Text only | Text with Images

2000 AD Online Forum

General Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2010, 03:59:03 PM

Title: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2010, 03:59:03 PM
As the "election" is coming up, when we'll all be asked to vote on the people the Power Elite tell us to vote for, I thought we might as well have a political thread for this and other political comments.

I'll kick off by posting this here:


"Dear friends,

Take a look at this: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/clean-up-lobbying

I've just emailed my local election candidates to demand that they support new rules to ban secret lobbying to help clean up politics.

Whether it's tobacco advertising, arms deals, GM food, or airport expansion, companies pay people to try to influence government. We've got a right to know what they're doing, especially when its our prospective MPs who are working as lobbyists.

Please email your candidates now and ask them to commit to lobbying transparency, it only takes two minutes: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/clean-up-lobbying

Thanks,"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 April, 2010, 04:34:44 PM
I'm glad there are people like you who still give a damn about politics, because I no longer have the energy for it. I was very interested and involved in politics from the age of 13 right up until the 1997 general election, in which I voted for a party other than Labour, such was my disgust at what the Labour Party had become. From that day on my involvement in politics has been minimal, amounting to no more than voting whenever the opportunity arises, and activism against the imposition of Controlled Parking across my whole neighbourhood by the City Council.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2010, 05:14:22 PM
Now is the time for us to take Parliament back.

It is our right and our duty to do all we can to leave behind an honest and decent society for future generations. History may only record the names of Kings and Lords and Presidents, but it's the unnamed millions who fuel it. One small person can't do it all, but all people can do one small thing. To vote is one small thing. To fight against controlled parking is one small thing. To post here is one small thing.

I don't need to say any more, you know exactly where I'm going with this.

(http://www.tootingpopularfront.com/citizensmith.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 April, 2010, 05:42:01 PM
I am voting for an independent party which is going to be UKIP as i refuse to vote for a the main three co-opted parties so therefore i dont sanction their sham and illusion of choice.

David Cameron isnt the answer as its just more vague and abstract "change" which translated means more of the same shit.David Cameron is a traitor and a fifth columnist who works for globalists and foreign interests and does not in any way represent the United Kingdom or its people or their interests.David Cameron and George Osborne are both Bilderberg attendees and is the next pre- selected UK prime minister.David Cameron will not take us out of the EU and therefore out of the hands of foreign offshore bankers and Globalists and the IMF.You might think he is alright now when he is in opposition but just you wait and see.......

He is bought and paid for and this is how this sham of a democracy in this country is perpetuated.George Osborne and David Cameron both have well known connections to Rothschilds just like Mandelslime.


I have to also call into question the mentality or intelligence of anyone who votes for New Labour.

Lib Dems.I dont know about them but i wouldnt vote for them as they are weak and will just go with the flow and do what they are told.

Voting for an independent party is the only option left to at least make a statement otherwise i am not actually sure what the point of this election is other than to create the illusion that your vote means anything at all when in fact it doesnt.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 09 April, 2010, 05:42:52 PM
*sigh*

Do we have to do this here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 April, 2010, 05:51:31 PM
What just my comment or the entire thread ?

As a compromise just for you i deleted the final sentence but the rest stays as there is nothing offensive or incorrect about it.I was asked what i thought in a thread about the upcoming election and this is what i think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 06:15:58 PM
I'm an anarchist (without adjective) so politics, for me, is a huge big white elephant. It's like a posh form of gang warfare. I see nothing that government does that could not be done better, more efficiently and more honestly by you and me.

I wish everyone who continues to seek answers through organised politics all the very best. Me? I'll be spoiling my vote this year, as I did the year before. And I'll be having fun with my spoil :)   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 09 April, 2010, 06:35:09 PM
That wasn't directed at anyone in particular. The thread's in the off-topic section, so I'll just ignore it.

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 April, 2010, 06:52:14 PM
Thats alright then.I have already moderated my own comments today on the other thread out of consideration for the board.

Other than that there isnt much else i can do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 April, 2010, 07:16:23 PM
I hear ya Trouty, but surely if there is a dedicated thread maybe it'll suck the poison out of other threads... a bit like the Life Spugs and Minor Impediments thread, a one-stop shop for a specific type  of moaning.  As you were...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 09 April, 2010, 07:48:49 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 06:15:58 PM
I'm an anarchist (without adjective) so politics, for me, is a huge big white elephant. It's like a posh form of gang warfare. I see nothing that government does that could not be done better, more efficiently and more honestly by you and me.

I wish everyone who continues to seek answers through organised politics all the very best. Me? I'll be spoiling my vote this year, as I did the year before. And I'll be having fun with my spoil :)   

What's the point? They'll just throw it in the bin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 08:21:04 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 09 April, 2010, 07:48:49 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 06:15:58 PM
I'm an anarchist (without adjective) so politics, for me, is a huge big white elephant. It's like a posh form of gang warfare. I see nothing that government does that could not be done better, more efficiently and more honestly by you and me.

I wish everyone who continues to seek answers through organised politics all the very best. Me? I'll be spoiling my vote this year, as I did the year before. And I'll be having fun with my spoil :)   

What's the point? They'll just throw it in the bin.

You're probably right, but there's two reasons I persist:

1) It gives me a smile and, quite possibly, the poor fecker counting the votes.
2) If everyone who doesn't normally vote (over 33% of Northern Ireland, for example) decided to spoil their vote, instead, it would send out one hell of a message.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 09 April, 2010, 08:36:29 PM
Although spoiling your vote may seem like a waste of time one reason for doing so, if you have no preference is that it will be counted- in as far as calculating the number of people who came out to vote

In Ireland we had to redo a referendum (it's a national pass-time here) because it was deemed that too few people came out to vote. Had more people made their mark-even by drawing willies on the ballot form, the results of the yes and no votes would have stood....

I think

...these things tend to get complicated
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 April, 2010, 08:47:34 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 08:21:04 PM2) If everyone who doesn't normally vote (over 33% of Northern Ireland, for example) decided to spoil their vote, instead, it would send out one hell of a message.

The only problem here is that a spoilt ballot paper could mean the voter is sending a message, but equally it could mean the voter is an incompetent tit. For that reason, I remain in favour of at least the option of 'None of the Above', but preferably 'Round them Up, Shoot them All'.

As a more general comment, perhaps it would be wiser of we kept our specific voting intentions to ourselves. For example, I consider UKIP to be a sickening bunch of filthy, small-minded, pig-ignorant racist bastards, intent on stirring up hostility and bigotry at every opportunity, and frankly no better than the BNP. I really don't need to know who here is planning on voting for them.

As another general comment, this will end in flames.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Martin Jameson on 09 April, 2010, 08:49:59 PM
I'm voting Lib Dem simply because their leader is a Klegg. (Clegg is close enough)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 April, 2010, 08:58:24 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 09 April, 2010, 08:36:29 PM
Although spoiling your vote may seem like a waste of time one reason for doing so, if you have no preference is that it will be counted- in as far as calculating the number of people who came out to vote...

Had more people made their mark-even by drawing willies on the ballot form, the results of the yes and no votes would have stood....

Oh, the irony. Oh yes.

When I lived in York the council held a referendum on having residents only parking (it follows me wherever I go). I voted no, but 51% of those who voted were in favour of the changes. What annoyed me enormously is that had more than a handful of those who voted no merely not turned out to vote, the result would have been invalid. They couldn't have pushed through their measure without my 'no' vote. The bastards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 09 April, 2010, 09:02:43 PM
Damn...this is a car crash thread in the making.

Don't agree with ballet spoiling but would prefer there to be a 'none of the above' option, now that would send a message.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 09:18:37 PM
Quote from: WoD on 09 April, 2010, 09:02:43 PM
Don't agree with ballet spoiling but would prefer there to be a 'none of the above' option, now that would send a message.

I agree. But when it isn't available, I write my own 'none of the above' on the paper in a freeform way.

However, I am seriously considering spoiling my vote in the form of a mime, this year.  ;)

Another thing - I wonder can anyone here put their hands on their hearts and say they truly believe in the vote they cast. The best I've heard, so far, from the boarders who do vote have been 'best of a bad bunch' remarks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 April, 2010, 09:25:41 PM
When I vote I tend to think in terms of which candidates are promising to make rich people pay more taxes than poor people, and which are promising to give rich people more money than they have already. I usually find the choice quite easy to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 April, 2010, 09:26:03 PM
Not too sure about ballot spoiling but I really like the sound of spoiling a ballet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 09 April, 2010, 09:26:12 PM
It's practically impossible (I would think) to have a totally informed opinion on all the relevant issues that you should consider when reviewing your voting options.  'Best of a bad bunch' seems to have some merit, but again is possible for that to be totally thought through?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 09 April, 2010, 09:26:58 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 09 April, 2010, 09:26:03 PM
Not too sure about ballot spoiling but I really like the sound of spoiling a ballet.

ahh ... oops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 09 April, 2010, 09:30:02 PM
Whats the betting that some sort of massive facebook election protest/prank thing gets rolling in the next week or two?

Am going to register to vote for the first time ever this year. I'm undecided - but there is no chance in hell that I am voting for either of the main two parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 April, 2010, 09:45:26 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 April, 2010, 08:47:34 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 09 April, 2010, 08:21:04 PM2) If everyone who doesn't normally vote (over 33% of Northern Ireland, for example) decided to spoil their vote, instead, it would send out one hell of a message.


As a more general comment, perhaps it would be wiser of we kept our specific voting intentions to ourselves. For example, I consider UKIP to be a sickening bunch of filthy, small-minded, pig-ignorant racist bastards, intent on stirring up hostility and bigotry at every opportunity, and frankly no better than the BNP. I really don't need to know who here is planning on voting for them.

As another general comment, this will end in flames.


Regards

Robin




Article :

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100033643/nutty-ukip-says-its-a-party-of-real-people-real-people-should-sue/

The comments are worth reading as well.  :D

If we keep things civil then this thread shouldnt end in flames so luckily i am not going to reply to that inflammatory comment.I am not convinced that there is anything Racist in any of UKIP policies but they have been infiltrated by BNP members in the past amongst other things.

I will look into it some more but i will say that i have my reasons for potentially voting for them but none of my reasons are based on Racism or Xenophobia.

I am done with the LIBLABCON.

Otherwise there should be a NO vote/none of the above as a recognised vote of NO confidence.

Not sure about the line them up and shoot them option though as thats what happens in despotic regimes though its interesting you say that.If they are tried in a court of law for treason and sedition then that carries a death penalty.Not sure i sanction the death penalty but thats a seperate topic.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 09 April, 2010, 09:45:39 PM
mayor ambrose he seems like a nice fella...or dave the orang utan...but he's dead. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 10 April, 2010, 12:08:03 AM
If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 April, 2010, 12:38:32 AM
I'd vote for Ambrose based on his record in office. A real man of the people and a solid, upright citizen.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2010, 03:09:27 AM
I have always voted and always will.
I have voted for different parties during my years, depending on what I thought would be best for the country and not just for me. I have also written abuse on a few European ballot papers, because I can and because it disgusts me that they are so corrupt (oops, put my Peter head on then ;)).


By the way on the way back from Hi-Ex! Peter and myself sorted out this countries woes and put it back on track. It was so simple :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 April, 2010, 03:57:02 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2010, 03:09:27 AM
I have always voted and always will.
I have voted for different parties during my years, depending on what I thought would be best for the country and not just for me. I have also written abuse on a few European ballot papers, because I can and because it disgusts me that they are so corrupt (oops, put my Peter head on then ;)).


By the way on the way back from Hi-Ex! Peter and myself sorted out this countries woes and put it back on track. It was so simple :lol:

I didnt get to fiddle any expenses though which was unfortunate.

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 April, 2010, 11:24:45 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7h7B3gAxgZU

Confidence in politicians at an all-time low? This will help then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 April, 2010, 11:30:20 AM
Vote for who you believe will guide us best through these increasingly troubled times.

Oh bloody hell that means none of 'em...! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 April, 2010, 11:38:19 AM
These aren't troubled times. All that's happened is that the economy has been exposed as not so much a flimsy house of cards but rather as an illusion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 10 April, 2010, 11:39:59 AM
You should all vote for me and My Selfish Bastard party. At least you know I'm a crook. There's no need to worry about being disappointed by our sham democracy because with me disappointments guaranteed!

My policies-Grab power, ignore the electorate once the elections over, grovel to big business/the power elite ,help criminals not the public,have our foreign policy decided in Washington.

See how fit for office I am?

Well i've still more policies than the Tories!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 April, 2010, 12:33:02 PM
Aguirre, the Wrath of God is on Tv tonight at 2.20am. Those of a political persuasion should view this and understand that el Dorado will always be out of reach. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2010, 01:16:05 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6NcAzqAd6M&fmt=18

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 10 April, 2010, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 April, 2010, 12:33:02 PM
Aguirre, the Wrath of God is on Tv tonight at 2.20am. Those of a political persuasion should view this and understand that el Dorado will always be out of reach. ;)
And everybody else should watch it just to see one of the best films ever made, from the opening shot to the bug-eyed, monkey-lording lunacy of the end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 10 April, 2010, 02:44:22 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 09 April, 2010, 09:26:03 PM
Not too sure about ballot spoiling but I really like the sound of spoiling a ballet.

What about ballot spoiling through the medium of ballet?  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 10 April, 2010, 02:52:13 PM
ahn the ballet- the bear in the little car right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 10 April, 2010, 04:11:19 PM
I'm voting LibDem just to increase the chance of a hung parliament. I want to see if they've got the stones to tell either Labour or the Tories to go suck a cock.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 April, 2010, 04:20:06 PM
US intelligence agencies has info on the Blair and Brown cabinets that links very high profile names to child abuse/paedophillia misdeeds.This was the FBI who were investigating the users of child porngraphy websites.

Blair was allegedly blackmailed by the US to back GWBush in Iraq because of this.

Also this was uncovered during what was known as "Operation Ore" which was a Police/CID investigation into child sexual abuse in the UK.Police appealed for info from the public as part of their investigation and they uncovered more than they expected.

The FBI initially forwarded the list to the Times newspaper.

Journalists got wind of this but they were silenced and some journalists were allegedly told that they would be suicided if they continued to cover the story.

Blair then slapped a D-notice on all media in 2003 which still remains in place although there is info available on the internet about this matter.The ongoing Hollie Greig child abuse case in Scotland is linked with this operation.It is this information that has been subject to non-disclosure for 100 years.

This much i know to be true.

Also i know from my contacts who are ex UK intelligence all of 2 that there were some sort of shenanigans that went on between Blair and Mandelson and that blackmail was involved which is why Mandelson keeps getting back into govt to the point now where he is running the UK govt or acting as its head in all but name.They wouldnt tell me any more but its an interesting angle on things.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2010, 04:41:48 PM
Anything to do with the group "Common Purpose," you think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 April, 2010, 04:55:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2010, 04:41:48 PM
Anything to do with the group "Common Purpose," you think?

Not sure as Common Purpose were never mentioned in any of the information that i have read.

They are definately an extension of the Labour Party and i know about them.They are connected to the Tavistock Institute.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 April, 2010, 05:00:26 PM
This sounds like the plot of Greysuit. I'm now guessing it practically wrote itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 April, 2010, 05:30:29 PM
I'm not entirely sure how the economy can be viewed as an illusion just because it was based entirely on money that never existed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2010, 05:39:39 PM
Where there's an illusion, there's an illusionist with a fat wallet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 April, 2010, 08:36:37 PM
In politics it is necessary either to betray one's country or the electorate. I prefer to betray the electorate.- Charles de Gaulle

Oh the cynicism! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 April, 2010, 08:51:29 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 April, 2010, 08:36:37 PM
In politics it is necessary either to betray one's country or the electorate. I prefer to betray the electorate.- Charles de Gaulle

Oh the cynicism! :)

These days its necessary to betray both.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 April, 2010, 08:25:34 PM
I think I will vote BNP..just kidding.
UKIP.. oh god they are just as bad.
Monster raving luny party.. now they have some solid policies.
Labour.. arrgh I've just soiled my computer screen.
Lib Dem.. lets just sit on the fence.
Conservative.. more bad news but I suppose a change is better than letting Labour go even more stale.
Green Party.. Hmmmm, I will leave that to my tree hugging hippy inlaw's.

Just remember if you don't vote you diminish your right to moan about whoever is in power.


Fucking politics, causes as much grief as religion.

Lets see what hornets nest these comments bring up.








V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2010, 08:55:08 PM
We live in a soda pop democracy, I say. You can have Coke or Pepsi or Dr Pepper, or if you're in the minority you can have Dandelion & Burdock, Lucozade or Irn Bru. They're all fizzy and sweet with a slightly different taste, but all equally bad for your teeth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 April, 2010, 09:05:37 PM
I'll have Dr. Pepper, please. I'm tired of cola, and dandelion & burdock, Lucozade and Irn Bru are all yuk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 11 April, 2010, 09:09:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2010, 08:55:08 PM
We live in a soda pop democracy, I say. You can have Coke or Pepsi or Dr Pepper, or if you're in the minority you can have Dandelion & Burdock, Lucozade or Irn Bru. They're all fizzy and sweet with a slightly different taste, but all equally bad for your teeth.

I like that - very well put.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 April, 2010, 11:37:55 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 April, 2010, 08:25:34 PM
I think I will vote BNP..just kidding.
UKIP.. oh god they are just as bad.









V

The fact is that is simply not true.

Even in the simplest terms UKIP dont have any problem appearing on Question Time and there has never been any objection to them appearing yet look what happened when Nick Griffin appeared on Question Time.

If you read a Wikipedia article on the BNP and then UKIP you will see that they have nothing in common beyond campaigning against immigration but for different reasons and if you read UKIPs immigration policies they are not racist.

LibDems have been imitating or adopting UKIP policies.

So if they are not Racist then why are they just as bad as the BNP ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 April, 2010, 12:17:34 AM
I think the chief similarity between BNP and UKIP is that both of them are seeking and rely upon the reactionary vote, which they have stood to take from the Conservatives since the Tories decided to shift leftward to contest the centre ground the Labour Party moved onto when it abandoned any pretence of being interested in socialism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 12 April, 2010, 12:32:17 AM
I contested your mom's centre ground many a time. (Sometimes I let your dad win).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 12 April, 2010, 12:38:52 AM
i'm voting the godpleton party :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 03:14:07 PM
They're fluoridating milk, you know: http://www.borrowfoundation.org/index.asp  Fluoride disrupts endocrine functions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 12 April, 2010, 04:25:21 PM
Pete I am sure wikipedia is full of untainted information that can be relied upon,








V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 April, 2010, 06:13:39 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 April, 2010, 11:37:55 PMSo if they are not Racist then why are they just as bad as the BNP ?

If nothing else, the fuss they made about the veil earlier in the year was a calculated attempt to woo racists and stir up fear and prejudice for their own benefit.

And even should I choose to ignore seriously despicable behaviour like that, I still think they stink, because the tossers apparently want to restore imperial measurements, and are sceptical of climate change. I think this county is scientifically illiterate as it is, and really doesn't need a political party encouraging it.

What I don't understand, Peter, is why you're happy to spread the most outrageous conspiracy theories about the mainstream parties as though they might be true, yet can't accept that a party whose raison d'etre is fear of foreigners might be a wee bit racist.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 12 April, 2010, 06:41:54 PM
I don't know enough about UK politics to be able to say whether or not the UKIP are racist. My concern is that if we use the words 'homophobic' and 'racist' too loosely, the terms themselves will become diluted.

In Northern Ireland, we've plenty of openly racist, homophobic assholes in power who would describe themselves as 'democratic'.

I would reject the UKIP's policy on immigration. Personally, I would like to see the borders open up more (totally, in fact) as opposed to closing. For one thing, research continues to demonstrate how a strong migrant workforce helps an economoy thrive rather than nose-dive. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 April, 2010, 06:54:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 April, 2010, 06:13:39 PM
and are sceptical of climate change.

Dear God, let's not go down this road again ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 April, 2010, 06:58:07 PM
I don't think opening your borders up totally is a sensible thing to do unilaterally. At the moment EU countries have an obligation to accept their share of refugees. If we had no border controls all those refugees, and the torturers and murderers they're running from, as well as any chancer with no education and no marketable skills who's doing badly in their own country, would come straight to Britain instead of making a few stop-offs on the continent along the way. The message would be "don't just come to Europe, come to Britain." Needless to say it wouldn't make us popular with our neighbours. You know how unpopular the French are with Britain for maintaining detention centres on its northern sea border, seen as a way to channel France's own illegal immigrants over to neighbouring countries? That would be us.

This may as well have been a party election broadcast for UKIP, I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:21:21 PM
Fix the economies of the world by taking back the right of governments to print their own money and the cost of immigration and the reasons behind it (and most other problems such as housing, health care, public spending etc) tend to evaporate. Keeping everyone arguing about the problem (in this case, immigration) and not the cause (hollow banking) is just one example of what all political parties are about. This is the politics of distraction.

The Prime Minister can be seen as the captain of the ship of state. Once the passengers (the electorate) elect a captain and crew (PM and MPs), the ship is redecorated, the way the ship is run is altered, the shift patterns and responsibilities of the crew are tweaked, new rules and regulations are put into place, the decks are swabbed etc, etc, etc - but the course of the ship is not altered. Some years later, a new captain and crew are elected who change everything back again, but the course of the ship is still not altered. This is the politics of distraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 April, 2010, 07:29:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:21:21 PM
Fix the economies of the world by taking back the right of governments to print their own money and the cost of immigration and the reasons behind it tend to evaporate.

Ah, but now you're laying down the steps necessary as a precondition for totally open borders. Fix the economies of the world (that's only about 195 nation states) and then we can talk about the abolition of border controls. And nation states, for that matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:41:09 PM
I wouldn't want to abolish any Nation State. National Sovereignty is up to the populace of a country and not to be dictated by others. Once one Nation State, or a group thereof, begins interfering in the affairs of others we arrive at Iraq. Whether a country wants open borders or not is up to that country, irrespective of whether they print their own money or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 08:40:36 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 April, 2010, 06:13:39 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 April, 2010, 11:37:55 PMSo if they are not Racist then why are they just as bad as the BNP ?

If nothing else, the fuss they made about the veil earlier in the year was a calculated attempt to woo racists and stir up fear and prejudice for their own benefit.

And even should I choose to ignore seriously despicable behaviour like that, I still think they stink, because the tossers apparently want to restore imperial measurements, and are sceptical of climate change. I think this county is scientifically illiterate as it is, and really doesn't need a political party encouraging it.

What I don't understand, Peter, is why you're happy to spread the most outrageous conspiracy theories about the mainstream parties as though they might be true, yet can't accept that a party whose raison d'etre is fear of foreigners might be a wee bit racist.

Regards

Robin

All my info on the mainstream parties namely New Labour checks out and while i am at it Harriet Harman is an apologist/sympathiser for paedophiles and once campaigned on their behalf.You can google that as its well documented and true.

I dont think that UKIP are sceptical of climate change per se as that would be absurd as i dont know anyone who is sceptical of climate change  :lol: only the causes of climate change namely the CO2 scam which is what i am sceptical of.

Imperial measurements alongside metric.I still work in imperial and i will continue to do so but i also work in metric.Personally i dont see that as very important. :lol:

Your final point about UKIPs reason d'etre being fear of foreigners which is Xenophobia.

Its good that you say that because there is a difference beteween Xenophobia and Racism but the veil incident isnt enough to make me not consider voting for UKIP.


The arguments about immigration should be based on economics and numbers only which they are.

UKIP immigration policy itself is not racist as they clearly say that EVERYONE will be treated the same regardless of race or nationality.They also propose to regain control of UK borders and introduce a points system.The UK has only recently lost control of its borders and prior to that there has been plenty of immigration when the /UK had a points system/border control.

SO therefore UKIPs immigration policy is LESS discriminatory than the UK present immigration policy.

UKIPs reason d'etre is to campaign against the EU and it always has been.

If UKIPS policies are not racist or discriminatory then they are not racists and thats what i have to go on rather than isolated incidents or a minority of racists or xenophobes who may or may not reside in or support the party.

Quote from: HOO-HAA on 12 April, 2010, 06:41:54 PM


For one thing, research continues to demonstrate how a strong migrant workforce helps an economoy thrive rather than nose-dive.  


Thats such a generalised statement i dont know where to start but its partly true but it can just as easily have a negative effect but mostly on the workforce as it can drive down labour costs across the board as it has done in the construction industry because employers will often take advantage of cheap labour therefore driving down labour costs throughout the industry and more than once i have lost work because of ridiculously cheap prices offered by cheap immigrant labour that i cant compete with or i refuse to.






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 12 April, 2010, 09:51:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:21:21 PM
The Prime Minister can be seen as the captain of the ship of state. Once the passengers (the electorate) elect a captain and crew (PM and MPs), the ship is redecorated, the way the ship is run is altered, the shift patterns and responsibilities of the crew are tweaked, new rules and regulations are put into place, the decks are swabbed etc, etc, etc - but the course of the ship is not altered. Some years later, a new captain and crew are elected who change everything back again, but the course of the ship is still not altered. This is the politics of distraction.

Wow, I love it! Again, well put, Shark  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 April, 2010, 09:55:25 PM
I think you are too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 10:57:02 PM
Thanks, Hoo! I am liking for my explainings to clearly be, and understood with ease.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 12 April, 2010, 11:21:17 PM
I keep checking back on this thread, expecting it to have degenerated into childish squabbling and vicious personal attacks. But... nothing.

Must try harder, people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 11:39:39 PM
Get stuffed.












:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 11:51:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:41:09 PM
I wouldn't want to abolish any Nation State. National Sovereignty is up to the populace of a country and not to be dictated by others. Once one Nation State, or a group thereof, begins interfering in the affairs of others we arrive at Iraq. Whether a country wants open borders or not is up to that country, irrespective of whether they print their own money or not.


It just doesnt make any sense to me to give up the right to self govern or hand over power/give up sovereignty to another centralised ruling body.Its even worse when you are subjegated by pro EU fifth columnists [New Labour]

I challenge anyone to make a good argument for it.

I cant think of any.

Its going to cost the UK taxpayer 650 million to help bail out Greece because of EU Collectivism.

This a good idea anyone ?

This is just one example.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 07:58:40 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 11:51:48 PM
It just doesnt make any sense to me to give up the right to self govern or hand over power/give up sovereignty to another centralised ruling body.

When you've got two commentators advocating the opening of boarders in the name of anarchism, in a world where immigration isn't a problem because every country's economy has been fixed, we're not talking about giving up sovereignty to a centralised ruling body, we're talking about the voluntary dissolution of government.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:41:09 PM
I wouldn't want to abolish any Nation State. National Sovereignty is up to the populace of a country and not to be dictated by others. Whether a country wants open borders or not is up to that country, irrespective of whether they print their own money or not.

I don't know how you would maintain the existence of a nation state with no borders and no government. I think the country that adopts anarchist principles of government will soon be at numerous kinds of disadvantage relative to its neighbours and would soon find itself annexed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:05:58 AM
This is indeed a very interesting thread. Here are some thoughts.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 08:40:36 PM

The arguments about immigration should be based on economics and numbers only which they are.


Immigration based on economics only? Bollocks! So you would put money before principles then? How about slavery then? Let's bring back serfdom. How about keeping the poor poor? Let's just farm a workforce, a la brave new world. It would be good for the economy. Money is not our reason for being, it is just a mechanism for trade.
I have no problems with people coming to this country, so long as they become us and support us, believe in what we believe in and add to the life of this nation. If they want to come here and be themselves and set up their own churches, communities etc. Then they can fuck off! Immigrants, yes. Colonists, no.
Numbers! I have no children, I have no desire for them, but I still care about my country even after my death. Unlimited immigration will only lead to this country being very, very overcrowded. It already is in my opinion. What do you want, your descendents to live in Mega-city UK, or a clean and calm country where people can enjoy the wonderous natural landscape of these treasured isles? Do you want your descendents to wait in line for their meagre weekly ration of soylent red, white and blue, or a place where everyone can have a free and healthy life without want?

I think alot of people know that I'm Scottish and that I believe in an independant Scottish state. Yup, I'm an SNP voter. Though I don't agree with all their policies, I still vote for them. They are by and large a bunch of pinko lefty liberals who try and massage the cocks of public opinion and political correctness (like every other party it seems). However, for me they do offer the best avenue for my own political beliefs. ie an independant Scotland.
Whatever everyone does. Vote. An imperfect choice is better than no choice at all.

Rant over. :)

I really shouldn't read stuff about politics and opinion, it sets me off! My wife has already banned me from watching the news on the telly. I have no idea why! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 11:12:53 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 07:58:40 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 11:51:48 PM
It just doesnt make any sense to me to give up the right to self govern or hand over power/give up sovereignty to another centralised ruling body.

When you've got two commentators advocating the opening of boarders in the name of anarchism, in a world where immigration isn't a problem because every country's economy has been fixed, we're not talking about giving up sovereignty to a centralised ruling body, we're talking about the voluntary dissolution of government.





My comment was about handing over power to the EU and not in reply to anyone elses comments.I quoted LS but i wasnt replying to it.I quoted it simply because he was talking about nation states and i agreed with what he said.

No worries though as the EU cant even answer that question themselves beyond saying that it makes the EU more "Efficient" and "streamlined".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 12:55:07 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:05:58 AM
I have no problems with people coming to this country, so long as they become us and support us, believe in what we believe in and add to the life of this nation. If they want to come here and be themselves and set up their own churches, communities etc. Then they can fuck off! Immigrants, yes. Colonists, no.

I have a big problem with that statement - it suggests a kind of protectionism which I think breeds contempt and often leads to civil unrest. People being allowed to conduct their lives the way they wish, whether at home or abroad, is part of a solution to me as opposed to part of a problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 13 April, 2010, 01:01:08 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:05:58 AM
I have no problems with people coming to this country, so long as they become us and support us, believe in what we believe in and add to the life of this nation. If they want to come here and be themselves and set up their own churches, communities etc. Then they can fuck off!
:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2010, 01:05:22 PM
Humanity belongs to the world, the world doesn't belong to humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 April, 2010, 01:16:37 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil
I have no problems with people coming to this country, so long as they become us and support us, believe in what we believe in and add to the life of this nation. If they want to come here and be themselves and set up their own churches, communities etc. Then they can fuck off! Immigrants, yes. Colonists, no.

Colin - you're one of my all-time 2000AD heroes but I can't agree with that, sorry. I live in Birmingham which is very multi-cultural and wish things were even more integrated here than they already are, but don't begrudge each community their own way of doing things.

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2010, 01:27:50 PM
Got this in my email today, which raised a slight smile:

CHOICES........................

While walking down the street one day a "Member of Parliament" is tragically hit by a truck and dies.

His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the  entrance.

'Welcome to heaven,' says St. Peter.. 'Before you settle in,  it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you.'

'No problem, just let me in,' says the man.

'Well, I'd like to, but I  have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity.'

'Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven,'  says the MP.

'I'm sorry, but we have our rules.'

And with  that, St. Peter  escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down  to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green  golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it  are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with  him.

Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had  while getting rich at the expense of the people.

They play a  friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and  champagne.

Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly & nice guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go.

Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises....

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him.

'Now it's time  to visit heaven.'

So, 24 hours pass with the MP joining a group  of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing.  They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by  and St. Peter returns.

'Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and  another in heaven. Now choose your eternity.'

The MP reflects for a minute, then he answers: 'Well, I would never have said it  before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but  I think I would be better off  in hell.'

So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down,  down, down to hell.

Now the doors of  the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with  waste and garbage.

He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above.

The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his  shoulder. 'I don't understand,' stammers the MP. 'Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time.. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable.


    What happened?'

    The devil looks at him, smiles and says, 'Yesterday we were campaigning... ...


    Today you voted.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 01:49:56 PM
I agree with both Colin McNeill and HOO-HAA .

Everyone should be able to live the way they like in principle but you do get problems with ex-pat communities who set up in other countries yet they make no effort to integrate into the countries they have emmigrated into like all English in Spain for example.Theres no law against doing that but it creates bad feeling among the indigenous people.Communities that dont integrate cause bad feeling.

Thats what seems to be the main problem.Having said that if they dont want to integrate then no one is forcing them to and its not the be all and end all of life but the line has to be drawn when an immigrant population start to impose their will on the host nation and thats unnacceptable in my mind.Its hypocritical as well becaise i couldnt very well start imposing my will in certain countries i wont mention by name because they wouldnt tolerate it.

Shariah law in the UK should be out of the question and if Muslims decide to live in the UK then they should realise that the UK is not a Muslim country before they choose to live here.Saying or thinking otherwise is just plain stupid.Tolerance and religious freedom\freedom of expression should be enough for *anyone* but there are always going to be some that want more than that and if you give them an inch they will take a mile if they think that they can get away with it and its human nature for some [usually a minority - no not that kind of minority] to abuse the generosity and tolerance of others.

Think of this messageboard as a community and how everyone integrates and is tolerant of others and their views or whatever.What happens if myself or anyone else decides that they dont like this messageboard because of this or that and they decided that they wanted to change its content ?

There is too much talk all about Judge Dredd for example so i decide that i have had enough of it and decide to rant about it or loudly protest about it ?

Whats going to happen then ?

Its 100 percent certain that i would be told to fuck right off if i didnt like it and its the same thing as choosing to move to another country and then ranting and raving about it for whatever reason.The choice is theirs to either stay or leave.


Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:05:58 AM
This is indeed a very interesting thread. Here are some thoughts.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 April, 2010, 08:40:36 PM

The arguments about immigration should be based on economics and numbers only which they are.


Immigration based on economics only? Bollocks! So you would put money before principles then? How about slavery then? Let's bring back serfdom. How about keeping the poor poor? Let's just farm a workforce, a la brave new world. It would be good for the economy. Money is not our reason for being, it is just a mechanism for trade.


What i meant by "Economics" was having immigration quotas that are linked to the economic situation in a country.I guess economics was the wrong choice of word but if you chose to emmigrate to Australia for example or Canada they have a points system and its related to skills and skills shortages and there is a direct relation with that to the economy and what you can contribute to it.Thats not what i think but its how it is.

The poor are kept poor regardless.Banksters and the rest of the criminals see to that.We are all slaves or chattel anyway and that much is fact.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 02:37:40 PM
Well, I have certainly seemed to stir things up!
I make no apologies for my views, it comes from the views of my culture. I am in my mid forties, my father was in his forties when I was born, his father was in his thirties when he was born. My upbringing was, in a sense, in the pre modern enlightenment way. I have VERY old fashioned views. I have spoken to many diverse people in Scotland and the vast majority generally agree with me, at least those in their 40's/50's and over. The older they are the more similar the views.
I grew up in a time and place where it was considered "multi-cultural" if both Catholics and Protestants lived on the same street, or even if someone from Glasgow or Edinburgh lived there.
It may sound strange to you younger folk, or to those who do live amongst many communities, but that is how my life/culture was then.
It was also my culture to look down on the poor, the homosexual, the aetheist etc. Those things have changed thankfully, but at least that was a move from within my own culture. All cultures change, some die out, some stamped out. I guess what I'm trying to saw is let's see where "our" culture will take us, not the homogenous culture of global multi-culturism, where wherever you go you get the same thing again and again.
This country has suffered terribly in the last century, from the loss of an entire generation in the First World War where the hearts of entire communities were litterally wiped out in Scotland. To the wiping out of the hopes and stability of entire communities with the destruction of the old industries, coal, ship building and steel making in the eighties.

We do need immigrants to come here, to help with the rich diversity of our gene pool, to bring new ideas and ways of doing stuff. But not at the cost at what our ancestors struggled and died for.
In the very early nineties I considered moving to London to help progress my career, but I decided not to because I wanted to remain Scottish. If I were to move outside Scotland then the land and people I would live with would have to have my full support, otherewise why would they have any reason to accept me. Maybe it's an old fashioned view, I don't know. All I know is that I can see my nation's culture teeter on the edge of oblivion and it makes me sad. The glens of my ancestors are all but devoid of their natives, their language, dialects and customs are all disappearing.
Maybe our culture should disappear from this earth. Maybe it's too old fashioned, too un-PC, too different to the demands of global modernisation.

Maybe multi-culturism is the future, I don't know. All I know is that I want to spend the rest of my life on this sphere here, amongst my own kin, amongst those who hold their memories dear and those who will fight and give everything for that dream that is Scotland.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 April, 2010, 02:47:11 PM
Quote from: Banners on 13 April, 2010, 01:16:37 PM
but don't begrudge each community their own way of doing things.

I'm genuinely about as liberal and wishy-washy PC as they come, but there is a group that flyers and flyposts my neighbourhood every local/European/General election with the single message: "Voting is a sin against Islam."

To which, I'm afraid, my response is: "Fine -- fuck off and live in an Islamic state, then."

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2010, 03:31:23 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 April, 2010, 02:47:11 PM

...there is a group that flyers and flyposts my neighbourhood every local/European/General election with the single message: "Voting is a sin against Islam."

To which, I'm afraid, my response is: "Fine -- fuck off and live in an Islamic state, then."

Cheers

Jim

"The process of voting in non-Muslim democratic countries is not based on religious ideologies neither are elections won and lost on the basis of religion. As such, a candidate that stands up in an election does not promise to implement the laws of Islam or any other religion for that matter.

Normally a candidate promises the public better services and facilities. These services may also be connected to a particular religion, like promising Muslims financial assistance for the construction of Masjids, and so on.

Therefore, to vote a particular candidate or party in non-Muslim countries will be permissible and not considered a sin or Kufr. When one votes for a party, it does not necessarily mean that one agrees completely with their beliefs and ideologies, rather the intention is that the candidate (or party) will be of help to the whole community.

In light of the above, it becomes clear that to vote in itself is not something that is impermissible..." Muhammad ibn Adam, Darul Iftaa, Leicester , UK
http://www.therevival.co.uk/wp-site/270


"In some cases it is wrong to vote, such as when the matter will have no effect on the Muslims, or when the Muslims have no effect on the outcome of the vote. In this case voting or not voting is all the same. The same applies in cases where all the candidates are equally evil or where they all have the same attitude towards Muslims...

It may be the case that the interests of Islam require Muslims to vote so as to ward off the greater evil and to reduce harmful effects, such as where two candidates may be non-Muslims but one of them is less hostile towards Muslims than the other, and Muslims' votes will have an impact on the outcome of the election. In such cases there is nothing wrong with Muslims casting their votes in favour of the less evil candidate." Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid
http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/3062


It seems to me that anyone who proclaims that "voting is a sin against Islam," is either working against Islam (third party agitators? Surely not!) or needs to understand it better. The thing is, upon seeing that slogan, how many people will even bother to check if it's true?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 13 April, 2010, 03:45:07 PM
I think most people would agree that it isn't to the benefit of anyone (the 'indigenous' population or immigrants) when ethnic groups entrench themselves.

I don't know if that has happened with some groups consciously – perhaps due to fears of children / women in particular having contact with this comparatively more liberal society, religious extremism; racism or perhaps some just couldn't relate to this society. Knowledge of the English language or lack of it no doubt would play some part. I suppose it's a combination of some of the above to some degree.

But I know immigrants who have been here for decades, still have a very limited use of English and yet have children who have studied hard, gone to university and have gone on to have very successful careers. People who are extremely high earners who have risen to the top of their chosen professions and have integrated, some marrying inside of their communities and some outside. Don't know what harm they or their parents caused anyone other than being a bit 'different'. Perhaps they didn't manage to fully integrate 100 percent but they did a good job of bringing up kids who did.

I can't understand what harm is being caused to anyone by immigrants and their descendants having their own communities and worshipping in their own churches / mosques / temples / synagogues or whatever. Should they not have freedom of religion?

I was just about to say that I don't see communities imposing their will on others and then I read Jim's comment. Beggars belief that they don't see what harm they are causing everyone by fly posting that sort of stuff.

As for disappearing culture, I do hear of misguided people such as those in councils around the country trying to bend over backwards not to offend ethnic minorities and as a result contribute to ridding this country of its heritage eg references to Christmas. I was glad to see on TV recently that other religious groups joined Christians in campaigning for councils to keep Christmas festivities and even participated in demonstrations in support. Unfortunately the misguided acts of some councils result in other religious communities taking the blame.

There was another TV series or programme a while ago which looked at the ethnic origins of people and it was surprising how many people, some with shall we say not very liberal views where found to have roots outside of these shores. Who knows how long it took their predecessors to integrate.

I am reminded by the comments of ex-England football manager Don Revie in the 70s (I think it was him) who apparently said that there were too many foreigners playing in the English league and by that he meant Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 04:35:20 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 13 April, 2010, 03:45:07 PM

As for disappearing culture, I do hear of misguided people such as those in councils around the country trying to bend over backwards not to offend ethnic minorities and as a result contribute to ridding this country of its heritage eg references to Christmas. I was glad to see on TV recently that other religious groups joined Christians in campaigning for councils to keep Christmas festivities and even participated in demonstrations in support. Unfortunately the misguided acts of some councils result in other religious communities taking the blame.





Thats one of the interesting things that was said in that BBC "Are Christians Being Persecuted".The meddling and misguided councils imposing their politically correct dictats which are handed down to them from central government.You must be talking about the same thing.

WTF has it got to do with the council anyway ??

>:(

Let the communities decide for themselves if they want to celebrate Xmas and how they celebrate it.

I totally agree with you there.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 13 April, 2010, 04:51:13 PM
http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2009/12/how-to-write-christmas-is-under-attack.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2010, 05:09:00 PM
Excellent!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pete Wells on 13 April, 2010, 05:23:47 PM
Ha, that's funny. It reminds me of my other pet peeve hysterical tabloid story:

"< Insert incarcerated killer/pedo's name here > is enjoying < insert Christmas Dinner/random pass time here > at the taxpayers' expense!"

I'm sure they have a template and just take turns sticking Huntly/Glitter/Venables in there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 13 April, 2010, 05:31:27 PM
Stewart Lee on Political Correctness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGAOCVwLrXo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 13 April, 2010, 05:45:04 PM
Quote from: Al_Ewing on 13 April, 2010, 04:51:13 PM
http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2009/12/how-to-write-christmas-is-under-attack.html
For years I thought these were myths about Councils and their Winterval at the expense of Christmas celebrations but that doesn't seem to be the case according to this programme:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rx7tj

I worked in an organisation where some staff it seemed were reluctant to say Merry Christmas. Quite a few where saying Happy New Year before the Xmas holidays which seemed weird (unlike Muslim staff who had no problem giving Christmas greetings). And in another company where I worked we had a long discussion about what text to put in an Xmas card we were designing. 'Season's Greetings' was wrong because it doesn't encompass all religions as it was specific to the Christian festival so we had to go with 'Seasons Greetings'. Plural, geddit? Everyone happy though only a pedant would spot that one.

And 'Happy Holidays' is not tabloid exaggeration.

True stories, folks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 02:37:40 PM
I guess what I'm trying to saw is let's see where "our" culture will take us, not the homogenous culture of global multi-culturism, where wherever you go you get the same thing again and again.




I totally agree with you as well.

Cultures should be allowed to evolve naturally on their own instead of being interfered with or experimented with by central govt so that they fit their own warped ideologies.Not everyone wants to live in a homogenised culture where you get the same thing over and over again and that applies to everything including race and ethnicity.

Its curious isnt it how you get all this talk of diversity with the PC brigade yet its they who want to dilute everything and homogenise everything so in that process diversity is destroyed.Its wrong because its being forced.

The people themselves should shape their own communities not govts but govts are because they allow immigration but immigration should not be because of central govt social engineering programmes.You dont build successful communities by making them conform to diversity quotas that are decided by central planning [New Labour].

Stupid Cunts.This is why i totally disagree with the destruction of nation states because you actually cant do it.They can draw new maps and call England whatever the fuck its called in the new EUROZONE but as far as i am concerned England will still be England as its not like anything has really changed beyond what EU bereaucrats are imposing on us with their dictats.The English channel is to be renamed as the Anglo-French Pond !!

Its not though as its the English fucking Channel  >:(

Its not like nations like the UK or France suddenly stop existing just because a bereaucrat redraws a map.

I am so sick :sick: and tired of the fucking One World Balloonheads and their warped ideology.

I had best stop before i go off on one .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LARF on 13 April, 2010, 05:50:10 PM
Around 600 years ago my ancestors on my fathers side came over here and settled from France, on the other hand my Mother's family descend from Romany Gypsies that moved to the UK around 200 years ago - so my question is, "Which country should I fuck off back to?"

The UK is a country of mixed breeds, Saxons, Romans, Vikings, French, Germans, Africans, Indians, Pakistanis, Jews, Muslims (the latter not just over the last few decades, but over the last few hundred years), not to mention the mixing of our four 'inherent' UK countries - what can we call 'True Brit?', or a 'True UK Citizen?' We're all mongrels created by Empire building, War and Invasion. This is what we should be proud of, that our heritage has made us a hardy breed immune to intolerance and hatred, not a people blind and blinkered to other cultures because all of us are made of ancestors from other cultures.

Look at the providence of your surname and your Mother's Maiden name, look at your heritage and answer whether you are truly British, Welsh, Scottish or Irish...

BTW: I think the conservatives are a complete bunch of cocks
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 April, 2010, 05:52:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2010, 03:31:23 PM
It seems to me that anyone who proclaims that "voting is a sin against Islam," is either working against Islam (third party agitators? Surely not!) or needs to understand it better. The thing is, upon seeing that slogan, how many people will even bother to check if it's true?

It seems to me that the matter is not as cut and dried as you present -- there are a broad spectrum of interpretations of Islam and I live in an area with a very large Muslim population. There most certainly is a view within sections of the Muslim community that voting acknowledges an authority other than God and thus is explicitly prohibited by the Koran. I have no issue with people holding this view, but I do have an issue with them campaigning against democracy as a concept.

I would also point out that the second of your quotations describes voting as being the necessity of choosing the "less evil" of the candidates, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of the democratic process!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 05:59:44 PM
It's quite simple really

The Labour party are



THE BORG
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 13 April, 2010, 06:11:44 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 02:37:40 PMIf I were to move outside Scotland then the land and people I would live with would have to have my full support, otherewise why would they have any reason to accept me.

Why wouldn't they accept you? You're a human being the same as the rest of us. Most of us on the board live in England, I think, but it's quite clear that we don't have one idea of what it means to be English, or what it means to support the land and the people, so you living in England but supporting Scotland would be of no consequence at all.

As it is, I'm technically half Scottish, a quarter English and a quarter Welsh, but I refuse to be defined by such trivia, and I claim the right to live in every part of this island and support who and what I want to support based on my personal beliefs, rather than lines on bloody maps.

This is not to say there's anyting wrong with choosing to support a particular place - I choose support this island as a unified whole with regional variations - but I have no problem with differences adding to it. If anything, it is in-coming influences and differences that define it.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 06:20:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 05:59:44 PM
It's quite simple really

The Labour party are



THE BORG

So is the EU or its ruling centralised govt to be more exact and not to disparage or denigrate all of its people.

Look at Poland.One of the very last countries or nation states that hadnt signed up fully to the EU and its single currency and it declined to borrow cash from the IMF loanshark Bankster mafia and it was the only EU member state/nation state within the EU whose economy had grown during 2009 and it was on the right tracks for more growth and it also hadnt gone mad with borrowing and spending like other EU member states and its leadership - Kaczinsky etc spoke out very recently about the IMF creating the conditions that required regional states to borrow from them amongst many other things.

The next thing you know is the entire political leadership of Poland has been wiped out in a plane crash.

Thats either a conspiracy and they were whacked or its just very fortunate because now Polands political leadership can be replaced by pro-EU Federalist fifth columnists/Quislings instead because thats how things work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 13 April, 2010, 06:26:53 PM
I'm very relieved that my initial concerns proved unfounded, and this thread was in no way a bad idea.

Fucking hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 06:29:47 PM
I'm with you Peter.
People laugh at conspiracies but remember that small £1,000,000+ I talked about on the Hell-Trek.
They do happen, as I was involved in that one (no not the plane crash).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 13 April, 2010, 06:34:46 PM

Vote Conservative.

Do you see what I did there.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 06:35:33 PM
No, what did you do ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 13 April, 2010, 06:37:23 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 13 April, 2010, 06:26:53 PM
I'm very relieved that my initial concerns proved unfounded, and this thread was in no way a bad idea.

Fucking hell.

Have a little patience.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 13 April, 2010, 06:48:57 PM
Jonathan Bartley on the Nicky Campbell doc:

http://blog.echurchwebsites.org.uk/2010/04/05/verdict-nicky-campbells-easter-sunday-bbc-documentary-christians-persecuted/

I'm just putting that up for balance because I SURRENDER and I'm running back to the Doctor Who review thread where I belong with my tail between my legs. YOU WIN! I can't stand the political heat! Also I hate Christmas and want to replace it with LIFE DAY. (And I gotta get back to work! Sorry guys for this cowardly retreat. I'll check back in tomorrow and see how it all shook out.)

(shakes fist, boards TARDIS, enters political exile or possibly Zero Room)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 07:21:10 PM
Quote from: Al_Ewing on 13 April, 2010, 04:51:13 PM
http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2009/12/how-to-write-christmas-is-under-attack.html

A nice article that linked to. This comment on it, from 'Culfy' really made me laugh:

QuoteI agree. Those evil PC secularists forcing everyone to change 'Christmas' to 'winter'

They've even rewritten those beautiful Christmas songs 'Walking in a Christmas Wonderland' and 'In The Bleak MidChristmas'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 07:25:11 PM
I can express my thinking on the immigration discussion with one sentence:

'An it harm none, do what ye will.'

In my perfect world, that goes for muslims, jews, christians, satanists, wiccans, wizards, elves, traffic wardens, readers of marvel comics etc.

Me? I'm an atheist. However, I will defend another person's basic right to believe what they want, practice it how they like and gather together in communities with other like-minded people to express whatever they wish to express.

As long as it harms no one else, it's all fine by me.  

Here's another soundbite I like to throw around:

I'm pro-choice. About everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LARF on 13 April, 2010, 07:40:19 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 13 April, 2010, 06:34:46 PM

Vote Conservative.

Do you see what I did there.






V

Ooh, clever, I like it.

Sublibinal
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 13 April, 2010, 07:40:41 PM
I think Labour camps should be re-introduced for the great unwashed who will never do a days work in their lives. Many would get of their fat drug induced arses if this was implemented. The Polish migrants etc do the farm work bramble picking etc so why cant all the scrounging dole scum on the council estates be made to do it.
Community service doesn't count as honest work.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 April, 2010, 07:49:00 PM
Elves are gits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 07:25:11 PM
'An it harm none, do what ye will.'

We already have proper laws like that, enforced by the police and law courts. The principle of outlawing harm is behind laws against assault, murder, drink driving and disposing of hazardous waste improperly.

Unfortunately we also have laws against possession of recreational drugs, which should be nobody's business but the user's, laws which circumscribe our right to free assembly, and laws which insist drivers have to wear a seatbelt and motorcyclists must wear a helmet because the government has decided it knows better than they do what's good for them.

I cannot support the principle of freedom of choice in everything, I'm afraid. A lot of the things we take for granted as 'culture' wouldn't be possible if everyone just did their own thing. Museums and libraries would be ransacked in short order, and the perpetrators wouldn't be hurting anybody, would they? I like the conservation of not just 'historical,' but also merely old buildings. If I lived in a 15th century cottage, why should I not be allowed to set fire to it, or knock it down, or paint it bright green, windowpanes and all? Surely I wouldn't be doing any harm; I'd just be expressing myself. But my community would be culturally the poorer for it.

A creed that is predicated upon doing whatever you like as long as it isn't harmful would need to have a much narrower conception of what constitutes harm than we do already, seeing as the law would be very short on specifics and virtually impossible to enforce. I think the world would soon come to resemble the wasteland Max Headroom used to broadcast to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 08:12:04 PM
I think that's a myth, Usher.

The world wouldn't simply descend into chaos as soon as the government stepped aside. I would contest that, strongly. The government, of course, will encourage you to believe it, strongly.

Anarchy is what happens every day. It's the millions upon millions of voluntary actions that represent the vast, vast majority of what we call everyday life. The government put a tax on everyday life, however, introducing ever-incresing numbers of bureaus to collect the tax and spend the tax, and then feed the myth that their presence prevents everyday life descending into chaos.

Think of it this way - what do the government do that you and I and everyone else on the board couldn't do for ourselves more effectively?   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 13 April, 2010, 08:15:08 PM
Mount an invasion?

:P

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 08:16:02 PM
Surface the roads. I don't think my neighbours would do a very good job of it themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 08:16:30 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 08:12:04 PM
Think of it this way - what do the government do that you and I and everyone else on the board couldn't do for ourselves more effectively?   

FUCK UP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 08:33:52 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 13 April, 2010, 07:40:41 PM
I think Labour camps should be re-introduced for the great unwashed who will never do a days work in their lives.

Labour camps! Take two bottles of Zyclon B into the shower? Couldn't I be sent to a Liberal or Green Party camp instead, they sound so much nicer. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 08:34:12 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 13 April, 2010, 08:15:08 PM
Mount an invasion?

:P

M.

hahah!  :lol:

Quote from: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 08:16:02 PM
Surface the roads. I don't think my neighbours would do a very good job of it themselves.

Yeah, but could a private company or a not-for-profit company or a communal collective not work out some way forward there (excuse the pun)?

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 April, 2010, 08:16:30 PM
FUCK UP!

Sorry?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul faplad Finch on 13 April, 2010, 08:46:44 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 08:12:04 PM
Think of it this way - what do the government do that you and I and everyone else on the board couldn't do for ourselves more effectively?

Quote from: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 08:16:02 PM
Surface the roads. I don't think my neighbours would do a very good job of it themselves.


Beware. Ill-informed knee jerk response ahead.

I reckon that, as Usher quite rightly points out, there are many things done by the Government that are largely unnoticed. At least until they aren't getting done anymore. Refuse Collection? Free public lending libraries? Primary and Secondary education for all? The list goes on.

I will however agree that there may be a case for saying the Government meddles a little to closely in the minutae of our lives. This is a problem that seems only to be getting worse as time goes on.  I simply think that, in my opinion, a middle ground needs to be found. Anarchy is not the answer.

Will this middle ground be found anytime soon? I doubt it. Not until we get some politicians who understandd that they are elected to serve the population, not Rule it, and given the options available to us, we aint getting them this time around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:22:42 PM
Quote from: faplad on 13 April, 2010, 08:46:44 PM
I will however agree that there may be a case for saying the Government meddles a little to closely in the minutae of our lives. This is a problem that seems only to be getting worse as time goes on.  I simply think that, in my opinion, a middle ground needs to be found. Anarchy is not the answer.

Will this middle ground be found anytime soon? I doubt it. Not until we get some politicians who understandd that they are elected to serve the population, not Rule it, and given the options available to us, we aint getting them this time around.

I appreciate what you're saying, faplad. However, from my perspective, the system of organised politics is fundamentally and terminally flawed - it's not about getting the right man/ woman for the job.

I refer you back to Shark's metaphor of the ship, earlier in the thread...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:35:01 PM
But, I must add... on reflection, it seems like I'm coming across like an evangelist for anarchy. That's not my intention - it's my POV, but I feel no need to shove it down any other throats. In fact, way I see it, the more ideas on the table the better.

This has been a great thread with some wonderful debate. I've had a great time trading POVs with everyone but I might step back a little and see what others think.

Oh, and Shark... you da man.  :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 April, 2010, 09:41:07 PM
All I care about is fast food: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVLEB0lv1rw


Do you see?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul faplad Finch on 13 April, 2010, 09:47:49 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:35:01 PM
This has been a great thread with some wonderful debate.

Indeed. I was a little worried that it could degenerate into a slanging match, which is why I waited as long as I did before joining it. Proof once again that this is the most civilised place on the web.

Still, plenty of time yet.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:53:54 PM
Quote from: faplad on 13 April, 2010, 09:47:49 PM
Still, plenty of time yet.

Maybe we should continue the debate... with alcohol...

:-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 09:54:15 PM
If you did away with the government tomorrow and replaced that with the rule of anarchy, you get an anarchist library with no membership cards, no fines and no reminders, just 'bring it back when you're done with it.' Within a week all the Jeffrey Archer novels go on the bonfire because... ah, never mind - I hear he's litigious. Within a year all the books have been burned because there's no gas for central heating and we've got to keep warm. After a while the anarchist press starts producing its own new books to replace the old ones. Some are typo-filled facsimiles of old books that still exist in a few private collections or are occasionally rescued from the town dump, and others are new products of the anarchist society and become a popular replacement for proper literature.

Society finds that it can run its own affairs quite well without an elected executive telling it what to do. Eventually some people emerge as being really good at planning and organizing and getting things done, and they get put in charge of service provision and by no means everybody is happy about it. Within a few decades the new society has evolved its own bureaucracy led by publicly elected officials. If the people are lucky they get to vote for the members of the newly-emerged politburo every 5 years. If they're unlucky, the executive get jobs for life, in their gift, to pass on to their own decendants.


For some reason I keep picturing scenes from Dr. Zhivago.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 April, 2010, 09:56:58 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:22:42 PM
Quote from: faplad on 13 April, 2010, 08:46:44 PM
I will however agree that there may be a case for saying the Government meddles a little to closely in the minutae of our lives. This is a problem that seems only to be getting worse as time goes on.  I simply think that, in my opinion, a middle ground needs to be found. Anarchy is not the answer.

Will this middle ground be found anytime soon? I doubt it. Not until we get some politicians who understandd that they are elected to serve the population, not Rule it, and given the options available to us, we aint getting them this time around.

I appreciate what you're saying, faplad. However, from my perspective, the system of organised politics is fundamentally and terminally flawed - it's not about getting the right man/ woman for the job.

I refer you back to Shark's metaphor of the ship, earlier in the thread...

[I have had a couple of drinks so i hope i am not rambling or typing too much...]

In my opinion it has never had an opportunity to really prove itself because it has been hijacked by criminal and sociopathic forces right from the word go so  therefore it cant be written off as being unviable.

To understand why i say this you have to understand WHY things are the way they are at present.

I can understand why yourself or anyone else will come to this conclusion if things are taken at face value but its not seeing the whole picture.Its terminally flawed from our perspective but thats because the system has been hijacked and its a sham and i dont have the time or the inclination to type 10,000 or 20,000 words explaining this but i could.

The problem with organised politics has been correctly identified and it is being dealt with.

I believe in the institution of govt in principle if its constitutional and represents the interests of the people and not power elites who control everything from behind the scenes.

I believe in the rule of law and by that i mean common law but i disregard a lot of legislation/ corporate law.

Getting rid of all the NWO/global governance freaks and the Rockerfeller/Rothschild filth and all the rest of them and all of those Club Of Rome/Bilderberg and all of that shadow govt and all of their institutions who are behind all of the problems we face today is the only viable solution to having any kind of future otherwise we will all end up living in a high tech tyrannical feudal system and a cultural/political dystopia of averageness and mankind will never reach its full potential.

Are things getting any better as we get older ?

No they are not as they are getting worse.Everytime we have an election the majority of people have this vague idea that things might improve with a newly elected govt but everytime this doesnt happen and this is because the vast majority havent identified what the problem is.

So if you dont know what the problem is then how can you fix it ?

You cant fix something unless you understand how it works.

Simple common sense.

I already know what the future is if we dont do something about it but the future is not set.

People need to learn about and understand what makes the world go round before they are able to advocate solutions.

I am not trying to disparage your views at all but i am with HOU on this one and Faplad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 09:59:11 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 09:53:54 PM
Quote from: faplad on 13 April, 2010, 09:47:49 PM
Still, plenty of time yet.

Maybe we should continue the debate... with alcohol...

:-\

Are you a mind reader as well hoo-Haa, (or is my web cam still on?) I just opened myself a bottle of beer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 10:03:34 PM
I myself head a 'Princeton' with dinner: gin, port and orange bitters!  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Here's an idea for everyone. Conscription politics!
Instead of mainly (though not all) self serving "elected" politicians, why not a national lottery akin to jury service where people are conscripted to political office.
Imagine the scene. You pick up your post one morning and...
"Bugger! I'm the chancellor of the exchequer!"
A half-way house between anarchy and "regular" politics?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 13 April, 2010, 10:19:48 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Here's an idea for everyone. Conscription politics!
Instead of mainly (though not all) self serving "elected" politicians, why not a national lottery akin to jury service where people are conscripted to political office.
Imagine the scene. You pick up your post one morning and...
"Bugger! I'm the chancellor of the exchequer!"
A half-way house between anarchy and "regular" politics?

hahahah! Brilliant, I love it! :lol:

And pity the poor Scotsman as he opens his mail, one sleepy-eyed morning, to discover he's Northern Ireland's Home Secretary!

ARGH!  :'(

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 13 April, 2010, 10:46:13 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Here's an idea for everyone. Conscription politics!
Instead of mainly (though not all) self serving "elected" politicians, why not a national lottery akin to jury service where people are conscripted to political office.
Imagine the scene. You pick up your post one morning and...
"Bugger! I'm the chancellor of the exchequer!"
A half-way house between anarchy and "regular" politics?


That's a brilliant idea Colin!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 April, 2010, 11:20:48 PM
My solution is that you can join a queue for any position and when it's your turn you get the job no matter how unqualified you are.

However when you are in the job, all the other people in the queue are in a meta-queue to fuck you in the ass bareback. You get to keep the job for as long as you can tolerate being fucked in the ass multiple times a day.

Now aside from the bareback rule it is entirely up to the related parties how they want to deal with things. The incumbent could stop wiping his ass so that his poo goes inside of his opponents body after it travels through the bell end, but does he really want so many fecal blood clots on his conscience? Sure, the fucker can spend all day fucking the incumbent so that he can't buy new schoolteachers, but what happens when HIS child wants to hire more staff?




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 April, 2010, 12:07:05 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Here's an idea for everyone. Conscription politics!
Instead of mainly (though not all) self serving "elected" politicians, why not a national lottery akin to jury service where people are conscripted to political office.
Imagine the scene. You pick up your post one morning and...
"Bugger! I'm the chancellor of the exchequer!"
A half-way house between anarchy and "regular" politics?


You must have read Solar Lottery by P.K. Dick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 14 April, 2010, 12:22:32 AM
Quote from: Garageman on 14 April, 2010, 12:07:05 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 13 April, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Here's an idea for everyone. Conscription politics!
Instead of mainly (though not all) self serving "elected" politicians, why not a national lottery akin to jury service where people are conscripted to political office.
Imagine the scene. You pick up your post one morning and...
"Bugger! I'm the chancellor of the exchequer!"
A half-way house between anarchy and "regular" politics?

You must have read Solar Lottery by P.K. Dick.

I think the President of Earth in Legion of Super-Heroes is decided by a big computer, possibly at random but perhaps screening people out for anti-social tendencies (like actually wanting to be a politician). Ah the future, where they have somehow managed to eliminate hacking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 April, 2010, 12:31:45 AM
They will never eliminate fucking though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 April, 2010, 12:34:28 AM
Down, boy.



I remember Armando Ianucci did an amusing skit where a trio of elderly women were reminiscing about the war, and they all had to take a turn in Churchill's wartime cabinet as their contribution to the war effort.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 14 April, 2010, 09:48:28 AM
http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ is a great site that enables you to choose between the parties by a direct blind comparison of policies.  No personalities, no marketing, just the actual promises.

Really useful for me - I'm 45% Green, 22% Labour, which I'd have guessed, but I'd never have thought I'd side with the Tories in 2 major policy areas.  Still, thank goodness I am 100% free of BNP/UKIP sympathies.  Sadly, it doesn't include the major nationalist parties or Northern Irish parties yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 April, 2010, 11:15:28 AM
I've bought myself a new 10 foot pole, specifically so I can NOT touch this thread with it.

Has anyone made a Hiltler comparison yet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2010, 11:40:26 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 14 April, 2010, 11:15:28 AM
I've bought myself a new 10 foot pole, specifically so I can NOT touch this thread with it.

Fascist!

QuoteHas anyone made a Hiltler comparison yet?

Will that one do?

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 14 April, 2010, 11:49:58 AM
Great find, Dudley - I'd recommend that to anyone. Turns out I'm mostly Green Party with leanings towards the Lib Dems, which is making me think a little about which of the two I should vote for.

The one shurely shome mishtake? moment was finding out that I agree with Labour on crime, which is strange because Labour's policy of creating new and ever more draconian laws whenever the wind changes is one of the reasons I've come to despise them. Oddly the policy didn't mention this little quirk and instead seemed to focus on more accountability for the police, unless I accidentally missed the part about expanding thoughtcrime legislation.

I think for fairness the Labour policy statement should include things like "We plan to create a legal system where you can get five years in 'the hole' for looking sideways at a public building while thinking about porn" and "We're changing the name of the country to 'Strangeways' so we can lock you all up at once, you naughty naughty people" to reflect the policies they've ruled by for the last far-too-many years.

Apart from that, great site. Fun spotting the BNP policies which are all totally insane and revolve around getting rid of THOSE PEOPLE as a universal panacaea for all our ills. Not so much fun seeing that 9% of visitors seem to respond strongly to their freaky Hitler-speak. (God DAMMIT Jim got there first.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 14 April, 2010, 11:53:13 AM
Actually looking at that Labour crime policy again I think I must have just clicked on the wrong one by mistake. It's nutty. Can I have a do-over?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2010, 12:00:35 PM
Quote from: Dudley on 14 April, 2010, 09:48:28 AM
http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ is a great site that enables you to choose between the parties by a direct blind comparison of policies.  No personalities, no marketing, just the actual promises.

20% Lib Dem; 60% Green; 20% Labour. Told you I was a wishy-washy PC liberal type ...

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2010, 12:02:50 PM
Quote from: Al_Ewing on 14 April, 2010, 11:49:58 AM
Apart from that, great site. Fun spotting the BNP policies which are all totally insane and revolve around getting rid of THOSE PEOPLE as a universal panacaea for all our ills.

Heh. I particularly liked the one where the root cause of all environmental problems is over-population which is caused by immigrants ...

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 April, 2010, 12:05:39 PM
I'm a quarter UKIP and half Lib Dem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 14 April, 2010, 12:10:22 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 14 April, 2010, 11:15:28 AM
I've bought myself a new 10 foot pole

You see? There's facilitators of illegal immigration on this very board!. I really hope he's worth the destruction of this country's values, health care and environment. Tsk! I suppose you want a free house to put him in,and next thing his family'll be over.Have you seen what they eat? You couldn't make it up! I'm not racist but...

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 14 April, 2010, 12:38:47 PM
... and "they get flash cars and what do we get? Nothing!"
– as I once heard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2010, 12:54:55 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 14 April, 2010, 12:38:47 PM
... and "they get flash cars and what do we get? Nothing!"
– as I once heard.

"What's the government doing? Nothing! It's a fucking disgrace!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Jo4JQIQro)

:-)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Albion on 14 April, 2010, 01:58:24 PM
I was surprised by my results.
50% Conservative, 25% Green, 25% Labour.

Before taking the test I'd have expected to see some Lid Dem in my results but there was none.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 April, 2010, 02:09:11 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 13 April, 2010, 11:20:48 PM
My solution is that you can join a queue for any position and when it's your turn you get the job no matter how unqualified you are.
However when you are in the job, all the other people in the queue are in a meta-queue to fuck you in the ass bareback. You get to keep the job for as long as you can tolerate being fucked in the ass multiple times a day.

As I understand from talking to its employees, this is the very contract offered by the Irish Civil Service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 02:22:15 PM
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, here's my view on the situation.

In order to raise money, the Government sells bonds. A bond is really nothing more than an I.O.U. which is worth more than you pay for it. For example, you may purchase a £1,000 bond for which you will be paid £1,100 when the time comes to sell it back to the government. All well and good so far.

Once the government has sold the bonds, it has enough money to pay for itself, to pay for hospitals and roads and jails and all the other things governments must pay for. It all sounds innocent enough so far.

Then comes the time for honouring the bond promise and paying you back your £1,100. In order to do this, the government issues more bonds to raise the money to do so. It also needs to issue and sell even more bonds because as well as paying bond holders (mainly banks and similar financial institutions) it also must continue paying for all the other stuff governments need to pay for.

As you can see, the more bonds the government issues, the more bonds it needs to issue in a vicious circle of spiralling debt - we call this "inflation." To pay back the bond holders, taxes continue to rise. Your taxes all go into paying off bond holders. Every penny.

It strikes me, then, how truly abominable it is for the government to be bailing out the banks. To bail out the banks, the government needs to issue bonds to sell to the banks in order to raise money to give to the banks to help them out. Work that one out.

Of course, none of the money I've been talking about so far is real. It's all just created out of nothing - mere numbers on a screen. We are all, however, expected to pay real money into the system in order to pay off this unreal debt. This is how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, it's a hideous system and I don't know why more people aren't up in arms about it.

The solution is simple. If a government can print bonds, then it can print money. If a government issued money instead of bonds, that money would be spent into society rather than lent into society. There would be nobody to pay back, no interest to find, no bankers with a stranglehold on our government. Taxes would fall dramatically for everyone and the standard of living for all would rise in equal measure. It would not cure all a society's ills, granted, but it would go a long way towards giving everyone a fair society and a decent standard of living.

Why do our politicians not remedy this situation?

Well, if you're one of the bankers who owns shares in the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England or any other of the central banks (such as a Rothschild, Schiff, Morgan etc), then you're going to be rich. I'm talking properly rich. Bill Gates isn't rich compared to these guys, he's just wealthy. When you have trillions of dollars in your bank (having used some of it to buy up as much of the world's gold, land, water and industry as you can) what could you not achieve? Say you have a promising young politician who's sympathetic to your business, you can fund him like mad. If, on the other hand, you have a promising young politician who's against you, then it's easy to destroy him with ruthless efficiency.

This is the main reason why our democracy is a sham. I am certain that most politicians begin their political careers actually wanting to do some good for the country, but once they find themselves inside the system they can't do much about it. If they try to do something about it they can soon be stopped by a 'phone call to a reporter alleging sexual misconduct, for example. If you're JFK (who himself tried to take the US out of the Federal Reserve's stranglehold by issuing government printed US Dollars backed by silver reserves), well...

I believe that we have to work together with our politicians to reclaim our parliament from the bankers and corporations who have hijacked it so ruthlessly. To simply blame the system of government or the politicians we have ended up with is too simplistic and presents a danger that we may be tempted to throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is our fault too for not keeping a close enough eye on how things are working.

The idea from earlier in this thread about a jury-type arrangement is a good one, but I think that your "Parliamentary Service" should consist of a constantly changing bunch of randomly chosen civilians being ever present in ministerial meetings to ask questions, make suggestions and even vote on the things our politicians are trying to do. Oversight, I suppose would be the idea I'm wandering after on this one. I'd also like to see independent reporters assigned to every ministry and department, probably on a rotating schedule.

The government doesn't need smashing - it needs rescuing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2010, 02:29:30 PM
Worryingly, I seem to agree with the Conservatives (22.22%) on health and education, but otherwise I seem to have a straight flush of agreement with the gay communists of the Green Party (77.78%).

And for a blind test, it's rather easy to spot BNP policies, I thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 April, 2010, 02:43:23 PM
That 'vote for policies' website is a great idea - some of them were difficult to choose between two options, and if I took it again I may end up with different percentages, but apparently I'm 55.56% green, 33.33% lib dem and 11.11% labour, which is kind of what I was expecting. In the past I would have been almost fully labour, but Nu-Labour (or Tory-lite) put an end to that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 14 April, 2010, 03:10:22 PM
11% Labour (crime), 11% Liberal Democrat (Europe) and 78% Green (everything else).

Fucking Hell, I'm a tree hugging hippy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 14 April, 2010, 03:40:01 PM
Democracy = UKIP

Europe = UKIP

Immigration = Conservatives

Economy = Labour

God knows how or why i chose Labour economic policy.

UKIP = 50 percent

Conservative = 25 percent

Labour = 25 percent


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 14 April, 2010, 05:20:36 PM
Didn't realise that I'm a Greenie 44%, with Lib Dem 33% and Labour 22%. That does surprise me. I found that difficult and I would like to revisit my choices. Definitely makes me want to look deeper into the policies of the parties so good website. Really gets one thinking.

Changing the subject somewhat, I have to say I'm liking the design of the Tory manifesto. Nice illustrations contrasting with the sober text. The Labour manifesto is lame and the Lib Dem's is dullo. (Could I really vote for a party with a logo that bad?)

Still no idea who I will vote for and not even sure that I will.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 April, 2010, 05:30:41 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 13 April, 2010, 07:55:03 PM
Unfortunately we also have laws against possession of recreational drugs, which should be nobody's business but the user's, ....... and laws which insist drivers have to wear a seatbelt and motorcyclists must wear a helmet because the government has decided it knows better than they do what's good for them.

Not having those laws would be fine if it wasn't for the fact that when thing go wrong, and they do so all the time, other people and society in general are affected.

If drivers who fail to wear seatbelts, or simply speed, are willing to opt out of NHS care and go private (assuming they live, of course), then we can scrap those laws.

If all the recreational drug users used private support services when they start suffering mental health disorders, then we can scrap those laws, too.

And it's not always as simple as a government deciding what's good for us - although a degree of ideology will be involved in many instances, many laws are evidence-based, whether they seem excessive or not.

Personally, I only have a problem with laws that cause suffering, not ones that merely cause irritation or inconvenience.


Regards

Robin

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 05:33:51 PM
Healthcare only for those who deserve it? I can't agree with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 14 April, 2010, 05:45:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 05:33:51 PM
Healthcare only for those who deserve it? I can't agree with that.

Who is proposing that ?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 06:35:37 PM
I was responding to this: "If drivers who fail to wear seatbelts, or simply speed, are willing to opt out of NHS care and go private (assuming they live, of course)..."

I am totally against treating people according to a non-medical opinion. "We won't treat alcoholics because they're alcoholics," "we won't treat accident victims who failed to take adequate precautions" or "we won't treat drug users because they use drugs." These sentiments are anathema to me. It's a bit like the death penalty in that if somebody dies and it's later found that they were actually innocent/wearing a seat belt after all, it's hard to put that right.

Once the Government finances are sorted out properly, as I keep banging on about, then there'll be enough money available to the NHS to banish thoughts of cost-cutting through selective treatments forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 April, 2010, 06:39:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 05:33:51 PM
Healthcare only for those who deserve it? I can't agree with that.

I can't either, and I certainly wasn't advocating it - my issue was with Usher's point about laws that infringe personal liberty.

The reality is that there will always be a finite pot of money to support members of the public in times of need. We can do the best we can to make sure public services use it efficiently and wisely, but at the same time the public has to accept some laws that may or may not be inconvenient are there to save that money, as well as protect us from our own stupidity and selfishness, and generally reduce suffering.

Now the right of assembly is another matter... although, sadly, it's not hard to see how that could put pressure on police budgets, because large masses of human beings do need to be managed.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 14 April, 2010, 06:53:06 PM
I am pleasantly surprised by this thread.  Carry on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2010, 07:06:11 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 14 April, 2010, 06:53:06 PM
I am pleasantly surprised by this thread.  Carry on.

Nazi!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 07:13:46 PM
Large masses of human beings largely manage themselves. This is not to say that we don't need laws and police, I think these things are as important to society as water and housing. The thing about police and laws are that they exist to manage extraordinary circumstances such as accidents and crime. For the most part, communities of people are perfectly capable of running their own affairs without everything turning into Mad Max.

For millions of years, humans got by without needing to be told how to live by some almighty leader. Each tribe looked after itself, kept its own laws and customs, traded and cooperated with other tribes, occasionally went to war. It's all perfectly natural and there's no great trick to it.

Today, of course, we live a lot differently and I think we've forgotten just how much of a social animal a human being is. Humans like to live in tribes, they love being part of a group and we have certain social skills hardwired into us. The truth is, if the government fell apart tomorrow, there would be some chaos, sure - but the majority of communities would remain intact. Many would most likely become stronger.

Now, if you meant that large masses of human beings in the modern world need to have their environment managed (by which I mean such things as keeping the sewers unblocked, making sure the water and food supplies are properly managed, roads and hospitals are built and there are enough ambulances and fire engines to go around etc., etc.) then I agree. This is what governments are for, to allow us all to live as closely to our own needs, beliefs and desires as possible and not, not ever, to tell us how to live beyond one or two widely accepted expectations such as not murdering or raping one another and suchlike.

To add a couple of RPM to Aleister Crowley's incredible rotating corpse, "And 'Do No Harm' shall be the whole of the Law."

Then again, I am often accused of being an unrealistic idealist so please feel free to leave me and the faeries alone to discuss our Utopia snuggled up inside this disused molehill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 April, 2010, 07:41:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 07:13:46 PMThis is what governments are for, to allow us all to live as closely to our own needs, beliefs and desires as possible and not, not ever, to tell us how to live beyond one or two widely accepted expectations such as not murdering or raping one another and suchlike.

I have a much more cynical view of humans and history, and I think part of a government's job is to protect individuals and societies from our own worst traits, such as our ignorance, selfishness and outright stupidity. Obviously, being composed largely of humans, governments are capable of the same behaviour at times, but that's why elections are not a bad thing every now and again.

Inevitably, every government is going to do some things that some of us don't agree with, but we have to make a distinction between serious issues and inconveniences.

It's also important to recognise that while any of us can argue hypothetically over the rights and wrongs any issue under the sun, governments and politicians actually have to make some real, practical decisions. We have to hope, and demand, that they make decisions based on facts and often harsh realities, rather than political ideology, greed and selfishness. I think those three latter issues are the root causes of most of our problems.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 14 April, 2010, 07:51:34 PM
100% BNP. I'm to don my jack boots.
(http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/36991-1/SiegHeilPuppy.jpg)







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 14 April, 2010, 08:14:43 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 14 April, 2010, 07:51:34 PM
100% BNP. I'm to don my jack boots.
(http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/36991-1/SiegHeilPuppy.jpg)

i dont feel as bad now, i'm only 75% bnp and 25% ukip :-X







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 14 April, 2010, 09:13:29 PM
QuoteFor the most part, communities of people are perfectly capable of running their own affairs without everything turning into Mad Max.

I don't agree at all - I don't think it would take much at all for the facade of society to slip completely. I definitely subscribe to the Joker's philosophy that "when the chips are down, civilized people will eat each other".

I wish my view of humanity was as optimistic as yours!

QuoteFor millions of years, humans got by without needing to be told how to live by some almighty leader. Each tribe looked after itself, kept its own laws and customs, traded and cooperated with other tribes, occasionally went to war. It's all perfectly natural and there's no great trick to it.

For millions of years we also had famine, plague, genocide, invaders, slavery, widespread superstiton, a life expectancy of 30, no healthcare, no leisure time, no means of mass transport, no internet, no xboxes. I think I'm a lot happer with the way things are now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 09:22:51 PM
Ah, but we were 'appy then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 14 April, 2010, 09:34:37 PM
QuoteAh, but we were 'appy then...

The concept of 'happiness' is a modern invention, surely? I would imagine that until relatively recently life for the vast majority of people was an endless, desperate struggle to simply scrabble together enough food to survive, interspersed with periods of literally unimaginable horror and suffering.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2010, 09:44:04 PM
I wouldn't be too sure. Once you've mastered fire you can pretty much sleep in a tree all day like those sex-maniac monkeys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 April, 2010, 09:55:39 PM
Quote from: albion83uk on 14 April, 2010, 01:58:24 PM
I was surprised by my results.
50% Conservative, 25% Green, 25% Labour.

Before taking the test I'd have expected to see some Lid Dem in my results but there was none.

Quoth Lembit Opik: "Have you got any LibDem in you? D'you want some?  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 14 April, 2010, 10:01:34 PM
Quote from: radiator on 14 April, 2010, 09:34:37 PM
QuoteAh, but we were 'appy then...

The concept of 'happiness' is a modern invention, surely? I would imagine that until relatively recently life for the vast majority of people was an endless, desperate struggle to simply scrabble together enough food to survive, interspersed with periods of literally unimaginable horror and suffering.

Ah... You've had tea with my in-laws then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 April, 2010, 10:02:55 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 14 April, 2010, 03:10:22 PM
11% Labour (crime), 11% Liberal Democrat (Europe) and 78% Green (everything else).

Fucking Hell, I'm a tree hugging hippy.


Just think what you could all accomplish together if you all started voting accordingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 14 April, 2010, 10:10:31 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 14 April, 2010, 09:55:39 PM
Quoth Lembit Opik: "Have you got any LibDem in you? D'you want some?  ;)
Who's a cheeky boy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 14 April, 2010, 10:10:59 PM
UKIP are by far the best option for the economy because they propose to axe all of the quangos that have been set up by New Labour and stop the taxpayer funding the private sector through what is known as the Third Sector.

Not only that they would exit the UK from the EU and save the taxpayer up to 120 billion a year.

None of the main 3 parties are prepared to do this as they would prefer to cut public services instead while they continue to fund the Third Sector.They would also cut Public Sector non-jobs as well.Of course this will create more unemployment by default as the Third Sector trough-feeders will have no other form of generating income for themselves in the short term and its the same with Public Sector non-jobs so they cost the taxpayer when they are feeding off them and they will still be feeding off the taxpayer when they are unemployed so you cant really win here at all in terms of saving money in the short term until they can generate their own income within the private sector which is what everyone else has to do who doesnt work in the public sector.

I have yet to hear a convincing argument that is for unelected quangos etc but i am all ears.........

None of the main 3 parties outline any policies to deal with the criminality within the banking sector or the BOE so its business as usual in that respect so all we have to look forward to with them is the dismal interest rates paid by banks to savers and no end to the taxpayer footing the bill/shovelling cash for the excesses and mistakes and criminality within the banking and financial sector.

I quote conservatives : "We will restore the banks historic role in monitoring the overall growth of credit and debt in the economy "

Yes of course you will and its not like they have stopped doing that under New Labour.

I am sure that they will continue to expand and contract the money supply/the economy as that is their historic role.This is an outline proposal but i havent gone into it in any detail so i dont know if the conservatives have expanded upon this beyond what i have quoted from their election manifesto.

"We need to change the way we regulate our banks to stop a crisis on this scale ever happening again"

Again i dont know what this means in detail so it could mean anything or it could mean we wont do anything about it.Saying "We need" to do something is not the same as "We will do something" and anyway govts dont dictate banking policy as its the BOE who are affiliated to the FED in the US who are owned and control by Rothschilds etc who dictate banking regulations and everything else to do with the financial sector and i might as well point out to everyone that Bilderberg who David Cameron is affiliated to have already stated that it is their intention to keep the economy in contraction for at least another 12 months.

They also state that : "WE will put the BOE in charge of prudential supervision"

They already are.

Thats all for now.

Thats an outline of their policy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 April, 2010, 10:16:20 PM
Quote from: radiator on 14 April, 2010, 09:13:29 PM
For millions of years we also had famine, plague, genocide, invaders, slavery, widespread superstiton, a life expectancy of 30, no healthcare, no leisure time, no means of mass transport, no internet, no xboxes. I think I'm a lot happer with the way things are now.

That was the answer. I'm guessing the question was "what have the Romans ever done for us?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 15 April, 2010, 01:05:34 PM
I do recall reading once that when man was in his hunter/gatherer phase, he only had to work about twenty hours a week to provide food and shelter etc. for him and his family.

I'd be willing to add another five onto that to pay for games, television and cinema.

Sadly the extra fifteen hours is probably just tax and insurance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2010, 03:26:14 PM
"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power."

Benito Mussolini
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 April, 2010, 03:45:11 PM
I recall now that i chose what turned out to be Labour in that survey because that outline policy said that it aimed to keep homeowners in their homes if they lose their jobs or whatever.

That seemed like a good idea.

I turned down UKIP immigration because of ONE thing and that was future immigrants shall have to prove that they can support themselves financially without recourse to the benefits system which seemed to me to a bit extreme and i disagreed with it.Its the total opposite of what happens now but if someone emmigrates to the UK and is a taxpayer then they should have access to the benefits system as and when they need it the same as the existing population who are already UK citzens have.

What happens if they lose their jobs ?

How can you discriminate like that ?

If you invite them into the country then they have a right to access the benefits system but not to exploit it of course.

This needs sorting out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 15 April, 2010, 03:57:32 PM
I find it very hard to decide on who to vote for as my political beliefs are quite contradictory - most of my views are very leftist, but on some issues are very right wing. I don't slot neatly into any one party.

I think my survey results support this - 66% Green, 22% Tory and 11% Liberal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2010, 04:11:45 PM
Ask your candidates if they're going to continue letting the government raise money based on debt by selling bonds, or allow them to print their own debt-free money. If they want to keep things as they are, don't vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 April, 2010, 04:26:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2010, 04:11:45 PM
Ask your candidates if they're going to continue letting the government raise money based on debt by selling bonds, or allow them to print their own debt-free money. If they want to keep things as they are, don't vote for them.


Rothschilds invest in Govt bonds.

I think David Cameron is a career politician and a fraud and he is the next chosen PM but its not guaranteeed because of the popularity of the independent parties which is why the mainstream media are totally ignoring them which is really all they can do to divert attention away from them because the mainstream media just perpetuate what is now known as the left/right paradigm which is an illusion of choice when they are two sides of the same coin which is where the saying "No matter who you vote for the govt always gets in" originates from.

There was David Cameron today saying that Gordon is a genius and that type of thing.

Get Fucking real.He is supposed to the opposition but he is just playing the career politician game and he knows the score and who is really in control.

We have paper voting but that can easily be fiddled.

I dont reckon that UKIP would win this election at all because i think that will be Conservatives and if that happens we will be having exactly the same conversation we are having now in 5 years time and so the cycle continues............................
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 15 April, 2010, 04:29:45 PM
I like this bit:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2010, 04:11:45 PM
don't vote for them.

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 April, 2010, 04:33:31 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 15 April, 2010, 04:26:01 PM
We have paper voting but that can easily be fiddled.

Not as easily as computer voting.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2010, 05:24:22 PM
I just came across the phrase "the managed decline of developed nations." Neat idea for a story, I thought. Then I looked around...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Daveycandlish on 15 April, 2010, 06:28:24 PM
So who's watchin the mass debate tonight? (and yes I meant that)

Me? Think I'll catch up on last fridays Ashes to Ashes...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 06:44:58 PM
Here's a very interesting tale, and I thought I'd share it as a lesson, even though I was trying to steer clear of this thread.

I decided to do the "voteforpolicies" test for a laugh to see what kind of mix I would end up with.

I didn't read the "further policies" on any party, in any section.

I went through the test in about 10 minutes, tops.

I got bored trying to decipher some parts of it and I confess my mind was drifting to 'putting the kettle on'. To highlight this, I have rather a short attention span if I suspect things are being explained in an overly complicated manner, when a more coherent method is easily available)

I came out with a 33% leaning towards the policies of the fucking BNP.

This makes me sick, quite frankly. Without paying enough attention, entirely my own fault, I have partially agreed with a legalised bunch of racists.

The moral of this story is READ THE SMALL PRINT. For God's sake, vote at the election. If you don't, you have no right to complain later. Vote for whatever it is that you genuinely believe in. But make damn sure you know exactly who you're supporting and exactly what it is you're signing up for, not just the headline policies.

The devil is indeed in the detail.

I'm off to wash my soul in soapy water.

(In other news I was 33% Green, and then 11% Tory, Labour and Liberal)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 April, 2010, 07:13:19 PM
Quote from: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 06:44:58 PM
(In other news I was 33% Green, and then 11% Tory, Labour and Liberal)

So basically, you'll just be happy if somebody wins?  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 07:22:21 PM
I think it means I just wish we could all get along :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 15 April, 2010, 07:23:12 PM
I'm in total agreement with Fester.

People; please pay attention to who you're considering voting for, I mean, we are voting for who is going to lead this country, not for who is going to win X-Factor.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 15 April, 2010, 07:26:09 PM
Ah fuck it I'm just going to write all the parties down on a piece of paper, pin it to a dart board and throw a dart at it.








VNP (Vzzbux National Party) (Vote now)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 15 April, 2010, 07:45:29 PM
Quote from: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 06:44:58 PM
I'm off to wash my soul in soapy water.

(In other news I was 33% Green, and then 11% Tory, Labour and Liberal)


I recommend Ecover products for creating your soapy water in a Green Party type way....

However, they are a Belgian company so you'll have to hate yourself at the same time....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 07:46:30 PM
Hey Fester I did the complete test with some strange results.
Eyes down for a full recap:-

Democracy.......Conservative
Crime...............UKIP
Health..............UKIP
Education.........UKIP
Environment......Labour
Immigration.......Labour
Europe.............BNP
Economy..........BNP
Welfare............Liberal

As you can see it's a right old mish mash across the board. I do believe that if you do the test you have to be truthful, otherwise it's a waste of time. Especially if you are trying to answer just to get the party that you want everyone to know you follow.
I have always thought that there is no one party for me and this just proves it. I knew I am to the right in some areas but again I am also to the left in others.

Before I get the old racist card thrown at me because of the BNP bits, remember to look at my immigration result.

All this means is that I will be voting Liberal in my area (I know I can't believe it myself) and here are the main reasons why.
I can never vote for a party that sold all that gold at rock bottom prices and also robbed our pension funds and this by the Chancellor at the time.
I also can't vote Tory as those Bastards made parking in my Fucking street cost £25. I now park up the road in the non permit area. It's not just the big things that piss me off.

So come voting day my cross will be a waste of time as it'll be in the yellow box  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 07:54:51 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 07:46:30 PM
So come voting day my cross will be a waste of time as it'll be in the yellow box  ::)

I'm not sure any more if the term 'wasted vote' really means what it did in previous terms of office. It seems to me that, in the current climate, it could at least be a signal that the main two parties can no longer rely on the guilt of it to garner more votes for themselves.

Or maybe I'm just getting old.

Or maybe I'm just trying to see it from all angles, whilst really waiting for the Conspiracy Thread...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 07:57:48 PM
Just think if everyone who was pissed off or just don't normally vote put a tick in their box, what an upset :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 07:59:52 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 07:57:48 PM
Just think if everyone who was pissed off or just don't normally vote put a tick in their box, what an upset :o

Well, quite. But it would be more of a landslide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 15 April, 2010, 08:20:45 PM
I got 25% Liberal Democrat (welfare) and 75% Green (environment, education and democracy). Those are the issues that interest me. I'll see how I score on the issues that don't (and the economy, which does, but I don't think there are any magic solutions).

Edit: Oh buggah. I see now it says choose at least 4, not just 4. I'm not sure I can have another go. Oh well. I'd already decided how I was going to vote anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 08:23:51 PM
No Green for me HoU, damn this planet and all who sail on her  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 15 April, 2010, 08:25:32 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 April, 2010, 08:23:51 PM
No Green for me HoU, damn this planet and all who sail on her  :lol:

That's Tordelback and DevonsDaddy, then.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 April, 2010, 08:29:35 PM
I've found the solution to the countries problems. HOO HAA's books inspired me so here goes.>bates breath accordingly<

ZOMBIE-FACATION!

If we zombiefy the nation we save on fuel, electricity everything and help protect the enviroment for future undead generations.

Quantitive Eating I call it. Its the Noble Prize for sure this time! I think this will go down far better than my Sabre toothed kitten experiments. Glory days they were though eh? [spoiler][minus the court cases and prison term of course.][/spoiler]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 15 April, 2010, 08:50:38 PM
I love these quiz things!

I'm 25% Conservative (health), 25% Lib Dem (education), 25% Labour (environment), and 25% Green (welfare).



I'll probably vote Socialist when the time comes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 15 April, 2010, 08:58:56 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 April, 2010, 08:29:35 PM
Quantitive Eating I call it. Its the Noble Prize for sure this time! I think this will go down far better than my Sabre toothed kitten experiments. Glory days they were though eh? [spoiler][minus the court cases and prison term of course.][/spoiler]

A wonderful idea! Move over Logan's Run!  :lol:

Just switched over the three party debate. Not a word of truth out of those charlatans... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 15 April, 2010, 09:01:18 PM
Oh was that debate on tonight. I would never have guessed. They haven't even mentioned it on the TV. Can't believe I missed it.







VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 April, 2010, 09:40:35 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 15 April, 2010, 08:20:45 PM


Edit: Oh buggah. I see now it says choose at least 4, not just 4. I'm not sure I can have another go. Oh well. I'd already decided how I was going to vote anyway.

I did the same thing as i didnt have time to go through all of the topics.I will go back and do the rest later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 15 April, 2010, 10:29:28 PM
Who wants to buy my vote?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
I've just gone through Vote for Policies, and frankly the experience was somewhat depressing. In every case there was a total lack of practical detail. Also, I had to choose the lesser evil in every case - there was nothing I could subscribe to with any enthusiasm, and I've forgotten what I voted for already. As someone who works in the NHS, the health policies made particularly grim reading - none of them have a fucking clue.

The laughable result was 77.78% to the Greens, 11.11% to the Lib Dems (Democracy), 11.11% to the Conservatives (Education).

Why is the result laughable? I'd never vote for the Greens, because I'm not anti-nuclear power and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Cthulouis on 15 April, 2010, 11:11:59 PM
Quote from: uncle fester on 15 April, 2010, 06:44:58 PM
For God's sake, vote at the election. If you don't, you have no right to complain later.

Just being human, regardless of whether or not you vote, puts you under the remit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19 of which states "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

If I don't vote for anyone, I can still voice opposition at whoever wins. If I do vote for someone, and they subsequently fulfil every promise they made, I can still complain if I don't like it. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 April, 2010, 04:00:41 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
Why is the result laughable? I'd never vote for the Greens, because I'm not anti-nuclear power and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.


Regards

Robin

But do those two beliefs determine your vote ahead of issues such as the economy, policing, education, foreign affairs, etc?  The Greens offer the best overall package of policies (to my mind and, it seems, to yours): inevitably you'll not agree with all of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 09:20:40 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
I'd never vote for the Greens, because I'm not anti-nuclear power and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.

Are you so keen on nuclear power that you wouldn't vote Green, because you couldn't guard against the possibility that having just two or three Green MPs in the House would be enough to stop a nuclear power station being built?

I am interested to know more about your enthusiasm for genetic modification. I'm not exactly horrified by it myself, but it seems to me any advantages it has to offer are purely commercial, whereas there are far greater potential human benefits to be had from social, political and economic reform than from the technological fix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 16 April, 2010, 10:18:05 AM
Somebody should really start making "I agree with Nick" posters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 April, 2010, 12:01:16 PM
Quote from: Daveycandlish on 15 April, 2010, 06:28:24 PM
So who's watchin the mass debate tonight? (and yes I meant that)

Me? Think I'll catch up on last fridays Ashes to Ashes...

Spooky! That's what we did!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 01:49:33 PM
I have engaged the Borg...

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/Misc/borrow_facebook_ban.jpg

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 16 April, 2010, 01:59:15 PM
What was the content of the facebook postings that were so contentious?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 02:03:16 PM
I asked, "Why did you not even bother to vote on the Digital Economy Bill?" which is, as anyone can clearly see, a wholly inappropriate question to ask an elected representative.

I should be ashamed of myself.  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 16 April, 2010, 02:33:58 PM
I amazed that you were not the one vilified in the paper...shame on you...you disgust me with your objectionable manner and view-point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Stacey on 16 April, 2010, 02:48:57 PM
Shark .. you know this makes you legendary, right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 16 April, 2010, 02:51:08 PM
Quote from: James S on 16 April, 2010, 02:48:57 PM
Shark .. you know this makes you legendary, right?

He's got a point.
Well done, Mr Shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 02:57:11 PM
You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 April, 2010, 03:06:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 01:49:33 PM
I have engaged the Borg...

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/Misc/borrow_facebook_ban.jpg



Its interesting how each time you have confronted the dishonourable MP about this matter each time they have chosen to have someone else speak for them rather than talk about it directly.

Its as if they feel that it is beneath themselves to talk directly to anyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 05:53:14 PM
David Borrow apparently had the eighth largest MPs' expenses claim in 2007/8: £172,706.


Driving home tonight I was heartened by all the vox pops on the radio saying that after hearing the leaders' debate they would now be voting LibDem instead of Labour or Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 07:11:28 PM
Quote from: Dudley on 16 April, 2010, 04:00:41 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
Why is the result laughable? I'd never vote for the Greens, because I'm not anti-nuclear power and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.

But do those two beliefs determine your vote ahead of issues such as the economy, policing, education, foreign affairs, etc?  The Greens offer the best overall package of policies (to my mind and, it seems, to yours): inevitably you'll not agree with all of them.

Remember that I also said:

Also, I had to choose the lesser evil in every case - there was nothing I could subscribe to with any enthusiasm, and I've forgotten what I voted for already.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 08:04:31 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 09:20:40 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
I'd never vote for the Greens, because I'm not anti-nuclear power and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.

Are you so keen on nuclear power that you wouldn't vote Green, because you couldn't guard against the possibility that having just two or three Green MPs in the House would be enough to stop a nuclear power station being built?

I'm not especially keen on nuclear power, I'm just not anti- it. It's the anti-technology angle that concerns me. The Greens are in favour to renewable technologies, of couse, but generally I don't trust them.

QuoteI am interested to know more about your enthusiasm for genetic modification. I'm not exactly horrified by it myself, but it seems to me any advantages it has to offer are purely commercial, whereas there are far greater potential human benefits to be had from social, political and economic reform than from the technological fix.

The commercial sector will exploit anything it can get its grubby little mitts on, even, I suspect, social, political and economic reforms. We just have to aim to curb its excesses and support what's good.

Sadly, most research is driven by the commercial sector, and as a result it gets the rights to exploit it. The only way to mitigate this is for public money to be put into scientfic and technological research, with a view to developing new industries that are going to provide jobs and produce beneficial products.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 08:16:09 PM
A time limit on all patents of five to ten years might help. You invent something, you make a fortune off it for 5-10 years and then the idea reverts to public ownership, or 95% of it to public ownership if you think the inventor should keep earning until death.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 08:34:13 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 08:04:31 PM
Sadly, most research is driven by the commercial sector, and as a result it gets the rights to exploit it. The only way to mitigate this is for public money to be put into scientfic and technological research, with a view to developing new industries that are going to provide jobs and produce beneficial products.

I'm not wholly in favour of public investment where GM or biotechnology in general are concerned. In recent years the pharmaceutical industry, struggling to come up with new blockbuster drugs through the conventional fine synthetic chemistry approach, has been keen to buy up biotech companies with the most promising products pipeline in the hope that they'll be the future source of lucrative large molecule patents. Public investment comes in the form of grants and technology park facilities to get things started, but it's big business that stands to reap the commercial dividends. The same would be happening with GM crops if the industry had managed to persuade the public that there was any need at all for the products to exist, but they weren't very convincing. People are a lot more willing to give free money to the pharmaceutical industry than agribusiness because they're willing to believe that the former is about saving lives rather than making money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 April, 2010, 08:50:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 15 April, 2010, 10:38:38 PM
and I'm strongly pro-GM technology.


Regards

Robin

I think its outrageous that Monsanto should be allowed to corporatise and control the food chain wholesale but they wont try that here in the west but they would like to do this in developing countries if they are not already doing so.

I think they should be stamped on very very hard.

This is the worst example of private sector exploitation.

I dont think any public money should be given to the private sector in principle because they wont see a return on it and i expect the private sector to fund itself.There has been far too much of this already what with bailouts being given to banks and the taxpayer being charged with it with NO return on their investments.

I am seeing this happen more and more but thats because we live in a corporatocray [fascism] where govts treat the the public purse as an infinate supply of cash that they think they can do what they like with.

For example Microsoft were proposing a tax paid by everyone to contribute towards improved cybersecurity because govts latest scare campaign is cyberattacks from russia and China etc.This is complete bolloxs and what makes it worse is Microsoft were proposing it.

My solution for that was for Microsoft to improve the security of their software which they could easily do plus the fact that we all pay cash to private sector ISP of which a percentage of their profits should go towards improving cybersecurity not taxpayers.

I dont want one penny of any taxes i pay going towards the pharmaceutical companies.Its totally out of the question.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 11:12:55 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 08:34:13 PMPublic investment comes in the form of grants and technology park facilities to get things started, but it's big business that stands to reap the commercial dividends.

Yes, so you make sure the companies you set up and fun are public sector companies.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 11:21:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 16 April, 2010, 08:50:34 PM

I dont think any public money should be given to the private sector in principle because they wont see a return on it and i expect the private sector to fund itself.

I never said that money should be given to the private sector. I said:

Sadly, most research is driven by the commercial sector, and as a result it gets the rights to exploit it. The only way to mitigate this is for public money to be put into scientfic and technological research, with a view to developing new industries that are going to provide jobs and produce beneficial products.

the implication being that public sector R&D and commercialisation of results is funded and supported in order to offset the activities of the private.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 April, 2010, 11:57:41 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 11:21:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 16 April, 2010, 08:50:34 PM

I dont think any public money should be given to the private sector in principle because they wont see a return on it and i expect the private sector to fund itself.

I never said that money should be given to the private sector. I said:

Sadly, most research is driven by the commercial sector, and as a result it gets the rights to exploit it. The only way to mitigate this is for public money to be put into scientfic and technological research, with a view to developing new industries that are going to provide jobs and produce beneficial products.

the implication being that public sector R&D and commercialisation of results is funded and supported in order to offset the activities of the private.


Regards

Robin

That part of my comment wasnt directed at yourself and i understood what you were saying.It was just the GM bit.

Apologies.

I just realised how stupid my comment was regarding my taxes going to pharmaceutical companies because up to a point i dont mind at all but it was that H1N1 scare that i took exception to for various reasons and now there are all those unwanted H1N1 vaccinations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 12:23:55 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 11:21:13 PM
I never said that money should be given to the private sector. The implication being that public sector R&D and commercialisation of results is funded and supported in order to offset the activities of the private.

Fair enough. I just lack your vision. Just because we don't do that at the moment I was assuming we'd continue in the same vein in the future. I hear plenty about enabling research entrepreneurs to start up private firms, and seeking private sector partnerships to commercialize laboratory science discoveries from the universities, but I don't hear much from any political party about setting up new state-owned commercial enterprises. I think politicians on the the whole tend to see that as not being the role of government these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 17 April, 2010, 12:42:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2010, 02:57:11 PM
You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment.  ;)

You're still Warren's bitch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 17 April, 2010, 08:45:34 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 12:23:55 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 16 April, 2010, 11:21:13 PM
I never said that money should be given to the private sector. The implication being that public sector R&D and commercialisation of results is funded and supported in order to offset the activities of the private.

Fair enough. I just lack your vision.

Most would say my naivety - I expect it would be much harder and more complex than I hope.


QuoteI don't hear much from any political party about setting up new state-owned commercial enterprises. I think politicians on the the whole tend to see that as not being the role of government these days.

Let's face it, it would be a costly can of worms, and I can see why governments and would-be-governments steer clear of it. However, I'd really like to see some genuine Big Ideas for our countries that are properly planned and properly explained to the electorate. Most policy and argument is vague waffle about fairness, reducing waste, and so forth, or designed to appeal to our fears, prejudices and general ignorance.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 17 April, 2010, 01:10:07 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 April, 2010, 05:53:14 PM
David Borrow apparently had the eighth largest MPs' expenses claim in 2007/8: £172,706.


Driving home tonight I was heartened by all the vox pops on the radio saying that after hearing the leaders' debate they would now be voting LibDem instead of Labour or Tory.


Didnt LibDems announce that they are going to get rid of all the oppressive legislation in the UK to do with civil liberties that has been forced on us by New Labour ?

I wipll have to look that one up but if there was a political party that guaranteed that it is going to dismantle the police state in the UK i would vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 01:22:05 PM
So would I. It won't happen, though. Nobody's going to change any of that oppressive legislation.

It does all have the whiff of stage management, though. I was watching an analysis of that leaders' "debate" the other night, and one of the analysts began with the words "the Lib Dems are not going to win the election..." I keep hearing this. The Lib Dems are not going to win. Not going to win. But, they're "doing so well." It's almost like they're being set up to win, just to give the impression to the electorate that something genuinely new is going to happen.

We all know it doesn't matter which branch of the LibLabCon Party gets in, it'll still be the bankers and corporations calling the shots, but those who look no further than the colour of the flag flying above Number 10 will think something significant has happened when, in fact, nothing will change.

Just an observation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 17 April, 2010, 03:54:59 PM
Lib Dems  want to scrap the pound and join the Euro which i dont agree with especially as the EU and the EURO are becoming unstable and besides from what i understand there are certain forces within the /UK establishment that wont let that happen and this is why the UK hasnt already scrapped the pound already so thats a failed policy.

I dont want their shite globalist/NWO currency as the Euro is a inbetween stage for a global currency.

They also propose to scrap the ID card scheme as well but wether they will if they get in is another story but i refuse to submit to /ID cards anyway.

I am also sick of elections in the UK being all about majorities and the first past the post horse race because it makes more sense for there to be proportional representation which would mean that a party like Labour would not be able to continue its wrecking spree of the UK unchallenged.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 17 April, 2010, 06:02:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 01:22:05 PM
We all know it doesn't matter which branch of the LibLabCon Party gets in, it'll still be the bankers and corporations calling the shots, but those who look no further than the colour of the flag flying above Number 10 will think something significant has happened when, in fact, nothing will change.

Just an observation.

An observation based on years upon years of exactly what you're talking about happening across the western world.

Yet people still get excited at election time. In fact, as time passes, elections seem to be getting more and more like the X-Factor final - not surprising, then, to hear Simon Cowell say he wants to get involved in politics, bringing more and more 'entertainment' value to the whole process.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Braincrusher on 17 April, 2010, 06:51:18 PM
If I don't vote, it won't be out of apathy or being too lazy. I'm SICK OF THE LOT OF 'EM and why can't they put a none of the above option on the forms?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 17 April, 2010, 07:49:57 PM
Quote from: Braincrusher on 17 April, 2010, 06:51:18 PM
If I don't vote, it won't be out of apathy or being too lazy. I'm SICK OF THE LOT OF 'EM and why can't they put a none of the above option on the forms?

Dude, write/ draw a 'none of the above' box onto your form. That's a standard spoil, right there, and far from apathetic (in my humble opinion).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 08:03:19 PM
And then you can say afterwards "shit, look - the Tories/Labour got in again! I'm glad I spoiled my vote, as it would have done no good anyway if I'd voted."


For anyone interested in tactical voting, there are hours of fun to be had from this website.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/ (http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/)

The Greens are in third place in Brighton Pavilion (Labour) and have a genuine chance of winning. The 2005 results were:

Labour 15,995
Conservative 10,343
'Minority parties' 9,252
Liberal Democrats 7,070

If you lived there and reject the main parties you could vote Green for a laugh, or you could just write 'arseholes' on your ballot paper, which is funnier but changes nothing. Rejecting the electoral process doesn't actually change the composition of parliament. If you don't like the way they govern, refusing to vote isn't the same as taking the moral high ground any more than Pontias Pilate washing his hands is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 08:11:30 PM
Vote for Pingu.



Might as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 02:42:39 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 08:11:30 PM
Vote for Pingu.



Might as well.

If they are affiliated to or are a fifth cloumnist for foreign/offshore NWO/banking/Globalist interests like Bilderberg then dont vote for them either.

Nick Clegg has attended Bilderberg meetings.

All 3 main parties are affiliated to Bilderberg so i reject all 3 main parties and if you think that Nick Clegg is being set up to win you know he doesnt represent us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 08:52:27 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 08:03:19 PM
If you don't like the way they govern, refusing to vote isn't the same as taking the moral high ground any more than Pontias Pilate washing his hands is.

For me, to spoil my vote is not just a rejection of the current leadership - it's a rejection of the process, itself.

It's certainly not an exercise in piety...

It's this:

To have my gang get into power and be able to tell you, and your gang, how to live your life seems fundamentally flawed, to me.

'an it harm none, do what ye will'

I have no wish to tell you, or anyone else, how to handle your finances, how to conduct your personal life or how to express your beliefs; religious or otherwise.

Spoiling my vote, therefore, may remain an expression of apathy to you, Usher, but it is the only expression with any integrity I am left with.    
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 18 April, 2010, 12:02:50 PM
Territoriality seems to be a human condition that has never really dissapeared. If you and your kith or kin outnumber others you can dominate that area by sheer weight of numbers alone and can therefore order the world to suit your interests or prejudices even.

Is that not the nature of human power since we first began creating civilizations, remaking the enviroment to our own liking?

Some more contentious theories about civilizations origins have rejected the hunter gather to collective farming hypothesis believing instead that organized violence,warfare was the trigger for settled communities. You bully one group into becoming farmers who grow the crops to feed the Army so it can go raiding, gathering more booty, territory and subject peoples to do the dirty work for you  [slaves.]

Er, I'm probably going to vote Lib Dem. Not that I believe a word they say but it's them or the Tories so my territorial prejudice and self interest would be better served by a Nick Clegg administration. How selfish of me, eh?

Civilization indeed. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 12:52:06 PM
Why can't we all have our own little local governments on the village/town or county level with Westminster there entirely for national co-ordination? It would be magnificently chaotic and uneven, but truly democratic. Local laws for local people.

If one side (nationally) gains 51% of the votes and gets to be in charge, that isn't democracy at all - that's just mob rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 18 April, 2010, 02:11:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 12:52:06 PM
Why can't we all have our own little local governments on the village/town or county level with Westminster there entirely for national co-ordination? It would be magnificently chaotic and uneven, but truly democratic. Local laws for local people.

Okay, so who is going to decide which little community we each get to live in? What if too many people want to live in one place? What if large numbers of old people go and retire to East Anglia, but nobody is working there; are the taxes from hard working Londoners or the industrious Scots going to be directed towards the massively increased healthcare needs of that region? When folks from Texting-While-Driving-Is-Fine are caught using their phones driving through Mobiles-Kill, are they tried in Texting-Is-Fine or Mobiles-Kill? While awaiting trial for murder, which region's prison are they kept in, and who foots the bill? This isn't just a can of worms, it's New Improved Wormo, with added Wriggle.

Things are difficult and badly coordinated as it is without even more fragmentation.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 02:23:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 01:22:05 PM
So would I. It won't happen, though. Nobody's going to change any of that oppressive legislation.

It does all have the whiff of stage management, though. I was watching an analysis of that leaders' "debate" the other night, and one of the analysts began with the words "the Lib Dems are not going to win the election..." I keep hearing this. The Lib Dems are not going to win. Not going to win. But, they're "doing so well." It's almost like they're being set up to win, just to give the impression to the electorate that something genuinely new is going to happen.

We all know it doesn't matter which branch of the LibLabCon Party gets in, it'll still be the bankers and corporations calling the shots, but those who look no further than the colour of the flag flying above Number 10 will think something significant has happened when, in fact, nothing will change.

Just an observation.

I am not taken in by Nick Cleggs professional northener facade.

LibDems will definately not get my vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 02:45:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 18 April, 2010, 02:11:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 12:52:06 PM
Why can't we all have our own little local governments on the village/town or county level with Westminster there entirely for national co-ordination? It would be magnificently chaotic and uneven, but truly democratic. Local laws for local people.



Things are difficult and badly coordinated as it is without even more fragmentation.

Regards

Robin

And all that is the complete opposite of what we have going on now regarding the EU and a central planning office that rules 28 member states by dictats.

There is even talk of the EU due to the fiasco in Greece dictating to member states what their budget should be rather than the member state itself deciding its own economic policy.

So i ask how can a central planning office possibly understand what each member states fiscal policy should be ?

How can it possibly know ?

So really central govt at national level is really the only way to do it but on a regional level there should also be less govt dictats because even on a national level its very difficult to have a one size fits all economic policy for example or any policy for that matter.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 04:02:19 PM
Of course, the absolute most important thing to do is remove the central banks from the picture and allow governments to print their own money instead of relying on the inherently debt-laden bonds system. Once this is fixed, you will find that many of society's ills actually begin to fix themselves. Until we abolish this horrendous bonds system, there isn't going to be an improvement in anything because it is designed to generate debt. I don't know why more people aren't up in arms about this.

Once we have rescued our economy and parliament from this cancer, we can begin constructing a society future generations can be proud of. If we can fix this one thing, then our generation will shine through the ages as the one that finally emancipated humanity.

If you want to know why I'm so adamant about this, here's a website that explains things much better than I can: http://tinyurl.com/y6ahopc

Please, please, please look into this. It is, in my humble view, the most important political subject I have ever encountered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 04:57:24 PM
The other single most important thing is to remove the round table groups like Bilderberg,The Council On Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission and the Club Of Rome etc from the equation.

These are another kind of cancer that is destroying society.



BTW Nick Clegg is not from Sheffield and he is just another fraud working for the above.

You have been warned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 05:36:04 PM
I agree, Peter - but the central banks are their main weapon. Take this away from them and their power diminishes drastically.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 06:05:16 PM
I'm not so into the 'truther' theories, to be honest.

It's not that I rule them out as mere paranoia, but I think there's enough going on under a person's nose to be getting on with, such as the recent expenses scandal, without dipping under the covers.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 06:15:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2010, 05:36:04 PM
I agree, Peter - but the central banks are their main weapon. Take this away from them and their power diminishes drastically.

Thats right as the central banks are their food supply.

My party of choice wont win but i am happy in knowing that i havent been duped by the Dog and Pony show that is the LibLabCon.

You cant fool all of the people all of the time and you cant fool some of them any of the time.

Quote from: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 06:05:16 PM
I'm not so into the 'truther' theories, to be honest.

It's not that I rule them out as mere paranoia, but I think there's enough going on under a person's nose to be getting on with, such as the recent expenses scandal, without dipping under the covers.  

:lol: ::)

Dont be offended but we have a serious problem here and avoiding it and avoiding the truth isnt going to get us anywhere.

Besides which it is one of my main interests and i mean to continue.

Be very wary of issues that are there to distract you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 06:23:31 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 06:15:27 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 06:05:16 PM
I'm not so into the 'truther' theories, to be honest.

It's not that I rule them out as mere paranoia, but I think there's enough going on under a person's nose to be getting on with, such as the recent expenses scandal, without dipping under the covers.  

:lol: ::)

Dont be offended but we have a serious problem here and avoiding it and avoiding the truth isnt going to get us anywhere.

Besides which it is one of my main interests and i mean to continue.

Be very wary of issues that are there to distract you.

I'm not offended at all, dude. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 06:38:15 PM
I am glad about that  :)

I wasnt meaning to take the piss even though i just did.I dont usually make a point of mocking others.Apologies for that.

I am not saying that its not a legitimate issue because it might have sounded like that and i am sure there are some journalists and investigators covering it but its just not important enough for me to waste my time with.Besides there is wholesale fraud that is endemic in the UK political system and politicians buying pot plants or pornographic DVDs or paying for duck islands is only a small part of the problem.

Anyway very little has been done to resolve the expenses issue beyond half a dozen low level sacrificial lambs that are subject to a criminal investigation.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 18 April, 2010, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 08:52:27 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 08:03:19 PM
If you don't like the way they govern, refusing to vote isn't the same as taking the moral high ground any more than Pontias Pilate washing his hands is.

For me, to spoil my vote is not just a rejection of the current leadership - it's a rejection of the process, itself.

It's certainly not an exercise in piety...

It's this:

To have my gang get into power and be able to tell you, and your gang, how to live your life seems fundamentally flawed, to me.

'an it harm none, do what ye will'

I have no wish to tell you, or anyone else, how to handle your finances, how to conduct your personal life or how to express your beliefs; religious or otherwise.

Spoiling my vote, therefore, may remain an expression of apathy to you, Usher, but it is the only expression with any integrity I am left with.    

Pffft... I bet you'd be the first to moan if you were denied a vote...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 18 April, 2010, 07:22:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 April, 2010, 01:22:05 PM
So would I. It won't happen, though. Nobody's going to change any of that oppressive legislation.

It does all have the whiff of stage management, though. I was watching an analysis of that leaders' "debate" the other night, and one of the analysts began with the words "the Lib Dems are not going to win the election..." I keep hearing this. The Lib Dems are not going to win. Not going to win. But, they're "doing so well." It's almost like they're being set up to win, just to give the impression to the electorate that something genuinely new is going to happen.

We all know it doesn't matter which branch of the LibLabCon Party gets in, it'll still be the bankers and corporations calling the shots, but those who look no further than the colour of the flag flying above Number 10 will think something significant has happened when, in fact, nothing will change.

Just an observation.

What a depressingly accurate observation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 07:23:42 PM
No apologies required, Peter!

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 06:38:15 PM
Anyway very little has been done to resolve the expenses issue beyond half a dozen low level sacrificial lambs that are subject to a criminal investigation.

Of course, the whole Swine Flu fiasco was a great distraction from the expenses row. Gubment was quick to hold that up on a sign saying, 'Look, everyone! We're taking serious action to prevent a worldwide pandemic! We are relevant!'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 07:25:27 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 18 April, 2010, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 18 April, 2010, 08:52:27 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 17 April, 2010, 08:03:19 PM
If you don't like the way they govern, refusing to vote isn't the same as taking the moral high ground any more than Pontias Pilate washing his hands is.

For me, to spoil my vote is not just a rejection of the current leadership - it's a rejection of the process, itself.

It's certainly not an exercise in piety...

It's this:

To have my gang get into power and be able to tell you, and your gang, how to live your life seems fundamentally flawed, to me.

'an it harm none, do what ye will'

I have no wish to tell you, or anyone else, how to handle your finances, how to conduct your personal life or how to express your beliefs; religious or otherwise.

Spoiling my vote, therefore, may remain an expression of apathy to you, Usher, but it is the only expression with any integrity I am left with.    

Pffft... I bet you'd be the first to moan if you were denied a vote...

:lol:

Why, it's my basic human right, I'll have you know!

I do enjoy spoiling my vote so you could be right. This year, a friend and I are considering simply stamping the form with a solid, red VOID.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 18 April, 2010, 08:06:22 PM
This thread can be summed up thusly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSI0YjPFPoo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 18 April, 2010, 08:50:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh6oHP40Q4A&feature=related
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 19 April, 2010, 01:49:23 PM
Interesting observation from yesterdays Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/clegg-media-elite-murdoch-lib-dem

"I doubt if Rupert Murdoch watched the election debate last week. His focus is very firmly on the United States, especially his resurgent Wall Street Journal. But if he did, there would have been one man totally unknown to him. One man utterly beyond the tentacles of any of his family, his editors or his advisers. That man is Nick Clegg.

Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election – or held the balance of power – it would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite.

I can say this with some authority because in my five years editing the Sun I did not once meet a Lib Dem leader, even though I met Tony Blair, William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith on countless occasions. (Full disclosure: I have since met Nick Clegg.)"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 April, 2010, 01:53:59 PM
Interesting. Maybe that explains this:

April 18, 2010
YouGov/Murdoch Distort Poll To Stop Lib Dem Momentum

YouGov produce a daily poll for the Sun and Sunday Times. Today's YouGov was the only post-debate poll to show the LibDems in third place.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/04/yougovmurdoch_d.html

Surely this kind of thing is treason?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 April, 2010, 05:45:53 PM
I dont quite get the importance or point of that guardian article.
Quote from: johnnystress on 19 April, 2010, 01:49:23 PM
Interesting observation from yesterdays Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/clegg-media-elite-murdoch-lib-dem

"I doubt if Rupert Murdoch watched the election debate last week. His focus is very firmly on the United States, especially his resurgent Wall Street Journal. But if he did, there would have been one man totally unknown to him. One man utterly beyond the tentacles of any of his family, his editors or his advisers. That man is Nick Clegg.

Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election – or held the balance of power – it would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite.

I can say this with some authority because in my five years editing the Sun I did not once meet a Lib Dem leader, even though I met Tony Blair, William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith on countless occasions. (Full disclosure: I have since met Nick Clegg.)"
[/quote]

Of course thats all well and good but it doesnt address the fact that there are 4 other political parties in the UK besides the LibLabCon but i dont find the media focussing much on them so while this article points out the Murdoch influence its still reinforcing the LibLabCon because its claiming the LibDems are a voice for the powerless.The fact is i believe that LibDems are already a co-opted party and if they are not at present then they will be if they are elected and that includes Rupert Murdoch.

Also its very hypocritical of the author of the article to complain about the Murdoch influence on papers that publish pro-conservative propaganda while at the same time the Guardian has been pro-New Labour and especially Gordon Brown and much more than that.

The pot calls the kettle black.

How much coverage does the Guardian give to Conservatives and UKIP for example ?

It covers them but it doesnt endorse them in any way.

Hypocritical bullshit article that is guilty of that of which it condemns while the Guardian pushes its own style of propagnanda but because its not Murdoch then that makes it alright.

"The fact is much of the print press in this country is entirely partisan and always has been"

That must include the Guardian then and it doesnt exonerate itself from this by printing this revelation although its hardly that.


The other slant is that the author of the article is probably a disenfranchised New Labour supporter who is pissed that New Labour probably wont get re-elected so he has jumped ship to the LibDems and is very happy to see the propaganda wing of the Conservative party become ineffective.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 April, 2010, 09:53:17 PM
I forgot to point out that the Sun was Pro Labour while David Yelland was editor although it had already started to move away from supporting Conservatives with its previous editor.Rebecca Wade who is also very pro labour replaced Yelland so the Sun continued to be pro Labour until very recently when it shifted back to being pro Conservative which is what i think David Yelland doesnt like.

So was David Yelland who is pro Labour and has connections with No10 complaining then about Rupert Murdochs influence then ?

Most probably not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2010, 01:22:45 PM
I can't get ANY of my local Parliamentary candidates to answer a question. Indeed, they won't even reply to my emails! The question is:

"Should the British Government reclaim the responsibility of printing its own money?"

If anyone else would like to ask this question of their MPs/candidates, please do so and post any replies here. Ta!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 11:48:03 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 02:23:39 PM
I am not taken in by Nick Cleggs professional northener facade.

Ugh. He's northern? Damn. And I was thinking of voting for his party. That's torn it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 24 April, 2010, 12:25:11 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 11:48:03 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 18 April, 2010, 02:23:39 PM
I am not taken in by Nick Cleggs professional northener facade.

Ugh. He's northern? Damn. And I was thinking of voting for his party. That's torn it.

Nick Clegg isnt a northener but he pretends to be northern by putting on an accent and pretending he is from sheffield when in actual fact he is from the home counties.Just another empty suit and a career politician.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 12:57:33 PM
Nope, sorry, I don't understand why pretending you're from Sheffield would make more people want to vote for you. I'd be more inclined to think he's just picked the accent up due to being around people who talk with it rather a lot. It does happen, you know.

Personally, I'm just disappointed he's not a psychotic seven foot high talking alligator beasty from space.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2010, 01:10:03 PM
Vote for me.

I'm proper northern.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 01:23:14 PM
Pfft... You're not a real shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 24 April, 2010, 01:31:53 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 12:57:33 PM
Nope, sorry, I don't understand why pretending you're from Sheffield would make more people want to vote for you. I'd be more inclined to think he's just picked the accent up due to being around people who talk with it rather a lot. It does happen, you know.



All i am doing is stating where Nick Clegg is from for the record.

For example "I'm the only leader of the three leaders who actually comes from one of the great cities of the North."

This is what is incorrect because to say you come from somewhere means or implies that you originate or were born in a particular place and its dishonest and misleading to make claims that are incorrect.He doesnt say "I come from Chalfont St.Giles in Buckinghamshire but i represent my constituents in Sheffield" or "Despite coming from Buckinghamshire,Sheffield is my second home and i am proud to represent the people of one of the great cities in the North".

I could move to Scotland and after a while i might pick up the accent but it would be dishonest if i then made claims that i am Scottish.

Its just a small thing i know but i am a stickler for detail and facts or perhaps with X Factor politics details are not important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2010, 01:50:01 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 01:23:14 PM
Pfft... You're not a real shark.

I think you'll find that the issue isn't the reality of my sharkiness, but the beneficial effect my party will have on sharkiness in the future. I promise quality, affordable sharkiness for all (except those sections of society we neither like nor talk about) and I also promise something about tax.

Go on, vote for me. Makes as much sense as voting for anyone else and if there's one thing this country really does need it's a Sharxx Dek Thargo in Number 10.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 01:58:49 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 24 April, 2010, 01:31:53 PM
For example "I'm the only leader of the three leaders who actually comes from one of the great cities of the North."

If that's what he's said, then that is indeed technically wrong. So fair enough. Doesn't necessarily mean he's putting on the accent though.

..and anyway, you're not even a real wolf.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2010, 01:50:01 PM
Go on, vote for me. Makes as much sense as voting for anyone else and if there's one thing this country really does need it's a Sharxx Dek Thargo in Number 10.

Sorry, Shark. I already know who I'm voting for. http://malcolmkirk.deviantart.com/art/Doomlord-For-Prime-Minister-161313700 (http://malcolmkirk.deviantart.com/art/Doomlord-For-Prime-Minister-161313700)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 02:15:40 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 01:23:14 PM
Pfft... You're not even a real shark.

Fixed that for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2010, 02:19:53 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 02:15:40 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 01:23:14 PM
Pfft... You're not even a real shark.

Fixed that for you.

I think you'll find that the issue isn't who fixed what for whom, but how little it would cost under the Sharkplan and how very much more it would've cost under a Doomlord government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2010, 02:26:29 PM
Not even a real house.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 24 April, 2010, 02:29:22 PM
It's a very small thing, but this little article has endeared me to Nick Clegg a little. Personally it's a pet-hate of mine when politicians try to reference Susan Boyle or the Arctic Monkeys to appear to be cool and in touch with the public when we all know they aren't - it was bad enough when Blair did it, full-on excruciating when Brown or Cameron attempt it.

QuoteLiberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has admitted that he is not a fan of the UK's soaps.

The politician made his confession in an interview with the Radio Times after being asked whether he enjoyed Coronation Street, EastEnders, The Bill or The Archers.

Clegg replied: "I don't watch or listen to any of these, I'm afraid."

Meanwhile, when asked to pick a favourite out of X Factor judges Simon Cowell, Cheryl Cole, Dannii Minogue and Louis Walsh, the 43-year-old said: "None of the above."

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/news/a215400/nick-clegg-i-dont-watch-soaps.html (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/news/a215400/nick-clegg-i-dont-watch-soaps.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 24 April, 2010, 03:57:06 PM
That may be because Clegg is actually a human being instead of being an alien from planet politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 24 April, 2010, 07:33:00 PM
Quote from: Christov on 24 April, 2010, 03:57:06 PM
That may be because Clegg is actually a human being instead of being an alien from planet politics.

I'm not sure of that, dude... I think he's pretty much a tentacle-spewing monstrostity from Planet Politics, just like the others. His PR people are just a little more shrewd, perhaps...   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 09:09:24 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 24 April, 2010, 07:33:00 PM
I think he's pretty much a tentacle-spewing monstrostity from Planet Politics, just like the others. His PR people are just a little more shrewd, perhaps...  

Have a read of his wikipedia entry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Clegg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Clegg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 24 April, 2010, 10:43:54 PM
A quick peruse of Clegg's Wiki, I am disappointed that there is no mention of Cal or his fellow mercenaries. That's bloody spin for you.






VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 24 April, 2010, 11:24:17 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 09:09:24 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 24 April, 2010, 07:33:00 PM
I think he's pretty much a tentacle-spewing monstrostity from Planet Politics, just like the others. His PR people are just a little more shrewd, perhaps...  

Have a read of his wikipedia entry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Clegg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Clegg)


From wikipedia:

He recently supported "liberal interventionism", arguing that the "unjustified invasion of Iraq" should not weaken support for this. He expressed that there should be more emphasis on a more humanitarian foreign policy.

Come on now, Mr Clegg. Liberal interventionism?

Just a new spin on an old, nasty habit.

Any you wonder why I distrust these people?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 24 April, 2010, 11:53:30 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 24 April, 2010, 11:24:17 PM
He recently supported "liberal interventionism", arguing that the "unjustified invasion of Iraq" should not weaken support for this. He expressed that there should be more emphasis on a more humanitarian foreign policy.

Heh. Notice only 6 words of that is direct quotation, and four of those words are "unjustified invasion of Iraq."

As I understand it, the alternative to both military imperialism and 'liberal interventionism' is laissez-faire: put simply, 'what do we care what one bunch of foreigners does to another? Let them all die.'

What I meant by introducing that link is that it gives an idea of his sympathies, his qualifications and his previous employment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 25 April, 2010, 12:00:38 AM
The invasion of Iraq was justified. America sold Saddam the WMD's. They are there its just Iraq is a big place to bury them, needle in a haystack comes to mind.
I think they were so sure they would find them almost straight away.

I don't know why I am posting this here but ah well.





VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2010, 12:14:35 AM
The invasion of Iraq is about nothing more or less than money. It's not just about war profiteering or stealing oil, it's about a whole new market for Coca~Cola and Prozac. The Middle East is full of consumers who just aren't consuming enough, dammit, and we've got simply gigatons of cool, pointless shite we can sell them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 25 April, 2010, 12:14:50 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 25 April, 2010, 12:00:38 AM
I don't know why I am posting this here but ah well.

I don't know either, but you may as well. The more the merrier; what the heck.

I think HOO-HAA and I are agreed that the invasion of Iraq was unjustified (even if you disagree, Vzzbux), but he seems to be saying we should stay out of other people's business (including Mugabe's murderous rampage in Zimbabwe?), whereas I think that 'liberal intervention' is fair enough, as keeping your options open goes.

My own view of Iraq is that political considerations (i.e. propping up secular dictatorship in the middle east) took precedence over justice and held George Bush Sr. back from helping America's allies remove Saddam Hussein from power in the first Gulf War. 10 years on is too late to decide you didn't get the result you wanted from a war you already fought and won. You can't go back again for another go because your actions were unprincipled last time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 April, 2010, 12:18:31 AM
Famous Liberal interventionists include GHW Bush,GWBush,Bill Clinton,Tony Blair,and Gordon Brown among others.

So what this translates to is prime ministers and presidents of elected non-representative govts using their respective military capabilities to further the geopolitical agenda of the Bilderberg Group and the Council of Foreign Relations etc etc and Globalist/Internationalist interests and the interests of mercantile bankers like Rothschilds etc so really it is Imperialism.

If you realise this you realise why Nick Clegg says "Unjustified invasion of Iraq" should not weaken support for this".

Its all about trying to justify wars and invasions and selling them on the grounds that there are moral reasons for them or resorting to war for moral purposes especially if the pretext for those wars or invasions or bombing campaigns is false as it was in Kosovo and Iraq and most probably Iran.Its also at the very least arguable that the pretext to invading Iraq was false but its fact that the necessity of the UK having to neutralise SH because of alleged WMDs was overstated to say the very least.

So Nick clegg is just another interchangable empty suit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 25 April, 2010, 12:23:53 AM
The Bilderberg Group, yesterday:

(http://nahummer.hypocrisy.com/files/2009/05/stonecutters-300x225.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 25 April, 2010, 09:37:57 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 25 April, 2010, 12:14:50 AM
I think HOO-HAA and I are agreed that the invasion of Iraq was unjustified (even if you disagree, Vzzbux), but he seems to be saying we should stay out of other people's business (including Mugabe's murderous rampage in Zimbabwe?), whereas I think that 'liberal intervention' is fair enough, as keeping your options open goes.

Invasion of another's country is never, ever about 'helping out', Usher - not in my experience. As Peter says, governments and politicians often try to put some kind of moral spin on their actions, but it usually boils down to cash and land and key territory regarding military strategy. Just take a little peek at Tony Blair's oil portfolio, following the Iraq war.

Zimbabwee does come up quite a bit in debates for interventionism, but I don't think invasion would help those folks out. It would most likely cause more unrest. People are best left to sort their own business out, from both a moral and pragmatic perspective - and they are more likely to sort it out quicker and more efficiently. That said, I do appreciate how horrible it is to watch thugs like Mugabee in action. However, trade sanctions and other non-aggressive action may seem more effective means to bring him back into line.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 25 April, 2010, 09:51:44 AM
Very reasonably put. However, I don't think it's fair to judge Nick Clegg by Tony Blair's actions. My interest in the LibDems is predominantly down to their domestic policies. Foreign policy doesn't interest me very much; I'm just keen that we should be allies with nice countries, condemn horrible ones and exploit trading opportunities with the ones in between.


Edit - P.S. I don't think a government Nick Clegg has any say in would go needlessly starting wars all over the place because there's a greater imperative to try and cut spending.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 25 April, 2010, 12:35:41 PM
I appreciate where you're coming from too, Usher - I must admit to being just a tiny bit... intrigued... by Clegg. He's very skilled at what he does and must be commended for his PR.

I'm afraid that's the best I can do, in terms of praise, for any of them. But it's something, right? Especially from a self-confessed anarchist! :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 25 April, 2010, 03:05:51 PM
I think his appeal rests in the notion that he isn't entirely dependent on PR. He's gotten himself into trouble a couple times because of how frank he is sometimes, especially when Ming Campbell's leadership of the LibDems was in doubt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 April, 2010, 10:01:28 PM



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtHshBWFRyg&feature=related


I am not going to be taken in by another smooth talking and seemingly open and reasonable politician in a suit who seems like a breath of fresh air promising change.I wasnt taken in by the last one who was elected in 1997 or the other who was elected in the US in Nov 2008.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 26 April, 2010, 07:26:13 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 25 April, 2010, 10:01:28 PM
I am not going to be taken in by another smooth talking and seemingly open and reasonable politician in a suit who seems like a breath of fresh air promising change.I wasnt taken in by the last one who was elected in 1997 or the other who was elected in the US in Nov 2008.

Alas, this is also the bottom line for me, Peter.

But... I'm interested in how you see the UKIP as any different? Surely Robert Kilroy Silk (now no longer with them, but still...) was the smoothest talking suit of them all, no?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 02:35:19 PM
UKIP are no different. I've telephoned and emailed each and every one of my Parliamentary candidates (David Borrow (Lab), Peter Fisher (Lib Dem), Lorraine Fullbrook (Con) and David Duxbury (UKIP)) over my concerns surrounding the way the Government raises money and... guess what?

Not one of them will even talk about it. None of them want to look into it. None of them will tell me that I'm wrong. None of them will tell me that I'm right. The prevailing attitude seems to be "I'm not an economist, so I have no opinion on this. Maybe you should try another party."

How depressing to live in a mockocracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 April, 2010, 02:58:28 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 26 April, 2010, 07:26:13 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 25 April, 2010, 10:01:28 PM
I am not going to be taken in by another smooth talking and seemingly open and reasonable politician in a suit who seems like a breath of fresh air promising change.I wasnt taken in by the last one who was elected in 1997 or the other who was elected in the US in Nov 2008.

Alas, this is also the bottom line for me, Peter.

But... I'm interested in how you see the UKIP as any different? Surely Robert Kilroy Silk (now no longer with them, but still...) was the smoothest talking suit of them all, no?

I just love UKIP - not only do they provide some of the best comedy and satire of the campaign, they appeal to all the europhobic middle-Englanders and divert loads of votes away from the Tories, without ever being in danger of getting elected themselves. We need more of these Daily Mail style parties to split the tory vote even further. It used to just be the lefties who were prone to endless factionalism and infighting!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 04:46:00 PM
I am not a Europhobe in the broad sense as i have no problem with integrating with the rest of Europe or trading with Europe as my problem is why we have to lose our sovereignty and our right to self govern at the same time when we could do all of these things by joining the European Free Trade Agreement instead after leaving its present power structure and also it would save the UK billions and billions and billions a year that it throws at the EU.I might also remind everyone thast the EU has never had its books audited and in my mind it is a criminal organisation that embezzles billions and billions that its member states throw at it each year.

I dont like Collectivism especially when it concerns the EU and why should EU law have superiority over UK law ?

Why is a centralised power structure that is by default undemocratic better than democratic self-rule ?

Why should i go along with what is described in their own words as the "post-democratic era" ?

What does the post democratic era mean to you ?

What does it imply ?

It implies to me that we are ruled by dictats which is exactly what is happening right now and i wholeheartedly reject being ruled by a monolithic bereaucrtaic monolithic centralised govt that to me is very similar to the USSR in its outlook and ideology and thats no good to me so i will keep on opposing it and always will do and UKIP are the only party that represents my interests in that respect having rejected the BNP as a voting option.I will not go along with the destruction of national sovereignty or at least NOT UNTIL there are proper checks and balances in place that will protect the UK from the dangers of misplaced power and influence that are not in my interests none of which are present in the current Lisbon Treaty so its the treaty that needs to be reformed and rewritten and not the EU itself as its the Lisbon Treaty that outlines where the power has been allocated to because it removes power from the UK.

Why does what was originally intended as a trading bloc have to evolve into a power grab which is what was the intention of Adolf Hitler ?

So anyone who claims that its all about Xenophobia and that type of thing is in my mind is uneducated and they degrade and trivialise the argument against the EU in its present state by reducing a UKIP vote to that kind of level and i could write 10,000 words explaining my position on it but i wont.The EU issue is very big and very complicated/multifacted and reducing it down to simplistic arguments is just for the dull minded.

So please dont trivialise my voting choice by calling myself a eorophobic middle englander as i will take offence and i may become unpleasent because i find it insulting in the extreme as my vote is purely academic and is based on having an understanding of the political process and certainly not bigotry or ignorance.Perhaps it is for some but its not for me.

I might also add that i bitterly resent being denied a properly counted referendum on the subject where all the ins and outs of it are presented to the public so that they can decide for themselves after weighing up the pros and cons of EU membership of which there are many.some might not like this is they have collectivist tendencies and think that direct democracy is wrong but thats tough shit because they dont rule by a majority.

UKIP in my mind are the only viable vote because i am not willing to risk being cheated by the main 3 co-opted parties who are one and the same.Perhaps i am being judgemental about Nick Clegg when he hasnt even had a chance as PM but i dont know if i see someone who has personal integrity who means what they say or will it be a string of broken promises and business as usual ?

Thats my dilemma and if i was to vote for Nick Clegg then i want him to renounce his membership of Bilderberg because you cannot be a member of that organisation and claim to represent the interest of the people whom he claims to represent.However having said that Nick Clegg is distancing himself from New Labour over civil liberties which is a good thing but i need to know more before i decide to vote for them.There should also be political accountability because if i did vote for LibDems on the basis that they promised to scrap the ID cards scheme and databases and oppressive legislation and then they didnt then the electorate should have recourse to demand that they do it as promised.

UKIP are an independent party that are not co-opted and they represent my interests or at least some of them.

In my mind the idea of an integrated Europe has been completely ruined by these Globalist collectivist freaks so it the EU or its binding treaty and the way it goes about its business within its parliament and as Nigel Farage correctly stated the people of the UK gave their lives fighting so that the UK could be a sovereign nation and decide its own policies and hire and fire its own politicians as its people and its govt see fit and i do not accept being ruled by Herman Van Rompuy who is nothing more than a shill for Global Governance.

No thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 05:01:09 PM
Well said, Peter.

I want my government back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 April, 2010, 05:02:44 PM
Why does not wanting to be swallowed up by Europe equate to you hating Europe. 'europhobic middle-Englander' does this mean that people are scared of Europe?
When I visit countries in Europe I want to exxperience 'THAT' country and not a bastardised version on every country. I seem to recall many people slag off America for spreading all their stuff around the globe but those same people want Europe to be the same, weird.
Norway and Switzerland seem to be enjoying themselves, are those countries full of racist Euro haters!!!

I say this not to start a massive argument but to point out that some people just don't see the point of being swallowed up by Europe to be part of Europe.
I also seem to recall that at one stage they said there would be no more wars because we would be as one. That didn't work and the Yanks helped sort that out, even with the French passing secret flight routes over to the enemy at the time.
We would all prosper with one currency and interest rate, yes indeedy do, that works a treat doesn't it!

See what you've made me do, I must stop it, as I need to order a pizza (see how I support foods from Europe  ;))
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 05:09:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 April, 2010, 05:02:44 PM

We would all prosper with one currency and interest rate, yes indeedy do, that works a treat doesn't it!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!



*swoons*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 April, 2010, 05:20:50 PM
You got so upset Shark that you nearly vanished off the screen  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 05:49:26 PM
Vanished up my own self, more like  :lol: And, even further up myself I find the following nuggets...

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People vs. The Banks." – Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875


"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent." — Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976


"The eyes of our citizens are not sufficiently open to the true cause of our distress. They ascribe them to everything but their true cause, the banking system;The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution." – Thomas Jefferson


"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right MAJOR CRISIS, and the nations will accept the NEW WORLD ORDER." — David Rockefeller — Chairman, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 06:03:44 PM
The Euro is already failing because of the debacle in Greece which is a result of the greeks mishandling their economy and also because of bankers like Goldman Sachs but its very convoluted to explain.

Anyway the flaw in the system of a single currency is that other member states are expected to bail out the Greeks despite having their own individual economic problems and being in the middle of a downturn/recession but despite this the UK presntly will be forced to contribute 20 percent of whatever sum of money is allocated to bailing out Greece which is currently set at 35 billion GBP but could potentially be as high as 80 billion GBP and the UK is already 750 billion GBP in debt so we have to borrow more money from central banks that are privately owned which increases the debt slavery already imposed on us by the likes Of Gordon Brown and his destruction by default economic policies that were instigated by central privately owned and runned banks.

So at best its 7 billion GBP that will be removed from our economy or as much as 18 billion GBP

So what happens then other countries who have had their economies trashed by design follow suit like Portugal and spain and Italy etc ?

Are we going to be forced to help contribute funds to bailout those countries as well ?

Does anyone else see that this in itself is unsustainable if it is repeated ?

I might as well point out that if none of those countries had adopted the Euro then it wouldnt cost anyone else anything to bail them out as it wouldnt have been necessary to do so other than offer that country aid or loans on our own terms so the whole thing is going to be a very costly mistake all round but of course no one will realise this until its too late but it just goes to show how ill conceived the whole EU/single currency thing is.

The EU forcing its one size - fits all economic policies/straitjacket on its member states just isnt going to work and now the EU or its central governing body wants or proposes to dictate to the UK what its future budget will be domestically and the UK will be forced to follows its imposed austerity measures.

Its just wrong on so many levels.

The upshot of ALL the loans and bailouts that are being imposed on taxpayers both in the EU and the US is that it massively increases the transfer of wealth and assets into the hands of privately owned and operated central banks and gives them via their collective slush fund/holding company the IMF MASSIVE MASSIVE leverage over countries and entire continents which is of course the point of the preplanned and manufactured boom and bust economic cycles.The IMF has already financially ruined many many developing countries and the third world so now they are moving onto the West and what we are experiencing right now is the first stage in that process and it will get worse unless it is stopped.We are all in effect not that much different to the people of Haiti in this respect.

So in that sense Nick Clegg is a moron for proposing to scrap the pound and adopt the Euro.


So get this BanksterGangster Globalist fraudulent criminal collectivist NWO filth out of my adopted country and their representatives and shills because like LS i want my adopted country and my govt back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 26 April, 2010, 06:19:36 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 04:46:00 PM
Lots and lots of words.

What the LibDems are offering for your particular interests;

. The Freedom bill, which will return quite a few civil liberties that have been stripped from us under Labour and will most likely remain that way under the Tories. (Has been backed by Clegg since 2006)

. Electoral reform, which will take us out of this mockery we call democracy into a system that actually makes votes count. (The LibDems have been pushing this for a while, only for Labour and the Tories to smack it right back down)

. Mass elimination of bureaucrats throughout the public services, coupled with decentralising power from Whitehall.

. Taking a more central role in the EU instead of being a whiney little loner middleman for America.

. Having a special relationship with the US that doesn't have us fellating them constantly and getting smacked around like a whore.

I'm not trying to change your political views or anything, but I'm just putting a few points out there you might find interesting. Oh, and in the event Clegg does get in and he backpedals on these promises, just watch as the shit hits the fan.

We're in a situation where if we don't stop the Tories and Labour from tossing the reins to this country to each other, we'll continue to be this stunted little shell of a nation. We may not know how a LibDem government will work in practice, but it has to be a lot fucking better than the shambles the other two have made of the job.

As for the Euro, well, I'm skeptical, but fuck it, got to take the bad with the good, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 06:22:51 PM
"Give me control of a country's money, and I care not who writes its laws."
~ Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Now his descendants want control of a world's money. Should we give it to them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 06:28:32 PM
Libdems have got my interest but i am undecided at present.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 10:04:19 PM
I just wanted to say that i wasnt getting at DanDontDare earlier personally as i was talking generally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 April, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
I really don't know how we've survived all these years, with all these terrible politicians from the Left and Right, they've absolutely ruined us!!  Ah well, nothing else to do but turn off my laptop, get up from this comfortable sofa, switch off the flat-screen HD TV, take out the disc from the BlueRay, make myself a cup of tea with lovely fresh water; might stick a pasty in the microwave, washed down with a nice glass of wine, then I suppose I'll have to drag my badly governed bones off to that piping hot electric shower, that's, of course, after I've used the modern sanitation system, then I'll be off to lay in my comfortable king-sized bed, and drift off to sleep listening to Radio 4 on the Bose system or, using my government supplied education, I might read a shiny new book!!  And, if I'm feeling rough in the morning, I can pop down the road to see my lovely GP, who will give me lots of lovely free medication if I should need it!!  Yeah! Life's a bitch........!!!

I'm sure those Africans dying through lack of sanitation, dirty drinking water, AIDS, and lacking medical care or a decent education, etc. etc. would quite like our terrible life styles, given half the chance.

Yeah, what have those bloody politicians ever done for us??!!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 April, 2010, 10:42:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2010, 06:22:51 PM
"Give me control of a country's money, and I care not who writes its laws."
~ Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Context? I'm not familiar with the quote or the speaker, but to me this could be read several different ways. Realpolitik? Fearless articulation of a truth of capitalism? Rubbing the noses of anti-semites in his success? Or is it because from being banker to Wilhelm IX he kept his position after Napoleon invaded? The rulers of the principality of Hesse-Kassel came and went with the whims of fate, but they needed the same banking services. They're not exactly the words of a man hell-bent on world domination.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 26 April, 2010, 10:43:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 April, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
Yeah, what have those bloody politicians ever done for us??!!

Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of what you've listed has been done by you, and people like you. Politicians just tax it all ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 26 April, 2010, 10:45:30 PM
mr bnp has just been on with his broadcast wringing his hands like some nervous bond villains henchman :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 April, 2010, 10:58:01 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 26 April, 2010, 10:43:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 April, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
Yeah, what have those bloody politicians ever done for us??!!

Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of what you've listed has been done by you, and people like you. Politicians just tax it all ;)

Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of posts on this thread have been various iterations of "im too clever to vote because THEY ARE ALL THE SAME MIRITE!!!!" or "I'm not voting unless they pander solely to my inane and spurious prejudices".



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 11:30:32 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 April, 2010, 10:58:01 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 26 April, 2010, 10:43:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 April, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
Yeah, what have those bloody politicians ever done for us??!!

Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of what you've listed has been done by you, and people like you. Politicians just tax it all ;)

Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of posts on this thread have been various iterations of "im too clever to vote because THEY ARE ALL THE SAME MIRITE!!!!" or "I'm not voting unless they pander solely to my inane and spurious prejudices".





Whats "MIRITE"   ?

I understood the rest of your nonsense but its just that word that i dont know the meaning of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 April, 2010, 11:39:06 PM
It's a condensed-ening of "Am I Right".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 April, 2010, 11:46:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 April, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
 And, if I'm feeling rough in the morning, I can pop down the road to see my lovely GP, who will give me lots of lovely free medication if I should need it!!  Yeah! Life's a bitch........!!!


Yeah, what have those bloody politicians ever done for us??!!



Dont forget all those who gave their lives during WW2 so that we were rewarded with free healthcare and a welfare state as a result !!

Its not actually free because the NHS is funded by taxpayers so thank the people who pay for it as well !!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 01:55:03 AM
What have politicians ever done for us? I don't quite know how to answer that. I certainly don't subscribe to the view that all politicians are bad, nor that everything Parliament does is selfish. Our political system, and those members of society we elect to run that system for us, are not perfect. I doubt you'll find many British people who would disagree with that. By the same token, our system is not the worst in the world, either. I think it's fair to describe us as "Good, but could do better."

We do indeed live in a wonderful society filled with abundance and convenience. I sit typing this with a full belly, with a roof over my head and safe drinking water just a few feet away. I'm hooked up to an electronic network that can connect me to my friend in New York for a frivolous natter or to a local emergency center should I be bleeding, under attack or on fire. There are a million different ways I can distract myself, from watching Laurel & Hardy reruns to reading the galaxy's greatest comic to getting pissed out of my tree to attending a God awful Enya concert. I used to love this world; being all wrapped in comfort, ease and privilege. It is an easy world to live in and an easy world to love. It is a powerful world, and it is our duty as part owners of that power to ensure it is wielded fairly and with humanity.

We eventually discover, as we grow and our outlook matures, that there are other countries in the world where people aren't as "lucky" as us. Countries where they have seemingly incessant wars, brutal genocides, blazing droughts and murderous famines. Because we know how lucky we are, we throw a few coppers in charity tins and maybe buy a CD of singers we don't like singing songs we detest using money that isn't ours in aid of a cause we don't fully understand. A lot of clever people swim in and out of focus, wafting like infoghosts across the chattering cyclops telling us that it's all about debt relief or local government corruption or tribal rivalries or shifting climate or the fact that they're all just stupid bloody savages with no concept of how to run a country properly or any one of a myriad other factors that might be to blame.

But you get the feeling that this is all bullshit and that, deep down, it's not just "bad luck" at all but really our fault for allowing Big Banking, Big Business and Big Politics to go raping other people's countries in order to keep us in the lap of luxury - because so long as we have nothing to complain about, those people we put in charge can just keep on getting away with whatever it is they're getting away with.

But the cause doesn't matter, really, does it? Look; pictures of people starving and covered in flies staring uncomprehendingly at the camera to the accompaniment of a rock ballad or bloody Enya. Throw a few coppers at the problem. Money always helps, doesn't it? We all know it's not as simple as that, of course. Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, give a man a fishing rod and he'll eat for life. Right on, man. Groovy cool beans. Don't give cash, give goods because cash just evaporates faster the nearer to the ground it gets.

Anyway, it's not our job to fix the world, is it? We've got our own problems: Crime. Global warming. Immigration. The credit crunch. Iraq. Unemployment. Afghanistan. Global cooling. Public health. Fuel prices. Mortgage rates. Tax. Bills. Speed cameras. Computer viruses. The European Union. A volcano. Enya.

I guess my point is that everyone knows that the world we've got isn't the world any of us would want, but it is the world we deserve. We spend so much time arguing, fucking each other over and listening to Enya that we've taken our eye off the ball. We have no vision for the future. We have become small. We have become a species of Scrooges, grubbing about in the dust and shit for coppers when we should be reaching for the stars.

Now, I bang on a lot about the banks being a vampire attached to the very hearts of many of our societies, bleeding us all just dry enough to keep us quiet. Many people don't believe this, and I understand that. I didn't believe it when I first heard it a couple of years ago. I thought the idea was just mad - as mad as thinking the Royal Family are really shape-shifting space lizards who live off the blood of new born babies and control our minds via CIA operated telepathic satellite transmissions of Enya songs. As I learned more, I didn't want to believe it because the very thought that bankers might actually be doing this for real was (and still is) terrifying to me. Politicians and bankers can't be that corrupt, can they? Somebody would have noticed by now if all this had been going on for as long as people said it had. Abraham Lincoln noticed. So did JFK. They both tried to do something about it and things did not end well for either of them. Luckily, I'm a nobody and not worth shooting (hopefully), but I do have to examine my courage every time I post something like this. Well, I'm sure you can imagine how afraid to speak out you might be if you believed what I believe. I don't talk about this shit for fun, you know.

There is still a part of me, even now, that sometimes tells me I'm being stupid and that this can't possibly be. Then I learn a little bit more (such as the fact that the Bank of England pays 25% of its post tax profits to HM Treasury every year, but there's no mention of what happens to the other 75%) and I am reluctantly reintroduced to what I see as a likely reality. I don't expect anybody to be convinced by me or to follow me or even to take me seriously. All I say is that I believe that this country which I love is being quietly sacked by a small band of powerful European and domestic families who own most of the world's central banks. Because they control the money supply, they are above the law. This is what Meyer Amschel Rothschild meant when he said "Give me control of a country's money, and I care not who writes its laws." If your bank tells you that your mortgage has gone up, you pay it or the bank takes your house off you. If your bank tells you it's altering the terms of your mortgage (due to paragraph 56, Heading 44c, Subsection F2, line 8 of the thing you signed fifteen years ago without reading properly) you comply or the bank takes your house off you. This is precisely the position governments have got themselves into with the central banks - if governments don't comply, the banks turn off the money supply. The way out of this is for governments around the world to boot out the central banks and start printing their own debt-free money again.

Now, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm completely and irredeemably cock-out-howling-at-the-moon-in-a-tinfoil-hat loopy, but so what? I exercise my right as a free man in a free country to express whichever views I so choose, be they right or be they wrong. I'm not the only person in the world who believes that the human race is being not only held back but brutally damaged by the banking vampires or corporape interests and I see more and more people waking up to the idea every day. I do not see myself as a revolutionary - Hell, I'm not even interested in politics, to be honest - but I do feel very strongly about this one subject. I see myself only as one insignificant human being pointing and saying "look at that." Whether you look or not is up to you. What you see when you look is also up to you, as is what you may want to do about it.

I could go on and on and on about this (er, and I think I just did), but I don't think that what I say is unreasonable or beyond the bounds of possibility. I am disappointed that none of my parliamentary candidates will even talk about the subject. Does this mean I should forget it and just pick a party that's near enough to my views on everything else except this, even though I firmly believe that unless we change the way our country prints money nothing else actually can change?

So, what have politicians ever done for us? A great deal, and nowhere near enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 April, 2010, 02:43:59 AM
I couldnt give a rats ass about the govt entering my name onto a govt watch list as a potential terrorist or subversive or anything else and i i will continue to speak out against what i see as being wrong as i want to do something useful with my life that contributes something positive and otherwise i dont give a toss about the consequences to myself and history will be the judge of wether i am right or wrong or misguided here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 27 April, 2010, 08:03:48 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 April, 2010, 10:58:01 PM
Well, to be honest, dude, the vast majority of posts on this thread have been various iterations of "im too clever to vote because THEY ARE ALL THE SAME MIRITE!!!!" or "I'm not voting unless they pander solely to my inane and spurious prejudices".


Is that really your perception, Roger? Or are you simply throwing a cat among the pigeons?

If you really think that my reason for not voting is to do with no one following my way (or... prejudices!?), then you really haven't read a word I've written. My reason for not voting is the exact opposite of that - I see the whole concept of voting being about the herd mentality you describe; being able to force others to 'pander solely to [your] inane and spurious prejudices'. For me, to not vote is a rejection of that very concept.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 April, 2010, 09:17:29 AM
But Roger isn't describing a herd mentality there - quite the opposite. "im too clever to vote" and "I'm not voting unless they pander solely to my inane and spurious prejudices" speak of a very determined individualism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 27 April, 2010, 01:09:15 PM
You may have a point there, Usher. I stand corrected.

What I meant by herd mentality, however, is the mob rule principle at the centre of our current understanding of democracy - one party wins and can, therefore, dictate their belief system to every other individual. It's a system I worry about - particularly from the perspective of minority groups. It's also what I am rejecting when I spoil my vote, as opposed to what Roger's understanding seems to be; that of I spoil my vote because none of the parties presenting represent my viewpoint. The system is what I reject, not necessarily the viewpoints held by any parties (some of which I can see as reasonable, others which I see as unreasonable).

I want to be clear on that.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 01:38:39 PM
I suppose one could say that our country has an "operating system" that keeps things running in the background. You'll still dial 999 for an ambulance under the Conservatives, Lib Dems, Labour, UKIP or the Greens; you'll still get food from a food shop, still get water out of a tap, still have the same speed limits and still drive on the same side of the road.

We could, of course, change our operating system if we so choose, but every four or five years we just vote on changing the desktop theme. Maybe we should run a security program to eliminate viruses, Trojans, rootkits and keyloggers instead? (That's what the Central Banks are, a Trojan nestled at the heart of our Operating System.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 27 April, 2010, 01:59:54 PM
A wonderful way with words as usual, Shark. Very well put! :)

And let me also add - how much of the operating system's programs do we actually (or could we actually) run/ maintain ourselves without any help (or worse; only pesky intereference/ taxation/ ruination!) from gubment?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 April, 2010, 02:10:44 PM
You should just have bought a Mac.  Then you'd never need to worry about what was going on under the hood.  Just like North Korea did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 April, 2010, 02:12:02 PM
It makes me quite angry when i think about what these idiots are doing to the people of this country and the US and especially the US because they are having a very hard time of it at present and how they think we are all too stupid to notice or care but the fact is that some of us are not stupid and we do care about what is happening and that we are watching them all the time but none of it would be possible without the internet and its the internet that is creating a revolution of minds because its all about information and awareness.

How dare these politicians and globalists and bankers try to steal and ruin our future and our childrens future.

How dare they do that ?

I might be just one individual typing on a keyboard and i dont know how much difference i can make but i am NOT tolerating or accepting it.I either do that or just completely ignore and wash my hands of the whole thing but i dont think that i could do that even if i wanted to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 02:19:47 PM
Join the Wolfshark Party for a better world!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 April, 2010, 07:07:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 02:19:47 PM
Join the Wolfshark Party for a better world!

It probably would be as well.I think that humanity deserves better than what is on the table at present and we are being held back from reaching our true potential both individually and as a collective and all you can do in the meantime is not allow yourself to be sucked into it all and try and do the right thing for yourself and everyone else.You sound like you have come into this a lot later than i did and in some ways i often wonder if i would be better off just being some dumb idiot who doesnt give a shit about it all and maybe i would be happier [not that i am unhappy in any way] just being in my own little world and thinking to hell with it all but i am not because i have gone too far down the rabbit hole as it were to turn back now.A lot of it as you know is very very negative and i think you have to have to have a lot of inner strenth and be very well balanced spiritually to be able to take it all in without being affected by it in whatever way.

All that is offset by the fact that you and i really can make a difference but that wouldnt be possible without the internet which initially was a product of military research and development for military applications so i thank them for that and really my main interest in life is seeing an end to this system rather than anything else that revolves around self interest.

I dont know if we are only here once in this life and thats it but i can relax knowing that i tried to do the right thing and without being delusional or narcissistic i feel that it is partly what i am here for.I just felt from a very young age that there was just something very wrong about the world i live in without knowing why and in 1987 when conservatives were re-elected there bean the beginning of my experience with depression.

When i was very young growing up in the 70s and 80s i used to see all these politicians on TV like Kissinger and all the rest of them and there was just something about them that was wrong or evil and i could see it in their eyes and i just felt like there was something very wrong about it all and it wasnt until i was about 30 that i started to look into it all.

I am very glad and very relieved that people are waking up to it all because we cant carry on like this.Everyone must realise deep down inside that this system we live under is all Bs and is all built on deception and lies and i am taking what is rightfullly mine because this life is too precious to have it ruined by a load of inbred parasitical greedy control freaks and i dont know if there is a hell but if there is there are places reserved for them.

Apologies for babbling on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 April, 2010, 07:16:29 PM
Well I've just voted, so I am making it official that political parties can stop pushing crap through my door and no longer need to clutter up the TV with party political broadcasts. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 April, 2010, 07:39:08 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 27 April, 2010, 07:16:29 PM
Well I've just voted, so I am making it official that political parties can stop pushing crap through my door and no longer need to clutter up the TV with party political broadcasts. Thanks.

How can you vote when the election isnt until May 6th ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 07:54:13 PM
Postal voting, methinks...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 April, 2010, 07:59:38 PM
More and more people are voting by post as they can't, or don't want to, bothr schleppping to the polling station on the day. I've started seeing lost of posters in windows saying "already voted - no more leaflets please". It's also much more open to corruption however

PS - the UKIP dig wasn't aimed at you but at those daily-mail types who froth at the mouth over all those made-up stories about Brussels outlawing bendy bananas, and christmas being banned to appease muslims etc.

A few selections from Wiki about UKIP - you can look into it further if you wish:
"Controversy over proposed constitution changes In December 2008 the NEC proposed two significant amendments to the UKIP Constitution ... some members claiming that their purpose was to prevent members from voting on party business and to allow the unelected Party Chairman to expel members without a hearing. ...[and] centralise more power within the leadership and to reduce democracy and accountability in the party."
Nigel Farage expenses disclosure...UKIP's leader, Nigel Farage had said in a speech to the Foreign Press Association that over ten years as a member of the European Parliament he used nearly £2 million of taxpayers' money in expenses and allowances, on top of his £64,000 a year salary."
UKIP racism controversyUKIP's London chair, Paul Wiffen, was suspended as Chairman of the London region over "racist remarks" made on the social work website Community Care...Frank Maloney UKIP's 2004 London Mayoral candidate and a 2010 General Election candidate was once described as a "dangerous racist"[22] and said to be promoting "Griffin-like racism".[23]. His campaign manager Gary Cartwright[24], ...was a regular contributor to holocaust denier David Irving's historical revisionist Focal Point website"
Unlawful donations UKIP accepted over £360 000 in donations from bookmaker Alan Bown and Nightech Limited between 2004 and 2006. The Electoral Commission took the party to court over the matter, as Bown was not on the electoral register and thus not allowed to make donations to a political party.

A breath of frsha air? Nah, just more of the same. That was just from a brief surfing, I'm sure if you dig further you'll unceover much more shit about them (if you want to)

IMHO, they're just tories who are too extreme to be a member of the main party, and while there is nothing explicitly racist in their output (even the BNP is good at not saying explicitly racist things) there's an undercurrent to them that just leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 April, 2010, 08:04:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 27 April, 2010, 07:39:08 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 27 April, 2010, 07:16:29 PM
Well I've just voted, so I am making it official that political parties can stop pushing crap through my door and no longer need to clutter up the TV with party political broadcasts. Thanks.

How can you vote when the election isnt until May 6th ?

Special Imperial Dispensations - it takes a while for my 10,000 votes to be transported from the Moon and it requires extra counting too.

Or... you know, what Sharky says:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 07:54:13 PM
Postal voting, methinks...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 April, 2010, 08:11:02 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 April, 2010, 07:59:38 PM
More and more people are voting by post as they can't, or don't want to, bothr schleppping to the polling station on the day.

Or you walked to the polling station you've used for years and they won't let you vote because they claim you've been moved to another polling station and no amount of explaining that I'd always voted there helped resolve the situation in my favour. If they are going to go round trying to confuse me then I'm having none of their silly system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 April, 2010, 10:42:01 PM
David Cameron promising to fire teachers who give exam marks for writing Fuck off! discussed here:

http://www.2000adonline.com/forum/index.php/topic,26559.0.html (http://www.2000adonline.com/forum/index.php/topic,26559.0.html)


Needless to say he's just attacking a straw man. He'll be promising to clear the Hundred Acre Wood of heffalumps and woozles next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 April, 2010, 03:18:15 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 27 April, 2010, 10:42:01 PM
David Cameron promising to fire teachers who give exam marks for writing Fuck off! discussed here:

http://www.2000adonline.com/forum/index.php/topic,26559.0.html (http://www.2000adonline.com/forum/index.php/topic,26559.0.html)


Needless to say he's just attacking a straw man. He'll be promising to clear the Hundred Acre Wood of heffalumps and woozles next.

Surely it makes more sense to not fire teachers for giving exam marks for exam papers that have fuck off written on them and help them to become better teachers by changing the ludicrous criteria as dictated to the teachers by OFSTED and the National Curriculum?

Why not attack a symptom of the problem instead of the cause ?

All that misplaced and misdirected righteous anger of a career politician on the election campaign trail.
i think i have heard all this type of thing before somewhere.

Is this a taste of what is potentially to come ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 April, 2010, 04:01:09 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1waGanUNt0


:lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 April, 2010, 08:47:06 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 27 April, 2010, 10:42:01 PM
He'll be promising to clear the Hundred Acre Wood of heffalumps and woozles next.

This excellent jibe is sadly undermined by the appearance of Heffalumps in The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, for which crime I hope someone was shot at dawn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 01:29:07 PM
The following Facebook exchange between me and my cousin could just as easily have appeared on the "Stupid Things Peole Have Said To You" thread:


E**a H*****s
WHICH PARTY WILL YOU VOTE FOR AT THE MAY GENERAL ELECTION ? : BNP
POLICIES: IMMIGRATION – time to say ENOUGH! On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years. To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identit...

Yesterday at 19:08 via 2010 U.K. Mock Election, Opinion Poll  · Comment · LikeUnlike · 2010 U.K. Mock Election,

Matt Nicholson
You do know the "native British people" are long gone, don't you? I mean, even the Anglo Saxons were immigrants...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_People

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people
37 minutes ago ·

E**a H*****s
Yeah but at least they shown respect. The other parties are useless and never stick to their word, and the fact of the matter is they haven't monitored the issue, the country is over crowded and there is too much of a strain.
31 minutes ago

Matt Nicholson
Oh dear. Think I'm going to put this can of worms down before it gets spilled...
about a minute ago ·


Seriously - is there an emoticon for "open-mouthed with facepalm-inducing gobsmackery"? I wonder if Tordelback can confirm my cousin's theory that the Anglo Saxons only popped round to borrow a cup of sugar?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 28 April, 2010, 01:31:10 PM
Gordon Brown would probably say your cousin is bigoted... ;-)

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 01:40:28 PM
Send us all back where we came from, that's what I say...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 01:57:57 PM
Dear Daily Mail,

Bloody locals, lazing around my country letting foreigners do all the hard work! It's a disgrace. They're obviously not working nearly hard enough to pay proper taxes because my benefit payments are a fecking disgrace so I can't laze around in peace any more. Whip the buggers, I say! Give 'em the lash! Make 'em put their bloody backs into it!

Confused of Godalming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 02:21:32 PM
Heh, I think someone else must have chimed in - her original post and all subsequent replies have been deleted! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 April, 2010, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 01:29:07 PM
I wonder if Tordelback can confirm my cousin's theory that the Anglo Saxons only popped round to borrow a cup of sugar?

Heh.  I've long suspected that most English people believe themselves to be direct descendants of the Romans (the ones with the RSC accents off of I Claudius, not those Eytie ones from the Med), rather than any of those squalid Germanic tribes.  It is quite amusing as an outsider watching the agonisingly inane UK election coverage to see immigration be listed as One of the Top 2 Issues of The Election.  Looking at the actual news (rather than self-serving vox-pop) it's very hard to believe that it could even be in the Top 20.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 03:33:44 PM
Just for your pleasure  ;)

Royal Mail created a stamp with a picture of the Prime Minister on it.
The stamp was not sticking to envelopes. 
This enraged the Prime Minister, who demanded a full investigation.
After a month of testing and spending £1.1M, a Special Commission presented the following three findings:

1. The stamp is in perfect order.
2. There is nothing wrong with the adhesive.
3. People are spitting on the wrong side of the stamp


I thank you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 28 April, 2010, 03:48:20 PM
Quote from: Banners on 28 April, 2010, 01:31:10 PM
Gordon Brown would probably say your cousin is bigoted... ;-)

M@

Sheesh! Gordon Brown can't do anything right, can he?

Poor sod.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 28 April, 2010, 03:50:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2010, 01:55:03 AM
attending a God awful Enya concert.

to the accompaniment of a rock ballad or bloody Enya.

We've got our own problems: Crime. Global warming. Immigration. ... A volcano. Enya.

fucking each other over and listening to Enya

CIA operated telepathic satellite transmissions of Enya songs.

Ummm. I know I'm about two pages behind the curve, but do ya think the Shark has a bit of a crush on someone??

OK. OK. I know it's a serious thread. Happy day that Mr Wolf is finding messages from the Lib Dems that appeal, that HooHaa remains true to his anarchism and that debate can thrive, even if it gets tetchy from time to time.

No point to make (sorry), just appreciation for the thread :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 April, 2010, 03:56:59 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 April, 2010, 03:48:20 PM
Quote from: Banners on 28 April, 2010, 01:31:10 PM
Gordon Brown would probably say your cousin is bigoted... ;-)

M@

Sheesh! Gordon Brown can't do anything right, can he?

Poor sod.

Incapability Brown.

Gordon BrNWO.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 04:01:02 PM
"Incapability Brown!"

Ha ha ha! Genius!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 04:04:47 PM
Did you hear the news last night. Greece have been rated as 'Junk Bond Status' and the world trembles. The 'PIGS' countries will drag Europe down if 'WE' don't all step in and prop them up  ::)

This is what Europe is all about, spend, spend, spend, on failing countries, will this madness never end!

I was always told not to throw good money after bad but it seems countries can do this all the time, with our money!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 28 April, 2010, 04:08:03 PM
Quote from: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 01:40:28 PM
Send us all back where we came from, that's what I say...

I was born in Cyprus, I await my free airline ticket. As a British citizen they can't stop me sneaking back in again, so they could keep sending me back, once a year in the Winter, when it is cooler, would be lovely thanks. Do I apply to Nick Griffin now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 04:10:09 PM
This wouldn't be happening if sovereign states reclaimed the responsibility of printing their own... er, haven't I said this already? I forget.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 28 April, 2010, 06:09:41 PM
Quote from: Banners on 28 April, 2010, 01:31:10 PM
Gordon Brown would probably say your cousin is bigoted... ;-)

M@

Heh heh heh. Having finally caught the news, Everything becomes clear!
I think the soft sod just lost Rochdale...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 06:52:35 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed that on the news tonight, let Labour spin out of that  :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is what people in power think of us lot, we are the shit on the sole of their shoes. He only apologised because he was found out, I wonder how many other life long labour supporters he thinks are shits.

Anyway that old woman will still vote labour as it's in her blood, so he'll be happy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 April, 2010, 07:39:17 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 06:52:35 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed that on the news tonight, let Labour spin out of that  :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is what people in power think of us lot, we are the shit on the sole of their shoes. He only apologised because he was found out, I wonder how many other life long labour supporters he thinks are shits.

Just got in, so this sent me off to the BBC website. I wouldn't be surprised if this costs him more than Rochdale.

Funnily enough, his apology annoys me more than what he said (which doesn't actually bother me at all) - if you said it, Brown, that's what think, so have the courage to stand by your opinion. It's not as if you're unwilling to stand by a lot of other unpopular things.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 28 April, 2010, 07:39:49 PM
Isn't it great to watch a politician squirm. To watch that clip from the Jeremy Vine show was priceless.






VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 April, 2010, 07:49:28 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 April, 2010, 07:39:17 PM


Just got in, so this sent me off to the BBC website. I wouldn't be surprised if this costs him more than Rochdale.



lets hope so because i dont think i could stand another 5 years of that stupid clown as PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 28 April, 2010, 07:57:36 PM
I know he's rubbish and everything but I do genuinely feel a little bit sorry for him sometimes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 08:01:07 PM
I can see what you mean, Blair must be pissing himself laughing!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 08:02:21 PM
That'd be the ideal way to top it off - 'phone camera footage of Blair literally pissing himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 28 April, 2010, 08:59:58 PM
 Clearly it's an ambush by a bigoted, shameless, self- promoter who hates everyone.
Poor Misses Duffy. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 April, 2010, 11:10:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 04:10:09 PM
This wouldn't be happening if sovereign states reclaimed the responsibility of printing their own... er, haven't I said this already? I forget.

Weimar Germany used to print loads.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 12:14:59 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 28 April, 2010, 11:10:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 04:10:09 PM
This wouldn't be happening if sovereign states reclaimed the responsibility of printing their own... er, haven't I said this already? I forget.

Weimar Germany used to print loads.  ;)

Weimar germany was forced to print loads because of WW1 reperations that they were forced to pay out.

I am not sure wether Germany was controlled by the Rothschild international banking cartel/Anglo-Dutch banking cartel at that point but they certainly were by the time Hitler was in power but i would guess that they were.

If that is the case then Germany didnt have control of its own banking system and the printing of paper money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 April, 2010, 12:52:13 AM
Yep, the insane inflation of Weimar Germany certainly worked to the long term advantage of Europe as a whole.  AFAICS there is no real difference between extreme devaluation of a 'sovereign' currency and debt default of one state within a single currency from the point of view of that state's neighbours.  They'll end up having to deal with the mess either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 04:23:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2010, 04:10:09 PM
This wouldn't be happening if sovereign states reclaimed the responsibility of printing their own... er, haven't I said this already? I forget.

Here you are LS:


http://www.prisonplanet.com/trichet-calls-for-corrupt-bis-to-boss-global-government-in-cfr-speech.html


Crisis creation - Crisis reaction - Crisis resolution/solution - Crisis prevention.

Cockroaches.



Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2010, 04:04:47 PM
Did you hear the news last night. Greece have been rated as 'Junk Bond Status' and the world trembles. The 'PIGS' countries will drag Europe down if 'WE' don't all step in and prop them up  ::)

This is what Europe is all about, spend, spend, spend, on failing countries, will this madness never end!

I was always told not to throw good money after bad but it seems countries can do this all the time, with our money!

Here we go........

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/eurozone-edges-closer-to-endgame-as-greek-contagion-hits-portugal-1956203.html


The EU Empire has spread itself too thin and is more interested in swallowing up countries without thinking about the consequences of it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2010, 06:19:29 PM
http://www.ted.com/talks/omar_ahmad_political_change_with_pen_and_paper.html/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 29 April, 2010, 08:42:56 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dw9J36mHOmQ/S9WJv4ed1TI/AAAAAAAAALM/jkUFqs4eX8g/s400/Screen+shot+2010-04-26+at+1.39.43+PM.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 09:31:13 PM
The lunatics have taken over the asylum :

http://climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151:uk-house-of-commons-qthe-regulation-of-geoengineeringq&catid=38:climate-intervention-news&Itemid=63
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 29 April, 2010, 09:51:06 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 29 April, 2010, 08:42:56 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dw9J36mHOmQ/S9WJv4ed1TI/AAAAAAAAALM/jkUFqs4eX8g/s400/Screen+shot+2010-04-26+at+1.39.43+PM.png)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 April, 2010, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 09:31:13 PM
The lunatics have taken over the asylum :

http://climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151:uk-house-of-commons-qthe-regulation-of-geoengineeringq&catid=38:climate-intervention-news&Itemid=63

I don't get it - this seems to be saying that countries should not be allowed to unilaterally launch "geo-engineering" projects, that may affect the climate of the whole world, and that we need regulation to stop such potentially irresponsible ventures. You disagree?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 29 April, 2010, 10:26:54 PM
Cameron was all over the bloody place tonight, used buzzwords and scaremongering as a crutch like nobody's business.

Clegg was middling for a bit but shot off a couple swift bitchslaps to both the Tories and Labour, I'm quite sure his consistently good performance over the three debates will be reflected in the polls tomorrow.

Brown actually held his own tonight, despite battling to get over Bigotgate, and he almost had me thinking seriously about Labour for once during his closing statement until he did that. fucking. smile. I swear I shit a little.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 29 April, 2010, 10:41:59 PM
Brown worst mannerism is when he sucks his bottom lip over his teeth. It really grates me.

To the Bigoted British public.
(http://www.treehugger.com/gordon-brown-community.jpg)







VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2010, 11:28:18 PM
Brown planning to "compel" people to work, Cameron broadly agreeing. Compel? A democratic government wants to compel its people?


Arbeit macht frei?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 11:49:04 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 April, 2010, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 09:31:13 PM
The lunatics have taken over the asylum :

http://climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151:uk-house-of-commons-qthe-regulation-of-geoengineeringq&catid=38:climate-intervention-news&Itemid=63

I don't get it - this seems to be saying that countries should not be allowed to unilaterally launch "geo-engineering" projects, that may affect the climate of the whole world, and that we need regulation to stop such potentially irresponsible ventures. You disagree?

Thats fair enough in principle but that wasnt my point as my point was that it should not be permitted under ANY circumatance whatsoever wether its unregulated or regulated.

It should be unilaterrally banned. [not to mention the fact that it is already happening unofficially.]


Period.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2010, 11:28:18 PM
Brown planning to "compel" people to work, Cameron broadly agreeing. Compel? A democratic government wants to compel its people?


Arbeit macht frei?

I really dont want to get started on that but the longer everyone just accepts this kind of thing then the longer it will continue and the cutbacks wont start till after the election as they are saving all that till you have all voted them in and there is nothing you can do about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 April, 2010, 08:20:50 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 04:23:13 PM
The EU Empire has spread itself too thin and is more interested in swallowing up countries without thinking about the consequences of it all.

Um, are you suggesting that Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Ireland (to which the linked article refers) have no place in the EU?  I was under the impression that the inclusion of the 'peripheral' countries in a single market that already included the industrialised heartland was pretty much the original goal of the community project.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 April, 2010, 09:52:26 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 11:49:04 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 April, 2010, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 09:31:13 PM
The lunatics have taken over the asylum :

http://climateresponsefund.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151:uk-house-of-commons-qthe-regulation-of-geoengineeringq&catid=38:climate-intervention-news&Itemid=63

I don't get it - this seems to be saying that countries should not be allowed to unilaterally launch "geo-engineering" projects, that may affect the climate of the whole world, and that we need regulation to stop such potentially irresponsible ventures. You disagree?

Thats fair enough in principle but that wasnt my point as my point was that it should not be permitted under ANY circumatance whatsoever wether its unregulated or regulated.

It should be unilaterrally banned. [not to mention the fact that it is already happening unofficially.


A unilateral ban would be pointless - if GB said we're banning it, any other country could go ahead. The article proposes a GLOBAL framework of regulations that would prevent ANY country unilaterally launching such a project.

But that would require some sort of international body, representing every counttry in the world, with the powers to implement, monitor and if necessary enforce such a ban, such as ....errr... the United Nations - and I know how much you love that organisation!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LARF on 30 April, 2010, 12:34:48 PM
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47752000/jpg/_47752203_brown226250in_ap.jpg)

Vote for the Fonz! Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy...

(finally proving that Brown has 'jumped the Shark!')
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 April, 2010, 01:22:57 PM
Oy...



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 April, 2010, 05:33:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2010, 11:28:18 PM
Brown planning to "compel" people to work, Cameron broadly agreeing. Compel? A democratic government wants to compel its people?

Well, in all seriousness, given the reality that there are some people who will cheerfully live on benefit payments and make no effort to find work or won't accept work they can do when it's offered on a plate, how would you resolve this problem?

(I'm making an assumption about the context here, so sorry if I'm off the mark.)


QuoteArbeit macht frei?

I think that's a bit OTT.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 30 April, 2010, 06:06:56 PM
Couldn't help but notice that an 'Al Ewing' was quoted in the Times today concerning last night's party leader debate. Co-inky-dink or the man himself?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 30 April, 2010, 06:18:54 PM
That was me, in relation to something that was happening on screen right at that moment, which is why it looks so flaccid and lifeless now that some hack at Murdoch's shitrag's decided to nick it to fill some space. Anyone following me on the basis of that will have got a near-incoherent rant about yellow journalists eating babies this morning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 30 April, 2010, 06:26:32 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 April, 2010, 08:20:50 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 04:23:13 PM
The EU Empire has spread itself too thin and is more interested in swallowing up countries without thinking about the consequences of it all.

Um, are you suggesting that Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Ireland (to which the linked article refers) have no place in the EU?  I was under the impression that the inclusion of the 'peripheral' countries in a single market that already included the industrialised heartland was pretty much the original goal of the community project.

No i am not but they were let into the single currency [EURO] while not being finacially solvent to varying degrees which was always going to be storing up problems for later on so it wasnt thought out properly at all.These countries are absorbed into the EU partly on the basis that the EU has been all about expanding its empire as much as possible without out any other consideration other than that.These countries were all insolvent to varying degrees when they first joined and since then the entire designed to fail economies of every other country within the EU have now also become insolvent including the UK.

So the way i see it the whole thing was a trap financially unless Greece decides to leave the Eurozone and its a house of cards because if other countries follow on from Greece then we have a problem because it will not be financially sustainable to bail them all out so this in turn will leave these countries open to be abused and exploited by the IMF [right where they want them] and besides that the EU themselves havent got any real solutions to this problem in the long term as they cant agree among themselves who should pay what which is why i say it wasnt thought out properly in the first place.

So no i am not saying those countries dont have any place in the EU but rather that the whole single currency thing is ill conceived because it doesnt take countries going bankrupt or adverse economic conditions into account and it didnt have a plan already worked out in advance or they didnt see it coming or they did but they let Greece join regardless.

Also if these countries go bankrupt or already are then it either means they have to borrow more money to keep paying into the EU or it will cost the other EU member states who are also in varying degrees of bankruptcy/insolvency more money on top of what they pay into it already.

Which is exactly what is already happening.



Its just a very costly mistake.
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 April, 2010, 05:33:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2010, 11:28:18 PM
Brown planning to "compel" people to work, Cameron broadly agreeing. Compel? A democratic government wants to compel its people?

Well, in all seriousness, given the reality that there are some people who will cheerfully live on benefit payments and make no effort to find work or won't accept work they can do when it's offered on a plate, how would you resolve this problem?





Regards

Robin

Thats very true.Having said that these politicians will always pick the easy and soft targets when it comes to making spending cuts if its not applied selectively and used against the unemployed in general.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 30 April, 2010, 07:45:13 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 April, 2010, 08:20:50 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2010, 04:23:13 PM
The EU Empire has spread itself too thin and is more interested in swallowing up countries without thinking about the consequences of it all.

Um, are you suggesting that Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Ireland (to which the linked article refers) have no place in the EU?  I was under the impression that the inclusion of the 'peripheral' countries in a single market that already included the industrialised heartland was pretty much the original goal of the community project.

Apologies for double posting but its exactly the same thinking and methodology at work in the EU in terms of increasing its membership/empire as it is with NATO who accept all those ex-soviet satellite nations into NATO despite the fact that they contribute virtually nothing in terms of additional military capability because its all strategic and an alternative to letting them be absorbed by Russia all over again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 April, 2010, 09:11:45 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 14 April, 2010, 10:10:59 PM
UKIP .... would exit the UK from the EU and save the taxpayer up to 120 billion a year.

The Guardian are doing a series of those worthy but boring supplements all week, chock full of graphs and statistics about Britain today. From today's:

What Britain put into the EU in 2008 (after the rebate*):
£6.08 bn
What the EU put into Britain in 2008:
£5.84bn

(*This is the £4.96bn rebate that Thatcher insisted on because of the relatively small size of our agricultural sector)

But I'm sure UKIP have more 'creative' accounting methods when it comes to statistics!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 30 April, 2010, 10:52:57 PM
Mmm, UKIP do like to fudge facts, but don't all the parties really?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 30 April, 2010, 10:57:47 PM
So membership of the EU costs us about a third of a Millennium Dome every year?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 12:48:32 AM
Is this a simple journalistic error ?
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 April, 2010, 09:11:45 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 14 April, 2010, 10:10:59 PM
UKIP .... would exit the UK from the EU and save the taxpayer up to 120 billion a year.

The Guardian are doing a series of those worthy but boring supplements all week, chock full of graphs and statistics about Britain today. From today's:

What Britain put into the EU in 2008 (after the rebate*):
£6.08 bn
What the EU put into Britain in 2008:
£5.84bn

(*This is the £4.96bn rebate that Thatcher insisted on because of the relatively small size of our agricultural sector)

But I'm sure UKIP have more 'creative' accounting methods when it comes to statistics!



Where you quoted me for saying it costs 120 billion i cant believe that i said that :-[ :lol:.I wasnt trying to deceive anyone because thats just outlandish !

I must have added a 0 and was meant to say 12 billion which was an approx figure and the gross contribution and i can say that neither UKIP or anyone else claims that we pay 120 billion per year.Thanks for correcting that.

The gross UK EU contribution in 2009 was approx 14 billion or 14.5 billion.

UKIP were basing their 40 million per day cost to the UK taxpayer on the gross UK contribution rather than the net contribution to the EU.

So the net cost to the UK that it pays to the EU is 13 million per day - 4.6 billion per year in 2009.

Tony Blair signed away a large amount of our Thatcher rebate so next year our net contribution will increase by 60 percent.

The cash that is given back to us is given to all these organisations like the Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund and all kinds of things  so the cash benefits the public/taxpayer directly or indirectly or not at all.Whatever.

I complain about the cost of it but it is peanuts compared to the bigger picture when you consider that the toal contributed by income tax alone approx 155 billion in 2009 alone and if the argument against the EU was just based on costs to the UK taxpayer there wouldnt be much of an argument but its more than that.

Also these are official figures so they are not necessarily 100 percent accurate.

Also my point about the Third Sector wasnt right either because that includes a lot of wothwhile charities and non-profit organisations but i should have said it was ceertain sections of the private sector thast are feeding off the taxpayer like consultancies and quangos and that type of thing and not charities etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 12:59:48 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 12:48:32 AM
when you consider that the toal contributed by income tax alone approx 155 billion in 2009 alone and if the argument against the EU was just based on costs to the UK taxpayer there wouldnt be much of an argument but its more than that.



That should have read as "the total contributed to govt by income tax alone is approx 155 billion"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 04:21:08 AM
I forgot about this :

http://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/?article=14036


Apparently the EU creates one million + jobs so its an expensive way of creating employment.

And then theres this 120 billion :

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:c9TT0dlQIaQJ:euobserver.com/19/29961+uk+contributes+120+billion+to+the+eu&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2010, 03:09:18 PM
Dear Mark J.,

Our poll results are in - over 90% of us want to stop the scaremongering about a hung parliament. So the campaign starts now!

The tabloid press is doing all it can to skew the election result by bullying and scaring voters. [1] The political editor of The Sun has been given clear instructions from Rupert Murdoch: "It is my job to see that Cameron f****g well gets into Downing Street" [2]. Murdoch and his tabloid press friends think they've got the right to decide who governs us.

Together we can stand up for our right to choose who we vote for and expose this cynical manipulation. Let's shame the tabloids, and prove to the rest of the media that we won't buy their spin.

Please sign the petition now and forward this message to stop this media scaremongering:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/hung_parliament

Right now the media scaremongering is dominating the airwaves. But we know that millions of us want to cast our votes with hope - of a better politics and more balanced parliament. A massive outcry by tens of thousands of us will help shift the debate.

Numbers matter here, so we're teaming up with Avaaz.org. In total there are half a million of us - if enough of us get involved and spread the word we can break the tabloid stranglehold. By acting now, we can make sure we don't wake up on May 7th to hear Rupert Murdoch gloat again that "it was the Sun wot won it".

We can show we're not going to sit by and let right-wing media barons decide who runs the country. Sign the petition now:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/hung_parliament

A hung parliament carries its own uncertainties and risks. But it also spells opportunities - for a more balanced parliament, reform to the voting system, and a different way of doing politics. [3] For many of us, it looks like it might be our best bet for changing politics for the better. But whoever we end up voting for, it should be us the voters, not foreign media barons, who call the shots in this election.

The tabloid editors are rattled. Polls suggest voters may defy them and refuse to vote in their chosen party. [4] That means right now they'll be planning to step up their dirty tricks in the final days of the campaign. A huge petition from 38 Degrees and Avaaz, defending our right to choose our own political destiny, could create a buzz on the internet and throw their plans off-course.

Add your voice now by clicking here, then please forward this message to all your friends:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/hung_parliament

Thanks for getting involved,

David, Hannah, Johnny, Nina and the 38 Degrees Team

P.S. Create your own hung parliament scare story with our "Tabloid headline generator" at http://labs.38degrees.org.uk/headline/and we can add some of the best to the website.



NOTES

[1]see for example: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/election2010/2942670/Election-2010-The-no-win-nightmare.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=Election+2010

[2]  http://www.newstatesman.com/media/2010/05/murdoch-clegg-cameron-paper

[3]  http://www.charter2010.co.uk/news/who-says-hung-parliaments-cant-be-effective

[4]  http://charter2010.co.uk/news/yougov-shows-53pc-hoping-hung-parliament
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 01 May, 2010, 03:20:03 PM
I've signed it. I don't know how much good it will do to 'shame' Murdoch - he has none - but it's worth it for the principle of the thing.

These are human vultures who feed off the fears they create, who breed ignorance to increase their own power, who've turned 'journalism' into a dirty word, and Murdoch is the prime offender. Dacre needs a slap too, mind. Until we get a Press Complaints Commission with any teeth to it, this will have to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 05:24:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2010, 03:09:18 PM


The tabloid press is doing all it can to skew the election result by bullying and scaring voters. [1] The political editor of The Sun has been given clear instructions from Rupert Murdoch: "It is my job to see that Cameron f****g well gets into Downing Street" [2]. Murdoch and his tabloid press friends think they've got the right to decide who governs us.

Together we can stand up for our right to choose who we vote for and expose this cynical manipulation. Let's shame the tabloids, and prove to the rest of the media that we won't buy their spin.




I have been totally avoiding the tabloid prole media completely and i dont even look at the covers.

I like the sound of a hung parliament though.

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2010, 05:33:15 PM
Roger's Momma's hoping for a well hung parliament.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 May, 2010, 05:35:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2010, 05:33:15 PM
Roger's Momma's hoping for a well hung parliament.

Groan............................and I bet she will  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 01 May, 2010, 05:43:52 PM
I want a well hung parliament as well and they should be left hanging for at least 1 week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
I'm going to be honest here; I'm rather scared by the idea of a Conservative government.

While I don't doubt that they have the best interests of the country at heart, they serve certain classes more than others, have an incredibly murky funding source, are known for political cockblocking because it doesn't fit in with their plans, and see the world through a middle class middle Englander filter.

Anybody who thinks they'll be vastly different or superior to an already monstrously shite Labour are seriously mistaken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2010, 02:06:41 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
Anybody who thinks they'll be vastly different or superior to an already monstrously shite Labour are seriously mistaken.

You can kiss goodbye to the BBC under a Conservative government which, on its own, is enough to keep me from voting for them.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 02:22:21 PM
Damn bloody right.

Cameron is Murdoch's puppet. Along with ripping the BBC to pieces,he'll relax OfCom so SKY can charge far more for their services and allow for more blatantly biased media. Basically, we'll end up with a television equivalent of The Daily Mail, or at the very least the Telegraph.

By the way, for anybody still thinking the Conservatives will usher in a new 'golden age', take a look at this: http://johannhari.com//2010/05/05/welcome-to-cameron-land (http://johannhari.com//2010/05/05/welcome-to-cameron-land)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2010, 03:36:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2010, 02:06:41 PM
You can kiss goodbye to the BBC under a Conservative government which, on its own, is enough to keep me voting for them.

Cheers

Jim

Well said Jim  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2010, 03:41:05 PM
I don't want to be a dick, CF, but if my words are inside a quote tag, I'd appreciate it if they were my words, and if they've been edited (for humorous effect or otherwise), I'd like it to be quite clear that this is the case -- you could have left the word "from" in and used the strikethrough tag, for example.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2010, 03:55:49 PM
"Re: The Royal Charter of the BBC, & the Treason & Felony Act, 1848
Notice Before Action.

It has been brought to my attention that the Corporation has received and is now receiving substantial amounts of funding from the European Union, in breach of Charter Provisions, and that in consequence of this very suspect arrangement the BBC is now reduced to the function of providing both broadcasting & propaganda facilities to a form of alien authority that fails to acknowledge the Supreme Authority of the British Crown.

I must advise you that all such conduct serves to breach the provisions of the Treason Act, 1351 with the further provisions of the Treason & Felony Act, 1848.

In addition, I must advise that the Treason & Felony Act of 1848 provides that it is a Criminal Offence for Subjects of the Crown to give aid or comfort to Traitors, and that this offence is punishable by imprisonment for life.

I am concerned for my own position and I must ask you to cease and desist from all treacherous conduct & financial arrangements, without delay.

Unless I receive your written assurance that the Corporation will issue an immediate public apology for all Treason committed thus far, with your further guarantee that the Corporation will cease and desist from all and any conduct that fails to maintain the Supremacy of the British Crown, then I must give fair warning of my intention to discontinue the payment of all such moneys as are now being applied to the financial support of the BBC."


From here: http://www.tpuc.org/stoppayingtvlicencefees

I make no comment other than to draw your attention to this. What, if anything, you do with this information is entirely up to you.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2010, 04:01:40 PM
No Probs Jim, I'll remember that for the next time  :-X

Just look forward to demise of the war mongering party being pushed out of office on the 6th, that's all I'll say  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 04:06:24 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
I'm going to be honest here; I'm rather scared by the idea of a Conservative government.



Anybody who thinks they'll be vastly different or superior to an already monstrously shite Labour are seriously mistaken.

I dont think you will find that any of them are very different to each other and i have NO faith in the LibLabCon but my main worry is Nick Clegg taking this country into the Euro which is a major mistake and another financial trap that the UK could well do without.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2010, 04:01:40 PM
No Probs Jim, I'll remember that for the next time  :-X

Just look forward to demise of the war mongering party being pushed out of office on the 6th, that's all I'll say  ;)

Thats until the next warmongering party gets elected whose foreign policy is dictated to them by their friends in Bilderberg and the CFR and the Trilateral Commission.

*
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2010, 03:55:49 PM
"Re: The Royal Charter of the BBC, & the Treason & Felony Act, 1848
Notice Before Action.

It has been brought to my attention that the Corporation has received and is now receiving substantial amounts of funding from the European Union, in breach of Charter Provisions, and that in consequence of this very suspect arrangement the BBC is now reduced to the function of providing both broadcasting & propaganda facilities to a form of alien authority that fails to acknowledge the Supreme Authority of the British Crown.


I make no comment other than to draw your attention to this. What, if anything, you do with this information is entirely up to you.




We can thank New Labour for all that not to mention  that the BBC is rife with Common/Communist Purpose members.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2010, 04:15:49 PM
I compare the Labour Party to an old car. It's been going a while but for the last dozen years it's costing more and more to run because when you come to think of it, it's bloody well clapped out and will just eat all your spare cash and you won't get any further down the road with it.

Time to trade in for a new model, just this time I'll be making sure it isn't red!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 05 May, 2010, 08:03:44 PM
I'm finding the idea of someone I otherwise think well of voting for those evil blue bastards quite hard to deal with. Is this normal?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2010, 08:08:19 PM
I shall be taking a picture of my x tomorrow and posting it on here, I expect all to follow  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:26 PM
Quote from: Noisybast on 05 May, 2010, 08:03:44 PM
I'm finding the idea of someone I otherwise think well of voting for those evil blue bastards quite hard to deal with. Is this normal?

Normal and understandable.

This was just brought to my attention:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poverty-and-injustice-in-david-cameronrsquos-model-borough-1962318.html


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:57 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 04:06:24 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
I'm going to be honest here; I'm rather scared by the idea of a Conservative government.



Anybody who thinks they'll be vastly different or superior to an already monstrously shite Labour are seriously mistaken.

I dont think you will find that any of them are very different to each other and i have NO faith in the LibLabCon but my main worry is Nick Clegg taking this country into the Euro which is a major mistake and another financial trap that the UK could well do without.

Clegg has stated time and time again that he will only consider going into the Euro if the circumstances are absolutely perfect, and even then a referendum will be held in order to let the country decide. LibDems actually listen to people's opinions on a regular basis, and not just when the Daily Mail brigade spring into action like Labour (and the Conservatives too, well, if they weren't the best of chums).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 09:39:42 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:57 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 04:06:24 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
I'm going to be honest here; I'm rather scared by the idea of a Conservative government.



Anybody who thinks they'll be vastly different or superior to an already monstrously shite Labour are seriously mistaken.

I dont think you will find that any of them are very different to each other and i have NO faith in the LibLabCon but my main worry is Nick Clegg taking this country into the Euro which is a major mistake and another financial trap that the UK could well do without.

Clegg has stated time and time again that he will only consider going into the Euro if the circumstances are absolutely perfect, and even then a referendum will be held in order to let the country decide. LibDems actually listen to people's opinions on a regular basis, and not just when the Daily Mail brigade spring into action like Labour (and the Conservatives too, well, if they weren't the best of chums).

Thats all well and good but you should know very well not to expect politicians to keep their promises/pledges.

What happened to the last referendum that the UK was promised ?

Nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 05 May, 2010, 10:10:20 PM
I just look at it this way. Am I better off now than 10 years ago.
Answer NO.
Time for a change.







VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 12:02:11 AM
It's polling day, so no more politics, it's the LAW. Well on the radio it is, not sure about the telly  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 12:32:35 AM
I actually forgot about it all until today as its all just business as usual to me.

I am going to use a pen to mark the X so it cant be surreptitiously rubbed out and moved into another box.

Its the only way to be sure.

Either that or press very hard with the pencil and go over it over and over again so it cant be rubbed out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 06 May, 2010, 01:20:29 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 09:39:42 PM
Thats all well and good but you should know very well not to expect politicians to keep their promises/pledges.

What happened to the last referendum that the UK was promised ?

Nothing.

A.) The reason we had no referendum was mostly likely because of Tory/Labour cockblocking.

and

B.) The process of changing to the Euro would be massive scrutiny, and you can bet your arse the media circuit will lean on whoever is in power to give us a referendum.

I don't trust politicians much either, but acting like they're all the spawn of Satan and cannot be a force of good in the world through any capacity is just silly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 06 May, 2010, 01:53:53 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:26 PM
This was just brought to my attention:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poverty-and-injustice-in-david-cameronrsquos-model-borough-1962318.html

Grim reading.

Barring a miracle, tomorrow is not going to be fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 01:58:58 AM
Quote from: Christov on 06 May, 2010, 01:20:29 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2010, 09:39:42 PM
Thats all well and good but you should know very well not to expect politicians to keep their promises/pledges.

What happened to the last referendum that the UK was promised ?

Nothing.

A.) The reason we had no referendum was mostly likely because of Tory/Labour cockblocking.

and

B.) The process of changing to the Euro would be massive scrutiny, and you can bet your arse the media circuit will lean on whoever is in power to give us a referendum.

I don't trust politicians much either, but acting like they're all the spawn of Satan and cannot be a force of good in the world through any capacity is just silly.

I dont understand point A.What does "cockblocking" mean ?

I also already know and understand why we didnt get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

B:The media can lean on whoever is in power to give us a referendum as much as they like but that doesnt have anything to do with the electorate being given one.All they can do is promote or propagandise the issue for or against it.

C:I am not acting like anything.All i do is point out facts so if politicians want to start acting like they are a force for good then i will shut up and be out of a job and then perhaps i cant start paying attention to other things instead.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:19:15 AM
I will vote for anyone who can make my life feel like this:

(http://www.firefox10.com/images/firefox-on-breast.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2010, 09:38:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:19:15 AM
I will vote for anyone who can make my life feel like this:

(http://www.firefox10.com/images/firefox-on-breast.jpg)

AWWWWWWWW!!! Pinks nosed puppies and kittens! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: stacey on 06 May, 2010, 10:23:59 AM
Quote from: Al_Ewing on 06 May, 2010, 01:53:53 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:26 PM
This was just brought to my attention:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poverty-and-injustice-in-david-cameronrsquos-model-borough-1962318.html

Grim reading.

Barring a miracle, tomorrow is not going to be fun.

It's a pity they couldn't get some of these people asking questions in the debate and watch the plastic frowny man squirm. Very uncomfortable reading.

I am scared for us all. I am a single mother of two relying on my tax credits to be able to live and work. Trying to make the best decision for my little family is a difficult and scary thing, it won't be Tory, they hate me, as if I planned for my marriage to fail. I feel really angry and let down and still undecided about who is going to do the best for me, as selfishly thats what I have to think about. Me and my girls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 11:06:07 AM
Anyone been to the polling station yet?

Later, I shall post a pic of my dog and I on our journey towards spoiling my vote.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LARF on 06 May, 2010, 11:12:30 AM
Oooh! are you going to cover it in Chum and feed it to the dog?

:-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: davethomson on 06 May, 2010, 11:16:47 AM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 11:06:07 AM
Anyone been to the polling station yet?

Just got back from the polling station, it was very quiet. Voted for the SNP (which I'm sure many people consider to be ballot spoiling), got wet in the rain and bought some cigarettes for when the results come out.

Typical election day, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 11:22:42 AM
"The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 11:31:46 AM
Quote from: Christov on 05 May, 2010, 01:59:06 PM
I'm rather scared by the idea of a Conservative government...While I don't doubt that they have the best interests of the country at heart
I doubt it very much - and I share your fear

Quote from: Noisybast on 05 May, 2010, 08:03:44 PM
I'm finding the idea of someone I otherwise think well of voting for those evil blue bastards quite hard to deal with. Is this normal?
Normal? It's commendable!

Quote from: Robin Low on 05 May, 2010, 09:26:26 PM
This was just brought to my attention:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poverty-and-injustice-in-david-cameronrsquos-model-borough-1962318.html
And that's why, the evil scumsuckers.

I expect to be rather depressed tomorrow  :(



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 11:34:55 AM
Might as well be depressed now and get it over with.

Tomorrow we can begin planning the revolution. (Open-ended rolling strikes, boycotting of major corporations (except the banks - boycott the banks and they'll shut off the money supply and blame the boycotts), rolling roadblocks and flash-mobs until the politicians either side with us or with the corporations/banks. The ones who side with us get an unconditional pardon, the ones who side with the banks/corporations get fired and imprisoned.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 12:13:24 PM
Quote from: davethomson on 06 May, 2010, 11:16:47 AM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 11:06:07 AM
Anyone been to the polling station yet?

Just got back from the polling station, it was very quiet. Voted for the SNP (which I'm sure many people consider to be ballot spoiling), got wet in the rain and bought some cigarettes for when the results come out.

Typical election day, eh?

Well, it wasn't a wasted journey. You got yourself some smokes, after all! :)

Quote from: LARF on 06 May, 2010, 11:12:30 AM
Oooh! are you going to cover it in Chum and feed it to the dog?

:-)

There's an idea...

OR I could feign madness by dragging the polling card along the ground, on a lead, and offering my dog as proof of eligibility to vote!

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 06 May, 2010, 12:19:01 PM
I've done my bit. Now looking forward to shouting at the telly later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 12:26:21 PM
Quote from: uncle fester on 06 May, 2010, 12:19:01 PM
Now looking forward to shouting at the telly later.

And shaking your fist. Don't forget the fist-shaking, Damn it!

*shakes fist at computer*

>:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: davethomson on 06 May, 2010, 12:33:10 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 12:13:24 PM
Well, it wasn't a wasted journey. You got yourself some smokes, after all! :)

Very true, I think all the polling stations in Scotland are located next to places to which sell booze and smokes. We need the encouragement, us Scots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2010, 02:12:49 PM
Quote from: davethomson on 06 May, 2010, 12:33:10 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 12:13:24 PM
Well, it wasn't a wasted journey. You got yourself some smokes, after all! :)

Very true, I think all the polling stations in Scotland are located next to places to which sell booze and smokes. We need the encouragement, us Scots.

I voted, I bought tobacco but I also bought tomato and onion bajis. See, not all scots are the same. :D
Tomato and onion baji slathered in sweet chilli sauce on a wholemeal seeded ciabatta goes very well with banana milk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 06 May, 2010, 02:17:38 PM
I voted and on the way back I got some Pickled Onion Space Raiders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:19:11 PM
I voted and on the way back somebody stole my country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 06 May, 2010, 02:24:44 PM
The theft won't happen until tonight. Expect some high drama tonight and tomorrow, though - Florida-style dirty tricks a-go-go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Stacey on 06 May, 2010, 02:28:20 PM
More importantly ... you can still get Space Raiders ??  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 06 May, 2010, 02:31:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 11:34:55 AM
Tomorrow we can begin planning the revolution.

http://uk.autoblog.com/2010/05/05/elderly-campaigner-causes-4-mile-tailbacks-with-traffic-light-pr/ (http://uk.autoblog.com/2010/05/05/elderly-campaigner-causes-4-mile-tailbacks-with-traffic-light-pr/)

Come the revolution, I want this guy to be involved....

Quote from: Al_Ewing on 06 May, 2010, 02:17:38 PM
I voted and on the way back I got some Pickled Onion Space Raiders.

I am extremely concerned about the health and wellbeing of many contributors to this forum. I call for a Nanny State to protect you all from yourselves. Maybe this kind of Nanny....

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:19:15 AM
(http://www.firefox10.com/images/firefox-on-breast.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:47:19 PM
Excellent idea to use pedestrian crossings to stop traffic. Imagine thousands of people all across the country doing that on the same day. I'll add that to the rolling strikes and boycotts on the day we rebel... Brilliant!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: nev on 06 May, 2010, 03:17:01 PM
Quote from: James S on 06 May, 2010, 02:28:20 PM
More importantly ... you can still get Space Raiders ??  :o
Recessions hit hard though, think it's up to 15p a pack now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 06 May, 2010, 03:21:52 PM

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 02:47:19 PM
Excellent idea to use pedestrian crossings to stop traffic.

Hoist 'em on their own petards, that's what I say... (Note to self: find out what the fk a petard is)...

Am enjoying the Minute by Minute coverage on the Guardian website, mainly because nothing's happening. Love the following image though:

http://is.gd/bWKXh (http://is.gd/bWKXh)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 03:34:07 PM
A petard, iIrc, is a kind of old-fashioned hand grenade. It had a rather twitchy fuse and used to go off unexpectedly before even being thrown, flinging the unfortunate grenade-tosser into the air. Hence the phrase, hoist by his own petard. I guess if that happened these days we'd call it being petarded.


*edit* not a hand grenade, but a bomb used to blow holes in the walls/doors of besieged cities or buildings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 06 May, 2010, 03:34:47 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 01:58:58 AM
I dont understand point A.What does "cockblocking" mean ?

I also already know and understand why we didnt get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

B:The media can lean on whoever is in power to give us a referendum as much as they like but that doesnt have anything to do with the electorate being given one.All they can do is promote or propagandise the issue for or against it.

C:I am not acting like anything.All i do is point out facts so if politicians want to start acting like they are a force for good then i will shut up and be out of a job and then perhaps i cant start paying attention to other things instead.




Basically, Lab/Con/Lib/Whoever 'cockblocks' (not a real political term mind you, would be nice if it was) something in parliament by teaming up to stop a proposed item going through. Lab didn't offer a referendum on Lisbon, Cons attacked them (but then didn't offer a referendum themselves, and the LibDems said an issue like this didn't call for a referendum and called for a poll to see if we should stay in or leave the EU instead, so in this case no parties outright called for a referendum, but at least the LibDems offered something, which is the point I'm trying to argue.

B: Believe me; enough leaning will get the people what they want. Sadly, this has been abused by the Daily Mail brigade who simply exist to complain about things.

C: Sorry mate, but you come off as a bit 'tinfoil hat' sometimes, but not without reason mind you. Politics is a bloody murky business.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 03:38:28 PM
So, a cockblocking is like a gangbang where the electorate gets shafted by all the parties?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 May, 2010, 03:42:34 PM
QuoteBasically, Lab/Con/Lib/Whoever 'cockblocks' (not a real political term mind you, would be nice if it was) something in parliament by teaming up to stop a proposed item going through.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 04:04:22 PM
Get a load of this as you will like it:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/doctorow/4581218328/

I feel like i want to laugh and get angry at once.

[/quote]

Basically, Lab/Con/Lib/Whoever 'cockblocks' (not a real political term mind you, would be nice if it was) something in parliament by teaming up to stop a proposed item going through. Lab didn't offer a referendum on Lisbon, Cons attacked them (but then didn't offer a referendum themselves, and the LibDems said an issue like this didn't call for a referendum and called for a poll to see if we should stay in or leave the EU instead, so in this case no parties outright called for a referendum, but at least the LibDems offered something, which is the point I'm trying to argue.

B: Believe me; enough leaning will get the people what they want. Sadly, this has been abused by the Daily Mail brigade who simply exist to complain about things.

C: Sorry mate, but you come off as a bit 'tinfoil hat' sometimes, but not without reason mind you. Politics is a bloody murky business.
[/quote]

A:No wonder i didnt recognise the term Cockblocking as it isnt a political term.

Labour broke a specific election promise to offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.Conservatives/David Cameron made a lot of noise about offering a referendum on it while in opposition but as the election got closer and closer they flip flopped on it so no referendum from them now.You can read their election manifesto on europe yourself.They werent at any time able to offer a referendum while they were in opposition.

There is a big difference between an opinion poll and a referendum regarding the LibDems and the LibDems did previously support the idea of a LT referendum but again they flip flopped as well at the beginning of 2009.

B:I will believe it when it happens and NOT until because i have as little faith in the corporate media as i have with the LibLabCon.The corporate media havent exactly made much noise or leaned on politicians very much over the Lisbon Treaty so far and dont reflect the views of the public .

C:Its not like i sit here and make stuff up and its a question of how educated or wordly you are as to how much of a tin foil hatter i am .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 04:10:29 PM
I shall be voting in about an hour, cameraphone at the ready, with a few badges to be placed somewhere on the ballot paper (to prove it's me).
Luckily for you lot, you'll all be asleep when the counting takes place but I'll be tortured with it while I'm at work, unless I listen to the dross, that is the music stations  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 06 May, 2010, 04:22:26 PM
I voted as I always do with my pencil hovering over each of the unworthy candidates. I eventually went for the SNP woman who was the only one who actually lived in the constituancy. The socialist candiate refused to divulge his address on the ballot - that'll be helpful when I try to enlist his help in my planning dispute!

People who say you should vote becuase people died in wars to allow us to do so annoy me. They forget that people died in wars so that we can choose whether we want to bloody well vote or not. And don't say 'voting is compulsory in Australia' I know and to me that devalues the whole process.

Betfair has the Tories favourites by 100 seats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 06 May, 2010, 04:25:46 PM
Well the fine for not voting is only $20 austraian dollors... and remember if voting is compulory... you could at least spoil your ballot paper. I don't think that is a criminal offence.

I have voted 3 hours ago.

I would really like to see a couple of independant/ monster raving Loony candiates elected.
I think it would send a strong message as to how dissatisfied many see the system.

That's all I am going to say.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 06 May, 2010, 04:27:23 PM
Is it annoyed that The Sun and Daily Mail, Sky News want Tory to win? as many people I knew dont want to vote them, cos of 1979-96....

I would reallllllllly like to see what's their reactions if it fail!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 04:28:54 PM
I'm with you on that Buttonman. The last thing I think about when in the middle of a firefight is 'I hope those (add expletive) back home vote because I'm doing this for them.'  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 04:30:29 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 04:04:22 PM
Get a load of this as you will like it:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/doctorow/4581218328/

I feel like i want to laugh and get angry at once.

(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/2000ADonline%20Images/webcock.jpg)

I wonder how long it'll take the Photobucket Sex Wombles to tidy this away?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 04:45:01 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 06 May, 2010, 04:27:23 PM
cos of 1979-96.... 

Was this when we had the dead not being burried, strikes galore, rubbish piled up all over the place, etc....

Oops, that's right Labour were in then, the good old 'Winter of Discontent,' oh how people selectively forget somethings from the recent past. Don't just slag off other parties everyone, look a bit closer to home first  ;)


And no I ain't voting Tory, as the woman standing for them was Labour a couple of years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 05:05:49 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 06 May, 2010, 04:27:23 PM
Is it annoyed that The Sun and Daily Mail, Sky News want Tory to win? as many people I knew dont want to vote them, cos of 1979-96....

I would reallllllllly like to see what's their reactions if it fail!

I dont want Labour to win because of 1997 to 06/06/2010.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2010, 05:11:50 PM
I don't want any of the parties to win because of 1707-2010.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:16:32 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 05:05:49 PM
I dont want Labour to win because of 1997 to 06/06/2010.

Be careful Peter, now that these polite and loving Labour lot know that you won't be voting for their party, they will despise you.
As far as they are concerned anything that has gone wrong with this country in it's entire history is the Conservative parties fault, even before it was invented, especially because of Maggie Thatcher  ;)

I say this not to imply that you are voting Tory but because that's what they will think!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 05:24:52 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 04:45:01 PM
And no I ain't voting Tory, as the woman standing for them was Labour a couple of years ago

That says it all, for me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:27:34 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 05:24:52 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 04:45:01 PM
And no I ain't voting Tory, as the woman standing for them was Labour a couple of years ago

That says it all, for me...

I agree, you can't trust Labour  :lol: :lol: :lol:


I shall post my ballot later, still haven't voted as I had to wait for Carolyn to get home so we can have a night out at the polling station  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 06 May, 2010, 05:30:53 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:16:32 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 05:05:49 PM
I dont want Labour to win because of 1997 to 06/06/2010.

Be careful Peter, now that these polite and loving Labour lot know that you won't be voting for their party, they will despise you.
As far as they are concerned anything that has gone wrong with this country in it's entire history is the Conservative parties fault, even before it was invented, especially because of Maggie Thatcher  ;)

I say this not to imply that you are voting Tory but because that's what they will think!

I thought he was voting for UKIP. Mind you, I've not been playing close attention lately.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:33:48 PM
He's very environment friendly is Peter, I'll bet he votes Green ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 05:41:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:27:34 PM
still haven't voted as I had to wait for Carolyn to get home so we can have a night out at the polling station  ::)[/color]

Wouldn't it be cool to have a first date at the polling station?

'She says tomato, I say NATO... let's call the whole thing off!'

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 06 May, 2010, 06:18:01 PM
Done and voted, lovely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 07:38:11 PM
Here's a couple of shots of me starting off on my journey to spoil my gaddam vote. Notice; even the dog looks disinterested.

(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a128/spikyprofile74/011-2.jpg)

(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a128/spikyprofile74/012.jpg)

Wasn't quite sure how to make my spoil, until I saw a work colleague's t-shirt.

Hence, inspired by this:

http://store.engrish.com/poevrut.html

... I simply placed a bracket around all the candidates and wrote, 'Poisonous and Evil Rubbish'

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 07:52:17 PM
As promised, after all I am a man of my word (unlike those people we are voting for), here is my ballot paper. Carolyn did ask why I took so long in the cubicle and she just rolled her eyes when I told her.

As I said before, I voted Labour in 97, due to the sleeze and after the first term of Labour rule went back to the Conservatives. Now that the country is worse off due to many factors (there is no point going over it all again) I decided to vote this shower of shite into some sort of power to teach those gits in parliment a lesson that they will never forget (that's if it works).
Also the candidate for Maidstone was a Labour bod not long ago, plus she doesn't even live in the town. But above all the Tories changed our free resident parking  to a £25 tax (luckily I can still park up the street for free, only half the street is permit parking, don't ask).
I told this to the Tory bod outside and he looked quite shocked that I binned his vote due to permit parking :lol: :lol: :lol:

Anyway, the proof is in the pudding:-

(http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af293/judgedredd67/951b4a75-1-1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dunk! on 06 May, 2010, 07:56:49 PM
The National Front are still going?

I thought they'd morphed into the BNP.

Don't tell me: there's folks out there who regard the BNP policies as too liberal?

Chesus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 08:00:04 PM
Oh! yes, when their sheet of paper dropped through the letterbox I nearly pissed myself laughing at what they had written. Suffice to say it went in the recycling bin straight after and I hadn't even left the doorstep :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 08:16:53 PM
Our BNP candidate is called Trebilcock.

Seems apt - Three times as much of a dick as the other candidates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 08:16:53 PM
Our BNP candidate is called Trebilcock.

Seems apt - Three times as much of a dick as the other candidates.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

It's also interesting to see the differences in the actual voting form, CF. Here our voting form has the candidate's address on it too. Most of the candidates live in the constituancy, however some don't. One said somewhere "in Midlothian". Hardly a local candidate. I can't remember which party it was now, either labour or tory I think.
Though yor's did have some nice swirly patterns on it. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 06 May, 2010, 08:28:31 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 08:16:53 PM
Our BNP candidate is called Trebilcock.

Seems apt - Three times as much of a dick as the other candidates.

Just for interest:

http://www.surnamedb.com/surname.aspx?name=trebilcock


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2010, 08:31:07 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 08:16:53 PM
Our BNP candidate is called Trebilcock.

Seems apt - Three times as much of a dick as the other candidates.

hahah! Dick cubed!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 08:31:24 PM
I did a trial post to see if it looked okay and then realised all the addresses where visible, so I quickly did that arty swirl thing, don't want to get in the shit  ;)

Saying that the original is on my photobucket site  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 06 May, 2010, 08:37:42 PM
My vote went in last week. Too easy.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BRtASsu3vYA/Rsm4pH8_sUI/AAAAAAAAAD4/ZwoxEazZnBs/s320/Blog+Post+Boxes.jpg)






VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 06 May, 2010, 08:39:09 PM
Carroll, Grant, Jeffrey... is your poll based on first names only? As for the National Front man "I 'ate you Butler"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2010, 08:40:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 08:31:24 PM
I did a trial post to see if it looked okay and then realised all the addresses where visible, so I quickly did that arty swirl thing, don't want to get in the shit  ;)

Well it looked very nice, CF. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 06 May, 2010, 08:49:36 PM
On our form it showed where the candidates lived (or didn't)...my local Labour candidate was from Surrey - hope that loses them a vote or two.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Kerrin on 06 May, 2010, 09:00:05 PM
Voted, not that it will do much in my constituency, the only one in England that has never been anything other than Tory. Francis Maude is probably pouring champagne into his silly arse-like face as I write this. Bollocks to him, voted Lib-dem anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dunk! on 06 May, 2010, 09:02:47 PM
Is it just me or does the NF symbol look like a Union flag held aloft on fire?

Confusing message there.

Extra morons.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 09:58:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 05:16:32 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2010, 05:05:49 PM
I dont want Labour to win because of 1997 to 06/06/2010.

Be careful Peter, now that these polite and loving Labour lot know that you won't be voting for their party, they will despise you.
As far as they are concerned anything that has gone wrong with this country in it's entire history is the Conservative parties fault, even before it was invented, especially because of Maggie Thatcher  ;)

I say this not to imply that you are voting Tory but because that's what they will think!


I havent got any time for stupid partisan rubbish.

I dont care and they can feel free to despise me as much as they like but in the next 5 years everyone who voted will have time to reflect on it all.

The most favorable outcome here is a hung parliament which will force them all to work together which will make it a lot harder in theory for any of them to do what they like.

Anyway heres to the next 5 years.

Have fun everyone  !!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 06 May, 2010, 10:00:54 PM
Quote from: Dunk! on 06 May, 2010, 09:02:47 PM
Is it just me or does the NF symbol look like a Union flag held aloft on fire?

The Conservative one is surprisingly weak, little more than a smudged scribble really. I can only assume the tree is an attempt to lure in a few confused Green voters.

The Christian Party's effort is a bit simplistic, but you can see where they're coming from.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 06 May, 2010, 10:18:59 PM
Our Lib Dem candidate went by the unlikely name of Sebastian MartineauTombs.  And he lived in that Edinburgh, some 70 miles away from our actual constituency.  And we didn't even get a leaflet through the door from him. (Possibly a good thing as our SNP candidate looked, well, pissed).  So he'll be lucky if he gets a hundred votes I reckon.

I guess they just weren't trying; the Lib Dems really are the 4th Party up here in Jockland.

No other candidates than Tory, Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which was very disappointing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 11:09:16 PM
I see the Dark Lord of the Sith is now saying that we need voting reform (is this because it doesn't look good for his party) and also that his boss, Emperor Brown can still run the country with another party, Jesus Christ  :o

Just go gracefully and get in jail you fucking criminal!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2010, 11:24:17 PM
Shock News.
Many voters stopped from voting because of queues and 22:00 came too early  ::)

Jesus Christ Man hater is now saying Brown should rule, because the voting system should be changed and that's why people voted against Labour. You could NOT make this up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grant Goggans on 06 May, 2010, 11:28:28 PM
The "full UK scoreboard" on the BBC site fascinates me.  It lists 20 parties.  Outside of the lead six (Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, British National Party, UK Independence Party, Democratic Unionist Party and Scottish National Party, all of which I've heard of), are any of the others expected to win any seats?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 06 May, 2010, 11:32:16 PM
Ordinarily, no, but this time maybe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 11:32:31 PM
Tragedy? Comedy? Divine Justice? Conspiracy? You be the judge! (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8666202.stm)





(PS, I know it's wrong, but I lean towards option B. But I've got a dark sense of humour!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 11:34:47 PM
Quote from: Grant Goggans on 06 May, 2010, 11:28:28 PMare any of the others expected to win any seats?
The Greens have a chance of taking one seat in Brighton, and veteran TV presenter Esther Rantzen (google her) may win one as an independent, but I think that's about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 06 May, 2010, 11:37:21 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare
Quote from: Grant Goggansare any of the others expected to win any seats?
The Greens have a chance of taking one seat in Brighton, and veteran TV presenter Esther Rantzen (google her) may win one as an independent, but I think that's about it.

UKIP's Nigel Farage might have beaten that godawful Bercow, but since his plane crash I can't see that happening...

M@



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 06 May, 2010, 11:40:43 PM
QuoteThe aircraft, a PZL-104 Wilga 35A, is a Polish fixed-wing aircraft which is reportedly owned by Sky Banners, in Walton-on-Thames, Surrey.

We're onto you, sonny jim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grant Goggans on 06 May, 2010, 11:41:52 PM
I see 2462 votes for "Others" right now.  Are these votes that haven't been sorted into all those other small party columns, or write-ins, or the real oddballs like the Monster Raving Loonies that the BBC doesn't want to acknowledge?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 06 May, 2010, 11:48:21 PM
Quote from: Grant Goggans
I see 2462 votes for "Others" right now.  Are these votes that haven't been sorted into all those other small party columns, or write-ins, or the real oddballs like the Monster Raving Loonies that the BBC doesn't want to acknowledge?

Could just be Independents ie. people standing on their own, rather than for any party.

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2010, 11:49:46 PM
Quote from: Grant Goggans on 06 May, 2010, 11:41:52 PM
I see 2462 votes for "Others" right now.  Are these votes that haven't been sorted into all those other small party columns, or write-ins, or the real oddballs like the Monster Raving Loonies that the BBC doesn't want to acknowledge?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_Kingdom)
scroll down to the 'Minor English Parties' for a good snapshot of the wondrous variety of bonkers British democracy in action
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 06 May, 2010, 11:54:18 PM
Im watching this at the min on UTV, I love elections, all the spin, celebrations and recriminations.
I have only a passing knowledge of British politic, I would be pretty familiar with the goings on up north though, Its all facinating. Beware the polls, and bring in PR, it makes it even more entertaining!

David
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 07 May, 2010, 12:06:13 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 May, 2010, 10:18:59 PM
Our Lib Dem candidate went by the unlikely name of Sebastian MartineauTombs.  And he lived in that Edinburgh, some 70 miles away from our actual constituency.

That's nothin'. Our's lives in Birmingham (over 300 miles away).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2010, 12:23:46 AM
Ours is a lizard from Zeta Reticuli.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 12:52:46 AM
Northern Ireland First Minister is gone  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 12:58:33 AM
I'm Staying up for this. The right ear of Andrew Neil is scaring me on BBC1. I think he could be a Vulcan. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 01:15:06 AM
Quote from: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 12:58:33 AM
I'm Staying up for this. The right ear of Andrew Neil is scaring me on BBC1. I think he could be a Vulcan. 

Me too, Nap. It's gonna be a long night, but alcohol will help. :D
We get scottish election programme here, but I just discovered I can see what you see on BBC news channel. Haven't seen the ear yet!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MIKE COLLINS on 07 May, 2010, 01:18:20 AM
QuoteMe too, Nap. It's gonna be a long night, but alcohol will help. Cheesy
We get scottish election programme here, but I just discovered I can see what you see on BBC news channel. Haven't seen the ear yet!

Same in Wales-- so I'm flicking between the two... charming low tech Cardiff studio vs Blofeld's Lair on BBC News!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 01:31:48 AM
It's going to be a long night so time to open another bottle. We are trying to take it seriously but the Mrs and I are now voting on who has the best ears for the job. If it was all down to ears I think Brown could win it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 01:33:30 AM
Why are people in Kirkcaldy holding up their fists?

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 01:38:13 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 01:33:30 AM
Why are people in Kirkcaldy holding up their fists?

M@

Maybe he wanted to ask a question. Like "what happened to my deposit?" :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 01:39:20 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 01:33:30 AM
Why are people in Kirkcaldy holding up their fists?

M@
What Party was fist man representing? I know he got 57 votes.
The Mrs said he must be a comic book fan which did make me laugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 01:40:56 AM
Heh - good work both of you :-) I think he was from the "Landless Peasant" party(!)

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 01:44:22 AM
His name is Sunglasses Fist or at least it should be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 01:45:11 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 01:40:56 AM
Heh - good work both of you :-) I think he was from the "Landless Peasant" party(!)

M@

:lol:

The "Land is Power" party is the party he represented.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 01:46:57 AM
Fist Man was some kind of "Land of the People" party - no idea what he meant. Thought it was black power with vitiligo..... (but that's obviously wholly inappropriate)....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 01:53:47 AM
I think it's going to be quite an historic night in British Politics. Imagine all the deals that are being made all the strategies and alliances coming into play as we watch. Fascinating stuff. As a side note I'm really missing the Monster Raving Loony Party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:08:46 AM
Tis intriguing.... It's still early so everything looks good (in England) if you're left of centre... It also looks quite interesting in Scotland - early swing to Labour, no doubt an SNP fightback and possibility that the Tories could get chucked out (again).

If only time could stop now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 May, 2010, 02:24:01 AM
Lembit! Noooooooo!!!!  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 02:26:33 AM
Lembit goes and the BBC turn straight to a pundit called Sian Lloyd(!)

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 07 May, 2010, 02:29:07 AM
Impending Tory leadership. Currently bricking it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 02:30:37 AM
Dear me, I go to get some paperwork at Swan Valley and the Cheeky Boy has gone  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 02:36:52 AM
Quote from: Christov on 07 May, 2010, 02:29:07 AM
Impending Tory leadership. Currently bricking it.

You may not need to be so worried, the Dark Lord of the Sith will tell his Emperor to do a deal with the devil to hang on to power. I can see them now in the Death Star, ringing the hotline to HELL  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:40:22 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 07 May, 2010, 02:24:01 AM
Lembit! Noooooooo!!!!  :o

Oh my gosh. Unc Fester and I are a bit taken aback by the loss of Celeb-MP-Number-One.... It's cos Simon Cowell told everyone to vote Gory Tory.

However, within 6 months, Lembit will have his own TV show (hopefully displacing Andrew Neil), co-hosting a show with Peter Robinson - Different Votes, perhaps....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 07 May, 2010, 02:42:05 AM
Clearly, folk up here are so scared the Tories might get back in that they've decided the safest bet is to vote Labour.

Meh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:44:56 AM
But what the buggery is going on in Wales??? Have a whole bunch of rich folk bought second homes or something?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 02:51:48 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:44:56 AM
But what the buggery is going on in Wales??? Have a whole bunch of rich folk bought second homes or something?

Well there's been lots of tv shows in the last few years about moving to the countryside around. Y'know downsizing and buying houses in quaint little villages for the price of rabbit hutches in the home counties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:57:28 AM
My other (non-rhetorical) question is "where are the Monster Raving Loony Party?".... I was about to say "where are the people in fancy dress?" but they're now showing Cameron's result and there are two....

If only one of them would win....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 02:57:36 AM
Blimey - Jesus is in Witney(!)

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 02:58:53 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 02:57:36 AM
Blimey - Jesus is in Witney(!)

M@

Zombie Jesus by the looks of it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 02:59:26 AM
and he got 37 votes... original Jesus only had 12 friends....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 May, 2010, 03:01:01 AM
Almost voted MRL before I saw they were the "Monster Raving Loony William Hill Party".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:01:51 AM
sorry, but this is funny... CamRon has just thanked all his opponents for campaigning in a "fair and reasonable way"... Given that he was up against Jesus, Boss Hogg and the BNP, that's quite a statement... (honestly, look at the pictures)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 03:05:16 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:01:51 AM
sorry, but this is funny... CamRon has just thanked all his opponents for campaigning in a "fair and reasonable way"... Given that he was up against Jesus, Boss Hogg and the BNP, that's quite a statement... (honestly, look at the pictures)...

:D That brought tears to my eyes.
It's now neck and neck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:05:23 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:01:51 AM
sorry, but this is funny... CamRon has just thanked all his opponents for campaigning in a "fair and reasonable way"... Given that he was up against Jesus, Boss Hogg and the BNP, that's quite a statement... (honestly, look at the pictures)...
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 03:17:04 AM
Starting to freak out a bit. When the blue number overtakes the red number I'm going to fully freak out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:21:07 AM
Quote from: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 03:17:04 AM
Starting to freak out a bit. When the blue number overtakes the red number I'm going to fully freak out.

I am with you... Am currently shouting "Nooooo-oooo" at the TV whenever it gets close. The red number is (so far) staying ahead but I don't expect it to last.

Oh and by the way, Pickled Onion Space Whatevers - tchaa. You shoulda been campaignin', big fella....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2010, 03:24:41 AM
Oh dear... the blue team is winning now!

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:26:38 AM
As Samuel Johnson once said: "Bollocks"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 03:27:53 AM
Are the Lib Dems about to become the new King Makers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 03:30:37 AM
I did a lot of virtual campaigning on the Twitter. Does that count?

Anyway, I'm now fully freaking out. Holding onto that Kingmaker thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:34:08 AM
Kingmakers: Maybe, but perhaps not as much as everyone suspected. In my constituency, there had been massively open campaigning until the last 24 hours. At that point it shifted to tactical voting - the Labs and the Cons both saying that a Lib Dem vote was a waste. Think that tactic could have worked.....

(Oh good God, the BBC are now interviewing those two well known political pundits: Al Murray Pub Landlord and Bill Wyman, who frankly should be in jail for statutory rape. Golden age of broadcasting eh?)

Quote from: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 03:30:37 AM
I did a lot of virtual campaigning on the Twitter. Does that count?
Not for anybody under an age that begins with 3. But well done on embracing the new-fangled. Can you explain it to me??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 07 May, 2010, 03:38:44 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:34:08 AM
Can you explain it to me??

Not really. It's basically a giant comic convention that never ends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:40:27 AM
Lots of MacNeil style drinking then? But without a limit on how many letters you can have in a panel...

WITH a limit... WITH a  limit.. Gosh pay attention girl....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 03:43:06 AM
At the end of the day all we are doing is voting for one bunch of fuck wits replace another bunch of fuck wits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:44:23 AM
Quote from: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 03:43:06 AM
At the end of the day all we are doing is voting for one bunch of fuck wits replace another bunch of fuck wits.


Yes, but do you want your fuckwits educated at a first-tier public school or a second-tier public school?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:47:06 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:40:27 AM
Lots of MacNeil style drinking then?

I'm sure I don't know what you mean! hic!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 May, 2010, 03:49:55 AM
I think number 10 Downing Street is about to become a time share apartment :).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:53:42 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:47:06 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:40:27 AM
Lots of MacNeil style drinking then?

I'm sure I don't know what you mean! hic!

I believe we have a standing appointment for pints of Babycham at Birmingham.....

Turns out that the birds start singing in South London at ten to four in the morning. Just before some freakin' Tory comes out to shoot 'em. It's the brave new world of tomorrow, folks, and I feel somewhat weary and cynical about it. No doubt after some sleep I'll be reinvigorated and leading the march on Downing Street... But right now I just feel a little sad....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:59:50 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:53:42 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:47:06 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 03:40:27 AM
Lots of MacNeil style drinking then?

I'm sure I don't know what you mean! hic!

I believe we have a standing appointment for pints of Babycham at Birmingham.....

Turns out that the birds start singing in South London at ten to four in the morning. Just before some freakin' Tory comes out to shoot 'em. It's the brave new world of tomorrow, folks, and I feel somewhat weary and cynical about it. No doubt after some sleep I'll be reinvigorated and leading the march on Downing Street... But right now I just feel a little sad....
I almost forgot about the Babycham! :D

Never mind, just get lagered up on Babycham tomorrow and.. and... well the world doesn't seem so bad after that. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 07 May, 2010, 04:00:01 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 02:36:52 AM
Quote from: Christov on 07 May, 2010, 02:29:07 AM
Impending Tory leadership. Currently bricking it.

You may not need to be so worried, the Dark Lord of the Sith will tell his Emperor to do a deal with the devil to hang on to power. I can see them now in the Death Star, ringing the hotline to HELL  :lol:

Cameron is Cthulhu/Satan/Thatcher's brain in a waxwork body.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 04:04:08 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:59:50 AM
Never mind, just get lagered up on Babycham tomorrow and.. and... well the world doesn't seem so bad after that. :D

Oddly enough, tomorrow / today I'm heading off for my Hen Weekend in Edinburgh, so I'd imagine that pints of Babycham may be in order....

There was a wonderful description earlier that Cameron was a "fish in a condom". Missed the context for it but it was a cool image....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 04:16:42 AM
Quote from: Lady Festina on 07 May, 2010, 04:04:08 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 07 May, 2010, 03:59:50 AM
Never mind, just get lagered up on Babycham tomorrow and.. and... well the world doesn't seem so bad after that. :D

Oddly enough, tomorrow / today I'm heading off for my Hen Weekend in Edinburgh, so I'd imagine that pints of Babycham may be in order....

There was a wonderful description earlier that Cameron was a "fish in a condom". Missed the context for it but it was a cool image....


Well, I hope you have a good time tomorrow/today then and all the best when the big day arrives.
"Fish in a condom"! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 04:22:21 AM
Balls to Ed Balls

I would also like to thank Gordon Brown for sabotaging the Labour party.

:lol: :lol:

I am hoping that it will be a hung parliament rather than a majority because its never happened before in my lifetime but its still too early to say.......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 04:36:35 AM
Bye Jackie Smith  :wave:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2010, 06:52:56 AM
Peter Robinson, eh?  Seems no-one wants a First Minister with horns.

A hung parliament, you say.  What fun you Brits will have, our Irish coalition governments have been just super.   Nothing like the strong will and clear vision of a leader who has to base all his decisions on fulfilling the every whim of a small group of former opponents, themselves so shocked to have ministerial salaries that they'll go along with any kind of crap to retain them.   Fun times for all!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 07 May, 2010, 06:53:35 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 04:22:21 AM
I am hoping that it will be a hung parliament rather than a majority because its never happened before in my lifetime but its still too early to say.......

Looks to be what's happening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 06:56:54 AM
And so, after an exciting night laughing at the radio and enjoying the banter on the thread and twitter I now retire to my pit and await the hilarity of the parties kissing each other's arses on the news when I awake  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 07:59:39 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 May, 2010, 06:52:56 AM
A hung parliament, you say.  What fun you Brits will have, our Irish coalition governments have been just super.

I think a lot of people are forgetting that we've already seen a Tory government propped up by the DUP, in the shape of the last seven or eight months of the John Major government. It wasn't pretty, TBH.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 07 May, 2010, 11:19:17 AM
I think that was the UUP Jim. Who now have no seats, probably because of tying themselves to the Nice But Dim Conservative Party in a NEW FORCE!

Voting? It's all a load of ballots I say.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 May, 2010, 11:36:13 AM
I stood in the middle of the living room and laughed out loud at the news about Robinson- that really cheered me up!
I love that his unbounded arrogance still does not allow him to admit any wrong- he seems to be blaming the BBC for his downfall... when I'm pretty sure he was the one doing suspicious land deals and it was his wife who was fucking a nineteen year old boy...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 11:37:37 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 07 May, 2010, 11:19:17 AM
I think that was the UUP Jim.

You could very well be right. I couldn't be arsed to look it up.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 07 May, 2010, 05:37:06 PM
Well I think I got the fabled Triple Win - I voted with my heart, I voted tactically and it worked. I switched my vote to the party I used to vote for in order to keep out a candidate I can't stand and it worked (although it was close). :)

Plus on the national stage all three major parties got a hefty boot in their arrogant knackers. :D It was also entertaining watching the TV pundits squirming around trying to come up with a consistent narrative for the evening when the main story was really the lack of one ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 07 May, 2010, 05:44:05 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 May, 2010, 11:36:13 AM
I love that his unbounded arrogance still does not allow him to admit any wrong- he seems to be blaming the BBC for his downfall... when I'm pretty sure he was the one doing suspicious land deals and it was his wife who was fucking a nineteen year old boy...

:lol:

It did make me smile to see the Robinson dynasty crumble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 06:03:09 PM
I thought that Nick Clegg accepted defeat with good grace so i was impressed with that.

Also Mandelslime looked well pissed off this morning  :lol: :lol: :lol:

Bye Bye slimeball Mandelson.[Being hopelessly optimistic here as i think we havent seen the back of that POS yet]

It does seem that a lot of Labour supporters are blind to their parties inadequacies and failures because they are not as bad as Tories so it seems there votes are based on loyalty rather than actualities of just how disasterous New Labour have been while in office not to mention the class issue as well but its worth pointing out that its Labour that have enriched the Banksters etc at the expense of the working person not to mention their onslaught/assault on civil liberties wheras i always thought that a Liberal govt would protect them.Not so with Labour.

Its fair to point out that the assault on civil liberties and the surveillance society started with Conservatives and no doubt that they would have continued it if they stayed in office after 1997.

I didnt vote Conservative but i dont think that Labour are inherently better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 07:36:10 PM
I love the way that a bloke who was not elected to rule, became the Prime Minister due to a deal done years ago is now trying to hang onto power, after his party lost the election. If this was happening in a third world country, Labour voters would be up in arms about it.
Still I'm sure Clegg will stand by his word and if he did go with Labour, at least Brown would be out.

On a personal note, I thoroughly enjoyed the tweets of doom by the Red Army last night, as their rally cry went unheard  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
Does anyone know why Scottish Nationalism/Independence isnt a bad thing  and yet British Nationalism/independence is ?

Forget the BNP as i am not talking about them.

I am only talking here strictly about Nationalism in terms of wanting independence and sovereignty but i guess its because the SNP being left wing are inherently good yet when its UKIP Nationalism/independence is not good because the party leans to the right yet clearly Nationalism/Independence is a by-partisan issue.

Obviously there are different ways to go about this but i am arguing purely in the sense of sovereignty and self rule in principle and i dont think anyone can argue that self rule/sovereignty is a bad thing or you wouldnt be voting in a UK election.

Unless you are a fifth columnist or a quisling of course.

Just pointing out the flaw in this kind of thinking and the hypocrisy of it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 09:51:17 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2010, 07:36:10 PM
I love the way that a bloke who was not elected to rule, became the Prime Minister due to a deal done years ago is now trying to hang onto power, after his party lost the election.

Depressingly, I find myself not caring in the slightest - I can't see how having anyone else in charge for the last few years would really have made anything better. I come back to the lesser evil option, and right now I think that is Brown and Clegg working something out. Electoral reforms and Vince Cable as Chancellor might not be a bad start.


QuoteIf this was happening in a third world country, Labour voters would be up in arms about it.

I'm more concerned about the people who queued to vote but couldn't. Numerically, their votes wouldn't have made a difference as I understand it, but I find that loss of democratic rights far more appaling than an electoral quirk that allows Brown to hang-on until something else is sorted out.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 10:01:52 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
Does anyone know why Scottish Nationalism/Independence isnt a bad thing  and yet British Nationalism/independence is ?

Personally, I've got no time for nationalism of any variety. I also believe that united we stand, divided we fall. Appreciating and caring for your home is noble, but making a political and divisive issue out of it just causes trouble.

However, the key difference between Scottish and Welsh nationalism is that the Scots and Welsh nationalists are concerned with the excessive political influence of England. Poltically active British nationalists tend to be concerned with the mere presence of non-white people in their midst.

That's a generalisation, but the tendency resluts in the negativity.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 10:21:47 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 10:01:52 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
Does anyone know why Scottish Nationalism/Independence isnt a bad thing  and yet British Nationalism/independence is ?

Personally, I've got no time for nationalism of any variety. I also believe that united we stand, divided we fall. Appreciating and caring for your home is noble, but making a political and divisive issue out of it just causes trouble.

However, the key difference between Scottish and Welsh nationalism is that the Scots and Welsh nationalists are concerned with the excessive political influence of England. Poltically active British nationalists tend to be concerned with the mere presence of non-white people in their midst.

That's a generalisation, but the tendency resluts in the negativity.

Regards

Robin

I dont actually like using the term "Nationalism" myself because of its associations which makes me slightly uncomfortable and i was only using it in the context of the SNP.I would rather just use the words sovereignty - self rule and independence.

Not arguing with you about British Nationalists but my concern is the excessive influence of the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 10:24:29 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
i guess its because the SNP being left wing are inherently good pocrisy of it all.
Where on earth do you get the idea that the SNP are left wing?  I was a lefty student in Scotland, and I always had the impression that the SNP were the party of rich establishment  types, while labour were the left working class alternative. The Tories didn't even get a mention. Their USP was Scottish independence, but they weren't lefty in any other respect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 07 May, 2010, 10:46:50 PM
I can't believe after all Gordon Brown and Labour has put us through over the last 14 Centuries years so many still voted. Sheesh..

Would have thought the lib dem's had done better though.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 11:05:26 PM
Lib dems got greater percentage of the vote but less seats.

Tories demanding right to form govt when they agreed the rules just 2 years ago in a cross party committee- the sitting party gets first dibs on forming a coalition govt,

I can't see why the lib-dems would form a coalition with the tories as they're 100% against electoral reform. If they make that their condition, a coalition with labour (sans Brown) could see us achieve a more rational system.

If the lib dems have any balls they'll sacrifice every other policy in a one-shot blast at getting this ridiculous constituency system reformed.  They'll never have a better chance.

I'm just clutching at any scenario that will avoid another fucking tory administration! AAAARGH!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 May, 2010, 11:10:23 PM
Meanwhile I'm clutching at your mom to set up a very fucking administration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 11:11:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 10:24:29 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
i guess its because the SNP being left wing are inherently good pocrisy of it all.
Where on earth do you get the idea that the SNP are left wing?  

Thats what they claim they are themselves going by their website.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 11:17:51 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 11:11:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 10:24:29 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
i guess its because the SNP being left wing are inherently good pocrisy of it all.
Where on earth do you get the idea that the SNP are left wing?  

Thats what they claim they are themselves going by their website.
Just had a look at their website and even tried a search under "left" - couldn't find anything. Could you provide a link?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 07 May, 2010, 10:46:50 PM
I can't believe after all Gordon Brown and Labour has put us through over the last 14 Centuries years so many still voted. Sheesh..

I think it boils down to the fact that a fair few people are actually reasonably happy with the way things are.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 07 May, 2010, 11:31:26 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 11:17:51 PM
Just had a look at their website and even tried a search under "left" - couldn't find anything. Could you provide a link?

The Wolf is correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 11:37:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
I think it boils down to the fact that a fair few people are actually reasonably happy with the way things are.

Also, when you get down to it, the big* beef most people have with New Labour is Iraq. Illegal war, yes. Lies, yes. Yes, to all of it. Blair is a snivelling, supine cunt whose cowering acquiescence to Dubya's wishes should guarantee him a very special place in Hell. Yes, I agree.

Now, someone look me in the eye and tell me that --for one second-- you believe that the Tories would have done anything different, that the Tories would have stood up to or defied the wishes of any American government.

Cheers

Jim

*Not to say there aren't lots and lots of little beefs. And not so little beefs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 07 May, 2010, 11:42:04 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 11:37:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
I think it boils down to the fact that a fair few people are actually reasonably happy with the way things are.

Also, when you get down to it, the big* beef most people have with New Labour is Iraq. Illegal war, yes. Lies, yes. Yes, to all of it. Blair is a snivelling, supine cunt whose cowering acquiescence to Dubya's wishes should guarantee him a very special place in Hell. Yes, I agree.

Now, someone look me in the eye and tell me that --for one second-- you believe that the Tories would have done anything different, that the Tories would have stood up to or defied the wishes of any American government.

Cheers

Jim

*Not to say there aren't lots and lots of little beefs. And not so little beefs.

Exactly right. The Tories may have taken an even more heavy handed approach to Iraq, and they're using the same excuse that Labour does about Saddam Hussein needing to be taken out of the picture eventually.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 11:47:34 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 07 May, 2010, 11:31:26 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2010, 11:17:51 PM
Just had a look at their website and even tried a search under "left" - couldn't find anything. Could you provide a link?

The Wolf is correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party)

Fair dos. Centre left.

My experience was from Dundee in the late 80s -  as a Labour student, I spent time canvassing for labour, and areas that would be considered Tory in England (big houses and money in general) tended to be SNP, whilst the working class areas were pure Labour.

And Jim - YES, well said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 May, 2010, 11:56:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 11:37:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
I think it boils down to the fact that a fair few people are actually reasonably happy with the way things are.

Also, when you get down to it, the big* beef most people have with New Labour is Iraq. Illegal war, yes. Lies, yes. Yes, to all of it. Blair is a snivelling, supine cunt whose cowering acquiescence to Dubya's wishes should guarantee him a very special place in Hell. Yes, I agree.

Now, someone look me in the eye and tell me that --for one second-- you believe that the Tories would have done anything different, that the Tories would have stood up to or defied the wishes of any American government.

Cheers

Jim

*Not to say there aren't lots and lots of little beefs. And not so little beefs.

Its not just Iraq but Conservatives would have done EXACTLY the same thing when it came to Iraq/Afghanistan and bailing out banks and all the other major issues including the EU.

Which is why i always say they are all the same beyond superficial differences which is the main point i am trying to make most of the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 09:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2010, 11:37:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 07 May, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
I think it boils down to the fact that a fair few people are actually reasonably happy with the way things are.

Also, when you get down to it, the big* beef most people have with New Labour is Iraq. Illegal war, yes. Lies, yes. Yes, to all of it. Blair is a snivelling, supine cunt whose cowering acquiescence to Dubya's wishes should guarantee him a very special place in Hell. Yes, I agree.

I think this is the root of it all. May have already posted this, but I still think that without Iraq Blair would still be PM and/or fairly well respected.

The other big issue, the one to beat Brown himself with, is the national debt, but as far as I can tell if Brown hadn't borrowed and spent that money the country would have been completely fucked and the situation far, far worse than it is. I seem to recall we were in debt in 1997, too, but it was Brown who paid that off. Little is made of this in the media, but I think people are conscious of it to some degree.

The Conservatives haven't quite made it because, I think, much of the general public is concerned that they'll resolve the debt issue through pretty severe cuts in public services. I think we all realise that cuts are coming anyway, but it's a matter of degree and focus, and the Conservatives are probably less trusted to get that right.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM
I think that the traditional Labour party stopped existing when John Smith died and then became something quite different which of course it did.

Personally i think what Brown and Blair have done to this country is totally unforgivable and for a country to be virtually bankrupt after 12 years of economic growth regardless of how that came about is quite astonishing and yet he stood there and said "no more return to boom and bust" while apparently not knowing that was exactly going to happen.His only defence for that is that the UK was part of a bigger problem and because now everything is interconnected globally once one economy starts to fail they all do.

Just where did all the money go to ??

Either it was all by design or Brown was totally clueless but either way this country is locked into a situation where it has to borrow more money and spend just to stay afloat but personally i think certain political parties just have a total misunderstanding of economics.

I think we are starting to see the breakdown of the EU economically which is starting with Greece but if the growth of the national debt is not curtailed very soon then in 12 to 24 months we will be in the same economic position as Greece as in being bailed out by the IMF and European central banks and reduced to the status of a third world country.The only advantage is that the UK is not part of the Eurozone.

Will a Conservative coalition take the UK out of Afghanistan where it costs 5 billion + a year that is spent defending poppyfields instead of cutting that much from the NHS and other public services ?

I dont think so.


"Peoples' willingness to believe that their leaders know what they are doing and support them while they create havoc around the world, both financially, by misinformation and by military force indicates a serious lack of their own individual ability to think for themselves."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM
Personally i think what Brown and Blair have done to this country is totally unforgivable and for a country to be virtually bankrupt after 12 years of economic growth regardless of how that came about

So what should Brown have done? What have other countries like ours with economies that are heavily reliant on the financial services industry done that have proved more effective? What should have been done about banks that were collapsing?

Quotebut personally i think certain political parties just have a total misunderstanding of economics.

You mean ones you don't agree with? Seems to me that even experienced economists can't agree, so how you can expect politicians to understand or to presume that you understand is beyond me.

Whether it's politicans or the public, I see a lot of criticism of Brown, but little in the way of practical alternatives that are supported by convincing evidence in their favour.

I really don't like politicians in general, so I've no particular liking for Brown. However, as far as I can tell he gets the blame because of his position, not because he's actually directly responsible for anything particularly outrageous. The current problems can be laid at the doors of many people and organisations, in many countries, and over many years - it's far too easy and far too lazy to blame one prominent individual.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 08 May, 2010, 05:59:48 PM
RE; The Conservatives war strategy. Don't they still believe in the jolly officer rules war strategy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 07:17:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM
.His only defence for that is that the UK was part of a bigger problem and because now everything is interconnected globally once one economy starts to fail they all do.





You didnt read that part of my comment Robin so here it is again.

Brown was Chancellor and then an unelected PM so he has to be expected to take at the very least part of the blame for the mess but as i said above the problem is much much bigger than Brown.

However there are plenty of economists who do agree and understand the causes of the economic crisis but they dont work for the govt and they are not listened to.

For example the cause of the collapse of the problems in Greece are because of criminality that is all connected to Goldman Sachs and the other too big to fails and its hardly very likely that Gordon Brown would call for an investigation into that before any cash is handed over to Greece.


Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM


You mean ones you don't agree with? Seems to me that even experienced economists can't agree, so how you can expect politicians to understand or to presume that you understand is beyond me.



Its quite simple really.Brown has an army of advisors at hand or alternatively he could have sought the right kind of independent financial advice and listened to it as there are plenty of economists who do understand the causes of the problems and you dont even need to be an economist to understand it.As it is Brown is just fronting a criminal system.

Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM

So what should Brown have done? What have other countries like ours with economies that are heavily reliant on the financial services industry done that have proved more effective? What should have been done about banks that were collapsing?



Regards

Robin

Brown should not have given the banks that were too big to fail our cash without stipulating strict conditions on which the cash was lent so that the cash actually went back into the economy instead of just being simply removed.

Thats simple enough and thats the first thing he should have done if he had no choice to bail them out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2010, 08:39:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
I really don't like politicians in general, so I've no particular liking for Brown. However, as far as I can tell he gets the blame because of his position, not because he's actually directly responsible for anything particularly outrageous. The current problems can be laid at the doors of many people and organisations, in many countries, and over many years - it's far too easy and far too lazy to blame one prominent individual.

Sorry Robin but he wanted those jobs. I get sick of people passing the buck to other people, why can't he be a man and admit that he FUCKED UP. All of his mistakes will never touch the people in power, with money! It's going to be you and me who have a hard future.
When he was the Chancellor he could have changed things and stopped many things from getting way out of hand but he did NOTHING! The mark of a prudent man....


I'll only mention the KILLER TWO.

Selling 60% of the country's gold and letting every Fucker know in advance, which meant the price dropped to a 20 year low. Some place the loss to the treasury between 2 & 5 Billion pounds.

Remember the pension fiasco, when his own people told him not to do it and he just went ahead and changed the tax system (this hit the poor more than the rich - treasury officials reported). This will hit everyone with a pension, especially the POOR.

These two reasons alone are enough for me to detest the person

Here's a little bit about me so you know where I'm coming from.
I come from a mining background and since leaving school :-
I have never missed a days work, EVER!
I have paid into my different pensions constantly, because it's the right thing to do, even though I feel like stopping now.
I have never been in debt.
I don't own a credit card.
I live in the real world and live within my means.
I put money away each month into Sam's account (he now has more savings than us).
I am not the highest paid person in the country, by a long way!
I have just got on with what ever life throws at me, as I have a very strong work ethic. I always said that when I left the forces I would do the shitiest job going if needed, to pay for me and my family to get on and enjoy life. I was made redundant last summer but walked straight into a better job after 2 months gardening leave and that was paid for just being a HGV driver. Life is bloody strange but I knew I'd find work, no matter what.

Also, I knew that because of all the bad lending by irresponsible greedy people to greedy irresponsible people would bite us on the arse one day and I'm not an economist!
By the way, the government pay out more in benefits than they take in at the moment, that was from a BBC programme, we can't go on like this!

Here are a few ways I would improve this Great Country of ours!

All sports centres, youth clubs, swimming pools, etc to be paid for out of taxes. You can use your local ones free (may have to pay to use out of your area ones).
All the unemployed to be paid a certain wage and have to do charitable work, help the aged, clean the beaches, community stuff, etc.... (I suppose some people will moan that they have to work for the dole, well I'd change the bloody name then).
All buses and trains in the country are free, paid for by taxes again. More people would bloody use them then, if they knew that their taxes paid for them and you could just jump on and off with no tickets.

There we go, Tory me (who is the only person on here who can prove the way he voted, I did put my reason down for voting Liberal this time) believes in paying for that lot to benefit everyone in this country. Sometimes you have to break the mould and start again. The only problem with my idea is that the rich bods who own all the above would not be able to fleece everyone anymore and all parties wouldn't allow that.

Here endeth my report to save the country  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 09:57:58 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 07:17:13 PM

However there are plenty of economists who do agree and understand the causes of the economic crisis but they dont work for the govt and they are not listened to.

You mean the ones you happen to agree with. That doesn't make them right.

This is all opinion, Peter, not fact.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 May, 2010, 10:01:47 PM
I like your ideas, CF.

They sound expensive to me, but also quite progressive. All of them would need an increase in income tax to pay for them. I've never been against income tax rises myself, but some people are funny about that.

As far as the proposal to make unemployed people work without giving them real jobs goes, as somebody who has spent far too long a time unemployed myself, I can't say I'd be against it as all the things you've mentioned are socially useful. I volunteered anyway, but the job centre places time limits on it. If the deal were to work 20-30 hours a week for enhanced benefits, with a reduced expectation on numbers of job applications, I'd happily have done that.

I hated having to contend with the expectation to apply for jobs that paid so little I'd be worse off after factoring in food and travel costs. I also hated the additional penalties associated with working in the black economy when you're receiving benefits, and as a consequence I turned down neighbours' requests for help that came with a much desired offer of financial recompense, which I would have gladly done for nothing when I've had wages coming in.

Like "will you take Mrs so-and-so shopping every Wednesday? there's £20 in it for you." - "What like every Wednesday? Regularly?" - "Yes, regularly." - "Sounds a bit like a job. No, sorry - can't do that. Could land me in a whole heap of trouble with the benefits agency." - So Mrs so-and-so will have to just stay indoors and rely on relatives to bring her shopping round on a Saturday (for example).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 10:15:53 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 09:57:58 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 07:17:13 PM

However there are plenty of economists who do agree and understand the causes of the economic crisis but they dont work for the govt and they are not listened to.

You mean the ones you happen to agree with. That doesn't make them right.

This is all opinion, Peter, not fact.

Regards

Robin

Wrong.

Facts are facts and truth is beyond subjectivity.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 May, 2010, 10:18:51 PM
Not where economics is concerned. It's a question of theory into practice. You can't presume a positivistic cause-and-effect relationship between two variables in economics because there are many, many more variables, and there isn't perfect agreement on how they fit together.

Economic policy is as much driven by political ideology as it is by scientific objectivity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 10:58:58 PM
When talking about and explaining the causes and the effects of the current economic crisis its very clear especially if you factor in criminality and corruption.


So if either yourself or Robin are suggesting that the causes of the current economic crisis havent been isolated or narrowed down to very specific factors then that completely ridiculous.

I am not sure i see any point in continuing to discuss this topic as its unproductive.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 May, 2010, 11:07:16 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 10:58:58 PM
I am not sure i see any point in continuing to discuss this topic as its unproductive

Ok, fine. I find economics boring anyway. If the causes of the economic crisis have been isolated, and they are criminality and corruption, then Gordon Brown's failure is in allowing criminality and corruption on a global scale to go on instead of putting a stop to them as a better man would have done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 08 May, 2010, 11:28:08 PM
The Tories would have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan but they weren't the ones that did. Labour fucked up plenty of times constantly since they have been in power. Like the Conservatives did last time they were in, Labour have gone stagnant and are just too cock sure of themselves. I voted Tory just because I am sick at the way the country is being ran at the moment and it is good to have a change every now and again. To have the same party in over and over again just makes them think they can do what they want and not give a shit about the great unwashed. Complacency is never a good thing.

This is now the Tories turn to fuck up.

Perhaps have a similar way the Americans run their leaders. Any one person is allowed only two terms in office. Thatcher was in way too long, likewise Blair.

That is all




VNP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2010, 11:42:21 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 08 May, 2010, 11:28:08 PM
This is now the Tories turn to fuck up.

Kiss the BBC goodbye, then.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 08 May, 2010, 11:45:47 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 03:37:32 PM
Personally i think what Brown and Blair have done to this country is totally unforgivable and for a country to be virtually bankrupt after 12 years of economic growth regardless of how that came about

So what should Brown have done? What have other countries like ours with economies that are heavily reliant on the financial services industry done that have proved more effective? What should have been done about banks that were collapsing?

Quotebut personally i think certain political parties just have a total misunderstanding of economics.

You mean ones you don't agree with? Seems to me that even experienced economists can't agree, so how you can expect politicians to understand or to presume that you understand is beyond me.

Whether it's politicans or the public, I see a lot of criticism of Brown, but little in the way of practical alternatives that are supported by convincing evidence in their favour.

I really don't like politicians in general, so I've no particular liking for Brown. However, as far as I can tell he gets the blame because of his position, not because he's actually directly responsible for anything particularly outrageous. The current problems can be laid at the doors of many people and organisations, in many countries, and over many years - it's far too easy and far too lazy to blame one prominent individual.


Regards

Robin

Apart from selling our gold reserves and plundering the pension pot.  Nice one, Gordon!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2010, 11:50:19 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 08 May, 2010, 11:45:47 PM
Apart from selling our gold reserves

Now, that was quite brain-fuckingly stupid.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 09 May, 2010, 12:16:49 AM
Protests for electoral reform and against Sky News on the same day?

Have I died and gone to angry young man heaven?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 09 May, 2010, 12:19:16 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2010, 11:42:21 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 08 May, 2010, 11:28:08 PM
This is now the Tories turn to fuck up.

Kiss the BBC goodbye, then.

Cheers

Jim

Rather the BBC than half the gold reserves.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 12:25:14 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 09 May, 2010, 12:19:16 AM
Rather the BBC than half the gold reserves.

The gold reserves are already gone. How does sacrificing the BBC on the altar of market forces and the Tories' pandering to Murdoch have any bearing on that fact?

Cheers

Jim


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 12:26:48 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 08 May, 2010, 11:07:16 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 10:58:58 PM
I am not sure i see any point in continuing to discuss this topic as its unproductive

Ok, fine. I find economics boring anyway. If the causes of the economic crisis have been isolated, and they are criminality and corruption, then Gordon Brown's failure is in allowing criminality and corruption on a global scale to go on instead of putting a stop to them as a better man would have done.

I say this because my comments are totally disregarded and why ? well its because others dont like them or understand them and everything i type is somehow my own subjective opinion when its not as i am just telling it like it is regardless of what i think or what my opinion is.

So yes i find it unproductive.



The cause of the economic collapse in Greece has been directly attributed to the activities of the then Greek govt who colluded with Goldman Sachs to hide the then Greek debt and Credit Default Swaps.This is not the only contributory factor involved.The present Greek govt admit this themselves.

Wether i agree with this or not is irrelevent.

So yes the fact that i am having to constantly stress that what i am saying is beyond what i personally agree with other than it being fact like the above is very tiring and unproductive.Get over the fact that its me pointing this out and go look it all up yourself.The infromation is there for everyone if they want it.

Quote from: Robin Low on 08 May, 2010, 05:56:26 PM
The current problems can be laid at the doors of many people and organisations, in many countries, and over many years - it's far too easy and far too lazy to blame one prominent individual.


Regards

Robin

This comment is very true but by default GB has to be held accountable or blamed at least in part but quite honestly i find this kind of blame game unproductive because it diverts attention away from the real cause of it because like i said earlier this is all much bigger than GB.GB was just doing his job and doing what he was told to do in my opinion.

How complicit or culpable GB is in all of this debacle would be something for an independent impartial wider inquiry/investigation and perhaps even a criminal court to decide in the long term and its the same for Tony Blair and Iraq.If this happened then Tony Blair and Gordon Brown would not be found to be exclusively to blame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 09 May, 2010, 12:40:52 AM
TBH losing the BBC wouldn't bother me that much.
But it's not necessary losing the BBC but changing how its run. I don't watch it that much or TV in general.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AM
I spent over an hour replying to this last night, then posted only to discover the connection had gone tits up and I lost everything. Some of you may have heard my cry of anguish.


Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2010, 08:39:34 PM
All of his mistakes will never touch the people in power, with money! It's going to be you and me who have a hard future.

That always has and always will be the case.

QuoteSelling 60% of the country's gold and letting every Fucker know in advance, which meant the price dropped to a 20 year low. Some place the loss to the treasury between 2 & 5 Billion pounds.

Is that a loss per year or a one-off? If it's a one-off loss, it's bordering on the irrelevant, shocking though it may seem. The NHS alone cost £94 billion in 2008/9.


QuoteRemember the pension fiasco, when his own people told him not to do it and he just went ahead and changed the tax system (this hit the poor more than the rich - treasury officials reported). This will hit everyone with a pension, especially the POOR.

I admit I don't know much about this one - I'll ask my folks how they've been affected.


QuoteHere's a little bit about me so you know where I'm coming from.

Here's a little about me, because I like talking about myself:

My dad was a sales rep and my mum was a nurse. Dad was made redundant and took early retirement, mum only retired last year. Dad now does voluntary driving for the ambulance service, mum does voluntary work for the MS society.

Mum worked nights for decades and wore the same few dresses until the armpits wore out, and then had to keep wearing them. They spent all their money putting my brother and I through private education after the Tories closed down the local grammar school.

I have missed the odd-day from work, but not for years. After starting teacher training following two years unemployment I had appendicitits and glandular fever one on top of the other, and had to go back living with my folks for a year, got no benefits, and as a result of this won't be getting a full state pension.

Similarly, I've paid into my work pension schemes, but another two years at univeristy getting another degree resulted in missing more pension contributions, so even less of a state pension for me.

I've never been in debt or overdrawn, despite six years at university.

I've never owned a credit card.

I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't have a car or mobile phone - it staggers me how much money people are willing to waste on this stuff.

I don't have kids - I don't think I can afford them.

I'm paid well enough, currently on 24,000. My brother, with a tiny fraction of the qualifications I have and working the private sector as a machinist earns more.

I hate my job. I keep doing it because it's in the public sector and it matters. I live with the constant knowledge that if I fuck up, worst case scenario is that people die - my colleagues might say I'm being melodramatic, but in truth I don't they don't think about the implications a lot of the time.

Next five years, well, who knows if I'll have a job. The public sector is not safe. I don't blame any government - I blame the general public who demand more and more and more, without even attempting to find out how much services cost and refuse to vote for governments with open tax policies.


QuoteAlso, I knew that because of all the bad lending by irresponsible greedy people to greedy irresponsible people would bite us on the arse one day and I'm not an economist!

I'd worked that out, too, but I blame the people who decided to borrow. I recieved all the offers of credit cards and ignored them, even at times when I had nothing. The government could have stepped in and controlled the banks, I suppose, but I can see all the headlines and forums crying 'nanny state!' if it had.


QuoteBy the way, the government pay out more in benefits than they take in at the moment, that was from a BBC programme, we can't go on like this!

I agree. Increase taxes or kick people off benefits? Which one is going to get us elected?

QuoteHere are a few ways I would improve this Great Country of ours!

All sports centres, youth clubs, swimming pools, etc to be paid for out of taxes. You can use your local ones free (may have to pay to use out of your area ones).

What will you say to all the people who say these things are non-essential services, they're a waste of money that could be put into education, road-building, the NHS and so on? Those who don't want to use such services - I loathe exercise and never needed a youth club to keep me on the straight-and-narrow after school.


QuoteAll the unemployed to be paid a certain wage and have to do charitable work, help the aged, clean the beaches, community stuff, etc.... (I suppose some people will moan that they have to work for the dole, well I'd change the bloody name then).

Fine. You realise this will require a massive reorganisation of the employment services, liaising with thousands of outside organisations, medical services to properly assess claimants and work, police checks for those working with the vulnerable. A huge increase in cost.

QuoteAll buses and trains in the country are free, paid for by taxes again. More people would bloody use them then, if they knew that their taxes paid for them and you could just jump on and off with no tickets.

That's great - I don't drive and rely heavily (though not entirely) on public transport. However, I've argued with enough people to know how much others hate travelling alongside strangers, crammed in, unable to smoke and use their mobiles if they want to, aren't free to come and go at the time of their choosing, having to wait - the complaints are endless.

If we really want to help people, help society, and save millions if not billions every single year then we should ban alcohol and smoking, but I think we know what trying that would get us.

QuoteThere we go, Tory me (who is the only person on here who can prove the way he voted, I did put my reason down for voting Liberal this time) believes in paying for that lot to benefit everyone in this country.

As I said way back, I'm not interested in knowing who you or anyone else voted for. And incidentally, a photo of a voting slip proves nothing - did we see it go into a box? I am not, repreat not, saying it didn't, just pointing out how easy it is to take something at face value.

QuoteSometimes you have to break the mould and start again. The only problem with my idea is that the rich bods who own all the above would not be able to fleece everyone anymore and all parties wouldn't allow that.

I place blame for the problem on the ignorance and selfishness of the general public. Blaming everything on the rich or on governments is so, so easy - I did it myself for years - but when it comes down to it most people vote for themselves, not for society. I think that's the root of the problem.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:40:28 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AMHere's a little about me, because I like talking about myself:

I forgot to mention that I'm currently growing a goatee. There's a depressing amount of white in it.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 09 May, 2010, 11:07:55 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AM


I place blame for the problem on the ignorance and selfishness of the general public. Blaming everything on the rich or on governments is so, so easy - I did it myself for years - but when it comes down to it most people vote for themselves, not for society. I think that's the root of the problem.


Quite right Robin. The problem being, when did you last see turkey's voting for christmas? Oh yes, Brighton wasn't it? They voted green!
Maybe there's hope yet. :)

Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:40:28 AM

I forgot to mention that I'm currently growing a goatee. There's a depressing amount of white in it.

Get used to it! It's only going to get worse. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 May, 2010, 11:22:02 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AM
I place blame for the problem on the ignorance and selfishness of the general public.

Ah, ignorance. I read a touching analysis in The Guardian last week that described it as 'heartbreaking' that, in a survey, 70% of the British public agreed with the proposition that it is possible to reduce public spending without cutting front-line services.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 12:42:23 PM
The live news feeds are very interesting at the moment.
It all seems to coming to an end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 09 May, 2010, 12:44:20 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 12:42:23 PM
The live news feeds are very interesting at the moment.
It all seems to coming to an end.

The election stand-off or just things in general? :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 01:21:28 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 09 May, 2010, 11:22:02 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AM
I place blame for the problem on the ignorance and selfishness of the general public.

Ah, ignorance. I read a touching analysis in The Guardian last week that described it as 'heartbreaking' that, in a survey, 70% of the British public agreed with the proposition that it is possible to reduce public spending without cutting front-line services.

Actually, I suspect that is possible in the NHS. Unfortunately, much of it would also involve the public stopping smoking, stopping drinking, stopping eating unhealthily, doing more exercise, not going to the GM or A&E for niffles and grazes, and so on.

There's a  general perception that we're over-run by expensive managers, but in reality services are so complex that they need managing. What's currently happening is that when senior people are retiring, all the work they did is being shared out to other people who are already over-loaded with work and have no time, without any increase in pay.

I often wonder what the public consider front-line services to be. I work in the labs, so the public doesn't see me, but 70% of diagnoses are based on lab results.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:33:46 PM
Hello uncle fester, it seems from what Brown is doing that he is resigned to leaving number 10.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 01:39:10 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 01:21:28 PM
Unfortunately, much of it would also involve the public stopping smoking, stopping drinking, stopping eating unhealthily, doing more exercise,

But many of these people are still going to get cancer or develop other diseases requiring long-term care or expensive surgical solutions. At the same time, many of those who would otherwise obligingly die young or drop down dead from a coronary are going to live to an expensive old age requiring full time residential/nursing care.

Many (not you, I should add) people who put forward the argument that the NHS is burdened by treating the side effects of people's vices appear to believe that eliminating this behaviour simply allows you to subtract the total cost of those treatments from the NHS bill for the year. Is there any convincing work that projects the increased burdens on the state from increasing the life expectancy of the average Briton by a significant number of years?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:54:35 PM
My good lady works for the NHS and her mother retired from it a couple of years ago. Now from what they tell me, it is top heavy (by the way her mother was very high up) and the wastage of money is unbelievable, due to many factors!
The problem is, if you try to rock the boat by saying this, then say goodbye to your career.

Don't get me on about 'Team FUCKING Building exercises'  >:( anyway I'm moving off the subject ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 02:15:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:33:46 PM
Hello uncle fester, it seems from what Brown is doing that he is resigned to leaving number 10.

Good riddance.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 May, 2010, 02:19:47 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 02:15:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:33:46 PM
Hello uncle fester, it seems from what Brown is doing that he is resigned to leaving number 10.

Good riddance.

I'd rather have a genetic amalgamation of Brown, Fred West and Piers Morgan running the country than Cameron!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 May, 2010, 02:59:23 PM
Isn't that what Cameron is?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 01:39:10 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 01:21:28 PM
Unfortunately, much of it would also involve the public stopping smoking, stopping drinking, stopping eating unhealthily, doing more exercise,

But many of these people are still going to get cancer or develop other diseases requiring long-term care or expensive surgical solutions. At the same time, many of those who would otherwise obligingly die young or drop down dead from a coronary are going to live to an expensive old age requiring full time residential/nursing care.

I can't point you to specific research, but epidemiologists do take this kind of stuff into account. And with specific regard to alcohol, when you add in the myriad social effects we start going beyond the NHS.

The aim is a longer life with fewer problems in old age as the result of healthier lifestyle when younger.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 03:54:23 PM
I used to get laughed at or thought of as weird by some because i ate healthily and didnt drink excessively or take drugs generally speaking  ;).I did a little bit as you have to live.

The not eating rubbish and checking the ingredients for additives etc was thought of as being particularly odd but my answer was and still is that i dont want to end up in a hospital bed when i am 50.


I cant wait to see if Mandelslime tries to do a deal with Tony Cameron.If Mandelslime joins the Conservatives then you know that nothing will have changed.I shall be watching this kind of thing very closely.

Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:13:23 AM

I place blame for the problem on the ignorance and selfishness of the general public. Blaming everything on the rich or on governments is so, so easy - I did it myself for years - but when it comes down to it most people vote for themselves, not for society. I think that's the root of the problem.


Regards

Robin

I dont think everything can be blamed exclusively on the electorate but i would say they are both equally to blame in different ways.The elites and govtsetc i mean.

Its easy to blame the people exclusively and it shows a clear lack of understanding to do so.In any case i am much less to blame because i constantly point out the corruption and criminality to raise awareness of how the system is wrong.Look what happens when i do that  :lol:  ::) .A chorus of disapproval and reflex actions caused by cognitive dissonance because a lot of people cant handle the truth.

You can lead a horse to water but you casnt force it to drink it.

Its like trying to blame the economic problems exclusively on the people and it doesnt stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:13:37 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:54:35 PM
My good lady works for the NHS and her mother retired from it a couple of years ago. Now from what they tell me, it is top heavy (by the way her mother was very high up) and the wastage of money is unbelievable, due to many factors!
The problem is, if you try to rock the boat by saying this, then say goodbye to your career.

We all have our own experiences, but I'm already seeing the effects of removing manager-level posts and redistributing work to lower grades. I also tend to keep my ears open more than most of my colleagues, so I'm aware of the amount of work that goes on at higher levels. Those of us lower down the tree simply wouldn't able to operate without others taking on a massive amount of tedious but essential work. My other half and her sister also work in a related lab, and because of extra work they've had to take on, they can also attest to the amount of work staff higher up the tree have to cope with, and how necessary they are.

There's also an ongoing request in our Trust for ideas for saving money and reducing waste, all ideas welcome. We also do work for the private sector - because of our volume work, we're more cost effective than the private sector can ever possibly be, so we bring money into our department - this of course goes to the service not to staff.

It would be daft of me to suggest that in an organisation as large and diverse as the NHS there are aren't examples of bad practice and waste, but again I shy away from the easier targets.


QuoteDon't get me on about 'Team FUCKING Building exercises'  >:( anyway I'm moving off the subject ::)

Never been on or been offered a team building exercise - not aware of anyone else who has, either.

Public services are a subject worth discussing.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 03:54:23 PMA chorus of disapproval and reflex actions caused by cognitive dissonance because a lot of people cant handle the truth.

*shrug* That could as easily be said about you as anyone else.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:44:16 PM
I've been trying to figure out who should be in charge...

Conservative - Votes: 10,706,647 -- 36.1%
Labour - Votes: 8,604,358 -- 29.0%
Liberal Democrat - Votes: 6,827,938 -- 23.0%

Only 36.1% of voters want the Conservative in charge.

Only 23% want the Lib Dems involved in government, but they're the ones who are the deciding factor.

If they both end up in charge, you disenfranchise ~40% of the population. If the Lib Dems and Labour got together, you'd disenfranchise ~48% of the population. Neither of those are insignificant minorities.

It seems to me that the real problem here is having to have a Prime Minister who is the leader of a party. What might be better is a cabinet whose members are elected by the MPs, with a PM elected by the elected cabinet.

Okay, that's a simplistic off-the-cuff idea. Come kick it around until it works.



Regards

Robin


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:49:14 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:44:16 PM
I've been trying to figure out who should be in charge...

Conservative - Votes: 10,706,647 -- 36.1%
Labour - Votes: 8,604,358 -- 29.0%
Liberal Democrat - Votes: 6,827,938 -- 23.0%

Only 36.1% of voters want the Conservative in charge.

Only 23% want the Lib Dems involved in government, but they're the ones who are the deciding factor.

If they both end up in charge, you disenfranchise ~40% of the population. If the Lib Dems and Labour got together, you'd disenfranchise ~48% of the population. Neither of those are insignificant minorities.

It seems to me that the real problem here is having to have a Prime Minister who is the leader of a party. What might be better is a cabinet whose members are elected by the MPs, with a PM elected by the elected cabinet. EDIT: This probably falls apart if one party has a huge majority.

Okay, that's a simplistic off-the-cuff idea. Come kick it around until it works.



Regards

Robin



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 03:54:23 PMA chorus of disapproval and reflex actions caused by cognitive dissonance because a lot of people cant handle the truth.

*shrug* That could as easily be said about you as anyone else.

Regards

Robin

I havent got time for squabbling with you.

*

Its all becoming very clear what is going on here.

This election result is all a sham because even in a Hung Parliament you still dont have any across the board power sharing going on.Conservatives immediately offered to work with LibDems but not with Labour.Labour or Brown showed willingness to work with the conservatives and LibDems but i never followed that one up and now i cant find any reference to it on Google.

So no real power sharing going on because LibDems will join Conservatives and wont really have that much influence in the longer term so Conservatives will become the defacto ruling Majority govt rather than a minority govt and Labour will revert back to being in opposition again for the next 5 years.

This is clearly not a coalition government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
I havent got time for squabbling with you.

Given your normal posting rate, that surprises me.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:51:33 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
I havent got time for squabbling with you.

Given your normal posting rate, that surprises me.

Regards

Robin

There you go again.You sounded like you wanted this thread to end in a flaming session but i wont be doing that.

I have lost respect for you now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 06:53:20 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:51:33 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
I havent got time for squabbling with you.

Given your normal posting rate, that surprises me.

Regards

Robin

There you go again.You sounded like you wanted this thread to end in a flaming session but i wont be doing that.

I have lost respect for you now.

Your post count is about eight times what mine is - it was hardly an unreasonable observation and certainly not hostile enough to be considered flaming.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 07:15:25 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 06:53:20 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:51:33 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
I havent got time for squabbling with you.

Given your normal posting rate, that surprises me.

Regards

Robin

There you go again.You sounded like you wanted this thread to end in a flaming session but i wont be doing that.

I have lost respect for you now.

Your post count is about eight times what mine is - it was hardly an unreasonable observation and certainly not hostile enough to be considered flaming.

Regards

Robin

So what ?

What has my post rate got to do with what is being talked about here ?

Is this an attempt at muckraking ?

Its totally irrelevent because i said that i have no wish to squabble with you yet you chose to start being personal.

Also i didnt say that your comments were flaming up till now but its very clear to me how this could end which is why i said "I dont have time to squabble with you" which means i am not interested.

That was an attempt at spin but it was a failure.Just give it up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 May, 2010, 07:28:53 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 04:13:37 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2010, 01:54:35 PM
Don't get me on about 'Team FUCKING Building exercises'  >:( anyway I'm moving off the subject ::)
Never been on or been offered a team building exercise - not aware of anyone else who has, either.

You get team building exercizes in any large organization that takes management science guff seriously. I've had one recently as part of a larger training session not exclusively devoted to team building. It wasn't very useful to me, and if I were a trainer I wouldn't have used it, except maybe to fill time for which I was getting paid a consultancy fee.

I would echo what Robin said about higher tier management performing a necessary role, and what happens when their work gets shared out lower down the chain. Mistakes are made, and what gets delivered back up to the top tier ends up not being what the top wanted, expected, or promised customers.

By the way, plans have been in the pipeline for the past year to reduce budgets, freeze recruitment and even do away with a few senior posts altogether. Senior managers who leave the organization are not being replaced. Whether or not this has an adverse effect on quality and delivery only time will tell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 08:02:12 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 07:15:25 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 06:53:20 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:51:33 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 05:34:40 PM
I havent got time for squabbling with you.

Given your normal posting rate, that surprises me.

Regards

Robin

There you go again.You sounded like you wanted this thread to end in a flaming session but i wont be doing that.

I have lost respect for you now.

Your post count is about eight times what mine is - it was hardly an unreasonable observation and certainly not hostile enough to be considered flaming.

Regards

Robin

So what ?

What has my post rate got to do with what is being talked about here ?

Is this an attempt at muckraking ?

Its totally irrelevent because i said that i have no wish to squabble with you yet you chose to start being personal.

Also i didnt say that your comments were flaming up till now but its very clear to me how this could end which is why i said "I dont have time to squabble with you" which means i am not interested.

That was an attempt at spin but it was a failure.Just give it up.

Peter, you said you didn't have time for squabbling. I was pointing out that your high post rate suggests that you have have plenty of time to spare. As I said, not an unreasonable observation, nor hostile, and certainly not muckraking or spin.

As I'm sure others will tell you, I never give up.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 08:12:29 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 08:02:12 PM
As I'm sure others will tell you, I never give up.

Listen, and understand. Robin Low is out there. He can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until you concede his point.

:-)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 09 May, 2010, 08:26:47 PM
Leave this thread if you want to live?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 08:30:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 08:02:12 PM


Peter, you said you didn't have time for squabbling. I was pointing out that your high post rate suggests that you have have plenty of time to spare. As I said, not an unreasonable observation, nor hostile, and certainly not muckraking or spin.

As I'm sure others will tell you, I never give up.

Regards

Robin

How much time i may or may not have to spare is irrelevent like my post count as i clearly said i am not interested.The reason i am posting this is just to make myself clear rather than argue.

It does sound like you are after something here but unless you have anything interesting or constructive to say our conversation is over.I have the upper hand here.



You obviously dont know me very well at all either.

My personal record is 15 LONG replies to 15 long replies before the individual who i was arguing with gave up. Anyway i really dont have time for this at all and it would be a shame to ruin the thread dont you think ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 09 May, 2010, 09:01:14 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 08:30:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 08:02:12 PM


Peter, you said you didn't have time for squabbling. I was pointing out that your high post rate suggests that you have have plenty of time to spare. As I said, not an unreasonable observation, nor hostile, and certainly not muckraking or spin.

As I'm sure others will tell you, I never give up.

Regards

Robin

How much time i may or may not have to spare is irrelevent like my post count as i clearly said i am not interested.The reason i am posting this is just to make myself clear rather than argue.

It does sound like you are after something here but unless you have anything interesting or constructive to say our conversation is over.I have the upper hand here.



You obviously dont know me very well at all either.

My personal record is 15 LONG replies to 15 long replies before the individual who i was arguing with gave up. Anyway i really dont have time for this at all and it would be a shame to ruin the thread dont you think ?

Irresistible force, meet immovable object...

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 09 May, 2010, 09:16:38 PM
I want to watch them have sex.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:07:43 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 09 May, 2010, 09:16:38 PM
I want to watch them have sex.

I suspect the foreplay would last for days...

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:07:43 PM
I suspect the foreplay would last for days...

Holy Christ! I need to WASH MY BRAIN!

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:17:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 08:30:09 PM...LONG replies...

This is partly where you're going wrong, Peter. Your posts are often so long and rambling that the point you're trying to make is often lost in the confusion. In all seriousness, and without intending to insult, you need to tighten your focus when you write.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:24:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2010, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 May, 2010, 10:07:43 PM
I suspect the foreplay would last for days...

Holy Christ! I need to WASH MY BRAIN!


It's not often I use these things, but  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 May, 2010, 10:59:19 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 08 May, 2010, 11:07:16 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 May, 2010, 10:58:58 PM
I am not sure i see any point in continuing to discuss this topic as its unproductive

Ok, fine. I find economics boring anyway. If the causes of the economic crisis have been isolated, and they are criminality and corruption, then Gordon Brown's failure is in allowing criminality and corruption on a global scale to go on instead of putting a stop to them as a better man would have done.

In defence of Gordon Brown and posted in the interests of fairness and believe it or not i didnt know about this until today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/18/gordon-brown-angela-merkel-goldman-sachs

Its interesting because i have not heard Gordon Brown be this openly critical about Goldman Sachs before.The actual amount of money involved is very small and its just one aspect of their activities and the tip of the iceberg and wether the investigation will go anywhere is uncertain but it helps to remember that even if Gordon Brown called for an investigation of Goldman Sachs they could easily block that or obstruct it in whatever way possible.

Its a start though.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 May, 2010, 11:47:07 AM
Aw gents (wipes away tears of laughter), thanks so much for this last run of posts.. it's the first time I've ever found post-Roman politics interesting!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 10 May, 2010, 12:05:49 PM
Roman politics is interesting? ;)

Maybe we should vote for parliament to start lighting the winter nights with burning Christians, breeding with close family members and eating 'till they boke.


M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 10 May, 2010, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 10 May, 2010, 12:05:49 PM
Roman politics is interesting? ;)

Maybe we should vote for parliament to start lighting the winter nights with burning Christians, breeding with close family members and eating 'till they boke.


M.
Basically Norfolk? Well, if you replace the bit about Christians with minorities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: stacey on 10 May, 2010, 12:14:21 PM
I wish they would just sort it all out and stopping posting pictures of Nick Clegg everywhere wearing his suit. It is playing havoc with my libido, he's not even that pretty - why's he so sexy?

This is my perfectly logical and reasonable assessment of current political shennigans. I'm off for a cold shower and to stay away from teh News for a couple of hours!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 10 May, 2010, 12:18:33 PM
Quote from: stacey on 10 May, 2010, 12:14:21 PM
I wish they would just sort it all out and stopping posting pictures of Nick Clegg everywhere wearing his suit. It is playing havoc with my libido, he's not even that pretty - why's he so sexy?

This is my perfectly logical and reasonable assessment of current political shennigans. I'm off for a cold shower and to stay away from teh News for a couple of hours!

Is it because if you got into bed with him, you know you could make him do anything you liked? (badoom tish)

-pj
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 01:25:25 PM
750 billion Euro rescue package:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8671632.stm

The article also states that the IMF are going to contribute 250 billion Euros but i am not clear if that is an additional 250 billion or not.Anyway this is their solution to everything.Cream as much cash off the taxpayer and throw it at the problem instead of investigating the root cause of it.

An investigation into Goldman Sachs would have saved the European economy 750 billion.


The taxpayer also funds the IMF.

Angela Merkel in reaction to this and the Greek bailouts and the cost to the German economy is to say that the banks - I.E Goldman Sachs and the other 6 major banks was to call them "Treacherous" but that is just for public consumption because elections are upcoming in Germany.

Thats unless she actually means it because people are starting to realise what is going on and when that happens politicians are right in the firing line.

Quote:


BERLIN — German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday slammed "treacherous" practices by banks during the Greek crisis and said governments must crack down on speculators hunting profits in the turmoil.

Merkel, whose Christian Democrats face a tough re-election battle in Germany's most populous state Sunday, railed against gamblers on the financial markets who she said were exacerbating an already volatile situation.

"First the banks failed, forcing states to carry out rescue operations. They plunged the global economy over the precipice and we had to initiate recovery packages. Because of these packages, we have become indebted and now, they are speculating against these debts -- that is really very treacherous," she said.

"Governments must regain their supremacy over the markets, which they no longer have, and for that we need much stricter global rules," she added, at a debate on Europe organised by a public broadcaster.

Merkel said it was now up to the European Union member states to reassert their authority and shore up the financial rules governing the bloc.

"We must clearly demonstrate that in Europe we have the political power, each in his own country, of getting back on the track of the Stability and Growth Pact," she said.

"It is a fight of policy against the markets. That is how I see it personally but I am determined -- as are my colleagues, I am certain -- to win this fight and we will be victorious, I am sure."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 10 May, 2010, 01:29:01 PM
Quote from: stacey on 10 May, 2010, 12:14:21 PM
I wish they would just sort it all out and stopping posting pictures of Nick Clegg everywhere wearing his suit. It is playing havoc with my libido, he's not even that pretty - why's he so sexy?

Just imagine him cozying up to Gordon Brown in a sauna and that should put you right.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2010, 01:30:14 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 10 May, 2010, 01:29:01 PM
Just imagine him cozying up to Gordon Brown in a sauna and that should put you right.

Ewww! Will you pack that in?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 10 May, 2010, 01:34:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2010, 01:30:14 PM
Ewww! Will you pack that in?


I would, but it's grown too big.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 10 May, 2010, 01:36:30 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 10 May, 2010, 01:34:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2010, 01:30:14 PM
Ewww! Will you pack that in?


I would, but it's grown too big.

Regards

Robin

Take a cold shower then.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 May, 2010, 01:55:52 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 01:25:25 PM
An investigation into Goldman Sachs would have saved the European economy 750 billion.

An investigation wouldn't save anything, only the potential action taken as a result of it. What do you suggest should have been done to save this whopping amount? Is this the same sort of maths that gave you the "we'd save £120 billion by withdrawing from the EU" figure?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 10 May, 2010, 02:45:48 PM
The star of this election for me was "Mighty Fist Man"
He's made the pages of the Chortle.
http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2010/05/09/10965/whos_this_comedian%3F
(http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2010/05/09/10965/whos_this_comedian%3F)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2010, 03:07:45 PM
If, and it's a big if, the politicians are beginning to maneuver themselves into an anti-central bank stance because the people are waking up to the fact that our governments are not in control of the money supply (and so, by extension, CANNOT be in control of their respective countries), then I expect some big banking heads to be ostensibly sacrificed to appease the masses. Perhaps even a few more presidents lost in accidents or high-profile politicians sacrificed on the altar of Very Bad Press as the Banksters attempt to reassert their position. If the Banksters feel threatened, they will further restrict the supply of money into the economy and their media allies will blame the governments. This is the time to be strong, and to look for solutions very different to the ones being offered by the Banksters. Never Trust A Banker.

This is all very interesting and could indeed be the beginning of the end of the central banks' grip on the governments of this world. I can only hope and pray, for all our sakes, that the population of Europe is finally cottoning on to the horrendous vampire attached to the very hearts of our democracies. Let your government create and control its own money supply and that vampire will wither and die to the benefit of virtually everyone.

The time is coming for a revolution fought not with bullets but with Truth. Arm yourselves with that truth and fire it at any politician or public servant you meet. That truth is that our government has abnegated its right to create and control the United Kingdom's money supply and handed it on to private banks. As a result, these private banks have an ungodly amount of control over the economy and, as a natural extension of that, control over society itself. If you want your elected politicians in control of your society and not a bunch of bankers you've never heard of, then campaign for this one simple thing: Let MY government create and control MY country's money.

Don't take my word for it. If you want to do your own research on this most important of issues, here are a few key words to get you started:

Jekyll Island
President Woodrow Wilson "A great industrial nation is controlled by it's system of credit..."
executive order 11110
http://www.michaeljournal.org/lesson4.htm
http://www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/bankchaos.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: stacey on 10 May, 2010, 03:19:24 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 10 May, 2010, 12:18:33 PM
Quote from: stacey on 10 May, 2010, 12:14:21 PM
I wish they would just sort it all out and stopping posting pictures of Nick Clegg everywhere wearing his suit. It is playing havoc with my libido, he's not even that pretty - why's he so sexy?

This is my perfectly logical and reasonable assessment of current political shennigans. I'm off for a cold shower and to stay away from teh News for a couple of hours!

Is it because if you got into bed with him, you know you could make him do anything you liked? (badoom tish)

hehehe, but also, NOT helping! :-D

-pj
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 05:17:06 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 May, 2010, 01:55:52 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 01:25:25 PM
An investigation into Goldman Sachs would have saved the European economy 750 billion.

An investigation wouldn't save anything, only the potential action taken as a result of it. What do you suggest should have been done to save this whopping amount? Is this the same sort of maths that gave you the "we'd save £120 billion by withdrawing from the EU" figure?

I thought i made it clear that the 120 billion was a typo and i meant 12 billion ?

Pay attention at the back !

I suggest an investigation into the banking fraud/embezzlement which would in turn uncover the fraud and then in turn it would have saved the taxpayer money.The result of a successful investigation would result in criminal charges against Goldman Sucks and their assets siezed and frozen until the investigation is complete.

So Ok the 750 billion would have to be allocated to bailing out various countries until the investigation was complete but in theory it would be returnable to the taxpayer and it would be deducted from the accounts of Goldin Sacks.

*

BTW LS there are extremely suspicious circumstances surrounding the 1000 point drop in the Dow Jones Index last Friday which coincided with the meeting that was to decide and approve the 750 Euro bailout fund.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2010, 05:41:54 PM
Holy shit!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 May, 2010, 05:45:12 PM
Here's a small thing that has been bugging me since the election was known to be heading into a hung government.
All we get from the Labour lot at the moment is lets have PR. I don't recall them wanting it at any election since 97 when they had a landslide victory (I voted Labour then as I was sick of the sleaze and no-one being man (or woman) enough to stand down as an MP). Every election since they could have said lets do PR this time, as no-one could have stopped them, with their majority.
Now they don't get a lanslide victory and the white hankies are out, "WE DEMAND PR", you have to laugh. PR will mean that one lot are never in charge, could this be the reason Labour didn't want it in the last few elections  ;)

Also listening to and watching the news (I include the :lol: impartial :lol: BBC in this) it seems that many backbenchers from both Labour and Conservative parties don't want PR. You have to laugh don't you  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 May, 2010, 06:02:28 PM
GOODBYE GORDON BROWN but not the Labour party, yet!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 03:40:33 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 May, 2010, 01:55:52 PM
What do you suggest should have been done to save this whopping amount?

Correctly identify and find the cause of the problem

Dig a very large hole out in the middle of nowhere.No particular location as any will do providing it fits the criteria.

Place the cause of the problem into the above hole.

Add generous amounts of Quicklime

Fill the hole up again with the soil you excavated from it and level it off.

Then forget about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 11 May, 2010, 09:38:52 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 03:40:33 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 May, 2010, 01:55:52 PM
What do you suggest should have been done to save this whopping amount?

Correctly identify and find the cause of the problem

Dig a very large hole out in the middle of nowhere.No particular location as any will do providing it fits the criteria.

Place the cause of the problem into the above hole.

Add generous amounts of Quicklime

Fill the hole up again with the soil you excavated from it and level it off.

Then forget about it.

An elegantly and precisely phrased post, and rather amusingly tempting, if unpractical. Just need to correctly identify the cause or causes now.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 10:54:26 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 05:17:06 PM
I suggest an investigation into the banking fraud/embezzlement which would in turn uncover the fraud and then in turn it would have saved the taxpayer money.The result of a successful investigation would result in criminal charges against Goldman Sucks and their assets siezed and frozen until the investigation is complete.

Hard to know where to start with this nonsense. Who would prosecute the case? In which jurisdiction? Who would the actual defendants be? What would the charges be? Remember that many of the sharp practices of the banking industry may look like fraud or corruption to a normal reasoanble observer, but aren't actually illegal. A prosecution would also cost millions and take months if not years, all at the expense of the taxpayer.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 10 May, 2010, 05:17:06 PM
So Ok the 750 billion would have to be allocated to bailing out various countries until the investigation was complete but in theory it would be returnable to the taxpayer and it would be deducted from the accounts of Goldin Sacks.
Goldman Sachs don't have a big bank vault full of cash, they actually have very few assets at all. They generate vast profits by moving other people's money around. In the unlikely event that you could bring a successful case against them, the moment this became clear, the company would instantly crash and be worth precisely zilch.

Now destroying the company may be a good thing in the long run, but it would cost the taxpayer a lot of money, and generate nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Delingpole on 11 May, 2010, 01:05:51 PM
Does anyone remember the Lib Lab Flab alliance? I think the fatties could make all the difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 01:16:58 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 10:54:26 AM


Hard to know where to start with this nonsense. Who would prosecute the case? In which jurisdiction? Who would the actual defendants be? What would the charges be? Remember that many of the sharp practices of the banking industry may look like fraud or corruption to a normal reasoanble observer, but aren't actually illegal. A prosecution would also cost millions and take months if not years, all at the expense of the taxpayer.



Why is it nonsense ?

Articles :

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=investigate+goldman+sachs&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=6A9&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&prmd=n&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=O0PpS6r3MZ_SmgOY56jjDA&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CC4QsQQwAw

This is the latest on the ongoing effort to audit the federal reserve:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3zPPiAFVPs4J:www.chrismartenson.com/forum/audit-fed-bill-trouble-ron-paul-calls-our-support/39190+ron+paul+withdraws+support+from+auditing+the+fed&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

Read the comments especially the final comment which summarises it pretty well.

I havent got time to address any of your other points right now but i am sure you dont think that leaving things as they are is a viable option and its the only way to sort out the mess concerning the Derivatives bubble before it goes POP!!! with MASSIVE financial consequences.Also it is very difficult to know exactly where to start.


Quote from: Robin Low on 11 May, 2010, 09:38:52 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 03:40:33 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 May, 2010, 01:55:52 PM
What do you suggest should have been done to save this whopping amount?

Correctly identify and find the cause of the problem

Dig a very large hole out in the middle of nowhere.No particular location as any will do providing it fits the criteria.

Place the cause of the problem into the above hole.

Add generous amounts of Quicklime

Fill the hole up again with the soil you excavated from it and level it off.

Then forget about it.

An elegantly and precisely phrased post, and rather amusingly tempting, if unpractical. Just need to correctly identify the cause or causes now.

Regards

Robin

Its good to agree on something Robin. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 02:08:05 PM
i agree that it's difficult to know where to start and that the current set up is not viable, but investigations or legal cases against these banks would not suddenly cause all those billions to flow back to the taxpayer.

And as the current (probably failing) prosecution of two GS execs shows, it's enormously difficult to put topgether a successful prosecution, even in the most blatant of examples. And again, if it ever looked like being possible, the banks' shares would just plummet until there was no money left in the company to seize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 02:33:50 PM
"Nonsense?" You think these banks are all out to make the world a better place for everyone, Dan? You think that the banks have a God given right to charge us for using our own money? You think the banks are entitled to hold entire countries to ransom? You think the banks should be allowed to create and control the money supply you elected a government (ie, Chancellor) to create and control? You think the banks are totally immune to the temptations afforded by being in total control of trillions of dollars? We should just leave things as they are because... well, why would anyone want to leave things as they are?

Banks are not intrinsically evil; society needs banks because society needs money. Money can be compared to water; we all need it, and for some to hoard and manipulate it while others starve is an abomination against humanity. Do the banks really need to operate the way they do? If you go for a mortgage or loan, the "money" the bank "lends" you simply doesn't exist until you ask for it. Then it becomes a debt, negative money if you will. You give your hard earned cash to the bank to clear this non-existent debt and also pay interest on top of that for the pleasure.

Is that fair? Of course not, both the Bible and the Koran call this abhorrent practice "usury" and class it as a sin. Muslim banks don't pay or charge interest because it's against their religion. Christian banks don't give a toss about stuff like that and employ usury as something to be applauded and increased. Even the people who wrote the Bible and the Koran understood that the banking system we seem to think is so reputable these days is actually a scam. We need to re-learn the wisdom of the ancients and start treating money as a necessity of life, not an end in itself.

Love of money is, after all, the root of all evil.

I favour the following option:

1: Issue a declaration of amnesty against all politicians and bankers involved in the practice of keeping governments away from their right to print and control the money supply of their individual nations. There are only two sides to be on; debt-free money or debt-based money. Anyone who opts to be on the side of debt-based money will be declared a criminal and prosecuted accordingly. Anyone coming down on the side of government controlled and created, debt-free money will be issued a complete pardon.

2: A series of open-ended, rolling strikes (like the ones the Spanish employed to stop their government sending troops to the illegal Iraq war), marches, flash-mobs, rolling roadblocks, civil disobedience, sit-ins and boycotts will be continued until the debt-based money supporters resign from office or are arrested. (It is important here not to boycott the high street banks themselves, as any direct move against the banks will give them the excuse to reduce the money supply into the economy and blame the resulting financial hardships on the boycotts/rolling strikes.)

3: Once the government begins creating and controlling the UK's money supply, we will still pay back all those bonds/gilts that people have paid for with "real" money. Those people who took money from their bank accounts to pay for government bonds, or gilts, will still be paid back. Those banks who took government bonds/gilts without paying for them with real money (ie, those who have yet to pay or who used debt-money (created at the push of a button or stroke of a pen) will not be paid back as this money never existed in the first place and so will not be missed by the banks.)

4: Once government created, debt-free money begins flowing into the economy it will eventually flush out the old debt-based currency (a little like a blood transfusion). High street banks will be ordered to work towards full reserve banking (ie, they can only lend out the money they can cover with their reserves). This can be phased in over a number of years, meaning that the banks can start with 10% reserve banking for the first year, 20% reserve for the second year and so on. Social banking (mortgages for family homes, loans for private or home use) will be handled by the newly government reclaimed Bank of England for zero interest - only a handling fee for handling the paperwork etc.

5: Let society evolve without the constant drain of the current banking system sapping all our resources.

It can be done without bloodshed or society collapsing. It's not rocket surgery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 02:52:42 PM
I haven't read your full post yet, but the answer to the questions in your first paragraph is a resounding NO - if I thought any of those things, I would have said so, and they are pretty much the opposite of my own views. Don't assume to tell me what I think and then criticise me for it.

The "nonsense" was the naive idea that an investigation of Goldmans would allow the taxpayer to recoup $750bn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 02:57:02 PM
If I'd assumed, I'd have presented each of those opening sentences without question marks.

I'm not getting at anybody's beliefs, I just present my own in as forceful manner as possible. If this upsets anyone, then that's a Good Thing as this is a subject that we should all be upset about.

Nothing personal, Dan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 03:10:08 PM
That's how Hitler started!  ;)

(well we've already had "my opinions aren't opinions they're facts" and "you are not agreeing so I am no longer discussing this with you" in this thread, so I thought I'd best chuck in the last of the Holy Trinity of internet political arguments!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 03:19:54 PM
Burning of the Reichstag / September 11th.

Your Hitler comment is not entirely without merit here... :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 03:39:26 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 03:10:08 PM


(well we've already had "my opinions aren't opinions they're facts" and "you are not agreeing so I am no longer discussing this with you" in this thread, so I thought I'd best chuck in the last of the Holy Trinity of internet political arguments!)

Not exactly. I was quite happy to argue about something rather than nothing in particular plus it seemed like it was heading towards pointless unproductive arguing.That seemed to be where it was heading which is why i stopped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 07:32:24 PM
I hope everyone is cheering, the person who is solely responsible for destroying our childrens futures, by spending money that he didn't have (from our pensions) has finally buggered off.

What a disgrace, using the children to get the sympathy and pity vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 11 May, 2010, 07:47:27 PM
QuoteIf this upsets anyone, then that's a Good Thing as this is a subject that we should all be upset about.

This is a comics website.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 07:53:30 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 11 May, 2010, 07:47:27 PM
This is a comics website.

Gets busy on MACH 1 BkII: The Alien Bankers of 9/11...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul faplad Finch on 11 May, 2010, 07:59:20 PM
What if the Queen carks it between one guy leaving and the other arriving. Sorry if thats in bad taste but considering the farce this election has been so far I wouldn't be massively surprised.

Do we have to thn wait for Charlie - or whoever - to be crowned before a new Government can be sworn in?

Is there even a law in place to cover this eventuality?

Not a joke, I'm genuinely curious and I'm not particularly well clued up on these things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 08:02:31 PM
I reckon the Queen should tell Cameron to fuck off and then re-start Imperial rule.








V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 08:08:02 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 08:02:31 PM
I reckon the Queen should tell Cameron to fuck off and then re-start Imperial rule.

YES and bring back debtors prisons  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
And don't forget declaring war on France and Spain.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 08:27:17 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
And don't forget declaring war on France and Spain.

Lets's take back America  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 08:32:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 07:32:24 PM
I hope everyone is cheering, the person who is solely responsible for destroying our childrens futures, by spending money that he didn't have (from our pensions) has finally buggered off.

What a disgrace, using the children to get the sympathy and pity vote.

I am not cheering at all though i will say good riddance.As for destroying ours and our childrens futures then i hate to dissapoint you but its not going to stop just because of the exit of Gordon Brown.

Prepare yourself for more of the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 11 May, 2010, 08:36:24 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 08:27:17 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
And don't forget declaring war on France and Spain.

Lets's take back America  ;)

and oz!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 08:43:02 PM
Speaking of Imperialism, am I the only person who hears the Imperial March from Star Wars playing in my head every time I see Lord Mandleson? In fact, I'm beginning to hear it every time I see an image of Number 10...

Of course, we'd all like to avoid any Imperial entanglements.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 08:44:39 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 08:32:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 May, 2010, 07:32:24 PM
I hope everyone is cheering, the person who is solely responsible for destroying our childrens futures, by spending money that he didn't have (from our pensions) has finally buggered off.

What a disgrace, using the children to get the sympathy and pity vote.

I am not cheering at all though i will say good riddance.As for destroying ours and our childrens futures then i hate to dissapoint you but its not going to stop just because of the exit of Gordon Brown.

Prepare yourself for more of the same.

I know that but he should have just said we have no money to do all the things Tony and I promised.
Just because the Conservative lot got in doesn't mean it's going to get better overnight, it may take generations. Saying that, so long as you lot keep eating I'll be okay  ;)

Also Shark, it is a known fact that Mandelson has signed things in the past 'The Dark Lord'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pete Wells on 11 May, 2010, 08:54:18 PM
Yeuch, I can't believe that horrible smug cunt is my Prime minister, I fucking hate him. Depressed now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 11 May, 2010, 09:01:19 PM
Well thats just bloody terrible
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 May, 2010, 09:09:35 PM
crap.

crappity crap crap crap crap.

Buggering bollocking arsebiscuits.

Only slim positive I can see - they'll be so unpopular once the cutbacks start to bite (and the fatcats stay fat) that in 4 years time they'll be unelectable for decades. (But then again, I said something similar every time Thatcher got back in, and we still elected Major)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 11 May, 2010, 09:13:17 PM
William Somerset: [discovering what's inside the package] California, tell your people to stay away. Stay away now, don't - don't come in here. Whatever you hear, stay away! John Doe has the upper hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 11 May, 2010, 09:27:47 PM
Look on the bright side.  2000AD's golden age happened under (and possibly as a reaction to) a Conservative government.

The 2000AD resurgence starts here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 09:51:22 PM
C.A.M.E.R. One?

Please Grud, no...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 09:56:41 PM
David CaMoron.

Nothing personal as its just a pun on the name.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 10:09:35 PM
Cameron LA-LA-LA Cameron LA-LA-LA.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 10:15:22 PM
Cameron Eileen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 11 May, 2010, 10:22:37 PM
I Cameron inside all of yous moms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 May, 2010, 10:25:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2010, 10:15:22 PM
Cameron Eileen

You're fired -- Ed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 May, 2010, 10:44:00 PM
Cameron and Obama talk together on the telephone about the "special relationship" between the UK and the US.

How predictable.This means another 5 years of the UK being entangled in and participating in the protracted overseas conflicts that are part of the Agenda of the Trilateral Commission etc etc etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 11 May, 2010, 10:46:24 PM
Be fair now, everyone has to have a turn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 May, 2010, 10:46:58 PM
Quote from: faplad on 11 May, 2010, 07:59:20 PM
What if the Queen carks it between one guy leaving and the other arriving. Do we have to thn wait for Charlie - or whoever - to be crowned before a new Government can be sworn in?

I'm guessing Charles would do the formalities. The Coronation, another formality, would come later.


Roll on the next election. I want my single transferable vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 11 May, 2010, 11:00:09 PM
I'd best get an abortion before they're made illegal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 May, 2010, 11:21:22 PM
Welcome to the age of spin gentlemen. I look forward to being lied to on a daily basis by and about everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 11:28:52 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 May, 2010, 11:21:22 PM
Welcome to the age of spin gentlemen. I look forward to being lied to on a daily basis by and about everything.

And why is that different to before the election?






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 11 May, 2010, 11:45:33 PM
That Samantha needs a good fucking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rio De Fideldo on 11 May, 2010, 11:47:08 PM
I don't normally like to comment about politics on a forum dedicated to a comic.

I also don't like to swear on a forum where kids may be reading.


Having said all that...







I can't fucking believe the fucking Tories are back in control.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 May, 2010, 11:50:09 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 11:28:52 PM
And why is that different to before the election?

Because this government is being sponsored by it instead of the other way round. This is propagandatown now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 May, 2010, 12:19:00 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 May, 2010, 11:50:09 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 May, 2010, 11:28:52 PM
And why is that different to before the election?

Because this government is being sponsored by it instead of the other way round. This is propagandatown now.

Its business as usual then.

The Blair/Brown adminstration ran on spin.

I dont have a short or selective memory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2010, 12:22:50 AM
Under the rule of the Consiberal Party, there will be minimal spin and all memories will be subject to Government approval. Everything is under control. Go back to your duties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul faplad Finch on 12 May, 2010, 12:27:28 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 11 May, 2010, 10:46:58 PM
Quote from: faplad on 11 May, 2010, 07:59:20 PM
What if the Queen carks it between one guy leaving and the other arriving. Do we have to thn wait for Charlie - or whoever - to be crowned before a new Government can be sworn in?

I'm guessing Charles would do the formalities. The Coronation, another formality, would come later.


Roll on the next election. I want my single transferable vote.

I figured as much but wasn't sure which formality would take prescedence(sp?). Common sense would dictate that you would get the Government running - if installing this lot could ever be called common sense - but you never know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 May, 2010, 12:31:32 AM
Sigh. Listen man, I'm just trying to point out that this government is sponsored by Rupert Murdoch, Sky News, the Daily Mail, The Sun, Simon Cowell and BASICALLY everything that makes modern media disgustingly biased toward intolerance and stupidity. I'm not trying to say that before that this kind of thing wasn't present but now it's more than an ugly minority. Now it's the law.

PUNK!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 May, 2010, 12:43:07 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 May, 2010, 12:31:32 AM
Sigh. Listen man, I'm just trying to point out that this government is sponsored by Rupert Murdoch, Sky News, the Daily Mail, The Sun, Simon Cowell and BASICALLY everything that makes modern media disgustingly biased toward intolerance and stupidity. I'm not trying to say that before that this kind of thing wasn't present but now it's more than an ugly minority. Now it's the law.

PUNK!

Can you explain with a bit more detail ?

I need some examples because AFAIAC the tabloids and the rest spin every election.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 May, 2010, 01:08:59 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 May, 2010, 12:43:07 AM
Can you explain with a bit more detail ?

No. If you genuinely feel that the tabloids haven't gained any footing at all in this election and all is the same as before then my only words are HURRAY IGNORANCE! (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/may/10/general-election-power-of-press)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 01:14:09 AM
I had a thought the other day about how League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: The Black Dossier predicted all this: the dismantling of 'True Labour,' and everything they stood for being swept away almost overnight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 May, 2010, 04:09:38 PM
Clegg and Cameron's comedy double act when at the lawn press conference Dave was asked about his old favourite joke being two words - "Nick" and "Clegg", was brilliant. It bodes well.

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 05:46:49 PM
I do laugh when Labour lovies slag off certain newspapers and Murdoch for going with the Conservatives, especially the Sun. Did these Labour bods say the same when the Sun and Murdoch backed the Labour party, seems very strange or is it just that they are sore losers.
In fact they are so sore that Twitter and numerous other places seems to be full of them wanting the ConLibDem lot to fail, I wonder if that means they want the country to fail, so that we are all in the shit. Anything to get Labour in, dear me!
I hope you all puked when Brown mentioned his love of the troops, is that the same love that messed up getting the kit out to them and never turning up for the return of any of our fallen. He also went on about being green in his goodbye speech and then he went by PLANE up to Scotland.
I was hoping he would go by boat like that other Labour pension thief and fall overboard and do us all a favour.

Anyway, it looks like our new leaders have many interesting ideas, my favourite is to get the workshy into some sort of job. Before everyone winges about those jobs are not the ones that these people will want, tough shit, life is like that. Only a few people on this planet have the jobs they want (which pay well obviously).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 07:52:27 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 05:46:49 PM
Anyway, it looks like our new leaders have many interesting ideas, my favourite is to get the workshy into some sort of job.

I seem to recall they had that policy throughout the 80s and 90s. Oddly enough, nothing came of it.

I'm curious to know what 'some sort of job is'. I mean, would you want to employ the genuinely workshy?

I suspect the only way to really deal with this problem is to restore a sense of shame in unemployment and pride in a job well done, but god knows how you do that.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 08:00:36 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 07:52:27 PM
I'm curious to know what 'some sort of job is'. I mean, would you want to employ the genuinely workshy?

I suspect the only way to really deal with this problem is to restore a sense of shame in unemployment and pride in a job well done, but god knows how you do that.

I agree with your last bit Robin but rather then just keep going the way we are going something needs to be done. It's a work ethic thing, generations have seen their parents live a cushy life on benefits so why should their children bother when mugginns here will pay for it  ::)

As for the jobs, lets get them cleaning the country up and if they don't like it, cut their benefits. Also these jobs would be paid a living wage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 12 May, 2010, 08:01:41 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 May, 2010, 12:31:32 AM
Sigh. Listen man, I'm just trying to point out that this government is sponsored by Rupert Murdoch, Sky News, the Daily Mail, The Sun, Simon Cowell and BASICALLY everything that makes modern media disgustingly biased toward intolerance and stupidity. I'm not trying to say that before that this kind of thing wasn't present but now it's more than an ugly minority. Now it's the law.

PUNK!

Murdoch played a big hand in Labour's win in 1996 giving hardly any press backing for the tories, so nothing changes as far as I can see it, seems the media choose who wins. Just sour grapes for labour.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 May, 2010, 08:48:09 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 12 May, 2010, 08:01:41 PM
Murdoch played a big hand in Labour's win in 1996 giving hardly any press backing for the tories, so nothing changes as far as I can see it, seems the media choose who wins. Just sour grapes for labour.

Except that in 1996, Sky was an expanding business -- now Murdoch's business is profitable but flat, and he has his eye very firmly on having the BBC's remit savagely reined in to create space in the market for his expansion plans.

Now, I know you don't care, but I do!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 08:53:05 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 05:46:49 PM
Anyway, it looks like our new leaders have many interesting ideas, my favourite is to get the workshy into some sort of job.

The main problem there is, we struggle at the moment to find enough jobs for the 2.5 million who count in the unemployment figures to do, never mind the something like 9 million working-age adults classed as 'economically inactive.' Aside from labour camps, I don't know how you magic up the best part of 10 million jobs overnight.

The problem with creating jobs is someone has to pay wages. I seem to remember Thatcher thinking it was cheaper to put miners on the dole than pay them to mine coal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 08:56:45 PM
I know, why don't we do nothing then and let the people who do work keep paying for the people who can't be arsed.

If we can pay all this money out in benefits lets get them doing something for it then instead
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 08:58:45 PM
Sorry, this is a tad lupine...

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 08:00:36 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 07:52:27 PM
I'm curious to know what 'some sort of job is'. I mean, would you want to employ the genuinely workshy?

I suspect the only way to really deal with this problem is to restore a sense of shame in unemployment and pride in a job well done, but god knows how you do that.

I agree with your last bit Robin but rather then just keep going the way we are going something needs to be done. It's a work ethic thing, generations have seen their parents live a cushy life on benefits so why should their children bother when mugginns here will pay for it  ::)

I think you're right about the generation/work ethic thing, but I'm inclined to blame the 80s Conservatives for creating that generation. For example, closing down the mines may well have been an economic necessity, but as far as I remember they made no effort at all to help set-up and develop new industries. They Conservatives put a good part of a generation on the dole, and their children followed.

Sure, that's a gross simplification, and these things never are simple, but I think there's an essential truth there. I don't think that the Conservatives have ever acknowledged that they had a hand creating this situation, and I think their failure to it recognise doesn't bode well for attempts to fix it.

QuoteAs for the jobs, lets get them cleaning the country up and if they don't like it, cut their benefits. Also these jobs would be paid a living wage.

I go back to the points I made back thread when you raised this before: how are you going to organise and fund this? It's gonna cost to make it work properly.

Cutting benefits always sounds tempting, and superficially it's hard to see what's wrong with the idea. However, there are always going to be knock-on effects: increased crime, increased domestic violence, more children in poverty and taken into care, more people ending up on the streets, and so.

I'm not advocating throwing our hands up in the air and crying there's nothing to be done, but we have to remember that actions are going to have consequences beyond those we want or we expect.

The politicians, on all sides, spout the things we want to hear, but do the things they believe in ideologically, rarely thinking about the negative consequences and never accepting it when they fuck up. Essentially, I'm just saying be cautious when you hear the things you want to hear, because it won't necessarily work out for the best, for you or the country.



For what it's worth, while I've never been a fan of the idea of military National Service, I'm increasingly interested in a broader concept of National Service. We need to change people's lives and attitudes to work, so we get them into work as soon as they leave school - there's no thinking about looking for work, three years public service becomes a part of life like going to school. We have a huge public sector, so we use it. There are plenty of different sorts of jobs for all sorts of ability - however it does require a complete separation of public sector and private sector, except where the public is making money out of the private.

I don't think we can just take people off the dole now and shove them into hospitals or the services - this has to be something that happens to a new generation, so that it seems natural, expected.

University, well, I'm a smart-arse with three degrees, but I think there are far too-many people going to university right now who simply shouldn't be there. Sorry, we need the smart  and creative ones going there, the ones who are going to contribute to the country's science and technology and, yes, the arts too, because there has to be something outside work. You can apply to university and if you get in fine. However, after you get your degree you have a choice: pay for your degree yourself and you're free to go into the private sector; go into the public sector for three years after it and the state pays for it. You can put off the inevitable with higher degrees. If you're good and industry snaps you up then, maybe they'll pay off the degree for you.

Cost, well I imagine that will be fucking enormous, the administration a nightmare, and it won't be easy. Undoubtedly there will be all the negative consequences I haven't thought of. However, off the top of my head I can't think of another way to restore the idea of a normal working life for all people, create involvement and understanding of the public services, and benefit the country as a whole.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 12 May, 2010, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 08:56:45 PM
I know, why don't we do nothing then and let the people who do work keep paying for the people who can't be arsed.



Bring back labour camps and get the work shy scum bramble picking. It's these scum who moan about the Eastern Europeans coming over here to take our jobs but these are the jobs they are doing. If these slack arses did the jobs there wouldn't be any need to look to these countries to do the 'menial jobs'







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 12 May, 2010, 09:06:51 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 12 May, 2010, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 12 May, 2010, 08:56:45 PM
I know, why don't we do nothing then and let the people who do work keep paying for the people who can't be arsed.



Bring back labour camps and get the work shy scum bramble picking.

Labour had... camps? For bramble picking?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 09:25:22 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 08:58:45 PM
You can apply to university and if you get in fine. However, after you get your degree you have a choice: pay for your degree yourself and you're free to go into the private sector; go into the public sector for three years after it and the state pays for it. You can put off the inevitable with higher degrees. If you're good and industry snaps you up then, maybe they'll pay off the degree for you... Undoubtedly there will be all the negative consequences I haven't thought of.

I'm practically a Trot, but even I can see how that plan would stifle enterprise. Also, I think it's very easy to over-estimate the public sector's demand for high achieving graduates in non-technical occupations. There's a lot of Continuous Professional Development for school leavers to work their way up in government jobs, whereas it's seen as an affront to common sense when a graduate expects on-the-job training because they don't already know the ins and outs of an organization they're completely new to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 09:27:01 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 08:58:45 PM
You can apply to university and if you get in fine. However, after you get your degree you have a choice: pay for your degree yourself and you're free to go into the private sector; go into the public sector for three years after it and the state pays for it. You can put off the inevitable with higher degrees. If you're good and industry snaps you up then, maybe they'll pay off the degree for you... Undoubtedly there will be all the negative consequences I haven't thought of.

When it comes to free market economics I'm practically a Trot, but even I can see how that plan would stifle enterprise. Also, I think it's very easy to over-estimate the public sector's demand for high achieving graduates in non-technical occupations. There's a lot of Continuous Professional Development for school leavers to work their way up in government jobs, whereas it's seen as an affront to common sense when a graduate expects on-the-job training because they don't already know the ins and outs of an organization they're completely new to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 09:46:34 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 09:25:22 PMI'm practically a Trot, but even I can see how that plan would stifle enterprise. Also, I think it's very easy to over-estimate the public sector's demand for high achieving graduates in non-technical occupations. There's a lot of Continuous Professional Development for school leavers to work their way up in government jobs, whereas it's seen as an affront to common sense when a graduate expects on-the-job training because they don't already know the ins and outs of an organization they're completely new to.

That's fine - I certainly didn't expect to be able chuck a lot of stuff onto the screen and have it work perfectly. But you get the broad principles, I'm sure. Now, how do we make it work?

Broadly speaking, we have too many people going to university, a number of whom are just there to avoid work or get drunk - we need to trim the fat. If we introduce this concept of National Service, some people will try to delay it by going to university, but we don't want them thinking they're going to get out of making some sort of practical contribution to society. I'm trying to avoid a situation where some only go to university and some only do a National Service - I want to avoid an us-and-them situation developing, and create a common work and service ethic.

Seriously, ideas? I'm genuinely trying to do something practical, even if only as a mental exercise for us here.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 10:03:23 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 09:46:34 PM
I'm trying to avoid a situation where some only go to university and some only do a National Service

What you'd do is make university and national service totally independent of one another. You'd still have to do the same as everybody else, but it would be negotiable whether you did it before or after university. It could be a great social leveller. Especially if it slowed down the career progression of toffs whose connections get them a top gig with a newspaper, a merchant bank or the civil service straight out of university.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 May, 2010, 01:04:11 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 May, 2010, 01:08:59 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 May, 2010, 12:43:07 AM
Can you explain with a bit more detail ?

No. If you genuinely feel that the tabloids haven't gained any footing at all in this election and all is the same as before then my only words are HURRAY IGNORANCE! (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/may/10/general-election-power-of-press)

I will accept that certain sections of the media were more shrill in their support of Cameron but thats all you are going to get from me but i am pretty certain that if those same papers had supported Brown instead then you wouldnt have been whining about it especially if Labour won.

Unless of course you are pissed off that they didnt bother to support Nick Clegg then i can kind of see how that influenced the LibDem vote.However if they had really got behind Clegg then that may have influenced the vote and if you had a LibDem win then again i dont think you would have complained.

Its the fact that your point and complaints about the media spin are not impartial that is the weakness in your argument here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 13 May, 2010, 08:43:00 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 12 May, 2010, 10:03:23 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 12 May, 2010, 09:46:34 PM
I'm trying to avoid a situation where some only go to university and some only do a National Service

What you'd do is make university and national service totally independent of one another. You'd still have to do the same as everybody else, but it would be negotiable whether you did it before or after university. It could be a great social leveller. Especially if it slowed down the career progression of toffs whose connections get them a top gig with a newspaper, a merchant bank or the civil service straight out of university.

I'd thought about that approach, but there's a risk with having a break between school and university, or a break between university and degree-relevant career, that you lose skills and knowledge. In science or technology-based degrees or jobs, I think that's significant.

I wouldn't want university to be seen as a way to get out of Public Service (perhaps a better term than National Service?), though. Your approach may be better, but possibly creates some other issues.

To be honest, through, I think there are bigger problems in terms of finding a place in the public sector for every school leaver. That'll be the real challenge here.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 May, 2010, 02:20:30 AM
Here we go again just as i predicted :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8684162.stm

Baby faced sellout POS Trash meets ugly Globalist Harridan to discuss the next 5 years of the UKs foreign policy being dictated to by the CFR and the Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg.

I mean William fucking Hague.

Just another Poodle.

>:(

Heres to the next 5 years !!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 15 May, 2010, 02:37:14 AM
For sale: One unwanted PM
John Major's Spitting Image puppet

John Major's Spitting Image puppet is to go under the hammer next month.

Auctioneers Bonhams expect the all-grey model to fetch £3,500 as part of a double lot with his wife Norma.

It is not the first former Prime Ministerial puppet to be sold. Tony and Cherie Blair's puppets recently fetched £12,600, while Baroness Thatcher went for £5,040. Gordon Brown got just £4,800 in 2007.

Stephanie Connell of Bonhams said: 'These items are a great piece of British television and political memorabilia and the popularity of Spitting Image puppets continues - they are much loved by politicians and the public alike.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 May, 2010, 09:43:23 AM
Is it just me, or does anyone else think Theresa May is quite sexy?

M@
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 May, 2010, 09:59:22 AM
Quote from: Banners on 20 May, 2010, 09:43:23 AM
Is it just me, or does anyone else think Theresa May is quite sexy?

M@

It might be the other Theresa May you're thinking of..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 20 May, 2010, 10:06:28 AM
I hope it's the other one he's thinking of...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 20 May, 2010, 01:11:18 PM
So, the government is looking to use some of the license fee to pay for high speed broadband being rolled out into rural areas.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 May, 2010, 01:24:13 PM
Well, I guess most of you know what I think.

If the government created its own money instead of letting the banks do it at interest, we could afford to give everyone free broadband for life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 20 May, 2010, 01:31:38 PM
Is it just me or did Theresa suddenly get real old, real fast?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 May, 2010, 03:35:34 PM
Quote from: Christov on 20 May, 2010, 01:11:18 PM
So, the government is looking to use some of the license fee to pay for high speed broadband being rolled out into rural areas.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this...

While i dont begrudge the idea too much in principle its curious because this is part of an ongoing trend that i am see a lot of now where public funds like licence fee revenues and tax revenue is increasingly being used to fund the private sector.

Why is it ?? that the private sector I.E ISPs cannot fund this rollout of high speed broadband connection to rural areas themselves ??

Am i missing something here ?

Why is it if there is talk of cuts in the services that the BBC offers then why is the licence fee revenue which is in itself a pretty constant source of revenue being used for this purpose ?

BTW i heard somewhere that 6Music is not going to be axed after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 May, 2010, 04:58:19 PM
I say FUCK those country folk, always slagging off us townies, they can stick with bloody dial up  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 May, 2010, 05:10:06 PM
Since when is this part of the remit of the BBC anyway ?

Having said that it must be because of the BBCIPlayer service not being available without high speed broadband but it doesnt justify the expense of providing the infrastructure for it unless it remains the property of the BBC which means its the property of every licence fee payer so does the BBC itself become an ISP ?

The Govt/BBC will probably just turn the whole thing over to the private sector anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 May, 2010, 05:12:52 PM
It's just like public transport, which seems to be all run by private companies, yet loads of public cash is splashed out to help them out  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 20 May, 2010, 08:04:38 PM
If you want decent Iplayer go for the new Virgin HD box (cisco). It's not that bad really.
If you upgrade you current Digi and keep that one on your account for another room it is free, beats paying a flat £49 for one

(http://www.cnet.co.uk/i/c/blg/cat/televisions/vbox_hd.jpg)







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 May, 2010, 11:51:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 May, 2010, 01:24:13 PM
Well, I guess most of you know what I think.

If the government created its own money instead of letting the banks do it at interest, we could afford to give everyone free broadband for life.

Its good news what is going on in Greece lately.I am not saying that rioting and the destruction of property that is an inevitable consequence of rioting is a good thing but they should keep it up and tell their govt and the Goldman Sucks criminals and all the rest of them to go fuck themselves and tell them that they will just have to eat their losses that they were responsible for.It will collapse the Euro as well and after a period of re-adjustment life will improve.

They should also just leave the Eurozone ASAP and repudiate their debts and start all over again with a clean slate.

What makes gangsterBanksters think that they have the right to have a risk free business/investment enviroment when no one else does ?

Why cant they accept a certain amount of loss themselves and impose cutbacks on themselves ?

I say risk free because the taxpayer refunds them for their losses.

What you ask for will happen eventually anyway as its just a case of when.

Like someone else said in a comment i read earlier you cant expect to fix the problem if you are using the same logic that created and perpetuates the problem and the cause of the problem in the first place which is what these idiot politicians and Banksters will never understand unless they dont want to if you see what i mean.


There needs to be more of this sort of thing and lots of it and the people always have the upper hand ultimately if they choose to exercise it.

Their days are numbered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 May, 2010, 06:50:14 PM

I thought that this might be of interest :

New UK govt to curb CCTV, scrap ID cards, help open source:


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/new-uk-govt-to-curb-cctv-scrap-id-cards-help-open-source.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 23 May, 2010, 09:21:00 AM
Glad to see the back of the essentially pointless ID cards, but I have less of a problem with CCTV. I don't actually find it at all intrusive, but its value was brought home to me a few years ago when a serial rapist was caught because it was noticed that the same car kept appearing in the areas around where that attacks took place. The rapist had been using his girlfriend's car, so once the police had the car linked to the areas and times they just followed the trail.

Also, it can help alert police, fire and ambulance services to problems before a 999 call is made, if such a call is made at all.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 May, 2010, 01:39:35 PM
I used to know a security guard who worked alone at nights in a small security office serving a large factory. He had remote control of about four CCTV cameras and would delight in showing me how two of them could be used to peer into the bedroom windows of neighbouring domestic houses.

I agree that CCTV is indeed a useful tool but, like all tools, it can be misused. It is the practice of misuse that needs to be protected against, not use of the technology itself. The same could be said of ID cards, they could play a very useful role in emergency situations such as medical crises, for example, but take them too far and you get checkpoints, restricted travel and an erosion of privacy.

Of course, this is a simple observation and can be applied to any tool. A screwdriver is an extremely useful thing, but in the wrong circumstances can easily kill. Money, too, is a tool (and how many of you just knew I was going to bring it up?) and, when misused, causes untold misery, deprivation and death. Money is like water, we all need it and we all need to keep the supply flowing according to the immediate needs of society. Returning control of that flow to the hands of our elected officials at the Treasury would drastically reduce the opportunities for misuse.

When a technology such as CCTV first appears, it takes some time for it to integrate into society. Infrastructure, legislation, operation and public attitude all take time to adjust. Experiences from all sides are examined, debated and acted upon and eventually - if we're lucky - enough compromises are reached for CCTV to become just another thing we have. That's what I love about this country - we're always arguing, but that's a good thing. Arguments open the mind to new possibilities and highlight obvious, and not so obvious, truths and lies that eventually lead us to a better understanding and informed decisions. This works on all levels of society from the family group to the workplace to government, everybody is working towards what they believe to be "good." Admittedly, this is also one of our biggest weaknesses - we don't all believe the same things are good.

Still, those security cameras I mentioned at the start, there was an argument over those. One of the neighbours of the factory noticed that a camera was looking into private bedrooms and, for a while, things got very nasty. In the end, shields were fitted to the offending cameras, limiting their field of view only to the factory. The guard kept his job, but it was a damn close run thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 23 May, 2010, 07:11:59 PM
I currently work in an office where there is CCTV everywhere for security reasons. So long as it's used only for security purposes I don't mind; anything else speaks of low levels of trust.

I have in the past worked for a retail outlet and a charity where CCTV was used to spy on employees and monitor how they work, which I found very intrusive. Working in a record shop I was called to the manager's office and told I had spent too long advising one customer, although it was legitimate for the manager to waste time snooping on staff instead of coming onto the shop floor and helping out during a busy period.

When I worked in a residential hostel, the manager there trawled through a whole week's worth of CCTV footage to check that hourly security patrols were being conducted, because he was trying to get something on me. What he found was that I was the only member of staff who had done their share of patrols and everyone else was slacking. No action was taken against the others who weren't pulling their weight because he was pally with all of them. You don't spy on your staff unless you have a suspicion of serious wrongdoing or you have warned them that you are going to be checking up on whether they're doing the job properly or not. You don't just set a trap on a whim and see if they fall into it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 23 May, 2010, 11:09:06 PM
On the subject of CCTV. When I was stationed (censored due to the official secrets act).

oh how we all laughed.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 24 May, 2010, 04:14:13 PM
I dont like the idea of being constantly under surveillance but at the same time i am totally oblivious to CCTV cameras in actuality so in that sense i dont find them intrusive simply because i ignore them.
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 May, 2010, 01:39:35 PM

Of course, this is a simple observation and can be applied to any tool. A screwdriver is an extremely useful thing, but in the wrong circumstances can easily kill. Money, too, is a tool (and how many of you just knew I was going to bring it up?) and, when misused, causes untold misery, deprivation and death. Money is like water, we all need it and we all need to keep the supply flowing according to the immediate needs of society. Returning control of that flow to the hands of our elected officials at the Treasury would drastically reduce the opportunities for misuse.



Thats very very true about misuse.Rather like power that is given to elected officials who misuse it.

Its the same thing as the saying "Money is the root of all evil"

No its not.

Its people or certain types of people who are the root of all evil.Money is just an inanimate object like a screwdriver that can be misused and its an ignorant and misguided statement.I mean you wouldnt say a screwdriver is evil despite the fact it could be used as an offensive weapon.

*

No mention in that article of scrapping the DNA database which was curious as that should either be scrapped or it should be subject to very strict guidelines and checks and balances which at present it is not.

For example why is the DNA of Babies being stored on it without the parents consent or even knowledge ?

A perfect example of misuse by the state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 May, 2010, 04:33:35 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 24 May, 2010, 04:14:13 PM
Its the same thing as the saying "Money is the root of all evil"

This doesn't affect your point but..... [ENGAGE PEDANT MODE] this is one of those often misquoted phrases - it should be "the pursuit of money is the root of all evil", a subtle but important difference. [DISENGAGE PEDANT MODE]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2010, 05:07:58 PM
I always thought it was "love of money is at the root of all evil." Same difference, though. And, looking around, never has it been so apparent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 May, 2010, 06:47:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2010, 05:07:58 PM
I always thought it was "love of money is at the root of all evil." Same difference, though. And, looking around, never has it been so apparent.

DAMMIT! Nothing worse than trying to be a pedantic smartarse and then being proved wrong.  :-[

You're absolutely right:
Timothy 6:10 (King James Version):
    For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

I'll go and flog myself thoroughly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 24 May, 2010, 06:50:28 PM
Money is great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2010, 06:51:44 PM
Thus began the Great Pedant War of 2010... (Although, technically, it started much earlier. Or much later, depending on the pedant you ask.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 May, 2010, 11:59:30 PM
Well, technically... it can't be a war if it starts with one of the parties involved realising that they're in the wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2010, 12:22:42 AM
I fight for my right to be wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 May, 2010, 12:55:50 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 May, 2010, 01:24:13 PM
Well, I guess most of you know what I think.

If the government created its own money instead of letting the banks do it at interest, we could afford to give everyone free broadband for life.

Thats right.

All the countries in the G8 and the G20 dont have any control over their own central banks as they gave up control or ownership of them when they signed up.

Heres what someone else has to say about in reply to a question of who owns and controls the central bank of Canada:
"Actually in Canada.... up untill the 1970/80's the Debt was held almost at zero because the people of Canada publically own the Bank of Canada, and back then , it was the only Bank responsible for the printing of new dollars....however....
A stipulation of Canada being part of the "G7″countries was, Canada would have to stop using the Publically owned Bank of Canada, and sub out the printing of Canada's Dollars to the International Monetary Fund at interest...
60% of Canada's paper money, is printed in Germany, by the same company who print Canadian Tire money...
The Bank of Canada still Print.... but they have to pay the IMF a steep fee for every bill they press...
Hence, When it comes to pay off the Canadian debt today, there is not enough in circulation to pay it as each dollar made adds to the debt...."

This is why whenever the G8 or G20 meet up to decide which way the economy is going to go behind closed doors they have to have very tight security and the LRAD sound weapons are wheeled out to disperse the peasents who they are bleeding dry.

Outrageous isnt it ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2010, 01:33:52 AM
No, it's not outrageous - it's murderous.

This is the system that keeps Africa starving, the system that creates child slave labour, the system that makes clean drinking water too expensive for Brazilians and ensures our own pensioners have the unenviable winter's choice of buying food or heat, but not both.

I have emailed politicians about this, and the few who reply simply talk about government spending, unable or unwilling to grasp the fact that it makes no difference whatsoever how a government spends its money if that money is made of debt to begin with.

I emailed the Treasury with the simple question, "can you please explain to me why my government borrows money instead of creating it?" According to the automatically generated "read receipts," my email was read by two different people, neither of whom thought it was worth responding to the legitimate questions of a concerned electorate (i.e., me).

If our governments can fix this, they will make life better for virtually everyone. If they can't fix it, they don't deserve to represent us and our interests. If they don't want to fix it, they should stand trial for accessory to fraud and, possibly, economic treason.

I know I get on peoples' nerves banging on about this, but in my view it is one of the most important problems facing humanity today, probably even more urgent than climate change. It's certainly easier to fix than climate change, all it requires is the stroke of a pen. And wouldn't we all love to be a part of the generation that abolished poverty? Wouldn't that just be so cool?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 29 May, 2010, 11:39:58 AM
For what it's worth, you're not getting on my nerves. Which is, in itself, no small feat.

I don't believe that it's a case of if the world economy will collapse, but rather when. Call me a paid up member of the tinfoil hat club if you will, but I think that the policy makers know this, but that they're not worried because they know full well that when it happens, they, for the most part, will own everything that you currently own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2010, 12:22:39 PM
Exactly. Hence the rumblings about a World Central Bank (privately owned, of course) that will do for the world what the Federal Reserve did for the USA: Ruin it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 May, 2010, 01:00:15 PM
It will be time to kick out the moneychangers/lenders out of the temple soon.

Its nothing less than overt criminality.
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2010, 12:22:39 PM
Exactly. Hence the rumblings about a World Central Bank (privately owned, of course) that will do for the world what the Federal Reserve did for the USA: Ruin it.

Thats what was talked about at the very recent Bilderberg[the above mentioned policy makers] meeting in Spain.

"The Bilderberg-controlled Washington Post called for making the IMF a "global overseer" on May 20. Bilderberg is exploiting the financial crisis in Greece and other EU countries to advance efforts to make the IMF a world Treasury Department under the UN."

"It may take a global agency like the IMF" to address the problem, The Post said, attributing the view to Liliana Rojas-Suarez, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development."

Article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/19/AR2009041902242.html?hpid=topnews

All of this economic situation is deliberately planned and executed to consolidate assets and power into the hands of the Anglo-Dutch banking cartel and ultimately Rothschilds using the derivatives bubble as the pretext to it amongst others.

Remember everyone if you tolerate this your children will be next.

Also if anyone dares to call me a "Tinfoil hat wearer" then i will just laugh at them and those that toss around that term of description are not only doing themselves a disservice but everyone else as well and by refusing to face facts and educate themselves about this situation they are indirectly aiding and abetting and defending these overtly criminal Cocksuckers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2010, 01:12:44 PM
Damn right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 May, 2010, 01:52:50 PM
(http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/7299/ignorancep.jpg) (http://img687.imageshack.us/i/ignorancep.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 May, 2010, 02:26:50 PM
When the uprising is near I'm sure the internet will be shut down and with it the uprising!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 June, 2010, 01:30:24 PM
I wonder what would have happened if Iran had attacked the Gaza aid convoy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 June, 2010, 02:17:28 PM
Bilderberg have allegedly greenlighted airstrikes on Iran.

Also Bilderberg are allegedly scared and panicking as there is so much heat on them because they are being exposed with plenty of notable names not attending for the same reasons this year.

:lol:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 June, 2010, 03:42:31 PM
Those Israeli Commandos fast roped onto that ship rather slowly, if you ask me  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 06 June, 2010, 03:45:11 PM
Billy Bragg  :thumbsup:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WME495PWWJE
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 June, 2010, 03:56:12 PM
For all you out there who don't believe the truth, here it is  ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw26ihYzBgo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw26ihYzBgo)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2010, 05:55:39 PM
Awesome! What's the dates for the World Tour?!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 06 June, 2010, 07:36:01 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 June, 2010, 03:56:12 PM
For all you out there who don't believe the truth, here it is  ;)

I'm really glad 'the truth' comes with an ironic wink. I couldn't stomach more than 1.58 of that - partisan, ill-informed and unfunny. Urgh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 June, 2010, 10:49:26 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 06 June, 2010, 07:36:01 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 June, 2010, 03:56:12 PM
For all you out there who don't believe the truth, here it is  ;)

I'm really glad 'the truth' comes with an ironic wink. I couldn't stomach more than 1.58 of that - partisan, ill-informed and unfunny. Urgh.

Agreed.

Absolute complete and utter Garbage.

Pathetic.

They obviously have nothing better to do than make their stupid videos.

I gave up commenting on another website about that incident because i could not stand debating the subject with others because their views amounted to nothing more than religious extremism which was coming from the Christians in the US who seem to think that its their sworn duty to defend Israel even when its completely in the wrong as they clearly were because the incident took place in International waters.

Obviously religious extremism is alright if its coming from them but not alright when its coming from Muslims.

And of course Israel will get away with this as usual and if you criticise them then its Anti-Semitism and hate speech.You might get a few words of condemnation from supine politicians but that will be about it because Israel can murder and break international law with impunity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 06 June, 2010, 11:14:10 PM
I have deliberately not kept up to date with this story so can't comment for or against either side and am hitting this without blinkered vision.
I will only add that I thought you needed permission to enter a countries waters (but then again I don't know if the events happened inside or outside Israeli waters).
If it was international waters then the UN need to step in now.
If not then the Israelies have every right to defend their waters. Whether the threat is real or not. I know I am going to be lambasted for this but just imagine a convoy of ships were heading for the UK and was declined permission would the government just let them in or send in the navy to intercept.

I will not say another word on this.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 10:19:29 AM
QuoteBilderberg have allegedly greenlighted airstrikes on Iran.

I don't even know where to start with this...

Ummm- evidence?
Also, why would an industrialists drinking club be bothered about such things?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 01:06:04 PM
I think that "industrialists' drinking club" makes it all sound very cosy. A brief glance at Bilderberg attendees makes interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants) and http://www.somethingmustbreak.net/id147.html (http://www.somethingmustbreak.net/id147.html)

Now, it may be nothing more sinister than a load of powerful people getting together for cocktails and nibbles, but with so many of our own elected representatives attending, including the last three prime ministers, isn't it reasonable to ask just what they're doing? Especially, I would suggest, if any of these people are attending on tax payers money or whilst in power. (When George Osborne, now the Chancellor, went last year he registered it in the parliamentary register of members' interests*.)

Given the average politician's attitudes towards power and wealth, is it entirely reasonable that putting them in the same room as the world's most powerful bankers and corporatists will never lead to backroom deals and arrangements? After all, each of us knows how trustworthy politicians and businessmen are, don't we?

And, let's throw the spurious "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument at them that they throw at us in defence of intrusive "security" measures. Why not let the press in?


*http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7804197/The-Bilderberg-Group-fact-and-fantasy.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7804197/The-Bilderberg-Group-fact-and-fantasy.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 01:12:09 PM
QuoteNow, it may be nothing more sinister than a load of powerful people getting together for cocktails and nibbles, but with so many of our own elected representatives attending, including the last three prime ministers, isn't it reasonable to ask just what they're doing?

Indeed.
Whcih is still a world away from
QuoteBilderberg have allegedly greenlighted airstrikes on Iran.

My opinion: I think we give these groups too much in being paranoid about them. Governments are simplily not competent enough, and are to large to run any kind of worldwide Illuminati type deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 01:38:47 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 01:12:09 PM
Governments are simplily not competent enough, and are to large to run any kind of worldwide Illuminati type deal.

Well they're doing a pretty good job on global warming, which is far more likely to be a result of the sun's magnetic field periodically letting in fewer or more cosmic ray particles as it progresses through its natural cycle than man made carbon dioxide. You can't tax sunlight, but you can tax emissions. (Nb, there's nothing wrong with cutting out pollutants, but carbon dioxide is vital - more carbon dioxide = more plants = greater crop yields, for example. Carbon dioxide makes up 0.038% of Earth's atmosphere, with man-made Co2 accounting for less than half of 1% of that figure. By far the biggest greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapour.)

They're also doing a pretty good job of ignoring the vast benefits of social money (debt free money created by governments as opposed to debt-based money created by banks) as well. I won't bang on about this subject any more here as you all know how important I think it is to address this.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that a small group of people is controlling the entire world and everything that goes on in it, but I do buy a scenario where the same small group of people enjoy far too much influence over global policy for personal financial and political gain. One might say "it was ever thus," but that doesn't mean it's a state of affairs that should continue or even remain uninvestigated. If there's a 5% chance that this small group of people are fleecing the rest of us every chance they get, shouldn't it be investigated? If there was a 5% chance that the police thought any of us might be up to similar things on a smaller scale (bribing, bullying or making secret deals with local, community level parish or town councils), we'd be investigated in a shot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 01:48:46 PM
QuoteWell they're doing a pretty good job on global warming, which is far more likely to be a result of the sun's magnetic field periodically letting in fewer or more cosmic ray particles as it progresses through its natural cycle than man made carbon dioxide.

Okay, at with this breathtaking statement, I shall withdraw from the conversation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 02:02:36 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1542332/Cosmic-rays-blamed-for-global-warming.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 June, 2010, 02:07:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 June, 2010, 03:56:12 PM
For all you out there who don't believe the truth, here it is  ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw26ihYzBgo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw26ihYzBgo)
Vile and offensive. They murder aid workers and then put a "funny" spoof on you tube. Ha fucking ha. Maybe you'd find a joke song about dead squaddies in afghanistan equally amusing, as long as it was posted with a wink?

And Vzzbux, the boats did not enter israeli waters. The israelis have unilaterally imposed an illegal 25 mile blockade around the Gaza coast, but this attack took place well outside even that.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 02:02:36 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1542332/Cosmic-rays-blamed-for-global-warming.html
Oh it's in a book published by a scientist. Must be true then. Shame how almost all the other scientists in the field disagree. Science isn't a democracy, but when the vast majority of experts (of which none of us are) agree on somethimg, I'm inclined to take their word for it, until someone actually comes up with some proof.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 02:17:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 02:02:36 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1542332/Cosmic-rays-blamed-for-global-warming.html

You're quoting an article in the Telegraph as evidence?
An article where a scientest- an expert in the field- says:
QuoteGiles Harrison, a cloud specialist at Reading University said that he had carried out research on cosmic rays and their effect on clouds, but believed the impact on climate is much smaller than Mr Svensmark claims.

Mr Harrison said: "I have been looking at cloud data going back 50 years over the UK and found there was a small relationship with cosmic rays. It looks like it creates some additional variability in a natural climate system but this is small."

http://thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2009/10/22/nope-cosmic-rays-still-not-driving-global-warming-continued/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 02:48:42 PM
The point is, nobody understands what's really going on. Yes, it makes sense to act on what we know, but we need to expand what we know so we do the right thing and not just the profitable thing.

Just about the biggest thing in the solar system is the sun's magnetic field, which acts much like the Earth's magnetic field in keeping cosmic radiation at bay. This field fluctuates over time, letting in more or fewer cosmic rays as it does so. There is some evidence to show that other planets in the solar system are warming, too. Anyway, if you want to investigate this further, there's a Channel 4 documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" that presents the non-anthropogenic side of the argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TqqWJugXzs&fmt=18

As for me, I simply don't know who's right, or indeed if anyone is. I just think that any reasonable possibilities must be investigated, and as the Sun is the hottest thing in the vicinity, to rule it out is folly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 10:19:29 AM
QuoteBilderberg have allegedly greenlighted airstrikes on Iran.

I don't even know where to start with this...

Ummm- evidence?
Also, why would an industrialists drinking club be bothered about such things?

I dont know where to start either since its such a big subject.

The same goes for Israel but its well worth pointing out that not every Israeli supports that kind of action by any means as there were mass peace protests inside Israel by Israelis but you dont dont get to hear about it because mainstream media censors it completely.The same goes for the Israelis or Jews/Orthodox Jews who do not supoort the actions of the Israeli govt in regard to the Palestinians.

*

The CO2 tax scam is dead in the water.Almost...........

Back to Bilderberg:

They operate under Chatham House rules but for the first time this year the mainstream media in the UK are covering them including The Guardian [Charlie Skelton] amongst others instead of the usual media blackout and denial of their existence.I have been talking about them for years and i have looked into them so if anyone says i am paranoid or any of that kind of nonsense it matters not because i know i am right.

They are one of the main architects of Global Governance but they are beginning to realise that its a non starter because too many people like myself are onto them

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 01:12:09 PM

Whcih is still a world away from
QuoteBilderberg have allegedly greenlighted airstrikes on Iran.

My opinion: I think we give these groups too much in being paranoid about them. Governments are simplily not competent enough, and are to large to run any kind of worldwide Illuminati type deal.

The information about airstrikes on Iran being greenlighted was the result of investigations by Jim Tucker who has been investigating their activities for 30 years +.The information was leaked to Jim Tucker who was in attendence of it this years event who has very credible and reliable sources.Its basically intelligence gathering and any intelligence is only good as its source but you appreciate that its the nature of intelligence to not have absolute 100 percent concrete evidence to back it up.

Your second comment : "My opinion: I think we etc etc....."

That believe it or not IS correct and is about the strength of it but i do disagree with you about the paranoia aspect because you can never be paarnoid or curious enough regarding their activities and when a subject stops being a Conspiracy Theory and becomes Conspiracy Fact then paranoia becomes reduntant.

The NWO/Global Governance project is dead on arrival and is a non starter as it simply cannot be done.Beraucracy on that kind of scale is never going to work because its fraught with difficulties and there are far too many variables.Look at what has happened with Greece which is throwing the whole EU/Euro project into complete dissaray.They are incapable of exercising control to that extent.When its game over for Bilderberg the dark suited corrupt control freaks will scatter and go into hiding.Its not a case of IF but WHEN.

The other main obstacle is that the Globalists/Bilderbergers/Trilateralists etc are actually in serious trouble because there is so much heat on them and awareness within the public at large of their activiities that they simply do not know what to do about it.They admit this themselves and very recently Zbiginiew Brerzinski who is THE top political advisor/Strategist of the Trilateral Commission said in a speech to a selection of Globalists at a Trilateral Commission conference in Ireland a month ago said : "For the first time in history we have a world population that is politically aware"

Too right.

:lol:

That will do for now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 June, 2010, 03:03:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 02:48:42 PM
The point is, nobody understands what's really going on. Yes, it makes sense to act on what we know, but we need to expand what we know so we do the right thing and not just the profitable thing.

Hmm. 'The profitable thing' is not to go dampening people's consumption of fuel, automobiles, air conditioning and consumer goods through environmental taxes. If it were, George W. Bush would have been all for it instead of trying to block carbondioxide reduction targets at every turn. For years the 'do nothing' approach has been advocated by business interests that would be harmed by people buying, using and wasting less. Whatever motives there are for tackling global warming, profitability isn't right there at the top of the list (and by 'tackling' I of course mean using a sieve to bail out a leaking boat).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 June, 2010, 03:07:24 PM
QuoteAnyway, if you want to investigate this further, there's a Channel 4 documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" that presents the non-anthropogenic side of the argument:

Now I know you must be taking the piss! No one could seriously be still quoting this programme as evidence!

http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 03:21:13 PM
Carbon tax. Very profitable.

Nobody mentioned evidence, just the "non-anthropogenic side of the argument."

The "truth," I'd venture to suggest, is probably rather more complicated than either side yet understands. Both camps tend towards zealotry in their arguments, which is not very scientific but very, very human. If you tried to pin me down, I'd lean towards the non-anthropogenic camp but with the belief that it's probably just as well that we stop pumping dangerous pollutants into the environment just as a matter of respect for the planet and its inhabitants.

On the plus side, nobody's arguing against the desirability of debt-free money any more, so I must be winning that one!

I love this thread!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 June, 2010, 03:25:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 03:21:13 PM
Carbon tax. Very profitable.

This is usually the bit where the safety curtain comes down and the stage manager comes out front and anxiously asks the audience "is there an economist in the house?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 03:25:53 PM
I am staying out of the debate about Climate Change because i will just repeat what i have said before but what i will say is the subject should NEVER have been hijacked by political/business/financial/social engineering interests in the first place.

If those factors were ruled out of the equation right from the start and there was clear and open and unbiased scientific debate and research on the subject we would already be a LOT closer to the solution/s than we are now because we are really no nearer to finding solutions than we were 10years ago when there was NO action and NO debate on the subject.

Whats more its the same interests that are trying to reduce atmospheric CO2 while at the same time dumping unknown quantities of Aluminium and Barium and god knows what else into the atmosphere on a daily basis as part of a Geo-Engineering project which has been disclosed as a way of controlling climate change.It really makes sense to exasapate what might well be a natural phenomena by conducting experiments with the atmosphere with unknown consequences.

Yes that really makes sense.

Anyway it should be prefectly obvious to anyone that politicians and big business are not capable of solving enviromental problems as is clearly evidenced by the Gulf Of Mexico oil leak debacle.

What is it now 40 + days + with no stoppage and NO solutions except for BP releasing 1 million gallons + of the Neurotoxin Pesticide/Dispersant Corexit into the sea with unknown consequences beyond certain death for the immediate ecosystem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2010, 03:41:12 PM
Why don't the Aid charities take their aid into Gaza through the Egyptian crossing points at Kerem Shalom and Rafah?  Oh! silly me!  Of course........the Egyptians have closed these crossing points.  Funny how this action doesn't seem to make the headlines!!  I wonder why?!!!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 03:42:44 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 June, 2010, 02:07:39 PM
Vile and offensive. They murder aid workers and then put a "funny" spoof on you tube. Ha fucking ha. Maybe you'd find a joke song about dead squaddies in afghanistan equally amusing, as long as it was posted with a wink?

I would laugh at a funny spoof and crap song about dead squaddies in Afghanistan, Iraq, Falklands, Northern Ireland, in fact anywhere.
Most squaddies would be the same, in fact we love anti war songs and films as well.
I find it very strange that the footage that you watched of 'peace activitsts' attacking a boarding party with metal bars, knives and sidearms is overlooked as you believe that the 'peace activists' did nothing wrong.

At a guess, I am probably the only forum member who was part of a Maritime Counter terrorism unit who has actually boarded ships and oil rigs. So because of this I probably know what type of mission objectives were issued. At an informed guess, I would say they were on a mission to just board the ship and search it for banned items (I hope you will agree with that DDD).
Now when doing this, all personnel will be heavily armed as they are the 'military' and you have to be ready for a contact situation, if the situation arises.

Obviously when I went onto a ship a few extra things happened before the teams fastroped onto the target. The Israeli commandos did not do any of these, as the situation did not warrant it. Once on it seems (as I am looking at the footage, I don't know what footage you have seen but it's obviously different) as if a certain amount of 'peace activists' decided to try and kill the commandos by using the weapons mentioned earlier.
Now this is when the mission objective would change, the commandos would try to secure a safe RV area and defend it until more troops arrive or the situation was under control, whichever came first.
Let me tell all you peace lovers out there, what would you do if a group of 'peace activists' came at you with weapons and tried to kill you by throwing you over the side of the ship. I bet you wouldn't have let them batter you to death as is the pack mentality, which is what I saw on those videos.
A double tap to the closest threat might stop the rest continuing their attack, who knows. All this aiming to wound in a hot zone is a load of old bollocks by the way!

It's strange how the next ship just let the commandos on board and let the search go ahead. Perhaps there were no activists on board.

Now I know there are two sides to every story, something which many people seem to 'always' forget but I would not take the word of any 'peace activist' from that ship as, let me think, what are they bound to say. At the moment I will go with the video footage that my eyes have seen.
As for collecting mobiles and camera's and such items, I presume this might be because the footage would show the commandos running amok and killing people willy nilly. It would have nothing to do with SOP's (Standard Operating Procedures).

Do you honestly think that the commandos mission was to board that ship and kill people, if you do think that then god help us all. Next you'll be saying that New Labour did an excellent job in government, leaving the country facing economic ruin.

By the way here's a wink for you  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 03:52:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 03:21:13 PM


On the plus side, nobody's arguing against the desirability of debt-free money any more, so I must be winning that one!

Maybe, just maybe, this might have something to do with the fact that THIS IS A FUCKING COMICS WEBSITE AND NOBODY GIVES A SHIT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 03:56:27 PM
Well said, CF.

It's easy to forget, as I sit here airing my views, that these issues affect real people, spill real blood and cost real lives. To me, talking about Gaza or global warming or globalization is simply a diverting intellectual exercise - but to many these are matters of life and death.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 04:02:09 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 03:52:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 03:21:13 PM


On the plus side, nobody's arguing against the desirability of debt-free money any more, so I must be winning that one!

Maybe, just maybe, this might have something to do with the fact that THIS IS A FUCKING COMICS WEBSITE AND NOBODY GIVES A SHIT.

STFU !

Its a political thread so if you dont like it then dont fucking read it !

"Nobody gives a shit !"

I give a shit and so do many others as you dont know who is reading or who is actually interested beyond the comments that have been posted on it and anyway it doesnt matter what you think because you are just some 20 something kid still living at home with his MOM and stacking shelves in a supermarket or wherever it is that you work if you actually have a job so sit down and STFU and fuck off if you dont like it and dont piss me off/.

What do you ever contribute of interest to anyone ?? apart from inane juvenile comments about your MOM or otherwise deliberately childishly offensive comments ?

Also your use of massively oversized caps is highly ignorant and discurteous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 04:15:59 PM
Apologies if I have upset anyone, but I really think this thread is somewhat of a font of negative vibes and spurious reasoning.

As a guess, I might wonder that absolutely no-one has had their minds changed about anything as a consequence of all our witterings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 04:17:51 PM
Don't you believe it Roger, I'm gonna make DDD a war mongering hard assed killer if it takes me all day!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 04:23:01 PM
He's viewing the thread as I type!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 04:26:03 PM
I won't be impressed unless you cyborgize him and make him fire flaming dildos out of his head at Railgun speeds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 07 June, 2010, 04:39:27 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 04:02:09 PM
apart from inane juvenile comments about your MOM or otherwise deliberately childishly offensive comments ?

That's about the measure of our very own Godders. And long may it continue!

I feel I must point out that even though the climate word has been mentioned, I'm saying nothing.

M

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 04:44:20 PM
I think we're all doing rather well - 52 pages on politics and the forum isn't on fire yet.

Now to go and make The Religion Thread...  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Nap Normal on 07 June, 2010, 04:46:06 PM
All I know is I'm fed giving money to these evil, corrupt and incompetent regimes. Labour, Tory party or New Labour they are all the same.
As for the planet and it's well being. My personal believe is...
I think humanity is a cancer on this planet. We have taken the most beautiful world in the solar system and turned it into a living hell. A place filled with greed, corruption, selfishness and hate.I no longer feel free I'm living in a prison with out walls.
Jay
P.s Guess who got his phone bill and a parking ticket this morning? :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 07 June, 2010, 04:50:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2010, 04:44:20 PM
I think we're all doing rather well - 52 pages on politics and the forum isn't on fire yet.

Now to go and make The Religion Thread...  :o

There already is one in the vaults somewhere but that was locked away for good reason.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2010, 05:01:10 PM
Taking on board :D everything CF says, but surely armed men boarding a ship in international water is Piracy? or does that just apply to Somalians?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 05:09:47 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 04:15:59 PM
Apologies if I have upset anyone, but I really think this thread is somewhat of a font of negative vibes and spurious reasoning.

As a guess, I might wonder that absolutely no-one has had their minds changed about anything as a consequence of all our witterings.

In that case i will apologise as well but i wasnt upset but i was annoyed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 05:19:14 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2010, 05:01:10 PM
Taking on board :D everything CF says, but surely armed men boarding a ship in international water is Piracy? or does that just apply to Somalians?

I'm with you on that point Proudhuff, I'm sure that the world will stand proud against them, or not!
I suppose they'll come up with a reason that will satisfy themselves and the US. They will say that they have a legitimate reason to intercept a ship heading straight for their territorial waters, or something like that. They could show sat tracking, speeds, directions, radio messages to prove that the ship was heading towards them, which we all knew anyway.

I feel that if Turkey escort the next ship into Israeli waters then things will escalate horribly, as I don't rate anyones capabilities in that area against Israel. As they have proven many a time, especially as they have the equipment and skills to take on all their neighbours.

Things will only become a lot worse for the innocent in the end as they always do, sadly.

P.S. Why didn't the Labour Government do more about the passport incident with Israel!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 June, 2010, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 07 June, 2010, 04:26:03 PM
I won't be impressed unless you cyborgize him and make him fire flaming dildos out of his head at Railgun speeds.
:lol:  That's the best thing anyone's ever said about me. EVER.

CF, I'm glad you seem willing to accept that there may be a big difference between what you did with HM forces and this illegal act of piracy on Israel's part. If you wanted to stretch international law to breaking point, you could argue that the crew were merely defending themselves against pirates, but I don't think that would wash. It still remains that the occupation and the blockade are illegal under international law, and therefore they had no right to be boarding anyone.

Basically, they feel able to act with impunity (and the reason more wasn't made of the passport thing, as you say) is simple - the yanks. Just like North Korea gets to do what it likes because China backs it, Israel knows that the US will always back it. If Obama simply made it clear he would no longer veto critical resolutions in the UN, things would be a lot different. But he won't, or can't, it's domestic political suicide.

I still find that song vile though. I switched off at the line "nobody got killed"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 June, 2010, 05:34:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 05:19:14 PM


P.S. Why didn't the Labour Government do more about the passport incident with Israel!!![/color]


because the government are petrified of the Israeli lobby.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 05:45:33 PM
Turkey are not to be messed with either.

The Iranian Red Crescent are going to be sending aid ships to the Palestinians so that will be fun if the Israelis start attacking their ships in international waters because if just one of those ships are attacked then thats it.

You have to question what gives Israel the right to set up and enforce naval blockades in what is a sovereign states territory in the first place ?

Were the UK and US govt in on it all in the first place ?

Article :

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19573

I also read reports that the IDF opened fire on the aid ship from above minutes before boarding it.

What a wonderful job our elected non-representative representatives and the UN are doing regarding the Israel/Palestine problem.Themselves and the UN do absolutely NOTHING about it other than a few condemnations and lip service to this or that and then nothing.Nothing at all.

You could say that their inaction is tantamount to gross negligence and is actually encouraging by its inaction the actions of an out of control rogue state that really needs to be brought to heel by the above and by doing so they are endangering all of us if you think about the implications of an Israeli attack on Turkish or Iranian ships [WW3 although we are technically in a World War] but i think that another war is what they want.

Things are going to get out of control before anything gets better.

Its a sad indictement on the political community.
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 03:42:44 PM
It would have nothing to do with SOP's (Standard Operating Procedures).

Do you honestly think that the commandos mission was to board that ship and kill people, if you do think that then god help us all.



I am thinking along those lines.Why shouldnt you ?

You have to think of every possible angle as a possible explanation.Was it their intent ?

Wether the intent was there or not the outcome was the exactly the same.Has the ISraeli govt condemned the actions of the IDF and stated they were not following a SOP ?

Exactly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 06:15:08 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 June, 2010, 05:31:43 PM
I still find that song vile though. I switched off at the line "nobody got killed"

I watched it on the phone at work so there was a lot of background noise in the office but I have to agree with DDD on this. People did die on the ship, so I have to mark the song down a couple of points for this.

As for China & North Korea and the US & Israel. Wouldn't the world be a better place if every other country stood up to them and said no more.
Just imagine it, Africa, South and Latin America, Europe, Asia, etc all made a stand.

Obviously it'll never happen  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 June, 2010, 06:20:16 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 06:15:08 PM

As for China & North Korea and the US & Israel. Wouldn't the world be a better place if every other country stood up to them and said no more.
Just imagine it, Africa, South and Latin America, Europe, Asia, etc all made a stand.

Obviously it'll never happen  ::) [/color]

What about Britain, what side do you think they're on?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 June, 2010, 06:28:10 PM
As the great George Michael once sang!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3q3J-_bkOI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3q3J-_bkOI)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 June, 2010, 06:32:12 PM
I thhought it was going to be Club Tropicana for a second there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 June, 2010, 07:01:42 PM
Club TropiGaza .

I shall stop there before i start rewriting the lyrics because its highly distasteful to make light of it especially when children are dying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 12:27:01 PM
There is a banking system out there that doesn't deal with interest. If I had money, or a mortgage, I'd certainly look into this:  http://www.islamic-bank.com/

You don't have to be a Muslim to use this bank.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 12:52:05 PM
Here's an interesting article...

" Many people believe that the Bank of England is a privately owned corporation. Many people believe that it's owned by the Rothchilds.

Neither of these beliefs is true.

The truth is much worse..."

Continues at:  http://www.ukcolumn.org/2009/04/14/bank-of-england
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 June, 2010, 01:01:19 PM
The article lost me at the fifth paragraph with "In 1844, the Rothschild inspired desire to take complete control of Britain..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 01:45:24 PM
Indeed. The Rothschild family do get blamed for a lot of things. Whether they are actually behind or involved in this I frankly don't know. However, there is something fishy going on. The more I learn, the less I understand about how it all works.

Who are the Bank of England Nominees Ltd, for example? And, if the BoE is our bank, why will nobody tell us who these people are? The Bank of England either belongs to the Government (and, by extension, the people) or it doesn't. If it does belong to us, this information should be available. If it doesn't belong to us, it shouldn't control our sovereign money supply.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 June, 2010, 02:10:03 PM
Quote"In 1998, the final piece of the puzzle fell into place. In return for fixing the 1997 elections and getting New Labour into power, the Government enacted the 1998 Bank of England Act, which gave the Bank's Court of Directors complete independence with regard to monetary policy."

1. the Bank of England's Court of Directors did not 'fix the 1997 elections'. The British public did that because they were fed up with 18 years of the Tories doing whatever the hell they pleased.

2. the point of the 1998 Bank of England Act, which gave the Bank independence, was to stop governments manipulating interest rates for political purposes, like lowering them when there's an election coming up to curry favour with the electorate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 02:16:52 PM
1: I can't comment, because I don't know. I hope nothing was fixed, I really do.

2: That worked out nicely, didn't it? Well, it did for the banks - not so much for the rest of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 June, 2010, 02:18:09 PM
I really should do a proper course in economics. I have strong political opinions, but when it comes to interest rates, the IMF, national debts, inflation etc, I find I'm rapidly out of my depth, and I really wished I had a better grasp of the priincipal arguments.

Anyone suggest the best way to go about this - GCSE at night school? Open University? Correspondence/web based course?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 02:41:32 PM
I'm not an economist, either, so I may well be wrong in everything I say and write about it. That said, I know fish when I smell it.

One analogy that helps me understand the root of the problem is this:

Imagine that money is water. The flow of water must be kept up according to the needs of the system - everyone needs water, just like everyone needs money.

The Government, who we elect, has access to its own well. All it has to do is lower a bucket into this public well, draw a bucket of water and pour it carefully into the system (public spending). The water flows around the system and trickles back into the public well in the form of taxes, keeping the public well topped up.

The Government, however, has fallen into the bad habit of using a private well from which to draw the water. So, the Government goes to this private well, draws a bucket of water and carefully pours it into the system. Now, the water that flows out of the system in taxes is used to re-fill the bucket, which is then poured back into the private well. On top of this, an extra quarter of a bucket of water is drained from the system to pour into the private well because the owners of this private well want to be paid for using their water (interest). This means that more water is being drained from the system than is being returned to it. Thus, the parts of the system that use the most water are deprived of it and whither away and die - like Britain's manufacturing industry.

Once we persuade the Government to begin using its own well again, we can still pay off all those quarter buckets we owe whilst not drawing any more water from that private well. Once this is done, the amount drained from the system will fall dramatically, allowing everyone's taxes to fall and allowing an appropriate amount to be invested in industry, public services and society as a whole. So long as the water continues to be added to and drained from the system according to established economic principles and the needs of society, the only losers will be the owners of the private well, who have enough water of their own to begin with and don't need ours.

I thought of that analogy a couple of days ago - does it work, you think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 08 June, 2010, 02:51:48 PM
QuoteALL THE PEOPLE BEHIND AND INVOLED WITH THE BIDERBURG GROUP (HUMAN OR ALIEN) NEED TO BE LOCK UP , AND THE KEYS TROWN,AWAY,ITS A OUTRAGE WHAT THIS GROUP HAVE DONE, AND WHAT THEY ARE REPOSSIBLE FOR,AND WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING ,AND STILL CONTROLING,EVENTS EVEN NOW, I THINK SOON IT WILL BE SHOW TIME,THATS WHY WE CAN ALL,HAVE OUR VIEW FOR NOW ,BUT THEY HAVE SOMETHING UP THEIR SLEVES, IAM SURE,IF THE GAME WASNT UP DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD BE HAPPY ABOUT ALL THIS EXPOSER,THEY CAN AND DO OPERATE,WHAT WE SEE AND COMMENT ON i think their are,playing a waiting game,I THINK THEY HAVE NUKED THE ICELAND VOLCANEO,FOR ONE,they have the tech,TWO, KNOCK THE EARTHS AXIS, has we see with the hatti earthquack,also has we see more and more earthuaks and volcaneos,HOWS TO SAY THEY ARE NOT JUST WAITING ,FOR MILLIONS TO DIE,FROM, POISIONS, IN THE ATMOSPHERE,MILLION TO DIE,FROM STAVATION,please check out this site www.cambridge.org.liv...the ice pack is melting.GIVES US A VIEW ON HOW ,AND WHAT MAY BE IN SORE FOR EVERY COUNTRY,THE GAME ISNT OVER...ITS NOT EVEN STARTED YET...GET AHEAD OF THE REST,AGENDA 21,DEPOULATION PROGRAMME, IT ALL HAPPENING NOW IF YOU LOOK IN TO THE CURRENT EVENTS WE, ARE TALKING ABOUT HISTORY RIGHT NOW,all goverments are resposible for all the evil they enforce, THEY,ARE WINNING, UNLESS WE USE OUR MINDS TO DEFET THEM,THATS ONE THING THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OVER, WE ARE EACH CONNECT TO EACH OTHER WE ALL STRIVE FOR THE SAME PERPOSE,think about our world think about loveing our follow man DONT THINK ABOUT MONEY,WERE IS THE COMPASSION IN OUR WORLD ITS IN OUR HEARTS IF WE SEE IT, this is a war on ourselfs,everyone is under attact, we have to come together has one,OR ELSE THEY WIN,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 08 June, 2010, 03:01:55 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 08 June, 2010, 02:51:48 PM
QuoteTWO, KNOCK THE EARTHS AXIS, has we see with the hatti earthquack,

I thought she was very good in Carry On Doctor.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:09:22 PM
Hatti Earthquack and the Earth-Axis Knockers. Definitely one for Tharg!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 08 June, 2010, 03:17:38 PM
'Volcaneos' and 'earthquaks' made me snort apples through me nose.

Have you thought about setting up an 'Ask Godpelton' type thing? That would be a good start for the Icke crowd. If you add climate into it you'd be elected.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:23:55 PM
Don't forget to rant about the Royal Family being shape-shifting lizards who bathe in the blood of virgins.

David Ike and his like really get on my nerves as they take serious concerns over the more shadowy aspects of government and make a mockery of them. It makes anyone who investigates real conspiracies and cover-ups easy to dismiss as a "conspiracy theorist nutcase." Conspiracy has become a dirty word, but anyone who plans something in secret, from organising a surprise birthday party to a covert military operation, is a conspirator.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:31:50 PM
Bank of England Court of Directors, 2010  http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/annualreport/2010/courtofdirectors2010.pdf

Not one of them elected, not one of them accountable to the public.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 June, 2010, 04:01:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:23:55 PM
Don't forget to rant about the Royal Family being shape-shifting lizards

And Willie Nelson. Apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 June, 2010, 04:26:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:31:50 PM
Bank of England Court of Directors, 2010  http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/annualreport/2010/courtofdirectors2010.pdf

One of them is called Charlie Bean. He sounds nice, like a character out of an animated children's TV programme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 04:36:14 PM
He must be... the bean counter.

(Kindly leave the stage, I know.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 June, 2010, 05:13:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:31:50 PM
Bank of England Court of Directors, 2010  http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/annualreport/2010/courtofdirectors2010.pdf

Not one of them elected, not one of them accountable to the public.

They are not accountable to the public anymore than any other board of directors of any privately owned company as they are just Minions employed by Rothschilds/The Anglo-dutch banking cartel.The only difference being we probably pay their wages although that is an assumption/presumption on my part.Theres a couple of fake /Non-Heriditary peers in there who i know nothing about but Lord Adair Turner looks a bit suspect going by his credentials.There is one Trade Unionist in there as well but whats that Mark Turner doing in there who looks a bit like Mark Radcliffe ?

In what way is someone who has a professional background in the Arts qualified to sit on the board of directors of the BOE ?

Mervyn King is a well known Bilderberg attendee who therefore has a conflict of interest between the needs of the UK and Globalist interests and is another advocate of creating a Global/international central bank and financial bereaucracy.I bet they are all advocates of the above as well and i am really sure that they would all be very happy to answer all our queries and concerns about Fractional Reserve Lending and Quantative Easing and Fiat Currency etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 June, 2010, 07:00:38 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 June, 2010, 05:13:16 PM
In what way is someone who has a professional background in the Arts qualified to sit on the board of directors of the BOE ?

On the other hand, I'm not sure I'd be happy with the whole show being run by positivists and technocrats.
:|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 June, 2010, 06:39:48 PM
I emailed the Treasury with the simple question:

"Dear Sir or Madam,

Could you please explain to me why the government borrows the money that
the banks create instead of exercising its right to print its own,
debt-free money?

Thanks

Mark Howard"

Here's the reply (which came after another email wondering what happened to the first):

Dear Mr Howard,

Thank you for your email please see reply below.

Operational independence for the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) has been a central feature of the UK's monetary policy framework, and the inflation-targeting objectives of the monetary policy framework are unchanged. The MPC continues to pursue an objective of maintaining price stability - as defined by a 2 per cent annual rise in CPI inflation. The MPC was authorised to use the Asset Purchase Facility (APF) for monetary policy purposes on 3 March. On 5 November, the MPC announced that it would purchase a further £25 billion of assets financed by the issuance of central bank reserves, bringing their scheduled total purchases to £200 billion.

Quantitative easing aims to raise inflation relative to what it would have been if quantitative easing had not been implemented. But it is being used in a deflationary environment with considerable spare capacity in the economy. The severity of the global downturn created strong deflationary pressures on the economy and consequently a real risk of deflation. CPI inflation fell from its peak of 5.2% in September 2008 to 1.1% in September 2009. The considerable margin of spare capacity in the economy will continue to put downward pressure on inflation over the medium-term.

The decisions of the MPC continue to be guided by the medium-term outlook for inflation, and its remit to target CPI inflation at 2%. The use of the APF for monetary policy purposes demonstrates its commitment to the inflation target. Private sector inflation expectations remain anchored around the 2% inflation target. As growth returns and the outlook for inflation picks up, the MPC will make the necessary adjustments to monetary policy to keep inflation under control. Consequently, quantitative easing will not result in high inflation.

Asset purchases financed by central bank reserves expand the monetary base, and allow the MPC to ease monetary conditions further by raising the quantity of money in circulation, at a time when it has not been feasible to reduce further the price of money. The MPC cut Bank Rate to 0.5 per cent in March and decided that further policy action was needed to counter the risk of deflation. The aim of quantitative easing is to get the annual rate of growth of nominal spending in the economy back to near the 5 per cent that it averaged during the first decade of the MPC's existence, and which is consistent with inflation at target and growth at trend. The MPC is concerned with the growth of nominal spending because it is a primary determinant of inflation in the medium term.

The Bank of England is not buying gilts from the Government and is not creating money to finance the Government's deficit. For governments to print money to finance their borrowing would be in contravention of Article 104(1) of the Maastricht Treaty. The Bank of England is purchasing gilts on the secondary market from private-sector holders of those assets. Central banks routinely buy and sell government debt in the secondary market as part of their normal operations in the money markets, and such operations are not deemed to amount to monetary financing under the Maastricht Treaty. Quantitative easing differs from these normal operations only in their scale and the length of time for which the assets are likely to be held. The MPC decides on the level of asset purchases to finance through the issuance of central bank reserves. Its decision is informed by its assessment of the scale of asset purchases needed to meet the inflation target, and not by the need to finance the government's deficit. The Committee's actions are being undertaken for monetary policy purposes and not for fiscal policy purposes.

I hope this is helpful.


Thank you
Enquiry Unit.



To which, I have replied:


Dear Sir or Madam,

1. I am NOT asking why the MPC exists.
2. I am not asking if it is a good idea to have an independent monetary policy.
3. I am NOT asking if it is a good idea to attempt to control inflation.
4. I am NOT asking what the causes are for and reactions are to the "global downturn".
5. I am NOT asking if you believe that the MPC is committed to their stated inflation targets.
6. I am NOT asking if governments should print money to finance their borrowing.
7. I am NOT asking if it is unusual for central banks to buy and sell government debt.

The answers you provided work from the standpoint of acceptance of government debt
as if it is a force of nature. My questions are more fundamental than any of the
answers you have provided :

1. Is the Bank of England a fully government controlled entity, is it privately
    held or is it semi-private/public? (please choose from one of these options and
    provide sources to support your answer)

2. What is the authority relation between the UK government, the Bank of England and
    the MPC? In other words : who is legally allowed to override whose decisions?
    (please provide sources to support your answer)

3. Is it or is it not true that the UK government, like many other countries, acquired
    their large debts because the central bank was privatized, issuance of money was
    delegated to the privatized central bank and interest was charged to the UK
    government on the money it borrowed from the central bank? (please provide a
    simple yes or no answer first, then feel free to elaborate and please provide
    sources to support your answer)

4. Is it or is it not true that the UK government issues government bonds to the
    central bank, in effect making tax payers the collateral for the debts incurred?
    (if your answer is "no", then please explain what IS used as collateral and
    provide sources to support your answer)

5.    Please name 10 nations that do not have a privatized central bank that issues
    debt based currency. Please name 10 nations that do not have a national debt.

6.    Do you PERSONALLY believe that it is good for a government to be forced to
    borrow debt based money from a privatized central bank? Do you personally
    believe that this is better for taxpayers than if a government would issue
    its own debt free money, NOT to finance borrowing, but to prevent debts to
    third parties and to control government spending?

7.    Do you PERSONALLY believe that treaties like the Maastricht Treaty should be
    adhered to in perpetuity, even if it is not to the benefit of the nation and
    its taxpayers?


Best,

Mark J. Howard

Wonder what'll happen next?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 June, 2010, 08:43:32 PM
Its difficult to comment on all of that because there is so much of it and i need longer than a 5 minute read of it and anyway it will save a long and convoluted comment.

This is worthy of comment though :

"The BOE is not buying gilts from the govt..."

The BOE couldnt buy gilts from the Govt because the Govt doesnt have any to sell because they sold it all some while back.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 June, 2010, 06:39:48 PM


The Bank of England is not buying gilts from the Government and is not creating money to finance the Government's deficit. For governments to print money to finance their borrowing would be in contravention of Article 104(1) of the Maastricht Treaty.


Well you find out or learn something new every day.This is actually REALLY interesting and i mean to look into this some more but it seems going by that John Major sold out the UKs govts legal right to own and operate its own nationalised central bank by signing up to the Maastricht Treaty which as you know was the forerunner of the Lisbon Treaty.I am not absolutely clear wether or not the Lisbon Treaty supercedes the Maastricht Treaty or if it is simply an addition to the Maastricht Treaty.

Is there an equivalent article in the Lisbon Treaty ?

Obviously there is but i dont have it to hand without looking that one up.

So already we now know that a major part of the Sovereignty of the UK I.E the right of a sovereign nation to print its own currency and have control over it no longer exists as it was signed away by yet another well known Bilderberg attendee by the name of John Major.

We CANNOT have a nationalised/State owned central bank because of some treaty !!

I have been right about these treaties and all along and the destruction of the sovereignty of the UK  and these dark suited treasonous Bilderberg Lurkers that inhabit UK politics.Its nothing more than a hostile takeover by GangsterBanksters in the form of what is at present a benign collectivist/Fascist dictatorship which is not as much of an oxymoron as it sounds as its true to the definition of the terms.

I see this as indefensible and i cant see how anyone can argue that this is good for you and good for me and the UK as a whole.I cant even think of any intangible "benefits" of this arrangement because the treaty obviously allows a privately owned central bank to print money to finance the UK govts borrowing to finance its deficit and to add interest on that borrowing and charge it to the taxpayer so that the debt and the borrowing and the interest gets bigger and bigger which will obviously just perpetuate the cycle of borrowing and debt.Its just like dealing with loan sharks on a massive scale.

This is also why the EU has the legal right to impose austerity measures on countries like Greece and the only way out of this is for Greece to leave the EU collective and default/repudiate its debts.

I have very little good to say about the present EU power structure and the destruction of sovereignty and this just adds to it but one possible solution is to either leave the EU so that the UK can take back control over the issuance of its own currency via a state owned central bank and then take control of the ownership of the BOE.

The EU is just basically a massive finacial trap that is sucking every country in it dry to varying degrees and its banking system is owned and controlled by the likes of the likes of Rothschilds and the like.Its exactly the same set up as the US with the privately owned and operated Federal \Reserve and they are in the same mess we are in.

So 2 entire continents are under the control of the Anglo-Dutch offshore banking cartel.

Quote

The Bank of England is purchasing gilts on the secondary market from private-sector holders of those assets. Central banks routinely buy and sell government debt in the secondary market as part of their normal operations in the money markets, and such operations are not deemed to amount to monetary financing under the Maastricht Treaty.


You bet the UK govt is buying Gilts from private sector holders of those assets.

Now i wonder who they could be ?   ;)

Sir Evil-In De Rothschild [head of the UK branch of the Parasite family] owns HUGE amounts of UK Govt bonds because they are a very sound investment because they are a guaranteed source of revenue by which i mean the interest payable by the taxpayer and charged to the taxpayer via the govt by the Rothschild owned BOE and should the SHTF and everything collapses then Sir Evil-In can just seize the assets and infrastructure of the UK as collateral until the debts are paid off while in the meantime the interest on the debt just increases on a daily basis because it cannot be paid back because this country doesnt have the means to physically pay it all back because it doesnt produce nearly enough and there are not enough jobs to provide income and therefore tax revenue for the UK govt to service its debts to the likes of Sir Evil-In and so in not so many words we are basically FUCKED.

I could go on but i wont  :lol:

BTW the reply you posted contained only stock replies that they give out whenever questions of this type arise but as for getting a reply beyond the stock answers you were given i dont fancy your chances or mine because its more than likely you and i or anyone else would just be stonewalled or conveniently forgotten [same thing].

I am not being negative as that is just an expected outcome.

Article directly related to your questions and points raised :

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kifZMQOSAa8J:moneyasdebt.wordpress.com/2010/04/13/quantitative-easing-the-boe-explains-and-i-comment/+BOE+buys+and+sells+govt+debt&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 June, 2010, 09:02:43 PM
Indeed, Peter. I think that the "water" analogy I posted earlier adequately and simply explains how the system really works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 June, 2010, 04:54:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 June, 2010, 03:23:55 PM
Don't forget to rant about the Royal Family being shape-shifting lizards who bathe in the blood of virgins.

David Ike and his like really get on my nerves as they take serious concerns over the more shadowy aspects of government and make a mockery of them. It makes anyone who investigates real conspiracies and cover-ups easy to dismiss as a "conspiracy theorist nutcase." Conspiracy has become a dirty word, but anyone who plans something in secret, from organising a surprise birthday party to a covert military operation, is a conspirator.

There was an hour and a bit long David Icke interview on Edge TV recently.The last ever in actual fact because Edge TV is closing down apparently.

Bless him as he means well but he just loses me in the end when he rambles on and on and on about changes in the vibrational frequencies and how mankind is being manpulated by alien entities who have accessed this particular dimension and are feeding off fear and negativity and that type of thing.Its all well and good but i dont have that much time for woolly NewAge type stuff and it doesnt solve the immediate problem/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2010, 11:06:00 PM
How do conspiracy theories start? Here's a clue to a theory emerging at this very moment:

First, read this:  http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/asat/miracl.htm

Then, watch this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eLHGblEww

Finally, Bond, report to Q Branch for your atomic wristwatch and invisible car...


(Of course, it could just be an optical illusion.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 June, 2010, 11:08:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2010, 11:06:00 PM
How do conspiracy theories start?

Since The Assassination of Julius Caesar, 44 BC


The Plan:

"The conspirators never met openly, but they assembled a few at a time in each others' homes. There were many discussions and proposals, as might be expected, while they investigated how and where to execute their design. Some suggested that they should make the attempt as he was going along the Sacred Way, which was one of his favorite walks. Another idea was for it to be done at the elections during which he bad to cross a bridge to appoint the magistrates in the Campus Martius; they should draw lots for some to push him from the bridge and for others to run up and kill him. A third plan was to wait for a coming gladiatorial show. The advantage of that would be that, because of the show, no suspicion would be aroused if arms were seen prepared for the attempt. But the majority opinion favored killing him while he sat in the Senate, where he would be by himself since non-Senators would not be admitted, and where the many conspirators could hide their daggers beneath their togas. This plan won the day."



See also: Night of the Long Knives, 1934 AD


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 12:01:22 AM
Also:

Burning of the Reichstag
Gulf of Tonkin
Operation Northwoods
9/11 (?)
The Gunpowder Plot
Small pox infected blankets given to Native Americans
Western Water Rights: Los Angeles vs. Owens Valley
Federal Reserve Act (Jekyll Island)
Operation Midnight Climax
Operation Ajax
Operation Menu
Watergate
Iran-Contra
etc, etc, etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 16 June, 2010, 05:02:06 PM
No mention of the Saville report here?

I reckon this says it all

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2010/6/16/1276645660616/Steve-Bell-16.05.10-001.jpg)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 June, 2010, 05:21:50 PM

Quote from: johnnystress on 16 June, 2010, 05:02:06 PM
No mention of the Saville report here?

(http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/punting.jpg)

That's me that is  :D

I reckon our resident politicos are just going through the report now, hence the current lack of comment.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 June, 2010, 07:50:00 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 16 June, 2010, 05:21:50 PM



I reckon our resident politicos are just going through the report now, hence the current lack of comment.

M.

I know very little about the subject either the event itself or the report/inquiry and if truth be known it doesnt interest me very much.There only so many political issues i can pay attention to at any one time.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2010, 11:06:00 PM
How do conspiracy theories start? Here's a clue to a theory emerging at this very moment:

First, read this:  http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/asat/miracl.htm

Then, watch this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eLHGblEww

Finally, Bond, report to Q Branch for your atomic wristwatch and invisible car...


(Of course, it could just be an optical illusion.)

I am not buying that for one second.

Now watch this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMRXi9ZVaN8&feature=related


Thats one conspiracy theory debunked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 16 June, 2010, 07:57:33 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 16 June, 2010, 05:02:06 PM
No mention of the Saville report here?

I reckon this says it all

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2010/6/16/1276645660616/Steve-Bell-16.05.10-001.jpg)





Yeh it seem like Jimmy has put this report together.
That is all for now
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 07:59:06 PM
Well done, Bond.

Here is your next target:

(http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/de-Rothschild-415x515.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 June, 2010, 08:06:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 07:59:06 PM
Well done, Bond.

Here is your next target:

(http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/de-Rothschild-415x515.jpg)

Now you are talking !

And NO its not Nicholas Parsons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 June, 2010, 08:30:26 PM
He looks like the warm up act at a dodgy holiday camp.

Since I am completley ignorant of the powers that be who is this bloke? :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 June, 2010, 08:31:12 PM
He wants you to kiss his ring!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 16 June, 2010, 08:46:05 PM
It's a twelve foot high alien lizard! just liek the Queen. those who can;t see it need to take more drugs maaahnnn
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 09:02:22 PM
That's Evelin de-Rothschild, one of the men who steals all your tax money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 June, 2010, 09:06:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 09:02:22 PM
That's Evelin de-Rothschild, one of the men who steals all your tax money.

Thanks Shark.

So thats the swine! I'm writing to my MP ! Oh, he probably owns her. Damn!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 17 June, 2010, 02:57:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2010, 09:02:22 PM
That's Evelin de-Rothschild, one of the men who steals all your tax money.

Filth and a common enemy of free humanity.

The current debt crisis and liabilities that have been imposed on the people of the US by the Sir Evil-In De Rothschild owned and operated Federal Reserve amounts to approx 28 trillion USD which breaks down to approx 75,000USD per US citzen and that includes everyone including children.Obviously this debt will grow due to the interest on the debt.The Federal Reserve has been buying/investing in US Govt bonds so if the US defaults on its debt repayments then the Federal Reserve can effectively sieze assets and infrastructure as collateral to withhold until the debts are repaid which of course they wont because there is nothing to repay the massive 28 + trillion debt or deficit or whatever.

At the same time the US govt has to continue selling US Treasury /Govt bonds to keep essential and mandatory services and programmes going so the debt just gets bigger and bigger and bigger.

The above individual is the one of the principle instigators of the C02 taxation scam who will collect your taxes via the IMF and do what he likes with it and invest it in god iknows what.All i know is none of it will help save the planet as the CO2/AGW scam has been well and truly exposed for what it is and that is a fraud.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 June, 2010, 12:35:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 June, 2010, 09:02:43 PM
Indeed, Peter. I think that the "water" analogy I posted earlier adequately and simply explains how the system really works.

I thought this article might be of interest:

http://kevboyle.blogspot.com/2010/06/so-bank-of-england-is-to-take-over.html

Be sure to read the comments as there is a really interesting comment by "Anonymous" which talks about The Bank Of England [Creation Of Currency] Bill 2010-



http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-taEYP02HHIJ:www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/act/+bank+of+england+creation+of+currency+bill+2010&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a


Have you heard of this before ?


Quote from "Anonymous":


"I agree absolutely about governments having the duty to create the nation's money supply, but it's the commercial banks that have the privilege of doing so at the moment, not the Bank of England (which only issues notes and coins, a mere 3% of the money supply). All non-cash money (97% of money in circulation) is created in the form of "loans" by the high-street banks to their customers."

This comment is correct apart from where it says "which *only* issues notes and coins etc etc" which is an erroneous and misleading statement.

Yes the BOE does have an exclusive licence to print hard currency and it only creates enough physical currency to keep the cash economy flowing which is small in comparison to the cashless electronic economy but if this cashless economy was not a reality then it would be printing 100 percent of the physical cash in circulation.

The BOE hasnt lost 97 percent of its business in the meantime so for example where did the approx 1.5 trillion come from that the Govt borrowed to bailout the financial sector if the Govt didnt have a spare 1.5 trillion set aside for a rainy day ??

Where did it come from if the govt didnt just find 1.5 trillion down the back of the sofa ?

Thats right it had to borrow it from the BOE as it wasnt just created out of thin air or it was but not officially of course  :lol:

"All non-cash money ius created in the form of loans.....yadda yadda yadda....."

Its not "All non cash money" at all as i have just pointed out above as the High St banks and their lending is a totally seperate economy to the 1.5 trillion bailout as the people on MainSt dont go to the BOE for a loan on a house or car or whatever.How can someone confuse the commercial banking sector with large scale borrowing and the creation of currency by the BOE or ignore it completely ??

I dont know but i am pointing out the errors as they are major errors that need to be pointed out.

Anyway one final point in the comments section which is concise and completely correct :


"Profits are private and losses are collectively passed onto the citizens/tax payers."

Its not like we will all receive dividends the banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer and its exactly the same in the US.Politicians and the likes of Bernanke and Brown tell us what a good investment it was for the taxpayer blah blah blah but no one will see a penny of it because it is not passed on as it stays in the hands of the State so by default it stays in the hands of the Bankers which means we are buying the banks for them while they charge us interest on the loans so the assets that they take over and sieze are not costing them ANYTHING !!

They get the assets and they get the interest on the loans.

What a great system !

::) :lol: :-X  :crazy:  :thumbsdown:  :sick:  :ssh:  :eh:  >:(  :-\


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 19 June, 2010, 02:34:07 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 17 June, 2010, 02:57:17 PM
CO2/AGW scam has been well and truly exposed for what it is and that is a fraud.

I expect it's not a surprise I'd pick that out of the pile! I'm not sure if you're referring to 'Climate Gate' or not, but for the sake of balance (if anyone's interested) here's a few links. After all, the follow up reporting was a bit skimpy.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/04/oxburgh-report-clears-controvers.html (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/04/oxburgh-report-clears-controvers.html)

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/38702.htm (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/38702.htm)

http://www.cce-review.org/ (http://www.cce-review.org/)

M



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2010, 02:37:48 PM
Great link there, Peter, thanks. Just spent an hour or so surfing around it and found some interesting stuff. Not least of which amongst my finds was the Proposed Bank of England Act 2010, which is well worth telling your local MP about. You can see what it is here:  http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/ (http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/)

The latest proposal in the ongoing attack on the world's wealth is that all these "bigger banks" need to be broken up into smaller entities and placed under the direct control of... guess who? The Company of the Bank of England, of course, with it's unelected Court of Directors in charge. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book.

The hour grows late indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2010, 02:45:39 PM
Actually, Mikey, the real truth is that nobody's completely sure what's driving climate change. The suspicion is that the anthropogenic hypothesis is being more extensively researched than other possibilities for financial purposes, chief of which is the carbon tax. If you've been keeping up with how the banking system works, taking more out of the system than is put in, then it becomes clear how much governments need this extra, global revenue and how invested they are in seeing this one "explanation" solidified as the root cause. If, for example, it turns out that cosmic rays are chiefly responsible for climate change, the need for a carbon tax evaporates overnight. Trillions of dollars in lost income.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 19 June, 2010, 03:24:00 PM
I love this thread.  And I'm not even being sarcastic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 June, 2010, 03:46:00 PM
We live under a criminal system and expecting the same criminals and robber barons and corporations to be the solution to the planets enviromental/energy problems is just plain *idiotic*.

Carbon credits ?

Al Gore/Ken Lay/David De Rothschild/Bill Gates who wants to reduce Human C02 output to ZERO ??  :lol: :lol: etc etc and about 100/1000 other things ??  

Give me a break.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 June, 2010, 03:57:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2010, 02:45:39 PM
If, for example, it turns out that cosmic rays are chiefly responsible for climate change,

That's like saying "if it turns out the banking system is fine and pixies have been stealing our money". Of course the bankers and politicians have turned the climate crisis to their advantage with the criminal and pointless carbon trading, but that's no excuse to give any credence to discredited theories like that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2010, 04:34:04 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 June, 2010, 03:57:52 PM
... no excuse to give any credence to discredited theories like that one.

That theory was mentioned there in the context of the carbon tax argument, not for its level of current scientific credibility.

On the subject of scientific credibility, though, I find it curious how mere mention of certain theories such as the one alluded to can cause such an instant negative reaction. Cosmic rays certainly exist. They certainly interact with other things in the Solar System such as the heliosphere, the Earth's magnetic field and our atmosphere. Whether or not the interaction of cosmic rays with our atmosphere is a driver to climate change or not is surely, from a scientific standpoint, irrelevant?

Science is not a straight path and study of cosmic ray interactions in the atmosphere may lead to a deeper understanding of how our climate works or even lead to some other discovery entirely. Once a theory is slammed and mocked because "that's not the cause," it ostracizes every serious scientist interested in that field. Political and media pressure is brought to bear on scientists, encouraging one view and rubbishing another instead of respecting the true nature of science, which is the quest for truths, be they inconvenient or otherwise.

I accept where you're coming from, Dan, and I'm prepared to admit that the current scientific opinion is that cosmic ray interactions with the atmosphere seem unlikely to be a major contributing factor to climate change. I do not accept, however, that majority scientific opinion is always correct and, because of this, any researcher who believes this to be a valid field of research should be free to explore it without political pressure to do otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 19 June, 2010, 06:14:51 PM
For the record, I posted those links to highlight 'what happened next' in response to Peter's comment (that I took to refer to UEA etc). I understand those and perhaps future findings may be seen as part of the alleged conspiracy, but there you go. I'm not interested in 'converting' anyone.

I've stated before now what my view on the whole thing is, so I won't repeat myself apart from saying I find a lot of people IMO would rather believe ANYTHING other than we have had a direct and measurable impact on the atmosphere.

The fact the fuckers well discussed here can make money out of it, well it doesn't make me very comfortable, but it doesn't give me any doubts about my own understanding.

And I live over 10m OD :)

(I was reading this morning about a proposed link between megafauna extinction and a drop in CH4, linking to the Younger Dryas/Nahanagan! How interesting is that?)

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2010, 06:34:05 PM
A good point well put, Mikey.

I honestly don't know if it's all a conspiracy or not, to be honest. The corporations and central banks may or may not be singing from the same hymn sheet, and what does it really matter if they are? We can carry on as is or we can change things.

And for the record, I don't know enough about what's causing climate change to be sure of anything. I just don't know. All I know is that we'd better learn to either control it or adapt to it, or a mixture of the two, or we might all live to regret it.

As for the proposed link between megafauna extinction and a drop in CH4, linking to the Younger Dryas/Nahanagan, I can only say this: Huh? You just made me feel very dumb :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 June, 2010, 08:27:22 PM
I am not sure i like all this "Blame Obama" thing going on with the BP oil leak because its too much like over-simplified scapegoating when its actually far more complicated than that and really the blame is has to be shared with all those who have vested interests in BP like Goldman Sachs and politicians in govt in the US, BP themselves, and all kinds of things.

There is a "Blame Obama" voting box ad type thing on Youtube.

I think its idiotic and its for people who havent got a clue about anything and as much as i have disagreed with the Obama administration on just about EVERYTHING i cant go along with mindless misdirected scapegoating on an obvious target because that always means that those who are actually to blame and are responsible get away with it all yet again just like they always do like Goldman Sachs for example.The way i see it potentially going with this situation is Barak.H.Obama being used and set up as a fall guy in an attempt to save the reputation and viability of BP as a going concern.This is the way that the likes of Goldman Sachs [major shareholders of BP] etc work to protect their investments as they use people up and then throw them away when they are no longer useful.

I said Obama was capitulating to corporate/financial interests and thats because corporate/financial interests own and paid for Obamas election campaign and own Obama so Obama just does what he is told and thats how it works.Look at BPs activities in the Gulf Of Mexico right now because that tells you all you need to know about who exactly is in charge and its certainly not Obama or the US Federal govt for that matter.

People dont know anything about how the pecking order/hierachy works in politics.


Quote from: Mikey on 19 June, 2010, 06:14:51 PM
For the record, I posted those links to highlight 'what happened next' in response to Peter's comment (that I took to refer to UEA etc). I understand those and perhaps future findings may be seen as part of the alleged conspiracy, but there you go. I'm not interested in 'converting' anyone.

I've stated before now what my view on the whole thing is, so I won't repeat myself apart from saying I find a lot of people IMO would rather believe ANYTHING other than we have had a direct and measurable impact on the atmosphere.

The fact the fuckers well discussed here can make money out of it, well it doesn't make me very comfortable, but it doesn't give me any doubts about my own understanding.


M

I just deleted my reply by mistake unfortunately so another time but i didnt want to appear like i was ignoring your posts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 20 June, 2010, 12:05:35 PM
 :-[  :o

Um, I'm both relieved and slightly embarassed; I don't really remember posting that second comment yesterday as I'd been drinking cider and getting sunburned during the afternoon.

Thankfully I didn't kick off! But why the hell did I add that bit at the end? I can see what I was thinking about, but was too fuddled to make a point. It was also posted from my phone, so must have taken ages to type (found my phone in the garden, which lead to the dim recollection I had posted something  ::) ) it's the first time I've posted drunk, honest.

As you were...

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 June, 2010, 02:30:15 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 20 June, 2010, 12:05:35 PM
:-[  :o

Um, I'm both relieved and slightly embarassed; I don't really remember posting that second comment yesterday as I'd been drinking cider and getting sunburned during the afternoon.

Thankfully I didn't kick off! But why the hell did I add that bit at the end? I can see what I was thinking about, but was too fuddled to make a point. It was also posted from my phone, so must have taken ages to type (found my phone in the garden, which lead to the dim recollection I had posted something  ::) ) it's the first time I've posted drunk, honest.

As you were...

M.


I dont see any problem with your second comment so i am not sure what you mean and if you were drunk then it was certainly not apparent.

I am not doing politics today either.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 20 June, 2010, 03:33:59 PM
It's the bit in brackets-it's not relevant and comes across as smartarse I think. The rest I'm ok with!

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 June, 2010, 03:55:50 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 20 June, 2010, 03:33:59 PM
It's the bit in brackets-it's not relevant and comes across as smartarse I think. The rest I'm ok with!

M

Quote from: Mikey on 19 June, 2010, 06:14:51 PM

And I live over 10m OD :)



M

I didnt know what that was meant to mean or what "Nahanagen" is but i didnt pay a lot of attention to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 21 June, 2010, 11:12:41 PM
Prepare for a massive rodding with tomorrow's budget if you're not rich as fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2010, 01:03:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2010, 11:06:00 PM
How do conspiracy theories start? Here's a clue to a theory emerging at this very moment:

First, read this:  http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/asat/miracl.htm

Then, watch this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eLHGblEww

Finally, Bond, report to Q Branch for your atomic wristwatch and invisible car...


(Of course, it could just be an optical illusion.)

They start like this:


http://shtf411.com/bp-illusion-of-a-false-spill-t7065.html

This has just appeared in the last couple of days.I have read this 3 times very quickly buts its full of holes and inconsistencies.Its also where the info first appeared but i may be wrong but notice that forum user @Forbidden knowledge has only posted 2 comments.

For starters at the very beginning of the article in the first paragraph the author states :

"I cannot reveal my sources as they go straight to the top"

Then at the beginning of the second paragraph the author states :

"Much of the information i present here cannot be easily verified ,fast checked , or ever presented as anything , but hearsay , as they are just the words of an anonymous online entity."

That just contradicts itself completely.

The words of an anonymous online entity or 2 if you count the author of the article i quoted or more likely just the author of the article.If they were provided with the information from an "anonymous online entity" then why not quote the original info rather than re-writing it ?

There are so many inconsistencies in this i havent got the time to list them all and there is just something about the wording and the way its presented which makes me very suspicious not to mention the fact it has been leaked or published on an obscure website instead of somewhere credible.These types always claim to have inside info and know more than you or i do yet they never elaborate on it .

If something sounds too good to be true then quite often it is.

This info is bullshit in my opinion but that doesnt mean everything in it is bullshit.

Quote from: Christov on 21 June, 2010, 11:12:41 PM
Prepare for a massive rodding with tomorrow's budget if you're not rich as fuck.


We already have had a massive "Rodding" already and have done since the economy collapsed.This just adds to it even more.Business as usual.More revenue collection for the UK corporation and the banking cartel and the longer everyone tolerates it the longer it will go on.

Business as usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 22 June, 2010, 01:10:12 AM
The Kremlin does not approve of Vodka. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/21/russia-shock-ads-price-vodka

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 22 June, 2010, 11:33:16 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 22 June, 2010, 01:10:12 AM
The Kremlin does not approve of Vodka. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/21/russia-shock-ads-price-vodka

I think there's a massive clue to potential policy failure right here: "Russians who cannot afford vodka often turn to powerful, and sometimes deadly, homemade spirits." Hmm. That's what I thought. If you make the legitimate stuff more expensive, you'll turn even more people to black market poison.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 22 June, 2010, 07:37:48 PM
The budget wasn't as bad as I was expecting. The missus has done some quick calculations and we are better off  :thumbsup:






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Al_Ewing on 16 July, 2010, 12:09:26 AM
Hesitant though I am to bring this thread back to life... I assume everyone's making their views heard on this thingy?

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/

Remember you can vote down as well as up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2010, 12:16:21 AM
Oh, joy. Prepare yourselves for another bill to bring back hanging, this time "by public demand."

Gah!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 July, 2010, 12:56:06 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2010, 12:16:21 AM
Oh, joy. Prepare yourselves for another bill to bring back hanging, this time "by public demand."

Gah!

Jim

I hope not. Nick Clegg says in the video that there were some ideas suggested that the coalition is explicitly not going to consider putting into legislation, like re-introducing the death penalty and repealing the ban on indoor smoking in public places.

Doesn't rule out a Private Member's Bill though. I cede your point!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2010, 01:26:35 AM
As some of you know, I've been trying to get answers from the Treasury. They have replied to my questions but, as somebody once said, all answers are replies but not all replies are answers. Here's the Treasury's evasions and obfuscations in their entirity:

To Mr Howard

Thank you for your email dated 9 June about government debt.

For clarity, I will address each of your questions in turn.

1.   Is the Bank of England a fully government controlled entity, is it privately held or is it semi-private/public? (please choose from one of these options and provide sources to support your answer)

The entire capital stock of the Bank of England was brought into public ownership under the Bank of England Act 1946. By the Bank of England (Transfer of Stock) Order 1946, the person nominated by the Treasury to hold the stock was the Solicitor for the Affairs of HM Treasury (the Treasury Solicitor).

2.   What is the authority relation between the UK government, the Bank of England and      the MPC? In other words: who is legally allowed to override whose decisions? (please provide sources to support your answer)

The Bank of England Act 1998 states that the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of the Bank of England is an independent Committee of the Bank. The Bank's Court of Directors keeps the procedures followed by the MPC under review, but the MPC has full responsibility and independence for formulating monetary policy. Section 19 of the Bank of England Act 1998 states that "the Treasury, after consultation with the Governor of the Bank, may by order give the Bank directions with respect to monetary policy if they are satisfied that the directions are required in the public interest and by extreme economic circumstances." The full Bank of England Act 1998 is available at the following address:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/legislation/1998act.pdf


3.   Is it or is it not true that the UK government, like many other countries, acquired their large debts because the central bank was privatized, issuance of money was delegated to the privatized central bank and interest was charged to the UK government on the money it borrowed from the central bank? (please provide a simple yes or no answer first, then feel free to elaborate and please provide sources to support your answer)

The Treasury's glossary of terms states that the national debt is the total amount of debt owed by a government, raised through borrowing from individuals and institutions. It is the sum total of all previously incurred deficits that have not been paid. The glossary is available in full at the Treasury's website:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/junebudget_glossary.htm


4.   Is it or is it not true that the UK government issues government bonds to the central bank, in effect making tax payers the collateral for the debts incurred? (if your answer is "no", then please explain what IS used as collateral and provide sources to support your answer)

The UK Government does not issue Government bonds (gilts) to the central bank. The Debt Management Office (DMO) sells gilts to the Gilt-Edged Market Makers (GEMMs) in the primary market. The GEMMs then sell gilts to end-investors in the secondary market. The Bank of England purchases gilts in the secondary market via the Asset Purchase Facility (APF) or for its own balance sheet purposes. The Government will indemnify the Bank of England and the fund specially created by the Bank to implement the APF for any losses arising out of or connected to the facility, as set out in the letter from the previous Chancellor to the Governor of the Bank of England available at the following website link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/ck_letter_boe290109.pdf


5.   Please name 10 nations that do not have a privatized central bank that issues debt based currency. Please name 10 nations that do not have a national debt.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is an international organisation, which fosters international monetary and financial cooperation and serves as a bank for central banks. The following link is a hub for all the Central Bank websites, which will provide information for each one on its legal structure as well as information on each Central Bank's operations. http://bis.org/cbanks.htm

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) collects data on its 187 member countries. Its World Economic Outlook database provides information on economic and government statistics for each of these countries, including historical and forecasts of government debt. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/01/weodata/index.aspx


6.   Do you PERSONALLY believe that it is good for a government to be forced to      borrow debt based money from a privatized central bank? Do you personally believe that this is better for taxpayers than if a government would issue its own debt free money, NOT to finance borrowing, but to prevent debts to third parties and to control government spending?

In line with the Civil Service Code, it is not appropriate for civil servants to proffer personal opinions on government policy. As set out in the answer to your fourth question, the Government does not issue gilts to the central bank. The DMO sells gilts to the GEMMs in the primary market, who in turn sell gilts to end-investors in the secondary market.

As set out in the answer to your second question, the MPC of the Bank of England has full operational independence over monetary policy. The Chancellor confirmed in the Budget that the MPC will continue to target 2 per cent inflation, as measured by the 12-month increase in the Consumer Prices Index (CPI). The MPC could not instruct the Bank of England to print money to fund government spending and prevent debt to third parties as it would not be consistent with the MPC meeting its inflation target. Further information on the monetary policy framework is available at the Bank of England's website: http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetarypolicy/index.htm

7.   Do you PERSONALLY believe that treaties like the Maastricht Treaty should be      adhered to in perpetuity, even if it is not to the benefit of the nation and its taxpayers?

In line with the Civil Service Code, it is not appropriate for civil servants to proffer personal opinions on government policy. The Government believes that membership of the EU is in the UK's national interest, and intends to vigorously champion the interests of the UK and play an active role within the EU. The Government also believes that the EU needs to change and that it can do things better, but is confident in Britain's ability to move the EU in the right direction. I would also note that the government has set out that it intends to amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any further transfer of powers must be subject to a referendum.

I hope that you find these responses helpful.

Yours sincerely
Enquiry Unit


So, are we any the wiser?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 July, 2010, 01:44:10 AM
Now look what you've done, Mr. Al so-called Ewing!  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2010, 01:58:32 AM
Bwa ha ha haaaaa
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 July, 2010, 07:43:00 AM
Even though most of that was cut-and-paste of dubious relevance, I'm still amazed at the length of those answers.  It might have been a bit optimistic to look for 'personal' opinions, and I'm not sure the rhetorical Question 5 was a good idea, but very interesting (if not enlightening) all the same... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 July, 2010, 01:08:53 PM
I would have worded question 5 as name any country whose privately owned independent central bank doesnt operate a criminal Ponzi scheme and which also doesnt conspire in conjunction with other criminal banking institutions and the BIS and govt to interfere with and manipulate the money markets and conspire to expand and contract the money supply as and when it is directed by the private consortium of majority shareholders of the privately owned central banks and which doesnt create debt in order to snare the nation state in a trap where it is beholden to the IMF which is the international holding company of the majority shareholders of the criminal privately owned Ponzi banking system.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 July, 2010, 01:25:54 PM
I would have put some punctuation in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 July, 2010, 01:43:25 PM
:lol:

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 July, 2010, 01:46:48 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 16 July, 2010, 01:08:53 PM
I would have worded question 5 as name any country whose privately owned independent central bank doesnt operate a criminal Ponzi scheme and which also doesnt conspire in conjunction with other criminal banking institutions... etc.etc.

Yeah, but would you have expected a Civil Service department to answer a 'name any country', 'name 5 countries', etc. type question?  It's plainly a rhetorical device rather than a genuine enquiry.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 16 July, 2010, 01:52:04 PM
Um, yah. Your first mistake was all caps. IT MAKES YOU LOOK CRAZY.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 16 July, 2010, 02:03:42 PM
'Look'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2010, 02:16:40 PM
I knew they wouldn't be able to answer Q5. So far as I can tell, the only countries in the world free of a National Debt are Brunei, Liechtenstein, Macau and  Palau. That's four countries out of 196 which are debt-free. If that little statistic doesn't indicate that something is wrong somewhere, I don't know what does.

I'm still picking my way through this Treasury reply and formulating a response and I'll post it here if anyone's interested. (If anyone's getting intrigued by this, try finding out who is on Bank of England Nominees Ltd and why the BoE only pays 25% of its profits to the Treasury. Where does the other 75% go?)

JUST FOR ROGER, I'LL WRITE MY NEXT EMAIL TO THEM LIKE THIS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 July, 2010, 04:24:47 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 July, 2010, 01:25:54 PM
I would have put some punctuation in.

With a small amount of Biological stuff  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 July, 2010, 10:11:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2010, 02:16:40 PM
(If anyone's getting intrigued by this, try finding out who is on Bank of England Nominees Ltd and why the BoE only pays 25% of its profits to the Treasury. Where does the other 75% go?)



The other 75 percent goes to the majority shareholders of BOEN Ltd [limited liability - how convenient !] which must be the queen and Rothschilds etc who deposit it offshore or wherever where no tax is paid on it whatsoever and the other 25 percent gets given to HM Treasury which effectively means that they are giving it to themselves.

The BOEN is protected by non disclosure acts unlike any other limited liability company so it never has to disclose anything about its assets or financial activities because :


"it was considered undesirable that the disclosure requirements should apply to certain categories of shareholders".The BOEN was set up in 1977.

That statement says it all.

Heres the crunch though....UK govt has no power whatsoever over the BOE itself as it is a sovereign entity that is located within an individual sovereign state which is the City Of London so therefore it cannot be a publically owned company or asset by default plus its the BOEN that controls the BOE and the govt plays a superficial role in the activities of the BOE and even less so since more power was given back to the BOE in 1998 when it allowed the BOE to set interest rates which is when the Ponzi scheme/funny money scam really took off .

The majority shareholders of BOEN LTD also invest heavily in UK/HM Govt bonds and this on record from Sir Evil-In De Rothschild.Its the most secure investment there is.

Anyway the BOE is not Govt controlled or owned and it is a wholly independent privately owned limited liability company and if the BOE was publically owned we would not be paying interest on the funny money that it prints when the Govt borrows from the BOE.

How is that possible if you are a shareholder in a publically owned company ?

::) :lol:

Anyway without rambling on anymore this should answer the question correctly rather than the reply by HM Treasury Borg mind which did not provide a satisfactory answer.They can hardly admit thast it is privately owned and they cant very well lie and claim that it is publically owned so its like a taboo subject.

The whole concept of a Central bank is something that is derived from the Communist model of centralised govt and central planning.

My Dad had an interesting idea of setting yourself up as a limited liability company which means you wouldnt be liable for debts incurred by yourself to banks etc etc as its based on exactly the same principle as any limited liability company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 16 July, 2010, 11:09:31 PM
If hanging is brought back by public vote then in my opinion it is deserved. But lets not let this happen. There are a lot of people who would like to see this back.







V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 July, 2010, 11:16:43 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 16 July, 2010, 10:11:43 PM
My Dad had an interesting idea of setting yourself up as a limited liability company which means you wouldnt be liable for debts incurred by yourself to banks etc etc as its based on exactly the same principle as any limited liability company.

It's a neat idea, but as I've found to my very great cost, these days no bank will lend buttons to a small limited company without a guarantee secured against the owners' assets.  So while the 'limited' part of the incorporation secures executive directors against excessive liability (with the exception of criminal liability) the guarantee needed to secure working capital or maintain liquidity (i.e. the debt incurred against the bank) is no different from any other personal loan - except that the bank can generally call time whenever it wants.  I imagine it works differently in the big leagues, but if you're a small operator you're screwed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 July, 2010, 11:51:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 July, 2010, 11:16:43 PM


It's a neat idea, but as I've found to my very great cost, these days no bank will lend buttons to a small limited company without a guarantee secured against the owners' assets.  So while the 'limited' part of the incorporation secures executive directors against excessive liability (with the exception of criminal liability) the guarantee needed to secure working capital or maintain liquidity (i.e. the debt incurred against the bank) is no different from any other personal loan - except that the bank can generally call time whenever it wants.  I imagine it works differently in the big leagues, but if you're a small operator you're screwed.

I think thats because banks and govt want to put a stranglehold on the private sector and small businesses as its their policy even though the banks were given our money to free up the credit market in order to encourage a recovery but of course it didnt quite work out like that as the banks sat on the money instead.

This is one of the main reasons we are not seeing an economic recovery while we are being constantly lied to by govt and media who keep asserting that the economy is recovering although very recently they have changed their tune and are now saying we are in a Depression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2010, 05:01:10 PM
"Zeitgeist" is on Controversial TV (Sky Channel 200) tonight at 7pm. Well worth a watch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 July, 2010, 02:52:39 PM
There needs to be more of this sort of thing :

Cops charge Irish govt with Treason:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Cops-Charge-Irish-Governme-by-Gabriel-Donohoe-100722-896.html

This is what needs to happen in every country that has been infiltrated with these fifth columnist Bilderberg/globalist lurkers that have infested the political system like cockroaches.Alongside charges of Treason there should be charges of political/economic malfeascence plus various other charges that i cant be bothered to type.

I cant see the UK police and judiciary doing this as they have been thoroughly compromised so they should be charged with dereliction of duty as well.Actually thats a military term but its still appropriate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 July, 2010, 03:19:16 PM
Not that I disagree one whit with the sentiment, but the Gardaí's actual complaint was that their benchmarked pay, overtime payments, generous allowance system and pension entitlements (90% of their final pension fund comes from the taxpayer, 10% from their own contributions) are under threat as part of cutbacks in public sector spending - along with most everyone else (public spending cuts that are genuinely necessary as tax revenues literally implode).  The reason for the strong language is that they aren't permitted to strike, so words are all they have.  I wouldn't mistake it for an altruistic defense of  representative democracy (although our cops do have a pleasantly light touch, and I wouldn't do their job for a sackful of IPads). 

But yeah, economic treason, that's pretty much it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 July, 2010, 03:28:49 PM
"(public spending cuts that are genuinely necessary as tax revenues literally implode)"

Public spending cuts are only necessary due to the fact that governments borrow money from private central banks like the BoE and the Fed instead of creating their own. Borrow money = money lent into society. Create money = money spent into society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 July, 2010, 03:35:58 PM
What a misleasding headline - nobody's been charged with anything (in the legal sense), somebody has just made a speech at a conference - and it seems that the hardest hitting bits of the speech were never even delivered:
Quote"Gardaí present at the meeting gave Mr. O'Boyce a standing ovation for the speech of which they were aware but which was never actually made."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 July, 2010, 03:46:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 July, 2010, 03:28:49 PM
"(public spending cuts that are genuinely necessary as tax revenues literally implode)"

Public spending cuts are only necessary due to the fact that governments borrow money from private central banks like the BoE and the Fed instead of creating their own. Borrow money + money lent into society. Create money = money spent into society.

Yeah, I do get that TLS, and I'm all about fair taxation, borrowing and investment over PS cuts, but average Garda remuneration (across all ranks and divisions, and including allowances) is €62,000 p.a.  (STG£52,000).  That's twice the average industrial wage, and (I believe) about 50% over their British counterparts.  

These ludicrously high figures have been reached by an irresponsible  Government handing out seemingly endless increases to its public sector for the sake of an easy life, and  a correspondingly high wage for themselves at the top of the scale.  As often noted our Taoiseachs's salary is higher than Obama's (although this is a convenient calculation that ignores a great many things about the benefits of the office of POTUS).  All the 'creating wealth' in the world isn't going to make for a competive economy if it has to handle the overheads.

I should also note that a large part of the way the Irish Govt approaches PS cuts is designed to incite jealousy and bitterness, and forms part of a rather brilliant divide-and-conquer strategy.  In this instance it does seem to me that a more streamlined way of funding an effective police force might be to everyone's advantage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 July, 2010, 05:21:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 July, 2010, 03:19:16 PM
Not that I disagree one whit with the sentiment, but the Gardaí's actual complaint was that their benchmarked pay, overtime payments, generous allowance system and pension entitlements (90% of their final pension fund comes from the taxpayer, 10% from their own contributions) are under threat as part of cutbacks in public sector spending - along with most everyone else (public spending cuts that are genuinely necessary as tax revenues literally implode).  The reason for the strong language is that they aren't permitted to strike, so words are all they have.  I wouldn't mistake it for an altruistic defense of  representative democracy (although our cops do have a pleasantly light touch, and I wouldn't do their job for a sackful of IPads).  

But yeah, economic treason, that's pretty much it.

Thats not the impression i got from reading the article but hopefully its the thin end of the wedge.

18 percent approval rating for Brian Cowan  :lol: :lol:

Thats one used up and washed up sellout politician but theres plenty more where that came from.

The article also states that the Irish bailouts were the most expensive but i disagree with that completely unless it has been calculated on some kind of per capita basis.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 July, 2010, 07:06:08 PM
"Yeah, I do get that TLS, and I'm all about fair taxation..."

Sorry, Tords - I know I'm a broken record when it comes to this and I do go on about it waaaaay too much.  :-[  :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 July, 2010, 07:25:28 PM
Not at all squire, it's all part of an interesting conversation.  As Data would say, please continue with the pointless bickering!  What I really meant to do was call into question the motives behind that 'speech' (the article casts it in the light of a heroic people's police force standing up to its despotic masters - sort of like Mace Windu going to arrest Chancellor Palpatine, whereas in reality it's a plea to maintain the status quo), rather than to oppose its message, which I (pretty much) agree with.  
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 05:39:47 AM
We all know that some corporations think nothing of destroying ordinary people like you and me to turn a buck. We grumble about it and don't do much because, well, there are agencies and government departments to protect us, right? Occasionally, though, something comes along to demonstrate just how little we matter when compared to profits. One such thing is the documentary "GasLand," about the process of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," which I just watched with horror. Fracking may be coming to Europe, if we don't stop it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1558250/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1558250/)

I urge everyone to do a search and watch it online or download it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 July, 2010, 01:24:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 05:39:47 AM
We all know that some corporations think nothing of destroying ordinary people like you and me to turn a buck. We grumble about it and don't do much because, well, there are agencies and government departments to protect us, right? Occasionally, though, something comes along to demonstrate just how little we matter when compared to profits.

The BP disaster proves that govts collude with multinationals or are subservient to them plus the fact that govt agencies do nothing to protect you.Govt is the very last thing i would expect help from and if anything protection is needed against Govt and corporation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 02:18:42 PM
Why the world needs WikiLeaks

http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2010-07-20
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 July, 2010, 07:05:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 05:39:47 AMOne such thing is the documentary "GasLand," about the process of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," which I just watched with horror. Fracking may be coming to Europe, if we don't stop it.

If you mean THIS (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jul/25/shale-gas-drilling-blackpool), then it may indeed be coming to Blackpool. Or rather "a geological formation that stretches from Pendle Hill to the Lancashire coast near Blackpool", which is where I grew up and comprises the Ribble Valley and the Trough of Bowland, some of the loveliest countryside in Lancashire.

I am not a happy bunny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 07:35:00 PM
I live in the Ribble Valley, just across the marshes from St Anne's.

I can feel a crusade coming on, especially if even half of what I saw in that documentary is true (for example, tap-water that can be set on fire as it comes out of the tap!).

My happy bunnyness has also plummeted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 11:57:26 PM
http://www2.fylde.gov.uk/1/00/04/47/00044748.pdf

https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/upstream/licensing/onshore_10th/Basin_HC_prosp.pdf

http://nohotair.typepad.co.uk/no_hot_air/2010/03/first-uk-shale-gas-well.html

Cuadrilla is backed by the Carlyle Group. Oh shit. We'd best start stocking up on drinking water.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 27 July, 2010, 12:10:05 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 07:35:00 PM
I can feel a crusade coming on, especially if even half of what I saw in that documentary is true (for example, tap-water that can be set on fire as it comes out of the tap!).
ARSOM! I would buy a house there if it's guaranteed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 July, 2010, 02:46:55 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 02:18:42 PM
Why the world needs WikiLeaks

http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2010-07-20

Why indeed  :-*

Beware of Wikileaks.

Wikileaks and Julian Assange are rather suspect.Not so long ago or very recently Julian Assange was on a wanted list and in hiding in undisclosed locations because of the Apache helicopter video footage and the next thing you know he is giving talks for the Globalist/Elitist TED organisation whose talks are sponsored by one of those nasty corporations that are part of the military/industrial complex.The next thing you know he is in London giving speeches.

The thinking is that Wikileaks is there to create the pretext for govt clampdowns on freedom on the internet by releasing all this "classified" military material and documents.

Julian Assange releases 92,000 highly classified military documents or logs or whatever about Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iran and he is giving speeches in public about it ?



Alarm bells are ringing and the bullshit detector is going off.

If the intelligence agencies and those that control the US govt etc etc really wanted to stop the info being leaked then it has had every opportunity to do so and every means at their disposal not to mention they had advance notice for weeks that Wikileaks were going to release the info as Julian Assange talked about this recently when he was allegedly in hiding as i mentioned above.This leak of info is being allowed to happen and its also interesting how a lot of the info being leaked is actually reinforcing the agenda of the War On Terror fraud by whistleblowing all this info to do with funding and training of Al Queada and the Taliban by Iran and Pakistan and no doubt other countries like Somalia etc etc.

Its very convoluted but Wikileaks is working in cooperation with various govts,intelligence agencies[CIA/Mossad etc] and are also suspected to be linked to George Soros who is allegedly behind the idea of moving Wikileaks to Iceland and in Iceland being set up as apparent "Safehaven" for internet freedom.

Its all very suspect and its my thinking that Wikileaks [I always thought that was an odd choice of name] are not what they appear and that Julian Assange is some kind of CIA/Mossad asset.

Theres more than that and a lot more besides but that will do for now.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 July, 2010, 11:57:26 PM
http://www2.fylde.gov.uk/1/00/04/47/00044748.pdf

https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/upstream/licensing/onshore_10th/Basin_HC_prosp.pdf

http://nohotair.typepad.co.uk/no_hot_air/2010/03/first-uk-shale-gas-well.html

Cuadrilla is backed by the Carlyle Group. Oh shit. We'd best start stocking up on drinking water.

The Carlyle Group and Halliburton are closely connected as they share the same investors/shareholders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 July, 2010, 06:08:55 PM
Collecting Rainwater Now Illegal In Many States In USA:  http://www.countercurrents.org/adams280710.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 30 July, 2010, 10:47:55 PM
(http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/9018/davidcameronpostergroun.jpg) (http://img638.imageshack.us/i/davidcameronpostergroun.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 July, 2010, 11:23:28 PM
This...thread...is...dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 31 July, 2010, 11:46:22 AM
Quote from: Garageman on 30 July, 2010, 11:23:28 PM
This...thread...is...dead.

Its not dead at all as it is just in a coma the majority of the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 July, 2010, 12:49:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 31 July, 2010, 11:46:22 AM
Its not dead at all as it is just in a coma the majority of the time.

Just like real politics.

Also, ya-boo!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 31 July, 2010, 01:42:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 July, 2010, 12:49:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 31 July, 2010, 11:46:22 AM
Its not dead at all as it is just in a coma the majority of the time.

Just like real politics.

Also, ya-boo!

I am enjoying the Wilikleaks/Mainstream media Dog and Pony show !   :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 31 July, 2010, 01:47:22 PM
I see David Cameron has managed to offend both Israel and Pakistan in a single day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 31 July, 2010, 10:01:02 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 31 July, 2010, 01:47:22 PM
I see David Cameron has managed to offend both Israel and Pakistan in a single day.

he's done well just two weeks after offending his own war heroes.

From what I can tell, the guys a bit of an idiot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 August, 2010, 12:30:53 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 31 July, 2010, 01:47:22 PM
I see David Cameron has managed to offend both Israel and Pakistan in a single day.



at least he's spreading his bigotry around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 02:29:09 AM
http://www.worldreports.org/news/282_all_uk_legislation_passed_since_2000_is_null_and_void

Is this  :o ,  ::) or  :lol: ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 09:33:48 AM
Definitely  ::) - It's a ridiculous story. Some highlights:
"the laws don't exist in reality, only on paper" - huh?
"ignoring this will have fatal consequences" - no it won't.

The internet is full of some strange and deluded people, but nouveau-royalist paranoid conspiracy theorists are a new one on me though! You have to go quite far down before we get the Obama-bashing and World government nonsense. And then it goes on to advertise some "internet solutions" that will protect you from the microsoft/google/NSA/CIA conspiracy. The net equivalent of a tinfoil hat, or an elaborate spamming excercise to sell software to gullible conspiracy nuts - you decide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 04 August, 2010, 01:07:55 PM
What do you think yourself Shark?

I'm with DDD block. I think that such sites would be much more convincing, or at least feasibly credible, if they wouldn't throw around emotive language so much.

Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 09:33:48 AM
but nouveau-royalist paranoid conspiracy theorists are a new one on me though!

What the hell do you do on the intertubes, Dan? Look up pr0n? Well, pull up yer breeks and get with it!


M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 01:16:44 PM
Yeah, I thought pretty much what Dan thought - however, the dodgy removal of the peers from the House of Lords is interesting, constitutionally speaking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 01:56:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 01:16:44 PM
Yeah, I thought pretty much what Dan thought - however, the dodgy removal of the peers from the House of Lords is interesting, constitutionally speaking.


But the UK does not have a constitution, and never has - our laws are made up as we go along, based on votes in parliament and legal precedent.  In the USA a law can be struck down because it does not conform to the constitution, which trumps everything else, but we don't have that. So to say such and such a law in the UK is not valid is bollocks - if parliament passed it, it's valid and supercedes everything that has gone before.

Personally, I support the creation of a binding constitution that sets out certain principles and freedoms, but it's a whole big can o'worms that nobody seems keen to tackle.

Quote from: Mikey on 04 August, 2010, 01:07:55 PM
What the hell do you do on the intertubes, Dan? Look up pr0n? Well, pull up yer breeks and get with it!
:-[ ahem, no no of course not *rapidly deletes browsing history*.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 02:17:04 PM
It's not strictly true that Britain has no constitution. Unlike the United States, which has a written Constitution, ours is contained in several documents such as Magna Carta, acts of Parliament and court judgements along with other aspects such as parliamentary constitutional conventions and royal prerogatives. It's all a bit of an unholy mess, really, and I think that we probably should have a proper, codified constitution to protect both the British people and the integrity of our Parliament.

That said, it has worked well in the past (until Europe began sticking its oar in) - no parliament could pass a law ignoring the aforementioned documents etc without repealing those old statutes or laws first. For example, Parliament couldn't pass a law requiring all blue eyed babies to be killed without a hell of a lot of prior destruction of existing statutes, legislation or laws. Just passing a bill saying something is so, doesn't automatically make it law. At least, that's how I understand it (which is, admittedly, probably not very well).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 August, 2010, 04:47:07 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 09:33:48 AM


And then it goes on to advertise some "internet solutions" that will protect you from the microsoft/google/NSA/CIA conspiracy. The net equivalent of a tinfoil hat, or an elaborate spamming excercise to sell software to gullible conspiracy nuts - you decide.


Google and Microsoft and Facebook,Twitter etc are all working with the NSA/CIA to varying degrees.This is official and its mostly about sharing information.Its also common knowledge that computer software and microchips [IntelInside - as if the name isnt obvious enough!] and anti-virus software etc are all compromised or more accurately were specifically designed/written to allow govt intelligence agencies access to your computer.

This is very well documented.

Its actually more absurd to imagine that intelligence agencies/govt dont have any ties with Google etc.

You need to cross reference before you dismiss something you dont know anything about completely out of hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 August, 2010, 05:56:20 PM
I see David Cameron's latest nutty idea to spread envy and division is a proposal to do away with lifetime council tenancies in favour of 5-year tenancies reviewed according to 'need' (doesn't everybody need a home?) and income. This, apparently, on the grounds of 'scarce resource' and 'social mobility.'

David Cameron, you terrible c***!


I can't imagine a single housing officer in the country can think this is a good idea.
I can't believe this will ever happen. It's just another right-wing politician mouthing off to impress moronic Daily Mail readers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 06:03:51 PM
And these bastards are supposed to be looking out for our best interests. What a joke.

We need to take our government back. Simple as that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 August, 2010, 06:15:15 PM
Can anyone tell me how many council houses 'NEW' Labour built whilst they ruled the land. They could have borrowed 'even' more money that we don't have to do it, just like all the other money they spent, which has made our debt worse than most other countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 August, 2010, 06:24:50 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 August, 2010, 06:15:15 PM
Can anyone tell me how many council houses 'NEW' Labour built whilst they ruled the land.

The figure for 2008 was 375. I don't know how many for the period 1997-2010, but the answer is 'not many.' Most new social housing built since 1980 was built by housing associations - councils just didn't have the money to do it, and they weren't allowed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 August, 2010, 06:33:32 PM
Everything Usher lists rings true.  It's not entirely comparable to a house, but you should see the shenanigans that go on over here in the Banana Republic with the means-tested Medical Card (entitling the 'lucky' 30% (of which many are OAPs) to free GP visits (currently ca. €60 a visit, even for babies), prescriptions, glasses and dental treament).  

If you've a few kids, or god forbid you or one or more of your family has any kind of chronic or persistent medical needs it's a life-saver, but get any kind of even average-paying job and it's gone and that's all suddenly got to come out of your wage - almost by definition you'll be worse off working, unless you can get a well-paid position straight out of the gate.  Add to that the extreme difficulty of getting your card back if your new job turns out to be short term, and it's a serious disincentive to doing anything that might increase your (declared) income

I've known several highly capable blokes who were effectively stuck in an endless cycle of training schemes, 'community employment' and nixers so that they could hang on to their medical card to support sick kids, and in one case a sick wife.  The term 'poverty trap' could have been coined for this one thing.  Imagine that scenario heightened by the fear of losing your home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 08:54:07 PM
It's insanity. Get a good job - and lose your home! Can't think of a bigger disincentive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 August, 2010, 09:19:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 August, 2010, 06:33:32 PM
Everything Usher lists rings true.  It's not entirely comparable to a house, but you should see the shenanigans that go on over here in the Banana Republic with the means-tested Medical Card (entitling the 'lucky' 30% (of which many are OAPs) to free GP visits (currently ca. €60 a visit, even for babies), prescriptions, glasses and dental treament).  

If you've a few kids, or god forbid you or one or more of your family has any kind of chronic or persistent medical needs it's a life-saver, but get any kind of even average-paying job and it's gone and that's all suddenly got to come out of your wage - almost by definition you'll be worse off working, unless you can get a well-paid position straight out of the gate.  Add to that the extreme difficulty of getting your card back if your new job turns out to be short term, and it's a serious disincentive to doing anything that might increase your (declared) income

I've known several highly capable blokes who were effectively stuck in an endless cycle of training schemes, 'community employment' and nixers so that they could hang on to their medical card to support sick kids, and in one case a sick wife.  The term 'poverty trap' could have been coined for this one thing.  Imagine that scenario heightened by the fear of losing your home.


Yes, we have a society that encourages fraud, even Ivor Callely's doing it. If you feel bad about it you can go to your local priest, confess your sins, chant a few incantations and still feel good about it afterwards. If it worked for the Corleones why not us?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 August, 2010, 10:02:33 PM


Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 August, 2010, 08:54:07 PM
It's insanity. Get a good job - and lose your home! Can't think of a bigger disincentive.


Another disincentive must be the cost of private sector housing either to rent or buy especially in London.

Another disincentive is if you live in an area that is populated by second home owners like Cornwall.

Another disincentive is the general lack of job security which means you might at one point no longer fit the criteria for a council tenancy and then 6 months down the line you are out of a job.

Another disincentive on top of that is knowing that if you re-apply then you go right to the back of the queue

There are probably lots more.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2010, 11:31:06 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksrcor1DKV1qznpi1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0RYTHV9YYQ4W5Q3HQMG2&Expires=1281133630&Signature=BIPyw4VKYQ%2FXY6XCp21XvEg2feg%3D)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 06 August, 2010, 12:02:56 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 August, 2010, 10:02:33 PM




Another disincentive is if you live in an area that is populated by second home owners like Cornwall.



spot on Pete.  We have amongst the lowest wages in the UK and yet highest house prices due to that.  I work in a social housing trust and we provide a vital lifeline for people here. We have thousands on our waiting list.  It's a horrible situation.  Rural hidden homelessness is rife here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 06 August, 2010, 12:51:27 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2010, 11:31:06 PM
http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksrcor1DKV1qznpi1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0RYTHV9YYQ4W5Q3HQMG2&Expires=1281133630&Signature=BIPyw4VKYQ%2FXY6XCp21XvEg2feg%3D
:cool:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 August, 2010, 01:08:15 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 August, 2010, 01:16:44 PM
Yeah, I thought pretty much what Dan thought - however, the dodgy removal of the peers from the House of Lords is interesting, constitutionally speaking.


There is probably some truth in it knowing Neu Liebours shenanigans and the removal of heriditary peers and replacement with various Neu Liebour Lefist trash and curry kings etc etc and cash for peerages but any claims that it was all about removing the monarchy are utterly ridiculous because it doesnt quite work like that at all as the queen is a lot more than just a titular token figurehead.She co owns the whole country and banking system so she isnt going to be pushed out by a load of trashy Neu Liebour Nouveau champagne Marxists/Communitarians.

As for disregarding the uncollated into one article UK constitution rather than it being a conspiracy its more like a complete disregard for it just the same as it is with the Obamba adminstration in the US who totally disregard the US Constitution.

Forget it as its just silly and if anything she is complicit in the whole thing.She isnt going anywhere unfortunately.

The article itself was hard work to read and badly written and structured and it doesnt do the author or websites credibility any good whatsoever especially to those who know nothing about the subject and think its all "conspiracy nonsense".I was reading it and i was thinking just get to the bloody point of what the actual legal disparagy is but before that happens you have to wade through far too much personal opinion which was structured in such a way to attempt to force you to read through the article before it gets to the point.I dont like that type of thing and its what you do find with websites that are trying to sell you something which of course it was although there is nothing wrong in priciple with selling a product to finance your operations.

Good writing should make you want to keep reading which the article didnt as i was scrolling down it without really reading it.

Amongst other things the article is claiming that G.H.W bush is head of the banking fraternity which as far as i know is wrong as in reality G.H.W.Bush isnt that far up the mafia food chain.

The author of the article who is an investigator/journalist died very recently :

http://www.worldreports.org/news/6497_christopher_story_frsa

I have read a lot of conjecture online from various sources about the circumstances of the authors death which talked about the author being deliberately infected with viruses or something which triggered the "short illness" as he was a nuisance to the establishment.Of course this either sounds like an off the peg conspiracy theory or there might be something in it as its not exactly unknown for various people who knew too much to be suicided or irradiated or offed in any number of different ways.Dr.Kelly springs to mind here for obvious reasons.

The David Cameron Cancellasse thing is just David Cameron playing to the conservative voters/Daily Mail readers/taxi drivers/whatever and posturing because somehow David Cameron [A change agent] has got to convince them all in the next 4 years that himself and the Conservative party are actually Conservatives when in reality they are not as there are only superficial differences between them and Liebour.They think that if they give an overpriviledged Toff from Eaton in a penguin suit groomed by Bilderbergers the premiership is enough when it isnt.David Cameron is another Trojan horse and is a fan of Saul Alinsky and if you dont know who Saul Alinsky is then look it up.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2010, 11:31:06 PM
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_ksrcor1DKV1qznpi1o1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0RYTHV9YYQ4W5Q3HQMG2Expires=1281133630&Signature=BIPyw4VKYQ%2FXY6XCp21XvEg2feg%3D)

Nobody tells the truth except nobody.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 01:44:59 PM
End Legal Loan Sharking

The UK's poorest borrowers pay the highest price for credit in Europe – we can change that.

With the End Legal Loan Sharking campaign gathering momentum every day, there has been a buzz of activity and support from politicians, academics, campaign groups and, most importantly, individuals emailing the Prime Minister to encourage him to cap the total cost of credit. Yet, from one group of people, the silence is deafening...

http://www.endlegalloansharks.org.uk/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 03:53:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 01:44:59 PM
End Legal Loan Sharking

The UK's poorest borrowers pay the highest price for credit in Europe – we can change that.

With the End Legal Loan Sharking campaign gathering momentum every day, there has been a buzz of activity and support from politicians, academics, campaign groups and, most importantly, individuals emailing the Prime Minister to encourage him to cap the total cost of credit. Yet, from one group of people, the silence is deafening...

http://www.endlegalloansharks.org.uk/



There needs to be more promotion of Credit Unions especially when you compare a monthly interest rate of 1 percent - 12.7 APR on all loans over £2600 compared to the 2500 percent APR of Loan sharks.

http://www.eastsussexcu.org.uk/content.asp?section=163

I have to say that you must be pretty stupid to sign up for a loan with an interest rate of 1737 percent interest but really people need to be protected from their own stupidity by not making those kinds of interest rates available.

Doorstep unofficial loan sharks interest rates should be repaid using a baseball bat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 04:20:54 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 03:53:16 PM


Doorstep unofficial loan sharks interest rates should be repaid using a baseball bat.

::) :-[ :-[

That was worded really badly .I meant to say that the doostep loan sharks should be on the receiving end of the baseball bat.

Not the other way around.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 04:30:58 PM
Absolutely. It's about time money and credit began to be used as a tool for the advancement of all society rather than the vehicle of economic slavery. As somebody whose name I can't remember once said, slavery means that you have to pay for the food, water and housing of your slaves whilst economic slavery expects your slaves to pay for their own food, water and housing.

Money, like water, is essential to the smooth running of society, which is why neither should ever have been privatized. I won't be content until the ability to create and control the money supply is taken away from the private central banks and returned to the government, where it belongs. The above link is a small step in the right direction, but that's all it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 05:32:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 04:30:58 PM
The above link is a small step in the right direction, but that's all it is.

Rope and forfeiture of cash and assets is another step in the right direction.

Criminal charges and proceedings and incarceration are another.

Like you i will never accept or submit to these robber barons as resolve runs very deep.

What is there to lose ??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 06:36:01 PM
Only our chains, brother, only our chains.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 06:48:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2010, 06:36:01 PM
Only our chains, brother, only our chains.

I bet if Credit Unions became much more popular then the Bankster monopolists would try to legislate them out of existence.

Its just so easy to predict.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 06:54:51 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 25 August, 2010, 06:48:47 PM

Not sure what happened but i didnt mean to double post



Competition is a sin apparently.

The whole thing is just the school playground bully scenario on a much bigger scale but the problem is solved in exactly the same way that you would deal with a bully in the playground.

People need to have more self respect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 September, 2010, 11:43:10 AM
Douglas Carswell leads the way on bank reform

There is a doctrine which creates wealth and spreads it around. It is just and moral. It works. It is called capitalism and, today, in practice, there is very obviously something wrong with it...

continues here:  http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2010/09/carswell-on-bank-reform.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 13 September, 2010, 09:22:00 PM
Sob  :( :-[ :o


http://www.politics.ie/education-science/138007-conor-lenihan-minister-science-launch-anti-evolution-book.html


Yes, The Irish Minister for Science is endorsing this bullshit

Anyone going to the Gorillas and Girls ball afterwards?
(http://www.theoriginofspeciousnonsense.com/images/launch%20pic.jpg)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 September, 2010, 09:42:45 PM
That is one kerr-azy country you got there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 13 September, 2010, 09:57:43 PM
Five years ago this same Minister shouted out a racist slur during a parliamentary debate

The following year he was appointed Minister For Immigration



wail :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 13 September, 2010, 10:34:06 PM
You guys have no idea. In terms of corruption, and sheer incompotence our government makes yours look like geniuses.

Getting back to Ireland's first (I hope) Creationism book, here's a sample.

Quote from: John J. May on 13 September, 2010, 09:42:45 PM
7 Reasons Why I Detect and Reject Evolution

1: It teaches us to be satisfied with - not understanding origins.

2: It promotes the dangerous nonsense of no first cause - no supreme scientist and suggests order came from disorder.

3: It is a mataphysical speculation, a doctrine dressed up in scientific garb.

4: Anyone who teaches evolution is either ignorant or deliberately suppressing the known scientific facts.

5: It is a toxic poisonous mind virus which destroys the hearts immune system against hope and common sense.

6: It is an anaesthetic against reason.

7: It cripples sanity, promotes myths, obscures reality and elevates matter above a maker.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:05:45 PM
At least one of us had the balls to literally "dance on the grave" of our most infamously crooked leader Haughey and film the occasion to share with the rest of us. How many would do it elsewhere?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pifibs_q7ec&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:08:15 PM
Gorillas and Girls Party, must be another "rugger" get-together in Lillies for the Blackrock Boys.


At least that cunt the Pope is too afraid to come here, he stops short at England now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 September, 2010, 11:08:36 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 13 September, 2010, 10:34:06 PM
You guys have no idea. In terms of corruption, and sheer incompotence our government makes yours look like geniuses.

YOU WORK FOR THEM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:12:44 PM



None of us are immune unfortunately. Once you settle for placing an X beside someone's name every four years you're FUCKED.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 September, 2010, 11:18:20 PM
Jesus fucking Christ.  Not only do I get to watch these fuckwits destroy my country by failing to understand economics to even a Junior Cert level, now I have to see them publicly admit to utter contempt for the scientific process, and having read an extract from the book, basic logical thought. My four-year old has a better grasp on reality.  I feel sick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:19:57 PM
Remember the blasphemy law installed this year by "Dermot de Torquemada ".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 September, 2010, 11:28:01 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 September, 2010, 11:18:20 PM
Jesus fucking Christ.  Not only do I get to watch these fuckwits destroy my country by failing to understand economics to even a Junior Cert level, now I have to see them publicly admit to utter contempt for the scientific process, and having read an extract from the book, basic logical thought. My four-year old has a better grasp on reality.  I feel sick.


Seconded. Fuck them, fuck creationism and fuck their fucking blasphemy law.  Apparently freedom of speech is only permitted for believers in the outlandish superstitions of ancient desert tribes. (Apologies if you're religious, but that's the way I see it.) I wrote to my local TD for an explanation of the blasphemy law - did he get back to me or even acknowledge my letter? Did he balls.
Keep this shit out of educated countries. I think a letter to  Conor Lenihan, John J May and the papers is called for, for all the good it will do
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:29:26 PM
Let's just stop paying taxes, hit 'em where it hurts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: exilewood on 13 September, 2010, 11:30:24 PM
I ain't paid ANY tax EVER.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 September, 2010, 11:30:47 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 13 September, 2010, 11:29:26 PM
Let's just stop paying taxes, hit 'em where it hurts.

I already have.  Although admittedly not by choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2010, 11:32:12 PM
Well done that man. Kinda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: exilewood on 13 September, 2010, 11:36:37 PM
I'm a musician by profession - it's just the way it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 September, 2010, 11:49:29 PM
It looks like a flyer for a club night which it partly is anyway but the only thing missing is any drinks promotions and special offers and that kind of thing.

It looks like some kind of spoof and its not a good advertisment for the book that expects to be taken seriously.Its not a very intelligent way to present ones case.I dont know a thing about the politician in question so i cannot comment on that but i prefer politicians to not be publically promoting their religious causes as there is supposed to be a seperation of Church and State but that may not be the case in Ireland.

Also while i am not a Creationist and not particularly religious i have certain specific prejudices against Darwin and certain/specific political/philosophical doctrines or thinking that support Darwinsm but thats not for discussion today.

Quote from: Jared Katooie on 13 September, 2010, 10:34:06 PM
You guys have no idea. In terms of corruption, and sheer incompotence our government makes yours look like geniuses.




You dont know the half of it.

I have an idea alright but unfortunately  the situation is no different here than it is in Ireland and its certainly no better.We just had an election and just like i said nothing has changed and nothing is going to get better but it seems that the electorate cant even learn by Pavlovian conditioning as they just do the same thing over and over again as if they actually enjoy it and enjoy being scammed and lied to and they treat it like its a stupid game which actually isnt very far from the truth.

Its actually laughable that boarders here were encouraging me to vote Lib Dem as if i am some kind of idiot but as usual i sit here typing and explaining the truth and no one listens and no doubt in 4 years time i will be saying the same thing most probably under worse political circumstances while the whole cycle continues......

As for not paying taxes there are lots of ways round that which are legal especially if you are self employed.

Taxation without representation is Tyranny.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 September, 2010, 11:51:12 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 13 September, 2010, 11:49:29 PM
Taxation without representation is Tyranny.

Nah, a babe with a tail, that's Tyranny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 September, 2010, 12:02:45 AM
Fetch me my supper, you. And tell your mom to stop dressing so dowdylike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 September, 2010, 12:05:03 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 14 September, 2010, 12:02:45 AM
Fetch me my supper, you. And tell your mom to stop dressing so dowdylike.


Such words from "the subjects" across the water?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dreddzilla on 14 September, 2010, 12:15:30 AM
So do we discuss the politics of the U.S. & A. too? or is it just Euro politics?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 September, 2010, 12:17:13 AM
Of course you may.
PLEASE NO, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD NNNNNOOOOOOOOOO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dreddzilla on 14 September, 2010, 12:22:14 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 14 September, 2010, 12:17:13 AM
Of course you may.
PLEASE NO, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD NNNNNOOOOOOOOOO.

YAY!!! :D
I was hoping that would be the case.
I've found that if you limit yourself to just talking politics in you're area/ region/ State or Country, you lack real insight to the affairs of the world.
Like it or not, (and many in my country sadly don't want to) but one bullet shot on the other side of the world effects all of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 September, 2010, 12:22:39 AM
Quote from: Mr 9.8 on 14 September, 2010, 12:15:30 AM
So do we discuss the politics of the U.S. & A. too? or is it just Euro politics?


Only if you feel like burning the Quorn Qur'an.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dreddzilla on 14 September, 2010, 12:26:02 AM
Quote from: Garageman on 14 September, 2010, 12:22:39 AM
Quote from: Mr 9.8 on 14 September, 2010, 12:15:30 AM
So do we discuss the politics of the U.S. & A. too? or is it just Euro politics?


Only if you feel like burning the Quorn Qur'an.

Well they burn Bibles & the American Flag in Islamic countries so all's fair in love & war in my mind. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 September, 2010, 12:35:06 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZpT2Muxoo0&fmt=18
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 14 September, 2010, 09:27:39 AM
Interested in this new Irish blasphemy law, but nowhere near a working computer to Google it. Anyone care to sum it up?
SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 14 September, 2010, 12:56:49 PM
whimper  :(

http://www.clareherald.com/news/national/2916-taoiseach-brian-cowen-hits-back-at-drunk-claim.html?lang=
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 September, 2010, 02:15:34 PM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 14 September, 2010, 09:27:39 AM
Interested in this new Irish blasphemy law, but nowhere near a working computer to Google it. Anyone care to sum it up?
SBT

From Wikipedia - Read it and weep:

'In the Republic of Ireland, blasphemy is required to be prohibited by Article 40.6.1.i. of the 1937 Constitution. The common law offence of blasphemous libel was effectively replaced in 2009 by a new offence of "publication or utterance of blasphemous matter". The continued existence of a blasphemy offence is controversial, with proponents of freedom of speech and freedom of religion arguing it should be removed.'

Cunts, cunts, cunts.

(You have a computer that only visits the 2000ad webpage, then?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 September, 2010, 02:42:55 PM
Be Pure, Be Vigilant, Be Fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 September, 2010, 03:15:48 PM
I see that even in Cuba they are getting rid of quite a few public sector jobs (Radio 5live last night).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 14 September, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 14 September, 2010, 02:42:55 PM
Be Pure, Be Vigilant, Be Fucked.

Be Pure. BeVigilant. Bejaysus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 September, 2010, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 14 September, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 14 September, 2010, 02:42:55 PM
Be Pure, Be Vigilant, Be Fucked.

Be Pure. BeVigilant. Bejaysus.

Be Pure. Be Vililant. Begorrah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 14 September, 2010, 04:51:16 PM
Cheers jayzus, that's appalling, and im glad to see that mine and my wife's decision to leave Ireland in 2003 because we didnt want our children brought up there hasnt proven to be an overreaction.
And no, i access this forum (and facebook) through my phone, and all other sites are either non-optimised or just too slow to deal with, on the mobile internet. My laptop sadly has killed itself, and its replacement wont be got until thursday. I was at work earlier, and my guys wouldn't have appreciated me using theirs.
SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 September, 2010, 05:24:31 PM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 14 September, 2010, 04:51:16 PM
Cheers jayzus, that's appalling, and im glad to see that mine and my wife's decision to leave Ireland in 2003 because we didnt want our children brought up there hasnt proven to be an overreaction.


It's still a better place to raise kids than most and with a tiny population. Just instill in them the need to overthrow their rulers more often.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 September, 2010, 05:49:46 PM
Cor! Are people still interested in politics, then?

They're going to privatise Royal Mail, you know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 September, 2010, 07:15:35 PM
The government is floating plans to slash NHS Direct. They seem to want to drastically cut the number of nurses at the other end of the phone. They've even talked about scrapping the service altogether. But if we work together fast, we can make them think again.

These cuts won't save money [1] and will mean millions of ill people needing advice will be forced to go to casualty or a doctors' surgery, when they could have been treated at home via NHS Direct.

The government is still deciding what they can get away with. That means we've got a real chance to influence the debate. If our MPs hear from thousands of us this week it will send a strong signal that we don't want to see NHS Direct scrapped. That could be enough to tip the balance and protect the future of NHS Direct.

It's easy to write to your MP and tell them why you don't want NHS Direct cut - click here to send them a message:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-direct

There are plenty of politicians who want to chip away at the NHS. But they know they have to tread carefully or they'll face a massive public backlash. By floating these plans to scrap NHS Direct they're testing the water. If thousands of us speak out now against these stealth cuts we can make them back down.

E-mail your MP now and stand up for NHS Direct:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-direct

In the last two weeks, nearly 25,000 of us have come together to show politicians that they can't attack the NHS without facing a massive public outcry. Our map is full of inspiring stories of how the NHS has changed our lives: looking after us when we've been injured; delivering babies safe and sound; helping us to cope with problems that might mean we can't work or learn and, at the end of our lives, managing pain and comforting those left behind.

Now, we need to work together again to show that we can defend NHS Direct from cuts that will mean it can't look after its patients properly any more. Together, we can send a message to every single MP that we won't stand for NHS cuts, just like when we stopped the cuts to 6 Music and topslicing of the BBC.

E-mail your MP now to tell them to put a stop to cuts to NHS Direct - it only takes 2 minutes: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/nhs-direct

Thanks for being involved,

David, Hannah, Johnny and the 38 Degrees team

P.S. 38 Degrees members have already come up with lots of good ideas about how we can work together to influence the debate about the cuts. If you've got ideas, please add them to the Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/peoplepowerchange/) or add a comment on our blog (http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2010/09/14/cuts-what-should-38-degrees-do/)



Notes
[1] - NHS Direct saves the taxpayer £213 million a year by giving advice on the phone instead of at a hospital or doctors' surgery. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23871909-plans-to-scrap-nhs-direct-attacked.do
- Read more about the NHS Direct climbdown and nurses cut at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/09/nhs-direct-closure-health-politics
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 September, 2010, 07:17:24 PM
We're swimming against the tide and fighting back against the legal loan sharks. Since last Monday over 500 of you have written to your MP asking them to sign our Early Day Motion. Thanks to this pressure 90 MPs have signed, but we need to reach at least 100 by the end of the week. Can you help us today? Use our easy tool to write to your MP:

http://action.compassonline.org.uk/EDM660

Early Day Motions are useful tools to publicise issues and lobby the government but to have a real impact they need to have a large number of signatories. Our EDM, 660 now has 90 MPs supporting it but we need to be armed with the support of over 100 MPs when we go to Number 10 Downing Street next week.

EDM 660 calls on the government to 'End Legal Loan Sharking' by capping the cost of credit and providing alternative sources of affordable borrowing. You can help bring EDM 660 to your MP's attention by writing to them now. We have set up a quick and easy tool below to enable you to lobby your MP:

http://action.compassonline.org.uk/EDM660

This is a big month for the campaign. We are having motions debated at both Liberal Democrat and Labour Party conference. We are also meeting with the government to discuss our campaign. This is why it is important that we build up as much pressure as possible in the coming weeks. We hope you can help.

http://action.compassonline.org.uk/EDM660

Help us fight back and end legal loan sharking once and for all.

Gavin
General Secretary, Compass

P.S: If you want to do more than just the above check out our comprehensive action page on the End Legal Loan Sharking campaign website: http://www.endlegalloansharks.org.uk/?page_id=11
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 15 September, 2010, 03:58:29 AM
Quote from: Mr 9.8 on 14 September, 2010, 12:26:02 AM
Quote from: Garageman on 14 September, 2010, 12:22:39 AM
Quote from: Mr 9.8 on 14 September, 2010, 12:15:30 AM
So do we discuss the politics of the U.S. & A. too? or is it just Euro politics?


Only if you feel like burning the Quorn Qur'an.

Well they burn Bibles & the American Flag in Islamic countries so all's fair in love & war in my mind. :lol:

This isn't really a reply to your comment, which I agree with. I just thought it was something worth mentioning because they're connected.

Orthodox Jewish youths burn New Testaments in Or Yehuda
http://www.haaretz.com/news/orthodox-jewish-youths-burn-new-testaments-in-or-yehuda-1.246153

Muslims Block Bible-Burning In South Africa
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6728577-muslims-block-bibleburning-in-south-africa

I actually disagree with the banning of book burnings by private citizens but I suppose it's the thought that counts.

Now if politicians start burning books...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2010, 08:48:05 AM
QuoteCheers jayzus, that's appalling, and im glad to see that mine and my wife's decision to leave Ireland in 2003 because we didnt want our children brought up there hasnt proven to be an overreaction.

Nae tother a'ball.  Fortunately not everyone in Ireland is retarded enough to support this horrible idea:

'Michael Nugent, (Atheist Ireland)'s chair, said that it would challenge the law through the courts if it were charged with blasphemy.

Nugent said: "This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic states led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

"We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous."'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 15 September, 2010, 10:15:30 AM
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e146/vgupload/VoteBiffo.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Casshern on 15 September, 2010, 12:43:14 PM
I would vote for the above poster !
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 01:20:59 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 15 September, 2010, 10:15:30 AM
(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e146/vgupload/VoteBiffo.jpg)

Brian Cowan is a complete and utter Buffoon and is as stupid as he looks.

Do yourselves a favor and stop voting for these idiots.

*

If NHS Direct saves the taxpayer 213 Million a year then why scrap it ??

Hold it a minute i think i know why.Its because those that run this country are Morons and their ideas of cost cutting are childish and simplistic because they obviously dont factor in that scrapping the scheme will not save money and cause many many adverse effects on the NHS.

If this is so obvious and is simple logic then why is it considered to be costcutting ?

Idiots.

This is proven by the fact that we are having to petition govt to stop legal loan sharking operations when if we had an intelligent govt instead of a bunch of morons then they would already be outlawed especially in this kind of economic climate thast leaves people wide open to exploitation but why stop there ??

Does this legislation also apply to the Bankster filth as well since they are a legal loansharking operation ??

Perhaps not now but sometime soon they will be removed because people are wising up to the scam and when that happens the Bankster Filth are going to be giving some very serious thought about what they are going to do and where they are going to go when the people have had enough because they have now gone way past the point of no return and there is more and more material coming out against them every day.


Like i have said many many times before if the UK and Ireland stopped paying cash to the EU year in year out then that would mean less cost cutting and not only that but the UK pays something in the region of 43 Billion per year in servicing the interest on its debts and guess who the interest payments go to ?

The money lenders/changers who own the banking system because fo4 some reason the govt cant issue its own currency.

We all know why that is or at least you should do by now.

This figure could rise to 70 billion a year but this is a projected figure that is perhaps being used to make spending cuts* seem inevitable but i wouldnt be surprised if its not far from the truth and again we simply do not know what the exact figures are.

The yearly payments to the EU seem to vary in the figures that are quoted from various sources from 5 billion per year to 55.755 billion per year.The simple fact is that the true figure is actually unknown unless you have access to the accounts of the EU but since they dont seem to keep accounts or have their accounts audited we simply do not know and not only that but official figures from this govt are not to be trusted like anything else to do with govt.

*New Liebour completely overfinanced and overstaffed and over just about everything else concerning the public sector anyway so a certain amount of costcutting within the public sector is justified and is very necessary and those that will lose their jobs in the public sector will cry about it but they will have to make their own way in the private sector the same as everyone else instead of suckling off the govt and having a sense of entitlement and if there are no jobs for them in the private sector we know why that is and its more than likely that the public sector workers supported Labour for 11 years which means that they themselves enabled and assisted the outsourcing of jobs and the shifting of the manufacturing base overseas which has created the unemployment problem and the fact that the UK doesnt produce enough GDP to become solvent ever again and you cant rebuild an economy based on services because you have to make things and then sell them and export them and right now that isnt happening and its unlikely to happen.

Its also curious why its always such an outcry against public sector jobs being lost but there are plenty in the private sector who have lost jobs and businesses and the media never focusess on them unless its yet another large scale manufaturer that is closing down its UK operations and moving overseas and that is always seen as something that is necessary or inevitable rather than being seen as a serious problem that needs to be adressed urgently as i have heard NOTHING from this fake Coalition govt about addressing this problem.

So in the meantime more jobs are lost which means less revenue to keep the country going which is worse for the economy and the govt just sits back and lets it all happen because they have this stupid fixation with "Service Economies".

Morons.

In a word we are F U C K E D and the economy isnt even being allowed to recover naturally as it is being constantly manipulated so that it gets worse and the recession/depression is being prolonged mostly because the banks were given our money which we pay interest on to lend but they are not lending.

My maths isnt always that good but 20 to 25 percent of those of working age in the US are now unemployed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 September, 2010, 01:40:43 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 01:20:59 PM
Brian Cowan is a complete and utter Buffoon and is as stupid as he looks.

Do yourselves a favor and stop voting for these idiots.

I've never voted for those idiots, doesn't seem to keep them away.  I do however disagree that Cowen is stupid - he's a bright bloke with a long history of writing or at least editing his own speeches (which is disturbingly rare according to my Civil Service mates), and he's refreshingly unspun and unscripted.  Unfortunately he's entirely the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time, and has both inherited and been party to creating a fucking catastrophe.  He mumbles, barks, looks miserable and irritated at the same time, and thus instead of directing the mood of the country in a positive direction he just amplifies it by looking exactly how we all feel. 

That he gave an earl-morning interview hung over is neither here nor there with regard to his competence or character, but that he wasn't aware of or didn't care about the bitterness that behaviour would engender amongst people who desperately want him to be working his highly-paid arse off 24-7 to pull us out of the mire... well that's just symptomatic of someone who has lost the plot.  That old celtic stuff about  the health and fertility of the land depending on the character and person of the king isn't far off the mark.  Brian has broken more than one of the geasa that circumscribe his office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 04:15:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 September, 2010, 01:40:43 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 01:20:59 PM
Brian Cowan is a complete and utter Buffoon and is as stupid as he looks.

Do yourselves a favor and stop voting for these idiots.

I've never voted for those idiots, doesn't seem to keep them away.  I do however disagree that Cowen is stupid - he's a bright bloke with a long history of writing or at least editing his own speeches (which is disturbingly rare according to my Civil Service mates), and he's refreshingly unspun and unscripted.  Unfortunately he's entirely the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time, and has both inherited and been party to creating a fucking catastrophe.  He mumbles, barks, looks miserable and irritated at the same time, and thus instead of directing the mood of the country in a positive direction he just amplifies it by looking exactly how we all feel. 

That he gave an earl-morning interview hung over is neither here nor there with regard to his competence or character, but that he wasn't aware of or didn't care about the bitterness that behaviour would engender amongst people who desperately want him to be working his highly-paid arse off 24-7 to pull us out of the mire... well that's just symptomatic of someone who has lost the plot.  That old celtic stuff about  the health and fertility of the land depending on the character and person of the king isn't far off the mark.  Brian has broken more than one of the geasa that circumscribe his office.

Fair enough what you say but i do recall how he was suckered by Manuel Barosso where he looked like he was being led astray which of course he was.The problem is much bigger than Brian Cowan and Brian Cowan cant be expected to fix it and obsessing over PMs etc doesnt get anyone anywhere but i do feel that people who dont understand politics have too much faith invested in them without understanding what is really going on and they go wrong when they all blame Brian Cowan for everything going wrong when again there is a lot more to it than that.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2010, 04:40:23 PM
Yayyy! Good news at last. Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster for small mercies.

http://www.build.ie/national_news.asp?newsid=116493 (http://www.build.ie/national_news.asp?newsid=116493)

Most heartening quote:
QuoteAt the time of writing, Mr Lenihan's twitter page is receiving statement's of criticism and condemnation at the rate of approximately one per second, with one tweeter reffering to the minister as "an ignorant fool" and another asking "Can you please say which other 'theories' need debunking in new books? How do you stand on gravity?
(Pity about the journalist's spelling, but it's the thought that counts.)

Good to see that not everyone is as fucking thick as the Minister.

(Reminds me of a Public Enemy gig I went to see in Dublin years ago, where Chuck Dee shouted out 'Do you believe in God?' expectantly, only to be met with a silence punctuated with a few quiet 'no's.  'Fuck it, I do', said Chuck, glumly.)




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 04:47:46 PM
Not every Christian believes in the literal translation of the Bible like Creationists.

I just thought i would point that out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2010, 04:49:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 04:47:46 PM
Not every Christian believes in the literal translation of the Bible like Creationists.

I just thought i would point that out.


I realise that. Personally, I don't believe in either Christianity or Creationism.

EDIT: In fact, as far as I know, even the Catholic Church supports the theory of evolution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 05:15:16 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2010, 04:49:34 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 15 September, 2010, 04:47:46 PM
Not every Christian believes in the literal translation of the Bible like Creationists.

I just thought i would point that out.


I realise that. Personally, I don't believe in either Christianity or Creationism.

EDIT: In fact, as far as I know, even the Catholic Church supports the theory of evolution.

The Catholic Church supports a lot of other things but i wont go into that. ;)

I wasnt directing that comment at you personally but there is a lot of ridicule directed at Christians where they are all labelled as ridiculous Creationists which i dont agree with.

I am a devout Agnostic in the sense that i dont know for sure if there is anything else rather than not knowing if there is any kind of God in the abstract sense as the term "God" is completely abstract.

It must be very difficult to have faith in God when you look at what goes on on this planet and why evil always seems to prevail and that in itself makes me question the existence of God but i have to say despite the fact i am not a Christian i would rather live in a country that has Christian values in the moderate sense than a hardcore Atheist State but again i wont go into that now.

Unsold UK Pope tickets :


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0911/1224278638530.html

:lol:

Its interesting that the Catholic church wants a payment of 20 quid per ticket but its not surprising really but its not like they are short of cash.

It must cost a lot to keep the PopeMobile/Ice Cream van going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2010, 11:08:42 PM
QuoteI wasnt directing that comment at you personally but there is a lot of ridicule directed at Christians where they are all labelled as ridiculous Creationists which i dont agree with.

No worries, chief, I agree with you there - as far as my lack of belief goes, Jesus's divinity isn't too far behind Creationism, though to be fair Creationism can pretty be scientifically proven wrong.

Quote
Its interesting that the Catholic church wants a payment of 20 quid per ticket but its not surprising really but its not like they are short of cash.

It must cost a lot to keep the PopeMobile/Ice Cream van going.

Heh.  There was a letter into Viz once referring to the current pope's revision of (I think) the 7 deadly sins -

'I see "amassing huge amounts of wealth" is now on the list. It's a good thing hypocrisy isn't there too, or they'd be doubly fucked.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 September, 2010, 11:32:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 September, 2010, 01:40:43 PM

That he gave an earl-morning interview hung over is neither here nor there with regard to his competence or character, but that he wasn't aware of or didn't care about the bitterness that behaviour would engender amongst people who desperately want him to be working his highly-paid arse off 24-7 to pull us out of the mire... well that's just symptomatic of someone who has lost the plot.  That old celtic stuff about  the health and fertility of the land depending on the character and person of the king isn't far off the mark.  Brian has broken more than one of the geasa that circumscribe his office.

Quite right.

The drinking is not the real gripe but there is a media and political putsch to get him out, a crude one, but it's happening. Cowen is well known as a heavy drinker, depending on who you talk to, he may have a drink problem (the wife beating rumours once started to flow about Bertie but were nipped in the bud). His "enemies" are using it as a another stick to beat him with. If Cowen didn't have the brains to cancel the interview knowing he sounded like shit and would give off a bad impression (did no one advise him?) why would anyone want him deciding on the future of the country? He doesn't give a shit about how he comes across. Stupid or not, he's our Boris Yeltsin/Gordon Brown.


if Cowen had proved himself as even half a talent in his job none of this would matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 16 September, 2010, 07:20:20 PM
Inspirational- this man will show us what to do

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3vEOSkk5AM

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2010, 08:24:16 PM
Good vid on this page, well worth a watch:  http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 17 September, 2010, 02:13:16 AM
How much is this recession affecting the sci-fi-horror-fan dollar?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2010, 06:46:33 AM
Quote from: Krombasher on 17 September, 2010, 02:13:16 AM
How much is this recession affecting the sci-fi-horror-fan dollar?

The Four Colour Dollar?  A lot.  In my case, average monthly spend on things Comics/2000AD/Gaming/Star Wars/SF two or three years ago would have been ca. €90-120.  Now it's €25, and that's all 2000AD.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 03:02:52 PM
The last two Megazines were almost a tenner in euros. It's treading a fine line with me at the moment as it stands - not its fault it's a tenner, but I'm beginning to wonder if its worth it when we're all hard up
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 September, 2010, 03:06:09 PM
Dreams are important in hard times, and Twoothy & the Meg are chock full of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 03:15:02 PM
Aye, true, I'm sticking by them anyway - though with the Meg (apart from the fine latest issue) the odd time, a sense of loyalty is what keeps me buying it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 17 September, 2010, 03:28:22 PM
The prog and the meg are part of my monthly 'budget', so there's no chance of letting them go without a fight. I spend less on comics than 'normal people' do on booze in the average month, and that's the defence i use when my expenditure is criticised. Not drinking (except on very special occasions) does wonders to my balance sheet. I use the library for general comics-reading, buy the majority of books cheaply second hand, never buy dvds unless under a fiver and even then only rarely, and never buy cds. Im cutting our expenditure right to the bone, so i reckon as long as my wife still gets wine and chocolate, my kids still get their comics and i get the prog and the meg and a few sundries, we're placed to ride this out without going mad.
SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 September, 2010, 03:34:16 PM
I salute your indefatigability, Sir!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 17 September, 2010, 03:35:20 PM
http://heyilike.fansociety.com/p.php?p=37321
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2010, 07:31:45 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 03:02:52 PM
The last two Megazines were almost a tenner in euros. It's treading a fine line with me at the moment as it stands - not its fault it's a tenner, but I'm beginning to wonder if its worth it when we're all hard up

Too true.  I handed over €12.70 for my Prog and Meg combo today.  That's 20c more than my entire disposable income for the week, so not even a cup of coffee or a stick of chewing gum 'til next Friday - still worth it, but it's a lot of dosh.  I'm saving reading the Meg for a few days.  Scary times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 07:39:08 PM
Shit, TB, sorry to hear that. No wonder you're good at crosswords. Still clutching at employment myself but I'll be out of a job by Christmas; the plan is to hop on a plane to Australia after that and start afresh. Not as easy at 35 as for the younger folk, but I'll give it a whirl
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 September, 2010, 07:51:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 September, 2010, 07:31:45 PM
Too true.  I handed over €12.70 for my Prog and Meg combo today.  That's 20c more than my entire disposable income for the week, so not even a cup of coffee or a stick of chewing gum 'til next Friday - still worth it, but it's a lot of dosh.  I'm saving reading the Meg for a few days.  Scary times.



Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 03:02:52 PM
The last two Megazines were almost a tenner in euros. It's treading a fine line with me at the moment as it stands - not its fault it's a tenner, but I'm beginning to wonder if its worth it when we're all hard up


There are always options, why don't you buy it from clickwheel? It's less than a fiver for two issues of the Meg, €2.38 each. €1.78 for a prog...and you'll be able to carry them around on the ipads we'll all have (eventually).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2010, 08:00:58 PM
QuoteThere are always options, why don't you buy it from clickwheel? It's less than a fiver for two issues of the Meg, €2.38 each. €1.78 for a prog...and you'll be able to carry them around on the ipads we'll all have (eventually).


Hmmm... not a bad idea at all, that. Might give it a try
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 September, 2010, 08:03:50 PM
Once you give up the lure of dead trees, after a while you won't miss it too much, and it takes up a lot less space. If you go to OZ, clickwheel is definitely a more attractive option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2010, 08:05:57 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 17 September, 2010, 08:03:50 PM
Once you give up the lure of dead trees, after a while you won't miss it too much, and it takes up a lot less space.

Pretty good idea, GM.  I couldn't live without my paper Prog, too much of a ritual for me, but the Meg (still a newcomer to my routine, after 20 years) would do nicely digitally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 September, 2010, 08:11:26 PM
I've often gone to Easons and seen the prog, I flick through, bringing back that seven year old's experience of the visceral rush of ink strokes, but then I remember the amount of care and space needed to keep them and it goes, but I often wonder...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 17 September, 2010, 10:48:22 PM
"the lure of dead trees"

I've gone all mystical and gothic

in a good way
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 17 September, 2010, 11:49:25 PM
I paid over €20 in the newsagents on thurs for our weekly round up, 2000ad, JD Meg Heat, The Beano, Ben 10, and a Nursery title.
The meg really does put up the cost, and €20 out of one week budget is too much. Especially since at work we are been threatened  for the last six months with more paycuts, 3 day week, etc etc.
I do feel, and this is only anecdotally, that some rural areas havent been  hit as bad as urban areas. The company I work for has outlets all over the country and the biggest sales drop have all been the urban areas. Obviously there isint the population density for unemployment to have as big affect, but the so called tiger never came across the Shannon with as much ferocity as the rest of the ocuntry, mayby except for Galway.
Even though I dont like the idea of a digital comic, if the meg continued at that price, there wouldnt be much option.

David
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 17 September, 2010, 11:54:07 PM
If you all want to give me a pound per week, I can PM you the details of what happens in the prog.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 18 September, 2010, 12:35:42 PM
My subscription has lapsed. Renewing it for 2000ad only might have saved me £12 a year, but instead I went for the false economy of picking it up every week from a newsagent's. At least this way they won't be crumpled, torn or sodden.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 September, 2010, 01:37:16 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 18 September, 2010, 12:35:42 PM
At least this way they won't be crumpled, torn or sodden.

F'ing part-time posties!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 September, 2010, 01:58:17 PM
You can still get that authentic crumpled, torn and sodden look if you employ the services of your local newsagents' youthful Delivery Division.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2010, 06:58:22 PM
Just to steer the thread back to politics again, I would like to respond to the pope;s recent comments comparing atheism to Nazism by saying it was a little bit rich for a former Hitler Youth member - though it's not a fair argument.

However, i will quote Hitler himself here: "The National Government regards the two Christian confessions (i.e. Catholicism and Protestantism) as factors essential to the soul of the German people. ... We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people."

Also it was the Catholic Church, not any atheist group, that had to apologise for their collusion with the Nazi party in WW2.

Lastly, seeing as the pope has compared me and some of my best friends to Nazis, I think politeness is out the window:  The sooner people see through this small-minded , bigoted old man and look at the real world, the better things will be for all of us.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 September, 2010, 09:50:52 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2010, 06:58:22 PM
  The sooner people see through this small-minded , bigoted old man and look at the real world, the better things will be for all of us.



The Catholic church is a totally corrupt organisation like just like everything else and this is the organisation that silences the victims of child abuse and which protects the perpetrators of it within the Catholic church which also has a slush fund in which to pay off the victims of child abuse.There are lots of other issues as well but the child abuse issue is the main focus on the Catholic church.

So Ratzinger is in no position to lecture anyone about morality.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 21 September, 2010, 06:21:20 PM
Govt to seize all paychecks :

Govt Idiocy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcgJnL6s2JY

It is only a proposal/consultation paper but its laughable because it is the Inland Revenue that are mainly responsible for the taxation fiasco so their solution for you to give them all of your pay only for it to be returned less tax deductions is just stupid unless they wish to deduct arbitary sums of cash as and when they feel like it.

Why is it necessary to give them cash only for it to be returned again ?

Idiocy and i just dont see it that employers are responsible for the mess within the tax system but of course the govt will shift the blame to compensate for its own inadequacies when what it is really about is Collectivism with the immovable edifice of govt at the centre of it which reinforces the message that you work for them.

Govt is God - Govt is God - Govt is God......

They just dont like not having complete control of your pay so this is their solution and they particularly dont like it that people were not paying incorrect tax bills.They hate that so instead we have this proposal of moving money about backwards and forwards which is going to cause all kinds of problems and anyway it will still be the Inland Revenue that will be handling it all as they do already except now there will be 30 million BACS payments every week all handled by the Inland Revenue so what could possibly go wrong* ??

::) :lol: :lol:

*The Inland Revenue still run Windows 3.1 apparently  :lol:

As usual the PAYE taxpayers are forced onto the front line.

Central Planning you cant trust particularly as they couldnt organise a cup of Coffee.

They just love to get their hands on your money as there are the useless scrounging parasites who own the banking system want their cut of your earnings as well dont forget.This proposal also sends out the message that no one else can be trusted except Govt when in actual fact the reverse is true and its a bit like being treated like children by the All-seeing-All-knowing Nanny State who will look after your money.

All your money is collected into a Holding/Escrow account and its another way for them to have control over your money and if the system crashes which it WILL then those without any savings to fall back on will be Fucked and this in turn will start a cascade of missed payments which in turn will create more chaos.

So what will this solve n the face of it ?

Nothing but no doubt part of this workload will be farmed out to the private sector who will then leave all your bank details lying around here and there.

This is going to cost but the object of the exercise isnt to save money as its all about control.

The Govt are wary of a Tax revolt so they are not taking chances and this also gives the Govt another opportunity to do what it likes.

Still i have a clear conscience as i didnt vote for these Maggots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 08:56:15 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2010, 06:58:22 PM
The sooner people see through this small-minded , bigoted old man and look at the real world, the better things will be for all of us.

http://countmeout.ie/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 September, 2010, 09:27:18 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 08:56:15 PM

http://countmeout.ie/




All ready done that, had the chat with the Assistant Chancellor (sounds like the Empire doesn't it) at the Chacellery in Drumcondra. It may not mean much -if you're not a believer or practitioner anyway- but it's better to do it in as much that it means the numbers on their books get reduced and they get a more relative count of how many they can actually consider to be believers living in Ireland rather than most people staying on file as unacknowledged nonbelievers and continue to make up the Church's claimed numbers by remaining on the baptismal register.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 09:38:12 PM
pretty much my reasoning..have to hunt down the address of the diocese i was baptized in

On that site there is a link to an interview with one of the founders of the count me out campaign and John Waters....Lord, how I hate that prick
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 September, 2010, 10:22:58 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 09:38:12 PM
John Waters....Lord, how I hate that prick


agreed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 21 September, 2010, 10:38:58 PM
He didn't force Divine to put shit in her mouth you guys...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 September, 2010, 11:00:48 PM
but he made her swallow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2010, 11:08:26 PM
Quoteit means the numbers on their books get reduced and they get a more relative count of how many they can actually consider to be believers living in Ireland rather than most people staying on file as unacknowledged nonbelievers and continue to make up the Church's claimed numbers by remaining on the baptismal register.

Good point, that. Wonder how much of a Catholic country Ireland would be if all the disgruntled non-believers were taken off the file?  I know very few people of my age group who give a shit about Catholicism, and even fewer who go to mass outside of weddings and funerals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 September, 2010, 11:39:01 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 21 September, 2010, 10:22:58 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 09:38:12 PM
John Waters....Lord, how I hate that prick


agreed.

I've just looked him up and based on his wiki entry ("In his articles titled "Impose democracy on Iraq" and "Bush and Blair doing right thing"...) I think I agree.

The funny thing is that until today, I always thought that the guy who married Sinead O'Connor (and who she wrote that horrible song about) was John Peel's old producer John Walters! D'OH!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 September, 2010, 12:02:00 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 21 September, 2010, 11:39:01 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 21 September, 2010, 10:22:58 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 09:38:12 PM
John Waters....Lord, how I hate that prick


agreed.

I've just looked him up and based on his wiki entry ("In his articles titled "Impose democracy on Iraq"


Isnt that an oxymoron ?

"Impose Democracy"

It implies the use of force and coercion.

There are plenty of other examples of this kind of reverse/doublespeak.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 September, 2010, 12:13:22 AM
Isn't imposing anything on anybody tyranny...much like what Catholicism did to Ireland? Sounds like old hairy/baldy Waters has a taste for the Lash and the Big Stick. He comes from the "it's all right as long as we're doin it" camp. Prick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 September, 2010, 11:19:50 AM
Quote from: Garageman on 21 September, 2010, 10:22:58 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 21 September, 2010, 09:38:12 PM
John Waters....Lord, how I hate that prick
agreed.

A vile creature, and even on the rare occasion when he's espousing a cause I agree with (father's rights, for example), I find myself turning against it as soon as he opens his mouth.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 September, 2010, 12:49:20 PM
I admit that i know nothing about John Waters and i dont really have the time or the inclination as i have enough on my plate as it with this kind of subject matter as it is.

I thought this article may be of interest to tothers who have more interest in John Waters than i do:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:frRf48x5znIJ:www.indymedia.ie/article/75809+john+waters+ireland&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

Has he recanted his views/beliefs on Iraq-Blair/Bush etc yet ?

If not then he is not worth listening to as he has no understanding of the subject as he just taking things at face value as he clearly has no understanding of politics/geo-politics.

He may be right about other subject matter but i cant comment because i simply dont know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 23 September, 2010, 11:40:42 AM
(http://www.thephoenix.ie/phoenix/subscriber/library/volume-28/issue-19/cover-image.jpg?ref=nf)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2010, 11:59:55 AM

There is a reform that could prevent a future financial crisis, clear the national debt, and restart the economy.

It cures the sickness in our economy and financial system by tackling the root cause of the problem, rather than just the symptoms.

It would make the 'inevitable' cuts in public services completely unnecessary, reduce the tax burden by up to 30%, reduce overall levels of debt and allow us to start clearing the national debt. It takes control of the UK's money supply out of the hands of the commercial banking sector and restores it to the state, where it can be used to benefit the economy, rather than providing a £100 billion annual subsidy to the banking sector.

Join the campaign at:  http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 14 October, 2010, 12:39:19 PM
Haven't you said this before?  :lol:


Anyway, I was glad to hear that all 33 Chilean miners were rescued. It made me forget all about child benefit, the deficit, the impending public sector job cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2010, 01:03:06 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 14 October, 2010, 12:39:19 PM
Haven't you said this before?  :lol:

Yeeeeeees!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 21 October, 2010, 11:03:38 PM
Ian Duncan-Smith on Newsnight, about unemployment in Wales:

The unemployed in Baenau Gwent, where unemployment is at 10%, should be prepared to spend an hour each way travelling to Merthyr Tydfil or Cardiff by bus and look for jobs in those places. As a 'job seeker' in Cardiff, I find this objectionable because:

* I don't want people coming from Blaenau Gwent to Cardiff and 'taking our jobs'
* Nobody should be faced with a 2-hour daily commute to earn £6.00 an hour
* It's a waste of fuel to move people 60 miles in a day for a job someone living within 4 miles can do
* Ian Duncan-Smith has no idea how 10 or 12 bus fares in a week would eat into your wages
* From an employers point of view, there's greater risk in employing someone who lives 30 miles away and is dependent upon public transport
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 21 October, 2010, 11:30:17 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 21 October, 2010, 11:03:38 PM
Ian Duncan-Smith on Newsnight, about unemployment in Wales:

The unemployed in Baenau Gwent, where unemployment is at 10%, should be prepared to spend an hour each way travelling to Merthyr Tydfil or Cardiff by bus and look for jobs in those places. As a 'job seeker' in Cardiff, I find this objectionable because:

* I don't want people coming from Blaenau Gwent to Cardiff and 'taking our jobs'
* Nobody should be faced with a 2-hour daily commute to earn £6.00 an hour
* It's a waste of fuel to move people 60 miles in a day for a job someone living within 4 miles can do
* Ian Duncan-Smith has no idea how 10 or 12 bus fares in a week would eat into your wages
* From an employers point of view, there's greater risk in employing someone who lives 30 miles away and is dependent upon public transport

Honestly i just read your comment and before i even finished reading it i was thinking that WTF happens to the unemployed in Cardiff ?

Is there a surplus of jobs in Cardiff that no one in Cardiff wants ?

Are there no unemployed[unproductive - economically unviable debt slaves] in Cardiff ?

Idiotic nonsense.

I would have told Ian Duncan Smith to sort out the problems that are causing unemployment with his bosses who have deliberately Fucked up the economy.

Stupid Twat.


Any cutbacks/austerity measures to ministerial expenses to help pay off the debt to the centralised banking Oligarchs Ponzi debt slavery scam ?

Its been curiously quiet in that respect.


I have been listening to a 1.5 hr long talk explaining the systemic/endemic mortgage fraud/derivatives scam in the US and Europe and how to stop foreclosures through the courts.Its so convoluted i need to listen to it again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2010, 11:41:26 PM
Got a link, Peter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 October, 2010, 01:21:10 AM

How to take back what they take from you :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm_qmqwigyI

This goes on a bit but no one has to read it and i tried to keep it short

Its interesting that derivatives appeared at the exact same time that the deregulation of banks and building societies/easy credit/low interest rates* which created the housing bubble.Overconfidence and greed and too much leverage based on nothing or next to nothing pushed house prices upwards which means more expensive loans.

You couldnt have had Derivates without an easy supply of credit available to generate income.

*Made possible by the removal of the Glass Steagal Act


This is very serious and one possible scenario in the simplest terms would be the federal govt seizing control of the existing mortgages or seizing control of the entire housing stock in the US through whatever means they see fit while the fraud will be allegedly investigated.This will mean the end of private property rights and the beginning of state owned property like in other Communist countries.

This situation will create a crisis and this is how i think the Federal govt in the US will react with a unilateral property/land grab in the US.

Govts are always there to react to a manufactured crisis.

This is just straight off the top of my head because the problem here is who owns the property/holds the note after the mortgage has changed hands and been sold on at a profit 8 to 10 times ?

Bundles of mortgages might have been sold to the Chinese for example which basically means they have been scammed or anyone who bought them has been scsmmed.There is a paper trail leading right back to the initial loan who i think still holds the Note.They are not going to be very happy but they are becoming aware of the scam.

Whoever holds the Note has exclusive rights to the property.Anyone else who has claims against the property but doesnt have the Note has no claim against the property because only the holder of the Note is recognised by a court of law or at least in a court of law  free of corrupt judges.

So this means that if a mortgage or 10,000 - 20,000 mortgages have changed hands 8 times on the Derivatives market bought and paid for each time without a Note attached to each mortgage then they are just trading and buying worthless bits of paper which means if the courts uphold that only the holder of the Note has rights to the property then they all lose out as they were scammed.

Or something like that....

This is the nature of derivatives.

How do you compensate all the investors who have been scammed ?

The short answer is you cant.

This is the beginning of the unravelling and popping of the derivatives bubble.The Derivatives bubble is valued at 4 times the total wealth and physical assets on the planet.1.4 quadrillion ? I forget the exact figure.

The Derviatives bubble will be used as the pretext for unilateral control of the banking and financial sectors and the wiping of the slate and the establishment of global financial governance by that i mean overseers.They already control and own the banking/financial sectors but this time it will be official so those that created the problem will be the solution.

Thats how it works and they have been saving the best till last.

One thing you can be certain of is that Govts and their controllers will be ready with a solution to the manufactured crisis.

Watch this space.......


I just remembered something very important.I heard a good while back that Lawyers were shredding the original deeds to houses in the UK and i thought thats a bit odd to be shredding original documents attached to property   :-\

This came up because of the problems finding deeds to listed/historic buildings and it might possibly be connected to the scam.Shred the original document and produce a new document with different wording.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 22 October, 2010, 01:53:48 AM
I'd swear this thread was built on an Indian burial ground.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 October, 2010, 03:10:57 PM
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_2ai3N24CriLuM:http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w84/deer_012/IMG_0682.jpg&t=1)


"Of all the many ways of organising banking, the worst is the one we have today."

Mervyn King (Governor of the Bank of England) – speaking on banking reform in New York – 25th October 2010

Join the campaign to fix society:  http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 26 October, 2010, 10:30:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 October, 2010, 03:10:57 PM
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_2ai3N24CriLuM:http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w84/deer_012/IMG_0682.jpg&t=1)


"Of all the many ways of organising banking, the worst is the one we have today."

Mervyn King (Governor of the Bank of England) – speaking on banking reform in New York – 25th October 2010

Join the campaign to fix society:  http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

I notice that he is only talking about clearing banks rather than privately owned central banks but my guess is banking reform wont go far enough and what he is saying may be right but he said nothing about this before now so its just closing the stable door after the horse has bolted and its just being said for public consumption because whatever the outcome of banking reform is the cause of the problem will be doing the reforming.

Closing the stable door etc is the solution following the problem and the reaction.

He doesnt point out that Fractional Reserve Lending is fraudulent but only points out its unsustainable if banks dont hold enough reserves of cash and cant protect themselves from Bank Runs.

This is just pointing out the obvious and any reform wont happen for another 10 years.

I wouldnt take any notice of this and its just someone who presided over the whole banking fiasco/Ponzi scheme doing a face saving exercise before retirement.

Everything is always corrected or its faults pointed out in hindsight but curiously never with any foresight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 01 November, 2010, 10:33:44 PM
I don't really like talking politics as it causes too much bad feeling but watching the news today and seeing in parliment Labour asking the questions as to why those devises weren't found sooner. But they were found weren't they (fuknutz) and also the new government have not long been in power, so any security at the moment is there from the previous government and any changes that the current government cannot be made without going through the right channels which take time, so to criticise the way the security conduct themselves is to criticise the previous govt surely?

(Steps slowly off soap box)



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2010, 09:59:29 AM
Parliament has no control over central banking. Rather, the reverse is true.

There can be no progress (social or economic) until the right to create and control the money supply is reclaimed by our *accountable* government. Leaving the creation and control of money in the hands of unaccountable and largely faceless multi-trillionaires is not, I'm sure you can see, the most conducive of circumstances for the betterment of honesty and fairness.

If you'd come up with a scam whereby every penny in tax revenue from 192 of the 196 countries in the world went directly into your pocket, would you give it up without a fight? No, you probably wouldn't - but that's the fight we need to take on. It's not a new fight by any means. Julius Caesar fought it and, by winning, ushered in a Golden Age for Rome and Abraham Lincoln printed "Greenbacks" to pay for the Civil War (which itself was fought more over taxation than emancipation).

I urge everyone to watch the 1995 documentary "The Money Masters" produced by Patrick S. J. Carmack and directed and narrated by William T. Still.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 02 November, 2010, 06:08:23 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 01 November, 2010, 10:33:44 PM
I don't really like talking politics as it causes too much bad feeling but watching the news today and seeing in parliment Labour asking the questions as to why those devises weren't found sooner. But they were found weren't they (fuknutz) and also the new government have not long been in power, so any security at the moment is there from the previous government and any changes that the current government cannot be made without going through the right channels which take time, so to criticise the way the security conduct themselves is to criticise the previous govt surely?

(Steps slowly off soap box)

V

And not one of them stands up in Parliament and says its all BS but thats what i am saying.Not that i expect that to happen.

Its all a load of CRAP and as usual we will get it in the neck one way or another as air travel has been completly ruined by all this security nonsense.

Awl Alacki the CIA Lackey.

Honestly its just pathetic that everytime the govt is having problems and whenever the fake war on terror is flagging there is more impetus in the form of fake terror threats and the Islamic fundamentalists are wheeled out in public again and again.The trend now is for fake terror events that are foiled just in time because govts are wary of staging more false flags that result in loss of life because people are wise to it and the questions come back to haunt them.

No inquiries - no questions asked and no mess to clear up but there are always questions to be asked regardless.

Another terrorist plot foiled so arent the security services doing a great job of keeping us all safe ?

Maintain the heightened security alert and maintain the politics of fear as its a way of govt justifying its existence and to justify more spending on war in the Yemen - Pakistan - Iraq - Iran etc etc.

Has anyone ever noticed that the alleged terrorists keeping winning as we lose more and more of our freedoms that the alleged terrorists hate ??

Coincidence ?

I dont think so.

Someone should tell them not to bother anymore. [sarcasm]

*

Abraham Lincoln was shot dead for printing paper money independently of the banking oligarchs.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 03 November, 2010, 02:06:11 AM
Have given up on Politics.

Preparing a rocket to the Moon where I shall live as King of the Clangers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 07:36:29 AM
Be their banker instead - you'll have way more power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 03 November, 2010, 11:16:36 AM
David Cameron and the Coalition govt flip flop on future referendums on the EU.

David Cameron and the coalition govt flip flop on reversing the database/surveillance state.

Its just what i expected and i even said as much.

enough said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 03 November, 2010, 02:10:42 PM
Oh, you guys will just love this:

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/11/conspiracy-theories.html

:D

By way of Si Spurrier and Antony Johnston, on Twitter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 04:50:34 PM
Heh, it sounds a lot like the work of the "Office of International Treasury Control."

http://www.unoitc.org/index.html

One would have thought that an organization with enough financial clout to bail out entire countries would be able to afford a decent web designer. (Or maybe that's just what they want us to think...  ::)  )

"Just deposit $1.5M in my First Bank of Nigeria account to release the funds necessary for bailing out your country. Free gold or diamond mine with every application."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 03 November, 2010, 04:55:44 PM
I think i need to read all that again......... :-\

Bailing out entire countries is all well and good but its not very clever handing over gold to criminals. :rolleyes:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 05:29:57 PM
Yes, mention of the Gold Standard set my alarm bells ringing too.

As you know, it was the goldsmiths who first hit upon the idea of fractional reserve lending - one of the major problems in our economy today. Basing the "worth" of currency on gold is good for the rich (who already own most of the gold anyway and can, because gold is such a limited resource, continue to manipulate currencies and, by natural extension, governments and societies through this horrid metal), but not so good for the rest of us.

Also, there has never been an audit of the gold reserves in Fort Knox and the British Treasury (and many other global financial bodies) are strangely reluctant to let the rest of us know exactly how much gold there actually is in the world. From a few comments in this Hansard report, though, it seems that the Bank of England does in fact know how much gold there is in the world and, I presume, who owns it. Of course, that information is too important to be entrusted to peasants* like us.

*I use this word entirely correctly, as this is how the dozen or so families who own the world's Central Banks regard us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 05:36:37 PM
Whois Record For Unoitc.org

Registrant Name:UNOITC HEAD QUARTERS
Registrant Organization:The Office Of International Treasury Control
Registrant Street1:1133 Connecticut Avenue
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Washington
Registrant State/Province:District of Columbia
Registrant Postal Code:20036
Registrant Country:US

http://whois.domaintools.com/unoitc.org
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 03 November, 2010, 06:09:16 PM
As i understand it the total value of the planets known* gold reserves in the form of bullion is 3.7 trillion so there simply is not enough gold to go round and i dont really know if the Gold standard is a viable option while the economy is flooded with worthless cash backed with nothing so there would have to be some kind of redress to be able to offset currency against gold.

I say known as there may well be more than that hidden away in undisclosed locations or in places like Switzerland and my guess is the criminals are hoarding it to manipulate the gold market and when it suits them they will dump a lot of it onto the market so the value will drop by a lot and all the small time investors will lose out.

Bailing out a nation with gold isnt a good idea for that reason as its too volatile a commodity because if this country is given gold then that gold is going to have to be sold off and if its advertised that an unknown bebefactor is going to give gold the4n that will instantly cause ripples in the gold market.

Is the value of the gift* 5 billion ?

Thats peanuts.I really need to read this again but a lot of this sounds very spurious and since when does the BOE launder cash since its not that kind of bank and its certainly not a clearing bank and since when does the IRA have 1 billion to launder ?

They have never5 been that well funded as it sounds ludicrous.

"Foundation X" - I wonder if this is one of the Rothschild/Rockefeller tax free foundations ?

I need to read this again and its going to take ages to go through it all.

*No such thing as a free gift and whoever gives cash will want some sort of control as there will be conditions.


Beware of those who bear gifts.....

It would be far easier and more satisfying to force the Banksters to wipe the debt.Why should we have to pay them for their scams ??

There is only 13 f
Amilies after all and at the most 300 of them within the families and there are more of us than them and when they have to bail out they will more than likely live out at sea rather than on land on their yachts and cruisers......

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 05:36:37 PM
Whois Record For Unoitc.org

Registrant Name:UNOITC HEAD QUARTERS
Registrant Organization:The Office Of International Treasury Control
Registrant Street1:1133 Connecticut Avenue
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Washington
Registrant State/Province:District of Columbia
Registrant Postal Code:20036
Registrant Country:US

http://whois.domaintools.com/unoitc.org

F them.They are affiliated to the UN which means they sre affiliated to Banksters and criminals and they are based in Washington DC with all the rrest of the criminals and i notice they are a sovereign entity.So its alright for them to be a sovereign entity but its not alright for individual nations to be sovereign entities ??

If its them giving the cash then my suspicions are correct and if they give cash and its accepted then its nothing more than a takeover and we will be beholden to the UN and a protectorate of the UN so if its them i would turn down their offer.

I need to know more about this but thanks for posting.

alarm bells are ringing......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 03 November, 2010, 09:12:59 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 03 November, 2010, 02:10:42 PM
Oh, you guys will just love this:

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/11/conspiracy-theories.html

:D

By way of Si Spurrier and Antony Johnston, on Twitter.

Starting to think the Moon might not be far away enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 04 November, 2010, 04:55:12 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2010, 04:50:34 PM
Heh, it sounds a lot like the work of the "Office of International Treasury Control."

http://www.unoitc.org/index.html

Could be:

http://hopisen.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/have-we-uncovered-foundation-x/

He gives a decent summary:
http://hopisen.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/the-lord-the-cabinet-minister-foundation-x-and-a-mysterious-5-billion/

That The Garudian reposted:
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/03/strange-case-lord-james-foundation-x

A separate question is: What was he doing laundering terrorist money??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Misanthrope on 04 November, 2010, 05:01:45 AM
The majority of MPs are selfish and greedy. That is all you need to know about politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 November, 2010, 11:22:30 PM
FEDRES dumps/injects 2 trillion into the US economy in return for 2 Trillions worth of US Treasury bonds.

I cut and pasted this from elsewhere as i am not typing all that again as i have a headache.

The FEDRES is literally buying/stealing the US by buying Treasury bonds out of money that it costs them next to nothing to print so its a means of taking over as the offshore bankers like Rothschilds openly state that Govt Treasury bonds are the safest form of investment because when the nation is completely bankrupt they get to own everything as they will take everything as collateral when the treasury cant pay the interest on the Treasury Bonds at the end of their life which could be 30 years but they could cash them sooner than that.There may not be any need to cash them as being the majority shareholder is what they are interested in as that means ownership and control.They dont need to cash the bonds as they dont need the cash as its not their main interest but rather a means to an end.

Rothschilds are the largest holder of UK Treasury bonds and the US is next......

So if the privately owned Fed buy 2 trillions worth of US Treasury bonds they will become the largest majority holder of US Treasuries.

We are in effect paying the FED to do this as every FEDRES note is chargeable to the taxpayer or everyone through indirect means so this way they get to own as well as create debt and interest.

Absolutely f---ing incredible blatant criminality and there will be more to follow........

Its nothing more than a massive asset seizing/stripping exercise because their plan is to totally destroy the US and its economy because what appears to be injecting cash into the economy is actually theft if you understand what is going on.Now the banks have been bailed out and the cash moved offshore the FED is now closing in on the US itself by purchasing US treasury bonds.The way i see it is the economy wont totally implode just yet as its in their interests to keep it on a knife edge so it can justify dumping more cash into the economy in return for more Treasury bonds and when they have bought as many as they require then the economy will totally collapse.

When this happens they will have to pay off with interest the other holders of Treasury bonds as they will be the majority shareholder in the US Corporation and the takeover will be complete.They will have stolen the US right in front of everyone.Paying off China is preferable to conflict with China unless its a war that they want as war is profitable after all but i dont see China thinking that 887 billion USD plus interest is worth a conflict.

Brazil for example holds 170 billion USD worth of treasury bonds so they can pay them off easily.Its not difficult to pay off anyone if you print cash out of nothing.

Inflation is a weapon that is used against everyone as it drives down your spending power and add that to the virtually zero percent interest rates they offer everyone.They just want everyone to be bankrupt serfs.

Say hello to 21st century high tec Neo-Feudalism.

They are stealing our future.

We have to take it back.

This isnt just criminal.Its diabolical.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2010, 11:59:42 PM
Absolutely.

In a nutshell, if the government can print two trillion dollars' worth of bonds it can can print 2 trillion dollars worth of dollars.

Printing 2 trillion dollars worth of bonds creates 2 trillion dollars' worth of debt on top of which is added God knows how much interest. (This is because the government bonds are sold to central bankers, who pay for the bonds with money created out of thin air. This money is then used by the government to pay for hospitals, police, grants etc - every cent of which must be paid back to the central banks. Can you see the scam here?)

Printing 2 trillion dollars' worth of dollars creates 2 trillion dollars. This cash is then spent into society by the government. Nothing has to be paid back as this money was created by society and not a private entity.


"If the American people really knew how the economy works, there would be a revolution before breakfast." Henry Ford
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 05 November, 2010, 12:33:49 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/04/george-osborne-misleading-crisis-claims (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/04/george-osborne-misleading-crisis-claims)

Osborne being a lying little scrote, sky is blue, water is wet, etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 12:34:04 AM
I don't get it. I'm not an economist. But presumably the point is that if you create new money someone has to underwrite the value of that money. If a government just started issuing more money it would devalue the currency, because it has nothing to back up that printed money with. Presumably the purpose of issuing bonds and borrowing the money (i.e. getting a third party to underwrite the value of it, and paying them back with interest) is that the third party has to be good for that money in a way that the government isn't or it wouldn't have to be borrowing it in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:12:30 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 12:34:04 AM
I don't get it. I'm not an economist. But presumably the point is that if you create new money someone has to underwrite the value of that money. If a government just started issuing more money it would devalue the currency, because it has nothing to back up that printed money with. Presumably the purpose of issuing bonds and borrowing the money (i.e. getting a third party to underwrite the value of it, and paying them back with interest) is that the third party has to be good for that money in a way that the government isn't or it wouldn't have to be borrowing it in the first place.

We underwrite the cash and then some which is why we are classified as collateral.We are bought and sold as collateral due to the fact we generate the interest on the cash   that is backed by nothing so in effect we are what is backing the cash.Taxation is servicing the debt and we are bought and sold as collateral.The average Serf/Slave is calculated to generate X amount of income to service debt during its working life.

Its the Slave/Serf standard.


If the FEDRES just starts printing more money then it devalues the currency and wether it is backed by anything or not makes no difference.

George Osborne is just doing what he is told to do by the central bankers who control the fiscal policy of every nation that was sold out to the G20.The UK Govt doesnt have the final say on fiscal policy and all the austerity measures are straight from the central bankers.This is what happens when your elected govt doesnt represent you.

Its all about centralisation and consolidation of control of the economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 01:47:09 AM
Our currency is based on nothing, it is a fiat currency. This is not a bad thing at all.

The value of a £5 note is based entirely upon trust. That is, I give you this £5 note and trust you will give me £5 worth of goods or services in return. In short, money is only worth what society decides it is worth.

So long as you can pay your taxes with it, you can use whatever you want as money from sea shells to tally sticks to metal discs. Society underwrites the "value" of the money.

Of course, printing too much or too little money will harm any economy but existing economic and monetary mechanisms and safeguards are more than adequate to prevent such imbalances. It is the source of the money supply that needs changing (and a few other things such as fractional reserve lending) - the general public will notice little difference in the way things work except that  everyone's level of debt will fall dramatically.

Privatized central banks lend money into society.
Public central banks spend money into society.

It does take a bit of thinking about to get your head around, but it's like one of those magic eye pictures - as soon as you see it, it really jumps out at you. If you can read this and not find yourself seething with anger then either I haven't explained it properly or you haven't understood it.

Imagine money is milk, society is a primary school and the central bank is a farmer.

If the primary school owns a cow, all the kids get virtually free milk.

If the cow is owned by the farmer, the kids have to pay for their milk.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 02:29:48 AM
By the time all this is over everyone will wish that things were still like they were when things were really bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 10:09:36 AM
The frustrating thing is that this whole economic disaster is so easy to fix. The politicians refuse to listen, the public refuses to think about it and all the while those thieving bastard bankers continue to steal all the value from our society - just like they stole from our parents and grandparents and just as they intend to continue stealing from our children and grandchildren
until one day we wake up homeless, penniless and futureless in the country our forefathers built for us and our politicians gave away.

I weep for us all, I truly do.

Not one of these government cuts or austerity measures is necessary. NOT ONE. This country could be completely out of debt in under a year. Please, please, please watch "The Money Masters" documentary I mentioned in an earlier post - it'll take a couple of hours of your life and I promise that it will open your eyes to a world of possibilities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 11:05:14 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:12:30 AM
Taxation is servicing the debt and we are bought and sold as collateral.The average Serf/Slave is calculated to generate X amount of income to service debt during its working life.

Except, and even Marxists recognize this, in the capitalist economy, workers are formally free. I could, if I so wished, go and live in any country that will have me and pay my taxes there instead, or live in an offshore tax haven. There are limits to the extent I can literally be bought and sold - all any lender has a stake in is any future tax revenues that can be extracted from me so long as I choose to live in Britain and not elsewhere.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:12:30 AM
George Osborne is just doing what he is told to do by the central bankers who control the fiscal policy of every nation that was sold out to the G20.

You let George Osborne off too lightly. You make it sound as if the Tories didn't want to cut public spending for reasons that are predominantly ideological. The current financial troubles have provided the Tories the excuse they needed to bring in a whole raft of regressive policy measures, including completely doing away with council housing as we know it. Thre are no shadowy puppet masters making them do that - it's what they Tories wanted to do.

Furthermore, you make it sound as if the Tories have no choice in the matter. If George Osborne is doing what the central bankers told him to do, then why is George Osborne doing anything different to what Labour would be doing or the Liberal Democrats wanted to do? Neither Labour nor the Liberal Democrats had plans for the swingeing cuts the coalition has implemented.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 01:47:09 AM
If the primary school owns a cow, all the kids get virtually free milk.
If the cow is owned by the farmer, the kids have to pay for their milk.

You're talking about ownership of the means of production, which is elementary Marxism. I'm not sure the average Tory MP cares about who owns anything, including the economy, so long as their kids go to public school and the champagne never runs out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 12:38:47 PM
Yes, I'm talking about ownership of the means of production of this country's money supply. Should our money supply be created by private institutions (thereby requiring every penny plus interest to be paid back to those private institutions at a massive loss to society) or should it be created at virtually no cost by our elected representatives in government?

"...why is George Osborne doing anything different to what Labour would be doing or the Liberal Democrats wanted to do? Neither Labour nor the Liberal Democrats had plans for the swingeing cuts the coalition has implemented."

Exactly. No matter which party gets in, major fiscal policies rarely change. Lib Dems now support tuition fees, for example. They have been conned into u-turning on tuition fees because borrowing money to pay for education is expensive. This is entirely the point of the whole argument. Let the government create and control the money supply and all education could be paid for by society and not borrowed from private financiers whose sole goal is to make a profit.

Governments naturally serve whoever holds the power. Ideally, the people a government represents hold the power - but not in our case. In Britain, the Central Bankers and large corporations hold the power - therefore the government serves them first, not us. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

How many times have governments changed only for things to remain the same or be re-introduced under a different name or hidden away in a budget or defence spending review? "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." If the people financing the change (the Central Bankers) don't want that change, they can simply blackmail the government into capitulating by threatening or causing a financial downturn. This is easy for them to do and requires only a reduction of the amount of money in the system, just as is happening right now. (That said, there is some indication that maybe the situation is even spiralling out of control of even the Central Bankers.)

Our system of government is basically a good one. In my view, all we need do is remove the unfair influence Central Bankers and large corporations have over it. The way to remove this influence is to strip the central banks of their ability to create money out of nothing to lend to our government, thereby freeing us all from their grip and allowing us to finally elect the MPs we deserve - not the MPs we can afford or whomever is the best of a bad bunch. I don't want to smash or overthrow the British Government, I just want it back in the hands of the People. Period.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:28:55 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 11:05:14 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:12:30 AM
Taxation is servicing the debt and we are bought and sold as collateral.The average Serf/Slave is calculated to generate X amount of income to service debt during its working life.

Except, and even Marxists recognize this, in the capitalist economy, workers are formally free. I could, if I so wished, go and live in any country that will have me and pay my taxes there instead, or live in an offshore tax haven. There are limits to the extent I can literally be bought and sold - all any lender has a stake in is any future tax revenues that can be extracted from me so long as I choose to live in Britain and not elsewhere.





Thats true in a way as you are not a prisoner of the UK but it doesnt really make any diiference if you moved and paid tax in any Western/developed nation as its all interconnected.

Quote from: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 11:05:14 AM


Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:12:30 AM
George Osborne is just doing what he is told to do by the central bankers who control the fiscal policy of every nation that was sold out to the G20.

You let George Osborne off too lightly. You make it sound as if the Tories didn't want to cut public spending for reasons that are predominantly ideological. The current financial troubles have provided the Tories the excuse they needed to bring in a whole raft of regressive policy measures, including completely doing away with council housing as we know it. Thre are no shadowy puppet masters making them do that - it's what they Tories wanted to do.

Furthermore, you make it sound as if the Tories have no choice in the matter. If George Osborne is doing what the central bankers told him to do, then why is George Osborne doing anything different to what Labour would be doing or the Liberal Democrats wanted to do? Neither Labour nor the Liberal Democrats had plans for the swingeing cuts the coalition has implemented.



Please do not mistake my comment as being an apology for Conservative spending cuts or Conservatives in general because it wasnt.The Conservatives are allowed a degree of autonomy to decide where the spending cuts will come from but ultimately if they are told there have to be spending cuts there will be spending cuts.Look at the spending cuts that are imposed on other nations that are traditionally more Socialist in nature like France.

The fiscal policies do come from the central bankers and i am not about to second guess what Labour or LibDems would have done but its possible that Labour would have continued spending and spending and spending with more Quantitative Easing which would have made this country even more worse off than it is already or they might have also cut spending because they were told to.Both are bad but more QE means more debt and if it continues like it is in the US then Bankuptcy is virtually guaranteed but the plan is not to totally bankrupt the UK.The plan is to take European countries to the edge of Bankruptcy and then reap the interest payments on the massive debt.There is no sense in totally destroying the UK Corporation cash cow.



Its quite possible that Labour would have promised no spending cuts or maybe they did.I cant remember what they promised but in any case their plans might well have changed once elected.Labour would have had to borrow more money to continue spending but the problem was that Labour despite 11 yrs of economic boom still managed to virtually bankrupt the nation instead of storing up a surplus of funds instead of a defecit which is what we got as Labour wasted all that cash*.The one thing i am glad about with Tory spending cuts is the scrapping of over 300 quangos that are serviced by taxpayers.

Why cant payments to the EU be suspended until this country is out of debt ?

Thats not politicking as its just fact and i havent got any time for tory/Labour mud slinging.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 10:09:36 AM
The frustrating thing is that this whole economic disaster is so easy to fix. The politicians refuse to listen, the public refuses to think about it and all the while those thieving bastard bankers continue to steal all the value from our society - just like they stole from our parents and grandparents and just as they intend to continue stealing from our children and grandchildren
until one day we wake up homeless, penniless and futureless in the country our forefathers built for us and our politicians gave away.

I weep for us all, I truly do.

Not one of these government cuts or austerity measures is necessary. NOT ONE. This country could be completely out of debt in under a year. Please, please, please watch "The Money Masters" documentary I mentioned in an earlier post - it'll take a couple of hours of your life and I promise that it will open your eyes to a world of possibilities.

No more denial.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 05 November, 2010, 03:49:57 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:28:55 PM
The one thing i am glad about with Tory spending cuts is the scrapping of over 300 quangos that are serviced by taxpayers.
Even the UK Film Council?

I mean, it isn't like Jeremy Hunt's argument that 'oh, the executive salaries are bloated' really sticks, because they were due to send a recalculation of finances that cut them by almost half.

Even if you think Quangos are the height of beaurocracy, you have to admit that some of them actually did a good job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 04:00:11 PM
It doesn't really matter what the quangos actually did, all that matters to the Tories is that scrapping them saves a few bob and is a good news story in the Daily Mail. Personally I would be happy if if the Quality Assurance Agency was one of the quangos getting scrapped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 November, 2010, 04:04:55 PM
I look forward to the day when the populace rise up and remove the people in power!

Alas I think this is still a few years off  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 04:09:07 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 November, 2010, 04:04:55 PM
I look forward to the day when the populace rise up and remove the people in power!

Alas I think this is still a few years off  ::)

That won't happen except in the wake of a zombie emergency, sorry; after that we'll all be grateful for the jackboot heel of firm government anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 05 November, 2010, 05:59:49 PM
I do smile at the notion that Labour wouldn't be making massive cuts now, just because they didn't make them before the election- in much the same way that I'm amused people that people think we've actually had much in the way of a change of Government at all.

The last one was rubbish and about as far removed from its origins as it could get without actually saying, "hey! We're the slightly more groovy Conservative party!" This Government is equally rubbish and whatever replaces them will, no doubt, be on a par- whatever side of the fence they claim to sit.

You may disagree- and that's fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 06:07:55 PM
Quote from: Christov on 05 November, 2010, 03:49:57 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 01:28:55 PM
The one thing i am glad about with Tory spending cuts is the scrapping of over 300 quangos that are serviced by taxpayers.
Even the UK Film Council?

I mean, it isn't like Jeremy Hunt's argument that 'oh, the executive salaries are bloated' really sticks, because they were due to send a recalculation of finances that cut them by almost half.

Even if you think Quangos are the height of beaurocracy, you have to admit that some of them actually did a good job.

Thats probably very true but i was generalising.  :D


I just want to say that i type long comments and i reply to others comments but i am not saying i am right and whatever anyone else says is wrong as i just try to present the facts.Some of it is off the top of my head and i said so but the point of my comments is to inform instead of wanting to start argumentative debates.

Politics is one of my main interests which is why i talk about it a lot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 07:58:19 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 05 November, 2010, 05:59:49 PM
I do smile at the notion that Labour wouldn't be making massive cuts now, just because they didn't make them before the election

I'm fairly certain Labour wouldn't be scrapping council housing if they had been elected instead of the other Tories. Labour were most definitely not going to cut the schools renovation budget.

Quote from: Matt Timson on 05 November, 2010, 05:59:49 PM
The last one was rubbish and about as far removed from its origins as it could get without actually saying, "hey! We're the slightly more groovy Conservative party!" This Government is equally rubbish and whatever replaces them will, no doubt, be on a par- whatever side of the fence they claim to sit. You may disagree- and that's fine.

No disagreement here. Whoever gets elected from now on they will still be the Conservatives. The difference is one lot of conservatives likes to spend money, the other likes to make cuts. The reason Labour now follows Thatcherite economic policies is that they don't know how they could get away with doing anything else. Redistributing wealth and giving people anything that resembles job security tends to be unpopular with naturally conservative voters who tend to be self-employed, or higher earners, and like to think of themselves as doing quite well without the assistance of the state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 November, 2010, 09:22:09 PM
Nothing wrong with high earners, we'd be even more in the crap without them when you bear in mind that the highest paid 15% of the work force pay 70% of the income tax that the Government gets.  Nothing wrong with being self-employed either, working your bollocks off, with very little holiday, and no job security whatsoever.  It's a shame more of the population aren't self-sufficient.

Of course, we need the State to provide for the sick and disabled and the genuine unemployed, but there's got to be a limit.  Never could work out a few years ago with one and a half million people on the dole, upwards of a million Eastern Europeans came over and found work.  Perhaps they brought the jobs with them in their rucksacks!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 09:48:11 PM
Labour stopped being Labour when John Smith died.That was a shame as i liked John Smith.I liked Robin Cook as well and he died.

*

Everyone should familiarise themselves with Communitarianism as we now live under a Communitarian system.This is the ideology that hardly anyone talks about.Communitarianism is the ideology of the Post-Democratic era which is Collectivism on a global scale with a centralised autocratic power structure that is unelected but at the same it also allows for the private sector in terms of business instead of businesses being owned and controlled by the state but the private sector is owned and controlled by corporate monopolies as competition is a sin.

So its a mix of Left and Right wing ideology that is Collectivist in terms of Governace and Capitalist in terms of business as business will be owned and controlled by corporate/financial Oligarchs.

The NWO/Global Governace* is Communitarian.

"Global Citizenship" is Communitarian.

Communitarianism is the same in some ways as a Kleptocracy and the present system we live under is a Kleptocracy.


*There is a gig difference between Governance and government.

Google pay 2.5 percent tax per year on their earnings.

PAYE taxpayers pay the majority of taxes in the UK in terms of direct taxation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 10:38:43 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 November, 2010, 09:22:09 PM
Nothing wrong with high earners

I was merely pointing out that a lot of them vote Tory. That makes them bad people. I've nothing against high earners who realize that it would be impossible for them to make huge amounts of money were it not for the low-paid workers who keep things running smoothly - the bus drivers, the cleaners, the road menders, the hospital porters, etc. and therefore don't mind chipping in to pay for government, schools, hospitals, libraries and other services that make life more tolerable for people who are never going to earn more than just a basic wage.

I don't resent the wealth of high earners; I resent the resentment a lot of them feel about about having to pay their taxes to provide services they themselves don't use, but which make life more comfortable for the society that makes their high earnings possible in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 November, 2010, 10:53:07 PM
Politics is administering the possible while promising the impossible. Read Machiavelli's The Prince for leaders, peoples and political alignments constantly shift but POWER always remains the same. The power we speak of is the ability to arrange society to suit your own or your followers self interests.

Observe the Tories ideological instinct to cut everything except Mr Cameron's photographer,etc etc.

The age of belief is over. None of their ideologies work whether Free Market scum or socialist bullshitter. All that is left is cynical indifference to the political system. I am one of those cynically, indifferent people and the sad truth is I'm  allowing them to get away with it since I'm too apathetic to do anything about it. I think some Greek philosopher said that Apathy and tolerance are signs of a dying society. Well find out if he was right soon enough.   :(   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 11:02:52 PM
"...Apathy and tolerance are signs of a dying society."

Some of us are fighting for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 November, 2010, 11:05:08 PM
I'm not!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 November, 2010, 11:14:37 PM
Ironically this forum has helped restore my usually jaundiced view of humanity. So keep at it! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 11:24:38 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 November, 2010, 10:53:07 PM



Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2010, 11:02:52 PM
"...Apathy and tolerance are signs of a dying society."

Some of us are fighting for you.

"The age of belief is over"

The system wants everyone to be apathetic and tolerant and cynical and it wants you to feel like you have no power and it wants to grind everyone down so they roll over and submit to the system.The system wants everyone to give up on politics because they are sick and tired of it.The system wants everyone to think that nothing ever changes and everything stays the same but in this system the progress and changes happen to keep everything the same as it ever was as the C*** are still running the world.

Its important to understand the psychology involved here.

Its easy to take over when everyone is cynical and lazy and indifferent and complacent.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 November, 2010, 11:29:45 PM
There I said keep at it-and you have!  :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 07 November, 2010, 09:38:00 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 05 November, 2010, 09:48:11 PM
Labour stopped being Labour when John Smith died.That was a shame as i liked John Smith.I liked Robin Cook as well and he died.

*



Please say you don't like me.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2010, 01:33:29 PM
As long as Grant Morrison doesn't write you dying in a story.

Don't worry about Mark Millar though, he killed Tony Blair, then forgot and brought him back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 November, 2010, 02:18:59 PM
GOP Establishment Republicans/Neocons in da house.

Bomb bomb bomb Iran !

It will be Hillary Clinton/Sarah Palin for POTUS in 2012.

This is the next election Dog and Pony show coming up !

This is how the establishment will sell the next US election.Stick a woman in the White House for more change you cant believe in.Its funny and tragic at the same time watching all the Tea Party dupes cheering Sarah Palin.

And so the cycle continues.......... ::) :crazy:

Its a shame that so many adults have low intelligence and learning difficulties.

How is the Change promised by the Conservative Coalition govt going ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 05:25:39 PM
Iain Duncan Smith again: unemployed people should be made to do 4 weeks' community service for 30 hours a week to remind them what work is like. Except they're not going to be called unemployed, they are going to be labelled 'workshy' so that when you see people out doing their work for benefits, you will know that they are being punished. That's why benefit claimants are going to be forced to do the kind of unpaid work currently done by shoplifters, burglars and vandals: because benefit claimants are no better than criminals.

Now here's a funny thing: how come there aren't lots of 30 hours a week minimum wage jobs advertised improving the neighbourhoods of local communities? If there were, I would apply for one of them. I could do with a guaranteed 30 hours' paid work each week. Maybe the reason no-one's advertising jobs like these at the moment is that they don't need doing. This is make-work to keep people busy, rather than there being anything that needs to be done that isn't getting done currently.

Another thing: as the Financial Times points out, no-one has yet looked into the cost of implementing Iain Duncan Smith's scheme. There's paperwork, interviews, training, surveillance and time sheets, insurance, boots, high visibility vests and all-weather clothing to be issued, transport, and certificates of compliance to return to the Job Centre at the end.

So, at a time when the Conservatives are cutting useful public services to save money, they are planning to spend more of our money to pester, cajole and humiliate unemployed people because it plays well to core Tory voters, i.e. people who are doing alright for themselves - in this I include a lot of baby boomers whose own working lives were characterized by economic growth and full employment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 06:43:17 PM
Alternatively, we could just continue paying people for doing nothing!!  Oh, silly me, we're doing that already!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2010, 06:50:15 PM
Or we could fix the economy.

Just a thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 06:57:27 PM
Perhaps that's what the Government's in the process of doing.  A bit of pain before the gain!!  What do you think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2010, 06:59:02 PM
I think the government should print its own money instead of borrowing privately printed (and owned) money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 07:02:40 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 06:43:17 PM
Alternatively, we could just continue paying people for doing nothing!!  Oh, silly me, we're doing that already!!

Why don't we carry on doing that, and pay still more to keep them busy? We could make them run laps of the block, or dig holes and then fill them back in again. That's what I want to see my taxes used for. Thanks, Iain Duncan Smith, for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 November, 2010, 07:04:00 PM
In this economic climate its a little bit unfair to say or think that everyone who is unemployed is unemployed out of choice and a layabout.

It also doesnt wash to make a big deal out of paying for the unemployed to do nothing out if your taxes or if you do then make sure you complain and protest about all the other ways that cash is scammed off you the taxpayer unless your intelligence level is similar to a tabloid.

Bash the unemployed - bash the unemployed - bash the unemployed............

Boring.

Who fucked up the economy ?

The unemployed didnt and if anyone doesnt like the fact there are growing numbers of unemployed then stop voting for politicians and parties that dont represent you or this country.

Where are the jobs going to come from to solve unemployment ?

They are not coming from anywhere so get used to it and those that bitch about the unemployed should consider that they could become unemployed at any time through no fault of their own.

Just saying......


Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 06:57:27 PM
Perhaps that's what the Government's in the process of doing.  A bit of pain before the gain!!  What do you think?

What do i think ?

Are you a Taxi driver ?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 November, 2010, 07:07:49 PM
Iain Duncan Smith has read The Bible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2010, 07:11:12 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 07 November, 2010, 07:07:49 PM
Iain Duncan Smith has read The Bible.

Indeed. However, like most politicians he must have skipped over the parts about usury.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 November, 2010, 07:15:54 PM
The Bankers screwed up the economy.

I don't see any tabloid Tories calling for them to be put on £1 an hour and forced to sweep the streets. WE [the taxpayer] gave them a handout as I recall. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 07:22:47 PM
No, I'm not a taxi driver, Peter, but I could well have been, as I'm an Essex boy born and bred, whose family moved out of the East End to better themselves through hard work and diligence.  Oh, and by the way, I won't be unemployed, Mate, as I've now retired, although I'm still "young at heart".

Ush! I'm one of those "baby boomers", you know that generation that only 10% of had the opportunity to go to university, and never had access to the credit available now.  We had to save up for things.  Perhaps if you youngsters had done the same we wouldn't be in the shit we're in now!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 November, 2010, 07:37:09 PM
I WORKED HARD ALL MY LIFE TO AFFORD THAT SECOND EXCLAMATION MARK IT IS THE SWEAT ON MY BROW DO YOU WANT ME TO MAIL YOU MY SWEAT DON'T THINK I WON'T DO IT YOU FUCKING LEECHES
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 07:43:39 PM
SEE!!  ROGE GETS IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 08:34:00 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 07:22:47 PM
Ush! I'm one of those "baby boomers", you know that generation that only 10% of had the opportunity to go to university, and never had access to the credit available now.  We had to save up for things.  Perhaps if you youngsters had done the same we wouldn't be in the shit we're in now!!

I'm probably wasting my time, but there is a point here and you're missing it. The baby boomers by and large enjoyed full employment and benefited most from the welfare society. Heck, Thatcher was even doling out council houses at a discount to the ones who hadn't bought a house on their own initiative, which is why there is such a shortgage of council houses today. Our economy becoming heavily dependent on credit was eagerly encouraged by the Tories. That and mass unemployment were what brought about the so-called 'great economic miracle' of the 1980s. The reason we have so many unemployed people now is that Thatcher thought unemployment was a price worth paying for low inflation. The genuis part of this wheeze was that you could then blame unemployed people for it afterwards.

I don't see the relevance of university participation in this discussion. In the 1970s 14% of school leavers went to university, and by the early 1990s it was 20% and rising. The opportunities for my generation to go to university were not as great as double the chances of yours - certainly not quintupled as they are now. Even with average A-level grades one would still have got into university before John Major removed the cap on student numbers in 1989, even from a comprehensive school. One reason why even good academic performers didn't go to university in the '50s and '60s is that there were still grammar schools. If you went to a grammar school you didn't need to go to university. Things are a bit more shit than that now, and have been for a good 30 years and more.

One major difference to education funding is that the student grant was universal until the 1980s, when Sir Keith Joseph introduced means testing and froze the grant in 1983. Who were the last generation to get the benefit of full maintenance grants regardless of parental income? Oh look, it's our friends the baby boom generation again. Over the course of the next three decades it became a policy aim of all parties that students should make increasing use of credit to pay for their studies, including maintenance, ie borrowing money to pay for rent and food, something considered ruinous for working and unemployed people. Needless to say, with half the school leaver population now going to university, and in a permanent recession, the benefits of going to university are not what they were 30 years ago.

I can't tell if you're saying your generation missed out on going to university or got off lightly by not having to because there were other options. I'm sure there's plenty to be said in favour of either point of view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 09:11:02 PM
Hi Ush, no, you're not wasting your time, we just have different views.  I know you're in the education field so I'll take your word for it that 14% of people in the '70s went to university.  I can only say that where I came from I never came across anybody who'd been to university.  It was only when I joined the Army and met the officer class that I had the pleasure of meeting a graduate.

As for uni, we were proud parents as our son became the first person in either of our families to reach this elevated position.  But what an eye opener!!  Things have got to change.  We can no longer carry on with the nonsense that at some universities, like my son's, first year studies don't even go towards the degree mark.  Seven grand that first year cost me, I wish I'd have known that at the start, 'cos if I had, my lad would definitely have had to find himself a part-time job!

If the new system stops people doing pointless courses and just going on a three year "piss-up", I'm all for it.  Under the current system, why should "white van" man and the unemployed pay taxes to send people to uni.  Here's an idea, let the Government pay for everything; reduce most uni courses to two years (medical, science and engineering courses would obviously be longer); students to spend more time in lecture theatres; and the authorities to make sure that everybody grafts.  If they don't want to do that, sling them out or let them fund themselves.  What do you think of that idea?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 November, 2010, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 07:22:47 PM
 Oh, and by the way, I won't be unemployed, Mate, as I've now retired, although I'm still "young at heart".



Goody for you but i bet you are feeling the pinch.

I am not defending those that choose to nothing and feed off the system but those who become unemployed because of present economic problems or for any other reason that they are not personally responsible for like living in an area where there are no jobs.

Thats my point and i dont think its unreasonable or hard to understand.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 10:15:35 PM
There's a lot of food for thought there. A proper response would take considerable time and effort, and I'm sure other people have views too besides me. I'll try and respond off the top of my head.

Hmm. Can't say I'd ever met a graduate either, except some of the younger teachers at the schools I attended; certainly not the older ones.

First year not counting towards the final mark is fairly common and used to be standard. The first year used to consist of a mixture of optional and compulsory modules to give students a broader-based education and the opportunity to sample other subjects in case they had made the wrong choice and wanted to switch, but most importantly it was a test to see if they were capable of the level of study needed to complete the degree, hence having to pass the first year exams to continue, and after that being allowed to carry on to the end.

Split finals are becoming increasingly common, whereby exams in the second year count towards the final mark as well as the exams taken at the end of three years.

Students having to take jobs to support themselves can adversely affect studying - quite simply the less time spent earning, the more study time you have and the greater the competitive advantage you have over fellow students. You're probably right that having to work shouldn't make a great deal of difference to the first year, when all that matters is getting a passing grade. There are retakes in September.

I'm all for reducing the number of university students, especially the ones who are there for a piss-up - it's not in their best interests to borrow huge amounts of money for the purpose when the same result could be achieved without the debt by working for a living. I'm all in favour of the government (that's the taxpayer again) paying for everything, but that means going back to reduced participation at 10% of school leavers or fewer, which, again, I have no problem with. However, any reduction in participation has the effect of increasing the numbers of unemployed people, and politicians don't like that.

Two year degrees would be a horrible development, but I do believe they are inevitable when what universities are asked to deliver now is training, not education. The trouble is a two-year degree changes what a degree is. The learning experience would be shallower and even more instrumental than it is already. I'm not in favour. However, there are very serious people promoting this as a serious proposition. I'm glad it doesn't affect me.

Students should definitely spend more time in lecture theatres. Unfortunately, the reason why they don't is the massive expansion of student numbers. When they doubled the size of the student population there were not enough lecture theatres or laboratories to go round, so they reduced the amount of time students were required to spend in them. Instead of 30 students having two lectures in a day with two lecturers you now have 60 students having one lecture a day because whilst student numbers doubled, the size of the lecture theatre didn't. However many staff you have (and there have been cutbacks) staff-student contact has to be timetabled around the availability of teaching space.

Things won't carry on as they are. Enormous changes are on the way, and one of the likely effects is a narrowing of the university curriculum. There will be a big reduction in our capacity to teach a wide variety of subjects, starting with foreign languages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 10:31:26 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2010, 09:11:02 PM
Hi Ush, no, you're not wasting your time, we just have different views.  I know you're in the education field

I am indeed, now as a home tutor. I'm also in the mail sorting and delivery field and the laminate flooring packing field. I'm hotly anticipating moving into more fields as the opportunity arises.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 November, 2010, 10:37:28 PM
A finger in every pie, go on the Ush.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 07 November, 2010, 10:43:58 PM
I regularly ease all five fingers in your mom's solitary pie.


That goes for all of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2010, 01:08:12 AM
Hardly solitary then.
Mine passes on her thanks, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:06 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 05:25:39 PM
Iain Duncan Smith again: unemployed people should be made to do 4 weeks' community service for 30 hours a week to remind them what work is like. Except they're not going to be called unemployed, they are going to be labelled 'workshy' so that when you see people out doing their work for benefits, you will know that they are being punished. That's why benefit claimants are going to be forced to do the kind of unpaid work currently done by shoplifters, burglars and vandals: because benefit claimants are no better than criminals.

Now here's a funny thing: how come there aren't lots of 30 hours a week minimum wage jobs advertised improving the neighbourhoods of local communities? If there were, I would apply for one of them. I could do with a guaranteed 30 hours' paid work each week. Maybe the reason no-one's advertising jobs like these at the moment is that they don't need doing. This is make-work to keep people busy, rather than there being anything that needs to be done that isn't getting done currently.

Another thing: as the Financial Times points out, no-one has yet looked into the cost of implementing Iain Duncan Smith's scheme. There's paperwork, interviews, training, surveillance and time sheets, insurance, boots, high visibility vests and all-weather clothing to be issued, transport, and certificates of compliance to return to the Job Centre at the end.

So, at a time when the Conservatives are cutting useful public services to save money, they are planning to spend more of our money to pester, cajole and humiliate unemployed people because it plays well to core Tory voters, i.e. people who are doing alright for themselves - in this I include a lot of baby boomers whose own working lives were characterized by economic growth and full employment.

If they're going to do that, then they need to bump the benefits up to the equivalent of at least minimum wage.  It's still a shitty thing to do, mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 08 November, 2010, 12:05:10 PM
Years back I used to live in an area where the crims would be forced to wash stairs and cut grass, etc.

The funny thing is all the old biddies who lived there used to go nuts because if someone is getting forced to do a job they have no interest in doing then the results are half arsed at best. In the end the oldies would have to do the job again.

So the end result was everyone pissed off including the people you are meant to be helping.

I can see this going the same route.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NeilFord on 08 November, 2010, 01:18:29 PM

Quote from: House of Usher on 07 November, 2010, 05:25:39 PM
Maybe the reason no-one's advertising jobs like these at the moment is that they don't need doing. This is make-work to keep people busy, rather than there being anything that needs to be done that isn't getting done currently.

I imagine the real problems with this policy is less about what is 'needed', and more with what is  'possible'.

My local authority used to run vocational work courses for the longterm unemployed, did things like making wilderness footpaths, home insulation schemes, park furniture etc [...crucially, I feel, it was voluntary]. Definately useful community work, but not commercially viable if the workers were getting a working wage.
A lot of these courses got slashed in the last round of public service cuts a few years ago - and that's the point, these are quite expensive to administer and operate, even with voluntary participants who are only in receipt of benefits. You still need administers, supervisors, health & safety courses, equipment etc...
So who will administer IDS's proposed scheme? Local authorities? Most of them have just had  a 25% budget cut over 4 years. Who will pay for it?

And that's just to operate it on the ground, if there is an element of compulsion, that will require a beurocracy to police it. If the unemployed don't play ball, they get no benefits for 3 months, how can this sensibly work? What if there are families with children? Again this is a burden for local authorities who have a DUTY to house the homeless and care for vunerable children.

If they really want to enshrine the notion ensure that "work always pays", then the minum wage for work done sounds fair to me. If the goal is to encourage and enable the longterm unemployed, I don't think compulsory menial tasks at @1.00 per hour is going to do that - it looks like a punitive measure and will be viewed as such.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2010, 01:27:24 PM
Does the economy own the people or do the people own the economy?

Does the government own the people or do the people own the government?

Just who the Hell has the right to tell people that they MUST work at menial jobs for virtually no pay?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 November, 2010, 03:03:26 PM
Expect a climbdown, with the policy quietly dropped when the details of it prove to be unworkable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 06:27:20 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 08 November, 2010, 03:03:26 PM
Expect a climbdown, with the policy quietly dropped when the details of it prove to be unworkable.

Its clearly a reactionary policy that hasnt been thought out at all and its not even a policy as its a proposal.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2010, 01:27:24 PM
Does the economy own the people or do the people own the economy?

Does the government own the people or do the people own the government?

Just who the Hell has the right to tell people that they MUST work at menial jobs for virtually no pay?

The government/governance and the economy own the people until the people decide that the reverse is true but it takes so long to happen because the majority cant be bothered to do anything about it.

This is where complacency - laziness and apathy and selfishness gets everyone but to be honest i didnt have any real interest in politics until about 10 years ago and i didnt have a clue but i always knew that something was wrong and it wasnt what it seemed.Before that all i knew was one party got voted in until it all went wrong and then another party got voted in and then that all went wrong and then the other party gets voted in again and all that went wrong and so on and so on......

I didnt have a clue as i just thought they were just incompetent idiots as i dint know about the bigger picture but the one thing i could never understand and still dont why everyone just tolerated it and went along with it with a kind of fatalism that was like saying "Thats just the way it is".

Complacency costs and heres where everyone starts paying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 08 November, 2010, 06:40:09 PM
Mmm.

When that old trope of the Conservatives being in favour of bringing back the workhouses reared it's head again, I didn't think it'd be based in actual reality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 07:52:54 PM
The government's side of the bargain will be the promise of a new "universal credit", to replace all existing benefits, " - IDS

What does this mean ?

Why wasnt it explained in the article ?

"that will ensure it always pays to work rather than stay on welfare."

Is that an offer you couldnt refuse ?

Do you get a financial incentive to stay in work ?

|How much will that cost ?

If its not a financial incentive then it can only be some form of coercion or/and withdrawal of entitlements if you dont conform to a strict govt criteria.

"A universal credit"

Credit instead of cash ?

Food stamps ?

Vouchers/credits only redeemable at certain govt sanctioned outlets ?

Deny the unemployable/unemployed any choice at all in how their benefits are spent ?

How much will it cost to design and set up and organise and run an entirely new system of benefits and benefit payments ?

::)

Unless its already been carefully planned and organised in advance of course.That wouldnt be surprising at all.

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 November, 2010, 08:14:21 PM
I think that the government should give the people who decide not to work more money, detatched 4 bedroom houses, two cars and three holidays a year because anything else they try to do just isn't going to work!

I could go on about the scum that I got thrown out from next door work shy, children breeders, drug takers (every couple of nights, at the same time three lads on pushbikes, aged about 15+ came to their house and sold them drugs. How do I know, I saw it handed over a few times when I walked past, plus these lads are known. Before you ask the Police were not interested), Sky subscribers, taxi users, delivered take away food eaters 5 times a week at least (I sit in the dining room when I'm on here, in the bay window and see all these things), the list goes on.
By the way they didn't work and obviously don't need to with the life they can afford to lead. By the way, you are paying the £950 a month rent, I checked what was being asked on the owners website! That is a hell of a lot more than my mortgage, for the same house and we have a bloody conservatory on ours  ::)

Now we have another family in and it looks like it's all starting again  >:(

So when people are wondering why something HAS to be done come and watch my neighbours live the high life and wonder why you should work for a wage.

There are many people in this country who are doing hard shite jobs because they have a strong work ethic and so just get on with it. We can't all be movie stars, pop stars, etc as that is just life.

It's quite easy to knock what is proposed but at least something is being attempted to stop my neighbours and people like them taking the piss. I know one size doesn't fit all but something needs to be done. It's not a Tory, Lib Dem, Labour thing, it's an ingrained part of our country now and it's getting worse.

I suppose I'll be accused of being a Daily Mail reader (yawn), shall we continue until everyone decides to just jack it all in and live on benefits!

So lets have some decent ideas on how to sort this mess out instead....

Over to the forum  :think:

p.s. I'm not having a go at people who fall on hard times, are injured, have diasbilities, etc.. as that is what benefits are for!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 08 November, 2010, 08:41:45 PM
Here Here.
At least this government has the balls to stand up and try something to quell the tidal wave of spongers.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 November, 2010, 08:55:58 PM
Light the blue touch paper and retire!!!!! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 08 November, 2010, 09:25:33 PM
Something I've never understood is how come I didn't get that kind of money when I was unemployed.

Having spent several years unemployed and then experiencing life in a job centre during my first full-time job, I find it amazing that anyone would choose benefits as a lifestyle - the money was pitiful, the forms endless and often incomprehensible, and the whole process was patronising and demeaning. It was both amusing and sad seeing the people who were used to working hard for a living suddenly discovering what it's like to treated as dole scum, how little they were entitled to, and all the hoops they had to jump through to get any of it.

Incidentally, when I worked for the benefits agency, I conducted a survey of all our long-term claimants. They were characterised by two features: absolutely nothing in the way of worthwhile qualifications and back problems. I just can't wait to see them all out working in the community, because they're going to be the thickest, sickest workforce imaginable.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 November, 2010, 11:12:31 PM
The only people I have ever known to do well out of state benefits had children or mental health issues or both, like the single mother with 5 kids and bipolar disorder I know. She's quite partial to a bit of the skunk as well as it happens. I can't say I approve, but it's not my lookout that she gets a free pass from paid work for life.

If the only benefits you're getting are Jobseeker's Allowance plus housing benefit, you're going to be quite hard up unless you also have some sort of criminal sideline like burglary or drug dealing to tide you over. £950 a month housing benefit is really quite a lot, but probably reflects the going rate in the neighbourhood. Imagine working for living and handing over almost £12,000 a year for a house you're not even buying! No wonder the only tenants some landlords can get are people who aren't paying the rent themselves. There are limits to what the council will pay for a rental property. The Area Reference Rent means that the local authority won't pay full rent above a certain limit based on some sort of local private sector average, which may or may not be up to date, compiled by the rent officer service.

When I had a housing benefit claim in Swansea the council refused to pay as much as £80 a week for a 3-bedroom house in a run-down estate on the edge of town because the reference rent was £75 a week, but they would have gladly paid upwards of £80 a week for a cramped and shabby 2-bedroom flat in the town centre. In Leicester I rented a damp studio flat for £65 a week because I couldn't get definite word from the council if they would pay £75 a week for a 2-bedroom house. I really didn't have the other £10 a week to make up the difference, so opted for the damp place to save money rather than take a gamble on it. There are not blank cheques for everyone.

When people on benefits rent fantastically expensive properties it's either because they are living somewhere where private rents are very, very high and housing benefit will cover the full amount (most private rents are more than mortgage payments, naturally), or because they can afford to make up a shortfall in housing benefit out of some other benefit they get due to kids or disability, to which people who are merely out of work are not entitled.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 November, 2010, 08:14:21 PM


Now we have another family in and it looks like it's all starting again  >:(



I suppose I'll be accused of being a Daily Mail reader (yawn), shall we continue until everyone decides to just jack it all in and live on benefits!

So lets have some decent ideas on how to sort this mess out instead....

Over to the forum  :think:

p.s. I'm not having a go at people who fall on hard times, are injured, have diasbilities, etc.. as that is what benefits are for![/color]

Your neighbour is worthless trash just like her tenants when you think about it.

What does she contribute to society ?

Not a lot but each month she takes 950 quid off the taxpayer to pay for her investment as that is all she is interested in.She is not interested in you and how her tenants adversely affect your life and how her rental property would have an adverse effect on yours if you tried to sell it.She obviously is only interested in herself and she is also useless selfish trash and a parasite as well as the tenants.


anyway one size fits all policies dont and wont work and unless this proposal profiles those that abuse the system and those that dont i cant support it but i do get sick and tired of layabouts as well and theres times when i do think that cutting their benefits would taech them a lesson as they make a career out of cheating and exploiting the system.

I am sick of liberal type attitudes that promotes this kind of thing.

Heres a good example:

I was reading about a Lesbian who chose to have a child outside of a relationship with a sperm donor and then decides that she cant earn a living because she has to stay at home and look after a child and when the child goes to school she can sit around all day while the kid is at school and on and on it goes  >:(

She knew only too well that she would have everything paid for before she *chose* to have a child and this is wrong.

She doesnt like men but she has a child by a man purely because she decides she wants a child and then because she has a child she has a sense of entitlement.In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture where she has to do something once or twicew a week because this was the easier option as aversed to working and finding a job now the kid is at school.

Studying for her is just a cop out and she probably wont get a job as she has no work history or experience and now there is less chance of getting a job so she will most likely be on benefits for the rest of her life as she is totally useless.Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Totally useless and whats more in the old days she would live with her parents who would look after herself and the child instead of the state.

Children equals free cash.

Useless Trash.

I would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 09 November, 2010, 12:29:14 AM
They can all come and work for me in my Death-gyro factory. This way they can all contribute to society on multiple fronts, including the war effort. They will help win hearts and minds, and in some cases they will have to help to literally win hearts and minds, and also some blood (more on that later, specifically the next paragraph).

And anyone who doesn't pull their weight can be infected with my newly developed infectioning (air-infectioning) version of diabetes so they can help in the fight against diabetes so that I be assured that I need to pee because two litres of cola is two litres of liquid and not because it's two litres of sugar.

Also they will be needed to help in the fight of finding a cure for airborne diabetes when it is inevitably weaponized* because my scientists have nothing else to do and I don't really like the idea of paying people retainers. *(sic(?))

All the children will become my wards, but they will all have varying numbers of n's at the end of their names so they can be ranked. This will teach them to be competitive and that effort is rewarded. Sure being Robinnnnnnnnnn is cool, but wouldn't you rather be Robinnnnnnnn?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:31 PM

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

QuoteI would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 06:17:47 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 09 November, 2010, 12:29:14 AM
They can all come and work for me in my Death-gyro factory.

Has anyone actually met Roger in real life, or is he just some bizarre A.I. spawned by the Internet itself?

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 November, 2010, 06:32:58 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 06:14:24 PM
Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

I think the implication is that it's the part-time mode of study that's forced on her, rather than having to study at all, because it's difficult to get benefits while studying full time, but I'm willing to be wrong on that.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:31 PM
its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.
:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 07:40:18 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:31 PM

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

QuoteI would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin


She has to either study which extends her benefits or find work that is part time.Its been a while since i read the article but she had to either do one or the other.It was something to do with a reduction in benefits.My point was she wouldnt have gone on the course otherwise as previously she had done nothing to attempt to find work and there was no need to do so.No incentive.She had to be prompted to do something which was my point instead of being motivated to do it herself since its all provided.

As for the second comment i shouldnt have said "force" as i wouldnt force anyone to do anything *generally* speaking but otherwise it wouldnt do her any harm to work with men but the all male enviroment was a bit much but her comments wound me up.Reactionary Hyperbole.

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.



@Roger is real as he went to the HI-EX where i met him as i travelled in a minubus there and back.Roger isnt his real name and he is not like he comes across online.He just types that kind of thing.No idea why.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 07:49:04 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 07:40:18 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 06:14:24 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 November, 2010, 11:21:31 PM

In the meantime she is now allowed to study for a qualification in horticulture

Apart from being forced to study part time she has done nothing else to improve her chances of finding work or even teach herself something at home.

Pardon the snippage, but in one paragraph she is allowed to study and in the next she's forced to study. It's handy to know which is correct, as it has some bearing on the claim that she's done nothing to improve her chances of finding work.

QuoteI would force her to work in an all male enviroment or do voluntary work with men as its men that go to work and pay taxes so she can sit around all day with a chip on her shoulder along with her sense of entitlement.

Just read that one back to yourself, Peter, and let us know if you're really prepared to stand by it.

Regards

Robin


She has to either study which extends her benefits or find work that is part time.Its been a while since i read the article but she had to either do one or the other.It was something to do with a reduction in benefits.My point was she wouldnt have gone on the course otherwise as previously she had done nothing to attempt to find work and there was no need to do so.No incentive.She had to be prompted to do something which was my point instead of being motivated to do it herself since its all provided.



As for the second comment i shouldnt have said "force" as i wouldnt force anyone to do anything *generally* speaking but otherwise it wouldnt do her any harm to work with men but the all male enviroment was a bit much but her comments wound me up.Reactionary Hyperbole.

I am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.



@Roger is real as he went to the HI-EX where i met him as i travelled in a minubus there and back.Roger isnt his real name and he is not like he comes across online.He just types that kind of thing.No idea why.


It was part time study not full time.


Ush:no need to be so shocked as it was a reaction to her comments and its certainly no more ridiculous than her anti-men statements.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 08:46:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 07:40:18 PMI am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.

Quite possibly, but I'm damned if I can remember any examples. I tend to preview and rewrite posts several times, and often scrap them altogether to avoid getting bogged down in follow-up. I'm more likely to get in trouble for saying things I do mean, and I try to avoid that, too - saves a lot of hassle at work.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 09 November, 2010, 08:46:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 09 November, 2010, 07:40:18 PMI am sure you have typed or said things you dont mean before.

I'm more likely to get in trouble for saying things I do mean
Regards

Robin

So am i.

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 10 November, 2010, 10:49:12 PM
After today's escapade at the student fees protest, and as someone who has recently left university, allow me to say that I find it difficult to sympathise with rioting students, irrespective of the issue at hand.

-Why are French students rioting about the retirement age? Most of them are barely twenty! They haven't done a day's work in their indolent lives! And the French retire earlier than most places in Europe as it is (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sarkozy-follows-europe-in-raising-retirement-age-1983938.html), so their petulant bleating (and smashing up of streets) completely fails to move me.

-It's all very well to talk about the halcyon Avalon of free university grants, but back in the 1970s 14% of British school leavers went on to university. Now it has more than trebled to 43%. Something's got to give somewhere. 

-For ****'s sake, for the umpteenth ****ing time, fees are not a barrier to entry[/u]. Under the student loan system you only have to pay once the degree is completed, and then only once you've reached a certain income level, so your background is irrelevant - and before you leap down my throat condemning me as the typical insensitive Tory, you should know that Vince Cable said the exact same thing (http://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-cables-speech-on-higher-education-funding-20305.html).

QuoteWe currently have what is misleadingly called a system of 'tuition fees'. Many people believe, wrongly that when students arrive at university they or their parents are required to get out their chequebooks, or wallets, and pay more than £3000 for a year's tuition.

The idea that students are repelled from higher education by fees owes much to this erroneous belief.

In reality of course most students meet these costs by taking a student loan, payable direct from income after graduation when earning a reasonable salary.

Cable goes on to criticise the current system in that someone like me (an archaeologist) has to pay a similar amount to a stockbroker with a higher salary, but there is no financial barrier stopping a salt-of-the-earth blue-collar honest-crust flat-cap working-class person from applying for law or medicine or any other upwardly mobile degree should he so desire. To insinuate otherwise is fearmongering agitprop from people deliberately trying to provoke a false crisis. In short, lies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 10 November, 2010, 11:14:35 PM
Any student found guilty of antagonism, violence or criminal damage should be kicked out of uni altogether.
What started out as a good idea tuned into a disgrace and I was sickened and getting angry just looking at the events on the news. Don't get me started on the idiots that where throwing objects off the building onto the police. Attempted murder springs to mind.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 November, 2010, 11:30:53 PM
I only briefly glimpsed the lunchtime news so I haven't got up yet. The most ludicrous tit I saw on the lunchtime news was the student who said something along the lines of:

"Education is a right. Everyone should have the right to go to university and get the kind of job they want."

I don't know where he heard that, and I don't know of any political party that promotes that as one of its core beliefs!

If one accepts that education is a right, then the principle is met by two resolutions: one is that everyone in Britain gets free education up to the age of 16; the other is that everyone gets to compete for a place to study at university on an equal basis regardless of income, and if you don't get a place then so be it.

Nobody has an automatic right to get the kind of job they want. Real life is a bit more complicated than that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 12:42:38 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 10 November, 2010, 11:14:35 PM
Any student found guilty of antagonism, violence or criminal damage should be kicked out of uni altogether.
What started out as a good idea tuned into a disgrace and I was sickened and getting angry just looking at the events on the news. Don't get me started on the idiots that where throwing objects off the building onto the police. Attempted murder springs to mind.




V

I am always very suspicious of the black clad black masked teenagers/young adults who appear at protests and whenever they do it always turns into a riot.They are like a Rent-A-Mob of Useful Idiots who are hired to sabotage protests.They are a convenient way to discredit legitimate peaceful protests as police often just stand and watch them and do nothing while peaceful legitimate protesters are often corralled and assaulted.I have seen this time and time again.

I would like to know exactly who hires and recruits them and why the police often just stand and watch them smash up property*.They need to be surrounded and have the shit kicked out of them after they have been de-masked and photographed and i dont mean by the police.If you smash up others property then you deserve it.
Rioting achieves nothing anyway.


*I have my suspicions.State sponsored Dis-Establishmentarianism.


While i was typing i was thinking that there are moves to audit and end the privately owned FEDRES Ponzi scheme operators before they buy enough Treasury bonds to forclose on the US not to mention at least 100 other reasons.They will wind down the operation to escape being seized and audited once the dollar collapses which is already happening 100 years more or less after it was established which is interesting because last weekend they were celebrating 100 years of financially and politically raping the US.

Crashing the dollar creates the right pretext to wind down the FED but it will be only for public consumption.

In the meantime there will be moves to end the FEDRES in as much as incorporating it into a centralised world bank owned and controlled by the same Ponzi scheme FEDRES operators - the solution to the current economic problems-the solution to the problem and the reaction they themselves caused.Their base of operations moves out of the US where they think they wont be scrutinised.They might think that removing the focus of all the attention will save themselves but that would be a miscalculation.

Another scenario is that they want to bankrupt the US before the FEDRES is able to be scrutinised to completely disable its people and its political system.Again this is a miscalculation as the FEDRES has gone way past the point of no return.

I think both of these will happen.

I say this because there is so much heat on the FEDRES that is growing by the day that something has to give and its simply a matter of who does what first.Anyway in the end the FEDRES will be very difficult to properly investigate as its activities are so convoluted and no doubt they have destroyed any evidence that would compromise them but again this is another miscalculation as the QE 2 is an act of economic terrorism in itself.Things will get a lot worse before they get any better unfortunately simply because its all accelerating so quickly which is an obvious strategy on their part.

The FEDRES financially rapes you and the TSA feels you up.



Keep the heat and the pressure on them as it is having a positive effect and tell others about this or else sit there and dont do anything while you sabotage your own future.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 11 November, 2010, 10:40:07 AM
Daily reminder; not everybody on benefits is a lazy workshy cunt.

Just saying. It is remarkably easy to slip into generalisations, but I trust this board is smarter than that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 12:25:09 PM
Just now watching Iain Duncan Smith reading aloud an evidently very difficult speech he hasn't read through in advance (or seen before?) thus tripping up over the parsing.

The Labour spokesman's response is much more clearly annunciated and his delivery is more measured, probably because he has rehearsed it and probably because he wrote it himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 06:34:39 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 12:25:09 PM
Just now watching Iain Duncan Smith reading aloud an evidently very difficult speech he hasn't read through in advance (or seen before?) thus tripping up over the parsing.

The Labour spokesman's response is much more clearly annunciated and his delivery is more measured, probably because he has rehearsed it and probably because he wrote it himself.

I learnt to read out loud to others at school without having previously read the material i was reading.

Rehearsing speeches.  ::) :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 06:50:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 06:34:39 PM
I learnt to read out loud to others at school without having previously read the material i was reading.

Well, they obviously didn't teach it at the school Iain Duncan Smith went to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 06:54:34 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 06:50:26 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 06:34:39 PM
I learnt to read out loud to others at school without having previously read the material i was reading.

Well, they obviously didn't teach it at the school Iain Duncan Smith went to.

What is even funnier than that is Teleprompters.

:lol: ::)

The next thing you know is they will need someone else to read it for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 10 November, 2010, 10:49:12 PM
After today's escapade at the student fees protest, and as someone who has recently left university, allow me to say that I find it difficult to sympathise with rioting students, irrespective of the issue at hand.

-Why are French students rioting about the retirement age? Most of them are barely twenty! They haven't done a day's work in their indolent lives! And the French retire earlier than most places in Europe as it is (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sarkozy-follows-europe-in-raising-retirement-age-1983938.html), so their petulant bleating (and smashing up of streets) completely fails to move me.

-It's all very well to talk about the halcyon Avalon of free university grants, but back in the 1970s 14% of British school leavers went on to university. Now it has more than trebled to 43%. Something's got to give somewhere. 

-For ****'s sake, for the umpteenth ****ing time, fees are not a barrier to entry[/u]. Under the student loan system you only have to pay once the degree is completed, and then only once you've reached a certain income level, so your background is irrelevant - and before you leap down my throat condemning me as the typical insensitive Tory, you should know that Vince Cable said the exact same thing (http://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-cables-speech-on-higher-education-funding-20305.html).

QuoteWe currently have what is misleadingly called a system of 'tuition fees'. Many people believe, wrongly that when students arrive at university they or their parents are required to get out their chequebooks, or wallets, and pay more than £3000 for a year's tuition.

The idea that students are repelled from higher education by fees owes much to this erroneous belief.

In reality of course most students meet these costs by taking a student loan, payable direct from income after graduation when earning a reasonable salary.

Cable goes on to criticise the current system in that someone like me (an archaeologist) has to pay a similar amount to a stockbroker with a higher salary, but there is no financial barrier stopping a salt-of-the-earth blue-collar honest-crust flat-cap working-class person from applying for law or medicine or any other upwardly mobile degree should he so desire. To insinuate otherwise is fearmongering agitprop from people deliberately trying to provoke a false crisis. In short, lies.

The clue is in the word "Loan"

Students are signing up to a loan which of course has interest added to it @ 3 points higher than the RPI.Also the Govt knows that most wont be able to pay off the full amount very quickly if at all so they work out a deduction scheme where pay is deducted @ 9 percent while still adding interest on top of the loan.The worse off in work after graduating will pay more interest on the loan than the better off.

Thats the bit you missed out

Its immoral to charge the student interest on top of the tuition fees.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 09:28:56 PM
Being as cynical as I am, I had to agree with my reactionary friend on another message board that the £9,000 a year fees are fair on poor students, only with the proviso that they never earn as much as £21,000 a year so long as they live, thus never having to repay a penny of their borrowing. We were, both of us, quite pleased with this elegant solution, which is course a bit of a gamble. How fair the higher fees are will depend entirely upon how certain you feel that you will never enter employment in a professional occupation subsequent to graduation. So long as your aspirations are more modest than to want to be a school teacher or a nurse, it looks like a fairly safe bet to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 11:03:23 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 09:28:56 PM
Being as cynical as I am, I had to agree with my reactionary friend on another message board that the £9,000 a year fees are fair on poor students, only with the proviso that they never earn as much as £21,000 a year so long as they live, thus never having to repay a penny of their borrowing. We were, both of us, quite pleased with this elegant solution, which is course a bit of a gamble. How fair the higher fees are will depend entirely upon how certain you feel that you will never enter employment in a professional occupation subsequent to graduation. So long as your aspirations are more modest than to want to be a school teacher or a nurse, it looks like a fairly safe bet to me.

Interest on the loans is unfair because those who can afford to pay the tuition fees upfront will not have to take out the loan so therefore student loans are unfair in principle.

Even though a student who pays interest on the loan doesnt get anything more from the university than the student who pays upfront it costs them a LOT more in the long term.

This hardly seems fair to me.Everyone has an equal opportunity to go to University but the system favors the better off.

Debt slavery sounds fair to me and whats more if you are not from a better off background if you want to go to university you have NO choice but to take the offer of the loan which to me is exploitative.there is no need to "insinuate" anything either as this is all fact so its fair to say that the loan is off putting to some especially in this economic climate and you could say that while its not actually a barrier it is a deterrent.

This is hardly fair.

The comment i am referring to was Bollocks.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:06:13 PM
Peter, why is it immoral to charge interest on tuition fees?  We all need a roof over our head and to achieve that most of us have to take out a mortgage.  Is it immoral, therefore, for the banks to charge us interest on our loans?

I would point out, it's not compulsory to go to university.  Most of the people I know who have achieved a good standard of living are self-employed builders, plumbers, electricians, etc., etc.  The most required attributes in the modern jobs market are a willingness to work hard, self-reliance, and flexibility, not a BA in Fine Art!!

There must be jobs out there, 'cos if I'm reading one of Ush's posts correctly, he's got three of them!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 11:21:28 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 11:03:23 PM
This is hardly fair.

You are, of course, quite right.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:06:13 PM
There must be jobs out there, 'cos if I'm reading one of Ush's posts correctly, he's got three of them!!

Nah, I haven't got a job. What I have got is work. With two working adults in the house we can pay for mortgage, bills and food. Nice though it is not to have an employer, it's nicer to know exactly how much money you've got coming in from one week to the next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WoD on 11 November, 2010, 11:26:40 PM
my argument here is simply that if these rules were in place when I had the opportunity to attend university I could simply not have afforded to go. Simple as that...just not enough money and too much debt for me to consider going.

I agree that Students should contribute towards the University funding, but not to this extent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 11 November, 2010, 11:32:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:06:13 PM
Peter, why is it immoral to charge interest on tuition fees?  We all need a roof over our head and to achieve that most of us have to take out a mortgage.  

I would point out, it's not compulsory to go to university.  Most of the people I know who have achieved a good standard of living are self-employed builders, plumbers, electricians, etc., etc.  The most required attributes in the modern jobs market are a willingness to work hard, self-reliance, and flexibility, not a BA in Fine Art!!

There must be jobs out there, 'cos if I'm reading one of Ush's posts correctly, he's got three of them!!


"Is it immoral, therefore, for the banks to charge us interest on our loans?"

Yes it is as banks generate credit out of nothing and charge interest on the loan.Its all about generating as much income as possible in return so the whole system is exploitative and immoral.

I havent got much time for Strawman arguments as before i know it another half an hour has gone by.I am working as there are jobs out there and i am self employed.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:36:28 PM
Ush, am I right in saying that, under the proposed new system, you won't be able to pay your student fees up front?  Also, if "wealthy" students want to pay their student loans off early, isn't there going to be a penalty charge?  Or have I got that wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:06:13 PM
I would point out, it's not compulsory to go to university.  Most of the people I know who have achieved a good standard of living are self-employed builders, plumbers, electricians, etc., etc.  The most required attributes in the modern jobs market are a willingness to work hard, self-reliance, and flexibility, not a BA in Fine Art!!

Which modern jobs market are you talking about? My family were all self-employed trades people. They did very well out of self-reliance, flexibility and hard work in the '60s and '70s, when they were earning more than anyone we knew who had an employer. They did alright in the '80s too, although the the earnings premium for being self-employed diminished a fair bit for them. By the time the last recession started, a lot of them were scrabbling around for any job in their field that had a regular paycheck in it.

In the current job market, there are a lot of piddly little jobs that consist of a few hours here and there, because employers have got wise to the fact that they can vary the size of their workforce from one day to the next by not offering any full-time contracts and using agency workers to minimize their payroll commitment. It was a lot easier to achieve a good standard of living when employers offered full-time contracts; it's not so easy when they only offer 4 hours a day to cover their busiest times.

As for qualifications, the one that employers want these days is NVQ3, in all kinds of bogus shit like event stewardship and customer service; if you have one of those it doesn't matter whether or not you can spell or add up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 11:46:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:36:28 PM
Ush, am I right in saying that, under the proposed new system, you won't be able to pay your student fees up front?  Also, if "wealthy" students want to pay their student loans off early, isn't there going to be a penalty charge?  Or have I got that wrong?

Sorry, not certain. As far as I know, wealthy students are allowed to just pay cash up front for their fees if they want to. And no, there's not usually a penalty charge for early payment of student loans. You can pay off as much as you like as soon as you like. However, to my knowledge, it's not in any student's interest to pay off any portion of their loans before they absolutely have to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
I have to correct myself here as the interest rates payable on the loan by the better off are higher than those who are worse off.

Off again:

The catch here is that the govt have created a cash-cow with this no fees upfront system and what is worse than that is the fact that the interest rates are linked to the RPI [retail price index] and the interest rates can go up as well as down and at todays rates you would be paying 7.6 percent interest [4.6 percent [RPI] + 3 percent] on a 30,000 loan on an income over 41,000.

They cant even offer/guarantee a fixed rate of interest.

What happens if you default on the loan payments ?

Why charge interest when they could simply charge the ex-student on 41,000 PA an extra £1000 per year [£19.23 pw] in tax to pay back a govt loan of 30,000 without interest @7.6 percent [£2,280 pa - £43.84 pw - £68,400 over the life of the loan which is 30 years] on top of the loan therefore paying back the actual costs they incurred to the taxpayer ?

The taxpayer is refunded so what is the problem ?

Student Loan:

total amount repayable :

Loan = 30,000 + Interest repayable at todays RPI [4.6 percent plus 3 percent = 7.6 percent pa over 30 yrs = 68,400 = 98,400.

£3,280 pa over 30 years.  :o  



Since when did the Govt become a moneylender ?

Because the govt has created the Student Loan Company with unattractive/punitive rates of interest and there is no other way for a student to be able to borrow 30000 so its the SLC or nothing.Companies exist to make money and its immoral for a govt to set up a company to make money out of those who cant afford to tuition fees and top up fees rather than making adjustments to the taxation system.

Where does the revenue generated by the SLC go to ?

This company will almost certainly be registered as a private company in Dunn and Bradstreet so does it pay taxes on its earnings ?

I should think not.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 November, 2010, 11:42:39 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
Why charge interest when they could simply charge the ex-student on 41,000 PA an extra £1000 per year [£19.23 pw] in tax to pay back a govt loan of 30,000 without interest
Why have a loans system at all? Why not make higher education free and restrict it to the best 20% of school leavers, and make higher rate taxpayers foot the bill? If there were such a thing as a graduate earnings premium, which is looking increasingly marginal all the time, then the higher rate tax band/s (we should have more than one!) would capture anyone whose higher income was due to having gained higher qualifications. We don't need a tax system that distinguishes between graduates and non-graduates, only between high earners and low earners.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
Since when did the Govt become a moneylender ?
This is what free market economists always wanted, and they had the ear of Conservative government in the 1980s and '90s. I'm sure it was Patrick Minford I saw on a Channel 4 opinion segment once advocating scrapping free schools, the NHS and welfare benefits and replacing it all with a welfare loans system. That way only people with children would pay for schools, and they could borrow from the government if they couldn't afford school fees, and if you were out of work you could become indebted to the government for life instead of getting a state handout.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
Because the govt has created the Student Loan Company with unattractive/punitive rates of interest and there is no other way for a student to be able to borrow 30000 so its the SLC or nothing.
I agree that the SLC is pretty much the only means most students have of borrowing a 5-figure sum, but I don't know what you consider a punitive rate of interest. Typical APR on a lot of high street borrowing is around 18% currently.

Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
Where does the revenue generated by the SLC go to ?
To the Student Loans Company, I suppose. It's not their own money they're lending, is it? Considering repayment of the loans is contingent upon earnings and can be written off after a certain time, no private bank could afford the risk of non-repayment. The SLC exists just to administer the scheme for the government, and was set up in the first place because a) the Conservatives love the myth that the private sector can deliver everything better and cheaper than the public sector, and b) they like to set up public services to generate profit for the private sector wherever possible. Compare rail privatization with British Rail. What's the difference? The difference is that a large chunk of revenues, including public subsidy, goes to rail franchise shareholders rather than being spent on improving services.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2010, 01:20:06 PM
Of course, if the government went back to creating its own money supply instead of paying someone else to do it, all education would be free. Pre-school, primary school, secondary school, college, university, apprenticeships et al. Everything paid for by society and not lent by private central banks to make a profit on.

We can't have rich people not making profits out of the rest of us though, can we? That'd never do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 12 November, 2010, 11:42:39 AM


Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
Where does the revenue generated by the SLC go to ?
To the Student Loans Company, I suppose. It's not their own money they're lending, is it? Considering repayment of the loans is contingent upon earnings and can be written off after a certain time, no private bank could afford the risk of non-repayment. The SLC exists just to administer the scheme for the government, and was set up in the first place because a) the Conservatives love the myth that the private sector can deliver everything better and cheaper than the public sector, and b) they like to set up public services to generate profit for the private sector wherever possible. Compare rail privatization with British Rail. What's the difference? The difference is that a large chunk of revenues, including public subsidy, goes to rail franchise shareholders rather than being spent on improving services.

Tesco are offering loans @7.9 percent or thereabouts at present.


Whos money is it that they are lending ?

Who exactly is lending students loans ?

I was and still am working under the ass-umption that its taxpayers cash that is being loaned but perhaps it is a PFI instead as you say ?

What private financiers would allow those on a low income to escape paying anything at all apart from the welfare sector of UK private limited Company ?

Where else does this happen ?

So i could presume that taxpayer revenue is involved but your comment about the Lender of the loan wanting to not risk non-repayment of the loan doesnt quite add up because they have already given students the option of non-repayment.  :-\

Unless of course its offset by the higher rates of interest payable by high earners but there wouldnt be enough high earners for this to happen.

This is what i want to know as we have at present a private company with connections to BP lending cash to students and profiting from it.It cannot be taxpayers money that is being lent out to a private business as that would be totally unnacceptable [although it has already happened] so what you are saying is that the loaning of tuition fees has been privatised ?

Thats certainly possible but i dont recall any formal announcement of this but its what you expect in a corrupt and morally bankrupt political system and country.

There are always plenty of opportunities and cash to be made out of bankrupt countries through Private Finance Initiatives.

Why dont students study for degrees in how to be fucked over by the system ??

They are going to need it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2010, 11:39:51 PM
One of the most compelling 9/11 documentaries I have seen to date:  http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 13 November, 2010, 12:03:30 AM
Where are the Porsche's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 01:27:21 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
I could presume that taxpayer revenue is involved but your comment about the Lender of the loan wanting to not risk non-repayment of the loan doesnt quite add up because they have already given students the option of non-repayment.  :-\

Unless of course its offset by the higher rates of interest payable by high earners but there wouldnt be enough high earners for this to happen.

It cannot be taxpayers money that is being lent out to a private business as that would be totally unnacceptable [although it has already happened] so what you are saying is that the loaning of tuition fees has been privatised ?

To be honest, I found your query quite hard to follow. As I understood things, the Student Loans Company didn't have any money of its own to lend out. I thought it was administering loans on behalf of the government, and the government had contracted out the collection of repayment to the Student Loans Company. That way the Student Loans Company loses nothing when students get their loans written off by going most of their working lives without earning more than 80% of the national average (mean) income. As far as I know, the Student Loans Company makes its money out of keeping a percentage of the interest built up on any proportion of loans that are paid off; the government gets back the rest. Therefore there's an incentive for the company to be efficient about collecting as much repayment as possible from students who are earning enough to pay or don't get their deferral forms submitted in time, and that happens a lot. Incidentally, there is now more than one company administering student loans. Thesis Servicing Limited is one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 13 November, 2010, 01:58:27 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 11 November, 2010, 11:46:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 November, 2010, 11:36:28 PM
Ush, am I right in saying that, under the proposed new system, you won't be able to pay your student fees up front?  Also, if "wealthy" students want to pay their student loans off early, isn't there going to be a penalty charge?  Or have I got that wrong?

Sorry, not certain. As far as I know, wealthy students are allowed to just pay cash up front for their fees if they want to. And no, there's not usually a penalty charge for early payment of student loans. You can pay off as much as you like as soon as you like. However, to my knowledge, it's not in any student's interest to pay off any portion of their loans before they absolutely have to.

It is though - the sooner you pay off the loan the less you owe because you've accrued less interest. This was flagged as being one of the changes that favours rich students and the government have said they'd impose extra fees for anyone trying to pay off their loan early so it balances out. However, I can't see how you can come up with a simple scheme that would make the system fair. Because of this, I have to assume they'll not allow people to pay the fees up front as that would definitely favour the wealthy but that would mean people would all be forced to take out loans from the Student Loan Company (when some people might be able to find a better deal by shopping around).

I still think that a Graduate Tax is the best option, the better a graduate does the more they pay - but that'd mean the rich pay more and God forbid that'd ever happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 11:07:32 AM
Quote from: Emperor on 13 November, 2010, 01:58:27 AM
It is though - the sooner you pay off the loan the less you owe because you've accrued less interest. This was flagged as being one of the changes that favours rich students and the government have said they'd impose extra fees for anyone trying to pay off their loan early so it balances out.

Told you I wasn't certain!  ;)
The trouble is they keep changing the terms under which students loans are given. I think that since they were introduced in 1990, there have been about four different types of students loans - the terms relating to my undergraduate loan and my PGCE loan are quite different. In 1990 the deal was that you repaid at a standard rate as soon as you began earning 80% of the mean average; the first change they made was to lower the earnings threshold of repayment to £15,000 - regardless of wage inflation - which was manifestly unfair.

Quote from: Emperor on 13 November, 2010, 01:58:27 AM
still think that a Graduate Tax is the best option, the better a graduate does the more they pay - but that'd mean the rich pay more and God forbid that'd ever happen.

I am really not in favour of a graduate tax. If it only kicks in at a given level of earnings that means the graduate is on better than average pay, in which case they should be paying more tax because of their higher earnings, not because of the qualifications they had to earn to get into a better paid job in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2010, 11:33:39 AM
It's not just the student loan. People will also have to find cash for accommodation, transport, food, books (?), clothing, electricity, gas, beer...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2010, 11:33:39 AM
It's not just the student loan. People will also have to find cash for accommodation, transport, food, books (?), clothing, electricity, gas, beer...

Well, there is a maximum student grant of £2,906 for students whose household (parental) income is less than £25,000 per annum. The cut-off point is h/hold income of £40,000 which entitles you to an annual grant of £711. There's also a maintenance loan (not for tuition fees) of between £3,497 and £4,925 which again is variable depending on household income (these aren't London rates).

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/EducationAndLearning/UniversityAndHigherEducation/StudentFinance/Applyingforthefirsttime/DG_174046 (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/EducationAndLearning/UniversityAndHigherEducation/StudentFinance/Applyingforthefirsttime/DG_174046)

Mind you, my mate Alex's dad just pays his rent for him outright, so he's already £4,000 up on the deal before he's borrowed a penny. It goes without saying that not everyone's parents is in a position to do the same for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 01:57:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2010, 11:33:39 AM
books (?)

Excuse the double posting! Books are an interesting item of expenditure. Depending on what course you're doing, books are almost a complete waste of money (with the exceptions of English and philosophy, which require close readings of classic texts, in which case I can't see how you'd manage without buying the books). For most courses you need just one or two essential text books.

An environmental biologist in the early '90s would have needed six (general biology, microbiology, biochemistry, entomology, plant physiology and plant anatomy - that's £150 to £300, total). They would probably need one on genetics nowadays, because nobody studies plant anatomy or physiology any more: nobody ever made money on the FTSE out of plant anatomy, after all!

A social science course at the same time would have required the purchase of zero books. I bought two. I must have done two dozen modules, and I'd have needed to read at least three for each one of them. Most required texts would have been relevant to my studies for about a fortnight and I'd have read each of them only once. There's no way I could have afforded to buy 50 to 100 books, so why buy any at all? That's what universities have libraries for. Of course, 8 copies of a book between 50 students doesn't go far, so we had to take it in turns to tackle the assignments, or sometimes choose our assignments based on which books were available rather than which topics were of most interest to us. The more comfortably off students just bought their own.

Rich or spendaholic students still buy dozens of textbooks, but a lot of the lazier ones won't use anything they can't find for free on the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 13 November, 2010, 03:23:06 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 01:57:17 PMBooks are an interesting item of expenditure.

And don't forget that there is a pretty rich seam of secondhand text books available to students.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 03:58:10 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 13 November, 2010, 03:23:06 PM
And don't forget that there is a pretty rich seam of secondhand text books available to students.

There is now, partly due to the internet, and partly due to the huge numbers of students going into higher education now with unprecedented levels of credit at their disposal and a seeemingly growing unwillingness to engage with the library collection. How rich that seem is varies by subject. Classics of literature, philosophy and political theory are mainstream, enduring and widely available; second-hand social science texts, for instance, are harder to come by and only remain current for about 10 years. I don't know what the mileage is like on science text books; the structure of the cell, plant hormones and photosynthesis stay the same from one decade to the next, but technology changes quite rapidly.

Secondhand books can still be quite expensive unless out of date. Final year students rarely sell theirs for less than half price, and Oxfam and campus secondhand book shops charge two-thirds of cover price. Worth it for any books you absolutely have to have, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 13 November, 2010, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 13 November, 2010, 01:27:21 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 12 November, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
I could presume that taxpayer revenue is involved but your comment about the Lender of the loan wanting to not risk non-repayment of the loan doesnt quite add up because they have already given students the option of non-repayment.  :-\

Unless of course its offset by the higher rates of interest payable by high earners but there wouldnt be enough high earners for this to happen.

It cannot be taxpayers money that is being lent out to a private business as that would be totally unnacceptable [although it has already happened] so what you are saying is that the loaning of tuition fees has been privatised ?

To be honest, I found your query quite hard to follow. As I understood things, the Student Loans Company didn't have any money of its own to lend out. I thought it was administering loans on behalf of the government, and the government had contracted out the collection of repayment to the Student Loans Company. That way the Student Loans Company loses nothing when students get their loans written off by going most of their working lives without earning more than 80% of the national average (mean) income. As far as I know, the Student Loans Company makes its money out of keeping a percentage of the interest built up on any proportion of loans that are paid off; the government gets back the rest. Therefore there's an incentive for the company to be efficient about collecting as much repayment as possible from students who are earning enough to pay or don't get their deferral forms submitted in time, and that happens a lot. Incidentally, there is now more than one company administering student loans. Thesis Servicing Limited is one.

I still think its a racket simply because what used to be govt expenditure paid for by tax revenue has now been magically transformed into a loan which means ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££.The govt pays the universities on your behalf and collects interest.

I dont like this at all and i will not accept it.I can just about begrudgingly accept students paying tuition fees but i cant accept the interest because its unjustified.I dont pay much tax at present but in principle i resent taxes being used to generate revenue through Usury.

What i think is unless students take advantage of the non-repayment option the cycle of debt will put off a great many school leavers going into university so this in effect will result in fewer students which amounts to cutting back on universities across the board which means less expenditure. ;)

I see it as a Trojan horse and the proof of this will be the reduced numbers of school leavers going into further education in the next 4 years.

Why go to university only to earn 21000 or less to escape the repayment of a loan ?

This is a massive dis-incentive to achieve anything at all upon graduation which makes going to university in the first place completely pointless and a waste of cash.

I wasnt betrayed by the coalition govt as i didnt vote for them and i didnt invest or place any trust in them at all and its misplaced trust on the part of the electorate which is responsible for the problems we are talking about.Another elected govt breaks just about every one its election promises.


See you in 4 years time  :wave:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 16 November, 2010, 11:24:51 PM
I was just reading about Irelands Bankruptcy proceedings that are going on which will involve being "bailed Out" by the IMF to avert a bigger crisis involving potential and apparently inevitable bailouts of the "PIIGS"[how i hate that acronym] countries as a consequence of not accepting an IMF [theres a perfect acronym if ever there was one  :lol:]
"Bailout".

All the Shill central bank governers like Miguel Ordonez of Spain are bullying Ireland to go to the IMF and make the "proper decision" with their alarmism when they know that Spain is next.....

This is why the single currency always was meant to be a trap.Its the domino effect that is used to trap and force and blackmail a country like Ireland to accept loans from the IMF.This is what will happen to potentially every country within the \EU as they all have similar financial problems and each in turn will be bullied and blackmailed and forced to accept IMF "Bailouts".

They are told if they dont accept bailouts and go to the InternationalMotherF****** because OMG !! its such a big panic !!! then it will cause a complete collapse of the EUro and the sky will fall in.The UK is in a better position because its not joined the single currency as that was never part of the plan.

The Euro was sold on the basis that it offered security and stability when it should have been obvious to anyone that there are two sides to that coin and it was a clear case of Reverse-speak.Reverse its meaning to understand what it really means.

I feel so sorry for TordelBack as this is wicked what is going on and the Irish dont deserve it and neither does anyone else.

Its all for the greater good of the EU and the Euro apparently.  :sick: :sick: :sick: :thumbsdown: :crazy: :rolleyes:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2010, 11:54:39 PM
http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 17 November, 2010, 06:30:58 AM
Here's a nice bit of politics. I like this man. Not afraid to say what he thinks, even if it might be unpopular:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waAniAG-Nf0&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waAniAG-Nf0&feature=player_embedded)

Good on you, Paul O'Grady!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 17 November, 2010, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 17 November, 2010, 06:30:58 AM
Here's a nice bit of politics. I like this man. Not afraid to say what he thinks, even if it might be unpopular:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waAniAG-Nf0&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waAniAG-Nf0&feature=player_embedded)

Good on you, Paul O'Grady!

Its true though innit ?  

They do though dont they though ?

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2010, 02:19:41 PM
Dear Mark J.,

Brilliant! In just 2 days, over 12,000 of us have written messages to Ofcom, telling them not to make it easy for Rupert Murdoch to seize even more power over our media.

We're going to hand in all the messages to Ofcom this Friday. If we can reach 20,000 messages by then, it will put Ofcom under massive pressure. The more messages we hand in, the more likely we'll get a full inquiry into Murdoch's power grab.

Can you help us reach 20,000? Please forward this message to your family and friends, and ask them to add their message by clicking here - it only takes 2 minutes:

http://www.38degrees.org.uk/stop-murdoch-media-power-grab
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 November, 2010, 07:56:42 PM
Done. I added my own rather less restrained paragraph to the standard text too!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2010, 08:06:02 PM
Yaay! Democracy in Action!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 17 November, 2010, 08:06:59 PM
I will sign it later but i dont understand why anyone would read or watch News International/Murdoch Operation Mockingbird garbage.

BTW Murdochs online subscription newspaper websites havent exactly been a success.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2010, 08:16:04 PM
Good point. Still, it feels good to thwart a tyrant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 November, 2010, 03:38:16 PM
Wow!!  12,000 signatures, out of an adult population of some 40-odd million, that's marvellous!!  The populace are obviously enthralled by this campaign!!  And, yes, I am a Times reader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: davethomson on 18 November, 2010, 03:48:14 PM
Added mine to the petition. I hate Sky and not just because I don't have any south facing walls on my flat either!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 November, 2010, 04:42:14 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 November, 2010, 03:38:16 PM
Wow!!  12,000 signatures, out of an adult population of some 40-odd million, that's marvellous!!  The populace are obviously enthralled by this campaign!!  And, yes, I am a Times reader.

Maybe if this issue had a higher profile in the mainstream media there would be way more signatures - surely the whole point of this "independent" campaign?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: noodles on 18 November, 2010, 04:43:18 PM
Heard in the Corridor the other day:-

Patient 1:- Do you have Sky at home then?

Patient 2:- No, I have a job.

Priceless!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 18 November, 2010, 08:53:54 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 November, 2010, 03:38:16 PM
Wow!!  12,000 signatures, out of an adult population of some 40-odd million Morons that's marvellous!!  The populace are obviously enthralled by this campaign!!  And, yes, I am a Times reader.

I had to make a correction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 18 November, 2010, 09:08:49 PM
Most of the channels that Virgin owned 6 months ago are now owned by Sky. That is the reason the channel 'Virgin 1' changed its name to 'Channel one'. Living, Bravo, Challenge all those are now under the Sky rule.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 18 November, 2010, 09:13:24 PM
Less than a month until the most brutal budget in Irish history.

Who will feel the most pain? Healthcare workers? The disabled? The elderly? Parents? Children? The police? The homeless?

Place your bets now, fellow Paddies!



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 November, 2010, 09:43:50 PM
I'm outta here. As soon as possible. We're in the gutter and we're not getting out of it any time soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 18 November, 2010, 11:57:36 PM
All Social welfare from the dole to pensions, childrens allowance,  is going to get hammered, because it the easy target, no messy unions to get involved. The low paid will get brought into the tax bracket and the minimum wage will probably be reduced. Metro north(right name?) the Greens pet project will get the flick. Water charges will be introduced, which I have no particular beef with, I pay for the ESB no reason I shouldnt pay for water.
Property tax will probably be introduced which I have a hugh problem with, I have sunk a tonne of money into my house over the years and Im lucky enough not to be caught in negative equity, But I have paid vat on everything that went into the huse, Stamp duty, registration fee commencement fee planning fee,  etc, I have paid my tax on my house, so feic off you bastards!!!!! 

I reckon the budget wont be put through, the governmet will fall. There will be a new government before christmas with a comfortable majority, (not FF) who will ram the budget through, international markets will react favourably, so we may not have to dip into the IMFecb contingency fund.
QuoteWe're in the gutter
I wouldnt get too panicked yet unless you are stuck with a mortgage you cant pay( there should be some sort of help fo those)  Ireland is still in a very good position, far from been broke the Irish taxpayer has vast amounts of money piled away but they are too frightened to spend it, once everything settles that money will reappear. Ireland also has the highest birthrate in Europe, and a young highly skilled workforce and the only English Speaking country in the Eurozone, which is of big interest to american corpos.

Is there enough predictions there?!  Be interesting to see how it pans out, Im positive, today is the worst day, and in the words of that other Irishman, 'things can only get better'

David
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 19 November, 2010, 12:11:07 AM
PLUS YOU HAVE SOME BITCHIN' ASS SOAP SOITIS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAXPGtpZvQI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQk-imB1m2k&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjSNrg7T0Wo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2RoCF3GoiE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XtaQAS4dzA
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2010, 12:18:07 AM
Google:

"crash JP Morgan buy silver"

The fightback is on!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2010, 11:52:25 AM
"November 19th, 2010

We've just got back from handing in 60,000 messages to Ofcom calling on them to block Rupert Murdoch's bid to take control of BSkyB..."

From:  http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 19 November, 2010, 07:18:35 PM
I really hope that the Irish continue to hold out and refuse EU/IMF bailouts as it wont do them any good at all because if they do then things wont get better as you will be totally FUCKED as this is proven time and time again.I also read somewhere today that the Irish are being pushed to raise corporation taxes which is another BAD idea as that is one of the few things that might save Ireland.

Dont anyone get any ideas that they are out of the woods because you are not.

Ireland should leave the EU ASAP.

Last of all its the Irish Pro-EU brigade that got you into this mess so dont go voting any more Pro-EU Shills into office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 20 November, 2010, 12:43:54 AM
(http://www.spaceavalanche.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/cowen-nothing-to-be-ashamed_on-white.jpg?ref=nf)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2010, 12:48:23 AM
Superb!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: noodles on 20 November, 2010, 07:17:49 PM
And as if you didn't have enough to worry about...http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-no-moralising-reverend-sir-gerard-adams-all-right-weve-heard-the-shovels-at-midnight-2421780.html (http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-no-moralising-reverend-sir-gerard-adams-all-right-weve-heard-the-shovels-at-midnight-2421780.html)

Good luck Ireland!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 07:37:33 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 20 November, 2010, 12:43:54 AM
(http://www.spaceavalanche.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/cowen-nothing-to-be-ashamed_on-white.jpg?ref=nf)


He has the lips for it but it's usually only Carlsberg that passes them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 07:38:41 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 19 November, 2010, 12:11:07 AM
PLUS YOU HAVE SOME BITCHIN' ASS SOAP SOITIS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAXPGtpZvQI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQk-imB1m2k&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjSNrg7T0Wo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2RoCF3GoiE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XtaQAS4dzA


I'd say that soap is as irish as "Lucky Charms".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 07:42:54 PM
Quote from: noodles on 20 November, 2010, 07:17:49 PM
And as if you didn't have enough to worry about...http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-no-moralising-reverend-sir-gerard-adams-all-right-weve-heard-the-shovels-at-midnight-2421780.html (http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-no-moralising-reverend-sir-gerard-adams-all-right-weve-heard-the-shovels-at-midnight-2421780.html)

Good luck Ireland!


Gerry Adams is no threat to this country, the vast majority of people only tolerate him for his involvement in the peace process but not as a political leader. The author of this article Kevin Myers is a known snobby/right-wing scaremonger who once supported the IRA in his youth as a bourgeois student but then became a conservative in middle-age. The Independent newspaper is a cornucopia of these types, telling us for years that we should be spending money on property like there's no tomorrow and don't forget to support Fianna Fail, a party who have done more damage to this country than the IRA did in their terror campaign. Gene Kerrigan is the only real journalist in that rag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 07:49:09 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 November, 2010, 09:43:50 PM
I'm outta here. As soon as possible. We're in the gutter and we're not getting out of it any time soon.


It will be a worldwide depression eventually, there's nowhere left to run for the working man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 20 November, 2010, 08:59:23 PM
The Real IRA allegedly threaten to blow up banks and bankers:


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/real-ira-threatens-to-attack-british-bankers-2338591.html

This could be BS but its very easy to see that as the problems with bankers escalate then its definately possible that there will be attacks on Banks that are either real or staged and the result will be more security clampdowns which means clampdowns on your rights as it will escalate the Police State and it will provide the perfect pretext to attempt to distract everyone from their criminal activities as they will all run and hide behind the security threat and there will be a ring of armed security all around the City Of London and body scanners etc which make the criminals who operate from the City more protected and untouchable.

Respective govts will attempt to justify their existence by dealing with it using the politics of fear.

Since when do terrorist organisations that are genuine conduct interviews with the Guardian newspaper ?

How do you know for sure that it is the Real IRA ?

:lol:

Its just laughable and if you dont believe me then try it yourself.Create your own terrorist organisation that plans to bomb the City Of London and contact the Guardian and wait and see what happens......

Another article :


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8003234/Real-IRA-threatens-to-attack-British-bankers.html

Its completely and utterly ludicrous  :lol:

This must be some kind of controlled opposition exercise involving intelligence agencies.You would think that giving speeches about that kind of subject matter would have you arrested by police [unless you are an intelligence operative or connected to them] and besides if these Muppets meant business then they would not be talking about it in public like this or conducting interviews as they would be doing it.

The establishment will try to control and manipulate and divert and co-opt peoples anger at the Bankers through various means.Its not being talked about very much at present but it soon will be i am sure.

This in turn will create the situation where if you talk openly about the Banksters and the banking system in any way that is not positive then you might well find yourself being labelled as a "Terrorist" not to mention any affiliation to any political organisation or political website will result in the same thing.Its very easy to see where this is going........

Never let a crisis [either real or engineered [create the crisis]] go to waste as it allows you to do things that you were previously unable to do.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 09:01:30 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 20 November, 2010, 08:59:23 PM
The Real IRA allegedly threaten to blow up banks and bankers:





So?, they also deal drugs and shoot people. Once a killer, always a killer, the victim doesn't matter in either case, only that they believe they're right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 20 November, 2010, 09:30:12 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 20 November, 2010, 08:59:23 PM
Never let a crisis go to waste as it allows you to do things that you were previously unable to do.

The Tory cuts agenda in a nutshell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 20 November, 2010, 11:07:29 PM
Quote
Gerry Adams is no threat to this country, the vast majority of people only tolerate him for his involvement in the peace process but not as a political leader.

Sorry and Gerry Adams shouldn't be placed in the same paragraph as peace. Fucking murdering bastard.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2010, 11:12:25 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 20 November, 2010, 11:07:29 PM
Quote
Gerry Adams is no threat to this country, the vast majority of people only tolerate him for his involvement in the peace process but not as a political leader.

Sorry and Gerry Adams shouldn't be placed in the same paragraph as peace. Fucking murdering bastard.




I'm not sure where you got the "Sorry" from but whatever you think of the man and his unforgivable actions, without him there wouldn't have been a peace process. His secret talks with the British and Irish governments unbeknownst to his own party Sinn Fein/I.R.A. down though the years led to the Stormont talks. Don't be naive, even villains and I include all sides, have their role. The unfortunate this is both the political elites and the paramilitaries -especially on the Loyalist side- had an unspoken agreement -Final Solution- to increase the violence in Nothern Ireland so much, that the people would become so sick of it that peace talks would be forced through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 21 November, 2010, 12:00:47 AM
And should be a comma fuck knows what happened there.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 21 November, 2010, 02:59:42 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 20 November, 2010, 09:30:12 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 20 November, 2010, 08:59:23 PM
Never let a crisis go to waste as it allows you to do things that you were previously unable to do.

The Tory cuts agenda in a nutshell.

The same thing applies here as well :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/8147913/IMFs-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-wants-fiscal-and-reform-powers-given-to-Europe.html

Whats this i hear about the setting up of a centralised EUSSR governing organisation runned by the IMF etc that will decide monetary/fiscal policy of the EUSSR free from the influence of individual EUSSR member states ??

Central banking/planning you cant trust.Create the crisis as the pretext to centralise power.Just what i am expecting.

How is it possible that Strauss Khan is a possible French presidential candidate while being connected to the IMF ?

No thank you
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 21 November, 2010, 06:56:05 PM
Pope says condoms okay but only for male prostitutes!




Earth calling Pope - what's it like on your planet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 November, 2010, 08:42:42 PM
Well we don't want all the boys in the Vatican gettin' AIDS now do we.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 21 November, 2010, 09:16:00 PM
This just seems like a not-so cunning plan to further "criminalise" condoms in the eyes of the devout. As in, "you've bought condoms Georgio O'Murphy? What are you- a male prostitute?!" Never underestimate the Evil of Ratzinger.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 22 November, 2010, 09:19:49 AM
fuck it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncEQvCQAlvs
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 22 November, 2010, 09:37:07 AM
Today, artistic freedom died.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2010, 10:00:39 AM
This morning's email to my MP:

Subject: The Completely Unnecessary Irish Bailout

Dear Mrs Fullbrook,

Ireland will print 100bn Euros worth of bonds/gilts.

These will be used as collateral against a100bn Euro loan from the IMF (a private bank).

The IMF (a private bank) will create the "required" 100bn Euros OUT OF NOTHING by simply pressing a button.

With interest added, Ireland will have to pay back up to 125bn Euros to the IMF (a private bank).

The IMF (a private bank) is therefore not lending Ireland 100bn Euros but extracting 25bn Euros from Ireland.

The Bank of England (another private bank) is joining in this rape by also creating £7bn to lend to Ireland for a profit. This £7bn will also be created OUT OF NOTHING and the profits will not go to the UK but to the PRIVATE SHAREHOLDERS OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND.

This is monstrous.

The solution is simple:

If Ireland can print 100bn Euros worth of gilts/bonds - it can print 100bn Euros worth of its own currency. Allowing Ireland to print 100bn Euros worth of currency gives Ireland 100bn Euros worth of currency to spend into its economy at virtually no cost and with NO PRIVATE BANKERS TO PAY BACK.

Forcing Ireland to print 100bn Euros worth of bonds/gilts costs Ireland 125bn Euros and succeeds only in generating 125bn Euros worth of straight profit for the IMF (a private bank) whilst further impoverishing Irish society to the tune of over 1,250bn Euros. (Impoverishing Ireland to this extent will, amongst other things, cause further decline by requiring higher taxes of its people, allowing high street banks to create up to 10x the 100bn Euro loan in fractional reserve lending bubbles, decline of public services and infrastructure and the withdrawal of real foreign investment.)

How can my government justify this wholesale rape of our closest neighbour?

Mrs Fullbrook, please, please, please oppose this vile transaction.

If you do not oppose it, I should love to know on what grounds you and my government can defend this "bail out" and why you think it's justified.

I hope you do not simply ignore me again (that's getting old) and will actually try to understand what's going on here and respond honestly and truthfully to my concerns. It's only a matter of time before the IMF (a private bank) comes after Britain as well.

Yours in very deep concern,

Etc., etc.

Wonder if she'll reply?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 22 November, 2010, 10:16:17 AM
No.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 November, 2010, 02:06:08 PM
I know you're the expert on this, Shark, and I'm sure what you're saying is correct but I think I might have an even simpler solution.  Why don't the Irish borrow as much as they possibly can, from any governments/banks and any other mugs out there who're prepared to lend them money and then just default?  It's been done many times before.  Argentina defaulted in the early '90s and the last time I looked on a map Argentina was still there!  It doesn't seem to have fallen into a black hole and the population doesn't appear to be starving!  Problem solved for the Irish.

There'll be a bit of whining for a few months by the governments/banks who've been striped up, but it will soon be forgotten and the merry-go-round will just start again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2010, 02:42:11 PM
That's when all the countries with central banks (ie, all of them) impose crippling sanctions on Ireland, refuse to lend them more money, declare them a rogue state, pour money into "financial wolves" (the Central Banks' economic and political subversion agents) and repurpose NATO troops as debt collectors.

Seriously, though, that is an excellent idea. If every country with a national debt (192 out of 196) simply defaulted, the only people to suffer would be a handful of Central Bankers. (And then only by not having any more billions rolling in. They'd most likely find ways to keep hold of the trillions they've already swindled off us, but that's a matter for the courts.) There would still be crops in the fields, oil in the wells, water in the resevoirs and wool on the sheep.  Each country could then go back to creating and controlling its own money supply and the problem would be solved.

As I keep saying, the solution to the "world financial crisis" is, at its core, very simple indeed. Defaulting is one of those simple solutions*.


*However, there are levels of defaulting. I would completely agree with defaulting on loans of created money from the central banks. As that money never existed in the first place, the repayments would not be missed. Members of the public, however, who have purchased government bonds, gilts or national savings certificates (for example) using money they've earned or saved MUST be repaid by the government. As this repayment will be made with new, debt-free, government created money the fact that these repayments represent a loss to the government under the old system suddenly becomes a bonus as it helps to reintroduce debt-free money into the economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 November, 2010, 03:00:02 PM
Hi Shark, I totally take your point regarding peoples' savings, I was being slightly frivolous there but, as any household knows, taking on debt to pay debt is the road to hell. I simply don't see how Ireland can get out of this.  I predict that within the next five years they will either restructure their debt or default.  Why not do it now and get it out the way?  Nothing bad will become of the Irish people as the political decision was taken many years ago that the European super state and the EU currency will never be allowed to fail.  The Germans will just have to keep on putting their hand in their pocket to support countries like Ireland, Portugal, Spain etc. etc.  Oh! and the UK, as we're almost in as much c**p as the Irish!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2010, 03:13:47 PM
Absolutely, Tankie.

As I say, the solution is simple - take away the central banks' monopoly on creating money and work towards abolishing fractional reserve banking.

All we have to do is keep on telling our politicians that until enough of us are saying it and then they'll have no choice but to bow to the will of the people. The only hurdle at the moment is that the majority of the people (and, to be fair, the majority of politicians) don't understand how the banking system really works because they've been educated in banking by the banks themselves. Email your MP or local Lord, write to Watchdog or Panorama, put a poster in your window, talk about it in the pub - anything.

Spread the word, save the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 November, 2010, 07:00:30 PM
Good comments above and without going into too much detail heres what i think about Ireland defaulting :

First priority : Vote in REPRESENTATIVE politicians/candidates who represent the interests of Ireland rather than Globalists/Central Bankers.You can do this next week or in 6 months or 1 yr later.Really though obviously this needs to happen at the next election.NO MORE Shills and Fifth Columnists/Quislings or idiots like Cowan although blaming Cowan is naive and simplistic to say the least.

This NEEDS to happen because if this doesnt happen then nothing will change and it may not be possible to default until this happens.

Second priority - Defaulting : differentiate between legitimate debt and non-legitimate debt.By non-legitimate debt i mean debt that has been generated through fraudulent means like the selling of Derivatives to Ireland by the criminals in the banking system as they are fraudulent and as fraud was involved then you have a legitimate case for defaulting.Fraudulent debt will be written off.Simply borrowing more cash from wherever possible with the intent of defaulting is NOT an option as creating more fraud to fight fraud is not the way forward but since the majority of the debt is fraudulent then there is no need to borrow more from anywhere to pay it off.Like Shark says any member of the public who bought into the fraud without realising it is all fraud will be refunded or whatever adjustments are needed to make their investments safe.

Basically Fuck them and their debt and their Derivatives.

Default - Default - Default - Default - Default and call them out publically and they wont be able to stand the pressure on them and keep increasing the pressure by telling everyone you know what is going on.

Third priority : REMOVE the privately owned central bank of Ireland from the  aforementioned criminal banking cartel and return it to public ownership where your theoretical representative politicians will administer the cash in a fashion that represents the people of Ireland and instead of the bankster fraud loan sharks.

FUCK the EU [The EU can be restructered/reformed]

FUCK the IMF


DONT believe the hype about financial catastrophe if Ireland doesnt accept RobberBaron IMF ["Bailouts" - thats an oxymoron] as they dont represent your interests.RESIST or if it happens then you have the option of defaulting on it later so all is not lost.Its all unsustainable and the debt is too big to be repaid so fuck them and we are not their little slaves as our lives and our future has VALUE and its not the value of paying off debts that are not ours anyway.Its their debt that they created so they can pay it off.

This is all no longer conspiracy theory as its fact so living in denial in LA LA land is no longer an option.

Ask yourself what is there to lose by resisting ?

Nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Now i feel better   :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 November, 2010, 07:18:27 PM
I forgot to say that differentiating between fraudulent debt and non fraudulent debt and defaulting on the fraudulent debt negates the need for any bankruptcy proceedings as defaulting on fraudulent debt means you are defaulting on paying back criminals so NO need for bankruptcy as the payments will be suspended until the debt is wiped of.

No one needs to go bankrupt for defaulting the loan sharks as there will be a criminal investigation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 November, 2010, 09:15:43 PM
Since our gold reserves are held by the ECB, I say we take all the IMF money and buy gold with it -gold will always be worth something since it's real- then tell them to fuck off and start printing our own money again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 November, 2010, 08:41:29 PM
I heard on the radio this morning that Eric Cantona has come up with an idea about how to bring the banks down, see what you have done now Shark  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 November, 2010, 09:02:47 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 November, 2010, 08:41:29 PM
I heard on the radio this morning that Eric Cantona has come up with an idea about how to bring the banks down, see what you have done now Shark  ;)

The French are organising a national take your money out of the bank day on Dec 7th.

You know this already but the problem with this idea is it is a Bank Run and what happens on Bank Runs is that everyone wants to take out their money at the same time which means queues round the block and hardly any except those at the front of the queue actually get to take out their money as the banks dont hold enough cash to pay everyone at once.The banks will close their doors and millions will actually lose their cash.

Another problem is advertising the event because banks will take precautions as they have advance notice.

::)

This is not a very well thought out protest in that sense and if the public really want to shut down the banking system then it makes far more sense to take out all your cash quietly and slowly and not all at the same time over the course of say 6 months or so.

This is simple common sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2010, 09:40:43 PM
The best way to safeguard your savings is to buy silver. With a cheque.

Cantona's "idea" is foolish as less than 3% of the money in the system  is coins and bills. The rest is just numbers on a spreadsheet (debt money, basically).

Buying silver  will also help to bury JP Morgan (one of the biggest and most corrupt banks) as they have been short selling silver - ie, claiming more silver reserves than they actually have. You can get a nice 1oz silver coin for about £30. I'm thinking of getting myself one for Christmas. It will also come in handy should there ever be a plague of werewolves in the vicinity.

*edit* Furthermore, bringing down the high street banks is pointless and counter productive. Society and the economy need high street banks to facilitate all the normal, day to day financial stuff that needs doing - loans, savings, cheques etc. The only things that need changing about the high street banks is to outlaw fractional reserve lending and to ban them from participating in the stock market and buggering about with all that weird financial alchemy such as sub-prime mortgages, selling loans and all those other instruments of idiocy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 23 November, 2010, 10:12:08 PM
The Legendary Shark for Taoiseach
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2010, 11:28:26 PM
I had to Google "Taoiseach." Thought it was something out of Dune  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 November, 2010, 11:31:54 PM
It's Irish for "Chief Cunt".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 November, 2010, 12:21:18 AM
"Muad Dipshit"

All these years I spend supporting the European project because I believe it to be the best hope for our religiously mired gombeen nation for progressive policy and legislation on equality and human rights, and right there in the first document, in the VERY FIRST THING the IMF proposes to address our catastrophic situation is that we should base our (their?) tax bands on biologically-determined gender.  I want to hit someone.  Many someones.  And I speak as a man whose wife is now the sole breadwinner, and would thus theoretically benefit to the tune of 5% from this grotesque subversion of every egalitarian principle I cleave to.  

Peter Wolf was right.  It's that bad.

That said, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1: pretty cool.  Rupert Grint for Taoiseach.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 24 November, 2010, 12:26:48 AM
Absolutely-- we are fucked

also

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/1123/1224283932871.html?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4ceba4037eac7091,0

The primary goal of the IMF-EU package to which any new government will be committed is not to stop Ireland spiralling downwards into economic depression. It is to ensure that Irish citizens cough up yet more money for the banks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 November, 2010, 12:31:23 AM
It's worse than bad TB, it's the road to our eventual default -preferable now I think- either now or in the coming years and Portugal and Spain to follow which will be the end of the Euro. Spain's debt amount breaks down as €1trillion private and €1trillion public. The ECB can't possibly cover over €2trillion. Endgame. We either reject IMF enslavement or they sell our country to the highest bidder. If the rumoured €350billion at 7% is true for Ireland, there'll be burnings.


The IMF represents the interests of 500 global banks. It's a BANK not a benevolent fund, people need to get that into through thick skulls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 24 November, 2010, 12:49:41 AM
Ireland has been sold by Brian Coward etc etc who must have had one or two backroom meetings with the economic Hitmen from the EU/IMF and thanks also to Irelands Rothschild etc agent Patrick Honohan who is governer of Irelands Central Bank who assisted.

Credit where it is due but apologies to any names or organisations i have missed out.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 November, 2010, 01:03:46 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 24 November, 2010, 12:49:41 AM
Ireland has been sold by Brian Coward etc etc who must have had one or two backroom meetings with the economic Hitmen from the EU/IMF and thanks also to Irelands Rothschild etc agent Patrick Honohan who is governer of Irelands Central Bank who assisted.

Credit where it is due but apologies to any names or organisations i have missed out.




Unfortunately none of us are privy to backroom dealings to speculate on the ins & outs of such or said happenings or who's involved in them, and I won't pretend to, but put simply, the only thing we need to know is this: It's a banking cartel of major banks using the IMF to force tax payers to bail 'em out. It's a Ponzi system entirely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 24 November, 2010, 01:25:44 AM
one more time
(http://www.spaceavalanche.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/cowen-nothing-to-be-ashamed_on-white.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 November, 2010, 01:33:57 AM
Unfortunately it will be us on lip duty for the IMF when it passes, Biffo will escape with a pension and a getaway in Offaly/Paraguay, where there's no extradition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 24 November, 2010, 01:43:21 AM
I know ...sob... :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 November, 2010, 03:49:18 AM
I'm looking forward to when the people have finally had enough, hang on that won't happen as we'll just moan and grumble and get on with it. Look at the pice of petrol and this is from a legal cartel :lol:

If only everyone would rise up and storm the parliaments, financial centres and the likes .................... hang on was I dreaming there ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2010, 03:53:28 PM
Welcome back T.B. Where yer been?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 November, 2010, 06:02:06 PM
Out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 November, 2010, 06:07:36 PM
Tweakin' nipple valves again eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 24 November, 2010, 10:02:47 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 November, 2010, 06:02:06 PM
Out.

What did you do?



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 November, 2010, 10:12:50 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 24 November, 2010, 10:02:47 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 November, 2010, 06:02:06 PM
Out.

What did you do?



V

Nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 24 November, 2010, 10:22:10 PM
More of a Rodice than a Halo I see.
Welcome back.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pete Wells on 25 November, 2010, 08:36:31 AM
Heh, just saw a student demo sign that read:

"Conservatives - you put the N in cuts!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 25 November, 2010, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2010, 09:40:43 PM
The best way to safeguard your savings is to buy silver. With a cheque.

Buying silver  will also help to bury JP Morgan (one of the biggest and most corrupt banks) as they have been short selling silver - ie, claiming more silver reserves than they actually have.

Why would you need to buy the silver with a cheque?  And how does it hurt JP Morgan?  Also, why is it better than buying gold or diamonds- or anything else, if it comes to that?

Serious questions, I must add.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 November, 2010, 03:39:31 PM
JP Morgan is a huge player in the derivatives market. They have a balance sheet exposure of something like 1.5 trillion, a lot of that is tied to their silver shorts. That is to say they have sold silver contracts that don't exist. They're engaging in naked short selling, this is a form of counterfeiting.

Huge hedge funds around the world are buying lots of silver because they know that if they force JP Morgan to have to buy silver on the open market they're going to make money. You can piggyback on these huge players. All you have to do is buy one silver coin, maybe two silver coins and demand physical delivery of that silver thus forcing JP Morgan and these other financial terrorists to have to cover their negative bets and put a company like JP Morgan in bankruptcy.

There is no way JP Morgan can cover their liabilites if we all buy one silver coin and demand physical delivery putting JP Morgan out of business.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2010, 03:54:28 PM
Hush now, my sister-in-law works for them - you're putting my niece's free childcare at risk with your anarchist schemes!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 November, 2010, 04:10:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 November, 2010, 03:54:28 PM
Hush now, my sister-in-law works for them - you're putting my niece's free childcare at risk with your anarchist schemes!


Don't worry, we can send some cheese.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2010, 04:50:51 PM
It's not really necessary to buy silver using a cheque - that's just my perverse world view. Cheque money doesn't actually exist, it's just numbers in a ledger/on a screen. Keep your cash away from your bank account if you possibly can and in reserve for when the economy is crashed. It simply appeals to me to turn illusory money into something of real value. Also, using a cheque gives you a receipt which is good - if you trust your legal systems. If you don't trust them, use untraceable cash.

Silver is actually more useful than gold in an industrial sense.

Silver is also cheaper to buy and also holds its value just as well as gold does:

(http://www.kitco.com/LFgif/au85-pres.gif) (http://www.kitco.com/LFgif/ag85-pres.gif)

Gold is hoarded by the ruthless banks such as JP Morgan and their private owners for personal profit. They buy low (by bribing/conning/bullying fools like Gordon Brown, who auctioned off over half the UK's gold reserves at rock-bottom prices in 1999, costing the taxpayer around £3.3bn  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1655001.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1655001.ece)) Once the banks have artificially inflated the price of gold they cause it to crash again in order to buy more and then repeat the process. Therefore, investing in gold is far more expensive than investing in silver and far more risky. Governments in the past have also been known to confiscate gold from the general public as happened in the United States in 1933:

(http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images/2009/Aug/gold-confsfication.jpg)

As  the question of how purchasing silver will affect the likes of JP Morgan, that question was answered by Garageman above so there's no need for me to answer that again.

In short, silver is the poor mans' gold and a good thing to have under your bed when a loaf of bread costs £150.

You can even buy it over the internet: http://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/silver-bars/ (http://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/silver-bars/)  (NB - I have no idea about the reputation of this website. I have never used it and only post it here as an example.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 November, 2010, 05:18:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2010, 04:50:51 PM


(http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images/2009/Aug/gold-confsfication.jpg)

As  the question of how purchasing silver will affect the likes of JP Morgan, that question was answered by Garageman above so there's no need for me to answer that again.

In short, silver is the poor mans' gold and a good thing to have under your bed when a loaf of bread costs £150.

You can even buy it over the internet: http://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/silver-bars/ (http://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/silver-bars/)  (NB - I have no idea about the reputation of this website. I have never used it and only post it here as an example.)

I like the idea of everyone handing in their LEAD* reserves to the Govt and Bankster Filth.

*If you know what i mean.

I already have a few coins plus some antique silver spoons that are worth more as antiques than silver bullion.


Now given all that is going on regarding the criminality of bankers etc its very easy to understand why they are so enthusiastic about abolishing cash and introducing an electronic/virtual cashless society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 25 November, 2010, 06:40:41 PM
Thanks for the answers.

:thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 25 November, 2010, 06:49:34 PM
I want my own bullion bar now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 25 November, 2010, 06:49:54 PM
Hoarding silver - the new survivalism.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 November, 2010, 07:24:20 PM
Silver is a rarer and a more useful metal than gold, which has more of an historical and aesthetic value so there is always a chance that silver may surpass gold in the future as a commodity unless the currencies collapse and we go back to a gold standard.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2010, 04:50:51 PM

In short, silver is the poor mans' gold and a good thing to have under your bed when a loaf of bread costs £150.




Well there's not much sense holding silver if it gets that bad, you're better off having your own bakery or farm than actually holding silver cos food and water are the ultimate commodities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 25 November, 2010, 11:53:29 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 24 November, 2010, 01:03:46 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 24 November, 2010, 12:49:41 AM
Ireland has been sold by Brian Coward etc etc who must have had one or two backroom meetings with the economic Hitmen from the EU/IMF and thanks also to Irelands Rothschild etc agent Patrick Honohan who is governer of Irelands Central Bank who assisted.

Credit where it is due but apologies to any names or organisations i have missed out.




Unfortunately none of us are privy to backroom dealings to speculate on the ins & outs of such or said happenings or who's involved in them, and I won't pretend to, but put simply, the only thing we need to know is this: It's a banking cartel of major banks using the IMF to force tax payers to bail 'em out. It's a Ponzi system entirely.

The Ponzi scheme as it were is just the means to an end and the end is a MASSIVE transfer of ownership of entire countries over to the offshore/international bankers plus the centralisation of control and regulation of the banking/financial sector worldwide.

The Ponzi scheme is like a snare or a trap that each individual nation that has a privately owned central bank has been manipulated into walking into it.

Belgium were turned down when asking for a bailout as Germany said no apparently but i cant believe its going to end that quickly and easily somehow.I cant believe that the IMF/EU who are a holding company of the international bankers are just going to give up when their plan is to eventually collapse and take over every EU member state including the UK.

Apparently the continual bailing out of other EU member states is unsustainable because individual member states like Germany are saying NO because they cant afford it.

Will it end there ??

I dont think so as Germany might be forgetting that the EU is top-down govt and individual member states have already signed over their sovereignty when they signed up to join the EU.When you have the likes of the IMF wanting to take you over and trap countries in debt NO is not the answer they want to hear as they will find a way to make you say YES PLEASE !.

Bailing out and buying up artificially bankrupted nations is affordable to those who control the money supply and who print money out of nothing and i simply dont expect the fact that its unaffordable for the EU member states to continue bailing out to be enough to stop the spread of bailouts.I am waffling a bit here but if it is unsustainable economically then what mechanism will enable the IMF to continue taking over ?

If taxpayers cant continue paying into the EU/IMF to fund it then where is the cash going to come from ?

If EU member sates cant afford it then where is the cash going to come from ?

My guess is the international banking cartel will finally have to start funding it themselves or through some other means but my point is taxpayers can only pay so much and Spain is being described as too big to save because of the costs involved.

My guess is that the crisis will be used to create an IMF centralised banking/regulatory body that will assume control [take over] of the EU member states and Spain etc may have some of their debts wiped clean to allow it to happen.They dont care about the money [they have enough of it already and it doesnt cost them anything to print or create on a computer screen] as they want your assets and infrastructure and control to forgive debts that are unrepayable

I am not saying this is right as its my own thoughts entirely as i have not read similar thoughts elsewhere as i have thought about this while typing.

Ultimately if there is simply not enough cash to go round to bail out the likes of Spain then my guess is the international banking cartel will assume control of each member state and be the guarantor as it were of each member states central bank* to bail out the entire EU in one go.Every country that has a privately owned central bank that they are in massive massive debt to so what does anyone think will happen if a country is bankrupted ??

No country has ever left the EU once it joined so what happens when that happens is a complete unknown.

Opting out of the EU/EURO isnt enough not while you have privately owned central banks as they need to be got rid of as well or more like the owners need to be got rid of permanently.

*This is for public consumption because anyone who knows anything already knows they already own all of privately owned central banks.As an example Sir Evelyn [Evil-In] De Rothschild is a majority shareholder of UK Treasury bonds as they are in his own words "the safest form of investment".

Its the biggest takeover and transfer of wealth and assets in history athough this is actually an illusion because like i just said the UK for example is already owned by the likes of Rothschilds etc who are based in the City Of London which is an individual sovereign state.The UK is listed as a privately owned corporation but hardly anyone realises it.

Thats not to say that there is a massive transfer of wealth going on as well which there is which is evident when you read the long list of bondholders [nearly all are not based in Ireland which is to be expected in a globalised ecomomy] who are being bailed out by Irish taxpayers ultimately.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2010, 09:15:27 PM
This thread has been surprisingly informative and fun, neither of which seemed very likely when it started out.  I wish I'd bought shares in it back then.       
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2010, 10:55:16 PM
I'll sell you mine for thirty pieces of silver...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 27 November, 2010, 12:18:02 AM
Still my favourite thread.  And I'm still being sincere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 November, 2010, 06:11:26 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/8162118/Euro-slides-as-Portugal-bailout-pressure-builds.html


The Portuguese who are next on the IMF hitlist are now being pressurised to accept an EU/IMF bailout package despite the Portuguese Govt claiming they are not being pressurised to accept a loan and can manage without it.Each govt in turn will capitulate to the EU/IMF.There may well be an article or directive within the Lisbon Treaty that specifically allows it to happen like an executive order.

Exactly the same thing happened to Ireland and i think its already a forgone conclusion as a pattern is emerging just like i thought it would as its so obvious and predictable.

I would really like to be proved wrong here.

Each country is forced to accept a bailout because otherwise its neighbours sky will fall in but then after being bailed out its neighbours sky falls in anyway because they need to be bailed out as well or their neighbours sky will fall in and then their neighbour has to be bailed out anyway or their neighbours sky will fall in, and so on...........

Its actually farciacal  :lol:

"As with the Irish case, many economists have suggested that EU and IMF bailouts are a means of pressuring countries such as Portugal to implement savage cuts and tax increases. "

This is partly true but many economists apparently either dont understand the bigger picture or they dont want to tell the truth.

"Have suggested"   :lol: :lol: Give the economists and the writer of the article a banana.I love the way the media tip toe around the implications of an IMF bailout other  than loss of sovereignty as if thats something new when they all gave it up when they signed up to the Lisbon Treaty.Someone shut the stable door too late.I havent read a single mainstream media article that actually spells out that an IMF loan is a trap and nothing more than a transfer of assets etc.The term "Bailout" and "Loan" are totally disingenious.

Why tell half the story ??

Every time the media cover the issue and every time the EU Central Bank make press announcements it creates a reaction and manipulates the market and devalues that nations govt bonds which in turn justifies the need for it to be bailed out so it becomes inevitable and everything goes to plan.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 November, 2010, 08:17:13 PM
An explanation , by robots

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLniOkpl1QY

:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 27 November, 2010, 10:14:33 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 27 November, 2010, 08:17:13 PM
An explanation , by robots

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLniOkpl1QY

:(

I have an idea.......


:-X   :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 December, 2010, 12:19:14 AM
Garden gnome slags off students as ugly and badly dressed:
http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/12/oxfordshire-tory-council-leader-keith-mitchell-in-twitter-rant-at-students/ (http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/12/oxfordshire-tory-council-leader-keith-mitchell-in-twitter-rant-at-students/)

Also: pot calls kettle black.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 December, 2010, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 November, 2010, 09:15:27 PM
This thread has been surprisingly informative and fun, neither of which seemed very likely when it started out.  I wish I'd bought shares in it back then.       

Though I think it needs a good fact check facility.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 02:23:08 PM
I think that WeakILeaks/Julian Assange ought to be fact checked because its all very suspect and so is the absurd media circus surrounding the above and the absurd cat and mouse game of the authorities who cant seem to find Julian Assange probably because he is not meant to be caught whereas if the intelligence agencies and Interpol etc wanted to shut Julian Arseange up they could have done so already as it wouldnt be difficult for them to do so either.Its even more laughable that the US Govt cant stop the publication of the Weakileaks files when they could if they wanted to yet somehow they cant stop the publication of Weakileaks files.

What a laugh. :lol: :lol:

Its interesting that if Julian Assange is such a problem then why is he still running around and appearing on TV like last time there was a Weakileaks exposure ?

Its also interesting that nothing ever happens or changes as a result of Weakileaks exposures and why am i expected to take their word that the latest Weakileak was a result of a disgruntled 23 yr old private in the military who downloaded files onto a DVD while pretending to listen to LadyGaGoo when no one was looking ?

How has this been verified ?

It hasnt because its what you and i are told and its a ridiculous claim that has no basis in fact and no understanding of security protocols yey somehow because it is the claim made by Weakileaks it is somehow credible and i am expected to believe it but i am not inclined to believe it any more than i would believe the cow jumped over the moon if it was claimed to have happened by Weakileaks and the lamestream media.

Digital files [that dont constitute proof anyway] that are handed over to the mainstream media before being published instead of being uploaded directly onto the internet [there are plenty of ways to upload without being traced anyway like using foreign servers in a country outside of the west where police/intelligence agencies from the West dont have any jurisdiction or cooperation etc etc] for all to see rather than handing it all over to the media to do what they like with and fabricate etc etc etc.

Honestly i could just type paragraph after paragraph after paragraph about all the holes in the story and i do not believe for one second that Julian Assange is a real truth activist.The leaks are just chatter and there is nothing incriminating in there as it all just perpetuates the status quo most noticably when the focus of the media is on America which i believe is being done to create more anti-American sentiment but i bet anything you like that you will never hear anything from Weakileaks about the Council Of Foreign Relations etc etc etc who are behind Americas disasterous foreign policy.I bet anyone you wont hear anything from Julian Arseange about the CIAs involvement in US foreign policy and many many other topics i could mention.

No Siree and of course nothing about 9/11 either because Julian Arseange claims it is of no consequence and its a closed case which is because Julian Arseange doesnt want to upset his bosses in the intelligence agencies.Julian Arseange seems to think he has a monopoly on truth.

Will "America" change its foreign policy as a result of Weakileaks ?

No it wont as the Weakileaks are about perpetuating conflict with countries like Pakistan.

Controlled leaks and controlled opposition and the mainstream media cover it all furiously which is an attempt by the mainstream media to appear to be anti-establishment and to appear to be credible but since when does the establishment media cover anything that is harmful to itself ?The mainstream media always dances to the tune of Weakileaks though.

Julian Arseange is endorsed by the Economist magazine which says it all.

Annoying little Shit.I wish there was a contract out on his life.

Rumour has it that Weakileaks are going to release files on 2 or 3 banks so that those banks go to the wall after intiating an irresponsible bank run just like that other irresponsible bank run being promoted by Eric Cuntona on Dec 7.

Complete and utter C R A P.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 December, 2010, 02:28:37 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 02:23:08 PM

Julian Arseange is endorsed by the Economist magazine which says it all.

Annoying little Shit.I wish there was a contract out on his life.




Of course that'll help us all, won't it. If he bothers you that much, just ignore him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 02:30:18 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 02:28:37 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 02:23:08 PM

Julian Arseange is endorsed by the Economist magazine which says it all.

Annoying little Shit.I wish there was a contract out on his life.




Of course that'll help us all, won't it. If he bothers you that much, just ignore him.

If i want your advice i will ask for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2010, 02:38:06 PM
Ignoring things like this does not help. It's like discovering a lump and ignoring it, it might make you feel better in the short term but eventually it's going to kill you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 December, 2010, 02:41:00 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 02:30:18 PM

If i want your advice i will ask for it.



Fair enough, but since you criticise the veracity of Wikileaks material and their intention -which I neither trust nor distrust-, the capability of governments to stop leaks etc.  Can you verify everything you claim to know with reliable sources and documentation? Can you be held to the same arbiter?


The fact is none of us really know or are in the loop, so where do you shout stop?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 December, 2010, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 November, 2010, 09:15:27 PM
This thread has been surprisingly informative and fun, neither of which seemed very likely when it started out.  I wish I'd bought shares in it back then.        

Though I think it needs a good fact check facility.

It's all good if you assume that what the "facts" actually convey is information about the poster.  And I mean that in a nice way - I think the enthusiastic questionning and clever theory-building of the Squaxx is a joy to behold, although I tend to stop short of endorsing calls for assassination.

Meanwhile, I loved Martin Turner's cartoon in the Irish Times today, whihc featured the tiny speech bubbles "..Only 8% want Brian Cowen as Taoiseach"  "And most of them are political cartoonists".  You can see it here: http://irishtimes.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 December, 2010, 03:25:49 PM
So Brian Cowen is worth about the same as an Irish Bond.


(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ga9BrVE8mVM/TPQPTq6qJRI/AAAAAAAAA-E/cP-GRGrHUYc/s640/cowen_bailout.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 04:08:54 PM
The majority of my comment is myself questioning Weakileaks for the first time and reading between the lines which makes it observational and a series of educated guesses and i am not obliged to provide verification or documentation as the point was to raise questions that need to be asked and answered rather than accepting everything at face value.

The next stage is to look into it further but in the meantime there are many reliable sources asking the same questions as i am and the lack of official documentation at this stage is not any good reason to close down dissenting opinion which was implied in the following comment:



Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 02:41:00 PM



The fact is none of us really know or are in the loop, so where do you shout stop?

I dont think anyone is in any position to shout stop to others speaking their mind.I am not in the loop regarding the banking sector but thats not enough to stop me commenting on it.

There are a multitude of questions and a multitude of different angles that you could look at it from and if anyone has looked into it all themselves its like walking into quicksand as it sucks you in and hours and hours and hours of time just disappears.You follow a lead and that can eat up hours of sparetime and thats just one lead or angle.

Try it yourself at home if you dont believe it.


What is the purpose of the leaks anyway ?

For instance one leaked file claims/confirms the US was behind and covered up an airstrike by pilotless drone in the Yemen that killed 21 children amongst the 41 killed back in Dec 2009.

What does anyone expect to happen as a result of this and this being just one example ?

Nothing is going to happen and you cannot expect a criminal system to investigate and prosecute itself as evidenced when the Pentagon denied that it was involved in the incident despite the leaked communication that is allegedly genuine so as a result no further action will be taken so what is the point of the leaks anyway ?

What does anyone expect to change as a result ?

I dont expect anything to change and the 41 dead Yemeni are just more forgotten collateral damage had it not been for the leaked file and sooner rather than later they will be forgotten about again as its all business as usual and besides its common knowledge that these kinds of incidents happen on a regular basis week in week out so in effect the leaks mean nothing and will change nothing as they only confirm what people already know.

The Yemen allows an open door policy for the US to strike against Al-Quaeda.

Thats hardly ground breaking news.

The alleged leaked official file confirms the presence of Al-quaeda in the Yemen so therefore provides the justification of US airstrikes within the Yemen and reinforces the spurious war on terror.Yemens president confirms the presence of Al Quaeda.

No shit Sherlock.

I have to stop but i could fill page after page after page with comment on this subject.

BTW a flippant comment should be read as a flippant comment and no more than that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 December, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 04:08:54 PM

Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 02:41:00 PM



The fact is none of us really know or are in the loop, so where do you shout stop?

I dont think anyone is in any position to shout stop to others speaking their mind.I am not in the loop regarding the banking sector but thats not enough to stop me commenting on it.



BTW a flippant comment should be read as a flippant comment and no more than that.



No one said you couldn't speak your mind, it was a comment on how far you go into the perceived "agenda" and still believe any of the info you read, especially on the web. I mean if the media is a controlled entity by several private groups at least, all you will ever know is filtered through their own personal agendas, of which I believe there are many at all levels of Western society. So who can you really trust?


I wouldn't call "wishing someone would take a contract out on another person" being flippant, especially when your varied posts on this thread are long and personally felt. They geuinely seem to be your beliefs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2010, 06:09:30 PM
Indeed.

The reason why I concentrate on the central banking/government bonds and gilts issue is because there are so many "angles" out there that really need looking into and nobody can look into them all with any real hope of putting everything together in one coherent picture.

I used to accept what the BBC told me without much question as I have been raised to think of the BBC as a truthful and in-depth news service. I did think that there was something fishy about 9/11 but, like most people, I assumed that certain things were being kept secret for "security reasons." Then somebody suggested I look into the collapse of the third tower (WTC 7). I had no idea that three steel and concrete buildings had collapsed in exactly the same strange manner (along the path of most resistance into their own footprints) following the 9/11 attacks. The fact that a third tower had collapsed was news to me and did get me thinking. WTC 7 was my "keyhole event," the event that got me looking into all the other incidents/events on 9/11 and the multitudinous related events that the BBC and other mainstream media either ignored or simply dismissed. I will admit that the more I discovered, the murkier things got and the more frightened I became. The whole world began to remake itself before my very eyes in a way that shifted my entire view of virtually everything I'd taken as read beforehand.

Once through this keyhole, I began to stumble across a great many things that simply didn't add up. There's also a Hell of a lot of bullshit, madness and disinformation out there and so making sense of it all becomes virtually impossible. It eventually became clear to me that there are shadowy forces in this world which, while not in control of the world per-se, have an inordinate amount of influence on governments and societies. These forces are like a hydra with heads in many, many pies. To fight a hydra, simply going for the individual heads will not work - you need to go for its vital and most exposed points.

In deciding which path to take I came to realise that the extensive control these agencies have over the banking system is one of their major pillars of power and influence and therefore one of their greatest weaknesses. Take away these agencies' power over the creation and control of the world's money supply and they will be severely weakened. The amount of "conspiracy" paths that lead back to banking control is voluminous and so I decided to focus on this area. Reclaiming control of our country's (and all the countries of the world's) banking system will not automatically clear up every problem but it will make life far more difficult for those who see themselves as the natural "Rulers of the World" and be a big step towards returning control of governments to their respective peoples.

To my mind the pointless and illegal wars in which we are embroiled, the gradual creep of Western democracies' towards ever more restrictive and oppressive atmospheres, the spurious "War on Terror," economic subjugation, media control, the corporatisation of essential services, globalization and all the rest of it are part of the ruling elite's "War on Terra." It's a hard thing to believe, I know, and an even harder thing to ignore. (Sometimes I wish I could go back in time and resist looking at WTC 7 - my life was so much more simple back then.) Something is definitely going on and I do not pretend to know exactly what is going on and who (if anyone) is behind it. Trust me, I'd love to be wrong about everything I've discovered and once more come to believe that my government has my (and your) best interests at heart. Unfortunately, I simply cannot believe that any more.

I have no argument with anyone who solely pursues 9/11 truth, for example, as everything that affects our world and our freedoms must be investigated and understood. The path I have taken has led me to look hard at the central banking system as I personally believe this to be the major area where the greatest amount of good can be done for the majority of people on the Earth. Others disagree with me, preferring to rail against 9/11 cover-ups, globalization or corporatization for example, and these fights are just as valid as my fight. All I know is that we must investigate these things and fight for truth and justice in our own ways otherwise one day we will awake to a world in which we are all slaves. The majority of people will be led into that slavery unknowingly, even willingly.

I will not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 06:46:52 PM
Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 05:24:50 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 04:08:54 PM

Quote from: Garageman on 04 December, 2010, 02:41:00 PM



The fact is none of us really know or are in the loop, so where do you shout stop?

I dont think anyone is in any position to shout stop to others speaking their mind.I am not in the loop regarding the banking sector but thats not enough to stop me commenting on it.



BTW a flippant comment should be read as a flippant comment and no more than that.



No one said you couldn't speak your mind, it was a comment on how far you go into the perceived "agenda" and still believe any of the info you read, especially on the web. I mean if the media is a controlled entity by several private groups at least, all you will ever know is filtered through their own personal agendas, of which I believe there are many at all levels of Western society. So who can you really trust?


I wouldn't call "wishing someone would take a contract out on another person" being flippant, especially when your varied posts on this thread are long and personally felt. They geuinely seem to be your beliefs.

Its an absolute minefield most of the time but there are certain names and sources i can trust.Its like being your own detective a lot of the time.Its hobby and i like to deconstruct it all but its difficult to verbalise/explain the thought processes and how i come to certain conclusions.Its really a case of understanding how the system operates and once you understand it then it becomes fairly easy to get into its mindset as its like the saying that if you have a criminal mind yourself then its easier to understand the mind of other criminals and to predict their next move.

I would rather not explain myself any more than that as its surprisingly difficult.I am driven to question things and always have been and its challenging to try and deconstruct it all and i feel driven to do so.

Ultimately its just myself and a computer/keypad and a broadband connection with access to info trying my hardest to make sense of the organised chaos and insanity and BS i am confronted with and surrounded by on a daily basis and i will not stop as its my mission in life or one of.

On an intuitive level something is seriously not right here as the Pentagon for example say that they can or could close down Wikileaks in an instant if they wanted to but they claim there is no need.So there is no need to shut down Wikileaks despite the fact that they are slowly releasing apparently classified information which is serious offence.They complain and whine about the leaks while doing nothing about it yet they make a big deal about Hilary Clinton who is a duplicitious traitorous trash and the rest of it at the best of times having to heal rifts  :lol:

How can Hilary Clinton heal rifts with other countries ?

:lol:

:-\

The whole thing is a farce.

I just get tired of the whole ridiculous dog and pony show and the Maggots/parasites and human garbage who are responsible for and perpetuate a criminal system that is my enemy and the enemy of everyone who is not a part of it.  :sick:

Not on my watch.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 04 December, 2010, 07:14:14 PM
yikes

KUHNER: Assassinate Assange

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/2/assassinate-assange/?page=2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 04 December, 2010, 08:13:38 PM
"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. vows that he is looking into possible criminal charges against Mr. Assange. It is too late for tough talk. At this point, we are beyond indictments and courts. The damage has been done; people have died - and will die because of the actions of this puerile, self-absorbed narcissist. News reports say the WikiLeaks founder is hiding out in England. If that's true, we should treat Mr. Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him."

[quoted from the article posted above mine]

People have died and will continue to die because of the actions of the US govt and the CFR etc etc who sanction and perpetuate US foreign policy which threatens Americans and everyone else and the likes of Jeffrey T Khuner who go along with it all with their fake American patriotism and love of war and big govt.

:lol:

What a laugh considering the Edmund Burke institute is rife with Neocons/establishment conservatives who will defend imperialism and overseas intervention and which claims to represent minorities.

Establishment hypocrite    :thumbsdown: :sick:

I shouldnt post any more comments.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 07 December, 2010, 12:18:30 PM
wikileaks joke
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v79/johnnystress/where_is_assange_2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 07 December, 2010, 06:01:25 PM
Horrifying conspiracy theory of the day; Assange is a US plant to orchestrate the justification of the censorship of the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 December, 2010, 07:48:28 PM
Quote from: Christov on 07 December, 2010, 06:01:25 PM
Horrifying conspiracy theory of the day; Assange is a US plant to orchestrate the justification of the censorship of the internet.

"WeakiLeaks talking points disclosure ends Net Neutrality"

Its certainly a possibility and i have been thinking along those lines among others.

If it is all a problem-reaction-solution then it has to appear to be credible to most people who dont know much about the subject and the fact that the media leapt on it [they love to create an easily identifiable bad guy to focus on] does make it look suspicious in my mind and it would explain the selected info that has been leaked as its not serious enough to incriminate anyone in govt but its serious enough to create the pretext for internet censorship and it does seem to have been timed well to coincide with the re-election of Republicans/Neocons in the US and if there is a reaction and a solution then it will more than likely come from them.

"Truth" is a big business now and "Truth" has moved across to the mainstream media and the papers covered the story because it will more papers and it makes them look more credible to the majority of people.

If it wasnt an operation to create the pretext for an internet information clampdown from the word go then its obvious that the establishment will react in exactly the same way so the end result might well be the same PLUS its the perfect angle to exploit to divert attention away from the content of the cables PLUS the sex charges divert attention anyway from the cables.

It seems to have culminated in an arrest so i bet the media will no longer focus on it all very much from now and it will all blow over and it will be business as usual........

Of course the establishment would love to be able to censor the internet but its a lot easier said than done as people can be very creative and also censoring subject matter only ever attracts more attention to it which would be counterproductive for the establishment to try it.The establishment however realise just how much information there is on the internet that is detrimental to themselves and instead of ignoring all that completely they have reacted to it by admitting that certain topics are in fact truth simply because so much of it is now in the open.Their attitude is "So What if the US military/Govt is assisting in the cultivation of Opium in Afghanistan ?? What are you going to do about it ??" and about a hundred plus other topics but i hate to say it but they are right because no one is doing anything about it and hardly anyone talks about it.

Blatant in your face criminality.These are the times we live in.

Julian Assange has just been arrested/detained by Scotland Yard after handing himself into a police to answer the charges of rape that happened in Sweden that are apparently spurious.

"Our operative is now back in the fold"   :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 December, 2010, 08:51:21 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 07 December, 2010, 12:18:30 PM
wikileaks joke
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v79/johnnystress/where_is_assange_2.jpg)


Genius

So now they have him in Custody, do ye think the Yanks are going to try to get him extradited like with Gray McKinnon? That whole McKinnon thing is disgraceful. I'll gladly be corrected on this but didn't Mckinnon only hack all those top secret systems to see if he could, for a bit of craic? Maybe that's a bit glib, but still.

Here's a top secret about world leaders and politicians. Sometimes when you see pictures of them smiling, they're not actually happy or enjoying themselves. Shocking, I know. Clearly because this information is so sensitive, its source cannot be disclosed ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 December, 2010, 08:55:18 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 07 December, 2010, 08:51:21 PM



Here's a top secret about world leaders and politicians. Sometimes when you see pictures of them smiling, they're not actually happy or enjoying themselves. Shocking, I know. Clearly because this information is so sensitive, its source cannot be disclosed ;)

I often think they are laughing at us and laughing about what they are getting away with day after day because they think they are untouchable.I know they enjoy it as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 December, 2010, 08:57:23 PM
Tony Blair certainly seemed to. A lot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Kerrin on 08 December, 2010, 11:28:44 PM
I believe this gentleman sums up the current Irish financial situation in an eloquent fashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koY6kXhQDQo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koY6kXhQDQo)

It's the Michael Flatley bit at the end that gets me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 December, 2010, 11:47:15 PM
He's not wrong.  But it's all okay, our public servants have just had their basic salaries capped (with the caveat that this may not be enforceable where contracts already exist).  At €250K. That's 20 times what I currently earn, and 10 times the average industrial wage. Ooooh, draconian budget alright.

And if you think that's insane, ruminate on the fact that the head of the Electricity Supply Board (a semi-state body with an effective monopoly, in a state with 4.5 million people) was getting €750K p.a.  For...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 December, 2010, 11:50:30 PM
It's called: pulling up the ladder.









After the break: Collapse of the €uro.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 10 December, 2010, 09:27:42 AM
15 years old..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U_gHUiL4P8
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 December, 2010, 01:04:53 PM
Nice! He may look like Tom Cruise meets the guy from the Dark Crystal, but if he's the future, I'm all for it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 December, 2010, 03:12:31 PM
Good lad! Honed his skills in a public school debating society much? The protest movement and the future of organized resistance needs him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 December, 2010, 07:06:35 PM
That's obviously fake, if mainstream media has taught us anything, it's that all teenagers are obese, monosyllabic, knife wielding savages ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 December, 2010, 07:50:14 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 10 December, 2010, 03:12:31 PM
Good lad! Honed his skills in a public school debating society much? The protest movement and the future of organized resistance needs him.

Its horses for courses.

:D Just having a laugh.

Rupert/Toby gives the establishment what for.


He does sound exactly like Tony Blair.Its exactly the same accent !!

"Well you know ...i mean.....uhmmm...ok...I mean  we sure showed them something last Wednesday...errr..you know..... this was meant to be the first post-idealogical generation right ?"


He isnt old enough to pay taxes or vote so he should sit down and shut up and go back to his schoolwork. :D

Also the comment about having a university education and the police was a little bit off and snotty especially as having a university degree is not a guarantee of anything but young Tarquin will probably go to a proper university and get a proper education and a proper job instead of joining the police force or something awful like that.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 December, 2010, 08:00:44 PM
I remember New labour's greatest bastards sounding like this when they were that age. But at least someone's saying it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 10 December, 2010, 08:19:38 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 December, 2010, 08:00:44 PM
I remember New labour's greatest bastards sounding like this when they were that age. But at least someone's saying it.

Thats very true.

"I have a vision of a modern and new progressive United Kingdom where fairness and open accountable transparent govt - equality and equal opportunities with a forward thinking progressive and inclusive further education system will propel this nation forwards together into the Post-Democratic Era for a new dawn of peace and prosperity and a future fair for all "
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 11 December, 2010, 07:16:49 PM
New terrifying theory; Assange is made of ham and goes dogging on the weekends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 December, 2010, 03:27:46 PM
"Murdoch's power grab: Jeremy Hunt is not impartial.

"Sign the petition to demand an impartial investigation by the Competition Commission.

"The petition text:

"David Cameron, Nick Clegg, and Jeremy Hunt,

"We are standing up for due process and a fair future for media in the UK.

"If Vince Cable isn't impartial to make decisions about the BSkyB takeover, neither is Jeremy Hunt. Jeremy Hunt is an outspoken supporter of Rupert Murdoch.

"We demand that Jeremy Hunt passes Ofcom's report straight to the competition commission for a full-scale investigation, without political interference."

http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/Jeremy-Hunt-not-impartial#petition (http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/Jeremy-Hunt-not-impartial#petition)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 28 December, 2010, 07:51:19 PM

"Rather than worry about Rupert Murdoch owning another TV channel, what we should recognise is that he has probably done more to create variety and choice in British TV than any other single person because of his huge investment in setting up Sky TV, which, at one point, was losing several million pounds a day.

We would be the poorer and wouldn't be saying that British TV is the envy of the world if it hadn't been for him being prepared to take that commercial risk. We need to encourage that kind of investment." - Jeremy Hunt.

Even the name sounds like cockney rhyming slang along the same lines as James blunt.

You dont have to look very hard to realise that Jeremy Hunt is Rupert Murdochs paid off pet poodle politician.

It wasnt Sky that made UK TV/broadcasting the envy of the world as the BBC and various other UK produced TV did that and the statement is baseless and disingenuous and should be disregarded or even better retracted as its not only a statement that attempts to distract and divert the topic away from monopolies but the statement as a whole is an apology for Rupert Murdoch.Its also a defence of Rupert Murdoch and its also insinuating that the UK as a whole owes something to Murdoch because of previous investment.Sky TV should not even be categorised as "British TV" as all Sky did was offer more choice if you were prepared to pay for it.

"Rather than worry"

Yes dont worry about Rupert Murdoch and monopolies.Shut up about Rupert Murdoch and be grateful for what you are given.

It sounds like a foregone conclusion to me but i dont care because i dont subscribe to Sky.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 29 December, 2010, 06:53:22 AM
Doesn't SKY television basically consist of American stuff and the football?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2010, 01:44:14 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 28 December, 2010, 07:51:19 PM
"We would be the poorer and wouldn't be saying that British TV is the envy of the world if it hadn't been for him being prepared to take that commercial risk. "

As part of the world that envies British TV, I can assure you that Sky has nothing to do with it.   Cheeses fucking crust, I'm starting to think your current government has the potential to be as bad as ours. 

No, I don't really mean it, nothing could be that bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 01:51:27 PM
Have we ever had Government TB? Before the current Kleptocrats, it was Rome Rule rather than Home Rule and before that the last of old school Empire.


When all the current incumbents are finally washed away -that generation of hangers-on who've been bleeding us since the 70's- maybe then we can actually start a Government or even better a proper society. It'll be in the hands of the millenial genration then.


At least in terms of drama, Brit-telly is no longer the envy of the world that now lies with the Yanks, but it still trumps the competition in other genres.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2010, 02:03:21 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 01:51:27 PM
Have we ever had Government TB? Before the current Kleptocrats, it was Rome Rule rather than Home Rule and before that the last of old school Empire.

So painfully true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 December, 2010, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 December, 2010, 02:03:21 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 01:51:27 PM
Have we ever had Government TB? Before the current Kleptocrats, it was Rome Rule rather than Home Rule and before that the last of old school Empire.

So painfully true.

Thirded.  Wonder who we'll be asking to piss down our necks and tell us it's raining next?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 December, 2010, 03:16:21 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 December, 2010, 01:44:14 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 28 December, 2010, 07:51:19 PM
"We would be the poorer and wouldn't be saying that British TV is the envy of the world if it hadn't been for him being prepared to take that commercial risk. "

As part of the world that envies British TV, I can assure you that Sky has nothing to do with it.   Cheeses fucking crust, I'm starting to think your current government has the potential to be as bad as ours. 

No, I don't really mean it, nothing could be that bad.

They are all scum and they all have the potential to be as bad as each other.Look at what is going on in the US with the Obama administration.I challenge anyone to name a govt in the West that is worse than than that cesspool of corrupt Globalist/NWO control freak degenerates.

We are living in a Kleptocracy/Corporatocracy/Thugocracy that no longer represents any of our interests and the longer everyone tolerates it the worse it will get and we all have front row seats to sit and watch civilisation and society decline into a culture of mediocrity and tyranny that is driven by greed and corruption and stupidity and all of the other negative aspects of human nature.

God help us all.

The Conservative/LibDem Coalition in the UK is a total sham as well as Conservatives are no longer Conservatives and what you have now in the UK is a two party system whose political ideology is virtually identical which amounts to a one party system.

Its not government its governance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 03:22:27 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 December, 2010, 03:16:21 PM

Its not government its governance.


No, it's management, governance -suggesting affairs of state, organization, regulation, policy- has nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 December, 2010, 03:36:28 PM
It's geopolitics is what it is. All of us under the control of the same banks, the same corporations, the same rules, the same ideologies and the same people. This is only a few steps away. 2011 may well be the new 1984.

Support the wars.
Be vigilant against terrorism.
Trust the TV.
Consume.
Consume.
Consume.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 December, 2010, 04:02:21 PM


Trust the govt
Love the govt
Be a stateist
Dont question authority
Live in fear of those in authority
Love your servitude
Feel disenfranchised and disempowered and worthless and isolated
Be scared of Muslims
Spy and snitch on each other
Support and pay the CO2 life taxes
Live in denial and pretend everything is alright
Eat junk food and chemical laced GM food
Allow yourself to be scammed and hoodwinked and deceived
Laugh at and belittle and ridicule others who speak the plain truth
Support Globalism
Take your pharaceuticals and get your vaccination shots
Drink poisoned tapwater

Article :

http://uruknet.info/?p=m73331&hd=&size=1&l=e
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2010, 04:10:46 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 29 December, 2010, 04:02:21 PM
Drink poisoned tapwater

Chance'd be a fine thing round here.  Did it snow in the last month?  Why yes, it did.  Forget running water then you greedy wasteful peasants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 04:12:09 PM
Should've saved some snow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 29 December, 2010, 04:22:57 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 04:12:09 PMShould've saved some snow.
But not the yellow stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 December, 2010, 05:04:29 PM
Mmm, salty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 21 January, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
I wanted to share my thoughts on the long term implications of China as the new NO 1 superpower since the transition from the US is nearly complete.

The way i see it is that China has been preparing for this for quite some time now and you can see this for yourself if you compare the China of 10 years ago to the present day China.

Theres lots of reasons for this which are too convoluted to go into here but people who dont know any better think of China as a miracle economy which is partly true but no more than that as people dont realise that China has a massive debt bubble/massive amounts of lending and from what i understand no longer prints its own debt free currency anymore as you now have private banks and the Globalist/NWO power elite have infiltrated their banking system and banks practice Fractional Reserve lending so to all intents and purposes as they have become more westernised they have adopted Western banking practices as well which is very bad news for them although the Chinese are very good at wiping out debt en masse which might save them as their economy is being set up as a planned implosion economy just like ours has been and the fact is their economy has been built by overseas investment/manufacturing/exports but at the same time China has been building an internal economy on top of that which has adopted a Western planned implosion/Ponzi scheme economy.Any economy that is built up that quickly cant last especially as their exports are shrinking as the West goes deeper into economic depression.

China is well in with the Globalists as they have been wining and dining them for years but as much as i dont like the Chinese govt and its political system i cant help but think that they are going to be used just like America has been for the last hundred years as when the power elite take over a country they build it up and then knock it down after having bled it dry as we are seeing with the US right now.China is and will be manipulated and used and abused by the same organisation that has been manipulating world events and initiating and starting wars for the last one hundred years or more.

The Globalist/NWO agenda has so far taken over the US and Europe and China has been set up as the next host to the Globalist/NWO/Bankster parasites.South America is some way off yet but they are next as Africa never will be any kind of world power and the Middle East and particularly Iran are proving to be a problem but Irans alleged WMD program is non-existent as its another lie.Iran is an obstacle to the Globalist/NWO agenda having full spectrum dominance.

I am not saying that the US military and their foreign policy is about to be wound down but the fact that China has now become the NO 1 superpower there is absolutely no reason why they shouldnt potentially be the worlds NO 1 aggressor and its already beginning.......and anyway any global superpower has to have an enemy to a certain extent but even if it hasnt it can still justify massive amounts of spending on defence just to make a statement along the lines of my guns are bigger than yours.

You will all see this unfold  and its going to be China - China - China - from now on.

People claim that China is the largest holder of US Treasury bonds which is wrong yet i hear this again and again when the largest holder of US Treasury bonds is the Federal Reserve plus US pensionholders collectively own 4.2 Trillions worth.

If the Chinese leadership werent idiots they would realise that they have invested in US Treasury Bonds that are backed by nothing and are in fact worthless but thats not the way they see it unfortunately as they would rather use them as leverage against the US as this suits their geo-political much better and they would rather appeal to their own vanity as is usually the case with political leadership.Vanity makes people so easy to manpulate.

China is also guilty of theft of intellectual property as China is not good at innovating anything in terms of technology.

The Chinese leadership have been aggressively outspoken on its recent US state visit and this is not normal protocol when you think about diplomatic relations but it wasnt a diplomatic visit as it was China marking its territory which explains the mass placing and flying of the Chinese flag in places that you could say were wholly innappropriate.

And so the ongoing geo-political agenda continues.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 28 January, 2011, 11:45:41 PM
P Diddy did 9/11!!!

http://www.billboard.com/#/news/diddy-sued-for-1-trillion-blamed-for-9-11-1005015102.story
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 28 January, 2011, 11:52:00 PM
I though Peter did it, he seems to know so much of the plan, it's logical.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 29 January, 2011, 03:27:14 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 28 January, 2011, 11:45:41 PM
P Diddy did 9/11!!!

http://www.billboard.com/#/news/diddy-sued-for-1-trillion-blamed-for-9-11-1005015102.story

Hooray! for mental illness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 29 January, 2011, 05:45:49 PM
Quote from: Christov on 29 December, 2010, 06:53:22 AM
Doesn't SKY television basically consist of American stuff and the football?

and Cricket and rugby.  So that's my soul leased then  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 February, 2011, 09:03:02 PM
A guy I do work for seriously suggested to me that the Pleiadean aliens should confiscate all of the world's nuclear weapons in order to avert the end of the world in 2012. I thought this thread was the appropriate place to post it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 February, 2011, 09:21:19 PM
Recent -boring- 2012 thread...


http://www.2000adonline.com/forum/index.php/topic,31667.msg577830.html#msg577830
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 February, 2011, 03:54:47 PM
I enjoyed watching Jack Straw on the news last night when he was asked about the release of Al Megrahi and Labours help in this sordid affair. His response was to say that the Tories would have done it if they were in power ::) (I couldn't find a shake of the head smiley)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 February, 2011, 04:30:40 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 February, 2011, 03:54:47 PM
I enjoyed watching Jack Straw on the news last night when he was asked about the release of Al Megrahi and Labours help in this sordid affair. His response was to say that the Tories would have done it if they were in power ::) (I couldn't find a shake of the head smiley)

They almost certainly would - a condition of his release was the dropping of his appeal. If that had been allowed to go ahead, a lot of murky information would have come out about his (unreliable) conviction and the government back-room deals that lead to it.

Now I can't say for certain that he, or Libya, had NO involvement in the bombing, but he was certainly convicetd on very dodgy, if not blatantly falsified, evidence, and was made a scapegoat so that awkward questions would not be asked about the involvement of other governments, whose support we needed for war against Saddam Hussein.

Of course neither party can admit this, hence the ridiculous and empty posturing about a done deal.

A summary (http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&article=122) of Private Eye's investaigation - the full report makes inetersting reading
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 February, 2011, 04:35:04 PM
What I'm saying is that he should have answered the question and not say, well they would have done it. After all I think he is above infant school age  ;)
I love seeing these thieving twats squirm, whatever party they belong to!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 08 February, 2011, 07:30:25 PM
I saw a newspaper headline today that referred to Al Megrahi as 'the Lockerbie bomber.' Now there's a misnomer if ever there was one (it was the Syrians).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hegel on 08 February, 2011, 07:54:36 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 21 January, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
I wanted to share my thoughts on the long term implications of China as the new NO 1 superpower since the transition from the US is nearly complete.

The way i see it is that China has been preparing for this for quite some time now and you can see this for yourself if you compare the China of 10 years ago to the present day China.

Theres lots of reasons for this which are too convoluted to go into here but people who dont know any better think of China as a miracle economy which is partly true but no more than that as people dont realise that China has a massive debt bubble/massive amounts of lending and from what i understand no longer prints its own debt free currency anymore as you now have private banks and the Globalist/NWO power elite have infiltrated their banking system and banks practice Fractional Reserve lending so to all intents and purposes as they have become more westernised they have adopted Western banking practices as well which is very bad news for them although the Chinese are very good at wiping out debt en masse which might save them as their economy is being set up as a planned implosion economy just like ours has been and the fact is their economy has been built by overseas investment/manufacturing/exports but at the same time China has been building an internal economy on top of that which has adopted a Western planned implosion/Ponzi scheme economy.Any economy that is built up that quickly cant last especially as their exports are shrinking as the West goes deeper into economic depression.

China is well in with the Globalists as they have been wining and dining them for years but as much as i dont like the Chinese govt and its political system i cant help but think that they are going to be used just like America has been for the last hundred years as when the power elite take over a country they build it up and then knock it down after having bled it dry as we are seeing with the US right now.China is and will be manipulated and used and abused by the same organisation that has been manipulating world events and initiating and starting wars for the last one hundred years or more.

The Globalist/NWO agenda has so far taken over the US and Europe and China has been set up as the next host to the Globalist/NWO/Bankster parasites.South America is some way off yet but they are next as Africa never will be any kind of world power and the Middle East and particularly Iran are proving to be a problem but Irans alleged WMD program is non-existent as its another lie.Iran is an obstacle to the Globalist/NWO agenda having full spectrum dominance.

I am not saying that the US military and their foreign policy is about to be wound down but the fact that China has now become the NO 1 superpower there is absolutely no reason why they shouldnt potentially be the worlds NO 1 aggressor and its already beginning.......and anyway any global superpower has to have an enemy to a certain extent but even if it hasnt it can still justify massive amounts of spending on defence just to make a statement along the lines of my guns are bigger than yours.

You will all see this unfold  and its going to be China - China - China - from now on.

People claim that China is the largest holder of US Treasury bonds which is wrong yet i hear this again and again when the largest holder of US Treasury bonds is the Federal Reserve plus US pensionholders collectively own 4.2 Trillions worth.

If the Chinese leadership werent idiots they would realise that they have invested in US Treasury Bonds that are backed by nothing and are in fact worthless but thats not the way they see it unfortunately as they would rather use them as leverage against the US as this suits their geo-political much better and they would rather appeal to their own vanity as is usually the case with political leadership.Vanity makes people so easy to manpulate.

China is also guilty of theft of intellectual property as China is not good at innovating anything in terms of technology.

The Chinese leadership have been aggressively outspoken on its recent US state visit and this is not normal protocol when you think about diplomatic relations but it wasnt a diplomatic visit as it was China marking its territory which explains the mass placing and flying of the Chinese flag in places that you could say were wholly innappropriate.

And so the ongoing geo-political agenda continues.....

Interesting.

Something that should not be forgotten is that the neo-liberal paradigm of increasing production/consumption intrinsic to globalisation cannot last for very much longer. Even ignoring the tendency for the rate of profit to fall and the internal dynamic of capitalism to 'eat-itself', the earth cannot sustain it for a litany of reasons: oil reserves running out and harder to get, rare but crucial metals and minerals running out, apparently devastating climate change and it's wholesale upheaveal of many of the worlds established norms, a population swelling and spawning with ever increasing pressures on land, agriculture, and water. Also, much of the wealth WE have decedantly enjoyed over the last 200 years has been the result of expansion abroad - use of cheaper labour, resources, cultivating emerging markets and the like - this will also start to inflict more pressure as the increasingly crowded 'advanced' world starts to run out of places to expand into (there are some places left but they all want a material standard like ours - and who can blame them).

China is the next super power, and historically you could argue that they are just taking back a position they held for thousands of years before the industrial revolution and European imperialism, but they will not be able to sustain their current 8-10% growth rates too much longer and in the medium term may find that the 'corporate-statist' model of capitalism that serves them at the moment is utterly unsustainable.

An advanced chinese economy of 1.5 odd billion people, joining the equivalent number in the old 'west' not to mention the incredible growth of India's billion or so people and the resurgence of south america.... these are the current populations, let alone future projections..... all of them demanding state of the art tech and consumer durables, quality food, entertainment, transport, electricity, quality housing etc etc etc.   The paradigm cannot last.

What really saddens me is not that all of this is inevitable but that the consensus is that it is inevitable. That business ontology is somehow a natural state of affairs. It wont matter eventually because it will have to be replaced by something else. The question is what and how painful will the tansition be?

China is in the ascendency, America is an empire in decline (although I would argue currently still number one thanks to its military and financial centers and also the per capita inequality within the vast chinese population), and the thing that drives everyone on is looking a bit peaky to say the least. The recent financial crisis, which is still rumbling on (just look at the saving of greece or ireland - essentially using more debt to buy them out of debt - simply shifting the debt around and not solving anything) showed us, if nothing else, how much of an illusionary house of cards the whole system is.

I have gone off on one...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 February, 2011, 08:31:17 PM
Did you see the 18:30 ITV news today.

MI6 have an artist in residence, WHAT THE FUCK!
Let's get rid of that sort of bollocks job Cameron before anything else. I nearly had a fit when I watched that bit of news, in fact I had to rewind it just to verify what I had seen  >:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 February, 2011, 09:28:36 PM
No way. Resident Artist must be code for super cyborg ninja spy

Speaking of codes, did you know that Sesame Street (broadcast in over 120 countries) was used to transmit coded directives to sleeper agents
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 February, 2011, 09:35:19 PM
Damn double post
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 February, 2011, 09:35:39 PM
I always had my suspicions about Mr Snuffleupagus
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2011, 10:11:42 PM
Might not the repeats cause some confusion?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 February, 2011, 10:14:25 PM
Sunny Day
Sweepin' the clouds away
On my way to where the air is sweet

Can you tell me how to get,
How to get to Sesame Street

Come and play
Everything's A-OK
Friendly neighbors there
That's where we meet

Can you tell me how to get
How to get to Sesame Street

It's a magic carpet ride
Every door will open wide

To happy people like you--
Happy people like
What a beautiful

Sunny Day
Sweepin' the clouds away
On my way to where the air is sweet

Can you tell me how to get,
How to get to Sesame Street...

How to get to Sesame Street
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2011, 11:37:58 PM
That information is classified.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 February, 2011, 11:46:06 PM
I'll tell you what isn't classified: The fact that when you eat a varied menu, you get more out of every meal. It doesn't matter if your meals are boiled or stewed, whether you eat them whole or whether you chew them. They will taste so good provided that you chew them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 February, 2011, 12:38:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 February, 2011, 08:31:17 PM
Did you see the 18:30 ITV news today.

MI6 have an artist in residence, WHAT THE FUCK!
Let's get rid of that sort of bollocks job Cameron before anything else. I nearly had a fit when I watched that bit of news, in fact I had to rewind it just to verify what I had seen  >:D

I guess they saw Goldfinger spraypainting Shirley Eaton gold, not as cold-blooded murder, but as an art installation...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 15 February, 2011, 12:46:45 AM
I wonder how many years in prison you'd get for spraypainting someone to death? My guess would be somewhere in the region of onetwothreefourfive, sixseveneightnineten, eleven, twelve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 February, 2011, 01:10:08 AM
Is that one of the wine making regions in France Roger?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2011, 06:03:24 PM
DIVERSION, THE PRIMARY STRATEGY

Experience has proven that the simplest method of securing a silent weapon and gaining control of the public is to keep the public undisciplined and ignorant of basic systems principles on the one hand, while keeping them confused, disorganized, and distracted with matters of no real importance on the other hand.

This is achieved by:

(1) Disengaging their minds, sabotaging their mental activities, by providing a low quality program of public education in mathematics, logic, systems design, and economics, and by discouraging technical creativity.

(2) Engaging their emotions, increasing their self-indulgence and their indulgence in emotional and physical activities, by:

    (a) unrelenting emotional affrontations and attacks (mental and emotional rape) by way of a constant barrage of sex, violence, and wars in the media - especially the T.V. and the newspapers.

    (b) giving them what they desire - in excess - "junk food for thought" and depriving them of what they really need.

(3) Rewriting history and law and subjecting the public to the deviant creation, thus being able to shift their thinking from personal needs to highly fabricated outside priorities.

These preclude their interest in and discovery of the silent weapons of social automation technology.

The general rule is that there is profit in confusion; the more confusion, the more profit. Therefore, the best approach is to create problems and then offer the solutions.

DIVERSION SUMMARY

MEDIA: Keep the adult public attention diverted away from the real social issues, and captivated by matters of no real importance.

SCHOOLS: Keep the young public ignorant of real mathematics, real economics, real law, and real history.

ENTERTAINMENT: Keep the public entertainment below a sixth grade level.

WORK: Keep the public busy, busy, busy, with no time to think; back on the farm with the other animals.

***

THE ARTIFICIAL WOMB

From the time a person leaves its mother's womb, its every effort is directed toward building, maintaining, and withdrawing into artificial wombs, various sorts of substitute protective devices or shells.

The objective of these artificial wombs is to provide a stable environment for both stable and unstable activity; to provide a shelter for the evolutionary processes of growth, and maturity - i.e., survival; to provide security for freedom and to provide defensive protection for offensive activity.

THE POLITICAL STRUCTURE OF A NATION - DEPENDENCY

The primary reason why the individual citizens of a country create a political structure is a subconscious wish or desire to perpetuate their own dependency relationship of childhood.

Simply put, they want a human god to eliminate all risk from their life, pat them on the head, kiss their bruises, put a chicken on every dinner table, clothe their bodies, tuck them into bed at night, and tell them that everything will be alright when they wake up in the morning.

This public demand is incredible, so the human god, the political, meets incredibility with incredibility by promising the world and delivering nothing. So who is the bigger liar?, the public?, or the 'godfather'?

This public behavior is surrender born of fear, laziness and expediency. It is the basis of the welfare state as a strategic weapon, useful against a disgusting public.

***

Extracted from "Silent Weapons for a Quiet War," an alleged Bilderburg Group document found on July 7, 1986, in an IBM copier that had been purchased at a surplus sale.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/silentweaponsforquietwars.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 February, 2011, 06:49:37 PM
Arsom (if rather convenient).  I miss Peter, he always gave good Bilderberg too.  
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 23 February, 2011, 07:30:06 PM
what is going on in t'middle east? has everyone signed up to an uprising group on facebook? the thing is if me,sat in the northwest of england can see that rising up against a nutter like gaddaffi isnt going to end well how didnt they?

  in all seriousness why is this happening now? is something or someone more sinister pulling the strings?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 February, 2011, 08:06:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2011, 06:03:24 PM
Extracted from "Silent Weapons for a Quiet War," an alleged Bilderburg Group document found on July 7, 1986, in an IBM copier that had been purchased at a surplus sale.
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/silentweaponsforquietwars.htm

Now at first I thought this was a perfectly serviceable, if a little obvious, lecture/discourse about how evil capitalist bastards manipulate society, no problesm wuith that, but this last bit just made me laugh out loud. It's a spoof isn't it? Are they also claiming it was found with a big book called '10001 ways to cook orphans' and a box of twirly waxed moustaches?

ah no, I tell a lie - The website has the word "truth" in the title so it must be FACT!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 February, 2011, 08:16:42 PM
Considering Henry Kissinger's 70's 'paper' on how to control and limit the world's population through famine, pestilence and war is freely available to read these days, t'wouldn't surprise me if it was real. What else do policy makers/monied class, rather than politicos, talk about? The Rand think tanks are infamous for this shit, including the idea that the best way to integrate the worlds different races into accepeting serfdom for a proper global consumerist culture is through the threat of alien invasion, real or not? Where's Alan Moore when you need him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 24 February, 2011, 11:19:10 AM
And in the meantime, here in the Emerald Isle, our so-called intelligent electorate are preparing to swap one right-wing, free-market, capitalist, greed-is-good bunch of wankers for another, equally morally bereft, in-thrall-to-the markets bunch of wankers. I mean, what part of "it's the capitalist system that has screwed everything up" don't these idiots understand? I'll still vote but, quite honestly, it's hard to summon up any enthusiasm for the democratic process when you realise that, at the end of the day, you are a lone voice in a room full of shrieking cretins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2011, 12:08:50 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 24 February, 2011, 11:19:10 AM
And in the meantime, here in the Emerald Isle, our so-called intelligent electorate are preparing to swap one right-wing, free-market, capitalist, greed-is-good bunch of wankers for another, equally morally bereft, in-thrall-to-the markets bunch of wankers.

It is simply incredible, isn't it?  A party that couldn't get a seat in SuperMacs a few years ago looks set to romp to victory, despite still offering absolutely nothing but business as usual, with added stag-hunting and gay-marriage-bashing.  I know several life-long FF'ers who normally wouldn't piss on Enda Kenny and his backstabbing crew who are going to vote FG 'cos they know their boys have no chance, but still want to ensure that nothing changes.  And we'll get arch-opportunist and anti-Walter-Mitty Baron Adams on the payroll too - talk about a carcass attracting flies.  It's very depressing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 February, 2011, 12:11:02 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 24 February, 2011, 11:19:10 AM
at the end of the day, you are a lone voice in a room full of shrieking cretins.

Possibly the best description of modern politics I've ever read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 February, 2011, 12:17:05 PM
Take heart lads, at least ye don't live here in the North
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 February, 2011, 05:35:46 PM
I'm in the non-voting minority and I think we need a proper cultural shock to make us take responsibility for ourselves, and it is coming. Putting an X beside someone's name every four years is the ultimate in passing-the-buck/kicking-the-can-down-the-road mentality and it ain't democracy either. Things never change within politics, it's always external activism that counts. The way things are going, I can't wait till they make Adams Minister for Justice.



Best I heard was a bloke on a phone one day saying 'well I'll either vote for Fianna Fail or Fine Gael, the rest are just hangers-on'- Jaysus wept.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2011, 05:55:02 PM
I'll tell you what Irish guys, why don't we swap our bunch of wankers for your bunch of wankers!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2011, 06:20:59 PM
Though it pains me to say it, no thanks!  I like libraries, me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2011, 06:46:05 PM
"Greece, Ireland and the EU bailouts: the end of democracy in Europe"

http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/02/greece-ireland-and-the-eu-bailouts-the-end-of-democracy-in-europe.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 February, 2011, 06:48:24 PM
What's wrong with you lot, you've never had it so good!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2011, 06:52:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2011, 06:46:05 PM
"Greece, Ireland and the EU bailouts: the end of democracy in Europe"

The Daily Fail, TLS.  For shame!

Not that there's a lot in that piece that can be argued with, except perhaps the motivations ascribed to those plebs who support the EU project, which are not universally as simple as greed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 24 February, 2011, 07:58:17 PM
All I can say is I am better off personally now than I was two years ago.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 25 February, 2011, 01:45:39 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2011, 06:46:05 PM
"Greece, Ireland and the EU bailouts: the end of democracy in Europe"
http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/02/greece-ireland-and-the-eu-bailouts-the-end-of-democracy-in-europe.html

Article is written by a right prickfuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 25 February, 2011, 01:58:42 AM
It's written by a GIRL. Her office is the KITCHEN and the rest of her columns are about MAKE UP and MASTURBATORY AIDS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 25 February, 2011, 06:34:50 AM
Balls to those hypocrites. I'm telling you England would react the same way as Moma. With zero tolerance, instigations of violence and possible covert operators to quash any rise from mindless compliance and complete subservience.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2011, 02:05:52 PM
You speak for yourself!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 February, 2011, 03:36:49 PM
Never mind all that, Ireland are on their last wicket needing 32 runs off 6 overs against Bangladesh.   Aaaargh the tension.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 February, 2011, 03:48:30 PM
Balls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 25 February, 2011, 05:24:53 PM
How's the election Eire going?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 February, 2011, 05:44:56 PM
They don't start the counting until 9am tomorrow.  But in the words of The Who, "meet the new boss...".

Not as exciting as the cricket, that's for sure.  But probably just as disappointing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 06:35:27 PM
Fine Gael will win..no question about it. Labour may get enough to stop them having a majority. But Labour these days are no different than the other crowd so it doesn't really matter.

We are preparing for a few decades of Thatcherite misery...

I need a drink
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 07:50:56 PM
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5215/5446905220_e11a4a8030.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v79/johnnystress/kenny.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 February, 2011, 08:18:21 PM
Swapping a shower of crooks for the f'ing Blueshirts, jeebus wept.  Hitting the homebrew hard tonight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 February, 2011, 08:21:52 PM
You could always start your own party and run for office!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 08:22:54 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 06:35:27 PMWe are preparing for a few decades of Thatcherite misery...


I think there'll be bigger crises between now and then that'll probably shake things up again and destroy the next incumbents.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 08:24:33 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 February, 2011, 08:21:52 PM
You could always start your own party and run for office!


I'd sooner strap dynamite to my chest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 08:27:37 PM
You're probably right. The new government will be overwhelmed at the scale of the shitstorm they have to deal with, will collapse in a couple of years, or sooner, and Fianna fucking Fail will be re-elected assuring a grateful, craven people that they are the only ones who can ever look after the country
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 08:34:07 PM
By then we'll be out of the EU and we'll have our fish back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 08:35:34 PM
Hope they don't take the roads back
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 08:43:39 PM
If they took the church back as well, it'd be a fair deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 08:49:14 PM
Angela Merkel and all would be delighted with it...so grateful that in return they might throw us a mature and open attitude to sex and sexuality
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 09:00:02 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 08:49:14 PM
they might throw us a mature and open attitude to sex and sexuality


or one clad in black leather.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 25 February, 2011, 09:07:00 PM
cor!!! it just gets better! roll on the catastrophe!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 09:14:24 PM
Ready the tins of Lilt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 February, 2011, 09:21:19 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 08:43:39 PM
If they took the church back as well, it'd be a fair deal.

Actually I think we gave them the church last time.  Bright light of the dark ages and all that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 25 February, 2011, 10:53:23 PM
Fuck the Oirish election, Charlie Sheen's gone nuts! He phoned Alex Jones, which makes it political!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 11:09:50 PM
Fine Fáil did 9/11, Charlie Sheen's a shill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 February, 2011, 11:30:06 PM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZkEbTT1RKjA/TWbnkaN67II/AAAAAAAABBQ/lN7R4SzSOtE/s1600/FF-monopoly2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 25 February, 2011, 11:54:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BxfpbyV-uc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2011, 08:18:24 AM
That's arsom, Joe.  Might print it out and play it while watching the cunt counting.  
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 26 February, 2011, 05:05:16 PM
"the first time in 54 years there is no Haughey family member in the Dail."

I really hope lessons have been learned
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 10:22:29 PM
I voted the fuck outta this yesterday. Hope my my fellow Micks voted too!

Take heart brothers! The arch-traitors have been decimated, and a whole new bunch of chancers have taken power! We have our oldest taoiseach ever! We have ! We have our first terrorist TD! This is a time to celebrate!

johnnystress, please don't go to Australia. The brave new Ireland that is coming will need talented individuals like yourself to work our attack zeppelins and farm our psychic broccolli fields.

Horay for Ireland! Hooray for democracy! Hooray for that independant guy I voted for whose name I can't remember!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 10:26:58 PM

Nope, like turkeys votin' for Christmas. I can't help but wonder at the contradiction in your statements above. You're only voting for the next person to hold the day-stick.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 10:29:41 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 26 February, 2011, 05:05:16 PM
"the first time in 54 years there is no Haughey family member in the Dail."

I really hope lessons have been learned



Theres no more money in politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 10:26:58 PM

Nope, like turkeys votin' for Christmas. I can't help but wonder at the contradiction in your statements above. You're only voting for the next person to hold the day-stick.


Well when I'm getting getting beaten in the location of my choice, by the most attractive fascist thug I bet you'll be eating your words.

Anyway, you claim to disapprove of the whole process but I'm betting you weren't petrol bombing the Dail or executing politicians on the internet - you hypocrite! I mean, you even have access to TV cameras; but I digress...

Do I believe voting will make a huge difference? Of course not! But a tiny difference? Yes! And each tiny change is another step on the path to salvation. Whatever that is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2011, 11:08:53 PM
What a result.  Gerry Adams as possible leader of the opposition.  A man so utterly dishonest he won't even admit to the terrorist past he's supposed to have put behind him.  A man who now feels that being identified as a former member of the IRA amounts to actual defamation of his character, although he would never condemn that same organisation when it mattered.  Who doesn't even live in this State, or pay taxes here (until now, presumably).  Who owns three houses but only earns the average industrial wage.  Hero of the ordinary people, hammer of the corrupt!  Jeebus wept.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:10:47 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PMAnyway, you claim to disapprove of the whole process but I'm betting you weren't petrol bombing the Dail or executing politicians on the internet - you hypocrite! I mean, you even have access to TV cameras; but I digress...

I don't see why disapproving of the 'process' allows me to petrol bomb the dail or harm people, this isn't V for Vendetta. Disengaging from it is an 'action' in itself. I don't have access to TV cameras either, I'm an editor.


Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PMAnd each tiny change is another step on the path to salvation.

I think I heard Enda 'tin of Lilt' Kenny and Gerry 'Killer Kane' Adams saying something like that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:17:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 February, 2011, 11:08:53 PM
What a result.  Gerry Adams as possible leader of the opposition.  A man so utterly dishonest he won't even admit to the terrorist past he's supposed to have put behind him.  A man who now feels that being identified as a former member of the IRA amounts to actual defamation of his character, although he would never condemn that same organisation when it mattered.  Who doesn't even live in this State, or pay taxes here (until now, presumably).  Who owns three houses but only earns the average industrial wage.  Hero of the ordinary people, hammer of the corrupt!  Jeebus wept.


If we go down the route of vetting Adams -we should- then it needs to happen to Gilmore too, he was a member of Sinn Fein at it's active height in the 70's and evades talking about it when broached. He does buy his wine in my local O'Briens and seems a bit cranky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2011, 11:31:05 PM
I've no problem with the man's past (-chokes back bile-) - I accept that it's to everyone's benefit that we move on and engage in democratic politics instead of finger pointing.  It's denying it and threatening legal action that pisses me off.  And no-one has photos of Gilmore in a black beret and sunglasses, and no-one has referred to him as their commanding officer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:44:42 PM
We've always been good at finger-pointing but shite at gettin'-the-finger-out and dishin' out pain where it's deserved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:47:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:10:47 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PMAnyway, you claim to disapprove of the whole process but I'm betting you weren't petrol bombing the Dail or executing politicians on the internet - you hypocrite! I mean, you even have access to TV cameras; but I digress...

I don't see why disapproving of the 'process' allows me to petrol bomb the dail or harm people, this isn't V for Vendetta. Disengaging from it is an 'action' in itself. I don't have access to TV cameras either, I'm an editor.

I dunno. I guess I just see not voting as a form of inaction rather than a form of action. Even accepting the notion that politicians would view non-voting as a statement of dissaproval, I have to ask - would they care?

Petrol bombing an innocent <cough> politicians house is clearly an unconscionable action, but there's no denying that it does communicate your discontent fairly effectively. Of course that sort of criminal behaviour could land you in jail (or in the Dail), so I view voting as a more moral alternative.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:10:47 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PMAnd each tiny change is another step on the path to salvation.

I think I heard Enda 'tin of Lilt' Kenny and Gerry 'Killer Kane' Adams saying something like that...

Well now you're just being mean. Comments like that will only discourage enthusiastic individuals such as myself from treating the ballot paper like some sort of lunatic Sudoku puzzle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 26 February, 2011, 11:50:06 PM
It will be intersting to see how the seats fall, at the end of the day Id prefer a FG Labour or FG overall, I wouldnt like to see Independants prop up the government, the Healy-Rae effect we can do without.
Whatever your thought on the incoming part(ies) in the short term it can only be a good thing for the domestic economy. The Hotels, pubs, cinemas, dogs tracks etc are dying on their feet because people who are working, and have some disposal income are not spending because they are afraid of what coming next.
They may take solace from a government who appear to have a plan and appear to have an idea of what their doing and get out and spend some of thier money. Appearence is everything, it dosent matter if they dont have a clue of what they are at, just so long as they look competent!
As for the bigger bank picture, that will sort itself out at a european level, the bank debt will be fereralised at some level and the interet rate will be reduced, because it serves europe to do so, but FG will take full credit.

Anyway, four from Mayo, I could do with a few potholes fixed, I have a good choice now!
David
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 26 February, 2011, 11:54:21 PM
Irish election: Enda Kenny claims opposition victory
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12585048

Ireland's main opposition leader Enda Kenny has said his Fine Gael party has won a "massive endorsement" to govern after parliamentary elections.

See what you've done? Now a politician thinks people like him.

Never trust a guy who's one typo away from having a woman's name.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:58:27 PM
Still, a few lengthy make-out sessions with old flame Angela Merkel behind closed doors and Ireland could receive some tasty economic favours.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 12:00:19 AM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:47:31 PM

I dunno. I guess I just see not voting as a form of inaction rather than a form of action. Even accepting the notion that politicians would view non-voting as a statement of dissaproval, I have to ask - would they care?


That's not the point. You can never really tell if a politician cares about anything other than getting elected of which there seems to be enough people around to do and who are you voting for really, the person or the party? Both end up ineffective in our parliament, especially independents.

All our 'policies' are effectively made outside the country now, how will voting in another round of shitebags help? None want to go down as the 'ones' who brought down Europe. Things never change within politics because their jobs depend on it not changing.


Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 February, 2011, 11:10:47 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 February, 2011, 11:04:12 PMAnd each tiny change is another step on the path to salvation.

I think I heard Enda 'tin of Lilt' Kenny and Gerry 'Killer Kane' Adams saying something like that...

Well now you're just being mean. Comments like that will only discourage enthusiastic individuals such as myself from treating the ballot paper like some sort of lunatic Sudoku puzzle.

More like 'spot-the-balls'.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 12:03:34 AM
Quote from: Stan on 26 February, 2011, 11:54:21 PMNever trust a guy who's one typo away from having a woman's name.


He also comes across as the most stage-managed politico since George Bush.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 12:09:05 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 26 February, 2011, 11:50:06 PMAs for the bigger bank picture, that will sort itself out at a european level, the bank debt will be fereralised at some level and the interet rate will be reduced, because it serves europe to do so, but FG will take full credit.


I have no such faith, we live in a supposed democratic nation which is one small floating bit in a non-democractic superstate of which we don't elect the leaders. The 'power centre' will be served and we will be squeezed to pay for it.

The banking crisis is not something that can be sorted at a European level because it's a global problem that simply at the end of the day must be defaulted on. Printing money or fucking around with interest rates until-the-cows-come-home cannot fix economies of diminishing returns, currency values and resources, the steps towards controlled collapse have yet to be taken and won't be till there is no other option or when the next crisis/war hits and then it will just be collapse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 10:07:07 AM
AT the end of the day FG's policies are not much different than FF's.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

We've achieved nothing with this election- I don't see anything to be happy about
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 27 February, 2011, 11:30:02 AM
Quote from: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 10:07:07 AM
AT the end of the day FG's policies are not much different than FF's.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

We've achieved nothing with this election- I don't see anything to be happy about

Nothing ever changes. The faces come and go but power always remains the same.

I suspect like after the crash of 1929 and the follow on of 1933 we're on a slow dive to another World War. Thank you world banking system, cheers. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2011, 12:28:13 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 27 February, 2011, 11:30:02 AM
I suspect like after the crash of 1929 and the follow on of 1933 we're on a slow dive to another World War. Thank you world banking system, cheers. :(

Blimey, I thought I was a pessimist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 27 February, 2011, 12:52:10 PM
A bit grim I admit but being of Scottish descent I see pessimism as a must!

There's too many differing groups of people now scrambling for finite resources [oil, gas, water etc ] so that makes conflict almost inevitable. Bit of a downer really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gavin_Leahy_Block on 27 February, 2011, 01:17:52 PM
I believe that FG will have learned from FF and not even consider going into government with Independents and a deal with Labour has already been done before anyone even cast there vote. I would be pleased strong Labour presents in the next government, hopefully this will soften the harshness of FG. But, it remains to be seen if they chose to nearly sit back.
As for my own area, Tipperary South, I'm delighted that there will be no more madness fron Martin Mansergh, although at times it made great viewing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVzZWIvUF0o&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVzZWIvUF0o&feature=related)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 01:21:10 PM
At least Roscommon have a dope smoking long hair to represent them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Int0CGNvo3E
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 01:34:54 PM
I think Ming should move-in to the Aras with Norris -when he gets the presidency- and call it the Ministry of Fun- Welcome to the Pleasuredome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 February, 2011, 12:28:13 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 27 February, 2011, 11:30:02 AM
I suspect like after the crash of 1929 and the follow on of 1933 we're on a slow dive to another World War. Thank you world banking system, cheers. :(

Blimey, I thought I was a pessimist!



I've had the same suspicion myself for a number of years, when power wanes at the top and the support base begins to dissolve, war is what is chosen by the monied class and the gears are oiled, but with resources dwindling on the energy front I wonder if that option is open to them anymore? We really are in uncharted territory.

My own ham-fisted prediction is that the US will go the way of the Soviet Union, it's demographics point that way, except worse, the Russian underclass at least had a residual notion of community, farming and group survival, the Yanks have paranoia and guns, and lots of both, a military contraction will precede a hard transition to break-up.

Germany and Russia, likely France too, will become closer due to trade and gas/oil resources; China may be part of that but I have a feeling they may go the way of the US while struggling to keep it's population in-check due to it's own ecological problems and need for oil which is not as easily accessible to them as the last oil fields are located in Siberia so a possible conflict or alliance lies there.

The interesting thing about Germany is if the Euro does break-up, it will be the first time in 50 years that they will be reunified and hold their own single currency again, something that has so far, been illegal.

Ireland and the UK will be mutually dependent, as they always have been, with maybe some of the PIIGS too. Scandinavia will remain just that.

The Middle East, as always, is a wild-card, but I wouldn't condemn them to intenicine warfare, they may prove the West's condescending democratically-enlightened-market-flat-earth-politics for the bullshit it is and either retreat to consolidate or become more integrative. Nevertheless, Israel will become very scared without US support.

Certainly the US rhetoric/propaganda that their military influence in the area would create a domino effect of toppling dictatorships/regimes making the way for 'US style democracy' has proven to be exactly the reverse in recent weeks! It has now been shown that the waning of US military power/influence in the region has brought about the domino effect for whatever is to come.

Caveat: Of course this could all change when that magic free-energy technology the Yanks have hidden all this time is released!

...and, I'm optimistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 02:16:18 PM
(http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/183805_169067066478964_116110171774654_425758_6151394_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 02:19:51 PM
The Kingdom is theirs, and even their horses are fat. I hear the Conan theme music playing...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZY2mRG5mzg


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 27 February, 2011, 02:28:19 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 February, 2011, 12:28:13 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 27 February, 2011, 11:30:02 AM
I suspect like after the crash of 1929 and the follow on of 1933 we're on a slow dive to another World War. Thank you world banking system, cheers. :(

Blimey, I thought I was a pessimist!



I've had the same suspicion myself for a number of years, when power wanes at the top and the support base begins to dissolve, war is what is chosen by the monied class and the gears are oiled, but with resources dwindling on the energy front I wonder if that option is open to them anymore? We really are in uncharted territory.

My own ham-fisted prediction is that the US will go the way of the Soviet Union, it's demographics point that way, except worse, the Russian underclass at least had a residual notion of community, farming and group survival, the Yanks have paranoia and guns, and lots of both, a military contraction will precede a hard transition to break-up.

Germany and Russia, likely France too, will become closer due to trade and gas/oil resources; China may be part of that but I have a feeling they may go the way of the US while struggling to keep it's population in-check due to it's own ecological problems and need for oil which is not as easily accessible to them as the last oil fields are located in Siberia so a possible conflict or alliance lies there.

The interesting thing about Germany is if the Euro does break-up, it will be the first time in 50 years that they will be reunified and hold their own single currency again, something that has so far, been illegal.

Ireland and the UK will be mutually dependent, as they always have been, with maybe some of the PIIGS too. Scandinavia will remain just that.

The Middle East, as always, is a wild-card, but I wouldn't condemn them to intenicine warfare, they may prove the West's condescending democratically-enlightened-market-flat-earth-politics for the bullshit it is and either retreat to consolidate or become more integrative. Nevertheless, Israel will become very scared without US support.

Certainly the US rhetoric/propaganda that their military influence in the area would create a domino effect of toppling dictatorships/regimes making the way for 'US style democracy' has proven to be exactly the reverse in recent weeks! It has now been shown that the waning of US military power/influence in the region has brought about the domino effect for whatever is to come.

Caveat: Of course this could all change when that magic free-energy technology the Yanks have hidden all this time is released!

...and, I'm optimistic.


cheerful lot.

can we at least have a civil war first to overthrow the government and topple the royals
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 02:31:36 PM
It's on the list. The Levellers release 7 new albums in a-single-day before hand. David Bowie will be the last Duke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 08:28:39 PM
http://www.breakingnews.ie/election/news/new-td-flanagan-demands-pay-cut-for-himself-495211.html
New TD Flanagan demands pay cut for himself

26/02/2011 - 23:46:42
Roscommon/North Leitrim's new TD, Independent candidate Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, has made an unusual demand for a politician - he wants his pay halved.

"The first thing I intend to do in the Dáil is to take a 50% pay cut," he said. "Because I think out TDs are paid way too much, especially now at a time when everyone is suffering from various charges, universal social charges, etc."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2011, 08:33:49 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 08:28:39 PM
"The first thing I intend to do in the Dáil is to take a 50% pay cut," he said. "Because I think out TDs are paid way too much, especially now at a time when everyone is suffering from various charges, universal social charges, etc."

Grud bless'im -  I think personally something like this would be a hugely positive step if universally adopted (fat chance).  Mind, 50K will still buy a lot of weed.  And 100 sitting days a year gives plenty of time to enjoy it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 27 February, 2011, 08:48:57 PM
he should be allowed a ministers munchies allowance. we're not cmommies after all
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 10:12:20 PM
Joe Higgins has been accepting no more than the average industrial wage since elected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2011, 10:30:14 PM
Ditto the Shinners.  Although they appear to take the full whack (90K+) and give the balance to the party, so why the taxpayer should care is beyond me. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 27 February, 2011, 10:37:26 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 February, 2011, 11:08:53 PM
What a result.  Gerry Adams as possible leader of the opposition.  A man so utterly dishonest he won't even admit to the terrorist past he's supposed to have put behind him.  A man who now feels that being identified as a former member of the IRA amounts to actual defamation of his character, although he would never condemn that same organisation when it mattered.  Who doesn't even live in this State, or pay taxes here (until now, presumably).  Who owns three houses but only earns the average industrial wage.  Hero of the ordinary people, hammer of the corrupt!  Jeebus wept.
This beggars belief. For Mr Adams to Deny what transpired in his past leaves me agog.
I wish I could share with you some of my knowledge but am duty bound to keep stum even after all these years.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 10:39:32 PM
Probably to pay for balaclavas and black t-shirts. They're still the only party who would tell the IMF and the EU to fuck-off in fairness, the rest are too quick to call them nuts for the only logical, inevitable path.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 February, 2011, 10:42:28 PM
Well done Ireland, now your troubles are all over  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 February, 2011, 10:46:18 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 27 February, 2011, 10:37:26 PMThis beggars belief. For Mr Adams to Deny what transpired in his past leaves me agog. I wish I could share with you some of my knowledge but am duty bound to keep stum even after all these years.


We know enough of the involvement from ALL sides -including the governments of both Nation States- to know how history transpired and how 'the final solution' and the unnecessary blood that was spilled because of it, was instigated, to formulate our own pesonal arbitration. Not one of the players, and players is an apt term, are innocent here but their role in contemporary politics really is at an end and rightly so. There is plenty of denial to go round but the innocent still suffer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 27 February, 2011, 10:46:33 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 27 February, 2011, 10:37:26 PM
I wish I could share with you some of my knowledge but am duty bound to keep stum even after all these years.

A wise precaution. Just remember that Stumm is banned in open areas!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 28 February, 2011, 12:25:08 PM
http://davidcameronpretendingtobecommon.tumblr.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2011, 11:00:25 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 March, 2011, 08:21:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2011, 07:31:19 PM
"I don't see why they would need to bother with 'social-control' for a situation like this. Japan is an ally and I don't see the military wanting a war either. It's more likely, believable, that it's a certain insular attitude amongst certain dumb Americans."

Divide and rule. They got you thinking "dumb Americans" after all, when Americans are really no dumber than anyone else.



I could say that they got you thinking they're in-charge and and Americans are no dumber than anyone else too but that's still conjecture and giving them too much credit.


Plus you misread, notice I said 'certain' dumb Americans. There are plenty of dumb Americans as well as smart ones, some will always be dumb, the same as any other country, saing 'no dumber than anyone else' is a cop-out; incompetence/stupidity/racism are everywhere, no point making excuses for it or blaming 'the-powers-that-be' either. Stupid travels.

The comments are very much like any you'd find on any forum where there's stupid opinions flying around, it's not always about social control, we do enough of that ourselves.

I still don't see how 'divide and rule' applies to American 'attitudes' towards people suffering a disaster in Japan or why the military would target them at this specific time to create the attitude. They aren't at war, it's a different country, and what any 'World Bank disaster relief/debt slavery' that happens, has to do with the creation of those 'attitudes' doesn't really ring through either.

It sounds like too many conspiracy sound bytes, false flag, divide and rule, problem-reaction-solution are applied and bandied around these days to whatever new event or disaster comes to pass so other conspiracists can communicate with each other and understand them in their own terms rather than looking for any 'factual' truth; it's a rather limited perspective, lazy, and just not always the case.

Yes there are power-agendas constantly but trying to tie up any event or twitter into those agendas without logic is basically paranoid.

To answer your first point, I don't think that anyone is "in charge" per-se. I do, however, think that some people have an unusual and unwarranted amount of influence over our democratic systems and it appears that their influence is increasing. Now, one might say with reasonable confidence that this has always been the case but that only now, with the advent of the internet, has the extent of this shadowy influence begun to reveal its true extent to the masses. I will agree that some of what I think is conjecture - for example, I'm relatively certain that there is such a thing as the Bilderberg Group and that it consists of many of the most powerful politicians, bankers and various powermongers on Earth, but as they never publish any minutes of their meetings I can only speculate as to what they discuss, debate or decide behind those heavily guarded, closed doors. Are they discussing how to make ordinary people like you and I better off or figuring out how to consolodate their own wealth and positions? I honestly don't know, but I have my suspicions. When politicians from a democratic country such as ours attend Bilderberg meetings at the taxpayer's expense (1), should not we know what they've been up to in those meetings? I say yes, Bilderbergers say no.

"Plus you misread, notice I said 'certain' dumb Americans." Conceded. However, I will say that in my experience the vast majority of people are just that; people. Dumb, smart or indifferent, most people will be appalled and upset by the current catastrophe in Japan. And being dumb, smart or indifferent is no bar to being racist or having one's views coloured or influenced by "leaders," certain elements of the media or by projects such as the U.S. Air Force one I highlighted in the "Japan Earthquake" thread. Neither do I claim that every one of those sick "Pearl Harbour" comments was faked. I can, however, envisage certain factions within the U.S. military (for example) using such tactics to foster anti-American sentiment. After all, what good is an armed force (or, indeed, an obscenely profitable military/industrial complex) without people willing to be your enemy? Stupid doesn't just travel, stupid can be instilled.

The Japanese people would not be the target of these "Pearl Harbour" posts (if some or all were faked). The target is you and me. Anyone who could point to these vile posts and complain or, in extreme cases, threaten. It is a process that fosters anti-American sentiment thereby justifying increased expenditure on security or even more swingeing "patriotic" legislation. Also, if some or all of these "Pearl Harbour" posts were faked, this isn't the main thrust of any social control campaign but merely a tiny part of it. There is more to modern warfare than jets, tanks, troops and bombs. Hearts and minds, remember?

I am often amused by the way in which people fire out the word "conspiracy" as if it were a bullet. Somehow, that word has been placed in the same enclosure as "paedophile," "Holocaust denier" or "psycho." This attitude is rife across the media, where anyone who dares question the Official Truth is seen as a terrorist or undesirable and it puts me in mind of the famous statement attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group: "First they came for the communists, but I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, but I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, but I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak out." First they came for the conspiracy theorists...

And, just in case you think governments never, ever conspire against their own people, conceal truths, tell outright lies or are themselves conspired against, have a look at some of these:

Hitler burns the Reichstag as an excuse to ban the Communist Party.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident, a Vietnamese/U.S. naval engagement which led directly to America entering the Vietnam war, never actually happened.
Operation Northwoods.
MK-ULTRA.
Operation Mockingbird.
Manhattan Project.
Watergate.
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study.
1990 Testimony of Nayirah.
Counter Intelligence Programs Against Activists in the 60s.
Main Core.
Rex 84.
The Iran-Contra Affair.
The BCCI Scandal.
CIA Drug Running in LA.
Operation Ajax.
Operation Snow White.
Operation Gladio.
The CIA Assassinates A Lot Of People (Church Committee).
The New World Order.
Kennedy Assassinations.
CIA Drug Smuggling in Arkansas.
Bohemian Grove.
Operation Paperclip.
The Federal Reserve Bank (U.S.A.)
Etc, etc, etc.

The above are all what you refer to as "'factual' truths." I don't see how this is a "limited perspective" and I do object to being called "lazy" for looking into such things. In my opinion, a lazy view of the world comes from plonking yourself in front of the BBC or the Telegraph and just digesting the pre-chewed crap they spew all over you and accepting the opinions of their "experts" without question. For example, when was the last time you heard about World Trade Centre Tower 7 on the BBC? I bet you thought only two towers collapsed on that day, didn't you? Now, that's lazy...

(1) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mandelsons-greek-farce-act-ii-1761474.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 12 March, 2011, 11:38:41 PM
The trouble is, there are a lot of conspiracy theorists who are not just prepared to believe anything, but are actually eager to believe anything.

Take, for example, 9/11 conspiracy theories. On the one hand, it is perfectly credible that no such organization as Al Qaida existed before 9/11, and that Al Qaida was invented by the CIA in order to provide a target for American military adventurism in Iraq and Afghanistan. No-one has ever put forward a convincing argument for why Al Qaida was necessary and why just a small group of individuals with limited financial resources could not come up with a plan to take flying lessons and co-ordinate their activities to board passenger planes, hi-jack them and fly them into targets on the ground.

So far, this is quite a straightforward proposition: America used a terrorist attack it would prefer not to have happened as an excuse to wage war on foreign countries it wanted to have a pop at anyway; not wanting to let a crisis go to waste - that's how cynical these bastards are.

Now, there are some conspiracy theorists who will go even further and say there was no terrorist attack on the world trade centre: it was a CIA plot; it wasn't a plane, it was a cruise missile; the cruise missile was disguised to look like a plane using a 3D hologram; the 3D hologram was created by the BBC (!)

Those who promote the theory that America attacked targets on its own soil in order to create a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan are not the brave crusaders for truth. What they are is defeatists who who are saying, in effect, that the military/industrial complex has got things so tightly sewn up that they can pull off any outrage they can dream up and we are helpless to do anything about it. The conspiracy theorists who like to think they are under attack from their own government are living in fear as much as those who are convinced that we are all under constant threat of annihilation by Muslim fanatics.

In fact, one reason to doubt everything conspiracy theorists say is because, by their own logic, all these stories about faked evidence of terrorist attacks could just as easily be emanating from a shadowy intelligence agency trying to confuse and divide people as come from real people who have really seen through the deception. When the same people who claim that the 9/11 attacks were faked also claim that attitudes and beliefs are being framed in cyberspace by intelligence agencies, how can you choose which of their bullshit stories to believe and which to doubt?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 13 March, 2011, 12:01:44 AM
For anyone to say that 911 was self inflicted have something loose in the head.
I can still remember clearly that day. I had an early finish from work, about 1300, and watched the events unfold at home until the wife got home from work at 1800.
The sheer scale of what happened and an iconic world landmark wiped out is just preposterous. Not even Bush jr would have been that stupid to give it a go ahead.
Just thinking about that day sends shivers down my spine.



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 March, 2011, 12:11:06 AM
That's what the Lizard People want you to think
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 March, 2011, 12:21:49 AM
I think you're missing my point. The people who make a living off 'conspiracy', and it is a business news demographic now, the Alex Jones' of this world, have definitely created a lexicon that many who are looking for an explanation of 'why' things happen that are not 'officially' acknowledged have adopted and use to explain almost any major event down to the royal wedding. This lexicon is continually used as shorthand by those who feel the need to rail against the Landlords of this world and to describe what's happening. This is a dangerous road as it shrinks the actual pursuit of achieving anything positive.



QuoteThe Japanese people would not be the target of these "Pearl Harbour" posts (if some or all were faked). The target is you and me.

I'm fairly aware why propaganda is produced, Jacques Ullul practically wrote the book on it, but it still doesn't need explaining that there are plenty of Americans with that attitude so 'they' wouldn't really need to 'fake it' even if they did or not.


and the reason why 'conspiracy' is a bad term bandied about is not just because of mainstream pigeonholing of investigations/exposes but also the higher profile names that come across as arrogant, vain and rather silly when properly challenged when it comes to actual evidence and logic of their opinions. Many times have Alex Jones, Jim Corr et al just glossed over or shouted down any criticisms of their agendas when caught out, they are expersts on nothing except rants. None of these have the investigative intellect or graft of someone like Greg Palast who does put boots on the ground and discovers true corruption without the need for silly hyperbole but still gets marginalised. I wouldn't even touch Icke, often a guest of Jones.


QuoteAnd, just in case you think governments never, ever conspire against their own people, conceal truths, tell outright lies or are themselves conspired against, have a look at some of these:

Hitler burns the Reichstag as an excuse to ban the Communist Party.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident, a Vietnamese/U.S. naval engagement which led directly to America entering the Vietnam war, never actually happened.
Operation Northwoods.
MK-ULTRA.
Operation Mockingbird.
Manhattan Project.
Watergate.
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study.
1990 Testimony of Nayirah.
Counter Intelligence Programs Against Activists in the 60s.
Main Core.
Rex 84.
The Iran-Contra Affair.
The BCCI Scandal.
CIA Drug Running in LA.
Operation Ajax.
Operation Snow White.
Operation Gladio.
The CIA Assassinates A Lot Of People (Church Committee).
The New World Order.
Kennedy Assassinations.
CIA Drug Smuggling in Arkansas.
Bohemian Grove.
Operation Paperclip.
The Federal Reserve Bank (U.S.A.)
Etc, etc, etc.

The above are all what you refer to as "'factual' truths." I don't see how this is a "limited perspective" and I do object to being called "lazy" for looking into such things. In my opinion, a lazy view of the world comes from plonking yourself in front of the BBC or the Telegraph and just digesting the pre-chewed crap they spew all over you and accepting the opinions of their "experts" without question. For example, when was the last time you heard about World Trade Centre Tower 7 on the BBC? I bet you thought only two towers collapsed on that day, didn't you? Now, that's lazy...


I've never said such things could not or never happened, I'm aware of all of them on that list and more (I'm involved with a US doc on the Franklin Case in Omaha which ties in with the Savings and Loan Scandal, based on the available evidence and personal testimony; I can tell you some scary shit about that and the difficulties getting it finished).  

I'm criticising the laziness of people who fall back on the usual 'conspiracy' tropes and phrases/buzz-words that give them away about where they're getting their info from -in the way anyone who only watches SKY or reads the Daily Mail does with the news and repeat a certain vocabulary- easy answers created by the likes of Jones with his literal 'satanic govenrment' and Rense's Zionism etc. a lot of it without actual verification and some of the real stuff distorted to suit the news that fits the demographic. These people are really running 'conspiracy' rackets that are as one-sided as FOXCORP/Glen Beck/Rush Limbaugh. There is nothing 'fair' about any of them when they are analysed. It is these people who have spun and spun so much 'conjecture' as 'truth' that it is becoming the equal of government disinfo.

We can cite examples all day about things that have happened or we've read that endlessly get repeated -many of which we'd find hard to prove or know the 'why' of anyway-  but it never makes for any solutions, the trick is to provoke others to solve problems for themselves not to always convince them that everything they know is a lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 March, 2011, 12:33:26 AM
I began composing all kinds of stuff to post about conspiracy theorists, but HoU summed it up better than I ever could.

When it comes to Groupings of Bastards (Bilderburg, Bohemia Grove, Freemasons, Skull'n'Bones whatever) people mistake common purpose for conspiracy. These shitsuckers don't sit around plotting Bond villain stunts to deceive the public and distort the economy, it's just that the top million or so of rich and powerful fuckers tend to behave in similar ways, prop up each others' interests and thus appear to be a "conspiracy", when all they're probably doing at these meetings is snorting coke off teenagers tits and comparing yacht sizes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 March, 2011, 12:47:16 AM
Don't forget the blackmail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 01:08:42 AM
Well, 9/11. Where to begin?

Yes, there are a lot of nut cases out there and a lot of bullshit. (Indeed, there are conspiracy theories that some of the more outlandish conspiracy theories have been deliberately made to look mad and then let loose into the world to discredit the serious questions - kind of like in those legal dramas where the nasty lawyers hide the one scrap of evidence that will damn/exonerate the accused inside a mountain of trivia and bullshit.) I find that the best way is to believe none of it and just ask questions.

Here are some of the questions surrounding 9/11 that I think have yet to be answered adequately:

Why are at least four of the alleged 9/11 hi-jackers still alive? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1559151.stm

Why is USAMA BIN LADEN not wanted for the 9/11 attacks? http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/wanted_terrorists

Why did the 47-storey WTC Building Seven collapse at near free-fall speed when it wasn't even hit by a 'plane? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

How do two 90,000 ton steel and concrete skyscrapers (WTC 1&2) collapse perfectly symmetrically into their own footprints, from the top down, following the path of MOST resistance at near free-fall speeds with enough force to pulverize concrete and leave pools of molten steel in the rubble due to asymmetrical impact damage and relatively cool jet fuel (kerosene) fires which burned for just a few hours? (Build a tower of dominoes or cardboard boxes or something, set fire to one of the top corners and see if you can achieve a similar collapse pattern. Bet you can't do it.)

How did one of the hijacker's passports survive the plane crash, subsequent fires and building collapse only to be found in the vicinity of Vesey Street, near the World Trade Center? http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_08.htm

Why was there thermite in the wtc rubble? http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_08.htm#sc

Why was the steel from the towers exported for recycling within weeks of the attacks, before any thorough investigation could be undertaken? http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html

And this only scratching the surface. There are still questions about how the US Air Force, which was well used to intercepting commercial aircraft wandering off their flight paths (nearly 100 times in the 12 months before 9/11, if memory serves) on the fatal day failed not once but FOUR times. Before we get to the lack of debris at Shanksville and the Pentagon impact which was powerful enough to vapourise a full passenger jet (including twenty ton engines and titanium alloy landing gear) and yet not hot enough to destroy the dna evidence required to identify the victims.

Questions, questions, questions. That's all I'm saying.

And, given that there are many questions, and that the upshot of 9/11 was war that has now lasted longer than WWII, slaughter on a grand scale and profits that read like cosmological distances - shouldn't there be a full and independent inquiry into what exactly happened on that day? To my mind, the answer to that question is a resounding YES.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 01:39:29 AM
I'm not a big fan of Alex Jones, Michael Moore and their ilk. Maybe they're good for attracting the attention of people who haven't thought about any of this stuff before, but beyond that they are, as you say, just making money out of it.

My advice to anyone looking into this is to start with WTC 7 and just root through the more sober 9/11 Truth websites, of which there are a fair few. If you look through it all and find nothing amiss with the official version of events then I'm truly glad for you because your world will go on as normal and all will seem as it ever was. If, on the other hand, you find gaping holes in the official story then it'll probably scare you shitless for months. It scared the crap out of me when I first started looking, I don't mind admitting that. The revelation of WTC7 led me into a rabbit hole of terror and paranoia, but that eventually wore off.

Now I don't really give a shit if other people believe it or not. Other people's beliefs are other people's beliefs and I respect that - I wouldn't want to force anyone to see things "my way" because I'm fairly certain that I don't have all the facts or understand most of what's actually going on. I guess that now I simply suspect that there's all kinds of evil shit going on in this world, most of it perpetrated by the very people we look up to or aspire to emulate. It really sucks.

In the end, the only beliefs I can change are my own. The only world I can alter is my own. I choose to distrust the higher strata of power, the majority of the so-called "elites." But I'm also a bit of a romantic and choose also to believe that, as well as the secret evil agendas pushed by trillionaire devils from their various ivory towers there are also a few trillionaire angels on our side. Although, I do fear that the angels are an endangered species. All we really have to do to stop the conspirators is keep an eye on them, refuse to be anything less than free human beings and to call the bastards to account when they step too close to the line. There's more of us than there are of them, so they're the ones who should be scared, not us.

Now, where's me Blitzspear? I fancy tearing the place up a bit...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 March, 2011, 07:48:36 AM
Michael Moore? I've never heard Michael Moore come up with anything implausible and far fetched. I thought his thesis was just that the super rich and powerful take every opportunity they get to do down the common working man. Isn't that the way it's always been?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 13 March, 2011, 08:26:00 AM
Perhaps aliens orchestrated 911 so the world can pound itself into the ground. Soft and weakened, ripe for invasion.

I am sure that is a theory that is banded out there. If not lets start is and shit on all those lives lost on that fateful day.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 10:38:57 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 13 March, 2011, 08:26:00 AM
Perhaps aliens orchestrated 911 so the world can pound itself into the ground. Soft and weakened, ripe for invasion.

I am sure that is a theory that is banded out there. If not lets start is and shit on all those lives lost on that fateful day.

V

This is precisely the kind of uneducated and offensive waffle that hampers real investigations, trivializes the disaster and truly shits on all the lives lost both on and as a result of 9/11. Did you even look into any of the questions I posed or just write the above based only on what you've been told to believe by the media?

Now, if you want to believe in this "aliens did it" theory of yours, you should at least provide some evidence to support your claim (unless of course you were just joking...). Personally, I want a fully independent, international inquiry into what happened. What's so dumb about that? I want the first responders (firefighters, police, paramedics, rescue workers, members of the public who pitched in to help etc) treated properly now up to 70% of them are suffering from debilitating respiratory illnesses. (On Sept. 28, 2001, 17 days after the attacks, New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said, "The air quality is safe and acceptable." 8,000 to 12,000 people are currently sick, many of them terminally so, for daring to help and only now is the US Government beginning to grudgingly accept that there's even a problem. Now that is shitting on all those lives lost.)

I used to get angry at foolish comments like the one Vzzbux makes above, but what's the point? There are none so blind as those who will not see. Get past your knee-jerk reactions and just look into the questions arising  before pronouncing with such blind certitude that the official version of events is set in stone and iron clad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 13 March, 2011, 12:44:24 PM
I am not poo pooing any questions raised.
Any event that has happened  raises questions which cannot directly be answered unless someone comes forward and says this is what we did and here is the direct evidence.

I just cannot believe that the US government was behind the 9/11 attack. That they would inflict the misery caused.
Am I not entitled to that opinion?

And yes I was joking about the Alien conspiracy unlike a lot of nut jobs, I just googled alien conspiracy 9/11.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 02:01:28 PM
Did I say anything about the US Government being behind it? Imagining that the whole government, its people, processes and machinery were responsible for 9/11 is as outlandish as blaming aliens, Elvis or the Loch Ness Monster.

Also, questions cannot be answered unless they are asked. I don't blame you for this Vzzbux, far from it - but ask yourself how often you hear these questions explored in any serious way on the mainstream media. We've all been brought up to trust the tube (see the fantastic 1976 film Network - even more apt today than it was then).

And I don't place myself above all this - I'm as brainwashed by telly as the next person. It's just that I'm beginning to see through some of it and I know that others are, too. We could have such a great world, such great societies, if enough of us just started to wake up and actively reject the bullshit. Let's get the likes of Bush, Blair and Rumsfeld into an open court and investigate them properly. If they truly had nothing to do with this, I'd be the first to apologise to them. But if they were involved, at any level, I'd be the first to call for their lifetime incarceration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 March, 2011, 02:19:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 02:01:28 PM
Did I say anything about the US Government being behind it? Imagining that the whole government, its people, processes and machinery were responsible for 9/11 is as outlandish as blaming aliens, Elvis or the Loch Ness Monster.

Unless I am very much mistaken, that was precisely vzzbux's point.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 10:38:57 AM
This is precisely the kind of uneducated and offensive waffle that hampers real investigations, trivializes the disaster and truly shits on all the lives lost both on and as a result of 9/11.

What vzzbux said was no more offensive than claims that the American military/industrial complex did the attack itself and faked up terrorist involvement, which was the target of his sarcastic critique. He didn't waffle. He was concise and to the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 March, 2011, 02:41:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 01:08:42 AM
Here are some of the questions surrounding 9/11 that I think have yet to be answered adequately:

Why was there thermite in the wtc rubble? http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_08.htm#sc

Quote from: 9/11 Hard FactsTesting residue from the beam and dust with an Electron Microprobe, Dr. Jones found compounds wholly consistent with thermite reactions - abundant Iron, Zinc, Sulfur, Manganese, Fluorine, and, perhaps most suspiciously, Barium, a highly toxic substance found in military grade explosives, not in building material, airplanes, or office supplies.

Iron, zinc, sulphur, manganese and fluorine are common elements used for all sorts of things, and iron, zinc and sulphur are even present in a lot of foods. Barium is used in rat poison. Barium-nickel alloy is used in car ignitions. Barium is also used in vacuum tubes, such as cathode ray television tubes, to round up stray gases, including oxygen, and in rubber manufacture, and coating electrodes of fluorescent lamps. It's also used as a radiocontrast agent for intestinal x-rays.

Quote from: wikipediaJones' interests also extend to archaeometry, solar energy,[2][3] and, like many professors at BYU, archaeology and the Book of Mormon.[4] For example, he has sought radiocarbon dating evidence of the existence of pre-Columbian horses in the Americas,[5] and has interpreted archaeological evidence from the ancient Mayans as supporting his faith's belief that Jesus Christ visited America.[6]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 March, 2011, 03:18:26 PM
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 04:02:09 PM
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 March, 2011, 04:19:26 PM
Sorry Shark, but this 9/1 conspiracy shit is just that- shit.

On balance, I'd rather take the word of popular mechanics on the melting point and the stresses on metal framed building than of some fucking internet nut.
These fucking people are an insult to every single fucking person who died in those buildings that day. Like it or not- there is an explanation that fits, it's just not the one that nutters who need to see something bigger, to have some big bogey man controlling their lives, like to see.

I've really tried to stay out of this debate, but this stuff is just so plain insulting to both the dead and to the intelligence of anyone with the ability to read a technical manual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 04:25:32 PM
Who's the internet nut of whom you speak?

I understand how frightening this subject is. The idea that the authorities are not telling the truth about such a horrific event is truly unthinkable - so, why think it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 13 March, 2011, 04:56:06 PM
Shark, I would hazard a guess and say no amount of debunking will ever be enough for the Truth Movement, at least not the majority of. The same way most people of faith will always believe, no matter what that pesky thing called Science throws their way.

My question, then, is this: What exactly would it take? For you to actually consider the likelihood that there is and was no conspiracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 13 March, 2011, 05:06:16 PM
go on then, who did 7/7? cia ,tony blair, al quaeda or elvis? i suppose the ira were made up too so someone could profit in government? the whole conspiracy thing is bollocks except the moon landings i'm sure i read somewhere the crew wold have been killed by the van allen(?) radiation belt???
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 05:08:20 PM
An open, free, public and international inquiry with the legal powers to force witnesses to appear, documents to be produced and evidence thoroughly investigated by independent experts. Not really a lot to ask, is it, given the lives that have been lost on the day and as a consequence?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 05:28:31 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 13 March, 2011, 05:06:16 PM
go on then, who did 7/7?

These guys, apparently:

(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/bombers_luton_203a.jpg)

(Image taken from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/investigation/html/introduction.stm  and blown up (if you'll pardon the pun) by myself). Note the amazing ability of the middle/rear "bomber" to walk in front of a guard rail without actually walking in front of a guard rail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 13 March, 2011, 05:48:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 05:28:31 PM
Note the amazing ability of the middle/rear "bomber" to walk in front of a guard rail without actually walking in front of a guard rail.

?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 March, 2011, 05:49:19 PM
QuoteNote the amazing ability of the middle/rear "bomber" to walk in front of a guard rail without actually walking in front of a guard rail.

Apart from the fact that he's not, of course. He clearly has his hands in his pockets.
Unless you're suggesting that this video was somehow and for some reason created using SFX?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 06:34:02 PM
So far as I know, there is no cctv footage from 7/7 showing the bombers together at Luton. I may be wrong (7/7 isn't something I've really looked into in any great depth), but I seem to recall that only the above single frame was ever released from the day and location in question. There is moving cctv footage of the bombers at Luton, I think, but this comes from about a month before the attacks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 13 March, 2011, 06:38:10 PM
Well here's my thoughts on the situation...


FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 07:13:33 PM
Heh, we should probably let this drop, now. I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me - at least not on a 2000AD forum!

I've enjoyed the discussion but these are fractious issues and, quite aside from all the paranoia and mud slinging and theoreticals, living, breathing, real people actually died in the events we've been discussing.

I therefore propose a truce before we all start ripping chunks off one another.

Instead, maybe we should discuss something a little less ire-inspiring like, maybe, who is Barry Soetoro?

*titters*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 March, 2011, 07:21:26 PM
Isn't it just the name Obama's stepfather (whose name was Soetoro) used for him when the family lived in Indonesia?  Is there a mystery I'm missing here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 07:37:26 PM
Nah, I was just being devilish  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 15 March, 2011, 07:00:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2011, 07:13:33 PM
Heh, we should probably let this drop, now. I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me - at least not on a 2000AD forum!

I've enjoyed the discussion but these are fractious issues and, quite aside from all the paranoia and mud slinging and theoreticals, living, breathing, real people actually died in the events we've been discussing.

I therefore propose a truce before we all start ripping chunks off one another.

Instead, maybe we should discuss something a little less ire-inspiring like, maybe, who is Barry Soetoro?

*titters*


we humbly accept your surrender  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2011, 07:45:21 PM
(http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-sf2p/v335/194/72/35769248311/n35769248311_1331663_6672.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 March, 2011, 09:00:19 PM
Condescending?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2011, 09:46:52 PM
More amusing, really.

I have neither the wit, intelligence or desire to be condescending.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 15 March, 2011, 10:35:52 PM
I wish our government was in control.  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2011, 11:04:00 PM
I wish we were in control of our government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 15 March, 2011, 11:07:11 PM
I wish your government was in control of us.  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 March, 2011, 11:08:41 PM
A government of sharks. I prefer none myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 16 March, 2011, 12:22:00 AM
If wishes were fishes, sharks would never go hungry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 March, 2011, 08:06:52 AM
If wishes were sharks my First Year French teacher would be chum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2011, 09:38:10 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 15 March, 2011, 11:08:41 PM
A government of sharks. I prefer none myself.

No sharks or no government?

If no sharks, then all I can say is:   :'(  (Well, excepting hammerhead sharks, that is. All the rest of us normal sharks think that hammerheads are foolish. Even jellyfish laugh at hammerheads, and jellyfish have brains the size of a molecule. So yes, get rid of the hammerheads by all means...)

If no government, well, that sounds good in theory. However, I think what we need to do is re-evaluate exactly what we want out of government. To my mind, a government's role is to coordinate the frameworks of society. For example, a government should make sure that all the sewers are working properly and all the roads are in good repair. It should make sure that nobody goes without food, water, shelter, medicine, law etc. We should strip the government of the power to borrow money "on our behalf," ensure that it holds the welfare of the individual above the welfare of corporations and should absolutely and irrevocably be stripped of its power to take us to war if we don't want to go. It should stay out of our personal lives, keep no secrets from us and stop stealing our wealth. It should be our government, not some distant, autonomous Elites' Club.

In my view, the government has one fundamental role, a role which it has been neglecting and even actively working against: To provide a decent life for everyone - no exceptions, no compromises.

(Well, except for hammerheads, that is...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 March, 2011, 02:30:45 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 15 March, 2011, 10:35:52 PM
I wish our government was in control.  :(

My first thought was something similar. A lot of conspiracy theories credit governments with far more competence in manipulation than they actually have. Governments aren't nearly as much in control as most people imagine, which is why so much of what they do is reactive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2011, 02:48:58 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 March, 2011, 02:30:45 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 15 March, 2011, 10:35:52 PM
I wish our government was in control.  :(

My first thought was something similar. A lot of conspiracy theories credit governments with far more competence in manipulation than they actually have. Governments aren't nearly as much in control as most people imagine, which is why so much of what they do is reactive.

Indeed- this is my point of view also. It's hard to credit hiding something as complex as, say, a staged bombing, to a group of people who cannot even manage to keep secret the fact that one of them charged a kit-kat to expenses.

It also occoured to me that in this new, post-wikileaks- world, that it is incredible to believe that any information on anything of public import remains hidden.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 March, 2011, 03:01:20 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2011, 02:48:58 PM
It also occoured to me that in this new, post-wikileaks- world, that it is incredible to believe that any information on anything of public import remains hidden.

That's what they want you to think. Sucker!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2011, 03:10:56 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 March, 2011, 03:01:20 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2011, 02:48:58 PM
It also occoured to me that in this new, post-wikileaks- world, that it is incredible to believe that any information on anything of public import remains hidden.

That's what they want you to think. Sucker!

Dammit! I'm falling for the Big Lie!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2011, 05:19:32 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 16 March, 2011, 02:30:45 PM
... A lot of conspiracy theories credit governments with far more competence in manipulation than they actually have. Governments aren't nearly as much in control as most people imagine, which is why so much of what they do is reactive.

This is exactly right.

Let me try to explain what I have come to understand. Basically, it's all about that old and very efficient military method for keeping secrets - compartmentalization.


For argument's sake, let us imagine that I was born into a phenominally rich banking family that routinely makes trillions of dollars out of lending non-existant money to governments (I've explained already on this thread how such a process works, so I won't go into it again here). My family, in this hypothetical scenario, basically has so much money and other resources that I am more or less above the law. I believe that I am better than the rest of humanity and therefore should be in charge of just about everything - do I need to directly control entire governments in order to achieve my goals? No, not at all. I need only a handful of allies in strategic positions in governments, industry, the media, intelligence services etc.

It would be very easy for me to fund, usually indirectly, up-and-coming politicians (for example) if I approve of their personalities and/or policies. As a powerful man, I will also have "agents" in the high echelons of the media to sex-up the politicians I like and destroy the ones I don't like. I can also set up blackmailable situations for the politicians I'm not sure about and keep the evidence in reserve for such a time as it may be needed in the future. Using these methods, I can steer certain politicians into positions of power and keep the ones I have no interest in away from positions of power. (I am not starting from scratch, of course, because my father, grandfather, great-grandfather etc. have been running similar operations for many, many years and so I already have "agents" in the government who will basically toe the line. These politicians rarely even know what my agenda is because I only convince/bribe/blackmail them into doing what it is in their power to do.) The vast majority of politicians, then, have very little real power and are kept too busy to effectively join all the dots. (My own MP (Lorraine Fullbrook) told me that she can only afford to employ one assistant and has so much work to do that she hardly even has time to sleep.)

Given (again, for argument's sake) that the above is true and I believe that to keep the population under control there needs to be more stringent laws which favour me and my kind (the Elite) and keep the "useless eaters" (as Henry Kissinger allegedly described ordinary people) down and powerless. The best way to do this is through law making and by manipulating public opinion. I want to convince you that it's for your own good to give away your rights. How to do this?

Firstly, using serving intelligence agents, or even retired ones, I trick, bully, blackmail, pay or otherwise convince some fairly harmless "malcontents" into doing the dirty work. This is not quite so difficult as it may first appear. The patsies are convinced that "the authorities" are onto them and that if they don't cooperate they'll be going to jail, get sent to Guantanamo Bay or something equally frightening. To avoid this scenario, they are asked to carry "fake bombs" onto trains or buses as part of an "exercise" to test security. On the day the patsies
undertake their "exercise" a "real" exercise is also taking place at exactly the same time (as happened on both 9/11 and 7/7). Of course, the patsies' bombs are not fake at all and the mock attack becomes real, wiping out innocent civilians and the patsies at the same time. As you can see, this does not require the complicity of very many people at all, just a few key personnel.

Once the attack has happened, my "agents" in government, industry and the media start shouting that "something must be done" to protect us all from such fiendish "terrorist attacks." Thus we get, very quickly in most cases, legislation such as The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (UK) or The Patriot Act (USA) - legislation which chips away at the civil liberties of the useless eaters. This is, of course, an extreme example but, as you can see, it doesn't take very many people to commit such an atrocity. (Indeed, if the official story of 9/11 is true it took only 19 hijackers to kill 2,977 people and plunge the world into terror and war. On 7/7, officially, it took only four people.) As a result, the useless eaters have a little more of their power taken away. Then I'll wait a while and look for an opportunity to advance my plans a little more. The freedom of a nation is not taken all at once, but in small increments until one day we wake up in a country where the majority of our laws are imposed from an unelected, foreign beurocracy... And what do the useless eaters do? They welcome it. The ones who criticise or question are marginalized, demonized, lampooned or even killed (Dr David Kelly, Robin Cook etc.).

The above extreme example, of course, does not occur in a vacuum. The vast majority of my goals are achieved in the shadows - in secret meetings between my agents and often unknowing politicians who can be made to see the sense (and the personal gain) of doing things may way. The addition of a small legislative change here or the green-lighting of a corporate project there. The rewards for compliance are generous (for example, Tony Blair now earns millions working for JP Morgan Chase, one of the major banks raping the British people).

Our governments don't need to be destroyed, just cleaned and returned to us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 March, 2011, 05:36:46 PM
viva la revolution! power to the people! these romans are crazy!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 16 March, 2011, 06:05:23 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2011, 02:48:58 PM
It also occoured to me that in this new, post-wikileaks- world, that it is incredible to believe that any information on anything of public import remains hidden.

Oh I wouldn't go that far. Governemnts are incompotent and are often caught out, but there's bound to be some stuff which manages to remain hidden. It counts in their favour that there are very real consequences for those who do get caught leaking information.

Pfc. Bradley Manning. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40797738/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2011, 06:08:55 PM
I don't trust Wikileaks
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2011, 06:10:46 PM
Sometimes, we talk about these things in the Yap Shop (well, I talk about them but most people just ignore me and chat around it), so why not drop in tonight? Things usually get going proper after 8pm.

We mainly talk about other stuff, though - comics, movies, music, whatever. Come along and have some fun!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 March, 2011, 08:33:18 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 16 March, 2011, 06:05:23 PMOh I wouldn't go that far. Governemnts are incompotent and are often caught out, but there's bound to be some stuff which manages to remain hidden.


Plenty of sexual blackmail too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 March, 2011, 08:59:27 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 16 March, 2011, 08:33:18 PM

Plenty of sexual blackmail too.

There are rumours that either the British Security Forces or former Warsaw Pact members blackmailed the then British Prime Minister Harold Wilson because he was allegedly a secret Bi-sexual. Wilson re signed complaining bitterly against dark forces moving against him.

I watched a truly disturbing programme on I think the Military History channel about Operation Gladio with it's strategy of tension with the left. Central to this strategy was the instigation of centre right goverments in Europe.

Extreme right wingers infiltrated left wing groups to discredit them commiting appalling acts of terrorism. 16 people in Germany were blown up at the Oktoberfest. One of these right wing maniacs died in the blast probably by his own malfunctioning bomb.

Hideous though it is too contemplate was Wilson, a socialist deliberatley undermined as part of this Gladio operation ?

Chilling viewing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 16 March, 2011, 11:12:40 PM
Governments look incompetent because they're busy running around like headless chickens covering up for the rape and pillage conducted by our corporate masters, which is almost impossible to do with a straight face. Hence we point and laugh at their stupidity as they suck people dry of their wealth and freedoms like a super-blackhole. Then we vote them back into office. :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 March, 2011, 07:22:00 PM
"Libyan Hospitals Attacked"

No sources listed, so hopefully this isn't true. Still, I do get that horrible sinking feeling. Again...

http://www.countercurrents.org/nazemroaya200311.htm

http://www.irishrepublican.net/forum/showthread.php?67595-US-and-brits-bomb-hospital-in-Libya

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 21 March, 2011, 01:25:09 PM
How is the Libyan situation different to Zimbabwe? Oh yes the oil. How could I have overlooked that one. ::)

They didn't want our help when we sent in the SAS to assassinate Gadaffi. (Well that little force wasn't there for anything else I can think of). Unless the Rebels have approached the coalition then we should stay out.



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2011, 02:02:43 PM
In order to lay secure pipelines from the oil and gas fields in the Caspian Sea area to The Gulf/Arabian Sea, control of Iraq and Afghanistan was required. Control of Iran would be preferable as it would allow a more direct route.

Libya, of course, has approximately 39.1 billion barrels of oil reserves of its own (far more than the Caspian Kazakhstan (9.0bn barrels) and Azerbaijan (7.0bn barrels) region). Control of pipelines through Libya and Egypt into the Red Sea might be one goal here. We've all been taught that Somali pirates are a nuisance at the southern end of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, so once Libya is on-side I wouldn't be surprised to see the Somali Republic begin to generate more news of terrorism, piracy and such to prepare the way for more Allied naval strength in the area to protect the oil routes.

Another goal might be the neutralization of the Libyan Navy and the establishment of "Allied" naval bases along the Libyan coast, thereby making oil tanker shipping through the Mediterranean more secure.

This is all pure conjecture on my part, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 March, 2011, 02:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2011, 02:02:43 PM
This is all pure conjecture on my part, of course.

Sadly not likely to be far from the truth.  I would stop short of using IrishRepublican.net as a reliable source myself, although they do have plenty of connections to Libya.

Bombing Gadaffi's compound, huh?  It really is the '80's all over again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2011, 03:09:23 PM
The price I'm paying for petrol at the moment, I'm all for making oil tanker shipping through the Mediterranean more secure!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2011, 12:21:18 AM
An email I got today. Unfortunately, I can't make it but maybe others will be in a better position to take part...

"This Saturday 26th March is the big day for the anti cuts movement, hundreds of thousands of people will March in London for an alternative to the spending cuts. We'll be there representing the One Good Cut campaign, a campaign aiming to get monetary reform onto the anti-cuts agenda as a viable alternative.

Over the next few months we aim to present the arguments for monetary reform to the environmental and anti-poverty lobbies, explaining why banking and finance have an exacerbatiing effect on environmental destruction and poverty at home and abroad, and how taking back control of the money supply offers us a way out of these problems.

Whether you are against the recent spending cuts or not, the past few months have shown that protest in the UK can be successful, the Save the Forests campaign achieving a total U-turn in government policy, the actions of UK Uncut rousing the left and showing signs of small turnarounds in government tax policy.



As you will know if you are receiving this email, the greatest commons resource of all, the money supply, has been privatised and turned from an instrument of value into an instrument of debt. Every single penny of all the money in flow in the UK has been borrowed from a bank, and the banks decide who gets to borrow it, and for what purpose.



The enormous size of the banking sector is sucking the life out of the economy, and the signs are more visible now than ever before. It cannot continue forever, the profits earned from exercising the benefits of their unfathomably profitable subsidy is not sustainable, and the real economy suffers every day as a result.



I feel it is unlikely that banking reform will be achieved purely through lobbying and good ideas, protesting and demonstrating support in public places is bound to play a significant part in this. Whether or not we have a role to play in this as an organisation, many of you receiving this email will. Saturday 26th March is the biggest event of its kind since the Iraq war demonstrations, there will be plenty of opportunity to make ourselves heard, have a good day out, and meet other like minded people at this event.



March with us on the 26th, visit http://www.positivemoney.org.uk tomorrow evening to get prepared and find out how you can put banking reform at the heart of the protest movement.

Kind Regards

Ben Curtis"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 March, 2011, 12:30:05 AM
This thread reminds me of the people who ring Talk Sport through the night (that's when they don't 'talk sport'), as they love this sort of stuff!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2011, 01:43:01 AM
"Long time listener, first time caller, Brad. I'd like to talk about wasps and their impact on the earwig population in Penge, please..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 March, 2011, 01:45:28 AM
It gets worse than anything that's appeared on this thread and ever so heated. I have a good old laugh every night at work but amazingly I agree with some of the callers when they really go for it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 23 March, 2011, 10:38:38 AM
What happened to the TUC mass protest?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 March, 2011, 11:29:56 AM
Quote from: Krombasher on 23 March, 2011, 10:38:38 AM
What happened to the TUC mass protest?

It's this Saturday - I'll be there! trying to work out a good slogan for a sign - I think I'll just go with ARSE. Says it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2011, 11:36:40 AM
Ass
Rape
Social
Elites!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 10:52:56 PM
IF you can possibly make it into London tomorrow, add yourself to the weight of numbers who are marching to say that we should not be axing the arts, childcare, legal advice, libraries, forensic laboratories, domestic violence support, scientific research, social services, homeless shelters, drug advice, meals on wheels flood defences, solar energy, special needs education, forestryrecycling,      ...to pay for the billions we shovelled into the banker's trough.

Labour did not bankrupt the country. Borrowing (as a %age of GDP) is less than under Thatcher, governments always live on credit and we owe less than the Americans. In true Goeballs-style however the Tories have peddled this Big Lie that the international banking fuckup wasn't to blame, but that 'Labour have pissed all your money away'; to get away with a mind-boggling attack on the weakest and most vulnerable members of our society. Repeat it often enough and even intelligent people start agreeing that swinging cuts in basic service are necessary - BOLLOX!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 25 March, 2011, 10:58:45 PM
I know its old new but this didn't help the economy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1654931.ece





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 11:06:48 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 25 March, 2011, 10:58:45 PM
I know its old new but this didn't help the economy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1654931.ece





V

True, true, that boneheaded cock-up cost the country £2bn. The banking crisis cost us £850bn
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2011, 11:10:09 PM
I wonder if the bankers call the banking crisis a banking crisis, or do they call it a banking bonanza?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 11:22:05 PM
Did I mention that I have to get up at five bloody thirty in the bastard morning to exercise my democratic rights? Arsebiscuit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2011, 11:25:45 PM
I saw my MP tonight.

She promised to help with our village's inadequate drains.

Woop de doo doo, pass her a shovel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 11:37:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2011, 11:25:45 PM
I saw my MP tonight.

She promised to help with our village's inadequate drains.

Woop de doo doo, pass her a shovel.

It's the Big Society - she'll find a way for you and your neighbours to arrange a more cost effective way of disposing with your faeces, rather than expecting the State to do it for you.

Seriously GO TO LONDON TOMORROW everyone! If you think what we're being told is shit, then come and march - adding yourself to the numbers does have an effect!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 March, 2011, 01:10:09 AM
Go to London, you do realise that some of us have jobs to go to!
I hope you will be planting trees to offset all the carbon that you will be using to get there!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 March, 2011, 09:54:05 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 11:22:05 PM
Did I mention that I have to get up at five bloody thirty in the bastard morning to exercise my democratic rights? Arsebiscuit.

That's nothing. I get up at 5.00 in the morning three days a week (7.00 on Sundays) to pay my mortgage and put food on the table! At least you're getting a day out.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 March, 2011, 01:10:09 AM
Go to London, you do realise that some of us have jobs to go to!
I hope you will be planting trees to offset all the carbon that you will be using to get there!

And what is it you do in this job you have to go to? Does it release much carbon dioxide? Plant a lot of trees, do you?
;)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 26 March, 2011, 10:17:36 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 25 March, 2011, 11:37:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2011, 11:25:45 PM
I saw my MP tonight.

She promised to help with our village's inadequate drains.

Woop de doo doo, pass her a shovel.

It's the Big Society - she'll find a way for you and your neighbours to arrange a more cost effective way of disposing with your faeces, rather than expecting the State to do it for you.

Seriously GO TO LONDON TOMORROW everyone! If you think what we're being told is shit, then come and march - adding yourself to the numbers does have an effect!

Good luck, DDD- Bou's down in the middle of that somewhere too!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 March, 2011, 11:56:51 AM
Good luck to everyone involved in the march.

I'm with you in spirit.

Watch out for those agents provocateurs and try not to get kettled!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: uncle fester on 26 March, 2011, 12:45:59 PM
Protesters heading for London to voice their outrage and frustration. Cameron et al heading to the river to watch the boat race.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 26 March, 2011, 01:09:04 PM
I look forward to the conflicting estimates of the turnout.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2011, 04:09:29 PM
Oh, there'll be millions!  ;) And all well-behaved!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 March, 2011, 05:10:14 PM
I was wondering how much they spent on Vuvuzelas and inflatable giant scissors?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 March, 2011, 07:41:20 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 March, 2011, 05:10:14 PM
I was wondering how much they spent on Vuvuzelas and inflatable giant scissors?

Not nearly as much as one might spend on skiing in Klosters, dinner at the Ritz or a hamper from Fortnum and Mason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 March, 2011, 08:32:50 PM
On way home on a bus full of pissed up psych  nurses. A grand day out!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 March, 2011, 10:25:02 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 26 March, 2011, 07:41:20 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 March, 2011, 05:10:14 PM
I was wondering how much they spent on Vuvuzelas and inflatable giant scissors?

Not nearly as much as one might spend on skiing in Klosters, dinner at the Ritz or a hamper from Fortnum and Mason.

Oh, I don't know - you might get some bargains from Fortnum and Mason tomorrow...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 March, 2011, 10:36:15 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 March, 2011, 10:25:02 PM
Oh, I don't know - you might get some bargains from Fortnum and Mason tomorrow...

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 26 March, 2011, 10:36:31 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 26 March, 2011, 08:32:50 PM
On way home on a bus full of pissed up psych  nurses. A grand day out!

As pissed as they are make sure they wipe your bottom and give you your meds before they put you to bed
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 March, 2011, 04:51:39 AM
Nxtgen's rap about the changes to the NHS:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl1jPqqTdNo

QuoteThe rapper, real name Sean Donnelly, has found himself a viral YouTube and Twitter celebrity after recording a track that certainly offers a "different sound". Eschewing the traditional hiphop themes of bling, booty and babes, Donnelly has recorded a caustic three-minute rap about the Department of Health's white paper "Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS", and dedicated it personally – highly personally, one might say – to the health minister himself.

"Andrew Lansley, greedy! Andrew Lansley, tosser!" runs the refrain, repeated throughout the song, over a sample taken from The House of the Rising Sun. "The NHS is not for sale, you grey-haired manky codger!" But if Donnelly is far from polite in his political protest, he has certainly done his research.

"So the budget of the PCTs, he wants to hand to the GPs / Oh please. Dumb geeks are gonna buy from any willing provider, / Get care from private companies."

Later, he offers a helpful parse of the white paper, saying Lansley's plans are that "we'll become more like the US / and care will be farmed out to private companies, / who will sell their service to the NHS via the GPs / who will have more to do with service purchase arrangements / than anything to do with seeing their patients."

...

He even riffs on the health secretary's expenses record, and – in what has a reasonable claim to be the unlikeliest rap lyric ever – on the controversial donation to Lansley's office by the chairman of a private health company. "He's been given cash / by John Nash / chairman of Care UK, / a private healthcare provider, / who, if they have their own way, / will be the biggest beneficiaries / of Conservative Lib-Dem policies / to privatise healthcare, pull apart the welfare state ..." It's some distance from 2 Live Crew's Me So Horny.

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/mar/25/andrew-lansley-rap-mc-nxtgen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 March, 2011, 08:34:59 AM
If you were to ask outsiders what was the best thing about the British state, it'd be a toss up between the BBC and the NHS - and anyone who had actually experienced both would plump for the NHS.  I know several folk from Norn Iron who now live and work down here in Saor Stat Merkel, and traipse back home every time they need a doctor or a dentist.  It baffles me that something that so defines what's good about the UK could be about to be turned into a second-rate copy of systems whose users can only dream of what you currently have. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 27 March, 2011, 10:10:00 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 March, 2011, 08:34:59 AM
If you were to ask outsiders what was the best thing about the British state, it'd be a toss up between the BBC and the NHS - and anyone who had actually experienced both would plump for the NHS.  I know several folk from Norn Iron who now live and work down here in Saor Stat Merkel, and traipse back home every time they need a doctor or a dentist.  It baffles me that something that so defines what's good about the UK could be about to be turned into a second-rate copy of systems whose users can only dream of what you currently have. 

It's certainly scaring the crap out of me. There are a number of private companies who are straining at the leash to get in there and rip-off chunks of the NHS, from pathology to continence services. Now, some of these companies might be extremely smart and efficient when it comes to business, but since their bottom line is profit and not people I wouldn't trust them in the slightest.

The real problem is that there is no active support from the general public, who through no real fault of its own has no knowledge or understanding of the complexity and cost of running the NHS - hell, I find that even people within the service are staggeringly ignorant of issues outside their immediate area of work. I think because of that ignorance, there's similarly no understanding of what's going to happen when the private sector gets even more involved.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:37:16 AM
Just 'cos someone does a nifty little rap, doesn't make something true.  The NHS definitely needs reforming, my missus worked in it for years and always said the waste was appalling.  Just because something's done for a profit, doesn't make it bad or inefficient.  In fact, I would argue that it would improve services, as a private company would not want to lose its cash cow to a rival company through bad service.

The NHS just doesn't do efficiency.  Anybody who works in the NHS and says they've never seen bad practice is telling porkies.

The PCTs waste a fortune, why not see if the Docs can do a better job!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 March, 2011, 11:22:30 AM
It's not really my place to comment, as a non-Brit, but to me the issue isn't "Reform: Good or Bad?" - obviously the NHS, and most state organisations everywhere, could benefit from reform.  Public Sectors are always rife with inefficiencies that would be weeded out by financial pressure in the Private Sector.  However the scale of reform proposed, the resources required to make such a change actually workable, and the general philosophical direction it takes (from an inefficient system where the casualties tend to be costs, to an allegedly efficient system where the casualties are more likely to be, well, casualties) are all deeply suspect.  It's not like this model hasn't been explored elsewhere, in countries with infinitely crapper health care services.

I work in a sector which supplies (far less important) private services to the State - I can assure you that what many of my colleagues see when they see a public contract hove into view is 'ker-ching!".  State bureaucracies are seldom equipped to deal efficiently and promptly with the deficencies of the faster, cleverer and more determined contractors they end up getting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 11:34:57 AM
I take your point about some private companies lapping it up when they get public sector contracts, TB, there would obviously have to be strict controls.  But I have to disagree with you when you say that in "an inefficient system the casualties tend to be costs"; a milion pounds wasted through inefficiencies is a scanner or some life-saving drugs or some doctors and nurses.  That's why I think there needs to be reforms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 27 March, 2011, 11:39:39 AM
I see the marches went peaceful then with no wanton destruction.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 27 March, 2011, 11:41:27 AM
Ah yes the private sector the people that brought you Enron and the current financial catastrophe. They would have taken all our money/savings, your wages would have stopped and every ATM would be empty in order to pay for their own folly.

The world was just a few hours from that happening until guess what? The boring old state/taxpayer had to save their sorry over paid pompous arses. Free  markets are bullshit. And dangerous bullshit too.

Strange how the government never rushed to help say the British ship building industry or mining yet bankers are protected.
Free markets for the poor, socialism for the rich no wonder people are rioting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 March, 2011, 11:41:51 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 27 March, 2011, 11:39:39 AM
I see the marches went peaceful then with no wanton destruction.




V

Yes, the march did- the twats who went on a wrecking spree were clearly nothing to do with the TUC organised demonstration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 27 March, 2011, 11:48:36 AM
It just seems odd that no one has mentioned the events of yesterday. Normally an event like this would have its own thread. I know a few of the boarders were on that march and I hope they are all right.
Having had a torrid day at work yesterday and finishing late the only footage of the events I have viewed is whats on the news at the moment. They are mainly concentrating on the violence and disruption. Yet again the media showing you what they want you to see.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 March, 2011, 12:18:22 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 27 March, 2011, 11:48:36 AM
It just seems odd that no one has mentioned the events of yesterday. Normally an event like this would have its own thread. I know a few of the boarders were on that march and I hope they are all right.
Having had a torrid day at work yesterday and finishing late the only footage of the events I have viewed is whats on the news at the moment. They are mainly concentrating on the violence and disruption. Yet again the media showing you what they want you to see.





V

I had the bbc news channel on in the background yesterday (in a hope of spotting Bou in the crowd) and they had some pretty fair coverage most of the day. They did, however, cut to and minor skirmish at any given opportunity. But on the whole, I'd have to say I thought the (live) coverage from the BBC on the day was good.
I didn't see anything last night, or haven't had the news on this morning to comment on what they're reporting right now however.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2011, 12:55:25 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 27 March, 2011, 11:41:27 AMStrange how the government never rushed to help say the British ship building industry or mining yet bankers are protected.

Be fair - most MPs don't go on to highly-paid consultancy jobs in the ship building or mining industries once they do their stint in office.

Didn't I also read somewhere that Britain farms out MPs as consultants on privitising nationalised industry?  MPs make a huge amount of money telling the world how privatisation works so they actually have to advertise that it's a real thing by selling off whatever's not nailed down while they're in office in order to reap the rewards when they leave that office.

No conflict of interest there, then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 01:00:12 PM
Save the NHS campaign:  http://38degrees.org.uk/ (http://38degrees.org.uk/)

I too heard some of the BBC's coverage yesterday. Several times I heard reporters, upon interviewing members of the crowd, say stuff like "but, there is no alternative to cuts, is there?"

Yes, BBC, there is an alternative. A huge great stonking alternative that would solve not only public service cuts but reinvigorate every area of the world. It's an alternative that isn't new and has been proven to work. The alternative that allowed Caesar to build a world-spanning empire. The alternative that allowed Abraham Lincoln to fight the War of Independence.

It's simple: Take away from the banks the power to create and control the money supply and return that power to the people via their governments. The only people who will lose out under this system are a handful of bankers and hedge fund managers - and I think they're already rich enough to cope with being forced to exist on a couple of pounds less caviare a month. It's not as if using public money instead of private money will throw anyone into poverty, for Christ's sake - just the opposite.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/ (http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/)

Blood pressure returning to normal. Soap box sagging. Frustration easing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 01:08:30 PM
"According to the Guardian and others, minister Ed Vaizey is still considering web blocking as a serious option to tackle copyright infringement..."

http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=1422&ea.campaign.id=9984 (http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=1422&ea.campaign.id=9984)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 27 March, 2011, 01:21:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:37:16 AM
Just 'cos someone does a nifty little rap, doesn't make something true.  The NHS definitely needs reforming, my missus worked in it for years and always said the waste was appalling.

I also work in the NHS and my mother worked in it for 43 years over five decades (she also has experience of the private sector). Neither of us are going to proclaim perfection, but both of us are seeing a service intended to care for human beings being turned into a sausage factory where numbers are the primary consideration. That's the sort of reform that's happening, not improvement to actual healthcare.

QuoteJust because something's done for a profit, doesn't make it bad or inefficient.  In fact, I would argue that it would improve services, as a private company would not want to lose its cash cow to a rival company through bad service.

It seems a logical argument, but then it's private companies who are providing the cleaning services that are so routinely condemned, but since they employ minimum wage staff, often from overseas, and treat them just as resources not people, what can you expect? It's a question of an organisation's priority, and for the private sector that's just profit. Any organisation who sees any part of the NHS as a cash cow should not be allowed anywhere near it.

QuoteThe NHS just doesn't do efficiency.  Anybody who works in the NHS and says they've never seen bad practice is telling porkies.

The NHS does do efficiency and cost effectiveness. Hell, our pathology services does the local private hospital's work because they couldn't do it cheaply or efficiently enough. Sure, you can find bad practice in the NHS, but anyone who works in the private sector who says they've never seen bad practice is also a liar. And at least some of the alleged bad practice the NHS is accused of is actually based on opinion, selfishness and plain lack of understanding of systems, technical requirements and legal obligations, both within and without the service.


QuoteThe PCTs waste a fortune, why not see if the Docs can do a better job!

They won't, for they simple reason that doctors and consultants live in their own little microcosm of the NHS have no or limited understanding of how anything else works. Even when you explain something to them with short words, diagrams and physical examples they fail to understand. Even when you think you've got through to them, you find that they've completely forgotten within a couple of months. Or they just do something their way, because they want to, and stuff anyone else. These are often people who can't even fill out basic patient details properly or legibly on standard forms they use everyday. There's also a shocking degree of selfishness and lack of consideration of others. A gross generalisation, of course, but the culture is there.

All this extra responsibility placed on GPs eats into their already limited time. The only way they'll be able to manage things efficiently will be to hire administrative staff to do it for them.

One of the other things we're talking about is point-of-care testing - some (though no all) diagnostic tests being done at the GPs rather than sent to laboratories. This seems easier for patients, and some GPs think it's going to be cheaper for them. However, GPs and practice nurses frequently do not understand the science and practicalities of performing tests properly, interpteting the validity of results, or even the equipment (I've already heard some horror stories) - and there's no reason why they should, it's not their area of expertise.

So, we're looking at massive and costly training and external auditing systems that will need to be put in place or expanded to make sure everything is done properly. Also, you'll end up with lots of little groups each with their own kit and equipment, rather than more centralised, hospital-based labs working on a larger scale - there is no way on earth this will be more cost-effective or efficient.

What so few people seem able to grasp - even many of the people working in it - is the enormous complexity of the NHS, the incredible diversity and range of services and departments even within subsections of it, the legal requirements, health and safety rules that cannot be ignored, the theoretical and practical science and equipment that underpins diagnosis, cleaning and laundry services, finances and purchases of anything from paper towels to ink cartidges to diagnostic antibodies, hazardous waste mangement which ranges from bloody swabs and body parts to sharps to thousands of litres of toxic chemicals, mandatory and specialist training, internal and external auditing, volunteer transport service, physical and staffed security system, and more.

And if you you're going to say that other companies have to do that, well, I'll remind you that the NHS is the world's third largest employer and one of the most publically scrutinised, and I doubt the scale of our services are matched by any other.


Regards

Robin

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 02:14:21 PM
The NHS has saved my life at least twice.

Never once was I presented with a bill. Never once was it even considered too expensive to save my worthless hide.

Efficient or not, what more could I ask?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 March, 2011, 02:27:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 02:14:21 PM
Never once was I presented with a bill. Never once was it even considered too expensive to save my worthless hide.

The politicians and corporate interests who advocate dismantling of the NHS are not the people who are dependent on it.  Otherwise it would be as inviolate as executive bonuses and ministerial pensions.    

Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 11:34:57 AM
...a milion pounds wasted through inefficiencies is a scanner or some life-saving drugs or some doctors and nurses. 

You don't think that million pounds (and the rest) isn't just going to go on corporate bonuses in the private companies?  I do agree that there's surely room/need for reform, but I don't believe that the scrutiny of private companies is going to be any easier than a process of reform within the organisation as it exists.

Anyhow, I should stop offering opinions on health services that are none of my business.  I've plenty to give out about with regard to the one on my doorstep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 02:31:17 PM
Of course you were presented with a bill, it went under the heading of "Taxes" and perhaps if the NHS was more efficient it would have the resources to save many more worthless hides!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 02:54:48 PM
Most taxes go towards paying off the national debt. Virtually none of the money you pay in taxes goes towards actual services like the NHS. It's all paid for out of interest bearing, privately created loans - hence the need to return to socially created, interest free money.

It's not rocket surgery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 03:23:34 PM
Can't agree with you there, Sharky.  The Government in total takes far more in Income Tax, VAT, Inheritance Tax, Savings Tax, Insurance Tax, etc. etc. than it borrows; although I agree the borrowing is horrendous, that's why we need efficiencies in the public services.

Tax doesn't have to be taxing!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 04:49:53 PM
UK Tax income 2009-2010 = £519.8bn


UK new borrowing 2009-2010 = £159.8bn (not including existing deficit of £1000.4bn)

Uk Government spending 2009-2010 = £669.26bn



159.8bn + 1000.4bn + 669.26bn = 1829.46bn

1829.46bn - 519.8bn = 1309.66bn

Therefore, more is owed than can be paid back through taxation, leading to more borrowing, leading to higher taxation, leading to more borrowing, leading to higher taxation... This is the real driver behind inflation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 March, 2011, 04:54:24 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:37:16 AM
Just 'cos someone does a nifty little rap, doesn't make something true.  The NHS definitely needs reforming

I'm sure it does, but it doesn't need privatisation - it might be a nifty little rap but the key is that he is also spot on with his analysis of NHS reforms. How many people really look at American healthcare and think they'd prefer that to the NHS?

The Tory government are using the economic crisis for a "disaster capitalism" ram raid on important parts of the state, all to benefit big business. What'll be interesting to see is if they can sell this to the British people - polls do show a slim majority supporting the need for cuts (so the Tory spin that this is all down to Labour's profligate spending, rather than a global economic crisis seems to be working), but will that be sustained when it turns out the "fair" cuts aren't and we aren't all in this together.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 01:00:12 PM
Save the NHS campaign:  http://38degrees.org.uk/ (http://38degrees.org.uk/)

I too heard some of the BBC's coverage yesterday. Several times I heard reporters, upon interviewing members of the crowd, say stuff like "but, there is no alternative to cuts, is there?"

Yes, BBC, there is an alternative. A huge great stonking alternative that would solve not only public service cuts but reinvigorate every area of the world. It's an alternative that isn't new and has been proven to work. The alternative that allowed Caesar to build a world-spanning empire. The alternative that allowed Abraham Lincoln to fight the War of Independence.

It's simple: Take away from the banks the power to create and control the money supply and return that power to the people via their governments. The only people who will lose out under this system are a handful of bankers and hedge fund managers - and I think they're already rich enough to cope with being forced to exist on a couple of pounds less caviare a month. It's not as if using public money instead of private money will throw anyone into poverty, for Christ's sake - just the opposite.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/ (http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/)

Blood pressure returning to normal. Soap box sagging. Frustration easing...

Somehow, I knew you'd say that ;)

Personally, I'd rather start by cutting down on tax avoidance and tax evasion - for every pound spent on this we get 30 back, and yet the number of people working at HMRC is being cut (and was cut before under Labour too, so it is not a party political point - they are both in thrall to those with deep pockets).

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 02:14:21 PM
The NHS has saved my life at least twice.

Never once was I presented with a bill. Never once was it even considered too expensive to save my worthless hide.

I will be writing to my MP about this first thing tomorrow. Rest assured it won't happen again ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 05:01:30 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 27 March, 2011, 04:54:24 PM
I will be writing to my MP about this first thing tomorrow. Rest assured it won't happen again ;)

Heh, I wouldn't worry about it. Me and Her Maj will probably both be disposed of cheaply and efficiently by certain "dark forces," so it won't cost you a penny!  :o

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article823072.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article823072.ece)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 05:32:29 PM
Is it possible to get out of debt for free?

Maybe it is...

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/

(I don't know if any of this works or not, but if anyone tries it I'd love to know how you get on. I'd try it myself, but I have no debts.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 March, 2011, 06:42:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2011, 02:14:21 PM
The NHS has saved my life at least twice.

Never once was I presented with a bill. Never once was it even considered too expensive to save my worthless hide.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 02:31:17 PM
Of course you were presented with a bill, it went under the heading of "Taxes" and perhaps if the NHS was more efficient it would have the resources to save many more worthless hides!!

If Shark was presented with the bill, under the heading of 'taxes,' then so were you and I. I have never been at death's door and have never been treated in hospital except as an out patient, so it's arguable that I have paid more into the NHS (but arguably not all areas of state funding that go through the treasury) than I have taken out. You and I have probably paid for Shark's life to be saved: he hasn't borne the cost alone. That, surely, is the point of the NHS. It's nit-picking to contest claims that the NHS is or isn't free. It is free 'at the point of delivery,' regardless of how we collectively pay for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 March, 2011, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 11:34:57 AM
I take your point about some private companies lapping it up when they get public sector contracts, TB, there would obviously have to be strict controls.  But I have to disagree with you when you say that in "an inefficient system the casualties tend to be costs"; a milion pounds wasted through inefficiencies is a scanner or some life-saving drugs or some doctors and nurses.  That's why I think there needs to be reforms.

The point of the Tories' proposed NHS 'reforms' (so-called) is not savings or efficiency. The point is to create business opportunities for the private sector and to dismantle the welfare state into the bargain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:35:42 PM
But, Ush, the private sector is already heavily involved in the NHS.  When I have my NHS funded eye test done, it's done in a private sector opticians; when I take my NHS prescription to be filled, it's done in a private sector chemist; when I go to my brand-new local hospital, it's being paid for by a PFI agreement; when I go for my NHS dental treatment, it's done by a private sector dental firm.  Many NHS operations, in the last few years, have been carried out in private sector hospitals.  All these things have been done under a Labour government!!

If certain things can be done better by the public sector, that's great, and if other things can be done better by the private sector, that's also great.  No political dogma here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 March, 2011, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:35:42 PM
If certain things can be done better by the public sector, that's great, and if other things can be done better by the private sector, that's also great.  No political dogma here!

Anyone who has worked in the spurious business of performance measurement, as I briefly and reluctantly did, will know that 'better' depends upon which of innumerable and antagonistic criteria you choose, and the subjective weighting you place upon them. The game can easily be rigged to produce the result you are looking for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 28 March, 2011, 12:14:42 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 27 March, 2011, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:35:42 PM
If certain things can be done better by the public sector, that's great, and if other things can be done better by the private sector, that's also great.  No political dogma here!

Anyone who has worked in the spurious business of performance measurement, as I briefly and reluctantly did, will know that 'better' depends upon which of innumerable and antagonistic criteria you choose, and the subjective weighting you place upon them. The game can easily be rigged to produce the result you are looking for.
As Ush says, you have to ask what is better - where is the evidence that private is better? My dealings with priavte secotr and public sector seem to show similar levels of competency, except when it comes to calling in the debt of course!  I work with someone who used to work for a company that had a contract with the jobcentres to gain a bounty on finding people work, and they basically claimed the credit for anything that moved, whether theyd been involved with the search for work or not.  The financial motivation in doing so is obvious, and might make them appear better (although its my understanding that these private sector schemes have never been any more successful than the inhouse ones).  If one bunch of people can do it for their wages and another for the wages and a bounty, which is more efficient?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 March, 2011, 12:50:49 AM
The problem with selling off chunks of the NHS is that there will - for the sake of profit - be those who get shortchanged by the service provided.  The NHS needs to solve its problems with reform, not simply sell off difficult areas so they're no longer under the auspices of league tables and thus technically one in the 'win' column. I may be missing something, but when has ignoring or hiding from a problem ever made things better?

Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 March, 2011, 10:35:42 PMWhen I have my NHS funded eye test done, it's done in a private sector opticians; when I take my NHS prescription to be filled, it's done in a private sector chemist; when I go to my brand-new local hospital, it's being paid for by a PFI agreement; when I go for my NHS dental treatment, it's done by a private sector dental firm.  Many NHS operations, in the last few years, have been carried out in private sector hospitals.  All these things have been done under a Labour government!!

Your situation and means are not necessarily the uniform experience, though if you can get an optician or dentist that accepts NHS patients you're way ahead of a great many people.  The private sector accepts a certain quota of NHS patients and then they close their books, so in small communities with maybe one or two dentists some patients have to do without.  The last time a dentist opened around here there were people sleeping in cars the night before the place first opened in order to register as NHS patients.  Myself, I'm unemployed and use a private dentist because I can't get registered anywhere as an NHS patient.  Can't afford it, but what other option do I have?
Private sector chemists are also like any shop - service and stock is variable.  I avoid certain chemists in the town because they are quite terrible, but one of them is situated next door to the only clinic, and I can only imagine what choice that offers to elderly or invalid patients.  As for "Brand new hospital" lucky you!  They're making new hospitals?  Not around here - they're shutting down as many accident and emergency centers as possible in an attempt to eventually centralise emergency care in Belfast, which for some is a journey of several hundred miles.

Quote from: Leigh S on 28 March, 2011, 12:14:42 AMI work with someone who used to work for a company that had a contract with the jobcentres to gain a bounty on finding people work, and they basically claimed the credit for anything that moved, whether theyd been involved with the search for work or not.

My little brother was fucking livid to discover that those guys in the local Job Center were claiming to have gotten him trained and out of work even though they'd done fuck all for him.  He went out and did volunteer work with the Citizen's Advice in the town for the whole time he was unemployed - as much to avoid boredom as to get training - and used that as a reference to get a civil service job.  The Job Center was never a factor as they actually ruled out sending people to the CAB quite some time ago, as so many local businesses were complaining to the council that their employees were insisting on their legal rights after visiting the CAB offices so they were denied any kind of support from the council to the point that my mate's mum actually used to be the CAB from her own front room.
Not that I'm saying this instance of private sector laziness and outright lying is in any way the norm.  I imagine everywhere else it's a well-oiled machine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 March, 2011, 01:33:23 AM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 28 March, 2011, 12:50:49 AM
The problem with selling off chunks of the NHS is that there will - for the sake of profit - be those who get shortchanged by the service provided.  The NHS needs to solve its problems with reform, not simply sell off difficult areas so they're no longer under the auspices of league tables and thus technically one in the 'win' column.

More likely it'll be the 'easy' bits that are sold off - the more routine and easily broken down into cost units and therefore the easiest to be made to turn a profit. How it works is you get a clerical, medical or industrial procedure that costs the NHS £45 to do. You work out a way to do it for £37 - using inferior materials, speeding it up or using less well trained staff, paid lower wages. You bill the NHS £45 for it, and you pocket £8. Voila.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:19:12 AM
But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 March, 2011, 12:35:44 PM
Back-handers to ministers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 03:11:17 PM
Or some saintly public service employee!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 28 March, 2011, 05:35:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:19:12 AM
But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?

I'd be very surprised if the surplus 3 quid ended up anywhere near the NHS.  Far more likely that the NHS would be seen to need 3 quid less than it's already getting, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 March, 2011, 05:36:26 PM
Or the prospective shareholders would need £3 more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 March, 2011, 07:17:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:19:12 AM
But surely in the example you've just given, it wouldn't be farmed out, would it?  If there's no cost saving, there's no point giving the job to the private sector.  Now, if the job was done for £42, instead of £45, and the 3 quid difference is re-invested in the health service, that would make sense.  Or am I missing something?

One thing you're missing is that it's not as simple as comparing two numbers. If the private sector can do something more cheaply, you have to ask how it's doing it more cheaply. What's it cutting back on, exactly?

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 March, 2011, 07:19:02 PM
Or how much waste is there in the public sector?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 March, 2011, 07:26:12 PM


Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 March, 2011, 07:19:02 PM
Or how much waste is there in the MOD?


fixed that for ya!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 March, 2011, 07:33:45 PM
I agree Proudhuff. Plus the amount of useless twats who are able to hide in certain departments and never do a days bloody work in their lives.
If I had my way..................better not go there!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 March, 2011, 07:36:15 PM
and relax!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 28 March, 2011, 08:21:21 PM
I reckon there's a bunch of TD's sitting in the Dail today discussing how, in these times of economic crisis, what Ireland needs is a bunch of maniacs that blow shit up when they don't get their way
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 March, 2011, 09:17:50 PM
Just doing a YouGov poll at the moment and this question has come up

QuoteThe Government is currently considering whether to allow private companies to take over parts of the NHS Blood and Transplant Service, such as the testing, processing and transport of blood.
Some say that this will make the NHS Blood and Transplant Service more cost effective and will save money for the rest of the NHS. Others say that as those who donate their blood do not get paid it would be wrong for a private company to make money from this service.

I think our Legendary Shark might want to answer!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 March, 2011, 10:03:45 PM
This is just making me hungry...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:24:47 PM
Hopefully, Matt, the saved 3 quid would be pumped back into the Health Service but I do concede that I may be being very naive.  It's just that I don't go along with this mantra that public servants always do the job better than the evil private sector.

Robin, maybe the savings would come from the private sector firm not being over staffed and providing pensions schemes that they can afford.  Very different from the public sector pensions which have to be subsidised by private sector workers.

CF, where's that poll?  I feel the need to contribute!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 March, 2011, 10:25:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 March, 2011, 09:17:50 PM
Just doing a YouGov poll at the moment and this question has come up

QuoteSome say that this will make the NHS Blood and Transplant Service more cost effective and will save money for the rest of the NHS.

And I'd quite to know who those "some" are and what evidence they have to support the idea that the private sector will be more cost effective. Given that the Blood and Transplant Service is a pretty specialised outfit, I'm wondering which part of the private sector has the knowledge-base and experience to attempt a better job.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 March, 2011, 10:35:34 PM
The Transylvanian Mafia?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 28 March, 2011, 10:46:30 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 28 March, 2011, 01:33:23 AM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 28 March, 2011, 12:50:49 AM
The problem with selling off chunks of the NHS is that there will - for the sake of profit - be those who get shortchanged by the service provided.  The NHS needs to solve its problems with reform, not simply sell off difficult areas so they're no longer under the auspices of league tables and thus technically one in the 'win' column.

More likely it'll be the 'easy' bits that are sold off - the more routine and easily broken down into cost units and therefore the easiest to be made to turn a profit. How it works is you get a clerical, medical or industrial procedure that costs the NHS £45 to do. You work out a way to do it for £37 - using inferior materials, speeding it up or using less well trained staff, paid lower wages. You bill the NHS £45 for it, and you pocket £8. Voila.

Or it now costs 50 quid and the extra fiver goes into the pocket of the board of directors of the company, who also happens to include an MP or ex MP who voted for the changes in the first place....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 March, 2011, 10:58:01 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:24:47 PMIt's just that I don't go along with this mantra that public servants always do the job better than the evil private sector.

And I don't go along with the mantra that the public sector, and the NHS in particular, does a worse job than the private sector. I suspect the reality is that both sectors have something to learn from the other, but ultimately they have fundamentally different goals and it would be dangerous to ignore that.

QuoteRobin, maybe the savings would come from the private sector firm not being over staffed and providing pensions schemes that they can afford.  Very different from the public sector pensions which have to be subsidised by private sector workers.

Do you really believe what you're saying?

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 11:16:24 PM
Do you really believe that public sector pensions are not in deficit and are not being propped up by private sector workers income taxes?

And do you really believe that there's no examples of overmanning in the Health Service?

Well.......I'll go to the foot of my stairs!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 March, 2011, 02:22:46 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:24:47 PM
CF, where's that poll?  I feel the need to contribute!!

You need to join YouGov and they send polls all the time, I just answer the ones that give me points, as when I reach a certain amount I get a cheque for £50, just for answering a few questions now and then. I reckon I will get that dosh before summer  :D

By the way, many of the polls I answer revolve around current political stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 March, 2011, 07:42:57 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 11:16:24 PM
Do you really believe that public sector pensions are not in deficit and are not being propped up by private sector workers income taxes?

I don't actually know. What I do know is that the tabloids and the media in general make a lot of claims about pensions that aren't actually true. But if it was all it was cracked up to be, I doubt you'd see so many people leave.

I do know that at least some people who don't work in NHS imagine that salaries are higher than they actually are. My uncle, for example, who worked in banking, assumed that my mother, a senior nurse manager with decades of nursing experience and direct resposibility for hundreds of patients care and budgets in the millions, was earning a six-figure salary, when in reality she wasn't half-way to six-figures. As far as I'm concerned, she paid for and earnt her pension.

There's a big difference between perception and reality.

QuoteAnd do you really believe that there's no examples of overmanning in the Health Service?

What I'd like is evidence to that effect.

What I'm seeing in my small corner of the NHS is people not being replaced and the burden of their workload being put onto other people, together with increasing reliance on unqualified staff.

If there is over-staffing, then why, for example, has my other half had over 90 hours of time owing for a year now, and her sister 50? Keep in mind they also start half an hour early every day, which they don't record, the same way they don't record anything under 30s. They get back late every day, and lose evenings to paperwork on a weekly basis, and it's not unusual to lose a Sunday to it, too. None of that time is claimed back or paid for. The same goes for all the missed lunch hours.

Sure, I don't doubt you can find examples of all sorts of bad stuff in the NHS, but don't suggest to me it's a general truth and that you can't find the exact same problems in the private sector.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 11:24:04 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 March, 2011, 10:58:01 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 March, 2011, 10:24:47 PMIt's just that I don't go along with this mantra that public servants always do the job better than the evil private sector.

And I don't go along with the mantra that the public sector, and the NHS in particular, does a worse job than the private sector. I suspect the reality is that both sectors have something to learn from the other, but ultimately they have fundamentally different goals and it would be dangerous to ignore that.

QuoteRobin, maybe the savings would come from the private sector firm not being over staffed and providing pensions schemes that they can afford.  Very different from the public sector pensions which have to be subsidised by private sector workers.

Do you really believe what you're saying?

Regards

Robin

To be fair, the pensions bit is largely true.  As it stands at the moment, over a quarter of your council tax goes to top up badly performing or simply mismanaged public sector pensions.  

I don't believe in gold plated pensions for anyone for any reason.  I often hear the argument that private sector employees are paid better in the first place, so the public sector are entitled to those pensions.  Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that.  Not everybody that works in the private sector is on a hefty salary.  They include factory workers, mechanics, refuse collectors- even humble illustrators like myself.  None of these people earn outrageous sums of money and their pensions aren't protected.

Now if somebody wants to legislate for everyone's pensions being protected, that I might be willing to get behind.

All that said, a deal is a deal, I suppose- and people who work in a job with a guaranteed pension at the end of it should get that pension- I just don't see that a bloke emptying bins should have to pay for it when his own pension isn't guaranteed at all.  

I don't really know what the answer is- but I think that it's worth making the point.

Going back to the main point- I agree that there's probably some middle ground to be had between public and private sector practices where the NHS is concerned.  I certainly don't want to see it privatised though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 March, 2011, 08:13:07 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 11:24:04 AM

To be fair, the pensions bit is largely true.  As it stands at the moment, over a quarter of your council tax goes to top up badly performing or simply mismanaged public sector pensions.  

NHS pensions are among the best, or so I'm told - I've not actually been in a position to make comparisons. However, my mother (for reasons beyond me) gets the Mail on Sunday, and I'm given to understand it has been making wildly exaggerated claims about NHS pensions. This sort of misinformation and propaganda tends to feed out and become accepted as fact, when, as usual, things are not as simple as they seem.

It might be useful if we all knew what we all think a fair wage and a fair pension actually is, in terms of what people actually do.

QuoteI don't believe in gold plated pensions for anyone for any reason.  I often hear the argument that private sector employees are paid better in the first place, so the public sector are entitled to those pensions.  Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that.  Not everybody that works in the private sector is on a hefty salary.  They include factory workers, mechanics, refuse collectors- even humble illustrators like myself.  None of these people earn outrageous sums of money and their pensions aren't protected.

Now if somebody wants to legislate for everyone's pensions being protected, that I might be willing to get behind.

Fine by me. I'd be willing to pay more tax to ensure a better state pension, too, same way I'd be willing to pay more tax to support public services and help clear the debt.


QuoteAll that said, a deal is a deal, I suppose- and people who work in a job with a guaranteed pension at the end of it should get that pension- I just don't see that a bloke emptying bins should have to pay for it when his own pension isn't guaranteed at all.  

Slightly off the point...

When there were strikes in the north not so long ago, the news report said how much the binmen were getting. Apparently, they were earning more than me, a state registered Biomedical Scientist. I forget the figure, but it made me raise my eyebrows at the time.

This seemed rather unfair to me, but (A) just because someone said it on TV doesn't make it true or accurate, and (B) as I don't actually know what being a binman involves apart from the bit I see them doing, I don't feel in a position to make an issue of it.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 08:46:11 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 29 March, 2011, 08:13:07 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 11:24:04 AM

To be fair, the pensions bit is largely true.  As it stands at the moment, over a quarter of your council tax goes to top up badly performing or simply mismanaged public sector pensions.  

NHS pensions are among the best, or so I'm told - I've not actually been in a position to make comparisons. However, my mother (for reasons beyond me) gets the Mail on Sunday, and I'm given to understand it has been making wildly exaggerated claims about NHS pensions. This sort of misinformation and propaganda tends to feed out and become accepted as fact, when, as usual, things are not as simple as they seem.

It might be useful if we all knew what we all think a fair wage and a fair pension actually is, in terms of what people actually do.

QuoteI don't believe in gold plated pensions for anyone for any reason.  I often hear the argument that private sector employees are paid better in the first place, so the public sector are entitled to those pensions.  Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that.  Not everybody that works in the private sector is on a hefty salary.  They include factory workers, mechanics, refuse collectors- even humble illustrators like myself.  None of these people earn outrageous sums of money and their pensions aren't protected.

Now if somebody wants to legislate for everyone's pensions being protected, that I might be willing to get behind.

Fine by me. I'd be willing to pay more tax to ensure a better state pension, too, same way I'd be willing to pay more tax to support public services and help clear the debt.


QuoteAll that said, a deal is a deal, I suppose- and people who work in a job with a guaranteed pension at the end of it should get that pension- I just don't see that a bloke emptying bins should have to pay for it when his own pension isn't guaranteed at all.  

Slightly off the point...

When there were strikes in the north not so long ago, the news report said how much the binmen were getting. Apparently, they were earning more than me, a state registered Biomedical Scientist. I forget the figure, but it made me raise my eyebrows at the time.

This seemed rather unfair to me, but (A) just because someone said it on TV doesn't make it true or accurate, and (B) as I don't actually know what being a binman involves apart from the bit I see them doing, I don't feel in a position to make an issue of it.


Regards

Robin

Quotes within quotes within quote make my poor brain hurt- so I'm just going to lump it all together at the bottom- sorry!

Yes, by and large, newspapers will quote outrageous figures, so I don't doubt what your mother is saying about pensions.  We also know a couple of doctors that don't earn anything like the 100k that's been reported.  I think reporters seek out the highest pay grade that they can and then apply it to everyone doing whatever job it is that they're saying is "grossly overpaid" that particular week.

I don't know what you earn, but the guy across the road is a binman and earns just over 300 quid a week.  He took that job because it paid more than his 'real' job (qualified butcher).

I guess it's hard to say what a fair wage/pension is really, isn't it?  I certainly can't think of anything off the top of my head.  For the most part, I tend not to begrudge anyone earning a lot of money- so long as they pay tax on it and don't earn an inflated salary at the expense of others.  I might not think that what they do is important, but if somebody is willing to pay them for whatever it is they're doing- more power to them.

It's a bit like companies that avoid tax.  I don't like the fact that they do it- but I understand why they do it.  The loophole is there- why wouldn't they take advantage of it?  Close the loopholes and they'll pay up.  Simples.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 March, 2011, 10:54:29 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 08:46:11 PM

We also know a couple of doctors that don't earn anything like the 100k that's been reported.  

Yeah, the trouble with doctors is that the term 'doctors' covers an awful lot of ground. There are your fresh out of medical school types (no idea what they earn) and your consultants, at least some of whom are in the £70,000-100,000 bracket.

Also, keep in mind that doctors are outside the pay scheme that applies to the rest of the NHS workforce.


QuoteI think reporters seek out the highest pay grade that they can and then apply it to everyone doing whatever job it is that they're saying is "grossly overpaid" that particular week.

I'm pretty certain that's the case.

QuoteI don't know what you earn, but the guy across the road is a binman and earns just over 300 quid a week.  He took that job because it paid more than his 'real' job (qualified butcher).

Is that before or after tax? Either way, I appear to be better off. My take-home is currently £1420. I don't feel I have anything to grumble about, but then I don't have children and I don't run a car. I am really, really glad that I've never learnt to drive.

For everyone's general interest, here are the NHS pay scales:

http://www.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/233901/003303.pdf

I'm in Band 5 - this is the band for jobs that require state registration, which is coupled with specific training and a degree. Band 7 posts can require a Masters degree or other specialist knowledge, experience and responsibility. Band 8 jobs are entering management territory, but not necessarily suits and ties management.

The rungs in each band are annual increments. However, within these are a couple of 'gateways' - essentially you have to provide evidence of continual professional development before you can pass through the gateway (there's one after 12 months, and the other varies between Bands, but it's three or four rungs from the top). When you reach the top of a band, that's as far as you go, unless you apply for and get a new job on a higher band.


I really have no idea what other jobs pay, in or out of the public sector (although in my particular area things are much better than a decade ago when there was a real recruitment problem). My brother is a machinist and he earns more than me (but I don't think he ever stops working), and an old school friend who sells mobile kitchen units and equipment was on £30,000 about five or six years ago. I was a trainee at the time, and he laughed when he heard what I was earning back then.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 March, 2011, 11:34:14 PM
The Mail is the master of subverting facts - I saw an article where they compared the top 100 civil servants pensions with teh average private sector pension... I imagine if theyd compared it with the top 100 earning private sector pensions it would have told a quite different story!

One reason I joined the public sector was I was planning ahead - I knew a decent pension was something worth taking a hit elsewhere for.  Over the years, its possible that private sector earnings have fallen behind (though god knows how when it took me 18 years to reach my pay band maximum!), so that the old bad wages now, good pension later doesnt apply so much - but really, my pension is not gold plated by any stretch, and you have to ask why, in a world where the gap between rich and poor has never been wider, we seem to not be able to offer what we could decades past, to both private and public sector workers.

to quote Bon Dylan:

"But rather get you down in the hole That he's in"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 30 March, 2011, 09:21:04 PM
My Mum has a public sector pension, and the previous Government have been dipping into it and trimming it back for years. I think it rather cheeky that the Coalition has the nerve to lump her and many other hard working people into the hyperbolic 'gold plated public pension' group to justify them cutting it back further.

Also, merging income tax and National Insurance seems like a sneaky way of cutting NI and by default the NHS under the guise of 'look peasants, tax cuts! YAAAAAY'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 31 March, 2011, 10:41:32 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 29 March, 2011, 10:54:29 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 29 March, 2011, 08:46:11 PM

We also know a couple of doctors that don't earn anything like the 100k that's been reported.  

Yeah, the trouble with doctors is that the term 'doctors' covers an awful lot of ground. There are your fresh out of medical school types (no idea what they earn) and your consultants, at least some of whom are in the £70,000-100,000 bracket.

Also, keep in mind that doctors are outside the pay scheme that applies to the rest of the NHS workforce.


QuoteI think reporters seek out the highest pay grade that they can and then apply it to everyone doing whatever job it is that they're saying is "grossly overpaid" that particular week.

I'm pretty certain that's the case.

QuoteI don't know what you earn, but the guy across the road is a binman and earns just over 300 quid a week.  He took that job because it paid more than his 'real' job (qualified butcher).

Is that before or after tax? Either way, I appear to be better off. My take-home is currently £1420. I don't feel I have anything to grumble about, but then I don't have children and I don't run a car. I am really, really glad that I've never learnt to drive.

For everyone's general interest, here are the NHS pay scales:

http://www.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/233901/003303.pdf

I'm in Band 5 - this is the band for jobs that require state registration, which is coupled with specific training and a degree. Band 7 posts can require a Masters degree or other specialist knowledge, experience and responsibility. Band 8 jobs are entering management territory, but not necessarily suits and ties management.

The rungs in each band are annual increments. However, within these are a couple of 'gateways' - essentially you have to provide evidence of continual professional development before you can pass through the gateway (there's one after 12 months, and the other varies between Bands, but it's three or four rungs from the top). When you reach the top of a band, that's as far as you go, unless you apply for and get a new job on a higher band.


I really have no idea what other jobs pay, in or out of the public sector (although in my particular area things are much better than a decade ago when there was a real recruitment problem). My brother is a machinist and he earns more than me (but I don't think he ever stops working), and an old school friend who sells mobile kitchen units and equipment was on £30,000 about five or six years ago. I was a trainee at the time, and he laughed when he heard what I was earning back then.


Regards

Robin

Yeah- we have another friend who has recently made the leap to consultant- his starting salary for that (NHS) is £70,000.  He moans about this, by the way- despite the fact that his private work will be more than double this figure!

On one hand, I do understand his argument- you have to work for a long time, putting in long and anti-social hours- plus exams that, again, seem to go on for years.  I've seen him have to accept postings that most of us would consider outrageous (basically, if you're offered something 400 miles away, you'd better accept it on the spot, or forget about ever being offered anything again), having to uproot the entire family at least three times.  Bear with me- this is all going somewhere.

Basically, contrast that £70,000 starting salary for consultants (he's a spinal surgeon, by the way) and the money paid to some people working in the finance sector.  I know accountants that earn more than that- which kind of leads me back to your question of how much is a fair wage for what people actually do?  Personally, I'd place greater value on a surgeon than on a number cruncher.

Anyway, on the other hand, whereas I see the point my surgeon friend is making- he's got absolutely no reason to complain about the money he's bringing in.

I think 300 quid was the binman's take home pay, by the way- but I wouldn't like to swear to it or anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 31 March, 2011, 10:47:48 AM
Quote from: Christov on 30 March, 2011, 09:21:04 PM
My Mum has a public sector pension, and the previous Government have been dipping into it and trimming it back for years. I think it rather cheeky that the Coalition has the nerve to lump her and many other hard working people into the hyperbolic 'gold plated public pension' group to justify them cutting it back further.

Also, merging income tax and National Insurance seems like a sneaky way of cutting NI and by default the NHS under the guise of 'look peasants, tax cuts! YAAAAAY'.


Just out of interest- how do you feel about private sector workers that have been left with nothing after their pensions collapsed?  The government is largely ignoring their plight.  Again, these aren't just city types- they're factory workers and the like- just regular pongos like you and me.  Well, you, anyway*... :D



*attention, reactionary nerds- this is a joke.  I repeat, this is a joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 31 March, 2011, 10:51:33 AM
QuoteI think 300 quid was the binman's take home pay, by the way- but I wouldn't like to swear to it or anything.

I have preveiously work as a bin man, and didn't bring home this amount.
The driver of the vehicle might though- as an HGV driver is, rightly, paid more than a loader.

Personally, and I know no one was saying the opposite of this, I think that these guys could not be paid enough for what they do. It's a fucking hard and dirty (not in a good way) job, and you don't know real misery until you've trudged through a grey council estate on a pishy wet day behind a bin lorry...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 31 March, 2011, 02:14:19 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 31 March, 2011, 10:51:33 AM
QuoteI think 300 quid was the binman's take home pay, by the way- but I wouldn't like to swear to it or anything.

I have preveiously work as a bin man, and didn't bring home this amount.
The driver of the vehicle might though- as an HGV driver is, rightly, paid more than a loader.

Personally, and I know no one was saying the opposite of this, I think that these guys could not be paid enough for what they do. It's a fucking hard and dirty (not in a good way) job, and you don't know real misery until you've trudged through a grey council estate on a pishy wet day behind a bin lorry...

but, but, aren't we all in this together?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 March, 2011, 02:30:44 PM
Yes, we are all in this together (but only if you've got less than £10M in the bank, in which case you're on your own).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hegel on 31 March, 2011, 02:57:27 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl1jPqqTdNo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl1jPqqTdNo)

On the NHS debate I've half read in this thread, this seems relevant, amusing, and has a modicum of information too, even if the style is not to everyone's taste.

According to one of the comments its current at 64 in the charts - would be funny if it went top twenty.

hopefully not already posted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 31 March, 2011, 10:18:21 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 31 March, 2011, 10:51:33 AMPersonally, and I know no one was saying the opposite of this, I think that these guys could not be paid enough for what they do. It's a fucking hard and dirty (not in a good way) job, and you don't know real misery until you've trudged through a grey council estate on a pishy wet day behind a bin lorry...

How about pouring formaldehyde and human body parts through a colander for the better part of three hours, in a hot room with a respirator clamped to your face? Not me, fortunately, just our porter.

But yeah, I take the point, although assessing a job's relative level of drudgery is a tough one.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 01 April, 2011, 09:24:28 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 31 March, 2011, 10:18:21 PM
How about pouring formaldehyde and human body parts through a colander for the better part of three hours, in a hot room with a respirator clamped to your face? Not me, fortunately, just our porter.

Ah, them was the days! Except for me it was assorted animal bits in NBF, not human, and the lab was cold. It was reserved as a regular overtime duty too!

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 01 April, 2011, 07:09:09 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 01 April, 2011, 09:24:28 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 31 March, 2011, 10:18:21 PM
How about pouring formaldehyde and human body parts through a colander for the better part of three hours, in a hot room with a respirator clamped to your face? Not me, fortunately, just our porter.

Ah, them was the days! Except for me it was assorted animal bits in NBF, not human, and the lab was cold. It was reserved as a regular overtime duty too!

What a bizarre world we all live in! I really wasn't expecting anyone to be able to share the pain on that one.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 01 April, 2011, 07:13:07 PM
QuoteWhat a bizarre world we all live in! I really wasn't expecting anyone to be able to share the pain on that one.

It's a comics message board on the internet, Robin! There's probably someone here who does it for a hobby.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 01 April, 2011, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 31 March, 2011, 10:18:21 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 31 March, 2011, 10:51:33 AMHow about pouring formaldehyde and human body parts through a colander for the better part of three hours, in a hot room with a respirator clamped to your face? Not me, fortunately, just our porter.

That's Resyk isn't it? It was in the prog recently
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 April, 2011, 01:52:14 PM
From an email I received from http://38degrees.org.uk/ (http://38degrees.org.uk/) about the NHS. I post it here for the use/abuse of all you political animals out there.

"Is it starting to work? Yesterday's Times newspaper reported that Cameron and Clegg are starting to worry about the huge public opposition to the NHS plans. It's a clear sign that public pressure can save the NHS.

"The Times said that David Cameron and Nick Clegg will sit down "in the next week or two" to "plan the way ahead". [1] That means the future of the NHS is on a knife edge. They could decide to carry on forcing the changes through. Or they could decide to stop. We need to increase our pressure now, before these critical meetings

"If MPs receive a flood of emails ahead of the crunch meetings, it could tip the balance and persuade the government to back off. Can you email your MP now?

"Take two minutes to tell your MP to take our message to Cameron and Clegg:
http://www.38degrees.org.uk/NHS-email-MP (http://www.38degrees.org.uk/NHS-email-MP)"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 April, 2011, 01:54:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 April, 2011, 01:52:14 PM
"If MPs receive a flood of emails ahead of the crunch meetings, it could tip the balance and persuade the government to back off."

What the hell was in those spliffs!


More seriously, can't hurt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 April, 2011, 01:59:11 PM
Heh - well, in theory our MPs are supposed to listen to us - I don't think The System's completely buggered just yet, so we may as well make use of it. If nothing else it gives them a headache, which is at least something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2011, 02:24:46 AM
Just got home from the hospital - Mother had a mini-stroke (she's fine now, they let her come home after all the  tests and stuff.)

The mad part was that the ambulance crew had to wait with her at the hospital until she'd been seen - nearly two hours. How insane is that? The local area only has two ambulances and they were both out of action just waiting around with nothing to do. Who in God's name thought that this was a good way for four highly skilled professionals (and two expensive and vital pieces of kit) to spend their time? Madness.

However - thank God for the NHS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:41:28 AM
Glad to hear she's okay Shark!

By the way, I'm now expecting the US to invade Ireland. There seems to be some sort of terrorist activity in the country, not that it ever went away! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2011, 02:50:28 AM
Thanks, CF! Hell of a scare, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 04 April, 2011, 02:55:12 AM
Oh I bet, can you imagine what would have happened if they'd first had to check if she had health insurance? As you say - God bless the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 09:44:03 AM
Glad to see your Mum's okay, Shark.  God bless the NHS, indeed.  Bearing in mind previous conversations on this thread about the NHS, it's interesting to see that you now have first-hand experience of wasted resources within the system.  Wonder if anybody suffered because of the skilled ambulance crew just "waiting around with nothing to do", don't tell me that that can't be improved.

Leave it out, Emps, no one is denied emergency treatment in the States!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 April, 2011, 09:54:57 AM
I think what they should do is use agency ambulance crew instead, and ring round when they have an emergency to see who is available, instead of paying them for a full shift when there might be nothing for them to do. Then whoever is willing to take the call could rush down to the ambulance station, clock in, deal with the emergency, clock out and go home again until they're needed. There must surely be a saving in there somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 10:01:13 AM
No need for sarcasm, Ush!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 04 April, 2011, 10:12:39 AM
Glad your mum's ok Sharky - I'm sure it was a frightening experience. Best wishes to her and your family.

Regarding the ambo crew waiting; was the hospital she went to set up for cranial surgery? A bleed out or a second, larger stroke is always possilble in these cases, so perhaps it's a standard practice in case the patient needs urgent transport to a surgical theatre. I think I've mentioned before that my father in law had a massive stroke last year - he had to be transferred to a surgical hospital to drain the ongoing bleed, but i've no idea if the ambulance was waiting until that decision was made.
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:41:28 AM


By the way, I'm now expecting the US to invade Ireland. There seems to be some sort of terrorist activity in the country, not that it ever went away! 

Aye maybe, but we've no oil, very little coal and a lot of what's left of the peat is of high conservation value! They'll only take that from my cold, dead hands   :lol:

M.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 April, 2011, 11:33:06 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 04 April, 2011, 10:12:39 AM
Aye maybe, but we've no oil, very little coal and a lot of what's left of the peat is of high conservation value! They'll only take that from my cold, dead hands   :lol:

Plenty of natural gas, though.  Oh wait, they already got that.  Who needs cruise missiles when you have manilla envelopes?

As to conservation of  peat... maybe you shouldn't visit Shannonbridge or Lough Ree.  Or most of Connacht, for that matter.

Good to hear your Mum was okay, TLS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2011, 12:20:24 PM
Thanks all for your kind wishes :)

"Regarding the ambo crew waiting; was the hospital she went to set up for cranial surgery?" Unfortunately, it wasn't the case that the ambulance crew were waiting "just in case." They have to wait like that for every patient - including drunks etc who really didn't need an ambulance to start with. I got the impression that it's due to patients having to wait in corridors because all the doctors and nurses are busy. An ass-covering insurance thing, probably. Disgraceful, I thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 April, 2011, 02:17:39 PM
This is correct - until a doctor sees the patient they are still under the care of the paramedics (with all the legal responsibilities that implies). if she'd had another stroke in the waiting room, you wouldn't want the receptionist to be in clinical charge would you? We could get all the ambulances back out isntantly, but that would involve hiring many more doctors to take the patients the second they arrive.

An example of how "targets" that determine budgets have unforeseen consequences came in with labour's pledge for everyone in A&E to be seen by a doctor within a certain time from arrival, or the hospital would lose funds. A&E depts did not have enough staff to achieve this, so patients ended up waiting hours in ambulances in the car park as they hadn't technically "arrived" in that case.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 09:44:03 AM
Leave it out, Emps, no one is denied emergency treatment in the States!

No, but theys often get a huge bill afterwards and need to sell their homes or take out massive loans to pay it. People also avoid seeking emergency treatment for this reason. True "free" emergency treatment is piecemeal and usually provided by charities.


PS - All the best to Mrs Shark
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:29:30 PM
I think you'll find that many, many, many items in our hospitals are donated by charities and I think some wards are as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 April, 2011, 02:32:25 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 April, 2011, 02:17:39 PM
An example of how "targets" that determine budgets have unforeseen consequences came in with labour's pledge for everyone in A&E to be seen by a doctor within a certain time from arrival, or the hospital would lose funds.

It's the perverse outcome of performance optimization theories developed by right wing economists. You give people targets to meet all the time and they lose sight of the job they were originally employed to do, because they are judged to have done a good or bad job depending on whether or not they have met the targets. Performance targets are the tail that ends up wagging the dog.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:34:22 PM
And New Labour loved them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 02:39:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:34:22 PM
And New Labour loved them!

Exactly what he said- right wing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 April, 2011, 02:45:48 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 02:39:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 April, 2011, 02:34:22 PM
And New Labour loved them!

Exactly what he said- right wing.

Yep - what Rich said I said!

Here's a link to an hour long BBC documentary if you like:

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=6075374506314368402# (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=6075374506314368402#)

You only need the first 10 minutes to get the gist, but it tells a pretty compelling story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 02:56:40 PM
I know that cutting out waste within the system, so that the savings could be redirected towards patient care, would seem radical to left wing economists, but, hey, these are radical times.  Remember, as George says, we're all in this together.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 April, 2011, 03:19:00 PM
Having hospital staff diverted from treating patients to act instead as greeters in order to meet targets for speed of patients being seen, as a consequence of an imperative to generate statistics for audit purposes, doesn't cut out any waste within the system, but comes from exactly the same accounting mindset that insists everything must be timed and measured so you know how the service is performing. Far more resources are wasted counting, timing and documenting everything than are wasted by people standing around doing nothing, except that sometimes they are standing around doing nothing because that's what is required to meet some performance criterion or other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 03:35:19 PM
So, when the next person dies, because an ambulance didn't turn up quick enough as the crew was sitting in a hospital corridor with their previous patient, the decease's family will just have to accept that left wing economic dogma killed their loved one.  I'm sure they'll understand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 03:40:33 PM
Erm... left wing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 03:46:28 PM
Yep! Think about it!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 04 April, 2011, 03:49:24 PM
I think it's interesting and ironic that my grandparents' and parents' generations, who benefited from Keynsian economics all their lives (welfare state, full employment, job creation, command economy) opted for and voted for right wing free market economics for their children and grandchildren to live with: welfare cuts, education cuts, health service cuts, pension cuts, mass unemployment to tackle inflation, and job insecurity: the main beneficiaries of which have been the super-rich, not Britain's competitiveness or the economy as a whole.

Once again, I will say that ambulance crews standing around waiting has nothing to do with left wing anything. It's entirely to do with people fulfilling the terms of their contracts because the audit culture equates that with people doing their jobs properly.

The idea that Labour = left and Tory = right has been out of date at least since the death of John Smith. New Labour's enthusiasm for Tory market economics and performance targets cannot be blamed on the Left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 04:23:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 03:46:28 PM
Yep! Think about it!!

I am and I don't know what you're talking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 04:33:16 PM
 ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 04:55:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 04:33:16 PM
;)

No, seriously. Could you explain what you mean by 'left wing economic dogma'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 05:28:25 PM
Yeah, like you're really interested in my views, Rich.  But, okay, I'll give it a go.  The left wing economic dogma that says the public sector is the only way to go, the private sector is evil, and, under no circumstances no matter what state the country's in, there must never be cuts.  'Fraid I don't agree with it.  I think the NHS is great but there must be savings to be made that can be reinvested into patient care.  What Sharky described is a disgrace and although Ush comes up with lots of eloquent statements he never actually says how the system can be improved.

I don't agree that the Labour Party is not left wing.  The previous Deputy Prime Minister was not left wing?!  Diane Abbott not left wing?  Pull the other one!!

Well, that's it in a nutshell.  I'm sure you think it's a load of bollocks but I'm entitled to my opinion just as you and Ush are entitled to yours.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 04 April, 2011, 05:33:24 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 03:35:19 PM
So, when the next person dies, because an ambulance didn't turn up quick enough as the crew was sitting in a hospital corridor with their previous patient, the decease's family will just have to accept that left wing economic dogma killed their loved one.  I'm sure they'll understand.

For the ambulance crew to formally 'deliver' the patient, you need available, qualified hospital staff to 'take delivery' of the patient. This requires a sufficient number of suitable hospital staff, which in turn requires money to fund those posts.

Alternatively, you have more ambulances and paramedics available to pick up the slack on busy days. That costs money, too.

Of course, as the NHS is being constantly accused of waste, so you don't want to have too many crews (or A&E staff) sitting around idle waiting for calls, which inevitably means there's a shortage of crews on very busy days.

This has nothing to do with left-wing economic dogma. It's a simple consequence of A) legal obligations towards patients who have entered the system and B) the number of available qualified staff, which is subject to both funding and and day-to-day pressures.


Regards

Robin

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2011, 07:24:52 PM
The solution: Social money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 07:30:49 PM
QuoteYeah, like you're really interested in my views, Rich.

Please don't try to patronise me. Believe me, if I did not want to know, I would have just ignored you.

QuoteThe left wing economic dogma that says the public sector is the only way to go, the private sector is evil, and, under no circumstances no matter what state the country's in, there must never be cuts.
Which, as far as I can see kind of contradicts this:
QuoteI don't agree that the Labour Party is not left wing.
Unless you're saying the previous Labour government were trying to dismantle any private sector involvement in public owned bodies? Because I do not think this is what they did.


QuoteThe previous Deputy Prime Minister was not left wing?!

John Prescott, you mean? He certainly claimed to be, yes, but he also did not oppose any of Blair or Brown's obviously right wing policies. So in that respected I would say that no, he was not what I would call Left Wing.

QuoteDiane Abbott not left wing?
That is also debatable, I think. She's probably Left Wing in comparison to the current Labour Party leadership.

So... your two examples proving the Labour Party to be Left Wing are a retired minister and one back bench MP?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 07:36:53 PM
Ah well, we disagree, that's life!!  I'm off to have pancakes, better late than never!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 04 April, 2011, 07:36:53 PM
Ah well, we disagree, that's life!!  I'm off to have pancakes, better late than never!!

Ha! Apple Strudel for me!
We can't even agree on that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 April, 2011, 08:25:42 PM
Me must all learn to wrap pancakes around strudel if we are to build a better, more delicious future. Some Ice Cream would be nice too
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 04 April, 2011, 09:14:59 PM
WHAT?! It's pancake day?! Where's mine?

Gruddamit, this is what happens when I ain't got no woman  >:(

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 April, 2011, 10:03:51 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 04 April, 2011, 08:25:42 PM
Me must all learn to wrap pancakes around strudel if we are to build a better, more delicious future. Some Ice Cream would be nice too

I had custard- the ice cream was in the freezer in another room.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 05 April, 2011, 05:10:48 PM
Irony is dead, David Cameron has stood on its head.

First he applauds protesters in the Middle East while keeping his boot on the throat of those doing so at home and then goes on an arms-dealing jaunt around the Middle East, selling weapons and military vehicles to regimes currently suppressing protest in their own countries (and even exporting it as Saudi Arabia did with Bahrain).

Now this:

QuoteHe said the Pakistan was simply "not raising the resources necessary to pay for things that a modern state and people require".

The Pakistani fiscal position was a serious one because "too few people pay tax. Too many of your richest people are getting away without paying much tax at all – and that's not fair".

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/05/david-cameron-pakistan-raise-taxes-rich

Best summary is from China Mieville (http://chinamieville.net/post/4366750879/bravo-dracula-is-right-drinking-blood-is-wrong).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 April, 2011, 05:42:08 PM
Surely in the case just described, irony is alive and kicking!!?  Maybe it's me, I don't pretend to be "ejumacated."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 05:45:18 PM
Blame the international banking system, not the people.

If Pakistan could create and control its own money supply virtually for free instead of borrowing privately created money at interest, it wouldn't need aid. No country would.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 05 April, 2011, 07:43:34 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 05 April, 2011, 05:10:48 PM
Irony is dead, David Cameron has stood on its head.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 April, 2011, 05:42:08 PM
Surely in the case just described, irony is alive and kicking!!?

You're both right. What David Cameron said was ironic, but the irony is surely lost on him. What Emperor said was sarcastic, because the irony is surely lost on Dave Cameron.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 05:45:18 PM
Blame the international banking system, not the people. If Pakistan could create and control its own money supply virtually for free instead of borrowing privately created money at interest, it wouldn't need aid. No country would.

Is the Netherlands free of the international banking system, then, and does it create and supply its own money? If not, how come they were able to impose a retrospective 100% tax on bank bonuses, backdated to 2008? Why can't we do that here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SMOKESCREEN:ED:9 on 05 April, 2011, 07:54:05 PM
Talking about going full circle. Anyone remember, David Cameron and the rest of his moist dishevelled and most likely wrinkled foreskin cronies promising to not only stop ALL cuts to the NHS, but to invest heavily in our dilapidating medical dungeons of hope, (And let's not forget, despair.)
INVEST YOU TIGHT WINGERS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 09:00:54 PM
No, Ush - taxation comes after creation (basically to pay for the creation).

Michael Meacher is the latest MP to see the light, as he explains on his blog here: http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/2011/03/when-are-the-banks-going-to-be-reformed/

If you'd like to email your own MP about this vitally important issue, yo can find the following form email at  http://action.positivemoney.org.uk/page/speakout/OGC_Tell_Your_MP

(It'll fill in your MP's name and contact details for you.)

"Dear [INSERT YOUR MP's NAME],

I was surprised to discover recently that while the government has apparently run out of money, the high-street banks that caused the crisis are effectively able to create tens of billions of pounds every year. The laws that stop criminals printing their own £5 or £10 notes have never been updated to take account of the fact that most money now is digital. Banks make use of this loophole to create up to £200bn a year, and pump this money into housing bubbles and toxic derivatives.

I'm concerned that no democratic decision has ever been made to allow high-street banks to create money in this way. I'm also concerned that ordinary people are being made to pay the costs of a crisis that was caused by the banks, while the banks are permitted to return to business as usual.

Would you watch this 3 minute video, which explains the issue succinctly:

http://action.positivemoney.org.uk/one-good-cut

Your sincerely,

[INSERT YOUR NAME HERE]"

I'd love to hear your views on this subject!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 11:04:29 PM
Would you work for nothing just to keep your CV padded out? Just to say that you have a job? Kelly Fallis, chief executive of Remote Stylist, a Toronto and New York-based startup that provides Web-based interior design services, thinks so. "Ten years from now, this is going to be the norm," she says.

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/03/25/unpaid-jobs-the-new-normal/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 11:20:41 PM
Wow - this thread will be one year old on Saturday! A whole year of Twoothy politics and not one expense fiddled, corporation sucked-off or war started!

We rock!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 April, 2011, 11:33:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 11:04:29 PM
Would you work for nothing just to keep your CV padded out?

That's called 'academia', isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 11:36:58 PM
Heh - and politics (at least initially). Work as an intern for nothing - thus ensuring that only the people who can afford it get the political experience needed to get ahead in Westminster. And they say there's no such thing as conspiracies... ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 April, 2011, 02:13:00 PM
Have you seen Klegg banging on today about improving internships and apprenticeships so that career prospects don't depend on "who your father's friends are" (He got his first work experience at a Finnish bank because his dad, who was the chairman of the United Trust Bank, 'had a word' with a friend)

The man has no shame at all does he?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 06 April, 2011, 08:41:06 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 April, 2011, 11:33:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2011, 11:04:29 PM
Would you work for nothing just to keep your CV padded out?

That's called 'academia', isn't it?
At the moment my missus is doing quite a bit of voluntary work for the local sure start at the moment and has been doing for some time now so yes it does happen occasionally. I begrudgingly accept it as she has a foot in the door to hopefully start in that line of work when Sophie starts school full time.



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2011, 08:45:21 PM
We sometimes talk politics in the Yap Shop. (Sometimes...)

Oh look - it's Yap Shop night tonight. What a coincidence...

(Shameless Publicity Dept.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 08 April, 2011, 05:06:46 PM
I am seriously considering the idea of making a bid for local council next year (in Scotland). I'm fed up of politicians serving their own interests before those of the local community, or indeed the country. I think that given the same opportunity, I would do my utmost to serve not only those who might elect me, but also those groups who are most vulnerable.

Now, I'm a reasonably intelligent guy, I have a degree and I believe I have the passion that's needed, but I have little to no experience or knowledge of how to even contemplate going about this.

Does anyone have any experience or insight on working for local government or suggestions as to where to start? I'm obviously using the Google for the interwebby side of things...

Cheers for any and all help/suggestions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2011, 05:42:32 PM
Start by getting onto your local Parish Council or similar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 08 April, 2011, 10:41:59 PM
I would say the same.  I've worked for LG and also been on the Parish and you really do learn a lot about how it works on there.

I'll be looking to go back into it when my son grows up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 09 April, 2011, 11:16:48 AM
Thanks for the advice guys. I figure I have a year to get myself prepared for this, so any and all advice is very much appreciated. I will definitely be looking into the local community council (if there even is one in my neck of the woods. I know there are definitely a few in the county).

Cheers!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2011, 05:58:54 PM
An email I just got from positivemoney.org which some may find interesting:

"Dear Mark,

"58% of the Icelandic public voted against the latest plans to pay back UK savers for the £3.5bn lost by British and Dutch investors in Icesave. After borrowing 3 times the GDP of the Icelandic economy, doubling house prices on the back of bribing economists to provide favourable assessments of the highly leveraged country, and entering the UK banking market, Landsbanki, marketed in the UK as Icesave, collapsed during the financial crisis.

"The Icelandic prime minister said the choice was the "worst option", meaning that it now seems likely that the British and Dutch governments will take Iceland to court over the £168 million the Icelandic public are expected to have to cover, after the assets of Icesave have been sold. £168 million doesn't seem like a lot of money, but to a country with a little over 300,000 citizens, the payout could amount to around £600 for every man, woman, and child in the country. One Icelandic commentator said "If all bank losses must be paid by the taxpayer, all bank profits should be kept by the taxpayer", the double standards involved in a system that guarantees enormous private profit and socialised losses are rarely clearer than in Iceland. The father and son team heading up Landsbanki were the two richest people in the small nation.

"The choice of the public to leave it to the courts may not have been the best decision economically, the court will likely rule in favour of the UK and Dutch governments, but the decision to take a stand can only be applauded. Iceland are likely to remain "outsiders" in international financial markets, their credit rating will likely be downgraded once again. The legal process could take up to two years to be resolved, and will likely feature prominently in news coverage when it begins.

"In the UK the Independent Commission are due to report back tomorrow, some journalists who were given early access have reported that the report is likely to suggest "firewalls" between investment and retail banking divisions, to prevent newly created money from being easily borrowed by investment banking divisions. Whether this will systemically prevent risky and socially harmful investment banking operations from being funded by money creation is as of yet an unknown.

"It is likely that investment banks will be required to hold their own capital, shielding losses from being absorbed by retail banks holding deposits. Banks have already begun to criticise this, claiming they will be put at an international disadvantage, and they expect ratings agencies to downgrade their ratings accordingly. The banks are also worried about the prospect of having to raise their own capital to form these subsidiary companies, and would prefer a system of "resolution", whereby the investment banking operations are only split into seperate companies in the case of bankruptcy.

"When the report is released tomorrow we will be going through it with a toothcomb, so expect more analysis of what it all means in laymans terms, and what the likely next steps are for the banking reform process.

"Best regards

Ben Curtis"

So, do we side with the Icelandic people against the banks, side with British investors against the Icelandic taxpayers or what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2011, 07:59:24 PM
Peter Joseph (of the Zeitgeist Movement) interviewed on Russia Today:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7-Qbbrwyw
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 April, 2011, 08:08:48 PM
Quote from: Something Fishy on 08 April, 2011, 10:41:59 PM
I would say the same.  I've worked for LG and also been on the Parish and you really do learn a lot about how it works on there.

Duh!  :lol:

I've only just realized what you meant when you said you've worked for LG. I thought you meant the Korean electronics manufacturer! I'm really not getting enough sleep - my intellect is plummeting by the day. I need to get out of retail or get more sympathetic hours.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 April, 2011, 08:15:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2011, 05:58:54 PM
One Icelandic commentator said "If all bank losses must be paid by the taxpayer, all bank profits should be kept by the taxpayer", the double standards involved in a system that guarantees enormous private profit and socialised losses are rarely clearer than in Iceland. The father and son team heading up Landsbanki were the two richest people in the small nation.

That was a beautifully written letter by Curtis of positivemoney.org
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2011, 08:29:38 PM
If you haven't seen any of the Zeitgeist films, I recommend everyone should give them a go. Apart from Part 1 of Film 1 about the religious aspects of society (which is pretty out there and not really something I'm interested in), the rest I broadly agree with.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

Enjoy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 April, 2011, 11:01:09 PM
Thought it might be worth noting that the sham elections for the Stormont Assembly are coming up
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 April, 2011, 11:14:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2011, 08:29:38 PM
If you haven't seen any of the Zeitgeist films, I recommend everyone should give them a go. Apart from Part 1 of Film 1 about the religious aspects of society (which is pretty out there and not really something I'm interested in), the rest I broadly agree with.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

Enjoy!


Too much conjecture without proof or even reference in that flick, plenty of style over content, emotion over reason too. It looks and sounds nice but 'bollocks' mixed in with 'facts' is still just bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2011, 11:25:59 PM
And their ideas for the future? Those just bollocks too?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 April, 2011, 11:39:42 PM
In a word, yes.

A technocratic-utopianist future?


The film's prescriptions are posed within a distinctly Hegelian framework. In many instances, the solutions proffered by Zeitgeist: Addendum merely constitute dialectic extremes that produce precisely the same results as the problems that they allegedly address.

A consistently reiterated theme throughout Zeitgeist: Addendum is the notion that social progress is inextricably linked to scientific and technological progress. Such a contention is vintage techno-utopianism, the belief that technology will eventually end all social evils and give rise to a perfect society. Nonsense, technology is a tool, not a solution. A bit like Fukuyama's market-democracy signalling the end of history.


I believe Zbigniew Brzezinski has similar ideas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2011, 11:51:17 PM
I've seen Jacque Fresco interviewed many times and he never uses the word "Utopian" as it indicates a final state for society. The main thrust of the Venus Project (which, I agree, has its flaws) is to begin making mankind's technology work for the betterment of society as a whole rather than as a profit-driven exercise. For example, using computer modelling to indicate how much corn needs to be grown and the best place to grow it may be more efficient than leaving those decisions to political/corporate systems.

Also, (as I keep banging on about) the switch to social economics would be beneficial for almost everyone.

Still, I guess it's easier to carry on as we are, innit?


Yes, technology is a tool. So is money. Technology won't save us and neither will money. As the old military adage goes, it's not the weapons you hold that wins battles, it's how you use them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 12:17:53 AM

Utopianism is implied.



So who makes the decisions in this tech-society, who decides who gets the tech first in a socialist world of limited resources? The delivery of technology necessitates the creation of some sort of order or class system just as it does with currency. There will still be a hierarchy of people making the decisions and a hierarchy of people benefiting from them. Today the people who use the newly created debt currency first benefit the most, in the new proposed system the people who get the newly created technology first benefit the most.



Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2011, 11:51:17 PMStill, I guess it's easier to carry on as we are, innit?


That's up to each individual. Trying to reshape what's all ready 'too big to exist' won't help. There will need to be a fragmentation and contraction before we start again. Diminishing resources will see to that and no computer-modelling or new infrastructure will stop it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2011, 12:37:20 AM
I disagree that Utopianism is implied. A better way of doing things is implied, but that is not Utopianism in my (admittedly limited) book.

I guess who does what is up to the social structure we put in place as a part of such a project. I personally favour the UTN (United Terrans' Network) idea to actually run the system. As to the world having limited resources - that's why the Venus Project suggests a global inventory before we begin to estimate just what we have to work with. There is more than enough on our planet (and in the "cosmic vicinity" of the Solar System) for everyone to enjoy abundance. (The best definition for abundance that I've heard is "the ability to do what you need to do when you need to do it," not "everyone can have whatever they want." I don't suggest that you think one or the other of these ways, I'm just explaining my own take on it.)

If we were to build something like the Venus Project and leave it in the same hands that run the current system, we really may as well not bother.

What system would you suggest to run something like the Venus Project? Or do you favour another future altogether? Maybe, from all the ideas and ways of doing things we've ever created or observed, humanity can construct a social system that actually works for the greatest number of people possible. Surely it's not beyond us?

Anyhoo - off to watch Zeitgiest III: Moving Forward. Dunno' what's in it yet, I'll report back later...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 12:54:40 AM
My honest opinion is that there is no one solution and this is my problem with people who propose such notions, I find them profoundly naive and to me their notion of a socialist-tech-globalism is just another version of communism or something that will eventually become 'controlled centrally' because it is inherently undynamic.

We live in a pluralist world, not everyone wishes to be the same or live by the same rules as everyone else. It's state and systemic coercion/terrorism/war that creates the most conflict, I don't see anything different in the Venus Project. One man's perfection is another man's nightmare.

To me humans do not work well when herded/clustered into large homogenised groups where consensus cannot be reached with within walking distance but are at their best in mutually beneficial small communities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2011, 04:00:39 AM
After watching Zeitgeist: Moving Forward I think I can say that the movement is not proposing anything like Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Consumerism or any other "ism." The main idea seems to me to be about creating the best framework we possibly can for society to exist in.

I like this idea because it doesn't tell people which god to follow or political party to vote for or anything like that - rather, it relies on individuals themselves to live their lives as they wish without worrying about hunger or poverty. With mankind's basic life-needs catered for, society would be free to evolve in whichever direction it collectively chooses with each individual participating in as great or small a capacity as they desire. I guess it's like saying that it doesn't matter if you're living in a Communist society, a Capitalist society or a strict religious society - if the structure of that society is falling apart you're going to be just as hungry, impoverished or dead as the next guy.

At the very least Zeitgeist: Moving Forward presents an intriguing and attainable vision for the future and I'd love to hear the thoughts/criticisms of it on this thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 April, 2011, 08:46:45 AM
I watched some of the Zeitgeist stuff a while ago and my first thought was: "these guys have watched way too much Star Trek". I don't think Utopianism is an unfair description, it all seemed very idealistic and wooly.

Most of their arguments seem to boil down to "wouldn't it be great if....", when the answer is obviously yes, but they provide very little detail on how to get from here to there, or how to overcome mass apathy or entrenched powers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2011, 12:13:36 PM
"...very little detail on how to get from here to there, or how to overcome mass apathy or entrenched powers."

Well, that's kinda' up to us, isn't it? The third film does explore this in a little more detail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2011, 07:02:32 PM
"FREEZE MURDOCH'S DEAL

"Rupert Murdoch's media empire has finally confessed to widespread phone hacking.

"Sign the petition - build pressure, stop Murdoch's takeover."

http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/Murdoch_BSkyB_takeover_phone_hacking_petition
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 April, 2011, 07:22:43 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 12:54:40 AMTo me humans do not work well when herded/clustered into large homogenised groups where consensus cannot be reached with within walking distance but are at their best in mutually beneficial small communities.

I'm suddenly reminded - possibly inappropriately - of Ken MacLeod's The Star Fraction.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 08:05:10 PM
but of course there's a world dictatorship in the Star Fraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 12 April, 2011, 08:17:20 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 08:05:10 PM
but of course there's a world dictatorship in the Star Fraction.

I think I was thinking of the way London was broken up into lots of smaller communities. It's a good ten years since I read it, though.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2011, 08:18:16 PM
Microstates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 13 April, 2011, 11:16:16 AM
So, any thoughts on the Scottish election campaign so far? I recognise that most forum dwellers are from South Britain so it might escape your notice (particularly if you're watching the BBC), but North of the border it is a reasonably big deal. So far we have seen manifestos from the Torys, the Lib-Liars and Labour, the only one of which to really consider is, of course, Labour's. The SNP have yet to release, as have the Greens, but that didn't stop the BBC holding their own poll on election policies last week.

So far we have seen some leader debates, Iain Gray (Scottish Labour leader) running away from a handful of protestors in Glasgow Central train station and Tavish Scott (Lib Dems) have a mini meltdown on Newsnight.

What's your opinion then? I'm personally looking forward to seeing the Lib Dems absolutely annihilated, hopefully for SNP and Green gain. The Tory vote probably won't change a great deal, as the same old die hard Torys have been voting for their handful of MSPs for years. Labour were ahead in the polls but are rapidly losing ground with Iain Gray as a leader so ineffectual, he makes Ed Milliband look like Winston Churchill.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 April, 2011, 10:05:56 AM
The Conservatives are using Department of Health money to produce party political propaganda.

Ben Goldacre writes in The Guardian that they have just produced a leaflet full of misleading and fake statistics to justify their plan to privatise the NHS. As you might expect, this involves inventing false stories about how the NHS was inefficient under Labour and how things have improved since the May 2010 general election.

The leaflet claims: "If the NHS was performing at truly world-class levels we would save an extra 5,000 lives from cancer every year." Where they get their data from is an academic study that analysed data from 1985 to 1999, which found that in that time, 7,000 deaths per year were unavoidable. Note that for 12 out of those 14 years the Tories were running things. Note also that those 7,000 people per year are already dead and cannot be brought back to life again, so have no bearing on future survival rates, and that changes made by Labour in 2000 have markedly reduced the number of unavoidable deaths from cancer. So the Tories are using statistics from 1985 to 1999 to make claims about avoidable cancer deaths for a ten year period since 2000, when a major government initiative to reduce deaths from cancer was implemented. They are not interested in considering data for the past 10 years because it doesn't support the message they want to communicate, which is that Britain is lagging behind other European countries on cancer survival, which it was twelve years ago!

They are claiming that if we improved cancer survival now we would save 5,000 deaths per year. In fact, Labour did improve cancer survival rates and we have saved 5,000 avoidable cancer deaths per year already, but to acknowledge that wouldn't support the Tory case for dismantling the NHS.

The Tories also claim that since the Coalition, by their own admission, didn't win the election, the number of doctors has increased by 2,550. This is true: however, they were trained or recruited in the first place under a Labour government. It is also true that the total number of doctors increased from 88,693 to 132,683 between 1999 and 2009, but because that happened before May 2010 the Coalition can't take credit for that. That's 4,399 extra doctors per year for 10 years under Labour, and the Coalition boasts of an additional 2,550 doctors in a single year as if it summoned them up by magic. It didn't. Labour paid for their training.

The Tory propaganda leaflet also claims that 95% of patients want more choice over their healthcare. Choice is that old Tory favourite. Look at schools: parents want more choice over what schools their kids go to. They don't want good schools for all children; no, that would cost too much. What they want instead is the choice to send their own kids to a good school and let other people's kids go to failing schools. Choice fixes everything, doesn't it? Because nobody would choose a failing school or an under-resourced hospital.

Anyway, this leaflet claims to have got its 95% statistic from the British Social Attitudes Survey, which doesn't even ask if people want more choice. And the Tories love the British Social Attitudes Survey so much they are going to scrap it after 25 years of comparable data.

Is there any chance, since this leaflet serves party political interests and not the interests of the public or the NHS, that we could have a refund from Conservative Party funds of the cost of producing it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2011, 02:51:04 PM
Ah, Tories - confusing freedom of choice with freedom. Numbskulls.

Anyhoo.

"Save The NHS: What Next?

"Let's decide together what we should do next to Save The NHS. Please fill in the survey at: http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/what-next-nhs#petition   "
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2011, 03:09:55 PM
"The disastrous proposal to extend the term of copyright protection for sound recordings to 70 years is back on the European Council's agenda.

"There is a chance to stop this. You can help by writing to your MEPs now to tell them about your concerns, and ask them to make sure the Directive gets proper scrutiny from the European Parliament."

This is going on all over the world, even in the UN. They're starting with music and such, but it's basically a way of giving corporations more power over the things they create (drugs, new technologies etc), thereby extending the amount of time they can extract over inflated profits from stuff that could be produced cheaply by smaller companies once the copyright has run out.

http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=1422&ea.campaign.id=10288
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2011, 07:29:22 PM
"Local politics -- schools, zoning, council elections -- hit us where we live. So why don't more of us actually get involved? Is it apathy? Dave Meslin says no. He identifies 7 barriers that keep us from taking part in our communities, even when we truly care."

(7m06s)

http://www.ted.com/talks/dave_meslin_the_antidote_to_apathy.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2011-04-12&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email (http://www.ted.com/talks/dave_meslin_the_antidote_to_apathy.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2011-04-12&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 16 April, 2011, 10:42:55 PM
People like me who prefer to absorb information at our own pace by reading must be the internet film maker's nightmare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 22 April, 2011, 10:07:29 PM
I've compiled my thoughts on the Scottish elections so far into a new blog. Rather than post it (it's a bit on the long side), I'll just post a link: http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 22 April, 2011, 11:48:14 PM
A quote from Groucho Marx on politics...

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 April, 2011, 12:46:56 AM
Frank Zappa called it the entertainment branch of Industry
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 23 April, 2011, 01:12:32 AM
I have to say I'm less than impressed with campaign literature in the local elections and the voting reform referendum.

I completed my postal vote a few days ago, at which time I had only received one bundle of leaflets in an envelope specifically addressed to me, which is odd in itself as it was the Conservative candidate's leaflet, the local Tory newsletter and the No campaign leaflet of lies but the local Conservatives know to avoid me house and the two either side because they'd be risking a bollocking. So the only real effect was to strengthen my vote for AV because it is clearly what the Tory's and their millionaire backers want. It does make me wonder about the funding of these things, as Cameron has been very specific that the no vote is non-political, so who was paying for the envelope and employing the person who posted it through the door (and then ran away very quickly)? It is all very shifty indeed. I also got a No campaign leaflet sent to me through the post too.

Since sealing up my postal vote I got a leaflet from the Greens which I dropped straight in the recycling, I'm sure the candidate appreciated that.

Nothing from Labour or the Lib Dems or the Yes campaign. Pretty piss poor considering this is a Labour seat but the local wards are held by the Lid Dems, so you'd think Labour might want to capitalise on the Liberals' problems and steal a council seat or two. Given the Lib Dem support for AV it is odd that I have seen nothing from them on this either.

I know the No campaign has received orders of magnitude more funding but you'd think the folks pushing for Yes might want to set out their stall somehow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 23 April, 2011, 01:20:02 AM
Labour,conservative...all a shower of lieing twats that promise the earth and deliver sod all!
I'm just waiting for the day that you can vote for "none of the above"

Got loadsa bumf from all the main parties...and they all say the same thing...."its all their fault"...and "we will..(insert what people want to hear)"....strange that when they get that vote they do fuck all but blame their opposition for their inability to make any of the changes they promised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 23 April, 2011, 04:26:04 PM
Wrote another post for my new blog, accompanied by this image:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XIotVLQFgs0/TbLt2Mz396I/AAAAAAAAAG0/6y-rTEICixM/s1600/superlabourbros.jpg)


Blog can be found here: http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 April, 2011, 08:10:36 PM
So this happened 300 yards from the house in which I grew up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13196032 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13196032)

The month of May has an election, the Queen's visit to the Republic and the 30th anniversary of Bobby Sands death. I'm thinking of starting a sweepstakes on what date these utter fucktards and cowards will blow something up.

Any takers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 April, 2011, 11:00:42 PM
Incredible, isn't it?   Just what this island needs right now.  Please, please, crawl back under your rocks you fucking vermin. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 28 April, 2011, 10:00:45 AM
I don't like being in the EU. Who should I blow up first?  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 28 April, 2011, 10:11:35 AM
Did everyone else think 'France'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 28 April, 2011, 11:59:23 AM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 28 April, 2011, 02:23:11 PM
Just had the CENSUS operatives around saying this is the last nice visit they'll make and the fine people are coming next.

Can anyone tell me what the fuck the CENSUS is up to? Its scaring the hell out of me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 April, 2011, 02:30:28 PM
I dunno. I put mine in the post and a week later a guy from the census knocked the door saying they hadn't received it. We've heard nothing from them since, so I'm presuming it turned up eventually. What did you do with yours?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 28 April, 2011, 02:35:00 PM
Just tell them you did filled it in and posted it already.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 28 April, 2011, 02:46:29 PM
Well I showed them I hadn't[Filled/posted] but said that I will and then post it. So I will consider both your posts. Cheers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 28 April, 2011, 02:57:29 PM
Or do it online (http://www.census.gov.uk/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 April, 2011, 04:53:50 PM
Here's an example of that drive for 'efficiency' in the NHS we hear so much of nowadays...

A ward sister gets her nurses to work 12-hour shifts with a single, half-hour paid break in the middle. Because the break is paid, she adds up all the nurses' breaks over 24 shifts to make a total of twelve hours, and gets them to work one shift in 25 unpaid to claw back what they've been paid for breaks.

There are 30 patients on the ward. There are 3 nurses on the ward during the day, so there is one nurse for every 10 patients. At night there are only 2 nurses on a shift, so that's one nurse for every 15 patients.

The ward sister is garnering praise left right and centre for the 'efficiency' with which she's running her ward. Meanwhile the nurses are getting tired and frazzled from nursing 10 or 15 patients at a time for 12-hour stints, they are being exploited financially, and patient care is being gambled with.

I don't know if any of this is true, but it was told to me by a nurse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 April, 2011, 05:07:45 PM
Having worked a fair few 12 hour shifts in my time on far, far less important jobs, I'm gobsmacked that anyone thinks it's a good idea for nurses to do the same, and be responsible for up to 15 patients while doing it.  As an employer, the paid-breaks dodge makes me feel slightly sick. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 April, 2011, 05:10:49 PM
If that's true, Ush, I'm a Martian!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 April, 2011, 07:31:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 April, 2011, 05:10:49 PM
If that's true, Ush, I'm a Martian!

Then I shall smash her lying, nursey face in!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 April, 2011, 11:52:36 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 28 April, 2011, 04:53:50 PM
Here's an example of that drive for 'efficiency' in the NHS we hear so much of nowadays...

A ward sister gets her nurses to work 12-hour shifts with a single, half-hour paid break in the middle. Because the break is paid, she adds up all the nurses' breaks over 24 shifts to make a total of twelve hours, and gets them to work one shift in 25 unpaid to claw back what they've been paid for breaks.

On the face of it, the bit about making them work an unpaid shift sounds like utter nonsense. Twelve hour shifts aren't really unusual, either. I'm inclined to think there are some facts missing from the story.

My other half has come up with this scenario:

Imagine you're calculating your rota on an eight week basis, with a contracted 37.5 hour week (normal NHS working week under Agenda for Change). This will equate to 300 hours in an eight week period. Dividing 300 hours by 12 (shift length) equals 25 (shifts required).

So, you'd work three 12-hour shifts per week, but for one week in eight you'd work four shifts, all paid and taking into account paid half-hour breaks.

Hard to say for sure without more details, but it sounds like there's been a failure to understand/explain the shift system.


QuoteThere are 30 patients on the ward. There are 3 nurses on the ward during the day, so there is one nurse for every 10 patients. At night there are only 2 nurses on a shift, so that's one nurse for every 15 patients.


Really depends on the nature of the ward as to whether or not that's good or bad. Also, nurses are rarely the only members of staff working on wards and caring for patients.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 April, 2011, 11:57:08 PM
Don't forget all those fag breaks!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 29 April, 2011, 09:30:06 AM
I once visited my gran in hospital, only to find that she'd been sitting in her own shit for hours.  No less than five nurses were standing around the main ward desk, laughing and joking about something or other.  The worst thing was the feeling that we couldn't even say anything, due to the fact that we'd seen somebody ejected only the day before for doing nothing more sinister than questioning the care that their loved one wasn't receiving.

I'd never judge all nurses based on these events- but I'd like to think that those nurses will get to sit in their own shit for a while one day.  I'd like to say that was the worst thing that happened to my gran while she was there, but it wasn't.  I was genuinely shocked at how lazy and ignorant this particular bunch were, to be honest.

There are some jobs that I honestly believe you have to give your all to- at all times. If you can't do that- piss off and find another job where it doesn't matter if you coast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 April, 2011, 12:02:22 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 29 April, 2011, 09:30:06 AM
I once visited my gran in hospital, only to find that she'd been sitting in her own shit for hours.  No less than five nurses were standing around the main ward desk, laughing and joking about something or other.  The worst thing was the feeling that we couldn't even say anything, due to the fact that we'd seen somebody ejected only the day before for doing nothing more sinister than questioning the care that their loved one wasn't receiving.

I'd never judge all nurses based on these events- but I'd like to think that those nurses will get to sit in their own shit for a while one day.  I'd like to say that was the worst thing that happened to my gran while she was there, but it wasn't.  I was genuinely shocked at how lazy and ignorant this particular bunch were, to be honest.

You hear stories like this pretty often (along with bad GPs, stupid midwives, you name it) - members of my family have been unimpressed by some of their experiences, too. My (limited) personal experience of going on to wards is more that it's often dead quiet and you wonder where everyone is.

(Something to remember, though, is that there are a lot of people in uniforms that make them look like nurses that are not, in fact, nurses at all. Obviously, I'm in no position at all to suggest that happened here, but generally I think this is a real issue when it comes to public perception.)

I would encourage anyone who experiences this sort of thing to make a formal complaint in writing to the hospital authorities as soon as possible.



QuoteThere are some jobs that I honestly believe you have to give your all to- at all times. If you can't do that- piss off and find another job where it doesn't matter if you coast.

I agree with you absolutely. I hate my job, and frankly it's making my life an utter misery right now, and there's a large part of me just thinking remember the mortgage, but there's another part reminding me that what I do matters a fuckload more than how I feel.

However, it does get demoralising when you do give it your all, meet targets, make more savings year in year out, and face a constant increase in workload... and then get told that you're lazy, inefficient and wasteful, often by people who have no experience of doing the job themselves. (Yup, some of us do know what it's like for writers, artists and editors...) It does require a degree of bloody-mindedness and passion to stand up to it, which not everyone has, and I suspect that some staff are eventually ground into apathy.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 02:40:09 PM
As someone who's had a lot of experience of hospitals, I've come to the conclusion that nurses are the same as the rest of us; some of them are lazy; some of them are caring; some of them are hard working; and some of them are uncaring bastards, just like the society that they're drawn from.  Without doubt, the most caring people that I've come across in my many hospital stays/visits are the auxiliary staff, you know the ones that get their hands dirty, clearing up the crap, emptying bedpans, and washing people.  Quite often I found that "proper" nurses were "too posh to wash"!

I do think it makes a difference what type of ward you're in, I'm sure most nurses in childrens wards and in intensive care wards are wonderful and caring, but I've seen some bad things in neurological wards and geriatric wards.  I know it shouldn't make any difference but it does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 April, 2011, 03:34:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 02:40:09 PMQuite often I found that "proper" nurses were "too posh to wash"!

Up to a point, you have to bear in mind that nursing has changed, and many aspects of what is seen as traditional nursing have been passed on to less qualified, cheaper staff. "Too posh to wash" can translate to "more appropriate use of resources".

It's been happening all over the NHS for years and there's going to be more of it - in the labs, medical laboratory assistants are taking on more parts of the work traditionally done by Biomedical Scientists, and Biodmedical Scientists are starting to take on some parts of the work traditionally done by consultants. For those of you wanting more private sector efficiency and organisation, and sharper, better use of available resources and skills, then here it is.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 29 April, 2011, 04:19:49 PM
While there is inefficiency and waste within the NHS as its inevitable as its a Bereaucracy that is subject to all of the usual foibles of people particularly in the upper levels of management and that kind of thing it has over the last couple of decades become something of a whipping post used by politicians whenever they want to talk about saving taxpayers money and "expenditure" and that type of thing so it gets far more attention and focus than is really warranted in that respect while at the same time the taxpayers cash that is wasted and flushed away through overseas Globalist military occupations/wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and now Libya which alone is estimated at costing the UK taxpayer £750,000,000 + per month [with no exit strategy while offering little or nothing in terms of value that benefits the UK taxpayer] plus another £70,000,000 spent on a royal wedding spectacle being just 2 examples and thats not going into bailouts and EU payments from the UK.

These things are either promoted as being money well spent or are conveniently swept under the rug.

Quote from: Robin Low on 29 April, 2011, 03:34:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 02:40:09 PMQuite often I found that "proper" nurses were "too posh to wash"!

Up to a point, you have to bear in mind that nursing has changed, and many aspects of what is seen as traditional nursing have been passed on to less qualified, cheaper staff. "Too posh to wash" can translate to "more appropriate use of resources".

It's been happening all over the NHS for years and there's going to be more of it - in the labs, medical laboratory assistants are taking on more parts of the work traditionally done by Biomedical Scientists, and Biodmedical Scientists are starting to take on some parts of the work traditionally done by consultants. For those of you wanting more private sector efficiency and organisation, and sharper, better use of available resources and skills, then here it is.


Regards

Robin

So as a result of that you now the kind of examples cited by @RL above which are effeciency drives that are partly done by politicians balancing budgets to please the public who want to see cuts or are told that cuts are "necessary" to "streamline" the NHS to reduce the public debt and "expenditure" and the upshot of all of that and all of the overseas miltary excursions and all of govt waste is that patients and staff of the NHS all suffer in the long term and short term.The worst kind of costcutting i can think of.

Its a miracle in this day and age that the NHS ticks along as well as it does when its under stress and attack the whole time.

The UK govt really do see the NHS as a problem that they would willingly hand over to the private sector wholesale anytime if they thought that they would get away with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 29 April, 2011, 04:36:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 02:40:09 PM
Without doubt, the most caring people that I've come across in my many hospital stays/visits are the auxiliary staff, you know the ones that get their hands dirty, clearing up the crap, emptying bedpans, and washing people.  Quite often I found that "proper" nurses were "too posh to wash"!

I do recognize this, and so does my friend who's a nurse. One of the reasons for it is that nurses are, indeed, getting a lot posher these days. Nursing used to be a working class occupation, and to qualify you did an on-the-job college training as a school leaver. Nowadays, because our society has fallen for credentialism in a big way, nursing is fast becoming a graduate job. Some graduate nurses are a bit fancy-pants about having a degree qualification, and the job has in recent years attracted many recruits who didn't get the grades for medical school but want a degree so they can enter medicine by the graduate route. Naturally, nurses who really want to be doctors aren't going to make the best nurses.

My 'source' tells me that she encountered an awful lot of nurses during her training who thought it was beneath them to do certain tasks, for which patients had to wait until someone less important was available to take care of their needs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 04:58:01 PM
Totally agree with you about the wars in Iraq and Afghan, Peter, and our current involvement in Libya is a nonsense, and don't get me started on our contributions to the EU, but, hey, leave the Wedding alone.  Me and the missus have had a lovely day, watching all the pomp and ceremony, sharing a nice glass of Pimms, and hanging the bunting out, lovely jubbly!!  But then we are a pair of old Tories!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 29 April, 2011, 05:04:25 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 April, 2011, 11:52:36 PM
On the face of it, the bit about making them work an unpaid shift sounds like utter nonsense. Twelve hour shifts aren't really unusual, either. I'm inclined to think there are some facts missing from the story.

Sorry, yes, you're right and I stand corrected. Apparently she puts in twelve and a half hours a day with a half hour paid break, times three, equals 37.5 hours a week. There probably isn't anything cruel or unusual about the nurse in charge, just that the nurses on the ward feel quite thinly spread and worry about patient care and potential for clinical errors. However, 12.5 only goes into 300 24 times, not 25. I'll have to interrogate her further! I don't know what other staff are present in addition to qualified nurses, but I am told there isn't any slack, and it's easy to see there is no necessary relationship between increased 'efficiency' and improved care for patients.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 April, 2011, 05:33:40 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 29 April, 2011, 05:04:25 PM... but I am told there isn't any slack, and it's easy to see there is no necessary relationship between increased 'efficiency' and improved care for patients.

Now I can well-believe that!

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 29 April, 2011, 09:54:27 PM
When my daughter was seriously ill a few years ago the NHS couldn't do anything wrong. From start to finish everyone was great. When Sophie was ready to leave some of the nurses that looked after her when she was in ICU came to see her off.
Whoever came up with the quick response paramedics idea needs to be knighted. I am convinced that saved her life. Every time I see one stationary in a lay-by it gives me a warm feeling inside.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 30 April, 2011, 10:27:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 April, 2011, 04:58:01 PM
but, hey, leave the Wedding alone.  Me and the missus have had a lovely day, watching all the pomp and ceremony, sharing a nice glass of Pimms, and hanging the bunting out, lovely jubbly!!  But then we are a pair of old Tories!!

As long as you enjoyed yourselves then thats the main thing  :D

I received my complimentary Fortnum and Mason hamper on the big day so i was able to enjoy a selection of fine cheeses and preserves and biscuits and a whole side of wild smoked salmon plus assorted champagnes and liqueors while celebrating so i am not really complaining  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 04 May, 2011, 09:12:53 PM
So, this alternative vote referendum. Yes, no or spoilt ballot?

It's not remotely proportional but if you can change the electoral system once you can change it again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 May, 2011, 09:18:43 PM
It's a bit ironic for me, in Northern ireland we're voting for the local assembly using AV, and then voting on whether we want AV or not.

No one ever asked us if we wanted it in the first place. If the tories seem to think its a horrible idea, then why's it ok to implement it here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 09:22:12 PM
Votes don't matter in a plutocracy, no matter how they are cast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 May, 2011, 09:28:52 PM
We need more meritocracy. I reckon it would prevent P.R gimps becoming prime minister and (in N.I) stop people who left school at 15 becoming education ministers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 09:46:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 09:22:12 PM
Votes don't matter in a plutocracy, no matter how they are cast.



I bet you voted in the last election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 09:51:19 PM
I did. I voted for "None of the Above" in a special box I added in crayon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 09:58:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 09:51:19 PM
I did. I voted for "None of the Above" in a special box I added in crayon.


Doesn't that contradict your last statement and why you bothered to vote?


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 09:22:12 PM
Votes don't matter in a plutocracy, no matter how they are cast.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:03:24 PM
Absolutely. It's a choice between apathy or rebellion, I suppose.

I never claimed to be consistent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 10:10:08 PM
I'd say the apathy could be more effective. Rebellion through systemic support doesn't really work. The system relies on citizen reflexivity.


QuoteI never claimed to be consistent.


Ae you a Mark Millar character?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
Apathy is seen as acquiescence. Maybe one day they'll get more spoiled votes than "good" votes - then what will they do? probably nothing, but there's always a chance, however slim.

And I thought I'd already made this clear, but I actually have no character at all. Not a shred.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 10:28:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
Apathy is seen as acquiescence. Maybe one day they'll get more spoiled votes than "good" votes - then what will they do?  probably nothing


Nothing is right, it'll just show democracy is bollocks whereas not voting all ready knows that. The more important question is what will we do to organise our own 'alternatives' now the politicos are irrelevant?



Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:14:08 PM
And I thought I'd already made this clear, but I actually have no character at all. Not a shred.


What's with the shark then? Tax dodge?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 04 May, 2011, 10:36:37 PM
So, it's voting day tomorrow. And I've just thought of this year's spoil. Now, can any boarder name this quote:

'It's bullshit, all of it. The Cabinet minister. The whole business. You got us in here to do your dirty work...'

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:39:51 PM
I don't think that democracy is bollocks - the way we use it at the moment is bollocks. As for how to fix it? Jeez, if I knew that do you think I'd have the time to be posting on a comic forum? All I know is that there must be a better way. I can see elements of that better way (socializing the money supply, breaking the stranglehold of corporations, switching our resources from war to peace), but I'm the first to admit that these are just broad-stroke ideals and the reality is much more complex. It's something we should all be working on, I think.

There is a better way, and we will find it. It's just a matter of how long it's going to take us to wake up and how many of us are going to be gunned down before we do, that's all.

Nah, the Shark thing's just an erotic diversion...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 11:07:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 10:39:51 PMjust broad-stroke ideals and the reality is much more complex.


Too complex for a democratic sytem which says 51% can tell the other 49% what to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 11:15:20 PM
Exactly. We need something more. Democracy 2.0?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 11:38:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 11:15:20 PM
Exactly. We need something more. Democracy 2.0?


Democracy: government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives and the lives of others, this to me is unworkable and a total paradox.  Proper community based consensualism and sustainability is where it starts. It must be grown from the base but no one way should be totally prescriptive as each state will have different needs and resources.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2011, 11:44:06 PM
I agree 100%. Decisions should be made at a local level with the government acting as nothing more than facilitators or co-ordinators. Put the power - and the responsibility - back where it belongs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 11:55:34 PM
Consensus in action!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 12:04:42 AM
I sense an embryonic new coalition in the making...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 05 May, 2011, 12:11:43 AM
How about somebody tells me what democracy means?

Surely, one person, one vote on every issue is not just unworkable but actually undesirable. The logical step is to devolve the decision making process to a smaller, specialised group, no?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 May, 2011, 12:11:58 AM
Can you imagine how even more brilliant it would be if we were drunk!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 May, 2011, 12:14:09 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 05 May, 2011, 12:11:43 AMSurely, one person, one vote on every issue is not just unworkable but actually undesirable. The logical step is to devolve the decision making process to a smaller, specialised group, no?


That's why consensus is the better alternative, at a basic level if you agree on something with others it's a collective in pursuit of that objective, those who don't agree have no obligation to be a part of but don't get the benefit of the achievment either; of course there are flexibilities within any situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 12:22:38 AM
A network of democracy rather than a pyramid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 May, 2011, 12:27:50 AM
Not democracy, consensus. Democracy is a system of "rule by the governed" which is paradoxical and means constraining the individual via other individuals which leads to cronyism and hierarchy. Take rule and governed out of the equation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 May, 2011, 12:36:53 AM
It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always wins

That's satire that is
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 May, 2011, 12:38:37 AM
No it's not, it's truth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 May, 2011, 12:49:19 AM
Consensus?

Obama's just made an executive decision not to release any photos/footage to confirm Bin Laden's demise.

Here's a hypothetical situation:

Wikileaks, does its thing and gets the photos online by the end of the month. The US administration has a wee hissy fit, but there's not much they can do about it, wikileaks are just publishing extra media about a story that was already public knowledge.

So now instead of deferring to Obama's executive privilege, people can choose for themselves, whether or not they want/need to see a corpse.

The internet is all about consensus (when its not about trolling/spamming)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 12:54:36 AM
The internet is the beginning of the end of corporate (both economic and political) power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 May, 2011, 12:58:02 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 05 May, 2011, 12:49:19 AMThe internet is all about consensus (when its not about trolling/spamming)


As long as we get enough oil to power the generators that power the servers. Otherwise it's back to pigeons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 May, 2011, 01:01:07 AM
Pigeon fuelled generators? Good idea, burn the wee sky rats
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2011, 02:10:36 AM
Remember that Democracy is no good without a written Constitution/Bill of rights based on the rule of Law/Common Law/Natural Law.

I advocate the US as an example of that which hasnt ever been improved upon as it protects the rights of minorities/individuals and which restricts the size and influence of central Govt by constraints and which allows seperate states/regions a certain amount of autonomy.

It provides a system of checks and balances that prevents one sector of the public from imposing their will onto other members of society which is what usually happens in a Democracy where the emphasis is placed on the majority[mob rule] and popular elected govt while the minority suffers.


For example in the US you have the right to own firearms but if you dont agree with that then you have the right not to own firearms.

If you dont believe in free speech then outside of the normal parameters of free speech you have the right not to speak your mind and censor yourself.[Free speech is a tricky one as its not always an absolute in certain instances]

If you object to others religious pratices for example then you have the right to not participate in or share the same religion.

If you object to a public political protest for example then you have the right not to attend the protest but yourself or anyone else does not have the right to deny others the right to protest in public.

If you object to the right to defend your home and property with force from criminals for example then you have the right not to defend your home and property with force from criminals.

And so on.........

Its all about stopping one sector of people imposing/enforcing their ideas and views onto others by force of will  as everyones rights are protected as you have the choice while you still have the right to object but not enforce.


Quote from: JOE SOAP on 04 May, 2011, 10:28:33 PM
The more important question is what will we do to organise our own 'alternatives' now the politicos are irrelevant?


Think of alternatives and start doing it.For example the Federal Govt in the US is forbidding anyone from selling raw milk and growing organic vegetables so the solution to that problem is to fuck them off and start selling or continue selling raw milk and organic vegetables and if everyone does this then the Federal Govt will be unable to enforce its legislation.

The criminal system relies on your consent to stay in power and the present criminal system will try its hardest to prevent the alternatives and it will only succeed if everyone allows it to as the system wouldnt be able to cope with any large scale civil disobedience.

People who were and are sick of the mainstream media create the alternative media and contribute to it as an alternative.People are sick of mainstream media journalists so they decided to be their own journalists and write their own articles.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:16:24 AM
That's a good idea. We can adopt the United States' Constitution - they don't seem to be using it at the moment...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 May, 2011, 02:40:19 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:16:24 AM
That's a good idea. We can adopt the United States' Constitution - they don't seem to be using it at the moment...

We are not using ours very much either as all of these Constitutions and Magna Cartas etc are just so antiquated and we need to move with the times and modernise and live under a legislative framework where rights become privelages and subject to change at any given time without discussion or democratic process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:44:14 AM
1: A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.
2: Cause loss or harm to no-one.
3: Enjoy.

This concludes the Patented Shark Constitution. (Keep it simple, I say.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 05 May, 2011, 12:51:51 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 05 May, 2011, 12:11:43 AM
How about somebody tells me what democracy means?

Two wolves and a sheep arguing over who's going to be dinner tonight :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 06 May, 2011, 05:18:43 PM
Woah! Liberal Democrats have lost 591 council seats, and counting.


Liberal Democrats in "failed to realise how much of their support comes from the Left" shock.

::)


(duh.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 06 May, 2011, 05:21:21 PM
Blimey...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 May, 2011, 05:46:38 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 06 May, 2011, 05:18:43 PM
Liberal Democrats in "failed to realise how much of their support comes from the Left" shock.

I'm amazed that anyone would vote for the Lib Dems ever again.  If you'd wanted a government somewhere far to the right of Thatcher I'm sure it'd have been simpler to actually vote for one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2011, 06:03:06 PM
This is what you get when you reduce politics to simply voting for your favourite colour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2011, 06:06:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:44:14 AM
1: A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.
2: Cause loss or harm to no-one.
3: Enjoy.

This concludes the Patented Shark Constitution. (Keep it simple, I say.)

I've got my constitution tattooed on my neck: An it harm none, do what ye will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 06 May, 2011, 06:28:17 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2011, 06:06:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:44:14 AM
1: A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.
2: Cause loss or harm to no-one.
3: Enjoy.

This concludes the Patented Shark Constitution. (Keep it simple, I say.)

I've got my constitution tattooed on my neck: An it harm none, do what ye will.

The Imperial Constitution: Don't be a dick.*

Not sure where I'd have that tattooed though. ;)

* It works well in most circumstances from the personal to the global.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 06 May, 2011, 07:08:52 PM
There was a plan to merge the Libdems/Conservatives permanently which would have reduced voter choice to 2 interchangeable mainstream parties but the fact that LibDem supporters seem to have rejected that idea since the majority didnt vote LibDem as a protest means that the LibDems/Conservatives will part company once this term in office is over.LibDem voters were cheated at the last election anyway as there was no justifiable reason why LibDems had to be absorbed into the Conservative party but if that hadnt happened then Çonservatives wouldnt have been able to force through unpopular policies.

It remains to be seen wether or not the LibDems will recover support again or be looked upon as sellouts forever by their voting base.If their voting base switch to Labour  at the next general election then LibDems will become irrelevent and you still end up with 2 interchangeable mainstream parties.

I spoilt my ballot paper for the first time last night as i looked at the choices and it was all LibDem/Conservative/Labour/Greens and i am not interested in any of them so i drew a line through all of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2011, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 06 May, 2011, 06:28:17 PM
Quote from: HOO-HAA on 06 May, 2011, 06:06:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2011, 02:44:14 AM
1: A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.
2: Cause loss or harm to no-one.
3: Enjoy.

This concludes the Patented Shark Constitution. (Keep it simple, I say.)

I've got my constitution tattooed on my neck: An it harm none, do what ye will.

The Imperial Constitution: Don't be a dick.*

Not sure where I'd have that tattooed though. ;)

* It works well in most circumstances from the personal to the global.

hahah!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Slip de Garcon on 07 May, 2011, 08:19:28 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 06 May, 2011, 05:18:43 PM
Woah! Liberal Democrats have lost 591 council seats, and counting.


Liberal Democrats in "failed to realise how much of their support comes from the Left" shock.

::)


(duh.)

If much of their support comes from the left, weren't said supporters always gambling by voting for them? The outcome of a Lib/Tory coalition was always on the cards, and the best way of a left wing voter to prevent it would be to vote Labour, surely?

IMHO an awful lot of people that normally vote LD don't actually want to vote for a winner, so when the LDs went into government it was always going to alienate a lot of their voters - whatever they did in power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 May, 2011, 09:47:53 AM
Yes, voting LibDem was a gamble for left-wing voters. However, anyone really left-wing couldn't have given their wholehearted support to Blair's Labour Party and would have been looking for an alternative since 1997 or before. The Liberal Democrats had some good policies a left-winger could get behind, like a new top rate of income tax and its historical commitment to electoral reform.

A lot of voters have lost their appetite for electoral reform now that they've seen what happens when the LibDems hold the keys to power, i.e. they just hand it over to the Tories. If you've got no more chance of a left of centre government with AV than without, why would you vote in favour of AV? What opportunity the LibDems had to bring change to the voting system they wasted by settling for too little from the Tories and by getting the question wrong.

A LibDem/Tory coalition was never a foregone conclusion. You may remember that the May 2010 election result put Nick Clegg - just one man - in the position of being able to decide whether we had a Labour or a Tory government. Therefore there is no sense in which voters were given a straight choice of voting for a Tory/LibDem coalition or voting Labour to prevent it.

Many LibDem voters were disenchanted Labour voters who wanted to show that Labour couldn't take their votes for granted. Thursday's desertion of the Liberal Democrats by those same voters is sending the same message to the LibDems: you cannot take our votes for granted. The Labour Party needs to make serious overtures to those voters now to get them back on board. There's no point the LibDems worrying about it. Many of those people will never vote LibDem again and I think the LibDems have made it pretty clear they don't want their votes anyway.

I think the main lesson for left-wing voters is that we really do live in an age of broadly right-wing consensus politics (as Tony Blair supposed when he took over Labour and made it right-wing) and there is never going to be a time when there will be a mainstream left-wing political party with a realistic prospect of winning a national election outright and being able to form a government. In England and Wales (not Scotland, hurrah!) left-wing voters will have no choice but to vote Labour and put up with its neo-liberalism, its craven genuflexion to big business, and the dominance of the professional political class in the party hierarchy.

In future, am I going to vote for a fairer, more democratic, more equal society? No. I'm going to vote Labour instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 May, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
Did you expect it to be any different?  All three parties vie for the centre-right management position (one of them to act as electoral facilitator for the others) there is no divisiveness or alternative policy between any of these parties anymore because that's not the function of political power. 'mainstream left-wing political party' is never an idea that will catch on nor do I believe it will be able to function either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 May, 2011, 11:04:51 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 07 May, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
Did you expect it to be any different?

No. No, I didn't. But with politics you have to entertain the possibility of the kind of change you'd like to see even if you don't really believe it's a very likely outcome. Like all those people who voted in favour of AV and wished really, really hard that 'yes' votes would outnumber 'no' votes when there was never any realistic possibility of it happening.

The reason I didn't vote Labour in 1997 is that I didn't approve of the direction in which the Labour Party had been taken. I could have voted for them despite not liking what they stood for, and added my vote to the mandate they had to do whatever the hell they liked, however right-wing. As it was, they won without my help and my hands stayed clean.

Up to this point I have observed the principle of showing my displeasure through the ballot box and voting for whichever party most closely corresponds to my own political views. I'm not a floating voter: it's the parties that are floating, and in only one direction. Labour, Plaid Cymru and the LibDems have shifted to the right and they've failed to take me with them. The only option remaining to me now is to vote Green where I can and Labour where I can't.

Last year's general election and Thursday's council elections in Brighton have shown that the Greens can win even without electoral reform, and the party list system by which the Welsh Assembly is elected would give us a Green Party assembly member with something like just a 2% swing to the Greens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 07 May, 2011, 12:13:12 PM
Coalition  a quaking. Quite a few audible complaints about the Cons dirtying the poor old lib dems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 May, 2011, 12:17:57 PM
What a great couple of weeks!  Wills & Kate tied the knot; Bed Linen is away with his virgins; electorial reform got shafted; SNP won loads of seats (go go Alex, an English Parliament gets nearer by the day); and Davey Boy actually increased his number of councillors!!  Unbelievable!!  I'm off down the Conservative Club for a Dubonnet & Lemonade!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 May, 2011, 01:44:08 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 May, 2011, 12:17:57 PMI'm off down the Conservative Club for a Dubonnet & Lemonade!!

Rather amusingly, the favourite tipple of this character:

http://www.toonhound.com/briggsuw.htm

(Raymond Briggs fans take note - if you don't have Unlucky Wally and Unlucky Wally: Twenty Years On, then you jolly well should.)

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 May, 2011, 02:42:56 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:00:17 PM
New blog post on the result of the Scottish elections:

http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/ (http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 May, 2011, 05:12:03 PM
Quote from: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:00:17 PM
New blog post on the result of the Scottish elections:

http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/ (http://chillypolitics.blogspot.com/)

Rather early days, but I'm wondering who would be eligible to vote on a referendum on Scottish independence. My dad is Scottish, but lives in England and has done so for decades. I'm half-Scottish, and value that part as much as the English and Welsh quarters. Would either of us get a vote?


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:42:35 PM
As far as I understand it, anyone who is resident in Scotland is entitled to a vote. That means anyone from any ethnicity or background is allowed to vote as long as they are on the electoral register in Scotland. As for ex-pats, I have to admit that I'm not sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2011, 05:47:52 PM
Quote from: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:42:35 PM
As for ex-pats, I have to admit that I'm not sure.

Splitters!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:53:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 May, 2011, 05:47:52 PM
Quote from: chilipenguin on 07 May, 2011, 05:42:35 PM
As for ex-pats, I have to admit that I'm not sure.

Splitters!

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 08 May, 2011, 11:32:21 PM
Oh Internet, you never fail - does what it says on the tin:

http://nickclegglookingsad.tumblr.com
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 May, 2011, 11:34:38 PM
Unlike Nick Clegg, that website delivers on its promises
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Slip de Garcon on 09 May, 2011, 03:36:56 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 07 May, 2011, 09:47:53 AM
A lot of voters have lost their appetite for electoral reform now that they've seen what happens when the LibDems hold the keys to power, i.e. they just hand it over to the Tories.

With respect, if Labour had beaten the Tories but still a hung parliament, I imagine the Lib Dems would've handed over power to Labour. Same result, different tie.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 May, 2011, 04:50:48 PM
Quote from: Slip de Garcon on 09 May, 2011, 03:36:56 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 07 May, 2011, 09:47:53 AM
A lot of voters have lost their appetite for electoral reform now that they've seen what happens when the LibDems hold the keys to power, i.e. they just hand it over to the Tories.

With respect, if Labour had beaten the Tories but still a hung parliament, I imagine the Lib Dems would've handed over power to Labour. Same result, different tie.  

With respect, a) going into a coalition doesn't mean letting the Tories get away with all the ideological crap they pull that has nothing to do with cutting the deficit, in exchange for what? A referendum the LibDems couldn't win anyway; and b) if Labour had beaten the Tories in last May's hung parliament election the LibDems would probably have gone into coalition with Labour and could have expected to lose all the support it gets from the right.

Incidentally, shifting to the right has cost the LibDems a fall in popularity from 24% to 10%, so it's hard to imagine that a shift to the left could have cost them anywhere nearly as big a fall. Of the 10% of voters who still support the LibDems some will be die-hard supporters who hate the direction the party has taken but are clinging to it in the hope it can still be saved.

Last May Nick Clegg let the numbers decide rather than the political leanings of his support base. In effect, he discounted the LibDem voters' views and just compared how many seats the Tories and Labour had won, and went with the party who got the most. His decision should not have come down to numbers, it should have come down to political philosophy. Clegg evidently decided the LibDems' political philosophy (whatever it is) was closer to that of the Tories than Labour or he couldn't justify giving his voters what they didn't vote for. Clearly his voters beg to differ, and no doubt many will have learned from the experience: once bitten, twice shy.

It was nice of the LibDems to sacrifice their party "in the national interest," as Cleggie put it on the Andrew Marr show yesterday, but except for the ones who already vote Conservative and believe all that bollocks about appeasing international credit rating agencies, the electorate won't thank him for it. Instead they will punish him for it forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2011, 05:05:44 PM
They do say that a Liberal is just a Conservative that hasn't had a crime committed against them yet!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 09 May, 2011, 05:39:15 PM
No matter who won the election we would still be bitching at what they are doing. I don't think it matters who is in power the results will be the same. Our county is fucked and cuts are necessary. At least it is across the board and not concentrated in a certain area, Probably why so many of us are so pissed off.
The problem with labour in the past is that they got stagnant because they were in power too long and just felt like they could do what they wanted. The same happened with the Conservatives previously. Since Thatcher got in power this is only our second swap of power. Thats pretty shit for a thirty plus year period.
I think regular change at the top is a good thing. It keeps the bastards on their toes.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Slip de Garcon on 09 May, 2011, 06:12:50 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 09 May, 2011, 04:50:48 PM
Last May Nick Clegg let the numbers decide rather than the political leanings of his support base.

The maths just didn't add up to Clegg being able to form a stable coalition with Labour. IIRC they would have had to coalesce (is that the word?) with the Green MP, and various Celtic Fringe nationalist parties that they may or may not be in opposition to in their home nations. And even then it was touch and go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 09 May, 2011, 11:48:27 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 09 May, 2011, 05:39:15 PM
Our county is fucked and cuts are necessary. At least it is across the board and not concentrated in a certain area, Probably why so many of us are so pissed off.

Britain really isn't fucked:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13325999 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13325999)

"The rich are getting richer, with the combined wealth of Britain's richest 1,000 up 18% in the past year to £396bn."

and the cuts are not evenly distributed:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/13/council-cuts-poorest-worst-hit (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/13/council-cuts-poorest-worst-hit)

"The government has been accused of targeting the most deprived towns and cities with cuts, forcing councils in Britain's poorest areas to rapidly expand existing plans to shed thousands of jobs and reduce frontline services.
Local authority leaders say changes to the way cash is distributed among councils will ensure Britain's poorest areas are worst affected."

http://www.u.tv/News/NI-lower-incomes-worst-hit-by-cuts/e7b05463-994f-4528-b348-1251244c1445 (http://www.u.tv/News/NI-lower-incomes-worst-hit-by-cuts/e7b05463-994f-4528-b348-1251244c1445)

"Northern Ireland will be one of the worst hit areas when Coalition Government changes to tax and benefits come into place.
According to new research commissioned by Law Centre (NI), people in the region will suffer more than any other parts of the UK - with the exception of those living in London.
Those on lower incomes will be hit the hardest."

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/south_yorkshire_to_be_one_of_worst_hit_by_cuts_1_2994545 (http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/south_yorkshire_to_be_one_of_worst_hit_by_cuts_1_2994545)

"PEOPLE in South Yorkshire will be among the worst hit by the Government's welfare funding cuts, according to a new report released today.
Forecasters at the Centre for Cities say the cuts will be most profoundly felt in areas like South Yorkshire, which have already been badly damaged by the recession and the decline in industry.
They say Barnsley will have received the fifth largest welfare cuts per person in the country by the next General Election in 2015."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 21 June, 2011, 06:24:59 PM
The Tories are opposing EU regulation to stop fuel from tar sands being used (yes I know it isn't a big surprise) and there is a petition on the go to see if we can change their minds:

www.avaaz.org/en/crude_politics/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 21 June, 2011, 07:55:27 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2011, 05:05:44 PM
They do say that a Liberal is just a Conservative that hasn't had a crime committed against them yet!


I've never heard that.  Nice one.

Must admit though that I'm a liberal type and i can't imagine anything could make me vote Tory.  Never say never I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2011, 02:35:53 AM




Quote from: Something Fishy on 21 June, 2011, 07:55:27 PM


Must admit though that I'm a liberal type and i can't imagine anything could make me vote Tory.  Never say never I guess.

I say never and i mean it in the same way that i say i will never drive up the M6 backwards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 22 June, 2011, 07:50:35 AM
well i never have yet. i've hated the scuzzers since growing up in a poor family under Maggie.  33% unemployment in my local town and barely a pot to piss in did not endear me to them.

Mind you, at least I didn't need a mortgage to educate my way out of it back then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2011, 11:18:50 AM
Both political parties in the UK are interchangeable and are all the same to me.

[I forgot about LibDems as they are inconsequential]

Blair MK2 David CaMoron even has his own war that is unpopular and open-ended and unlawful and unethical and highly dubious and a waste of cash just BLiar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PM
Having been brought up in a Labour stronghold (Hartlepool) I have nothing but absolute contempt for them. I could see at a young age that they prefer to keep the areas that they control in shit state and then blame the Conservatives. This means that all the Labour supporters in the town act like sheep and can't be bothered to see who is actually running the council and messing everything up for the residents. So long as Labour remain true hypocrites then my contempt for them will never end!

Just look at Lord Kinnock and his family HYPOCRITE'S
Blair HYPOCRITE
Brown HYPOCRITE
Prescott HYPOCRITE

I could go on but what would be the point.

We can all keep blaming the bankers for the state of the world but lets not forget the idiots who LIED to the banks to get a mortgage they couldn't afford, all the people who spend money that they don't have and never will have (and then just make themselves bankrupt and start again), the deluded fools that think getting on reality tv is a job, the feckless and the workshy, etc...

I just get on with my job, do it and then enjoy family life as soon as I get in the door from work. I don't want to be rich, so I don't play the stupid people tax game (that's the Lottery), all I want is to lead a happy family life!

I do feel sorry for people who are having a hard time in this country but only those in true poverty (which the government should get off their arses and help) and not those in relative poverty. That's when these so called poor all seem to have Sky tv, PS3's, latest mobile phones, take aways every night, smoke, drink, etc... Before you all say but John not everyone is like that, I refer you to both of the scum families that made our life hell for two years when they rented the house next door (sorry when my taxes helped pay the rent for next door). Those are the people I'm on about!

I also see that women are complaining that they have to wait till the same age as men now till they get their pension. Well seeing as we kept being told that women live longer it seems only fair. Or do these people only want to be equal when it suits them. I know it's a bit unfair but when I went to school I was told I would get mine at 65 and that's changed, such is life.

If people want to change things why don't they run for the council or become an MP.

Let's just keep blaming the bankers only and that will hide all the other goings on.

I hope you all heard the tax payers alliance talking about the waste that your local councils like to encourge (via the freedom of information act), on the radio last night, very interesting listening. It seems that once people get into the public sector they think it has a bottomless pit of gold to spend. These are the so called nice people and not just the horrible bankers people should be complaining about. The government must be laughing as there is so much (and quite rightly so) hate hurled towards the bankers as it let's the rest of them keep fleecing the public.

There, I feel better now.

As for Drugs.................
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 22 June, 2011, 05:45:18 PM
Very well put CF (for a monkey hanger  :P*), couldn't agree more.


(*and of course I know the legend about the monkey's false, people from Hartlepool don't hang monkeys, they elect them to high office ;))
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 22 June, 2011, 07:53:09 PM
QuoteI do feel sorry for people who are having a hard time in this country but only those in true poverty (which the government should get off their arses and help) and not those in relative poverty. That's when these so called poor all seem to have Sky tv, PS3's, latest mobile phones, take aways every night, smoke, drink, etc... Before you all say but John not everyone is like that, I refer you to both of the scum families that made our life hell for two years when they rented the house next door (sorry when my taxes helped pay the rent for next door). Those are the people I'm on about!

I also see that women are complaining that they have to wait till the same age as men now till they get their pension. Well seeing as we kept being told that women live longer it seems only fair. Or do these people only want to be equal when it suits them. I know it's a bit unfair but when I went to school I was told I would get mine at 65 and that's changed, such is life.

Bingo to all what you have just posted Just like to highlight these two paragraphs.

The first. I see this day in day out during installs. Rather have the non essentials than keep little Jack and Jenny happy and comfortable, they are arguing over whether to spend the last £10 on a wrap or food for the kids (I actually hear this on a semi regular basis which almost breaks my heart).

The second. Some women seem to want it all, Equal rights and a man to be chivalrous, sorry luv chivalry died with feminism.



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 22 June, 2011, 08:33:50 PM
Have to agree with CF for sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 June, 2011, 08:40:26 PM
I think a posse is forming...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2011, 11:09:09 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PM


Just look at Lord Kinnock and his family HYPOCRITE'S
Blair HYPOCRITE
Brown HYPOCRITE
Prescott HYPOCRITE



Maggot traitor trough feeding parasites and sellouts and theives and  whores.

Why did you have to mention the Kinnocks ??

Fucking losers who cant even stand up straight without assistance from the taxpayer.Kinnock is a useless buffoon and always will be and an embarressment to the Welsh who was so useless he couldnt even win an election against the unpopular Thatcher so the Kinnocks were packed off to the EU where they could ride the EU gravy train and have their snouts in the trough to the tune of 8 million quid a year.
Fake Lord Kinnock.They claimed to despise heriditary peers and titles so they kick them out and claim the titles.Thats a typical example of their kind of hypocrisy but they dont recognise it as they are mentally defective.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
Politics is just theatre, it means nothing and changes nothing. Anyone who thinks they're voting for anything more than red or blue is just deluded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 01:01:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PM
I hope you all heard the tax payers alliance talking about the waste that your local councils like to encourge (via the freedom of information act), on the radio last night, very interesting listening.   

If we're throwing around accusations of hypocrisy, then look no further than this self-serving shower of shites. The TPA is funded by millionaire Tory donors and big business owners, the majority of which have expensive tax lawyers and live overseas to avoid paying British tax. If these greedy cunts actually paid their fair share of tax on their vast earnings, there would be a lot more money in the public pot, so I object to them telling councils thay have to close libraries and sell off swimming pools.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 01:06:29 PM
No amount of tax paid by billionaires would make the slightest difference to the government's debt under the current system. Taxing the rich to pay for the poor sounds good, but it just doesn't work like that at the moment, unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 01:19:39 PM
I don't just mean income tax on their personal earnings, which is admittedly a drop in the ocean, whatever the arguments about fairness; I'm talking about multi-billion pound businesses like Tesco which shift their dealings through layers of shell companies and overseas subsidiaries to avoid paying hundreds of millions in tax.

Taxation is any governemnt's main source of income so when the rich, either as indivduals or corporations, dopn't pay their fair share, the burden falls on the lower and middle-income taxpayers who don't have that option.

We're all in it together? Bollox
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 01:57:28 PM
The government's main source of income is not tax, it's borrowing.

Governments print bonds, which are like IOUs. (A bond worth x amount is printed and sold to investors with the promise that the same bond will be worth x+y% when the investor comes to collect from the government. It's like me saying here's an IOU for a fiver but I'll give you six quid for it when you come to cash it in.) The interest therefore mounts up and can never be repaid under the current system. Every penny of tax is swallowed up in trying to clear an unclearable debt. Roads, hospitals, police et al are paid for out of fresh borrowing.

Whilst I agree that corporations should pay fair amounts of tax, these corporations know what the score is and that their taxes (like everyone else's) would essentially be wasted on trying to pay off this ever growing and useless interest-incurred debt. I don't care about corporations or billionaires dodging taxes under the current system - if I could do the same, I would.

Return the creation and control of the money supply to the people (the government) and the national debt would be easily cleared and then it would be productive for corporations and the rich to pay a fair rate of tax. Socializing the money supply means that the government would be printing its own money instead of borrowing money created by banks at interest. After all, if a government can print a billion pounds worth of bonds against which it's going to make a loss then it can print a billion pounds worth of pounds at virtually no cost to the tax payer whatsoever.

Don't get bogged down in the rich v poor taxation argument, it's just one more way of keeping different sections of society at one another's throats - distracting us from the true problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 02:30:57 PM
okay, fair point on government bonds and banks etc - but it still sticks in my craw to have a bunch of millionaire tax dodgers calling themselves Taxpayers and lecturing poorer people about unjustified spending!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 06:19:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 02:30:57 PM
okay, fair point on government bonds and banks etc - but it still sticks in my craw to have a bunch of millionaire tax dodgers calling themselves Taxpayers and lecturing poorer people about unjustified spending!

The Taxdodgers Alliance

I reckon the whole bloody lot of them should be bloody strung up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 06:38:41 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 06:19:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 02:30:57 PM
okay, fair point on government bonds and banks etc - but it still sticks in my craw to have a bunch of millionaire tax dodgers calling themselves Taxpayers and lecturing poorer people about unjustified spending!

The Taxdodgers Alliance

I reckon the whole bloody lot of them should be bloody strung up.

Who's "them"? Who decides who's to be hanged and who isn't? Murder is not the answer and it's that kind of comment that prevents people from seeing the real solutions to our problems.

If the system encourages some people to dodge taxes and also allows them to do so then it's the system that must die, not the human beings who take advantage of it. Rich or poor, high or low, we are all trapped in this hideous system together. Once the system is changed, then we can start having investigations and imprisoning those who deserve it (like the war criminals Blair, Brown and Cameron or the financial terrorists like Sir Mervyn Allister King, George Osborne  and most of the Rothschilds). The more we see this as an us and them problem, the more we fall into the old patterns that just drive us apart instead of uniting us in common cause.

A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 23 June, 2011, 06:59:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PMIt seems that once people get into the public sector they think it has a bottomless pit of gold to spend.[/color]

No.

That's the general public you're thinking of.

The public sector contains the people who are obliged to make savings year in, year out (or, ironically, face their budgets being cut) while being expected to simultaneously expand and improve services.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 June, 2011, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 23 June, 2011, 06:59:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PMIt seems that once people get into the public sector they think it has a bottomless pit of gold to spend.[/color]

No.

That's the general public you're thinking of.

The public sector contains the people who are obliged to make savings year in, year out (or, ironically, face their budgets being cut) while being expected to simultaneously expand and improve services.


Regards

Robin

Indeed. We have been saddled with a council tax freeze, been told to make saving and expand the service we provide- all at the same time. There has been a pay freeze for the past few years and one promised for the next five. That means there will be people who will not see a pay increase for EIGHT years, so forgive me if I disagree, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 07:06:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 06:38:41 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 06:19:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 02:30:57 PM
okay, fair point on government bonds and banks etc - but it still sticks in my craw to have a bunch of millionaire tax dodgers calling themselves Taxpayers and lecturing poorer people about unjustified spending!

The Taxdodgers Alliance

I reckon the whole bloody lot of them should be bloody strung up.

Who's "them"? Who decides who's to be hanged and who isn't? Murder is not the answer and it's that kind of comment that prevents people from seeing the real solutions to our problems.

If the system encourages some people to dodge taxes and also allows them to do so then it's the system that must die, not the human beings who take advantage of it. Rich or poor, high or low, we are all trapped in this hideous system together. Once the system is changed, then we can start having investigations and imprisoning those who deserve it (like the war criminals Blair, Brown and Cameron or the financial terrorists like Sir Mervyn Allister King, George Osborne  and most of the Rothschilds). The more we see this as an us and them problem, the more we fall into the old patterns that just drive us apart instead of uniting us in common cause.

A decent life for everyone; no exceptions, no compromises.

It was meant as humor as in what a taxi driver might say about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2011, 07:09:47 PM
Oh if only that were true Robin. My mother-in-law was a Senior Staff Nurse and my wife works up at the Hospital now in the drug rehab part of it and I was in the forces and the stories of waste we could all talk about.

Obviously all these stories released under the freedom of information act are just lies and there is no waste what so ever in the public sector.

I still wait for the day that a left leaning person might admit to there being waste and the ability to save money in the public sector but I fear that day will never come.

Before you say it, there is waste in the private sector and you wouldn't believe the shit I cause at work talking about what goes on there but no-one wants to know!


P.S. I was the shop steward at my last place and believe me I can kick up a pile of shit if needs be. Can you believe it, me a right leaning person being the shop steward. That's because I believe in right over wrong above all else!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 07:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 06:38:41 PM
If the system encourages some people to dodge taxes and also allows them to do so then it's the system that must die, not the human beings who take advantage of it. Rich or poor, high or low, we are all trapped in this hideous system together.

No, I'm not having that. It's about CHOICE (a word that both this and the last governemnet abuse on a daily basis - but that's another argument). A rich man can choose to pay full taxes or move his assets offshore. A low paid worker doesn't have that choice. To say it's not their fault beacuse the system encourages them to dodge tax is like saying it's not the fault of poor people if they turn into muggers, everyone has a personal choice whether to behave decently or like a selfish cnut.

And CF, I'm a left-leaning person and of course there is waste in the public (and private) sector. However waste is not removed by slashing pensions or closing libraries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2011, 07:19:48 PM
Well done DDD, I can now relax as my mission here is done  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 07:41:25 PM
Someone who is on PAYE cannot dodge paying income tax and its those on PAYE who are the largest net contributor of income tax.

Halliburton who supply the US military amongst other things moved their headquarters offshore to avoid taxation and since the US military are funded by taxpayers then Halliburton are funded by taxpayers and Halliburton make billions and dont pay taxes.Thats just one example of the corporate sector who dont pay taxes but the same applies to the majority of them.

Does the Bank Of England pay taxes ?

No.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 07:46:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2011, 07:19:48 PM
Well done DDD, I can now relax as my mission here is done  :D

Oh no, I've given succour to a fascist running dog of the military industrial complex.

I hang my head in shame!   :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2011, 07:52:35 PM
Tharg where is this bloody like button  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 23 June, 2011, 08:11:10 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2011, 11:09:09 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PM


Just look at Lord Kinnock and his family HYPOCRITE'S
Blair HYPOCRITE
Brown HYPOCRITE
Prescott HYPOCRITE



Maggot traitor trough feeding parasites and sellouts and theives and  whores.

Why did you have to mention the Kinnocks ??

Fucking losers who cant even stand up straight without assistance from the taxpayer.Kinnock is a useless buffoon and always will be and an embarressment to the Welsh who was so useless he couldnt even win an election against the unpopular Thatcher so the Kinnocks were packed off to the EU where they could ride the EU gravy train and have their snouts in the trough to the tune of 8 million quid a year.
Fake Lord Kinnock.They claimed to despise heriditary peers and titles so they kick them out and claim the titles.Thats a typical example of their kind of hypocrisy but they dont recognise it as they are mentally defective.

Peter, you've peaked.  You can retire on that post as far as I'm concerned.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 07:06:15 PM
It was meant as humour as in what a taxi driver might say about it.

I thought it must be something like that as you have a much deeper understanding of things like the geopolitical agenda and Frankfurt School subversion tactics than most people. I did have to respond to the "hang them" comment, though - just as I'd have responded to a taxi driver.

Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2011, 07:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 06:38:41 PM
If the system encourages some people to dodge taxes and also allows them to do so then it's the system that must die, not the human beings who take advantage of it. Rich or poor, high or low, we are all trapped in this hideous system together.

No, I'm not having that. It's about CHOICE (a word that both this and the last governemnet abuse on a daily basis - but that's another argument). A rich man can choose to pay full taxes or move his assets offshore. A low paid worker doesn't have that choice. To say it's not their fault beacuse the system encourages them to dodge tax is like saying it's not the fault of poor people if they turn into muggers, everyone has a personal choice whether to behave decently or like a selfish cnut.

You're absolutely right that it's about choice, but that doesn't mitigate the role of a system that pushes people into making selfish choices.

For example, let's imagine that there is a 50% inheritance tax in whatever country. A struggling young family's parent dies, leaving them a modest estate of, say, £200,000. The government immediately wants half of this in taxes. Now, let's say that before the parent dies the family is advised by a lawyer on a perfectly legal way to avoid inheritance taxes altogether - the parent sells the entire estate to the child for £1 before death sets in. It's all perfectly legal and above board but not many people know about this "loophole" because it is used mainly by substantial landowners (lords, barons, billionaires etc.) and costs the government money. Is it wrong for the ordinary family to make such a deal or should they "do the right thing" and pay the tax?

This is the kind of thing I mean when I say the system should die, not the people trapped in it. Of course, anyone who raids the company pension fund should be prosecuted. In my opinion, the criteria for deciding on which people should be punished for taking advantage of the system and which people should not is simple: Was harm, loss or damage caused to others? In the case of loopholing your way out of inheritance tax I'd say no punishment, but in the case of the pension raider I'd say otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 23 June, 2011, 09:22:14 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2011, 07:09:47 PM
Oh if only that were true Robin. My mother-in-law was a Senior Staff Nurse and my wife works up at the Hospital now in the drug rehab part of it and I was in the forces and the stories of waste we could all talk about.

Obviously all these stories released under the freedom of information act are just lies and there is no waste what so ever in the public sector.

I still wait for the day that a left leaning person might admit to there being waste and the ability to save money in the public sector but I fear that day will never come.

Perhaps you'd like to explain to me then how our Trust was able to save the required 30 million pounds last year and deal with an increase in work if it's so wasteful. Or how my mother saved £100,000 by renogotiating contracts with medical suppliers. Or how about the 90+ hours of unpaid time my girlfriend is currently owed but never likely to see (and keep in mind she doesn't record anything under 30 minutes). We can all play the anecdote game, but the proof is in the reality of the incredible range and depth of effective public services that are provided 24 hours a day, seven days a week across the whole of this country.

I don't doubt you can find examples of waste and bad practice in the public sector, but prove to me that it's worse than in the private sector. Whether you accept it or not, the public sector is required to make savings every year, while at the same time implementing a constant stream of changes to services. And you know what, it does it pretty well given the demands and expectations that are placed on it.

As for Freedom of Information requests, did you actually read the information provided and put it into an appropriate context, or did you just listen to a summary provided by an organisation with a hostile political agenda? Hell, you could make an FoI and discover that my department goes through an awful lot of boxes of tissues every week. No doubt the Taxpayers Alliance would ask why the British Taxpayer should have to pay for people to blow their noses, gleefully ignoring the fact we use tissues to clean forceps and draw across waterbaths so that we don't get cross-contamination between different patients' specimens.

Regards

Robin


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 09:50:53 PM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 23 June, 2011, 08:11:10 PM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 22 June, 2011, 11:09:09 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2011, 05:01:26 PM


Just look at Lord Kinnock and his family HYPOCRITE'S
Blair HYPOCRITE
Brown HYPOCRITE
Prescott HYPOCRITE



Maggot traitor trough feeding parasites and sellouts and theives and  whores.

Why did you have to mention the Kinnocks ??

Fucking losers who cant even stand up straight without assistance from the taxpayer.Kinnock is a useless buffoon and always will be and an embarressment to the Welsh who was so useless he couldnt even win an election against the unpopular Thatcher so the Kinnocks were packed off to the EU where they could ride the EU gravy train and have their snouts in the trough to the tune of 8 million quid a year.
Fake Lord Kinnock.They claimed to despise heriditary peers and titles so they kick them out and claim the titles.Thats a typical example of their kind of hypocrisy but they dont recognise it as they are mentally defective.

Peter, you've peaked.  You can retire on that post as far as I'm concerned.

:lol:

:o

I never expected that at all but thanks all the same and i am pleased that you found it funny.I have been making an effort not to rant in these threads anymore and to tone down the language as a rule but not when i typed that .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 23 June, 2011, 10:10:01 PM
I would love to put something in about monies which someone close to me manages which is encouraged to stretch by the local council but wont (I am sure even this site is monitored). At least all money goes to the right places and is distributed wisely.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 23 June, 2011, 10:38:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2011, 08:30:07 PM



You're absolutely right that it's about choice, but that doesn't mitigate the role of a system that pushes people into making selfish choices.

For example, let's imagine that there is a 50% inheritance tax in whatever country. A struggling young family's parent dies, leaving them a modest estate of, say, £200,000. The government immediately wants half of this in taxes. Now, let's say that before the parent dies the family is advised by a lawyer on a perfectly legal way to avoid inheritance taxes altogether - the parent sells the entire estate to the child for £1 before death sets in. It's all perfectly legal and above board but not many people know about this "loophole" because it is used mainly by substantial landowners (lords, barons, billionaires etc.) and costs the government money. Is it wrong for the ordinary family to make such a deal or should they "do the right thing" and pay the tax?



I dont think anyone should pay inheritence tax as i think its immoral and unfair and excessive as anyone who dies who has presumably worked and paid taxes already not to mention all the other indirect taxes should not pay tax on their estate particularly these days when the older generation who are now retired are getting virtually no returns on their cash that is in the bank resulting in them eating into their savings if they have any.My family will not be paying any inheritance taxes thats for sure and when my father was working he was paying the top rate of tax back then when cash had value unlike now so really F inheritance tax.There are plenty who always did the right thing all their lives only to realise later that the system is runned by parasites and criminals.They would take everything off you if they had their way.

Paying it is giving the parasites who own the banking system more cash on top of their reputed 750 trillion in cash and assets so again F that.Its not selfish as its all about survival especially in this day and age.

If anyone disagrees then there really isnt anything i can do to change that.

Going back to the bankers etc they have stolen trillions off taxpayers and unless they go down which they should then future generations will be paying for their criminality and greed and fraud as they have stolen their futures in more ways than one so everything has changed now and unless this problem is addressed then there is every justification for not paying taxes if at all possible.Look at the tax bill f.or overseas invasions on top of that and i copuld continue but i wont.

Personally i dont object to direct or indirect taxes or to paying into a socialised welfare/health system but i strongly object to the present criminal system and always will do unless it ends.


Paying taxes pays for bombing Libyans but i realise that not paying taxes is something that works to the detriment of others so its a difficult situation to reconcile in  some ways but presently the taxpayer is used and abused and exploited to the max especially since we have ZERO say in wethyer we want our taxes spent on bombing Libyans and bailing out too big to fails or being given to the EU to spend on what they like.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 05 July, 2011, 06:48:48 PM
Petitions are going up to stop Murdoch being given all of BSkyB:

www.avaaz.org/en/murdoch_messages_2/?cl=1144931266&v=9510
www.38degrees.org.uk/page/m/74c0580a/2d463aae/597b9f02/4674cc03/959045652/VEsH/

Might be useful:

http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 July, 2011, 07:34:47 PM
since signing up to one of these, I get regular emails from David Babbs at 38 degrees. I had to laugh today because now that I'm using Thunderbird to access my emails, they are always preceded by a banner that says THIS E-MAIL MAY BE A SCAM.  :lol:

But we don't need to have any concerns about Rupe taking over - they've imposed "safeguards" to ensure impartiality. Phew, I was worried for a moment there!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 July, 2011, 07:57:15 PM
Safeguards = secrecy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 05 July, 2011, 08:36:34 PM
It's a done deal and it's a bloody disgrace.  More sleazy bastard Tories.  Shocking to think Cameron intervened to stop Wade being fired.

Personal friends and he has got himself involved in this disgusting hacking situation.

Having got Murdochs help to get power Cam has no choice but to allow it really I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 July, 2011, 09:16:05 PM
I wonder if lots of other newspapers are looking on with a hint of dread. i suspect many may have been "at it". As for M the Tories will crawl to this free market cheerleader,(who I believe sold his nationality for tax reasons)  and then he'll have cart blanche to launch an attack on his real target for destruction -the BBC.

How dare  a public broadcaster exist denying monies rightfully belonging to News International shareholders? Our democracy is a rich mans joke.

Sign that petition!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 July, 2011, 09:23:56 PM
So, Cameron intervened to stop Wade being fired, did he?  Where'd you get that from, Fishy?  Not been hacking his 'phone have you?!!  Perhaps we should get the other lot back in, 'cos they were soooooo straight.  How many Labour MPs have been locked up for corruption, I'm begining to lose count!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 July, 2011, 09:42:24 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 05 July, 2011, 09:16:05 PM
I wonder if lots of other newspapers are looking on with a hint of dread. i suspect many may have been "at it".

It has been suggested that those messages were deleted to prevent rival publishers from getting them
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 05 July, 2011, 10:07:33 PM
No surprise as its business as usual in the house of non-representative representatives and sellouts.

Murdoch is a member of the Council Of Foreign Relations as their publisher of propaganda.The picture of Murdoch in the link above looks like Davros.The problem with Murdoch is that he isnt dead.

Fascism - The merger of politics and corporations.Tell me i am wrong.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 05 July, 2011, 10:25:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 July, 2011, 09:23:56 PMHow many Labour MPs have been locked up for corruption, I'm begining to lose count!!

About three.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 07 July, 2011, 09:58:40 AM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2011, 06:11:34 PM
News of the World. Good bye, good riddance, fuck off, rot in hell.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 07 July, 2011, 06:39:26 PM
And hello, soon-to-be Sunday edition of the super soaraway Sun.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 July, 2011, 06:51:48 PM
None of the guilty to be punished; opportunity to make some job cuts among journalistic and production staff at News International*.



* mind you, I'd feel quite guilty, not to mention dirty, about working for News International anyway
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 July, 2011, 06:52:31 PM
The Sunday Sun, eh!?  Yep, that's got a nice ring to it, that could well be a goer!!  I'm off down the road to place an advance order in anticipation.  It'll sit very nicely alongside my Sunday Times!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2011, 06:53:27 PM
"Mr Murdoch said proceeds from the last edition would go to good causes."

"No advertisements will run in this weekend's paper - instead any advertising space will be donated to charities and good causes."

""While we may never be able to make up for distress that has been caused, the right thing to do is for every penny of the circulation revenue we receive this weekend to go to organisations that improve life in Britain and are devoted to treating others with dignity.""

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_AFLGquyJJds/SaTLvZrfIiI/AAAAAAAAAAc/e6p9HT3yh6E/s320/insincere.jpg)

More like a desperate attempt to make the Murdochs look like human beings instead of greedy hatemongers whose idea of a good time is boiling live kittens in snake venom whilst waiting for democracy to collapse.

Quotations taken from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14070733 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14070733)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 07 July, 2011, 07:04:47 PM
New International is going downhill in terms of revenue of newspaper sales[filthy rags like the Sun and the NOW etc] and the online subscription service has been a disaster as there are not enough subscribers for it.

That should please all of you.


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2011, 06:53:27 PM
"Mr Murdoch said proceeds from the last edition would go to good causes."

"No advertisements will run in this weekend's paper - instead any advertising space will be donated to charities and good causes."

""While we may never be able to make up for distress that has been caused, the right thing to do is for every penny of the circulation revenue we receive this weekend to go to organisations that improve life in Britain and are devoted to treating others with dignity.""

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_AFLGquyJJds/SaTLvZrfIiI/AAAAAAAAAAc/e6p9HT3yh6E/s320/insincere.jpg)

More like a desperate attempt to make the Murdochs look like human beings instead of greedy hatemongers whose idea of a good time is boiling live kittens in snake venom whilst waiting for democracy to collapse.

Quotations taken from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14070733 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14070733)

A pathetic PR attempt to sweeten the public which involves giving to charity because they were forced to do so.I havent been following this at all so i cant comment on anything else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 07 July, 2011, 07:06:16 PM
A cynical move in which none of those actually responsible are held responsible only those who had little to do with it must suffer.

Just like the banking crisis.

I'm sure Murdoch's bid for BSKY B will eventually get through despite the furore. Rebecca Brooks knows where the bodies are buried and dear Rupert would never let her blab or else somebody might be going to jail.

It's also the act of a power mad loon. To show despite it all he's still in charge and is really calling the shots and everyone else can go hang. He'll tough it out because that's what he's done all his selfish rotten life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 July, 2011, 07:15:33 PM
Let's hope everyone get's rid of their SKY tv subscriptions!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 07 July, 2011, 07:17:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2011, 06:53:27 PM
"Mr Murdoch said proceeds from the last edition would go to good causes."

"No advertisements will run in this weekend's paper - instead any advertising space will be donated to charities and good causes."

""While we may never be able to make up for distress that has been caused, the right thing to do is for every penny of the circulation revenue we receive this weekend to go to organisations that improve life in Britain and are devoted to treating others with dignity.""

I'd much rather see prison sentences for media executives than a lot of empty gesture public relations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 July, 2011, 07:25:13 PM
or everyone boycotting all of Murdoch's papers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 07 July, 2011, 07:27:31 PM
A cynical attempt to cut lose a toxic brand without holding the guilty to account, keeping it out of the limelight long enough for them to snag BskyB before bringing it back as the Sunday Sun?

This not only doesn't change my opinion of News Corp/News International, I think it might actually lower it further. I'm not going to be satisfied with anything less than Murdoch's British empire being broken up and sold off.

Don't forget:

Quote from: Emperor on 05 July, 2011, 06:48:48 PM
Petitions are going up to stop Murdoch being given all of BSkyB:

www.avaaz.org/en/murdoch_messages_2/?cl=1144931266&v=9510
www.38degrees.org.uk/page/m/74c0580a/2d463aae/597b9f02/4674cc03/959045652/VEsH/

Might be useful:

http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/

Earlier 38 Degress also sent out this link so you can contact your MP about it:

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/Murdoch-MP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 07 July, 2011, 09:10:29 PM
Dimbleby's on it tonight, with flag spokesperson at the helm None other than the highly credible Hugh Grant!

But like Dimblez sayz; its not going to stop the questions. I like how the cops started a tit for tat leaking of materials disreputable war at the beginning of the enchilada. They are not going down alone. And, the "Cameron Connection" is an ongoing concern.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Christov on 07 July, 2011, 09:14:53 PM
Absolutely nothing will come of this. They'll just be far better at covering it up next time.

EDIT: Props to The Guardian for actually killing another paper though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 07 July, 2011, 09:31:38 PM
Courtesy of friends off of facebook.  There's a few Andy Curtis fans on here too, I seem to remember.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/01/rupert_murdoch_-_a_portrait_of.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 July, 2011, 09:36:03 PM
Quote from: Krombasher on 07 July, 2011, 09:31:38 PM
Courtesy of friends off of facebook.  There's a few Adam Curtis fans on here too, I seem to remember.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/01/rupert_murdoch_-_a_portrait_of.html


Fixed that for ya.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 07 July, 2011, 09:38:20 PM
SPLURG! Its right there in my tab too!   :-[  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 July, 2011, 11:41:51 PM
She's with him for his looks & personality of course...


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Rupert_Murdoch_Wendi_Murdoch_2011_Shankbone.JPG/783px-Rupert_Murdoch_Wendi_Murdoch_2011_Shankbone.JPG)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 July, 2011, 11:56:57 PM
To paraphrase Mrs. Merton; What first attracted her to the rich and powerful, multi-billionaire, Rupert Murdoch?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Peter Wolf on 08 July, 2011, 12:01:09 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 07 July, 2011, 11:56:57 PM
To paraphrase Mrs. Merton; What first attracted her to the rich and powerful, multi-billionaire, Rupert Murdoch?

She is blind and has necrophilliac tendencies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 July, 2011, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Peter Wolf on 08 July, 2011, 12:01:09 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 07 July, 2011, 11:56:57 PM
To paraphrase Mrs. Merton; What first attracted her to the rich and powerful, multi-billionaire, Rupert Murdoch?

She is blind and has necrophilliac tendencies.

HA!  Whatever the answer, I'm sure a shrewd business mogul such as Murdoch is fully aware that a pretty little thing like that is not with him for his looks or personality.  I hope that eats away at him.

I bet there's wee Jimeny Cricket on his shoulder, and the wee  anthropomorphic grasshopper can't even open its wee anthropomorphic mouth because of all the hyper-injuctions Murdoch has slapped on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 July, 2011, 06:59:18 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 08 July, 2011, 12:26:04 AM
I'm sure a shrewd business mogul such as Murdoch is fully aware that a pretty little thing like that is not with him for his looks or personality.

Surely being obscenely rich is his personality?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 14 July, 2011, 12:50:04 AM
Just a reminder that Murdoch is still going and is still a threat to democracy, now is the time to keep pushing and get his media empire here broken up:

www.avaaz.org/en/stop_the_murdoch_mafia_2/
www.38degrees.org.uk/page/signup/murdoch-what-should-we-do-next
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 July, 2011, 01:00:04 AM
No BSKYB though...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 July, 2011, 07:26:09 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 14 July, 2011, 01:00:04 AM
No BSKYB though...

I fail to see the threat...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 01:17:03 PM
You fail to see the threat of a media baron whom politicians up until now didn't want to speak against through fear of what he'd say about them in the third of Britain's media he owns? Really? You're fine with someone having that much influence over elected MPs? Really?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 04:22:43 PM
Sir John Vickers (Chair of the ICB) has been instructed by the government to come up with proposals to ensure the future stability of the banking system. You can use this tool to tell him your thoughts on banking reform:

http://action.compassonline.org.uk/page/speakout/icblobby?js=false (http://action.compassonline.org.uk/page/speakout/icblobby?js=false)

The people of the world can no longer continue groaning under the unjustifiable financial demands of a very few insanely greedy people. It's time to start fighting back. The above doesn't address the core issue of private versus social money, but it's a start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 July, 2011, 04:26:04 PM
But some politicians have been speaking out against him for years, (just not the ones you're thinking of), along with some journalists.  And as for him being a great danger to our democracy, he's almost as dangerous as a muzzled and controlled press, which is what we're going to get after all this nonsense if we're not careful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 05:12:31 PM
The more people who own newspapers/TV stations/Radio stations etc., the freer the press. The fewer owners, the less balanced the overall content. Democracy needs divers voices to be healthy, not just a few powerful moguls telling us what they think is right or wrong.

People like Murdoch are emblematic of the wider problems of the world. Too much power and wealth is being consolidated into the hands of too few people, stifling social diversity and social progress. We risk becoming peasants and serfs in a neo-feudalistic society ruled not by kings or presidents or emperors but by CEOs, bankers and accountants.

People like Murdoch need to be brought down to a manageable level. That is, beneath common law and not above it. Like the rest of us. Had it not been for this 'phone hacking scandal I'm fairly sure that his bid for BSkyB would have gone through whether there'd been petitions against it or not. It just became impossible for the government to not condemn these actions. So, it's only an accidental kind of a victory won by public opinion and circumstance. Still, a win is a win.

These are the kinds of things that give me hope for the future. No matter how corrupt or stupid members of parliament are, no matter how strenuously they push to impose their own agendas or the agendas of their backers - we can still push back. And we can push hard if we have to. It is we who hold the true power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 July, 2011, 05:57:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 01:17:03 PM
You fail to see the threat of a media baron whom politicians up until now didn't want to speak against through fear of what he'd say about them in the third of Britain's media he owns? Really? You're fine with someone having that much influence over elected MPs? Really?

No- I fail to see having no Sky TV as being in anyway a bad thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 14 July, 2011, 06:01:47 PM
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 06:05:28 PM
Heh, in that case we are in agreement. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 July, 2011, 06:25:30 PM
Don't forget to boycott all films from Fox  ;)

the studio is a subsidiary of News Corporation
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 July, 2011, 06:42:21 PM



A good thing Dredd is no longer under FOX Searchlight or you wouldn't be so right-on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 14 July, 2011, 08:39:54 PM
Less Sky more installations for me.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 July, 2011, 09:14:00 PM
More Catholic Church cover-up scumbaggery in Ireland. When are we ever going to learn? Bosses working hard to cover up sexual crimes = criminal organisation. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 July, 2011, 09:49:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2011, 05:12:31 PM
The more people who own newspapers/TV stations/Radio stations etc., the freer the press. The fewer owners, the less balanced the overall content. Democracy needs divers voices to be healthy, not just a few powerful moguls telling us what they think is right or wrong.


The Simpsons did a whole episode about that. I prefer the one about the monorail though
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 July, 2011, 11:06:34 PM
This Hacking story just keeps getting better and better
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2011, 11:19:16 AM
Scuse me for going off on my own tasngent again, but the Irish Government is now in a state of opposition to the Vatican, threatening it to stay out of our affairs!  :o If you grew up in the 80s in Ireland like me, this would have been absolutely unthinkable.
For my own part, I'm saying GET THE FUCK IN! I've been waiting for all my adult life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 July, 2011, 11:29:31 AM
Too little far too late, JBC.  I'd like to see the state tell the church (all churches, actually) that they have to fund their own abuse compensation in its entirety, and screw this 50% bullshit that they deny agreeing to. 

The argument that this would throw retired religious out on the street and close schools elicits a 'so drokking what' response from me - let the religious petition the Vatican for some of its billions, or live on state handouts like everyone else whose employers turned out to be corrupt incompetent bastards, and let the state take over the much-vaunted school property holdings. 

If those undertakings end up costing more than the compensation itself, well then at least we'll have rooted out those vipers once and for all.  Here endeth the lesson.

EDIT:  And now I feel like a vindictive shite.  I've known plenty of decent priests and the odd decent nun, and I've nothing against them.  It's the idea that their organisation is entitled to special treatment, in effect to be 'bailed out' like the other shower of crooks, that gets my goat.  Companies go the wall through no wrong-doing and get fuck all help, a shower of entrail-readers get caught covering up the widepsread fucking of children and get taxpayers money shovelled at them...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 18 July, 2011, 11:43:42 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2011, 11:19:16 AM
Scuse me for going off on my own tasngent again, but the Irish Government is now in a state of opposition to the Vatican, threatening it to stay out of our affairs!  :o If you grew up in the 80s in Ireland like me, this would have been absolutely unthinkable.
For my own part, I'm saying GET THE FUCK IN! I've been waiting for all my adult life.


When it's the likes of Alan Shatter saying all this...doesn't give one confidence and they really aren't going far enough with it. We'll need to see a few bishops in the stripey hole before it gets real.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2011, 05:24:43 PM
Fair point, lads. But it's a huge step forward from the last government (I spit on its grave) and its long-standing tradition of arse-licking and turning a blind eye.

I agree with everything you say, TB, but at least this government (imperfect as it is) has finally seen the RCC for what it is - a megalomaniacal, meddling dictatorship, which despite its many good members is rotten to the core.

And yep, you're right there too, Joe.  Most other superiors who actively conspire to cover up serious crimes within their organisations are treated as criminals too. Bishops on the other hand are given the option of retiring. Throw the fuckers in jail where they can't do any more harm, is the obvious solution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2011, 06:42:32 PM
Speaking of the RCC, isn't it strange that three independent states cause so much trouble in the world? Vatican City, the City of London and Washington DC. One there for the Coincidence Theorists!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 18 July, 2011, 08:14:35 PM
Apart from suggesting the idea of a 'conspiracy of city-states' -a rather vague notion- them being city-sates doesn't really mean they are separate or any way more special/different/powerful than untouchable trans-national bodies involved in corruption.

Besides, condemning/criticising the RCC in Ireland is only half the story, it's equally the fault of multiple government's in the Republic since the inception of the state and only have themselves to blame. The bigger enemy in 20th century Ireland was the church in-truck with successive governments. While they abused innocents, dumb militants on all sides preferred to blow them up, the real enemies of the people were always closer and we need to cut the ties forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2011, 08:19:12 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 18 July, 2011, 08:14:35 PM
...the church in-truck with successive governments. While they abused innocents, dumb militants on all sides preferred to blow them up, the real enemies of the people were always closer and we need to cut the ties forever.

The same could be said of the banks (CoL) and the military industrial complex (WDC), from a certain point of view. Bwa ha ha haa.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 18 July, 2011, 08:40:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2011, 08:19:12 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 18 July, 2011, 08:14:35 PM
...the church in-truck with successive governments. While they abused innocents, dumb militants on all sides preferred to blow them up, the real enemies of the people were always closer and we need to cut the ties forever.

The same could be said of the banks (CoL) and the military industrial complex (WDC), from a certain point of view. Bwa ha ha haa.


but that could be said of any large business/structure so it's nothing special, corruption/collusion happens in all bureaucracies. Just cos they're old/mystical/ideological/mythical don't mean they're any worse/better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 July, 2011, 09:14:07 PM
Got to hand it to Enda Kenny (our head man in Ireland) - his anti-Vatican speech yesterday was absolutely outstanding, highlighting just how much we've let snivelling little lick-arses of politicians allow bishops to walk all over us in the past.  I've never voted for him, but I have a lot more respect for him now and truly believe his speech will be in the history books. i just hope he delivers on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 July, 2011, 09:19:33 PM
...like when he said he wouldn't close the A & E at Roscommon hospital...? We'll see if it bears any fruit... They're just juggling their promises to suit the moment when all else is in disarray, and the Vatican is an easy target to fire words at, why aren't they so forthright with bankers and frauds?

"LET THE WORDS OF POLITICIANS BE ACCOMPANIED BY GOOD WORKS" not more hyperbole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 July, 2011, 10:38:45 PM
Fair point. But to be fair to kenny, he was saying it while helping to pass the law that stops priests keeping confessional secrets relating to child abuse, so whatever else happens, you can't really say he's done nothing at all. 

As for bankers, yes, he ought to condemn them as well, but that's a seperate issue. I'm only talking about the influence of the Catholic Church here, not the economic crisis.  Enda Kenny may not have said what he said if he didn't think he had the people's support, but I'm just glad to finally live in a country where he knows he does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 July, 2011, 10:49:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 July, 2011, 10:38:45 PMAs for bankers, yes, he ought to condemn them as well, but that's a seperate issue. I'm only talking about the influence of the Catholic Church here, not the economic crisis.



Ah, but there lies the rub, is it right for government to have separate moralities for different issues? The tactic of separation is how they justify the sociopathic nature of their institution, the subtext of which which indicates government doesn't really mean it in the way it's portrayed. Mixed messages of where the government 'really' stands is not good, never has been in our history. Joined up critical thinking should be used when judging governments. Chase the little bishops in funny hats but not the bankers in bowlers, we're not closing hospitals when we say they're not open?

Will the 'real' Fine Gael please stand up?


QuoteEnda Kenny may not have said what he said if he didn't think he had the people's support, but I'm just glad to finally live in a country where he knows he does.

Ok but people shouldn't vote for him just because of that, it's a no-brainer really and he shouldn't be using it as a pretext to bash the last incompetent government when his own incompetent party did fuck all as a weak opposition at the time.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 22 July, 2011, 01:53:49 AM
Hardly comparable, Bankers and child abusers?
Im a catholic, I attend the same Church as Kenny,  I was extremely impressed by Kenny for his speech. Forget the subtext, was it made to cover the Roscommon mess, it does'nt matter. So long as a government is seen to be doing something, its doing something.
I remember that little #### Daly on the telly years ago, and Fr. Darcy having a go at him from the audience (the Late Late, I think), snidy remarks in reply. For all the kids that the church in Ireland have absolutly and utterly destroyed, this might be a little chink of light.

David

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 July, 2011, 09:23:29 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 22 July, 2011, 01:53:49 AMHardly comparable, Bankers and child abusers?


...but I never said they were comparable, it's the government idea of social morality that's the issue and that should apply to any decision they make not when it is poltically convenient for them to do it or after the fact the horse has bolted. The government's moral attitude is different on each issue because they are a weak government. The message it sends is it's ok to let criminals with money get away with fraud and embezzlement, for future generations to live in poverty and for hospitals to be closed. This is one of the main problems with how we judge government in our country and the reason why we get the governments we deserve.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 July, 2011, 09:36:36 AM
All true Joe, particularly the failure of FG in opposition, but taking everything one little positive at a time, it's quite nice to have a Taoiseach that even appears to be putting the boot in on this issue at least.  Particularly coming from the party that gave us Eoin O'Duffy and St. Patrick's Blueshirts, and particularly in preference to some soggy potato muttering despondently into his pint. I thought Kenny was a charisma void, and I'm happy to say I was wrong - having an elected leader who doesn't embarrass every time he appears is a refreshing change.

Yes, it's a splintered kind of morality on show, but I'm still going to chalk this one up on the rather empty-looking 'plus' side.  Still won't be voting for FG if I can help it, but hey.

Now if they'd just hurry up and default and put us out of our misery...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 July, 2011, 09:44:41 AM
I'm just hoping they stay true to their word and that if/when they don't follow up, people will be as fervent in their criticism as in their praise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 July, 2011, 10:03:19 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 22 July, 2011, 09:44:41 AM
I'm just hoping they stay true to their word and that if/when they don't follow up, people will be as fervent in their criticism as in their praise.

Amen, my son.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 July, 2011, 11:32:20 AM
Credo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2011, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 22 July, 2011, 01:53:49 AM
Hardly comparable, Bankers and child abusers?

No, bankers are much worse because their greed starves countless people in Africa to death, fuels wars around the globe and bankrupts entire nations. Those are the ones we're all really rebelling against.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 July, 2011, 01:09:12 PM
QuoteI'm just hoping they stay true to their word and that if/when they don't follow up, people will be as fervent in their criticism as in their praise.

Can't say fairer than that. I respected Kenny a lot for his speech, and it's definitely won him a few brownie points from me, but there's a few years to go yet and it doesn't necessarily mean I'll vote for him the next time round. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 22 July, 2011, 01:54:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2011, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 22 July, 2011, 01:53:49 AM
Hardly comparable, Bankers and child abusers?
No, bankers are much worse because their greed starves countless people in Africa to death, fuels wars around the globe and bankrupts entire nations. Those are the ones we're all really rebelling against.
True, but the Pope causes AIDS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2011, 02:02:07 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 22 July, 2011, 01:54:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2011, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 22 July, 2011, 01:53:49 AM
Hardly comparable, Bankers and child abusers?
No, bankers are much worse because their greed starves countless people in Africa to death, fuels wars around the globe and bankrupts entire nations. Those are the ones we're all really rebelling against.
True, but the Pope causes AIDS.

We're not going to have to get into a game of "My Bugbear's a Lot Bugbearier Than Your Bugbear" are we?  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2011, 04:11:54 PM
"In four days the UN Security Council will meet, and the world has an opportunity to embrace a new proposal that could turn the tide on decades of failed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks: UN recognition of the state of Palestine.

"Over 120 nations from the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Latin America have already endorsed this initiative, but Israel's right-wing government and the US vehemently oppose it. The UK and other key European countries are still undecided, but a massive public push now could tip them to vote for this momentous opportunity to end 40 years of military occupation.

"US-led peace initiatives have failed for decades, while Israel has confined the Palestinians to small areas, confiscated their lands and blocked their independence. This bold new initiative could be the best opportunity to jump start a resolution of the conflict, but Europe and the UK must take the lead. Let's build a massive global call for the UK and other European leaders to endorse this statehood bid now, and make clear that citizens across the world support this legitimate, non-violent, diplomatic proposal. Sign the petition and send this campaign to everyone."

http://www.avaaz.org/en/independence_for_palestine_uk/?cl=1175268226&v=9676 (http://www.avaaz.org/en/independence_for_palestine_uk/?cl=1175268226&v=9676)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 July, 2011, 12:35:02 AM
I thought the UN Security Council were supposed to be instruments of the one world Zionist government conspiracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 July, 2011, 01:27:57 AM
Even if that were true, they'd still have to be careful to appear sensitive to the wishes of people in general. Sometimes this means bowing to public pressure if only for appearance' sake.

Zionism is a political movement whose goal was the creation of a Jewish homeland but now is focussed more on the maintenance and governance of Israel - and I'm pretty sure that doesn't involve turning the whole world Jewish (I have had myself circumcised though, just in case...).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 26 July, 2011, 09:23:48 PM
Help improve your political know-how with...


Prime Minister's Questions: The Game! (http://pixelpolitics.tumblr.com/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 October, 2011, 12:02:35 AM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 26 July, 2011, 09:23:48 PM
Help improve your political know-how with...


Prime Minister's Questions: The Game! (http://pixelpolitics.tumblr.com/)

I'm about to click this link, but before I do, I predict it will involve a lot of blaming everything on the previous government

*Edit

That's not at all what I was expecting. Cool
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 05:01:03 PM
Who was it that said there isn't any waste in the Public sector, well let me tell you what I heard today  :lol:

I was talking to my mate who just happens to run the kitchens at a school and he told me that the teachers are entitled to free drinks of tea and coffee at any time they like, WHY! This comes out of the schools budget and guess what the cost was because of these piss takers. Well for the month of September it was £1900. He mentioned that he gets through 40 pints of milk a day on the teachers alone.

I would like to know why they should be given anything free, if you want a bloody drink then bloody well pay for it like most other people have to. Once you let people have such a thing they do as this lot have and take the piss.

He did tell me loads of other stuff but I know that many on here don't believe such things happen  :-X

Now before you all explode at me picking on the bloated Public sector, at my place there are many piss takers as well and guess what happened when they were all reported, that's right folks.......NOTHING!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 22 October, 2011, 06:05:45 PM
QuoteWell for the month of September it was £1900. He mentioned that he gets through 40 pints of milk a day on the teachers alone.

No offence, CF, but unless he's working at a school with several thousand teachers, I would speculate that this is complete bullshit.
40 pints of milk a day? On tea and coffee?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 October, 2011, 06:26:00 PM
Maybe he should try the Bells instead...

I know, I know. I'm going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 06:36:41 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 22 October, 2011, 06:05:45 PM
QuoteWell for the month of September it was £1900. He mentioned that he gets through 40 pints of milk a day on the teachers alone.

No offence, CF, but unless he's working at a school with several thousand teachers, I would speculate that this is complete bullshit.
40 pints of milk a day? On tea and coffee?

I can believe it, in my work's staff room we have one of those milk dispenser machines, from which I've seen people filling those 3 litres milk bottles from Tesco. It's not public sector though, and the guy that owns the place is a lord, so screw him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 06:41:33 PM
The school has just 200 teachers and its not amazing, seeing as he runs the kitchen and was headhunted from his last job, which happened to be another public service job, I would believe him.
He's told me numerous stories about the waste that goes on and it is not hard to believe, especially after what he told me went on at the last place. Politicians are not the only greedy people in our society and the sooner that people realise this the better. You let people know they can have something for free and quite a few of them will take the piss.

By the way Rich do the calculation 40 pints divided by 200 is what, a pint between 5 people a day, not such a fantastic figure that needs thousands to be correct. I know you think that the public sector are beyond reproach but sometimes the truth is disgusting and beggers belief.

Greed sadly happens everywhere but the reason it goes on here is because the public purse seems to be accountable to no one. The worst bit is that these are the very people who say that there is no waste in their jobs. As I have always said there is waste in the public and private sector but no one gives a shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 06:42:25 PM
Heh, just saw this on facebook:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/315980_10150428649884903_619469902_10250353_888567562_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 22 October, 2011, 07:00:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 05:01:03 PM
Who was it that said there isn't any waste in the Public sector, well let me tell you what I heard today  :lol:

Good question. Who did say that, CF?


CF, you really have to stop taking secondhand anecdotal stories and turning them into generalities.

I can tell you stories about British soldiers gang raping a teenage girl behind a nightclub. I also seem to recall some pretty nasty things going on in Cyprus a number of years ago. I also remember the recruitment adverts for the army in the job centre: "no qualifications required".

Would you be happy with the generalisation that British soldiers are largely a bunch of uneducated murderous rapists based on some stuff I heard from a mate?

Anecdotes, even individual detailed cases, don't provide an accurate picture of the broader truth.

As you know, I work in the NHS. The Trust provides us with tea making facilities, which amounts to water and a kettle, and that's it. I've worked in one department where we had to provide teabags and milk for ourselves. In my current department, teabags, milk, coffee and sugar are graciously provided by our consultants. We have, I think, around 80 members of staff, with a morning and afternoon break and a lunchtime, so we might be talking about potentially 240 cups of tea or coffee a day. I'm guestimating, but I don't think we get through more than 8 pints a day, but let's call it 12.

Can I reasonably extrapolate this and present it as a general picture of tea-making of the NHS? No, of course I bloody can't. There are hundreds of hospitals, each with many different departments, all of different sizes. The same goes for schools. It's impossible to take your mate's stories - even if they happen to be facts for his specific school - and use them to make generalisations about other schools and public sector waste.

And personally, I don't begrudge teachers as many cups of fucking coffee as their swollen bladders can hold, any more than I begrudge damaged soldiers getting decent healthcare even though they freely volunteered for a potentially lethal and sometimes morally dubious occupation.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 07:10:24 PM
^I think that's a knockout.^


Teachers, nurses and other frontline staff are not the enemy and shouldn't be treated as such. They didn't create the problems we're all now in or accept huge pay-offs, however other higher incompetents who get paid more than any of us, did. Our aim needs to be sharper than petty squabbling amongst ourselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 07:15:19 PM
Rape accusations are a bit harsh, and it doesn't really address the MASSIVE sums of money wasted on defense. Tens of litres of milk are nothing compared with Aircraft Carriers and Euro-Fighters, and how they went into a desert arena to fight experienced Afghan guerillas with unsuitable gear
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 22 October, 2011, 07:24:05 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 06:41:33 PM
Greed sadly happens everywhere but the reason it goes on here is because the public purse seems to be accountable to no one.

It may seem that way to you, but if you'd actually had to go through the control systems required to purchase even basic consumables, submit monthly figures for review, or  face detailed annual appraisals of your performance (which affect pay and job security) you might think otherwise. Obviously, I'm just speaking for a few small parts of the NHS I'm familiar with, not making a generalisation.

Quote The worst bit is that these are the very people who say that there is no waste in their jobs. As I have always said there is waste in the public and private sector but no one gives a shit.


Oh, and I've agreed before that there is waste in the Public Sector. My questions have always been is it as widespread as often depicted by the media and the government, and is it really any worse than in the Private Sector which supposedly has all the answers? But one seems to give a shit about about that, either, least of all your good self.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 22 October, 2011, 07:25:33 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 07:10:24 PM

Teachers, nurses and other frontline staff are not the enemy and shouldn't be treated as such.

Well said, Mr. Low and Mr. Soap.

First time I've posted in this thread, largely 'cos I mostly come here to talk comics / pop culture stuff, but as some of you are aware I am a secondary school teacher, and while I am not in any position to dispute CF's mate's statistical claims (don't even drink tea or coffee at all, myself... wonder how many of the 200 staff in the aforementioned school are like me?) I take issue with the whole implication, intentional or not, that people who do my job just sit about taking advantage of the taxpayer's hard-earned cash. Frankly, I'm not sure where we'd find the time: in the average school day, any non-contact time teachers have which is not taken away so you can cover for someone absent is largely used to mark pupil work or develop work for classes.

I find this sort of claim troublesome, because we are at a time when education budgets are being hammered, when headteachers are being asked to make cutback after cutback and still improve results, when pupil support funding is being slashed, and when in Scotland the entire education system is undergoing massive changes.  What I see in my school (and I teach in a school whose catchment area is pretty economically deprived) is staff doing their damndest to try and push, motivate, develop and support pupils to achieve their goals. Do we always succeed? Hell no, I wish we did. Sometimes you have to take heart from small victories. Something which is made harder when you have to read tabloid-style generalisations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 22 October, 2011, 07:26:10 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 22 October, 2011, 07:15:19 PM
Rape accusations are a bit harsh, ...

Yes, they are indeed, and I apologise unreservedly for any offence to you or CF. But that's the problem with generalisations. They are unfair and often wrong.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 07:30:42 PM
Aye, well, accusing someone of stealing a bit of milk doesn't really have the same legal implications as accusing someone of rape.

There's a joke here about how Thatcher raped the British Isles AND stole the milk from schools
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 22 October, 2011, 07:36:09 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 22 October, 2011, 07:30:42 PM
Aye, well, accusing someone of stealing a bit of milk doesn't really have the same legal implications as accusing someone of rape.

I wasn't making an accusation. I was using an incident that happened when I was at university to make a point about generalisations. Nevertheless, I have apologised in my previous post.


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 07:38:39 PM
I don't believe Robin was accusing anyone of anything but using talk of one incident as an example that could then be extrapolated into a generalisation. Though I have heard similar things said about particular groups of military men, I've also heard the same about rugby teams et al. but that doesn't indicate they're all like that just the same as teachers aren't guzzling free milk for the sake of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 07:46:29 PM
I believe I understand, Robin was demonstrating how things can be blown out of proportion. This makes me FURIOUS >:(
;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 07:52:22 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 22 October, 2011, 07:46:29 PM
Robin was demonstrating how things can be blown out of proportion. This makes me FURIOUS

I believe a man in your position would rape him and steal his milk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 October, 2011, 08:03:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 07:52:22 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 22 October, 2011, 07:46:29 PM
Robin was demonstrating how things can be blown out of proportion. This makes me FURIOUS

I believe a man in your position would rape him and steal his milk.

Nice euphemism
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 22 October, 2011, 08:16:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 05:01:03 PM
teachers are entitled to free drinks of tea and coffee at any time they like, WHY! This comes out of the schools budget and guess what the cost was because of these piss takers.

Um. Lemme get this straight. These teachers make use of something they're entitled to, right? They are therefore piss-takers (and wasteful, by crikey!) . . . how?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 October, 2011, 08:20:11 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 22 October, 2011, 08:03:50 PMNice euphemism


Glad you noticed, means you thought about it, you're all the same youse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 10:26:39 PM
Before I go on can you please quote me where I said that my mates information went on everwhere in the public sector. I think as is the norm, you just saw words that didn't actually exist in my post about his place and just jumped in to defend against something you thought you saw!.

Lets get this straight shall we, the person who runs the school kitchens and then tells me what goes on must be a liar, as that is the implication of what you have said. Excellent, then that would mean that everything you say that comes from any source must be bollocks a well.

I can never understand why people can't admit there is a vast amount of waste in both sectors. How many times must I tell you that I saw waste at my place and no fucker gave a shit. I put my head on the line with another bloke to say something about this to the boss and guess what, bugger all got done. At least I know I did my bit to stop it but as far as I can see that's our country for you, nobody seems to give a shit.

Now back to the tea and coffee, why should anyone be given free food or drink at work, as far as I can see they are there to do their jobs, not get fed and watered. I must be living on another planet, why not go the whole hog and let the cleaners have free tea and coffee as well. I see you mention that you used to bring your own tea bags and coffee in at one of your old departments and at your new place the consultant brings them in for you. Guess what I'm okay with that as that is how it should be done.

I think I remeber you said way back in this thread that your mother found £100,000 of waste and sorted it out. Well I don't believe that as that must be one of those, hang on a second 'secondhand anecdotal stories' that you always go on about. That's how insane it is when people try as hard as you not to believe anything bad against their workplace.

My wife works for the NHS and her mother did her whole life before she retired but I won't mention any of their stories, even if they said just good things about the NHS as these must be discounted, as they are 'secondhand anecdotal stories', see how this can go on.

I went in hospital the other week for an op and I couldn't fault the staff who dealt with me but I'll tell you this. When they came around with tea, coffee and sarnies, I declined as I don't bellieve I'm there to be fed. I did ask for some water though, as that was free. I'm not saying that other patients don't need to be fed but I was only in for about 6 hours and didn't want to be a burden on their budget as I have my principles and I actually live by them.

I did like the uneducated murderous rapists comments as I knew you would resort to stuff like that and don't worry I don't accept your apology, as you should stand by your words as I do mine. If you had said them verbally I could understand, as it would be in the heat of the moment but typing them takes a bit of time and you can always check before you post.

Yes I'm sure squaddies have murdered people (the bloke who played that bod on Eastenders for one). I'm sure they have raped people and I'm sure that some are uneducated as with people in every other job in life.
Do you want me to mention the amount of money that is paid out due to the mistakes that happen in our hospitals every year. Now that is a disgrace but obviously those BILLIONS are only paid out for a few mistakes. Now obviously you probably think I made that up cause a mate told me or something, so just for you have a look at this article (http://www.hsj.co.uk/news/finance/negligence-payouts-soared-to-1bn-in-2010-11/5031302.article). They must be making mistakes all the time, I could go on about the state of the cleaning in hospitals. MRSA must be something I just made up and then we get down to the doctors and nurses who actually go out of their way to kill people. A small amount I know but never the less they exist. I do find it fun to point these things out, which I wasn't really bothered about as all I mention was tea and coffee at a school but I'm quite enjoying it now. I'll let you do a search for the doctors and nurses who kill as I'm sure you don't believe any of these people could do such a thing.

I love the way you link teachers having free tea and coffee to military personel being given treatment after being wounded, I don't think the comparison really works but good try. I suppose that would work for a firefighter, policeman/woman, etc...

You mention they all 'volunteered for a potentially lethal and sometimes morally dubious occupation'. Well they volunteered to join the forces to defend this country as the primary role and for adventure (probably the other way round I suspect), obviously you will have those who actually might want to just kill someone. The dubious occupation, well you can thank Labour for that. When two of my nephews wanted to join I laid it all out for them the good and the bad. I pressed home the fact that if they happened to become injured then don't expect the forces to give a shit but they both signed up anyway.

Now I'll actually use a full quote from yourself this time just to clarify something.
QuoteOh, and I've agreed before that there is waste in the Public Sector. My questions have always been is it as widespread as often depicted by the media and the government, and is it really any worse than in the Private Sector which supposedly has all the answers? But one seems to give a shit about about that, either, least of all your good self.
Are you saying with the last part that I don't give a shit about the waste in the private sector, just look at what I mention earlier on in this post. I was that whistleblower and nothing happened, so please don't say that I don't care. Then again that could be one of those secondhand anecdotal stories if the other bloke told you it  :lol:

Why do people find it hard to believe that the PUBLIC SECTOR has waste in it. Fucking Hell the PRIVATE SECTOR does and I'm the first to admit it. I mention one specific point and it's like I've said the Left loves wars and Gaddafi.

Can anyone of you say that there is NO WASTE in the PUBLIC SECTOR with your hand on your heart. I thought not so why shout to the high heavens that there isn't as that is what it feels like you are doing.

Before I go and learn my ABD's and rape someone before I kill them, don't forget to quote me where I mentioned that this tea/coffee incident went on everywhere  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mgubgub on 22 October, 2011, 11:46:27 PM
I rarely post on the board but feel compelled to join in due to the liveliness of this engaging debate. One way of approaching without taking sides is to offer two statements and by comparison, see, using Occams razor which is the most likely to be the true statement.

There is no waste in the public or private sector

Both the public and private sector have waste.

To view and accept the truth postulated in the first statement that there is no waste would be foolish and the likelihood of the second statement would I hope be deemed to be more accurate than the first.
Upon reflection as I write this the first statement reminds me of the propaganda overtones spat by domineering sinister Governments ie Communist nations and also reminds me of certain excerpts from 1984 and Animal Farm. The second line that there is waste offers in some way an air of optimism in the way that we have admitted to a flaw and just by doing so hope to right the wrong.
I once wrote on twitter "Because Utopia is impossible Dystopia is acceptable". If a government is telling you that things are so great and there is nothing wrong they are wrong and more than likely lying.

The whole view or bigger picture and truth also lies in the fact that you can't reward failure and you can't punish success. Neil Cavuto on Fox said the other week he had known poor people and he had known rich people yet he had never been employed by a poor person. A necessity of capitalism and probably the reason why the west won the cold war and thawed Russia's totalitarian stance was it could afford to be competitive. Through having contractors compete to win military contracts companies had to have the maximum damage minimum cost at the optimum ratio of our guys win and at a certain cost that remained acceptable to the democratic doctrine of most western nations and in doing so preserve freedom of speech. The west still remains a potent force today due to the way in which it maintains it's serviceman and their capabilities. One sore truth I believe in is the way in which Oil rich nations in the middle east mainly armed themselves with Russian equipment??? Now they are what we in the west believe to be rich yet they bought the cheapest equipment and with it lost many of the present day fights.

I'm not practised in the art of debate and my comment was designed to act as a way for both sides of the argument being able to nod at each other and say "Agreed there is waste".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 23 October, 2011, 12:13:01 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 October, 2011, 10:26:39 PM
Before I go on can you please quote me where I said that my mates information went on everwhere in the public sector.

I think the implication is quite clear, since this is a topic you choose to return to. That may be a misreading on my part

QuoteI think as is the norm, you just saw words that didn't actually exist in my post about his place and just jumped in to defend against something you thought you saw!.

I don't accept that I did anything of the sort.

QuoteLets get this straight shall we, the person who runs the school kitchens and then tells me what goes on must be a liar, as that is the implication of what you have said.

No, that is not the implication. My post clearly concerns the dangers of generalisations, as I restated in subsequent posts.


QuoteExcellent, then that would mean that everything you say that comes from any source must be bollocks a well.

I don't recall dismissing your stories as bollocks, nor have I used any of my anecdotes to condemn the private sector, just offer some balance.

QuoteI can never understand why people can't admit there is a vast amount of waste in both sectors.

I have acknowledged waste. What I won't do is make assumptions about how much and who is worse or better based on little data.

QuoteHow many times must I tell you that I saw waste at my place and no fucker gave a shit. I put my head on the line with another bloke to say something about this to the boss and guess what, bugger all got done. At least I know I did my bit to stop it but as far as I can see that's our country for you, nobody seems to give a shit.

Okay, you've had a bad experience. Why do you assume it's the same for everyone else?

QuoteNow back to the tea and coffee, why should anyone be given free food or drink at work, as far as I can see they are there to do their jobs, not get fed and watered. I must be living on another planet, why not go the whole hog and let the cleaners have free tea and coffee as well. I see you mention that you used to bring your own tea bags and coffee in at one of your old departments and at your new place the consultant brings them in for you. Guess what I'm okay with that as that is how it should be done.

I've got no problem with any organisation looking after its staff. Clearly this is an issue for you, but personally I don't understand why.

QuoteI think I remeber you said way back in this thread that your mother found £100,000 of waste and sorted it out. Well I don't believe that as that must be one of those, hang on a second 'secondhand anecdotal stories' that you always go on about. That's how insane it is when people try as hard as you not to believe anything bad against their workplace.

Just to remind you, I wrote:

Perhaps you'd like to explain to me then how our Trust was able to save the required 30 million pounds last year and deal with an increase in work if it's so wasteful. Or how my mother saved £100,000 by renogotiating contracts with medical suppliers. Or how about the 90+ hours of unpaid time my girlfriend is currently owed but never likely to see (and keep in mind she doesn't record anything under 30 minutes). We can all play the anecdote game, but the proof is in the reality of the incredible range and depth of effective public services that are provided 24 hours a day, seven days a week across the whole of this country.

Note that I acknowledge that anecdotes are a two-way street.

QuoteMy wife works for the NHS and her mother did her whole life before she retired but I won't mention any of their stories, even if they said just good things about the NHS as these must be discounted, as they are 'secondhand anecdotal stories', see how this can go on.

Positive ancedotal stories don't prove the NHS is perfect, and I've never suggested otherwise.

QuoteI went in hospital the other week for an op and I couldn't fault the staff who dealt with me but I'll tell you this. When they came around with tea, coffee and sarnies, I declined as I don't bellieve I'm there to be fed. I did ask for some water though, as that was free. I'm not saying that other patients don't need to be fed but I was only in for about 6 hours and didn't want to be a burden on their budget as I have my principles and I actually live by them.

A burden on their budget. Jesus, you really have no conception at all of costs.

QuoteI did like the uneducated murderous rapists comments as I knew you would resort to stuff like that

You knew that did you? How did you know that? Personally, I think it's one of the most extreme things I'ver ever written here, so I really don't see how you could know I'd resort to it.

Quoteand don't worry I don't accept your apology, as you should stand by your words as I do mine. If you had said them verbally I could understand, as it would be in the heat of the moment but typing them takes a bit of time and you can always check before you post.

I do stand by my words and the point I was making about generalisation. I apologised because I didn't want to cause offence should you or others assume I was making a statement I believed in. Unfortunately, that seems to be the ways it has been read. I rarely apologise for anything, but if you don't accept it that's your business.

QuoteYes I'm sure squaddies have murdered people (the bloke who played that bod on Eastenders for one). I'm sure they have raped people and I'm sure that some are uneducated as with people in every other job in life.

Do you want me to mention the amount of money that is paid out due to the mistakes that happen in our hospitals every year. Now that is a disgrace but obviously those BILLIONS are only paid out for a few mistakes. Now obviously you probably think I made that up cause a mate told me or something, so just for you have a look at this article (http://www.hsj.co.uk/news/finance/negligence-payouts-soared-to-1bn-in-2010-11/5031302.article). They must be making mistakes all the time, I could go on about the state of the cleaning in hospitals. MRSA must be something I just made up and then we get down to the doctors and nurses who actually go out of their way to kill people. A small amount I know but never the less they exist. I do find it fun to point these things out, which I wasn't really bothered about as all I mention was tea and coffee at a school but I'm quite enjoying it now. I'll let you do a search for the doctors and nurses who kill as I'm sure you don't believe any of these people could do such a thing.

You've completely missed the point. I mean really, completely and utterly.

QuoteI love the way you link teachers having free tea and coffee to military personel being given treatment after being wounded, I don't think the comparison really works but good try. I suppose that would work for a firefighter, policeman/woman, etc...

I'm not making a link between tea and treatment, teachers and soldiers, I'm making a comparison between our attitudes to things funded by the tax payer.


QuoteYou mention they all 'volunteered for a potentially lethal and sometimes morally dubious occupation'. Well they volunteered to join the forces to defend this country as the primary role and for adventure (probably the other way round I suspect), obviously you will have those who actually might want to just kill someone.

I'm working on the assumption that most soldiers may be called upon to fight and kill someone at some point. I've always assumed this was a fundamental part of the job, and people who join the army presumably realise that and willing to do it.


QuoteThe dubious occupation, well you can thank Labour for that.

I think being willing to kill is dubious, regardless of their politics. You'll note that 'dubious' does not mean 'wrong' or 'bad'.

QuoteWhen two of my nephews wanted to join I laid it all out for them the good and the bad. I pressed home the fact that if they happened to become injured then don't expect the forces to give a shit but they both signed up anyway.

Being treated like shit by your employers is something you have to accept if you work in the public sector. But that's not really the point. My issue is with killing. I can see times when there is no choice other than to fight and kill, but as it currently stands, those signing up do have a choice. So, I have a problem with it. However, regardless of my personal concerns, I fully expect that soldiers, and others, should be properly funded, equipped and cared for in the course of their work and afterwards. I don't begrudge them that, even though I don't necessarily support all of their actions.

But this is badly derailing the point I had hoped to make.

QuoteNow I'll actually use a full quote from yourself this time just to clarify something.[/color]
QuoteOh, and I've agreed before that there is waste in the Public Sector. My questions have always been is it as widespread as often depicted by the media and the government, and is it really any worse than in the Private Sector which supposedly has all the answers? But one seems to give a shit about about that, either, least of all your good self.
Are you saying with the last part that I don't give a shit about the waste in the private sector, just look at what I mention earlier on in this post. I was that whistleblower and nothing happened, so please don't say that I don't care. Then again that could be one of those secondhand anecdotal stories if the other bloke told you it  :lol:

Look: completely out of the blue you posted something a mate told you, using it to support an argument you've raised before. It's clear it's an issue for you, so it's not an unreasonable assumption that your main motivation is having go at the public sector. Mentioning your experience in the private sector may look like an attempt at balance to you, but it still looks like your primary motivation is knocking the public sector.

That may not be true, but that's how it looks.

QuoteWhy do people find it hard to believe that the PUBLIC SECTOR has waste in it.

Nobody finds it hard to believe that the public sector has waste in it. People are not disagreeing with you on this. Hell, you win! What I and some others are challenging you on is the degree and significance of that waste, and whether the public sector really has that much to learn from the private, and if the latter should take over more of the former (which I seem to remember is where all this first started).


Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 October, 2011, 02:03:21 AM
Glad you couldn't quote me on what you thought you saw. Jumping to conclusions is great especially as you still seem to be doing that by saying that the implication is quite clear.

You keep bringing up generalisations when I gave what information that had come to me from the 'horses mouth' and nothing else. I keep looking through my couple of posts and can't see any generalisations from me, just the one FACT!

I see you offer balance but I am unable when I mention what is going on at my place, which is not a one off but I'll fill you in on that later.

I agree you did say there was waste in the public sector and I won't deny that, as that is what my fact is all about. I still didn't generalise though, I stated one FACT!

As I'm going down your list in order I'll tell you about the waste at my place that is not a one off but is continous. We have 120 drivers at work, 60 days, 60 nights and out of that lot 80 plus are known to defraud the company through taking the piss. How do they do this, numerous ways! They get a job and they take over an hour to leave the yard (it should take 20 mins at the most), they get to a drop and ask for an hour plus break and then have breaks outside after they have done the drop (we are entitled to a 45 min break, driving laws), they deliberately drive slow so that someone else might overtake them to the drop and so slow them down even more, the list goes on.
I'm not happy with this kind of attitude to work and so with another bloke went forward with loads of info but no names, on how to stop all this. I was stunned when nothing happened.
So as you can see it's not a one off and not just one person, it's the majority. The drivers even tell each other on how to hang the job out to get more overtime.

I have a problem with the tea and coffee as you are there to work. Even my missus who is extreme left (I'll jump to a conclusion on this one, I bet you don't believe that) is disgusted by this. She said that it's not for the tax payer to supply drinks for staff and said that when her uncle used to teach Science in London he would use his teabags more than once. Perhaps times have moved on and everyone is in it for themselves now.

I did like the way you mention I have no conception of costs. That is where it all starts, I'll take a bit of that, I'll take a bit more next time, this time I'll bloody well help myself. What's wrong with a person following his belief and not taking something. If one of those teachers stood up and said "you know what, it doesn't feel right us lot having free drinks" I'd be impressed. Then again £1900 a month is nothing compared to my one cup and a sarnie that I declined.

The squaddie bit is what I expected because it is the same lame response from many people, when they know your past job. I'm actually surprised you didn't call me a Right Wing Nazi!

The apology bit I couldn't care less about, you typed those words in and then use it as a generalisation. I then put some facts about the NHS in to show you that I won't generalise, as I like to deal in facts. You then say that I missed the point. As I said I like to deal in facts which is what my initial post was all about. A fact from the person who runs the place, not some second hand yarn from some bloke in a pub who knows someone.

The sentence that you mention teachers and squaddies is a comparison as far as I can see it. Otherwise why mention the squaddies (could it be because I was one), why not mention nurses, or not even mention any other job.

You work under the assumption that most soldiers may be called to kill someone during a conflict. Here's a fact for you around 10% of the British army are frontline troops, it may be slightly more nowadays due to cuts. Those that join the CDO's, PARAS, Infantry and then rebadge into the SAS and SBS will stand a good chance but even out of the first three a large portion will be rear echelon. Yes everyone is taught infantry skills on joining during basic training but then you badge into your trades or infantry units and progress.

I did enjoy your concerns about about those soldiers and their choice nowadays to join up. Perhaps you should be glad that someone wants to better themselves and get a trade and higher education (yes the forces allow that) By the way, those are my leftie wifes words.

You mention that out of the blue I mention what I was told. Well it was out of the blue but I was told it yesterday (now) and so I thought I would enlighten everyone as to what is going on in ONE school. I suppose I could have waited years to say it or better still never mention it and hope it goes away. Again you jump at the conclusion, still with no quote, that I am saying this happens everywhere, which I am not. Perhaps you know more than you let on and I have touched a nerve.
That may not be true, but that's how it looks.

I'm still happy that you agree that there is waste in the Public sector though.

One last thing, you mention that this all started with someone saying that the public sector could learn a thing or two from the private. It's obvious that they could and the same goes the other way as well. I haven't read that post so I never knew it all started there.

P.S. I wonder if the bloke who had those discs about the MP's taking the piss had someone have a go at him for spilling those facts. I do hope not!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 23 October, 2011, 11:06:34 AM
CF, there's way too much there even for me to reply and I've made you far to angry, so there's no point me following it up right now. It's ruining both our weekends. I will attempt to clarify one point and one point only:

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 October, 2011, 02:03:21 AM
The sentence that you mention teachers and squaddies is a comparison as far as I can see it. Otherwise why mention the squaddies (could it be because I was one), why not mention nurses, or not even mention any other job.

The reason I used soldiers, particularly in my original example, was in the hope I could make you understand how it feels to be on the recieving on of generalised criticism. I accept I went too far in my example and have unreservedly apologised, but if you see it as genuine malice I doubt there is anything I can do to change your mind. But I do regret it, and I am sorry to offend you so much.

Regards

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 23 October, 2011, 01:28:14 PM
This thread has led two of 2000AD's biggest fans - the keeper of the Cellar of Dredd and a man so knowledgeable about the comic that John Wagner consulted him and name-checked him in the prog - into an argument about NOTHING AT ALL.

Gentlemen, your opinions differ and that's okay. But when you start arguing about "what you said" and "what I said", the whole exercise is pointless. I like you both very much and I think Robin's doing the right thing by leaving it alone.

I've made no secret of my utter hatred for this thread, which is pretty much poisonous to new readers of 2000AD who might stumble across it. If I had my way I would just lock it. I don't see why the comic's publishers bother to pay for a website that hosts it. It does nothing to benefit their business.

- Trout

(Edited for a small typo.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2011, 01:41:08 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 23 October, 2011, 01:28:14 PM
I don't see why the comic's publishers bother to pay for a website that hosts it. It does nothing to benefit their business.


Yeah, well, y'know that's just like eh...your opinion man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 October, 2011, 01:47:44 PM
I agree King Trout, it has become a bit he said, she said (even though we are both males) so I'll just leave it at that and if some Moderator wants to lock the topic or even delete it then fine.

I think that politics are probably best talked about face to face rather than through a forum, as things are easily discussed via the former.

All the best,
John
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2011, 01:58:22 PM
No one need read this thread if they don't want to. It's purpose is to keep this kind of thing from leaking into other threads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 23 October, 2011, 02:08:19 PM
So people keep telling me. Perhaps this sort of thing should just leak to the appropriate place - some other website.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 23 October, 2011, 03:14:02 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 23 October, 2011, 02:08:19 PM
So people keep telling me. Perhaps this sort of thing should just leak to the appropriate place - some other website.

As good an idea as that may be, I think doing away with all talk of politics on a forum for fans of a comic whose most popular and enduring character is a fascistic-police-state-law-officer-type-bloke  might be asking a bit too much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2011, 03:56:43 PM
CF and Robin are both gents and have always acted as such, this situation included. Previous lunatics -since gone- have dragged their personal rants across the entire forum. It's not the thread that can be a problem. It's those without manners. I would hate to think the official 2000AD forum should ever become censored/boring because someone feels a bit uncomfortable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 October, 2011, 05:25:58 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2011, 03:56:43 PM
I would hate to think the official 2000AD forum should ever become censored/boring because someone feels a bit uncomfortable.

Hear Hear. As Mark Twain* once said:  'Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.'

Although I'm pretty sure I read that he stole this off someone else
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 October, 2011, 08:32:02 PM
I find it amusing to be talking about the waste associated with piffling things like tea and biscuits when the banks and corporations are stealing millions off us daily with the help of our own politicians. Disgruntled coach-drivers I used to work with employed similar scams to enhance their wages - but why shouldn't they? They saw our politicians raking in a grand for some half-hour nefarious meeting and then when they got the chance sold a ticket for a coach journey without putting it through the receipt book, making around five to twelve quid at a time up to three or four times a month. I'm not condoning this type of behaviour, but if you want to stamp out waste you first must stamp out greed - and in a society where greed is both glorified and rewarded (if you're rich to begin with, that is - greed is only seen as a negative if you're poor), that's not such an easy thing to do.

On an unrelated note, I started this thread (and a notorious sister thread) because I found my politics spilling over into other posts. I eventually recognised that this was Bad Form and so started these threads to contain the overspill. Politics is, after all, a very divisive subject and can fray tempers at the double quick hurry-up. I for one credit each person who posts in this thread with the intelligence to understand and accept that any thread with the word "Political" in the title has the capacity to offend and upset.

Also, why aren't we talking about Occupy Wall Street and its' sister occupations? Demonstrations against corporate greed and undue private financial control over governments are going on in over 900 cities worldwide, and it gets a few minutes of woefully inadequate coverage on the BBC, ITV, Sky and CNN? They're still calling them "anti-capitalists" for Christ's sake! The only in-depth coverage of these movements to be had is on Press TV (which OFCOM is banning for being a little too pro-Patestinian), Al Jazeera and (amazingly, at least to the Cold War Baby within me) Russia Today.

I also love you all, so if anyone takes umbrage at what I say then it's your own fault. Keep the umbrage you've taken and frame it or something, because I don't want it back. The stuff soon goes off and starts to reek after only a couple of days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 October, 2011, 08:39:15 PM
Occupy Wall Street? Let me tell you about Occupy Belfast. They're camped out in front of St. Annes Cathedral beside sheltered accomodation for the homeless/art students. :-*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2011, 10:10:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 October, 2011, 08:32:02 PM
Also, why aren't we talking about Occupy Wall Street and its' sister occupations? Demonstrations against corporate greed and undue private financial control over governments are going on in over 900 cities worldwide, and it gets a few minutes of woefully inadequate coverage on the BBC, ITV, Sky and CNN?


Obviously the majority of us aren't suffering enough yet -for the underclass welfare has unfortunately become a bribe to stay put and shut up in these isles- and until it happens normal programming will resume on this channel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 October, 2011, 10:38:38 PM
I fear you're right, Joe. It kind of reminds me of that Martin Niemoller quote:

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist. Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me and by that time there was no one left to speak out."

First they came for the family businesses...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 23 October, 2011, 11:12:49 PM
You are the first person to ever use that quote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 October, 2011, 11:29:56 PM
Yaay!

What do I win?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 October, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
Of course there's waste in the private as well as the public sector.  But, surely, the difference is if a private sector company continues to waste money it will eventually go skint; the only victims being the employees of and the suppliers to that company.  But we are all victims of waste in the public sector, as we are paying for it in our taxes.  That is why waste in the public sector needs to be sorted.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 October, 2011, 05:55:35 PM
QuoteBut, surely, the difference is if a private sector company continues to waste money it will eventually go skint
Unless our government decides to spend billions of pounds of our money propping them up, of course!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 October, 2011, 05:59:47 PM
Well, yeah, that's true.  I should have put "excluding bankers"!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2011, 03:44:39 PM
Speaking of waste... (http://costofwar.com/en/)

And keep in mind, due to the way the global economy works, that isn't existing money spent on the wars. About 99% of that money is being created out of nothing by private central banks and then lent to governments at interest so that taxpayers can pay it back. If it wasn't so evil it'd be beautiful. And that's just the money being created to fund two wars. By one country. Think of all the other things countries borrow this fake private money for. Think of all the countries borrowing it. All from the same handful of banking cartels like the IMF and World Bank, which are themselves owned and run by other banks like the Federal Reserve and Bank of England, which in turn are owned and/or run by private banks like Rothschilds and JP Morgan, where the fake money is born.

But if it's fake money, how can you buy fish and shoes with it? Because you believe you can. Essentially, a £5 note is worthless; you can't eat it, plant it or put in your fuel tank. It's just a symbol representing a portion of your country's wealth. A fiat currency. The only thing backing your £5 note is the faith you have in it. You don't really care whose face is on your £5 note as long as you can get £5 worth of fish or shoes with it. The same can be said for digital currencies which exist without being notes or coins. Because this currency is basically worthless, it's all too easy to create too much of it as the Cost of War counter so vividly demonstrates.

To divert for a moment, gold and silver coins make an excellent currency because, no matter how low your faith in the economy is, gold and silver are useful, real metals that hold their value. This is why you often hear people calling for a return to the gold standard (which allows countries to print only as much fiat currency as their gold and silver reserves can justify), but I am wary of this as he who controls the gold controls the standard. And you can bet your bottom dollar that the IMF and World Bank have most of that gold squirrelled away for a rainy day, so if we are silly enough to return to a gold standard the same old greedsquids will be calling the shots again.

Anyway, back to the topic. I want to focus for a moment on inflation. Snoozeville, I know. The Corporate/Political line is that economic growth is paramount and must be maintained at all costs. The reasons behind this seem muddled - to keep up with our massively increasing populations and rising living standards and costly wars and such. As the economy grows, resources become scarcer and this causes prices to rise to reflect that. This is basically okay so long as everything inflates at the same time; fuel costs, material costs, labour costs, earnings, public spending. As we can plainly see, however, this is not currently the case. This is because inflation is actually caused by interest.

Let's say I go to my local bank for a loan ( :lol:) of £1,000. The high street branch I go to can't lend me all of that money because it simply hasn't got it. It can't lend me other people's deposited money because that's illegal, so the high street bank goes up the chain to its corporate parent bank which issues it with enough credit to cover the loan, say £950. (The corporate parent first has to get that credit from an even higher up private central bank such as the Fed or BoE where the credit is created from nothing.) If I want cash, the high street bank can then lend me the cash deposited by someone else as they now have credit from above to cover the missing money.

So, I've got my grand, what do I care? Off to buy that lock of Cameron Diaz's hair from Shady Sid down the pub... Sid spends his cash on whatever Sid gets up to in that horrid cottage of his and the grand dissipates into the economy, finally ending up at another bank backing another loan. I get to sniff Cameron's hair all night long. Strange how she smells like old Fishy Peg, the barmaid from The Realm.

I pay my grand back, plus interest. £1,100 for argument's sake. That breaks down as the £50 the high street bank could afford to loan me, the £950 it borrowed to loan me and £100 out of my own pocket for interest. Out of this, the high street branch pays off the corporate parent with interest and fees and the corporate parent pays off the central bank with interest and fees. That all seems very jolly, but let's just look at that £100 interest. If the banks didn't create that £100, where did it come from?

In order to pay the interest on the loan I had to not pay for other stuff. Maybe I skipped some meals or bought fewer books or whatever. £100 of resources have been channelled out of my life and up the food chain to the central banks. I borrowed £50 worth of real money and out of that the banks generated £1,050 worth of fake money. Only when I've converted enough of my own resources into money to pay that loan back does the £1,050 become "real".

But I'm not the only one bleeding resources this way. Most people pay interest on one thing or another. Most companies. Most councils. The government, too. This, then, is the cause of inflation. Credit is converted into money by sucking actual wealth from society. And given that it takes only £50 to create £1,050 of credit (and that's not taking into account that under the fractional reserve lending system once the loan has been paid back the £100 interest they made can be used as surety against the creation of over £900 more in credit) it takes more and more credit and cash to keep the whole thing running. It's like trying to fill a bucket that has a hole in it. The credit in the system gradually devalues the money and the interest syphons off tangible wealth so more borrowing is needed, leading to a vicious upward spiral that drags prices up after it. Thus there is less money in the system and we have to start doing without things like a Sunday drive or the odd night out or a new road or some hospitals. Have to start spending less on our food, our homes, our police forces, our teachers and their tea and biscuits.

All because of privately created credit.

And if that's not waste, I don't know what is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 29 October, 2011, 02:29:14 AM
The problem with that model though is that the behaviour of money in the economy is an ecology, not a food chain. You're assuming that once the interest reaches the top of the figurative chain it stays there, as if there's a great underground vault where the gold piles up. This isn't the case. For a start, credit does not come from 'nothing' - it's essentially a plan for the disposition of your future earnings, which is why we have different credit ratings depending on people's confidence in your ability to follow that plan. Furthermore, the interest is not being "removed" from society at all - it will be returned in another form, backing other ventures... and hey, even JP Morgan might like to buy a new pair of socks every now and again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2011, 01:22:58 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 29 October, 2011, 02:29:14 AM
The problem with that model though is that the behaviour of money in the economy is an ecology, not a food chain. You're assuming that once the interest reaches the top of the figurative chain it stays there, as if there's a great underground vault where the gold piles up. This isn't the case. For a start, credit does not come from 'nothing' - it's essentially a plan for the disposition of your future earnings, which is why we have different credit ratings depending on people's confidence in your ability to follow that plan. Furthermore, the interest is not being "removed" from society at all - it will be returned in another form, backing other ventures... and hey, even JP Morgan might like to buy a new pair of socks every now and again.

I've been trying to get my head around the "money is an ecology" similie and I'm afraid I'm just not seeing it. I can imagine the economy/society as the ecology and money as the water in it. In this case, high street banks do the job of river banks, directing the flow to where it's needed. The water turns the water-wheels and turbines of industry as well as providing drinking water and sewer water. Private savings would be represented by garden ponds or private lakes if you're rich. Large lakes and resevoirs would represent the role central banks should provide. (This model, of course, doesn't consider rain - but I'd equate rain to the creation of new money, in an idealized model the rainfall would also be regulated to prevent floods and droughts.) In this model, it can be seen that the larger banks and corporations build dams, hoarding water and diverting it to where they want it to go. Any life downstream of the dam is starved of water and must relocate or perish. It is these "Hoover dams" within our ecology that are killing us.

I have to disagree with your view on interest. It is created from nothing. The process you speak of is just a formula for working interest out based on stuff that hasn't happened yet. The plan you mention surely does exist, but the credit itself is created from nothing - a ghost sitting on an abstract extracted from the future.

I must also take issue with your contention that the interest is "returned in another form". A small fraction of it certainly is released back into the system, purely to keep the fractional reserve levels as stable as possible (which isn't very). If all the interest were returned to society, then we wouldn't need all these cuts and austerity because there'd be enough money in the system for everyone, low to high, to have a decent life.

But, why pay interest at all? The Koran doesn't like it, and neither does the Bible. The people who own the private Hoover dams at the moment control all the water behind those dams and kindly let governments (and us) use that water at a cost. For every bucket of water, we've got to pay back a full bucket of water plus a glass of water. That glass of water is the interest. When millions of people are handing over all those seemingly insignificant extra glasses of water as well as repaying their buckets full, you can see how soon water starts to become scarce (removing resources from society). Even the government can't help you by regulating the flow of water as it can only control so much water - however much the people who own the Hoover dams graciously agree to release. The released water is metered and the government has to pay it back, plus the extra glasses. These borrowings and costs are passed on to us in the form taxes.

The solution is simple - to put those Hoover dams under the direct control of the people, through government. This way the water can be released in a more measured way, ensuring society has enough water flowing through it to make it all work decently. Once the dams are publically owned, there would be no need for interest. A nominal flat fee on some loans and mortgages would be enough to pay for the upkeep and operation of the dam.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 30 October, 2011, 07:47:15 PM
NOT SUITABLE FOR WORK.
You've been warned.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOg5GoFdTJ0




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 30 October, 2011, 11:12:56 PM
Gosh, is there still an appetite for this thread? I'm almost surprised.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 October, 2011, 05:08:19 PM
Of course there's waste in the private as well as the public sector.  But, surely, the difference is if a private sector company continues to waste money it will eventually go skint; the only victims being the employees of and the suppliers to that company.  But we are all victims of waste in the public sector, as we are paying for it in our taxes.  That is why waste in the public sector needs to be sorted.

The difference is if a private company goes skint, the only victims are the employees of and the suppliers to (and the shareholders of) that company. If the public sector were to go skint, children wouldn't get schooled, crime wouldn't get policed, elderly people wouldn't get looked after, roads wouldn't get repaired and sick people would die for lack of treatment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 06:08:48 PM
It's getting increasingly difficult to decide whether some of the stuff I find should be posted here or in the "Truth?" thread.

Admittedly, I don't watch TV news much any more, but when I do catch it I don't hear any newsreadrers or commentators talking about how well Iceland seems to be doing since they rejected the Central Banks' plans. I guess that if the media isn't talking about it then the politicians aren't talking about it either.

Anyhoo, here's a nice little article I stumbled across that may be of particular interest to Greek and Irish Earthlets: Will Greece Pull an Iceland ... And Tell the Banks to Pound Sand? (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/11/will-greece-pull-an-iceland-and-tell-the-banks-to-pound-sand.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 07:12:32 PM
Iceland aren't in the Euro, they're a relatively young country with a simple infrastructure that serves a tiny population of 318,000. They had little choice but to default and not the fear of an army of tanks waiting to roll in when they did.

With such a complex structure of old politics and interwoven currency/economies, for any country in Europe to be the one that pulls the trigger will be a brave move on their part fraught with international and national tension. That's why Papandreou -bluffing the best bailout deal in the poker game- is letting the Greek people decide which way to go instead of doing it himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 07:30:58 PM
Yes, I don't deny that this is a fragile time. Things could go either way at the moment but I sense a great opportunity ahead.

That's why I post this stuff - I'm no expert, far from it, but I do think I see a few of those fundamental flaws and so I try and point them out. The time will come when we'll have to make a decision, as a planet or as a country or just as a person, whether to continue much as we are or to try something different. Therefore I say - there are alternatives to the austerity demanded of you by the rich. The Austerity Road, well, I reckon we can all guess where that leads - but the Alternative Road, I am convinced, may lead us all into a Second Renaissance.

But then, I always was a dreamer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 07:42:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 07:30:58 PM
The time will come when we'll have to make a decision, as a planet or as a country or just as a person, whether to continue much as we are or to try something different.


I believe that decision will be made for us whether we like it or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 07:53:09 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 07:42:42 PM
I believe that decision will be made for us whether we like it or not.

That's just the kind of defeatist attitude that's going to lose us this war, soldier!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 07:54:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 07:53:09 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 07:42:42 PM
I believe that decision will be made for us whether we like it or not.

That's just the kind of defeatist attitude that's going to lose us this war, soldier!


You can't fight nature and the limitation of resources.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 08:17:02 PM
Precisely - which is exactly what we're doing right now. We're running way too many linear processes, especially in manufacturing. For example, it's perfectly easy to create biodegradable plastics and yet we still choose to pump out ton after ton of this stuff as bottles that just end up in landfills or deep ocean gyres and entering the food chain all along the way. It's madness the amount of resources we put into stuff that just gets chucked away. (Find a documentary entitled "Addicted to Plastic" for a peep into this unsettling subject).

There are better ways - all we have lacked until now is the will to change. Now the will is emerging, so it's important to know what needs changing and how to proceed responsibly. So yes, I agree with your last statement entirely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 08:34:36 PM
Whatever we do will be decided by the contraction of mass industry, however we decide to react to that in the meantime, the result will be the same, living within our means.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 02 November, 2011, 08:43:22 PM
More like Ex-Zorba-tant the Greek.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 08:53:24 PM
My post agreeing with Joe again got swallowed up somehow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 08:59:52 PM
Roger's good with the swallow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2011, 09:11:11 PM
His Mom's better...

And don't ask me how I know. I just know, okay?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 02 November, 2011, 09:58:17 PM
Hey Soap, don't try and blame me for your country's Econo-Mick calamity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 November, 2011, 11:08:15 PM


Au contraire Monsieur Godpleton I wouldn't think of it, 'youse' fucked our country up long before we did and now we own all your post-office savings, merci.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 November, 2011, 09:24:07 PM
I did my bit for the economy over the last week. I never do overtime but last week I did over 25 hours and the tax from this will help pay off the national debt. You can all thank me up Thought Bubble, when I spend that 25 hours worth of dosh, more tax to the economy. Fuck me I think I'm single handedly gonna save our country  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 November, 2011, 09:33:20 PM
Um, actually the tax you paid will make the national debt worse. This is because you gave the government a little more money, which they can point to and say "hey, here's a little more tax money - now we can borrow more created money from the private banks against that."

Sorry to burst your Thought Bubble :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 November, 2011, 09:34:47 PM
You had to spoil it didn't you  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 November, 2011, 09:41:04 PM
It's what I do :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 06 November, 2011, 10:08:00 PM
I do your mom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 November, 2011, 10:10:31 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 06 November, 2011, 10:08:00 PM
I do your mom.


You pay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 November, 2011, 10:32:52 PM
I know. She says you're very pedestrian.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 06 November, 2011, 10:47:17 PM
I was saying that I cut your mom's hair. If that's what she says I'll just let you deal with it, you ridiculous little man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 December, 2011, 08:19:26 PM
I need to leave this stupid wee country before I die of shame (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-15948835)

All he's really achieved here, is to give a 15 year old a pretty good reason not to like Catholics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 December, 2011, 09:49:48 PM
New Sinn Féin are the same as old school Fianna Fáil. We need to clear the decks of these low frequency fucks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 December, 2011, 09:56:33 PM
Is there a word for the very specific type of shame you experience when listening to an Irish Mayor?  Because it would be disturbingly useful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMt160pToxY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 01 December, 2011, 11:45:28 PM
The comments on that video are awesome. Ireland is a wonderful country, so it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 December, 2011, 12:14:38 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 01 December, 2011, 11:45:28 PM
The comments on that video are awesome. Ireland is a wonderful country, so it is.


Xenoenvy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 December, 2011, 08:27:43 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 01 December, 2011, 11:45:28 PM
Ireland is a wonderful country, so it is.

It was, before the Black Africans ruined it.  All 40,000 of them (1% of the population), overwhelming us like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 04 January, 2012, 05:20:44 PM
RICK SANTORUM FOR PRESIDENT WWWWWHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOO!

Google "santorum" if you are not at work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 04 January, 2012, 05:27:30 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 04 January, 2012, 05:20:44 PMGoogle "santorum" if you are not at work.

Oh my. There is even a Wikipedia article on it that is probably NSFW:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 January, 2012, 06:09:35 PM
It's been a very successful campaign.  I came across santorum (oh have your fun) a while back, and didn't realise it wasn't a 'real' term. I suppose it is now!  Now, what could 'godpletoning' be?   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 04 January, 2012, 06:10:16 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 January, 2012, 06:09:35 PM
It's been a very successful campaign.  I came across santorum (oh have your fun) a while back, and didn't realise it wasn't a 'real' term. I suppose it is now!  Now, what could 'godpletoning' be?

Whatever it is, it involves someone's mum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 05 January, 2012, 08:11:50 PM
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattcherette/25-people-who-just-googled-santorum-for-the-firs
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 05 January, 2012, 09:10:34 PM
Frothy anal discharge might be one way to describe some of his views as well - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9671217.stm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2012, 09:15:36 PM
It's either Mitt or Newt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 05 January, 2012, 09:54:20 PM
http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/rick-santorum-quotes-as-new-yorker-cartoons
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 January, 2012, 04:20:47 AM
I was stunned to hear that one of Labours front benchers has been found out to be a racist and amazingly I found this on the Mirror (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2012/01/05/labour-mp-diane-abbott-apologises-after-racist-tweet-storm-115875-23681033/) website.
It was out of context, blah, blah, blah. Next she'll be telling us that she has 'white' friends  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 09 January, 2012, 11:54:59 PM
We all love firing people, Mitt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 10 January, 2012, 07:57:04 AM
Mitt Romney is the best chance the Republicans have of taking back the White House, for several reasons;

1) he's not a right-wing ideologue, but is a moderate conservative, and can thus garner votes from the Republican base (especially if he has Marco Rubio or Chris Christie as VP), independents, and soft Democrats who don't like Obama's hard-left socialism.

2) he's not tainted by the profligate Republican Congress the American electorate threw out in 2006 and 2008.

3) he has executive experience - a Republican governor in the most liberal state in the union (Mass.) - and extensive private sector experience, which is a heck of a lot more than Barack Hussein Obama had when he was elected President!

4) he's been preparing for the White House run since his first campaign ended in 2008, and has both the money and the infrastructure to win not only the primary/caucus process, but to go toe-to-toe with Obama and his erstwhile fellow travellers in what amounts to the American press these days.

5) he has barely put a foot wrong thus far in the campaign - with the exception of the $10, 000 bet he tried to make with Texas governor Rick Perry - and if you think that's just luck, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya!

I would personally agree with Rick Santorum (and that link was just disgusting, which is what I'd expect from that usual crowd of degenerates and reprobates, they're not only a disgrace to the human race, they're a public health hazard into the bargain), Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, et al, but they couldn't win the general election against Obama, and Romney CAN, period!  Republicans cannot afford ideological purity this year, the American electorate haven't forgotten why they voted them out a mere few years ago, and the broader the coalition behind the Republican nominee, the greater the chance of winning the White House (it's how Stephen Harper and the Conservatives in Canada were able to regain a majority in the federal House of Commons last year for the first time in 18 years)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2012, 08:08:19 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 10 January, 2012, 07:57:04 AM
I would personally agree with Rick Santorum [...] Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, et al

You're a funny guy, Beaky.  You're seriously telling us that you'd agree with Perry and Santorum?  Semi-human garbage though they be?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 10 January, 2012, 08:40:03 AM
I fail to see how you think it's funny Tordelback dude, I agree with their conservative - both social and economic - positions, in that I believe EVERY unborn child has a right to life, in that I believe that marriage should be EXCLUSIVELY between one man and one woman, in that I believe that that you should be able to keep more of the money you earn instead of the government taxing you excessively and giving it to others who didn't earn it, in that I believe that a nation should have a robust foreign policy agenda that promotes freedom and liberty and treats allies as friends and enemies as foes (not the other way round like Obama), and in that I believe the free world should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel because if they fall to the barbaric Islamic hordes then Europe is next, geddit?

You can disagree with conservative views if you like, no problem there, but please don't do what most of the organised Left do and attempt to discredit conservative opinions by calling them "mad" or "funny" or "extreme" or whatever, it's amazing how quickly liberal 'tolerance' for diversity quickly disappears when that diversity includes an opinion that happens to fall on the right (in more ways than one) side of the political spectrum... but just so I don't end this post on a sour note - :D - there ya go, that's better...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2012, 08:43:41 AM
Thank you for your polite response to my very impolite comment Beaky, but I think we had best agree to fundamentally, utterly, completely disagree!  It is good that we can find common ground in our affection for a comic, but, uh, I think that's about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 January, 2012, 09:20:49 AM
I wouldn't presume that anyone is automatically left-wing just because they don't agree with your views Beaky -an extremist position- nor would I see your views as particularly 'conservative' or promoting freedom and liberty but that's politics for ya. One man's left is another's right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2012, 10:36:02 AM
"barbaric Islamic hordes"?

Good grief.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2012, 10:48:11 AM
Don't worry Sharky, the hordes aren't as large as you might think - after all, there's no such thing as Palestinians, so that's about 3 million less bloodthirsty barbarians at the gate.  I know, 'cos Gingrich told me so.

I'm going to shut up now.  (-cheering erupts-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 10 January, 2012, 10:57:38 AM
I like Clint

http://www.thereformedbroker.com/2011/09/18/why-clint-eastwood-isnt-a-republican-anymore/

"I was an Eisenhower Republican when I started out at 21, because he promised to get us out of the Korean War. And over the years, I realized there was a Republican philosophy that I liked. And then they lost it. And libertarians had more of it. Because what I really believe is, let's spend a little more time leaving everybody alone. These people who are making a big deal out of gay marriage? I don't give a fuck about who wants to get married to anybody else! Why not?! We're making a big deal out of things we shouldn't be making a deal out of."


as you were
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 10 January, 2012, 11:34:24 AM
Wait, we had a teabagger on the board and he was saying things? Goddamnit, that'll teach me to stay up all night drinking Pepsi.




Though I suppose it wouldn't have mattered if I had been awake because it looks like I forgot to bring my pokeballs to work today. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2012, 05:23:22 PM
Mitt Romney has about as much chance of being the next President of the United States as Wallace, oops! sorry, Ed Miliband has of being the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 10 January, 2012, 05:28:58 PM
We'll just have to wait for the results from the next Burgerbilt conference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 10 January, 2012, 05:38:28 PM
NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARIES TODAY WHOO
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 10 January, 2012, 09:39:43 PM
I've been depressed by this thread all day...I should let it go
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 January, 2012, 12:25:50 AM
You are johnnystress.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 January, 2012, 01:48:33 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 January, 2012, 08:43:41 AM
Thank you for your polite response to my very impolite comment Beaky, but I think we had best agree to fundamentally, utterly, completely disagree!  It is good that we can find common ground in our affection for a comic, but, uh, I think that's about it.

You're welcome dude, you're a gentleman, now onto that Dredd trailer (on another thread, of course)...

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 10 January, 2012, 09:20:49 AM
I wouldn't presume that anyone is automatically left-wing just because they don't agree with your views Beaky -an extremist position- nor would I see your views as particularly 'conservative' or promoting freedom and liberty but that's politics for ya. One man's left is another's right.

I never said anyone was automatically left-wing because they disagreed with my views, but point taken nonetheless, although I strongly disagree that my opinions are "extreme", THAT'S the point I was trying to make in that the organised Left attempt to paint everyone who holds a conservative viewpoint as 'extreme', my views on the protection of life and the institution of marriage are exactly that reflected in the Irish Constitution, just saying, but good points made, I understand and respect your viewpoint...

Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2012, 05:23:22 PM
Mitt Romney has about as much chance of being the next President of the United States as Wallace, oops! sorry, Ed Miliband has of being the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom!

Not according to recent opinion polls which put Mitt Romney around six points ahead of Obama, but things can change on a dime, and certainly Republicans are going to have to fight tooth-and-nail and hammer-and-tongs to get back the White House, they cannot take for granted they'll beat Obama, George Soros' manchuriuan president isn't gonna go quietly into the night without a low-down-and-dirty Chicago brawl... now what about that whole Scottish independence thing then...?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 January, 2012, 03:53:33 PM
Ah! Beaky Smoochies, ......the Scottish Independence thing......... Now, I wouldn't have brought this subject up myself but, being as you've asked for my opinion, as an Englishman I hope and pray that I live long enough to see the day when they depart!!  But, to be honest, I think our friends north of the Border will "bottle" it.  Incidentally, I think that a referendum that could result in the breakup of the United Kingdom should be voted on by every part of the United Kingdom and, if it was, I feel we would definitely be saying "Bye, bye" to Scotland!!  ...................... Well, you did ask!!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 11 January, 2012, 07:08:17 PM
Wish somebody would offer the English Independence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 11 January, 2012, 07:10:27 PM
My first decree as Boarder of the Year 2011 is that this thread only be used for stupid jokes from now on as Linker-in-Chief johnnystress is feeling unwell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 January, 2012, 07:21:11 PM
I wish the government would offer English independence to.  Then maybe us Jocks could stop subsidising your Olympics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 11 January, 2012, 07:32:32 PM
Tut,  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 January, 2012, 08:34:13 PM
I say go for a referendum. But you can guarantee that if it fails there will be a push for another.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 11 January, 2012, 08:37:38 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 11 January, 2012, 07:10:27 PM
My first decree as Boarder of the Year 2011 is that this thread only be used for stupid jokes from now on as Linker-in-Chief johnnystress is feeling unwell.

Just the feeling off your favourite pub being invaded by people you find objectionable

I'll get over it

Thanks though
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 January, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 January, 2012, 01:48:33 AM
I never said anyone was automatically left-wing because they disagreed with my views, but point taken nonetheless, although I strongly disagree that my opinions are "extreme", THAT'S the point I was trying to make in that the organised Left attempt to paint everyone who holds a conservative viewpoint as 'extreme', my views on the protection of life and the institution of marriage are exactly that reflected in the Irish Constitution, just saying, but good points made, I understand and respect your viewpoint...


Fair enough, but if Republicans/Conservatives are the 'guardians' of morality and the sanctity of marriage why is it the political party with the most sex offenders, paedophiles and hypocritic closet-gay-men? Not to mention Mitt Romney's polygamistic potential for multiple wives, more beds in the White House please!

I'm no admirer of the Democrats lack of scruples either but personally I think politics shouldn't have anything to do with how consenting adults wish to live their own private lives. Whatever unions they choose to live within should be at least equal with the rights of everyone else and respected. That kind of urge to control such a private thing is 'extreme' to me.

There are plenty of anachronisms I could point out in the Irish Constitution -including the blasphemy law- that really have no bearing on rationality and the rights of individuals, picking the ones that suit an argument doesn't really mean anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 11 January, 2012, 11:14:34 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 11 January, 2012, 07:21:11 PM
I wish the government would offer English independence to.  Then maybe us Jocks could stop subsidising your Olympics.

'Our' Olympics?

I wanted nothing to do with that jumped up sports day...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 January, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
Whatever unions they choose to live within should be at least equal with the rights of everyone else and respected. That kind of urge to control such a private thing is 'extreme' to me.

Believe it or not, I actually agree with you to a point, what consenting adults choose to do with each other is their business alone (as Thomas Jefferson once said, "That government is best which governs least"), and why government is even concerned with who marries who, I'll never know, you didn't even have to register your marriage with the government in Great Britain before the 1840's, and in Ireland (when you lot were still part of the U.K.) before the 1860's, who you choose to marry is, or rather SHOULD be, between you, your spouse-to-be, the church (if you want a religious ceremony), and God - the only time you should have to present any official certification of marriage would be for purposes of taxation and/or adoption, apart from that, leave people alone to live their lives as they see fit, I think THAT'S a pretty conservative opinion, I'll hope you agree, Joe my friend...

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 January, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
There are plenty of anachronisms I could point out in the Irish Constitution -including the blasphemy law- that really have no bearing on rationality and the rights of individuals, picking the ones that suit an argument doesn't really mean anything.

Tsk, tsk, Joe, Dev will be turning in his grave if he heard that, I don't know what The Big Fella' would have made of it, though ;)...

As for the Scottish independence thing, if I were David Cameron, I'd be pushing for the 'devo max' option to be included in the referendum, if that question is included, I'll bet every penny I own right now that the Scottish people will reject full independence but go with that instead, in which case, the Union survives intact, with Cameron claiming credit for saving it via his gamble on 'devo max', AND the Conservatives get rid of almost all (with probably a single-digit number of Scots MP's returning to Westminster as opposed to the current 52) those Scottish Labour and Lib Dem MP's, making it much harder for the Left to return to Downing Street anytime soon, it really is a win-win situation for the Tories, in my opinion...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 12 January, 2012, 08:12:22 AM
Well if they're not our olympics, and they're not your olympics...must just belong to Boris.  Bless 'im, the Tories'll keep him in a job at any cost.

as for devo max as an appeasement policy, labour tried the same thing in'97 with devolution.  They thought it would kill nationalism stone dead. The main Westminster parties are pushing for a vote right now because only about thirty percent ofscots would vote for independence right now. The SNP want another couple of years to try to get this figure up.  That said, the best way to get more people to support the snp is for Cameron to tell them not to. The conservatives are the fourth party at Holyrood, almost a fringe party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 January, 2012, 08:42:29 AM
I guess the feeling is he can do less damage as Mayor than as leader of the Conservative party...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 January, 2012, 08:52:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 04:40:14 AMTsk, tsk, Joe, Dev will be turning in his grave if he heard that


Good, considering he handed the running of the country over to the Catholic church and destroyed the civil service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 January, 2012, 09:10:54 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 January, 2012, 08:52:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 04:40:14 AMTsk, tsk, Joe, Dev will be turning in his grave if he heard that

Good, considering he handed the running of the country over to the Catholic church and destroyed the civil service.

The cult of DeValera, Champion of the Republic, annoys me intensely, despite my emerging from school fully indoctrinated in it, and his being pally with my granddad.  Where this country might be now if that treacherous hypocrite hadn't kept us groveling in the shit for nearly 50 years - he's Ireland's Franco, with the magdelene asylums, laundries and industrial schools standing in for the Generalisimo's concentration camps.  Being played by Alan Rickman isn't punishment enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 January, 2012, 09:30:04 AM
Making it compulsory to speak gaeilge -very few could- to enter the civil service was a disastrous policy that meant those without experience, but had the 'language', could only be given jobs. Mostly people from rural backgrounds/gaeilge strongholds, excluding everyone else. Also a method of getting rid of experienced Protestants with job knowledge from positions of administration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 09:34:53 AM
I'm not championing Dev, Tordelback dude, don't get me wrong, both you and Joe are bang-on correct about the damage he did to Ireland - both north and south - the Free State Constitution was a decent document, in my opinion, which I would've enthusiastically supported, it was Dev and the Fianna Fail wackos that tore it up and replaced it with a theocratic Constitution in 1937 that both put Ireland back decades, but also alienated most Irish Protestants, north and south, with it's adherence to the Mother Church, not to mention the illegal and highly provocative territorial claim to the north, which put Unionist heckles up, and virtually destroyed the relative good relations the two states had for the first decade of partition... and gave Paisley all the ammunition he ever needed to go on a rampage (and look where that ended)!

If you'll do me the courtesy of allowing a controversial statement, I personally think that if the U.K. government had offered the Irish Parliamentary Party what we are now referring to today as 'devo-max' (the Irish, minus the six counties, take care of every legislative matter via their own bicameral parliament, except foreign policy and defence, maintain a few MP's at Westminster to have representation in those two remaining areas, and remain in the Union but with national status) in 1914, and implemented it immediatly instead of waiting for the end of WW1, Eire could still be part of the Union today, would be much better off (IMHO), and we all could have been spared four decades of bloody mayhem, just a thought, but I'll just duck for cover now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 January, 2012, 09:44:08 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 09:34:53 AM
If you'll do me the courtesy of allowing a controversial statement, I personally think that if the U.K. government had offered the Irish Parliamentary Party what we are now referring to today as 'devo-max' (the Irish, minus the six counties, take care of everything except foreign policy and defence, and remain in the Union, but with national status) in 1914, and implemented it immediatly instead of waiting for the end of WW1, Eire could still be part of the Union today, would be much better off (IMHO), and we all could have been spared four decades of bloody mayhem, just a thought, but I'll just duck for cover now...

There's no question that if the Third Home Rule Bill had been enacted in 1914 things would have played out very differently, but I'm not sure permanent partition would have been part of it.  Sadly, I suspect assholes with guns and the cries of poets in the ears would still have done something stupid at some point down the road.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 January, 2012, 09:50:38 AM
Churchill offered Dev a United Ireland if he promised to throw in his lot against Hitler and allow the British access to Irish ports, Dev refused because he didn't want to have Prods sitting in the Dublin Parliament. Religion and politics don't mix.


Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 09:34:53 AMIf you'll do me the courtesy of allowing a controversial statement, I personally think that if the U.K. government had offered the Irish Parliamentary Party what we are now referring to today as 'devo-max' (the Irish, minus the six counties, take care of every legislative matter via their own bicameral parliament, except foreign policy and defence, maintain a few MP's at Westminster to have representation in those two remaining areas, and remain in the Union but with national status) in 1914, and implemented it immediatly instead of waiting for the end of WW1, Eire could still be part of the Union today, would be much better off (IMHO), and we all could have been spared four decades of bloody mayhem, just a thought, but I'll just duck for cover now...


It would never have happened -regarding either side- after hundreds of years of oppression unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 10:15:41 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 January, 2012, 09:50:38 AM
Churchill offered Dev a United Ireland if he promised to throw in his lot against Hitler and allow the British access to Irish ports, Dev refused because he didn't want to have Prods sitting in the Dublin Parliament. Religion and politics don't mix.

I don't think it was because he hated Prods, Joe, Dev was against Eire leaving the Commonwealth, and didn't even turn up to the ceremony in Dublin to mark Eire becoming a republic in 1949, because he thought it would help placate Unionists if some nominal connection to the Crown was maintained.  As far as Churchill's offer of a united Ireland, Dev was a canny fox and knew Churchill had no way to implement it even if Eire joined the war effort, northern Unionists would have went ballistic and threatened all-out resistance with the guns they smuggled in back in 1912, and we'd be back to square one all over again... and besides, there was already Prods in both the Dail and the Senate, not to mention the first President of the Irish Republic, Douglas Hyde, being a Protestant himself!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 January, 2012, 11:35:47 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 January, 2012, 10:15:41 AMI don't think it was because he hated Prods, ... and besides, there was already Prods in both the Dail and the Senate, not to mention the first President of the Irish Republic, Douglas Hyde, being a Protestant himself!


I never said he hated Prods but having a Dáil with a large Protestant representation from the North was not desirable for Dev's nor the Church's "Catholic Ireland".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 15 January, 2012, 06:17:06 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 14 January, 2012, 11:35:47 AM
I never said he hated Prods but having a Dáil with a large Protestant representation from the North was not desirable for Dev's nor the Church's "Catholic Ireland".

True, you never actually said that, apologies on my part for picking that up wrong :-[, but if the north had thrown their lot in with the independent Irish state (and, speaking as a northern Protestant myself, sometimes I genuinely ponder whether we should have, with certain cast-iron political/economic/cultural guarantees codified in a written Constitution), they would have had no more TD's in Dail Eireann than MP's in Westminster, as we would still have retained the northern parliament (Collins and Griffith both readily agreed to that during the Anglo-Irish Treaty negotiations), it's the southern Unionists that were not represented proportionally there- the percentage of Protestants in the 26 counties after partition was 10%, meaning if there was, say, 150 in the Dail, then 15 should have been southern Unionists (there was only 4 out of 128 TD's), and if you add that to the likely number of northern Protestant TD's (had they thrown their lot in with the rest of Ireland), that would have constituted another, say, 12 (conservative estimate based on number of Unionist MP's at Westminster), that's 27 Protestant TD's out of a potential 166-member Dail (16 northern TD's in total; 12 Unionist and 4 Nationalist, based on population demographics at the time), and considering you also had Fine Gael (or their forerunners that I can't spell), Sinn Fein, Labour, and independents, I'm not sure if they wouuld have made THAT big a difference, considering coalition governments in Eire didn't really become a permanent fixture until 1989 onwards, but as ever, I could be wrong, you live there Joe, so I'll defer to you as always...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 January, 2012, 12:12:02 PM
My point is there would've been a large voting block of Nothern Protestants now included in the body politic of the country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ICONIC_TM on 15 January, 2012, 02:28:49 PM
Old Boy Down The Pub Told Me, Never Talk About Football, Politics Or Religion. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 January, 2012, 02:57:10 PM
130 pages in, it's called 'the Political Thread'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ICONIC_TM on 15 January, 2012, 03:10:43 PM
And Things Are Still The Same?   ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 January, 2012, 03:21:03 PM
That's politics for ya.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 January, 2012, 03:40:32 PM
Quote from: MARVELMAGPIE on 15 January, 2012, 03:10:43 PM
And Things Are Still The Same?   ::) ::) ::)


No peterwolf left ages ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ICONIC_TM on 15 January, 2012, 06:57:00 PM
K Moody Ill Keep My Mouth Shut?  :|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2012, 04:48:14 PM
In a few days we have a chance to persuade MPs to back a new law that would give voters the power to sack MPs who don't do their job properly. If the vote goes the right way, MPs who scrounge thousands on expenses or break their promises can be made to face a new election and answer to voters.

Put Voters in Charge of MPs (http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/speakout/voters-in-charge)

I wonder what the outcome of this vote will be?  :crazy:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 18 January, 2012, 10:11:17 PM
M.P.'s 1 ... Voters 0
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 24 January, 2012, 08:17:39 PM
Today in Rick Santorum:

Quote"I believe and I think that the right approach is to accept this horribly created, in the sense of rape, but nevertheless, in a very broken way, a gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you. As you know, in lots of different aspects of our life we have horrible things happening. I can't think of anything more horrible, but nevertheless we have to make the best out of a bad situation. And that is making the best of a bad situation."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: flintlockjaw on 24 January, 2012, 08:21:40 PM
Rick Sanitarium.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 28 January, 2012, 11:33:07 PM
NSFW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOg5GoFdTJ0&feature=related





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 04:13:43 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 24 January, 2012, 08:17:39 PM
Today in Rick Santorum:
Quote"I believe and I think that the right approach is to accept this horribly created, in the sense of rape, but nevertheless, in a very broken way, a gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you. As you know, in lots of different aspects of our life we have horrible things happening. I can't think of anything more horrible, but nevertheless we have to make the best out of a bad situation. And that is making the best of a bad situation."
Quote from: flintlockjaw on 24 January, 2012, 08:21:40 PM
Rick Sanitarium.

Why is that in any mad or crazy, the act of rape may have been a terrible crime, but the life that was the product of that crime deserves a chance the same as any other, why compound one wrong with the commission of another?  It's very easy to try and smear conservatives like Rick Santorum - or myself - with derogatory or derisory remarks, but would you rather the unborn have no rights whatsoever, in which case, welcome to Nazi Germany reborn... a place that Great Britain is at unfortunately, but not Eire yet (although they have a problem with some pretty bad anti-semitism judging by their attitudes to Israel most times)!

I know I'm stepping on some touchy territory here, I didn't start it but I'll sure as hell finish it, so let the backlash begin, all form an orderly queue...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2012, 06:39:04 AM
Wrote a long one, hovered over 'post', thought better of it.  Life's too short.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 29 January, 2012, 07:52:57 AM
You should always "look on the bright side of life".... Voltaire's Pangloss did the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 09:11:29 AM
Quote from: wonkychop on 29 January, 2012, 07:52:57 AM
You should always "look on the bright side of life".... Voltaire's Pangloss did the same.

Yeah, while we're name-checking Voltaire, let's also quote him, "the best form of government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination"... if that's what you'd like to be ruled by, go right ahead, I'll stick with Thomas Jefferson et al!

By the way, hi Scott...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 29 January, 2012, 09:40:12 AM
I took that to be his opinion on governments in general, and not as a blueprint for power. he is saying all forms of governments have failed, not : this is my model for rule of the populace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2012, 02:34:42 PM
Having been involved with abortion three times in my life I can say that the decision is never made lightly and is as intensely emotional as anything you're likely to experience. The guilt and regret I carry are enormous and I can only guess what my exes carry with them.

In my view, the only involvement governments should have in this area (as with all areas of personal life) is to provide clear, helpful information and viable and safe options. The decision is not, never was and never will be theirs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 January, 2012, 02:40:36 PM
After last night, I resolve to stop smearing Santorum everywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 January, 2012, 04:22:23 PM
Quotea gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you.
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 04:13:43 AM
Why is that in any mad or crazy,

Maybe because it suggests that God is allowing rape to occur in order to give people children.

I would have thought that anyone with a modicum of sense, whatever their personal beliefs, would realise that this is a bit of a totally f**ked up thing to say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 29 January, 2012, 09:06:53 PM
A rape victim giving birth to the act will be constantly reminded of the rape every time she looks at the child. Yes she could give up the child for adoption but imagine the child locating her when it is older. "Mum why did you give me away".
If don't believe in god, why should you be forced by their rules.*
God is such a wonderful deity to allow these things to happen.
*This is a shortened version of what I was going to send but I have deleted quite a lot as I don't want to stir up any shit.




V




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2012, 09:11:16 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 29 January, 2012, 09:06:53 PM
*This is a shortened version of what I was going to send but I have deleted quite a lot as I don't want to stir up any shit.


You're a better man than I - I couldn't even manage a single sentence of response without losing the rag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2012, 10:10:48 PM
Tordels is wise.

This is one subject where generalizations definitely fall way short. Unless this is happening to you or those you love, it's best to judge in silence or, if that be your world, talk of it in quiet moments to your God and no one else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 January, 2012, 12:26:11 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 04:13:43 AM

I know I'm stepping on some touchy territory here, I didn't start it but I'll sure as hell finish it, so let the backlash begin, all form an orderly queue...


You're on a web-forum, what could you possibly finish and how? This ain't a war.

I always thought true Conservatives were all about keeping things at home, not getting involved and telling others how things should be?


You need a weekend at Rancho Relaxo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 30 January, 2012, 05:12:03 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2012, 02:34:42 PM
Having been involved with abortion three times in my life I can say that the decision is never made lightly and is as intensely emotional as anything you're likely to experience. The guilt and regret I carry are enormous and I can only guess what my exes carry with them.
In my view, the only involvement governments should have in this area (as with all areas of personal life) is to provide clear, helpful information and viable and safe options. The decision is not, never was and never will be theirs.

Well said Shark, my condolences and sympathies to you and your exes on what was no doubt a painful decision not made in haste or cavalierly, but I think government has a duty to protect the most innocent and vunerable in society, and if that's not the unborn, I dunno what is, just my opinion.

Quote from: M.I.K. on 29 January, 2012, 04:22:23 PM
Quotea gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you.
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 04:13:43 AM
Why is that in any mad or crazy,
Maybe because it suggests that God is allowing rape to occur in order to give people children.
I would have thought that anyone with a modicum of sense, whatever their personal beliefs, would realise that this is a bit of a totally f**ked up thing to say.

That's not what he said or meant, he meant that the actual rape may not have been God's will, but the baby was, I happen to believe there are no 'accidental' people, once again, my opinion.

Quote from: vzzbux on 29 January, 2012, 09:06:53 PM
A rape victim giving birth to the act will be constantly reminded of the rape every time she looks at the child. Yes she could give up the child for adoption but imagine the child locating her when it is older. "Mum why did you give me away".
If don't believe in god, why should you be forced by their rules.*
God is such a wonderful deity to allow these things to happen.

I suggest you talk to a rape victim who had an abortion after the fact, and they'll tell you they wish they could back and undo the abortive act itself, and those who kept the child are thankful every day for the child that may have been conceived in a crime, but they have no regrets about keeping what has turned out to be the greatest thing in their lives, the offspring.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 January, 2012, 12:26:11 AM
You're on a web-forum, what could you possibly finish and how? This ain't a war.
I always thought true Conservatives were all about keeping things at home, not getting involved and telling others how things should be?
You need a weekend at Rancho Relaxo.

Just a manner of speaking, a touch of hyperbole on my part, Joe dude, and I agree that conservatives are, to a degree, about not telling others how to live their lives, but it's also about sticking up for the most vunerable in society that don't have a voice, and advocating for a society that cherishes life, marriage, and the family, not the destructive ideology of socialism, liberalism, and relativism that has done so much damage these last five or six decades.  No Rancho Relaxo needed here, but what I think I WILL do is maybe give this thread a wide berth in future, it seems to bring out the worst in people, and I like this forum (and EVERYONE on it, yes everyone) too much to stir the doo-doo anymore and potentially cause bad feelings or a feud to arise, so as one Walter Kovacs, a.k.a. Rorshach, eloquently stated "I live my life free of compromise, step into the shadow without complaint or regret...", see y'all on the Dredd threads, 'nuff said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 30 January, 2012, 09:42:10 AM
From now on this thread is ABORTED to me.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 09:57:25 AM
I respect your views Beaky, but I do not share them. The problem for me is, what you're trying to describe would probably be better off under a thread with the heading "My Religious Beliefs" rather than a thread about politics. No hard feelings but I know of a section of the Christian faith who believe blood tranfusions and so on to be against the will of God. You seem to be angling for this with your views on childbirth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 10:11:05 AM
The person who tries to separate someone's beliefs from their politics has an odd view of humanity.  Politics are a way to see one's beliefs enacted in the world.  The nature of those beliefs will determine to what extent the individual requires their own beliefs to take precedence over others', but it's always about shaping the kind of world you believe to be the best.  If it's God, Buddha, Marx, Dawkins, Thoreau, B F Skinner, 4Chan, Crowley, drugs, Gary Gygax or Sharky's little voice that shapes the beliefs makes little difference.  Be they rationally determined after a period of prolonged statistical analysis, or handed down on stone tablets, and whether it's 'do what thou wilst' or 'ein reich, ein volk', your beliefs and a helthy dose of expediency are what guide your politics. 

Also, I  don't think that's what Beaky was saying.  He's coming it from a view of individual rights that sees a zygote having an equal weight as an adult.  Whether he's religiously inspired to this... perspective is neither here nor there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 30 January, 2012, 10:31:46 AM
Just read through the last few pages of this thread. F*ck me  :o.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 January, 2012, 10:36:58 AM
Quote from: Rick Santoruma gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you.

Here in the UK, it's estimated twelve per cent (http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/miscarriage/pages/introduction.aspx) of all clinically recognized pregnancies end in miscarriage. Unrecognized miscarriages are estimated to be between forty and sixty per cent (http://www.tommys.org/page.aspx?pid=383).

God's Will, indeed. And making Him far more prolific than any abortion clinic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spaceghost on 30 January, 2012, 10:40:05 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 January, 2012, 05:12:03 AM
the actual rape may not have been God's will, but the baby was, I happen to believe there are no 'accidental' people, once again, my opinion.

This is something I have trouble understanding. I've heard religious people mention 'God's will' a lot as if events somehow transpire according to some grand plan that God has for us. But also, it's usually said that God gave us free will to allow us to live our own lives free from his influence.

You can't have it both ways. Either God is manipulating events on Earth or he isn't.

Example: a friend at work was involved in a car accident about 20 years ago which resulted in her sister being brain damaged. They are a religious family and took counsel with their priest who gave them the 'God works in mysterious ways' speech.

Now. The man who crashed his car into them; was God steering him into their car? No, the driver was in control and he has free will. Did God make sure my friend's family were parked in that spot ensuring they would be hit? No, they have free will and they had decided it for themselves. All things happen due to people making decisions for themselves and are usually completely random, unless you believe God is planting subliminal suggestions in our minds in order to get us into these situations which is a really creepy thought.

Going back to the scenario above; if God didn't 'will' for the rape to take place, how can he possibly have 'willed' for the child to be born? You can't have one without the other. At what point and in what form did 'God's will' manifest itself?

These kinds of massive gaps in the logic of those who believe in God are extremely harmful in my opinion. They allow a certain absolution from responsibility which is very dangerous.

To paraphrase Judge Dredd; "There is no God, we're on our own and we'll just have to make it work."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 12:01:58 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 January, 2012, 05:12:03 AM

That's not what he said or meant, he meant that the actual rape may not have been God's will, but the baby was, I happen to believe there are no 'accidental' people, once again, my opinion.

Quote from: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 10:11:05 AM
Also, I  don't think that's what Beaky was saying.  He's coming it from a view of individual rights that sees a zygote having an equal weight as an adult.  Whether he's religiously inspired to this... perspective is neither here nor there.

It's good that you actually care about life Beaky, but this is a religious view not a political one.

I suppose the politics comes into it when you take the mother out of the equation and insert demographics instead, and look at how many terminations are carried out in our society. Then it's a matter for politicians to argue over numbers, targets and cost, and not the right and wrong of it. Again whether it's right or wrong to terminate a baby is between the mother, her doctor and her god. Not for us to decide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 12:31:05 PM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 30 January, 2012, 10:40:05 AM
These kinds of massive gaps in the logic of those who believe in God are extremely harmful in my opinion. They allow a certain absolution from responsibility which is very dangerous.

Well put, Lee. The so-called "Christian" leaders like Bush, Obama, Blair and Cameron seem to believe deeply in the concept of Armageddon (the End-Times tumult bit, not the location) as they are doing their best to hasten it, most lately by itching for a nuclear war with Iran. Strange how these same "Christians" seem to give only the scantest lip service to the concept of peace, tolerance and loving thine enemy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 12:52:28 PM
Quote from: wonkychop on 30 January, 2012, 12:01:58 PM
I suppose the politics comes into it when you take the mother out of the equation and insert demographics instead, and look at how many terminations are carried out in our society. Then it's a matter for politicians to argue over numbers, targets and cost, and not the right and wrong of it.

I don't get you here, Wonky.  Politics is just the means by which a group makes decisions collectively.  What guides the motivations of individual actors in that group is irrelevant - religious conviction is just as much a factor in politics as economic theory, tradition, prejudice, altruism, selfishness, adherence to a philosophical or sociological model etc.  You can't divorce religiously inspired aspirations for how the group should act from all the other motivations, just because it's based on (say) a specific Bronze Age urge for lebensraum.   You and I might hope that someone would lobby or vote in line with the best principles of live-and-let-live leavened with the guidance of scientific process, but that doesn't mean that religious belief has no place in a political discussion - once somebody acts on it to guide the group's decision making, it's become political:  Beaky's viewpoint is a political one, because it (tries to) affect group decisions.  Would that it were otherwise (he said, exercising his own beliefs).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 01:21:35 PM
George Carlin - Pro-Life is Anti-Woman!  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qtlvr6LLV8&feature=related)

Also, if you want to belive in someone, believe in Carl Sagan. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=OL15pD5Vl8o)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 01:53:05 PM
(http://i.mgur.com/XSm7H.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 January, 2012, 01:55:05 PM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 30 January, 2012, 10:40:05 AM
Going back to the scenario above; if God didn't 'will' for the rape to take place, how can he possibly have 'willed' for the child to be born? You can't have one without the other. At what point and in what form did 'God's will' manifest itself?

Also, how can anyone be sure that someone choosing to have an abortion isn't due to God's will that the child not be born because he's changed his mind?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 01:56:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 01:21:35 PM
George Carlin - Pro-Life is Anti-Woman!  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qtlvr6LLV8&feature=related)

Thanks for that link, Sharky - I do so love that man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 02:25:16 PM
Saying the sun comes up everyday is god's will is a religious belief and not political dogma, Tordell. So is saying a woman giving birth is god's will. It may or may not be so. That is a private belief and nothing to do with politicians.
 
Beaky. This person is an accident of nature believe me.

(http://i.imgur.com/XSm7H.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 02:47:11 PM
Quote from: wonkychop on 30 January, 2012, 02:25:16 PM
Saying the sun comes up everyday is god's will is a religious belief and not political dogma, Tordell. So is saying a woman giving birth is god's will. It may or may not be so. That is a private belief and nothing to do with politicians.

Wonky, I'm not sure where you think people that participate in politics (i.e. the electorate and the elected) come from, but I can assure you that a great many of them have religious beliefs that influence if not direct their opinions, and thus their actions on the political stage.  Putting politics and religion into two separate camps is a noble aspiration, but possibly one for a species other than H. sapiens sapiens. 

This is not the same as saying there shouldn't be a separation of church and state, or that policy shouldn't be enacted on religious principles, but if a participant in the political system (a voter, lobbyist or representative) has views as to how the state should operate, it is very naive to hope that they do not reflect that person's beliefs in some way.  The position adopted by Beaky here being a case in point - he has a view, that view is probably influenced by his religious beliefs or background, and as a participant in some sort of democracy he will act on that view, whether the state he participates in is as secular as my atheistic arse, or a some kind of borderline theocratic hellhole.

Now personally I wish people who wanted to see these kinds of views reflected in society would do everyone a great service and go and live in harmony on Pluto, or some other place where they can more easily commune with their hateful imaginary friend free of the distractions of the actual living humans they claim to cherish as His divine creation, but as it is I'm stuck with them, and I'd rather acknowledge and strive to minimise their influence than pretend they don't belong in a political discussion just because.

And you've managed to extract from me the kind of mean-spirited no-good-will-come-of-it rant I was trying desperately to avoid burdening a company's comics discussion forum with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 30 January, 2012, 04:25:23 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 January, 2012, 04:13:43 AM

welcome to Nazi Germany reborn... a place that Great Britain is at unfortunately,

really?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 04:29:26 PM
Dear Tordell,

I don't disagree with you in principle. I have the feeling you are barking up the wrong tree here with these accusations. In the final analysis, I expect someone who has a differnent or opposite belief to mine to be able to express them without jumping down my throat. If you have not noticed, I have a very, very low opinion of politicians and I'm not afraid of expressing this. If this seems patronising to anyone on the forum, that is unintentional. My contempt is reserved for politicians. Why you misconstrue this as a personal attack on the integrity of the members of this forum mystifies me. Maybe you could explain why you think I am attacking someone's personal feelings rather than discussing the contradictions inherent in a subject such as religion?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 January, 2012, 04:35:21 PM
Great Britain is many things, some good, some bad, but what it isn't is Nazi Germany reborn.  Anybody who seriously thinks it is, is showing themselves to be very ignorant of history, and not to know anything about Nazi Germany at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 04:52:16 PM
Honestly wonkychop, I have no idea what part of your most recent post relates to anything I've posted.  I'm not accusing you of anything, and I'm certainly not jumping down your throat - I'm just trying to explain my view of what constitutes politics and a political discussion. 

You say Beaky's views have no place in a 'political' thread because they're based on personal religious belief. I'm saying Beaky's views are political views, based on a view of individual rights that is (very probably) based on religious beliefs. I don't see how what they're based on makes them any less political if he's prepared to articulate them in the field of influencing public policy - which he clearly is.   

I don't give a fig for Beaky's 'integrity' (sorry, Beaky) or your supposed impugning of it, nor do I see or say that you are attacking his 'personal feelings'.  I'm not defending Beaky, if he even needed such, and from his posts on this thread to date it looks like I could never imagine a scenario in which I ever want would do such a thing, or be in any way associated with his views, which are largely (to coin a religious phrase) anathema to me. 

What I am saying, obviously very badly, is that a political discussion is precisely the place that these sorts of things should be addressed, and not hidden away under the inviolable seal of the personal or the religious, where everyone is entitled to harbour whatever comforting fancies they cleave to.  I'm utterly sick of people hiding their agendas behind the shield of personal faith.  Beaky has a vote and a voice.  If someone wants to use those precious things to impose the supposed authority of some long-dead con-men on living peoples, I say bring it out into the open and challenge it as relates to the real world: in a political debate.

tl; dr version:  I'm not accusing you of anything of the sort.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 January, 2012, 04:57:31 PM
I blame New Labour.................................for EVERYTHING  :thumbsup:



Or is it Old Labour now  :crazy:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 January, 2012, 06:02:26 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 January, 2012, 04:35:21 PM
Great Britain is many things, some good, some bad, but what it isn't is Nazi Germany reborn.  Anybody who seriously thinks it is, is showing themselves to be very ignorant of history, and not to know anything about Nazi Germany at all.

Yup. Comparing the massive freedoms we have now to the attempted genocide of several societal groups is pretty ignorant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 06:21:23 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 January, 2012, 06:02:26 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 January, 2012, 04:35:21 PM
Great Britain is many things, some good, some bad, but what it isn't is Nazi Germany reborn.  Anybody who seriously thinks it is, is showing themselves to be very ignorant of history, and not to know anything about Nazi Germany at all.

Yup. Comparing the massive freedoms we have now to the attempted genocide of several societal groups is pretty ignorant.

Besides, I thought WE were far ahead of Britain in that respect!  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:34:16 PM
Nazi: a member of the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power.

Sounds a lot like the path the U.S. is on, and where Uncle Sam leads John Bull has in recent times lagged not too far behind. It is certainly something to keep vigilance angainst.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 06:36:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:34:16 PM
Nazi: a member of the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power.

Sounds a lot like the path the U.S. is on, and where Uncle Sam leads John Bull has in recent times lagged not too far behind. It is certainly something to keep vigilance angainst.

Now, if I didn't know you better Shark, I might take offense to you keeping the "aggressive anti-Semitism" when describing the political (or otherwise) climate of the US.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 January, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
Hello Tordel, I think the crux of Beakies' argument should be on a different thread : If Beaky thinks Nazism was a part of god's plan for humanity as well, it belongs to religious debate. We will have to agree to disagree on this Tordell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:55:37 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 06:36:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:34:16 PM
Nazi: a member of the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power.

Now, if I didn't know you better Shark, I might take offense to you keeping the "aggressive anti-Semitism" when describing the political (or otherwise) climate of the US.

Simply replace the "aggressive anti-Semitism" espoused by the Nazi party to "aggressive anti-Islamism" espoused by various U.S. power-brokers and it still fits. (I don't include the vast bulk of U.S. citizens in this but level the accusations mainly at the power brokers, just as ours espouse the same hideous rhetoric thinly disguised as an attack on terrorism.) Indeed, the U.S. Government seems to have completely the mirror attitude which could be described as "aggressive pro-Semitism".

** And by now, I hope that you do know me better.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 January, 2012, 06:58:21 PM
Quote"aggressive pro-Semitism"

That's the stuff that's in them yogurts, isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 07:00:26 PM
Maybe - but not in those fruit corners...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 07:00:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:55:37 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 06:36:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 06:34:16 PM
Nazi: a member of the National Socialist German Workers' party of Germany, which in 1933, under Adolf Hitler, seized political control of the country, suppressing all opposition and establishing a dictatorship over all cultural, economic, and political activities of the people, and promulgated belief in the supremacy of Hitler as Führer, aggressive anti-Semitism, the natural supremacy of the German people, and the establishment of Germany by superior force as a dominant world power.

Now, if I didn't know you better Shark, I might take offense to you keeping the "aggressive anti-Semitism" when describing the political (or otherwise) climate of the US.

Simply replace the "aggressive anti-Semitism" espoused by the Nazi party to "aggressive anti-Islamism" espoused by various U.S. power-brokers and it still fits. (I don't include the vast bulk of U.S. citizens in this but level the accusations mainly at the power brokers, just as ours espouse the same hideous rhetoric thinly disguised as an attack on terrorism.) Indeed, the U.S. Government seems to have completely the mirror attitude which could be described as "aggressive pro-Semitism".

Pot calling the kettle black, a bit. During my time in England/Scotland I've experienced just as much anti-Polish (and to an extent anti-Islamism) sentiment as anything I've experienced in the States.

Personally, I feel the assumption that the States is approaching anything near Nazi Socialism is way off base (number one, there will never be a unified National Identity in the States - the pot has melted too far for that). Had you said the US was heading towards some sort of fascism, I would agree. Nazism, no. No way at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 07:00:34 PM
Had you said the US was heading towards some sort of fascism, I would agree.

Yes, I can agree with that. Same over here.

The problem (I find) with using the N Word is that people automatically think 'Holocaust'. Hitler first came across a National Socialism type organization in about 1919 and the Final Solution didn't go into (secret) operation until 1941. Naziism, then, was just the vehicle through which Fascism was introduced - a step at a time. In both our countries, I think, there are those taking the same small steps but don't openly call themselves Nazis.

** And yes, we do have these prejudices drummed into us, as well - "coming over here, taking our women and stealing our jobs..." is an old, old story.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 07:11:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2012, 07:08:19 PM
In both our countries, I think, there are those taking the same small steps but don't openly call themselves Nazis.

Of course. But I don't think that can ever take root here in the US because we simply do not have the National Identity you Britons do (and I'm not implying anything here). In fact, I couldn't tell you how many times I've found myself envious of the National Identity you folks do have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 07:28:59 PM
Quote from: wonkychop on 30 January, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
I think the crux of Beakies' argument should be on a different thread : If Beaky thinks Nazism was a part of god's plan for humanity as well, it belongs to religious debate.

I'm not sure how that particular fantasy would factor into any ongoing political issue, in the way that views on the rights of the unborn definitely does, but I'm sure I could be shown otherwise.  I do however agree that we should agree to disagree. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 30 January, 2012, 07:36:34 PM
When mother told me that I wasn't an accident, she completely shattered my entire world. THANKS MUM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 January, 2012, 07:46:12 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 January, 2012, 04:57:31 PM
I blame New Labour.................................for EVERYTHING  :thumbsup:

Nonsense, it's all Thatcher's fault as any sane person knows..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 30 January, 2012, 07:48:45 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 07:28:59 PM
Quote from: wonkychop on 30 January, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
I think the crux of Beakies' argument should be on a different thread : If Beaky thinks Nazism was a part of god's plan for humanity as well, it belongs to religious debate.

I'm not sure how that particular fantasy would factor into any ongoing political issue, in the way that views on the rights of the unborn definitely does, but I'm sure I could be shown otherwise.  I do however agree that we should agree to disagree.

I don't understand how he cannot get what you're saying, Tordel. In simple terms, more often than not religion and politics go hand-in-hand. Religion often influences political decisions (which I think the abortion debate clearly shows). It's that easy to connect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 30 January, 2012, 07:57:34 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 January, 2012, 07:46:12 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 January, 2012, 04:57:31 PM
I blame New Labour.................................for EVERYTHING  :thumbsup:

Nonsense, it's all Thatcher's fault as any sane person knows..
I blame Pitt the younger, for all those campaigns against France. The tax payers money he spent on war must have been horrific.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Pitt_the_Younger.jpg/245px-Pitt_the_Younger.jpg)




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 08:24:00 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 30 January, 2012, 07:57:34 PM
I blame Pitt the younger

Nah, it was Pitt The Glint in the Milkman's Eye.

(http://application.denofgeek.com/pics/tv/list/tvpol.ba.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 30 January, 2012, 08:28:01 PM
Yayyyy. Exactly the following post and poster I was expecting.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
I'm nothing if not relentless, grindingly, predictable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 30 January, 2012, 08:37:42 PM
I was only two of those things with your mom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 09:14:59 PM
So that's why my baby brother is such a worthless gimp!




(Actually I should note that he's 6' 4" and built like the proverbial shithouse, and a thoroughly sound bloke, just in case he happens to read this... so much for genetics!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 30 January, 2012, 09:20:47 PM
Actually I made her get an abortion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2012, 09:24:18 PM
You Nazi!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 January, 2012, 11:35:24 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 30 January, 2012, 09:20:47 PM
Actually I made her get an abortion.


Smeaky Boochies will tea-bag you for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 31 January, 2012, 12:20:30 AM
Only if he coats them in honey and fluoxetine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 31 January, 2012, 12:07:05 PM
After ingesting that concoction you'll end up with skid marks. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 01 February, 2012, 08:54:43 PM
One day, I would like to vote for this woman: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/senator-janet-howell-attaches-rectal-exam-amendmen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Third Estate Ned on 01 February, 2012, 08:56:36 PM
I like how the last two posts are linked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 16 March, 2012, 05:59:18 PM
QuoteGeorge Osborne is poised to slash the top rate of income tax from 50p to 40p in next week's budget in a dramatic move that will delight business and the Tory right, but risks reinforcing the Conservatives' reputation as protectors of the super-rich.

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/15/george-osborne-top-tax-rate

I'm starting work on a couple of placards:

"In this together, my arse" (possibly with a picture of Jim Royle)

"Eat the rich (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvzePsDYv7k)"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 16 March, 2012, 06:57:14 PM
What a bunch of cunts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 16 March, 2012, 07:27:23 PM
Quote from: mygrimmbrother on 16 March, 2012, 06:57:14 PM
What a bunch of cunts.

LOL. I was just debating whether to put the Tory's "stop and talk to me" notice in the window to lure a Conservative to the door so I could call them "a shower of cunts" and slam the door in their face (they need luring in as it is my understanding that the door-to-door canvassers skip my house and the ones on either side because of the hostile reception, however, I'm thinking a hostile reception is just what they deserve. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 March, 2012, 09:48:45 PM
Via Richmond & the Clements on facebook:


Kony 2012 Co-founder Arrested for Drunkenly Masturbating in Public


(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gna6q876c44png/original.png)


http://jezebel.com/5894048/invisible-children-co+founder-arrested-for-drunkenly-masturbating-in-public
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SquashedFly on 17 March, 2012, 12:22:27 AM
Dirty Bar Steward. Firing his Invisible Children all over the pavement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM
QuoteGeorge Osborne is poised to slash the top rate of income tax from 50p to 40p in next week's budget in a dramatic move that will delight business and the Tory right, but risks reinforcing the Conservatives' reputation as protectors of the super-rich.

Baloney, they should be dropping it to 20% at most!  You should have a flat tax code in the U.K. (just like in the Irish Republic), with everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - who receives earned income having to pay tax on it; no exceptions, no excuses, no exemptions, period!  The lowest earners would pay a flat rate of 5%, the middle income earners would pay 10%, and the highest earners would pay the aforementioned 20% flat rate, with the corporation tax dropped to 10%, and the elimination of the capital gains/dividends tax and the horrendously socialistic inheritance tax, plus ALL benefits means-tested, those who wish to opt out of paying national insurance contributions and purchase their own private healthcare premiums can do so, drop VAT to 5% across the board, and on top of all that, you drastically reduce overall government spending to pre-1997 levels... you do all that, the U.K. economy would take off like a rocket and the deficit would be paid off within a decade!!!

Quotea dramatic move that will delight business and the Tory right, but risks reinforcing the Conservatives' reputation as protectors of the super-rich.

You mean the people who actually open and expand businesses, create thousands of jobs, sign the paycheques, and generally keep the entire economy afloat, you mean those people...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 March, 2012, 06:58:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM...just like in the Irish Republic...

Ah the Irish Republic...  What ever happened to those guys?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 March, 2012, 08:22:57 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 March, 2012, 06:58:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM...just like in the Irish Republic...

Ah the Irish Republic...  What ever happened to those guys?


Such a great example, Gombeen Nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 17 March, 2012, 10:24:00 AM
I like how his favourite phrase is the same as Timmy McVeigh's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 17 March, 2012, 12:12:07 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM
QuoteGeorge Osborne is poised to slash the top rate of income tax from 50p to 40p in next week's budget in a dramatic move that will delight business and the Tory right, but risks reinforcing the Conservatives' reputation as protectors of the super-rich.

Baloney, they should be dropping it to 20% at most!  You should have a flat tax code in the U.K. (just like in the Irish Republic), with everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - who receives earned income having to pay tax on it; no exceptions, no excuses, no exemptions, period!  The lowest earners would pay a flat rate of 5%, the middle income earners would pay 10%, and the highest earners would pay the aforementioned 20% flat rate, with the corporation tax dropped to 10%, and the elimination of the capital gains/dividends tax and the horrendously socialistic inheritance tax, plus ALL benefits means-tested, those who wish to opt out of paying national insurance contributions and purchase their own private healthcare premiums can do so, drop VAT to 5% across the board, and on top of all that, you drastically reduce overall government spending to pre-1997 levels... you do all that, the U.K. economy would take off like a rocket and the deficit would be paid off within a decade!!!

Quotea dramatic move that will delight business and the Tory right, but risks reinforcing the Conservatives' reputation as protectors of the super-rich.

You mean the people who actually open and expand businesses, create thousands of jobs, sign the paycheques, and generally keep the entire economy afloat, you mean those people...?

Which category do you think you belong to, just out of interest?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 March, 2012, 12:23:04 PM
Of course, if the government would start creating its own money instead of buying privately created money, then everybody's tax would be cut to less than 2%. In fact, income tax, inheritance tax and possibly even VAT could be done away with altogether.

But, they'd rather buy privately created money and screw you for the interest.

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/how-banks-create-money/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 18 March, 2012, 03:10:54 AM
Quote from: fonky on 17 March, 2012, 12:12:07 PM
Which category do you think you belong to, just out of interest?

Probably lower middle-income, never really gave it much thought to be honest, fonky dude...

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 March, 2012, 12:23:04 PM
Of course, if the government would start creating its own money instead of buying privately created money, then everybody's tax would be cut to less than 2%. In fact, income tax, inheritance tax and possibly even VAT could be done away with altogether.
But, they'd rather buy privately created money and screw you for the interest.

Or permanently dissolve the Bank of England as a national central bank, Thomas Jefferson warned about the dangers of a central bank in managing national finances back in the late 18th/early 19th century, and God bless 'im, he was right...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 18 March, 2012, 11:52:30 AM
Well I'm so poor I couldn't even give you the time of the day, or pay attention.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 March, 2012, 02:20:42 AM
Quote from: fonky on 18 March, 2012, 11:52:30 AM
Well I'm so poor I couldn't even give you the time of the day, or pay attention.

:'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 March, 2012, 02:55:32 AM
I think I'm gonna buy shares in the roads now  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 March, 2012, 10:43:41 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 March, 2012, 02:55:32 AM
I think I'm gonna buy shares in the roads now  :D


Your tax share that paid for them says you all ready own them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2012, 10:48:43 AM
...and the pot holes that go with them!  Our tax share paid is obviously not enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 19 March, 2012, 10:55:57 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 March, 2012, 02:55:32 AM
I think I'm gonna buy shares in the roads now  :D

you're going to buy shares in a Chinese sovereign wealth fund?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 19 March, 2012, 12:31:14 PM
It's no longer a figure of speech to say that the government is selling the ground beneath your feet.

I shouldn't think there is much else left that they can flog to the foreigners.

                            ??????????????????????????????????????

2000ad?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 19 March, 2012, 01:01:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 March, 2012, 06:58:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM...just like in the Irish Republic...

Ah the Irish Republic...  What ever happened to those guys?
arent they a theme park now?   :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2012, 01:11:34 PM
Quote from: Slips on 19 March, 2012, 01:01:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 March, 2012, 06:58:48 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 March, 2012, 03:47:26 AM...just like in the Irish Republic...

Ah the Irish Republic...  What ever happened to those guys?
arent they a theme park now?   :lol:

Don't care for the theme much.  Was Westworld too much to ask for?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 March, 2012, 01:35:05 PM
Selling off our roads? *sigh*

It seems that the same greedy, murdering scumbags are behind this attack. According to The Guardian:

"The bankers NM Rothschild suggested in a report in 2010 that privatising the road network could raise £100bn. Government sources said the scheme proposed by Cameron would raise far less because he plans to lease out trunk roads and motorways, rather than embarking on a full-scale sell-off, as NM Rothschild suggested."

Oh, those pesky Rothschilds (Rothschildren?) - isn't it enough that they already own our money supply and vast swathes of our other utilities? Feudalism, anyone? One day soon, if we are not careful, we will awake one morning to find that we are mere serfs in the countries our forefathers worked and fought and died for to make free.

Okay, instead of going on about the evils foisted on us by these banksters I'd like to take a different tack and ask a simple question:

What is Government for?

Answers on a postcard to: David Cameron, 10 Downing Street, London - because I don't think he knows.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 20 March, 2012, 02:11:04 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 March, 2012, 01:35:05 PM
Selling off our roads? *sigh*
It seems that the same greedy, murdering scumbags are behind this attack. According to The Guardian:
"The bankers NM Rothschild suggested in a report in 2010 that privatising the road network could raise £100bn. Government sources said the scheme proposed by Cameron would raise far less because he plans to lease out trunk roads and motorways, rather than embarking on a full-scale sell-off, as NM Rothschild suggested."
Oh, those pesky Rothschilds (Rothschildren?) - isn't it enough that they already own our money supply and vast swathes of our other utilities? Feudalism, anyone? One day soon, if we are not careful, we will awake one morning to find that we are mere serfs in the countries our forefathers worked and fought and died for to make free.
Okay, instead of going on about the evils foisted on us by these banksters I'd like to take a different tack and ask a simple question:
What is Government for?
Answers on a postcard to: David Cameron, 10 Downing Street, London - because I don't think he knows.

In all fairness, private companies would more than likely do a better job in the upkeep of roads if they had to compete for the contract to do it, free market competition, boys and girls, it DOES work you know...

And in answer to the (rhetorical) question of what is government for, well, to put it in a concise little soundbite; building roads, and protecting the populace from violence, fraud, and plague, and that's pretty much it, everything else can be dealt with by the free market, yes'm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 March, 2012, 02:22:03 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 20 March, 2012, 02:11:04 AM
In all fairness, private companies would more than likely do a better job in the upkeep of roads if they had to compete for the contract to do it, free market competition, boys and girls, it DOES work you know...



What that requires is an Anarchist/Minarchist rather than just a standard Libertarian set-up and since it's never really been tried in modern "civilisation" no one really knows how it'd turn out. The infrastructure that serves the needs of the global distribution network of all resources needs to be scaled down -either by choice or force through crisis/collapse- and simplified by magnitudes starting from a base local level before it could even be tried. It would most likely happen in pockets where the less affluent eke out a living before the larger cities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 20 March, 2012, 11:47:59 AM
If the building and upkeep of the roads was left to private companies motivated by the ethics of profit the U.K. countryside would soon be covered over with tarmac.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2012, 01:14:10 PM
I am surprised Britain is going down the crapper - an unelected minority imposing their will on the majority has always worked out so well in the past.

Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 20 March, 2012, 02:11:04 AMIn all fairness, private companies would more than likely do a better job in the upkeep of roads if they had to compete for the contract to do it, free market competition, boys and girls, it DOES work you know...

In all fairness, privatisation has never improved services in the past and there is no evidence to suggest that would change with privatised roads.  What is far more likely is that the small number of companies in a position to actually undertake such a huge project would divvy up the road system amongst themselves, the more profitable sections of that newly-created cash-cow going to the private firms with the most political clout and the shaggy dog sections of roads with little profit to be had getting contracted to the metaphorical last turkey in the shop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 20 March, 2012, 01:45:19 PM
So who do you think builds and maintains the roads now?  Fred and Bill from the Town Hall!  Many road schemes are already built by private companies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 March, 2012, 02:32:26 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 20 March, 2012, 01:14:10 PM
the more profitable sections of that newly-created cash-cow going to the private firms with the most political clout and the shaggy dog sections of roads with little profit to be had getting contracted to the metaphorical last turkey in the shop.


That's the problem, once government exists, you can't really have a corruption-free, market.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2012, 03:19:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 20 March, 2012, 01:45:19 PM
So who do you think builds and maintains the roads now?  Fred and Bill from the Town Hall!  Many road schemes are already built by private companies.

Speaking as someone living in a small town where many things are farmed out to companies by our council, this would explain why our roads are better than ever and no-one ever complains.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 March, 2012, 04:04:31 PM
You could do what we do in the Republic of Lose.  Let companies bid competitively to operate toll-roads, but then when they aren't making as much money as they expected have the taxpayer make up the difference. 

Better yet, have central and local government implement a policy of actively discouraging car use through direct and indirect taxation and parking charges, benefit-in-kind tax on company parking spaces etc. (but make it clear that these revenues are essential for road maintenance, improving the urban experience, funding public transport infrastructure, and environmental reasons) and then wonder why toll numbers are down, and compensate the operators for lost business with the taxes you've already taken off road users (rather than spending them on, say, road maintenance, improving the urban experience, etc. etc,).  If you can, orchestrate an economic collapse to further reduce toll revenues, and further compensate the private operators from the public purse, borrowing at extortionate international rates to do so. 

Make sure all this is black and white in any contract you sign with private operators so future governments can't weasel out of their obligations to these cost-effective private operators without incurring huge penalties.

See also: refuse collection, swimming pools, the banking system...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 20 March, 2012, 04:06:58 PM
I'm with Mallory Archer when it comes to Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 March, 2012, 04:10:12 PM
The sooner Ireland becomes a theme park, the better for all who live there  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 March, 2012, 04:15:04 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 20 March, 2012, 04:06:58 PM
I'm with Mallory Archer when it comes to Ireland.

Yes, but she frustratingly doesn't provide an answer to her own most devious conundrum: should you eat the potato now, or let it ferment so you can drink it later?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 20 March, 2012, 04:23:40 PM
You should scrape together all of your government's mistakes and knit it a onesie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2012, 04:53:23 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 March, 2012, 04:04:31 PM
You could do what we do in the Republic of Lose.

Thankfully, TB, our wonderfully sectarian Assembly would sooner eat glass than adopt any policies of the South, which makes me more or less certain that they'll just find some kind of system which is even more stupid, unfair, and rewards the private sector with public cash and adopt that instead.  Strange but true: six counties full of alcoholics, boy racers and wife beaters don't need any A&E departments, but it does need a 10 percent salary hike for Assembly members.  Yay government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 March, 2012, 06:19:20 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 March, 2012, 04:04:31 PM
You could do what we do in the Republic of Lose.  Let companies bid competitively to operate toll-roads, but then when they aren't making as much money as they expected have the taxpayer make up the difference. 

Better yet, have central and local government implement a policy of actively discouraging car use through direct and indirect taxation and parking charges, benefit-in-kind tax on company parking spaces etc. (but make it clear that these revenues are essential for road maintenance, improving the urban experience, funding public transport infrastructure, and environmental reasons) and then wonder why toll numbers are down, and compensate the operators for lost business with the taxes you've already taken off road users (rather than spending them on, say, road maintenance, improving the urban experience, etc. etc,).  If you can, orchestrate an economic collapse to further reduce toll revenues, and further compensate the private operators from the public purse, borrowing at extortionate international rates to do so. 

Make sure all this is black and white in any contract you sign with private operators so future governments can't weasel out of their obligations to these cost-effective private operators without incurring huge penalties.

See also: refuse collection, swimming pools, the banking system...


Yes, but we have all that Omnium yet to be mined.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 March, 2012, 12:21:05 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 March, 2012, 06:19:20 PM
Yes, but we have all that Omnium yet to be mined.

Keep it hush-hush, or they'll send Sergeant Pluck round to knock over our giant tree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 21 March, 2012, 03:18:47 AM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 20 March, 2012, 03:19:42 PM
Speaking as someone living in a small town where many things are farmed out to companies by our council, this would explain why our roads are better than ever and no-one ever complains.

I rest my case...

Quote from: Professah Byah on 20 March, 2012, 04:53:23 PM
Thankfully, TB, our wonderfully sectarian Assembly would sooner eat glass than adopt any policies of the South, which makes me more or less certain that they'll just find some kind of system which is even more stupid, unfair, and rewards the private sector with public cash and adopt that instead.  Strange but true: six counties full of alcoholics, boy racers and wife beaters don't need any A&E departments, but it does need a 10 percent salary hike for Assembly members.  Yay government.

Yeah, from one northerner to another, Professah dude ('bout ye), you tell 'em, so ya will, we have a wonderful Assembly that pretty much disposes of every fundamental rule of democracy, replacing it instead with a system that locks sectarian division in stone rather than moving away from Unionist/Nationalist designations, which I fear will continue until both sides grow up and realise that not only are our best interests not served in a united Ireland (ninety years on and they still are genetically incapable of running themselves), but neither are they served in a United Kingdom that treats us like dirt and imposes a political arrangement on us that not only would they would NEVER accept themselves, they wouldn't even dare suggest such a thing to the Scots or the Welsh, we would be better off leaving the Union and become a completely autonomous Crown territory (whether a Dependency, Overseas, or a Dominion) with national status, a democratically elected bicameral Parliament, a proper and normalised left/right-driven parliamentary democracy, and a written Constitution, alas though, I think there's probably more chance of Ian Paisley joining Sinn Fein than what I suggested actually ever happening...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 March, 2012, 09:05:08 AM
 
Quote(ninety years on and they still are genetically incapable of running themselves)

I'd like to argue but I don't have a leg to stand on  :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 March, 2012, 10:29:37 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 March, 2012, 09:05:08 AM
Quote(ninety years on and they still are genetically incapable of running themselves)

I'd like to argue but I don't have a leg to stand on  :'(



Those damn different genetics of ours a few miles over the West Wall of the six-counties left us without decent bipedal -or bicameral- support.

Hopefully the Great Nothern Assembly will build town-ships for us one day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 22 March, 2012, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 16 March, 2012, 09:48:45 PM
Via Richmond & the Clements on facebook:


Kony 2012 Co-founder Arrested for Drunkenly Masturbating in Public

http://jezebel.com/5894048/invisible-children-co+founder-arrested-for-drunkenly-masturbating-in-public

As a correction to this(they do also have updates on the blog there too):

QuoteThe director of the viral video about brutal African warlord Joseph Kony has been diagnosed with what's called brief reactive psychosis and is expected to stay in hospital for weeks, his wife said on Wednesday. Jason Russell, 33, was hospitalised in San Diego, California, after witnesses saw him running through streets, in his underwear, screaming incoherently and banging his fists on the pavement.

...

"The preliminary diagnosis he received is called brief reactive psychosis, an acute state brought on by extreme exhaustion, stress and dehydration," Danica Russell said. "Though new to us, the doctors say this is a common experience given the great mental, emotional and physical shock his body has gone through in these last two weeks. Even for us, it's hard to understand the sudden transition from relative anonymity to worldwide attention – both raves and ridicules, in a matter of days."

The condition is triggered by extreme stress. Symptoms include hallucinations and strange speech and behavior. Antipsychotic drugs and talk therapy can alleviate symptoms, and people typically get better within a month.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/21/kony-2012-director-diagnosed-psychosis

And the sad Catch 22 of this must be that he is going to be even more stressed when he recovers enough to realise what has happened to him :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 23 March, 2012, 03:52:34 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 March, 2012, 09:05:08 AM
I'd like to argue but I don't have a leg to stand on  :'(

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 22 March, 2012, 10:29:37 AM
Those damn different genetics of ours a few miles over the West Wall of the six-counties left us without decent bipedal -or bicameral- support.
Hopefully the Great Nothern Assembly will build town-ships for us one day.

Just stirring the pot a bit guys, a little humour on my part, no insult intended, apologies if taken that way...

And I've been openly critical of us northern Protestants on this forum before, we've certainly behaved in a less than Christian way in the past, no argument there, but it was the politicisation of the Gaelic culture and a narrow-minded anti-Britishness (whilst understandable) that drove many Protestants away from self-rule and closer to Westminster, considering it was Anglo-Irish Protestants who basically founded the Irish republican movement. 

A good case in point is how many Irish Protestants considered themselves 'Irish' in nationality at the beginning of the 20th Century compared to those same people a decade or so later who had then switched to the 'British' nationality option in the national census, what happened in between was the explosion of the Home Rule movement, the UVF/Volunteers gun-running escapades, the Ulster Covenant, the 1916 Rising, the so-called War of Independence, and ultimately partition.  The Irish separatist leaders were right to be angry at the exclusion of the north-eastern counties from the newly-independent state as that was where the main industries of the island were concentrated, and made it harder to balance their economy next to the U.K. -  but President Cosgrave and co did all right until Dev and Fianna Fail came along and wrecked the place... a tradition ably followed by Bertie and Biffo in recent years! - but at the same time, there was no advantage nor incentive for Protestants to join the State in 1921, maybe if some Protestant leader(s) had a forward-looking view and negotiated a better deal for the north in a unitary Irish state (independence for the northern legislature from the national one in Dublin, caps on income and business tax rates, guaranteed continued free trade with the British Empire, etc), things could have been different, and I'm certainly not ideologically against such a thing ever happening in the future, but we look across the border and see the mess you lot have made of your country - and it didn't have to be that way, Ireland could have been the Switzerland of the north Atlantic - and thank the good Lord we didn't throw our lot in with it, it's not personal, it's the economy (stupid), not to mention a few other things as well...   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 07:23:51 AM
EDIT: Retracted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 March, 2012, 07:44:41 AM
The unbridled truth is neither Britain nor the Republic really wants fiscal or full responsibility for the North, hence the reluctance of any southern Irish government to whole-heartedly push for re-unification and Britain only holds on for the obvious complications of letting go and it's responsible place, historically, as the major player.

Ideologically some minor sections of the Irish body-politic may now and again tout visions of a nation once again but as is the way of these things, it appeals to a certain notion of political destiny for a minority of entrenched nationalists at voting time but that doesn't pay the bills for the rest of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 23 March, 2012, 09:27:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 07:23:51 AM
EDIT: Retracted.
Shouldnt this be redacted?  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 09:37:22 AM
Quote from: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 23 March, 2012, 09:27:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 07:23:51 AM
EDIT: Retracted.
Shouldnt this be redacted?  :lol:

Posted an, errr, robust comment, thought better of it.  I'm conscious that firing off one aggressive response and then leaving a discussion is a shitty thing to do, and I didn't want to spend my day in pointless argument.  It's sunny out, and I have concrete to mix.  That's enough stirring for anyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 23 March, 2012, 10:42:06 AM
No it's not. I expect you to stir the cocktails that I am paying you £5 to mix for me, you servile colonial.


I believe I shall have an "Irish Car Bomb" to start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 10:54:30 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 23 March, 2012, 10:42:06 AM
I believe I shall have an "Irish Car Bomb" to start.

Coming right up!  I'll whip up in a Rusty Nail or two while I'm at it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 March, 2012, 10:55:33 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 09:37:22 AM
It's sunny out, and I have concrete to mix.  That's enough stirring for anyone.



Hey, Fred West is back!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 24 March, 2012, 01:27:01 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 23 March, 2012, 07:44:41 AM
The unbridled truth is neither Britain nor the Republic really wants fiscal or full responsibility for the North, hence the reluctance of any southern Irish government to whole-heartedly push for re-unification and Britain only holds on for the obvious complications of letting go and it's responsible place, historically, as the major player.
Ideologically some minor sections of the Irish body-politic may now and again tout visions of a nation once again but as is the way of these things, it appeals to a certain notion of political destiny for a minority of entrenched nationalists at voting time but that doesn't pay the bills for the rest of us.

Agreed Joe, darn good points... unfortunately (for the decent majority across this wonderful little island)!

Quote from: TordelBack on 23 March, 2012, 09:37:22 AM
Posted an, errr, robust comment, thought better of it.  I'm conscious that firing off one aggressive response and then leaving a discussion is a shitty thing to do, and I didn't want to spend my day in pointless argument.  It's sunny out, and I have concrete to mix.  That's enough stirring for anyone.

Don't hold back on my account, Tordelback dude, go nuts, if you think I'm wrong/deluded/insane/whatever, then people fought and died for your right to get stuck in, have one on me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 March, 2012, 11:52:18 AM
QuoteI believe I shall have an "Irish Car Bomb" to start.

Be careful what you wish for  ;)

Anyway here's an expert view on the subject

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euhGPrgVZj0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euhGPrgVZj0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 March, 2012, 08:27:56 PM
Jesus do I hate living in this shitty, backwards, insular wee province.

Gene-pools are the opposite of swimming pools in that they are more dangerous when they're shallow.

You may quote me (http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=2132&mobile=0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 25 March, 2012, 05:25:50 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 24 March, 2012, 08:27:56 PM
Jesus do I hate living in this shitty, backwards, insular wee province.

Tell that to the voluminous amounts of Brits now living here, I've never heard so many English and Scottish accents on the street as over the last decade, and they ALL (almost without exception) say they love here, and wouldn't go back to Blighty if you put a gun to their he- um, maybe that's not the most appropriate metaphor for this place, woops...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 March, 2012, 04:18:42 PM
QuoteDon't hold back on my account, Tordelback dude, go nuts, if you think I'm wrong/deluded/insane/whatever, then people fought and died for your right to get stuck in, have one on me...

I'll step in here if nobody minds. Genetically I'm half Brit (my mother's from Preston) and I fucking despise the corruption and general incompetence of so many Irish governments.  I also resent the fact that they've allowed their own normal people to be raped, both figuratively, by kowtowing to the rich at the expense of the economy, and literally, by licking the arse of the Vatican for so long. 

BUT... (I like big buts and I cannot lie)...

Despite all of this, I would prefer Ireland to be ruled by Irish governments rather than by foreign colonialists. Nothing against England or anything, but I'd just prefer to be ruled from our own capital city. For all past governments' faults, at least we chose them.  (Well, I didn't vote for them personally, but the majority did.)  And I'd prefer my passport to say 'Citizen' like my father's rather than 'Subject' like my mother's.

My tuppenceworth, anyway
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2012, 04:28:49 PM
I don't want to be ruled by anybody - I can rule myself, thank you very much. All I want my government to do is look after the weak and make sure that all the tools of society are in good working order.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 March, 2012, 08:44:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2012, 04:28:49 PMAll I want my government to do is look after the weak and make sure that all the tools of society are in good working order.

But... but... You'd hardly ever invade anyone with that attitude!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Judo on 25 March, 2012, 08:49:54 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 March, 2012, 08:44:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2012, 04:28:49 PMAll I want my government to do is look after the weak and make sure that all the tools of society are in good working order.

But... but... You'd hardly ever invade anyone with that attitude!
shall I cancel the catapult order? x
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 March, 2012, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: Judo on 25 March, 2012, 08:49:54 PM
shall I cancel the catapult order? x

Yes, I would recommend ordering some missile sleds and heavy ordinance instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 25 March, 2012, 09:49:58 PM
All you need is a phial of Shark's flop sweat and you can synthesize an incredibly effective virus that does the job of a nuclear bomb in half the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Minkyboy on 25 March, 2012, 10:31:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2012, 04:28:49 PM
All I want my government to do is look after the tools of society.

Well we, your fellow boarders, appreciate your good wishes Sharky.
Although not so much the name calling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 March, 2012, 10:51:14 PM
Curveball:



Zimbabwe 'sperm hunters' picking up male travellers

Gangs of women in Zimbabwe have been picking up male travellers to have sexual intercourse and harvest their sperm, according to reports.



Susan Dhliwayo claims she pulled her car over recently to pick up a group of male hitchhikers and they refused to get in, because they feared they were going to be raped.
"Now, men fear women. They said: 'we can't go with you because we don't trust you'," 19-year-old Miss Dhliwayo recounted.
Local media have reported victims of the highway prowlers being drugged, subdued at gun or knife point – even with a live snake in one case – given a sexual stimulant and forced into repeated sex before being dumped on the roadside.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9159992/Zimbabwe-sperm-hunters-picking-up-male-travellers.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 25 March, 2012, 10:55:12 PM
Who is for a Hell Trek to Zimbabwe?





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 March, 2012, 10:57:48 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 25 March, 2012, 10:55:12 PM
Who is for a Hell Trek to Zimbabwe?


I'm in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 March, 2012, 11:03:46 PM
Ah male rape, the acceptable face of sexual violation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 March, 2012, 11:07:03 PM
Hooray! for the double standard/entendre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 March, 2012, 11:12:25 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 March, 2012, 11:03:46 PM
Ah male rape, the acceptable face of sexual violation.

I thought the pope was the acceptable face of sexual  violation.

ZING
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 March, 2012, 11:20:51 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 25 March, 2012, 11:12:25 PM
I thought the pope was the acceptable face of sexual  violation.

ZING

Nah, he's the acceptable face of the Hitler Youth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2012, 10:57:29 AM
Ah!  It's a lovely morning here, it's put me in a really frivolous mood.  So, with that in mind, pray tell me JayzusB, in this modern world, what are the advantages that your Dad has as a "Citizen" over your Mum as a "Subject"?  Just asking, 'cos I can't think of many myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 March, 2012, 01:16:29 PM
Citizen

citizen,n.1.  A  person  who,  by  either  birth  or  naturalization,  is  a  member  of  a  political
community, owing allegiance to the community and being entitled to enjoy all its civil rights and
protections;  a  member  of  the  civil  state,  entitled  to  all  its  privileges. 

2.  For  diversity-jurisdiction  purposes,  a  corporation  that  was  incorporated  within  a  state  or
has its principal place of business there.

SUBJECT

subject,n.1. One who owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by that sovereign's laws
<the monarchy's subjects>.

"Speaking generally, we may say that the terms subject and citizen are synonymous. Subjects
and  citizens  are  alike  those  whose  relation  to  the  state  is  personal  and  not  merely  territorial,
permanent  and  not  merely  temporary.  This  equivalent,  however,  is  not  absolute.  For  in  the  first
place, the term  subject is commonly limited to  monarchical forms of government, while the term
citizen  is  more  specially  applicable  in  the  case  of  republics.  A  British  subject  becomes  by
naturalisation a citizen of the United States of America or of France. In the second place, the term
citizen  brings  into  prominence  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  status,  rather  than  its  correlative
obligations, while the reverse is the case with the term subject. Finally it is to be  noticed that the
term  subject  is capable  of  a  different  and  wider  application,  in  which  it  includes  all  members  of
the body politic, whether they are citizens (i.e., subjects stricto sensu) or resident aliens. All such
persons are subjects, all being subject to the power of the state and to its jurisdiction, and as owing
to it, at least temporarily, fidelity and obedience."

liege subject.See natural-born subject.
natural-born subject.A person born within the dominion of a monarchy, esp. England. — Also
termed liege subject.

Black's Law 8th Ed
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 26 March, 2012, 01:44:46 PM
Is it just me or do other people find themselves reading Sharky's posts to the rythym of his avatar's jaw? It's quite entertaining!

Sorry...carry on....


M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 26 March, 2012, 01:47:14 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 26 March, 2012, 01:44:46 PM
Is it just me or do other people find themselves reading Sharky's posts to the rythym of his avatar's jaw? It's quite entertaining!

Sorry...carry on....


M.
Blah Blah Blah Blah.....

Yes Indeed works for me  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 01:49:15 PM
I think the difference is clearer than TLS' useful legal definitions suggest.

As a subject, you live within a system which is based on the concept that some people (rulers) are innately superior to others (subjects) purely because they belong to a particular narrowly-defined lineage.  The state asserts that you are born inferior, and unless you're Kate Middleton you will die inferior.  The Queen gets to sign stuff into law because of who her Papa was - you never will, because of who your Dad wasn't.

As a citizen, even where it is utterly masked by non-institutional discrimination through wealth and casual conspiracy, no such relationship is codified. 

Whether this has any material effect is hard to measure, given the imbalance that circumstances of birth introduces in any modern state anyway, but at least when striving for equality of opportunity a citizen isn't operating in an environment that incorporates the legal denial of that very thing. The actual concept of equality itself is eroded by the presence of hereditary royalty and peers, and deference to same.

All that said, I think the UK monarchy is presently an asset for that state.  While I wouldn't cross the street to gawp at them myself, the royals represent in physical form a long history and elaborate, colourful traditions, that help define national identity and international perception (from a cultural impact an tourism point of view). 

I'm less sure that this benefit outweighs the moral injury of being born on one's knees, but I very much doubt it's much worse than having one's elected equals suborned by bribery, collegiatism, clientilism and boundless greed.  At least you know what you're getting with the royal family.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 26 March, 2012, 02:05:37 PM
(I didn't mean that derogatorily Sharky!)

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 March, 2012, 02:13:15 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 26 March, 2012, 02:05:37 PM
(I didn't mean that derogatorily Sharky!)

M.

I didn't take it that way, Mikey, don't worry. It does kinda' fit, though.

Yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap shop!

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 26 March, 2012, 02:18:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 01:49:15 PM
All that said, I think the UK monarchy is presently an asset for that state.  While I wouldn't cross the street to gawp at them myself, the royals represent in physical form a long history and elaborate, colourful traditions, that help define national identity and international perception (from a cultural impact an tourism point of view).
However purely symbolic or ceremonial they actually are I still can't accept the argument that tourism revenue is any basis for a system of government. After all, plenty of people still visit the Palace of Versailles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2012, 02:25:31 PM
Interesting post there.

I still don't see what practical difference it makes.  Her Maj rules with consent and if the bulk of the British people didn't want her she'd be gone.  Surely Kate Middleton's example shows that you can get into that so-called "elite group", both her parents were flight attendants, hardly royalty.

If you're a citizen you can get rid of a president but, can you get rid of The President?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 02:52:38 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 26 March, 2012, 02:18:11 PM
However purely symbolic or ceremonial they actually are I still can't accept the argument that tourism revenue is any basis for a system of government. After all, plenty of people still visit the Palace of Versailles.

Agreed, but even with that symbol of excessive royal spending, the international concept of (I know it's just an example) France isn't so intimately tied up with the idea of monarchy as the UK's is.  England in particular is Beefeaters, royal castles, gold coaches and Princess Di to many further afield.

As some wise person from this very forum recently remarked, you wouldn't set out to create a new state as a constitutional monarchy, but seeing as you have one...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 26 March, 2012, 03:29:31 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 26 March, 2012, 02:18:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 01:49:15 PM
All that said, I think the UK monarchy is presently an asset for that state.  While I wouldn't cross the street to gawp at them myself, the royals represent in physical form a long history and elaborate, colourful traditions, that help define national identity and international perception (from a cultural impact an tourism point of view).
However purely symbolic or ceremonial they actually are I still can't accept the argument that tourism revenue is any basis for a system of government. After all, plenty of people still visit the Palace of Versailles.

Also that tourism revenue wouldn't be diminished if they were mere figureheads with no constitutional role. Taking back all the land they've stolen (including vast swathes of the sea bed, from which they stand to earn millions from wind farms) and essentially becoming a republic would not stop a single tourist coming along and standing outside our Buckingham Palace to gawp at historical (and genetic) oddities we allow to live there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 03:43:35 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 26 March, 2012, 03:29:31 PM
Also that tourism revenue wouldn't be diminished if they were mere figureheads with no constitutional role.

I'm not sure this is entirely true.  There are plenty of royal dynasties cluttering up Europe, but none with the international prominence or cachet of the UK's - due in part I suspect to their ongoing relevance in the state's business, and the perceived quaintness thereof.   Also, it's not just tourism - it's the way your cultural products are viewed and consumed abroad.  It's a bit like Ireland and alcohol.  What excessive drinking costs us in ruined lives is more than made up for in our international fondness rating - we'd be lost without it, and countless midwives would be on the dole.

And just to be clear, if it was me saddled with them, I'd be demanding their removal toot-sweet.  But seeing as it's someone else that has them, and so many of you seem to hold them in some affection, I'm inclined to look for positives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 March, 2012, 03:49:01 PM
QuoteAh!  It's a lovely morning here, it's put me in a really frivolous mood.  So, with that in mind, pray tell me JayzusB, in this modern world, what are the advantages that your Dad has as a "Citizen" over your Mum as a "Subject"?  Just asking, 'cos I can't think of many myself

Fair point, Tankie. I was struggling, but as usual TB has expressed my own opinion far better than I ever could.


QuoteAs a subject, you live within a system which is based on the concept that some people (rulers) are innately superior to others (subjects) purely because they belong to a particular narrowly-defined lineage.  The state asserts that you are born inferior, and unless you're Kate Middleton you will die inferior.  The Queen gets to sign stuff into law because of who her Papa was - you never will, because of who your Dad wasn't.

As a citizen, even where it is utterly masked by non-institutional discrimination through wealth and casual conspiracy, no such relationship is codified. 

It's purely idealogical really, and admittedly there are no real practical benefits of being a citizen for the average person.  It's probably ingrained into me as a result of growing up in Ireland too:  Having always lived in a republic, I would simply find it hard to accept the fact that I was ruled by a person that nobody elected (even if it is only a symbolic rule).  This is also one of the many, many reasons I try to have as little to do as possible with the Catholic church.

But yeah, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a 'subject', it's just not my preferred passport identity.  I just wish Tordelback was there for me every time I shoot my mouth off about points I can't back up.  :)

As an aside, I'm in Thailand at the moment. If we were Thai subjects, and we had a discussion like this one about the royals here, a lot of us would very likely be put in prison.  No exaggeration. They take royalty verrrry seriously here
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 26 March, 2012, 04:08:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 March, 2012, 03:43:35 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 26 March, 2012, 03:29:31 PM
Also that tourism revenue wouldn't be diminished if they were mere figureheads with no constitutional role.

I'm not sure this is entirely true.  There are plenty of royal dynasties cluttering up Europe, but none with the international prominence or cachet of the UK's - due in part I suspect to their ongoing relevance in the state's business, and the perceived quaintness thereof.

I can't see it making a blind bit of a difference to a tourist - they see the Queen one day, pop over to Stonehenge on another, etc. and I can't see people avoiding Stonehenge because it no longer has the power it used to, it is important because of the history and the impressiveness.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 March, 2012, 03:49:01 PMIt's purely idealogical really, and admittedly there are no real practical benefits of being a citizen for the average person.

As citizens we'd get a proper written constitution, which would have knock on effects in all sorts of areas, like this example from George Monbiot concerining the City of London:

QuoteIf you've ever dithered over the question of whether the UK needs a written constitution, dither no longer. Imagine the clauses required to preserve the status of the Corporation. "The City of London will remain outside the authority of parliament. Domestic and foreign banks will be permitted to vote as if they were human beings, and their votes will outnumber those cast by real people. Its elected officials will be chosen from people deemed acceptable by a group of medieval guilds ...".

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval

For a more general overview:

www.republic.org.uk/britishconstitution/
www.republic.org.uk/case/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2012, 02:55:39 PM
Please consider signing my petition, To Return the Creation and Control of the Money Supply to the People (http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/To_return_creation_and_control_of_the_money_supply_to_the_people/?cvEAccb).

Here is the wording of the petition:

At present around 99% of the country's money is created from nothing by private banks and then lent to the government and the people at interest.

This is the root cause of the current 'financial crisis' as the system tries desperately to find ways of paying back the interest, which does not exist because the money to pay the interest was never created.

The solution is simple: We must return the power to create and control the money supply, interest free, to The People where this power rightly belongs.

Secondly, fractional reserve lending must be phased out and eventually (within a year to eighteen months) outlawed.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, a Truth and Reconcilliation process must be set up to gather information on the private and hidden dealings of the bankers and their associates. We must know exactly what damage these people have done so that the system can be repaired and the culprits brought to justice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 24 April, 2012, 03:04:01 PM
I agree. Coincidentally, I own a large stake in a dunking chair firm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 25 April, 2012, 06:06:01 PM
A petition to get rid of Jeremy Hunt:

www.avaaz.org/en/fire_jeremy_hunt_2/

However, this may have largely implications:

QuoteSecond, and potentially even more serious, the prime minister would be in jeopardy if the alleged support for the BSkyB bid proved to be part of a bigger deal between the Conservative leadership and News Corp. In its crudest form, the suggestion is that the Murdochs used the Sun to make sure that Gordon Brown was driven out of Downing Street so that the incoming Conservative government could deliver them a sequence of favours – a fair wind for them to take over BSkyB; the emasculation of the much resented Ofcom; and a severe funding cut to their primary broadcasting rival, the BBC.

This was the core of the toughest exchanges on Tuesday, as Robert Jay QC, for the inquiry, laid out fragments of evidence that suggest this big deal was made, and concluded: "It all falls together, doesn't it?" In reply, James Murdoch passionately denied that he would ever link his newspaper's endorsement of a political party to the commercial interests of his company. "I simply wouldn't do business that way."

Until Tuesday, all of the evidence for the big deal was circumstantial.

We knew that both Rupert and James Murdoch had complained publicly and bitterly that Ofcom was interfering in their business. This came to a head on 26 June 2009, when Ofcom announced it wanted to force BSkyB to sell its channels to rivals at far lower prices. Ten days later, on 6 July, Cameron announced that, if elected, he would abolish Ofcom.

Similarly, the Murdochs have launched a series of lacerating attacks on the BBC, arguing that its income should be cut and its commercial activity restricted. In March 2009, Cameron called for the BBC licence fee to be frozen. In May 2009, Hunt did the same. Days after James Murdoch delivered his famous MacTaggart lecture in August 2009 – in which he renewed his attack on Ofcom as well as the BBC – Hunt met News Corp officials in New York. He then wrote an article for the Sun attacking the BBC for accepting a rise in its licence fee that year and calling on it to cut back its commercial activities.

It was disclosed on Tuesday that days later, on 10 September, James Murdoch went to a private drinking club in Mayfair for an evening meeting with Cameron, during which he told him that the Sun would back the Tories in the next election.

Murdoch also disclosed on Tuesday that the BSkyB bid had been discussed at a formal News Corp meeting in Los Angeles a few weeks before this meeting. There is no evidence at this stage, however, that the bid was mentioned to Cameron.

The Sun then used its news columns to launch a sustained attack on Gordon Brown. Five months after the election, Cameron's government slashed Ofcom's budget by 28% and cut back its role; and slashed the BBC's income by 16% and cut back its commercial activity.

Tuesday's cache of emails about the BSkyB bid appears to fit into that sequence with a neatness that will alarm the government.

It will alarm them, too, that in the political heat of last July, Cameron gave Leveson terms of reference for this part of his inquiry, which are very broad: "To inquire into ... the relationships between national newspapers and politicians, and the conduct of each."

www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/24/leveson-inquiry-murdoch-david-cameron
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 25 April, 2012, 06:40:13 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 25 April, 2012, 06:06:01 PM
However, this may have largely implications:

Come again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2012, 06:45:15 PM
If he could do that he wouldn't need the truss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 27 April, 2012, 01:02:08 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 25 April, 2012, 06:40:13 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 25 April, 2012, 06:06:01 PM
However, this may have largely implications:

Come again?

Again? Once'd be nice.

Orrrrrrrrrrrr I meant "larger."

You decide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 27 April, 2012, 01:06:53 AM
There's no need to be huffy. You made a mistake and people were confused by what you said as a consequence. You would find that people would be more willing to engage with you if you didn't act so angry all the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Misanthrope on 27 April, 2012, 01:20:11 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-17857148 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-17857148)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 April, 2012, 09:26:33 AM
London 2012: the friendly games (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17360803)

Anyone who can explain why a few hundred ton of metal streaking toward the London skyline is any more dangerous than a few hundred ton of metal streaking toward the London skyline in a ball of flames wins a special prize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 29 April, 2012, 11:42:46 AM
In the movies any airborne target destroyed with missiles over a densely populated area is instantly vaporised, so I shouldn't worry about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 April, 2012, 12:21:27 PM
Sounds like fun, definitely more than Olympics itself, maybe it's a new event like synchronised swimming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 April, 2012, 01:29:13 PM
Rumours that one of the artillery batteries will be manned by blind billionaire pop star Stig are, at this point, unconfirmed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2012, 01:50:20 PM
Well I Guess we need something tangible to look at to keep us afraid seeing as how all these "terrorists" seem to be all but invisible...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 April, 2012, 02:12:17 PM
Oh if only they'd had missile batteries at the Munich Olympics, or in London on 7th July '05, things could have been so exactly the same.  I hope they're considering mining the olympic harbour at Weymouth too, I've seen Speed 2. 

Also, I do wonder what blowing up a (say) fully-fueled 747 over the Stratford stadium would actually achieve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 April, 2012, 02:17:53 PM
Residential flats should have their own Citi-Def.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 29 April, 2012, 02:26:39 PM
Don't worry. These micro bots will save us! [ Or enslave us.] A lot smaller than missile systems. Science marches on to inevitable victory.

http://youtu.be/YQIMGV5vtd4
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 April, 2012, 05:01:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2012, 01:50:20 PM
Well I Guess we need something tangible to look at to keep us afraid seeing as how all these "terrorists" seem to be all but invisible...

You do realise that placing the word terrorist within parentheses triggers a subversion-bot at GCHQ, don't you? You're not paranoid, Shark, they really are all out to get you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2012, 05:29:09 PM
I refuse to be afraid of my own government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 April, 2012, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2012, 05:29:09 PM
I refuse to be afraid of my own government.

That's the truly scary thing though, isn't it; they are just us. A colleague of mine's wife is standing for the SNP in the local council elections and it's odd seeing someone's individual personality being first co-opted, then entirely consumed by the discourse of party politics.

If the ruling classes were all drawn from a homogenous group of public school boys or were seven foot lizards wearing Ken Livingstone suits it'd be easy to out them in the media (like Mike Donovan) and restore the rule of the people- but they are the people.

If you or I were to go down the same route, we'd find ourselves talking that same nonsense talk that means you don't give your opponent an easy soundbite to attack, making tiny concessions, taking pragmatic decisions, and telling ourselves that once we've got a hand on the levers of power- then's the time to really start making a difference. 

And by that point you are for all intents and purposes one of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 April, 2012, 08:33:39 PM
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 29 April, 2012, 08:36:13 PM
Four legs, two legs and two wings good. Two legs bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 April, 2012, 08:49:39 PM
Dozen limbs, bat wings, pterodon head/tail and a fucking scythe-wielding skeleton weirdly stickin' oot yer torso BAD

(http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/features/interviews/2005/grant/alpha_dies.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 30 April, 2012, 08:36:51 AM
sigh

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/military-aircraft-get-bogged-down-in-turfcutting-spy-games-3095262.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 02 May, 2012, 02:41:45 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 30 April, 2012, 08:36:51 AM
sigh

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/military-aircraft-get-bogged-down-in-turfcutting-spy-games-3095262.html

There's a name for folk who spy on people on bogs...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 02 May, 2012, 04:51:16 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 02 May, 2012, 02:41:45 PM
There's a name for folk who spy on people on bogs...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2006749/Man-hides-portable-toilet-Hanuman-Yoga-Festival.html

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/deep-inside-the-chain-pub-piss-dungeon
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 May, 2012, 06:53:10 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 29 April, 2012, 08:49:39 PM
Dozen limbs, bat wings, pterodon head/tail and a fucking scythe-wielding skeleton weirdly stickin' oot yer torso BAD

(http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/features/interviews/2005/grant/alpha_dies.jpg)

That was a great scene. I wish it would actually still of would have of actually have had actually would of still have of had happened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 May, 2012, 07:05:19 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 May, 2012, 06:53:10 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 29 April, 2012, 08:49:39 PM
Dozen limbs, bat wings, pterodon head/tail and a fucking scythe-wielding skeleton weirdly stickin' oot yer torso BAD

(http://www.2000adreview.co.uk/features/interviews/2005/grant/alpha_dies.jpg)

That was a great scene. I wish it would actually still of would have of actually have had actually would of still have of had happened.

Yup. Wagner and Ezquerra can do whatever they fucking-well please and I'll lap it up, but when they do decide to put a lid on Johnny Alpha's career, I'll be hugely impressed if they can come up with anything as moving and consistent with the character and the themes of the strip.

Back on topic; what's the point of a Parliamentary committee finding that Rupert Murdoch's a very naughty boy if that only results in him being given the equivalent of a public school de-bagging? Oh yeah, and that was supposed to read 'pteranodon', above.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 03 May, 2012, 03:16:39 PM
It's London Lord Mayor voting today, no report on virus of Chaos yet?

(sorry as I post it in wrong thread first, wish they fix the edit!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 May, 2012, 05:51:32 PM
Went into the booth today, looked at the list of candidates: two Labour (previous administration, which left Scotland's smallest local authority with an inexplicable £9 million black hole in the finances); two SNP (current incumbents, who seem more interested in blaming Labour for everything than coming up with any solutions); No Independents, not even a fucking Lib-Dem for the disillusioned protest voter.

Reader, I voted Tory.

There's about as much chance of David Cameron's man getting a seat at the big table as Alex Salmond winning a beauty contest (former mining country, reflexively socialist), but it still felt wrong.

On the plus side, the Single Transferable Vote ballot system made ranking Bob Tory as my number one (and only) choice- instead of ranking them all 1-5, in order of preference- at least made me feel more as if I was registering a genuine protest, rather than endorsing the candidacy of some cunt who'd shut the library and slash services to the elderly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2012, 10:44:11 PM
Political bias at the BBC? Surely not?

I hope this linky thing works!

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/4911-questions-over-bbc-scotlands-election-figure-claims#comment-152910

If it can happen in Scotland, it can happen in the rest of the UK. The implications affect us all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 May, 2012, 10:33:58 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2012, 10:44:11 PM
Political bias at the BBC? Surely not?

I hope this linky thing works!

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/4911-questions-over-bbc-scotlands-election-figure-claims#comment-152910

If it can happen in Scotland, it can happen in the rest of the UK. The implications affect us all.


Pacific Quay might as well have a red star and minaret on the roof, but Salmond's shown he's more than capable of doing whatever's necessary to secure favourable media coverage from equally influential quarters (http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/gerry-hassan/alex-salmond-rupert-murdoch-and-pitfalls-of-crony-capitalism).

Don't you have Dark Judges to draw, MacNeil?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 08 May, 2012, 02:41:01 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 07 May, 2012, 10:33:58 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 06 May, 2012, 10:44:11 PM
Political bias at the BBC? Surely not?

I hope this linky thing works!

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/4911-questions-over-bbc-scotlands-election-figure-claims#comment-152910

If it can happen in Scotland, it can happen in the rest of the UK. The implications affect us all.




Pacific Quay might as well have a red star and minaret on the roof, but Salmond's shown he's more than capable of doing whatever's necessary to secure favourable media coverage from equally influential quarters (http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/gerry-hassan/alex-salmond-rupert-murdoch-and-pitfalls-of-crony-capitalism).

Don't you have Dark Judges to draw, MacNeil?

So, your quip about red star and minarets means you do agree with me that the BBC in Scotland IS biased then? So, you don't give a damn for honesty and integrity then? That's nice to know.

You however choose to drag up the same old Unionist smears against the First Minister of Scotland. This post was not about the discussion over Scotland, it was about the people who WE pay to provide US with with unbiased factual news from which we can make considered decisions  that affect our lives.

If you don't want to live in a free and democratic land where freeborn men and women share in the fruits of our labours, where they are told the truth about what happens in their world and in their name, then by all means continue voting the way you do. I however have better dreams for my life and the land which I love.


For those interested.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/4874-the-salmond-smear-campaign-and-the-unknown-email

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 May, 2012, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 08 May, 2012, 02:41:01 PM
So, your quip about red star and minarets means you do agree with me that the BBC in Scotland IS biased then? So, you don't give a damn for honesty and integrity then? That's nice to know.

You however choose to drag up the same old Unionist smears against the First Minister of Scotland. This post was not about the discussion over Scotland, it was about the people who WE pay to provide US with with unbiased factual news from which we can make considered decisions  that affect our lives.

If you don't want to live in a free and democratic land where freeborn men and women share in the fruits of our labours, where they are told the truth about what happens in their world and in their name, then by all means continue voting the way you do. I however have better dreams for my life and the land which I love.

For those interested.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/4874-the-salmond-smear-campaign-and-the-unknown-email

Fuck me, I've pissed off a legend. The Political Compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org/test) test put me square in the centre of the libertarian left, so let's assume my ballot choice was an expression of discontent, and that I'm not a Tory.

The point of both the posts you refer to was my exasperation with party politics and I wasn't contradicting the point you or the article you linked to made. It's clear there was bias- conscious or unconscious- in the choices the BBC made, but the explicit backing given to the SNP by the Sun (just as it endorsed Labour for a decade) is no less pernicious just because it's a bias that seems to go unchallenged.

The BBC is held to different standards of accountability than the rest of the media and, while it would be naive to think that no political horse trading occurs around Charter Renewal time, it's (rightly) watched like a hawk for evidence of bias ... chiefly by the same privately owned media outlets that freely endorse whichever political party best reflects their own agenda and interests.

Just to use the example of the second news article you linked to: why is an attempt to determine whether there was any transaction between Salmond and Murdoch characterised as an "attack"? To use the example of the report I linked to (the first that google returned): why would Salmond being found not to have behaved improperly constitute an "escape" (implying guilt)? Each author enjoys unlimited freedom to present events in the light which best suits their purposes and supports their own assumptions.

As a state-funded broadcaster, the BBC's in a unique position and deserves to be upbraided for any failure to adhere to the standards of impartiality demanded of it, so I completely agree with the point you were making. But I see that as no less important than the work of the Leveson Inquiry in holding politicians like Salmond, Cameron, Blair and Brown to account for the contemptible toadying to an unaccountable, manipulative, oligarch wanker like Murdoch that led us into an illegal war and utter financial ruin, without a word of complaint from the most powerful organ of the British media.

The enquiry into precisely how that unprecedented degree of media aquiessence was secured, and what Murdoch did with the freedom from scrutiny that bought him, will provide damning headlines for all hues of the political spectrum, without painting any of them in a particularly flattering light. If you want to hear the truth about the bastards you disagree with, you're obliged to treat the ugly truth about the bastards you agree with in the same manner.

Justice has a price, Colin; thankfully Lord Justice Leveson doesn't.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 07:52:03 PM
I think we should have a haggis-baking contest to see who wins this argument. If it's a tie you will dance me a jig.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 May, 2012, 07:59:48 PM
Crivvens, it's a 20 stretch on Titan for you Sauchieboy Bikini Kill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 08:01:28 PM
There is a moose, loose aboot this hoose.

It is the moose of discord.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 May, 2012, 08:12:15 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 08:01:28 PM
There is a moose, loose aboot this hoose.

It is the moose of discord.

I love it when the southern people get all het up. Soon we will snigger at you from behind our wall, while Call Me Dave feasts upon the flesh of your children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2012, 08:16:43 PM
Quote from: Trout on 08 May, 2012, 08:12:15 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 08:01:28 PM
There is a moose, loose aboot this hoose.

It is the moose of discord.

I love it when the southern people get all het up. Soon we will snigger at you from behind our wall, while Call Me Dave feasts upon the flesh of your children.

no you won't cos the wall will be 20 years late and cost ninety three billion poonds by then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 08:23:06 PM
You will look at your feet, bloody from walking 500 miles and bruised from walking 500 more. You will be rained on, leading you to wonder why it always rains on you. You will have to chase a bunch of cars. You will look at your cities, built on rock and roll.

And you will see that it was not worth it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 May, 2012, 08:25:03 PM
We're going to do terrible, terrible things to Jimmy Hill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 May, 2012, 08:26:44 PM
I think he's done that all ready.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 May, 2012, 09:27:16 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2012, 08:16:43 PM
I love it when the southern people get all het up. Soon we will snigger at you from behind our wall, while Call Me Dave feasts upon the flesh of your children.

No you won't cos the wall will be 20 years late and cost ninety three billion poonds by then.

Ooh! That hurt because it's true. The examples you allude to are all based around Edinburgh, though: the Scottish Parliament, the tram project, and they still haven't finished painting the Forth Bridge yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 May, 2012, 09:32:54 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 08 May, 2012, 09:27:16 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2012, 08:16:43 PM
I love it when the southern people get all het up. Soon we will snigger at you from behind our wall, while Call Me Dave feasts upon the flesh of your children.

No you won't cos the wall will be 20 years late and cost ninety three billion poonds by then.

Ooh! That hurt because it's true. The examples you allude to are all based around Edinburgh, though: the Scottish Parliament, the tram project, and they still haven't finished painting the Forth Bridge yet.

Actually, they have finished that.

Another great moment in the life of a left-of-centre Tory. Yay!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 May, 2012, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: Trout on 08 May, 2012, 09:32:54 PM

they still haven't finished painting the Forth Bridge yet.

Actually, they have finished that.

Another great moment in the life of a left-of-centre Tory. Yay!

That shameful admission was my equivalent of Dan Clowse's 'sock-huffing' scene.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 10:48:15 PM
More like Joe Matt getting a handjob from a disgusting hooker in a porno theater.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2012, 06:33:00 AM
Colin McNeil will paint all your death scenes, and I won't be a bit sorry for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 May, 2012, 06:36:18 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 10:48:15 PM
More like Joe Matt getting a handjob from a disgusting hooker in a porno theater.

In that scenario, I'd be the hooker and Joe Matt would be Dave Cameron.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 May, 2012, 07:26:43 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 09 May, 2012, 06:36:18 AM
In that scenario, I'd be the hooker and Joe Matt would be Dave Cameron.

Presumably that makes Clegg the hankie.  See you next Wednesday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2012, 02:11:27 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 08 May, 2012, 08:01:28 PM
There is a moose, loose aboot this hoose.

It is the moose of discord.

Just read this and laughed for a good 5 minutes.  It's posts like this that remind me why we keep the fecker round  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Kowalsky (formerly JudgeGumpty) on 10 May, 2012, 03:50:26 AM
(http://i45.tinypic.com/s2tf6h.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:41:51 PM
Oh no! That would be ending a sentence with a preposition, except that it isn't really a sentence - it lacks a subject, and has only a present participle in place of a compound verb for the present continuous tense.

Still, it made me wonder, 'screwing the ordinary man over... what ?' A park bench? The bonnet of a Ford Mondeo?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 May, 2012, 05:43:38 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:41:51 PM
Oh no! That would be ending a sentence with a preposition, except that it isn't really a sentence - it lacks a subject, and has only a present participle in place of a compound verb for the present continuous tense.

Still, it made me wonder, 'screwing the ordinary man over... what ?' A park bench? The bonnet of a Ford Mondeo?

Ha, ha! I laugh at your useless skills and knowledge. Oh, wait. I'm a newspaper sub-editor.

Shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:49:16 PM
Of course, really, it calls for the verb to be in its present perfect continuous form, taking into account the '300 years and counting' duration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 10 May, 2012, 05:52:54 PM
You had a preposition just the other week. You preposed that all of the mods just let the front office take the site down for half a week because you were too apathetic to say no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: U.S.S.R on 10 May, 2012, 06:12:14 PM
Quote from: Kowalsky (formerly JudgeGumpty) on 10 May, 2012, 03:50:26 AM
(http://i45.tinypic.com/s2tf6h.png)

Haha that is brilliant  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 May, 2012, 06:50:03 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:49:16 PM
Of course, really, it calls for the verb to be in its present perfect continuous form, taking into account the '300 years and counting' duration.

That would be more impressive if you weren't typing it in your pyjamas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 May, 2012, 10:25:43 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:41:51 PMStill, it made me wonder, 'screwing the ordinary man over... what ?' A park bench? The bonnet of a Ford Mondeo?


Your dead body.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 11 May, 2012, 05:51:27 PM
Quote from: Trout on 10 May, 2012, 06:50:03 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 10 May, 2012, 05:49:16 PM
Of course, really, it calls for the verb to be in its present perfect continuous form, taking into account the '300 years and counting' duration.

That would be more impressive if you weren't typing it in your pyjamas.

So that is where he keeps his keyboard. That explains a few things...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 13 May, 2012, 06:57:47 AM
Funny poster that, David "call me Dave" Cameron being a robot would certainly explain some of his more, uh, esoteric policies.  Don't know about that "Next Generation Thatcher Clone" bit though, I'm sure the Tory backbenchers would disagree with that assessment, if he was indeed a clone of Lady Thatcher, he would have won an outright majority in 2010, and wouldn't be in the doghouse with many of his M.P.'s, never trusted that man myself, being an unapologetic right-wing nutcase myself (as everyone here will confirm), I wish so much he was indeed a Thatcher clone, that woman (love or loathe her) knew what she wanted, and knew how to get us there... if I was a member of the so-called 'Conservative' party, I would have handed my resignation in before now and enthusiastically joined U.K.I.P., the REAL conservative party and the knight in shining armour of British politics, in my humble opinion (conservative in opinion, libertarian in practice - exactly where I stand)... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 13 May, 2012, 10:22:12 AM
From here, David Cameron seems almost beyond parody, but that poster is pretty good. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 May, 2012, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 13 May, 2012, 06:57:47 AM
Funny poster that, ... if (Cameron) was indeed a clone of Lady Thatcher, he would have won an outright majority in 2010, and wouldn't be in the doghouse with many of his M.P.'s. Never trusted that man myself, being an unapologetic right-wing nutcase myself ... (conservative in opinion, libertarian in practice - exactly where I stand)

The point of democratic politics is to force you to see things from perspectives other than your own, so it's always interesting to hear from you, Beaky; and interesting that Cameron engenders such conformity of opinion in folk who normally can't agree about the price of milk.

The man doesn't appear to be driven by ideology- not a bad thing-  but then, as you point out, he isn't proving particularly adept at governing by pragmatic response to exigency either. In my most paranoid fever dreams of where public dissatisfaction with the rudderless drift of Her Majesty's current goverment (and opposition) might lead politics (don't click if you're squeamish (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyoOQ8R2E4I&skipcontrinter=1)), Dave Cameron's limp moderacy and the fogeyish bluster of Boris and Nigel Farage seem almost acceptable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 13 May, 2012, 11:51:48 AM
The greatest trick teh devil ever pulled etc.

Dave is downright more Right wing than Maggie ever was - witness the whole sale slash and burn of benefits and the privatisation of areas that Maggie wouldnt have dared approach (police/NHS) etc.

The moderate image is just that - image.  It may have meant that he pisses off his core audience, but the idea is to play to a wider one, while dismantling the state and passing it off to his mates in a race to beat teh 2015 election deadline.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 May, 2012, 11:55:06 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 13 May, 2012, 11:35:28 AM(don't click if you're squeamish (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyoOQ8R2E4I&skipcontrinter=1)),

I always love the St. George iconography in these things - celebrate your pure white Englishness and Imperial heritage with reference to (possibly) a half-Turkish half-Palestinian* emigrant who was born in Syria and was martyred by the Romans for refusing to conform to the religion of the Empire he served. 



*I appreciate that these are anachronistic ethnicities to ascribe to folk based on their geographical origins in the 3rd C, but that's sort-of the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 May, 2012, 12:24:25 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 13 May, 2012, 11:51:48 AM
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled etc. Dave is downright more Right wing than Maggie ever was - witness the whole sale slash and burn of benefits and the privatisation of areas that Maggie wouldnt have dared approach (police/NHS) etc.

The moderate image is just that - image.  It may have meant that he pisses off his core audience, but the idea is to play to a wider one, while dismantling the state and passing it off to his mates in a race to beat the 2015 election deadline.

I essentially agree, Leigh; but the liberal economic concensus amidst the governing class is such that I can't imagine either of the Milibands presenting options to address the defecit that differ radically from those favoured by their counterparts.

I don't quite understand how we found ourselves in a position where universal health, social and welfare provision, which seemed- as part of the post-WWII settlement- to be accepted as an obvious benefit to society, are now commodified as just another national asset to be popped off in the post to see how much Cash For Gold or Mazuma will give us for it. I wonder whether Osbourne or Balls have contacted Wonga?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 May, 2012, 02:32:43 PM
Reduction and raising the price of life-standards is the name of the game.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 May, 2012, 10:00:49 PM
Apologies for not replying sooner.

I'm not a legend, but I was "pissed off". Apologies, there's  no need for me to behave like that. I was just so frustrated and exasperated by the media, not just the BBC in particular, and especially the whole Independence Referendum thing going on.
This post was a lot longer, but it was going all ranty and rambling. I cut it down to a few paragraphs which express ... something. I do struggle to find words that describe my feelings  I am an artist after all), so I've added some links to other people's words to help explain.  It might help, it might confuse, but at least it might be fun. Have a Youtubetastic time! :)
Cheers
Colin

Economic – left/right  -7.38
Social – libertarian/authoritarian  -2.82
I am a believer in having a "none of the above" option on all ballot papers. They'd have got my vote at least a couple of times.
I agree with you, the scrutiny of the BBC is of vital importance. We pay for it, after all, more importantly rely on it for impartial truthful reporting of facts, not opinion, not speculation, but facts.
Has anyone seen the emails in question? I found them on The Spectators website, not the BBC. The BBC showed one line from the emails. (at the time of looking) This whole story is much more interesting when you actually read the entire email and the others too. Can you tell what the picture is from one small detail? No?! Neither can I.
Justice has a price indeed, so does Scottish Independence. Those who strive for us politically have to walk through the shit that the Union and the elites have given us.
The elites created this union, not because it was good for me and you. They did it because it was good for them, and it still is. In the past you had to be born in to the elites, now you merely have to believe in them and serve your time to become one of "them".
When you have to walk through shit, then some of it's going to stick you. Whether you crap in it too, is a whole other question. When the Opposition/BBC/Unionists/whoever say, "Look! He has shit on him! That proves he shat in it!" No, it doesn't. All it means is that he has shit on him. There is no proof, so far, that any shit was taken. We need to follow the paper trail to find the truth of this shit. Levenson and Co, Plumbers to the political classes. We need to wait till they've got their arm right round the U-bend and they finally pull out the turd of "truth". Then we will see what colour it is and who it really belongs to.
If he is mired in the filth of power, if he really does think more of himself and his party than Scotland, if he really is sucking the balls of the elites, then I will be first to sharpen the axe. And I don't mean that metaphorically! Those who have ultimate power and responsibility over us should be bound by the ultimate price. Twenty years on Titan? Just chop their f***ing heads off! There is only one sentence for a "Rogue".
All this been said, I do trust Alex Salmond. I've met him, I've looked him in the eye and shaken his hand. I know it's only a feeling, but feelings are all we have. It's feelings and emotions that get us through life and more importantly give us a chance of a happy and worthwhile existence.
I am a Scot. I love my country.
It's the land-it is our wisdom
It's the land-it shines us through
It's the land-it feeds our children
It's the land-you cannot own the land
The land owns you
-   (Dougie MacLean – Solid Ground)
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
-   Mahatma Ghandi


Dougie MacLean – Solid Ground
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i_GbfKAu8k
The Corries – A Man's a Man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSoxa8XpJ84&feature=relmfu
The Corries – The Dawning of the Day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmuY6aBeBQg&feature=related
The Corries – Scotland Will Flourish
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkr9c_ok-7c&feature=related
Dick Gaughin – Freedom Come All Ye
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nLGKFTH5sw
Brian McNeill – No Gods and Precious Few Heroes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUI1O8m-L7k
Robert Burns - Auld Lang Syne
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86_tlA9maA0
John McDermott – Scotland the Brave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5bxT-j9UOQ
Gaberlunzie – Scotland Tomorrow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxtwZA-472g
The ChielMeister – Ah'm e Chiel (sae dinna fash)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig_hEe4TVU4
Battlefield Band – The Yew Tree
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8nIFwpb3NQ&feature=related
The Corries – Highland Lament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_i49qdVtyY&feature=related
Dougie MacLean's – Homeland
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3VXb2T1uqA
Andy M Stewart – Gallant Murray
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50vFarPZla0
Robert Hall and Jimmy MacGregor - The Wee Magic Stane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKI8wwvY5mA&feature=related
Dick Gaughin – John MacLean's March
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKk8cxskmVo
The Corries – The Sheriffmuir Fight Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TkQkyXV-M4&feature=related
Traditional - The Drunk Scotsman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ35SOU9HTM
The Corries – Scotland the Brave (humorous)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK6LkpfZ94s
North Sea Gas – The Kishorn Commandos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_i49qdVtyY&feature=related
The Corries – Kismuil's Galley
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 May, 2012, 10:03:22 PM
tl;dr
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 13 May, 2012, 10:27:44 PM
Sorry, wrong link. Here's the correct one.

The Corries - Highland Lament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQOuyP1pCJc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 11:26:59 AM
Sorry we've kept you enslaved for so long.  As an Englishman, I wish you well.  Bon Voyage and all that.  Oh! and close the door behind you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 May, 2012, 11:30:24 AM
tr;dr
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 11:49:05 AM
Roger, tr;dr?  If that's an insult, it's wasted on me, mate, 'cos I haven't got a clue what it means.  Could you please insult me in plain English!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 14 May, 2012, 12:48:51 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 11:26:59 AM
Sorry we've kept you enslaved for so long.  As an Englishman, I wish you well.  Bon Voyage and all that.  Oh! and close the door behind you!

You haven't kept us enslaved. That's the point. WE have kept ourselves enslaved. It's the elites who have done this to us, whether Scottish kings or Tory and Labour Prime Ministers in Westminster. Their lies and greed have kept us enslaved.

It's only stupid feckless Scots who hate the English. Most of us have no animosity to the English people at all. As the old joke goes, "some of my best friends are English".

As much as I believe in an independent Scotland, I also believe in an independent England. I also believe we can be friends, our two nations, despite our histories and despite our different dreams for our countries futures. We mustn't close the door on friendship.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 01:05:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 11:49:05 AM
Roger, tr;dr?  If that's an insult, it's wasted on me, mate, 'cos I haven't got a clue what it means.  Could you please insult me in plain English!

I'll have a go, if you like.

Contrary to popular belief, Scottish people don't tend to have a problem with the English, despite notable exceptions such as Jimmy Hill. We do, however, dislike obnoxious people.

Best wishes

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:14:56 PM
Yep, I agree with everything you say, Colin.  I happen to think that Alex Salmond is by far the most charismatic politician in British politics today.  I'm like you, I believe in independence for my country, but the politicians at Westminster don't want to know about an English parliament.  So, if the only way we can get one is by default, with the Welsh, Scots, and Northern Irish going their own way, then so be it.

I was only joking about closing the door.  Been to Scotland many times and I love the place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:16:43 PM
Oh! Troutie!!!  I've upset you!  Didums!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 01:20:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:16:43 PM
Oh! Troutie!!!  I've upset you!  Didums!!

Nah. I just wanted to insult you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:27:13 PM
No, you haven't insulted me, I just think you're funny!  But, heh, you could try insulting me again.  Better luck next time.  Best wishes.  Mike
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 01:42:18 PM
Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 01:05:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 11:49:05 AM
Roger, tr;dr?  If that's an insult, it's wasted on me, mate, 'cos I haven't got a clue what it means.  Could you please insult me in plain English!

I'll have a go, if you like.

Contrary to popular belief, Scottish people don't tend to have a problem with the English, despite notable exceptions such as Jimmy Hill. We do, however, dislike obnoxious people.

Best wishes

- Trout
Some of us are even married to you, some of us even live in your country........

Interestingly, the perception amongst the English is that we dont like them.  For that I actually agree with Mr MacNeil, there is a perception down here that the Scots Hate the English and that is fuelled by media rhetoric.  Not by the actual English, though there is a feeling that they pay for the rest of the UK or at least pay for anywhere not in the South East, which is were the lovely media bubble resides. 

My wife felt when we lived in Scotland for a year, that the constant, "you English" nonsense and the constant "so what School did you actually go to" really just put her off from ever living in Scotland.  Though this may be due to west coast influences rather than Scots ones.  I think this contradicts what Ive said.  But thats her experience not mine. 

Being a Scot who really never wants to go back and live in Scotland, and an outsider in my own country and in England.  My take on indepence is this,
Since the Blair/Brown fudged independence and went with the Scottish Parliament, Independence is actually pretty much unavoidable.  I feel it was used to make sure that the Scots stayed within the Union, keeping the MP's in the Uk Parliament keeping labour "in power" and making sure the vested interests stayed.  I think thats probably back fired and allowed the question "As we are making all theses decisions, we can make them all".   I also feel that the powers that be are pretty much scared of that whole scenario. 

I think there has actually been a loss of Englishness amongst the English, they are actually mostly confused as what to be English actually is.  Is it the stiff upper lip thing?  Does it mean the Empire?  Does it mean the thuggish football supporters and the right wing of the EDL or BNP?  Does it mean Morris Dancers or something else?  Personally I think they get Britishness confused with Englishness and the two are synonomous with each other.  The English need their own parliament even if the Union were to stay that would mean having a much smaller UK establishment which would control things like Defence or Enviroment or similar universal functions.  This of course wont happen and thus the break up of the union is pretty much a foregone conclusion, if not now within 30 years. 

As a final point on this, Im Scottish but I dont want a vote on this (ive lived in England for close to 20 years), the people who currently live in Scotland should vote and those over 18 only (anything else would be seen as a fudge)

Just my own thoughts!  :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 02:01:29 PM
Nice post, Slips, agreed with most of it but not the English losing their identity bit.  I think English identity is growing.  I'm old enough, (just) to remember the '66 World Cup Final, the (English) crowd were waving Union flags; go to an England game now and they're nearly all waving St. George's flags.

As a child, I can't remember any celebrations marking St. George's Day, but on the 23rd April just gone, I saw English flags flying and even went to a St. George's Day parade.  Unheard of in my youth.  I accept, on the whole, that we're not a nation "to beat our chests".  But I think the English are very at home with their identity, I think that's one of the reasons we're so welcoming to outsiders.

Yes, I know we have our morons but so does everybody else.  I'm talking about the English as a whole, not the fringe nutters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 02:16:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 02:01:29 PM
Nice post, Slips, agreed with most of it but not the English losing their identity bit.  I think English identity is growing.  I'm old enough, (just) to remember the '66 World Cup Final, the (English) crowd were waving Union flags; go to an England game now and they're nearly all waving St. George's flags.

As a child, I can't remember any celebrations marking St. George's Day, but on the 23rd April just gone, I saw English flags flying and even went to a St. George's Day parade.  Unheard of in my youth.  I accept, on the whole, that we're not a nation "to beat our chests".  But I think the English are very at home with their identity, I think that's one of the reasons we're so welcoming to outsiders.

Yes, I know we have our morons but so does everybody else.  I'm talking about the English as a whole, not the fringe nutters.
We are kind of on the same page but the point I make is what is Englishness or being English?  Its not a critism, its just my observation.  Other than football and rugby matches how exactly does it manifest itself.  Scotland has tartans and clans, Wales has singing and that industrial belt (miners and the like), Northern Ireland has its two fractions (which are at almost opposite ends of the scale).  But what does England have thats unique from Britishness?  As far as I can see it doesnt and there seems to be a confusion over what being English actually is, its a problem that neither the Scots the Welsh or the Irish dont seem to have.   

Id add in that actually, I do see more St Georges flags and things like that its probably increased over the last 5 years.  Maybe the English are beginning to define themselves as seperate to British.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:27:13 PM
No, you haven't insulted me, I just think you're funny!  But, heh, you could try insulting me again.  Better luck next time.  Best wishes.  Mike

Let us know when you work out what Roger called you.

Slips: I think one of the side-effects in Scotland of the move towards independence is people are thinking a little more clearly about our relationship with other countries. Maybe I have a sheltered life, but I honestly can't remember the last time I heard anyone make a derogatory comment towards someone because they were English.

I'm pretty open-minded on the whole issue. I'm following the debate with interest.

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 May, 2012, 02:46:41 PM
What constitutes "Englishness" has always been a bit vague, and maybe always will be. Perhaps being the larger, more influential and populous nation we never had to worry about such things. And being among the first to move from being predominantly a rural, to a urban country, maybe a lot was lost in the process.
Perhaps, and a dont mean this as a slight, but regarding Scots, Welsh and Irish indentity being stronger and more definable, has this come about, to some degree, by being on the edge, and feeling insecure?
The upshot of this, is today these nation's are more secure/definable regarding who they are, while its the English who are now feeling insecure?
Though i totally agree we are not a nation to beat our chests. Personally, i find it a bit false and embarrassing when we do!
Anyways - my view is personally i wouldnt want to see the union break up, though of course Scottish independence its a matter for the Scots, though saying that - it does have implications for the rest of the UK, and the concern is, with Scotland gone, what does it mean for the rest of us? Perhaps the union can be "modernised"? Im certainly not against bringing things up to date for all the home nations. Perhaps all the home nations can be indepenent, but still within a loose union for some matters?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 02:48:39 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 14 May, 2012, 02:46:41 PM
Perhaps all the home nations can be indepenent, but still within a loose union for some matters?

I think that's kind of the plan, if Scotland gets EU and Nato membership. There have been all sorts of sneers, and even threats to veto any Scottish application, but the idea is that we'd be good neighbours as best we can.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 02:57:01 PM
Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 02:42:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 01:27:13 PM
No, you haven't insulted me, I just think you're funny!  But, heh, you could try insulting me again.  Better luck next time.  Best wishes.  Mike

Let us know when you work out what Roger called you.

Slips: I think one of the side-effects in Scotland of the move towards independence is people are thinking a little more clearly about our relationship with other countries. Maybe I have a sheltered life, but I honestly can't remember the last time I heard anyone make a derogatory comment towards someone because they were English.

I'm pretty open-minded on the whole issue. I'm following the debate with interest.

- Trout
My own feelings on that are similar. 
But the experience was my wifes.  She was a fairly senior person at a large national company and she was still asked about schooling, religion and football (it was Glasgow and was nigh on 15 years ago).  I think the comment that stuck in her mind was the "English coming here taking our jobs".  She asked me if we were the same country.  Ive no doubt that Scotland has moved on, within my own family the following of the Labour party has been dropped and they have nearly all moved to SNP (not my vote but it seems to be generally the case), so theres hope of sorts. 

I personally would prefer a looser union, much like the EU with a decentralisation of powers into the member countries (much like Devolution) at the same power levels eg tax raising powers, etc.  But maybe have control of things like Defence, Enviroment, Agriculture, Energy Centralised.... that is almost a federal state I think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 May, 2012, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 02:48:39 PM
I think that's kind of the plan, if Scotland gets EU and Nato membership. There have been all sorts of sneers, and even threats to veto any Scottish application, but the idea is that we'd be good neighbours as best we can.


Surely a indepenent Scotland would have automatic EU and NATO membership? The question of needing to re-apply doesnt make sense - or am i missing summat?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:00:39 PM
Hi Slips, why dismiss football and rugby as a national identity but not clans and kilts or choirs.  Each to their own surely.  One is not more important than the other.  There are many other examples of English identity from our countryside to our engineers, architects and poets, cathedrals and curry houses, to name but a few, the list is endless and I won't bore you with them all!  I'm off for a Real Ale!!  English, of course!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 03:09:25 PM
Quote from: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 02:57:01 PM
she was still asked about schooling, religion and football (it was Glasgow and was nigh on 15 years ago).  I think the comment that stuck in her mind was the "English coming here taking our jobs".

I suspect that Glasgow has been the overriding influence there, but I think there's some serious stupidity in what was said. I can't imagine any situation I am in - at work on otherwise - where this sort of talk would be tolerated now. If someone did make a comment like that, I would expect 10 people to tell them to stop being such a bigot.


Quote from: Judge Jack on 14 May, 2012, 02:58:10 PM
Surely a indepenent Scotland would have automatic EU and NATO membership? The question of needing to re-apply doesnt make sense - or am i missing summat?

That's the assumption that was made, but elements in the UK parties keep saying that neither membership would be automatic. Just a wee bit politically motivated there, I think.

There's a new scare story every few days: "An independent Scotland would never survive because..." It's actually kind of funny because such stories - which amount to patting us on the head and shaking a finger at us - just drive more people to join the SNP. I'd much rather there was an intelligent debate about it.

Damn! How did I get drawn into a discussion on my most hated thread?  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 03:12:27 PM
Because they are international sports, the English "may" have invented them.  But for example in football it was the scots in the industrial heartlands of the north who updated the game into its modern incarnation at the turn of the 20th century.  Im not saying they arent important at all, I was getting at outside sports were is the English identity, what makes being English unique.  What makes it different from Empire and Britishness? 

As for your other stuff a lot of these are interlinked with Empire and thus Britishness.  Some of the most important Engineers were Scots, they just worked in England (thats what I do).  Curry houses are another example of Empire and of Britishness.   Are there no Curry Houses in Scotland or Wales or Ireland? 

Im only asking the questions, questions I fire at my English friends on occassion?   There may be a reassesment of Englishness going on that will be refined into something unique.  As someone else has said this could be that the other nations felt inferior to the English or felt they were the older brother who always put them down.  So developed something to make them different, Im not sure.  I just have never worked out what being english is, well nothing that sets it apart from Scotland for example.


 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2012, 03:17:22 PM
For a long time, I've been under the impression that Old Tankie was that mohawked punk DJ lady.  Who was that then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:28:41 PM
No, JB, that's not me!

Slips - I never brought up football and rugby, you did.  Kilts are not unique to the Scots, choirs are not unique to the Welsh.  I'm beginning to struggle with your point.  Surely you can have identities that you share with other people but they're a pointer to your own identity. But maybe you're right and I'm Scottish!!  Aren't there English bagpipes?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 03:30:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2012, 03:17:22 PM
For a long time, I've been under the impression that Old Tankie was that mohawked punk DJ lady.  Who was that then?

That was Lara, who had a username themed on Tank Girl. She's still doing her thing but can be found on Twitter instead of here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 May, 2012, 03:35:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:00:39 PM
There are many other examples of English identity from our countryside to our engineers, architects and poets, cathedrals and curry houses, to name but a few

Glad you didnt name Shakespeare, always best to keep that trump card in reserve.  ;)

Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 03:09:25 PM

Quote from: Judge Jack on 14 May, 2012, 02:58:10 PM
Surely a indepenent Scotland would have automatic EU and NATO membership? The question of needing to re-apply doesnt make sense - or am i missing summat?

That's the assumption that was made, but elements in the UK parties keep saying that neither membership would be automatic. Just a wee bit politically motivated there, I think.

There's a new scare story every few days: "An independent Scotland would never survive because..." It's actually kind of funny because such stories - which amount to patting us on the head and shaking a finger at us - just drive more people to join the SNP. I'd much rather there was an intelligent debate about it.

Well im certainly no expert - but i would have thought if Scotland had to re-apply, for whatever reason, then so would England-Wales-Northern Ireland?
My logic being that the UK that signed up for these things, constituted Four nations. and with Scotland gone, then the UK that would be left, would not be the same UK that signed up - hence; we'd all need to re-apply?
But i doubt this issue would ever arise really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:39:47 PM
No, I really am an old Tankie.  Badger Sqn, 2nd Royal Tank Regiment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 03:42:06 PM
Jack: Yeah, and I seriously doubt that it's a major concern for most people who are keen to see Scotland independent, anyway. It's obvious to anyone with a bit of intelligence that there are plenty of international opportunities for a new country. There are a lot of details to be worked out - the negotiations will take years, I understand - so there are plenty of issues like this that will need to be resolved, if people do vote for independence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2012, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 03:30:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2012, 03:17:22 PM
For a long time, I've been under the impression that Old Tankie was that mohawked punk DJ lady.  Who was that then?

That was Lara, who had a username themed on Tank Girl. She's still doing her thing but can be found on Twitter instead of here.

That's the one, it was the Tank bit that threw me.  And there I was last month thinking I was debating the pros and cons of monarchy with a leather-clad punk chick - what would Johnny and Sid have thought? :)

Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:39:47 PM
No, I really am an old Tankie.  Badger Sqn, 2nd Royal Tank Regiment.

Yeah, I seem to remember now.  Isn't there another military lad on the board too?  There used to be a copper, Jimbob, but he's drifted away
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 03:49:00 PM
Possibly but they are more linked with Scotland..... We have things in common a shared heritage all of us on these isles, of course there are things that we share.  But there are also things which come from one side or the other, doesnt make them better.   

Maybe Im making this point badly, I dont know.  The only thing I find is that I cant seem to seperate Englishness from Britishness, and Ive lived here for over 15 years.   Im just looking for that Eureka moment, the one that says there it is.  Though Ill concede that Shakespeare is quintessentially English, he was before the union was formed though!   

There might not be any more, that may be my own niavity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:50:47 PM
I'm all for that re-applying to the EU, Jack, hopefully they'd turn us down.  No need to name Shakespeare, Jack, the whole world knows he's ours.

JB - you've just referred to me as a "lad" - you've made my day!!!  Unfortunately, I haven't been a lad for many a year, but we can all dream.  Thank you, sir.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2012, 03:55:37 PM
Any time!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 04:04:07 PM
Regarding Glasgow – We have spent most of the time hating each other so don't take it personally Mrs Slips, theres an old joke that on the flights here they ask you to set your watch back 50 years.

I don't know anyone here who would say they hate the English, English football pundits on the other hand are a bunch of sneering cunts!

I think the whole anti English/Irish/Scots/Welsh thing is so last gen, We have a whole host of Eastern Europeans to blame for all our ills now. That's progress.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 May, 2012, 04:07:45 PM
Re : national identity...

The whole clan tartan thing is a load of guff, constructed in the mid nineteenth century to appeal to English tourists after Sir Walter Scott decided to Scottishify the hell out of everything for a visit by King George IV, thus starting a craze. Prior to that, the different tartans were linked to specific regions.

None of that kind of thing seems very 'genuine' to me, and personally I'm more inclined to regard Scottish culture as stuff like Oor Wullie and The Broons (originally illustrated by an Englishman), Glen Michael's Cartoon Cavalcade, (English bloke), and Irn Bru (Scottish but also produced in England).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 May, 2012, 04:08:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 03:50:47 PM
I'm all for that re-applying to the EU, Jack, hopefully they'd turn us down.

^ There ya go Slips - good old fashioned English intransigence Humour.

Quote from: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 03:49:00 PM
Maybe Im making this point badly, I dont know.  The only thing I find is that I cant seem to seperate Englishness from Britishness, and Ive lived here for over 15 years.

Ive lived here for 44 and i still cant put me finger on it. Its all very vague and dreamy. Still, we muddle on  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: the 'artist' formerly known as Slips on 14 May, 2012, 04:16:01 PM
Quote from: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 04:04:07 PM
Regarding Glasgow – We have spent most of the time hating each other so don't take it personally Mrs Slips, theres an old joke that on the flights here they ask you to set your watch back 50 years.

I don't know anyone here who would say they hate the English, English football pundits on the other hand are a bunch of sneering cunts!

I think the whole anti English/Irish/Scots/Welsh thing is so last gen, We have a whole host of Eastern Europeans to blame for all our ills now. That's progress.
Im from Greenock/Largs.  Believe you me we can get a whole load more backward than 50 years Satanist!  The only place worse is Paisley ;) (old football predjudices showing though)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 04:31:21 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 14 May, 2012, 04:07:45 PM
Re : national identity...

The whole clan tartan thing is a load of guff, constructed in the mid nineteenth century to appeal to English tourists after Sir Walter Scott decided to Scottishify the hell out of everything for a visit by King George IV, thus starting a craze. Prior to that, the different tartans were linked to specific regions.

None of that kind of thing seems very 'genuine' to me, and personally I'm more inclined to regard Scottish culture as stuff like Oor Wullie and The Broons (originally illustrated by an Englishman), Glen Michael's Cartoon Cavalcade, (English bloke), and Irn Bru (Scottish but also produced in England).

Brilliant post, says it all really.  Perhaps we should all identify with one another, but from completely different countries.  And, yeah, Jack, you've got it, our humour.  Wicked!!  That sets us apart!  (And our sarcasm!)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 04:57:38 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 14 May, 2012, 04:07:45 PM
Re : national identity...

The whole clan tartan thing is a load of guff, constructed in the mid nineteenth century to appeal to English tourists after Sir Walter Scott decided to Scottishify the hell out of everything for a visit by King George IV, thus starting a craze. Prior to that, the different tartans were linked to specific regions.

None of that kind of thing seems very 'genuine' to me, and personally I'm more inclined to regard Scottish culture as stuff like Oor Wullie and The Broons (originally illustrated by an Englishman), Glen Michael's Cartoon Cavalcade, (English bloke), and Irn Bru (Scottish but also produced in England).

The idea is to look forward, not back. Kilts and tartan and all those other cliched things have their place, but they aren't the sum total of Scotland. Also, who said anybody needs to define their country?

(Cartoon Cavalcade wasn't shown across all of Scotland, by the way.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 14 May, 2012, 05:03:08 PM
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zaJPOVGlEPs/0.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 05:08:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 May, 2012, 04:31:21 PMour humour.  Wicked!!  That sets us apart!  (And our sarcasm!)

That's right! England has Michael McIntyre, Scotland has Frankie Boyle.  :lol:

If you want identity then why not return to the stereotypes of old...

England - Arrogant Racists who still think they have an empire
Irish - Thick
Scots - Violent penny pinching Alcoholics
Welsh - Good at singing about Leeks and in dire need of vowels

It's all a nonsense


Oh and Cartoon Cavalcade was shite, cheap cartoons and a creepy lamp? Worse than the poll tax!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 14 May, 2012, 05:17:56 PM
I used to love Paladin, Rusty the dog and Glen's floating 'space head'. No wait it was a pile o shite and they just showed the same crappy Disney trailers every week.

I can't wait for the Scottish Parliament to get more power - first it was no booze sold before 10am and now a 50p a unit minimum price for booze. Anyone would think they have a one track mind. What next lager to be renamed 'Gayboy Juice'to deter purchase? (thank you Frankie Boyle.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 May, 2012, 05:24:12 PM
Quote from: Trout on 14 May, 2012, 04:57:38 PM
(Cartoon Cavalcade wasn't shown across all of Scotland, by the way.)

Aye it wis, just not every series. It was on STV and Grampian when I was watching it in the early '80s.

Quote from: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 05:08:59 PM
Oh and Cartoon Cavalcade was shite, cheap cartoons and a creepy lamp? Worse than the poll tax!

Pfft... No taste, some folk. How could anyone find fault with animation such as this? (http://youtu.be/SLECR3LLMXs)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 15 May, 2012, 02:36:13 AM
Quote from: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 05:08:59 PM
England - Arrogant Racists who still think they have an empire
Irish - Thick
Scots - Violent penny pinching Alcoholics
Welsh - Good at singing about Leeks and in dire need of vowels

What about the Northern Irish, where do we fit in?

I'm all for Scottish independence me, five million less whingers in the U.K., and once yer gone (and not missed either), the Conservative/Unionist/UKIP bloc at Westminster will have an unreachable majority from then 'til the Second Coming... roll on the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland!

Quote from: Buttonman on 14 May, 2012, 05:17:56 PM
I can't wait for the Scottish Parliament to get more power - first it was no booze sold before 10am and now a 50p a unit minimum price for booze. Anyone would think they have a one track mind. What next lager to be renamed 'Gayboy Juice'to deter purchase? (thank you Frankie Boyle.)

:lol:... and then some dude!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 15 May, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 15 May, 2012, 02:36:13 AM
I'm all for Scottish independence me, five million less whingers in the U.K., and once yer gone (and not missed either), the Conservative/Unionist/UKIP bloc at Westminster will have an unreachable majority from then 'til the Second Coming... roll on the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland!

I wish there was some sort of award that we could nominate posters for. This one's a real prize-winner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 15 May, 2012, 09:31:01 AM
Frankly I would much rather keep Scotland over that ridiculous joke of a colony.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 15 May, 2012, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 15 May, 2012, 02:36:13 AM
What about the Northern Irish, where do we fit in?


Oh alright then...

Northern Irish - neither fish nor fowl, where do we fit in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 May, 2012, 10:45:54 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 15 May, 2012, 02:36:13 AM
What about the Northern Irish, where do we fit in?

The simple answer is we don't! The rest of the world sees us as Irish, whether you feel you are or not. (Doesn't bother me much as it happens. And I've got a UK passport). Or alternatively, a quick fixed! gives us;

Quote from: Satanist on 14 May, 2012, 05:08:59 PM
Northern Irish - Thick, violent penny pinching alcoholic, arrogant racists who still think they're part of an empire or a republic. Good at singing and marching about opression or old battles and mangling of vowels. Some want to be Scottish, English or Irish and can easily find blame in the others perspective.

Incidently, Mrs Mikey researches representations of the Irish on stage, screen and in the media in the late 19th & early 20th Century. Some mental stuff that has the capacity to be at turns hilarious and blood boiling! It's all down to Gerald of Wales. He wants his teeth kicked in, that one.

To comment on the wider debate regarding idependence of the countries of the north east Atlantic Archipelago, I'd say we're all the same so why bother getting worked up about it? Fuck borders! We're all people, people!

I hereby promise to not add further to a debate about nationalism.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 15 May, 2012, 11:09:35 AM
And we all have terrible food.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 15 May, 2012, 11:50:22 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 15 May, 2012, 10:45:54 AM
To comment on the wider debate regarding idependence of the countries of the north east Atlantic Archipelago, I'd say we're all the same so why bother getting worked up about it? Fuck borders! We're all people, people!

THIS!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 15 May, 2012, 01:14:11 PM
It is a *very* small group of islands...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 15 May, 2012, 02:46:32 PM
I've just watched that programme where Arch Bishop Lang and the Old Gang conspire to oust King Edward VIII. There's a lot of people trying to hold onto history, disallowing history itself from happening, creating unnatural histories. I'd call it misguided but it should be a perfect excuse for calling it treason.

The King himself was a king that the 20th century needed. His trench warfare, his need for a fairer society and the respectful relationship (rather than the pandering Colony guilt one we've got) with America, all appeal to an imagined, better modernity. All twisted to being something gauche and naive by rhetoric clerics. What a shame Edward was too reasonable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 May, 2012, 06:02:29 PM
Quote from: Trout on 15 May, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 15 May, 2012, 02:36:13 AM
I'm all for Scottish independence me, five million less whingers in the U.K., and once yer gone (and not missed either), the Conservative/Unionist/UKIP bloc at Westminster will have an unreachable majority from then 'til the Second Coming... roll on the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland!

I wish there was some sort of award that we could nominate posters for. This one's a real prize-winner

Roger's name has already been engraved on the trophy you have in mind. Beaky; advice on the successful division of an island from an NI man? The Brits don't have a great track record on separation: whether it's the partition of India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel, or our exit from the African continent, we've made the Koreans and Sudanese look like they possess the wisdom of Solomon.

Linda Colley's highly readable Britons: Forging the Nation 1707-1837 describes how until fairly recently (in historical terms) local and regional identities (village or county) were far more important to peoples' sense of who they were. The long project of creating a unifying British identity, she argues, was made possible by uniting and defining ourselves in opposition to 'others' through war (chiefly with France), religion (persecution of Catholics), and through Empire (economic opportunities and sense of shared pride in punching above our weight).

You could argue that Wales and Scotland (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5cUxawA_6w&feature=related) were the first English colonies, and that domestic independence movements are just the last stages in the dismantling of the English Empire, but I think that if there's any value at all in the weird creation that is British national identity it's in allowing us to think beyond things like village, county, regional and national borders and see that mutual interest is a stronger tie than geographical proximity.

It seems to me that I've got more shared interests with 'others' working in a poorly paid job- or who like reading and music- in Aberdeen, London, New York or Tokyo than the arbitrary drawing of lines on a map would suggest. Precisely where and by whom decisions that affect our social, political and economic interests are taken seems less important than our ability to influence the people we elect to make those decisions on our behalf and keep the fuckers honest.

P.S. MacNeil, thanks for the reply; but when I tell you you're a legend, you'll accept that you're a legend and fucking-well like it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2012, 08:06:01 PM
How is it an English Empire?  Perhaps I mis-read my history books about the thin red line of Highlanders and about the Irish regiments serving under Wellington at Waterloo and other places.  Of course, the great man himself was born in Ireland.  But, hey yeah, let's just blame the English for everything.  Don't know why anyone's surprised about the breakup of the United Kingdom, it started nearly a hundred years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 May, 2012, 08:36:14 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2012, 08:06:01 PM
How is it an English Empire?  Perhaps I mis-read my history books about the thin red line of Highlanders and about the Irish regiments serving under Wellington at Waterloo and other places.  Of course, the great man himself was born in Ireland.  But, hey yeah, let's just blame the English for everything.  Don't know why anyone's surprised about the breakup of the United Kingdom, it started nearly a hundred years ago.

I didn't realise I was making an accusation, Tankie. The Scots, Welsh and Irish were among the most enthusiastic participants in the Imperial project. Not just militarily (as you point out), but economically, industrially, politically and intellectually, they were often the force behind the drive to turn the world's map pink. Whether you think that makes them culpable, or to "blame" as you put it, for anything depends on your opinion concerning the legacy of Empire.

The only reason to characterise it as the English Empire would be if you take the point of view I referred to in my post, that the English military conquest of Ireland and Wales- and the political integration of a bankrupt Scotland- allows them to be figured as the first colonies of an Empire that revolved around the twin hubs of the Square Mile of the City of London and the court of King James.

As my post indicated, I was referencing- rather than endorsing- that point of view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2012, 09:00:38 PM
Yep, sorry, Mate, bit a bit too quickly there.  I take your point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 May, 2012, 09:06:51 PM
Nae worries, Tankie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 May, 2012, 09:07:38 PM
Most of the Irish were too busy fighting amongst themselves/starving/emigrating to do anything useful for the Empire. Unless you count all our criminals that now populate Auxtralia ;-P.

The only thing about the English that I find intolerable is the hysteria of their Sports Pundits. Now I know many of you don't really care for Football, but here's a challenge: Tune into the BBC/ITV during halftime and see if you can figure out which two countries are playing. You won't be able to because they only ever seem to talk about The English Football Team and their W.A.Gs.

It's OK to generalise, because this is a political discussion ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 May, 2012, 09:39:02 PM
Ok, I'm breaking my own word, but I'm back.

I think part of the issue some people take is that quite often, Britain and England have been used to mean the same thing. That's maybe down to the rise of nationalist politics over the years and looong memories of real, imagined or romanticised slights by England.

Another thing I wanted to add was I think the Irish Diaspora in the context of the US (of mainly Irish Catholics,the Prods went earlier and into the wide open,rather than staying in the Eastern Seabord afair) was instrumental in forming the 'Irish Identity', and there's a link to how Ireland was administered at the time and mass emigration of those that could. I'm not throwing rocks here or meaning to agitate in any way,but it's a significant part of the history. My view is that it was hardly down to the English peasantry,the common people-it was the same type of people who are still fuckin us all over.

M   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 May, 2012, 10:53:55 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 15 May, 2012, 09:07:38 PM
The only thing about the English that I find intolerable is the hysteria of their Sports Pundits ... they only ever seem to talk about The English Football Team and their W.A.Gs.

Have you ever thought of contacting a Scottish tabloid newspaper or radio phone-in with this revelation? You're right about the bias of English pundits; not one mention of the Scotland team at any of the major football tournaments of the last fourteen years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 16 May, 2012, 01:19:05 AM
Quote from: Trout on 15 May, 2012, 09:08:07 AM
I wish there was some sort of award that we could nominate posters for. This one's a real prize-winner.

Thank yoop :D...

Quote from: George Dread on 15 May, 2012, 02:46:32 PM
I've just watched that programme where Arch Bishop Lang and the Old Gang conspire to oust King Edward VIII. There's a lot of people trying to hold onto history, disallowing history itself from happening, creating unnatural histories. I'd call it misguided but it should be a perfect excuse for calling it treason.
The King himself was a king that the 20th century needed. His trench warfare, his need for a fairer society and the respectful relationship (rather than the pandering Colony guilt one we've got) with America, all appeal to an imagined, better modernity. All twisted to being something gauche and naive by rhetoric clerics. What a shame Edward was too reasonable.

You've got to be kidding, George dude, that programme was typical C4 historical revisionism, Edward was ousted because him and his skank of a mistress were Nazi sympathisers and genuine national security threats, she was having an affair with von Ribbentraup, the Nazi ambassador to the U.K. and passing on state secrets, he was negotiating with Nazi personnel over the heads of the government in total violation of the British Constitution, that's why he was ousted.  And as for this whole thing about somehow being the "people's King", he hated the little people - not to mention Jews - and loathed having to appear at public events, that's not my opinion, but that of people who knew and worked with him at the time... watch the documentary Britain's Nazi King, sometimes shown on the Military Channel...

Quote from: bikini kill on 15 May, 2012, 06:02:29 PM
Roger's name has already been engraved on the trophy you have in mind. Beaky; advice on the successful division of an island from an NI man?

True, we haven't exactly got the best track record on the matter, and I've been highly critical of how my fellow Ulster Prods have behaved on this little island, although much of what they were concerned about proved to be absolutely correct... Home Rule really did turn out to be Rome rule, and the Irish have unfortunately made a dog's dinner of their little state, which I take no pleasure in saying, as I sincerely wish the whole Irish independence experiment had been a success rather than the abject failure it's turned out to be (I know I'll get flack for saying this, but the truth's the truth)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 May, 2012, 05:52:45 AM
QuoteHome Rule really did turn out to be Rome rule, and the Irish have unfortunately made a dog's dinner of their little state

True enough, sadly.  Nothing like celebrating the end of one form of foreign oppression by choosing another.  Despite being almost irreversibly a Catholic on paper, I despise the whole arrogant, bigoted, self-absorbed and near-psychopathic hierarchy, and am pleased to see the new generation sharing my opinion. I dearly hope Rome's toxic influence will be reduced to insignificance within the coming generations .

However: We have fucked up in many ways, no doubt about it, but as I said before I prefer to live in a country that has the opportunity to make its own fuck-ups rather than have another country's fuck-ups imposed on it by force.  I'm no hard-core nationalist, but I prefer to live in an independent country rather than a colony state. It's just a personal opinion.

QuoteMy view is that it was hardly down to the English peasantry,the common people-it was the same type of people who are still fuckin us all over.

Couldn't agree more.  There's a particularly nasty strain of narrow-minded bigotry in Ireland that 'hates the English' as a whole, not realising that while the tiny ruling minority in England was pissing on our ordinary working people, it was also to a large extent pissing on its own.  My mother is English, and I got plenty of stick for that when I was growing up. She's from a poor Lancashire family who I don't believe ever had the opportunity to oppress other countries unless they were conscripted.  (Being Catholic, she also had the misfortune to be educated by celibate and sadistic sky-fairy worshippers.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2012, 07:20:42 AM
John Stewart (http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/4od) on the Eurozone crash and attendant horrors. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 May, 2012, 07:21:47 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 15 May, 2012, 10:45:54 AMIt's all down to Gerald of Wales. He wants his teeth kicked in, that one.

That bloody man.  A Rough Guide researcher that never left the airport bar, and was clearly overcharged while there.  Still, where would Pat Mills be without him.

Nationalism is on my list right after religion. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 May, 2012, 09:05:57 AM
Amen citizen,amen.

See what I did there?

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 16 May, 2012, 11:27:54 AM
QuoteYou've got to be kidding, George dude, that programme was typical C4 historical revisionism, Edward was ousted because him and his skank of a mistress were Nazi sympathisers and genuine national security threats, she was having an affair with von Ribbentraup, the Nazi ambassador to the U.K. and passing on state secrets, he was negotiating with Nazi personnel over the heads of the government in total violation of the British Constitution, that's why he was ousted.  And as for this whole thing about somehow being the "people's King", he hated the little people - not to mention Jews - and loathed having to appear at public events, that's not my opinion, but that of people who knew and worked with him at the time... watch the documentary Britain's Nazi King, sometimes shown on the Military Channel...

Really? I feel modestly uninformed. He seems very callous now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Third Estate Ned on 16 May, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Given the debate of the last few pages, I thought this'd be an appropriate place to post this European time lapse map of the ever changing political borders:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK9yncmps8&feature=player_embedded#! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK9yncmps8&feature=player_embedded#!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mudcrab on 16 May, 2012, 03:58:12 PM
Quote from: Third Estate Ned on 16 May, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Given the debate of the last few pages, I thought this'd be an appropriate place to post this European time lapse map of the ever changing political borders:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK9yncmps8&feature=player_embedded#! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK9yncmps8&feature=player_embedded#!)

Given the conversation it'll need updated soon too! Maybe  ;)

That's pretty fascinating though. The utter mess in the middle of Europe with the fall of the Roman Empire, how young Germany actually was as a country before it exploded over the map and was swiftly pushed back and occupied. The comment is right, it's a strange way to look at it considering the amount of people that died in pretty horrible ways in the process of those borders changing.

So here's to "vaguely offensive if you choose to take it that way" comments/banter on a forum being the worst of it for us :D The land itself is going nowhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 May, 2012, 04:28:06 PM
That time lapse thing put me in mind of a very quick round of Total War: Medieval. Loved that game.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 17 May, 2012, 01:31:48 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 May, 2012, 05:52:45 AM
True enough, sadly.  Nothing like celebrating the end of one form of foreign oppression by choosing another.  Despite being almost irreversibly a Catholic on paper, I despise the whole arrogant, bigoted, self-absorbed and near-psychopathic hierarchy, and am pleased to see the new generation sharing my opinion. I dearly hope Rome's toxic influence will be reduced to insignificance within the coming generations .
However: We have fucked up in many ways, no doubt about it, but as I said before I prefer to live in a country that has the opportunity to make its own fuck-ups rather than have another country's fuck-ups imposed on it by force.  I'm no hard-core nationalist, but I prefer to live in an independent country rather than a colony state. It's just a personal opinion.

I totally get and understand where you're coming from, Jay my friend, but do you not think the good people of Ireland would have been better served with near-total autonomy (national security, foreign relations, and matters of currency and Monarchy notwithstanding) within the United Kingdom, that way, they would had free rein to run themselves as they saw fit, with Westminster pretty much having an 'out of sight, out of mind' view, the Irish would be able to express their Gaelic/Hibernian/Catholic identity to their hearts content, plus Ireland would have had all the financial and economic benefits of the Union... to me, it would have been a win-win situation for the good people of the Emerald Isle, a much better situation than well over 700, 000 emigrated since partition, perpetual economic deprivation and poverty, and a heavy-handed Europe stealing your hard-won sovereignty from under your nose, just a thought though...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 May, 2012, 02:09:18 AM
It's an interesting but a rather academic and retrospective ad hoc hypothesis that realistically wouldn't stand-up as an ideal solution and probably would've caused more trouble in the long run across both landmasses.

Unfortunately, as it turned out, whether by design or consequence a lot of those anachronistic nationalist and imperialist emotions ended up being mostly contained/impacted in Northern Ireland because of partition and eventually exploded on both sides of the fence.

It's an easy thing to look back and say what if but when it comes to how life actually was back then in a stillborn nation, who are any of us to say how it should've been?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 May, 2012, 11:13:32 AM
Quotedo you not think the good people of Ireland would have been better served with near-total autonomy (national security, foreign relations, and matters of currency and Monarchy notwithstanding) within the United Kingdom, that way, they would had free rein to run themselves as they saw fit, with Westminster pretty much having an 'out of sight, out of mind' view,

Maybe.  I can't help feeling that (as Joe says) it would have led to even more sectarian violence than there already was.  My own preference for total independence is purely a matter of personal feeling and emotion, in the same way I don't want to be ruled even symbolically by royalty; rather than an actual breakdown of the pros and cons of each situation. The truth is, I just don't know. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 17 May, 2012, 01:31:48 AM
plus Ireland would have had all the financial and economic benefits of the Union...

But how do we know they wouldn't have walked away from us like all resource-loaded colonies they had like Iraq, Iran, Nigeria etc.?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 May, 2012, 09:29:57 PM
That time-lapse map of Europe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBK9yncmps8&feature=player_embedded#!) demonstrates the arbitrary and contingent nature of national boundaries, but the global concensus in embracing the ideology of Free Market Economics means the imaginary lines that have exercised such debate on these pages are- at best- an irrelevance. Those of you resident in the Poblacht na hÉireann have experienced centuries of having all your important decisions taken in a small city on mainland Europe, but we'll all soon be getting used to the idea of checking with the ECB in Frankfurt before we make any major purchases.

As John Stewart pointed out in the piece I posted previously (here (http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/4od)), and Robert Peston indicates here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18088540)- whether Germany steps in to bail out Greece, Italy and Spain or not- some degree of Federal government, administered by Germany, is pretty much inevitable. What the Aryan idiots of the German National Socialist Workers' Party couldn't achieve, the greed and incompetence of Goldman Sachs is about to deliver.

Federation isn't necessarily a bad thing, but- as the example of the USA demonstrates- the further you are from the centre of power, the lesser your ability to influence those decisions. Even assuming the UK stays out of such a federation, we're still so economically and geopolitically tied to our closest neighbours to make the results of any Independence referendum a formality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 May, 2012, 10:11:01 PM
Germany will pull out of the EU when it realises there's a load of parasites living on its back and the increasing price of fuel due to dwindling resources will put a stop to global free marketeering.



Worth a punt:


http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story/2012/05/16/ireland-clones-pound.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 17 May, 2012, 10:39:06 PM
This is all the fault of Professor of Roads David Knight and Mayor of Australia Thryllseekyr.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 18 May, 2012, 02:41:14 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
But how do we know they wouldn't have walked away from us like all resource-loaded colonies they had like Iraq, Iran, Nigeria etc.?

Very good point, and they did, but I don't know that there would have been more sectarian violence had all of Ireland remained in the Union, there was none in the Republic until the Troubles began (granted, because only 3% of the populace were Protestant), and much of the violence in da Nort' really began as Paisley and his mad minions first caused a three-day riot in a Catholic area in the early 1960's by demanding the police remove a tiny Tricolour in a Sinn Fein office window (subsequently radicalizing a whole new generation of young Catholics that weren't previous to this incident), then tried to oust a democratically-elected reformist Unionist Prime Minister, namely Terence O'Neill, whose outreach to the Catholic minority was starting to work and pay dividends, but who Paisley and co. were denouncing as traitors and sell-outs (an accusation as ludicrous as it was untrue), the Catholic backlash from Paisley's rampage soured the body politic here and started raising tensions to the point that by August 1969 (the official start of the Troubles), no-one was really listening to pleas for restraint and for cooler heads to prevail... and when you thought it couldn't get any worse, Bloody Sunday happened (the old English tactic of using the proverbial sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut!), and after that, the dye was cast for the next three decades!

Speaking as an Northern Irishman, born and bred, I honestly believe that Ireland would have been better served in the Union to this day, I also understand others' views to the contrary, and I don't believe that had they remained, further sectarian violence was a foregone conclusion, as intransigent Unionism/militant Nationalism would both have backed off and calmed down if the 1914 Home Rule Act had been implemented immediately upon Royal Assent being given, unfortunately the gun-running escapades on both sides, the gratuitous execution of the Easter rebels, and the conduct of the Black and Tans made up majority Ireland's minds on that matter...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 18 May, 2012, 09:44:11 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
But how do we know they wouldn't have walked away from us like all resource-loaded colonies they had like Iraq, Iran, Nigeria etc.?

Eh? Ireland is pretty low in natural resources - do you mean mainly people and farmland?

Quote from: bikini kill on 17 May, 2012, 09:29:57 PM
Those of you resident in the Poblacht na hÉireann have experienced centuries of having all your important decisions taken in a small city on mainland Europe,

Eh? Partition was in 1922, it's not even a century yet! Never mind the EEC started out in the late '50s...

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 18 May, 2012, 09:46:21 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 18 May, 2012, 09:44:11 AMEh? Ireland is pretty low in natural resources


We have turf!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 18 May, 2012, 09:56:17 AM
Of course!

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2012, 06:04:35 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 18 May, 2012, 09:44:11 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 17 May, 2012, 09:29:57 PM
Those of you resident in the Poblacht na hÉireann have experienced centuries of having all your important decisions taken in a small city on mainland Europe,

Eh? Partition was in 1922, it's not even a century yet! Never mind the EEC started out in the late '50s...

I meant the really important decisions, Mikey- like who, how and when you fuck- the city in question being Vatican City.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 May, 2012, 06:29:19 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 18 May, 2012, 06:04:35 PM
I meant the really important decisions, Mikey- like who, how and when you fuck- the city in question being Vatican City.

Except of course that people, in the nature of people, always heeded their own counsel on the matter of "who, how and when you fuck", the issue was who you could tell, and what happened when you were found out.  Who got to fuck you, now that was controlled from afar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 18 May, 2012, 06:50:03 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 18 May, 2012, 09:44:11 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2012, 04:08:26 PM
But how do we know they wouldn't have walked away from us like all resource-loaded colonies they had like Iraq, Iran, Nigeria etc.?

Eh? Ireland is pretty low in natural resources - do you mean mainly people and farmland?

M.

Sorry, I should have written that post a bit better. The point I have was trying to make was the British left the resource laden colonies (and they knew the resources were there), so why would they stick around Ireland when it is resource poor?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2012, 08:25:04 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 18 May, 2012, 06:50:03 PM
The point I have was trying to make was the British left the resource laden colonies (and they knew the resources were there), so why would they stick around Ireland when it is resource poor?

The forces of Empire only ever cut their losses and ran when their continued presence was politically, economically or militarily unviable, and Ireland- through the presence of the Ascendancy as a (mostly) sympathetic domestic ruling elite- meant Ireland largely paid for and governed itself.

At the time of the Napoleonic wars, the ability of the UK's enemies to make alliances with Irish dissidents to foment dissent, provide enemy forces with a platform to mount attacks on the mainland and force the British to fight a war on two fronts loomed large in Parliamentarians' thinking. That same strategic thinking carried into the 20th century, and Brit politicos couldn't have known that when the opportunity arose to stick the knife in, the government of an independent Ireland would prefer neutrality to a pact with the Axis forces.

I'm not sure whether Ireland was seen so much as a prize to be coveted, as something that couldn't be allowed to fall into a foreign power's sphere of influence. The idea of having Britain's access to international shipping lanes surrounded on all sides by hostile Catholic states would have been anathema to an establishment whose twin ideologies were free market capitalism and Protestantism.

I don't think there was any great desire to retain direct rule over Ireland- Gladstone and Parnell spent their entire careers almost finding a way out of their bind- but there were enough factors that would make that island's abandonment more problematic than maintaining the status quo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 May, 2012, 02:15:21 AM
What he said, and I agree...

It was the intent - if not the stated policy - of successive British administrations, from Gladstone through to Wilson, for the United Kingdom to extricate itself from the troublesome island as soon as could be guaranteed it wouldn't erupt into civil war once the last civil servant got on the boat, and who can blame them?  Yes, a lot of bad things were done by the Brits in Ireland, but they also brought civilization and infrastructure to a mainly tribal culture, and for the most part, the Union was good for Ireland... well, apart from London's non-interventionist policy regarding the potato blight that turned an agricultural crisis into a social holocaust, not exactly our finest hour :-[...

The truth is, and some here may be surprised to hear me say this, I actually think the northern Protestants missed an absolutely unprecedented, never-to-be-repeated opportunity in 1921 to name their price for participation in an independent Ireland - albeit one under the Crown with Dominion status - had Carson, Craig, and co. seen the writing on the wall, and threw their lot in with the rest of the island (retaining the northern Parliament at the same time), they could have practically written the eventual Constitution themselves, so desperate would The Big Fella' and his crew been to have the entirety of the island as a singular nation state.  It is my opinion that northern Protestants held all the cards at that time, and had no need to play bluff, they could simply have spelled out their terms and conditions for joining an independent Ireland, and within reason, the Irish nationalists would have agreed, that opportunity will never come again, the Irish question could have been permanently settled there and then, and tens of thousands of people would not have paid the price with life and limb...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2012, 02:50:13 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 19 May, 2012, 02:15:21 AM...but they also brought civilization and infrastructure to a mainly tribal culture...

Now Beaky my lad, I thought better of you.  I think you and are going to have to have words, if'n you're suggesting that one of the central myths of Unionism can survive even the vaguest encounter with historical and archaeological analysis.  I've no problem with people holding odd beliefs, but id prefer if they didn't assert them as fact.

It's only a short hop to parroting the sectarian tracts I was exposed to as a proddy kid that claimed that prior to the modernising christianising interventation that was the Plantation the Irish peasant tied a simple plank to the tail of his horse and called it a plough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 May, 2012, 03:11:16 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 May, 2012, 02:50:13 AM
Now Beaky my lad, I thought better of you.  I think you and are going to have to have words, if'n you're suggesting that one of the central myths of Unionism can survive even the vaguest encounter with historical and archaeological analysis.  I've no problem with people holding odd beliefs, but id prefer if they didn't assert them as fact.  It's only a short hop to parroting the sectarian tracts I was exposed to as a proddy kid that claimed that prior to the modernising christianising interventation that was the Plantation the Irish peasant tied a simple plank to the tail of his horse and called it a plough.

Perish the thought, Tordel' my friend, and it wasn't the Plantation I was referring to specifically, but rather the overarching influence of the British cultural and political system in the Emerald Isle.  To suggest that the poor Oirish were backward before us enlightened Chosen -  :D - made it over the Irish Sea was not what I was saying nor meant, the best recommendation I could make for more specificity on this matter is to watch the excellent RTE documentary series, What Have The Brits Done For Us? , broadcast recently, it was very, uh, enlightening... and that was from an Irish perspective!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 May, 2012, 09:35:39 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 19 May, 2012, 02:15:21 AM

The truth is, and some here may be surprised to hear me say this, I actually think the northern Protestants missed an absolutely unprecedented, never-to-be-repeated opportunity in 1921 to name their price for participation in an independent Ireland - albeit one under the Crown with Dominion status - had Carson, Craig, and co. seen the writing on the wall, and threw their lot in with the rest of the island (retaining the northern Parliament at the same time), they could have practically written the eventual Constitution themselves, so desperate would The Big Fella' and his crew been to have the entirety of the island as a singular nation state.  It is my opinion that northern Protestants held all the cards at that time, and had no need to play bluff, they could simply have spelled out their terms and conditions for joining an independent Ireland, and within reason, the Irish nationalists would have agreed, that opportunity will never come again, the Irish question could have been permanently settled there and then, and tens of thousands of people would not have paid the price with life and limb...



A lot of ifs and assumptions there about people that doesn't really take into consideration the beliefs, reality of living and being human in the respective time. It's an unfalsifiable argument, can't be proved or disproved because it never happened and likely couldn't because it was never truly desired by either side, and if it did, could have had worse consequences. Collins & Co being ideologically driven just didn't want to live under the crown.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 19 May, 2012, 02:50:54 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 18 May, 2012, 06:04:35 PM
I meant the really important decisions, Mikey- like who, how and when you fuck- the city in question being Vatican City.

Fair enough, but you did specifically mention the young nation that is the Irish Republic! And up until the Reformation, pretty much everyone else in Europe was in the same boat. I'd definitely say the influence the Catholic Church had on the ROI as a nation is mental - but I'll leave that to those with direct experience of living with it.

M.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 19 May, 2012, 11:07:03 PM
Can we all not just get along? Think of the children.
See how these guys did it!
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/LJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/MJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/NJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/OJ.jpg)

This one is even better.
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/VJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/WJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/XJ.jpg)
(http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u283/johncookxx/momi/YJ.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 20 May, 2012, 10:25:16 AM
 :D Those are fantastic!
What comic are they from?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 20 May, 2012, 11:36:33 AM
JET Comic appeared from May 1971 to September 1971 when it was merged with Buster! 

That's according to the British Comics.com website.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 20 May, 2012, 11:54:01 AM
Yep, its from Jet, so bad its great, it has other such classics as Adares Anglians and Paddy McGintys goat. IPC fostering closer ties throughout the British isles and Ireland in the early seventies!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2012, 06:10:47 PM
I really wasn't sure whether to post this (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/05/scottish-parliament-motion-acknowledges-marvels-same-sex-wedding/), or this (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/05/one-million-moms-targets-dc-marvel-over-gay-storylines/), or even if this is the correct thread.

If I hadn't read the second of the above articles, the first would have qualified as the most mental thing I've ever heard of. Having read One Million Moms's bizarre rallying cry (http://www.onemillionmoms.com/currentissue.asp), though; the sponsoring MSP seems like a rational human with a finely tuned sense of perspective. Mental, truly mental.

Question: is "fellow snow sports enthusiast" a euphemism for one of the many sexual possibilities that life has cruelly denied me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2012, 06:39:52 PM
I'd like to cordially extend one million fuck offs to those Moms.  If God really is on their side, he's a bigger twonk than they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 25 May, 2012, 07:09:47 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 25 May, 2012, 06:10:47 PM
I really wasn't sure whether to post this (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/05/scottish-parliament-motion-acknowledges-marvels-same-sex-wedding/), or this (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/05/one-million-moms-targets-dc-marvel-over-gay-storylines/), or even if this is the correct thread.

If I hadn't read the second of the above articles, the first would have qualified as the most mental thing I've ever heard of. Having read One Million Moms's bizarre rallying cry (http://www.onemillionmoms.com/currentissue.asp), though; the sponsoring MSP seems like a rational human with a finely tuned sense of perspective. Mental, truly mental.

I'm impressed by this about One Million Moms (I wonder what the actual count of moms involved in that is? Eight?): "A project of the nonprofit American Family Association, which is designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center."

Just imagine the good an actual one million moms could do if they put there mind to it and didn't get too worried about whether a comic would engay their kids.

Quote from: bikini kill on 25 May, 2012, 06:10:47 PMQuestion: is "fellow snow sports enthusiast" a euphemism for one of the many sexual possibilities that life has cruelly denied me?

My understanding is that it is a sexual depravity involving an icing bag containing a 70/30 mix of icing/cocaine, not to be confused with a Kentucky Piper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 25 May, 2012, 07:29:20 PM
I wonder if they think the worlds really 4000 years old.
They have managed to get some TV programmes stopped that they didn't like, including one that was "nasty" to Christians. That 'ull save America.

Damn. I wanted to corrupt America's youth but the lousy media and right wing internet crazies have beaten me to it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 26 May, 2012, 03:19:31 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2012, 06:39:52 PM
I'd like to cordially extend one million fuck offs to those Moms.

Why?  Isn't their point of view as valid as anyone else's, or does that only apply to those of a liberal disposition, I for one wholeheartedly agree with them, kids read comics to be entertained and, like it or not, do form opinions based on what they read and see, and while Marvel have a first amendment right to print what they like (within the law), the One Million Moms also have that same God-given right to speak up when they feel someone's pushing a radical political agenda down their kids' throats, more power to 'em I say and long may they continue...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 26 May, 2012, 04:35:06 AM
Anyway, enough of that 'moral majority' crap (round of applause heard all round), something much more interesting is afoot - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/9290226/Campaign-for-Scottish-independence-launched.html - this is going to be a REALLY interesting next two-and-a-half years, the SNP are going to have a steep uphill climb to convince a 51%-plus majority in Scotland to go it alone, but considering what effective and canny political operators they are, I wouldn't bet against them.

Personally, I think it's a pity that Scotland wasn't always an independent nation, they always were and still are a culture apart from England and Wales, and had they remained independent, they would be more like Northern Ireland (minus the constitutional turmoil); a country divided along religious lines with sectarian tensions bubbling up every now and again, the Protestants voting largely for the center-right party(s) and the Catholics voting largely for the social democratic ones, I still feel a deep cultural connection to Scotland and I lament the fact I wasn't born and raised in a sovereign country with a strong and largely singular cultural identity (as opposed to an artificially created province like N.I. with it's sharply divided identities) to call our own, as for me, if I lived in Scotland, I'd be voting 'Yes' in 2014...   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2012, 09:36:19 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 26 May, 2012, 03:19:31 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2012, 06:39:52 PM
I'd like to cordially extend one million fuck offs to those Moms.
Why? Isn't their point of view as valid as anyone else's, or does that only apply to those of a liberal disposition

Nobody else is trying to tell folk what they can say or what they can read. Kiefer Sutherland and Murdoch's Fox network used 24 as a vehicle to articulate a particular world view at a crucial point in The War On Terror (http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol39_no2/lasson.pdf); I didn't really watch it. Phoning the Ford motor company to demand they withdrew their cringeworthy sponsorship of the show, so nobody who liked it was allowed to make their own mind up- as 1MMoms advocate- seems mental. If this shower of eejits (http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=7423ea73-51c6-4fae-ac8e-59bfd525693e&k=32385) are clearly opportunist dicks, why not The Moms?

Quotekids read comics to be entertained and, like it or not, do form opinions based on what they read and see

Special interest groups never seem willing to admit they just don't like something (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT9xuXQjxMM), and instead pretend to be acting in the interests of some other, powerless group: children (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo), the feeble-minded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM_vLk1I6G4), minorities (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf8eEHi2gOc), etc. Reducing all culture to something someone (who, exactly?) thinks will have an improving effect on toddlers' minds seems a good way to kill off intelligent entertainment and independent thought, especially since the readership of the X titles is experiencing the same demographic slide beyond the age of majority as all comics.

QuoteMarvel have a first amendment right to print what they like (within the law), the One Million Moms also have that same God-given right to speak up when they feel someone's pushing a radical political agenda down their kids' throats, more power to 'em I say and long may they continue...

Why should the injunction in your signature quote- for government to fuck off out of other peoples' business- not apply to any organisation? The attempts of political parties to foist their agenda on other people don't seem any more or less pernicious than an organisation trying to limit the choices available to those who do not share their morality or their beliefs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 May, 2012, 09:51:42 AM
Been reading the comments section of the recent BBC website story on the launch of the independence campaign; the level of uninformed spite launched at anyone who isn't pro-Union is terrifying.  The number of people who are happy to announce that Scotland is a subsidy junkie incapable of governing itself is truly worrying, considering that anyone who actually wanted to see the figures on the Scottish economy could easily find them.

Like a Million Moms, all opinions are not created equal: some are considered and open to change based on fact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 26 May, 2012, 10:40:07 AM
Territorial behaviour isn't limited just to animals. Humans are territorial Apes in disguise so inevitably any implied loss of territory is less resources coming to your tribe and your descendents. One group will apparently gain territory while the other group feels it's losing some.

Add in Race and you've got tension and uncertainty not stability this in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the second world war. This expresses itself as 'social sniping' ie: making derogatory remarks about the other groups claim so you can reinforce your position as the sensible one.

I see the dislocation of the Union as inevitable because as all things it was of it's time created for another purpose. Those times have long gone and no amount of harking on about tradition will change that now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:45:36 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 26 May, 2012, 03:19:31 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2012, 06:39:52 PM
I'd like to cordially extend one million fuck offs to those Moms.

Why?  Isn't their point of view as valid as anyone else's, or does that only apply to those of a liberal disposition, I for one wholeheartedly agree with them, kids read comics to be entertained and, like it or not, do form opinions based on what they read and see, and while Marvel have a first amendment right to print what they like (within the law), the One Million Moms also have that same God-given right to speak up when they feel someone's pushing a radical political agenda down their kids' throats, more power to 'em I say and long may they continue...


No one said they couldn't express what they felt but I see nothing radical about what DC/Marvel are doing -being gay is as old as mankind itself, it's just that some people can't get over that fact of life- other than selling comics to a current audience.

I think the most tormented individuals tend to be those who feel thay are not allowed to admit their real sexuality because of the dictats of a socially conservative church. The hypocritical and compulsively dishonest sociopath Ted Haggard (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,482527,00.html) (real person) would be one of the worst role models for any young mind to be exposed to, Northstar (fictional) hasn't a patch on him.


Anyone who believes being aware of homosexuality from a young age makes you homosexual is seriously stupid. No more than being aware of football makes you a footballer.







Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2012, 08:09:02 PM
QuoteWhy?  Isn't their point of view as valid as anyone else's, or does that only apply to those of a liberal disposition

Nobody's point of view is invalid.  It doesn't mean I have to agree with it, or like it. Personally my issue with groups like One Million Moms goes beyond what they say about Marvel Comics.  My problem is with comments like this:

QuoteThese companies are heavily influencing our youth by using children's superheroes to desensitize and brainwash them in thinking that a gay lifestyle choice is normal and desirable. As Christians, we know that homosexuality is a sin

I don't see it as a free speech issue - anyone can express any opinion they like as far as I'm concerned - but I reserve the right to take exception to agendas, for example an agenda that seeks to demonise gay people for trying to live their lives in peace without harming anyone.  Unless my knowledge of the subject is wrong, homosexuals are genetically predisposed to be that way, and the spread the idea that such people are sinful and abnormal is a concept that irritates me a lot (as does, say, the concept of legally stoning adulteresses to death in certain other cultures. In many people's opinion, this is perfectly acceptable, but I am opposed to the practice).  Hence my 'one million fuck offs' - a bit facetious,maybe, but i do not like to see bigots trying influence the workings of society.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 08:41:17 PM
If they can't have tolerance for gays in life, and in art/commerce, they aren't serving their constitution very well. They can say what they want, doesn't mean it should be governmental or artistic policy and since this is more an issue of medieval religious belief, what does it have to do with the law or the government, whatever happened to the separation of church and state?

Isn't that one of the great things about the US constitution?

Protection of the voice/right of minorities: gays, race, religious belief, but none having a say over how the other should live their lives as long as it doesn't interfere with anybody else's choice?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2012, 09:28:48 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 08:41:17 PM
Isn't that one of the great things about the US constitution? Protection of the voice/right of minorities: gays, race, religious belief, but none having a say over how the other should live their lives as long as it doesn't interfere with anybody else's choice?

Fuck me, this is inspirational stuff, Lads.

I'm picturing Obama in a three-way with Thoreau and Walt Whitman, with the Bill of Rights as a duvet. As Betsy Ross rhythmically tugs Old Glory up the flag pole, Walt shoots his creamy load in the face of The Commander In Chief and Thoreau furiously pumps a clenched fist in and out of Hussein's Castro Street exit; a visibly delighted Mapplethorpe capturing the moment for posterity in a blizzard of popping flash bulbs.

Soundtrack: Lady Ga Ga's Born This Way and C & C Music Factory. God Bless America.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 09:36:22 PM
You are Gore Vidal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2012, 09:48:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 09:36:22 PM
You are Gore Vidal.

You fucking wish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 09:56:34 PM
He's barely even that weirdo who does Fifteen shades of Grey.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 09:56:45 PM
Bikini Kill's 'Fuck me' comment is a bit over the top. Rolling up everything the American right disapproves of into one - admittedly spectacular - vignette doesn't prove anything, but it does make the right look a bit ridiculous and, dare I say it, preoccupied.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2012, 08:09:02 PM
Unless my knowledge of the subject is wrong, homosexuals are genetically predisposed to be that way

Actually, there is no conclusive proof that same-sex attraction is genetically predisposed. There is, as yet, no confirmation of the existence of a 'gay gene.' I know many gays would like there to be one because it would be a biological vindication of their sexual orientation, and many anti-gays (call them fascists, if you will) would like there to be a gay gene because then you could test for it or eliminiate it.

My own view is it shouldn't matter a jot whether gayness is 'caused' by genes or other biological or non-biological factors. It's a fact of life that some people are sexually attracted to people of the same sex as them, and, quite frankly, no-one has any business objecting to that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 10:01:01 PM
There should be a cure for choosing to live in Wales.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:07:34 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 09:56:45 PM


Actually, there is no conclusive proof that same-sex attraction is genetically predisposed.

My own view is it shouldn't matter a jot whether gayness is 'caused' by genes or other biological or non-biological factors. It's a fact of life that some people are sexually attracted to people of the same sex as them, and, quite frankly, no-one has any business objecting to that.


Yep, don't give a flying-fuck if it's genetic, caused by a wonky morphic field or a stroke (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2130900/Chris-Birch-Rugby-player-woke-gay-stroke-says-hes-happiest-hes-been.html). I think the gay lobby limit themselves clinging on to science to justify their right to be, what if it's disproven? That's a lot of spin gone down with a ship full of seamen.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:08:13 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 10:01:01 PM
There should be a cure for choosing to live in Wales.


There is, it's called being Irish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 26 May, 2012, 10:09:29 PM
what's wrong with choosing to live in Wales? I've never been there myself.

HoU's words are pretty sane and sensible.  Objecting to the 'normalisation' onof homosexuality begs the question of what exactly the objectors would like instead of such normalisation - ostracism? outlawing it completely? don't-ask-don't-tell as some kind of national legal policy?  They don't say, which seems a bit dishoingenuous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 10:13:19 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 26 May, 2012, 10:09:29 PM
what's wrong with choosing to live in Wales? I've never been there myself.

It's me. I live in Wales. By choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:16:00 PM
Once read a report about a man with dissociative identity disorder -multiple personalities- one of his personalities was gay -sexually active- while the rest were straight -also sexually active- that throws up all sorts of questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2012, 10:38:26 PM
Loving husband and father suddenly starts trying to fuck his step-daughter; discovers he has brain tumour (http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2011/12/neurolaw-do-we-have-a-responsibility-to-use-neuroscience-to-inform-law/). Once the tumour is removed he no longer exhibits paedophile tendencies. This proves and disproves nothing (and I'm certainly drawing no moral equivalence beween homosexuality and paedophilia), except that there's probably a number of factors- physiological, neurological, experiential and societal- to everything we are and do. 

Some folk are fat because they love cake, others because of some biologically determined reason, most because of a combination of the two. That last statement works just as well if you alter the vowel sound in 'cake'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:47:57 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 26 May, 2012, 10:38:26 PM
Some folk are fat because they love cake, others because of some biologically determined reason, most because of a combination of the two. That last statement works just as well if you alter the vowel sound in 'cake'.


So you're telling us you're a fat-fag?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 11:07:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 10:16:00 PM
Once read a report about a man with dissociative identity disorder -multiple personalities- one of his personalities was gay -sexually active- while the rest were straight -also sexually active- that throws up all sorts of questions.

D.I.D. is quite a controversial diagnosis these days. It comes under the heading of possible iatrogenic disorders, i.e. disorders which are created via the intervention of doctors, e.g. the patient producing symptoms to please the doctor or in order to fit in with the doctor's assumptions about the nature of the patient's condition. Some psychiatric patients definitely are dissociative, but the evidence for multiple personalities is sketchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:12:36 PM
If only you had multiple personalities. Then one of them could do all of the modding that you seem to think you are above doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:22:59 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 11:07:11 PM
D.I.D. is quite a controversial diagnosis these days. It comes under the heading of possible iatrogenic disorders, i.e. disorders which are created via the intervention of doctors, e.g. the patient producing symptoms to please the doctor or in order to fit in with the doctor's assumptions about the nature of the patient's condition. Some psychiatric patients definitely are dissociative, but the evidence for multiple personalities is sketchy.


Isn't that why they changed the original term from 'multiple personality' to 'D.I.D.'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:24:00 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:12:36 PM
If only you had multiple personalities. Then one of them could do all of the modding that you seem to think you are above doing.



If you had an extra one you could pop-fuck too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:27:37 PM
The fact that you call it that tells me that your're not ready.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 26 May, 2012, 11:29:41 PM
As usual, this thread is the human race's nadir.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:32:28 PM
*FOOTAGE NOT FOUND*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:32:47 PM
Quote from: Trout on 26 May, 2012, 11:29:41 PM
As usual, this thread is the human race's nadir.


Best place to start anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:37:27 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:27:37 PM
The fact that you call it that tells me that your're not ready.


My 'your ares' are fine thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:39:44 PM
I've made a huge mistake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 26 May, 2012, 11:43:18 PM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:39:44 PM
I've made a huge mistake.

You should knock before you enter a bedroom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 26 May, 2012, 11:50:58 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oabcM9SOF-E
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 11:52:49 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:22:59 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 26 May, 2012, 11:07:11 PM
D.I.D. is quite a controversial diagnosis these days.

Isn't that why they changed the original term from 'multiple personality' to 'D.I.D.'?

That didn't fix it. One school of thought has it that people still don't have multiple personalities (unless a doctor tells them they have, in which case many are happy to oblige).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2012, 11:55:24 PM
Quote from: Trout on 26 May, 2012, 11:29:41 PM
As usual, this thread is the human race's nadir.

Drunkenly stumbling into your most hated thread looking for a guilty thrill is the worst kind of middle class ghetto tourism. Some of us live here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8GvLKTsTuI&ob=av).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:59:26 PM
Fuk da polis!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 27 May, 2012, 12:02:55 AM
Hmmm... html failure here.

Let's not bother.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 12:07:05 AM
A giver and a receiver, eh...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq5wD5xxDhY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 27 May, 2012, 12:10:24 AM
Well, I tried to reply to a past post but for some reason the quote tags were all over the place. I thought it best to modify the comment and remove its content. Why bother getting into an argument on the internet?

It's interesting that this thread doesn't even fulfil its original purpose any more. Apparently it's just for insulting one another now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2012, 12:11:45 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 11:59:26 PM
Fuk da polis!

Lock the thread, Usher! That's the most succint summation of this thread and the collective outlook of forum members posssible; everything else that might follow would be redundant rephrasing and mere reiteration of Soap's rallying cry.

Fuck da polis, Joe; fuck da polis, indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 12:19:28 AM
(http://us6.memecdn.com/spiderman-fuck-the-police_o_282555.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 27 May, 2012, 12:20:59 AM
I like Spider-Man. He's a really good guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 27 May, 2012, 12:24:37 AM
With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.


Some words for House of Usher to consider, there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 27 May, 2012, 12:36:06 AM
But Roger, your powers are also mighty. If you were given the terrible powers of a mod, you would become a tyrant.

That's right - Roger for mod!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2012, 03:17:04 AM
Everyone's a nazi except me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 27 May, 2012, 04:05:26 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2012, 08:41:17 PM
Protection of the voice/right of minorities: gays, race, religious belief, but none having a say over how the other should live their lives as long as it doesn't interfere with anybody else's choice?

What he said - and then some - it wasn't the fact that two guys get married in Canada (that's for the Canadians to decide), my problem is Marvel depicting in a comic-book widely read by many young kids what is a highly contentious and for some (myself included) a deeply troubling matter of the militant homosexual agenda attempting to insert themselves into every aspect of society, granted not all are like that, in fact I know many despise the militant activists in their 'community', believing it actually hinders rather than helps their cause, but One Million Moms have every right to call Marvel on it, and them doing so does not mean they are bigots nor does it mean they are trying to stifle free speech, not everyone thinks that particular lifestyle is either normal nor healthy (to the individual or society at large), it doesn't mean we want to kick the doors in and drag them out into the night, but their rights end where mine and those of a likewise socially conservative disposition begin, and that simply isn't the case at the moment where Christians are being actively prosecuted (persecuted?) by the authorities of several countries for not bowing the knee to a PC lifestyle 'choice' ... that was my point, sorry if this is dragging out a divisive argument, not trying to insult or offend anyone here, just an honest opinion...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 27 May, 2012, 09:07:17 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 27 May, 2012, 04:05:26 AMa PC lifestyle 'choice'

And by that you mean . . . what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2012, 09:27:41 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 27 May, 2012, 04:05:26 AM
"(M)y problem is ... (the) deeply troubling matter of the militant homosexual agenda attempting to insert themselves into every aspect of society, granted not all are like that"

Do you see what your subconscious has done to you (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXYnEobD_0k) there, Neebs?

Quote"it doesn't mean we want to kick the doors in and drag them out into the night, but their rights end where mine ... begin ... Christians are being actively prosecuted (persecuted?) by the authorities of several countries for not bowing the knee to a PC lifestyle 'choice'"

We live in a European liberal democracy, where the extent of the persecution is a few desk monkeys being told to adhere to their employers' dress code, and registrars being reminded that their job involves marrying people. Like you and the 1MMoms, they have the right to say and do as they please, but no special right to be spared from that which they find offensive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 11:10:17 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 27 May, 2012, 04:05:26 AM
One Million Moms have every right to call Marvel on it, and them doing so does not mean they are bigots nor does it mean they are trying to stifle free speech, not everyone thinks that particular lifestyle is either normal nor healthy (to the individual or society at large), it doesn't mean we want to kick the doors in and drag them out into the night, but their rights end where mine and those of a likewise socially conservative disposition begin, and that simply isn't the case at the moment where Christians are being actively prosecuted (persecuted?) by the authorities of several countries for not bowing the knee to a PC lifestyle 'choice' ... that was my point, sorry if this is dragging out a divisive argument, not trying to insult or offend anyone here, just an honest opinion...



How about just not buying the comics for their kids? That's 'choice' right there. Why should their view dictate what others print? The US is not a Theocracy and Marvel should not be forced to adapt their comics to reflect strict Christian values or any religious values, otherwise it's not America, is it?

It just seems hypocritical to actively espouse core American constitutional values but not to want them when something/somebody offends you. Isn't that part of the point?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 27 May, 2012, 11:19:04 AM
I'm happy for my children to know that two men can get married.

I'm not sure why that idea is so frightening to some people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: Trout on 27 May, 2012, 11:19:04 AM
I'm not sure why that idea is so frightening to some people.




http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/201106/homophobic-men-most-aroused-gay-male-porn


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP4zr0agHSM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2012, 01:31:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 11:30:17 AM
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/201106/homophobic-men-most-aroused-gay-male-porn

Favourite phrase in that feature: "But, their penises reported otherwise". I must hate Rihanna. There's empirical evidence to suggest I really hate her videos.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 27 May, 2012, 01:58:28 PM
perhaps homophobes are just more aroused by  the 'device' the guy's clipping on to them

Here the gay marriage issue is going strong.  I don't mind if they get to get married. 

I do wonder though - why now rather than ten years ago?  This isn't a stealthy way to criticise the drive for marriage equality - I'm genuinely curious.  Does anyone know?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 May, 2012, 02:04:12 PM
It's been made a pseudo political issue by both sides for the last number of elections -hoping people will ignore the shite economy- and as soon as the election's over it goes back in the campaign box.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 May, 2012, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 27 May, 2012, 01:58:28 PM
I do wonder though - why now rather than ten years ago?

A cynical person might claim that it's just a marketing tactic, based on stirring up controversy amongst the easily outraged and the 'no such thing as bad publicity' principle. That cynical person might then go on to assert that in all likelihood, neither Marvel nor DC have anything interesting or insightful to contribute to the Civil Rights debate. But I'm not cynical at all so thoughts like that would never enter my head.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 27 May, 2012, 02:38:13 PM
well thank goodness you aren't the cynical person.  They sound pretty obtuse. 
  I'm not interested in Marvel or DC's reaction to the issue, which I'm pretty sure predates their comics. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 May, 2012, 06:29:47 PM
Say what you like about "militant" gays, their uniforms are FABULOUS.

isn't it odd that when christians complain about losing their rights, its usually the right to treat someone else as a second class citizen. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 27 May, 2012, 06:43:01 PM
YOU KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY WHEN GAYS CAN SERVE OPENLY IN THE MILITARY BUT OUR CHILDREN CAN'T READ A THIRD STRING TEEN TITAN'S SOLO BOOK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 May, 2012, 07:22:10 PM
I think it also needs to be highlighted that not every Christian subscribes to an anti-gay stance. For me one of the tragedies of this kind of debate is that it highlights peoples often correct perceptions of people like me. We God-botherers have some serious issues at times.

In this instance I think it may be quite justifiable to shoot the messenger-we've screwed the message up to a criminal degree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 May, 2012, 07:30:14 PM
Damn gays, fighting our wars and defending our freedoms.

Its truly unfortunate that those with the most unpleasantly radical opinions, be they religious or political, shout the loudest.  The call to treat others with respect is considered so bland that its often disregarded in favour of pointing cameras and microphones at the ranting lunatic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 27 May, 2012, 07:33:04 PM
^ Correct.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 May, 2012, 08:01:24 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 27 May, 2012, 07:30:14 PM
Damn gays, fighting our wars and defending our freedoms.

Its truly unfortunate that those with the most unpleasantly radical opinions, be they religious or political, shout the loudest.  The call to treat others with respect is considered so bland that its often disregarded in favour of pointing cameras and microphones at the ranting lunatic.

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 May, 2012, 08:05:37 PM
Its worth being aware that One Million Moms isn't a grassroots protest movement for concerned parents.  Its a front for the the American Family Association, an extreme rightwing group who have organised protests against, well, just about everyone in their mission to turn America into a religious state run by unregulated "Christian" corporations.

Check out:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_million_moms
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 May, 2012, 08:41:48 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 27 May, 2012, 08:05:37 PM
Its worth being aware that One Million Moms isn't a grassroots protest movement for concerned parents.  Its a front for the the American Family Association, an extreme rightwing group who have organised protests against, well, just about everyone in their mission to turn America into a religious state run by unregulated "Christian" corporations.

Check out:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_million_moms


Found myself looking for a "like" button there.............
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 28 May, 2012, 02:20:40 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 26 May, 2012, 09:36:19 AM
Nobody else is trying to tell folk what they can say or what they can read. Kiefer Sutherland and Murdoch's Fox network used 24 as a vehicle to articulate a particular world view at a crucial point in The War On Terror (http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol39_no2/lasson.pdf); I didn't really watch it. Phoning the Ford motor company to demand they withdrew their cringeworthy sponsorship of the show, so nobody who liked it was allowed to make their own mind up- as 1MMoms advocate- seems mental.

You clearly have never watched 24, bikini kill dude, that show has more white American corporate villains than Middle Eastern and/or ethnic ones, the writing staff had more Democrats than Republicans in it, Kiefer Sutherland is a self-confessed "socialist" in his political views, and the show was created before 9/11 took place... 24 is no more an advocation of the Bush Doctrine than 007 is a comment on British foreign policy, you really need to stop reading those kooky left-wing websites, with due and sincere respect...

Quote from: Temponaut on 27 May, 2012, 06:29:47 PM
isn't it odd that when christians complain about losing their rights, its usually the right to treat someone else as a second class citizen. 

... or the right to liberty of conscience...

Quote from: The Prodigal on 27 May, 2012, 07:22:10 PM
I think it also needs to be highlighted that not every Christian subscribes to an anti-gay stance. For me one of the tragedies of this kind of debate is that it highlights peoples often correct perceptions of people like me. We God-botherers have some serious issues at times.  In this instance I think it may be quite justifiable to shoot the messenger-we've screwed the message up to a criminal degree.

So you think, respectfully asking, that when the Almighty condemns that particular behavior, He has issues, do you?  And Christians are supposed to be salt and light to the world, not to compromise with it, and as far as supposedly screwing up the message, which message is that precisely, we are to love the sinner but hate the sin, and if some get confused about that, they need to take it up with the Almighty, it really is that simple... I LOVE this thread, it really is a stimulating one, if only the rest of the interweb was this engaging and thoroughly decent in the discussion of emotive issues, bravo...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 28 May, 2012, 03:17:10 AM
The Almighty also condemns polyester shirts.

(Leviticus 19:19)

'Nuff said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 May, 2012, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 28 May, 2012, 02:20:40 AM
Kiefer Sutherland is a self-confessed "socialist" in his political views, and the show was created before 9/11 took place ... you really need to stop reading those kooky left-wing websites, with due and sincere respect...

Tony Blair identified himself as a socialist. The link I provided (CLICK (http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol39_no2/lasson.pdf)) was to a dry academic paper by a Professor of Law, not the Huffington Post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 28 May, 2012, 07:29:39 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 28 May, 2012, 02:20:40 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 26 May, 2012, 09:36:19 AM
Nobody else is trying to tell folk what they can say or what they can read. Kiefer Sutherland and Murdoch's Fox network used 24 as a vehicle to articulate a particular world view at a crucial point in The War On Terror (http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol39_no2/lasson.pdf); I didn't really watch it. Phoning the Ford motor company to demand they withdrew their cringeworthy sponsorship of the show, so nobody who liked it was allowed to make their own mind up- as 1MMoms advocate- seems mental.

You clearly have never watched 24, bikini kill dude, that show has more white American corporate villains than Middle Eastern and/or ethnic ones, the writing staff had more Democrats than Republicans in it, Kiefer Sutherland is a self-confessed "socialist" in his political views, and the show was created before 9/11 took place... 24 is no more an advocation of the Bush Doctrine than 007 is a comment on British foreign policy, you really need to stop reading those kooky left-wing websites, with due and sincere respect...

Quote from: Temponaut on 27 May, 2012, 06:29:47 PM
isn't it odd that when christians complain about losing their rights, its usually the right to treat someone else as a second class citizen. 

... or the right to liberty of conscience...

Quote from: The Prodigal on 27 May, 2012, 07:22:10 PM
I think it also needs to be highlighted that not every Christian subscribes to an anti-gay stance. For me one of the tragedies of this kind of debate is that it highlights peoples often correct perceptions of people like me. We God-botherers have some serious issues at times.  In this instance I think it may be quite justifiable to shoot the messenger-we've screwed the message up to a criminal degree.

So you think, respectfully asking, that when the Almighty condemns that particular behavior, He has issues, do you?  And Christians are supposed to be salt and light to the world, not to compromise with it, and as far as supposedly screwing up the message, which message is that precisely, we are to love the sinner but hate the sin, and if some get confused about that, they need to take it up with the Almighty, it really is that simple... I LOVE this thread, it really is a stimulating one, if only the rest of the interweb was this engaging and thoroughly decent in the discussion of emotive issues, bravo...

Genuinely not sure if you are being serious or not but in case you are:

Hate the sin and love the sinner? Is gay orientation a sin?

Even if you define it as such-In your opinion have Christians ever fallen a little short of that your standard maybe done less well with the love the sinner bit? Maybe got wrapped up in a little good old fashioned plain prejudice and wrapped selective bits of the Bible around it to justify that all too human prejudice ? I think (respectfully) that they might have.

The message? One of grace and love. A recognition that we all sin and come short. A shaking of the head on my part when people get all smug because certain people perhaps sin differently than they do. If you are going to start with gays lets move on to see what the Bible says about people like the gluttonous etc Lets go the whole hog. And while we are it lets question why Jesus never once referred to gays but did have so much to say about justice and intolerance.

I'm not saying its not a difficult issue on which people can hold genuine and sincere differences-it plainly is. But lets approach it with brutal honesty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 28 May, 2012, 08:13:09 AM
What your encountering isn't the loss of freedom of belief Beaky, its the creeping realisation that christians aren't the unquestioned authority anymore.

Jesus didn't tell you that homosexuality is wrong.  He didn't mention it once, although He did advise you to hate your family and that you wouldn't be allowed unto heaven unless your a Jew.

The teaching you are following are much older.  The can be found in the same scripture that outlaws the wearing of certain fabrics, the eating of shellfish, the trimming of beards, not killing disobedient children.  your rejected these teachings, presumably?

Replace 'gay' with any other minority and your beliefs would be regarded as archiac.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2012, 09:49:07 AM
I've always thought focussing a pro-gay argument on the genetic causes of homosexuality is a really bad idea. 

It's certainly a fair observation that homosexuality is present across the animal kingdom, and thus is likely to a basic feature of (at least) vertebrate behaviour, but so is a hell of a lot of other less desirable stuff that we wisely set rules against (GBH, theft, rape etc.) - best not to base the argument around that.  Far better to step back from genetic determinism and focus on the simple philosophy of a wonderfully complex humanity played out in each individual.

I'm sure some people are born in such a way that homosexuality will always be their exclusive orientation (my best friend growing up was gay from Day 1 - he knew he was gay and even I knew he was gay even before we knew the word), and I'm equally sure that other people's lives lead them in that direction, some all of the way, some part of the way, some temporarily, some permanently and exclusively.  So (literally) fucking what.  People are what they are, like what they like, and act accordingly.  The question only matters if you bring some bizarre agenda of prevention or cure into the picture.  Better by far to put all that thought and effort into tackling the other great genetic/environment issue of obesity.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 28 May, 2012, 10:13:39 AM
The lifestyle choice to be overweight is a morally wrong one and they should be refused the right to marry or have kids until they get one the treadmill and loose some pounds.  Anyone who disagrees is wrong, and denying me my freedom of belief.

..only kidding.  I love fatties...almost as much as I love secretly gay christians....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2012, 10:31:41 AM
Quote from: Temponaut on 28 May, 2012, 10:13:39 AM
I love fatties...

We love you too (roasted in goosefat).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 28 May, 2012, 10:33:00 AM
I find it fascinating that people use religion as an excuse to be an utter wanker. Can they not see the contradiction?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 28 May, 2012, 10:48:05 AM
Stop persecuting wankers.

If everyone was a wanker, or at least admitted to being a wanker, the world would be a much more relaxed place. I'd take being a wanker over being an Abrahmite any day of the week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2012, 11:17:27 AM
Quote from: Roger Godpleton on 28 May, 2012, 10:48:05 AMI'd take being a wanker over being an Abrahmite any day of the week.

I doubt Abraham himself had any time for wanking, what with his divine mandate to impregnate servants.  Even poor old Onan himself did his seed-spilling in company.  The Bible's problem with wanking is that they were all too shagged out from shagging to even bother. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 28 May, 2012, 11:22:17 AM
I'm sure there would be a lot more love for Christians, even from atheists, if 21st century religiosity wouldn't keep aligning itself so determinedly with right-wing politics, which is the politics of, you know, hatred and greed. Religion is supposed to be about love, and yet so many followers of religion these days are constantly telling us religion is about low taxes and hegemony.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 28 May, 2012, 11:43:08 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 28 May, 2012, 11:22:17 AM
I'm sure there would be a lot more love for Christians, even from atheists, if 21st century religiosity wouldn't keep aligning itself so determinedly with right-wing politics, which is the politics of, you know, hatred and greed. Religion is supposed to be about love, and yet so many followers of religion these days are constantly telling us religion is about low taxes and hegemony.


In North America Christians tend (sometimes unfairly) to be linked to horrendous right wing politics. In Europe we can be a bit more left orientated. My own personal politics are very much left directed.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/TheChristianLeft
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2012, 11:45:11 AM
Quite a good Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal in and around the gay marriage non-issue:


(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20120526.gif) (http://"http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2622")
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 28 May, 2012, 12:56:30 PM
The pull of political extremes is probably difficult to avoid if you have a belief system that deals in absolutes and unquestioning acceptance of authority.  When your world is drawn into question by secular attitudes, withdrawing into the warm embrace of the faith that you are right must be comforting.

I think it was Jonathan Haidt who wrote that no-one is preaching that the sun will rise tomorrow.  Its an enevitability, which we accept as fact.  Only viewpoints which are questioned are preached from the pulpit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2012, 04:47:10 PM
I am reminded of a Polish friend of mine - a very lovely woman but in some ways a bit narrow-minded (and in others not at all, as we shall see).

Her:  'I can't let my children see gay pride marches in Ireland. It's not normal.'
Me:  'What will you do if your son turns out to be gay?'
Her:  'He won't be. (Pause of a few seconds) I'd like to try it with another woman though. Two of us and my   husband. But I wouldn't ask him, he's too conservative.'

Poor chap is missing out on a two-girl threesome because his wife is too scared to ask him.

Anyway, to return to the original point (and I'm sorry, now it's me who's dragging out the debate):  I'd like to see a time when gay marriages in comics are not seen as 'pushing an agenda' but just something that fucking happens in the story.  I don't remember anybody up in arms about Treasure Steel and her wife Terry, after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2012, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 28 May, 2012, 11:43:08 AM
My own personal politics are very much left directed.

That'll learn you to go about following the teachings of that Jesus bloke.  Always was something a bit red about that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 May, 2012, 08:39:24 PM
Quote from: House of Usher on 28 May, 2012, 11:22:17 AM
I'm sure there would be a lot more love for Christians, even from atheists, if 21st century religiosity wouldn't keep aligning itself so determinedly with right-wing politics, which is the politics of, you know, hatred and greed. Religion is supposed to be about love, and yet so many followers of religion these days are constantly telling us religion is about low taxes and hegemony.

The specific ideology is irrelevant; all political, religious and economic belief systems attempt to construct a totalising explanation of the world and offer a set of rules to live by. There are plenty of reasonable people among the adherents of any ideology, but it doesn't surprise me that the few zealots in one group find common cause with those in another.

The only meaningful distinction is between the kind of people who want to tell other people what to do (and need to find a pretext which allows them to do so) and everyone else in the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 29 May, 2012, 12:13:18 AM
So I guess these One Million Moms have isolated their children from cultural entertainment containing homosexual characters etc. So what will they do or say if any of their children come out?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 12:17:26 AM
Why is your're avatar a dinosaur when your name is "otter"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 29 May, 2012, 12:39:08 AM
I got the avatar from the first forum I ever joined, back when Humanoids Publishing had one (it's from The Metabarons by Alexander Jodoworsky & Juan Gimenez) - I liked it so much I kept on other boards I joined, before I started posting under this user name, though I have been thinking getting a more suitable one for this board.... What's your avatar from, Mr. Godpleton?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 12:42:53 AM
Chronos Carnival.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 01:49:09 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 May, 2012, 03:17:10 AM
The Almighty also condemns polyester shirts.
(Leviticus 19:19)
'Nuff said.

That's a totally tired and frankly bunk attack line, those regulations were given by God to the Israelites in the wilderness to keep them on the straight and narrow until the Promised Land and the Messiah, they never applied to us Gentiles and don't even apply to the Jews anymore, nice try though...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 01:59:58 AM
It is 2 o'clock in the morning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 02:06:34 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 28 May, 2012, 07:29:39 AM
Genuinely not sure if you are being serious or not but in case you are:
Hate the sin and love the sinner? Is gay orientation a sin?  Even if you define it as such-In your opinion have Christians ever fallen a little short of that your standard maybe done less well with the love the sinner bit? Maybe got wrapped up in a little good old fashioned plain prejudice and wrapped selective bits of the Bible around it to justify that all too human prejudice ? I think (respectfully) that they might have.  The message? One of grace and love. A recognition that we all sin and come short. A shaking of the head on my part when people get all smug because certain people perhaps sin differently than they do. If you are going to start with gays lets move on to see what the Bible says about people like the gluttonous etc Lets go the whole hog. And while we are it lets question why Jesus never once referred to gays but did have so much to say about justice and intolerance.  I'm not saying its not a difficult issue on which people can hold genuine and sincere differences-it plainly is. But lets approach it with brutal honesty.

I AM serious - do I look like I'm joking :D ? - and no, the orientation itself is not a sin, but acting on it most certainly is.  I fully admit we all fall short of God's perfect standard (I'm front of the line on that one), but we Christians are also called to rebuke immorality when we see it, and that whole 'grace and love' thing doesn't give you carte blanche to live as you please, the apostle Paul roundly condemned that viewpoint in Romans, yes, God is a god of grace and love, but He's also one of holiness and righteousness, and he does set a moral code of behavior to live by, that's not prejudice.  And the reason Jesus didn't mention homosexuals is because that behavior was already condemned in the Old Testament, and He was fulfilling the law not rewriting it.  I respect the fact you hold a different opinion on the matter, Prodigal dude, and I'm just being honest about mine, I simply cannot call that which an abomination in the eyes of God something other than what it is, I fear the judgement of God over the mockery of men any day, but that's just me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 02:13:08 AM
QuoteI fear the judgement of God over the mockery of men any day, but that's just me...

Must... resist... easier than Cyberleader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 May, 2012, 06:24:25 AM
Retracted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 May, 2012, 07:07:59 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 01:49:09 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 May, 2012, 03:17:10 AM
The Almighty also condemns polyester shirts.(Leviticus 19:19)'Nuff said.

That's a totally tired and frankly bunk attack line, those regulations were given by God to the Israelites in the wilderness to keep them on the straight and narrow until the Promised Land and the Messiah, they never applied to us Gentiles and don't even apply to the Jews anymore, nice try though...

So His Old Testament instructions to the anal-loving, shellfish guzzling, freshly shaven tribes of the Old Testament were conditional and were never meant to be applied in a wider context? I'm sure you see there's an analogy to be drawn with His pronouncements on homosexuality too.

I can't remember Him ever publishing a retraction or a clarification of those guidelines, so presumably it was humans who decided that particular part of the handbook was context-specific and no longer had any relevance to how we live our lives today. If you respect their authority to produce new interpretations of revealed truth, why not Rowan Williams and the Anglican Church's reading of The Amighty's comments on homosexuality?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 29 May, 2012, 08:06:12 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 02:06:34 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 28 May, 2012, 07:29:39 AM
Genuinely not sure if you are being serious or not but in case you are:
Hate the sin and love the sinner? Is gay orientation a sin?  Even if you define it as such-In your opinion have Christians ever fallen a little short of that your standard maybe done less well with the love the sinner bit? Maybe got wrapped up in a little good old fashioned plain prejudice and wrapped selective bits of the Bible around it to justify that all too human prejudice ? I think (respectfully) that they might have.  The message? One of grace and love. A recognition that we all sin and come short. A shaking of the head on my part when people get all smug because certain people perhaps sin differently than they do. If you are going to start with gays lets move on to see what the Bible says about people like the gluttonous etc Lets go the whole hog. And while we are it lets question why Jesus never once referred to gays but did have so much to say about justice and intolerance.  I'm not saying its not a difficult issue on which people can hold genuine and sincere differences-it plainly is. But lets approach it with brutal honesty.

I AM serious - do I look like I'm joking :D ? - and no, the orientation itself is not a sin, but acting on it most certainly is.  I fully admit we all fall short of God's perfect standard (I'm front of the line on that one), but we Christians are also called to rebuke immorality when we see it, and that whole 'grace and love' thing doesn't give you carte blanche to live as you please, the apostle Paul roundly condemned that viewpoint in Romans, yes, God is a god of grace and love, but He's also one of holiness and righteousness, and he does set a moral code of behavior to live by, that's not prejudice.  And the reason Jesus didn't mention homosexuals is because that behavior was already condemned in the Old Testament, and He was fulfilling the law not rewriting it.  I respect the fact you hold a different opinion on the matter, Prodigal dude, and I'm just being honest about mine, I simply cannot call that which an abomination in the eyes of God something other than what it is, I fear the judgement of God over the mockery of men any day, but that's just me...

Fair do's mate. I totally agree grace and love are no blank cheque to do what you or anyone else wants.

I suppose I was arguing that if you are going to go fundamentalist then do it right across the range. What about everything else that is condemned/regulated in the OT? Where's the protests there? If we follow the OT should we kill them? I would also reiterate that I strongly suspect that we God botherers have often wrapped good old human prejudice in a God flag. The sin/sinner distinction? Not sure we (including me) do that as well as we might in this instance. Even if I regard homosexual practice as wrong I am still to show that gay man or woman all the grace and love that I can muster.

I am now anxious I am turning this thread into a theology thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 May, 2012, 08:22:53 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 02:06:34 AM

I AM serious - do I look like I'm joking :D ? - and no, the orientation itself is not a sin, but acting on it most certainly is.  I fully admit we all fall short of God's perfect standard (I'm front of the line on that one), but we Christians are also called to rebuke immorality when we see it, and that whole 'grace and love' thing doesn't give you carte blanche to live as you please



So you agree with this then?

Lev. 20:13:

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 May, 2012, 08:27:39 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 02:06:34 AM
And the reason Jesus didn't mention homosexuals is because that behavior was already condemned in the Old Testament, and He was fulfilling the law not rewriting it.



and you know this, how? I don't see the point in setting up an unfalsifiable argument that can't be proven or disproven, it makes for a very weak argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 May, 2012, 09:45:07 AM
When questioned on whether old testament laws should be ignored, Jesus said that they all stand until the end if time and that "not one jot or tittle" should be disregarded.  He didn't say "just pay attention to some of them, especially the ones about queers.  The others were just temporary, to get you on the straight and narrow until you figured the whole morality think out for yourself."

He, in his Devine wisdom and mercy, also mocked those who failed to execute disobedient children, for disregarding the commandments of the lord in favourof their own laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 29 May, 2012, 10:30:06 AM
Quote from: Temponaut on 29 May, 2012, 09:45:07 AM
When questioned on whether old testament laws should be ignored, Jesus said that they all stand until the end if time and that "not one jot or tittle" should be disregarded.  He didn't say "just pay attention to some of them, especially the ones about queers.  The others were just temporary, to get you on the straight and narrow until you figured the whole morality think out for yourself."

He, in his Devine wisdom and mercy, also mocked those who failed to execute disobedient children, for disregarding the commandments of the lord in favourof their own laws.

http://subversive1.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/not-one-jot-or-tittle.html

Probably articulates the response better than I could.

This has become a theology thread. Soz. I only came on here to get advice about Rogue trooper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 10:36:04 AM
You should of asked what colour Rouge Trooper's poops are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 May, 2012, 12:05:42 PM
Ssshhhh...if he realises its gone all theological, Emps will split the thread and Roger will FREAKOUT.

Rouge Trooper poops a girly pink.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 May, 2012, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 01:49:09 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 May, 2012, 03:17:10 AM
The Almighty also condemns polyester shirts.
(Leviticus 19:19)
'Nuff said.

That's a totally tired and frankly bunk attack line, those regulations were given by God to the Israelites in the wilderness to keep them on the straight and narrow until the Promised Land and the Messiah, they never applied to us Gentiles and don't even apply to the Jews anymore, nice try though...

How odd, that get-out clause doersn't seem to appear in my bible. And if some rules were temporary, as you say, and don
't apply to gentiles, why are they included in the christain bible and why isn't the one about homosexuality one of those? T

his is what bugs me about Christaians. they'll take one phrase or bit of text and consider it massively important, enough to start wars or oppress whole sections of the population; but happily gloss over or sideline other bits that don't fit their world view. As for America and christianity, my reading of the NT tells me that JC's fundamental message was one of pacifism (turn the other cheek) and anti-capitalism (moneychangers, eye of the needle etc), which are the exact opposite of everything the USA stands for - military might and financial riches.

Bottom line, the bible, old and new, was written by fallible human beings with their own influences and agendas and so to take this collection of texts, written by different people in different lands over centuries, bundle them together in one book, allow the Catholic Church sole rights to copy, edit and translate it for another thousand years or so, and then consider it to be the infallible word of God is patently ridiculous.

I've got no beef with people of faith or spirituality, but have contempt for anyone who blindly follows a 'holy book' without question. Believe what you will, but don't force anyone else to. You think God doesn't want gay people to marry? Fine, don't marry a gay person, but no church has the right to impose that belief on anyone else.

I'm not going to enter in a debate, as I've been rouind these houses too many times in the past and I find that it's impossibleto rationally argue with religious types, especially right wing american ones ( The Holy Trinity of Dickery IMHO) so mr Beaky can now go back into my ignore list while I get on with my life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 29 May, 2012, 12:57:41 PM
The more religious you are, the less sex you get (unless you're a kiddy fiddler).

No thanks God! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 29 May, 2012, 01:01:33 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 May, 2012, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 29 May, 2012, 01:49:09 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 May, 2012, 03:17:10 AM
The Almighty also condemns polyester shirts.
(Leviticus 19:19)
'Nuff said.

That's a totally tired and frankly bunk attack line, those regulations were given by God to the Israelites in the wilderness to keep them on the straight and narrow until the Promised Land and the Messiah, they never applied to us Gentiles and don't even apply to the Jews anymore, nice try though...

How odd, that get-out clause doersn't seem to appear in my bible. And if some rules were temporary, as you say, and don
't apply to gentiles, why are they included in the christain bible and why isn't the one about homosexuality one of those? T

his is what bugs me about Christaians. they'll take one phrase or bit of text and consider it massively important, enough to start wars or oppress whole sections of the population; but happily gloss over or sideline other bits that don't fit their world view. As for America and christianity, my reading of the NT tells me that JC's fundamental message was one of pacifism (turn the other cheek) and anti-capitalism (moneychangers, eye of the needle etc), which are the exact opposite of everything the USA stands for - military might and financial riches.

Bottom line, the bible, old and new, was written by fallible human beings with their own influences and agendas and so to take this collection of texts, written by different people in different lands over centuries, bundle them together in one book, allow the Catholic Church sole rights to copy, edit and translate it for another thousand years or so, and then consider it to be the infallible word of God is patently ridiculous.

I've got no beef with people of faith or spirituality, but have contempt for anyone who blindly follows a 'holy book' without question. Believe what you will, but don't force anyone else to. You think God doesn't want gay people to marry? Fine, don't marry a gay person, but no church has the right to impose that belief on anyone else.

I'm not going to enter in a debate, as I've been rouind these houses too many times in the past and I find that it's impossibleto rationally argue with religious types, especially right wing american ones ( The Holy Trinity of Dickery IMHO) so mr Beaky can now go back into my ignore list while I get on with my life.


As a Christian who believes that you should genuinely question everything including the nature of Biblical texts etc I would like to say that I genuinely agree with an awful lot of your post.

I am sorry but I do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2012, 01:43:42 PM
Exodus 22:25
If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him.

Ezekiel 18:13
Lends at interest, and takes profit; shall he then live? He shall not live. He has done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon himself.

Deuteronomy 23:19
You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest.

Proverbs 28:8
Whoever multiplies his wealth by interest and profit gathers it for him who is generous to the poor.

Leviticus 25:3-7
Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. 37 You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit.

Leviticus 25:1-55
The Lord spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, saying, "Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, When you come into the land that I give you, the land shall keep a Sabbath to the Lord. For six years you shall sow your field, and for six years you shall prune your vineyard and gather in its fruits, but in the seventh year there shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a Sabbath to the Lord. You shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard. You shall not reap what grows of itself in your harvest, or gather the grapes of your undressed vine. It shall be a year of solemn rest for the land.

Psalm 15:5
Who does not put out his money at interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never be moved.

Nehemiah 5:1-13
Now there arose a great outcry of the people and of their wives against their Jewish brothers. For there were those who said, "With our sons and our daughters, we are many. So let us get grain, that we may eat and keep alive." There were also those who said, "We are mortgaging our fields, our vineyards, and our houses to get grain because of the famine." And there were those who said, "We have borrowed money for the king's tax on our fields and our vineyards. Now our flesh is as the flesh of our brothers, our children are as their children. Yet we are forcing our sons and our daughters to be slaves, and some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but it is not in our power to help it, for other men have our fields and our vineyards." ...

Psalm 15:1-5
A Psalm of David. O Lord, who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell on your holy hill? He who walks blamelessly and does what is right and speaks truth in his heart; who does not slander with his tongue and does no evil to his neighbor, nor takes up a reproach against his friend; in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but who honors those who fear the Lord; who swears to his own hurt and does not change; who does not put out his money at interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never be moved.

Nehemiah 5:7
I took counsel with myself, and I brought charges against the nobles and the officials. I said to them, "You are exacting interest, each from his brother." And I held a great assembly against them

Proverbs 22:7
The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender

***
The 'Imrans 3:130
Believers, do not live on usury, doubling your wealth many times over.

The Cow 2:275
Those that live in usury shall rise up before God like men whom Satan has demented by his touch; for they claim that trading is no different from usury.

The Cow 2:280
If your debtor be in straits, grant him a delay until he can discharge his debt; but if you waive the sum as alms it will be better for you, if you but knew it.

***
So, how many devout Christians have credit cards, loans at interest or mortgages? If your religious leaders are so adamant about sticking to Holy Writ, why does not your rich church offer interest-free loans to you and forgive those loans every seven years? Why does not your church crusade against the usurers who are destroying our societies? Why are not congregations all over the land being told that the Bible is against charging interest? If God is so against it, why do we all believe without question that All Debts Must Be Paid and that interest is simply one of those unavoidable things?

Religion, sadly, is nothing more than a tool for social control. Whilst religion can do many great things, it is a poor second cousin to faith. Religion teaches us that we need it in order to reach God, just like government teaches that we need it to run our lives, but the truth (to my mind) is much simpler and far more empowering. If God is everything and everywhere (let's call Him the Universe) then I am God. Well, I'm a little piece of God and so are you and so is everything else. The overwhelming majority of people know the difference between right and wrong on an almost instinctive level - how we choose to act on that knowledge is the free will part. This is where religion can be useful if it teaches people to look inward at this knowledge and develop a personal relationship with 'God'. The Bible and Koran then become not instruction manuals to be adhered to but 'work-books' to help individuals think about what is Right and what is Wrong for themselves.

But religion, like politics, has been hijacked at the highest levels by the usurers. This is why I found it fitting to see the Occupy London protestors camped outside St Paul's.

Thread successfully steered back to politics, I think! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 29 May, 2012, 01:48:54 PM
Well balls to all that!

It's time for a muscial interlude! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3B-riRbaa0)

I was just listening to Rings Around the World on the weekend for first time in an age. It's still aces.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2012, 02:14:56 PM
"A Greek economy in depression, austerity that guarantees they'll stay in depression and living on life support from the rest of Europe is the best,"  Kit Juckes (http://www.bloomberglink.com/gatherings_participants_bio.php?gathering=113&Id=3060), global head of foreign exchange at Societe Generale.

Taken from this (http://www.cnbc.com/id/47587509) CNBC articletrashing Greece. Note how the Greeks themselves are blamed for not paying off their basically unpayable debts - debts upayable because of ever increasing interest. In the article, Nick Dewhirst says that "...a German has to increase working from 65 to 67 and that is to pay for Greeks retiring at 50." This is only partially true.

As more and more money is created out of nothing and lent at interest the amount of debt, which also accrues intrest on itself, inevitably skyrockets. As the money to pay the interest (and the interest on the interest) is not created - where do the repayments come from? They come from Germans having to work longer, Brits having their services cut and Greeks selling their country - all because of usury.

Just as you are at the core of your faith you are also the core of your economy. All wealth comes from you - not from your gold or land but from the work you do or the skills you sell. If all money, then, is based on the work we do - how can we justify being charged to use it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 29 May, 2012, 02:30:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2012, 01:43:42 PM
Exodus 22:25
If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him.

Ezekiel 18:13
Lends at interest, and takes profit; shall he then live? He shall not live. He has done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon himself.

Deuteronomy 23:19
You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest.

Proverbs 28:8
Whoever multiplies his wealth by interest and profit gathers it for him who is generous to the poor.

Leviticus 25:3-7
Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. 37 You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit.

Leviticus 25:1-55
The Lord spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, saying, "Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, When you come into the land that I give you, the land shall keep a Sabbath to the Lord. For six years you shall sow your field, and for six years you shall prune your vineyard and gather in its fruits, but in the seventh year there shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a Sabbath to the Lord. You shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard. You shall not reap what grows of itself in your harvest, or gather the grapes of your undressed vine. It shall be a year of solemn rest for the land.

Psalm 15:5
Who does not put out his money at interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never be moved.

Nehemiah 5:1-13
Now there arose a great outcry of the people and of their wives against their Jewish brothers. For there were those who said, "With our sons and our daughters, we are many. So let us get grain, that we may eat and keep alive." There were also those who said, "We are mortgaging our fields, our vineyards, and our houses to get grain because of the famine." And there were those who said, "We have borrowed money for the king's tax on our fields and our vineyards. Now our flesh is as the flesh of our brothers, our children are as their children. Yet we are forcing our sons and our daughters to be slaves, and some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but it is not in our power to help it, for other men have our fields and our vineyards." ...

Psalm 15:1-5
A Psalm of David. O Lord, who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell on your holy hill? He who walks blamelessly and does what is right and speaks truth in his heart; who does not slander with his tongue and does no evil to his neighbor, nor takes up a reproach against his friend; in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but who honors those who fear the Lord; who swears to his own hurt and does not change; who does not put out his money at interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent. He who does these things shall never be moved.

Nehemiah 5:7
I took counsel with myself, and I brought charges against the nobles and the officials. I said to them, "You are exacting interest, each from his brother." And I held a great assembly against them

Proverbs 22:7
The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender

***
The 'Imrans 3:130
Believers, do not live on usury, doubling your wealth many times over.

The Cow 2:275
Those that live in usury shall rise up before God like men whom Satan has demented by his touch; for they claim that trading is no different from usury.

The Cow 2:280
If your debtor be in straits, grant him a delay until he can discharge his debt; but if you waive the sum as alms it will be better for you, if you but knew it.

***
So, how many devout Christians have credit cards, loans at interest or mortgages? If your religious leaders are so adamant about sticking to Holy Writ, why does not your rich church offer interest-free loans to you and forgive those loans every seven years? Why does not your church crusade against the usurers who are destroying our societies? Why are not congregations all over the land being told that the Bible is against charging interest? If God is so against it, why do we all believe without question that All Debts Must Be Paid and that interest is simply one of those unavoidable things?

Religion, sadly, is nothing more than a tool for social control. Whilst religion can do many great things, it is a poor second cousin to faith. Religion teaches us that we need it in order to reach God, just like government teaches that we need it to run our lives, but the truth (to my mind) is much simpler and far more empowering. If God is everything and everywhere (let's call Him the Universe) then I am God. Well, I'm a little piece of God and so are you and so is everything else. The overwhelming majority of people know the difference between right and wrong on an almost instinctive level - how we choose to act on that knowledge is the free will part. This is where religion can be useful if it teaches people to look inward at this knowledge and develop a personal relationship with 'God'. The Bible and Koran then become not instruction manuals to be adhered to but 'work-books' to help individuals think about what is Right and what is Wrong for themselves.

But religion, like politics, has been hijacked at the highest levels by the usurers. This is why I found it fitting to see the Occupy London protestors camped outside St Paul's.

Thread successfully steered back to politics, I think! :)

Shark it might not command the attention as much as right wing cross and flag merchants but there is a very substantial Christian reaction to well reaction. Even in North america there are counter-currents to the usual right wing malarky. There are an incredible array of left leaning social justice campaigners who derive their impetus from what they regard as plain though oft ignored Biblical imperatives to side with the poor and oppressed.

Wasn't it once said that the origins of the British Labour party owed more to Methodism than Marx?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 May, 2012, 02:52:03 PM
The Prodigal makes a good point, and makes me glad I deleted my angry post from earlier on.  Most of the religious types I know are decent skins and know evil shite when they see it, same as the rest of us god-deniers.  Having just read Stephen Fry's (first) autobiography his analysis of the reasoning behind people's objections to (other's) homosexuality is very fresh in my mind, and I suspect it is these things that lie behind the selective adoption of archaic laws rather than any genuine scriptural or theological analysis, or even 'faith and obedience' itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2012, 03:00:18 PM
I agree. A bad system doesn't automatically make the people within it bad too. The knowledge of right and wrong is within us all and most of us want to do what's right whenever we can. I think that 'do unto others as you would have others do unto you' should be the whole of the Bible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 29 May, 2012, 03:17:27 PM
Why's everyone being reasonable? This is the fuckin Politics thread!

M.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 06:52:36 PM
tl;dr
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2012, 06:55:58 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 29 May, 2012, 03:17:27 PM
Why's everyone being reasonable? This is the fuckin Politics thread!

M.




Agreed

I disagree with Gay Marriage because I believe it's a conspiracy cooked up by Divorce Lawyers trying to expand their market and line their pockets. Gruddamn Lawyers.

I think that's fairly unreasonable. Not as unreasonable as citing the centuries old ramblings of a bunch of middle eastern goat-farmers in an effort not to sound bigotted, but fairly unreasonable nonetheless
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 29 May, 2012, 07:12:43 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 29 May, 2012, 06:55:58 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 29 May, 2012, 03:17:27 PM
Why's everyone being reasonable? This is the fuckin Politics thread!

M.




Agreed

I disagree with Gay Marriage because I believe it's a conspiracy cooked up by Divorce Lawyers trying to expand their market and line their pockets. Gruddamn Lawyers.

I think that's fairly unreasonable. Not as unreasonable as citing the centuries old ramblings of a bunch of middle eastern goat-farmers in an effort not to sound bigotted, but fairly unreasonable nonetheless

I have read the last para a few times and am still unreasonably confused by the unreasonable amount of negatives in it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2012, 07:25:43 PM
Taking me too seriously would be a completely unreasonable thing to do. Gay Marriage seems to me like a complete non-issue that a few nut-jobs have hi-jacked. Some straight people have already cheapened the institution in much worse ways. There's a breed of celebrity that appears to think marriages are a self-promotional media circuses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 29 May, 2012, 07:44:45 PM
LIKE YOUR'RE MOM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 May, 2012, 11:20:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2012, 03:00:18 PM
I agree. A bad system doesn't automatically make the people within it bad too. The knowledge of right and wrong is within us all and most of us want to do what's right whenever we can. I think that 'do unto others as you would have others do unto you' should be the whole of the Bible.

Amen to that, Shark. As I said previously, I don't think there's any meaningful distinction between ideologies such as Christianity or Capitalism; they're just attempts to understand the world we live in. As soon as people start treating the tenets of those ideologies as more important than individual freedoms, or substitute adherence to their strictures for independent thought, they become problematic.

Michael Sandel (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01hw6g1)'s new book looks at how, for example, seeing profit as an end in itself and treating everything as a commodity ultimately leads to you fucking an eight year old prostitute up the arse- since the transaction of cash legitimates any behaviour.

Quote(T)he Greeks themselves are blamed for not paying off their basically unpayable debts - debts upayable because of ever increasing interest ... As more and more money is created out of nothing and lent at interest the amount of debt, which also accrues intrest on itself, inevitably skyrockets ... Just as you are at the core of your faith, you are also the core of your economy. All wealth comes from you - not from your gold or land but from the work you do or the skills you sell. If all money, then, is based on the work we do - how can we justify being charged to use it?

I'm with Tyler Durden, and the ultimate aim of Project Mayhem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVof0qj7SOw), with regard to the insane, byzantine system of credit, credit default swaps, and securitised assets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 May, 2012, 08:22:53 AM
So you agree with this then?
Lev. 20:13:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

I was going to let this go, but have to reply just once more - this has become a theological thread - and then I'm done, so listen up children, just one more time;

It's not that I agree or disagree with that regulation, it simply doesn't apply to now or to me as a Gentile, it was EXCLUSIVELY for the Israelites in the wilderness in advance of the Messiah, after which the Mosaic Law effectively became null and void because grace replaced legalism.  And when Jesus referred to "every jot and tittle" being fulfilled, He didn't mean the legal regulations, but rather the fruition of the Father's plan for salvation and the eventual new Heaven and Earth.  And how do I know these things, Joe, because it's in the Bible, if you choose not to believe it, fine, but I for one do, that's where we differ...

Quote from: JamesC on 29 May, 2012, 12:57:41 PM
No thanks God! :D

That is a remark so monumentally stupid, arrogant, and foolishly reckless, I genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark, and believe me, you won't cop an attitude then, not trying to sound confrontational, just looking out for you dude, I would sincerely hope you take that one back...

There, now I'm done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2012, 03:03:20 AM
I disagree with gay marriage because those poor people have suffered enough already.

As for the Bible and its attitude to gayness, you have to take a personal accounting on that score: the book of Job is essentially the Bible telling you that God will piss over your life if you don't take control of it for yourself.  Believe or not, but at the end of the day the Bible is telling you that you don't get to abdicate personal responsibility - it's practically laughing at the stupidity of those who do so, equating Eden/paradise with ignorance and self-awareness with hell because of the massive responsibility that comes with having to make and answer for your own decisions and actions, and even if that account isn't given to God, you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in this life or the next who'll take a kind view of "well, basically, I made the lives of others worse."

Christianity is based on not being a cock.  Take that much from it and you - and it - are doing just fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 May, 2012, 07:07:56 AM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 30 May, 2012, 03:03:20 AM
Christianity is based on not being a cock.  Take that much from it and you - and it - are doing just fine

The essence of every faith, from Islam to Buddhism, and the quick summary of their holy scriptures, is as dumb and platitudinous- and valid- as Bill and Ted's injunction to be excellent to each other.

Similarly, the belief systems founded by Karl Marx, Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson, and the holy texts on which they were based, offered new ways of understanding the world and for guiding the disciple's actions in that world to ensure the best outcome.

It's only when zealots begin priveleging close reading of the footnotes and asides contained within those sacred documents, diregarding the chapter headings ('DON'T BE A DICK' in 24pt sans serif uppercase Helvetica Bold), that they lose sight of the founding principles and guiding motives of their faiths and their founders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 May, 2012, 08:47:22 AM
Hmmm...so jot and tittle didn't mean every jot and tittle.  Just some of the jots and a few of the tittles.  In fact, just the jots and tittles which don't inconvenience us in our everyday lives, unless we happen to be in a minority.

I fear for the day when fearfull bigots get to heaven and realise that God is a eight limbed, three hundred tonne marsupial.  Its what I believe, which makes it a  valid argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 30 May, 2012, 08:54:44 AM
I sincerely believe that i wish they would sort out the mobile version of this forum, so people that i have ignored in the full version stay ignored when viewing on my phone. Otherwise i am continually shown utter bollocks like beaky smoochies response there. It doesnt offend me, it jyst makes me weep for the mental health of the world.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 09:09:23 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AM

Quote from: JamesC on 29 May, 2012, 12:57:41 PM
No thanks God! :D

That is a remark so monumentally stupid, arrogant, and foolishly reckless, I genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark, and believe me, you won't cop an attitude then, not trying to sound confrontational, just looking out for you dude, I would sincerely hope you take that one back...

There, now I'm done.


I just hope for your own sake that your God ain't as petty as you make him out to be. If we're judged on what we post on this forum, all of us are damned!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 09:23:57 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AM
That is a remark so monumentally stupid, arrogant, and foolishly reckless, I genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark, and believe me, you won't cop an attitude then, not trying to sound confrontational, just looking out for you dude, I would sincerely hope you take that one back...

There, now I'm done.

You see, I'd say your presumption that there is a god and that the one you believe in is the right one, is an arrogant assumption, perhaps even stupid and foolish. Such as the one where you assert that your god will ask for account for comments on a message board and that you think he'll find all people wanting. I thought one of the things about yer god is that no one knows how it thinks or indeed it's motivations, so you're speaking from your or your church's interpretation of your holy text, which may or may not have been accurately translated over the years. Other Christians have different interpretations, other religions hold different texts as holy - is it all right or all wrong?

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 30 May, 2012, 09:25:45 AM



That is a remark so monumentally stupid, arrogant, and foolishly reckless, I genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark, and believe me, you won't cop an attitude then, not trying to sound confrontational, just looking out for you dude, I would sincerely hope you take that one back...

There, now I'm done.
[/quote]




If your god really does exist then he'll probably be too busy judging people who stone to death rape victims in the name of a false prophet, or gays that got married. I reckon I'll slip in under the radar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AMIt's not that I agree or disagree with that regulation, it simply doesn't apply to now or to me as a Gentile, it was EXCLUSIVELY for the Israelites in the wilderness in advance of the Messiah, after which the Mosaic Law effectively became null and void because grace replaced legalism.  And when Jesus referred to "every jot and tittle" being fulfilled, He didn't mean the legal regulations, but rather the fruition of the Father's plan for salvation and the eventual new Heaven and Earth.  And how do I know these things, Joe, because it's in the Bible, if you choose not to believe it, fine, but I for one do, that's where we differ...

Except Jesus didn't fulfil the prerequisites of being the Jewish Messiah set down in the Tanakh. The Hebrew scriptures make it pretty clear the main players are killed only because they've found God's disfavour; which, I presume, is the reason why the death of Jesus is therefore justified by Original Sin. The Jewish Messiah, however, is supposed to be a sinner, albeit a righteous one. And, as a righteous sinner, he is required by Mosaic Law to make bull sacrifices on an annual basis as expiation for his sins. Jesus being born without sin and to a virgin was unnecessary. The Immaculate Conception, that Mary was also born without sin, even more so.

Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AMI genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark

For your sake, I hope the god you yourself answer to isn't Vishnu. Or Zeus. Or Atum or . . .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 10:39:22 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Jesus being born without sin and to a virgin was unnecessary. The Immaculate Conception, that Mary was also born without sin, even more so.


The 'virgin' birth was an intepretaion -or mis-translation- of the original texts which originally meant 'young' woman, not virgin. The Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 is "almah," and its inherent meaning is "young woman." You could interpret from that, if you so wish, that most young women would be virigns too but that doesn't make it the crux of the word's original use in scripture.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 10:55:23 AM
QuoteHmmm...so jot and tittle didn't mean every jot and tittle.  Just some of the jots and a few of the tittles.  In fact, just the jots and tittles which don't inconvenience us in our everyday lives, unless we happen to be in a minority.

^^^This.

EDIT: What's a tittle anyway? I want one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 11:05:13 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 10:55:23 AM
EDIT: What's a tittle anyway? I want one.

Diminutive of a 'titt'?

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 11:15:33 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 11:05:13 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 10:55:23 AM
EDIT: What's a tittle anyway? I want one.

Diminutive of a 'titt'?

M.

If it's diminutive then I don't want one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 11:17:05 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 11:15:33 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 11:05:13 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 10:55:23 AM
EDIT: What's a tittle anyway? I want one.

Diminutive of a 'titt'?



If it's diminutive then I don't want one.
You all ready have two, unless you're moobile.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 10:39:22 AMThe 'virgin' birth was an intepretaion -or mis-translation- of the original texts . . .

After two millennia of tradition, dogma, and testimony, Christians (or the majority of, certainly) are unlikely to be swayed by that teensy little fact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 11:25:35 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 11:15:33 AM
If it's diminutive then I don't want one.

Have two then - they're small.

Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 11:19:29 AM
After two millennia of tradition, dogma, and testimony, Christians (or the majority of, certainly) are unlikely to be swayed by that teensy little fact.

Fact and faith can be two very different things. In the best possible way, faith negates the need for facts or the need to be realigned in the face of them.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 30 May, 2012, 11:35:11 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 10:39:22 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 09:55:15 AM
Jesus being born without sin and to a virgin was unnecessary. The Immaculate Conception, that Mary was also born without sin, even more so.


The 'virgin' birth was an intepretaion -or mis-translation- of the original texts which originally meant 'young' woman, not virgin. The Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 is "almah," and its inherent meaning is "young woman."

You could interpret from that, if you so wish, that most young women would be virigns too but that doesn't make it the crux of the word's original use in scripture.

What a catastrophic F*** UP, that little misunderstanding has led to down the way. It's like building without a plumb line. With the more laid onto it becoming more unstable as time has gone on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 11:25:35 AMFact and faith can be two very different things. In the best possible way, faith negates the need for facts or the need to be realigned in the face of them.

Sorry, Mikey. I'm a bear of very little brain so you'll have to clarify what you mean by 'the best possible way'.

Faith doesn't need proof if it remains a personal thing. But, as an atheist and a lazy-arse sceptic, I do have a problem if and when that faith is used in support of inequality and hate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 01:10:57 PM
Faith and reason are the shoes on your feet, you can get further with both than just one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 01:26:20 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 12:56:28 PM
Sorry, Mikey. I'm a bear of very little brain so you'll have to clarify what you mean by 'the best possible way'..

I mean without ending up in a fury of spittle fuelled rage trying to work out how some things can be rationalised despite what seems to be a big arrow pointing at it that says 'this is a load of bollocks'. It was an attempt to not denigrate how important faith is to individuals - I know not all religious folks just lap up everything that's put in front of them, but spend a lot of time thinking about how their faith tallies with the world around them without denying that homosexuality, for example, is within the range of normal human behaviours.

I suppose I could have just said that!

FWIW I don't believe in a god, I don't think we are semi divine or here for any particular purpose. I also think two or more consenting adults can do what they like with each other (some things should be private though!). I don't think a community organised around a church is inherently a bad thing until it starts to tell others they're wrong for not being part of it, for whatever reason, or maybe starts killing non believers directly or believers indirectly.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 01:10:57 PM
Faith and reason are the shoes on your feet, you can get further with both than just one.

Or one of your feet are protected, the other is exposed to the ravages of nature and found wanting.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 01:37:40 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 01:26:20 PM. . . I suppose I could have just said that!

Heh. Thought that was probably what you were getting at. I was just being dull-headed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 02:15:55 PM
Quote
The 'virgin' birth was an intepretaion -or mis-translation- of the original texts which originally meant 'young' woman, not virgin. The Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 is "almah," and its inherent meaning is "young woman."

You could interpret from that, if you so wish, that most young women would be virigns too but that doesn't make it the crux of the word's original use in scripture.

Quote from: George Dread on 30 May, 2012, 11:35:11 AM

What a catastrophic F*** UP, that little misunderstanding has led to down the way. It's like building without a plumb line. With the more laid onto it becoming more unstable as time has gone on.


Also helped fuck-up the prequels; is there no end to this evil?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 30 May, 2012, 02:40:11 PM
As a relative newbie may I ask-what is the relative spread of left/right politics wise among 2000ad's followers?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 02:41:18 PM
I do not subscribe to the false right/left paradigm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 30 May, 2012, 02:46:51 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 30 May, 2012, 02:40:11 PM
As a relative newbie may I ask-what is the relative spread of left/right politics wise among 2000ad's followers?

This board is a sub-group of 2000AD readers: those who have internet access and are willing to post here. Also, several people here are posters who don't read the comic.

This thread is a sub-group of that sub-group: those who are willing to get involved in a "political" conversation that never seems to end, or make much sense.

Please don't think this thread represents 2000AD fans. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 30 May, 2012, 02:52:42 PM
Just answer the question or you are going to hell-ok?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 30 May, 2012, 02:59:37 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 30 May, 2012, 02:52:42 PM
Just answer the question or you are going to hell-ok?

They're all Lib Dems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 03:15:31 PM
Oi! Who you callin a Lib Dem?  >:(

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 30 May, 2012, 03:27:58 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 30 May, 2012, 03:15:31 PM
Oi! Who you callin a Lib Dem?  >:(

M.

MWAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 03:28:53 PM
QuoteWhat a catastrophic F*** UP, that little misunderstanding has led to down the way. It's like building without a plumb line. With the more laid onto it becoming more unstable as time has gone on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70IAwHTzrHI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70IAwHTzrHI)


By the way, I've always voted Labour (in Ireland, that is).  They're pretty shit, but better than the other ones in my opinion
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 03:32:56 PM
I usually draw a little box on my ballot paper, write 'none of the above' next to it and tick that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 May, 2012, 07:04:22 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2012, 03:28:53 PM
By the way, I've always voted Labour (in Ireland, that is).

We'll put you down as 'Right-of-centre', so.   ;)


(Me too.  Well, along with the Greens and Democratic Left.  The Blueshirts and the Gombeen Men can feck off.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 30 May, 2012, 07:10:02 PM
Standing ovation ...

http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/child_abuse_toddler_sings_aint_no_homo_gonna_make_it_to_heaven_in_church
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 07:18:58 PM
I only vote during referendums/referenda or whatever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2012, 07:36:06 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 30 May, 2012, 07:10:02 PM
Quote from: Beatific Tike
Ain't no homos gonna make it to Heaven

http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/child_abuse_toddler_sings_aint_no_homo_gonna_make_it_to_heaven_in_church

Being of Moabite descent, nor's Jesus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 May, 2012, 07:44:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 03:32:56 PM
I usually draw a little box on my ballot paper, write 'none of the above' next to it and tick that.

See, I really think that should be an official option. Maybe we should start a 'None of the Above' party like Richard Pryor did in Brewster's Millions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 May, 2012, 08:03:05 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 May, 2012, 02:04:20 AM
That is a remark so monumentally stupid, arrogant, and foolishly reckless, I genuinely fear for the day when you're going to have give account to God for that remark, and believe me, you won't cop an attitude then...

I don't want to sound like I'm always picking a fight with you Beaky, you're plainly an intelligent and articulate fellow and I do enjoy your non-political, non-religious contributions here, and I do not enjoy offending you.

BUT.

If I happen to be wrong about the non-existence of deeply implausible supreme creators in general and Jehovah in particular (and I'm quite prepared to admit the possibility what with it being unfalsifiable), and there IS a God that will sit in judgement on me on the Last Day, I most certainly will 'cop an attitude' with Him*.

I have many, many, many bones to pick with Him, and the neat hat-trick of sunsets, cheese and women do not get Him off the hook.  If a god exists with the characteristics of Jehovah as described to us in the Bible, and the world as presented to our senses, He is not deserving of my faith, obedience or respect.  I deny Him and I defy Him, and I consider it well done. 



*Well, let's be honest, sometime between shitting myself and begging for mercy that obviously won't be forthcoming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2012, 08:09:35 PM
Don't forget to drop in to the Yap Shop tonight, Tordels. It's Roger's Birthday Party in here and I've never chatted to someone who's going to get struck by lightning before, so that could be quite a spectacle to add to the festivities...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 08:27:25 PM
By the time I get to heaven, I hope the Saint of Killers will have cleaned up the place, t'was starting to stink of piety.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 31 May, 2012, 04:19:53 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 May, 2012, 10:39:22 AM
The 'virgin' birth was an intepretaion -or mis-translation- of the original texts which originally meant 'young' woman, not virgin. The Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 is "almah," and its inherent meaning is "young woman." You could interpret from that, if you so wish, that most young women would be virigns too but that doesn't make it the crux of the word's original use in scripture.

You've been watching Guy Ritchie's Snatch recently, haven't you Joe, the whole opening conversation in that film sounds suspiciously like your above post, admit it now dude :D...

Quote from: TordelBack on 30 May, 2012, 08:03:05 PM
I don't want to sound like I'm always picking a fight with you Beaky, you're plainly an intelligent and articulate fellow and I do enjoy your non-political, non-religious contributions here, and I do not enjoy offending you.

No offence ever taken (and certainly none ever intended, I do tend to jump in with both feet sometimes ::)), Tordel' dude, and I never thought you were ever picking a fight with me, you just go on the way you're going, I'm a big boy, I can take it (said the vicar to the porn star...OO-ER MISSUS!).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 31 May, 2012, 08:19:55 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 31 May, 2012, 04:19:53 AM

You've been watching Guy Ritchie's Snatch recently, haven't you Joe, the whole opening conversation in that film sounds suspiciously like your above post, admit it now dude :D...


Never seen it. I wouldn't watch a Guy Ritchie film even if my salvation depended on it and you shouldn't be either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 May, 2012, 08:26:00 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 31 May, 2012, 08:19:55 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 31 May, 2012, 04:19:53 AM

You've been watching Guy Ritchie's Snatch recently...

Never seen it.

Ah you must have.  Everyone sneaked a look at that SEX book, and then there were was the pre-waxing Playboy set...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 31 May, 2012, 06:56:33 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 31 May, 2012, 08:26:00 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 31 May, 2012, 08:19:55 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 31 May, 2012, 04:19:53 AM
You've been watching Guy Ritchie's Snatch recently...
Never seen it.

Ah you must have.  Everyone sneaked a look at that SEX book, and then there were was the pre-waxing Playboy set...

Guffaw! Actually, this picture (http://beautifulgirlspictures.net/var/albums/jacqui-ainsley-hot-picture-gallery/jacqui-ainsley-15.jpg?m=1329035648) shows Guy Ritchie's Snatch: part two in considerable detail. That must have been before she had the kid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 01 June, 2012, 02:07:04 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 31 May, 2012, 08:26:00 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 31 May, 2012, 08:19:55 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 31 May, 2012, 04:19:53 AM

You've been watching Guy Ritchie's Snatch recently...

Never seen it.

Ah you must have.  Everyone sneaked a look at that SEX book, and then there were was the pre-waxing Playboy set...

You'd need to pay me to look a Madonna's mimsy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2012, 08:02:15 AM
Quote from: Emperor on 01 June, 2012, 02:07:04 AM
You'd need to pay me to look a Madonna's mimsy.

Some aspects of your business plan need work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 June, 2012, 06:01:51 PM
Now that all of Ireland has given its enthusiastic and unanimous support to triumphant Volgan Krieg-Königin Angela Merkel's plans, how did the 2000ad contingent vote (if at all) in your referendum? UK TV news managed to find a few beleaguered Dubliners who thought it wouldn't be so bad if all the difficult decisions were taken out of their hands; I'm sure our plucky Brit journalists sought out a completely representative sample of Irish popular opinion.

And what does everyone make of Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01jhlsz/Newsnight_30_05_2012/)'s  thoughts (31min 36sec) on the perils of the rush toward fiscal austerity? Do you think Greece is being made an example of, to scare the rest of the EC into falling into (goose) step with the Reich Chancellor's economic agenda?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 June, 2012, 06:37:37 PM
Don't mention the war!

Bikini did once, but I think he got away with it.

I'm just glad that the government is taking the austerity thing seriously and not just shafting the most vulnerable and wasting all our cash on big stupid nostalgia party, or something.

...oh....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 01 June, 2012, 07:25:41 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 01 June, 2012, 06:01:51 PM
Now that all of Ireland has given its enthusiastic and unanimous support to triumphant Volgan Krieg-Königin Angela Merkel's plans, how did the 2000ad contingent vote (if at all) in your referendum? UK TV news managed to find a few beleaguered Dubliners who thought it wouldn't be so bad if all the difficult decisions were taken out of their hands; I'm sure our plucky Brit journalists sought out a completely representative sample of Irish popular opinion.

And what does everyone make of Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01jhlsz/Newsnight_30_05_2012/)'s  thoughts (31min 36sec) on the perils of the rush toward fiscal austerity? Do you think Greece is being made an example of, to scare the rest of the EC into falling into (goose) step with the Reich Chancellor's economic agenda?

In short I think Krugman talks a lot of sense. I doubt if he will get much in the way of a listening ear from the our Etonian overlords though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 June, 2012, 08:33:13 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 01 June, 2012, 07:25:41 PM
In short I think Krugman talks a lot of sense. I doubt if he will get much in the way of a listening ear from the our Etonian overlords though.

Krugman's identification of the push for austerity owing more to ideology than a commitment to reducing the UK's deficit rings true. Osbourne's rhetoric doesn't obscure the long standing desire of those in his party (and many in the last Labour government) to subject every aspect of ordinary peoples' lives to the vagaries of the free market.

Deregulation makes a fortune for the ruling classes, and absolves government of any blame for decisions taken by the private contractors who will soon be in de facto control of hospitals, prisons, policing and local authorities. Coppers mistakenly shot your Brazilian son for being an Arab terrorist? "Operational command resides with the law enforcement franchise holder, Tesco(p); but rest assured- come contract review time- my government will take full account of such regrettable incidents in our attempts to secure the best value for money on behalf of the consumer (voter) ". You've got to ask, though, what the point is of electing a government that never takes any fucking decisions?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:18:16 PM
Yes or No, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Voting No: you're totally on your own, scrimping to get by and doing the best you can for yourself while watching out for the governmental gombeens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombeen_man) you know.

Voting Yes: you're getting a constant flow of pocket money but doing what's best for Germany and unable to watch for gombeens you don't know.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 June, 2012, 09:43:40 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:18:16 PM
Yes or No, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Voting No: you're totally on your own, scrimping to get by and doing the best you can for yourself while watching out for the governmental gombeens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombeen_man) you know.

Voting Yes: you're getting a constant flow of pocket money but doing what's best for Germany and unable to watch for gombeens you don't know.

My understanding is that the pact will be ratified by quiescent goverments across Europe regardless of the answer Enda Kenny got from you lot- the only difference being that a 'No' vote would have fucked youz for any more bailout money in the meantime.

The decision to offer your population (alone in Europe) an essentially irrelevant vote seems like a cynical political manoeuvre- and a sadistic demand for the confession and acceptance of guilt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 01 June, 2012, 09:44:58 PM
Alan Scott is now a Gay.

Fourty Two Thousand Cunts are not pleased.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 01 June, 2012, 09:43:40 PM

My understanding is that the pact will be ratified by quiescent goverments across Europe regardless of the answer Enda Kenny got from you lot- the only difference being that a 'No' vote would have fucked youz for any more bailout money in the meantime.

The decision to offer your population (alone in Europe) an essentially irrelevant vote seems like a cynical political manoeuvre- and a sadistic demand for the confession and acceptance of guilt.

If we'd voted No it could not legally have applied to Ireland because it requires a change in the constitution. The treaty will put austerity rules into Irish law both binding and permanent. Europe will have final say on how we spend our budgets- mostly paying the debt of European banks.

It's not a cynical political manoeuvre, it's part of our constitution that any amendment made to it must be ratified by the people. The other countries don't have that right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 01 June, 2012, 10:16:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 01 June, 2012, 08:02:15 AM
Quote from: Emperor on 01 June, 2012, 02:07:04 AM
You'd need to pay me to look a Madonna's mimsy.

Some aspects of your business plan need work.

Works for me. At least until someone actually gives me money for this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
If we'd voted No it could not legally have applied to Ireland because it requires a change in the constitution. The treaty will put austerity rules into Irish law both binding and permanent. Europe will have final say on how we spend our budgets- mostly paying the debt of European banks.

Welcome to the joys of losing your sovereign independence after gaining it back, Joe dude...

Quote from: bikini kill on 01 June, 2012, 08:33:13 PM
Krugman's identification of the push for austerity owing more to ideology than a commitment to reducing the UK's deficit rings true. Osbourne's rhetoric doesn't obscure the long standing desire of those in his party (and many in the last Labour government) to subject every aspect of ordinary peoples' lives to the vagaries of the free market.

And the problem with that is...?  The notion of social justice is all well and admirable (and as Christians, we have a duty to help those less fortunate), but you have to get the money from somewhere, and Krugman is just a boilerplate demagogue who - like the entire Democratic party - don't want ANY cuts to welfare entitlements, I think Lady Thatcher said it best; "the problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of everyone else's money", I say let the free market decide, it worked well so far... and for those who say "what about the credit crunch?", that wasn't free-market capitalism, THAT was crony capitalism borne out of attempted social engineering by the Democrats (see the 'Community Reinvestment Act')...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 07:17:40 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
I say let the free market decide, it worked well so far...

I feel the need to clarify the above statement, because I know I'm going to get blowback on it from some (genuinely well-meaning) forum posters here, so here goes;

By "free market" in regards to social justice, I mean having those who are of a sufficient income band out of receiving any welfare entitlements or healthcare (means-tested in other words) in order to alleviate the considerable burden on those public resources so they are there for those who really need those services, with those more affluent citizens able to put their contributions for such matters in tax-free savings accounts for matters relating to healthcare and social security for their family.

There, hope that clarified things a bit...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 02 June, 2012, 08:07:03 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
If we'd voted No it could not legally have applied to Ireland because it requires a change in the constitution. The treaty will put austerity rules into Irish law both binding and permanent. Europe will have final say on how we spend our budgets- mostly paying the debt of European banks.

Welcome to the joys of losing your sovereign independence after gaining it back, Joe dude...

Quote from: bikini kill on 01 June, 2012, 08:33:13 PM
Krugman's identification of the push for austerity owing more to ideology than a commitment to reducing the UK's deficit rings true. Osbourne's rhetoric doesn't obscure the long standing desire of those in his party (and many in the last Labour government) to subject every aspect of ordinary peoples' lives to the vagaries of the free market.

And the problem with that is...?  The notion of social justice is all well and admirable (and as Christians, we have a duty to help those less fortunate), but you have to get the money from somewhere, and Krugman is just a boilerplate demagogue who - like the entire Democratic party - don't want ANY cuts to welfare entitlements, I think Lady Thatcher said it best; "the problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of everyone else's money", I say let the free market decide, it worked well so far... and for those who say "what about the credit crunch?", that wasn't free-market capitalism, THAT was crony capitalism borne out of attempted social engineering by the Democrats (see the 'Community Reinvestment Act')...

Beaky No offence but when you describe one of the world's most respected and authoritative economists as a boiler plate demagogue (and then go on to extoll the virtues of Margaret Thatcher) then I am afraid I find myself wondering where you are coming from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 02 June, 2012, 08:25:13 AM
Beaky you refer to crony capitalism and juxtaposition it witha seemingly more pure and laudable version of it. What are the distinguishing features of each and how would you prevent the emergence of the crony version?

Don't mean to sound antagonistic Beaky. It's a good debate and thanks for some good saturday morning exchange.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 June, 2012, 09:59:14 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
I say let the free market decide, it worked well so far... and for those who say "what about the credit crunch?", that wasn't free-market capitalism, THAT was crony capitalism borne out of attempted social engineering by the Democrats (see the 'Community Reinvestment Act')...

Beaky; can you point to a single example where the operations of the free market have been allowed unlimited free play? Haven't the sterling efforts of industrialists and financiers always (in your view) been frustrated by some damned state intervention? Doesn't that make your your argument effectively unfalsifiable?

You're comparing your Platonic ideal of capitalism with the messy reality of how the financial and corporate sectors, monetary policy, and international trade have actually been demonstrated to interact in the real world we all have to co-exist in.

I'd second The Prodigal's encomium regarding your courage, your strength and your indefatiguability in continually contributing to debates where you know you're going to take considerable flack. As I said before, the purpose of exposing yourself to views different to your own is to force you to rethink and reformulate what can sometimes be lazily entrenched positions. Cheers for keeping us all on our toes, Beaky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 02 June, 2012, 10:06:48 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 02 June, 2012, 09:59:14 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
I say let the free market decide, it worked well so far... and for those who say "what about the credit crunch?", that wasn't free-market capitalism, THAT was crony capitalism borne out of attempted social engineering by the Democrats (see the 'Community Reinvestment Act')...

Beaky; can you point to a single example where the operations of the free market have been allowed unlimited free play? Haven't the sterling efforts of industrialists and financiers always (in your view) been frustrated by some damned state intervention? Doesn't that make your your argument effectively unfalsifiable?

You're comparing your Platonic ideal of capitalism with the messy reality of how the financial and corporate sectors, monetary policy, and international trade have actually been demonstrated to interact in the real world we all have to co-exist in.

I'd second The Prodigal's encomium regarding your courage, your strength and your indefatiguability in continually contributing to debates where you know you're going to take considerable flack. As I said before, the purpose of exposing yourself to views different to your own is to force you to rethink and reformulate what can sometimes be lazily entrenched positions. Cheers for keeping us all on our toes, Beaky.

Great post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 June, 2012, 11:33:00 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 02:40:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
If we'd voted No it could not legally have applied to Ireland because it requires a change in the constitution. The treaty will put austerity rules into Irish law both binding and permanent. Europe will have final say on how we spend our budgets- mostly paying the debt of European banks.

Welcome to the joys of losing your sovereign independence after gaining it back, Joe dude...





It matters little, the Euro's finished.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 June, 2012, 11:36:54 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 02 June, 2012, 07:17:40 AM

I feel the need to clarify the above statement, because I know I'm going to get blowback on it from some (genuinely well-meaning) forum posters here, so here goes;

By "free market" in regards to social justice, I mean having those who are of a sufficient income band out of receiving any welfare entitlements or healthcare (means-tested in other words) in order to alleviate the considerable burden on those public resources so they are there for those who really need those services, with those more affluent citizens able to put their contributions for such matters in tax-free savings accounts for matters relating to healthcare and social security for their family.

There, hope that clarified things a bit...


Then that's not a real 'free market'. That's still socialism. This says to me that you don't have much confidence in a true free-market: a market without state intervention.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 02 June, 2012, 03:34:47 PM
A lot of talk about losing our sovereign independence because of the yes vote

But didn't Biffo hand over the keys a while back?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 June, 2012, 03:43:40 PM
Yep, we lost it years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 June, 2012, 06:57:08 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 June, 2012, 09:59:22 PM
If we'd voted No it could not legally have applied to Ireland because it requires a change in the constitution. The treaty will put austerity rules into Irish law both binding and permanent. Europe will have final say on how we spend our budgets- mostly paying the debt of European banks.

It's not a cynical political manoeuvre, it's part of our constitution that any amendment made to it must be ratified by the people. The other countries don't have that right.

A vote where the choice is between a shite sandwich and a shite club sandwich still seems to make a mockery of the principle of a referendum. The promise of referenda on specific issues always seems to be born out of politicians' instinct to cover their arses, rather than a desire to let the people have their say, and ensuring every Mary and Patrick has their hands dipped in the blood doesn't make the decision to yield sovereignty to Frankfurt a democratic one.

States either operate as direct democracies, where we all have to take a deep breath and educate ourselves on important issues before voting on everything- and accept responsibility when we (collectively) fuck up; or everyone (including the political class) agrees that, in our current Western model of representative democracy, we in the third estate subcontract responsibility for taking all the tough decisions on our behalf to the people we elect every four or five years.

Constitutionally mandating the populace to vote on a pact that will (ultimately) be enacted regardless of their decision produces the same degree of democratic deficit as politicians letting the operations of free market economics and the interests of industry and finance decide the future development of national infrastructure projects and public services.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 June, 2012, 07:23:01 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 02 June, 2012, 06:57:08 PM
Constitutionally mandating the populace to vote on a pact that will (ultimately) be enacted regardless of their decision produces the same degree of democratic deficit as politicians letting the operations of free market economics and the interests of industry and finance decide the future development of national infrastructure projects and public services.


Constitutionally it couldn't be written in and enacted if voted down.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 June, 2012, 04:14:52 AM
Alrighty, just let me put my flak jacket on first, now then, here goes (deep intake of breath)...

I think the Dredd trailer will be in July sometime bec- oh wait, wrong subject, woops, let me try that again (ahem) -

Firstly, regarding Krugman, you claim he's "one of the world's most respected and authoritative economists", by whose standard?  If you mean the liberal media, go figure, if you mean the London School of Economics crowd (an institution founded by Fabian Socialists with the expressed intent of replacing capitalism with socialism), then go figure, every economic strategy supported and advocated by the likes of Krugman and co (large-scale spending, more spending to overcome economic retraction, etc) have been unmitigated failures, yet the the British/Irish/American media at large still have him on, despite his atrocious track record on matters of economic and fiscal prudence... why don't they have someone who is GENUINELY an "authoritative" expert on such matters, someone like Thomas Sowell, but as he's an African-American conservative, he's tantamount to a child molester in the eyes of the 'lamestream' media...

As far as my standards for both crony and free-market capitalism, the former is when government effectively hot-wires the system by picking winners and losers by handing out contracts, subsidies, and general all-round goodies to their donors and benefactors, instead of the latter option which is letting the market forces of genuine supply-and-demand determine what works and is most effective, free of outright and direct political influence, a bit crude and rough outlines there, but just to get my point across...

Lady Thatcher certainly made mistakes in her administration (the Anglo-Irish Agreement easily the worst one), but her economic record stands by itself, what was Britain's economic health like in 1979 and what was it in 1990 when she stepped aside (after being knifed in the back by her cabinet, the b**tards!), and, lastly (no cheering in the aisles there), do I feel government has long held back industrialists and financiers with "damned state intervention", the answer is no, you need SOME amount of regulation to prevent exploitation and/or fraud, a good example being Canada, who were spared the worst of the credit crunch as they had strict banking regulations on the buying and selling of junk bonds and reckless mortgage-backed securities, so that proved to be a good thing, certainly for them.

Phew, I think that clears that up, I'm knackered now, please be gentle with the responses guys, I bleed easily :D...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 03 June, 2012, 08:51:50 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 June, 2012, 04:14:52 AM
Alrighty, just let me put my flak jacket on first, now then, here goes (deep intake of breath)...

I think the Dredd trailer will be in July sometime bec- oh wait, wrong subject, woops, let me try that again (ahem) -

Firstly, regarding Krugman, you claim he's "one of the world's most respected and authoritative economists", by whose standard?  If you mean the liberal media, go figure, if you mean the London School of Economics crowd (an institution founded by Fabian Socialists with the expressed intent of replacing capitalism with socialism), then go figure, every economic strategy supported and advocated by the likes of Krugman and co (large-scale spending, more spending to overcome economic retraction, etc) have been unmitigated failures, yet the the British/Irish/American media at large still have him on, despite his atrocious track record on matters of economic and fiscal prudence... why don't they have someone who is GENUINELY an "authoritative" expert on such matters, someone like Thomas Sowell, but as he's an African-American conservative, he's tantamount to a child molester in the eyes of the 'lamestream' media...

As far as my standards for both crony and free-market capitalism, the former is when government effectively hot-wires the system by picking winners and losers by handing out contracts, subsidies, and general all-round goodies to their donors and benefactors, instead of the latter option which is letting the market forces of genuine supply-and-demand determine what works and is most effective, free of outright and direct political influence, a bit crude and rough outlines there, but just to get my point across...

Lady Thatcher certainly made mistakes in her administration (the Anglo-Irish Agreement easily the worst one), but her economic record stands by itself, what was Britain's economic health like in 1979 and what was it in 1990 when she stepped aside (after being knifed in the back by her cabinet, the b**tards!), and, lastly (no cheering in the aisles there), do I feel government has long held back industrialists and financiers with "damned state intervention", the answer is no, you need SOME amount of regulation to prevent exploitation and/or fraud, a good example being Canada, who were spared the worst of the credit crunch as they had strict banking regulations on the buying and selling of junk bonds and reckless mortgage-backed securities, so that proved to be a good thing, certainly for them.

Phew, I think that clears that up, I'm knackered now, please be gentle with the responses guys, I bleed easily :D...

First paragraph of something as accessible as wiki ought to refute your labelling of Krugamn as only a "boiler-plate demagogue" Beaky

Paul Robin Krugman ( /ˈkruːɡmən/;[6] born February 28, 1953) is an American economist, Professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times.[7][8] In 2008, Krugman won the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences (informally the Nobel Prize in Economics) for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography. According to the Nobel Prize Committee, the prize was given for Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic concentration of wealth, by examining the impact of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[9]

Krugman is known in academia for his work on international economics (including trade theory, economic geography, and international finance),[10][11] liquidity traps and currency crises. He is the 17th most widely cited economist in the world today[12] and is ranked among the most influential academic thinkers in the US.[13]

As of 2008, Krugman has written 20 books and has published over 200 scholarly articles in professional journals and edited volumes.[14] He has also written more than 750 columns on economic and political issues for The New York Times.

He sounds like a right idiot tbf.

Beaky I endorse the regulation you speak of-but is that compromising the libetarianism that you seem to champion elsewhere? You cite Canada but hasn't the likes of Sarah Palin and her right wing fellow tea party travellers labelled Canada as a socialist country.

Oh and good morning mate. I hope all is well and thanks for the debate. Its most enjoyable!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 June, 2012, 04:14:52 AM
Lady Thatcher certainly made mistakes in her administration ... but her economic record stands by itself, what was Britain's economic health like in 1979 and what was it in 1990 when she stepped aside(?)

Black Wednesday (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00k282b/Witness_Black_Wednesday/)? Thatcher exited the stage just in time for her successor to take the rap for the policies they'd both implemented, just like Blair two decades later, and the Thatcher/Lawson hailing of their economic miracle (http://econ.economicshelp.org/2008/01/lawson-boom-of-late-1980s.html) was as patently ridiculous as Brown's claim to have ended the Boom and Bust economic cycle. It's widely accepted that Thatcher's disastrous decision to enter the ERM was a last, desperate move to stave off the consequences of endemic inflation, caused by the previous decade of low taxes/low public spending.

Quotedo I feel government has long held back industrialists and financiers with "damned state intervention", the answer is no, you need SOME amount of regulation to prevent exploitation and/or fraud, a good example being Canada, who were spared the worst of the credit crunch as they had strict banking regulations on the buying and selling of junk bonds and reckless mortgage-backed securities, so that proved to be a good thing, certainly for them.

I agree that that countries like Canada and Germany serve as excellent models of how to proceed in the long term- but neither has responded to the present worldwide financial crisis by making sudden, drastic cuts to public spending. There are no do-overs or quick take-backs in strategic economic policy, so Krugman's argument- that drastically changing course causes more lasting problems than the pressing exigencies it appears to address- has some bearing on the question of how to prevent our current stagnation turning into an irreversible decline.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 11:10:19 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 June, 2012, 04:14:52 AM

Lady Thatcher certainly made mistakes in her administration (the Anglo-Irish Agreement easily the worst one), but her economic record stands by itself, what was Britain's economic health like in 1979 and what was it in 1990 when she stepped aside (after being knifed in the back by her cabinet, the b**tards!), and, lastly (no cheering in the aisles there), do I feel government has long held back industrialists and financiers with "damned state intervention", the answer is no, you need SOME amount of regulation to prevent exploitation and/or fraud, a good example being Canada, who were spared the worst of the credit crunch as they had strict banking regulations on the buying and selling of junk bonds and reckless mortgage-backed securities, so that proved to be a good thing, certainly for them.




Quote from: bikini kill on 03 June, 2012, 10:19:58 AM
There are no do-overs or quick take-backs in strategic economic policy, so Krugman's argument- that drastically changing course causes more lasting problems than the pressing exigencies it appears to address- has some bearing on the question of how to prevent our current stagnation turning into an irreversible decline.




I believe that's inevitable. It's how we respond to that inevitability that matters most.

Consider how world leaders have reacted to the ongoing implosion of the global economy, or any recent crisis you name: in each case, it's a broken record sequence of understanding the problem, trying to manage appearances, getting caught flat-footed by events, and struggling to load the blame for another round of failures onto anybody within reach. Rinse and repeat a few times and even the most die-hard of the status quo will be begging for some one who can demonstrate leadership. A dangerous time if you know history. Beware any revitalisation movements.



Growth is over, we over-shot our resource base, you can't get back from that. This is the basic lesson of history being ignored. Notions of the installation of a true free-market at this stage are laughable, the good times are over. Basic life-sustainability and less energy reliant infrastructure should be our main concern and unfortunately the money to do that still travels upwards for ever more useless speculation and uncertain investment strangling any chance at sustaining functional economies; another repeat of what happened before the great crash(es). Power makes people weak and that weakness leads to bad decisions for the rest of us.


Thatcher and Reagan ushered in an era of the greatest squandering of resources when they embraced short term politics at the expense of realistic preparations for the future. As result, we no longer have the resource base needed to stave off the normal trajectory of a society that overshoots its ecological limits - a trajectory of decline and fall. We need to learn how to live differently and probably without the help of our leaders.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 12:23:18 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 11:10:19 AM
I believe (decline is) inevitable. It's how we respond to that inevitability that matters most.

Consider how world leaders have reacted to the ongoing implosion of the global economy, or any recent crisis you name: in each case, it's a broken record sequence of understanding the problem, trying to manage appearances, getting caught flat-footed by events, and struggling to load the blame for another round of failures onto anybody within reach. Rinse and repeat a few times and even the most die-hard of the status quo will be begging for some one who can demonstrate leadership. A dangerous time if you know history. Beware any revitalisation movements.

You can't subvert Godwin's law with allusion. Mods, I must ask this court for a ruling.

QuoteGrowth is over, we over-shot our resource base, you can't get back from that. This is the basic lesson of history being ignored. Notions of the installation of a true free-market at this stage are laughable, the good times are over. Basic life-sustainability and less energy reliant infrastructure should be our main concern ... We need to learn how to live differently and probably without the help of our leaders.

The aspiration toward eternal growth was the most easily falsifiable fantasy peddled by Western governments in the last forty years. You only have to consider the underpinnings of that concept, and how it could be achieved- given a finite world with finite resources- to see that it leads to something resembling the artificial conflicts between the two entrenched trading blocks of Eurasia and Oceania in 1984.

The push towards everlasting, ever-increasing growth is a corollary of the political system we've allowed to develop. Under our present electoral system, if one party want to wrest power from another, they have to convince the voter that (A) the incumbents have got it wrong, and (B) they can offer something better. The proposition that you should vote for a party who promise to do much the same as their opponents, but manage resources and streamline administration to increase efficiency, is never going to be the vote winner that offering to take less from you in tax and increase the easy availability of debt has proven for successive goverments.

Before we were seduced by the idea that replacing your telly every few years was more important than fixing your teeth or securing a decent pension, politics was the dry sexless preserve of the laughably uncool technocrat. We get the goverments and the politicians we (collectively) deserve, and we've only got ourselves to blame when a series of hucksters and wideboys flog us either a load of old rope, a pig in a poke, or down the figuratively-fucking-cliched river.

None of the pressing issues jostling with the results show of BGT for our attention are so complex that they require a special breed of professional politicians to understand them or balance the importance of their sometimes competing demands. No-one who can hold thirty-odd years of Dredd continuity in their heads needs more than a few hours study to be able to judge whether the choices presented to us by the political classes are real solutions to the problems that really matter, or the kind of ponzi economics that'll deliver us into the hands of the kind of people alluded to by Soap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 12:39:48 PM
If you want to know how to get our governments out from under the bankers and back into the hands of the people, just have a look at what Iceland did to try and solve its financial crisis.

The only way we can begin to make progress both socially and economically is to remove the bankers' control of our governments and our lives.

"I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ...The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply."  Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 01:10:10 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 June, 2012, 12:23:18 PM


Under our present electoral system, if one party want to wrest power from another, they have to convince the voter that (A) the incumbents have got it wrong, and (B) they can offer something better. The proposition that you should vote for a party who promise to do much the same as their opponents, but manage resources and streamline administration to increase efficiency, is never going to be the vote winner that offering to take less from you in tax and increase the easy availability of debt has proven for successive goverments.



Same situation round the same time Socrates was murdered after the coup in ancient Athens before it all came apart: a corrupt two party system were people only voted on issues.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 01:18:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 12:39:48 PM
If you want to know how to get our governments out from under the bankers and back into the hands of the people, just have a look at what Iceland did to try and solve its financial crisis.

The only way we can begin to make progress both socially and economically is to remove the bankers' control of our governments and our lives.

"I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ...The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply."  Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild.


It's the progress myth bit we have to dump, the unrealistic promise of a better, more comfortable and easy future with ever growing prosperity ahead but no reduction in living standards or suffering (and nowadays no damage to the environment) is what they've been selling us for 200 years since the industrial revolution. Only decency and common sense can crack that nut.


The rich will always have their money and their armies and power but it'll be harder to maintain with dwindling resources and overstretch; expect them to break-away or control their own fiefdoms and resources -the Bush family didn't buy a large province of Paraguay to build flats on- so they can maintain maximum comfort while the rest of us go about living.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 01:24:46 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 June, 2012, 12:23:18 PM

None of the pressing issues jostling with the results show of BGT for our attention are so complex that they require a special breed of professional politicians to understand them or balance the importance of their sometimes competing demands. No-one who can hold thirty-odd years of Dredd continuity in their heads needs more than a few hours study to be able to judge whether the choices presented to us by the political classes are real solutions to the problems that really matter, or the kind of ponzi economics that'll deliver us into the hands of the kind of people alluded to by Soap.


Where there's a problem there's a solution but our culture, political and popular, does not display the conviction nor the will to solve these problems, we're 5 years into this depression -after a prelude of a 30 year splurge and inflation- and nothing's changed. You can't break the holding pattern narrative of promised linear progress without properly facing the reality of the situtation and do you think a culture that thrives on X-Factor is willing to consider the notion of one day not having that reactive/emotional crutch to rely on, do you think any politician will ever tell them that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 12:39:48 PM
If you want to know how to get our governments out from under the bankers and back into the hands of the people, just have a look at what Iceland did to try and solve its financial crisis.

The only way we can begin to make progress both socially and economically is to remove the bankers' control of our governments and our lives.

"I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ...The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply."  Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild.

I certainly don't hold any grudge against either spectacularly wealthy individuals or institutions, but the only way to save them from the kind of inevitable and ruinous hubris your quote embodies is to mitigate against the accumulation of such obscene sums by individuals or corporations.

To be fair to the pointlessly rich, many of them (Carnegie being the most obvious example) have already tried their best to redistribute their useless billions more equitably through their personal efforts, but that's never going to have the same effect as the properly co-ordinated and impartially regulated operations of the institutions of democratically elected goverments.

The same principle I mentioned with reference to governmental power holds true here as well, though; the further removed from the centre of power (in this case financial power) you happen to be, the less say you tend to have in decision making. If the solution to the democratic deficit that obviously pertains today is to de-centralise and devolve decision making out toward individuals, community groups and local authorities; then the same holds true for the de-centralising of wealth away from concentration in the hands of either a single individual or privately owned, unaccountable institutions.

There's a finite supply of wealth and resources, seeing them distributed more equitably doesn't make anyone any better or worse off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 01:51:24 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 June, 2012, 12:23:18 PM

The aspiration toward eternal growth was the most easily falsifiable fantasy peddled by Western governments in the last forty years.

The push towards everlasting, ever-increasing growth is a corollary of the political system we've allowed to develop.

Under the current system of privately controlled debt-money creation, growth and inflation are both vital and unavoidable.

When a government needs money it prints bonds and gilts, which are basically I.O.U.s with fancy names. If a government needed £100, it would print a bond worth £110 and sell it to a bank (via the Bank of England) for £100 (or probably nearer £90 once the bank's finished adding charges and whatnot). Basically, the government is selling £90 for £110. Thus, there will always be a shortfall built-in. (This is a simplified example, in reality it's wreathed in technospeak and legalese to obscure this fundamental scam.) When the bond matures, the bank sells it back to the government for £110 (or probably nearer £120 once the bank's finished adding interest and whatnot) - every penny of which which comes from your taxes.

The bank that buys the £100 bond doesn't have the whole £100 available to purchase this bond, so it uses say £10 of 'real' money from its reserves and the other £90 it creates from nothing, most likely electronically. Just think about that for a minute. I wish I could lend non-existant money to governments and people at interest, I could make fortunes.

This means that for every £90 the government borrows, it has to pay back up to £120.

This is what drives inflation, for in order for the government to pay back the original £90 plus the £30 shortfall, it must raise taxes and find new ones and also make economies across all services. This is the major push behind the drive for growth - if the economy doesn't continually grow then the £30 shortfall becomes £31, then £32 and so on.

This banking scam is behind a huge chunk of the world's problems - from the false overpopulation story to the Global Warming myth (which has been politicised beyond all reason as an excuse to impose carbon taxes so that the world's governments can pay off their national debts and shortfalls) and from an overstretched NHS to crumbling roads.

The solution is, at its core, very simple. If your government needs £100, it creates £100. It then spends this into society with no need for interest or even for it all to be repaid. (And repaid to whom, by the way? Money, like water, is essential to society and therefore its creation and control belongs to society, not private individuals.) Taxes would under this system be very low and used as a pressure valve to keep the amount of money in the system at any one time at optimum levels so that nobody has too much and nobody has too little. The economy would boom due to cheap or virtually interest-free business loans that can be written-off with a minimal effect on the local or national economy. Which also means that people who give business a go and then legitimately fail don't end up losing their houses as well.

Under the current private-money system we use, our ship of state is sinking. The politicians, God loves 'em if we don't, are just as misinformed as the rest of society on this issue and are arguing over which type of bucket is best for bailing the ship out rather than plugging the hole in the hull.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 02:07:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 01:51:24 PM
The solution is, at its core, very simple. If your government needs £100, it creates £100. It then spends this into society with no need for interest or even for it all to be repaid. (And repaid to whom, by the way? Money, like water, is essential to society and therefore its creation and control belongs to society, not private individuals).

That money doesn't need to be repaid because it never existed in the first place.

My local authority's in a precarious position because they were gullible enough to grasp the illusory investment opportunities dangled in front of them by Landsbanki. Why should I be obliged to make real the entirely imaginary riches described to them by the fiction department of the Bank of Bjork?

At least the citizens of Reykjavík had the good sense to stick a full stop at the end of the international finance community's evolving free-form narrative riff on Jack and the Beanstalk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 02:09:14 PM
Hang on and I'll write you some change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 02:26:41 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 02:09:14 PM
Hang on and I'll write you some change.

Heh!

If the ability to write a load of nonsense translated into earthly riches, my personal harem of amazonian bodyguards would be holding Airwolf in a steady hover while I pished through the windows of your lifesize Disney Princess castle right now, Soap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 June, 2012, 02:38:43 PM
Heh, wasn't Seagoon always trying to buy things/bribe people with drawings and photographs of five pound notes?

"Wait a minute... the five pound note in this photograph... It's a forgery!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 03 June, 2012, 04:29:05 PM
I'm not sure we should be looking at Canada as a model of stability - they are the currently the worlds biggest exporter of oil to the USA, at a very heavy environmental cost from tar and oil sands.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 06:19:47 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 03 June, 2012, 04:29:05 PM
I'm not sure we should be looking at Canada as a model of stability - they are the currently the worlds biggest exporter of oil to the USA, at a very heavy environmental cost from tar and oil sands.

Canada's like the Mrs Gunderson of the international community. If even they're complicit in evil, we're all damned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 03 June, 2012, 04:29:05 PM
I'm not sure we should be looking at Canada as a model of stability - they are the currently the worlds biggest exporter of oil to the USA, at a very heavy environmental cost from tar and oil sands.


It'll only last about 15 years anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 June, 2012, 10:17:18 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2012, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 03 June, 2012, 04:29:05 PM
I'm not sure we should be looking at Canada as a model of stability - they are the currently the worlds biggest exporter of oil to the USA, at a very heavy environmental cost from tar and oil sands.

It'll only last about 15 years anyway.

Not a believer in the miracle of fracking, Soap?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 05 June, 2012, 01:22:21 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 03 June, 2012, 08:51:50 AM
As of 2008, Krugman has written 20 books and has published over 200 scholarly articles in professional journals and edited volumes.[14] He has also written more than 750 columns on economic and political issues for The New York Times.  He sounds like a right idiot tbf.
Beaky I endorse the regulation you speak of-but is that compromising the libetarianism that you seem to champion elsewhere? You cite Canada but hasn't the likes of Sarah Palin and her right wing fellow tea party travellers labelled Canada as a socialist country.
Oh and good morning mate. I hope all is well and thanks for the debate. Its most enjoyable!

I never said Krugman was an idiot, Prodigal dude, he clearly is an intelligent man, but he is also a left-wing demagogue, and that bio was very revealing- London School of Economics, surprise surprise!  And having a fair and needed minimum amount of necessary regulation doesn't compromise my libertarian principles, it enhances them, it allows proper free trade to flourish (relatively) free of the cowboy capitalism that gives us free-marketeers a bad name.  And I've never heard Sarah Palin ever even mention Canada as a socialist country, maybe she was referencing the healthcare system there or something, I don't know, never heard her even mention Canada, so I'm in the dark on that one...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 June, 2012, 01:39:14 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 June, 2012, 10:17:18 PM

Not a believer in the miracle of fracking, Soap?


Only in BSG.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 June, 2012, 07:23:12 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 05 June, 2012, 01:22:21 AM
I never said Krugman was an idiot, Prodigal dude, he clearly is an intelligent man, but he is also a left-wing demagogue, and that bio was very revealing- London School of Economics, surprise surprise!

Alumni of the LSE:

Right Wingers
Niall Ferguson, David Starkey, Edwina Currie, Michael Chertoff (architect of Bush's Homeland Security strategy), John F. Kennedy (instigator of two disastrous wars with Communist states)


Politically unaligned Good Guys
David Attenborough, Sir Stelios, Mick Jagger


Fascist Murderous Arseholes
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, Robert Mugabe, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Carlos the Jackal, and perhaps most chilling of all ... Judge Dredd (1995) Executive Producer, Edward R. Pressman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:05:02 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 05 June, 2012, 07:23:12 AM
Right Wingers
John F. Kennedy (instigator of two disastrous wars with Communist states)

This has got to be the first time I've read JFK referred to as a right-winger, I'm sure his (late) brothers would have had something to say on that one, of course, the fact one of them was a murderer might not help their cred... I know the Bay of Pigs is one of the disasters you had in mind, what was the other one?

Quote from: bikini kill on 05 June, 2012, 07:23:12 AM
Fascist Murderous Arseholes
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, Robert Mugabe, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Carlos the Jackal, and perhaps most chilling of all ... Judge Dredd (1995) Executive Producer, Edward R. Pressman.

So THAT explains Conan the Destroyer and the 1995 Stallone debacle :D...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 02:26:52 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:05:02 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 05 June, 2012, 07:23:12 AM
Right Wingers
John F. Kennedy (instigator of two disastrous wars with Communist states)

This has got to be the first time I've read JFK referred to as a right-winger, I'm sure his (late) brothers would have had something to say on that one, of course, the fact one of them was a murderer might not help their cred... I know the Bay of Pigs is one of the disasters you had in mind, what was the other one?



I don't think there's one example of any US president being a left-winger. How many wars now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:33:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 02:26:52 AM
I don't think there's one example of any US president being a left-winger. How many wars now?

The current occupant of the White House, Joe?  And as far as wars go, you have to distinguish between necessary and gratuitous conflagrations; WWI, WWII, Korea, the 1991 Gulf War, and Afghanistan (although in truth, that should have been wrapped up back in 2004 at latest) being necessary ones, the others, well, that's another matter...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 03:12:17 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:33:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 02:26:52 AM
I don't think there's one example of any US president being a left-winger. How many wars now?

The current occupant of the White House, Joe?


Joking? The Democrats entire are nowhere near what anyone could in all seriousness could call left-wing. They're a centrist party with a different set of vested interests from their opposite number but vested interests all the same. Obama serves corporations and bankers as much as the previous incumbents, most of his cabinet is made up of bankers who pretty much carried him into the White House.

To bastardise Plato's Simile of the Chariot: There maybe two horses in US politics but there's still one arse riding them: Corporate America.



Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:33:36 AM
And as far as wars go, you have to distinguish between necessary and gratuitous conflagrations; WWI, WWII, Korea, the 1991 Gulf War, and Afghanistan (although in truth, that should have been wrapped up back in 2004 at latest) being necessary ones, the others, well, that's another matter...


I see very few wars, in recent memory, after Vietnam as necessary, unless you're a crusader with a prioritised geo-strategy that encompasses a set of pretexts both public and private for reasons to make war -dubious morals are in there but low down the list- and I doubt there were too many justified wars before Nam except maybe the obvious big exception.

The Neo-Cons were probably the worst practitioners of the idea of a so called 'just war'. Hangovers from anticommunism who became so obsessed with their enemy that through sheer single-minded contemplation of one idea, Communism, for so long; they ended up imitating that very enemy -albeit via different values-, transposed their psychotic energy onto newer villains then proceeded to set-up a familiar landscape of secret prisons, torture and agressive war waged under dubious pretexts (that still continue under the so called 'left-winger' Obama). A straightforward inversion that adopted nearly every detail of the Third International's philosophy, rhetoric and practise but reversed some of the value judgements.

Swell bunch a guys. Come back Edmunde Burke, your ideology has been hi-jacked.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 June, 2012, 07:24:05 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:05:02 AM
This has got to be the first time I've read JFK referred to as a right-winger, I'm sure his (late) brothers would have had something to say on that one, of course, the fact one of them was a murderer might not help their cred... I know the Bay of Pigs is one of the disasters you had in mind, what was the other one?

Joe Kennedy's boy was Commander in Chief for all of five minutes, so there aren't many candidates. Are you referring to the fine legalistic parsing that means the US never officially declared war on North Vietnam? I'm not sure the inhabitants of Mai Lai would appreciate the distinction.

The tone of the political conversation and frame of reference in the US is such that European right wingers like Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy look like black pyjama wearing godless Communists. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 06 June, 2012, 08:22:29 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 05 June, 2012, 01:22:21 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 03 June, 2012, 08:51:50 AM
As of 2008, Krugman has written 20 books and has published over 200 scholarly articles in professional journals and edited volumes.[14] He has also written more than 750 columns on economic and political issues for The New York Times.  He sounds like a right idiot tbf.
Beaky I endorse the regulation you speak of-but is that compromising the libetarianism that you seem to champion elsewhere? You cite Canada but hasn't the likes of Sarah Palin and her right wing fellow tea party travellers labelled Canada as a socialist country.
Oh and good morning mate. I hope all is well and thanks for the debate. Its most enjoyable!

I never said Krugman was an idiot, Prodigal dude, he clearly is an intelligent man, but he is also a left-wing demagogue, and that bio was very revealing- London School of Economics, surprise surprise!  And having a fair and needed minimum amount of necessary regulation doesn't compromise my libertarian principles, it enhances them, it allows proper free trade to flourish (relatively) free of the cowboy capitalism that gives us free-marketeers a bad name.  And I've never heard Sarah Palin ever even mention Canada as a socialist country, maybe she was referencing the healthcare system there or something, I don't know, never heard her even mention Canada, so I'm in the dark on that one...

That bio is very revealing and contains an awful lot more than the London School of Economics Beaky. Also a demagogue? What is your definition of a demagogue?

The Sarah Palin thing about Canada? Her references to Canada as a socialist while at the same time being revealed to have availed of its "socialist" health care system in the past? Not that I would award credibility to anything described by Palin as socialist. Thatcher was probably a pinko subversive in that woman's reckoning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2012, 11:43:35 AM
I agree with everything Joe says about economics, the entitlement days are well and truly over, but I don't agree with all this dividing people into Left and Right camps.  Surely you can be a bit of both?  I'm politically Right Wing but socially Left Wing, if that makes sense!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 12:11:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2012, 11:43:35 AM
I agree with everything Joe says about economics, the entitlement days are well and truly over, but I don't agree with all this dividing people into Left and Right camps.  Surely you can be a bit of both?  I'm politically Right Wing but socially Left Wing, if that makes sense!


That's part of what I was trying to say, There is no real left or right wing nor any other valid option, certainly not in the modern western political spectrum. Everything's reduced to a binary choice of extremes, the political establishment only exists by saying that an endles trajectory of perpetual progress and growth is inevitable and the only option, the opposition fringe say that complete and sudden collapse is the only thing upon us. Try to propose a third/ternary option, such as decline - which after all is what's happened to every past civilisation that's overshot its resource base, as ours has - and you can count on coming under fire from both sides. Such is our immovable and limited cutural/political landscape.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 06 June, 2012, 12:34:51 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2012, 12:11:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2012, 11:43:35 AM
I agree with everything Joe says about economics, the entitlement days are well and truly over, but I don't agree with all this dividing people into Left and Right camps.  Surely you can be a bit of both?  I'm politically Right Wing but socially Left Wing, if that makes sense!


That's part of what I was trying to say, There is no real left or right wing nor any other valid option, certainly not in the modern western political spectrum. Everything's reduced to a binary choice of extremes, the political establishment only exists by saying that an endles trajectory of perpetual progress and growth is inevitable and the only option, the opposition fringe say that complete and sudden collapse is the only thing upon us. Try to propose a third/ternary option, such as decline - which after all is what's happened to every past civilisation that's overshot its resource base, as ours has - and you can count on coming under fire from both sides. Such is our immovable and limited cutural/political landscape.

Good stuff Joseph. My left/right predicated query was an inadequate attempt to get a sense of where people were coming from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 June, 2012, 07:01:31 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 06 June, 2012, 02:33:36 AM
(A)s far as wars go, you have to distinguish between necessary and gratuitous conflagrations; WWI, WWII, Korea, the 1991 Gulf War, and Afghanistan (although in truth, that should have been wrapped up back in 2004 at latest) being necessary ones, the others, well, that's another matter...

I can't see what made WWI necessary; the Kaiser's actions were motivated by opportunism, rather than the fanatical ideology that drove Hitler to seek world domination. In the long term; diplomacy, sanctions, isolation, and a united front from the many states ranged against the newly formed German nation could have cut to the political and geographical horse trading that eventually settled the matter anyway.

Most of the countries ultimately drawn into that pointless conflict spent months trying to extricate themselves from the complex diplomatic ties and treaties that obliged an entire continent to decimate itself because one nutter, acting independently, shot someone's cousin. No-one else had to die.

From a British perspective; it took some typically hysterical and unverifiable newspaper reporting of attrocities in Belgium before there was enough public will to merit sending even a small expeditionary force to the continent. The decision to commit substantive numbers of troops had more to do with vocal agitation from a strand of the British ruling elite that believed war served some kind of purifying function in society; clearing out the dead wood, improving the moral fibre of those who survived, and keeping down the subversive urges. Dicks.

Korea, The Gulf War and Afghanistan don't make my list either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 June, 2012, 07:18:25 PM
Don't forget how profitable war is, as well. Not very profitable for those fighting it but a veritable golden goose for those lending the warring nations money. Not that these lenders would in any way lobby, cajole, threaten, manoeuvre or blackmail the governments they lend imaginary money to towards fighting one another simply for profit. Of course not. That would be wrong and our politicians are more than strong enough to resist such undue pressures and temptations.

oh shit

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 June, 2012, 07:53:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 June, 2012, 07:18:25 PM
Don't forget how profitable war is, as well. Not very profitable for those fighting it but a veritable golden goose for those lending the warring nations money. Not that these lenders would in any way lobby, cajole, threaten, manoeuvre or blackmail the governments they lend imaginary money to towards fighting one another simply for profit. Of course not. That would be wrong and our politicians are more than strong enough to resist such undue pressures and temptations.oh shit

There's a perverse logic that dictates that, once lobbyists and the media have terrified and cajoled countries into spunking a good chunk of their GDP on state of the art technology, it'd be a shame not to use it.

Here's Senator John McCain spouting a version of that same line on The World At One (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b01jhdgs) (31m 50s) earlier today.

I had to stop at BAE System's Glasgow office recently and took the opportunity to remind the minion I spoke to that he was working for an organisation that is essentially evil, or at least immoral. He didn't seem fussed, and it felt less like sticking it to The Man than being an annoying prick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 07 June, 2012, 12:19:50 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 06 June, 2012, 07:24:05 AM
The tone of the political conversation and frame of reference in the US is such that European right wingers like Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy look like black pyjama wearing godless Communists.

Now this is true, the whole U.S. politics things just plain wears me out, it's all hyper-partisanship all the time, I know Americans tend to take things to the n th degree, but really...

Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2012, 11:43:35 AM
I'm politically Right Wing but socially Left Wing, if that makes sense!

I think it does, you're economically and politically conservative but socially liberal, am I right...?

Quote from: bikini kill on 06 June, 2012, 07:01:31 PM
I can't see what made WWI necessary; the Kaiser's actions were motivated by opportunism, rather than the fanatical ideology that drove Hitler to seek world domination. In the long term; diplomacy, sanctions, isolation, and a united front from the many states ranged against the newly formed German nation could have cut to the political and geographical horse trading that eventually settled the matter anyway.

I completely agree, WWI was NOT a necessary war in and of itself, I was referring to America's involvement in it, which was brought about by Mexico aligning themselves with Germany and striking a bargain wherein the territorial sovereignty of the southern U.S. would be threatened in the result of a German victory in that war, but that whole fiasco and utter debacle of a conflict happened because imperial powers just didn't have the sense to back off, so you and I are in complete agreement there...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 June, 2012, 06:50:16 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 07 June, 2012, 12:19:50 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 06 June, 2012, 07:24:05 AM
The tone of the political conversation and frame of reference in the US is such that European right wingers like Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy look like black pyjama wearing godless Communists.

Now this is true, the whole U.S. politics things just plain wears me out, it's all hyper-partisanship all the time, I know Americans tend to take things to the n th degree, but really...

Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2012, 11:43:35 AM
I'm politically Right Wing but socially Left Wing, if that makes sense!

I think it does, you're economically and politically conservative but socially liberal, am I right...?

Quote from: bikini kill on 06 June, 2012, 07:01:31 PM
I can't see what made WWI necessary; the Kaiser's actions were motivated by opportunism, rather than the fanatical ideology that drove Hitler to seek world domination. In the long term; diplomacy, sanctions, isolation, and a united front from the many states ranged against the newly formed German nation could have cut to the political and geographical horse trading that eventually settled the matter anyway.

I completely agree, WWI was NOT a necessary war in and of itself, I was referring to America's involvement in it, which was brought about by Mexico aligning themselves with Germany and striking a bargain wherein the territorial sovereignty of the southern U.S. would be threatened in the result of a German victory in that war, but that whole fiasco and utter debacle of a conflict happened because imperial powers just didn't have the sense to back off, so you and I are in complete agreement there...

I agree with everything said above. This represents the end of forums. Quick, somebody say something dickish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 10 June, 2012, 09:46:33 AM
three cheers for Jonathan Haidt, that sounds good.
  here in Aus we have an athiest unmarried Prime Minister who is shacked up with her boyfriend but who claims to sincerely believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman.  I find this unconvincing.
  Myself, I'm a form of Christian, but agree with the Trout that people do often use religion as an excuse to behave appallingly.  In general I think the 'all power corrupts' saying applies to institutions as well as people, religions being institutions too. 
  It has been observed* that there isn't a religion in the world that can stop its adherents behaving like scum in the right circumstances.  It has also been observed that it nice people will be nice, ratbags will be rotten, but it takes devout religious belief to make nice people do terrible things.  I think that's true, although I'm sure there are a lot of cases of devout religious belief (or ideological zeal)  making otherwise awful people do nice things

*by Julie Burchill, back in the days when she was witty and readable
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 June, 2012, 01:54:10 PM
Religion is like a large dog. If it's yours it can provide great comfort and security; if it's someone else's it can be scary; but in either case it should be kept away from small children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AM
that's a good one Dan!

There isn't an innate reason why evangelical Christians have to be right-wing nut cakes.  Jimmy Carter was quite sincerely evangelical and Christian and was always very progressive.  It's a loooooooooooooong (ie, since the early 80s)  time since I've had anything to do with evangelicals, but I remember some of them being very politically varied.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 June, 2012, 01:52:52 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AMThere isn't an innate reason why evangelical Christians have to be right-wing nut cakes. 


Maybe the desire for a dominating over-seeing presence in one's life and inversely the will to dominate others?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:03:58 AM
Must...resist...urge...to...respond...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 June, 2012, 02:09:11 AM
Self-flagellation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:09:49 AM
Nope, Carlsberg...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:15:56 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AM
Jimmy Carter was quite sincerely evangelical and Christian and was always very progressive. 

He's also a rabid anti-Semite whose virulently anti-Israel book in 2007 led to around fifteen of his own employees walking out on him, says it all really...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 07:56:12 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:15:56 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AM
Jimmy Carter was quite sincerely evangelical and Christian and was always very progressive. 

He's also a rabid anti-Semite whose virulently anti-Israel book in 2007 led to around fifteen of his own employees walking out on him, says it all really...
you do know that disagreeing with the actions of the state of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 June, 2012, 08:25:02 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:15:56 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AM
Jimmy Carter was quite sincerely evangelical and Christian and was always very progressive. 

He's also a rabid anti-Semite whose virulently anti-Israel book in 2007 led to around fifteen of his own employees walking out on him, says it all really...

Oh fella please. He is not an rabid anti-semite. Please stop equating the likes of Jimmy Carter with the likes of Hitler. It serves no good end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 June, 2012, 08:25:47 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 07:56:12 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 02:15:56 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 01:43:21 AM
Jimmy Carter was quite sincerely evangelical and Christian and was always very progressive. 

He's also a rabid anti-Semite whose virulently anti-Israel book in 2007 led to around fifteen of his own employees walking out on him, says it all really...
you do know that disagreeing with the actions of the state of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic right?

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 08:32:03 AM
Instead of me answering that last post, I'll let Martin Luther King Jr answer it;

"... You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist'.  And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth:  When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews -- this is God's own truth."

I think the champion of civil rights said it better than I ever could, don'tcha think...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 08:50:33 AM
Maybe my history is a little off, but I'm sure MLK died before I asked you the question.
So following this logic- I think Robert Mugabe is a bad man- does this make me anti-black?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 11 June, 2012, 10:31:08 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 08:50:33 AM
Maybe my history is a little off, but I'm sure MLK died before I asked you the question.
So following this logic- I think Robert Mugabe is a bad man- does this make me anti-black?

Did you even read his post? He TOTALLY quoted Martin Luther King, who TOTALLY used the word 'truth' twice there. So, you know, it must be true.

...don'tcha think...?

...dude?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Misanthrope on 11 June, 2012, 11:03:52 AM
It is in fact pronounced: Throat Wobbler Mangrove.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 11 June, 2012, 11:53:09 AM
No, that does it for me.  Quoting MLK on another topic completely proves that any criticism of Israel is in fact anti-semitism.  How could I have been so blind?
  unless of course, MLK was wrong if he meant that any criticism of Zionism is the same as anti-Semitism.  There's a good point - could he have been wrong about that?  I don't know much about the great man beyond the 'I have a dream' speech and stories that he put it around a lot.  Was he infallible or something? Or is it just such a good point that whoever he was talking to was a badly disguised anti-semite and that anyone who thinks that Israel's every action is self-defence is likewise, that quoting the dream-having guy just points it out?
 
anyway, it's good to read a Gordon R post again.  That brought a smile to my (no doubt antisemitic) dial
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
Can I presume any Israeli who votes for Yisrael Beiteinu is also an anti-semite?

Incidentally:

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 08:50:33 AM
Maybe my history is a little off, but I'm sure MLK died before I asked you the question.

You should know that I will be plagiarising this phrase to assist in all future pub arguments.  I hope it makes me look half so sharp.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 June, 2012, 04:16:32 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 June, 2012, 08:32:03 AM
Instead of me answering that last post, I'll let Martin Luther King Jr answer it;

"... You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist'.  And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth:  When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews -- this is God's own truth."

I think the champion of civil rights said it better than I ever could, don'tcha think...?


Beaky are you aware that that reference is considered to be of extremely dubious origin? have another look at it.

Also even if it was authentic-let me answer one "quote" with another.

"!Dr. King's expertise as a non-violent civil rights leader and visionary are unparalleled in U.S. history. However, that does not make him an informed commentator on Middle Eastern affairs or on the ideological facets of Zionism. As impressive as the references to his views on Israel may seem, this is a textbook example of Argumentum Ad Verecundiam."

Love the debates with you Beaky mate. All the best fella.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 08:00:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 June, 2012, 12:50:39 PM
Can I presume any Israeli who votes for Yisrael Beiteinu is also an anti-semite?

Incidentally:

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 June, 2012, 08:50:33 AM
Maybe my history is a little off, but I'm sure MLK died before I asked you the question.

You should know that I will be plagiarising this phrase to assist in all future pub arguments.  I hope it makes me look half so sharp.  :D

I can think of no greater honour!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 June, 2012, 02:55:14 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 11 June, 2012, 04:16:32 PM
Love the debates with you Beaky mate. All the best fella.

Right back at ya :thumbsup:...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Matt Timson on 19 June, 2012, 12:13:20 AM
What has happened to my favourite thread?

:'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 June, 2012, 12:26:08 AM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 19 June, 2012, 12:13:20 AM
What has happened to my favourite thread? :'(

Dredd trailer. Although, I see Aung San Suu Kyi has got out the house for a change. Any of you Dubliners get to see my all-time no 1 political crush? The woman's the living embodiment of democracy; it'd be like getting off with The Statue of Liberty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 June, 2012, 12:52:01 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 19 June, 2012, 12:26:08 AMI see Aung San Suu Kyi has got out the house for a change. Any of you Dubliners get to see my all-time no 1 political crush? The woman's the living embodiment of democracy; it'd be like getting off with The Statue of Liberty.


Seen one suffragette, seen 'em all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 June, 2012, 03:06:12 AM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 19 June, 2012, 12:13:20 AM
What has happened to my favourite thread?
:'(

It's been co-opted by Smoochies Enterprises, a'la Pyramid Transnational by Veidt Enterprises, no giant alien squid promised though...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 June, 2012, 07:49:45 AM
Quote from: Matt Timson on 19 June, 2012, 12:13:20 AM
What has happened to my favourite thread?

:'(
beaky was asked some pointed questions and stopped posting in the hope nobody would notice and forget them.
Dude.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 June, 2012, 08:22:30 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 19 June, 2012, 07:49:45 AM
beaky was asked some pointed questions and stopped posting in the hope nobody would notice and forget them.  Dude.

Perish the thought Richmond, I said my piece, people responded, have nothing further to add, that was it, simple really, clear enough :D ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 June, 2012, 08:40:15 AM
Of course you did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 19 June, 2012, 08:46:53 AM
Of course I didn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 19 June, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Our Prez
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/06/19/pimp-his-ride-you-say/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 June, 2012, 11:37:23 PM
Poetry & Law


(http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/246.jpg)




Quote from: johnnystress on 19 June, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Our Prez
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/06/19/pimp-his-ride-you-say/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 June, 2012, 11:40:16 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 19 June, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Our Prez
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/06/19/pimp-his-ride-you-say/

You have a President and a Taoiseach? I thought you wee buggers were supposed to be making efficiency savings?

The wheels on that lawmaster aren't big enough, Urban's chin doesn't look big enough in that picture, etc, etc, you all know the fucking drill ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2012, 11:40:31 PM
So that's what the 'D' stands for!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 June, 2012, 11:42:19 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 19 June, 2012, 11:40:16 PM
The wheels on that lawmaster aren't big enough


Feckin' President's not big enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 June, 2012, 11:46:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 19 June, 2012, 11:42:19 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 19 June, 2012, 11:40:16 PM
The wheels on that lawmaster aren't big enough
Feckin' President's not big enough.

I hear that if you catch hold of him and don't let go, he has to tell you where the EC bailout money is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 20 June, 2012, 03:38:44 AM
Quote from: johnnystress on 19 June, 2012, 11:33:44 PM
Our Prez
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/06/19/pimp-his-ride-you-say/

Booo, I was rootin' for Sean Gallagher, he was robbed...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 June, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 20 June, 2012, 03:38:44 AM

Booo, I was rootin' for Sean Gallagher, he was robbed...



He shouldn't be accepting donations from convicted fuel smugglers with paramilitary connections then, the idiot. Corrupt as any Fianna Fáil man.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/presidential-election/gallagher-continues-denials-as-fuel-smuggler-sticks-to-claims-2917794.html


http://www.thejournal.ie/gallagher-doesnt-remember-visiting-morgan-to-deliver-photograph-263605-Oct2011/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 20 June, 2012, 03:59:28 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 June, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
He shouldn't be accepting donations from convicted fuel smugglers with paramilitary connections then, the idiot. Corrupt as any Fianna Fáil man.

Didn't he say something about it not resting in his personal account or whatever, or was that Father Ted I'm thinking of?  You have to admit Joe, had it not been for the orchestrated stitch-up (and that now infamous mention of an envelope, oops!) on that RTE debate, he'd be sitting in the Aras right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 June, 2012, 04:06:01 AM
I don't believe he would. Still can't deny the truth of corruption though, and I don't know why anyone would want someone with those connections in the Aras.

As for orchestration in RTE, heh, I'd like to see them try and orchestrate anything. Incompetency all the way at that level. I have a fair idea what went on there and it was far from 'conspiracy'. You give them too much credit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 20 June, 2012, 04:29:36 AM
Yeah, but that last week going in to election day, he was several points ahead of everyone else, until that RTE debate, after which, his ratings cratered and that was all she wrote for poor Sean, had he coasted, or at the very least, effectively deflected those allegations, you'd be calling HIM Prez now, am I wrong...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 June, 2012, 09:14:58 AM
Well you're not right either. With or without TV debates he was going to lose when corruption info -which it inevitably would- came out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 20 June, 2012, 01:33:32 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 19 June, 2012, 11:40:16 PM

You have a President and a Taoiseach? I thought you wee buggers were supposed to be making efficiency savings?


Cutting welfare and increasing taxes for the lower paid will soon sort things out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 20 June, 2012, 01:47:54 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 June, 2012, 03:48:38 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 20 June, 2012, 03:38:44 AM

Booo, I was rootin' for Sean Gallagher, he was robbed...

Corrupt as any Fianna Fáil man.


Hi IS a Fianna Fáil man..to the core.

As my helpful little info graphic illustrates...that's him on the end there

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E7nHSQX7R1I/Tqfdc-n4P-I/AAAAAAAAA88/fw55AVV1Bxg/s1600/dolls.png)

He manoeuvred himself away from the party to run as an independent because of all the negativity towards FF. And it worked! Because we, the Irish electorate are deeply stupid.
I agree with Beaky ( I can't believe I just typed that); Only for that incident on RTE, orchestrated or not, he would now be in the Áras
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2012, 09:19:16 AM
I don't care how orchestrated it was or who orchestrated it - I'm just glad the sneaky little bastard was exposed before it was too late.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 June, 2012, 10:01:27 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2012, 09:19:16 AM
I don't care how orchestrated it was or who orchestrated it - I'm just glad the sneaky little bastard was exposed before it was too late.
yeah, is the complaint he was set up or that he should have got in? Probably the latter...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 June, 2012, 10:28:32 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 June, 2012, 10:01:27 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2012, 09:19:16 AM
I don't care how orchestrated it was or who orchestrated it - I'm just glad the sneaky little bastard was exposed before it was too late.
yeah, is the complaint he was set up or that he should have got in? Probably the latter...


I took it he wanted him in either way despite his trangressions. Ideally it's not very Christian to support a corrupt fraud I wouldn't think. Ye shall know them by their fruits* an' all that.



*The old type of fruit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 21 June, 2012, 05:35:12 PM
I dont think he would have got in, he had nowhere to go for transfers, and Michael D mopped up second preferences. Dosent matter now anyway.
Best description of him I heard was a thumb with a face!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 June, 2012, 06:02:46 PM
Whereas Cowen is an arse with a face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 22 June, 2012, 03:37:47 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 21 June, 2012, 10:28:32 AM
Ye shall know them by their fruits*

Ah, King James Version man, are ya :D ?

Quote from: maryanddavid on 21 June, 2012, 05:35:12 PM
I dont think he would have got in, he had nowhere to go for transfers, and Michael D mopped up second preferences.

Now THIS is a very good point, never thought of that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 29 June, 2012, 02:46:20 AM
All this talk of reforming the House of Lords seems like rearranging deckchairs. Why can't we have a true House of Representatives or a House of Peers, with a second house made up of ordinary people, as opposed to nobs, political flunkies and the like? Perhaps run it like a form of jury service (although possibly with a opt-out option) with people draw at random from the population and doing say a shift of 6 months. Make use of tele-conferencing and the like for any debates (which might lead to suggestions for amendments) and electronic or postal votes on whether to pass laws, so people don't have to actual go to London and it doesn't turn into a chore.

OK one reason would be that none of the politicians would want it, but other than that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 June, 2012, 06:58:27 AM
I'm all for comprehensive House of Lords reform me, and whilst they should have reformed it back in the 1950's or the 1980's (when a stable and strong Conservative majority government was in place), it's better late than never, the only trouble is this whole 'primacy of the Commons' crap that gets batted about, who says one chamber has to be subordinate to the other, or that there would be political gridlock if a mostly-or-entirely elected Lords had the power to veto legislation passed in the Commons, was there gridlock when the Lords had veto powers for nearly a millennium, is there gridlock in the Australian federal Parliament where their Senate can effectively veto legislation passed in the House of Representatives, the answer of course is a resounding "NO", the MP's in the Commons just don't want to give up power and compete with a second co-equal competing chamber, which every proper parliamentary democracy should have...

My own personal opinion on a reformed Lords would consist of 150 elected Senators (50 elected by STV across a single UK-wide constituency to single, non-renewable 12-year terms every four years), 150 appointed non-party-affiliated Peers (chosen by an independent commission upon nomination by MPs and Peers, and based on their knowledge and experience of important matters), 150 hereditary Lords (there is value to retaining a remnant of the ancient and noble aristocracy), and 25 Lords Spiritual (consisting of bishops from the English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish national churches), all in all a total of 475 members of an upper chamber with the power to revise, amend, and block indefinitely (but not initiate) legislation, if so voted upon by members...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
Quote from: Emperor on 29 June, 2012, 02:46:20 AM
All this talk of reforming the House of Lords seems like rearranging deckchairs. Why can't we have a true House of Representatives or a House of Peers, with a second house made up of ordinary people, as opposed to nobs, political flunkies and the like? Perhaps run it like a form of jury service (although possibly with a opt-out option) with people draw at random from the population and doing say a shift of 6 months. Make use of tele-conferencing and the like for any debates (which might lead to suggestions for amendments) and electronic or postal votes on whether to pass laws, so people don't have to actual go to London and it doesn't turn into a chore.

OK one reason would be that none of the politicians would want it, but other than that?

Good idea, and it's basically how Athenean democracy operated. Taking your turn serving on the legislature was just one of those dull chores you had to accept and wanted to get over with as soon as possible, rather than the cushy life-long sinecure we've turned it into.


Beaky; in any bi-cameral assembly, one house is generally afforded primacy- otherwise you see the sort of legislative deadlock and factionalism that paralyses US democracy. The modern gloss on the function of the Lords is that it's a Chamber of Review', which scrutinises legislation that's already been passed by the Commons for anomalies and inconsistencies. Might be hard to get people to stand for election to such a house, or imagine how you'd campaign for election to that kind of body. If those sitting in the Lords have the same democratic mandate as their colleagues in the Commons, what's to stop them challenging their legislation in the same way as the US Senate does?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 29 June, 2012, 07:59:45 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
Beaky; in any bi-cameral assembly, one house is generally afforded primacy- otherwise you see the sort of legislative deadlock and factionalism that paralyses US democracy.

The Aussie Parliament isn't riven with perpetual gridlock, whilst the U.S. political tensions between White House/House/Senate is because of the 60-vote filibuster rule, a rule designed to ensure a simple majority doesn't trample the rights and liberty of the minority, and a very good rule it is too, wish we had it in the UK...

Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
The modern gloss on the function of the Lords is that it's a Chamber of Review', which scrutinises legislation that's already been passed by the Commons for anomalies and inconsistencies.

I'm aware of the Lords' current constitutional duties and limitations, I just think the upper chamber should be able to challenge the power of the executive and legislative branch of government the way the pre-1911 Lords was able to, and there was no political paralysis in British politics before the 1911 Parliament Act was brought in, so the straw-man argument of political gridlock doesn't hold, in my humble opinion...

Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
Might be hard to get people to stand for election to such a house, or imagine how you'd campaign for election to that kind of body.

Why would it be hard to get people to stand for election to such a chamber, they'd campaign like any other elected representative on a party or independent manifesto?

Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
If those sitting in the Lords have the same democratic mandate as their colleagues in the Commons, what's to stop them challenging their legislation in the same way as the US Senate does?

Nothing, as it should be, who says the lower chamber absolutely, positively, must have supremacy, that particular mantra was brought in by liberals/progressives who wanted to eviscerate the Lords because the Lords was the ultimate check-and-balance on the power of an executive that was intent on turning imperial Britannia into socialist Britannia... and because of Lords 'reform' in 1911, 1949, and 1999, they've largely succeeded, alas...

Sorry for the long answer, bikini sir, just wanted to give a decent response to your fine rebuttal...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 June, 2012, 09:16:23 AM
I think we should give Sortition a try.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 29 June, 2012, 08:21:11 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 07:24:26 AM
Quote from: Emperor on 29 June, 2012, 02:46:20 AM
All this talk of reforming the House of Lords seems like rearranging deckchairs. Why can't we have a true House of Representatives or a House of Peers, with a second house made up of ordinary people, as opposed to nobs, political flunkies and the like? Perhaps run it like a form of jury service (although possibly with a opt-out option) with people draw at random from the population and doing say a shift of 6 months. Make use of tele-conferencing and the like for any debates (which might lead to suggestions for amendments) and electronic or postal votes on whether to pass laws, so people don't have to actual go to London and it doesn't turn into a chore.

OK one reason would be that none of the politicians would want it, but other than that?

Good idea, and it's basically how Athenean democracy operated. Taking your turn serving on the legislature was just one of those dull chores you had to accept and wanted to get over with as soon as possible, rather than the cushy life-long sinecure we've turned it into.

Good historical precedent there.

It'd also fit with the idea of the House of Lords as a House of Review - Parliament would propose laws and vote them up to the House of Peers who would look it over with an eye to how it would impact everyone's lives and open it up to scrutiny by people with recent working knowledge in the relevant field, like doctors, soldiers, teachers, binmen, etc. Which is better than it'd get in the Commons now filled with career politicians (and quite a few lawyers) or the Lords crammed with hereditary numpties and political appointees.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 June, 2012, 09:16:23 AM
I think we should give Sortition a try.

Now I know it has a name, I will drop this into relevant conversation from now on. In fact, thanks to Wikipedia, I am apparently not the first to think this (as if I'd ever be so original):

QuoteSome contemporary thinkers have advocated a greater use of selection by lot in today's political systems for example reform of the British House of Lords

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition#Today

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_of_the_House_of_Lords#Allotment_.28sortition.29

Which says:

QuoteOpposition is based either on the practical need for some expertise amongst members of the upper chamber or on a belief that "Democracy means an elected second chamber".

Surely, as touched on above, sortition would supply people with expertise - in fact it is rare the House of Parliament has a debate on something like defence or the police where there is a member there with practical experience. Although checking the source for that it is Tony Benn, who I have a lot of respect for. Anyway it needn't be 100% sortition, you could also have appointed experts who could help explain the technical points and provide valuable insight into areas that might be overlooked.

There is a good overview of the issues here, which mentions British Columbia's experience with it:

QuoteThe news media were initially skeptical about the ability of 'ordinary people' to become familiar with the complexities of electoral rules and their parliamentary consequences but, as the Assembly's meetings progressed, the tone of media reporting moved from mild condescension to admiration both for the substance and the tone of the Assembly's discussions.

The faith in 'ordinary people' being able to make decisions on complex political issues had been overwhelmingly endorsed. The public goodwill towards the Citizens' Assembly process was perhaps its most important achievement.

www.southsearepublic.org/article/556/read/sortition_for_the_house_of_lords_in_britain

Looking around I found this which tracks the idea of sortition for the House of Lords:

http://equalitybylot.wordpress.com/category/house-of-lords/

There is even a book on it from 1998 (republished in 2008), The Athenian Option: Radical Reform for the House of Lords:

QuoteBefore New Labour came to power and when even the prospect of reform of Britain s House of Lords was regarded with scepticism, Anthony Barnett and Peter Carty developed the idea of selecting part of a new upper house by lot: creating a jury or juries, that are representative of the population as a whole while being selected at random, to assess legislation. This new edition of the original proposal includes an account of the reception of the idea, their evidence before the Commission on the Lords established by Tony Blair, and a response to the great advances in citizen-based deliberation that have taken place since the mid-1990s. It concludes with a new appeal to adopt their approach as efforts to reform the Lords continue.

www.amazon.co.uk/The-Athenian-Option-Radical-Sortition/dp/1845401395

There is a bit more background on how that came about at the Society for Democracy including Random Selection:

http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm

Constitution.org has a selection of writings on the subject, the first on the list being the intriguingly titled "Let's Toss For It" which is one way of doing it, but I fear all the public schoolboys would win, due to their years of playing Soggy Biscuit:

http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm

So it is encouraging that a random idea I had, has already been proposed and debated. So I feel much more confident in this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 June, 2012, 10:44:19 PM
QuoteConstitution.org has a selection of writings on the subject, the first on the list being the intriguingly titled "Let's Toss For It" which is one way of doing it, but I fear all the public schoolboys would win, due to their years of playing Soggy Biscuit:

http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm (http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm)

So it is encouraging that a random idea I had, has already been proposed and debated. So I feel much more confident in this.

Soggy Biscuit must be an urban legend; you wouldn't want to lose, but winning isn't any great testament to your sexual prowess either. The analogy of jury service is interesting; not just in terms of how members are selected, but because (as indicated above) jurors aren't expected to become instant authorities on the facts they're asked to assess- they're offered testimony from experts and given guidance by the presiding Judge.

Sortition (thanks Soap) has one final thing going for it; it finds a solution to Billy Connolly's decree that the desire to become a politician should automatically bar you from ever becoming one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 30 June, 2012, 12:13:48 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 10:44:19 PM
QuoteConstitution.org has a selection of writings on the subject, the first on the list being the intriguingly titled "Let's Toss For It" which is one way of doing it, but I fear all the public schoolboys would win, due to their years of playing Soggy Biscuit:

http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm (http://constitution.org/elec/sortition.htm)

So it is encouraging that a random idea I had, has already been proposed and debated. So I feel much more confident in this.

Soggy Biscuit must be an urban legend; you wouldn't want to lose, but winning isn't any great testament to your sexual prowess either. The analogy of jury service is interesting; not just in terms of how members are selected, but because (as indicated above) jurors aren't expected to become instant authorities on the facts they're asked to assess- they're offered testimony from experts and given guidance by the presiding Judge.

I refer you to the great organ of truth that is Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soggy_biscuit

Thing is though, once it is out there as an idea someone will have given it a go and let's be honest, rugby players have done worse. There are definitely people online who have been present when a game was player - although no one ever admits to having been involved (no, tell a lie (http://www.menshealth.co.uk/community/forums/thread/463407)).

Quote from: bikini kill on 29 June, 2012, 10:44:19 PMSortition (thanks Soap) has one final thing going for it; it finds a solution to Billy Connolly's decree that the desire to become a politician should automatically bar you from ever becoming one.

Indeed. It is a mental aberration that should lead long-term incarceration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 June, 2012, 01:49:53 AM
QuoteBUZZ ALDRIN PUNCHES MOON LANDING DENIER IN HIS STUPID FACE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic

Having the same point repeatedly put to you by an annoying man with horrible hair? If only Chloe Smith (advisor to the Treasury) had seen Aldrin's response before this Paxman ambush:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqiFr0uppVk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqiFr0uppVk)

The look on her face at 6m 15s almost made me feel sorry for her.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 30 June, 2012, 08:14:19 AM
Sortition sounds noble and decent in theory, but is it actually doable in the real sense; legislation takes time and effort to go through in a thorough and comprehensive manner, so how long would each layperson in a House of Peers (or whatever it was renamed) serve for, would they have to give up their job temporarily to do so, what burdens would that put on their employers in replacing them, how long would they have in advance to secure lodgings in the capital before their term begins, do they have the knowledge and expertise to handle complex and often legally/constitutionally labyrinthine legislation, etc, etc... you see my point?

Whilst the current House of Lords is certainly a flawed and imperfect institution in it's (limited) constitutional duties, I would rather they just 'tidy up' the chamber rather than go for some Lib Dem-spearheaded folly of a reform bill that's going to make matters worse.  A lot worse.  If they cap the numbers of the House to about 450 (as planned), bring in non-renewable term limits for all new appointed Peers (12 years), ensure that political parties are represented in the Lords proportional to their overall percentage of the vote at the last general election, clear the decks of all current Peers who haven't shown up for more than a determined number of days over the last parliamentary term (and continue to do so at the end of each five-year parliamentary term), raise the maximum time the Lords can delay a bill from one year to three years, and leave everything else as is, that I would have no problem with; the Commons retains supremacy, the Lords remains a purely revising chamber (but with added teeth and less fat), and the knowledge and experience of serving Peers is retained, not perfect but infinitely better than the current constitutional wrecking ball planned by Cleggers and co...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 June, 2012, 10:41:09 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 30 June, 2012, 08:14:19 AM
Sortition sounds noble and decent in theory, but is it actually doable in the real sense; legislation takes time and effort to go through in a thorough and comprehensive manner, so how long would each layperson in a House of Peers (or whatever it was renamed) serve for, would they have to give up their job temporarily to do so, what burdens would that put on their employers in replacing them, how long would they have in advance to secure lodgings in the capital before their term begins, do they have the knowledge and expertise to handle complex and often legally/constitutionally labyrinthine legislation, etc, etc... you see my point

Beaky; every single objection you raise has already been dealt with in the previous posts. Whatever doubts you have concerning the practicality of the solutions proposed, they can't be any more expensive or cumbersome than the existing system of expenses and second home allowances that have brought our current legislators into disrepute. I was presenting sortition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition) as a model for replacing both chambers of Parliament, rather than as a sop to an ideological desire to dismantle The Lords.

The greatest advantage I can see of Sortition, is that it does away with the influence of party political loyalty and vested interest in the decision making process. Because they're not career politicians, the ordinary punters alotted to serve a fixed term at Westminster wouldn't let their own career prospects influence the decisions they made; and they wouldn't suffer from our current legislators' paralysing fear of being shown to get decisions wrong, or of being shown to have changed their minds on an important issue.

That Chloe Smith beasting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqiFr0uppVk) I linked to only happened because the poor wee cow was doing her utmost to avoid admitting that her boss (Gideon Osbourne, strangely not available for interview) had got it wrong and changed his mind. What kind of political and media culture have we created when the folk we elect to make important decisions on our behalf are forced to persevere with ill-conceived or no longer appropriate policies because they live in terror of the political fallout from admitting they fucked up? Most people would agree with the decision to suspend the increased tax on fuel.

Sortition would force us all to grow up and stop looking for Churchillian or presidential leaders who know better than us and have some kind of spurious vision for where we're all headed. When we're all effectively, collectively responsible for taking the decisions that affect our daily lives, we won't have the lazy, cynical fall back position of blaming them for everything that goes wrong- or the cruel pleasure of watching Paxman demolish party apparatchiks for sport.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 02 July, 2012, 01:52:23 PM
So where you going to explain exactly what makes Jimmy Carter a vicious anti-semite (or even a cuddly one) or are you just going to let questionable quotations from Martin Luther King do the job for you?  I'm genuinely curious about this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 July, 2012, 02:34:25 PM
The fact that sortition was the least corruptable of democratic systems and functioned quite well in ancient Athens* is probably one of the reasons why it never caught on. It's such a dispassionate egalitarian system that it tends not to stoke ideological fires amongst progressives, zealots, radicals and other shitehawk-led and fire-branded movements who feed off the mythical, empty and impossible promise of an always 'better' future, instead of just getting the job done.


Being of an anarcho bent anyway and influenced by P.K. Dick's Solar Lottery, there's a modern sortition group I've been following these past years called the Kleroterians:


Equality-by-lot is the blog of the Kleroterians. The Kleroterians are an informal group interested in the deliberate use of randomness (lottery) in human affairs. There are two main areas of interest: Its use in Governance (sortition) and Distribution. The aim of this blog is to provide a discussion and information forum for ourselves, but also a 'shop-window' for our ideas.



https://equalitybylot.wordpress.com/


*Although it was restricted to males who'd done military service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 02 July, 2012, 02:40:56 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 02 July, 2012, 01:52:23 PM
So where you going to explain exactly what makes Jimmy Carter a vicious anti-semite (or even a cuddly one) or are you just going to let questionable quotations from Martin Luther King do the job for you?  I'm genuinely curious about this.

I was wondering that too, especially since he's tried trolling with this apparent nonsense elsewhere on the board. Some chapter and verse evidence on the theme of Jimmy Carter: Well-Known Anti-Semite would be useful here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 02 July, 2012, 04:01:25 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 02 July, 2012, 02:40:56 PM
Jimmy Carter: Well-Known Anti-Semite.

I read that - wasn't as good as Pride & Prejudice & Zombies though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
Okie-dokie then, by popular demand and constant baiting by some here (looking at YOU Rich), I'll respond to what I said about Carter;

I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda, so I'll give you a link to a newspaper that's far from being a right-wing/conservative site, and let that speak for itself, but before I do, that quote from Martin Luther King is not a "dubious" quote, no-one has ever disputed the fact that MLK wrote it in his own hand, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears, but you can't, now then, that link-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011901541.html

- no doubt some here will dispute the article, but let it not be said here (looking at YOU again Rich) that I have not responded in kind, argument given, job done, subject over (for me anyway), unless you fancy going another round...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2012, 05:36:48 AM
If I'm understanding the author of that opinion piece correctly, she seems to be saying that Jimmy Carter's criticism of the media is in danger of being anti-semitic, because of the implication that the media is under Jewish control.

Not as convincing an argument as it could be, to be honest. Need better evidence.

Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AMI could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail,

I could probably link to a few explaining some Jewish folk's intense dislike of the Jewish state in specific detail. Does that make them anti-semitic?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 06:19:37 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2012, 05:36:48 AM
If I'm understanding the author of that opinion piece correctly, she seems to be saying that Jimmy Carter's criticism of the media is in danger of being anti-semitic, because of the implication that the media is under Jewish control.  Not as convincing an argument as it could be, to be honest. Need better evidence.

That's not how I read it, I think you're reading into it what you want to read (with all due respect), and what "better evidence" would you like, Carter's Hamas membership card?  I find it amusing that some many here, and in the world at large, have a pretty glaring double-standard when it comes to Israel, the very worst slanders, smear, and blood libels are levelled at the Jewish state ad nauseum, they are accused of the worst things by some highly dubious people (Galloway, Carter, Fink, Pilcher, to name a few usual anti-semitic suspects), and is believed by many at face value, but call out the slander and smear merchants for what they are, and systematically debunk their vile propaganda, you get a backlash like on this thread, sad, people, sad...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 06:32:30 AM
My last word on this subject - and thread, it seems to bring out the worst in people here - is MLK's words on this subject; read it, consider it, think about it, and look in the mirror if you dare, I'm done here, 'nuff said. -

http://www.internationalwallofprayer.org/A-022-Martin-Luther-King-Zionism.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 03 July, 2012, 09:35:10 AM
Where do you stand on Fruit Pastilles?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 03 July, 2012, 09:37:58 AM
Beaky, being as you are an unapologetically right-wing Christian evangelical Zionist social and economic conservative with libertarian leanings, you've got a vested interest in the restoration of Israel, yes?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 03 July, 2012, 09:54:37 AM
Wasn't there a series of 'Crusader States' built by Western power's in the Holy land that all lasted about 80 years or so? All failed or were overrun by Saladin I think.

Perhaps that's the fate that awaits Israel. The country will last a century or so but eventually external and internal pressures mean collapse and a retreat to Europe or America for the survivors. Also with American power slowly failing Israel's neighbours and historical rivals will inevitably gain a social and Military momentum that will properly prove unstoppable.

The Muslim Brotherhood recently voted into power in Egypt could be the shape of things to come.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 11:39:46 AM

Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 06:32:30 AM
My last word on this subject - and thread, it seems to bring out the worst in people here - is MLK's words on this subject; read it, consider it, think about it, and look in the mirror if you dare, I'm done here, 'nuff said. -



It's that type of pontification that gets people nowhere.






Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 06:19:37 AM
but call out the slander and smear merchants for what they are, and systematically debunk their vile propaganda, you get a backlash like on this thread, sad, people, sad...


Despite how any side sells it, Israel is not beyond reproach, and I feel sorry for anyone who has their land taken from them, even Palestinians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2012, 12:02:06 PM
Capitalism, Communism, Zionism, Nazism, Marxism, Catholicism, Federalism - they're all the same animal. The Greater Spotted Ism is a curious beast with a flair for camouflage and a seductive song. All Isms require resources to survive and jostle for position as Alpha Ism and they do this by appealing to the baser fears and desires of human nature; presenting problems and then providing solutions and rewards. Isms need followers to survive and zealots for the jostling. And as these majestic Isms lock horns in the eternal struggle for supremacy, countless Ordinary People are swept along and trampled underfoot.

Our ancestors tamed wolves and wildcats and oxen and horses. Maybe it's time we did our bit for human evolution and tamed the Isms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 03 July, 2012, 02:13:19 PM
well thank you for posting the article.  I don't think it particularly shows that Carter is anti-semitic, except by virtue of not criticising Israel's actions in the way that Lipstader would like him to.  I get the impression that the only criticism of Israeli behaviour would that prefaced by a long session on how the Holocaust excuses everything. 
  I'm still baffled as to how Martin Luther King can prove that Jimmy Carter is anti-semitic in the future.  I read the quote and looked at myself in the mirror carefully.  Still fabulous, but still don't see Carter as an anti-semite, or how that quote could possibly prove it.  If that's what Martin Luther thought, he was wrong, which is not at all impossible.

Myself, I've never gone a bundle on fruit pastilles, but there's no arguing in matters of taste.  If you can convince him that Martin Luther King thought they were evil, you could get Beakysmoochies to mail you his.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 03 July, 2012, 02:33:39 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
Okie-dokie then, by popular demand and constant baiting by some here (looking at YOU Rich), I'll respond to what I said about Carter;

I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda, so I'll give you a link to a newspaper that's far from being a right-wing/conservative site, and let that speak for itself, but before I do, that quote from Martin Luther King is not a "dubious" quote, no-one has ever disputed the fact that MLK wrote it in his own hand, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears, but you can't, now then, that link-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011901541.html

- no doubt some here will dispute the article, but let it not be said here (looking at YOU again Rich) that I have not responded in kind, argument given, job done, subject over (for me anyway), unless you fancy going another round...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_to_an_Anti-Zionist_Friend

Sound dubious to me which is not to displace what others have said about MLK not being the supreme arbiter in all these things in any case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2012, 02:52:04 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 06:19:37 AM
I think you're reading into it what you want to read

Guff. Makes no real difference to me what Carter thinks. I don't exactly have a shrine to him in the corner. I barely know a thing about him. What I want to read is a convincing argument, and that isn't one.

On the subject of Fruit Pastilles... The purple ones are my favourite, and after consuming a standard packet last week I couldn't help wondering why they didn't produce packets made up entirely of the purple ones, as they are generally the most popular. I then went online and discovered that Rowntrees had, in fact, already done this, about three years ago. They couldn't have sold that well, though, because I now can't find any purple packets for sale anywhere. I had missed my opportunity. Gutted, I was.

(Seemingly, you can get the blackcurrant ones in big bags alongside strawberry ones, but it's not quite the same).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 03:06:21 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 03 July, 2012, 02:33:39 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_to_an_Anti-Zionist_Friend

Sound dubious to me which is not to displace what others have said about MLK not being the supreme arbiter in all these things in any case.


From M.L. King Jr., "Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend,"
Saturday Review XLVII (August 1967), pg. 76

However, no such letter was published in any of the four Saturday Review issues released that month.

The letter may have been based on a statement attributed to King at a dinner event in Cambridge, Massachusetts. According to Seymour Martin Lipset, an African American student made a statement sharply critical of Zionists at a dinner that Lipset recalled as having taken place in 1968, and King replied: "Don't talk like that. When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You're talking anti-Semitism."

Wise asserts that King "appears never to have made any public comment about Zionism per se." According to Wise, the Lipset quote does not support the claim that opposition to Zionism was inherently anti-Semitic, and the comment in question may have been limited to the specific circumstances: "As for what King would say today about Israel, Zionism, and the Palestinian struggle, one can only speculate." Kiblawi and Youmans suggest that a reliance on King's views in this matter constitutes a fallacious argument from authority, since Middle East issues were not among King's areas of expertise. They also assert that the Lipset quote was a reply to explicitly anti-white and anti-Semitic militancy of the time, and that most modern-day renditions omit this "crucial context".



So this letter Beaky's been swingin' out of is more likely fake propaganda hijacked by partisans and may indicate that MLK had a more sober view on the situation at the time. King supported Israel's nonviolent right to exist which is perfectly right but his opinion on the subject of anti-semitism was in the context of a response to anti-white and anti-Semitic militancy. That casts this thing in a completely different light.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 03 July, 2012, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
Okie-dokie then, by popular demand and constant baiting by some here (looking at YOU Rich), I'll respond to what I said about Carter;

I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda, so I'll give you a link to a newspaper that's far from being a right-wing/conservative site, and let that speak for itself, but before I do, that quote from Martin Luther King is not a "dubious" quote, no-one has ever disputed the fact that MLK wrote it in his own hand, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears, but you can't, now then, that link-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011901541.html

- no doubt some here will dispute the article, but let it not be said here (looking at YOU again Rich) that I have not responded in kind, argument given, job done, subject over (for me anyway), unless you fancy going another round...

"Some journalists and academics have praised Carter for what they believe to be speaking honestly about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a media environment described as hostile to opponents of Israel's policies.[citation needed] Some left-leaning Israeli politicians such as Yossi Beilin and Shulamit Aloni argued that Carter's critique of Israeli policy in the Palestinian territories reflects that of many Israelis themselves.[21][22]" From the wiki reference on the book

Vicious jewish anti-semites! What next eh?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
Demographics, rather than Tony Blair, are going to solve the problem of anti-Zionism. Israeli Arab's be fuckin', and unless the state of Israel wants to abandon democracy and universal suffrage, non-jewish citizens will represent the majority by the middle of this century. Once a predominantly Muslim regime is in charge of Israel's nuclear arsenal, it'll be interesting to see how long it takes for that state to go from our best frenemy in the Middle East to a threat to world peace.

I never understood why Palestine was chosen as the location for a jewish homeland anyway. If, as part of war reparations, Germany/Austria had been forced to surrender 8000 sqm (that's how tiny Israel actually is) of territory around the city of Vienna- home to one of the greatest concentrations of Jewish citizens before WWII- the sense of injustice felt by Palestinians could have been avoided. Might have been a hard sell persuading Jews to flock back to the Fatherland, mind.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 09:31:03 PM
Or move them to Indiana.


I found this fairly hilarious:


Israeli Government Tells Israelis Not to Marry American Jews


The Israeli government has launched an aggressive advertising campaign in the U.S. to discourage its expats from marrying American Jews—who some see as not really Jews at all.



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/01/israeli-government-tells-israelis-not-to-marry-american-jews.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 09:34:49 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
Demographics, rather than Tony Blair, are going to solve the problem of anti-Zionism. Israeli Arab's be fuckin', and unless the state of Israel wants to abandon democracy and universal suffrage, non-jewish citizens will represent the majority by the middle of this century. Once a predominantly Muslim regime is in charge of Israel's nuclear arsenal, it'll be interesting to see how long it takes for that state to go from our best frenemy in the Middle East to a threat to world peace.


Only if the West seriously wants what oil is left there cos we have nuffin' to offer them except old T.V.s, bad-housing and some spring-water.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2012, 09:58:48 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 09:31:03 PM
Or move them to Indiana. I found this fairly hilarious:

Israeli Government Tells Israelis Not to Marry American Jews

The Israeli government has launched an aggressive advertising campaign in the U.S. to discourage its expats from marrying American Jews—who some see as not really Jews at all.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/01/israeli-government-tells-israelis-not-to-marry-american-jews.html

"It's hard to find clear-cut numbers on how many Israeli expats live in the U.S., but the Jewish Channel reported about 2 million. The Daily Beast (see link above)

The total Israeli Jewish population is around six million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel). Total US Jewish population is five and a quarter million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population). Indiana might not be such a ludicrous location for a new Jewish homeland; apparently, it already contains a New Jerusalem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 July, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Nazis. Every single one of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 10:31:03 PM
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2012, 10:38:52 PM
Oy vey.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 03 July, 2012, 10:49:01 PM
My hair went mental curly because of summer and I looked like a Jew because jews have curly hair. NOW I AM CLEANSED BECAUSE JIMMY CARTER, DREADLORD OF PEANUTS AND ANTI-SEMITISM AND HIS ARCHPRIEST RICHARD CLEMENCE DEMANDED IT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 11:11:27 PM
I'M WITH JIMMY CARTER BLOCK! WHO YOU FIGHTIN' WITH?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2012, 11:22:14 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 11:11:27 PM
I'M WITH JIMMY CARTER BLOCK! WHO YOU FIGHTIN' WITH?

Is that one of those shitey wee one bedroom hovels (http://www.habitatforhumanity.org.uk/) he makes single Moms and Haitians live in? The fascist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 July, 2012, 11:25:54 PM
It's home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 04 July, 2012, 12:10:05 AM
I'm glad you're enjoying your one-bedroom hovel, Joe.
   Credit where credit is due -  I had forgotten about the purple fruit pastilles.  Those ones are pretty good.
   I only mentioned Jimmy Carter as an instance of evangelical Christians not necessarily being right-wing nutbags.  Now I have learned that he is anti-semitic, if you use the standards of Lipstader (ie anything other than uncritical one-eyed support of Israel is anti-semtic).  I don't have a shrine to him either, but he always seemed to be one of the nice guys.
  I should apologise for derailing a discussion of Irish politics.  I have absolutely no idea what's going on there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 July, 2012, 12:22:14 AM
Not sure if he's a 'nice guy' -can anyone really be one when they reach that level- but on this thread the diversion of JC's toothy-grin is a bobbing-raft in a ocean of po-faces.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 02:12:16 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
I never understood why Palestine was chosen as the location for a jewish homeland anyway.  Might have been a hard sell persuading Jews to flock back to the Fatherland, mind.

Just when I am determined to pretty much vacate this thread, y'all seem to get very reasonable in your responses, so thank you one and all for ALL responses, was genuinely interesting to say the least...

Palestine wasn't chosen for the Jewish homeland, the Jewish homeland was ethnically cleansed by the Romans and then named Palestine to rub the Hebrew's nose in it, and the Zionist movement may have been started by men, but it was ordained by God, it's HIS land, not the Jews and not the Arabs, He gave it to Moses and the Israelites following the Exodus, was taken away from them in 70 A.D. because they rejected and crucified the Christ, and have been restored nationally (but not spiritually, not yet) since 1948 in fulfillment of prophecy, some here will resent me saying that, but it's the truth, and I stand on it...

Quote from: bikini kill on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
Might have been a hard sell persuading Jews to flock back to the Fatherland, mind.

Ah, a touch of the gallows humor there, quite...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 03:53:56 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 03 July, 2012, 09:37:58 AM
Beaky, being as you are an unapologetically right-wing Christian evangelical Zionist social and economic conservative with libertarian leanings, you've got a vested interest in the restoration of Israel, yes?

Sorry, forgot to reply to this one before, I have absolutely NO vested interest in the restoration of Israel, God's ultimate plan of redemption for the Jews will happen regardless of whether I approve/disapprove/care about that nation state, which I very much do, as it happens, but it's not a vested interest per se, I have no financial ties to Israel, have no family or friends there, never visited or considering moving there, don't know a single Israeli citizen by name, but I care about God's chosen people because we as Christians are told to respect and treat them right because they ARE God's chosen people - "And I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse those who curses you, and in you all the families of the Earth will be blessed", Genesis 12:3 - it makes no difference to God's ultimate plan what I think or what I do regarding Israel, but it makes a difference to God how we treat the Jews, both individually and nationally (one big reason for the UK's decline post-1948), and that's what concerns me, Israel will get along just fine without me or any evangelical Christian (especially the likes of Carter), they have the Almighty on their side, and that trumps any United Nations resolution any day (thank God)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 July, 2012, 07:22:54 AM
You've got to accept that for me and the rest of the three quarters of the world's population who aren't either Jewish or Christian, and who don't consider The Bible to be revealed truth, appeals to the authority of that book are meaningless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 07:24:45 AM
Aw shucks, back to the Billy beer then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:16:02 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 02:12:16 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
I never understood why Palestine was chosen as the location for a jewish homeland anyway.  Might have been a hard sell persuading Jews to flock back to the Fatherland, mind.

Just when I am determined to pretty much vacate this thread, y'all seem to get very reasonable in your responses, so thank you one and all for ALL responses, was genuinely interesting to say the least...

Palestine wasn't chosen for the Jewish homeland, the Jewish homeland was ethnically cleansed by the Romans and then named Palestine to rub the Hebrew's nose in it, and the Zionist movement may have been started by men, but it was ordained by God, it's HIS land, not the Jews and not the Arabs, He gave it to Moses and the Israelites following the Exodus, was taken away from them in 70 A.D. because they rejected and crucified the Christ, and have been restored nationally (but not spiritually, not yet) since 1948 in fulfillment of prophecy, some here will resent me saying that, but it's the truth, and I stand on it...

Quote from: bikini kill on 03 July, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
Might have been a hard sell persuading Jews to flock back to the Fatherland, mind.

Ah, a touch of the gallows humor there, quite...

Speaking as a Christian Beaky I have to point out that not everyone signs up to your particular interpretation of things. I do not intend to hijack this thread again and push it down the theology route but just feel the need to point that out for the purposes of the viewing public.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:24:43 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 03:53:56 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 03 July, 2012, 09:37:58 AM
Beaky, being as you are an unapologetically right-wing Christian evangelical Zionist social and economic conservative with libertarian leanings, you've got a vested interest in the restoration of Israel, yes?

Sorry, forgot to reply to this one before, I have absolutely NO vested interest in the restoration of Israel, God's ultimate plan of redemption for the Jews will happen regardless of whether I approve/disapprove/care about that nation state, which I very much do, as it happens, but it's not a vested interest per se, I have no financial ties to Israel, have no family or friends there, never visited or considering moving there, don't know a single Israeli citizen by name, but I care about God's chosen people because we as Christians are told to respect and treat them right because they ARE God's chosen people - "And I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse those who curses you, and in you all the families of the Earth will be blessed", Genesis 12:3 - it makes no difference to God's ultimate plan what I think or what I do regarding Israel, but it makes a difference to God how we treat the Jews, both individually and nationally (one big reason for the UK's decline post-1948), and that's what concerns me, Israel will get along just fine without me or any evangelical Christian (especially the likes of Carter), they have the Almighty on their side, and that trumps any United Nations resolution any day (thank God)...

This represents one particular school of theology. It's not mine. With mine there is no need to spiritually under-write Israeli abuses.

http://www.stephensizer.com/2011/07/john-stott-the-place-of-israel/

Beaky you may recognise the name.Maybe in your world he was a vicious anti-semite or summat.

Ps I don't support Hamas etc and do know people in the middle east. I work in the field of peace and reconciliation with a Christian ethos'ed organisation.

PPS to everyone already bored. I'm sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 08:32:25 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:16:02 AM
Speaking as a Christian Beaky I have to point out that not everyone signs up to your particular interpretation of things. I do not intend to hijack this thread again and push it down the theology route but just feel the need to point that out for the purposes of the viewing public.

I know, I don't expect you and I to agree on every theological matter, glad you're along for the ride though...

Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:24:43 AM
This represents one particular school of theology. It's not mine. With mine there is no need to spiritually under-write Israeli abuses.
http://www.stephensizer.com/2011/07/john-stott-the-place-of-israel/
Beaky you may recognise the name.Maybe in your world he was a vicious anti-semite or summat.

John Stott no, Stephen Sizer most definitely YES. With great big feckin' bells on...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 04 July, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
If there is a God, he should strike down people who punctuate badly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 04 July, 2012, 09:56:28 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 03:53:56 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 03 July, 2012, 09:37:58 AM
Beaky, being as you are an unapologetically right-wing Christian evangelical Zionist social and economic conservative with libertarian leanings, you've got a vested interest in the restoration of Israel, yes?

Sorry, forgot to reply to this one before, I have absolutely NO vested interest in the restoration of Israel, God's ultimate plan of redemption for the Jews will happen regardless of whether I approve/disapprove/care about that nation state . . .

By vested interest, I meant the Second Coming. Israel's restoration hastens all that, doesn't it? You've classed yourself as being a 'Christian evangelical Zionist', that's what prompted me to ask.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 04 July, 2012, 10:00:15 AM
Quote from: Trout on 04 July, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
If there is a God, he should strike down people who punctuate badly.

Mea culpa! I should've put Beaky's original declaration in quotes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 10:25:29 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 04 July, 2012, 09:56:28 AM
By vested interest, I meant the Second Coming. Israel's restoration hastens all that, doesn't it? You've classed yourself as being a 'Christian evangelical Zionist', that's what prompted me to ask.

Oh right, gotcha now, sorry 'bout that.  The answer, simply put, is a resounding NO, Israel's restoration does not alter one iota the time of the Second Coming, it neither hastens it, nor would it delay it if Israel didn't exist as a nation state presently, God has a time for everything already laid out in advance, if mankind could change His plans by their own actions, He wouldn't be much of an omnipotent and omniscient Deity, now would He?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 04 July, 2012, 08:32:25 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:16:02 AM
Speaking as a Christian Beaky I have to point out that not everyone signs up to your particular interpretation of things. I do not intend to hijack this thread again and push it down the theology route but just feel the need to point that out for the purposes of the viewing public.

I know, I don't expect you and I to agree on every theological matter, glad you're along for the ride though...

Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 08:24:43 AM
This represents one particular school of theology. It's not mine. With mine there is no need to spiritually under-write Israeli abuses.
http://www.stephensizer.com/2011/07/john-stott-the-place-of-israel/
Beaky you may recognise the name.Maybe in your world he was a vicious anti-semite or summat.

John Stott no, Stephen Sizer most definitely YES. With great big feckin' bells on...

You seriously have never heard of John Stott? Beaky he probably was the most prominent British evangelical of the last 50 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Strontium Claw on 04 July, 2012, 03:31:18 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda.

You do realise that it's possible to dislike the actions of the Israeli state (or disagree with its existence full stop) without disliking the people in it?

In a sort of, you know... hate the sin, love the sinner kind of thing  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 July, 2012, 03:50:27 PM
Quote from: Strontium Claw on 04 July, 2012, 03:31:18 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs)

You do realise that it's possible to dislike the actions of the Israeli state (or disagree with its existence full stop) without disliking the people in it?

In a sort of, you know... hate the sin, love the sinner kind of thing  ;)



You may be an exhausted liberal, allegedly.




Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda.



You've done much the same thing when anyone's linked to something that's counterpoint to what you believe or agree with, which one is true?


I doubt any of us have the monopoly on truth.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 July, 2012, 04:08:25 PM

Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 03 July, 2012, 03:26:01 AM
I could tell you why Carter is an anti-semite in my own words, but ,you would just say I'm a right-wing bigot (the last defense of an exhausted argument from libs), I could link to a web page that explains Carter's deep-rooted hatred for the Jewish state in specific detail, but you would just denounce it as right-wing propaganda.




The irony. In the same sentence you accuse others of making blanket 'right-wing' generalisations yet you then proceed with a blanket 'liberal' generalisation?

You're better than that Mr. Beaks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 July, 2012, 06:00:29 PM
QuoteYou're better than that Mr. Beaks.

You got a link to any evidence of that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 04 July, 2012, 06:36:25 PM
Ah politics, it brings out the best in us all doesn't it?

Anyway back to sortition...

I stumbled across this link but the site was down at the time, it is now back and it gives a nice overview of the debate over the years and some gems:

QuoteThere was a striking moment for me in going to give evidence to the Royal Commission, I found myself in a lift with 'Lord' Douglas Hurd who was one of its luminaries. He commented on how extraordinary it was that when the Commission had gone round the country to hear from the public at every occasion someone had stood up and suggested that the Lords be selected like a jury from members of the public. It was clear that he regarded the notion as bizarre, evidence that the public was slightly mad and could not be trusted.

www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/max-atkinson/sortition-wont-lie-down-blueprint-for-truly-representative-house-of-lords

Because your average person on the street can't be expected to understand complicated issues which have serious implications for life and liberty, because they'd need to understand a large amount of detailed evidence. Despite the fact this is something that happens routinely throughout the country all the time. Oh and, you know, the system having been already deployed in the real world where it has proved to be effective and popular.  ::)

Of course, as the comments say there - why not cut out the middle man and have sortition for the House of Commons? The simple answer is that the politicians would never stand for it so it will never happen this side of and it does seem to currently act as a brake on some of the less desirable policies (like bringing back capital punishment, although we might also get the decriminalisation of cannabis so...).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 July, 2012, 07:18:11 PM
Quote from: Trout on 04 July, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
If there is a God, he should strike down people who punctuate badly.

Render unto Trouty the things that are Trouty's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 July, 2012, 09:41:16 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 04 July, 2012, 06:36:25 PM
Ah politics, it brings out the best in us all doesn't it? Anyway back to sortition...
... why not cut out the middle man and have sortition for the House of Commons? The simple answer is that the politicians would never stand for it so it will never happen this side of and it does seem to currently act as a brake on some of the less desirable policies (like bringing back capital punishment, although we might also get the decriminalisation of cannabis so...).

Capital punishment and immigration seem two of the most obvious instances where the great unwashed would let their worst instincts rule their heads under sortition. I think it'd probably lead to a very speedy process of everyone GROWING THE FUCK UP and realising that it's easier to whine about shit than to take decisions that have massive repercussions.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 04 July, 2012, 11:22:00 PM
So what's sortition? I'm guessing it's to do with either Ireland or the House of Lords.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 July, 2012, 11:28:26 PM
Election by lottery (chance).


http://www.imprint.co.uk/books/9781845401375.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emperor on 05 July, 2012, 12:40:19 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 04 July, 2012, 09:41:16 PM
Quote from: Emperor on 04 July, 2012, 06:36:25 PM
Ah politics, it brings out the best in us all doesn't it? Anyway back to sortition...
... why not cut out the middle man and have sortition for the House of Commons? The simple answer is that the politicians would never stand for it so it will never happen this side of and it does seem to currently act as a brake on some of the less desirable policies (like bringing back capital punishment, although we might also get the decriminalisation of cannabis so...).

Capital punishment and immigration seem two of the most obvious instances where the great unwashed would let their worst instincts rule their heads under sortition. I think it'd probably lead to a very speedy process of everyone GROWING THE FUCK UP and realising that it's easier to whine about shit than to take decisions that have massive repercussions.

As long as we can give the Murdoch (and tabloid) press a kick in the collective papery balls to stop their cheap thrill, scaremongering that tends to distort the debate away from the general British take on things, which tends to be more inclusive and tolerant than you'd believe from looking at newspapers run by billionaire owners not shy about pushing their own agendas onto people.

But yes growing up seems to be the thing and that tends to happen when people get more responsibilities, rather than relying on someone else to make all the decisions for them. We'll see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 July, 2012, 01:04:05 AM
Quote from: Trout on 04 July, 2012, 09:26:16 AM
If there is a God, he should strike down people who punctuate badly.

If there is a God, he would forgive them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 July, 2012, 01:21:39 AM
I am God.
You are God.
We are all God.
God is us.

Now get back to work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: U.S.S.R on 05 July, 2012, 01:25:25 AM
Left is right and right is wrong. See, politics isn't so complicated! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 July, 2012, 02:13:48 AM
Taxes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDIGzzeQjaE&feature=related)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 05 July, 2012, 03:28:53 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 July, 2012, 11:04:54 AM
You seriously have never heard of John Stott? Beaky he probably was the most prominent British evangelical of the last 50 years.

Sorry if I was somewhat clumsy in how I phrased that, prodigal dude, of course I've heard of John Stott, what Christian hasn't, don't agree with him on everything (Israel notwithstanding) - annihilation theory, for one thing - but he seemed a thoroughly decent and honorable gentleman, the same, however, cannot be said for Sizer, who I hold with utter contempt, and I know I shouldn't - hate the sin and love the sinner, as others have pointed out here, Christ was sinless, I'm not - but there ye go... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 05 July, 2012, 03:37:09 AM
Quote from: Strontium Claw on 04 July, 2012, 03:31:18 PM
You do realise that it's possible to dislike the actions of the Israeli state (or disagree with its existence full stop) without disliking the people in it?
In a sort of, you know... hate the sin, love the sinner kind of thing  ;)

Absolutely, lots of Israelis strongly disagree with the actions of their government, and I'm certainly not calling them anti-semites; one is a political opinion, the other is an outright prejudice, sometimes they're separate, sometimes the two converge, such is life...

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 04 July, 2012, 04:08:25 PM
The irony. In the same sentence you accuse others of making blanket 'right-wing' generalisations yet you then proceed with a blanket 'liberal' generalisation?  You're better than that Mr. Beaks.

You're absolutely right there, Joe my friend, I wholeheartedly withdraw that unfair generalization, my bad, apologies all round, did it aga-  :o, hang on a mo', did you just pay me a compliment there Joe, I'm "better than that" you say, well there goes your credibility on this forum...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 05 July, 2012, 08:14:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2012, 12:02:06 PM
Capitalism, Communism, Zionism, Nazism, Marxism, Catholicism, Federalism - they're all the same animal. The Greater Spotted Ism is a curious beast with a flair for camouflage and a seductive song. All Isms require resources to survive and jostle for position as Alpha Ism and they do this by appealing to the baser fears and desires of human nature; presenting problems and then providing solutions and rewards. Isms need followers to survive and zealots for the jostling. And as these majestic Isms lock horns in the eternal struggle for supremacy, countless Ordinary People are swept along and trampled underfoot.

Our ancestors tamed wolves and wildcats and oxen and horses. Maybe it's time we did our bit for human evolution and tamed the Isms.

Ismist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 July, 2012, 08:34:24 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 05 July, 2012, 03:37:09 AM
did you just pay me a compliment there Joe, I'm "better than that" you say, well there goes your credibility on this forum...


Get it while it's good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 July, 2012, 09:25:07 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 05 July, 2012, 08:14:59 PM
Ismist.

Anti-Ismite?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 12 July, 2012, 10:59:14 PM
Can someone fill me in on this voter ID issue that's upsetting the Democrats so much over the pond? They're against it and I'm a bit confused as I thought having ID would help prevent the fraud issues they are constantly harping on about at every single election.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 13 July, 2012, 01:58:39 AM
Becase Barack Hussain Osama wants to help his terrorist buddies from being discovered so they can BOMB THE POLLING STATIONS. WAKE UP SHEEPLE BARRY SOTERO IS ONE OF THEM.

DAY 1 JOB ONE REpel UNCONSTITUTION OBAMATERRORISTMUSLIMCARE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 13 July, 2012, 05:39:51 AM
Quote from: DeFuzzed on 12 July, 2012, 10:59:14 PM
Can someone fill me in on this voter ID issue that's upsetting the Democrats so much over the pond? They're against it and I'm a bit confused as I thought having ID would help prevent the fraud issues they are constantly harping on about at every single election.

Republican state governors want to make sure anyone who votes is both eligible to do so and is actually a U.S. citizen in order to do so, Democrats rely on voter fraud to win elections - JFK's theft of the 1960 election, the dubious Washington state gubernatorial result in 2004, and Al Franken's highly-suspect Senate win in 2008 being the best examples - and thus don't want ANY voter ID laws whatsoever, using the most inflammatory racially-tinged rhetoric to try and paint the GOP as racists to ethnic minorities, whose votes Obama simply has to get in order to win in November... the fact that just about every western developed country in the world (except the U.S.) has voter ID laws seems to have escaped them!

Probably stirring up another hornet's nest here, but don't care, Dredd reviews are mostly enthusiastic and overwhelmingly positive, so I'm feeling invincible right now, tomorrow'll be a different matter probably...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 July, 2012, 07:16:55 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 13 July, 2012, 05:39:51 AM
Quote from: DeFuzzed on 12 July, 2012, 10:59:14 PM
Can someone fill me in on this voter ID issue that's upsetting the Democrats so much over the pond? They're against it and I'm a bit confused as I thought having ID would help prevent the fraud issues they are constantly harping on about at every single election.

Republican state governors want to make sure anyone who votes is both eligible to do so and is actually a U.S. citizen in order to do so, Democrats rely on voter fraud to win elections - JFK's theft of the 1960 election, the dubious Washington state gubernatorial result in 2004, and Al Franken's highly-suspect Senate win in 2008 being the best examples - and thus don't want ANY voter ID laws whatsoever, using the most inflammatory racially-tinged rhetoric to try and paint the GOP as racists to ethnic minorities, whose votes Obama simply has to get in order to win in November... the fact that just about every western developed country in the world (except the U.S.) has voter ID laws seems to have escaped them!

Democrats steal elections? (cough) Bush/Cheney 2000 [cough)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 13 July, 2012, 07:44:13 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 13 July, 2012, 07:16:55 AM
Democrats steal elections? (cough) Bush/Cheney 2000 [cough)

Don't believe the agitprop about that election, Bush/Cheney won that election fair and square, every - and I mean EVERY - count in Florida had the GOP ticket ahead of the Gore/Lieberman one, not by much granted, but it was ahead, even after EIGHT recounts, and the Supreme Court stopped any further recounts because every one before had shown Dubya ahead, the Civil Rights Commission even conducted a six-month investigation into reports that minorities had their votes uncounted or weren't able to vote at all, and do you know how many verifiable cases of disenfranchisement they found; ZERO, that's right, not one single case!  Gore/Lieberman got 500, 000 more votes nationally than Bush/Cheney, but the Presidential election isn't a popular vote, it's an electoral college one (thank goodness too), and Bush/Cheney won Florida by 527 votes, thereby taking that state, and by extension, the Presidency... case closed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 13 July, 2012, 07:55:53 AM
Thanks. For a minute there, I thought I was missing something and being all thick like but it turns out it's that same cognitive dissonance that happened when I heard about Palin's VP bid, and thought - 'at least they can't go at her from the experience point since he has none' - only to see them going at her experience.

And going further back, when Hillary Clinton got more votes than him and he still got the nomination. The result is there, clear as day, and yet. Democrats indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 July, 2012, 08:30:06 AM
Christ, there's two of them now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 13 July, 2012, 08:51:44 AM
Just saying it as I see it. If you can point out anything I said that was wrong, please do. If you can answer my question with a different answer to Beaky's, then please do. I have absolutely no problems with admitting when I'm wrong.

My question was an honest one, since I was too lazy to research the answer for myself and as I was trying to stay awake for Dredd news, I explored this forum and discovered you lot talking politics here. Seemed a good place to get my curiosity sated.

By the way, I'm a LibDem (standing by Clegg despite heckling from all sides; it's a tough job but someone has to do it) - if you're going down the path of accusing me of being rightwing; or if accusing me of racism, I'm a brownie with a yellowish tinge. But as I'm sure we all know, being both of those doesn't mean I can't have rightwing or racist tendencies, so I'm just laying this out for full disclosure purposes only.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 July, 2012, 09:34:48 AM
Amazing that Beaky can dismiss the claim of voter fraud in the Florida instance, but happily and hypocritically can make the same claim about JFK without the need to back anything up.
Worse still is that you seem to just be happy to accept what he says as fact because it gels with your own preconceived notions.
Just calling it like I see it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 13 July, 2012, 10:27:50 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 July, 2012, 08:30:06 AM
Christ, there's two of them now.

Where's the gruddamn 'like' button?

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 13 July, 2012, 10:30:15 AM
My preconceived notions were that it didn't make sense to not require ID while voting. Just to show folks that I have the right to vote for whatever it is. Like I have to when I go to vote in my polling station here in London. To resist having that kind of ID, the only reason I could think of was if you didn't have that right and wanted to hide that fact.

But it couldn't be that since no one would support cheating in elections, not in the land of the free, not openly anyway, so that's why I was confused and why I asked you here to help clear it up for me.

Were there other issues like privacy? Tracking? I remember ID cards were scrapped here too, for similar reasons I think. (Or maybe it was too costly, can't remember exactly). Same with the voter ID?

Your initial answer was something about terrorists, sounded like you were joking so I ignored it. And yes, Beaky responded with what I was assuming so I thought I had understood it right in the first place. As unlikely as it had seemed, because American politics had confused me like this before.

Was there voter fraud in all those elections? I have no idea, having never looked into it in much depth. But I do know that one party doesn't have the evil crown and the other a halo so I'm sure if voter fraud happens, all parties have had their share of it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 July, 2012, 10:31:58 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 13 July, 2012, 07:44:13 AM
the Civil Rights Commission even conducted a six-month investigation into reports that minorities had their votes uncounted or weren't able to vote at all, and do you know how many verifiable cases of disenfranchisement they found; ZERO, that's right, not one single case! 


Oh really:

Excerpt from the conclusion of the Civil Rights Commission Report on 2000 Florida Elections:



Former director of the Division of Elections, Ethel Baxter, in 1998, recommended to the supervisors of elections that if there was any doubt as to the accuracy of an individual's status, the voter should be allowed to vote by affidavit. Despite knowing the exclusion lists contained many errors, there is no record that the Division of Elections provided similar cautionary advice to the supervisors of elections for the 2000 presidential election. The evidence does show that some election officials decided that it further served the state's interests to capture as many names as possible on these exclusion lists.

The process by which each county verified its exclusion list was as varied and unique as the supervisors of elections themselves. Some supervisors of elections sent letters to the alleged felons and held hearings to allow them to produce evidence of their clemency status or establish they were on the list in error. Other supervisors chose not to use the exclusion list at all.

Although the Commission's record reflects that the Division of Elections is responsible for coordinating two statewide workshops annually for the supervisors of elections to ensure uniformity in the interpretation of Florida election laws, the complaints registered by some supervisors of elections suggest that there was no common understanding of the use of the exclusion lists. The Florida legislature's decision to privatize its list maintenance procedures without establishing effective clear guidance for these private efforts from the highest levels, coupled with the absence of uniform and reliable verification procedures, resulted in countless eligible voters being deprived of their right to vote.


www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch5.htm



I fear that your devout partisanship clouds judgement of the facts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 July, 2012, 11:04:17 AM
Voter Fraud for the Complete Idiot (http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/voter_fraud_for_the_complete_idiot.html)

Republican National Lawyers Association Vote Fraud News (http://www.rnla.org/votefraud.asp)

Coalition Against Election Fraud (http://caef.us/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 13 July, 2012, 11:24:47 AM
Thanks, Shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DeFuzzed on 13 July, 2012, 11:26:16 AM
Thanks, Joe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 July, 2012, 11:31:11 AM
Bloody hell, reading through those links, that really is a mess. The obvious question to ask is which type of fraud (calculated disenfranchisment versus ineligible voters) distorts democracy the most - my guess is it isn't the participitaion of ineligible residents/non-citizens, who after all do live and work and have a stake in the direction of the country.  Surely reform of the registration system itself would be the first step, then an enforcement of ID.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 July, 2012, 06:50:42 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 July, 2012, 11:31:11 AM
Bloody hell, reading through those links, that really is a mess. The obvious question to ask is which type of fraud (calculated disenfranchisment versus ineligible voters) distorts democracy the most - my guess is it isn't the participitaion of ineligible residents/non-citizens, who after all do live and work and have a stake in the direction of the country.  Surely reform of the registration system itself would be the first step, then an enforcement of ID.

I'm always disappointed I don't leave the polling station with my thumb dyed purple. When Afghanistan's giving you lessons in civics and organisation, you've got to take a look at yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 12:29:07 AM
in Australia if you don't vote socialists come to your house and force you to go through gay marriage.

Probably stirring up a hornet's nest here, but the reviews for Dredd are so good I just feel like saying some stuff that is demonstrably untrue
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 14 July, 2012, 04:25:25 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 13 July, 2012, 10:31:58 AM
I fear that your devout partisanship clouds judgement of the facts.

Nope, the Commission on Civil Rights is a discredited body, although I was wrong to say they found no verifiable disenfranchisement (it was a sloppy lapse in memory recollection on my part, hands up), but only insofar that they did indeed put supposed disenfranchisement into their 'report', but in truth, it was a partisan majority looking for somewhere to grind their Democratic axes, the fact that conservative members of that commission had another thing to say about that 'report' and the rather suspicious fact it was 'leaked' to liberal news agencies first., but don't take my word for it; http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/5/162803.shtml. 
Bush/Cheney won that election fair and square, whatever problems there may have been weren't intentional acts of deliberate voter fraud, and it was the Democrat lawyers not the GOP ones that picked which Floridian counties to dispute the results of.

Bush won, served two terms, and will be vindicated by history as a great-if-flawed President, get over it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 14 July, 2012, 04:37:25 AM
Oops, forgot to say one more thing; just because no-one owned up to, continually denied being part of, or has photos of anyone actually stuffing ballots or perpetrating actual voter fraud in 1960 doesn't mean it didn't happen Rich, it's highly amusing how people like your good self believe reports at face value of alleged (not to mention utterly unsubstantiated) voter fraud by Republicans in 2000, but have a visceral reaction to any accusation of voter fraud by Democrats in 1960, funny that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
that's a good point.  The fact there's no evidence of something happening doesn't mean that it definitely didn't happen.  We can't prove without a doubt that JFK's election wasn't won by fraud, any more than we can prove that there isn't a tea cup in elliptical orbit around Saturn.  Do you have any evidence that the first alleged event is more likely to be true than the second?
Personally, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that Jimmy Carter is a vicious anti-semite.  So far you've offered the following:
- an irrelevant quotation, allegedly from Martin Luther King
- the fact that some of his staff resigned, allegedly because he was anti semitic - in itself this doesn't prove anything except that they may have the same loose way of defining anti-semitism as you and as....
- a newspaper column, whose author thought that Carter's anti-semitism was proved by him not mentioning the holocaust in a book about Israel and Palestine and by him saying he'd been criticised by American Jewish organisations.  The latter is true and it's not anti-Semitic of him to say it.  The former is just silly.

So do you have any actual proof of the allegation beyond the above?  Or do you just like saying silly stuff? I mention this because it's on my mind whenever I'm tempted to take you seriously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 14 July, 2012, 07:41:44 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
that's a good point.  The fact there's no evidence of something happening doesn't mean that it definitely didn't happen. 

Dwight Eisenhower as well as many Illinois Republicans knew there was outright fraud perpetrated, and even encouraged Nixon to challenge the results, but Nixon - ever the gentleman - decided against it because he thought it would have been too divisive.  I'll say the same to you as I did to Rich; if it's Republicans/conservatives/Christians/Israel in the firing line, you're only too willing to believe the worst at face value, but challenge liberal icons like JFK or that nice pleasant old man Jimmy Carter (how could such a likable old gentlemen be a raging Jew-baiter underneath, oh perish the thought ::)) and you get the kind of third-degree you're giving me now, double standard perhaps?

Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
Personally, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that Jimmy Carter is a vicious anti-semite. 

What exactly would you like me to show you, Carter's Hamas membership card?  If it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck, chances are it's a duck... I'm not trying to convince you, I know what Carter thinks of Israel, his words state it plainly, seventeen of own employees at his institute left in disgust over his 2007 book, which if you don't think is an anti-semitic screed, then absolutely nothing I say here will ever convince you otherwise, I've said my piece about Carter, move along dude, move along...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 14 July, 2012, 08:02:23 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
that's a good point.  The fact there's no evidence of something happening doesn't mean that it definitely didn't happen.  We can't prove without a doubt that JFK's election wasn't won by fraud, any more than we can prove that there isn't a tea cup in elliptical orbit around Saturn.  Do you have any evidence that the first alleged event is more likely to be true than the second?

If you insist - http://www.adversity.net/florida/Frame_Fla_Stories/Kennedy_Daley_1960.htm - if that ain't good enough, well we'll resurrect both JFK and Bill Daley from the dead via a seance and we can both ask them whether or not deliberate fraud took place in 1960, would that satisfy you then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 08:36:00 AM
you've said your piece = you've said that Jimmy Carter is a vicious anti-semite, without any evidence. Iwouldn't need to see Carter's Hamas membership card to believe that he's an anti-semite.  Just anything he's said that's in any way anti-semitic would be enough.
    Perhaps there's something in his book which is anti-semitic, in a vicious way, that you could quote?  From what  I have read of the book, it isn't anti-semitic, although it does criticize Israel.  I guess we have different definitions of anti-semitism; mine being 'hating Jewish people' and yours being 'criticizing the state of Israel in any way with which B Smoochies disagrees'.

As for your proof that JFK stole an election, do you have anything that isn't from a wing-nut right wing website?  I'm not asking for a Guardian article autographed by John Pilger and George Monbiot.  Just any media source I've ever heard of would be good.

We don't have any more evidence for the things you say than we do for the teacup orbiting Saturn, so it's not unreasonable to ask for evidence as the price of taking them seriously.  In the case of the teacup, I'd be asking questions like 'how do you know?' and 'how did it get there?'
In the case of Carter, I'm only asking for evidence that fits the definition of anti-semitism that I know of.  Is that unreasonable?
  In the case of JFK, I've never heard this before, so it's not out of order for me to wonder why I've never heard of this, why people who would have had good reason for talking about it never did (Nixon was too much of a gentleman to act legally in his own interests?  I'd want a whole bunch of proof for that). 

It's good that you're not trying to convince me, as you say, because you certainly aren't. You are having fun though and being yourself, so that's lovely.

cheers,

Floyd
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 14 July, 2012, 09:30:34 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 14 July, 2012, 07:41:44 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
that's a good point.  The fact there's no evidence of something happening doesn't mean that it definitely didn't happen. 

Dwight Eisenhower as well as many Illinois Republicans knew there was outright fraud perpetrated, and even encouraged Nixon to challenge the results, but Nixon - ever the gentleman - decided against it because he thought it would have been too divisive.  I'll say the same to you as I did to Rich; if it's Republicans/conservatives/Christians/Israel in the firing line, you're only too willing to believe the worst at face value, but challenge liberal icons like JFK or that nice pleasant old man Jimmy Carter (how could such a likable old gentlemen be a raging Jew-baiter underneath, oh perish the thought ::)) and you get the kind of third-degree you're giving me now, double standard perhaps?

Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 06:54:43 AM
Personally, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that Jimmy Carter is a vicious anti-semite. 

What exactly would you like me to show you, Carter's Hamas membership card?  If it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck, chances are it's a duck... I'm not trying to convince you, I know what Carter thinks of Israel, his words state it plainly, seventeen of own employees at his institute left in disgust over his 2007 book, which if you don't think is an anti-semitic screed, then absolutely nothing I say here will ever convince you otherwise, I've said my piece about Carter, move along dude, move along...

Beaky I despair fella-I really do. I showed you a citation that showed that some jewish politicians agreed with carter in his analysis. are you seriously suggesting that they are virulent anti-semites? You may have said your piece but you ignore clear counter-arguments when they are presented to you mate.

And Beaky speaking as someone who works full time in the field of anti-racism and anti-sectarianism in Northern Ireland I can advise you that it is very unhelpful when people start to obscure the differences between people like Jimmy Carter and the genuine racist article.

That broadside aside I hope you are well mate. All the very best fella and thanks again for these spirited exchanges which are the best of craic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 09:52:11 AM
working full time in the field of anti-racism and anti-sectarianism in Northern Ireland is the most interesting job I've heard of for ages!  How's it going?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 14 July, 2012, 10:13:53 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 09:52:11 AM
working full time in the field of anti-racism and anti-sectarianism in Northern Ireland is the most interesting job I've heard of for ages!  How's it going?

Judge its going somewhere-its the where I am often un-sure of. The sectarian thing is still the biggie in the eyes of most but to articulate how it is going it in a line or two is difficult. Maybe the best short take on it is to say that its an uneven picture of progress and a case of the more things change the more it stays the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 11:16:56 AM
well I take my hat off to you - it sounds like admirable work.  There are shadows of sectarianism here, but it's not the force it used to be and is mainly to be seen in historical hangovers like the names on law firms and support for football teams.  Oh and it's trotted out as an alibi everytime our bizarre school funding policies are questioned (ie the religious private schools are subsidized by people who can't afford to use them).
As for racism, we  have a bit, but overall we do pretty well with multiculturalism, I reckon (of course I'm in the group that experiences the least racism and in an industry that is full of dedicated non-racists, so I would say that)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2012, 12:48:35 PM
American / Isreali Dual Citizens Running the American Government (http://salonesoterica.wordpress.com/2008/04/03/dual-us-israeli-citizens-running-american-government/)
Attorney General – Michael Mukasey
Head of Homeland Security –  Michael Chertoff
Chairman Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Richard  Perle
Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz
Under Secretary  of Defense – Douglas Feith
National Security Council Advisor – Elliott  Abrams
Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff (Former) – "Scooter"  Libby
White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten
Under Secretary of  State for Political Affairs – Marc Grossman
Director of Policy Planning at  the State Department – Richard Haass
U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level  Position) – Robert Zoellick
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – James  Schlesinger
UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton
Under Secretary for  Arms Control – David Wurmser
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Eliot  Cohen
Senior Advisor to the President – Steve Goldsmith
Principal Deputy  Assistant Secretary – Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of State –  Lincoln Bloomfield
Deputy Assistant to the President – Jay Lefkowitz
White  House Political Director – Ken Melman
National Security Study Group – Edward  Luttwak
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Kenneth Adelman
Defense  Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) – Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
National  Security Council Advisor – Robert Satloff
President Export-Import Bank U.S. –  Mel Sembler
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and  Families – Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban  Development for Public Affairs – Mark Weinberger
White House Speechwriter –  David Frum
White House Spokesman (Former) – Ari Fleischer
Pentagon's  Defense Policy Board – Henry Kissinger
Deputy Secretary of Commerce – Samuel  Bodman
Under Secretary of State for Management – Bonnie Cohen
Director of  Foreign Service Institute – Ruth Davis
(I haven't fact-checked this list.)



Dual Citizenship -- Loyal to Whom? (http://www.viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html)



The power of America's "Jewish lobby" is said to be legendary. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7104030.stm)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 July, 2012, 01:24:04 PM
...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 01:38:27 PM
Ah hey now, I know you said you didn't fact-check it, but that list has been kicking around for a long time and is deeply suspect.  Several people on it aren't even Jewish, never mind 'dual-citizen' Israelis.  By virtue of being exaggerated, it is dangerously close to classic "you can never trust those Jews" anti-semitic propaganda.

Not suggesting for a moment that was or ever would be your intention, Sharky, or that a healthy suspicion about Israeli influence on American policy is in itself even vaguely anti-semitic.  But this sort of thing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 14 July, 2012, 02:00:34 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 01:38:27 PMSeveral people on it aren't even Jewish

Well as a supposedly democratic country, I imagine you wouldn't have to be Jewish to be a Israeli citizen....
They are drafting a new law allowing Israeli Arabs & ultra orthodox Jews to be conscripted into the army, anyone else think that sounds like they are in trouble? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 July, 2012, 02:12:58 PM
No! Legendary Shark's an anti-semitic nut-farmer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 14 July, 2012, 02:37:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 01:38:27 PM
Ah hey now, I know you said you didn't fact-check it, but that list has been kicking around for a long time and is deeply suspect.  Several people on it aren't even Jewish, never mind 'dual-citizen' Israelis.  By virtue of being exaggerated, it is dangerously close to classic "you can never trust those Jews" anti-semitic propaganda.

Not suggesting for a moment that was or ever would be your intention, Sharky, or that a healthy suspicion about Israeli influence on American policy is in itself even vaguely anti-semitic.  But this sort of thing...

Agreed. Well said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 02:41:18 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 14 July, 2012, 02:00:34 PM
Well as a supposedly democratic country, I imagine you wouldn't have to be Jewish to be a Israeli citizen....

Well of course not, but I'd direct you to early internet versions of this kind of list: http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/frnklin.htm

This thread is already Godwinned six ways to Tuesday, so I have no hesitation in suggesting that this kind of 'outing' is straight out of Goebbels for Dummies.  Every politico, every person, has ties that may be in conflict with the common good they are supposed to represent, be it family, region, business, ancestral country or religion.  Picking one out, exagerrating it, and then suggesting questionable loyalties is pretty poor fare.  Where this is predominantly parsed through identification of a Jewish background we are treading a well-worn and hateful path.

Far better to focus on the actions of a government and its members rather than creating fear of zionist cabals.  Again.

And just to be absolutely clear, I'm not in any way implying TLS is any kind of unpleasant-ist.  He's not.

Well, maybe an onanist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 14 July, 2012, 03:04:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 02:41:18 PMAnd just to be absolutely clear, I'm not in any way implying TLS is any kind of unpleasant-ist.  He's not.

MLK and Jimmy told me otherwise...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2012, 04:09:02 PM
I posted that list and those articles simply to foster debate and provide a viewpoint some may find worth studying if they think this exploration of the anti-Semitic phenomena is worth exploring. Personally, I'm not really interested in this sort of thing as it smacks to me of an advanced kind of name-calling. Organizations set up to combat anti-Semitism (for example) by their very nature foster distrust and tend to focus on the differences between believers or races instead of the similarities. There are only two kinds of people in this world; those people who are me and those people who are not me.

I'm far more interested in this LIBOR thing and wondering why nobody's talking about it very much. The Bank of England had to be involved and if the Bank of England was involved then the Treasury was involved. That's before we even get to the intimate relationships the Bank of England has with, say, the US Federal Reserve (from whence I've been led to understand the LIBOR mechanism is controlled), the IMF, the European Central Bank, JP Morgan Chase and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. The LIBOR manipulations made the things WE buy more expensive. That's stealing from everyone and what does Bob Diamond get? £2M instead of £22M, was it? How about 20 years instead of £2M? But no, he'll just move on to another job for some big financial company and carry on helping the Banksters steal from anti-Semites, Muslims and Christians alike.

I'm not saying that arguments about what or who is anti-Semitic or not are trivial or that the people who enjoy this thread are wrong in their opinions or beliefs. It's just that I personally don't give a flying drokk whether somebody's an anti-Semite or not. I wouldn't care if the fireman who pulled me from a burning building was a white supremacist and I don't care if the Minister for Agriculture abhors homosexuality or if half our MPs have dual British/Ugandan passports. So long as they do no harm, keep to their word as best they can, think of the people first and limit the fraud to the odd free lunch then I'm content to leave them to it.

I'll stop ranting now, lol, you all know where I think the real threat to society is coming from - and it's not the Jews.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 04:35:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2012, 04:09:02 PM...you all know where I think the real threat to society is coming from...

Short shorts?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2012, 04:41:36 PM
Godpleton's mom!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 July, 2012, 11:04:14 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 July, 2012, 02:41:18 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 14 July, 2012, 02:00:34 PM
Well as a supposedly democratic country, I imagine you wouldn't have to be Jewish to be a Israeli citizen....

Well of course not, but I'd direct you to early internet versions of this kind of list: http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/frnklin.htm

This thread is already Godwinned six ways to Tuesday, so I have no hesitation in suggesting that this kind of 'outing' is straight out of Goebbels for Dummies.  Every politico, every person, has ties that may be in conflict with the common good they are supposed to represent, be it family, region, business, ancestral country or religion.  Picking one out, exagerrating it, and then suggesting questionable loyalties is pretty poor fare.  Where this is predominantly parsed through identification of a Jewish background we are treading a well-worn and hateful path.

Far better to focus on the actions of a government and its members rather than creating fear of zionist cabals.  Again.

And just to be absolutely clear, I'm not in any way implying TLS is any kind of unpleasant-ist.  He's not.

Well, maybe an onanist.

I'm with you on the list, Tordelback .
     The Legendary Shark's second link was to an article  and later book by Walt and Mersheimerabout the Israel lobby in the US.  I've read the article in the London Review of Books.  It seemed pretty reasonable to me.  The lobby they describe is a real organisation, called AIPAC. 
  Of course, discussion of anything related to Israel being what it was, it was not only hotly disputed but also described as 'anti-semitic' by the 'Israel can do no wrong and it's antisemitic to say otherwise' crowd.  One of the Israel-firsters later referred to the book as 'discredited', mainly on the basis that a bunch of his mates had written the same thing about it.   
  short shorts?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 14 July, 2012, 11:13:13 PM
I farted on my hand today and it smelt like I don't really know where I'm going with this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 14 July, 2012, 11:19:08 PM
How are the Israelis going to attach magnetic bombs to Shark's car when he doesn't drive?

If they clone my passport again when they send in the assassins I'll be well cross.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 July, 2012, 11:29:37 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 14 July, 2012, 11:19:08 PM
How are the Israelis going to attach magnetic bombs to Shark's car

schtick-y bomb?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 July, 2012, 12:24:28 AM
Quote from: bikini kill on 14 July, 2012, 11:29:37 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 14 July, 2012, 11:19:08 PM
How are the Israelis going to attach magnetic bombs to Shark's car

schtick-y bomb?


(http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/7787/minep.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 15 July, 2012, 12:47:27 AM
Attached is a list of all the PP's(possible Paddies) in American Government,  shur they heva great time!
#
Attorney General – Michael Mukasey
Head of Homeland Security –  Michael Chertoff
Chairman Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Richard  Perle
Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz
Under Secretary  of Defense – Douglas Feith
National Security Council Advisor – Elliott  Abrams
Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff (Former) – "Scooter"  Libby
White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten
Under Secretary of  State for Political Affairs – Marc Grossman
Director of Policy Planning at  the State Department – Richard Haass
U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level  Position) – Robert Zoellick
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – James  Schlesinger
UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton
Under Secretary for  Arms Control – David Wurmser
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Eliot  Cohen
Senior Advisor to the President – Steve Goldsmith
Principal Deputy  Assistant Secretary – Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of State –  Lincoln Bloomfield
Deputy Assistant to the President – Jay Lefkowitz
White  House Political Director – Ken Melman
National Security Study Group – Edward  Luttwak
Pentagon's Defense Policy Board – Kenneth Adelman
Defense  Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) – Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
National  Security Council Advisor – Robert Satloff
President Export-Import Bank U.S. –  Mel Sembler
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and  Families – Christopher Gersten
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban  Development for Public Affairs – Mark Weinberger
White House Speechwriter –  David Frum
White House Spokesman (Former) – Ari Fleischer
Pentagon's  Defense Policy Board – Henry Kissinger
Deputy Secretary of Commerce – Samuel  Bodman
Under Secretary of State for Management – Bonnie Cohen
Director of  Foreign Service Institute – Ruth Davis
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 July, 2012, 01:01:05 AM
All of them half-pissed and crashing their cars like Ted Kennedy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 15 July, 2012, 01:07:23 AM
An sher Joe, whas wrong with a few drinks, sher everyone has a few crashes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Roger Godpleton on 15 July, 2012, 01:19:01 AM
Irish aren't to be worried about. You just throw a potato at them and they'll run after it. Jews are more cunning. They train themselves not to eat pork and I don't know where I'm going with this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 July, 2012, 04:08:47 AM
You're going to hell. You're all going to hell
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 15 July, 2012, 07:11:24 AM
Quote from: pops1983 on 15 July, 2012, 04:08:47 AM
You're going to hell. You're all going to hell

No, just me probably... and rightly so (hope John Wayne's there)!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 15 July, 2012, 07:23:06 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 14 July, 2012, 09:30:34 AM
Beaky I despair fella-I really do. I showed you a citation that showed that some jewish politicians agreed with carter in his analysis. are you seriously suggesting that they are virulent anti-semites? You may have said your piece but you ignore clear counter-arguments when they are presented to you mate.

Do I?  Certainly not my intent, I state my piece and usually respond to other's response, but after that, I'm not entirely sure what else to say (I let other folks put their two-cents in), and in answer to your above question; no, they're not anti-semites, I stated about one page back or so there are Israelis who disagree with some of their government's security policies, and that their views are politically motivated not racial, does that clear it up, cheers dude!?

...is it getting a little warm in here or is just me :cool:, there, that's better...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 15 July, 2012, 09:25:46 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 15 July, 2012, 07:23:06 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 14 July, 2012, 09:30:34 AM
Beaky I despair fella-I really do. I showed you a citation that showed that some jewish politicians agreed with carter in his analysis. are you seriously suggesting that they are virulent anti-semites? You may have said your piece but you ignore clear counter-arguments when they are presented to you mate.

Do I?  Certainly not my intent, I state my piece and usually respond to other's response, but after that, I'm not entirely sure what else to say (I let other folks put their two-cents in), and in answer to your above question; no, they're not anti-semites, I stated about one page back or so there are Israelis who disagree with some of their government's security policies, and that their views are politically motivated not racial, does that clear it up, cheers dude!?

...is it getting a little warm in here or is just me :cool:, there, that's better...


:) My point is Beaky that Carter merely shares what some Israeli politicians already believe so to make a grand assertion that the man is a virulent anti-semite is to do him a terrible dis-service.

All the best Beaky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 July, 2012, 10:32:48 PM
PUSSY RIOT! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALS92big4TY)

They're sexy, they're political, they're going to jail. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17753013)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 August, 2012, 07:20:35 AM
In the USA, any child- no matter how humble their beginnings- can grow up to be President. As long as they can raise:

$2.5 BILLION (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19052054)

That's shocking, but can you believe our own shitey little effort cost $49 million? The only bits anyone can remember from the whole campaign are the "I agree with Nick" telly debate and Gordon Brown not telling a pensioner she was racist- that should have come to a few grand at most.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mudcrab on 02 August, 2012, 12:29:54 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 21 July, 2012, 10:32:48 PM
PUSSY RIOT! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALS92big4TY)

They're sexy, they're political, they're going to jail. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17753013)

I do hope they're going to play their songs when Emperor Putin visits for the Olympics  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2012, 09:39:31 PM
Piers shite-stirrer Morgan.


(http://i.imgur.com/CPZcy.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 02 August, 2012, 11:18:04 PM
So that's why he wants Yanks disarmed. Deport the fifth columnist immediately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 08 August, 2012, 10:16:05 AM
speaking of Piers Morgan*, are Pussy Riot any good as a band?  I'm fondly imagining them to be a more political and more Russian version of Shonen Knife, but haven't listened to them in case they turn out to be awful.



*is he really 'politics'?  Isn't he comedy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 08 August, 2012, 01:05:48 PM
Bad comedy. Are Pussy Riot those Russian guys who're at risk of being imprisoned? I've not listened to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 August, 2012, 10:27:50 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 08 August, 2012, 10:16:05 AM
are Pussy Riot any good as a band?  I'm fondly imagining them to be a more political and more Russian version of Shonen Knife, but haven't listened to them in case they turn out to be awful.

Quote from: Stan on 08 August, 2012, 01:05:48 PM
Are Pussy Riot those Russian guys who're at risk of being imprisoned? I've not listened to them.

JUDGE Y'R'SELF (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZUhkWiiv7M&feature=related)

The politically neutral and deliberately musically naive Shonen Knife are probably a decent aesthetic reference point. Nineties Riot Grrrl acts like Huggy Bear (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfP5HNvsWAo) and Bikini Kill (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WreQbMlFEjU) made a similar racket, while screaming shrilly but vaguely about the oppression of something by someone or other, in the same vein as Pussy Riot. I fear for those grrrls' futures, though- once Madonna latches onto you, you're well and truly fucked. And lead singer Nadya Tolokno (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOhoiX8VE7o)'s too pretty to go to prison.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 August, 2012, 11:18:41 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 08 August, 2012, 10:27:50 PM
And lead singer Nadya Tolokno (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOhoiX8VE7o)'s too pretty to go to prison.



At least you'll have a new pen-pal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 21 August, 2012, 12:10:10 PM
Not too bad.  I like bands that remind me of TISM.

thanks,

Floyd
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 August, 2012, 07:41:23 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 21 August, 2012, 12:10:10 PM
Not too bad.  I like bands that remind me of TISM.thanks,

Heh, TISM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-mLIdLZZeI) are new to me. I feel I've been missing out by not owning a record called Australia The Lucky Cunt, and the convergence point between Sigue Sigue Sputnik and Devo isn't a bad place to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 August, 2012, 07:51:08 PM
Speaking of conflation, both the proper news and idiotic radio phone-ins have been treating US congressman Todd Akin's bizarre claim that 'legitimate' rape cannot result in pregnancy and Respect MP George Galloway's idiotic assertion that unconscious women are capable of consenting to sex as part of the same agenda, despite their positions at opposing ends of the political spectrum.

THE MIRACLE OF RAPE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joxny3rco_4)

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l95SNGX0Ttk) (2m 55s)

Akin's clearly a moron, but the shrewd Galloway's exploiting similar ambiguities in popular attitudes to rape in his instinctive defence of the necessary wanker that is Julian Assange. Both men seem to be twisting logic and flying in the face of common sense because of their respective political ideologies and tribal instincts. If you find yourself telling someone they haven't really been raped properly, you should probably take a good look at your motivations and your conscience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 August, 2012, 07:56:01 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 21 August, 2012, 07:51:08 PM
necessary wanker

an excellent term for people like Assange (and Galloway) who fight battles that need to be fought and who I agree with on many issues, but are in themselves total and utter dipshits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 August, 2012, 07:57:04 PM



Where's Beaky Smoochies when you need him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 August, 2012, 08:39:16 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 21 August, 2012, 07:57:04 PM
Where's Beaky Smoochies when you need him?

I'd like to see what Beaky could do with Todd Akins's exculpatory plea "The mistake I made was in the words I said, not in the heart I hold". It's an unusually brave strategy for a politician to admit that the shit that pours from his mouth bears absolutley no relation to what he actually intends to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SMUDGE10 on 21 August, 2012, 09:28:23 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 21 August, 2012, 07:51:08 PMIf you find yourself telling someone they haven't really been raped properly, you should probably take a good look at your motivations and your conscience.

Indeed.
And if your 'doctor' tells you that 'the female body has ways of shutting down to avoid pregnancy if raped' you need to stop visiting Witch Doctors and find a science based alternative. They are all the rage these days I hear. Y'know; clever folks who really know about stuff.....

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 August, 2012, 09:45:25 PM
Quote from: SMUDGE10 on 21 August, 2012, 09:28:23 PM
And if your 'doctor' tells you that 'the female body has ways of shutting down to avoid pregnancy if raped' you need to stop visiting Witch Doctors and find a science based alternative.

I'd be interested to know what the fuck he thought he was talking about. Maybe rapist spunk has a different pH factor, which stops it adhering to the lining of the cervix? Those Bosnian and Rwandan women condemned to raise children with faces much like those of the men who raped them and murdered their families just weren't trying hard enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 22 August, 2012, 01:36:52 PM
This man believes Pussy Riot owe him respect
(http://i.imgur.com/zQHv4.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 22 August, 2012, 01:56:33 PM
Is that the rich ghost of a teletubby policeman?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 22 August, 2012, 02:12:26 PM
I want a hat like that! To eBay!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 August, 2012, 07:38:19 PM
Quote from: SMUDGE10 on 21 August, 2012, 09:28:23 PM
And if your 'doctor' tells you that 'the female body has ways of shutting down to avoid pregnancy if raped' you need to stop visiting Witch Doctors and find a science based alternative. They are all the rage these days I hear. Y'know; clever folks who really know about stuff.....

That man shouldn't just be automatically barred from office, he should be completely disenfranchised until he can pass a basic general science course.  At least he has the defence of gross stupidity and ignorance -   Galloway, on the other hand, should and does know better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 23 August, 2012, 01:49:31 PM
Quote from: bikini kill on 21 August, 2012, 07:41:23 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 21 August, 2012, 12:10:10 PM
Not too bad.  I like bands that remind me of TISM.thanks,

Heh, TISM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-mLIdLZZeI) are new to me. I feel I've been missing out by not owning a record called Australia The Lucky Cunt, and the convergence point between Sigue Sigue Sputnik and Devo isn't a bad place to be.

My favourite is 'I'm on the drug (that killed River Phoenix)' (think the title was 'he'll never be an old man river now')

As for Galloway - well, that was a stupid thing to say, indeed.  What's the bet that some nitwit will pretend that Assange said it, or endorsed it?

That Akins guy is so dumb, it's scary - cf the other politician who talked about 'coercive rape'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 August, 2012, 08:49:41 PM
Since we all appear to agree that rape's wrong, what do we think of the merits of the Assange case itself, and the Swedish government's attempts to have him extradited?

I can't see how Assange can possibly hope to avoid eventually having to answer those charges, but the chances of any conviction seem hopelessly remote for the same reason so many rape prosecutions either collapse or never go ahead- the precise details of what happened are known only to the two parties involved, making it one person's word against the other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 24 August, 2012, 03:33:47 AM
I'm with Seumas Milne on this:

"Can anyone seriously believe the dispute would have gone global, or that the British government would have made its asinine threat to suspend the Ecuadorean embassy's diplomatic status and enter it by force, or that scores of police would have surrounded the building, swarming up and down the fire escape and guarding every window, if it was all about one man wanted for questioning over sex crime allegations in Stockholm?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/21/why-us-is-out-to-get-assange?INTCMP=SRCH

....and top marks for using the word 'asinine', correctly, to describe the British government.

I don't see why Assange can't be questioned in the UK and why the Swedes can't guarantee not to extradite him to the US.  So far, all I've seen to the contrary is assertions that Sweden hardly ever extradites people to the States, which is not the same as undertaking not to extradite Assange there.  I understand that the Swedes have sent representatives to other countries to question people of interest to their legal system before.
  I'm not a one-eyed Asange follower, but do agree with Milne that the whole thing is a bit of a smokescreen from what Wikileaks turned up in the first place.  Assertions that there have to be some secrets or that Assange is a bit creepy are completely beside the point, as are any nasty things the Ecuardorean government may have done to its reporters. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 24 August, 2012, 04:06:42 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 21 August, 2012, 07:57:04 PM
Where's Beaky Smoochies when you need him?

You rang m'lud?

Quote from: bikini kill on 21 August, 2012, 08:39:16 PM
I'd like to see what Beaky could do with Todd Akins's exculpatory plea "The mistake I made was in the words I said, not in the heart I hold". It's an unusually brave strategy for a politician to admit that the shit that pours from his mouth bears absolutley no relation to what he actually intends to do.

Todd Akin may not have actually meant what he said, but it looked simply atrocious, and he needed to think of the good of his party and just step aside post haste, the fact he hasn't thus far will not win him any friends in the Senate in the event he actually beats Clare McCaskill in November, which is now doubtful whereas before he was almost a dead cert to win (Missouri is as red a state as they come).  He's a knucklehead for not reading the writing on the wall and stepping aside by Monday morning, if the GOP lose that seat and (potentially) control of the Senate in November (with 51 votes needed to overturn Obamacare), he's gonna be burned in effigy for a long time to come, he'll be the 21st century Republican equivalent of Benedict Arnold, and no mistake...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 01 September, 2012, 10:34:24 AM
Are you feeling OK, Mr Eastwood (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19434705#) ?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 September, 2012, 02:51:25 PM
Eastwood's monologue at Romney-Con surely heralds the end of a once great career. This guy was an icon, so watching him slowly die in stage was heartbreaking.

Blaming Obama for the afghan war, for not bringing troops home faster (which in fairly sure isn't Republican policy), claiming than the prison camp at Guantanamo shouldn't be closed because it "was expensive to set up".  The most support he could muster for Mit was that "maybe" "possibly" it was time for "someone else", since the current president hasn't insulated the US against a global economic collapse he inherited.

All of this was sad, the sort of illconsidered mud slinging which has become commonplace in American politics... addressing your complaints to an empty chair, which you pretend is insulting you? The only thing harder to watch than that was the sight of the baying crowd, cheering as Clint stumbled over his words, egging him on to insult Oprah and churn out tired movie lines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 September, 2012, 03:20:00 PM
If he'd stepped up to the mic, growled "Obama's been fuckin' useless", then exited the stage, I would have been cheering right along with those wizened WASP wanks. Seeing all those white faces light up when Eastwood dropped his "we own this country" line was still frightening, though- even knowing that by 2030 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-11-population-study_N.htm) that won't be the case in either demographic or financial terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 September, 2012, 02:58:39 AM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/c37.0.403.403/p403x403/314183_516261715069953_1911816237_n.jpg)

Sesame Street has always been educational
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 September, 2012, 12:15:17 PM
I think a new system should be created based on mutual co-operation with our fellow Earthlets, greater respect for one another, and less reliance on corporations/banks and Religious zealots.

Perhaps we should start a 'Pipe-dream' thread or a 'This will certainly never happen' thread.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 September, 2012, 01:51:39 AM
Those darn Republicans, at it again:



Anti-gay Republican Caught Cruising Craigslist For 18-Year-Old Male Prostitute (http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/anti-gay-republican-caught-cruising-craigslist-for)




If the Republican party properly came-out en masse and went for the gay-vote the'd probably win every election.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 04 October, 2012, 03:53:49 AM
Two more debates like that and Mittens Romney will be the next Puppet-in-chief of the USA.

And I can't say I'll miss the current guy any more than I'll look forward to seeing the new one in action.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2012, 11:31:35 PM

Hugo Chavez re-elected in the Venezuelan presidential election; who woulda thunk it?! That's another fiver Ladbrokes have had off me, but I'm confident that the punts I take every year on the Ayatolla Khamenei and Alex Ferguson being unseated will pay out any day now.

http://tehrantimes.com/opinion/102199-a-socialist-victory-in-the-venezuelan-elections (http://tehrantimes.com/opinion/102199-a-socialist-victory-in-the-venezuelan-elections)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 October, 2012, 11:43:34 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.


You never did leave the KGB.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 08 October, 2012, 11:50:12 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.
I caught some of his speech on Newsnight. He's still using his old "all in this together" nonsense and then he gets an applause by saying the current determination of theirs is inspired by Thatcher?!
Yeah- bringing her into it will surely convince the doubters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 October, 2012, 11:53:53 PM
There something familiar about Romney?

I wonder if JW see the future?

(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/120822105409-romney-story-top.jpg)

(http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/9116/341158-19752-126086-1-2000-a-d_super.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 08 October, 2012, 11:58:45 PM
AND on the subject of Romney/Ryan and the whole Tea Party movement...
Why is it whenever these people say they support the ideas of Ayn Rand, the Democrats don't point out that two of Rand's works (Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged) feature a "strong woman" whose first sexual encounter is an act of sexual assault and both women fall in love with the men responsible? Isn't that a very dangerous idea to be putting across?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 October, 2012, 12:21:29 AM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 08 October, 2012, 11:58:45 PMIsn't that a very dangerous idea to be putting across?

As opposed to the benign humanity espoused by the rest of her work?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 October, 2012, 12:27:42 AM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 08 October, 2012, 11:58:45 PM
Why is it whenever these people say they support the ideas of Ayn Rand, the Democrats don't point out that two of Rand's works (Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged) feature a "strong woman" whose first sexual encounter is an act of sexual assault and both women fall in love with the men responsible? Isn't that a very dangerous idea to be putting across?


It worked great in WATCHMEN
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 12:52:59 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 October, 2012, 12:21:29 AM
As opposed to the benign humanity espoused by the rest of her work?
Ha you've got me trying to think of a character in either book who could be described as being kind or decent and it's proving difficult.
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 October, 2012, 12:27:42 AM
It worked great in WATCHMEN
That is a weird one, isn't it- especially after reading his INVISIBLE GIRLS AND PHANTOM LADIES piece. Still- there's always hope that one day when Rand's works are being viewed as something to draw inspiration from, THIS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j56IiLqZ9U will be shown in response...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 October, 2012, 01:06:27 AM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 12:52:59 AM
That is a weird one, isn't it- especially after reading his INVISIBLE GIRLS AND PHANTOM LADIES piece.


It's human and within the context of a story in a comic that's very self-aware.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 01:31:43 AM
I get that myself but I remember either on the In Search of Steve Ditko documentary or maybe even Comics Britannia Moore explained that whole development on camera. Him doing that had me wonder whether the producer had actually asked him why he'd written that or whether Moore wanted to discuss it himself because a small number of people (hopefully small, anyway) could have looked at that as some kind of misogynistic fantasy or something along those lines. I understand people can see whatever meaning they want in whatever they're paying attention to, but Moore explaining that some 30 years or so after it had first been printed just seemed a little strange to me. Stranger yet was The Daily Mail etc weren't demanding this disgusting material be taken from the shelves immediately afterwards...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 09 October, 2012, 06:10:56 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.

...and finally he hits rock bottom, been a while coming too, you either need to get a reality check or a seriously strong human compassion transfusion, Rich dude, you may not agree with Osborne's political views, but "horrible car crash", "painful form of cancer", that is both genuinely sad and truly malevolent that I thought not even possible by your own (admittedly low) standards, not to mention utter malice of such I had yet to encounter on this forum, sad dude, genuinely, genuinely sad, I pray you nor anyone you love (besides yourself, clearly) are neither in a "horrible car crash" nor develop "a painful form of cancer", but just one more thing before I logout, you posted THIS on the Prometheus  thread on October 4 this year;

Mmm... maybe you missed my post about not making this personal?
This stops now.
By all means, talk about how Prometheus is rubbish, but do not make any more posts like this.

... by that same standard, are you going to reprimand, ban, or remove yourself as moderator from this forum, if not, more than a little hypocritical, wouldn't you say, I await your (no doubt) venomous and oh-so-witty response, but I'll not hold my breath ::), 'nuff said... and then some!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 October, 2012, 07:48:39 AM
Really struggling with that vow to leave and never come back, aren't you, Beaky? I'm not surprised that I can add "hypocrite" and "liar" to the long list of your reprehensible character traits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 October, 2012, 08:35:55 AM
Mild-mannered humanist RAC goes all Old Testament on the money-changers for once, and right-wing heathen-smiter Beaky disapproves?  I don't know what to think now. 

I will say this, though: getting 'personal' about some sleazebag politico on the Political Thread is one thing, getting personal about a highly valued member of this fan community is something else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 October, 2012, 08:38:08 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 October, 2012, 07:48:39 AM
Really struggling with that vow to leave and never come back, aren't you, Beaky? I'm not surprised that I can add "hypocrite" and "liar" to the long list of your reprehensible character traits.

Jim has put it better than I could.
I'm touched that your need to defend a right wing millionare against a post I made on a site about a comic prompted you to break your word.
And do me a afavour - if you're praying for me, make it to Odin. He's cool and has a groovy horse. Not really interested in that Jimmy Saville peadophile ghost fella you claim to follow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 October, 2012, 09:05:27 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 October, 2012, 08:35:55 AM
Mild-mannered humanist RAC goes all Old Testament on the money-changers for once, and right-wing heathen-smiter Beaky disapproves?  I don't know what to think now. 

I will say this, though: getting 'personal' about some sleazebag politico on the Political Thread is one thing, getting personal about a highly valued member of this fan community is something else.

HUG!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 09 October, 2012, 09:27:10 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 October, 2012, 08:35:55 AM
Mild-mannered humanist RAC goes all Old Testament on the money-changers for once, and right-wing heathen-smiter Beaky disapproves?  I don't know what to think now. 

I will say this, though: getting 'personal' about some sleazebag politico on the Political Thread is one thing, getting personal about a highly valued member of this fan community is something else.

The money changers and the worship of power and wealth get a fair hammerin' in the new testament as well Tordelback. Indeed the use of, and attitude to, power and wealth is used as one of the primary indicators of where our hearts truly lie. Unfortunately a lot of this is often ignored. I would say more about Jimmy saville but can't remember reading that bit.

Beaky fella I would agree that wishing ill on anyone (e.g. Iranians) isn't the best of sentiments except I don't think Richmond was actually wishing that. He doesn't need me to talk for him but I think he was just expressing extreme anger at something and this Christian shares the anger if not the expression of it.

All the best fellas. Mrs Merton would be proud of us.

Ps I really like Odin too. Huge Thor fan me-massive comic collection on that front.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 October, 2012, 12:31:44 PM
Not to sound too rude but George Osbourne is a proper Twat, just like the rest of his party. I'm a bit sick of hearing 'we're all in it together'. I also cannot understand how the Lib Dems and Tories can formed a coalition when their political ideologies are so fundamentally different (are they different?). And as for Labour, they're a bunch of clowns as well.

The only parties I hate more than the main 3 is the BNP and EDL. Knobs the lot of 'em!!!

I thought I'd stepped in Dogshit the other day but when I looked it was a BNP leaflet!

Cheers  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 09 October, 2012, 12:33:18 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.

I wouldn't shed a tear for a single one of them, and I'm a very moderate, compassionate and sensitive human being. In fact, I came out as more to the left than the Dalai Lama in that online test thing that was doing the rounds some months back.

I believe in the inherent goodness of humanity but we are being governed by a mob of truly despicable elitist gangsters, who have nothing but contempt for 99.9% of the electorate.

So fuck it, line 'em up I say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 01:46:18 PM
I wasn't raised to follow any particular religion, the closest I came to that was having to pray at the end of each school assembly. I was brought up to see the good of the Labour party, however and think they have received a lot of flack in recent years. Some people blame an entire global financial crisis on Labour- largely as the Conservatives rushed out to say it was Labour's fault time and time again- and believe this despite a number of economic experts etc at the time saying Gordon Brown was taking the right path to try and get a quick recovery. Sadly, this recovery was choked right off by those in charge now. I understand people will have different views but the way I see it when it comes to politics- at least with Labour we're safe in the knowledge we won't lose the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 October, 2012, 02:55:26 PM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 01:46:18 PM
I wasn't raised to follow any particular religion, the closest I came to that was having to pray at the end of each school assembly. I was brought up to see the good of the Labour party, however and think they have received a lot of flack in recent years. Some people blame an entire global financial crisis on Labour- largely as the Conservatives rushed out to say it was Labour's fault time and time again- and believe this despite a number of economic experts etc at the time saying Gordon Brown was taking the right path to try and get a quick recovery. Sadly, this recovery was choked right off by those in charge now. I understand people will have different views but the way I see it when it comes to politics- at least with Labour we're safe in the knowledge we won't lose the NHS.

I used to think Labour were great (back when they represented the common individual) but over the years they've become more like the Tories. All the political parties seem to be moving towards a common goal of non stop bullshit to the electorate. 

The NHS is something to be cherished but I think even Labour will sell out the remainder of their morals for the right price.

Cheers  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 09 October, 2012, 04:39:42 PM
And so much for the olympic games inspiring a generation twaddle. We've got the bulldozers outside digging up the last playing field in our town. Pppppfffffrrrrttttt!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 October, 2012, 05:15:18 PM
I am happy to see this thread latterly becoming more relatable as it calls for the murder of our feudal masters and an end to their constant taxes on the working classes.
What we need more than anything is an election system that relies entirely on write-in candidates.  It means that we might end up with Zod or Robocop in Downing Street, but at least those guys will murder you to your face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 09 October, 2012, 07:08:06 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 09 October, 2012, 05:15:18 PM
I am happy to see this thread latterly becoming more relatable as it calls for the murder of our feudal masters and an end to their constant taxes on the working classes.
What we need more than anything is an election system that relies entirely on write-in candidates.  It means that we might end up with Zod or Robocop in Downing Street, but at least those guys will murder you to your face.

You'd get my vote Prof.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 October, 2012, 08:50:00 PM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 09 October, 2012, 01:46:18 PM
I wasn't raised to follow any particular religion, the closest I came to that was having to pray at the end of each school assembly. I was brought up to see the good of the Labour party, however and think they have received a lot of flack in recent years. Some people blame an entire global financial crisis on Labour- largely as the Conservatives rushed out to say it was Labour's fault time and time again- and believe this despite a number of economic experts etc at the time saying Gordon Brown was taking the right path to try and get a quick recovery. Sadly, this recovery was choked right off by those in charge now. I understand people will have different views but the way I see it when it comes to politics- at least with Labour we're safe in the knowledge we won't lose the NHS.

Gordon Brown had the longest period in office, the greatest influence on policy, and enjoyed more independence of action than any Chancellor in living memory (perhaps of all time). He really has no-one else to blame for selling off assets to fund non-capital expenditure during the boom years, without replenishing those reserves (while credit was still easily available on favourable terms) to see us through the bust that Brown assured us he'd put an end to. There are sound economic reasons why Angela Merkel's sitting, like Smaug, on top of a pile of gold in Frankfurt.

Worse, the Labour Party (1997-2010) managed to throw unprecedented sums of cash at the NHS without improving the service or establishing a source of long-term funding for it that would have put it beyond the reach of characters like Osbourne and Cameron. Health spending still accounts for around 7% of UK GDP; if the IMF's gloomy predictions about the UK's negative growth prove correct, the coalition's going to look at cutting NHS staffing and resources - and it's difficult to see how Labour could or would do differently in the same circumstances.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 October, 2012, 09:04:21 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 October, 2012, 08:50:00 PM
There are sound economic reasons why Angela Merkel's sitting, like Smaug, on top of a pile of gold in Frankfurt.


Or rather Ben Shalom (the great Worm) Bernanke (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/debate-breaks-out-in-germany-over-foreign-gold-reserves-a-833289.html) is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 09 October, 2012, 09:12:09 PM
"Selling off assets to fund non-capital expenditure" ?

Do you mean selling industry and business ownership, along with gold reserves abroad to pay for politicians and civil servants obscene incomes?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 October, 2012, 09:31:43 PM
You've done it now, the Borg will be coming for you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 10 October, 2012, 04:09:36 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 09 October, 2012, 09:27:10 AM
Beaky fella I would agree that wishing ill on anyone (e.g. Iranians) isn't the best of sentiments except I don't think Richmond was actually wishing that. He doesn't need me to talk for him but I think he was just expressing extreme anger at something and this Christian shares the anger if not the expression of it.

Once again you're the moderate voice in the extremist crowd - myself notwithstanding, of course - Prodigal dude, and I don't wish harm on Iranians, it's their leadership that needs to be taught a valuable lesson... preferably by a payload of bunker busters and a nice nuke down the hole, and God bless the Israeli pilot that pulls the trigger on the one that sends Ahmadinejad to Hades...

And our fair 'moderator' - and that's a joke in itself now - wished plainly and explicitly that a politician whose views he disagreed with would get either in a car crash or develop cancer, I think that speaks for itself, he was clearly wishing that, and he's an idiot for doing so... although the fact he's a fool isn't exactly a surprise!

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 09 October, 2012, 08:38:08 AM
Jim has put it better than I could.
I'm touched that your need to defend a right wing millionare against a post I made on a site about a comic prompted you to break your word.
And do me a afavour - if you're praying for me, make it to Odin. He's cool and has a groovy horse. Not really interested in that Jimmy Saville peadophile ghost fella you claim to follow.

The subject matters may be different, but you chastised one poster for getting personal, whilst you clearly got a heck of a lot more personal yourself, it was hypocrisy and you know it is, but why would I expect anything less from you?  And I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say with that Jimmy Saville remark, what he or a ghost (?) has to do with your hypocrisy and utter ineptitude as a so-called 'moderator' is beyond me, but stick with the medication, Rich, it's bound to kick in one of these days... 

Now if you'll excuse me, this forum has started to stink something awful, enjoy yourselves gentlemen, you deserve each other (Prodigal excepted)... here endeth the lesson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 October, 2012, 04:41:47 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 10 October, 2012, 04:09:36 AM
And our fair 'moderator' - and that's a joke in itself now - wished plainly and explicitly that a politician whose views he disagreed with would get either in a car crash or develop cancer

No he didn't. He said he wouldn't get upset if he did. That's quite a big distinction. It's the difference between actively wishing harm on someone and lacking compassion regarding their eventual fate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: WhitBloke on 10 October, 2012, 04:44:13 AM
If asked yesterday, "Hey, how do you put one pile of holes inside another pile of holes?" I wouldn't have had a clue.  About the only response I could have mustered would have been, "There's so many holes there, it's not funny."  Mind you, if somebody were to have shown me it's quite likely I would have thought them some kind of genius.

That was yesterday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2012, 07:41:17 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 10 October, 2012, 04:09:36 AM... it's their leadership that needs to be taught a valuable lesson... preferably by a payload of bunker busters and a nice nuke down the hole, and God bless the Israeli pilot that pulls the trigger on the one that sends Ahmadinejad to Hades...

...

...wished plainly and explicitly that a politician whose views he disagreed with would get either in a car crash or develop cancer

As a wise Gungan once said, "Better dead here, den deader in da core...Ye gods, whatsa mesa sayin?"

Neither wishing nor God make it so, however similar the wish.  Important lesson.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 08:41:37 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2012, 07:41:17 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 10 October, 2012, 04:09:36 AM... it's their leadership that needs to be taught a valuable lesson... preferably by a payload of bunker busters and a nice nuke down the hole, and God bless the Israeli pilot that pulls the trigger on the one that sends Ahmadinejad to Hades...

...

...wished plainly and explicitly that a politician whose views he disagreed with would get either in a car crash or develop cancer

As a wise Gungan once said, "Better dead here, den deader in da core...Ye gods, whatsa mesa sayin?"

Neither wishing nor God make it so, however similar the wish.  Important lesson.

I was going to point out this hypocrisy myself...

QuoteAnd I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say with that Jimmy Saville remark, what he or a ghost (?)
It's all in that old book, I'm surprised you don't know the story. Y'know, when the magic ghost gets a 13/14 year old girl pregnant? You're right of course, as far as we know, Savile did not have any children.

But really, Beaky, you do seem to have a particular problem with me. I would suggest that if you find my moderation of the forum to be suspect, that you report my posts and they in turn will be moderated by someone else.

QuoteNow if you'll excuse me, this forum has started to stink something awful, enjoy yourselves gentlemen, you deserve each other (Prodigal excepted)... here endeth the lesson.

Oh, sorry. You've left again forever. Again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 October, 2012, 10:03:52 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 10 October, 2012, 04:09:36 AMOnce again you're the moderate voice in the extremist crowd - myself notwithstanding, of course - Prodigal dude, and I don't wish harm on Iranians, it's their leadership that needs to be taught a valuable lesson... preferably by a payload of bunker busters and a nice nuke down the hole, and God bless the Israeli pilot that pulls the trigger on the one that sends Ahmadinejad to Hades...


Of course bombing people in the name of god is not extremist at all.

Hypocrisy indeed.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 10 October, 2012, 10:29:39 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 October, 2012, 11:34:53 PM
I would not be at all upset if George Osborne died in a horrible car crash. Or from a painful form of cancer.

THIS.

The guys a class A tit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 October, 2012, 10:40:28 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 08:41:37 AM
Oh, sorry. You've left again forever. Again.

Funny how the 'stink' coming and going seems to coincide with BS (good intials; I wonder if we should read something into that?) flouncing in and out of the forum...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 10 October, 2012, 12:47:27 PM
The world has indeed gone to shit if we no longer have the freedom to wish our detested political leaders dead. Am i no longer allowed to say i hope Margaret Thatcher dies a painful death then? Try telling that to my father's generation- or even just my father- and see the response you get. When you do, you'd better hope your beloved tories havent completely destroyed the NHS, because you'll need it.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 12:48:37 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Well, he's a Norn Iron Christian, so what else do you expect?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 October, 2012, 01:15:40 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 12:48:37 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Well, he's a Norn Iron Christian, so what else do you expect?

A plastic cup of tea on the way home from the pub?

But seriously what the fuck is that supposed to mean? I know plenty of Norn Irn christians that are nothing like BS. Get personal with that loon all you want, but don't tar all NI christians with the same brush
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 01:25:39 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 10 October, 2012, 01:15:40 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 12:48:37 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Well, he's a Norn Iron Christian, so what else do you expect?

A plastic cup of tea on the way home from the pub?

But seriously what the fuck is that supposed to mean? I know plenty of Norn Irn christians that are nothing like BS. Get personal with that loon all you want, but don't tar all NI christians with the same brush

You're quite right, of course. I would count my own parents amongst that number. But there are plenty of right wing rascist loons there who call themselves Christian, too...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2012, 03:14:36 PM
Didn't know BS was a local boy, but an early wording of my above comment was along the lines of "Hey, Rich, did you mention you were a Catholic or something?  The board feels a bit 1985 all of a sudden."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 October, 2012, 03:25:08 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 01:25:39 PM
I would count my own parents amongst that number.

A godless heathen like you has parents?! I assumed that you had been expelled, fully-formed, from Satan's very own Infernal Rectum...

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2012, 03:31:06 PM
We call it Larne, Jim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 10 October, 2012, 04:17:01 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 12:48:37 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Well, he's a Norn Iron Christian, so what else do you expect?


Ear hold on-I'm an Norn Iron christian. I appreciate the stereotype (we do that stereotyping thing so well over here) but this one is a left wing seditious type engaged in full time peace and reconciliation work over here nto the bargain.

Please put the blunderbuss down Richmond. Some of us wish you nothing but peace. There are no nukes here bro'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 10 October, 2012, 04:20:31 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 01:25:39 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 10 October, 2012, 01:15:40 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 12:48:37 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
Ironically, quite clearly a pattern of deeply unchristian behavior.
Well, he's a Norn Iron Christian, so what else do you expect?

A plastic cup of tea on the way home from the pub?

But seriously what the fuck is that supposed to mean? I know plenty of Norn Irn christians that are nothing like BS. Get personal with that loon all you want, but don't tar all NI christians with the same brush

You're quite right, of course. I would count my own parents amongst that number. But there are plenty of right wing rascist loons there who call themselves Christian, too...

Undeniably, horrifically true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 October, 2012, 05:44:13 PM
Didn't realize there were so many Ulster types here. Let's all talk about the troubles, WON'T THAT BE FUN?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 October, 2012, 05:45:09 PM

Youz forgot to put any politics in your politics thread.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 10 October, 2012, 06:21:41 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 10 October, 2012, 05:44:13 PM
Didn't realize there were so many Ulster types here. Let's all talk about the troubles, WON'T THAT BE FUN?

Ha!

You're right about the Ulster types though-seems to be no shortage on here. Good to see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2012, 07:26:29 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 03:31:06 PM
We call it Larne, Jim.

Screw the Edit button, we need a Like button first.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2012, 08:56:20 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2012, 07:26:29 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 10 October, 2012, 03:31:06 PM
We call it Larne, Jim.

Screw the Edit button, we need a Like button first.

It's funny 'cause it's true!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 10 October, 2012, 09:00:22 PM
Damn last time I looked at this thread it was intense and was going to put this up to lighten it up abit everyone seems rather jovial but sod it I will put it up anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnxPuidq1qQ&feature=related




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 10 October, 2012, 10:18:56 PM
WUR NAWT BRIZIL WUR NORN AIRLIN etc.

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 11 October, 2012, 12:26:49 PM
Did BS commission these? The proud Ulstermen will raze Iraq to the ground...in the name of their Christian God.

(http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Screen-Shot-2012-10-10-at-10.02.46.jpg)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 October, 2012, 12:44:46 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 11 October, 2012, 12:26:49 PM
Did BS commission these? The proud Ulstermen will raze Iraq to the ground...in the name of their Christian God.

(http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Screen-Shot-2012-10-10-at-10.02.46.jpg)


What the heck is going on there??!

Where did you clock those John?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 October, 2012, 01:05:16 PM
You'll note the price is in Euros. To the people of the Republic the North is lumped under 'invading foreign  power', so you can understand the confusion. Dudes.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 01:18:01 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 11 October, 2012, 01:05:16 PM
You'll note the price is in Euros.

More specifically, it says "BJ €2" - not bad, as long as you don't have to go after the soldiers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 October, 2012, 01:20:38 PM
For the record I said I didn't want to bomb Iran. I never mentioned Iraq.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 01:23:36 PM
We took it as read.  Bombing guys who can bomb back is never as much fun.   ;)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 11 October, 2012, 01:34:51 PM
I don't want to bomb anyone...but I wouldn't shed a tear if they all died in a car crash...while crashing into a cancer ward or hospice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 11 October, 2012, 01:35:00 PM
not really though
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2012, 01:37:06 PM
You sir are a monster! This place stinks - I'm never coming back..!

Ummm... something about Israel...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 October, 2012, 01:39:20 PM
Pfft! Fuckin moderators.

Just wait till god hears about this message board - you is well fucked. Dudes.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 01:41:39 PM
god is cancer caused by a car-crash.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 11 October, 2012, 01:42:25 PM
Of to write a D-Beat song called "God is Cancer"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 01:46:34 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 01:41:39 PM
god is cancer caused by a car-crash.

Switch that around a bit and you have a Daily Mail headline.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2012, 02:31:28 PM
Only if an immigrant had the cancer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2012, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 11 October, 2012, 02:31:28 PM
Only if an immigrant had the cancer.

And gave it to Diana (God bless her) and cause house prices to plunge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 02:48:14 PM
MickVK has this on facebook:


Life Sized Satanic Doll Serves As Masturbation Toy For America's Youth (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0899/jar.html)

Any child that has seen this movie is finding that their natural attraction to members of the opposite sex is being replaced with an attraction to a 7ft devil with elephant feet, a 25 inch tongue, polka dot skin, a fish snout, and two phallic eyes that jut out like hard erotic pokers. For the Love of God! If you've got this devil in your house, remove it as soon as possible!




It's more disturbing and hilarious than you think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 October, 2012, 03:14:35 PM
As a God botherin' Norn Iron Christian I have been condemned as a right wing racist loon. I can take that. I would however like to make it clear that I have no association with the Daily Mail.

Even loons have standards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2012, 03:53:57 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2012, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 11 October, 2012, 02:31:28 PM
Only if an immigrant had the cancer.

And gave it to Diana (God bless her) and cause house prices to plunge.

You're underselling it if anything: the immigrant caught cancer abroad - from sex tourist pedophile Gary Glitter - and came here to get the NHS to pay for his treatment while he was claiming benefits and working, specifically building wind farms that brought down the property value of summer cottages.

In other Norn Irn news, the local population of bored middle class housewives and religeous zealots have a new hobby: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19902778
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 October, 2012, 05:53:30 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 11 October, 2012, 03:53:57 PM
In other Norn Irn news, the local population of bored middle class housewives and religeous zealots have a new hobby: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19902778

The report I heard on the radio said that the clinic in question had blast doors and shutters that made it look like Peach Trees on lockdown. The previously thriving abortion clinics of Stranraer and Birkenhead will have to start offering two-for-one deals in order to compete.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 05:57:46 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 11 October, 2012, 05:53:30 PM
The report I heard on the radio said that the clinic in question had blast doors and shutters that made it look like Peach Trees on lockdown.


Don't tell me...Marie Stopes is known locally as Ma Ma.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 October, 2012, 05:59:02 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 11 October, 2012, 03:14:35 PM
As a God botherin' Norn Iron Christian I have been condemned as a right wing racist loon.

Nahhh, that's the other guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 October, 2012, 06:07:02 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 02:48:14 PM
Life Sized Satanic Doll Serves As Masturbation Toy For America's Youth (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0899/jar.html)

"The doll was created for the sole purpose of masturbation. It has four openings, and three extrusions, making it compatible for male or female pleasure". "Four openings"? Girls have been holding out on me for years. Mind you, I appear to be sexually deficient (by a factor of three) myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 06:17:06 PM


You need to put out more, Sauch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 06:43:43 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 11 October, 2012, 06:07:02 PM
"The doll was created for the sole purpose of masturbation. It has four openings, and three extrusions, making it compatible for male or female pleasure". "Four openings"? Girls have been holding out on me for years.

Of course I've had it in the ear before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 October, 2012, 06:44:33 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 06:43:43 PM
Of course I've had it in the ear before.

Pardon?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 October, 2012, 06:53:32 PM
Here comes johnny yen again
With the liquor and drugs
And the flesh machine
He's gonna do another strip tease.
Hey man, where'd ya get that lotion?
I've been hurting since I've bought the gimmick
About something called love
Yeah, something called love.
Well, that's like hypnotizing chickens.

Well, I'm just a modern guy
Of course, I've had it in the ear before.
I have a lust for life
'cause of a lust for life.

I'm worth a million in prizes
With my torture film
Drive a gto
Wear a uniform
All on a government loan.
I'm worth a million in prizes
Yeah, I'm through with sleeping on the sidewalk
No more beating my brains
No more beating my brains
With liquor and drugs
With liquor and drugs.
Well, I'm just a modern guy
Of course, I've had it in my ear before
Well, I've a lust for life (lust for life)
'cause of a lust for life (lust for life, oooo)
I got a lust for life (oooo)
Got a lust for life (oooo)
Oh, a lust for life (oooo)
Oh, a lust for life (oooo)
A lust for life (oooo)
I got a lust for life (oooo)
Got a lust for life.

Well, I'm just a modern guy
Of course, I've had it in my ear before
Well, I've a lust for life
'cause I've a lust for life.

Here comes johnny yen again
With the liquor and drugs
And the flesh machine
He's gonna do another strip tease.
Hey man, where'd ya get that lotion?
Your skin starts itching once you buy the gimmick
About something called love
Love, love, love
Well, that's like hypnotizing chickens.

Well, I'm just a modern guy
Of course, I've had it in the ear before
And I've a lust for life (lust for life)
'cause I've a lust for life (lust for life)
Got a lust for life
Yeah, a lust for life
I got a lust for life
A lust for life
Got a lust for life
Yeah a lust for life
I got a lust for life
Lust for life
Lust for life
Lust for life
Lust for life
Lust for life
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 06:55:28 PM


You just made that up!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 11 October, 2012, 07:07:42 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 11 October, 2012, 06:44:33 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 October, 2012, 06:43:43 PM
Of course I've had it in the ear before.

Pardon?

a painful sdeath, car crash or Geworge Osbourne? I'm confused.Was the sex doll used at the party conference? Was Jimmy Saville there as we'll? Or is it Jim'll Fix it I mean do I?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2012, 07:14:36 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 06:55:28 PM


You just made that up!

Where's the damned LIKE button!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 October, 2012, 08:11:01 PM



(http://matthewpaulturner.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/577018_10151425061028835_1671986210_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 October, 2012, 08:24:55 PM
A sex toy? Really?
(http://www.retroactionfigures.com/images/281336_10150266764449819_158937874818_7315299_8215560_n.jpg)



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 14 October, 2012, 07:09:01 AM
this thread is getting like the threajacking thread.  Were you all moved by Clegg's apology?  Did anyone see Julia Gillard's 'misognyn' speech?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 14 October, 2012, 08:32:27 AM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 October, 2012, 07:09:01 AM
this thread is getting like the threajacking thread.  Were you all moved by Clegg's apology?  Did anyone see Julia Gillard's 'misognyn' speech?


I find Nick Clegg to be a bit of a damp squib, or wet fart or (insert appropriate). The trouble with him and others of his ilk is that they continually bullshit everyone, then they're on their knees begging forgiveness and understanding for causing the very problems we are facing.

Cheers  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 October, 2012, 02:21:18 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 October, 2012, 07:09:01 AM
Did anyone see Julia Gillard's 'misognyn' speech?

She sounds like a cunt.  joke (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJfy2VI23Cw)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 15 October, 2012, 02:50:53 PM
Scottish Independence - are ye for or agin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 02:57:17 PM
For and hopefully one of the benefits is that we will never see the New/Old Labour party in power south of the border EVER AGAIN :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:09:07 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 02:57:17 PM
For and hopefully one of the benefits is that we will never see the New/Old Labour party in power south of the border EVER AGAIN :lol:

Why, yes, because having this shower of over-privileged public school cunts in charge, dismantling our public services and putting them in the hands of private companies who will be subsidised by our taxes every time they prove too incompetent to make money even when handed a defacto monopoly is infinitely preferable.

Edit to add: Beyond the dreams of Swift -- they're selling our blood. (http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-tories-are-selling-our-blood-those.html)

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 03:11:58 PM
Go UKIP :thumbsup:

If it's good for Scotland then it's good for us ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:16:30 PM
UKIP are also shower of over-privileged public school cunts, who happen to have added parochial little-Englander syndrome to their array of unappealing character traits. Let's face it, if you dislike foreigners so much that you can't find a place in the Tory party, drowning's too fucking good for you.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 03:23:42 PM
See how people think that UKIP are all about hating 'Johnny foreigner' which it isn't. I would say it's primarily all about not wanting to be ruled by 'unelected' imbeciles in Europe (which is doing quite well don't you think). I wonder if they will ever get their books straight in the near future!

I always loved the way they have two meeting places in Europe, which is an excellent way to save money as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 October, 2012, 03:33:00 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 14 October, 2012, 07:09:01 AM
Did anyone see Julia Gillard's 'misognyn' speech?

I thought this speech was priceless, although her colleagues kept annoyingly stepping on her punchlines. The smarmy twat opposite (whose name I can't be bothered to Google) should've known better. To slag someone off for misogynistic comments with his track record, he was just laying himself open to a monstering. And another tip - when being harangued by a woman for sexism, DO NOT check your watch, it doesn't help!

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:16:30 PM
Let's face it, if you dislike foreigners so much that you can't find a place in the Tory party, drowning's too fucking good for you.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 03:38:00 PM
I always thought that a typical Labour supporter was like that lady who Gordon Brown said was a bigot and her being a life long supporter of the party as well :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 03:41:45 PM
QuoteI would say it's primarily all about not wanting to be ruled by 'unelected' imbeciles in Europe

Except, of course, that they are not unelected, are they?
Remind me... UKIP hvae no MPs..? But they have elected memebers sitting... where is it again..?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:45:50 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 03:38:00 PM
I always thought that a typical Labour supporter was like that lady who Gordon Brown said was a bigot and her being a life long supporter of the party as well :lol:

I heard what she said to Brown and --you know what?-- I'd have had more respect for Brown and the Labour Party if they'd told their spin doctors to fuck off and just said:

"Yes, she's a bigot. We don't care if it's a generational thing to dislike foreigners, we need immigrants to swell the workforce because we have an ageing population and not enough citizens of working age to support them. If we can't breed a large enough workforce (and we can't, certainly not quickly enough) then we have no option other than import them."

But issues like immigration are held hostage to the agendas of the tabloid front pages and sensible debate on this, much like drug policy, is impossible.

Double bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 03:53:00 PM
The UKIP party are showing us all the methods of corruption used in Europe, you won't find that sitting on the outside. Out of all the leaders of the parties in the UK, I have the most respect for Nigel Farage.

I agree about the use of spin doctors Jim, it's a joke! It seems that the spin doctors have no idea what the populace want but keep being employed by political parties to tell them what they want to hear, at our cost!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2012, 05:38:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:09:07 PMEdit to add: Beyond the dreams of Swift -- they're selling our blood. (http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-tories-are-selling-our-blood-those.html)

It always amazes me that comments sections of blogs like that aren't just swamped with people typing "fucking cunts" and "I am going to kill David Cameron with a fucking hammer" in all caps.  If I was even vaguely political and living in the UK proper I think I'd be going mad by now, or at the very least have some sort of ulcer - thank Christ I have plenty of localised Norn Irn lunacy to distract me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 15 October, 2012, 06:18:19 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 03:41:45 PM
QuoteI would say it's primarily all about not wanting to be ruled by 'unelected' imbeciles in Europe

Except, of course, that they are not unelected, are they?
Remind me... UKIP hvae no MPs..? But they have elected memebers sitting... where is it again..?

The EU parliament is a talking shop. I just prefer UKIP doing the talking. B|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 06:27:37 PM
Quote from: Stan on 15 October, 2012, 06:18:19 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 03:41:45 PM
QuoteI would say it's primarily all about not wanting to be ruled by 'unelected' imbeciles in Europe

Except, of course, that they are not unelected, are they?
Remind me... UKIP hvae no MPs..? But they have elected memebers sitting... where is it again..?

The EU parliament is a talking shop. I just prefer UKIP doing the talking. B|

You say a talking shop, CF says they're our unelected leaders... I would suggest that in cannot be both.
Out of curiosity though, can anyone tell me anything - anything at all - that UKIP have actually achieved in their infiltration of the European Parliament?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 06:44:54 PM
Being such a small party they will never be able to stop the pigs feeding from the trough but they have revealed corruption all over the place. Strangely nothing seems to get done about it because it's the people who make the laws that feed from the corrupt trough, funny that!

I won't waste my time like I did months ago with links about other stuff, when no-one 'wants' to believe in such things. All you have to do is google and you will find and be amazed at that beautiful gravy train!

I must say that I'm amazed that people who are for Scotland wanting independence, want to be controlled by Europe, funny that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 06:51:05 PM
"Controlled by Europe"?

I don't even know what that means!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 October, 2012, 06:54:47 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 06:27:37 PM
Out of curiosity though, can anyone tell me anything - anything at all - that UKIP have actually achieved in their infiltration of the European Parliament?

Made it appear to be stocked with otherwise unelectable junketeers?

I've been a flag-waver for the European Union project as long as I've been aware of it, but it should come as no surprise that my faith has taken one hell of a kicking in recent years*. I've also known too many people billeted in Brussels to have anything but horror for the wasteful expense of the operation itself.

However, I suspect the alternative is the perpetuation of the self-absorbed chauvinistic nation-state into the future, and that I really will have no truck with.  (-hums the Internationale quietly to himself-)



*Not that I blame Ireland's disastrous collapse on such ephemera as the Euro or ECB interest rate, those were epiphenomena feeding onto all-pervasive greed and short-sighted self-interest.  The subsequent handling of no-longer-our affairs by what turned out to be the tools of financial speculators and manipulators, and the tone adopted in its execution, I have real issues with.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:04:06 PM
If you would prefer the term governed then I'll settle for that, unless you don't think we are governed by the multitude of laws passed by Europe!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 October, 2012, 07:09:01 PM
I was under the impression that the EU mostly just issues 'guidelines' and everyone ignores them, apart from the tabloids when it's a slow news day and they're trying to stir things up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:17:49 PM
Let's just all agree then shall we that the EU is superb!

Absolutely no one involved with the EU is corrupt!
There has been no fiddling of the figures or cooking of the books!
Nobody has employed family members in jobs that should have been advertised!
Whistle blowers have NEVER been sacked, etc, etc...

Norway and Switzerland seem to do okay!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 07:42:37 PM
QuoteLet's just all agree then shall we that the EU is superb!

Absolutely no one involved with the EU is corrupt!

Mmm... pretty sure that nobody actually said that. But let's not a little thing like a fact get in the way, eh..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:44:56 PM
Here's an idea, why don't you list all the amazing things the EU have done for the member states that they couldn't have done for themselves, with their own money!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 October, 2012, 07:58:46 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:17:49 PM
Let's just all agree then shall we that the EU is superb!

Absolutely no one involved with the EU is corrupt!
There has been no fiddling of the figures or cooking of the books!
Nobody has employed family members in jobs that should have been advertised!
Whistle blowers have NEVER been sacked, etc, etc...

Norway and Switzerland seem to do okay!

And UKIP isn't corrupt or racist? (http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/10/ukip-staffer-tell-all-book-expose-corruption-and-racism-jasna-badzak-godfrey-bloom/)

And Farage is a paragon of democracy? (http://juniusonukip.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/ukip-marta-andreasen-on-farages.html)

Supporting UKIP cos the EU is corrupt is liking supporting Al Qaeda because America is corrupt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:44:56 PM
Here's an idea, why don't you list all the amazing things the EU have done for the member states that they couldn't have done for themselves, with their own money!

The diplomatic, political and trade bindings that European integration has caused have given rise to the longest uninterrupted period of peace in mainland Europe since the Romans.

Now, you can obviously argue that that effect wasn't a direct result of the EU as an organisation, but as a side-effect of process which gives rise to the EU as its most visible manifestation, I'll take it over pretty much all the alternatives.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 08:12:10 PM
I will argue that the EU had no effect in that Jim, thank you!

Also Dan, I see that that book isn't even out until 2014 and from that small article I look forward to reading what comes up, time will tell. Please buy the book and then tell me all the facts. I will wait with baited breath!

I enjoyed the other article about Nigel surrounding himself with people he wants, dear me I would have thought he would have went for people he hated. Please do better next time.

By the way the two articles are just claims at the moment and nothing factual, which is a shame because I prefer to read facts :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 October, 2012, 08:15:33 PM
....... or, CF, in the UK's case (along with the Germans, Swedes, Dutch and Italians), think what they could have done with all their own money that has, as EU net contributors, just disappeared.  Although, on the other hand, there are some wonderful new roads in Spain, Ireland and Greece!!

So Yugoslavia wasn't on mainland Europe then??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 08:16:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:44:56 PM
Here's an idea, why don't you list all the amazing things the EU have done for the member states that they couldn't have done for themselves, with their own money!

The diplomatic, political and trade bindings that European integration has caused have given rise to the longest uninterrupted period of peace in mainland Europe since the Romans.

Now, you can obviously argue that that effect wasn't a direct result of the EU as an organisation, but as a side-effect of process which gives rise to the EU as its most visible manifestation, I'll take it over pretty much all the alternatives.

Cheers

Jim

This.

They have also funded my wages for 12 years. Thank you Europe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 08:21:01 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 08:16:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:44:56 PM
Here's an idea, why don't you list all the amazing things the EU have done for the member states that they couldn't have done for themselves, with their own money!

The diplomatic, political and trade bindings that European integration has caused have given rise to the longest uninterrupted period of peace in mainland Europe since the Romans.

Now, you can obviously argue that that effect wasn't a direct result of the EU as an organisation, but as a side-effect of process which gives rise to the EU as its most visible manifestation, I'll take it over pretty much all the alternatives.

Cheers

Jim

This.

They have also funded my wages for 12 years. Thank you Europe.

And Nigel Farage's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 08:24:09 PM
Don't mention the war, some of the forum might just have been putting their own lives on the line for fellow Europeans during that conflict that the EU sorted out, with no help from the evil empire America!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 October, 2012, 08:29:06 PM
Sure ye wouldn't want help from America during a war, with all their 'friendly' fire
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 08:35:02 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 08:21:01 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 08:16:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 07:44:56 PM
Here's an idea, why don't you list all the amazing things the EU have done for the member states that they couldn't have done for themselves, with their own money!

The diplomatic, political and trade bindings that European integration has caused have given rise to the longest uninterrupted period of peace in mainland Europe since the Romans.

Now, you can obviously argue that that effect wasn't a direct result of the EU as an organisation, but as a side-effect of process which gives rise to the EU as its most visible manifestation, I'll take it over pretty much all the alternatives.

Cheers

Jim

This.

They have also funded my wages for 12 years. Thank you Europe.

And Nigel Farage's.

We have never been seen together. MOTWYW.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 October, 2012, 09:19:52 PM
While in the grand tradition of this thread I find myself opposed to his political opinions at almost every turn, I'd probably vote for CF himself given half a chance.  Fine appreciation of cultural heritage and its curation, and he certainly made the minibuses run on time. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 15 October, 2012, 09:25:59 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 06:27:37 PM
Quote from: Stan on 15 October, 2012, 06:18:19 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2012, 03:41:45 PM
QuoteI would say it's primarily all about not wanting to be ruled by 'unelected' imbeciles in Europe

Except, of course, that they are not unelected, are they?
Remind me... UKIP hvae no MPs..? But they have elected memebers sitting... where is it again..?

The EU parliament is a talking shop. I just prefer UKIP doing the talking. B|

You say a talking shop, CF says they're our unelected leaders... I would suggest that in cannot be both.
Out of curiosity though, can anyone tell me anything - anything at all - that UKIP have actually achieved in their infiltration of the European Parliament?

Besides annoying people I can't really think of anything spectacular off the top of my head. If all they're doing is just relaying the opinions of other EUskeptics then I'm fine with that, for now. Some of these people (ie. Barroso) need to be slapped around every once and a while, and I can't very well do it from my armchair!.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 October, 2012, 09:32:53 PM



Brussels is where they make all the evil.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 09:36:27 PM
I heard that the only place on earth that can legally produce sprouts, is Brussels!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 09:38:10 PM
They have invested billions of euros in the Norn Iron peace and reconciliation sector.

I spent most of my slice on comics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 October, 2012, 09:39:55 PM
If it weren't for all Brussels and Westminster's money, Norn Irn would be a third world country
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 09:42:15 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 15 October, 2012, 09:39:55 PM
If it weren't for all Brussels and Westminster's money, Norn Irn would be a third world country

More to the point I'd have no comics Joe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 October, 2012, 09:51:31 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 15 October, 2012, 09:39:55 PM
If it weren't for all Brussels and Westminster's money, Norn Irn would be a third world country


You mean part of the Republic?

You have a point.

But at least you'd have the comfort knowing that all your tax money would be spent making your road-signs as gaeilge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 October, 2012, 09:52:51 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 October, 2012, 08:15:33 PM
So Yugoslavia wasn't on mainland Europe then??

I've often thought the same when commentators made that claim, Tankie. While agreeing with your geography, Yugoslavia and the many nations into which it splintered following the collapse of the Soviet Bloc weren't members of the EU at the time they degenerated into civil war and genocide. I'm sure Jim didn't intend to argue that the self-evident emolient effects of greater economic and social integration extended beyond the political borders of the signatories of the Treaty of Rome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 October, 2012, 09:54:55 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 15 October, 2012, 09:42:15 PM
More to the point I'd have no comics Joe.


Let's have a WAR! It'll boost the economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 October, 2012, 09:56:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 08:12:10 PM
Also Dan, I see that that book isn't even out until 2014 and from that small article I look forward to reading what comes up, time will tell. Please buy the book and then tell me all the facts. I will wait with baited breath!

Fair do's. I began googling stuff, but then just couldn't be arsed doing a proper job of it. I know in my soul that they're evil twatbaskets, but I'm never going to convince you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 October, 2012, 10:21:40 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 06:44:54 PM
I must say that I'm amazed that people who are for Scotland wanting independence, want to be controlled by Europe, funny that!

Most Scots are phlegmatic concerning the EU because we've been sending our elected representatives to a parliament in another country for over 300 years. When folk discuss a federal Europe they most often point toward the USA as a model, but the United Kingdom (especially after devolution) seems to provide a better paradigm.

You're right that the decidedly fuzzy (dis)connection between voters and their MEP's (and the lack of accountability this encourages) means the wee buggers need a closer eye kept on them to avoid corruption, but we've just been through a similar experience with our own domestic governing class. That's not a valid argument for abandoning UK parliamentary democracy or the Union, and it's not much reason for giving up on the European project either..

It's naive to imagine that, without the EU, decisions that directly affect your life wouldn't be taken in other countries by people who don't care what you think anyway. Some mechanism has to be in place to allow us to influence that decision making process; the fact that the European Parliament doesn't do so is more of an argument in favour of reform and greater participation than a retreat into splendid isolation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 October, 2012, 10:23:05 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 October, 2012, 09:56:49 PM
... I know in my soul that they're evil twatbaskets...

Of course they are, they're policians
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 October, 2012, 10:29:12 PM
*POLITICIANS

ARRRRGGGHHH
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 October, 2012, 12:12:22 AM



If you don't trust cunts over here why trust cunts over there?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 16 October, 2012, 12:42:25 AM
Never trust a pelican.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 October, 2012, 12:55:10 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 16 October, 2012, 12:42:25 AM
Never trust a pelican.

Their bills are bigger than they look
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2012, 07:42:43 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 October, 2012, 09:52:51 PM
I'm sure Jim didn't intend to argue that the self-evident emolient effects of greater economic and social integration extended beyond the political borders of the signatories of the Treaty of Rome.

Well, yes. I would have thought my explicit reference to the peace being an effect of trade, political and diplomatic ties would have made it quite clear that I wasn't referring to countries not subject to those effects.

I think the fact that the collapse of a large and hostile empire that had ranged along thousands of miles of border, and that empire's subsequent regression into disparate nation states along various historic borders, resulted in only one civil war of any significance is fairly remarkable.

Rather than disproving the point about European integration (note that I am describing this as a process of which the EU is a manifestation, not arguing that the EU is the necessary or best means of achieving that process) it would seem to me that the only significant conflict in the wider European geographical area took place in a nation/s not subject to those ties of integration suggests the reverse.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 October, 2012, 08:02:32 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 October, 2012, 10:21:40 PM...phlegmatic...

Europe has gone disastrously wrong in failing to implement a law mandating the use of this word at least once a day.  Mmmmmm, phlegmatic....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 02:30:53 PM
But, Jim, I read your "explicit reference" to be "mainland Europe"!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2012, 02:53:01 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 02:30:53 PM
But, Jim, I read your "explicit reference" to be "mainland Europe"!

If you want to be obtuse about this, be my guest. Clearly, by describing the benefits of integration I was referring to the states that were actually subject to that integration.

If you want to point to a civil war caused by the demise of the authoritarian regime that held half-a-dozen or so smaller states within a larger confederation more-or-less with an iron fist, and draw equivalence with the wars that raged pretty much continuously between the nation states of Europe for 1500 years prior to that, then you are free to do so. I, however, would suggest that such equivalence is a product of your political/rhetorical intent rather than any sensible judgement of the comparison.

Even then, as I said, one localised conflict as the fallout from the collapse of the Soviet empire along all those thousands of miles of border is actually pretty remarkable in itself. Look East and see how things are turning out in the "Stans" for an alternative picture of that fragmentation can work out.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 03:30:09 PM
I might be obtuse but you were wrong, weren't you.  I only replied to what you wrote.  You should have put "within the borders of the EU"!!  My "political/rhetorical intent" has got nothing to do with it, you were just factually incorrect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2012, 03:36:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 03:30:09 PM
I might be obtuse but you were wrong, weren't you.  I only replied to what you wrote.  You should have put "within the borders of the EU"!!  My "political/rhetorical intent" has got nothing to do with it, you were just factually incorrect.

*sigh* Doesn't really detract from my actual point, does it? +/- One relatively small civil war, we've enjoyed a longer period of peace than at any time since the Romans, or do you want to include the Lebanon and/or Israel given that they have Mediterranean coasts?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 03:42:33 PM
Why would I want to include Lebanon and Israel, they're not in Europe!!  I think the main reason there has been a long period of peace in much of Europe (but not all) has more to do with NATO than the EU.  Still, we're obviously not going to agree, so, c'est la vie!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2012, 03:47:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2012, 03:42:33 PM
I think the main reason there has been a long period of peace in much of Europe (but not all) has more to do with NATO than the EU.

No, we're certainly not going to agree, particularly on that point.

I shall take my leave of this discussion in the interests of my blood pressure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 16 October, 2012, 08:42:08 PM
Please excuse me while I cry a huge river for Alan Johnson. B|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 October, 2012, 10:23:08 PM
Quote from: Stan on 16 October, 2012, 08:42:08 PM
Please excuse me while I cry a huge river for Alan Johnson. B|

"The Home Secretary has made a decision today that's in her own party's best interest; it is not in the best interests of the country." (http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-10-16/alan-johnson-accuses-home-secretary-of-serving-party-interests/)

What, like following the US into two disatrous and unnecessary wars, Alan? One of the advantages of our electoral sytem is that every five or ten years a new lot take over and are free to admit that what their predecessors did was fucking stupid and reverse their decisions. Blair and Brown's cronies popping up every now and again to tell us that the coalition is undoing all their good work is like the guy who shat on your carpet criticising the cleaner for using too much Vanish and Febreze on the stain. And yes, I know the current lot are no better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2012, 03:42:45 AM
Holdonaminutethere... Didn't it leak out about a year or two ago that Gordon Brown had been trying to get a deal via the US ambassador to have McKinnon serve a sentence in the UK?

These politician folk are a confusing bunch, aren't they?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 07:00:44 PM
Just watched the ITV news and I have to say, well done to the COALITION Government for seeing more people employed in the UK since records began :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 October, 2012, 07:42:55 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 07:00:44 PM
Just watched the ITV news and I have to say, well done to the COALITION Government for seeing more people employed in the UK since records began :thumbsup:

Records began in 1971, when the UK population was 56 million. It's around 62 million now, there are more women in work now than in the Seventies, and there are a lot of part-time jobs in those figures too.

The connection between having a larger number of people of working age in the country and there being more people in work is a no-brainer, and that's at least partly a result of all the able-bodied young Poles and North Africans we've had to import to wipe the arses of our burgeoning elderly population - and some people would like to send those workers back where they came from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 October, 2012, 07:45:23 PM
And also the definition of 'employed' is somewhat elastic...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2012, 07:52:07 PM
Does 'employed' in this instance include those who are in 'training'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 17 October, 2012, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2012, 03:09:07 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2012, 02:57:17 PM
For and hopefully one of the benefits is that we will never see the New/Old Labour party in power south of the border EVER AGAIN :lol:

Why, yes, because having this shower of over-privileged public school cunts in charge, dismantling our public services and putting them in the hands of private companies who will be subsidised by our taxes every time they prove too incompetent to make money even when handed a defacto monopoly is infinitely preferable.

Edit to add: Beyond the dreams of Swift -- they're selling our blood. (http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-tories-are-selling-our-blood-those.html)

Bah.

Jim

^THIS.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 17 October, 2012, 08:04:41 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2012, 07:52:07 PM
Does 'employed' in this instance include those who are in 'training'?

Yes it most probably does.  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 October, 2012, 08:10:40 PM
Quote from: Mabs on 17 October, 2012, 08:04:41 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2012, 07:52:07 PM
Does 'employed' in this instance include those who are in 'training'?

Yes it most probably does.  :-\

And those who are not employed and also not signing on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 08:12:31 PM
Great news isn't it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 17 October, 2012, 08:17:52 PM
The Coalition have made it even easier for people to lose their JSA for upwards of 3 months- say for writing down 19 things you did in search for work one week instead of the agreed 20. That would see you lose your JSA for 3 months and during those three months, you're not classified as being unemployed! During these 3 months you can't apply for a crisis loan for bills, food etc because you are not claiming JSA. Then there are the various training places were the Job Centre pays £1 a week of your JSA and the government funded course pays the rest. Again, during this time, you are not classified as being unemployed.
A friend of mine arranged to start a course that would increase his chances of finding work doing what he enjoyed. He was told when he went to sign-on that he had to start a course the following week. When he explained to his advisor he couldn't because of the course he had arranged to go on himself, he was told he would lose his JSA unless he went to the one the Job Centre told him to go to.
Our Coalition government- always a way to fiddle the statistics and kick those who are already down!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 08:24:21 PM
He should complain to his MP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 17 October, 2012, 08:27:00 PM
He probably won't have an MP if Cameron gets his boundary changes in*!
*If Cameron does, he will be the 3rd Conservative PM to play with the boundaries to make it harder for another party to be elected into power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 08:30:17 PM
Even with the boundary changes he will still have an MP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 17 October, 2012, 08:33:50 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 08:30:17 PM
Even with the boundary changes he will still have an MP
And now the idea of boundary changes confuses me all the more... I thought the recent argument for it was "We have too many MPs- let's cull!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 October, 2012, 08:37:26 PM
Less MP's equates to more people to supposedly work for, so less done per individual. I wonder if they will absorb the wages of the MP's who are binned into their own with a lovely pay increase!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 October, 2012, 08:38:55 PM
Imagine my delight when I discovered that -- should my work ever dry up and leave me unemployed -- my NI contributions don't count for benefit purposes. That's right: I pay tax and NI; I make a net contribution to the UK economy because I'm bringing overseas currencies into the country, and my NI DOESN'T FUCKING COUNT towards benefit.

Bollocks.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 October, 2012, 08:51:41 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 October, 2012, 08:38:55 PM
Imagine my delight when I discovered that -- should my work ever dry up and leave me unemployed -- my NI contributions don't count for benefit purposes. That's right: I pay tax and NI; I make a net contribution to the UK economy because I'm bringing overseas currencies into the country, and my NI DOESN'T FUCKING COUNT towards benefit.

Bollocks.

Jim

God bless the Tories, they're doing a great job, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 17 October, 2012, 09:59:31 PM

Have you heard they've invented a new coffin for Ed?
It's from the head down to shoulders.

It's for people who are dead from the neck up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 18 October, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
In all seriousness I think the current political system is a Fucking shambles. Democracy is largely an illusion considering the three main parties are not only profoundly similar, but also the way they forget their own political stance to 'cozy up' with each other to form coalitions (not just the current crop of twats, Labour would have done the same).

Politicians should be accountable to the General Public, but I fear this isn't (or ever will be) the case!

I won't call for revolution cause the Fuzz have tried doing me for incitement before, so all I will say is...

Cheers  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 October, 2012, 01:29:52 PM
Just playing devil's advocate here, but perhaps we're being unreasonable in wishing cancer upon David Cameron and a painful hammer related bludgeoning on Nick Clegg just for wanting to line their own pockets at the expense of the rest of the citizenry and the well-being of the country?  They're in a paid job and the aim in any paid job is to make as much cash as possible before you're out the door one way or another and that's what they're doing.  I mean, I wouldn't expect a McDonalds employee to stop and think "how will what I do next affect the long term economic and political health of Britain as a whole?" every time they go to mop up sick or unblock a toilet, and maybe we are being unreasonable to expect that of the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JTurner on 18 October, 2012, 02:05:47 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 18 October, 2012, 01:29:52 PM
I mean, I wouldn't expect a McDonalds employee to stop and think "how will what I do next affect the long term economic and political health of Britain as a whole?" every time they go to mop up sick or unblock a toilet, and maybe we are being unreasonable to expect that of the Tories.

Except that thinking "how will what I do next affect the long term economic and political health of Britain as a whole?" is Cameron and Clegg's bloody job.

I'd like a McDonalds employee to occasionally stop and think "how will what I do next affect the long term health of my customer as a whole?".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 October, 2012, 02:07:19 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 18 October, 2012, 01:29:52 PMThey're in a paid job and the aim in any paid job is to make as much cash as possible before you're out the door one way or another ...

I know you are exaggerating for ironic effect here Prof, but can you imagine if that was really the aim in every paid job?  I appreciate that there may be jobs where your only aim is the dosh of a Thursday (stockbroking, Eastenders scriptwriter, paparazzi etc.), but happily most folk put more into their work than the value of their pay would require.  One quakes in horror at the notion of a world where nurses only put in what they were remunerated for.  I suspect this is something that the voracious parasites that infest political and financial life will never understand - work itself has a value that transcends the monetary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 October, 2012, 02:40:04 PM
Trust me, TB, you do not need to lecture a man who draws comics about doing something for love rather than actual money - but the only people who get into a job where everyone hates them for the love of the job alone are professional wrestlers who play heels, and even then sooner or later they get to play a babyface.  Cameron does not get to play the good guy, ipso fatso he is in it for the money.

Quote from: JTurner on 18 October, 2012, 02:05:47 PMExcept that thinking "how will what I do next affect the long term economic and political health of Britain as a whole?" is Cameron and Clegg's bloody job.

This is naive.
Someone pays you 5 pounds to do something and someone else offers 10 pounds to do something else, which do you take and who do you work for?  Now change "5 pounds" to "a civil servant's wage" and "10 pounds" to "consultancy fee" and you get the idea.  Cameron does not work for you or me or any other British subject, he works for the people who give his party money and will pay him fat consultancy fees when he leaves number 10 in a year or two, and his job is to think of ways to obfuscate this as best he can, not to make our lives better.  He does not do that job for the good of his health or to make friends with poor people, he does it to make money and we all know that yet still expect him to act contrary to his best interests and I am suggesting this might be unreasonable on our part.
Okay, yes, he is dismantling health services and will profit from the murder of the sick and vulnerable, but what did we expect, really?  Did anyone, anywhere really think "Oh good, David Cameron is running things, now things will be better?"  Things are getting worse just like we knew they would, yet still we kvetch like we expected otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 October, 2012, 02:42:08 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 18 October, 2012, 02:40:04 PM
Did anyone, anywhere really think "Oh good, David Cameron is running things, now things will be better?" 

Commando Forces, apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 October, 2012, 02:48:42 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 18 October, 2012, 02:40:04 PM
Trust me, TB, you do not need to lecture a man who draws comics about doing something for love rather than actual money - but the only people who get into a job where everyone hates them for the love of the job alone are professional wrestlers who play heels...

Didn't mean to lecture, Prof, and certainly didn't mean to suggest Cameron (and ilk) was anything but well-dressed pond scum - merely trying to develop your point by contrasting actual people doing real jobs with those who consider themselves our betters, to whom an almost unimaginable living is apparently owed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 18 October, 2012, 03:03:40 PM

No it don't.

Why are you having a pop at ole MacDonald , what about you're local boozery? I know it's an Englishman's right to enjoy a pint, but alcohol consumption turns our town centre to a no go zone at Friday and Saturday evenings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 03:16:11 PM
Considering I never never voted Conservative this time but Liberal, just to stop a Tory candidate getting in, in the town I would wish some people would get their facts correct. I, unlike the blind faithful who will always put a cross in the Labour box, can think for myself. To be so closed to any idea unless Labour come up with it is quite sad really.

Notice how I'm not using derogatory words to put this across. I wouldn't dream of saying someone who votes for another party is a c**t, bastard, evil, scum, etc... The use of the first word shows a contempt for woman and that you associate part of the female form with being the worst there is. My extreme left wing wife wonders how you lot can claim to be 'so for the people' but use that word.
I won't even mention using bastard and its connotations with single parent families and the way the conservatives supposedly treat them all. I suppose you'd walk up to a child that doesn't know its father and call it a bastard. At the very least can you use descriptive words that don't slight women or children but then again, that is the way of the left wing mind, or so it would seem.

Anyway, back on track. Your blind faith is disturbing to say the least. You probably kept voting for Labour even when you realised Blair wasn't quite what you thought. Why not vote for some other party and I don't mean the Torys but that would mean you become a traitor in your own eyes probably.

Looking through this fun thread is quite hilarious. The bile and hate comes from one corner and that is, well have a guess! You never want a reasoned debate, as god forbid you might ever agree with something that someone from the right says, you'd have a heart attack before you said that's good. It's always negative!

I am neither left or right but a bit of everything, so really I would be more Liberal. I have mentioned before certain things I would like for the country. Free travel on buses and trains for all eligible, free public sports centres, public run sectors run without the massive waste of money, etc... but because I'm hard on criminals and want controlled immigration (I'm sure you think controlled immigration means no foreigners) and such things then I am totally right wing  ::)

I am ready for the outpouring of bile and hate now :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 18 October, 2012, 03:20:13 PM
Why do you assume that everybody but you is a labour voter no matter what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 October, 2012, 03:33:21 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 03:16:11 PMConsidering I never never voted Conservative this time but Liberal, just to stop a Tory candidate getting in, in the town I would wish some people would get their facts correct.

I didn't say you voted Conservative. Honestly, I wish people would get their facts straight.

However, given that you actually said that anything which prevented a Labour government from ever being elected again would be a good thing, it's not unfair to assume that you would find a Tory government preferable to a Labour one, particularly given your Euro-sceptic leanings.

And, for what it's worth, I've voted for all three of the main parties in England in various elections over the last 25 years, plus a selection of independents in council elections. My bile for this particular shower of cunts springs from their self-evident contempt for the electorate. These people think they're better than us, they don't even think it's worth coming up with convincing lies to justify their contemptible smash and grab raid to hand our taxes to private enterprise whilst denying us the services we thought we'd be getting for our tax money...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 03:43:48 PM
This is exactly it, I didn't. I said the 'blind faithful' that doesn't say everyone on here or the planet.

Just seen the next one by Jim. So the Labour Party never did this, or were not planning to do so if they got in, which they have admitted in some departments reference the cuts!

By the way, you used that word Jim ;)

Just so you know [spoiler]I put those little bits up because I know certain people will be drawn to the board and it gives me a warm glow inside to know that I can control your actions. Just like I did when you unspoilered this bit[/spoiler] ;) I reckon I should patent my skill, if that is possible.

Deep down I like this thread because no-one ever wants to kill anyone, except that evil lot of scum from the LEFT :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 October, 2012, 04:17:43 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 03:43:48 PM
Just seen the next one by Jim. So the Labour Party never did this, or were not planning to do so if they got in, which they have admitted in some departments reference the cuts!

I don't care. I care about the barefaced lies, ideology dressed up as necessity. The first thing the coalition did, for example, was embark on the 'bonfire of the quangos' on the grounds that we 'couldn't afford' these organisations. Never mind that this included the UK Film Council which raised more inward investment than it cost to run; never mind that it included the FSA when, clearly, the last thing the financial sector needed was less regulation; never mind all that, when pressed, the Government was forced to admit that this policy wasn't going to save any money at all. What it did do, though, was throw tens of thousands of people onto the dole right in the middle of an economic downturn for no practical reason, just ideology hidden behind a transparent lie.

I don't have time to list all the policies the coalition is implementing whose stated justifications are provably untrue, but it's a long fucking list. And if it was a Labour government doing this? Then, yes, I'd be bitching just as hard about that, too.

(I'm still waiting for apologies from the long line of people (not on here) who heaped online abuse on me for suggesting that the Iraq dossier was a blatant fabrication when it was first published,* and I hope there's a very special place in Hell for Tony Blair.)

QuoteI reckon I should patent my skill, if that is possible.

I have no idea what that last part was supposed to mean. If you mean you're deliberately baiting people with statements you don't mean in order to elicit a response, there's a word for that, and it's trolling.

Bah.

Jim

*Seriously. I read the whole thing. It was pathetic. I could have naffed a few fuzzy satellite photos off the internet and added arrows and captions saying "missile base". There wasn't a single sentence in the whole dossier that I would have dignified with the term 'fact'. Well, they got Iraq's geographical location right...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 04:37:35 PM
The last part first, it's called a joke! Unlike the vile words that come across in some people posts and I'll include you in that Jim with your love of the word c**t. Can't you pick another word less offensive to women and most decent people, especially on a forum that has female members. You do like to use phrases and sayings, ref books and it's cover. Now I'm not 100% sure but isn't there a saying about arguments and swearing!

By the way, I loved the way you say that you don't care that the Labour party would have implimented some, if not a most of those cuts (that's all online) so long as it keeps you happy then that is okay.

I will heap praise when it's due and I agree reference Blair and the war, it was an absolute disgrace and he should be held to account. Pity the die hards voted him in again though! From what I read and hear he is thinking of coming back for another go with the party but it's all gone quiet as of late.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 October, 2012, 04:44:03 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 04:37:35 PM
Now I'm not 100% sure but isn't there a saying about arguments and swearing!

"As my old Nan used to say: if you can't say something without swearing, then you're obviously a cunt."

QuoteBy the way, I loved the way you say that you don't care that the Labour party would have implimented some, if not a most of those cuts (that's all online) so long as it keeps you happy then that is okay.

That is most emphatically not what I said. Unless you stopped reading that paragraph after the first three words, in which case I'd be careful about complaining that other people are misrepresenting you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 October, 2012, 04:47:41 PM
I read it all.

By the way, loving the excessive use of your favourite word!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 18 October, 2012, 08:39:14 PM
Well, at least no one has used the term 'Binders full of women'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 18 October, 2012, 09:31:46 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 17 October, 2012, 08:51:41 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 October, 2012, 08:38:55 PM
Imagine my delight when I discovered that -- should my work ever dry up and leave me unemployed -- my NI contributions don't count for benefit purposes. That's right: I pay tax and NI; I make a net contribution to the UK economy because I'm bringing overseas currencies into the country, and my NI DOESN'T FUCKING COUNT towards benefit.

Bollocks.

Jim

God bless the Tories, they're doing a great job, eh?
This was under Blair regime as well. I took a sabbatical from work for three years and discovered this back then. You can't blaim the Tories for this.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 19 October, 2012, 01:24:25 AM
Binders full of women!

I'm sorry about your Tory government.  They come across as beyond parody
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 October, 2012, 07:21:06 PM
Andrew Mitchell has resigned; score one to the plebs. Actually, should the fact that the Police Federation have demonstrated their ability to bring down a government minister during pay negotiations be a cause for celebration? I wonder what other public sector workers will get the heave so cops can maintain their current terms and conditions and above-inflation wage increases?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 October, 2012, 07:26:27 PM
Great news :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 October, 2012, 10:42:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 October, 2012, 08:38:55 PM
Imagine my delight when I discovered that -- should my work ever dry up and leave me unemployed -- my NI contributions don't count for benefit purposes. That's right: I pay tax and NI; I make a net contribution to the UK economy because I'm bringing overseas currencies into the country, and my NI DOESN'T FUCKING COUNT towards benefit.

Bollocks.

Jim

Is that right, Jim?  I thought Class II Contributions (assuming you're self-employed) covered a range of benefits but not contributory-based JSA.  But you'd still be able to claim non-contributory-based JSA.  Still, if I've got this wrong, I'm sure there will be plenty of people on here willing to shoot me down!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 October, 2012, 10:55:38 PM
I can't claim contribution-based JSA with Class 2 and Class 4 NI -- only Class 1 counts. I am eligible for income-based JSA, but you'll note the word "income" in that description, which means that I'm automatically disqualified because my wife works. This would not be the case if'd had the exact same career over the last few years as an employee of someone else.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 October, 2012, 11:50:22 PM
PENSIONERS WEED SELVES (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2219477/Cannabis-factory-couple-gave-400-000-drug-dealing-fortune-poor-Kenyans-jailed-years.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)

'I am sure you were doing good things in Kenya with your drugs money, whether that was to appease your consciences I can only speculate.'

Appease their consciences? As far as I can tell, the only reason these two had to look to their consciences was that they were supplying a local dealer, who may or may not have been involved in nasty dealer shit. Of course, the only reason they were mixing with that type of person, and the only reason that kind of person was interested in selling their produce was because dope's illegal and there's widespread demand for it ... I think I see a solution.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 October, 2012, 12:02:41 AM
Jovus Drokk, Sauchie, warn a Squaxx when you're going to link to that Mail site!  Every time I go there I see... things that can't be unseen, and start thinking dark uncharitable thoughts about humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 20 October, 2012, 04:59:45 PM

Once you legalise dope you go down the road of legalising smack and coke, followed by prostitution. Where does it end up? Slave ownership?

I don't think we need to be locking up dope fiends though...unless they vote Tory of course.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 October, 2012, 05:55:22 PM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 04:59:45 PMOnce you legalise dope you go down the road of legalising smack and coke, followed by prostitution. Where does it end up? Slave ownership?

Please explain.

More addictive and dangerous narcotics than marijuana (alcohol, nicotine, caffeine) are freely available on the open market.  A cynical man - and I think the record will reflect that I am certainly not one of those - would suggest that the only real reason MJ isn't legal is because it's already so freely and widely available to anyone that actually wants it that taxing it would be impossible compared to taxing the existing alternatives like tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and - latterly - cooked food.  Your lords want their bite of the pie and they wouldn't get that from making mj legal - if anything, they'd see a decrease in sales of some of the alternatives (except cooked foods).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 October, 2012, 06:50:42 PM
Exactly, Pro Byah. Pasties: roll 'em, light 'em, smoke 'em.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 20 October, 2012, 07:04:09 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 20 October, 2012, 05:55:22 PM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 04:59:45 PMOnce you legalise dope you go down the road of legalising smack and coke, followed by prostitution. Where does it end up? Slave ownership?

Please explain.

More addictive and dangerous narcotics than marijuana (alcohol, nicotine, caffeine) are freely available on the open market.  A cynical man - and I think the record will reflect that I am certainly not one of those - would suggest that the only real reason MJ isn't legal is because it's already so freely and widely available to anyone that actually wants it that taxing it would be impossible compared to taxing the existing alternatives like tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and - latterly - cooked food.  Your lords want their bite of the pie and they wouldn't get that from making mj legal - if anything, they'd see a decrease in sales of some of the alternatives (except cooked foods).

But isnt keeping it illegal more costly in terms of policing?  If it was just a money equation?  All I know is from a personal perspective if it was legal, I'd probably dabble, so I'm kind of happy it isn't... Have enough trouble with my motivation these days as it is! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 20 October, 2012, 07:23:00 PM
I think Weed should be legalized for a couple of reasons.

The procurement of it can lead to meetings with extremely unsavory types who'll do a lot worse than 'sell you harder drugs'.

Buying a product which is unregulated (Weed) can expose you to contaminants; Ie: fiberglass resin, glass particles, sugar spray, etc. This is all done to give the illusion of 'Crystals' on what would otherwise be below standard home-grown.

And finally, I thought the only reason it was initially made illegal was because the Pharmecuticals lobbied the Goverment of the time so that they could then con the General Publuc with their mass produced nonsense.

Cheers, and legalize it!   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 20 October, 2012, 08:09:56 PM
Just say no, Kids.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 20 October, 2012, 08:32:45 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 20 October, 2012, 05:55:22 PM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 04:59:45 PMOnce you legalise dope you go down the road of legalising smack and coke, followed by prostitution. Where does it end up? Slave ownership?

Please explain.

More addictive and dangerous narcotics than marijuana (alcohol, nicotine, caffeine) are freely available on the open market.  A cynical man - and I think the record will reflect that I am certainly not one of those - would suggest that the only real reason MJ isn't legal is because it's already so freely and widely available to anyone that actually wants it that taxing it would be impossible compared to taxing the existing alternatives like tobacco, alcohol, caffeine, and - latterly - cooked food.  Your lords want their bite of the pie and they wouldn't get that from making mj legal - if anything, they'd see a decrease in sales of some of the alternatives (except cooked foods).

So, if marijuana was legalised, the sales of caffeine would fall, would they?  Hmmm, sure you're not indulging!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 20 October, 2012, 10:24:10 PM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 04:59:45 PM

Once you legalise dope you go down the road of legalising smack and coke, followed by prostitution. Where does it end up? Slave ownership?

I never thought I'd comment in this thread but Fonky's right. He's totally right. I grew up smoking weed and I've got to say, I regularly not only pimp out prostitutes but purchase their services. Also I have a slave. I named him Rory Gallagher after Rory Gallagher and he MOWS MY LAWN.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 20 October, 2012, 10:30:55 PM
Well that's just tosh. I've never smoked anything in my life and I own dozens of slaves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 October, 2012, 10:59:53 PM
Didn't George Washington force his slaves to toil in his massive dope plantations all the live-long day?

WARNING: CONTAINS MILLA JOVOVICH (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH__GUg1EwY)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 20 October, 2012, 11:38:42 PM

This is my point it will turn the clock back circa 235 years... as soon as you legalise weed, the next person starts shouting for his human righs too..."The govt. have legalised pot! What about us other so-called criminals? Now legalise crack for me!"

As I've said... once you go down that route you'll have every pervo in the country clammering for equal rights.... "What do you mean I'm not allowed to shag my sister?" We'd be better off going back to living in caves.

Look at "sir" Jimmy Saville for crissakes.

Sorry to bore you folks with crap facts on a friday night, when you're probably all too stoned to focus your eyes on these words...let alone reply articulately to them. Mmmnnnnmm.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 20 October, 2012, 11:44:58 PM
I think its time you went up the wooden hill, Mr Fonky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 October, 2012, 12:04:20 AM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 11:38:42 PM

This is my point it will turn the clock back circa 235 years... as soon as you legalise weed, the next person starts shouting for his human righs too..."The govt. have legalised pot! What about us other so-called criminals? Now legalise crack for me!"

As I've said... once you go down that route you'll have every pervo in the country clammering for equal rights.... "What do you mean I'm not allowed to shag my sister?" We'd be better off going back to living in caves.

Look at "sir" Jimmy Saville for crissakes.

Sorry to bore you folks with crap facts on a friday night, when you're probably all too stoned to focus your eyes on these words...let alone reply articulately to them. Mmmnnnnmm.


Worse drugs like alcohol and nicotene being legal didn't lead to the legalisation of paedophilia either. Just because a specific drug becomes legalised doesn't mean we collectively must decide to give up all morals. There are plenty of legal drugs that are far worse. Maybe you prefer that the unregulated black-market and criminals line their pockets selling it instead? Maybe legal and regulated production of marijuana could fund research into better health care?

As for pervs clamouring for their rights - a completely separate issue - there are groups that've been doing for the past 40 years in case you haven't noticed. We still, gladly, pay no attention to them. Just because someone asks for something doesn't mean you have to give it to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 October, 2012, 12:07:02 AM
Quote from: fonky on 20 October, 2012, 11:38:42 PM
Sorry to bore you folks with crap facts on a friday night, when you're probably all too stoned to focus your eyes on these words...let alone reply articulately to them. Mmmnnnnmm.

Saturday night.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 October, 2012, 08:46:35 AM
The argument that legalising one thing that many people deem to be acceptable will automatically lead to legalising something that everyone finds unacceptable is exactly the same nonsense that has been used to oppose gay rights, racial equality, universal franchise, secular schooling and comics fercripesakes.  It's one of the most pernicious and damaging lines of 'reasoning' loose in the world today. 

Evaluate the merits of a case on the evidence of that case as presented, not your warped perceptions of some unrelated case.

Or as some beautiful ladies in swumsuits would have it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXPcBI4CJc8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXPcBI4CJc8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 21 October, 2012, 10:31:44 AM

...Pot smoker one day, crack head the next...

I know this to be the case after watching "Reefer Madness" on channel 4 years ago.

Joe's right...I'm always asking for a pay rise but never get given any. It's enough to drive a guy to drink.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 October, 2012, 05:29:47 PM
Quote from: fonky on 21 October, 2012, 10:31:44 AM
It's enough to drive a guy to drink.

Watch out, you start drinking who knows WHERE it might lead!

A man I once read about drank a bottle of beer and ended up HUNG DRAWN AND QUARTERED. And then his remains were eaten by SHABBY DOGS.

IT COULD HAPPEN TO OUR ENTIRE CULTURE. This isn't hyperbole! THIS ISN'T MANIC CONJECTURE! This isn't entirely pointless presumption! THESE ARE THE FACTS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 October, 2012, 05:46:06 PM
I'm curious about the claim that MJ is a gateway drug: is there any science to back this up?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 October, 2012, 05:54:29 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 21 October, 2012, 05:46:06 PM
I'm curious about the claim that MJ is a gateway drug: is there any science to back this up?

I certainly found it to be a gateway to Supermacs.  That was some heavy shit.  Maybe not even 'heavy'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 21 October, 2012, 06:06:43 PM
You need to chill out mate. Have a smoke on a joiint to calm yourself down! This level of hysteria could encourage a witch hunt against alcoholics. Some misguided idiot could come on this forum and read your last post, then walking through the park on his way home beat up the nearest tramp he sees lying on the park bench drinking a bottle of meths, because he felt it a threat to his country's morals and code of conduct...BECAUSE OF YOUR LAST POST!


And I'm not exaggerating here....I personally know someone who had a forum with some lesbian transvestites after seeing a clip on YouTube from a swingers club. You see! Too much self indulgence invariably leads onto rampant moral degeneracy. If he'd restricted himself to just a spit roasting, he could still be here to tell you in his own words how awful life is to oversexed drug addicts.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 21 October, 2012, 07:03:05 PM
And on E-bay, the best bargain went to E-bay (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20022365) itself.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 21 October, 2012, 08:50:07 PM

Golly! That's unfair isn't it. I don't think I'll use ebay ever again because of that.

I bet David Cameron and Ed Milliband will be very angry when they find out about this.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 October, 2012, 06:48:26 PM
Nice to see Alex Salmond is just like all the rest.
His party has change its mind about NATO, hypocrites indeed! 'But we had a debate and decided to change what we have believed in for the last 30 years!' I suppose they saw how the Liberals went when they got a bit of power and realised the best way to advance is to throw out your principles!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2012, 07:51:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 October, 2012, 06:48:26 PM
Nice to see Alex Salmond is just like all the rest. His party has change its mind about NATO, hypocrites indeed! 'But we had a debate and decided to change what we have believed in for the last 30 years!' I suppose they saw how the Liberals went when they got a bit of power and realised the best way to advance is to throw out your principles!

Bring forth MacNeil, of the clan MacNeil.

On the offchance that Colin's busy; I'm not an SNP supporter, but you've got to admit that Wee Eck dances rings around every other politician (and political correspondent) in the country. Considering the mediocrity of those ranged against him, I wouldn't bet against him getting his way in the referendum. I'm sure this is an important part of his positioning going into next year's vote, and getting the nukes out of Faslane without completely alienating London or Washington seems like a win/win scenario to me.

I'd be more interested in hearing him explain exactly what difference independence will make if (as he currently insists) we'll be keeping sterling as our currency, and have our interest rates set by the Bank of England.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2012, 08:13:09 PM
QuoteI'm not an SNP supporter, but you've got to admit that Wee Eck dances rings around every other politician (and political correspondent) in the country.

Indeed! I'm broadly a supporter of the party, but you're right, watching him effortlessly destroy anyone who dares stand in his path is a joy to behold.
I agree with being in NATO, a couple of my local MSPs have just resigned the party in protest over this change of policy. I admire them for doing so, but this is this is one of the reasons I could never join a political party. The need to compromise or dilute ones own political beliefs for the sake of a party is something I could never do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 23 October, 2012, 08:55:35 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2012, 08:13:09 PM
QuoteI'm not an SNP supporter, but you've got to admit that Wee Eck dances rings around every other politician (and political correspondent) in the country.

I'm not an SNP supporter either, just an SNP voter. I don't intend to vote for them on independence.

Anyhoo, NATO and the SNP? See link.

http://wingsland.podgamer.com/how-we-learned-to-stop-worrying-but-without-loving-the-bomb/

Re currency and the Bank of England? Don't forget, this is just the starting point for a newly independent Scotland. Once we're independent, I'd like to see our own central bank be set up with our own currency. I'm hoping it'll be the Scot's Merk.  :D

Here's another article which has some stuff to think about in it regarding Scotland.
http://wingsland.podgamer.com/the-barnett-trap-and-the-expensive-lunch/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2012, 09:46:15 PM
Quote from: fonky on 21 October, 2012, 06:06:43 PMAnd I'm not exaggerating here....I personally know someone who had a forum with some lesbian transvestites after seeing a clip on YouTube from a swingers club.

Do you know anyone who did their best to sound like an arsehole on the internet?  If so, seek them out, they may have some advice you will find useful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2012, 11:14:13 PM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 23 October, 2012, 08:55:35 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2012, 08:13:09 PM
QuoteI'm not an SNP supporter, but you've got to admit that Wee Eck dances rings around every other politician (and political correspondent) in the country.

I'm not an SNP supporter either, just an SNP voter. I don't intend to vote for them on independence.

Anyhoo, NATO and the SNP? See link.

http://wingsland.podgamer.com/how-we-learned-to-stop-worrying-but-without-loving-the-bomb/

Re currency and the Bank of England? Don't forget, this is just the starting point for a newly independent Scotland. Once we're independent, I'd like to see our own central bank be set up with our own currency. I'm hoping it'll be the Scot's Merk.  :D

Here's another article which has some stuff to think about in it regarding Scotland.
http://wingsland.podgamer.com/the-barnett-trap-and-the-expensive-lunch/

That's actual MacNeil, folks. You don't see Henry Flint popping up here to offer his opinion on a third runway at Heathrow. Can't argue with this from the link above:

Nuclear weapons are pointless, expensive and dangerous even when not being fired at anyone. They didn't stop Argentina invading the Falklands or Iraq invading Kuwait, because in both cases the aggressor knew they could never be used. They haven't stopped any of the scores of wars that have beset the world since 1945, nor any terrorist atrocities. They're self-evidently NOT a deterrent, and if they're not a deterrent then they're no good for anything.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 October, 2012, 12:19:07 AM
I've just been watching You've Been Trumped, the documentary about the man with the world's most improbable comb over's reenactment of the plot of Once Upon a Time in the West on the East coast of Scotland. Here's Scottish cops demonstrating how much hired muscle $1.2 billion buys you (51 min):

LAW 27: BROWN SHOES DON'T MAKE IT (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nln7g/Youve_Been_Trumped/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 28 October, 2012, 12:39:29 AM


The long-awaited sequel to Local hero.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 October, 2012, 11:00:36 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 28 October, 2012, 12:39:29 AM
The long-awaited sequel to Local Hero.

Aye, they used that film quite cleverly in the documentary to hilight the difference between the romantic fantasy of film and the brutal reality of how those type of scenarios actually play out. The only small consolation is that Trump's now whining that the wind farm his former pals in the Scottish Government are planning to build off the shore of what used to be an unspoiled natural conservation zone will spoil the beauty of the area. Not a big fan of irony, is Mr Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 01:13:36 AM
QuoteNuclear weapons are pointless, expensive and dangerous even when not being fired at anyone. They didn't stop Argentina invading the Falklands or Iraq invading Kuwait, because in both cases the aggressor knew they could never be used. They haven't stopped any of the scores of wars that have beset the world since 1945, nor any terrorist atrocities. They're self-evidently NOT a deterrent, and if they're not a deterrent then they're no good for anything.

Actually, that's not self-evident at all. The whole paragraph is a very superficial approach to nuclear weapons. Nukes may not have prevented the proliferation of small wars, but no-one suggested that they would... not to say that it wouldn't have been immensely satisfying to have ground a H-Bomb right into the nose of Nasser or Galtieri or McGuinness, but it would have been a bit of overkill. What nukes have done, though, is stopped another big war (how quickly people forget that for almost half of the last century Europe was split in two by minefields and razorwire and Workers' Democracy and machine-gun nests!) and contributed to keeping the small wars contained by tying the hands of intervening forces, preventing them from escalating into big ones in the way a small insurgency in a corner of Bosnia ended up with the Somme. Today, nuclear weapons are the price of admission to the high diplomatic table and so tied to maintaining our relative prosperity in more ways than waging war - and if you honestly believe that there'll never be anything like the Cold War or a similar crisis in the future... well, I have a bridge in London that I'm looking to offload if you're interested!

And heck, look at it this way... if we didn't have nukes we would never have had the Apocalypse War, and the Dreddverse would be lesser for it.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2012, 09:44:26 AM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 01:13:36 AM
Nukes may not have prevented the proliferation of small wars, but no-one suggested that they would ... What nukes have done, though, is stopped another big war

Following VE day, my Granny prayed there wouldn't be another war every night; proving it wasn't her prayers which made the difference between war and peace in Europe would be difficult. My Granny's prayers and the absolute conviction some have that nuclear weapons averted WWIII are both superstitious beliefs, with no direct causal connection to the observable outcomes for which they are credited.

It could be argued that it was the Treaty of Rome (1957) which prevented war in Western Europe, since nuclear weapons certainly didn't prevent large scale and devastating conflict elsewhere. The people of Vietnam, Afghanistan, Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Columbia, and Nicaragua will be relieved to know that a proxy war - consisting of a series of military interventions, economic warfare, and gangsterism (on both sides) - lasting half a century and encompassing most of the globe is preferable to civil war within Europe.

It's been argued by folk with a better grasp of history than you and me that the fear of nuclear conflict actually facilitated the CCCP's brutal response to peaceful resistance movements in the Eastern Bloc, such as the Prague Spring. No-one from outside dared to help for fear of escalating the conflict and risking nuclear annihilation. If either Kennedy or Kruschev had been in slightly different moods on one afternoon in 1962, the terms within which these arguments are framed would be very different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2012, 11:02:38 AM
Ronald Reagan only found out that radiation was real when he watched The Day After, a tv movie which starred Steve Guttenberg, so while I'd like to think that the presence of nuclear weapons prevented a shooting war and thus justified their creation, the evidence isn't really there, only specious conjecture based on the fact the human race is still kicking - but considering some of the stories of close calls that have emerged over the decades that's as likely dumb luck as anything else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
QuoteIt could be argued that it was the Treaty of Rome (1957) which prevented war in Western Europe

:lol:

It could, sure, but it wouldn't get very far.

Again, people rapidly forget about the Iron Curtain and the T-72s waiting to roll across Germany and bring the manifold wonders of cheap vodka and Trabants to us savages. I think that had a more clarifying effect on minds in Western Europe than any level of starry-eyed cant about acquis communitaire. There were also only six founding states of the EU... you couldn't really say that it encompassed even all of "Western Europe" until Spain joined in 1986. Peace is easier to maintain when you keep reducing your scale to exclude the potential area of conflict. Maybe I should get a Peace Prize - there hasn't been any war in my street since I moved here.

The EU has done diddly-squat to maintain peace in Western Europe. NATO maintained peace in Western Europe, by which of course we mean that America maintained peace in Western Europe.

Incidentally, discounting UN work, EEC/EC/EU members have taken military action in at least the following countries:

-Afghanistan
-Albania
-Algeria
-Bosnia
-Central African Empire/Republic
-Chad
-Croatia
-Cyprus
-Egypt
-Falklands
-Iraq
-Ivory Coast
-Kuwait
-Kosovo
-Libya
-Oman
-Vietnam
-Zaire/Congo

...what was that about "superstitious beliefs, with no direct causal connection to the observable outcomes for which they are credited"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 October, 2012, 12:31:59 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 23 October, 2012, 09:46:15 PM
Quote from: fonky on 21 October, 2012, 06:06:43 PMAnd I'm not exaggerating here....I personally know someone who had a forum with some lesbian transvestites after seeing a clip on YouTube from a swingers club.

Do you know anyone who did their best to sound like an arsehole on the internet?  If so, seek them out, they may have some advice you will find useful.

That's shocking, you used the word arse. You should be penalised... Although you sound like you may have been penalised more than once.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2012, 01:02:25 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
The EU has done diddly-squat to maintain peace in Western Europe.

Except by making internal conflict undesirable and unprofitable through a shared economic and political base, and to many of us, simply inconceivable. It also serves to undermine the pernicious chest-beating effects of the nation state by offering a larger more exciting identity as a European, with our local and cultural identities intact but not necessarily tied to ideas of dominance and militarism.  For those of us who embrace the ideas of free trade and free movement, any European war would be a Civil War, and I think everyone agrees that one or two of those each was quite enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2012, 01:09:05 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
QuoteIt could be argued that it was the Treaty of Rome (1957) which prevented war in Western Europe

:lol: It could, sure, but it wouldn't get very far. Maybe I should get a Peace Prize - there hasn't been any war in my street since I moved here ...what was that about "superstitious beliefs, with no direct causal connection to the observable outcomes for which they are credited"?

Glad to see you (kind of) understood the point I made. That was an analogy; if I'd wanted to make that argument concerning the EU myself I would have said so in unambiguous terms.

There's no validity to the arguments that either the European Union or nuclear brinksmanship were responsible for maintaining the domestic peace in Western Europe, since we have no idea how things would have turned out otherwise. Both arguments involve taking an observable fact and working backwards to arrive at a conclusion which serves a preconceived ideological position. In epistemological terms, your argument conflates an a posteriori argument with falsely assumed a priori truth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 October, 2012, 02:28:16 PM

Smilies should be banned.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 02:47:56 PM
QuoteIt also serves to undermine the pernicious chest-beating effects of the nation state

It hasn't done anything of the sort, just kicked it up a level from the national to the "larger more exciting" continental, except that the European brand of swaggering self-absorbed arrogance tends to be parcelled with an inferiority complex about the other, bigger continental power - America. As for "ideas of dominance and militarism", hundreds of thousands of people have already been killed to date in modern wars waged by EU member states... and it looks set to continue. We already have EUFOR operations in the Balkans and Africa, the EADS defence conglomerate and movements towards a "Common Security and Defence Policy" specified in the Lisbon Treaty, so I wonder how long it will be until 'rationalisation and integration' create a military not only obfuscated by the EU's shoddy accountability, but also with the pooled resources that will only enable and encourage foreign invasions.

A quick wikiquote:

"The Petersberg tasks, which outline the duties of the European Rapid Reaction Force, have been expanded from humanitarian, rescue, and peacekeeping and peacemaking to include 'joint disarmament operation', 'military advice and assistance tasks' and 'post-conflict stabilisation'. It also states that, "all these tasks may contribute to the fight against terrorism, including by supporting third countries in combating terrorism in their territories."

That pretty much describes the "police action" of Vietnam.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2012, 02:53:26 PM
'Peace' in Europe was maintained by several means both overt and covert. See, for example, Operation Gladio - to which numerous analogous 'terrorost attacks' in modern Europe are entirely similar. This kind of thing (which, of course, does not go on any more because modern Europeans are entirely different to the Europeans of sixty years ago and no longer conspire for political or corporate goals) is designed to maintain peace (although a better word would be 'order') through tension.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 October, 2012, 05:10:02 PM
I laugh at the idea that the EU makes the world a safer place, many of its nations have been involved in the two Gulf wars and Afghanistan?  Hardly peacemakers!

How could a war in Europe be a civil war?  It's not a country (yet)!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2012, 05:25:05 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 02:47:56 PMAs for "ideas of dominance and militarism", hundreds of thousands of people have already been killed to date in modern wars waged by EU member states... and it looks set to continue.

Please point to the part of my post where I say that any of these things have been eliminated, or make any claims whatsoever for anything other than the unbelievable reduction of conflict within Western Europe, by contrast with the preceding millennia of almost endless war in the same area.  How member states act outside the EU, and how the EU presents itself on a world stage is an entirely different issue to the one I was address: to wit, peace in Western Europe in explicit response to this:
QuoteThe EU has done diddly-squat to maintain peace in Western Europe.

My case, such as it is, would be that this is at least a step on the road to co-operative internationalism - it is far harder to go to war with people you are actively working with, and with whom you have mutual economic and political interests.  The concept of the racially unified nation-state uber alles takes a beating when people are born and educated in one country, work, pay taxes and raise a family in another, but can still vote in both local government elections and the elections of the wider EU, and return home or to any other state within that area at any time.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 October, 2012, 05:10:02 PM
How could a war in Europe be a civil war?  It's not a country (yet)!!

Tankie, we seldom agree on much, but do me the favour of citing my remarks in some sort of context:

Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2012, 01:02:25 PMFor those of us who embrace the ideas of free trade and free movement, any European war would be a Civil War...

i.e. a war between elements within what is perceived as one body.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 October, 2012, 06:02:44 PM
Fair point, TB, that'll teach me not to "skip-read"!!  Although I am surprised you don't think we agree on much.   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2012, 06:04:51 PM
Is it really a revelation to any rational adult that, like people, no institution is either entirely good or evil, and that they need watching like hawks to make sure they aren't getting themselves into mischief?

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 October, 2012, 02:28:16 PM
Smilies should be banned.

Like wanking, they lead to greater evils. Also, how about a moratorium on posts that start with phrases such as What you don't seem to understand ..., or You obviously aren't aware that ... It's safe to assume that, like you, everyone else has read a couple of books and takes a look at the papers every now and then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2012, 06:48:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 October, 2012, 06:02:44 PM
Although I am surprised you don't think we agree on much.   :)

Other than our undying love, I meant.  Silly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 30 October, 2012, 07:24:16 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2012, 01:02:25 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 30 October, 2012, 12:21:13 PM
The EU has done diddly-squat to maintain peace in Western Europe.

Except by making internal conflict undesirable and unprofitable through a shared economic and political base, and to many of us, simply inconceivable. It also serves to undermine the pernicious chest-beating effects of the nation state by offering a larger more exciting identity as a European, with our local and cultural identities intact but not necessarily tied to ideas of dominance and militarism.  For those of us who embrace the ideas of free trade and free movement, any European war would be a Civil War, and I think everyone agrees that one or two of those each was quite enough.

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2012, 07:27:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2012, 02:53:26 PM
'Peace' in Europe was maintained by several means both overt and covert. See, for example, Operation Gladio - to which numerous analogous 'terrorost attacks' in modern Europe are entirely similar. This kind of thing (which, of course, does not go on any more because modern Europeans are entirely different to the Europeans of sixty years ago and no longer conspire for political or corporate goals) is designed to maintain peace (although a better word would be 'order') through tension.

Cheers, Shark. I knew the US (et al) hung around in Italy for far too long, on the premise of Commie-busting, but the preparations made to resist Soviet invasion and subversion in the UK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio#United_Kingdom) under the umbrella of Gladio was news to me. It's the perfect example of mission creep, and how the granting of powers which might just be deemed appropriate and proportionate in times of peril is often impossible to rescind in later times.

While I don't share American survivalist and Tea Party analyses of geopolitics, it's difficult not to share their unease at the United Nations' ability to waltz into other peoples' countries and tell them what to do at gunpoint. It's perfectly possible to see how an organisation that was set up to do good and ensure peace could end up being a tool of oppression unless its subject to scrutiny and censure by some kind of countervaling independent body.

Just in case this sounds like paranoia about what dirty foreigners get up to, here's Ian Cobain talking about Cruel Brittania, his very fair and nuanced study of the British government's use of torture in the fight against terror since WWII to the present day, and from the heart of London to Kenya to Northern Ireland and to Iraq. He starts with the observation that those who argue torture doesn't work are mistaken, which you wouldn't expect from a Guardian journalist:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nkwxc/Start_the_Week_Torture_terrorism_and_secrets/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nkwxc/Start_the_Week_Torture_terrorism_and_secrets/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gonk on 30 October, 2012, 10:43:53 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 October, 2012, 06:04:51 PM

Like wanking, they lead to greater evils. Also, how about a moratorium on posts that start with phrases such as What you don't seem to understand ..., or You obviously aren't aware that ... It's safe to assume that, like you, everyone else has read a couple of books and takes a look at the papers every now and then.

Maybe we should try to be a little less blase over the ability to be able to read books and newspapers; after all, in some countries and/or certain periods of history, this seemingly innocent pastime would have got you locked up in prison or worse.
Having said that though, I believe anyone with a set of Gary Glitter albums ought to be locked up or worse.

....better say something vaguely political....er..it's obvious that the current brand of political choices available in the west are entirely hegemonic in character, in the Gramanscian sense of the word, and that everyone really knows that true power belongs to the faceless,monolithic corporations that control the media and consumer utilities...um..blah blah...er..something else about the Arabs and the Jews and American demand for oil..

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 30 October, 2012, 11:14:41 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 October, 2012, 07:27:30 PM
Cheers, Shark. I knew the US (et al) hung around in Italy for far too long, on the premise of Commie-busting, but the preparations made to resist Soviet invasion and subversion in the UK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio#United_Kingdom) under the umbrella of Gladio was news to me.

And to me. Made for interesting reading.
Following that link, and as a fan of 'what if' fiction, im curious to read that The Third World War: The Untold Story (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_World_War:_The_Untold_Story) book, now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 30 October, 2012, 11:33:47 PM
Official UK Government document re an independent Scotland and the EU.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmfaff/writev/643/m05.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2012, 11:46:19 PM
Jovus. Trust the bureaucrats to take a perfectly simple idea like 'freedom' and complicate the Hell out of it like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 31 October, 2012, 07:11:21 AM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 30 October, 2012, 11:14:41 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 October, 2012, 07:27:30 PM
Cheers, Shark. I knew the US (et al) hung around in Italy for far too long, on the premise of Commie-busting, but the preparations made to resist Soviet invasion and subversion in the UK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio#United_Kingdom) under the umbrella of Gladio was news to me.

And to me. Made for interesting reading.
Following that link, and as a fan of 'what if' fiction, im curious to read that The Third World War: The Untold Story (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_World_War:_The_Untold_Story) book, now.

I remember reading that one back when it was first published.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 October, 2012, 08:07:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2012, 02:53:26 PM
See, for example, Operation Gladio - to which numerous analogous 'terrorost attacks' in modern Europe are entirely similar ... designed to maintain peace (although a better word would be 'order') through tension.

Cor, that is an interesting specific can of worms I've never peeked into.  Cheers, TLS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 31 October, 2012, 08:28:14 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 31 October, 2012, 08:07:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 October, 2012, 02:53:26 PM
See, for example, Operation Gladio - to which numerous analogous 'terrorost attacks' in modern Europe are entirely similar ... designed to maintain peace (although a better word would be 'order') through tension.

Cor, that is an interesting specific can of worms I've never peeked into.  Cheers, TLS!

Mind-buckling stuff if even a tenth of it is true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 31 October, 2012, 08:54:16 AM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 30 October, 2012, 11:02:38 AM
Ronald Reagan only found out that radiation was real when he watched The Day After, a tv movie which starred Steve Guttenberg, so while I'd like to think that the presence of nuclear weapons prevented a shooting war and thus justified their creation, the evidence isn't really there.

On the other hand, this means that Steve Guttenberg prevented a shooting war and thus justified the existence of Police Academy 4: Citizens on Patrol.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 October, 2012, 11:45:10 AM
For anyone who's interested there's this:  Operation Gladio [BBC Timewatch, 1992] State-Sponsored Terror: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUvrPvV-KQo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 31 October, 2012, 11:58:53 AM
False flag operations are forever a well established and successful  stratedgy. Here's the more recent Nato's Secret Soldiers, [2009] shown on the Military Channel. Very poor quality video but the narration will tell you the grim truth behind a significant number of terrorist outrages in Europe.

http://youtu.be/5soEhxA6zXs
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 31 October, 2012, 07:10:28 PM
Expect Dave's non-resignation in 3..2..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 05 November, 2012, 02:27:03 PM
Dave -Rampant Twat- Cameron is at it again. Apparently raising Human Rights issues in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, while at the same time selling them Weapons with his cadre of Arms dealers.

Well done Dave! You really are a class act!!!

Cheers  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 November, 2012, 06:53:46 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 05 November, 2012, 02:27:03 PM
Dave -Rampant Twat- Cameron is at it again. Apparently raising Human Rights issues in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, while at the same time selling them Weapons with his cadre of Arms dealers. Well done Dave! You really are a class act!!! Cheers  >:(

In the interests of balance, Blair had Lord Goldsmith - the same Attorney General who told him the invasion of Iraq would be illegal, then changed his advice when asked to go away and think about it - cancel the investigation into the Saudi Al-Yamamah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Yamamah_arms_deal) arms deal in 2006 because "Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is vitally important for our country in terms of counter-terrorism, in terms of the broader Middle East, in terms of helping in respect of Israel and Palestine. That strategic interest comes first."

I can't think of a shabbier deception than New Labour touting their ethical foreign policy, while knowing full well what BAE were up to on their behalf. If anyone can explain to me the difference between the activities of successive UK governments between 1985 and 2006, exchanging Saudi blood money for clean UK tax payer's cash via the exchange of oil - or how that gives the highest offices of state any more dignity or integrity than the porn shops organised criminals use to launder the proceeds of violence and vice - wins a special prize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 November, 2012, 06:59:12 PM
You've done it now sauchie, you mentioned balance :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 05 November, 2012, 07:13:01 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 05 November, 2012, 06:53:46 PM
I can't think of a shabbier deception than New Labour touting their ethical foreign policy, while knowing full well what BAE were up to on their behalf. If anyone can explain to me the difference between the activities of successive UK governments between 1985 and 2006, exchanging Saudi blood money for clean UK tax payer's cash via the exchange of oil - or how that gives the highest offices of state any more dignity or integrity than the porn shops organised criminals use to launder the proceeds of violence and vice - wins a special prize.

You're right, New Labour are a bunch of C**ts as well. I think the overall problem is that no one really gives a Fuck; everyone seems content to sit back and let these clowns behave however they want.

Cameron is still King of the Twats though, purely because he's still in power!!!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 November, 2012, 12:01:19 PM
WHY CAN'T WE USE INTERNET VOTING IN GENERAL ELECTIONS? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20211167)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 November, 2012, 05:30:51 PM
This could be an omen: WASN'T DIXVILLE NOTCH LILY LANGTRY'S NICKNAME FOR HER VAGINA? (http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2012/11/06/obama-romney-dixville-notch/1685083/http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2012/11/06/obama-romney-dixville-notch/1685083/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 07 November, 2012, 01:16:08 PM
So four more years then... any thoughts? I know Obama's first term has had its problems but I can't help feeling a huge sense of relief that old Mittens was denied the White House. Although as a colleague described it this morning, the candidate on the left is creeping towards the egde of the cliffs of doom at a slightly slower pace than the candidate on the right... well put I thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 November, 2012, 01:18:06 PM
Phew, thank fuck for that. WWIII is postponed for a few more years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 November, 2012, 01:40:49 PM
I'm glad 'The Mitt' lost, but I wonder what Obama will achieve in the next few years. Good intentions don't really translate well in the world of Politics and Corporations.

Cheers  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 November, 2012, 01:57:24 PM
Awesome that Obama won it!

Glad Booth, I means Mitt not in!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2012, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 05 November, 2012, 06:53:46 PMIf anyone can explain to me the difference between the activities of successive UK governments between 1985 and 2006, exchanging Saudi blood money for clean UK tax payer's cash via the exchange of oil - or how that gives the highest offices of state any more dignity or integrity than the porn shops organised criminals use to launder the proceeds of violence and vice - wins a special prize.

The army and police force are the means through which the state's monopoly on the use of violence to enforce its will is how we maintain a healthy democracy, and if you take that to its logical end, the state must be allowed the use of other acts - lies, murder, torture, theft - that would unconscionable if perpetrated by one citizen upon another.  The government is allowed to beat the shit out of you and bang you up for years if you don't cough up your taxes - a tithe they have not in any way earned which is taken from the poor and given to the rich - yet the small businessmen of the local mafia try this same tactic on a smaller scale and they're branded criminals - "one law for some" is hardly a new situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 November, 2012, 04:06:27 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 07 November, 2012, 01:57:24 PM
Glad Booth, I means Mitt not in!

As Dredd would say - one job at a time.
So, just the Mayan's to defeat now,  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2012, 04:10:58 PM
Given that the POTUS is just a figurehead moved this way and that by big business and old money, I suppose it's a good thing that the effigy that was selected represents much of what is good about the USA (progressive change, melting pot, and looking cool), while the rejected placeholder evokes much of what is wrong with it (superior, rich and wilfully ignorant). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 November, 2012, 05:40:54 PM
Alan Moore has released a single called The Decline of English Murder (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/nov/05/alan-moore-decline-english-murder-video), in support of the Occupy Movement - I don't think it'll trouble the charts much!

Sample line: "Your average psychopath at least kills with a hammer or brick / And not with greed and incompetence / And after two or three years maybe they'll express remorse."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 November, 2012, 07:06:16 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 07 November, 2012, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 05 November, 2012, 06:53:46 PMIf anyone can explain to me the difference between the activities of successive UK governments between 1985 and 2006, exchanging Saudi blood money for clean UK tax payer's cash via the exchange of oil - or how that gives the highest offices of state any more dignity or integrity than the porn shops organised criminals use to launder the proceeds of violence and vice - wins a special prize.

The army and police force are the means through which the state's monopoly on the use of violence to enforce its will is how we maintain a healthy democracy, and if you take that to its logical end, the state must be allowed the use of other acts - lies, murder, torture, theft - that would unconscionable if perpetrated by one citizen upon another.  The government is allowed to beat the shit out of you and bang you up for years if you don't cough up your taxes - a tithe they have not in any way earned which is taken from the poor and given to the rich - yet the small businessmen of the local mafia try this same tactic on a smaller scale and they're branded criminals - "one law for some" is hardly a new situation.

Now I feel bad I didn't organise an actual prize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 07 November, 2012, 08:59:09 PM
Speaking on the US elections for the moment, I must say that I wasn't in favor of either. My views are more to the left and both candidates were essentially moderates in the US sphere in the long run. Support the rich and continue the same foreign policy. Romney's campaign is believed to  have raised something like  $800 million total, Obama in the $9900 million. The Citizens United case really opened up the floodgates for corporate funding via Super PACs.

I ended up voting for the Green Party candidate Jill Stein, since her views were the closest to mine of those that had ballot access in Texas, and I figured it was the best use of a protest vote against the two party system compared to the other third parties.

Always bothered me how the pundits here claim Obama was a socialist (ie 'european-style' welfare state as Americans see it) or even a full blown Marxist because of his tax polices. I don't think he would even pass for a social democrat in Europe. Or the other stuff about him being a closeted Muslim with an agenda to intentionally weaken to US.

One thing amusing on this side of the ocean is what happens after the results are announced. Angry liberals are funny, but I say conservatives are a riot. Onwards!

(http://i.imgur.com/F3cWU.png)
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md4pz38lWV1rkzwu3o1_1280.png)
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md4rd1K9kU1rkzwu3o1_1280.jpg)

and a big wtf on this
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md4q81phZj1rkzwu3o1_1280.png)

Following stuff via goptears.tumblr.com

QuoteRUSH: A note that I got from a good friend of mine — this is a fascinating little think piece. He lives in Kansas City. He's fed up with all the ads on TV. He's just fed up with it. His Romney sign was defaced. Cow manure was thrown all over it and underneath it on his yard. He says, "You know, I'm getting real tired of all the ads. I can't wait 'til tomorrow, and I hope your prediction is right. But here's my idea: Let's just flip a coin.

"If the Republicans win, they get to select the half of the country they want and the Democrats get the other half. You split this country right down the middle. Republicans pick the side they want; the Democrats get the other side. We have Mitt; they have Obama. You can live wherever you want to live. You choose which side you want to live in." He said, "The question is: How long would it be before Democrats are building tunnels to get underneath the wall keeping them out of the Republican side?"

Stop and think. This is a great illustration. You split the country right in half, right down the Mississippi River, and let's just say the Republicans get the left half the country and they build a wall. The Mississippi River is not a moat. You build a wall there. The Democrats get everything on the East and we get everything on the West. Or flip it. It doesn't matter. We get our ways of life on our side; they get their ways of life on theirs.

How long will it be before all those Democrats are trying to get over to our side?

How long? We'd have to have checkpoints! We'd have to shoot 'em on sight if they're trying to get into our side of the country, just like in the old East and West Germany days. Stop and think of that. It would make a great book: Talking about one side and comparing the two. It would be a great movie showing where certain companies chose to live, where certain people chose to live. It'd show how they chose to run their businesses, how they chose to manage their affairs.

(http://www.rushimg.com/cimages//media/1rushmontages/rushusmaprealvilleobamaville/1018815-1-eng-GB/RushUSMapRealvilleObamaville.jpg)

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md4paaF2Xe1rkzwu3o1_1280.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 November, 2012, 09:05:22 PM
Ahaha.

This one's been doing the rounds heavily:

(http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/394110_10151233105293936_1666027369_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2012, 09:12:46 PM
Someone really needs to tell all those Republicans that Australia hasn't used criminals as the basis for their population since 1868.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 November, 2012, 09:18:56 PM
Ye know who they sound like?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_-O7esdGkoHo/TQPNjLR4D5I/AAAAAAAA7f4/JS4EMWrkiEg/s1600/america.jpg)

Now, does Godwin's Law apply when you compare someone to any fascist, or is it only Hitler specifically?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 November, 2012, 09:36:59 PM
Quote from: pops1983 on 07 November, 2012, 09:18:56 PM
Ye know who they sound like?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_-O7esdGkoHo/TQPNjLR4D5I/AAAAAAAA7f4/JS4EMWrkiEg/s1600/america.jpg)

Now, does Godwin's Law apply when you compare someone to any fascist, or is it only Hitler specifically?

Ha! I was thinking the same thing!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2012, 10:03:58 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 November, 2012, 09:36:59 PM
Ha! I was thinking the same thing!

Face it, Joseph Stalin Dredd's a grudless communist - under his rule 90% are on 'handouts', vivisection became illegal and selective subsidised healthcare was introduced ("The City will pay!").  Then there's those filthy muties he loves so much - they took uhhhr juuhhbs. I hear his whole family are mutated, and what's with his niece's Brit accent? .

And then there's the discrepancies on his birth cert: why is there no record of him in MC-1 until age 5, hmmm?  Go back to Mutiestan, chinface!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 November, 2012, 10:11:08 PM
Remain in your room, citizen, Judges will be along shortly to escort you to your cube.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 November, 2012, 10:11:49 PM
Quote from: MercZ on 07 November, 2012, 08:59:09 PM
One thing amusing on this side of the ocean is what happens after the results are announced. Angry liberals are funny, but I say conservatives are a riot. Onwards!

This is true, and thanks for posting those hilarious examples. I checked out the Fox News website for the first time today just for the helluvit. Turns out it was the Liberal Media's fault for concentrating on all those irrelevant gaffes. Oh and the Jews. Who are liberal, but love Israel so they voted for the Israel-hating.. .. erm ... waitaminute..

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Minkyboy on 07 November, 2012, 10:18:52 PM
Perfect

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/obama-thanks-romney-for-being-such-a-penis-2012110748131 (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/obama-thanks-romney-for-being-such-a-penis-2012110748131)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 07 November, 2012, 10:53:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 07 November, 2012, 10:11:49 PM
This is true, and thanks for posting those hilarious examples. I checked out the Fox News website for the first time today just for the helluvit. Turns out it was the Liberal Media's fault for concentrating on all those irrelevant gaffes. Oh and the Jews. Who are liberal, but love Israel so they voted for the Israel-hating.. .. erm ... waitaminute..

Yeah, it's quite amusing really. I'm not sure where this Australia thing took off from but that image above from CrazyFoxMachine pretty much sums it up. I remember something similar about people threatening to move to Germany along similar lines. It's really batshit crazy, and being in Texas it's pretty much a normal occurrence here.

Speaking of which, I wonder what I'll do in 2014 for Texas's statewide elections. Maybe I'll do some write-ins for Dave the Orangutan?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2012, 01:48:03 PM
Some private corporation wrote to me today on behalf of the council informing me that my housing benefit may be cut due to the government's unnecessary 'austerity measures'.
Now, legally speaking, I think that this letter is technically an offer of a contract - they're offering me the opportunity to claim less in benefits. If I don't write back to them, I will be deemed to have accepted their authority to alter and amend my 'claim' as they see fit. So I simply wrote 'I do not consent to this' on their letter and sent it back to them.
Will it work? Well, it worked with the TV License and seems to be working with the water company, too. It's time to fight back, people. Democracy is rule by consent, so any legislation passed by a democratic government is also consentual, therefore we do not have to consent to any of it. (And before anybody goes off on one, things like murder, GBH and theft come under common law, not statute law.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2012, 04:13:35 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 07 November, 2012, 07:06:16 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 07 November, 2012, 02:03:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 05 November, 2012, 06:53:46 PMIf anyone can explain to me the difference between the activities of successive UK governments between 1985 and 2006, exchanging Saudi blood money for clean UK tax payer's cash via the exchange of oil - or how that gives the highest offices of state any more dignity or integrity than the porn shops organised criminals use to launder the proceeds of violence and vice - wins a special prize.

The army and police force are the means through which the state's monopoly on the use of violence to enforce its will is how we maintain a healthy democracy, and if you take that to its logical end, the state must be allowed the use of other acts - lies, murder, torture, theft - that would unconscionable if perpetrated by one citizen upon another.  The government is allowed to beat the shit out of you and bang you up for years if you don't cough up your taxes - a tithe they have not in any way earned which is taken from the poor and given to the rich - yet the small businessmen of the local mafia try this same tactic on a smaller scale and they're branded criminals - "one law for some" is hardly a new situation.

Now I feel bad I didn't organise an actual prize.

You know who else lies, Sauchie?  Governments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2012, 06:53:04 PM
Governments don't lie.

People lie.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 November, 2012, 07:14:57 PM
Don't fuck with the IDF (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpwMnXcAwI). There were four folk in that car, including the target's son; it's difficult to believe they all posed a direct threat to Israeli security.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 November, 2012, 07:25:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2012, 06:53:04 PM
Governments don't lie.

People lie.

Giving you the facts as best they understand them at the time to be accurate isn't lying, it's their job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 06:13:26 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 14 November, 2012, 07:14:57 PM
Don't fuck with the IDF (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpwMnXcAwI). There were four folk in that car, including the target's son; it's difficult to believe they all posed a direct threat to Israeli security.

Ignore my previous post; Hamas have killed three Israeli civilians with rocket attacks. That makes everything equal, and I'm sure this is the last we'll be hearing of this matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2012, 06:36:03 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 November, 2012, 06:13:26 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 14 November, 2012, 07:14:57 PM
Don't fuck with the IDF (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpwMnXcAwI). There were four folk in that car, including the target's son; it's difficult to believe they all posed a direct threat to Israeli security.

Ignore my previous post; Hamas have killed three Israeli civilians with rocket attacks. That makes everything equal, and I'm sure this is the last we'll be hearing of this matter.

I'd say everyone presently in positions of power are genuinely delighted with that neat little exchange.  Israel provokes Hamas, Hamas provokes Israel, a few rockets here and there and hopefully a revitalised cycle of escalation and retaliation, and everyone's political relevance is demonstrably assured into the elections.   When you think of the multi-billions wasted on swaying voters in the US elections, some well-placed ordnance is a much more efficient way of maintaining the status quo for both sides.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 07:02:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 November, 2012, 06:36:03 PM

....some well-placed ordnance is a much more efficient way of maintaining the status quo for both sides.



As JFK discovered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 07:11:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 07:02:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 November, 2012, 06:36:03 PM
....some well-placed ordnance is a much more efficient way of maintaining the status quo for both sides.

As JFK discovered.

To be fair, that required a magic bullet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfSXkfV_mhA).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 07:31:54 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 November, 2012, 06:36:03 PM
I'd say everyone presently in positions of power are genuinely delighted with that neat little exchange.  Israel provokes Hamas, Hamas provokes Israel, a few rockets here and there and hopefully a revitalised cycle of escalation and retaliation, and everyone's political relevance is demonstrably assured into the elections.   When you think of the multi-billions wasted on swaying voters in the US elections, some well-placed ordnance is a much more efficient way of maintaining the status quo for both sides.

Channel Four News have representatives of Israel and The Palestinian Authority on just now, both stating that they're only responding to the other party's aggression. Andrew Marr had an Israeli author on STW this Monday, who made the point that the West (the liberal West, anyway) tends to think of hostilities between Israel and Paletine as being the result of some catastrophic misunderstanding, whereas both sides actually understand each other perfectly and they're both right.

There are only a small number of dicks sustaining the cycle of violence, but it would be foolish for either party to unilaterally renounce violence when the relatively few hot heads and angry voices on each side enjoy such political influence, and would use that moment of vulnerability to inflict a devastating coup de grâce. It's difficult to see any way out of that impasse without the geopolitics of the region changing more significantly than the Arab Spring has managed to achieve so far.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 November, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
I hope you all made the effort to vote today, I drokkin' did :D

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/553730_4992088084327_391009209_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 07:44:29 PM
Disappointing, CF; Tharg's soft on sentencing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 15 November, 2012, 07:50:42 PM
I could have voted for John Prescott. But i didnt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 15 November, 2012, 08:34:13 PM
Is this political? It is now.
Dated 2010. We are now nearing the end. Apparently 3 billion will die, thats only half Dredds total.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU537f4bnFM&feature=related



V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 15 November, 2012, 09:07:49 PM
For a second there, I thought Paulo Wanchope was the UKIP candidate on your ballot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2012, 09:25:13 PM
bugger - I forgot to vote for the first time in ages. I'm always nagging at people who don't bother to vote, it's a privilege that people fought and died for and if you don't take part, you've got no right to complain about who gets in. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 09:58:02 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2012, 09:25:13 PM
...if you don't take part, you've got no right to complain about who gets in. 

Rubbish. It seems to me that those who don't vote because the candidates presented are unsuitable to hold any form of public office have just as much right to complain, and possibly even more of a right, than those who just vote for a candidate irrespective of their suitability because it is their 'duty'. Now, if a 'None Of The Above' option existed on ballot papers then I might agree with this 'don't vote, don't complain' nonsense - but until then, in a free and democratic country, the right not to vote is just as valid as the right to vote.

And on a slightly more incendiary note, nobody ever fought and died for me - they fought and died for politics, resources and the interests of people who care not one shit for me, my community or my country. I do not for one second dispute the bravery or competence of our armed forces - but rather that thanking them for what they are doing for 'me' I pity them for fighting for lies. If the armed forces want my thanks, they should invade the City of London and Wall Street - I'd put my name to that operation in a heartbeat but if anyone thinks that killing Iraqis, Syrians, Afghans, Iranians and whoever the Hell else we're kicking at the moment is what I want then they are sadly and spectacularly mistaken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 November, 2012, 10:11:30 PM
QuoteRubbish.
No it's not. I don't see how in a ballot with sometimes dozens of names on it, you could not find one person to vote for.
You wouldn't vote for the local single issue candidate who's trying to save a hospital or school, for example?

QuoteAnd on a slightly more incendiary note, nobody ever fought and died for me - they fought and died for politics

No, not incendiary. Just utter fucking bullshit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 10:28:01 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 November, 2012, 10:11:30 PM
QuoteRubbish.
No it's not. I don't see how in a ballot with sometimes dozens of names on it, you could not find one person to vote for.
You wouldn't vote for the local single issue candidate who's trying to save a hospital or school, for example?

In all honesty, no - I wouldn't vote for a single-issue candidate in a society simply bursting with multiple issues. Now, if a local candidate stood for a single issue like saving a school and nothing else, I would vote for them to do that and then step down when the school is saved.


Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 November, 2012, 10:11:30 PM

QuoteAnd on a slightly more incendiary note, nobody ever fought and died for me - they fought and died for politics

No, not incendiary. Just utter fucking bullshit.

Why? No Iraqi ever shot at me or my family or at anyone I know. Maybe you've had a different experience, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 15 November, 2012, 10:46:16 PM
Well maybe an older member of your family has been shot at i.e. first or second world war.
To note I have been shot at on a peace keeping tour in Croatia whilst driving along the boarder to Bosnia in a clearly marked military ambulance. Also random shells fall close to our position in Saudi Arabia on the boarder to Iraq waiting for the land push to start.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 10:47:11 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 November, 2012, 10:11:30 PM
I don't see how in a ballot with sometimes dozens of names on it, you could not find one person to vote for.
You wouldn't vote for the local single issue candidate who's trying to save a hospital or school, for example?

I know The Shark was making a more general point about democracy, but that ballot paper CF posted for the Commissioner Gordon vote featured two independents and a bunch of candidates sponsored by political parties. Quite why the cancer of party politics should contaminate ballots for positions such as Commissioner and Mayor, which involve issues on which I'd imagine most folk don't think along traditional party lines, is beyond me. If all these elections do is encourage folk to vote in exactly the same way they do at every other election - and most voters are frighteningly loyal - they'll change precisely fuck all.

QuoteAnd on a slightly more incendiary note, nobody ever fought and died for me - they fought and died for politics

QuoteNo, not incendiary. Just utter fucking bullshit.

True. I'd argue there's almost always no excuse for war, but WWII always has anyone advancing that argument looking at their feet and mumbling uncertainly. Having said that, everyone who fought in the Battle of Britain was unquestionably fighting for my freedom, those who (in good faith) participated in the fire bombing of Dresden were probably doing something quite different. It's always more complicated and nuanced than arguments like those above can convey.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 10:56:47 PM
And WWII began because the Allies stripped Germany of everything after WWI - we even took their crops, livestock, rolling stock and factory machinery as 'compensation'. To add to this, when the Germans tried to print their own money for internal use, the Allies decided what this money would be worth (fuck all) thereby causing the now famous hyperinflation. It was the Allies who created the environment in which the National Socialist Party rose to power. I'm not suggesting that WWII was entirely the fault of the Allies but if you keep on kicking a country when it's down then one day, it's going to kick back and kick back hard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 11:03:42 PM
To digress, a corporation named Cuadrilla wants to start hydraulic fracturing for gas around my village and surrounding areas. We have researched this process, colloquially known as 'fraccing', and found much that concerns us about this process. Resistance to this project is strong amongst both the general population and our local councillors.

There was recently a vote on whether to allow this process to go ahead and, guess what? Cuadrilla won by one vote. They would not have won if the Whip's Office in London hadn't sent some people down to tell our local councillors how to vote. Democracy? When there's a profit to be made? Yeah, right...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 11:09:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 10:56:47 PM
And WWII began because the Allies stripped Germany of everything after WWI - we even took their crops, livestock, rolling stock and factory machinery as 'compensation'. To add to this, when the Germans tried to print their own money for internal use, the Allies decided what this money would be worth (fuck all) thereby causing the now famous hyperinflation. It was the Allies who created the environment in which the National Socialist Party rose to power. I'm not suggesting that WWII was entirely the fault of the Allies but if you keep on kicking a country when it's down then one day, it's going to kick back and kick back hard.

Without disagreeing, countries like Poland were invaded, humiliated, impoverished and enslaved by various empires for centuries without ever rising up and trying to wreak their revenge on any other nations, let alone trying to annihalate an entire people (though they shared Germany's rampant anti-semitism). If you keep tracing these things back you can always find someone else responsible for making you act like a dick (see my comments on Israel/Palestine on previous page); at some point you've got to accept responsibility for your own (collective) actions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 11:17:37 PM
Yes absolutely, we can sit and argue about who did what to whom and we'll be back 2,000 years or more before we're done. The point is that we must recognise the flaws and fix them instead of going down the same old paths draped in national flags and politically-induced jingoism designed to demonise the foreign humans and their inhuman ways whilst virtually canonising our local humans and their exemplary ways.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2012, 11:26:07 PM
I like the odd war now and then to keep my BAE and Monsanto stock good and healthy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2012, 11:37:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2012, 11:17:37 PM
Yes absolutely, we can sit and argue about who did what to whom and we'll be back 2,000 years or more before we're done. The point is that we must recognise the flaws and fix them instead of going down the same old paths draped in national flags and politically-induced jingoism designed to demonise the foreign humans and their inhuman ways whilst virtually canonising our local humans and their exemplary ways.

"Consider for instance, Cruel Britannia by Ian Cobain, published by Portobello Books, which relates the British torture of Nazi POWs during and after World War Two. It describes "the horrifying interrogation methods that belie our proud boast that we fought a clean war." (tinyurl.com/9ju64mj)

And the excellent Unpatriotic History of the Second World War by James Heartfield (Zero Books). It describes how British officers pushed in front of their men to escape at Dunkirk.  It relates the Allied policy of taking no prisoners when fighting against the Japanese.  It talks about the British responsibility for the Bengal famine in which 1.5 million to 4 million people died.  It was not a natural thing, "the cause of the famine was an order from Churchill to starve the Bengalis, the order was called the Rice Denial policy."

Actually, I think it's patriotic to finally recognize that Britain is no different to any other country and is not morally superior – which is certainly what I was taught at school.  Or rather lied to at school.  I can remember being told how evil the Mau Mau freedom fighters in Kenya were. Ditto freedom fighters in Aden, Malaya and Cyprus. Anyone who challenges Britain and stop it stealing their wealth must – by definition – be evil."

https://patmills.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/hammerstein-vs-the-us-president/ (https://patmills.wordpress.com/2012/10/30/hammerstein-vs-the-us-president/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 16 November, 2012, 11:52:02 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 November, 2012, 10:47:11 PM
Having said that, everyone who fought in the Battle of Britain was unquestionably fighting for my freedom, those who (in good faith) participated in the fire bombing of Dresden were probably doing something quite different.

However controversial Bomber Command's (along with the USAF) methods were, i think they were unquestionably fighting for our collective freedoms as well.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
Why 'unquestionably'? Maybe that's what the actual combatants thought and were led to believe, but in the eyes of the sponsors of the war it didn't (and still doesn't) matter in the slightest who wins and who loses. So long as the winners have a privately controlled central bank through which governments and populations can be controlled, that's all that mattered (and still is). From that point of view, WWII had no winners.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 November, 2012, 01:01:17 PM
Harking back to the petulent "if you don't vote you can't complain" argument, for those not knowledgeable, in NI you basically have a choice between terrorist apologists, communists, religious bigots, white power affiliates,  and - most likely - some bloke you've known all your life who lives on your street who you wouldn't trust to shit himself let alone run any kind of public office, and just to make things even better, every single candidate is an anti-abortionist, except the fucking communist.
I do not vote because I would not piss on these people if they were on fire, and I'll gripe all I want about politics, thank you.  You don't like them apples, you can suck my dick, son.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 01:05:27 PM
Quote from: Professah Byah on 16 November, 2012, 01:01:17 PM
Harking back to the petulent "if you don't vote you can't complain" argument, for those not knowledgeable, in NI you basically have a choice between terrorist apologists, communists, religious bigots, white power affiliates,  and - most likely - some bloke you've known all your life who lives on your street who you wouldn't trust to shit himself let alone run any kind of public office, and just to make things even better, every single candidate is an anti-abortionist, except the fucking communist.
I do not vote because I would not piss on these people if they were on fire, and I'll gripe all I want about politics, thank you.  You don't like them apples, you can suck my dick, son.

Damn right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 November, 2012, 01:09:57 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 16 November, 2012, 11:52:02 AM
However controversial Bomber Command's (along with the USAF) methods were, i think they were unquestionably fighting for our collective freedoms as well.

Aye; as my original post made clear, I wouldn't question the motives of the individuals involved or the ends to which their actions were directed, but I think the people responsible for the tactical decisions in that instance definitely lost sight of why they were doing what they were doing (to stop people who indiscriminately killed civilians in huge numbers):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RXsNLUB6kF0#t=57s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RXsNLUB6kF0#t=57s)

The link in that Pat Mills blog I quoted (tinyurl.com/9ju64mj (http://tinyurl.com/9ju64mj)) features a comments section where Daily Mail readers vociferously respond to Ian Cobain's description of how the UK government continued to torture German POWs even after the end of WWII with the line that this wasn't half as bad as what the Nazis got up to. I'm not sure that makes any difference to the moral standards we set for ourselves, in fact I'd argue it's the fact we're supposed to uphold those values that distinguishes that conflict from every other pointless territorial dispute and factional squabble in the history of human conflict.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 November, 2012, 01:15:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
From that point of view, WWII had no winners.

I would suggest that you might have felt differently had the Nazis conquered Europe, North Africa and the UK and continued to feed any minority and political dissident they disapproved of into concentration camps... assuming your forebears passed muster with Nazis' sundry purity tests and you ever got born at all.

I am well aware that the vast majority of people fighting WWII on the Allied side had no idea of the Nazis' programme of industrialised genocide, and that there is evidence to suggest that some elements of the Powers-That-Were did know and appear to have cared very little, but to argue that stopping the fucking Nazis was not a generally positive outcome for the war beggars belief.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 November, 2012, 01:38:13 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 November, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
I hope you all made the effort to vote today, I drokkin' did :D

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/553730_4992088084327_391009209_n.jpg)

You were one of the few, CF; voter turnout was just 15% nationally, and there were an unusually high number of spoiled papers such as your own:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20356910 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20356910)

The important point to be made here is that in elections with such low turnouts a very small number of people are responsible for making the decisions that affect all our lives, and those most motivated to vote often have some very odd ideas. Twilight's Last Gleaming covered this twenty years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:09:28 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 November, 2012, 01:15:35 PM
...but to argue that stopping the fucking Nazis was not a generally positive outcome for the war beggars belief.

Jim

That's not what I said and you know it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 16 November, 2012, 03:11:39 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 November, 2012, 01:09:57 PM
Aye; as my original post made clear, I wouldn't question the motives of the individuals involved or the ends to which their actions were directed

Yet that quote seemed to be saying otherwise..

Quote from: sauchie on 06 June, 1970, 03:31:53 PMI think the people responsible for the tactical decisions in that instance definitely lost sight of why they were doing what they were doing

To shorten/end the war, by practically any means necassary?
Its uncomfortable, destructive and its messy. Just like war, itself. Even the good ones.

This kind of bombing by the allies, first employed by the Nazis from the Spanish civil war onwards, as ive said, certainly isnt without controversy - not least for the appalling loss of life on both sides, and rightly should be debated. But for a long time, 'strategic' bombing, in whatever form, was the only means of hitting back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 November, 2012, 03:21:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:09:28 PM
That's not what I said and you know it.

I was merely observing that the "point of view" from which WWII had no winners is one of such incredibly narrow focus as to be practically worthless.

Wars are generally conducted between groups of people each equally convinced of the rightness of their cause and the moral superiority of one side over the other is usually a by-product of being the victor. WWII is a historical anomaly in as much as it had one side that could be characterised by almost any yardstick of human decency as 'the bad guys'. Any point of view that doesn't acknowledge the fact that the bad guys lost is going to get short shrift from me.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:33:29 PM
http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/get-informed/uranium-weapons/ (http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/get-informed/uranium-weapons/)

How is this, if true, any better than what the Nazis did? I'm also quite disappointed that Jim reduces the Second World War to a simplistic Bad Guys v Good Guys paradigm. Well, maybe he's right - but it seems to me that the Good Guys are now the Bad Guys. I don't want to be on the side of the Bad Guys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 16 November, 2012, 03:38:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 November, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
I hope you all made the effort to vote today, I drokkin' did :D

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/553730_4992088084327_391009209_n.jpg)

You certainly look to have dug that pencil in there with a passion, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 16 November, 2012, 03:43:49 PM
I wish to congratulate you all on this thread reaching 200 pages. It is laden with entertainment and irony. My favourite bit is when you all start on about the Nazis.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 November, 2012, 03:48:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:33:29 PM
Well, maybe he's right - but it seems to me that the Good Guys are now the Bad Guys. I don't want to be on the side of the Bad Guys.

How is anything I said about a historical conflict relevant to the behaviour of any of the participants subsequent to that? It's possible for bad people to do good things and vice versa; it's possible for people and nations to do things that might be construed as 'good' and then go on to do things that are 'bad' -- the bad doesn't reverberate back through time and undo the good.

I've already acknowledged that stopping the Nazis' genocide was a largely unintended consequence of the war, so to suggest that I have a simplistic view of the conflict doesn't hold water.

Unintended or not, however, it was a consequence and one of the few in history that it's hard to argue isn't objectively morally positive.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:55:15 PM
By that same logic, if our forces and allies are using live uranium weapons to get around the ban on depleted uranium weapons, if the Iraqis or Iranians beat us that will be a morally positive outcome - which I would actually agree with.

'...the bad doesn't reverberate back through time and undo the good.' Tell that to Jimmy Savile! (Sarcasm.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 03:56:04 PM
Quote from: Trout on 16 November, 2012, 03:43:49 PM
I wish to congratulate you all on this thread reaching 200 pages. It is laden with entertainment and irony. My favourite bit is when you all start on about the Nazis.



That's what Hitler would have said...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 November, 2012, 03:57:13 PM
Quote from: Trout on 16 November, 2012, 03:43:49 PM
I wish to congratulate you all on this thread reaching 200 pages. It is laden with entertainment and irony. My favourite bit is when you all start on about the Nazis.

I'm pretty sure Godwin's Law doesn't actually apply to a discussion that is specifically about who the protagonists of the second world war might have been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 16 November, 2012, 03:59:09 PM
This whole thread needs a new law: "There is no online political discussion that cannot unexpectedly become even more insane".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 04:04:15 PM
Quote from: Trout on 16 November, 2012, 03:59:09 PM
This whole thread needs a new law: "There is no online political discussion that cannot unexpectedly become even more insane by adding a shark".

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 16 November, 2012, 04:09:51 PM
Awesome!

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/865898/thumbs/r-A7011TQCAAA9C0F-large570.jpg?4)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 November, 2012, 04:20:18 PM
just to clarify, when I said people have died for your right to vote I wasn't talking about the World Wars I was talking about events like the Peterloo massacre, the suffragettes and other examples of the brutal repression by the ruling classes of people who were fighting for the right to be represented.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 04:38:39 PM
Ah, I'll let you off, then ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 November, 2012, 07:59:22 PM
Tonight, the BBC are asking us to give them money to help vulnerable children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2012, 08:24:03 PM
(http://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/148485_10151151335258441_1219186180_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 23 November, 2012, 03:06:33 AM
Only after sunset? They wish.

I'm also glad the Lib Dems got, like, totally totalled the other week. UKIP were just 0.4 off them on Merseyside, which is quite a feat in red territory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 10:32:07 AM
Not often i post in this thread, but in this instance i very much want to find out what people think.

A foster couple have had three children removed from their care by the labour-run council 'because they belong to ukip'. Or so the news channels are reporting. Nigel Farage is quite understanably outraged, the whole thing seems an excuse to rant about immigration again, whatever side you're on. I dont see how it can ever be justified to remove children from foster parents based on anything other than direct and provable threat to their safety. I dont care if they're placed with bnp parents or even tory ones, if the kids are physically safe, then that's fine. We cant start removing children from parents who share an ideology we dont like, or the next step is basing it on religious belief- and that way lies madness.

Are we now in a police state?

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 November, 2012, 11:20:57 AM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 10:32:07 AM
Not often i post in this thread, but in this instance i very much want to find out what people think.

A foster couple have had three children removed from their care by the labour-run council 'because they belong to ukip'. Or so the news channels are reporting. Nigel Farage is quite understanably outraged, the whole thing seems an excuse to rant about immigration again, whatever side you're on. I dont see how it can ever be justified to remove children from foster parents based on anything other than direct and provable threat to their safety. I dont care if they're placed with bnp parents or even tory ones, if the kids are physically safe, then that's fine. We cant start removing children from parents who share an ideology we dont like, or the next step is basing it on religious belief- and that way lies madness.

Are we now in a police state?

SBT

The council have tied themselves in knots, saying both that they had to think of the kids' long term needs and that the placement was only ever intended to be for the short term. They've also made it clear there was no problem with the actual care the foster family were providing, so yanking the kids out after eight weeks seems like a gross over reaction.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20474120)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 November, 2012, 11:43:44 AM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 10:32:07 AMWe cant start removing children from parents who share an ideology we dont like, or the next step is basing it on religious belief- and that way lies madness.

I'm sure (okay, I hope) there's more to this than is reported, but yeah it'd be daft - not least because the chain of ideological succession is by no means a strong one. 

Anecdotally, my own dear mother is an embarrassingly appalling racist (even though, as we keep pointing out to her to no avail, she has many non-white, non-Irish, non-Settled friends - it's just all the furriners she's never met that she has a problem with), and occupies ideological ground somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan, but I don't seem to have 'inherited' any of that, and nor have either of my siblings.  Quite the reverse, if anything.

I'd worry more about good diet, voluntary work (which is what they're already doing) and having books in the house.  While I understand the huge responsibilities involved, the whole fostering (and adoption) system often seems (to an outsider) to be driven by arse-covering rather than children's welfare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 11:56:39 AM
Well said. Apple trees do indeed lob their fruit significantly further than you might think- i suffer from parents with, shall we say, "outdated ideologies" too, and im lefter than Lefty McScargill.

Im not sure if this is an inappropriate place to tell this anecdote or not, but it made me laugh. Last week i was waiting for a bus in the rain, and two old ladies were discussing race. One said "i know youre not allowed to call them (lower voice) n*****s anymore. I call them noggers instead. they can't get me for that!"

Sadly, last night on my way to chatham, i witnessed an altogether more horrible bit of racism- as a drunk sat behind a black woman as we pulled into chatham, loudly talking to himself about how wrong it was she was allowed to travel in the same carriage as him. The fact that she was sober, on her way home from work and accepted it all with a wry smile and raised eyebrow, while he quietly ranted behind her makes me think that yes it is. And that he should have been on the roof.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 November, 2012, 12:46:41 PM
The UK Column has been investigating the Social Services' treatment of children for a while now with some vigour. Although some of their articles tend towards the frothing, and given the subject matter I can see why, they seem to be adequately researched and, if true, deeply worrying. You can read some of their articles here but I warn you, it may be upsetting information:  http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/Children

And SBT, we're not quite in a police state yet - but it won't take much to push us all the way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 24 November, 2012, 03:16:09 PM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 11:56:39 AM
Sadly, last night on my way to chatham, i witnessed an altogether more horrible bit of racism- as a drunk sat behind a black woman as we pulled into chatham, loudly talking to himself about how wrong it was she was allowed to travel in the same carriage as him. The fact that she was sober, on her way home from work and accepted it all with a wry smile and raised eyebrow, while he quietly ranted behind her makes me think that yes it is. And that he should have been on the roof.

SBT

:)

And yeah, the foster situation is disgusting. Joyce Thacker is unrepentant and needs to be fired or downgraded to toilet cleaner. Is it a Godwin to reference East Germany?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 24 November, 2012, 07:04:23 PM
Maybe not..

"They were told that the local safeguarding children team had received an anonymous tip-off that they were members of UKIP."

You'd think they were goose-stepping up and down their driveway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 07:18:39 PM
All of these problems would be solved very easily and in one generation if everyone was forced to have a five minute interview with me before being allowed to breed.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 24 November, 2012, 08:09:18 PM
And/or vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 November, 2012, 01:15:58 AM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing on 24 November, 2012, 07:18:39 PM
All of these problems would be solved very easily and in one generation if everyone was forced to have a five minute interview with me before being allowed to breed.

SBT

I'm taking this to mean you can seduce ANYONE in less than 5 minutes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 30 November, 2012, 01:56:41 AM
Two 2nd place finishes for UKIP so far.

Lib Dems lose their deposit again. You'd need a heart of stone etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 November, 2012, 10:08:28 AM
There would certainly hve been a lot more going on in the fostering case than being members of UKIP. Social workers are bound by confidentiality so when they are "wrecking homes by snatching kids" or "allowing children to be abused by not noticing danger signs" (delete depending upon which direction that week's tabloid attack is coming from), they are unable to correct all the speculation and frothing.

One of my friends is a senior SW often working on high profile cases, and gets really mad when a case she's dealing with gets dragged up by newspapers and politicians becaue they invariably get their facts wrong but she can't correct them.

On another political note I feel very weird today as I think I may be agreeing with David Cameron, and that doesn't sit well. Govt regulation of the press is a very dangerous slippery slope. I certainly don't trust this shower to craft well-thought out legislation with all the proper safeguards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 30 November, 2012, 11:14:45 AM
I think the difference in this case is that social services defended their decision, which is tantamount to admitting the parent's version of events was true. Well see but I think people may be clutching at straws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 November, 2012, 03:26:28 PM
I do find it interesting that the political parties have a go at the public when they don't vote at General Elections, By-elections, Police Chief elections, etc... AND then THEY abstain from the Palestine vote at the UN ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2012, 06:03:03 PM
Good point, CF. I guess it's better for the politicians to say that only 25% bothered to vote rather than 75% abstained.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 November, 2012, 07:05:08 PM
A hypocritical politician?  WELL I NEVER.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 November, 2012, 07:33:08 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 November, 2012, 10:08:28 AM
I feel very weird today as I think I may be agreeing with David Cameron, and that doesn't sit well. Govt regulation of the press is a very dangerous slippery slope. I certainly don't trust this shower to craft well-thought out legislation with all the proper safeguards.

Weird feeling, isn't it? To be fair, it isn't government regulation of the press; the newspaper industry are being asked to appoint an independent body which will arbitrate in disputes - but, unlike the current PCC, the results of that process will have the weight of Parliament behind it. To be honest, the exact nature of the proposed body and how its powers would be enforced seem too vague at this point for laymen like me to have much idea of whether it's a minor tweak of the system or the kind of thing we'll end up regretting.

His distaste for this thread is well known, but it seems this is an instance where supermarine Troutfire could have something of interest to say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 November, 2012, 07:58:38 PM



Who regulates the regulators of the regulators?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 30 November, 2012, 09:04:47 PM
If Palestine is recognized as a state by the United Nations, can they pass sanctions on them now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2012, 10:07:56 PM
All they're doing is telling us that we're dumb, our laws don't work and we need some official body to look after us. They put before us a problem knowing that we'll cry 'save us!' True to form, 'save us!' we cry (or the media cries it for us on our behalf) and, before you know it, you've got some weird new thing that isn't quite government and isn't quite private but is stuffed with Lords and Knights and tycoons all suckling off the public tit whilst explaining at length the problems and opposition and considerations they must conquer before anything much can happen. Then, when whatever it is they decide should happen happens, it'll happen to be illegal or unworkable or irrelevant and we'll all get pissed off with it and cry 'save us!' and, before you know it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 December, 2012, 11:47:33 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 30 November, 2012, 09:04:47 PM
If Palestine is recognized as a state by the United Nations, can they pass sanctions on them now?

No. "The resolution elevates their status from "non-member observer entity" to "non-member observer state," the same category as the Vatican, which Palestinians hope will provide new leverage in their dealings with Israel"

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/index.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 01 December, 2012, 12:51:36 PM
Recognition as a state is important in international law, as it means the Palestinians now have a right to territorial integrity. That makes it illegal for anyone to violate Palestine's borders, if they can be defined. Of course, international law and "what the USA is prepared to agree to" tend to be the same thing most of the time, but diplomatically and politically this is a massive boost for Palestine. (I have a degree in international law.)

As for Leveson, we in print media are unanimous in that we will accept what the Government decides. Proper regulation is what everyone wants. The only question is the role the Government will play.

Bear this in mind:
Most people in the media do not work in print.
Most people in print media do not work for tabloids, or for News International.
Most people who work for tabloids do not work on stories which raise privacy issues.
Most people - almost everyone - working on such stories never hacked a phone or breached the existing - very stringent - code of practice.
Shouting "Rupert Murdoch" a lot does not tell the whole story or make you seem interesting or intelligent.

Also, compare the proportion of journalists who hacked phones with the proportion of MPs who fiddled their expenses (and, crucially, were caught doing so by a printed newspaper, the only type of media organisation with the resources to research it properly) and you'll understand why the Government cannot be trusted to regulate the media. Sooner or later they will suppress a story that needs to be told.
The Speaker spent large amounts of public money on court action to try to stop the details of MPs' expenses being released publically, and in the end the Daily Telegraph only got hold of them by paying £50,000 for stolen files.

It's not about "Who watches the watchmen?" It's "Who's the bigger bunch of cunts?" In short: careful, now.

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 December, 2012, 03:25:18 PM
I think Trout's largely correct. Most people who work in journalism are not the whiskey-soaked, sociopathic sharks of urban legend but decent, rounded human beings with all the strengths and flaws that suggests.

I do not think that the media needs close supervision by any kind of outside body except the Public Domain itself. Perhaps the People should come up with a Media Charter we expect journalists to stick to and, if any journalist goes against it or breaks the law then that is what our courts are for. My idea for such a media charter would be quite simple:

1): Check your facts.
2): Check your sources.
3): Double check everything.
4): Are you sure?
5): Publish and accept the consequences.

I would hazard that many journalists have similar working practices anyway, or at least aspire to meet them, because I'm sure that most people, whether they be journalists or not, would be horrified to destroy an innocent reputation through repeating unfounded and incorrect information.

We know that we can't trust governments or the corporate world to have undue influence over the media so the only other option is to trust the individual journalists themselves. It is they who must decide which stories need to be told, not ministers, judges or CEOs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 01 December, 2012, 03:33:02 PM
"Laws are like cobwebs, strong enough to detain only the weak, and too weak to hold the strong."
Anacharsis
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 December, 2012, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Supermarine Troutfire on 01 December, 2012, 12:51:36 PM
As for Leveson, we in print media are unanimous in that we will accept what the Government decides. Proper regulation is what everyone wants. The only question is the role the Government will play. Bear this in mind:

Most people in the media do not work in print.
Most people in print media do not work for tabloids, or for News International.
Most people who work for tabloids do not work on stories which raise privacy issues.
Most people - almost everyone - working on such stories never hacked a phone or breached the existing - very stringent - code of practice.

Ian Hislop's been making the point that everything of which that small minority of journalists have been accused (and in some cases convicted) is already illegal. My only point in response would be that the knowledge they could be jeopardising the chances of a successful prosecution of Christopher Jefferies didn't stop almost all UK tabloid newspapers printing a succession of stories about his past and speculating on his involvement in the murder of Joanna Yeates.

All anyone is really seeking is for the print media to adhere to standards of behaviour which, as far as I can tell, they mostly did (voluntarily) until relatively recently. I don't see why a body which operates in the same way Ofcom does with regard to broadcast media is out of the question, but I'd be a lot happier if the newspaper industry would steal their critics' thunder and set up a credible independent regulator of their own volition, and agree to bind themselves to rulings made by that body.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 01 December, 2012, 07:38:53 PM
Quote from: we are all roger godpleton on 01 December, 2012, 07:11:02 PM
Quote from: Supermarine Troutfire on 01 December, 2012, 12:51:36 PM
As for Leveson, we in print media are unanimous in that we will accept what the Government decides. Proper regulation is what everyone wants. The only question is the role the Government will play. Bear this in mind:

Most people in the media do not work in print.
Most people in print media do not work for tabloids, or for News International.
Most people who work for tabloids do not work on stories which raise privacy issues.
Most people - almost everyone - working on such stories never hacked a phone or breached the existing - very stringent - code of practice.

Ian Hislop's been making the point that everything of which that small minority of journalists have been accused (and in some cases convicted) is already illegal. My only point in response would be that the knowledge they could be jeopardising the chances of a successful prosecution of Christopher Jefferies didn't stop almost all UK tabloid newspapers printing a succession of stories about his past and speculating on his involvement in the murder of Joanna Yeates.

All anyone is really seeking is for the print media to adhere to standards of behaviour which, as far as I can tell, they mostly did (voluntarily) until relatively recently. I don't see why a body which operates in the same way Ofcom does with regard to broadcast media is out of the question, but I'd be a lot happier if the newspaper industry would steal their critics' thunder and set up a credible independent regulator of their own volition, and agree to bind themselves to rulings made by that body.

Yes, fine. Everybody's OK with that. Let me emphasise: everybody's in agreement. But it must be independent of the Government.

Even senior members of the Conservative party know: if you give a Government minister the power of censorship, then freedom of speech is fucked. They wouldn't be able to resist the temptation.

By the way: "they mostly did (voluntarily) until relatively recently". No. Almost everyone always has, and still does. That's thousands of journalists who do the right thing, set against a handful who did not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 December, 2012, 05:52:18 PM
Agreed.  Shame the leader of the Labour Party doesn't agree.  Also I find it strange that victims are automatically given expert status, their views shouldn't count anymore than anybody else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 December, 2012, 06:55:28 PM
Quote from: Supermarine Troutfire on 01 December, 2012, 07:38:53 PM
Let me emphasise: everybody's in agreement. But it must be independent of the Government. Even senior members of the Conservative party know: if you give a Government minister the power of censorship, then freedom of speech is fucked. They wouldn't be able to resist the temptation.

Leveson isn't recommending any government involvement in press regulation, let alone censorship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 03 December, 2012, 03:15:23 AM
Yes it is. It suggests statutory regulation. That means an Act of Parliament. The Government has a majority in Parliament. They're right to be reluctant to get involved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 December, 2012, 03:15:39 PM
Most people who work in banking aren't corrupt.  Most businesses don't empty toxic waste into rivers. Most people don't get drunk and beat their kids. 

But some do.  A small minority of individuals will do anything that they think they can get away with.  They will fill their own pockets and stamp all over the powerless.  Regulation needs to be put in place to stop these individuals from destroying everything that most decent people work hard for.

Is statutory regulation the same as government control?  I work for an organization which supervises people who are appointed to look after the vulnerable.  We regulate and control and were created by new legislation.  We are also a non-ministerial agency. We don't have to do whatever the politician who happens to be in charge at any given moment tell us to.

Regulation which isn't enforced by law is essentially just asking the press nicely to behave themselves. The moral individuals will behave, the immoral ones won't.  The immoral ones will sell more newspapers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 03 December, 2012, 03:43:14 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 03 December, 2012, 03:15:39 PM
Is statutory regulation the same as government control?

Yes, when the press has a role in holding the Government to account. Let me stress again: everybody's fine with a tougher regulatory regime. There will be enforceable sanctions, such as forcing editors to print very embarrassing things when they get it wrong. It also looks like there will be a system of arbitration, which will save everyone involved a huge amount of money. The entire culture in newspapers is changing - for example, how many kiss and tell stories have you seen lately? It's just not worth the risk.

Meanwhile, online media generate the most appalling, actionable, damaging content and nobody bats an eyelid, because it's new and exciting - and hard to control. It's easier to attack the newspapers that people have built up an ill-defined resentment of, despite the fact they support many thousands of jobs and have a vital role in our society.

With statutory regulation of newspapers there is a very real risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Sooner or later, a minister is going to use it stop a legitimate piece of journalism. It cannot be allowed.

Anyway, I knew this thread carried a risk of me getting into an argument I didn't want. With respect to you all, I think I'll leave the debate to others.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 December, 2012, 03:47:25 PM
Statutory regulation is set up by Parliament and can, therefore, be changed by Parliament, thus you have political involvement.  What would you do to the publications that refused to be controlled by this statutory regulation?  Ban them?  Throw the editors in jail?  No political interference in a free press there then!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 December, 2012, 04:13:34 PM
You're assuming that parliament would become directly involved in regulating the press, then complaining about their involvement.

Yes, statutory regulation would mean parliament's involvement.  The courts would have no power without laws made by parliament - but that doesn't mean that judges have to do what politicians tell them.  They are empowered to act and then go ahead and act.  A regulatory body for the press would be empowered to act by legislation, but that doesn't mean that politicians control it.

Political parties could, in theory, re-write the law to do whatever they want and assume complete control. They could take control by regulating the press.  They could also, in theory, force through legislation to make being a member of an opposition party illegal, and having death squads patrol the streets.  But we're a parliamentary democracy, and it's incredibly unlikely.

So what about those who refuse to be regulated?  What about banks who refuse to be supervised by the banking ombudsman?  What about anyone else who refuses to accept the law?  When an organization or individual refuses to accept the law, they are punished. 

Unless the punishing is done for political reasons, it's not political interference. Regulatory bodies are created to ensure that politicians are not directly involved and there is no political interference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 03 December, 2012, 04:47:03 PM
I think I've made my opinion clear and we're going round in circles now.

Best wishes

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 December, 2012, 06:58:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 03 December, 2012, 03:47:25 PM
What would you do to the publications that refused to be controlled by this statutory regulation?  Ban them?  Throw the editors in jail?  No political interference in a free press there then!

If you want to set up in business as a dentist you have to join a professional body and agree to submit to its discipline. Failure to do so is against the law.

The Leveson report suggests a new regulating body should be created, which would enforce existing standards of professional conduct in a way the current regulating body (the PCC) has repeatedly failed to do. Failure to sign up to independent arbitration by this body is the only offence Leveson recommends creating; any legislation which limited the freedom of the press would have to make it through both houses of Parliament, just like any other law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2012, 07:03:00 PM
Ian Hislop has observed that pretty much all the objectionable behaviour highlighted by Leveson is already illegal under UK law, and that the real failure is of the police to investigate and prosecute appropriately under existing legislation.

But, then, they were being given brown paper bags stuffed with twenties by the tabloid hacks.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 December, 2012, 08:05:17 PM
Quote from: we are all roger godpleton on 03 December, 2012, 06:58:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 03 December, 2012, 03:47:25 PM
What would you do to the publications that refused to be controlled by this statutory regulation?  Ban them?  Throw the editors in jail?  No political interference in a free press there then!

If you want to set up in business as a dentist you have to join a professional body and agree to submit to its discipline. Failure to do so is against the law.

The Leveson report suggests a new regulating body should be created, which would enforce existing standards of professional conduct in a way the current regulating body (the PCC) has repeatedly failed to do. Failure to sign up to independent arbitration by this body is the only offence Leveson recommends creating; any legislation which limited the freedom of the press would have to make it through both houses of Parliament, just like any other law.

Statutory regulation of the press is limiting the freedom of the press.  I shall leave my last words on the subject to Franklin D. Roosevelt - "If in other lands the press and books and literature of all kinds are censored, we must redouble our efforts here to keep them free."


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 03 December, 2012, 08:41:28 PM
I'm not really involved because I live in idyllic Australia where the press would never do rotten things like that and haven't been caught yet.  However I'm an anglophile where reading is involved and have a sister and her family living there, so can't resist observing that:
- what you have now didn't work, so something needs to change.  Of course that doesn't in itself mean that statutory regulation is the change you need or is without problems
- the 'slippery slope to totalitarianism' argument is a bit suss. While it's true that nasty governments around the world use press regulation for censorship and other forms of evil, you have a better system than that.  Just as the extra powers given to your police, while not good, haven't meant you've turned into post-Soviet Russia, a bit of statutory regulation of the press won't necessarily turn you into Zimbabwe with far worse weather.  Also there's every sign that the report recommending statutory back up to an independent regulator (what I think they're after) is alert to possible problems and has anticipated them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 December, 2012, 09:10:47 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 03 December, 2012, 08:41:28 PM
I'm not really involved because I live in idyllic Australia where the press would never do rotten things like that and haven't been caught yet.

The proposed body won't have any influence in Scotland, so I'm technically a disinterested party too. Wee Eck will decide whether Trout is free to continue hacking JK Rowling's phone or not; so if the worst predictions come true, and all English papers become Pravda, you might all be fighting the Scots economic migrants in your midst for the few copies of the Daily Record you sometimes get at service stations down South for news from the free world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 03 December, 2012, 09:19:05 PM
They better not try to remove the Page Three Girl..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 December, 2012, 09:24:03 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 03 December, 2012, 09:19:05 PM
They better not try to remove the Page Three Girl..



Don't worry they won't, she'll just become that scabby prostitute Winston Smith visits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 December, 2012, 06:32:32 PM
They could put a 50ft inflatable penis up on Belfast city hall for all I care. For one thing it would be less embarrassing seeing that on the news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 06 December, 2012, 06:26:11 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2012, 07:03:00 PM
Ian Hislop has observed that pretty much all the objectionable behaviour highlighted by Leveson is already illegal under UK law, and that the real failure is of the police to investigate and prosecute appropriately under existing legislation.

But, then, they were being given brown paper bags stuffed with twenties by the tabloid hacks.

Cheers

Jim

Indeed. If I rob a bank, Parliament won't ask that I resign as Chief Bank Robber Extraordinaire or launch some huge inquiry in order to stop future bank robbing while allowing me to roam free to commit more crimes. They'd just throw me in prison (I'd hope!).

How is it that these people live under different rules? It seems like a clear case of problem>reaction>solution.

Screw giving more power to government, who have already shown an unwillingness to enforce existing legislation. Just throw these crooks in prison and be done with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 December, 2012, 07:42:56 AM
Quote from: Pops on 04 December, 2012, 06:32:32 PM
They could put a 50ft inflatable penis up on Belfast city hall for all I care. For one thing it would be less embarrassing seeing that on the news.

I see they're at it in Carrick, too.
Idiots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 08:56:02 AM
Quote from: Pops on 04 December, 2012, 06:32:32 PM
They could put a 50ft inflatable penis up on Belfast city hall for all I care. For one thing it would be less embarrassing seeing that on the news.

Daft business, both the removal and the reaction.  The only good flag is a black one, and I'd hoist it with the intestines of the lot of 'em.

Meanwhile in the Glorious Republic the yearning for and fear of which seems to generate such passion, yesterday's budget has taken half of our already meagre weekly grocery budget away, so expect to be seeing less of me, b'dum tish.  I'm sure the international money men can spend it better on a baby sandwich.  On the plus side, the back garden is looking very good for rice growing (resisting obvious joke).

Join ussssss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 06 December, 2012, 12:12:43 PM
Quotehalf of our already meagre weekly grocery budget away
:o
And thought we had been hit a bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 December, 2012, 12:33:35 PM
I'm all for just throwing the criminals in prison, but if you have an issue with a tabloid, what are you going to do about it?  contact the police force who took bribes and hope they decide you are important enough to allocate resources to?  Employ a solicitor and take on a powerful organisation with deep pockets and a complete lack of morals?  maybe the complaints commission set up and controlled by the editors?

A new body wouldn't give new powers to parliament - it would give powers to investigateto an independent organisation, outwith political interference.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2012, 01:20:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 08:56:02 AMyesterday's budget has taken half of our already meagre weekly grocery budget away

You live in Ireland so I assume you hear this a lot already:  MOVE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 06 December, 2012, 01:44:33 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 06 December, 2012, 07:42:56 AM
Quote from: Pops on 04 December, 2012, 06:32:32 PM
They could put a 50ft inflatable penis up on Belfast city hall for all I care. For one thing it would be less embarrassing seeing that on the news.

I see they're at it in Carrick, too.
Idiots.

And Bangor last night too. Like the joke goes 'You are now landing at Belfast International Airport. Please put back your watches 300 years'

Reminds me of this a bit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2TM6RyBrnQ)

For the record I don't give a shite what flag if any they fly, but you would really think by now everyone would know it'll kick off if you start to change anything at all about anything. Woeful. I understand the objection to it's presence and also how important it is for some to see it flying, but in the name of good fuck what difference does it make? Ignore it or salute it, just grow up ye friggin glypes.

M.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2012, 01:57:23 PM
My favorite bit of flag malarky was when one of our local political loudmouths saw a load of flags from around the world flying over a primary school and deciding the Italian one was actually the Irish tricolour, so he went on Facebook and declared the school an IRA training ground.  Another reason why I don't vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 December, 2012, 02:22:49 PM
I think 'flags' are largely irrelevant. They're mostly used these days for inciting some form of violence or hatred, or other such nonsense. Take the middle East for example; the media regularly showed burning American flags and baying mobs, but I find it hard to that American flags are readily available in their countries if their hatred is that intense.
(beware the 'Press' bearing gifts)

Flags are just another Propaganda tool, that bear no relevance in the modern world!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 02:32:17 PM
Quote from: Hawkeye McGillicuddy on 06 December, 2012, 01:57:23 PM
My favorite bit of flag malarky was when one of our local political loudmouths saw a load of flags from around the world flying over a primary school and deciding the Italian one was actually the Irish tricolour, so he went on Facebook and declared the school an IRA training ground. 

In fairness that was one of the funniest things ever (repercussions aside), almost justified the Troubles in their entirety

As to moving, who'd have me?  Can't sell the house [not one single unit has sold in our estate since 2010], can't rent it out, owe about 280K on the mortgage, plus have 5-figure personal debt inherited from my failed business and absolutely no savings,  negotiating  the least bad way/stage to declare personal bankruptcy, our only 'asset' is the wife's job which we would obviously lose after a move. 

Even if any self-respecting country would let me in in the first place with that shining portfolio of failure, we'd rapidly starve without some sort of a float, and wouldn't have the deposit for a rental place or to cover childcare so we could actually get out and find work.  Don't think I haven't thought about moving, but I'm afraid you're stuck with me for now! 

I confess I was rather enjoying the house-husband challenge of feeding the four of us decent food on the 50 euro a week (supplemented by garden and foraging) we have left after mortgage and debt repayments, insurance, power, school and transport, but as that will now apparently be below 25, unless we find another 1200 a year to cut from the overall household budget, I'm not so keen.  Still, I'm sure it can be done - Enda and Eamon would only ever act in my best interests, eh?

More sensibly, there are many and far more vulnerable others hit far harder, the missus still has a job and we're all hale and happy  - it's the entirely imaginary value of my house re: property tax that's really kicking us in the balls.  What's the actual monetary value of an asset that you can't monetise?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2012, 02:36:50 PM
There's nothing wrong with flags. Flags are colourful and pretty and help large groups of athletes find their way around various stadiums during opening ceremonies.

What I do object to is those people who hold up anything (be it a book, a belief, a system or a flag) and expect other people to bleed over it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2012, 02:42:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 02:32:17 PM
...owe about 280K on the mortgage, plus have 5-figure personal debt inherited from my failed business and absolutely no savings,  negotiating  the least bad way/stage to declare personal bankruptcy, our only 'asset' is the wife's job which we would obviously lose after a move.


Beat the Banks, Credit Cards and the Debt Collectors totally Lawfully and Get out of Debt for Free (http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2012, 02:51:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 02:32:17 PMWhat's the actual monetary value of an asset that you can't monetise?

This is why we invented insurance fraud: suddenly that imaginary value becomes cold hard cash.  As long as your insurance provider doesn't try to act the gipe, obviously, but that's why you earmark a few grand for a local kneebreaker to make sure your adjuster is enthusiastic to see you get your payout.
Alternatively, rent the house to illegal immigrants with factory jobs.  They're usually family men not keen to be deported back to a shithole like Portugal or wherever, so they know to keep their head down and the chances of their turning your house into a brothel are much lower than you might expect.
I might have suggested pimping once upon a time, but drugs have ruined that for most honest people.  Fucking economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2012, 02:58:03 PM
Seriously, visit www.getoutofdebtfree.org  -  you're not as powerless as you think.

For example, ask your bank if you can see the original mortgage papers you signed. There is a strong chance that they sold those papers in some complicated internal money making scheme and, if they have done this, then your debt has been sold and legally discharged leaving you owing nothing.

Same when a debt collector turns up at your door (or more likely telephones or writes to you) - they have in all probability purchased that debt from the original creditor - essentially discharging your debt and your obligation to pay it. The Golden Rule for debt collectors is to treat them like vampires - they can't enter your home unless you invite them in, which they'll try to trick you into doing. Also, agree to nothing - all they have to back up their speculative claims is empty threats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2012, 06:44:30 PM
I am serious.  Profiting from crime is not just for the upper classes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 December, 2012, 09:31:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2012, 02:58:03 PM
Seriously, visit www.getoutofdebtfree.org  -  you're not as powerless as you think.

Aye, it's a route I've actively looked at, possibly even on the strength of your previous advice.  My former leech business partner is apparently trying it (despite having several houses and boats and given to renting villas in Venice for a month, and suchlike), and if he pulled it off I'd be stuck with the full company debt (I should tell you the true story of how that debt doesn't actually exist, but somehow we still owe it, it'd be right up your street!).  However, I ran the specifics of their programme by my solicitor (an old family friend and all-round daecent skin) and he laughed until I was sick.  That said, nothing ventured...

I'm an old hand at dealing with debt collectors and sheriffs, unfortunately, as for the last year-or-so of the company's active run that was basically my life, morning, noon and night.  The level of paper-thin faux-thuggery and implicit threat employed is almost funny. 

TBH, the core problem is that I am basically unwilling to walk away from my debts, and while some of them exist solely as an accounting fiction, some are to actual people, and all were incurred due to my own failings as a manager.  Prolonged reflection has revealed that my primary responsibility is to my family, overriding my responsibility to my own ideas of morality, but it doesn't stop me wishing it was different

Anyway, this is now far from political.

Quote from: Hawkeye McGillicuddy on 06 December, 2012, 02:51:05 PM...the chances of their turning your house into a brothel are much lower than you might expect.

Not so, we had a brothel run out of the house just across the road on exactly this basis, so one imagines there's even an unserviced demand in the locality.  The missus doesn't look too bad in a dim light, might be worth a shot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 07 December, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quoteprimary responsibility is to my family

This.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 07 December, 2012, 03:53:03 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 07 December, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quoteprimary responsibility is to my family

This.

Yes, that. Stay focused on the good things, mate. Best wishes to you from us all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 December, 2012, 07:34:58 AM
Quote from: Supermarine Troutfire on 07 December, 2012, 03:53:03 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 07 December, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quoteprimary responsibility is to my family

This.

Yes, that. Stay focused on the good things, mate. Best wishes to you from us all.

Bah, no need for any good wishes*, I'm not really complaining beyond observing the abstract shape of how these debt things work, I'm living a very good life at the moment, in many ways much better than the one I had before when I was a 60-80 hour type - spending proper time with the kids while they're still young enough to appreciate it and seeing more of my parents while they're still around, finally getting a handle on decent cooking, sl-o-o-o-wly working through my enormous backlog of reports, articles and archiving by night, keeping my hand in with the odd tiny job when I can get it and endlessly applying for big ones: a true gentleman of leisure, and not feeling too guilty about it since they stopped paying me jobseekers, and since my wife started enjoying her job again.  If I can only stop feeling terrible about the past and fearful of the future, all would be well, as the present is grand.

And nothing lasts, so I plan to enjoy it even as I scheme a way out of it.



*Although appreciated nonetheless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 December, 2012, 12:04:58 PM
Ah, you're a grand man, Tordels, and I have every confidence in you and your future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 December, 2012, 02:17:39 PM
You have best wishes regardless, TB.  My brother in law is in much the same boat as yourself, it seems, though his ex business partner gave up on surreptitiousness and instead one day landed in the floundering office he'd bled dry and then buggered off from taking all the cash with him (and then set up an identical business right across the street from the BiL's) with a solicitor in tow asking BiL to sign a document accepting all his partner's debts so he could "apply for loans".  I am convinced he thought that his sheer balls in asking was the reason he'd get what he wanted, never mind out of the building alive.

There are plenty of crime-related solutions to financial woes even if you're not keen on drugs, pimping or selling babies - thanks to a well-fucked tax system, diesel runs across the border are practically a public service.  Alternatively, apply for EU grants, as there are art grants on the go so you could conceivably apply for one by claiming to do an arty graphic novel about archeology or other boffiny heritage stuff.  A mate got a grant to do a graphic novel about the history of my home town and ended up just turning in a bunch of landscape paintings and paid another mate a few hundred quid to write poems for each one.
Just think, TB, you could have the distinction of being the only unemployed person in Ireland to claim to be an artist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 16 December, 2012, 04:23:42 AM
I didn't want to clog up the RIP thread with this, and I wasn't sure if I should make a new thread about it. I figure here is as good as any place to do it.

When I woke up yesterday, my phone was clogged with updates from my different news sources about the Connecticut school shooting. It was rather sad to wake up to, worse to see how the toll went up and up as it often happens. It's been a rather bad year as far as shootings go in the United States, just off the top my head,

-Oregon mall shooting
-Oikos University shooting
-Workplace shooting in Minnesota
-Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting
-Seattle Cafe shooting
-Aurora movie theater shooting

Those are the ones that come from the top of my head. I don't know about coverage outside of the US but here it's of course been filling up airwaves. I think the whole of today it's been completely focused on the event, as well as yesterday. Knowing the media this'll probably continue into most of next week too as more information comes out about the shooter and they go onto why he did it. Was it a personal problem? Were the weapons too easy to access? Some psychological/mental illness? Or some sort of unknown factors? It's rather difficult in cases like this, because while they can identify patterns, it's impractical to construct a 'profile' to analyze this better.

There's always the bit about having a conversation about these shootings, why the happened. Access to weapons, social problems, psychological issues, etc etc but they rarely stick around. People find something else to focus on. Just looking at my neighbors there'll not be much of a stomach to try and get changes. Gun control especially is such a third rail that people don't talk about it, especially politicians because it's not good for image. There's been some calls though they should push for the renewal of the assault rifle ban that lapsed back in 2004. Others have been talking about ways to overhaul school "security" and ways to keep people out.

Still, I don't think there's a surefire solution to all this. I think the impact of this particular shooting was more due to the age of the children, I don't recall this kind of vibe even after the Virginia Tech shootings. People felt bad after the Norway shootings here too, though since it didn't happen in the United States it of course didn't prompt any discussions on these problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 December, 2012, 04:16:19 PM
Its certainly been big news on this side of the water.  News channels here seem to be in the slightly odd position of not just reporting on the event, but reporting on the coverage of the event by US media, who seem to go into overdrive following a tragedy like this.

Watching CNN interview a child shortly after the fact was incredibly disturbing.  Why any journalist would think it appropriate to point a camera at a seven year old and ask her if she was scared is completely beyond me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 16 December, 2012, 06:44:51 PM
The media reaction to events generally take this direction. Farming and digging for what ever thing to broadcast or publish online, no matter how pointless or insensitive it might be. The big problem here though is with the way news spreads now, the rush to be the first with some tidbit of information is even more pronounced.

For most people I think this was evident with the way many media outlets released the name of the shooter as "Ryan Lanza", the brother of the shooter, before the police did so themselves. This, of course, illicited the expected response on the internet and caused a great deal of mess for him. There was a good summary of this written by a political cartoon guy who happened to be facebook friends with this guy (presumambly a fan of his work).

http://www.mattbors.com/blog/2012/12/16/i-am-facebook-friends-with-ryan-lanza-which-became-a-problem/

Problem is, as far as I see it, media do this to farm for page hits, ratings, what ever. And that's driven by people watching and browsing, so they're merely farming to this kind of person (intersecting with those that view the moral outrage-type sensational articles...).

As these things often go though, it'll be beat over for a week or so until another big event comes up, and people move on to stressing out over that. So even with all these statements that come up a discussion or dialog needs to start, people have lost their interest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 17 December, 2012, 08:51:55 PM
Adrian Bamforth posted in the RIP thread how irksome facebook activism can be even when he agrees with the cause. This got me thinking about a recent incident in China (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910), where a man went on a stabbing spree in a school, 22 children injured, none killed (China has had a rash of stabbing sprees in recent years). People are looking at this, saying this is an example of how a tragedy like what recently happened in America can be prevented with tighter gun control. 22 children got stabbed, two seriously injured and that's just physical injury, don't think they should be using this as a example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 17 December, 2012, 11:22:05 PM
They weren't shot in the head by an assault rifle, is the point. Very clear to me what the point of the comparison is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 18 December, 2012, 12:12:55 AM
What I should have fully said is comparing tragedies in shorts bursts of social media chatter like twitter (where I saw the comparison) to bring a point across might not be a good idea of putting a point across, some people might it offensive. Apologies if I offended you blackmocco.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 December, 2012, 10:37:08 PM
Quote from: Big Barry PengeBack on 20 December, 2012, 08:01:43 PM
Hmmm, I find that nettavist bollocks almost as offensive as Phelps himself (almost) - profoundly childish, especially seeing as Phelps surrounds himself with his horrifically abused descendants.  But yeah, it almost makes me wish that the Jesus of the Gospels was an immortal omnipotent deity, because by my reading he would kick their twisted inhuman arses.

"In May 2011, representatives of the Ku Klux Klan distanced themselves from the church, denouncing them as "hatemongers".[185]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church#Criticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church#Criticism)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 21 December, 2012, 05:49:25 AM
I can't figure out sometimes if WBC is serious or if they are the best trolls to ever exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 21 December, 2012, 09:32:54 AM
I've often wondered if they're some kind of COINTELPRO type thing but a friend suggested the following on his FB page. Not sure how accurate it is.

"And all of a sudden, as if in answer to my quandary, I stumble upon a logical answer to a long standing question just by paying attention to my friends posting. Observe: Ivory Blom: (to) Matt DeMille- also...the westboro baptist church...they are lawyers and its big business for them. The Phelps family and their hate group do not actually protest based on any real belief system. This is a business model for them. They purposefully seek to protest in the most offensive places so that municipalities will infringe upon their First Amendment rights...Once this happens, they sue... and they win. its abuse. how bout that?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 21 December, 2012, 09:34:44 AM
The point is, I find them very suspicious so the above answer would at least make sense to me if true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 December, 2012, 02:05:44 PM
Ah, the NRA, bless 'em, continue to simplify the situation with their view that, in a world with too many black-hats, what we really need is a whole bunch of well armed white-hats. 

And what people really want in a time of tragedy is simple answers to complex questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 23 December, 2012, 01:54:57 AM
on an unrelated point, does anyone else get annoyed by politicians taking credit where none is due?  Our local hack, after years of 'that's not my department' responses to anything unpopular, took credit for every bloody road, tramstop and school in the electorate when election time came up.  That's not unusual.
Recently the government here backed off a commitment to get the budget back in surplus, having previously committed to this goal.  A lot of economists had said it was a stupid goal, but, the electorate being pretty dim, the govt had promised to achieve it.  When they finally said they couldn't do it, the economists were mostly positive and the opposition was predictably scornful. 
  Next thing I know, I get an email from the Greens leader saying the government has finally listened to them.  Now the Greens here are not without influence, since they help prop up a minority government (think your Lib Dems but with an ounce of principle), but there was no evidence at all that the Greens had anything to do with the decision at all.  Harrumph.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 December, 2012, 02:03:22 AM
The way to take back our power from the politicians is to first take back the money supply.

Have a look at the Lawful Bank.

Control the purse strings, control the government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 23 December, 2012, 10:44:48 PM
It may be the holidays but the scumbags keep on scumming:

Timbuktu mausoleums 'destroyed' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20833010)

Therecent issue of New Internationalist (http://www.newint.org/issues/2012/12/01/) had an article about a lot if the recent upheaval in Mali has been fueled by the Americans....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 27 December, 2012, 05:56:36 AM
Here's some more moronic stuff from this end of the ocean. I was rather amused. Note the headine

http://nation.foxnews.com/connecticut-elementary-school-shooting/2012/12/20/bikers-turn-out-protect-newtown-mourners-westboro-baptist-church

Quote
Bikers Turn Out to Protect Newtown Mourners from Left-Wing Westboro Cult

Bikers descended on the town of Newtown yesterday and linked arms blocking the hate group protesters of Westboro Baptist Church from disrupting the funerals. (Free Republic)

Conservative bikers turned out yesterday to protect Newtown mourners from Democrat Fred Phelps and his Westboro cult from protesting.
The Cochrane Times reported:

Bikers seem to have thwarted attempts by the Westboro Baptist Church to protest the funeral of Newtown, Conn., shooting victim Principal Dawn Hochsprung.

I guess Fox News sees WBC as a left-wing organization, and Phelps a no good dirty Democrat. Yeah, Phelps ran as a democrat back in the 80s and 90s before he went crazy and off the rails, but I just found this small article rather funny. Fox quality.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 27 December, 2012, 06:22:20 AM
I wasn't aware of that connection but colour me unsurprised. The Democrats and Ku Klux Klan have a long and hateful relationship together. This adds to my suspicion that the WBC may not be what they seem on the surface.

And Fox News sucks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 28 December, 2012, 07:47:37 PM
Are you looking for another reason to hate Margaret Thatcher? How about her plans to remove the British welfare system completely? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/28/margaret-thatcher-role-plan-to-dismantle-welfare-state-revealed)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: U.S.S.R on 29 December, 2012, 03:38:12 PM
Margaret Thatcher really was scum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 December, 2012, 03:55:01 PM
She is BRILLIANT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:02:22 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 December, 2012, 03:55:01 PM
She is BRILLIANT

I cannot conceive of how anyone can regard someone who wanted to dismantle the welfare state as brilliant.

Abolish the NHS is a brilliant notion?

I dearly hope you are a wum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 January, 2013, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:02:22 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 December, 2012, 03:55:01 PM
She is BRILLIANT

I cannot conceive of how anyone can regard someone who wanted to dismantle the welfare state as brilliant.

Abolish the NHS is a brilliant notion?

I dearly hope you are a wum.
Let's not forget sending mounted police in against men trying to save their jobs. That was a classic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:11:59 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 04 January, 2013, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:02:22 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 December, 2012, 03:55:01 PM
She is BRILLIANT

I cannot conceive of how anyone can regard someone who wanted to dismantle the welfare state as brilliant.

Abolish the NHS is a brilliant notion?

I dearly hope you are a wum.
Let's not forget sending mounted police in against men trying to save their jobs. That was a classic.

Nothing like a cavalry charge against pesky workers to get the blood up Richmond!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 January, 2013, 09:17:13 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:11:59 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 04 January, 2013, 09:07:53 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 04 January, 2013, 09:02:22 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 December, 2012, 03:55:01 PM
She is BRILLIANT

I cannot conceive of how anyone can regard someone who wanted to dismantle the welfare state as brilliant.

Abolish the NHS is a brilliant notion?

I dearly hope you are a wum.
Let's not forget sending mounted police in against men trying to save their jobs. That was a classic.

Nothing like a cavalry charge against pesky workers to get the blood up Richmond!
Damn right! Keep 'em in their place I say!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 January, 2013, 10:49:42 AM
I see nothing wrong with charging people to be schooled or receive medical aid.  Helps thin the herd, refines the gene pool, makes the workforce stronger.  People need reminding their money belongs to their feudal overlords and betters, and that they are merely borrowing it at best.

Quote from: judgefloyd on 23 December, 2012, 01:54:57 AMon an unrelated point, does anyone else get annoyed by politicians taking credit where none is due?

Here in Northern Ireland, the cap on decades of civil war and terrorism was a local politician taking credit for the ceasefire he not only had fuck all to do with, but actively undermined.  They actually made him First Minister and gave him the Nobel peace prize for his supposed efforts in rebuilding cross-community government which he then walked out on in an attempt to destroy the ceasefire and send thousands more innocent people to their deaths.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 January, 2013, 11:28:54 AM
That Nobel Peace Prize is a fickle ol' bird.

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/05/03/article-1382859-0BE03DE700000578-150_964x642.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 04 January, 2013, 11:53:18 AM
From Gotcha to Gertcha (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20907312)

One trick pony, and Argentine president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner may be a joke, but im not sure the Sun wading in is the best idea. Still..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 January, 2013, 01:00:20 PM
Quote from: TotalHack on 04 January, 2013, 11:28:54 AM
That Nobel Peace Prize is a fickle ol' bird.

my brain is sludgy with flu germs but I don't get it - what's the link between the NPP and that picture? I thought it had been awarded to the whole of europe this year (which is odd enough....)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 04 January, 2013, 01:53:41 PM
I was a little confused by that too and assumed it was a general reference to Barack Obama continuing George's Bush's mass murder policy. Though I don't even think Bush openly worked with Al Qaeda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 January, 2013, 02:26:27 PM
I shall have to look back at my history books to see when the NHS was stopped by Thatcher, as I don't recall her actually doing such a thing. We all know that cabinet meetings come up with strange bollocks from all parties and most of the time those ideas are left at that, ideas.

As for the Miners strike, I witnessed unlawful things done by both sides at the Easington Mine but I don't pick one side and believe only that because it suits me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 January, 2013, 02:38:33 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 January, 2013, 02:26:27 PM
I shall have to look back at my history books to see when the NHS was stopped by Thatcher, as I don't recall her actually doing such a thing. We all know that cabinet meetings come up with strange bollocks from all parties and most of the time those ideas are left at that, ideas.

because they know they couldn't get away with it. The point is that recently released cabinet documents show that she WANTED to get rid of the welfare state and the NHS, but more sensible people advsied her it would be suicide. So she's still an evil c*nt in my book. These days Cameron's trying to do the same thing bit by bit in the hope we don't notice.

And when it comes to "illegal acts", I think we're entitled to expect a higher standard of behaviour in that regard when it comes to peoiple in blue uniforms. The wholesale assaults, lies, frame-ups and cover ups were just scandalous, as recent revalations show. Unfortunately, we've had to wait 30 years for even partial truth to come out.

Out of interest, which bits did you witness? Or do you mean witness as in "read all the lies in the media"?

Thankfully, today's police hate tories just as much as lefties so Cameron will never be able to use them as a paramilitary force like Thatcher did!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 January, 2013, 02:49:42 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 January, 2013, 02:26:27 PMAs for the Miners strike, I witnessed unlawful things done by both sides at the Easington Mine but I don't pick one side and believe only that because it suits me.

Arguably it is worse when the police conspire to break the law and pervert the course of justice than when desperate, angry mobs lash out.  Kind of like it's slightly more worrying if a Tory MP mauls a toddler than if a bulldog does it - the dog will pay for its transgression, but the Tory MP will chalk it up to being misquoted by the Guardian and get his job back in a year's time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 January, 2013, 02:53:08 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 January, 2013, 02:38:33 PM
Or do you mean witness as in "read all the lies in the media"?

It was something of a revelation to me when I saw the uncut rushes of BBC News' film of the 'Battle of Orgreave' -- in the report broadcast on the news that evening, the pickets are clearly shown throwing objects at the police, after which the police mount a horseback charge on the miners. In the rushes, these two events happen the other way around. The rushes have a timecode on them, which makes the sequence of events difficult to dispute.

QuoteAnd when it comes to "illegal acts", I think we're entitled to expect a higher standard of behaviour in that regard when it comes to peoiple in blue uniforms.

The Met, in particular, were notorious for their behaviour during the Miners' Strike -- they would remove the identifying insignia and PC numbers from their uniforms before deployment.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 January, 2013, 02:53:52 PM
I presume you mean those police involved in the plebgate story. Just who can you believe nowadays!

Come on DDD, you must know me by now. I only ever try to quote facts from official sites from the organisations involved and through left wing media, as I feel that will be believed more.

As for the mine at Easington, seeing as that is where my mam comes from and many of my family live, along with Horden, I spent many a year in those places and so witnessed quite a lot of stuff with my own eyes. I was also told stuff that went on but never made the press. Interesting times!
I hope the fact that I lived there helps ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 04 January, 2013, 02:55:29 PM
As a well know comic character once said, "When a judge breaks the Law, there is no Law."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 January, 2013, 02:58:56 PM
I demand to hear some of CF's firsthand experiences so I can give them a fair and balanced evaluation before dismissing them as scurrilous lefty lies.

SPILL, you communist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 January, 2013, 03:12:32 PM
Quote from: Stan on 04 January, 2013, 01:53:41 PM
I was a little confused by that too and assumed it was a general reference to Barack Obama continuing George's Bush's mass murder policy. Though I don't even think Bush openly worked with Al Qaeda.

I don't think you could realistically call Obama a peace-maker - increased drone-strikes etc. - which is the reason I suppose they awarded him the prize before he ever did anything.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 04 January, 2013, 11:38:03 PM
QuoteAnd when it comes to "illegal acts", I think we're entitled to expect a higher standard of behaviour in that regard when it comes to peoiple in blue uniforms

Heartily disagree here - if one side sets the agenda they can't complain (or at least justifiably) if they get the same in return. I had a work colleague try to advance an arguement that it was acceptable for the IRA to kill who they liked but government forces should 'play by the rules'. Fook that. Same applies to drone attacks - if Al Qaeda wants to declare war on the West and kill indiscriminately I'm all for anything that wipes them out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 January, 2013, 11:52:04 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 04 January, 2013, 01:00:20 PM
Quote from: TotalHack on 04 January, 2013, 11:28:54 AM
That Nobel Peace Prize is a fickle ol' bird.

my brain is sludgy with flu germs but I don't get it - what's the link between the NPP and that picture? I thought it had been awarded to the whole of europe this year (which is odd enough....)

Friend Barack was awarded the NPP in 2009 for:

Quote...his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.

The pic I posted is of said PotUS overseeing the killing of bin Laden and sundry of his family, staff and their families.  Not that I'll miss the evil scrote myself, but it is an odd interpretation of 'diplomacy and cooperation between peoples'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 January, 2013, 11:52:59 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 04 January, 2013, 11:38:03 PM
Same applies to drone attacks - if Al Qaeda wants to declare war on the West and kill indiscriminately I'm all for anything that wipes them out.


What you're saying is you agree with indiscriminate killing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 January, 2013, 11:58:41 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 04 January, 2013, 11:52:59 PM
What you're saying is you agree with indiscriminate killing.

I doubt that's what BM meant at all (although it's a fair reading of the sentence), but I'd be more concerned by the notion that drone attacks will wipe Al Queda, or more generally Islamic terrorism, out.  I'd have thought quite the opposite, much like Israeli strikes on Hamas chiefs.  Asymmetric warfare has its downsides for both sides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2013, 12:26:59 AM
Quote from: Buttonman on 04 January, 2013, 11:38:03 PM
Heartily disagree here - if one side sets the agenda they can't complain (or at least justifiably) if they get the same in return.

Some quarters already believe that the British government and military had a shoot to kill policy with suspected IRA members - if so, it wasn't very successful, certainly not for that 8 year old they shot dead a couple of hundred yards from where I'm sitting because he was playing with a toy gun that has yet to turn up.  The po-po are employed specifically to enforce the law and see it isn't broken, even by their own number, likewise, there's a reason you don't hear much about those politicians running for office on a platform of getting back at Arabs by slaughtering children in their beds via an organised campaign of suicide bombings.

An eye for an eye doesn't work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 12:38:09 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 04 January, 2013, 11:52:59 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 04 January, 2013, 11:38:03 PM
Same applies to drone attacks - if Al Qaeda wants to declare war on the West and kill indiscriminately I'm all for anything that wipes them out.


What you're saying is you agree with indiscriminate killing.

No, that's what you're saying I'm saying.

Your liberal agenda is fine but if the people who would rather see us and our way of life dead don't suscribe to it, we might as well run up the white flag right now.

As far as I know the drones are tageted and operated onto targets remotely - indiscriminate would be a blunter tool - say a 747 into a tower block?

As for the shoot to kill policy you're being naive if you don't think Thatcher could have wiped out the IRA command in a single night - the SAS will always have better training, guns and intelligence. What she needed was some kind of settlement to stop Ireland from ripping itself apart  for ever more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 January, 2013, 12:48:42 AM
Seems like I'm always disagreeing with you this evening, BM, please be assured that it isn't intentional, but...

Isn't one of the important things about 'our way of life' that we believe in the rule of law, and its universal application?

It also seems to me that your points re: the IRA and Al Queda are arguing against each other.  If the problem of Islamic terrorism can be eliminated by drone strikes, then why couldn't the threat of Republican terrorism be dealt with by your SAS-in-one-night model? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 12:50:59 AM
because the SAS ain't thousands upon thousands strong. It ain't the movies you know!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 January, 2013, 12:54:58 AM
That minor issue aside...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 12:59:41 AM
Quote from: TotalHack on 05 January, 2013, 12:48:42 AM
Seems like I'm always disagreeing with you this evening, BM, please be assured that it isn't intentional, but...

Isn't one of the important things about 'our way of life' that we believe in the rule of law, and its universal application?

It also seems to me that your points re: the IRA and Al Queda are arguing against each other.  If the problem of Islamic terrorism can be eliminated by drone strikes, then why couldn't the threat of Republican terrorism be dealt with by your SAS-in-one-night model?

Haha - Like Lionel Ritchie I can take it all night long!

You misinterpret me - I'm all for going toe to toe with the bad guys and wiping them out. With Al Qaeda that's an option and one the powers that be are embracing. With Ireland the political will wasn't there so they didn't despite the provocation. If the government had went on the offensive I'd have supported them (retrospectively I was about 10) but horses for courses I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 01:01:01 AM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 12:38:09 AMYour liberal agenda is fine but if the people who would rather see us and our way of life dead don't suscribe to it, we might as well run up the white flag right now.

As far as I know the drones are tageted and operated onto targets remotely - indiscriminate would be a blunter tool - say a 747 into a tower block?

As for the shoot to kill policy you're being naive if you don't think Thatcher could have wiped out the IRA command in a single night - the SAS will always have better training, guns and intelligence. What she needed was some kind of settlement to stop Ireland from ripping itself apart  for ever more.



I don't have an agenda any more than you do and Ireland wasn't ripping itself apart; the South were as ignorant as much as any on the British mainland. Wiping out the IRA in a single night would have compounded the problem just like it perpetually does in the Middle-East, there's always someone else. It's a naive appraisal of what was actually going on in Northern Ireland, an appraisal that fits the news reports but not the actualities and back-street politics of the time.


Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 12:38:09 AMWhat she needed was some kind of settlement to stop Ireland from ripping itself apart for ever more.


Clearly she wasn't the person to do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:04:59 AM
I'm parked up now so I can tell you some amazing news I just heard on Radio5 (that's a BBC station for anyone not in the UK).
If Labour get in at the next election, they promise to give the long term unemployed jobs for 6 months, on the minimum wage and if they don't accept the job they lose their benefits. What a bunch of Nazis :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 01:12:51 AM


I recommend they get rid of the welfare state.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 05 January, 2013, 01:15:30 AM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 12:38:09 AMAs far as I know the drones are tageted and operated onto targets remotely - indiscriminate would be a blunter tool - say a 747 into a tower block?

The towers were targeted by passengers jets. Just as drones target funerals, weddings, raves or basically anywhere else you find lots of civilians. Both sides are just as vile as each other as far as I'm concerned.

Don't worry though. Politicians have bunkers and bodyguards so next time Al Qaeda blow something up it'll just be the proles who catch shrapnel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:19:41 AM
As for the troubles. British armed forces carried the infamous white card which stated when we could fire upon the IRA. One of the best parts was when it said, when you are fired upon, which doesn't give you much of a chance now does it. As Buttonman stated, we seem to love to follow rules and like to fight with one arm tied behind our backs, as we are nice amid obviously the good guys

It seems the evil West go out of their way to invent killing machines that try to take out the target with pinpoint accuracy and spend billions doing so. Sadly there will always be the death of innocent people but until politicians fight wars, then this is the way hit will be. I suppose we could walk into mosques and markets wearing suicide vests and kill only the innocent but as far as I'm concerned that is done by truly evil people and people who may have been brainwashed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 01:26:36 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:19:41 AM
It seems the evil West go out of their way to invent killing machines that try to take out the target with pinpoint accuracy and spend billions doing so.



While the private-sector earns billions in the global arms-trade selling them to allies/future-enemies and creating new wars to fight in.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:32:17 AM
That's the private sector being helped by the public sector. Now who says that they can't work together :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 January, 2013, 01:35:36 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:32:17 AM
That's the private sector being helped by the public sector. Now who says that they can't work together :D

I award this round to the man in the blue corner!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 01:35:56 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 01:32:17 AM
That's the private sector being helped by the public sector. Now who says that they can't work together :D

Tru dat but I wished they'd share the profits.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 12:50:59 AM
because the SAS ain't thousands upon thousands strong. It ain't the movies you know!

And how many active members do you think the IRA had at any one time?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2013, 12:28:25 PM
Depends how you would define "active", if you're talking about the people who pulled the trigger or made the bombs, at the height of "the Troubles" you'd be talking about the low hundreds.  But, if you're including the guys and girls that hid the weapons and explosives, supplied safe houses and hides, contributed money towards the weapons, passed on information about the security forces, did reconnaissance, and who travelled Europe buying weapons, etc., etc., you'll be up there in the low thousands.  And, if you include the INLA, OIRA, the UVF, the UDA, etc., etc., the numbers just keep going up and up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 12:53:55 PM

Not to forget those individuals high up in paramilitaries actively meeting with the respective governments unbeknownst to their organisations at the time. The final solution arguments rarely work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 January, 2013, 02:22:48 PM
And let's not forget the internecine warfare, beatings and murder amongst such "freedom fighters" as some would see them.

States have to be wicked as there are such wicked people in the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 January, 2013, 02:37:36 PM
When you use the same lowly tactics as the people you're fighting against, then what are you fighting for?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 January, 2013, 02:39:01 PM
To win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 January, 2013, 03:05:49 PM
Win what?  Most conflict might hide behind an ideological battle, but when it comes down to it any war is about who is in charge, which individuals get to call the shots.  if you can't distinguish your own tribe from the enemy tribe by your actions, then why fight them at all?

Suppose, that in order to "win" the "war on terror" we use the same  methods as terrorist groups - indiscriminate mass murder.  Fear makes our enemy more likely to grow in number, more desperate, as it already has in Afghanistan and Iraq...so we match them massacre for massacre.  We become more entrenched, more fearfull and more brutal.  We might have the resources and drones to ensure that we don't have to strap bomb vests to our children, but it won't make us any more free.  In the end, we get a repressive and brutal leadership whether we win or loose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 03:23:51 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 05 January, 2013, 03:05:49 PM
Win what?

Precisely. One does not 'win' the war on terror with draconian security legislation and the erosion of civil liberties, one wins every single day on an individual level by simply refusing to be terrorised.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 January, 2013, 04:18:04 PM
War is between nation states. Terrorism is by non state groups or even  individuals the use of violence with a political end,(which would include the usual suspects the Taleban,PIRA,ETA,Red Army Faction and even of course the CIA and dear MI6), what we have in Afghanistan is the usual Western early 21st century muddle, a limited "war" with what objective? No one seems to know. Limited wars don't work.

And we must in the end negotiate with an enemy,(presuming you cannot destroy them utterly as say Rome did or Genghis Khan), so all you high moralists are ready to shake hands with the Taleban (unless they try and murder you, you infidel) with the people who torture and murder female teachers and students?

Where's your morals now?

It's a wicked world. And it always will be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 04:59:53 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2013, 12:28:25 PM
Depends how you would define "active", if you're talking about the people who pulled the trigger or made the bombs, at the height of "the Troubles" you'd be talking about the low hundreds.  But, if you're including the guys and girls that hid the weapons and explosives, supplied safe houses and hides, contributed money towards the weapons, passed on information about the security forces, did reconnaissance, and who travelled Europe buying weapons, etc., etc., you'll be up there in the low thousands.  And, if you include the INLA, OIRA, the UVF, the UDA, etc., etc., the numbers just keep going up and up.

Indeed. And it is the folks that provide safe houses, allow weapons to be stored in there houses or give money are the ones that, I suspect, Mr Obama is blowing up with such glee.
Imagine if this tactic had been used in NI - imagine dropping a bomb on, say, a wedding in the Bogside in Stroke City because the bride or groom had once allowed a few guns to be stored in their house (probably under pain of death).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 January, 2013, 05:22:02 PM
"war is when two armies are fighting" as American philosopher Bill Hicks once said.

The Taliban, to all intents and purposes, were the government of Afghanistan - in so far as Afghanistan was actually a nation, rather than just the bit between neighbouring countries which nobody was able to control. 

Shake hands with the enemy?  It seems to be working in Ireland.  Even if we don't, that doesn't mean we have to engage them on their terms.  We don't have to kill civilians and torture people to get what we want - in facts, its completely counter productive.
The Taliban, the IRA, as with any other extremist group, might pretend to be about fighting an ideological battle, but the foot soldiers just want to be safe, to feed their families, and feel like their simplistic view of the world isn't under threat.

Al Queda, the boogie men, are nothing special or new.  They don't have any real structure or purpose.  They only thing they have going for them is the constant supply of new recruits and money which will seek them out to give some purpose to sad little lives.  New recruits and money are much easier to find if rather than coming up with a cohesive goal you can just point to the westerners who kill whole villages and call them the common enemy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 05:31:49 PM
We don't need to imagine that, as that is the sort of tactic the IRA did. Bombs in pubs, cars, shopping centres, etc... killing the innocent and not their enemy. I won't bother with all the kneecappings, punishment beatings, etc...
As for the ability to take out all the leaders of the terrorist groups in one night, they were all known and the resources were on the ground. If the order was given, it would've happened but Maggie, bless her didn't want to go that way.

By the way, it is nice to see there's no trouble in Northern Ireland nowadays. I hear Belfast is lovely, especially over the last month. Sadly some people will always find a cause to fight for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 January, 2013, 05:44:27 PM
I think there's some Loyalist riots in Belfast this evening. :'( Ultimately I'd have to swallow and shake hands with scumbies cos that's the world we live in. (i'd have something horrible on mine-more horrible than normal though not polonium 210 since the russkies spoiled that trick) :-X.

Tempting it must have been to send the Harriers south and blast Dublin and historically we will not know if it would have worked.And Obama is striking at the taleban leadership though America seems to have a strange propensity for hitting weddings and British tanks. :( 
Terrorists/insurgents have been defeated militarily even the IRA had a ceasefire due to horrendous losses in the mid seventies, but it is politics that ultimately determines these things. Not  just might. Those who live in such areas will ultimately determine what happens for good or ill.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2013, 05:52:55 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 05:31:49 PMBy the way, it is nice to see there's no trouble in Northern Ireland nowadays. I hear Belfast is lovely, especially over the last month. Sadly some people will always find a cause to fight for.

The current unrest in Belfast isn't coming from Republicans, it's from the upstanding British citizens who would have been left to their own devices after the blitzkrieg you suggested on the last couple of pages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 06:15:24 PM
I do follow the news (on the radio mainly) and do know who is doing the attacks on the police and property. Pity the news don't show what's happening on the tv, perhaps they don't want to stop potential investment.

As for me suggesting a blitzkrieg, can you quote me where I said I wanted that (unless you are not saying I want it but that I just pointed a fact out). I think I said something along the lines of Maggie not wanting that. I don't think I've ever typed on this forum that I want to wipe someone out or a group of people. On the other hand many people on here have wished certain political people dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 06:21:44 PM
QuoteI do follow the news (on the radio mainly)
QuotePity the news don't show what's happening on the tv

Maybe if you did watch the news, you'd see that they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 06:36:11 PM
As you quote I said I mainly listen to the radio news and that gives a much broader coverage over the whole night, with first hand accounts from all sides. This is something the tv news can never compete with. One of the best blokes doing this is an Irish bloke on Radio5 called Stephen Nolan, who sees things from all perspectives.

I do watch the evening news before work and try to catch a bit from the news channels when I can. I prefer the ITV news as they aren't showing a left wing slant on everything like the BBC TV news does. I actually like to see all sides of everything and not just what I want to hear.

By the way, what do you labour lot think of the news about Labour's idea that I mentioned earlier about stopping benefits. I have yet to see anything on tv about this yet but I may have missed something, as I can't watch the tv all the time, as I have have to work to pay my taxes to help keep paying for Labour's war effort.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 06:54:23 PM
QuoteOne of the best blokes doing this is an Irish bloke on Radio5 called Stephen Nolan

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! Nolan... best... HAAAHHAAAHAHAHAAAA!

QuoteI prefer the ITV news as they aren't showing a left wing slant on everything like the BBC TV news does

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHAA! Stop it, my sides...

QuoteBy the way, what do you labour lot

See, this is something you do all the time, and it sort of bugs the shit out of me. I have never, and will never vote Labour. Being left wing doesn't mean you vote Labour, you know.
It's like assuming someone Right Wing would vote for a shower of twats like UKIP.


Oh...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 06:59:37 PM

In fairness to old Burdis he never said he wanted the night of the long knives, only that it was a plausible action if decided by those in power. -Joe Soap whose only affiliation is to himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:01:04 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 06:54:23 PM
QuoteOne of the best blokes doing this is an Irish bloke on Radio5 called Stephen Nolan

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! Nolan... best... HAAAHHAAAHAHAHAAAA!

QuoteI prefer the ITV news as they aren't showing a left wing slant on everything like the BBC TV news does

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHAA! Stop it, my sides...


Can't argue with informed debate like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 07:04:45 PM
QuoteCan't argue with informed debate like that.

Have you ever heard Nolan?
he is an utter imbecile. His entire 'act' is to try and create conflict by trying to wind up whoever calls in. He is tiresome and embarrassing. And also, it should be pointed out, on the 'left wing' BBC.
Speaking of which - I'd love some examples of their left wing bias.


There, does that meet with your approval?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:09:58 PM
No. You haven't justified your childish ejaculation regarding ITV news. I doubt you can because if you watch it you are basically saying 'I watch a programme that I deem laughable' and if you don't watch it your comment regarding its content is worthless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 07:10:43 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:01:04 PM
Can't argue with informed debate like that.

To be fair, if you're going to dismiss one of the most respected and trusted news organisations in the world in favour of the shallow, tabloid, sound-bite rubbish peddled by ITV,* then I think you deserve all the ridicule you get.

Cheers

Jim

*I prefer Channel 4 News myself -- the channel's insistence on devoting an hour of prime-time TV to a news programme of this quality justifies its existence in and of itself, IMO. Feeble-minded interviews with Bryan and Mary Talbot notwithstanding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 07:14:55 PM
Thank you Joe, that is what I said.

As for Richmond (seeing as you say I do some things all the time), I do love the way you think its hilarious, that's nearly as hilarious as starting a sexist thread about wanting to look at women's underwear. An excellent thread in these enlightened times when women should be treated equally to men. I await you thread on men in their underwear as a witty retort.

A while ago you said that a few sketches of female comic characters scantily drawn was everything that is wrong with comics today, yet you started that thread!

By the way the BBC admitted they were left leaning in their news not long ago, in fact it was on the news!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 07:16:18 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:09:58 PM
No. You haven't justified your childish ejaculation regarding ITV news. I doubt you can because if you watch it you are basically saying 'I watch a programme that I deem laughable' and if you don't watch it your comment regarding its content is worthless.

No, I was laughing at the assertion that the BBC is Left Wing. ITV news, is, as Jim said, tabloid shite. And please, don't tell me what I was saying - I know what I was saying and it wasn't that. You see?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 January, 2013, 07:17:42 PM
Okay, as John seems hell bent on making this personal, I shall bow out of the conversation now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 05 January, 2013, 07:17:52 PM
Take it easy, lads. This one's got flame war written all over it.

I think you should all leave it for tonight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 January, 2013, 07:14:55 PM
By the way the BBC admitted they were left leaning in their news not long ago, in fact it was on the news!

You'll notice that when Labour is in power, they complain about anti-government bias in the BBC, and when the Tories are in power, they complain about anti-government bias in the BBC.

Should we not be proud of having a state broadcaster that is so consistently and even-handedly an irritant to whichever political flavour the government of the day happens to be?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:22:10 PM
Bollocks to that just having a bit of banter.

My bad - you didn't specify which part of the ITV/BBC comment you were HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAing about - guess it helps to make a specific and respectful remarks regarding someone else's opinion to avoid being misinterpreted.

To be precise - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 07:24:58 PM


Cease these childish ejaculations!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:44:00 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 07:20:04 PM

Should we not be proud of having a state broadcaster that is so consistently and even-handedly an irritant to whichever political flavour the government of the day happens to be?

Anyone who followed BBC Scotland's handling of the Rangers Tax case will smirk at the 'even handed' suggestion. They had a (laughably BAFTA winning) documentary that stated for fact that Rangers were cheats and tax dodgers. But lo, Rangers won their tax tribunal and a lot of egg was on face and backtracking was done. Not respecting due process and clearly having a biased agenda certainly doesn't give them any moral high ground over the Sunday Sport, never mind ITV.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2013, 07:56:02 PM
BBC outposts usually reflect the failings of their region and ours (BBCNI) is likewise a joke with programming to match (light on the parochial entertainment they're supposed to be providing and heavy on documentaries and political soapboxes that can be sold elsewhere), but I still support the main body over the alternatives like Sky or Fox setting the agenda.  Without the Beeb, tv would be like a William Gibson novel.

CF makes a salient point that the women's underware thread has no male counterpart.  It is clear we need to fix this double standard immediately with a thread dedicated to fit blokes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 January, 2013, 08:06:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2013, 07:56:02 PM
BBC outposts usually reflect the failings of their region and ours (BBCNI) is likewise a joke with programming to match (light on the parochial entertainment they're supposed to be providing and heavy on documentaries and political soapboxes that can be sold elsewhere)

Do you miss Give My head Peace that much?


Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2013, 07:56:02 PM
CF makes a salient point that the women's underware thread has no male counterpart.  It is clear we need to fix this double standard immediately with a thread dedicated to fit blokes.


Get all your personal pics ready.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 08:15:40 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:44:00 PM
Anyone who followed BBC Scotland's handling of the Rangers Tax case will smirk at the 'even handed' suggestion.

I have no idea how you think plucking a single example from a regional division over something as partisan and sectarian as Glaswegian football has the least relevance to what I posted.

Thank you for playing, though.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:22:14 PM
I believe I have provided a legitimate and high profile example which contradicted you argument.

Thank you for your patronage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2013, 08:31:05 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:22:14 PM
I believe I have provided a legitimate and high profile example which contradicted you argument.

I can't help what you believe and if I have to explain why your example doesn't engage with my observations about national government then, well, I don't know where to start. I'm not patronising you (and I'm certainly not your patron), I'm pointing out that you might as well be responding with: "Yeah? Well, I don't like cheese!" for all the relevance your response had.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:43:29 PM
All for a bit of debate but baffled by that rebuttal. So ends my dalliance with the political thread!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 January, 2013, 08:44:41 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:43:29 PM
All for a bit of debate but baffled by that rebuttal. So ends my dalliance with the political thread!

Good here, innit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 05 January, 2013, 08:51:24 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:43:29 PM
All for a bit of debate but baffled by that rebuttal. So ends my dalliance with the political thread!

Rangers are shite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 05 January, 2013, 08:57:46 PM
Quote from: Supermarine Troutfire on 05 January, 2013, 08:51:24 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 08:43:29 PM
All for a bit of debate but baffled by that rebuttal. So ends my dalliance with the political thread!

Rangers are shite.

No. But I suspect their owners have alot of explaining to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 05 January, 2013, 09:14:30 PM
That was just random abuse directed at Paisley boy.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 January, 2013, 01:15:16 AM
Here is one link reference the left wing bias from the bbc and it was from Mark Thompson BBC IS NOT BIAS (http://www.standard.co.uk/news/bbc-chief-mark-thompson-admits-leftwing-bias-6509105.html). It was a while ago but hey ho I haven't got time to help you get your facts correct!

And one to highlight an investigation that should end soon about their impartiality GUARDIAN WEBSITE (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/10/bbc-review-liberal-bias), see I even look at that website :-[

Dismiss these if you wish and probably will but we all know where the BBC likes to lean.

As for the bit about the underwear thread, we treat this forum like a pub (without the drink, although some on here are drunk) and if you are gonna just laugh at what someone says with no explanation, then expect a response that may hurt!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 January, 2013, 11:18:09 AM
Quote from: Buttonman on 05 January, 2013, 07:44:00 PM
Anyone who followed BBC Scotland's handling of the Rangers Tax case will smirk at the 'even handed' suggestion. They had a (laughably BAFTA winning) documentary that stated for fact that Rangers were cheats and tax dodgers. But lo, Rangers won their tax tribunal and a lot of egg was on face and backtracking was done.

Anyone arguing that BBC Scotland isn't the most Northerly outpost of Millbank doesn't know what they're talking about, but - just to continue the Paisley Boy-bashing - what the tax tribunal of The Rangers Football Club (i) proved was that they were fiddling the tax system, but only in the way any number of other clubs and private businesses were fiddling the tax system, and in a way that is not illegal.

Everything the BBC's investigation of Rangers' tax affairs claimed was true, and if they'd stuck to pointing out how incredibly shady the practice of issuing tax-free 'loans' to millionaire players which have never and were never intended to be repaid undoubtedly is (rather than insinuating criminal wrong-doing) they wouldn't have left themselves open to accusations of bias.


(i) I'm loving that definite article
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 06 January, 2013, 11:47:11 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 January, 2013, 11:18:09 AM


just to continue the Paisley Boy-bashing - what the tax tribunal of The Rangers Football Club (i) proved was that they were fiddling the tax system, but only in the way any number of other clubs and private businesses were fiddling the tax system, and in a way that is not illegal.

Run that past me again?

Shady you may think but tax avoidence and tax evasion are different things and what he BBC did was have Rangers guilty before the official tribunal reported. This supposed guilty verdict which would have cost £10s of millions left the club unsaleable to all but an asset stripper who saw them liquidated. Lazy, preachy yellow journalism of the worst kind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 06 January, 2013, 11:51:28 AM
I felt the real story - which the BBC broke, despite significant attempts to stop them - was Craig Whyte's dodgy past.

But I am NOT getting involved in this fucking disease of a thread.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 January, 2013, 12:02:49 PM
"dodgy"?  It was entirely semi-legal!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 January, 2013, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 06 January, 2013, 11:47:11 AM
Shady you may think but tax avoidence and tax evasion are different things and what he BBC did was have Rangers guilty before the official tribunal reported.

It's Not Right, But It's Okay (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J538b-OLRU). I've no more beef with Oldco Rangers than I have with any other multi-million pound company which uses cute tricks to treat any of the Queen's sterling which passes through its books as its own private property. Most of the money that enters the closed loop of private capital seems to circulate amongst billionaire directors, their millionaire employees, and their millionaire friends, instead of making it out into the wider economy to do the job it's supposed to. I don't know about you, but when the taxman comes knocking at my door there's not much negotiation involved in how much is handed over - I don't see why having shitloads of cash should change the terms of The Social Contract (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Contract#Overview).

Trout's right, the only thing in the BBC's reporting which counted as a scoop was the investigation into Craig Whyte's hilarious past (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/feb/17/craig-whyte-rangers-owner-scrutiny), but nothing it claimed regarding the club's tax affairs was untrue. The fact more folk weren't aware of or angry about the industrial level of tax avoidance (http://www.channel4.com/news/tax-avoidance-or-tax-evasion) which goes on amongst many organisations more than capable of paying their fair whack makes it a legitimate story, and Rangers a good journalistic hook to pin the story on. I don't seem to remember that quite being the angle taken by Mark Daly's programme, though, and it's the BBC's own fault they left themselves open to accusations of bias or, in the phrase beloved of both sides of the West of Scotland, having an agenda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 06 January, 2013, 02:25:55 PM
Didn't matter that the EBTs were detailed on their accounts and advised to the SFA then? I won't bore the wider community with the ins and outs of things but I feel any reasonable person would say Rangers were shabbily treated by the BBC and SFA.Whether the SFA have an agenda is open for debate but an organisation so skint it can't pay its clubs on time spunking cash on a jaundiced investigation tells its own story. As does the composition of the 'independent' tribunal and the solicitors employed to gather 'evidence'.

As for the BBC they broadcast fact when it was at best speculation and that's as unprofessional as journalism gets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 January, 2013, 03:04:38 PM
I'm confused - what does any of that have to do with left or right wing bias?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 January, 2013, 03:57:53 PM
Speaking of tax avoidance, can anyone make a fist of telling me why I should give a flying fuck that Jimmy Carr avoided paying tax via creative but legal accounting practices?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 06 January, 2013, 05:12:13 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 January, 2013, 03:57:53 PM
Speaking of tax avoidance, can anyone make a fist of telling me why I should give a flying fuck that Jimmy Carr avoided paying tax via creative but legal accounting practices?

Because of his hypocrisy? He had done a sketch on 10 O'Clock Live attacking banks tax dodging before getting busted, as pointed out on his colleague Charlie Brooker's show Screen Wipe 2012.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 January, 2013, 06:00:01 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 06 January, 2013, 05:12:13 PM
Because of his hypocrisy? He had done a sketch on 10 O'Clock Live attacking banks tax dodging before getting busted, as pointed out on his colleague Charlie Brooker's show Screen Wipe 2012.

A bit rich that he gets attacked by Cameron, though, given that:

1) Cameron is in charge of the fucking government. If he doesn't like people exploiting tax loopholes then he, of all people is uniquely able to do something about it.

2) Cameron is filthy, stinking rich due to his millionaire Dad salting money away in Cayman Island tax havens for decades.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 January, 2013, 06:00:28 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 06 January, 2013, 03:04:38 PM
I'm confused - what does any of that have to do with left or right wing bias?

Fuck all, as I believe I observed on the previous page.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 January, 2013, 06:06:54 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 06 January, 2013, 05:12:13 PMBecause of his hypocrisy? He had done a sketch on 10 O'Clock Live attacking banks tax dodging before getting busted, as pointed out on his colleague Charlie Brooker's show Screen Wipe 2012.

I still fail to see why I should give a toss at the same level the press did at the time.  He's not a bank, he's not an MP, he didn't break the law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 January, 2013, 06:11:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 January, 2013, 06:06:54 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 06 January, 2013, 05:12:13 PMBecause of his hypocrisy? He had done a sketch on 10 O'Clock Live attacking banks tax dodging before getting busted, as pointed out on his colleague Charlie Brooker's show Screen Wipe 2012.

I still fail to see why I should give a toss at the same level the press did at the time.  He's not a bank, he's not an MP, he didn't break the law.

Ah, but he's one of them there smug leftie types and needed taken down a peg or two.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 January, 2013, 06:12:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 January, 2013, 06:06:54 PM
He's not a bank, he's not an MP, he didn't break the law.

Quite. Many people on this forum are self-employed, or have to fill out a self-assessment form or file a return because of a second job. If your accountant/financial advisor came to you and said: "You know what? You're paying more tax than you need to. I can heavily reduce your annual tax bill and do so 100% legally" how many of us would reply: "Ooh, no -- I like paying all this tax, thankyouverymuch..."?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 January, 2013, 07:01:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 January, 2013, 06:12:27 PM
Many people on this forum are self-employed, or have to fill out a self-assessment form or file a return because of a second job. If your accountant/financial advisor came to you and said: "You know what? You're paying more tax than you need to. I can heavily reduce your annual tax bill and do so 100% legally" how many of us would reply: "Ooh, no -- I like paying all this tax, thankyouverymuch..."?

Radio Fours More Or Less tried their best to get to the bottom of whether all the thousands of folk with window cleaning rounds who weren't declaring their full (relatively modest) incomes to HMRC were costing the exchequer more or less than all the large corporations who employed armies of accountants to minimise their tax profile - and came to the conclusion that it worked out roughly the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 07 January, 2013, 08:39:42 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 January, 2013, 07:01:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 January, 2013, 06:12:27 PM
Many people on this forum are self-employed, or have to fill out a self-assessment form or file a return because of a second job. If your accountant/financial advisor came to you and said: "You know what? You're paying more tax than you need to. I can heavily reduce your annual tax bill and do so 100% legally" how many of us would reply: "Ooh, no -- I like paying all this tax, thankyouverymuch..."?

Radio Fours More Or Less tried their best to get to the bottom of whether all the thousands of folk with window cleaning rounds who weren't declaring their full (relatively modest) incomes to HMRC were costing the exchequer more or less than all the large corporations who employed armies of accountants to minimise their tax profile - and came to the conclusion that it worked out roughly the same.

Would love a look at some of those figures.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 January, 2013, 09:56:09 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 January, 2013, 07:01:45 PM
[Radio Fours More Or Less tried their best to get to the bottom of whether all the thousands of folk with window cleaning rounds who weren't declaring their full (relatively modest) incomes to HMRC were costing the exchequer more or less than all the large corporations who employed armies of accountants to minimise their tax profile - and came to the conclusion that it worked out roughly the same.

I managed to miss that, and I'm usually an avid listener to 'More Or Less' ...

Of course, there's a key difference between undeclared income from window cleaning and, ahem, minimised corporation tax payments. Note that I am not saying that any form of tax fiddling is right and proper, but...

The hypothetical window cleaner will put that money back into the UK economy, where it will help to sustain jobs and where HMRC will, at least, stand a chance of getting another crack at it in the form of VAT. Money that would otherwise have gone in corporation tax is almost without exception spirited away to offshore tax havens, where it will do not the slightest good to the UK economy, unless and until some of it comes back to UK shareholders in the form of dividends (which are then quite likely to be immediately hurried offshore again to minimize the tax liabilities of the shareholders).

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 January, 2013, 11:55:15 AM
Very interesting, but it does seem quite hard to believe that the Black/Grey Economies can compete with the incredible figures for completely legal corporate tax minimisation.  When I have personally paid more tax than all Starbucks' 25 Irish outlets combined over the period 2005-2012 - and I've had effectively no taxable income since 2010 - well, that's a lot of window cleaning! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 January, 2013, 12:23:44 PM
QuoteQuite. Many people on this forum are self-employed, or have to fill out a self-assessment form or file a return because of a second job. If your accountant/financial advisor came to you and said: "You know what? You're paying more tax than you need to. I can heavily reduce your annual tax bill and do so 100% legally" how many of us would reply: "Ooh, no -- I like paying all this tax, thankyouverymuch..."?

Not quite. But when I was a contractor, I didn't pay myself a tiny wage and then pay the rest in huge director dividends (a common way of avoiding paying NI contributions) because it just felt wrong.  I think they changed the rules since to catch people who were doing this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 05:58:45 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 January, 2013, 07:01:45 PMRadio Fours More Or Less tried their best to get to the bottom of whether all the thousands of folk with window cleaning rounds who weren't declaring their full (relatively modest) incomes to HMRC were costing the exchequer more or less than all the large corporations who employed armies of accountants to minimise their tax profile - and came to the conclusion that it worked out roughly the same.

My issues with this comparison would be that such undeclared income is a largely imaginary variable, not a constant.  Without a set and specific number of window washers, fees charged, and number of times services are employed by home owners or deployed by providers, I would go so far as to say the nigh-impossibility of nailing down the actual figures in this instance renders conclusions drawn anecdotal at best.

Of course, it also begs the question "do I actually give a monkeys if a white van driver keeps all the money he's earned when he already pays tax for all the accouterments of his trade?" (if he uses a van he already pays road tax, if he uses sponges or cleaning products he already pays VAT during their purchase, and so on)  I don't think I do.  Taxing everything he owns and does and then demanding tax on top of that for his efforts smells a bit feudal to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 07:34:01 PM
Alex Jones is on CNN tonight and has already got himself in trouble with the TSA. Usually I wouldn't lower myself to watching Piers Morgan but you'd think there'd be a good chance of someone kicking off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 January, 2013, 08:03:36 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 07 January, 2013, 08:39:42 AM
Would love a look at some of those figures.

I remember the feature playing out a couple of months ago, but I've had a look through the More or Less podcast archive (http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/moreorless/all), and I can't see one with anything about tax avoidance/evasion in the title from that time (i) - so that's me reached the limits of my research skills. What More or Less does is test the credibility of statistics published in the media, and googling reveals that The National Audit Office put out a press release in November (ii) making claims regarding the scale of tax avoidance (iii), so I suppose that's what they were discussing.

It's important to note that the program wasn't undertaking its own investigation, but trying to understand how The National Audit Office arrived at its published estimates. Off the top of my head, I seem to remember the professor they asked to look into the figures (a real professor, not an ursine professor) called it something like 2.3 billion p/a for Del Boy and 2.5 billion p/a for Mark Zuckerberg. Their methodology, or my memory's bastardised version of it, was to take the total declared income of first small businesses then big businesses, work out what the tax paid on each should come to, subtract those (and all other relevant sources of wealth) from UK GDP, and the difference between the two figures is the amount lost to tax avoidance each year.

The program examined the problems associated with the methodology used by the NAO, and all the other factors which needed to be taken into account, but seemed reasonably confident about the relative proportions of the amount lost to avoidance by small and large businesses. This bit of TUC dogma (iv) arrives at hugely different numbers, but similar proportions.


(i) which makes me think I might actually be remembering the programme's presenter, Tim Harford, in one of his appearances on Eddie Mair's PM

(ii) Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236100/National-Audit-Office-Tax-avoidance-robbing-Britain-5billion-year.html), BBC news (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20417221)

(iii) my example of the window cleaner's undeclared income would constitute evasion

(iv) http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-14238-f0.cfm (http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-14238-f0.cfm)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 January, 2013, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 07:34:01 PM
Alex Jones is on CNN tonight and has already got himself in trouble with the TSA. Usually I wouldn't lower myself to watching Piers Morgan but you'd think there'd be a good chance of someone kicking off.


Watching two cunts cancel each other out can leave one feeling neutral.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 07 January, 2013, 09:47:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 07 January, 2013, 08:03:36 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 07 January, 2013, 08:39:42 AM
Would love a look at some of those figures.

I remember the feature playing out a couple of months ago, but I've had a look through the More or Less podcast archive (http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/moreorless/all), and I can't see one with anything about tax avoidance/evasion in the title from that time (i) - so that's me reached the limits of my research skills. What More or Less does is test the credibility of statistics published in the media, and googling reveals that The National Audit Office put out a press release in November (ii) making claims regarding the scale of tax avoidance (iii), so I suppose that's what they were discussing.

It's important to note that the program wasn't undertaking its own investigation, but trying to understand how The National Audit Office arrived at its published estimates. Off the top of my head, I seem to remember the professor they asked to look into the figures (a real professor, not an ursine professor) called it something like 2.3 billion p/a for Del Boy and 2.5 billion p/a for Mark Zuckerberg. Their methodology, or my memory's bastardised version of it, was to take the total declared income of first small businesses then big businesses, work out what the tax paid on each should come to, subtract those (and all other relevant sources of wealth) from UK GDP, and the difference between the two figures is the amount lost to tax avoidance each year.

The program examined the problems associated with the methodology used by the NAO, and all the other factors which needed to be taken into account, but seemed reasonably confident about the relative proportions of the amount lost to avoidance by small and large businesses. This bit of TUC dogma (iv) arrives at hugely different numbers, but similar proportions.


(i) which makes me think I might actually be remembering the programme's presenter, Tim Harford, in one of his appearances on Eddie Mair's PM

(ii) Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236100/National-Audit-Office-Tax-avoidance-robbing-Britain-5billion-year.html), BBC news (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20417221)

(iii) my example of the window cleaner's undeclared income would constitute evasion

(iv) http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-14238-f0.cfm (http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-14238-f0.cfm)


Stan that's one heckua' comprehensive reply. Thanks fella.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
For the record, I am a real professor.  Of bears.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 January, 2013, 11:06:34 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
For the record, I am a real professor.  Of bears.

And do they shit in the woods?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 11:25:57 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 07 January, 2013, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 07:34:01 PM
Alex Jones is on CNN tonight and has already got himself in trouble with the TSA. Usually I wouldn't lower myself to watching Piers Morgan but you'd think there'd be a good chance of someone kicking off.


Watching two cunts cancel each other out can leave one feeling neutral.

Well three if you count David Gergen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 11:33:21 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 January, 2013, 11:06:34 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
For the record, I am a real professor.  Of bears.

And do they shit in the woods?

Cheers

Jim

Not exclusively.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 08 January, 2013, 03:33:46 AM
Quote from: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 11:25:57 PM
Well three if you count David Gergen.

Aaarg. For some reason I got him and Dershowitz mixed up. Because they're both douchebags, I imagine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 08 January, 2013, 04:18:35 AM
Quote from: Stan on 07 January, 2013, 07:34:01 PM
Alex Jones is on CNN tonight and has already got himself in trouble with the TSA. Usually I wouldn't lower myself to watching Piers Morgan but you'd think there'd be a good chance of someone kicking off.

Coincidentally, when I was driving today I saw someone with an infowars bumper sticker. Then I remembered that Texas is his stomping grounds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2013, 02:39:26 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2013, 11:33:21 PM
Not exclusively.

I'm glad we got to the bottom of that.*

Cheers!

Jim

*Do you see what I did there?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 03:08:44 AM


MORGAN v JONES - DEATHMATCH (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWQPZ-taYBs)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 03:12:03 AM
I told you it would kick off. Chuck Sixpackman is never wrong.

Which means we'll also get a sequel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 03:19:59 AM
Piers is a liar though (*gasp*). He claims to only want an 'assault weapons' ban when in actual fact he wants a complete ban of all firearms, hence the reason he brought up Fort Hood. One guy, one handgun and 13 dead soldiers. No rifles involved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 03:28:29 AM


It's an understatement to say Jones didn't come off too well here and that's some feat considering who he's up against.

Pardon the pun but Jones gave Morgan all the ammunition he needed to ridicule him and he didn't need to open his mouth.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 03:43:43 AM
As I watched it I went through a combination of smile/laugh/facepalm reactions, admittedly coming from Jones's side of the argument. One thing's for sure though, his ilk won't allow themselves to be guilt-tripped into giving up their perceived 2nd amendment rights, as was done in the 90's when the militia crowd kinda drifted off into that long dark night. The battle lines have been drawn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 January, 2013, 08:30:03 AM
I may have to drown myself in bleach after finding myself sharing a thought with Piers Morgan.  And this after enjoying a programme on European railways hosted by Michael Portillo.  I expect my knighthood is in the post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 09 January, 2013, 12:08:43 PM
why is it all the maddos want to keep guns? oh yeah they're mad that's it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
The thought of Piers Morgan being right about something frightens and confuses me.

Not everyone with a gun is mad, but "home protection" is probably the biggest draw for owners and the media probably have to take a smidge of the blame for the culture of fear that makes the average American Joe think they could get killed by anything from a coyote to a gang member on their own front lawn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 02:29:26 PM

It's impossible to debate with Jones and his followers because anything that counters their argument is met with accusations of acting out your programmed-condtioning which is ironic since ultimately Jones is the ultimate end-product of the same culture of fear he believes gives him the right to shoot people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 January, 2013, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: TotalHack on 09 January, 2013, 08:30:03 AM
I may have to drown myself in bleach after finding myself sharing a thought with Piers Morgan. 
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
The thought of Piers Morgan being right about something frightens and confuses me.

I believe this is known as the Galloway Conundrum or the Assange Paradox
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 02:54:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 02:29:26 PM

It's impossible to debate with Jones and his followers because anything that counters their argument is met with accusations of acting out your programmed-condtioning which is ironic since ultimately Jones is the ultimate end-product of the same culture of fear he believes gives him the right to shoot people.

I thought he might start banging on about the character being called Judge Dredd, not Dredd 3D at one point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 03:17:03 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 January, 2013, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: TotalHack on 09 January, 2013, 08:30:03 AM
I may have to drown myself in bleach after finding myself sharing a thought with Piers Morgan. 
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
The thought of Piers Morgan being right about something frightens and confuses me.

I believe this is known as the Galloway Conundrum or the Assange Paradox

Thanks. I'd completely forgotten about that guy. Is he still camping out?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 09 January, 2013, 03:40:57 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
The thought of Piers Morgan being right about something frightens and confuses me.
me too

Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM

Not everyone with a gun is mad,
True and I'd never cliam that

Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
"home protection" is probably the biggest draw for owners and the media probably have to take a smidge of the blame for the culture of fear that makes the average American Joe think they could get killed by anything from a coyote to a gang member on their own front lawn.
and they are more likely to get killed with their own gun (the home owner not the Coyote)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 03:42:04 PM
Still in the Ecuadoran Embassy.

His speeches from the balcony make me laugh though, just because it's so pokey and on the ground floor...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 04:10:08 PM
You'd think that at some point they'll try to slip him out the side door. Hopefully the sniper teams are stayin' frosty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 January, 2013, 06:46:25 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 January, 2013, 02:03:56 PM
Not everyone with a gun is mad, but "home protection" is probably the biggest draw for owners and the media probably have to take a smidge of the blame for the culture of fear that makes the average American Joe think they could get killed by anything from a coyote to a gang member on their own front lawn.

I don't disagree with anyone having the right to defend their own home, but that's not what assault rifles are for. There's a clue as to what they're for in their name
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 January, 2013, 06:51:17 PM
Semi-automatic rifles are nothing more than incorrectly named...rifles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 07:08:55 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 03:42:04 PM
Still in the Ecuadoran Embassy.

His speeches from the balcony make me laugh though, just because it's so pokey and on the ground floor...


Salman Rushdie's pissed he's no longer history's celeb home-hostage numero uno.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 07:13:37 PM
Terry Waite must be fuming then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 January, 2013, 08:38:59 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 07:13:37 PM
Terry Waite must be fuming then.

Terry who?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2013, 09:56:37 PM
You just made him cry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 09 January, 2013, 11:35:44 PM
The encounter between Piers Morgan and Alex Jones was truly a meeting of the minds, representing everything bad about junky journalism in this country and over in the UK.

It has worked I guess for Morgan's visibility in the media. Part of the reason he had brought Alex Jones onto the show is because he was one of the pushers for people to sign onto the white house petition to have Piers Morgan deported back to the UK (which prompted another, unfortunately smaller petition of concerned British citizens that they would not accept him back back). Of course these petitions won't be taken seriously much like the secession ones, but it rather amuses me how of all the people who wanted more gun control, they focused on Piers Morgan the most. I mean all Piers Morgan achieved here was a judge spot on America's Got Talent then Larry King's old slot on CNN which hasn't been doing too well in ratings anyways.

I wonder if I could float a conspiracy that Morgan and Jones cooperated in this particular episode for some cheap media coverage. I wouldn't put it past them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 January, 2013, 09:31:13 PM
Kinda funny how they wheeled out the victim's relatives to lay a guilt trip before they all sat around joking about shooting Alex Jones. Very sensitive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 January, 2013, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: Stan on 10 January, 2013, 09:31:13 PM
Kinda funny how they wheeled out the victim's relatives to lay a guilt trip before they all sat around joking about shooting Alex Jones. Very sensitive.

My heart bleeds for the paranoid, mentalist idiot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 January, 2013, 09:49:08 PM
Alex is big and ugly enough to look after himself. It's the fact that they were all joking about shooting people while the victim's family members were looking on (in horror, I imagine). So much for being super sensitive and caring about the children etc. The words 'crocodile tears' come to mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 January, 2013, 09:57:01 PM
Quote from: Stan on 10 January, 2013, 09:49:08 PM
Alex is big and ugly enough to look after himself. It's the fact that they were all joking about shooting people while the victim's family members were looking on (in horror, I imagine). So much for being super sensitive and caring about the children etc. The words 'crocodile tears' come to mind.

Well, Morgan is as Evil as Alex is, so you really can't expect anything more (or less).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 09:59:18 PM
Evil? How so?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 January, 2013, 10:09:06 PM
He started out as a Sun journo then became editor of the News of the World and pushed it into privacy-invasion headline-grabbing, and we know where that ended up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 January, 2013, 10:10:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 09:59:18 PM
Evil? How so?

Well, I may have been being hyperbolic, but he (Morgan) is certainly a horrible excuse for a human being.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/video-from-2003-shows-piers-morgan-talking-about-phone-hacking-8364468.html

But as for Alex - well, if it is not obvious watching the videos how utterly deranged and dangerous the man is, then nothing more can I teach you! ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 10:30:46 PM
Alex Jones does get on my nerves, as does Morgan and so many other opinionists. I do, however, try to see past the "obvious" and ask myself "what is this person really trying to say?"

I wonder how many people at the time called Jesus a 'raving loon' or 'evil' for losing his rag at the money changers in the temple without even bothering to think about what he was saying and why?

Do ordinary people have the right to own guns? I say yes, people do have the right but that this powerful right carries with it equally powerful responsibilites. I'd like to think that, if I had a gun I'd be far more responsible than my government is with them. I would never shoot innocent Iraqi men, women and children using mythical WMDs as an excuse or gun down an electrician in an underground train station.

Am I evil for thinking this way?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 January, 2013, 10:37:47 PM
Please say I'm wrong. I just heard on the radio that ipsa did a survey with our beloved MPs, which was done anonymously and they want a measly 32% pay increase.

We're all in it together :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 10:41:48 PM
I'd pay them double if they'd start running the country for the people instead of the corporations. Triple, even. Quadruple.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 January, 2013, 10:45:48 PM
I hope they push through that cap on benefits alongside that pay rise for themselves.

As for the gun control debate, my main memory of the 1980s is that it was a decade where an armed gang of bank robbers traumatised by their experiences in Vietnam and convinced they were being persecuted by their own government travelled around America attacking countless people with what I presume were illegally-obtained automatic weapons, sometimes even fashioning new kinds of guns and assault vehicles from scrap with which to persecute whoever they saw as "bad guys", but they never hurt anybody and were actually viewed by the media as admirable Robin Hood types, so guns can't be that harmful if you have a bit of training under your belt - perhaps some kind of compulsory military service for all citizens?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 10:50:09 PM
Teach people about guns in schools.

You need a test to drive a car or fly a 'plane, so why not something similar for folk who want a gun? Education, I think, is the key.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 January, 2013, 10:52:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 10:30:46 PM
...I say yes, people do have the right but that this powerful right carries with it equally powerful responsibilites.

For me, that's the heart of the arguement. People bang on about how they're entitled to certain rights, but ignore the responsibilities those rights entail. You've probably had your rights violated by someone claiming 'It's for your own protection' (have you ever been on an airplane?). These people are probably just covering their asses after some over-entitled eejit, abused their 'rights', in a reckless way that didn't end well.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 10:30:46 PM
Am I evil for thinking this way?

All Sharks are evil. Ye have a conveyor belt of teeth fer fuck sake. Evil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 11:10:44 PM
I think you're correct.

We seem to have transferred most of our responsibilities to government not realising that we've given away our rights as well. This process is, to my mind, very dangerous and only leads to a dumb and lazy society that believes in everything being somebody else's responsibility. The way we do things at the moment may be very easy for us but it might lead to a class of people who think they know how you should live your life better than you do...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 January, 2013, 11:24:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2013, 11:10:44 PM
The way we do things at the moment may be very easy for us but it might lead to a class of people who think they know how you should live your life better than you do...

Might?

(http://denning.law.ox.ac.uk/lrsp/images/parliament_000.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 11 January, 2013, 06:54:46 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 10 January, 2013, 10:45:48 PM
As for the gun control debate, my main memory of the 1980s is that it was a decade where an armed gang of bank robbers traumatised by their experiences in Vietnam and convinced they were being persecuted by their own government travelled around America attacking countless people with what I presume were illegally-obtained automatic weapons, sometimes even fashioning new kinds of guns and assault vehicles from scrap with which to persecute whoever they saw as "bad guys", but they never hurt anybody and were actually viewed by the media as admirable Robin Hood types, so guns can't be that harmful if you have a bit of training under your belt - perhaps some kind of compulsory military service for all citizens?

I'm not sure if they had much of an effect on the collective mood as some of the other stuff that ran rampant in the 80s in the US. We know 1980s saw a kick in crime paranoia and such, bouncing off perceptions of crime rate in the 70s. It fueled support for tough on crime politicians who weren't afraid of exploiting it. Hence the popularity of movies like Dirty Harry and Death Wish. It's this same sentiment that played a part in the formation of Judge Dredd to parody it. And that approach to begin with is in part causing the US prison population to increase year after year.

Even though current gun proponents laud their possession as simultaneously for security, hobby/hunting, and a more blunt way to keep the government accountable, the first gun laws that were passed in the US saw them usually silent. They were usually targeted at either trying to keep unions from getting into violent confrontations (such as this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain)) with management or prevent minority groups from becoming a cohesive force- and of course neither make up the majority of what the NRA is now. In the latter case, the first assault weapons ban were passed by the state of California, then under the governorship of Ronald Reagan, in great part due to the activities of the Black Panthers (prompting their brandishing of weapons at the state capitol (http://25.media.tumblr.com/889e3223ee1ee35922bc39dc376243d0/tumblr_mfalcw6DiC1qap9gno1_500.jpg)). Of course none of these are usually mentioned by the NRA, because it does not fit into their world view.

Education about weapons would be good in general though, I don't think any harm comes out of educating people about it, if not requiring some form of education on them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2013, 08:20:18 AM
the 2nd amendment is the only bit of the constitution that explicitly requires it to be "well regulated" - even the founding fathers didn't think that just anyone should be able to own a gun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2013, 08:51:24 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2013, 08:20:18 AM..Even the founding fathers didn't think that just anyone should be able to own a gun.

Certainly not blacks or women, and that's just for starters. 

While I'm a great admirer of the American project, why anyone should take the views of 50-odd 18thC plantation owners and rich merchants* on muzzle-loading flintlocks as the ne plus ultra determinant of 21st C law and morality is beyond me.  Although I suppose it's better than wilfully misinterpreting some Bronze Age xenophobes.


*and a handful of scientists and doctors.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2013, 12:39:28 PM
I don't think that dismissing the U.S. Constitution just because it's old is a valid argument. "Thou shalt not kill" is also a pretty old idea but still, I think, a valid one that probably goes back to the Stone Age.

Of course, no constitution or legislation is ever perfect and the more words and clauses they contain the more susceptible they are to interpretation and the exploitation of loopholes.

If I had to write a constitution it would be really simple, along the lines of:

Cause loss, harm or damage to no-one.
Honour your contracts.
Pay your bills.

What more is there to add? From a system as simple as this, juries would simply be asked to decide what, if any, loss harm or damage has been inflicted or suffered and pass judgement from that standpoint instead of being confused and derailed by Section 2, Sub-Section D, Paragraph 2 of the "Except Me Act, 1997".

In my opinion (and to bastardise Alestair Crowley) - And "do no harm" shall be the whole of the Law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2013, 02:00:08 PM
My problem with "thou shalt not kill" is that it's a divine decree and not a moral directive, and what prompts these laws, however sound and sensible they may be, is just as important as what these laws demand of us.  A document written centuries ago can be the basis of the laws of today, but it cannot be the entirety of the argument for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2013, 04:51:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2013, 12:39:28 PM
I don't think that dismissing the U.S. Constitution just because it's old is a valid argument

Nor is elevating it to the level of divine revelation, or using it to rule on the specifics of matters its writers could not possibly have foreseen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2013, 05:53:57 PM
Agreed. All laws, including "thou shalt not kill" are merely guides, rules of thumb. If laws were perfect and life was uncomplicated and black & white we wouldn't need courts, juries, police or legislators at all. Things like the U.S. Constitution, our own Magna Carta or even the Ten Commandments are simply foundations; good places to start.

In the end event, laws are simply what people decide they are and everyone has a right to break them just as everyone else has the right to uphold them.

The example "thou shalt not kill" was my (clumsy) attempt to point out one of the basic laws of human society which has, over the centuries, been written in many forms and languages around the world and is a law that the overwhelming majority of people that I know would never break whether it was written down or not - an innate human law, if you will. A good place to start.

It was certainly not my intention to elevate the U.S. Constitution, or any other human law for that matter, to divine status and I apologise if I gave that impression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 12 January, 2013, 12:13:45 PM


Can we have a Death Star please, President Obama? (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/isnt-petition-response-youre-looking)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 14 January, 2013, 11:37:54 PM
A malware program may have stealing classified documents for the last five years. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21013087)

So France decides to act in Africa by launching airstrikes in Mali and assisting the army there (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21009368) and launching a ill-fated commando rescue raid into Somalia (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21009364). The RAF are sending material support to Mali and according to the U.K. Government Mali is a concern to the U.K. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21018382), so might the British army be part of a E.U. army group that will be going there later in the year?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2013, 11:43:00 PM
You just know things are bad when even the French are scrapping. We'll only know that things are *really* bad when they start running away...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 14 January, 2013, 11:46:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2013, 11:43:00 PMWe'll only know that things are *really* bad when they start running away...

A reference to their withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2013, 11:48:31 PM
No, just a poor joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 January, 2013, 11:50:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2013, 11:43:00 PM
You just know things are bad when even the French are scrapping. We'll only know that things are *really* bad when the Germans get started.

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 January, 2013, 12:10:27 AM
There's a reason that French forces were put out of harms way during the first Gulf War, you can't trust the buggers! Just look at a certain European conflict not long ago and what they got up to and I'm not talking both world wars!
The only part of the French armed forces that is any good is made up of foreigners :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mike Carroll on 15 January, 2013, 11:44:45 PM
A warning: certain recent comments on this thread have been reported. Please exercise restraint and consideration when making comments about other nationalities!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 January, 2013, 11:50:40 PM
ZOOT ALORS!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 16 January, 2013, 12:28:39 AM
I suggest that this conversation ends right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 16 January, 2013, 12:55:39 AM
... or the entire thread for that matter...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 January, 2013, 01:12:48 AM


You played your part.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 16 January, 2013, 01:26:14 AM
I've turned a blind eye to this thread for some time, as it was boisterous but contained. Please be aware that the situation has now changed. Posts of an offensive nature will result in temporary bans. If you don't understand what is offensive and what is not then I suggest you back away from your keyboard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 January, 2013, 02:13:32 AM


Alex Jones' INFO WARS 'reviews' DREDD (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GTjijfo-q8)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 16 January, 2013, 02:30:45 AM
What's odd is that he did say in his Dark Knight review that there'd be violence related to it*, and there has been some weird connections to Dark Knight and recent shootings (Aurora and the Sandy Hook map thing).

I'm not even saying there's anything to it. It's just...strange.

*I don't recall if he specifically said mass shootings and can't be arsed re-watching the 10 minutes vid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2013, 02:31:19 AM
Don't mention the Volgans...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2013, 03:54:58 AM
A Frenchman, a German and a Ugandan are all being held without trial in the same cupboard at Guantanamo Bay. During a break between waterboarding sessions, conversation turns to why each of them had been arrested in the first place.

"Well," begins the Frenchman in a perfectly normal French accent which is neither stereotypical or amusing, "I chained my bicycle to a lamp-post outside a bank while I went for a wee and the authorities thought that my bike was a bomb."

"I also needed a wee," adds the German in an entirely natural and not at all satirical Dussledorf lilt, "but in my case I accidenally left a few stray droplets on the floor of the urinal, which the authorities mistook for a chemical attack."

"I cannot tell you why I was arrested," the Ugandan says in an accent I'm not even going to attempt to describe, "because even if what happened to me is gut-bustingly funny this will be seen as a racist joke and the underlying commentry concerning the on-going Nazification of governments around the globe will be lost."

"Get stuffed, you Ugandan pillock," says the Frenchman.

"Don't you talk to him like that," ejaculates the German.

"Shut yer pie-holes or I'll beat the lot of you senseless," orders the American guard with an accent like two drunken hookers vomiting into a toaster.

"And you, my son, are banned," said the British internet message board administrator.



I'll get me coat... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 16 January, 2013, 09:57:28 AM
That probably took a while to type. Just think of all the life-affirming things you could otherwise have done with the time...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 January, 2013, 11:52:58 AM
If Physics has killed Philosophy with it's determinist view of reality; all things come from that which came before and therefore we effect nothing about the Universe, since our actions are all pre destined should we accept that or 'rise against' it even though this attempt to do so is itself a pre destination and unavoidable reaction to the aforementioned determinism?

We might have a social revolution altering the current freemarket dominated society we live in but will this merely install a new Elite who claim to work in the Peoples name, but who are ultimately just another Elite, obsessed by power and therefore be just as shite as the Freemarket scum they replaced?

Ah, back on track I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 January, 2013, 12:02:50 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 January, 2013, 11:52:58 AM
If Physics has killed Philosophy....

I don't think so. Most of the physics types I know are a very philosophical bunch. Etymologically, you could say Physics is philosophy, or 'love of knowledge' (when translated from the original Klingon). Physics definitely didn't kill philosophy. This quotation from Einstein should clear things up:

QuoteIt wasn't me! It was the one armed man!


Annnnd we're back off track
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 January, 2013, 04:19:02 PM
Physics hasn't killed philosophy, you only have to look at the ubiquitous acceptance of "dark matter" to see physicists are still very much at the "it's magic and you have to believe in it really, really hard" stage of explaining some things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 16 January, 2013, 11:41:52 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 January, 2013, 11:52:58 AMWe might have a social revolution altering the current freemarket dominated society we live in but will this merely install a new Elite who claim to work in the Peoples name, but who are ultimately just another Elite, obsessed by power and therefore be just as shite as the Freemarket scum they replaced?

History, like the Man from Del Monte, says yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 January, 2013, 10:49:16 PM
This (http://splasho.nfshost.com/upgoer5/) website challenges you to describe any complex subject you wish, and the only rule is this:

You can only use the one thousand most commonly used English words (http://splasho.nfshost.com/upgoer5/phpspellcheck/dictionaries/1000.dicin).

This is how someone described parliament:

QuoteThis is the group of people who decide the things that we have to do, the things we can't do, and how some of your money will be spent. There are 650 of them.

We pick which people will decide things for us every so often. Usually we do that every five years. Most people pick the people who will decide things for us by which party they want to be deciding things.

The 650 people pick a smaller group of to decide most of important things. Some of the people will agree with that, and some of the people will not agree with that. They sort themselves into groups, one side agree with the smaller group, the other side does not agree with the smaller group. The side that agrees with the smaller group has to be the biggest, or we all have to pick a new group of people.

The smaller group will decide what important things they want to change. The whole group has to agree that those changes are a good idea. If too many of the people who are on the side that agrees with the smaller group, think the idea is a bad idea, then the change can't happen.

You can write to the person that you picked to decide things for you. You can ask them to say things, and do things, that help change things to be more like what you want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2013, 04:16:39 PM
I'm liking this new thing that we're all being invited to fear; "ungoverned spaces". I guess that an ungoverned space must be a space without any government officials inside, like the Sahara Desert, bits of Algeria, every ocean, sea, lake and river on Earth, my back garden and the inside of David Cameron's head.

So not only does the world face invisible terrorists but it also transpires that these ethereal monsters live in invisible places.

What we need, it seems, is some kind of global government to take responsibility for all these frightening and deserted (except for invisible terrorists, of course) places. We will also, of course, need to send lots and lots of bombs, drones and troops to pacify these ungoverned spaces.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 January, 2013, 07:45:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2013, 04:16:39 PM
I'm liking this new thing that we're all being invited to fear; "ungoverned spaces". I guess that an ungoverned space must be a space without any government officials inside, like the Sahara Desert, bits of Algeria, every ocean, sea, lake and river on Earth, my back garden and the inside of David Cameron's head.

So not only does the world face invisible terrorists but it also transpires that these ethereal monsters live in invisible places.

What we need, it seems, is some kind of global government to take responsibility for all these frightening and deserted (except for invisible terrorists, of course) places. We will also, of course, need to send lots and lots of bombs, drones and troops to pacify these ungoverned spaces.

As an example of newspeaking doublethink, the notion of an ungoverned space is right up there with insurgent (http://media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com/upload/14003448812517822_hKM0V2Xv_b.jpg) and liberal intervention (http://www.2000adonline.com/books/assets/covers/invasion_1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 24 January, 2013, 09:02:47 PM
My gut says cruise missile..

Syria's Aleppo university bombing: amateur video footage
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jan/23/syria-aleppo-university-bombing-video
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 24 January, 2013, 09:23:48 PM
Politics and religion. Two poisons that can destroy Tranquility. (was going to use Nirvana but being linked to Buddism kind of defeats the quote).




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 January, 2013, 11:39:53 PM
In my head I occasionally confuse the Huffington Post with the Onion - but when they run stories like this you can sort of understand why: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/new-mexico-abortion-bill_n_2541894.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 January, 2013, 04:33:06 AM
From his own mouth on the radio tonight. Peter Stringfellow may enter politics and run against Nick Clegg at the next general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2013, 09:02:01 AM
Well, Stringfellow does own a club and Clegg has all the ferocity of a baby seal...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 26 January, 2013, 10:09:13 PM
That seems to be a ploy to make you vote for Clegg given that the opposition is an even bigger useless fucktard.

Satan really has to dig deep to keep up his end of the bargain as far as Clegg goes :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 27 January, 2013, 10:20:40 AM
http://newint.org/features/2013/01/01/waging-war-on-poor/ (http://newint.org/features/2013/01/01/waging-war-on-poor/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 January, 2013, 02:26:53 PM
Quote from: Hoagy on 27 January, 2013, 10:20:40 AM
http://newint.org/features/2013/01/01/waging-war-on-poor/ (http://newint.org/features/2013/01/01/waging-war-on-poor/)

The New Internationalist is obviously approaching that issue from a particular ideological perspective, but that article makes an interesting observation regarding the way the tax burden has been shifted in recent years from large private institutions to the middle classes - setting one against the other and replacing the post-war political consensus regarding the general utility of universal health and welfare provision with a spurious faith in the operation of markets.

HAVE YOU MET THE POOR? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=167IhlXnN2Y#t=10s)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 27 January, 2013, 03:21:49 PM
Slightly off topic but you're all bound to know about how the Home Office made a load of redundancies last year. This was done so they could then start hiring via temping agencies so they don't have to pay the temps full overtime, a pension, the same wage as another Home Office worker etc (I know a few people who worked in the Home Office, took redundancy and have now returned to their old jobs this way). A friend of mine recently had a computer exercise at a temping agency to get into the UK Border Control part of the Home Office and, having passed, was told to wait a total of six weeks for his security check to go through. With 2 weeks to go before his check is completed, it's announced UK Border Control are striking next month. Thanks to new laws brought in- if my friend refuses to cross the picket lines, he'll be waving away his rights to JSA for up to 3 years. This coalition really does believe in divide and conquer, doesn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 January, 2013, 05:16:26 PM
So, people are taking redundancy money from the Home Office and then going back there to work for an agency and you think that's a bad deal!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 January, 2013, 05:27:02 PM
This is what a lot of nurses do as well (not the redundancy bit but the leaving bit) and then get paid more.

They can work via NHSP, which is when they still work for the NHS and just want the overtime and not just at their own place of work. Then there are the agency nurses who have left the NHS and want to still do nursing but on a better wage paid for by the local trust.

Where my good lady works, they try to only use the NHSP nurses but at a last resort they will cough up for the agency ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 27 January, 2013, 06:36:05 PM
In response to Old Tankie (my computer isn't allowing me to use the quote option for some reason) if you take redundancy and then join a temping agency, the temping agency is bound to tell you how you can get off JSA and do what you were doing before, albeit at a lower wage. However, these people going to the Home Office via a temping agency are not part of the union and are therefore not covered/ allowed to strike, so they have to cross the picket lines if they don't want to lose a job and be sent back to the job centre where they will be forced to say they refused to work and lose their entitlement to JSA for three years because of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 30 January, 2013, 10:59:46 PM
After observing someone combining the issue of abortion and gun control I think it's finally time Facebook banned political updates via the sharing of crappy fan page pics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 31 January, 2013, 01:42:26 AM
Quote from: Stan on 30 January, 2013, 10:59:46 PM
After observing someone combining the issue of abortion and gun control I think it's finally time Facebook banned political updates via the sharing of crappy fan page pics.

No. Just No.

You cannot censor social media. If you have a social media page, you control the content on that page. You censor what shows up on it yourself. Well at least I do, and I'm not comfortable with giving someone else that power.

If Facebook ever did adopt such a policy, they would have to update their Terms of Use Policy. And that policy would have a clause saying that you agree to give Facebook the right to censor your free speech. And most people wouldn't read it and would just click agree, before getting back to posting pictures of what they had for tea and suchlike.

Until one day, they read a facebook post, or a tweet, about some celebrity (probably one of those 'controversial' types) getting censored on social media. And there'd be a big uproar about how Facebook hates free speech, even though most people had agreed to be censored without knowing or needing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 31 January, 2013, 03:08:23 AM
I was being a tad facetious and completely agree. I'd just have more respect for someone who's willing to type a few sentences and take ownership of their mini-rants than a person who relentlessly shares annoying pics from various fan pages. It's almost like they feel they can get away with being 20 times more asinine because it wasn't really they themselves who made the original argument/statement or whatever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 31 January, 2013, 12:02:46 PM
Quote from: Stan on 30 January, 2013, 10:59:46 PM
After observing someone combining the issue of abortion and gun control I think it's finally time Facebook banned political updates via the sharing of crappy fan page pics.

I presume they were making the perfectly reasonable point that 'pro-life' actually means anti-abortion, which is a much narrower concern than 'pro-life' makes it sound, and life isn't really very important to a lot of U.S. political organizations and activists who espouse a world view which includes being anti-abortion.

That said, just sharing a vitriolic or satirical caption put together by somebody else doesn't really say much for one's own understanding of the issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 31 January, 2013, 09:41:12 PM
No, but I agree on the definition for some. I personally prefer the version of pro-life which doesn't involve bombing the living daylights out of people for no good reason.

I had to double check because it wasn't really my intention to get into a huge abortion debate. The image was from Move On, which explains the partisan silliness. For one thing it's been scientifically established that outlawing firearms doesn't prevent gun violence. And secondly, I've never heard a pro-lifer of any definition claim abortions would no longer happen if they were made illegal.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/424892_10151202364220493_1892577735_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: House of Usher on 31 January, 2013, 10:10:04 PM
Quote from: Stan on 31 January, 2013, 09:41:12 PM
I had to double check because it wasn't really my intention to get into a huge abortion debate...

And secondly, I've never heard a pro-lifer of any definition claim abortions would no longer happen if they were made illegal.

No, I don't want to get into an abortion debate either. However, it seems self-evident that campaigners who want abortion to be made illegal want it to be made illegal because they believe that will result in fewer abortions, not because they want abortions to be nastier, unregulated, unofficial and possibly carried out by amateurs.

P.S. - I think it's the haphazard, devil-may-care use of the word 'prevent' in that slogan that makes it so stupid.

P.P.S. - and the use of the phrase 'outlawing guns,' seeing as I don't know of anyone, anywhere, currently advocating such a move.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 31 January, 2013, 11:45:20 PM
That's partly what I mean. It's doesn't even mesh with my friend's actual position on gun control. There would've been less eye rolling if he'd just typed a few sentences himself instead of letting fan page pics speak for him.  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 February, 2013, 01:47:21 AM
Why go to the bother of typing forming your own opinion and then type out  ALL!  THOSE!  WORDS!* When you can just let a meme speak for you?

(http://global3.memecdn.com/spock_o_295039.jpg)

*Grammatically correct, no less**

**The most important thing to remember when correcting someone's grammar is this: EVERYONE HATES YOU
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 05 February, 2013, 05:01:20 AM
Quote from: House of Usher on 31 January, 2013, 10:10:04 PM
P.P.S. - and the use of the phrase 'outlawing guns,' seeing as I don't know of anyone, anywhere, currently advocating such a move.

A lot of the spin machine in the United States is painting the gun control debate as a slippery slope type deal- give way for the smaller things and before you know it, bam, dictatorship.

I never understood that train of logic but it's common here in the US. Godwin law is even invoked because they talk about how Nazi Germany confiscated weapons, which lead to the holocaust. I'm not joking about that, comes up on bumper stickers here alot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 February, 2013, 05:18:35 AM
What about Douglas Huhne, perjury from a politician  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 February, 2013, 07:19:25 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 February, 2013, 05:18:35 AM
What about Douglas Huhne, perjury from a politician  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You mean Chris Huhne's been lying about his name too? Not a smart move to involve your missus in a criminal conspiracy then dump her for a younger model. Like they always say, if he does that to the woman he loved imagine what he'd be prepared to do to the anonymous voting public.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 05 February, 2013, 07:31:44 AM
Well he did give us a by-election so I'll try not to hold him in too much contempt. Maybe the Lib Dems can even walk away with their deposit on this one. That should be nice for them. I just hope it's soon anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 February, 2013, 12:10:55 PM
How on earth did Douglas come out of the keyboard (slaps forehead) what a twat :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 05 February, 2013, 12:18:50 PM
I suspect you were thinking of former Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home (pronounced "hume").
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 07 February, 2013, 03:18:33 PM
Wot, no one here's mentioned this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21346220)?

Ah, ya buncha homophobes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 03:27:36 PM
Brilliant news isn't it and it only took a Conservative leader to get the ball rolling :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 February, 2013, 03:30:42 PM
yup, and even better, it may kill his career! Win-Win situation!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 February, 2013, 03:57:27 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 03:27:36 PM
Brilliant news isn't it and it only took a Conservative leader to get the ball rolling :D

Yep but he wasn't there, just tweet it...? What a coward!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 04:09:14 PM
I can't recall New Labour putting this forward in the 13 years they were in power, or did I miss something inbetween wars and the gap between the rich and poor expanding ever more!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 February, 2013, 06:42:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 03:27:36 PM
Brilliant news isn't it and it only took a Conservative leader to get the ball rolling :D

It was pressure from Liberal party coalition partners which pushed the issue up the agenda. This is the kind of thing only the Tories can get away with while in power - the New Labour Project's cowed terror of negative headlines from the Daily Mail meant they could never take something like this on, while Dave can rely on them reverting to type and falling into line when it comes to the next election.

Ditto regarding cutting the budgets of the military and the police - soft-on-crime Blair and chums would have been slaughtered for implementing the coalition's cutbacks in those areas, but the perception of the Conservatives as being the party of the establishment and law and order means they're regarded as necessary economies, rather than driven by ideology or weakness.

It's a corollary of the rule that means the ruling classes have to wait until their red party are in power before they can get away with embedding free market principles in the daily operation of the health and social welfare services. The left and liberal-leaning sections of the press would be up in arms if Dave & Co tried to introduce similar (ahem!) reforms or -as you point out - start a series of illegal and ruinous wars for no good reason and to no real effect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 February, 2013, 07:05:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 03:27:36 PM
Brilliant news isn't it and it only took a Conservative leader to get the ball rolling :D

I could almost agree with that, if half of them hadn't actually voted against equality for their fellow citizens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 07:10:58 PM
I agree but at least he did the correct thing and stuck by it, even when people told him not to!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 07 February, 2013, 07:16:51 PM
It was interesting to see the UK do that. I could never see this happen in the US Congress in its current composition though, it's been tough enough getting it through state legislatures and ballot measures. Last time they touched at the federal level, DOMA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOMA) came out of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 07 February, 2013, 09:45:49 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 07 February, 2013, 06:42:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2013, 03:27:36 PM
Brilliant news isn't it and it only took a Conservative leader to get the ball rolling :D

It was pressure from Liberal party coalition partners which pushed the issue up the agenda. This is the kind of thing only the Tories can get away with while in power - the New Labour Project's cowed terror of negative headlines from the Daily Mail meant they could never take something like this on, while Dave can rely on them reverting to type and falling into line when it comes to the next election.

Ditto regarding cutting the budgets of the military and the police - soft-on-crime Blair and chums would have been slaughtered for implementing the coalition's cutbacks in those areas, but the perception of the Conservatives as being the party of the establishment and law and order means they're regarded as necessary economies, rather than driven by ideology or weakness.

It's a corollary of the rule that means the ruling classes have to wait until their red party are in power before they can get away with embedding free market principles in the daily operation of the health and social welfare services. The left and liberal-leaning sections of the press would be up in arms if Dave & Co tried to introduce similar (ahem!) reforms or -as you point out - start a series of illegal and ruinous wars for no good reason and to no real effect.

I agree with your general left/right cover point allowing each gang of crooks to get away with certain policies the other couldn't but I don't think this has anything to do with the Lib Dems. Why would Dave destroy his chances at the next election for a bunch of petulant children who knifed him in the back over boundary changes?

I'd suggest the establishment left should be giving him credit on this one but I think most of them know this wasn't done on a matter of principal. For some bizarre reason he appears to have thought it would help him politically. Not very smart for a rich boy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 07 February, 2013, 10:06:28 PM
I can't believe the swathe of hatred towards the verdict. Or is that just the media focusing on the negatives again.  ::)
Damned if you do etc.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 February, 2013, 10:20:55 PM
Quote from: Stan on 07 February, 2013, 09:45:49 PM
I don't think this has anything to do with the Lib Dems. Why would Dave destroy his chances at the next election for a bunch of petulant children who knifed him in the back over boundary changes?

It's all ... er, politics:

"Liberal Democrats today overwhelmingly backed moves to allow same-sex and mixed-sex couples to choose whether they wish to have a marriage or a civil partnership and to allow gay couples to have a church wedding. Evan Harris, the former MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, said the motion would "test" the Conservatives' commitment to equality and would strengthen the hand of Lib Dem equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, in pressing for a change in the law.

Harris told delegates at the party's annual conference in Liverpool that the party should use the fact that it was part of the coalition government to "seize the moment to push the agenda forward on full equality"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/21/liberal-democrats-same-sex-marriage (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/21/liberal-democrats-same-sex-marriage)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 07 February, 2013, 11:26:50 PM
Bloody Christ, over ten posts and no Beaky rearing up from his self-imposed riddance to register his disgust?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 08 February, 2013, 12:17:09 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 07 February, 2013, 10:20:55 PM
Quote from: Stan on 07 February, 2013, 09:45:49 PM
I don't think this has anything to do with the Lib Dems. Why would Dave destroy his chances at the next election for a bunch of petulant children who knifed him in the back over boundary changes?

It's all ... er, politics:

"Liberal Democrats today overwhelmingly backed moves to allow same-sex and mixed-sex couples to choose whether they wish to have a marriage or a civil partnership and to allow gay couples to have a church wedding. Evan Harris, the former MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, said the motion would "test" the Conservatives' commitment to equality and would strengthen the hand of Lib Dem equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, in pressing for a change in the law.

Harris told delegates at the party's annual conference in Liverpool that the party should use the fact that it was part of the coalition government to "seize the moment to push the agenda forward on full equality"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/21/liberal-democrats-same-sex-marriage (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/21/liberal-democrats-same-sex-marriage)

My post wasn't very clear in hindsight. I don't deny the Lib Dems were pushing for it. They're the one party you'd expect to do so. I just don't think Dave was forced into this position.

Though I will admit it's all very bizarre, so who knows really? There must be a good reason Dave slashed his own throat this way but I can't fathom what it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 08 February, 2013, 03:20:49 AM
You know, Conservatives introduced to politics the first non-Christian PM (D'Israeli*), the first non-British PM (Law), the first unmarried-and-maybe-gay PM (Heath) and the first female PM (Thatcher) - indeed, the very first female MP to sit in the Commons (Viscountess Astor) was a Tory, as was the first Jewish MP (Sir Lopes).

Labour did get the first Muslim MP (Sarwar) - eventually, in 1997 - but your Bingo card is looking awfully bare in comparison.

*Yeah, he converted, but don't imagine that the stigmas magically evaporated - and he succeeded anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 08 February, 2013, 03:36:35 AM
They might also give us our first black PM if the last month is anything to go by.

Probably the smartest move they could make right now. Unless he hates gays or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2013, 08:22:07 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 07 February, 2013, 11:26:50 PM
Bloody Christ, over ten posts and no Beaky rearing up from his self-imposed riddance to register his disgust?

Too busy planning his big day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 08 February, 2013, 09:29:15 AM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 08 February, 2013, 03:20:49 AM
- indeed, the very first female MP to sit in the Commons (Viscountess Astor) was a Tory,

And the first female MP elected to the British Parliament, Constance Markievicz, was in Sinn Fein. That's politics!

M. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 08 February, 2013, 09:47:20 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 February, 2013, 08:22:07 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 07 February, 2013, 11:26:50 PM
Bloody Christ, over ten posts and no Beaky rearing up from his self-imposed riddance to register his disgust?

Too busy planning his big day.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 08 February, 2013, 12:10:27 PM
Quote from: Robert Frazer on 08 February, 2013, 03:20:49 AMthe first unmarried-and-maybe-gay

I like the way they got that demographic covered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 February, 2013, 10:27:16 AM
Quote from: Stan on 08 February, 2013, 12:17:09 AM
I don't deny the Lib Dems were pushing for it. They're the one party you'd expect to do so. I just don't think Dave was forced into this position. Though I will admit it's all very bizarre, so who knows really? There must be a good reason Dave slashed his own throat this way but I can't fathom what it is.

Aye and No. Dave's been making speeches for the last five years which demonstrated that he was in favour of this and didn't mind pissing off the minority of the country and his party who feel strongly about this (non) issue. The 50/50 split in the parliamentary Conservative party vote in the free vote over this bill isn't representative of the strength of felling in the UK as a whole, where most folk couldn't give a toss one way or the other and where a defacto form of gay marriage already exists in everything but name.

Those rebelling Tory MPs knew they could afford to look like they were taking a principled stand to the vocal minority of their constituents who were making phone calls and organising campaigns, safe in the knowledge that the vote would always go the way their party's leadership intended. Dave hands an olive branch to his coalition partners, so they can go back to their party faithful and say look what we made the Tories do! (even though Dave didn't mind doing it at all), allowing them to save a little face as they go along with policies which are antithetical to their core principles.

Meanwhile, all the pictures of Dave on my telly for the last few days have been of him delivering a Thatcher-like "No-No-No" outside the EU building, telling the media that he's going to make Johnny Foreigner acquiesce to British demands that they adopt an Osbourne-style austerity program. If there's one touchstone issue for UK Conservatives, it's Europe, and they love a bit of Frog/Kraut-bashing much more than they dislike the idea of marriage between homosexuals . The folk who were opposing that bill weren't really bigots, they were the kind of folk who obsess over the correct use and definition of words and who still can't get over the fact that Snickers, Starburst and Cif used to be called one thing and are now called another - even though it makes no real fucking difference to the way things are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 February, 2013, 10:36:39 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 February, 2013, 10:27:16 AMThe folk who were opposing that bill weren't really bigots, they were the kind of folk who obsess over the correct use and definition of words and who still can't get over the fact that Snickers, Starburst and Cif used to be called one thing and are now called another - even though it makes no real fucking difference to the way things are.

Yes, a good chunk of them really are bigots, and the argument about 'redefining' the word marriage not being within Parliament's remit is amongst the most spurious, weaselly pieces of shit the 'anti' campaign spewed out. Or are they forgetting that "voter" was once defined as "white, land-owning man" ...?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 February, 2013, 11:14:33 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 February, 2013, 10:36:39 AM
Yes, a good chunk of them really are bigots, and the argument about 'redefining' the word marriage not being within Parliament's remit is amongst the most spurious, weaselly pieces of shit the 'anti' campaign spewed out. Or are they forgetting that "voter" was once defined as "white, land-owning man" ...?

I'd stand by my characterisation of the opposition to the current bill as largely composed of instinctively conservative little Lynne Trusses, who just want everything to stay the way it's always been because that's the way it's always been. The folk with the real ideological opposition to social reform, who are making a concerted effort to change the way the real world operates, are those who keep bankrolling and publicising legal challenges to legislation which makes it illegal for state officials to use their religious beliefs as a basis to deny folk their legal rights and access to public services.

When the executive and legislative parts of the body politic have proven themselves agin ye, the judiciary and the fourth estate are your next options. 'Mike Judge, a spokesman for the Christian Institute, which helped fund Miss Ladele's case, added: "Christians will feel let down by this decision. It will only serve to reinforce the impression that Christians are being pushed to the sidelines of public life. "Our nation's highest court has effectively told them their concerns are not of general public importance." ' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7399275/Christian-registrar-denied-leave-to-appeal-gay-wedding-refusal.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 February, 2013, 11:18:19 AM
QuoteWhen the executive and legislative parts of the body politic have proven themselves agin ye, the judiciary and the fourth estate are your next options. 'Mike Judge, a spokesman for the Christian Institute, which helped fund Miss Ladele's case, added: "Christians will feel let down by this decision. It will only serve to reinforce the impression that Christians are being pushed to the sidelines of public life. "Our nation's highest court has effectively told them their concerns are not of general public importance." '

So, the court decided that their belief system was equal in Law to the others and has no special exception. Hardly 'being pushed to the sidelines'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 February, 2013, 11:31:03 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 09 February, 2013, 11:18:19 AM
So, the court decided that their belief system was equal in Law to the others and has no special exception. Hardly 'being pushed to the sidelines'.

I'd argue that the spectacle of the appeal and the use to which it was put by the media served the ends of its financial backers better than a win would have done. The outcome is largely irrelevant and was never really in doubt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 09 February, 2013, 04:28:15 PM
So Fianna Fail, the political party that - in conjunction with the banks, speculators and property-developers - decimated the Irish economy, is now, according to a recent survey, the most popular among voters in the Irish Republic.

Yes, you read that correctly, folks. Despite making a complete bags of the place, these cretinous cankers on the arse of the body politic would be voted back in tomorrow if there was an election.

There is only one word to describe anyone who would vote for these clowns, and that is "Moron" !

Remember those old Punch cartoons depicting the stupid, greedy, drunken Irish gobshites holding their caps out for whatever shillings they could get? Reading today's newspaper's has me thinking we deserve that reputation.

Is it any fucking wonder that I'm a misanthrophist?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 February, 2013, 04:46:56 PM
Sorry to hear that.  Is it painful?!  Bit like shingles, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2013, 05:25:51 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 09 February, 2013, 04:28:15 PM
So Fianna Fail, the political party that - in conjunction with the banks, speculators and property-developers - decimated the Irish economy, is now, according to a recent survey, the most popular among voters in the Irish Republic.

Yes, you read that correctly, folks. Despite making a complete bags of the place, these cretinous cankers on the arse of the body politic would be voted back in tomorrow if there was an election.


I hear you.  I just can't understand it - have the electorate got the memory of a goldfish?  Because it's not like FF have done anything in the meantime to salvage their reputation. For fuxake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2013, 07:00:17 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2013, 05:25:51 PMI just can't understand it - have the electorate got the memory of a goldfish?  Because it's not like FF have done anything in the meantime to salvage their reputation. For fuxake.

Goldfish memories, or just feel the Blueshirts and their power-hungry ideology-traitor allies* have by now demonstrated sufficiently little wit and empathy in their largely nominal stewardship of this rudderless clusterfuck of a state that it's now socially acceptable to return to the Civil War allegiances that make us all feel so connected to our glorious past of murdering each other and blaming someone else.

*The party I inexplicably keep voting for, despite their unbroken track record of propping up whatever wealth-obsessed knobs look like they might not get in otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 09 February, 2013, 11:21:09 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 09 February, 2013, 04:28:15 PM
So Fianna Fail, the political party that - in conjunction with the banks, speculators and property-developers - decimated the Irish economy, is now, according to a recent survey, the most popular among voters in the Irish Republic.


The revolving door of politics is a weird thing, but it seems the way it works now. Party performs less than expected and the one before gets popular again. Then they get back into power. Rinse, wash, and repair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2013, 11:25:08 PM
QuoteThe party I inexplicably keep voting for, despite their unbroken track record of propping up whatever wealth-obsessed knobs look like they might not get in otherwise.

Me too.  The only reason being that the only electable alternatives are slightly more bungling and cynical oafs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 10 February, 2013, 12:17:40 AM
To be honest what are the alternatives, FF or SF? Both government parties are coming in for a kicking for very legitmate and stupid decision, and also coming in for criticisims for decisions that they have to make. So if Im a pissed off voter with FG and La where do I send my vote?
SF may be a political force in the future, but they need to get coherent policy and put all skeletons firmly in the ground.
FF is the only alternative, not that I would ever give them the vote but I can understand the reason for the result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 February, 2013, 02:15:02 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 February, 2013, 10:27:16 AM
Quote from: Stan on 08 February, 2013, 12:17:09 AM
I don't deny the Lib Dems were pushing for it. They're the one party you'd expect to do so. I just don't think Dave was forced into this position. Though I will admit it's all very bizarre, so who knows really? There must be a good reason Dave slashed his own throat this way but I can't fathom what it is.

Aye and No. Dave's been making speeches for the last five years which demonstrated that he was in favour of this and didn't mind pissing off the minority of the country and his party who feel strongly about this (non) issue. The 50/50 split in the parliamentary Conservative party vote in the free vote over this bill isn't representative of the strength of felling in the UK as a whole, where most folk couldn't give a toss one way or the other and where a defacto form of gay marriage already exists in everything but name.

Those rebelling Tory MPs knew they could afford to look like they were taking a principled stand to the vocal minority of their constituents who were making phone calls and organising campaigns, safe in the knowledge that the vote would always go the way their party's leadership intended. Dave hands an olive branch to his coalition partners, so they can go back to their party faithful and say look what we made the Tories do! (even though Dave didn't mind doing it at all), allowing them to save a little face as they go along with policies which are antithetical to their core principles.

Meanwhile, all the pictures of Dave on my telly for the last few days have been of him delivering a Thatcher-like "No-No-No" outside the EU building, telling the media that he's going to make Johnny Foreigner acquiesce to British demands that they adopt an Osbourne-style austerity program. If there's one touchstone issue for UK Conservatives, it's Europe, and they love a bit of Frog/Kraut-bashing much more than they dislike the idea of marriage between homosexuals . The folk who were opposing that bill weren't really bigots, they were the kind of folk who obsess over the correct use and definition of words and who still can't get over the fact that Snickers, Starburst and Cif used to be called one thing and are now called another - even though it makes no real fucking difference to the way things are.

I don't think the phony budget cut helped him to be honest. If the blogosphere is anything to go by people are even more pissed. Then you have the secret vote etc. Any positive could be wiped out North Korea style. Thus pissing people off even more.

Then he made the mistake of telling people this was one of his good reasons to stay in the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 February, 2013, 02:27:59 AM
What's another word for 'people'? I'll have to check the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 19 February, 2013, 01:50:36 AM
This political cartoon came up during the release of US DoJ documents providing a justification for government drone strikes on citizens.

(http://www.mattbors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/970.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 19 February, 2013, 11:49:24 PM
Excellent. :thumbs:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 February, 2013, 11:49:22 AM

Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Stonewall's Bigot of the Year and one of the men responsible for choosing a new Pope who can sort out Ratzinger's botched handling of decades of allegations of sexual abuse by the clergy, is facing accusations of making inappropriate advances to young priests: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21563345 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21563345)

If these allegations turn out to have any substance, you can chalk O'Brien's vociferous opposition to gay marriage - drawing an equivalence between renaming civil partnerships and legalising slavery (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/02/22/cardinal-keith-obrien-gay-people-should-not-be-allowed-to-marry-but-straight-catholic-priests-can/) (!) - to another case of the folk who get most worked up about things generally being those who are dissembling and displacing their own internal conflicts onto wider society. It allows you to understand his recent call for priests to be allowed to marry (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/02/22/cardinal-keith-obrien-gay-people-should-not-be-allowed-to-marry-but-straight-catholic-priests-can/) in an entirely different light.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 February, 2013, 12:57:50 PM
Serious news for the catholic church, there.  Serious, hilarious news.

I'm sure that we all wish the cardinal well in his new role as a hated outcast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 February, 2013, 01:20:33 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 24 February, 2013, 12:57:50 PM
Serious news for the catholic church, there.  Serious, hilarious news. I'm sure that we all wish the cardinal well in his new role as a hated outcast.

I don't know, it's fun to take the pish out of what looks like breathtaking hypocrisy, but if this isn't just another Roberto Calvi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Calvi)-like bit of Vatican intrigue and power-playing ahead of an important vote that will probably decide the future of the church and the balance of power in Vatican City for a quarter of a century, then it's mostly just sad. An old man has wasted his entire life hating himself and furtively trying to find an outlet for what he's been taught to regard as shameful urges.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 February, 2013, 02:57:57 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 February, 2013, 11:14:33 AM
'Mike Judge, a spokesman for the Christian Institute, which helped fund Miss Ladele's case, added: "Christians will feel let down by this decision. It will only serve to reinforce the impression that Christians are being pushed to the sidelines of public life. "Our nation's highest court has effectively told them their concerns are not of general public importance." '

(http://guycodeblog.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/beavis-spitting.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 February, 2013, 03:07:21 PM
Pops; are you the kid who's been whacking off in my tool shed?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 February, 2013, 03:14:15 PM
Ahhh....huh-huh-huh-huh-huh-heh....ummmm...huh-huh-huh.....no?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2013, 03:53:10 PM
...words...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 February, 2013, 01:20:33 PM...wasted his entire life hating himself and furtively trying to find an outlet for what he's been taught to regard as shameful urges.

Who hasn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 28 February, 2013, 05:55:11 PM
It seems BetFair and PoliticalBetting have UKIP as second favourites. This could be a dark day for Dave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 February, 2013, 06:05:19 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 February, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 February, 2013, 01:20:33 PM...wasted his entire life hating himself and furtively trying to find an outlet for what he's been taught to regard as shameful urges.

Who hasn't.

That's no way to talk about your wife.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2013, 06:39:28 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 28 February, 2013, 06:05:19 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 February, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 February, 2013, 01:20:33 PM...wasted his entire life hating himself and furtively trying to find an outlet for what he's been taught to regard as shameful urges.

Who hasn't.

That's no way to talk about your wife.

Or yer ma.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2013, 05:51:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 February, 2013, 06:39:28 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 28 February, 2013, 06:05:19 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 February, 2013, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 February, 2013, 01:20:33 PM...wasted his entire life hating himself and furtively trying to find an outlet for what he's been taught to regard as shameful urges.

Who hasn't.

That's no way to talk about your wife.

Or yer ma.

It sounds so much better than 'your're mom', it really does
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 March, 2013, 05:44:53 PM
the good cardinal has released a statement...

"In recent days certain allegations which have been made against me have become public. Initially, their anonymous and non-specific nature led me to contest them.

"However, I wish to take this opportunity to admit that there have been times that my sexual conduct has fallen below the standards expected of me as a priest, archbishop and cardinal."

...or - I was accused of doing something wrong.  I thought I could lie about it.  Turns out I can't.  Bye.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 March, 2013, 06:40:15 PM
Lindsey Hilsum of Channel Four News has just told me that the supposed assassination of Mokhtar Belmokhtar in Mali was probably not the work of Chadian troops, as early reports have suggested, but the result of a French air strike. The reason the French authorities might want to keep their dabs off this one is that they probably also wiped out seven of their own citizens who the jihadists were holding hostage ... which would be fantastically cynical, if true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 March, 2013, 01:39:16 AM
QuoteInitially, their anonymous and non-specific nature led me to contest them.

Now that is taking the piss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 04 March, 2013, 01:58:53 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 03 March, 2013, 06:40:15 PM
Lindsey Hilsum of Channel Four News has just told me that the supposed assassination of Mokhtar Belmokhtar in Mali was probably not the work of Chadian troops, as early reports have suggested, but the result of a French air strike. The reason the French authorities might want to keep their dabs off this one is that they probably also wiped out seven of their own citizens who the jihadists were holding hostage ... which would be fantastically cynical, if true.

There's some indication that he may have not even died, since the government is having trouble confirming it. If so this'd be like when the Libyan rebel groups claimed to have killed Qaddafi's sons on several occasions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 09 March, 2013, 05:21:32 AM
I saw this come up on the twitter feed. I think it's another example of a guy reading Dredd straight to a fault.

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thecolumnists/2013/03/paul-abbott-what-conservatives-can-learn-from-comic-books.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 09 March, 2013, 08:39:42 PM
(http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2013/3/9/225565/default/v1/george-bush-painting1-1-522x293.jpg)

Quote"He has such a passion for painting, it's amazing," His teacher said. "He's going to go down in the history books as a great artist."

Oh I don't think that's what he'll be remembered for.

http://news.sky.com/story/1062501/george-w-bush-ex-presidents-dog-doodles
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 09 March, 2013, 10:32:03 PM
I was going say summat about Hitler, and his love of painting, but i changed my mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 March, 2013, 10:55:40 PM


Any idiot can be president or paint, doesn't mean they'll be good at it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 March, 2013, 09:35:08 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 March, 2013, 10:55:40 PM
Any idiot can be president or paint, doesn't mean they'll be good at it.

Are you accusing pencil-monkeys of nepotism?  Other than Hector and various Breughels, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 March, 2013, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 March, 2013, 09:35:08 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 March, 2013, 10:55:40 PM
Any idiot can be president or paint, doesn't mean they'll be good at it.

Are you accusing pencil-monkeys of nepotism?  Other than Hector and various Breughels, of course.

It's the Robson and Potter lettering dynasties which fill the coffers of the Bildeberg group and represent the true evil loose in the world today. Martin Amis and Leah Moore similarly inhibit the advancement of the proletariat. Politics.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 March, 2013, 11:25:46 AM

There's only ever been one conspiracy; the Rich against the rest of us and they are definitely winning at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 12 March, 2013, 09:49:17 PM
We don't really have random news/sociological/affairs of the world thread so I just pop these here....

Think once, think twice, think three times about your job before you ever risk your life for somebody else. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-21753342)

'Pirate Bay' for 3D printing launched. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21754915)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 March, 2013, 10:00:24 PM
Jesus.  Printing guns* for free in your own home.  I don't know whether to smile or run away screaming.


*It's always guns with 3D printers, isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 12 March, 2013, 10:07:59 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 March, 2013, 10:00:24 PM
Jesus.  Printing guns* for free in your own home.  I don't know whether to smile or run away screaming.


*It's always guns with 3D printers, isn't it?

Could try and make something more nasty than guns if you read the quote in the article:

The blueprints available on the site will be for "important stuff", he said. "Not trinkets, not garden gnomes but the things institutions and industries have an interest in keeping from us; access, medical devices, drugs, goods, guns."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: soggy on 13 March, 2013, 04:50:26 PM
That article about the 3D printer was clearly written by somebody without a clue about the topic.

Ignoring his confusion regarding copyright-free/copyright flouting in the introduction, he seems to think a 3D printer is akin to a Star Trek Replicator. Drugs - only if your drug of choice is a lump of plastic.

I could go on but....

S
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 13 March, 2013, 05:44:25 PM
Id be slightly more concerned about the impending economic collapse when companies realize that a few printers are more cost effective than a factory of badly paid workers.  A whole bunch of Chinese people are going to be pissed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 March, 2013, 05:44:44 PM
QuoteDrugs - only if your drug of choice is a lump of plastic.

I thought of that, too. If it was that easy all drug dealers would be out of a job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 March, 2013, 08:02:03 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 March, 2013, 05:44:44 PM
If it was that easy all drug dealers would be out of a job.

Sitting around, smoking marijuana, eating Cheetos and masturbating do not constitute 'plans.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 13 March, 2013, 09:25:34 PM
Quote from: soggy on 13 March, 2013, 04:50:26 PMThat article about the 3D printer was clearly written by somebody without a clue about the topic.

The quote about manufacturing drugs came from the person who is setting up the 3D printing site (and has already designed a 3D printable gun), not the writers of the article, just to clarify that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 March, 2013, 06:53:20 PM
I see savers in Cyprus are going mad and trying to withdraw all their money. European Union at its very best :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 March, 2013, 07:46:40 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 March, 2013, 06:53:20 PM
I see savers in Cyprus are going mad and trying to withdraw all their money. European Union at its very best :lol:

Giving someone with €100 in their bank account €6.75 of shares in the equivalent of RBS (i) seems like a better way of dealing with politicians' financial mismanagement than forcing disabled folk out of their homes (ii) or stopping their benefits entirely (iii), John. The real target of that policy is Russian mafia money, and it's a manoeuvre intended to cajole Vlad and his pals into extending a loan they can easily afford. For some crazy reason, the Cypriot authorities imagine the Russian underworld has some influence over the Kremlin ...

(i) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21814325 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21814325)

(ii) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572238 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21572238)

(iii) http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/atos-scandal-benefits-bosses-admit-1344278 (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/atos-scandal-benefits-bosses-admit-1344278)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 March, 2013, 09:05:24 PM
...Or, say, imposing a property tax on people who can't sell their houses despite being unable to pay their mortgages, and taking the payment out of their benefits if they are out of work.  This (drastic) measure at least only targets those who have savings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 March, 2013, 09:21:05 PM
At least the British people elected the politicians who are supposedly throwing disabled people out of their houses and stopping their benefits (although I must say that I'm disabled and I haven't been thrown out of my home nor had my benefits stopped).  Did the Cypriot people elect the Troika or has this been imposed upon them by their EU rulers?

Right, TB, let's just smash the prudent people, you know, the ones that worked hard and saved a few quid, instead of getting into debt that they can't repay.  There's no easy answer to any of this but to continue hitting savers and decimating pension funds by printing money is the road to nowhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2013, 09:28:21 PM
The main thing is to take money from poor people and give it to rich people.  That'll get us back on track.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 March, 2013, 09:58:05 PM
QuoteRight, TB, let's just smash the prudent people, you know, the ones that worked hard and saved a few quid, instead of getting into debt that they can't repay. 
Plenty of people out there working hard and not able to save. I've certainly never had that luxury. Most of us are running just to stand still.

Bear puts it best though:
QuoteThe main thing is to take money from poor people and give it to rich people.  That'll get us back on track.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 March, 2013, 10:25:06 PM
NM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 March, 2013, 11:01:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 March, 2013, 09:21:05 PM
At least the British people elected the politicians who are supposedly throwing disabled people out of their houses and stopping their benefits (although I must say that I'm disabled and I haven't been thrown out of my home nor had my benefits stopped).  Did the Cypriot people elect the Troika or has this been imposed upon them by their EU rulers?

Right, TB, let's just smash the prudent people, you know, the ones that worked hard and saved a few quid, instead of getting into debt that they can't repay.  There's no easy answer to any of this but to continue hitting savers and decimating pension funds by printing money is the road to nowhere.

Cyprus has a population of just over a million people, Tankie. Even if savings rates in an impoverished nation like Cyprus were similar to that of the relatively prosperous UK, converting 6.75% of their savings into shares in their bank wouldn't account for even a tiny fraction of the €10 billion required by the bailout. As the BBC report linked to above makes clear, it's the immense sums held in Cypriot banks by Russian gangsters which the 10% levy on accounts containing over €100,000 is targeting.

The intention is to convince the cash-rich Russian government to extend the terms of a loan, or Russian 'investors' will have a tenth of their capital invested in the Cypriot economy anyway. You're talking about a general point of principle, the Cypriot government is engaging in realpolitik.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 17 March, 2013, 08:23:26 PM
And the gangsters will I'm sure just sit still and take it. The way the British public does over rewards for bankers yet cuts in defence,  etc.

Oh no they won't. Hope those Cypriot politicians have got good body armour. They're probably going to need it.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/cyprus-politicians-decide-bailout-demands-061611987--finance.html#DdVwBCN

They've put the vote back perhaps Mr Putin's on the line...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 March, 2013, 07:13:44 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 March, 2013, 06:53:20 PM
I see savers in Cyprus are going mad and trying to withdraw all their money. European Union at its very best :lol:

John, your original point was that the EU always seems to find a way to fuck up even the simplest thing, and I'd have to agree that this is now a prime example. Half a dozen states have had bank bail-outs now, and there's no difference between what's happening in Cyprus and us all having to pay the same amount of tax for reduced public services - but the way both the EU and the Cypriot authorities have handled this has been an omishambles.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2013, 10:43:00 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 19 March, 2013, 07:13:44 AMHalf a dozen states have had bank bail-outs now, and there's no difference between what's happening in Cyprus and us all having to pay the same amount of tax for reduced public services - but the way both the EU and the Cypriot authorities have handled this has been an omishambles.

Yeah.

Other than being distinctly more egalitarian and up-front than what's happening in Ireland for example, there is little difference in the substance of what's being done in Cyprus.  The manner, the execution and the implications however... sweet cheeses, what a mess.  One can only hope that this does constitute a key move in the machiavellian master plan of the self-serving financial uberelite, because the only alternative is that, yet again, the conductor's taking the fares but there's no-one at the wheel.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:20:02 PM
Weren't our European masters telling us, only a few weeks ago, that the problems were sorted, yea, of course they were.  The Euro is ultimately doomed, the EU elite just won't admit it.  Lots more pain to come before someone finally pulls the plug, that could take another fifty years, though.  But, heh, the EU has "kept the peace in Europe."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 March, 2013, 03:25:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:20:02 PM
Weren't our European masters telling us, only a few weeks ago, that the problems were sorted

No, I don't think anyone said that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 March, 2013, 03:30:42 PM
Don't mean to derail the debate here, but I found this rather hilarious.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/18/conservative-mp-gavin-barwell-in-date-arab-girls-twitter-gaffe-3546925/ (http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/18/conservative-mp-gavin-barwell-in-date-arab-girls-twitter-gaffe-3546925/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:40:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 March, 2013, 03:25:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:20:02 PM
Weren't our European masters telling us, only a few weeks ago, that the problems were sorted

No, I don't think anyone said that.

"I think we can say that the existential threat against the euro has essentially been overcome" said European commission president Jose Manuel Barroso. 

Ref:  The Guardian Monday, 7th January 2013.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 March, 2013, 03:46:55 PM
These are just minor niggles in the great scheme of things, Europe will succeed, no matter what! You may not enjoy the crap that is coming your way (in fact most of you are having a rough time of it now) but so long as the powerful elite are taken care of and we all act like sheep they don't give a toss.
If it takes 50 years to try and squeeze Europe into a ridiculously shaped hole then they will keep pushing. I could go on about how our bosses are insanely driven by their need to reduce our greenhouse gasses while no other country seems bothered. Who cares, so long as we make this country uncompetitive.
And before the green lobby jump in, most if not all of them are hypocrites, so I take everything that comes out of their mouths with a pinch of salt.
The banking crisis, yes the bankers are twats and need to be punished and it looks like their bluff has finally been called. I also blame the twats who took out loans and mortgages and store cards and maxed out their credit cards. Have some bloody guilt yourselves you greedy bastards. Many hard working fuckers are suffering because you are the want it now culture.

Anyway that's enough of that, back to watching telly!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:57:58 PM
Round of applause for that man!!  Trouble is, CF, although it's staring them in the face, they just keep turning the mirror round!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2013, 04:19:27 PM
Don't ever change, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 March, 2013, 04:36:05 PM
I won't  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 19 March, 2013, 04:51:17 PM
I'd argue that the 'want it now culture' was in large part created by advertising and marketing giving people a sense that they could be happy if they bought more stuff that other people might already have.  Showing people material fantasies just out of reach and making material wealth a socially competitive game meant other parts of the free market system were obviously compelled to help with this growing malaise by developing a new way to assess risk, allowing people who couldn't really afford it within their means get what they saw on their increasingly large televisions, what they were led to believe was what 'normal' people had and what 'normal' people's aspirations were made of. Like going to fucking Disneyland or owning a fucking BMW is a measure of worth. This could be of some use in politics as when you have a bunch of people fixed on what their neighbours have or haven't got, you can tell them that your party will make the economy so utterly brilliant you could afford everything you desire. Or something.

I wholeheartedly agree that there was a choice, but for some people it was obviously Hobson's, for whatever reasons. Shoring any country's economy up on something that was created to make more money out of us punters has been shown to be a bit short sighted, no matter if you are part of a federal or sovereign monetary system if you ask me.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 March, 2013, 05:12:14 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:40:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 March, 2013, 03:25:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2013, 03:20:02 PM
Weren't our European masters telling us, only a few weeks ago, that the problems were sorted

No, I don't think anyone said that.

"I think we can say that the existential threat against the euro has essentially been overcome" said European commission president Jose Manuel Barroso. 

Ref:  The Guardian Monday, 7th January 2013.

Ah, that was just the existential threat. The real shit is still there  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 March, 2013, 05:14:58 PM


I have an existential crisis everyday.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2013, 07:17:03 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 19 March, 2013, 05:14:58 PM
I have an existential crisis everyday.

Ah, but have you got Issue 63?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 March, 2013, 06:43:51 PM

BUDGET CALCULATOR (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442946)

I've just made £285 - bitch!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 March, 2013, 08:23:54 PM

This is just Eddie Mair being incredibly rude to Boris johnson, knowing he can't respond in kind, but it's factual and it's fun:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21916385 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21916385)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 March, 2013, 09:08:32 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 March, 2013, 08:23:54 PM

This is just Eddie Mair being incredibly rude to Boris johnson, knowing he can't respond in kind, but it's factual and it's fun:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21916385 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21916385)

Nothing the shit didn't deserve! It's about time someone asked him about that stuff!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 26 March, 2013, 08:52:02 PM
Stop the Cyborgs? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21937145)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 March, 2013, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 March, 2013, 01:56:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 March, 2013, 02:03:07 AM
WTF North Korea ::)

^^This.

Bill Hicks's disqualification of the 1991 Gulf war on the grounds that the definition of a war is when two armies are fighting is probably relevant here. A war of annihilation between the world's only superpower and a country which depends on welfare handouts from China just to feed (some of) its people would be over before we all go back to work on Tuesday.

The fat kid's only acting out because he has a new step-Daddy  (http://www.ft.com/indepth/china-leadership-transition) and wants to see how far stamping his feet and shouting will get him (same as a few other dependents (http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20130329_ap_foreignfirmsseekactionfromchinasnewleaders.html)). There's an awful lot of newly-mega-rich countries in that region who are doing too well out of the financial collapse of Western capitalism to let the Special Unit kid shit in the pool and spoil the party.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2013, 06:15:56 PM
Emergency rulers imposed in U.S. cities - democracy can no longer be trusted, apparently.  Nice move, Chief Judge Snyder

http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit# (http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit#)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 April, 2013, 06:51:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2013, 06:15:56 PM
Emergency rulers imposed in U.S. cities - democracy can no longer be trusted, apparently.  Nice move, Chief Judge Snyder

http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit# (http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit#)

According to this Fox News piece (http://video.foxnews.com/v/2243233613001/gov-snyder-its-about-bringing-more-jobs-to-michigan/), it's all the fault of uppity black union leaders who eat too many burgers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 06:53:29 PM
Osborne was at my workplace today. I noticed he didn't stick to the walkways in the warehouse ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 02 April, 2013, 07:08:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 06:53:29 PM
Osborne was at my workplace today. I noticed he didn't stick to the walkways in the warehouse ::)

I don't get it...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 07:20:41 PM
Due to forklifts and heavy machinery in use between the stacks there are designated walkways for health and safety. If you get hit while walking inside those areas you can claim. If you are wandering outside those areas and get hit, forget it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 April, 2013, 07:26:28 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 06:53:29 PM
Osborne was at my workplace today. I noticed he didn't stick to the walkways in the warehouse ::)

(http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/081c67Vg654EN/500x.jpg?center=0.5,0)

Hi-vis vest, builder's mug, works canteen - I don't think I've ever seen anyone look more obviously out of their natural environment ... except maybe when the lawyer Tony Blair or the TV executive David Cameron throw a flak jacket on over their Paul Smith suit for a flying visit to Afghanistan.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 07:29:48 PM
Last week they started painting the areas that he would visit and last night they cordoned off certain car spaces in the car park for him and his clan. This pissed me off the most, as they cordoned off quite a few disabled bays, the lazy twat!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2013, 07:41:10 PM
The Condems took something from the disabled just to make things easier for themselves and their mates?  I find that very hard to believe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 April, 2013, 07:42:00 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 07:29:48 PM
Last week they started painting the areas that he would visit and last night they cordoned off certain car spaces in the car park for him and his clan. This pissed me off the most, as they cordoned off quite a few disabled bays, the lazy twat!

How many spaces - twenny-free? You don' wanna nark a tasty geezer like Osbourne, CF - he's Bridain's 'ardest man:

STRIKE A LIGHT! (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9966717/Mockney-George-Osborne-backs-the-Briddish-who-wanna-work.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 02 April, 2013, 08:12:04 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 07:29:48 PM
Last week they started painting the areas that he would visit and last night they cordoned off certain car spaces in the car park for him and his clan.

As part of my day job, i regulary have to help out and 'smarten the place up' a bit. Last time was for Kate Middleton's flying visit. 

Can i smell wet paint? Yes, so i must be in the right place then,  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 April, 2013, 08:43:14 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2013, 06:15:56 PM
Emergency rulers imposed in U.S. cities - democracy can no longer be trusted, apparently.  Nice move, Chief Judge Snyder

http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit# (http://www.thenation.com/blog/173510/austeritys-cruelest-cut-democracy-denied-detroit#)
well we all know where that's heading...
(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/anaconda888/ocpdetroitpoliceblack_zps97a70b24.jpg)

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 07:20:41 PM
Due to forklifts and heavy machinery in use between the stacks there are designated walkways for health and safety. If you get hit while walking inside those areas you can claim. If you are wandering outside those areas and get hit, forget it!

I would've paid you good money to run him down with a fork lift. Ah c'mon, whatever your politics, you've got to admit that's a truly punchable face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 09:06:07 PM
If I'd have been in I would've confronted him on numerous things and wouldn't have cared about the bosses panicking as I made my way to him. He came to us, not the other way round so I would've not been worried about any repercussions on my behalf.

I'm all over the shop when it comes to my politics, left, right and centre, as you may know. I do believe that the weakest in our society should be cared for above everything else, as that shows what we have truly evolved!
All this 'keep our mates okay' pisses me off to no end and let's be half hearted in everything we do, unless it's for our mates again drives me mad.

High Fucking Speed Link bollocks, what a load of old SHIT! New toll road in Wales, wank! Lack of future runway capability, unbelievable. It just goes on in transport.

As for the NHS. Everyone except the people in power seem to understand where the money should be spent and it ain't on fucking MORE managers!

Housing. Build more and if all this climate change is ALL our fault then why are all new builds not forced by law to have triple glazing, solar panels, insulation, etc...

Schools. Not long ago in the southeast they closed loads of primary schools, even though we knew a fucking baby boom was coming.

Water, why did London close 25 reservoirs to sell off over the last few years.

It goes on with half hearted schemes and nothing ever really gets done!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 April, 2013, 09:42:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 09:06:07 PM
If I'd have been in I would've confronted him on numerous things and wouldn't have cared about the bosses panicking as I made my way to him. He came to us, not the other way round so I would've not been worried about any repercussions on my behalf.



Great promotion for the comic too as you're required to be in uniform for all public functions and official visits. I reckon they booked the visit around you, John.








Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 April, 2013, 09:57:19 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 April, 2013, 09:06:07 PM
I'm all over the shop when it comes to my politics, left, right and centre, as you may know

Most folk are. Everyone in the country agrees that medical care should be free, that murderers and sex offenders belong in the clink, that everyone should do some kind of work. It's the nutters at both extremes of the spectrum who make all the noise and keep the system in paralysis over special interest shite which most folk have no strong opinion on either way.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 April, 2013, 01:40:48 AM
This will never work, but a higher number of signatories will put some more meat on the inevitable "IDS snootily dismisses XXXXXX voters demands" stories: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 April, 2013, 07:19:31 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 03 April, 2013, 01:40:48 AM
This will never work, but a higher number of signatories will put some more meat on the inevitable "IDS snootily dismisses XXXXXX voters demands" stories: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week

It's an old trope: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3195040.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3195040.stm)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2013, 09:45:30 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 03 April, 2013, 01:40:48 AM
This will never work, but a higher number of signatories will put some more meat on the inevitable "IDS snootily dismisses XXXXXX voters demands" stories: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week

already dismissed by IDS.  Well over 300 million signatories and climbing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 April, 2013, 10:36:20 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2013, 09:45:30 AM
Well over 300 million signatories and climbing.


Exaggerating a bit there.

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2013, 04:40:28 PM
currently 383,985. 

Or was the exaggeration on the part of IDS?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 April, 2013, 05:05:46 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2013, 04:40:28 PM
currently 383,985. 

Or was the exaggeration on the part of IDS?

You had said 300 million!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 April, 2013, 05:06:04 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2013, 04:40:28 PM
currently 383,985. 

Or was the exaggeration on the part of IDS?

You had said 300 million!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 03 April, 2013, 09:41:12 PM
According to the BBC there are seven social classes in the U.K. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22007058)

Which one are you a part of? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22000973)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MercZ on 03 April, 2013, 10:51:02 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 02 April, 2013, 06:51:13 PM
According to this Fox News piece (http://video.foxnews.com/v/2243233613001/gov-snyder-its-about-bringing-more-jobs-to-michigan/), it's all the fault of uppity black union leaders who eat too many burgers.

It's the common theme in media coverage here about Detroit, it has been since the first black mayor was elected (Coleman Young). They had a field day with Kwame Kilpatrick's corruption stuff being exposed, or assessing the impact of Young's 20 year mayor term, during which Detroit began to fall apart. The rhetoric is masked by something like "urban" politicians taxing the crap out of "hard workers" (which refers more specifically to upper middle class and executives, rather than factory workers...) and destroying Detroit that way. Nothing to do with, apparently, the decline of the American auto industry, though they blame that one on the unions too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 04 April, 2013, 04:26:17 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 March, 2013, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 March, 2013, 01:56:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 March, 2013, 02:03:07 AM
WTF North Korea ::)

^^This.

Bill Hicks's disqualification of the 1991 Gulf war on the grounds that the definition of a war is when two armies are fighting is probably relevant here. A war of annihilation between the world's only superpower and a country which depends on welfare handouts from China just to feed (some of) its people would be over before we all go back to work on Tuesday.

The fat kid's only acting out because he has a new step-Daddy  (http://www.ft.com/indepth/china-leadership-transition) and wants to see how far stamping his feet and shouting will get him (same as a few other dependents (http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20130329_ap_foreignfirmsseekactionfromchinasnewleaders.html)). There's an awful lot of newly-mega-rich countries in that region who are doing too well out of the financial collapse of Western capitalism to let the Special Unit kid shit in the pool and spoil the party.

I hope your right, Sauch - and certainly North Korea's traditional allies seem far from impressed.
But incredibley silly, and scary talk coming from that place..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 April, 2013, 07:05:17 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 04 April, 2013, 04:26:17 PM
I hope your right, Sauch - and certainly North Korea's traditional allies seem far from impressed. But incredibley silly, and scary talk coming from that place..

Don't take my word for it. The financial sector's normally as skittish as a fawn; the slightest sign of social unrest or political instability in a region and the boys in stripy shirts and red braces have their billions out of there before the morning bell has rung. If the folk who make it their business to cultivate direct access to government agencies and military intelligence thought there was the slightest chance that the US and China were prepared to let this escalate, then shares in Samsung (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=005930.KS#symbol=005930.ks;range=1y;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;) and Hyundai (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=011760.KS) would already be dropping through the floor.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 04 April, 2013, 07:16:53 PM
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2013/04/04/2013040401314.html

Somebody's moving their troops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 April, 2013, 07:33:28 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 04 April, 2013, 07:16:53 PM
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2013/04/04/2013040401314.html

Somebody's moving their troops.

But Chinese state media (http://english.cntv.cn/program/newsupdate/20130404/105239.shtml) are playing down the threat.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 06 April, 2013, 12:52:21 AM
Fernandez Called 'Old Hag' By Uruguay President. (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/kirchner-called-old-hag-uruguay-president-110023682.html#zlxNiWm) This president of Uruguay has apparently been shot six times,done fourteen years in jail and donates 90% of his monthly salary to charity (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493) so I don't think he'll care much about what the Argentinian president will say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 April, 2013, 09:23:20 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 06 April, 2013, 12:52:21 AM
Fernandez Called 'Old Hag' By Uruguay President. (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/kirchner-called-old-hag-uruguay-president-110023682.html#zlxNiWm) This president of Uruguay has apparently been shot six times,done fourteen years in jail and donates 90% of his monthly salary to charity (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243493) so I don't think he'll care much about what the Argentinian president will say.

What a character; like Chavez without the ego and showbiz aspirations:

Quote"I don't feel poor. Poor people are those who only work to try to keep an expensive lifestyle, and always want more and more ... This is a matter of freedom. If you don't have many possessions then you don't need to work all your life like a slave to sustain them, and therefore you have more time for yourself ...

(addressing the Rio+20 summit in June last year): Do we want the model of development and consumption of the rich countries? Does this planet have enough resources so seven or eight billion can have the same level of consumption and waste that today is seen in rich societies? It is this level of hyper-consumption that is harming our planet." Mujica accuses most world leaders of having a "blind obsession to achieve growth with consumption, as if the contrary would mean the end of the world".

This year he has also been under fire because of two controversial moves. Uruguay's Congress recently passed a bill which legalised abortions for pregnancies up to 12 weeks. Unlike his predecessor, Mujica did not veto it. He is also supporting a debate on the legalisation of the consumption of cannabis, in a bill that would also give the state the monopoly over its trade. "Consumption of cannabis is not the most worrying thing, drug-dealing is the real problem," he says.


Being a little odd and standing outside society allows you the freedom to challenge orthodoxy, and it's rare to even hear a head of state speak frankly and pragmatically about an issue such as drug laws - or see a latin politician with the cajones to go against The Vatican on the issue of abortion. Having said that, Fernandez es una chica hermosa ; either every female in Uruguay looks like Eva Mendez or Mujica needs his eyes tested :

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRJF2_usTRF1ro6kk65T86bKLhVp-N8gIifrVqwi6pDQggmWwcw0g)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 April, 2013, 01:46:39 PM
I think it's worth pointing out, to those offended by people cheapening the death of a human being in order to make a political statement -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/05/pm-osborne-linking-philpott-welfare

It's fine, even the folk at the top do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 April, 2013, 05:17:50 PM
(http://www.tiananmensquare.co.uk/wp-content/themes/ts/images/bg.jpg)
(http://www.defendtherighttoprotest.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/miners-strike-orgreave.jpg)

Spot the difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 08 April, 2013, 05:40:42 PM
Well we didn't use heavy weapons and machine guns that said the dear old gov used five and all its naughty tricks to destroy a trade union, the only time we evr had a national police force so i for one am glad thw wicked witch of the west is no more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 08 April, 2013, 06:52:24 PM
I thought this article in the Guardian was well considered:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-death-etiquette

This'll probably be my only contribution to any debate on this thread. Anyone that has me on Twitter or Facebook probably already knows my feelings on the matter anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2013, 07:00:55 PM
How I would love to live in China because it is such a great country with more freedom for its people than us saps in Great Britain. I suppose you could say our freedom was eroded when Labour got into power and made our population the most watched with a swathe of new laws.

Enough of that though lets just listen to Amnesty shall we  ;)

Amnesty, which compiles its report every year, opposes capital punishment in all circumstances, regardless of allegations against those facing the death penalty.

It noted that the U.S. shares its dubious ranking with countries like China, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, which round out the top five. China was by far the worst offender, and the group said it suspects that thousands were executed last year, but they could not provide an estimate because those numbers are suppresse

China the land of freedom! Remember the June Fourth Incident were no protesters died, no neither do I, as quite a lot of them died but not in that square but we always seem to forget that :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 April, 2013, 07:14:01 PM
Running down working men with tanks... running them down with horses... one is as bad a s the other.
I believe that is the point I was making...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2013, 07:17:56 PM
No probs with that Richmond, just pointing out that people did actually die in China during those events!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 April, 2013, 07:34:25 PM
Hggnnnn!
Ah, I'm going for a shower..!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 April, 2013, 08:03:14 PM
Apparently one of them wee fellas from One Direction tweeted about yer woman dying, and none of their fans knew who she was.

I'm not on twitter, but I'd bet certain comedians are havin' a field day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 08 April, 2013, 08:11:21 PM
Why should the youngsters know about Thatcher. They have their own ogres like war criminal Blair and economy smashing Brown.






V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 April, 2013, 08:21:50 PM


Well at the end of the day she was someone's mother, even if that somone happened to like getting involved in the odd coup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Thatcher).


Must've been something in his upbringing.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 April, 2013, 08:39:20 PM
Quote from: vzzbux on 08 April, 2013, 08:11:21 PM
Why should the youngsters know about Thatcher. They have their own ogres like war criminal Blair and economy smashing Brown.

I'm not sure I can find it in myself to hate Thatcher or Blair or Brown.

Henry VIII, however, was a total bastard. I'm glad he's dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 April, 2013, 09:10:52 PM
Arguing that the actions of any political figure are/were entirely good or bad is a sure sign you're talking out of your hole. The infrastructure which underpins the Bundesautobahn network has long been the envy of the world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 April, 2013, 09:16:54 PM

I saw lots of people on Facebook happy that Thatcher happy that she's died, I ask them why, many replies such as don't know as just follow other people and kept want attention at them!

Sad world! She our leader of UK, yes many good and bad things with her. but still the old leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 April, 2013, 09:32:31 PM
I also enjoy Fanta, the Volkswagen beetle, and the jet propulsion engine.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: darnmarr on 08 April, 2013, 09:34:27 PM
And a stronger version of concrete.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 08 April, 2013, 09:35:46 PM
While I'm quite enjoying the hysteria and vitriol and appalled at the lionisation from some quarters, Billy Bragg sums it up nicely

From Billy Bragg, Calgary, AB, Canada, on the death of Margaret Thatcher:

This is not a time for celebration. The death of Margaret Thatcher is nothing more than a salient reminder of how Britain got into the mess that we are in today. Of why ordinary working people are no longer able to earn enough from one job to support a family; of why there is a shortage of decent affordable housing; of why domestic growth is driven by credit, not by real incomes; of why tax-payers are forced to top up wages; of why a spiteful government seeks to penalise the poor for having an extra bedroom; of why Rupert Murdoch became so powerful; of why cynicism and greed became the hallmarks of our society.

Raising a glass to the death of an infirm old lady changes none of this. The only real antidote to cynicism is activism. Don't celebrate - organise!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 April, 2013, 09:44:03 PM
Dresden is a fine showcase for late-20th century architecture.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 08 April, 2013, 09:56:21 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 08 April, 2013, 09:35:46 PM
While I'm quite enjoying the hysteria and vitriol and appalled at the lionisation from some quarters, Billy Bragg sums it up nicely

From Billy Bragg, Calgary, AB, Canada, on the death of Margaret Thatcher:

This is not a time for celebration. The death of Margaret Thatcher is nothing more than a salient reminder of how Britain got into the mess that we are in today. Of why ordinary working people are no longer able to earn enough from one job to support a family; of why there is a shortage of decent affordable housing; of why domestic growth is driven by credit, not by real incomes; of why tax-payers are forced to top up wages; of why a spiteful government seeks to penalise the poor for having an extra bedroom; of why Rupert Murdoch became so powerful; of why cynicism and greed became the hallmarks of our society.

Raising a glass to the death of an infirm old lady changes none of this. The only real antidote to cynicism is activism. Don't celebrate - organise!

^ This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pete Wells on 09 April, 2013, 12:50:15 AM
Ah, good old Billy Bragg, Morrissey and Elvis Costello are getting lots of column inches today, s'nice! Being old, a bit drunk and waaaaay out of touch I wanna ask, do the yoof of today have decent protest bands/singers? All I see are One Direction dancing with David Cameron and rappers babbling about how many Rolexes and bitches they have.

I know this ain't particularly political (I'd hate our young people to get all their views from popular music) but are there bands with a bit of a message kicking around? Ha, I realise just how old and wrinkly this post makes me sound!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 12:52:14 AM
Pink did a good one ripping into the president!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Silent_Bomber on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:42 AM
Being that I was born in the early 80s I'm not really in much of a position to comment, but I must say that every time I see videos, or pictures of 70s Britain before Thatcher it looks like a miserable, disheveled craphole and I get the feeling I should be thankful for growing up in the 80s (except for the music). 

If Thatcher did so much bad for Britain then why does it seem to look so much worse before she came to power? or do they just handpick bad photos whenever they do anything on the 70s or something?

Also Carry On at your Own Convenience didn't paint a very good picture of the Trade Unions, maybe that's not the best source for evidence but its the only one which comes to mind at the moment  :lol:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 09 April, 2013, 02:50:44 AM
things look worse in the 70s because they're older and daggier and a lot of the good things are intangible and can't be photographed.  Unions, like governments, can be lazy and corrupt as well as useful.  Attacking the unions very existence is as sensible as saying we shouldn't have government because Kim Jung Un runs one or that we should do without music because One Direction are musical.  It's more fun to read about silly demarcation rules (like the argument in the BBC about whether the clock on Playschool was covered by the Electrical or Carpenters union) than it is to read about increased workplace safety.
  Thatcher's love of freedom seems to have been limited along tribal lines - she was into it for the Eastern Bloc, not so much so for the South Africans and Chileans.  She didn't just abstain from any boycots, but positively encouraged Pinochet.
  I love 80s music but I would - I was 17 in 1980.

yours, stillintoHeaven17,

Floyd
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: darnmarr on 09 April, 2013, 03:14:18 AM
Quote from: Silent_Bomber on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:42 AM

Also Carry On at your Own Convenience didn't paint a very good picture of the Trade Unions.
Never a truer word said:
'Carry On at your Own Convenience' did not paint a very good picture of the Trade Unions.
I agree. It didn't. If anything 'Carry On at your Own Convenience'  painted a very bad picture of the Trade Unions. A very bad picture indeed.

alright, a caveat... I too have been drinkinage

She wasn't my prime minister and whether you think she saved Britain or destroyed Britain she's certainly a big factor in the Britain you have now. The whole tone of the galaxy's greatest comic owes something to her. She had a democratically elected MP from Northern Ireland starve himself to death rather than acknowledge his status as a poliitical prisoner, and if your ball landed in her garden, she wouldn't give it back. But she also was an old woman suffering from a horrific illness who just recently died. My sympathies go those who respect and revere her, my sympathies go to those who think she ruined it all. But Maggies gone a long time now so if this is a political thread,- lets talk politics and not history. I was happy to bury my head in the progs when all that 'up the IRA ' crap was happening around me because I reckoned the future was way more important than the past and I still think that's true.

Also 'the heaven seventeen' rock.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 April, 2013, 03:25:36 AM
Quote from: Silent_Bomber on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:42 AM
Being that I was born in the early 80s I'm not really in much of a position to comment, but I must say that every time I see videos, or pictures of 70s Britain before Thatcher it looks like a miserable, disheveled craphole and I get the feeling I should be thankful for growing up in the 80s (except for the music). 

If Thatcher did so much bad for Britain then why does it seem to look so much worse before she came to power? or do they just handpick bad photos whenever they do anything on the 70s or something?

Because it was a complete shithole. If it wasn't for the fact that we had nukes the US probably would've invaded to protect our oil and bring us democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 April, 2013, 03:32:42 AM
I was sitting in front of a couple of women on the bus earlier (Liverpool) and they were very loudly relaying a stream of extremely crass jokes to the everyone on board. I'm hardly the most sociable person on earth but I don't recall ever feeling that uncomfortable in public before.

Though of all the horrible things I've heard today that dig at 80's music was easily the most shocking and reprehensible.  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: darnmarr on 09 April, 2013, 03:42:16 AM
'Temptation' is a great song.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2013, 12:02:22 PM
A rich white woman died at the age of eightysomething. To some she was a hero and to others a villain. To me she was just an old lady due the same level of respect as any old lady.

3,500 children under the age of five die every day due in large part to the policies applied by that rich white lady when she was our leader - policies followed by every leader we've had since.

That's why we don't need leaders or heroes to follow.  Lead yourself - it's your life, after all.

We are the ones we've been waiting for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 09 April, 2013, 12:40:28 PM
Thatcher's dead, but Thatcherism is still thriving. I wonder did she need to be sure that her heirs in government had fully cheesed the I-pod before shuffling off?

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 April, 2013, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2013, 12:02:22 PMshe was just an old lady due the same level of respect as any old lady.

Couldn't disagree more. Nobody is automatically deserving of respect, certainly not for just being old or for being female - respect is earned, it's a reflection of how people regard you based on your words and actions.

I have no respect at all for the evil old witch, and have actually just arranged to meet a friend tomorrow night to split a bottle of bubbly, fulfilling a vow I made to myself over 20 years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 09 April, 2013, 01:12:56 PM
Quote from: Pete Wells on 09 April, 2013, 12:50:15 AM
Ah, good old Billy Bragg, Morrissey and Elvis Costello are getting lots of column inches today, s'nice! Being old, a bit drunk and waaaaay out of touch I wanna ask, do the yoof of today have decent protest bands/singers? All I see are One Direction dancing with David Cameron and rappers babbling about how many Rolexes and bitches they have.

I know this ain't particularly political (I'd hate our young people to get all their views from popular music) but are there bands with a bit of a message kicking around? Ha, I realise just how old and wrinkly this post makes me sound!
Get with the programme, grandad! While the early 80s were clearly the heyday of political pop, there's always room for some social commentary in the life of a disaffected youth. Here's Frank Turner, formerly of shouty types Million Dead, with a number perfectly in tune  that picture of Mrs T posing alongside Saville which was doing the rounds yesterday. Thatcher Fucked the Kids (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjfSucUhJiQ).

Quote from: vzzbux on 08 April, 2013, 08:11:21 PM
Why should the youngsters know about Thatcher. They have their own ogres like war criminal Blair and economy smashing Brown.
Bit of basic general knowledge. Fairly certain I knew who Churchill was when I was 14.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:06 PM
Best reaction I've seen so far has been Irvine Welsh, who said that the private sector should pay for Thatcher's state funeral.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 April, 2013, 02:47:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 April, 2013, 01:04:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2013, 12:02:22 PMshe was just an old lady due the same level of respect as any old lady.

Couldn't disagree more. Nobody is automatically deserving of respect, certainly not for just being old or for being female - respect is earned, it's a reflection of how people regard you based on your words and actions.

I have no respect at all for the evil old witch, and have actually just arranged to meet a friend tomorrow night to split a bottle of bubbly, fulfilling a vow I made to myself over 20 years ago.

This. Wholeheartedly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2013, 02:58:41 PM
Quote from: Silent_Bomber on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:42 AM
Being that I was born in the early 80s I'm not really in much of a position to comment, but I must say that every time I see videos, or pictures of 70s Britain before Thatcher it looks like a miserable, disheveled craphole and I get the feeling I should be thankful for growing up in the 80s (except for the music). 

If Thatcher did so much bad for Britain then why does it seem to look so much worse before she came to power? or do they just handpick bad photos whenever they do anything on the 70s or something?

Also Carry On at your Own Convenience didn't paint a very good picture of the Trade Unions, maybe that's not the best source for evidence but its the only one which comes to mind at the moment  :lol:

No, the old videos were right, Britain was a shit hole in the '70s.  I'm actually old enough to have lived through it, not just read about it in a load of left-wing publications.  "The great nationalised industries", who are they trying to kid.  They were great if you liked power cuts; a three day working week, (of course, that meant getting paid for only three days); transport workers always on strike, so you couldn't even get to your three day working factory; unburied bodies in Liverpool; rubbish piled high and ten foot deep in Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square 'cos the bin men were on strike; '77 the firemen were on strike, (I can remember that 'cos I was drafted in with the rest of the Regiment to drive the Green Goddesses); 29,000,000 working days lost through strikes in 1978; closed shop trade unions, where you had to join a union if you wanted a certain job; industries where you couldn't get a job unless you knew someone; very high mortgage rates, very high inflation; Denis Healey having to go to the IMF with a begging bowl; controls on how much money you could take out of the country, £50 if my memory serves me right (think Cyprus, only worse).  Oh! and square steering wheels on some models of Austin Allegros, that was a design classic!!  Yea, the '70s were bloody marvellous!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 April, 2013, 03:29:13 PM
People with no idea who Thatcher was 'ecstatic' that she's dead
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/people-with-no-idea-who-thatcher-was-ecstatic-that-shes-dead-2013040865066
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 April, 2013, 03:32:43 PM
Saw that yesterday, and it made me chuckle. It's like I said to a mate:

"I don't remember you being this happy when she left Downing street. Maybe it's because YOU WERE ONLY SEVEN!"

I don't think I even knew what politics was when I was seven.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 09 April, 2013, 04:22:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2013, 02:58:41 PM
Quote from: Silent_Bomber on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:42 AM
Being that I was born in the early 80s I'm not really in much of a position to comment, but I must say that every time I see videos, or pictures of 70s Britain before Thatcher it looks like a miserable, disheveled craphole and I get the feeling I should be thankful for growing up in the 80s (except for the music). 

If Thatcher did so much bad for Britain then why does it seem to look so much worse before she came to power? or do they just handpick bad photos whenever they do anything on the 70s or something?

Also Carry On at your Own Convenience didn't paint a very good picture of the Trade Unions, maybe that's not the best source for evidence but its the only one which comes to mind at the moment  :lol:

No, the old videos were right, Britain was a shit hole in the '70s.  I'm actually old enough to have lived through it, not just read about it in a load of left-wing publications.  "The great nationalised industries", who are they trying to kid.  They were great if you liked power cuts; a three day working week, (of course, that meant getting paid for only three days); transport workers always on strike, so you couldn't even get to your three day working factory; unburied bodies in Liverpool; rubbish piled high and ten foot deep in Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square 'cos the bin men were on strike; '77 the firemen were on strike, (I can remember that 'cos I was drafted in with the rest of the Regiment to drive the Green Goddesses); 29,000,000 working days lost through strikes in 1978; closed shop trade unions, where you had to join a union if you wanted a certain job; industries where you couldn't get a job unless you knew someone; very high mortgage rates, very high inflation; Denis Healey having to go to the IMF with a begging bowl; controls on how much money you could take out of the country, £50 if my memory serves me right (think Cyprus, only worse).  Oh! and square steering wheels on some models of Austin Allegros, that was a design classic!!  Yea, the '70s were bloody marvellous!!

Oh, the 70's was all that - and more!
Bloody brilliant decade though, is my opinion. Still, i suspect it was harder, and a lot less enjoyable - at times, for my parents.
Those that didnt live through, or can remember the 70's, i can well imagine it must seem like Britain then was a third World country - which by today's standards it probably was. Certainly it was only a few steps away from total collapse on more than one occasion.
And the early/mid 80's was just as harsh and just as extreme.
Strange, and turbulent times to be growing up in, but im glad that i did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 April, 2013, 04:57:27 PM
Don't talk to me about the 70s.  I remember them only too well.
Building snowmen with my dad, cutting out dinosaurs at playschool, imagining the baby Jesus's head as a giant sweet when we got to the relevant line in 'Away in a Manger'.
Heady times, man.  Yep, I remember the 70s (or about 2 to 3 years' worth of them anyway).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 05:14:04 PM
Quote from: radiator on 09 April, 2013, 01:35:06 PM
Best reaction I've seen so far has been Irvine Welsh, who said that the private sector should pay for Thatcher's state funeral.

It would set them back £5 million, apparently (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/former-prime-minister-margaret-thatcher-1819497). I think Welsh was grabbing a backie off the freewheelin' Ken Loach's more aphoristic response (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2013/apr/09/margaret-thatcher-death-reaction-funeral-live):

QuoteI think her funeral should be privatised, put out to competitive tender, and we should accept the cheapest funeral. I'm sure it's what she would have wanted.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 09 April, 2013, 05:16:00 PM
Quote from: El Pops on 09 April, 2013, 03:32:43 PM
Saw that yesterday, and it made me chuckle. It's like I said to a mate:

"I don't remember you being this happy when she left Downing street. Maybe it's because YOU WERE ONLY SEVEN!"

I don't think I even knew what politics was when I was seven.

Must admit I was one of those who was very happy when she left.  I celebrated loudly.

But I was young back then and had been growing up in a mining town hit with 33% unemployment and seen most of the people around me pushed out of work.

As I've aged I've kind of re-evaluated her to an extent.  I do not like the way she went about it but change was needed and the more middle ground politics we have now are possible because we don't have unions running the country but at the same time we haven't entirely ditched good rights and protection either.

not a fan at all but I guess she was a certain person for a certain time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 April, 2013, 04:57:27 PM
Yep, I remember the 70s (or about 2 to 3 years' worth of them anyway).

Same here. I don't know how old Old Tankie actually is, but his description of the seventies sounds a lot more like the collective picture of the seventies drawn by TV and newspapers than a personal reminiscence, drawn from direct experience. I remember the regular power cuts he mentions (which lasted well into the eighties), but I'm sure I gained my knowledge of unburied bodies in seventies Liverpool from the same sources as he did.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:03:15 PM
Yes the 70's were crap in certain places and we all know why but obviously some will deny that it had anything to do with the Unions, which I find sad!

As for Thatcher, I agreed with some of her policies and not with others but hey, she was elected by the majority 3 times and after she went John Major was elected by a majority. You can find the numbers online, if you so desire it!

Now for the Champagne Socialist Billy Bragg, who I find to be just a wee bit of a hypocrite (just like most left wing comedians).
He mentions that there has to be two wage earners nowadays to survive. I beg to differ, many people manage to support a large family with both parents having no jobs! My parents both worked in the 70's and 80's, strange that!

Affordable decent housing, now this is an interesting one! Maggie gave every council house occupant the chance to own their own home at a very reasonable price. The money earned from these sales was supposed to go back into the system to provide new council houses. I know none of the Conservative councils did this because they are evil but at least all the Labour councils did build new houses. Hang on a second, they didn't, weird that isn't it!

Domestic growth is driven by credit, he could have a point there but at what stage does this begin and end and who do we blame in this want it now culture, which is supported by all people from all parties. The only credit that I have ever had is my mortgage and I don't own a credit card, or as I like to call it, a DEBT card!

Topping up wages, why! I could go back to the above answer of everyone wanting an X-Box with expensive games, the latest smart phone, etc... Every generation has the list of wants, I think it was certain jeans and trainers when I was a school. This will never end, it's just how you are brought up that helps you deal with this fact of life.

The spare bedroom conundrum is a difficult one. Obviously if you have an extra bedroom who cares but this should only come into effect when you have a situation where an individual or couple live in a 3 or 4 bedroom council house. They should move on to something smaller but only if available. Just think of the money they will save not heating such a big place for a start and the upkeep of having fewer rooms!

As for Rupert Murdoch, if you watch Sky or any of the programmes on his stations then shut the fuck up. If you believe in something so bloody strongly then follow it through at all times! Many folks have become mega powerful including the hypocrite who was in charge of Apple but people loved him because he made nice stuff and overtook the evil Microsoft. I always find these debates hilarious but going back to Murdoch, don't buy his products if you hate him. Just one thing, don't tell me not to buy something, if I want Virgin and an iPad then I'll fucking well buy them both as it's a free market, to an extent!

Cynicism and greed, well I am a cynic with a few things but I have never been greedy. I know what I can afford and what is most important to me in life, perhaps other people should start to understand what is really important in life!

I had to write all that, as I said earlier Billy Bragg is not someone who I would follow in his two up two down, or doesn't he live in a house like that anymore! I wonder if he has taken money from the hand of Murdoch, now that would be interesting but I can't be arsed to find out! If you are going to slag something off then please make sure that you don't leave yourself open to being called out on such things!

As for people celebrating the Death of Maggie, well that's very nice of them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 07:33:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:03:15 PM
As for Thatcher, I agreed with some of her policies and not with others but hey, she was elected by the majority 3 times and after she went John Major was elected by a majority. You can find the numbers online, if you so desire it!

Yes you can, John. Thatcher never won a majority of the public vote:

1979: 44% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1979

1983: 42% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1983

1987: 42% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1987

At that first election, she had only 2 million more votes than the ailing Labour administration. Whether you agree with the results thrown up by our odd electoral system, which delivered huge parliamentary majorities to both Thatcher and Blair after much less decisive electoral mandates from the voting public, is another matter. Most independent observers agree that it was the squaddies who caught a South Atlantic suntan who actually won the 1983 general election; Thatcher had been odds-on to lose until that point.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:03:15 PM
Now for the Champagne Socialist Billy Bragg, who I find to be just a wee bit of a hypocrite (just like most left wing comedians).

He mentions that there has to be two wage earners nowadays to survive. I beg to differ, many people manage to support a large family with both parents having no jobs!


The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:38:43 PM
It's the majority of the system we use at this moment in time. Until we adopt the Libs version then that is how the vote will always be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 07:43:38 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:03:15 PM
I know [...] what is most important to me in life, perhaps other people should start to understand what is really important in life!

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:50:20 PM
That goes without saying :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 07:50:51 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.

The majority of the welfare bill goes to pensioners and child tax credits (which all working families received until recently):

Quote20.3 million families receive some kind of benefit (64% of all families), about 8.7 million of them pensioners. For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income (30% of all families), around 5.3 million of them pensioners. The number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer now because of changes to child tax credits that mean some working families who previously got a small amount now get nothing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Business/Pix/cartoon/2013/4/6/1365266927421/GU-2-001.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 07:55:56 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 April, 2013, 07:38:43 PM
It's the majority of the system we use at this moment in time. Until we adopt the Libs version then that is how the vote will always be.

It's the false sense of public confidence and perceived democratic mandate which that perverse system encourages which leads Prime Ministers to rule like US Presidents (who are directly elected) and make disastrous decisions like the Poll tax and the Iraq War - disastrous and unpopular decisions which would never have passed a public vote.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:56:40 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 April, 2013, 07:50:51 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.

The majority of the welfare bill goes to pensioners and child tax credits (which all working families received until recently):

Quote20.3 million families receive some kind of benefit (64% of all families), about 8.7 million of them pensioners. For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income (30% of all families), around 5.3 million of them pensioners. The number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer now because of changes to child tax credits that mean some working families who previously got a small amount now get nothing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/06/welfare-britain-facts-myths

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Business/Pix/cartoon/2013/4/6/1365266927421/GU-2-001.jpg)

the thing is that methadone subscription alone cost's around 60 million and I'm not getting started on JSA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 09 April, 2013, 07:57:11 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.
The simple joy of putting huge numbers of people out of work before turning to those still in work and saying "All our problems are down to this lazy lot". I think it's known as divide and conquer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:00:44 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:56:40 PM
the thing is that methadone subscription alone cost's around 60 million and I'm not getting started on JSA. Yeah, well, you can prove anything with facts.

FTFY.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:01:51 PM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 09 April, 2013, 07:57:11 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.
The simple joy of putting huge numbers of people out of work before turning to those still in work and saying "All our problems are down to this lazy lot". I think it's known as divide and conquer.

If they are actively looking for work then i have no problem, but 90% of people out of work are not. I have seen people filling their books in the jobcentre 5 mins before their appointment
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 09 April, 2013, 08:03:19 PM
90% of people out of work aren't really looking for work?
That's fascinating. Please post the link where this fact of yours can be found.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:06:48 PM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 09 April, 2013, 08:03:19 PM
90% of people out of work aren't really looking for work?
That's fascinating. Please post the link where this fact of yours can be found.

It came from personal experience, Nearly all of the people i know out of work are not looking. Why work 40 hours a week to come away with less money and more effort
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:06:48 PM
It came from personal experience

Anecdotes do not equal data, and the people you know are not a statistically valid sample. Stop making shit up and passing your prejudices off as 'facts'.

Gah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:14:43 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:06:48 PM
It came from personal experience

Anecdotes do not equal data, and the people you know are not a statistically valid sample. Stop making shit up and passing your prejudices off as 'facts'.

Gah.

Jim

It was an opinion not a fact, Merely putting my 2 pence in, sorry if i have offended anyone
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 08:15:36 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:56:40 PM
the thing is that methadone subscription alone cost's around 60 million and I'm not getting started on JSA.

I don't know many junkies or folk on methadone programs who indulge in the foreign travel you were complaining about; for obvious reasons, they prefer to stay near home. The UK has exactly the same rate of unemployment as the booming economy of Deutschland, so that's not the answer:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/oct/31/europe-unemployment-rate-by-country-eurozone

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:19:01 PM
It was in an article in a paper I read a few weeks ago, Foreign travel?  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 April, 2013, 08:23:41 PM
It would be much easier to allow the unemployed to live in poverty if we would just all buy into the idea that the poor choose to be poor.  They are lazy, well provided for by the state, and will quite possibly kill their children unless their benefits are slashed and they are forced into one of the large number of vacant and well paid jobs available.

Also, the wealthy create jobs, disabled people are just pretending, and North Korea are a genuine threat.  Return to your designated living area.  Your government is in control.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:24:29 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:14:43 PM
It was an opinion not a fact, Merely putting my 2 pence in, sorry if i have offended anyone

Don't be sorry, try not being a prejudiced fuckhead spouting ill-informed crap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 08:24:43 PM
Er, make that Sweden. The figures are really close together, okay!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2013, 08:27:53 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:19:01 PM
Foreign travel?  :-\

This, neebs:

Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:29:16 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:24:29 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:14:43 PM
It was an opinion not a fact, Merely putting my 2 pence in, sorry if i have offended anyone

Don't be sorry, try not being a prejudiced fuckhead spouting ill-informed crap.

ok thanks for the advice
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:30:13 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 April, 2013, 08:27:53 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:19:01 PM
Foreign travel?  :-\

This, neebs:

Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 07:37:30 PM
The story of our country, Don't work, Have kids, Go on holiday. Meanwhile all working tax payers pick up the slack.

Ahh i get u now sorry :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 April, 2013, 08:52:23 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2013, 08:09:40 PM
Quote from: Dredd Head on 09 April, 2013, 08:06:48 PM
It came from personal experience

Anecdotes do not equal data, and the people you know are not a statistically valid sample. Stop making shit up and passing your prejudices off as 'facts'.

Gah.

Jim

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2013, 10:58:16 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 April, 2013, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 April, 2013, 04:57:27 PM
Yep, I remember the 70s (or about 2 to 3 years' worth of them anyway).

Same here. I don't know how old Old Tankie actually is, but his description of the seventies sounds a lot more like the collective picture of the seventies drawn by TV and newspapers than a personal reminiscence, drawn from direct experience. I remember the regular power cuts he mentions (which lasted well into the eighties), but I'm sure I gained my knowledge of unburied bodies in seventies Liverpool from the same sources as he did.



I'm 56 next month which makes me more than old enough to remember the 70s personally.  Being an Essex boy, born and bred, of course I didn't stumble over the unburied bodies in Liverpool.  You can't personally experience everything that happened in a decade all round the country!!  I did though work on the production line at Ford's in Dagenham when the "workers" were stopping the production line over the tiniest dispute.  I did work on the London Underground and saw, first hand, the restricted practices going on there.  I did have my journeys to work curtailed by striking transport workers.  I did help my old man in his business when the lights kept going off through power cuts.  I couldn't leave the country with more than 50 quid in my pocket.  I was a squaddie and helped to cover the firemens strike in '77.  So, I do have personal experience about the "wonderful" pre-Thatcher days.  It's not me who's getting their history through the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 April, 2013, 11:12:20 PM
QuoteSo, I do have personal experience about the "wonderful" pre-Thatcher days.  It's not me who's getting their history through the media.

It's hard to argue with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 09 April, 2013, 11:29:35 PM
With respect to both sides in this argument, I have a problem with the logic of Thatcher's supporters:

Life used to be bad, pre-Thatcherism

Thatcherism happened

Life got better (in the opinion of many)

Thatcherism is therefore good

I can't subscribe to that. I can accept that, yes, there needed to be change but that doesn't mean that Thatcherism had to happen. It certainly doesn't mean that the worst excesses of Thatcher and her government - such as the significant erosion of workers' rights, the imposition of the invidious poll tax, and the very 1980s principle that greed is good and socialist thinking is bad - should be seen as acceptable.

History happened - fine. That doesn't mean it had to happen that way. As science fiction fans, you should all understand that.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 10 April, 2013, 12:35:18 AM
well said Trout.  There's a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc involved in accounts of her life, along the lines of:
- Thatcher happened
- the cold war ended
so Thatcher made the Cold War end. 
  As you say, we're all into Sci Fi and counterfactuals.  Would the Cold War really not have ended without Thatcher?  I'm stuffed if I know how she made a difference to it at all. 
  As for the 'she took us out of a socialist hell-hole', well, I wasn't there.  It's definitely not the case, as her hero Hayek would have it, that having progressive taxes and a social welfare system lead inexorably to being East Germany
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 12:56:54 AM
You mention unions, are these the same unions that took the piss constantly. How many stories have we heard about what went on but I suppose those stories are ALL made up.
Arthur 'Hero of the Miners' Scargill made a terrible mistake when he said he would bring down the government and look what happened. By the way, I think he's being evicted out of his home by that very union now, so poetic!
The problem is that its always the extreme left and extreme right that battle it out and the moderates are lost in the dust storm that blows up and you can thank the press and TV for that.

I don't think anyone has said it was universally better under Thatcher but I tell you what, she gave people the chance to get on and better themselves. It might have been hard with certain industries closing because they couldn't compete but I suppose we could still have miners now doing a dangerous job by the thousands. Then again what about the greenhouse gases. You can't have it both ways folks.
By the way, my background is from the pit villages and I've been down a mine and that is a shit existence but if you think we should have people doing that type of work okay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: flintlockjaw on 10 April, 2013, 02:42:43 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 12:56:54 AM

The problem is that its always the extreme left and extreme right that battle it out and the moderates are lost in the dust storm that blows up and you can thank the press and TV for that.

Amen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 10 April, 2013, 04:31:25 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22087702
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 06:17:42 AM
Why not put a lovely header above your link, like Racist Thatcher the truth is out!

I always love this sort of stuff from people who know you can't slander the dead and end up in court. I could waffle on about Australias navy not long ago stopping those same migrants trying to get into the country but that wouldn't be fair.

Why did he wait until now to say that, apart from not being able to be taken to court. He says that he couldn't believe what she said and luckily his wife was out of earshot, as she is Malaysian born. What a joke, if that had been me I'd have called her out and made her repeat it in front of my wife and other witnesses. That fact alone speaks volumes about the man if you ask me.
Very poor point put forward, must try harder!

By the way, I shall take all you lot going on about the milk song to task later. If you want to save me the trouble search the web and look at what Labour did the decade before and also why she was actually against stopping the milk. Damn I've given it all away ::)

Facts do ruin things don't they!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 10 April, 2013, 07:46:52 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 April, 2013, 07:55:56 PM
It's the false sense of public confidence and perceived democratic mandate which that perverse system encourages which leads Prime Ministers to rule like US Presidents (who are directly elected) and make disastrous decisions like the Poll tax and the Iraq War - disastrous and unpopular decisions which would never have passed a public vote.

THIS is absolutely correct and very insightful.  I liked Margaret Thatcher and (most of) her policies a great deal - except the treasonous Anglo-Irish Agreement (which intransigent Unionism effectively brought on itself) - she didn't get everything right or go about everything the right way, although I believe her motives were just and noble and right, but she also behaved in a very Presidential manner that continuously humiliated, ultimately alienated, and eventually motivated her cabinet colleagues to stage a bloodless coup on her premiership that the Conservative Party still have yet to fully recover from.

The U.K. is supposed  to be a parliamentary democracy but has since Lloyd George and the creation of the Cabinet Office become increasingly like a de facto presidential democracy, with the Prime Minister increasingly becoming more powerful at the expense of the Commons or for that matter the very notion of collective cabinet government, and Margaret Thatcher represented this unfortunate development.  Granted it was her sheer force of will imposed on her colleagues, the fact she pretty much ditched consensus politics over conviction politics wholesale, that got many of her signature and more controversial policies through, but it also ultimately sealed her political fate.

The Irish Free State Constitution of 1922 got it right (I believe), the powers of the chief executive - ironically titled as President of the Executive Council - were very constrained and restrained in nature, they effectively were the chairman of the board and moderator of a collective government rather than an all-powerful Great Leader, and who had to get approval from assembled members of the lower chamber for the cabinet, and again should any change of personnel happen in said cabinet... this is proper collective cabinet governance, one wonders how Margaret Thatcher would have fared in such a constitutional situation?

Of course, having a House of Lords that actually had teeth and could stop legislation in it's tracks also helps as well... but Lloyd George certainly saw to that one!

Here endeth the lesson.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 10 April, 2013, 07:55:29 AM
Quote from: Trout on 09 April, 2013, 11:29:35 PM
With respect to both sides in this argument, I have a problem with the logic of Thatcher's supporters:

Life used to be bad, pre-Thatcherism

Thatcherism happened

Life got better (in the opinion of many)

Thatcherism is therefore good

I can't subscribe to that. I can accept that, yes, there needed to be change but that doesn't mean that Thatcherism had to happen. It certainly doesn't mean that the worst excesses of Thatcher and her government - such as the significant erosion of workers' rights, the imposition of the invidious poll tax, and the very 1980s principle that greed is good and socialist thinking is bad - should be seen as acceptable.

History happened - fine. That doesn't mean it had to happen that way. As science fiction fans, you should all understand that.  :)

What Trout said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 April, 2013, 10:40:54 AM
QuoteWhat a joke, if that had been me I'd have called her out and made her repeat it in front of my wife and other witnesses. That fact alone speaks volumes about the man if you ask me.

or maybe its true. Maybe he thought that calling out a woman who was famous for not changing her mind would onlybe embarrassing for his wife.  Maybe there isn't a liberal conspiracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 April, 2013, 11:16:27 AM
Quote from: Temponaut on 10 April, 2013, 10:40:54 AM
QuoteWhat a joke, if that had been me I'd have called her out and made her repeat it in front of my wife and other witnesses. That fact alone speaks volumes about the man if you ask me.

or maybe its true. Maybe he thought that calling out a woman who was famous for not changing her mind would onlybe embarrassing for his wife.  Maybe there isn't a liberal conspiracy.

And Carol Thatcher had to learn it somewhere...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 April, 2013, 12:47:21 PM
In the 70s we had an abundance of affordable housing and almost full employment, a working man could expect to have a job for life and support his family. The bosses of companies earned maybe 10 or 20 times what their most basic workers earned.

Now we have mass unemployment as a permanent fact of life, and those people lucky enough to have a job are likely to be on casual or zero-hour contracts. Three in four benefit claimants are workers who need to claim benefits as well because they cannot support the family on what they are paid. CEOs now earn 100-200 times what their workers earn. Many children of workers who were thrown on the scrapheap by Thatcher when entire industries were destroyed have never known employment in their household - this world of benefit-dependency that the ConDems are always banging on about is her legacy.

So yes, she "won" against the unions - and ever since, the rich have gotten richer, the poor have gotten poorer, the bosses shaft us time and again and then walk away with payoffs and pensions - and the people we blame are the unemployed! I work for a big company in an office and people are always  bitching about their pay and changes that are being made to shifts/holidays etc. The difference is that they feel absolutely powerless, they can't even conceive of a system in which they'd have a say in this.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 10 April, 2013, 02:30:18 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 06:17:42 AM
Why not put a lovely header above your link, like Racist Thatcher the truth is out!

I always love this sort of stuff from people who know you can't slander the dead and end up in court. I could waffle on about Australias navy not long ago stopping those same migrants trying to get into the country but that wouldn't be fair.

Why did he wait until now to say that, apart from not being able to be taken to court. He says that he couldn't believe what she said and luckily his wife was out of earshot, as she is Malaysian born. What a joke, if that had been me I'd have called her out and made her repeat it in front of my wife and other witnesses. That fact alone speaks volumes about the man if you ask me.
Very poor point put forward, must try harder!

By the way, I shall take all you lot going on about the milk song to task later. If you want to save me the trouble search the web and look at what Labour did the decade before and also why she was actually against stopping the milk. Damn I've given it all away ::)

Facts do ruin things don't they!

Why didn't he say anything about it earlier?  Well everyone is giving their two cents about Thatcher, why shouldn't Bob Carr give his?
  I'm not sure what your point is in asking why he didn't make her repeat it in front of his wife.  Is picking fights with foreign dignitaries what politicians are supposed to do?It's great to hear that you'd have done it differently - that'll come in handy the next time a foreign PM drops in on the UK and says something to you that would offend your wife.  I don't have to worry about these situations myself; (a) because I married a Japanese, not a Malaysian and (b) because I don't meet Prime Ministers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 10 April, 2013, 06:22:40 PM
A bit off topic, but I never really got my head round the 'Palace coup' that slung her out, without giving vent to the Giant Lizard school of thought, I'd be interested in what (some) of you think?

I know there is a general handwave about the Poll tax but that seems to be it, was it really Pat Mills greysuits?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 April, 2013, 06:53:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2013, 10:58:16 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 April, 2013, 06:06:30 PM
I don't know how old Old Tankie actually is, but his description of the seventies sounds a lot more like the collective picture of the seventies drawn by TV and newspapers than a personal reminiscence, drawn from direct experience. I remember the regular power cuts he mentions (which lasted well into the eighties), but I'm sure I gained my knowledge of unburied bodies in seventies Liverpool from the same sources as he did.

I'm 56 next month which makes me more than old enough to remember the 70s personally ... You can't personally experience everything that happened in a decade all round the country!!  ... I do have personal experience about the "wonderful" pre-Thatcher days.  It's not me who's getting their history through the media.

That was my point, Tankie; your personal experience of the seventies is just that. Your impression of what happened in the wider world during that decade, on the other hand, is mediated by the same second hand sources as that of someone reading a newspaper account or a historical study of that time. For example, my Dad was a fireman at the time of the industrial action by the FBU to which you refer; consequently I have a very different personal experience and opinion of that episode than your own. That doesn't invalidate your experience of those events anymore than yours invalidates mine; all it proves is that subjective experience differs wildly, and that the only real way of discussing such matters is a sober analysis of the facts.

Any appraisal of the Thatcher government's response to the appalling industrial unrest which afflicted the country in the seventies has to also take into account the fact that the process of deregulation of the financial sector (continued by successive administrations) led directly to the greatest depression in recorded history, and that adjusting the balance of power in favour of employers has resulted in a situation where real-terms income for the majority of people are falling (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/mro/news-release/incomes-squeezed-more-than-in-previous-recessions/national-well-being-the-economy.html), and the incomes of those workers in the bottom 60% of earnings have been falling  for the last three decades (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:rC53CsbtrxcJ:research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/hbai/hbai2011/low_income_dynamics_1991_2005.pdf+&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiDZ7AKQVkgc2pRwJJT4AIyZAA24mRObSi4YOW8-tjqkhRkNva-eStXyjVX4WyppW0AWtk9a7aFqsL81E2NSGdW4gkVSY42Mu7gP0xkASPBRducdvULC_WHysFcqT-QBG6kZUXz&sig=AHIEtbTiPww0-DFIhQDxzAoB8pvxDVwm0A).  Whether you think our current difficulties are any better or worse than than those of the seventies probably depends on your own subjective experience and what you read in the papers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 07:03:02 PM
If you think the Oz situation couldn't be resolved on the spot diplomatically then so be it. If this did happen and he was terrified that it would've caused a diplomatic incident, probably along the lines of when some Oz bird touched the back of the Queen the other year, then god help us all.

It really is quite simple I would've thought. The racist Thatcher says her piece and he does a polite laugh. He then says to Maggie something along the lines of 'You must say that to my wife, she will love that' and then he introduces her. Now that wouldn't cause a major incident would it!

Now if he was so terrified that we would invade because of this, why not wait until the next day and go on the news about it then. I refer you to my earlier post about not being sued by the dead.

Anyone seen the info about the Milk Snatcher bollocks yet, interesting that isn't it :lol:

And one last thing, I agree the bosses are getting richer and that is bad and strangely the gap widened faster under LABOUR. They are all as bad as each other and when  people go on about Blair being Tory, then every Labour MP must've been Tory as well. Perhaps they would just obey him and do ANYTHING to get into power!

As for the houses, I take you again to an earlier post. Did those Labour councils build new homes with the money they earned from selling the council stock off!!!!

I work for an average wage, so all these horrible things should be killing me but somehow they don't. Plus, why should you have a job for life. What happens when your company is being undercut by a competitor, do you cut your prices and cut them again because that in the end would make your wages impossible to pay!

I left the forces and was prepared to do any job just to pay the mortgage and managed to get a job that was enjoyable and after a long time was made redundant, along with everyone else of the 100+ workforce and I was the SHOP STEWARD (I bet that shocked you all) and so had loads of stuff to sort out for everyone else as well as look for a new job myself.
I cried my eyes out and cursed the Labour government, the company, the new company that took the contract away, baby Jesus, Santa, Manchester United, etc... I lie, I didn't blame anyone, I just looked for another job and got on with it as that my good friends is life in this evil world!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 April, 2013, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 07:03:02 PM
I work for an average wage, so all these horrible things should be killing me but somehow they don't. Plus, why should you have a job for life. What happens when your company is being undercut by a competitor, do you cut your prices and cut them again because that in the end would make your wages impossible to pay!

I left the forces and was prepared to do any job just to pay the mortgage and managed to get a job that was enjoyable and after a long time was made redundant, along with everyone else of the 100+ workforce and I was the SHOP STEWARD (I bet that shocked you all) and so had loads of stuff to sort out for everyone else as well as look for a new job myself. I cried my eyes out and cursed the Labour government, the company, the new company that took the contract away, baby Jesus, Santa, Manchester United, etc... I lie, I didn't blame anyone, I just looked for another job and got on with it as that my good friends is life in this evil world!

That doesn't surprise me at all, John; you have the organising instinct, sense of community and bolshie streak that make a good shop steward.

People tend to discuss these matters in absolute terms; the behaviour of unions across Europe in the seventies was out of hand and unrealistic, but economies like Sweden and Germany managed to negotiate their way out of similar difficulties to our own without the social and political division experienced here. In Sweden today, union membership is still as high among executives  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Sweden#Trade_unions) as it is among their employees, disputes are resolved through collective bargaining, and they managed to reform working practices without doing away with almost the entire industrial sector of their economy, as we did.

I think the crucial difference might be that their unions are unaffiliated to a particular political party, and the fact that UK unions and associated industries were targeted by cuts which were driven as much by ideology and political self-interest as they were by practical reality is probably as much a fault of the unions and their financial control of the Parliamentary Labour Party as it is of the Thatcher government.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 April, 2013, 08:00:08 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 07:03:02 PM
I agree the bosses are getting richer and that is bad and strangely the gap widened faster under LABOUR. They are all as bad as each other and when  people go on about Blair being Tory, then every Labour MP must've been Tory as well. Perhaps they would just obey him and do ANYTHING to get into power!

As for the houses, I take you again to an earlier post. Did those Labour councils build new homes with the money they earned from selling the council stock off!!!!

So you agree Thatcher fucked the country, but Labour didn't put things right?

WE AGREE 100%!  :lol: When John Smith died and Blair's cabal created the tory-lite monstrosity that is New labour by ditching clause IV and (and all their left wing principles) we were well and truly screwed - but he was only apeing Thatcherism, so them  outcome of Thatcher + Blair is the situation w have today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 08:18:27 PM
You need your eyesight testing. I never said she fucked the country, I seem to be okay on the average wage and living in one of the most expensive parts of the country.

If some people want to feel as they are victims all the time well good for them. Maggie gave everyone the chance to better themselves, some people took it and others didn't. I wonder who we can blame for that!

If you voted for Blairs Labour lot three times then look deep inside yourself, especially if you are true left. I'm sure you could've voted for some socialist person on the ballot form but then again voting for socialism is a wasted vote as it doesn't work. North Korea anyone!

Don't keep blaming Thatcher for todays so called ills. There must've been a few true left wing MP's in that Blair lot when they got into power, why didn't they stand up with the unions and shout Blair down. I shall tell you why because they became hypocrites and wanted to cling to power at the cost of their beliefs and the left kept voting for them. I rest my case!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 10 April, 2013, 08:41:31 PM
Slightly off the Thatcher Debate.
These benefit cuts seem to be having some positive effect. The work shy scumbag that lives next to my mum looks like he has got himself a job.
If he can get a job (finally after years of not trying) then there must be some out there.





V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 April, 2013, 08:48:39 PM
QuoteAnyone seen the info about the Milk Snatcher bollocks yet, interesting that isn't it

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/uk_confidential/1095121.stm

QuoteResponding to the demands to end free school milk, Mrs Thatcher said: "I think that the complete withdrawal of free milk for our school children would be too drastic a step and would arouse more widespread public antagonism than the saving justifies."

She proposed the compromise, later accepted, that milk would only be available to pupils in nursery and primary schools.

So, yes, she only withdrew it from some schools. The woman was a saint.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 08:53:32 PM
Just like when the Labour party withdrew it from all secondary schools the decade earlier. Labour are saints too :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 April, 2013, 08:56:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 08:53:32 PM
Just like when the Labour party withdrew it from all secondary schools the decade earlier. Labour are saints too :D

Really don't see the point you're trying to make here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 10 April, 2013, 08:58:12 PM
I fear all she and her wretched credo will ultimately bring is the war of all against all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 09:04:45 PM
All the parties are as bad as each other in the end. This thread is constantly a point of hilarity for me as it seems to be an area where people like to constantly bemoan the tories and all the evils that only they have done. I pop on now and again just to point out, as I said above it's all parties!

All you have to do is look around the web and you will see points that show how all these parties do their dirty work but some people can't be bothered and just cherry pick points to their own end.

I think this latest bout all stemmed from the champagne socialist Billy and his points and so I placed up the counter argument which showed yet again that all the parties are doing the same thing.

Thatcher stole the milk from children in the 70's but that was under orders of the cabinet. The decade before the Labour party stopped (see how I don't write stole) the milk for secondary schools but you don't see that getting spouted out because it ruins some people points.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 April, 2013, 09:10:24 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 09:04:45 PM
people like to constantly bemoan the tories and all the evils that only they have done.

Show me one post in this thread slagging off Thatcher that says ONLY she was evil or claims that labour are saints.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 09:21:13 PM
Here's one for you instead, as it seems to be me doing all the answering but no one answers my valid points. Explain why those Labour councils never reinvested the money from the council house sales into more housing stock, seeing as no body wants to answer that one.

Or why no one mentions the milk being stopped by Labour.

It's because the posts are ways anti anything but Labour.

I dare you all to write down some things that have upset you from Labour and not just Blair's version. Pretty big lists I bet but it goes against your code.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 April, 2013, 09:25:49 PM
QuotePretty big lists I bet but it goes against your code.
What in the name of hell are you talking about? What code is this?
Oh! Is the the secret one that the left wing junta have?
I have told you before that I never have and never will vote Labour.
I'll ask again a question i asked yo before - why do you assume everyone 'Left wing' votes labour? It's like thinking everyone right wing would vote UKIP...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 April, 2013, 09:38:02 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 09:21:13 PM
Explain why those Labour councils never reinvested the money from the council house sales into more housing stock, seeing as no body wants to answer that one.

Because the legislation enabling the sake if council houses prevented those same councils reinvesting the proceeds in new house building.

Could the subsequent Labour government have done more about this? Yes. Could they do anything about the vast majority of the housing stock that had already been sold? Not so much.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 10 April, 2013, 09:59:05 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/p480x480/545980_10201005133670794_367683072_n.jpg)
Just to lighten the place up a little.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 April, 2013, 10:08:19 PM
I noticed that Rimmel are running an advert for 'Apocalips'

Nice to see someone's getting some mileage out of the chubby kid's antics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 10:08:43 PM
Where did I post that I said everyone who is left wing voted Labour Richmond. I'm at work now so I won't be able to look on my phone for a while. When you've found that particular post I will be happy.

As for the code, its very hard for anyone on the left to pick fault with anything done by the left, especially when you look through this thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 April, 2013, 10:10:12 PM
There are two kinds of people in the world.

Those that can extrapolate from....

...no that's not right.

There're people that have lived past puberty and there are sensible adults.

The problem is, policies (left or right or wrong) are based on the behaviour of the former, and it frustrates the latter.

This sweeping statement was brought to you by a 12 Hour shift followed by pints.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 10 April, 2013, 10:56:21 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 07:03:02 PM
If you think the Oz situation couldn't be resolved on the spot diplomatically then so be it. If this did happen and he was terrified that it would've caused a diplomatic incident, probably along the lines of when some Oz bird touched the back of the Queen the other year, then god help us all.

It really is quite simple I would've thought. The racist Thatcher says her piece and he does a polite laugh. He then says to Maggie something along the lines of 'You must say that to my wife, she will love that' and then he introduces her. Now that wouldn't cause a major incident would it!

Now if he was so terrified that we would invade because of this, why not wait until the next day and go on the news about it then. I refer you to my earlier post about not being sued by the dead.



I don't know what you're getting at Commando Forces.  I think it's pretty simple too.  Thatcher said something kind of racist, he thought it was  a bit insensitive, especially given the proximity of his wife and he remembered this when asked to reminisce about her.  You'll note that he said lots of respectful stuff too.  I don't think he did anything cowardly or wrong at the time.  I don't think he has done anything hypocritical by repeating the story now and your little story about what he should have done hasn't changed my opinion.
  That's about it really.  Feel free to drop Bob Carr a line explaining what he should have done.
      Moving along, there's a piece by an American writer, Lionel Shriver, explaining that Thatcher was a real feminist because she knew what she believed in.  That's a tired alibi for all sorts of obnoxiousness - people used to say it about Joh Bjelke Peterson (pretty much our most corrupt politician ever) -
'well at least you know what he thinks, hah hah'.
   This is not to say that Thatcher was as corrupt as Bjelke Petersen or that everything she did was awful, just that it's a lame reason for respecting someone.
  Shriver doesn't explain why an American thinks its great the the British hold on to Nothern Ireland, but it obviously turns her on. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jared Katooie on 10 April, 2013, 11:07:19 PM
Say what you like about Thatcher, but she was definitely a human female politician.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 10 April, 2013, 11:39:06 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 10 April, 2013, 11:07:19 PM
Say what you like about Thatcher, but she was definitely a SPACE LIZARD female politician.

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 April, 2013, 11:40:15 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 10 April, 2013, 11:39:06 PM
Quote from: Jared Katooie on 10 April, 2013, 11:07:19 PM
Say what you like about Thatcher, but she was definitely a SPACE LIZARD female politician WITH EVIL LASER EYES.

FTFY

FTFTFYFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 11 April, 2013, 12:13:20 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 06:17:42 AM
I always love this sort of stuff from people who know you can't slander the dead and end up in court.

Apparently she commissioned her biography way back in 1997 but said to release it only after her death...muck raking ahoy!

On Thatcher & Britain - what does the board think of opinions that the U.K. was in decline for a good while before she came into power and her position merely delayed/exacerbated said decline?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 April, 2013, 12:38:56 AM
What I have loved most the last few days is hearing the defensive rhetoric from Tories about what would be said by the deluded hate-filled leftie trots and poofters in the days to come - even before said Tories knew what had been said about Mrs T, or even if anything was said at all, "you'll probably hear from the usual bitter lefties that Mrs T did this or that" kind of thing, usually followed by "but labor did worse back in the day and you don't hear people complaining about that, do you?  No because EVERYTHING IS A LEFTIE SOCIALIST CONSPIRACY TO KEEP THE WHITE MAN CONSERVATIVE VOTER DOWN."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Silent_Bomber on 11 April, 2013, 04:03:42 AM
I don't really get why the government should be giving out free milk anyway to be honest, shouldn't parents be taking the responsibility of looking after their own children?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 05:21:44 AM
Oh my God!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 07:18:09 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 10:08:43 PM
As for the code, its very hard for anyone on the left to pick fault with anything done by the left, especially when you look through this thread.

You'll note that I provided you with an explanation of why new council houses weren't built with the proceeds of the sale of the old ones, and criticised New Labour for doing nothing about the collapse of the social housing sector during its time in power.

All generalisations are rubbish, CF.

Cheers

Jmi
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 11 April, 2013, 07:47:41 AM
The sale of council houses - and my parents used the opportunity to buy the one I grew up in - happened on Michael Heseltine's watch, when he was Environment Secretary. Here's what ol' Tarzan had to say about the matter just last week in an interview in that bastion of leftie agitation, the Daily Telegraph:

QuoteThe unintended consequence of this policy, though, has been a shortfall of social housing stock. It is very much a live issue, with the Coalition struggling to make amends by, in effect, taxing council tenants on empty bedrooms.

Lord Heseltine has his defence ready: "I did argue at the time that we needed to invest the proceeds from the sales into building new social housing, but after I left, the department failed to follow through with the investment."

Full interview here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9975599/Michael-Heseltine-at-80-on-Boris-Ukip-and-why-he-wont-visit-Lady-Thatcher.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9975599/Michael-Heseltine-at-80-on-Boris-Ukip-and-why-he-wont-visit-Lady-Thatcher.html)

So are we all clear now that the failure to reinvest in public housing was the fault of central government, and not of local councils, Labour or otherwise, who didn't see back the money made from the sale policy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 08:33:53 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 10:08:43 PM
Where did I post that I said everyone who is left wing voted Labour Richmond.

He didn't say that, CF. He was noting — not for the first time — that your knee-jerk reaction to criticism of the Tories is point to something Labour/New Labour did or didn't do and demand "Well, what about that?"

Rich is pointing out to you that since he has never voted Labour, he is under no obligation to justify anything they did or did not do. You have a habit of creating a homogenous lump of 'lefties' on the grounds that they disagree with the right and applying cretinous generalisations to them (that "code", for a start) all the while moaning that people label you a right-winger on the grounds of your frequently right-wing rants.

People, you included, do not fit so easily into these party-political pigeonholes. I have already told you that I have put my X next to candidates from all three main parties (in England) and one minor one across various national and local elections. I am generally left-of-centre on social welfare and considerably left-of-centre on regulation of the free market, taxation and the ownership of national infrastucture, but I'm far more pro-military and pro-law and order than you might infer from my position on those matters. I'm pro-Europe and relaxed on immigration. I'm a disciplinarian and educational traditionalist when it comes to children, and support first-past-the-post and the House of Lords* when it comes to our parliamentary democracy.

No party represents me, so every election is a case of finding the best fit or not bothering. A lot of people have sacrificed a great deal over a great many years to enable me to stick that little X next to someone's name, and I believe it would be disrespectful not to exercise that right. So, I vote. Often without much hope or conviction, but believing it to be better than the alternatives.

Cheers

Jim

*Oddly, the Lords is an imperfect answer to the oft-repeated truism that seeking high office ought to lead to automatic disbarment from said high office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 April, 2013, 09:48:54 AM
This thread is a shit storm just waiting to happen, if I may use such a colloquial term.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 10:02:44 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 April, 2013, 09:48:54 AM
This thread is a shit storm just waiting to happen, if I may use such a colloquial term.

Well, yes, that's rather the point of it. The idea is that whenever another thread threatens to de-rail because of political differences, the participants can be directed here rather than shitting up every other thread with political barnies.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 April, 2013, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 10:02:44 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 April, 2013, 09:48:54 AM
This thread is a shit storm just waiting to happen, if I may use such a colloquial term.

Well, yes, that's rather the point of it. The idea is that whenever another thread threatens to de-rail because of political differences, the participants can be directed here rather than shitting up every other thread with political barnies.

Cheers

Jim
At least there is an excuse then I guess. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 April, 2013, 10:38:21 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 April, 2013, 10:08:43 PM
As for the code, its very hard for anyone on the left to pick fault with anything done by the left, especially when you look through this thread.

While I understand there is a general blindness to the faults of whichever group in life one belong to, I must say the left are particularly good at picking fault with other lefties, IMHO its what has destroyed any concensus on the left anytime 'we' achieve the slightest victory, as someone who has been involved in campaigns since the 70s the People's Liberation Front of Judea scene in Life of Brian is spot on.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 11 April, 2013, 02:53:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 08:33:53 AM
No party represents me

I'm the same. I'd rather consider an issue then act accordingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 April, 2013, 03:07:57 PM
Quote from: Trout on 11 April, 2013, 02:53:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 08:33:53 AM
No party represents me

I'm the same. I'd rather consider an issue then act accordingly.

Yup. If at all possible, I will vote for an independent candidate. But back in NI, I voted at one time for pretty much every party from the DUP to the Shinners at some point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 April, 2013, 03:39:40 PM

The final word on the Thatcher years:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WhhSBgd3KI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WhhSBgd3KI)

skip the ad, gggggrrrrr!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 April, 2013, 03:48:11 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 April, 2013, 03:07:57 PM
Quote from: Trout on 11 April, 2013, 02:53:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 April, 2013, 08:33:53 AM
No party represents me

I'm the same. I'd rather consider an issue then act accordingly.

Yup. If at all possible, I will vote for an independent candidate. But back in NI, I voted at one time for pretty much every party from the DUP to the Shinners at some point.

The elections here are largely a pointless sectarian head count. The main problem for me is the parties represent either the British or the Irish, and none of them seem to give a shit about the Northern Irish, the people that actually live here. I consider myself neither British nor Irish. I'm Northern Irish.  I don't have any problems with British or Irish people, but if'n they're going to live in my country, they had best learn to behave themselves.The British/Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community and the Irish/Catholic/Nationalist/Republican community don't seem to realize they have more in common with each other than they do with anyone across the Irish sea or south of the border.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 04:56:13 PM
Jim, I don't think I have ever mentioned that I have been moaned at for being so called right wing on here. If you think that by merely pointing out that there are two sides to every point is me moaning that people think I'm right wing, then you are very much mistaken. Sadly a few people on here don't ever want to see their points being corrected and so they pick one tiny part of the debate and go off on one again but ignore everything else that has been said. Just look back and you will see it happen all the time.

I, like you vote different parties and have tried to keep our Tory MP out of Maidstone but alas not yet but the numbers are getting closer each vote. I even post my vote up here for a laugh but still one person didn't believe that when I did it at least one of those times. It doesn't matter what you say, some people will never believe you.

If we want this thread to be a debate then the way to do it is actually talk and discuss stuff in the end and not just do the above and pick and choose, leaving out the stuff that finds that you were wrong. The latest was due to a post by Billy Bragg. I picked the quote up on numerous points and expected some debate and the only part that has happened is with the housing when Gordon came back with a link to an interview which I enjoyed reading.

I always thought that the money from the sales was destined to go into more builds and I am wrong. Still doesn't alter the main fact in the end though does it, that no-one built enough new council stock in the end and still to this day we haven't enough.

That is what it all boils down to in the end as I keep saying, all the parties in power are out for themselves.

I suppose we could have this thread as a sounding board with no debate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 11 April, 2013, 05:53:10 PM
Let's have a 2000ad.party then.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 April, 2013, 05:57:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 04:56:13 PM
I always thought that the money from the sales was destined to go into more builds and I am wrong. Still doesn't alter the main fact in the end though does it, that no-one built enough new council stock in the end and still to this day we haven't enough.

There isn't really any incentive for local authorities to invest in creating more social housing when they would be forced to sell their stock off in a few years time at a very generous discount. No political party is going to repeal the right-to-buy legislation because it's been an enormously popular policy - who wouldn't want (almost) free stuff, or at least an investment that would only appreciate in the long term? - and, as you say, all political parties are only interested in gaining or keeping power.

That's why the only new social housing in my area has been built as a result of 'partnerships' between the local authority and housing trusts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_association#History), where taxpayers' money is basically given away to private corporations to get round the problems presented by right-to-buy. This doesn't really address the housing shortfall, because changes in funding and grant allocation mean local authorities can only really afford to make housing provision for the most vulnerable and difficult to home tenants.

The new housing association homes under construction next to my work right now are intended to house both the profoundly disabled and newly released felons, which sounds like a recipe for trouble. Although that's all very necessary, it doesn't help the majority of folk who don't meet those criteria find accommodation at a time when private rents (in an area of the country officially recognised as an economic disaster area) are upwards of $400 per month, a 2 bed former council flat will set you back £70,000, and the days of 90% mortgages and low deposits are a distant memory. Housing costs now account for almost half  (http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jul/19/uk-housing-costs-third-highest) of the spending of low/middle income households and that percentage has been rising since the eighties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_housing#United_Kingdom).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 April, 2013, 06:12:41 PM

(http://www.poverty.org.uk/03/a.png)


The definition of low income here is the universally accepted one of any household earning 60% or less of the median income.

http://www.poverty.org.uk/03/index.shtml (http://www.poverty.org.uk/03/index.shtml)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 April, 2013, 06:29:45 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 04:56:13 PM
Jim, I don't think I have ever mentioned that I have been moaned at for being so called right wing on here. If you think that by merely pointing out that there are two sides to every point is me moaning that people think I'm right wing, then you are very much mistaken.

But you only ever point out one of them! When people slag off Blair or Brown, I never hear your usual argument being deployed, ie "Why aren't you slagging the tories, because they're just as bad" - there's an eerie silence when the left is being criticised, but one word against the tories and you come out blazing, so don't try to give us that impartiality bollox!

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 04:56:13 PM
I always thought that the money from the sales was destined to go into more builds and I am wrong. Still doesn't alter the main fact in the end though does it, that no-one built enough new council stock in the end and still to this day we haven't enough.

BECAUSE OF THATCHER! Which is where we came in.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 06:45:43 PM
So I never mentioned that the Tories backed Blair in the wars, which were something that we shouldn't have done as what was going on in those countries had nothing at the time in question, anything to do with us. Still nothing, even now to do with us as far as I can see!
Show me all these posts that slag off Blair and Brown on here and I'll rip into the Tories if needs be! Obviously you think I'm gonna watch this thread and sit down and answer every post that comes up.

If anyone is blinded by a belief DDD, it would be you and your raising a glass to the death of someone, says more about your character than anything else. Even many of the most ardent haters of Thatcher agree that that is a disgrace but each to their own. I shall be asleep when she is buried, as I couldn't give a toss as she isn't family or close to me but I feel sorry for her family and friends but only from a distance as I wouldn't cry for them.

You say because of Thatcher, yet again! How many years in the future are you going to carry that on, she has been out of power for 20+ years and yet no other party has rectified this problem. I could go back to the insanity of what went on in the 70's and say everything is a product of that. As if we didn't have that then we wouldn't have had Thatcher.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 April, 2013, 07:36:51 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 11 April, 2013, 06:45:43 PM
Even many of the most ardent haters of Thatcher agree that that is a disgrace

I'll think you'll find that the "ardent haters of Thatcher", have been, and will continue to be, raising a glass rather than deploring it. Hence the description "ardent haters of Thatcher"

QuoteYou say because of Thatcher, yet again! How many years in the future are you going to carry that on, she has been out of power for 20+ years and yet no other party has rectified this problem
As you have conceded, the reason they haven't fixed the problem is because Thatcher put measures in place to prevent it. THAT is why I blame her more than others. Jim proved you wrong, you conceded the fact and then a few posts later you're back to the same discredited argument! Unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 11 April, 2013, 07:47:43 PM
I can't help but feel she'll be having the last laugh re: my own feelings on her demise- my extortionate water bill is due any time now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: vzzbux on 11 April, 2013, 08:02:46 PM
I blame that fucker Cromwell, things would be a whole lot better without him in power.




V
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 11 April, 2013, 08:05:41 PM
Quote from: Charlie boy on 11 April, 2013, 07:47:43 PM
I can't help but feel she'll be having the last laugh

She's incapable of laughing, due to being dead  ;)

I see Jeremy Clarkson is off to the funeral, or has been invited at least..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 April, 2013, 08:27:07 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 11 April, 2013, 08:05:41 PM
I see Jeremy Clarkson is off to the funeral, or has been invited at least..

... along with Blair, Brown, Clinton, and Bushes 39 and 41; I can see why the cops have been talking about the need for a ring of steel around the capital. If any Islamic fascists fancy having a go at achieving what the Luftwaffe never could, here's the route they'll be taking to St Pauls:


(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/panels/13/apr/thatcher_funeral/img/graphic_1365595897.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: darnmarr on 11 April, 2013, 09:20:53 PM
From Captain Howdy over on B3ta:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9knVx_jvTyY/T6Zbm_u0fwI/AAAAAAAABtY/gZtQy5CJEpU/s1600/maggie.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 April, 2013, 09:22:54 PM
I'm having that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 April, 2013, 09:55:14 PM
Yoink! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 April, 2013, 01:16:08 AM
Quote from: El Pops on 11 April, 2013, 03:48:11 PM
The elections here are largely a pointless sectarian head count. The main problem for me is the parties represent either the British or the Irish, and none of them seem to give a shit about the Northern Irish, the people that actually live here. I consider myself neither British nor Irish. I'm Northern Irish.  I don't have any problems with British or Irish people, but if'n they're going to live in my country, they had best learn to behave themselves.The British/Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community and the Irish/Catholic/Nationalist/Republican community don't seem to realize they have more in common with each other than they do with anyone across the Irish sea or south of the border.

Which is what I've been saying both here and elsewhere for years now!  Every constitutional debate in this place always seems to come down to an either-or, United Kingdom or United Ireland choice, and I NEVER hear a third choice in the mix, a very obvious and workable and indeed feasible third choice exists; an independent Northern Ireland under the Crown (either as an Overseas Territory at least or as an outright Dominion territory at most), with a written Constitution, a proper bicameral Parliament, a Governor (or Governor General if a Dominion state), a normal Left/Right political landscape, a singular national identity (Northern Irish) with accompanying passport, a national flag (the St Patrick saltire), and a national seal (the Maid of Erin harp motif currently on the Royal Standard).  And don't give me any nonsense that an independent Northern Ireland couldn't afford itself, like any small country we would cut our suit to suit our cloth, have competitive tax rates, and not have an obscenely bloated public sector, have strict welfare means tests, and a tight rein on public spending and/or borrowing... the myopia among politicians and intellectual talking heads will be the real undoing of Norn Iron's potential, not sectarianism or social division!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 12 April, 2013, 01:32:55 AM
Quote from: vzzbux on 11 April, 2013, 08:02:46 PM
I blame that fucker Cromwell, things would be a whole lot better without him in power.

As a long-time student of history, I respectfully disagree with that assessment of Oliver Cromwell's legacy.  It's precisely because  Cromwell wouldn't accept the Crown and become King Oliver I that many problems in the post-monarchy English state began, simply put, having dispatched one royal tyrant, they had no idea what to replace him with, leading to Cromwell nearly becoming a bit of a tyrant himself... and look where that led, right back to where they began with Charles Stuart's son back on the throne.

If Cromwell had accepted the Crown, ruled with both the necessary and absolute consent of both the House of Commons and Lords in all constitutional and governing matters, and had a written Constitution drawn up to effectively codify the political settlement across all three kingdoms of the new Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland - all of which was proposed and had support across most political lines of the day - history would have been very different, and for the better in my opinion...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2013, 01:39:50 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 April, 2013, 01:32:55 AM
If Cromwell had accepted the Crown, ruled with both the necessary and absolute consent of both the House of Commons and Lords in all constitutional and governing matters, and had a written Constitution drawn up to effectively codify the political settlement across all three kingdoms of the new Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland - all of which was proposed and had support across most political lines of the day - history would have been very different, and for the better in my opinion...


Yes, well, that's easily said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 April, 2013, 01:53:21 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 12 April, 2013, 01:16:08 AM
Which is what I've been saying both here and elsewhere for years now!  Every constitutional debate in this place always seems to come down to an either-or, United Kingdom or United Ireland choice, and I NEVER hear a third choice in the mix, a very obvious and workable and indeed feasible third choice exists; an independent Northern Ireland under the Crown (either as an Overseas Territory at least or as an outright Dominion territory at most), with a written Constitution, a proper bicameral Parliament, a Governor (or Governor General if a Dominion state), a normal Left/Right political landscape, a singular national identity (Northern Irish) with accompanying passport, a national flag (the St Patrick saltire), and a national seal (the Maid of Erin harp motif currently on the Royal Standard).  And don't give me any nonsense that an independent Northern Ireland couldn't afford itself, like any small country we would cut our suit to suit our cloth, have competitive tax rates, and not have an obscenely bloated public sector, have strict welfare means tests, and a tight rein on public spending and/or borrowing... the myopia among politicians and intellectual talking heads will be the real undoing of Norn Iron's potential, not sectarianism or social division!

To be honest B.S.; I don't think too many - either side of the Border- spend much of their day giving-a-shite about Norn Irn to have put forth any proposition/solution - be it Irish, British or something else - and if the peeps of the Border-Land really want such a thing, they'll have to demand it, cause no one's going to hand it to them. Methinks yourselves alone will have to bite-the-bullet and get together on that one...if you collectively want to give up the benefits and embrace Nationalism.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 12 April, 2013, 02:50:34 AM
Meanwhile, John Howard is celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Iraq invasion by lying his arse off, one more time, just for the fans
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/howard-ignored-advice-and-went-to-war-in-iraq-20130411-2ho5d.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Silent_Bomber on 12 April, 2013, 10:00:24 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 11 April, 2013, 06:12:41 PM

(http://www.poverty.org.uk/03/a.png)

Does this take into account whether "low-income" in the 1980s was significantly more (or less) money than in the 70s?

It seems to me (sorry if I'm talking nonsense) that if the Median income skyrocketed in the 80s these graphs could be a bit misleading.

Are there any places which have graphs which simply lay out all of the different earning demographics (altered to take into account inflation) and then state how many people were in each demographic in the UK from the 70s to the present day?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 April, 2013, 10:28:49 PM
Quote from: Silent_Bomber on 12 April, 2013, 10:00:24 PM
It seems to me (sorry if I'm talking nonsense) that if the Median income skyrocketed in the 80s these graphs could be a bit misleading. Are there any places which have graphs which simply lay out all of the different earning demographics (altered to take into account inflation) and then state how many people were in each demographic in the UK from the 70s to the present day?

Not that I can find.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/09/wage-gap-rich-poor-widens-25-years-data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/09/wage-gap-rich-poor-widens-25-years-data)

http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/ukearncpi/result2.php (http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/ukearncpi/result2.php)

The above is talking about average earnings, which is of course different from median income. Wages have doubled since the eighties, but so have prices, so things even out - but the longterm trend is for an increasing gap between those earning most and those in that bottom 60% (the majority). That means the burden placed upon the majority of folk by rising house prices has still eaten into disposable income.


(http://monevator.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/house-price-earnings-graph.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 April, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
A rare thing in Ireland:  A victory of human rights over the joyless old men of the Vatican.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum)

We're getting there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 April, 2013, 06:46:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 April, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
A rare thing in Ireland:  A victory of human rights over the joyless old men of the Vatican.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum)

We're getting there.

You can see why the Catholic church would be against gay marriage. Given their position on sex outside wedlock, they'd be forced to marry every altar boy they fucked.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 April, 2013, 08:24:12 PM
I suppose that also explains why they don't see the need for contraception.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 April, 2013, 08:55:08 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 April, 2013, 06:46:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 April, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
A rare thing in Ireland:  A victory of human rights over the joyless old men of the Vatican.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/14/ireland-hold-gay-marriage-referendum)

We're getting there.

You can see why the Catholic church would be against gay marriage. Given their position on sex outside wedlock, they'd be forced to marry every altar boy they fucked.
But that would be adultry and polygomy! Blessed are our vatican to not hold such moral! They f*ck them and kill them, save's time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 16 April, 2013, 05:16:46 AM
I've always wondered why the push for gay marriage is happening now and not some other time, in general and not in Ireland, I mean.  According to a Gary Younge piece in the Grauniad the other day, some guy in  the USA was trying to get it to happen in 1971.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: darnmarr on 16 April, 2013, 02:07:16 PM
The cabbies discuss gay marraige in Taxi-driver: they are in favour as I recall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 April, 2013, 04:16:30 PM
I often wonder to myself whether there'll be another people's revolution in China.  My only evidence is having been there and taught people one-to-one.

Though it would be very rude for a foreigner to bring it up, a bit of chat reveals that absolutely no clued-up person is happy with the government and its system.  The emergence of a new middle class has given a bit of free time to actually think about how the country is run and compare it with other countries.

For this reason Facebook and Youtube are filtered out by the government firewall, but most of the people I knew had proxy software to get around it - and many of them used it specifically to avoid the state-controlled media and glean some objective news about China.

As far as I can see protests happen on a regular basis in places like Tianenmen Square (in which nothing bad ever happened, according to the government, but the people know better) but the perpetrators are quickly arrested and carted away in secrecy, presumably for 're-education' or worse. 

The Mao revolution in its infancy is seen as a golden age by most people, as it was a time when people were genuinely equal (though I suspect Mao and his closest aides were a bit more equal).  There are huge divisions in society nowadays, and corruption is rife.  The countryside is being poisoned at a rapid rate as industry grows.

I remember teaching this I.T. guy, a very pleasant and warm chap as many Beijingers are when you get to know them, who frequently checked outside views of China using his proxy device.  Though it took him a bit of internet translation, he eventually arrived at this impressive statement: 'The government cannot stop the flow of history.'

Anyway, as I say I only have the evidence of having lived there for a short while and met some of the people.  It really does seem like the government is clinging desperately onto power.  Does anyone have a bit more of academic view of the situation there?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 22 May, 2013, 09:20:48 AM
Halfway there:

Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22605011)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 22 May, 2013, 10:00:02 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 April, 2013, 04:16:30 PM
I often wonder to myself whether there'll be another people's revolution in China.  My only evidence is having been there and taught people one-to-one.


I don't have any more academic views, but I meet a lot of recently arrived Chinese people.  My observation is that none of them actually respect the government they have.  Of course that doesn't mean there'll be another revolution any time soon - lots of people don't respect the government here, which is ideal by comparison.  People can put up with a lot of awfulness rather than overthrow the system.  My Chinese students all like their country and see the government as something to be put up with. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 28 May, 2013, 08:37:58 PM
So what's the opinon in U.K. about arming Syrian rebels? Libya didn't turn out as pro-Western as Nato would liked after all their help....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 28 May, 2013, 08:56:04 PM
What? Openly arming insane Al Qaeda jihadists against a country which was basically just sitting there doing nothing (compared to us)? To me, it really is a sign of how increasingly despicable and embarrassing our governments become with each passing parliament when Russia are the guys who deserve a pat on the back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 28 May, 2013, 08:56:35 PM
So yeah. I had a strong opinion on that, I suppose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2013, 12:35:20 AM
Ages ago, I watched Robocop: The Series and had a good laugh at the clumsy satire, like that one where no doctor would perform an operation on a dying child because he was so high-risk that if he died under the knife, their overall statistical rating on a national table of doctors' success rates would take a hit, the hospital would have to pay higher insurance, etc - and of course the ConDems want this exact system for the NHS.  Undeterred, they also want to make further storylines from Robocop: The Series a reality and are thus privatising the courts:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3776508.ece
I like that the man describing the possible process makes no distinction between someone having to use the courts and someone who is already in jail.  That bodes well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 May, 2013, 10:28:54 AM
Oh no, the political thread us back! Die, Politics, Die!

Glad to hear that the Russian missiles are the sort that only kill mad jihadists, and not the pro-democracy forces who started the fight.  Or even the planes of western armies who dare intervene in a fight the Russians have now intervened in.  When Russia is a shining example that governments aspire to, we're all screwed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 29 May, 2013, 10:42:54 AM
Last two threads !!!!    ^^    ....Wonderful stuff !!...

Sarcasm and Wit Rule....... :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 29 May, 2013, 05:18:40 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 29 May, 2013, 10:28:54 AM
Oh no, the political thread us back! Die, Politics, Die!

Glad to hear that the Russian missiles are the sort that only kill mad jihadists, and not the pro-democracy forces who started the fight.  Or even the planes of western armies who dare intervene in a fight the Russians have now intervened in.  When Russia is a shining example that governments aspire to, we're all screwed.

The Russians didn't intervene first. We did by sending 'aid' to a bunch of foreign mercenaries and misc Syrians who seem quite happy to see said mercs butcher their fellow citizens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 May, 2013, 06:17:12 PM
I didn't claim they intervened first.  The Russian intervention, however, is calculated to prevent western governments from becoming involved. Handing over surface to air missiles has given Russia a monopoly in foreign intervention. I find that troubling, since pseudo - democratic Russia is not a country i would feel comfortable about having more control in the middleeast.

Your argument appears to be that it is a good thing to arm oppressive regimes in order to prevent the rise of other oppressive regimes.  My argument is that foriegn weapons in the hands if the Syrian government won't just be used against mad jihadists.  They'll be used against the pro western pro democratic forces as well.  They'll be used to butcher the very same civilians your worried about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 29 May, 2013, 06:41:55 PM
Well yeah, it's a faux-civil war and I understand the wrong people will die. Both we and the Americans have had a few between us. It's horrible and should be unnecessary in this day and age, but still none of my business. More importantly though, I don't see how funding Al Qaeda and their child soldiers can ever be morally acceptable.

Not that I'm accusing you of anything. I get where you're coming from and understand there's a huge gray area in the middle of this whole mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 29 May, 2013, 06:48:25 PM
One of the reasons I specifically refer to our politicians as despicable is because they cherry pick which countries they intervene in based on who they do and don't like. It's hypocrisy. At least if they bombed everyone equally I might be tempted to believe they're not quite morally bankrupt after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2013, 10:43:57 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4947427072/h79978A62/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 30 May, 2013, 12:04:10 AM
*something controversial and rage-inducing*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 May, 2013, 01:48:32 AM
Damned if you do, damned if you don't!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 May, 2013, 07:34:39 AM
Hang the lot of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 May, 2013, 07:39:12 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 May, 2013, 01:48:32 AM
Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b021v4cg/The_Iraq_War_Regime_Change/

My favourite bit is Dick Cheney's (apparently unintentional) paradoxical statement; "we learned you have to work with what you've got, and anyone was better than Saddam".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 30 May, 2013, 08:54:56 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 May, 2013, 07:39:12 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 May, 2013, 01:48:32 AM
Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b021v4cg/The_Iraq_War_Regime_Change/

My favourite bit is Dick Cheney's (apparently unintentional) paradoxical statement; "we learned you have to work with what you've got, and anyone was better than Saddam".

Caught this last night, Sauchie. And what a thoroughly depressing watch. Everything about it just reaks of madness.
Did we really live through all that, and only a few short years ago?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 31 May, 2013, 12:12:37 AM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 30 May, 2013, 08:54:56 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 30 May, 2013, 07:39:12 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 May, 2013, 01:48:32 AM
Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b021v4cg/The_Iraq_War_Regime_Change/

My favourite bit is Dick Cheney's (apparently unintentional) paradoxical statement; "we learned you have to work with what you've got, and anyone was better than Saddam".

Caught this last night, Sauchie. And what a thoroughly depressing watch. Everything about it just reaks of madness.
Did we really live through all that, and only a few short years ago?

Just watched this again and cannot believe how many half truths, downright lies and dis-information we were subjected to prior to going to War.....
Millions of people worldwide rejected the premise that we 'needed' to wage war on Saddam.....A million people protested in London........and 'our' Government still didn't listen....
For me one of the ultimate excuses....It was the Frenchs' fault because they voted against us......
FFS ..........!!
Sometimes you just get 'weary' of all the lies we are fed.........But it still doesn't seem to change.. :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 June, 2013, 06:27:49 PM
My congratulations to Mark Millar on receiving his MBE in recognition of his contribution to the industry.

I have nothing sarcastic to say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 16 June, 2013, 07:01:20 PM
I think it's only a matter of time before there will be a full blown revolution in a major European country. Turkey seems to be the prime candidate at the minute, but I wouldn't be suprised if either Greece or Spain had a revolution. Of course if one troubled country started it's own revolution then that could be the catalyst for others to join suite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 June, 2013, 07:52:57 PM
Quote from: Tim Tailz on 16 June, 2013, 07:01:20 PM
I think it's only a matter of time before there will be a full blown revolution in a major European country. Turkey seems to be the prime candidate at the minute, but I wouldn't be suprised if either Greece or Spain had a revolution. Of course if one troubled country started it's own revolution then that could be the catalyst for others to join suite.

Doesn't seem likely now, does it? There's a general election coming in Turkey in less time than it takes to make a baby, never mind put together an armed insurgency, and if Greece or Spain were going to build to a critical mass you would imagine that would have happened at the height of their worries. If you read or listen to reports from those two countries the mood seems to be of wearied resignation and noses pushed firmly to the grindstone, rather than angry determination to make someone else pay.

Some other major catastrophe could always throw things back into flux, but even if that's the case I think the character of a revolution within the cosy confines of the European family is going to be qualitatively different than even the relatively peaceful transition of power seen in Tunisia. If you think about it, Italy has already kind of undergone a sort of revolution, in that the voting public unseated a plurality of sitting parliamentary representatives and replaced them with folk with absolutely no connection to any existing political party.

Italy being Italy, it's all being sorted out by horse trading but I think that's what revolution in 21st century Europe looks like - one lot of liberal democrats coughing politely as the previous liberal democrats incumbent give up their chairs and move on to well paid positions in Brussels. Everyone wants change, but no-one wants to miss a paycheck, and the public have lost faith in the big ideologies. If I'm wrong you can always taunt me with cries of "Francis Fukuyama, Francis Fukuyama" every time I raise my head above the parapets.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 16 June, 2013, 08:06:37 PM
Well they do say "Any society is only three meals away from revolution".

Or was that Red Dwarf?  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 June, 2013, 10:51:00 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 June, 2013, 07:52:57 PM
If I'm wrong you can always taunt me with cries of "Francis Fukuyama, Francis Fukuyama" every time I raise my head above the parapets.


That Francis Fukuyama, always waiting for the End of History, I just wanted the bell to ring so I could go home.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 June, 2013, 10:52:51 PM



There is a well-known if dubious story that claims that at a concert in Glasgow Bono began a slow hand-clap. He is supposed to have announced: "Every time I clap my hands, a child in Africa dies." Whereupon someone in the audience shouted: "Well fucking stop doing it then." It's good advice, and I wish he'd take it. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/17/bono-africans-stealing-voice-poor)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 June, 2013, 08:31:59 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 17 June, 2013, 10:52:51 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/17/bono-africans-stealing-voice-poor (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/17/bono-africans-stealing-voice-poor)

The ONE campaign looks to me like the sort of organisation that John le Carré or Robert Harris might have invented ...

... or the kind of scheme that the Quantum organisation would be involved in; that could provide the basis for the most interesting Bond villain scheme since License To KIll's drug kingpin televangelist or Tomorrow Never Dies's Rupert Murdoch analogue. Fassbender to play the preening rock star frontman who Daniel Craig defenestrates for funnelling funds from charities to buy up land in Africa and control the world's food supply.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 22 June, 2013, 03:45:08 AM
There's an article popping up all over the internet with the heading 'Snowden faces execution...'

This is apparently causing loads of anger and hysteria, incitements to revolution, etc; and it doesn't seem to have occurred to many people that maybe it's meant to say 'Snowden faces extradition...'

Seriously... I've seen like two other folk that've noticed the words are similar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 June, 2013, 09:29:37 AM
The Espionage Act provides for the death penalty (just ask Ethel Rosenberg), so it's true, if unlikely. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 22 June, 2013, 01:09:11 PM
As corrupt and out of control the US government increasingly gets, I think they'd have a pretty hard time justifying Snowden's execution to the masses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 22 June, 2013, 01:13:25 PM
Add to the fact that this is the same gang of crooks constantly petitioning for Jonathan Pollard's release. Snowden's mistake was that he didn't specifically drop the information at Israel's door, apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2013, 03:13:33 PM
Listening to BBC's Question Time as I work, for the first time in ages (more of an Any Questions man meself).  I was puzzled to see Russell Brand on the billing (until I saw he was promoting a new tour), but he turned out to be the most rational and coherent of the lot of them.  Boris Johnson, Melanie Phillips and Tessa Jowell: three of the most foolish people I've ever seen in a room at the same time*.  It was like the bit in The Return of the King film where the orcs at Cirith Ungol turn on each other, each more stupid and pig-headed than the last.  I woke next door's baby shouting 'FOR FECK'S SAKE!' at the computer.  Who books the guests for these things?

*Ed Davey was there at the same time, but he's the audio equivalent of tope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 June, 2013, 05:34:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 June, 2013, 03:13:33 PM
Listening to BBC's Question Time as I work, for the first time in ages (more of an Any Questions man meself).  I was puzzled to see Russell Brand on the billing (until I saw he was promoting a new tour), but he turned out to be the most rational and coherent of the lot of them.  Boris Johnson, Melanie Phillips and Tessa Jowell: three of the most foolish people I've ever seen in a room at the same time*.  It was like the bit in The Return of the King film where the orcs at Cirith Ungol turn on each other, each more stupid and pig-headed than the last.  I woke next door's baby shouting 'FOR FECK'S SAKE!' at the computer.  Who books the guests for these things?

Aye, if you can get past his (understandable (http://www.okmagazine.com/sites/okmagazine.com/files/imagecache/gallery_full_image/photo_gallery_picture_images/katy-perry-july1-104.jpg)) vanity Brand's actually a cogent, articulate and very entertaining character. Here's the link to the Question Time (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02zc9l5/Question_Time_20_06_2013/) appearance, and he was on even better form earlier in the day on Radio Five (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02xb1lh). They talk about his recent destruction of MSNBC's Morning Joe news bunnies, which has been a big viral hit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HqflTYCM2s).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2013, 06:01:40 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 June, 2013, 05:34:29 PMThey talk about his recent destruction of MSNBC's Morning Joe news bunnies, which has been a big viral hit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HqflTYCM2s).

Oh that is good.  Holy crap, are those three complete simpletons?  Do they normally live in some kind of nature preserve where no-one ever deviates from a prepared script?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 23 June, 2013, 06:14:10 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 June, 2013, 05:34:29 PM
...his recent destruction of MSNBC's Morning Joe news bunnies, which has been a big viral hit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HqflTYCM2s).
Brand demolished them. Must say I do find that some US tv interviewer/presenters can't relate to people from the arts they interview. Not a UK/US thing as I recently watched some interviews with Janis Joplin which are similar to the above interaction with Brand. They can come across as rather condescending.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 June, 2013, 08:39:13 PM

Thursday's Question Time is the first time I've seen Mad Mel Phillips in action, rather than just hearing her on the radio - what a fucking nutter. The weird body language when she was trying to silence and brow beat the guy who objected to her reduction of the complexities of the Syrian civil war to we have to take Assad out to confound Iran's faith-based determination to bring forth The Apocalypse was very illuminating.

The behaviour of her, the blandness of the others, and the aimless rambling of Bojo meant the whole thing was utterly useless as a way of understanding the issues or the approaches of the various parties to addressing them, and reminded me why I don't watch it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2013, 10:33:48 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 June, 2013, 08:39:13 PM
Thursday's Question Time is the first time I've seen Mad Mel Phillips in action, rather than just hearing her on the radio - what a fucking nutter. The weird body language when she was trying to silence and brow beat the guy who objected to her reduction of the complexities of the Syrian civil war to we have to take Assad out to confound Iran's faith-based determination to bring forth The Apocalypse was very illuminating.

For a lasting memory I was torn between Philips' palpable insanity, Johnson's incoherent mumbling and babbling, and Tessa Jowell's staggering (and repeated) assertion that the global financial crisis would never have happened if there were more women bankers. Not rapacious greed, not a failure of regulation, not political croneyism: gender.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 July, 2013, 05:10:01 AM
Now that's how you get rid of a democratically elected government!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 July, 2013, 07:03:47 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 July, 2013, 05:10:01 AM
Now that's how you get rid of a democratically elected government!

Tough one, innit? Morsi was steadily changing the constitution to give himself more power and altering the tone of civil society to make the Muslim Brotherhood more influential in daily life, but this isn't the way you do things in a democracy. Morsi was shite though, and folk were on the streets because he spent more time promoting Sharia law than he did reviving the stagnant economy. Morsi fought the 2012 election against the guy who was PM under the Mubarak regime, and - even if some kind of election is eventually held - it's difficult not to see this military coup as the generals engineering a way to get the result they wanted last time.

It's like the bits in Origins and The Cursed Earth where the people 'ask' the judges to step in and rule on their behalf, only for real.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 05 July, 2013, 12:08:21 AM
Easy to see why Erdogan is cribbing over the regime change in Egypt, he wouldn't want the Turkish military getting any ideas with their history of overthrowing governments...

Edit: Egyptian stock exchange jumps on Morsi ousting. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23183838) Someone else pulling the strings, perhaps...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 July, 2013, 11:11:37 PM
Hands up who would like an 11% pay increase, just to curb the temptation to FIDDLE your expenses!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 July, 2013, 11:30:19 PM
That would be ideal.  What would be even better was if I could decide to give that raise to myself, and then poor people paid it to me using the money they were going to invest in the NHS.  I don't know about you, but I consider my day wasted if I haven't caused at least one child or elderly person to die just so I can have a free meal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 July, 2013, 12:19:04 AM
Children, the elderly and the sick are basically parasites on society, sucking up resources and contributing essentially nothing.  That particular ecological niche isn't big enough to support two such species, so you can hardly blame their competitors for wanting them dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 July, 2013, 12:53:12 AM
That all sounds like boffin talk to me - I just want money for me and my friends, I don't really care about the science of it all as I don't need to know how it works, only what parts can be sold.  I'm a bit like the chaps pulling out gold teeth at Auschwitz in that respect.
Godwin's Law aside, it's a metaphor that keeps on giving, that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 July, 2013, 07:24:19 AM

Peasants. There are any number of legitimate reasons why our loyal and obedient servants incur expenses in the course of their duties; I just think those lads need to be a bit more creative in how they source their office supplies, secretarial services and other vital resources (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Duck-House-Wooden-Floating-Platform-Wood-Nesting-Box-Waterfowl-Pond-Easipet-263-/111080365578?pt=UK_Pet_Supplies_Poultry&hash=item19dce7de0a).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 10:56:06 AM
After the expenses scandal, the great British public decided that it was evil that MPs and Ministers set their own pay, so the government of the day set up an entirely independent pay review board to set MPs and Ministers salaries.

The completely independent pay board decides to award our parliamentarians a pay increase and the great British public still thinks the politicians are evil and money grabbing prats.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 July, 2013, 12:03:06 PM
I saw the front page of today's Mirror and they're giving off that the poor pay more income tax than the rich.  I mean, surely this is only sensible seeing as the poor have less income and need to pay more of it to keep up with what the rich contribute?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 July, 2013, 12:24:45 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 11 July, 2013, 12:03:06 PM
I saw the front page of today's Mirror and they're giving off that the poor pay more income tax than the rich.  I mean, surely this is only sensible seeing as the poor have less income and need to pay more of it to keep up with what the rich contribute?

You're missing the point again.  It's all about motivation.  The poor are poor because they are lazy and/or useless, and thus need the incentive of reducing their tax bill by earning more and thus improving their moral standing as a group. Without the carrot and the stick, how will they ever better themselves?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 12:40:58 PM
Well, if it's on the front page of the Mirror then it must be true!!  How can the poor pay more in tax than the rich?  The top 10% of earners in the UK pay at least 25% of the tax.  Most working lower income families get tax or child tax credits.  Only half of the working age population of the UK pay more in taxes than they take out in benefits.  You can do anything you like with statistics.  One of the big problems with this country is that many of the lower paid are having their wages topped up by the State and not being paid properly by the companies that they work for.  It's one of the many reasons the country's skint.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 July, 2013, 12:54:29 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 12:40:58 PM
Well, if it's on the front page of the Mirror then it must be true!!  How can the poor pay more in tax than the rich?  The top 10% of earners in the UK pay at least 25% of the tax.  Most working lower income families get tax or child tax credits.  Only half of the working age population of the UK pay more in taxes than they take out in benefits.  You can do anything you like with statistics.  One of the big problems with this country is that many of the lower paid are having their wages topped up by the State and not being paid properly by the companies that they work for.  It's one of the many reasons the country's skint.

If only we could have some kind of system where they could unite into an organisation and demand better wages, or withdraw their labour. Wouldn't that be great?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 01:07:41 PM
Yes, I think they've tried that already, weren't they called trade unions!!  Obviously they didn't work!  What do trade union bosses earn?  Don't some of them earn more than the prime minister?  Still, they're only looking after their members!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 July, 2013, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 01:07:41 PM
Yes, I think they've tried that already, weren't they called trade unions!!  Obviously they didn't work!  What do trade union bosses earn?  Don't some of them earn more than the prime minister?  Still, they're only looking after their members!!

That's be the millionaire prime minister, whose father made his fortune telling people how to avoid paying tax in the UK?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 July, 2013, 01:30:35 PM
trade unions did work, too well in fact. the bosses (including the govt in the case of nationalised industries) could not accept that they no longer had the power to fix wages or hire and fire at will, so their power had to be broken.

there may have been some excesses (the RMT try even my patience), but it was a far better system than the current one of zero-hour contracts, no job security and breadline wages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 01:33:06 PM
True.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 July, 2013, 01:47:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2013, 01:33:06 PM
True.

Now just wait a minute you two!
Have I just seen two people agreeing about something on here? You you pair even know how to use the internet??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 11 July, 2013, 01:56:16 PM
Side-effect of the forum purge.

Normal service will be resumed ASAP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 11 July, 2013, 05:43:58 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 11 July, 2013, 12:03:06 PM
I saw the front page of today's Mirror and they're giving off that the poor pay more income tax than the rich.  I mean, surely this is only sensible seeing as the poor have less income and need to pay more of it to keep up with what the rich contribute?

Are you sure it was just income tax? I recall seeing a break down which showed the poor paying a higher percentage overall but not just for income tax.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 July, 2013, 05:54:20 PM
Quote from: Stan on 11 July, 2013, 05:43:58 PM
Are you sure it was just income tax? I recall seeing a break down which showed the poor paying a higher percentage overall but not just for income tax.

I believe VAT is particularly brutal to people on lower income. Note how successive governments have been happy to hike VAT rather than income tax...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 11 July, 2013, 06:12:35 PM
VAT is one of those 'stealth taxes' though where most of the time you don't recognise that you are paying it.

With income tax, I recall some years back (before Blair, I think) where Labour were expected to win the next election.  So they decided to be honest and tell folks they would have to up the income tax. Result = another term for the Conservatives. 

I don't believe anyone has drastically changed income tax since!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 July, 2013, 08:23:18 PM
Ok, I'm going to vent a wee bit about the disgraceful situation* in Northern Ireland.

When it comes to topics like gay marriage or abortion, our elected** representatives come out talking about how it goes against their christian values and they roll out the bible quotations.

Have you ever heard a single one of these unqualified cunts quote "love thy neighbour"?

No. You haven't. It's almost like they're only christians when it suits their agenda.

*pronounced colloquially as sitchooo-ay-shun
**by block voting based on 800 year old bullshit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 July, 2013, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 15 July, 2013, 08:23:18 PM
Ok, I'm going to vent a wee bit about the disgraceful situation* in Northern Ireland. When it comes to topics like gay marriage or abortion, our elected representatives come out talking about how it goes against their christian values and they roll out the bible quotations. Have you ever heard a single one of these unqualified cunts quote "love thy neighbour"?

'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone' would be apposite. I'm unsure whether the Old Testament makes specific reference to the use of petrol bombs, but the passages cited to justify opposition to gay marriage and abortion need a little reading between the lines and generous interpretation to work as well.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 July, 2013, 11:31:09 PM
Their version of the Bible - which was probably written a few months ago when they set up their own church - likely does have extensive quotes about bumming being bad, because as far as I can tell, it's something they like to talk about.  A LOT.
I can sort of sympathise if they can't stop thinking about muscular men rubbing their penises together to the extent they have to stand in the street shouting about it.  Clearly it is something they feel passionate about and want to talk and think about as often as they possibly can in the hopes of making it stop, as it probably even distracts them to the point that last thing at night before they go to sleep they have to have a good think about oiled-up men rubbing each other - if they can even sleep at all with such thoughts keeping them up.  Clearly they need to get out in the streets and scream about buggery at random strangers - including children - because, you know, it's gay people that have the problem in this equation.
As for abortion, I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly think I'm better qualified to make a medical decision than any doctor - basing my opinion as I do entirely on magic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:42:35 AM
Not every Christian in Northern Ireland buys into the "God and Ulster" thing thankfully. It is however very much alive and I agree with previous posters as to its abhorrence. Verily it boils my urine.

Btw. Here's an interesting wee link to anyone have interested in a perspective that challenges the sort of homophobia that comes complete with Bible verses:

http://www.soulforce.org/resources/what-the-bible-says-and-doesnt-say-about-homosexuality/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:44:15 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:42:35 AM
Not every Christian in Northern Ireland buys into the "God and Ulster" thing thankfully. It is however very much alive and I agree with previous posters as to its abhorrence. Verily it boils my urine.

Btw. Here's an interesting wee link to anyone have interested in a perspective that challenges the sort of homophobia that comes complete with Bible verses:

http://www.soulforce.org/resources/what-the-bible-says-and-doesnt-say-about-homosexuality/

Food for thought even for those who dismiss the whole thing as hokum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 July, 2013, 05:45:15 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:42:35 AM
Here's an interesting wee link to anyone have interested in a perspective that challenges the sort of homophobia that comes complete with Bible verses:

http://www.soulforce.org/resources/what-the-bible-says-and-doesnt-say-about-homosexuality/

Cheers, Prodigal; that's a useful resource from someone who's done their homework. I'll admit that the one time I tried to read The Bible from the beginning I got frustrated with the lack of coherent narrative and just skipped to all the obvious good bits.

One of the bits I read in full was the passage dealing with Sodom and Gomorrah, and the author of that piece's observation regarding the real definition of a Sodomite is a great illustration of the way what you're told about scripture differs from the experience of reading it for yourself - when I couldn't find any mention of Jehovah destroying the city because of all the arse sex going on there I thought at first I'd zoned out and skipped a couple of lines. Thanks to that article, I'm going to take great pleasure in explaining to folk I know that they're actually Sodomites.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 July, 2013, 11:49:26 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:44:15 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 16 July, 2013, 08:42:35 AM
Not every Christian in Northern Ireland buys into the "God and Ulster" thing thankfully. It is however very much alive and I agree with previous posters as to its abhorrence. Verily it boils my urine.

Btw. Here's an interesting wee link to anyone have interested in a perspective that challenges the sort of homophobia that comes complete with Bible verses:

http://www.soulforce.org/resources/what-the-bible-says-and-doesnt-say-about-homosexuality/

Food for thought even for those who dismiss the whole thing as hokum.

Yup.  Again I say:  I wish all Christians were like the Prodigal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 17 July, 2013, 12:55:51 AM
While I have absolutely no problem with someone quite rightly pointing out all those other rules that have since been allowed to slide, the article itself does smack of someone wanting to be a member of some club that -- by its own rules -- is already letting in people it shouldn't.

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation. The Bible, as with every other religious text, should be able to withstand scientific and societal scrutiny without the need for metaphor or archaic understanding. Buggered if that shouldn't also go for human sexuality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 July, 2013, 08:30:28 AM
QuoteIf God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation. The Bible, as with every other religious text, should be able to withstand scientific and societal scrutiny without the need for metaphor or archaic understanding. Buggered if that shouldn't also go for human sexuality.

^^This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 July, 2013, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 15 July, 2013, 11:31:09 PM
Their version of the Bible - which was probably written a few months ago when they set up their own church - likely does have extensive quotes about bumming being bad, because as far as I can tell, it's something they like to talk about.  A LOT.
I can sort of sympathise if they can't stop thinking about muscular men rubbing their penises together to the extent they have to stand in the street shouting about it.  Clearly it is something they feel passionate about and want to talk and think about as often as they possibly can in the hopes of making it stop, as it probably even distracts them to the point that last thing at night before they go to sleep they have to have a good think about oiled-up men rubbing each other - if they can even sleep at all with such thoughts keeping them up.  Clearly they need to get out in the streets and scream about buggery at random strangers - including children - because, you know, it's gay people that have the problem in this equation.


I can tell you've put a lot of thought into this.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 17 July, 2013, 09:14:49 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 17 July, 2013, 12:55:51 AM
While I have absolutely no problem with someone quite rightly pointing out all those other rules that have since been allowed to slide, the article itself does smack of someone wanting to be a member of some club that -- by its own rules -- is already letting in people it shouldn't.

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation. The Bible, as with every other religious text, should be able to withstand scientific and societal scrutiny without the need for metaphor or archaic understanding. Buggered if that shouldn't also go for human sexuality.


Good thought provoking post Eric. A proper answer would get into all sorts of hermeneutics (that word always sounds like an old artificial sweetner to me) as to the Bible's nature etc. I was raised theologically in the old "faxed down directly from God's desk" model of inerrancy etc. Nowdays I think its all rather more complicated.

Often does my head in tbh. Sometimes I would like to be an atheist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 July, 2013, 10:12:35 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 17 July, 2013, 12:55:51 AM
If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation.

A guy I used to work for trained for the priesthood. He explained to me that one of the great sources of theological debate was a single line from The Crucifixion, where Jesus promises one of his fellow dying criminals "Truly I say to you today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43). The debate centred on whether that line should read

I say to you (comma) today you shall be with Me in Paradise or
I say to you today (comma) you shall be with Me in Paradise.

The first implies that the souls of both Jesus and his companion (and therefore all souls) leave the body and are in Heaven at the instant of death, or at least soon after. The second line relegates the use of the word "today" to the ranks of a rhetorical flourish on the part of Nazareth's favourite chippie. As I'm sure The Prodigal can confirm, there's no such thing as a comma in the language systems originally used to encode the direct Word Of God, so any punctuation used in modern day translations - and how they affect the interpretation of the text - are entirely the work of man and his imperfect tool of written communication.

That's before you get onto the thorny issues of translation, the many different versions of the texts included in The New Testament, the texts excluded from The New Testament by the early Church, and the problem of many words having multiple or ambiguous meanings in the original languages of the authors but especially in the promiscuous and polysemous English language. If you haven't read The Bible I urge you to read it, but if you want to read it in translation you might have to polish up on your Polish. It'll add another string to your bow, and I bow before anyone who doesn't bow under the pressure from above to have the meaning of texts handed to them, neatly tied up with a bow (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Bow).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 July, 2013, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 17 July, 2013, 08:56:05 AMI can tell you've put a lot of thought into this.

I can only think about it in 5-6 minute bursts.  Then I usually have a nap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 July, 2013, 12:12:25 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 17 July, 2013, 10:12:35 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 17 July, 2013, 12:55:51 AM
If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation.

A guy I used to work for trained for the priesthood. He explained to me that one of the great sources of theological debate was a single line from The Crucifixion, where Jesus promises one of his fellow dying criminals "Truly I say to you today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43). The debate centred on whether that line should read

I say to you (comma) today you shall be with Me in Paradise or
I say to you today (comma) you shall be with Me in Paradise.

That's nothing - the Great Schism of 1054, which led to the separation of the Catholic and Orthodox churches hinged on whether the credo should say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; or from the Father AND the Son.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 July, 2013, 01:55:13 PM


Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 July, 2013, 12:12:25 PM
That's nothing - the Great Schism of 1054, which led to the separation of the Catholic and Orthodox churches hinged on whether the credo should say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; or from the Father AND the Son.


Typical nerds.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 July, 2013, 02:10:36 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 July, 2013, 05:45:15 PM... a great illustration of the way what you're told about scripture differs from the experience of reading it for yourself.

As I've often trotted out, I was quite the religious spode with one eye on a vocation when I set about reading the Bible cover-to-cover, and pestering a well-meaning curate about details and meanings as I went on. I was an atheist long before I got to the end. 

By that token maybe I should try bumming (or rather, being bummed, as like most so-called 'straight' folk I've done the former, albeit with a lady) as a means of inoculating myself against late-onset gay?  If that were to happen I just don't think I could cope with the level of personal grooming that seems to be a prerequsite.  Not at my age.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 17 July, 2013, 03:02:00 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 July, 2013, 02:10:36 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 July, 2013, 05:45:15 PM... a great illustration of the way what you're told about scripture differs from the experience of reading it for yourself.

As I've often trotted out, I was quite the religious spode with one eye on a vocation when I set about reading the Bible cover-to-cover, and pestering a well-meaning curate about details and meanings as I went on. I was an atheist long before I got to the end. 

By that token maybe I should try bumming (or rather, being bummed, as like most so-called 'straight' folk I've done the former, albeit with a lady) as a means of inoculating myself against late-onset gay?  If that were to happen I just don't think I could cope with the level of personal grooming that seems to be a prerequsite.  Not at my age.

I could see where that would be the case TordelBack. There's enough in there particularly in the Old Testament that is weird, whacky and abhorrent, never-mind issues around historicity that would raise some very fundamental questions. I've been knee deep in that territory myself and re-visit it often.

I think I might shut up now. I'm beginning to bore myself tbh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 July, 2013, 10:34:57 PM
QuoteSometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 July, 2013, 11:00:50 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 July, 2013, 10:34:57 PM
QuoteSometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child.  ;)

When did they make that proselytizing polemicist a feckin' lord?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 July, 2013, 11:01:48 PM
Mr. Pops, one does not simply question Mr. Dawkins!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 18 July, 2013, 08:49:26 AM
Will Lord Dawkins give me a black exo-skeleton and a light sabre?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 22 July, 2013, 02:43:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 July, 2013, 10:34:57 PM
QuoteSometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child.  ;)

I think thy Lord Dawkins is agnostic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 July, 2013, 03:03:47 PM
Have to say, I really liked the God Delusion and can find little in Dawkins' work I could disagree with, but he gets on my tits a bit these days. He used to be known as a revolutionary science writer; now it's all about atheism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 22 July, 2013, 09:22:37 PM
Richard Dawkins. Typical Aries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 23 July, 2013, 12:21:19 PM
AS candidate I can believe in...
Cat Gets Thousands of Votes in Mexico Election

PHOTO: "I came for the rats," reads this campaign Facebook meme for Morris the Cat. "And I'll trounce the vultures with my legs."
"I came for the rats," reads this campaign Facebook meme for Morris the Cat. "And I'll trounce the vultures with my legs." Despite being a cat, Morris obtained some 12,000 votes in the election for mayor of Xalapa, Mexico.

By MANUEL RUEDA (@ruedareport)
July 15, 2013
Morris, the cat whose underground political candidacy won him headlines around the world, lapped up 12,000 votes in the election for mayor of Xalapa, Mexico, his handlers claimed on Monday.

The vote tally was nowhere near large enough to give this feline candidate the mayoral job. But it did place Morris fourth in a field of 11 candidates in the race to run Xalapa, population 420,000. Morris earned more votes than the candidate from Mexico's most influential left-wing party, the PRD.

The idea of running a cat for mayor was devised a couple months ago by two recent university graduates, who said that they did not identify with any of the city's human politicians.

On Facebook, the grads joked that Morris would rid the city of its corrupt political "rats" and said that voting for Morris would enable citizens to express their dissatisfaction with the city's rulers in an election that was already "a joke."

The cat's candidacy was hugely popular online, and it prompted disgruntled citizens elsewhere in Mexico to nominate more animals for office.

But Morris' campaign also generated political controversy, with some critics claiming that the pawed pol may have split the opposition vote in Xalapa, enabling Mexico's powerful ruling party, the PRI, to come out victorious.

Morris' handlers lashed out at these criticisms on Monday, in an oped published on the news site Animal Politico.

"Let's be realistic," Morris's campaign team wrote. "Who divided the vote? A simple cat, or the fragmented opposition?"

"If you combined the votes of [the top two opposition candidates], they would have easily had more votes than the PRI."

Critics are also questioning whether Morris actually secured the 12,000 votes that his handlers said he got.

Election officials in Xalapa did not allow the cat to officially register as a candidate (he is not human, after all) and said that any ballot in which someone wrote the cat's name would be considered an "invalid" vote and not be counted.

The votes that Morris supposedly got, are therefore, the votes that have been counted as "invalid" by officials, but of course there are numerous other reasons why votes can be determined to be invalid, like when someone ticks two candidates pictures.

To get their message across however, hundreds of Morris supporters took cell phone pictures of their ballots on election day, showing how they wrote in the cat's name.

Morris's campaign team thanked its supporters online, and promised that the famous cat would not disappear from politics. His Facebook page, in fact, now advocates for a series of animal rights laws in Mexico.

"We want to thank you," a banner on Morris' page reads. "The evolution of this project is just getting started.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 July, 2013, 02:09:26 PM
Quote from: The Doctor Alt 8 on 23 July, 2013, 12:21:19 PM
AS candidate I can believe in...
Cat Gets Thousands of Votes in Mexico Election

PHOTO: "I came for the rats," reads this campaign Facebook meme for Morris the Cat. "And I'll trounce the vultures with my legs."
"I came for the rats," reads this campaign Facebook meme for Morris the Cat. "And I'll trounce the vultures with my legs." Despite being a cat, Morris obtained some 12,000 votes in the election for mayor of Xalapa, Mexico.

I think this is how planet of the apes will begin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 31 July, 2013, 06:36:19 PM

Polling day in Zimbabwe's general election (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-23507207). Can't wait to find out who wins.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LorcanQ on 01 August, 2013, 01:27:03 PM
Just read Chomsky - Hopes and prospects

Anyone read Chomsky? He's fucking brilliant. If he was president of the US, the world would be a truly truly better place

At the moment, am reading all the Celtic Tiger/recession books. Frustrating stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 August, 2013, 01:30:15 PM
Quote from: LorcanQ on 01 August, 2013, 01:27:03 PM
Just read Chomsky - Hopes and prospects

Anyone read Chomsky? He's fucking brilliant. If he was president of the US, the world would be a truly truly better place

At the moment, am reading all the Celtic Tiger/recession books. Frustrating stuff.

I've listened to a lot of the Chomsky chap's interviews and lectures; it made the stress of living in Beijing last year a bit more bearable.  He's great; the best anarchist in writing since Alan Moore
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 August, 2013, 01:49:37 PM
I went to a series of lectures Chomsky gave in Dublin 20-odd years ago (covering all  of his various fields), they were mind-expanding in the genuine sense of that phrase.  By the end of the series they had to do video feeds to two other theatres to accommodate numbers, meaning he had an audience of about 1,200 - not bad for a talk on linguistics! 

I have a notebook sketch I did of him at the lectern that is the best thing I ever managed to draw, not long before I realised that I have not an atom of artistic ability. So he inspired in many ways.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 August, 2013, 03:10:54 PM
I would really like to see your drawing anyway! Go on, you know you want to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 August, 2013, 03:20:54 PM


The battle between Chomsky & Zizek is a battle more about how much time we're willing to spend listening to them when we could be doing something else than it is about theory versus pragmatism:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWRqPbwwYS0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ1ylGxGBF4
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 August, 2013, 07:39:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 August, 2013, 03:10:54 PM
I would really like to see your drawing anyway!

What, and find my precious IP adorning a pedestrian crossing in Leixlip next week?   ;)

Even as I wrote that post, I realised I have no idea where the hell it is.  A notebook.  Somewhere. I think I'll do a Kickstarter to fund the search.  Stretch goals include typing up my notes from the actual lecture, and for top-level pledges a facsimile edition of my Star Wars Sequel Decalogy (1983-7).  Trust me, there'd be no need to manufacture consent on that baby.

I'll have a look, but it's not worth the wait.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 01 August, 2013, 08:28:53 PM
WWIII Queen's speech' script revealed (http://'http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23518587) in U.K. national archives released today. Also in the archive: sacrificing Kent and Essex to save London in tidal flood. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23518590)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2013, 12:49:57 AM


Quote from: TordelBack on 01 August, 2013, 07:39:13 PM
and for top-level pledges a facsimile edition of my Star Wars Sequel Decalogy (1983-7).


You could've saved Lucasfilm a lot of money.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 August, 2013, 08:03:17 AM
QuoteWhat, and find my precious IP adorning a pedestrian crossing in Leixlip next week?   ;)

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 August, 2013, 08:50:24 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2013, 12:49:57 AM
You could've saved Lucasfilm a lot of money.

Probably not.  The SFX costs of two galaxies colliding! would have been considerable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 August, 2013, 09:09:22 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 August, 2013, 08:50:24 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2013, 12:49:57 AM
You could've saved Lucasfilm a lot of money.

Probably not.  The SFX costs of two galaxies colliding! would have been considerable.

It sounds frickin' awesome.  I'm sure George Lucas would happily find a way to fuck it up then sell it to Disney.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 August, 2013, 06:38:24 PM

Landslide for Mugabe (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-23554443)! The bookies must be smarting after that shocker.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 02 August, 2013, 07:03:36 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 01 August, 2013, 03:20:54 PM


The battle between Chomsky & Zizek is a battle more about how much time we're willing to spend listening to them when we could be doing something else than it is about theory versus pragmatism:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWRqPbwwYS0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ1ylGxGBF4

It's also about Chomsky delivering a brilliantly written knockout blow to a few statements given off-the-cuff in a Q&A with Zizek, half of which Zizek thinks were recorded incorrectly.  So you read Chomsky's rebuttal thinking, "Yes, this is great" and then read Zizek's response thinking "Bugger, Chomsky just made a complete tit of himself, didn't he?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2013, 02:23:44 PM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23662583

Cameron makes the case for 'Fracking'!

I think this an absolutely shit idea for a couple of reasons:

To say that environmental damage will be minimal as long as everything is properly regulated, seems a bit of a lie to be honest. Any kind of underground drilling has profound consequences, and regulation (banks) is just a nice word to put the public at ease.

And to drill for the gas will take a massive amount of energy (oil), the cost of which would probably be factored into 'future shale gas' prices; so probably more expensive than what people are already paying.

I realise some of you may have a deeper understanding on the subject, but to me it all sounds a bit fucking pointless!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2013, 02:36:31 PM
The fracking companies have already said that, contrary to Cameron and Osborne's claims, fracking won't cut energy bills. (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/cuadrilla-pr-man-admits-george-osbornes-shale-gas-revolution-wont-cut-energy-bills-8656246.html)

What it does seem quite likely to do is put up water bills. (http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/the-fracktured-future-of-water-millions-to-face-higher-bills-with-compulsory-water-meters-to-satiate-uks-thirst-for-fracking/)

(Keep in mind that we — in a country where it rains all the fucking time — pay more for domestic water than Spain or Italy, thanks to the rampant profiteering of the private water companies...)

It does seem a little bloody-minded that if, as a nation, we are determined to look to fossil hydrocarbons as at least a short term fix to energy supply problems, we should so comprehensively ignore the fact that we live on island made of coal.

In fact, 40% of our electricity is still made by burning coal, but we import most of it because domestic coal is too expensive. Be nice if the coal industry got a big, fat tax break like the frackers, eh? Particularly since we seem to be on the verge of CO2-free combustion of coal (http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2013/02/scientists-generate-electricity-from-coal-without-burning-it/).

Still, mining's a bit of a politically charged issue and no one wants to develop a sensible energy policy if it might cause a bit of a fuss...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 12 August, 2013, 03:01:56 PM
Ha!  I'm sure I read somewhere recently that part of the increase in fuel costs that we have seen of late have been down to Government interference with things like setting up wind farms and making energy companies provide cheap insulation for homes.  All of which have had little actual effect on CO2 emissions. 

I don't really know much about fracking but like many folks I have seen those videos on youtube where people have been able to set light to the water coming out of their taps.  So, it seems that there can be some impact with it!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2013, 03:06:02 PM
Fracking is basically five different catastrophes waiting to happen at any one time, and the more fracking sites there are and the bigger they get, the more likely one or more of those disasters becomes - that's just basic statistical probability, too, I'm not even bringing the need for corporations to cut costs and culpability at a legal level through lobbying into things there - but a better understanding of the subject is largely unnecessary as you just have to look at Cameron's face - especially his dead eyes - to know he is not on your side, he is not like us, and nothing he does is for our benefit.

I thought "fair play" when people started talking about restricting the amount of rape/child pornography on the web, but then Cameron threw his weight behind it and bells started ringing, and sure enough the actual legislation proposed is a mess of Orwellian proportions that will stop households accessing everything from sexual health to Wikipedia pages, ushering in the long-delayed age of web puritanism wanted by corporations and "moral guardians".  The man is such a greasy, untrustworthy little shit* that he has somehow taken the words "child porn is bad" and made them a lie, and just to remind you what a piece of work he really is, he has used actual murdered children to push this agenda and grab himself headlines while doing so.

But on the whole, though, I think this government has been good for us.  I don't just mean because we'd gotten to the point where we said "anything would be better than 4 more years of Labour" so we clearly needed reminding, I mean it was also good to see what a colossal betrayal and waste of time the Lib Dems are.  Labour may be greedy, unreliable, borderline-corrupt, criminally incompetent warmongers, but at least they know what a sausage roll is.


* IMO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 August, 2013, 03:06:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2013, 02:36:31 PM
What it does seem quite likely to do is put up water bills. (http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/the-fracktured-future-of-water-millions-to-face-higher-bills-with-compulsory-water-meters-to-satiate-uks-thirst-for-fracking/)

and get ready for drained reservoirs and aquifers leading to permanent hosepipe bans: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water). Which they will then use this as an excuse to put up bills because they need the 'investment' in improvements
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2013, 03:12:46 PM
Apropos of nothing, I watched a cartoon yesterday where a character mentioned in passing how the Hopi built their cities into south-facing cliffs so as to maximise their exposure to the sun.  Strange to think that even barely-lingual savages a thousand years ago knew they needed more energy-efficient homes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 12 August, 2013, 03:46:37 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 12 August, 2013, 03:12:46 PM
Apropos of nothing, I watched a cartoon yesterday where a character mentioned in passing how the Hopi built their cities into south-facing cliffs so as to maximise their exposure to the sun.  Strange to think that even barely-lingual savages a thousand years ago knew they needed more energy-efficient homes.

I think that might be a teeny bit racist or milleniumist or something. Cities suggest 'civilised' and organisational skills you don't get from being barely-lingual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 12 August, 2013, 04:01:16 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 12 August, 2013, 03:46:37 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 12 August, 2013, 03:12:46 PM
Apropos of nothing, I watched a cartoon yesterday where a character mentioned in passing how the Hopi built their cities into south-facing cliffs so as to maximise their exposure to the sun.  Strange to think that even barely-lingual savages a thousand years ago knew they needed more energy-efficient homes.

I think that might be a teeny bit racist or milleniumist or something. Cities suggest 'civilised' and organisational skills you don't get from being barely-lingual.

Or perhaps a teeny bit tongue in cheek...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 12 August, 2013, 04:08:05 PM
Oh. Fair enough then. Slight headache and blehness means I'm a bit slow on the uptake today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
Frack away, I say!!  Until someone can explain to me how a wind farm can replace the gas that goes into my boiler and radiators that keep me toasty warm, I'm quite happy to stay with coal, nuclear and any other system that works.  Come on you clever lot, how does a wind farm supply heating to 60 million people?  I really want to know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 12 August, 2013, 05:01:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
Frack away, I say!!  Until someone can explain to me how a wind farm can replace the gas that goes into my boiler and radiators that keep me toasty warm, I'm quite happy to stay with coal, nuclear and any other system that works.  Come on you clever lot, how does a wind farm supply heating to 60 million people?  I really want to know.

Have you tried the internet?
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-power.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2013, 05:10:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
Frack away, I say!!  Until someone can explain to me how a wind farm can replace the gas that goes into my boiler and radiators that keep me toasty warm, I'm quite happy to stay with coal, nuclear and any other system that works.  Come on you clever lot, how does a wind farm supply heating to 60 million people?  I really want to know.


With proper investment hydro-power and wind farms could be more than viable, and a lot less destructive.

If 'keeping warm' is your main concern you should try wearing a coat - this would be cheaper, and again; a lot less destructive to the environment.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:14:06 PM
Thanks for the link, Richmond, very interesting but I've got a gas pipe coming into my house from the road, into my recently purchased expensive gas boiler which then warms the pipes to my radiators.  How is all that lot replaced by a wind turbine?  How much is it going to cost me?  I need to know, I'm on a budget!  I was talking about heating not lighting, most of us have got gas boilers, who's going to pay to replace them all with something that lets all that wind in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 12 August, 2013, 05:17:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:14:06 PM
Thanks for the link, Richmond, very interesting but I've got a gas pipe coming into my house from the road, into my recently purchased expensive gas boiler which then warms the pipes to my radiators.  How is all that lot replaced by a wind turbine?  How much is it going to cost me?  I need to know, I'm on a budget!  I was talking about heating not lighting, most of us have got gas boilers, who's going to pay to replace them all with something that lets all that wind in?

You seem to be mistaking me for your heating engineer. Perhaps you should ask them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 12 August, 2013, 05:21:44 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2013, 05:10:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
Frack away, I say!!  Until someone can explain to me how a wind farm can replace the gas that goes into my boiler and radiators that keep me toasty warm, I'm quite happy to stay with coal, nuclear and any other system that works.  Come on you clever lot, how does a wind farm supply heating to 60 million people?  I really want to know.


With proper investment hydro-power and wind farms could be more than viable, and a lot less destructive.

If 'keeping warm' is your main concern you should try wearing a coat - this would be cheaper, and again; a lot less destructive to the environment.

Cheers

This sounds like something Prince Charles might say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:29:20 PM
Damn, Richmond, I thought you were going to give me the answer.  No more time wasters, please.  Surely there's an earth-hugger out there who can give me the answer!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2013, 05:33:03 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:29:20 PM
Damn, Richmond, I thought you were going to give me the answer.  No more time wasters, please.  Surely there's an earth-hugger out there who can give me the answer!

You really are a colossal fuckwit, aren't you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:38:56 PM
..........and you really don't have a sense of humour, do you!  All hail to the great Jim_Campbell!!  Another web-site warrior!  Hopefully, Richmond on the other hand, realises that I'm having a laugh with him and takes it in the manner in which it was meant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 August, 2013, 05:44:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
I'm quite happy to stay with coal, nuclear and any other system that works.  Come on you clever lot, how does a wind farm supply heating to 60 million people? 

You might as well ask how an electricity generating power station is supposed to pipe gas into your home. Energy generation in the UK is already the result of a mix of all the sources you describe, plus oil, hydroelectric, imported energy, and renewables other than wind. Renewables already account for the same percentage of UK energy production as nuclear currently does:

https://restats.decc.gov.uk/cms/national-renewables-statistics/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 12 August, 2013, 05:49:31 PM
...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 12 August, 2013, 05:50:05 PM
That worked well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 12 August, 2013, 05:51:12 PM
Old Tankie does kind of raise a good point - wind farms, hydro-electric plants and even nuclear all generate electricity whereas in this country the majority of homes are still heated by gas.  Of late, the North Sea reserves of Gas have really dropped which is probably why they now want to frack for it.  Short-term this leaves us importing the majority of our gas.

The answer to Tankie's question is to change from a gas boiler to an electric one and then you don't need to change anything else in your system.  The future is electric, whether that be generated by burning coal, wind-farms or nuclear power plants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:54:47 PM
Thank you, Sir.  It was a genuine question about the practicalities of a country that currently uses gas boilers as its main heating system and how it can be changed without costing us a bloody fortune.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 August, 2013, 06:03:30 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:54:47 PM
Thank you, Sir.  It was a genuine question about the practicalities of a country that currently uses gas boilers as its main heating system and how it can be changed without costing us a bloody fortune.

Most boilers last between 7-15 years. As gas becomes scarce enough to be prohibitively expensive, folk will just change over to a different system when they'd be upgrading their old boiler anyway.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 12 August, 2013, 07:28:34 PM
Apparently tidal power could potentially provide 20% of our energy needs which sounds quite amazing. I guess the technology is not as exportable as some though which may go some way to explaining why we're not surging ahead with it.

I'd like to think that in the future our energy needs will lessen anyway. Led lighting (and other lower energy devices) better insulation and less wasteful infrastructures at home ( grey water tanks, solar panels, ground source heat pumps) will hopefully offset rising costs per unit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 12 August, 2013, 09:11:42 PM
One of the reasons I read National Geographic magazine is to learn about the multitude of schemes and ideas for renewable and sustainable energy that are been developed.  Things like turbines in even slow moving rivers which aren't a danger to fish but which can generate as much as a wind turbine 24/7, and solar panels that are flexible and so can be wrapped around structures easily.

I often see older houses fitted with solar panels which look bulky and ugly and possibly in danger of been ripped off by a strong wind (not to mention adding extra weight to roofing joists).  A company in California has designed a miniature panel the size and shape of a roof tile so you can cover the entire of a building's roof with solar panels and not have them stand out like something from the Sov-Tastic architecture thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 August, 2013, 12:27:32 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 12 August, 2013, 06:03:30 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2013, 05:54:47 PM
Thank you, Sir.  It was a genuine question about the practicalities of a country that currently uses gas boilers as its main heating system and how it can be changed without costing us a bloody fortune.

Most boilers last between 7-15 years. As gas becomes scarce enough to be prohibitively expensive, folk will just change over to a different system when they'd be upgrading their old boiler anyway.

Our boiler is knocking on for thirty years old. I just have to replace the thermocouple every 4 years but it keeps on ticking. Every plumber that comes to the house looks at it and says "That one will never break down. Hang on to it. You'll never save enough on bills from a new boiler to recoup the cost." This doesn't seem right to me - but is a refreshing variation on "oooh, I'll have to replace the entire energy infrastructure of your house" that you often get..


I do like Prof Bear's description of Cameron: "He is not on your side. He is not one of us. Nothing he does is for your benefit". I might use that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 14 August, 2013, 07:36:33 PM
I know some environmentalists are against solar panels because of the toxic chemicals involved in their manufacture and I have heard with the older ones (not sure about the new ones) that by the time they had money invested in them paid for, it was time to replace them. We'll see what impact the Chinese will have on their manufacture and the market, now that E.U. are resolving their tariff issue against them.

In related news: Light from plastic bottles  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23536914)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 14 August, 2013, 11:07:52 PM
Led lighting are fine but they will reduce your electricity bill very little.
The biggest energy bill in a house is heating, be it water or central heating. Solar panels for water are generally a fad, if you are installing them in the British Isles and Ireland, the payback on them is so long that they are not worth putting in, if you are in Portugal they are a great idea.

Turbines will be a good investment when the systems get a bit cheaper especially on the west coast of these islands, and the electricity companies start to buy the current at a decent price, not the sum they currently pay. There is all sorts of systems, turbines directly to the house with current sensing relays that will turn off the mains and use the turbines, turbines to a battery dump that is used to power the house when needed, neither system is great, the first will only turn off the mains when a certain amount of current is created, wasting electricity, the second, the battery dumps have to be replaced, and thats not cheap. The easiest is to sell the electricty directly to the provider and get credit off your bill.

Stream and river turbines work well too, but the cost is huge, and not worth it for domestic application.

Electrical solar panels really are toys in this part of the world, they will provided current, so long as its a bulb you want lit, just don't ask it to boil a kettle!

The best way of saving money and using less energy is insulation, the amount is important, but it come to a point that if you use any more it makes no difference. The the real important thing with insulation is that its fitted properly.

Other simple things that really do make a difference, even though they are on every government green flyers, close the doors, if you have appliances that are a few years old that are left plugged in on standby, plug them out when no in use, depending on what you have this can make more difference that using CFL of LED lamps. Lagging, less water in the kettle etc etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 August, 2013, 10:54:49 AM
This is from an email that came around at work - I thought it was quite funny:

On her radio show, Dr. Laura said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Schlesinger, written by a US man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as quite informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman,

Ed.D. Professor Emeritus,

Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

P.S. (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 August, 2013, 11:19:46 AM
Blissful.

How long does Trout have to remain in Canada before we can purchase him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 24 August, 2013, 09:55:40 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 August, 2013, 10:54:49 AM
This is from an email that came around at work - I thought it was quite funny:

On her radio show, Dr. Laura said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Schlesinger, written by a US man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as quite informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman,

Ed.D. Professor Emeritus,

Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

P.S. (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian.)


:)An excellent response and one that highlights effectively the need for a little thought and discernment when it comes to these things. The tragedy for me as someone who believes is that a sizeable proportion of the Christian community (for a start) doesn't realise that this kind of stuff is in the Biblical texts and another section prefers to avoid it entirely.

Not exactly Songs of Praise is it?

I have a few to add should anyone want them for future reference btw
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 August, 2013, 11:59:36 AM
It amazes me how many "good" people are willing to treat others badly because their partial reading of a poorly translated version of something written on goat skin by a hermit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 24 August, 2013, 12:14:18 PM
A uni module I did focused on how the Bible can be used in various ways by those in power etc who clearly skip over or pretend certain parts of it aren't there. I ended up finding a site- I think it was something easy to remember like evilbible.com- that gave a long listing of the bad like the bloke a couple of posts up did. I did purchase a Bible to check them and they were in there- mine were just a verse or two off from the ones posted online.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 24 August, 2013, 02:07:03 PM
There are however, Christian theologians who are very open about the whole "dark side of the Bible."

One bloke Greg Boyd has a book out shortly on precisely these kind of things and that indeed is the very title of the book.

Refreshing little article:

http://reknew.org/2013/03/getting-honest-about-the-dark-side-of-the-bible/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 26 August, 2013, 12:14:43 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 24 August, 2013, 02:07:03 PM
Refreshing little article:

http://reknew.org/2013/03/getting-honest-about-the-dark-side-of-the-bible/

Hubris. The inherent arrogance of Christianity is that it presumes the Jews got their own religion wrong. In the unlikely event of Christendom ditching the Tanakh it would literally halve its theological issues.

Fudge me if Christianity isn't the Star Trek of religions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 08:49:14 AM
Quote....the more fundamental problem is that the dilemma we're facing isn't first and foremost about the clash between horrific portraits of God in Scripture and our moral intuitions. It's rather about the clash between these portraits and God's own self-revelation in the crucified Christ.

No, I think it has a everything to do with our 'moral intuitions'.  Murdering the innocent and oppressing the other  is wrong - we don't need to read about God's avatar/son/logos being tortured to death to grasp that.  The persistent assertion that morality can only derive from a divine revelation is the most patronising aspect of most religious thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 08:55:44 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 26 August, 2013, 12:14:43 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 24 August, 2013, 02:07:03 PM
Refreshing little article:

http://reknew.org/2013/03/getting-honest-about-the-dark-side-of-the-bible/

Hubris. The inherent arrogance of Christianity is that it presumes the Jews got their own religion wrong. In the unlikely event of Christendom ditching the Tanakh it would literally halve its theological issues.

Fudge me if Christianity isn't the Star Trek of religions.

Not sure I get this Eric. Are you saying that Christian theologians are guilty of hubris towards Judaism but should nevertheless dump the entire Old testament to avoid the nasty bits and hence resolve the identified issues?

Star Trek? Are you referring to a religious amalgam or Spock's Judaic based Vulcan salute?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:03:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 08:49:14 AM
Quote....the more fundamental problem is that the dilemma we're facing isn't first and foremost about the clash between horrific portraits of God in Scripture and our moral intuitions. It's rather about the clash between these portraits and God's own self-revelation in the crucified Christ.

No, I think it has a everything to do with our 'moral intuitions'.  Murdering the innocent and oppressing the other  is wrong - we don't need to read about God's avatar/son/logos being tortured to death to grasp that.  The persistent assertion that morality can only derive from a divine revelation is the most patronising aspect of most religious thought.

Tordel I think you need to recognise the articles immediate intended audience and the fact that it is a theological work and maybe in that respect adopt a different approach road. The article is written for a Christian audience. He is stirring the pot of the Christian community in the first instance.

Also in writing:

"At the same time, I believe it is also vitally important that we remain ruthlessly honest with ourselves and others and God about this material. How else can we describe material such as this as anything other than horrific, macabre, grotesque, and even revolting? If a portrait of God commanding people to slaughter babies and causing mothers to eat them doesn't qualify as revolting, what would? If you found material like this in any other ancient or modern text, would you hesitate for a moment from labeling it as macabre, revolting, or some such phrase? If we are honest, we cannot deny it. So how does horrific material like what I just reviewed suddenly become less revolting by virtue of being found in our sacred text rather than someone else's? - See more at: http://reknew.org/2013/03/getting-honest-about-the-dark-side-of-the-bible/#sthash.7RH06fo4.dpuf"


I think he is acknowledging an obvious role for an inbuilt moral intuition right at the outset of the article. Besides I know this guys thinking and he is not a fundamentalist in the sense that he of course acknowledges that very worthy value bases can flow from atheistic/humanist fundamentals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 09:10:16 AM
If I thought for one second that the religious audience would see theological discussions as only addressed to them and not humanity as a whole I'd be more tolerant, in the same way that I wouldn't troll a My Little Pony forum unless they insisted that I too brush my mane thrice daily, and persist in enshrining this in secular law.

Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:03:41 AM
I think he is acknowledging an obvious moral intuition right at the outset of the article.

Beyond the introduction, it seems clear that he is asserting 'normal' morality as deriving from the New Testament.  That said, he seems like a decent guy.  (see also: Satan)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:29:39 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 09:10:16 AM
If I thought for one second that the religious audience would see theological discussions as only addressed to them and not humanity as a whole I'd be more tolerant, in the same way that I wouldn't troll a My Little Pony forum unless they insisted that I too brush my mane thrice daily, and persist in enshrining this in secular law.

Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:03:41 AM
I think he is acknowledging an obvious moral intuition right at the outset of the article.

Beyond the introduction, it seems clear that he is asserting 'normal' morality as deriving from the New Testament.  That said, he seems like a decent guy.  (see also: Satan)

Tordel as previously stated I am both a Christian and committed secularist. I believe faith should be a personal position and when it affects the state ugly things can happen and have happened. Faith and politics is a potentially very poisonous mix. I am not on my own in that respect within the Christian community.

I think in the article Greg is saying in the first instance, doesn't this material strike your moral intuition as bizarre and just plain wrong and then having acknowledged that, is viewing this material in the context of the picture of Jesus presented in the NT and asking some key questions.

Boyd is a good fella. Intensely anti-nationalistic and shares my secularism. he has taken a lot of flak from the religious right for his stance. He is also a huge Pink Floyd fan which I like a lot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:33:32 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:29:39 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 09:10:16 AM
If I thought for one second that the religious audience would see theological discussions as only addressed to them and not humanity as a whole I'd be more tolerant, in the same way that I wouldn't troll a My Little Pony forum unless they insisted that I too brush my mane thrice daily, and persist in enshrining this in secular law.

Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 09:03:41 AM
I think he is acknowledging an obvious moral intuition right at the outset of the article.

Beyond the introduction, it seems clear that he is asserting 'normal' morality as deriving from the New Testament.  That said, he seems like a decent guy.  (see also: Satan)

Tordel as previously stated I am both a Christian and committed secularist. I believe faith should be a personal position and when it affects the state ugly things can happen and have happened. Faith and politics is a potentially very poisonous mix. I am not on my own in that respect within the Christian community though I freely acknowledge the

I think in the article Greg is saying in the first instance, doesn't this material strike your moral intuition as bizarre and just plain wrong and then having acknowledged that, is viewing this material in the context of the picture of Jesus presented in the NT and asking some key questions.

Boyd is a good fella. Intensely anti-nationalistic and shares my secularism. he has taken a lot of flak from the religious right for his stance. He is also a huge Pink Floyd fan which I like a lot.

Double post-apologies.

Where is the disintegrator button?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2013, 09:39:23 PM
Religion was in charge of the world once, coincidentally we call that time the Dark Ages.
Generally speaking, I find that we and not our imaginary friends should make decisions about our lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 26 August, 2013, 10:38:35 PM
^
Where is the LIKE button on this forum....
Can we get one.....Please...

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 26 August, 2013, 11:48:43 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 08:55:44 AM
Not sure I get this Eric. Are you saying that Christian theologians are guilty of hubris towards Judaism but should nevertheless dump the entire Old testament to avoid the nasty bits and hence resolve the identified issues?

Star Trek? Are you referring to a religious amalgam or Spock's Judaic based Vulcan salute?

Sorry, Prodigal. I'll usually give up if I can't articulate something to my satisfaction by the third or fourth attempt of writing. Last night? Just one of those times I decided to post and be damned.

What I was trying to say is that it's Christian hubris that has created the kind of problem Boyd is addressing. He quotes several 'horrific portraits of God in Scripture' yet glosses over the rather salient fact they're all taken from the Tanakh (i.e. the 'Old Testament') – the God of which is not the same as the New Testament's. As a Christian, I presume you accept both Gods as being one and the same despite the former making good on his threats while the latter . . . simply makes threats.

As for Star Trek . . . well. The Original Series has effectively been overwritten by the franchise it spawned; that, despite the various spin-offs remaining so intrinsically linked to the adventures of Kirk and co. The more obsessive Trekkies try their best to reconcile the various discontinuities of an already inconsistent and contradictory narrative; a narrative complicated further by a reboot that's little more than a mish-mash of tropes and characters but with a Star Wars aesthetic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 11:56:01 PM
Apologies if you read my rant as directed at you, Prodigal - I know theocracy is most definitely not your game.  They were intemperate if heart-felt remarks, and inspired by those who see intelligent theological argument as somehow better than the old dumb stuff, and thus more suited to be a guide to morality in modern governance.  To my ear all theological arguments sound like we do on here when debating how many monkeys-in-fezs there should be in Dredd's chain, or which cheese is better for cleaning your iPad screen.  As I completely reject the premises on which these arguments are based, I find it hard to deal with the idea that they should affect my life.  Which they frequently do. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 August, 2013, 07:44:33 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 26 August, 2013, 11:48:43 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 26 August, 2013, 08:55:44 AM
Not sure I get this Eric. Are you saying that Christian theologians are guilty of hubris towards Judaism but should nevertheless dump the entire Old testament to avoid the nasty bits and hence resolve the identified issues?

Star Trek? Are you referring to a religious amalgam or Spock's Judaic based Vulcan salute?

Sorry, Prodigal. I'll usually give up if I can't articulate something to my satisfaction by the third or fourth attempt of writing. Last night? Just one of those times I decided to post and be damned.

What I was trying to say is that it's Christian hubris that has created the kind of problem Boyd is addressing. He quotes several 'horrific portraits of God in Scripture' yet glosses over the rather salient fact they're all taken from the Tanakh (i.e. the 'Old Testament') – the God of which is not the same as the New Testament's. As a Christian, I presume you accept both Gods as being one and the same despite the former making good on his threats while the latter . . . simply makes threats.

As for Star Trek . . . well. The Original Series has effectively been overwritten by the franchise it spawned; that, despite the various spin-offs remaining so intrinsically linked to the adventures of Kirk and co. The more obsessive Trekkies try their best to reconcile the various discontinuities of an already inconsistent and contradictory narrative; a narrative complicated further by a reboot that's little more than a mish-mash of tropes and characters but with a Star Wars aesthetic.

Gotcha Eric.

There have been times in my life where I have steered very close to your position believe it or not. I am no stranger to both faith and doubt and this area of OT/NT has been one of my battle-grounds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 August, 2013, 07:50:29 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2013, 11:56:01 PM
Apologies if you read my rant as directed at you, Prodigal - I know theocracy is most definitely not your game.  They were intemperate if heart-felt remarks, and inspired by those who see intelligent theological argument as somehow better than the old dumb stuff, and thus more suited to be a guide to morality in modern governance.  To my ear all theological arguments sound like we do on here when debating how many monkeys-in-fezs there should be in Dredd's chain, or which cheese is better for cleaning your iPad screen.  As I completely reject the premises on which these arguments are based, I find it hard to deal with the idea that they should affect my life.  Which they frequently do.

Tordel no apologies are necessary. You are a most eloquent and keenly intelligent fellow (not that you need an endorsement from me) who challenges my beliefs where they need to be challenged. Your opinion on these things and (in the past) what 2000AD goodies I should read as a relative newbie have been most welcome and I am grateful for them.

Tbh I have friends in the "real world" who would dismiss my beliefs with a far more agricultural turn of phrase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 August, 2013, 08:56:05 AM
Turn that other cheek Prodigal baby, I got another slap right here!   ;)

You are a fine advert for your faith, Prodigal.  These days I wouldn't seek to challenge anyone's beliefs (since even the most ardent rationalists operate with world views that are riddled with the irrational) right up to the point where those beliefs include a conviction that others should be made to think and do likewise. 

For myself, I believe that all public policy should be evidence-based, which by definition eliminates all faith-based input, and where addressing a question that is really about prevailing mores should be open to debate with a strong presumption in the favour of freedom of thought, word and deed.  It's about as naive a position as most religions aspire to, so I'll have to get in the queue for the stone-throwing.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 27 August, 2013, 10:44:00 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 August, 2013, 08:56:05 AM
Turn that other cheek Prodigal baby, I got another slap right here!   ;)

You are a fine advert for your faith, Prodigal.  These days I wouldn't seek to challenge anyone's beliefs (since even the most ardent rationalists operate with world views that are riddled with the irrational) right up to the point where those beliefs include a conviction that others should be made to think and do likewise. 

For myself, I believe that all public policy should be evidence-based, which by definition eliminates all faith-based input, and where addressing a question that is really about prevailing mores should be open to debate with a strong presumption in the favour of freedom of thought, word and deed.  It's about as naive a position as most religions aspire to, so I'll have to get in the queue for the stone-throwing.

I found myself nodding sage like at that Tordel. I am very fond of freedom of thought, word and deed and recognise religion's often oppressive presence there.

Btw I should thank you for a very recent fine read. I departed all domestic produced comics for years and having returned to the fold find that there are enormous gaps in my knowledge both 2000AD wise and broader a-field. I saw your  endorsement of Mezolith in a thread and picked it up. Beautiful stuff so genuine thanks for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 September, 2013, 07:12:22 PM
So. No Syria campaign. 'Looks around nervously' Well. I'm OK with that t least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 02 September, 2013, 08:49:06 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 01 September, 2013, 07:12:22 PM
So. No Syria campaign. 'Looks around nervously' Well. I'm OK with that t least.

Me too hawk. I was actually quite taken back by the UK's Parliamentary stance-good to see the brakes being applied.

So very often when I read sabre rattling posts about no need for UN approval for military action etc I genuinely see Charley's War and Pat Mills commentaries flash before my eyes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 September, 2013, 11:50:11 AM
Oh! there'll be a Syrian campaign all right, it just won't involve the British (apparently!!).  Are we really supposed to believe that GCHQ in Britain, and the extensive British surveillance facilities in Cyprus, are not helping the campaign?!  And do we really, really, really believe that there are no British special forces on the ground in Syria, helping to locate possible targets?  Oh! look!  there's a pink pig flying!!!

Don't you just love Parliamentary democracies, you always get the truth!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 September, 2013, 03:18:06 PM
Ah I don't care. I keep my nose out of politics mostly, but I just don't want our lads being dragged into another wild goose chase by the US.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2013, 04:43:28 PM
QuoteAh I don't care.

And that right there is what's wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 September, 2013, 04:51:49 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 September, 2013, 11:50:11 AM
Oh! there'll be a Syrian campaign all right, it just won't involve the British (apparently!!).  Are we really supposed to believe that GCHQ in Britain, and the extensive British surveillance facilities in Cyprus, are not helping the campaign?!  And do we really, really, really believe that there are no British special forces on the ground in Syria, helping to locate possible targets?  Oh! look!  there's a pink pig flying!!!

Don't you just love Parliamentary democracies, you always get the truth!!

If Bush and Blair had finished the 9/11 memorial service by announcing that - instead of invading Afghanistan then Iraq - they were going to send a dedicated team of 12 hard bastards into the wilds of Afghanistan/Pakistan and tell them not to come back unless one of them was carrying Osama Bin Laden's head in their kit bag, absolutely everyone in both countries would have been fine with that. Everyone would still be fine with that course of action today, had it been taken.

Even if whatever the US seems determined to get itself into in Syria proves to be an unqualified success, I don't think anyone in this country will look back and regret not being a major part of it. Whatever the reason for UK conventional forces sitting this one out (and I suspect it might have as much to do with us being skint as the 2015 General Election), kudos to Dave and Nick for not employing the fanatic zeal and chicanery of Tony Blair to make sure we do the right thing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 September, 2013, 05:04:57 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2013, 04:43:28 PM
QuoteAh I don't care.

And that right there is what's wrong.
Dude, the population of the earth is 7 Billion. There will always be conflict, deaths and tragedies. Filtering money into a campaign while our country goes down the fucking gutter is what's been going on the last decade. Do you know haw hard it was for me to get a first job? It took me 4 years of constant searching because there was fuck all in my home town. No work what so ever. We should be focusing on our own issues not solving those of others, I have a right to live as well. If the yanks want to get involved in every damn genocide that occures wether it involves them or not, by all means, let them, they are a world power, we are not (anymore). Fact is we don't have the money, and after the right ball's up that was Iraq I frankly just want us to stay out of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 September, 2013, 06:14:15 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 02 September, 2013, 05:04:57 PM
Do you know haw hard it was for me to get a first job? It took me 4 years of constant searching because there was fuck all in my home town. No work what so ever. We should be focusing on our own issues not solving those of others, I have a right to live as well.

If there's an easy answer to whether I should care more about you not being able to get on in life and a Syrian kid being slaughtered by their own government, I can't think of it. Like you say though, Hawkmungous, it's a big old world - why I should just shrug my shoulders and acquiesce to genocide because the victims have a different postcode to my own also escapes me. If you want to reduce it to a matter of borders and governments, we live in different countries to each other.

I'd still care if someone decided to dose you with nerve agents, I'm just not sure that bombarding Leeds (?) with tomahawk missiles from a submarine off the North East coast of England would be the best way of helping you out.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 September, 2013, 07:36:06 PM
Please don't think it doesn't sadden me that these things are happening. But ever since humanity was spawned there has been war between one another and horrific acts that are not right. I'm sadly of two minds though. On the one hand, such things simply show humanity's penchant for power and meaningless violence in order to achieve their goals and are monstrosities. On the other, such culls are present in all species. Speaking as a biology student, it's well documented that many colony species of invertebrates kill there fellows in order to achieve areas of land and secure food supplies. Such things are needed to keep a species in check (and at over 7 billion, the effects of humanities over population are apparent). It's an old argument, human ethics over natural selection.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 September, 2013, 08:10:48 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 02 September, 2013, 07:36:06 PM
such culls are present in all species. Speaking as a biology student, it's well documented that many colony species of invertebrates kill there fellows in order to achieve areas of land and secure food supplies. Such things are needed to keep a species in check (and at over 7 billion, the effects of humanities over population are apparent). It's an old argument, human ethics over natural selection.

Syria has a population of 22 million (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sy.html) occupying a land mass not much smaller than that of the UK (pop. 63 million), and an economy the size of that of New Zealand - which was in growth until the uprising. Competition for territory or resources has nothing to do with the present conflict, which started out as the same protests against inequality of opportunity which have been seen across North Africa but has taken on an increasingly ethnic character (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/27/the-one-map-that-shows-why-syria-is-so-complicated/).

The kind of social and economic Darwinism (http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/eh4.shtml) you espouse above was in vogue around the end of the 19th century, and that ideology played a key role in bringing about the obscenity of WWI - there was much talk in both England and Germany about the degeneration of the species and the inevitable necessity of thinning out the heard. You should try reading outside your syllabus, Hawkmonger; start with some history and then maybe a newspaper too, buddy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 September, 2013, 08:23:55 PM
I'm merely stating the obvious. Look beyond the Syria conflict at the world in general. 7 Billion people. It's impossible for them to all agree, people are going to disagree. And when certain vulgar people disagree they get violent. And people die. I don't need to have a pHd to know that much. It's regrettable, but a fact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 September, 2013, 09:14:07 PM
It's not fact, it's huge generalisation. Those aren't facts, those are just you summing up various things to simplistic point that bear no relation to reality. I'd suggest stopping before you dig yourself even further down into this mess of misguided logic.

"certain vulgar people" indeed...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 September, 2013, 09:19:43 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 02 September, 2013, 08:23:55 PM
I'm merely stating the obvious. Look beyond the Syria conflict at the world in general. 7 Billion people. It's impossible for them to all agree, people are going to disagree. And when certain vulgar people disagree they get violent. And people die. I don't need to have a pHd to know that much. It's regrettable, but a fact.

Like I said, Social Darwinism has been discredited for around a century. The thesis that increased population density correlates with increasing levels of violence doesn't stand up to a close examination of the available facts either:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576583203589408180.html

"About 15% of people in prestate eras died violently, compared to about 3% of the citizens of the earliest states. Historical records show that between the late Middle Ages and the 20th century, European countries saw a 10- to 50-fold decline in their rates of homicide.

Since 1946, several organizations have tracked the number of armed conflicts and their human toll world-wide. The rate of documented direct deaths from political violence (war, terrorism, genocide and warlord militias) in the past decade is an unprecedented few hundredths of a percentage point. Even if we multiplied that rate to account for unrecorded deaths and the victims of war-caused disease and famine, it would not exceed 1%.

An important peacemaker has been cosmopolitanism—the expansion of people's parochial little worlds through literacy, mobility, education, science, history, journalism and mass media. These can prompt people to take the perspective of people unlike themselves and to expand their circle of sympathy to embrace rationality and objectivity in human affairs. People reflect more on the way they live and consider how they could be better off."

- Steven Pinker PhD, Harvard University, from The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 02 September, 2013, 09:22:11 PM
Here's an interesting article on this subject:

http://onviolence.com/?e=481
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 September, 2013, 09:22:35 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 02 September, 2013, 08:23:55 PM
I'm merely stating the obvious.

Exactly, you're not giving any Earth shattering insights, you're stating well known and general things everyone is familiar with as if it's some sort of wisdom
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 02 September, 2013, 09:23:03 PM
This reminds me of this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1DnltskkWk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 September, 2013, 09:53:07 PM
Haha love ya Richmond! Just knew someone was gonna pull that at some point. All I'm saying guys (and unlike some of you seem to think, I'm not trying to prove anythinghere) is that this is no different from any conflict before now. Just that the media seem to love it. And the fact that the government will doggedly follow thebUS into every wild goose chase they point them to. All the while the nations going to shit (we can all agree on that, yeas?) and we don't have the money to fix it because we've gone and funded some insurgency into a country on the other side of the globe! My cousins are living off food banks because they can't find work because there's no industry to work in. There's no industry to work in because there's no money to fund any. Where become a consumerist society and there's little work to be had. Now where's did all the money go? Funding Iraq and Afghanistan. That's what I know. That my family is living out some rotten half existence while the government hold a monopoly on world justice. I might not be as well read as you lot, I wouldn't be at my age, but I can tell when something is wrong and when you've given to the point where there's nearly nothing left to give.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 September, 2013, 11:47:59 PM
Our governments couldn't give a flying fuck about melted babies - the fact they can't even give their own populations medicine ought to tell you that much.  The only hawk who wants to wage a war on humanity who is worth listening to is from season 2 of Buck Rogers, and as time went on he seemed to be against it and more for hanging out with his mates and looking for a wife.  There's probably a lesson for us all in there somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 September, 2013, 02:06:34 AM
This is how all quagmires begin... the road to Hades is littered with endless good intentions!  World War I was a mistake, the Suez Canal crisis was a mistake, Vietnam was a mistake, Iraq was a mistake, and getting involved in a bloody civil war in the Middle East that has already far-reaching repercussions... well, what could POSSIBLY go wrong there!?

If you're going to send brave young men and women (let's not forget the ladieesss!) to fight, to bleed, to push a button, or even to die, there needs to be three main and very clear objectives;

1)  The reason for intervention, and why and/or how it affects our territorial sovereignty and/or national security.

2)  The objectives of intervention and a clear exit strategy under variable and differing circumstances.

3)  That our armed forces are properly and sufficiently equipped and prepared for all conditions, circumstances, and scenarios as much as can be predicted.

Anyone think Obumma and 'Dave' have met or will meet these conditions...?



*** sound of chirping crickets***



Argument over.  Sorry Syrian rebel dudes, you're on your own...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 03 September, 2013, 03:22:13 AM
"Hear the words I sing,
War's a horrid thing,
So I sing sing sing...ding-a-ling-a-ling."
                                           
                                         Pvt. S. Baldrick



Words of wisdom indeed... 'nuff said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 September, 2013, 08:13:41 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 September, 2013, 09:14:07 PM

"certain vulgar people" indeed...
Sorry, only just saw your post CFM. You do realise when I said "Certain vulger individuals" I was refering to the typical cast of misguided individuals. Terrorists, serial killers, dictators et al.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 September, 2013, 03:25:20 PM
Syria, what a mess!

Anyway read this instead -

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.

Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

The Germans have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be alright, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is cancelled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.

-- John Cleese
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 September, 2013, 03:38:35 PM
Amusing, but bugger all to do with John Cleese (http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/terrorismalert.asp).

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 September, 2013, 04:34:46 PM
Anyway, enough of all the fun.

Does anyone think that the list of all those companies who have been spying on the general public will be published this week. Obviously certain people don't want it to come out and they'll do everything in their power to stop it!

I find this should be grabbing larger headlines than the Murdoch/Newspapers spying stories due to the fact that it seems to be out of control. We always knew that the papers did this sort of stuff to chase their stories but it seems that they will be dwarfed by this lot, especially as it's us lot and not mainly the famous people that have been spied on!

I'm looking forward to see what happens this week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 September, 2013, 04:59:47 PM
I don't see why not - even taking into account the 4 under investigation it still leaves a bunch who could be revealed under parliamentary privilege by the looks of it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bluechip-hacking-battle-to-hide-the-truth-revealed-as-police-remove-key-names-from-soca-list-of-firms-that-used-rogue-private-investigators-8802737.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bluechip-hacking-battle-to-hide-the-truth-revealed-as-police-remove-key-names-from-soca-list-of-firms-that-used-rogue-private-investigators-8802737.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 September, 2013, 06:34:52 PM
It's gonna be an interesting time seeing who is revealed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2013, 10:19:21 PM
I'm surprised that anybody would be surprised that we're being spied upon, you've only got to walk into the street to see the cameras! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 September, 2013, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2013, 10:19:21 PM
I'm surprised that anybody would be surprised that we're being spied upon, you've only got to walk into the street to see the cameras!


It could be argued that cameras are there to prevent crime (maybe); whereas having your private communications monitored by a 'foreign power' is more akin to outright Fascism!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 September, 2013, 03:32:52 PM
So......... as long as it's our own government, or councils, or private companies, or private individuals, spying on us, it's okay?  It's only when it's that nasty "Johnny Foreigner" doing it that we get the hump!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 September, 2013, 03:53:47 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 September, 2013, 03:32:52 PM
So......... as long as it's our own government, or councils, or private companies, or private individuals, spying on us, it's okay?  It's only when it's that nasty "Johnny Foreigner" doing it that we get the hump!

Pretty sure he didn't say that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 September, 2013, 03:54:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 September, 2013, 03:32:52 PM
So......... as long as it's our own government, or councils, or private companies, or private individuals, spying on us, it's okay?  It's only when it's that nasty "Johnny Foreigner" doing it that we get the hump!

I never said it was ok for our own government to 'spy' on us.

You should try reading my post again; but this time use your eyes, not your attitude!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 September, 2013, 04:17:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2013, 10:19:21 PM
I'm surprised that anybody would be surprised that we're being spied upon, you've only got to walk into the street to see the cameras!

The cameras are in a public place and blatantly there. It's not being done covertly and they're not obtaining 'private' information, so they aren't really spying.

My brother was properly spied on once when someone wrongly accused him of benefit fraud. He was followed around for quite a while, which wasn't too obvious when he was in town but became so when they repeatedly followed him to the middle of nowhere and sat in a parked car, not doing anything. Job centre later confirmed that someone had been watching him and why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 09 September, 2013, 04:29:09 PM
There is no doubt that there are a lot of cameras about nowadays - when you do go into your town centre then they can trace you as you go about and if they wish, make note of all the places you have been.  The other issue is how long they plan to store these recordings.  Fair enough, you could say that they are there for your safety (a policeman standing there can do similar though can't it?) but if nothing happens that day do they then delete the recordings or keep them?  If they are kept - for how long?

I was not aware of this current news story and had a look at the link.  As far as I could tell though it is about companies using private investigators.  These investigators then hack into people's emails, etc...  I feel the same about this as the newspaper stuff - they should not do it but I am not surprised at all that they do. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 September, 2013, 04:44:43 PM
Several points really - maybe he didn't say that, Richmond, but if that's the way I read it, then that's the way I read it.  I wasn't rude, just a difference of opinion.

NapalmKev - if I want to read your post with "attitude", surely that's allowed, you've certainly given me "attitude" back, and that's fine.

Carrying on the points raised by M.I.K. and Recrewt - it's the very fact that I'm law abiding that I'm against the surveillance society.  We don't know who's watching us, for how long, and for what reason.  Do we really trust the people with their hands on the camera controls?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 September, 2013, 05:11:56 PM

CCTV cameras are one of the best illustrations of the tension between individual liberty and the pursuit of justice. I'm instinctively against them, but you don't have to think very hard to come up with a list of quite rare but high profile cases of murder or sexual assault where the proliferation of CCTV (not just one camera) was important in securing a conviction. Unhelpfully, that argument works just as well when inverted.

Why should every single person in the country be made the subject of surveillance - and prosecution for some minor infractions which would otherwise have gone unnoticed - just because it might prove helpful in a small number of extraordinary cases - cases which might have been solved and successfully prosecuted by other means. There's no easy balance to be found.

Practical outcomes and evidence might be the the best way of examining the problem. Having our every move monitored hasn't made the UK any safer (http://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp) or our serious crime rate lower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country) than other developed nations; none of whom make as widespread use of CCTV as our government does. The use of private detectives by corporate actors is much easier - pretty much everything they were up to is already illegal, and there's no defence of public interest, as there was in the case of newspapers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 September, 2013, 05:16:16 PM
Yes, Sauchie, well said, very good points there.  You're able to put into words what I think.  Wish I was that clever!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 September, 2013, 05:24:40 PM
The sooner we all have our DNA taken at birth and a mirco chip inserted into us the better :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 September, 2013, 06:57:56 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 September, 2013, 05:24:40 PM
The sooner we all have our DNA taken at birth...

Clearly angling for a Rico II of his very own...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 09 September, 2013, 09:05:00 PM
Speaking as someone who has operated CCTV in a very public building and still has day to day experience of it I'd say that CCTV is, on the whole, a pretty good thing as long as the human element remains.
The vast majority of positive use we have gotten from our system is either searching for missing persons (we've had quite a bit of success there) or reviewing events after the fact. Often the CCTV operator will be alerted to an ongoing incident and then the police will review it afterwards to get a good idea of what has happened. It saves a lot of time when there are fights etc. and everyone has a different story about who started it.
Spying on people isn't really something that happens in my experience. You very quickly get to spot things that aren't quite right - even from the corner of your eye - and people just aren't interesting enough to stalk via the cameras.
We keep recorded footage for a month and then it's recorded over. There are lots of forms to fill in if anyone requests to view footage and only a licenced user can share footage from a standalone computer. I think the longest you're allowed to keep footage for is three months (I could be wrong though).

Having said all of that, there are some scary advances which bypass the human controller somewhat. Facial recognition technology is pretty amazing now and is mainly used in conjunction with safer neighbourhood schemes. Once you're on an 'Individuals of Note' list, you'll be flagged up any time you're caught on camera.
There are also programmes designed to flag up odd behaviour - for example if you spend too long in a particular aisle in a supermarket you'll get flagged. Presumably because the system thinks you're a shoplifter waiting for an opportunity to pinch something.
There are also websites where certain CCTV operators can link their live feed to the Internet and users can view it any time live (they won't let you record) in the hope of spotting a criminal and getting a reward. We wouldn't be able to do hat with our licence (I think because our system captures more than a certain amount of public property) but small shops, off licences etc can.



...Don't tell me - TLDR :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 10 September, 2013, 03:33:03 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 September, 2013, 05:24:40 PM
The sooner we all have our DNA taken at birth and a mirco chip inserted into us the better :thumbsup:

Who says that day is far away - http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news/cebit-quarter-of-germans-happy-to-have-chip-implants-5590 - it always begins with "the public good" being served until it doesn't, but by then it will be too late!  Of course, an elderly Jew on the isle of Patmos prophesied all this back in 95-96 A.D. so we shouldn't be too surprised... funny how a book many consider to be obsolete and outdated can both keep up with and predict current events so accurately!

I think Reverend Tim Lovejoy put it best; "IT'S IN REVELATION(S), PEOPLE!!!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 September, 2013, 07:19:22 AM

"And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six."

It's remarkable, isn't it? St John the Divine is obviously referring directly to micro-chipping of humans here, describing the system and the mark itself with a level of detail which precludes any suggestion that it's the same kind of unfalsifiable, vague nonsense common to authors who definitely were not inspired by the god of the Hebrews, such as the Oracle at Delphi, Nostradamus and Judith Hann.

The passage above could just as easily be understood as the divinely revealed knowledge that one day theme park and festival access would be dependent upon the wearing of a wristband.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2013, 08:16:35 AM
The Revelation is a sadistic political rant that makes a complete hames of the New Testament - 'god of love' me arse - a series finale spectacle that makes little sense and contradicts much of what has gone before (it'd never happen these days  ::)). 

However, despite its specifics being contingent on its time and place of writing, like much of the Bible it manages to be powerful enduring stuff, and it derives that power from speaking to human truths.  John's thoughts on centrally issued 'marks' that allow one to participate fully in society reflect a universal fear of the choice between being controlled and being excluded - perhaps understandable for a man exiled from Rome to a volcanic rock in the Dodecanese.  It doesn't have to be divinely inspired or prophetic to have value as a mirror of contemporary culture or human behaviour, and I suspect the wallies that like to map it onto Stars of David or barcodes or microchips or Paypal or whatever it is today are doing John, nasty scrote that he was, an injustice.

(Also fairly sure that John the Divine wasn't a Jew - that's the other one).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 September, 2013, 08:44:20 AM
I had my DNA taken (a cheek swab) along with my mugshot, belt and shoelaces after being arrested, in handcuffs, by the British Transport Police.
I was put in a cell for the night and missed the next day of work (I phoned in sick rather than say I was in a police cell!). I hadn't actually done anything wrong but was arrested with a whole group of people after a fight had taken place.
I was released in the morning after a short interview - at the end of which I was told that they knew I wasn't involved after viewing the CCTV.
Make of that what you will. I had to pay out for a single train ticket back to Norwich too, as I'd only had a day return.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 10 September, 2013, 09:00:08 AM
I am getting flash backs here to my Northern Irish protestant upbringing filled with Hal Lindsay's takes on Revelation, implanted micro-chips and war against the soviet union.

Revelation is a strange book. There is a very good chance that it wasn't aspiring to be prophetical in any futurist sense at all with its application directed entirely elsewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 September, 2013, 11:47:29 AM
http://youtu.be/Tgz5-8chSlk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 10 September, 2013, 10:14:50 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 September, 2013, 08:44:20 AM
I had my DNA taken (a cheek swab) along with my mugshot, belt and shoelaces after being arrested, in handcuffs, by the British Transport Police.
I was put in a cell for the night and missed the next day of work (I phoned in sick rather than say I was in a police cell!). I hadn't actually done anything wrong but was arrested with a whole group of people after a fight had taken place.
I was released in the morning after a short interview - at the end of which I was told that they knew I wasn't involved after viewing the CCTV.
Make of that what you will. I had to pay out for a single train ticket back to Norwich too, as I'd only had a day return.

Bit overkill by the Bill? You'd struggle to get Gardaí to arrest actual criminals over here, never mind rounding up standbyers in the vicinity of a crime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 10 September, 2013, 11:22:04 PM
Adam Curtis relinked an old article on his blog from two years ago, about the West's relationship with Syria in the 20th century: Link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/the_baby_and_the_baath_water)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Beaky Smoochies on 11 September, 2013, 05:20:49 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 10 September, 2013, 09:00:08 AM
I am getting flash backs here to my Northern Irish protestant upbringing filled with Hal Lindsay's takes on Revelation, implanted micro-chips and war against the soviet union.
Revelation is a strange book. There is a very good chance that it wasn't aspiring to be prophetical in any futurist sense at all with its application directed entirely elsewhere.

Hal Lindsey is likely totally correct in his interpretation of some eschatological matters, but that's another story... onto the main event, to quote verbatim (NIV);

The Revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

So exactly which part of the above doesn't "aspire to be prophetical in any futurist sense", Prodigal dude?  I love ya dearly and the back-and-forth we've had over time, but if you don't mind me saying so, I sometimes wonder why you even bother calling yourself a Christian at all... do you believe the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and divinely inspired?  If not, you're not a Christian, period... the others on this forum I'd expect the usual nonsense from - the blind leading the stupid basically - but you always were a voice of sanity and reason even though I strongly but respectfully disagree with you on many matters, political and spiritual, if you call yourself by someone's name, it's reasonable to believe in that person's doctrine, no?

God bless you Prodigal my friend, I hope our paths cross one day, and to everyone else here, well... whatever, haha, see y'all in the funny pages...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 08:09:10 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 September, 2013, 05:20:49 AM... do you believe the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and divinely inspired?  If not, you're not a Christian, period... the others on this forum I'd expect the usual nonsense from - the blind leading the stupid basically...

Ah, so that'd be the love, tolerance and inclusion shining through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2013, 08:15:10 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 08:09:10 AM
Ah, so that'd be the love, tolerance and inclusion shining through.

Don't you see, TB? He said "dude" which makes his assertion that he and he alone has discerned the path to spiritual truth and all others are found wanting a bit of friendly banter and most emphatically not evidence that he's an unutterable cunt.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 September, 2013, 08:39:22 AM
I would invite you, beaky dude, to use this forum  to discuss 2000ad and other comics.
If you what to talk exclusively about Right Wing religious politics, I'm sure there are other forums for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 September, 2013, 10:08:52 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 September, 2013, 05:20:49 AM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 10 September, 2013, 09:00:08 AM
I am getting flash backs here to my Northern Irish protestant upbringing filled with Hal Lindsay's takes on Revelation, implanted micro-chips and war against the soviet union.
Revelation is a strange book. There is a very good chance that it wasn't aspiring to be prophetical in any futurist sense at all with its application directed entirely elsewhere.

Hal Lindsey is likely totally correct in his interpretation of some eschatological matters, but that's another story... onto the main event, to quote verbatim (NIV);

The Revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

So exactly which part of the above doesn't "aspire to be prophetical in any futurist sense", Prodigal dude?  I love ya dearly and the back-and-forth we've had over time, but if you don't mind me saying so, I sometimes wonder why you even bother calling yourself a Christian at all... do you believe the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and divinely inspired?  If not, you're not a Christian, period... the others on this forum I'd expect the usual nonsense from - the blind leading the stupid basically - but you always were a voice of sanity and reason even though I strongly but respectfully disagree with you on many matters, political and spiritual, if you call yourself by someone's name, it's reasonable to believe in that person's doctrine, no?

God bless you Prodigal my friend, I hope our paths cross one day, and to everyone else here, well... whatever, haha, see y'all in the funny pages...

Beaky insulting someone in the deepest sense you can think of and then signing off "God bless you prodigal my friend" doesn't really work for me or I suspect most people.

I could say an awful lot more but I am in no mood to turn this into a Prodigal and Beaky pantomime. I really didn't join this place with the intention of wilfully irritating the good people of this forum whose internet company I have rather enjoyed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 10:41:53 AM
Don't let it worry you Prodigal, as I'm sure I've said before, your own internet persona is a positive advert for your beliefs, and is far easier to square with following the teachings of the lodging-with-Zaccheus / leper-touching /do-unto-one-of-the-least-of-these-my-brethren / my-Father's-house-has-many-rooms Jesus fellow I've read so much about, than certain other... perspectives. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2013, 11:35:05 AM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 September, 2013, 05:20:49 AM... do you believe the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and divinely inspired?  If not, you're not a Christian, period...

I don't think idolatry is the counter-argument you think it is.
The bible isn't Christ, the bible is just a book, and even the devil can quote it.  Christ on the other hand was a person who acted according to his conscience even when it contradicted his own religion or the opinions of fundamentalist morons who presumed to speak for all others.  He had to navigate his life and actions as he saw fit because all the scriptures of the time were outdated or at odds with science, and so Christ took responsibility for himself and didn't hide behind the words of some 8000 year old hick who endorsed slavery and stoning women, he took only the good from scripture and left the bad and to me these will always be the actions of a true Christian, but sadly, there are not enough people calling themselves Christian who fit the description - most just hide behind the label when appropriate to excuse their own shortcomings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 September, 2013, 12:16:48 PM
Quote from: Beaky Smoochies on 11 September, 2013, 05:20:49 AMBlessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.


Is that God-time or Man-time? cos I'm on a schedule and half the elderly I used to know are dead all ready.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 September, 2013, 01:34:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak

A very interesting read indeed.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2013, 01:36:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak
Top notch journalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 September, 2013, 01:48:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 September, 2013, 01:36:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak
Top notch journalism.

seconded
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 11 September, 2013, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak

Great article. If only we could get more journalism of this calibre from our media in general.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 11 September, 2013, 07:37:36 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 11 September, 2013, 01:48:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 September, 2013, 01:36:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2013, 12:20:13 PM
Meanwhile in the real world, turns out that John Pilger still has it:  http://johnpilger.com/articles/from-hiroshima-to-syria-the-enemy-whose-name-we-dare-not-speak
Top notch journalism.

seconded

Thirded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 September, 2013, 11:42:45 PM
I don't often post here because it makes you all seem mental.

But that John Pilger thing is great.

By strange coincidence, I was helping Tiny Tips with his homework tonight and it was all about the American constitution. Talk about forgetting what your mission statement was. Or don't all those rights apply to Johnny Foreigner?

Oh and Beaky, I thought you might have had the decency to stay fucked off when you said you were fucking off forever.  I wonder if your "forever" in Heaven will be so short.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 September, 2013, 11:52:22 PM
Quote from: The Prodigal on 11 September, 2013, 10:08:52 AM
Beaky insulting someone in the deepest sense you can think of and then signing off "God bless you prodigal my friend" doesn't really work for me or I suspect most people.

I could say an awful lot more but I am in no mood to turn this into a Prodigal and Beaky pantomime. I really didn't join this place with the intention of wilfully irritating the good people of this forum whose internet company I have rather enjoyed.

Prodigal, you're one of the best, you really are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2013, 07:09:19 AM
Reading people getting on makes me feel bad for my rushed and inconsistent rant a few pages back... :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 12 September, 2013, 08:23:19 AM
Good article by the Chomsky chap on the Syrian situation:

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/13880
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 September, 2013, 02:17:09 PM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23914519

Al-Qaeda, lego Star Wars, Darth Vader, and 50 shades of Grey.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 September, 2013, 04:22:08 PM
Quote"If we were a different country, we might have taken him out and shot him," says a spokesman for the Guantanamo detention facility, Capt Robert Durand, during the hearing.

Whereas if you were the same country you might have summarily executed him and members of his family and community with a drone strike; or secretly abducted, abused and tortured him; or conspired to have him overthrown and beaten to death in the street by some other group of fundamentalist nutters; or just held him without trial indefinitely in some kind of sub-tropical version of Kafka.  Please do us all a favour and stop pretending you're wearing the white hats here, we're all fucking sick of it.  Just do whatever it is serves your economic ends best and shut up while you're doing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 12 September, 2013, 05:15:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 September, 2013, 04:22:08 PM
Quote"If we were a different country, we might have taken him out and shot him," says a spokesman for the Guantanamo detention facility, Capt Robert Durand, during the hearing.

Whereas if you were the same country you might have summarily executed him and members of his family and community with a drone strike; or secretly abducted, abused and tortured him; or conspired to have him overthrown and beaten to death in the street by some other group of fundamentalist nutters; or just held him without trial indefinitely in some kind of sub-tropical version of Kafka.  Please do us all a favour and stop pretending you're wearing the white hats here, we're all fucking sick of it.  Just do whatever it is serves your economic ends best and shut up while you're doing it.

Hammer + Nail = TordelBack
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Slip de Garcon on 12 September, 2013, 09:44:42 PM
Wow, that Pilger guy's a fucking loon. It's quite impressive how wrong about everything one journo can be. To be fair it was originally published in the Guardian - which is why no one's ever read it before.

It's touching to find someone who thinks that by definition everything the USA does is EVIL because they are the USA. It's almost like looking at the world through a pair of French glasses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 September, 2013, 10:07:02 PM

Quote from: Slip de Garcon on 12 September, 2013, 09:44:42 PM
It's touching to find someone who thinks that by definition everything the USA does is EVIL because they are the USA. It's almost like looking at the world through a pair of French glasses.

It's wrong to stereotype the US but ok to do it to the French?





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 September, 2013, 12:22:45 AM
That's different - the French are foreign.
I would also point out that rather than "no-one seeing it", the Guardian's website is one of the most highly-viewed in the world, though admittedly most of those views are from right-wing trolls who regularly invade the comments sections to post some variation of WRONG WRONG THIS ARTICLE IS WRONG THIS JOURNALIST IS WRONG THE TORIES ARE GREAT THE GUARDIAN IS SHIT HMPH like they're doing everyone a favor rather than holding up a sign with the word "wanker" on it and an arrow pointing downwards.  If the article writer is female, the abuse is significantly worse.
For some reason.

Hey, I may as well ask the mods while I'm here: is it okay to start a thread titled "The FUCK THE TORIES thread"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 08:09:05 AM
Here in Ireland we will soon be voting on whether or not to retain the seanad (senate). This in this morning's metro newspaper
(http://pinterest.com/pin/178384835213706208/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 September, 2013, 08:33:00 AM
Quote from: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 08:09:05 AM
Here in Ireland we will soon be voting on whether or not to retain the seanad (senate). This in this morning's metro newspaper
(http://pinterest.com/pin/178384835213706208/)

Yon Pinterest image isn't showing up for me Johnny, but here's a link to it if anyone is having the same problems:  Metro piece (http://pinterest.com/pin/178384835213706208)

Further down that column the destruction of Alderaan is directly linked to the abolition of the Galactic Senate, which is a valid point.

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?pbid=29d1fc55-aa9f-42b7-a349-7e59ecaeb548

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 10:16:47 AM
Cheers TB

And to return the favour here is that link for those not registered with Metro online

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7797850624/h3BB3EEFD/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 08:09:05 AM
Here in Ireland we will soon be voting on whether or not to retain the seanad (senate). This in this morning's metro newspaper
(http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/bd/98/28/bd982856d1e17079d46fd5b2fb501d1f.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 18 September, 2013, 07:27:24 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 18 September, 2013, 10:16:47 AM
Cheers TB

And to return the favour here is that link for those not registered with Metro online

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7797850624/h3BB3EEFD/)

But it worked fine for the peddlers of weapons of mass destruction... :-\you know this might be  a bit more worrying than I thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 September, 2013, 08:36:39 AM
QuoteThe church's pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.

You know who said this?  The Pope.  THE POPE.  What the hell is happening to the world.

He also said:

QuoteA person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: 'Tell me: When God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?' We must always consider the person

I appear to have woken up in the Mirror Universe.  I'm going back to bed until I grow a goatee.

In the meantime I'd advise Francis to get a bulletproof cassock.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 September, 2013, 09:11:40 AM
Wow! Never thought I'd say it, but nice one, Franky Boy!  The P Monster has come good this time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 September, 2013, 09:14:49 AM
I always thought it was the duty of a Pope to be up his own arse. Seemingly not, because for once in my life I have alot of time for one. This guy honestly acts like a normal human for once. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 September, 2013, 09:20:29 AM
Oh it's probably all a cynical stage-managed ploy by the Vatican moneymen to broaden modern appeal and suck in yet more shekels, and I don't see the golden throne being broken up to fund family planning clinics just yet, but you can't aheh expect miracles ahemhem (at least until he's been dead a while), so given that these ex officio words do have an influence on a fair few folk, I'll take what I can get.

I have plenty of time for Jesus himself, but his HR department has always been a joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 20 September, 2013, 09:59:08 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 September, 2013, 09:20:29 AM
Oh it's probably all a cynical stage-managed ploy by the Vatican moneymen to broaden modern appeal and suck in yet more shekels, and I don't see the golden throne being broken up to fund family planning clinics just yet, but you can't aheh expect miracles ahemhem (at least until he's been dead a while), so given that these ex officio words do have an influence on a fair few folk, I'll take what I can get.

I have plenty of time for Jesus himself, but his HR department has always been a joke.

Despite viewing this 'more compassionate' outlook,  with much cynicism .....I too am hopeful that this could be a small 'step change',  in what has previously been an intractable and antiquated organisation...

Cheers.... :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 September, 2013, 12:10:12 PM
Not bad going considering he only has to be better than a Nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 September, 2013, 12:43:45 PM
Yes, listen to the nice man who represents an organisation that insists you need an intermediary between you and God because you were born sinful and can't be trusted to be good on your own.

"Split a piece of wood and you will find me; lift a stone and I am there." In other words - we don' need no steenkin' chorches...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 September, 2013, 12:57:59 PM


I'm still not going to mass.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 September, 2013, 01:55:10 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 September, 2013, 12:57:59 PM
I'm still not going to mass more than once a day.

Slacker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 September, 2013, 02:01:15 PM
An altar-boy's work is never done ≈cough
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 September, 2013, 04:15:56 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 September, 2013, 12:57:59 PM


I'm still not going to mass.
Yeah, prity much a snap. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 September, 2013, 09:47:27 AM
So aside from David Blunkett's party conference speech claiming that it was  the acceptance of homosexuality, cabarets and Jazz clubs led to the rise of Nazi Germany (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24223744), and not, as you might have supposed, grinding economic hardship, I loved this snippet from Helen Goodman, shadow minister for media reform:

QuoteIt would be quite wrong if we were to preserve a special place within the law, where the net could be outside the law. The net today should not be like the forest in the 13th Century.  Robin Hood and the outlaws - they were called that because they were outside the law - that was not a sustainable position in the 13th Century and it's not a sustainable position now.

Those Merry Men terrorist insurgents, what were they thinking with their unacceptable left-wing ideas about redistribution of wealth and resisting unjust tyranny...  Vote Sheriff of Nottingham for a safer sylvan environment and the perpetuation of existing systemic inequalities!

That, and not being real.

Oh Labour, whatever happened to you, man.  You used to be cool.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 September, 2013, 10:35:44 AM

I hope someone interrupted Blunkett, announced that he'd Godwinned the conference, and told everyone to go home.

Yes, Dave, goat herders in the Tyrol acquiesced to the holocaust because bumming was going on in a few nightclubs in Berlin. Those earnest farming folk would probably be more concerned with the idea of other men fucking their wives (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254365/I-did-wrong-David-Blunketts-mistress-Kimberly-Quinn-admits-remorse-year-affair.html), the prospect of being tricked into raising the bastards resulting from that adultery as their own, and the decline in standards of public life which sees corrupt government officials using their position to procure preferential treatment which allows their already rich cronies to exploit residents of the second world for their own benefit (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/1479051/Blunkett-quits-over-nanny-visa-scandal.html).

As a wee boy, I remember laughing at old people who traced all of the nation's ills back to the change to counting money in multiples of 10 instead of 12 - it's odd to see a similar process happening in my adult life with regard to porn and technology. Folk don't ditch democratically elected governments because they no longer have to scour hedgerows for discarded stroke books anymore. Just as in Wiemar Germany, they're more likely to overthrow the government of the day because of economic factors and out of touch politicians. You'd think New labour veterans would have learned that lesson ...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2013, 01:12:46 PM
Of course they've learned their lesson. The lesson being that if we're all at one another's throats over everything from Fascism to football, we won't notice who's selling us the guns and the goalposts. If we're all struggling to pay the bills, we won't have time to wonder why we're paying or what we're paying with. If all our "heroes" are celebrities and all our dreams are about brand-new possessions, we're all so much easier to bribe. Encourage the greedy and the sociopathic into positions of power whilst marginalising and ridiculing the independent thinkers, projecting the impression that all politics must be grubby and self-serving, undermining trust. International corporate and banking fraud goes largely unanswered while disabled people who can't afford the Bedroom Tax are being evicted over two hundred quid. As Johnny Cash sang, "everywhere you look, things need changing."

So yeah - lessons have been learned. The Elites have learned that things, countries and even whole worlds are a lot cheaper to buy when they're broken, polluted and/or on fire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2013, 02:07:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 September, 2013, 09:47:27 AM

QuoteIt would be quite wrong if we were to preserve a special place within the law, where the net could be outside the law. The net today should not be like the forest in the 13th Century.  Robin Hood and the outlaws - they were called that because they were outside the law - that was not a sustainable position in the 13th Century and it's not a sustainable position now.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what's going on here: a rich person is defending a system of unfair taxes on the poorest members of society, tax money which goes via various means into the pockets of the rich or well-off and their cronies because there's no accountability and "democracy" is a sham as power resides in the hands of a small group of rich white people who tell poor people that they're not trying hard enough, that they are the problem that needs solving, and this person is doing so by saying Robin Hood is the baddie?  Is this some meta thing I don't understand or has human history just run out of ideas and begun recycling?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2013, 05:29:32 PM
Robin Hood lived outside of man's law - the artificial, paper acts, legislation and tax demands symbolised by the Sheriff's towns - preferring instead to live under the basic Common Law which was symbolised by the forest - where the only law is natural law.

People have forgotten the power of Common Law, thinking it outmoded and irrelevant, but it is still the foundation of our legal system and everyone knows it:

Cause loss, harm or damage to no one; pay your lawful bills, honour your lawful contracts and be honest in your dealings with people. Even more succinctly; do unto others as you'd have others do unto you.

But when we allow folks like the Sheriff of Nottingham, Rabid Macaroon and Angular Merkin make the "laws" all we get is shafted and then despised for bending over to take it.

So, at least in my fevered imagining gland,  Robin Hood wasn't technically an outlaw, operating as he did more in the realms of Common or Natural Law. A more accurate but entirely less romantic description might be 'outlegislation' or even 'free human'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 September, 2013, 06:08:49 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 September, 2013, 09:47:27 AM
So aside from David Blunkett's party conference speech claiming that it was  the acceptance of homosexuality, cabarets and Jazz clubs led to the rise of Nazi Germany (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24223744), and not, as you might have supposed, grinding economic hardship, I loved this snippet from Helen Goodman, shadow minister for media reform:

QuoteIt would be quite wrong if we were to preserve a special place within the law, where the net could be outside the law. The net today should not be like the forest in the 13th Century.  Robin Hood and the outlaws - they were called that because they were outside the law - that was not a sustainable position in the 13th Century and it's not a sustainable position now.

Those Merry Men terrorist insurgents, what were they thinking with their unacceptable left-wing ideas about redistribution of wealth and resisting unjust tyranny...  Vote Sheriff of Nottingham for a safer sylvan environment and the perpetuation of existing systemic inequalities!

That, and not being real.

Oh Labour, whatever happened to you, man.  You used to be cool.

To descend into very bad taste and paraphrase a letter into Viz, why doesn't everyone just tell Blunkett that they've stopped putting porn on the internet?  He won't know any better.  (Sorry)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 October, 2013, 07:14:42 AM

As of midnight, government of the people, by the people and for the people in the USA has perished from this Earth (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24343698):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPfcim_p38w

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 October, 2013, 07:31:29 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 01 October, 2013, 07:14:42 AM

As of midnight, government of the people, by the people and for the people in the USA has perished from this Earth (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24343698):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPfcim_p38w

Excellent, just think of all those army bases round the world standing empty, Guantanamo unguarded, torture chambers silent, all those drones sitting idle and nuclear subs pulling in for some desert island shore leave.  That seems a fair trade for delaying the hated roll-out of quasi-affordable healthcare. 

What's that you say, it only applies to the non-lethal arms of government?  I particularly like that veteran's benefits will be suspended, while serving military are unaffected, it sort of sums it all up. 

I'm no fan of Obama these days, but Republicans really are dicks.  How can anyone believe that the best way to serve your constituents is to grind the country to a halt. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 October, 2013, 09:22:02 AM
They're not serving their constituents - they're serving the corporations. Like I said, it's cheaper to buy (or privatise) things that are, ostensibly at least, broken.

Who'd want to pay top dollar for a top quality health service, for example? Nobody because it'd be too expensive. Luckily, the top corporations also own large chunks of the media so it's easy to bring the price down by blowing small or localised problems out of all proportion.

The U.S. Government "shutdown" is nothing more than theatrics to show that banks and the phantom money and credit they create and issue are more important and more powerful than the people and their governments. It's just brainwashing and misdirection.

Similarly, Rabid Macaroon's latest wheeze to remove the U.K. from the "European Declaration of Human Rights" is designed to get people arguing about who should be allowed do decide what your rights are when we were all born with Natural Common Law Rights and Responsibilities.

It is the People who give the government its rights, not the other way around.

Somehow, the banks and corporations have convinced governments and societies around the world that their rights are paramount, with the rights of people and governments coming a poor third (after the rights of animals and plants). The U.S. "Shutdown" is simply a demonstration of power from the elites to keep us all scared.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 October, 2013, 09:24:40 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 October, 2013, 09:22:02 AM
Somehow, the banks and corporations have convinced governments and societies around the world that their rights are paramount, with the rights of people and governments coming a poor third (after the rights of animals and plants). The U.S. "Shutdown" is simply a demonstration of power from the elites to keep us all scared.

I always feel a twinge of dread when I respond to a TLS post thusly, but:

S'right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 October, 2013, 06:13:11 PM
the Randian Utopia of a people without government has finally been achieved by the Republicans.  Lets see how that works out for them...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2013, 07:14:21 PM
Oh yeah did any of  the U.K board members hear that Geroge Galloway is crowdsourcing for Tony Blair: The Movie (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/22595538/the-killing-of-tony-blair?ref=home_popular)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 October, 2013, 07:51:33 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2013, 07:14:21 PM
Oh yeah did any of  the U.K board members hear that Geroge Galloway is crowdsourcing for Tony Blair: The Movie (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/22595538/the-killing-of-tony-blair?ref=home_popular)?

£127, 865 pledged towards their £50,000 goal - dumb communists can't count. It does demonstrate the strength of feeling Blair engenders, even all these years and other criminal acts by different warmongers later.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 October, 2013, 08:21:12 PM
Speaking of Republicans, I've just been discussing Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead with my friend.  We both came to the conclusion that the hero is a bit of a cock, and that the natural conclusion of Ayn Rand's philosophy is dictatorship at worst and Thatcherism at best.

I have to admit I didn't finish it; but it really seemed to be a case of championing intellectual snobbery and general misanthropy.  Perhaps, though, hindsight is a luxury that I have:  As far as I can see, the elitist approach to architecture taken by Rand's antisocial ubermensch of a protagonist holds very little appeal to the normal people who actually have to inhabit 'machines for living in'.  Outside of the field of architecture (which itself is not much more than a vehicle for Rand to express her Objectivist views), the general view seems to be that most people are too stupid to know what they like, and certain intellectual overlords have to free themselves from the mediocrity of the commoners.

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick completely?  As a loony liberal who tends to like and get on with most people, I suppose it's not written for the likes of me anyway.  But at least I've avoided Godwin's Law - believe me, it hasn't been easy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 October, 2013, 08:33:11 PM
I've heard that the only reason to read Rand's work is so that you may have an informed debate with objectivists. Which is something I doubt anyone actually wants to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 October, 2013, 08:44:55 PM

I haven't read any Rand either, but the Objectivist philosophy sounds like the kind of whiney special pleading they despise in others.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2013, 09:23:58 PM
Coincidentally, I read Daryl Cunningham's biography of Ayn Rand on Sunday, interesting to see a critique of her by a libertarian in the book: It's free to read on Act-i-vate. (http://activatecomix.com/162.comic) Looks like a prelude to a graphic novel he's doing on the financial crash of 2008.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 01 October, 2013, 09:36:09 PM
I saw a documentary about Ayn Rand and thought she sounded like a pain in the arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 October, 2013, 09:44:23 PM
I can actually feel bile jetting from my liver and causing my gallbladder to swell up like a red-hot golfball whenever I see, hear or imagine Ayn Rand's name.  Almost everything I hate in all of humanity encapsulated in one person's turgid output and its pompous cheerleaders. BAD CESS TO THEM ALL!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Charlie boy on 01 October, 2013, 09:47:06 PM
I think I may have posted this before but
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j56IiLqZ9U
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2013, 08:52:50 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2013, 09:23:58 PM
Coincidentally, I read Daryl Cunningham's biography of Ayn Rand on Sunday, interesting to see a critique of her by a libertarian in the book: It's free to read on Act-i-vate. (http://activatecomix.com/162.comic) Looks like a prelude to a graphic novel he's doing on the financial crash of 2008.

Thanks! That was massively interesting, and confirmed my suspiction that Ayn Rand was indeed a colossal pain in the bollix.  I realise, of course, it's written from an anti-Rand viewpoint, but it's still very informative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 October, 2013, 04:15:33 PM
For every sensible thing Rand ever uttered it is immediately followed by something diametrically moronic (the reason for such epic face-palming). For some reason admirers only ever consider the first part and ignore or excuse the latter. Still, at least those declaring themselves 'Randian' or 'Objectivist' serves as good short-hand for getting their measure.


I'll still read Steve Ditko, though.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2013, 06:33:37 PM
As Hitchens (no angel himself) remarked more than once, who knew that people needed a whole movement to help them be selfish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2013, 06:52:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 October, 2013, 06:33:37 PM
As Hitchens (no angel himself) remarked more than once, who knew that people needed a whole movement to help them be selfish.

While it's a bit rich coming from the late Ego King himself, he makes a good point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 October, 2013, 07:06:41 PM
I haven't read the doorstop of Atlas Shrugged, but i have made it the way through The Fountainhead, which she wrote several years before.  It is, frankly, badly written shit.  Rand thought that she had come up with these inspiring, heroic characters, but is unable to develop them much beyond two dimensions.  Once she's introduced these characters, she seems unable to come up with anything interesting for them to do, so has them stumble from one hateful adventure to the next, stomping all over unions, the homeless, liberals, and other scumbags.

The most telling part of the whole book was the intro, in which Rand essentially says that anyone who doesn't think she written a great book and who agrees with everything she says is a useless idiot.

Oh, and she's also the only author I've ever read who uses "humanitarian" as an insult.  the Tories are well on their way there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2013, 07:09:19 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 02 October, 2013, 04:15:33 PM
I'll still read Steve Ditko, though.

That's what Mr. A said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2013, 08:47:28 PM
I read "The Fountainhead" last year and finished "Atlas Shrugged" a couple of weeks ago. I read them mainly because I saw somewhere that Ayn Rand is arch-vilain Alan Greenspan's favourite author, and I can see why.

Although the books are huge blocks of numbing rubbish they do contain a few interesting nuggets (especially A.S.) such as Government "laws" only applying to those people who agree to be bound by (or 'understand') them. One character in A.S. is taken to court in order for the government to take over his company - he does not argue his case at all, instead stating that whatever the government does to him must be done without his consent. The court demands that he argues his case but he replies with something like "I will not engage in an argument whose ultimate expression is the barrel of a gun," which I thought was a fantastic phrase and one I can't wait to use on some pompous official.

Also, A.S. is quite chilling in its descriptions of a world being run down by the money men - containing much that seems frighteningly prescient.

The messages of selfishness and elitist technocracy constantly grated, however, and I found it frustrating how Rand often very nearly got it right. While, in my view, selfishness is sometimes necessary I think that enlightened self-interest is far more useful.

Rand does seem to be the author to read if you do want an insight into the way the elites think. Chilling stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2013, 09:09:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2013, 08:47:28 PM
The messages of selfishness and elitist technocracy constantly grated, however, and I found it frustrating how Rand often very nearly got it right.

This is what is so awful about the whole thing - the lure is individual freedom, self-determination, success through merit, hard work and rational thought, independence from the mindlessness of the herd and extortion of the corrupt.  But buried right there at the heart of all this good stuff is the hook, the awful hopeless emptiness of contempt and antipathy for your fellow humans, who exist only as impediments to your own fulfilment and apotheosis. 

I have to stop typing now because my hands are actually shaking with hatred.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2013, 09:17:35 PM
Very well put, Tordels.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 03 October, 2013, 01:27:26 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 October, 2013, 09:09:18 PM
But buried right there at the heart of all this good stuff is the hook, the awful hopeless emptiness of contempt and antipathy for your fellow humans, who exist only as impediments to your own fulfilment and apotheosis. 

I have to stop typing now because my hands are actually shaking with hatred.

One of the many things I love about SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE is that, despite all of it's faults, it is NOT an "improve your life at the expense of others" book. So many self-help* books are all about manipulating situations to your benefit where SEVEN HABITS urges you to stop, take a look at why you are the way you are and do the things you do and try and understand why other people are the way they are and do the things they do. It is not a quick fix, it is a paradigm shift. (In fact, it's about sixty pages in before it tells you what HABIT ONE is).



*Probably why they are called SELF help, actually.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2013, 02:41:50 PM
Too much discussion of hopeless fruitloop...  Must.  Derail.  Thread.

I quite like that Boris Johnson.  There, I've said it.
I think it's ace that he's a real politician and not something someone made up, and while I don't necessarily agree with his politics, I don't agree with strapping rockets to buildings with children in them and blasting them into space either - but that doesn't stop me liking Doctor Doom.  Johnson could be like "I have announced a tax on cats" and it's not like you can seriously come back with "that is another tax on poor people by an out of touch politician" because just look at him - how can you be surprised at anything he does?  He looks like a character created for a crudely-animated children's cartoon made by the BBC circa 1981: Mister Mayor or something like that, who lives in a run-down house with an army of rodents who inhabit his scale model of London that sprawls through multiple rooms.  For all I know this is actually how Boris rolls in the real world - like I say, just look at him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 03 October, 2013, 02:56:48 PM
Not wanting to engage with something that's been put here to intentional derail it but if you lived in London you probably wouldn't find him so uniquely charming. So a Tory lives up to their boorish image, he's still an arse.

During a lull in conversation recently with a person I'd only just met in a pub they went "so, I'm going to say it, I don't agree with UKIP at all but you've GOT to agree Nigel Farage is a great politician"

...no one talked to him for the rest of the evening and he just quietly got up and left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2013, 03:18:12 PM
To return to my original analogy, I am sure people in Latveria think Doctor Doom is a massive arsehole, but people in the rest of the (Marvel) world probably think it must be great to have such a transparent politician compared to the lying, shifty, shitweasels they have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2013, 03:59:58 PM
Boris is a perfect example of modern politics - hiding the truth behind a distracting facade. If he'd just stick to HIGNFY I'd be a big fan but he doesn't so I'm not. Just because a man knows how to play the engaging buffoon doesn't make the misery he causes or the City of London criminal activities he ignores and/or helps facilitate any less despicable. I'm not sure if Mugabe, Saddam or Blair would be any less monstrous had they been known to crack a joke or two.

Thread back on track again, I think :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2013, 04:19:42 PM
Hey, if he was that bad they wouldn't keep electing him - he's what Londoners want, so blame them.  You don't blame a lion for eating babies if you go around leaving babies unattended in the middle of the jungle - Boris is a beast of the field, he can't help it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 October, 2013, 04:52:53 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 03 October, 2013, 02:56:48 PM
Not wanting to engage with something that's been put here to intentional derail it but if you lived in London you probably wouldn't find him so uniquely charming. So a Tory lives up to their boorish image, he's still an arse.

During a lull in conversation recently with a person I'd only just met in a pub they went "so, I'm going to say it, I don't agree with UKIP at all but you've GOT to agree Nigel Farage is a great politician"

...no one talked to him for the rest of the evening and he just quietly got up and left.

He probably left because he thought you and your companions were boring, after all, you wouldn't want to engage will someone with a different political view to yours, would you!!  Perish the thought!!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 October, 2013, 05:24:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2013, 03:59:58 PM
I'm not sure if Mugabe, Saddam or Blair would be any less monstrous had they been known to crack a joke or two.

I actually quite liked Dave Cameron's crap Dad gag - Land of Hope is Tory (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2442170/David-Cameron-vows-crush-Ed-Milibands-1970s-style-socialism.html) - in his leader's speech at conference yesterday. That kind of sub-editorial punning does make you wonder if Dave's got rid of absolutely all of those former Newscorp employees he had on his payroll, though.

At least Cameron had the decency to trade in the same only-funny-in-the-House-of-Commons groaners you expect from politicians, rather than Milliband's equally pish attempts at Jerry Seinfeld style (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rkBq3kRJF20#t=50) self deprecating observational comedy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2013, 05:39:16 PM
If I want comedy I'll watch Laurel & Hardy - but I wouldn't want them running a country (however, now that they're both dead they couldn't do any worse than the muppets we're currently suffering).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 October, 2013, 06:16:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2013, 05:39:16 PM
If I want comedy I'll watch Laurel & Hardy ...

You should check out the remake, Dave & Nick, although Dave's mangled the original catchphrase and replaced it with "Another fine mess you've gotten us into, Labour!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2013, 09:55:33 AM
Now I generally find Mehdi Hasan a worrying sort of public figure, a fiercely eloquent man apparently encumbered with antique religious beliefs that I find difficult to square with his obvious intelligence and insight, but how could anyone not enjoy this evisceration of a toerag and his masters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JIvARoGbS4

Of course, the Mail's biggest factual inaccuracy has yet to be challenged: calling Ed Milliband a socialist.

Meanwhile, earlier this morning I voted in two referenda in a polling station where the only other voter was my wife, and despite both of us being engaged by the issues in question, we both struggled to work out which mark on which bit of coloured paper would mean what.  This doesn't bode well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 October, 2013, 10:00:43 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 October, 2013, 09:55:33 AM
Now I generally find Mehdi Hasan a worrying sort of public figure, a fiercely eloquent man apparently encumbered with antique religious beliefs that I find difficult to square with his obvious intelligence and insight, but how could anyone not enjoy this evisceration of a toerag and his masters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JIvARoGbS4


I'm no fan of Alastair (no relation) Campbell, but, despite his many faults, he's both articulate and intelligent and I couldn't help but enjoy his merciless pummelling (http://youtu.be/w-GMTxycAXY) of Mail deputy editor Jon Steafel on Newsnight.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 October, 2013, 10:55:11 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 October, 2013, 10:00:43 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 October, 2013, 09:55:33 AM
Now I generally find Mehdi Hasan a worrying sort of public figure, a fiercely eloquent man apparently encumbered with antique religious beliefs that I find difficult to square with his obvious intelligence and insight, but how could anyone not enjoy this evisceration of a toerag and his masters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JIvARoGbS4


I'm no fan of Alastair (no relation) Campbell, but, despite his many faults, he's both articulate and intelligent and I couldn't help but enjoy his merciless pummelling (http://youtu.be/w-GMTxycAXY) of Mail deputy editor Jon Steafel on Newsnight.

Cheers

Jim

Re: The Daily Mail - "The worst of British values posing as the best".
Seems like a pretty fair summary.


Having said that, about 70% of British newspaper content is irresponsible, disgusting shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2013, 11:10:53 AM
Agreed. But the Mail gets extra hate points from me. How many papers can claim to have actualy printed an article so mean spirited and spiteful it actualy caused a woman to commit suicide?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 October, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
How Much Are YOU Hated by the Daily Mail (http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 04 October, 2013, 01:10:51 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 04 October, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
How Much Are YOU Hated by the Daily Mail (http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/)


Ha, looks like they hate me then. Funny that cause I think they're* an absolute bunch of C**TS who are only interested in peddling Bullshit propaganda and jive-ass nonsense.

Cheers


*Daily Mail, not even good for wiping your arse with
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2013, 01:17:30 PM
 :| They hate me so much. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 October, 2013, 01:21:57 PM
Yep, I'm hated! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 04 October, 2013, 01:39:09 PM
Hated by the Mail. Well done me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2013, 05:08:05 PM
I think most papers despise their readers, judging by the bullsh*t they serve up and the stories they ignore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 October, 2013, 10:32:18 PM
the day I don't feel hated by the Daily Mail, I'll just lie down and you can kick the dirt over me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 October, 2013, 10:40:11 PM
Great news about it being the most read News Site on the planet :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2013, 10:48:07 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 October, 2013, 10:40:11 PM
Great news about it being the most read News Site on the planet :thumbsup:

Unbelievably, that's not actually true (http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/news-websites), John. If you've ever looked at their website, you'll know that it's not the Mail's op-ed pieces or investigative journalism which are the primary drivers of traffic either.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 October, 2013, 10:53:22 PM
Never looked at it, I always look at the left leaning sites to back my little bits up. I heard the hypocrite say it in that clip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 October, 2013, 11:45:15 PM
I think the 'I' is about the best newspaper I've read lately - in terms of just getting the gist of things.

There was a time (not too long ago) that even papers like the Sun or Mirror were fairly reliable for just getting a concise, sort of bullet point version, of world events. (These days you're more likely to get despicable judgements about someone's private life).

I tend to use papers as a way of flagging up stories which I may be interested in and then I'll read up on them elsewhere. God help us if people are still reading papers like the Mail and taking it as gospel!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 05 October, 2013, 03:15:48 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 04 October, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
How Much Are YOU Hated by the Daily Mail (http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/)


Took 5 clicks...

Not having a penis helped !
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 October, 2013, 04:56:28 PM
Meanwhile, we in the Banana Republic get to keep our upper house, despite the referendum to remove it being proposed by a government with a monstrous majority.  Now our Seanad is far from democratic and less than effective, but it's mildly heartening to see that the tiny proportion of the electorate who actually voted yesterday can stop a change that would significantly reduce the checks on the power of a government they also elected.  Hopefully this will also be seen as an endorsement of reform of how that house is appointed and operates.

Anyway, any body that counts William 'Monkey Glands' Yeats, Brian Friel, Gordon Wilson, my old archaeology professor, and generally at least some folk who don't spend their careers getting motorways built to their constituencies, among its alumni can't be all bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 October, 2013, 05:14:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 October, 2013, 04:56:28 PM
Meanwhile, we in the Banana Republic get to keep our upper house, despite the referendum to remove it being proposed by a government with a monstrous majority.  Now our Seanad is far from democratic and less than effective, but it's mildly heartening to see that the tiny proportion of the electorate who actually voted yesterday can stop a change that would significantly reduce the checks on the power of a government they also elected.  Hopefully this will also be seen as an endorsement of reform of how that house is appointed and operates.


They're afraid that if reformed it might end up working.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 October, 2013, 05:17:38 PM
Quote from: The Doctor Alt 8 on 05 October, 2013, 03:15:48 PM
Not having a penis helped !

I don't think anyone's expressed that sentiment before. Now you Irish lads have sorted out your senate you should probably offer Barack Obama some pointers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2013, 05:29:56 PM
NASA's shut.

Of all the diatribes I've ever written about the system not working, that small sentence is probably the most convincing. And one of the saddest.

What the Hell is wrong with us?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 October, 2013, 07:41:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2013, 05:29:56 PM
NASA's shut.

It is f***ing pathetic, an insult to humanity as a whole, but probably a cause for particular celebration amongst those who brought it about.  Who are of course still getting paid.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 October, 2013, 10:38:12 PM

Pair o' fuckin' communists, yez. Private companies will obviously now step in to fill the void more cost-efficiently and efficiently than the state could ever hope to - just like when the railways and energy companies were privatised.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 October, 2013, 11:57:26 PM
Did you know it's illegal for Chinese people to enter Nasa property? http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/05/us-scientists-boycott-nasa-china-ban (http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/05/us-scientists-boycott-nasa-china-ban)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 09 October, 2013, 05:36:35 PM
Mr Robinson (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24442953) still doesnt like 'extremists', but will go about it in a nicer way...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 October, 2013, 06:01:45 PM
Rocking back and forth, despairing at the state of the country...

"never read the comments section never read the comments section never read the comments section"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 October, 2013, 06:01:55 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 09 October, 2013, 05:36:35 PM
Mr Robinson (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24442953) still doesnt like 'extremists', but will go about it in a nicer way...

Tommy Robinson's gearing up for a move into mainstream politics, more like. Everybody thinks he's headed for UKIP, but their fifteen minutes appear to be up already. He'd be useful to the Tories if they wanted to steal the last bit of UKIP's thunder, shed their public school image, and put him up as a candidate somewhere like Bradford or Kent.

Robinson's official position - he's never been against Muslims, just extremists - is no different to that of Dave Cameron or Ed Milliband, and Tony Blair's responsible for the deaths of a greater number of ordinary Muslims than the EDL.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 October, 2013, 06:07:39 PM
QuoteHe'd be useful to the Tories if they wanted to steal the last bit of UKIP's thunder, shed their public school image, and put him up as a candidate somewhere like Bradford or Kent.

Trouble is, he's a useless dick who cannot actually survive any sort of in depth interview...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZHbXhstXG4
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 October, 2013, 11:39:02 PM
That's odd, Richmond - I thought you were from Northern Ireland.  If you were, you'd know that coming off like a bigoted cunt in interviews is not actually a barrier to being a politician.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 October, 2013, 01:34:04 AM
Indeed, it seems to be considered an asset.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2013, 07:49:43 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 October, 2013, 11:39:02 PM
That's odd, Richmond - I thought you were from Northern Ireland.  If you were, you'd know that coming off like a bigoted cunt in interviews is not actually a barrier to being a politician.

Mmmm... good point...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2013, 08:24:47 AM
Well, it's finally happened. Now they want to tax sunshine... m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24272061
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 10 October, 2013, 10:53:46 AM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 09 October, 2013, 11:39:02 PM
That's odd, Richmond - I thought you were from Northern Ireland.  If you were, you'd know that coming off like a bigoted cunt in interviews is not actually a barrier to being a politician.

Also Mr Pops' quote......
" Indeed, it seems to be considered an asset !!"...

Wonderful stuff, Prof and Mr Pops.....
Unfortunately, and sadly both very true.......That's before including lying, cheating, theft, abuse of power and the rest of their failings.....
Going to have to go with Mr Billy Connollys' view...." Anyone who actually wants to become a politician, should automatically be excluded from doing so "

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 October, 2013, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: Sideshow Bob on 10 October, 2013, 10:53:46 AM

Going to have to go with Mr Billy Connollys' view...." Anyone who actually wants to become a politician, should automatically be excluded from doing so "


Same goes for police officers, judges, or any position of relative authority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 October, 2013, 04:36:38 PM
Disagree with you on Police Officers, whats wrong with aspiring to a position where you can actually help someone, rather than dicking about in Commons or in a law book?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 October, 2013, 05:12:56 PM
Nothing wrong with it. I just wish they did a better job weeding out the bad ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2013, 05:23:23 PM
Agree with Hawkmonger.

People who want these jobs should be nurtured and encouraged but the institutions themselves need to be shielded from corporate manipulation.

We need judges and politicians and so it's our responsibility as a society to provide them with protection from corruption as best we can.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 October, 2013, 05:28:01 PM
Those same politicians mentioned something about a decent pay increase helping stop corruption, especially on their expenses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 October, 2013, 07:45:19 PM
I used to share a house with a young lady police constable.
She wasn't the sharpest tool in the box and the Norwich police seemed to be about the most incestuous institution I've ever heard of (insert joke about Norfolk inbreeding here). If they spent as much time combating anti-social behaviour as trying to get in each other's pants we'd all be better off.

I picked up a bit of police slang though - my favourite being 'he was NFA'd'. It turned out NFA stands for 'No Further Action', but they'd use the term NFA'd to people to make them think that something was being done.
EG, 'We got the guy that nicked your bike and he's been NFA'd. He'll think twice next time!'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2013, 08:21:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2013, 08:24:47 AM
Well, it's finally happened. Now they want to tax sunshine... m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24272061

This is nothing new - that's why we have a "fuel tax" rather than a tax on the use of petrochemicals, to steal money from those who'd come up with alternatives to oil, even Joe Blogs and his chip fat engine.  See also: those court cases where people collecting river and rainwater were charged rates for it by their councils.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 10 October, 2013, 10:00:54 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 October, 2013, 07:45:19 PM
I picked up a bit of police slang though - my favourite being 'he was NFA'd'. It turned out NFA stands for 'No Further Action', but they'd use the term NFA'd to people to make them think that something was being done.
EG, 'We got the guy that nicked your bike and he's been NFA'd. He'll think twice next time!'

Pretty depressing but not unexpected. The last episode of the Adam Curtis series "The Trap" mentioned the rampant massaging of statistics and figures by government institutions to make it appear targets were being reached or exceeded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 October, 2013, 06:32:03 PM
In a Conservative Britain, just because you're homeless doesn't mean you have nothing left to lose: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 14 October, 2013, 06:46:41 PM
Quote from: Professor James T Bear on 14 October, 2013, 06:32:03 PM
In a Conservative Britain, just because you're homeless doesn't mean you have nothing left to lose: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-seize-possessions-of-rough-sleepers-in-crackdown-on-homelessness-8631665.html

It reminds me of that 'The Day Today' feature where they were clamping them.
They should get Kim Wilde to stage a protest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 October, 2013, 06:46:59 PM
Quote"They [the police officers] were just taking the sleeping bags and chucking out everything. I asked to keep it, and the food, but they said 'No'.

Police later confirmed that the shocking intervention was part of a co-ordinated effort to "reduce the negative impact of rough sleepers".

I suppose if the homeless don't eat they'll get skinnier and make less of a visual impact. If the cops are short of cash for their Christmas party, can't they just issue more speeding fines, rather than stealing food from the homeless to provide the nibbles?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2013, 09:35:03 PM
If we saw police officers doing this, how many of us would try to stop them, I wonder? If we saw a gang of skinheads doing this, would we try to stop them?

I'm not judging here (not sure what I'd do myself, to be honest), I'm just curious.

At what point does one step in? Hopefully well before the police get the job of putting Certain People onto trucks bound for 'resettlement camps'.

"First they came for the homeless and I didn't speak up because I wasn't homeless..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 October, 2013, 10:27:06 PM
Wise words Mr Shark, too many keyboard warriors in society who would standby and never put themselves at the slightest risk to help another.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 October, 2013, 10:34:01 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 October, 2013, 10:27:06 PM...too many keyboard warriors in society who would standby and never put themselves at the slightest risk to help another.[/color]

You're right. What we need is some kind of professional law-enforcement agency that are actually trained and equipped to intervene in such situations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 October, 2013, 10:40:24 PM
In the situation that is being talked about, there is obviously something wrong going on. It doesn't take a hero to walk up to the police and enquire as to what is happening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 October, 2013, 10:44:53 PM
Only Trotsky troublemakers would do that!  Our superiors and their armies know what is best for us even if we do not understand ourselves - they are like gods in that respect, and it is not our place to question them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 October, 2013, 10:48:06 PM
My point being that these are the roles we specifically create to prevent exactly what they themselves are engaged in.  It shouldn't be necessary to intervene because it shouldn't happen.

I also wouldn't presume that people here aren't prepared to question police actions in the real world, since that wouldn't be the case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 October, 2013, 10:52:45 PM
I stated keyboard warriors in general and didn't mention a specific place, just in case you are presuming otherwise!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 October, 2013, 11:37:13 PM
Understood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 15 October, 2013, 09:03:18 AM
On the few occasions I've asked police "what's going on?" I've been told to move on, and even threatened with arrest for obstruction (?).

No I know not all police officers are clowns, but a good portion of them (especially where I live) seem to misunderstand the fact they are public servants, and that by asking a valid question I am merely exercising my right to free speech.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 October, 2013, 09:07:28 AM
Glad to see you still think you have a right to free speech, you're obviously not a journalist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2013, 04:43:14 PM
Who would've thought that we would be heading down the slippery road to join the ranks of North Korea, Syria, and many others states.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 October, 2013, 05:37:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2013, 04:43:14 PM
Who would've thought that we would be heading down the slippery road to join the ranks of North Korea, Syria, and many others states.

Anyone who said that people should not have voted Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 October, 2013, 06:11:12 PM
I've just spent the last hour or so trawling through the comments section on FoxNation.

I feel dirty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 October, 2013, 07:00:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2013, 04:43:14 PM
Who would've thought that we would be heading down the slippery road to join the ranks of North Korea, Syria, and many others states.

Er...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 October, 2013, 07:04:01 PM
If you start to curtail the press, due to some of their activities (mainly with the general public who are dragged into events, through no fault of their own) then where will it stop, as we all know it won't stop there, given the chance.

That's what I'm getting at!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 07:57:21 PM
The press have shown time and time again that they cannot be trusted to keep their own house in order. Yes editors and journalists are on trial and others involved are in prison. But these were only because police and politicians were forced to act to enforce the law as it already stands. What was for example the News corps behaviour (not words) when the allegations first arose? Did they go to the police (lawyers in tow as is their right) to make sure everything was done  to see if there was any impropriety like an honest person/organisation would?

No. They paid off the ones going to jail to keep their traps shut so that others higher up couldn't be caught even though they were likely the ones demanding the scoops and putting pressure on to get a story anyway, anyhow.

They are like a persistent offender trying to plea his way out of real porridge because once he was nice to a pussycat(allegedly) :).

It's not to curtail the press it's to curtail their criminality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 October, 2013, 08:27:18 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 07:57:21 PM
It's not to curtail the press it's to curtail their criminality.

It won't. The Independent have already said they aren't going to sign up to the new regulatory regime, and the rest are so opposed to it they don't even have to say so. Which makes everything that's happened over the last few years a pointless exercise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 08:59:10 PM
Then that tells you all you need to know. They thought they were above the law when hacking phones. They still do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2013, 09:17:15 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 07:57:21 PM
It's not to curtail the press it's to curtail their criminality.

Things like phone-hacking and bribing the police are already against the law. Maligning or misrepresenting people is generally covered under libel, so perhaps steps should be taken to stop libel lawsuits being the exclusive domain of the wealthy...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 09:41:39 PM
That would be a good start but I don't see any political or legal drive to do this, alas. The press are biding their time knowing full well elections are near and they don't give a damn about anything other than what their owners think.

Business as usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 October, 2013, 11:49:32 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 15 October, 2013, 08:27:18 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 15 October, 2013, 07:57:21 PM
It's not to curtail the press it's to curtail their criminality.

It won't. The Independent have already said they aren't going to sign up to the new regulatory regime, and the rest are so opposed to it they don't even have to say so. Which makes everything that's happened over the last few years a pointless exercise..

Good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 October, 2013, 09:20:00 AM
The most dangerous part of the new plans is the fact that if they don't sign up to the charter they could end up paying massive legal costs even if they WIN a libel case - this means that the rich and powerful can simply say to a publication "if you print that story about me, I'll sue you for libel. I may not win, but the case will bankrupt you anyway". This may not be such a threat if you have Murdoch's millions behind you but for smaller publications, they wouldn't  be able to risk publication, even if they knew they were 100% in the right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 October, 2013, 10:14:25 AM
Well said, DDD.  In April, it was 250 years since the radical journalist and MP, John Wilkes, was imprisoned for daring to criticise George III.  I wonder how long it will be before a present day journalist is arrested for refusing to join the Government's "voluntary" Royal Charter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 October, 2013, 11:30:10 AM
Hislop had a great speech/rant about in on HIGNFY on Friday - worth checking out on the iplayer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 11:33:25 AM
As for the rich and powerful telling newspapers what to do, is that not what we have now anyway? They have shown a seemingly telepathic link with their owners as cheerleaders for the psychopath led version of "free" markets which has brought such ruin to so many.

Yet you still say that the press must be left alone to it's own devices.
When they were they became criminals.

Past behaviour is the key to future behaviour, unless some major intervention occurs.

Do you think they're on your side? Unless you are all secretly billionaires, they are not.

Or is this really as I suspect simply a smokescreen for people who don't like government, of any kind?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2013, 11:36:51 AM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 11:33:25 AM
Yet you still say that the press must be left alone to it's own devices.
When they were they became criminals.

The key word here, as I have already pointed out to you, is criminals. What is required here is not a new raft of legislation opening the possibility of direct political interference with press, but for the press to be held accountable under the existing laws that they were already breaking.

(I'm also unsure why you brought up phone hacking in relation to the Independent saying they wouldn't sign on to the currently proposed regulations.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 October, 2013, 12:07:40 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 11:33:25 AM
As for the rich and powerful telling newspapers what to do, is that not what we have now anyway? They have shown a seemingly telepathic link with their owners as cheerleaders for the psychopath led version of "free" markets which has brought such ruin to so many.

Yet you still say that the press must be left alone to it's own devices.
When they were they became criminals.

Past behaviour is the key to future behaviour, unless some major intervention occurs.

Do you think they're on your side? Unless you are all secretly billionaires, they are not.

Or is this really as I suspect simply a smokescreen for people who don't like government, of any kind?

missing the point entirely there - It's not a case of The Press - Good or bad.

Pointing out that these proposals will allow the rich & powerful to muzzle discussion of their tax dodging, bribery and general malfeasance is not the same as saying that reporters are all angels and never behave badly.

However rich and powerful someone may be, and however much influence they may have in the press, they are still acutely aware that they need to look over their shoulders and be aware that their misdeeds can be exposed at any time.

People like the Barclay Bros  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Frederick_Barclay) who own the Telegraph. they also have lots of other business interests and act almost as feudal lords of Sark and Brecqhou in the channel islands - they are notoriously litigious, extremely rich and try to block any attempt to write about them. This new charter will give them virtual impunity from investigation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 12:31:55 PM
I must disagree the press appear to be in the pockets of the wealthy I do not think for one moment the Barclay bros are worried about the whining of a few lefties in the Independent or anywhere else. Now were a government to point guns at them like we should have at Switzerland...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2013, 12:42:18 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 12:31:55 PM
I must disagree the press appear to be in the pockets of the wealthy I do not think for one moment the Barclay bros are worried about the whining of a few lefties in the Independent or anywhere else. Now were a government to point guns at them like we should have at Switzerland...

I have no fucking idea what you're trying to say and, at this point, I suspect you don't either.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 12:49:01 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 October, 2013, 12:42:18 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 12:31:55 PM
I must disagree the press appear to be in the pockets of the wealthy I do not think for one moment the Barclay bros are worried about the whining of a few lefties in the Independent or anywhere else. Now were a government to point guns at them like we should have at Switzerland...

I have no fucking idea what you're trying to say and, at this point, I suspect you don't either.

Jim

Fair enough. I'll stop and you can relax.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 October, 2013, 01:17:42 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 16 October, 2013, 12:31:55 PM
I do not think for one moment the Barclay bros are worried about the whining of a few lefties in the Independent or anywhere else.

Its not about "whining" it's about exposing corruption. Suppose the Indy found that the Barclay's had bribed a politician to get some favour - you don't want them able to report that?

the biggest scandals - and the consequent changes that are made - often come from journalistic exposes in the first place - look at all this wikileaks/snowden thing, or the MPs expenses scandal, or neglect in care homes just to name a few. If the powerful can suppress investigation of their affairs, they can get away with anything. It's not about "whining lefties"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 October, 2013, 07:25:59 PM
Here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO1mKGaa890
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 16 October, 2013, 10:56:36 PM
The BBC are gearing up for the 100th anniversary of WWI: 2500 hours of programming planned (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24552194)

Quote"And realise that more than any other event, this was the one that made modern Britain." - Jeremy Paxman

Doesn't look like they are planning any Monocled Mutineer style programs....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 October, 2013, 09:33:12 AM
Over a family lunch, discussion of Ramadan with my son (7) included the fact that three kids in his class (in one of the relatively few non-religious schools in the country) are Muslims, or have at least one Muslim parent. Instantly my mother comes out with: "I hate the way these Muslims are taking over everything". 

I'm used to this kind of thinking*, but the bald instantaneous venom of this remark, in front of kids and effectively  about kids, took me aback.

Where does this kind of thing come from?  How could anyone think that in the Republic of Ireland, of all the monotheistic places on Earth, Islam is 'taking over'?  Taking over from what, institutionalised child abuse and hospitals and schools run as the executive arms of some medieval cult?  How do three children (all of whom, it goes without saying, are really nice kids) in a class of 28, in a school specifically chosen by us because of its explicit commitment to diversity, merit such a response? 

Is this simply a picture created by the media (my mother reads the Mail and listens to talk radio), or do the media just cater to an existing perception?  How do you tackle this barbarians-at-the-gates mentality?




*Some context, no need to read: While in other respects a kind and selfless person who I love very much, my mother is an appalling bigot of the most parochial nature imaginable: people from other postal districts are to be pitied and feared in equal measure, never mind those with different skin tones, variant religious mumbo-jumbo or a hint of a divergent accent.  The laughable exceptions to this rule are anyone she has ever actually met, all of whom are presented as miraculous individual exceptions to the genetic-and-or-cultural cesspool they hail from.  It'd be funny if it wasn't so fucking awful. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2013, 10:43:14 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 October, 2013, 09:33:12 AM
Is this simply a picture created by the media (my mother reads the Mail) ... The laughable exceptions to this rule are anyone she has ever actually met, all of whom are presented as miraculous individual exceptions 

Ditto. Folk are just desperate to have the comforting picture of the world familiar from their youth reified, despite all available evidence. That explains the contradictory editorial stance of The Mail and its olde worlde typography and design.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 12:56:52 PM
People are afraid of difference because they're afraid of change. They think that the different people will change them and they'll have to take on the scary new ways!
It's the same reason the Liliputians fought a Boiled Egg War and everyone was afraid of pod-people in the '50s.

I'd suggest that in some ways the media actually makes people more accepting of cultural change. If you'd have told a 10 year old me that pensioners would be eating things like Pizza or Thai Green Curry (aka 'foreign muck') and using computers I doubt I'd have believed you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 October, 2013, 09:33:12 AM
Over a family lunch, discussion of Ramadan with my son (7) included the fact that three kids in his class (in one of the relatively few non-religious schools in the country) are Muslims, or have at least one Muslim parent. Instantly my mother comes out with: "I hate the way these Muslims are taking over everything". 

Is this simply a picture created by the media (my mother reads the Mail and listens to talk radio), or do the media just cater to an existing perception?  How do you tackle this barbarians-at-the-gates mentality?

The Daily Mail really does have to be seen to be believed - the amount of bile and hatred on those pages is astounding.  My own Dear Mum reads the Express, which is not much better.  I normally tackle such situations by calling them out for the absolute b*ll*x that they are.  Not in a horrible way but just by pointing out how untrue it is. 

Christmas is coming, so you could always buy her a book on the Ottoman Empire!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
I normally tackle such situations by calling them out for the absolute b*ll*x that they are.  Not in a horrible way but just by pointing out how untrue it is. 

A recent conversation with my 64 year old Mum and my seventy year old uncle, in which both parroted their chosen papers' lambasting of all these unemployed scroungers who were pushing up the benefits bill, ended in stony silence when some cold hard stats were produced:

(http://fullfact.org/sites/fullfact.org/files/social%20protection%20spending%20breakdown_0.png)

I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 October, 2013, 02:18:28 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
I normally tackle such situations by calling them out for the absolute b*ll*x that they are.  Not in a horrible way but just by pointing out how untrue it is. 

I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.

Nobody likes a person who uses facts to sway and argument. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 October, 2013, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 23 October, 2013, 02:18:28 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
I normally tackle such situations by calling them out for the absolute b*ll*x that they are.  Not in a horrible way but just by pointing out how untrue it is. 

I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.

Nobody likes a person who is right. ;)
FIFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2013, 02:37:14 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.


Take comfort in the fact you're unlikely to receive the same benefits when your time to clock-out arrives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 02:46:57 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.

Yeah, exactly - you don't have to be horrible about it with them but you can't just let it pass as if its the truth. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2013, 04:18:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2013, 02:37:14 PM
Take comfort in the fact you're unlikely to receive the same benefits when your time to clock-out arrives.

Joke's on you, sucker. I'm a Scottish, working class male on a low income - I won't live long enough to worry about being fiddled out of my pension.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11878212

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 05:35:18 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 October, 2013, 02:07:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 23 October, 2013, 01:39:41 PM
I normally tackle such situations by calling them out for the absolute b*ll*x that they are.  Not in a horrible way but just by pointing out how untrue it is. 

A recent conversation with my 64 year old Mum and my seventy year old uncle, in which both parroted their chosen papers' lambasting of all these unemployed scroungers who were pushing up the benefits bill, ended in stony silence when some cold hard stats were produced:

(http://fullfact.org/sites/fullfact.org/files/social%20protection%20spending%20breakdown_0.png)

I felt like a nob, because they've both worked long and hard enough to deserve every penny they have coming to them over the next twenty years of doing whatever they please, but facts is facts.

I think the fact that they deserve it is relevant though.
The politics around benefits are very emotive and the way politicians and the media deal with them are very frustrating.
Every time a politician announces a plan to cut benefit fraud relating to disability allowances Jeremy Vine has a phone-in which amounts to lots of people phoning in telling you how immobile they are. IF YOU REALLY ARE DISABLED YOU'RE NOT COMMITING FRAUD SO GET OFF THE FUCKING LINE.
The other thing that frustrates me is that I've yet to hear a main party politician admitting to the fact that there are people out there that choose being on the dole as a lifestyle and they live their entire life without doing a days work. It's depressing but true - and I know this because members of my own family are doing it right now. They deny their existence because they can then lambast anyone who mentions it as an elitist nutter who is anti working class.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 05:47:10 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 05:35:18 PM
It's depressing but true - and I know this because members of my own family are doing it right now. They deny their existence because they can then lambast anyone who mentions it as an elitist nutter who is anti working class.

Anecdote ≠ data

The fact is: fraud is a minuscule part of the total benefit bill. The government is throwing hundreds of millions of pounds at ATOS to harass and humiliate disabled people because it fits with their narrative and chimes with the prejudiced streak of things the general public 'know is true'.

At the same time, they're cutting staffing levels at HMRC to the bone, to the point where the Revenue can't even make sure tax that they know is legitimately owed is collected, never mind go after the billions of pounds that are siphoned out of the UK economy by the wealthy and corporations through evasion and accounting fast practise. The returns to the UK Treasury from shutting ATOS down and giving the exact same amount of money to HMRC to spend on enforcement and collection would be orders of magnitude higher than they're extracting from the benefit fraud 'clampdown'.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2013, 05:59:13 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 05:35:18 PM
I think the fact that they deserve it is relevant though.

Aye, but - in the context of a conversation about the impact fraudulent unemployment benefit claimants have on public spending - the point would be that robbing every pensioner in the land (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/britain-becomes-a-nation-of-pensioners-1059449.html) of one pound per week of their state benefit would produce almost as great a saving as reducing Jobseeker's Allowance to zero.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 06:09:00 PM
I'm afraid I have no hard data but I'd like to think that people will take my anecdotal evidence as truth.

I can see that there are many more pressing concerns to the economy and that benefits, pensions etc are something of a minefield.
My only point is that denying the existence of a class group, however small, helps no one. If a child grows up in a house where, not only does no one work but no one intends to work then it seems to me the problem will only increase over the generations.

I was going to write another anecdote here but I really don't want to start typing out stories about family members on the internet.
I'm losing the point of what I'm trying say here but I think it's something along the lines of - if you ignore (or deny the existence) of the small problems, they're likely to turn into big problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2013, 06:14:26 PM
We already have big problems, most notably that we're seemingly happy being ground underfoot.  If some working class tosser doesn't need 38 pounds a week, a multi-millionaire doesn't need 40 000 pounds a week on top of paid room and board, travel costs and expenses.  It's the fuckers at the top that need looking at, not bottom-feeders, but like the obedient chattel we are we'd sooner fight amongst ourselves than be free of our slavemasters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 October, 2013, 06:23:10 PM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 23 October, 2013, 06:14:26 PM
We already have big problems, most notably that we're seemingly happy being ground underfoot.  If some working class tosser doesn't need 38 pounds a week, a multi-millionaire doesn't need 40 000 pounds a week on top of paid room and board, travel costs and expenses.  It's the fuckers at the top that need looking at, not bottom-feeders, but like the obedient chattel we are we'd sooner fight amongst ourselves than be free of our slavemasters.

Exactly right!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 October, 2013, 06:25:40 PM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24645300

"30 Activists on a dead man's chest, Yo Ho Ho and a bottle of ...", hang on, they ain't even Pirates.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 October, 2013, 06:28:39 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 06:09:00 PM
I was going to write another anecdote here but I really don't want to start typing out stories about family members on the internet. I'm losing the point of what I'm trying say here but I think it's something along the lines of - if you ignore (or deny the existence) of the small problems, they're likely to turn into big problems.

I know what you mean, and I can think of one member of my own extended family doing exactly as you describe, but I can think of many more disabled folk I know who deserve whatever they get - some of whom work as well as receiving DLA. The argument is generally that those who were once fraudulently claiming unemployment benefit have migrated onto Disability Living Allowance, but by far the greatest increase in the number of new claimants since the benefit was introduced are either below or above working age:

(http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Age-and-DLA-1-500x325.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 06:29:23 PM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 23 October, 2013, 06:14:26 PM
We already have big problems, most notably that we're seemingly happy being ground underfoot.  If some working class tosser doesn't need 38 pounds a week, a multi-millionaire doesn't need 40 000 pounds a week on top of paid room and board, travel costs and expenses.  It's the fuckers at the top that need looking at, not bottom-feeders, but like the obedient chattel we are we'd sooner fight amongst ourselves than be free of our slavemasters.

While I wouldn't say I agree with everything above it does highlight the point that emotions are important in politics.
While taking from the pensioners and giving to the unemployed may make sense mathematically it doesn't emotionally. It's no good building a society where everyone has X amount in their bank account if were all at each other's throats. I think the majority of people would prefer a just society to a mathematically logical one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 07:00:45 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 06:09:00 PM
I'm afraid I have no hard data but I'd like to think that people will take my anecdotal evidence as truth.

You appear to understand the meaning and significance of data. I'm not suggesting your anecdote isn't true, I'm pointing out that it's not significant.

For example:

QuoteIf a child grows up in a house where, not only does no one work but no one intends to work then it seems to me the problem will only increase over the generations.

Ian Duncan Smith's "households where three generations have never worked" simply does not exist. There is no data to support this claim; IDS just makes up shit based on his prejudices and things he hears down the gentleman's club and then enacts policy on it.

I'm not saying that these people don't exist. I know people who don't work and seem happy to sit on their arses claiming benefits, but they're not statistically significant. There will always be a small number of people who can game the system, the question is whether you want to devise a system that disadvantages the vast majority of legitimate claimants simply to weed out a tiny percentage who are taking the piss.

As someone who's experienced occasional periods of unemployment, I would rather there was a functioning safety net rather than a regime designed to make the whole experience so unpleasant that no one in their right mind would ever try to avail themselves of it.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 07:17:11 PM
Understood.
I think that's an excellent post that anyone in their right mind would find it hard to disagree with.
I think my other point, about it not being statistically significant but emotionally significant stands. I think people who do have this kind of anecdotal evidence deserve to be heard and not just shot down.
I have to say though, that if politicians explained the situation in the way you just have it would be really helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 October, 2013, 07:26:56 PM
Someone would have to explain it to them first.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 October, 2013, 07:48:01 PM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 23 October, 2013, 06:14:26 PM
It's the fuckers at the top that need looking at, not bottom-feeders, but like the obedient chattel we are we'd sooner fight amongst ourselves than be free of our slavemasters.


Man...I told you...I didn't wanna be involved! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9rrgJXfLns)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 23 October, 2013, 08:02:53 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 05:47:10 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 05:35:18 PM
It's depressing but true - and I know this because members of my own family are doing it right now. They deny their existence because they can then lambast anyone who mentions it as an elitist nutter who is anti working class.

Anecdote ≠ data

The fact is: fraud is a minuscule part of the total benefit bill. The government is throwing hundreds of millions of pounds at ATOS to harass and humiliate disabled people because it fits with their narrative and chimes with the prejudiced streak of things the general public 'know is true'.

At the same time, they're cutting staffing levels at HMRC to the bone, to the point where the Revenue can't even make sure tax that they know is legitimately owed is collected, never mind go after the billions of pounds that are siphoned out of the UK economy by the wealthy and corporations through evasion and accounting fast practise. The returns to the UK Treasury from shutting ATOS down and giving the exact same amount of money to HMRC to spend on enforcement and collection would be orders of magnitude higher than they're extracting from the benefit fraud 'clampdown'.

Cheers

Jim

One of my favourite posts on the internet ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 23 October, 2013, 08:09:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 October, 2013, 09:33:12 AM
Over a family lunch, discussion of Ramadan with my son (7) included the fact that three kids in his class (in one of the relatively few non-religious schools in the country) are Muslims, or have at least one Muslim parent. Instantly my mother comes out with: "I hate the way these Muslims are taking over everything". 

I'm used to this kind of thinking*, but the bald instantaneous venom of this remark, in front of kids and effectively  about kids, took me aback.

Where does this kind of thing come from?  How could anyone think that in the Republic of Ireland, of all the monotheistic places on Earth, Islam is 'taking over'?  Taking over from what, institutionalised child abuse and hospitals and schools run as the executive arms of some medieval cult?  How do three children (all of whom, it goes without saying, are really nice kids) in a class of 28, in a school specifically chosen by us because of its explicit commitment to diversity, merit such a response? 

Is this simply a picture created by the media (my mother reads the Mail and listens to talk radio), or do the media just cater to an existing perception?  How do you tackle this barbarians-at-the-gates mentality?




*Some context, no need to read: While in other respects a kind and selfless person who I love very much, my mother is an appalling bigot of the most parochial nature imaginable: people from other postal districts are to be pitied and feared in equal measure, never mind those with different skin tones, variant religious mumbo-jumbo or a hint of a divergent accent.  The laughable exceptions to this rule are anyone she has ever actually met, all of whom are presented as miraculous individual exceptions to the genetic-and-or-cultural cesspool they hail from.  It'd be funny if it wasn't so fucking awful.

Tordelback I have been involved all my professional life in work around prejudice awareness-primarily anti-sectarian work but also other related fields such as anti-racism and anti-homophobia. The work has un-covered some gems. A few years back a bunch of young loyalists advised me in alarmed tones how "pakis" were taking over their town. Further investigation revealed that 4 had been spotted observing a parade.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 08:45:41 PM
People's fears need to be addressed rather than just calling them idiotic Mail readers.  There's plenty of nonsense in The Guardian but that seems to be okay.  I think people are worried about jobs for their children/grandchildren; school places; housing; social mobility; access to health services.  Why, with almost a million 18-24 year olds out of work, are we continuing to import labour?  Why have we scraped the retirement age?  How does that help young people to get work?

People won't be getting disability living allowance for much longer, it's being scraped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 08:49:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 08:45:41 PM
People's fears need to be addressed rather than just calling them idiotic Mail readers.  There's plenty of nonsense in The Guardian but that seems to be okay.  I think people are worried about jobs for their children/grandchildren; school places; housing; social mobility; access to health services.  Why, with almost a million 18-24 year olds out of work, are we continuing to import labour?  Why have we scraped the retirement age?  How does that help young people to get work?

People won't be getting disability living allowance for much longer, it's being scraped.

People will continue to vote Tory, that's why...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 09:01:37 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 08:45:41 PM
Why, with almost a million 18-24 year olds out of work, are we continuing to import labour? forcing people on benefits to work for nothing?

A more pertinent question, since it's within the direct control of the government and not subject to considerations of European or international law. If Tesco has shelves that need stacking, why the fuck isn't Tesco paying minimum wage and employing someone to do it? Oh, because the DWP will send someone along to do it at the taxpayers' expense.

But, never mind, as long as Ian Duncan Smith is being tough on the scroungers. All in the name of 'fairness' of course.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:17:40 PM
What!!  No shelf stackers in Tesco's are being paid by Tesco's?  I find that hard to believe.  But, if it's true, I totally agree with you, it's bang out of order!  Or is that a slight exaggeration?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 09:22:48 PM
http://news.sky.com/story/1147058/jobless-to-be-forced-to-work-for-benefits
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 09:25:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:17:40 PM
What!!  No shelf stackers in Tesco's are being paid by Tesco's?  I find that hard to believe.  But, if it's true, I totally agree with you, it's bang out of order!  Or is that a slight exaggeration?

It would be an exaggeration if that was what I said but, if you read what I wrote carefully and get a grown-up to help you with the long words, you may notice that I didn't say anything of the fucking kind.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:31:08 PM
Yes you did.  Perhaps you should read your own post again or get a grown up to read it for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 09:37:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:31:08 PM
Yes you did.  Perhaps you should read your own post again or get a grown up to read it for you.

He absolutely didn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 October, 2013, 09:46:09 PM
Politics in action.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 09:51:27 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:31:08 PM
Yes you did.  Perhaps you should read your own post again or get a grown up to read it for you.

Where do I say that Tesco don't pay any of their shelf stackers, you colossal fuckwit? Where? Please quote the section of my post where I state this or retract your idiotic assertion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:54:46 PM
Richmond, he said, "If Tesco has shelves that need stacking, why the f*** isn't Tesco paying minimum wage and employing someone to do it?"

Richmond, obviously, I'm not as educated as you and Jim, but why couldn't one read that as saying that no one stacking shelves at Tesco's is getting paid by Tesco's?

Yes, good point Hawkmonger, I shall now retire ungraciously!!

Just about to post, Jim, when I saw your last reply.  You really do have a short fuse!!  I recommend Kalpol!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2013, 09:59:02 PM
Jim is Scottish, elderly, currently sober and a Sisters Of Mercy fan, so I'd say his short temper is both to be expected and the least of his problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 10:00:00 PM
QuoteRichmond, obviously, I'm not as educated as you and Jim, but why couldn't one read that as saying that no one stacking shelves at Tesco's is getting paid by Tesco's?

I have absolutely no idea how or why you could read it the way you did, because I doubt anyone else did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 10:00:29 PM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 23 October, 2013, 09:59:02 PM
Jim is Scottish, elderly, currently sober and a Sisters Of Mercy fan, so I'd say his short temper is both to be expected and the least of his problems.

Scottish..? News to him, I suspect...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 October, 2013, 10:03:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 23 October, 2013, 09:59:02 PM
Jim is Scottish, elderly, currently sober and a Sisters Of Mercy fan, so I'd say his short temper is both to be expected and the least of his problems.
He's a Scotch?! Mr. Clements. We can not allow this blatant abuse of forum free entry policies!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 10:04:30 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 09:54:46 PM
Just about to post, Jim, when I saw your last reply.  You really do have a short fuse!!  I recommend Kalpol!

Yeah. Wilfully misreading my posts in order to distort my position and score a cheap point will tend to rub me up the wrong way. I'm funny like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2013, 10:06:57 PM
I apologize deeply for suggesting Jim is Scotch.  So far as I know he has never taken heroin or had a heart attack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 October, 2013, 10:07:14 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 10:00:29 PM
Scottish..? News to him, I suspect...

I've been on the receiving end of some pretty offensive accusations over the years, but I have to draw the line at THIS!

Och!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 10:12:33 PM
Campbell's Scottish isn't it?

A more important political point - when are they going to stop selling fireworks to the general public in the middle of October?
Some twat is setting them off right outside and my cat is freaking out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 10:14:36 PM
I didn't "wilfully" misread anything, it's just the way that I read it.  I certainly didn't swear at you nor insult you.

I've "rubbed you up the wrong way."  On a forum?  We're not down the pub, I don't know you.  Probably never met you (although my lad might have done, he's in a similar game as you).  You can't smack me in the mouth, we're not face-to-face!!  How can a bit of banter on a forum wind you up so much?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 October, 2013, 10:19:09 PM
Yeah Jim.

Not touching, can't get mad :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 October, 2013, 10:21:33 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 October, 2013, 10:12:33 PM
Campbell's Scottish isn't it?

A more important political point - when are they going to stop selling fireworks to the general public in the middle of October?
Some twat is setting them off right outside and my cat is freaking out.
People will set off a firework for any old reason these days. The charm has vanished with commercialisation of the novelty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 23 October, 2013, 10:41:28 PM
Tankie you seem to have definitely  come to the wrong conclusion but Jim, surely  a simple "No, you appear to have misinterprretted what I wrote." without the insult about grown-ups helping would have sufficed?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 October, 2013, 10:44:22 PM
Fair enough, Tips.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 23 October, 2013, 10:47:57 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 October, 2013, 10:00:00 PM
QuoteRichmond, obviously, I'm not as educated as you and Jim, but why couldn't one read that as saying that no one stacking shelves at Tesco's is getting paid by Tesco's?

I have absolutely no idea how or why you could read it the way you did, because I doubt anyone else did.

Or, to put it another way, why would Tesco fork out a minimum of £130.20 a week to employ someone to stack shelves when the UK Government will pay someone a maximum of £71.70 to do it for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 12:52:40 PM
Just saw this, and it reminded me of the Ayn rand discussion we had a while back:

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/ayn_random.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 October, 2013, 12:57:10 PM
the blonde child abducted by police & social services from the Dublin Roma family is confirmed to be their daughter. Can you imagine a nice middle class family having their child taken away for three days because it has different coloured hair?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 October, 2013, 01:10:57 PM
No.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 24 October, 2013, 02:03:52 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 24 October, 2013, 12:57:10 PM
the blonde child abducted by police & social services from the Dublin Roma family is confirmed to be their daughter. Can you imagine a nice middle class family having their child taken away for three days because it has different coloured hair?

I would have been snatched in a flash. My parents have black and brunette hair, and I'm ginger. Come to think of it, my sister is blonde. Hmmm. I think I need to speak to my mum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 02:38:30 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 24 October, 2013, 12:57:10 PM
the blonde child abducted by police & social services from the Dublin Roma family is confirmed to be their daughter. Can you imagine a nice middle class family having their child taken away for three days because it has different coloured hair?

I hate to say this about something so unimaginably awful, but the backlash looks like it may actually do some good here.  I suspect it never occurred to a lot of Irish people that the Roma might actually be human instead of some annoying variety of parasite.

Last week my wife had to caution colleagues to control their lunchtime speculations into the Maddy-snatching ways of the evil gypsy last week, as they were (unknowingly) conducting them in front a Roma work-experience kid.  She was initially informed she must be talking crap, since the boy in question also happened to be blond.  This week it's a different story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2013, 02:52:46 PM
I was more or less waiting for some kind of backlash coming out of the Greek story, but it was good to see it resolved so quickly as I could see the Guards dragging that out for years rather than admit wrongdoing.  I blame Enid Blyton for making gypsies the perennial arch-nemeses of the western middle classes, though it's heartening to see the BBC keeping up the gypo-bashing these days in shows like Wolfblood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 24 October, 2013, 03:27:33 PM
I'm sure I had a Rupert Bear annual in which Rupert and his mates were given mushrooms by some gypsies which made them float off to another land.

Rupert was blond too (apart from on the front cover - he was always brunette on those for some reason). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judda fett on 24 October, 2013, 03:37:41 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 24 October, 2013, 03:27:33 PM
I'm sure I had a Rupert Bear annual in which Rupert and his mates were given mushrooms by some gypsies which made them float off to another land.

Rupert was blond too (apart from on the front cover - he was always brunette on those for some reason).

I went on a substance awareness training course as part of my job and that Rupert story was used as reference. Can't remember if they were gypsies though or mountain pixies (is there much to distinguish between them)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2013, 06:26:06 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 02:38:30 PM


I hate to say this about something so unimaginably awful, but the backlash looks like it may actually do some good here.  I suspect it never occurred to a lot of Irish people that the Roma might actually be human instead of some annoying variety of parasite.


I hear you.  There sometimes seems to be a view in Ireland that racism 'doesn't apply' to the Roma people; and to my great shame I've been somewhat guilty of it myself in the past.

Fortunately for me, I've got to know a Roma girl who sells the Big Issue beside a shop window I regularly paint, and found out she is a really pleasant person with an enjoyably wicked sense of humour;  in fact I look forward to the banter when I get commissions from the shop in question.  (I did initially have to dissuade her from asking me for large sums of money; she hasn't done since the day I met her.  To be fair, she really doesn't have any, but I tend not to have much either.)

In any case, thankfully I have overcome that particular dose of nasty, ill-informed bigotry.  At least I never believed that Roma mothers 'leave their baby-buggies at the bus stops, because the government gives them free ones whenever they want'. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 07:04:25 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2013, 06:26:06 PMAt least I never believed that Roma mothers 'leave their baby-buggies at the bus stops, because the government gives them free ones whenever they want'.

How could anyone think that?  Everyone knows they government gives them all new-reg people-carriers as soon as they step off the boat, so why would they be on the bus at all. You're thinking of Nigerians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:04:38 PM


Before Blacks, Muslims and Eastern Europeans arrived in Ireland the two despised minority groups were knackers and Italians. We've come a long way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 08:08:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:04:38 PM


Before Blacks, Muslims and Eastern Europeans arrived in Ireland the two despised minority groups were knackers and Italians. We've come a long way.

You left out the English
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 October, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
My old parents live on a housing association estate with about 50 little bungalows all for elderly people on it.  The residents are a mixture of old London and old Peterborough, all white.  About six months ago they found out that an empty bungalow opposite them was going to be taken by foreigners.  Old man up in arms! 

An old couple from Eastern Europe moved in, appeared to speak very little English, but what a change in my old man's attitude.  He can't understand a word the old boy says but they spend most of their days waving to each other and giving each other thumbs-up signs, and following each other about on their mobility scooters!!

Every time I go round there, my old man says, "what a lovely geezer that chap is!"  He still doesn't know exactly where he comes from but now he thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread.  It's just fear of the unknown.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:23:07 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 08:08:50 PM
You left out the English


We called it Thatcher.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 08:31:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 October, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
Every time I go round there, my old man says, "what a lovely geezer that chap is!"  He still doesn't know exactly where he comes from but now he thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread.  It's just fear of the unknown.

In some ways this truth is the most tragic part of the whole silly mess. 

My mother spent most of my childhood warning us of the sheer terror that is tinkers, literal bogeymen, with the notable exception of old Peggy who came to the door with her two grandkids every other month looking for old clothes and was the 'salt of the earth' and worthy of tea and a chat.  Then my mother through her job started working with Pavee Point (the main Traveller support/education/advocacy organisation here), and to our genuine amazement suddenly all the people she met there were great altogether too. 

But somehow after several decades if this she still bangs on about the evils of Travellers, as if 'they' were in some sense entirely distinct from the individuals she knows and likes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 24 October, 2013, 08:56:01 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 08:31:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 October, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
Every time I go round there, my old man says, "what a lovely geezer that chap is!"  He still doesn't know exactly where he comes from but now he thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread.  It's just fear of the unknown.

In some ways this truth is the most tragic part of the whole silly mess. 

My mother spent most of my childhood warning us of the sheer terror that is tinkers, literal bogeymen, with the notable exception of old Peggy who came to the door with her two grandkids every other month looking for old clothes and was the 'salt of the earth' and worthy of tea and a chat.  Then my mother through her job started working with Pavee Point (the main Traveller support/education/advocacy organisation here), and to our genuine amazement suddenly all the people she met there were great altogether too. 

But somehow after several decades if this she still bangs on about the evils of Travellers, as if 'they' were in some sense entirely distinct from the individuals she knows and likes.

Tordelback research around sectarian issues here in the north points to a considerable faculty on the part of many to create an "exception to the rule" narrative even after meaningful contact between communities through involvement in community relations programmes etc. I saw it in my own family.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 October, 2013, 09:31:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 08:08:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:04:38 PM


Before Blacks, Muslims and Eastern Europeans arrived in Ireland the two despised minority groups were knackers and Italians. We've come a long way.

You left out the English
Everybody hates the English. Even the English. Why do you think there is so much dross in the media?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 October, 2013, 10:02:21 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 24 October, 2013, 09:31:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 08:08:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:04:38 PM


Before Blacks, Muslims and Eastern Europeans arrived in Ireland the two despised minority groups were knackers and Italians. We've come a long way.

You left out the English
Everybody hates the English. Even the English. Why do you think there is so much dross in the media?


I'm English and the only people I hate are far-right wankers/racists, religious extremists (of any denomination) and certain Corporate Wankers who would happily take profit from destroying peoples lives, and the Environment!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=44
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 October, 2013, 10:05:40 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 24 October, 2013, 10:02:21 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 24 October, 2013, 09:31:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 October, 2013, 08:08:50 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 08:04:38 PM


Before Blacks, Muslims and Eastern Europeans arrived in Ireland the two despised minority groups were knackers and Italians. We've come a long way.

You left out the English
Everybody hates the English. Even the English. Why do you think there is so much dross in the media?


I'm English and the only people I hate are far-right wankers/racists, religious extremists (of any denomination) and certain Corporate Wankers who would happily take profit from destroying peoples lives, and the Environment!

Cheers
So most corporate organisations then? Yes, I'm looking at you nestle!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=44

Yeah, he wrecks my head, but he's as smart and as charismatic as it gets.  Every time I see or read him I think better of him, which is not a usual state of affairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:20:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=44

Yeah, he wrecks my head, but he's as smart and as charismatic as it gets.  Every time I see or read him I think better of him, which is not a usual state of affairs.

Yup - I'm as confused as you on this one...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 10:34:39 PM
It's interesting but if 'socialism' and enforced redistribution of wealth is his answer to the world's problems, I'm not quite sure that underneath the barrage of cute sentences and charming tangents he thinks that deeply or long enough about such things. 'No voting' can be a catalyst of something but combined with advocacy of a bureaucratic government is mindless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 24 October, 2013, 10:46:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 10:34:39 PM
It's interesting but if 'socialism' and enforced redistribution of wealth is his answer to the world's problems, I'm not quite sure that underneath the barrage of cute sentences and charming tangents he thinks that deeply or long enough about such things. 'No voting' can be a catalyst of something but combined with advocacy of a bureaucratic government is mindless.

I don't think he's against voting per se, just that he's against voting for something that you don't actually believe in just because those are the only choices available.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 24 October, 2013, 10:56:46 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=44

Yeah, he wrecks my head, but he's as smart and as charismatic as it gets.  Every time I see or read him I think better of him, which is not a usual state of affairs.

Caught this on Newsnight the other day, and had to turn down the sound until the interview was over. The man's unbearable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 24 October, 2013, 10:46:31 PM

I don't think he's against voting per se, just that he's against voting for something that you don't actually believe in just because those are the only choices available.


Speaking as someone who doesn't vote when it comes to personalities I presume the problem is most people who do vote tend to believe or swallow what they vote for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 11:23:39 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 24 October, 2013, 10:56:46 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 October, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk#t=44

Yeah, he wrecks my head, but he's as smart and as charismatic as it gets.  Every time I see or read him I think better of him, which is not a usual state of affairs.

Caught this on Newsnight the other day, and had to turn down the sound until the interview was over. The man's unbearable.

Nice to see you coming into it with an open mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 25 October, 2013, 08:14:01 AM
Much like your post, i found him predictable, and halfway through i voted with my volume control.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 25 October, 2013, 09:39:59 AM
QuoteMuch like your post, i found him predictable

I don't know what this means.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 25 October, 2013, 12:23:13 PM
Judge Jack do.... posts have sound for you?

You might have to get your computer looked at!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 25 October, 2013, 12:43:24 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 October, 2013, 11:07:00 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 24 October, 2013, 10:46:31 PM

I don't think he's against voting per se, just that he's against voting for something that you don't actually believe in just because those are the only choices available.


Speaking as someone who doesn't vote when it comes to personalities I presume the problem is most people who do vote tend to believe or swallow what they vote for.

My stance in the last couple of local elections was to go to the voting booth and write 'there's no one worth voting for' on the ballot.
My understanding is that this has to be counted and becomes part of the pie chart (counted as a spoiled vote).
When they count up the votes, even if only 5 percent of the population votes they can say - Conservatives (or whoever) won 70% of the vote (but that's only 70% of the 5% that voted). If everyone who doesn't vote spoiled their balot instead it would be more like - Conservative 7%, labour 5%, Lib Dems 3%, Spoiled votes 85%!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 October, 2013, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 25 October, 2013, 12:43:24 PM
If everyone who doesn't vote spoiled their balot instead it would be more like - Conservative 7%, labour 5%, Lib Dems 3%, Spoiled votes 85%!

And whoever got the most votes, even if it was just one vote, would still win. I'm a staunch advocate of adding a "None of the above" or "No confidence" option to the bottom of the ballot paper. In fact, once that was in place, I'd make voting compulsory.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 October, 2013, 12:49:52 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 October, 2013, 10:03:59 PM
Now, I may not be a fan of his comedy, but by grud, Russel Brand has a fierce intelligence.

A rather vigorous response to Brand's New Statesman piece:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/robin-lustig/russell-brand-not-only-dangerous_b_4155341.html

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 25 October, 2013, 01:05:37 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 October, 2013, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 25 October, 2013, 12:43:24 PM
If everyone who doesn't vote spoiled their balot instead it would be more like - Conservative 7%, labour 5%, Lib Dems 3%, Spoiled votes 85%!

And whoever got the most votes, even if it was just one vote, would still win. I'm a staunch advocate of adding a "None of the above" or "No confidence" option to the bottom of the ballot paper. In fact, once that was in place, I'd make voting compulsory.

Cheers

Jim

That's right, but within the current system, if there were a large enough percentage of people that were shown as willing voters but not alligned to any party surely it would encourage parties to try to gain their votes by targetting their needs?
I agree that a 'none of the above' option is preferable though. I wonder if anyone has tried to implement this via the governments 'start a petition' system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 October, 2013, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 October, 2013, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 25 October, 2013, 12:43:24 PM
If everyone who doesn't vote spoiled their balot instead it would be more like - Conservative 7%, labour 5%, Lib Dems 3%, Spoiled votes 85%!

And whoever got the most votes, even if it was just one vote, would still win. I'm a staunch advocate of adding a "None of the above" or "No confidence" option to the bottom of the ballot paper. In fact, once that was in place, I'd make voting compulsory.

Cheers

Jim

That gets my vote Jim.

As for Russell Brand criticizing the current power institutions? Hardly mind-blowing insight, but it needed to be said, and it needs to be said again and again and again (although, maybe without the insipid whimsy), until those out of touch fuckwits start listening. It would be easy to criticize Brand for not really offering any solutions or alternatives, but he's not standing for election (thank fuck) and the people who are aren't offering solutions or alternatives either. I think that's why you shouldn't vote. The people asking for your vote, so they can get a good salary, a free gaff and expenses, aren't really offering you anything in return.

Those colonials had it right back in 1776. By the people for the people ( I love that episode of Star Trek where Kirk pisses all over the prime directive and starts lecturing an alien culture about the Declaration of Independence).

In other news, Barry Obama has proven he has a decent singing voice, so maybe he should consider offering a rendition of this song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcZn2-bGXqQ).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 October, 2013, 04:55:32 PM
Always voted.  Always voted Tory............... but not anymore.  Dave's got no chance at the next Election.  There are plenty of places in the world where you can't vote, I wonder if they're better off?  I don't think so. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 October, 2013, 05:37:06 PM
I can, and do, take part in the democratic process, I spoil my vote. As Mr Campbell pointed out, there's no 'none of the above' option. That's basically the political institution telling me that my choice can only be valid if I agree with one of their political narratives. I shouldn't feel privileged to be allowed to vote, the government should feel privileged to get my vote. I would love to vote for a politician that I can agree with, but none currently exist, and if I want to vote against an incumbent I don't agree with, I should have an option other than voting for another politician I don't agree with and to whom I can't relate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 October, 2013, 05:59:27 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 25 October, 2013, 01:38:25 PM
Barry Obama has proven he has a decent singing voice, so maybe he should consider offering a rendition of this song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcZn2-bGXqQ).

Arf! Ange should record an answer song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YvAYIJSSZY&feature=player_detailpage#t=5). Regarding Brand, there's obviously something substantial missing from the heart of his argument, but if he was peddling a five step recovery and reform programme the general public would be just as reluctant to give him an airing as they are when any of the figure heads of the established parties starts banging on about hard working families and QE.

The reason folk are prepared to listen to him is because - like Farage - he doesn't talk or act in the incredibly mannered and obscure fashion of the political class. Brand was poncing around the Occupy demos in London, saying he just wanted to understand what it was that had involved folk enough for them to take to the streets. The one thing seasoned commentators can agree upon with regard to that movement is that - like Brand - it had no singular aim or agreed plan of action.

Most analysts presented that as a weakness, but political operators more astute and better connected than Brand will have noted the inarticulate rage and vague demand that something's got to change, to which he's now giving a voice. The mathematics of Britain's arcane electoral system probably means that kind of protest vote can't swing more than one or two seats in parliament, but that might not be the case somewhere like austerity Spain - where youth unemployment is 56% (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23447087).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 25 October, 2013, 08:37:36 PM
All this talk of spoiled votes reminds me of a novel I read a review of a few years ago. The gist of it was there was a national election and nobody turned up to vote because the public was so disillusioned with any parties candidates thus causing a national crisis. I think it was a Spanish or Portuguese novel but for the life of me I can't remember the title, sorry folks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 October, 2013, 09:47:41 PM
All that would happen in such a scenario is that the people who organise voting buses - usually right-wing parties - would win in a landslide result, or someone's joke/protest candidate would win.  I recall there was some hilarity in the 1990s when people started insisting that Irish television celebrity Dustin Hoffman (no, not that one, this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_the_Turkey ) run for office, and apparently to this day thousands of people in Ireland still deliberately spoil their ballots by doing him as a write-in candidate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 October, 2013, 10:26:40 AM
I'm generally amazed at the number of people that seem to forget the Tories didn't actually win the last election.
The Lib Dems have really screwed up in the coalition - they now seem to barely register on the public consciousness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 October, 2013, 10:34:40 AM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 25 October, 2013, 09:47:41 PM
All that would happen in such a scenario is that the people who organise voting buses - usually right-wing parties - would win in a landslide result

Yep, that's the problem with not voting.  Someone will still win.  In Ireland, at least, all major parties are comprised mainly of bumbling buffoons and / or shady semi-gangsters, but some more than others.  For me, voting is picking the best of a bad lot, and at the very least doing my bit to keep Fianna Fáil's* oafish hands off the economy before they can do any more damage.

*Irish political party who played a massive part in ruining the country, and who for some reason people seem to be still voting for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2013, 09:31:59 AM
See that Tianenmen Square explosion?  If I was still living down the street from it (as I was for a couple of months last summer), I wouldn't have heard of it.  In fact, nothing of interest ever happened in Tianenmen Square, apparently
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2013, 09:40:55 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 October, 2013, 10:34:40 AM
Quote from: Professor Vundabar K Werewolf on 25 October, 2013, 09:47:41 PM
All that would happen in such a scenario is that the people who organise voting buses - usually right-wing parties - would win in a landslide result

Yep, that's the problem with not voting.  Someone will still win.

Or as someone wise put it, if you don't vote you double the value of some other bastard's vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2013, 10:00:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2013, 09:31:59 AM
See that Tianenmen Square explosion?  If I was still living down the street from it (as I was for a couple of months last summer), I wouldn't have heard of it.  In fact, nothing of interest ever happened in Tianenmen Square, apparently

I'm surprised you hear about any acts of political dissent or governmental corruption, Jayzus. Your quiescent print media is censored and silenced by exactly the kind of charter body which the brave Tommies of the UK press are about to go into battle against (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24738359), to save readers from being squashed under the jackboot of fascism.

Good job Dave Cameron's close ties to Newscorp mean he would never intrude on the freedom of the press (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/10/28/uk-usa-spying-cameron-idUKBRE99O0K120131028).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2013, 11:08:25 AM
QuoteI'm surprised you hear about any acts of political dissent or governmental corruption, Jayzus. Your quiescent print media is censored and silenced by exactly the kind of charter body which the brave Tommies of the UK press are about to go into battle against, to save readers from being squashed under the jackboot of fascism.

I've been home in Ireland for the last year; but you're still not far off the mark (a blasphemy law was passed in 2009, for fuxake).  And just to link the themes of my double posting antics:

I like Russell Brand and respect many of his views, but the idea that apathy on the part of the electorate paves the way to revolution just does not wash with me.

As much as I could gather from my short time in Beijing, the Chinese culture of political apathy plays a large part in allowing their government to do what it does.  And it pretty much does as it pleases - corruption is rife; government officials roll in money while small-town kids walk ten miles to school, and generally speaking it is either not known about or tolerated. 

Small-scale protests do occasionally occur in Tianenmen Square and near government buildings, but the protestors are generally taken away without fuss (and definitely without any media coverage), presumeably for 're-education'.

So sorry, Russell, if you want to see what political apathy leads to, take a look at how the megalomania of the Chinese government has spiralled out of control.  At the very least, the fact that we can use our vote gives our governments cause to consider our opinions if they want to stay in power. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Prodigal on 30 October, 2013, 05:31:18 PM
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/10/robert-webb-re-joins-labour-protest-russell-brand

Interesting response.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2013, 06:58:19 PM

Quotewhen you end a piece about politics with the injunction 'I will never vote and I don't think you should either', then you're actively telling a lot of people that engagement with our democracy is a bad idea. That just gives politicians the green light to neglect the concerns of young people because they've been relieved of the responsibility of courting their vote.
Quote'They're all the same' is what reactionaries love to hear. It leaves the status quo serenely untroubled, it cedes the floor to the easy answers of Ukip and the Daily Mail. No, if you want to be a nuisance to the people whom you most detest in public life, vote.

Now that's more like it.  I'm going to see Russell Brand's show in a couple of weeks, and he was great the last time I saw him, but on this issue I'm fighting with Bob Webb block.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2013, 07:09:00 PM
Though the blood of thousands of innocents is a stain that's hard to get out, Webb is right that Labour did a lot of good while in power.  I recall being unemployed when the government changed hands and things turned nasty overnight for the jobless to the point that today the British courts ruled that what went on was unlawful.  Yes, I know - forcing people to work without payment is apparently illegal.  Who knew?

I would like to like Russel brand, but he's a knob.  That time he found his patter wasn't working on a makeup lady on one of his films so he held up production for hours until she showed him her breasts - or he'd walk off the film and make sure she never worked again?  He was kind of a hard sell for me after that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 October, 2013, 07:15:06 PM
I think you could make an argument that a least a few people that do vote aren't really engaging in democracy, just abdicating responsibility by complacently ticking a box every few years. In a real democracy everyone's opinion has to count, even if they have the opinion that no one deserves their vote, otherwise it's meaningless.

Anyways, the energy companies, does anyone think they'll be charged with price fixing under existing laws, or will we just have another completely unnecessary enquiry at the public's expense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2013, 07:18:08 PM
The second one.  All expenses paid, naturally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 October, 2013, 08:52:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2013, 11:08:25 AMAt the very least, the fact that we can use our vote gives our governments cause to consider our opinions if they want to stay in power.


Then they turn around and ignore every promise that got them elected i.e. every Irish government. Voting: damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's unfortunate that in our current education system and body politic the ideal of 'rule of the people' has been reduced to the idea of ticking a box next to the name of some local gombeen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombeen) every 4 years. Our current 'democracy' is the furthest thing from that ideal as the only contribution by the people that matters to government is tax and the musical-chairs of assorted bribes and burglaries that accompanies it every year on budget day.

I know plenty of people who don't vote but aren't in the least bit apathetic but I know plenty who do vote that are. None of them are Russell Brand. To vote or not to vote matters little if the people are either clueless or apathetic anyway.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 November, 2013, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 October, 2013, 08:52:02 PM
I know plenty of people who don't vote but aren't in the least bit apathetic but I know plenty who do vote that are. None of them are Russell Brand. To vote or not to vote matters little if the people are either clueless or apathetic anyway.

WHAT  KIND  OF  RULER  WOULD  YOU  BE? (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_type_of_ruler_would_you_be)

My own result - 86% Big Brother. My people are like children, easily led and unsure of what is in their best interests.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2013, 09:12:00 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 November, 2013, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 30 October, 2013, 08:52:02 PM
I know plenty of people who don't vote but aren't in the least bit apathetic but I know plenty who do vote that are. None of them are Russell Brand. To vote or not to vote matters little if the people are either clueless or apathetic anyway.

WHAT  KIND  OF  RULER  WOULD  YOU  BE? (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_type_of_ruler_would_you_be)

My own result - 86% Big Brother. My people are like children, easily led and unsure of what is in their best interests.

Anarchist.  This is what I get for reading Noam Chomsky and Alan Moore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 November, 2013, 10:13:29 AM
Authoritarian/Dictator-put your hands in the air and prepare to be judged!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2013, 10:29:12 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2013, 07:09:00 PM
I would like to like Russel brand, but he's a knob.  That time he found his patter wasn't working on a makeup lady on one of his films so he held up production for hours until she showed him her breasts - or he'd walk off the film and make sure she never worked again?  He was kind of a hard sell for me after that.

"That [widely reported] story," says Connolly evenly, "is a total invention. A complete fabrication. It's total bollocks. It never happened. Russell was very well-behaved, and I found him very interesting."

Or at least says big Yin. (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/comedy/features/yin-and-yang-how-billy-connolly-calmed-down-just-dont-mention-piers-morgan-8412113.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2013, 10:59:09 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 November, 2013, 08:13:56 PM
WHAT  KIND  OF  RULER  WOULD  YOU  BE? (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_type_of_ruler_would_you_be)

12 inches.


No damnit, Democratic President 77%.  Gruddamnit, that's no fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 November, 2013, 11:32:09 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 November, 2013, 10:59:09 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 November, 2013, 08:13:56 PM
WHAT  KIND  OF  RULER  WOULD  YOU  BE? (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_type_of_ruler_would_you_be)

12 inches.


No damnit, Democratic President 77%.  Gruddamnit, that's no fun.

74% Anarchist.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2013, 03:59:22 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 November, 2013, 08:13:56 PM

My own result - 86% Big Brother. My people are like children, easily led and unsure of what is in their best interests.

May I refer you back to the Ayn Rand discussion a few pages back?  ;)

NapalmKev; I think my Anarchist score was lower than yours; so I'll be the Evey to your V.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 November, 2013, 04:29:27 PM
yup, another anarchist here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2013, 06:49:18 PM
I'm still pretty disappointed to find I'd be just as boring a Glorious Leader as I am a Lumpen Prole.

Very well then, if I can't be an anarchist I'll just have to reinvent myself in course of a long journey through the dark heart of the emerald isle, and emerge with a hate-filled manifesto of rigid propriety and adherence to an imagined norm.  You'll be sorry, you'll all be sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 November, 2013, 06:51:14 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 November, 2013, 06:49:18 PM
I'll just have to reinvent myself in course of a long journey through the dark heart of the emerald isle, and emerge with a hate-filled manifesto of rigid propriety and adherence to an imagined norm.

So you're coming up north to join the DUP?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2013, 06:56:36 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 07 November, 2013, 06:51:14 PM
So you're coming up north to join the DUP?

Damn you!  Even in my sacrificial rejection of all I hold dear, I end up conforming! 

I now see where Ribena Hardly-Lucidberry was coming from.  Grape costume it is, then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 November, 2013, 07:00:13 PM
Blip Blip!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2013, 08:21:33 AM
Anyone see the always-wonderful Hans Rosling's Don't Panic on the Beeb last night?  If not, get thee to iPlayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03h8r1j): a great overview of a brilliant man's thoughts, with his usual showmanlike exploration of global demographics, poverty and resource distribution, worth a look for the remarkable still-cutting-edge animated Trendalyser graphs he presents alone, and the gift of being able to drop the phrases 'Peak Child' and '80% literacy' over after-dinner drinks at the club.

Yes, it had all the patronising stylings you'd expect from a Swedish UN doctor-statistician sword-swallower, but there's so much to like in Rosling's conclusions and attitude, even if you're already aware of the raw numbers.  He offers population expansion not as an uncontrollable malthusian crisis but as an inevitable map of the future with clear stages, geography and outcome - and thus a well-defined set of (massive) challenges that can be addressed rationally. 

His numbers are clear, and in aggregate largely irrefutable: 11 billion people by 2100: 1 billion in Europe, 1 billion in the Americas, 4 billion in Africa, 5 billion in Asia.  And then that is it, no further growth.  "All" we have to do is make those numbers work with the resources we have, and given the global improvement in living standards over the past 40 years, why shouldn't we: if we know the future, we can plan and act, and most important of all, not panic.

Taking this on board along with the Pinker book I've been frothing all over in another thread, it's all very inspiring, if terrifying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 November, 2013, 07:33:49 PM

Addressing the comments made on another thread regarding the incidence of inter-racial gun deaths in the USA, the assertion that "There's (sic) more whites shot by blacks, but overwhelmingly more blacks shot by blacks" is both wrong and right. 16.9 African Americans per 100,000 (http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-by-raceethnicity/) die as a result of gun homicide, compared to 9.2 per 100,00 of the white population. 67% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States) of all homicides in the US involve firearms.

In terms of murder more generally, the FBI's NCVS (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/bvvc.txt) shows that the great majority of murders involve members of the same ethnicity - "About 93% of black homicide victims and 85% of white victims in single victim and single offender homicides were murdered by someone of their race". So, it's perfectly true to say that (in the nominal terms used above) more African-Americans murder black people than murder their white countrymen.

More black people are arrested for murder annually (4,149) than vice versa (4,000 (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43)), it's just that not that many more. It is, however, true to say that African-Americans are proportionally held responsible for a greater share of all homicides in the USA (49.7%) (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43), since they account for just 13.6% (http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb12-ff01.html) of the total population. White Americans account for 74% of the population, and 48% of all arrests for murder.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2013, 08:06:24 PM
The majority of deliberate gun deaths in the US, I remember reading somewhere so correct me if I'm wrong, are the result of suicides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2013, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 08 November, 2013, 07:33:49 PM...the great majority of murders involve members of the same ethnicity...

Which is hardly surprising, since about a quarter of murders in the US are by a family member of the victim, and over half by someone they know - given the high levels of racial segregation still present both spatially and socially.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 November, 2013, 08:20:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2013, 08:06:24 PM
The majority of deliberate gun deaths in the US, I remember reading somewhere so correct me if I'm wrong, are the result of suicides.

Suicide accounts for 60% (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=966) of all adult firearm deaths - I'm fairly sure those taking their own lives in that way aren't racists. The FBI stats I quoted above are for homicide arrests.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2013, 09:55:47 AM
True - it's just that suicide figures often get lumped in to the Gun Deaths category, skewing perceptions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 November, 2013, 10:21:38 AM

Don't you think it's interesting that folk are more interested in debating the intricacies of netiquette - whether it was right or wrong to re-post something a creator had said online - than whether what Brendan McCarthy said was factually correct or not? Whether you would want to characterise the remark as racist or not does depend on whether what he said was true or not, and on what particular point he was making.

Someone can make the factual observation that most winners of the Olympic Men's 100m or the World Heavyweight Boxing Championship in recent times have been African American males, and that's not racist - it's a fact. That observation only takes on a racist character if it's used in support of an argument of genetic difference and racial superiority, or in support of the US slave trade as a form of eugenics.

The argument McCarthy was using his observation to support concerned the tribalism and selective reporting of the US media, and the way childishly right-baiting sites such as Salon (http://www.salon.com/category/politics/) (and their right wing counterparts) distort facts and hijack tragedies like the one under discussion, reducing them to anecdotes in support of their party political talking points. His argument had fuck all to do with race.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2013, 01:58:02 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 November, 2013, 10:21:38 AM
The argument McCarthy was using his observation to support concerned the tribalism and selective reporting of the US media, and the way childishly right-baiting sites such as Salon (http://www.salon.com/category/politics/) (and their right wing counterparts) distort facts and hijack tragedies like the one under discussion, reducing them to anecdotes in support of their party political talking points. His argument had fuck all to do with race.

I'm not sure that his argument had 'fuck all to do with race', even if it wasn't his intention that it did.  Your point about media tribalism is taken as read, but any remark about racially-biased reporting is made within a context of both historic wrong and ongoing imbalanced relationships of power and control.  Again, this might be insensitivity to that context, either wilfully or in ignorance, and thus playing into the wrong side of a larger argument, but that's a long way from being a racist.

I'm always intrinsically nervous of claims of liberal and left-wing conspiracies, because that's where I find myself politically and thus find such claims to be wishful thinking and/or a right-wing false-flag operation ( ;)), or more seriously part of the ongoing divide-and-conquer shell game of the grey men that get paid no matter whether red or blue are in the ascendant. However I don't see the problem with intelligent folk examining the possibility, even if I find some of the things they say in the process to be ill-considered or actively risible.  I imagine they think the same of me, if they ever do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2013, 02:46:03 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 09 November, 2013, 10:21:38 AMDon't you think it's interesting that folk are more interested in debating the intricacies of netiquette - whether it was right or wrong to re-post something a creator had said online - than whether what Brendan McCarthy said was factually correct or not? Whether you would want to characterise the remark as racist or not does depend on whether what he said was true or not, and on what particular point he was making


My issue with the other thread is I'm not sure what people expected to get out of it with so little to go on. Accusations of ignoring the issue or sweeping-it-under-the-carpet make no sense unless there's something substantial to go on other than a few off-hand stats - of which I'd say most who read them know as little as I do - in comments posted on the most shallow and reflex inducing social-media sites (Bleeding Cool is not much better). I don't think it was something that demanded attention in what was otherwise a thread intended for his mostly unseen art-work.

Reading the responses McCarthy's given I can't discern a right/left or much of an ideology in any of it other than a general malaise with a certain attitude he feels is prevailing, or glean much more than the opinion of someone who perceives too few faults in a system of cultural attitudes borne of a plethora of agendas that are a ball of confusion at the best of times, but a racist? No, I'm not seeing that at all, and anybody who reads his work, I believe, won't see it either.

There wasn't going to be some eye-opening re-evaluation of his work because there's not been any hardened ideological stance put forth by McCarthy to compare or contrast with his vast amount of art-work. A work which over-whelmingly seems totally at odds with the internet claims of him being a 'racist'.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 November, 2013, 03:28:13 PM

Aye, we're parsing a few initial words for deeper significance when McCarthy's longer response seems (to me, at least) to make his position and the argument he was putting forward fairly clear. You don't have to follow American politics and news media particularly closely to be familiar with the disgusting, ideologically driven vultures who picked over the corpses of Trayvon Martin and the children of Sandy Hook alike, exploiting the grief of others to further their own ends.

The Clay Davises who use racial tensions to shore up their power base and the bizarre pronouncements of the NRA on such matters deserve equal scorn, derision, and rebuttal.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2013, 04:44:26 PM
Most politicians are aficionados of the Politics of Fear, to be fair. Fear of guns, fear of terrorism, fear of disease, fear of immigrants, fear of Europe, fear of ideas, fear of questions, fear of badgers and, most of all, fear of not getting richer...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2013, 05:07:55 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2013, 02:46:03 PM
There wasn't going to be some eye-opening re-evaluation of his work because there's not been any hardened ideological stance put forth by McCarthy to compare or contrast with his vast amount of art-work. A work which over-whelmingly seems totally at odds with the internet claims of him being a 'racist'.

And then there's this:

http://mindlessones.com/2013/11/09/flashback-to-fever-brendan-mccarthy-race-and-seeing-whats-in-front-of-your-face/

Apparently others have 'found' that 'hardened ideological stance'.  From the comments on that blog post: 

QuoteWoah, I had no idea McCarthy was such a piece of crap.

QuoteIt's important to be made aware when your heroes are total shits.

QuoteRight now I feel very much like someone I adored has died...because I've come to realize he never existed in the first place.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see the perfect world that these chaps live in, where no-one ever writes cringeworthy african-american dialogue in a comic, or makes an insensitive comment in defense of a dodgy conspiracy theory they harbour, without automatically being a disgrace to the human race.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 09 November, 2013, 07:15:26 PM
I have to say, this whole debate about McCarthy has really pissed me off.

No one on the bloody internet knows whether he's a racist or not. End of.

It's so easy, when writing on Facebook or on message boards, to use language that can be ambiguous in meaning or to use phrases that have different connotations to yourself than they have for others. It's also absolutely legitimate for someone to comment on a particular aspect (the media reporting it as a race issue) of a tragic story (the American lady's death) without it making the author insensitive to the wider tragedy.
I doubt there's any person on this board that hasn't posted something that's been misconstrued at one time or another. It's a far cry from Frank Miller or Dave Simm's evangelistic political rants - for a start they've set themselves up as armchair political activists over a long period of time and written articles for the specific purpose of encouraging debate. Brendan McCarthy has simply contributed to an ongoing debate as part of a Facebook group, which, though a public lobby, shouldn't then be plastered all over the internet.
This sort of sensationalist online lynch mobbing (not just here but on other sites) could have a real, long-term detrimental effect on Mr McCarthy's income, well being and life in general.

I think, when there are such potentially devastating consequences to Mr McCarthy, he should be afforded the benefit of the doubt. Not because he's a comic artist (although the fact that he's not a professional political commentator or writer in any capacity is relevant) but because he's a human being.

All of the 'stirrers' on this board should be ashamed of themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2013, 08:29:10 PM
I was more interested in the odd idea that public comments weren't open for debate.  In general I subscribe to the philosophy that if people are talking about it, then it is relevant whether we like it or not and the only concern is that things remain civil and non-libelous - don't like that an art thread has become a discussion about the artist's political views?  Tough shit.  Go find a board that makes stifling discussion a part of policy, because that, thankfully, is not here.
For my money, McCarthy wasn't being racist, he was being a holier-than-thou hipster jerk by attempting to attack the source of consensus opinion (a typically sneering punk reaction to most things), and the day you can no longer do that on the internet will be a black day for this board in particular, robbing myself and several others of most of our material and we'll be back to talking about werewolves and cheeses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 November, 2013, 08:58:50 PM
Cheesist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 09 November, 2013, 09:17:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2013, 08:29:10 PM
I was more interested in the odd idea that public comments weren't open for debate.

Just because you can do something it doesn't necessarily mean you should.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2013, 09:55:29 PM
I like cheese, but I have said all that I need to on the matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2013, 10:02:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2013, 09:55:29 PM
I like cheese, but I have said all that I need to on the matter.

Gouda 'nuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2013, 06:28:52 AM
Ah - but what kind of cheese? Are you a loyal Cheddarite, a misinformed Edamist or a filthy Gorgonzolan? Please tell me you're not one of the ignorant and untrustworthy Spreadable Masses...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2013, 09:48:05 AM
Beneath a thin paneer of rodoric, these anti-cheese raclettes herve nothing but hate for the urda:  we need a banon these munsters, if this Formaggio is to avoid a terrible feta.  Chimay well ask what the halloumi talking about, but there are no easi singles.








Consider my coat got.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 November, 2013, 11:14:38 AM
Too change the cheese related subject here's something that might be interesting to watch.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2013/46/strange-days.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 November, 2013, 10:06:24 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2013, 08:29:10 PM
For my money, McCarthy wasn't being racist, he was being a holier-than-thou hipster jerk by attempting to attack the source of consensus opinion (a typically sneering punk reaction to most things), and the day you can no longer do that on the internet will be a black day for this board in particular, robbing myself and several others of most of our material and we'll be back to talking about werewolves and cheeses.

Sums it up pretty perfectly.

Still a bit of a simp.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 13 November, 2013, 12:43:52 PM
I wasn't sure where to put this (definitely not 'science is drokking fantastic').

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15663982

Tis a fucking shame and no mistake!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 01:02:29 PM
Worth reading just for the words "Tarzan's chameleon".

.

Here's a thought, just for argument's sake: Why bother trying to prevent extinctions at all? Extinctions have been going on practically forever and are a perfectly natural process. So what if tigers are cute? If they can't cope with the modern world then why should we carry them? Just let them go. In another ten million years, who's going to care? By that time, they'll be having extinctions of their own to worry about.

.

Screw the black rhino - save the beef!

.

Pigeons - cat; cat - pigeons...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 November, 2013, 01:05:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 01:02:29 PM
Here's a thought, just for argument's sake: Why bother trying to prevent extinctions at all? Extinctions have been going on practically forever and are a perfectly natural process.

Because there's nothing fucking natural about shooting the last surviving members of a species so you can hack of a part of its body and sell it to idiotic fuckwits who think it'll help them get an erection.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 November, 2013, 01:50:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 01:02:29 PM
Here's a thought, just for argument's sake

Phew, I'm glad this is just you trying to start an argument because if you actually believed the utter Jeremy Clarksonesque bullshit you wrote there I would say a certain fish "can't cope" and needs to be "let go"!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 02:29:29 PM
I often find it amusing and informative to argue against things I believe in - I find that it encourages me to think. So, in that spirit...

.

A fox will break into a chicken coop and kill every single bird. The fox would act the same if it attacked one of a trillion chicken coops or the last chicken coops on Earth.

.

The elephant will strip vegetation and then move on with no thought that the trees and shrubs they're eating could be the last of their kind.

.

The whale will continue to guzzle krill until there's none left.

.

Granted, the whale, the elephant and the fox may not possess the abstract reasoning of the human animal but each has the potential to cause an extinction in another species. The only difference between a fox eating the last chicken and a human shooting the last rhino is that the human has a higher awareness of what he/she is doing.

.

Extinctions happen - they're nothing to feel bad about.

.

(Have we got any pigeons left?)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 November, 2013, 02:31:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 02:29:29 PM
The only difference between a fox eating the last chicken and a human shooting the last rhino is that the human has a higher awareness of what he/she is doing.

Umm... I would argue that "only difference" is all the difference that is needed. It's why we don't put sharks in prison for murder.

I genuinely have no idea what point you think you're making here. It's either trolling or it's cretinous, either way it does you little credit.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 03:11:15 PM
Just trying to debate, is all.

Of course, the more diverse an ecosystem is the more resilient it seems to be - which is for me a good enough argument on its own to protect as many species as we can.

.

To explore the other side of the argument (and there clearly is another side else nobody would be shooting at things until there's none left) is, to me, a way of testing the side one believes in.

.

The problem with a subject like the one I have (perhaps unwisely) chosen is that it is so emotive. I instinctively feel that it's "right" to protect other species but just because I feel a thing that doesn't automatically make it right. And my questioning doesn't, I hope make me a troll. I like questions. Questions are where Wisdom keeps her seeds (right next to the rusty old oil drum containing my pomposity).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 November, 2013, 03:35:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 03:11:15 PM
just because I feel a thing that doesn't automatically make it right.

And just because you think a thing doesn't automatically mean it needs to be debated - if you want to find out more about the precise nature of extinction and the ethical responsibilities of humanity in relation to it wikipedia covers it in a great deal more detail than we could possibly go into here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 03:53:42 PM
Thanks, Foxy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2013, 04:08:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 01:02:29 PMSo what if tigers are cute? If they can't cope with the modern world then why should we carry them? Just let them go. In another ten million years, who's going to care?

I always wondered what David Cameron did with his spare time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 04:33:36 PM
Bloody tigers, coming over here living in luxury in expensive zoos without paying a penny for their cages or their own upkeep, eating our beef and wowing our women with their cute, smug little faces...

What we need, people, is a Tiger Tax to show these stripey layabouts that nobody gets a free lunch!

Vote Conservative for the Tiger Tax - reject Labour's Lion Levy and ridicule the Lib-Dems' Cheetah Charge!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2013, 04:53:15 PM
Do you have any numbers or statistics to support these claims of feline freeloadery?  Only I can't help but notice that the vast majority of social security is spent on buy catnip for elderly tabby cats who read the Daily Mail, while actual state spending on immigrant tigers accounts for zero percent.
Also how do you respond to the claims that private firms employed to work as wardens at Yarl's Wood Zoo have been having intercourse with the animals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 05:17:57 PM
All of this might have been true under Labour, who consistently failed to act responsibly and cut spending on this thing of yours whilst at the same time more and more hard-earned taxpayers' money was poured into that thing of theirs, but under my party all cuts have been reclassified as Economy Dividends and all living things are much better off for it - cats included.

.

Certain of the dastardly opposition have also been short-sighted about my new Dawn Chorus Charge. This country has one of the most beautiful dawn choruses in the world, thanks to this government's tireless and award-winning Minister for Songbirds, Robin Piggs, and so why shouldn't we charge people for listening to it? We have to find some way of paying off this un-payoffable government debt which we inherited from the previous party - who thought it was a good idea to try and run an economy using privately created interest-bearing credit instead of proper money.

.

These taxes are not the whole solution, I can see that, but in combination with the proposed Atmospheric Cleanliness Tax, the new Existence Permit and Sunshine Rationing they may stave off the inevitable financial implosion just long enough for me to get out of office with a big house stuffed with gold.

.

Don't forget to vote!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 November, 2013, 06:21:48 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 November, 2013, 01:05:13 PM
Because there's nothing fucking natural about shooting the last surviving members of a species so you can hack of a part of its body and sell it to idiotic fuckwits who think it'll help them get an erection.

I get what Mr. Shark is saying and I'd argue that the human race is as much a part of nature as any other species and it's completely natural for them to massacre things out of existence and be idiotic fuckwits. They've been doing it for millennia, the horrible gits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 13 November, 2013, 06:46:26 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 13 November, 2013, 06:21:48 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 November, 2013, 01:05:13 PM
Because there's nothing fucking natural about shooting the last surviving members of a species so you can hack of a part of its body and sell it to idiotic fuckwits who think it'll help them get an erection.

I get what Mr. Shark is saying and I'd argue that the human race is as much a part of nature as any other species and it's completely natural for them to massacre things out of existence and be idiotic fuckwits. They've been doing it for millennia, the horrible gits.

The way I see it is thus:

The Human race is apparently the apex of evolution on Terra, with our complex emotions, advanced thought, the ability to adapt to pretty much any situation; and yet we allow the world around us to be pretty much Fucked in the Ass by a corporate minority and self serving politicians.


This is not an intelligent way for a species to behave as far as I'm concerned. By destroying our own environment (and the life within) we are ensuring our own demise.


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 13 November, 2013, 07:15:58 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 November, 2013, 03:35:39 PM
....if you want to find out more about the precise nature of extinction and the ethical responsibilities of humanity in relation to it wikipedia covers it in a great deal more detail than we could possibly go into here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction


Nice to see Dredd and his Cursed Earth battles with tyrannosaurs getting a mention in the cloning section!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 13 November, 2013, 07:30:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2013, 01:02:29 PMHere's a thought, just for argument's sake: Why bother trying to prevent extinctions at all?

If you want a short simple answer: cash, as argued by this book: What Has Nature Ever Done For Us? (http://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Has-Nature-Ever-Done/dp/1846685605)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 November, 2013, 07:32:56 PM
It's the rate of extinctions, much as it is with climate change, that is the real matter of note: there have of course been many examples of both, and both are essential for this world we live in to exist in the first place, but precious few came on with the speed and extent we're managing.  Ask a putative individual living at the end of the Ordovician, Devonian, Permian or the Cretaceous whether they would stop what was happening if they could, and I think you'd get a consensus.

Anyway, some amusement at the expense of the floppy-of-dick and hard-of-thinking: I dunno if you heard about the Rhino horns that were stolen from Dublin's National Museum storage facility last year, but the smart money says they were heading for the imaginary viagra market.  Happily they dated from the 19th C end of the collection, and thus were prepared with the choicest preservative of the day: arsenic. Put that in your pipe etc.

 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 13 November, 2013, 07:44:03 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 November, 2013, 07:32:56 PM
It's the rate of extinctions, much as it is with climate change, that is the real matter of note: there have of course been many examples of both, and both are essential for this world we live in to exist in the first place, but precious few came on with the speed and extent we're managing.  Ask a putative individual living at the end of the Ordovician, Devonian, Permian or the Cretaceous whether they would stop what was happening if they could, and I think you'd get a consensus.

Indeed, it's not just about one or two species just dying out, we are currently living through the six greatest mass extinction of life on Earth: Quick summary (http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/eldredge2.html)

QuoteAnyway, some amusement at expense of the floppy of dick and hard of thinking: I dunno if you heard about the Rhino horns that were stolen from Dublin's National Museum store last year, but the smart money says they were heading for the imaginary viagra market.  Happily they dated from the 19th C end of the collection, and thus were prepared with the choicest preservative of the day: arsenic. Put that in your pipe etc.

A couple of lads from Rathkeale (home of the best antiques thieves in Europe according to Interpol) were up for stealing and handling stolen antique rhino horns, would they need or have the Triad connections for a Chinese black market?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 November, 2013, 10:18:37 AM
Extinctions are natural. However building great sodding lumps of rock everywhere, poisoning the Earth and slaughtering species at an industrial pace is not.

Animals make other animals go extinct generally by being to good at the competition in question. We're not even in the game, we just drive a bulldozer across the pitch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 11:03:37 AM
By that rationale, one might equate human activity to a very slow natural disaster on a par with a super volcano or asteroid impact - the only real difference being the time-scale. Where the Chicxulub Impact did most of its damage in the first few hours, days and weeks, human activity is stretching the process out.

.

This leads me on an intriguing line of thought...

.

If it wasn't for the Chicxulub Impact (eg.) humanity probably wouldn't even exist. From our point of view, then, Chicxulub was a Good Thing. Impacts, however, are a very hit and miss (no pun intended) driver of extinctions - too big a hit and the planet could have remained lifeless forever. An impact is also indiscriminate, eradicating all species - the successful and unsuccessful alike.

.

Given the above, are not the extinctions man is causing and allegedly causing a much gentler and less dangerous cause than asteroids? We all know how robust life is - if all the tigers disappear (God forbid) then eventually something else will move in to take its place - something with a better understanding of how to co-exist with the human animal.

.

It could be argued, then, that as a driver to extinctions human activity is preferable to impacts or super volcanoes and, at the extreme end of the argument, actually a Good Thing.

.

Are there any "good" extinctions? What if we could make the Ebola virus extinct? Or some species of harmful bacteria? How about making mosquitoes extinct? They've killed more people than all the lions and tigers and crocodiles and sharks in all of history combined, probably. And what about rats? Horrid, filthy, disease-ridden vermin with those nasty teeth, cold dead eyes and those disgusting nuts they have sticking out the back. If rats were moved onto the 'Endangered List" tomorrow would you think "shame" or would you think "it's about bloody time"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 14 November, 2013, 12:12:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 11:03:37 AM
By that rationale, one might equate human activity to a very slow natural disaster on a par with a super volcano or asteroid impact - the only real difference being the time-scale. Where the Chicxulub Impact did most of its damage in the first few hours, days and weeks, human activity is stretching the process out.

.

This leads me on an intriguing line of thought...

.

If it wasn't for the Chicxulub Impact (eg.) humanity probably wouldn't even exist. From our point of view, then, Chicxulub was a Good Thing. Impacts, however, are a very hit and miss (no pun intended) driver of extinctions - too big a hit and the planet could have remained lifeless forever. An impact is also indiscriminate, eradicating all species - the successful and unsuccessful alike.

.

Given the above, are not the extinctions man is causing and allegedly causing a much gentler and less dangerous cause than asteroids? We all know how robust life is - if all the tigers disappear (God forbid) then eventually something else will move in to take its place - something with a better understanding of how to co-exist with the human animal.

.

It could be argued, then, that as a driver to extinctions human activity is preferable to impacts or super volcanoes and, at the extreme end of the argument, actually a Good Thing.

.

Are there any "good" extinctions? What if we could make the Ebola virus extinct? Or some species of harmful bacteria? How about making mosquitoes extinct? They've killed more people than all the lions and tigers and crocodiles and sharks in all of history combined, probably. And what about rats? Horrid, filthy, disease-ridden vermin with those nasty teeth, cold dead eyes and those disgusting nuts they have sticking out the back. If rats were moved onto the 'Endangered List" tomorrow would you think "shame" or would you think "it's about bloody time"?

One creature that drives me to absolute rage; Flies!
Detestable dirty things, yes; but I still would not wish for their complete eradication from existence.

It's the same with harmful viruses - yes they kill some people, but not all (evolution in action right there).

And as for Tigers, if they were wiped out what could possibly take their place? Evolution doesn't happen overnight.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2013, 12:35:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 11:03:37 AMIt could be argued, then, that as a driver to extinctions human activity is preferable to impacts or super volcanoes and, at the extreme end of the argument, actually a Good Thing.

It's not an either/or proposition.  There will be super-volcanoes and cometary impacts as well, and by the same token our sun will eventually leave the main sequence and terrestrial life will have a very hard time of it.

The concept of 'good' has no place in extinctions or natural selection as a whole.  'Good' is something bothersome humans bring to the equation.  As we, as humans, claim to value the utility, educational potential and aesthetic qualities of the existing diversity of life on earth, then its maintenance is in aggregate 'good', as far as humans are concerned. If an antiseptic life in synthetic worlds is what humans actually value, then extinctions may indeed be 'good'.  It is of necessity relative to the species that created and sustain the concept of good/bad.

Extinctions of the fluffy and overlegged alike threaten the stability of the existing spread of life, with ultimate consequences that cannot be easily predicted.  The usual succession of forms that provides the medium of evolution is probably no more bloody or unfair than the everyday interaction of predator and prey, but the rates of extinction now being brought about by ours truly has one significant difference over the earlier mass-extinctions: there is no void left to fill with successor species.  We have used up the space that a devastated biome would normally inherit, and its survivors radiate throughout.  We aren't opening a door for the usual business of post-catastrophe change and succession, we're barring the gates and knocking down the building. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 12:38:34 PM
The niche vacated by tigers would be initially filled by a range of other animals as the ecosystem slowly adapts. The predation once meted out by tigers might be filled by a variety of other carnivores. If the decline in tiger predation results instead in an explosion of herbivores then other factors come into play - perhaps over-grazing and starvation allowing for a scavenger to reach the "top spot". As you say, evolution does not happen overnight but then again it actually does - evolution happens every night. Nature is very, very good at plugging gaps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 12:53:22 PM
The first priority of the human race is to survive - when I invoked the "G" word, I was referring to events that assist that priority. Perhaps instead of 'good thing' I should have said 'convenient thing'.

I wonder if anthroprogenic extinctions are similar to the notion of anthroprogenic climate change? We know that climate change is happening and has always happened and, even though human activity does have an effect the hands-down main driver of CT is the sun (imo).  Maybe human activity is the driver behind some extinctions - but all of them? What level of extinctions is the normal 'background level'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 November, 2013, 12:57:02 PM
the hands-down main driver of CT is the sun (imo).

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

Science would disagree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2013, 01:33:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 12:38:34 PMNature is very, very good at plugging gaps.

We don't leave gaps to plug.  You make it sound like we're just going after the rhinos or what-not: we're not, we're removing entire eco-systems. What has refilled the 'gaps' left by our urban sprawls and pesticide monocultures: foxes and seagulls?  And we want rid of those too.

Yes, in the short term some species will benefit from the conditions caused by the loss of the elephants and the tigers and all the less photogenic candidates, but in no time at all we'll come for them too.  A planet of just hermetically-sealed humans and extremophile species doesn't sound like anywhere I want to live.

As to climatic forcing, seeing as the science hasn't convinced you, nothing anyone can say here is likely to do much.  However, accepting the basic principle of not knocking holes in a sinking ship might do even the most ardent deniers some credit.  Or even looking at who stands on either side of the debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 01:57:50 PM
There was once scientific consensus that God created humans out of lumps of clay, that bad smells caused disease and that the sun orbited the Earth.

.

The true complexity and interweaving factors driving climate change have yet to be fathomed, I think, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that the hottest thing within a light year has *something* to do with it.

.

Whatever - carbon taxes aren't the answer. The climate change debate has been effectively stifled in order to impose these taxes. I bet I could find 1,000 "scientists" willing to support my claim that the sun drives climate change if I paid them enough.

.

The answer is not carbon taxes - the answer is human ingenuity - as it always has been. We need to be 'future-proofing" our at-risk areas with sea defences, resevoirs and better land management - not farting around with the fraud of carbon taxes.

.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 02:05:31 PM
What exactly is the sun doing differently now compared to a few hundred years ago? I wouldn't deny that that great big nuclear reactor affects the planet, but it has been doing so for the past 3 odd billion years.  What's different now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2013, 02:16:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 01:57:50 PM
There was once scientific consensus that God created humans out of lumps of clay, that bad smells caused disease and that the sun orbited the Earth.

Ah now.  Those are traditional explanations, some enshrined in religion, and overturned by science.  Indeed, we often date the beginnings of early modern science precisely from Copernicus' work on heliocentrism.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 01:57:50 PMThe true complexity and interweaving factors driving climate change have yet to be fathomed, I think, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that the hottest thing within a light year has *something* to do with it.

No one, absolutely no-one, is doubting the massive influence of solar variability, or milankovitch cycles, or any of that stuff, as factors in climate change -  indeed this is specifically what were taught, as orthodoxy, in climatology. As a baseline.  The issue with anthropogenic climate change is that current change appears to depart wildly from this baseline, in precise sync with the the massive increase with human activity that demonstrates a plausible mechanism for affecting climate. 

You know all this Sharky, you're a very bright, very well-informed man.  There's little point me going over it again. You just don't trust the innumerable people telling you, for understandable reasons.  What's still incomprehensible to me is why you prefer 'facts' spontaneously generated from the ignorance of a self-serving minority.

The carbon tax issue is one of policy, and response.  I'm quite happy to see alternatives proposed to that one.  Doesn't change the science.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 02:25:05 PM
Tordels, (and I'm still just playing Devil's advocate here), Human population centres cover a tiny proportion of the Earth's surface and no city is sterile of life. One might sniff at the odd urban fox or pigeon but cities are stuffed with life. Granted, if you build a city over the top of an existing ecosystem then you're going to destroy that ecosystem in favour of a new one.

.

Your shiny new city won't stay lifeless for long, though. It will soon attract plants and insects and scavengers and opportunists and pests and parasites and whatnot. Chances are that some of these creatures and plants will come from other parts of the planet and so you might find that your city ends up with a more diverse and resilient ecosystem than the one that was destroyed.  Just because there are no elephants wobbling down the street or gorillas shaking their fists at bi-planes from rooftops doesn't mean there's nothing there.

.

The influence of agricultural land is, I think, the biggest threat to other species but here, again, I find the portrayal of it as an almost sterile place is misleading. I live in a rural area and there is life *everywhere*. Again, no elephants or gorillas but plenty of species of small and domesticated animals.

.

I think that human activity can rip holes in ecosystems but they adapt. Once an ecosystem, or a part of an ecosystem is gone, the likelihood is that it's gone for good - but that doesn't mean that nothing will take its place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 November, 2013, 02:26:14 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 02:05:31 PM
What exactly is the sun doing differently now compared to a few hundred years ago? I wouldn't deny that that great big nuclear reactor affects the planet, but it has been doing so for the past 3 odd billion years.  What's different now?

What was it doing during the Ice-Age or when things were hotter than they are now? But nowadays it seems not much is different than a few hundred years ago.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/acrim-pmod-sun-getting-hotter.htm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 02:37:48 PM
Tordels, I don't know what's really behind climate change. So much of the science (at least, what little of it I can understand) both for anthroproenic and heliocentric climate change just doesn't add up to may.

.

Hell, maybe the CO2 theory *is* right - but I truly don't know, and while that state of affairs exists I'll challenge anyone who just believes the official line just because a bunch of paid scientists tell them to until the cows come home. There is not a scientific consensus on climate change and for the authorities to claim that there is is misinformed at best and mind-shreddingly stupid at worst.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 November, 2013, 02:47:47 PM
Quotepaid scientists

Sorry, but what? Does this mistrust only extend to scientists? Or do you have an equal mistrust of, say, bus drivers or waiters or surgeons who also get paid for their job?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 02:52:50 PM
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7zL14dMfSO0/TpShEO5bIkI/AAAAAAAAAA0/x8mjNgDFTi0/s1600/hoax.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 14 November, 2013, 02:58:19 PM
I don't get paid to do anything, so by rights I'm the most trustworthy person here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:20:23 PM
Climate change is a very tricky subject to make much sense of.  Despite what may be reported on either side of the CO2 debate - the real answer is they don't know.  I also agree that just because many scientists feel the same way, does not mean they are correct - there have been many examples of scientists who have gone against common perception, only to be prooved correct. 

Measuring the climate is difficult enough but then you have to build models that can handle all the other influences on the climate e.g. the sun - a giant ball of flame, that ebbs and flows like any fire does.  The other issue is with the quality of the data - most decent climate data has only been recorded from the last few decades - anything further back is based on data which is most likely flawed.  So, assuming the earth is 4.5 billion years old then we have accurate(ish) climate data for approx 0.000001% of the total earth time.  It doesn't sound like the solid basis for predicting future climate change like they say it is.

And yes, there are those that have used the CO2 debate to enhance their own agenda - I am continually shocked when I hear so called 'green' people talking about how Nuclear energy is the fuel of the future.  Apparantly it is better to use a method where waste has to be put in a deep hole and covered in concrete for hundreds of thousands of years rather than burning some coal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 November, 2013, 03:24:51 PM
QuoteClimate change is a very tricky subject to make much sense of.  Despite what may be reported on either side of the CO2 debate - the real answer is they don't know.

Wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:35:25 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 14 November, 2013, 03:24:51 PM
QuoteClimate change is a very tricky subject to make much sense of.  Despite what may be reported on either side of the CO2 debate - the real answer is they don't know.

Wrong.

Oh, so they do know...

the level of CO2 in the atmosphere?
the amount of CO2 produced by humans?
what happenned to the difference in the level of CO2 humans apparantly create versus what they find in the atmosphere?
what effects the increased CO2 has?
what the 'breaking point is'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 03:39:33 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:20:23 PM
Apparantly it is better to use a method where waste has to be put in a deep hole and covered in concrete for hundreds of thousands of years rather than burning some coal.

Lovely, clean, limitless coal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 November, 2013, 03:49:40 PM
I think Tordelbacks "Lets not kick holes in a sinking ship" is a basic point that most people who don't believe in humanity's role in climate change refuse to acknowledge.

If humans have any effect whatsoever on climate change does it matter what other factors are responsible if they are going to keep doing it and we can't stop it?

The idea that mankind has a negligible effect on the planet should have been put to bed with the industrial revolution and should have become the sole province of those who mistakenly believe in some kind of eternal cradle for mankind. If the industrial revolution didn't end it, the nuclear one should have done. At an extreme, we can turn the surface of the Earth into glass.

Wait, I just realised. Haven't you seen the cursed earth!??! Do you want the flying ratplague to eat you alive

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 November, 2013, 03:50:06 PM
Pandas are just taking the piss.

A carnivore that has evolved into a picky vegan that refuses to shag. Perhaps some species are just meant to be extinct.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:50:55 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 03:39:33 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:20:23 PM
Apparantly it is better to use a method where waste has to be put in a deep hole and covered in concrete for hundreds of thousands of years rather than burning some coal.

Lovely, clean, limitless coal.

To quote Smithy, of Gavin and Stacey:
"Oh, let's all buy a Prius and shit in the woods".

No-one is saying coal is clean or limitless but I am amazed that people consider nuclear to be the 'green' alternative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 03:52:59 PM
I wonder why we can't convert some of the Earth's magnetic field into electricity? You'd have thought there'd be enough to maybe run a few street lights or something.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 04:01:36 PM
The Earth's magnetic field is only just strong enough to move a tiny needle in a compass, it's not going to power a dynamo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 14 November, 2013, 04:01:50 PM
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3427891/free_energy_how_to_build_magnetic_power_generator_for_home/ (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3427891/free_energy_how_to_build_magnetic_power_generator_for_home/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 04:17:31 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:50:55 PM
No-one is saying coal is clean or limitless but I am amazed that people consider nuclear to be the 'green' alternative.

As long as the waste (which is admitedly horribly dangerous and toxic stuff) is correctly managed (and there are many ways to do that) it has practically no impact on the environment. They are constantly finding ways of making nuclear reactors safer and more efficient, I believe breeder reactors (which produce more fissile material as a by-product) are the big thing now. And of course, there's fusion. Once we crack that we'll be set up for billions of years of completely clean energy.

We're running out of fossil fuels, so we need alternatives. The carbon tax is bullshit as long as the government hands out permits for petrochemical companies to cause half a dozen natural disasters at once. I believe "fracking" is the technical term. We can't keep digging deeper and deeper. Just ask the dwarfs in Moria. OH YOU CAN'T, THE BALROG ATE THEM ALL!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 04:48:18 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 November, 2013, 04:17:31 PM
We can't keep digging deeper and deeper. Just ask the dwarfs in Moria. OH YOU CAN'T, THE BALROG ATE THEM ALL!

:lol:  Best environmental argument, ever!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 09:10:20 PM
Yes - but the Earth's magnetic field can cause a trillion compass needles to twitch. Got to be some energy in a trillion twitches, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 November, 2013, 09:20:46 PM


THE WORLD SAYS GOODBYE TO THE NEWLY EXTINCT BLACK RHINOS (http://www.geekexchange.com/the-world-says-good-bye-to-the-black-rhino-90889.html)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 14 November, 2013, 09:55:47 PM
I wish it was those that buy rhino horn and sell it on to gullible fools were the ones going extinct.

I'm sure they'll carry on regardless, some other creature will be found to meet the "demand".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2013, 12:09:43 AM
Tonight I'm pouring a forty on the curb of my crib.  Although by "on the curb" I mean "into my belly" - I might be saddened by their passing but I'm still an alcoholic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 15 November, 2013, 12:21:15 AM
That's drinking enthusiast Prof Bear.... :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2013, 12:49:47 AM
Limbering up for next month's Alcohlympics in the Sector Seven Ian Holm Pukeatorim (and later at Resyk) - judges permitting, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 15 November, 2013, 10:52:13 PM
This may make them think twice....

(http://i.imgur.com/AU0Ex4h.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 20 November, 2013, 08:06:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 09:10:20 PM
Yes - but the Earth's magnetic field can cause a trillion compass needles to twitch. Got to be some energy in a trillion twitches, I guess.

But then you can't get those needles *back* to twitch again without putting more energy in than you got out in the first place- the earth's magnetic field is to all intents and purposes static, you can't extract energy from it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2013, 09:55:48 PM
Hmmm... I was under the impression that the Earth's magnetic field was a dynamic thing; created by a spinning core, squeezed and pumped by the sun's magnetosphere and deformed by the charged particle solar winds and such. Sure, wiring up a trillion compasses and keeping them in motion by sellotaping them to windmills to keep the needles twitching might be impractical by today's standards and understanding but who knows about tomorrow? My point about the compasses was to show the scale of the field - and with a field of such size and power it may be possible to exploit its smallest fluctuations to generate or extract electricity.  I have no idea how but I believe it can be done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2013, 10:27:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2013, 09:55:48 PMMy point about the compasses was to show the scale of the field - and with a field of such size and power it may be possible to exploit its smallest fluctuations to generate or extract electricity.  I have no idea how but I believe it can be done.

The issue, as I understand it, is that you are dealing with a very weak field with respect to each of your compasses, and the variations that would actually create energy even tinier, such that the intrinsic constraint of the amount of energy lost per compass (through heat mainly), would roughly equal the amount generated.  And that's ignoring the energy input into the construction of trillions of the thingsm and the infrastructure for carrying power away from so many individual components.

As to taping compasses to windmills, well you'd do a lot better just using them as ordinary turbine generators since the energy generated will be vastly greater than the twitching compasses, which at best would be acting to retard the turning of the blades, as with the orbitally-based electrodynamic tether (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether), where it's the wire moving through the Earth's magnetic field rather than being moved by it.

Why am I always trying to piss on your chips, Sharky?  I love you and your wacky schemings really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2013, 10:40:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2013, 09:55:48 PM
My point about the compasses was to show the scale of the field - and with a field of such size and power it may be possible to exploit its smallest fluctuations to generate or extract electricity.  I have no idea how but I believe it can be done.


I think it would be more energy-productive to harness energy from the Earth's rotation in a similar way to tidal power. Not sure if the magnetosphere would produce anything particularly useable or much more than the equivalent of static electricity spread over a wide area.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 November, 2013, 10:43:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 November, 2013, 10:27:31 PM
Why am I always trying to piss on your chips, Sharky?  I love you and your wacky schemings really.


Think of it as showering his fries with gold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2013, 10:49:43 PM
Fear not, Tordels! You always make good points.  Rumour has it that Tesla found a way...  Maybe the answer isn't in physical machines but some kind of standing wave or interference effect to 'bleed off' energy in some way.  My long-suffering physics teacher, Mr Bowler, was a lovely chap but taught me only two things: First, the best way to get out of sports was to join the AVA Club and claim pressing needs for such things as VHS recordings inventories and that electricity and magnetism are interchangeable. "It's not called 'electromagnetism' for nothing," he once told me an instant before his blackboard duster whistled in a cloudy arc past my ear. I wasn't very interested in physics, to be honest - not when I had Michaela Wilson and her enormous boobs sat at my table. Poor old Michaela - I bet she has a really bad back by now :(   Anyway, maybe there might be some way of using the Earth's magnetic field to power or partially power nanomachines. If it wasn't for those majestic knockers, I'd know a lot more about this (and everything else).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 November, 2013, 03:21:11 AM
It's Faraday's Law.

QuoteThe induced electromotive force in any closed circuit is equal to the negative of the time rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit.

You can make shit move around by running an electric current through a magnetic field, and it works when it's rearranged. You can make an electric current by moving around magnetic fields.  The Earth's magnetic field is quite weak, so it's not as useful. Take fridge magnets*, They're cheap enough and they're strong enough to completely ignore the Earth's magnetic field not to mention the gravitational pull of the entire planet.


*Halbach array (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 11:28:15 AM
Somebody's designed a machine: www.magneticenergy.org.uk/Romag/Romag%20Generator.htm


No idea if it works or not - any bright sparks out there fancy building one?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2013, 11:35:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 11:28:15 AM
Somebody's designed a machine: www.magneticenergy.org.uk/Romag/Romag%20Generator.htm

From the link:

QuoteMagnetic energy is also called life force energy (an energy occurring in all life and all things), zero-point energy (an energy that occurs even in the absolute zero temperature of space), ether (an energy that interacts with gravity and exists on a cosmic scale to guide celestial bodies and life) as well as other terms.

So many things wrong with that sentence that it makes my brain want to implode.

So, to summarise: idiot makes patently absurd claim on the internet. Film at eleven.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 November, 2013, 11:40:30 AM
Ether? Seriously?
Can I just check: this *is* the 21st Century, right..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2013, 11:42:27 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 November, 2013, 11:40:30 AM
Ether? Seriously?
Can I just check: this *is* the 21st Century, right..?

What's your problem, bub? You'll be dissing phlogiston next...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 12:38:13 PM
Interesting response - almost religious in its tone. One of the OED's definitions for "ether" is: "...informal air regarded as a medium for radio." Bloody OED crackpots, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2013, 12:54:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 12:38:13 PM
Interesting response - almost religious in its tone. One of the OED's definitions for "ether" is: "...informal air regarded as a medium for radio." Bloody OED crackpots, eh?

Notice the word "informal", meaning "colloquial". I use the word frequently about missing emails "disappearing into the ether". That doesn't mean that I actually think the emails have become lost in some mysterious pseudo-element, rather that I am using the term informally.

The notion of it as an actual, scientific term vanished in the Victorian age. Conflating Earth's magnetic field and zero point energy is also an indication that the author has not the slightest fucking clue what s/he is talking about. Honestly, Shark, stick to the conspiracy theories, because this stuff makes you look like a credulous idiot.

Gah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 01:44:13 PM
As I think I said, I don't know if this works or not without building one. Also, I don't mind looking like a "credulous idiot" just for having my interest and imagination piqued. If the author has actually got one of these things to work then it doesn't automatically follow that he/she knows how they got it to work and is struggling to put it into words.

.

Of course, it may be complete moonshine but, in this modern energy-dependant world I think one should always approach things like this with a scientific "let's test this idea" as to do otherwise would make me look and feel like a close-minded simpleton.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 November, 2013, 01:45:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2013, 12:54:51 PMConflating Earth's magnetic field and zero point energy...

That is a particularly good one alright, although to be fair Einstein was still redefining both the mechanical and electromagnetic ('luminiferous') ethers in terms of Special Relativity well into the 1920's: redefining it, that is, in such a way as it bore no resemblance to Newton or Maxwell's conceptions .  Anyway, seeing as we were working through the chapter headings of an introduction to modern physics, I'm surprised we didn't just go the whole hog and invoke dark matter and quantum entanglement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 21 November, 2013, 02:44:28 PM
EDL Humiliated in Exeter!


http://exeteredlnews.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/edl-humiliated-in-exeter/


The report does contain comments from EDL members, but I'm sure the enlightened amongst you can see through their putrid mumbling waffle!


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 November, 2013, 05:59:13 PM
QuoteMagnetic energy is also called life force energy (an energy occurring in all life and all things), zero-point energy (an energy that occurs even in the absolute zero temperature of space), ether (an energy that interacts with gravity and exists on a cosmic scale to guide celestial bodies and life) as well as other terms.

But this is as patent a load of bollocks as anything ever written.

I don't know if this works without building one. However I am very very certain that this sentence reveals a complete disconnect to the working models of physics without any framework to accomodate existing evidence of natural forces. Or in shorter words, there is no such thing as life force energy and it certainly isn't the same as magnetic energy.

Mind you if it worked no one could argue with it. But it don't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 November, 2013, 06:34:09 PM
Out of curiosity, I have a question for the board boffins: if they invented a super-efficient method of converting solar energy to the extent that if you roofed your house with solar mirrors you could meet your energy needs without using the national grid - even in winter because hypothetical scenario that's why - how would this impact the economy?  It seems to me that no-one would actually want that technology to become viable considering (in theory) you can't tax the sun, but then you factor in the impact on energy firms, the mining and oil industries, etc and I can't see that cat ever getting out of the bag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 November, 2013, 06:50:11 PM
Invent new taxes and raise others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 21 November, 2013, 07:37:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 November, 2013, 06:34:09 PM
Out of curiosity, I have a question for the board boffins: if they invented a super-efficient method of converting solar energy to the extent that if you roofed your house with solar mirrors you could meet your energy needs without using the national grid - even in winter because hypothetical scenario that's why - how would this impact the economy?  It seems to me that no-one would actually want that technology to become viable considering (in theory) you can't tax the sun, but then you factor in the impact on energy firms, the mining and oil industries, etc and I can't see that cat ever getting out of the bag.


You tax the material required to make the panels. The impact on industry would be more one of adjustment to a new infrastructure since the demand for such technology would be very high and presumably all households in the developed and devloping world would demand it, and rather than the economy, it would be putting a huge strain on resources- a problem which eventually will be solved by nature running short.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 10:32:44 PM
How about 'Pedal Prisons' where your inmates can make a bob or two on an exercise bike wired up to push juice into the National Grid?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM
Bwah ha ha!

Just now on Newsnight!

Question: Michael, is cooking a life skill?

Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.


Just to clarify - this wasn't a joke.


Fucking hell.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 November, 2013, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM


Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.



*dismissive wanking gesture*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 01:07:36 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 22 November, 2013, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM
Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.
*dismissive wanking gesture*

Madre de Grud.   If feeding yourself and your family doesn't count as a life skill, what does is anyone's guess. Not even his pretty train programmes can make that man seem human(e).

Sharky: here's a great free-to-read SF short story about a bicycle power economy: http://cheeseburgerbrown.com/stories/The_Bikes_of_New_York.html.  Predates Black Mirror, obviously.

Much of the rest of Chester Brown's stuff is worth a read too, especially his autobiographical tales.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 01:15:08 AM
To clarify: not that Chester Brown. This one. (http://cheeseburgerbrown.com/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 November, 2013, 08:13:08 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM
Bwah ha ha!

Just now on Newsnight!

Question: Michael, is cooking a life skill?

Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.


Just to clarify - this wasn't a joke.


Fucking hell.
::) :lol:

Well, as a student who is paying his own parents rent and buy his own food, I can clarify that any student who can afford to go to a restaurant with or without a certain other any more frequently than once a month is either fucking minted or fucking stupid. Or a Tory. Fucking idiot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 12:16:14 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 14 November, 2013, 03:35:25 PM
Oh, so they do know...

the level of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Yes.

Quotethe amount of CO2 produced by humans?
Yes. Can certainly make a good estimate.

Quotewhat happenned to the difference in the level of CO2 humans apparantly create versus what they find in the atmosphere?
Don't know what you mean here. Do you mean the concentration more than around 2 million years ago i.e. pre human? If so, then yes. There's a lot of proxy evidence which extends to back the conditions of the early Earth atmosphere.

Quotewhat effects the increased CO2 has?
Yes.

Quotewhat the 'breaking point is'?
Not yet, maybe not before it happens if it ever does. The 'tipping point', or the state change the atmosphere will go through before a new equilibrium is established, is a bit vague if you ask me, but would be the most mental bit. That's the badger that relies on the effects and feedbacks through the whole Earth system.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2013, 02:37:48 PM
I'll challenge anyone who just believes the official line just because a bunch of paid scientists tell them to until the cows come home. There is not a scientific consensus on climate change and for the authorities to claim that there is is misinformed at best and mind-shreddingly stupid at worst.

Wish I got paid for this shit. Plus: ballix (you expected that though!)

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 22 November, 2013, 01:13:46 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM
Bwah ha ha!

Just now on Newsnight!

Question: Michael, is cooking a life skill?

Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.


Just to clarify - this wasn't a joke.


Fucking hell.

Just when you think people can't get any stupider...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 01:49:54 PM
More carbon dioxide = more plants = bigger harvests = more food.

.

To attribute the major driver of climate change to human activity (and to publicly insinuate that it's All our fault) is, to my mind, dangerous hubris. Focusing on CO2 emissions and telling YOU how YOU should be behaving diverts attention away from the real and pressing environmental problems we should be addressing. Such questions as, how much plastic have you thrown away today?

.

Climate change is a fact. Climate change is man's fault? Bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 22 November, 2013, 01:57:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 01:49:54 PM

.

Climate change is a fact. Climate change is man's fault? Bollocks.

So why do you think scientists, like Mikey here, are all lying?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 November, 2013, 01:59:08 PM
or why it's impossible to find ANY qualified climate scientsts who are not funded by the oil industry or climate-denier groups who agrees with you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 November, 2013, 02:04:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 01:49:54 PM
More carbon dioxide = more plants = bigger harvests = more food.

No... just... no. No.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 November, 2013, 02:04:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 01:49:54 PM
Climate change is a fact. Climate change is man's fault? Bollocks.

*Sigh*

1) The planet was significantly warmer and had a significantly higher CO2 content in the atmosphere in the distant mists of pre-history. These are scientific facts.

2) Over many millions of years, billions of tonnes of CO2 were absorbed by mainly plants that weren't released back into the atmosphere upon the death of those organisms by normal processes of decomp because those plants became fossil fuels instead, leaving that carbon sequestered underground, until we took it upon ourselves to dig those fossil fuels up and burn them, returning that long-sequestered CO2 to the atmosphere. These are also scientific facts.

If you are suggesting that you cannot draw a line between points 1) and 2) and logically, reasonably infer that restoring the planet's atmosphere to a composition similar to that which existed when the planet was much warmer may well result in the planet becoming much warmer then I have no idea what to say to you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 November, 2013, 02:11:27 PM
I find it really baffling that human influence on climate change is 'bollocks' but magnetic energy, life force and the ether are credible in the slightest. I also find it baffling that you can look over the Meg's walls and out into the Cursed Earth and have any doubt about man-made climate change.... (and incidentally how much plastic have you thrown away today is actually tied quite closely to carbon emissions).

However on a less fanatically stubborn subject:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2013, 10:32:44 PM
How about 'Pedal Prisons' where your inmates can make a bob or two on an exercise bike wired up to push juice into the National Grid?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadwheel

It's been done mate :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 02:33:57 PM
I know I keep droning on about this, but...

TLS believes that the majority of scientist falsify and/or ignore results so their work maintains a party line in order to keep their careers and income ticking over.  Nothing they say is reliable, and we should give far greater credence to a tiny number of voices of dissent.  The climate change narrative is part of an overall system of socio-political and economic control and/or incompetence that transcends this issue and makes it quasi-irrelevant, especially when tied to a certain intrinsic humility when it comes to humanity' puissance as agents in an infinitely larger environment.

That's fine, it's a challenging position he's arrived at after much thought.  It's totally wrong, but it's a position.

However.

Given that this position contends that the Sun or other external forcing factors are by far the most significant driver over the (apparently coincidental) astonishingly rapid warming of our global climate, and that we have no control whatsoever over this, why would trying to reduce what supposedly tiny additional impact humanity makes be a bad thing? 

I have no problem with suggesting ANY other methods for achieving the goal of reducing carbon release across the board, but I just cannot see what is wrong with the goal itself, even from TLS' particular position.  If anything constantly questioning the established facts and best-fit theory only continues to drag all attention away from other critical environmental and other issues and focus on a debate that should have been over long ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 02:48:49 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 22 November, 2013, 02:11:27 PM
I find it really baffling that human influence on climate change is 'bollocks' but magnetic energy, life force and the ether are credible in the slightest.

I think Mr Sharky is making a point about just believing what's reported in the mainstream media and that 'outsider' ideas are dismissed out of hand, when they should be given some air. We've been around this whole climate thing before now and me and he will likely never agree on the core of the subject. But I think we agree there's an issue with how the information is used by the governments of the world. What I do understand is that research on the climate was stimulated by the drop in temperatures reported in the 60-70s, that led to some speculation (not peer reviewed papers) on the onset of another ice age. A bunch of scientist dudes realised they didn't really know enough to say if that was the case. Next thing you know they tell us we're heating the place up to fuck. A lot quicker than was expected in the early part of an Interglacial at any rate.

My take (as I've said before) is that I think there is an inherent distrust of science and therefore scientists as they are seen as well paid (to say the right thing) and part of the 'establishment'. From my perspective, and experience, this isn't the case. Don't know if it's been a hatchet job or that it's a reaction to an increasingly technological society where people haven't been told how stuff works. I'd be inclined to go for the latter on the most part, which is why I read SF.

And, generally speaking, scientists take a long time to be convinced of anything until there's a good chance it's probably 95% right.

M.

EDIT: And what TB said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 03:23:36 PM
I think it is human nature to look to the scientists to come up with a definitive answer but in regards to climate change they can not.  It is difficult to provide quality data for more than a few decades and there are huge margins of error with the rest.  Climate modelling can provide us with ball-park estimates but they are not a definitive answer. 

As for why it matters - well, obviously all scientific research should be aimed at finding the truth but beyond that governments and the like are using this to determine energy policies e.g. more nuclear plants. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 03:43:16 PM
Gosh - a lot to respond to!

.

First, though, I don't think anyone's lying - and I want to make that absolutely crystal clear. When the scientists of the day thought the sun orbited the Earth, they weren't lying. The astronomers who initially taught Einstein that there was only one galaxy weren't lying. Climate scientists today are not lying. All these errors are based on incomplete understanding and a necessarily outdated education. (Most education must be outdated because you can only teach what has already happened and what seems to be true at the time - this is not meant as an insult to education or the educated, mark you.)

.

To demonstrate my point, one of the criticisms levelled at my position concerned the carbon captured by so-called "fossil-fuels". It is argued that oil is basically dead dinosaur juice - and this really makes little sense to me. For an oilfield to form, there must have been some massive concentration of life that died all at once, got covered in rocks over millions of years and not only never dessicated in all that time but remained fluid enough to contain millions of barrels of the stuff. And this miracle didn't happen just once but thousands of times all around the world. Why isn't this process still going on? What was so special about the dinosaurs that they were made from petrol and we aren't?

.

Okay, so maybe oilfields don't die in pockets but globally, somehow. A mass extinction, 98% of all the biomass on the Earth wiped out in one go. All that putrid juice just leeched into the ground and pooled into oil wells? Maybe, as the weather and rivers wash all the slush into pools or underground aquifers to, again, remain viscous for millions of years.

.

Is it possible that oil is not fossil-based at all but some form of on-going deep-Earth geological or even biogeological process? The vast bulk of life on Earth is bacteria, after all, and most of this lives to great depths. There are  oil-eating bacteria, so why shouldn't there be oil-defacating bacteria?

www.nytimes.com/1995/09/26/science/geochemist-says-oil-fieldsmay-be-refilled-naturally.html?src=pm

.

So, if the fossil-fuel plank of the anthroprgenic climate change theory is wrong, how would that affect the calculations?

.

It might also surprise some people to know that Saturn's frigid moon Titan contains hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than the Earth. Was the Solar System once much hotter so that there were dinosaurs all over Titan? Hundreds of times more dinosaurs than ever existed on Earth? When the sun cooled and all the Titanian dinosaurs died, did their juices remain fluid to the present day? Or did the hydrocarbons on Titan come from somewhere else? Emerge from some other process?

www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassini-20080213.html

.

Dead dinosaurs? The more I think about it, the less sense it makes. But I've believed it for decades because it's what I was taught and it's what most everyone else seems to think.

.

Saying what you think is not lying.


.

Also, farmers around here (and around the world) pump extra CO2 into their greenhouses to increase yields.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 03:43:34 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 02:48:49 PM
My take (as I've said before) is that I think there is an inherent distrust of science and therefore scientists as they are seen as well paid (to say the right thing) and part of the 'establishment'. From my perspective, and experience, this isn't the case.

Encouraging mistrust of scientists of all stripes is obviously in the interests of politicians, religions, big business and even much of the media:  how can you make a career out of peddling self-serving lies when there is an entire body of people whose goal is to establish the truth in a transparent, testable, repeatable way? 

The problem is that even when intelligent, perceptive people know that these supposed pillars of society are generally as altruistic as Wayne Rooney volunteering for Meals on Wheels, they then take this hard-won cynicism and apply it to the sciences, not realising that the sciences thrive on exposing misconeptioons and errors.  Of course there are seat-warmers in sinecures, greedy bullies and lazy thinkers, but that is not the culture of science in the way it is in business and politics: it is indirect opposition to it. Indeed, science itself is the mechanism for rooting out chancers.

EDIT: Sincere pologies for mis-representing you re: accusing scientists of lying, Sharky. However, I don't know where to begin to respond to the rest of your post.  I think I'll just tag-in Mikey...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 November, 2013, 03:57:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 03:43:16 PM
To demonstrate my point...

Oh.

My.

God.

You have no point. I simply don't understand why you would attempt to engage in discussion on a subject of which you clearly do not have the slightest fucking understanding.

To disabuse you of all your misconceptions and explain the entire topic of discussion from first principles is a task requiring more skill and patience than I will ever be able to muster. Good luck to any boarder brave/foolish enough to try.

Your contribution here is somewhat akin to me saying "Yeah, well, particle physics — it's all a load of old shite, innit?"

It may or may not be, but because I know absolutely fucking nothing I at least have the decency to say nothing on the subject.*

Gnngh.

Jim

*Note that I don't claim expert knowledge on fossil fuels, climate change or geology, but I have taken enough of an interest as a layman to have some broad, imperfect surface knowledge which I try to maintain through broad reading and, where possible, some attempts to grapple with raw data.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 November, 2013, 04:10:48 PM
Has anyone heard of the confirmation bias? I read an article about it once, but I didn't really believe it, so it must be a load of bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 04:13:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 03:23:36 PM
It is difficult to provide quality data for more than a few decades and there are huge margins of error with the rest.

That's not the case.

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/bas_research/science_briefings/icecorebriefing.php (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/bas_research/science_briefings/icecorebriefing.php)

http://www.clim-past.net/9/2489/2013/cp-9-2489-2013.html (http://www.clim-past.net/9/2489/2013/cp-9-2489-2013.html)

Resolution of course changes when using proxies from the rock record I referred to before, but there's enough quallty information to get a good idea of how the climate has varied even in very old rocks - back to perhaps as far as around 750 million years ago, when Earth was maybe Hoth:

http://www.snowballearth.org/ (http://www.snowballearth.org/)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 03:43:16 PM
To demonstrate my point, one of the criticisms levelled at my position concerned the carbon captured by so-called "fossil-fuels". It is argued that oil is basically dead dinosaur juice - and this really makes little sense to me. For an oilfield to form, there must have been some massive concentration of life that died all at once, got covered in rocks over millions of years and not only never dessicated in all that time but remained fluid enough to contain millions of barrels of the stuff. And this miracle didn't happen just once but thousands of times all around the world. Why isn't this process still going on? What was so special about the dinosaurs that they were made from petrol and we aren't?

...

Is it possible that oil is not fossil-based at all but some form of on-going deep-Earth geological or even biogeological process? The vast bulk of life on Earth is bacteria, after all, and most of this lives to great depths. There are  oil-eating bacteria, so why shouldn't there be oil-defacating bacteria?

...

So, if the fossil-fuel plank of the anthroprgenic climate change theory is wrong, how would that affect the calculations?

Dead dinosaurs? The more I think about it, the less sense it makes. But I've believed it for decades because it's what I was taught and it's what most everyone else seems to think.

Anyone who told you it was 'dead dinosaurs' was an ass hat. And if I follow you correctly, you are saying that if hydrocarbons are abiotic there's not greenhouse gas produced by burning them? You do use the term biogeological - that's pretty much what I understand it to be!

I don't know if you are being disingenious, but there's enough information about regarding how coal and hydrocarbons form and evidence for a biologcal source for much of it (on Earth). The key word is fossilisation - there are different types of preservational environments. And the process is understood to be happening (well, the early stages) in some places today. As regards hydrocarbons on Titan, that's yer chemistry doing crazy shit right there. Many comets have water ice - did it rain on them once?

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 04:39:49 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 04:13:05 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 03:23:36 PM
It is difficult to provide quality data for more than a few decades and there are huge margins of error with the rest.

That's not the case.

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/bas_research/science_briefings/icecorebriefing.php (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/bas_research/science_briefings/icecorebriefing.php)

http://www.clim-past.net/9/2489/2013/cp-9-2489-2013.html (http://www.clim-past.net/9/2489/2013/cp-9-2489-2013.html)

Resolution of course changes when using proxies from the rock record I referred to before, but there's enough quallty information to get a good idea of how the climate has varied even in very old rocks - back to perhaps as far as around 750 million years ago, when Earth was maybe Hoth:

http://www.snowballearth.org/ (http://www.snowballearth.org/)

I think the main area of contention in my earlier statement would be 'quality'. 

Ice cores can provide a wealth of information but it is not necessarily without issues.  Firstly, ice does not just stay in one position and sub-layers can move around.  It is a difficult task dating an ice sample and this is even more complicated the further you go down where you cannot determine between the layers.  Add to this the possibility of contamination, especially where additional fluids need to be added to maintain the stability of deep cores and then there is the fact that different gases are trapped at different depths in ice and that the pressures involved in deep ice are also likely to have an impact.

The simple view is that a bubble of air is trapped and remains there for 500,000 years unchanged, but this is not the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 04:51:18 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 04:39:49 PM
The simple view is that a bubble of air is trapped and remains there for 500,000 years unchanged, but this is not the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core)

Recrewt, are you arguing that an entire sub-discipline of palaeoclimatology has ignored/not realised the methodological problems you outline?  Any science, even shoddy humanities wannabes like my own, makes tackling these very issues its priority: it's the starting point of any single piece of research, the subject of theses, grants, courses, interdisciplinary projects, conferences, synthetic overviews etc. etc. 

Yes, there's always room for constant refinement in method, collection, analysis and interpretation of data, but you'll find a statement of the limitations of any serious study presented right there in the project report.  There may be better data around the corner, but we can only ever work with what we have, through the lense of what we know about it.  The palaeoclimate data being supplied from ice cores has already been put through the ringer before you or I get to go 'but what about...'.  Dismissing the value of something because it has acknowledged limitations is a road to nowhere.

I know I sound like some kind of brainwashed science-zealot here.  I'm not sure what I can do about that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 November, 2013, 04:59:59 PM
QuoteWhat was so special about the dinosaurs that they were made from petrol and we aren't?

Nothing at all. Other than that they died millions of years ago. Surpisingly you are right - bacteria can 'defecate' oil. This is in a vague sense the anaerobic decomposition that creates fossil fuels when combined with the sheer ridiculous pressure of geological forces over geological time.

Increasing C02 into a greenhouse does increase yields you are right. This seems an odd analogy given that the Greenhouse Effect is what is being denied, incidentally. However as with most things, this is not a universal rule. What is good for one plant is bad for others. There are many complicating and limiting factors involved, the most obvious of which are changes to temperature which if you know anything about growing plants, is a reet bastard. And remember plants dont grow to the beat of just one drum, what might be right for one, may not be right for some....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 05:00:57 PM
QuoteWhat was so special about the dinosaurs that they were made from petrol and we aren't?

Just so long as Pat Mills never sees that phrase...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 05:07:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 04:51:18 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 04:39:49 PM
The simple view is that a bubble of air is trapped and remains there for 500,000 years unchanged, but this is not the case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core)

Recrewt, are you arguing that an entire sub-discipline of palaeoclimatology has ignored/not realised the methodological problems you outline? 

No, but am I arguing the normal reporting of this data over-emphasises the accuracy of the data and underplays the potential flaws? 

Or that links such as Mikey included from the British Antarctic survey include potentially misleading comments like "Crucially, the ice encloses small bubbles of air that contain a sample of the atmosphere — from these it is possible to measure directly the past concentration of gases (including carbon dioxide and methane) in the atmosphere." but only mentions one potential flaw with the method " although we do have to be cautious, as artefacts can arise at sites with high concentrations of other impurities.".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 November, 2013, 05:25:12 PM
QuoteWhat was so special about the dinosaurs that they were made from petrol and we aren't?
What the actual fuck? Do you even know how fossil fuels are formed? I'll give you a clue, it's in the name.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 05:34:25 PM
What do you mean by 'normal reporting'? And there'll always be emphasis on accuracy! It brings up the point about constant refinement mind-though it doesn't change the overall picture I'd say. 

M   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2013, 05:59:56 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 November, 2013, 12:24:46 AM


Michael Portillo: it's not a life skill in terms of something you need to survive. Instant meals are available or you can go out to restaurants.




Let them eat cake...

Haven't read all the climate change posts, but I will. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 22 November, 2013, 06:08:01 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2013, 05:59:56 PM
Haven't read all the climate change posts, but I will.

Ive just finished 'em. Phew......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 06:22:01 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 22 November, 2013, 05:34:25 PM
What do you mean by 'normal reporting'? And there'll always be emphasis on accuracy! It brings up the point about constant refinement mind-though it doesn't change the overall picture I'd say. 

M   

The majority of people do not spend their time reading scientific research papers (myself included) and rely on 'normal reporting' i.e. through journals, magazines, websites and the press that summarise the research.

I think we are over-analysing this now but my point was that the earth is very big and very old and the climate is always changing.  Accurately measuring the climate is hard enough i.e. how many measuring stations do you need to confidently say you have measured the atmosphere at any point in time?  To then try and model the future changes in the climate is monumentally difficult.  Small changes in the accuracy of your data can also have big effects on climate change models.

Accurate ice core data = Sample A, Depth 500 meters, CO2 300 ppmv
Inaccurate ice core data = Sample A, Depth 500 meters, 40,000 years old (+-4000 years)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 09:23:21 PM
I don't deny the greenhouse effect - it's what keeps us warm at night and maintains the surface of Venus at the temperature of hot lead.

.

I don't deny that burning hydrocarbons releases CO2. My question was what the effect of discovering that the creation of oil was an on-going process - something forced up from the unknown depths rather than a more or less surface phenomena. There's a lot of CO2 in the magma, right? Under great pressure and heat. All that cooking, all those elements, all that time. Anything could be happening down there to replenish those oil wells in which this phenomena has been observed. I think that if this were found to be the case then it would add greatly to the problem.


.

Rain on comets? Well, I'm sure that happens *somewhere* in the universe.  If hydrocarbons appear on worlds as dissimilar as Titan and Earth then isn't it reasonable to ask what similarities there are that might lead to the same substance instead of assuming one process for one world and another for the second? Earth has an abundance of surface life whilst Titan (so far as we know) does not. Both Earth and Titan have warm pressurised interiors. Both have atmospheres and receive sunlight. Of course, there may be a very many ways of producing hydrocarbons - and if we can discover one then maybe we can kill two birds with one stone and cycle CO2 between gas and fuel over and over again. Who knows?

.

And no, I don't know how fossil fuels are formed (with the exception of peat) and neither, I suspect, does anyone else.

.

And Jim - calm down, mate! In the final analysis mine is just one mind amongst 7 billion - what I think doesn't matter a damn and doesn't change anything at all.  What I think is what I think and what you think is what you think - it's the differences that interest me the most. I love engaging with the minds of others - especially the people here who are all vastly more educated than me.

.

I should really stop posting on this thread - I'll never get a tin hat on over my foil helmet :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 November, 2013, 09:47:28 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel

QuotePetroleum and natural gas are formed by the anaerobic decomposition of remains of organisms including phytoplankton and zooplankton that settled to the sea (or lake) bottom in large quantities under anoxic conditions, millions of years ago. Over geological time, this organic matter, mixed with mud, got buried under heavy layers of sediment. The resulting high levels of heat and pressure caused the organic matter to chemically alter, first into a waxy material known as kerogen which is found in oil shales, and then with more heat into liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons in a process known as catagenesis.
There is a wide range of organic, or hydrocarbon, compounds in any given fuel mixture. The specific mixture of hydrocarbons gives a fuel its characteristic properties, such as boiling point, melting point, density, viscosity, etc. Some fuels like natural gas, for instance, contain only very low boiling, gaseous components. Others such as gasoline or diesel contain much higher boiling components.
Terrestrial plants, on the other hand, tend to form coal and methane. Many of the coal fields date to the Carboniferous period of Earth's history. Terrestrial plants also form type III kerogen, a source of natural gas.

Time it took to google. 5 seconds. And this is taught in GCSE classes now. So no. Not such a mystery after all. ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2013, 09:57:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 09:23:21 PMJim - calm down

This is far and away the craziest statement you've made.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 10:04:58 PM
Yep, that's pretty much what they taught me at school.  They didn't teach me about the oil wells that replenish, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 November, 2013, 10:16:52 PM
OK, i'm done. Thats the damn stupidest thing i've read all day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2013, 10:31:05 PM
Everyone pile on the Shark! 

But while jumping do remember that if they do nothing else,  Sharky's different views of things are an encouragement to examine what we each know (or think we know), and structure a counter argument, even if only in our heads.  There are few better ways of improving your own understanding of something. I know I've seldom come away from even the apparently-daftest discussions with TLS without learning or realising something new.  And sometimes he's convinced me with his polite persistence (although never on the present topic, I hasten to add).

Keep your pectoral fins up, Shark, you keep things interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 November, 2013, 10:48:53 PM
Alternative opinions are all well and good. But at the end of the day, opinions are just that without proof.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2013, 10:51:52 PM
Personally, I believe that the Holocaust happened.

Over to you, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 22 November, 2013, 10:54:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2013, 10:51:52 PM
Personally, I believe that the Holocaust happened.

Over to you, Sharky.

Pffft. According to paid historians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 10:57:19 PM
Hawkmonger - I posted a link earlier to the New York Times reporting a scientist from Wood's Hole talking about replenishing oil wells. Russian oil companies have known about and used this phenomena for decades.

.

Thanks, Tordels - it's a joy to debate with people like yourself (and many others on this board, I have to say) who don't take my (sometimes simply impishly) contrary views personally. I'm not out to convince anyone of anything - I mean, how could I in all honesty claim other people are wrong without allowing for the possibility of being wrong myself?

.
I also learn a lot from these debates and my thoughts often evolve because of them - although mostly not in directions most of you would agree with!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:08:43 PM
So now I'm a Holocaust denier? Really? Maybe I eat babies and rape pensioners and vote EDL as well?

.

I'm not usually one to take umbrage but I do feel rather upset to be accused, however obliquely, of denying the murders of so many Jews, Gypsies, Communists, mental patients and other undesirables simply because I'm not convinced about certain received wisdom. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as such ad hominim attacks begin any further discussion is pointless.

.

I'm quite ashamed - but prepared to accept that it was just a (very tasteless) joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 22 November, 2013, 11:22:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 10:57:19 PM
Hawkmonger - I posted a link earlier to the New York Times reporting a scientist from Wood's Hole talking about replenishing oil wells. Russian oil companies have known about and used this phenomena for decades.

The article of the title says "Geochemist Says Oil Fields May Be Refilled Naturally", if this a major possiblility, surely the oil companies would be all over it instead of the huge investments in fracking and shale oil?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:27:30 PM
I'm sorry for the above outburst.

.

It just cut me quite deeply, is all - given that one of the main reasons I question and challenge government is to prevent similar holocausts occurring again. How many times have you read me quoting, mis-quoting and paraphrasing Pastor Martin Niemoller ("First they came for the Communists...") on this very thread?

.

Anyway, that's my excuse and I hope you'll forgive me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 22 November, 2013, 11:34:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:27:30 PM
given that one of the main reasons I question and challenge government is to prevent similar holocausts occurring again. How many times have you read me quoting, mis-quoting and paraphrasing Pastor Martin Niemoller ("First they came for the Communists...") on this very thread?

But you are quite happy to deny man-made climate change, care naught about extinctions of species and listen to Putin-biased news channels?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 22 November, 2013, 11:35:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:08:43 PM
So now I'm a Holocaust denier? Really? Maybe I eat babies and rape pensioners and vote EDL as well?

.

I'm not usually one to take umbrage but I do feel rather upset to be accused, however obliquely, of denying the murders of so many Jews, Gypsies, Communists, mental patients and other undesirables simply because I'm not convinced about certain received wisdom. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as such ad hominim attacks begin any further discussion is pointless.

.

I'm quite ashamed - but prepared to accept that it was just a (very tasteless) joke.

So... why accept the evidence for this but not for, say, there being no conspiracy behind 9/11 or MMGW?

(I believe that was the Bear's point...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:46:32 PM
Hawkmonger - oil companies are in it for the money so, given the choice of announcing a practically unlimited supply (thereby driving down the price) or maintaining the firm conviction that oil is a finite (and therefore increasingly expensive) resource, which option do you think the shareholders would prefer?

.

The word "may" appears everywhere in science: The universe may have begun in a Big Bang, for example. Smoking may cause cancer. Aspartame may cause brain and nerve degradation.

.

"There is no scientific evidence to support this claim" is another example of the argument you seem to be using. Drugs companies in particular use this phrase when asked about, say, the efficacy of sodium bicarbonate in curing cancer. What the drug companies mean is that there is no scientific evidence because they won't do, or allow to be done, the research - no matter how good or bad a cure it is.

.

Just as with the oil companies, the operative word in 'pharmaceutical companies' is "companies". Why give you a cure when they can sell you medicine? And cancer medicines in particular make billions every year - what company is going to risk losing that income?

.

So, yes, oil wells *may* replenish themselves - but is this possibility not worth serious and impartial rigorous scientific investigation? I think so.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:00:50 AM
Jeez - I don't think mankind is the main driver of climate change. The extinction argument was me (as I think I pointed out right at the start) just making an argument for argument's sake. Given the anomalies and profusion of evidence, there is virtually no chance that the official story of the events of 9/11 is correct. I get some of my 'news' from RT. I think that businesses and governments tend to fund and promote the scientists and experts they agree with. I believe that there is a subtle but massive fraud at the very core of our economy which is corroding all human society. I believe that humanity will overcome these problems and that we stand at the dawn of a new Golden Age.

.

So sue me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 23 November, 2013, 12:14:55 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 11:46:32 PM
Hawkmonger - oil companies are in it for the money so, given the choice of announcing a practically unlimited supply (thereby driving down the price) or maintaining the firm conviction that oil is a finite (and therefore increasingly expensive) resource, which option do you think the shareholders would prefer?

I believe it was me you were replying to instead of Hawkmonger. There is no proof yet that it is a practically unlimited supply if it is self-replenishing , as the global demand for oil could outstrip the replenishment rate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 23 November, 2013, 12:32:38 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:00:50 AM
The extinction argument was me (as I think I pointed out right at the start) just making an argument for argument's sake.

I know you said that but your argument and counter argument lead me to feel it's not a matter you care about. So sue me.  :P

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:00:50 AMI believe that humanity will overcome these problems and that we stand at the dawn of a new Golden Age.

Something everyone on the board agrees on. Hopefully.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:36:18 AM
Sorry Otter - stuff coming from all directions!

.

That's another danger of a (possibly) practically unlimited (given the right management) supply increasing our horrendous throwaway culture (an average of 7 gallons of oil goes into making every tyre, I seem to recall).

.

I am certain that, wherever oil comes from and whether burning it drives climate change or not, we really do need to clean up our act. There are some great ideas out there, such as an ice cream wrapper designed to be thrown away as litter because it's made of gelatin and will rot away to nothing but also (and this is the bit I love) contains the seeds of rare wild flowers. We'll never defeat littering but ideas like that could turn a bad thing to good. But plastic's made of oil and the oil companies want you buying fresh plastic every day.

.

Oil is too important a thing to be controlled by oil companies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:45:54 AM
I can't help how my extinction argument made you feel. Not sure how I can demonstrate that I was just arguing for argument's sake. Maybe you could give me a completely contrary argument to make and I'll do my best to defend the indefensible (within reason).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 23 November, 2013, 01:08:31 AM
Forget about it TheLegendaryShark, there will be plenty more items for everyone to debate on in future.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 November, 2013, 01:26:21 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:36:18 AM
Oil is too important a thing to be controlled by oil companies.


Doesn't matter if oil is produced abiotically or the real way; oil-companies are finding it increasingly difficult to suck-up the milkshake with their straw because they don't have the required suck or long enough straw to pull from the bottom of the glass (the Gulf spill was caused by drilling too deep) and world oil-production/discovery has decreased since 2005 ushering in desperate measures such as the introduction of decades old and previously considered crap techniques such as fracking to compensate for the short-fall and increasing demand.

It's liars like Obama telling us we don't have an energy issue and that fracking and coal are good for at least 100 years that are the problem.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 November, 2013, 01:35:24 AM
I wasn't accusing anyone of being a Holocaust denier, I was just taking Sharky at his word that the official line on anything is open to counter-argument from other - sometimes academic - sources.  In this case, governments, the media - they're all saying the Holocaust happened so I thought I'd test his mettle and see if he'd air the counter-arguments or if he'd wuss out like a big wet girl.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 November, 2013, 03:38:54 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:00:50 AM
I think that businesses and governments tend to fund and promote the scientists and experts they agree with.

Well I'd agree with this to an extent. It's like Malcolm Tucker once said "Never hire an expert unless you already know what they're going to tell you!"

Promoting the evidence indicating that refining and burning fossil fuels is bad for the planet and an inefficient use of our limited resources.

Cui bono?

Not the petrochemical industry. They have more than enough cash, they could have nipped this in the bud, they could have buried it before it caught on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 November, 2013, 10:00:10 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 November, 2013, 03:38:54 AM
Cui bono?

Don't bring him into this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2013, 12:46:45 PM
So far as I can recall, denial of the Holocaust was based on some pretty ropey evidence such as the claims of one scientist that no traces of Zyclon B (?) could be found at certain concentration camps about 40 years after the crime. I did look into these claims a long time ago and I can't remember much about what I found but I remember being far from convinced. (I think one of the arguments was that some of the camps had been destroyed after the war and had other things put in their places meaning that the very existence of the camps could now not be proven!)

.

The interesting thing to me is not that the Holocaust denial argument exists but the reason it exists. I wonder if the argument was created as a kind of political weapon - you create a position so offensive that it will repel just about everybody simply in order that the accusation can be levelled at certain opponents. In fact, given the track records of certain intelligence agencies, I wouldn't be speechless with surprise if the Hd argument originated with, or at least is maintained, by Mossad.

.

Another possibly artificial label in the same vein is "conspiracy theorist". Take a moment to think about it, if you would. If a presenter or journalist on the BBC describes someone as a conspiracy theorist, the implication is of a paranoid personality who thinks that everything is a lie spun by all the politicians, civil servants, business leaders and religions in the world who are all in on one huge plot for world domination. If this person thinks the official story of 9/11 is a lie then they're also just as likely to believe in CIA mind control rays, shape-shifting alien lizards pretending to be royalty and that Elvis lives with Shergar and Nessie in a London bus on the moon. By labelling a person a conspiracy theorist one automatically feels, before listening to word one of what they say, that this person's views cannot be trusted. "Conspiracy theorist" has become a kind of Pavlov's bell which, once heard, makes our brains salivate in a certain way. Some people think that this is low level social conditioning to discourage free thinking ("Don't think like that or else everyone will know you're a nutter!").

.

There are conspiracies in the world. This fact is undeniable. Organising anything from the Gulf of Tonkin incident to a surprise birthday party for your mum is a conspiracy. Some conspiracies overlap. Many people are involved in more than one at a time.

.

A conspiracy theorist, then, is only someone who looks at what he or she is told and decides to investigate further rather than taking the investigations and conclusions of others at face value.

.

The perception is that a conspiracy theorist is a gullible idiot but, I would suggest, the complete opposite is true.

.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 23 November, 2013, 01:18:39 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 22 November, 2013, 06:22:01 PM
The majority of people do not spend their time reading scientific research papers (myself included) and rely on 'normal reporting' i.e. through journals, magazines, websites and the press that summarise the research.

I think we are over-analysing this now but my point was that the earth is very big and very old and the climate is always changing.  Accurately measuring the climate is hard enough i.e. how many measuring stations do you need to confidently say you have measured the atmosphere at any point in time?  To then try and model the future changes in the climate is monumentally difficult.  Small changes in the accuracy of your data can also have big effects on climate change models.

Accurate ice core data = Sample A, Depth 500 meters, CO2 300 ppmv
Inaccurate ice core data = Sample A, Depth 500 meters, 40,000 years old (+-4000 years)

Gotcha Recrewt. Though I'd say the likes of New Scientist is readily accessible without being difficult to wade through. The reason why I linked to some stuff on ice cores is because you said there's only reliable data for the last few decades, and that's not the case with the ice core data extending into hundreds of thousands of years. And just to add when you go back into real geological time, the rocks give information on sea level, which is connected to the amount of ice, which is of course related to climate. You can in some instances use oxygen isotopes in carbonates from limestones or fossils to give you more information. Ice sheets both respond to and drive climate changes which is what makes them interesting.

Regarding your example of accurate versus inaccurate: it's not fair to say the second part of your example is inaccurate when the accuracy has been clearly stated. The first part hasn't a qualifying statement so the accuracy may be in doubt. If I saw that reported somewhere I'd make what would likely be a safe assumption that the 40k wasn't a single measurement but perhaps the mean of numerous repeats, perhaps by numerous labs. When that is correlated, say, with other information that pointed at 40k, if your results gave a mean of around 40k it's looking good. And 10% either side isn't bad either!

I've used 'may' and 'perhaps' in the way it's usually used for such things - it allows room for more information to revise the findings as it's a continual refinement process, including debate and repitition. If proven wrong somehow later on then that's a win.

QuoteQuote from: The Legendary Shark on Today at 12:00:50 AM
I think that businesses and governments tend to fund and promote the scientists and experts they agree with.

Does that only apply to sciences or is gubmint funding of arts and humanities research not part of The Plan?

Quotesomething forced up from the unknown depths rather than a more or less surface phenomena. There's a lot of CO2 in the magma, right? Under great pressure and heat. All that cooking, all those elements, all that time. Anything could be happening down there to replenish those oil wells in which this phenomena has been observed. I think that if this were found to be the case then it would add greatly to the problem.

But magmatic processes don't produce oil - they just don't. If so, oil fields would be found mostly associated igneous provinces or areas of high volcanic activity, at plate margins or 'hot spots' and they aren't. Of course you may not take plate tectonics as a verifiable actuality. 'Uknown depths'? Yes, there's a lot that has yet and may be never be directly observed in situ, but that's what geophysics is for plus the odd outcrop of obducted material, including bits of the mantle if you're lucky.

Any chance to talk about geology or Earth Science is not to be missed, but I'll give over now.

And with that, he wandered back off into the mists of statistics, so painful to peruse on a beautiful winter Saturday afternoon, all the while regretting that San Fansisco cocktail imbibed too late, far too late last night

M.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 November, 2013, 02:32:02 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 23 November, 2013, 01:18:39 PM...all the while regretting that San Fansisco cocktail imbibed too late, far too late last night[/i]

Away with your pretence of urbanity, you're still just a rock nerd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 November, 2013, 04:23:23 PM
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090910084259.htm

.

Another view on oil and natural gas formation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 November, 2013, 11:17:28 AM
I think ultimately all anyone is trying to say is that the counter-argument to the established theory is in this case, very badly constructed and misrepresents what it should be directly engaged with.

And that conspiracies exist is undeniable. However they are very limited in scope in my opinion. The ultimate conspiracy is self-interest and it requires no shadowy cabal for its hegemony to be perpetuated.

However the conspiracy at work in climate change is surely the people opposing the idea that human activity can drive climate change. Follow the money. Which approach will make more money for the existing system...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2013, 12:22:22 PM
Which approach will make more money for the system?

.

Carbon taxes, which throw a thin veil of "doing something" over the problems. These taxes (which, needs must, mainly go towards paying off un-payoffable government debts in richer countries and push the poorer ones deeper still into debt) are meant to convince us that something is being done about CO2 whilst oil continues to be pumped, deforestation rampages ahead, industrial and military pollution increases daily and improper water management and overfarming encourages desertification and droughts.

.

So, balance the cost of cleaning up our act properly (which would eat significantly into the profits of the. "Elites") against inventing a carbon tax (from which the "Elites" can and do make billions) and I think that answers, or at least part answers, your question from my perspective.

.

Strategies like carbon taxes generally arise from completely illegal gatherings like Bilderberg - which was, of course, dismissed for decades as a "conspiracy theory". A conspiracy isn't necessarily a bunch of evil tycoons in a dimly lit bunker somewhere - often it's just a mindset or general strategy amongst the "Elites", who push that mindset down through their businesses, organisations or governments so that it fetches up in our lives from several directions at once, giving the impression of a consensus or tightly controlled conspiracy.

.

Follow the money indeed - have a look at how much Al Gore has made out of climate change, for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 25 November, 2013, 02:03:36 PM
Estimated worth of Al Gore - about $200 million. Which will include his diverse business interests, salaries raked in from a career at the top end of US politics (congressman, senator, vice-president) and the fact that he comes from a wealthy family to start with.

Confirmed third quarter profits reported by Exxon, October 2013 - $7.87 billion.

That's one oil's company's profits, in one quarter.

If you're following the money, then whose front door does it lead you to - the people saying climate change is man-made, real and happening (99.9999% of them nowhere near as wealthy as Al Gore), or the people with a vast and vested financial interest in denying all of this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 November, 2013, 02:21:19 PM
QuoteCarbon taxes, which throw a thin veil of "doing something" over the problems

Indeed and are widely criticised for those reasons. However I'm not seeing where carbon taxes are intrinsically linked to the concept of human pollution causing/exacerbating climate change.

Carbon taxes are intended to be a stimulus for alternative technology and decreasing pollution, not a solution in and of themselves. That the vast private interests of existing technology/resource exploitation groups are fighting both carbon taxes and the concept of climate change itself should be telling - that they however continue to pay them rather than alter their strategy even more so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2013, 06:41:48 PM
Even though he has less money than Exxon, in 2012 Al gore was worth 50 times more than when he was vice president.  m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1961299

.

In theory, a Carbon Tax is fine - you take a small fee for every tree felled and use that money to plant more trees and fund forestry research and whatnot. That would work fine if the world was using real money like gold, silver or properly backed currency - but we ain't.

.

I know everyone gets ticked off at me for going on about it but our current global monetary system is at the heart of so many of our problems, including this one.

.

Because we don't use money but fiat currency, this has a toxic effect on all kinds of things. So, your governments are getting deeper and deeper into debt to the banks (who create that debt out of nothing and list it as an asset against which they can issue even more debt to you and me) and need to cut more services, raise taxes and borrow a little bit more every more every week. Government debts can never truly be paid off (even if HMG paid off all it's debts tomorrow, it would still have to borrow money in the future), especially with compound interest.

.

At this point, it doesn't matter what's driving climate change - a Carbon Tax presents a great opportunity to raise revenues locally with green taxes and charges (which the energy companies kindly pass on to us) to try and get the debt down a bit - and who could blame them for trying?

.

So under the current system, you charge a small fee for every tree felled and use that fee for two things: First, it goes into paying the Impossible Debt and second, the fees raised from the tree-felling serve as *collateral* against which to borrow *more* privately created bank debt *at interest* to pay for the Green Projects they promised us in return. That debt is turned into credits and coins by the BoE and then filtered down through government departments, corporations, managers, secretaries, under-managers, under-secretaries, advisors, experts, workers, buildings, equipment and utilities and at the end of it, if there's enough left, you might end up with a few windmills and some solar-powered LCD streetlights and maybe a bit of research into alternative energy sources (except geomagnetic energy transfer or alternate oil formation theories, it seems - I'd have thought they might be worth a couple of million, just on the off-chance).

.

The Carbon Tax, then, fails spectacularly in two ways. First, governments won't be able to borrow money for green projects without green taxes - and because the money they intend to borrow for their Green Projects will bear interest, they'll need *more* trees to be cut down every year. If climate change is man-made, the Carbon Tax here exacerbates the problem. Secondly, as every penny in circulation has to be paid back (ten times over by now, I shouldn't wonder), tax rises, charges and cuts are inevitable. Everything becomes more expensive to compensate (inflation) meaning that more money is needed in the economy (growth). With prices so high, vehicle and factory maintenance standards fall and pollution (and man-made climate change, if you believe in that sort of thing) increases. Double-whammy for the Carbon Tax - it does precisely the opposite of what it's supposed to do.

.


Now, if we could convince our governments to grow a pair and take back control of the money supply I'd be all for a Carbon Tax - anything that'll get us to clean up our act.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 November, 2013, 09:57:16 AM
I'm still not seeing where carbon taxes are intrinsically linked to the concept of human pollution causing/exacerbating climate change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Hmm, not sure how much more clearly I can put it. Maybe I've confused things with the tree-felling example.

.

Let me try to explain the principal by presenting a vastly simplified model. Let's imagine that there is only one forest in the world and that it contains 100,000 trees. The only source of wood, the forest has been losing trees to humans for a long time but the tree population has remained fairly constant at 100,000 for a long time.

.

As human numbers and activity increase, more and more wood is needed until tree numbers begin to decline.

.

It is then discovered that 1,000 trees have been lost from the forest and that the temperature of the world has increased by 0.05 degrees. Correlations are made and research done and it is discovered that for every tree lost the temperature of the world increases by 0.00005 degrees (*I know this isn't how it works in practice, it's just a simplified example*).

.

To tackle this problem it is decided that a Chopping Tax will be raised to discourage excess tree felling and to pay for repairing past damage etc. So far so good.

.

In this simple world with only one forest let us now imagine that there is only one government and only one bank and that the bank long ago convinced the government that, as a bank, only it was qualified to create and control the money supply.

.

Having identified the problem, the government approaches the bank for further loans in order to rectify it. The bank points out that the government is already in debt for all those hospitals and roads it borrowed money to build and wants to know how this new loan will be paid for. The government securitizes the loan on future taxes from tree felling - turning the forest into a monetized asset. The bank agrees the loan and the Chopping Tax is levied on the lumberjack.

.

Now, for every tree felled the government charges a fee allowing two saplings to be planted. Simple, right?

.
Well, not quite. The lumberjack cuts down the first taxable tree and pays his fee to the government through the new Chopping Tax. That first payment goes in to paying the government's *existing* debt but, on the strength of it, the bank agrees to create enough money for two saplings to be planted and lends it to the government, which plants two saplings. Great - it's working!

.
But the government is now faced with a dilemma. In order for the initial loan to be repaid, the government needs to keep gathering the Chopping Tax and, because of interest, raise the tax. The lumberjack grumbles at the rising prices but cuts down another tree and pays the higher tax, which the government uses as before - to pay towards previous debts and as "proof of income" to secure new ones. As this process continues it becomes more and more expensive to fell trees and this cost is passed on to the rest of society - which is already struggling to keep up the government's existing loan repayments.

.

A vicious circle emerges whereby the *need to repay the government's debt* overtakes the imperative of replenishing the forest. Compound interest pushes the debt ever deeper, requires even more trees to be felled (with all the concomitant energy and resource usage) at higher and higher rates of tax until the price of wood is at an all-time high whilst never having been more abundant.

.

At some point, it will become too expensive for the lumberjack to continue his business legally and so he'll either quit or go black market. By this time, there will also be a lot of unregulated tree felling by black marketeers and the poor who can't afford 'proper' wood.

.
It's the *interest* the bank charges that's the killer, for even though saplings have been planted the interest must come from somewhere - which means a little extra work done, a little more energy expended and a little more wood used up every time. This Chopping Tax system is doomed to either collapse long before the original 1,000 trees have been replaced or to consume the entire forest and be forced to start feeding on the saplings.

.
Let us now imagine a very slight change in our fictional world. The initial problem has just been discovered and, again, it is decided that the Chopping Tax is the best solution. The lumberjack chops down his first taxable tree and the government collects the money.

.
Crucially, though, in this world the government creates its own money out of nothing and spends or lends it into society at zero interest using the banks as distributors. The government then takes the lumberjack's tax payment and plants two saplings with it. Job done - there's nobody to pay back, no interest to find and no pressing need to cut down another tree until it's needed - at which time the Chopping Tax (which, having nothing driving the cost up) will again pay for planting two new saplings and so on until the job is done without becoming mired in artificial debt.

.
The Chopping Tax, like the Carbon and Green Taxes, would work very well in the second world but in the first can only make things worse. This is what these taxes are doing to our world - but on a massive scale. They are not only counterproductive but dangerous.

.
In theory Carbon Taxes may be about saving the planet, and so are they enthusiastically touted by cash-strapped governments all over the world, but in practice they are all about making a profit. This is why I'm totally opposed to all taxes in their current form - because they make everyone work harder and consume more resources to pay back that interest. That's wasted work, wasted resources, wasted time - all to pay private banks for the privilege of using money they created out of nothing. It's monstrous.

.
And that's how carbon taxes exacerbate the problem.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2013, 05:15:47 PM
I imagine this petition to limit MP pay rises will be ignored, so there's no point signing it.

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-stop-the-11-pay-rise-for-mps-salaries
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 November, 2013, 06:44:11 PM
How can six and a half billion people not affect the climate?  Whether the effects will be as bad as some predict, I'm not so sure and, to be totally honest, I couldn't give a toss what happens to the planet, in 500, or 5,000, or 5 million years time!  Yeah, go on, call me selfish!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2013, 06:54:04 PM
See how far ahead the Tories where when they helped to close those polluting mines. All hail Maggie and her Green policies :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2013, 07:21:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 November, 2013, 06:44:11 PMWhether the effects will be as bad as some predict, I'm not so sure and, to be totally honest, I couldn't give a toss what happens to the planet, in 500, or 5,000, or 5 million years time!  Yeah, go on, call me selfish!!!

I'm just thrilled you have a vote.   ;)


More seriously we're also talking about serious effects in whatever is left of our lifetimes, not 500 years down the line.  And population's 7.1 billion right now, and it'll be 11 billion before we top out in 80 years or so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2013, 07:29:36 PM
I'm actively hoping for disastrous environmental collapse - the future has already disappointed me in not delivering jetpacks, domed cities on the moon and laser handguns, but if we all pull together we might just get to live in Mad Max times.  Plus our government is now advocating concentration camps for unemployed families and you know what?  I am all for it - that is our government so we clearly deserve everything we get and if it ever goes to a vote, I am voting in favor.  We've had our chance and the sooner the slate gets wiped clean the sooner the cockroaches can make a start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 26 November, 2013, 07:36:58 PM
I liked how Thatcher helped the prosthetics industry by sending all those soldiers to get injured in the Falklands too.


Oh, almost forgot:  ;)  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 26 November, 2013, 07:37:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2013, 07:29:36 PM
We've had our chance and the sooner the slate gets wiped clean the sooner the cockroaches can make a start.

Ants. It'll be the ants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 November, 2013, 07:50:08 PM
Well said, Prof!   :) 

Of course, you're right, TB, but while our little islands only contribute 2% to global warming and we've got China apparently building a new coal-fired power station virtually every month, I don't see why me and you should be paying green taxes now; sort out the big polluters first and then I'll be happy to pay my bit.

I know there are problems currently with climate change, I've read James Lovelock!!  But to be honest, in this part of the world, at the moment, I'm more concerned with what my grandchildren are going to do for a job and how they're going to be able to afford housing, rather than whether they're going to fry or freeze!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2013, 08:52:12 PM
If our effect on the world's climate was so catastrophic, then why are we pussy footing about. I happily recycle into our multitude of bins only for the council, or whoever, to sometimes place it all in landfill, as has been known.
Many years ago we took our newspapers to some dodgy bloke with his scales and he paid us for the weight, same as milk bottle tops. The Lowcocks pop man collected our empty bottles and you had a percentage taken off your next purchase.

Why don't all new builds have fully energy efficient items fitted as standard. Solar panels, wind turbines, triple glazing, thermal heating, etc..

So long as the dickheads in charge try to ruin this country while many others do what they want, brilliant! As has been said earlier, we can have the moral high ground but China, India, Pakistan, Brazil, Russia, the US, etc... Must be pissing themselves, as they watch us implode but at least we are 100% saving the planet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 07:56:30 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2013, 06:54:04 PM
See how far ahead the Tories where when they helped to close those polluting mines. All hail Maggie and her Green policies :thumbsup:

I appreciate that you're just trying to bait the 'lefties' but you know that about 40% of our electricity still comes from burning coal, right? It's just that we now import it from Eastern Europe and South America, where they can dig it up at a much lower cost by paying less attention to minor concerns like worker safety and environmental impact. Hurrah for the free market!

Most of the generating capacity switched away from coal was switched to gas, contributing in no small measure to the depletion of the North Sea gas reserves, leaving us at the mercy of the in-no-way-capricious Russian suppliers.

Meanwhile, the apparent saviour in our energy crisis is fracking, being handed a massive tax break to extract hydrocarbons from the ground in the way that contaminates ground water, depletes local water reserves and causes earth tremors.

And yet we live on an island made of fucking coal. Were it not for the political baggage attached to coal mining, the Powers-that-Be would be all over new technologies like this (http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2013/02/scientists-generate-electricity-from-coal-without-burning-it/).

None of the political parties have anything resembling a coherent energy policy, but arguing that other countries aren't bothering so why should we is in argument for doing nothing in almost all circumstances. Sometimes you have to try to do the right thing because it's the right thing and in hope that others may follow.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 08:02:09 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 07:56:30 AMSometimes you have to try to do the right thing because it's the right thing and in hope that others may follow.

The goth's not for turning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:16:23 PM
Ha! Well, we have just spent several pages arguing debating over climate change and CO2 emissions so I can just imagine the reaction to opening up more coal mines in the UK.  I do agree though that there are reserves there ready and waiting but unfortunately cost is key.  If it is cheaper to import coal than extract our own then why bother?

And it is hard to argue against it - the cost of setting up a new coal mine in the UK compared to what the energy companies expect to pay for it does not equal a big profit.  And as for worker safety, a lot of the mines in places like Russia are open cast where one guy sits in a big machine like a jcb and scoops up coal and puts it in the back of a dumper truck.  Compare this to the UK's often deep mines with thin seems and you can see which might be better for the workers.  Mining in the UK is dirty and dangerous work - if you don't get gassed, drowned or crushed then you usually end up with something more stealthy like lung cancer. 

So what do you do?  Buggered if I know!  It would be nice to have a sensible debate from our leader's that recognises whilst we should try to be as environmentally clean as we can, there is no fuel source that currently delivers that.  In fact, wouldn't it be nice to have some cross-party agreements about the future of fuel in the UK?  This could lead to agreements over finding more efficient ways to use gas/coal in short term and perhaps finally sort out the Nuclear waste issue for the long term. 



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 12:25:58 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:16:23 PM
Ha! Well, we have just spent several pages arguing debating over climate change and CO2 emissions so I can just imagine the reaction to opening up more coal mines in the UK.

Did you read the article I linked to? It's a method of liberating energy from coal with zero CO2 emissions.

QuoteIf it is cheaper to import coal than extract our own then why bother?

I believe that energy security, like food security, should be subject to a more sensible policy than just 'let the market decide'. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination —global pandemic of some kind, say?— to conjure a scenario where countries start significantly restricting the flow of goods and people across their borders yet, in such a scenario, we're basically fucked.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 12:35:00 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:16:23 PMIt would be nice to have a sensible debate from our leader's that recognises whilst we should try to be as environmentally clean as we can, there is no fuel source that currently delivers that.

This is only one issue.  Power consumption is if anything a bigger one, and one that is readily tackle-able without massive infrastructural investment or technological breakthroughs: just stop using planes on a whim if you're rich, reduce car journeys where possible if you're not, insulate properly, drop the heating several notches/raise the aircon temp and turn off the damn X-Box when you go to bed etc.  However, this involves the consumer accepting a change to their precious lifestyle.  The richest 20% of the planet's population consumes 75% of total global energy production. Or to put it another way, most of the world's energy consumption is based around luxury or convenience.

If that could be reduced things would change far more significantly than jockeying about with nuclear versus fossil etc.  This however is essentially deflationary, and it'll be a cold day in the Caymans before the rich endorse it or lead by example: that kind of move, reducing energy consumption, can only come from the people, and only through awareness and enlightened self-interest.

Take 2 minutes to watch the genius of Hans Rosling explain it better than I ever could: http://jeremyjschmidt.com/2013/10/24/hans-rosling-inequality-and-the-unjust-use-of-energy/ (http://jeremyjschmidt.com/2013/10/24/hans-rosling-inequality-and-the-unjust-use-of-energy/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:47:55 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 12:25:58 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:16:23 PM
Ha! Well, we have just spent several pages arguing debating over climate change and CO2 emissions so I can just imagine the reaction to opening up more coal mines in the UK.

Did you read the article I linked to? It's a method of liberating energy from coal with zero CO2 emissions.

Yes, well I scan read it Sir - is there going to be a test? ;)  Interesting stuff but this method still consumes coal doesn't it so we will need to mine some and there will be CO2 emmissions from creating and setting up a new coal mine. 

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 12:25:58 PM
QuoteIf it is cheaper to import coal than extract our own then why bother?
I believe that energy security, like food security, should be subject to a more sensible policy than just 'let the market decide'. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination —global pandemic of some kind, say?— to conjure a scenario where countries start significantly restricting the flow of goods and people across their borders yet, in such a scenario, we're basically fucked.

Whilst I agree we should not just let the market decide - that's a bit doom and gloom view of things isn't it?  We do have coal mines running in the UK and there are also stockpiles of coal we have imported.  More likeley, we will have the new Nuclear power plants or will indeed open up new coal mines to use those reserves?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 27 November, 2013, 01:20:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2013, 08:52:12 PM
If our effect on the world's climate was so catastrophic, then why are we pussy footing about...

...Why don't all new builds have fully energy efficient items fitted as standard. Solar panels, wind turbines, triple glazing, thermal heating, etc..

So long as the dickheads in charge try to ruin this country while many others do what they want, brilliant! As has been said earlier, we can have the moral high ground but China, India, Pakistan, Brazil, Russia, the US, etc... Must be pissing themselves, as they watch us implode but at least we are 100% saving the planet.

Yep - why indeed. Never mind the 'recycling' can be going to landfills or breakers yards in some of the countries you mention, where no one is giving a shit about the pollution or effects on workers. You're dead right there's a moral (or ethical?) dimension to it too. I don't think people in what I suppose you could call post industrial societies could deny other countries the opportunity to supply electricity and other modern conveniences to a largely dirt poor population. And at the same time I think it's right to take the lead on alternatives if the opportunity is there. Surely the expertise that could be developed in renewable or cleaner forms of energy gives you a) a skill base and b) products, that you can sell both of later on to the new members of the club?

Meh, give it all a few million years and it'll be all 'how do we melt the fuckin ice now?'

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 27 November, 2013, 01:23:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 12:35:00 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:16:23 PMIt would be nice to have a sensible debate from our leader's that recognises whilst we should try to be as environmentally clean as we can, there is no fuel source that currently delivers that.

This is only one issue.  Power consumption is if anything a bigger one, and one that is readily tackle-able without massive infrastructural investment or technological breakthroughs: just stop using planes on a whim if you're rich, reduce car journeys where possible if you're not, insulate properly, drop the heating several notches/raise the aircon temp and turn off the damn X-Box when you go to bed etc.  However, this involves the consumer accepting a change to their precious lifestyle.  The richest 20% of the planet's population consumes 75% of total global energy production. Or to put it another way, most of the world's energy consumption is based around luxury or convenience.

If that could be reduced things would change far more significantly than jockeying about with nuclear versus fossil etc.  This however is essentially deflationary, and it'll be a cold day in the Caymans before the rich endorse it or lead by example: that kind of move, reducing energy consumption, can only come from the people, and only through awareness and enlightened self-interest.

Take 2 minutes to watch the genius of Hans Rosling explain it better than I ever could: http://jeremyjschmidt.com/2013/10/24/hans-rosling-inequality-and-the-unjust-use-of-energy/ (http://jeremyjschmidt.com/2013/10/24/hans-rosling-inequality-and-the-unjust-use-of-energy/)

While this is all quite correct it's very easy to criticise 'the rich' if you aren't one of them.

If you ask most people what they'd do if they won the lottery they'd say 'buy a big house, a fast car and go on lots of exotic holidays'.
If you're rich you want to enjoy it. It's pretty much the carrot that drives a capitalist society.

I'm not trying to say that there's no burden of responsibility on the rich, just that it's hard to point the finger at the real culprits.
For example - what's the point of a Ferrari? Should we judge the rich for buying them or should we just expect the company to stop making them - or to start making electric ones?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 27 November, 2013, 01:24:33 PM
Electric Ferarri is a great name for a band...or a porn star.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 27 November, 2013, 01:29:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2013, 08:52:12 PM
If our effect on the world's climate was so catastrophic, then why are we pussy footing about. I happily recycle into our multitude of bins only for the council, or whoever, to sometimes place it all in landfill, as has been known.
Many years ago we took our newspapers to some dodgy bloke with his scales and he paid us for the weight, same as milk bottle tops. The Lowcocks pop man collected our empty bottles and you had a percentage taken off your next purchase.

Why don't all new builds have fully energy efficient items fitted as standard. Solar panels, wind turbines, triple glazing, thermal heating, etc..

So long as the dickheads in charge try to ruin this country while many others do what they want, brilliant! As has been said earlier, we can have the moral high ground but China, India, Pakistan, Brazil, Russia, the US, etc... Must be pissing themselves, as they watch us implode but at least we are 100% saving the planet.

I find it hard to believe that there hasn't been some sort of campaign to re-instate the milkman (probably with tax breaks to make it viable). The milk gets delivered from a local dairy, by electric vehicle, in a reusable bottle. Brilliant.

They should start distributing beer in reusable bottles again too (when I worked in a bar the only bottles that went back to be re-used were Holsten Pills, Mann's and Schweppes mixers. I don't think even they get reused any more).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 01:31:21 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:47:55 PM
Interesting stuff but this method still consumes coal doesn't it so we will need to mine some and there will be CO2 emmissions from creating and setting up a new coal mine.

One of the maddening things about the climate change discussion is the insistence on counting all CO2 emissions as if they're equal.

If I grow a tree, then cut it down and burn it for fuel, that's broadly carbon neutral, since I'm only releasing the carbon the tree sequestered from the atmosphere in the process of growing. If I dig up a half a tonne of coal and burn that then I'm adding CO2 into the atmosphere that hadn't been there for many millions of years. It's changing the balance of carbon in the atmosphere that's the problem, not the blanket process of doing stuff that liberates CO2 into the atmosphere.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 01:31:21 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 27 November, 2013, 12:47:55 PM
Interesting stuff but this method still consumes coal doesn't it so we will need to mine some and there will be CO2 emmissions from creating and setting up a new coal mine.

One of the maddening things about the climate change discussion is the insistence on counting all CO2 emissions as if they're equal.

Quite.  The almost fanatical view of restricting any CO2 emmissions is daft and hampers serious discussions about how we tackle the problem and move forward.

Almost everything we do creates CO2.  In fact, I'm emmitting CO2 myself as I type this message!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 01:52:44 PM
Bringing back re-usable glass containers is a good idea from a societal and environmental standpoint. However, the oil and plastics corporations make oodles of money out of throwaway containers - more than enough to justify paying lobbyists to convince key MPs that glass milk bottles are dirty, dangerous, expensive and antiquated carriers of disease while plastic is clean, safe, cheap, modern and sterile.

.

From a global economic point of view plastics are vital to the debt illusion. For precisely the same reasons as I outlined in my earlier "Chopping Tax" post, plastic has never been so abundant or so expensive (just like the oil from which it is derived) and to curtail its use would impact on tax revenues, thereby diminishing the government's borrowing power.

.

Everything comes back to the money supply - fix that first and we've got a good chance of fixing a whole bunch of problems like this one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 November, 2013, 03:00:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2013, 12:23:55 PM
Really long post

In theory Carbon Taxes may be about saving the planet, and so are they enthusiastically touted by cash-strapped governments all over the world, but in practice they are all about making a profit. This is why I'm totally opposed to all taxes in their current form - because they make everyone work harder and consume more resources to pay back that interest. That's wasted work, wasted resources, wasted time - all to pay private banks for the privilege of using money they created out of nothing. It's monstrous.

Heh, ok... I will try to be clearer. I am not sure I am managing to get what I am confused about across to you :) My basic argument is: Flaws in carbon tax schemes (and your wider point about taxation in general) do not have anything to say about the implausibility of man-made climate change.

To illustrate the point badly, whether or not you think the traffic lights change because you press the button at the traffic lights or because they are programmed to do so anyway, the light still changes.

In less cackhanded allegorical terms, the issue of climate change's scientific basis is entirely removed from whether economic measures such as carbon taxes are a practical means of dealing with it. Carbon taxes are predicated on climate change but climate change is not predicated on carbon taxes.

I think almost everyone who is arguing the point would agree that the financial system is ****ed, particularly in how the basic concept of a carbon tax stimulating greener approaches is being undermined by the usual spreadsheet balancing approach (or in other words how moving numbers around fails to actually change things in the physical world) to problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 03:25:49 PM
For the purposes of taxation it doesn't matter whether MMCC is real or not - the government taxes hundreds of unreal things (for example, does not having a driving license affect one's skill as a driver or does paying for a passport affect one's ability to physically move through space?).

.
My point was not that Carbon Taxes drive or don't drive, prove or disprove MMCC. My point was that Carbon Taxes in their present form are worsening the situation in a number of ways - including (if it's true, which I am not yet prepared to concede) Man Made Climate Change.

.
So I guess we were really on the same page, or at least adjacent pages, after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 27 November, 2013, 04:02:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 07:56:30 AM

And yet we live on an island made of fucking coal. Were it not for the political baggage attached to coal mining, the Powers-that-Be would be all over new technologies like this (http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2013/02/scientists-generate-electricity-from-coal-without-burning-it/).


The blog you linked to there is an awful rightwing libertarian shitpile and I'd take anything on it with a pinch of salt-"without burning" especially is a bit of a misnomer, given you're still reacting carbon and oxygen and making carbon dioxide.  That said, the technology itself looks promising- there's an interesting book on the technicalities here (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WDVldP9YUPkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Chemical+Looping+Systems+for+Fossil+Energy+Conversions&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UhaWUsXtOOz8yAOFw4HQBA&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Chemical%20Looping%20Systems%20for%20Fossil%20Energy%20Conversions&f=false).  The key point I think is that you've still got to sequester that carbon somewhere that you can be sure it's not going to get out, otherwise you're just as fucked as if you'd just burnt it in the first place (apparently higher efficiency of this technology aside).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 November, 2013, 04:12:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 03:25:49 PM
So I guess we were really on the same page, or at least adjacent pages, after all.

Well almost...

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2013, 01:49:54 PM
Climate change is a fact. Climate change is man's fault? Bollocks.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 04:16:16 PM
Okay then - same page, different book; how's that? :-D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
I was just reading an article about Bitcoin - a totally made-up imaginary currency on the internet that is now worth actual money despite being conjured out of the ether - and immediately thought of poor Sharky's blood pressure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 05:15:49 PM
BitCoin is great. It's currency created by the people and cannot be controlled by the central banks. BitCoin and the plethora of other publically issued and controlled currencies are the way forward - at least until we realise that we don't really need money at all.

.
"The economics of the future are somewhat different. We no longer work for personal profit; we work to better ourselves." Words to aspire to, what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 27 November, 2013, 05:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 03:25:49 PM
My point was not that Carbon Taxes drive or don't drive, prove or disprove MMCC. My point was that Carbon Taxes in their present form are worsening the situation in a number of ways - including (if it's true, which I am not yet prepared to concede) Man Made Climate Change.

You've lost me a bit. If I understand it correctly, overall the thrust of what you're saying is that the anthropogenic contribution to a warming climate was made up so that a new tax could be imposed. So you don't like a tax making something that you don't accept worse? Think you're hitting the wood there!

And something else I meant to mention earlier - you said further up the thread that you accept the Greenhouse Affect. What do you understand that to be?

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 06:08:09 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 27 November, 2013, 01:23:08 PM
While this is all quite correct it's very easy to criticise 'the rich' if you aren't one of them.

Well I hate to break it to you, but by most criteria the rich are us.  Rosling uses a simple 7-fold division of wealth, 1 group for each billion, and all of us here are in group 1 or 2 (and I've been out of regular work for 2 years, own virtually nothing and owe more money than I've ever seen: still in the top quarter of the world's population).  The super-rich are another matter, but it's you an me that account for over 50% of the world's energy usage. 

QuoteFor example - what's the point of a Ferrari? Should we judge the rich for buying them or should we just expect the company to stop making them - or to start making electric ones?

This is the question at the heart of the phrase 'enlightened self-interest'.  What do we value in this life?  Is the carrot in this fake-capitalist society the only one worth having?  What and who are we prepared to sacrifice to get it?   And while I know you only mean it as an illustration, it's not really Ferraris that are the problem: it's unnecessary flights, it's unnecessary transport of goods to minimise costs when equivalents are available locally, it's (as TLS mentions) making new crap when old crap could be used instead. 

There'll be 2 billion more people living in Africa at the end of this century, that's way more than live there now. How is the current distribution of resources and consumption going to work in the face of that reality?  What does that mean for the world of 2100?  These are questions we need to ask ourselves, questions more important to our lives and our fellows' lives than can I afford the new iPhone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 06:45:02 PM
Lawks, I've gone off on one again.  Please ignore, long day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2013, 06:47:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
I was just reading an article about Bitcoin - a totally made-up imaginary currency on the internet that is now worth actual money despite being conjured out of the ether - and immediately thought of poor Sharky's blood pressure.

All currency is imaginary. In that respect, it's quite miraculous.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 November, 2013, 06:52:19 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 04:52:55 PM
I was just reading an article about Bitcoin - a totally made-up imaginary currency on the internet that is now worth actual money despite being conjured out of the ether

All fiat currency is made up or conjured out of the ether unless it's tied to the flux of something that's actually worth something or has recognisable value -none of our money is- and Bitcoin is no different.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2013, 07:03:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 05:15:49 PM
BitCoin is great. It's currency created by the people and cannot be controlled by the central banks.

Oh don't worry, they'll find a  way.

Wish I'd bought some bitcoins as when they first came out though:  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:10:03 PM
Not made up, exactly. Certain evidence, research and opinion was seized upon to present a 'solution' to the global phenomena of climate change.  The mantra of the architects of this scheme is 'never let a good crisis go to waste' and what could be a bigger crisis than Global Warming (as it was first trumpeted)?

.
In Global Warming was an opportunity to cash-in on this 'crisis' irrespective of how great or small is the effect of human activity on the climate. That the climate changes over time is undeniable - in a dynamic system like the Earth's atmosphere, which envelopes a geologically dynamic planet orbiting a dynamic star in a dynamic galaxy, how could it not change?

.
You can't tax the atmosphere or the sun or the galaxy, you can only tax people - so you have to emphasise the view that this is all our fault and that only we can fix it and that the only way to fix it is to tax carbon, because CO2 is one of the greenhouse gases and humans belch out clouds of the stuff. CO2 emissions are also something that can be measured, predicted, quantified and controlled - providing some lovely graphs to point at in UN briefing rooms. Also, if you can quantify something you can attach a value to it - which is where carbon trading comes in (which leads me to the stock market and a whole other can of worms I think I'll leave unopened - for sanity's sake).

.
By drilling down to and focusing almost solely on the CO2 aspect, irrespective of its relevance or level of relevance in the overall situation, we have become almost blinkered to the wider issues concerning our stewardship of this world.

.
Whether it be a conspiracy to brainwash a planet by a shadowy cabal of shape-shifting alien lizards, a tyrannical Master Plan by hidden Nazis to enslave every human being with debt, a corporate backroom-nod-and-wink arrangement between greedy corporate toads or just incompetent politicians desperate to be seen to be doing something - or some hellish combination of all of the above - Carbon Taxes are not the answer and, no matter which side of the MMCC argument one takes, are positively toxic.

.
Imagine that tomorrow Professor Unquestionable turns up with some spectacularly impressive graphs, spreadsheets and Powerpoint presentations proving, even to a silly old git like me, that man's CO2 emissions were definitely and completely to blame for climate change and that the Carbon Tax is the only way to curb our emissions.

.
Convinced, the world's population cuts its emissions by 50% in a year. Revenue from carbon taxes plummets right when it's needed most. Just because emissions have been halved that doesn't mean the problem's fixed.

.
So, with all these debts to repay, tax revenue at an all-time low and carbon being so expensive to burn - where's the money going to come from to fund the projects we should already be on with? Projects like some proper inland water-management schemes. Every year it seems to piss down hard enough somewhere to wash people's lives away - and how hard would it be with today's technologies to fix stuff like that? Half of Holland used to be in the North Sea, for flip's sake - we can't stop a few housing estates from flooding? Use some of those abandoned coal mines as artificial aquifers, maybe? Build a sea wall or two? But no - the artificial debt must be repaid first.

.
So the answer to your question is that my views on MMCC and the Carbon Tax are only superficially linked. My questioning of MMCC and my opposition to Carbon Taxes (under the current system) are separate arguments in their own right.

.
And the Greenhouse Effect (as I understand it and without recourse to Uncle Google) is when solar (and geothermal, I think) radiation is inhibited from radiating out into space by certain gases in the atmosphere such as water vapour. This is why cloudy nights are generally warmer than clear ones, because the cloud layer traps and reflects a lot of the heat soaked up by the ground during the day.

.
On Venus, the atmosphere is thick with sulphuric acid clouds and CO2 - so thick that traps a lot more heat than the Earth's atmosphere, giving it a virtually constant temperature on both lit and unlit parts of the planet.

.
Conversely, as there is virtually no atmosphere on the Moon, no gases, very little solar radiation is trapped, leading to massive temperature differentials between areas of sunlight and shade.

.
How's that? Do I get the CSE?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:17:47 PM
I went in M&S today and bought a jumper.  I didn't imagine the three tenners in my hand, they were really there!  The lady behind the counter took them out of my grubby mitt and gave me a nice new jumper!  How were the three tenners not real?  And, could I have done the same with bitcoin?  I can tell you're a disciple of the legendary Max Keiser, Sharky.  I love his programme but most of what he says is going to happen never seems to happen in the end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 07:24:06 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:17:47 PM
I went in M&S today and bought a jumper.  I didn't imagine the three tenners in my hand, they were really there!  The lady behind the counter took them out of my grubby mitt and gave me a nice new jumper!  How were the three tenners not real?  And, could I have done the same with bitcoin?  I can tell you're a disciple of the legendary Max Keiser, Sharky.  I love his programme but most of what he says is going to happen never seems to happen in the end.

Nah - what does it say on the £10 note? "I promise to pay the bearer..."
That's not actually money - it is a note promising to pay money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 27 November, 2013, 07:26:40 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 27 November, 2013, 01:20:06 PM
Meh, give it all a few million years and it'll be all 'how do we melt the fuckin ice now?'

M.

The Russians were planning a few years ago to place an orbital mirror over St. Petersburg to shine sunlight on it during near total darkness of the Arctic winter (another ethical poser). These mirrors could aimed at the glaciers to help melt them....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:29:57 PM
Tordels - your post got me thinking about how to measure wealth. The temptation is to do it in dollars but I think that's a flawed measure.

.
My favourite definition of Freedom is: The ability to do what you need to do when you need to do it.

.
Maybe a good definition of wealth would be similar?  The resources to do what you need to do when you need to do it.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:32:09 PM
I'm probably being incredibly thick here, Richmond, but isn't the "I promise to pay...." just a throwback to the old days when we dealt in gold coins?  If my £10 note's not real money, I've been seriously deluded for the last 56 years!  Ah! well, time for the nursing home!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:37:16 PM
Old Tankie, sorry to break it to you but yes; you've been labouring under a misapprehension all your life. I didn't believe it at first either, but it's undeniably true.

.
That "I promise to pay the bearer..." may be a detail but it's a crucial and game-changing one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 27 November, 2013, 07:37:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:29:57 PMMaybe a good definition of wealth would be similar?  The resources to do what you need to do when you need to do it.

I remember a good few years ago (before the Recession when people were going insane with easy credit here in Ireland) on The Last Word there was a speaker (can't remember his name, sorry) saying people should measure their wealth in how long they can last for without a income, too bad people didn't really listen...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 27 November, 2013, 07:39:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:10:03 PM
Not made up, exactly. Certain evidence, research and opinion was seized upon to present a 'solution' to the global phenomena of climate change.  The mantra of the architects of this scheme is 'never let a good crisis go to waste' and what could be a bigger crisis than Global Warming (as it was first trumpeted)?

.
In Global Warming was an opportunity to cash-in on this 'crisis' irrespective of how great or small is the effect of human activity on the climate. That the climate changes over time is undeniable - in a dynamic system like the Earth's atmosphere, which envelopes a geologically dynamic planet orbiting a dynamic star in a dynamic galaxy, how could it not change?

The gradient of that change shows anthropogenic GW to be true.  Global mean temperature has increased at an unprecedentedly high rate on a timescale that's utterly minuscule in geological terms, and just happens to coincide with us increasing the parts per million of CO2(which, as you say yourself, is known empirically to be a greenhouse gas) at an unprecedentedly high rate. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2013, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:29:57 PM
My favourite definition of Freedom is: The ability to do what you need to do when you need to do it.

Now we just need a definition of "need"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:44:14 PM
So, does that mean I got the jumper for nothing, Sharky?!!  If that's so, I'm back down there tomorrow for a real load-up; suits, shirts, shoes, the whole nine yards!!  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 07:49:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:37:16 PM
Old Tankie, sorry to break it to you but yes; you've been labouring under a misapprehension all your life. I didn't believe it at first either, but it's undeniably true.

.
That "I promise to pay the bearer..." may be a detail but it's a crucial and game-changing one.

It's not often Sharky and I agree on this thread - but when he's right, he's right!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 27 November, 2013, 07:55:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:10:03 PM
And the Greenhouse Effect (as I understand it and without recourse to Uncle Google) is when solar (and geothermal, I think) radiation is inhibited from radiating out into space by certain gases in the atmosphere such as water vapour. This is why cloudy nights are generally warmer than clear ones, because the cloud layer traps and reflects a lot of the heat soaked up by the ground during the day.

.
On Venus, the atmosphere is thick with sulphuric acid clouds and CO2 - so thick that traps a lot more heat than the Earth's atmosphere, giving it a virtually constant temperature on both lit and unlit parts of the planet.

.
Conversely, as there is virtually no atmosphere on the Moon, no gases, very little solar radiation is trapped, leading to massive temperature differentials between areas of sunlight and shade.

I wasn't trying to be snippy by the way, I was just asking. I didn't pass on spelling 'Effect!'

So if you accept that certain gases help trap heat in the atmosphere, then if you add more of those gases it may be capable of retaining more heat?

M. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:58:21 PM
Well, the "need" part comes from the flip-side of the Freedom coin; Responsibility. A person is able to decide, as a sentient individual, what they responsibly need and it is up to peers and society to ultimately decide - either through debate, custom, legislation or the courts.

.
If a poor person without transport needs to attend the distant funeral of a loved one then I think that society should recognise that need and provide a taxi or at least a return bus ticket. If, on the other hand, a poor person without a Ferrari needs to compensate for a dearth of penile tissue then I think that society should recognise that need and provide a psychologist and maybe one of those devices that a friend of mine told me that his cousin's hairdresser's nephew happened to read about in a magazine he borrowed once (from me).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:59:39 PM
Right!  I'm still getting my head 'round this, and you know what, I don't give a toss, if it's real money or not, they still put the jumper in a bag and gave it to me.  And, as long as I can go into a pub and hand over some of this "not real money" and get served with a pint of Guinness I really couldn't care less.  In fact, I wouldn't mind a few sackfuls of this "not real money", I'll find a use for it somehow!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 08:05:09 PM
Well, the "need" part comes from the flip-side of the Freedom coin; Responsibility. A person is able to decide, as a sentient individual, what they responsibly need and it is up to peers and society to ultimately decide - either through debate, custom, legislation or the courts.

.
If a poor person without transport needs to attend the distant funeral of a loved one then I think that society should recognise that need and provide a taxi or at least a return bus ticket. If, on the other hand, a poor person without a Ferrari needs to compensate for a dearth of penile tissue then I think that society should recognise that need and provide a psychologist and maybe one of those devices that a friend of mine told me that his cousin's hairdresser's nephew happened to read about in a magazine he borrowed once (from me).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 08:06:09 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:59:39 PM
Right!  I'm still getting my head 'round this, and you know what, I don't give a toss, if it's real money or not, they still put the jumper in a bag and gave it to me.  And, as long as I can go into a pub and hand over some of this "not real money" and get served with a pint of Guinness I really couldn't care less.  In fact, I wouldn't mind a few sackfuls of this "not real money", I'll find a use for it somehow!!

That was pretty much my thought process on it too...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 08:09:57 PM
Christ, Richmond, we agree on something!  I'm sure it wont last!!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 08:39:46 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 08:09:57 PM
Christ, Richmond, we agree on something!  I'm sure it wont last!!  :)

Ha! It's Christmas - it's a time for miracles!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 08:53:00 PM
Tankie, the point isn't that your money can buy you a jumper - the point is, to whom does that money belong?

.
You might think that the answer is obvious - it belonged to you and then you swapped it for a jumper so now it belongs to a shopkeeper. But that's only the smallest part of the story - the bit we all see and use and think we understand every day. Of course it's real money - you can buy stuff with it!

.
But.

.
That very money you paid for your jumper with was initially borrowed from a private source by the Bank of England. It was borrowed first and then printed. It was borrowed on the strength of a *promise* - the promise that it'll be paid back in the future - from your taxes.

.
A Fiver, then comes into being worth *nothing* minus interest. It is worth nothing because, as soon as it is printed, as soon as it becomes 'real', it represents £5 worth of debt and £5 worth of credit at the same time (this is the trick at the heart of the scam, as far as I understand it) but, crucially, has already started incurring interest charges.

.

Okay, so now your Fiver goes out into the world through many routes. Let's say our Fiver gets lent to a high street bank (because this is where high street banks get most of their money from - they borrow it from each other like some people switch debts between credit cards) at low interest. Now it's worth minus five pounds (because the high street bank needs to pay it back) and has two lots of interest pulling on it.

.
Next step, some Old Dear draws the Fiver out of her bank account as part of her pension. The Fiver is now worth minus ten pounds as the pension pot is now a fiver shy - and as pensions are funded through borrowing, that Fiver now has three lots of interest being sucked out of it.

.
Your Old Dear spends our Fiver in the shop and pays VAT, so now our Fiver's worth minus ten quid, minus 20% VAT and still has three lots of interest on it.

.
Then Tankie gets the Fiver in his change and swaps it for a jumper and more taxes taken out (is there VAT on jumpers?). The more the Fiver is used, the less it is worth to society and the more it is worth to the bankers.

.
This is how our debts got to be so high and why our governments and societies are trapped - how can you pay back a debt when your money is worth less than nothing? Well, you start with the poor - you repossess their property and assign it a monetary value to balance the books.

.
That jumper you bought was only worth pennies in real terms, the overwhelming majority of the cost was debt.

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 09:03:56 PM
Oh - and I didn't think anyone was being snippy. Sorry if I gave that impression.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 09:14:15 PM
So how does the act of burning money - taking that fiver and burning it to ash without ever spending it - affect the economy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 27 November, 2013, 09:35:34 PM
Sorry Mr. Shark but as far as I'm concerned my attitude towards money is the same as that towards Christina Hendrick's bosom.  When people tell me they (or it as the case may be) is fake my reply is always "if I can touch them, they're real".

Simply put "money" (real or illusionary) can be exchanged for goods and/or services which I can then enjoy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 09:36:29 PM
Burning the Fiver will stop it accruing more debt but, even though it no longer physically exists the debt it has already accumulated on its travels still remains.

It also means one less fiver in the economy, meaning the rest of them have to stretch a little further.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 10:00:57 PM
Tombo - do you think it's right that you have to pay to use money? Pay to borrow it, pay to own it, pay to use it? Do you think it's right that for every £1 you own, other people owe £99? Are you comfortable with the fact that banks have more power than governments and societies?

.
Of course you can swap promisary notes for goods and services - it wouldn't be much of an illusion otherwise, would it?

.
I also love boobs as much as the next man but I prefer real ones to promised ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 27 November, 2013, 10:02:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 November, 2013, 06:08:09 PM
There'll be 2 billion more people living in Africa at the end of this century, that's way more than live there now. How is the current distribution of resources and consumption going to work in the face of that reality?  What does that mean for the world of 2100?  These are questions we need to ask ourselves, questions more important to our lives and our fellows' lives than can I afford the new iPhone.

As if the ethical dimension wasn't good enough reason, switching to a vegan diet would help with this problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 11:12:03 PM
Serious question here: can I bill my credit card company for my time?  If so, I'll shortly see how those cunts like being charged out the arsehole for fuck all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 11:29:55 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2013, 11:12:03 PM
Serious question here: can I bill my credit card company for my time?  If so, I'll shortly see how those cunts like being charged out the arsehole for fuck all.

I have heard of this being done, yes. Also people charging banks for letters they have written to them etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 11:31:08 PM
Of course you can. You can bill anyone who expects a slice of your time. Whether they'll pay you or not, though, is a different matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2013, 01:13:46 AM
I'm more curious of the specifics of how I go about this: do I initiate contact with them, how do I bill them, etc.  I've decided to do this after discovering that my credit card company went paperless without consulting me and then immediately started charging me for an accounting error they'd made - they were in error so they removed the charge, but not the late fee for me not paying for their error, and have been charging additional late fees ever since - which I've been unaware of, seeing as they stopped sending me bills, bills I need to actually take into a bank to pay off what's owed, and so it goes...  I'd actually paid the card off years ago so there's nothing on it at this stage except them charging me for their telling me that they're charging me.

I was heartened a while back after seeing that the TV licencing bods found to their cost that if someone bills them, just ignoring the bill isn't enough, as the law states that if no-one shows up in the small claims court to refute a legitimate claim, the case is awarded by default to the claimant, meaning the court orders the company to pay what they've been billed, and the claimant's legal fees.  That's why if you bill the TV licencing company for taking up your time, they will now send out a form letter telling you that your bill is invalid - though the form letter does not actually invalidate your bill, it's just sleight of hand to make you think there's nothing you can do, which is pretty much tv licencing in a nutshell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2013, 07:52:43 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 27 November, 2013, 10:02:29 PM...switching to a vegan diet would help with this problem.

To a sauropod every problem looks like a hard-to-reach leaf.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 November, 2013, 08:34:19 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 November, 2013, 07:52:43 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 27 November, 2013, 10:02:29 PM...switching to a vegan diet would help with this problem.

To a sauropod every problem looks like a hard-to-reach leaf.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 November, 2013, 08:44:48 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:32:09 PM
I'm probably being incredibly thick here, Richmond, but isn't the "I promise to pay...." just a throwback to the old days when we dealt in gold coins?  If my £10 note's not real money, I've been seriously deluded for the last 56 years!  Ah! well, time for the nursing home!!

Try rolling up to the Bank of England with a tenner and asking for your gold. You won't get it. That tenner is literally not worth the paper it's printed on because someone's defaced it with all that ink.

The point is that when you present it at the bar, the barman, as proxy for the landlord, the brewery and the Treasury, agrees that your piece of paper is worth £10 and, crucially, you agree that your pint is worth £3.50. It's a complete fiction: we imagine that there is gold somewhere to back up that note, but there really isn't, not in any tangible, accessible sense. The system works because it's a consensual fiction between both parties.

Stripped back to its most basic, all human effort is expended to create food and shelter for yourself and your family unit. Once upon a time, we expended that effort directly on these things: you grew, raised or caught what you ate and you constructed and maintained your own shelter.

As humans developed communities, simple common sense dictates that instead of growing your own wheat, milling it and baking bread, you get one guy to grow all the wheat and another to mill it and bake the bread. No one wants the farmer to starve, so he gets bread back in return for his efforts. The problem with barter is that quickly breaks down. If you're the chicken-raising guy in the community and the roof blows off your hovel, you want the roof-fixing guy to put it back on ASAP. Problem is, you gave the pig-guy some chickens in exchange for a a side of ham last week and his roof blew off a couple of days ago and he used those chickens to pay roof-guy, meaning that roof-guy doesn't need any chickens.

So... you could run around town, trying to find someone who has something roof-guy does want and who is willing to trade it for chickens. Or you could agree with roof guy that the work is worth six chickens and write him an IOU that he can bring back the next time he does need chickens. Before roof-guy needs chickens, however, his horse needs shoeing, and the blacksmith's roof is fine, so roof-guy offers the blacksmith the chicken IOU and you've invented money.

The problem with this is that it relies on trust. The moment the blacksmith says "I don't trust chicken-guy — he gave me an IOU last year and he still owes me" the IOU is worthless. What government money does is formalise that arrangement, enabling us to exchange labour or goods with whomever we please in return for tokens that we can trade in for food and shelter. Or an XBox.

However, you may have spotted the wrinkle in this example. If the blacksmith accepts the IOU, and passes it on to the baker in return for bread, who in turn gives it to the dairy-guy for cheese... for as long as it's changing hands, you never have to stump up the actual chickens. Let's say it gets handed to the cow-guy in the next village. You could die and as long as he didn't know you were dead, and the guy accepting the IOU didn't know you were dead, the effective value of that piece of paper is undiminished, but its actual value is zero.

Which is why I find money an amazing thing: its exchange is an act of faith that condenses into physical things.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 09:39:06 AM
Prof Bear - it's easy. All you do is what they do; send them a letter outlining your charges (no need to nasty about it, just basic and clear) and mentioning that they are non-negotiable.

.
They may ignore your letter - which is good as this constitutes tacit agreement on their part.

.
They may write to you in order to refuse your charges but you just politely but firmly repeat that if they want you to continue as their customer then your charges stand. Post your reply off to them with a bill - and if they continue writing to you to dispute your charges, just keep on sending polite replies with bills attached.

.
Just to be clear, you will probably never be paid for these bills but, the next time they send you a bill you can just knock what they're asking for off whatever they owe you and also charge them for your time in dealing with their administrative paperwork.

.
The third thing they might do is write to you thanking you for your complaint and informing you that it's going through their internal or independent complaints procedure. You must stamp on this IMMEDIATELY by writing to them saying that you do not have a complaint and that your Fee Notice was just that - a notice and not a complaint.

.
If the credit card is a personal, not business, one then I'd be tempted to just refuse to pay the erroneous debt and get another credit card with somebody else. Eventually your original card company will sell the 'debt' to a debt collector - at which point you're in the clear so long as you keep your nerve.

.
See, as soon as you sell a debt (even to a debt collector) then that debt is lawfully and legally discharged. Also, you don't have a contract with the debt collector, unless you're foolish enough to sign something they ask you to sign. Debt collectors rely on the fact that most people don't know this little snippet of law and simply collapse and pay up when threatened.

.
I personally have seen off 3 different debt collection agencies using this knowledge.

.
Also spend some time looking through www.getoutofdebtfree.org which is full of completely lawful ways of eliminating artificial debt.

.
It's great fun!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 09:56:30 AM
Great post, Jim!

.
Of course, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with a fiat money system (look at the Bank of North Dakota, the Brixton Pound and BitCoin as examples). It's how the currency is issued that's important: if it's created out of nothing and lent at interest into society it's incredibly toxic but if it's created out of nothing and spent interest-free into society then everything works like a well-oiled machine and there's enough for everyone.

.
As long as we insist on using this primitive thing called money we might as well use proper public money rather than privately issued credit-based money.

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 28 November, 2013, 10:09:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2013, 07:10:03 PM
On Venus, the atmosphere is thick with sulphuric acid clouds and CO2 - so thick that traps a lot more heat than the Earth's atmosphere, giving it a virtually constant temperature on both lit and unlit parts of the planet.

Again with that! The Flamebelt, yes, but not the entire planet. That's just part of the reptilian conspiracy (which Mikey is in cahoots with, natch) and its attempts to prevent us from exploiting the natural resources Venus has to offer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 10:20:26 AM
I don't understand what you're getting at, Eric...

.
www.universetoday.com/14146/atmosphere-of-venus/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 November, 2013, 10:34:18 AM
QuoteSo the answer to your question is that my views on MMCC and the Carbon Tax are only superficially linked. My questioning of MMCC and my opposition to Carbon Taxes (under the current system) are separate arguments in their own right.

Yes! If you could only stop switching between them when trying to talk about MMCC  ::)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 10:37:30 AM
I shall endeavour to be clearer in the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 11:58:56 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 27 November, 2013, 08:06:09 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 November, 2013, 07:59:39 PM
Right!  I'm still getting my head 'round this, and you know what, I don't give a toss, if it's real money or not, they still put the jumper in a bag and gave it to me.  And, as long as I can go into a pub and hand over some of this "not real money" and get served with a pint of Guinness I really couldn't care less.  In fact, I wouldn't mind a few sackfuls of this "not real money", I'll find a use for it somehow!!

That was pretty much my thought process on it too...

Jim's post has already explained this very well but just to add my ten cents (see what I did there  ;)).

That £10 note that you have is real money Tankie.  But money itself is just an agreed token in payment for goods and/or services.  For most of us this money is earned through work - you do your 38 hours a week and get so much money in return which in this case, you used some of to pay for the jumper.

The thing to consider is value.  The £10 note really is just a piece of paper so lets say we end up in some post-nuclear wasteland - what use would that £10 note then be?  The funny thing is people often compare money to gold, but let's be honest - the value of gold has been imposed by us anyway.  I mean, what is it?  A pretty stone that has been dug up from the ground.  In that post-nuclear wasteland that gold would be pretty useless also.  The only things of real value to us are food, water and shelter - anything else is really a nice to have.

But ultimately, like you say - it doesn't matter.  We live in a society that has an accepted and recognised monetary system that allows easy trade.  Bitcoin is no better or worse than pounds, dollars or euros.  They are all just different tokens that are used for the same purpose. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2013, 12:40:04 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 11:58:56 AMThe funny thing is people often compare money to gold, but let's be honest - the value of gold has been imposed by us anyway.  I mean, what is it?  A pretty stone that has been dug up from the ground.  In that post-nuclear wasteland that gold would be pretty useless also.

Not much use in efficiently extracting nutritious goo from your neighbours' femurs certainly, but very handy if your mutated descendants ever wanted to manufacture any sort of electronics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 12:43:08 PM
No, it's not real money. It's fiat money, the *promise* of money,

.
'Real' money is made from something with intrinsic worth and scarcity. Gold, silver, copper, even tin and iron are considered 'real' because these metals are useful for other things besides money.

.
Most people think that money is backed by a country's gold and silver reserves but this has not been the case for a long time now. World Wars I and II, for example, would not have been possible had the world been using gold and silver as currency as there wasn't enough of these metals in the world to pay for them at the time - such widespread carnage, destruction and rebuilding was only made possible through the use of fiat or unreal money.

.
You think we'd have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq if we'd had to pay for it in gold? Luckily, though, those nice bankers will create as much fiat money as we need to continue ripping people to bloody chunks. Hooray for bankers!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 01:06:34 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 November, 2013, 12:40:04 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 11:58:56 AMThe funny thing is people often compare money to gold, but let's be honest - the value of gold has been imposed by us anyway.  I mean, what is it?  A pretty stone that has been dug up from the ground.  In that post-nuclear wasteland that gold would be pretty useless also.

Not much use in efficiently extracting nutritious goo from your neighbours' femurs certainly, but very handy if your mutated descendants ever wanted to manufacture any sort of electronics.

Mmmmmm, bone goo - tasty!  ;)


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 12:43:08 PM
No, it's not real money. It's fiat money, the *promise* of money,

.
'Real' money is made from something with intrinsic worth and scarcity. Gold, silver, copper, even tin and iron are considered 'real' because these metals are useful for other things besides money.

Nope, money is definitely the token itself Sharky.  Have a look in the dictionary at the definition of money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 01:40:55 PM
But the currency we use is NOT money - it's the promise of that token you mentioned. It's the equivalent of a photograph of real money, which itself is the equivalent of a photograph of some gold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 November, 2013, 01:45:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2013, 07:03:17 PM
Wish I'd bought some bitcoins as when they first came out though:  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home)


...but it's not always good news with Bitcoins: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/27/hard-drive-bitcoin-landfill-site (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/27/hard-drive-bitcoin-landfill-site)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 03:17:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 01:40:55 PM
But the currency we use is NOT money - it's the promise of that token you mentioned. It's the equivalent of a photograph of real money, which itself is the equivalent of a photograph of some gold.

Right, I think I see what you mean. 

OK, a UK £10 is real money.  It's a recognised and accepted token to pay for goods and services.  The 'promise to pay the bearer' refers to the old days where people originally deposited gold in banks and were given bank notes in return.  Also, people used to be able to go to their bank and turn their bank notes into gold.  That is no longer the case, as you said before, so if you were to go to the bank today and demand £10 for your banknote - guess what you would get back?  Another £10 note. 

Gold can be a bit more tricky to explain, not least because there have been gold coins used in the past, which were also money.  You could argue that gold itself is money however it is not really used as such nowadays.  I mean, what would happen if you tried to pay for your McDonalds Happy Meal with a gold nugget?

Gold is an asset which has a generally agreed value that is easily traded - in that respect it is a lot like money however in the UK the real money is pound sterling. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 04:04:48 PM
No - the "I promise to pay the bearer..." is not a throwback phrase left over from the past; it is a current and relevant legal phrase.

.
Who is the bearer? You are (or the person holding the note). Who is the "I"? The Governor of the Bank of England (not the Prime Minister, the Chancellor or even the Queen - just a non-elected bank manager).

.
And it doesn't mention "Sterling" anywhere on my bank notes, only a certain number of pounds. It doesn't even tell me what I am promised pounds of (pounds of silver? Pounds of gold? Pounds of apples?). So the official money of the UK might be called pounds sterling but I bet you haven't got any.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 28 November, 2013, 04:13:15 PM
QuoteOK, a UK £10 is real money.
Stating something as fact does not make it so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 November, 2013, 04:19:05 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 28 November, 2013, 04:13:15 PM
QuoteOK, a UK £10 is real money.
Stating something as fact does not make it so.

It does on the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 04:36:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 04:04:48 PM
No - the "I promise to pay the bearer..." is not a throwback phrase left over from the past; it is a current and relevant legal phrase.

.
Who is the bearer? You are (or the person holding the note). Who is the "I"? The Governor of the Bank of England (not the Prime Minister, the Chancellor or even the Queen - just a non-elected bank manager).

.
And it doesn't mention "Sterling" anywhere on my bank notes, only a certain number of pounds. It doesn't even tell me what I am promised pounds of (pounds of silver? Pounds of gold? Pounds of apples?). So the official money of the UK might be called pounds sterling but I bet you haven't got any.

You are correct about the promise to pay the bearer but if you were to take that £10 note to the bank of england then they would pay you another £10.  They no longer convert it into gold. 

Pound sterling, commonly known simply as the pound is the official currency of the UK.  Yes, I do have some - I have a five pound note in my pocket right now.


Quote from: Richmond Clements on 28 November, 2013, 04:13:15 PM
QuoteOK, a UK £10 is real money.
Stating something as fact does not make it so.

True,  but I suggested earlier that Sharky have a look at the definition of money in the dictionary. 

From the Oxford English dictionary, definition of money:
"A current medium of exchange in the form of coins and banknotes; coins and banknotes collectively".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 28 November, 2013, 04:57:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 November, 2013, 01:45:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2013, 07:03:17 PM
Wish I'd bought some bitcoins as when they first came out though:  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/29/bitcoin-forgotten-currency-norway-oslo-home)


...but it's not always good news with Bitcoins: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/27/hard-drive-bitcoin-landfill-site (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/27/hard-drive-bitcoin-landfill-site)

Ah yes, caught this on the Jeremy Vine show today. Unlucky!

But this thread has become just the best over the last few days, or so - keep posting chaps  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 05:17:45 PM
Okay, Recrewt, have it your way. If those 16 words you found in the OED adequately explains the entire complexity of this subject to you then you're a better man than me.

.
Just don't go scratching your head when the economy starts collapsing because there's not enough 'money' in it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 28 November, 2013, 05:32:25 PM
Now Mr Shark, I do hope that nothing I have said has offended you.  To me, this is just like two blokes talking stuff over a pint in the pub.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 05:46:10 PM
Not at all, Sir - this is a very difficult subject to grasp and even more difficult to explain. It took me almost a year to wrap my head around it at first and I'm aware that I'm not always the best person to explain it, what with my rabid ranting and raving and all.

.
I'm not offended at all - just maybe a little frustrated with myself for struggling to make my points clearly enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 28 November, 2013, 06:24:15 PM
Question:

Should the Nigella Lawson / Saatchi story be on the BBC six o'clock news?

I'm in two minds about it. There's obviously public interest in it but it isn't in the public interest (if that makes sense). It doesn't seem to be a landmark, legislation changing legal case and there are no politicians or publicly accountable figures involved.
I guess I'm veering toward a viewpoint that the story shouldn't be included but part of me thinks that it would be so conspicuous in its absence that it seems silly not to report it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 November, 2013, 06:27:46 PM
Moose!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 06:41:40 PM
So, we've done oil, extinctions, climate change and money - what next?

.
How about the dangers of GM foods?


www.businessinsider.com/monsantos-roundup-and-resistant-corn-found-to-be-toxic-2012-9

.
The link is to a French study (which, to be fair, has been criticised for using a breed of rat which is prone to cancer and for statistical errors) that fed rats Roundup and GM maize for two years - which is 15 months longer than the studies GM companies do.

.
As far as I understand it, although genetic engineering sounds all very scientific and precise it is actually a rather hit-and-miss affair employing a 'gene gun'. Basically, the genes to be introduced to an existing organism are loaded into a kind of tiny blunderbuss and then fired at target DNA with the hopes that a) the genetic material survives the process and that b) the new genes end up in the correct part of the target DNA.

.
Another criticism is the emotively titled 'killer gene' which companies like Monsanto put into the seeds they sell to prevent the crops grown from those seeds producing fertile seeds of their own on maturation. Quite apart from the horrendous economic impacts of such disgusting business practice ( www.globalresearch.ca/the-seeds-of-suicide-how-monsanto-destroys-farming ), what if these terminator genes 'get out'? Nature's been shuffling genes around for billions of years and we still don't know precisely how that happens.

.
The following is a silly question but illustrates one of the concerns I have over GM crops very well: What if this terminator gene got into bees?

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2013, 07:20:45 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 28 November, 2013, 06:24:15 PM
I guess I'm veering toward a viewpoint that the story shouldn't be included but part of me thinks that it would be so conspicuous in its absence that it seems silly not to report it.

I'm afraid that's my thought too.  Saatchi is an odious fuck who should be in jail anyway, and Lawson is too gorgeous for words, but I still don't want to read about their private lives as exposed in court, or see why anyone should.  But the story is story in itself, so it'd be ridiculous for TV news to ignore it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2013, 08:19:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 06:41:40 PMThe following is a silly question but illustrates one of the concerns I have over GM crops very well: What if this terminator gene got into bees?

Monsanto bought up the company in charge of investigating Monsanto's environmental impact on bee populations (no bullshit - look it up), so what would happen is this: we wouldn't know about it, and Monsanto would sue nature itself for stealing Monsanto's property.  I'm going by their past form, of course, where they've adopted a response to contaminating the environment with modified crops that is basically akin to someone wandering around a farm with a gun until it goes off and shoots someone in the farm next door, so that person complains about being shot so Monsanto sue that person for slandering them and then demand their bullet back.


Me, I think Monsanto are great.  Someone in charge of that company woke up one day and decided they didn't want to be a boring old capitalist any more, they wanted to be Cobra Commander, so now they come up with these crazy plans that are basically plots a 1980s cartoon supervillain would come up with.  There is literally no downside to Monsanto: either a multinational taskforce of heroes will be formed to defeat them, or the cockroaches (or the ants) get their turn.  Either way it's all gravy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 08:21:25 PM
Haven't seen the BBC today and RT hasn't mentioned Nigella. RT's been on about earthquakes in Texas caused by fraccing, a terrorist attack on the Russian embassy in Damascus, the fifth day of pro-EU trade protests in the Ukraine, the Thai prime minister surviving a vote of no confidence, the increase of child labour throughout Europe (including Russia, Bulgaria and the UK), the world's first working computer 3d printed gun and why it's been banned in Philadelphia, Putin condemning drone strikes, Cameron and a few other European leaders complaining about freedom of migration and the possibility of growing crops on the Moon - but of Nigella, not a word.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 28 November, 2013, 08:29:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 06:41:40 PM
So, we've done oil, extinctions, climate change and money - what next?
.
How about the dangers of GM foods?

.

Ignoring the health concerns itself; ownership,copyright and food security is a huge issue with these. You know the Americans wrote a law into the Iraqi constitiution stating they cannot save seeds they bought (GMO or otherwise) and must buy new seeds each year?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 28 November, 2013, 08:31:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 08:21:25 PM
Haven't seen the BBC today and RT hasn't mentioned Nigella. RT's been on about earthquakes in Texas caused by fraccing, a terrorist attack on the Russian embassy in Damascus, the fifth day of pro-EU trade protests in the Ukraine, the Thai prime minister surviving a vote of no confidence, the increase of child labour throughout Europe (including Russia, Bulgaria and the UK), the world's first working computer 3d printed gun and why it's been banned in Philadelphia, Putin condemning drone strikes, Cameron and a few other European leaders complaining about freedom of migration and the possibility of growing crops on the Moon - but of Nigella, not a word.


They need to get their priorities straight!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 08:38:48 PM
Heh - latest report on RT is the most tragic stories of the day: 240,000 bottles of beer have been confiscated and destroyed in Nigeria: www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/world/2013/11/28/nigeria-sharia-police-smash-240000-bottles-of-beer

.
Oh! The humanity!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 28 November, 2013, 08:58:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 08:38:48 PM
Heh - latest report on RT is the most tragic stories of the day: 240,000 bottles of beer have been confiscated and destroyed in Nigeria: www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/world/2013/11/28/nigeria-sharia-police-smash-240000-bottles-of-beer

.
Oh! The humanity!

240,000 bottles of beer on the wall...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 28 November, 2013, 09:02:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 08:21:25 PM
Haven't seen the BBC today and RT hasn't mentioned Nigella. RT's been on about earthquakes in Texas caused by fraccing, a terrorist attack on the Russian embassy in Damascus, the fifth day of pro-EU trade protests in the Ukraine, the Thai prime minister surviving a vote of no confidence, the increase of child labour throughout Europe (including Russia, Bulgaria and the UK), the world's first working computer 3d printed gun and why it's been banned in Philadelphia, Putin condemning drone strikes, Cameron and a few other European leaders complaining about freedom of migration and the possibility of growing crops on the Moon - but of Nigella, not a word.

Did they mention their brutal oppression of homosexuals and Pussy Riot at all..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 09:34:48 PM
Not today, no - but Pussy Riot have had a lot of airtime in the past, as have the apparently unpopular and widely opposed (according to the RT reports I remember) anti-gay laws.

.
rt.com/news/tolokonnikova-move-pussy-riot-144/

.
rt.com/tags/pussy-riot/

.
Of course, just like the BBC or CNN, RT must be cautious when reporting certain things. For CNN it's stuff like Guantanamo Bay, for the BBC it's the City of London and for RT gay laws. That doesn't mean they don't try, though:  rt.com/op-edge/meet-true-journalists-kirchick-924/

.
It's an ache in the fundament to trawl the RT website with this 'phone so I can't really comment any further. Maybe someone with a PC could have a quick trawl to ascertain the level and quality of the reporting on this issue as it's not something I've really been following.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 28 November, 2013, 10:28:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 09:34:48 PM
for RT gay laws. That doesn't mean they don't try, though:  rt.com/op-edge/meet-true-journalists-kirchick-924/

Shark, did you actually read the article you linked to? (http://rt.com/op-edge/meet-true-journalists-kirchick-924/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 10:38:58 PM
All the way through, yes.

.
Didn't understand a word of it and didn't follow any of the links, either.  Rich merely asked if the subject had been mentioned - he didn't specify the parameters of that mention. Well, there's a mention - I don't know how many more there are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 29 November, 2013, 12:35:09 AM
I suspect you may have taken Rich's post a little too literally.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 10:38:58 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 28 November, 2013, 10:28:30 PM
Shark, did you actually read the article you linked to? (http://rt.com/op-edge/meet-true-journalists-kirchick-924/)

All the way through, yes.

Didn't understand a word of it and didn't follow any of the links, either.  Rich merely asked if the subject had been mentioned - he didn't specify the parameters of that mention. Well, there's a mention - I don't know how many more there are.

Rich didn't provide any parameters, true. He didn't need to, though, because you provided one anyway when you said:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2013, 09:34:48 PM
That doesn't mean they don't try, though

which, in your own context of RT being "cautious", infers that RT does at least report on the Kremlin's homophobia, even with the restrictions imposed on it by the channel's sponsor, the Kremlin.

Thing is, the article you linked to is over three months old and full of snark. And actually a reaction to someone saying stuff RT didn't like rather than, y'know. Just reporting the news. Which might explain why you didn't understand a word of it, because it's merely a "mention".

And which I suspect is kind of what Rich was getting at.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 29 November, 2013, 01:40:16 AM
Side note on the theme of money: I find US artist Boggs fascinating. He creates pieces of art based on dollar bills. Collectors pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for his work. Boggs goes to stores and rather than use dollar bills he offers to swap his art for goods. He's not using his art as counterfeit dollar bills but is swapping it. If people accept they can make a heck of a lot of profit if they sell on to a collector. I saw a programme once in which he swapped some of his art for a Harley Davidson bike. As expected, he is viewed with suspicion by the authorities and has been arrested a number of times in various countries – including the UK where Bank of England notes were apparently redesigned because of his antics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._S._G._Boggs

Boggs' Bills: Money as Art | Secret Life of Money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ5x2-VUGXI
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 November, 2013, 11:46:36 AM
There's a half hour documentary on RT right now, that will probably be repeated all day, about the struggle of a Russian transsexual trying to get a sex change operation and day to day life.

.
Not exactly what was asked about (again) but there it is.

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 November, 2013, 09:24:08 PM
If I paid tax, I'd feel I was finally getting some value for my money:  Miracle on Kildare Street (http://www.thejournal.ie/santa-claus-exists-ireland-1198210-Nov2013/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 November, 2013, 08:38:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 November, 2013, 11:46:36 AM
There's a half hour documentary on RT right now, that will probably be repeated all day, about the struggle of a Russian transsexual trying to get a sex change operation and day to day life.

Not exactly what was asked about (again) but there it is.

So your point is . . . what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2013, 11:39:53 AM
My point is whatever you need it to be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2013, 12:02:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2013, 11:39:53 AM
My point is whatever you need it to be.

Comes right after the tipping.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2013, 12:11:07 PM
And just before the blank.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 03:37:30 PM
The government of Iceland is helping its citizens out by giving $1.25billion in debt relief to mortgage holders: washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-MX0VXI6S972H01-34GAU5TRU0OO8HQHVJ2ATVIRJI

.

And what is our government doing to help its citizens? Why, far more sensible things like chucking people off benefits, imposing a bedroom tax and giving as much money as it can to the banks.

.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 03 December, 2013, 05:08:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 03:37:30 PM
The government of Iceland is helping its citizens out by giving $1.25billion in debt relief to mortgage holders: washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-MX0VXI6S972H01-34GAU5TRU0OO8HQHVJ2ATVIRJI

.

And what is our government doing to help its citizens? Why, far more sensible things like chucking people off benefits, imposing a bedroom tax and giving as much money as it can to the banks.

.

Our Government is a shower of shit.

Iceland also has around 90,000 firearms compared with a population of about 300,000; and yet their statistics for violent crime seem to be one of the lowest I've ever seen. (i know 300,000 isn't large by any stretch but consider the fact that we're looking at a ratio of one-to-three for gun ownership).


http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25201471


Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 08:12:56 PM
Guns don't kill people, cultures kill people.

.

Say - you think if we asked real nice and promised not to fight back those lovely Icelandic folks might invade us?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 December, 2013, 08:17:30 PM
They must live in a state of permanent fear to have that high a percentage of gun ownership. I want to know why they feel the need to own so much firepower!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 03 December, 2013, 08:49:23 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 December, 2013, 08:17:30 PM
They must live in a state of permanent fear to have that high a percentage of gun ownership. I want to know why they feel the need to own so much firepower!


http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1ry4do/til_that_iceland_has_one_of_the_largest_gun/

Or, from a different angle...

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-02/in-iceland-when-police-kill-a-gunman-they-apologize.html


It looks to me that they're not actually "in fear" of anything. The majority of gun ownership is apparently for the purpose of hunting. And the people themselves seem to be pretty easy going.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 03 December, 2013, 08:49:56 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 December, 2013, 08:17:30 PM
They must live in a state of permanent fear to have that high a percentage of gun ownership. I want to know why they feel the need to own so much firepower!

Three words - Drunken Polar Bears!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 09:11:43 PM
Damn polar bears - off out on the lash all night and then could murder a manbab on the way home...

.
I was brought up around shotguns and I know a lot of people who own one (I don't own one, although I had one as a teen for clay-pigeon shooting with my dad). This is why I can understand places like Canada and Iceland but not the US.

.
The First Law of Guns: Never point a gun at anyone, ever. That was drummed into me by every gun owner I knew and is still the Number One rule. There is an immense respect for what guns can do around here. A gun is looked upon in the same way as a car or a power drill - as a potentially lethal tool (like Iain Duncan Smith).

.
In the US the opposite seems to be the case - a gun there isn't a tool but a statement and you can point it at whomever one dashed well chooses, dagnabbit.

.
Everyone should be required to carry a six gun all the time - this, I am sure, would lead to a vast increase in politeness and mutual respect (after the initial novelty holocaust, of course).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 December, 2013, 09:23:09 PM
No polar bears in Iceland, as far as I know...

I'm sure there's a cheap food joke here somewhere, but you can do that yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 09:43:52 PM
Well...  www.newsoficeland.com/home/environment/item/2128-polar-bears-on-their-way-to-iceland
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 December, 2013, 10:10:03 PM
Well at least they'll be ready for them.  Although I hope they're better armed than Sharky - wouldn't fancy going up against a polar bear with a shotgun.  Chances are at least one of those bastards is on the CIA Death List.  But then who isn't these days?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2013, 10:53:02 PM
Shark v Polar Bear... I feel a Shako v Hookjaw crossover coming on...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 04 December, 2013, 12:40:56 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 December, 2013, 08:17:30 PM
They must live in a state of permanent fear to have that high a percentage of gun ownership. I want to know why they feel the need to own so much firepower!

To protect themselves from cyclists?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 05 December, 2013, 02:33:38 PM
Tax breaks to encourage Fracking, and other quality gems from Mr Osborne!


http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25225532


The guy's an absolute Cock!


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 01:59:45 PM
I was just watching "Breaking the Set" on RT and it contained two fascinating interviews that got me thinking.

.
The first was with a U.S. lawyer who put a good case for awarding animals equal (or near equal) rights under the law as human beings. The main thrust of his argument was that we do not really need to use or consume animals any more and therefore we must stop slaughtering and abusing them for no reason. From memory, he quoted figures of 58 billion land animals and a trillion marine animals being slaughtered annually. Just because humans have evolved eating meat, he argued, is no reason to continue - humans have also evolved as sexists but we are beginning to see this as wrong, so why not ban all animal exploitation? To the argument "it's okay to kill an animal so long as it's well treated in life and killed humanely" he wondered how humane it was to take newborns away from their mothers to be slaughtered for products like veal - just because we like the taste. He likened it to one person killing another - it would be okay for me to shoot you in the head while you slept but bad if I tortured you first.

.
Of course, this argument just got me thinking who would benefit from such a ban, or at least a curb, on animal use and my cynical mind leaped straight to the usual suspects like Monsanto and B.P. During the adverts I wondered if the university this lawyer worked for had received any funding from these or similar corporations and if some of that funding was being used to push this point of view into the public eye in order to scare politicians into taking measures suggested by certain industry lobbyists. I grumbled to myself about this all the time I was making a cup of tea.

.
I was still thinking about it when the second half of the show came on and the second interview started - which was with some feminist going on about how women are marginalised, or something.

.
Yes, that was my attitude - yes, yes, love; women are equal, I get it, I agree, now can we move on please? I know women should be equal, I want women to be equal - you're preaching to the choir, sister - so I wasn't really listening - at least not at first.

.
Throughout recorded history women have been regarded as property - incubators belonging to men. This has only really started to change in the last forty years, and then only in some societies, and then with limited success. The view that women are property runs very deep still, especially in old established organisations like religions and governments which still try to own the female incubator through the imposition of things like abortion laws. The very existence of abortion laws, she argued, proves that women are still seen as owned incubators - that it is illegal for a woman to interfere with the function assigned to her. Irrespective of whether a foetus is a baby or not, it is growing inside a woman's body and therefore IS her body; outlawing abortion, then, is like outlawing amputation.

.
The second part of her argument was also interesting. She thinks that womens' movements all around the world are missing the point by trying to make compromises or find common ground. If the abortion argument begins revolving around the age or condition of the foetus it still implies that the woman is merely an incubator, merely property. The question is, do men own women or not? Do men decide what women are, what their function is and what they can or can't do or not? All other discussions about "equality" are moot until this core question has been addressed.

.
Wow, love, you really got me thinking, there.

.
The first interviewee had used the fact that we have evolved as sexists to bolster his own argument and (in the hopes that this isn't some subtle KGB/CIA media manipulation psi-op programming technique designed to get people like me putting two and two together to make five) I suddenly wondered if this might be at the heart of all our problems - the concept of 'ownership'.

.
The first interviewee questioned the ownership of animals and the second questioned the ownership of women - both hinting that it is a kind of instinct. Searching within myself, trying to explore my own instincts, I think they are both correct. My instinct is to stop anyone from stealing my pet dog - even if they could give him the ideal life far superior to anything I could provide, I would resist it. When I have been loved by women (yes, it has happened - but in a longer time than I'd care to admit) I found that love to be a precious thing and would resist losing it.

.
Herein may lie the problem: As a male, I regard the love given to me by a female as mine and mine alone - it feels great and I want to keep it. It is only a small step from there to believe that because I own the love I own the female and if I can own another human being I can own anything from slaves to land to DVDs. (I have been using the word 'love' a lot - take that as you will but I mean it as the instinctive bonding and mating instincts leading (hopefully, from an evolutionary perspective) to the parental and familial instincts.) A male guards his female jealously in order to pass on his genes. I don't think we can really help feeling like that, no matter how much we resist, deny or ignore it. Women are not exempt from this instinct - I have lost many women because I refused to 'fight for them' - as if they regarded even themselves as little more than a prize to be awarded to the worthy winner. Not being female, of course, I can only speculate as to their true feelings on the matter - maybe they just thought I was a wanker and any old excuse would do...

.
So, is that at the heart of all the world's problems? The unconscious male desire to own women (and, by extension, Everything Else) and the unconscious female desire to be owned by men (putting themselves in the same category as Everything Else)?

.
Is it time to stop thinking that males are superior and fighting for females to be equal? What does sexual equality even mean, anyway? How can two different things be equal? Does teaching a woman to do things the same way as a man so she can succeed in a male-dominated sphere make her equal or just an honorary man?

.
I think it's time we started regarding men and women as complimentary; humans and animals as complimentary; corporations and the planet as complementary.

.
This is, of course, unlikely to be a new thought or a fresh observation but I thought it might spark some interesting discussion. Is feminism a dead end? Does it simply exacerbate the differences instead of integrating them as compliments?

.
Any of you pretty little ladies want to worry your pretty little heads about this pretty little topic - please feel free to witter away to your pretty little heart's content...  :D

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2013, 05:22:30 PM
You do a lot of powerful thinking, Shark!

My main contribution here would be to note that humans have a clearly established set of inherent rights (however much we seem to enjoy denying them), and the main issue facing everyone is ensuring that those rights are accorded equally across all genders and none, whereas the rights of animals are far less clear or established, and agreeing these is still a necessary step.  Feminism is thus a matter of movement by humans towards an equal application of existing human rights, with actors and subject being one and the same, and I'm not sure it equates at all easily with animal rights where the actors and subject are entirely different, and thus I don't really see how relevant issues of 'ownership' are.

In this framework the question of abortion is essentially about the definition of human, and on the basis of the answer to that puzzler the negotiation of conflicting rights.  As it refers to so many diverse species with diverse qualities, there are many different grades within the term animal, and it lacks the absolute nature of the terms we tend to apply to human.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 07:23:03 PM
Some very interesting points there, Tordels.

.
On the question of rights I think that both sexes have a long way to go and that it might not be possible to have a uniform set of rights for anyone or any animal.

.
Let me give my own personal situation as an example. I believe that, just like a rabbit or a cockle, I have the right to a home. I live in a council flat, which I believe is classified as 'social housing' for the poor or needy. I claim not one penny in support of any kind from the government as I know where benefit money really comes from and how toxic to society the DWP has become - you've all read my rants on this so I won't bore you further. Suffice to say that I refuse to engage with this fraudulent and criminal system any further. Irrespective of whether I am correct or incorrect in my assessment I believe it is my right to refuse to get involved with any activities I distrust or suspect to be unlawful.

.
Living entirely without benefits is not easy but, luckily, an old boss of mine is able to throw me a bit of work here and there. This is not easy for me as I have several conditions which often make it difficult for me to even go outside and the pay's not much; usually between 30 and 100 pounds a week with some weeks creeping up to £200 and others returning bugger all.

.
I have the right to a home and that right is recognised by the society I live in to such an extent that social housing was created to address that right. The local council, however, believes that its right to demand of me £80 per week is greater than my right to a home. I recognise the council's right to charge rent but I believe that charge must be reasonable and so have offered to pay it a fixed percentage of my income. The council will not even enter into discussions on the point, saying that my only options are to pay £80 a week myself, borrow £80 a week to pay them, get £80 a week off the government to pay them or get the Hell out and go live somewhere else. I have lived in this flat for 27 years - I don't want to live anywhere else and I have nowhere else to go. The council has applied to the "court" for a "possession order" and the "court" has granted it. It is the council's stated goal now to have me evicted. But I have the right to a home and I won't let it.

.
Or am I incorrect? Sure, a rabbit has the right to dig burrows under a farmer's field but the farmer has the right to gas the rabbits and fill in the warren. Maybe the council's right to demand £80 a week is greater than my right to a home - I mean, I could always allow myself to be evicted and then build my own home out of old tyres and rubbish somewhere, right? If I can find a piece of land that isn't already "owned" to build it on and the council decides not to knock it down and haul it away to the tip.

.
So rights appear to be fuzzy - I have the right to food, water, medicine and shelter; but only if I, or somebody, can pay for those rights. The right to an abortion is no right at all if you can't afford one. I think the question of rights might be a bit of a red herring - with the UK government trying to exempt itself from the European Human Rights Act the perception is that your rights are what the government tells you they are. There's that male concept of 'ownership' I was talking about; the elites think they 'own' your rights so completely that they can only be exercised with their consent (my own council's apparent attitude).

.
To my mind, the issue of rights is a personal one. It is up to me to decide what my rights and responsibilities are and to do that in as balanced and responsible a way as possible. This of course means that everyone else (animals included) has that self same right to decide as I do - and the responsibility of facing up to the consequences.

.
I believe that the concept of rights is pretty much inherent, most of us know what's right for us and what's not. In a way, and to a lesser extent, I think most animals do as well - although almost certainly not on a conscious level. 

.
I think, therefore, that any attempt to codify human or even animal rights, never mind applying them, is almost doomed to fail from the start unless the whole issue can be simplified and boiled down to something as basic as "do unto others as you'd have others do unto you" and then to inform that with societal, historical and philosophical education rather than having a bunch of musty old judges write down a list of "one size fits all" human or animal rights.

.
I must own my own rights and responsibilities, just as you must own yours. That might sound like a recipe for anarchy of the worst kind but I don't think so. On a personal level, most of us know that we have the right to kill other people to get what we want but the overwhelming majority of us also understand that we have the responsibility not to do that. It is only when the rights of others get codified that things seem to go awry - the right of Monsanto to control seeds, the right of the United Kingdom to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, the right of soldiers to kill, the right of a third party to decide whether a person can have an abortion or not, the right of the council to evict me.

.
Okay - I think I just went way off topic there! In my defence, I'm just making this shit up as I go along, exploring this new (to me) idea that ownership, especially from the male perspective, may be our biggest problem - and our greatest opportunity.

.
Either I own my rights or nobody does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2013, 07:44:49 PM
Leaving this meeting of the Middle Aged Wankers' Debating Society aside for one moment: bloody hell Mark, that's an awful situation.  Without wanting to suggest that you compromise your beliefs, I do think you might consider being the middleman of a simple transfer from one pocket of the state to another, simply to alleviate the stress.   I know to my cost that principles are at their most important when you're at the end of your rope, but even so mate...

Back on topic (although I'm not sure we left it), you're quite correct, rights are More Complicated Than That.  I was trying to set out a higher-level stall as a point of reference: we agree that humans have certain rights (unless, apparently, they are criminals, accused of a crime or just plain foreign-looking), so the issues are of applying these equally first, before digging down into the conflicts and subtilties below, which you provided such concrete examples of. Rights have to exist in some form before they can be in conflict.

Animal rights have still to even get to that starting point: the according of any rights to non-humans, or whether such a thing is even possible, is still very much in question. 

I'm also more than a bit leery of discussing feminism in the same conversation as animal rights, with the worrying possibility of anyone thinking that these things can be compared or conflated, although I see why you brought the two together in this instance (the two TV pieces and their comparison).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 08:35:28 PM
Yes, yes! Absolutely! Thanks for that, Tordels - I am not lumping feminism and animal rights into the same category (even though I am a man)!  :D

.
Thanks also for the support - it's much appreciated. I really don't think I can compromise, though - no matter how tempting and "sane" that might be. It would be so easy to give in, sit down and shut up - but how could I ever respect myself if I did? How could I ever post in this thread again? I'm sure I've said it before but sometimes I hate knowing what I think I know and believing what I think I believe. All I really want is to be left alone.

.
There is wisdom in your words, Tordels, and I thank you for them, truly, but I can't heed your advice under current conditions. I have suggested to the council that if they cannot fulfil their social housing obligations due to poverty then they should apply to the government for some kind of "tenant benefit" to help them out. I even offered to write them a reference and to do all in my power to help them with their claim. The (by now exasperated into silence) council manager dealing with me has taken a particularly dim view of this offer.

.
Sometimes being a geek helps. I have known for a long time that I can't win and this depressed me immensely until I suddenly remembered how Data defeated the Strategema Master. I don't have to win - all I need is a stalemate.

.
My (quite possibly lunatic) attitude may provide a sort of answer to your point of how rights can be applied - by what agency. The blanket imposition of rights through such things as the courts would seem to be an unwieldy process containing many practical and ethical challenges. In my case, I am attempting to take control of, and take responsibility for, my own rights.

.
Maybe the best way to ensure the equal application of human rights is to expect people to apply them themselves. Where conflicts occur, the courts then should step in on a case-by-case basis (which leads us into law, the justice system and another can of worms altogether!).

.
That question of ownership again - I can own my rights but can I own the rights of another person? In some cases yes (I would be morally required to own the rights of my newborn child until it could begin to understand owning its own rights). In some cases, maybe as with an older child, a spouse, a charge or a business partner, ownership of rights is shared. In most cases I have absolutely no ownership over the rights of other people just as other people have no ownership over my rights.

.
I don't know - does any of this make sense or should I just crack open the Scotch and put another Farscape DVD on?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 12 December, 2013, 09:22:59 PM
The analogy I am working on for animal rights goes along the lines of:

A film needs a scene of a cow exploding. Even if it provided the most realistic and satisfying shot, everybody would think it completely immoral to blow up and kill a real cow to get the shot. Especially when there are so many ways to fake it; puppets, scale models, cgi etc.

So why do we allow this to happen for our eating habits?

Last time I checked I wasn't in the employ of Monsanto, I am just concerned about ethics. It does happen. Maybe the lawyer is too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 09:37:31 PM
What if the cow had BSE and its death would be utterly painless?

.
Say I contracted a painful and incurable disease (God forbid), would it be immoral of me to offer to get myself willingly blown up to add verisimilitude to a film, the cash to go to my family?

.
It's okay to pump the milk out of cows twice a day whether they like it or not, keep some of them constantly pregnant only to kill the newborn males for veal and eventually shoot them through the brain to eat them and make shoes out of them but it's wrong to blow a cow up painlessly for entertainment? Forgive me but I'm beginning to suspect that either each of the above is true or none of them are.

.
Damn that lawyer and his persuasive arguments...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 12 December, 2013, 10:03:05 PM
Go Vegan dude. Second best decision I ever made.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 10:09:12 PM
As if I didn't have enough on my plate - now this!

.
God sure does have a sense of humour, sending me all these moral crises at once...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 December, 2013, 03:42:08 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2013, 09:37:31 PM

Say I contracted a painful and incurable disease (God forbid), would it be immoral of me to offer to get myself willingly blown up to add verisimilitude to a film, the cash to go to my family?

Are you talking about euthanasia or blowing yourself up? Both illegal, but immoral? If you're okay with it, I'm ok with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2013, 08:32:17 AM
Do you need to 'own' your own rights?  Doesn't the concept of ownership imply the possibility of transfer or loss?  If something is intrinsic to a person can it be owned in that sense?

Asserting your rights is another thing, as is interpreting, weighing and expanding them.  I suspect that linking the two concepts runs the risk of denying rights to those that can't actively assert them.  Segue...

The double-think of humans' relationship with animals is an endless source of horror, as both Tips and Sharky illustrate - it's a case of humanity's terrible blindspot of 'what's far away doesn't concern me' writ large. I would (and have) stopped someone in the street for meting out the tiniest fraction of the cruelty to an animal that I endorse and ignore every time I fancy a BLT.

Obviously the elimination of the suffering of farm animals, and the resultant environmental benefits, is an intriguing goal - but I find it hard to commit to this kind of absolute prescription. To live in this world in any form is to die, to eat and be eaten, but I agree, that doesn't mean we as beings capable of reason and reflective morality should ignore our responsibilities.  I think I'd settle for a huge reduction in the quantity of animals farmed, and an increase in the quality of their lives and deaths. 

Once (if) that has been achieved, it would be time to look at what should happen next.  One of the problems I have with getting my head around veganism is its inevitable reduction of the whole spectrum of farmed animals to a handful of zoo exhibits.  In their present form these animals are largely human creations, and have no sustainable place or role without our constant management or predation.  It's hard to imagine what the world would look like without them, but that on its own may not be a reason to perpetuate the current system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 08:44:50 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 December, 2013, 08:32:17 AM
Once (if) that has been achieved, it would be time to look at what should happen next.  One of the problems I have with getting my head around veganism is it's inevitable reduction of the whole spectrum of farmed animals to a handful of zoo exhibits.  In their present form these animals are largely human creations, and have no sustainable place or role without our constant management or predation.

I have had several hilarious conversations with militant vegetarians/vegans who simply have no answer to the question: "If you could wave a magic wand and eliminate the eating of meat overnight, what happens to the pigs?"

Like you, I don't argue for the status quo. Were it in my power to wave a magic wand, I'd institute a draconian policy of world-beating animal welfare standards for farmed animals and insist that all imported meat must be provably produced to the same standards.*

This usually prompts wails of protest that this would make meat very expensive. Good. We eat too much meat, and we waste far too much of what we buy. In my scenario, we address the health and waste implications and instantly give a massive boost to the depressed rural economy.

(I know people who buy a supermarket battery-farmed chicken, carve the breast meat for Sunday roast and throw the rest of it away. Fuck that. We buy a chicken for Sunday roast, then we get sandwiches, then we get a curry off scratty bits that remain, then we boil the bones for stock and make soup.)

Cheers

Jim

*Exception: we're within sight of commercially viable lab-grown meat. I have no objection to lab-grown cow muscle being minced up for Tesco Value Lasagne.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 09:37:50 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 08:44:50 AM
I have had several hilarious conversations with militant vegetarians/vegans who simply have no answer to the question: "If you could wave a magic wand and eliminate the eating of meat overnight, what happens to the pigs?"

To be fair, it's a weird question.  If you could wave a magic wand and eliminate all sexism overnight, what would happen to all the people whose jobs relate to combating sexism?  Answer: it's not going to happen, so it's completely irrelevant to the discussion...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 09:58:39 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 09:37:50 AM
To be fair, it's a weird question.  If you could wave a magic wand and eliminate all sexism overnight, what would happen to all the people whose jobs relate to combating sexism?  Answer: it's not going to happen, so it's completely irrelevant to the discussion...

Nonsense. It's a completely fair question. If someone is going to give me a hard time about eating meat, to make it very clear that in their ideal world no one would eat meat, then they need to have an answer to the question: "What happens to the pigs?"

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2013, 10:36:03 AM
Leaving aside the magic wand, and broadening out the question to include the less-tasty livestock, it becomes a whole raft of good questions.  Looking out the window, what happens to grassland and marginal countryside parts of which have been grazed for many thousands of years?  How do we get wool without the castration or slaughter of tups?   WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHEESE.

None of this is to say that the bad would outweigh the good (there's a lot of good), but livestock management has been a key part of our 10,000-year journey from 5 million folks to 7.2 billion, and there are implications for abandoning it that are well worth considering.  I don't however advocate staying where we are now: something has to change, but as always taking absolute positions tend to turn discussion into entrenchment and name-calling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 10:45:54 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 09:58:39 AM
Nonsense. It's a completely fair question. If someone is going to give me a hard time about eating meat, to make it very clear that in their ideal world no one would eat meat, then they need to have an answer to the question: "What happens to the pigs?"

Cheers

Jim

Two options:

1) We transition gradually to my ideal world, in which case demand for pigflesh drops and pigs are gradually not bred any more, or
2) I have a magic wand!  I'll feed the pigs in comfort until they die of natural causes!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 10:45:54 AM
1) We transition gradually to my ideal world, in which case demand for pigflesh drops and pigs are gradually not bred any more

As Tordel notes, this takes a somewhat simplistic view of man's relationship with the livestock and the land. You're also advocating the planned extinction of a significant number species, which seems odd if you're advocating it from an animal welfare position.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 11:37:04 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 10:49:26 AM
As Tordel notes, this takes a somewhat simplistic view of man's relationship with the livestock and the land.

Well, your example was specifically about pigs, the disappearance of which would have very little effect on grazing land etc.  I take Tordelback's point in that certain artificial landscapes would disappear, taking with them entire ecosystems.  But, equally new ecosystems would take their place, arguably richer and more diverse.  Given the way that meat-eating contributes to far more significant ecological destruction via (e.g.) methane production, the trade-off seems a fair one.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 10:49:26 AM
You're also advocating the planned extinction of a significant number species, which seems odd if you're advocating it from an animal welfare position.

Don't see this at all - the original species will survive, even as the bloated, unhealthy, non-self-sustaining human creations die out.

I don't think you've ever had this argument IRL as you claimed - these points are all very simple and anyone with a basic grasp of animal rights issues should be able to respond without causing too much hilarity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 11:45:35 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 11:37:04 AM
I don't think you've ever had this argument IRL as you claimed - these points are all very simple and anyone with a basic grasp of animal rights issues should be able to respond without causing too much hilarity.

Are you actually calling me a liar, Dudley?

Don't see this at all - the original species will survive, even as the bloated, unhealthy, non-self-sustaining human creations die out. (http://don't%20see%20this%20at%20all%20-%20the%20original%20species%20will%20survive,%20even%20as%20the%20bloated,%20unhealthy,%20non-self-sustaining%20human%20creations%20die%20out.)

You think there is room in the British landscape for wild pigs? Without culling?

'Original' species by whose definition? Are you proposing a cut-off date, before which the species is 'pure' and free from the taint of tens of thousands of years of human husbandry and after which the species is undeserving of life?

Yes, you're right, these are clearly simple issues that have clear-cut answers.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2013, 12:17:31 PM
On the question of me owning my own rights or simply applying them, I'm wondering if these aren't actually one and the same thing. If we were to regard rights (for the sake of this argument) as entirely similar to language, would this help in any way? We are all taught the basic rules of language more or less from Day One and after that the language is inside you, "owned" by you. How you then employ your language is entirely up to you. You are free to use words like "nigger" as much as you want but we all accept that there is a risk in doing so.

.
Anyone who "owns" language in this way is capable of producing a work like War and Peace but nobody can be forced (at least not lawfully) to do so.

.
If, then, we treated rights in the same way and taught them equally to everyone in school the application of individually owned rights may become easier. If everyone in the country knew their rights (and responsibilities, of course) then institutions like OffCom would become increasingly irrelevant as businesses would be forced by individuals into acting properly.

.
Let me try and illustrate, again, from my own experience. Some of you may be amused, intrigued or appalled to discover that I haven't paid a water bill in over two years. It's a long story, settle in...

.
It began when I received a water bill that I considered to be too large. I wrote to the water company to express my concerns and negotiate for a reduction. The water company's answer was to install a water meter and then I'd get a reduction next year. Maybe. If I used less water.

.
Without changing my levels of water usage (wasting water has always been one of my bugbears) the meter produced the next water bill which was a third of what I had been paying. This indicated to me that I had been over paying significantly for two decades and so requested some form of recompense from the water company, who flatly refused even to discuss the matter.

.
Dander up, I did a little research and read the gobbledegookinous water privatisation legislation. Most of it was pretty dry and incomprehensible but what I basically learned was that the water companies had purchased two things in order to run the country's water system: a right and a responsibility. The responsibility purchased was to supply the people of the country with adequate drinking water and to safely remove their sewage. The right they purchased was to raise a levy on that service.

.
Nowhere in that legislation did I find a clause rendering that levy compulsory - the only 'compulsory' levy is tax and only governments, not private companies, can impose taxes. Using this new knowledge, I wrote back to the water company and told them that I would pay what they asked if they could prove I had to; either by pointing to specific law or legislation or by producing a contract, signed by me, containing my agreement to pay whatever was demanded of me.

.
Fuck you; pay me.

.
Prove I have to.

.
Fuck you; pay me.

.
This went on for a few months - all the water company did was send terse demands, ignoring my question utterly. When the last three letters demanding payment were all virtually word-for-word identical I felt that an impasse had been reached and imposed a condition of my own: As we're getting nowhere and appear to be going around in circles, and because my time is precious, I am no longer prepared to deal with your correspondence for free. Enclosed is a SAE containing a contract saying that I agree to deal with as many letters as you want to send but my charge is £25 per letter.

.
Fuck you; pay me.

.
As the contract was not returned, every subsequent letter from the water company was returned unopened with "RETURNED UNREAD - AS AGREED" written on it in red Sharpie.

.
This happened about four times before the first letter from a debt collection agency arrived, threatening all manner of legal and financial nasties if I didn't pay up. It took only three letters to convince them that I knew the law well enough to know that a) any company that sells or otherwise passes on any debt to a third party automatically dissolves that debt (Bills of Exchange Act 1882) and that b) no private company (including and especially debt collection agencies) has the right to take my money without my consent.

.
Then the letters from the water company started coming again - and each was RETURNED UNREAD - AS AGREED, a practice which remains in force to this day. The established pattern seems to be 4 letters from the water company, two or three from a debt collection agency, 4 more from the water company and so on and on.

.
If the water company had respected my rights from the outset then it would now be reaping at least some money from my responsibility to pay my share but in denying my rights it is also denying my responsibilities. It cannot deny its responsibilities because it purchased them and is also a thing (a non-living entity, a corporation, a straw man) with far fewer rights and responsibilities than you or me.

.
Of course, whether my strategy will hold in the face of my current situation has yet to be seen but, for the moment at least, I suspect that - so long as I remain firm, stick to my rights and honour my responsibilities - all they can do is threaten, bully and practice to deceive.

.
It is difficult to stand up for oneself under the current system. It seems that many people believe their rights are bestowed from above rather than part of their DNA, so to speak. The more of us that do it, though, the easier it becomes. I've even started helping others with debt collectors - saving them quite a lot of money. I do not charge for this help (although I will admit to getting one or two good shared meals out of it) and never will. My only request is to pass the knowledge on to others so they can own their own rights.

.
Crap - another novel and I still don't think I'm any closer to putting my thoughts on "ownership" into any coherent form!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 12:30:02 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 11:45:35 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 13 December, 2013, 11:37:04 AM
I don't think you've ever had this argument IRL as you claimed - these points are all very simple and anyone with a basic grasp of animal rights issues should be able to respond without causing too much hilarity.

Are you actually calling me a liar, Dudley?

Don't see this at all - the original species will survive, even as the bloated, unhealthy, non-self-sustaining human creations die out. (http://don't%20see%20this%20at%20all%20-%20the%20original%20species%20will%20survive,%20even%20as%20the%20bloated,%20unhealthy,%20non-self-sustaining%20human%20creations%20die%20out.)

You think there is room in the British landscape for wild pigs? Without culling?

'Original' species by whose definition? Are you proposing a cut-off date, before which the species is 'pure' and free from the taint of tens of thousands of years of human husbandry and after which the species is undeserving of life?

Yes, you're right, these are clearly simple issues that have clear-cut answers.

Cheers

Jim

Well then you've been engaging with very dim vegetarian and vegans.

The very first thing you learn to do when faced with one of these "magic wand" questions (or the ever hilarious, "If you were stranded on a desert island, and the only thing to eat is a pig, would you kill it?") is to respond with:

"You are asking me to respond to a completely hypothetical scenario.

What YOU need to ask YOURSELF FIRST is the very REAL question and scenario:

Why, when there is currently an abundance of ways and means of feeding yourself with fruit, vegetables, nuts and pulses that do not require any cruelty to, or the slaughter of animals, do you continue to choose to eat meat and inflict pain and suffering and slaughter? "


As to the "Magic Wand" question:

So ultimately you may have to cull the current live stock of pigs which were all destined to be cruelly slaughtered anyway.  To end up in a world where nobody eats meat?  I would suggest that the vegans and vegetarians are not making the issue any worse.

The poor pigs are getting it either way.

One ends up with a status quo (creating new generations of pigs to which we are cruel and ultimately slaughter) and one which, after an uncomfortable and unpleasant start, leads to a more sustainable world where there is no animal cruelty.

Is that really that hard a decision even if you don't have a magic wand?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2013, 12:47:16 PM
On the question of animals, I really don't know what our long-term objectives should be, although I do have some suggestions for the short term:

.
Break up mega-farms and re-institute as many small, "family" or community farms as possible, such farms dedicated to feeding the local populace and trade of excess products.

.
An immediate cessation and reversal of the breathtakingly ill-advised United Nations projects "Agenda 21" and "Codex Alimentarius".

.
Immediate repeal of legislation requiring all livestock to be injected with antibiotics and artificial growth hormones.

.
A complete ban (except where impracticable, for example remote communities requiring fresh stocks) on the transport of living animals more than 20 miles.

.
More families should own a cow or a pig or chickens so we can not only feed ourselves with meat, milk an eggs we know to be of good quality but also learn about what we're eating.

.
Fewer supermarkets and more local butcher's shops sourcing local products.

.
Running the farming industry to meet the needs of society instead of the needs of shareholders, stockbrokers and bankers.

.
Heh - you knew I couldn't leave the bankers out for long, right? :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 December, 2013, 01:07:26 PM
QuoteWhy, when there is currently an abundance of ways and means of feeding yourself with fruit, vegetables, nuts and pulses that do not require any cruelty to, or the slaughter of animals, do you continue to choose to eat meat and inflict pain and suffering and slaughter?

And an excellent question this is, too.
My answer is that as long as I can live with myself for eating the flesh of another animal, I will do so. There may come a time when I change my mind (I only eat meat once or twice a week as it is) but that is not today.

Sort version: Because bacon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 13 December, 2013, 01:23:40 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 12:30:02 PM


What YOU need to ask YOURSELF FIRST is the very REAL question and scenario:

Why, when there is currently an abundance of ways and means of feeding yourself with fruit, vegetables, nuts and pulses that do not require any cruelty to, or the slaughter of animals, do you continue to choose to eat meat and inflict pain and suffering and slaughter? [/i] "



If I'm totally honest it's partly because I enjoy the taste of meat but it's far more to do with laziness on my part. It's so convenient being a meat eater. If I'm on a long drive I can stop off any time I see the golden arches.
I have thought about becoming a vegetarian but I just can't bring myself to re-educate myself with what I can and can't eat and to learn to cook again. Everything in my repertoire contains meat and I find vegetarian cookery very un-intuitive.
I console myself by trying to be a responsible meat eater. I try to buy good quality meat with the tractor mark and I don't eat meat every day (my girlfriend is vegetarian but I can only stand her meals about 3 times a week as she only knows how to make about 4 things and they're all what I call Blob Dinners).

I do think it's possible to farm animals for food without them suffering but I try not to think about this too much to be honest (which is probably a bit cowardly - I'm happy to eat a bacon sarnie and ask no questions).   

If I became a parent I may think about making a more drastic change, or at least looking into the issues more deeply - if only to give sensible, informed answers to the inevitable animal cruelty questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 01:27:39 PM
Indeed, and that is REALLY the answer for a lot of people despite the many varied and hilarious excuses they give ("But we've been designed to eat meat" etc.).

I always find myself amused when people accuse vegans and vegetarians of "taking the moral high ground" when, if you examine the anwer to that question, they HAVE the moral high ground.

Eating meat, and dairy, is ultimately a SELFISH act.  The person cares only about the self, not the cruel fate of the animals or the effects on the planet.

The next question, is of course, how do we get everybody to stop being selfish.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 01:30:10 PM
(For a start, you don't call them "selfish").
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 01:43:17 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 12:30:02 PM
Well then you've been engaging with very dim vegetarian and vegans.

That was rather the subtext of my original post.

QuoteWhy, when there is currently an abundance of ways and means of feeding yourself with fruit, vegetables, nuts and pulses that do not require any cruelty to, or the slaughter of animals, do you continue to choose to eat meat and inflict pain and suffering and slaughter?

OK, firstly, I don't condone pain and suffering. Up until relatively recently, in smaller rural communities people kept pigs that lived (seemingly) content lives in fields and were well fed up until the day the chap in the village with the gun came round and shot them. I am not convinced that transporting live animals hundreds of miles to massive abattoirs and slaughtering them on an industrial scale represents an improvement in animal welfare. Again: I am not arguing for the status quo.

However, living involves eating things and, absent my ability to photosynthesise, something has to die to facilitate that. I don't have any particular problem with that proposition in and of itself* and I don't accord human beings any special status in the food chain. We're largely hairless apes who've wound up top of the food chain by a couple of million years of very lucky breaks. I appreciate that there are good health reasons for not eating people, but I have no particular qualms about the idea in the abstract: in a straight 'stranded on a desert island' choice, I'd certainly eat a dead human before I killed a live pig.

I absolutely believe that if we are going to expect sheep and pigs and cows and chickens to die in order to feed us, then they should live lives that are as comfortable as possible and are ushered off this mortal coil in a fashion as humane as is humanly possible. I have the massive luxury of being reasonably well off and living somewhere I can directly access meat butchered and prepared by the farmers who raised the animals. Had I more land, I would happily put my money where my mouth is and keep and kill my own chickens.

Eating meat does not automatically mean "[choosing] to inflict pain and suffering and slaughter", and I'm not arguing in favour of a system that does so.

Cheers

Jim

*It always annoys me when there's a shark hunt after a surfer gets eaten, for example. If you're going to present yourself as food to one of the few species on the planet capable of posing a threat... well, circle of life and all that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 01:53:25 PM
Nice points.

"Eating meat does not automatically mean "[choosing] to inflict pain and suffering and slaughter", and I'm not arguing in favour of a system that does so"

Two of the three are certainly open to debate (I'd argue all captivity/ownership is a form of suffering) but I'm pretty certain you have to slaughter the animals to eat their meat.

Unless you go for eating them one joint at a time. ;o)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 02:03:50 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 01:53:25 PM
Two of the three are certainly open to debate (I'd argue all captivity/ownership is a form of suffering) but I'm pretty certain you have to slaughter the animals to eat their meat.

"Pig like that, you don't eat it all at once..."*

No, you're right about the slaughtering.

However, I think that if sheep could talk, they'd most likely disagree with you about the captivity/ownership thing. Let's be honest: a sheep's life consists of getting born, wandering around fields eating grass, having a couple of lambs every year and dying after a few years. Add humans to this and what you get is the exact same life with the addition of someone who actively looks after them, keeps them safe from predators and feeds them when food is scarce. A friend of mine once observed that, from a sheep's point of view, the best thing they ever did was invent shepherds.

Cheers

Jim

*Very old joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 December, 2013, 02:44:48 PM
A high number of fruit, vegetables and pulses do not agree with my digestive system. If I eat too many of them my stomach makes its displeasure evident in a horribly uncomfortable manner. I love the taste of cucumber but I've learned I have to completely avoid the things or suffer severe pain. Can't eat too many onions, can't eat the tiniest amount of peppers, too much wheat causes acid, can't eat too much of any green, leafy stuff and eating more than one banana a day recently proved to be a huge mistake.

Unless I was prepared to live on a diet of nowt but raw carrots and stuff made from potatoes, (which I think might also be causing a certain degree of bloating), I could never be a vegetarian without being in a constant state of intense discomfort. Eating meat and fish has never caused me such problems, (except for earlier this year when an H. Pylori infection made it impossible to eat pretty much anything without bringing it back up in an acidic soup).

So, yes, it might be selfish, but I think I'll remain an omnivore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 13 December, 2013, 07:52:27 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 01:27:39 PM
Indeed, and that is REALLY the answer for a lot of people despite the many varied and hilarious excuses they give ("But we've been designed to eat meat" etc.).

I'm not asking out of snarkyness but are we not designed to eat fruit, vegetables, grains etc. and meat? I'm just asking you because you seem the right person to ask this. I think it is totally noble of a person to be a vegetarian/vegan so no animal will ever harmed for them but the "not designed to meat" argument I'm unclear about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2013, 08:48:22 PM
It's the whole concept of 'being designed' I find most problematic  :o. 

But more seriously, asserting knowledge about what humans 'evolved to eat' when that is by no means clear, either in terms of basic definitions of 'human', palaeoanthropological evidence or its relevance to what humans eat now, strikes me as unwise in what is essentially an ethical argument.

I'm very sympathetic to vegitarianism, I was a vegetarian for 8 years, I've volunteered in an animal welfare shelter for 14 years, I make sure what little meat we eat is as free-range and cruelty-free as possible, and I make sure I cook my kids tasty vegitarian food at least twice a week so that they see it as a viable, enjoyable choice.  But it remains one option, with costs and benefits and repercussions that are worthy of debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 December, 2013, 01:46:07 AM


Quote from: Ancient Otter on 13 December, 2013, 07:52:27 PMI'm not asking out of snarkyness but are we not designed to eat fruit, vegetables, grains etc. and meat?


That depends on whether you agree with the long-term effects eating meat and dairy has on human health for the majority of people. Prostate cancer, many other cancers, osteoporosis and heart disease were almost unheard of in countries such as Japan before they adopted a more Western diet of red meat, refined sugar etc. after World War II. These diseases were of course all ready prevalent in the West but have reached almost epidemic proportions in the last century because of how much more we consume of the stuff; because it's so much easier to acquire and that we eat less plant-based food as a result which should make up the majority of our daily diet if we want to avoid chronic illness or rely on medication.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2013, 02:26:04 AM
The argument there is one of degree, as well as being tied up with wider lifestyle factors.  But I would agree that from the health side the best arguments come from evidence-based study. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 December, 2013, 02:45:33 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 December, 2013, 02:26:04 AM
The argument there is one of degree, as well as being tied up with wider lifestyle factors.

Aye and it's the degree to which us folk tend to favour the wrong end of the slide that gets us in trouble but the China cancer-atlas and the cross-referencing with US studies (outside the FDA) are very convincing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 December, 2013, 11:31:44 AM
Keep 5% of the pigs alive, put 1% into zoos, 1% as pets and release the other 3% into the wild in suitable areas. Slaughter the rest and grind half up to fertilise the soy fields and freeze the rest as a hedge against famine.

.
Simples.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 December, 2013, 11:40:35 AM
I only occasionally eat red meat and only eat species of fish that can be farmed such a cod or mackerel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2013, 11:23:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 01:43:17 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 12:30:02 PM
Well then you've been engaging with very dim vegetarian and vegans.

That was rather the subtext of my original post.

To be fair, maybe they aren't dim - maybe they just don't have the energy for an argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 December, 2013, 01:30:04 AM
Chemtrails.

The product of the people who don't know about water vapour and/or how engines work?

Or a sinister conspiracy all aroud (above) us?

Surprisingly popular theory amongst the crustys at Glasto I found.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2013, 10:52:57 AM
At first, nobody believed that burning petrol with lead in it did any harm.

.
Burning aviation fuel in the higher atmosphere does need looking at quite urgently. The hole in the ozone layer is still there, despite us cutting down our cfc use, so all suspects must be investigated. As far as I can recall, burning aviation fuel does produce things like barium and aluminium (which is a potent neurotoxin).

.
If there is a conspiracy here, it's probably essentially the same as the one to keep lead in petrol - because it was cheaper and easier to do so.

.
Whether chemtrails are a real attempt at geoengineering or poisoning the general population to keep us sick and easily repressed is immaterial, I think. With all the upheavals in our atmosphere I think that jet exhausts simply must be studied more closely. Viewing chem/contrails as pretty white lines in the sky too high up to be of any concern is foolish and dangerous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 15 December, 2013, 07:45:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 14 December, 2013, 11:40:35 AM
I only occasionally eat red meat and only eat species of fish that can be farmed such a cod or mackerel.

Fish farming has it's problems too  - waste from the fish, fish escaping from farms, parasites from farmed fish attacking wild fish etc.  I used to not eat fish but reading The Dead Seas by Taras Grescoe and watching Hughs Fish Fight convinced me to eat fish, sustainably.

Quote from: The Legendary SharkAt first, nobody believed that burning petrol with lead in it did any harm.

Looks like it was know at the time of invention that it did and there was an industry cover-up, the inventor also pioneered the use of CFCs in fridges, making him possibly one of the most destructive people in the history of the planet....Have a read here about the invention of leaded petrol. (http://www.damninteresting.com/the-ethyl-poisoned-earth/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 December, 2013, 08:04:01 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 15 December, 2013, 07:45:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 14 December, 2013, 11:40:35 AM
I only occasionally eat red meat and only eat species of fish that can be farmed such a cod or mackerel.

Fish farming has it's problems too  - waste from the fish, fish escaping from farms, parasites from farmed fish attacking wild fish etc.  I used to not eat fish but reading The Dead Seas by Taras Grescoe and watching Hughs Fish Fight convinced me to eat fish, sustainably.
Farming was perhaps a poor choice of words. Culturing, maybe. I was referring to fishing wild shoaling fish in minimal numbers with the entire cull listed as valid so as to reduce the level of RTSD's*. I also tend to buy my fish from a local fishmonger, who, as you said, fishes sustainably. Also, more appealing than lugging around a hideous super market.

*Returned To Sea Deceased. A term the aforementioned monger (no relation) uses to describe waisted fish that are considers to small to fillet and sell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 15 December, 2013, 08:17:07 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 15 December, 2013, 08:04:01 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 15 December, 2013, 07:45:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 14 December, 2013, 11:40:35 AM
I only occasionally eat red meat and only eat species of fish that can be farmed such a cod or mackerel.

Fish farming has it's problems too  - waste from the fish, fish escaping from farms, parasites from farmed fish attacking wild fish etc.  I used to not eat fish but reading The Dead Seas by Taras Grescoe and watching Hughs Fish Fight convinced me to eat fish, sustainably.
Farming was perhaps a poor choice of words. Culturing, maybe. I was referring to fishing wild shoaling fish in minimal numbers with the entire cull listed as valid so as to reduce the level of RTSD's*. I also tend to buy my fish from a local fishmonger, who, as you said, fishes sustainably. Also, more appealing than lugging around a hideous super market.

*Returned To Sea Deceased. A term the aforementioned monger (no relation) uses to describe waisted fish that are considers to small to fillet and sell.

Oh yeah sorry I should have made that clearer, didn't mean it as a nag against you Hawkmonger!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 December, 2013, 08:29:09 PM
No apologies needed Otter, purely down to my oft none existent linguistic capabilities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 December, 2013, 12:05:34 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 15 December, 2013, 07:45:44 PM
Looks like it was know at the time of invention that it did and there was an industry cover-up, the inventor also pioneered the use of CFCs in fridges, making him possibly one of the most destructive people in the history of the planet....Have a read here about the invention of leaded petrol. (http://www.damninteresting.com/the-ethyl-poisoned-earth/)

Great link Ancient Otter - strike one for the geochemists! I hadn't come across that website before and my procrastination is now moving to a whole new level. Thanks!

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 16 December, 2013, 05:50:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2013, 11:23:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2013, 01:43:17 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 December, 2013, 12:30:02 PM
Well then you've been engaging with very dim vegetarian and vegans.

That was rather the subtext of my original post.

To be fair, maybe they aren't dim - maybe they just don't have the energy for an argument.

Miss, Miss! Prof Bear is making jokes from 1972.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 December, 2013, 03:45:25 PM
Unconditional Basic Income.

.
This idea, which originated (this time around) in Switzerland iIrc, is interesting. Basically, we do away with all conditional state benefits in favour of a basic payment to everybody of enough to live on with no conditions attached.

.
My favourite argument in favour of this idea is how fundamentally empowering it would be. Most people want to be useful and for many that desire manifests as the desire to work, which at the moment makes tyrants of some bosses. Now imagine you get fifteen hundred quid a month regardless and your boss comes to you on a Friday night telling you that your weekend off's just been cancelled and that if you don't like it you can just... Oi! Where do you think you're going...?
.
Deep joy!
.
Here's a link for a petition which, if enough signatures are gathered, will require the E.U. to look into it:  basicincome2013.eu/

.
I can think of several upsides to this - anyone else got any thoughts?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 December, 2013, 04:34:27 PM
Yes, there would be immeasurable benefits to the population immediately, but the impact upon the wealthy minority would be what decided the fate of any such measure, as is always the case.  I recall getting sent a link to a Change.org petition calling for MPs to only receive minimum wage and no expenses, which had only a couple of thousand signatures, so I think people have just given up on the notion of a fair distribution of wealth if they literally cannot be bothered to make one click on a mouse on the offchance it frees up vast amounts of government money for other things.

One of the biggest gripes about Obamacare was that if people could get cheaper medicine, they would no longer work in badly-paying jobs to pay for something that would help them or their loved ones to stay alive, thus undermining the American economy which the Tea Party has now refreshingly admitted outright is based on slavery.  I imagine the same would apply over here: Daily Mail readers would get one whiff of the idea and realise that poor people would be under no obligation to stick with shit working conditions to get out of debt or buy leukemia treatment, and if people can live comfortably without struggle, what does that say about the privileged classes?  How exactly are they to define themselves in a socialist utopia when no-one is better off than anyone else?  In order to be further up the heap, you need people on the bottom, and sad to say, I am not actually being sarcastic, a lot of the more well-off among the population just want the poor to suffer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 December, 2013, 04:54:43 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 December, 2013, 04:34:27 PM...a lot of the more well-off among the population just want the poor to suffer.

While this is undoubtedly true, I don't think it's just 'them': the poor want the poor to suffer too, hence the enthusiasm with which people are grouped and defined as sub-human parasites: chavs, asylum-seekers, single mothers, the unemployed.  People who frequently have much the same limited means and opportunities as their would-be betters, but whose role is to provide a conceptual lower rung on the ladder on which to pour out your own self-righteousness. I may be deep in the shit, but I do my best, and at least I'm not one of them.  Take away their benefits, take away their houses, send them home, lousy scroungers, make the vermin suffer so I feel better about my own shitty situation. 

In a world of universal benefits, how would you know who the real scum are?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 December, 2013, 04:59:51 PM
Yes, yes - but what about the idea of UBI? A good idea? A bad one? Difficult to implement and fund or easy? What would the UBI achieve or destroy?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 December, 2013, 05:17:56 PM
Of course it's a good idea, and of course it's implementable if you take money away from ministers and their pet (white) elephants - but how likely do you think it is that they'll sacrifice one damn thing for you or me?

Quote from: TordelBack on 31 December, 2013, 04:54:43 PMWhile this is undoubtedly true, I don't think it's just 'them': the poor want the poor to suffer too

"The poor" rarely have any means by which to change their situation, though I take your broader point.  Strange but true: in countries where female circumcision is still practiced, the loudest, most vociferous anti-change voices are from women - it's what they want not just for themselves, but for others.  It's the first thing I think of when I see anti-abortion campaigners trotted out on tv like performing monkeys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 31 December, 2013, 05:22:27 PM
As lovely as the idea is, a decent income with no threat of losing your position if you don't meet the standards expected of you doesn't have a positive effect.  Some people will work hard and provide a decent service, but certainly not "most". Just look at MPs.  Or senior bankers.  Or large sections of the civil service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 31 December, 2013, 05:37:29 PM
The problem with a UBI would probably be inflation. With everyone having at least a basic living amount you would see prices rise, so an increase in UBI is in order, after which prices rise, oh, then we need to increase UBI...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 31 December, 2013, 06:17:06 PM
Wouldn't it mean that you'd be paying out fifteen grand a year to lots of rich people who don't need it too?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 December, 2013, 06:29:57 PM
Inflation is a side-effect of debt-based money creation and so until that's fixed inflation has no option but to continue. UBI would have very little or no effect on inflation if the current monetary system is retained as is. Any unreasonable price-hikes, therefore, would most likely be punishable under existing profiteering laws. With more money in our pockets, would we really fall for certain brands raising their prices just because they can? I think that people are smarter than that.
.
I'm not sure how one would think we "wouldn't be allowed" to implement this kind of thing. We are still, barely, a democratic country and so all we need are enough people calling for this to get things moving. The one thing the "poor" have that the "rich" do not is numbers. Massive, overwhelming numbers. The "rich" know this - some believe it is their greatest worry - and so, given the choice of a bloody class revolution ending with them and their families hanging by their own guts from flagpoles or paying everyone, including themselves and their families, their share of the country's wealth without killing or bankrupting anyone I think they'll start to see sense. The "rich" are just like the "poor" - neither wants to lose what they've got, no matter how much or little that is. I have no problem with the existence of rich and poor people in the same world - let's just make "poor" mean 'not rich' and not 'in danger of starving to death'.
.
I do think it's true that only the jobs people want to do would get done but are we sure this would be such a bad thing? There will still be criminals, for example, who could be invited to perform some unpopular jobs in return for whatever compensation society deems appropriate. There's also the option of a kind of voluntary "National Service" where one signs up for a period of time to serve as a cleaner, farm hand, charity worker or whatever society needs. I can't speak for others, either rich or poor, but if I was guaranteed enough to live on I'd definitely still do my little part-time job and wouldn't mind if I got paid or not. I'd be more amenable to helping out my community and neighbours whenever and however I could. Of course, I'd also spend most of my time trying to improve my writing and getting into women's underwear.
.
I also think that saying people won't try if they're guaranteed an income is incorrect. Again I can only speak for myself here but if I'm treated with honesty and respect at work then I do a much better job. With UBI in place, I think employers will be forced to improve in order to attract the best people - it won't just be about who's got the biggest cheque book any more. In my experience, most people who work want to do a good job - it's only when workers get treated like shit that standards seem to drop.
.
UBI would also make things like apprenticeships and opening small businesses far easier, I think. Charities would get an influx of volunteers. There would be more live music and entertainment in pubs and public places. More free time. Yes, there would be problems and unforeseen consequences but nothing, I think, that we couldn't handle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 December, 2013, 06:35:48 PM
JamesC - yes: The same for everyone, an equal share of the country's wealth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 31 December, 2013, 07:36:57 PM
UBI is an interesting idea but I'm not convinced that it could be implemented in the UK. Using your 1500 a month example Sharky equates to 18,000 per year (ignoring taxes and such).  Current UK population is about 63 million with about 20% of that being under 16 years of age (so, I'm assuming not included).  So 18,000 per year x 50 million people =  900 billion.  That's quite a bit of dosh to raise and a quick google search suggests that last year the UK Gov had about 600 billion total coming in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 December, 2013, 08:21:45 PM
That does seem like a lot of (imaginary) money but the current DWP yearly bill is about £170bn and the public sector pensions bill is about £9bn so that's nearly £200bn without even trying. The rest could be gathered from VAT, a financial transactions tax and even government borrowing (they borrow money from the banks to give to the banks to stop the banks having no money already, so if you're going to stick with a stupid plan you might as well do something good with the proceeds).

.
The injection of cash into society will also stimulate the economy root and branch, leading to more tax income to pump back into the system.

.
Of course, if the government reclaimed the right and responsibility to create and control the money supply then this UBI initiative would be piss easy to run and probably the best way to get money into the economy and working as it was intended - as an economic lubricant instead of an economic toxin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 January, 2014, 12:29:07 PM
Staggered by this:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qycqBYpAdiI/UsVQCFxHnGI/AAAAAAAADnc/4NcGx657zQ0/s400/article-2531850-1A5B72F200000578-808_634x636.jpg)

I initially assumed it was more brilliance from The Onion, but alas, no-one that bright was involved.  Would a simple poppy and 'we will remember them' or similar not have been the obvious and decent way to go? Is this really what should be commemorated?  Almost makes me glad Ireland is stuck with generic euros as we approach the centenary of 1916's self-absorbed clusterfuck...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 January, 2014, 12:49:42 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 January, 2014, 12:29:07 PM
I initially assumed it was more brilliance from The Onion, but alas, no-one that bright was involved.  Would a simple poppy and 'we will remember them' or similar not have been the obvious and decent way to go? Is this really what should be commemorated?

Not just staggeringly inappropriate, but also a horribly ham-fisted piece of design to boot, with the central elements spilling out into the outer circle in such a way as to destroy any sense of balance in the design!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 January, 2014, 02:24:17 PM
Inappropriate? No way. The only way this could be more appropriate would be if every coin came encrusted in the dried blood of murdered children.

.
War is money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 January, 2014, 04:02:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 January, 2014, 02:24:17 PM
Inappropriate? No way. The only way this could be more appropriate would be if every coin came encrusted in the dried blood of murdered children.

.
War is money.

I'm not saying that a coin is inappropriate, I'm saying that the paucity of imagination that puts a jingoistic Kitchener image complete with slogan on a commemorative coin is somewhat breath-taking. Add in the slap-dash design sensibilities and you have something that's just, well, horrible.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 January, 2014, 04:31:46 PM
I don't have a problem with the image but surely it's not beyond the wit of man to make it fit on the coin properly.  I'm certainly no designer but, to my untrained eye, that looks crap!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 02 January, 2014, 04:43:34 PM
A horrible artifact. There's nothing in the design to suggest that the War was bad in any way, or that we should learn a lesson from it or even that lots of people died and it's them that we should remember.
It seems to me that, as well as being ugly, the design doesn't even do the job it's supposed to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 02 January, 2014, 04:55:08 PM
It's apparently the first of five coins to commemorate WWI, one for each of the years it went on, so presumably they'll get a bit less jingoistic with each new design. Still more than a bit daft, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 January, 2014, 05:02:41 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 02 January, 2014, 04:43:34 PM
It seems to me that, as well as being ugly, the design doesn't even do the job it's supposed to.

I suspect the 'job' is to suggest that 'we' won the war against the ghastly hun only because ordinary people mindlessly sacrificed themselves in vast numbers on the instructions of their vastly more-intelligent rich white male betters.  And please keep it up.

It seems so at odds with sentiment towards WWI both in the immediate aftermath (witness the distinctly untriumphant Cenotaph and its largely bombast-free remembrance ceremony) and in the near-century since.  The Kitchener poster has only ever appeared in my consciousness in a context of mockery or near-aghast recollection of what it represented.

Quote from: M.I.K.It's apparently the first of five coins to commemorate WWI, one for each of the years it went on, so presumably they'll get a bit less jingoistic with each new design. Still more than a bit daft, though.

Gods I hope so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 January, 2014, 05:04:05 PM
I don't agree that it doesn't show the bad side of war.  A Lord, pointing with his finger, and saying "Your country needs you", and then hundreds of thousands of gullible young men flocking to the colours, a great many of them never to return.  I think it's a brilliant image of what's wrong with war.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 January, 2014, 05:07:55 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 January, 2014, 05:04:05 PM... hundreds of thousands of gullible young men ...

Potentially millions, Tankie, our relatives among them.  Although it didn't prevent the introduction of conscription just two years later.  I think you're being very charitable ascribing that level of subtlety in your reading of the use of that image.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 January, 2014, 05:23:04 PM
Yes, TB, over 5 million British and Irish men served, taking into account conscription, as you mentioned, and various other advertising campaigns of the time, I thought it a tad unfair to blame all of them joining up on Lord Kitchener!!  Maybe you're right about the subtlety of the image but it certainly puts me off war.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 January, 2014, 05:40:58 PM
Apologies, Jim - that wasn't a dig at you.  I certainly hate the thing as well but possibly for slightly different, slightly insane, reasons.

.
I think I've mentioned before that neither WWI or WWII (or any of the wars since) could have happened without fiat currency like this loathsome object because there simply wasn't (and isn't) enough gold and silver in the world to pay for it. To me at least, the poor design is the least of its worries. They could've gone back in time and got Mars himself to design the thing in the Celestial Mint but it would still be a slap in the face for all those who thought they were fighting and dying for principles.

.
All those uncountable millions dead and dying for profit disguised as honour and then this coin comes along - almost rubbing our noses in it. Apologies again, Jim, I could have worded my initial (angry) post a lot better than I did.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 03 January, 2014, 12:20:18 PM
Just heard on the radio that Nick Griffin has been declared bankrupt. I didn't catch whether it was morally, or financially.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 03 January, 2014, 01:09:30 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 03 January, 2014, 12:20:18 PM
Just heard on the radio that Nick Griffin has been declared bankrupt. I didn't catch whether it was morally, or financially.


After going bankrupt he's now going to advise others on their finances.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25590155

The man's an Arse!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2014, 02:40:32 PM
The man's designed to be an arse - that's his role on the political stage. His purpose is to curtail serious debate by reinforcing the idea that only racists, bigots and idiots ask certain questions and also to control dissent and opinion in entirely the same way that Lab and Con exist only to bolster the false left/right paradigm. Nick Griffin, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, David Cameron - they're all doing exactly the same thing: telling us what we should be thinking about and what our opinions should be. "If you're like us, you should think this way - if you think another way, you're like them and not one of us."
.
Look past the actors, the stage and the script.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 03 January, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
Question for the U.K. boarders - is it mentioned much there in the U.K of Kitchener's use of concentration camps in the Boer War?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 03 January, 2014, 08:02:12 PM
The 1976 film The Eagle Has Landed made passing reference to it. Apart from that......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2014, 08:07:34 PM
Oh, Sharkey...Sometimes a cigar, is just a cigar. 

QuoteKitchener's use of concentration camps in the Boer War

certainly not mentioned in the usual school curriculum.  In fact, having done history for four years of high school, the whole of the Boer War was mentioned only once in passing.  British atrocities of any kind were completely ignored - WW1 was all patriotic but badly led Tommies in trenches, whilst WW2 was all horrible, nasty Nazis.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 January, 2014, 08:07:55 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 03 January, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
Question for the U.K. boarders - is it mentioned much there in the U.K of Kitchener's use of concentration camps in the Boer War?

The fact that the two Boer campaigns led the UK to invent the concentration camp is pretty much the only thing anyone knows about those conflicts. Apart from Breaker Morant (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZgNosQ8oCY).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 January, 2014, 08:54:07 PM
It was talked about in my school. My history teacher was an old fighter pilot and I presume he took the view that you could make your own mind up with the facts he gave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 January, 2014, 09:42:38 PM
It's pretty hard to avoid in Dublin - our only 'marble arch' (well, granite) is at the entrance to St. Stephen's Green, and it's a memorial to the Fusiliers who died at Ladysmith, Hart's Hill and Laing's Neck, names that fascinated me as kid passing under it en route feed the ducks (there's some others I've forgotten). St. Patrick's Cathedral is also bursting at the seams with Second Boer War memorials, but i didn't notice that 'til later.  I confess I probably got the whole thing mixed up with Zulu as a kid, but the exciting exotic names meant I always paid attention to Boer War stuff, particularly the Young Churchill strip in ancient Eagles.  Even so I wouldn't be surprised if it was Pat Mills that clued me in on the concentration camp thing.

(http://www2.historyarchives.org/Photos/77/Photo77505.jpg)

In fact other than ones related to our own parochial squabbles I'd say the only war memorial that's more prominent than Fusiliers' Arch is the Wellington Monument in the Phoenix Park, which has the benefit of massive and entirely kewl relief panels of our reluctant stable-born son thrashing the frenchies cast in bronze from cannons taken at Waterloo (I said it was kewl).  It's no coincidence that this is technically a Testimonial rather than a memorial.

Great War memorials are of course everywhere, but here they tend to be hidden in churches, cemeteries, private schools or embodied as CoI parish halls, although there's a few plaques in train stations too. Point being, I don't think there was anything as publicly prominent as Fusiliers' Arch in Dublin when I was a kid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 04 January, 2014, 01:20:14 AM
There is a 'Mons Terrace' here in this remoter part of the Island, apparently houses built by the CoI for returning Connaught Rangers Veterans, and in the RC Church there is a glorious stained glass windows, paid for by the Connaught Rangers. Little memorials in plain view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 January, 2014, 08:42:46 PM
Say what you like about Dave, at least he helps out his fellow lizards.  Currently doing the rounds on Twitter, someone does some detective work to reveal that a housing benefit meant to help "poor single mums" get a rung on the housing ladder is just as helpful to well-off two-income families who want to funnel money into their own housing companies: http://legalaidandme.proboards.com/thread/8301/audacity-cameron-hypocrisy-help-buy?post-20923=undefined
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 03:43:30 PM
"a housing benefit meant to help 'poor single mums'"!!  You're having a laugh.  The scheme's also open to poor single dads, quite comfortable couples, hard-up grandpas and grandmas, Eton toffs, and anybody else who happens to meant the criteria.  It's easy enough to have a pop at Cameron by getting the facts correct, you don't have to make them up!!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2014, 03:58:08 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 03:43:30 PM
"a housing benefit meant to help 'poor single mums'"!!  You're having a laugh.  The scheme's also open to poor single dads, quite comfortable couples, hard-up grandpas and grandmas, Eton toffs, and anybody else who happens to meant the criteria.  It's easy enough to have a pop at Cameron by getting the facts correct, you don't have to make them up!!

For fuck's sake. Since you clearly didn't read the linked story before knee-jerking your response: the 'poor single mum' reference is quite clearly with respect to the linked story, in which Call-Me-Dave is shown with a woman and her child and their lovely new home, father nowhere in evidence, and we are led to believe that this is 'Help To Buy' in action. Except that the woman in question is a sales director of a property services company which was marketing the house that Help To Buy supposedly helped to buy...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 04:04:30 PM
I'll respond any way I like, I don't need your permission to "knee jerk."  'Bye for now.  I'm sure you'll be back!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2014, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 04:04:30 PM
I'll respond any way I like

In a way that clearly shows you hadn't read the link you were criticising. If you want to keep making a fool of yourself, I'm certainly not going to try and stop you.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 04:38:24 PM
Thanks for that, all I've ever wanted is your approval.  You don't know how much it means to me.  Thanks again.  With all my love.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2014, 06:57:17 PM
And a Happy New Year one and all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2014, 07:02:51 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 03:43:30 PMThe scheme's also open to poor single dads, quite comfortable couples, hard-up grandpas and grandmas, Eton toffs, and anybody else who happens to meant the criteria.  It's easy enough to have a pop at Cameron by getting the facts correct, you don't have to make them up!!

If only I'd remembered to put "poor single mums" in some kind of quotation marks or something, so that people knew I was referring to a specific story that I posted a link to!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 07:32:28 PM
So, exactly where on the link you supplied, are the words "poor single mums"?  As I said, you're having a laugh!

Thanks, Sharky, Happy New Year to you and yours.  All the best for 2014.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2014, 07:51:42 PM
Thanks, Tankie :)

.
New Year's Resolution - it's only politics. If I let it upset me that means Mark Carney wins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2014, 07:52:03 PM
Double post, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2014, 09:49:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 07:32:28 PMSo, exactly where on the link you supplied, are the words "poor single mums"?  As I said, you're having a laugh

If don't know the difference between context and direct quotation that's unfortunate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2014, 10:27:42 PM
When I first started this thread I did so with a deal of trepidation. I mean, politics is hard work. Wars have been fought over it. I was not the only one who feared that this thread would end in bitter recriminations, fire, brimstone and general destruction.
.
We've come close a time or two but so far we've done a fine job of avoiding all that and I think we've had some cracking discussions. I have had my perspectives broadened and my opinions challenged, amended or even abandoned because of the discussions I've read and participated in on this thread - and Great Kudos to the mods and to Rebellion for putting up with it.

.
I'm not criticising anyone here (for me to do so would not only be thoroughly inappropriate but also completely hypocritical), I simply offer the observation that this thread is at its best when we pick at the politics and not each other.

.
Now to start "The Religious Thread"... :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2014, 10:58:30 PM
UP YOU'RS BUMFACE
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2014, 11:15:27 PM
NO! YUOR MUM !!1!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2014, 11:26:38 PM
I love this thread.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 January, 2014, 11:31:16 PM
Faggit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 January, 2014, 09:57:09 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2014, 09:49:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 January, 2014, 07:32:28 PMSo, exactly where on the link you supplied, are the words "poor single mums"?  As I said, you're having a laugh

If don't know the difference between context and direct quotation that's unfortunate.

For you to criticise me for my lack of knowledge of the English language with the above sentence is taking the biscuit!  Are you sure we didn't go to the same school?!   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 06 January, 2014, 06:37:37 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 January, 2014, 11:31:16 PM
Faggit.

Toff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 12:18:50 PM
So, it seems that 40% of English schools are fingerprinting their pupils with almost a third of them not asking for the required parental consent.

.
Now, I get that biometrics, when used properly and honestly, can be a great time-saver and a boon to the efficiency of school libraries, canteens and registers but - as with any technology - the opportunity for abuse (especially post-Snowden) is huge.

.
My greatest worry with this is the "Indoctrination Factor". Linked with other worrying things I have heard about from friends with children at school, such as random bag searches and 'isolation', fingerprinting seems just another form of conditioning. How will one defend or enjoy freedom and privacy when taught from an early age that there is no such thing?
.
The most important part of the fingerprinting process, the CHOICE of whether to consent or not, is trivialised, obscured or flatly ignored - reinforcing the myth that The System is your Ruler and eroding the truth that The System is your Servant.
.
We can teach our children to comply and raise a whole generation of good little consumers or we can teach them to think and call them human.

.
As an aside, one idea I love is to give schoolchildren a fractional vote as part of their education. Each person gets, for example, a full vote at the age of 18. Before that age, you get a fraction of a vote according to age: 17/18ths at 17, 8/9ths at 16, 15/18ths at 15 and so on right back to primary school. A whole "Modern Society" syllabus could be built around it, indoctrinating our future generations into the democratic process whilst also involving them in it and (bonus!) taking their views into account come election or referendum time.

.
Sorry, went off-topic a bit there. Anyhoo, here's a linkie for the fingerprinting in schools story:   www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2014/01/one-million-pupils-fingerprinted-school.html#more-5794
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2014, 12:26:57 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 06 January, 2014, 06:37:37 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 January, 2014, 11:31:16 PM
Faggit.

Toff.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Fingers_and_thumb_in_circle_downward_motion.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 12:34:19 PM
That's not how you take a fingerprint...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2014, 12:47:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 12:18:50 PMAs an aside, one idea I love is to give schoolchildren a fractional vote as part of their education. Each person gets, for example, a full vote at the age of 18. Before that age, you get a fraction of a vote according to age: 17/18ths at 17, 8/9ths at 16, 15/18ths at 15 and so on right back to primary school. A whole "Modern Society" syllabus could be built around it, indoctrinating our future generations into the democratic process whilst also involving them in it and (bonus!) taking their views into account come election or referendum time.

The problem with trying to indoctrinate someone at a young age is that they're just as likely to become vociferous and intransigent opponents of the practice as adults - not an equal chance of this happening, I grant you, more like one in ten, but it's still there.

----

A sad story this one, that once I gave it a moment's thought just makes me angrier and angrier: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/10/bedroom-tax-exemptions-stephanie-bottrill
You see, I know for a fact from personal experience that benefits office people lie to your face about what you are subject/entitled to - they are under instruction to do so from their employers.  What I don't see in coverage of this story is anyone asking if this elderly woman was lied to about her being exempt from the poll bedroom tax, but I do see an unusually open amount of discussion about the benefits office making the kind of mistake they normally dig their heels in and keep mum about.
In a way the government response is also what Sharky is talking about: conditioning us to accept our place, and that our government can now kill people through neglect or outright deception and there's not a thing we can do about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2014, 01:00:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 12:18:50 PM
As an aside, one idea I love is to give schoolchildren a fractional vote as part of their education. Each person gets, for example, a full vote at the age of 18. Before that age, you get a fraction of a vote according to age: 17/18ths at 17, 8/9ths at 16, 15/18ths at 15 and so on right back to primary school. A whole "Modern Society" syllabus could be built around it, indoctrinating our future generations into the democratic process whilst also involving them in it and (bonus!) taking their views into account come election or referendum time.

Great idea this.  I'm not sure about the specific proportions, but the principle is fantastic.  My immediate reaction was that this disproportionately increases the voting power of domineering people who happen to have large families, but probably no more than is currently the case, and I suspect the benefits of an engaged electorate would outweigh such factors in any event.  I can guarantee that planning laws and tax-breaks for theme parks would be revised toot-sweet, and the election of Prez Rickard is just around the corner.

As to the fingerprint thing, sheesh, how depressing.  Schools spend enough of their time reinforcing systems of control and passive acquiesence without adding fingerprinting (which in itself seems laughably outdated when every kid's phone can be used to track their every move and interaction).  Although that said, at this point it's probably a foregone conclusion that any right to personal privacy is a thing of the past, so maybe delivering that lesson is part of a school's grim remit.  I've certainly taken to assuming that every thing I say and do will be taken down and used against me, maybe it would have been a good thing if I'd thought that way when I was younger and hornier.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 01:11:16 PM
I too am a victim of the DWP. It has lied to me, bullied and threatened me to such an extent that I have been forced to reject it. I will claim not one more penny from it in its current piratical form.

.
My life's a lot harder now and the council's itching to evict me because I can't pay the rent - but I'm free of their bullshit now. Whatever they do to me must be without my consent and against my will. The indoctrination is already well underway if the attitude of the council official 'dealing' with me is anything to go by: He seems unable to even conceive of answering any question or responding to any point that isn't in the council's rule book. He seems genuinely offended by my questioning of the system and my suggestions for a resolution to our dispute. As if he is incapable of sensing the Real World and can see only rule books and spreadsheets. In the Real World, I don't have any money to speak of. In the Real World, council housing is for people who don't have a lot of money. In the Real World, I live in a council flat. In the spreadsheet world, there are not enough numbers in Cell 1A to balance out the numbers in Cell 1B - therefore I am too poor to live in housing designed for the poor. This is what we're up against, and it begins in school.

.
Be Productive.
.
Be Compliant.
.
Be Paid.

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2014, 01:14:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 01:11:16 PMIn the spreadsheet world, there are not enough numbers in Cell 1A to balance out the numbers in Cell 1B - therefore I am too poor to live in housing designed for the poor. This is what we're up against, and it begins in school.

Well put, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 03:34:16 PM
That Grauniad story was interesting.
.
If Mrs Bottrill had only hung on and let The System do its work! If only she'd trusted The System! How subtly this shifts the blame...
.
I note that the 'Under-Occupancy Charge" is referred to as a 'tax' throughout the article. It is not a tax, it is a charge. Herein stands the biggest elephant in the room. Taxes are legally unavoidable but charges are legally voluntary. This being so, anybody who chooses to pay the charge is free to do so and anyone who doesn't want to pay it is also free to do so.
.
But the article focuses on technicalities and nuances of the legislation, implying that the charge is a tax and therefore unavoidable no matter the form it takes or the Legalese from which it is constructed. And by focusing on the minutiae we are distracted from the most important question.
.
What if I say no?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2014, 07:31:28 PM
Your post re: fingerprinting kids got me digging around a bit Sharky, and this is what popped up as a vision of the immediate future:  China's mandatory ID cards (http://privacysos.org/node/1296). 

QuoteKrauss [an AIDS activist] became interested in the Chinese ID cards because they contain information about HIV status. They also contain information like mental health reports and political views, in addition to basic biographical information such as where one lives and works. All of that data and more is immediately available to police officers, who swipe these ID cards at traffic stops and during field interrogations.
....
A billion Chinese citizens have government-issued smart-cards, identification cards with a little radio antennae and a micro-controller in them. They're mandatory.

Only a matter a time elsewhere, although my guess would be that we'll just bypass the card stage and go straight to biometrics linked to a database.  Assuming we're not there already. But sure if you've nothing to hide... etc.

That's a good blog, Privacy Matters (http://privacysos.org/blog/1).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 07:48:33 PM
The aim is to get us all chipped. No chip, no access.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2014, 08:06:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2014, 07:48:33 PM
The aim is to get us all chipped. No chip, no access.

I honestly doubt it.  Oh it'll happen, but it'll be based on something passive like facial recognition/biometrics, and whatever loopholes are left we'll close ourselves with whatever form the personal computing/comms device takes next.  No need to have something explicit to resist, like a chip or a card.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2014, 12:59:23 PM
Here's a really excellent blog post that explores the role of 'tone' in protest: Once upon a time... (http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.ie/2014/01/tone-is-tool-of-oppressor.html).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 13 January, 2014, 02:33:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 January, 2014, 12:59:23 PM
Here's a really excellent blog post that explores the role of 'tone' in protest: Once upon a time... (http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.ie/2014/01/tone-is-tool-of-oppressor.html).

An excellent read sir. I cannot dispute any part of the article, the guy certainly knows his Onions.

In relation to the 'Snowden' points raised: When I first became aware of the leaks I (rather naively) imagined that a 'change' may come in the way information was handled/stolen. But, as the article suggests, the powers that be seem to have made themselves look 'Hard-done by' by the eminently Evil Mr Snowden.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2014, 12:20:22 PM
Yes, a very good essay, that.
.
I have found that mirroring the style of 'authority' back at them is a great deal of fun. For example, I try not to fall into the trap of writing things like "I think that" or "you should be" etc in favour of phrases like "it has been decided that" or "your obligations in this matter are" and so forth.
.
It's a bit more complicated than that, of course. The first thing I keep in mind when writing to 'officials' is that they are human beings too, with all the emotions and human foibles of anyone else, and so I treat them with kindness, humanity and respect. I would never write, for example, "you are treating me unfairly" but rather, "please inform the Council that it is treating me unfairly".  Putting the two styles together often results in sentences like "I would be much obliged if you could please tell the Council that it has been decided that its current attack on me is unwarranted and that such unacceptable behaviour will not be tolerated."
.
I pretend that the corporation, company or department I'm writing to is actually owned/run by Satan or Darth Vader or someone equally dispassionate and that the poor sap who actually deals with my letters might get boiled in oil or distance-throttled if they don't get me to capitulate. My goal is to treat these poor wage slaves with more humour, respect and humanity than their own bosses whilst not backing down an inch from what I want. I figure that one can say "no" with a snarl or with a smile and saying it with a smile is lots more fun. For instance, sometimes they let little details slip that work in my favour and in these instances one can adopt an almost conspiratorial tone, thanking them for their "help" and praising their bravery. (Praising their bravery is brilliant - they hate that.)
.
So, write to that official as if he or she was one of your friends being forced to do an unpleasant job. Never mention Nuremberg, at least not directly, or that the Nazis would have got nowhere without the steady 'mission creep' of civil servants and other bureaucrats (from issuing business licenses to gathering racial data to authorising the seizure of Jewish property to issuing train tickets to ordering more gas) - but always keep this in the back of your mind. Writing to the Council in order to query the lawfulness or otherwise of the Council Tax (eg.) isn't just an excuse to have a pop at the fat cats (as if they give a shit anyway) but a great opportunity to 'save' someone from falling by inches into Fascism.
.
Tone, yes - it's all about tone. One only has to watch the news to know that - the tone with which questions like "what really happened on 9/11?" are met, for example.
.
That essay also reminded me of the discussion we had over men's "ownership" of women a couple of pages ago and I found the observation that the elite's first feminise those they mean to destroy very interesting indeed - I'll be keeping an eye out for that, now!
.
Own the tone!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 15 January, 2014, 10:50:25 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 January, 2014, 09:42:38 PM

Great War memorials are of course everywhere, but here they tend to be hidden in churches, cemeteries, private schools or embodied as CoI parish halls, although there's a few plaques in train stations too. Point being, I don't think there was anything as publicly prominent as Fusiliers' Arch in Dublin when I was a kid.

Agree with your point about these memorials not being publicly prominent in this country, which to my mind is a great shame, when you consider the staggering numbers of Irishmen killed in both world wars. That being said, the War Memorial Gardens in Islandbridge, Dublin 8 are a beautifully maintained and fitting tribute to those who died in both conflicts. The memorial itself is, as they say, off the beaten track but well worth the visit, especially in Spring or Summer when the gardens can be seen in all their glory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 January, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
Quote from: paddykafka on 15 January, 2014, 10:50:25 AMThat being said, the War Memorial Gardens in Islandbridge, Dublin 8 are a beautifully maintained and fitting tribute to those who died in both conflicts. The memorial itself is, as they say, off the beaten track but well worth the visit, especially in Spring or Summer when the gardens can be seen in all their glory.

Yeah, fantastic spot, can be part of a great walk along the Liffey too, looping across and back up through the Park.  Should have mentioned it, but it was neither open nor part of my consciousness when I was a nipper, which is what I was thinking about.  That Lutyens could memorialise like a good'un, really one of the all-time great architects. 

The other sort-of war memorial that's worth a visit is the Airmen's (or 'German') Cemetery behind the Reconciliation Centre in Glencree (WWII, naturally).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 January, 2014, 12:27:21 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 January, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
Quote from: paddykafka on 15 January, 2014, 10:50:25 AMThat being said, the War Memorial Gardens in Islandbridge, Dublin 8 are a beautifully maintained and fitting tribute to those who died in both conflicts. The memorial itself is, as they say, off the beaten track but well worth the visit, especially in Spring or Summer when the gardens can be seen in all their glory.

Yeah, fantastic spot, can be part of a great walk along the Liffey too, looping across and back up through the Park.  Should have mentioned it, but it was neither open nor part of my consciousness when I was a nipper, which is what I was thinking about.  That Lutyens could memorialise like a good'un, really one of the all-time great architects. 


I'll third that.  Very close to where I live at the moment in fact.  Last time I was there was during the summer heatwave, when I took my friend and his fiancee on an ill-advised but very enjoyable trip down the Liffey on my inflatable dinghy.  There's no better fun than potentially fatal fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 15 January, 2014, 02:01:49 PM
No internet? No problem, they can still keep an eye on you and your computer!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25743074

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 January, 2014, 06:16:23 PM
Odd thing happened while I was in the shopping centre today. I was sitting eating my lunch when I saw a small crowd watching an argument between a man with his wife and a seated woman, breastfeeding her child on the bench.

I went over, asked someone if the mans outrage was because of the breast feeding, to which I needed not have waited upon a reply due to a sudden cry of 'fucking disgusting!' From the offender. Ok, not to demonise the guy but he was being a prick so i'll carry on. The poor girl seemed completely at a loss and almost on the verge of tears.

It was at this point i stepped in and, amidst similar demands, asked the guy to leave the area. He gave an indignant look at all of us and wondered off, scowling.

I personally felt a little angry hat someone could still maintain a distaste for public breastfeeding. It seem's the most illogical thing to hate when it's both completely natural and immensely healthy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2014, 07:42:04 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 17 January, 2014, 06:16:23 PM
I personally felt a little angry hat someone could still maintain a distaste for public breastfeeding. It seem's the most illogical thing to hate when it's both completely natural and immensely healthy.

It's a bewildering attitude, alright, very hard to fathom how people find it disgusting or inappropriate.  And even if your upbringing does leave you finding it distasteful, what's it got to do with you anyway? Stopping looking and move on.  Well done for standing up for actual decency, Hawkmonger. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 17 January, 2014, 07:50:28 PM
What Tordelback said. Good job Hawkmonger for standing up to that knob head.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 17 January, 2014, 08:44:50 PM
Aye, good on yer Hawkmonger  :thumbsup:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 18 January, 2014, 12:39:15 AM
Good man.

Seriously, what is more likely to cause offence, breastfeeding a baby, or publicly humiliating a nursing mother in a shopping centre?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 01:34:14 AM
Good show, Hawkmonger - it's good to stand up to bullies.
.
I do wonder, though, where the line is. Would we be as quick to defend someone urinating in public? Defecating? Being angry? Making love? Walking around naked? All perfectly natural and commonplace biological functions - no different to breast feeding.
.
The miscreant's poor behaviour aside, who's to say what's proper and what's not? The young lady has the right to breast feed her baby and the miscreant has the right to be offended by that. It could be argued that the miscreant failed in his responsibility to keep his anger in check and that the young lady failed in her responsibility to consider the sensibilities of others.
.
I do find it bewildering that normal bodily functions could be so taboo in a world swamped with tits and bums;  tits and bums in every magazine,  tits and bums on every screen,  tits and bums on cereal packets,  tits and bums all over the shop. Yet a real-life naked human body (or even a single breast) is regarded almost as something demonic. Baffling.
.
Anyhoo, my 57 shades of bullshit aside, well done Hawkie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 18 January, 2014, 02:26:21 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 01:34:14 AM
I do wonder, though, where the line is. Would we be as quick to defend someone urinating in public? Defecating? Being angry? Making love? Walking around naked? All perfectly natural and commonplace biological functions - no different to breast feeding.

The line is harm to others.  Being angry is fine unless the angry person is smacking someone about the place or shouting in their face, causing emotional distress. Urinating, defecating, and love-making can leave icky unhygienicness around and lead to the spread of disease.

Breast feeding is highly unlikely to contaminate anyone, unless the mother has a highly contagious disease and is squirting poisonous breast milk directly into other people's faces.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 02:57:51 AM
Technically, you could say the same things about semen, faeces and urine - so long as you're free of highly contagious diseases and aren't squirting these substances directly in people's faces then everything should be fine. Sticky and stinky may be though, I'll give you that.
.
Did I read somewhere that urine is generally sterile, or did I dream it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 18 January, 2014, 04:21:24 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 02:57:51 AM
Technically, you could say the same things about semen, faeces and urine.

Only if they're going into some kind of receptacle. If they're in the middle of the street, there's a bit of a danger to the unwary and poop's full of loads of bacteria whether you've got an ailment or not.

Urine is sterile-ish, but apparently not sterile enough. You can still pick up infections from it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 18 January, 2014, 04:24:19 AM
And that's politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jo-L on 18 January, 2014, 05:21:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 02:57:51 AM
Technically, you could say the same things about semen, faeces and urine - so long as you're free of highly contagious diseases and aren't squirting these substances directly in people's faces then everything should be fine. Sticky and stinky may be though, I'll give you that.
.
Did I read somewhere that urine is generally sterile, or did I dream it?

I almost supported you, but common sense took hold.  Breastfeeding is 1000% different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 10:55:05 AM
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that these things be made mandatory nor would I be in favour of people just dropping their skiddies and pooing, cumming and peeing all over one another in the middle of a busy high street or supermarket any more than I'd be in favour of the breast feeding lady squirting her boob juice at passers by.
.
I'll wager that all of us have at least peed in public at least once in our lives. Usually, when caught short, people pee in public but as out of the way as possible - into a grid or under a tree or something. And very few people, I imagine, would even want to leave their doings in the middle of a pavement. If suddenly seized by the galloping squits with no toilet in range, wouldn't you look for a secluded spot over a grid in an alley or behind a skip in the corner of a car park or something?
.
The question is, if you saw somebody having a go at a person squitting into a perfectly reasonable grid in a relatively secluded public area, would you support the squitter or the squawker?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 January, 2014, 01:00:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 10:55:05 AM
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that these things be made mandatory nor would I be in favour of people just dropping their skiddies and pooing, cumming and peeing all over one another in the middle of a busy high street or supermarket any more than I'd be in favour of the breast feeding lady squirting her boob juice at passers by.
.
I'll wager that all of us have at least peed in public at least once in our lives. Usually, when caught short, people pee in public but as out of the way as possible - into a grid or under a tree or something. And very few people, I imagine, would even want to leave their doings in the middle of a pavement. If suddenly seized by the galloping squits with no toilet in range, wouldn't you look for a secluded spot over a grid in an alley or behind a skip in the corner of a car park or something?
.
The question is, if you saw somebody having a go at a person squitting into a perfectly reasonable grid in a relatively secluded public area, would you support the squitter or the squawker?
.

It depends on what's acceptable in the area you're doing said activity. Some cities put out public, open air urinals on busy streets where there are lots of bars and clubs. I think that's fine and it seems fairly sensible to me.
Most shopping centres have various eateries and most don't have any restrictions on eating pre-packaged food on the public benches. Essentially, a mother feeding her baby from her breast is no different from anyone else eating their food in the shopping centre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 January, 2014, 01:15:00 PM
Also, if where talking about potential infection risk here due to (albeit highly unlikely) exposure to breast milk I can vouch the risk just isn't their. Breast milk is usually highly sterile and only a risk to people if the mother has an infection of some kind, in which case she will not be breast feeding a child anyway.

It's still a thousand times more hygienic than exposure to formula milk. Do you have any idea how quickly that stuff goes of and just what exactly it degrades into?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 January, 2014, 01:22:50 PM
I suspect that the act of feeding isn't actually the issue. The breast is the issue. It isn't comparable to offence caused by the act of shitting or shagging or pissing, it's only comparable to the possible offence caused by other exposed body parts.
I don't think that any body parts are offensive and if there's a legitimate reason for them to be exposed then so be it.
The only real reason I can think that a bum or willy or whatever would be exposed in the public area of a shopping centre is through some sort of first aid emergency. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 January, 2014, 01:34:59 PM
This pretty much. It's more than a little prudish to claim the sight of breasts in public offends you, when any heterosexual male is more than happy to look at them in his own home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 01:37:53 PM
Apropos of nothing in particular, I seem to remember reading somewhere that, due to all the chemicals in our environment (from exhaust fumes to cleaning products to artificial growth hormones and antibiotics in our food to the unfiltered traces of drugs in our water supplies to plastic residue from all that food packaging and so on and on) one of the most broadly toxic foods there is in the Western World can be human breast milk.
.
Best to clean that toilet bowl with half a lemon than by tipping chemicals down it, in my view. I'd say that goes double if you're pregnant - you shy away from cigarette smoke but not chemical fumes? You avoid alcohol but not the chemical soup that is diet pop? Madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 January, 2014, 01:40:38 PM

GERMANS: HARIBO EVEN
MORE RACIST THAN
THOSE OLD KIA-ORA ADS (http://www.thelocal.de/20140117/haribo-pulls-racist-candy-after-complaints)

(http://marystevens.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/tete-de-negre.JPG) (http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/thumb/1390/03/1390035270862s.jpg) (http://www.bonbonsgourmands.fr/images/b_929167_image1.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2014, 01:41:58 PM
First aid on a willy?
.
"Help! I just got bit by a snake and I need the poison sucked out!"
.
You know, that might just work...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Llowellen on 18 January, 2014, 10:26:20 PM
Funnily enough, I have performed first aid on a willy on two separate occasions. I was unfortunate enough to once work a production line where 25 people would grimly stand around assembling pizzas for the supermarket. It would be one persons job to fish jalapeño peppers out of a bucket and drop them on the passing pizzas. Every once in a while that person would forget to wash their hands before using the loo..

..but I don't anyone ever did it twice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 19 January, 2014, 08:23:07 PM
Quote from: Llowellen on 18 January, 2014, 10:26:20 PM
Funnily enough, I have performed first aid on a willy on two separate occasions. I was unfortunate enough to once work a production line where 25 people would grimly stand around assembling pizzas for the supermarket...

I was slightly worried about where this was going for a moment.

Horse meat's bad enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 January, 2014, 05:50:14 PM
Thought I'd share an interesting encounter I had with the Thin Blue Line the other morning.
.
I was driving a little truck through a certain Northern city at silly o' clock in the morning, no other traffic, quiet as the grave - just made my first drop of the morning, making good time - when all of a suddenness this police car appears all lit up and flashing like the vanguard of an alien invasion with the word FOLLOW shining out of the back window. So, somewhat perplexed, I followed...
.
Up the road I was led, around a roundabout and back and up a little dimly lit nook. I stopped at the mouth of the nook, the police car, still flashing importantly, parked further down and the driver jumped out, gesticulating at me to draw near, which I did. As I drew close I wound the window down and asked, "Is there a problem, Constable?"
.
He then struck the most curious pose and, without answering me, looked down and towards the wheel of the lorry and pointed sternly towards a dark slab in the ground that transpired to be a weighbridge. I repeated my question. "Is there a problem, Constable?"
.
"Yeah, you're getting weighed."
"Why?"
"Get on the weighbridge, Sir. It's the law."
"Law? What law?"
"Your vehicle is going to be weighed and then inspected by VOSA."
"I don't really have time for this - I have deliveries to make. What happens if I say no?"
"If you...? I'll impound your vehicle! Now get on the weighbridge!"
"Okay, okay - Jeez."
.
So, the lorry was weighed (all fine - just pre-packaged salad, hardly any weight at all) and then I was ordered to follow the police car, now flashing rather angrily, to another side road lay-by where a flange of VOSA inspectors lay in wait. I pulled up behind the police car and the driver got out and stalked once again to my open window - obviously with things on his mind.
.
"You know, Sir, nobody has ever asked me what would happen if they didn't follow me, and that's got me thinking that you must be a poor driver who..."
"How dare you. This is a large vehicle I am driving with a lot of weight and power in it - a vehicle like this could do a lot of damage and I take my responsibilities seriously."
"Nevertheless, Sir, I'm just doing my job and if you're going to get shirty..."
"I am not being shirty, I just asked questions."
"Get shirty with me, this'll just take longer."
"I agree. Let's just get on with it then, shall we?"
"Because if you're going to be awkward about..."
"I said I agree - now can we please get on with it? I have places to be." (Heart pounding, brain screaming SHUT UP!)
.
"Right." He stalks off towards the VOSA guys. He comes back with his hand outstretched. "Keys." I hand them to him. He stalks off again. I've done it now, they're gonna' make me wait for hours. Jump through hoops. Don't let it get to you. There's no hurry to get to the next drop yet. Settle in. Feet on the dash, huddle into the seat, Classic FM. But he's back.
.
"How many points on your license?"
"None."
"Got it with you?"
"No."
"Driver's card?"
"In the tachograph."
"I need to see it."
"Won't eject without the ignition being on. I need the keys."
"The inspectors have the keys."
"I suppose we wait, then."
"No. Name and address."
I tell him. He checks it. He grudgingly confirms the spotlessness of my license. Is he... is he actually thinking about the question I asked him?
.
"I don't know what your problem is with me, Sir, but if you don't..."
"I have no problem with you or the police. I just worry that you don't know the difference between being a police officer and a police constable any more. The police are being asked to do a lot of questionable things, these days."
"Like what?"
"Like this very inspection - you'd expect the wholesale stopping and searching of innocent civilians in China or North Korea - but in Britain? Really?"
"Surely you realise that we must keep unsafe vehicles off the road?"
"That's not the issue. You ordered me to stop as if I had no choice in the matter - only a police officer can do that, a police constable cannot."
"You don't know what you're talking about - an officer and a constable are the same thing."
"No. It is the duty of a police constable to uphold the Common Law; to ensure loss, harm or damage comes to no-one on his or her patch. The role of the police officer to enforce Statute Law and raise revenue for the state..." (My God - he's nodding to himself, looking down again, hands resting in the arm holes of his stab vest. I press on...) "...My point is that you can't be both. You can be a constable or an officer - you see, the officer has forced me off the road..."
"I REQUESTED you to pull in, Sir."
"My point - a request backed by the threat of impound. In enforcing statute law by depriving me of my right to go about my lawful business you have failed in your duty as a constable to uphold my right to go about my lawful business uninterrupted, do you see?"
"No, Sir. I think you've got your definitions mixed up."
"Maybe so but I'd much rather be speaking to a constable than a mere officer. We need all the constables we can get."
"I really don't think you're right in your definitions."
"Well, I have given it a lot of thought, Constable, and I believe that I'm right."
"Then we'll just have to agree to disagree, Sir."
"Shame, but okay."
.
The VOSA inspectors have arrived but stand back, waiting to begin. First, the policeman must give me a lecture.
"Do you know how many accidents I've seen through poorly maintained vehicles?"
"More than me, I'm sure."
"The lorry parked behind you is one and a half tons overweight. The driver thought..."
"Hold on, are you sure you're supposed to be sharing such private and sensitive legal information?"
"The point is, Sir..."
"I know the point constable, the officer in you is enforcing statute law and you are using that to keep me here for as long as you can - getting your revenge for me asking questions, yes?" (Brain to Shark: THAT'S IT, I'M OUTTA' HERE!) "That's Not how..." He splutters and spins on his heel, the VOSA inspectors stand and watch, waiting to continue. Am I going to jail now?
.
The inspectors wait. I ask them what they're waiting for. "We need your permission to continue." The policeman and I look at each other. "You have it," I say, and the inspection begins.
.
The policeman can't let it go. "I'm just doing my job - and, for your information, I've checked my Warrant Card and it says 'Constable,' so there you go. (Wait a minute - he checked???) I drive lorries too - 30 tonners. I know what I'm talking about but for you to want to not co-operate..."
"What, not co-operating by parking where you told me to park and allowing the inspection you ordered me to allow? Just how am I failing to co-operate?"
"You weren't TOLD to do anything, I requested you to stop and you got shirty with me."
"No, you flagged me down and I asked you if there was a problem."
"No I didn't."
"Yes you did - I asked you 'is there a problem?' twice and you told me to get on the weighbridge or you'd impound my vehicle."
"No, that's not what happened." (He's looking at the floor again, feet apart, arms akimbo - he's trying to get me to lose my rag, to start an argument.) "Well, as neither of us recorded the conversation we'll just have to agree to disagree, as you said earlier."
.
Then, the most extraordinary thing. With not another word he stalks back to his vehicle and drives the police car away, its lights flashing uncertainly. The VOSA inspectors, and I was struck how very, very polite they were to me, finished their inspection (clean bill of health - no defects) in sharp time. Paperwork, handshake, on my way, a few minutes lost, trying to find my way back to the main road.
.
No further incidents (so far).
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 January, 2014, 06:32:56 PM
Be VERY careful, Sharky. Doing nothing wrong (even when in possession of a video camera) is apparently no obstacle to a good kicking if the Long Arm decides you're a mouthy git who needs taking down a peg:

http://bambuser.com/v/4284486

(You'll get the idea in the first minute or so, then skip to about 7:30 for the inevitable.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 January, 2014, 06:48:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 22 January, 2014, 06:32:56 PM
Be VERY careful, Sharky. Doing nothing wrong (even when in possession of a video camera) is apparently no obstacle to a good kicking if the Long Arm decides you're a mouthy git who needs taking down a peg:

http://bambuser.com/v/4284486

(You'll get the idea in the first minute or so, then skip to about 7:30 for the inevitable.)

Cheers

Jim

Wow. That's a pretty cut and dried account of Police operating beyond their legal powers.

Any idea if there have been repercussions?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 January, 2014, 06:56:14 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 22 January, 2014, 06:48:57 PM
Any idea if there have been repercussions?

Apparently, that constitutes resisting arrest (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/21/police-accused-brutality-anti-fracking-protester).

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 January, 2014, 07:04:25 PM
It'll be interesting to see what happens here. I suspect a police spokesperson will offer a backhanded apology to the media and it will be swept under the carpet.
Time will tell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2014, 07:14:07 PM
Nonsense!  We'll see justice done just like we did for that Brizilian electrician.
Speaking of which, anyone notice how that inquiry into the wrongful death of an innocent man took years, but Plebgate - an inquiry into whether or not a cunt was as big a cunt as someone claimed - took mere months?  Odd that, given the latter was one person's word against another while the former was a widely-reported murder with hundreds of witnesses.  I wonder why one was prioritised, yet not the other?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 January, 2014, 07:19:06 PM
That was a fascinating read, Sharky.  I'd say you were the talk of the station after that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 January, 2014, 08:58:43 PM
All I can say, Sharky, is that you must have a photographic memory, I can't remember word for word what I said to my missus five minutes ago!!  Or do we allow for some poetic licence here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2014, 02:36:13 AM
Of course there is some poetic license and the language has been tidied up and clarified a bit and made a little more entertaining but, in all the major aspects, it's a true and accurate account of the encounter.
.
Can't watch that link on my 'phone but I'll have a look when I can get to a webbed-up pc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 25 January, 2014, 10:57:34 AM
Not political as such but:


Yes It's your money, and if you can tell  us what you need it for we may let you have it!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25861717

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2014, 04:19:16 PM
Interesting article, Kev, thanks for that.
.
Firstly, not one penny of your money belongs to you, whether it's in your bank account or not. As all 'money' (really just promissory notes) begins its life created by the banks and then borrowed by governments, businesses and individuals, every ha'penny needs 'paying back' and so it ALL belongs to the banks and they can do what they want with it.
.
Secondly, because of this assetless money creation, all the big banks are technically insolvent. The money creation process now being out of control, banks must do all they can to maintain healthy balance sheets in order to perpetuate the facade of solvency.
.
Thirdly, where the Hell do these vampires get the idea that they're the only ones respectable enough to look after the money?  mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/hsbc-judge-approves-1-9b-drug-money-laundering-accord.html
.
Fourthly, if you want money that belongs to you and you alone, try keeping your savings in silver and gold (and now is a good time to buy because the banking system is keeping g/s prices artificially low to mask the plummeting 'value' of paper currencies around the world (India and China are especially switched on to this fact - China, after a massive gold buying spree, now has more than any other country in the world)), and also have a look at Bitcoin, which is growing in popularity and acceptability almost daily.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2014, 07:39:50 PM
Another nail in the coffin of the right to protest?
.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/24/water-cannon-democratic-protest

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 25 January, 2014, 09:15:32 PM
....jaysus. I was looking through the Ukranian government's anti free-speech laws that have caused nationwide protest and they are not at all dissimilar to the kind of thing we are seeing pushed here.

In other political news: UKIP want gun laws to be relaxed (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/275420a4-8500-11e3-8968-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rRmobvnV)

.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 January, 2014, 09:33:11 PM
Nope. Not in my god damn life time it wont.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 January, 2014, 11:11:16 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2014, 04:19:16 PM
Fourthly, if you want money that belongs to you and you alone, try keeping your savings in silver and gold (and now is a good time to buy because the banking system is keeping g/s prices artificially low to mask the plummeting 'value' of paper currencies around the world (India and China are especially switched on to this fact - China, after a massive gold buying spree, now has more than any other country in the world)), and also have a look at Bitcoin, which is growing in popularity and acceptability almost daily.

Gold and silver have no intrinsic value beyond what the markets set; its worth is as much a fiction as that of paper money, albeit a different fiction. Maybe Bitcoin's not that great (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-want-bitcoin-to-die-in-a.html), either.

Unless you're going to live in the hills and barter with the food you grow and the livestock you raise, you're pretty much stuck with system we've got. And even if you did voluntarily return yourself to the Stone Age, the land would only be yours for as long as no one wanted to build a road through it or discovered there was shale gas underneath it.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2014, 01:21:15 PM
Gold and silver do have intrinsic value in that they are useful, and in some cases vital, in industry and technology.
.
But yes, you're correct - no money ever has or ever will have intrinsic value. If one wishes to purchase goods and services with items of intrinsic value then one has to go back to barter. It is a currency's lack of intrinsic value that makes it so fungible and therefore so useful.
.
Yes, Bitcoin has its problems and its downsides, just like any currency, and it is an emergent system that is bound to throw up some unexpected circumstances along the way. There was nothing I read in that article you linked to that turned me off BtC and I think that when the author starts accusing the cryptocurrency of creating markets for assassinations and child pornography he's just grasping at straws. Was a child never sold for Euros, a man never killed for Sterling, drugs never purchased with a credit card, illegal weapons never bought with a cheque?
.
As for the second part of your post - wow, spoken like a true serf, man! That's the elite's argument; do as you're told or get stuffed. To assert that the only choice we have is between the modern age and the stone age is in my view a vast and unhelpful oversimplification of the monetary problem and the very real solutions which do exist that would allow all of us to live in the modern age - including those of us who live in countries a lot closer to the stone age than we are.
.
The world we could have, should we ever decide to turn our industries and technologies to serving people instead of profits, is astounding. But we're told that we can't afford that world - and who tells us we can't afford it? We all know who and we all know the kinds of worlds they luxuriate in.
.
Come away from the Dark Side, Jim! Don't listen to Emperor Camerontine and Darth Carney - their false dichotomies are poisoning your mind!
.
Come over to the Light, Jim - where we say No to false choices and strive to forge our own currenc... er, destinies!
.
www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/james-delingpole/9106132/those-bitcoin-weirdos-might-just-be-right/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 January, 2014, 01:23:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2014, 01:21:15 PM
As for the second part of your post - wow, spoken like a true serf, man!

Patronising, much?

One of is in the grip of a complete fantasy. I'll give you a clue: it isn't me.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2014, 01:33:20 PM
Trust me - my life at the moment is very real.
.
And I patronised the argument, not the man. Your posts indicate to me that you are a man of intelligence capable of reasoning and communicating in a deep and astute manner. I simply find the 'no other way' argument beneath us both.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 January, 2014, 01:47:12 PM
I don't really think it's possible to sustain a culturally diverse world population of 7 billion without relying on currency in place of barter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2014, 02:43:53 PM
How about currency alongside barter, as happens now?
.
As I say, it's not an either/or thing. It is perfectly feasible for fiat currencies, cryptocurrencies, metallic currencies and barter to coexist. Indeed, each one has its own merits and its own drawbacks, each one more useful in some circumstances than others.
.
For example, the debt-based currency we use at the moment is ideal for backing big business ventures. The money is created at interest and then invested into business projects - success generates returns for the money creators and failure results in the loss of artificial money anyway.
.
Socially created money, currencies created interest free by governments, are ideal for funding public needs like hospitals and social services. This type of money just pumps around the system, doing its job, until it is retired or destroyed, leaving no debt behind it.
.
Cryptocurrencies are good for e-shopping and e-transactions because they also are not based on debt and remove the need for expensive middlemen (banks, credit cards, etc.) and infrastructure.
.
Barter is good if I've ended up with two copies of a book you haven't got and you've ended up with two copies of a book I haven't got.
.
Metallic currencies are good in the End Times, when faith in all other currencies fail. Also, gold is worth something just about everywhere - even thus far undiscovered South American pygmies could probably be talked into trading you food and water for a gold coin.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 January, 2014, 05:07:05 PM
Well, the Crunch impends...
.
The bailiffs are coming on Monday morning, intent on rendering me homeless. It is my intent to foil their intentions. Will the loopy comic book guy prevail or be ground under the oppressor's heel?
.
I'm kinda' intrigued to know the answer myself...
.
Place your bets!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 28 January, 2014, 05:12:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 January, 2014, 05:07:05 PM
Well, the Crunch impends...
.
The bailiffs are coming on Monday morning, intent on rendering me homeless. It is my intent to foil their intentions. Will the loopy comic book guy prevail or be ground under the oppressor's heel?
.
I'm kinda' intrigued to know the answer myself...
.
Place your bets!


Whilst reading your post I was reminded of the King/Bachman book - Roadkill.

Good luck with the bailiffs.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 January, 2014, 05:52:25 PM
Thanks, Kev - I appreciate it.
.
Haven't read that one, I don't think. Does it have a happy ending?
.
Second thoughts; don't answer that! :-D



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 January, 2014, 07:36:44 PM
Best of luck with The Man, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 January, 2014, 08:57:41 PM
Aye, hope it all goes well, Sharky.  If you looked exactly like your avatar nobody would go near you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 28 January, 2014, 09:13:15 PM
Good luck with that Sharky. Hope it works out for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 January, 2014, 09:29:34 PM
Very best of luck, Mark.  I've had doings with the bailiffs myself, and while it wasn't pleasant I'm still here - sincerely hope that your principles-in-adversity triumph over bureaucratic inhumanity.  Let us know either way. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 28 January, 2014, 10:00:39 PM
Take care TLS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2014, 07:47:29 AM
Thanks for the support, chaps - it is very much appreciated.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2014, 08:03:04 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 January, 2014, 09:29:34 PM
Very best of luck, Mark.  I've had doings with the bailiffs myself, and while it wasn't pleasant I'm still here - sincerely hope that your principles-in-adversity triumph over bureaucratic inhumanity.  Let us know either way.

Indeed. Fingers crossed for the least-bad outcome.

Also: never underestimate the efficacy of boiling oil from the ramparts.

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2014, 08:11:10 AM
Heh, thanks, Jim. The boiling oil is a tempting idea but, unfortunately, I can't afford the oil and my gas has run out so I couldn't heat it up at the moment anyway.
.
The only weapon I have is my immense fucking charm...  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2014, 08:30:54 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2014, 08:11:10 AM
Heh, thanks, Jim. The boiling oil is a tempting idea but, unfortunately, I can't afford the oil and my gas has run out so I couldn't heat it up at the moment anyway.

Cold tea?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2014, 08:49:53 AM
I did think of filling a squeezy bottle with water to point at them and say something like, "Stand back! This is dihydrogen monoxide, a chemical widely used in industry, and if you get too much of it on you it WILL kill you!"
.
Then squirt them, shouting "Stand back! Dihydrogen monoxide!"
.
But that almost certainly wouldn't work...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2014, 09:29:44 AM
So a gagging law is being imposed in May. Be interesting to see how this unfolds with the Anon-pricks and the people who are actually going to do something about it. First, I want to know wether its only going to involve water canons or a total clampdown on public protest...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 January, 2014, 10:05:17 AM
Hi Legendary Shark, I'm a new poster on forum. I've read this topic with interest. Firstly, my heartfelt wishes in respect of your situation, hope it goes as well as these things can. Secondly in a more general sense, it pains me that the bulk of people in this country are being financially extripated in order to bail out a bunch of elitest scumbags from their ponzi scheme. Thirdly in regard to the May legislation; it's just another arrow in these creatures quiver. They will in extremis do anything to maintain the current stasis (loaded in their favour)....water cannon, they'd shoot people off the street if they thought it necessary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2014, 10:11:43 AM
Jean Charles de Menezis.
.
And welcome to the Forum!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 29 January, 2014, 10:43:44 AM
Hi Sharky. I just wanted to add my best wishes and good luck to you in your current situation. Have you tried getting advice from your local citizens advice people? Perhaps they could point you in the direction of some free legal aid or representation - assuming that is an option in your situation? Anyway, don't let the feckers the feckers grind ya down!

Cheers - Paddy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 29 January, 2014, 04:02:48 PM
Bit late to the discussion but just wanted to add my support Shark.  Hope all goes well on Monday and that this situation is not stressing you out too much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 January, 2014, 05:26:41 PM
Legendary Shark, I'm slowly (when work allows) reading through this 300 page topic. I know you're probably not in much of a mood to share my levity; but the post about the police stopping you and pulling you on to the Stockbridge is priceless....wish I'd been there. The discussion on the intrinsic nature of money is fascinating, and here's me thinking this site was going to be geeky discussions on the dimensions of Stallones Dredd uniform codpiece.
Again best regards for Monday....f**k them and launch the TAD's!
ZenArcade
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 January, 2014, 09:24:00 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 29 January, 2014, 10:05:17 AM
Hi Legendary Shark, I'm a new poster on forum. I've read this topic with interest. Firstly, my heartfelt wishes in respect of your situation, hope it goes as well as these things can. Secondly in a more general sense, it pains me that the bulk of people in this country are being financially extripated in order to bail out a bunch of elitest scumbags from their ponzi scheme. Thirdly in regard to the May legislation; it's just another arrow in these creatures quiver. They will in extremis do anything to maintain the current stasis (loaded in their favour)....water cannon, they'd shoot people off the street if they thought it necessary.

Jesus wept, it's the 80's all over again, isn't it? Ruthlessly quashing legitimate protests, taking basic public services out of the hands of the poor, generally looking after their rich mates at the expense of everyone else.  When they got in, I hadn't realised just how Tory this Tory government would be.  Not that our government over here is any better, I hasten to add.
Again, Sharky, I really hope all goes well on Monday.  Keep us posted. Never had a visit from the bailiffs myself, but then, I've never owned anything of any value.  I think the computer I'm typing this on is the most expensive thing I have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 30 January, 2014, 12:09:34 PM
All the best Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 30 January, 2014, 12:27:32 PM
good Luck Shark, give em hell!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 30 January, 2014, 03:43:16 PM
Aye, I don't often dip into this thread, but Shark- here's hoping that all works out for you. Hell of a place to be in...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2014, 07:24:22 PM
Thank you all for your understanding and support, I am truly thankful to be part of such an exemplary community - so win, lose or draw come Monday morning, I'm already a winner.
.
I'll keep you posted!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 January, 2014, 07:40:00 PM
Best o'luck Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dode C on 31 January, 2014, 12:27:09 AM
Fingers crossed Sharky. Best of luck!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 31 January, 2014, 04:10:12 AM
Rooting for you Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2014, 07:42:11 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/nyearrrrgh_zps31ad36be.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 01 February, 2014, 11:58:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2014, 07:24:22 PM
Thank you all for your understanding and support, I am truly thankful to be part of such an exemplary community - so win, lose or draw come Monday morning, I'm already a winner.
.
I'll keep you posted!

I have only been on here sporadically of late Shark but like everyone else has said, the best of luck fella.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2014, 04:04:12 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2014, 07:42:11 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/nyearrrrgh_zps31ad36be.jpg)
.
This must take the award for The Most Appropriate Application of a Cartoon of All Time. Love it - it sums up how I feel to a tee: Ostensibly foolish but deadly serious at heart.
.
Gonna' be a long Sunday night, methinks, but that's cheered me up no end!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 02 February, 2014, 10:46:12 PM
Best of luck Sharky!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 12:43:26 PM
I was expecting a restless night, hours of tossing and turning and worrying and fretting in the wee smalls. As it turned out, sleep found me with ease and didn't release me until the alarm clock came knocking.
.
I spent the morning setting up; making sure all the windows were firmly closed and the curtains drawn tight shut. I put a camp chair behind the front door and at its foot rested all the paperwork, books and stationary I thought I might need. Set up my computer and 'phone to record the proceedings. Rolled some fags and set them near at hand with a lighter. I even readied a squeezy bottle full of ice cubes and dihydrogen monoxide - because you never know.
.
The first wave came at around 10:35 - not bailiffs but council officials.
"Mr H__?"
"I neither confirm nor deny my identity. What do you want?"
"I need you to open the door, Sir."
"Sorry, no - I won't be opening my door today."
"But... Look, Mr H__..."
"I neither confirm nor deny my identity."
"Hmph. You will need to pack a bag, Sir, take what you and your dog need."
"I'm not going anywhere."
"Very well, at 11 o' clock the court bailiffs will be here with a carpenter and the police and we will..."
"The police? Why would you need to call the police when no crime has been committed?"
"You are refusing to co-operate, therefore the police will be called."
"As you wish - however, as I believe bailiffs are only permitted to call in the police should violence be done or threatened, and I have no intention of visiting violence upon you or even threatening you with it, calling the police would be wasting their time."
"Look, Mr H__, the bailiffs have a warrant from the court ordering your eviction."
"No they haven't."
He offers to show me a copy of the warrant, which he has in his car, I say no thanks. Copies are no good, I need to see the original. He's a tough guy, shaved head, and it's real cold outside. He's getting frustrated.
I explain that the bailiff's warrant can't be valid and, that being the case, I have no need to accept it. He scoffs and, I have to admit, even I'm not 100% sure about that claim either. We go around in circles for a bit before I get fed up with the conversation.
"All right," I say, "we'll play it your way. If the bailiffs turn up with a valid warrant we'll take it from there."
He grumpily agrees and stomps off back to his car for a warm.
.
Initial skirmish over, I settle into my camp chair with a cigarette to wait for the bailiffs. I don't know why but I'm feeling very calm and 20 minutes pass at a leisurely rate without me wishing them faster or slower.
.
Then, a shadow falls across the door lights...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 February, 2014, 01:25:27 PM
No passaran, Sharky! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 01:44:57 PM
"Hey up!" It's J__, a good friend of mine who's turned up with his video camera. "They're coming," he says and immediately the council guys and the bailiffs try to shoo him away.

.
"Excuse me," I call, firmly, through the letterbox which I have jammed open with an obscene-looking rolled up newspaper shrouded in brown tape, "please do not harass my friend - he is the only one out there my actual permission to be here today."
.
They leave J__ alone and turn their attention to me.
.
Crouched down to speak to me through the jammed open letterbox, the bailiff reveals that he has the same need as the council guy in relation to the arrangement of my front door.  I admit that I'm content with the current arrangement and have no plans to change it.
.
From what I can see of him through the letterbox, the bailiff is probably in his fifties. He has neat grey hair, glasses and a kindly face. He's probably been doing this for years, maybe even decades. I make a conscious effort to be polite yet firm.
.
"Mr H__, if you don't..."
"I neither confirm nor deny my identity, Sir," I say calmly, through a smile.
"You must open this door now, Sir."
"Do you have a warrant?"
.
He does. I ask him to hold it up to the letterbox so I can inspect it. He obliges, though keeps tight hold of the document lest, I suppose, one of my tentacles were to lash through the letterbox and snatch it from him.
.
This is it - this is where I find out whether all those hours reading old law books and wading through virtually indecipherable legislation and watching assorted kooks and numpties on YouTube has informed or misinformed me. At first, things look good...
.
"There doesn't seem to be an official court stamp or seal."
The statement doesn't phase him for an instant. He instantly spins the document around and points to the court stamp. My heart sinks. This could make things more complicated. I have one last chance at this particular attack. If it fails, the situation may spiral out of my control.
.
"Thank you," I say calmly and follow up, in the same calm and friendly tone but with my heart and mind starting to churn, "and the authorising signature of a Court Official?" I hold my breath. Crunch time.
.
The bailiff looks at the warrant. He frowns and says, "um..."
"Um?" I echo.
"These things aren't generally signed, there's no need..."
"So, warrants don't need to be authorized?"
"Um..."
"Look, Sir, that warrant has not been authorized by a court official and is therefore invalid."
"Mr H__..."
"I neither confirm nor deny my..."
"Yes, yes, yes - the thing is, if you refuse to comply I'll just go and get more bailiffs."
"Coming back mob-handed won't make that document you have any less invalid, will it?"
He pauses. He looks at the invalid warrant. "Just because you think this warrant is invalid doesn't make it so."
"And you believing it to be valid is no concern of mine. No signature, no warrant."
He pauses again. I notice for the first time that there don't seem to be any police outside. "I'll have to check with my boss," he says. "But this isn't over, we will be back."
"Be sure to bring a valid warrant, Sir, otherwise we'll just have a repeat of today."
.
The bailiff disappears and the council guy comes back to try and 'talk some sense into me'. He doesn't get very far. I hear the bailiffs telling the council guy that they're going to retire.
.
They leave the council guy to it. He argues with me some more, to no avail, he makes veiled threats and tells lies about me having no choice.
.
In the end, he leaves too.
.
There was a lot more to it, but that's the gist.
.
Round One to me but there's still a long road ahead. Hope I haven't bored you all too much with my wacky travails!
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 03 February, 2014, 01:47:34 PM
Funt Sharky, glad I'm not in your shoes. Take care my friend.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Stacey on 03 February, 2014, 01:51:40 PM
All the best Shark. Living up to the Legendary tag today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 03 February, 2014, 01:52:16 PM
Why do they want you out and where do they want you to go?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 02:16:34 PM
Thanks, chaps!
.
James, long story short, I refuse to claim housing benefit (or any benefits) on ideological grounds. This means that I cannot afford to pay the rent on my council flat - at least, not the amount they're asking. I currently regularly pay the council a percentage of my meagre part-time income but this is irksome to the council. That's why they want me out.
.
As to where I'm supposed to go, well, that'll be another department, I guess and, either way, nobody seems particularly concerned about such piddling details.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 February, 2014, 02:22:31 PM
Hell Sharky, I worry for you. I hope things turn out for the best for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 03 February, 2014, 02:31:15 PM
Well l done Sharky.  You would have thought that they would be able to process a warrant.  Shocking that they are so quick to use the police threat also.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 02:42:35 PM
Yes, Recrewt - the bailiff himself seemed flummoxed. He started to say at one point "but I've served hun...(dreds of these things?)" but trailed off. Could it be that he'd never considered the validity of the warrants he's been happily serving for God knows how long? Could he possibly have failed to notice the difference between a signed one and an unsigned one? He genuinely didn't seem to know what to do and even admitted that he saw my point.
.
I mean, if I didn't have a point, why did they all go away?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judda fett on 03 February, 2014, 02:50:39 PM
Just caught up on this, best wishes and positive thoughts to you shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 February, 2014, 03:32:40 PM
So, in essence, Sharkie, they want to evict you because you won't claim housing benefit but you want to stay there, even though you can't afford the rent, although they want to pay the rent for you.  Yep, the world's definitely gone mad!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 03:38:48 PM
Not exactly, Tankie, but more or less, yes.
.
It is a crazy world sure enough and getting crazier by the minute.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 February, 2014, 03:53:54 PM
So, what would you do if housing benefit was paid directly to the landlord, would you move out on principle?  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 04:23:19 PM
If my landlord wishes to get involved in criminal activities then that's something I can't prevent. I can, however, refuse to get involved. If they leave me alone then I'll leave them alone, within reason.
.
I have offered the council, and indeed pay regularly, a percentage of the money I honestly earn. If they want to make that up using stolen money (Housing Benefit) that's their own lookout.
.
I've lived here for nearly 30 years, in the village where I was bred and raised. No bunch of criminals is going to force me to abandon my home, no matter what seedy little arrangements they make with one another.
.
Hey, I'm not asking for sympathy here - I'm well aware that my current circumstances are a direct consequence of my own actions. I'm not asking for understanding, either, because I'm hardly sure I understand what I'm doing myself.
.
I don't really know what I'm asking for to be honest - maybe just for people to look over here and see if they can see something worrying or not, something worth thinking about or not.
.
Don't worry, I won't be passing 'round the hat or handing out Lawgivers or anything like that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 03 February, 2014, 04:26:15 PM
Seems ridiculous that they are trying to evict you because one department isn't getting the money from another (essentially).
I've dealt with my own council on far more trivial matters and I find their systems utterly incomprehensible and conscientious, capable council workers seem to be rarer than rocking horse shit (at least where I live).
You have my sympathy and best wishes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 February, 2014, 04:35:48 PM
Sharky, you're clearly a man of principle, and I really hope this all works out for you.  I'm wondering, though, why do you consider Housing Benefit stolen money? Though I share quite a few of your anarchist principles, and indeed believe the current political status quo to be utterly fecked and ultimately doomed, I think that at least taxes are being spent on giving homes to those who can't afford them, rather than on, say, illegal wars.  Not saying you're wrong - maybe I'm not well-enough informed.  I suppose I do live in a different country from yours.

EDIT:  By the way, your story isn't boring at all.  On the contrary, it's riveting.  Keep us posted on what happens, and like I say, I really hope you come through it ok
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 February, 2014, 04:48:47 PM
I wonder Sharkey, where do you stand on other benefits? As someone who (begrudgingly) applies for JSA I wonder how you would react to a situation like that.

And good for you for call BS on the police threat. Hollow antagonisation is all it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 05:02:07 PM
JBC - the overwhelming majority of money that a government spends is borrowed from the central banking system. The central banking system creates the money lent to governments out of nothing - just by filling in a few cells on a spreadsheet.
.
The government then takes this invented money and dishes it out on all sorts of things from bombing people to paying my rent.
.
That invented money then needs to be paid back. On top of the original loan, however, interest has been accruing. In essence, the central banking system wants more back than it "lent" - but as the central banks only created the original money and no more there simply doesn't exist the surplus to service the interest.
.
Because of this, every penny in taxes paid goes towards servicing this unserviceable debt - because don't forget that all the (official) money in existence was created in the same way.
.
This is why taxes continue to rise and cuts continue to increase. It's like lubricating an engine with borrowed oil: for every litre poured in the oil dealer wants 1.01 litres back. For a while you can keep draining a litre and a bit out whilst topping up with litres but eventually you're going to start needing to borrow 1.1 litres and draining 1.025 litres out to pay it back. You have to keep borrowing more and more oil to keep the engine running.
.
A consequence of this system is that every penny borrowed gets the world deeper and deeper into this imaginary debt and it's killing us. The world is falling apart under this ludicrous system, it is seriously and actually killing people, and I've had enough.
.
I'm as dischuffed as buggery and I'm not going to take it any more.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 05:11:02 PM
*1.125 litres.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 February, 2014, 05:28:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 01:44:57 PM
The bailiff disappears and the council guy comes back to try and 'talk some sense into me'.

They obviously have no idea who they're dealing with. To quote Jello Biafra, hooray for pranks.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 03 February, 2014, 05:46:37 PM
I wish I had your principles.

I take a stand on eating meat and dairy and eggs that most people just look at my blankly as if to say "Why inconvenience yourself?" but I think most people actually think it'd be the right thing to do, they just can't be arsed doing it. In the scheme of things though, it really is a minor impediment.

However standing up against, well, the entire way society is structured, is something that most people just won't be able to get their head rounds. That's from "Life Spugs!".

I see where you are coming from but I just wouldn't have the balls to do it.

Keep safe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 February, 2014, 05:58:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 05:02:07 PMA consequence of this system is that every penny borrowed gets the world deeper and deeper into this imaginary debt and it's killing us. The world is falling apart under this ludicrous system, it is seriously and actually killing people, and I've had enough.
.
I'm as dischuffed as buggery and I'm not going to take it any more.

I hold the same views, but I believe that the system will never change, can never truly be fixed or compromised into a working mechanism while geared towards servicing the needs of a small political elite rather than the vast majority of humanity, it can only be destroyed.  A do-over is the best we can hope for and change can only happen by people enabling the inevitable by milking the fuck out of the system so that the sooner everything goes to shit, the sooner we can start building something better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 06:49:55 PM
Systems change all throughout history - usually with lots of fire and sharp implements. The advantage we have today (if we can harness it before they lock it down and bury it with bullshit) is the internet.
.
Iceland's people built a new constitution over the internet - an open-source constitution; how cool is that?
.
It's still a Big Ask, I know, but we have to start thinking about how we're going to fix this. I'm not particularly subtle or clever so the best I can do is try to throw a spanner in the works. Try to shake things up a bit and ask some difficult questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 February, 2014, 07:01:29 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 03 February, 2014, 05:58:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 05:02:07 PMA consequence of this system is that every penny borrowed gets the world deeper and deeper into this imaginary debt and it's killing us. The world is falling apart under this ludicrous system, it is seriously and actually killing people, and I've had enough.

I hold the same views

I don't see how anyone who's been paying attention for the last six years, or who lived through the other three occasions during my lifetime when exactly the same thing has happened, could think any differently. Any system which is predicated upon constantly getting a little bit more from somewhere else - robbing Peter to pay Paul - is ultimately unsustainable, but no matter how many times that's made apparent everyone just agrees to carry on as if nothing happened.

The problem's one that can be illustrated by a story Slavoj Zizek tells about quantum physics genius Nils Bohr. A guest invited to Bohr's house expressed surprise on seeing a lucky horseshoe over the doorway. "It's nonsense, of course", replied Bohr, "but I heard it works even if you don't believe in it". Which is the problem with the current system; hundreds of millions of folk can point to the title deeds of their homes and the photographs of their three foreign holidays per year, and legitimately say that their grandparents could only have dreamed of that kind of life when they were young.

Even though they know it's a crock, the system's worked for them in the short term. The problem with that is that the remarkable increase in living standards for ordinary citizens of Western liberal democracies has only been possible by taking that little bit more from somewhere else. In previous centuries, that meant serfdom, then slavery/colonialism, then the current informal system of global Western hegemony, where the cost differentials of labour and materiel between the developed and developing world turns the latter into serfs and the former into credit/welfare dependents.

The wheels are coming off this latest cycle of taking a little bit more from somewhere else because we're running out of folk worse off than ourselves to exploit, as more populous and younger nations such as China, India, Nigeria and Turkey are undertaking the same remarkably rapid process of becoming middle class and educated (which took our immediate forebears centuries) in just a couple of decades or less. Point that out to someone and the best you'll get is a shrug and the information that communism was tried and failed - as if capitalism and communism are the only available alternatives.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 February, 2014, 07:22:27 PM
Hear, hear. We are in danger of entering an age of invisible hand control the like of which may last in perpetuity. Government and private interest are crafting a new world order where the possibility of a liberal 'free' existence is ever more at risk.  Will we degenerate to a world of panem et cirences for the mass of people and totaql control for the elite. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 07:28:21 PM
Brilliant.
.
I am in awe.
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 07:40:23 PM
My mate just dropped 'round with the DVD of what he filmed from outside - very Pythonesque! Blokes in suits and ties talking to a letterbox.
.
At one point, the council guy tells the letterbox, "things are now out of your control." A pause and then my voice calls back, "no they aren't."


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 February, 2014, 07:41:04 PM
well done sharkie, I would have lost the rag and thrown in the towel ages ago, best of luck for round two!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 03 February, 2014, 08:22:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 02:42:35 PM
Yes, Recrewt - the bailiff himself seemed flummoxed. He started to say at one point "but I've served hun...(dreds of these things?)" but trailed off. Could it be that he'd never considered the validity of the warrants he's been happily serving for God knows how long? Could he possibly have failed to notice the difference between a signed one and an unsigned one? He genuinely didn't seem to know what to do and even admitted that he saw my point.
.
I mean, if I didn't have a point, why did they all go away?

You've fended them for now and forced a Council robot to it question it's programming. Nice start TLS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 February, 2014, 08:53:36 PM
Shark, it's a great privilege to be able to read your witty account of what must be a very difficult stand to take, no matter how close you hold your principles.  Congrats on your success so far, and fingers crossed you continue to frustrate and bewilder in equal measure.  But do take care of yourself, mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 February, 2014, 09:11:52 PM
Yeah. We might have had disagreements in the past, Sharky, but I agree with your ideology (though lack the teneditu to follow suit) and can only hope things pull through. Next time we are at a con together im buying you a pint of the best!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 09:39:31 PM
Thank you all again for your concern and your support. I know I keep saying that and I hope the repetition doesn't lessen my sincerity in your eyes. (It feels obsequious to keep saying 'thank you' and ungrateful not to - what's the netiquette here???)
.
I'm sat here strategizing. Tsun Tsunami, or somebody similar (maybe Sonny Bono), said "the highest realisation of warfare is to attack plans."
.
I wonder what they plan to do next...?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 February, 2014, 10:16:21 PM
QuoteJBC - the overwhelming majority of money that a government spends is borrowed from the central banking system. The central banking system creates the money lent to governments out of nothing - just by filling in a few cells on a spreadsheet.
.
The government then takes this invented money and dishes it out on all sorts of things from bombing people to paying my rent.
.
That invented money then needs to be paid back. On top of the original loan, however, interest has been accruing. In essence, the central banking system wants more back than it "lent" - but as the central banks only created the original money and no more there simply doesn't exist the surplus to service the interest.
.
Because of this, every penny in taxes paid goes towards servicing this unserviceable debt - because don't forget that all the (official) money in existence was created in the same way.
.
This is why taxes continue to rise and cuts continue to increase. It's like lubricating an engine with borrowed oil: for every litre poured in the oil dealer wants 1.01 litres back. For a while you can keep draining a litre and a bit out whilst topping up with litres but eventually you're going to start needing to borrow 1.1 litres and draining 1.025 litres out to pay it back. You have to keep borrowing more and more oil to keep the engine running.
.
A consequence of this system is that every penny borrowed gets the world deeper and deeper into this imaginary debt and it's killing us. The world is falling apart under this ludicrous system, it is seriously and actually killing people, and I've had enough.
.
I'm as dischuffed as buggery and I'm not going to take it any more.

Fair enough, Sharky, you make a lot of sense and I respect and admire your principles on that one.  I suppose I take the Judge Beeny approach:  Work within the crappy system you're stuck with, in the hope that you can  shape it even a fraction.  Probably very naive but there you go, that's me.  I suppose I've struggled hard to set up my own small business;and I always try to treat  my clients and (occasional) staff as fairly and generously as possible. At the very least I'm not a wage-slave (as Noam Chomsky would put it) to any of the planet-destroying multinationals.
 
But as I say I fully respect your approach. You're a far more ethical and principled man than I am; and I hope you eventually come up smiling despite these difficulties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 10:24:43 PM
JBC, thank you. I try to live up to the simple tenets of Common Law upon which all subsequent laws and legislations both stand and depend;
.
Cause loss harm or damage to nobody, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings.
.
Easier to say than do - but I try!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 10:41:40 PM
Congratulations on running your own business, by the way, I am in no way anti-business and admire those who try to walk that ethical line in a deeply unethical world. Kudos to you for that.
.
I also want to say that what I'm doing is what I'm doing and I don't expect anyone to copy it. I once coined the expression "freedom virus" to describe what I'm trying to do. If we take the "vampire squid" analogy to describe The System then it does seem too big for one person, or even a group of people, to handle. A mob is cut out like a cancer, a movement is anaesthetised like a fracture and honest discourse is soothed away with placebos. The only way to kill something that big is with a virus, and I am an individual virus.
.
If every individual found just one thing to say 'no' to, whatever that one thing might be, that would be some virus, I think, some virus indeed...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 February, 2014, 10:47:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 10:41:40 PM
Congratulations on running your own business, by the way, I am in no way anti-business and admire those who try to walk that ethical line in a deeply unethical world. Kudos to you for that.

Thanks, mate.  It's a very very small business, and when I say I have staff I mean people who I call when I'm swamped myself.

QuoteCause loss harm or damage to nobody, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings.

Yep, can't say fairer than that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fragminion on 04 February, 2014, 01:56:49 AM
I dunno if it applies to this thread...but I gotta admit... My fave Dredd writer. Alan Grant!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rScec2duH30 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rScec2duH30)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 04 February, 2014, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2014, 06:49:55 PM
.
Iceland's people built a new constitution over the internet - an open-source constitution; how cool is that?
.

They failed - http://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/thorvaldur-gylfason/democracy-on-ice-post-mortem-of-icelandic-constitution (http://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/thorvaldur-gylfason/democracy-on-ice-post-mortem-of-icelandic-constitution).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 04 February, 2014, 12:21:24 PM
I dunno if this is real, but thought it worth posting here. Apologies if it has done the rounds already:

http://www.educateinspirechange.org/2014/02/anonymous-public-address-british-government.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 01:01:27 PM
Excellent article, thanks for drawing my attention to it. A few lessons could be drawn from this - not least. Of which being that constitutions are far too important to be left in the hands of politicians. Should we ever get around to crowd-sourcing our own constitution in the UK (the "Mega Carta" or the "Magna Data" or something) as soon as it's finished we bypass parliament altogether and get to the Palace with a pen and a big stick...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 03:37:11 PM
The bailiffs are going to try again on the 12th.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 04:44:17 PM
Well, how about this: the council have just called my Mother's phone! She's in her 70s, for pity's sake, she doesn't need all this stress. My God but that's low. (Saved me a job, though, I've been dreading telling her...)

Is it just me, or do these tactics seem a little desperate? Designed to get me riled up?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 February, 2014, 05:45:01 PM
Common strongarm tactic.  A mate owed some cash and they called his mum and tried to get her to pay his bill despite his not living in her house for over a decade.

There was a hubbub years ago when they tried to privatise water over here but climbed down not because it breached human rights laws to which the government was a signatory, not because the vast majority of the population had made it clear they didn't want it and weren't going to pay even if it came to pass, nor because it came to light that some politicians were getting money from those with a vested interest in seeing the change come into force, but because there wasn't enough of what was classed as "most vulnerable to scare tactics" in the populace, the tactic being to pursue not those most able to pay, but those most likely to be be fooled into paying bills with dodgy legal justification (water already being paid for over here via council tax provisions) - people with poor credit, a history of paying final demands and/or no access to legal advice - and thus create the illusion that the water company was "winning" and that people had to pay, even though the exact opposite was true and any private company who deliberately cut off a house's water supply would be breaking the law.
So yeah, they are basically working on the assumption that they can scare you into doing as you're told by threatening your mum, or at the very least goad you into doing something silly so they can call the pigs.

So don't.

My advice that is very easy to give from my comfy armchair - and that is not a metaphor, I am actually typing this from a comfy armchair - is to flip it somehow.  I think publicity would be your friend here, so if you'd keep a blog of all this, or put video of the meetings up on Youtube, I think it'd help garner interest and help inconvenience your pharisees further - "council harasses elderly woman to extort family member's debt" is a lovely headline if you can put it somewhere it'll be seen by people who do business with the council - spam the Facebook pages of the bailiffs or council workers with the link, or in a bit of karmic retribution, the Facebook pages of their family members, as apparently this is not actually harassment or dirty pool according to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 February, 2014, 06:06:02 PM
QuoteShould we ever get around to crowd-sourcing our own constitution in the UK (the "Mega Carta" or the "Magna Data" or something) as soon as it's finished we bypass parliament altogether and get to the Palace with a pen and a big stick...

I really like the fact that Alan Moore's Guy-Fawkes-faced anarchist has leaked out of the comic and into reality.  (The film probably played a large part in it, and though it kind of missed the point, feck it - the job is being done.)  Here's Noam Chomsky once again on Anarchism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB9rp_SAp2U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB9rp_SAp2U)

Also, sorry to hear about the harassment of your mother, Mark.  Nasty.  The good professor has the right idea - turn it back on them; even get onto the local papers about it.  The right to expose such unpleasant tactics by authorities still exists even if it hangs by a thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 February, 2014, 06:11:47 PM
It's funny you should mention anon's, JBC, because I can't stand them! XD
They claim to stand for socialism, yet are adorned with masks mass produced in third world nations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 February, 2014, 06:21:24 PM
Sharky ditto re the above. I'm no lawyer but does contacting your mother not constitute harassment in that she has no 'interest' in relation to your 'debt'. I'm not too sure about the injunctive process with regard to public bodies, but it might be worth a look.
I am filled with a profound sense of disquiet that these flunkeys are resorting to such base and spineless actions. My thoughts are with you and yours. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 07:36:05 PM
My mum's in a right bloody state now, her fella's not speaking to me and my cousin's been waiting for the chance to unload her displeasure on me for months.
.
I'd rather face fifty evictions than go through another family meeting like that. I feel sick.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 February, 2014, 07:58:59 PM
Hang in there chief, it was never going to be easy. These people are just being a wee bit more underhand and cynical than you maybe first thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 February, 2014, 08:14:51 PM
QuoteThey claim to stand for socialism, yet are adorned with masks mass produced in third world nations.

Was briefly at the occupy protest at St Paul's a few years ago, on 5th November.  the otherwise very friendly protesters were rudely interrupted by loud music and a bunch of Anonymous protesters wearing masks and suits, who marched in unison to the cathedral steps, carrying banners and saluting as the posed for pictures.

the guy standing next to me paused briefly, put aside his herbal cigarette and summed up their contribution:

"Jesus, they all look the same...like a bunch of f**king fascists!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 February, 2014, 08:46:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 07:36:05 PM
My mum's in a right bloody state now, her fella's not speaking to me and my cousin's been waiting for the chance to unload her displeasure on me for months.
.
I'd rather face fifty evictions than go through another family meeting like that. I feel sick.

That just isn't right, Shark. I'd be fit to hit someone for causing my family that much grief.  I've been worried that publicity would make it harder for the fuckers to back down, but if they are going to behave like that they need to be exposed to public disapproval quick sharp: blog it, get a local rag in, tweet your face off, whatever.  I know that's not your style, but jeebus man, that's some low, low shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 04 February, 2014, 08:55:17 PM
Have you got access to a web cam shark? Maybe put it in the corner of the door and record the proceedings to see if there's anything you can use later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 08:59:10 PM
You're right, Tordels - I'm so angry right now I'm still shaking.
.
What was that line in Henry V (?), "I was not angry since I came to this place until now."
.
This cannot stand.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 February, 2014, 11:20:24 PM
As a wise man once said: "Many times, that's what the fuck life is, one vile fucking task after another. But don't get aggravated: that's when the enemy has you by the short hairs."

Don't get aggravated, Shark.  You know what you are doing is right, even if many of us might not quite be able to see it that way. That bit doesn't matter - all that matters is how you conduct yourself.  Keep calm, rational and polite as you have been so far, but show them up for their despicable tactic.  Happy to help with any name-and-shame retweeting or what have you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 11:21:32 PM
On BBC1 now, head of the I.M.F. Christine Lagarde, has just said that the combined wealth of the richest 85 people in the world is equal to or greater than the combined wealth of the poorest 3,500,000,000 people in the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2014, 11:26:36 PM
You are wise, Tordels. This is obviously a tactic to, as you say, to aggravate me and split my resources between two fights.

Still, at least now I know which plans to attack!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 February, 2014, 11:55:55 PM
Let us know when you blog, tweet, or FB any of this so we can help distribute it further for you, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 12:10:26 AM
Thanks Prof, will do :)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 05 February, 2014, 10:52:58 AM
Hi Sharkey, I can't add much more to what everybody else has said. In my younger, more idealistic days, I would have shared your anarchist beliefs and ethics. Alas, increasing age and experience of humanity has long since withered those rosy views. But I admire you for the principled stand that you are taking and wish you the all the best. Take care and cheers - Paddy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 02:29:50 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 05 February, 2014, 10:52:58 AM
In my younger, more idealistic days, I would have shared your anarchist beliefs and ethics. Alas, increasing age and experience of humanity has long since withered those rosy views.

Oddly enough, I've gone the opposite way.  Though from a fairly lefty background, I felt myself swinging slightly to the right (ahem) during my twenties, but then began to see the global horrors of rampant Capitalism; and how it's almost without question going to destroy humanity as we know it.

I don't really think Anarchism is workable on an international or even national scale, at least not within my lifetime, because of the usual reason:  People are too greedy.  However, in my book at least, it's an ideal to strive towards while working within the shitty framework I was born into.  People can change; and while I'm far from free of the ego and greed that necessitates politics and law, I try my best. And if I can eventually influence even one or two people to put co-operation and harmony above greed then I'll be happy, but of course i have to work on myself first.

Many would cite Somalia as an example of the evils of anarchy, but there is a difference between the greed-based anarchy that Mogadishu has sunk into, and a co-operative anarchy based on respect for the Common Law that Sharky mentioned earlier.

There you go; call me a naive hippy if you like.  You're probably right, but I still prefer punk and techno to the Grateful Dead  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2014, 03:01:47 PM
I think my main concern with law abiding anarchy is the main reason why capitalism is currently inescapable, it's a key point I bring up frequently. There are just to many people to allow a superior system to be imposed. 7 billion people, with cultures and political ideologies many of us wont even have heard of.  For a more socialist system to be introduced the world population would have to be much lower, and who here has the right to say who lives and die's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 03:27:06 PM
I think that the overpopulation problem is mainly just hype, birth rates in Western countries have been declining for decades. In the 1950s the average birth rate was 5 children per woman, today it's 2.5. The number for a steady population is 2.1 children per woman.

The figure I mentioned in an an earlier post, that the rihest 85 people on Earth have a combined wealth greater than the poorest 50% of humanity, shows the real problem. It's not about population, it's about distribution of resources. There is more than enough on this planet for everybody.


http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-great-contraction-experts-predict-global-population-will-plateau-a-795479.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2014, 03:35:45 PM
You only took into account the western world, ignoring third world nations that don't have access to birth control or sex education. That is where the population is booming, as you can see below, populations in Niger and Tanzania alone are increasing at rates upwards of 7%. Not taking into account political ethics, this is also having a hugely negative ecological and social effect. Money is just a means to commodities, what good is it if we have a lack of land and to live off while maintaining a stable environment.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW/countries?display=map
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 05 February, 2014, 03:37:24 PM
There are lots more older people around than there used to be too.
I think one thing that probably hinders radical political / economic change is that people in power hold on to it for so long! Look at Rupert Murdoch. How old is he now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 04:05:46 PM
The entire human population of the Earth would fit into the Grand Canyon, although that would probably be a bit cramped and smelly. I also once worked out that every single man, woman and child on Earth could live in a landmass the size of Australia, have something like 1/4 of an acre of land each and still have most of New South Wales uninhabited. (I can't remember the exact figures but it's pretty easy to work out.)

And yes, population in certain African communities is still high but birth rates are beginning to fall as the toxic and destructive processes of the "modern world", and also the more positive aspects of Western systems, slowly and steadily take hold there.

Overpopulation, I think, is being used as a convenient excuse for poverty and such that diverts attention away from the 85 people I mentioned earlier. The idea is project the opinion that "85 people can't possibly be the cause of so great a problem, so it must be the fault of that poor and Randy 3.5 billion people who have nothing but continue to insist on having sex and squirting out babies like it was their God-given right."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 05 February, 2014, 04:13:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 03:27:06 PM
I think that the overpopulation problem is mainly just hype, birth rates in Western countries have been declining for decades. In the 1950s the average birth rate was 5 children per woman, today it's 2.5. The number for a steady population is 2.1 children per woman.
I think you're mixing up two slightly different things there: required birth rate for a steady population will be directly related to infant mortality rates. As my gran's sister once said: my mammy had 13 weans but we only knew 8 of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2014, 04:15:23 PM
As much as I agree that capitalism amongst the top 0.00000001% is no doubt a contributing factor to world deprivation, I strongly disagree with your assertion that people are blaming densely populated cointries for world famine. It's a proven fact (and common sense to boot) that a person with acccess to protection will have less children than one without access, which Is the mainr eason for population explosion, a lack of resources.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 04:36:34 PM
Not a lack of resources, I think, but a misallocation of resources.

And I wasn't claiming that you were blaming densely populated countries for famine but, when one watches "news" reports on this or similar topics there is always a strong inference that these people are starving because they insist on living in harsh environments or refuse to move to a city and that they are listless victims just sat around waiting for hand-outs. I don't know, maybe it's just me that sees that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2014, 04:44:14 PM
I never got that impression. Indeed most media sources infer that they can't move to city environments, even then, most cities in TWN's are often in even worse states than rural areas. Arid desertification doesn't exactly allow for easy life style and lack of resources (as apposed to apathy towards donations, neutral companies such as Red Cross are working flat out to provide what they can, but it's an impossible task).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 05 February, 2014, 04:46:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 04:36:34 PM
Not a lack of resources, I think, but a misallocation of resources.

And I wasn't claiming that you were blaming densely populated countries for famine but, when one watches "news" reports on this or similar topics there is always a strong inference that these people are starving because they insist on living in harsh environments or refuse to move to a city and that they are listless victims just sat around waiting for hand-outs. I don't know, maybe it's just me that sees that.

I agree entirely!


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 05:15:47 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 05 February, 2014, 03:01:47 PM
I think my main concern with law abiding anarchy is the main reason why capitalism is currently inescapable, it's a key point I bring up frequently. There are just to many people to allow a superior system to be imposed. 7 billion people, with cultures and political ideologies many of us wont even have heard of.  For a more socialist system to be introduced the world population would have to be much lower, and who here has the right to say who lives and die's?

Fair point; as I said though for me anarchism is an ideal to strive towards even if it never happens.  I just find it impossible to support any political system that upholds the current economic status quo, which supports (or even consists of) a mad dash to strip the world of resources at any costs, until there's nothing left.  Which ultimately is an unworkable system in itself, in that it might well kill us all before too long.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 05:34:45 PM
It is possible that, if I can figure out how to make it work and if anyone's interested, I will be playing the unedited recording of Monday's bailiff adventure in the Yap Shop tonight.
.
Click my banner image below for details of how to sign up for the (free) PalTalk chat site.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2014, 06:10:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 05 February, 2014, 03:35:45 PM
You only took into account the western world, ignoring third world nations that don't have access to birth control or sex education. That is where the population is booming, as you can see below, populations in Niger and Tanzania alone are increasing at rates upwards of 7%.

Increasing yes, but really only because people are living longer.  Birth rates worldwide are trending dramatically downwards (e.g. Bangladesh's birthrate has fallen from 7 per woman to just 2.2 in the past 40 years, while life expectancy has increased from 50 to 70), 'peak child' actually occurred over a decade ago, and by 2100 the global population will have reached its likely maximum of 11 billion (3 out of those 4 new billions being in Africa).  We know this will happen, in one sense it's already happened, and we need to make it work.  However the resource consumption of those billions is tiny compared to that consumed by a mere billion westerners.

Endless focus on population growth in poor countries has become a version of middle-class slut-shaming. Resource distribution and consumption rates in the north are what matter now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 February, 2014, 06:39:32 PM
Living a collectively more moderate lifestyle is better for societies for example the population of the UK had very high levels of health during WW2 (rationing etc). As a society we don't need half the crap we pine after, it's almost as if we've become a society of addicts. We pine for things which at most will give only very limited short term gratification. The really sad thing is that this is being pushed at people as a panacea. How the f**k did we let extreme capitalism creep up on us and turn us into consumption units in a grotesque world destroying machine?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2014, 06:49:07 PM
It happened because we weren't vigilant.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 05 February, 2014, 07:50:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 02:29:50 PMMany would cite Somalia as an example of the evils of anarchy, but there is a difference between the greed-based anarchy that Mogadishu has sunk into, and a co-operative anarchy based on respect for the Common Law that Sharky mentioned earlier.

I never heard anyone mention Anarchism and Somalia mentioned together...as far I understood Anarchist political ideology has nothing to the situation there. Correct me if I'm wrong (I usually am).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 05 February, 2014, 07:50:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 02:29:50 PMMany would cite Somalia as an example of the evils of anarchy, but there is a difference between the greed-based anarchy that Mogadishu has sunk into, and a co-operative anarchy based on respect for the Common Law that Sharky mentioned earlier.

I never heard anyone mention Anarchism and Somalia mentioned together...as far I understood Anarchist political ideology has nothing to the situation there. Correct me if I'm wrong (I usually am).

I'm even wronger.  A quick look at Wikipedia tells me Mogadishu was until 2011 a lawless zone under fluctuating control of rival militias until government troops began to take control of it.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 February, 2014, 11:08:12 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 05 February, 2014, 06:39:32 PM
Living a collectively more moderate lifestyle is better for societies for example the population of the UK had very high levels of health during WW2 (rationing etc). As a society we don't need half the crap we pine after, it's almost as if we've become a society of addicts. We pine for things which at most will give only very limited short term gratification. The really sad thing is that this is being pushed at people as a panacea. How the f**k did we let extreme capitalism creep up on us and turn us into consumption units in a grotesque world destroying machine?

'Scuse the double post, but I just noticed this and I fully agree with it.  I don't have anything against making money in an honest and ethical way; this is the system we're stuck in in and we can't just go and live in a field.

I remember listening to a psychology-based podcast, where it was posited (after a lot of research) that money can indeed make people happy; as long as it's spent on experiences rather than things.  Really, we don't need half the shite we have.  The same podcast also offered the theory that giving away money makes us happier than keeping it; and I've seen it supported in other sources since.

I think the best we can do is to try our best to see extreme commercialism as the insidious brainworm that it is and extract ourselves from it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 February, 2014, 11:26:18 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 05 February, 2014, 07:50:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2014, 02:29:50 PMMany would cite Somalia as an example of the evils of anarchy, but there is a difference between the greed-based anarchy that Mogadishu has sunk into, and a co-operative anarchy based on respect for the Common Law that Sharky mentioned earlier.

I never heard anyone mention Anarchism and Somalia mentioned together...as far I understood Anarchist political ideology has nothing to the situation there. Correct me if I'm wrong (I usually am).

I'm even wronger.  A quick look at Wikipedia tells me Mogadishu was until 2011 a lawless zone under fluctuating control of rival militias until government troops began to take control of it.

fluctuating control of rival militias : that's yer raw capitalism right there, nothing to do with anarchy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2014, 11:41:15 AM
It's not capitalism that's the problem - capitalism is a reasonably good system when applied correctly.
.
The problem is that we don't have proper capitalism, what we suffer is crony-capitalism and corporatism, which is inevitably inducing a fascist environment. (Recall what Mussolini said about fascism being more properly called corporatism.)
.
Fascism may be a strong word to use but the system presently hints and demonstrates that only the wealthy or "offcials"i are entitled to enjoy any personal power or freedom. This is not, I think, an entirely conscious mindset.
.
Take, for example, the council manager currently on my case. He earns, at a guesstimate, around £1,000 a week and works for the council at a fairly high level. Although I'm quite reasonably certain that this man would never dream of describing himself as a fascist, his attitude is one of superiority. He believes that his rights and opinions supersede the rights and opinions of anyone 'below' him in the social order.
.
Start paying for local government and services properly, with publically created money, and this attitude would most likely evaporate fairly quickly. Proper public money would lead to proper public capitalism, fewer fascist officials, better public services and a better society for everyone - rich and poor.
.
I don't really mind being 'poor', I'm not the type to hanker after the newest geegaw or upgraded thingummyjig, but I don't want to die of it or be demonized because my income is below a certain arbitrary level decided by 'richer' people than I.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2014, 02:53:36 PM
Latest: I had a word with our local Bobby, who kindly telephoned the council manager who's been bothering my mother and advised him to stop it.
.
There's a phone call that'll brighten his day...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 February, 2014, 03:09:00 PM
Go on lad
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 February, 2014, 03:11:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2014, 02:53:36 PM
Latest: I had a word with our local Bobby, who kindly telephoned the council manager who's been bothering my mother and advised him to stop it.
.
There's a phone call that'll brighten his day...
.

Nice work, fella!  Hopefully it'll be a bit of a wake-up call for the twat when he realises the Old Bill are on the side of, well, not intimidating elderly women.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 06 February, 2014, 05:57:01 PM
http://fullist.co.uk/2014/02/police-officer-frames-man-drink-driving-protests/

What is going on with our Police? Dear me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 February, 2014, 06:31:15 PM
On the plus side, we can be assured that they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and jailed for fibbing about hearing a cabinet minister saying a naughty word. 

We're all in this together.  But some of us are in it deeper than others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 06 February, 2014, 08:26:35 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 06 February, 2014, 05:57:01 PM
http://fullist.co.uk/2014/02/police-officer-frames-man-drink-driving-protests/

What is going on with our Police? Dear me.

Follow up to that story: Anti-fracking protester to sue police over 'trumped-up' drink arrest caught on video (http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/salford-anti-fracking-protester-sue-greater-6676499)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 February, 2014, 08:43:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2014, 02:53:36 PM
Latest: I had a word with our local Bobby, who kindly telephoned the council manager who's been bothering my mother and advised him to stop it.

Good on you, mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2014, 08:46:32 PM

I know this is just a (massive) advert for MoneyWeek magazine but it still contains some useful information: The End of Britain (http://info.moneyweek.com/urgent-bulletins/the-end-of-britain-2/?utm_expid=40940913-13.yjHlZZ3lQNO73t1lIe5x5A.1&infinity=gaw~DISPL%2BSPCFC%2BThe%20End%20Of%20Britain~DISPL%2BSPCFC%2BTopic%2BBusiness%20News~28198350429~placement:www.blacklistednews.com~c&gclid=CI-SjqqeuLwCFeXKtAod6VwAxw&utm_referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fgoogleads.g.doubleclick.net%2Fpagead%2Fads%3Fclient%3Dca-pub-1259739693885865%26output%3Dhtml%26h%3D60%26slotname%3D2605690634%26adk%3D2875986149%26w%3D468%26ea%3D0%26flash%3D0%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.blacklistednews.com%252FBloomberg_Will_Assist_UN_in_Creation_of_Agenda_21_Megacities%252F32674%252F0%252F38%252F38%252FY%252FM.html%26dt%3D1391714872947%26bpp%3D65%26bdt%3D4%26shv%3Dr20140130%26cbv%3Dr20140107%26saldr%3Dsa%26correlator%3D1391714873070%26frm%3D23%26ga_vid%3D2142871800.1391714873%26ga_sid%3D1391714873%26ga_hid%3D1572758389%26ga_fc%3D0%26u_tz%3D0%26u_his%3D1%26u_java%3D1%26u_h%3D534%26u_w%3D854%26u_ah%3D534%26u_aw%3D854%26u_cd%3D32%26u_nplug%3D0%26u_nmime%3D0%26dff%3Dsans-serif%26dfs%3D16%26adx%3D25%26ady%3D359%26biw%3D802%26bih%3D417%26isw%3D480%26ish%3D70%26ifk%3D3510556548%26oid%3D3%26rx%3D0%26eae%3D2%26vis%3D1%26fu%3D4%26ifi%3D1%26pfi%3D0%26dtd%3D222)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 06 February, 2014, 09:16:23 PM
That is a fairly chilling advert.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 February, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
Quote from: Temponaut on 06 February, 2014, 06:31:15 PM
On the plus side, we can be assured that they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and jailed for fibbing about hearing a cabinet minister saying a naughty word. 

We're all in this together.  But some of us are in it deeper than others.

This whole thing disgusts me and has been a real spit in the face to anyone who has paid any attention to how the police are normally held to account for their crimes. Such as whenever they interact with protestors drinking tea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 01:50:51 AM
Speaking of overzealous police, I'm not sure even Dredd would do this: Cop Handcuffs Firefighter (http://www.infowars.com/cop-handcuffs-firefighter-for-trying-to-protect-crash-victims/)


Well yes - he probably would at that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 01:32:56 PM
Latest: My cousin and her husband have been on at me, accusing me of deliberately making my mother ill. I woke up this morning to find my back garden gate wide open and possible evidence that somebody's been rooting about outside - this may of course be simple paranoia (but everyone in the universe has that) but I can't afford to take the chance. Because of this I had to turn down work this weekend, which my boss wasn't best pleased about, so now I'm going to be properly skint and might even have lost that job altogether. My mental problems are trying hard to engulf me and my dickey ticker feels all bubbly. The hits just keep on coming.

But am i disheartened?

A bit, to be honest, but only a bit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 February, 2014, 02:16:38 PM
Call me a duff old-fashioned square from the past, but I am reasonably certain that the idea is that a family closes ranks against threats rather than turns on each other.
I don't know your family details, Sharky, but based on the experience of mates it sounds like your mother's problems are incidental to your kin taking the opportunity to vent that they want you to make things easier for them by conforming, even if it means letting the guy harassing your mum get away with it as long as it gives them ammunition to have a pop at you.
And yes, this armchair really is very comfy, etc...

Chin up, old son.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 02:45:32 PM
Thanks, Prof. And you're right - I will one day forgive, but probably never forget, that my conformist cousin has taken the side of a bullying stranger over a member of her own family. I can't adequately express how deeply this has upset and disappointed me.

Still, if my life was a film this would be the part where the protagonist finds himself alone and must dig deep to stick to his principles. I'm just glad that i don't live in Mega City One!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 February, 2014, 07:00:40 PM
That's appalling all round, Shark.  For goodness' sake don't let all this get to your dodgy heart or your dodgy brain.  Principles or not, nothing is worth your health.  You can do more good (even if it's just keeping us all thinking) with your faculties intact than from some ward or other.  Non carborundum illegitimi, as no Roman ever said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 07:13:25 PM
Thanks, Tordels. On the (massive) plus side, I've just had a very good meeting but i don't want to say any more in public at this point.

Hope glimmers...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2014, 07:33:12 PM
Sharky, keeping an eye on this thread. I'd endorse TordelBack on his comment. Keep it positve (as much as possible); keep your focus and deal with one issue at a time. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 08:09:48 PM
Thanks, Zen.

I'm kinda' regretting posting about my health because it reads like I'm whining. Tordel's concerns have made me think, though, but - and I hope this doesn't sound trite - I don't think my health matters in this case. I wonder how many people in much worse situations than mine have bowed to bullying and been evicted or had possessions siezed under invalid warrants. I can see that it makes sense for me to give in and toe the line from a personal standpoint, and I have been thinking about little else today, but I find that I simply can't do it, you know? That sounds daft even to me - it's not like I'm doing something important like curing cancer or developing free energy but it's important to me and so I continue in spite of everything.

I know, I know - arrogant Muppet, right? No way I'll disagree with anyone who thinks so.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 February, 2014, 11:43:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2014, 08:09:48 PMI wonder how many people in much worse situations than mine have bowed to bullying and been evicted or had possessions siezed under invalid warrants. I can see that it makes sense for me to give in and toe the line from a personal standpoint, and I have been thinking about little else today, but I find that I simply can't do it, you know?

Wasn't suggesting you cave, Sharky, merely that you do your utmost to prevent the situation from affecting your health, and keep that at the forefront of your efforts.  You're no good to anyone in hospital or worse. 

Martyrs? We don' need no stinkin' martyrs.  Stay strong and stay strong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 12:06:30 AM
I know you weren't suggesting that, mate, but I have been considering it, much to my own chagrin.

In other news, U.S. Posties expecting trouble? (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=bc222ffef75536f044a0e0353788683b&tab=core&tabmode=list&print_preview=1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 February, 2014, 12:58:56 AM
I've avoided getting involved so far but I'm getting seriously worried about your welfare mate.

I initially assumed that you were being evicted because you were a victim of the pernicious bedroom tax or had your benefits denied for some spurious reason. Am I right in saying that you could stay in your flat with no problems if you had allowed HB to pay the rent?

If that's the case then I'm perplexed. You must accept the concept of "money" in some sense - you use it to buy food (and comics) and you get it from work or benefits. Your arguments about the inherent nonsense of the  monetary supply system are spot on, but as you know you can't avoid it altogether.

You have been candid about your mental health problems in the past, and without dismissing your (entirely reasonable) arguments, do you think that your decision making may be impaired at all? You are NOT wrong in your opinions, but I think you may be obsessing so much on points of principal that your current course of action constitutes self-destructive behaviour.

I don't know if you have regular contact with your GP or have any involvement with MH professionals, but if so I'd be interested to know their opinion of this - the smartest, most well meaning people can make bad decisions when affected by depression or any form of mental health problem, and it's the duty of MH professionals to protect their clients from making self-destructive decisions.

Please don't think I'm dismissing your concerns - you are so right in everything you say about the basic underpinning of our capitalist system, but I cannot see how this course of action will benefit you in any way.

Basically, the monetary system we live under is both INSANE and CORRUPT - you explain why this is the case better than anyone I've ever heard, and please God, never stop doing this. However, to make yourself homeless on a point of principle will change nothing except ruining your life.

If we live under an insane and corrupt system that oppresses the common man, that's bad - but why not allow one part of the insane and corrupt system (ie DWP) to shuffle 'non-existent' money to another part of the corrupt and insane system (ie the housing dept)  allowing you to stay in your home?

Please don't be offended, my comments are meant with huge amounts of respect for your position and genuine concern for your welfare. I think that some boarders here haven't been doing you any favours in supporting a course of action that will eventually prove very self destructive for you.

Practical advice? get the council to rescind the eviction on the understanding that you'll claim housing benefit. It's no more of a cop out than spending (non-existent) cash to buy your weekly necessities (ie food and thrillpower).

Personal advice? Look after yourself mate. I am lost in admiration of your understanding about just how ridiculous, corrupt and bat-shit crazy our economy is, but when the pigs are dragging you out your front door, technicalities such as whether they are officers or constables are frankly worth shit.

As for contacting your mum - that was just downright shitty behaviour, and you should pursue all official complaints channels about that.

Hope I haven't offended you at all in my analysis - bottom line: KEEP FIGHTING THE GOOD FIGHT - BUT PICK YOUR BATTLES!





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 February, 2014, 07:59:25 AM
I echo Dandontdare's concern.

You are well within your rights to make this protest, and good luck to you, but, as I understand it, the council has no choice but to evict someone who refuses to pay their rent. I would expect that to be the outcome of this stand-off, and I have great sympathy for the public servants who are having to deal with the issue.

If you understand that you'll probably lose your home, have somewhere else to go if/when that happens and are using this whole thing to get publicity for your cause, then as I say, good luck to you.

Otherwise, I would suggest backing down gracefully might be an excellent option right about now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 11:57:37 AM
DDD and JBA, thank you for your well constructed and sincere posts. I have read them several times and considered what you say - and I will keep your advice in mind as I move forward. Just about everything you say is valid, insightful (especially the bits about how cool I am  ;) ) and compassionate and I truly appreciate and am humbled by your concern for me.


The only thing I really didn't like was the suggestion that those who have posted their support are doing me a disservice. I find every post on this thread to be helpful and humbly beg that nobody stop posting- whether you agree with what I'm doing or not. However, as I think this suggestion was intended to prevent me from blindly continuing on my course thinking that messages of support validate whatever I do no matter what, I just want to reassure everyone that you are not egging me on. I'm not criticising this suggestion, it is a valid concern, but I would like to say that I don't consider myself to be easily led or influenced by the flattery of agreement or support. Keep on posting!


Mental health. Yes, I do have what modern society deems to be mental health problems but they are mild compared to what other folks go through. In fact, it often feels disingenuous to even mention them when I think of, for example, the challenges faced by Brett Ewins or Spike Milligan. The MPs I've been diagnosed with are depression, anxiety, agoraphobia and borderline paranoia. I often wonder if these really are mental problems or simply a part of my natural psychological makeup, which modern society wants to normalize so I can 'fit in'. In past times I would probably be the village hermit or something. My MPs, I think, effect my emotions rather than my cogitative faculties. When I was on medication for this my emotions were under control, flat and grey, but I was unable to think clearly and writing a post like this would have been practically impossible.


When I was on the medication my mind was truly open - but not in a good way. Thoughts and ideas and suggestions and orders, often contradictory, would drift in and out of my head effortlessly and with very littlte, if any, critical analysis. Everything was neutral and nothing mattered. My world was flat. When someone rang the doorbell I'd simply shuffle to the door and open it without thinking or feeling, as if I were little more than a butler-droid. When the doorbell rings now, the first thing I feel is a surge of fear - my anxiety kicking in. Then my paranoia takes over and I look through my little spy-hole to see who it is so I can decide whether to let the caller in, speak through an open but security chained door or ignore them completely. I have come to realise that these intense emotions I experience in certain situations are not monsters to be quashed by drugs but monsters to be kept on a leash through mental control - the guard dogs of my mind, so to speak. I think (I hope!) that most of the people from this board who have met me in the flesh would agree that I can function fairly well in the real world outside my front door, even though I don't really enjoy it. I might be a bit twitchy when I'm out or in the company of new people but I can at least have lucid conversations and 'join in' instead of being a dull spanner just nodding and not able to pay attention.


I believe that my 'MPs' are actually helpful to me in making decisions and thinking about things these days. As an example, whenever I read a post on this thread (or anywhere, for that matter) my borderline paranoia activates in the background - who's posting this and why? Is it someone trying to manipulate, confuse, conscript or otherwise trick me? If so, why? Having these irrational thoughts at the back of my mind can, of course, be uncomfortable and unsettling but, when kept under control, act as a kind of 'spider-sense' and help me to be more critical of things that I might otherwise accept without question.


Of course, there is always the possibility that everything I've written above is a complete crock - it's dicficult to be entirely certain when you're on the inside looking out. I've typed this long and dull explanation of my MPs not to garner sympathy but to, hopefully, put the minds of those lovely people on this board who, for some inexplicable reason, have grown to care about me and my welfare, to rest. I hope that I have at least partially achieved that.


Thirdly, I come to my second point; why the Hell am I doing this? Well, it's not just about the nature of money and such abstract notions but the noxious effects of such abstracts on the real world. There is so much I could write about this (as you are all painfully aware!) but I will concentrate on one real world example to illuminate the position I'm in: the warrant presented to me by the bailiffs last monday.


Irrespective of why this warrant was issued, I want to explain the process that has happened so far as best as I comprehend it just in relation to this one thing. The Council claims that a court proceeding has taken place, in a court in another county I might add, and that as a result of that proceeding a warrant was issued to repossess this flat.


Quite simply, what the council is claiming has happened is inaccurate and I'll tell you for why:


1: The room in which this procedure took place may well have been held in a court building but hire of that room was not paid for by the Ministry of Justice but by a council - either my own or the council in the county containing the court building.


2: The judge presiding was not appearing there under his or her Oath of Office. In short, the judge was appearing in much the same capacity as a police constable moonlighting as a security guard on days off. The judge was therefore in attendance as a private citizen with no more power over me than any other private citizen.


3: I did not stand accused of a crime.


4: There was no jury.


5: There was neither counsel for the prosecution nor counsel for the defence.


6: There was no stenographer and no public record.


7: No charges have been brought against me or warrants issued for my arrest due to failure to attend or contempt of court.


The seven main points above indicate that no court proceeding has taken place - there was a proceeding in a court building but this is not at all the same thing. This is how I knew that the repossession warrant was invalid, at best, or fraudulent, at worse. Sure enough, when the bailiff attended to serve this 'warrant' I knew it to be invalid before he even opened his mouth. I asked to see the judge's signature on the warrant but, of course, signature there was none because of the above mentioned moonlighting status of the judge. I also put the above seven points to the bailiff, who could find no counter argument and was forced to withdraw or risk facing prosecution himself. The council officials simply ignored my points and refused to investigate or even acknowledge them.


The bailiffs will return but their warrant will still be invalid.


The local bobby has told me that the police are forbidden to interfere with an eviction unless a breach of the peace ensues - the police cannot kick my door in and drag me out unless I'm committing a crime - say by threatening or visiting violence. Anyone, bailiffs included, who try to break the door down are easily thwarted - all I have to do is stand pressed against the door and any violence against the door which impacts upon me becomes assault, in which case I can call the police. Same thing if they do gain access and try to physically remove me - the second anyone lays hands on me without my consent they are guilty of assault.


Okay, that's a lot to take in and I'm sorry for this massive and boring post. Of course, there is a great deal more that I could write about other aspects of my situation, lawful and legal aspects, practicalities, abstracts, arguments, dangers, pitfalls and so on and on, but we all need to sleep sometime, right?


The main reason for me writing this was to hopefully demonstrate to those of you out there who are worried about me (and God bless you for your humanity and concern) that this is not some irrational adventure in rebellion but an attempt to force the ckuncil to deal with me on equal and, above all, lawful terms.


Sure, they can get me evicted - but only if they cheat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 February, 2014, 12:11:14 PM
Well put sharky. I for one (and I can only speak for myself) would never by any conscious intent wish to either directly or by association egg you on. All I can do is to provide as much moral support to you in this trying time for you as I possibly can. Thanks to Dandontdare for his post which again shows such insightful and heartfelt concern for your wellbeing. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2014, 02:14:37 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 08 February, 2014, 12:11:14 PM
I for one (and I can only speak for myself) would never by any conscious intent wish to either directly or by association egg you on. All I can do is to provide as much moral support to you in this trying time for you as I possibly can. Thanks to Dandontdare for his post which again shows such insightful and heartfelt concern for your wellbeing. Z

My feelings precisely.  I don't want to sound like I'm urging you along on a potentially injurious course of action, or to claim that your arguments convince me or suggest that everything is going to work out for the best if you hold to your current course, but I do very much want to offer my (completely impotent) support to you and for whatever considered choices you make as an individual.  You're alright in my book, Sharky, and I'd like you to stay that way.  I also fervently hope that you win, for whatever definition of victory you're prepared to accept.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 February, 2014, 02:29:17 PM
They're right, you know.

Your political reasons for doing this are irrelevant. If you continue on this course of action you will have nowhere to live. It's self-destructive. It's bad for you.

Sharky, talk to the council. Accept help. They're only people doing a job and I bet they will help if you let them.

I've made no secret of the fact that I don't share your principles, but you seem like a nice guy and it grieves me to see your principles putting you such a bad place. Nobody will think less of you if you suspend the political campaign just enough to secure a home for yourself.

The alternative is another heart attack, more unhappiness, and poverty. Stop it. Look after yourself better.

I hate this thread. ;-)

Best wishes

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 02:34:06 PM
Thanks, chaps. As I say, I don't think anyone is egging me on and neither do I believe that DDD thinks that either, that was entirely my own wording and, perhaps, ill-advised.

So long as people are prepared to read my posts then I'll continue to write them and, furthermore, I want you all to know that what I do I do under my own volition and the consequences are mine and mine alone. I am increasingly confident that the council and I can reach an amicable settlement over this issue, in no small part due to the perspectives, insights and support of the people who post on this thread.

I love you all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 02:39:30 PM
Trouty, don't worry too much. There are things going on and meetings I'm having (with officials) that I can't reveal at the moment but which show great promise.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 February, 2014, 02:48:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 02:39:30 PM
Trouty, don't worry too much. There are things going on and meetings I'm having (with officials) that I can't reveal at the moment but which show great promise.

Good! Remember: tea cures everything.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 03:05:17 PM
Tea, tenacity and truth - the Transcendent Trinity of Triumph!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2014, 04:00:31 PM
I personally worry for the vegetarians of the board.  I mean, it can't be healthy to not get all your protein and vitamins - would it kill them, if it was hard to find something to eat for a meal or two that wasn't meat to maybe eat a steak just this once?  It's not the end of the world, like, and it's not like their abstinence and principles are going to overturn the global meat market, is it?
I worry about the veggies and though I respect their principles, at some stage it seems like they're just being difficult.



Snideness aside, adversity is something that is unavoidable in life regardless of your well-being or otherwise when adversity occurs, and how we deal with it can make us stronger as much as it can break us.
Despite concerns about Sharky's situation initially, at some point it became a question of whether you supported a harmless bampot (sorry, Sharky!) or someone who'd make an old lady unwell just to take a pop at one of her children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 08 February, 2014, 04:05:41 PM
The man's talking to bailiffs through the letterbox. He has a history of heart trouble. Sometimes common sense has to be applied. It's not about taking sides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2014, 04:11:51 PM
Not everything is easy.  And I am still typing this from a comfy armchair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 February, 2014, 04:35:04 PM

I'm absolutely certain there's a solution to this situation which sees you staying in your own home and the council receiving the cash they need to balance their own books, but that resolution will not be arrived at by two men shouting at each other through a letterbox. Please let a family member or trusted friend contact Citizens Advice on your behalf and find someone who will take the time to understand your own concerns and act as an intermediary with your local authority.

All the best, neebs.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2014, 06:32:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 11:57:37 AM

When I was on the medication my mind was truly open - but not in a good way. Thoughts and ideas and suggestions and orders, often contradictory, would drift in and out of my head effortlessly and with very littlte, if any, critical analysis. Everything was neutral and nothing mattered. My world was flat.

Hmmm.  Now, me, I've had a very different experience with medication.  I've had about 4 serious episodes of depression through my 39 years on the earth, and found them absolutely crippling; both physically and mentally.  For me, it's the depression that stops me thinking logically - it fills my mind with unrealistically negative and pessimistic thoughts, to the point of blocking out any creativity or insight. 

With medication, along with techniques like meditation and general mindfulness, i find I have a much clearer outlook, and my ambition, enthusiasm and creativity come to the forefront. .  There's also the freedom of having much more control over my thoughts - while I can't exactly choose what to think, I can at least recognise which mental activities are useful and which are just repetitive nonsense.

It's not that i no longer see the problems with the world - it's just that I no longer let them overwhelm me, and also have the energy to make a positive contribution myself, or at least try.  When I was depressed, I no longer saw the point of doing anything positive.

That said, I wouldn't have traded my episodes of depression for 39 years of constant dumb happiness.  Meditation and counselling have led me to see the core of my ego and to stop taking it seriously. 

None of which is to negate or belittle any of YOUR experiences, Sharky.  Different people operate in different ways.  If medication dulls your mental faculties, then you're probably better off without it (but I would recommend mediTation, to you and to everyone reading this). What you're doing now would definitely not be MY way of doing things, but as I said before you have my utmost respect and I hope you win; whatever a victory entails to you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2014, 08:11:28 PM
Yeah, depression is arguably the hardest one to deal with - once that soul-deep inertia sets in it can be a pig to get going again. I have my own coping strategies which I have learned along the way - meditation and paying attention to as much within and around me as possible (which I imagine is something similar to your "mindfulness") do help immensely, as does the simple act of concentrating on my breathing for a moment, which s a great way to centre yourself in times of stress.

When I was researching for writing Jikan, I came across an old Samurai method of centering yourself based upon a Buddhist idea concerning the nature of time. Each man's life, the teaching goes, is a succession of moments - one heaped upon another heaped upon another like autumn leaves on the forest floor. No man can ever make sense of such a confusion of scattered and unique moments, to even try, especially in testing times, can lead only to confusion, doubt and weakness. All you have to do is understand this One Single Moment - the last mo.ent is gone forever and the next will never arrive. To understand this One Single Moment is to master all moments. A samurai who understands this, the lesson concluded, has the strength of two. I have found that keeping this lesson at the forefront of my mind has been very helpful to me.

As to what I would consider to be a victory, well, there are several options open to me. The most complete victory I can imagine involves an experimental partnership with the Council. As the financial attack on this country continues, more and more people - people who have 'played the game' in good faith - will find themselves facing eviction through no fault of their own. Not wishing to sound arrogant but these people, believers in the system, will not understand what is going on or recognise the options open to them. There will be ructions, recriminations and all 'round bad vibes. The problem is that by the time the Council and their tenants realise that constantly rising rents and charges so that poorer tenants are constantly evicted so that richer ones can take their place for as long as they can afford it isn't going to work, it'll be too late. A complete and utter victory for me, then, would be to use me as a test case to figure out how to deal with this kind of thing n the future in a way that's fair to both parties.

A bare minimum victory would be to keep my home by caving in fully. Surrender; the worst form of victory there is.

For now I just have to hold my nerve and stick to my guns and hope that wiser heads than Mombotherer prevail. I really do believe that there is the opportunity, however slim, for something really useful to be born, or at least conceived* here. I think I have to try. I know I do.

I know that some of you have suggested it but I've never wanted media publicity for this struggle precisely because I didn't want it turned into an Us and Them story, which is part of the media's effect (fostering divisions). Mr Mombotherer's actions have opened the door to victory for me and if I want a shot at total victory then I need to walk through it alone, without a mob at my back or theirs. I don't know if that makes any sense or not. This is the only place on the entire interweb where I post about this, simply because most of you have no political reasons to be here; you're not conspiracy theorists or Freemen, not the kind of mob who would be all over this like slavering wolves with axes to grind - just ordinary folk. Also, I think it would be easier to spot agents provocateur here. Mr Mombotherer also wouldn't have to be an internet genius to track this thread down and read it as a guest, which gives me the opportunity to communicate unofficially with him should the need arise. If I was feeling especially devious I could plant disinformation here to lead him into a trap. If I'm more devious than he believes, I may have already done this...


*No, I don't mean feck the council. Tsk, your filthy minds...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2014, 01:41:55 PM
QuoteWhen I was researching for writing Jikan, I came across an old Samurai method of centering yourself based upon a Buddhist idea concerning the nature of time. Each man's life, the teaching goes, is a succession of moments - one heaped upon another heaped upon another like autumn leaves on the forest floor. No man can ever make sense of such a confusion of scattered and unique moments, to even try, especially in testing times, can lead only to confusion, doubt and weakness. All you have to do is understand this One Single Moment - the last mo.ent is gone forever and the next will never arrive. To understand this One Single Moment is to master all moments. A samurai who understands this, the lesson concluded, has the strength of two. I have found that keeping this lesson at the forefront of my mind has been very helpful to me.

I like that analogy; it's very much in keeping with what Eckhart Tolle teaches.  I've read him fairly extensively and like his stuff a lot.  I've also been training in Bujinkan for about 8 years, which is a martial art derived from the traditions of both ninja and samurai; and it's very nice to know that this idea of living in the present fits in with the samurai tradition too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 02:17:14 PM
Iranian warships reportedly sailing towards U.S. maritime borders.  Reuters. (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA170VA20140208?irpc=932) Setting the stage for St. Obama's Missile Crisis Triumph or just the usual geopolitical tomfoolery?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 February, 2014, 02:25:16 PM
Barak' s disappointed a lot of people, what the hell did they expect from a guy who came out of the Chicago party machine! He was bought and paid for like the res  of them from day one. :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 03:22:04 PM
He didn't disappoint me. I suspected he'd be a puppet from Day One. Remember all the broo-ha-ha over how his birth certificate was allegedly a fake and his real name was Barry Sotoro? Was that ever resolved? Not that I care, to be honest. By a man's works shall ye judge him, and Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama has been judged a political puppet. A Pluppet?

Hey, I made a new word!


A joke I read:

Someone's thrown a brick through the window of 10 Downing Street and an MP is tasked with getting it fixed, so the MP calls in three builders for an estimate.

The first builder measures up with a laser-beam scanning ruler, inputs all the data into his laptop, searches the web for up to date prices and prints out an estimate for £900.

The second builder measures up with an old fashioned steel ruler, jots some sketches and figures down in an old notebook, does some calculations in his head and then writes his estimate on the back of an envelope; £700.

The third builder just leans close to the MP and whispers "£2,700" into his ear.

The MP is taken aback. "What? But, you didn't even measure anything! How on Earth did you arrive at that estimate?!"

"Easy," whispers the third builder. "A grand for me, a grand for you and we pay the second guy to do it."


And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how government contracts work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2014, 06:01:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 03:22:04 PM
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how government contracts work.

I will be trotting this one out all week, a superb and accurate summation. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 February, 2014, 06:33:33 PM
Cracking joke. Well observed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2014, 11:45:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 February, 2014, 06:01:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 03:22:04 PM
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how government contracts work.

I will be trotting this one out all week, a superb and accurate summation.


The new system of taxing Irish water springs to mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 11:58:29 PM
Water can be Irish? Does that mean raindrops need passports? Hell of a revenue stream if they can figure out how to get passport fees out of the clouds...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 February, 2014, 08:58:34 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 11:58:29 PM
Water can be Irish? Does that mean raindrops need passports? Hell of a revenue stream if they can figure out how to get passport fees out of the clouds...

Of course the system of pipes that gets the water from the hills to your kitchen grows organically.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 09:17:55 AM
Jeepers Richmond does it, happy days. I thought the costs would have be incorporated into the plethora of taxes we already pay to these administrations. Instead the costs of maintaining the already extensive infrastructure (with the obviously necessary) repair and replacement mandates the setting up of another QUANGO with the usual shower of political appointees and sh**e hawks all geared up to yet again bend Joe and Josephine public over the proverbial kitchen table. Yepee!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2014, 11:23:48 AM
As far as Barack Obama goes, he's a big improvement. The American government is set up in a way that stifles any real attempt at 'change' even more effectively than the old rich men and public school boys over here could even dream of.

Anyone remember the previous bloke they had? So Barack didn't create a utopia on Earth singlehandedly. At least he's not George Bush. Or David Cameron for that matter.

And all that fuss over his birth certificate was the most pathetic, racist thing I ever saw conducted in public affairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 11:40:40 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 09:17:55 AMI thought the costs would have be incorporated into the plethora of taxes we already pay to these administrations. Instead the costs of maintaining the already extensive infrastructure (with the obviously necessary) repair and replacement mandates the setting up of another QUANGO with the usual shower of political appointees and sh**e hawks all geared up to yet again bend Joe and Josephine public over the proverbial kitchen table. Yepee!  :thumbsup:

I've decided that I'd be a lot happier if our masters would give up with the fancy names for indirect regressive taxes and just divided them up by letter. Instead of Pay-Related Social Insurance, Universal Social Charge, Health Levy, Insurance Levy, VAT, Property Tax, Household Charge, Road Tax,Waste Charges, Water Charges, Broadcasting Charge,  etc., you could just have Tax A: 12%; Tax B: 7%; Tax C: etc.

Think of the bullshit, deceit and disappointment it would cut out:  Minister claims he needs more money, so Tax M (5%) is rolled out.  No need for justifications, social in-fighting, explanations of where the money went or whether it is fair or not. Much better than pretending it is being spent on childcare provision or dialysis machines or pothole repair (only to find later on that it's been handed out to super-rich gamblers), it's just Tax M (5%).  See which taxes apply to you, tot up the percentages and pay.

Of course it would make it harder to pretend we have a low-tax economy, which is only true if you are (a). rich and/or (b). a multinational corporation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 11:55:57 AM
He's certainly been a big improvement for the military industrial complex; all those expensive drones and missiles that any self-respecting Nobel Peace Prize winner needs have to be supplied by somebody. He's been a big improvement for the banks and energy corporations as well, with free money to keep the frauds going and a blind eye turned to the consequences of fraccing and protection for polluters like BP. We should also praise St Obama for improving the chances of poor Americans losing their jobs, homes and savings to keep the Too Big to Fails afloat, for doing all he can to put New Orleans back together, kick-starting the airport 'naked scanner' industry, keeping Guantanamo Bay open, letting the NSA carry on spying on anyone it wants, shutting the government down for a week at the order of the banks, refusing to allow auditors into Fort Knox to see how much gold (if any) is still there and all that other good stuff he's achieved.

The man's a pluppet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 12:08:43 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2014, 11:23:48 AM
As far as Barack Obama goes, he's a big improvement.

I wish I could agree, and I'd have voted for the guy - twice.  Aside from his incredibly valuable role in debunking racist myths and exposing racist thinking, and the fact that he cuts a suave and eloquent figure as an intelligent family man, I struggle to see how he's a significant improvement on Dubya.  At least with Bush you could rage at his comedy persona, and imagine every gaff and disaster was as much due to incompetence as cynical calculation.  Whether it's an example of the essential impotence of the modern presidential role, or just confirmation that only a certain type of person can ever be elected, Obama has turned out to be more of the same, just better dressed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 12:18:32 PM
Or the trickle down effect they've been f**king about with over the past few years. The money trickles down as far as a bunch of investment banks and other associated garbage who stop the trickle down and push billions if not trillions into a stack market (which looks as though it'll blow in Krakatoa proportions quite soon) or they just bung it in to the Caymans.
Someone said reacently that they'd be better dropping the money onto the populace out of a fleet of helicopters (at least it would reach real people who would circulate it).
But as far as the US political class is concerned, the money is going exactly where they want it to ge that is to the vested interests who are funding their 4 yearly cycles of slash and burn.
You really couldn't design on a super computer a more dishonest, short sightedn obscene mechanism than QE as it is shaped in this instance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2014, 12:30:06 PM
If any of you think it could be any better under the Republicans I have a bridge to sell you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 12:39:18 PM
Theblazeuk, the situation we're in now has moved far beyond 'party identification' these aren't parties which have any real sense of identification with the people anymore. They despise us and they've all been bought like whores. I'm looking at this mess with the semi-detached sense of bemusement that a ships captain has when the 3 mile wide iceberg looms out of the fog. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 10 February, 2014, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 12:08:43 PM
Aside from his incredibly valuable role in debunking racist myths and exposing racist thinking, and the fact that he cuts a suave and eloquent figure as an intelligent family man, I struggle to see how he's a significant improvement on Dubya. 

On international policy, which is what Europeans tend naturally to focus on, he's been far less gung-ho.  Bush started two wars and lead international efforts for sanctions and other aggressive measures in other situations.  Obama's America has been incredibly passive, notably but not exclusively in the Middle East.  Watching the results of sixty-plus years of American interventionism, I rather hope that this isolationist tendency continues.  All this is a matter of degree, not the sort of dramatic change that, e.g., the Nobel Peace prize people were hoping for.  Nonetheless, it represents a marked improvement over Dubya.

On domestic policy, people outside America just don't seem to appreciate quite how constrained the American Presidency is - the British Prime Minister, despite having less democratic legitimacy, enjoys a great deal more power, for example.  Obama's use of his limited powers has been eminently progressive, even dramatically left wing by the standards of the current US conversation. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 10 February, 2014, 12:41:30 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 12:39:18 PM
Theblazeuk, the situation we're in now has moved far beyond 'party identification' these aren't parties which have any real sense of identification with the people anymore.

Balls.  These are the parties people vote for.  I live in a democracy that still has such things as old-style Communist, ultra-left anarchist and Nazi parties as credible votes, and frankly I far prefer the UK's huddle to the middle. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2014, 12:53:15 PM
Dudley said it all better :)

The President has a great deal of executive power - to say NO. But not to do much else. Of course the great myth of America is that 'anyone can be president' and that being President makes you more than a mouthpiece for your party.

And I'm not really one for party identification but if you think the UK has a constrained political split, you should pay attention to the states. 'Liberals' and 'Conservatives' are like drocking tribes, neither one seeing that actually things tend to be more right wing than anything by the end of the day no matter who is in charge. The drones would be equipped with nuclear bombs if it was Bush.

Well maybe not but I'm not one to take moderation for granted.

I would also say the spread of creationist power has stalled and legal tolerance of alternative sexualities has improved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 01:06:05 PM
Dudley did you mean 'Ed Balls' in your last. Yes parties fire out a manifesto before every election promising us big rock candy apple mountain but  as soon as the elections over blammon this process is repeated ad finitum ad nauseum. See Lib dems in uk or the FG Lab coalition in the south of Ireland. I'm sorry to say but our interests are not being addressed in any meaningful way (hence the situation vast swathes of citizens in the west have painfully found out over the past few years). Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 02:07:02 PM
On Obama's watch:

U.S. casualties in Afghanistan up by 73%
Civilian deaths in Afghanistan up between 14% and 20%
Seven times more drone strikes than Bush in covert conflicts in places like Yemen and Pakistan.
"Targeted assassinations" of U.S. citizens routinely authorized - Bush didn't do this.

Consumer prices up by 10%
Real weekly earnings down by 0.2%
People on food stamps up by 50%

In Obama's first term, Federal debt owed to the public rose 83.5% and total Federal debt rose by 55%

Gasoline prices have risen by over 95% but U.S. gas and oil drilling rigs have increased by nearly 15% and in 2012 domestic U.S. crude oil production was up 29.4% since 2008 and petroleum imports fell by almost exactly a third over the same period.

Oh yeah - Obama's the model of restraint.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 02:23:51 PM
I never thought I'd say anything remotely good about Bush (being democratic and non elitist by nature): but at least his administration had the 'balls' to let Lehmans go to the wall, all that a party which, as previously pointed out, I naturally identify with has done is to bail the rest of these b*****ds out cause they're too big to fail.  This exercise has been repeated throughout the west. As my prior posts went, you couldn't make it up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 10 February, 2014, 02:33:25 PM
The phrase "too big to fail" says it all really. Does this mean that they can squander money indefinitely with no fear of retribution?

If a company fails either because of piss-poor management or reckless investment, surely that company is not worth saving.
The bottom line (as far as I'm concerned) is that the world is run by Corporations, whereas it should actually be run by everyday folks like you and I.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 02:41:39 PM
Absolutely, Kev.

And if the politicians really want to get behind something "too big to fail" - how about society?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 10 February, 2014, 02:42:59 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 01:06:05 PM
Dudley did you mean 'Ed Balls' in your last. Yes parties fire out a manifesto before every election promising us big rock candy apple mountain but  as soon as the elections over blammon this process is repeated ad finitum ad nauseum. See Lib dems in uk or the FG Lab coalition in the south of Ireland. I'm sorry to say but our interests are not being addressed in any meaningful way (hence the situation vast swathes of citizens in the west have painfully found out over the past few years). Z

And how would you address "our interests" in a way that most people would vote for?  That always seems to be the rub.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 February, 2014, 02:48:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2014, 11:58:29 PM
Water can be Irish? Does that mean raindrops need passports? Hell of a revenue stream if they can figure out how to get passport fees out of the clouds...

Ah, you know what I meant, Sharky.  I have an English mother and an Irish father, who is himself descended from Normans, who are in turn descended from prehistoric African humans, but the easiest way to put it is that I'm Irish.  Irish water is Irish in the same way that a Waterloo sunset is English.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 03:01:45 PM
Dudley, I agree therein is the rub. I am not, I hope, being deliberately contentious. As I said before we are in a situation today where the levers of influence and control have been stolen away from us over the past 2 decades. Like many others on this thread and I guess like many others in the civilised world we realise we are in a situation where we are essentially denuded of the mechanisms whereby this control can be legitimately wrested back. I can see with a fear filled heart others of a less democratic nature greedily filling this vacuum in the years to come.
My previous posts have possibly been something of a cathartic rant, but in the words Dylan Thomas 'do not go gentle into that good night'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 03:37:58 PM
I did know what you meant, JBC, I was just being silly to poke fun at the idea that resources belong to whomever's land they happen to be on. Sounds good in theory but in practice resources belong to whomever has the biggest stick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 04:22:05 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 03:01:45 PM
My previous posts have possibly been something of a cathartic rant...

That is why this thread exists.  So that we can unburden ourselves of concerns political without scaring the horses or dragging thread after thread into the middle-aged comics fan version of a flame war.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 07:16:35 PM
Harvard study indicates that fluoridated water damages the developing brains of children. (http://www.blacklistednews.com/Harvard_Study%3A_Fluoride_Lowers_Children's_Intelligence_By_7_IQ_Points/32760/0/38/38/Y/M.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 February, 2014, 07:55:52 PM
I am so, so fed up of people up in arm's over the shooting of a Giraffe at Copenhagen zoo. People are jumping on the bandwagon, calling conservationists elitists and monsters. I just want to get some facts straight. One, the creature was an inbreed. A freak accident that occurred without the keepers knowing. Two, due to this defect it was suffering from chronic depression was refusing to eat, it would have died in a matter of days. Three, conservationism and zoology is a thankless profession. No one ever acknowledges the hard work and lifetimes spent in caring for these animals and careful research and planing that goes into ensuring the survival of a species. So when one idiot decides to hold an execution of a IUCN LC tier species IN PUBLIC!, I would be vary grateful if no one ever affiliated me with said person.

Rant over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 08:00:19 PM
Yup. Kill a human and hardly anyone bats an eyelid - kill a cute animal and the whole world starts frothing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 10 February, 2014, 08:13:29 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 10 February, 2014, 07:55:52 PM
I am so, so fed up of people up in arm's over the shooting of a Giraffe at Copenhagen zoo. People are jumping on the bandwagon, calling conservationists elitists and monsters. I just want to get some facts straight. One, the creature was an inbreed. A freak accident that occurred without the keepers knowing. Two, due to this defect it was suffering from chronic depression was refusing to eat, it would have died in a matter of days. Three, conservationism and zoology is a thankless profession. No one ever acknowledges the hard work and lifetimes spent in caring for these animals and careful research and planing that goes into ensuring the survival of a species. So when one idiot decides to hold an execution of a IUCN LC tier species IN PUBLIC!, I would be vary grateful if no one ever affiliated me with said person.

Rant over.

Interesting that you mention that the giraffe was inbred because I read two newspapers today that didn't mention that but said there was a risk of inbreeding if the giraffe was left live, no mention that it was depressed. But why not neuter the giraffe  or sell it to the people that wanted to buy it for their reserves/private zoo?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 10 February, 2014, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 12:08:43 PMWhether it's an example of the essential impotence of the modern presidential role, or just confirmation that only a certain type of person can ever be elected, Obama has turned out to be more of the same, just better dressed.

Ever read The Nightly News by Jonathan Hickman? There's a mention of Jimmy Carter, saying he looked so tired when he left the presidency as he didn't have the taste for blood required for the job. Obama personally approves targets for elimination for CIA drone strikes so I guess he the requirements: Huffington post link (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)

I wonder how he feels about the collateral civilian deaths.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 February, 2014, 08:20:24 PM
@Otter
Been talking to a friend of mine (one of the UK's top Tetrapod zoologists) and he's positive the creature was screened before hand and had a close gene match to it's mother. The chronic depression was a quick reaction from on sight keepers, it's common for inbred mammals to exhibit low mood due to under developed brain function. This was deducted by the creatures general lack of appetite before and after weening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2014, 08:43:12 PM
Managing animals on anything beyond the domestic scale means killing certain animals.  Everyone involved in farming, animal welfare, zoos and conservation understands this (i.e. those people who put their money where their mouths are), but the rest of the general public can't see beyond the cosy world of pets and storybooks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 08:51:16 PM
S'true TordelBack, I come from a farming background (along the Tyrone/Monaghan border in NI). Animal welfare is at the heart of all we do. We preserve hedgerows, eschew chemical herbicides and generally work with the land and environment. It is sad that sometimes the decisions taken result in deaths of animals either as a commercial or welfare decision.
Still in all I do feel a degree of compassion for the poor auld Giraffe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 10 February, 2014, 08:51:40 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 10 February, 2014, 08:13:29 PM
Interesting that you mention that the giraffe was inbred because I read two newspapers today that didn't mention that but said there was a risk of inbreeding if the giraffe was left live, no mention that it was depressed. But why not neuter the giraffe  or sell it to the people that wanted to buy it for their reserves/private zoo?

I read somewhere that they couldn't pass the animal on to another zoo or park because none of the facilities that met international requirements re. welfare standards, breeding programmes etc. were able to take it due to been basically maxed out on their own giraffe population.  And at least the meat went to feeding animals rather than some upper class twits who could brag they'd eaten giraffe.

No point in neutering an animal if you're trying to develop a breeding programme of your own, why waste resources on an animal which wont be able to contribute it's genes.

I also heard that the stomach was sent of for analysis to see how the creature breaks down plant proteins with the idea been that scientists might develop better next-generation bio fuels (i.e. fuels from algae as well as plants not now considered suitable feed stocks) 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 08:57:40 PM
How does Obama feel about killing? Turns out he thinks he's "really good at it." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/03/obama-drones-double-down_n_4208815.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 08:58:44 PM
C'mon Tombo, your sinister post justifying the killing of that poor Giraffe is just the latest clandestine move in the Dragonfly led insect war against us mammals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2014, 09:09:52 PM
As I understand it, the risk wasn't from the giraffe being inbred but the chance of it breeding with a close relative at some point in the future, as the number of giraffes in captivity in Europe is quite small and they didn't want to risk diluting the already limited pool of genes with any accidental inbreeding.

Call me old fashioned but I'd be far more worried if people weren't getting up in arms everytime someone who sounds a bit German tells you they had to euthanise to protect the purity of the European gene pool.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2014, 09:15:05 PM
C'mon Prof, giraffeing a laugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 09:22:23 PM
Thinking of the giraffe spay?


I'll get me coat...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 February, 2014, 09:37:34 PM
I see PETA are condemning this and having their site linked to all over the internet. This is the PETA who've apparently euthanised 31,000 animals since 1998. Twisted, manipulative, hypocritical pricks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 February, 2014, 09:37:47 PM
Sorry Prof, thats where your wrong. The creature was deffinelty more than 60% gene match with it's mother. Information concerning this is still coming out so i'll try and keep you peeps updated. The fact that it had already dhown signs of hereditory diease at such a young age proves that it's imune system would soon be shot anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2014, 09:51:51 PM
Yes, shot in the head.

As mentioned, the gene pool for giraffes is very small in Europe so the commonality of the genes isn't that much of a surprise and the euthanising of the creature is scientifically defensible (if you don't object to captive breeding programmes and zoos in general) - things get tricky - and emotional - when you factor in the public spectacle made of the killing, dismemberment, and feeding to lions to turn a profit that followed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 February, 2014, 09:55:22 PM
I believe the spectacle could have been dealt with more subtlety, but A part of me feel's that the public needs to toughen up a bit as far as this is concerned. And the zoo will hardly be making a profit out of it, indeed the vast media misrepresentation will only be a detriment to them. I've lost friends arguing in defence of these actions so it's fair to say i'm a little highly strung atm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2014, 10:05:08 PM
Zoos and private parks feed animals back to other animals all the time, they just don't do it in public and advertise it as a matinee showing.  I'm not saying this was a failure of ethics, I'm saying it was a failure of empathy to not think that some people might be upset at the thought of lovable fluffy zoo attractions being killed, hacked up, and eaten for a paid spectacle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 February, 2014, 10:08:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2014, 10:05:08 PM
Zoos and private parks feed animals back to other animals all the time, they just don't do it in public and advertise it as a matinee showing.  I'm not saying this was a failure of ethics, I'm saying it was a failure of empathy to not think that some people might be upset at the thought of lovable fluffy zoo attractions being killed, hacked up, and eaten for a paid spectacle.

Yep. Especially when said attractions have been given names.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 February, 2014, 10:37:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2014, 03:37:58 PM
I did know what you meant, JBC, I was just being silly to poke fun at the idea that resources belong to whomever's land they happen to be on. Sounds good in theory but in practice resources belong to whomever has the biggest stick.

Can't argue with that, I suppose!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 11 February, 2014, 09:10:32 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 10 February, 2014, 09:55:22 PM
I believe the spectacle could have been dealt with more subtlety, but A part of me feel's that the public needs to toughen up a bit as far as this is concerned.

Hell yes.  Meat eaters who can't face up to certain realities should have their meat-eating privileges revoked.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 February, 2014, 02:25:06 PM
Coming soon to a car near you... a smoking ban!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26133374

The crux of this argument is "to protect children". Fair enough, nobody in their right Mind would want to inflict pain/injury or damage on another; but I would suggest that Cars/Vehicles have a far greater potential in poisoning people!


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 11 February, 2014, 02:57:27 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 11 February, 2014, 02:25:06 PM
Coming soon to a car near you... a smoking ban!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26133374

The crux of this argument is "to protect children". Fair enough, nobody in their right Mind would want to inflict pain/injury or damage on another; but I would suggest that Cars/Vehicles have a far greater potential in poisoning people!

The evidence seems to be against you... http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/12481.php
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2014, 03:19:47 PM
M.P.s obviously don't know much. When trapped in a car with a child, cigarettes are essential. Not only to keep you calm enough to restrain from strangling the little bastards but also to mask the stench of Happy Meals, spilled milk and shitty nappies.

Bloody politicians - they're so disconnected from reality, don't you find?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 February, 2014, 04:57:11 PM
Quote from: Dudley on 11 February, 2014, 02:57:27 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 11 February, 2014, 02:25:06 PM
Coming soon to a car near you... a smoking ban!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26133374

The crux of this argument is "to protect children". Fair enough, nobody in their right Mind would want to inflict pain/injury or damage on another; but I would suggest that Cars/Vehicles have a far greater potential in poisoning people!

The evidence seems to be against you... http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/12481.php

Fair enough, but I may doubt the validity of one controlled experiment conducted in someone's garage.

In the experiment they used three burning cigs (no smoke inhaled, just left to gather in the air) against a car left running. If you were the only adult in the car is it likely that you'd have 3 ciggies on the go at once? And if you did, wouldn't you inhale the smoke, lowering the particle count in the immediate vicinity?

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 February, 2014, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: Dudley on 11 February, 2014, 09:10:32 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 10 February, 2014, 09:55:22 PM
I believe the spectacle could have been dealt with more subtlety, but A part of me feel's that the public needs to toughen up a bit as far as this is concerned.

Hell yes.  Meat eaters who can't face up to certain realities should have their meat-eating privileges revoked.

indeed. Complain about needlessly killing a giraffe by all means but don't do it while eating an egg and bacon sarnie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 10:34:22 AM
Update: Today's planned unlawful eviction has been cancelled by the Council. They've been forced to face up to the fact that they can't evict someone who is (and always has been) willing to negotiate. There's still a long way to go but still...


Shark 2 - Council 0.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 February, 2014, 10:48:50 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 10:34:22 AMThey've been forced to face up to the fact that they can't evict someone who is (and always has been) willing to negotiate.

Well done Shark, I had hoped that would be the case. 


It's a totally different situation (one of my own making and not one related to my principles in any way) but my own troubles with bailiffs, sheriffs and debt collectors have usually been eased by my insistence on my willingness to negotiate - it can be a struggle to get them to acknowledge this, sometimes a legal one, but their powers, such as they are, are generally based on dealing with intransigence: seizure by force as a matter of last recourse.  It's very difficult for them to face into a possible court appearance when there's a folder full of written offers to arrive at a compromise that wouldn't waste a judge's time. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Stacey on 12 February, 2014, 10:57:29 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 10:34:22 AM
Update: Today's planned unlawful eviction has been cancelled by the Council. They've been forced to face up to the fact that they can't evict someone who is (and always has been) willing to negotiate. There's still a long way to go but still...


Shark 2 - Council 0.
Well done Sharky. Stay strong and keep yourself safe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 01:12:37 PM
Thanks again, chaps :)

On a different topic, there is a petition to get the government to debate existing drug laws. It needs 100,000 signatures p.d.q. My own signature was the 53,351st. Here's the link if anyone's interested:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/uk_epetition/?bvEAccb&v=35769


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 February, 2014, 01:18:42 PM
Sharkey, delighted to hear of some positive progress; hope the end of this saga is to your benefit and satisfaction. Z :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 12 February, 2014, 01:59:33 PM
Great news Sharky. I've been thinking about your situation all day. Very pleased things seem to be going your way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 February, 2014, 02:00:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 01:12:37 PM
Thanks again, chaps :)


Glad to hear things are going your way, i think its a tribute to your behaviour that they have backed off a bit, continue the reasoned debate and respecting the indiviual not the badge and you'll get there hopefully, best o luck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 February, 2014, 02:30:01 PM
Good going, Sharky.  You confused them into submission by having a spine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 12 February, 2014, 04:12:18 PM
Yes, well done Sharky.  I think you have handled this all very well by not losing your rag and being polite and open to discussion.  What will the council do now that they can't just put figure A into box B?  You might bring the whole system down after all!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2014, 04:32:21 PM
The Council guy was coming to meet with me this afternoon to negotiate but has just called to cancel because of the storms. In case the electricity goes off, he doesn't want to meet with me in the dark! Maybe he's seen my avatar after all...

Thanks again for all your kind comments - this would have been a lot harder without them. Come the revolution, you'll all be awarded Sharktopian knighthoods!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 08:11:31 PM
So, just spent almost two hours negotiating with a council bod. Well, I say negotiating - I was negotiating, he was intractable. Mostly.
.
His initial position was that I HAD to claim not only Housing Benefit but other benefits as well and must agree to ownership of the back-rent accrued while the disagreement was ongoing.
.
I managed to convince him that I won't claim responsibility for the back rent nor would I claim any benefits beyond HB, which I said I'd claim if the Council did all the work, as it's them who want it and not me.
.
Even though the Council only got me to capitulate on the HB I still feel defeated. Sick. Thing is, I know I could have continued with the struggle and kept entirely within the law but I folded.
.
I hate myself so much right now. Feel like I've sold my soul, betrayed everything I believe in, bent over to be shafted. Dammit.
.
Still, guess I'll just have to swallow it and carry on. There are still plenty of battles to fight but, to be honest, right now I'm thinking I'm not the guy to fight them.
.
Free and democratic country my ringpiece. We don't have a government, we have a meat grinder. People go in one end and money comes out the other - all that civil servants do is turn the handle.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 February, 2014, 08:35:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 08:11:31 PM
Free and democratic country my ringpiece. We don't have a government, we have a meat grinder. People go in one end and money comes out the other - all that civil servants do is turn the handle.

(http://lyrics.red-goose.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/public-enemy-fight-the-power1.jpg) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PaoLy7PHwk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 February, 2014, 09:23:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 08:11:31 PM
I hate myself so much right now. Feel like I've sold my soul, betrayed everything I believe in, bent over to be shafted. Dammit.

Dinnae be daft, Shark. All that's happened is you've been roped into a pointless game of pass the parcel that's been rigged so the person whose party it is gets the present. Sometimes you just have to go along with that kind of crap to get to the jelly and ice cream and a go on the bouncy castle later on.

(No, I'm not sure what I'm going on about either, but it sounds like it's probably really clever and insightful and stuff.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2014, 10:41:36 PM
Jesus Sharky, we take these small defeats every day. The measure of you isn't this day or moment; it's the person you present yourself as after this. You're not a gestalt of small incremental, petty defeats. Obversly you're the tantamount of a man who has faced the lying bullshit and has won out. Stay true. Your friend with respect Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 13 February, 2014, 11:05:18 PM
Its not a defeat. It's a bureaucratic arrangement. You've won Sharky
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 11:40:11 PM
Thanks y'all for trying to cheer me up but I don't feel like I've won anything.
.
What I can't get out of my head is the fear that in the future, maybe five or ten years from now, if things continue in the way they're going, will that same Council bod be sat there with his official policies and official forms deciding whether I should be put onto a train to take me to some 'Economic Resettlement Camp' or 'Productivity Zone' or something? Something that he's been told is for the good of myself and the good of the country?
.
And will I give in then, too?
.
A man who keeps an eye on the past is always blind in one eye but a man who looks only to the future is blind in both eyes.
.
I know that sounds like alarmist hyperbole but I just can't shake it. Meh - I'm sure I'll be back to my old self in a day or two.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2014, 11:56:49 PM
My choice of words earlier was maybe too pejorative. You weren't 'defeated' sharky. As for your last post, the dark of winter, late at night isn't the time to dwell on hypotheticals. It'll never come to that 'resettement' thing. They'll never have enough rolling stock by then. Instead they'll send you a letter 'inviting' you to a togetherness forum at the local quarry. When you get there, some bland faced young guy with too much of the whites of his eyes showing will 'mechanically resocialise' you with a low calibare pistol! Welcome to the future  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2014, 12:16:23 AM
Nothing wrong with your choice of words, Zen my friend, nothing whatever.
.
I'm sure the Jews and Gypsies thought it would never come to resettlement camps either. I'm sure the civil servants who did all the paperwork were equally sceptical. It's not as if they were told the real plan, they only knew and did as they were told.
.
I can't accept 'it'll never happen' as an argument. See how human beings labelled as immigrants, benefit scum and (yes) even bankers are demonised and reviled as almost subhuman. How hard would it be to sell the idea of putting certain sections of society into some segregated area for the benefit of the country and its  good, hard working taxpayers? Not too hard at all, sadly.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2014, 12:57:15 AM
Out of sight, out of mind - Britain already detains people with no criminal record in places like Yarl's Wood, where sexual misconduct upon female "guests" is not uncommon, and it's not too hard to imagine the same kind of care and attention being visited upon people living on the streets, or even in houses that may be out of their rental range and whom councils might want to "move elsewhere", as evidenced by the latest figures on people adversely affected by the bedroom tax - official figures say 4000 people erroneously affected (IE lied to), but freedom of information figures retrieved by Labour MPs reveal the number to be over 50,000.  The only thing missing right now, the only thing stopping them from rounding up the homeless, the poor, the mentally troubled and bunging them in a corner somewhere where they can be looked after by private contractors is the excuse they'd need to do so, because they're cunning lizards this current Tory lot, they learn the value of PR eventually because sooner or later a velociraptor does learn to use a doorknob.
It's not paranoia, me suggesting this, it's basic politics learned by happy accident in the US when Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans and the poorer - black - neighborhoods were depopulated for years after the event, changing the political landscape of one of the most blatantly liberal and multicultural cities in the bible belt overnight from a mostly-black local political scene to a bunch of very rich, very white folk being in charge.  Or maybe I am being a bit paranoid - I mean, it's not like there's any parts of Britain being flooded out and only the richer, more well-off areas more likely to contain those who will endorse conservative politicians are being prioritised by the relief effort, is it?

Not many people challenge their council at all and just roll over before the fight even starts, but if you are determined to view it as a loss, Sharky, it's still Sharky 2 Council 1.  The gentlemanly thing to do would be to rub this in their faces as best you can, and to keep reminding everyone that they harrass old women with deflected anger when they don't get their way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 February, 2014, 07:02:34 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2014, 12:16:23 AM
even bankers are demonised and reviled as almost subhuman.
Yep - let's not forget that in depression hit Weimar Germany, it was the bankers and international finance which were made the focus of public hatred. Money and international organisation being established code words referring to another group entirely, of course. The politics of blame take you to some scary places.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 February, 2014, 07:02:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 11:40:11 PM
Thanks y'all for trying to cheer me up but I don't feel like I've won anything.

Balls.  You fought them with honour and dignity, you delayed and inconvenienced them, you forced them to meet you in a compromise.  That's winning, that's how it goes when you're an individual and they're the power.  Imagine the world where every citizen fought for their principles like you do.  Only genocidal madmen insist on unconditional victory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2014, 11:32:42 AM
You're right - all of you.
.
I've had a very difficult night, churning things over in my mind, contemplating everything from the unthinkable to the impossible. I think I spat my dummy out when things didn't go exactly the way I wanted and reading your posts and PMs has made me see this. I apologise for whining and hope you can forgive me. As Bear said, it's still 2-1.
.
But now the anger and disappointment are beginning to dissipate new strategies are emerging. New goals and fresh perspectives are becoming apparent based on the harsh lessons I'm learning and the perspectives you have exposed me to.
.
This isn't over. It's not even half-time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 14 February, 2014, 11:48:44 AM
You did the right thing Sharkie, used your brain not your brawn, picked your battles and gave a bit ground, your still here and ready for the next round if they chose to come back, that's winning in my book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 February, 2014, 06:22:16 PM
Poudhuff's right, you know.  I remember you (Shark) posting this earlier in the thread:
QuoteIf my landlord wishes to get involved in criminal activities then that's something I can't prevent. I can, however, refuse to get involved. If they leave me alone then I'll leave them alone, within reason.

From how you've explained the outcome, you have something of a result there.  As you say, even though the HB is being paid, you've done nothing whatsoever to accommodate this situation.  Unless I've misunderstood things, they're pretty much organising your HB themselves without your involvement - all you've done is listened to them telling you that it would happen.

As you say, it's something you can't prevent, but you've stood by your principles from start to finish.  Without losing your home during apocalyptically bad weather.  Sounds ok to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 01:36:59 PM
Latest: Just had a very interesting meeting with a local councillor of long standing whom I trust. He's eager to help me, particularly in regards to getting an apology to my Mum from the Council and also in the area of questioning the way this whole process has been handled and formulating suggestions for the future.
.
One thing I don't think I've mentioned is that I have been regularly billing the Council for dealing with their letters (banks charge for writing letters so I do too) and fines for breaching the clearly posted Legal Notice on my front door (which basically says that anyone turning up without an appointment is liable to a £5,000 fine). The bills also have Late Payment Charges built in so that any bill which is not paid within 28 days incurs a charge of £25 per week per unpaid bill (which is how I see debt collectors off). The total owing on the Council's bill, which they have simply ignored (NEVER ignore your bills, right?) is now £39,100. This is a great lever which I will soon start using in earnest as a completely legal and valid bargaining chip.
.
A small and unimportant thing but maybe worth a mention; last Tuesday night as I was walking the dog his name tag fell off and blew away. I heard it go but it was stormy that night and I didn't realise what the tinkling noise was until I got home. I do try not to be superstitious but the fact that the dog's tag (with my address on it) had gone missing seemed like an evil omen and it played on my mind. I retraced my steps several times but could find no sign of it, which seemed like an eviller omen. Today I found it, in precisely the area where I'd lost it, right out in the open where nobody could miss it, in a place I've combed every day since. I'm going to take this as a good omen!
.
Lastly, am I monopolising this thread? Should I start another or just shut up about all this?

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 February, 2014, 01:56:31 PM
'S your thread, Sir, and it'd take a braver man than I to try to evict The Legendary Shark from what is rightly his.  Current subject matter would seem to me to represent issues at the heart of the system and how it relates to individuals, and broader matters of monetary theory, taxation and rights.  I'd say keep it all here. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 02:23:17 PM
Thanks, Tordels, that's pretty much what I was thinking (except that I can't claim ownership of this thread - it belongs primarily to Rebellion, I think - and I don't think I have any special rights or privileges just because I happened to start it).
.
Just thought I'd better ask as I can get pretty self-absorbed at times - which I'm sure you've all noticed! :-D
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 February, 2014, 04:42:13 PM
Howdy! Just had a bit of an epic read there...it's all happening round Sharky's gaff! Time for my tuppence to be deployed...

First of all - I can only admire someone who will stick to their principles. My personal view is that you have to deal with the world the way you feel it should be and don't be fooled it's all totally gone to shite. It was always shit for most of the populace through history and you need to recognise there is still beauty left, for want of a better term. But there's nothing wrong with compromise. In the end you did the right thing allowing the housing benefit to be paid in my opinion. As someone who has made contributions to the coffers of Westminster I can honestly say the best reason for doing so is to provide welfare to help people, despite your views on the whole damning nature of money as a concept. I'm glad it hasn't come to you being turfed out on your anal fin. I'd say this to anyone, but there's no point in cutting off your nose to spite your face either. If more people decided they didn't want to accept welfare from the state they might decide no one wants or needs it at all - and a lot of people have nothing else.

Secondly - if this whole thing ever gets to a court the magistrate will either applaud you for sticking it to the council, as in my experience a lot of them aren't really very keen on public servants, or he will throw whatever book he pleases at you for titting people about. If it does come to that, I advise not going on about Common Law. I think it's probably shaky ground to base a defence on. The magistrate will not appreciate being told what the law is or should be and if there is any legislation that covers these issues, no matter what they will be bound to uphold it. I know you've read up on a lot of stuff but I'm basing this on my experience - they really don't like smart arses.

Thirdly - see you billing the council for letters an all that, and your charges? You've read up about what constitutes a contract so it might be covered by the The Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 (and regs 2002 I think). If it is you can charge the base rate of interest plus 8% on late payments, plus seek compensation for reasonable costs in recovering the debt (set out in the regs I believe). It probably doesn't cover it, but thought I'd mention it for the crack.

And on side note, there was mention of not demonising people but yet you say that civil servants turn the handle of the meat grinder and that the Nazi civil servants filled out the paper work without an idea of the consequences. Do you mean those in Westminster or the people who are dealing with you personally? Anyone you've dealt with is a person who's trying to get by by having a job to pay their bills and determine their life as best thay can. You can't equate them to fuckin Nazis lightly! To me that's taking a moral high ground that's unjustified. There was a fuck load of admin needed to defeat the Nazis too like.

Keep 'er lit. I'll post about comics soon.

M.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2014, 06:06:19 PM
Yeah, it's pretty unfair to call council workers Nazis.  They're only obeying orders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 February, 2014, 06:40:15 PM
 very good :lol:.....................hey I'm a civil servant as well :|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2014, 06:47:16 PM
Aye, it's a strange one ... one of my mates, a huge, tattooed muscle-freak who dropped off the employment spectrum after considerable drug-abuse and mental breakdowns, claimed welfare for years.  He's now a tax inspector.  Funny old world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 February, 2014, 06:47:43 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 15 February, 2014, 04:42:13 PM
There was a fuck load of admin needed to defeat the Nazis too like.

Arf! Although the Carcharodon of Legend definitely Godwined the thread, I don't think he accused anyone of being a Nazi.

Ascribing any moral valency to the actions of folk who counter sign form V62(a) and retain the pink copy for their own records is pointless, since - like everyone else - they go through life making sure they perform their own specific function in a much larger system in a manner which avoids immediate censure from elsewhere.

Those in any large corporation (no matter their rank) consider themselves a single cog in a much larger machine, and just assume someone else, somewhere, has considered whether what they're up to in general is either effective or morally justifiable.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 February, 2014, 07:12:12 PM
Yep sauchie there's that herd instinct thing andd the totally rad whistleblowing policies which shine such a light on the murkier aspects of delivery of service...like f**k, try raising your head above the parapet and some 'facilitator' from a human resource unit (how I despise that terminology, they used to be called personnel, but why use one word when three will suffice) will be waiting with a smile on their face and a big bucket of crap to dump right over you for ever and ever and ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2014, 07:17:23 PM
My brother works claims processing for the Social Services and was told to draft and sign a letter addressed to a man who recently lost his wife.  The subject of the letter was that she was fraudulently claiming Jobseeker's Allowance until her death because she should have been claiming sickness benefits instead, as she was given a terminal diagnosis by a doctor and thus was not technically "available for work" when she said she was - so as her spouse, the SS was tithing his benefits until the sum was repaid.  My brother refused point blank to draft the letter and made it clear he'd be signing nothing of the sort.  It's people who work these jobs, not robots - the buck stops somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 08:28:49 PM
Great post, Mikey, thanks. I'll answer your points as best I can.
.
I'm not against welfare at all. In fact, I think it's a vital component in any enlightened state. My beef is with the way it is presently funded and applied. I won't go into the financing aspect here as I think my views on that have already been extensively ranted about by me.
.
When I first fell ill and applied for benefits I was denied because as one of my hobbies I listed writing. Writing, I was told, is a job - whether one gets paid for it or not. The civil servant helping me with my claim advised me to change 'writing' to 'watching television' and, hey presto, benefits were then granted. ("You can still write," she whispered conspiratorially, "just don't tell us about it.") I still write and have been published in organs like Zarjaz and Paragon but I don't get paid for it (probably with good reason!), so if the DWP found out about my scripts seeing print I'd be in lumber. To me, this is a complete nonsense. The work of amateurs and hobbyists such as myself does, in a minor way, help the economy: paper, ink and staple manufacturers make a sliver of cash out of our work as do printers and the Royal Mail. Our work brings a little joy into readers' lives and also gives me a good feeling, as if I'm actually contributing in my own infinitesimal way to the culture of this country. If I could earn enough money from my writing to pay my way without claiming benefits then I'd be content but I can't and probably never will. Writing also helps me - a kind of therapy almost - but to the government it is work that could be monetized despite the realities of the publishing world.
.
As I was making my tea tonight (I probably can't admit to cooking for myself either because if I can cook for myself I can cook for others and if I can cook for others I could get a job as a chef) I heard some politician on the radio spouting about the need to get people off benefits and back to work, which is what I want to do. My own Council, though, has just practically forced me into claiming benefits so I can afford to pay it for renting my council flat. I suspect the DWP is going to be reluctant to pay me very much due to my part time job, which is far better for my health than sitting around staring at the telly all day, and this is going to lead to me being worse off than if I were doing nothing. It's a classic Catch-22; try to help yourself out of benefits and you're hammered for it, sit around doing nothing and get constantly hounded to prove that you're sitting around doing nothing. It's insane.
.
In respect to courts and such, to me going to court is a Last Resort. Only when all avenues of compromise and negotiation have been exhausted should both parties go to court in order to get assistance in coming to an agreement. Instead, my council uses court action as a threat - and a hollow one at that as being in debt is not a crime and therefore any invitation to attend a court hearing under such circumstances is entirely voluntary. To suggest to anyone that an invitation to court Must Be Obeyed is, baldly, a lie. My aim is to leave the courts out of it and deal honestly and fairly with each other without immediately claiming that the slightest disagreement automatically needs lawyers, judges and magistrates to step in. How much money has my council wasted in paying for solicitors, hire of court rooms, judges, bailiffs, paperwork and God knows what else when all they really needed to do was talk to me reasonably? In short, I'm using the primacy of Common Law to keep out of the courts, not to fight court battles.
This is also the reasoning behind the charges I've imposed upon the Council - they're not there primarily to be paid but as an incentive to deal with me directly and evenly. If the Council does want to continue along the court path and invite me to see a magistrate to get me to pay them a couple of grand in back-rent (or whatever), do they really want me to risk saying to the judge, "okay, I give in, I'll pay up - now, time to consider my £40,000 counter-claim"? It's simply taking their own tactic and using it against them (and thanks for the legislation, by the way, that'll help me a great deal).
.
The only way you can be forced to court is if you break the Common Law (by causing actual loss, actual harm or actual damage) - the vast majority of court hearings are voluntary (hence the vital importance of knowing the legalese meaning of the word 'understand'). So if one accepts an invitation to court and then starts banging on about the unfairness and injustice of it all you're not going to get anywhere - it would be like accepting an invitation to play Monopoly and turning up with a chess set and expecting to somehow use your Queen as a Get Out Of Jail Free card - you'll just get crushed, and serve you right, too. (Note to self: Contact Waddington's re new game idea, 'Chessopoly'...)
.
Finally, and arguably most importantly, I don't think that civil servants are Nazis. In my anger I may have given that impression and, if this is the case, I unreservedly apologise. My fear is that the civil service (whose role, as I understand it, is to facilitate the smooth running of the country and enact the policies of government) can easily be unwittingly used for fascistic purposes. The civil servants do indeed turn the handle but it's governments who decide what the machine does, what goes in one end and what comes out the other.
.
If a modern Hitler were to rise to power in this country and pass laws expelling all foreign nationals, it would be the civil servants who would be charged with implementing these laws. How would the civil servants know if boatloads of deportees that they identified, notified and helped along their way were gassed to death and dumped in the ocean once out of sight of land?
.
Civil Servants, just like the rest of us, must base all their actions on the Common Law. As was established at the Nuremberg Trials after WWII, and in many cases since, "I was just following orders" is no excuse. It was no excuse then and it is no excuse now.
.
Damn, Mikey - you got me ranting again! (But then, that's not hard to do!) Great discussion, though, thanks for weighing in.  :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 09:01:57 PM
Kudos to your brother, Prof - he's exactly the kind of civil servant we need.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 February, 2014, 05:12:39 AM
 I'd been avoiding this thread, but it looks like The Shark has earned his Legendary status.

Although, I have to say, Professor Bear is completely wrong.

He thinks his armchair is comfy, but he is wrong. He has never sat in MY comfy armchair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2014, 09:10:08 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2014, 05:12:39 AM
He thinks his armchair is comfy, but he is wrong. He has never sat in MY comfy armchair.

DFS is the opiate of the masses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 February, 2014, 10:38:21 AM
According to the ancient laws of the internet - because this has descended into a conversation about Hitler does that mean this thread will stop?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 February, 2014, 10:46:00 AM
I thought it'd moved on to armchair dictators? I hope I'm not 'Goring' to get in trouble for my last.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 February, 2014, 12:31:18 PM
Facist!



....4 across, 6 letters.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 February, 2014, 01:19:28 PM
Something I should add is that I'm 100% behind you on making a stand Sharky. I've been through similar circumstances at times and it takes a lot of commitment and energy to see it through - but I would never want someone to put themselves in a worse position than they are already in, especially ending up homeless which is no fun at all.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 08:28:49 PM
try to help yourself out of benefits and you're hammered for it, sit around doing nothing and get constantly hounded to prove that you're sitting around doing nothing. It's insane.

Yeah, it's mad isn't it? At least the person you spoke to let you know how to avoid extra hassles.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2014, 08:28:49 PM
Civil Servants, just like the rest of us, must base all their actions on the Common Law. As was established at the Nuremberg Trials after WWII, and in many cases since, "I was just following orders" is no excuse. It was no excuse then and it is no excuse now.

That's what I'm getting at. It's too easy to hit what is really a soft target like a civil servant because they don't generally publically defend themselves for a variety of reasons. Does it extend to anyone in public service? Or has been paid either directly or indirectly from public funds? It's tarring a lot of people with the same shitty brush and there are plenty of civil or public servants that also need or are eligble to claim welfare and maybe are fighting the same battles as you are. The ministers and politicians hate civil servants too in most cases and perpetuating the blame allows the divide and conquer that suits the fuckers in power too well if you ask me. As Prof Bear says, it's people doing these jobs, who will listen and perhaps be willing to help if they can.

...

Anyway - how's about that response lag to the awful flooding in England? I like how trying to blame the Environment Agency hasn't worked.

M.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 February, 2014, 01:54:53 PM
It's ok, sooner or later it always hits the thames and the toffs get concerned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2014, 02:02:38 PM
Yeah - usually they'd just blame climate change, but they've been going on about that for so long and even levying taxes on it that something like this flooding simply exposes the fraud. Where did all those carbon taxes go if not on weatherproofing the country?
.
Into the pockets of the elites, of course, so they can just hop on jets to get them away from the rain any time they want. Dredging rivers, constructing dykes, dams and storm drains, building pumping stations etc., etc.? Sod that - the banks need free money to hide the fact that they're all bankrupt.
.
Seems like climate change is only used as another excuse for stealing the wealth of nations for the benefit of the very few. I've been saying this for years and seeing the proof of it gives me no satisfaction at all. Sometimes it's so depressing to be right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 February, 2014, 05:06:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2014, 02:02:38 PM
Sometimes it's so depressing to be right.

Tell me about it!

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 February, 2014, 10:01:32 PM

Country's only as free as its press. Well done, Namibia:

(http://i.imgur.com/XBHw44s.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 February, 2014, 12:06:08 AM
I'm pleasantly surprised to see Ireland at the top of the scale - things have definitely changed since I was a kid and the hocus-pocus freaks in black were in charge of pretty much everything.  Also surprised to see France is only 'satisfactory'.

Veering wildly off topic, is it just me or is the Lego Movie all about Anarchism versus Totalitarianism?  It certainly does a better job of conveying that theme than the V for Vendetta movie did.  Apart from its being a long ad for a huge toymaking business, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 February, 2014, 12:12:00 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 February, 2014, 12:06:08 AM
I'm pleasantly surprised to see Ireland at the top of the scale - things have definitely changed since I was a kid and the hocus-pocus freaks in black were in charge of pretty much everything.

Now Denis O'Brien owns most of the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 February, 2014, 09:01:32 AM
The great Mary Beard's musings on gendered speech:  http://www.lrb.co.uk/2014/02/14/mary-beard/the-public-voice-of-women

Very interesting to see the collision of Twitter and classical scholarship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 17 February, 2014, 11:33:28 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 February, 2014, 07:02:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2014, 11:40:11 PM
Thanks y'all for trying to cheer me up but I don't feel like I've won anything.

Balls.  You fought them with honour and dignity, you delayed and inconvenienced them, you forced them to meet you in a compromise.  That's winning, that's how it goes when you're an individual and they're the power.  Imagine the world where every citizen fought for their principles like you do.  Only genocidal madmen insist on unconditional victory.

One of the best things I have ever read methinks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 February, 2014, 12:26:10 PM
Has Sharky won?  Based purely on the amount that he's written about the subject on the thread, he's obviously been through hell.  I've only skip-read many of his posts, as they've made me feel uncomfortable at times, as has some of the "encouragement" from some of the boarders on here, who, presumably, don't know Sharky very well.  Hasn't he accepted what was originally offered by the landlord and council?

Sharky's only won if Sharky himself thinks he has won.  I'm physically disabled and people continually telling me, "go on, Mike, you can walk, you can walk, you've won, you've won", would not make me feel any better.

I hope you do feel you've won, Sharky, and all the best for the future.
 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 February, 2014, 02:36:55 PM
I know it's considered bad form to link to the Daily Mail website as it only encourages them, but today's front-page headline is a thing of perfect beauty: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560898/200-women-troops-sent-home-pregnant-MoD-wont-impose-war-zone-pregnancy-tests-privacy-fears.html
It perfectly encapsulates the ethos of a newspaper founded by a Nazi sympathiser and which to this very day still publishes attacks on "banking conglomerates", homosexuals, and frontline British troops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 17 February, 2014, 05:50:39 PM
Scotland may, or may not be, leaving the UK this year, and nowt's been said about it on here.

No one interested, or just saving it all up for nearer the day?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 February, 2014, 05:54:40 PM
I think what Scotland is failing to take into account is the fact that if they leave the UK they also leave the EU, or is that what they really want?  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 06:13:24 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 17 February, 2014, 05:54:40 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 17 February, 2014, 05:50:39 PM
Scotland may, or may not be, leaving the UK this year, and nowt's been said about it on here. No one interested, or just saving it all up for nearer the day?

I think what Scotland is failing to take into account is the fact that if they leave the UK they also leave the EU, or is that what they really want?  :-\

Just watch the Northward rush of Daily Mail readers if that came to pass. Hardly any brown people either, which would suit them down to the ground as well. Nobody on either side of the independence debate appears capable of listening to opposing arguments without imagining their grandmother's sexual manners have been called into question, so sensible folks tend read the papers, come to their own conclusions, and give the shrill name calling and witch hunts of the public debate a wide berth.

Whatever the outcome of the referendum, this has not been my civilisation's finest hour.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 06:26:48 PM
The EU situation is a really strange one.....there are 6 million EU citizens there, if Scotland does secede from the Union, and the EU member states like Spain (with their Catalan situation) throw the toys out of the cot and demand Scotland not be admitted to the EU as an independent entity. This still leaves 6 million people in Scotland who are still EU citizens even after the event.
My views on Scottish independence are fairly positive but that's for another time. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 17 February, 2014, 06:30:00 PM
@ Sauchie.
Its certainly an emotive subject for many, so to some degree its understandable, but it doesn't lend itself to sensible debate - at times, as you say.

Though I doubt any of the home nation's would behave any differently.

I was going to ask for a show of hands as to how the numerous Scots on the board will be voting come September, but does that come under 'Between me and the ballot box'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 06:45:49 PM
Quote from: Judge Jack on 17 February, 2014, 06:30:00 PM
I was going to ask for a show of hands as to how the numerous Scots on the board will be voting come September, but does that come under 'Between me and the ballot box'?

I'll be voting for no change. Not because I think independence would be a disaster, but because I don't think it would make any real difference.

The only real freedom in this world is financial independence, and - even without the plan to retain sterling as our currency and the influence that would afford Westminster over Holyrood's ability to determine their own course of action - the economic interests of the Northern and Southern halves of this island are so inextricably linked we'd end up operating a common economic policy anyway.

The first thing the Salmond administration did when they came to power was to order the signage outside Holyrood changed from THE SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE to THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT. Independence on the terms currently under offer seems like a similarly expensive and ultimately empty rebranding exercise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 February, 2014, 06:57:53 PM
@ Judge Jack

Like Sauchie I will be voting NO. We have come too far as part of the Union and, like most Scots, I am a pragmatist and I don't believe that it would be in our best interests to walk away. I come from Bannockburn - the site of a famous battle between Scotland and England - and personally I have no desire to fight old wars.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:12:22 PM
@ Tankie; I'm not sure that viewing what I'm doing in terms of winning and losing is entirely correct. It depends on the definitions, I suppose. One could take the view expounded in Babylon 5 that all you have to do to "win" is to say "no I won't" just one more time than they can say "yes you will", in which case the 'battle' could last practically forever. To my mind, a 'win' would be the Council and I coming to a mutually acceptable agreement and a 'loss' would be doing exactly as I'm told. This leaves a lot of scope in between. It can't be just a simple 'us and them' thing - the world's already too full of crap like that. Which is a roundabout way of saying that I don't know whether I've won or not!

@Scotland: This is your Big Chance to free yourselves from the bankers, dammit! Say "no" to the pound, the euro and the dollar; don't let your politicians buy money through printing bonds; don't allow them to borrow money either. YOU MUST TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE AND CONTROL YOUR OWN MONEY SUPPLY - ONLY BY DOING THIS CAN YOU ACHIEVE TRUE AND LASTING INDEPENDENCE. Do not allow your politicians to squander this chance and do not allow English, European or international bankers and politicians anywhere near your money supply or practically nothing will (or can) change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 February, 2014, 07:25:12 PM
I can understand (and support) the emotional appeal of independence from London, but I really hope (and fully expect) the vote to be a NO - if Scotland did leave, they would condemn the rest of England to permanent Tory majority *shudder*

As one comment on the BBC website put it:
Dear Scotland
If you leave, can you take us with you?
Love, The North.

It seems Wee Eck is making loads of promises that are not in his power to deliver - Nato, the EU, the pound - he may be able to make a good case why it'd be in everyone's interest, but doesn't mean he can make everyone else agree - particularly the Spanish
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 07:32:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:12:22 PM
@Scotland: This is your Big Chance to free yourselves from the bankers

Our First Minister is a former employee of The Royal Bank Of Scotland.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:35:21 PM
Sack him NOW.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2014, 07:46:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 February, 2014, 07:25:12 PM
It seems Wee Eck is making loads of promises that are not in his power to deliver - Nato, the EU, the pound

I'll confess that I've tried to steer clear of the independence debate, given that I'm not Scots and my leaning towards preserving the Union is largely a result of not wanting to see the Tories with a majority in Westminster for at least a generation, but...

I'm surprised Salmond hasn't promised everyone a pony if Scotland gets independence, such have been his claims of late. Keep the pound and have an independent monetary policy? I'm pretty sure it doesn't work like that. Automatically enter the EU as an independent nation? There are more countries than just Spain that want to keep uppity separatist regions in line. And the latest? That they'll enter the EU with the same rebates, exceptions and opt-outs that the UK negotiated? Really?

I'm a touch sceptical.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 07:49:32 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 February, 2014, 07:25:12 PM
Dear Scotland
If you leave, can you take us with you?
Love, The North.

Aye - the central belt of Scotland, where the vast majority of Scotland's 5.3 million population live, probably enjoys greater common economic interest with everything North of Birmingham than it does with the oil rich independent fiefdom of Aberdeen or the rural poor residents of the Northern Isles.

Using an arbitrary line determined centuries ago by warring gangs of sheep rustlers as the point where we're a' Jock Tamson's bairns and a' them other yins can go fuck themsels doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

If schemie neds in Govan and former civil servants who've retired to a bungalow in Inverness can put aside their differing priorities and work towards what they can agree is in their mutual interest, I don't see why they can't do the same with folk in Richmond upon Thames and Bradford.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 07:52:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:35:21 PM
Quote from: sauchie olympics on 17 February, 2014, 07:32:28 PM
Our First Minister is a former employee of The Royal Bank Of Scotland.

Sack him NOW.

Our previous First Minister was my maths teacher. Scotland feels a lot like Craggy Island.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:57:21 PM
Heh, down with this sort of thing! (Careful now...)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 February, 2014, 08:01:55 PM
Since the independence referendum has been brought up can we all agree that this board should be a "handshakes across the barricades" kind of place? We can be Scottish, English, Welsh, Irish, British or anything else and we don't have to defend our nationalities here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 08:05:06 PM
We're all Earthlets, aren't we?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 08:13:05 PM
Hear, hear guys we're all on the site out of abiding common love of a comic which had contributers from all parts of the UK, The Republic and indeed further afield.
My views on this are  strong but not ever to the extent of insulting or offending the views of parties who will for good or ill be directly participating in, and affected by the vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 17 February, 2014, 08:22:09 PM
Here's a couple of places for information for those who care.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/4341-a-unionist-lexicon-an-a-z-of-unionist-scare-stories-myths-and-misinformation#eu

http://wingsoverscotland.com/reference/

Those unfamiliar with Scottish history should probably start with 'The Claim of Scotland' by H J Paton which can be found in the Repository section in the Wings Over Scotland link. It'll give you a good background to the 'debate'.


For those who don't know, I'll be voting YES.


Cheers

Colin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 08:24:38 PM
Colin for King! He could certainly draw everyone together.


I'll get me kilt...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 17 February, 2014, 08:28:53 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 17 February, 2014, 08:01:55 PM
Since the independence referendum has been brought up can we all agree that this board should be a "handshakes across the barricades" kind of place? We can be Scottish, English, Welsh, Irish, British or anything else and we don't have to defend our nationalities here.

No. This is the fuckin internet, right? There must be a flag around here somewhere...

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 February, 2014, 08:32:59 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 08:13:05 PM
Hear, hear guys we're all on the site out of abiding common love of a comic which had contributers from all parts of the UK, The Republic and indeed further afield.
My views on this are  strong but not ever to the extent of insulting or offending the views of parties who will for good or ill be directly participating in, and affected by the vote.

Zen you are a gentleman and a scholar. I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm new here and therefore I am in no position to dictate to anyone how to behave towards each other. But at the same time we are all going to have different views (Colin MacNeil has expressed his and I respect him for it) and I would hate for people to fall out if the debate gets too "heated." Ta for your time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 08:42:28 PM
Mickey does the internet have it's own flag?  The way things are going it'll be a $ sign emblazoned on a field of gold bordered with all hearing ears and all seeing eyes! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 09:01:13 PM
(http://blog.archive.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/nsa_logo_2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 February, 2014, 09:01:57 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 17 February, 2014, 08:32:59 PM
we are all going to have different views (Colin MacNeil has expressed his and I respect him for it)

If the referendum delivers a YES vote, we're taking MacNeil with us and starting our own comic. Here's hoping Henry Flint and Edmund Bagwell have Scottish grannies, so they can contribute to 2000 Dundee *.


* Rejected titles included: The Fife Coast Avengers, Tennent's Summer Special, Calvin and Hibs, The Sectarian Spiderman, and kids' humour title Whizzer and Chips and Haggis (salt, sauce and a can of Irn Bru)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 February, 2014, 09:05:09 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 08:42:28 PMdoes the internet have it's own flag?

The stars and stripes...

(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/Nyan_Cat_zpsead40f40.jpg)

I'll spare you the anthem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 February, 2014, 09:11:58 PM
Sauchie, with the probability of major economic readjustment post referendum 2000 Dundee and its sister title in England 'Real 2000ad' would rapidly become 3000 Dundee and 'Real 3000ad'. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 February, 2014, 09:31:38 PM
Quote from: The Legetndary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 08:05:06 PM
We're all Earthlets, aren't we?

This will be my second Tattoo. It should also be the forum motto.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 February, 2014, 09:38:42 PM
So it is agreed, then. Colin MacNeil will lead us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 February, 2014, 08:45:35 AM
Could the unelected Brussels Commissioner, who has just told the Scots that they would not be allowed to join the EU if they separate from the UK, please make my day and extend that threat to England!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 February, 2014, 03:55:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2014, 07:12:22 PM
@Scotland: This is your Big Chance to free yourselves from the bankers, dammit! Say "no" to the pound, the euro and the dollar; don't let your politicians buy money through printing bonds; don't allow them to borrow money either. YOU MUST TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE AND CONTROL YOUR OWN MONEY SUPPLY - ONLY BY DOING THIS CAN YOU ACHIEVE TRUE AND LASTING INDEPENDENCE. Do not allow your politicians to squander this chance and do not allow English, European or international bankers and politicians anywhere near your money supply or practically nothing will (or can) change.

This ain't gonna happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 19 February, 2014, 04:00:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 February, 2014, 08:45:35 AM
Could the unelected Brussels Commissioner, who has just told the Scots that they would not be allowed to join the EU if they separate from the UK, please make my day and extend that threat to England!!

Out of curiosity, why don't you want to part of the E.U.?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 08:37:01 PM
Where shall I start!!  Let's take democracy.  In a national election I vote for a party and whatever party wins forms a government which then introduces its laws, be they good or bad.  In the EU you can elect a party but, because of majority voting in many areas now, your elected party can be out voted by people that you never had the chance to vote for.  How is that democracy?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 February, 2014, 08:40:27 PM
Severe corruption, as not once have the books balanced and if I remember a person was employed to investigate what was happening and they got the boot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 February, 2014, 08:43:44 PM
But then surley the answer then is further, closer unifi.....ah the hell with it I'm not gonna get involved (repeat ad infinitum).Z  >:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 February, 2014, 08:57:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 08:37:01 PM
In the EU you can elect a party but, because of majority voting in many areas now, your elected party can be out voted by people that you never had the chance to vote for.

How do you feel about Scottish independence?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 09:04:17 PM
I'm all for it!  The only thing I find strange is that the SNP want to get rid of one political union and re-join another one!  I'm not sure that's independence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 February, 2014, 09:12:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 09:04:17 PM
I'm all for it!

OK... so everyone on your street votes (hypothetically) Tory and everyone on the next five streets votes Labour. You get a Labour councillor. Do you get to secede from your local council?

I'm genuinely curious: I don't have a glib answer to this,* I just want to know where you think these boundaries should be drawn. Should the counties be self-governing? The UK regions?

Cheers

Jim

*Actually, I don't have any answer to this. Despite what some people may think, I'm not peddling a party agenda here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 February, 2014, 09:18:06 PM
I've seen a few background pieces to the debate, which were interesting.

I'm not sure how useful the interference from Con/Lab/Lib lot or the EU presidency, or Spain is, or if it's going to be totally counter-productive.

Whether 'project fear' is going to have the reverse effect remains to be seen.

I don't quite get the rationale that Scotland would have to reapply to the EU, but apparently the RestoftheUK wouldn't.

Cameron's rather cowardly potshots from the sidelines rather than going up to have a debate grates a bit.

I don't envy those having to make a decision...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuyVlWbcfgQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuyVlWbcfgQ)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 09:25:25 PM
Hi Jim, I believe boundaries should be drawn at a national level for things like foreign policy, immigration, taxation, amongst others, but I also believe in localism i.e. a district council area to decide certain things on a local basis, like health, transport, care for the elderly, and some benefits.  I certainly don't believe that European integration is the answer.  How could a politician in Rome, for example, (even if I could vote for him) know what's best for the East Midlands of England or England as a whole.

Not saying I'm right, it's just my opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 February, 2014, 10:00:21 PM

Dave Bowie's ill-advised contribution to the Scottish independence debate seems destined to be the talking point of this year's Brit awards. Quick capsule summary of reaction: he cares so much about the country he asked a middle aged junkie with an eating disorder to read out a telegram instead of showing up in person.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 February, 2014, 10:07:52 PM
Old Tankie: is what you say just the West Lothian question, but at a continental level as opposed to a national level? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 February, 2014, 10:19:36 PM
It's always amusing to see these things talked out.  I'd end all nation states tomorrow if I could.  A nested hierarchy of administrative units would do me just fine, starting at the street/townland level.  Sub-Regional-Scale Division 14 is the best Sub-Regional-Scale Division, can't stand all those Sub-Regional-Scale Division 13 bastards with their accents and attitudes.  But we can't go to war with them, because Regional-Scale Division 8 won't authorise the spend. Bastards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 10:29:04 PM
Hi Zen (hope I can call you Zen).  If the United Kingdom is going to remain as it is, the West Lothian question certainly needs to be sorted.  For example, how is it viable for Scottish MPs to be able to vote on changes to the English health service but they can't vote to change the Scottish health service?

I'm quite happy to be British, but I'm English first.  I believe in an English Parliament and if the only way to get it is to start with Scotland breaking away, then it's fine by me.  I think it's absurd that a country the size of England doesn't have its own Parliament.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 February, 2014, 10:40:28 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 February, 2014, 10:19:36 PM
I'd end all nation states tomorrow if I could.  A nested hierarchy of administrative units would do me just fine, starting at the street/townland level

This, basically. If there is a point to the EU, it's that once you have a working version of that in place for macro matters, there's no reason why the real decisions which affect your daily life can't be taken at a level which means your vote actually counts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 February, 2014, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: sauchie olympics on 19 February, 2014, 10:40:28 PM
This, basically. If there is a point to the EU, it's that once you have a working version of that in place for macro matters, there's no reason why the real decisions which affect your daily life can't be taken at a level which means your vote actually counts.


And if you don't vote the way they want you to, they'll ask you to do it again and again until you get it right.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 February, 2014, 10:58:20 PM
Couldn't have put it better myself.    :) 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 February, 2014, 11:02:51 PM
Old Tankie, I totally agree with you. The situation as it stands is absurd. There are intrinsic difficulties inherant in Scottish Independence taking place for parties both within the UK and indeed without.
Scotland as an Independant nation will be subject to all of the vicissitudes that entails...but with hard work and the use of intelligence there is no reason they cannot surmount them (God keep them that they will).
For England (and I'm not for a minute presupposing the political views of my follow squax in this thread) may well be faced with a continual conservative hegenomy.
The EU issue is farcical. How a political dream has turned into a nightmare; where founding ideals are subordinated if not prostituted  to greed, arrogance and unaccountability is staggering and shamefulm I must add I'm not of the UKIP camp here at all but that particular Temple is in serious need of someone to clear the moneylenders and shysters out! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 February, 2014, 12:13:57 AM
Independence for me or independence for nobody.

I'm basically with Tordels on this - independence begins at home.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 20 February, 2014, 12:35:11 AM
Re the 'myth' about permanent Tory rule if Scotland were to gain independence.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-useless-samaritans/

http://graphicalyes.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/scotland-is-virtually-powerless-to-stop.html

The last two links can be found from the first link, but I thought I'd add them anyway.



Here's another interesting link.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010


Cheers

Colin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 20 February, 2014, 12:58:26 AM
Colin, interesting links and I'd be happy if I'm wrong in my view.
If I can say as an aside and as an old Simon Harrison fan, your work on prog 736's Firepower Dredd story is beyond compare. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 February, 2014, 09:57:54 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 20 February, 2014, 12:58:26 AM
Colin, interesting links and I'd be happy if I'm wrong in my view.
If I can say as an aside and as an old Simon Harrison fan, your work on prog 736's Firepower Dredd story is beyond compare. Z

I liked Chopper's death scene most of all; with the huge holes in his back.  If only it had been a death scene.

As an aside, I'm with Tordelback all the way on democracy at ground level.  I read a book by new-age billionaire Marc Allen, who suggests 'leaving J. Edgar Hoover behind' - in other words, flatten the hierarchy and let people make their own decisions; it's the people who do the work who know how it should be done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 February, 2014, 10:06:45 AM
Spot on. Try running your own affairs though, as I am discovering, and the system doesn't like it. Personal freedom is anathema to our government, which instead touts freedom of choice as the only form of freedom one is allowed. And who presents us with the choices we are free to make?

Yep.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 February, 2014, 10:51:16 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 20 February, 2014, 12:35:11 AM
Re the 'myth' about permanent Tory rule if Scotland were to gain independence.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/

I'm sorry, Colin, but that link is a little bizarre and does some odd things with stats to bend the facts to its narrative. Crucially, it blithely ignores the slow but steady extinction of the Conservatives as a parliamentary force north of the border over the period it examines.

Plus: who gives a damn whether it would affected Eden's Tory majority if the Scots had gained independence in 1955? This is the most astonishingly obtuse diversionary tactic. If anyone is claiming that an argument against Scottish independence is that historically Labour would have formed fewer governments since WWII then the Wings Over Scotland link is a handy rebuttal. However, that would be a very bizarre argument and anyone making it is an idiot.

The argument is that now Scottish independence effectively removes 58 opposition seats from Westminster and would give the Tories a parliamentary majority without recourse to those pesky Liberal Democrats. Keep in mind that it was only sabotage by the LibDems that stopped the Tories from re-drawing the constituency boundaries to bias the electoral system still further in their favour.

Now, I freely concede that a Tory majority in Westminster for at least a generation is not of the slightest concern to an independent Scotland, and is certainly no reason for anyone in Scotland to vote 'No' to independence, but it's certainly a concern of stomach-churning proportions to those of us who will have to live with the consequences.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 20 February, 2014, 01:11:35 PM
Hi Jim  Could you explain to me how the electoral system is biased towards the Tories?  If anything, it's the other way around.  In 2010 the Tories got over 2 million votes more than Labour but were unable to form a majority, while in 2005, Labour got less than 1 million votes more than the Tories and were able to form a government with a majority of over 60.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 February, 2014, 01:16:52 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 20 February, 2014, 01:11:35 PM
Hi Jim  Could you explain to me how the electoral system is biased towards the Tories?

I meant 'still further' in relation to the way the political map would look if Scottish independence handed the Conservatives a 57 seat advantage, not from the current situation. My phrasing is unclear, for which I will apologise without reservation.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 20 February, 2014, 01:21:29 PM
Thanks for clearing that up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 February, 2014, 01:32:59 PM
Which of the mainstream political parties is against all these wars we're embroiled in? Which of them is against Q.E.? Which of them is against crony capitalism? Which one of them is for public money creation? Which one for the unions? Which one for personal freedom? For true electoral and democratic reform? Which one prepared to listen to reason or take its policies from what the general public needs? Which one for being truthful? Which one for allowing us to choose our own candidates?

They are all the same, which is why elections are like voting for your favourite disease.

No matter which way the Scottish referendum goes, nothing of any consequence will change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 February, 2014, 01:49:14 PM
Political parties are next on my list after nation states.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 February, 2014, 03:20:56 PM
QuoteI will apologise without reservation.

This is the politics thread! On the internet! We'll have less of this sort of thing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 February, 2014, 04:30:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 February, 2014, 01:16:52 PM,... for which I will apologise without reservation.


Nazi.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 20 February, 2014, 04:45:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 February, 2014, 01:32:59 PM
They are all the same, which is why elections are like voting for your favourite disease.

Or, to paraphrase Frankie Boyle, "It's a lot like betting on a Donkey Derby.  It doesn't matter what colour hat the donkey's wearing, whoever wins isn't relevant to the real world".  He was actually talking about football teams but the sentiments the same I guess.

Something struck me the other day (leaving a bruise, I shall be speaking to my solicitor).  I was mooching around Wikipedia and I read the article on some Labour MP who was first elected to the Commons in 1971 and had stayed there ever since.  I thought to myself "That woman has no idea at all about the real world, her entire life revolves around committees, meetings, and occasionally showing up to vote on what ever the party tells her to vote on".   

I had the idea that one way of controlling politicians would be to set a cap, say three times, on how many times they could stand for parliament, not get voted in mind but actually stand for election.  This would reduce the number of people who make a career out of showing up once a fortnight and claiming wages for a months work, force fresh blood into Parliament, and cut down on the number of "Standing-at-the back-looking-stupid" parties.  Just an idea of course, they'd never allow it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 February, 2014, 04:49:44 PM
Quote from: Tombo on 20 February, 2014, 04:45:48 PM
I had the idea that one way of controlling politicians would be to set a cap, say three times, on how many times they could stand for parliament

The Ancient World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy) beat you to it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2014, 10:59:46 PM
I am now retiring the phrase "the Tories cannot sink any lower" from my personal lexicon.  http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/20/people-stripped-benefits-charged-decision
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 20 February, 2014, 11:10:31 PM
Read the article earlier. If true, then utterly contemptable. What is it with these guys, do they think it makes them bigger men down in the club by beating up on the poor.  :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AM
Re Mr Campbell's remarks.

Bizarre link?
"This is the most astonishingly obtuse diversionary tactic." You really don't like the thought of an independent Scotland, do you? "The Bain Principle" at work here?

I put up these links to show that Scottish votes do not matter at Westminster, never have and never will. As someone said, he who does not keep one eye on the past will be blind to the future in both eyes.

If you are worried about Tory rule, persuade your fellow citizens to vote for something else. Don't blame the Scots for England's choices.

I'm an artist so not great at written argument, but if you think the facts are wrong in that link, then type a comment on to it, challenge it. You'll soon get a response from those who are more able than I to argue the point. See how you get on, dare you.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 20 February, 2014, 01:11:35 PM
Hi Jim  Could you explain to me how the electoral system is biased towards the Tories?

I meant 'still further' in relation to the way the political map would look if Scottish independence handed the Conservatives a 57 seat advantage, not from the current situation. My phrasing is unclear, for which I will apologise without reservation.

Cheers

Jim

Mr Campbell just lied to you Old Tankie, Scottish votes mean nothing. (You read the links, yes?) The constituency boundary areas favour the Labour Party at the moment. As you said in your post.

"Hi Jim  Could you explain to me how the electoral system is biased towards the Tories?  If anything, it's the other way around.  In 2010 the Tories got over 2 million votes more than Labour but were unable to form a majority, while in 2005, Labour got less than 1 million votes more than the Tories and were able to form a government with a majority of over 60."


Anyhoo, hope that's stirred the hornets nest a wee bit. :)


Kindest regards from a soon to be independent Kingdom of Scotland to a soon to be independent Kingdom of England (&NI). :)


Cheers

Colin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 February, 2014, 07:10:04 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AMKindest regards from a soon to be independent Kingdom of Scotland to a soon to be independent Kingdom of England (&NI). :)

Wales draws the short straw in your regards there Mr MacNeil!

Bydd Cymru'n rhydd!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 07:18:58 AM
And now to kick off the Campaign for an Independent Lancashire! Ey-up the People!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 February, 2014, 07:24:34 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AM
Re Mr Campbell's remarks.

Don't mess with the Campbells. Not after what happened last time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Glencoe).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 February, 2014, 08:03:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 07:18:58 AM
And now to kick off the Campaign for an Independent Lancashire! Ey-up the People!

Ya havving a laugh, mate! Where no more likely to go independent than a wart is to gain sentience!


Nice idea though!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 February, 2014, 08:21:03 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AM
I put up these links to show that Scottish votes do not matter at Westminster, never have and never will.

well, apart from:

Quote2010 Coalition govt (Cameron)
——————————————
Conservative majority: -38
Without Scottish MPs: 19
CHANGE: CON-LIB COALITION TO CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 08:31:29 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AM
...to a soon to be independent Kingdom of England (&NI). :)

What could possibly go wrong?  :)

Half the people in these here parts call themselves Scots,and think Scotland is totally brilliant for being Scottish and in no way Irish, so I don't know if that means they become automatically independent of, erm, something if Scotland goes that way. But generally those people are pro Union so probably not.

I'm interested in seeing what happens in Scotland if it goes for indepenence - I understand why a lot of folks are for it, and I do think a lot of the scaremongering from the Tories is because Aberdeen.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: jackstarr on 21 February, 2014, 08:40:02 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26277087

Magistrates to be based in police stations?  The beginning of the merging of police and court means the future of the Brit-Cit Justice Department starts here...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 08:49:00 AM
EDIT:

Quote from: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 08:31:29 AM
and I do think a lot of the scaremongering from the Tories is because Aberdeen.

I wanted to change that - it hasn't been just the Tories of course, but Labour and the Lib Dems too. And the BoE, and BP...

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 08:54:44 AM
Quote from: Colin MacNeil on 21 February, 2014, 01:47:56 AM
I put up these links to show that Scottish votes do not matter at Westminster, never have and never will. As someone said, he who does not keep one eye on the past will be blind to the future in both eyes.

And, as I said, you cannot project forward from past results in this manner, because the linked page ignores the extinction of the Scottish Tories over that period.

It also makes the mistake of framing the independence question in terms of 'benefit to Labour' which dilutes the effect which should more accurately be examined as 'benefit to the Conservatives' since it would represent a general hit to all opposition parties.

Given that the data presented cannot usefully be deployed to make inferences about future since it ignores a significant underlying trend, what purpose does it serve? If it seeks to make the rhetorical point that Scotland's votes have 'never counted'... well, you certainly can draw that inference from the data but you could repeat the exercise with Wales or, I suspect, any single predominantly-non-Tory-voting region of England. In fact, you could probably do the same with the Home Counties and argue that they should have been lobbying for autonomy every time there was a Labour government.

QuoteI'm an artist so not great at written argument

Nor at reading, it would seem.

I'm sorry, Colin, I've met you a few times and I've always found you to be a really decent bloke, and I know that this is an emotive subject, but...

QuoteIf you are worried about Tory rule, persuade your fellow citizens to vote for something else. Don't blame the Scots for England's choices.

I very specifically said that the effects on the remainder of the UK were no reason for anyone in Scotland to vote 'No'. Very specifically.


QuoteMr Campbell just lied to you Old Tankie, Scottish votes mean nothing.

And I take particular exception to you accusing me of lying directly after you quote me specifically not saying the thing you accuse me of lying about.

QuoteAnyhoo, hope that's stirred the hornets nest a wee bit.

If you want to stir the hornet's nest, please try doing so by actually reading the posts to which you take exception.

And I'd like you to withdraw that accusation about lying.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 09:24:34 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 08:31:29 AM
Half the people in these here parts call themselves Scots,and think Scotland is totally brilliant for being Scottish and in no way Irish, so I don't know if that means they become automatically independent of, erm, something if Scotland goes that way. But generally those people are pro Union so probably not.

How did this never occur to me?  A schism* leading to twice the number of marches, joy!  And think of the business this would create for vexillographers...

I love when this thread offers up excellent topics for pub conversations.

MacNeil (and Campbell): play nice. No need for accusations and acrimony, youze are discussing the interpretation and origin of complicated data: drawing a different conclusion does not constitute a lie, even if that was what said, which I don't think it was.


*Or is a schism in unionism an oxymoron?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 09:33:13 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 09:24:34 AM
*Or is a schism in unionism an oxymoron?

Well, there's the DUP, the UUP, the TUV, the PUP and NI21. And Willie Frazer. Schisms and unionism are close bedfellows it seems!

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 09:34:29 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 09:24:34 AM
even if that was what said, which I don't think it was.

If that was not the meaning I was supposed to take away from:

QuoteMr Campbell just lied to you Old Tankie

Then a retraction is most definitely in order. If that was the meaning I was supposed to take away, then a retraction is still in order, since I didn't say what Colin accuses me of saying, and he even quotes me not saying it.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 09:45:16 AM
Jim, I meant to imply that Colin misinterpreted what you had said (originally). 

You're both big boys, and good fellows to boot, I'm sure you can both see that passion may lead to intemperate language.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 09:53:50 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 20 February, 2014, 11:10:31 PM
Read the article earlier. If true, then utterly contemptable. What is it with these guys, do they think it makes them bigger men down in the club by beating up on the poor.  :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:

Come now ZenArcade.  All decent people have money, only feckless malingerers born into the stagnant end of the genetic pool are poor.  If you can't afford an appeal it stands to reason that you aren't a decent person, and thus the original decision to force you into prostitution, theft and/or vagrancy was entirely correct.  These scum should know their place, and if they don't we'll put them back in it.

Private sector debt collectors on the other hand, those people need all the support a caring society can offer...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 10:11:05 AM
Jackstar points out a very worrying proposal. The siting of magistrates in police stations is, to my mind, an extremely worrying development.
.
As I have said before, the only ways in which a sentence can be imposed on a person are either through a jury decision or through agreement ("understanding"). Most people don't know this and assume that, once arrested, one MUST comply with whatever the system deems appropriate. My research and personal experience have revealed to me that this is not the case.
.
Allow me to give a hypothetical example: Let us imagine that I have been arrested for carrying a concealed knife. As no loss, harm or damage has been caused by this then no actual crime has been committed and so the ONLY way I can be punished for this is if I agree or understand to punishment being imposed upon me. This is why police officers ask if people arrested for such crimes understand their rights. By saying "yes", the arrested person is agreeing to be punished.
.
If, on the other hand, I had taken out the knife and attacked somebody or something with it and caused actual loss, harm or damage it's a whole other ball game and ANYONE can arrest me whether I agree to it or not and be forced into a lawful court with a judge, jury and advocates to decide my punishment and have that punishment imposed upon me.
.
This might be an uncomfortable thought for some but it is the foundation of our legal system.
.
As most people are unaware of the distinction, and of their rights, the placement of magistrates in police stations has only one purpose, in my view, and that purpose is to raise revenue for the state (to help pay off the unpayoffable government debt) through the unlawful imposition of fines.
.
Not only do we need to rescue our government from these vampires, we need to rescue our justice system as well and inform people of their personal rights and responsibilities. I cannot understand how, in a free country, any of us can let this kind of thing stand.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 10:19:53 AM
Jackstar points out a very worrying proposal. The siting of magistrates in police stations is, to my mind, an extremely worrying development.
.
As I have said before, the only ways in which a sentence can be imposed on a person are either through a jury decision or through agreement ("understanding"). Most people don't know this and assume that, once arrested, one MUST comply with whatever the system deems appropriate. My research and personal experience have revealed to me that this is not the case.
.
Allow me to give a hypothetical example: Let us imagine that I have been arrested for carrying a concealed knife. As no loss, harm or damage has been caused by this then no actual crime has been committed and so the ONLY way I can be punished for this is if I agree or understand to punishment being imposed upon me. This is why police officers ask if people arrested for such crimes understand their rights. By saying "yes", the arrested person is agreeing to be punished.
.
If, on the other hand, I had taken out the knife and attacked somebody or something with it and caused actual loss, harm or damage it's a whole other ball game and ANYONE can arrest me whether I agree to it or not and be forced into a lawful court with a judge, jury and advocates to decide my punishment and have that punishment imposed upon me.
.
This might be an uncomfortable thought for some but it is the foundation of our legal system.
.
As most people are unaware of the distinction, and of their rights, the placement of magistrates in police stations has only one purpose, in my view, and that purpose is to raise revenue for the state (to help pay off the unpayoffable government debt) through the unlawful imposition of fines.
.
Not only do we need to rescue our government from these vampires, we need to rescue our justice system as well and inform people of their personal rights and responsibilities. I cannot understand how, in a free country, any of us can let this kind of thing stand.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 February, 2014, 10:22:53 AM
The biggest blow to the referendum debate is that on one side, you have Cameron.

On the other you have people who basically cry persecution every time their stance is questioned or their facts interrogated in the slightest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 10:47:03 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 21 February, 2014, 10:22:53 AM
The biggest blow to the referendum debate is that on one side, you have Cameron.

There is very little doubt in my mind that Cameron would shed no tears at all if the Scots vote for independence. As a Tory leader, he has to pay lip service to the idea of the Union, but I think this speaks more eloquently to his real feelings on the subject:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/tLEAmQq_zpsc52fb054.jpg)

I rather hope that there is a civilised and informed debate going on North of the border, because looking at it from down here, it's a mess.

On the one hand, you have Salmond asserting things as fact or fait accompli that would more accurately be filed under a heading of 'No useful precedents in international law; your guess is as good as mine' or making claims that he must know are untrue.*

Meanwhile, the paucity of the argument on the 'No' side is massively depressing. 'Better together'? More accurately: 'You'll be fucked if you go'. It's hardly compelling.

Bah.

Jim

*It may well be that Scotland could walk away from the UK sovereign debt, but if he honestly thinks the international credit ratings agencies wouldn't punish the country hard for that, or that such action would have no implications for Scots domestic policy then he's an idiot. And I don't think he's an idiot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 10:56:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 10:19:53 AMThis is why police officers ask if people arrested for such crimes understand their rights. By saying "yes", the arrested person is agreeing to be punished.

Sorry Sharky, I really don't understand this.  You have to acknowledge the right to be punished? So if you don't, you can't be punished?  I don't get it.

Surely the point of that question is to allow the arrestee to say 'no', so that they can have their rights explained to them, thereby deflecting accusations of improper procedure or abuse.  I don't see how consent comes into it.

I'm not disputing the negative connotations of magistrates in police stations, mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 11:41:48 AM
In Legalese, the word "understand" has a very specific meaning - it basically means "stand under" or accept. So technically, when a police officer reads you your rights he or she isn't asking you if you comprehend the meaning of the words he or she has just explained to you (as most people believe) but if you agree to be bound by them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 21 February, 2014, 11:57:38 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 10:19:53 AMThis is why police officers ask if people arrested for such crimes understand their rights. By saying "yes", the arrested person is agreeing to be punished.

Has there been case law made to that effect Sharky? I understand the English legal system has it's own foibles and ways of conducting itself, but the caution given before interviews is pretty much the same isn't it? As TB says, that is not what you are being asked if you understand. If you are cautioned when a police or other enforcement bod believe an offence may have been committed, you're being asked if you understand the meaning of the caution, which carries of course the implication that you might go to court. The relevant part of the caution is (or at least was) 'You do not have to say anything but if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court, it may harm your defence. If you do say anything it may be given in evidence. Do you understand the caution?'

But magistrates in police stations is a mental idea.

M.

M.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 February, 2014, 12:23:06 PM
Why not make the Magistrate the police officer.....surley there is some precedent for this in history; if not in fiction?Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 21 February, 2014, 12:27:01 PM
@ Jim Campbell

I'm not going to quote your post but all I can say is that as a Scot what Alex Salmond (as the First Minister of Scotland and leader of the SNP) says and what the Scottish people think are two separate things. Alex Salmond speaks for himself and the political objectives of his party. We are having a civilised and informed debate up here but if you are only looking at it through the prism of the English media (which I hope you are not) then it will look like a mess. We will not be going to the voting booths wearing See-You-Jimmy hats, blue face paint and drunkenly shaking our fists southward screaming, "Freedom!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: jackstarr on 21 February, 2014, 12:42:48 PM
QuoteWe will not be going to the voting booths wearing See-You-Jimmy hats, blue face paint and drunkenly shaking our fists southward screaming, "Freedom!"
Ah, but you see, we get our impression of you from the news media, Braveheart, and 2000ad.   

You mean you're not all like Mel Gibson, Middenface or Kenny Who?  :P


As emotive as this subject can be, I do think it's starting to overshadow (and distract from) other important political issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 12:47:41 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 21 February, 2014, 12:27:01 PM
We will not be going to the voting booths wearing See-You-Jimmy hats, blue face paint and drunkenly shaking our fists southward screaming, "Freedom!"

Heh. I should mention that my Dad was a Scot and for a big chunk of my childhood, family holidays were spent north of the border with relatives. I have very special affection for Scotland and the Scots and if there is an informed, civilised debate going on (which you would also not get a sense of get from any social media, either) then I'm delighted.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 21 February, 2014, 01:06:58 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 21 February, 2014, 12:27:01 PM
We will not be going to the voting booths wearing See-You-Jimmy hats, blue face paint and drunkenly shaking our fists southward screaming, "Freedom!"

Speak for yourself!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 21 February, 2014, 01:40:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 12:47:41 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 21 February, 2014, 12:27:01 PM
We will not be going to the voting booths wearing See-You-Jimmy hats, blue face paint and drunkenly shaking our fists southward screaming, "Freedom!"

Heh. I should mention that my Dad was a Scot and for a big chunk of my childhood, family holidays were spent north of the border with relatives. I have very special affection for Scotland and the Scots and if there is an informed, civilised debate going on (which you would also not get a sense of get from any social media, either) then I'm delighted.

Cheers

Jim

With a name like Jim Campbell I did suspect that you might have a bit of Highland Spring in your veins. I hope that I didn't come across as too defensive but I have had one too many run-ins with commentators from south of the border using Alex Salmond as a stick to beat all Scots with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 01:54:20 PM
Quote from: Eightball on 21 February, 2014, 01:40:39 PM
With a name like Jim Campbell I did suspect that you might have a bit of Highland Spring in your veins.

It's very strange... it sounds fanciful to put it down to the genes, but for the last few years I've felt an indescribable but very definite pull north and I can't explain it. I have some small caring responsibilities here but they won't last forever and I may try and persuade my wife to try a stint on the other side of Hadrian's Wall...

QuoteI hope that I didn't come across as too defensive but I have had one too many run-ins with commentators from south of the border using Alex Salmond as a stick to beat all Scots with.

Not at all, old chap! Toodle pip! ;-)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 01:56:50 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 01:54:20 PMI may try and persuade my wife to try a stint on the other side of Hadrian's Wall...

Jeez, if you like it so much up there why don't you go instead.   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2014, 02:14:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 February, 2014, 01:56:50 PM
Jeez, if you like it so much up there why don't you go instead.   ;)

Just think of the peace and quiet, man!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Emp on 21 February, 2014, 07:53:49 PM
If Scotland does indeed become a separate nation does that mean a new flag will be required to repace the current Union flag? If so, we should have a flag design comp...just for a laugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 07:58:44 PM
Mikey (sorry, for some reason I can't include quotes from this Kindle),

I haven't seen any case law on the word understand (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=understanding) but this is due to the fact that I haven't looked for any. This is because it is unlikely to be used as a defence in court. As I comprehend it, if someone is arrested for an offence where no Common Law crime (causing actual loss, harm or damage) has been committed then one of two main routes will be taken. If the arrestee answers "yes" to the question "do you understand?" then the damage has already been done; the arrestee has basically agreed to play the legal game and so to consequently claim in court that "I didn't know what 'understand' meant and didn't know what I was agreeing to" would be given short shrift by a judge, especially since other admissions would probably hace been made by this point - "yes, I was carrying cannabis", for example.


The arrestee who answers "no" to the question "do you understand" may (and  pdobably will) be taken into custody but, so long as no other admissions are made (and no Common Law crime has been committed), the custody sergeant and duty solicitor will have no option other than to release the arrestee as the arrest was unlawful. Thus the case will never get to court in the first place.


Please.note that I am not advocating use of this knowledge to allow folks to break the law with impunity, this knowledge is entirely meant to protect one from unlawful arrest and subsequent trial for non Common Law or legislative offences. If anyone breaks  Common Law then they should and must be taken to trial. That said, I have read of a case in the United States where a murderer did secure almost immediate release by answering "no" to the question simply because the arresting officer did not know  the difference between legislative and Common Law crimes. (The murderer was subsequently brought to book under a private prosecution from the victim's family, as I recall, so even though this is powerful knowledge it will not protect you from punishment for actual crimes.) The purpose of this knowledge is to protect you from unlawful arrest and subsequent trial and nothing more. It's more to do with knowing how to protect your own right to go about your lawful business unimpeded than using it as a loophole to avoid being arrested for inflicting actual loss, harm or damage - a shield against tyranny.


It's a complicated thing to get your head around, granted, and I'm probably not  the best person to explain it with any clarity, given my propensity for verbosity!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 February, 2014, 08:48:18 PM
Sharky, these legal nitpickings are entirely meaningless. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of British Law. In the absence of a written constitution, our law is determined by precedent and acts of parliament.

If a policeman/bailiff chooses to go with the commonly understood version of the law (ie  carrying a knife is illegal, so you're nicked) then you have little power in that situation, Whether or not your argument about "common law" holds any weight will be decided by a court.

So if you try to argue your meaning of "comprehend" in front of  a judge or magistrate they will make a ruling based on their perception of the law, which in this example will almost certainly go against you. This sets a precedent that a future judge or magistrate will follow, unless they can see a good legal reason to go against it.

Or to put it another way - they've got the handcuffs and prisons, so telling them what the law is is only works if you've got a good lawyer (or an army).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 February, 2014, 11:40:42 PM
I meant "understand" rather than "comprehend" in the sentence above.

I hate to cite wikipedia as a source, but I got bored trying to find a better and simple explanation of common law and precedent so here goes:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law)

so unless you can convince a judge that your argument outweighs all legal precedent and is against basic concepts of natural justice, it won't hold water.

My dad always used to talk about "barrack room lawyers" during national service, and I remember pub lawyers trying to convince me that you can't be nicked for drunk driving if the policeman wasn't wearing his hat when he stops you - but it's bollox.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2014, 03:57:57 AM
Fair enough, DDD - I hope neither of us ever has to find out for sure!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 February, 2014, 10:29:02 AM
Amen to that!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 22 February, 2014, 12:21:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 February, 2014, 07:18:58 AM
And now to kick off the Campaign for an Independent Lancashire! Ey-up the People!

I'm with shark block
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2014, 07:35:10 PM
Poor Ukraine. All that pain and death and suffering, on all sides, for nothing. No matter what happens tomorrow there's still the same old debt, the same old pipers to pay.

That kind of revolution never works. Things might change on the surface but its paid for with the same borrowed money, so no matter the depth of your new Utopia it is born with cancer. The government is not the target and never was. The government is nothing more than a human shield for the moneylenders. We don't need to smash that shield, we need to turn it around.

Or is that just me?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 February, 2014, 07:40:53 PM
Hear, hear Snarky....don't you worry buddy the people are eventually figuring out who's the monkey and who's the grinder! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2014, 07:50:08 PM
We've had at least two world wars, maybe more if you count the Cold War and this current Whatever the Fuck This Is. But with revolutions breaking out all over the globe, I wonder if we are living through World Revolution I?

No wonder they want to shut the internet down, watch it and keep it full of distracting bullshit covered in glitter and wrapped in money. Imagine globally co-ordinated revolutions. I bet that 0.001% and their buddies are terrified of the interweb.

Good.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 10:15:38 AM
Speaking of which -  this (http://www.dailycensored.com/2014-worldwide-wave-of-action-activist-leader-advises-what-you-should-do-3-of/). As the old Vorlon saying goes, the avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pepples to vote.

And, as this is a website for those of us with a particular perspective, how many people here think that governments, organizations and peoples around the world would do well to adopt G'Kar's Declaration of Principles (http://babylon5.wikia.com/wiki/Declaration_of_Principles)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 10:43:30 AM
Britain speaks in many languages, but only one voice.
The language is not English, or Welsh, or Cornish, or Gaelic or Manx
It speaks in the language of hope
It speaks in the language of trust
It speaks in the language of strength and the language of compassion
It is the language of the heart and the language of the soul.
But always it is the same voice
It is the voice of our ancestors, speaking through us,
And the voice of our inheritors, waiting to be born
It is the small, still voice that says
We are one
No matter the blood
No matter the skin
No matter the hearth
No matter the flag:
We are one
No matter the pain
No matter the darkness
No matter the loss
No matter the fear
We are one
Here, gathered together in common cause, we agree to recognize this
singular truth and this singular rule:
That we must be kind to one another
Because each voice enriches us and ennobles us and each voice lost
diminishes us.
We are the voice of the Universe, the soul of creation, the fire
that will light the way to a better future.
We are one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 February, 2014, 10:48:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 10:43:30 AM
Britain speaks in many languages, but only one voice.
The language is not English, or Welsh, or Cornish, or Gaelic or Manx
It speaks in the language of hope
It speaks in the language of trust
It speaks in the language of strength and the language of compassion
It is the language of the heart and the language of the soul.
But always it is the same voice
It is the voice of our ancestors, speaking through us,
And the voice of our inheritors, waiting to be born
It is the small, still voice that says
We are one
No matter the blood
No matter the skin
No matter the hearth
No matter the flag:
We are one
No matter the pain
No matter the darkness
No matter the loss
No matter the fear
We are one
Here, gathered together in common cause, we agree to recognize this
singular truth and this singular rule:
That we must be kind to one another
Because each voice enriches us and ennobles us and each voice lost
diminishes us.
We are the voice of the Universe, the soul of creation, the fire
that will light the way to a better future.
We are one.

I agree, but the phrasing of it sounds a bit like - "WE ARE THE BORG"!

cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 February, 2014, 11:00:18 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2014, 07:50:08 PM
with revolutions breaking out all over the globe, I wonder if we are living through World Revolution I? No wonder they want to shut the internet down, watch it and keep it full of distracting bullshit covered in glitter and wrapped in money. Imagine globally co-ordinated revolutions. I bet that 0.001% and their buddies are terrified of the interweb.

There may be a less high tech (http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/a-complex-systems-model-predicted-the-revolutions-sweeping-the-globe-right) explanation:

(http://lh4.ggpht.com/hcURiLQ6ltc8Eu4jO3VxEyYnekvzEF56HlYYOPvMSZOfA_fe0YnxCcWJohnOV7X5Hpj5zvh48gR3yerwQSUohB9WVyBFlcf7stzjNg=s0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 February, 2014, 11:18:44 AM
"make us your slaves, but feed us"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 February, 2014, 11:26:27 AM
The issue linking food prices and serious discontent is of course much broader than the 'starvation = riots' equation assumed in the comments at Sauchie's Motherboard link.  High food prices cut into disposable income, meaning that even where people have enough to eat in a meaningful sense, they see that they have far less of everything else as a result.

The tension between biofuels as a pressure on food prices, versus oil as a pressure on transport and processing costs, and thus on food prices, seems to be an intractable one.  At least until genuine serious efforts are made to reduce energy consumption generally, and in particular in the western world, where progress presently has only one measure: economic growth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 11:28:04 AM
And the thing that most affects food prices is debt.

Same old creditors at the heart of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 11:51:30 AM
Yes, the constant drive for economic growth is a huge factor - but this drive has a specific purpose, which is to keep up with inflation. Inflation, of course, is caused by rising taxes. To combat rising taxes eating into profits, either you increase the cost of your jar of olives or you put one fewer olive in every jar and make up the weight with an inferior heavy jar of lower quality, a thicker label and more glue. Taxes must continue to rise to service government debt. Government debt must continue to rise due to compound interest on that debt. Compound interest must continue to mount because the banks demand it. The banks must demand it because they're insolvent. The banks are insolvent due to their headlong charge for economic growth...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 February, 2014, 11:58:33 AM
'I understand your dichotomy comrade'. Who ever guesses where that quote comes from will get one (and only one) sarcastic,undermining e-mail from me. Z >:D
Keep on thread, keep on thread, must keep on thread....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 February, 2014, 06:17:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 11:51:30 AMInflation, of course, is caused by rising taxes.

No it isn't. Inflation is, at its most basic level,  caused by increasing the money supply, but there are many other factors: http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2011/05/30/what-actually-causes-inflation/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2011/05/30/what-actually-causes-inflation/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2014, 06:24:06 PM
The money supply would not need to increase if it weren't for compound interest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2014, 02:28:28 PM
Latest: After weeks of provarication and childishness, the Council has finally written a letter of apology to my Mother. Well, they call it a letter of apology but in my estimation it really isn't - it's a mealy-mouthed, flaccid letter of obfuscation and half-truths designed primarily to offer justification for the unjustifiable and an apology for how my Mum feels, not an apology for causing that feeling through despicable and unlawful behaviour.

I should be angry but I'm just amused. Some of the people involved have letters after their names and university time behind them but they are still too ignorant to know how apologies work. I'm as thick as two short planks but I can still see through the Council's clumsy and cowardly schemes with relative ease.

I'm counting that as a win, however, meagre and weak though it is.

2-1 to me, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 February, 2014, 02:42:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2014, 02:28:28 PM
Some of the people involved have letters after their names and university time behind them but they are still too ignorant to know how apologies work.

I think you'll find they know exactly how apologies work.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2014, 03:01:26 PM
That's kinda' what I meant. :-)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 28 February, 2014, 01:51:41 AM
So last year we had a story about hackers using webcam data to blackmail people. Then earlier this year it was revealed that the FBI were spying on people without triggering anything that would alert the victim. Now we find that GCHQ are doing basically the same thing.

Remember those craaaaaaazy tinfoilhatters who prefer put a little tape over their webcam?

Yeah...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2014, 02:00:32 AM
Now, about these shape-shifting lizard people...


Ooop... wrong thread. It's becoming ever more difficult to tell the two apart...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2014, 01:06:47 AM
'You don't just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext.' - John Kerry.  Who has clearly forgotten about an earlier 21st century invasion based on a completely trumped-up pretext.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 March, 2014, 06:52:46 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2014, 01:06:47 AM
'You don't just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext.' - John Kerry.  Who has clearly forgotten about an earlier 21st century invasion based on a completely trumped-up pretext.

It was okay when the US did it (twice), because they're the good guys. The Russians are the bad guys, Jayzus.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 03 March, 2014, 07:24:23 AM
Did we get T2 intro'd yet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 03 March, 2014, 07:27:57 AM
There is no fate but what we make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 10:34:23 AM
Heard the latest political "joke" from the Ukraine in an RT piece the other day:
.
The UN, the UK, the USA and the EU have been discussing the situation and are all in complete agreement that there should be no interference in the internal affairs of the Ukraine - by Russia.

.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2014, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 03 March, 2014, 06:52:46 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2014, 01:06:47 AM
'You don't just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext.' - John Kerry.  Who has clearly forgotten about an earlier 21st century invasion based on a completely trumped-up pretext.

It was okay when the US did it (twice), because they're the good guys. The Russians are the bad guys, Jayzus.

Ah, I see. My mistake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 March, 2014, 01:42:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2014, 02:28:28 PM
Latest: After weeks of provarication and childishness, the Council has finally written a letter of apology to my Mother. Well, they call it a letter of apology but in my estimation it really isn't - it's a mealy-mouthed, flaccid letter of obfuscation and half-truths designed primarily to offer justification for the unjustifiable and an apology for how my Mum feels, not an apology for causing that feeling through despicable and unlawful behaviour.

I should be angry but I'm just amused. Some of the people involved have letters after their names and university time behind them but they are still too ignorant to know how apologies work. I'm as thick as two short planks but I can still see through the Council's clumsy and cowardly schemes with relative ease.

I'm counting that as a win, however, meagre and weak though it is.

2-1 to me, I think.

One of my pet hates: 'I'm sorry you feel that way'  instead of 'I'm sorry I done that' gggggr!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 March, 2014, 01:49:47 PM
Kind of like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSHaCzb3yYk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSHaCzb3yYk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 March, 2014, 05:13:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 10:34:23 AM
Heard the latest political "joke" from the Ukraine in an RT piece the other day: The UN, the UK, the USA and the EU have been discussing the situation and are all in complete agreement that there should be no interference in the internal affairs of the Ukraine - by Russia.

How is Russian state media reporting the event, Shark?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 05:35:34 PM
See for yourself. Russia Today is on Sky Channel 512 (I don't kmow the Freesat number, sorry). Their website might be a good place to start...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 March, 2014, 05:55:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 05:35:34 PM
See for yourself. Russia Today is on Sky Channel 512 (I don't kmow the Freesat number, sorry). Their website might be a good place to start...

I suppose you could call that balance (http://rt.com/op-edge/ukraine-crimea-west-politics-110/), as long as the frothing jingoism of Fox News is on the other end of the see-saw.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 07:15:26 PM
That's an interview with an anti-imperialist. The purpose of interviews is to express bias, points of view, to show how events are being interpreted by different people/organizations/perspectives. You might find actual reports from the  News (http://on.rt.com/lq3l6g) section a trifle less biased. And just so you know, I think all media is biased. Just because I enjoy watching RT, that doesn't mean I believe anything it says without question. It doesn't mean that everything the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26425274) says is a lie, either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 March, 2014, 08:11:59 PM
Putin is a complicated little sh++t and no mistake, but I can't believe were belling the cat with him over this issue. Messing about with Russian naval facilities in the Black Sea area is uber provocative.
I can't understand the western Ukranians mad rush to take on a 40-60 Billion 'loan' from the western bankers. They'll mearly end up controllable debt slaves like the most of the western world (the way our masters want it by the way)!
Hope everyone pulls back from this one there's a lot of MIRV's floating about that part of the world.
Peace and brotherhood guys.Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 04 March, 2014, 08:26:29 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2014, 10:34:23 AM
The UN, the UK, the USA and the EU have been discussing the situation and are all in complete agreement that there should be no interference in the internal affairs of the Ukraine - by Russia.

Very good. I do feel slightly sorry for the people of Western Ukraine, even though they have rather brought this situation on their heads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 March, 2014, 02:50:16 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mpRabX98OIg/UxNpPVOGjwI/AAAAAAAAlBM/XBKCcEtRX_k/s1600/Spitting+Image-26.jpg)

Some - admittedly dated - political satire over on Bear Alley as Steve reprints some excerpts from the Spitting Image tie-in comic, featuring some contributions from 2000ad regulars like John Higgins and Steve Dillon:
http://bearalley.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/spitting-image-part-1-steve-dillon.html
http://bearalley.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/spitting-image-part-2-various.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2014, 03:45:52 PM
Point of order; Jesus confronted the money changers, not  the money lenders.
.
Lending money in Jesus' time was not seen as wrong but the charging of interest on loans was seen as wrong - the sin of usury. The money changers were selling Temple Coins, special coins for use inside the temple, in exchange for everyday coins. The priesthood, I think, would determine  the exchange rate and  the money changers got around the usury laws by charging fees on the transactions.
.
Say what you like about him but Jesus knew about banking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2014, 10:02:05 AM
What we are looking at with Ukraine is identical to Nazi Germanys invasion of Czechoslovakia before WW2. Stating the obvious maybe but it's not a good sign, doesn't help that as file a shit Putin is I can't deny the man sticks to his decisions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 March, 2014, 06:58:54 PM
Today, experts supported the idea of a currency union between Scotland and the UK in the event of a yes vote in the upcoming independence referendum.  Strangely, this isn't being reported on the BBC news reports - not even in the badly put together BBC Scotland.

Instead, we've been informed that the BBC economics editor, Robert Peston, has "discovered" that RBS and Lloyds TSB "must" move to London on the event of Scottish independence...Except, they don't, because they're already in London...some lovely extracts from Peston's own report...

"may not matter."
" I labour the point."
"And RBS has two head offices, one in London, one in Scotland - and, to repeat (yawn)" 
"If you are still with me (many congratulations, by the way)"

This report only a couple of weeks after Peston "discovered" that Standard Life would quit Scotland in the event of a yes vote...Except, again, they said no such thing.  They suggested setting up a separate English company might be a good idea.

I used to trust the BBC, but their partisan reporting on Scottish issues is really starting to get my goat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 March, 2014, 07:33:49 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 05 March, 2014, 10:02:05 AM
What we are looking at with Ukraine is identical to Nazi Germanys invasion of Czechoslovakia before WW2. Stating the obvious maybe but it's not a good sign, doesn't help that as file a shit Putin is I can't deny the man sticks to his decisions.

Russian intervention in South Ossetia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_war) seems like a more apt comparison. Vlad's backing down already (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/putins-improv-act/284227/).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 05 March, 2014, 09:35:25 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 05 March, 2014, 07:33:49 PM
Vlad's backing down already (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/03/putins-improv-act/284227/).

If you can't be bothered to read the article, this photo summarizes it with Putin on the left.

(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/234/767/8d0.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 March, 2014, 10:01:44 PM
I can't help but feel like that picture is insulting.

Insulting to dogs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 07 March, 2014, 04:32:07 PM
Did someone say dog?
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/9d/f8/43/9df84398792d8b503c8fe7132c34610f.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 March, 2014, 04:57:23 PM
Little on the internet has given me as much amusement as that meme, appropriate mockery for such cheap empty posing. It just makes me think of Public Defender 314's internalexternal monologue: (serious voice, deep concern).

Personal favourite is:

(http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article9173922.ece/ALTERNATES/w1024/ELNOMBRE1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 March, 2014, 05:15:29 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/bear_zpsc58f8deb.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 March, 2014, 10:10:25 PM
 :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 March, 2014, 11:01:41 AM
(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bh_3ZxCCEAAWpE2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 March, 2014, 11:55:50 AM
Christ on a bike, they say you get the politicians you deserve.....but no-one and I mean no-one deserves this shower!Z :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2014, 02:20:12 PM

No idea whether this  alleged report by Anonymous of impending "false flag" attacks in the Ukraine (http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2014/03/correspondence-of-us-army-attache-assistant-in-kiev-planning-false-flag-attack-in-ukraine-2916760.html) is real or not - but I wouldn't be surprised either way, especially given the deep involvement of people like George Soros. (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/17843-george-soros-s-giant-globalist-footprint-in-ukraine-s-turmoil)


Keep your eyes peeled...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 March, 2014, 03:58:51 PM
That bunch of cynical, dumb f**ks are really pushing the boundaries with this whole situation. Jesus at least when they went into Iraq and interfered in Lybia, they had the possibility of quick wins (didn't work out that way mind you). Russia is orders of magnitude more complex and the aims are to put it mildly, ill defined, let alone in any real sense achievable. More brave men and treasure will be pissed away on another US/EU/Russian ego trip. A plague on the bastards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2014, 05:28:42 PM
A war is a great way to disguise the inequality in wealth distribution in first-world countries and galvanise the right behind the richest members of society.  A war is only a terrible thing if you're not one of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 March, 2014, 10:16:42 AM
A really good article in Guardian On-line environment section (tsch a guardian reading leftie). A NASA funded study on the possibility of civilizations decline/collapse....guess why: resource stretch and massivy stratified inequality. What it took them this long to figure that out!!! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 March, 2014, 02:38:37 PM
I'd rather people not quote Anonymous as a source of information. Those people don't know their arse from a hole in the ground and are nothing more than suited up keyboard guardians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2014, 03:50:08 PM
I don't know who Anonymous are or what they want - they could be a largely unrelated movement of computer geeks or a secret NSA "Cyber-Gladio" type deal for all I know or care. What I'm interested in is the information - is it correct or partly correct, is it wrong or partly wrong and, at least as important as its veracity, why is that information there? Who benefits from such information?
.
I never know which information is going to be useful and which isn't so I find it best to listen to as many sources as possible (in which endeavour I often fail).
.
I like to keep an open mind but never forget that an open mind is like an open wound and if I don't look after it it'll get infected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2014, 04:09:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 16 March, 2014, 02:38:37 PM
I'd rather people not quote Anonymous as a source of information. Those people don't know their arse from a hole in the ground and are nothing more than suited up keyboard guardians.

"Anonymous" is not a group.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 March, 2014, 04:11:43 PM

The Crimea has already been subject to a false flag operation, in which foreign forces staged an illegal invasion and occupation under a (perfunctory and transparent) veil of anonymity. The Kremlin was still insisting the guys with their regimental insignia covered up who seized control of key assets in Sevastopol were public spirited local militia as late as last week ... even though they had heavy armour and air support.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 March, 2014, 04:38:38 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2014, 04:09:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 16 March, 2014, 02:38:37 PM
I'd rather people not quote Anonymous as a source of information. Those people don't know their arse from a hole in the ground and are nothing more than suited up keyboard guardians.

"Anonymous" is not a group.

Everyone knows the type im on about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2014, 04:58:05 PM
Humans?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2014, 09:07:57 PM
Fred Phelps is dying, he's pulled the 'i'm sorry' card and has been kicked out of his own church.



I don't care if I sound like a dick, but how's that for karma.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 March, 2014, 09:49:34 PM
Ironically, he spent a great deal of time telling people to pray to God to smite the right people so that America could be a better place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 March, 2014, 10:43:34 PM
Awful person but wouldn't wish his sickness on anyone. We're more than he was or is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2014, 11:59:06 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 19 March, 2014, 09:07:57 PM
I don't care if I sound like a dick, but how's that for karma.

Pretty sure that's not karma, and it's dangerously close to what he said about every person whose funeral he picketed, but still, I know what you mean.  Can't bring myself to play his game and express satisifaction at his sad end, since his evil antics have probably done more to undermine his general cause than almost anything else. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 12:18:02 AM
Word has just reached my Fortress of Sharkitude that there was a budget a couple of days ago. A normal budget, the kind that you or I might construct, is a way of working out how much money there is available and then allocating portions of that money to cover purchase of essentials such as food, shelter, fuel, clothing, dildos, bicycles, medications, water, piercings and i-pigs in such a way as to spread the shortfall evenly in order to delay bankruptcy for as long as possible. Most people know how to budget even if they can't be arsed working it all out in any great detail and everyone has their own way of doing it. My own preferred method is the widespread and popular process of weeping into an empty wallet in the forlorn hope that fivers will magically grow from my teardrops.

A government budget, however, is rather different. As all taxation is basically legalised theft, a government budget is like a polite mugging where the mugger, or "Chancellor", explains to the muggee, or "you", exactly how you're going to get shafted this year in such a way as to make it sound entirely reasonable.

The part about government budgets I don't get is that everybody argues about the details of the mugging to come and nobody questions its validity. The polite but creepy Oxbridge assailant corners you in an alley and promises only to steal a certain amount of your property, wealth, time and dignity whilst simultaneously describing the length, girth and hardness of the cock to be inserted into you whilst the theft is ongoing. The victim is permitted to either like or dislike the details of the impending violation and voice an opinion but must do so bent over a skip with dropped trousers and a strip of leather to bite on. The mugger doesn't even carry a gun because if you're dead you can't be mugged again tomorrow, and again the day after, and yet again the day after that.

It doesn't occur to us to just say no - but as "authority" never asks permission before it acts the opportunity to refuse never seems to come up and all any of us can do is weep into an empty wallet whilst trying to secure a supply of Anusol on the never-never.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 March, 2014, 01:17:33 AM
Your point reminds me of my dilemma about not giving a toss that Amazon/Google don't pay tax because they don't have to.  Likewise Jimmy Carr using creative but perfectly legal accounting to hold onto his own money - I'm not a fan of Carr by any stretch, but once again: couldn't give a toss and didn't understand why he was apologizing instead of just telling people to go fuck themselves for getting angry at creative accounting rather than the rise in the number of foodbanks, the dismantling of the NHS, or that woman David Cameron murdered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 07:17:48 AM
It makes me laugh when people try to make out that Amazon not paying tax that they don't legally owe is immoral.
To make that assertion you have to agree that our system of taxation is moral in the first place which I don't think it is. Inheritance tax is the one that really sticky in my craw.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 March, 2014, 08:33:46 AM

Load of shite. I like working street lights, and I'm pish in a fight, so polis seem like a good idea as well. Not only should all you disgusting, long haired hippies (Amazon included) pay your taxes, you should be happy about it and like it too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 09:21:44 AM
James, there's an easy way around inheritance tax that tha aristocracy have known about for centuries: you get your family to put EVERYTHING into a family trust. That way no one person owns anything, everything then being the property of the trust with however many family members you like being trustees. That way, when somebody dies there is no inheritance tax because, legally, nothing has been inherited.

Those crafty old aristocrats, eh?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 March, 2014, 09:28:54 AM
Personally I'm just glad to see TLS on top literary form.  Agree or disagree, that's some quality ranting writing up there:

QuoteThe polite but creepy Oxbridge assailant corners you in an alley and promises only to steal a certain amount of your property, wealth, time and dignity whilst simultaneously describing the length, girth and hardness of the cock to be inserted into you whilst the theft is ongoing.

Reads like a full gram of Charlie Brooker cut with some 80's Alexei Sayle.  Quality Sunday morning reading.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2014, 09:32:20 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 07:17:48 AM
To make that assertion you have to agree that our system of taxation is moral in the first place which I don't think it is.

Our tax system is beset with inequities and loopholes that favour the already-wealthy, but I'm curious as to how you think we get to have a society if you're railing against the general principal of taxation as a proportion of wealth...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 23 March, 2014, 09:33:28 AM
It's certainly possible to argue against taxation, and indeed against a social obligation to pay tax, if you believe that schools, hospitals, armies, dustbin emptiers, pothole repairers, etc., etc. all magically pay for themselves.

Otherwise, you sort of have to accept that there is such a thing a society, and that taxation is a necessary part of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 March, 2014, 09:48:36 AM

Fuck morality as a pretext. What's moral about having to go see a mad crone who lives in a hovel at the edge of your village for a 'cure' when you're going into renal failure? If Sir Philip Green thinks the application of vegetable poultices is an appropriate treatment for Neuroblastoma, he should go and live on one of the many small islands still left in the world where no state exists to impose harsh penalties upon his freedoms. Good luck selling those palm leaf skirts to the locals, Phil.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 11:00:33 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2014, 09:32:20 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 07:17:48 AM
To make that assertion you have to agree that our system of taxation is moral in the first place which I don't think it is.

Our tax system is beset with inequities and loopholes that favour the already-wealthy, but I'm curious as to how you think we get to have a society if you're railing against the general principal of taxation as a proportion of wealth...

Cheers

Jim

I'm not against all systems of taxation but I think we should have more of a say over what is and isn't fair. How this would be implemented I don't know but there are loads taxes that seem inexplicably unfair.
With this being the case it seems ludicrous that companies like Amazon are pilloried for following a totally legal method of tax avoidance.

To take Sauchie's example, I think we can all agree that some form of policing needs to be paid for. A chauffeur driven car for the Mayor? Probably up for debate. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 11:08:36 AM
I'm proud to be a taxpayer. When I watch the news and look at all the things I've helped pay for it makes me all warm inside, things like smart bombs, dumb bombs, hydrogen bombs, neutron bombs, napalm bombs, germ bombs, water bombs, cluster bombs, phosphor bombs, shrapnel bombs, cruise missiles, torpedoes, bunker busters, dam busters, tank busters, depleted uranium bullets, dum-dums, landmines, attack jets, attack helicopters, attack drones, howitzers, mortars, battleships, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, frigates, cruisers, weaponised viruses, assault rifles, sniper rifles, shotguns, pistols, chain guns, gatling guns, hand grenades, tasers, lasers, masers, phasers, sonic cannons, water cannons, long range cannons, short range cannons, mid range cannons, dynamite, thermite, gelignite, MBTs, APCs, AUVs, AFVs, self-propelled multiple rocket launchers, amphibious assault vehicles, armoured cars, bayonets, knives, truncheons, axes, clubs, ceremonial swords, sharp sticks and half bricks - to name but a few.

Once we've used all this shit to wipe out everyone else in the world we'll no longer need it and will be able to put our taxes to work on the next phase of the plan - feeding the hungry, housing the homeless and curing the sick. Oh yeah, I'm a really proud taxpayer, me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2014, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 11:08:36 AM
Oh yeah, I'm a really proud taxpayer, me.

Ludicrous straw man. Well done.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 11:27:17 AM
Ludicrous. Exactly.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 March, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
So you helped pay for that lot, bloody typical. My taxes go on all the stuff that helps society :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 March, 2014, 11:52:08 AM
I'm positively inclined to taxation as a general system as well, but I don't think it's wrong to point out the flaws (even to the point of logical fallacy) and try to think about alternatives.  It's easy to imagine that the situation we live in now is in some way eternal and inevitable, but the only thing we can be sure of it is that it most definitely is not.  There have been many social structures and many ways of moving necessities and surpluses around them, and there will be many more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 March, 2014, 11:56:59 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 March, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
So you helped pay for that lot

I don't know how many tax contributions the Shark will have made lately to either the defence budget or the hospitals and staff responsible for saving his life on a number of occasions, so his conscience is clear and his position perfectly coherent on those matters.

He and Amazon's UK staff are free to benefit from living in a society where other peoples' income tax and NI payments make universal healthcare provision and the infrastructure which means folk can have shoes they bought on the internet delivered to their door, upon which they depend, possible. They're welcome, but if they feel uncomfortable with this arrangement there are plenty regions of the world (not exactly nations, per se) they can go to where rugged individualism and self reliance are the principles upon which society is (dis)organised.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 12:39:13 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 March, 2014, 11:56:59 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 March, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
So you helped pay for that lot

I don't know how many tax contributions the Shark will have made lately to either the defence budget or the hospitals and staff responsible for saving his life on a number of occasions, so his conscience is clear and his position perfectly coherent on those matters.

He and Amazon's UK staff are free to benefit from living in a society where other peoples' income tax and NI payments make universal healthcare provision and the infrastructure which means folk can have shoes they bought on the internet delivered to their door, upon which they depend, possible. They're welcome, but if they feel uncomfortable with this arrangement there are plenty regions of the world (not exactly nations, per se) they can go to where rugged individualism and self reliance are the principles upon which society is (dis)organised.

But surely, even if you wholeheartedly agree with our system of taxation, you can still have criticisms of the way that system is being used?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 March, 2014, 12:53:50 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2014, 12:39:13 PM
even if you wholeheartedly agree with our system of taxation, you can still have criticisms of the way that system is being used?

I don't think our current tax legislation is fit for purpose, but even if that changes we'll still all be responsible for making sure our elected (and unelected) representatives don't piss our money away on floating duck houses, extraordinary rendition flights to Diego Garcia, and Trident.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 02:41:42 PM
Hey, if my society says I should die if I can't pay then I'll die. Why would I want to live in a society like that anyway? My mind does boggle at the suggestion that one is only allowed access to society if one can pay for it.

One way I like to look at it is to reduce the entire population of the world to just two people. If one of those two people needs help and the other will only provide help if the first pays for it then I make a judgement based on that. If the first person needs help to paint his house then the other is perfectly entitled to request payment but if the first person needs help to extinguish a house fire then the other is not entitled to withold help unless payment is made. If you saw somebody bleeding to death in the street and refused to help unless you got paid then that, in my opinion, would be wrong. What is acceptable between two people becomes no more or less acceptable because it's between two hundred, two million or two billion people.

This culture of "pay up or fuck off" is anathema to me. As I said earlier, authority never asks for permission and that is wrong in my book - as wrong as me going through your wallet and taking whatever I want without asking. We must free ourselves of this mindless obedience we've fallen into and start thinking about doing things with honesty and honour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 March, 2014, 03:24:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 March, 2014, 09:28:54 AM
Personally I'm just glad to see TLS on top literary form.


The Leg. Sha. or Times Lit. Supp.?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2014, 03:38:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 02:41:42 PM
My mind does boggle at the suggestion that one is only allowed access to society if one can pay for it.

Ludicrous strawman is ludicrous.

The essence of this is distilled perfectly in Blanc and then Marx's "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The point is not that everyone should pay, or be excluded from the benefits of society, the point is that if no one pays then there is no means of delivering the benefits of society. Exchange of goods and services in your village is all well and good if your roof needs fixing and you have something the roof-fixer wants, but it doesn't get hospitals and schools and suspension bridges built.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 03:58:54 PM
The only thing that builds hospitals, schools and suspension bridges is human beings. To think that the application of an inherantly flawed and patently artificial non-human agency (money, taxes, government) is required before anything can happen is no better than superstition. One might as well claim that Christmas is dependent upon the actions of Santa Claus and the application of magic pixie dust.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2014, 04:20:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 03:58:54 PM
One might as well claim that Christmas is dependent upon the actions of Santa Claus and the application of magic pixie dust.

I am well aware of money's nature as a consensual fiction, but it is the lubricant by which society is facilitated. I have explained at some length in this very thread (http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php/topic,28209.msg797902.html#msg797902) why money or some equivalent system of tokens becomes both necessary and inevitable once any society reaches a certain level of complexity. At the point where each individual ceases to be directly and solely responsible for the provision of food and shelter for their family unit, some form of units-of-agreed-value becomes necessary.

Your continued insistence that with the world the way it is now it is possible to hypothesise a complex developed-world society that functions without some form of money is entirely delusional. If you want to roll human development back to a hunter-gatherer basis and posit some kind of guiding authority that will gently steer them away from a units-of-agreed-value system of exchanging goods and services, well, there's no reason why you shouldn't but it's little more of a flight of fancy than my suggesting that it's hard to build a suspension bridge without putting up some cash.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 06:09:30 PM
I don't disagree that money can be a useful tool but, as I have often observed, we do not use money any more but promissory notes issued and therefore entirely owned by private banks which, as you well know, do not possess the gold, silver or other assets to give their notes any real value. What I think you are basically saying (and please correct me if I've misunderstood) is that it would be difficult to build a suspension bridge without promies, with which I wholeheartedly agree. These promises are not monetary but promises given by human beings - the promise of the architect that he or she is capable of designing a safe and adequate structure, the promise of miners that they can provide enough ore, the promise of foundry workers that the ore can be refined to proper standards, the promise of steel workers that the correct components can be manufactured, the promise of the haulier to get the component parts of the bridge to the correct place at the correct time, the promise of the bridge builder that the components can be properly assembled, the promise of construction workers to turn up and do the work and so on and on. Each one of these promises is more important, more real, than the promissory notes society deems so important and legitimate.

In the post you linked to you wrote "What government money does is formalise that arrangement, enabling us to exchange labour or goods with whomever we please in return for tokens that we can trade in for food and shelter." This, to my mind, is the basic flaw in your argument; that government is an essential part of the process of building the suspension bridge and that without the foundation of government virtually nothing is possible.

Government is a myth.

I should explain that last bold statement. If you were to be driving your car down my road unaware that one of your brake lights had burned out and I was to force you to stop and demand money from you because of this, you would quite properly tell me to sling my hook. If, on the other hand, a "government" thug, or police officer, were to do the same thing you would comply. What is more, if you refused to stop for the officer you would expect to be chased down, forced to stop, ordered to pay and maybe even be kidnapped and held to ransom. You might even expect to have your car stolen and held to ransom until you paid up. If I do not have the right to do these things to you, how can the government claim such rights unless it is some kind of superhuman or divine entity?

You might argue that the government has these rights because it has passed laws to assume them but, how is this possible? Governments are run by human beings (usually the worst kind of selfish, greedy and power-hungry human beings in society) so how can they legitimately pass laws affording them more rights and powers than the human beings who elected them? Just like promissory notes, the only thing giving governments legitimacy is our faith in them and the myths they propogate to reinforce that faith - just like religion or superstition or belief in Santa Claus.

Blind faith in the legitimacy of governments, and by extension government backed money, has led to the greatest crimes and calamities in human history as any cursory examination will more than adequately demonstrate. People like Hitler and Stalin would always have been monstrous individuals but, had they not been voted into "government" and then believed by the populace to be legitimate "lawmakers" their assaults on humanity would have been no more abominable than the assaults of Ian Brady or Fred West. Harold Shipman murdering several patients was seen as utterly wrong by the public but, had he been elevated to the position of Prime Minister and passed laws allowing patients to be euthenized by the thousands he would have been seen as at least partially legitimate until the laws he had passed could be repealed.

You might further argue that the government rules by consent but this is patently and demonstrably untrue. In order for a population to be governed by consent then the government must act on behalf of Everyone, which is clearly not and never has been the case. All any government can do is impose the will of one section of society upon another, which clearly breaches consent. If our government was truly a government of consent then any one of us could ignore its requests - but it does not request, it demands. And if we refuse those demands it visits varying degrees of violence upon us. This is simple thuggery, no different from a street gang.

If a street gang were to demand all your money under threat of violence you would be seen as within your rights and even heroic for resisting. If the government were to demand all your money under threat of violence (forcible arrest and incarceration) you would be seen as criminal and even evil for resisting. Such is the myth of government.

"Government backed money", then, is as fictitious as consentual government, Santa Claus or magic pixie dust.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 23 March, 2014, 07:37:33 PM
 Absence of government does not make people automatically good. It's the sort of nonsense knocked out by right wing think tanks. All laws are based on force otherwise they are just words and nothing else. This appears to have little to do with those wicked governments and everything to do with your own,  anti authoritarian personality TLS.  Pixie dust doesn't put you in prison if you break the law either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2014, 08:29:20 PM
Nor does absence of government automatically make people bad. The overwhelming majority of people inherantly know what is right and what is wrong. The idea that a lack of authority can only lead to Mad Max is the sort of nonsense pumped out by right wing think tanks who believe that ordinary people are too stupid, violent and greedy to run their own lives. I'm not and I don't think you are either.

Not all laws are based on force. I can't speak for anyone else here but I have never beaten, raped or murdered anybody - and that's not because there is always a police officer following me around to force me not to. "Cause loss, harm or damage to nobody; pay your lawful bills, honour your lawful contracts and be honest in your dealings" is just about the whole of Natural Law and is the law I try to adhere to. If I break those laws then society has every right to put me on trial and punish me accordingly but if I adhere to them then nobody has the right to judge me, arrest me, violate me or imprison me. A society without legislation is NOT a society without laws.

What gives any human being the right to rule another? The only person in the universe with any right to rule you is yourself. The only counter-argument to my position that I can see is Might Makes Right - but is this an argument that anyone here wants to make?  If you want to be governed by people who don't give a rat's ass about you then fine, go for it and let me know how that works out for you. Personally, I think I'm just about intelligent enough to know right from wrong all on my own - as I think just about everyone is.

Sometimes, of course, one does submit to authority but on a voluntary basis such as the employer/employee relationship, the trainer/sportsman relationship or the craftsman/apprentice relationship. The fundamental truth of such authoritarian relationships is that one can quit at any time. One cannot quit the authority of government except by crossing over an imaginary line on a map and into another authority's jurisdiction. One cannot be said to be governed by consent simply because one was born into a certain jurisdiction and refuses to leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 March, 2014, 11:47:57 AM
Sharky, based upon what you've previously said about your problems with housing benefit and how it was resolved, you'd have to have a half decent job to be paying enough taxes to make you a net contributor to the Exchequer, so I wouldn't worry too much about your taxes going to pay for bombs and bullets.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 12:07:23 PM
Just one penny towards such things is too much and more than enough to make me guilty or at least complicit, I think. No matter the level of funding I have contributed, I am a war criminal.
.
Some say (and I myself used to believe this) that it's people like Tony Blair and David Cameron who are the war criminals but I've come to realise that this is untrue. Blair may have ordered the illegal wars but it's people like me who helped fund it who are the real criminals.
.
"I was just following orders" was no defence at Nuremberg - it was no defence then and it's no defence now.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 12:13:44 PM
Maybe I should turn myself in...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 March, 2014, 12:16:21 PM
Yes :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 12:29:17 PM
Heh, I wish I hadn't thought of that...


.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 24 March, 2014, 01:14:37 PM
Everyone pays some kind of tax in the UK even if it's only VAT.
So at what point does one become a war criminal?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 01:21:50 PM
Good question. Probably at the point one realises the fact - I hadn't thought of it that way before today, so I guess I'm in the clear (yaay!) - at least until the next time I pay V.A.T. on something (d'oh!). That said, though, is ignorance a good enough excuse? Jeez - what a moral minefield...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 March, 2014, 01:34:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 12:07:23 PM
"I was just following orders" was no defence at Nuremberg - it was no defence then and it's no defence now.

This really is reductio ad absurdum, but if we're back in the Godwin zone I reckon I can go one louder:  by this line of reasoning the Jews paid for their own extermination initially through taxes and finally when they 'allowed' the state to confiscate their property, so really the Nazis weren't to blame, it was the zionist conspiracy after all.  There are levels of responsibility.  Your responsibility with regard to Iraq etc. extends to your role in the governance of the state, which is voting and/or standing for election, activism, campaigning, civil disobedience: once you'd done those things you never had an option on what part of your legitimate contribution was spent on on illegal wars and what was spent on maternity care, therefore you bear no more responsibility for one over the other. 

I can only assume that you get up every morning and congratulate yourself for your responsibility in providing libraries, the emergency services and Dr. Who, before falling to castigating yourself as a mass-muderer and torturer. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 02:10:04 PM
Sharkys back and making waves (see what I did there).

Whilst war crimes are never OK, I think you might be overstating the amount of money spent on UK defence.  Using the figures from 2013 below, UK Gov spent about 5.5% of its budget on sticks and stones whereas a whopping 60% was spent on social protection, health and education.  Hmmmm, maybe those politicians aren't so bad after all? 

(http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/7qo0LhIf8vqle22nuJbOvQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYyOQ--/http://l.yimg.com/os/publish-images/finance/2013-03-21/a29ef9dc-8992-47f1-b8db-9b3c86df6d8a_BUDGET-TaxSpend.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 02:35:43 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 02:10:04 PM
Using the figures from 2013 below, UK Gov spent about 5.5% of its budget on sticks and stones whereas a whopping 60% was spent on social protection, health and education.

Excellent, clear graphic.

Take a look at those numbers, and then ask yourself why this Government has over 3000 people employed through ATOS to harass sick and disabled people off benefit in the name of reducing £1.7bn in benefit fraud, but is still cutting staff numbers at HMRC who only have 300 people chasing an estimated £70bn in unpaid income tax...

Whatever the motivation, it's certainly not about reducing the deficit or pursuing the best course of action to shore up the public finances.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 02:47:18 PM
Calling myself a war criminal does sound absurd, even to me, as I know that every penny in taxes I've ever paid has gone towards just two things: paying down the government's debt and demonstrating surety for future government borrowing. However, my recent and still evolving realisation that all government/authority is a myth has got me thinking some weird and uncomfortable thoughts. Now that I know the government has no lawful power over me, what kind of a position does that put me in?


If I continue paying taxes to that myth, am I now voluntarily condoning its actions? In the case of V.A.T. I think the answer is no - because all taxation is theft and so taking responsibility for where that money "goes" is analogous to me taking responsibility for what a mugger spends my money on after he's stolen it from me. If I'm mugged and the mugger uses my stolen money to buy a gun in order to engage in more and bigger muggings, I don't think I can be held responsible for that portion of my stolen wealth that goes on to fund more criminal activities. So I guess I'm in the clear on V.A.T.

But does knowing this oblige me to do as much of my shopping as possible on the black market, which has its own down sides? Is it better to buy black market goods which may have a history of violence or stick with "official" goods which may contribute to a greater violence in the future? Should I "mix 'n' match" my purchases between the two markets, using my judgement to try and minimise my contributions to naughtiness? Should I grow as much of my own food as possible and engage in barter wherever possible? Should I avoid using government issued money as much as I possibly can? If I can't avoid contributing to the destructive and unlawful myth, I should at least cut my interaction with it to a minimum, I think.


Given that all government/authority is a myth, does my contributing to it in any way make me complicit in its illegal, unlawful and immoral actions? I don't know, I'm still trying to figure out how to accomodate this new "myth of authority" idea into my worldview and it's driving me nuts.


Any ideas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 March, 2014, 03:11:30 PM
How do you define legality without authority? Some things aren't myths so much as consensual abstractions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 March, 2014, 03:43:20 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 02:35:43 PMWhatever the motivation, it's certainly not about reducing the deficit or pursuing the best course of action to shore up the public finances.

I liked how the Condems raising tuition fees has actually cost the UK economy more, because it's simply created a larger amount of unpaid debt.  I also like that IDS' UC scheme will not only cost more to run than what it's replacing, but it doesn't even work and he's set to throw twice as much as what's been spent on it already at a second go at a system demonstrably unfit for purpose.

This was all knowledge available beforehand, too, so at some point you have to accept that continuing to enforce their broken vision is not about making these mechanisms work, it's either about breaking something they don't think should exist in the first place, or it's about creating a means for private citizens to receive public money.
A third option exists, but that would be that they don't know what they're doing and none of this makes sense, but I find it hard to believe anyone could be that destructively stupid, I want to give the benefit of the doubt that they're smart enough to simply be dishonest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 04:46:39 PM
The most worrying fact about all the austerity measures that UK Gov have recently taken is that they have not reduced the actual debt at all, rather they have reduced the rate at which it increases.

I do appreciate though that the task presented to them is far from easy.  For example, the NHS has in the region of 1.4 million employees .  Next time someone complains about why they need all those managers - that's why. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 05:12:02 PM
Theblaze, I think that legality and authority are basically the same thing. It is authority that decides what is legal whether we like it or not. What is legal is put into legislation by authority, which is utterly foolish when one thinks about it. Take the example of Prohibition in the United States. One day, drinking is moral and legal, the next day drinking becomes immoral and illegal and eventually returns to being moral and legal again. This exposes both legality and authority as a nonsense, a myth.

To explain, imagine a mathematician who announces that, from today, 2+2 will equal 5. He can say it all he wants, even force changes in textbooks and classrooms to teach that 2+2=5, but no matter how much he insists upon it, 2+2 will always in reality equal 4.

But what about crimes like murder? Virtually everybody knows that murder is wrong so even if authority passes legislation outlawing murder it wouldn't make any difference at all to the crime itself. Just because some legislation happens to forbid murder, rape or theft doesn't make those crimes unlawful any more than absence of such legislation makes them lawful. The overwhelming majority of legislation has one of only two purposes: to raise revenue for the state (by imposing fines, license fees and charges etc.) and to keep those in authority in authority.

Authority therefore has no authority to change any real law whatsoever - it's simply a myth writing its own mythology in order to finance and justify its own existence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 07:49:37 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 04:46:39 PM
The most worrying fact about all the austerity measures that UK Gov have recently taken is that they have not reduced the actual debt at all, rather they have reduced the rate at which it increases.

That's because, as the Prof alludes to above, the Tories' agenda has nothing to do with the necessity for austerity (clue: as a percentage of GDP, the UK's debt problems are relatively slight) other than as the smokescreen to allow them to dismantle the NHS, welfare state and state education systems and replace them with structures designed to shovel public money into the pockets of the same private companies they'll be directors of when they stand down from Parliament.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 08:14:39 PM
There is no debt. It's an illusion based on a lie spread by a myth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 08:50:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 08:14:39 PM
There is no debt. It's an illusion based on a lie spread by a myth.

For fuck's sake. You can choose to reject the consensual building blocks that enable society to function. Honestly, you can. It's fine. I choose not to, for the reasons I've already outlined at some length. I acknowledge the fact that the consensus is based on a fiction so there is little value in merely pointing out something on which we agree in principle but fundamentally disagree in practise.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 09:04:00 PM
What's a "consensual building block" and how do they work?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 10:06:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 09:04:00 PM
What's a "consensual building block" and how do they work?

I've explained until I'm tired of explaining. Your schtick, no matter how sincere, is tiresome in the extreme. I'm tired of asking you how these fantasies of yours function in the actual real world. You can reject the entire basis on which society functions, but I keep trying to get you to explain how we get from here to there. I'm trying to deal with here, and you seem to want to talk about nothing but there, but until you can tell me how we get from one to the other, yours is the crackpot fantasy, not mine.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 March, 2014, 10:37:50 PM
Whilst it's true that UK debt has continued to rise if there hadn't been austerity surely it would have risen even more?

The situation with the so-called student debt only goes to prove what the Tories always said, "it's not a student debt, it's a graduate debt."  If you don't earn a certain amount, you don't pay the bill.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 10:38:57 PM
We get from here to there by first understanding the problems. In order to understand the problems I need to ask questions about the here, which you seem to understand better than me, and you need to ask me about the there, which I seem to understand better than you. Then, when we both have an understanding of the here and there we can both try and figure out ways to get from the one to the other. At present, my only suggestions for moving forward are for each of us to start taking personal responsibility for our own lives, our own families, our own communities and our own country and, in my annoying opinion, to create a networked holographic system of government with which to replace the current hierarchical model to achieve this.

I honestly don't understand your position, which is most likely my fault and I apologise for that. My lack of understanding has not, does not and will never drive me to call you a crackpot fantasist, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 10:48:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 05:12:02 PM
Theblaze, I think that legality and authority are basically the same thing. It is authority that decides what is legal whether we like it or not. What is legal is put into legislation by authority, which is utterly foolish when one thinks about it. Take the example of Prohibition in the United States. One day, drinking is moral and legal, the next day drinking becomes immoral and illegal and eventually returns to being moral and legal again. This exposes both legality and authority as a nonsense, a myth.

But what about crimes like murder? Virtually everybody knows that murder is wrong so even if authority passes legislation outlawing murder it wouldn't make any difference at all to the crime itself. Just because some legislation happens to forbid murder, rape or theft doesn't make those crimes unlawful any more than absence of such legislation makes them lawful. The overwhelming majority of legislation has one of only two purposes: to raise revenue for the state (by imposing fines, license fees and charges etc.) and to keep those in authority in authority.

Authority therefore has no authority to change any real law whatsoever - it's simply a myth writing its own mythology in order to finance and justify its own existence.

You raise some interesting questions Sharky but as usual, I cannot agree with your conclusions.

The government runs the country and drafts new laws.  The government is formed from the political party that wins the most seats in a general election ( yeah, I know we have a coalition currently).  So their authority is given to them by us.

In terms of law and order - murder is unlawful because it is against the law to commit murder.  Laws are created to define a set of rules that everyone needs to follow.  Does a law saying murder is illegal prevent some murders? Yes, I suppose it could.  But even if it doesn't, when someone does commit murder then the legal system can punish them on the basis of that law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 March, 2014, 10:37:50 PM
Whilst it's true that UK debt has continued to rise if there hadn't been austerity surely it would have risen even more?


Well, no -- that's the crux of the debate. The deficit arises because of the shortfall between Govt income and expenditure. The counter argument against austerity is that it causes the economy to contract by making hundreds of thousands of public sector employees unemployed. These people stop putting money into their local economies causing the private sector to contract as well. Additionally, these people then increase the strain on the state coffers because they're taking more out in unemployment benefits than they're putting in in taxes.

The British economy is in no way as fucked as it was at the end of WWII, and yet we somehow managed to find the money to establish the NHS and the welfare state in that economic climate.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:11:43 PM
Recrewt, the current coalition (and all governments) only get their assumed authority from some of us - usually only a small portion of us who vote. That old chestnut of assuming those who don't vote must acquiesce anyway never sat easily with me. "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain" is, to me at least, utter tosh. It's like being asked to vote for your favourite disease and if you don't vote being infected with the disease the majority of voters opted for instead of the most logical conclusion, which is that those who don't vote don't want a disease.

When it comes to law, Common Law is all we really need. Legislation might have a small role to play in an 'advisory capacity' to help the courts arrive at an appropriate sentence but otherwise it's just fluff. Doing away with or drastically reducing legislative law would have little effect on criminal trials and would free up a lot of court time currently wasted  enforcing illusory statutes on otherwise innocent people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 March, 2014, 11:16:51 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
The British economy is in no way as fucked as it was at the end of WWII, and yet we somehow managed to find the money to establish the NHS and the welfare state in that economic climate.

Aye, but the way the UK managed to expand the economy (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/windrush_01.shtml) and pay off our debts in the wake of the second world war wouldn't win you many votes today.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:36:01 PM
The economy is not fucked but it's certainly not well. It's the monetary system that's fucked and needs reclaiming before it screws everything up like it did in 1930's Germany, late 90s Argentina and contemporary Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Portugal et al.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 24 March, 2014, 11:40:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:11:43 PM
When it comes to law, Common Law is all we really need. Legislation might have a small role to play in an 'advisory capacity' to help the courts arrive at an appropriate sentence but otherwise it's just fluff. Doing away with or drastically reducing legislative law would have little effect on criminal trials and would free up a lot of court time currently wasted  enforcing illusory statutes on otherwise innocent people.

I've shied away from this thread for its entire existence, but while procrastinating have dipped into its delights tonight.

It's like being in a student union.

I had a long post on the operation of law, the difference between law and legistation and the critical distinction between "illegal" and "unlawful", but - frankly - I sounded a bit pompous.

What I would say is that it is inherently easier to criticise the system than to fix it. Arguably, our very ability to complain about what we don't like demonstrates it works as well as can be expected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 24 March, 2014, 11:43:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:11:43 PM
Recrewt, the current coalition (and all governments) only get their assumed authority from some of us - usually only a small portion of us who vote. That old chestnut of assuming those who don't vote must acquiesce anyway never sat easily with me. "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain" is, to me at least, utter tosh. It's like being asked to vote for your favourite disease and if you don't vote being infected with the disease the majority of voters opted for instead of the most logical conclusion, which is that those who don't vote don't want a disease.

Are you proposing that only people who vote should be under government authority? And what of those who voted for a particular party that did not win? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:51:29 PM
I, for one, would like to read your post on law, Dr X. Don't worry about coming off as pompous - it never worried me, as anyone here can confirm!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:57:50 PM
No, Recrewt, I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that government has no authority over anyone at all due to its inherantly illegitimate nature.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 07:00:15 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 March, 2014, 11:16:51 PM
Aye, but the way the UK managed to expand the economy (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/windrush_01.shtml) and pay off our debts in the wake of the second world war wouldn't win you many votes today.

I wasn't suggesting that the two were comparable; the fact that they aren't is rather my point.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 25 March, 2014, 07:50:30 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 March, 2014, 11:57:50 PM
No, Recrewt, I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that government has no authority over anyone at all due to its inherantly illegitimate nature.

But don't you think that people want rules and laws and structure? And if so doesn't that have to come from somewhere? And then everyone has to have some understanding of what's going on and everyone has to have accountability.
For me it's just the last area where the problem lies at the moment and I think that arguing about the first two points, in the current climate, is a needless distraction.

To make a clumsy analogy, take a game of Monopoly. It has rules and a structure which is what makes it work as a game using it's various components. It works best if everyone understands the rules and everyone is accountable to them.
You can play as the banker, with a group of other players who do not understand the rules. This puts you in a powerful position and if the rules are withheld from the other players and they just rely on what you tell them you can win every time. This is what I think is happening under our current political system.

The way to improve things is to encourage political thinking and sensible debate. For many people, the only political debates they see are highly sensationalised television debates in which, for the sake of entertainment, they'll take a subject like immigration and pit a hard line Muslim extremist preacher against a member of the BNP as if that's going to reach a sensible conclusion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 March, 2014, 10:31:51 AM
QuoteBut what about crimes like murder? Virtually everybody knows that murder is wrong so even if authority passes legislation outlawing murder it wouldn't make any difference at all to the crime itself. Just because some legislation happens to forbid murder, rape or theft doesn't make those crimes unlawful any more than absence of such legislation makes them lawful. The overwhelming majority of legislation has one of only two purposes: to raise revenue for the state (by imposing fines, license fees and charges etc.) and to keep those in authority in authority.

Virtually everybody knows that murder is wrong but it would still happen way more frequently if there was no law against it - no agreement that if you did it, a more powerful group of people would intercede and stop you or punish you. Otherwise for some people the only obstacle would be the difficulty and risk posed by the potential victims themselves.

And I'm afraid that murder, rape and theft are definitely unlawful because some legislation happens to forbid murder, rape or theft. There are plenty of people who get away with these crimes and are only ever stopped from further perpetrating them because of the laws and authority of society - and the fact that those laws and that authority can be backed up by force.

On a lesser level just look at the bloody roads. If it wasn't for the law people would treat red lights worse than they treat the speed limit at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 11:41:17 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 March, 2014, 11:10:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 March, 2014, 10:37:50 PM
Whilst it's true that UK debt has continued to rise if there hadn't been austerity surely it would have risen even more?


Well, no -- that's the crux of the debate. The deficit arises because of the shortfall between Govt income and expenditure. The counter argument against austerity is that it causes the economy to contract by making hundreds of thousands of public sector employees unemployed. These people stop putting money into their local economies causing the private sector to contract as well. Additionally, these people then increase the strain on the state coffers because they're taking more out in unemployment benefits than they're putting in in taxes.

Quite, "Spend in a recession, cut in a boom," said Keynes.  The real problem is that both Mr Osborne and Mr Brown failed to follow this.  I agree that some of the austerity measures have been too severe but given what they started with, the govt had to be cautious with their borrowing. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 12:04:56 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 11:41:17 AM
I agree that some of the austerity measures have been too severe but given what they started with, the govt had to be cautious with their borrowing.

Except that I don't accept the basic premise that this government's concern is prudent borrowing or well-managed public finances. If those were their concerns, they wouldn't be throwing money down the black hole that is Ian Duncan Smith's Universal Credit disaster; they wouldn't be giving away hundreds of millions of pounds' worth of publicly-owned property to privately-owned consortia and companies in the form of academy schools; they wouldn't have changed the university tuition system to the point where it's so expensive that the increased defaults will mean it costs the state more than the system it replaced. And, as previously mentioned, they wouldn't be paying a private company hundreds of millions of pounds to expend ten times the resources chasing £1.7bn of benefit fraud than HMRC is allowed to expend chasing £70bn of tax. They wouldn't have pushed through NHS reforms that suck money out of the state healthcare system without delivering a single pound in extra care or services.

It's abundantly clear that this government is philosophically opposed to a vast raft of public services and that 'austerity' is merely a smokescreen to enable the most comprehensive dismantling of our social infrastructure in sixty years, and the attendant transfer of that government spending to private institutions.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 12:29:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 12:04:56 PM
It's abundantly clear that this government is philosophically opposed to a vast raft of public services and that 'austerity' is merely a smokescreen to enable the most comprehensive dismantling of our social infrastructure in sixty years, and the attendant transfer of that government spending to private institutions.

You are aware that both Academy schools and University Tuition Fees were introduced by the Labour party?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 12:41:55 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 12:29:31 PM
You are aware that both Academy schools and University Tuition Fees were introduced by the Labour party?

Of course I am. One of the most common misconceptions on this thread is that opposition to the current government automatically equates with uncritical support for the previous New Labour government. Academy schools seemed to be primarily a stealth means of funding faith schools under New Labour, and were a stupid idea, and now seem to be a mechanism to give away of vast tracts of publicly owned property under the coalition, which is also a bad idea.

Note that it was the coalition, however, who removed schools' legal requirement to provide outdoor exercise for pupils, so a newly-converted academy school is now able to sell its playing fields to property developers, placing vast tracts of publicly-owned land in the hands of private developers at zero cash benefit to the taxpayer.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 02:01:06 PM
Jim, I wasn't trying to suggest you were a New Labour fan but rather point out that some of the methods you describe as being used to dismantle the social infrastructure by the current government were actually introduced by the previous government. 

Presumably then, you mean that the current government has altered them to suit their own plans rather than a cross-party conspiracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 02:31:57 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 02:01:06 PM
Presumably then, you mean that the current government has altered them to suit their own plans rather than a cross-party conspiracy?

Pretty much. As a product of a "bog standard" comprehensive, I'm a huge believer in universal state education — I disagreed with academies when New Labour introduced them and they were largely taken up by faith schools, I disagree with the process now it's been hugely accelerated under Gove as means of transferring state education to the private sector.

I've been struck recently by just how far the entire political spectrum has moved to the right in the time that I've been a voting adult. Back in 1987, I'd have characterised myself as the wet end of Tory to the dry end of Liberal. Three years of university probably shifted me a few degrees to the left but I remain pretty much where I was all those years ago...

The difference now is that suggesting that the relentless march to hand public services over to the private sector might not be such a great idea, that there are conceivably elements of the national and social infrastructure that are not best served by the principle of maximising shareholder value, gets you looked at like some kind of Marxist throwback from the 70s, despite the fact that it is demonstrably a terrible idea. One has only to look at the mess we are in with the railways and the public utilities to see what a fantastically bad idea privatisation was (unless you're a shareholder, obviously) and yet the mantra remains unchanged in mainstream politics.

And just wait until the PFI timebomb starts to go off under all the hospitals and other capital projects that utilised the scheme... arguably the worst imaginable method to fund a project requiring government capital investment, apart from the fact that it doesn't add to the government borrowing figures and so was embraced by the Tories and New Labour alike.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 04:56:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 02:31:57 PM
I've been struck recently by just how far the entire political spectrum has moved to the right in the time that I've been a voting adult. Back in 1987, I'd have characterised myself as the wet end of Tory to the dry end of Liberal. Three years of university probably shifted me a few degrees to the left but I remain pretty much where I was all those years ago...

The difference now is that suggesting that the relentless march to hand public services over to the private sector might not be such a great idea, that there are conceivably elements of the national and social infrastructure that are not best served by the principle of maximising shareholder value, gets you looked at like some kind of Marxist throwback from the 70s, despite the fact that it is demonstrably a terrible idea.

Ha! I know what you mean there.  The main three all look like strangers to me and can I recall that Labour introduced the University Fees as it stood out as such an anti-Labour move!

PFI and privatisation are OK in some circumstances (I mean, does anyone really mind that British Airways is privatised?) but they have both been over-used.  I particular liked it following the financial crisis where credit was hard to come by so the government stumped up some cash to lend to private industry so they had money for the PFI contracts.  You really could not make this up.

I have not followed the Academy schools so closely but I cannot see what the benefit is or why schools need to specialise.  Plus, who really wants their kids to go to the MacDonalds Academy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2014, 05:08:50 PM
JamesC, I agree that people want rules and structure but - why do they want them? In my experience, most people believe themselves to be perfectly capable of acting lawfully - even though they might occasionally steal a pen from work or sneak over the speed limit from time to time. People want laws and structure to apply to others, to stop other people from acting against humanity and not themselves. You know that you will never murder anybody in cold blood and so demand laws to prevent other people from killing You in cold blood. The problem with this is that the simple phrase "breaking the law" covers everything from spitting in the street to mass murder and we've all been brainwashed to believe that breaking the law ALWAYS deserves punishment.

I like your Monopoly analogy, I often use it myself to describe "the system," but what if I don't want to play Monopoly? What if I want to play Ker-Plunk instead, or just sit and read my 2000AD quietly in the corner? If one is forced to play Monopoly against one's will, is one still obligated to play by the rules?


I think that the way to improve things is to encourage free thinking and personal responsibility.


Theblaze, I'm not sure I've made myself clear. Whether or not the "government" passes legislation outlawing murder or not makes no difference as murder is Always against the Common Law. If a person, for whatever reason, coldly and meticulously plans and carries out a murder then the existence of anti-murder legislation would not (and indeed does not) dissuade the murderer or impact upon the right of society to apprehend, try and punish the offender. Likewise, a murder committed as a "crime of passion" would not be affected by the existence, or otherwise, of anti-murder legislation. It is only our brainwashing that convinces us that legislation prevents crime. If that was the case, there would be no crime.


I'm glad that you mentioned the application of force because that is the only thing backing legislation of any kind. To explain, let's look at your other point, safety on the roads. There is nothing wrong with having traffic lights, speed limits and a highway code in order to facilitate road safety. But if we were to take these things away it wouldn't automatically mean that it suddenly becomes okay to drive on the wrong side of the road or plough through pedestrian filled pavements. Most of us recognise that the Rules of the Road are there for an extremely good reason and stick to them as best we can. We also have a low opinion of those who do not and use things like driving lessons, t.v. advertising campaigns and peer pressure to make sure these rules are adhered to. Once again, absence of legislation would not change this - in fact, I think it would actually increase the peer pressure to drive safely.


Of course, there will always be buffoons whose driving is mental and even without legislation a society would be entirely justified in preventing a maniac getting behind the wheel of a car if that maniac's driving constituted a clear hazard to the life and limb of others. If, on the other hand, that same maniac wanted to go screaming around a specially designated racetrack with a bunch of other maniacs then there's nothing to prevent that.


Just like most legislation, road traffic legislation is nothing more than a moneyspinner and does nothing to keep the roads safe. For example, imagine you're driving through the countryside on a deserted road at 3 a.m. and you come to a red traffic light at a junction with clear visibility all around. You know the road and you can see that there are no other vehicles coming from any direction and so, instead of stopping for the red light you sneak through in what you believe to be a safe manner. You don't hit anybody, nobody hits you and nobody is hurt, inconvenienced or even irritated by this. No actual crime has been committed.


Now let's say that a police officer has been parked in his patrol car behind some trees and chases you down for running the red light. You are issued with a ticket for £100 fine even though nobody and nothing has been harmed. Most people have been brainwashed into thinking that you got what you deserved but, in reality, you've just had £100 stolen from you by a "government" mercenary.


The money stolen from you, less fees and charges, ends up in the coffers of "government" to do with as it chooses. Some of it might go towards new bulbs for other traffic lights, which most people would think is fair. What a logical disconnect! People want laws to keep themselves and their property safe but have no qualms about using money extorted, sometimes using violence or deceit, from people who have harmed nobody to pay for public services. To believe in government legislation is to believe in violence, extortion and theft but we have all been brainwashed into not seeing this.


Any vote for any government, then, is a vote for slavery.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 March, 2014, 07:04:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2014, 05:08:50 PM
Just like most legislation, road traffic legislation is nothing more than a moneyspinner and does nothing to keep the roads safe. For example, imagine you're driving through the countryside on a deserted road at 3 a.m. and you come to a red traffic light at a junction with clear visibility all around. You know the road and you can see that there are no other vehicles coming from any direction and so, instead of stopping for the red light you sneak through in what you believe to be a safe manner. You don't hit anybody, nobody hits you and nobody is hurt, inconvenienced or even irritated by this. No actual crime has been committed.


Now let's say that a police officer has been parked in his patrol car behind some trees and chases you down for running the red light. You are issued with a ticket for £100 fine even though nobody and nothing has been harmed. Most people have been brainwashed into thinking that you got what you deserved but, in reality, you've just had £100 stolen from you by a "government" mercenary.

There aren't any traffic lights in the proper countryside unless there's very good reason for them being there and policemen don't venture into it unless they really, really have to. It frightens them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2014, 07:10:07 PM
Heh, the countryside only frightens them because I live there...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 March, 2014, 09:36:56 PM
Hi Jim - You described yourself as coming from the Left in politics but think the country's gone to the Right.  I would describe myself as coming from the Right of politics and think the country's gone to the Left!!!  As a counter balance to what you mentioned in your post, I would list large defence cuts, high immigration, massive widening of the social security safety net (tax credits, pension credits, for example), high taxes, civil partnerships, gay marriage, help with child care for people earning up to 150K each.

Now, I'm not saying the things above are wrong, I agree with some of them, but they're hardly the actions of rabid right-wing governments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 March, 2014, 10:18:31 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 March, 2014, 09:36:56 PM
Hi Jim - You described yourself as coming from the Left in politics

I don't think he did, you know. I think you must've read this bit wrong...

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 02:31:57 PM
Back in 1987, I'd have characterised myself as the wet end of Tory to the dry end of Liberal. Three years of university probably shifted me a few degrees to the left but I remain pretty much where I was all those years ago...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 March, 2014, 10:26:30 PM
Okay, okay!!  But Jim did say that the country's moved to the Right.  Or have I got that wrong too?  In any case, I'm pretty sure Jim's to the Left of me.  I shall be following your posts very closely from now on, and be very quick to point out any errors.  You've been warned!!   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 March, 2014, 10:48:14 PM
You'll be wasting your time. I never maek misteaks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 26 March, 2014, 10:44:27 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2014, 12:04:56 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 25 March, 2014, 11:41:17 AM
I agree that some of the austerity measures have been too severe but given what they started with, the govt had to be cautious with their borrowing.

Except that I don't accept the basic premise that this government's concern is prudent borrowing or well-managed public finances. If those were their concerns, they wouldn't be throwing money down the black hole that is Ian Duncan Smith's Universal Credit disaster; they wouldn't be giving away hundreds of millions of pounds' worth of publicly-owned property to privately-owned consortia and companies in the form of academy schools; they wouldn't have changed the university tuition system to the point where it's so expensive that the increased defaults will mean it costs the state more than the system it replaced. And, as previously mentioned, they wouldn't be paying a private company hundreds of millions of pounds to expend ten times the resources chasing £1.7bn of benefit fraud than HMRC is allowed to expend chasing £70bn of tax. They wouldn't have pushed through NHS reforms that suck money out of the state healthcare system without delivering a single pound in extra care or services.

It's abundantly clear that this government is philosophically opposed to a vast raft of public services and that 'austerity' is merely a smokescreen to enable the most comprehensive dismantling of our social infrastructure in sixty years, and the attendant transfer of that government spending to private institutions.

Cheers

Jim

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 March, 2014, 12:41:14 PM
Sharky, the world you live in is not the one I do. It is only the threat of penalisation that keeps the roads running smoothly. Otherwise every one would chance that red light to get through a little quicker and the pedestrians would be out of luck permanently.

And I do not know this common law that you speak of. Mob justice exists where legislation and authority does not but these are not anything more than the rule of the strong and the many against the weak and the few.

Legislation does prevent transgressive acts - if only by making them into crimes with according punishments. I grew up with a fair few people who have only stopped breaking into people's homes, mugging people in the street and so forth because they ended up in jail and don't want to go back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 01:16:25 PM
I was reading a really funny Onion article about a confirmed fraudster with no legal background who conned his way into an official position in some hick government's justice ministry and then banned families of prisoners from sending books into prisons as they had to send money instead so prisoners could buy books from the prison, but only from a list approved by the government.  It was a really funny satire on open corruption and something you could only make up.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 March, 2014, 09:36:56 PMI would describe myself as coming from the Right of politics and think the country's gone to the Left!!!

We never could have guessed from the liberal slant of your posts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 March, 2014, 01:56:43 PM
Right wing used to mean being a bit of a **** for the simple joy of prejudice. Now it means being a bit of a **** for money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 02:05:00 PM
I imagine there have been plenty of Conservative politicians in the past who stood against prejudice.  I don't think we'd have made it this far otherwise.

Also, from Twitter and vaguely on-topic:
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/Bjp9IZpCYAAcpSQpnglarge_zps8b72007a.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2014, 03:48:25 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 March, 2014, 01:56:43 PM
Right wing used to mean being a bit of a **** for the simple joy of prejudice. Now it means being a bit of a **** for money.
[Up yours :D/quote]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2014, 03:55:41 PM
Umm!  Sorry about that - the "up yours" and the Smiley were supposed to be under the quote, one day I'll get the hang of this interweb thingamajig!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 March, 2014, 04:04:18 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 01:16:25 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 March, 2014, 09:36:56 PMI would describe myself as coming from the Right of politics and think the country's gone to the Left!!!

We never could have guessed from the liberal slant of your posts.

At least he's not to the right of Hitler, like Campbell has been shown to be...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2014, 04:12:00 PM
You leave Jim alone!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 04:20:24 PM
I'm glad to see the government taking a tough stance on immigration by deporting a straight-A teenage student back to the abuse her mother took her to the UK to escape - no excuses, Jenny Foreigner!  When over a hundred thousand wet-behind-the-ears liberals treacherously signed a petition asking for her to remain in the UK where she could eventually aid our economy, the government achieved a compromise by taking these pinko Bolsheviks at their word about not deporting the girl "all alone" and separating her from her family by deporting her entire family as well - oh how I laughed!  That'll teach those liberal scum to try and put one over on Dangerous Dave Cameron and the top toffs of the Tory thinkbox currently rebuilding Blighty!  The British people can hold their heads high today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 March, 2014, 04:25:53 PM
Try as hard as you like, Prof, but I'm not biting!!  Just finished my wheel-chair T'ai Chi and all's right with the world.   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 March, 2014, 04:28:54 PM
I reckon she was a sleeper agent, just waiting until she would be activated in the future to kill for her masters in a land outside our borders. Good riddance I say!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 04:35:41 PM
It'll certainly teach her not to volunteer free time to teach kids to read in future!  You know what something you don't pay for is?

Worthless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 March, 2014, 04:38:32 PM
It annoyed me, not least because of the high level of illegal activity between recently migrated groups of Hungarians in the Bolton area. But of course, you wont be seeing anything in the news about my boss's van being hijacked at gun point and thousands of pounds worth of dive kit stolen including knifes and line cutters. And yet this bright little lass gets the boot?

Fucking idiotic policy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 March, 2014, 04:38:53 PM
Excellent sleeper tactics or so she thought :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 March, 2014, 04:46:57 PM
That's an unfair comparison, HM - those criminals spend money and keep the economy turning!  They're what makes Britain great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 March, 2014, 08:55:40 PM
Theblazeuk
Member
Sentient Tea Bot
**

Posts: 437
View Profile  Personal Message (Offline)

Re: The Political Thread
« Reply #4970 on: Today at 12:41:14 »
Quote
Sharky, the world you live in is not the one I do. It is only the threat of penalisation that keeps the roads running smoothly. Otherwise every one would chance that red light to get through a little quicker and the pedestrians would be out of luck permanently.

And I do not know this common law that you speak of. Mob justice exists where legislation and authority does not but these are not anything more than the rule of the strong and the many against the weak and the few.

Legislation does prevent transgressive acts - if only by making them into crimes with according punishments. I grew up with a fair few people who have only stopped breaking into people's homes, mugging people in the street and so forth because they ended up in jail and don't want to go back.


I don't agree. I think it's people's inherent judgement, training and experience that keeps the roads, and everything else, running. Whilst there will always be bad drivers who make bad choices, in my (not inconsiderable) driving experience I find the vast majority of drivers to be largely responsible. There is no legislation requiring drivers to allow room for other motorists to pull out (at motorway slip-roads, for example, where the legislative requirement is actually for the motorist joining the motorway to slot in with motorway traffic or stop until a gap opens up, I couldn't count the number of times I've seen or been involved in drivers on the motorway pulling into the middle lane to allow joining vehicles easier access), or for truck drivers to flash each other when it's safe to pull back in after overtaking. People let each other out of side roads or parking spaces all the time with absolutely no legislative requirement to do so. Not one driver does the above things because they'd get arrested or fined if they don't so I'm afraid your argument doesn't hold water.

You also know exactly what Common Law is. It's the foundation of what you were taught as a child about not stealing or hurting people. The Common Law is everywhere and dominates your life. It regulates trillions of social interactions every day; every person you pass on the street, interact with at work or transact with in shops who doesn't murder, rape or rob you is abiding by the Common Law - not because it is written but because it is right.

Those ex-miscreants you mentioned, are they in the majority of people you know or in the minority? My guess is the latter and I wonder why they acted as they did? Could it be because of mixed messages and brainwashing from childhood not taking properly? On the one hand children are taught (hopefully) not to bully, harm or steal and that good behaviour is a virtue whilst on the other they are taught that subservience to authority is also a virtue. But when they realise that authority is the biggest bully, attacker and thief on the block, what kind of message does that send? It's okay for authority to kick people's doors in to get at their money, okay for authority to have people kidnapped, beaten and sometimes even killed and so, as respect for authority has been drummed into them with religious fervour from an early age could their transgressions simply be a case of "monkey see, monkey do"? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 March, 2014, 11:56:05 AM
It's a nice place you describe but the Common Law does not exist. You are mistaking courtesy and kindness as a universal trait. You're also misconstruing what I am saying as a claim that the law is the only reason people aren't horrible to each other.

The law exists and nice people exist. The latter make up the majority. However this common law you describe is a suggestion and the minority would ignore that suggestion. Not because of any 'brainwashing' but because of the will to do so and the lack of concern or empathy for the consequences to others. The minority's actions only have repercussions due to the law.

My argument holds water because we live in a world where this suggestion is backed up by a rule. The minority are not allowed to ruin it for the rest of us. It only takes one shit to ruin it for a hundred people.

QuoteIt's the foundation of what you were taught as a child about not stealing or hurting people.

That's what I was taught. It's not what everyone is taught, clearly. And it also differs from person to person - do I really have to point to examples of people believing that its ok to beat on the gays, the blacks, the irish, the hippies...?

Beyond arguing these massively broad societal issues, just look at any murder case in the news. In this world of the 'common law' who is it who hunts down the idiot thug who kills a man for looking at him the wrong way?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 12:51:14 PM
"In this world of the 'common law' who is it who hunts down the idiot thug who kills a man for looking at him the wrong way?"


The police, of course.


To say that common law (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=Common+law) doesn't exist is just plain wrong. Google it. Look in a law book. Ask a police constable.




I don't dispute that there will always be people who believe it's all right to demonize other people but legislation makes this demonization even MORE destructive, as a moment's thought will prove to you. Take the example of Apartheid, which "legalized" racism. Instead of individulas deciding whether or not to engage in racism on their own, racism was imposed on everybody, even those who ware against it. So even white people who had nothing against black people were forced to engage in racism or be imprisoned themselves.




I personally have nothing against immigrants, be they "legal" or otherwise, but "authority" would punish me if I were to employ an "illegal" person, no matter how trustworthy or hard working that person was. "Authority" is at the root of human trafficking and abuse. By arbitrarily deciding that huge swathes of human beings are "illegal" or undesirable simply because of where they were born, "authority" installs the foundation of abuse. Imagine you were to find a truck full of suffering human beings who are being exploited and simply opened the truck door to set them free. "Authority" would punish you for helping them, as would the criminals abusing them. Once escaped from captivity, the human beings you had freed, being demonized by "authority" would be reluctant to approach that "authority" for help as they would be treated as "illegals" anyway. Now imagine the same scenario but without anti-immigration "legislation" - how long would people smuggling continue if every human being had a right to, under his or her own conscience, open those lorry doors to free these slaves with no fear of prosecution?




Common Law tells you that it's okay to help anyone you like, legislative "law" tells you that it isn't. This is the basic cognitive dissonance that's been brainwashed into us since school; be good but do as you're told. This is so deeply forced into us that, when faced with a choice of either doing right or following orders, we have been brainwashed into following orders rather than relying upon our own humanity, experience and/or judgement.




George Orwell must be spinning in his tear-soaked grave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2014, 02:53:50 PM
I disagree - Orwell would be pretty happy to see so much fodder for his writing, and probably heartened to see the organising resistance slowly taking shape in the likes of Occupy.  Living in times like ours would give him so much to do it'd probably put an extra decade on his life.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 12:51:14 PM
Imagine you were to find a truck full of suffering human beings who are being exploited and simply opened the truck door to set them free.

Replace "truck" with "privatised detention centers" and you're onto something.  The likes of Serco and Group 4 have already made the first steps towards the American model of monetising incarceration and making the creation of criminals an economic necessity, and not even a proven track record of starving, beating and sexually assaulting detainees (which include children) who've done nothing wrong beyond falling foul of technicalities in immigration law - and sometimes not even that - have so much as dented their ability to bid on other government contracts.

Orwell would be so happy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 March, 2014, 03:08:34 PM
QuoteA common law legal system is a system of law characterized by case law, which is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals

A little bit of reading will show that the Common Law exists, yes. And that it is dependent on "authorities". A system of government to establish said authority. This isn't the common law you've described.

Who are the police in this world without "authority"? And how are they the police if they don't have any position of authority - which they can't have since you have described all authority as inherently illegitimate?

You seem to misinterpret what I am saying into a blanket approval of all legislation due to its very nature. Of course legislation can be morally reprehensible. However I am only arguing the position that authority, government, legislation have a beneficial role not a purely destructive and "illegitimate one".

You have Jim Crow laws, you have emancipation proclamations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 03:25:11 PM
Heh, I suppose Mr Orwell's state of happiness, or otherwise, would depend on whether he intended 1984 to be a warning or a blueprint.Speaking of the "Occupy" movement, I'm coming to the conclusion that it (and all public demonstrations against "authority") are not only largely pointless but also rather counter-productive. It seems to me that it's logically impossible to have a ruler who serves the people - it's like having a slave owner who serves his slaves. The Occupy movement, and all other anti-this or pro-that demonstrations are like the slaves gathering outside the master's mansion saying "Master, please change how you dominate us because we don't like it but, until you do, we'll continue to accept the way you're dominating us at the moment." It's just mad.If all those thousands of people just stayed at home and instead refused to accept the injustice they're trying to get changed they'd have much better success. Instead of just whining at the powers that be in the hopes that the bedroom tax will be repealed, for example, if those same people simply refused to pay it then I think they'd get a lot further. This silly and destructive legislation would then be simply ignored into irrelevance in much the same way that the Prohibition Laws in the United States were.As the old saying goes, "suppose they had a war and nobody came?" Same principle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2014, 04:12:41 PM
You assume the Occupy we got was the entirety of the endevour, Sharky, but it wasn't even a focused campaign, which was why it flummoxed so many commentators who couldn't grasp that this wasn't some single figure or group making people do these things with an eye on an end goal, it was just a great many people who were so pissed off at so many different things that they just had to do something, even if that something was "sit in the street" until they were moved along.  Occupy was an opening salvo in something larger, because all the things that made people pissed off haven't gone away.
As you yourself pointed out, the money racket is still in play with the same old players doing the same old thing and there will be another Occupy sooner or later - probably after the next financial crash - but this time it will be starting to change form, possibly more focused, possibly more militant - who can say?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 05:15:19 PM
Theblaze, common law existed before authority arose and will still be around when authority fades away to nothing.

I also think you have misinterpreted the very quote you've used to argue your point. By highlighting the words judges, courts and tribunals you have overlooked the part that juries and social consent play in the legal system and you also seem to have ignored the fact that legislative law, criminal law and common law are in no way the same thing.

Common Law is based on custom and inherent human thought/behaviour.

Criminal Law, being closest to Common Law, is arrived at through innumerable trials in which juries decide whether or not an act is wrong. A publicly sanctioned judge then uses past cases and the determination of the jury to arrive at a hopefully unbiased punishment and to impose that punishment on the miscreant on behalf of society.

Legislative law, the lowest form of law, is based solely upon the whims of the ruling class, or "authority", with little or no relevance to the rights or wishes of the population expected to obey that law.

You raise an important point concerning the police but, I think, fail to realise that there are two kinds of police.

The first, and best, kind of police is the police Constable, whose job it is to uphold the common law. The second, inferior kind is the police officer, whose job it is to enforce legislative law.

The police Constable has no more powers than you or I and is simply someone employed by society to protect the lives, rights and property of every human being on his or her patch. The Constable is simply the person who, for example, is paid to break up bar fights or chase down actual thieves, rapists or murderers on our behalf. The Constable is simply an extension of our own right to defend and protect ourselves from the criminal elements in society and to find out who did what to whom so that we don't have to. The Constable is the old Dixon of Dock Green stereotype.

The police officer is an enforcer who acts in such a way as to be beyond or above the law and acts purely as a tool of "authority". The officer also has no more powers than you or I but is brainwashed th think that he has. I have no right to stop people at random and go through their pockets on the off-chance that they might be carrying something "illegal" or "immoral" and neither, in reality, does the police officer. The officer is the Judge Dredd stereotype (or even, to be wholly cynical, your basic Mafia enforcer).

When a police Constable takes off his uniform he can still perform his duties as he's not claiming any special rights or powers beyond the rest of us. When a police officer takes off his uniform he would be unable to continue with his duties as he claims special rights and powers unavailable to the rest of us - rights and powers bestowed by "authority".

The thing about legislative "law" that I don't like is that it's always either oppressive or irrelevant, though you may (and obviously do) disagree. Let me try to explain using "dangerous dogs" as an example.

A dog owner has a Hadean Pitbull Terrier that's vicious and aggressive. The dog owner's neighbours, concerned for their safety, have two options: to deal with the matter themselves or involve the police. The police Constable is called upon and can do no more than advise the dog owner to ensure that the animal is properly secured so that it can't hurt anyone. The dog owner is, of course, perfectly entitled to accept or reject the Constable's advice based upon personal judgement (frightening, I know, but this is the nature of freedom and free will). If the dog owner complies and keeps the animal safely and securely then there's no problem. If the dog owner ignores the Constable and the dog continues to be a danger, and especially if it harms somebody, then the Constable, on behalf of his community, is perfectly entitled then to have the dog destroyed. No ifs, no buts, no maybes - bullet to the head, problem solved. The dog owner, if his neighbours decide that this is not enough, can then take the dog owner to court to be tried. The dog owner is then perfectly free to acquire another Hadean Pitbull Terrier and, so long as this one isn't a danger too, there would be no problem. If it was a problem then society would be justified in sending the Constable again and even, through the courts, banning that person from keeping dogs at all and all this can be done under Common Law. Common Law only treats criminals as criminals.

Let us now bring authority and the police officer into the picture. Same dog owner, same dangerous dog. The reaction of "authority" is to make all Hadean Pitbull Terriers "illegal" across the board, irrespective of how dangerous or otherwise the individual animals might be. Suddenly, hundreds or thousands of dog owners who were law-abiding people yesterday arbitrarily become "criminals" and "authority" sends its enforcers (police officers) to forcibly remove and destroy every Hadean Pitbull Terrier in its jurisdiction and to also fine or even imprison "criminal" dog owners. Legislative "law" treats everyone as criminals.

Common Law requires that everybody takes responsibility for their own actions whilst legislative "law" requires that "authority" takes responsibility for everyone's actions.

As a side note, this is why the modern police force is in such a mess. They are still called "Constables" but are more and more required to function as officers. The roles are utterly incompatible and on the road to implosion. They are being told to function either as Dixon of Mega City One or Constable Dredd.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 05:35:39 PM
I agree with what you say about the Occupy Movement, Professor Bear, and at the time I was all for it. Now, although I'm still largely in agreement that something has to be done, I don't think that mass petitioning of our masters is the way to go.

For a start, a big march or sit-in is something akin to "voluntary kettling" - it puts all your most active activists in one place, providing "authority" with a huge target. Taking personal responsibility and simply refusing to comply with unjust or destructive legislation in their own lives fragments and vastly multiplies the targets on offer. Say 100,000 people march begging the masters to ban unfair mortgage charges and riot officers club them away, water cannon and tear-gas them into submission or even just contain and ignore them - the media reports this and the myth that "you can't beat the system" is reinforced.

Now, imagine that those same 100,000 simply stay at home and refuse to pay their mortgages until the criminal banks capitulate. All of a sudden "authority" has 100,000 individual targets (maybe even double or triple that amount as not everyone of the same mind is willing or able to join the big march) and would only be able to attack a small number of them. This is "authority's" greatest fear and biggest Achilles heel - that there are far more of us than there are of them. They might have all the biggest guns but there's no way they can take us all on if we split up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2014, 06:38:28 PM
They deal with large numbers of no-pay activists all the time.  The method is to target not those who can pay but those vulnerable to prosecution and public punishment - which we know because leaked documents from the Northern Ireland water bill fiasco prove this.  As you say, this is to give the illusion that the public must capitulate, but it works both ways, as the prospect of being shown up by stinking plebs made the government climb down on the water bill issue before they were humiliated with a rerun of the Poll Tax Riots - one thing about us Norn scum is that we'll riot if the local shop runs out of chunky Kit-Kats, and it was commonly accepted that water bill collectors would be skinned alive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 06:51:28 PM
I'm not aware of that situation, Prof, but from what you've said it sounds like Common Law in action!


Just like this! (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7CnrqD1L-Q)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2014, 07:45:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 06:51:28 PM
I'm not aware of that situation, Prof, but from what you've said it sounds like Common Law in action!

In a nutshell, the government tried to impose a water bill on every property in Northern Ireland and the vast majority of our population told them to go fuck themselves.
We told them to go fuck themselves in letters, we told them to go fuck themselves when we saw them in the street, we told them to go fuck themselves on the radio, and the tv and the papers ran stories about how a usually-polorised people were as one telling the government to go fuck themselves - the government, unused to this strange notion of doing what we tell them to do instead of the other way around, didn't take the hint and so lied to the population and said this wasn't already covered by our rates, then they lied again when they tried to move the goalposts by saying what a great bone they were tossing us in keeping the bills so low (according to leaked documents, this was bullshit as the bills were to increase by 100 percent annually for the first three years), then they tried to move the goalposts again with debates about how rates would or wouldn't be variable and vulnerable people wouldn't be at a disadvantage - which was proven to be even bigger bullshit when someone leaked documents stating how the private firms employed to manage debt collection were planning specifically to target the the poor, the disabled, and the mentally incompetent so as to have visible scalps to show during the early days of their PR campaign.
Despite their lies, lies and more lies, enough people said no to paying for their water twice despite access to it being a human right so the government and their private sector lapdogs folded because no amount of money can buy you a spine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2014, 08:06:31 PM
That's brilliant, Prof, truly brilliant. Exactly what I've been talking about and the only way we can free ourselves from the myth of "authority". The fact that this happened in Northern Ireland, where the "authorities" have inflicted so much damage and misery, is perhaps the most heartening thing I've heard in a long, long time.

I hope this doesn't sound patronising as that's the last thing on my mind but bloody well done, I'm proud of you all!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 March, 2014, 08:38:30 PM
Ulster says no
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 March, 2014, 10:03:06 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 27 March, 2014, 08:38:30 PM
Ulster says no

Practice makes perfect.

Meanwhile, the Republic says: "we'll just take it at source if you're PAYE or Social Welfare". It's what Collins would have wanted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2014, 10:39:27 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 March, 2014, 10:03:06 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 27 March, 2014, 08:38:30 PM
Ulster says no

Practice makes perfect.

"The Man From Del Monte was warned."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: soggy on 28 March, 2014, 05:17:53 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 March, 2014, 10:03:06 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 27 March, 2014, 08:38:30 PM
Ulster says no

Practice makes perfect.

Meanwhile, the Republic says: "we'll just take it at source if you're PAYE or Social Welfare". It's what Collins would have wanted.

Well he was Minister of Finance so you are probably right  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 March, 2014, 05:29:34 PM
QuoteThe first, and best, kind of police is the police Constable, whose job it is to uphold the common law. The second, inferior kind is the police officer, whose job it is to enforce legislative law.

There is no such distinction - every member of the police is a police officer, constable is simply the lowest rank.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 March, 2014, 05:36:16 PM
Like the Chief Constable, you mean?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 March, 2014, 11:05:36 PM
More heartening news: the schoolgirl they tried to deport back to her abusive family in Mauritius has had a stay when Air Mauritius - like British Airways before them - refused to take part in the deportation.  Easy to forget that there's people in these giant corporate entities and that occasionally they can come through and remind you we're getting better, though it's worth noting that she's still being held in Yarl's Wood, a privately-run detention center that employs rapists on its staff, has a history of sexual abuse against its mostly-female detainees - some of which are children - and which today has announced that a 40 year-old woman has died of "cardiac arrest."  Don't know about the rest of you, but I think that sounds perfectly legit.

Anyone on Twitter could do worse with a minute of their time to toss a missive at the minister for immigration, James Brokenshire: https://twitter.com/JBrokenshire
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2014, 11:47:39 PM
They'll probably just end up using the R.A.F. That's if Ryanair doesn't start up some kind of budget deportation service first, where deportees are charged for meals, oxygen and shackle hire and deposited in a country quite near the one they're being sent to and then bussed the rest of the way in a secure crate. EasyGetLost.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 March, 2014, 12:07:49 AM
I'm not sure, but I think that the military aren't allowed to intervene in civil matters like that, and using a Ryanair flight would constitute cruel and unusual punishment.

As for your hilarious jokes about people being charged for their own incarceration and deportation, I feel I have to point out what confirmed benefit fraudster Chris "I'm not a lawyer" Grayling has been up to recently and remind you that this is what the government are already doing.  Makes sense, really: private firms running jails can cut costs and maximise profit if inmates have to pay for their own amenities.  They can further profit if only they had more inmates to work with, but one step at a time, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 March, 2014, 12:33:18 AM
Yup, it's a clusterdrokk alright. Use the U.S. method, I say. Put prisoners to work for pennies in the pound making license plates and bodyarmour and throw 'em in solitary if they don't wanna' work. That way it's not slavery - it's rehabilitation and good for the economy. (And by "economy" I do mean, of course, billionaires.) The upside is that if you fancy a job for life, all you have to do is kill somebody. (This does not constitute career advice, just in case any lawyers are Twoothy fans...)

Hmmm... I seem to have my cynicism dial stuck on 4 1/2.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 March, 2014, 12:38:32 AM
(http://orientalreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/969321_294553067360127_845462323_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 02 April, 2014, 06:31:21 PM
It seems Air Mauritius changed their mind for some unknown reason.

They could've at least waited till either A) she finished her exams, or B) a decision had been made on the rest of here family. Preferably both.

And I don't have a problem with 'both'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 06:58:17 PM
As a mate of mine proffered, "they make exceptions all the time, I don't see what's so different this time around... for this black kid."

The kind of people who'd ask for clemency aren't likely to vote for Tory lizards anyway, so there's not really a downside for the party in kicking a highly-visible non-caucasian out of the country while liberals wail and gnash - this can only improve their standing with the disaffected racists who've gone over to UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 April, 2014, 07:25:02 PM
What does it say about a state when it behaves like this (not that my own parasites are any better). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 07:47:40 PM
I'm from Northern Ireland, TB - I've got both sets of the fuckers to worry about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 02 April, 2014, 08:30:46 PM
Speaking of UKIP, Nick Clegg took an even bigger beating in the polls this time. After watching the debate I assumed this would be the case.

YouGov:
Nigel Farage 68
Nick Clegg 27

ICM:
Nigel Farage 69
Nick Clegg 31
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 08:35:48 PM
I half hope the fuckers get in as it's the only way we'll get the revolution we need.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 April, 2014, 08:40:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 07:47:40 PM
I'm from Northern Ireland, TB - I've got both sets of the fuckers to worry about.

If the Scotch get their independence, we could potentially have three dicks to try and swallow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 02 April, 2014, 09:42:21 PM
Adam Curtis worked Alan Moore into his latest blog post (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/SUSPICIOUS-MINDS), about the lack of trust in authority in the U.K.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 10:38:31 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 06:58:17 PM
As a mate of mine proffered, "they make exceptions all the time, I don't see what's so different this time around... for this black kid."

The kind of people who'd ask for clemency aren't likely to vote for Tory lizards anyway, so there's not really a downside for the party in kicking a highly-visible non-caucasian out of the country while liberals wail and gnash - this can only improve their standing with the disaffected racists who've gone over to UKIP.

So, they should make an exception based on someone's colour?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 April, 2014, 10:41:40 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 02 April, 2014, 09:42:21 PM
Adam Curtis worked Alan Moore into his latest blog post (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/SUSPICIOUS-MINDS), about the lack of trust in authority in the U.K.

That was a fantastic read. Cheers, Otter.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 April, 2014, 11:08:47 PM
Adam Curtis has previously sung the praises of Alan Moore (http://www.e-flux.com/journal/in-conversation-with-adam-curtis-part-ii/):


"HUO: Many artists keep telling me how they're very inspired by Alan Moore. He's a total guru.

AC: They're right. I think he's a genius. Because he is obviously driven by this idea that you could do really complicated things, both in narrative and in what you're saying, yet do them in a really entertaining pop way. I would never compare myself to him because he is a sort of god, but I mean it's what I try and do—pop stuff, right? I do jokes. I use silly music. I have dancing animals, anything. But I try not to compromise in what I'm saying. I don't simplify it. I mean, I simplify it, but I don't degrade it. But he doesn't, either. And the way he structures narrative is just incredible."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 April, 2014, 11:12:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 10:38:31 PM
So, they should make an exception based on someone's colour?

What they should do is earn their silly money by making decisions on the basis of shared humanity and doing the decent thing, outside of lipservice adherence to an imperfect system.

It's one kid, the kind of kid we could all do with more of in our countries and communities.  If we're drawing up lists of people who should be moved on, there are more pressing names.

Even Judge Dredd understands how this sort of thing works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 02 April, 2014, 11:20:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 10:38:31 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 06:58:17 PM
As a mate of mine proffered, "they make exceptions all the time, I don't see what's so different this time around... for this black kid."

The kind of people who'd ask for clemency aren't likely to vote for Tory lizards anyway, so there's not really a downside for the party in kicking a highly-visible non-caucasian out of the country while liberals wail and gnash - this can only improve their standing with the disaffected racists who've gone over to UKIP.

So, they should make an exceptions based on someone's colour?

No, they should not make decisions based on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 11:25:21 PM
Quite right, Richmond, that's what I think.

Hi TB, not been following the story closely, but if you say the young lady has a good case for staying, based on what you've read, I'm quite happy to go along with you.  Of course there should be common sense in the system.  I just think it's lazy thinking for some people to suggest it's just because of her colour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 11:30:29 PM
As lazy and obvious as ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 11:34:14 PM
Stop talking about yourself, mate, you'll get a complex!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 April, 2014, 11:51:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 11:34:14 PM
I know what you are but what am I?

Damn - intellectually out-thunked again!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 April, 2014, 11:59:09 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 April, 2014, 09:13:44 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 April, 2014, 11:12:45 PM
Even Judge Dredd understands how this sort of thing works.
Uuuuurrrmmmm....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 April, 2014, 09:27:09 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 03 April, 2014, 09:13:44 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 April, 2014, 11:12:45 PM
Even Judge Dredd understands how this sort of thing works.
Uuuuurrrmmmm....

"These were good people, Chief Judge.  Decent law-fearing citizens.  Grud knows we see all too few of them.  Maybe I was wrong, but I figured they deserved a break". - A Brutal Indoctrinated Fascist, Prog 388.

Point being, even Dredd knows all rules have exceptions that derive from basic decency.  Plus, you know, mutants: do what is right, not what is easy.

I now feel like a maroon for dragging Dredd references into real-world situations, surely a reversal of what this thread is for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 April, 2014, 10:11:58 AM
Drokk no, Tordels - this isn't Hansard so I think it's perfectly reasonable to reference Dredd (or any other Twoothy story) to make or support a point. In fact, given whereabouts on the interweb we are, it would seem churlish not to allow them or to demean them.

Just for fun, I did search for Dredd on Hansard's site and found this (http://www.parliament.uk/search/results/?q=judge+dredd), which only goes to show that even some politicians get how old Joe's world is a future we really don't want coming to pass. So, reference away!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 April, 2014, 10:57:18 AM
So now the pointless politicians want to legislate love. The proposed "Cinderella Law (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/10732982/Parents-who-starve-children-of-love-face-jail.html)" seems to me to be something even Dredd wouldn't be too happy with.

Sure, it all sounds very reasonable to protect children from emotional abuse but, who's to decide when a parent saying "no" to their child constitutes abuse? My parents regularly verbally forced me to do something which the young me found to be upsetting, demeaning and painful. They did this almost every day of my young life despite me sometimes actually begging them not to make me do it. The fact that they never listened to me, never took my feelings into account on the matter and simply expected me to comply with their vile order is something that has scarred me deeply ever since - but it wasn't child abuse. They merely made me go to school.

And what about all those times when I couldn't have that birthday or Christmas present I wanted? The times when I scraped my knee and there was no comfort beyond a quick band-aid applied by a busy parent? Or all the times I was made to go on trips I didn't want to? Or the trips I wanted to undertake that I wasn't allowed to? My childish despair at such times seemed bottomless and cruelly inflicted. It is chilling, to me, to think that in future parents might face actual jail time for such "abuse".

Authority is out of control. We are the authority, not these Westminster airheads.



This Independent opinion piece (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/the-cinderella-law-emotional-correctness-gone-mad-9231233.html) puts it far more eloquently than I ever could.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 April, 2014, 01:23:04 PM
the proposed extension to the badger cull has been abandoned following the (clearly predictable) failure of the pilot scheme.

Could a glimmer of common sense be creeping into government? Ah no, wait a minute:
Quote"Defra's own independent assessment shows that culls in two pilot areas were not effective, and raised questions about their humaneness. These pilot culls will continue, though there will be no independent oversight to assess their future performance."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 03 April, 2014, 02:22:20 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 03 April, 2014, 01:23:04 PM
the proposed extension to the badger cull has been abandoned following the (clearly predictable) failure of the pilot scheme.

Could a glimmer of common sense be creeping into government? Ah no, wait a minute:
Quote"Defra's own independent assessment shows that culls in two pilot areas were not effective, and raised questions about their humaneness. These pilot culls will continue, though there will be no independent oversight to assess their future performance."

They'll be going after Cats next!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/first-cases-alert-pet-cats-spread-tb-to-four-people-9220060.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 03 April, 2014, 07:23:17 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 April, 2014, 09:27:09 AMI now feel like a maroon for dragging Dredd references into real-world situations, surely a reversal of what this thread is for.

Well we are on the official forums of the publisher of Judge Dredd so if you can't do it here...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2014, 11:35:09 AM
Back to my usual "conspiracy theory" that banks create money out of nothing, I've been struggling through the Bank of England's  Quarterly Bulletin 2014 Q1 (http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q1.aspx) document and, sure enough it says:

"Commercial banks create money, in the form of bank deposits, by making new loans.  When a bank makes a loan, for example to someone taking out a mortgage to buy a house, it does not typically do so by giving them thousands of pounds worth of banknotes.  Instead, it credits their bank account with a bank deposit of the size of the mortgage.  At that moment, new money is created.For this reason, some economists have referred to bank deposits as 'fountain pen money', created at the stroke of bankers' pens when they approve loans."

The Report, at least insofar as I have read it up to now, does not address the quandry of interest which is at the heart of current financial problems. If only the initial loan or mortgage amount is created (through the authorizing signature of the borrower) then where does the extra money to pay the interest come from? In theory, as the borrower authorized the creation of the original loan or mortgage amount just by signing for it, why cannot the interest payments be met in the same manner? And why do you need to "pay back" the amount that has already been created and spent?

The politician who addresses these questions might just get my vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2014, 04:21:59 PM
Change.org petition to make Maria Miller pay back all the cash she stole or resign:

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/maria-miller-mp-either-pay-back-45-000-in-fraudulent-expense-claims-or-resign

A nice sentiment, I suppose, only she sold the house in question a while back for a profit, so I don't see her paying back the cash as that much of a financial hardship.  Still, signing takes two seconds of your time, and when the papers and commentators come to announce how many people have expressed their opinion on the matter, a petition helps put a firm number to the amount of people who might be a bit angry at a benefits cheat getting 45-90,000 pounds of taxpayer money and then being told she has Ian Duncan Smith's support to do so.
Because we're all in this together.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2014, 09:00:56 PM

I'm bereft (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/conservative-mps-expenses/10754075/Maria-Miller-resigns-as-Culture-Secretary-as-it-happened.html). Maria Miller was by far my favourite of all the Secretaries of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and I just don't see how we're ever going to find another Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport who can fill this vital role as well as she has during her time in office.

It's vital we find someone of a similar calibre to replace Maria Miller to this most vital and high profile of all the offices of state. Sajid Javid seems like a decent enough guy, but he's no Maria Miller, and I'm not sure this billionaire former Vice Chairman of Chase Manhattan has the strength and depth of experience of a Maria Miller.

Let's not forget, this man now has operational control of all British culture. He's now in charge of Shakespeare, must make key strategic decisions regarding Coronation Street in real time, and will be responsible for all Premiership transfers. No wonder they transferred the under performing Jeremy Hunt to the NHS, where he can do no real harm.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2014, 10:26:11 PM
The fact that he's a billionaire (according to you) is about as relevant to his new job as the fact that he's the son of a bus driver!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 April, 2014, 10:35:58 PM
Well it is: haven't seen too many bus drivers basking in the sunny upper environs of expactory controldom. Just lots of old school dimbos who are busy sending us off on the road to impoverished filter down slavery. Z 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 April, 2014, 10:40:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2014, 10:26:11 PM
The fact that he's a billionaire (according to you) is about as relevant to his new job as the fact that he's the son of a bus driver!

Some irony appears to have found its way into my post, Tankie. I can only apologise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 April, 2014, 10:53:49 PM
Irony about what, sauchie?  Don't know about you but I like my culture, media and sport.  Come on you Spurs!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 10 April, 2014, 02:07:54 PM
'Culture' is something that evolves over time/generations and experience.

A 'Secretary of Culture' is unnecessary; as is a Chocolate Fireguard!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 April, 2014, 07:14:03 PM

I suspect this cowboy has been reading The Legendary Shark's tales of negotiating Housing Benefit payments with local authority officials through his letter box. They just do these things on a larger scale out West:

http://benswann.com/hundreds-of-armed-feds-and-snipers-surround-nevada-cattle-ranchers-property-is-this-the-next-ruby-ridge/#ixzz2yQIydsTD

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 April, 2014, 09:59:08 PM
I'm with the government on that one, as he's basically letting his cattle roam all over someone else's land. I know nothing of the man, but that seems dickish behavior.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 April, 2014, 10:13:46 PM

A certain section of the US media (http://www.infowars.com/20-cowboys-break-fed-blockade-in-nevada-retrieve-cattle/) would like this to become Obama's Waco. If the Federalés start alleging that the excellently named Clive Bundy has been sleeping with underage calves in his herd and training them in the use of assault weapons, you'll know the tanks are about to move in.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 April, 2014, 11:17:30 PM
Fuck the poor (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBuC_0-d-9Y)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judda fett on 11 April, 2014, 12:13:10 AM
Fuck Joffrey. Fuck the Queen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 April, 2014, 12:34:30 AM
Quote from: judda fett on 11 April, 2014, 12:13:10 AM
Fuck Joffrey. Fuck the Queen.

Bloody hell, how many times do I have to tell you people: he's not an inbred boy-king, he's just a very short president.

(http://darkroom.sundayworld.com/800/0/8b392d4307a25bfc932dcebab4f5e22b:07a57802cf8c30095996c67aeeac9f76/sabina-coyne-president-of-ireland-michael-d-higgins-queen-elizabeth-ii-and-the-duke-of-edinburgh-attend-a-state-banquet-at-windsor-castle-during-the-first-state-visit-to-the-uk-by-an-irish-president)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2014, 01:51:37 AM
My God... it's full of tsars...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 April, 2014, 08:56:21 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2014, 01:51:37 AM
My God... it's full of tsars...
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 April, 2014, 09:30:40 AM
What exactly is that growing out of the little Irish geezer's head?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 11 April, 2014, 03:38:52 PM
Hair?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 April, 2014, 04:40:29 PM
I think it's one of those implants that Lobot had in Empire Strikes Back.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 April, 2014, 04:50:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 April, 2014, 12:34:30 AM
Bloody hell, how many times do I have to tell you people: he's not an inbred boy-king, he's just a very short president.



(http://i1.cdnds.net/13/24/618x324/movies_smaugtrailer9.jpg)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 April, 2014, 05:06:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 April, 2014, 04:50:10 PM
(http://i1.cdnds.net/13/24/618x324/movies_smaugtrailer9.jpg)

Ah, so that's what the 'D' stands for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 11 April, 2014, 09:22:43 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 10 April, 2014, 10:13:46 PM

A certain section of the US media (http://www.infowars.com/20-cowboys-break-fed-blockade-in-nevada-retrieve-cattle/) would like this to become Obama's Waco. If the Federalés start alleging that the excellently named Clive Bundy has been sleeping with underage calves in his herd and training them in the use of assault weapons, you'll know the tanks are about to move in.

There's a ad on that site for a competition to win a AR-15! That reminds me of a story I forgot to link to ages ago, where a local militia controlled by a police chief held a town under siege. (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/08/03/armed-militia-holding-pennsylvania-town-hostage/) There is a follow up to that story here. (http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2013/10/mark_kessler_gilberton_militia.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 April, 2014, 05:06:53 PM

Champion of justice, The Daily Mail, runs story exposing the sickening corruption (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608606/No-ID-no-checks-vouchers-sob-stories-The-truth-shock-food-bank-claims.html) behind the nation's sinister network of food banks, where folk can - get this - apparently just walk in and get food! A furious and scandalised - but obviously bewildered - nation respond by mistakenly increasing donations to the Just Giving page of the charity (http://www.justgiving.com/crack-uk-hunger) which administers the volunteer-staffed food banks by a factor of six.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 April, 2014, 06:36:49 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 20 April, 2014, 05:06:53 PM...the sickening corruption[/url] behind the nation's sinister network of food banks, where folk can - get this - apparently just walk in and get food!

Truly despicable crap, bordering on inhuman.  Anyone who thinks that for someone using a foodbank it is as simple as 'just walk in and get food' has never, ever, had to depend on public charity from strangers.    The 'means test' is that you are using a foodbank.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 20 April, 2014, 06:41:15 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 20 April, 2014, 05:06:53 PM

Champion of justice, The Daily Mail, runs story exposing the sickening corruption (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608606/No-ID-no-checks-vouchers-sob-stories-The-truth-shock-food-bank-claims.html) behind the nation's sinister network of food banks, where folk can - get this - apparently just walk in and get food! A furious and scandalised - but obviously bewildered - nation respond by mistakenly increasing donations to the Just Giving page of the charity (http://www.justgiving.com/crack-uk-hunger) which administers the volunteer-staffed food banks by a factor of six.

I saw that earlier today, unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 April, 2014, 06:45:31 PM
Can I suggest contacting this organisation and reporting them: http://www.charityfraudline.co.uk/about
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 April, 2014, 07:16:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 April, 2014, 06:36:49 PM
Anyone who thinks that for someone using a foodbank it is as simple as 'just walk in and get food' has never, ever, had to depend on public charity from strangers. The 'means test' is that you are using a foodbank

Lord Rothermere's own article details how a nice pensioner took down his lying hack's contact details and asked why he needed to use their services - "our reporter explained he had been unemployed for a few months and had been caught out by higher than expected winter fuel bills and was strapped for cash and food. He added that his wife had left her job and was not earning and that they had two children to care for. After asking for details of how much Jobseekers' Allowance was received, the assessor's questions turned to the dietary requirements of the reporter and his family". The only folk The Mail have uncovered abusing the services of food banks are themselves.

It's not an original point, but there's a fantastic irony in them running this bizarrely mean-spirited, pointless shrug of a story during the weekend when Christians meditate on the ultimate act of selfless sacrifice by the fella who treated a bunch of strangers to all the loaves and fishes they could eat. Look at their liar's big haul, by the way; I could get that lot - intended to feed a family of four - from Tesco's value range and Lidl for a little over a tenner. It looks like the greedy fraudsters have helped themselves to some of the charity's own-brand biscuits too:

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/19/article-0-1D35441300000578-906_299x464.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 20 April, 2014, 08:05:34 PM
Just reading this now, it is never the time to pull off this bogus headline grabbing vileness; but coinciding with Easter (and all of what it means to a great many people) is awful. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2014, 09:47:02 PM
Tell me you are even remotely surprised that the current government has declared war on the concept of charity.  Tell me you believe they even know what charity is.

The Mail is at least consistent in its vileness, though it's just towing the government line, which is that food banks are bad not because of what they are, but because they have entered the popular lexicon, IDS having accused food bank charities of trying to grab headlines and manipulate how people feel with statistics that probably weren't accurate, which is entirely consistent for a man who decried benefits fraudsters and then 24 hours later supported Maria Miller without an ounce of shame.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 20 April, 2014, 11:57:49 PM
It's kind of a pish story, too. What a disaster!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 April, 2014, 09:24:27 AM
Horrible, vile piece of work. Isn't about time someone, anyone, knocked the Mail off their high horse of descrimination?

Oh, but the comments are a picture of stupidity to boot. A given on the Mail site. The readership is just a wretched as the paper itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 April, 2014, 09:31:35 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 21 April, 2014, 09:24:27 AMThe readership is just a wretched as the paper itself.

That would presumably be the Mail's argument (in essence, if not expression) - it certainly shifts enough copies/clicks.  However, the swing in donations would suggest some decency that isn't being catered for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 April, 2014, 11:17:17 AM
The Mail must be doing something right.  The readership is obviously very diverse, lovers and haters seem to read it in equal measure, which of course is, I should imagine, The Mail's business plan.  Sauchie, for example, seems to be an avid reader!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 April, 2014, 11:57:42 AM
Herm...I should probably have punctuated that statement with "Some of (the readership...)". My apologies for sounding rude.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 April, 2014, 12:04:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 21 April, 2014, 11:57:42 AM
Herm...I should probably have punctuated that statement with "Some of (the readership...)". My apologies for sounding rude.

No, I think you were right the first time. I'd like to tell you that you were wrong, because my parents and in-laws read the MoS and have as long as I can remember, but then I was at an Easter lunch with them yesterday and had to listen to my mother's 'hilarious' anecdote about being terrified on a plane because the co-pilot's name was Mohammed.  'Wretched' is the word.

All of us who follow Twitter links to the latest Mail outrage, and then spread the word, are complicit in it maintaining its current successfully horrid direction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 April, 2014, 02:11:19 PM
My usual schtick when discussing the Mail is to point out that it started life as a tabloid that took potshots at national heroes and whose founder was a personal friend of Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, but I have come to realise that this is grossly unfair to its current staff and editors and there's a great deal of difference between the Mail of yesterday and the Mail of today: the Mail of yesterday was anti-British, anti-poor, anti-labour, anti-semetic, anti-suffrage, anti-immigration, anti-arts and was full of slanted editorial pieces that pushed an imperialist viewpoint that technically didn't qualify as "outdated" because it was based on a notion of the country that never truly existed outside the minds of the worst kind of manipulative bigots, while the Mail of today sexualises children.

Quote from: TordelBack on 21 April, 2014, 12:04:16 PMAll of us who follow Twitter links to the latest Mail outrage, and then spread the word, are complicit in it maintaining its current successfully horrid direction.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/kitten-block/

YOUR WELCOME1
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 21 April, 2014, 04:29:56 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 20 April, 2014, 05:06:53 PM
A furious and scandalised - but obviously bewildered - nation respond by mistakenly increasing donations to the Just Giving page of the charity (http://www.justgiving.com/crack-uk-hunger) which administers the volunteer-staffed food banks by a factor of six.

No such thing as bad publicity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 April, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2014, 09:47:02 PM
Tell me you are even remotely surprised that the current government has declared war on the concept of charity.  Tell me you believe they even know what charity is.

The Tories do believe in a sort of Victorian philanthropy - eg. The Big Society - which they rather transparently would like to see replace the welfare state.

The specific issue Tories have with food banks is that they just don't understand why such things exist. IDS clearly believes a food bank is a sort of Marxist ploy to discredit his department's policies, and he has many supporters who pretty much feel the same. Obviously we're talking about rich people who have an almost total lack of empathy, so it's no wonder they can't imagine being poor enough not to be able to afford food, let alone that this might be the fault of their policies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 April, 2014, 07:42:00 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 April, 2014, 02:11:19 PM
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/kitten-block/

YOUR WELCOME1

Arsom.  Now if only my interactions with my own family could be mediated by Firefox...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 April, 2014, 10:09:13 PM
DadBlock Plus?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 April, 2014, 10:12:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 April, 2014, 10:09:13 PM
DadBlock Plus?

Norton Auntievirus.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 22 April, 2014, 11:45:27 AM
Awful piece from the DM there.  I do hate the way they constantly vilify poor people and charities. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 April, 2014, 02:32:27 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 21 April, 2014, 10:12:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 April, 2014, 10:09:13 PM
DadBlock Plus?

Norton Auntievirus.

Sauchie wins!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 April, 2014, 03:56:42 PM
Update...

Nothing much has happened since the "benefits meeting" (where I agreed to claim housing benefit on provision that the Council do all the paperwork - which they agreed to). I have had a couple of letters from them, which (for reasons arising from the eighteen months or so of correspondence which basically state that I'm simply not going to read anything the Council sends me until it pays its bill for my services (dealing with their paperwork) and various fines (the Legal Notice on my front door explains that anyone turning up without an appointment is liable to a fine of £5,000, for example), which now stands at just north of £41,000) I've been returning these to sender unread. I have provided the Council with specific reply-paid envelopes which they can use for specific purposes such as paying up, negotiating the rent I pay (which I diligently knock off what they owe me every month) or requesting assistance in their dealings with the DWP but these envelopes have not been used. It's been business as usual for the last couple of months. All quiet.

Today - a hand-delivered "Notice of Eviction" appeared in my letterbox. It's unsigned and contains the addresses of both the Council and the Court but fails to mention which of those august bodies issued this document. It goes on to explain what is going to be done to me by bailiffs and how I can go on my knees to the Court at any time. Yeah, sure.

I check my records and this is exactly the same as the last one I got back in January - only the time and date of the eviction have changed. But this one was not preceeded by a letter from the Court informing me of a hearing - so they must be basing this new Notice on the original, discredited hearing.

So I get my red Sharpie and write on the Notice: CONSENT WITHHELD. I DO NOT RECOGNIZE YOU. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT. I DO NOT HAVE AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY WITH YOU. NO VALUE ASSURED. NO LIABILITY. RETURNED TO SENDER. THANK YOU. Then I write out their latest bill; previous balance, minus my rent payments at the rate I promised, plus £100 for dealing with today's 'threatening letter' and various late payment fees (£25 per week per unpaid bill - it's a pain in the arse to keep track of but this week there were ten bills another two weeks overdue and one bill one week overdue - another £525 on the total!) and staple the bill to it.

Into an A4 envelope and straight back to the Council. The same guy in the Council gets everything I return - from form-letters to letters I've had to hold up to the light or half open to check for the Council's logo to free calendars and magazines - it all gets sent back to him. Poor guy. Still, he is the one trying to evict me. This time, though, I decide to be magnanimous and use a stamp.

What I'm trying to do is avoid playing the game. I've likened this whole commercial law system to Monopoly before and this latest "Notice" is an invitation to play their game and to submit to the rules of their game. What I've just done (I think) is decline their invitation. As I do not stand accused of a crime and am therefore not subject to a mandatory trial then I am perfectly free to decline the court's assistance in the dispute between the Council and I - which dispute I am perfectly open to negotiate with the Council about.

Of course, this probably won't stop the bailiffs turning up again next month - it didn't last time - but it is on record now that I refused to yield my jurisdiction to the Council. I will not renounce my sovereignty to a body put in place to serve me. All I can do now is hold steady and hope that this time will be like last time. So long as they stick to their rules (and here a good file full of downloaded legislation and a couple of law dictionaries helps you to make sure that they know that you know what they're permitted to do) I think (hope) I'll be able to hold them off again.

Let me know if this js annoying or boring. I thought that this time around I'd go into a little more detail for anyone who's interested, try to explain my perspective a bit and let you be the judge.


And finally, damn you, Sauchie, for your superior punnery!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 April, 2014, 05:22:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 April, 2014, 03:56:42 PM
Let me know if this is annoying or boring. I thought that this time around I'd go into a little more detail for anyone who's interested, try to explain my perspective a bit and let you be the judge

Not in any way annoying or boring, but I hope you appreciate that a few of us were really concerned for your welfare during the last tussle. The neat inversion contained in your idea of billing your adversaries for dealing with their unwanted correspondence and unscheduled visits made me pish myself laughing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2014, 04:20:42 PM
Ach, don't worry, Sauchie. I know the risks and if it all goes breasts aloft then I've got nobody to blame but myself.

Just been watching a really useful documentary called The Four Horsemen (http://m.youtube.com/?reload=7&rdm=12hj2cki#/watch?v=5fbvquHSPJU) over on YouTube. Here's the blurb:

FOUR HORSEMEN is an award winning independent feature documentary which lifts the lid on how the world really works.

As we will never return to 'business as usual' 23 international thinkers, government advisors and Wall Street money-men break their silence and explain how to establish a moral and just society.

FOUR HORSEMEN is free from mainstream media propaganda -- the film doesn't bash bankers, criticise politicians or get involved in conspiracy theories. It ignites the debate about how to usher a new economic paradigm into the world which would dramatically improve the quality of life for billions.

Well worth a watch.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 April, 2014, 04:50:44 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 22 April, 2014, 05:22:35 PMThe neat inversion contained in your idea of billing your adversaries for dealing with their unwanted correspondence and unscheduled visits made me pish myself laughing.

I wanted to charge my credit card company for my time but ended up just cancelling the card instead - though I did some online research and found that a great many people have successfully charged companies for the time taken to deal with payment demands.  Basically, the impression we have of such corporate entities as faceless apathetic machines that expect to be obeyed is entirely accurate, as the vast majority of successful billings occur when the companies don't show up in small claims court to dignify the claims and this automatically causes the claimant to win by default (the precedent for this was set by a large number of people fed up with the badgering and arrogance of the TV licencing bods).  There's often a counter-claim that these bills are invalid because no business agreement for your services is entered into by the company (an agreement requiring consent from both parties), but by sending letters to a private residence companies are actively soliciting your services if you've already established that you will be charging for your counsel.
Basically, it's perfectly legit to bill people badgering you for money so they will attempt to ignore you, but you will have a case so long as you stay the course, keep a straight face, and don't try to be a smartarse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2014, 05:17:17 PM
Very true, Prof. It's a tactic that's very effective against debt collectors and usually gets rid of them after just 3 letters.
.

Letter 1 (sent by the debt collection company) arrives and I basically reply with just 3 points: First, I have no contract with the agency; second, I don't want a contract with the agency and, thirdly, any further letters from the agency will be charged at £100 per letter.
.

Letter 2 comes, usually another form letter that ignores everything I said in reply to Letter 1. Once again, I largely ignore the contents of Letter 2 and stick to my "no contract existing or desired" position and bill the agency for £100 - as I promised I would.
.

Letter 3 is usually the last and I treat it exactly the same as Letter 2. Letter 3 generally explains that the "debt" is being handed back to their "client" and that the debt collection agency is not going to pay its bill. I send them another bill anyway (with built-in late payment charges that increase at £25 per week per unpaid bill) and then the letters just stop.
.

Dealing with it this way is so easy - they don't even turn up on my doorstep - which they would if I simply ignored them.
.

The key is to understand that private debt collection agencies can only take your money if you agree to it - which is why they bully people with (empty) threats about court trials (a Big Lie, as debt is not a crime) and legal fees.
.

So yeah, bill the buggers back. They'll never pay you but they do know that if it all goes to court, and provided you've done it correctly, then you have a cast-iron counterclaim against them so they have no option, either legally or lawfully, but to give up.
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 May, 2014, 06:42:35 PM

FERGIE: You're gonna get me killed.

DREDD: There's a maniac loose in this city !

FERGIE: What a coincidence, there's one out here too!

The weighty themes explored by the 1995 film which gave Rob Schneider his most famous role obviously left a deep impression on the actor of his generation. In an interview for US radio, Deuce Bigalow (male gigolo) documents The Land Of The Free's sad slide into totalitarian fascism:

QuoteSchneider struck on ominous tone when discussing the path he sees the country on.

"Democracies don't end well. We are sliding very fast towards fascism. It's an ugly kind of thing. There's this kind of mob mentality that we have to be careful of," he said. He believes comedians are pressured toward one side of the political spectrum.

"There's a polarization that's happening...I do think you look can look at government and go, 'Wow, it is out of control now,' and if you do criticize or tend to be not directly along a liberal stand, you can get murdered," Schneider commented.

Schneider was very critical of the President's handling of the economy and he feels certain policies are impacting businesses. "There's not one segment of business under the Obama administration that hasn't been hurt...he attacks for-profit schools, which is totally an elitist thing from a guy that went to Harvard. I think for free, by the way," Schneider said.

He was also critical of the media for being overly influenced by the government and not standing up for the American people. "We don't really have freedom of the press. It's owned by about eight different companies, and it doesn't really express or help the average American," Schneider stated.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2014/05/02/rob-schneider-tells-chris-stigall-we-are-sliding-very-fast-towards-fascism/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 May, 2014, 07:01:45 PM
It's not just the U.S. - it's everywhere.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 May, 2014, 07:32:59 PM
Sad to see him succumbing to the usual Republican lies about Obama's economic impact (PO has actually extended tax cuts for businesses started by Dubya and yet still massively reduced the national debt) because now Schneider's many fans will oh wait never mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 May, 2014, 09:06:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 May, 2014, 07:32:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 May, 2014, 07:01:45 PM
It's not just the U.S. - it's everywhere.

Sad to see him succumbing to the usual Republican lies about Obama's economic impact (PO has actually extended tax cuts for businesses started by Dubya and yet still massively reduced the national debt) because now Schneider's many fans will oh wait never mind.

I'm not sure the red party have the monopoly on lies, half-truths, and insinuations, but I was baffled by the contradiction Schneider apparently found in the fact his POTUS studied at Harvard at no cost to himself and now promotes the idea of free public education for everyone. Don't worry, Sharky; I'm pretty sure Schneider's concerns regarding the power the state enjoys over the individual will disappear sometime in late 2016/early 2017.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 05 May, 2014, 05:54:11 PM

http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/ (http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/)

interesting...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 May, 2014, 06:43:50 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 05 May, 2014, 05:54:11 PM

http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/ (http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/)

interesting...

It's an interesting piece, but I'm always dubious about the fact-checking process of someone who can't be bothered with spell-checking...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 May, 2014, 10:45:45 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 05 May, 2014, 05:54:11 PM
http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/ (http://www.golemxiv.co.uk/2014/03/ukraine-some-thoughts-on-who-is-playing-for-what/)

Probably, but there's no law against egging someone else on, and both the US and Russia have done so. Slavoy Zizek explains why (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/06/superpower-capitalist-world-order-ukraine).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 May, 2014, 09:34:38 AM
I'm not a UK resident and am not the best at following the news, so I've only heard of the Tories' Big Society policy recently.  On paper, it seems pretty close to how I'd like to see  my own country run: Giving more power to local government; making government data transparent; encouraging community mindedness.

But... there's something about it that doesn't add up.  That is not how Conservative governments work; and elitism and privilege still seem to be encouraged and community-mindedness thrown aside, following the legacy of Maggie herself.

But I don't have the facts, and admittedly I am biased against the Tories, because I am bitterly opposed to how they ran the UK in the past.  Would anyone care to fill me in about the workings of the Big Society?  Arguments from both sides are more than welcome.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2014, 09:51:28 AM
Big Society? Let me tell you about Big Society...

Today's the day; 12 noon - B-Day.

If things unfold as they did last time, the initial attack will come from Council agents at around 11:30, to soften me up for the deployment of the big gun (the bailiff) at precisely 12 noon.

As prepared as I can be, I sit and wait to defend my home and my person from the wolves unleashed by Big Society.

By 1pm the answer to that age-old conundrum should be known; who would win in a fight between a pack of wolves and a shark? One thing's for dead sure, the winner won't be society, big or otherwise. Society will only have won when it isn't in conflict with its own systems any more.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 May, 2014, 10:00:12 AM
best o luck Shark, keep your cool and keep the cameras running :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 May, 2014, 10:01:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2014, 09:51:28 AM
By 1pm the answer to that age-old conundrum should be known; who would win in a fight between a pack of wolves and a shark? One thing's for dead sure, the winner won't be society, big or otherwise. Society will only have won when it isn't in conflict with its own systems any more.

Rooting for you Sharky, keep calm, safe and well during the op. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2014, 10:10:34 AM
Thanks, guys. I'll file an ops-rep this afternoon - Great Spirit willing!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 12 May, 2014, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 May, 2014, 09:34:38 AM
Would anyone care to fill me in about the workings of the Big Society? 

My take is: you can vote (or not) for us to form a government, but we will absolve ourselves of any responsibility for the welfare of the society we wish to govern, so if your area's a shithole it's your own fault and there'll be none of that government interference to improve your lot. It's couching the removal of centrally and socially funded public services in terms that appeal to an idea of self governance and determination.

M.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2014, 12:50:51 PM
It's a soundbite with as much practical meaning as "we're in this together," meant to imply notions of a paradigm shift in methods of governance when things will actually continue on just as they have: expenses fiddling and benefit fraud is fine if you're rich but you're going to jail if you're poor, money meant for children will be stolen raided and used to fund the illusion that failed policies are working, underclasses such as immigrants, the poor and the sick will be scapegoated as a drain on resources, and fuck you, Joe Serf.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2014, 10:10:34 AM
Thanks, guys. I'll file an ops-rep this afternoon - Great Spirit willing!

Fingers crossed for you, Sharky.  I wouldn't have the balls for what you're doing, no matter how confrontational I like to appear through the anonymity filter of the web that puts brass ones on me and many other dickless web warriors.  I'd fold like a bitch and assume the position in a matter of microseconds, and even though I'm worried for you, I'm pulling for you and your act of civil disobedience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 May, 2014, 12:54:04 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2014, 12:50:51 PMI'd fold like a bitch and assume the position in a matter of microseconds, and even though I'm worried for you, I'm pulling for you and your act of civil disobedience.

What he said, although imagine I said 'paper airplane' instead of 'bitch', 'cos I'm an even bigger wuss..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 12 May, 2014, 01:00:15 PM
Oh, dear. Thought you'd gotten this all sorted after last time? Either way- best of British Shark!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 May, 2014, 06:10:15 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 May, 2014, 09:34:38 AM
I'm not a UK resident and am not the best at following the news, so I've only heard of the Tories' Big Society policy recently.  On paper, it seems pretty close to how I'd like to see  my own country run: Giving more power to local government; making government data transparent; encouraging community mindedness

It's not a policy, and no-one in the UK would associate the phrase with the virtues listed above. I've certainly never seen or heard freedom of information lumped in with hopes that pensioners will provide free babysitting services. Nobody I know in real life has ever used the phrase or could tell you what it means, and one year before the end of the coalition's term in office I've yet to read of a single example of it in practice in my area.

Cuts to public services have to be made because of Blair/Brown's financial mismanagement, the collapse of Western capitalism in 2008, and Tory ideology. The coalition's response is to hope that everyone will just rally round and replace essential services by volunteering in their own time and at their own expense. It's not a policy, but when Cameron's asked how social work departments are going to manage on less than half the budgets they had in previous years he can't say it'll all just sort itself out somehow, even if that's what it amounts to.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2014, 06:23:19 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 12 May, 2014, 06:10:15 PMThe coalition's response is to hope that everyone will just rally round and replace essential services by volunteering in their own time and at their own expense.

Actually, no - Lord Tebbit is on record as saying that food banks just encourage people to buy more junkfood with benefit money seeing as they don't have to spend it on essentials, and Ian Duncan Smith is on record attacking food banks as statistics-manipulating self-promotional egotists appealing to the base impulses and fears of the populace.  The Daily Mail has made its feelings known on the matter, too, so clearly charity and pulling together has never been part of the Tory agenda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 May, 2014, 06:26:21 PM
Thanks for your input, everyone - from how you've described Big Society, it's pretty much what I expected:  Hollow Tory rhetoric which can be manipulated to cover pretty much any policy they want it to cover.

And Sharky, best of luck.  As I've said before, your way of doing things definitely wouldn't be mine, but I really hope it works out well for you. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 May, 2014, 06:40:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2014, 12:50:51 PM
expenses fiddling and benefit fraud is fine if you're rich but you're going to jail if you're poor, money meant for children will be stolen raided and used to fund the illusion that failed policies are working, underclasses such as immigrants, the poor and the sick will be scapegoated as a drain on resources

>cough< Gary Barlow (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/gary-barlow-tax-avoidance-david-cameron-defends-take-that-singer-against-calls-he-should-give-back-obe-9354128.html) >cough<  Ironically, the policy of hoping that folk with too much time on their hands will supplant local authorities as providers of essential services might have had more traction in previous eras, when there were stay at home Mums, dole bludgers, and disability claimants hanging around all day with nothing better to do with themselves, but all three groups have been strongly encouraged back into the workforce in recent times.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 May, 2014, 06:40:56 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 12 May, 2014, 06:10:15 PM
Cuts to public services have to be made because of Blair/Brown's financial mismanagement, the collapse of Western capitalism in 2008, and Tory ideology.

The cuts, I have observed before, have nothing to with correcting financial mismanagement and everything to do with Tory ideology. If the Tories cared one jot about managing the public finances well, they wouldn't be throwing hundreds of millions of pounds into the black hole that is IDS' unworkable Universal Credit scheme. They wouldn't be giving away hundreds of millions of pounds of publicly owned assets to private companies in the form of academy schools. They wouldn't be paying ATOS (or whoever picks up the contract) hundreds of millions of pounds to harass sick and disabled people off benefit in the name of chasing £1.7bn in benefit fraud whilst cutting HMRC budgets so that they have a tenth of the resources to chase £70bn in unpaid tax. They wouldn't be implementing changes to the NHS that have cost £4bn in themselves and which suck still more cash away from front line services, forcing it to be spent instead on rising administration and legal costs.

In fact, the idea that almost any area of government policy has anything to do with good financial management is laughable when the aim almost exclusively seems to be finding mechanisms to shovel public cash into the pockets of private companies on whose boards the MPs and ministers concerned will almost find cushy directorships when they leave parliament.

Note that I'm not claiming that New Labour left the public finances in rude health. I believe, however, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Tories have seized on the issue as a wonderful pretext to comprehensively dismantle sixty years of public and social infrastructure.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2014, 07:10:44 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 May, 2014, 06:40:56 PMNote that I'm not claiming that New Labour left the public finances in rude health. I believe, however, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Tories have seized on the issue as a wonderful pretext to comprehensively dismantle sixty years of public and social infrastructure.

This is giving them far too much credit, Jim - they know full well that they're out in 2015 barring the kind of miracle that only comes with rigging the election wholesale and they're out to get what they can before that happens, which is why so many policies have been expensive political point-scoring like victimising the poor, or rushed-through fuck-ups like the postal service privatization that lost nearly a billion pounds of taxpayers' money.  Current Tory "ideology" is nothing more than a glorified ram-raid on the UK's finances, with each one out to fill their pockets before the election police arrive and drag them back into opposition.
But you know what?  Like I've said before: this coalition government has ultimately been good for the country, because it's shut up those wankers that harped on about how if the Tories ever got back in again they couldn't do much worse, and also highlighted what a spineless bunch of backstabbing cunts the Lib Dems really are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 May, 2014, 08:18:16 PM
All of the above! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 12 May, 2014, 08:33:10 PM
Sharky's plan to charge people for his time seems to be spreading:

(https://scontent-b-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1.0-9/q71/s720x720/10339698_706913866014387_7146758608164916286_n.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2014, 12:07:12 AM
Feck yeah, I saw that one on broadsheet.ie yesterday and immediately thought of Sharky
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 May, 2014, 07:40:16 AM
Fuuny, over the last few weeks i've been the target of dozens of fliers by various parties as this is my first local election. Reasonable I assume, but i've received no less than three UKIP one's. My stomach is churning and my blood pressure rises with each growing day as my hatred for these people grows ever more. If it wasn't for Nick Griffin at the BNP, UKIP would certainly be the most loathed candidate by myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 May, 2014, 07:52:15 AM
Jesus Hawk, count yourself lucky, my local candidates consist of ex-paramilitary mother of 10 kids murderers or religious nuts of the Torquemada type. There are  a couple of ineffectual middle ground parties, who I reluctantly vote for in the knowledge they will never have any real power. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 13 May, 2014, 10:20:17 AM
Nothing more from Sharky- hopefully this isn't the sign things went bad for him...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 May, 2014, 10:31:28 AM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 13 May, 2014, 10:20:17 AM
Nothing more from Sharky- hopefully this isn't the sign things went bad for him...
fingers crossed  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 May, 2014, 11:31:28 AM
Very troubling. Anyone in contact with him off-board? Hope he's alright!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 May, 2014, 12:17:25 PM
I e-mailed Shark early this morning to see how he was doing, but haven't heard anything back - I believe he uses his Kindle for email, so should be accessible if he's near any free wifi.  Hopefully he's just out and about with work, but can't help but think that we would have heard if he'd just seen them off like last time. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2014, 12:49:49 PM
Was thinking about doing the same but now don't want to crowd him in case the worst has come to pass.
Fingers still crossed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 13 May, 2014, 01:04:01 PM
I do have a phone number for him so I've sent him a text. Nothing as yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 13 May, 2014, 01:56:10 PM
Oh dear, hope Shark okay? His profile shows his last on here on that day?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2014, 05:04:24 PM
Just spent 26 hours in the iso cubes and have collected a goodly arrangement of new cuts, bruises and gouges but, hey, I'm a proper rebel now! I'll write a fuller report when I've found somewhere to crash.

And thanks all for your kind thoughts - really cheered me up on 'getting out'!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 May, 2014, 05:10:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2014, 05:04:24 PM
Just spent 26 hours in the iso cubes and have collected a goodly arrangement of new cuts, bruises and gouges but, hey, I'm a proper rebel now! I'll write a fuller report when I've found somewhere to crash.

And thanks all for your kind thoughts - really cheered me up on 'getting out'!

Bloody hell man.  At least you're still with us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 May, 2014, 05:20:00 PM
Yikes Shark - relieved you're (relatively) okay!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 May, 2014, 05:37:05 PM
Glad to hear you're ok buddy; not so glad to hear about cuts and bruises. Keep in touch with the thread, evidently a lot of people are very concerned for your wellbeing. Z ps: leave one of the guys a contactable number.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2014, 06:23:25 PM
Hope you're well despite current circumstances, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 13 May, 2014, 07:10:47 PM
I've just seen a European Election Broadcast by the BNP.

It was weird.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2014, 09:47:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2014, 05:04:24 PM
Just spent 26 hours in the iso cubes and have collected a goodly arrangement of new cuts, bruises and gouges but, hey, I'm a proper rebel now! I'll write a fuller report when I've found somewhere to crash.

And thanks all for your kind thoughts - really cheered me up on 'getting out'!

Jesus.  Glad you're (relatively) ok! Sorry to hear you've lost your gaff though; I hope it all works out for you
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Third Estate Ned on 13 May, 2014, 10:34:26 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 13 May, 2014, 07:10:47 PM
I've just seen a European Election Broadcast by the BNP.

It was weird.

This would be laughable if it wasn't also weird:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK0dQHSuVoc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK0dQHSuVoc)

Looks delicious. Not sure if those spuds are 100% indigenous, though.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 May, 2014, 10:47:40 PM
I don't know what to make of these elections. Or the European Union.

I think it's a good idea, but politics is where good ideas go to die.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dode C on 13 May, 2014, 11:38:16 PM
Good grief Sharky! Sounds like the past couple of days have been hard on you. Hope you're bearing up as well as can be expected and I really hope things work out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 May, 2014, 12:11:44 AM
Sleeping in a friend's workshop tonight and already the possibility of an actual writer's garret loft thing to move into. Will post more tomorrow - surprisingly tired at the moment for some reason.
.
Again, thank you all for your touching concern - as I think (hope) I've said before,  this situation is entirely of my own construction so I really don't deserve it but I'm jolly glad it's there :-)
.
Also, please don't worry - although I haven't particularly enjoyed the last couple of days it has been a terribly informative and inspiring time (lol - I'm talking like I've just served 26 years at Shawshank instead of a day in a  Skelmersdale cop shop cell!).
.
When (if) I get my computer back, there will certainly be at least one Iso Cube Dredd story to be typed into it.
.
Thanks again - I love you all :-X

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2014, 07:35:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 May, 2014, 12:11:44 AM
Sleeping in a friend's workshop tonight and already the possibility of an actual writer's garret loft thing to move into.

That sounds pretty damn nice.  While I hate the simple-minded saying 'Everything happens for a reason' (of course it does - the tsunami that killed tens of thousands in 2004 happened because of an earthquake, for example), maybe some good will come out of this whole sorry mess and you'll have a really decent place to live. 

Also, I'm simultaneously dreading and looking forward to your iso-cube tales!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 May, 2014, 07:55:26 AM
Chin up, keep walking forward and bloody well slug any sod that tries to stop you. We're thinking of you, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 14 May, 2014, 12:10:09 PM
Even the relative newbies like me are behind you Sharkers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 14 May, 2014, 04:50:01 PM
Sorry to hear of your recent problems Sharky.  Thinking of you mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 May, 2014, 05:20:51 PM
Totally endorse Hawks comments re slugging in the figurative sense, do it for real and these bastards have you. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 May, 2014, 09:41:47 PM
Been a hectic couple of days so haven't had time to write a report yet, sorry.

The thing that has cheered me the most has been my neighbours. Even the ones I didn't think liked me very much have been helping out and my close friends have been simply outstanding. I have been close to tears several times, not at my situation (which even I'm surprised to be taking almost in my stride) but at the seemingly fathomless bounds of human compassion. As one neighbour, who I never looked on as a friend, said - I akways have the time to stop and talk to her in the street and claims that I once helped her home with heavy shopping bags, although I have no memory of this it is the kind of thing I'm often doing just because it's in my nature.

Right now I'm relaxing at a good neighbour's house after being fed and waiting for the bath to fill. All my stuff, except the things I was stood up in when I got arrested, are still inside my flat, which has been sealed closed with metal shutters over all the windows and door, and I've been lent a tent (the garret fell through, unfortunately) and given clothes and food and a camping stove and all kinds of things.

On Monday I was disgusted with humanity but over the last two days I have re-learned how utterly brilliant ordinary human beings are. Take government out of the picture and people just blossom. Amazing and very, very humbling.

>wipes tear from eye<

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 May, 2014, 11:38:41 PM
Aye, well, people are at their most decent when you treat them decently, which you obviously have.  Glad to hear it, although a tent might not be quite the outcome I'd have hoped for it's a lot better than nothing.  Any reason given for effectively nicking all your stuff, Shark? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 15 May, 2014, 12:05:04 AM
Jeez-o Shark. Just take care of yourself, OK. I hope that things work out for you. :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 12:27:48 AM
Naw, Tordels - the Council isn't big on explaining itself - probably because it can't.

Now, there is a glimmer of hope (and it IS just a glimmer) that I can come out of this even but a lot of things have to go right and my plans have to be well laid and executed first - so, fingers crossed...

Anyhoo, I'm relaxing at a friend's house at the moment after enjoying my first bath in days and finally getting rid of that antiseptic cell stink and noticing a couple of fading bruises on my back which are now too faint to show up on a photo - unfortunately (at least in this case) I never did bruise very easily.

As promised, here's what happened:

Monday, 12 noon on the dot this time, the bailiffs turned up and, for the first ten minutes at least, things went more or less the same as the first time. Then it all started to go wrong. One of the outside invaders, I don't know who, began attacking the front door locks with a hammer. I immediately placed my back to the door, pushing with all my might. Bang! The Yale lock disintegrates and bits of it bounce off the back of my head. Bang! The deadlock is chiselled to oblivion and four or five of them start pushing at the door which now has only a security chain and me pushing it shut. The strain is enormous, and painful, but I have a wall to push against with my leg so the door stays mostly shut. So they fetch a battering ram, a thick wooden fence post of my own shed if you please, and begin to coordinate. Bang! Bang! Bang! And finally they get the bolt cutters through the gap and the chain is finally cut. Now it's just me holding the door shut as they repeatedly charge it. Somehow, soaked in sweat, quivering with strain and somewhere between abject terror and towering rage, all the time mindful of my language and attitude to give them no excuss, I manage to keep them out.

A pause. I'm panting like a Grand National winner and so are they. I can hear them talking but I can't tell what about. Then they begin battering at the door, and my back, again.

Crash! The bedroom window is smashed in and two coppers enter. That's it. Surrounded.

The two intruders wrestle me to the ground. I resist passively, not lashing out or punching or swearing but scrunching myself up, pulling away from every grab, writhing, generally being awkward. The door finally swings open, I manage to kick it shut again but it's a futile gesture. Another copper joins the frey and it's only a matter of time before they force the handcuffs on me.

They arrest me for "breach of the peace" - I refuse to "understand". How, I ask, can I breach the peace in my iwn home with all the windows and door locked, curtains shut, telly off and all by myself? Of course they don't listen and drag me outside, cuffed, with my neighbours looking on. One of them takes charge of my dog, poorittle bugger was terrified (thank God he didn't bite anyone or they'd have had him destroyed, I think) and spirited him away to safety. There were two police vans, at least one police car, two bailiffs, a smattering of council officials (including Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale - the architect of this treachery) and a carpenter or two are there. All to deal with one Legendary Shark.

The same neighbour offers to get my tobacco tin for me and I agree because we have to wait for another police van to turn up to take me away in! I tell her where my baccy tin is but the coppers won't let her in and send a PCSO in to get it. The small van arrives and, as they're bundling me into it, the PCSO appears with my baccy tin and a grin. "Found this in the tin," he says, holding up a small bag of weed, mostly empty, with enough to make one, maybe two small joints. They then charge me with possession of a Class B drug as well. I shrug. "That's definitely my tin but I didn't see you retrieve it and I can't know where that bag you're holding came from."

Then in the van and off to Skelmersdale cop shop. On the way, the arresting officer tells me a 'joke' - "how many police officers does it take to crack an egg? None - it fell down the stairs."

The journey seems to take forever...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 01:09:55 AM
At Skelmersdale police station. The Desk Sergeant, a lovely woman, fills in the arrest report. As the arresting officer explains what happened she types it all into the computer and then, as the details emerge, she stops typing. She doesn't say it out loud but she knows that this is a dodgy arrest - I tell her what I've been telling my kidnappers all the time; the police have no authority to act on a civil warrant; their role at evictions is simply to be on hand to prevent a breach of the peace in case I kick off at the bailiffs or the bailiffs kick off at me.

There is an awkward pause. "Oh - and we found a Class B drug on him." The seargent's face relaxes slightly but thank God I was paying attention.

"Excuse me, where did you say you found that?"

"Er, in his flat." The arresting officer holds up the small bag with it's pitifully meagre contents and the Sergeant's face again takes on a look of consternation. They take the cuffs off and put me in a cell with the door open while they go off for a conference. After this, the initial arrest for 'breach of the peace' is never mentioned again and I'm charged with possession of a Class B drug. I again refuse to understand. They read me my rights and I reject them. "You do what?"

"I reject the rights and privileges you offer and choose instead to stand under my Common Law rights."

They're visibly worried now but lock me in a cell anyway.

I'm nearly 48 years old and have never been arrested before. Being locked in that small, bare cell with nothing to occupy myself with was bloody hard work. I've often heard people saying they felt the walls closing in on them but never experienced that feeling until that time. I was surprised how short a time it took for me to just want to scream - but there was a cctv camera in the cell and so I forced myself to be calm, ran through stories and story ideas in my head to keep my mind busy.

Some hours later a pleasant young copper escorted me from the cell to the interview room to take my statement about the weed. As he's fiddling about putting the cassette tapes into the recorder we chat amiably.

"I don't know why we still use these old fashioned things," he says, almost embarrassed by the ancient technology.

"It's because it's analogue and very difficult to tamper with - it's far easier to manipulate digital recordings," I tell him.

He's impressed. "Oh wow, yeah, I never thought of that. You know, I do like talking to i telligent, well-informed people," he says.

I smile. "You won't do in five minutes," I say with a smile.

He laughs and asks his first question, simply requesting I verify my name and address.

"I neither confirm nor deny my identity."

His face darkens. "As you were told when you were arrested, if you fail to mention something..."

"Doesn't apply to me," I said, "I rejected those proffered rights and am standing under Common Law."

He decides to move swiftly on, asking if the cannabis is mine, where I get it, who's my dealer and so on. To every question I answer, calmly and with a faint smile, "no comment." In the end he loses patience and terminates the interview having learned precisely one thing - that he really doesn't like talking to i telligent, well informed people.

I'm taken back to the Desk Sergeant, a man with bloodshot eyes and terminal boredom, who says I'm free to go - if I just sign this form admitting to possession.

"No."

She's faken aback. "But... that just means we'll have to lock you back up again."

I shrug, turn away and walk back to that dreaded cell of my own volition. They're properly flummoxed now but it's lesson time. I don't see another human face until the morning and spend one of the longest nights of my life alone with my thoughts and the fevered rantings and incessant banging on the door of the crack-head in a nearby cell.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 15 May, 2014, 01:25:22 AM
Bloody hell, Shark. You're an eccentric bugger but I wish you all the best!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 02:16:03 AM
At some time between 11 and 12 thd next morning, a civilian officer opens the cell door. She informs me that it's time for me to be photographed, finger printed and DNA tested. I politely decline the offer. "You what?"

"I'm not a criminal. I have committed no crime and am standing under common law, therefore I do not consent to this."

Her face darkens, I seem to be having that effect quite a lot, and she informs me that if I don't comply, I will be forced.

"I can't stop you but neither will I assist you. I can't fight you but I will not cooperate."

She storms out of my cell, which I'm beginning to warm to, strangely, slamming the heavy door shut in frustration. Some 30 minutes later five coppers erupt into the cell and escort me to the fingerprinting room. They try to take my photo but I keep my head down and refuse to look at the camera. One of them grabs my head and forces it up into position and so I screw my eyes shut and pull a face. They take the photo anyway and move on to the fingerprinting. With five of them holding onto me and struggling to uunclench my fists and mash my writhing hands onto the scanner plate it must've taken them half an hour to complete the task and they're getting more and more frustrated.

Then comes the DNA test. I clamp my mouth tightly shut as the civilian officer advances with a swab. Now, you have to remember that by this time I have one copper clamped on my right arm, one on my left and the others just hanging around me lending a hand whenever needed. The civilian officer forces her probe into my mouth, nicking my lip slightly. It hurts and I instinctively grab for the swab, which is in the civilian officer's hand.

One of the coppers, seeing this, shouts "Assault! Take him down!" and the next thing I know I'm on the deck with five coppers kneeling on me. While I'm distracted, the swab is again thrust into my mouth but I manage to clamp it between my teeth, bite the end off and spit it onto the floor. They give up and throw me back into my cell, informing me that I now had "assaulting a police officer" added to the charge of "possession". I again refuse to understand.

Many hours later I'm taken to Ormskirk Magistrate's Court for a hearing to decide if I need to go to trial. The possession charge evaporates completely into nothingness and initial breach of the peace charge (for which I was originally arrested, if you recall) was never mentioned. A trial date of June 26th was set for my "assault" trial, the cuffs were removed and I was released on unconditional bail. I made sure to treat the court and all its officials with the utmost respect - they have, after all, done me no wrong and seem like decent people. I do, however, make sure that tbe soliciter I've been saddled with mentions the initial unlawful arrest a d the fact that I thought the initial arresting officer was acting beyond his jurisdiction.

Then I was set free and came home to find my flat all sealed up with steel shutters, all my worldly possessions trapped inside, beyond my reach. At that point I almost gave up, almost despaired, until first one then another then yet more neighbours approached me with concern and offers of help.

So, as you may be able to deduce, I do have a chance - but it's a slim one. I won't spell it out in case Stephen Jackson is reading this but, if he (or anyone else involved) is reading this, I think they'd be right to be concerned.

There was more to it than I've been able to explain here, but not much and only details, and a few things slightly embellished for the sake of the narrative but, basically, this is what went down.

So, who would win in a fight between a pack of wolves and a shark? I think that still remains to be seen...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 May, 2014, 06:29:56 AM
Feckin' hell, mate, that's some story.  One of the most disturbing parts is the bit about the copper telling you the 'joke'.  I won't say ACAB, but most of the ones I've met are.
A tent to stay in... jesus.  Lucky it's coming up to summer; I really hope you can sort something more substantial out soon.
Surely they can't take your possessions off you though? That's not part of the eviction 'deal' as I understand it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 08:25:00 AM
Can't even tell you how upsetting a read that is mate, but you certainly tell it well. 

To go from 'breach of the peace' to 'possession' to 'assaulting a police officer' by simply sitting peacefully in your home (however contested the title) is completely shocking.  I'm a well-established naif, but the idea of police officers breaking your bedroom window and grappling with you because you refuse to allow your door to be stove in seems an appalling betrayal.  I've been the subject of a similar event, a police raid where my (rented) front door was battered while two armed gardai smashed in my (rented) kitchen window and climbed in, but that was on foot of a (mistaken) anti-terrorism warrant - and that at least  I can understand: the mistaken assumption was that I had committed a violent crime and would probably be armed.  I was sh*tting myself, but at least I knew, and very quickly they knew, that they had the wrong man.

What exactly had you done that warranted the aggression of those who are empowered to maintain public order?  Surely this was a matter for the local authority to resolve, not the cops?  Is any of this in society's interest, in the community's interest?

I do worry that there's an essential contradiction between your (fascinating, courageous, barmy and extremely risky) insistence on not recognising the authority of the process you find yourself fucked over by, and asserting the illegality of the same process.  I very much want to believe that the actions you describe so eloquently will (and should) be viewed as illegal, but how does that work if you yourself reject the legal code that judges are bound by?

Anyway, the important thing is that you seem to have emerged inexplicably hale from an experience that would have me blubbing in a corner, and you need to keep it that way.  Try to find a course that will be easier on you, you've sacrificed nearly everything by keeping faith with your ideas, you don't need to do anything more than try to get back to a more comfortable, safer existence. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 15 May, 2014, 12:54:53 PM
All the best to you, Shark.

As a general rule, it always amazes me how readily people put stuff on this forum that could be used against them (e.g. the Best Spliff ever thread) by employers or polis etc.  Is there a way for people to contact the Mods to get any posts they may have made foolishly, removed?


I've only ever folded like a jedi at the end of Revenge of the Sith when faced with authority figures

e.g. when suggesting that money fraudulently taken from one of my debit cards be reported as a crime
"No, sir, you don't want to do that. It's a bank issue".
"Yes, but the bank don't have the power to find the address to which all of the goods ordered from my card were delivered and shut it down. You should be doing something about that"
"Do you really want to push this. Sir. We suggest you don't".
"Er... OK, not really.".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 May, 2014, 01:51:38 PM
All the best Sharky - I would LOVE to see a copy of that mugshot though!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 May, 2014, 02:07:42 PM
Sorry about my last post - completely the wrong link. Any chance a mod could delete it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Stacey on 15 May, 2014, 02:17:57 PM
All the best Sharky. If anyone is going to triumph it will be you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2014, 03:22:40 PM
I'm just angry reading that story, Sharky, but would probably appreciate finally being in a position where I was both supremely angry and also had nothing to lose so that I could make people like Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale my new hobby.
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio

Quote from: Tiplodocus on 15 May, 2014, 12:54:53 PMIs there a way for people to contact the Mods to get any posts they may have made foolishly, removed?

The European courts in the last couple of days established that all citizens have "a right to be forgotten" by digital archives and searches, should they so wish, and that they can demand older data be purged (on the basis of its contemporary irrelevance) to prevent it coming up in searches someone might make.  Not that this stopped a UKIP councillor from using private investigators to track down a critic so that he could set the police on them: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/12/police-ask-blogger-remove-legitimate-tweet-ukip

So we know from stories like the one above that local government is not above wielding the constabulary like a club even when there's no legal basis for doing so.  Were I Sharky - and not dead by now as would likely be the case if I was - I'd try tracking down an ambulance-chaser to sue this Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale and his fellow cronies via the civil law they seem to treasure so much over basic decency.  If nothing else, I imagine harassing an elderly woman, using unregulated bailiffs to destroy a man's shed to use the debris as a battering ram to beat down the man's front door - and by proxy to batter the man while he attempted to stop this gang of intruders - and then use the police to stitch the man up not once but three times in the space of 24 hours and to enact an illegal search of his home, taking his DNA without consent and then stealing all his worldly possessions including his dog - I imagine all this will make for lovely local news soundbites just as European elections are coming up.

Is it possible for you to stand for election, Sharky?  You could do so on a single-issue platform of "firing Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale" - I can see the taglines on the posters already: "I don't like him."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 04:05:00 PM
Good point, Prof - election time is a great opportunity to gather "allies" and that running for office idea is genius!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 15 May, 2014, 04:36:21 PM
That's quite a series of events there Sharky.  This has all got very serious and please take care of yourself and make use of the help available e.g. citizens advice, etc.

As I understand, they have locked the house up with those shutters to prevent you re-entering the property and you will need to talk to them about removing your belongings soon or they can dispose of them. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 04:45:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 04:05:00 PM
Good point, Prof - election time is a great opportunity to gather "allies" and that running for office idea is genius!

The only problem with this (exciting, enticing) plan is that the hounds would descend on your online life (to say nothing of your real one) and rip you not one but several new ones.  There's enough rope on this forum alone to hang an army (pod? school? shiver? shoal? muching?) of Sharks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 May, 2014, 04:49:18 PM
The collective noun for sharks is a Shiver.

A shiver of sharks.

Up to this point of your ordeal I felt there was nothing useful I could contribute, but now I feel slightly (but not much) better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 15 May, 2014, 05:19:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 04:45:04 PM
The only problem with this (exciting, enticing) plan is that the hounds would descend on your online life (to say nothing of your real one) and rip you not one but several new ones.  There's enough rope on this forum alone to hang an army (pod? school? shiver? shoal? muching?) of Sharks.

Your average U - K - I - P candidate says dumber things during interviews than the Shark does here, that doesn't stop 'em! ...seemingly AT ALL.

All power to you Shark but I can't help but think you're colouring your side here slightly glossier than it is. I confess I don't know the full gist of what exactly you're risking your health and happiness for but I urge you to try and look at those posts there through a  stranger's eyes and see how potentially worrying it all is. Not about our worryingly biased system (that tweet thing is a sure sign of that - hello GCHQ btw, how are you?). We were genuinely concerned when you went AWOL - and you repeatedly state you are encouraged by how caring people can be for you but... it's not a one-way thing is what I'm trying to say. As I think you've inferred before it's not just a battle between a you and Stephen Jackson (Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale) - but all those individual police officers, and court workers and your family and friends.... everyone's involved. Not just you. If you go down in your struggle we'll be all the poorer for it. It is not the wiser or nobler thing to fall on this sword that you yourself seem to have positioned yourself above. Rise above it and base your attack from a higher vantage.

Seriously - go into politics!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2014, 06:24:58 PM
Have the dog stand for office, then.  He won't care if people trash his reputation, and he can stand on the twin policies of "firing Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale" ("he treated me like an animal") and "making peace with cats."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 06:33:05 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 15 May, 2014, 05:19:56 PM
Your average U - K - I - P candidate says dumber things during interviews than the Shark does here, that doesn't stop 'em! ...seemingly AT ALL.

Yes, but their ramblings espouse hate, fear and wilful ignorance, which always finds a constituency - Shark is full of utopian strivings, ideas about mutual support and questions without simple answers, marking him out as an evil nutter, possibly* even a deviant. 

That said, I heartily endorse the sentiment: reading all this is desperately worrying, even from the vantage point of a boys' comic discussion forum, never mind those who are actually around you.  Choose your ground carefully Shark, the struggle is long and you need to be well and secure enough to fight it - and Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale, obviously.




*I'm being charitable here.   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 15 May, 2014, 07:02:48 PM
glad your ok sharky ,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2014, 07:16:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 06:33:05 PMYes, but their ramblings espouse hate, fear and wilful ignorance, which always finds a constituency

VOTE DOGKIP.

The DOGKIP Party does not stand for racist or xenophobic policies, it stands for the economically-based belief that cats shouldn't come to neighboring houses scrounging food meant for dogs, better they stay in their own baskets under the stairs of homes with their own ample supply and access to tuna and catnip and look towards using their skills to improve the lot of their own kittens.  Also the council should fire Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale, because I don't like him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 May, 2014, 08:16:09 PM
Here was the post I meant to, er, post the last time.  Just in case you thought punchy, hitty coppers were confined to Sharky's neck of the woods.  Here is an example of the behaviour of the nasty, violent c***s that we in Ireland pay to protect us:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/doctor-special-needs-boy-was-stripped-naked-and-whipped-with-belt-in-garda-custody-30274644.html (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/doctor-special-needs-boy-was-stripped-naked-and-whipped-with-belt-in-garda-custody-30274644.html)

Also, come the revolution, Stephen Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Services Manager and bearer of the most copied-and-pasted name in history, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale will be first against the wall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 May, 2014, 08:45:34 PM
And there it is. I love the immense support shown to Shark, in what, by any measure, is a really difficult and tough (both mental and physical) time for him. Our support, would be, in my opinion, best directed towards giving Sharky, direct, practical, step by step advice on remedys to the urgent issues at hand. Surely the hive-mind is capable of innovation and closure with respect to this. On the more Global points, I think we are transposing what we would like to have the balls to do (but don't) on the Sharks situation as it stands now. That, to me is wrong. I certainly feel, we as a forum group, could actually as a point of principle, field a candidate in the next election. After all it's only £600 and certain other minor undertakings. I think we under-estimate the ability of a gestalt like the hive-mind to articulate the issues in a rational, yet connective and brochable fashion. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2014, 09:05:10 PM
Spent most of the day compiling a lengthy and detailed affadavit in preparation for Phase Whatever-the-Hell-I'm-Up-To-Now.
.
Hopefully, by tomorrow one of my contacts will have put me in touch with a solicitor who specialises in prosecuting the police.
.
Right now I don't have the time or the resources to go political, and you know what I think of politicians  - why would I want to join in with such a shower of muppets anyway? It's still a good idea, though.
.
Another idea someone had was to post Stephen Jackson's email address on the interweb so that people the world over can register their disgust and let him know he's being watched. Of course, I couldn't possibly condone such an action but it might make the Council think twice before descending like six tons of guano on another unfortunate sod...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 May, 2014, 09:42:03 PM
I hear the Monster-Raving-Loony Party are looking for a new leader. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
I think Zen makes a good point about a board whip-round to help pay for revenge.  I'd be up for contributing, as like any good Catholic I never forgive.

I would not dismiss the political route, Sharky - you might actually be doing a lot of people a favor by forwarding a dog as a candidate, as given the UKIP showing lately and how the Condems slithered in at the last GE, there's clearly a market for visible and poorly-considered protest votes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2014, 10:41:06 PM
Some of the posts regarding Sharkey's situation and the naming of an individual and his work address really are scraping the barrel.  The guy can't defend himself and we only have one person's account that this has actually happened.

A couple of week's ago we had a thread on here about why we liked this Forum.  For me, it is because people are generally reasonable.  Now, as far as I'm concerned, that's gone.  How can you name an individual on here?  He's not a celebrity and, I repeat, how can he defend himself?  I'm amazed the Mods have let this stand.  I'm not saying he is, but, Sharkey could be talking a load of bollocks.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 11:05:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2014, 10:41:06 PMThe guy can't defend himself...

Defend himself from what, exactly?  Is someone using the police to break into his home, manhandle him, invent imaginary crimes, damage and sequester his property and leave him living in a borrowed tent?

You're probably correct that we should moderate the way we are using Rebellion's forum, it's not a matter they have any responsibility for but obviously that's not the way these things are viewed, but if even half of what Shark says is accurate (and I'd go closer to 90%) he's been subject to pretty inhumane and counterproductive treatment, and this bloke gets paid to be responsible for it.  Mentioning that fact, repeatedly, is hardly an extreme response - it's not like anyone is giving out personal information, or laying down a fatwa: he has a public official role, and the manner in which he carries out his duties is a matter of concern to anyone prepared to be concerned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2014, 11:18:34 PM
My point is, TB, how do you know Sharkey's 90% correct, he might be 10% correct and 90% wrong and it has opened the official up to possible abuse, because Sharkey's put the guy's details on here.  No one would have had a clue who was dealing with Sharkey's case otherwise.  I'd have more respect for the namers and shamers if they had the bottle to put their own real names and work addresses on here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 May, 2014, 11:28:55 PM
I think Tankie has a point.

What exactly, do you hope will happen if you post The Man's details on the web?

Is it a good thing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 11:34:46 PM
Guy A who you have at least some indirect personal knowledge of claims he has been abused.
Guy B who you don't know at all probably won't get any abuse.

Which one elicits your concern?

I appreciate the general principle that internet lynch mobs are a bad thing.  I just don't see how this is one.  I also think that the full names and professions of most people who have commented so far are known to almost everyone here: this isn't 4chan.  Also, please note, our outrageous internet actions of cut-and-pasting someone's name and work address were not undertaken in the course of our work, or for money. 

While irrelevant to the matter at hand, I should point out that Shark is a valued contributor to many fan publications that celebrate 2000AD and its characters and indeed its creators.  His well-being and his tribulations are very much on topic for this forum.

EDIT:

QuoteWhat exactly, do you hope will happen if you post The Man's details on the web?

People will take note of the way one particular aspect of the system is run, and make their feelings known to and with respect to the person responsible?

My actual concern here is whether this business helps Sharky's situation. It may well be that it does not, but so far this seems to be his choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 May, 2014, 11:40:12 PM
I do not agree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 May, 2014, 11:41:35 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 May, 2014, 11:34:46 PM
EDIT:

QuoteWhat exactly, do you hope will happen if you post The Man's details on the web?

People will take note of the way one particular aspect of the system is run, and make their feelings known to and with respect to the person responsible?

My actual concern here is whether this business helps Sharky's situation. It may well be that it does not, but so far this seems to be his choice.

WITH A HUNDRED ROLE'S PF TP!!!

'I joke of course.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2014, 11:44:03 PM
I suspect the copy and pasting might just be a running gag and not actually a socialist conspiracy, though I agree with Tankie that we should be wary of creating straw man arguments.
And as TB points out, some of us have dealings away from the forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 12:56:59 AM
I understand and 49% agree with what Tankie says. I did think long and hard about naming the official and his work address and I understand that it is a risk for myself and maybe even for Mr Jackson. But...
.
He is a public servant and must therefore be accountable to the public.
.
If the public body Mr Jackson works for, whose ostensible role is to help and support the public, are happy to allow this kind of behaviour without any apparent concern then who else is going to scrutinise the way these bodies and their employees act?
.
I have published no personal details about Mr Jackson that are not a matter of public record.
.
I have not published anything that Mr Jackson has written or said to me or anyone else except in the most general terms, if at all (I'm only 90% certain of this one).
.
I can't deny that base anger led to a petty desire for some form of revenge, of which I am not proud.
.
This isn't Twitter and I don't think many boarders bother with this thread anyway. This is the only place on the internet where I regularly post about this stuff and look upon it more as a gathering of like-minded friends than a populist drivel site like Facebook.
.
I trust the people on this thread to treat this information wisely. As I said, I consider you all to be friends who would not use this information to make matters worse for me - whether I'm entirely correct or utterly deluded, which I have to concede is a possibility (although it feels like reality).
.
If Mr Jackson wishes to reply, this is a public forum, all he has to do is register an account (and convert to 2000AD of course - I bet he'll adore Judge Dredd - and if he does I will publically and unconditionally forgive him everything).
.
I f Mr Jackson wishes to take me to court for what I have written and disclosed about him then he is perfectly free to do so as a private individual.
.
I've been unlawfully detained, imprisoned, shouted at, manhandled, abused and lost my home.  As I have said in the past, my own actions have led to this point and I take full responsibility for my part in this merry dance - but it does take two to tango and Mr Andrew Jackson, Rent and Money Advice Service Manager, WLBC, Elson House, 49-51 Westgate, Sandy Lane Centre, Skelmersdale, is my dance partner.
.
The address may not even be entirely correct as all my documentation is sealed up inside my flat and I'm posting from memory.
.
I had a lot of time to weigh the pros and cons in that police cell.
.
But, even with all that said, Tankie is right to raise these concerns and proves my point about the people regular to this thread being responsible people.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 16 May, 2014, 01:01:27 AM
I agree with Tankie (for the first time ever). I feel bad for Shark but I don't like the idea of someone being defamed in this way when they have no right of reply.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 May, 2014, 01:06:23 AM
Quote from: Trout on 16 May, 2014, 01:01:27 AM
I agree with Tankie (for the first time ever).

(http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/35600000/homer-homer-simpson-35643535-500-385.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 01:10:52 AM
And in the name of balance:

My name is Mark John Howard. I currently do not have an address but the address of the flat from which I was evicted is:
13 Hesketh Avenue
Banks
West Lancashire
PR9 8BH.
.
There are several people on this board who can verify that and I give them full permission to so if deemed necessary.
.
I want this address back and aim to get it.
.
Now they'll know where to put the Blue Plaque when I shuffle off :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 16 May, 2014, 01:20:16 AM
You know what, Shark? I'm glad you're getting support on here at a tough time but I think you should be thinking twice about what you're posting. Maybe step back a bit?

But hang in there. It's got to get better soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 May, 2014, 01:22:02 AM
I'm way out of my depth here, legally speaking. Trout and a few others here would have a far better understanding of what constitutes defamation under the law, and I defer to them, but I'm disheartened to think that ostensibly true assertions - or at least those presented in a factual manner - about the actions of public officials cannot be made without constituting defamation. 

On that basis, perhaps this really isn't the venue for this discussion, and perhaps Shark should be more cautious about what he posts - this may not be twitter, but it's only one mouse click away, and his welfare is the real, serious issue. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 16 May, 2014, 01:23:12 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 May, 2014, 01:22:02 AM
perhaps this really isn't the venue for this discussion

Yup.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 16 May, 2014, 10:08:50 AM
I'm with Tankie and have been bothered as this has gone on at the one-sided nature of this argument.
Trouble is, it's a story of actual real-world hardship and LS tells it so entertainingly. Doesn't make him a blameless victim of the State, but I root for him anyway.

All The Best, Shark, in the upcoming days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 10:15:22 AM
Maybe I have gone a little over the top - no excuses.

Perhaps it would be better for all concerned if I stop posting here and use a blog instead.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 16 May, 2014, 11:12:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 10:15:22 AM
Maybe I have gone a little over the top - no excuses.

Perhaps it would be better for all concerned if I stop posting here and use a blog instead.

This thread is about all things that could be constituted as Political. Your situation Sharky is of a political nature, as far as I'm concerned. And, as long as the Mods or 'Rebellion' themselves have no qualms about you posting such material, then you should continue to do so!

Regarding this guy at the Council (we dare not speak/type his name) if what you've said is true then I can't see how 'defamation of character' would hold up in court (as long as there is evidence of course).

All the best my good man, and Fight the Power!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 May, 2014, 11:22:01 AM
I don't know where this stands legally - I have asked for a ruling on Shark's posts here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 11:49:12 AM
I will abide by the mods' decision.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Daveycandlish on 16 May, 2014, 12:02:42 PM
I reckon Rebellion just need a disclaimer that they do not support/endorse any opinions on the forums and we can carry on letting the mods keep the house in order.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 02:36:09 PM
I don't think putting names and addresses up here adds anything to the argument beyond spelling things out for anyone too thick to click a link in someone's profile info, where many of us - perhaps unwisely - have links to our names, addresses, and information on how to make bombs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:15:04 PM
I probably am being "too thick to click a link", but I can't find your real name and work address anywhere on here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 03:17:35 PM
It is on a LINK, you eedjit.  I shan't point to it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:25:20 PM
Thanks for your reasonable reply, all you're doing is proving that you don't have the bottle to put it on here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 03:33:24 PM
"Old Tankie."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:37:26 PM
The difference is, Prof, "you eedjit", I didn't post the official's name and work address, unlike yourself.  You've got the front to put the guy's details on here, but not the bottle to put your own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 03:42:48 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:37:26 PM
I didn't post the official's name and work address, unlike yourself.

That would be the publicly available information on a public servant, yes? Who, in the unlikely event that anyone actually contacted him to complain over this matter, would have ample opportunity to set the record straight in his response to the complaint?

I agree completely that Shark needs to be very careful about what he says about any named individual — true or not, it may prove prejudicial to any hope of resolution he may have. Getting your knickers in a twist about the posting of information that can be obtained via the vicious left-wing subterfuge of searching on Google seems like a fairly determined effort to be offended for offence's sake.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 03:50:25 PM
Oh I see, you're not actually making any valid points or - crucially - listening to anything you're being told repeatedly by multiple posters, you're just arguing in circles.  By all means have at it.

/ignore
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 03:51:44 PM
Whoopsy - that last post wasn't aimed at you, Jim.  Although you are completely terrible, obviously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:53:36 PM
Hang on, Jim, I'm not offended at all.  It's got nothing to do with me, it doesn't affect me at all.  I just think it's unreasonable for the guy's details to be put on the Forum, when he probably hasn't got a clue about what's going on and has no chance to defend himself.

You say it's public information; it's only public information because Sharkey put it on here.  If he'd have just kept to the general situation and not named the guy or the Council, you wouldn't have had a clue where to look.

Oh! great Prof, I'm on your ignore list, that's mature!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 03:57:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 03:51:44 PM
Although you are completely terrible, obviously.

I am. It's true.

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 May, 2014, 04:46:11 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:53:36 PM
Hang on, Jim, I'm not offended at all.  It's got nothing to do with me, it doesn't affect me at all.  I just think it's unreasonable for the guy's details to be put on the Forum, when he probably hasn't got a clue about what's going on and has no chance to defend himself.

You say it's public information; it's only public information because Sharkey put it on here.  If he'd have just kept to the general situation and not named the guy or the Council, you wouldn't have had a clue where to look.

Oh! great Prof, I'm on your ignore list, that's mature!

Dude, as a public servant his details are made public anyway. Even if Sharky just name dropped him (which he has every right to do so) a simple google will pull all this up. It's hardly like Sharky has given his NIS, Birth Certificate and marriage documents to us to abuse at will, is it?

Edit: Oops. Just saw Jim say exactly the same three posts back. Sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 04:48:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 03:53:36 PM
You say it's public information; it's only public information because Sharkey put it on here.

No, I don't 'say' it's public information, it is because it's publicly available. It's only on here because TLS brought it up, but this is hardly the be-all and end-all of the internet, is it? If TLS had referred to this gentleman only by his position and the council for which he worked, a google search would have yielded the same information. It's not a secret. That's what public information means.

You not liking it being posted here is something entirely different.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 05:03:58 PM
What, there's an ignore list!!! So that's why no one ever replies to me. Z :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 05:11:17 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 05:03:58 PM
What, there's an ignore list!!! So that's why no one ever replies to me. Z :'(

who said that?! ;)

I'm with tankie block while I'm sorry for sharky and we don't know the full details it was a faux pax (?) to put the dudes details on here if he was to receive any abuse from either a boarder or lurker surely rebellion would be in the firing line as its their website,their comic and their forum...lets not forget the tony lee incident a while back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 05:24:40 PM
The full details are a few pages back, though I am curious about what the Tony Lee incident was.

Which is irrelevant, as now I insist we only ever spell that term "fucks pax".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 05:26:15 PM
I have pitched my tent in the back garden of #13. I'm camping in "my own" garden because I have nowhere else to go and all my stuff's inside - everything I own - and I need to keep an eye on it. Don't want crack-heads breaking in and selling my comic collection for drugs, do I?
.
The local constable was sent by the Council to run me off but, as he said, so long as I don't break into the flat myself and don't cause any problems it's nothing to do with him (if only he'd been there on Monday!). If the Council want me out of the garden, the Constable and I agreed, they'll have to go to court again. This gives me some time to organise myself further.
.
My neighbours have been brilliant, my friends outstanding and my family nowhere to be seen.
.
A lady from a church charity just turned up with bags of food, toiletries and clothes for me - completely out of the blue. I was so touched by this that I almost cried - I've got so much emotion stored up after the last few days I don't know how I stopped myself.
.
I'm told that some of my neighbours are organising a petition to get me back into my home.
.
My tent is so full of donated stuff now that it's almost embarrassing.
.
I am so very weary and frazzled right now but, by God, the unsolicited support I'm getting is a real shot in the arm. As one neighbour pointed out, "you've been a part of this street for three decades and we don't want to loose you."
.
And please don't fight about me naming the name. I can see both sides and accept full responsibility for the consequences, as I always do, unlike some people I could name - such as David Cameron, 10 Downing Street, London.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 05:47:01 PM
did you get your dog back btw?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Daveycandlish on 16 May, 2014, 05:53:21 PM
Now are you sure you should be disclosing another officials name and address?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 May, 2014, 06:16:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 05:26:15 PM
Don't want crack-heads breaking in and selling my comic collection for drugs, do I?

You did put your address on here Sharky, it's bound to happen. I'm rustling up the crack 'n' comic squad as we speak!

All that goodwill is remarkable, you're a luckier Shark than you seem I feel. Must be very heartening after everything you've been through.

As for the petition - very good idea and I wonder where folk will send it.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 06:38:48 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 05:11:17 PM
we don't know the full details it was a faux pax (?) to put the dudes details on here

The "dude's" publicly available details. No one's had their home address given out here.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 06:57:49 PM
Mogz, yes, I did get my dog back and he's loving being outside all day. My initial report was a little confusing on the point. The police did want to put my dog in a pound (at my expense, of course) but a neighbour took umbrage at that idea and spirited him away to safety before that happened. Picking him up was the first thing I did upon my return - got to get your priorities right, haven't you? Thanks for asking, though. Maybe I should report He-Who-Has-Been-Named-But-Now-Shall-Not-Be-Named to the RSPCA for causing mental distress to a dumb animal (or two dumb animals...).
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2014, 07:34:27 PM
Keep that dog safe, Sharky, he's going to be mayor one day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2014, 07:38:08 PM
The kindness of friends, neighbours and strangers is always heartwarming - the sad thing is that we tend to find it surprising.

If bailifs have repo'd your property due to unpaid debt, i'm afraid they'll be looking to sell any of your possessions that they can to go towards that debt.

Stay strong dude
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2014, 08:48:40 PM
Thanks, DDD, but they can only sell my stuff (lawfully) if I agree to it by signing something - otherwise it's just theft. Of course, it's getting them to play by their own rules.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 09:10:42 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 06:38:48 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 05:11:17 PM
we don't know the full details it was a faux pax (?) to put the dudes details on here

The "dude's" publicly available details. No one's had their home address given out here.

Cheers

Jim

who wasn't widely  known about  til he was posted on a public forum. I also imagine it would be easy for someone to find out his address now we know who he is?  shall we contact him and see what he has to say?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 09:28:45 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 09:10:42 PM
I also imagine it would be easy for someone to find out his address now we know who he is?  shall we contact him and see what he has to say?

I have no idea what point you now think you're trying to make, which is not unusual for you. However, I'm forced to observe that only one of us has his real name on the left hand side of his posts here and one us doesn't.

Yes, there are occasional nutbags who will take information off this forum and use it to harass people in a wider context. It's been done to me by someone who is no longer a member of this forum. It wasn't the Shark.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 09:43:09 PM
the point is obviously I disagree with posting someones details home/work or otherwise when they are not in a position to defend themselves. The only thing unusual for me is that I still get surprised that jolly jim Campbell singles me out when he doesn't like something I post be it backing up tankie's post or a light hearted post on the movie thread . I don't post my name because I don't have to and don't have to explain myself to someone who describes himself as an "ageing goth"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2014, 09:48:35 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 09:43:09 PM
I don't post my name because I don't have to and don't have to explain myself to someone who describes himself as an "ageing goth" because I'm an inarticulate hypocrite who has nothing to offer but personal abuse when confronted with an argument I can't counter.

Fixed that for you.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 09:54:35 PM
whatever. please excuse me while I go and stitch my sides from that "witticism"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 09:57:31 PM
Lads, it is actually upsetting seeing you both tear lumps out of each other. Z  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 10:01:14 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 09:57:31 PM
Lads, it is actually upsetting seeing you both tear lumps out of each other. Z  :(

thanks man, I don't enjoy it either but that's my fault for thinking free speech and opinions could be voiced on here  but I'm an inarticulate hypocrite apparently so what the fuck do I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 10:07:40 PM

A Hindu nationalist who doesn't seem to mind Muslim's being massacred is now in control of the world's largest democracy (1.2 billion souls). Seems worth mentioning on a politics thread:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304908304579564810455296606?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304908304579564810455296606.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:10:16 PM
It isn't for me to butt in, but step back from this, pm each other and try and sort it out. We are all caught up in the  real time crises Shark is sadly undergoing, but (and I'm sure Shark would be the first to say it) we are all on here because of an abiding love for 2000AD and all things related. We arent that different or antipathic that we should harrangue each other to a level possibly well beyond what was our original intent. Z :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 10:11:46 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:10:16 PM
It isn't for me to butt in, but step back from this, pm each other and try and sort it out. We are all caught up in the  real time crises Shark is sadly undergoing, but (and I'm sure Shark would be the first to say it) we are all on here because of an abiding love for 2000AD and all things related. We arent that different or antipathic that we should harrangue each other to a level possibly well beyond what was our original intent. Z :)

bloody hippy! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:16:11 PM
Really, really not a hippy, Jonny Rotten, not to be forgotten is more my line. Z  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 10:29:29 PM
Thanks for the support, mogzilla, and to Trout earlier and to several others.  At least Jim had the choice to use his real name on here or not, as opposed to the gentleman in question who wasn't given that choice.

I agree with Zen, this needs to stop.  Although I would be interested to see what the Mods/Rebellion have to say about it.

I do wish you all the best, Sharkey, and I'm sorry if my posts made you feel obliged to put your name and address on the internet.  Keep safe.  Mike.

   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 10:35:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 10:29:29 PM
I agree with Zen, this needs to stop

Then stop.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/10836444/Kenya-attacks-kill-10-after-British-terror-warning.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 May, 2014, 10:39:38 PM
 :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 10:41:38 PM

Secret Pentagon plans in event of zombie apocalypse:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/15/pentagon-has-plan-counter-zombie-dominance-during-/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:49:39 PM
WTF!  :o  :)  :D  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 10:52:26 PM

Laugh it up, hippie. You'll be grateful we drilled this stuff when The Infected are infesting your local Spar shop.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 10:54:20 PM
as long as they leave the cornettos alone
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 10:56:16 PM

I was hoping to lure Burdis into the debate, as I know for a fact he has his own zombie apocalypse survival plans and scant regard for US tactical acumen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:56:26 PM
The worst bit is they are going to side with known adversaries against american zombies....that is just inexcusable cowardice, treason and zombieist to boot. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:59:24 PM
Does the redoubtable CF's anti-zombie tactics involve cowering in a certain, paraphernalia bestrewn 'cellar' whilst the rest of us fight the good fight against the ravening undead hordes? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 May, 2014, 11:00:06 PM
I have my plan for survival all prepped and ready to go ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 11:00:45 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 May, 2014, 10:56:16 PM

I know for a fact he has his own zombie apocalypse survival plans

who doesn't?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 May, 2014, 11:09:23 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 10:56:26 PM
The worst bit is they are going to side with known adversaries against american zombies....that is just inexcusable cowardice, treason and zombieist to boot.

I suppose the real story is that the reason the US military came up with this fanciful scenario is that they knew their gaming scenarios would be made public and didn't want to give tinfoil hatters documentary evidence that Barack Osama-Bin-Laden was drawing up plans to have US troops open fire on US civilians:

"The military's "Counter-Zombie Dominance" plan was hatched in 2009 and 2010 when U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska, needed a creative way to conduct training that the civilian population wouldn't misinterpret in terms of civil liberties or real-world foreign policy objectives. Planners needed an intriguing situation (e.g., a deadly pathogen essentially turning people or animals into zombies) that would not cause political blow back for policymakers"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/15/pentagon-has-plan-counter-zombie-dominance-during-/#ixzz31v0rU4Tn

By contrast, if the front page of The Sun revealed that the SAS practiced bayonetting babies we'd all just roll our eyes and mutter "typical". Not that UK freedom of information laws would even require the details of Operation Shish Kebaby to be made public.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 May, 2014, 11:13:51 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 May, 2014, 11:09:23 PMOperation Shish Kebaby

I sense you've been saving that one up for some time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 16 May, 2014, 11:18:44 PM
Quote from: mogzilla on 16 May, 2014, 11:00:45 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 May, 2014, 10:56:16 PM

I know for a fact he has his own zombie apocalypse survival plans

who doesn't?

Ah. I keep putting that off...   :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 May, 2014, 11:21:15 PM
Operation Sish Kebaby would 'take away' the last vestiges of our humanity.....OK I'll leave. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2014, 11:39:54 PM
I realised not long ago that of all the possible crisis scenarios I may face in the next few decades - global financial crash, social breakdown and civil war, epidemic plague, nuclear war, etc - the only one that I feel prepared to deal with is the zombie apocalypse.

That's not very practical is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 May, 2014, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2014, 11:39:54 PM
That's not very practical is it?

You say that now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 17 May, 2014, 12:16:48 AM
he lives in Manchester all he has to do is wait for the bus drivers to run them all down
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 May, 2014, 03:54:19 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 May, 2014, 11:13:51 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 16 May, 2014, 11:09:23 PMOperation Shish Kebaby

I sense you've been saving that one up for some time.

It's times like this I remember you lads are two different people.  ;)

Not that I'm complaining; Tordels was always the witty and well-informed voice of reason; then another one came along.

That's my niceness done for the night, now to lie down and wait for my hangover
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 May, 2014, 08:00:35 AM
Quote from: mogzilla on 17 May, 2014, 12:16:48 AM
he lives in Manchester all he has to do is wait for the bus drivers to run them all down

I can vouch that this is probably true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2014, 01:14:42 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2014, 11:39:54 PM
I realised not long ago that of all the possible crisis scenarios I may face in the next few decades - global financial crash, social breakdown and civil war, epidemic plague, nuclear war, etc - the only one that I feel prepared to deal with is the zombie apocalypse.

That's not very practical is it?

Are you definitely sure you are ready? 5 popular zombie survival tactics that will get you killed. (http://www.cracked.com/article/126_5-popular-zombie-survival-tactics-that-will-get-you-killed/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 17 May, 2014, 01:25:28 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 17 May, 2014, 01:14:42 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2014, 11:39:54 PM
I realised not long ago that of all the possible crisis scenarios I may face in the next few decades - global financial crash, social breakdown and civil war, epidemic plague, nuclear war, etc - the only one that I feel prepared to deal with is the zombie apocalypse.

That's not very practical is it?

Are you definitely sure you are ready? 5 popular zombie survival tactics that will get you killed. (http://www.cracked.com/article/126_5-popular-zombie-survival-tactics-that-will-get-you-killed/)

At least some people (http://www.youtube.com/embed/mjeI6Wn_Tr4) are taking it seriously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 May, 2014, 02:49:55 PM
Latest news from Camp Bastard is a bit of a downer. Due to lack of resources, I have had to cancel my Twoothy, Meg and Marvel Ultimate GNC at the local newsagents.

Hmph.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 May, 2014, 03:43:26 PM
That is a right regal pain, but having done similar a couple of years back I can report that when things improve - and they will improve - there is much joy in knowing there are Progs you have not yet had the pleasure of.   Small compensation now, I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 May, 2014, 03:57:23 PM
I'll mail you a copy of the prog, till you get back on your feet. Pm me with an address. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 17 May, 2014, 04:13:12 PM
Wow Sharkie, have been off line a few days so missed all the action, really respect your ability to stay focused in these situations, best o luck with the future plans, stay safe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 May, 2014, 05:36:27 PM
Thank you all for your deeply generous offers of Progs, I'll PM you all individually.
.
This surely is the Best Place on the Web.
.
Oh, and I should have said this before but, Tankie, you didn't force me to publish my address - I sometimes just do silly things for the heck of it - so think nothing more of it.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2014, 02:16:05 AM
One of my brothers had an application for a postal vote in the upcoming local elections discounted because he'd supposedly sent in his form too late - except it had been posted at the same time as mine and another brother's application, the other brother being discounted because someone was "not satisfied" that his signature matched... erm... his other signature, and mine not being discounted at all.  It's a bit baffling, really, as even leaving aside that council workers are now handwriting experts, if one form was too late, surely the other two should have been too late as well?
While having a quick pint and catching up with scandal this evening, it seems we were far from the only postal voters who were discounted for odd, sometimes provably contradictory reasons, either, and the rejection letters were sent out mere days before the election is to take place, so the chances of getting time off work or traveling back into the country on such short notice is laughably slim for most.  I'm away off to make myself a tinfoil hat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2014, 08:14:16 AM

"Ukip is on course for a landslide victory in this week's European elections, a poll for The Independent on Sunday shows. Today's ComRes poll gives Ukip its highest lead in a European elections survey, suggesting that the Eurosceptic party will scoop up MEP seats across the country. Among those who are certain to vote, Ukip is on 35 per cent, 11 points ahead of Labour, on 24 per cent, with the Conservatives down two points from the last ComRes poll earlier this month, at 20 per cent. The Green Party has pushed the Liberal Democrats into fifth place and is up two points to 7 per cent, while Nick Clegg's party is down two to 6 per cent."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/european-elections-ukip-set-for-landmark-win-9391409.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/european-elections-ukip-set-for-landmark-win-9391409.html)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 09:11:22 AM
"Those who vote change nothing, those who count the votes change everything."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 09:16:23 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 18 May, 2014, 08:14:16 AM
"Ukip is on course for a landslide victory in this week's European elections

UKIP: so right-wing, even the Sun is backing away...

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/10171201_837364809624356_4624094931139920804_n_zpsd7dc2438.jpg)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 May, 2014, 09:28:06 AM
Nick Griffin. Leave and never come back. Heterophobia? Can he really be THAT stupid?

(http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/nick-griffin-gay-.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2014, 09:50:52 AM

Farage came across as a stuttering prick, tying himself in knots in that LBC radio interview (http://www.lbc.co.uk/watch-nigel-farage-v-james-obrien-live-from-1130-90532), but The Sun and the rest of the news media who are stepping into party political line by denouncing him are hypocrites:

UKIP leader stands by his assertion that people have a right to be concerned if a group of Romanians move in next door (http://www.ukip.org/ukip_leader_stands_by_his_assertion_that_people_have_a_right_to_be_concerned_if_a_group_of_romanians_move_in_next_door)

Nigel Farage said: "UKIP will never allow the false accusation of racism levelled by a politically correct elite to prevent the raising of issues that are of concern to the great majority of the British public. "The unfortunate reality is that we are in political union with a post-Communist country that has become highly susceptible to organised crime.

High levels of crime associated with Romanian nationals in Britain, corroborated by police sources and statistics, have been a major talking point in the British media for several years.

See, for example, The Sun 10/11/2013 "We're coming to Britain as it's easier to steal and pickpocket (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5253216/romanian-pickpockets-moving-to-uk.html)"

Also, Daily Mail 30/11/2013 disclosing that "More than 27,000 Romanian citizens have been held for serious offences in London in the past five years, including ten for murder, 142 for rape and 666 for other sex offences."

Also Daily Express 11/1/2014 "Romanian gangs 'behind half of pickpocketings'"

Also London Evening Standard 03/10/2013 "Europol warning over Romanian gangs"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 10:04:18 AM
A couple of pages back, I cited a stat about the relative expenditure of effort by the DWP chasing benefit fraud and HMRC chasing avoided/evaded tax.

Radio 4's excellent 'More Or Less' dismantled that stat on Friday. I'm very fond of quoting them when they take apart a government claim, so it's only fair I correct the stat when they demolish one I've used. FWIW, the numbers in the stat I referenced for DWP/HMRC are sourced, but use a very restrictive definition of HMRC investigators and a very high estimate for dodged tax.

This is annoying, because there is no need for that kind of distortion, as the more realistic figures still show this:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/ATOS_HMRC_Graphic_zps3cea8541.jpg)

Proportionately, roughly ten times the manpower being expended by DWP chasing benefit fraud than HMRC are expending on avoided/evaded tax. And the government is still cutting HMRC budgets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 10:47:37 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 18 May, 2014, 09:50:52 AM
Also, Daily Mail 30/11/2013 disclosing that "More than 27,000 Romanian citizens have been held for serious offences in London in the past five years, including ten for murder, 142 for rape and 666 for other sex offences."

Heh. 'More Or Less' did this one, too. The 27,000 figure is the number of arrests not the number of arrestees. The number is made up of a much smaller number of people, getting arrested a lot of times. Not that anyone should be surprised that the Mail would distort statistics to support a bit of inflammatory anti-immigrant rhetoric, mind...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2014, 10:52:11 AM
Jesus wept.  To quote Viz quoting Griffin, '...said the bozz-eyed shitter'.

Odd to see the Sun speaking out against homophobia.  It's a bit rich coming from a paper that employed both Gary Bushell and Richard Littlejohn to write hate-filled, queer-bashing rants on a regular basis, but at least it's a step in the right direction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 May, 2014, 12:51:51 PM
I don't know if it will be an actual permanent change, or a temporary 'Fuck. What have we created?' attitude to UKIP from the likes of the Sun/Mail/Express.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 May, 2014, 01:03:47 PM
It's something which has a momentum of it's own, that's why there is panic, anything which is uncontrollable by the powers that be is scary. The pity is, the thing beyond immediate control is so unpalatable to the left as well as the right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 03:45:04 PM
I am genuinely torn at the moment.  Always voted Tory but I'm wavering now.  You can't get a fag paper between the established parties when it comes to the European Union and immigration.  When you have a political system in which all the main stream parties have the same view on Europe and immigration, people like myself, who have worries about the affect of immigration and Europe, are left with nowhere to go apart from not voting at all or voting for a party that has aspects to it that I don't agree with.  I don't agree with some of Farage's rhetoric but I don't agree with the European Union or uncontrolled immigration from the European Union either.

So where does my vote go?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 03:45:04 PM
I don't agree with some of Farage's rhetoric but I don't agree with the European Union or uncontrolled immigration from the European Union either.

Fuck his rhetoric, what about his policies and the fact that he is a racist and his party is riddled from head to toe with racists?

(FWIW, EU migrants are net contributors to the UK economy, being far more likely to have jobs and pay taxes than they are to claim benefits.)

Jesus...

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 03:56:19 PM
What do you mean "Jesus.....", Jim?  Am I not allowed a different opinion to you?  I was trying to contribute to the general discussion in a sensible manner.  But,......... ah well, there you go!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 04:03:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 03:56:19 PM
What do you mean "Jesus.....", Jim?  Am I not allowed a different opinion to you

Of course you are. I'm aghast that the only thing you find objectionable about Farage is his 'rhetoric'.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2014, 04:04:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 03:45:04 PM
I am genuinely torn at the moment.  Always voted Tory but I'm wavering now ... I don't agree with the European Union or uncontrolled immigration from the European Union either. So where does my vote go?

Doesn't matter what Cameron wants (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-pledges-referendum-on-europe-even-if-attempts-to-reform-brussels-power-fails-9350870.html), and Farage could only ever hope to be a minority partner in some kind of coalition with the Tories anyway.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 May, 2014, 04:18:21 PM
I think UKIP will do well in Europe; I'm not too sure about Westminister. The impact may be on discomforting the encumbent main-stream parties in marginals. This I guess os why there is merit (albeit a very cynical/pragmatic merit) in Cameron doing either of two things: a) attempting to reach out to the UKIP vote base, or b) attempting a compact with UKIP before the election. This will probably have a negative effect on the middle ground small c Conservative voters, who possibly find some UKIP rhetoric unpalatable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:20:44 PM
Well, his rhetoric is the only thing I've got to go on, isn't it?  I've never met the guy, don't know him personally, and I've not seen him physically attack an immigrant on the street, so what can I go on, apart from what he says.  Or have I misused the word "rhetoric"?

I've already said that I don't agree with some of the things he's said, the comments he made about Rumanians were stupid and racist, the billboards are daft, and there are some nutters in his party. But, Ukip's policy is to pull out of the European Union and control immigration, which I agree with.  Now, if the Tory party were promising that I'd definitely be voting for them again.

Yes, I basically agree with you, sauchie, that's the dilemma.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2014, 04:31:14 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:20:44 PM
Ukip's policy is to pull out of the European Union and control immigration, which I agree with.  Now, if the Tory party were promising that I'd definitely be voting for them again. Yes, I basically agree with you, sauchie, that's the dilemma

I'm not sure you do, Tankie. Cameron's agreed to put continued EU membership to a national referendum by 2017. In a democracy, I'm not sure you can ask for much more than for everyone to be allowed to vote on the matter.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 04:35:03 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:20:44 PM
But, Ukip's policy is to pull out of the European Union and control immigration, which I agree with.

And the other stuff UKIP want to do? Dismantle the NHS? Hand everyone on basic rate tax a massive tax rise whilst slashing income tax for millionaires? Scrapping paid maternity leave, statutory entitlement to annual leave, holiday pay and sick pay?

While I'm at it, why does Europe vex you so? EU migration, as I have already stated, is a net benefit to the UK economy, and there are more British citizens in other EU countries than there immigrants in this country. The cost of the EU to the UK government is barely 1% of it's annual expenditure — that's practically a rounding error.

The systematic stealth dismantling of the NHS? The privatisation of the state education system? Plans to sell our medical and tax information to private companies? Hundreds of millions of pounds spent hounding sick and disabled people on benefits until they commit suicide? The state of British railways (we spend more subsidising our railways now that we did when it was nationalised and yet every single train operator turns a profit)? The fact that the 1000 richest people in the UK increased their wealth by 15% last year while the rest of us got poorer; that those same 1000 people have a combined worth of 1/3 the annual GDP of the entire country...?

All these things, and you're prepared to hang your vote on the single issue of the EU? To the extent that you'd consider voting for a collection of racist nutbags whose policies will make almost everyone worse off, before you've even considered the economic catastrophe that actually leaving the EU would cause?

Yes, I'm baffled.

Jim

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
Sorry, sauchie, my mistake.  I obviously misread your comments.  I'll go along with a referendum as a poor second best, but basically I believe in a parliamentary democracy.  I want to vote in a government that has a stated aim rather than a promise to ask me a question.  Anyway, the idea that the Tories are going to get elected next year is in "pink pigs are flying" territory.  The only chance they've got is if you guys up North decide to go for a stroll!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:41:59 PM
Yes, well we live in a democracy, Jim, I'm allowed to baffle you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 04:48:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:41:59 PM
Yes, well we live in a democracy, Jim, I'm allowed to baffle you!

Not going to answer the question, then? What vexes you so about the EU that you're prepared to consider voting for UKIP when I've spelled out some of their other policies and suggested some areas of British politics that have little or nothing to do with Europe and must surely have some relevance to your personal situation?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 May, 2014, 04:54:12 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
Sorry, sauchie, my mistake.  I obviously misread your comments.  I'll go along with a referendum as a poor second best, but basically I believe in a parliamentary democracy.  I want to vote in a government that has a stated aim rather than a promise to ask me a question.  Anyway, the idea that the Tories are going to get elected next year is in "pink pigs are flying" territory.  The only chance they've got is if you guys up North decide to go for a stroll!

HA! To be honest, I wouldn't want to put money on either of those contests turning out the way some polls have been suggesting. Milliband's not doing well, Cameron's just doing badly, and the latest poll (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8814) only puts Labour ahead by 3 points.

QuoteICM in the Scotland on Sunday have figures of YES 34%(-5), NO 46%(+4). This looks like a sudden big shift to NO, but I suspect a lot of that is a reversion to the mean. ICM's last Scottish poll was the one showing the NO lead shrinking to just 3 points... I suspect that one was just a bit of an outlier and this is a return to normality.

There is a big contrast between what different pollsters in Scotland are showing, and many people trying to read narratives and trends into the polls that aren't really there. Even attempts at "polls of polls" are tricky because of the difference between pollsters and their uneven pattern of publication ...

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 04:59:10 PM
My problem with the EU is that it is in the pockets of the same corporations and banks as Britain, France, Germany, India, China, Pakistan, the USA, Afghanistan (since we invaded), Iraq (since we invaded)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 May, 2014, 05:07:06 PM
I've no idea what's going to happen next year, but I could see the Tories hanging on.

Typically I've either voted LibDem or Labour, but after getting lumbered with a LibCon coalition I can't see myself voting LibDem, and Miliband doesn't convince either.

It's not much of a choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 05:15:47 PM
Hi Jim - Sure there are other issues that affect me.  I'm seriously physically disabled and have to rely on the State for a certain amount of my income.  I'm worried what will happen to me when my wife can no longer look after me and I have to go into some godforsaken home.  The current Government have cost me thousands of pounds by changing the benefit system.

I know not many immigrants claim out of work benefits, most of them are hard working but we've got millions of unemployed people here.  And I'm all for skilled immigrants if we need them.  But we haven't got enough housing as it is.

I agree, the NHS is cracking under the strain.  But, at the end of the day I believe in the nation state being able to control its own destiny.  I'm sure it's baffling, but that's my view.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 05:27:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 05:15:47 PM
ut, at the end of the day I believe in the nation state being able to control its own destiny.  I'm sure it's baffling, but that's my view.

To the exclusion of issues that affect you directly? You're prepared to consider voting for UKIP despite the only policy you approve of being abstract and having little or no direct bearing on your day-to-day existence? Despite all their other policies being massively detrimental to the average person in this country?

I'm sorry — this makes no sense.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 08:37:04 PM
Hi Jim, my point is that membership of the European Union is not an abstract thing, it has a massive affect on my day-to-day existence, from how much I pay for my groceries, to how long it takes to see a doctor, to how much VAT I pay on my utility bills, to the amount of green taxes I have to pay, to having to move my bank because of EU rules, etc., etc.  In fact, I can't think of one area that isn't affected wholly or partly by Britain's membership of the European Union.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 May, 2014, 09:03:45 PM
Yes, but a lot of us don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. I understand the argument by many UK posters here and voters in general, they are apprehensive with immigration; they have concerns over sovereignty and control of their lives. I even agree with some of these concerns, Brussels as it is constituted now is a pretty rarefied entity, there does appear to be flagerancy in terms of budget allocation; I am horrified with the meddling in the Ukraine etc. But (there's always a but) as Jim points out the alternative is worse. UKIP is as neo liberal as the rest of them, probably more so. The rights introduced by the EU in terms of what Jim set out are all that keep the majority of working people being existentially defaulted back to the 1830's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 09:22:25 PM
I agree, Zen, that some of the laws from the EU are good but some are bad and it's a choice for the individual to decide, with their vote, whether they agree with the Union or not.  But it's not an abstract thing, it has a big affect on our lives, good or bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 May, 2014, 09:33:32 PM
 No arguments here, you should count yourselves lucky....the shower of venal, asocial, evolution denying, mendacious f**king trash we get put in front of us on the ballot in NI are orders of magnitide beyond what you guys have to put up with in the rest of the UK.  :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 10:54:34 PM
I'm getting sick of democracy. In a democracy, 51% beats 49% - which means that if 51% pass the laws then 49% have no right to disagree.
.
I think a republic would be better because in a republic if the 51% pass laws they are only advisory and not mandatory. So if the 49% disagree with the laws passed they can comply or not based on personal choice. Anyone not complying with the laws of the majority is not automatically a criminal - unless actual loss, harm or damage is caused, in which case they get taken to court just like anyone else.
.
Democracy is all about blanket control whereas a republic is all about personal freedom and responsibility. Turn the EU into the ER and I'd be the first one waving the European flag.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
I'm getting sick of democracy. In a democracy, 51% beats 49% - which means that if 51% pass the laws then 49% have no right to disagree.
.
I think a republic would be better because in a republic if the 51% pass laws they are only advisory and not mandatory. So if the 49% disagree with the laws passed they can comply or not based on personal choice. Anyone not complying with the laws of the majority is not automatically a criminal - unless actual loss, harm or damage is caused, in which case they get taken to court just like anyone else.
.
Democracy is all about blanket control whereas a republic is all about personal freedom and responsibility. Turn the EU into the ER and I'd be the first one waving the European flag.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2014, 11:17:33 PM
I don't think these words mean what you think they mean.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 May, 2014, 11:21:55 PM
All I hear is Ideology. Which is almost always just superficial nonsense so i'm not gonna bother with either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 11:50:42 PM
www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 May, 2014, 01:40:52 AM
It's quite simple what's going to happen next week really!

UKIP will do well in the European Election and that will be through their core voters and disgruntled Tory, Labour and Liberal voters. Many people are disillusioned with the main parties and so to give them a bloody nose/embarrass them, they will put in a protest vote for UKIP.

Once we get back to the General Election, people will resort back to what they always vote, apart from the floating voters and the very few at that time who want to do a protest vote, which at that time will do nothing.

I shall be listening to the radio on the election night and will probably be having a good laugh, as party members come up with excuses as to why they did so badly, poor turn out, protest, weather, etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2014, 02:06:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2014, 10:54:34 PM
I'm getting sick of democracy. In a democracy, 51% beats 49% - which means that if 51% pass the laws then 49% have no right to disagree.
.
I think a republic would be better because in a republic if the 51% pass laws they are only advisory and not mandatory. So if the 49% disagree with the laws passed they can comply or not based on personal choice. Anyone not complying with the laws of the majority is not automatically a criminal - unless actual loss, harm or damage is caused, in which case they get taken to court just like anyone else.
.
Democracy is all about blanket control whereas a republic is all about personal freedom and responsibility. Turn the EU into the ER and I'd be the first one waving the European flag.
.

I don't know about that, Sharky, me old mate.  I live in a republic and feel like I have to comply with stupid laws all the time.  The last government prohibited the 'publication or utterance of blasphemous material', for example.  A fucking blasphemy law in 2009, for fuxake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 May, 2014, 02:09:13 AM
Stone him!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2014, 05:24:02 AM
But...  but... I'm Brian!
(I am, and all)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2014, 07:56:16 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2014, 02:06:13 AMI live in a republic and feel like I have to comply with stupid laws all the time. 

I think Sharky is talking about an actual republic, not an oligarchy-in-drag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 May, 2014, 10:13:20 AM
No point talking about actuality. Human greed and corruption always permeate any society hierarchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 May, 2014, 11:07:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 May, 2014, 07:56:16 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2014, 02:06:13 AMI live in a republic and feel like I have to comply with stupid laws all the time. 

I think Sharky is talking about an actual republic, not an oligarchy-in-drag.

Don't start dragging the Eurovision song contest into this!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 May, 2014, 11:37:38 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 May, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
.  Anyway, the idea that the Tories are going to get elected next year is in "pink pigs are flying" territory.  The only chance they've got is if you guys up North decide to go for a stroll!

Eh? as far as I know there is only one Tory MP in Scotland, so when we stroll off i don't think it will affect the Tory/UKip alliance when its elected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2014, 11:43:43 AM
Unless I'm missing something, he's saying that the only way the Tories will have a chance is if Scotland goes but you're reading it the other way around. As if Scotland is around they only get one Tory MP but Labour et al get several, whereas if nay Scotland is about then the competition loses out.


I'll be voting Green I think. I like my Labour MP and I like many Labour MPs but the cabinet are not a promising bunch. However the recent minimum wage announcement was a good step, I am so tired of politicians talking about national averages as though they represent the majority in any significant way. I wish more 'protest votes' would be cast for Green but largely in my experience the people who would protest by not doing anything period.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 May, 2014, 01:26:38 PM
You're missing my point, Proudhuff.  I wasn't referring to the one Tory MP, I was referring to the forty odd Labour MPs at Westminster who, presumably, wouldn't be there if Scotland votes for independence.  With them gone, the Tories have a chance, with them still there, they have no chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 May, 2014, 01:50:03 PM
The way the Tories have behaved I'd be surprised if they ever got Re-elected!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2014, 01:55:48 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 18 May, 2014, 09:33:32 PMvenal, asocial, evolution denying, mendacious f**king trash we get put in front of us on the ballot in NI are orders of magnitide beyond what you guys have to put up with in the rest of the UK.  :thumbsdown:

You forgot to add "holocaust deniers", "anti-semites", "terrorists", "Combat 18 apologists" etc.  I thought you'd at least know where you stood if you were electing a terrorist, but it seems quote-unquote socialism doesn't survive contact with a government job - on the other hand, bombs weren't working much so I suppose you can't blame them for finding a better way to dismantle British institutions in Northern Ireland (the NHS, Social Security etc).  Either way it just proves you can never trust a fucking commie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2014, 02:03:55 PM
This is what makes me chuckle* whenever I hear the vox populi going on about voting Sinn Fein Australis as a protest against austerity, the current government etc., as if this was some ingenious piece of realpolitik. Despite the fact that the only realistic outcome of a strong result for SF would be for them to enter a coalition with a mainstream party (one of the three that everyone hates), and if you want direct contemporary evidence of what that would look like, look no further than over the change-in-road-markings-formerly-known-as-the-Border. 

We also have a local European election candidate who bills himself as our 'Anti-Water Charges Candidate'.  It's certainly one way to avoid water charges, billeting yourself in Brussels/Strasbourg at our expense, but I'm not sure how having an MEP is going to help the people of Tallaght with their local services charges. 




*Not even vaguely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2014, 02:11:43 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 19 May, 2014, 01:50:03 PM
The way the Tories have behaved I'd be surprised if they ever got Re-elected!

Cheers

Sadly, people said that about the Tories before - when Thatcher was ousted.  They still got back in, and this time there's no single, unifying issue that galvanises the public against them like the Poll Tax Riots did, and if anything, I view Britain's population as less politicised these days that it used to be.  A massive protest vote is the only way I can see the Tories being definitively trumped and not just slinking back in as part of a coalition when a clear majority fails to materialise again, as much as it galls me to admit it, Dangerous Dave Cameron could do a much shitter job than the one he's done so far, and compared to the rest of the third world the UK isn't doing that bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 02:37:50 PM
I think the Tories are canny enough to have reined themselves in just enough to give them a chance, and if they get another shot will carve up whats left like a pack of piranhas... they arent going to do the damage this close to an election, but given another 5 years, we would really know what's what - sadly, I predict that's whats going to happen - you look at the UKIP vote, and you would expect that to come from disaffected Tories, but at least as much appears to come from Labour supporters who presumably don't know what they are voting for whether it be Labour or UKIP... as ever, we will get the Government we deserve, which is to say, not a good one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 May, 2014, 02:47:11 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 May, 2014, 01:26:38 PM
You're missing my point, Proudhuff.  I wasn't referring to the one Tory MP, I was referring to the forty odd Labour MPs at Westminster who, presumably, wouldn't be there if Scotland votes for independence.  With them gone, the Tories have a chance, with them still there, they have no chance.

I see what you mean, however I don't think they would ever hold the balance of power, Electing the next Tory/Ukipper Govt seems to be centred on Mondeo Man in Basildon or some-such place
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2014, 02:55:43 PM
I don't see how my particular personal situation would be different under any of the parties. It's still all about money and control no matter what colour the curtains are in Brussels or Downing Street.

Don't vote - you'll only encourage them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 03:06:37 PM
I thik the dioffernece is that Labour are generally wary bedfellows of business, whereas Tories are enthusiastic ones - the path may be the similar, but at least with Labour in charge we might not go so far so fast, and might avoid the real detours into absolute dismantling of every safety net.  So, yes, Labour mightnt be the dream party for me, but nothing winds me up more than the idea there is no diffference between the two - its the difference between being attacked by a trained rottweiler or a reluctant one...!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
Sorry, I can't agree with that. For example, just look who's paying Tony Blair's wages now - £13M last year alone - none other than JP Morgan, the bank that "convinced" the UK to sell its gold at knockdown prices. You think they pay him that because he was wary when in office?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 May, 2014, 03:32:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2014, 02:55:43 PM
Don't vote - you'll only encourage them!

More accurately: don't vote, you'll only hand control of political agenda to those who do.

Want to know why the government doesn't give a shit about youth unemployment? Because they don't vote. Want to know why they're brutally attacking those on benefits whilst making guarantees to pensioners (who are the cause of the real hole in the public finances)? Because people on benefits don't vote, and when they do, they don't vote Tory. Pensioners, on the other hand, do vote and as a group skew right. Want to know which chunk of the population is most aerated over immigration? Pensioners.

Even if you accept that all the parties are basically peddling the same neo-lib agenda, they still have to get a chunk of the population to vote for them and you can at least vary the flavour of the neo-lib ice cream even if they're all basically the same product...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 May, 2014, 04:38:39 PM
Cannot agree more with the comment above....voter apathy among the groups who are getting hammered by this govt will cause them to get a worse hammering the next time. People simply don't understand the value of a vote (or should I say of the votes of motivated groups of people).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 May, 2014, 05:02:31 PM
Whats peoples stance on spoiling votes? Does it count as a vote or not? It HAS to be counted but what it means is subjective. I view it as the closest to a "none of the above" option available.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2014, 05:06:18 PM
Votes have little value under the current structure. In my humble, the current system needs inverting. We should vote for our local representatives first, who should have absolute authority to do as they're told by the voters. These representatives (who we all know, as they are local) should then have the power to tell the local borough or county council what local communities need and they in turn should be able to tell Westminster what they need.

This way the power begins with local communities and trickles down through regional councils to London to Europe. Issues like immigration, then, become purely local matters as some areas need and benefit from immigration whilst others do not. This top down, "one size fits all" silly system we have now causes more problems than it solves.

I'm sure I've not explained that very well but it is a far from new idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 May, 2014, 05:06:56 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 19 May, 2014, 05:02:31 PM
Whats peoples stance on spoiling votes? Does it count as a vote or not? It HAS to be counted but what it means is subjective. I view it as the closest to a "none of the above" option available.

It's a waste of a vote. If everyone bar a single person spoiled their votes in an election, whoever got that single vote would still win. The crucial difference with 'None of the above' is that if 'None of the above' wins then no one gets elected.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 May, 2014, 05:24:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2014, 03:30:27 PM
just look who's paying Tony Blair's wages now - £13M last year alone - none other than JP Morgan, the bank that "convinced" the UK to sell its gold at knockdown prices. You think they pay him that because he was wary when in office?

Aye, New labour dropped their knickers for the financial sector. What's so annoying is that they seemed to get so little in return - they let the Square Mile do absolutely anything they wanted, and still didn't get enough in tax returns or increased GDP to build new schools or hospitals without saddling future generations with the burden of repaying the three-magic-beans-in-return-for-your-cow deals struck under PPP (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1518523.stm).

New Labour's time in office was characterised by inaction, complacency, and abject failure in almost every respect.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 05:47:04 PM
AS someone with kids attending a school in a rough neighbourhood during the Labour years, I saw a lot of money ploughed into that school and the area - whether it was money well spent, whether it was all PPP and a con I dont know... but at least these things were visible. Tories will also drop their knickers to use the lovely vernacular, but you arent even going to see a token or futile gesture the other way...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 May, 2014, 05:50:40 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 19 May, 2014, 05:24:10 PM
New Labour's time in office was characterised by inaction, complacency, and abject failure in almost every respect.

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/BZD55FACMAAlq2Ajpg_large_zps641cf633.jpg)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2014, 05:51:18 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 05:47:04 PMTories will also drop their knickers to use the lovely vernacular...

I don't think Tories have knickers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 05:54:04 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 May, 2014, 05:51:18 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 May, 2014, 05:47:04 PMTories will also drop their knickers to use the lovely vernacular...

I don't think Tories have knickers.

and that's the difference!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 May, 2014, 07:07:39 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 19 May, 2014, 05:24:10 PM
New labour dropped their knickers for the financial sector. What's so annoying is that they seemed to get so little in return - they let the Square Mile do absolutely anything they wanted, and still didn't get enough in tax returns or increased GDP to build new schools or hospitals without saddling future generations with the burden of repaying the three-magic-beans-in-return-for-your-cow deals struck under PPP (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1518523.stm).

New Labour's time in office was characterised by inaction, complacency, and abject failure in almost every respect

While New Labour was reaping the whirlwind of the housing boom and record stamp duty receipts (http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/stamp-duty/table15-1.pdf), gorging upon the dividend from auctioning off new areas of the telecoms spectrum (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/727831.stm), raiding private sector pension pots (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082511/Browns-17-000-tax-raid-EVERY-private-pension--value-cushy-public-sector-schemes-soars-1trillion.html), and offloading bullion reserves (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4162054/Gordon-Browns-decision-to-sell-half-of-the-UKs-gold-reserves-cost-UK-5billion.html) at Cash 4 Gold, they were urged to use the proceeds of these windfalls to set up something like Norway's sovereign wealth fund for the NHS - which would guarantee funding for 100 years, regardless of which party was in power.

They didn't, and now real terms cuts to NHS finances mean scandals like Mid-Staffs (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-20965469), where old folk die of dehydration and in their own filth, and reports of Accident and Emergency departments in Wales (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22041916) and Scotland (http://www.greenocktelegraph.co.uk/news/greenock/articles/2013/09/28/473150-ae-patients-face-8hour-wait-at-inverclyde-royal/) operating at breaking point as a matter of routine, are only going to increase as the current disingenuous pledges to maintain funding levels give way to the real implementation of austerity measures after the 2015 general election. We sure showed Saddam, though.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 May, 2014, 07:18:42 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 19 May, 2014, 07:07:39 PM
They didn't, and now real terms cuts to NHS finances mean scandals like Mid-Staffs (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-20965469), where old folk die of dehydration and in their own filth

You know that large parts of Julie Bailey's story don't hold water, right? Like vases having been banned from wards years before she says patients were forced to drink out of them? That the 'hundreds of deaths' claim trotted out about Mid-Staffs is the result of a persistent misrepresentation of the standardised mortality index uncritically parrotted by the media?

Quoteand reports of Accident and Emergency departments in Wales and Scotland operating at breaking point as a matter of routine

Might that have something to do with the Tories not protecting NHS spending and actually implementing real-terms budget cuts since they came into office? Coupled with their 're-organisation' that's sucked at least £3bn out of the NHS that could have been spent on nurses, while the reforms requiring services to be put out to tender are driving up administration and legal costs, diverting yet more money from actual care?

Might A&E Depts have been put under additional strain because the Tories removed the legal maximum amount of time a patient has to wait for a GP appointment, sending people to A&E for medical attention because they can't wait a week to see their own doctor?

Are you absolutely certain that the Tories' privatisation agenda isn't very well served by presenting the NHS* as being in crisis?

Cheers

Jim

*Note that I'm not saying that there aren't arguments for all sorts of NHS reform, but the Tories' aim is root-and-branch dismantling. They've said so. I don't agree that profit margin is an appropriate driver for standards of health care.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
Well, less than 24 hours to go until we get to vote in the European Elections.

I do think it is important to vote but these elections pose a dilemma for the average person.  I think that the EU is generally a good thing for the UK, especially in terms of trade and the fact that the UK is not the world power it once was so being part of the EU gives us increased protection/clout than if we went alone.  That said, of late many folks are concerned about immigration numbers and see the financial issues in places like Greece and Spain as being caused by the EU.  There are definitely areas for improvement but to be honest, when are there not?

The real issue with this election is how little debate I have heard about the EU short of UKIP telling us we need to leave and the other parties calling them racist.  I honestly have no clear idea what the Cons/Labs/Libs feel about Europe and what they will do if elected.  Perhaps some of this is due to the fact that they know the MEPs are fairly restricted in what they can achieve in Europe, given the number of seats UK has and the structure of the EU which also uses non-voted for elements.

I think UKIP will do well, partly because people have been bombarded with this fear of immigration and partly because they are one of the few parties with any clear message on Europe.  The real rub though, as I understand it, is that MEPs do not have the power to leave Europe - that decision would have to come from your normal Westminster MPs and UKIP currently have zero of those.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 21 May, 2014, 03:47:00 PM
my daughter gets a day off school so she's all for europe
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 May, 2014, 04:19:55 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
I think UKIP will do well, partly because people have been bombarded with this fear of immigration and partly because they are one of the few parties with any clear message on Europe.

Leaving aside whether in/out of the EU is a good/bad thing, the main problem with UKIP is that all their other policies are batshit insane. Remember that this is a party founded and bankrolled by people who don't think the most right-wing incarnation of the Conservative party for generations isn't right-wing enough.

Here's a handy illustration of UKIP's tax policy:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/BoCQzvsIMAAVnrIjpg_large_zpse7a7651c.jpg)

In case that graph's hard to read: earn less than ~£45K/pa and you will be worse off. Add to that their stated desire to completely privatise the NHS, thinking that the current Tory approach doesn't go far enough, fast enough; an end to statutory entitlements for workers' redundancy, sick pay, holiday entitlement and maternity leave; an immediate end to all renewable energy projects; the list goes on and on...

If all of that doesn't outweigh their position on Europe then I'm sorry, but you're out of your fucking mind. If you're a working man, UKIP is not your friend; if you're a woman of any kind, UKIP is not your friend; if you're gay or from any kind of minority, UKIP is not your friend. It's like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Gah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 May, 2014, 04:42:32 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
as I understand it, MEPs do not have the power to leave Europe - that decision would have to come from your normal Westminster MPs, and UKIP currently have zero of those

Dave's pledged to hold a fun IN/OUT referendum on EU membership - like the one he's letting us have in Scotland - if the Tories are re-elected in 2015:

(http://monmouthconservatives.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/imageproxy.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 04:44:40 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 May, 2014, 04:19:55 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 03:39:23 PM
I think UKIP will do well, partly because people have been bombarded with this fear of immigration and partly because they are one of the few parties with any clear message on Europe.

Leaving aside whether in/out of the EU is a good/bad thing, the main problem with UKIP is that all their other policies are batshit insane. Remember that this is a party founded and bankrolled by people who don't think the most right-wing incarnation of the Conservative party for generations isn't right-wing enough.

UKIP is a one-trick party.  Beyond 'leave Europe immediately' I think they literally just make up anything else. 

I think Lib/Lab/Con have to take a large portion of the blame here for failing to explain to people what Europe means and how we would most likely be worst off if we left rather than just trotting out some confusing guff.  The UKIP party have been sucessful in making this vote primarily about immigration, which is only one aspect of the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 04:51:15 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 21 May, 2014, 04:42:32 PM
Dave's pledged to hold a fun IN/OUT referendum on EU membership - like the one he's letting us have in Scotland - if the Tories are re-elected in 2015:

Pity Dave couldn't get this sorted before the next election but if he's promised then I guess we had better all vote for him!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 21 May, 2014, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 04:44:40 PM
I think Lib/Lab/Con have to take a large portion of the blame here for failing to explain to people what Europe means and how we would most likely be worst off if we left rather than just trotting out some confusing guff.

Agreed, and it's electoral suicide to be seen to unreservedly support the EU. Which is a shame. So our brave politicians keep quiet.
Clegg is the exception to this, but seems almost irrelevant given their catastrophic last few years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 May, 2014, 05:05:08 PM
With a bit of luck the EU might get their accounts signed off one year ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 May, 2014, 05:34:00 PM
It's such rubbish. "Oh yeah we'll have a referendum next time" has been pulled so many times it's laughable and I think the lie convinces people towards UKIP more than a straight 'NO' would do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 21 May, 2014, 05:44:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 May, 2014, 05:05:08 PM
With a bit of luck the EU might get their accounts signed off one year ;)

Depends who you believe CF  ;)

The European Court of Auditors issued the following statement as part of their press release on 5th November 2013:

EU accounts signed off, but errors persist in all main spending areas, say EU Auditors

The annual report on the EU budget for 2012 financial year was published today by the European Court of Auditors (ECA). As independent auditor, the ECA has signed off the 2012 accounts of the European Union, as it has done each year since the 2007 financial year. But in most spending areas of the EU budget the report finds that the legislation in force is still not fully complied with.

Now, the Daily Mail reported on 5th November 2013:

Auditors refuse to give EU accounts a clean bill of health for 19th year in a row as rate of unexplained spending rises 23%... with UK liable for £800m.

Auditors yesterday refused to sign off the EU accounts for the 19th year in succession as they revealed that the spending errors are 23 per cent up on the year before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 May, 2014, 05:45:57 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 21 May, 2014, 05:34:00 PM
It's such rubbish. "Oh yeah we'll have a referendum next time" has been pulled so many times it's laughable and I think the lie convinces people towards UKIP more than a straight 'NO' would do

Dave's letting the SNP have their independence referendum, and that wasn't one of his campaign pledges at a general election - which the 2017 EU membership referendum will be. He'd be finished politically if he went back on that specific pledge, and probably the Tories would be too. I don't think it matters, but I don't think it's possible for him to go back on that pledge either.

If the current atmosphere still obtains a year from now, I think whoever takes power after the 2015 general election is going to have to honour Dave's pledge.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 May, 2014, 05:59:13 PM
Hi Jim, thanks for telling me I'm "out of my f.....g mind".  You said before that the European Union is an abstract thing, and didn't respond when I pointed out some of the areas where the European Union is certainly not an abstract thing.  It affects our lives on a daily basis for good and bad.

I'm not voting Ukip because I think they're going to get elected, it's about forcing one of the main parties to give us a choice on the matter, as opposed to them all being for membership of the European Union.  That's all I want.  And if that makes me "f.....g mad", so be it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 May, 2014, 06:56:18 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 May, 2014, 04:19:55 PMIf all of that doesn't outweigh their position on Europe then I'm sorry, but you're out of your fucking mind.

I think this comment takes things too far, Jim - the idea that brain problems would make someone vote for UKIP is grossly insulting to harmless mentalists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 21 May, 2014, 09:40:58 PM
Morris the cat is surely the answer to all our electoral woes.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/the-sideshow/morris-cat-running-mayor-mexican-city-184338488.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 21 May, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
What is TTIP (http://newint.org/features/2014/05/01/trojan-treaties/) and where do your MEPs stand on it (particularly if England pulls out of the EU)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
It's global Fascism, that's all, and we're all too busy trying to make enough money to pay for it to fight it.
.
Never mind, though, we've got plenty of mindless politics, shallow news, ignorant racism and pointless television to distract us from it.
.
One day very soon we will all wake up as slaves in the countries our ancestors built for us and won't know exactly how or why or when it happened. It's just like boiling frogs - with us as the frogs.
.
It's time we started asking some fundamental questions such as, why do you have to pay to live on a planet you were born on?
.
Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm just a looney conspiracy theorist living in a borrowed tent. Nothing to see here. Move along.
.
Move along.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 22 May, 2014, 12:14:16 AM
I'm just glad to hear from you, Shark. Every time I see your name as last poster on this thread I wonder if you've blown up the Palace of Westminster!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2014, 12:17:31 AM
Not so long ago you were getting on at us for giving him ideas.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2014, 12:10:03 AMNever mind, though, we've got plenty of mindless politics, shallow news, ignorant racism and pointless television to distract us from it.

Circuses are nothing new, Sharky, but they still didn't stop the odd slave rebellion from happening.  Chin up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 May, 2014, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 May, 2014, 05:59:13 PM
I'm not voting Ukip because I think they're going to get elected, it's about forcing one of the main parties to give us a choice on the matter, as opposed to them all being for membership of the European Union.  That's all I want.  And if that makes me "f.....g mad", so be it.

European elections aren't run on first-past-the-post: vote for an extremist party and you'll get an extremist MEP, and the message you'll be sending to Westminster is "more extremism, please". You cannot pick a single issue out of UKIP's reprehensible array of policies and say that is what you're voting for, any more than you could say "Ooh, that nice Mr Hitler does have some funny ideas about the Jews but I'm in favour of his fiscal policy."

If you want to ignore the numerous policies I have clearly outlined and pretend that your vote for UKIP is solely about EU membership, particularly when the Tories are clearly committed to giving you a referendum on that very issue, then I say again: turkeys and Christmas.

QuoteYou said before that the European Union is an abstract thing, and didn't respond when I pointed out some of the areas where the European Union is certainly not an abstract thing.

Actually, I said that compared to a list of other things that I thought it was worth getting politically aggravated about, the EU was an abstract thing to be putting at the top of your concerns.

Quotefrom how much I pay for my groceries,

OK... you're going to need to tell me specifically how the EU affects this. I accept that there are lots of areas of EU policy/legislation that might affect this, but I need to know what you're specifically saying affects the cost of your weekly shop at Tesco, or wherever.

Quoteto how long it takes to see a doctor,

The current government has removed the legal requirement for your GP to see you within a specific timeframe. I'm unclear what the EU's involvement in that was.

Quoteto how much VAT I pay on my utility bills,

Yes, VAT is a European tax and significant changes to exemptions and reduced rates is subject to EU ratification, but VAT is also the government's third largest revenue stream. If you think domestic VAT* would look in any way different if we left the EU, you're sadly mistaken.

Quoteto the amount of green taxes I have to pay,

Some green taxes originate with the EU. Some don't. We'll have to agree to disagree on whether environmental protection is a good thing.

Quoteto having to move my bank because of EU rules

Again, you'll have to explain this to me.

Jim

*One thing that would happen, however, is that UK businesses trading with Europe would lose the ability to net off VAT charged and paid on some categories of services and product and just have to pay the whole lot. There are many reasons that no businesses which trade with Europe want to leave the EU, and this is one of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 May, 2014, 08:22:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2014, 12:10:03 AM
Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm just a looney conspiracy theorist living in a borrowed tent.

The Prophet of Millets.  I'm starting to think Mr. Ipsum Lorem, Position, Address 1, Address 2, City, Country, Postcode is actually your image consultant, Shark!

No, there isn't a word of that I couldn't agree with.  TTIP is a Bad Thing.  I asked a prospective MEP about it last week, and they blathered a bit and said they'd 'look into it'.  As you can imagine I was inspired by their zeal and general awareness.

Incidentally, the figures in the linked article suggest a 100 billion boost for the EU - that's 200 bucks each!  What're you going to do when they send you yours, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2014, 09:03:22 AM
Parliament doesn't need blowing up, it needs rescuing. I just wish I'd realised that before opening up all those abandoned underground lines and buying 25,000 dominoes...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 May, 2014, 09:50:48 AM
Hi Jim, I know the EU elections are not first passed the post but the idea is to make one of the main parties, probably Tory, change their EU policies in the General Election of either 2015 or, more probably, 2020.

As regards to how the EU affects me, my answers to your questions are:-

1.  The Common Agricultural Policy has forced up food prices over the years because of EU import tariffs on non-EU produce.  The UK is a net contributor to the EU budget, so who's taxes do you think were being used in the old days to create butter mountains and are now being used to pay farmers to keep their fields fallow.

2.  I live in an area of high population growth, some of it because of EU immigration, but my local doctor's surgery has not taken on any more doctors, but has taken on many more patients.  Therefore it takes me longer to see my doctor.  I don't care what the law says, that's the reality.

3.  I'm old enough to remember Gordon Brown wanting to scrap VAT on utility bills but he wasn't allowed to because of EU law.

4.  Green taxes are higher because we're in the EU.

5.  Yes, I know it's unbelievable but last year I was forced, because of EU rules, to move my bank account from Lloyds to another bank, even though it makes it much more difficult for me to visit my new bank.  But, hey!, why would the EU care about that!

Of course, these are just a few examples of the EU affecting my daily life, there are many more.  I'm just answering your specific points.

Finally, why would I pretend anything?  I don't care what you think of me.  I don't know you, so c'est la vie!




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 May, 2014, 10:14:50 AM
Well I'm voting UKIP because I'm sick of the gays controlling the weather
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 May, 2014, 10:28:13 AM
Why on earth would you be forced to move your account from Lloyds?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 May, 2014, 12:45:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 22 May, 2014, 09:50:48 AM
Hi Jim, I know the EU elections are not first passed the post but the idea is to make one of the main parties, probably Tory, change their EU policies in the General Election of either 2015 or, more probably, 2020.

You're providing support and validation for a racist, right-wing fringe party in order to force Cameron into doing something that he's already promised to do (i.e: hold an in/out referendum)?

QuoteOf course, these are just a few examples of the EU affecting my daily life, there are many more.  I'm just answering your specific points.

I should point out this is your list which you offered as reasons why you would place a party's position on EU membership as a higher political priority than the list of things I offered which, for the sake of completeness was this:

The systematic stealth dismantling of the NHS? The privatisation of the state education system? Plans to sell our medical and tax information to private companies? Hundreds of millions of pounds spent hounding sick and disabled people on benefits until they commit suicide? The state of British railways (we spend more subsidising our railways now that we did when it was nationalised and yet every single train operator turns a profit)?

Quote1.  The Common Agricultural Policy has forced up food prices over the years because of EU import tariffs on non-EU produce.  The UK is a net contributor to the EU budget, so who's taxes do you think were being used in the old days to create butter mountains and are now being used to pay farmers to keep their fields fallow.

Agriculture is a mess. I'm just as inclined to point to the distorting economic effects of the supermarket cartel, which gives rise to such insanities as the fact that we live on island that's basically a 600-mile strip of prime grazing pasture and all our dairy farmers are going out of business...

I don't know what the answer is, but I'll readily agree that isn't the CAP.

Quote2.  I live in an area of high population growth, some of it because of EU immigration, but my local doctor's surgery has not taken on any more doctors, but has taken on many more patients.  Therefore it takes me longer to see my doctor.  I don't care what the law says, that's the reality.

Wait. What? Your GP practise which — let's not forget — is a private business that makes money by providing a contracted service to the NHS chose to preserve its revenues by not taking on additional doctors, driving up waiting periods for appointments, and the current government has changed the law so that GPs are now legally able to do this. And this is the EU's fault?

Quote3.  I'm old enough to remember Gordon Brown wanting to scrap VAT on utility bills but he wasn't allowed to because of EU law.

How old you think I am?

I appreciate that every penny counts, but I suspect that flagrant profiteering by the privatised utilities is a larger chunk of your bill every month than the 5% that's going on VAT. You should have voted Green — they're committed to an in/out EU referendum and renationalising the energy utilities.

Quote4.  Green taxes are higher because we're in the EU.

I didn't dispute this. Green taxes serve a purpose. Whether or not that purpose is worthwhile is a different argument.

Quote5.  Yes, I know it's unbelievable but last year I was forced, because of EU rules, to move my bank account from Lloyds to another bank, even though it makes it much more difficult for me to visit my new bank.  But, hey!, why would the EU care about that!

I assume you're talking about the Lloyds/TSB de-merger? If so, it's true that this stemmed from EU legislation on anti-competitive practices — the generally sensible principle that trading partners shouldn't use government aid to give companies an unfair competitive advantage. This sort of thing is often also covered by international trade treaties and agreements — are you saying that governments should never sign any of those?

With respect to your specific example: I don't understand how you found yourself in that situation. The worst thing that should have happened was that your local branch turned into a TSB — was that not the case, or are you referring to something other than the de-merger?

Jim

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2014, 01:50:52 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 22 May, 2014, 10:14:50 AM
Well I'm voting UKIP because I'm sick of the gays controlling the weather

Damn gays.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2014, 02:00:39 PM
I'm on a real post-apocalyptic binge right now so I'm voting UKIP because I think I would do well if I lived in Mad Max times.  I imagine the actual apocalypse would be hard on most people, but the main thing is I'd be alright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 22 May, 2014, 03:15:59 PM
I never knew that gay people had super-powers. Wow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Radbacker on 22 May, 2014, 04:08:53 PM
Polatics schmolatics, we dont realise how feeble our poblems are in Stable places like OZ and the UK, all I can say is don't be in Thailand at the moment, which I am hope they don't close the airport before Monday when I'm due to fly out :(. One bonus i suppose ive Never seen a real tank until today

CU radbacker
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 May, 2014, 04:17:22 PM
Good luck Radbacker!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2014, 04:24:21 PM
Things is only stable in Oz if you're a honky.  If you're an Aboriginal, the government is (still) stealing babies that can pass for white and then selling them.  In the UK, one of our own boarders has been booted out of his home for daring to suggest that two arms of the same government should talk to each other rather than have him jump through hoops just so they can give themselves money - perhaps this is what Nigel means when he says no-one wants to live on a street with Romanians, he meant actually living on the street?

As an afterthought: stay safe, Radbacker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 May, 2014, 04:31:31 PM
That's my X's put in their boxes and dear God what a massive list of candidates on the European paper. Had good fun reading about them, funniest was the Harmony Party, as they are anything but!

Can't wait to see what happens as the results come in through the night. Something to listen to while at work, as the parties come up with their excuses/reasons as to why they didn't do so well, or better than expected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 22 May, 2014, 04:42:51 PM
I'm pretty sure the results for the Euro elections won't be announced until Sunday - but I guess we'll see the others soon enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 May, 2014, 04:47:32 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 May, 2014, 04:31:31 PMThat's my X's put in their boxes and dear God what a massive list of candidates on the European paper. Had good fun reading about them, funniest was the Harmony Party, as they are anything but!

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Fruitcakes_zps4cfa76d5.jpg)

I had to google "An Independence from Europe" Party when I got home — turns out that one of the things they're outraged about is the metric system. Nice to see they've got their priorities straight...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 May, 2014, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 21 May, 2014, 10:54:49 PM
What is TTIP (http://newint.org/features/2014/05/01/trojan-treaties/)

Thanks to listening to many impassioned rants by Jello Biafra in the nineties, I know that it's basically NAFTA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement). Biafra's big beef with NAFTA was that its terms allowed a foreign bio-tech or pharmaceutical corporation to sue a signatory nation because that nation's legislation concerning clinical trials and consumer safety prohibited the sale of the corporation's products (on the grounds that they hadn't been tested properly or had been tested and found not to meet the safety standards of the host nation).

The basis on which the corporation would be able to sue the nation which prohibits the sale of a medicine or product it considers unsafe or unproven would be the corporation's right to profit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 22 May, 2014, 04:53:18 PM
Does the Harmony Party lobby for more Scalextric?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 May, 2014, 04:56:23 PM
Whole lotta vote splittin' goin' on.

You have to love the English Democrats - I'd hate to see what their regional meetings are like.  "I'm Kentish - I'm not English or British or EUropean or Human".  I suppose if one was to pursue their line of reasoning far enough we might arrive at a place where we agree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 May, 2014, 05:03:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 May, 2014, 04:56:23 PM
I suppose if one was to pursue their line of reasoning far enough we might arrive at a place where we agree.

Hah. Stuart Lee appears to have had much the same thought (http://youtu.be/f4fQDAyl4GU).

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 May, 2014, 05:06:39 PM
Quote from: Radbacker on 22 May, 2014, 04:08:53 PM
Polatics schmolatics, we dont realise how feeble our problems are in stable places like OZ and the UK. All I can say is don't be in Thailand at the moment, which I am. Hope they don't close the airport before Monday when I'm due to fly out. One bonus, I suppose; I've never seen a real tank until today

Nasty - remember, curfew's 10 pm. Say what you like about the state of UK democracy, at least we manage to make it from one general election to another without Philip Hammond parking his tank up on the green outside Westminster and declaring martial law. I determined the fate of continental Europe at 7:38 am this morning, and if any of you peasants haven't registered your opposition to my will by 10pm tonight I don't want to see you on hear moaning about EU or UK politics again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 05:40:20 PM
Just voted at St Bart's on the leafy environs of the Stranmillis road. There was a lovely tiger striped tabby lolling about in the entrance....would have voted for her anyday, instead voted as ever for the anti-nasty party ticket, which doesn't work any more caure they're in control. How did it come to this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 May, 2014, 05:45:48 PM
I did mine weeks ago, you're all slow.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 May, 2014, 06:20:56 PM
I just popped to the primary school across the road to cast my vote, although the first voter card they sent me was for the same polling station as Zen, which is miles away, for reasons best understood by our local petty bureaucrats. Loads of election posters have popped up on our street overnight. They really are an ugly lot. Luckily for them, I don't vote on their appearance, I vote for the party(s) which weren't founded/based on sectarian xenophobia and bigotry. This severely limited my choices.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2014, 07:14:43 PM
Not sure I wish to disclose whom I voted for but it certainly wasn't the BNP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 07:25:55 PM
Jeez Hawk, you're still voting for dinosaurs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2014, 07:35:41 PM
Gotta do it i'm afraid, other wise I can't really bring myself to critisise the system unless I do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 08:11:15 PM
Well I went mostly vote Sauropod as opposed to Orthopod in antedieluvian choice menu. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 08:49:39 PM
Sorry Hawk: lizard toe/foot and bird foot/toe...so my last should have been orinth? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2014, 08:54:15 PM
You got it correct buddy! But if we're gonna refer to the Tories as prehistoric reptilians they have to be pro-sauropoda. Big fat useless sods namely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 May, 2014, 09:04:24 PM
Yeah but your problem there Zen is the that Saurischians (lizard hipped) also include the Theropods, so when you vote Saurischian you just don't know whether you're getting a lumbering but essentially harmless suaropod or a pack of savage little bambiraptors. 

Best vote Ornithischian (bird hipped) - at least then your swarm of aimiable duck-bills are only really cut with Ceratopsids and Ankylosaurs, and that's not half bad.

I lost track of this metaphor some time ago, didn't I?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2014, 09:10:26 PM
NOnonono lets role with it! So long as this makes Screaming Lord Sutch a Therazinosauride, a sheep in lions clothing, then we can keep rolling. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2014, 11:53:49 PM
Prehistoric Mafia Party - youvotafaurus.
.
Prehistoric Neocon Party - lieterrorcops
.
Prehistoric SNP Party - ochayeoptionfix
.
I'll get me loincloth...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 11:59:15 PM
I didn't vote Baryonyx, there was something fishy about it; I went for Troodon instead, it was the smart choice! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 02:26:40 AM
Well, well, well!

This is absolutely hilarious, I didn't expect this much of a protest vote in the local elections, or is the country just full of horrible people :lol:

I'm listening to the bickering from party bigwigs as UKIP have become a little bit more than a fly in the ointment.

I wonder if this continues through the night!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 05:22:55 AM
Dear me :D

From the BBC

The Conservatives have lost control of Maidstone Borough Council while UKIP has gained four seats.

Can't wait to watch the local news tonight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 23 May, 2014, 05:50:00 AM
Don't like the common view that mid-term non-Westminster elections are simply 'protest'. By avoiding the tired old first-past-the-post system you can vote with your convictions (like the Scottish Parliament, hurray). I voted Green last night, a first... but it gets COUNTED. Could not bring myself to endorse any of the 'big' parties. Or the racists...
Watched no coverage of this yet but expect the usual whingeing of big cheeses. Sigh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 May, 2014, 06:51:10 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 02:26:40 AM
I didn't expect this much of a protest vote in the local elections, or is the country just full of horrible people :lol:

Not enough horrible people to give UKIP control of a single council.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2014, 08:02:03 AM
They only put up candidates in about half the seats that were up for election, so they were never going to control any councils.  It's about the percentage vote in the seats that they did stand in.  And from a standing start, in most cases, they've done very well.  Role on Sunday!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 May, 2014, 08:19:10 AM
I'd love to know whether a media focus on UKIP and anti-UKIP stuff on social media has much of an effect, or if it just reinforces whichever side you're on.

I was quite surprised that Labour didn't do worse, with Cameron actually offering an in/out referendum, and Miliband's not exactly a star performer.

Anyway, my local council has swung to Labour from NOC. UKIP doesn't seem to have done as well in London.

I also spotted Magna being used for the Rotheram count last night - a step sideways from the unsavoury types that filled the place when we were making Judge Minty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 May, 2014, 08:30:41 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 22 May, 2014, 11:59:15 PM
I didn't vote Baryonyx, there was something fishy about it; I went for Troodon instead, it was the smart choice! Z

First guffaw of the day!

Vote Gorehead - tough on time-travelling cowboys, tough on the causality of time-travelling cowboys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 08:49:09 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 23 May, 2014, 08:19:10 AM
UKIP doesn't seem to have done as well in London.

UKIP polls less well where there actual immigrants shock!

Yeah... they score well in areas where people pretty much wouldn't know what an immigrant was if one moved in next door to them and married their daughter. Apart from that nice man who runs the local takeaway, but he's not a proper immigrant, you understand....

Gah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 May, 2014, 09:37:43 AM
Tordelwife and I were the only people in the polling station this morning the whole time we were there.  The ballot papers were filled with people - and indeed whole parties - I had never heard of, and I've been taking a decent amount of interest in proceedings, talking to cadgers at the door, reading bamf and even looking at Council and European voting records.

Only one thing is clear: Sinn Fein consistently have the best-looking candidates, and plenty of 'em, so I imagine the new thumbnail photos on the ballot paper benefit them hugely.  If it was a vote for which M/F pairing you'd like to see in a naughty film, they'd have my 1 and 2, as opposed to me not giving them a preference of any kind, because I own a memory.

Round here this has been the election of big stupid grins on posters, and while initially it annoyed me, as the weeks wore on I noticed that Labour's candidates (who along with the various Anti-Austerity chaps have generally retained the grim tight-lipped demeanour of the proletariat) look badly out of place amongst all the expensive dentistry and I have to resist the urge to wish they'd cheer the feck up. 

We're living in a dentocracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 May, 2014, 09:58:52 AM
Just want to say thanks to the people on this thread who know a lot more about politics than I do and have actually taught me a few things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 May, 2014, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 08:49:09 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 23 May, 2014, 08:19:10 AM
UKIP doesn't seem to have done as well in London.

UKIP polls less well where there actual immigrants shock!

And also where - by a party spokesperson's own admission - the electorate leans toward being "educated, cultured and young."

So they're saying they know their natural voter base is the uneducated, the uncultured and the old?

/looks at the available evidence on this very thread

Yep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 10:10:46 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 May, 2014, 09:58:52 AM
have actually taught me a few things.

I thought that was Roger's mum?

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 May, 2014, 10:16:39 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 10:10:46 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 May, 2014, 09:58:52 AM
have actually taught me a few things.

I thought that was Roger's mum?

Cheers!

Jim


'Shots where fired, missiles where launched'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 May, 2014, 12:30:05 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 05:22:55 AM
Dear me :D

From the BBC

The Conservatives have lost control of Maidstone Borough Council while UKIP has gained four seats.

Can't wait to watch the local news tonight.

Maidstone looks like an interesting one - tories have 25 on a 55 seat council, so don't have a majority but can win a vote if  any of the non-labour [parties vote with them, or even just 3 individuals from across the spectrum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 May, 2014, 12:39:05 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 May, 2014, 12:30:05 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 05:22:55 AM
Dear me :D

From the BBC

The Conservatives have lost control of Maidstone Borough Council while UKIP has gained four seats.

Can't wait to watch the local news tonight.

Maidstone looks like an interesting one - tories have 25 on a 55 seat council, so don't have a majority but can win a vote if  any of the non-labour [parties vote with them, or even just 3 individuals from across the spectrum.

Yes, it appears to be full of Right Wing nutters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 May, 2014, 01:05:42 PM
Being thick, I always choose who I want to be in charge of council refuse-collecting and local planning permission committees based on what they think of Europe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 May, 2014, 02:09:07 PM
UKIP were quite clear, they are sending it all back wherever it came from.

Doesn't bode well for the bins
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2014, 04:01:47 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 23 May, 2014, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 08:49:09 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 23 May, 2014, 08:19:10 AM
UKIP doesn't seem to have done as well in London.

UKIP polls less well where there actual immigrants shock!

And also where - by a party spokesperson's own admission - the electorate leans toward being "educated, cultured and young."

So they're saying they know their natural voter base is the uneducated, the uncultured and the old?

/looks at the available evidence on this very thread

Yep.

Yep, that's me.  Come on Nige!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 May, 2014, 05:31:06 PM

Am I the only one who can't quite see the evidence of the political earthquake I've been hearing about on the radio all day?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/england-council-election-results

UKIP are now less than half as powerful and influential (in local government) as the Lib-Dems, who took an absolute tanking. UKIP increased their number of seats, but that's not difficult if you're starting from a base of just 2, and Farage currently has less than 10% of the number of seats that gormless Ed Miliband managed to muster. I'm not sure the age of four party politics is upon us just yet.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mattofthespurs on 23 May, 2014, 05:47:06 PM
Voted yesterday.
In the council elections my choice, an independent, won. The only candidate to actually make an effort and address the issues of the place I live. hallelujah!

In the Euro bollocks I voted Labour. Was interested to note that out of the twelve parties 3 were outright (and proud of it) racist whilst the fourth were clearly xenophobic (no guesses needed there). Not a chance. Cons will win this easily because I live in Cambridgeshire.

Oh well, one out of two ain't bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 06:04:28 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 May, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
Am I the only one who can't quite see the evidence of the political earthquake I've been hearing about on the radio all day?

Yeah. The media coverage on this has been ludicrous. My main question is: if UKIP only had TWO FUCKING COUNCILLORS before this, why have they been getting ANY media coverage at all up until now?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 May, 2014, 06:24:11 PM
They only had 2 seats among the 161 councils up for election this year. They picked up a bunch of seats at the previous council elections a year or two ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Obviously no UKIP members managed to get any positions in the Labour heartlands. I wouldn't dare to presume that those votes came from the racist left, which come next year you'll be wanting back to vote for the non racist left!

As for Maidstone, the battle is always between the Tory party and the Liberal party and the Tories have always been in power since I've been here. I always vote against them in local elections (obviosuly I wouldn't dare to vote the loony left) as I don't agree with how they behave for the good of the town.

I'm sure that the main parties will be having some in depth talks behind the scenes about what's gone wrong with the populace because they are not behaving like sheep anymore and voting the way they want them to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 07:12:27 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 06:37:49 PM
Obviously no UKIP members managed to get any positions in the Labour heartlands. I wouldn't dare to presume that those votes came from the racist left, which come next year you'll be wanting back to vote for the non racist left!

Oh, do fuck off, John.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 23 May, 2014, 07:16:33 PM
My son-in-law came 2nd in Park Ward in Knowsley Council - with 46% of the vote. Knowsley Council has 60/60 Labour Councillors. He was standing for a new local party (who didn't stand on any National policies as Councils don't decide National policy.

No major party has got that close for quite some time. UKIP & BNP didn't stand. Nor did the Cons or Libs as they'd lose their deposit.

As a serving Civil Servant I can't comment on the EU Elections. So that's about that from me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 07:16:40 PM
So Jim, where have all these racists come from then?

You can swear all you like over the forum, as is your want but seeing as the labour heartland had UKIP votes, just where have they come from?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 07:31:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 07:16:40 PM
So Jim, where have all these racists come from then?

Labour voters can be racists, too, John. You insist on commenting as if there were these stupid fucking tribal divides, all the while protesting that people unfairly categorise you. It's thoroughly tiresome.

And it's "as is your wont" (http://www.wordreference.com/definition/wont).

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 May, 2014, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 07:16:40 PM
seeing as the labour heartland had UKIP votes, just where have all these racists come from then?

I think the preferred term is bigots, John. Your question is similar to one posed by this nice old lady:

(http://posthegemony.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/bigot.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 23 May, 2014, 07:43:42 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 May, 2014, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 May, 2014, 07:16:40 PM
seeing as the labour heartland had UKIP votes, just where have all these racists come from then?

I think the preferred term is bigots, John. Your question is similar to one posed by this nice old lady:

(http://posthegemony.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/bigot.jpg)


betty turpin was a bigot? then again I never saw her serve brown bread with her hotpot  ;) I want tell if you want
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 23 May, 2014, 07:59:54 PM
My son-in-law quoted in Liverpool Echo. 1st 4 Kirkby just misses seat in Knowsley Council elections (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/knowsley-council-election-results-1st-7167817) That link is to the Liverpool Echo (just in case anyone thought I'd suddenly started blogging about politics)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 May, 2014, 08:01:03 PM
Shall we all calm down a little chaps..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 23 May, 2014, 08:03:46 PM
never! a slur has been cast on betty and I won't stand for it I tell you!!!! :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 08:23:33 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 May, 2014, 08:01:03 PM
Shall we all calm down a little chaps..?

Fucking lesbian Muslim terrorists, coming over here, moderating our forums...

;-P

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 May, 2014, 08:45:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2014, 08:23:33 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 23 May, 2014, 08:01:03 PM
Shall we all calm down a little chaps..?

Fucking lesbian Muslim terrorists, coming over here, moderating our forums...

;-P

Jim

It's Penguins Griffin has a problem with now, Penguins Jim!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 23 May, 2014, 08:48:06 PM
if he just eats less penguins he wouldn't be such a fat bastard, problem solved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 May, 2014, 08:48:46 PM

The BNP won no seats at yesterday's local authority elections. I don't think Griffin can afford to lose so many deposits:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/england-council-election-results

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 May, 2014, 09:14:56 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 23 May, 2014, 08:48:46 PM

The BNP won no seats at yesterday's local authority elections.

This news, at least, pleases me.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 May, 2014, 12:22:29 PM
I'm finding it hard to find turnout numbers for these elections, normally they are highly advertised, i did hear a turnout of 36%, if that is the case then the UKIP groundswell is hardly that, 17% of 36%?

Nicely illustrating Jim's point above!



The big question they all should be asking is why the other 64% didn't vote?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 01:06:27 PM
As pointed out before: utter disconnect. The difficulty is the agendaised 35% are calling the shots. The 65% by not voting are empowering people with a vested interest in keeping the 65% in or near the poorhouse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 01:41:37 PM
Maybe people are beginning to realise that it's like voting for your favourite disease - why bother?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 May, 2014, 01:59:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 01:41:37 PM
Maybe people are beginning to realise that it's like voting for your favourite disease - why bother?

Because voting for the common cold means you're less likely to end up with the Ebola virus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 02:05:03 PM
Shark, because when you don't, you can gurantee someone (probably not with your best interests at heart) is voting. As the system is constituted, they then by proxy have the whip hand. I guess if voter participation fell below 25% there would be an issue of legitimacy, which would have to be seriously addressed...possibly. But sheer apathy/inertia seems a poor way of effecting positive change?Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 May, 2014, 02:51:42 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 24 May, 2014, 12:22:29 PM
The big question they all should be asking is why the other 64% didn't vote?

Because no-one has a clue who their MEP is and they never hear a single report of what their MEP and their pals have been up to in Brussels/Strasbourg from one year to another. You could argue that's because it's all so big and far away, but the same probably applies to their local councillor too.

Nick Robinson and his lot often leave the studio to do vox pops in shopping centres where they show members of the public a photograph of the leader of an opposition party and ask them if they know who they are. When hardly anyone can name them, the political correspondent grimly opines that said leader clearly has more work to do getting his name and his message out to UK voters, but when they do the same with Dave Cameron's picture the results aren't much better.

You remember how everyone slagged off that girl who tweeted something about Baracko Barma (sic) being leader of the country? That's because they thought she'd posted a picture of Andy Peters by mistake.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 03:05:44 PM
You vote when you're very young and angry, and you vote when you're very old and angry at how immigrants have made you a failure in life, but in between is the apathy years where you get jaded and have better things to do than vote.  For a laugh, I think one year we should have an election via social media - buggered if I know how that'll turn out, but I'm betting the country will at least be eventful for a few years.

In other news, Northern Irish intellectuals engaged head-on with the subject of multiculturalism in a polarised society: https://audioboo.fm/boos/2186646-nolan-clashes-with-caller-over-muslims
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 May, 2014, 03:14:30 PM
What is the worse that happens if you vote for the best available option in your opinion? Even if you don't believe that any of those options will do anything more than sustain a broken system, it's not as though any of us have a choice in that system - we are in it one way or another, no matter how vehement an opposition we have towards it.

At the very least, you could vote for the Greens, who are the only ones proposing anything different from varying shades of callousness towards Business As Usual. Or if possible the Monster Raving Loony Party who if they could stand across the nation, would make a very good candidate for a protest vote.

QuoteAs pointed out before: utter disconnect. The difficulty is the agendaised 35% are calling the shots. The 65% by not voting are empowering people with a vested interest in keeping the 65% in or near the poorhouse.


Agreed! Though I would trade any turnout at MEP election for a better turnout at the general election. One doesn't matter much without the other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 03:27:58 PM
Instead of swearing off politics if you don't agree with your MP, why not try changing their minds on issues in their manifesto that concern you?  They work for you, after all, and they don't have the luxury of long-term intransigence and must constantly modify their views to better represent the changing times we live in - even the Tories have grasped that much, and their whole deal is that they think it's still the middle ages.  You can't just pick someone and stand back and let them have at it, because you will never find someone who is in agreement with you on all matters: you must engage.  Opting out merely lets the worst possible candidates have a clear run at legitimacy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 05:26:03 PM
And what if I wish to commit the Cardinal Sin of  running my own life under Common Law? Entering into the contracts I want to enter into and refusing those I believe to be unethical or against my conscience?
.
If I vote to be infected with the common cold it makes absolutely no difference if the majority votes for AIDS or cancer.
.
The government, in my opinion, is there to govern things like the infrastructure of the country in order to keep it running for the benefit of all - no matter their personal political views - and not to rule every aspect of our lives like some elected tyrant.
.
Our government is no longer fit for purpose, it has been hijacked by corporate interests who are using it as a money-hoover to enrich and empower themselves by making it "law" that we all must work ever harder and ever longer to support these Fascist institutions.
.
Dissent is controlled and misdirected through "parties" like the BNP, UKIP, Greens and Monster Raving Loonies which are designed to water down disagreement by picking one or two emotive issues apiece, forcing us to choose whichever we feel most strongly about. This ensures only a fragmented and weak range of "one size fits all" politics which confuses myriad issues and condenses them into pointless and corrosive factions, keeping us all at one another's throats like little more than football hooligans fighting for our "teams" no matter how well they're playing.
.
Human beings are tribal animals who enjoy, and may even be genetically predisposed to, belonging to groups - just like being a Squaxx and belonging to this 2000ADonline group. How many of us, though, belong to just one group? Every human being is unique and has a wide range of (often contradictory) opinions, experiences and beliefs yet our politicians offer only very limited options from which we are forced to choose as if Freedom of Choice is the only Freedom we are entitled to.
.
Well, I choose not to choose. It's David Cameron's job to make sure my sewers work, my water is clean and my roads are in good repair. It is not his job to tell me how to live and who to pay for my existence on this Earth.
.
We need, as a matter of some urgency, to rescue our governments all over the world and put them to work FOR EVERYONE, not just the same old elites who control us by controlling the "political agenda". In my view, the government should be neutral and help everyone by leaving us alone until we, individually, need impartial and lawful assistance.
.
The only vote I have any right to cast is for whomever I wish to rule my own life - and the only person with any right to rule my life is me just as the only person with any right to rule your life is you - and so long as I/you don't infringe on the lives of others against their will then where's the harm?
.
The power is yours, the sovereignty is yours, the country is yours, the future is yours - don't give it all away to these greedy, self-serving muppets who think they know what's best for you - because, just like the rest of us, they only know (or think they know) what's best for themselves.
.
Every time you vote you betray yourself,  sacrifice your own freedoms and abdicate your own responsibilities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 06:21:06 PM
I feel compelled to point out that the guy I voted for lives three doors down and I've known him all my life.  Our street is a shithole, so he's not exactly the rich, distant fatcat of political lore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 06:54:28 PM
And does this guy know how you should live your life better than you do? Does he know how you should raise your children better than you do? Does he know what you should believe, how you should behave and how much you can afford to pay better than you do?
.
If the answer is yes, then by all means vote for him and let him tell you what to do. If the answer is no, well, I suppose you might as well vote for him and let him tell you what to do anyway.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 07:16:23 PM
Vernor Vinge et al would love you Shark, you are espousing a libertarian view of society, where individual freedom is promoted to the maximum. I really am not too sure if this concept is workable in a complex industrial/post industrial society. It might do if information technology were utilised to the full by an educated, informed population, with a roughly even distribution of resources. This is unrealisable as things stand now and frankly, as ever they will stand.
We are realistically stuck with some form of representative system. The difficulty now is this system whether by accident or, in my estimation, by design, is simply not delivering anywhere near the service to the commonweal that it is capable of. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 08:04:08 PM
You're right, Z, this can't be done overnight. We're all too used to the way things are and have been, and to just 'flip a switch' to turn on this way of thinking is both unreasonable and dangerous. First, we've got to get the ideas out there, start debating how and if it can be done, exploring the possible pitfalls and benefits, starting small, educating our children to prepare them for the possibilities and requirements such a future would require and allowing people like me to explore the path without penalty (unless I harm others, of course).
.
Maybe we could start with a "Freedom License" - just like a driving license where you need to take lessons and pass a test first. We can't just dump an entirely new system on people all at once and make it mandatory otherwise it's no better than forcing everyone to become Communists, Fascists or Scientologists whether they want to be or not.
.
As you correctly point out, the biggest advantage we have in evolving our society is the internet - with this tool we have a massive advantage over previous generations and a real opportunity to start moving our societies towards a far freer and more humane future.
.
I firmly believe that humanity stands on the cusp of a new Golden Age which, for possibly the first time in all recorded history, we can ease into rather than forcing into. I think we're living in exciting times that future generations will regard as one of the most important periods in history - The Age of Awakening!
.
Now, wouldn't you like to be in on that? I know I would!
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 08:12:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 06:54:28 PMIf the answer is yes, then by all means vote for him and let him tell you what to do. If the answer is no, well, I suppose you might as well vote for him and let him tell you what to do anyway.

He knows better than to try giving me orders for reasons I shan't share on a public forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 08:17:29 PM
The singularity cannot come quickly enough....anything has to be better than this unworkable, short termist, bullshit infused morass we're in at present....possibly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 May, 2014, 08:37:06 PM


I think the Singularity might be the most overrated and boring eschaton concept yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 May, 2014, 08:39:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 08:04:08 PM
I firmly believe that humanity stands on the cusp of a new Golden Age which, for possibly the first time in all recorded history, we can ease into rather than forcing into. I think we're living in exciting times that future generations will regard as one of the most important periods in history - The Age of Awakening!


I'm certain people of the last 10 centuries felt the same at some point in their short lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 May, 2014, 08:42:46 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 24 May, 2014, 08:37:06 PM
I think the Singularity might be the most overrated and boring eschaton concept yet

An eternity spent worshipping at the feet of Our Lord, bathing in the ecstasy of his divinity, wins that competition every time. Sorry, wrong thread.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 08:45:07 PM
By the great Von Neumann, a singularity denier! Burn him; purge him; crush him....do to him whatever, esotheric punishments our post-singularity betters come up with!  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 May, 2014, 08:51:36 PM


Does this mean Ray Kurzweil will achieve his dream of turning into a keyboard (http://www.performing-musician.com/pm/nov07/images/KurzweilSP2X_01.jpg)?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 24 May, 2014, 09:15:36 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 24 May, 2014, 12:22:29 PM
The big question they all should be asking is why the other 64% didn't vote?

A really convincing party election broadcast by the Apathy Party?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2014, 09:28:09 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 May, 2014, 05:28:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 08:12:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2014, 06:54:28 PMIf the answer is yes, then by all means vote for him and let him tell you what to do. If the answer is no, well, I suppose you might as well vote for him and let him tell you what to do anyway.

He knows better than to try giving me orders for reasons I shan't share on a public forum.

The system works
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 May, 2014, 10:25:53 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2014, 08:12:54 PM
He knows better than to try giving me orders for reasons I shan't share on a public forum.

This a sub/dom thing, hun?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 25 May, 2014, 10:33:58 AM
i just think sharky should stand for the use of the word "cusp"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 May, 2014, 10:58:47 AM
I'm all for the Freedom License thing.  I'd be surprised if it doesn't become a genuine political alternative by the next election.

Course, first we'll need to decide what constitutes "Freedom" and "Common Law rights".  Maybe we could choose representatives, perhaps based on some sort of secret ballot, to make these decisions.  Everyone could choose whether of not to take part, and have free access to all the information. 

Then we'd need some sort of system to resolve any disputes over Freedom, like some sort of Court.  It would probably be best if these decisions where resided over by people who have spend years studying the concepts, but it would be good if ordinary people were involved on occasion, perhaps forming some sort of jury.

Or course, the license will need to be administered by some sort of bureaurocracy, to ensure fair and equal treatment.  We're talking a whole country here, so sometimes we won't be able to address every individual circumstance.  Those who work for this system will be tasked with enforcing the rules, regardless of their personal feelings, otherwise the whole thing would just grind to a halt.

This will all be costly.  Maybe we could all contribute, based on our income and spending, through taxation. 

So: once we all have a government we can take part in, a judiciary to address our legal issues, a civil service which treats everyone the same, and a taxation system, we can all finally be Free.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 25 May, 2014, 11:08:57 AM
I'm voting Tempunaut! 

Who is with me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 11:22:39 AM
Temponaut gets it, although I'm not sure he realises the fact.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 May, 2014, 01:05:07 PM
Well done, UKIP voters. In addition to voting for a massive tax rise, privatisation of the NHS and end to legal protections on workers' redundancy, holiday, sickness and maternity entitlements, you've put people like this (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/24/ukip-councillor-investigation-racist-homophobic-facebook-comments) into local government:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/UKIP_Cnut_zpsd6ba3647.jpg)

You must all be very proud.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 01:10:19 PM
And this, they voted for this: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/24/ukip-councillor-investigation-racist-homophobic-facebook-comments

(edit - just noticed this is the same guy Jim posted about!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 01:11:26 PM

I'd be more worried about whoever voted for Michael Gove, who has just announced the opening of Boko Haram's UK chapter, part of exciting new plans to take us all back to the 19th century:

BAN THIS FOREIGN MUCK (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10855068/American-classics-axed-from-GSCE-syllabus-on-Goves-instruction.html)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 May, 2014, 01:29:54 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 25 May, 2014, 01:11:26 PM
I'd be more worried about whoever voted for Michael Gove,

I have enough outrage for both.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 May, 2014, 02:51:28 PM
Now, now...Just because ukip disproportionally have horrible, idiotic  bigots as their chosen representatives doesn't mean that they're all fearful, smallminded bigot.  Im sure some of them will be wonderful councill...

Nah, i can't do it. This is how the Nazis came to power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 25 May, 2014, 02:54:34 PM
UKIP can F-off, as far as I'm concerned!

I'm at a loss as to how they even get air time on the telly. The Green party do better in the elections, and yet, all we see on the Idiot Box is Farage. Shenanigans I say!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 May, 2014, 03:03:46 PM
We need UKIP and the BNP to set an example on how NOT to get people yo vote for you. As it is it would appear the BNP might actually be ousted from parliament, 1 seat? Pointless!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 03:35:27 PM
They're all over the telly because the elites who run the media/country/world want you scared. They want you scared so you'll appeal to the "regular" parties to save you. They want you to appeal to the "regular" parties to save you to reinforce your conditioning that you have no power to save yourselves. They want you to think that you have no power to distract you from the fact that the only political power in this country belongs to you. They want to distract you from the reality of your own power to keep you ignorant. They want you ignorant because ignorant people are easy to rule. They want you easy to rule so they can rule you. They want to rule you because they believe it's their birthright to rule you. They believe it's their birthright to rule you because you're so easily scared.
.
It's not rocket surgery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 25 May, 2014, 03:45:00 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 25 May, 2014, 02:54:34 PM
UKIP can F-off, as far as I'm concerned!

I'm at a loss as to how they even get air time on the telly. The Green party do better in the elections, and yet, all we see on the Idiot Box is Farage. Shenanigans I say!

As of this week, the Greens have 162 council seats in England & Wales, while UKIP now have 384. At the time of writing, still before the results of Thursday's Euro vote is known, The Greens have 2 Euro MPs, while UKIP have 13.

Clearly, we can put to bed the myth that the Green Party do better in elections.

They do have 1 Westminster MP, while UKIP have none, but UKIP secured 3.1% of the vote at the 2010 general election, while the Greens got 1%.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 May, 2014, 03:49:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 03:35:27 PMThey're all over the telly because the elites who run the media/country/world want you scared. They want you scared so you'll appeal to the "regular" parties to save you.

I recommend Howard Bloom's Lucifer Principle, Sharky, as you're on the same track as he was, though he explains at length how it wasn't planned ahead of time to create a media that keeps you afraid, voting for traditional political figures and systems, and - most crucially - consuming (people become more active consumers when afraid), it just worked out that way because thinking and reasoning as a group is much harder and less rewarding for us biologically than acting upon the impulses of the reptile brain to form a lynchmob.

Quote from: sauchie on 25 May, 2014, 01:11:26 PMI'd be more worried about whoever voted for Michael Gove, who has just announced the opening of Boko Haram's UK chapter, part of exciting new plans to take us all back to the 19th century:

BAN THIS FOREIGN MUCK (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10855068/American-classics-axed-from-GSCE-syllabus-on-Goves-instruction.html)

The subject's not called "words of the world", it's called ENGLISH.

THAT USED TO MEEN SOMETHING1
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 03:51:28 PM
Worth a read: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/local-election-results-2014-aav.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 25 May, 2014, 04:28:51 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 25 May, 2014, 03:45:00 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 25 May, 2014, 02:54:34 PM
UKIP can F-off, as far as I'm concerned!

I'm at a loss as to how they even get air time on the telly. The Green party do better in the elections, and yet, all we see on the Idiot Box is Farage. Shenanigans I say!

As of this week, the Greens have 162 council seats in England & Wales, while UKIP now have 384. At the time of writing, still before the results of Thursday's Euro vote is known, The Greens have 2 Euro MPs, while UKIP have 13.

Clearly, we can put to bed the myth that the Green Party do better in elections.

They do have 1 Westminster MP, while UKIP have none, but UKIP secured 3.1% of the vote at the 2010 general election, while the Greens got 1%.


Fair enough, But I still think Farage gets too much Airtime.

Given that we now have tv channels dedicated to Politics I see no reason why any Political Party couldn't be given some kind of televisual representation.

On a wider note that would also give a louder 'voice' to C***s like the BNP, but then that would bring us to the wider issue of what could be regarded as 'free-speech'.

I'm waffling to be honest; maybe I should be a Politician.


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 May, 2014, 06:24:54 PM
QuoteThey're all over the telly because the elites who run the media/country/world want you scared.

Or, they're all over the telly because the telly company wants you to watch, and pointing a camera at an "eccentric" who might explode and kill a gay foreigner at any time is more likely to get viewers than pointing a camera at a member of the Green party, who just want us all to get along.

Probably more likely than a vast, shadowy conspiracy involving all of the nations politicians and media.

Of course, I would say that, 'cos I'm secretly a lizardperson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 25 May, 2014, 06:43:02 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 25 May, 2014, 01:05:07 PM
Well done, UKIP voters . . .

Wait. What? While I could maybe believe it of Reg himself, Clare Balding's a carefree prostitute full of mirth who has sex with other men (http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/how-gay-came-to-mean-homosexual/)?

But the horses adore her!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 07:17:10 PM
That's a bit of a simplistic view, Temponaut. Assuming that every politician, corporatist, media worker etc has to "sign up" to some huge, meticulously planned conspiracy is, quite frankly, ludicrous, and to hint that this is the only option demonstrates a lack of understanding which is both insulting and intellectually lazy.
.
If you're expecting one big plan, say like Asimov's 'Foundation' novels, then you're ignoring all the facts and comforting yourself with an impossible fantasy simply in order that you can dismiss it without investing any thought or logic in the subject.
.
This is not a meticulous and detailed step-by-step blueprint for domination with specific events planned decades or even centuries in advance - if that were the case you'd be asking me to believe that events like 9/11 and 7/7 have been fixed on the elites' calendars since the year dot, which is patently foolish. What it is, is more of a strategy with tried and tested methods of causing and manipulating events in the short term in order to achieve long term goals.
.
Let's imagine I get a job in a factory making pins for fire extinguishers, which I find to be a worthwhile use of my time. But, what if those pins I'm so proud to be making are actually for hand grenades - how would I know? Very few people at the Acme Pin Company would actually know the true nature of the product - the top management and maybe a couple of others in accounts and possibly dispatch. Hundreds of people would be labouring under a lie with absolutely no idea of (or interest in) the actual truth.
.
Literally thousands of people across scores of facilities working in several countries worked on the first atomic bomb with absolutely no idea what they were really doing, so don't try to tell me that what I think is going on (and yes, I am intelligent enough to entertain the possibility that I'm wrong and that I don't understand everything that's going on) is pure fantasy just because you trust your feelings instead of doing the research.
.
Sorry, that sounds a bit harsh - and maybe it is - but I do get sick of people assuming that just because they see things a certain way then I must see the same things and be stupid for not reaching the same conclusions.
.
Believe me, I'd love to be wrong and be shown that the world's the way it is by accident or evolution or God's will or whatever other people believe to give themselves comfort. The things I have learned, however, lead me to different conclusions.
.
Calming down, now.
.
Calming.
.
Calming...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 08:19:38 PM
Apologies for that outburst. It's no excuse but I'm under a lot of pressure at the moment and I am only human.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2014, 08:19:56 PM
Apologies for that outburst. It's no excuse but I'm under a lot of pressure at the moment and I am only human.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 May, 2014, 09:08:35 PM
No need for apologies, Sharky.  We all appreciate that you've been through a lot recently.

I certainly don't think that your stupid for not reaching the same conclusions as me, and sure, there are plenty of reasons to think that there are some fairly horrible and extremely powerful people on the world, who influence political policy and interfere with our lives. 

I think it's going too far to suggest that political parties are a creation, specifically designed to confuse us.  Political parties are just groups of individuals, and individuals are perfectly capable of shitty behavior without folk like the Koch brother pulling the strings.  Not to say they never pull any strings, of course they do, because they want to maintain their own power, but that doesn't equal a worldwide conspiracy. No-one needed to encourage the Nick Griffin's of the world to believe nasty things.

If the factory says it makes fire extinguisher pins, it most likely does.  There's probably another factory down the road which makes the hand grenade pins.  They won't have it written on the door, but they wont go out of their way to hide it.  People will still take their money and work on the factory floor.  A conspiracy against us is unnecessary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2014, 09:19:06 PM
The difficulty is partially with political parties, as they are always going to be representative of their voter base. The main change over the past 25 -30 years has been the malign influence of organised lobbyist bodies. These bodies and the money they represent now mandate to a large extent who has a realistic chance of being elected. This was in the past most evident on the US system, but is now endemic throughout westren democracies. Political parties at the least pander to and court these bodies; and at worst are probably glove puppets for these interests.
The dificulty for all voter bases both in the right as well as the left is that the interests being pushed are globalised/supranational. This results in perceived national interests (welfare, health, education, workplace rights, defence, policing etc) being subordinated to interests which are not concamitant with democracy as most of us see it. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 09:31:57 PM

UK voter turnout in the EU elections was 36%, as opposed to 41% across the EU. And folk moan they don't want Brussels/Strasbourg telling them what to do ...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 May, 2014, 10:22:29 PM
The first results are in from the North East and the Tory Party chairman is using statistics from the past to try and brush it off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 May, 2014, 10:22:29 PM
The first results are in from the North East and the Tory Party chairman is using statistics from the past to try and brush it off.

UKIP came top in the Eastern region too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 25 May, 2014, 10:33:38 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 25 May, 2014, 06:24:54 PM
Pointing a camera at an "eccentric" who might explode and kill a gay foreigner at any time is more likely to get viewers than pointing a camera at a member of the Green party, who just want us all to get along.

Common sense? On this thread? It'll never catch on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 May, 2014, 10:37:02 PM
Ah well, there's always France.

Oh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 10:42:35 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 25 May, 2014, 10:37:02 PM
Ah well, there's always France. Oh.

Given the nature of the established French parties, I can see why any alternative seems preferable.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 11:14:27 PM
It's a great time to be a Right Wing racist prick right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 May, 2014, 11:19:24 PM
I thought it was the Year of the Horse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 May, 2014, 11:22:33 PM
Democracy, what a strange thing it can be!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 11:23:30 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 11:14:27 PM
It's a great time to be a Right Wing racist prick right now

Wasn't that UKIP's electoral slogan?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2014, 11:23:43 PM
This is looking fairly grim at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 11:28:13 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2014, 11:23:43 PM
This is looking fairly grim at the moment.

UKIP are on 6 MEPs, CON 5, LAB 4 so far (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/eu-uk-results) - hardly a landslide.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2014, 11:33:08 PM
I don't dispute the percentages; it's the added momentum engendered. They has a massivly disproportionate amount of media focus before this, Christ alone knows how much more they'll get now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 25 May, 2014, 11:37:38 PM
If my memory serves me correctly, most of that media coverage was not of the positive kind!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2014, 11:42:36 PM
The adage: 'any publicity is good publicity' would seem to apply.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 11:47:14 PM
Sorry, but if you voted UKIP you should be ashamed of yourself. Give yourself a lovely, racist, pat on the (white) back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 May, 2014, 11:54:35 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 25 May, 2014, 11:47:14 PM
Sorry, but if you voted UKIP you should be ashamed of yourself. Give yourself a lovely, racist, pat on the (white) back

I'm pretty sure Farage isn't, and he's refused to sit with the same grouping as Marine Le Pen in the EU parliament on the basis that they are racists. UKIP are xenophobes, despising Polish immigrants as much as Somali immigrants. The distinction's important - a useful definition of fascism is the removal of nuance, and doing so serves no-one's best interests.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 May, 2014, 12:16:33 AM
I agree there, I don't hate Nigel Farage, just get moderatly irritated by him. I dont think for one instant that any appreciable percentage of UKIP voters are racist anymore than is prevalent in society in general.  I just don't like their stance on many things and am incandescent with horror that frustrated and marginalised voters have no other alternative than to vote UKIP. The failure for this lies squarely with mainstream parties for not presenting any alternative for these voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:01:33 AM
Scotland has one UKIP MEP now :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 May, 2014, 01:04:09 AM
 So we know who Richmond, Sauchie et al really voted for then.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 May, 2014, 01:09:37 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:01:33 AM
Scotland has one UKIP MEP now :o

That's remarkable news...

...seeing as how - due to religious sensitivities in the Western Isles about vote-counting on a Sunday - the results won't be announced till lunch time Monday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:13:46 AM
It's already been said on the BBC that even if every vote goes to the second place party, they still can't beat UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2014, 01:20:24 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 26 May, 2014, 01:09:37 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:01:33 AM
Scotland has one UKIP MEP now :o

That's remarkable news ... seeing as how - due to religious sensitivities in the Western Isles about vote-counting on a Sunday - the results won't be announced till lunch time Monday

We have the tallies from the other 31 areas. We elect Scottish nationalists arguing for independence from the UK but within Europe to Holyrood, and elect a UK nationalist arguing for independence from Europe and UK national unity to Brussels - don't say we don't make things interesting, but don't expect any kind of coherence either.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:42:03 AM
That Scottish UKIP MEP is talking on LBC radio right now!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 May, 2014, 07:48:52 AM
So, "the uneducated, uncultured and old" were intelligent enough to use their hard won democratic rights.
The educated, cultured and young sat on their arses and didn't bother.  Not looking so educated and cultured now, are they!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 May, 2014, 09:07:44 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 May, 2014, 07:48:52 AM
So, "the uneducated, uncultured and old" were intelligent enough to use their hard won democratic rights.
The educated, cultured and young sat on their arses and didn't bother.  Not looking so educated and cultured now, are they!

I don't think you can group in everyone that didn't vote as lazy.
There are many reasons people don't vote and probably the most useful thing to do would be to understand the reasons and go some way to addressing them.
Politics are very obscure, there's so much reading between the lines to be done. The politicians themselves don't seem very representative of much of the population and the actual mechanics of voting seem very old fashioned.
I don't agree 100% with Russell Brands assertion of 'don't vote for people that don't represent you' but I don't think it can be brushed aside either.

As for all the UKIP voters, I'm not convinced most people actually know what they've voted for. I think many people have been blinded by the anti-Europe stance and looked no further.
I don't think that everyone who voted for UKIP is a racist. There are lots of people out there who genuinely believe that their lives are being made worse because of Europe and immigration. They've been sort of indoctrinated to think that anyone who defends Europe is a left wing do gooder and that the media are only concerned with political correctness and appeasing some obscure multi-cultural elite.
The only way to reach these people is through education. Unfortunately our society is failing in that and our media is only interested in cheap political point scoring and circus debates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2014, 09:28:50 AM
Just heard about the Elliot Rogers shooting. First and for most my condolences to the victims families. They must be going though and awful time at the moment and I wish them the best.

However, even with very little research their are issues regarding Elliot I feel I should address, namely the condition of his mental disorder, and my own, Aspergers syndrome. I intend to read his 'manifesto' and watch his video log with the sole porpoise of at least uncovering as much about the man himself without media bias before I formulate a full opinion. Because I have serious concerns, if the allegation over his disorder are true, that other young, autistic people, including many I work with, may try and copycat his crime. This worries me like nothing else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 25 May, 2014, 11:54:35 PMUKIP are xenophobes

UKIP are opportunists trading on the fears of xenophobes, if we're going to get into nuance. I doubt Farage fears Poles one way or the other.

While we're at it, our own dear SF are opportunists trading on disillusionment (and the oh-so-exciting lingering whiff of cordite - you dashing rebel, you!), without offering the vaguest suggestion of where the money's coming from (another Noraid whipround?).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 May, 2014, 10:05:32 AM
Yep, the stiuation both north and south is nothing to be proud of. In NI we can look forward to more years of socially and economically illeterate extremists f**king the thing up! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 26 May, 2014, 12:10:03 PM
Brother of a friend, aged 15, furious on FB today at the far-right results. His friends openly mock him for caring - I remind him the actual voter turn-out was less than 35% and that he should remember his anger when he's legally allowed to voice it booth-wise.

Strange things happen when people give a shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2014, 12:50:07 PM
If he's 15, he's too young to vote in the next election, and by the time the one after that comes around he'll either be knee-deep in booze and fanny and not care to vote, or he won't be able to find the time seeing as he'll be a year into Herr Farage's now-compulsory national service for the working classes.

Me, I'm all made up.  As a 2000ad fan, I have found that the book is at its best when working in an oppressive political landscape and has something to rebel against, as to me it's no coincidence that the Summer Offensive came during a period in the UK where the population had hope for the future for the first time in nearly two decades.
The book will perhaps regain some of its biting satirical edge around 2015, and I hope that we'll be allowed to read it in the camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2014, 01:24:34 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 09:45:56 AM
While we're at it, our own dear SF are opportunists trading on disillusionment (and the oh-so-exciting lingering whiff of cordite - you dashing rebel, you!), without offering the vaguest suggestion of where the money's coming from (another Noraid whipround?).

I might prefer a bit of disillusionment for a while instead of the tax and succumb policy as an answer to everything of FG, though I wouldn't worry too much about it lasting, the re-electrified corpse of FF will rise again for the next general election- a party whose only economic policy is self-enrichment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 May, 2014, 01:30:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:13:46 AM
It's already been said on the BBC that even if every vote goes to the second place party, they still can't beat UKIP.

Just shows we too have our share of nutters, again I'd point out that at 33% turnout ( and then only a small precentage of that) it hardly represents the general population or indeed all the praise and worship being directed at Ukippers by the BBC is really representive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 May, 2014, 01:33:38 PM
The Sinners have the taste of blood now that they have overed the Labour Party, FF are just next on the menu. The SDLP learned this to their cost in NI. when SF get a vote it's nigh on impossible to wrest it back....be warned! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 01:59:15 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2014, 01:24:34 PM
I might prefer a bit of disillusionment for a while instead of the tax and succumb policy as an answer to everything of FG..

Well indeed, but voting SF as a protest isn't going to get the job done either - it's so '30s they might as well have run Josephine Baker as a candidate.  I can certainly see their uses in the Locals, they're very good at being approachable and getting things done, especially in sub/urban constituencies, and bizarrely they have the advantage of not being tied into Civil War political divides, but the idea of their topping the polls in the Euros baffles me.  What exactly are their policies at a European level?  Their main international policy seems to be 'neutrality', which while I applaud the sentiment isn't actually something that's even a function of the European parliament.  Other than 'no to austerity', which while equally admirable is not broken down into practical steps at all, and the flat refusal of European financial loans would seem to me to demand infinitely greater austerity than obtains.  The degree to which all this is fantasy is exposed by their record in government in NI, which makes the Labour party's role in the coalition look like a Trotskyist takeover.

The pretence that voting SF represents a mature liberal attitude to a divisive history and a final embracing of the peace process annoys me more than anything. They know full well that a large amount of their support comes from the mystique of violence and sectarianism, and they're not afraid to trade on it when it suits.  Painting themselves as the second coming of Nelson Mandela ushering in a socialist alternative is just laughable.

Right old relic, I am.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 26 May, 2014, 02:14:00 PM
Belfast folk can rejoice that this charming lady has been elected

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/05/26/a-traditional-voice/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2014, 02:52:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 01:59:15 PM
voting SF as a protest isn't going to get the job done either ... but the idea of their topping the polls in the Euros baffles me.  What exactly are their policies at a European level?


This is the electorate that voted-in 'Kenneth' -keeping it real- Egan. Half of them don't consider what a European policy is actually for and vote according to their current grievances. 


Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 01:59:15 PMThe pretence that voting SF represents a mature liberal attitude to a divisive history and a final embracing of the peace process annoys me more than anything. They know full well that a large amount of their support comes from the mystique of violence and sectarianism, and they're not afraid to trade on it when it suits.  Painting themselves as the second coming of Nelson Mandela ushering in a socialist alternative is just laughable.


I've yet to find a party with a mature attitude to anything but we don't do justice or atonement for anything in this country very well -whether its crime or corruption- and recent editorials indicate the media establishment will go after SF full-throttle in the next few years; but I doubt much of it will be out of a will to construct a better state and some will just see them as another threat to the worth of their property portfolios.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2014, 03:06:04 PM
Quote from: johnnystress on 26 May, 2014, 02:14:00 PMBelfast folk can rejoice that this charming lady has been elected http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/05/26/a-traditional-voice/

"Scum elect scum" shocker!

I wouldn't worry - JoBu is a sideshow attraction and in the long run she's more of a help because she forces political adversaries into moderate alignments elsewhere by siphoning off their nutters for herself, a not exactly unheard of circumstance in NI.  Think of her like the Fred Phelps of Norn politics - she's something everyone else can agree upon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 26 May, 2014, 03:12:04 PM
well, ukip had topped the polls in the European elections.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2014, 05:04:47 PM
Six countries that went towards the left instead of the right in the European elections: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2014/may/26/european-elections-six-countries-went-left?CMP=twt_fd

It seems Romania went left, so now we know why Herr Farage hates that particular nationality so much - they're all lefty puffs.
All joking aside, having a country that's politically to the right of Italy and Portugal should worry most sensible people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2014, 05:29:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2014, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: sauchie on 25 May, 2014, 11:54:35 PMUKIP are xenophobes

UKIP are opportunists trading on the fears of xenophobes

Farage is; I believe most of the lower echelon nutters who've gathered around him lately are more or less genuine. Worth remembering that UKIP (i.e, Farage) only latched onto the immigrant thing relatively recently - before he spied that opportunity, UKIP were single issue EU expansion obstructionists with a silly Save the Pound slogan.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 May, 2014, 06:41:32 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2014, 05:04:47 PM
Six countries that went towards the left instead of the right in the European elections: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2014/may/26/european-elections-six-countries-went-left?CMP=twt_fd

It seems Romania went left, so now we know why Herr Farage hates that particular nationality so much - they're all lefty puffs.
All joking aside, having a country that's politically to the right of Italy and Portugal should worry most sensible people.


They missed out Malta, whose governing Labour Party maintained their 53% of the vote from last year's landslide general election. Their racist fringe garnered a mere 3.5%....somewhat less than ours.

Their 75% turnout - and that's down from their norm - remains the highest in the EU. (Discounting 90% Belgium, where voting is mandatory.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 26 May, 2014, 08:02:07 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 May, 2014, 01:30:30 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 May, 2014, 01:13:46 AM
It's already been said on the BBC that even if every vote goes to the second place party, they still can't beat UKIP.

Just shows we too have our share of nutters, again I'd point out that at 33% turnout ( and then only a small precentage of that) it hardly represents the general population or indeed all the praise and worship being directed at Ukippers by the BBC is really representive.

What's he going to do when and if he suddenly finds, in a few months, that he's not in the UK any more..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2014, 08:11:09 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 26 May, 2014, 08:02:07 PM
What's (Farage) going to do when and if he suddenly finds, in a few months, that he's not in the UK any more..?

The UK consists of England, Wales and some place called Northern Ireland too; when Brian Jones died, nobody suggested changing the name of the band to Terner's Purple Orchestra (http://mindlessones.com/2011/08/18/the-league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-century-1969-the-annocommentations-part-iv/). Plus, UKIP's logo's the £ound symbol, and Alec Salmond assures everyone we'll all certainly still be using that ...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 26 May, 2014, 08:15:34 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 26 May, 2014, 08:11:09 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 26 May, 2014, 08:02:07 PM
What's (Farage) going to do when and if he suddenly finds, in a few months, that he's not in the UK any more..?

The UK consists of England, Wales and some place called Northern Ireland too; when Brian Jones died, nobody suggested changing the name of the band to Terner's Purple Orchestra (http://mindlessones.com/2011/08/18/the-league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-century-1969-the-annocommentations-part-iv/). Plus, UKIP's logo's the £ound symbol, and Alec Salmond assures everyone we'll all certainly still be using that ...

Only I wasn't talking about Farage, but their MEP in Scotland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 26 May, 2014, 08:16:47 PM
It is going to be a very boring country these right wing voters want. I want diversity and an exploration of multi-global peoples and clean air and not to be defined by my paycheck.

It'll be only satisfactory for these people here, predominantly tepid earl grey coloured folk singing about the bastions of Victorian Britain with an emotional spectrum that begins at battleship grey and ends at dishwater. 

Drink darts dominoes dole departmentalization dull dumb discrimination demonisation and death. YAWN!

I mean I can live with those things but am capable of so much more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 May, 2014, 08:28:46 PM

I'm doing my bit for Farage by working one of the rubbish paid, manual labour jobs he doesn't want Polish Economics professors to come over here and do. Every time I clock-in, it's one in the eye for Herman Van Rompuy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2014, 11:48:07 PM
Good for you, Sauchie!  Now if we can just get everyone else in the country into a badly-paid manual labour job, Nige will be a happy man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Judo on 27 May, 2014, 04:48:20 PM
Bloody Foreigners coming over here wanting to know what love is x
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2014, 05:10:28 PM
Quote from: Judo on 27 May, 2014, 04:48:20 PM
Bloody Foreigners coming over here wanting to know what love is x

Heh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2014, 05:36:51 PM
Quote from: Judo on 27 May, 2014, 04:48:20 PM
Bloody Foreigners coming over here wanting to know what love is

Farage is really more of a seventies throwback than an eighties nostalgist. This isn't the kind of behaviour you expect from a future prime minister ... Dave Cameron hasn't done anything like that since university, and even then he used a champagne flute rather than a pint glass:

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/27/article-2639973-1E388ED100000578-751_634x379.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 27 May, 2014, 05:47:32 PM
Are there any photos or video footage of that prick Farage that aren't of him inside or in front of a pub holding a pint glass?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2014, 05:52:44 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 27 May, 2014, 05:47:32 PM
Are there any photos or video footage of that prick Farage that aren't of him inside or in front of a pub holding a pint glass?

No. I wouldn't ignore the symbolism of the name of the drinking establishment either. You could be forgiven for thinking that a man who's exactly as posh as the other three party leaders is projecting a carefully calculated image of himself as a man of the people *.


* of Clarkson middle England,at any rate
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 27 May, 2014, 06:00:53 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 27 May, 2014, 05:47:32 PM
Are there any photos or video footage of that prick Farage that aren't of him inside or in front of a pub holding a pint glass?

There's some fairly hilarious ones of him among the wreckage of that plane crash he was in at the last general election...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 May, 2014, 06:11:41 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 27 May, 2014, 06:00:53 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 27 May, 2014, 05:47:32 PM
Are there any photos or video footage of that prick Farage that aren't of him inside or in front of a pub holding a pint glass?

There's some fairly hilarious ones of him among the wreckage of that plane crash he was in at the last general election...

Nasty. You're thinking of that car crash (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630393/Nigel-Farage-challenged-LBC-expenses-racism-Ukip-candidate-wants-shoot-poofs-car-crash-interview-halted-spin-doctor-live-air.html) he was in the other week.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2014, 06:22:46 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 27 May, 2014, 05:52:44 PM
No. I wouldn't ignore the symbolism of the name of the drinking establishment either.

Many of that watering hole's former weekend comics mart clientele probably wouldn't spit on him if he was on fire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2014, 06:43:09 PM
Well, a new low.
.
Been trying to negotiate with He-Who-Has-Been-Named-Yet-Will-No-Longer-Be-Named, via email, to rescue my possessions. At the end I'm told that I won't be allowed anywhere near the flat due to "health and safety" concerns. He's using the "disturbing the peace" thing (which I was never charged with), the "assaulting a police officer" thing (of which I am innocent - or at least innocent until proven guilty in next month's hearing) and a "resisting arrest" thing (dredged up from his own imagination) to cry about his terror of getting lamped. He's holding everything I own to ransom. I wonder if he'd treat a member of his own family in this manner, or be content to see them treated thus by someone else?
.
The worst part is that it f*ucks the kind people up who have agreed to help me and now must reorganise for yet another day.
.
Well, at least now I know what a piece of shit feels like, or a 30s German Jew, or a modern immigrant. It's no wonder people kill themselves when treated like this. (I won't do that, don't worry, but by God I'm learning how some people can see it as the only answer when confronted with such blind bigotry.) I do feel like screaming, though.
.
Ffs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2014, 07:23:05 PM
Feck's sake Shark, how awful.  In a catalogue of crap, this one really stands out.

Try your best not to allow them to make you feel that way.  You know that's how they work, by trying to make you a non-person, but the support of your friends and neighbours shows that this is not going to work.

What's more, spurious citation of 'Health & Safety' is the last refuge of the ignorant and desperate, and undermines the real and serious business of accident prevention. I've seen it used time and again as a trump card by the worst kind of officious shits to get their way.  Even toddlers understand the implications of the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2014, 11:55:34 PM
Thanks, Tordels. In the end it's just stuff,  and the world is full of stuff. My conscience is clear, though, and I can be smug as I like with the fact that I would Never treat another human being with such callous disregard - not even him.
.
I long ago asked myself if I was prepared to lose everything by taking this path and decided that I was. Sure it stings but I'm not going to lose everything and I've gained some new friends, am starting off along a path I'd never considered before, have learned a lot about myself, discovered a strength and determination I never knew I had and done something that many people are too scared to even contemplate. And, of course, it ain't over yet. As a certain semi-cybernetic psycho might say, "it ain't over less'n I say it's over!" *bok*
.
A lot of folk probably think I'm a fool but I regret nothing. I picked a fight with tyranny and I'm still here. Granted, the tyrants are still here too but this is one shark that isn't afraid of them any more - and maybe that's enough to inspire one or two more people to stand up to them too, and that one or two might do a better job than I did and inspire two or three others and so on.
.
I am human - hear me roar!
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 May, 2014, 10:49:04 AM
Get someone else to go get your stuff

Try to trick him into explaining how exactly you were "breaching the peace" by doing sod all in your flat.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2014, 10:57:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2014, 11:55:34 PM
A lot of folk probably think I'm a fool...

You say that like it's a bad thing.  All the best people are fools, it's how the world moves forward, the stumble that turns into a step. 

What people worry about is that you are too hard on yourself, and try to fight on ground that you should cede if you hope to keep on fighting. 

There must - must - be some simple, easily accessed, grounds on which a human, convicted of no crime, can have reasonable access to his worldy possessions, a right which has to supersede the arse-covering witterings of some twat with a title. 

I know you've been asked this before, but surely Citizen's Advice can help?  Or even (for all that you reject the processes of government) your Councillors or your MP?  I can't believe that this situation can be allowed to stand through any means other than through systemic inertia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 May, 2014, 11:06:04 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 May, 2014, 07:23:05 PM
What's more, spurious citation of 'Health & Safety' is the last refuge of the ignorant and desperate, and undermines the real and serious business of accident prevention. I've seen it used time and again as a trump card by the worst kind of officious shits to get their way.

The H&SE has been getting quite stroppy about this of late. It may worth trying to pin down The Officious Shit™ on the precise nature of the supposed issue and then grassing him up to the local H&SE office — they're taking an increasingly dim view of being used as a catch-all excuse for arse-covering by other organisations.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2014, 12:46:19 PM
You're all correct, of course and I do have plans which, I know you'll understand, I don't want to make public just yet.
.
I have a small group of friends who have agreed to retrieve my most important possessions whilst I sit tight elsewhere on the other end of the 'phone. Friends and neighbours are going to store some of it and taking the opportunity to look at it as a radical "spring cleaning" exercise, paid for by the council.
.
In this instance I immediately capitulated to the council's "fears" and agreed to stay away without argument. I will stick to that agreement to demonstrate my aversion to violence for the record. (I have been firm but polite throughout this process. For example, for the last 12 months and more every letter I have written to the council man has begun with "Hello S______, I hope that you are well" and ends "My best to you and yours" and contain no name calling or threats.)
My behaviour, attitude and actions must remain reasonable, calm and - above all - lawful. It's difficult, of course, but I have to play the long game here and be prepared to make sacrifices. This works in my favour as I can change direction and approach at the drop of a hat if need be whilst the council cannot. I am small, mobile and adaptable whilst the council is big, fixed and mired in its processes.
.
When it comes to the CAB, and various housing departments and charities, can only help on government terms - meaning that I have to 'sign on' (with all the faffing about and detrimental agreements that entails) before I become "entitled" to that help. You'd be surprised how many people from these organisations have told me, off the record, that by refusing to go that way and operating from off the grid is the best way to get results in the long run as it leaves my hands untied and my options far less limited. Although this path is undoubtedly harder it does give me a better chance in the long run.
.
I'm not allowing the council to dictate everything that happens. For example, I refuse to deal with anyone other than SJ and made this clear many months ago. Every time I get a letter from some other council bod I always reply to SJ and simply refuse to deal with anyone else. SJ thought that, after the unlawful eviction, his part in the story was over and I became the responsibility of another person in another department but he was wrong. Now he's having to deal with it all. I'm not even going over his head to the CEO of the council - so, he's on his own and it doesn't matter what anyone else says, writes or thinks. This ensures that I'm always in contact with the one person intimately familiar with my case and there's none of this "I need some time to review the history of this case before I can act". It also presents a single target for any court actions I may take in the future and doesn't diffuse the blame across several people and departments. It keeps things simple for me and complicates the Hell out of things for them. Another advantage of this approach is that, if I can demonstrate that this one person has acted unlawfully or exceeded his jurisdiction then I can hold him to account personally instead of fighting a large and diffuse organisation. It also leaves the council with what might become the tempting option to cut him loose and even (in the best of all possible outcomes) taking my side against this 'rogue employee' who has acted beyond his authority. In short, it leaves the council a huge escape route - to which I own the padlock.
.
When it comes to the law (and this is why I think this whole recent European election thing is worse than pointless), I have already cited European and national legislation in my letters to SJ - which he has ignored. For example (and without access to my notes I can't cite this exactly), EU law states that everyone has a right to a home and a right to the uninterrupted enjoyment of their possessions. SJ simply ignored this - on his own volition or under orders I can't say, so that's something for the courts to decide.
.
The worst part is the lack of money. With no transport or cash for buses/taxis I can't currently get to work, use the laundrette or even buy bread/gas/electricity etc. I'm casting about for casual work but everyone's skint and I'm even contemplating going off with my little dog and a cardboard sign to do some begging but I really, really don't want to do this.
.
If anyone's got any proof-reading, copy writing or comic scripts they need doing then give me a call - reasonable rates!
.
I'm on a long, hard road but it could be a lot longer and it could be a lot harder. All I have to do is keep calm and carry on, and the support I'm getting from my friends, neighbours and fellow Squaxx is invaluable to me in this endeavour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 28 May, 2014, 08:09:16 PM
Dear Mister Shark,

I would like to apologize for explain my silence over the course of your ordeal. I have offered no support because at no point have I believed you needed any from me. The courage you have shown in your conviction speaks for itself, and far outstrips my own.

I have also offered no advice, partly because I only have your account to go by, and therefore probably don't entirely understand the subtleties. This is a not an accusation of lying by omission on your part, just an acknowledgement of the limited information you are able to share on an online comic forum, given everything you're going through. Mostly, I have offered no advice, because again, I don't think you really need any from me.

Yours faithfully,

Mister Pops and his Four Bottles of Stout.

P.S. All my best to you and yours.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2014, 08:42:21 PM
Don't be daft, Mister Pops, neither you, your bottles of stout or anyone else has anything to apologise for or explain. If anyone should be apologising it's me - for dumping all my crap on you good people without so much as a 'by your leave.'
.
I am well aware that many people might find my posts worrying or even upsetting and I have absolutely no issues whatsoever with what anyone chooses to post or not to post for whatever reason.
.
I would also point out that what you've just posted about how incredibly awesome I am is more than enough to help me keep strong and demonstrate your own wisdom in not posting just for the sake of it.
.
The same goes for everyone. I post here mainly for my own sake, to let off a bit of steam. Putting everything into words also helps me to marshal my own thoughts. The comments and perspectives, ideas and suggestions of others are very helpful to me but I in no way expect or demand them - they're just a useful bonus for which I am extremely grateful but not particularly deserving.
.
As you know, I am a great believer in personal freedom and have the utmost respect for other people's lives and views. You have never done me any harm and that's the height of respectability in my book - so kick back and have another bottle with a clear conscience.
.
Our very best wishes to you and yours,
.
Me and my little dog (who also has nothing to say but whom I still love to bits).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 May, 2014, 08:48:45 PM
Don't knock yourself down, Sharky! Their's plenty of people in the world nasty enough to do it for you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2014, 09:18:36 PM
I really wasn't knocking myself down, Hawkie, I just don't see myself as anything special - I'm no more or less than anyone else. If I'm hard on myself it's because I feel I have to be - I think it helps me to stay grounded.
.
If I posted here with the attitude that I'm always right and the rest of the world is always wrong (which sometimes I do, I fear) or that I am completely awesome and perfect (which of course I am) then you'd soon get sick of me...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 28 May, 2014, 09:46:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2014, 09:18:36 PM
If I posted here with the attitude that I'm always right and the rest of the world is always wrong (which sometimes I do, I fear) or that I am completely awesome and perfect (which of course I am) then you'd soon get sick of me...

You do realize this is this internet? That's essentially how things work here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 29 May, 2014, 11:17:24 AM
I was going to say something about Norn Iron and who we trust to send to the shops but I am not sure how/where to start.

Despair would probably be a key word in my post though.

Who needs houses when we can have caves?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2014, 11:43:35 AM
Jim, may I send you a PM please?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mogzilla on 29 May, 2014, 12:08:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2014, 09:18:36 PM
I really wasn't knocking myself down, Hawkie, I just don't see myself as anything special - I'm no more or less than anyone else. If I'm hard on myself it's because I feel I have to be - I think it helps me to stay grounded.
.
If I posted here with the attitude that I'm always right and the rest of the world is always wrong (which sometimes I do, I fear) or that I am completely awesome and perfect (which of course I am) then you'd soon get sick of me...
.

never feel you have anything to apologise for sharky we all have vented or ranted on here at some point and its good to get things off your chest to completely strange comic book nerds ;), I had the pleasure of meeting you at the event of the year...nay century that was southport comic con ,I may have been a bit quiet but that was cos I was on the road to recovery from that similar affliction we share I found you to be a pleasantly eccentric chap and only wish we had had time to pop for a tipple. I'll owe you one if youre at the next one. Again hope all works out well, and I find it usually does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2014, 12:33:19 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 29 May, 2014, 11:17:24 AM
I was going to say something about Norn Iron and who we trust to send to the shops but I am not sure how/where to start.

Despair would probably be a key word in my post though.

Who needs houses when we can have caves?

Yeah, people whine about UKIP, who don't even have an MP, while we have those clowns running the show here.

You want to know what I think of immigration? If all those British and Irish would just get out of my country, that would be swell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2014, 12:45:37 PM
I thought it was pretty funny that UKIP were canvassing in this neck of the woods - clearly someone had failed to explain to them that we have a surplus of rich wankers running the "I'm not a bigot, I'm just elected by bigots" act into the ground.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2014, 12:55:12 PM
In a sense we're all immigrants - from the Great Unknown we come, spend some time on Earth and then to the Great Unknown we return. And we don't seem to need passports, documentation or permission to do so.
.
Makes you think, doesn't it? No? Oh well, suit yourselves...
.
Thanks, Mogzie - when I get this boat going I'll have to potter up there (are there canals 'round your way?) and we can have a day on the water drinking drink and talking Twoothy as the great British countryside slides by.
.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 May, 2014, 12:58:30 PM
Technically the first individuals of H. spaiens croped up in Nambia and Angola about 3-2.5 mya. So white supremasists really have no grounds for their argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 May, 2014, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 29 May, 2014, 12:58:30 PM
Technically the first individuals of H. spaiens croped up in Nambia and Angola about 3-2.5 mya. So white supremasists really have no grounds for their argument.

Must... resist... pedantic... taxonomic... compulsion...  hrrrghhh...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 May, 2014, 01:59:01 PM
My phone has a really small screen and i'm tired!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 29 May, 2014, 02:30:31 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 May, 2014, 01:53:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 29 May, 2014, 12:58:30 PM
Technically the first individuals of H. spaiens croped up in Nambia and Angola about 3-2.5 mya. So white supremasists really have no grounds for their argument.

Must... resist... pedantic... taxonomic... compulsion...  hrrrghhh...

nah, go for it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2014, 02:39:51 PM
Well now Anna Lo has resigned from politics. If it were any other politician, I'd be celebrating.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 29 May, 2014, 02:40:46 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 29 May, 2014, 11:17:24 AM
I was going to say something about Norn Iron and who we trust to send to the shops but I am not sure how/where to start.

Despair would probably be a key word in my post though.


I couldn't believe that when i heard it, not only is it scary that these people still sprout this nonsense but that public figures feel they can defend it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2014, 03:34:58 PM
Listen to them long enough and you'll come to believe that no-one on Earth can play the victim like Norn Iron politicians can.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 May, 2014, 04:02:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2014, 12:55:12 PM
In a sense we're all immigrants - from the Great Unknown we come, spend some time on Earth and then to the Great Unknown we return. And we don't seem to need passports, documentation or permission to do so.

Let's hope not, but I've heard stories...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 29 May, 2014, 05:17:41 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 May, 2014, 02:39:51 PM
Well now Anna Lo has resigned from politics. If it were any other politician, I'd be celebrating.

There's been some quality racism on display in Norn Iron the past couple of weeks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 May, 2014, 05:47:41 PM
We are damned for the sins and crimes visited upon one another in NI, God help us. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 May, 2014, 05:58:32 PM

Ah, cheer up. You murdered each other for a while, then stopped - most societies on earth still haven't moved on to the second part of that sentence. Blame-mongering dicks dwell amongst us all, as my current avatar attests; you just have to shout across their braying idiocy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2014, 06:22:13 PM
Enlightened beings that we are here in NI, we eschew such backwards thinking as "ignoring" racists and instead prefer to elect them to public office.  Here's some choice electioneering from the newest member of Belfast City Council:


(http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/article30306947.ece/BINARY/buntingFB.jpg)


Because racist bigots are a section of the community, too.  We have to be inclusive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 29 May, 2014, 06:35:47 PM
Just watching that moron of a Pastor on the Nolan Show... bloody hell...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2014, 06:42:05 PM
Funnily enough, I was just about to post something about racism.  I've been absolutely shocked to discover recently just how many otherwise nice people don't like black people.
I have a very lovely friend from China. She doesn't like blacks, though; nor do the majority of Asian people with whom I have discussed the matter of race.
My housemate from Poland hates black people.  She is unwavering in this.  My friend's Polish girlfriend sees them as 'dirty'.  I have another Polish friend - a lesbian who came here largely to escape the intolerance of her own people - who I found out yesterday doesn't like black people.  (Apart from black children, who according to her are cute because they're 'like little monkeys').
I've also heard a Spanish secondary school teacher compare black children to monkeys.
One of my Russian students told me that most Russians don't like Obama, partly because he's American but also because he's black.
None of this is to let Irish people off the hook, mind you.  Yesterday I saw a huge gang of youths throwing chips at an (I think) Indian couple, and shouting 'gyppo' at a Romanian.  (I'd like to have been a hero, but seven large teenagers are too many for me).  I've seen a van driver shout 'nigger' out the window at a black person in Dublin.  These are just a few of many, many racist incidents I've heard of happening here.
I'm beginning to think most people in the world are racist, Grud help us all. No wonder UKIP did so well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 29 May, 2014, 07:39:01 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2014, 06:42:05 PM
....because he's American...

No he's not! He's Kenyan, and a Muslim, to boot.
Why wont he show us all his birth certificate, eh?   ;)


But we are definitely living in strange times. And UKIP's recent success is the cherry on the top.
Racists are now be free to be racists, it seems.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2014, 07:39:38 PM
We all have our irrational dislikes. Personally, I hate white trillionaires and think they should all be put into concentration camps. Mind you, I don't actually know any white trillionaires so I guess some of them might be very similar to decent human beings - but I doubt it.
.
I think it's fine to hate anyone you like so long as you don't actually harm them and are prepared to put up with them hating you back for no good reason.
.
The late Bernard Manning, wrongfully demonized in my view, had the right idea about racism - his jokes (especially in his later years) pointed out how stupid a thing it is but the media chose only to look to the surface of his act.  He used to open with, "before we start, can we have a big round of applause for two young lads who've been fighting in Afghanistan, over here at the back (...rapturous, jingoistic applause...) ...their names are Hamed and Faizal and they've been putting their lives on the line for the Taliban for months..."
.
Racist? Sure - but from what direction?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 29 May, 2014, 09:08:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2014, 06:42:05 PM
Yesterday I saw a huge gang of youths throwing chips at an (I think) Indian couple, and shouting 'gyppo' at a Romanian.  (I'd like to have been a hero, but seven large teenagers are too many for me). 

Aye, 'tis a pity Slaine wasn't with you at the time. He wouldn't have thought them too many, lol. 

Of the list of things that annoy me the most - and being a cranky, middle-aged git, that's a long list ! - racist behaviour is up there at the top of it. That said, as a believer in free speech, I think that if people want to hold or express bigoted opinions - however stupid or wrong I might personally think them to be - then they should have the right to do so: the proviso being, that they do not use those beliefs to incite hatred or commit criminal acts against whatever ethnic group or nationality they have a problem with. I also think that holding up the "You're-a-racist" card anytime someone expresses misgivings about, or opposition to immigrants is counterproductive. By stifling debate on the subject in such a manner, you are only adding to the suspicions of people who might simply hold genuine concerns - to them - about what is happening within their communities. But of equal importance, you are also letting the out-and-out racists off the hook when it comes to trying to justify their frankly ludicrous world-view.

There is, of course, a fine line to be drawn within society between following Voltaire's ideas, while at the same time respecting and protecting the rights of other people to exist, regardless of where they are from. Alas, human nature being what it is, achieving that balance is something that has so far eluded us and, I suspect, will continue to do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2014, 09:28:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 May, 2014, 07:39:38 PM
We all have our irrational dislikes. Personally, I hate white trillionaires and think they should all be put into concentration camps...
The late Bernard Manning, wrongfully demonized in my view, had the right idea about racism

Disagree on both counts.  I don't hate rich people automatically - Ghandi was minted, for example; he just chose to direct his money towards a cause he believed in rather than buy things.  I know he wasn't white, but I'm just saying I don't think people with money are automatically bad - they just know how to make money.  Sure, the world would be a better place without money, but as (I think) Abraham Lincoln said, 'you can't help the poor by being one of them'.

And Bernard Manning was racist.  He had to tone it down a bit when the times caught up with him, but shouting the n-word and sneering at the people in question is racist in my book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 May, 2014, 11:52:40 PM
And some people with money aren't good at making money, they're just born into it, which means it's not even their fault. Nobody should be judged by what they are, only what they do.

Talking of which,  I can remember watching that awkward, cringey Bernard Manning interview on the Mrs. Merton Show when he said he wouldn't give black people a lift in his car. He didn't appear to be kidding.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 10:15:19 AM
"Rich white trillionaires to concentration camps" was irony to demonstrate the foolishness of hating people you've never met.
.
I was serious about Bernard Manning, though. Having seen him live at the Embassy club when I was a coach driver I can appreciate that his racist jokes actually poked fun at racism instead of glorifying it. I wouldn't base my opinions about him on The Mrs Merton Show, which was basically Caroline Ahern playing an old lady in front of a partisan audience with the express purpose of making her "guests" look like idiots. There was a programme about Bernard shown (on C4, I think) shortly after his death that's worth watching, which puts his views across quite well. Laughing at something is a good way to disempower it - and can you think of anything that needs disempowering more than racism?
.
An unpopular view, perhaps, but I don't choose my views on how I think other people will react to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 May, 2014, 12:56:01 PM
I agree with The Shark - I wouldn't call Manning a campaigner for multiculturalism, but I don't think he deserves his reputation.

My favourite "subvert the racist joke formula" gag:
Paddy goes for a job on a building site, and the foreman asks him "Do you know the difference between a girder and a joist?"
"To be sure" answers Paddy, "Goethe wrote Faust and Joyce wrote Ulysses"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 30 May, 2014, 01:06:03 PM
"Girder" rhymes with "Goethe"?  Not in any Irish accent I know

Watching the various videos of Northern Irish racist eejits today..stunning stuff

"Go back to Britain" coming form a shouting Loyalist  was pretty good
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 01:30:23 PM
Going through the local papers...boy do we do being backward, intolerant f**ks well. Although to be fair only about 50% of NI voters go in for enfranchising the real divisive scum. Enough to make a man proud!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2014, 01:47:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 10:15:19 AM
I was serious about Bernard Manning, though. Having seen him live at the Embassy club when I was a coach driver I can appreciate that his racist jokes actually poked fun at racism instead of glorifying it.

Be as that maybe true, Shark, d'you think it's something the majority of Manning fans would have recognized and appreciated?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 May, 2014, 01:52:40 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2014, 01:47:34 PM
Be as that maybe true, Shark, d'you think it's something the majority of Manning fans would have recognized and appreciated?

I've seen several interviews with Manning that do nothing to give the impression his intent was to undermine or deflate racism and any attempt to suggest otherwise seems either delusional or disingenuous to me.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: johnnystress on 30 May, 2014, 01:55:28 PM
Jim Davidson said more or less the same thing. I don't believe him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 May, 2014, 01:56:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 10:15:19 AM
I wouldn't base my opinions about him on The Mrs Merton Show, which was basically Caroline Ahern playing an old lady in front of a partisan audience with the express purpose of making her "guests" look like idiots.

The audience was always made up of people of a certain age, a few of which, on that occasion also seemed to be fans of Bernard Manning.

The comment he made was in response to a question by an audience member who'd previously been given a lift in a car from Bernard. Nobody was trying to make him look like an idiot at the time and when fellow guest, Richard Wilson said "But I thought you weren't racist Bernard?", it only got worse from there on in.

http://youtu.be/dL13o8UCMyU?t=27s (http://youtu.be/dL13o8UCMyU?t=27s)

I think I saw that Channel 4 programme at the time. It had loads of folk saying 'it was only an act' and 'it's not what he actually thinks' and maybe that's also true of the clip I've posted the link to, but if that's an act, it's an unfunny one that makes him look like a total prick who means every word, and he's got no one to blame but himself for being demonised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 May, 2014, 01:58:55 PM
Saying he was playing with notions of racism makes him sound like the Stewart Lee of his day.
He was not, he was a nasty, vile racist. The Mrs Merton interview did not set him up, it revealed hi for the utter shit he was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Forgive me for stating, who really cares, he's dead and whatever influence he had is buried with him. It's the living that mainly concern me, and there's a lot of nasty sh*ts out there now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 May, 2014, 02:42:26 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Forgive me for stating, who really cares, he's dead and whatever influence he had is buried with him. It's the living that mainly concern me, and there's a lot of nasty sh*ts out there now.

There was a poll done this week that showed a third of people in the UK openly admitted to racial prejudice and much hand-wringing ensued about how it could be that the population had become more racist. They haven't, but the ones who are have become more emboldened by the current political climate and feel less embarrassed to admit that they're racists.

As such, attempts to rehabilitate the likes of Manning and Davidson feed into that culture and should be actively and vigorously resisted.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 02:46:38 PM
Fair point, but the mind staggers at how a repulsive prick like Jim Davidson could ever, ever be rehabilitated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 May, 2014, 02:57:42 PM
We live in an age where Jim Davidson wins a celebrity popularity contest and a far-right party wins the nation's hearts...

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/1/30/1391079778910/Jim-Davidson-celebrates-h-011.jpg)

welcome to the END TIMES


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 03:12:06 PM
I've just attended as a delegate at a 3 day Trade Union conference in Newcastle County Down (what a beautiful place). I can tell you after what I've heard from colleague's from all over NI: fellow workers, bombed; shots fired; subjected to threats to kill from both republican (the scum wouldn't know the meaning of the word) and loyalist  terrorist organisations; subjected to physical assaults; oceans of verbal abuse etc, boy do we have our work cut out for us, still....onwards and upwards. Z  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2014, 03:18:23 PM
I don't mind Jim Davidson because he's only an arsehole and for years he managed to rein in his bullshit and be a family entertainer - if you're a sexist racist jerk at heart, I don't think we can really ask more of you than that you keep such things to yourself when out in public, and Davidson has at least mastered that skill.

While Bernard was technically correct in his assertion that the Pakistani military could not have participated in the liberation of Europe from the Nazis as Pakistan didn't exist as a nation until several years after the war, I think where he went wrong was phrasing it "there weren't any Pakis at Arnhem."
Michael Barrymore has a valid case for being misrepresented by the media, but I don't think Manning does.  I can accept that he might not have been a racist in life, but he went out of his way to cultivate that image and no-one held a gun to his head and forced him to use words like "Paki" or to say he wouldn't give black people a lift in his car.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 May, 2014, 03:53:04 PM
I quite liked his Turkey Drummers though


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 04:18:04 PM
Well, if my only choices are between being disingenuous or delusional then I'll settle for delusional because I'm basing my opinion on personal experience which is, of course, subjective.
.
I think the likes of Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr work with material every bit as offensive and uncomfortable (and funny). And no, not everyone will get out of Manning's act what I got but then, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 May, 2014, 04:40:26 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2014, 03:18:23 PM
While Bernard was technically correct in his assertion that the Pakistani military could not have participated in the liberation of Europe from the Nazis as Pakistan didn't exist as a nation until several years after the war, I think where he went wrong was phrasing it "there weren't any Pakis at Arnhem."

Maybe not at that particular battle, but millions of citizens of what then was still India fought and died for His Majesty (http://metro.co.uk/2010/11/10/armistice-day-muslims-contribution-must-not-be-forgotten-577418/) in both world wars, just the same as Australians, Canadians, or subjects from any of the British Empire's other colonies. Stupid cunt.


Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2014, 03:18:23 PM
I can accept that he might not have been a racist in life, but he went out of his way to cultivate that image and no-one held a gun to his head and forced him to use words like "Paki" or to say he wouldn't give black people a lift in his car

Probably. His act pandered to the inherent prejudices of his particular audience, in the same way and for the same reason that the default political outlook articulated by any UK comedian who wants to make money and get on telly is broadly left wing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 05:09:13 PM
Just an observation, but if one wished to point out the stupidities of racism, which audience would you choose - those who already know that or those who do not? It's not my intention to canonise Manning but neither will I damn him - for to do so would make me a hypocrite.  I have told my fair share of Englishman, Irishman, Scotsman jokes in my time but that doesn't mean those jokes come from a place of hatred. Ignorance, maybe, but not hatred - and some of those jokes were very, very funny which, in the final analysis, is what jokes are for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2014, 05:48:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 May, 2014, 01:52:40 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2014, 01:47:34 PM
Be as that maybe true, Shark, d'you think it's something the majority of Manning fans would have recognized and appreciated?

I've seen several interviews with Manning that do nothing to give the impression his intent was to undermine or deflate racism and any attempt to suggest otherwise seems either delusional or disingenuous to me.

Jim

The only time I saw Manning defend his act was (I think) on THIS MORNING. However, instead of explaining how his routine was, in fact, a misunderstood metatheorem using racist language recursively to deconstruct racism itself he wheezed an anecdote about some black couple sitting in the front row and how they laughed it up so, no, his act wasn't offensive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 30 May, 2014, 05:58:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 05:09:13 PM
Just an observation, but if one wished to point out the stupidities of racism, which audience would you choose - those who already know that or those who do not?

The latter, of course. Because racists are well-known for going out of their way to be enlightened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 06:28:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 10:15:19 AM
"Rich white trillionaires to concentration camps" was irony to demonstrate the foolishness of hating people you've never met.


Fair enough.

But as for Bernard Manning being some kind of ironic satirist of the intolerant... well, of course you're entitled to your opinion, but I just don't see it, I'm afraid.  I believe Viz is the true master of satirising the intolerant, and here is its epitaph for Bernard:

(NSFW and in very bad taste)

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r153/brnwlsh/bernardmanningplate.jpg (http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r153/brnwlsh/bernardmanningplate.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 May, 2014, 07:27:14 PM
I wouldn't trust him to go to the shops for me
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 30 May, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
Socially I sometimes don't know what to do about racism. I mean obviously it's a bad thing but is it a case of 'love the racist, hate the racism'?
I've met people that I genuinely like and have affection for and then - Wham! - out of the blue they say something racist and hateful. I'm not afraid to say when I disagree with someone and they'll undoubtedly go down in my estimation but sometimes it's hard just to switch off your feelings of friendship toward them. I think it's best to try to change their minds or at least force them into analysing their opinions but it's almost like a sort of personality cancer and sometimes there's nothing you can do but agree to differ.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 May, 2014, 07:47:28 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 30 May, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
Socially I sometimes don't know what to do about racism. I mean obviously it's a bad thing but is it a case of 'love the racist, hate the racism'?
I've met people that I genuinely like and have affection for and then - Wham! - out of the blue they say something racist and hateful. I'm not afraid to say when I disagree with someone and they'll undoubtedly go down in my estimation but sometimes it's hard just to switch off your feelings of friendship toward them. I think it's best to try to change their minds or at least force them into analysing their opinions but it's almost like a sort of personality cancer and sometimes there's nothing you can do but agree to differ.

It's even harder with loved ones. I could never imagine hating my grand parents but i'm quite often struck with reality. One of my grand fathers is a proud supporter of UKIP and exhibits all the disillusioned hatred towards society that we are so used to. While my grandmother on the other pair is vehamently anti-bisexual, strangely she say's you should be one or the other. Not swing both ways. She had no issue with homosexuals. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 08:37:37 PM
You can't change the world, you can only change your world. Lead by example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 May, 2014, 08:42:27 PM
Well, while I share most of the above typical experiences, I can offer a more heartening example.

Today I was working in a hole in the ground just outside Cassidy's pub, bathed in the glow of JayzusBChrist's magnificent window paintings (particularly liked the Cantina scene - nice Ackbar!), when I espied with a certain amount of anticipatory dread a  small parade working its way across O'Connell Bridge - a parade of exclusively black Biafran men, celebrating how happy they were to be living in Ireland (that's what the banners said anyway). 

My prior experience with the construction industry would be that it's a fiery hotbed of racism, especially with the older men, but on this occasion the three middle aged men I was working with (One Welsh, one Northern Irish, one southern Irish) paused and observed the parade and variously remarked 'Good on them, glad to see someone's enjoying themselves', 'You wouldn't have seen that 20 years ago, amazing really' and 'I love a good parade' (no prizes for guessing which said the latter).

So maybe things are changing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 08:44:53 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 30 May, 2014, 07:47:28 PMWhile my grandmother on the other pair is vehamently anti-bisexual, strangely she say's you should be one or the other. Not swing both ways. She had no issue with homosexuals.

Now that is odd.
I met a gay chap once who thought gay pride marches should be banned.  In his view, they presented the gay scene as some kind of wacky freakshow, rather than normal people doing everyday things.

QuoteToday I was working in a hole in the ground just outside Cassidy's pub, bathed in the glow of JayzusBChrist's magnificent window paintings (particularly liked the Cantina scene - nice Ackbar!)

Holy shit, TB, that's you working in the hole?  Let me know next time you're there! I'm in and out of Cassidy's all the time (usually chasing paycheques).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 08:52:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 08:44:53 PM

In his view, they presented the gay scene as some kind of wacky freakshow, rather than normal people doing everyday things.

...

Holy shit, TB, that's you working in the hole?  Let me know next time you're there! I'm in and out... (usually chasing paycheques).


Those two comments of mine are unrelated, just for the record.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 May, 2014, 08:53:48 PM
 :o Yeah right!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 May, 2014, 08:54:37 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 08:52:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 08:44:53 PM

In his view, they presented the gay scene as some kind of wacky freakshow, rather than normal people doing everyday things.

...

Holy shit, TB, that's you working in the hole?  Let me know next time you're there! I'm in and out... (usually chasing paycheques).


Those two comments of mine are unrelated, just for the record.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 May, 2014, 09:07:57 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 30 May, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
I've met people that I genuinely like and have affection for and then - Wham! - out of the blue they say something racist and hateful.

Sigh... tell me about it.

Today a "friend" on FB had a weirdly homophobic status. He regularly has these Clarkson style "statements" that are meant to shock or whatever:

"Right - I'm not being funny but what's the point of being vegetarian - ?!?" etc etc etc

Always trying to push people's buttons and depressingly/satisfyingly he never seems to get the rise he wants - most people just ignore him. I've hidden him for a while now - because in real life he's really quite reasonable. Yet... he thinks and says those bloody things and I think less of him every time and today's one made me feel all weird and sad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 09:11:49 PM
Tordelback, you've got mail.

The rest of you, just leave me and my Tordy alone.  We can do what we want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 30 May, 2014, 09:15:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2014, 08:37:37 PM
You can't change the world, you can only change your world. Lead by example.

It's people's right to be dicks.  I only see an issue when people start acting on such beliefs, up until then they can say what they like, and I'll agree, or I won't. 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 May, 2014, 09:17:10 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2014, 09:11:49 PM
Tordelback, you've got mail.

The rest of you, just leave me and my Tordy alone.  We can do what we want.

Hey, it's your business whose hole you put your toad in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 30 May, 2014, 09:33:00 PM
Toad in the hole is easy. It's comedy that's hard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 May, 2014, 09:40:48 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 May, 2014, 09:07:57 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 30 May, 2014, 07:38:38 PM
I've met people that I genuinely like and have affection for and then - Wham! - out of the blue they say something racist and hateful.

Sigh... tell me about it.

Today a "friend" on FB had a weirdly homophobic status. He regularly has these Clarkson style "statements" that are meant to shock or whatever:

"Right - I'm not being funny but what's the point of being vegetarian - ?!?" etc etc etc

Always trying to push people's buttons and depressingly/satisfyingly he never seems to get the rise he wants - most people just ignore him. I've hidden him for a while now - because in real life he's really quite reasonable. Yet... he thinks and says those bloody things and I think less of him every time and today's one made me feel all weird and sad.

I can't really relate to this.

Where I grew up, bigotry reared its head very early on in any conversation with any potential friend.

What's the only English word with six silent letters?
Londonderry.

It was easy to tell who was or wasn't a bigot based on whether or not they gave a shit about the difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 May, 2014, 11:16:38 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 30 May, 2014, 09:40:48 PM
I can't really relate to this.

Where I grew up, bigotry reared its head very early on in any conversation with any potential friend.

What's the only English word with six silent letters?
Londonderry.

It was easy to tell who was or wasn't a bigot based on whether or not they gave a shit about the difference.

When I went to uni in Dundee in '85, it was the first time I got to meet lots of people from Norn Iron (both sides), and they opened my eyes about that QUESTION that would be asked early on - Could be subtle, or could just be "what;s your name?". It had never occurred to me before the significance of common names - I went to school with Williams and Patricks and there was no conception of a difference, but my friends told me tales of getting beaten up for the wrong answer. (or of sticking razors in your lapels in case somebody grabbed 'em ... I don;'t think that's a NI thing, it's just a generally gruesome detail that's stuck in my mind!)

My own family ranges  from *not politically correct but good-hearted" to "horribly racist". My dad (86) is the most fair minded person you could meet, but I sometimes have to tell him not to use terms like "darkies". I've got a cousin however who could turn every single conversation to being the fault of paki/muslims/gypos/gays
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2014, 12:09:19 AM
"When I'm using my umbrella in the rain in London, I hold it higher when passing other people so I don't poke their eyes out. It works okay but the last time I did this a dozen Japanese tourists followed me home."
.
This joke was on 'Room 101" this evening. Is it a racist joke? Would it still be funny without the word "Japanese"? Would it be more racist with the word "Pakistani" or less racist with the word "French"?
.
This comedy lark's a bloody nightmare...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 May, 2014, 12:25:17 AM
Maybe he had to qualify their nationality because the joke was that they thought he was Totorro?


Quote from: Mister Pops on 30 May, 2014, 09:40:48 PMWhat's the only English word with six silent letters?
Londonderry.

It was easy to tell who was or wasn't a bigot based on whether or not they gave a shit about the difference.

My favorite (possibly anecdotal) story was from a man who worked a second job in a Derry delicatessen counter at weekends: a customer comes in asking if they have "locally produced organic cheeses" and is told that yes, all cheese sold from the deli counter is "dairy fresh."  The customer gives him the evil eye and says firmly "you mean LONDONderry."  The man behind the counter explains that he means "dairy" in the sense of being made from milk from a cow, and the customer continues, even angrier "I don't give a fuck where they get the milk from, but if them cows is local then they're from LONDONderry."
From there, the conversation goes somewhat downhill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 31 May, 2014, 01:22:44 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 May, 2014, 12:25:17 AM
Maybe he had to qualify their nationality because the joke was that they thought he was Totorro?

Would've worked better if somebody like Phil Jupitus had said it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 31 May, 2014, 10:21:19 AM
I wouldn't have made the connection, it's a pretty niche reference for a prime-time BBC1 show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 11:49:34 AM
Lately, I've been working an odd mix of late night/early morning shifts on a transect right through the centre of Dublin's fair city, and have had too-ample opportunity to watch the movements and antics of its inhabitants.  It's fair to say that it has been a complete eye-opener for this 43 year old.  Firstly, my conceptions of what parts of the city centre were 'dodgy' has changed completely: anywhere people actually live, no matter how run-down and grim-looking, is totally different to the no-man's lands in between; secondly, my idea of what constitutes 'dodgy' has changed: the loud and visible packs of violent staggering drunks and gangs of hard-looking boys are not the real problem: that would be the serious drugs brigade; and thirdly, my view of where I live at the much-maligned outer margins of Tallaght has improved immeasurably: we don't know we're born out here.  What we call 'trouble' is minor indeed.

Anyway, that's by way of preamble.  What's really shocked me, to the point of reappraising my views on the endless torrent of vox-pop on  the subject, are the numbers and condition of junkies in the city.  From shooting up in broad daylight in the carpark of the Department of Health no less, to OD'ing (or just seizing, I'm mercifully not clear on the details) in the middle of the traffic, to persistently robbing from 24 hour shops, grabbing and threatening people and snatching phones/tablets/bags from tourists and just staggering away, not to mention beating the shite out of each other.  And none of this down dark alleyways, but large groups, right on the main streets of the capital city, in daylight.

What really bothers me is not the threat that these guys obviously represent  to everyone else using the city centre, but the lives of the poor sods themselves. 

How does anyone come back from this, even leaving aside the physical addiction?  The most obviously affected look like living skeletons, sunken cheeks, tombstone teeth and skin lesions, but the whole group seem to have slipped into some other reality, where they exist completely outside society, grabbing what they can and doing what they have to with no concern for or reference to the masses that flow around them.  The cops are called after some shop robbery or other.  They arrive, talk to people, the junkies wander off, the cops stand around for 10 minutes looking grim, and then they go, and the junkies reassemble and continue as before.  Obviously arresting them isn't going to do any good whatsoever, but nor is ignoring them.

Where are these people going to be in a month, in six months, in a year?  What can be done to help them out of this mess?  Has an city come up with a workable solution of care and rehabilitation?  It's as if there was some outbreak of a terrible illness right there in the heart of the capital, a modern equivalent of leprosy or something, and it's just being ignored.

I know this all sounds painfully naive at my age, but I've lived in some pretty rough situations in the past myself and I've worked with a homeless charity, and talking to the crews I'm working with, who have lived and worked in cities all over the world, I'm not alone in finding this situation to be genuinely shocking.

Is there a solution?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 17 June, 2014, 12:27:03 PM
We used to have a similar problem here in sunny ol' Exeter. Hordes of heroine addicts would congregate on the Cathedral Green in the heart of the city centre, doing their bit for the Tourist trade.

I've known many people who have dabbled with the harder end of the drugs scale (LSD was my limit, you can keep heroine and crack lads, it's not my bag at all). Some have managed to come off of the shit, and some have allowed it to destroy them and turn into absolutely horrible C***s.

Education is part of the problem, and I would also suggest lack of resources in deprived areas plays its part, but ultimately there will always be a few that quite literally 'can't help themselves' and take to the Pipe/syringe just for fun.

I cannot think of a clear solution to the problem.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 12:35:38 PM
What worries me is that I'm starting to see where taxi-drivers* are coming from.  They have a similar perspective to the one I'm currently getting, sitting around all night on the street in the midst of all this, it's easy to see how you could find yourself angrily ringing up late-night talk shows.  As far as I can see, the only official response is to move these people on, temporarily.  That annoys me because I can't see how that's going to help them, or in any way reduce the problem, and I imagine it annoys tax-drivers because they aren't being shipped to a concentration camp.

I agree with you NapalmKev, getting in there early and heading people down a different path is the solution, but even allowing that that might be possible, what do you do for the people whose lives are basically destroyed, who no longer live in the same world as the majority? 

It's pretty bad watching an iPad being yanked from the hands of a tourist, but it's worse watching some lad shooting up100 yards away a few hours later, and realising that these are just two points on a cycle, except that the junkie is more a victim of this problem than the people he robbed.




*Obvious generalising and straw-manning of taxi-drivers follows.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 June, 2014, 12:51:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 12:35:38 PM
What worries me is that I'm starting to see where taxi-drivers* are coming from.  They have a similar perspective to the one I'm currently getting, sitting around all night on the street in the midst of all this, it's easy to see how you could find yourself angrily ringing up late-night talk shows


Tordel Back = Travis Bickle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 01:02:47 PM
Government isn't going to solve this - there's no profit in humanity. We have to do it ourselves, individually, as best we can. You can't help them all but, if each of us takes the responsibility of looking out for our families/friends/neighbours then that's a start. We can't just carry on sitting around waiting for the government to come up with a (final?) solution.
.
Do what You can for who You can when You can and leave it at that. If others follow your example that's fantastic but if they don't then at least You've done something - whether you succeed or not.
.
How can we expect other people to solve these problems if we don't, or in some cases won't, try solving the smallest part of them ourselves, personally?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 17 June, 2014, 05:47:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 01:02:47 PM
Government isn't going to solve this - there's no profit in humanity. We have to do it ourselves, individually, as best we can. You can't help them all but, if each of us takes the responsibility of looking out for our families/friends/neighbours then that's a start. We can't just carry on sitting around waiting for the government to come up with a (final?) solution.
.
Do what You can for who You can when You can and leave it at that. If others follow your example that's fantastic but if they don't then at least You've done something - whether you succeed or not.
.
How can we expect other people to solve these problems if we don't, or in some cases won't, try solving the smallest part of them ourselves, personally?
.

Because I have neither the training nor the psychological makeup appropriate to helping a drug user, and I'd wager neither do most of the posters here.  How exactly do you think the multiple, highly-specialised professions and massive resources needed to tackle a problem like widespread heroin addiction can be coordinated without government?  States can and have (http://"http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/evaluating-drug-decriminalization-in-portugal-12-years-later-a-891060.html") enacted changes that have massively improved the situation, something that would be impossible if your kneejerk individualism held any water.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 05:53:28 PM
A desperately sad and troubling subject. We generally see only the end 'product' in a process riven with heartache and horror all the way through. If we look at the passage drugs sucha s Heroin or Cocaine. Take them from initial production, cocaine from South and Central America the Mexico drug war (a truly beastial affair) or the many other nations blighted with this problem; Heroin from Afghanistan (another disaster zone) through the banking laundering of proceeds through to the addiction and endemic criminality to 'feed' habits. There is an endless process of murder, rape, intimidation, theft etc.
There are two general approacher to dealing with the issue:
1. Law enforcement to interrupt at source; to interdict the transmission and to arrest and punish/rehabilitate the end users. This hasn't worked. It has fueled oppression in the producer states/failed states. It ignores the investors and launderers and as TordelBack has attested to, signally fails to deal with the domestic results in the West.
The other potential solution is legalisation. Many states especially in South America have moved towards this and it is constantly put forward by politicians/law enforcement officials and others domestically.
To my mind prohibition has not worked in any manner and the latter option should be put forward internationally (it will not work piecemeal). The process should be subject to regulation and oversight and at least tried out. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 June, 2014, 06:14:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 11:49:34 AM
Has an city come up with a workable solution of care and rehabilitation ... Is there a solution?

No, but Portugal decided to treat drug use as a medical problem rather than a criminal one, and saw a drastic reduction in the human carnage associated with hard drug use:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/portugal-drug-decriminalization/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

Switzerland, The Netherlands, and Germany adopt the typically pragmatic approach of allowing heroin users to shoot up free heroin in government clinics. Celts aren't Germans, and this article probably paints an overly rosy portrait of happy and fully employed smack addicts with great dentistry, but there at least appears to be some value in getting users into a system that allows social services to provide them with support and structure:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5043766.stm

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 17 June, 2014, 06:19:23 PM
Legalization certainly has some appealing aspects. If the drug of choice could be obtained from a 'shop', if you will, then at least it would remove the need to deal with 'twats in alleyways with Gangsta dispositions'*.
Also, the 'product' would have to be regulated, in which case you know your "Getting the good stuff".

It could further argued that Legalization would reduce Crime; Trafficking at the very least.**

Cheers

*some people will still go for this method of course.
**I'm not Endorsing the taking of 'Drugs', It's not Cool, clever or 'Hard'. Bear that in mind while you're drinking Coffee and Smoking ciggies.

Once again, Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 06:23:16 PM
What Napamkev!! Zenarcade  screams, throwing his can of special brew at the computer screen and burning the carpet with his dropped fag in horror!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 June, 2014, 06:26:37 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 17 June, 2014, 06:19:23 PM
It could further argued that Legalization would reduce Crime; Trafficking at the very least

This is a really spoddy point, but there's a difference between legalisation and decriminalisation. No country on Earth has legalised drug production, distribution, or use. Decriminalisation still treats those first two activities as criminal activities, but allows addicts to seek medical help for their addiction without fear of prosecution. The state effectively muscles in on the dealer's/traffickers action and assumes the role of the biggest pusher in history.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 06:33:36 PM
Fair point, it is also the case that the addiction epedemic is caused by deep rooted societal problems which drive people to become addicts. I am of course subject to correction but I find it hard to believe anyone actually takes heroin of Crack Cocaine as a lifestyle choice.
Anyone who sniffs coke up their nose is just an arrant, got up dick of course. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 June, 2014, 07:10:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 11:49:34 AM
Is there a solution?
Nuke it from orbit. Should do the job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 June, 2014, 08:28:39 PM
Legalise drugs and tax them and use the taxes raised to help people with a drug problem.  Or is that the view of an old git who doesn't know what he's talking about?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 08:35:43 PM
When I suggest doing something ourselves, I don't mean diving into squats and dragging the addict of your choice out by the collar to be cured in your shed with Lemsip and warm words or sweeping away the services and professionals already hip-deep in this problem.
.
Help comes in many forms and with many levels so just help who you can how you can and where you can - this can range from donating some tea bags or biscuits to a drop-in centre, dissuading someone you know from starting a habit, volunteering for a few hours a month or signing up for a degree course in social work. It won't cure the problem but it will help.
.
In fact, just helping someone who is in a bad place before they turn to drugs, or even think of turning to drugs, is just as important if not more so. Just help everyone you can, addict or not, that's really all any of us can do. In fact, I think most of us do that anyway - so just by listening to our friends when they need it has probably saved countless lives already. I'm not suggesting anything new or radical here.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 08:39:08 PM
Not really, but it begs the question on public policy, health etc. Should the Government be legalising something which has an adverse effect on public health. The move over the past few decades has been away from this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 08:40:26 PM
Sorry shark I was replying to Tankie. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 08:57:37 PM
My view is that people should be free to ingest whatever they want and be responsible for the consequences.
.
The role of government in this, again in my view, is to provide unbiased education, safe products and to pick up the pieces if it all goes breasts aloft.
.
Of course, attempting to cure "the drug problem" in isolation is futile unless concomitant contributory factors, such as poverty, homelessness, debt, lack of options, etc., etc., etc., are also addressed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 08:58:35 PM
No problem, Z - I figured that out :-D
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 June, 2014, 09:09:59 PM
The problem with just straight legalization of controlled substances, is that it costs the cartels money. A few states in America have legalized pot, and it's reckoned it has lost the cartels three billion dollars a year. That should give you pause for thought. If you legalized everything, the Cartels would lose a huge amount of revenue. Then what? Would they go quietly into the night?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 09:14:07 PM
If you extripate the revenue stream yes possibly. The risks involved in other illegal activities are high and the returns considerably lower. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 June, 2014, 09:18:16 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 09:14:07 PM
If you extripate the revenue stream yes possibly. The risks involved in other illegal activities are high and the returns considerably lower. Z

Capone them! Of course!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 09:18:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2014, 08:57:37 PM
Of course, attempting to cure "the drug problem" in isolation is futile unless concomitant contributory factors, such as poverty, homelessness, debt, lack of options, etc., etc., etc., are also addressed.

No arguments there, and thanks for all the ideas and opinions, all.

I suppose I'm really trying to think of how you can help the end-products of the problem.  I'm not kidding when I say I've been watching them from behind my Harris fencing and thinking time and again that they look like the walking dead, somehow excluded from the world of the living that blurs by them.  I also found myself thinking the Twilight Zone episode where everyone is frozen in time but the protagonist, or that Stephen King short The Langoliers where all but a handful of people have disappeared and they wander about trying to make sense of the empty world.  Only a few weeks back I'd been marvelling at the zombie-horde antics of the post chucking-out clubbing crowd in another part of town, and finding it all pretty damn amusing: this is something utterly different.  These are people, who presumably came into the world exactly the same as the rest of us, and have now ended up being viewed by people like me behind my security fence as some kind of terrible other: it's appalling.

Our former Lord Mayor (up 'til last week) was on the radio a few months back advocating for a properly resourced combined treatment and accommodation centre in the city itself, as an alternative to walk-in clinics and random hostels, and he subsequently perhaps predictably lost his Council seat in the recent local elections, when the dominant current of opinion on the radio and internet is 'stick them in jail or exile them all to an island, along with the Travellers'.  But I wonder is it just wishful thinking that that such a centre would have any real effect? 

I'm now seriously considering getting involved with groups that work with these guys.  I just can't get it out of my head that there's this whole world of horror at the other end of the tram line from my house, and no-one seems capable of doing anything about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 June, 2014, 09:35:11 PM
Tordel of course try and do something as an individual, that is what being a participative member of society is all about.  You are, I'm sure, more than aware that this positive participation will be no easy thing in the sense that the people you are trying to help and reach will have problems much seeper than the addiction issues.
Society today is ill divided and in my view getting progressivly more so and the 'end product' you see now may well be a different end product in a few years timen by which I mean people further up the reletive poverty scale. Unhappily yours. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2014, 10:32:43 PM
Nah, I get that I'm entirely the wrong person to be a direct help, at this point anyway: I'm not quite that naive.  A good mate of mine worked in the probation service for many years, and a more compassionate, realistic and positive fellow you would never meet, and it just gradually ground him down and down - and I'm not half the man he is.  I would like to talk to people and groups that have practical experience, and get an idea of what could be done to help, and then start working towards that. The idea that it's acceptable that a society allows people to end up in this state, and then just hopes they'll go away...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 18 June, 2014, 02:47:02 PM
Quote from: Islamic State of Iraq and Sauchie on 17 June, 2014, 06:26:37 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 17 June, 2014, 06:19:23 PM
It could further argued that Legalization would reduce Crime; Trafficking at the very least

The state effectively muscles in on the dealer's/traffickers action and assumes the role of the biggest pusher in history.

or re-assumes if its Britain. ( Dutch East India Co, 'Boxer' Rebellion, HK etc)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 June, 2014, 03:13:01 PM

Fuck you, commie! Her Majesty, Queen Victoria, was ripped off her tits on cocaine during that whole era - as were a good number of the middle classes (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2198086/Victorian-adverts-health-remedies-laden-cocaine-morphine-alcohol.html) - and it was all legit. Anyone who wanted to could get all the ching and skag they wanted from main street pharmacies, so really, any proposal to introduce high street clinics where junkies could shoot up during their lunch break from Starbucks would only be a return to the values that turned 80% of the globe pink.

All that business with the gun boats was just us trying to raise Chinese living standards and consumer choices to those of the English middle classes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 June, 2014, 05:24:11 PM
I feel like today's Labour announcement is being covered by the  media in all the stereotypical ways, completely missing what is actually being said. "Labour to cut youth benefits" was the tagline on BBC News - which is not entirely accurate. That's what the Tories are doing. The Labour policy is a bit more nuanced, even if sadly pandering to the gits in society who favour the ludicrous idea of a sharp stick poking people into employment rather than the only realistic solution of providing opportunities so people can be employed.

All depends on what this 'training' consists of. If it's worth doing then maybe it would be of some good, though the mandatory stance is once again, thoroughly disgusting. I'm doubtful of course as I'm well aware of what Job-seekers training seems to consist of, though have no experience of it myself.

However all aside, I feel it's a case of misrepresentation to boil it down to Labour to Cut Youth Benefits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 June, 2014, 05:42:11 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 19 June, 2014, 05:24:11 PM
I feel it's a case of misrepresentation to boil it down to Labour to Cut Youth Benefits

Which is the headline Labour HQ wanted, of course. One of their wonks was on The World At One (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b046nvxx) today, and eventually admitted that it's impossible to say whether the higher rate of benefits for anyone who's previously been in employment for a certain number of years may actually end up costing more than the existing model ...

... which, presumably, isn't the kind of headline Labour HQ were after when they came up with this policy on the back of a fag packet because they wanted to appeal to voters who think they're soft on benefits scroungers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 June, 2014, 05:53:05 PM
I would have thought victimising young people to be a great way to win Tory voters.  To really bring it home, Miliband should go on tv and announce that Labour will be clamping down on kids hanging around in groups, and making sensible haircuts/shoes compulsory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 June, 2014, 06:22:07 PM
Quote from: Kennari Bjarndýr on 19 June, 2014, 05:53:05 PM
I would have thought victimising young people to be a great way to win Tory voters

Nobody much younger than fifty votes, and everyone knows it. The old are hatefully resentful of the young, and there are no votes to be lost by picking on folk with plukes on their faces.

(http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/files/2010/03/Nonvoters.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 June, 2014, 09:27:19 PM
All too true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 June, 2014, 09:37:52 PM
That is right, right, right....the modern narcissistic, navel gazing, solophistic etc don't vote insanity of our youth perversly denudes them of a future. To be bought and paid for like a bunch of £10 whores by a crass, unrealisable, corporate propogated dreamworld: F**ked up and sad! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2014, 07:38:16 AM
Children should be educated about government and politics at school and also be able to vote. At age 8, they should get half a vote, at 9 they should get 9/16ths of a vote, at 10 5/8ths and so on up to a full vote at age 16.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 June, 2014, 09:33:08 AM
Thats an awful idea. Not the education part, thats great, but giving children bellow the age of 18 the right to vote? You do realise they'd just vote for their favourite colour, right?


:P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 20 June, 2014, 11:06:39 AM
I was involved in political education programmes designed to promote active engagement in Norn Iron's political process for half a life-time.

I have this vague sense of guilt about it now.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/first-minister-peter-robinson-in-uturn-over-locals-only-race-row-30370144.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 June, 2014, 12:42:19 PM
Hey! Who would have thunk it! Another school shooting in the US! Bet they still want to keep the second amendment though don't they!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2014, 12:48:45 PM
Er, most people just vote for their favourite colour anyway. Giving youngsters a partial vote in conjunction with a political/governmental education would be, I think, a good way to instill in them what voting and democracy are all about. The goal is to have the children understanding how it all works better than the adults - which should really be our goal throughout all education, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2014, 04:56:10 PM
I dunno - I quite like the idea of being the first country to vote to become a fire engine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 20 June, 2014, 05:17:06 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 20 June, 2014, 09:33:08 AM
children bellow the age of 18

One way to get your voice heard...   :)

I think 18 is fine? Gawd help us, but 16-year olds are being encouraged to vote in our (oor) Independence Referendum, and campaigners will say that this makes sense because - amongst other things - you can get married at 16, and drive at 17.
But... married at 16 is surely a phrase that chills the soul? And as far as responsibility goes, there is a reason why young 'uns pay higher car insurance premiums?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 June, 2014, 05:34:39 PM

The YES campaign are standing on a platform of chocolate ice cream for everyone if the referendum goes their way (currently unfunded), but the No campaign are indulging in the politics of fear by assuring everyone that independence will mean earlier bedtimes and more homework.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2014, 05:40:52 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 20 June, 2014, 05:17:06 PMI think 18 is fine? Gawd help us, but 16-year olds are being encouraged to vote in our (oor) Independence Referendum, and campaigners will say that this makes sense because - amongst other things - you can get married at 16, and drive at 17.

Once you turn 16, you're fair game to go abroad and kill "our" enemies and then come home and become a mentally-traumatised junkie living under a bridge and being pissed on by drunks - it's only fair you have a say in any political entity that would do this to you.  I know consistency is a bit of an ask of the political classes much like fairness, a backbone and self-awareness is, but either you are old enough to assume your rights as a citizen or you aren't, and being legally allowed to murder someone for reasons of economics must surely be the last thing you're allowed to do rather than the first?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 20 June, 2014, 05:42:52 PM
Quote from: Kennari Bjarndýr on 20 June, 2014, 05:40:52 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 20 June, 2014, 05:17:06 PMI think 18 is fine? Gawd help us, but 16-year olds are being encouraged to vote in our (oor) Independence Referendum, and campaigners will say that this makes sense because - amongst other things - you can get married at 16, and drive at 17.

Once you turn 16, you're fair game to go abroad and kill "our" enemies and then come home and become a mentally-traumatised junkie living under a bridge and being pissed on by drunks - it's only fair you have a say in any political entity that would do this to you.  I know consistency is a bit of an ask of the political classes much like fairness, a backbone and self-awareness is, but either you are old enough to assume your rights as a citizen or you aren't.

16 is too young to fight in wars. You're a wean.

(Edit for clarity: Agreed, and soldiering should therefore not be an option. Funny that this point is one you don't seem to hear).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2014, 05:51:29 PM
I am of a similar opinion that 17 is too young to own or drive a car, but the economic impact of denying such a "right" outweighs the concerns of the five people who die every day on the UK's roads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 June, 2014, 07:29:40 PM
Just to point out a fact, 18 is the age upon which a member of the British Armed Forces is allowed to fight on the front line, unless you know something different!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 20 June, 2014, 07:39:34 PM
Fair enough, that wasn't a distinction made when I looked this up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 June, 2014, 07:49:28 PM
Not having a go at you Fungus, rather the previous post!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2014, 08:35:24 PM
Leave Fungus alone, you.

Enlistment for the UK armed forces is from age 16 - though I take your point how if you want to legally kill anyone in the army before you're 18 you have to bully them into doing the deed themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 June, 2014, 08:37:50 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 June, 2014, 07:29:40 PM
Just to point out a fact, 18 is the age upon which a member of the British Armed Forces is allowed to fight on the front line, unless you know something different!
I still consider 18 to fragile and age to be sending young boys into life changing circumstances. But I haven't done a days marching in my life so i'm in no position to be in opposition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2014, 09:17:05 AM
Let's raise the minimum recruitment age to 25 - see how many people we can get to go off and kill other people then. On the plus side, recruits would be really keen by that age and also have (maybe) enough life experience under their belts to be more discerning killers. On the downside I suppose they'd be harder to train and physically unfit.
.
Or we could stop declaring war on countries and try declaring peace instead.
.
Or we could build bigger bombs.
.
Or I could shut up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 June, 2014, 09:33:01 AM
All national armies should do what the Romans in the early-mid republic did. That is have a levy of the enfranchised population and select on the basis of who had the most property (that is a vested interest in defending the state). I doubt the monied classes nowadays would share the Romans sense of societal cohesion in sending brave and idealistic young men and women off to war; or if they did they'd be a bit more circumspect in where and when. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 June, 2014, 09:40:10 AM
Both 5th C BC Athens and Sparta barred military service until age 20 (although Spartans started training at 7), which when you think about the average Classical life expectancy (at age 15) being around 50 gives you some idea of how odd it is that today we send 18 year-olds out to die professionally, when life expectancy at birth is around 80.  Hell of a lot to lose on the basis of choices made in your mid-teens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2014, 09:53:06 AM
If wars were only fought by old men, the world would be a peaceful place and Pat Mills would have to write about the Arthritic, Befuddled, Choleric Warriors...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:15:06 PM
Let's raise the minimum fighting age to never.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 June, 2014, 01:29:06 PM
Quote from: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:15:06 PM
Let's raise the minimum fighting age to never

Canadian.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:55:43 PM
Quote from: Sauchie on 21 June, 2014, 01:29:06 PM
Quote from: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:15:06 PM
Let's raise the minimum fighting age to never

Canadian.

Canada declined to fight in Iraq. I agreed with them then and I agree with them now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 21 June, 2014, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:55:43 PM
Canada declined to fight in Iraq. I agreed with them then and I agree with them now.

What's the Canadian population's view on Afghanistan? Do they mention it much to you? I think people over on this side generally forget they are there with other NATO countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 June, 2014, 08:19:18 PM
Quote from: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:15:06 PM
Let's raise the minimum fighting age to never.

I'm with the fish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 June, 2014, 09:19:17 PM
Canada did decline to fight in Iraq but Canadian troops were deployed into the combat zone, in all services.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 June, 2014, 09:29:05 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 June, 2014, 09:19:17 PM
Canada did decline to fight in Iraq but Canadian troops were deployed into the combat zone, in all services.

Canadia also opted to sit out the capitalist gang bang that led to the collapse of Western capitalism in 2008, which is why we poached their money guy to replace Mervyn King at the Bank of England. We should just run every idea we have by the Canadians first - if they don't fancy getting involved, we just act like we never thought it was a good idea and just said it for a laugh.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 22 June, 2014, 01:55:29 AM
I've never met a Canadian who thinks the conflict in Iraq was a good idea. Or many British people, come to think of it. But I have met lots of people who consider it a tragedy for all involved.

The attitude to Afghanistan here is interesting. It's much the same as in the UK - some in favour, some against - but the respect for the armed forces, in light of the risks they take, is much more vocal, and IMO much more widespread, even among opponents to the war. It's great, frankly.

There are many examples of tributes to serving soldiers and veterans, but my favourite is the poppy that veterans can get on their licence plate. There are designated spaces for veterans in car parks, with only the disabled spaces nearer to the doors of the shops, or whatever, and the poppy symbol gives them the right to park there.

And Sauchie is right. The recession never hit hard here. Some people have suffered but it's a fraction of what happened in the UK.

- Trout
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2014, 03:00:47 AM
Do people respect the bays for people with disabilities over there, or has it jumped onto the slippery slope, to what it's like over here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 22 June, 2014, 03:14:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2014, 03:00:47 AM
Do people respect the bays for people with disabilities over there

Yes, as far as I know. I didn't see a problem before I left the UK either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2014, 04:01:18 AM
You'd be surprised at how often people use the bays at supermarkets and incidents happen. It all has to be logged, if it's reported.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2014, 08:53:43 AM
Mark Carney has mortgaged Canada's future by relying on the housing market instead of industry - so condos were built as factories closed. He kept Canada's economy looking good by manipulating interest rates, thereby encouraging massive foreign investment, much of it in increasingly fragile foreign currencies. Canada has yet to pay for Carney's work, as has the UK.
.
Still, at least he's handsome and charismatic - and in this superficial world that's all anyone needs to be a success, right?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 22 June, 2014, 07:15:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2014, 08:53:43 AM
Mark Carney has mortgaged Canada's future by relying on the housing market instead of industry - so condos were built as factories closed. He kept Canada's economy looking good by manipulating interest rates, thereby encouraging massive foreign investment, much of it in increasingly fragile foreign currencies. Canada has yet to pay for Carney's work, as has the UK.
.
Still, at least he's handsome and charismatic - and in this superficial world that's all anyone needs to be a success, right?
.

Canada is supposed to the largest supplier of oil (mostly from shale) to the U.S.A. which is a nice little earner for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 June, 2014, 07:31:04 PM
Well it has the second largest land area of any nation state in the world with a population of say 32 million. It has a plethora of resourced commensurate with it's size....it'd be pretty hard to drop the ball economically. I mean no disrespect to Canadians by this (like probably everyone else in Ireland, I have family in Canada and they extoll it to the heavens). Britian has a diminishingly smaller land area with double the population so economic comparisons are surley meaningless? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 June, 2014, 09:45:04 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 June, 2014, 08:19:18 PM
Quote from: Trout on 21 June, 2014, 01:15:06 PM
Let's raise the minimum fighting age to never.

I'm with the fish.

I'd like to see a global treaty that stipulates that anyone who instigates, helps in the organisation of, or votes for a war has to serve 12 months on the frontlines actively fighting it.  The over-45s could be snipers or spies or something.  Well, we can always fucking dream, can't we.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 June, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Were that the case I'd doubt there'd be one more war! Sod the sniper part....let them march with everyone else. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 June, 2014, 09:49:55 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 22 June, 2014, 09:48:22 PM
Sod the sniper part....let them march with everyone else. Z

While we're dreaming - why the feck not.  They're usually happy enough to see the young get slaughtered for them; and ageism is a growing problem in the workplace - equal rights for all, I say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2014, 02:18:45 PM
Update. Well, I'm up before the magistrates tomorrow on this "assaulting a police officer" charge.
.
Last Monday, I called the solicitor that was assigned to me by the system - the day after he represented me the last time he went on holiday and I was told that he would "ring me nearer the time", which he didn't.
.
Thinking that 8 days was sufficiently "nearer the time" I took the initiative and called him on the Monday. He wasn't available but would call me back "as soon as possible", which transpired to be Tuesday afternoon. He asked me to attend his office on the Wednesday. But this was not for me to meet him and discuss the case but to drop my wage slips off. "Can't do anything until I know I'm going to get paid." Fair enough - should I drop my video evidence and statement off at the same time? "Er, yeah, if you want, I suppose."
.
Thursday, nothing. Friday, unreachable. Then it's the weekend.
.
10am this morning I called again and managed to talk to him directly. How's it going? "Well, I've had to send your paperwork to Nottingham for a decision on legal aid and other payment stuff."
.
"I see - and the case?"
.
"Still don't know if I can represent you, yet."
.
"Okay - so I'm at court at 9.30 in the morning. If you're there, you'll help me but if not I'm on my own?"
.
"Yeah."
.
"Brilliant. Thanks so much for your help. Goodbye" *BEEP*
.
So now I'm trawling the web learning about magistrates court procedure, working out questions and strategies and reading Cicero's "Murder Trials" for inspiration.
.
"If you cannot afford a solicitor, one will be provided for you." Yeah, right. Thanks for that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 June, 2014, 02:22:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2014, 02:18:45 PM
.
So now I'm trawling the web learning about magistrates court procedure, working out questions and strategies and reading Cicero's "Murder Trials" for inspiration.

Just stay away from Kafka  :D

Good luck my friend, I feel you may need it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2014, 02:26:17 PM
I admit I am armchair lawyering here, but I'm pretty sure if you don't have any representation there's no trial.  It sounds suspiciously like a dog and pony show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 June, 2014, 02:27:13 PM
This whole affair is turning out to be lonher than Die Nibelungen!

Good luck Sharky!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 June, 2014, 02:30:55 PM
Not too what Magistrates' Court procedure is like in England, but there should be a duty solicitor in the Court building, explain your position to her/him and they will persumably seek an adjournment untill you are properly advised upon how to plead, that is to say your 'attitude' towards the charge. If there is no duty solicitor, go to the Court Clerk before proceedings commence and ascertain your place on the list. Point out to her/him your situation in that your solicitor has engendered a delay and you wish to have the matter adjourned for say 2 weeks until you are able to brief and be adequately represented by a solicitor. This is not legal advice as I cannot comment on procedure in English Courts but in extremis it is what I'd be inclined to do. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2014, 02:30:55 PM
Heh, the idea of turning into a giant insect is rather appealing right now - especially one with wings. And yeah, I think I am going to need a lot of luck - and a lot of notes!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2014, 02:33:39 PM
Thanks, Z - was just reading about the duty solicitor before taking this coffee/panic break.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 June, 2014, 02:38:17 PM
You are at a very early stage of the process, so don't panic too much. The meat of the issue comes after you are arraigned. You cannot be arraigned untill either a. You elect to do so (don't do this) or b. You have sufficient legal advice on how to plead (do this). I would find it incredible if any Court allowed you to plea as an unrepresented person in a matter such as this. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 June, 2014, 03:55:55 PM
I think the only problem here (apart from the horredous stress of the case of course) is a bust solicitor failing to communicate what's happening.
If legal aid is not sorted by Monday, he *should* just tell the court this and your trail will be set for a later date, after Legal Aid  is determined.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 June, 2014, 07:19:05 PM
Wish I had some advice too, but I just have no idea.  I just hope it all works out well for you, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 June, 2014, 07:23:27 PM
I have nothing helpful to offer except my best wishes that everything works out for you Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2014, 08:49:02 PM
Thanks all - I'll let you know what happens tomorrow. Strangely, I'm more excited than scared, hungry for this new experience despite the dangers - is that wrong, I wonder?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2014, 10:11:39 PM
Bloody hell Shark, that is a ridiculous cause of added stress.  Very best of luck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2014, 10:16:14 PM
I'll give you the advice my gran gave me for dealing with John Q Law: always keep your balls covered and don't tell the bastards nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 23 June, 2014, 11:15:05 PM
May your gods go with you Shark - hope it all works okay and it won't be too long before we hear more from you on this thread here - honestly I'm wishing for a dull uneventful read with NO BAD THINGS :S
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 24 June, 2014, 05:22:39 AM
Just tell the magistrate what happened with the lawyer and they'll give you more time to get sorted out, Shark. I've seen it happen a thousand times. It's OK.

Good luck!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dode C on 24 June, 2014, 11:23:33 AM
Like many of us here Sharky, I can offer you zilch advice in matters legal, but one would assume that the Magistrate wouldn't let the case continue until proper legal representation is sorted. All the best on this one mate and hope you can take heart from the messages of support on the board.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2014, 06:57:46 PM
Well - got there at 9am, the trial started at 3pm and we only got through half of it. That solicitor finally turned out to be okay (but I had to keep on top of him - he nearly missed loads). Trial Part II begins next Tuesday.
.
Don't think I should say much about what went on but I sense it's going well.
.
Oh - and guess what the police are unable to provide due to a hard drive failure? (The magistrates were not impressed - especially as this missingness only came to light today...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2014, 05:19:16 PM
You're allowed to talk about events in the courtroom, Sharky, as this is supposedly the whole point of having an open and fair system of law applied publicly and equally to all - it says here - with nothing to hide, hence the hubbub of the last few weeks when the government tried to hold a secret trial.

As to what the police failed to produce, I want to say "evidence that does not exist or which contradicts a fictional narrative created in collusion with corrupt local officials", but that would be ridiculous* so I'll say "enough gum for everyone else."


* The CPS is required to supply their evidence to the defence 14 days before the trial begins, not at its leisure in the course of the trial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 June, 2014, 06:13:59 PM
I agree with the above, this all sounds as dodgy as a nine bob note. The issues of discovery and transparancy seem to be light on the ground. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 June, 2014, 10:22:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2014, 06:57:46 PM
Oh - and guess what the police are unable to provide due to a hard drive failure? (The magistrates were not impressed - especially as this missingness only came to light today...)

Imagine a fist raised in triumph in front of a black flag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 June, 2014, 11:00:28 PM
Self-made man IDS is the focus of a Nick Cohen Gruniad op-ed and the more observant reader may sense an undercurrent of negativity: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/28/iain-duncan-smith-stubborn-fool-not-statesman?CMP=twt_gu

Personally, I don't see what the problem is with giving hundreds of millions of pounds to Tory donors.  We'd only have spent it on sick people otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 July, 2014, 04:48:54 PM
Well, court today.
.
Of the 5 officers involved in the incident, only two were called as witnesses and their testimonies did not match.
.
The cctv footage of the incident was unavailable due to a "failed hard drive".
.
I'm 47 years old and have never been in trouble with the police or courts before, which the law considers indicates that I have a "good name".
.
Because of all this, they were unable to find me guilty of assault.
.
So they found me guilty of "reckless assault" instead - which means that if I'd complied meekly with the three or four police pinning me down then nobody would have touched anybody and there wouldn't be a problem.
.
1 year conditional discharge, no fine but I have to pay "legal costs" of £350 plus £15 for the "victims' fund".
.
What about my split lip and the bruises all over my back? An absolute travesty of a sham of a farce.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 01 July, 2014, 04:56:21 PM
TLS earlier today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP3uGDEPvzA
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2014, 05:08:50 PM
I am not sure what to say to that, Sharky, as around here we are not quite so easy going about police corruption.

Fuck 'em.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 July, 2014, 05:14:24 PM

My advice is just to pay up, and promptly. There's simply no conceivable way you can possibly evade the long arm of the law on this one, Shark:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/courts-write-11m-unpaid-fines-2688335

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2014, 05:30:03 PM
If it was me, they'd be fucking whistling for that money from now until the sun turned dark in the dead and strangled sky and whatever foul lizard beasts that claimed the ashes of our world crawled upon its surface and shat foul acids from their lizardy asses onto our very corpses, and even then, my corpse would still be clutching that cash because the lizards can fucking whistle for it, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2014, 05:36:01 PM
If you think you have a case, quickly move an appeal. I wouln't be happy walking away with a criminal record! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 July, 2014, 05:48:33 PM
No legal aid for appeals - no money, no access.
.
I'm feeling pretty sick at the moment.
.
But tomorrow, I guess I'll just have to carry on. There's still the initial unlawful arrest thing for me to consider. They took their shot and really only landed a glancing blow.
.
Now it's my turn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 July, 2014, 05:49:58 PM
I'm with the law on this, fancy attacking the poor police, they have families too you know. The sooner you are locked up and off the streets then I will feel much safer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2014, 06:16:31 PM
Attacked a whole group of them in their own police station and reverse-outnumbered them!
Then just to make their jobs harder, he fiddled with the knobs on the evidence-recording machines to make them stop working properly - thank goodness the UK doesn't practice a legal system based on the prosecution proving their case - or following their own rules of conduct or evidence - or he'd have gotten away with it, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2014, 06:33:45 PM
The decision does seem balance of probability more than beyond reasonable doubt. I'm not party to the detail in any objective manner, but I'd on instinct side with the Prof. Bad sh*t all around. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 July, 2014, 07:23:20 PM
I presume that some of the forum must've been present throughout this court case, so as to hear all the facts which is what poor Sharky was probably found guilty because of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2014, 07:33:28 PM
Can't speak to that, I wasn't there. What I can do is to offer my best wishes and hopes to Shark. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2014, 07:34:17 PM
I don't think I'd be able to sleep at night if I ever found myself publicly criticising the CPS.



I live in Northern Ireland, so I mean that literally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 July, 2014, 03:25:57 PM
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I can't think of another one for it.

Anyway the whole Rolf Harris thing got me thinking about the past; and though Russell Brand puts it better than I do, it's like a huge chunk of your childhood has crumbled away. Savile always seemed a little bit creepy, but Harris seemed like a source of decency, kindness and trustworthiness.

Similarly, while we've had a couple of decades here in Ireland to get used to the fact that the church that everyone let dictate morality was in fact a festering sewer of corruption and depravity, and still it continues to horrify as more and more of its past crimes come to light - the mass graves of children in the news lately are an example.  The church could, at the time, commit pretty much as many sex crimes and murders as they liked while remaining safe in the knowledge that nobody would prosecute them.

Murders may not have been as common one hundred years ago, but it was perfectly acceptable for governments to wipe out almost a whole generation of young European men in World War 1.

The tabloids like to make us believe that crime is rampant these days; and there's a general feeling that things were safer in the past.  The Rolf Harris has made me think that maybe this is all bullshit - it's just that rape and murder were covered up more in the past; and all that nostalgia that older people feel for the more tranquil life they used to have is just a memory of the lacquer that authority figures painted over the brutality and cruelty that has always been part of being human.

Maybe, in fact, things are safer today than they were - while there may indeed be more criminals on the streets, at least if someone rapes or murders children they can be made accountable for it.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 03 July, 2014, 03:41:40 PM
That's been my opinion for a long, long time. All this stuff happened, you just never heard about it - if it didn't happen to someone you knew I suppose.

Hell, today even the most common sicko is a source of national hatred and the celebs and powerful figures are an even bigger target for attention and attack. As Cyril Smith's communications have made clear, it was much easier to lean on people to be quiet back in the day. Today an  MP would have to have some serious dirt of their own to suppress such a story, rather than just their political position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2014, 04:07:11 PM
I'd say the political thread is exactly the place for a discussion of how societies have always been keen on hiding their failures rather than fixing the problems that cause them.

Another good example is how the Tories turned down hundreds of millions in EU funding for food banks and poverty relief because they are engaged in an ongoing campaign of denying such things are a problem in "their" Britain to the extent that people now have to actually die for that illusion, or the Everyday Sexism Project's soul-crushing legions of female stories of being sexually harassed and/or assaulted and then being told to not make a fuss about it by the people who are supposed to protect them from such things.  Even our own Sharky relates his story of getting a raw deal and then gets called a liar for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 July, 2014, 04:09:20 PM
A liar, where you in court, as you seem to know all the facts about the case!

Plus, can you post up where I said he was a liar, as yet again you see things that others don't!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 04:17:48 PM
People get away with crimes all the time, they always have and they always will. Dig deep enough into the past of any large group of people - in this case, 60's and 70's celebrities - and you will find dirt. I find it interesting that of all the crimes that must be there, from drink driving to embezzlement to murder, the government and media are concentrating on sex crimes, specifically paedophilia. This feels to my cynical soul like a co-ordinated attack on our childhoods. Why? Maybe to make us hate one another a little bit more, loathe ourselves a little bit more, distrust strangers and friends a little bit more, drive us all a little further apart, drive us all a little closer to the authority who promises to stop this sort of thing with more laws and powers, and all like that kind of socially toxic negativity.
.
Compared to the handful who have been convicted of these crimes, what percentage of that large group of 60's and 70's celebrities are innocent or actually did good or even heroic things which were never brought to light at the time? Why are the government and media not trawling the past for light to counter the darkness? Someone to point at to prove that not all people are inherently vile.
.
My own childhood wasn't exactly idyllic or euphoric or walked by heroes and neither was it particularly dark or miserable or haunted by paedophiles. In fact, I was in my mid teens before I got sexually assaulted by a bloke I worked with in the summer holidays. Two other blokes stopped him and no more was ever said about it. it was just one of those things. The overwhelming majority of the people I knew as a child treated me decently enough. Some were jerks, some were okay, a very few were a joy to know and a very few were vile. But why give so much coverage to the vile and virtually none to the joys?
.
It's almost as if they want you to live in darkness, past, present and future - so they can sell you candles, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 04:24:19 PM
I don't think CF called me a liar - and even if he did, he can't be trusted you know...  ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2014, 04:30:50 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 July, 2014, 04:09:20 PM
Plus, can you post up where I said he was a liar, as yet again you see things that others don't!

That wasn't in relation to you, CF, and I'm not going to search the thread for it as I've since blocked the forum member who posted it so I couldn't find it anyway, but it was something along the lines of "I don't know him so he could be bullshitting for all we know."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 July, 2014, 04:35:14 PM
Cheers for that professor and you are right, searching through this would take for ever.

Oi Sharky, seeing as you have no home phone number to call anymore. Have you managed to get your hands on a cheap mobile!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 July, 2014, 04:37:39 PM
Sorry to hear that Sharkie, good luck with your next step whatever you chose to do.

CF your faith in the British justice system is touching, i really hope you never get on the wrong side of it.
My father was very similar to you about the police, until one day someone reversed into his car.
Just a bump but insurance details etc were called for.
When presenting his DL to the police they notice that he never had the type of car he was driving ( amended as he was disabled) ticked on the back. Thus started a lengthy and stressful battle with the police who actively pursued him, (stopping him driving - even home from the station home), and were going to take him to court for driving without the correct DL for over 40 years, DVLC couldn't help as they had distroyed all records when they moved to computers from paper(we think this was when the mistake happened). he was only saved by the fact that he had kept an old DL from the fifties where it was marked accordingly (he'd lost his leg in a MC accident in the early fifties so was disabled then)  Police response? a scowled 'you're very lucky mate, that would have been a jail sentence'.

As I say, i hiope you and yours never come into their sights.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 04:46:41 PM
It gets more like the USSR every day.
.
CF, I'm still on the same mobile number.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2014, 04:51:47 PM
Hey, that's a terrible thing to say about the USSR.  They got the first man-made objects and people into space and say what you like about those stinking inbred commies but they at least contributed to furthering the knowledge and legacy of the human species.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 July, 2014, 04:55:23 PM
I did get on the wrong side of it at work a long while ago and the cps tried to do me on three things.
Long story short, massive pothole under flooded road, due to a leak by water company and I hit a buidling. Once I hit the pothole it bounced me onto a kerb and I braked but the path and grass was saturated and I jack-knifed and just kissed the side of a factory on the industrial estate.

When we went to court (after a year of waiting) they tried to pesruade me to accept two charges and they would drop the other one. I declined and then it went to accept the main charge and the other two would be dropped. Again I declined.

We went into court and a fiasco began.

The bods asked what charges were being brought forward and when the prosecution started to announce that the first two were dropped, the Judge said that he would be seeing them in his chambers afterwards for wasting court time, as this was allocated a certain amount of time.

We moved onto their final gambit and that was thrown out, due to lack of evidence and our expert putting my case forward.

Let me say, a few quid popped my way for this.

So when people say the cps are crap, yes they can be but you have to believe in yourself and your case. My lawyer bod told me before we went in court that he thought they would try to make me accept stuff and through other stuff out, as they were buggered and they knew it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 July, 2014, 05:30:12 PM
Throw, not through. That's what I get for rushing as tea was imminent :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2014, 05:38:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 04:17:48 PM
People get away with crimes all the time, they always have and they always will. Dig deep enough into the past of any large group of people - in this case, 60's and 70's celebrities - and you will find dirt. I find it interesting that of all the crimes that must be there, from drink driving to embezzlement to murder, the government and media are concentrating on sex crimes, specifically paedophilia. This feels to my cynical soul like a co-ordinated attack on our childhoods. Why? Maybe to make us hate one another a little bit more, loathe ourselves a little bit more, distrust strangers and friends a little bit more, drive us all a little further apart, drive us all a little closer to the authority who promises to stop this sort of thing with more laws and powers, and all like that kind of socially toxic negativity.

Don't see how that'd work seeing as how it's mainly folk with strong ties to the government and the media being accused and convicted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 05:40:48 PM
Damn, I wish I'd had your lawyer, CF. Mine was largely unequal to the task, sadly.
.
I don't blame him, though. Imagine a plump, middle-aged man with prematurely grey hair, a hangdog expression and a hangdog suit. I'll call him Paul Smithers to protect his real identity. He probably started out with fire in his belly and ambition in his heart but now, a minor solicitor working for a minor firm representing whatever minor scumbag the police happen to have locked up, there are nothing but ulcers in his belly and dissatisfaction in his heart. Lawyering has become merely his job and he's sick of it but can't do anything else.
.
So, Paul's trapped, like so many people, in a rut of his own making. He spends his time defending criminals, maniacs and idiots against slick CPS lawyers and probably loses 85% or more of his cases.
.
Then he gets me. You all know how I can bang on about stuff and have some pretty funky views. He thought I was an idiot, or possibly a maniac, and so his primary concern was making sure he got paid. I should imagine, given his enthusiasm for filling in Legal Aid application forms, that his firm holds regular meetings on the subject. I bet they have spreadsheets and pie charts and reports and everything. Only when the forms were all filled in did he relax and begin listening, half-heartedly at first, to my predicament and my position. Unfortunately, his interest only piqued near the end of the first day of the trial. By the time the proceedings of the first day had drawn to a close, Paul Smithers was a changed man - the fire was rekindled and the ambition stirred.
.
A good night's sleep and another Team Meeting cured him of that nonsense.
.
He started the second session as he had started the first - brandishing more Legal Aid forms. When I showed him the summary of points I'd condensed from my notes, centred upon the discrepancies in the witness statements, his eyes lit up. He thought my notes were very useful as he couldn't remember much of what happened last week and hadn't been allowed to do any work on my case away from the courthouse due to the inevitable Legal Aid constraints.
.
He didn't make a big enough point of the discrepancies, concentrating too much on the missing cctv and reasonable doubt instead. But when the magistrates left to deliberate, Paul was optimistic. He thought he had done well and that we'd get the correct verdict. He'd started to believe me again - but too late to reignite his fire. I think he did about 5% too little which, coupled with my inexperience and naiivity, sunk me.
.
Poor Paul was almost as crushed as I was - the only difference is that he was expecting it. I felt quite sorry for him as he walked away, his shoulders a little rounder, his head a little lower and his fat briefcase stuffed now with even more pointless paperwork.
.
And back he fades into the world of criminals, maniacs and idiots, spread sheets, pie charts and Team Meetings. Still, he got his Legal Aid payment. Well, some of it, anyway. Apparently, there were certain restrictions he hadn't anticipated.
.
I salute you, Paul Smithers - another 5% and we might just have shaved it, another ten and we'd have aced it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 05:57:27 PM
M.I.K., I think it's called The Frankfurt School Method of Managed Social Decline, if I remember the theory. The idea was to subdue and conquer countries without war, using such things as a simplified school curriculum, the manufacture of undistinguished and pointless public heroes, bribery and corruption of public figures, the demonization of nationalism, the erosion of family values, the starvation of public services, expansion of restrictive and contradictory laws, the confusion of freedom with freedom of choice, control of the money/debt supply, erosion of faith in public bodies, the installation of repulsive politicians and the demonization of beloved national figures - and all that kind of stuff.
.
Of course, there's no way that could be happening to us just because a handful of insane trillionaires wish it so. We're too smart to be fooled in such a manner, I hope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2014, 06:03:41 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 July, 2014, 03:25:57 PM
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I can't think of another one for it.

Anyway the whole Rolf Harris thing got me thinking about the past; and though Russell Brand puts it better than I do, it's like a huge chunk of your childhood has crumbled away. Savile always seemed a little bit creepy, but Harris seemed like a source of decency, kindness and trustworthiness.

Similarly, while we've had a couple of decades here in Ireland to get used to the fact that the church that everyone let dictate morality was in fact a festering sewer of corruption and depravity, and still it continues to horrify as more and more of its past crimes come to light - the mass graves of children in the news lately are an example.  The church could, at the time, commit pretty much as many sex crimes and murders as they liked while remaining safe in the knowledge that nobody would prosecute them.

Murders may not have been as common one hundred years ago, but it was perfectly acceptable for governments to wipe out almost a whole generation of young European men in World War 1.

The tabloids like to make us believe that crime is rampant these days; and there's a general feeling that things were safer in the past.  The Rolf Harris has made me think that maybe this is all bullshit - it's just that rape and murder were covered up more in the past; and all that nostalgia that older people feel for the more tranquil life they used to have is just a memory of the lacquer that authority figures painted over the brutality and cruelty that has always been part of being human.

Maybe, in fact, things are safer today than they were - while there may indeed be more criminals on the streets, at least if someone rapes or murders children they can be made accountable for it.

Such a great post it's worth quoting in full. Anecdotal evidence can be just as misleading as the picture of rampant depravity and lawlessness currently painted by the media, but enough members of my extended family have made matter of fact mentions of things everyone knew were going on, and which would have been police matters today, that I came to a similar conclusion as yourself.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2014, 06:12:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 05:57:27 PMthe starvation of public services

The current lot have expanded this part to "starving the public" period, so if nothing else you have to admire their initiative.

Me, I subscribe to the simpler theory that they're greedy fuckers who don't care what harm their actions and policies cause, as saying they have an evil long-term conspiracy gives them too much credit that they might actually have some kind of plan or coda.  Sustaining an atmosphere of fear and mining our childhoods to create bogeymen is just another extension of that - scare stories and sensationalist language shifts papers and the bastards want your money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2014, 06:15:57 PM

The individualism and self centred nature of the eighties, and the blame/victim culture which followed, rightly attract a lot of criticism. What they replaced, though, were (now-romanticised) communal values, which meant conceiving of yourself as an unimportant part of a larger whole, and ensured that the people in your family, in your town, and any representative of authority enjoyed your unquestioning compliance and discretion. 

It's not difficult to see how the disintegration of those bonds and that trust in authority, caused by the last few decades of rampant individualism, are at least partly responsible for the way the scales are currently falling from our eyes. That's why I'm sceptical about Russell Brand's spiritual prescription concerning the malady for all our ills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-0Rb0zweS8&feature=share&list=UUswH8ovgUp5Bdg-0_JTYFNw&index=4), since it's (in part) just the 12 step programme (http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/About-AA/The-12-Steps-of-AA)'s injunction to accept your powerlessness and place your faith in a higher power - which is what got us, the BBC, and the cops into such trouble with the likes of Savile, Hall, and Harris.

Before Burdis gets all excited, I'm not arguing that Thatcherism or Thatcher were good things - I'd say they were in many ways very bad things - but this is just the latest demonstration of the fascinating way bad things sometimes have unintended and good consequences, and vice versa. I always found Rolf Harris a bit creepy as a kid (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2VvcOHi2E8), but I also spent hours in rapt fascination watching him draw. There's no contradiction in that, for me, because of that potential for virtue to spring from evil - which is a concept that fascinated another pervy sex offender who exercised a hold over my youthful imagination (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJUgs8R4VeQ).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 July, 2014, 06:26:58 PM
Yes, they are "greedy fuckers who don't care what harm their actions and policies cause" - but who sponsors their campaigns, donates to their parties, lobbies them incessantly and give them good jobs when they inevitably crash out of office?
.
Here's a clue - last year alone, Tony Blair reportedly earned £13M from JP Morgan...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 July, 2014, 06:41:25 PM
Interesting views on crime on the thread. There is the argument supported by a lot of statistical evidence (you laugh, I know) that Crime is falling year on year. As part of my job, I like to keep abreast of the current theories. One that facinated me was that, so the argument goes, violent crime has actually increased and the only reason society isn't dealing with a murder pandemic is due to the impact of more effective medical treatment, from the initial response through the treatment process. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2014, 06:53:44 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 03 July, 2014, 06:41:25 PM
There is the argument supported by a lot of statistical evidence (you laugh, I know) that Crime is falling year on year

Promoted by Steve Pinker (https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence#), mainly. The Accident and Emergency idea is an interesting counter theory.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 July, 2014, 07:02:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 03 July, 2014, 06:15:57 PM
but I also spent hours in rapt fascination watching him draw.

I didn't even rate his drawing that much, probably mainly due to his complete inability to draw a recognisable depiction of Bugs Bunny on Cartoon Time, (and his Daffy Duck wasn't much better). I always wanted him to stop the amateurish scrawling and just show the damn cartoons. And then there was his continuing belief that Tweety Pie was female, despite all evidence to the contrary. I'm sure I remember him referring to Jerry, (of Tom and Jerry), as 'she' on at least a couple of occasions as well.

Cartoon Club was a better format, but Rolf's attempts at drawing well-known cartoon characters didn't really get any better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 July, 2014, 07:14:42 PM
F**k Rolf Harris and the rest of those unfunny, spooky pricks who 'stole the nations heart' from the 60's onwards.
Agree that Jaysus and sauchie have contributed as elegantly and informatively as ever re this topic. I am staggered as a proud Irish man that finding upwards of 800 dead babies in a sh*t filled midden hasn't provoked national outrage. Those murdering bastards in Iraq machinegunned 1700 surrendered men in a ditch and there has been international shock and disgust. What the f**k is wrong with people on this island. Did the gombeen men steal our hearts and souls along with the monies earned by the sweat of our brows? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 July, 2014, 07:18:11 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 03 July, 2014, 06:15:57 PM
Russell Brand's spiritual prescription concerning the malady for all our ills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-0Rb0zweS8&feature=share&list=UUswH8ovgUp5Bdg-0_JTYFNw&index=4)

Malady, remedy; all the same.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 04 July, 2014, 09:09:11 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 03 July, 2014, 06:41:25 PM
Interesting views on crime on the thread. There is the argument supported by a lot of statistical evidence (you laugh, I know) that Crime is falling year on year. As part of my job, I like to keep abreast of the current theories. One that facinated me was that, so the argument goes, violent crime has actually increased and the only reason society isn't dealing with a murder pandemic is due to the impact of more effective medical treatment, from the initial response through the treatment process. Z

This interested me- and to be honest made me instantly wish it wasn't true, as I found Steven Pinker's case quite convincing.

I found this (http://"http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7365/615.2") abstract on the subject.  It's a US based study, so I'd hope that a British based one wouldn't show the same amount of murders becoming aggravated assaults with better medical technology, but afaik nobody's done one. 

Given the USA's enormous wealth inequality and proliferation of guns I'd hope that it's a special case, but then again, given our own piss-poor Gini-coefficient, we might well find something similar here.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 July, 2014, 11:25:38 AM

With the news that the former Home Secretary who can't remember being handed a dossier * naming government figures who were members of a paedophile abuse ring is himself accused of raping a teenager (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681909/Leon-Brittan-quizzed-teen-rape-claim-Ex-Home-Secretary-accused-attacking-student-flat.html), the whole Elm Guest House thing appears to have reached a tipping point, as the mainstream media begin to take up a story which had previously been dismissed as the paranoid fantasy of Icke and the tinfoil hatters (http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/12/18/uk-establishment-closes-ranks-as-organised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/).


* which has now gone missing
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 July, 2014, 12:53:48 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 July, 2014, 11:25:38 AM

With the news that the former Home Secretary who can't remember being handed a dossier * naming government figures who were members of a paedophile abuse ring is himself accused of raping a teenager (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681909/Leon-Brittan-quizzed-teen-rape-claim-Ex-Home-Secretary-accused-attacking-student-flat.html), the whole Elm Guest House thing appears to have reached a tipping point, as the mainstream media begin to take up a story which had previously been dismissed as the paranoid fantasy of Icke and the tinfoil hatters (http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/12/18/uk-establishment-closes-ranks-as-organised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/).


* which has now gone missing


Allegedly it got mislaid somewhere between Westminste (http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5302/commentary-no-mp-should-name-paedophile-ex-minister-yet)r and his own visits to Elm Guest House (http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5225/customs-seized-video-of-child-sex-abuse-and-ex-cabinet-minister).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 July, 2014, 03:52:37 PM
Maybe they mistook it for a brochure rather than a dossier..... wonder if the public will let this evaporate in the same way the expenses scandal did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2014, 04:41:49 PM
I suppose it puts Call Me Dave's call for restraint during the Yewtree witch hunts in perspective, too.
I can't see a pedophile ring being covered up doing the Conservatives any harm in the same way that hundreds of dead babies buried in a shitter did the church any harm in Ireland.

In other news: Daily Mail scamps pretend to be Islamic extremists on an Islamic forum: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:QDDb7ydcC5kJ:www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php%3F408155-i-am-pledging-allegiance-to-the-caliphate+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

I can't imagine why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 July, 2014, 05:16:15 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 06 July, 2014, 03:52:37 PM
wonder if the public will let this evaporate in the same way the expenses scandal did.

It's already surfaced in the media a few times - if you Google the name of the guest house you'll find articles with photographs of tabloid spreads exposing seedy goings on there from the eighties and nineties - but without being able to name the big names involved it seems to peter out. SOAP's link claims tabloid's are desperate for MPs to name those said to be involved under the protection of Parliamentary privelege, because once that happens they can all report those names without fear of legal action.

That's what's kept something which appears to have been an open secret for decades out of the papers, and the biggest incentive for the government of the day not to toss this onto the too difficult pile is the fact that by Monday morning even folk who aren't on twitter and Facebook are going to know exactly what's being alleged. Nobody wants to be left looking like they were soft pedaling - or covering up - kiddie rape; especially not in the year before a general election.

The thing that sustained the expenses scandal was the Telegraph getting their hands on official documentation and releasing new details in a slow drip that stoked public fury. That's why there's a focus on locating the dossier Geoffrey Dickens is on public record as having handed to Leon Brittan. Folk eventually forgot about expenses because they all knew MPs were on the fiddle anyway. Child rape, or facilitating child rape - as the outrage concerning Savile and the BBC attests - is a different matter.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 July, 2014, 05:59:34 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 July, 2014, 05:16:15 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 06 July, 2014, 03:52:37 PM
wonder if the public will let this evaporate in the same way the expenses scandal did.

It's already surfaced in the media a few times - if you Google the name of the guest house you'll find articles with photographs of tabloid spreads exposing seedy goings on there from the eighties and nineties - but without being able to name the big names involved it seems to peter out. SOAP's link claims tabloid's are desperate for MPs to name those said to be involved under the protection of Parliamentary privelege, because once that happens they can all report those names without fear of legal action.

That's what's kept something which appears to have been an open secret for decades out of the papers, and the biggest incentive for the government of the day not to toss this onto the too difficult pile is the fact that by Monday morning even folk who aren't on twitter and Facebook are going to know exactly what's being alleged. Nobody wants to be left looking like they were soft pedaling - or covering up - kiddie rape; especially not in the year before a general election.

The thing that sustained the expenses scandal was the Telegraph getting their hands on official documentation and releasing new details in a slow drip that stoked public fury. That's why there's a focus on locating the dossier Geoffrey Dickens is on public record as having handed to Leon Brittan. Folk eventually forgot about expenses because they all knew MPs were on the fiddle anyway. Child rape, or facilitating child rape - as the outrage concerning Savile and the BBC attests - is a different matter.

You would hope so, but given this has apparently been an open secret since the 80s... why did no one have the fucking moral fortitude to publish the names and be damned?  Why was it allowed to fade away with a "probably true but we cant force the issue" attitude... when Tebbitt says that's what people did back then, well, it hurts to say it, but does he have a point?  If you knew and where in a position to do something about it?  It's horrifying, but everybody knew and nothing was done = it's beyond comprehension
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 July, 2014, 06:18:08 PM
One (admittedly fairly out there) conspiracy theory suggests that keeping this covered up was the reason Jill Dando was killed. If true, it would very likely be a contributing factor to people keeping their gobs shut.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 July, 2014, 07:13:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 July, 2014, 06:18:08 PM
One (admittedly fairly out there) conspiracy theory suggests that keeping this covered up was the reason Jill Dando was killed. If true, it would very likely be a contributing factor to people keeping their gobs shut.

Cheers

Jim

Well I suppose if you are willing to cover up and condone child abuse, there's not much else you wouldn't be capable of....but it's still a sorry state of affairs that no one stepped up - it was the era of childline for example.  Didn't Esther Rantzen say she had heard the rumours of Savile?  Presumably this would ahve been floating around the same time
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 July, 2014, 07:29:10 PM
I'll be honest: I'm not sure how much moral fortitude I could summon if a bullet in the back of the head was a real possibility for speaking out. Plus, there's the distinctly suspicious death of the wife of the Elm Tree guest house proprietor to chuck into the mix, too. I'm not condoning people's silence, but a real possibility of ending up dead would certainly make me think twice.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2014, 07:54:31 PM
If we're floating crazy theories, we may as well float the ones about the secret leaders of the world needing payment in the lives of children, or at the very least something with the Freemasons or Nessie.

Most likely the secrecy surrounding this is a matter of the press being powerless to even speak of the allegations in the face of yet another gagging order or super injunction - and to be fair, media outlets as diverse as Fox News and the Guardian have been trying to get us worried about that practice for quite some time now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 July, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
I wonder if these vile rings could be traps? The shadowy elites lure in people with a certain personality type, spike their drinks, force or trick or peer-pressure them into the deed and then photograph/film/video it.
.
Blackmail factories?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 July, 2014, 12:02:55 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 July, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
I wonder if these vile rings could be traps? The shadowy elites lure in people with a certain personality type, spike their drinks, force or trick or peer-pressure them into the deed and then photograph/film/video it.


I think they're generally depraved individuals and their arrogance makes them ripe to be taken advantage of; coercion isn't needed for them to be perverts or compromised.

It's an old story and the US had it's own analogue around the same time- as documented by Yorkshire television's Tim Tate in his unaired 1992 documentary (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtstlx96s8M).

It was a pretty serious story before Icke put lizards into it.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 06:22:59 PM
I know I've already written about the Rolf Harris scandal, but I don't think the reality of the situation hit me till last night, when the whole thing preyed on my mind so much I couldn't sleep.  I trawled the internet trying to make sense of it all and to get used to the fact that his name in the media is now preceded by the words 'convicted paedophile' rather than 'much-loved entertainer'.  But I just can't get a handle on the whole thing.

Some of my earliest memories are my father entertaining me with a description of Jake the Peg, and my mother singing 'Two Little Boys' to my brother and me (though I was pleased to discover that Harris was neither the writer not the original performer of that song).  My job involves drawing cartoons, and when I think of it now there's no way I wasn't influenced by Rolf's Cartoon Club as a kid.  Within months he has gone from being described as a 'national treasure' to 'sinister pervert' (as the prosecution accurately put it).    It's a mindfuck; it really is, and I don't know how else I can put it.

How trivial the misdemeanours of Angus Deayton, Richard Bacon and Hugh Grant seem now:  Mere disappointment from our stars would be a welcome relief when my generation's two most popular British children's entertainers are exposed as twisted monsters (with a ghoulishness entering Silence of the Lambs territory in Savile's case).  These are crazy times.

And now this, a possible paedophile ring going to the very top of British society.  (As I mentioned in my previous post, we've already had a chance to get used to the fact here in Ireland.)  Where is it all going to end?  I remember rumours of necrophilia being connected to Savile almost 15 years ago, and if even a few of these new allegations prove to be true, it is very, very hard to see how the establishment can retain any of the people's trust.  Michael Gove doesn't want any public investigation of the situation.  Why not?  What possible reason could he have to discourage an investigation, other than to protect his peers?  That isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely interested in whether anyone can suggest another reason. 

Anyway, sorry if I'm rambling; I've had the whole thing spinning round my mind all night and day and I'm hoping writing it down and discussing it with you people might help me to get a grasp on it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 July, 2014, 06:59:52 PM
Jazus, it is indeed mindbogglingly horrifying and disgusting. The very 'strongest' in society preying on the most vulnerable. Like yourself I'm personally struggling to grasp what has happened in Ireland over the past decades and now in GB.
I can only put it down to the possibility that many of those who fight their way through to positions of power or are bequeathed it by social background, have either sociopathic or Psychopathic personalities.
The public need transparent inquests by wholly independent scrutineers. Nothing less will suffice. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 July, 2014, 07:01:47 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 06:22:59 PM
Within months he has gone from being described as a 'national treasure' to 'sinister pervert' (as the prosecution accurately put it). It's a mindfuck; it really is, and I don't know how else I can put it

One of the girls at work told me a story about a teacher at her school who was convicted for possessing the most vile kind of child porn (baby, actually) and trying to pick up two wee girls in a supermarket car park. He was a genuinely lovely and caring person, and one of his female colleagues found it so difficult to reconcile these two apparently contradictory ideas that she ended up having a nervous breakdown in class and having to take early retirement. Look after yourself, Jayzus.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 July, 2014, 07:10:25 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 06:22:59 PM
Michael Gove doesn't want any public investigation of the situation.  Why not?  What possible reason could he have to discourage an investigation, other than to protect his peers?  That isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely interested in whether anyone can suggest another reason

It's the same problem that's helped stymie every previous investigation of these claims - that they're only really one person's word against another. Until you take an overview of the pattern of claims concerning the procurement of vulnerable children from the care system, those claims are hard to believe, and each investigation was only judging each individual claim in isolation and on its own perceived merits.

Also, many of the victims have lived lives and made decisions that make their testimony easy to dispute, which is the same reason Savile, Hall, Clifford, Harris, and their clerical soul mates were able to get away with their crimes. The only thing which has changed is that the mass of claims and the ensuing public mood has forced the government and the CPS to investigate and prosecute cases they would have dismissed as not worth bothering with previously.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 July, 2014, 09:14:19 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 06:22:59 PM
Michael Gove doesn't want any public investigation of the situation.  Why not?  What possible reason could he have to discourage an investigation, other than to protect his peers?  That isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely interested in whether anyone can suggest another reason. 

Is it not the most glaring admission that the poor and most vulnerable are not the priority for these people.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2014, 10:21:38 PM
Blackmail factories. I hate how much sense that idea makes to me. So easy for them to use the system to gather up anonymous victims that nobody will miss.
.
www.saff.ukhq.co.uk/childcourts.htm
.
And how far up the pyramid does this go?  www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread795798/pg1
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 10:48:04 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 07 July, 2014, 07:01:47 PMLook after yourself, Jayzus.

Thanks, Sauchie, I will. I really didn't expect it to have such an effect on me - Savile and the many priest incidents didn't hit me so hard -  but I know I'll get used to it soon; unlike Harris's poor victims.  (Just even typing 'Rolf Harris's victims' really doesn't sit with me properly, though.)  I have a friend, by the way, who has a very black and white way of seeing the world, and he still refuses to believe that Savile was guilty - he must know it's true, of course, he's not stupid, but he still can't bring himself to reconcile the chummy, generous TV persona with the vicious sociopath behind it.

And yeah, your explanation for Gove is a good one, but I still find it a bit sinister that an influential MP thinks a possible crime against children shouldn't be investigated.  If he honestly doesn't believe it's true, then that's an even stronger reason to see the notion disproved once and for all.  Then again, this is the man who seems to think the butchery of 37 million young men in disease-ridden World War 1 trenches is something to celebrate, so maybe we shouldn't be too surprised at him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 July, 2014, 11:18:58 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 10:48:04 PM
I still find it a bit sinister that an influential MP thinks a possible crime against children shouldn't be investigated.  If he honestly doesn't believe it's true, then that's an even stronger reason to see the notion disproved once and for all

I agree. While I'm personally inclined to believe Gove capable of every evil under the sun, the comments I've seen attributed to him (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/home-office-child-abuse-coverup-michael-gove-rules-out-public-inquiry-into-claims-of-paedophile-politicians-at-top-of-westminster-9587642.html) call for the cops to investigate individual allegations, rather than an overarching public inquiry into systemic failures. Which is fair enough, but that's exactly the approach that has allowed previous investigations peter out into inconclusive shrugs.

I'm not sure the inquiry Theresa May announced today will quite do the job everyone seems to expect of it - the remit is so broad I don't see a lot of time being devoted to the question of whether Parliamentarians were involved in the abuse or covering it up. It'll end up going over a lot of old ground concerning the NHS and the BBC, telling us things we already know, in the hope of boring everyone to death - just like the Leveson and Chilcot inquiries.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2014, 11:48:42 PM
QuoteI agree. While I'm personally inclined to believe Gove capable of every evil under the sun, the comments I've seen attributed to him call for the cops to investigate individual allegations, rather than an overarching public inquiry into systemic failures. Which is fair enough, but that's exactly the approach that has allowed previous investigations peter out into inconclusive shrugs.


Ah, I get you now.  Though you're a lot better-informed about it than I am, I still think that there's a chance that people involved in the scandal may be doing the investigating, and Gove is either completely ignorant of that or simply doesn't give a fuck about anyone but himself and his peers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 07 July, 2014, 11:57:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2014, 10:21:38 PM
And how far up the pyramid does this go?  www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread795798/pg1

Sandringham estate takes up 20,000 acres, which is over 30 square miles of land.

(Which I've just noticed someone else has also said in the comments)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 July, 2014, 12:00:01 AM
Gove is motivated by an outdated class and social system, and on top of the Maria Miller affair and Chris "not a lawyer, never worked in law" Greyling's attitude, I'd need convincing Tories as a body aren't simply of the opinion that the people at the bottom rung of the social ladder don't get to inconvenience those at the top of it no matter what the reason - which is essentially why the church in Ireland got away with what it did for so long, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 July, 2014, 09:49:31 AM
I'm at a loss for words. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 July, 2014, 10:31:06 AM
Not too long ago, a conversation about this subject would have been in the "Truth? You Can't Handle the Truth!" thread...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 July, 2014, 10:53:26 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 July, 2014, 09:49:31 AM
I'm at a loss for words. 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987)

I'm not sure if that article isn't more about homophobia than an expose of organised paedophilia. There's a slanted vagueness about the ages of the boys ('boys who were clearly only about 15 or 16 years old') that seems to be consciously set against a ludicrous homosexual age of consent of 21. 

I also find the Oscar namebadge thing stretches the source's credibility more than a little.

At the same time, if true, systematically procuring young prostitutes and cocaine for politicians is about as unsavoury, and hypocritical as it gets.  And I'm certainly not dismissing the abuse suffered by underage male prostitutes.  I'm just not sure if the scenario as presented is really in the same bracket as a paedo-ring.

But Shark is on the money when he notes that this is serious subject for discussion which only recently would have been consigned to the crank file.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 July, 2014, 11:35:43 AM
Exactly.
.
Now, about 9/11....   
.
:-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 July, 2014, 11:36:26 AM

Sorry, that's another thing we changed while you were away - the government are all paedophiles now. Actually, some of them are only guilty of assisting paedophiles and covering up their crimes to allay the anxieties of the general public, like James Mason's character in Salem's Lot. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHyL205enFE)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 13 July, 2014, 01:06:42 PM
"admits to being in awe of the men".
How anachronistic...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 13 July, 2014, 01:11:21 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 July, 2014, 12:53:48 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 06 July, 2014, 11:25:38 AM

With the news that the former Home Secretary who can't remember being handed a dossier * naming government figures who were members of a paedophile abuse ring is himself accused of raping a teenager (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681909/Leon-Brittan-quizzed-teen-rape-claim-Ex-Home-Secretary-accused-attacking-student-flat.html), the whole Elm Guest House thing appears to have reached a tipping point, as the mainstream media begin to take up a story which had previously been dismissed as the paranoid fantasy of Icke and the tinfoil hatters (http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/12/18/uk-establishment-closes-ranks-as-organised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/).


* which has now gone missing


Allegedly it got mislaid somewhere between Westminste (http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5302/commentary-no-mp-should-name-paedophile-ex-minister-yet)r and his own visits to Elm Guest House (http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5225/customs-seized-video-of-child-sex-abuse-and-ex-cabinet-minister).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 July, 2014, 04:24:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 July, 2014, 10:53:26 AMI also find the Oscar namebadge thing stretches the source's credibility more than a little.

An organised pedo ring in Westminster that's been covered-up by successive governments should ideally stretch credulity, yet here we now find ourselves.  From what I can see of the inquiry they're planning on having for the public, the whitewashing looks set to continue.

If we're still talking conspiracy theories, did anyone else find it odd that the celebrity pedo witch hunts were so public and well-covered, almost like the media were trying to burn the public out on pedo-outrage ahead of something else coming to light?  After Rolf and Jimmy, it'll be a good day to bury bad news for quite some time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 July, 2014, 04:44:34 PM
It'll be hard to bury this one, Murdoch hates the British political class with a passion after they humiliated him over the NotW. He'll have his revenge on this one I think. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 July, 2014, 05:18:15 PM
We can but hope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 July, 2014, 05:20:18 PM
Quote from: Professor Theopolis K Bear on 14 July, 2014, 04:24:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 July, 2014, 10:53:26 AMI also find the Oscar namebadge thing stretches the source's credibility more than a little.

An organised pedo ring in Westminster that's been covered-up by successive governments should ideally stretch credulity, yet here we now find ourselves.  From what I can see of the inquiry they're planning on having for the public, the whitewashing looks set to continue.

If we're still talking conspiracy theories, did anyone else find it odd that the celebrity pedo witch hunts were so public and well-covered, almost like the media were trying to burn the public out on pedo-outrage ahead of something else coming to light?  After Rolf and Jimmy, it'll be a good day to bury bad news for quite some time

I don't think there's anything odd about some MPs turning out to have been up to the same thing as some celebrities, or the order in which the rumours/revelations have emerged. Some of Them were at it because many, many people in wider society were doing the same - it would be weird if some light entertainers and right honourable members weren't up to the same disgusting business as so many others.

They got away with it for the same reason as thousands of ordinary people did - because the ones who found out either didn't think it was such a big deal or didn't do a thing about it. Most of us here grew up in the dog days of a society in which being a man meant you were allowed to do pretty much whatever you liked to whoever else you wanted - women, kids, the disabled, ethnic minorities - and even if someone else found out you were very unlikely to get in trouble for it.

I've heard enough stories from within my own small circle of kids being sexually exploited, folk knowing, and absolutely nothing being done about it, to know this problem wasn't limited to the highest levels of society. The people who should have been looking after the best interests of those involved thought molestation was best ignored or covered up. Unchecked authority over anyone else - as an MP, as a care worker, as a dad - is what allows abuse of any kind to happen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 July, 2014, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 14 July, 2014, 05:20:18 PM...a society in which being a man meant you were allowed to do pretty much whatever you liked to whoever else you wanted - women, kids, the disabled, ethnic minorities - and even if someone else found out you were very unlikely to get in trouble for it.

I've heard enough stories from within my own small circle of kids being sexually exploited, folk knowing, and absolutely nothing being done about it, to know this problem wasn't limited to the highest levels of society.

Yeah, that articulates my thoughts on the matter rather better than I could manage myself. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 July, 2014, 08:04:06 PM
Sauchie = Scotch* Tordelback.

*Yes, Scotch.  Like the eggs and the whiskey and the tape.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 July, 2014, 08:09:28 PM

Nah, I'm like The Planet Of The Apes on TV (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR5xGHPUEew&feature=kp).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 July, 2014, 11:24:13 PM
The Scotch Planet of the Apes on TV, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bazooka Joe on 17 July, 2014, 05:55:10 PM
Miliband to show Obama his 2000AD collection (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/miliband-to-show-obama-his-2000ad-collection-2014071788656)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 17 July, 2014, 06:06:00 PM
Quote from: Gypsum on 17 July, 2014, 05:55:10 PM
Miliband to show Obama his 2000AD collection (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/miliband-to-show-obama-his-2000ad-collection-2014071788656)

A typical gesture from the charismatic Labour leader, but I fear the special relationship is dead (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/london-aghast-president-obama-gifts-prime-minister-brown-article-1.366667).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 July, 2014, 06:08:17 PM
Erm... you know that Daily Mash is not actually a news site, right..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 17 July, 2014, 06:08:50 PM
Absolutely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 July, 2014, 06:09:46 PM
Quote from: Gypsum on 17 July, 2014, 05:55:10 PM
Miliband to show Obama his 2000AD collection (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/miliband-to-show-obama-his-2000ad-collection-2014071788656)

"Quite simply, in the international geo-politics of the 21st century there is no role for Nemesis the Warlock." Has somebody retweeted that to Pat Mills. He'd love it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 17 July, 2014, 06:50:55 PM
more worrying news from the eastern front with a Malaysian airliner being alledgedly shot down by Russian sepratists but some reports are suggesting the missile came from the motherland herself ,possibly 9 brits on board :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2014, 02:15:19 PM
On Saturday I had to attend a course to get a Certificate of Professional Competence, it lasted from 08:30 to 15:00 and was immensely dull. There were around 20 other people there, all professional truck drivers. Despite the fact that I've been doing this job, on and off, since I was at school, if I don't get this CPC I won't be allowed to drive for a living any more - even though I have never had a single point on my license, ever.
.
On the surface, this CPC seems like a good idea - training drivers in such things as H&S, first aid, tachograph rules and operation, correct loading procedure and so forth and on to make us all safer drivers. But...
.
Five of these courses must be attended before a CPC is issued and each one costs £45 plus the time, fuel, lunch money etc. needed to attend. Hmph. Furthermore, your CPC is valid for only five years - so once you have one you still need to repeat the courses to get your replacement CPC. Grr.
.
More than this, if I get stopped by VOSA and don't have a CPC or have left my CPC at home I'll get fined at least £200. You what?!
.
Everyone in the class, including the instructor, found this to be a terrible state of affairs - but not one of them did any more than just grumble about it as if they were just slaves.
.
In my view, this whole CPC thing is nothing more than a money making scheme to help the government pay off its eternal debt, through training costs but mostly through fines. And, as the government will never and indeed can never clear its artificial debt, we can expect more CPCs in the future, first for white van drivers, motorcycle couriers and whatever else they can think of, and then for all drivers of all vehicles, including you. You might eventually even need one to ride a bike or even walk down a public footpath. Think of the income from fines then, as everyone needs a CPC and lots of them leave their cards at home for whatever reason.
.
And, like the drivers in that CPC class, you'll grumble and moan - but you'll comply. You get told what to do and you do it, no matter how much you disagree.
.
I wouldn't have attended if I'd had to pay for it myself but my boss paid and so I just shut up and did it - I do my little part-time driving job primarily because I enjoy it and, because of this, I suppressed my usual acerbic opinions and attended the CPC lesson despite the bad taste it left in my mouth.
.
This morning my boss asked me about the course and if I'd learned anything.
.
"Yes," I said, "I learned that we are a beaten and dependent people."
.
He opined that I'm a proper miserable bugger. He's right, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 22 July, 2014, 02:24:42 PM
just go and work for a foreign firm,seriously,i don't think they have to do any courses including the driving test as demonstrated about nineish years ago when our bairn was still teeny tiny we had a day out in leeds,the motorway was a bit rainy anyway so loads of spray and not much visibility and our rover metro got boxed in behind a german lorry as another one tailgated us and with two others on either side we could go nowhere if we'd stalled or had to stop we'd have been dead ,I'm still convincved it was a bit of fun for the drivers almost planned as the german had cut us up putting himself right in front of us..sphincters went a little twitchy for sure that day!
  then to top it all as soon as we joined the motorway home little one started projectile vomiting so I had to climb over into the back at 70mph to sort her out... I may go to leeds again one day...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 22 July, 2014, 04:57:12 PM
Quote from: 2T(fru)T on 22 July, 2014, 02:24:42 PM
just go and work for a foreign firm,seriously,i don't think they have to do any courses including the driving test as demonstrated about nineish years ago when our bairn was still teeny tiny we had a day out in leeds...

All lorry drivers working in the UK have to do their CPC, even those that hail from abroad.

I agree with The Shark about the nonsense of it all, though. We've had CPC courses conducted at my workplace and I've yet to see anything constructive come out of it.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 July, 2014, 05:01:03 PM
The Shark is correct, when he says that the CPC is a money making scheme. I have mine and I actually learned nothing new, while sat bored to death in the class. The course was a joke and even the instructor said this is a waste of time and the money the company waste on this 'every year' is unbelievable.

You passed your driving test, theory and practical, you know the rules and regulations, so why do you need to know loads of things that are nothing to do with your actual job.

I look forward to my next lesson sometime next year, as it never ends ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 22 July, 2014, 06:58:31 PM
it sounds a bit like the bollocks of the dbs check ihave to do working in care which only proves I aint been caught murdering pensioners .
  It is flawed itself I had a certificate for someone through the post last week and thought it was just a dbs typo so told them then two days later got a letter from a retirement village for the same girl who doesn't live at our house ...or does she? if she hides in my daughter's room we'd never find her! anyway contacted the village who said that was the address she gave them and theyd have a word...sent a note to fraud team at dbs as she would have had to have documents with my address on them to get checked...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 July, 2014, 09:28:09 AM
In the Irish construction sector we have to sit through the hated Safepass course every 4 years, a one-day so mindnumbing that I regularly check the expiry date on my card in the reflexive fear that the fateful day is near once again.  The third worst thing about it is that it has to be a full day - even though I could do the exam right now and guarantee getting 100%, I still have to sit through a full 8 hours, complete with ludicrously long mandated coffee and lunch breaks.  The second worst thing about it is that you can actually be a safety officer, have safety management qualifications pouring out of your arse, and still have to suffer through the same base-level shite.  The very worst thing about it is that the instructors can and do cheat: I went to one where the examiner coughed theatrically at each correct multiple-choice answer.  At which point you have to ask why me?

At the last one I attended, almost everyone was on at least their third go-around, and we were able to chant the answers to the scripted in-course questions in unison. 

However.

I do believe the process has had positive effects, industry-wide, in the same way other more esoteric CPD I've done has.  There's no denying that it's a money-making scam, but having a common language, a common experience, related to safe practice makes certain things easier.  I can, with confidence, complain to a foreman that scaffolding near where I'm working hasn't been properly secured, because I know that he knows, and the scaffolders know, what the basic regulations are, above and beyond any parroted Safety Statement .  I can refuse to get into a trench that's too deep or too narrow because we all know that we all know that that's what it is: nobody can assert greater expertise, or accuse me of naivety, and tell me otherwise.  There's no room for bullshit when everyone has suffered through the same moronic twaddle over and over again.

Naturally this doesn't stop people from ignoring the whole thing, from apprentices to safety inspectors, and people still die doing or because of stupid obvious things, but at some general level there has been a step-up in standards and awareness: there's a shape to safety in the industry now, a base that you can compare any practice to.

Obviously I can't comment on the specifics of the CPC you noble chevaliers of the highway have to endure, and am sure you know bollocks when you see it, but some common ground that goes beyond the ingrained mechanics and specific qualifications of your job can have value, however irritating and pointless it seems as you hand over the cash and shut down your brain for yet another wasted day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 July, 2014, 09:57:46 AM
Just gonna leave these here.

Washington Post:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BtJoKnkIUAAZDvH.jpg:large)

Daily Telegraph:

(http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/html/Years/2014/July/img/gazaDeaths2.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 July, 2014, 10:09:53 AM
I always feel very awkward discussing Palistine as I have very little knowledge of what the conflict is actualy ABOUT. Call me a typical white Brit, but I think I need to go and remidy this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 24 July, 2014, 10:28:33 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 24 July, 2014, 10:09:53 AM
I always feel very awkward discussing Palistine as I have very little knowledge of what the conflict is actualy ABOUT.

I felt this way for years - I wish I still did because the heartbreaking thing is that it's really a question of entitlement and ownership of territory and its a simple and bloody dispute as old as the history of civilization (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-evIyrrjTTY).

The thing that baffles me most is how merciless some of the Israeli population have become to the suffering on their doorstep - I see these cold collections of horrific tweets/FB posts or the reports that some sit and watch the bombardment on hill-mounted sofas whilst eating snacks and I truly despair... no amount of fact-checking can make sense of that kind of attitude to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 July, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Yeah, I saw the news reports of them dragging sofas to watch the airstrikes. Unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 July, 2014, 01:10:26 PM
Israel just wants breathing room and this isn't genocide, it's self-defence.

Such is my understanding from the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 July, 2014, 01:46:32 PM
Quote from: Professor Theopolis K Bear on 24 July, 2014, 01:10:26 PM
Israel just wants breathing room and this isn't genocide, it's self-defence.

Don't forget the all-important imputation of anti-semitism against anyone disagreeing, on a scale ranging from "Hamas Apologist" to "Holocaust Denier".

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 24 July, 2014, 02:40:59 PM
Quick (theoretical) question. 

Imagine the scenario - Mexican narco-terrorists begin randomly firing rockets into southern California with the intent to kill as many civilians as possible, the US government asks the Mexican government to stop them only to receive the reply that it's not their (Mexico's) problem.  The CIA then uncovers evidence that rogue elements in the Mexican government and military are actually selling the rockets to the cartels.

How would the US react?  Keep asking nicely?  Go to the UN for help?  Or do it's utmost to stop the attacks either through passive countermeasure or actively going after the launch site?  Because that's exactly what has been happing in Israel.  It's only been the effectiveness of the Iron Dome system which has stopped hundreds of Israelis (of all faiths) been killed.

Granted the current operation is excessive but the Israeli government has shown a huge amount of restraint given that they have the capability to turn the entire Strip into one big car park.  I also believe that the civilians on both sides want an end to the fighting but "hawks" on both sides are in control at the moment

Oh and Palestinians have also been seen sitting on chairs cheering their rockets going in to Israel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 July, 2014, 02:55:20 PM
Bombing Civilian targets such as Schools and Hospitals is not the way to get your point across. And I would further argue that they are not showing "Restraint", by any measure.

Given the fact that Israelis have been persecuted many times in the past, I cannot understand why they would do it to other people?

And the US and UK Governments should feel utterly ashamed of themselves for doing absolutely FUCK ALL to help those that are genuinely in need of help, the warcrimes vote being a case in point!

cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 July, 2014, 02:59:21 PM
Quote from: Tombo on 24 July, 2014, 02:40:59 PM
Quick (theoretical) question. 

Imagine the scenario -

The US builds a massive fucking wall all the way around Mexico, infringes the internationally mandated coastal waters, enforces an armed blockade of basic goods and treats the Mexicans it allows to cross the border to do shitty jobs in the US as second class citizens. It declares chunks of land on the Mexican side of the wall as no-go areas to the Mexican population, even though those these areas encompass significant amounts of the available arable land. Its sea blockade radically impedes the Mexicans' ability to fish.

Also: pointing to the US as an example of how to behave in international relations undermines your point somewhat.

Quotea huge amount of restraint given that they have the capability to turn the entire Strip into one big car park.

It's OK for Israel to kill women and children because they could have killed everyone but they haven't? Umm... OK.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 July, 2014, 03:58:40 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/23/israel-may-have-committed-war-crimes-in-gaza-un

QuoteAid agencies said a child had been killed every hour on average in the past two days(my emphasis), and there had been a sharp spike in premature births. Gaza officials said more than 3,000 homes had been destroyed or damaged, and 46 schools, 56 mosques, and seven hospitals had been hit.  ...the death toll on the 16th day of conflict topped 700 – more than 690 Palestinians and 35 Israelis including three civilians

Restraint..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 July, 2014, 04:18:42 PM
Stop firing rockets into Israel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 July, 2014, 04:18:59 PM
I'm steaming about this so-called Russian arms embargo.

If they think that avoiding the economic fallout of damaging trade with Russia outweighs taking punitive action against Putin, then fair enough, just fucking say so. Instead we have Cameron attacking the French and Germans for not stopping arms sales and telling the commons that he had ordered a total embargo on all arms sales to Russia.

This is quite simply a lie - only 34 out of 285 arms export licences to Russia have been suspended or cancelled. The rest include serious military hardware such as surface to air missiles, although the government says these are not being sold to the Russian military. Now I don't know of any civilian organisations in Russia that would be allowed to purchase military hardware, but perhaps they were all sold to the entirely independent "Putinco Inc" and if they then sold them on to the military, well who knew?

It was also glimpsed on the notes of someone going into Downing street a while back that economic sanctions must not impede Russian oligarch's access to the City of London.

Now nations have always taken economic considerations into account when making foreign policy decisions, but it seems like the UK is now just a glorified arms dealership cum accountancy firm. The only time the PM and foreign sec seem to actively engage with other countries is when they're flying around trying to drum up arms sales, whilst turning a blind eye to the customers' human rights records.

Either quit it or admit it, but the weaselly hypocrisy just gets on my tits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 July, 2014, 04:41:32 PM
QuoteSince the year 2000, Israel has killed 1,500 Palestinian children, while Palestinians have killed 132 Israeli children. That means Israel has killed over 1,000% percent more Palestinian children than vice versa.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/facts-all-us-citizens-need-to-know-about-israel-and-palestine/5391043

Why do people ignore facts?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 July, 2014, 05:27:35 PM
Killing ten of the civilian population in retaliation for every one of their own was a common Nazi tactic when they were encountering resistance in occupied territories.  Funny how things come around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 July, 2014, 05:36:20 PM
Well, if you're comparing them to the Nazis, they've got a long way to go before they reach 6 million then, haven't they.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 July, 2014, 06:23:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 July, 2014, 05:36:20 PM
Well, if you're comparing them to the Nazis, they've got a long way to go before they reach 6 million then, haven't they.
One death is a tragedy. One million is a statistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 July, 2014, 06:24:16 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 July, 2014, 05:36:20 PM
Well, if you're comparing them to the Nazis, they've got a long way to go before they reach 6 million then, haven't they.

People ignored what the Nazis were up to until it was too late. The same thing could, conceivably, be happening here.

I think it could be another case of Ethnic Cleansing, hidden under the guise of self-defence and 'Retaliation against terrorists'.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 July, 2014, 08:54:14 PM

Ignoring the blatant Godwinning of this thread, both the Israeli and Palestinian governments should stop murdering children. No matter how many of your children someone has murdered, murdering their children in retaliation is never a sane or proportionate response.

There's no way for me to talk about selling arms to our enemies without retreading old Bill Hicks routines about Saddam Hussein (http://youtu.be/kqBOMBSDQsI), but the least the UK and France could do is to ensure weapons which might at some point in the future be turned against us or our allies are anachronistic pieces of crap that fall apart or shoot sideways.

I think it's fine that all of Europe buys its gas from Russia,  just as long as we never actually pay for the stuff. Send the Kremlin a bundle of credit default swaps and collateral used debt obligations as payment, or maybe some Greek government bonds.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 July, 2014, 09:04:58 PM
Second the above, you're dealing with two utterly cynical groupings in a seemingly endless conflict. They care little if anything for the slaughtered innocents. They are mearly pawns in what is a conflict played out on the media with the purpose of manipulation of media consumers (the rest of us). A plague on the bastards for that.
All we can hope for is a ceasefire and an end to this slaughter, but in the long term brace ourselves for much more of this. This is I think the way century 21 is shaping up. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 July, 2014, 10:50:04 PM
Criticising Israel is not the same thing as endorsing Hamas, no matter what Fox News says.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 24 July, 2014, 10:58:31 PM
Quote from: sauchie on 24 July, 2014, 08:54:14 PM
I think it's fine that all of Europe buys its gas from Russia,  just as long as we never actually pay for the stuff.

Putin's response:

(http://content9.flixster.com/question/67/85/78/6785783_std.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 25 July, 2014, 08:21:28 AM
Analogies are really unhelpful when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict, since they can't take in the context of the psychological necessity of Zionism, Europe's guilt, Arab hostility and unremitting racism, and the special swirl of religion and conspiracy theory on both sides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 July, 2014, 11:21:14 AM
Spot on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 July, 2014, 08:13:29 PM
I am horrified by the actions of both sides. Hamas have started this most recent outbreak of conflict knowing exactly what they were going to bring on themselves and their people, and Israel have followed the script with depressing enthusiasm.

At some point Israel is going to have to stop responding to Hamas provocations, because that is the only way out of this cycle of violence. It's not a very palatable option, though, and I can understand why it's so hard for them to get there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 27 July, 2014, 05:06:59 PM
This is a ridiculously one-sided conflict, not a war. It's a slaughter. As for Hamas provoking the current military action - Gaza has been under siege for 7 years, completely blockaded. Israel say they don't target civilian infrastructure yet there are accounts of them destroying olive groves and fishing nets along the coast. When you pen that many people in such a dense area and systematically abuse them, OF COURSE SOME WILL RESIST, and they have every right to.

Oh, and that fancy Iron Dome, I believe that shoots down 90-odd% of all Hamas' home-made, barely dangerous rockets anyway.

Fuck Israel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 07:33:55 PM
"Hamas' home-made, barely dangerous rockets", you having a laugh?  Or do you mean "home-made" by the Iranian State who, along with their mates in Hamas, want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.  Yes, and screw the Israelis for having the temerity to shoot down some of the rockets.  Perhaps they should let them land and kill as many Israelis as possible, would that make you happy?

According to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees more than 1,800 Palestinians have been starved to death or been murdered by President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.  Have you been on here having a pop at him?  If not, why not?

Have you commented on here about the massacres in South Sudan perpetrated by Boko Haram or the death of hundreds of children in Eastern Ukraine?  Or the thousands killed by Isis in Iraq?  Or any of the other killing fields in the world?  Or is it just Israel that grabs your attention?  I wonder why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 July, 2014, 09:36:45 PM
Do other horrors reduce the horrors that Israel is inflicting on Gaza?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 27 July, 2014, 10:03:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 07:33:55 PM
Have you commented on here about the massacres in South Sudan perpetrated by Boko Haram or the death of hundreds of children in Eastern Ukraine?  Or the thousands killed by Isis in Iraq?  Or any of the other killing fields in the world? 

Don't mean to nitpick your otherwise totally fact-checked post but "hundreds of children" have not died in Eastern Ukraine (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27804611) although that article doesn't include the 80 kids on MH17 because it's from last month but I don't think more than a hundred Ukranian kids have died since then. I'll keep a look out for more though so I can balance them out against all the other child deaths in the world and therefore not be totally mortified about the current Gaza crisis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 July, 2014, 10:19:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 07:33:55 PM
Have you commented on here about the massacres in South Sudan perpetrated by Boko Haram ... I wonder why.

Because Boko Haram is a Nigerian Islamic fascist organisation which does not operate in South Sudan, a state many thousands of miles to Nigeria's East. The genocide in South Sudan is of an ethnic character, rather than religious, and South Sudan was formed by mostly Christian and traditional African religious adherents who wanted to distance themselves from the predominantly Muslim North.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 July, 2014, 10:20:07 PM
That's some top class Whataboutery right there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 10:26:33 PM
Of course all casualties of wars are horrible, Jim.  I feel sorry for the Israeli casualties as well as the Palestinian casualties.  It's just that the concentration on Gaza intrigues me.  I wonder what the reason is?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 July, 2014, 10:29:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 10:26:33 PM
Of course all casualties of wars are horrible, Jim.  I feel sorry for the Israeli casualties as well as the Palestinian casualties.  It's just that the concentration on Gaza intrigues me.  I wonder what the reason is?

I assuming you're hinting that it is in some way anti Semitic to oppose the bombing of children's hospitals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 July, 2014, 10:33:11 PM
Because its the systematic assault by a massively well-equipped military state on a tiny area with two million people crammed into it, the vast majority of whom are just poor, hapless bastards who can't get out of the way because the Israelis have built a fucking great wall round the place and have even blockaded the coast. If the Israelis could work out how to put a roof on the place, I'm pretty sure they would.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 10:44:25 PM
I agree that the odds are heavily in Israel's favour, Jim, but how do you suggest they deal with the hundreds of rockets being fired at them.  They pulled out of Gaza years ago but the rockets kept coming.

I never mentioned anything about being anti-Semetic, Richmond.  I just asked a question and Jim's given me his answer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 28 July, 2014, 02:27:02 AM
I hate this thread so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 July, 2014, 09:09:03 AM
Threads dedicated to difficult topics can keep some loons contained within, Trouty.
I can recall at least one occasion that someone uncoupled their discussion from another thread to bring it here, so it's maybe good to have a lightning rod on a forum as fond of thread drift as this one.  I know I'd have highjacked that Paddington Bear discussion if someone hadn't started a dedicated Holocaust Denial thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 28 July, 2014, 10:02:32 AM
Jon Snow. Turns out he dosen't know nothing after all. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/27/jon-snow-gaza-israel-video-children-_n_5624934.html?utm_hp_ref=uk#closeOverlay
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 28 July, 2014, 12:18:58 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 27 July, 2014, 10:20:07 PM
That's some top class Whataboutery right there.

And that's exactly why I'm not even going to dignify Tankie's comment with a response.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 28 July, 2014, 08:02:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 July, 2014, 10:44:25 PM
I never mentioned anything about being anti-Semetic, Richmond.  I just asked a question and Jim's given me his answer.

That's somewhat disingenuous, I think the point you were making was perfectly clear.

Personally, a lot of the anti-Israel rhetoric does make me uncomfortable - even though I pretty much agree with it - because there's no getting round that it is a Jewish state with a democratically-elected government.

The reason Hamas provokes such slaughter of their own people with their stupid little rocket attacks is to harden international views against Israel, and it's obviously working. Israel needs to find another way of dealing with Hamas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 July, 2014, 10:52:39 PM
A very sad film on BBC2 tonight "Children of Syria."  "Syria's war is a war on children," says the film maker Lyse Doucet.  Terrible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 29 July, 2014, 01:09:27 AM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul K Bear on 28 July, 2014, 09:09:03 AM
Threads dedicated to difficult topics can keep some loons contained within, Trouty.
I can recall at least one occasion that someone uncoupled their discussion from another thread to bring it here, so it's maybe good to have a lightning rod on a forum as fond of thread drift as this one.  I know I'd have highjacked that Paddington Bear discussion if someone hadn't started a dedicated Holocaust Denial thread.

Or we could talk about 2000AD.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2014, 12:44:39 PM
This is hardly the place for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 29 July, 2014, 01:22:01 PM
Blood boiling int three. two, one... http://www.stopwar.org.uk/news/let-s-party-says-middle-east-peace-envoy-tony-blair-as-israel-carpet-bombs-gaza
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 02:04:43 PM
I'm pretty equivocal about the Gaza situation, but that party really sickened me. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2014, 03:17:16 PM
Say what you like about Tony B, but you can't say he's a fool, and only a fool would go to Israel right now as a "peace envoy" and illustrate to the world how useless they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 July, 2014, 05:18:41 PM
Peace envoy my arse - Blair's just a wannabe elite sent hither and yon by agencies of wealth and power to encourage general chaos and in-fighting.
.
Israelis v. Palestinians, North Koreans v. South Koreans, English v. Irish, U.S.A. v. Everybody - it's all about keeping us at one another's throats. Divide and conquer, it's the oldest trick in the book.
.
Everywhere I look I see people in conflict. Even in this country we have so many scapegoats to choose from as the source of all our woes; immigrants, nationalists, fundamentalists, police, politicians, bankers, corporatists, communists, anarchists, religionists, the rich, the poor, the middle classes, the elites, the homeless, the jobless, the sick, the old, the young. There are people out there who think I'm the problem, or that you're the problem.
.
Only the people themselves in places like the Middle East can solve their problems. The first thing they have to do is stop taking any notice of people like Tony sodding Blair, then they might have half a chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 06:40:34 PM
At my place of work, they've just sent two people over to Poland (on the QT) to recruit a load of drivers. I presume that this must be because the locals are lazy buggers and earn more money on benefits, than actually working!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 06:48:23 PM
They are very hard working, punctual and mannered. They also work for less than their UK equivalent. Globalised economy and all that. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 06:50:56 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 06:40:34 PM
I presume that this must be because the locals are lazy buggers and earn more money on benefits, than actually working!

Or possibly they find it difficult to find the money for a commercial driving license because the Unemployment Service won't fund it.

Or are you suggesting that there are lots of unemployed commercial drivers just sitting around, living the high life on that £72.40 a week (available for six months only, assuming two years of Class 1 NI prior)...?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:01:50 PM
No Jim they are not sitting around on that amount and you know quite well that people when they play the system can get a lot more than that. Also you don't need two years driving experience to work for the company, you can pass your test on Friday and get a job there on the following Monday, once you have been assessed. It's not allowed to discriminate like that anymore. Obviously there might be other compnaies that do but not with any of the major companies, otherwise you leave yourself open for a lovely court case!

By the way, this is not the first time the company have done this, as with another major company that I know of.

Why should the Unemployment Service fund your training? Should they fund everyone's training for any job that they want!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:01:50 PM
Why should the Unemployment Service fund your training? Should they fund everyone's training for any job that they want!

You're the one suggesting they should take the jobs. If they don't have drivers' licenses, commercial or otherwise, how are they supposed to?

And, yes, the Unemployment Service will send you on lots of stupid, pointless training courses that shovel hundreds of pounds a time into the pockets of private training companies to help you "write a better CV" or "manage your time effectively" but something that might actually help people get work...?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 July, 2014, 07:12:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 06:40:34 PM
At my place of work, they've just sent two people over to Poland (on the QT) to recruit a load of drivers. I presume that this must be because the locals are lazy buggers and earn more money on benefits, than actually working!

That's because real terms wages in the private sector are in the kind if long term decline your parents could never have imagined, despite profits increasing steadily during the same interval:

(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/thereporters/stephanieflanders/earnings466x280.gif)

(http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/files/UK_GDP_1_0609.gif)


Your employer's profits in particular are in the toilet (http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBREA2C0EB20140313?irpc=932), but since other large food retailers are experiencing growth, maybe the guys with clipboards and ties are more directly responsible for the overseas recruitment strategy than the guy down the road who gets up at noon to pull his trackies on and let his staffie out for a crap in the childrens' play park.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 07:23:54 PM
Agree with that, the bottom line is that a company is there to maximise profits and minimise overheads. They will of course employ people who will work for less. The onus should be on some form of benchmarking in these areas to ensure it is worthwile for British workers to do these jobs. By that I don't mean the minimum wage, which is exactly that: a minimum. The wage rates are static or falling over the past 15 years due to an influx of workers from abroad who will essentially work for less. I imply no criticism of these workers, but the free movement of labour in an unregulated market will lead to what we currently have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
There are numerous unemployed drivers out there. I know you find it hard to believe that people don't want to work, especially anti-social shift work! Numerous drivers start at all hours from 23:00 till 05:00, which may put people off but surely a work ethic means that you get in there and wait for the opportunity to get onto a better shift, unless those times suit your lifestyle to begin with!

As for profits and such, the investment in the local shops has took about 1/4 of a billion off the companies overall profits but it still made 3/4 of a billion last year. As Tesco is seeing, the Aldi's and such are eating into the profits of all and that is the way of business. Evolve or become the next Woolworths!

Why the supermarkets keep investing in home delivery is beyond me. Not one has made a profit from doing this but like sheep the bosses think they have to follow one another! I think Ocado have been going 15 years and made a constant loss!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 07:58:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
I know you find it hard to believe that people don't want to work, especially anti-social shift work!

No, I don't. I really don't — like most people, I know people whose unemployed status is easily as much "won't" as "can't"...

But you have neither demonstrated any evidence that there are enough unemployed drivers sitting around on the dole to fill the vacancies, nor even said whether those vacancies have been advertised locally at all. You just "presumed" and managed to indulge a range of your prejudices in one go. Well done, you must be very pleased with yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 July, 2014, 08:01:54 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
There are numerous unemployed drivers out there.

It's difficult to believe they'd all rather be watching Jeremy Kyle than doing a back shift. There's a huge refinery up the road from me, and the HGV drivers employed by contractors servicing it are/were all on long term contracts with well defined terms and conditions and generous pension plans. They say all the new starts taken on in recent years are on short term contracts, much smaller salaries, and no access to the pension scheme. I can't remember the last time a petrochemical company issued a profits warning to investors, so it's difficult to see the race to see how little they can pay their contractors and their employees as anything other than greed.

The oddball, Charles-Montgomery-Burns-like owner of the refinery just blackmailed shrewdly negotiated a deal with the Scottish government (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/41a27c9e-0d7c-11e4-b149-00144feabdc0.html) to underwrite a storage facility for US shale gas, so he obviously doesn't share your disdain for taxpayers' cash being lavished upon folk who've never done a real day's work in their lives.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2014, 08:44:02 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 07:58:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
I know you find it hard to believe that people don't want to work, especially anti-social shift work!

No, I don't. I really don't — like most people, I know people whose unemployed status is easily as much "won't" as "can't"...

Having done years of unemployment, I can heartily recommend it as a cure for the "won't" crowd, as it sends you fucking batty eventually.

And to be fair to CF, I didn't see any swipes at cyclists in his posts so he must be mellowing with age.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 08:53:19 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul K Bear on 29 July, 2014, 08:44:02 PM
Having done years of unemployment, I can heartily recommend it as a cure for the "won't" crowd, as it sends you fucking batty eventually.

I graduated with a useless degree into the middle of John Major's recession and a year-and-a-half of unemployment was enough to drive me to abject despair and profound depression... and I had a supportive, caring family to help me.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:19:51 PM
Thank god I was spared the brew* myself....I imagine it is no fun whatsoever. Z
*dole in NI speak
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 July, 2014, 09:32:03 PM

buroo (bəˈruː Pronunciation for buroo ; bru)

Definitions
noun (plural) -roos (Scottish & Irish, dialect)

1.the government office from which unemployment benefit is distributed
2.the unemployment benefit itself (esp in the phrase 'on the buroo')

Word Origin
C20: from bureau

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:36:37 PM
Well now I did not know that. There you go. Although we do spell it differently in Ireland; invented it first and ours tastes much nicer. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 July, 2014, 09:39:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 08:53:19 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul K Bear on 29 July, 2014, 08:44:02 PM
Having done years of unemployment, I can heartily recommend it as a cure for the "won't" crowd, as it sends you fucking batty eventually.

I graduated with a useless degree into the middle of John Major's recession and a year-and-a-half of unemployment was enough to drive me to abject despair and profound depression... and I had a supportive, caring family to help me.

Cheers

Jim

I dropped out of Uni just as John Major took over the recession and did an 11 month stretch with a bastard unsupportive family of bastards piling on more pressure in any way they could see fit, but it was the unemployment that did the most damage! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:46:29 PM
I am truely sorry to hear that Leigh, it must have been soul destroying. I thank God above every day for my good fortune in work and for a loving supportive family. I'd be a lost soul without them. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 July, 2014, 09:47:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:36:37 PM
Although we do spell it differently in Ireland; invented it first and ours tastes much nicer.

Heh - not biting. Because it isn't to be found in official documents or even the journalist's lexicon, the buroo is one of those terms you only ever encounter in conversation with others, so I'm sure its written form is a revelation to many. Angus Og (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Og_(comic_strip)) used to talk about going down the buroo to sign on, otherwise I wouldn't have a clue it was spelt that way:

(http://thecryptmag.com/Online/25/Images/drambeg4.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:51:37 PM
Ach sure we're 2 nations seperated by a different language. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 July, 2014, 10:02:54 PM
I too was unemployed for a year under John Major, and I didn't like it at all. Still, no one actually hassled me to get a job because IDS was a "bastard" that Major wouldn't let anywhere near his government and my Mum wanted me to go to university rather than to "get on my bike", so that's what I did. I got a grant, too. Seems like a different world...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 July, 2014, 10:20:46 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 09:46:29 PM
I am truely sorry to hear that Leigh, it must have been soul destroying. I thank God above every day for my good fortune in work and for a loving supportive family. I'd be a lost soul without them. Z

Cheers Zen... weird it's only now I'm in my 40s with children of my own I can see how isolated I was back then - I was a bright kid - top of my class and all that - but I'd never had any kind of guidance as to where I was going with my life.  Managed to get through school without any careeres advice, presumably on the understanding that as i was going to go on to A levels etc, I'd sort myself out.  Randomly chose a uni course and almost as randomly dropped out without anyone questioning it.  Once I ended up on the dole there was no actual support offered - so I drifted along without any direction from family, jobcentre or self - I was  (on paper) no dope, but it was so easy to slip into that role of someone without hope - my family could have been  a lot worse, and my own resources a lot less and I find it very hard to judge anyone who finds themselves entangled in that situation worse than I ever got
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 July, 2014, 10:30:12 PM
Amen to that kiddo. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 29 July, 2014, 10:46:59 PM
Well I have seen buroo written, often; it was the official nickname of our (Paisley) Students Union, 300 years ago...
Probably for historical reasons to do with the building, not an antagonistic swipe at the employment prospects after graduation  :)
... because, like others, I graduated in Major's Britain and suffered a year on the dole. Not nice. And I DID have a useful (Honours, FFS) degree. Hard Times.

This is a right spooky forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 29 July, 2014, 11:25:25 PM
I have the misfortune of having been unemployed for the best part of the year in the current climate...

Currently on two zero hour contracts and a housing benefit waiting list several months long.... too little work to earn regular money and too much work to claim jobseekers or look for another - we want to move house but they've started recently denying them to people on benefits so we're stuck in a damp flat that we can't afford with rude and forever-rowing landlords living overhead.

I'M PART OF THE BIG SOCIETY HOORAH.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2014, 12:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 07:58:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
I know you find it hard to believe that people don't want to work, especially anti-social shift work!

No, I don't. I really don't — like most people, I know people whose unemployed status is easily as much "won't" as "can't"...

But you have neither demonstrated any evidence that there are enough unemployed drivers sitting around on the dole to fill the vacancies, nor even said whether those vacancies have been advertised locally at all. You just "presumed" and managed to indulge a range of your prejudices in one go. Well done, you must be very pleased with yourself.

Perhaps it comes down to when the company can always use their chosen 'agency' staff to cover as they can come and go as they please. The problem with this is that the company are left in the lurch, when these people don't actually turn up, or come in two to three hours late and with no excuse.

Having worked in the transport office and seeing this with my own eyes, as I had to deal with it on a nightly basis, I think I know more about this problem than you. I know you like to think that people are hungry for work but I can assure you that there seems to be a certain amount that seemingly couldn't care less.

When people have been assessed for driving jobs and passed, many have binned it after the first week, if they are on those night shifts. To cover those shifts is the hardest problem for the company, as they are horrendous for most people but suit a few perfectly!

The company had a contract with the local council that they would employ mostly from the local area to get the site and build the plant on it. When they approached the council again to expand they were turned down, as the council pointed out that they didn't keep their promise with recruiting local people. I'm sure you won't believe that either, as you prefer to live in a blinkered world where the problems are all down to Thatcher and the Tories! Yes I know you say that you've voted for everyone but from your prejudice on here I find that hard to believe!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2014, 12:29:41 AM
When I said you were mellowing, I was only joking, there's really no need to overcompensate.
And though I don't pretend to speak for him, I'm sure Jim didn't mean that all the world's ills can be laid at the foot of Thatcherism - just everything that's been wrong with Britain for the last 35 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2014, 12:45:26 AM
I am rather mellow in my outlook on life! Even with all these hardships that are thrown our way, I just get on with it and enjoy it as much as I can. You should try it sometime!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2014, 12:52:13 AM
Textbook hippie behavior - not a care in the fucking world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2014, 12:54:12 AM
Perhaps I should get Planet Replicas to do a badge with HIPPIE on it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 July, 2014, 07:06:24 AM
I had a decade on benefits. It was a poor time in many ways but also very easy. The problem for me, with retrospect, was that being on benefits kept me ill and being ill entitled me to benefits. What's more, as soon as I tried to work, tried to sort myself out, it was like stepping on a landmine. I was instantly catapulted from total dependence on the state to the state telling me that I'm on my own and can they have some money now, please? There was no inbetween, no transitional processes, help or advice.
.
I feel like the government has just spat me out. I will never claim anything from it again nor do I regard it as my government any more. I want as little contact with it as possible, preferring to govern my own life instead. If that government is best which governs least then maybe those are the best governed who are governed the least, or accept the least governing.
.
I'm technically homeless, living on a friend's boat, and make money driving a small truck and harvesting samphire off the local salt marsh. It's hard work and I'm skint - but I'm not ill any more and my life is better, on the whole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 July, 2014, 09:27:11 AM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 30 July, 2014, 12:29:41 AM
When I said you were mellowing, I was only joking, there's really no need to overcompensate.
And though I don't pretend to speak for him, I'm sure Jim didn't mean that all the world's ills can be laid at the foot of Thatcherism - just everything that's been wrong with Britain for the last 35 years.

Indeed. Addressing what Jim said is fine, but making up things you claim he said and addressing them instead?
It's almost like there's no arguement to be had against it so you have to make up your own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 09:38:56 AM
I'd also like an apology for calling me a liar, John.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 10:54:22 AM
What are you moaning about, Jim, you've called me worse!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 July, 2014, 10:58:57 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 10:54:22 AM
What are you moaning about, Jim, you've called me worse!  :)

This is pure trolling. Please stop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 11:03:32 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 10:54:22 AM
What are you moaning about, Jim, you've called me worse!  :)

No. I haven't. I've pointed out where you were provably wrong. On the subject of which, you never actually responded to my list of rebuttals of things you erroneously blamed on the EU. You were — the best of my knowledge — mistaken about these things. I'll link back to it when I'm not on my phone and you can set me straight if I'm the one who's mistaken.

That's not the same as ascribing a worldview to me that could be described as (charitably) a generalisation and then using that to claim disbelief of something factual I chose to share about my previous voting patterns.

If you want to link to somewhere I've accused you of lying about something (not being mistaken, not simply being wrong, but knowingly saying something untrue) that's turned out to be true, I will happily apologise.

You won't, of course, because you can't. Unless you can, I'd thank you to stop drawing false equivalence and leave "Commando Forces" to look after himself, something he's more than capable of doing.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 11:04:51 AM
OK, Richmond, no problems, but I was having a joke with Jim.  I thought that's what a "Smiley" meant.  I'm learning more about this interwebby thing all the time.  Folks, if you're having a joke, don't use a "Smiley".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 11:11:43 AM
A smiley is not a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 July, 2014, 11:40:38 AM
Is anyone else absolutely terrified by what's happening in West Africa? I once read a book called The Hot Zone, wherein it describes the effects of the ebola virus on the Human body. I like to think I have a iron constitution, but that book made me feel nauseated. Those poor people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 July, 2014, 11:50:10 AM
That Ebola thing is terrifying and the particular complications in this, the largest outbreak in recorded history, are mind-numbing. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_West_Africa_Ebola_outbreak#Containment_complications)

Sheik Umar Khan who was the chief doctor trying to stem the outbreak died himself of Ebola yesterday which is harrowing in the extreme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 11:50:39 AM
Yes, Scary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 30 July, 2014, 12:00:43 PM
Yeah, I read The Hot Zone back in the day as well, and as a result Ebola is probably my biggest fear even now. Distressing to read, in that link, that perception of "witchcraft" and suspicion of doctors is adding to the likelihood that this could explode into something uncontainable. Science, schooling and a worldwide blanket ban on religious education for anyone under 21 is the only way forward.

SBT

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 12:05:12 PM
Hi Jim - I tried to send you a Private Message but it was blocked.  So, I'll write it on here.  I'm sorry if I offended you in this instance.  I was genuinely trying to have a joke with you.  I wasn't referring to the facts and figures we've banded about, but about the time you called me a "colossal f***wit".  Anyway, I'll say again, if you're offended, I'm sorry. Cheers, Mike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 12:10:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2014, 12:05:12 PM
Hi Jim - I tried to send you a Private Message but it was blocked.  So, I'll write it on here.  I'm sorry if I offended you in this instance.  I was genuinely trying to have a joke with you.  I wasn't referring to the facts and figures we've banded about, but about the time you called me a "colossal f***wit".  Anyway, I'll say again, if you're offended, I'm sorry. Cheers, Mike.

Fair play. Apology accepted. I missed your intent because I'm so bloody annoyed about the explicit suggestion that I've lied about something. Thank you for taking the time to straighten that out — it's appreciated.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 12:37:29 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 July, 2014, 11:50:10 AM
That Ebola thing is terrifying and the particular complications in this, the largest outbreak in recorded history, are mind-numbing. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_West_Africa_Ebola_outbreak#Containment_complications)

Sheik Umar Khan who was the chief doctor trying to stem the outbreak died himself of Ebola yesterday which is harrowing in the extreme.

Chinese TV reporting a suspected case in Hong Kong.

Edit: Tested negative.

The really alarming thing about this is that Ebola is actually quite hard to catch and is very easy to kill — nothing more than soap and hot water required, so how the hell did we end up with this...?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 July, 2014, 12:59:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 12:37:29 PM
The really alarming thing about this is that Ebola is actually quite hard to catch and is very easy to kill — nothing more than soap and hot water required, so how the hell did we end up with this...?

one factor, along with the mistrust of doctors and aid agencies* mentioned above is simply cultural - it is the custom when someone dies for the family to spend a lot of time with the body, washing it, preparing it for burial and paying respects, which leaves them all open to infection.


* a common theme that wasn't helped by the Bin Laden operation - using a fake vaccination programme to track him down set back international aid efforts in Africa and the Middle East a huge amount
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2014, 01:15:07 PM
Government agencies saying they would "contain" those testing positive for the virus and then letting them walk around unfettered to the point one of them got on an international flight, and another victim tested positive and is currently missing after being abducted from the hospital so her family could take her to a witchdoctor to be cured.
Like everyone else, I too am puzzled why this outbreak has spread like it has, but luckily the government have our back and are making plans as we speak to fortify their mansions protect us citizens in case the worst happens and I have every faith in them.


/prays like a motherfucker
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 July, 2014, 01:43:05 PM
If you're scared you'll do as you're told. Ebola, bird flu, MRSA - used as excuses to increase control over you, your environment and your freedoms.
.
Trust us or die horribly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 July, 2014, 01:46:33 PM
Good to see a bit of peace and reconcilliation between JC + OT (long may it last).
In relation to the Ebola situation, the transmission vector is people and the movement thereof. WHO probably need to start enforcing quarantines (this will of course be problematic for travellers, but...).
The fear isn't as was pointed out before the means of retarding or stopping the disease: soap and hot water, quarantenes etc. The fear is the 90% death rate of those infected.
As ever, we in the West have the organising capacity to deal with pandemics: foot and mouth being an instance (ok the measures taken were drastic), my worry is that West and Central African nations, who don't have the organising capacity, and in many cases are riven by internal strife,  in the worst scenario, this could be horrendous. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 30 July, 2014, 02:54:29 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 July, 2014, 01:46:33 PM
The fear is the 90% death rate of those infected.

Got to pull you up for hyperbole there - it's more like 64% (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_West_Africa_Ebola_outbreak#Fatality_rate) - of 1201 (!) suspected cases in this current outbreak there have been 672 deaths. Damned scary, damned horrible - but not 90. Although anything with a death rate of any number IS alarming admittedly. Ebola as a disease is terrifying.

Worthwhile donation links for those of a mind:

http://www.msf.org/donate

https://www.map.org/ebola
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 July, 2014, 03:00:20 PM
Happy to stand corrected CFM, 64% is still intolerably high (it is almost an insult to such a serious topic but that's not too far off MC1's DOC 75% to give the potential impact some relevance). Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 31 July, 2014, 01:35:27 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 July, 2014, 09:38:56 AM
I'd also like an apology for calling me a liar, John.

I presume that's with reference to the following 'Yes I know you say that you've voted for everyone but from your prejudice on here I find that hard to believe!'  I think that's pretty obvious really, from your standpoint on everything political I find it hard to comprehend that you would ever vote for the Tories.

By the way, remember a few years back when you said you were leaving this very forum to never come back, yet here you are posting away! Now I think that implies something but then again I could be wrong!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 July, 2014, 09:15:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2014, 12:15:10 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 July, 2014, 07:58:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2014, 07:27:26 PM
I know you find it hard to believe that people don't want to work, especially anti-social shift work!

No, I don't. I really don't — like most people, I know people whose unemployed status is easily as much "won't" as "can't"...

But you have neither demonstrated any evidence that there are enough unemployed drivers sitting around on the dole to fill the vacancies, nor even said whether those vacancies have been advertised locally at all. You just "presumed" and managed to indulge a range of your prejudices in one go. Well done, you must be very pleased with yourself.

I know you like to think that people are hungry for work but I can assure you that there seems to be a certain amount that seemingly couldn't care less.

Clearly reading comprehension isn't high on the list of job requirements for 'right wing troll' because, as you can see in the quoted text above, you make a claim about my opinion of unemployed people, directly below it, I refute your point and then you quote me refuting the point before ascribing that view to me again.

I was very clear in the text you quoted that my objection to your assertion was not that I have some fuzzy, cozy view of the unemployed, but that you made a claim which, absent any evidence that abundant local candidates existed or that the job had even been advertised locally, reflected nothing more than the nasty, right-wing bigotry I've come to expect from you, managing as it does to encompass a swipe at work-shy benefit scroungers and foreigners coming over stealing our jobs in just two short sentences. As I said, you must have been very proud of it. I'm sure some kind person helped you with the longer words.

QuoteHaving worked in the transport office and seeing this with my own eyes, as I had to deal with it on a nightly basis, I think I know more about this problem than you.

Well, we've only got your word for that, haven't we, John? If you refuse to believe basic facts offered in good faith by other posters, then you have to expect people to treat what you claim with a certain amount of scepticism, don't you? So, no, take your dubious anecdote and shove it.

What we've actually had, in response to my pointing out that you have no basis for your claim beyond your own prejudice is bluster, straw men, and personal attack.

QuoteI presume that's with reference to the following 'Yes I know you say that you've voted for everyone but from your prejudice on here I find that hard to believe!'  I think that's pretty obvious really, from your standpoint on everything political I find it hard to comprehend that you would ever vote for the Tories.

That's an explicit accusation of lying, John, and I want you to withdraw it. You have no evidence to the contrary and, unless you're suggesting I have early-onset Alzheimer's and can't remember how I've voted at various national, local and European elections, then you're calling me a liar.

(For your information, I voted Conservative in the Newark by-election this June because I was damned if I was going to live in the first constituency in the UK to return a UKIP MP, particularly a homophobic, racist cretin like Roger Helmer.)

QuoteI'm sure you won't believe that either, as you prefer to live in a blinkered world where the problems are all down to Thatcher and the Tories!

Your selective reading of my posts says more about your tedious habit of lumping everyone to the left of you (ie: just about everyone) into one great homogeneous lump labelled 'lefties' assigning your blanket view of what that means to all of us. I have variously been critical of much of New Labour's time in office: academy schools, the wholesale embrace of PFI, the Iraq War, the wholesale assault on civil liberties... it's a long list which utterly refutes your mis-characterisation of my position, but I should be used to you erecting straw men and tilting at them rather than engaging with the arguments at hand, since intellectual dishonesty* is very much your modus operandi.

On the subject of which:

QuoteBy the way, remember a few years back when you said you were leaving this very forum to never come back, yet here you are posting away! Now I think that implies something but then again I could be wrong!

I'd like you to find and quote a post from me saying that, John, because otherwise that's another lie from you. There was a period when I was getting routinely sniped at when I took a step back from the board (recently discussed here (http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php/topic,40790.msg835222.html#msg835222), to avoid going over it all again) but I don't ever recall announcing that I was leaving "never to come back" and I'd like you to back up your claim that I have.

So, in summary: you have cast doubt on the honesty of basic facts offered in good faith by another poster, which no basis for doing so, and have then, in the process of trying to bluster your way out of that been caught flat-footed in at least two more lies (charitably, gross misrepresentations) and yet want to appeal to your credibility as a poster in support of your otherwise unsubstantiated anecdote about benefit scroungers and job-stealing immigrants.

I can't speak for anyone else, but the opinion of a right-wing van driver whose hobbies include assaulting cyclists and dressing up as his favourite comic character is absolutely the first thing I give credence to when consider the rights and wrongs of a political issue.

No need for that apology, John — you've exposed your ignorance and bigotries, not to mention your penchant for flagrant trolling, for all to see.

Jim


*I use the word intellectual in the loosest possible sense, obviously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 31 July, 2014, 09:41:19 AM
Appallingly hyperbolic new site noth withstanding, caught this clip of Laverne Cox (Orange is the New Black) laying down why we need to get over Transphobia. Love this lady.

http://www.thewrap.com/laverne-cox-corrects-gayle-kings-trans-terminology-on-cbs-this-morning-video/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 31 July, 2014, 10:19:25 AM
We have taken a light touch with this thread, as it is inevitably a place for strong opinions.

However, it is now getting out of hand.

Personal attacks of all types will stop and they will stop now, otherwise this thread will be locked, deleted, and the entire forum will be on its final warning.

Thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 July, 2014, 11:54:02 AM
Quote from: Molch-R on 31 July, 2014, 10:19:25 AM
Personal attacks of all types will stop and they will stop now, otherwise this thread will be locked, deleted, and the entire forum will be on its final warning.

To be fair, the entire purpose of this thread is to contain the kind of dickwaddery that overruns other online forums to a single thread. There are many, many posters who (very sensibly) don't touch this thread with a bargepole and, of those who do, only a tiny fraction have been involved in the ill-tempered exchanges that have boiled up over the last few pages.

I will put my hand up and take my share of the responsibility for that, particularly for rising to a bait when it would have been better if I'd walked away. I'll apologise for that lack of judgement, both to you (as Tharg's proxy here) and to the many uninvolved forum members, and urge you not to hold the wider forum to account for the behaviour of a tiny fraction of its members.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 July, 2014, 11:57:32 AM
Hear, hear.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 31 July, 2014, 12:03:32 PM
Be a pity if this thread were locked/deleted, not withstanding bouts of ill temper and adverse reaction, there are some damn good debates on here. But I support the warning. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Noisybast on 31 July, 2014, 01:59:19 PM
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/6c/6c5d6f1b9fbc6c1e458dba54d8cc828cea56185270db86a8c3f0deddf7a715a8.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 31 July, 2014, 07:44:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 July, 2014, 09:15:58 AM
(For your information, I voted Conservative in the Newark by-election this June because I was damned if I was going to live in the first constituency in the UK to return a UKIP MP, particularly a homophobic, racist cretin like Roger Helmer.)

Interesting tactical vote, and it perhaps demonstrates that UKIP aren't such a big threat to the Tories at the next election as they have been painted. Tactically voting Lab or LibDem to keep out the Conservatives has been widespread for years, but now there's a party to the right of the political wing of the Bullingdon Club they may actually benefit themselves from the practice.

Next year's election is going to be pretty exciting...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2014, 07:00:11 AM
Next year's election is going to be just as pointless as all the previous ones. Despite the promises, nothing will change except the depth of our debt, which will increase steadily as usual.
.
And if Cameron's voted out, he'll get a job at a bank instead and never want for anything again - except maybe a clear conscience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 August, 2014, 12:14:30 PM

Saying you knew George Osbourne, and posting pictures of him at your flat with his arm around you to prove it, is now a criminal offence which will see you arrested by police and charged with abusive behaviour:

(http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/sauchieboy/4d77c0cc-33a4-41e9-8bee-ed60db36d517.png?t=1406891157)

(http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2011/09/Osborne2_1995909c.jpg)


http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/07/woman-arrested-for-posting-photo-of-george-osborne-at-prostitutes-flat-2565670.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 August, 2014, 12:22:27 PM
I have a feeling this thread will be locked very soon. Z :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 01 August, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 01 August, 2014, 12:14:30 PM

Saying you knew George Osbourne, and posting pictures of him at your flat with his arm around you to prove it, is now a criminal offence which will see you arrested by police and charged with abusive behaviour:

(http://i1050.photobucket.com/albums/s410/sauchieboy/4d77c0cc-33a4-41e9-8bee-ed60db36d517.png?t=1406891157)

(http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2011/09/Osborne2_1995909c.jpg)


http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2014/07/woman-arrested-for-posting-photo-of-george-osborne-at-prostitutes-flat-2565670.html

If this is true it sets an incredibly dangerous precident. I'm surprised it's not a bigger story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 August, 2014, 12:54:06 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 01 August, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
If this is true it sets an incredibly dangerous precident. I'm surprised it's not a bigger story

The picture itself was mentioned briefly on the news before I went to bed the other night, but all trace of the story has since disappeared. I learned about the apparent self censoring of the story by the media from PJ Holden (https://www.facebook.com/pjholden/posts/548026091968238) posting a feature the BBC had done on the dangers of trying to suppress stories making them bigger news ... because they can't/won't talk about the actual story itself. I can't decide whether this is Kafka or Orwell.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 01 August, 2014, 05:09:46 PM
Revenge porn precedent?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 11:10:39 AM
I see Barak's admitted they tortured some 'folks'. I wonder did they serve them some apple pie and soda pop up at the old homestead afterwards. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 August, 2014, 11:45:18 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 11:10:39 AM
I see Barak's admitted they tortured some 'folks'. I wonder did they serve them some apple pie and soda pop up at the old homestead afterwards. Z


Torture is apparently ok when Western powers Deign fit to do it. I wonder how Obama would feel if he was being tortured? He'd probably be fine with it as long as It's for the 'Greater Good'.

It also reminds me of several documentaries I've seen about UTILITARIANISM. The most morally reprehensible acts can be perpetrated in the name of Peace and Freedom. (I can't find the link at the mo' but the gist of one such interview with an advocate of Utilitarianism was that he would justify the torture of a criminals/terrorists Children if the result was that said Criminal/terrorist revealed information that could "Save Lives", an argument I feel is a total Crock of Shit!!)

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 12:07:05 PM
It is obviously the torture which is most offensive; but to couch it in pseudo, homely, white picket fence phraseology dreamt up by some snivelling spin doctor scum ensconced in some lobbyist office within the beltway is the utter limit. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 August, 2014, 02:59:00 PM
"To save lives" - the eternal excuse of the tyrant and tyrannised alike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 02 August, 2014, 03:56:43 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 02 August, 2014, 11:45:18 AM
It also reminds me of several documentaries I've seen about UTILITARIANISM. The most morally reprehensible acts can be perpetrated in the name of Peace and Freedom. (I can't find the link at the mo' but the gist of one such interview with an advocate of Utilitarianism was that he would justify the torture of a criminals/terrorists Children if the result was that said Criminal/terrorist revealed information that could "Save Lives", an argument I feel is a total Crock of Shit!!)

Cheers

"Better a thousand innocents suffer than one guilty soul escape justice" - Official credo of the Imperial Inquisition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 August, 2014, 04:49:37 PM
It's important to note that Obama isn't saying he authorised torture, approves of it or indeed that it was done whilst he has been president.

The weird phrasing has distracted people from the fact that this all happened under George W. Bush and that Obama isn't defending it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 04:57:43 PM
Fair point JBA, but I don't see any major clamour on his behalf to bring the culprits to justice; or for that matter to deal with the Guantanamo issue either. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 August, 2014, 05:30:52 PM
Once a State starts using torture it has lost all understanding of what it exists to stand in opposition to.  Even from a entirely 'utilitarian' point of view it's complete nonsense, merely a way for clueless thugs to mask their incompetence with the secret thrill of dirty deeds done in your name: we'll do whatever it takes to protect this nation, damnit.  And while there should be no surprises about how glibly the admission is delivered, even as the same administration deems it appropriate to resupply the monstrous aggression of Israel, it does remind us how morally bankrupt the US - and the West - now is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 August, 2014, 05:52:29 PM
The West has been morally lacking for quite some time.

Here's a podcast that shows that America has used outsider threats in the past as an excuse to amp up its naturally tendency towards viciousness and oppression:

http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive/Show-40---(BLITZ)-Radical-Thoughts/Hoover-Palmer%20Raids-Red%20Scare (http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive/Show-40---(BLITZ)-Radical-Thoughts/Hoover-Palmer%20Raids-Red%20Scare)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 05:53:29 PM
I have many american friends, a huge amount of american relatives and care passionatly about them. I love many things about america in terms of culture and history. It is an intellectual powerhouse and a wellspring of creativity. We are blessed with many american forum members (our mimikeke for instance).
My views on the subject here are intense but aimed at the last number of administrations and the  puppetmasters behind them.
But frankly this current administration which promised so much is the bitterest blow of all. Tbey are nothing more than a wolf to the weak and a rabbit to the strong. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 August, 2014, 05:59:24 PM
Torture is also a good deterrent to dissent by your own people. If you criticise certain things then you might get mistaken for a terrorist and tortured to save lives. So you'd best be careful what you say.
.
Once you admit that torture is justified in some cases you imply it might be justified in others - and that implication allows for "mission creep". Today they torture terrorists, tomorrow they torture suspected terrorists, next week they torture the friends of suspected terrorists and next month they torture whomever they damn well please.
.
And I agree with Zen - the USA could be such a force for good in the world if only it could get out from under the influence of those greedbags at the top. But then, that's true of the UK and the EU, and even the UN, as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 August, 2014, 06:04:10 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 05:53:29 PM
I have many american friends, a huge amount of american relatives and care passionatly about them. I love many things about america in terms of culture and history. It is an intellectual powerhouse and a wellspring of creativity. We are blessed with many american forum members (our mimikeke for instance).
My views on the subject here are intense but aimed at the last number of administrations and the  puppetmasters behind them.
But frankly this current administration which promised so much is the bitterest blow of all. Tbey are nothing more than a wolf to the weak and a rabbit to the strong. Z

Fair point.  I have American friends and relatives too; and shouldn't have generalised in my previous post.  As you say, it's the government (like so many governments) that operates in a belligerent and oppressive manner, not the people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 August, 2014, 06:07:40 PM
Oh aye, I've nothing against the US or Americans in general (it's an amazing place with profoundly decent people), and I certainly don't think this gross immorality is a new thing, or unique to that country.  I just wince when I see how it is treated publicly - not as a cause for resignations or national shame or re-dedication to principles, just 'shit happens'. Nixon is (rightly) demonised for his lies and manipulations, but was it really worse than what has gone on in plain sight for the last dozen years? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2014, 06:15:44 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 August, 2014, 04:49:37 PM
It's important to note that Obama isn't saying he authorised torture, approves of it or indeed that it was done whilst he has been president.

The weird phrasing has distracted people from the fact that this all happened under George W. Bush and that Obama isn't defending it.


Then why doesn't he close the 12-years-in-operation Guantanamo Bay concentration camp like he promised during his election run?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 06:20:01 PM
Jayzus my comment was in no way aimed at you or any of the other posters here. I find most of the posters on this thread thoroughly decent, reflective people and am happy to exchange views. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 August, 2014, 06:46:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 August, 2014, 05:30:52 PM
Once a State starts using torture it has lost all understanding of what it exists to stand in opposition to.  Even from a entirely 'utilitarian' point of view it's complete nonsense, merely a way for clueless thugs to mask their incompetence with the secret thrill of dirty deeds done in your name: we'll do whatever it takes to protect this nation, damnit.  And while there should be no surprises about how glibly the admission is delivered, even as the same administration deems it appropriate to resupply the monstrous aggression of Israel, it does remind us how morally bankrupt the US - and the West - now is.

http://youtu.be/ToKcmnrE5oY?t=21s

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 August, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
The US could be such a force for good in the world if it wasn't for the greedbags in charge. Still, that could be said of almost anywhere, including our own sceptred isles.
.
Obama hasn't shut down Guantanamo because he can't - he doesn't have the power. The president/prime minister/dictator is just the captain of the ship of state - it's the ship owners (or those who believe themselves to be so) who decide its course. The main role of the captain is to keep the crew and passengers in line and avoiding bumping into other ships.
.
I know, I know - I'm a cynical old git...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 August, 2014, 07:24:08 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 06:20:01 PM
Jayzus my comment was in no way aimed at you or any of the other posters here. I find most of the posters on this thread thoroughly decent, reflective people and am happy to exchange views. Z

No worries, I knew it wasn't about me.  But it made me realise that my previous post was a bit of a crass generalisation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2014, 07:40:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 August, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
Obama hasn't shut down Guantanamo because he can't - he doesn't have the power.


The President is the only one with the executive power to close it and he did exercise that power, officially:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-closure-dentention-facilities-guantanamo-bay-naval-base (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-closure-dentention-facilities-guantanamo-bay-naval-base)


But in the end he bottled it.


"Congress bears a great deal of blame for the failure to close Guantánamo, but there are several reasons why the president is also heavily responsible. First, he had the full authority to transfer detainees to the United States for prosecution for almost the first two years of his presidency. But rather than expediting its closure, his 2009 executive order contained a one year timeline; the delay allowed opponents to derail the plan.

Second, when the first complete ban on detainee transfers was enacted in January 2011, it applied only to Department of Defense funds. At that time, President Obama still had the option to transfer detainees to the US using Department of Justice funds, but he did not exercise that authority. He also could have vetoed the transfer provisions, but did not.

Third, he did not stand behind the attorney general's decision, in November 2009, to prosecute the 9/11 suspects in federal criminal courts. Allowing local and national elected officials to undermine the authority of the attorney general to prosecute was a stunning capitulation in the perennial turf war between the executive and legislative branches. In short, Obama succumbed to political pressure and refused to fight crucial battles."




http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/why-hasnt-obama-closed-guantanamo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 August, 2014, 07:53:05 PM
I got the impression Obama backtracked when he realised that closing the camp would mean letting a number of America's implacable enemies go free, and that if one of them did manage to attack the US he'd be blamed for it. It wasn't his finest hour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 August, 2014, 08:01:31 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 August, 2014, 07:53:05 PM
I got the impression Obama backtracked when he realised that closing the camp would mean letting a number of America's implacable enemies go free, and that if one of them did manage to attack the US he'd be blamed for it. It wasn't his finest hour.

It wouldn't be the first time a politician reneges on their promise out of political self-preservation; but then the question is why bother?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 August, 2014, 08:24:58 PM
Jimmy, again there is merit in the point that a lot of thoroughly nasty people were and indeed still are held there. The difficulty is the open ended detention without trial. I don't need to lecture you or anyone else here on the fundemental basis of western jurisprudence in that people are entitled to a fair hearing before the law within a reasonable period of time. This simply has not happened in this instance. If they have committed a crime they must answer for it, and it is down to the state to bring a case against them. If the state has insufficient evidence upon which to base a case then they must be released. I agree this is a bitter pill to swallow but what else is to be done. We cannot as a society which rightly extols the virtues of enlightened civilised behaviour, cast our hard won rights away as soon as we are faced with threats real or imagined. We either win this acting within the ideological compass set out by better minds than mine or we win by becoming just like the monsters who day and night seek to undermine and destroy that which we hold dear. I know what way I want to win. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 03 August, 2014, 06:35:09 AM
I would've replied to Jim earlier but alas I was busy drving a van about and helping to set up a forum and facebook page all to do with people dressing up as Judges and having fun. Seeing as the thread has been warned due to personal attacks, I won't reply but instead I'll say a BIG welcome to Jim Campbell for joining that very forum, for people who dress up in Judges uniforms.

Cheers

John
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 August, 2014, 01:48:21 PM

Ahem. Back on topic:  Russian separatists in Ukraine say they're carrying out summary executions to "prevent chaos (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-rebels-in-donetsk-say-discipline-is-good-after-they-carried-out-executions-to-prevent-chaos-9644629.html)", while Hamas declares it will keep on pointlessly firing rockets that will never reach their target until they " meet their objectives" and Netanyahu responds that Palestine will "pay an intolerable price (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-captured-soldier-hadar-goldin-declared-dead-by-israel-as-netanyahu-warns-hamas-it-will-pay-intolerable-price-9644764.html)" for the said pointless firing of effectively harmless rockets. The world is divided into people who are such dicks they're prepared to murder others just to get their own way, and everyone else.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 August, 2014, 05:05:45 PM
Hasn't it always  been that way, the murderers are in the ascendant at the moment. The annoying thing is the way we are being failed by the very people we elect to address  these very things.
Men and women of straw bought and paid for.
CF is getting plenty of forum members around this neck of the woods. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 August, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
It's something I've been thinking about a lot of late, sauchie, and a topic I know we've discussed here before.  It seems to me that for somebody to want to be the leader of a militarily aggressive (or at least active) country must take a certain amount of callousness that the average person just doesn't have.

Put it this way:  Imagine you were Tony Blair.  Whether or not the wars Britain under his rule was involved in served any 'greater good' purpose, the unalterable fact is that a decision he made caused an enormous number of deaths and a huge amount of suffering.  I believe that the majority of people, had they made the  decisions he made, would feel at the very least an incredible burden of guilt no matter what it ends they  seemed to justify.  But not him, and not Bush either for that matter.  They appear to sleep soundly at night despite being personally responsible for shedding the blood of innocent people in their thousands.

So perhaps that's why, as the current global political situation stands, it is imperative that nations are ruled by borderline sociopaths, or at least people lacking in normal feelings of human empathy.  Wars and indeed commerce can't be carried out effectively by those with the emotions of compassion and philanthropy that I believe that the average person has at least a sufficient degree of not to wish death on children and torture on potentially innocent suspects (or even guilty ones).

I don't follow Russell Brand's idea of opting out of democracy (such as it is) entirely - it's better to choose the least malevolent group than the worst one.  But the point I'm making, I suppose, is that to be involved in an electoral process, or to agree to the idea of national government, is to have to accept that whoever gets in is a far less compassionate or empathetic human being than most. 



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 August, 2014, 05:22:57 PM
It wouldn't be so bad if these people were effective. They are not,  we're essentially going to hell in a collective handcart because it is evident the likes of Blair/Cameron /Obama/Bush simply don't have the emotional intelligence from which balanced judgement stems.
Brand is of course wrong but something must be done to address the issue of why we are saddled with a pseudo-democratic process wherein fools are elected funded by interests which are in essence anti-democratic. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2014, 12:05:48 PM
The reason why we are saddled with a pseudo-democratic process wherein fools are elected funded by interests which are in essence anti-democratic is simple.
.
Because we allow it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 August, 2014, 12:21:52 PM
The most profitable rail company in the UK is also the only one still in public hands, after the last private owner ran it so badly into the ground that it had to be renationalised in 2009.  After running costs, it's returned over half a billion pounds of profit to British taxpayers, so naturally the Tories are selling it at a knockdown price to their mates, complete with subsidies so that it will actually cost the taxpayer money: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/04/east-coast-mainline-fury-reprivatisation-plan

They seem to be rushing it through before the next election, too.  Can't imagine what their hurry is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 August, 2014, 12:32:20 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 05 August, 2014, 12:21:52 PMThey seem to be rushing it through before the next election, too.  Can't imagine what their hurry is.

As I said when I mentioned this latest piece of idiocy on Facebook: "when will a mainstream political party break ranks and challenge this idiotic orthodoxy that private enterprise and the free market can solve the ills of the public sector?"

The railways are a prime example of the myth of private sector efficiency, and the lunacy of dogmatically pursuing the privatisation policy in the face of simple common sense. Whilst I wouldn't hold up the nationalised railways as a model of lean, efficient business, the plain fact is that we spend more money subsidising the railways now than we did when they were nationalised, and yet every single (privately owned) train operator runs at a profit.

Better yet, the French and German national rail operators have significant share holdings in the UK train operators meaning that a chunk of this profits goes into the coffers of the French and German nationalised railways and are used to help subsidise their own rail fares.

It's absolute madness.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 12:46:25 PM
Something I'm becoming more interested in as I get older the idea of how trust and respect works between the general public and authority figures.
From a young age we're taught that we should respect people in certain positions of authority. From your headmaster to your local bobby. But why? I can respect the scientific opinion of a professor working in his field, or the medical opinion of my local GP because they're working by methods which are empirically proven. Politicians, the local police and people who generally tell you how to run your life don't have this. Why should I respect a local politician any more than someone on Jobseeker's allowance?
I'm really trying my best to take people as I find them from now on, and to give respect where I think it's earned. I work in events and the amount of people, paid for by the public, who expect VIP treatment (by this I  mean to be segregated from the general public and given extra attention etc) really sticks in my craw. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2014, 12:47:00 PM
"Fascism should more properly be called 'corporatism' because it is the merging of state and business power." - Mussolini
.
We are taught respect for these 'authority figures' at school - and, who runs the schools, trains and hires the teachers, sets the curriculum? Those self same 'authority figures'. This will continue so long as our schools teach students what to think and not how to think - and so long as the media continues reinforcing the current scholastic paradigm.
.
"Question everything" should be carved in stone over every school entrance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 05:11:28 PM
Has anyone noticed that there are a hell of a lot of, what I call, 'We know best' programmes on lately?
There are things like Fake Britain, The Health Inspectors, Here Come the Sheriffs and various Police versions of, what seem to me, propaganda to show us how great various authorities are.
I wouldn't mind so much if the programmes were objective but they never show anyone making mistakes or arresting people wrongly and they don't even give the people on the other end of the disputes a platform to get their side of the story across. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
They subscribe to the current bullshit ploy of dumping on the weak/wee bit strange etc whilst working willfully ignoring the 'elephant in the room'  that being the shysters who should be standing tall before the man have escaped in the smoke with a nice wee 5% tax cut or no tax at all. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 06:23:00 PM
And in other news, Bernie Ecclestone has his bribery charge dropped by...er...paying a massive bribe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 August, 2014, 06:36:15 PM
If anyone is interested in why Scotland might be leaving the UK, the reasons will be assembling themselves into a vague human form, answering to the name "Darling", and explaining things really slowly in a television debate at 8pm tonight.

That's only for viewers in Scotland though.  The powers that be have decided that viewers in the rest of the UK would rather watch "Love your garden" with Alan Titchmarsh. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 06:44:44 PM
Loathe to get into a Scottish Independence debate, but could things possibly be any worse if the vote was yes. At least Salmon is directly accountable, DC certainly Isn't. But I'm an outside observer and am not totally versed in the detail of the argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 August, 2014, 06:48:08 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 06:23:00 PM
And in other news, Bernie Ecclestone has his bribery charge dropped by...er...paying a massive bribe

That's Germany for you. No attempt to dress things up prettily or pretend they're anything they aren't, like us or the Italians; just brutally honest, clinical, and explicit. Their pornography must be horrific, but I admire their decision to model their criminal justice system on the board game Monopoly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 August, 2014, 06:52:24 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 06:23:00 PM
And in other news, Bernie Ecclestone has his bribery charge dropped by...er...paying a massive bribe.

Disgusting. When rich people use their money and influence to buy their way out of trouble, I at least expect them to concoct some flimsy cover story. The fatcat bastards are even to lazy to do that any more, sheesh.

A friend of my cousins did two years inside for accepting a bribe, but the guy who paid it was acquitted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 August, 2014, 06:55:01 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 05 August, 2014, 06:36:15 PM
If anyone is interested in why Scotland might be leaving the UK, the reasons will be assembling themselves into a vague human form, answering to the name "Darling", and explaining things really slowly in a television debate at 8pm tonight.

That's only for viewers in Scotland though.  The powers that be have decided that viewers in the rest of the UK would rather watch "Love your garden" with Alan Titchmarsh.

Anyone mental enough to want to can witness the whole car crash on the STV website (http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/285075-alex-salmond-and-alistair-darling-prepare-to-clash-in-stv-debate/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 05 August, 2014, 06:59:41 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 05 August, 2014, 06:23:00 PM
And in other news, Bernie Ecclestone has his bribery charge dropped by...er...paying a massive bribe.

Yeah, hearing that headline during the news I said just that too. Quite how the BBC announcer avoided this is no doubt due to their advanced training.

Oh, and sickening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 06:59:53 PM
Just bought the pop corn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 August, 2014, 07:01:57 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 06:44:44 PM
Loathe to get into a Scottish Independence debate, but could things possibly be any worse if the vote was yes. At least Salmon is directly accountable

Your friends in the Republic can probably tell you how that theory works out in practice. I don't have any influence over the voting practices of my local councillor, and she lives four streets from me and I used to work with her husband. Once party politics happens, individual votes mean fuck all.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 05 August, 2014, 07:37:04 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuS5g7tIgAE7-w5.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 05 August, 2014, 07:53:34 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2014/aug/04/scottish-independence-referendum-debate-drinking-game
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 08:00:44 PM
As I say l'm loathe to comment......but
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 August, 2014, 08:03:20 PM

Fuck coy little drinking games - if you're not off your head on a combination of uppers, downers, and psychotropics going into this thing you're never going to make it to the first advert break.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 August, 2014, 08:50:36 PM
Possibly, but......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 05 August, 2014, 08:58:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2014, 12:47:00 PM
"Question everything" should be carved in stone over every school entrance.

Including the quote itself and the person who caved it into stone?  :-*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 12:57:53 AM
Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 06 August, 2014, 11:16:37 AM
It seems that police officers are now being routinely armed on patrol in the UK. Personally I find that alarming, undermining the fundamental principles of policing by consent - the idea that our police force owes its primary duty to the public, rather than the state.

I find it surprising this has been introduced by stealth, the thin end of a very large wedge, and we don't have to look far around the world to realise that armed police don't make the streets any safer.

If you happen to be as annoyed about this as I am, there's a petition to register your disquiet here:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/end-armed-officers-being-sent-on-routine-patrols



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 11:34:45 AM
Quote from: Montynero on 06 August, 2014, 11:16:37 AM
If you happen to be as annoyed about this as I am, there's a petition to register your disquiet here:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/end-armed-officers-being-sent-on-routine-patrols

Signed. Nobody else has a gun, ergo the polis do not need guns. Radio Scotland had a police spokesman on yesterday trying to justify the decision, and the best he could come up with was that if a terrorist attack took place he'd want a cop with a gun to be nearby.

He cited the attacks on Glasgow airport to support his argument, apparently forgetting that the two yahoos who set themselves on fire and drove a car into the entrance of the airport were taken down by a kick to the nuts delivered by a driver from the nearby taxi rank.

I'm struggling to think of the last terrorist incident in Scotland prior to that, or how armed cops would have prevented the bomb attacks on the London transport system in 2005, the murder of Lee Rigby in 2013, or the mainland bombing campaign of the IRA during the eighties.

Soldiers with assault weapons, driving round in armoured vehicles, did fuck all to stop daily carnage on the streets of N Ireland, so I'm not sure what difference arming PC Murdoch is supposed to make now. Simply mental.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 August, 2014, 11:43:28 AM
Quote from: Montynero on 06 August, 2014, 11:16:37 AM

If you happen to be as annoyed about this as I am, there's a petition to register your disquiet here:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/end-armed-officers-being-sent-on-routine-patrols

Done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 11:47:51 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 06 August, 2014, 11:43:28 AM
Done.

Likewise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 August, 2014, 12:01:37 PM
Nicola hughes and Fiona bone might still have been alive and dale cregan not if they had been armed and therefore able to defend themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 12:14:13 PM

Those of you fortunate enough not to live within the STV broadcast area can now catch up on the exciting independence debate between Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling from last night. You didn't miss much:  http://player.stv.tv/programmes/salmond-darling/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 06 August, 2014, 12:15:15 PM
This is NOT the way to go. It will only lead to escalation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 12:20:28 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 12:01:37 PM
Nicola hughes and Fiona bone might still have been alive and dale cregan not if they had been armed and therefore able to defend themselves.

I would suggest that sidearms aren't much of a defence against hand grenades and, if we're going to start playing games of "what if", we'll need to start totting up the number of innocent people who are going to get shot just because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time.*

Also, the introduction of this policy by stealth is disturbing, and the refusal to take account of the public outcry when it came to light puts the police in a very poor light when considering who is supposed to serve whom in this relationship.

Cheers

Jim

*Or are black. Or in possession of a beard and a suspicious-looking rucksack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 August, 2014, 12:31:03 PM
I do believe he shot them first then lobbed a grenade in. I don't believe arming the police is a bad thing ,yes there will be mistakes made but with the right training surely police wouldn't be running round shooting everyone willy nilly? I went to france once were the gendarmes carry in the week I was there we didn't get shot ,not once.
   the crims have guns and want t use them why shopuldnt the police be able to protect themselves and us with more than some pepper spray and a taser?
and the black with a beard and  rucksack thing? really?

and obviously any serving officers that may frequent or lurk I'd like to know what the boots on the ground think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 12:37:58 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 12:01:37 PM
Nicola hughes and Fiona bone might still have been alive and dale cregan not if they had been armed and therefore able to defend themselves.

Leaving aside whether that would have been the case or not, the routine arming of any beat cop responding to reports of vandalism (which was what led Hughes and Bone to Cregan's door) isn't what's happening here. Only authorised firearms officers are carrying weapons, and there are no more of them than there were before (only 275 out of 17,318 cops total in Scotland (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28656324)).

Until last year, these cops didn't carry their sidearms when on normal duties, only returning to retrieve them from locked safes in their patrol vehicle when asked to respond to a firearms incident. There has been no explanation of why this policy has changed. That same article linked to above cites a 2006 survey of serving officers which found 82% of them had no wish to see the routine arming of the police force.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 12:38:46 PM
Quotethe crims have guns and want t use them

It is hysterical assumption that all criminals have guns ESPECIALLY so far away from the hub of black market activity. What a load of hogwash.

Quoteand the black with a beard and  rucksack thing? really?

Yes, really. Also if you are Irish or have political beliefs out of tune with the state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 12:39:50 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 12:31:03 PM
and the black with a beard and  rucksack thing? really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 06 August, 2014, 12:53:23 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 12:01:37 PM
Nicola hughes and Fiona bone might still have been alive and dale cregan not if they had been armed and therefore able to defend themselves.

An absolute tragedy, but you can't allow terrorists to dictate your way of life.

Police in America carry guns and more than 100 have been killed in the line of duty every year since 1916 http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html (http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html) (apart from the war years, interestingly). It demonstrably doesn't lead to greater police safety. Not to mention the much higher numbers of people being shot by the police as a consequence http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/police-involved-shootings-2011-annual.html (http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/police-involved-shootings-2011-annual.html)

This experiment has been conducted elsewhere. The results are in. We simply need to make sure we don't make the same mistakes in the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 August, 2014, 12:57:42 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 12:38:46 PM


Yes, really. Also if you  have political beliefs out of tune with the state.

nigel farage better keep his head down

http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-being-a-police-officer-require-being-armed


  I just think people should have more faith in the police  I personally would not feel threatened by armed officers but I think that some of those crims who do have illegal firearms might think twice if they think they'll get shot back at.

  anyway that's my opinion ive said it some don't agree but that's a democratic free speech society for you.
toodles!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 01:00:45 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 12:31:03 PM
I do believe he shot them first then lobbed a grenade in. I don't believe arming the police is a bad thing ,yes there will be mistakes made but with the right training surely police wouldn't be running round shooting everyone willy nilly? I went to france once were the gendarmes carry in the week I was there we didn't get shot ,not once.

Look, this is simple balance of probabilities. The chance of anyone getting shot in any scenario where no one has a firearm is zero. The chance of someone getting shot in a scenario where someone does have a firearm is non-zero.

If we allow armed officers to respond to incidents where no firearm may be present (given the rarity of firearm crime in the UK, despite what various sections of the media would have you believe*) this means that in majority of scenarios where someone has a gun, that someone is likely to be a police officer.

The police don't have a fantastic record for not shooting people who didn't deserve shooting, so more routine activity on the street by armed officers inevitably increases the chance that someone is going to get shot.

I would contend that this is too high a price to pay for a change in policy which seems to be a response to an entirely non-existent problem.

Cheers

Jim

*I lived for almost twenty years in a shitty part of the supposed gun crime capital of Britain and never experienced gun crime, saw a gun, or even met anyone who had been a victim of gun crime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 06 August, 2014, 01:13:24 PM
I've known quite a few Police officers professionally and personally and for the most part I wouldn't trust them with a water pistol, let alone a firearm.
I have no doubt that many Police officers are top-notch professionals and I'd like to think they're the ones being picked to join the armed response teams.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 01:26:16 PM
QuoteI just think people should have more faith in the police

Sorry, I wouldn't trust the cops under any circumstances. As an organisation, they have proved their corruption, unreliability and willingness to abuse their power over and over again. A quick shufti around youtube for UK police brutality will show you what unarmed police get up to, and someone gives these socially retarded bullies more powerful weapons capable of killing in a split second?
No thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 01:34:59 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 12:38:46 PM
Quoteand the black with a beard and  rucksack thing? really?

Yes, really. Also if you are Irish or have political beliefs out of tune with the state

Or if you're a Scottish painter and decorator carrying a bit of wood on your way home, and some folk in a London boozer report you to police because they mistake you for Irish (in 2004, seven years after the Good Friday agreement):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3965207.stm

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 August, 2014, 01:35:33 PM
QuoteI just think people should have more faith in the police

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/something-rotten-in-the-metropolitan-police-corrupt-officers-may-escape-justice-thanks-to-mass-shredding-of-evidence-9215433.html

I live in Inverness. I have seen armed police officers walking around the centre of town on a Sunday afternoon. There is absolutely no need for them. This is, as Jim says, policy by stealth. They have made the decision to arm themselves, despite protests from politicans and the public.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 01:47:30 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 01:26:16 PM
As an organisation, they have proved their corruption, unreliability and willingness to abuse their power over and over again

Yep:

QuoteThree hundred Metropolitan Police officers and staff have been caught misusing the force's computers including some who were passing information to criminals. Officers were found leaking intelligence to a gangster linked to firearms, passing on information about drugs, and obtaining computer data 'to assist in criminality'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2621016/Met-shame-officers-leak-data-force-computer-criminals-300-uniform-civilian-staff-caught-abusing-system.html#ixzz39cDSDonx


QuoteThe Metropolitan Police corruption scandal has deepened after The Independent uncovered the existence of a previously secret investigation into criminal officers that went much further than the files destroyed by Scotland Yard. Operation Zloty, a wide-ranging inquiry spanning at least nine years, found dozens of rogue detectives in the employ of organised crime and operating with "virtual immunity".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-secret-second-metropolitan-police-corruption-probe-revealed-9217620.html


QuoteThe head of the Metropolitan Police has admitted that rogue and corrupt officers may evade justice because of the "mass-shredding" of sensitive corruption files held by Scotland Yard.

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe suggested the decision to destroy a "lorry-load" of intelligence from an investigation into criminality inside the Met was wrong and said such a decision would now only be taken at a very senior level, throwing the spotlight back on his predecessors Lord Stevens and Lord Blair.

With his force facing allegations of a cover-up since a damning review into the Lawrence murder was published earlier this month, Sir Bernard also revealed the force was attempting to open a new investigation into the notorious unsolved murder of Daniel Morgan, a private investigator who is said to have been killed just as he was about to blow the whistle on police corruption back in 1987

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/something-rotten-in-the-metropolitan-police-corrupt-officers-may-escape-justice-thanks-to-mass-shredding-of-evidence-9215433.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 06 August, 2014, 02:09:58 PM
http://www.infowars.com/were-all-criminals-and-outlaws-in-the-eyes-of-the-american-police-state/
(http://www.infowars.com/were-all-criminals-and-outlaws-in-the-eyes-of-the-american-police-state/)
How doubly appropriate a link!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 06 August, 2014, 02:21:35 PM
Good-ish article by patriots too!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 August, 2014, 02:34:51 PM
In other words - Crime blitz creeps! That's worth 2 in the cubes.


Whenever I hear about these things all I can think is the Rage Against The Machine lyric, "What? The Land of the Free? Whoever told you that is your enemy!"

Not that we are much better here of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
In my view, armed officers are required to keep you in line, not criminals.
.
Police unlawfully evicted me with an unsigned warrant and then incarcerated me without charge. Next time I refuse to open my door, will I just be shot to ease police cell overcrowding?
.
This is, as I keep saying, tyranny by stealth - an inch at a time. And it's happening because we allow it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 August, 2014, 03:44:23 PM
QuoteThis is, as I keep saying, tyranny by stealth - an inch at a time. And it's happening because we allow it.

We don't often see eye-to-eye on this thread, Shark, but you're bang on here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 04:15:08 PM
Thanks, Rich. I can't claim to know what to do about it but the first step is surely to recognise the problem. My own view is that each of us has to stand against it alone because it's harder to deal with 1,000 individuals than one group. Just consider how much 'trouble' I have caused them, lawfully and alone. Sure, I've fetched up in the mire for now - but I'm far from giving up.
.
As many people as possible, I think, should say 'no' to just one thing they don't agree with - but do it smart. For example, if you don't agree with the t.v. license then, the next time you get a bill, promise to pay exactly what they want providing they can show you the contract you signed with them wherein you agreed to pay exactly what they want. They'll threaten and bully you - but that's all they can do because you're not refusing to pay. If you do want to pay, then pay the amount You want to pay, not the amount they demand.
.
But that's just my way, my exploration of freedom - each person must resist, or not, in his or her own way. Freedom means being able to choose whether to agree with the system, in whole or in part, for yourself.
.
You are the One you've been waiting for.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 04:31:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 04:15:08 PM
For example, if you don't agree with the t.v. license then, the next time you get a bill, promise to pay exactly what they want providing they can show you the contract you signed with them wherein you agreed to pay exactly what they want.

Oh, for God's sake. This is not how the law works: not everything is a two-sided contract that can be disputed in the absence of signed consent. If HMRC come after me for not paying my taxes, I can't turn round and say "Aha! You have nothing signed by me saying that I agree to the UK taxation system!" It's the law: I have to obey unless or until I decide to move to a nation with tax laws more to my liking. Similarly, your option if you don't want to pay the TV license is to not own a TV — not paying it is (until the Tories change the law) a quick and easy route to a criminal record.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 August, 2014, 04:39:02 PM
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/76759000/jpg/_76759759_cascade_armed_police_inverness.jpg)

Inverness, never had that trouble at HiEx
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 August, 2014, 04:58:40 PM
just get I-player on your laptop or phone sharky the buggers cant get you then ;)

  it does make me wonder why we have to pay a licence. I rarely watch the beeb save for dr who top gear and more recently the musketeers but asides the odd documentary I don't , we tend to watch stuff on sky which we choose to pay for and itv is funded by ads surely?
  we should do one of those online petitions to question the tv licence!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 05:07:06 PM
Quote from: Grug on 06 August, 2014, 04:58:40 PM
it does make me wonder why we have to pay a licence. I rarely watch the beeb save for dr who top gear and more recently the musketeers but asides the odd documentary I don't , we tend to watch stuff on sky which we choose to pay for and itv is funded by ads surely?

Why should I pay for the NHS when I'm almost never ill? Why should my taxes pay for schools when I don't have kids? It's a piece of social infrastructure paid for by taxation, but peculiarly broken out from general taxation so you get to see yourself paying for it.

You get access to the broadcaster against which all other broadcasters around the world are compared to and found wanting: four TV channels plus a couple of kids' channels; a dozen radio stations; the only network of local news organisations worth a damn and a massive online resource... for roughly the price of one pint of beer per week, per household. You think even your limited viewing isn't worth that?

Ask ex-pat Americans living here what things they find remarkable about the UK, answer No1 is usually the NHS and No2 is usually the BBC.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 August, 2014, 05:10:52 PM
The TV license funds a lot of infrastructure and development as well as the BBC itself. From digital radio bandwiths to on-demand services and more. Needless to say, commercial companies are not exactly keen on investing in things like say, Freeview's digital platforms, iPlayer technology, subtitling for hard of hearing, etc....

Also as Jim says I have never met a foreigner who wasn't impressed by the two public services the general public resents or takes for granted. Well, except the French ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 05:37:39 PM
For the umpteenth time: Your taxes are used for only two things; to pay government debt and as surety for future borrowing.
.
"Everything must be paid for!" you might cry, and I agree - but while we are using privately created money, and paying interest for the privilege, we're paying way, way too much for everything and gradually losing what we've got - including freedom.
.
It's not about avoiding paying, it's about what we're paying with. In essence, if you use privately created money you have to pay 'rent' on it but publically created money is virtually rent free.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2014, 07:00:13 PM

What event and what group of people actually ended the First World War? The answers to those questions aren't any of the ones which just popped into your head:

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/world-war/1240

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2014, 07:11:56 PM
Interesting. I did not know that. Thanks, Sauchie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 August, 2014, 07:45:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 04:31:11 PMSimilarly, your option if you don't want to pay the TV license is to not own a TV

No, you can - for now - own a tv in your home without paying a licence, you simply have to remove your external antennae, or at the very least any means of connecting your tv to an external antennae.  You can have a console that receives streaming services like iPlayer connected to your tv without having to pay the licence, so if you can wait an hour you don't even have to miss Dr Who.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 08:19:43 PM
When my arm got bust outside a local Aberdonian tavern last year, the surgeons, orderlies and nurses were all pushing hard to get me to report the assault- mainly because of the severity of the injury and the relatively high chance that I will be left physically impaired by it. They couldn't understand why I was adamant that there was no way I was reporting it, I tried to explain that it was because I did not believe the Filth would treat me fairly, if they even bothered to do anything at all- "I dinna trust them, they're scum" pretty much summed it up.
My expectation was that they would simply charge both of us under public order, despite the fact the attack was unprovoked, and any violence on my part was in self-defence in an attempt to get away from the guy. I still believe I made the right decision- having worked in a prison and known a lot of 'criminals', and I've been on the receiving end of police shite enough over the years to second guess how they'd view it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 06 August, 2014, 08:22:02 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 06 August, 2014, 07:00:13 PM

What event and what group of people actually ended the First World War? The answers to those questions aren't any of the ones which just popped into your head:

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/world-war/1240

Very interesting read that, Sauchie. Must investigate further..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 08:34:26 PM
Dog: You're probably wise. This is a symptom of the whole target-driven, performance-related pay culture that dominates our so-called public services these days. Put simply, if a copper is called to an altercation, even if it's a scumbag who's been prevented from mugging an old lady by an upstanding citizen, nicking BOTH parties for affray, assault or other disorderly behaviour looks far better for his/her arrest rate at the next performance review than applying any sense of common decency or, y'know, justice. It also takes less time than working out who did what to whom and why.

A sad state of affairs, but that's what you get when you reduce complex public service roles to a series of performance checklists.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 August, 2014, 08:34:52 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 06 August, 2014, 07:45:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 04:31:11 PMSimilarly, your option if you don't want to pay the TV license is to not own a TV

No, you can - for now - own a tv in your home without paying a licence, you simply have to remove your external antennae, or at the very least any means of connecting your tv to an external antennae.  You can have a console that receives streaming services like iPlayer connected to your tv without having to pay the licence, so if you can wait an hour you don't even have to miss Dr Who.

http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 06 August, 2014, 08:59:22 PM
Yeah Jim, plus 'self-defence' is an easy claim to make, if you know the law well enough, and I learned it as part of my self-defence training (which, clearly, didn't work!) in prison (employment).
One does not have to be physically assaulted to strike out, only 'feel threatened' by an individual (in Scotland, anyway). Strong words and or/ close proximity are enough to warrant 'threat'. Also, your response can be anything from hollering a warning to smashing a cheek with a legally sanctioned palm strike- so long as you strike once and then remove yourself (which is what I did, though after I was initially assaulted).
Try proving you weren't 'causing someone to feel threatened', when the only witnesses are a bunch of drunken punters at closing time. In most cases it would come down to one word against another, which would lead to the PF dropping the charges on insufficient evidence, or charging both for public affray or whatever- especially when both parties would be classed as 'undesirables'. A huge fine or community service on top of a smashed humerus might have been a little too much grief to bear. If I required justice, I'd have to get it myself because I seriously doubt the state would give me it- the law is an ass, and its enforcers are arseholes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 August, 2014, 10:20:18 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 06 August, 2014, 08:34:52 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 06 August, 2014, 07:45:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 August, 2014, 04:31:11 PMSimilarly, your option if you don't want to pay the TV license is to not own a TV

No, you can - for now - own a tv in your home without paying a licence, you simply have to remove your external antennae, or at the very least any means of connecting your tv to an external antennae.  You can have a console that receives streaming services like iPlayer connected to your tv without having to pay the licence, so if you can wait an hour you don't even have to miss Dr Who.

http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence

The super-short version is: you only need a licence if you watch BBC programming as it's being broadcast.  If not, you don't need a licence.

Also, a good rule of thumb is to never trust what the BBC have to say about who needs to give them money.  Their advice seems to skew in a certain direction that may not always be factually accurate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 August, 2014, 10:53:34 PM
Christ, this thread is top gun (no pun) at the moment. I've crop Internet at the moment so can't stick my beak in.......gurrrrr. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 09:52:13 AM
I find attitudes to the t.v. license interesting. The consensus seems to be either pay up or throw away your television (and, presumably, your radio as well).
.
This seems to me to be indicative of prevailing views on society, views I am increasingly finding myself at odds with. If you don't pay for a t.v. license then you don't deserve a telly. And it's not just that; if you don't pay for a driving license you don't deserve to drive, if you don't pay for a fishing license you don't deserve to fish, if you don't pay for a passport you don't deserve to travel. Furthermore, there seems to be no difference between failure or refusal to pay and inability to pay.
.
This attitude goes a lot further, of course. No payment, no public transport, no housing, no water, no food, no clothing, no entertainment, no access to justice, etc., etc., etc.
.
In short, if you don't want to pay or can't pay then you don't deserve to be included in society. It's almost as if people believe that our society is a working persons' club owned and run by the 'authorities' and that it has the final say on who can participate and who cannot.
.
In the words of the late, great Bill Hicks, "you think you're free? Try going anywhere without money and see how f***ing free you are."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 09:59:20 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 09:52:13 AM
This seems to me to be indicative of prevailing views on society, views I am increasingly finding myself at odds with. If you don't pay for a t.v. license then you don't deserve a telly.

I emphatically did not say that. I said that your insistence that contract law is applicable in the example you gave is just plain wrong and people following your advice would find themselves on the fast track to a large fine and a criminal record.

In fact, I was advancing the idea of the BBC being an example of social infrastructure, of benefit to the fabric of the nation as a whole, which we all pay for because we are part of that society and, much like the NHS, not because we anticipate extracting the precise monetary value of our contributions from that service in return.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 August, 2014, 10:32:42 AM
QuoteI find attitudes to the t.v. license interesting. The consensus seems to be either pay up or throw away your television (and, presumably, your radio as well).
.

That's a gross misrepresentation. Where does anyone say anything of the sort?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 August, 2014, 10:34:48 AM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 06 August, 2014, 07:00:13 PM

What event and what group of people actually ended the First World War? The answers to those questions aren't any of the ones which just popped into your head:

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/world-war/1240

V.interesting and just goes to show why Charlies War is so bloody special.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 11:18:54 AM
Apologies, Jim - it was not my intent to charge you specifically with any views. The views I describe are simply the views of large sections of society as I perceive them.
.
My understanding of contract law is that it is the basis, or one of the major bases, of our entire social and legal systems. Contracts between people are fundamental to the rule of law in this country - ostensibly, at least.
.
For example, I could send Jim a demand for £150 a year for the pleasure of reading my posts - I have, after all, spent time and resources writing them and feel I need compensating for that (in this thought experiment, that is - in reality I know that my rantings and poor wordsmithery aren't worth a dull button).
.
So, I've sent Jim a demand for £150 and now he has four options: 1) He ignores it but this is dangerous as, under law, failure to object indicates acceptance, which leaves him open to my suing him for the full amount plus expenses. Now, Jim might feel confident that he could beat this, and so would I, but with a sharp enough lawyer working for me you never know. 2) Jim could negotiate with me, knocking the payment down to £1.50 a year (or even £1,500 if he thinks my witterings are worth it) by entering into a contract. 3) He could simply just pay up, which he might if my paperwork seemed official enough. 4) He could write back to me thanking me for my invitation but declining to enrol in my little scheme.
.
Now then, let's say that Jim and I both sign a contract whereby he agrees to pay me £150 a year provided that I write at least 52 posts a year. If then I send Jim my demand for payment and he refuses, I can sue him for breach of contract (assuming I've held up my end) and would have a good chance of winning. Conversely, if I fail to write my 52 posts per year, Jim could sue me for breach of contract.
.
In short, nobody can just demand money from you without a contract, no matter what they give you. There are two major factors which all contracts must possess in order to be valid and enforcible; a contract must be mutually consentual and must contain reasonable expectations.
.
Scaling my thought experiment up, replace my posts with the BBC's output and replace Jim with everyone who owns a television. Sure, the BBC could be the best broadcaster on Earth, with the best news service, the best sports coverage and the best educational and entertainment programs ever devised - but so what? If the BBC wants to limit its output to paying customers then it should go PPV, not demand funds through some Draconian, blanket license fee that it touts as obligatory.
.
Once again, Jim, I apologise for appearing to put words in your mouth. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I have neither the right nor the authority to do so, I'm simply trying to explain my world as I see it, not to change your world. The only person with any right to change your world is you (not just the 'you' of Jim - all of you) and the only person with any right to impose a contract on you, is you. You are the sovereign of your own world and nobody else's (except, maybe, for children and people in your care - and even then there are limits under common law).
.
We all have just as much right to say no as we have to say yes. The choice is yours - at least, the choice is yours in a free country.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 11:26:05 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 11:18:54 AM
In short, nobody can just demand money from you without a contract, no matter what they give you. There are two major factors which all contracts must possess in order to be valid and enforcible; a contract must be mutually consentual and must contain reasonable expectations.

Again. You are wrong. I'm not immune from prosecution from murder because no one can produce a contract I've signed undertaking to never kill anyone. Criminal law does not work like that.

At present, although the Tories are seriously muttering about changing it*, non-payment of the TV license is a criminal offence. Saying "Aha! You have no contract so I will not pay!" will get you a large fine and a criminal record.

I'm not disputing the moral or philosophical dimensions of whether that's right or wrong, but I assure you that's how it is.

Jim

*Because, of course, weakening the BBC to the benefit of Rupert Murdoch is an outcome we'd all like to see...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 11:53:13 AM
Your example is spurious, Jim, because murder is against the common law. (Euthenasia might be a different matter, though, in theory at least. If a vet puts my dog down against my wishes then I'd have a case against that vet but if I have a contract with that vet, either written or (to a lesser degree) verbal, then I have no recourse. (This is, of course, a very simplistic scenario which ignores all the complexities of the real world.) This contract would be valid as killing animals is not (in general) against the common law.)
.
But, if I sign a contract with someone to kill my grandmother then both that someone and myself would be guilty of murder as killing grandmothers is against the common law. Also in this case, if granny is unaware of the contract, the contract itself is illegal as granny did not consent and neither is it reasonable to expect that she would want to be killed.
.
If granny herself signs a contract with her killer, of course, the issues get more complex. Granny has the right under common law to die if she wants to but nobody has the right under common law to kill her. (This seems to me to be the basic legal problem at the heart of the euthanasia debate - the right to die versus the illegality of murder.)
.
And the way to do it is not to say, "I have no contract so I won't pay" - the way to do it is to say, "sure I'll pay. I'll pay anything you want so long as I'm contractually obliged to do so and you can produce said contract."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 11:56:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 11:53:13 AM
And the way to do it is not to say, "I have no contract so I won't pay" - the way to do it is to say, "sure I'll pay. I'll pay anything you want so long as I'm contractually obliged to do so and you can produce said contract."

No. Just fucking no. At this point, I'm just going to walk away from this because you have no idea what you're talking about. Try what you advocate: just try it. I guarantee you that the outcome will be a large fine and a criminal record.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 12:22:14 PM
I have tried it, Jim. In three years, the worst that happened was an inspector turning up at my door. I said politely to him "sorry, not interested," and closed the door. The result? A letter from the TV Licensing company saying they'd contact me in two years with another invitation to purchase a license. No fine, no criminal record. As soon as they know that you know their game, they back off.
.
You need to know how to do it properly, though, which words to use and so on. There are plenty of sites on the web that explain how to do this. Some are rubbish but a few are spot on - you need to do your research first though and a good place to start that research is at www.getoutofdebtfree.org
.
The main thing is not to ignore their letters (remember, failure to object indicates acceptance) and not to be intimidated by their threats. The downside is that it's a pain in the butt to keep responding to their letters but it has to be done.
.
This is what's known as lawful rebellion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 12:29:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 12:22:14 PM
I have tried it, Jim. In three years, the worst that happened was an inspector turning up at my door. I said politely to him "sorry, not interested," and closed the door. The result? A letter from the TV Licensing company saying they'd contact me in two years with another invitation to purchase a license. No fine, no criminal record. As soon as they know that you know their game, they back off.

OK. Whatever you did magically circumvented the criminal justice system, but the 140,000 people (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9154568/Thousands-in-court-every-week-for-not-having-a-TV-licence.html) who did get a criminal record in 2012 suggest that your example is the exception rather than the rule.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 August, 2014, 12:55:49 PM
(https://s3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/dP0gZxxr3BP8ZZunRsEjhw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0yNDA7cT03OTt3PTQwMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_uk/News/skynews/gettyimages-453236676-1-400x240-20140806-130203-316.jpg)

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 01:08:04 PM
"Magically circumvented the criminal justice system"? How? What loss, harm or damage did I cause? Which lawful contract did I breach? Which lawful bill did I refuse to pay? In which way did I act dishonestly?
.
I do like the word "magically", though, as it puts me in mind of what Alan Moore says about words ("spells") having power. Legislative law is all about using the correct "spells" in the proper way.
.
I did not circumvent the law, I wielded it. Those 140,000 people were convicted because they succumbed to legislative law and ignored the basic common law of this country. The law does not belong to the courts, to the police or to the government - the law belongs to all of us (ergo, 'common law') and we must each learn how to use it properly.
.
I see myself as an explorer of the law, an explorer of freedom and an explorer of responsibility. Undoubtedly, my explorations have led me to a difficult and lonely place but that's not reason enough to make me give up.
.
And just to be absolutely clear, I neither expect nor want anyone to follow my example. In many ways I have no idea what I'm doing or where I'm going and when my knowledge fails, which happens fairly often, I rely on instinct.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 August, 2014, 01:57:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 12:29:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2014, 12:22:14 PM
I have tried it, Jim. In three years, the worst that happened was an inspector turning up at my door. I said politely to him "sorry, not interested," and closed the door. The result? A letter from the TV Licensing company saying they'd contact me in two years with another invitation to purchase a license. No fine, no criminal record. As soon as they know that you know their game, they back off.

OK. Whatever you did magically circumvented the criminal justice system, but the 140,000 people (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9154568/Thousands-in-court-every-week-for-not-having-a-TV-licence.html) who did get a criminal record in 2012 suggest that your example is the exception rather than the rule.

Jim

Sharky likely looked like more trouble than he was worth to the tv licence bod - as you yourself have opined as being the case in the discussion of contract law, Jim.  TV licencing payment is enforced by a third party and not the BBC themselves, and common practice in debt recovery on a large scale isn't to investigate and identify who has the means to repay their debt, but to keep hounding those most likely to be intimidated into paying regardless of their means.

I mentioned it before back in the sands of time of this thread how it came to light in Northern Ireland when they tried to introduce water bills as a separate charge on every household, someone in an official capacity asked the debt recovery firm employed to enforce bill payment how they would do this in the short and long term, and then someone promptly posted the polite and workmanlike response to the local media: in it, the firm explained they had a standard practice of victimising the most vulnerable members of society who owed them money as an example to everyone else - the elderly, the disabled, the poor, single parents, immigrants, and those with mental problems: in short anyone likely to react poorly to stress or authority figures - in order to force people to get in line when they see that others were being prosecuted, and this would be most important in the early days - not recovering what was owed, but deliberately seeking out the scalps of those who couldn't pay in order to legitimise the charge and create an atmosphere of fear, but if you deal in intimidation and fear, it goes both ways - Sharky likely scared the licencing bods off by appearing like he'd keep fighting his corner regardless of what the outcome may be, so they probably buggered off to find a heavily-in-debt single mum to bully instead.

It's worth noting that the water charge was not asked for by the public, overwhelmingly opposed, and already being covered by existing council and service taxes, so that people would be racking up a debt for something they'd already paid for and for which they had not entered into any contract.  What killed it* in the end wasn't shame, honesty, or concern for the will of the electorate, it was the fact that over 90 percent of the population wasn't going to pay and no-one wanted to carry the can for that.  Like many others, I for one was greatly disappointed that a government comprised of terrorists, religious fanatics, racists, and (worst of all) communists has not produced a political system that works in our interest.


* I say "killed", but it's merely been pushed back a few years while politicians find a way to introduce it by stealth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 August, 2014, 05:01:12 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 07 August, 2014, 01:57:39 PM
Like many others, I for one was greatly disappointed that a government comprised of terrorists, religious fanatics, racists, and (worst of all) communists has not produced a political system that works in our interest.

I read every one of your glorious posts in eager anticipation of the topping sentence, dripping with sarcasm. The longer the post, the greater the building excitement inside me. You never let me down, and this - this, Professor - is a particularly fine example.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 August, 2014, 05:15:04 PM
why is it a criminal offence not to pay? its alright comparing it to  nhs and education but surely those are necessities rather than an entertainment service?

  sharky cant be touched now all he has to do is weigh anchor! ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Grug on 07 August, 2014, 05:15:04 PM
why is it a criminal offence not to pay?

Reading comprehension really isn't your strong point, is it? I specifically said I wasn't discussing the rights and wrongs of whether it was a criminal offence, only that it was.

I can see both sides to the argument, TBH. It seems like overkill to give people a criminal record for non-payment, but by the same token, the BBC argues (with some cause) that more people will fail to pay which just mean less money for the Corporation to do stuff.

And, as I say, the Tories current zeal for BBC 'reform' is more about weakening the BBC to give more power to Rupert Murdoch than it is any real concern for modernising the organisation.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 August, 2014, 05:33:15 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 05:28:13 PM
Quote from: Grug on 07 August, 2014, 05:15:04 PM
why is it a criminal offence not to pay?

Reading comprehension really isn't your strong point, is it? I specifically said I wasn't discussing the rights and wrongs of whether it was a criminal offence, only that it was.

I can see both sides to the argument, TBH. It seems like overkill to give people a criminal record for non-payment, but by the same token, the BBC argues (with some cause) that more people will fail to pay which just mean less money for the Corporation to do stuff.

And, as I say, the Tories current zeal for BBC 'reform' is more about weakening the BBC to give more power to Rupert Murdoch than it is any real concern for modernising the organisation.

Jim

you said  "only that it was" and I asked "why?"  if you are going to make personal comments on peoples reading comprehension perhaps you should take your own advice ?
didn't molcher make a post about making personal comments?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2014, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: Grug on 07 August, 2014, 05:33:15 PM
you said  "only that it was" and I asked "why?"  if you are going to make personal comments on peoples reading comprehension perhaps you should take your own advice ?

That's a fair point. I seem to spend an inordinate amount of time correcting people's —often wilful— misreadings of my posts so I'm a little over-sensitive about it. That was snide, and I apologise.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 August, 2014, 05:44:50 PM
hugs all round!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 August, 2014, 05:53:21 PM
Just how many Israeli tourists does Bradford get anyway? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMSM5vvAmYs)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 August, 2014, 09:59:06 PM
re the TV license- I've also read and watched some information from various activists on youtube who have pointed out that the BBC is in breach of their own contract with the UK government, which (apparently) forbids them to turn a profit out of public funding. Apparently again, this is something they ignore which makes that contract null and void, with the knock on effect of making any contract  based on it with the public an illegal and unenforceable contract.
I'm not up on the legal rights and wrongs of this line of argument, but I am aware it exists and is being used to combat both prosecution and paying the license fee.

As to the morality of the licence- well they use the money to help fund the cover up of activities of paedos, sexual harrassers, rapists and all manner of dodgy bastards. If I thought I could get away with it, I'd wouldn't pay either. As it stands, I'm not sure enough of the legalities to  give it a whirl.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 August, 2014, 09:50:22 AM
The police and the politicians are the ones using your public money to hide perverts and criminals. Despite all the scapegoating it doesn't matter how much money you throw at something if a bent copper or his boss isn't around to pick it up off the floor.

The BBC turns a profit that is reinvested into the corporation, not paid out to shareholders. High salaried managers and 'stars' notwithstanding.


(BTW it's not that I don't think there's anything to criticise but the scapegoating by vested interests who set a far lower standard - where was the crusading champion of the Sun when it was treating Jimmy like a national hero eh? - drives me up the wall. Plus most every discussion involves a ridiculous amount of hearsay, not least of which comes from various activists.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 August, 2014, 12:47:57 PM
I used to think the BBC was worth it for their news services alone, but their Gaza coverage was disturbingly pro-Israeli to the point they were continuing to report stories that had been proven false.  Then there's their baffling blanket coverage of a hard-right party with no MPs in parliament during an election season, and now the election is over and said party has no more need of publicity, the coverage has dried up - so much for not having any political agenda.
Without provable impartiality or at the very least some accountability, I think BBC news has no more validity than RT, and as such should go PPV.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 August, 2014, 01:00:15 PM
Yes, it is definitely slipping. Particularly in regards to Gaza. I recall it being toothless but relatively even during the last murder campaign.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 09 August, 2014, 03:16:47 AM
Christ, Shark. Get a lawyer and believe his or her advice, will you? Your understanding of basic legal principles is flawed in several ways. You worry me sometimes. I really hope it's all a joke.

Some examples:

Legislation supersedes common law. There are thousands of legal precedents to show it.

Contracts are null and void when they involve obligations that break the law. That includes the common law.

You can't bill someone for services they didn't request. It's banned under legislation. Unsolicited Goods and Practices Act, as I recall. The basis of your relationship with government services isn't contract law.

All that is just half-remembered stuff from law school long ago. Dr X is the real expert, of course. But... The things you say are just fantasy. Please stop being daft and hurting yourself with battles you can't win.

I bet you're Grant in a fiction suit.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2014, 06:36:51 AM
Legislation does not supersede common law. Common law is the Basis of legislative law. If, for example, the government passed legislation requiring everyone over the age of 60 be euthenised, would that mean that murdering the over 60s is suddenly legal? Of course not.
.
Also, I have a lawyer working on the police case for me and he understands my arguments and my outlook. The fact that few people understand or agree with my position is quite wearing and does get me down - but I will not give in. Win, lose or draw, this is a struggle I have to undertake. Simply sitting back and trusting to the opinions of others is lazy and dangerous. I was given a mind of my own and, for better or for worse, I intend to use that mind as best I can.
.
Sure, maybe I'm wrong and will end up living in a ditch, or worse. But, what if I'm right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 August, 2014, 12:04:18 PM
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/israeli-deputy-ambassador-accuses-irish-group-of-antisemitism-30493770.html (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/israeli-deputy-ambassador-accuses-irish-group-of-antisemitism-30493770.html)

Well, now, Mrs Modai, maybe it's time to grow the fuck up and stop playing the anti-semitism card whenever someone opposes genocide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 August, 2014, 02:26:13 PM
The anti-semitism card is invaluable to Israel's defence of their actions because - they believe - it allows them to play the victim.  Modai wants and needs the increasing tide of anti-semitism that Israel's actions have caused in the rest of the world as political capital, and I don't believe for one second she or her rich mates give two fucks about dead Israeli civilians or conscripts - but to give credit where it's due, she did at least have enough sense to not actually dance on the graves of those murdered teenagers for supplying the pretext for the current offensive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 09 August, 2014, 02:50:04 PM
Trout and Jim yesterday.

(http://www.mierdasacontecem.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/tumblr_inline_mhhn2yrjMJ1qz4rgp.gif)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2014, 02:54:29 PM
Makes me laugh. A Semite is a member of any of the peoples who spoke or speak a semitic language, including Jews and Arabs. The term "anti-Semitic" therefore has nothing to do with being simply anti-Jewish. "Anti-Zionic" would, to me at least, make far more sense and be far more accurate. Still, I guess bodies like the Jewish Defence League and such know what they're doing...
.
Control the language and control the debate. Orwell would be proud.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 August, 2014, 01:54:01 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2014, 06:36:51 AM
Legislation does not supersede common law.

Um, it does. The doctrine of supremacy of Parliament says so. Millions of people obey laws laid down in legislation that contradict outdated laws that grew up from old traditions. Honestly.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2014, 06:36:51 AM
If, for example, the government passed legislation requiring everyone over the age of 60 be euthenised, would that mean that murdering the over 60s is suddenly legal? Of course not.

Yes, it would. Arguably, if it breaches the Human Rights Act (based on EU law) then legislation can be struck down by the courts, but Parliament can pass any law it wants. Parliament makes the law. It's what it's for.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2014, 06:36:51 AM
But, what if I'm right?

You're not right. Sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 06:56:19 AM
Oh well, so all those law books I read must have been wrong, then. Guess I'll just have to resume the normal position of head down, arse up, cheeks spread and gob shut.
.
Parliament can pass any laws it wants but that doesn't mean I have to comply. The idea that only parliament can make law leads to things like the Holocaust, forced sterilisation and the Spanish Inquisition. Parliament is comprised of human beings just like you or me, with no more powers or rights than the rest of us. To believe that these people have supremacy is to believe that everyone else is insignificant and powerless.
.
Still, if that's what people want then that's what they'll get.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 August, 2014, 12:02:53 PM
Shark, of course you don't have to comply (you have free will); how ever if the individual chooses not to comply with the law then they are subject to the penalties commensurate with such non compliance. Z

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 12:47:03 PM
So, you regard non-compliance as being no different from criminality? That means that if the government passes a law requiring me to kill my neighbour I would be just as guilty for refusing to comply with that law as I would be for killing my neighbour under my own authority.
.
Do we not all have a right, even an obligation, to oppose unlawful legislation? I think that we do. I think that we must.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 August, 2014, 01:40:03 PM
Shark, I do regard non compliance as different from criminality, the law makers and enforcers don't. I didn't regard the poll tax (I lived in London back then and marched against it) as good law; I didn't regard the myriad laws in force in NI when I was young as good law and opposed those (legally).
Nothing but endless public pressure on the law makers changed the stance on these bad laws. The whole thing about them is they are unenforcable because they are bad, both in moral intent and usually their basic construction and are generally ended by way of protest and or testing in either national or European Courts.
The concept of extreme laws such as that used in your example are normally procluded by constutional ordinance again on a national level or a European level. 
So to sum up both you, I and the commonweal in general have not alone a right but an obligation to resist bad law. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 August, 2014, 03:36:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 06:56:19 AM
Parliament is comprised of human beings just like you or me, with no more powers or rights than the rest of us. To believe that these people have supremacy is to believe that everyone else is insignificant and powerless.
.
Still, if that's what people want then that's what they'll get.

Exactly. It's all about democracy. I expect this thread contains opinions about the issue, but the idea is that people express their views democratically, and that is the basis upon which Parliament passes laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 03:51:52 PM
So, for the minority, or those who vote for the losers, there are no rights under the law? That's just "might makes right", isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 August, 2014, 04:06:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 03:51:52 PM
So, for the minority, or those who vote for the losers, there are no rights under the law? That's just "might makes right", isn't it?

Close to giving up here.

Duly elected representatives are there to act on behalf of all people in their constituency, however they voted. It's a pledge that's often made in election night victory speeches.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 August, 2014, 04:26:52 PM
Shark, how can a person who chooses not to vote or votes for the losing party have no rights under the law. At the start of each parliamentary cycle all laws in place are not negated and a tranche of new laws put in place by the governing party.
The governing party rules and indeed legislates within a framework that being a constution (written or unwritten). Western constitutions were framed by our forbearers for the very purpose of enshrining certain immutable rights for the citizens of the state. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 10 August, 2014, 04:36:56 PM
I think what the Shark means is that those who vote for the losers will not get full representation, purely because the winning/opposite party had no intention of dealing with the issues that said voters wanted!

I take the Trouts point about elected officials having to represent their whole community, but I still feel they will push their own party's agenda over the wants/needs of the wider community.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 August, 2014, 04:41:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 03:51:52 PM
So, for the minority, or those who vote for the losers, there are no rights under the law?

Seriously - you honestly think that is what's being said? Or are you deliberately misrepresenting here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:43:29 PM
Don't give up, Trouty, I'm enjoying this debate.
.
That's all very well in theory, but the truth is that if 51% of the people (who bother to participate) vote for a party who pledges to, say, ban fox hunting then 49% of the people have no right to hunt foxes, even if they've been doing it for centuries..
.
Again, that's not law, it's mob rule.
.
And, as a snide aside, since when have we believed election night victory speeches?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:48:28 PM
"No rights under the law" was a poor choice of words on my part. "No choice but to accept new legislation" would have been more accurate, I think.
.
Sorry about that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 August, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:43:29 PM
And, as a snide aside, since when have we believed election night victory speeches?

Since I got to know people who make them, and decided I like, respect and believe some of this people.

It's all well and good to make radical statements on the internet, but it's quite another thing to invest time and energy in the political process in a positive way and to try to effect change. Leaving aside any cynicism about British political parties, I have more respect for someone who engages with the public and offers themself as their potential representative than a man who refuses to participate in society because he has unusual political views.

Arguing with bailiffs through the letterbox is not participating positively in society, in my view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 August, 2014, 04:52:09 PM
'Shots fired'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:55:26 PM
No, a bailiff arguing with me through my letterbox is not participating positively with society. (I know that's not what you meant but I just thought I'd turn it around.)
.
And now it's bedtime - the nightshift beckons!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 10 August, 2014, 05:09:17 PM
The bailiffs and others involved in your case, including the council employee who was named on this thread, are people with lives, doing their jobs and trying to get by in difficult times. THeir conduct may not make them likeable but I do, at least, respect the fact they have jobs, pay taxes (presumably) and, in their own way, participate in society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 August, 2014, 05:22:45 PM
Participating in society isn't necessarily a good thing if that participation involves circumventing established rules meant to make society function better, like using police officers as bailiffs, encouraging them to illegally enter homes, or to fit up harmless bampots.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:43:29 PM
That's all very well in theory, but the truth is that if 51% of the people (who bother to participate) vote for a party who pledges to, say, ban fox hunting then 49% of the people have no right to hunt foxes, even if they've been doing it for centuries..
.
Again, that's not law, it's mob rule.

It's also Michael Ironside's ethics class at the start of Starship Troopers when he explains that democracy is no different than fascism because they both rely on playing the numbers game and using force.

Seeing as you're not using your vote, Sharky, can I have it?  I'll give you a tenner for it, and the walk to the polling booth will do you and the dog good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 August, 2014, 05:24:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 04:43:29 PM
the truth is that if 51% of the people (who bother to participate) vote for a party who pledges to, say, ban fox hunting then 49% of the people have no right to hunt foxes, even if they've been doing it for centuries..
.
Again, that's not law, it's mob rule.

No, that party would have to propose a bill, which would become an act, which would both be voted upon (and amended) by all members of both houses of parliament. I'm pretty sure 100% of the fox community would vote for such legislation if it came down to a referendum, or do they not count?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 August, 2014, 05:41:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2014, 12:47:03 PM
That means that if the government passes a law requiring me to kill my neighbour I would be just as guilty for refusing to comply with that law as I would be for killing my neighbour under my own authority.
.


as most of his neighbours are ducks at the moment can you murder a couple for me please? I like a bit of hoisin sauce! yum yum!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 10 August, 2014, 06:53:51 PM
I'm worried about Shark's Granny, neighbours and everyone over 60 - seems like he has designs on them all!

I'm all for a principled stand over the perceived injustice of the licence fee but that support wanes entirely if it doesn't involve boycotting all of the BBC's output. If not, are you not just a parasite watching Dr Who on everyone else's ticket? If everyone took the same stand there would be no Dr Who for anyone.

The social contract that exists between us all dictates we must obey the laws of the land - if we don't like them we can votes for representatives who hold the same views. If they don't get in the majority rules. If we all refused to pay taxes there would be no NHS, welfare state etc.

To be honest I don't see why the government doesn't do away with all compulsory, but self bought taxes such as the licence fee, road tax and third party motor insurance and just add it to income tax. Less bureaucracy, less collection cost and less illegality.

You could argue 'Well I don't drive a car' but to steal Jim's point I don't have kids but still pay for schools and am happy to do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 August, 2014, 10:37:54 PM
Good to see the Kurds are helping the potential genocide candidates off that mountain. A small light in an extremly dark part of the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 10 August, 2014, 11:03:47 PM
QuoteGood to see the Kurds are helping the potential genocide candidates off that mountain. A small light in an extremly dark part of the world.
I'm not one for this thread much, but with the Arab Spring turning into a horror story, Gaza/Israel, Ukraine, and Iraq, horrific times for those that live in those countries. For our countries faults and problems, at least we can live relatively safe and peaceful lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 12:19:53 AM
It's a safe country if you've got money. If you haven't, you have to either use the false money the government borrows from the banksters or get your door stove in BY THE POLICE and thrown out onto the street, your possessions destroyed.
.
I would be against me too if it weren't for the fact that I got turfed out of social housing, which is meant for those who can't afford a private tenancy or to buy their own property, because I couldn't afford it. If the council's so strapped for cash, why doesn't it claim 'benefits' instead of making me do it?
.
Society is an excellent thing, so long as one can afford to be a part of it and is willing to turn a blind eye to the crimes of the 'authorities'. I, and many like me, have been all but expelled from the very society we were born into because we have few resources. This must change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Buttonman on 11 August, 2014, 12:40:24 AM
I'd guess that you'd know more about your own circumstances than the council would.

If you don't want to play by society's rules that's fine, but you can't complain when things don't go your way. I don't like working 9-5 and paying 50% of my hard earned in taxes but that's the price of being part of a civilised society where the NHS, benefits system amongst other things are taken for granted by those who decry the system that keeps them fed and warm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 11 August, 2014, 01:47:37 AM
What BM said. I fucking hate filling in forms but I claimed housing benefit when I had no other option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 August, 2014, 11:31:24 AM
Doing my best not to get sucked back into this veritable Afghanistan of a thread, but like all the great powers, failing in my turn.  I think that Sharky is perfectly aware of the contradictions in his position:  continuing to reject on principle the supports and present structures of the system he wants to change may make the task infinitely harder, but that doesn't mean that he loses the right to assert his beliefs, demand basic decency from his fellows, and to complain loudly when it is found lacking. 

I'd never ask him to stop questioning and arguing and resisting, but again I'll say that I wish that he would accept that the basis on which he opposes the system and the nature of its authority is far too broad to permit any meaningful exchange in the matter of T. L. Shark vs. Local Agents of Global Hegemony, and instead play along with the silly games of local bureaucracy so that he is in a better position to agitate and inspire, rather than expending his energies struggling with ongoing daily adversity.  By insisting on his own interpretations of law and the specifics of financial transfers he's speaking a language that his opponent cannot (allow itself to) understand or respond to, and that makes all attempts to persuade or outwit it hopeless.

In trying to stop a runaway train, would you be more effective standing in front of it or getting back into the cab and pulling some levers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 August, 2014, 12:18:43 PM
402 fucking pages of this. We are all masochists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 11 August, 2014, 12:22:29 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 August, 2014, 12:18:43 PM
402 fucking pages of this. We are all masochists.
Just change the number of posts per page and it's only 242.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 August, 2014, 01:18:23 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 11 August, 2014, 12:22:29 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 August, 2014, 12:18:43 PM
402 fucking pages of this. We are all masochists.
Just change the number of posts per page and it's only 242.

and that's how he gets jobs in Swisserland
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 04:51:40 PM
it's not about not paying but how much, what for and what with. I'm sure you're all sick of me going on about how we are forced to use privately created money, which is orders of magnitude more expensive than using publically created money, but that's at the core of my beef with the government.
.
So long as we continue to faff about with this primitive monetary economy then I'm perfectly willing to join in - but I will never agree with people being Forced to pay more than they can afford for Necessities. Nor do I support the idea that Everything must be run for profit. They've already sold large chunks of things that belonged to the people; the mines, public transport, bits of the NHS, police and other services, waste collection, infrastructure (why, for example, do you have to pay BT for line rental when you already own the lines, or a standing charge for water when you already own all the pipes?) and the Post Office. Hell, I think they're even planning to sell off the motorways - but only After all those miles of purple conduits (which I'm told contain detectors so that motorists can be charged by the mile) have been installed at our expense. I think it's obscene.
.
Profit from luxuries by all means but not from money, social housing, basic foodstuffs, water, basic energy, social benefits, public transport, justice or healthcare and suchlike. So long as huge chunks of our taxes go towards private corporate profits then I'm going to pay as little as possible.
.
To benderise Henry David Thoreau, I want a system that I'm morally happy to support. The current cesspit of a system is not it, so I won't support it willingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 August, 2014, 05:16:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 04:51:40 PM
Profit from luxuries by all means but not from money, social housing, basic foodstuffs, water, basic energy, social benefits, public transport, justice or healthcare and suchlike.

See?  Perfectly sensible position, even if you might not agree with it (I do).  These are things that could be fought for, but doing it from outside a political/societal set-up is effectively impossible.

The pesudo-cited Thoreau was able to pretend to remove himself from society in his hermitage at Walden, but only because he was buffered from hardship by wealth and connections: Emerson owned the land he lived on, and his musings on the 'home economy' of his new life (which only lasted two years) don't take account of the countless things he drew from his place in a wider society that was not bound by his essentialist project: he was as bound to the status quo of the world he stepped away from as anyone.  He's a great thinker and writer, and many of his ideas are fascinating and truly admirable, but ultimately he was just another rich tourist in the lifestyle he espoused.  That's not an option that many of us have.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 August, 2014, 05:37:26 PM

The site of Thoreau's rural isolation was also just a short walk from the nearest town, which is, like, a metaphor or something.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 06:21:14 PM
I admit I haven't read much Thoreau, just a handful of essays, and although I wasn't aware of what Tordels knows I did suspect something along those lines. The thing is, I don't want to be removed from society, to live apart from everyone else - I love being a part of this country. Well, mostly anyway - even though it might not seem like it sometimes.
.
I think I've said before that I've realised that I can't change the world - I can only change my world. There are no politicians or parties or organisations that represent my position and so my only option is to represent myself, stand up for myself and do the best that I can with the limited resources, knowledge and intelligence available to me.
.
Furthermore, I'm not a leader and nor do I want to be - but that doesn't mean that I want to be led, either. I'm perfectly capable of leading myself, as are the vast majority of people, I think. Maybe that means that I want the best of both worlds but then, who doesn't? There's no point having cake if you can't eat it (unless you own a cake shop, I suppose).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 August, 2014, 06:40:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 06:21:14 PMThe thing is, I don't want to be removed from society, to live apart from everyone else - I love being a part of this country.

Apologies, didn't mean to insinuate that at all - for 'society' I suppose I meant 'a system whose present state I reject', rather than co-existence with one's fellows.  Thoreau wasn't advocating isolation, but rather the simple life (apart from the odd sumptuous dinner party at Emerson's).

(The most telling thing for me is that the Walden area's biggest claims to fame prior to Thoreau's adoption of it as independent rural idyll was an 18th century massacre of Native American women and children, and the very first action of what would become the US army at North Bridge, Concord at the start of the Revolution (uncoincidently made famous by Emerson's poem as the 'shot heard round the world').  The very simplicity he found in those woods was possible only because of systematic genocide and communal sacrifice under arms at that very location).

(Lest folk mistake me for the kind of person who hungrily read Thoreau as part of the self-education of the young idealist, I recently only discovered him through Kim Stanley Robinson's 'Climate Disaster' SF trilogy which features a character obsessed with his environmental message, and then went on to read Walden, which was surprisingly heavy going but I really enjoyed it).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 August, 2014, 07:12:04 PM
No need to apologise, Tordels, I didn't think you were insinuating anything of the sort. I simply wanted to distance myself from Thoreau's own isolationism. I don't believe that anyone can change their role in society by isolating themselves from it. I think that's like trying to disprove Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by pretending it doesn't exist.
.
Indeed, if it wasn't for my society and its history I wouldn't be in any position to imagine, and strive for, something better. There are a great many good things about our society - not least among them the availability of writings by authors of all flavours. I haven't read any Walden (what would you recommend?) but I have the sneaking suspicion that I'd enjoy John Wagner more! (I'm really quite low brow at heart, to be honest.)
.
Speaking of recommendations, I'd appreciate any suggestions for authors I should read to deepen my understanding of the things I blather on about. There are a lot of clever, well-read people who contribute to this thread (and intimidate me with their understanding and well-readness) and I am always prepared to learn from intelligent, educated people like yourselves. One day, I hope to be intelligent and well-read myself... Gonna' take a long time, though!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 11 August, 2014, 09:46:37 PM
tbbh. It is is disgusting when one member of society deems another member of society unfit for society on the basis that that person has questioned society in the way he has. It is supremacist pure and simple.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 11 August, 2014, 11:03:31 PM
I'm now only reading the parts about cake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 August, 2014, 11:10:02 PM
Quote from: Trout on 11 August, 2014, 11:03:31 PM
I'm now only reading the parts about cake.

Safer than the parts about biscuits (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11CvBKpKbn8).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 11 August, 2014, 11:33:56 PM
Quote from: Hoagy on 11 August, 2014, 09:46:37 PM
tbbh. It is is disgusting when one member of society deems another member of society unfit for society on the basis that that person has questioned society in the way he has. It is supremacist pure and simple.

Hang on, who's supremacist?

And what do you mean by "supremacist"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 05:46:50 AM
Just hold on for one cotton-pickin' moment...
.
There's cake?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 12 August, 2014, 10:51:06 AM
supreme cake!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2014, 11:01:24 AM
The cake is a lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 August, 2014, 11:33:24 AM
The pesudo-cited Mary Berry was able to pretend to remove herself from her kitchen in her hermitage at Walden, but only because she was buffered from hardship by wealth and connections:  Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall owned the land he lived on, and his musings on the 'home economy' of his new cake (which only lasted two minutes) don't take account of the countless ingredients he drew from a wider society that was not bound by his Sponge cake project: he was as bound to the status quo of the world he stepped away from as anyone.  He's a great **nker and writer, and many of his ideas are fascinating and truly admirable, but ultimately he was just another rich black forest gateau in the display cabinet of life.  That's not an option that many of us have when it comes to cake based choices.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 August, 2014, 11:38:08 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 12 August, 2014, 11:33:24 AM
The pesudo-cited Mary Berry was able to pretend to remove herself from her kitchen in her hermitage at Walden, but only because she was buffered from hardship by wealth and connections:  Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall owned the land he lived on, and his musings on the 'home economy' of his new cake (which only lasted two minutes) don't take account of the countless ingredients he drew from a wider society that was not bound by his Sponge cake project: he was as bound to the status quo of the world he stepped away from as anyone.  He's a great **nker and writer, and many of his ideas are fascinating and truly admirable, but ultimately he was just another rich black forest gateau in the display cabinet of life.  That's not an option that many of us have when it comes to cake based choices.

Crumbs!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2014, 11:45:50 AM
Africa minister Mark Simmonds resigns because Ebola happened on his watch: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/11/tory-foreign-office-minister-quits-intolerable-expenses-rules

Okay, that's not true, but my idea makes as much sense as the reason he actually gave with a straight face.  Between him and his wife, he pulls down 104 thousand pounds of taxpayer money and this is not enough, so he quit the job - like I say, the Ebola thing at least makes a kind of sense.  If there are any jobseekers on the board, I think it should be mandatory that you apply for this vacant position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 August, 2014, 01:24:06 PM
As someone who lives in London I want to see him try doing it on a salary that is actually less than his expenses

Who votes for this entitled prick.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2014, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: Mullah Abdul Abderrahman Mohammed Ahmed Abdel Karim El Bear on 12 August, 2014, 11:45:50 AM
Africa minister Mark Simmonds resigns because Ebola happened on his watch: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/11/tory-foreign-office-minister-quits-intolerable-expenses-rules

Chris Mullin offers an entertaining commentary on this here (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/12/90000-not-enough-expenses-mark-simmonds-tories-ministers-wages?CMP=twt_gu). In the comments, someone has taken a look at Simmonds' voting record and notes that he was consistently opposed to any moves to raise benefit levels.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 August, 2014, 01:51:26 PM
The number of people saying "So what, he worked for his money and he wants more, that's life innit" astounds me.

Why do these people exist... how can anyone be so stupendously stupid that they can't even comprehend why Simmonds is a complete hypocrite. How can the same people who whine about "public sector workers" jump to defend greedy MPs like this? MPs who also got £50k for 'private consultancy' with vested interests eager for more slices of the public pie?

How can people not see. It's a Bad World.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 12 August, 2014, 02:36:57 PM
It's the brazenness of it I was amazed by. Maybe he wants more cash, but not to lie about his reason for quitting seems incredible!

When reported by the BBC they did mention that plenty of MPs agree that they need far more expenses - off the record of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 02:43:04 PM
Some of us see. Some of us see quite clearly and more eyes open every day. Unfortunately, a lot of people who see want to bring the government down, destroy it or replace it with something else.
.
Not me. I think that our government needs to be rescued. How? Sorry, no idea. The best I can suggest is to ignore it - suppose they held a general election and nobody voted, kind of thing. If you vote, then you must do whatever the government says (so long as it's lawful) and if you don't vote, then you must run your own life (so long as you do it lawfully).
.
Anyway, back to reality. When do I get my cake? (I believe that cake acts on the portion of the brain called Shatner's Bassoon - or did I dream that?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2014, 04:21:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 02:43:04 PM
Unfortunately, a lot of people who see want to bring the government down, destroy it or replace it with something else.

Would a profound change in our Political System be inherently bad? Part of the problem is that the only Parties that are likely to win are all exactly the same as each other!

Labour gave up the Left for a more Conservative approach. The Conservatives are becoming increasingly hardline against people in genuine need, and the Lib Dems will cosy-up with anyone that will have them.


Not the best democratic system IMO, but the illusion of Freedom will do, as opposed to outright Fascism.

cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2014, 04:26:26 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2014, 04:21:46 PM
Not the best democratic system IMO, but the illusion of Freedom will do, as opposed to outright Fascism.

See Charles Stross's excellent blog post on The Beige Dictatorship. (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/political-failure-modes-and-th.html)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 04:36:06 PM
It's the parties (and their paymasters) that the government needs rescuing from. The system isn't inherently good or bad, it's just a tool like a hammer. Give a sculptor a hammer and you get a statue, give it to a builder and get a house - but give it to a bully and you get threatened and robbed.
.
That might be a simplistic view but the systems we have in place have developed over centuries - there's no point just sweeping everything away because it happens to be being misused at the moment. We just need to figure out a way of making the system work for everyone and not just the few at the top - the bullies holding the hammer, as it were.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 August, 2014, 04:43:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 04:36:06 PM
It's the parties (and their paymasters) that the government needs rescuing from. The system isn't inherently good or bad, it's just a tool like a hammer. Give a sculptor a hammer and you get a statue, give it to a builder and get a house - but give it to a bully and you get threatened and robbed.
.
That might be a simplistic view but the systems we have in place have developed over centuries - there's no point just sweeping everything away because it happens to be being misused at the moment. We just need to figure out a way of making the system work for everyone and not just the few at the top - the bullies holding the hammer, as it were.

I must have swallowed something dodgy at work, because the Shark's starting to make sense.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2014, 04:50:12 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2014, 04:26:26 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2014, 04:21:46 PM
Not the best democratic system IMO, but the illusion of Freedom will do, as opposed to outright Fascism.

See Charles Stross's excellent blog post on The Beige Dictatorship. (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/political-failure-modes-and-th.html)

Cheers

Jim

A very interesting read Jim, thanks. Stross certainly knows his Onions; or Turnips in Politicians case!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 August, 2014, 04:56:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 04:36:06 PM
It's the parties (and their paymasters) that the government needs rescuing from. The system isn't inherently good or bad, it's just a tool like a hammer. Give a sculptor a hammer and you get a statue, give it to a builder and get a house - but give it to a bully and you get threatened and robbed.
.
That might be a simplistic view but the systems we have in place have developed over centuries - there's no point just sweeping everything away because it happens to be being misused at the moment. We just need to figure out a way of making the system work for everyone and not just the few at the top - the bullies holding the hammer, as it were.

Give a Hammer to a Politician and they'll dismantle any Public Service they can get their hands on!

The System needs more Public input, not just far away fools in suits that that have no connection to the very Public they themselves rely on.

I can't see how you can support this system when you regularly claim the right to "Govern yourself"? Without sounding rude, you can't have it both ways as far as I'm concerned, the Philosophys are too incompatible.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 06:32:10 PM
It's not two philosophies, just one. We can all govern ourselves but we need systems in place to keep things like roads, sewers and the emergency services running properly. IMHO, it's the job of the system to enable us all to enjoy the benefits of civilisation, to be there when we need it and to be absent when we don't.
.
So long as the government sees its role as ruling us, like some Medieval court of barons, then I'm not interested in being one of its serfs. The minute it starts putting the  people first I will be it's most ardent supporter but, while it's putting just a handful of people first I simply can't be on its side. If that means that I have to go it alone then so be it.
.
I have had more help off ordinary people, both friends and strangers alike, in recent months than I've had from the government. When I really needed help, the ordinary people were there in spades. The government was there too - but only to kick me while I was down and go through my pockets. So, if ordinary people are so helpful, what the Hell do we need the government for anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2014, 06:41:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 06:32:10 PM
So, if ordinary people are so helpful, what the Hell do we need the government for anyway?

As we've discussed before: your neighbours are unlikely to build any suspension bridges and I would be loathe to allow one of mine to remove my appendix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 07:10:27 PM
Which is why we need a system that works. Also, cannot doctors and engineers be neighbours too? My mother's neighbours are vastly experienced in trauma nursing on one side and a builder on the other. The builder's a bit of a dick, to be honest, but I'd trust him to organise building a modest bridge and I'd trust the two nurses with my life any day of the week.
.
It's not the system that builds bridges and removes appendixes, it's people. The system is there to organise them and make resources available, that's all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2014, 08:13:23 PM
Great link, Jim, thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 August, 2014, 10:03:27 AM
The groundsman at the place where I'm staying just got punched in the face three times by a painter. Three police officers turned up, with pistols on their hips (!), and nobody got arrested. All that happened was that the attacker was asked to apologise to his victim (who has blood all over his mouth) and then the police just went away.
.
I was arrested and incarcerated overnight, assaulted and 'fitted up' for nothing more than refusing to open my front door - nobody got hurt except me. I mean, wtf???
.
It's no wonder the police are increasingly distrusted. What a bloody farce.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 August, 2014, 11:26:14 AM
If it bothers you, you could see if you can get anyone to inquire on your behalf as to the disparity in police response, but not every police officer is some principled superhero willing to buck the system and solve things amicably with a handshake or a stern talking-to, most are just doing a job and sometimes that job involves being bailiffs for local councils.  Some might have qualms, but certain occupations like policing or the army tend to attract a very right-wing type of person and the more liberal or conshie types tend to either wash out or they find a way integrate with the prevailing mindset.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 August, 2014, 12:04:09 PM
I'm not really angry, just disappointed at the apparent disparity. It just seems like law and order is inconsistent, simply a matter of pot luck depending upon what mood the police officers happen to be in at the time. Surely we deserve better.
.
I also found three armed officers turning up to be extremely troubling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 August, 2014, 12:12:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 August, 2014, 12:04:09 PM
I also found three armed officers turning up to be extremely troubling.

No kidding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 August, 2014, 12:44:15 PM
Sometimes I forget how soft and gunshy you mainlanders are - over here cops carry guns all the time and it's worked out just fine.  On a completely unrelated note, there's a small cross not 100 yards from my home that commemorates the spot where a police officer shot an 8 year old to death.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 August, 2014, 06:22:34 PM

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--uXi13flw--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/kaeggvgfrik0a85osa2u.jpg)


This is a cop. In the USA. At a peaceful demonstration by unarmed citizens.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 14 August, 2014, 06:33:48 PM
They might put their hands up higher.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 14 August, 2014, 07:53:18 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 14 August, 2014, 06:22:34 PM

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--uXi13flw--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/kaeggvgfrik0a85osa2u.jpg)


This is a cop. In the USA. At a peaceful demonstration by unarmed citizens.

Its not a real gun, you can see those wee rubber cups on the end of the darts, they can smart you know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 14 August, 2014, 08:26:11 PM
He was aiming at villains like this:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bu9VaaACEAAx7OG.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 15 August, 2014, 09:53:10 AM
One interesting things here is the Pentagon have been giving a lot of ex military equipment to the police.

http://essentialopinion.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/beyond-black-and-white-ferguson-police-brutality-and-warrior-cops/

You start off with a cop with a pistol, like in Inverness, and this is where you end up decades later. Escalation.

The other interesting thing with Ferguson is when they withdrew the military style police last night and sent in the Highway Patrol to work with the crowds and even give out hugs the tension diffused. People have a right to protest peacefully  Long may that continue.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2014, 10:20:10 AM
The Americans would be lost without their guns. What would they use to intimidate old ladies at Wall-Mart or shoot deffenceless young adults with then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2014, 01:47:07 PM
Lynchings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 August, 2014, 02:15:47 PM
The amendment is totally outside any relevance in terms of time or effectiveness.
I assume it was drafted and endorsed for the original (noble) reason that it was a reasonable preposition that an armed citizenry (presumably with muskets, pistols, swords and possibly cannon of some sorts) would have a reasonable chance of deposing a government which oppressed or was inimical to what was set out in the bill of rights or constitution.
This is clearly impossible now, given the massive discrepancy between the arsenal held by the government and the citizen with pistol or rifle.
We are left with the scenario where far too many unvetted, unsuitable persons have a weapon or in many instances weapons to no end (as envisaged by the founding fathers). Hence the scenario we now see wherein ordinary dispute is lethal to the populace in general and whereby the government and it's affiliate state branches is unassailable even if they are or will be the tyrant. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 August, 2014, 02:31:40 PM
Gun advocates are clueless to the reality though.

Be interesting to see how they experienced their inalienable rights if they woke up one morning with a different skin colour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 August, 2014, 02:37:30 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 August, 2014, 02:15:47 PM
The amendment is totally outside any relevance in terms of time or effectiveness.
I assume it was drafted and endorsed for the original (noble) reason that it was a reasonable preposition that an armed citizenry (presumably with muskets, pistols, swords and possibly cannon of some sorts) would have a reasonable chance of deposing a government which oppressed or was inimical to what was set out in the bill of rights or constitution.

It's also worth noting that America at the time had no standing army, and no guarantee that the British wouldn't come back and have another go at reclaiming the territory — the American revolution was greatly aided by France, who pretty much bankrupted themselves in the process. The second amendment was drafted while France was in the grip of a bloody revolution with no real guarantee what the political landscape would look like when the dust settled, so "A well regulated Militia" was most certainly "necessary to the security of a free State", and thus eminently sensible that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Whilst not empowered to speak on behalf of the UK government, I feel broadly confident that a British invasion of the US is fairly unlikely.

Ironically, the situation in Ferguson looks like exactly the kind of government tyranny the NRA gun nuts claim they need their second amendment rights to defend against, and yet...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 August, 2014, 02:45:11 PM
Yes the counter point from the original intent to the present day reality would be laughably absurd if it were not for the at best insanely disproportionate responses to defenceless citizens, or at worst the shaping up of a government which is militarised to such an extent that one is left with little option but to think they are becoming the tyrant feared by the founders. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2014, 04:00:27 PM
When I'm Supreme Chancellor, I'm going to make it compulsory that everyone must carry a sword and practice at least once a week. My stormtroopers, of course, will have plasma blasters in case any of those filthy peasant swordspeople get any ideas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 15 August, 2014, 09:09:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 August, 2014, 02:37:30 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 August, 2014, 02:15:47 PM
The amendment is totally outside any relevance in terms of time or effectiveness.
I assume it was drafted and endorsed for the original (noble) reason that it was a reasonable preposition that an armed citizenry (presumably with muskets, pistols, swords and possibly cannon of some sorts) would have a reasonable chance of deposing a government which oppressed or was inimical to what was set out in the bill of rights or constitution.

It's also worth noting that America at the time had no standing army, and no guarantee that the British wouldn't come back and have another go at reclaiming the territory — the American revolution was greatly aided by France, who pretty much bankrupted themselves in the process. The second amendment was drafted while France was in the grip of a bloody revolution with no real guarantee what the political landscape would look like when the dust settled, so "A well regulated Militia" was most certainly "necessary to the security of a free State", and thus eminently sensible that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Whilst not empowered to speak on behalf of the UK government, I feel broadly confident that a British invasion of the US is fairly unlikely.

Ironically, the situation in Ferguson looks like exactly the kind of government tyranny the NRA gun nuts claim they need their second amendment rights to defend against, and yet...

Cheers

Jim

Sidenote here but these posts just reminded me that Brian Wood's follow-up to Northlanders is going to be a series at Dark Horse about Revolutionary-era America and he has stated one arc will be called "A Well Regulated Milita" and I for one can't wait for this series!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 20 August, 2014, 08:21:35 PM
Just came across this image in regards to the Ferguson USA protests. I don't think I like this.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bva-U6KCYAAxVHS.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2014, 01:08:31 AM
I have my own conspiracy theory as to why the Dredd movie didn't do so well - it was suppressed.
.
Those pesky elites, who ultimately fund just about everything, would love the Judges and MC1 to be a reality but Dredd's too on the nose - showing the dangers of an elitist ruling police force. So they simply ignored it - no media chatter, no buzz, no attention.
.
Contrast the Marvel films, where the US army is ubiquitous and doesn't really bother with international borders. In FF2, the US troops set up in Germany to capture the Silver Surfer with no mention of the German armed forces. A subtle reinforcement of the more "cuddly" form of elite US troops being a global protector with the right to go anywhere and do anything.
.
Dredd is more important today than he's ever been. As a great writer once said, "the job of science fiction is not always to predict the future but, sometimes, to prevent it."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 22 August, 2014, 09:26:20 AM
Deaths from police shootings (latest available year)

(http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/images/print-edition/20140823_USC577_0.png)

Hmmm. I wonder if these statistics could be in anyway linked to the weapons the police are equipped with, and the mindset that engenders?

It's interesting that Deputy chief constable Iain Livingstone considers "Our policing purpose is to keep people safe against all potential threats." to justify the glocks on police hips at routine UK incidents. That is of course exactly the same justification police in Missouri use for lobbing tear gas into your front garden.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/inverness/321446/undefined-headline-477/ (https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/inverness/321446/undefined-headline-477/)

The Ferguson photos accompanying this story really do look like a still from the Dredd film. So whereas Dredd seems to us an exotically satirical fantasy, for many Americans it's simply uncomfortable viewing.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21613272-police-missouri-suburb-demonstrate-how-not-quell-riot-overkill (http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21613272-police-missouri-suburb-demonstrate-how-not-quell-riot-overkill)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 August, 2014, 11:24:58 AM
America, land of the free (not).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 August, 2014, 11:28:12 AM
Land of the free if you fit a narrow criteria. White, rich and famous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 22 August, 2014, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 22 August, 2014, 11:28:12 AM
Land of the free if you fit a narrow criteria. White, rich and famous.

What does one out of three get me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 August, 2014, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 22 August, 2014, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 22 August, 2014, 11:28:12 AM
Land of the free if you fit a narrow criteria. White, rich and famous.

What does one out of three get me?
Not being shot as your not black or any other minority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 22 August, 2014, 12:57:25 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 22 August, 2014, 12:24:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 22 August, 2014, 11:28:12 AM
Land of the free if you fit a narrow criteria. White, rich and famous.
What does one out of three get me?
Anonymous begging letters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2014, 01:41:07 PM
According to this link, people with guns in the USA are far more likely to shoot themselves than anyone else: www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 August, 2014, 02:51:29 PM
Quote from: Montynero on 22 August, 2014, 09:26:20 AM
Deaths from police shootings (latest available year)

(http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/original-size/images/print-edition/20140823_USC577_0.png)


That figure is also highly suspect - it only records how many of these were 'justified'.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-many-americans-the-police-kill-each-year/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2014, 03:55:15 PM
Teach everyone about guns at school - what they are, how they work and the consequences of misuse. Peace through superior brain-power, to coin a phrase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 22 August, 2014, 06:54:29 PM
or a field trip to Iraq and Syria  lets see isis be brave (behind their balaclavas) when confronted by a few pickups of moonshined up southern boys...yee haaa!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2014, 07:07:59 PM
The Nukes of Hazzard
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 August, 2014, 09:33:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2014, 01:41:07 PM
According to this link, people with guns in the USA are far more likely to shoot themselves than anyone else: www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/
.

Not all bad news, then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 August, 2014, 10:04:43 PM

From what I can gather from tonight's debate, an independent Scotland would involve two elderly men interrupting each other and talking loudly while their red faced opponent is stuttering his way to the end of an incoherent sentence.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 25 August, 2014, 10:32:17 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 25 August, 2014, 10:04:43 PM

From what I can gather from tonight's debate, an independent Scotland would involve two elderly men interrupting each other and talking loudly while their red faced opponent is stuttering his way to the end of an incoherent sentence.

Oh, and one points a lot, while the other doesn't like that.

Got sucked into work after the first 30 mins, will now watch the rest. What I had enjoyed was Salmond going walkabout, presumably because - as Father Dougal may be able to tell you - near things are bigger. And possess more clout. The second time he did this it was also clear that this obscures Darling when viewed from the side-camera :) Out of sight, out of mind. Darling did shift to his right and got back into camera shot.

I'm not being shallow by focussing on the choreography; all the points had been made at the last debate. As they will again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 01:04:33 AM
I think Darling shifted to the right a long time ago fungus. Z  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 August, 2014, 06:44:24 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 01:04:33 AM
I think Darling shifted to the right a long time ago fungus. Z 

Bdum-tsh!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 26 August, 2014, 09:25:49 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 01:04:33 AM
I think Darling shifted to the right a long time ago fungus. Z  ;)

Woof!  :P

So I went back to the programme and Salmond was literally laughing that "these are the same points you made in the last debate!". I switched off. Can we bring the vote forward?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 12:15:01 PM
The most important question, in my view, that you Scots should be asking is - will you start creating and backing your own currency interest free or will you be forced to borrow privately created, interest bearing currency? If the answer is the latter then I wouldn't even bother voting because nothing can change for the better. 
.
Follow the money!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 26 August, 2014, 12:20:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 12:15:01 PM
I wouldn't even bother voting because nothing can change for the better. 

Vote 'No' ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 12:38:11 PM
Ah you should plough your own furrow. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 01:08:05 PM
Vote "None of the Above".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 August, 2014, 01:13:36 PM
I find myself coming to this small, peaceful corner of the interweb for moment of quiet reflection.  This morning, i have read comments from concerned No voters and our friends and family south of the border. I've read that Salmon is a bully, because he spoke over a man who was doing the same. I've read that the snp are racists, that nationalists are Nazis. I've read the Scotland is populated by ill mannered savages. I've read calls for a boycott on Scottish goods, that scots should be prevented from holding offices of state, that Scotland should be stripped of its political powers.  I've read that if Scotland does vote Yes; the rest of the UK should do it's best to ruin Scotland financially.
I've read all of these things written by ordinary voters who don't want us to leave them.

Cameron's lovebomb is over. UK is taking its ball and going home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2014, 01:20:21 PM
I was stuck standing on a wet street on a boring, boring overnight shift last night, and followed the... proceedings... on Twitter to keep myself awake.   I have no time for nation states, and with a eye cocked in TLS' direction wonder if the whole thing is just rearranging the proverbial deckchairs, but after reading umpteen zillion tweets on the subject, I formed a pretty clear picture of an abusive co-dependency: Scotland, you need to pack a bag and get the hell out of there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 01:44:09 PM
If you do leave the UK, can we come with you? Pretty please with a thistle on top?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 26 August, 2014, 01:58:47 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2014, 01:20:21 PM
after reading umpteen zillion tweets on the subject, I formed a pretty clear picture of an abusive co-dependency

I hope the shoutiness and apparent anger across the internet daily - Twitter especially - is not representative of real life and real people...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 26 August, 2014, 02:13:18 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 26 August, 2014, 01:13:36 PM
I find myself coming to this small, peaceful corner of the interweb for moment of quiet reflection.  This morning, i have read comments from concerned No voters and our friends and family south of the border. I've read that Salmon is a bully, because he spoke over a man who was doing the same. I've read that the snp are racists, that nationalists are Nazis. I've read the Scotland is populated by ill mannered savages. I've read calls for a boycott on Scottish goods, that scots should be prevented from holding offices of state, that Scotland should be stripped of its political powers.  I've read that if Scotland does vote Yes; the rest of the UK should do it's best to ruin Scotland financially.
I've read all of these things written by ordinary voters who don't want us to leave them.

Cameron's lovebomb is over. UK is taking its ball and going home.

This is why I refuse to be drawn into this shitstorm. It is not worth it.

That is all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 02:23:14 PM
Amen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2014, 02:29:10 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 26 August, 2014, 01:58:47 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 August, 2014, 01:20:21 PM
after reading umpteen zillion tweets on the subject, I formed a pretty clear picture of an abusive co-dependency

I hope the shoutiness and apparent anger across the internet daily - Twitter especially - is not representative of real life and real people...

That in itself is a very good point: opinions formed through reading people's opinions are likely to be similarly devoid of nuance or restraint.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 August, 2014, 02:57:34 PM
I fear that given the mask of the internet, we see the true face of the voting public.

And Sharky, you'd love it here. Our national traits are a distrust of those in authority, financial prudence, and being drunk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 02:58:54 PM
And how many twitterers are real and how many are automated bots or human agents for the various campaigns, factions and interests? Spotty, unpaid interns with whatever colour of politics they fancy making a career in hovering over dozens of media accounts spewing propaganda in the vain hope that, even though they have been told (wink, wink) not to do this, they can invent the most twitterers and achieve the most trends so that they attract the favourable attentions of a Party Mechanic with a spare greasy pole in need of a climber.
.
Or maybe people are simply natural bigots.
.
Good Lord - if I get any more cynical I'll have to stop believing in the water cycle. (Oh wait - we live on a wet planet mostly covered with water in one form or another and we're running out of the stuff; so it looks like skepticism concerning this absurd "water cycle" is already on the agenda. Whaddoyaknow? For once, I'm ahead of the curve!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 03:42:46 PM
And how many twitterers are real and how many are automated bots or human agents for the various campaigns, factions and interests? Spotty, unpaid interns with whatever colour of politics they fancy making a career in hovering over dozens of media accounts spewing propaganda in the vain hope that, even though they have been told (wink, wink) not to do this, they can invent the most twitterers and achieve the most trends so that they attract the favourable attentions of a Party Mechanic with a spare greasy pole in need of a climber.
.
Or maybe people are simply natural bigots.
.
Good Lord - if I get any more cynical I'll have to stop believing in the water cycle. (Oh wait - we live on a wet planet mostly covered with water in one form or another and we're running out of the stuff; so it looks like skepticism concerning this absurd "water cycle" is already on the agenda. Whaddoyaknow? For once, I'm ahead of the curve!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 03:46:25 PM
Oops. Sorry.
.
Tempy - sign me up!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 04:33:33 PM
To be ruled by a thousand tyrants a mile up the road; or 1 tyrant a thousand miles away....Mel Gibson wasn't it? 
F**k it, at least the bastards who'd be screwing ye would be bastards you could upbraid on the street. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 August, 2014, 04:38:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 12:15:01 PM
The most important question, in my view, that you Scots should be asking is - will you start creating and backing your own currency interest free or will you be forced to borrow privately created, interest bearing currency? If the answer is the latter then I wouldn't even bother voting because nothing can change for the better. 
.
Follow the money!

Plan A is to keep the pound as part of an official currency union with what's left of the UK, plan B is to use the pound as our currency without the permission of what's left of the UK.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2014, 05:06:40 PM
Now Sauchie, you know perfectly well that there is no Plan B.  That nice Mr. Darling told us so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 August, 2014, 05:07:41 PM
Don't know anything about Tweets or Twitterers but down here in Middle England all I sense is a complete indifference.  Go! Stay!  Oh! what's for tea, love?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 August, 2014, 05:11:24 PM
Darling Darling seemed to think that every option was a bad one. Maybe he's with the Shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 August, 2014, 06:29:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 12:15:01 PM
The most important question, in my view, that you Scots should be asking is - will you start creating and backing your own currency interest free or will you be forced to borrow privately created, interest bearing currency? If the answer is the latter then I wouldn't even bother voting because nothing can change for the better. 
.
Follow the money!

Was this the sort of top-level global economic insight you gained while shouting through the letterbox at the bailiffs?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 August, 2014, 06:48:33 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 26 August, 2014, 04:38:11 PM

Plan A is to keep the pound as part of an official currency union with what's left of the UK, plan B is to use the pound as our currency without the permission of what's left of the UK.

Plan A isn't going to happen, Plan B is Tory heaven because it means effective UK control of Scotland and perpetual Tory government. Salmond is only pushing this because he can then blame all the economic damage "independence" has caused on the English.

Actual independence would mean a new Scottish currency, as has been championed by some Yes campaigners with a bit more sense than their leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2014, 07:02:06 PM
'Salmond is only pushing this because he can then blame all the economic damage "independence" has caused on the English'

and your evidence is? No where, for god know how long, has he, or the SNP, blamed 'the english'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 August, 2014, 07:03:04 PM
Westminster --> The English.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 August, 2014, 07:19:11 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 26 August, 2014, 01:13:36 PMI've read the Scotland is populated by ill mannered savages.

Please link to this particular source, because that's not something I've come across in any of the Better Together campaign. Or is it just another  wee bit of salmond-esque exaggeration for effect?

Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2014, 07:02:06 PM
'Salmond is only pushing this because he can then blame all the economic damage "independence" has caused on the English'

and your evidence is? No where, for god know how long, has he, or the SNP, blamed 'the english'

The one thing that struck me about last night's debate (and God only knows why Darling didn't challenge it) is that Salmond kept banging on about " a sovereign mandate for the Scottish people" for a united currency, but that's bollocks.

The ONLY mandate they will have is to become an independent country, not that they get to force a monetray union. I did see a scenario where where they win the yes vote, currency union doesn't happen (as the bank of England and the rUK parties have said) and entry to Europe doesn't happen (as the EC president has said), giving the Scots decades of opportunity to blame their tanking economy on those English/Euro bastards.

Best not get into that situation in the first place if you ask me. But I'm only a UK citizen, so I don't get a vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 August, 2014, 07:43:09 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 26 August, 2014, 07:19:11 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 26 August, 2014, 01:13:36 PMI've read the Scotland is populated by ill mannered savages.

Please link to this particular source, because that's not something I've come across in any of the Better Together campaign. Or is it just another  wee bit of salmond-esque exaggeration for effect?


The comment was clearly made within a general discussion of social media, not the official NO campaign:


Quote from: Tempunaut on 26 August, 2014, 01:13:36 PM
I find myself coming to this small, peaceful corner of the interweb for moment of quiet reflection.  This morning, i have read comments from concerned No voters and our friends and family south of the border. I've read that Salmon is a bully, because he spoke over a man who was doing the same. I've read that the snp are racists, that nationalists are Nazis. I've read the Scotland is populated by ill mannered savages. I've read calls for a boycott on Scottish goods, that scots should be prevented from holding offices of state, that Scotland should be stripped of its political powers.  I've read that if Scotland does vote Yes; the rest of the UK should do it's best to ruin Scotland financially.
I've read all of these things written by ordinary voters who don't want us to leave them.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2014, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 August, 2014, 07:03:04 PM
Westminster --> The English.

well that says more about your lack of understanding that the First Minister's
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 August, 2014, 08:27:12 PM
QuotePlease link to this particular source, because that's not something I've come across in any of the Better Together campaign. Or is it just another  wee bit of salmond-esque exaggeration for effect?

As sauchie said, this came from social media rather that the Better Together campaign.  I'm a bit concerned that you thought the other comments could actually be official Westminster policy, to the extent that you didn't question them.

There's also no intention of "forcing" the UK into a currency union.  SNP policy is that a union would be best for Scotland and best for the rest of the UK.  That's the position going into negotiations, since it provides financial stability and clarity, prevents to devaluation of sterling caused by removing 10% of assets from the "sterling-zone", allows for the sharing of national debt, saves Scotland taking about 9% of bank of England assets and saves English companies to £500 million in bank charges it would costs that to trade with Scotland every year. 

Every party in Westminster has the policy of refusing to even discuss the matter.  They complain it would mean bailing out Scottish banks (because of the apparently huge number of investment banks we have in Scotland) in the unlikely event of a second economic collapse - whilst at the same time insisting we are all Better Together to share financial risk.

Also, the EU president didn't say that Scotland wouldn't get into Europe.  It's not his decision to make.  Since Scotland holds massive oil reserves, growing renewable energy potential, huge fishing areas, has been a member of the EU for years anyway, and is more than willing to accept EU immigration and business, I would expect that our European neighbours to be slightly more willing to negotiate with an independent Scotland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 August, 2014, 09:01:42 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2014, 07:49:12 PM

well that says more about your lack of understanding that the First Minister's

I have noticed that nationalists can be absolutely blind to their own euphemisms. I am certain many nationalists don't even realise how anti-English they come across to the English. Or maybe when we take offence at being slagged off relentless by Salmond and his cronies it's just because we're English, and don't understand that he's a loveable crusader for social justice, a concept that in itself we also don't understand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 August, 2014, 09:06:40 PM
Example?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 26 August, 2014, 09:30:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2014, 02:58:54 PMGood Lord - if I get any more cynical I'll have to stop believing in the water cycle. (Oh wait - we live on a wet planet mostly covered with water in one form or another and we're running out of the stuff; so it looks like skepticism concerning this absurd "water cycle" is already on the agenda. Whaddoyaknow? For once, I'm ahead of the curve!)

According to wikipedia, these factors affect the water cycle:

QuoteHuman activities that alter the water cycle include:

    agriculture
    industry
    alteration of the chemical composition of the atmosphere
    construction of dams
    deforestation and afforestation
    removal of groundwater from wells
    water abstraction from rivers
    urbanization

You do not believe any of these affect it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 August, 2014, 09:34:32 PM
Certainly not the the degree foil heads would make you believe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 August, 2014, 10:11:38 PM
It is unfortunate that 7 billion people have a massive need for fresh water for a myriad of different needs. There is a lack of water in, as usual, third world countries, and any that there is will become (if not already extant) a major antagonizing factor in relations. Consider the middle east, with the Jordan river or the Tigris/Euphrates, these rivers main line through war zones at the moment, what if some one threatened the supply, like ISIL and the reservoir recently. What about the water systems in the Indian sub continent or the Nile.
Even consider the UK, there is panic in a dry spell as the population is concentrated in the South and East, the water is in the North (Scotland)!
The answer many would say, would be desalination, the problem iis this is massively energy intensive. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 26 August, 2014, 10:46:49 PM
And it is not just a shortage of water, it is a also a shortage of uncontaminated water. Like look up information on mercury, plastic and radioactive contamination.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 August, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2014, 07:49:12 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 August, 2014, 07:03:04 PM
Westminster --> The English.

well that says more about your lack of understanding that the First Minister's

Don't be obtuse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 August, 2014, 01:25:31 PM
Grennie - the answer to your question is 'no'. Glad I could clear that up for you.
.
As to the water cycle, I was trying (and failing, as usual) to be funny. I recall a documentary (should be online somewhere) called something like "Blue Gold - World Water Wars" which has some interesting insights. For example, short of water Africa exports tons and tons of water to Europe every month in the form of meat and crops and a lot of the rest is contaminated by foreign-owned factories taking advantage of Africa's cheap land and labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 August, 2014, 01:31:49 PM
I thought everyone was running with the joke about the water cycle to be honest!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 August, 2014, 02:01:19 PM
I had one once, but it sank.
.
I'll get me coat...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 August, 2014, 02:02:27 PM
Is that the one between 'rinse' and 'spin'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 August, 2014, 02:09:19 PM
I don't know, Tordels - my kettle's not that advanced.
.
I'll get me... oh wait, I'm already wearing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2014, 11:40:31 PM
hang on ,do we not get a say? Scotland is still part of the uk so we should get to say wether we want them to stay or go .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 28 August, 2014, 12:20:15 AM
Isn't that like saying you're not allowed to leave your job unless your employer agrees to it?

Or a business relationship unless your business partner agrees to it?

Or a personal relationship unless your ex says you can go?

I can keep on going until you see how fucking stupid your point is...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2014, 03:20:50 AM
Grugz asks whether the English should get a say, not final authorization.
.
It's like saying your employer has no right to try to convince you not to quit your job.
.
Or your business partner has no right to point out the terms of your partnership contract.
.
Or your ex has no right to say anything about your personal relationships.
.
I can keep on going until you see how ignorant your point is...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 07:28:22 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2014, 03:20:50 AM
Grugz asks whether the English should get a say, not final authorization.

How would you define 'say' if not as a vote?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 28 August, 2014, 07:54:44 AM
In terms of politics, my limited understanding is that the Scottish Parliament is able to address the most important issues north of the border without recourse to Westminster. So, to me, it seems that the motiviation for complete independence is more like political gerrymandering, rather than a way of actually delivering Scotland the greatest benefit.

I don't really know that much about how it all works, but I think it's a huge shame that the debate - as far as I can see it, and including Monday's televised shouting match - is based almost solely in political and economical terms.

To me, Scotland being part of the UK has a much bigger cultural significance. Our families, friends, partners and colleagues have come together and been formed from all parts of the UK. In the rest of the UK, many of our heroes and leaders are Scottish, and many people from the rest of the UK have had a huge impact on Scotland itself, contributing to both its prosperity and identity. As far as I can see, we have enjoyed living, loving and working together across what are currently completely unemcumbered borders - and I don't understand how changing that offers any cultural or emotional benefit to anyone in the UK at present.

I respect the Scots' right to choose, and mean no disrespect to those intending to vote Yes - fair play to you.

But from here in England, I think it would be a huge shame, for all of us in the UK, if the political ramifications and logistical practicalities of a Yes vote were to endanger that very special cultural and emotional link which we are all currently able to engage with, embrace and enjoy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 08:32:16 AM
sorry if I offended you rennie wasn't intended I just wondered if the rest of the uk should have an opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 08:36:24 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 08:32:16 AM
sorry if I offended you rennie wasn't intended I just wondered if the rest of the uk should have an opinion.

'An opinion' is not the same thing as 'a say' — again, how do you define 'a say' if not as a vote. If you meant opinion, you should be more careful how you phrase things. FWIW, I'm not aware of anyone saying that the rest of the UK can't have an opinion.

(Actually, that's not strictly true. I'm not sure why, for example, so many 'Yes' supporters, on my Facebook feed at least, rushed to condemn David Bowie expressing a pro-union opinion but heartily cheered Dave Grohl expressing a pro-independence one.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 28 August, 2014, 08:36:58 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 07:28:22 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2014, 03:20:50 AM
Grugz asks whether the English should get a say, not final authorization.
How would you define 'say' if not as a vote?

Well, comment obviously. I ignore FB & Twitter and ration my news in recent times and still it's clear that the media is full of comment from all regions? I've certainly heard Banners' eloquent points made elsewhere and because I'm not an island I take them on board.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 08:49:45 AM
of course a say is an opinion and doesn't have to be a vote.
I have a say/opinion  as to wether the wife bought the new washer dryer ,it wasn't a vote as she got it anyway I had a say and an opinion and it didn't matter...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 28 August, 2014, 08:50:02 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 28 August, 2014, 08:36:58 AM
Well, comment obviously. I ignore FB & Twitter and ration my news in recent times and still it's clear that the media is full of comment from all regions? I've certainly heard Banners' eloquent points made elsewhere and because I'm not an island I take them on board.

Was about to tweak that before the Logic Police took it apart limb-from-limb... and see JC addressed all this in the meantime. Carry on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 28 August, 2014, 08:58:31 AM
Nice to know that nations will continue to be able to have these thoughtful, considered debates in the future (http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php/topic,41066.0/topicseen.html)   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 09:06:37 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 08:49:45 AM
of course a say is an opinion and doesn't have to be a vote.

Then I'll ask you again: who was saying you didn't get to have an opinion?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 09:32:30 AM
well I did mean some sort of opinion poll sorry I didn't make that clear .I also should have included a winky to demonstrate the light hearted tone it was meant instead of it being taken soooo seriously ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 10:00:46 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 09:32:30 AM
well I did mean some sort of opinion poll sorry I didn't make that clear .I also should have included a winky to demonstrate the light hearted tone it was meant instead of it being taken soooo seriously ;)

What, like all the polling described here? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014#Polling_in_the_rest_of_the_United_Kingdom)

I think you'd need more than a 'winky' to convey the fact that you didn't mean, or mis-used, pretty much all of the words in your post.

::) <— Mild exasperation, in case clarification is needed.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 10:13:59 AM
look, I've apologised to rennie for any offence caused unintentionally, I'm leaving at that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 August, 2014, 10:17:40 AM
Finally got round to watching that wondrous 'Yes' ad.  I couldn't help but imagine Middenface and the MLA pointing thwup guns at the production crew throughout.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 August, 2014, 10:28:35 AM
I would swap parliaments around so Westminster moved to Holyrood and Holyrood moved to Westminster.

Would make London a lot nicer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:23:21 PM
When people living in Scotland vote "No" to independence, why can't the rest of the United Kingdom have a referendum asking if they still want them in the United Kingdom?  Or is it just the people in Scotland who are allowed a vote to change the current arrangement?  Do the rest of us not count then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 03:27:34 PM
apparently not ,you just phrased it better than I did and I upset folk. ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:32:28 PM
Yes, Grugz, I knew exactly what you meant.  Don't worry about upsetting folk, I do it all the time on here.   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 03:39:00 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:23:21 PM
When people living in Scotland vote "No" to independence, why can't the rest of the United Kingdom have a referendum asking if they still want them in the United Kingdom?  Or is it just the people in Scotland who are allowed a vote to change the current arrangement?  Do the rest of us not count then?

My vow of silence on the matter prevents me from replying to this. I'll get back to you after the people of Scotland actually make their decision.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 03:27:34 PM
apparently not ,you just phrased it better than I did and I upset folk. ::)

So, to be clear then, you did mean "get a vote" when you said "have a say"...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 03:48:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:23:21 PM
When people living in Scotland vote "No" to independence, why can't the rest of the United Kingdom have a referendum asking if they still want them in the United Kingdom?  Or is it just the people in Scotland who are allowed a vote to change the current arrangement?  Do the rest of us not count then?

So, presumably you'd be happy for all the citizens of the current EU states to have a vote if/when the UK holds a referendum on EU membership?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 28 August, 2014, 03:49:10 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 03:27:34 PM
apparently not ,you just phrased it better than I did and I upset folk. ::)

So, to be clear then, you did mean "get a vote" when you said "have a say"...?

Quite. You want a say, you have it (are having it). You can't get a vote because that would be silly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 03:54:10 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 03:27:34 PM
apparently not ,you just phrased it better than I did and I upset folk. ::)

So, to be clear then, you did mean "get a vote" when you said "have a say"...?

no I meant some people might want a say vote or opinion not me personally as long as the price of whiskey doesn't shoot up I couldn't care less either way.but some people might as it would affect the whole united kingdom...tsk ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:54:45 PM
Two points really to that, Jim.  The UK is a political union, we keep being told that we're not in a European political union so it's not the same.  But, having said that, I'd be more than happy for the rest of the EU to have a vote on our membership, because I think I know what the answer would be!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 03:59:19 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 03:54:45 PM
Two points really to that, Jim.  The UK is a political union, we keep being told that we're not in a European political union so it's not the same.  But, having said that, I'd be more than happy for the rest of the EU to have a vote on our membership, because I think I know what the answer would be!  :)

You are right. The UK would never be allowed to leave the EU. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:01:32 PM
Sportsmen bet on that, mate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 04:02:24 PM
did anyone else see the story about vacuums over a certain wattage being banned by the eu?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:05:19 PM
No, surely not!!  The EU interfering pointlessly in our daily lives?  Never!  They wouldn't do that, would they?!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:08:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:01:32 PM
Sportsmen bet on that, mate!

I'm quite serious. If they (all the countries in the EU) had the vote we wouldn't be allowed to leave. The integrity of the project must be maintained. The only way to do it is unilaterally. Thems the breaks. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:14:37 PM
If the vote was only with the politicians I'm sure you'd be right.  But the people?  I'm not so sure.  Anyway, I'd be quite happy to leave unilaterally.  After all, the people in Scotland are getting the chance to leave the UK unilaterally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 04:14:57 PM
it was on the wright stuff last week in the papers section i'll try and find a link when I can be bothered finishing my ebay wrapping
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:18:36 PM
Don't bother, mate, it's true.  I was being sarcastic about the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:30:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:14:37 PM
If the vote was only with the politicians I'm sure you'd be right.  But the people?  I'm not so sure.  Anyway, I'd be quite happy to leave unilaterally.  After all, the people in Scotland are getting the chance to leave the UK unilaterally.

Indeed we are. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:33:10 PM
How do you think it's going to go?  Or should we not go there?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:33:10 PM
  Or should we not go there?!

I went there a few weeks back, it was nice and sunny mostly debunking most stereotypes of Scottish weather I'd deffo recommend going there ;)

saying that we were short changed by the wildlife or lack thereof  a couple of deer as we passed loch Lomond ,loads of birdies a vole and a bat in the bedroom but that was it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:41:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:33:10 PM
How do you think it's going to go?  Or should we not go there?!

OK, I'll bite. It will be a close one but in the end the status quo will be maintained and the rest of the UK can go back to not really giving a shit about what we drunken, quarrelsome, redheaded savages from the darklands of the north do. But that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 04:35:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2014, 04:33:10 PM
  Or should we not go there?!

I went there a few weeks back, it was nice and sunny mostly debunking most stereotypes of Scottish weather I'd deffo recommend going there ;)

saying that we were short changed by the wildlife or lack thereof  a couple of deer as we passed loch Lomond ,loads of birdies a vole and a bat in the bedroom but that was it!

:lol: Nice one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 04:47:06 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:41:05 PM
rest of the UK can go back to not really giving a shit about what we drunken, quarrelsome, redheaded savages from the darklands of the north do. But that's just my opinion.

This particular part of the UK very much gives a shit, given that we're looking at a generation of Tory rule if Scotland chooses independence, which would mean the death of the NHS, the wholesale privatisation of what remains of our public services and a very good chance we'd leave the EU (regardless of your opinion of the politics of this last, the economics of it are madness).

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 August, 2014, 04:49:35 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 27 August, 2014, 11:40:31 PM
hang on ,do we not get a say? Scotland is still part of the uk so we should get to say wether we want them to stay or go

In the event of a YES vote, whatever's left of the UK will get a huge say - a defining say - in exactly what form an independent Scotland would take, the currency it would use, the rate at which Scots could borrow, whether it operates its own central bank or not. We're essentially voting on whether we reckon the Scottish government's negotiating team will be able to pull one over on their English counterparts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 28 August, 2014, 05:17:03 PM
will all the yes voters be wearing blue woad? ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 07:09:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2014, 04:47:06 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 04:41:05 PM
rest of the UK can go back to not really giving a shit about what we drunken, quarrelsome, redheaded savages from the darklands of the north do. But that's just my opinion.

This particular part of the UK very much gives a shit, given that we're looking at a generation of Tory rule if Scotland chooses independence, which would mean the death of the NHS, the wholesale privatisation of what remains of our public services and a very good chance we'd leave the EU (regardless of your opinion of the politics of this last, the economics of it are madness).

Cheers

Jim

I don't disagree with you Jim. However, the Union, in its current form, is (to use a tired soundbite) no longer fit for purpose. This 300 year old union needs to be reformed or it will not survive another 100 let alone 300. The results of the 2010 General Election proved to Scotland that our voices carry no weight and that, when it comes to the Union, our presence is nominal. So why stay? The current referendum is a result of that rejection by our neighbours down south. I don't need to remind you that the Scottish parliamentary electoral system was designed by Westminster to deliver coalition/minority governments and keep the SNP at bay and yet after one year of Tory/Lib Dem coalition misrule we ended up with a majority SNP government in Holyrood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 August, 2014, 10:32:14 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 28 August, 2014, 07:09:35 PM

I The results of the 2010 General Election proved to Scotland that our voices carry no weight and that, when it comes to the Union, our presence is nominal. So why stay?

This is the rub. Some Scots don't believe it's a democracy if English votes count the same as theirs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 August, 2014, 10:34:47 AM
I don't think that being outvoted means that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 August, 2014, 10:46:35 AM
Scotland has already got its own parliament, which is more than what England has.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 12:19:57 PM
I'm not going to say anymore than I already have. Whatever the result things are going to have to change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 August, 2014, 12:29:46 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 29 August, 2014, 10:34:47 AM
I don't think that being outvoted means that.

Being outvoted is not the same as being disenfranchised.

The difference is very important, especially considering Salmond's plan is to hand economic control of Scotland over to the rest of the UK when he tears up the union. That's when you'll find out what it really means not to have a say in how your country is run.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 August, 2014, 06:47:43 PM
You mean when he argues in favour of the Bank of England having pretty much exactly the powers it has at the moment?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
Nah, you know what...
I was going to leave it at that, but over the last couple of days you've made a couple of bizarre claims which you've made no attempt to back up.  First off, you said:

QuoteSalmond is only pushing this because he can then blame all the economic damage "independence" has caused on the English.

right, so people who have spent their whole lives pushing for a particular political stance are, as soon as they get it, going to try to destroy their national economy just to get people to hate the English?  Then you said...

Quotewe take offence at being slagged off relentless by Salmond and his cronies it's just because we're English

Give me a single example of Salmond slagging off the English?  He's complained about westminster, he's argued about politics, but I am not aware of a single occasion when he, or his "cronies" have slagged off the English.

QuoteI am certain many nationalists don't even realise how anti-English they come across to the English...and don't understand that he's a loveable crusader for social justice, a concept that in itself we also don't understand.

You do realise how anti-Scottish your sarcasm sounds?

And then finally...

QuoteSalmond's plan is to hand economic control of Scotland over to the rest of the UK when he tears up the union. That's when you'll find out what it really means not to have a say in how your country is run.

Salmond's plan is to retain sterling and allow the Bank of England to set interest rates.  Exactly what happens at the moment.  If anything, under a shared sterling Scotland could argue for more control of interest rates.  At teh moment, any Scottish voice or concerns can easily be drowned out.

Suppose for a second that every single politician in Scotland was in agreement on a particular issue.  Even then, the fact that they make up a minority in Westminster would allow the rest of the UK to out vote anything they wanted.
Now, of course you can argue that that is how democracy works.  Scots are in a minority and should expect to be treated as such.  That's exactly what the debate is about.

Scotland has it's own legal system, a different education system, a different health system.  It has its own parliament, its own problems.  The question is, do enough of us consider ourselves sufficiently different to be a separate nation? 

It's not about hating the English.  It's nothing to do with the English.  It's about Scotland and how it sees itself in the world.  Its about being responsible for ourselves and trying to solve our own problems, whilst trying to maintain a close working relationship with our nearest neighbours and closest allies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 07:51:58 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
It's not about hating the English.

In some respects, it kind of is. When you'll support France in an England/France rugby match... that shit hurts, man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 07:51:58 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
It's not about hating the English.

In some respects, it kind of is. When you'll support France in an England/France rugby match... that shit hurts, man.

No, Jim, it isn't. This is the crux of the matter - Scottish people are not English. I genuinely hate it that Scottish people have to wrap themselves in the Union Jack to prove their "loyalty."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 August, 2014, 08:53:21 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28986271

FUUUUCK! The UK's terror threat level has been increased to SEVERE. I'm sure you all remember the wholesale slaughter and lawlessness which descended upon our shores for the half decade following the 7/7 attacks, when the threat level never dipped below SEVERE.

You'll want to stock up on shotgun shells and powdered fillet steak rations so you can sit out the latest dark age which is set to begin when 250 skinny teenagers called Muhammed return from their gap year of dysentery and getting fewer shots on target than a nine year old girl with an uzi to take up the offer of a place studying Computer Science/Business at their second choice university.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 29 August, 2014, 08:54:36 PM
They want to push a passport protocol through is all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 August, 2014, 08:55:05 PM
Cloudy with a chance of atrocities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 August, 2014, 09:03:07 PM
Totally agree with 8-Ball on his last post.  Why should the Scots support the English in sport?  They're Scots not English.  I had some great holidays in Scotland; spent half my Army career serving with a Scottish regiment; made some great pals who are Scottish, but support them in a sporting contest, no chance, I'm English!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 August, 2014, 09:05:07 PM

You pair of Muslim apologists sicken me. Maybe when it's too late, and you are dead, you will finally wake up.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 August, 2014, 09:09:09 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
First off, you said:
QuoteSalmond is only pushing this because he can then blame all the economic damage "independence" has caused on the English.
right, so people who have spent their whole lives pushing for a particular political stance are, as soon as they get it, going to try to destroy their national economy just to get people to hate the English? 

I don 't think that was the point he was trying to make. It's not that Salmond is going to deliberately destroy the economy, that's stupid, but if he wins the vote and his pie-in-the-sky economic utopia doesn't happen; if the "scaremongering" turns out be simple prescience;  if rUK and the BoE don't allow currency union (as they have steadfastly said will happen) - then they will never admit they were wrong, they will simply fall back on the ready made excuse of 'English intransigence' to blame for their woes. It's the same way the Tories and Labour excuse every failure by blaming the previous administration, but on a bigger scale (and longer-term).

Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
Salmond's plan is to retain sterling and allow the Bank of England to set interest rates.  Exactly what happens at the moment.  If anything, under a shared sterling Scotland could argue for more control of interest rates.  At the moment, any Scottish voice or concerns can easily be drowned out.

As I can't see a massive U-turn on currency union happening, you'll be left with the "Panama option" -  at the moment the BoE must make those decisions for the interests of the whole UK. After independence, then they MUST make those decisions for the interests of rUK, and if that happens to be against Scottish interests, it will just be tough shit. A national bank will not, can not, be beholden to the interests of a foreign country*

and as for your second point, Scotland "could argue" for the moon on a stick, but it doesn't mean that they will get it.



*unless it's the USA of course. All hail our global economic overlords.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
No, Jim, it isn't. This is the crux of the matter - Scottish people are not English. I genuinely hate it that Scottish people have to wrap themselves in the Union Jack to prove their "loyalty."

Attempt at humour clearly failed -- I honestly don't know how you got to "proving your loyalty" from what I said.

(However, it IS kind of depressing that the Scots will support the French over the English when the English would absolutely support the Scots over the French in the reverse situation.  Your failure to hate the French as much as we do renders you all deeply suspect. If you love them so much, maybe you should all just... oh.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 August, 2014, 09:30:35 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 August, 2014, 09:09:09 PM
if rUK and the BoE don't allow currency union ... they will simply fall back on the ready made excuse of 'English intransigence' to blame for their woes

It's difficult to imagine Scots blaming all our difficulties and defeats on the English for more than 300 years. We're not ones to hang onto old grievances.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 09:40:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
No, Jim, it isn't. This is the crux of the matter - Scottish people are not English. I genuinely hate it that Scottish people have to wrap themselves in the Union Jack to prove their "loyalty."

Attempt at humour clearly failed -- I honestly don't know how you got to "proving your loyalty" from what I said.

(However, it IS kind of depressing that the Scots will support the French over the English when the English would absolutely support the Scots over the French in the reverse situation.  Your failure to hate the French as much as we do renders you all deeply suspect. If you love them so much, maybe you should all just... oh.)

Cheers

Jim

Sorry Jim. You hit a raw nerve. I've been on this planet for about 35 years now and 35 years of hearing and seeing such wonderful things as "Sour faced Scots", "Whinging Jocks", "Chip on your shoulder", "Subsidy Junkies", "One eyed Scottish idiot" etc. from the people south of the border starts to take its toll. Enough is enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 August, 2014, 09:47:11 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_JS5WCO31Y
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 09:56:59 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 09:47:11 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_JS5WCO31Y

Sad but true. ;)
And with that I am done. I think that I have made a mistake commenting on a topic that I was going to stay clear from. I'm even coming around to the idea of going back to lurking in general. This place has become far too quiet and when boarders do converse with each other things seem to escalate in horrible ways. Seeya guys, 8-Ball (Ian Andrew Fleming) signing off. :wave:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 10:05:44 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 09:40:19 PM
Sorry Jim. You hit a raw nerve.

Hah! You think you get a name like James Campbell by accident? My Dad was Scots (born in Shetland, no less) and his side of the family cluster largely in the West round Dumfries & Galloway where I spent twice-yearly family holidays until my mid-teens. There's a part of me that would be desperately saddened if Scotland became a foreign country.

(Not an attempt to persuade anyone North of the border to vote one way or the other, just a personal emotional reaction to the prospect.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 29 August, 2014, 10:14:33 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 09:40:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 August, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 29 August, 2014, 08:40:46 PM
No, Jim, it isn't. This is the crux of the matter - Scottish people are not English. I genuinely hate it that Scottish people have to wrap themselves in the Union Jack to prove their "loyalty."

Attempt at humour clearly failed -- I honestly don't know how you got to "proving your loyalty" from what I said.

(However, it IS kind of depressing that the Scots will support the French over the English when the English would absolutely support the Scots over the French in the reverse situation.  Your failure to hate the French as much as we do renders you all deeply suspect. If you love them so much, maybe you should all just... oh.)

Cheers

Jim

Sorry Jim. You hit a raw nerve. I've been on this planet for about 35 years now and 35 years of hearing and seeing such wonderful things as "Sour faced Scots", "Whinging Jocks", "Chip on your shoulder", "Subsidy Junkies", "One eyed Scottish idiot" etc. from the people south of the border starts to take its toll. Enough is enough.

Blimey....
You think you've got it bad? Try being English! We get shit thrown at us from literally EVERYBODY.

But i'll let you into our secret for coping: We don't give a fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 August, 2014, 10:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 29 August, 2014, 07:44:58 PM
Nah, you know what...
I was going to leave it at that, but over the last couple of days you've made a couple of bizarre claims which you've made no attempt to back up.

Dandontdare has interpreted my position correctly. I think it's largely what Better Together are also saying.

QuoteGive me a single example of Salmond slagging off the English?  He's complained about westminster, he's argued about politics, but I am not aware of a single occasion when he, or his "cronies" have slagged off the English.

He speaks in thinly-veiled euphemisms, of which "Westminster" is one.

Quote
You do realise how anti-Scottish your sarcasm sounds?

I'll give you that one.

I don't consider myself anti-Scottish, and apologise if I come across that way, but I can't deny being anti-Scottish Nationalist Party.

QuoteSalmond's plan is to retain sterling and allow the Bank of England to set interest rates.  Exactly what happens at the moment.  If anything, under a shared sterling Scotland could argue for more control of interest rates.  At teh moment, any Scottish voice or concerns can easily be drowned out.

There is no possibility of a currency union. Every British party has ruled it out and even if one of them backtracked, the English public would never accept it.

Plan B is that Scotland uses Sterling without a currency union, thus ensuring that Scotland's interests would be ignored by the Bank of England.

QuoteSuppose for a second that every single politician in Scotland was in agreement on a particular issue.  Even then, the fact that they make up a minority in Westminster would allow the rest of the UK to out vote anything they wanted.
Now, of course you can argue that that is how democracy works.  Scots are in a minority and should expect to be treated as such.  That's exactly what the debate is about.

Scotland has it's own legal system, a different education system, a different health system.  It has its own parliament, its own problems.  The question is, do enough of us consider ourselves sufficiently different to be a separate nation?

Which is completely fair enough, as long as the terms of separation being voted on are clear. My concern is that the SNP seem to have resorted to telling lies about the rest of the UK accepting a post-independence currency union. We absolutely will not do that, and when we don't it's obvious that there's going to be a massive political problem between the two countries.

QuoteIt's not about hating the English.  It's nothing to do with the English.  It's about Scotland and how it sees itself in the world.  Its about being responsible for ourselves and trying to solve our own problems, whilst trying to maintain a close working relationship with our nearest neighbours and closest allies.

Yeah, and in that spirit, maybe the threat of reneging on Scotland's share of the national debt should be withdrawn?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2014, 11:31:09 PM
I don't think any of us has a say in how our countries are run - we simply vote periodically for the least bad person to run it. The ones who call the shots are the shareholders (which should be us but somehow isn't).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 29 August, 2014, 11:43:03 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 29 August, 2014, 09:30:35 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 August, 2014, 09:09:09 PM
if rUK and the BoE don't allow currency union ... they will simply fall back on the ready made excuse of 'English intransigence' to blame for their woes

It's difficult to imagine Scots blaming all our difficulties and defeats on the English for more than 300 years. We're not ones to hang onto old grievances.

Sometimes sarcasm can be a thing of real beauty  :D

While I'm here, 8-Ball's 'one-eyed Scottish idiot' was another highlight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 August, 2014, 12:54:26 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 August, 2014, 10:39:44 PM
Dandontdare has interpreted my position correctly.

Phew! It's always dodgy trying to elucidate on someone else's opinion, glad I got it right!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 August, 2014, 08:54:16 AM
Absolutely loving that post from Spikes.  He must be a Millwall fan!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 09:17:10 AM
If we vote yes, at least we'll still have an NHS. http://ht.ly/ASX2W
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2014, 09:31:53 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 09:17:10 AM
If we vote yes, at least we'll still have an NHS. http://ht.ly/ASX2W

Doesn't that article refer to NHS England, as the Scottish health service is already devolved?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2014, 09:31:53 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 09:17:10 AM
If we vote yes, at least we'll still have an NHS. http://ht.ly/ASX2W

Doesn't that article refer to NHS England, as the Scottish health service is already devolved?

Yes. And I expect we'll have English health tourists after you allow the Tories to dismantle the NHS...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 August, 2014, 09:42:30 AM
Yes, Richmond, that's probably true, at least they'll be able to wave to the Scots coming the other way looking for work!  :)

Ah! the Daily Mirror and Andy Burnham, paragons of virtue.  Didn't he contract out Hinchingbrooke Hospital, down the road from me.  Turned it round from a failing hospital to a success.  Good on you, mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2014, 09:45:02 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 09:36:53 AM
Yes. And I expect we'll have English health tourists after you allow the Tories to dismantle the NHS...

Maybe, but they'll probably get charged (like English students in Scottish unis) and Scotland will need the money so it could be a symbiotic relationship... ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 August, 2014, 09:49:19 AM
If you regard "Westminster" as a euphemism for "the English", doesn't that give a monopoly on complaining about Westminster politics to people in England, since anyone else could be dismissed as a racist? "Westminster" is no more a euphemism for "the people of England" than complaining about Boris is the same as complaining about Londoners, or disliking the functions of the European parliament means you hate the Belgians. 

For what it's worth, I do think that the SNP's policy of refusing to share BoE debts without a share of BoE assets should be withdrawn.  But then I also think that the Westminster party's policies of refusing to negotiate any of the terms of independence prior to a definitive Yes vote should be withdrawn.  Both sides have reached the point of playing chicken.

We all want the terms of separation to be absolutely clear - they should have been pre-negotiated so that we all know what we will get if we vote Yes or No.  However, the government at Westminster (the British government, meant to best represent the best interests of all of the people of  these islands), has refused to discuss the possibility independence (after pushing for a referendum) and provided nothing more than absurd claims and threats of our impending doom, coupled with vague promises of undefined powers and jam tomorrow. 

And yes, the NHS is already devolved.  The issue is that Scotland is funded by a block grant.  Start with the amount of money that Westminster spends on England, reduce that to a fixed percentage, then remove from that figure the amount of money Westminster decides is Scotland's contribution to projects designed to benefit Britain as a whole (the military, the Olympics, high speed railways from London to Birmingham), and that is the amount of money given to the Scottish government to spend on Scottish services.  It doesnt matter how much money is raised in Scotland through taxation -  a cut in services in England, means a cut in the budget for Scotland. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2014, 10:27:00 AM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 30 August, 2014, 09:49:19 AM
It doesnt matter how much money is raised in Scotland through taxation -  a cut in services in England, means a cut in the budget for Scotland.

I think that's right, although I don't believe there's really a tax and spend option on offer to Scotland. Currency union or sterling parity means being tied to English public spending, a new Scottish currency means weak exchange rates and therefore much higher costs for most products and services whereas adopting the Euro would lead to a world of pain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 August, 2014, 11:10:28 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2014, 10:27:00 AM
a new Scottish currency means weak exchange rates

Particularly if one of the first acts of an independent Scotland is to default on its share of UK sovereign debt. Financial markets don't look favourably on that kind of thing.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 11:21:44 AM
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/clair-ridge-and-scotlands-new-oil-boom/

It'll be fine...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 August, 2014, 11:33:12 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 11:21:44 AM
It'll be fine...

The Americans will probably invade you...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 11:35:22 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 August, 2014, 11:33:12 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2014, 11:21:44 AM
It'll be fine...

The Americans will probably invade you...

Cheers

Jim

We'll be ready...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2014, 02:19:46 PM
I find all this very depressing.  All those centuries of history, innovation and discovery and we're still squabbling over lines on a map and who gets to pay for what. It feels like we're going backwards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2014, 02:34:13 PM
Ah, come on now sharky, you know it isnt quite that simple. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 August, 2014, 03:35:47 PM
They want away from Tory lizards/UKIP trolls, and who can blame them?  I imagine the equivalent would be that bit in Evil Dead where the man cuts off his wanking hand rather than be wanked off by the devil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2014, 03:37:33 PM
Maybe things are that simple but we all think too much to see it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 August, 2014, 04:15:17 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2014, 02:34:13 PM
Ah, come on now sharky, you know it isnt quite that simple.

It is though. What Rich says above is true - it will be fine, but that applies equally whether the vote goes YES or NO. Anyone arguing that Scotland's political class would be incapable of running their affairs as well as Norway, Denmark, Belgium, or any number of small and unremarkable European nations is clearly an idiot or a fucking cunt. Similarly, those arguing that the English have been conspiring to steal our cash and hold us back for centuries are dangerous morons who are looking for someone to tear them a new arsehole.

The Nation is a threadbare concept that looks like it's reaching the end of its usefulness after a little less than 150 years, and squabbling over whether we belong to the UK or Scotland at a time when both of those constructs have never mattered less is preposterous. It really wouldn't make any difference.

The hysterical level at which the debate has been conducted has given the impassioned wankers on either side the opportunity to demonstrate what colossal pricks they really are. If you've spent the last few months furiously arguing that if the vote doesn't go your way Armageddon awaits, or that paradise is promised to anyone who agrees with you, you're a fucking LIAR. I've no interest in sharing ANY country with you or in having the ideology driven, self serving cocks you would elect taking the decisions that affect my life.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2014, 04:49:36 PM
This gets my vote for Rant of the Week. Marvellous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 August, 2014, 05:38:04 PM
Seconded :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2014, 06:26:29 PM
Oh sauchie.....the man; the polemic and the laughter and the approving nod. Z :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 30 August, 2014, 07:02:49 PM
Quote from: sauchie post office on 30 August, 2014, 04:15:17 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2014, 02:34:13 PM
Ah, come on now sharky, you know it isnt quite that simple.

It is though. What Rich says above is true - it will be fine, but that applies equally whether the vote goes YES or NO. Anyone arguing that Scotland's political class would be incapable of running their affairs as well as Norway, Denmark, Belgium, or any number of small and unremarkable European nations is clearly an idiot or a fucking cunt. Similarly, those arguing that the English have been conspiring to steal our cash and hold us back for centuries are dangerous morons who are looking for someone to tear them a new arsehole.

The Nation is a threadbare concept that looks like it's reaching the end of its usefulness after a little less than 150 years, and squabbling over whether we belong to the UK or Scotland at a time when both of those constructs have never mattered less is preposterous. It really wouldn't make any difference.

The hysterical level at which the debate has been conducted has given the impassioned wankers on either side the opportunity to demonstrate what colossal pricks they really are. If you've spent the last few months furiously arguing that if the vote doesn't go your way Armageddon awaits, or that paradise is promised to anyone who agrees with you, you're a fucking LIAR. I've no interest in sharing ANY country with you or in having the ideology driven, self serving cocks you would elect taking the decisions that affect my life.

I'm going to print this out and put it up on my wall.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 September, 2014, 12:25:41 PM
Agreed: No Armageddon (nor paradise), just a long slow slide into Tory/UKIP isolation and more of the same Neocon nonsense, or we could try another way, we thankfully have a choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 September, 2014, 01:01:21 PM
From the 'You couldn't make it up' file: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/03/tony-blair-gq-awards_n_5757280.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&utm_hp_ref=uk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 01:17:24 PM
You only get choices over things that don't matter. How many of us were given the choice over whether to invade Afghanistan or not after 9/11? Just those few of us who own and are in thrall to the military industrial complex and the war profiteers (banks). If we hadn't started invading all over the place when the US went mad, those few of us who got a vote would have missed out on earning trillions.
.
Whether Scotland votes Yes or No makes not one scrap of difference to the money men - for whichever way you go they'll still be fleecing you. You can rest assured that if a Yes vote meant their Scottish revenue dried up and a No vote meant their fleecings continued then there's no way you'd get anywhere near a ballot paper.
.
There is a huge difference between freedom and freedom of choice. Freedom is hard work because you have to devise and implement your own choices whilst tolerating and respecting the (lawful) choices of everyone else. Freedom of choice is piss easy because other people devise and implement your choices for you and boil it down to a couple of simplified options, neither of which is designed to change anything at the top of the societal pyramid. All you have to do is legitimise this bogus process by endorsing one or other pointless option.
.
I really don't care whether countries are independent of each other or not. What I do think is that people, all people, should be independent of countries.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 September, 2014, 01:26:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 01:17:24 PMWhat I do think is that people, all people, should be independent of countries.

Testify.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 02:19:53 PM
.
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 03 September, 2014, 01:01:21 PM
From the 'You couldn't make it up' file: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/03/tony-blair-gq-awards_n_5757280.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&utm_hp_ref=uk
.
Cute link, Rich, thanks.
.
Thought I'd do a little checking on who owns GQ and it turns out to be a company called Conde Nast - which is itself owned by Advance Publishing, a holding company. Researching on this 'phone is a tedious and frustrating affair so that's as far as I got. I don't know who owns Advance Publishing but I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be Disney or CBS or News International or even some of the old familiar Bilderberg names like Rothschild, Morgan, Greenspan, Rumsfeld, Koch or even Blair himself.
.
This award is, in my opinion, just one example of "news engineering". The vast majority of people won't think too deeply about this - we adore awards these days and even those who snort at this news might quietly believe that there's no smoke without fire, or no award without merit.
.
The award's also on the record now so, in 20 years when us old duffers have forgotten all about it students will be Googling Tony Blair for a project and hey presto! Look at all these awards he won - he must have been a heck of a good guy! This is how monsters are turned into heroes, one lie at a time.
.
Reminds me of the time Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for the things he might do. News engineering, that's all this is (and maybe part of Blair's reward for toeing the line - the lifestyle of a globetrotting multi- millionaire all-round-good-guy - the thinking idiot's James Bond, a man to admire and emulate).
.
Blech
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 03 September, 2014, 02:45:32 PM
Philanthropist of the year?

Satire is dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 September, 2014, 03:13:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 01:17:24 PM
You only get choices over things that don't matter. How many of us were given the choice over whether to invade Afghanistan or not after 9/11? Just those few of us who own and are in thrall to the military industrial complex and the war profiteers (banks). If we hadn't started invading all over the place when the US went mad, those few of us who got a vote would have missed out on earning trillions.

Interesting that you pick Afghanistan rather than Iraq.

I supported the toppling of the Taliban, who were pretty convincingly talked about as both partly culpable for 9/11 and a direct threat to UK security.

Iraq, on the other hand, I flatly opposed, as it was nothing to do with 9/11 and everything to do with the settling of old scores, as was obvious to most people at the time. Blair was clever though, he kept the Toreis to the right of him, so there wasn't a credible peace-loving option for UK voters to back at the following election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 September, 2014, 03:32:18 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 September, 2014, 03:13:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 01:17:24 PM
You only get choices over things that don't matter. How many of us were given the choice over whether to invade Afghanistan or not after 9/11? Just those few of us who own and are in thrall to the military industrial complex and the war profiteers (banks). If we hadn't started invading all over the place when the US went mad, those few of us who got a vote would have missed out on earning trillions.


Iraq, on the other hand, I flatly opposed, as it was nothing to do with 9/11 and everything to do with the settling of old scores,

and er, oil?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 03:47:59 PM
I chose Afghanistan because it was first, I seem to recall. The alleged mastermind of 9/11, Osama Bin Liner, was from Saudi Arabia, whose reportedly brutal ruling royal family are backed by the US and bristling with state of the art weaponry and sitting on oceans of cheap oil. Some of the alleged bombers may have been Afghans, the footsoldiers, so I guess it made sense to invade piss-poor Afghanistan rather than super-rich Saudi Arabia.
.
Point is, we never got to vote on it or even pick a target and look how many people have been killed and how much money has been made since. The Scottish vote is unlikely to result in so much murder, mayhem and moneymaking and so you can't do any damage no matter which way you decide to go - so you're being permitted to get involved but within strict parameters decided by others.
.
I don't envy you people north of the border, you're being asked to vote for your favourite impediment - and a lot of you will do it, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 September, 2014, 03:48:15 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 03 September, 2014, 03:32:18 PM
and er, oil?

I wouldn't argue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 September, 2014, 03:54:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 03:47:59 PM
I chose Afghanistan because it was first, I seem to recall. The alleged mastermind of 9/11, Osama Bin Liner, was from Saudi Arabia, whose reportedly brutal ruling royal family are backed by the US and bristling with state of the art weaponry and sitting on oceans of cheap oil. Some of the alleged bombers may have been Afghans, the footsoldiers, so I guess it made sense to invade piss-poor Afghanistan rather than super-rich Saudi Arabia.

I think it was more that Afghanistan was harbouring and supporting Al Qaeda, including Bin Laden, that meant they were first on the invasion list.

Quote
The Scottish vote is unlikely to result in so much murder, mayhem and moneymaking

Optimist! ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 04:06:43 PM
Also, drug exports from Afghanistan to the US fell dramatically under the Taliban. After the invasion, those poppy farmers were soon back in business again and doing better than ever.
.
Some claim that the CIA (or rogue elements within and around that agency) are responsible for most illegal drug imports to the US - both to fund black-ops and keep the underclass addicted, ruthless, stupid and fragmented. Divide and rule. Whether this is true or not I can't say but I do find it depressingly possible.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 September, 2014, 04:33:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 03:47:59 PMSome of the alleged bombers may have been Afghans, the footsoldiers, so I guess it made sense to invade piss-poor Afghanistan rather than super-rich Saudi Arabia.

Was it Farenheit 911 that had the segment with the banker explaining that if the Saudis ever withdrew the vast amounts of money they store in US banks, it would bankrupt the US overnight?  And supposedly after the attacks, Bush Jr walked into his first security meeting and asked how soon they could invade Iraq.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 04:56:45 PM
And the Bush and Bin Laden families have been business partners for a long while. Apparently, the only aircraft not grounded on 9/11 was a private jet travelling from the US to Saudi Arabia carrying - the Bin Laden family on the way home from a business meeting at Bush Oil.
.
The Bush family is no stranger to war profiteering and treason, Old Granpa' Bush having supplied a special synthetic oil to the Luftwaffe during WWII got himself taken to court for it.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 September, 2014, 05:40:53 PM
Treason?  How very dare you, sir!  Bush Jr was one of the few politicians to turn down a stay in tropical Vietnam watching hippie troublemakers like Jane Fonda and Bob Hope while smoking The Weed, and instead remained at home to protect the heart of America from Vietnamese ground troops.  You can Google it - not a single national monument was damaged by Vietnamese aggressors during Bush Jr's tenure in the national guard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 03 September, 2014, 11:37:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 September, 2014, 02:19:53 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 03 September, 2014, 01:01:21 PM
From the 'You couldn't make it up' file: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/03/tony-blair-gq-awards_n_5757280.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&utm_hp_ref=uk
Cute link, Rich, thanks.
When I first saw this headline I gave a little snort of derision and went about my business. The second time, I noticed the GQ part and became quite baffled. Criticism of Blair is fair enough but surely the cufflink fanciers' weekly element renders it all so meaningless it's like getting annoyed about Stephen Hawking being voted Top Gear Magazine's favourite deep sea diver.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 04 September, 2014, 01:45:02 AM
(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/BlairKane2_zps7a528df0.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 04 September, 2014, 12:52:32 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 03 September, 2014, 11:37:44 PM
Criticism of Blair is fair enough but surely the cufflink fanciers' weekly element renders it all so meaningless it's like getting annoyed about Stephen Hawking being voted Top Gear Magazine's favourite deep sea diver.

I'll be nicking that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 September, 2014, 02:25:26 PM
Loving this Scottish Independence debate.  Project Fear seems to have hit the buffers, now the Westminster Government have started Project Bribe!!  I wonder if it will work, I hope not!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 September, 2014, 03:49:51 PM
Out of curiosity, does anyone know how likely a Yes vote is looking at the moment?  Last I heard it was slightly tipped in favour of the Yes side.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 September, 2014, 03:53:26 PM
One poll had Yes slightly in front.

It's very close, going by the polls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 September, 2014, 04:02:01 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29096458 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29096458)

A YouGov poll, but it's counting those who have made up their minds, I can't see what the proportion of undecideds are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 08 September, 2014, 04:42:06 PM
I believe its about 7% but that's just from memory
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 September, 2014, 05:05:49 PM

Depends who you listen to. I always thought the huge NO lead would narrow closer to polling day, but the result of the recent YouGov survey would have been unthinkable just a week ago:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/poll-tracker

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3Cjx68qxq

Most other polls show the gap lessening but with NO still in front. I don't want to sound paranoid, but YouGov have staked a lot on their long standing prediction that NO would win by a great margin. I'm sure they would never stoop to trying to scare out the NO vote.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 September, 2014, 05:12:32 PM
Cheers Proudhuff - 8% undecided according to a graphic on BBC News just now.

I can't remember where I read/saw it, but there was a suggestion that YouGov targeted demographics more prone to voting Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 08 September, 2014, 05:21:27 PM
All the polls are biased really, and it's relatively easy to get skewed results. As Sauchie says, they have agendas to push themselves.
There's lies, damned lies and then there's statistics.

We won't really know until after the vote, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2014, 05:34:56 PM
Those who vote change nothing. Those who count the votes change perceptions. Those voted for change their minds. Those nobody votes for change everything.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 08 September, 2014, 07:34:24 PM
Shark- this is not a general election, I would suggest that the break up of the UK is a pretty big change.

Those who do nothing, well... they pretty much do nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 08 September, 2014, 08:01:20 PM
I just want the fucking thing to be over. >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 September, 2014, 08:40:19 PM
It does feel like the whole thing's being organised by Peter Jackson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 08 September, 2014, 10:13:41 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 08 September, 2014, 08:40:19 PM
It does feel like the whole thing's being organised by Peter Jackson.

Tell me about it. :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 08 September, 2014, 11:19:27 PM
And yet, despite the interminable length of the campaigns we've had the most feeble of national debates - barely rising beyond one side asserting everything will be brilliant in an independent Scotland because we simply will it to be so, and the other side prophesying doom like a camp Nostradamus.

I just want answers - on Scottish interest rates, mortgage and pension arrangements, economic and defence contingencies. You know, trivial stuff like that. Nothing that our homes, livelihoods and mutual well being depends on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 08 September, 2014, 11:33:19 PM
There are some answers if you want to read them...

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers

:)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 September, 2014, 12:04:54 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 08 September, 2014, 08:01:20 PM
I just want the fucking thing to be over. >:(

Same here. Just ten days left. At least when the vote is over there'll be less guesswork concerning the future of the UK and a little more doing. That could be interesting. Or at least not as dull.

It's a shame that during all this 'debate' there hasn't been a strong push for a federal option. Something like that may have actually inspired people while devolution just seems so half-arsed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 09 September, 2014, 09:33:16 AM
Quote from: Stan on 09 September, 2014, 12:04:54 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 08 September, 2014, 08:01:20 PM
I just want the fucking thing to be over. >:(

Same here. Just ten days left. At least when the vote is over there'll be less guesswork concerning the future of the UK and a little more doing. That could be interesting. Or at least not as dull.

It's a shame that during all this 'debate' there hasn't been a strong push for a federal option. Something like that may have actually inspired people while devolution just seems so half-arsed.

Which Mr Cameron wouldn't allow on the ballot paper, but has suddenly pushed his sidekick Brown into to spotlight to offer Devo-max.

As for inspiring people in 40 years of campaign work I've only once see this level of activity politically and that was during the miners strike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 September, 2014, 10:20:58 AM
I just think it's a little hard for many in the rest of the UK to get excited when they don't get to enjoy the actual voting bit (which they shouldn't, regardless of the illogical arguments for it).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 09 September, 2014, 10:40:33 AM
Quote from: Stan on 09 September, 2014, 10:20:58 AM
I just think it's a little hard for many in the rest of the UK to get excited when they don't get to enjoy the actual voting bit (which they shouldn't, regardless of the illogical arguments for it).

That's understandable, I know the feeling: when I watch the BBC National news talk about Education results, the NHS, Care for the Elderly and local elections I know they are nothing to do with what's happening up here. Never mind that have you seen the cover of the Megazine?  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 09 September, 2014, 10:57:06 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff
Never mind that have you seen the cover of the Megazine?  :o

'Undecided'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 09 September, 2014, 10:59:42 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 03 September, 2014, 01:01:21 PM
From the 'You couldn't make it up' file: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/03/tony-blair-gq-awards_n_5757280.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&utm_hp_ref=uk

I think it garners this awful mag publicity......?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 09 September, 2014, 07:42:47 PM
I only realised today, there's going to be a closed border between Scotland and England isn't there.

Salmond says his target for an increase in net migration is 24,000 a year. The UK are zealously cutting net migration. The only way those two policies work is if the border is closed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2014, 07:49:19 PM
Quote from: Montynero on 09 September, 2014, 07:42:47 PM
Salmond says his target for an increase in net migration is 24,000 a year. The UK are zealously cutting net migration. The only way those two policies work is if the border is closed.

Particulary since (I think) new EU members are expected to sign up to Shengen. Given what a (ludicrously, IMO) hot button immigration has become in England, the idea of a Shengen nation not separated from England/rUK by the English Channel but by an open land border is going to be an issue.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 September, 2014, 08:11:44 PM

I had a friendly conversation with two guys at work today in which they told me they were voting YES and that the first thing they wanted Salmond to do was to get rid of immigrants. Informing them that officially stated SNP policy is the direct opposite (and that Scotland's aging population means independence wouldn't work without an influx of tens of thousands of working/breeding age foreigners every single year) didn't phase them at all.

In unrelated news, Channel Four's Paul Mason is currently taking pelters on social media for suggesting that discussion of technicalities and policy fly over the heads of ordinary people.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin MacNeil on 09 September, 2014, 08:13:19 PM
Quote from: Montynero on 08 September, 2014, 11:19:27 PM
And yet, despite the interminable length of the campaigns we've had the most feeble of national debates - barely rising beyond one side asserting everything will be brilliant in an independent Scotland because we simply will it to be so, and the other side prophesying doom like a camp Nostradamus.

I just want answers - on Scottish interest rates, mortgage and pension arrangements, economic and defence contingencies. You know, trivial stuff like that. Nothing that our homes, livelihoods and mutual well being depends on.


Here you go, read this. It'll answer your questions about the border and immigration, among other things.

http://www.theweebluebook.com/index.php

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2014, 08:23:11 PM
Hmmm.

From the Wee Blue Book:

"The UK government claims that an independent Scotland would have to sign up to Schengen, which would in turn require border posts to be set up between Scotland and England to comply with the Agreement's rules and to protect the rUK against mass illegal immigration through Scotland.

There are all sorts of complex and technical reasons why none of this would be the case, but again the common-sense analysis is the simplest and clearest."

However...

New EU member states do not sign the Schengen Agreement as such; instead, they are bound to implement the Schengen rules as part of the pre-existing body of EU law, which every new entrant is required to accept. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement) (Supported here. (http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen/index_en.htm))

(Note that I firmly believe that "Scotland's aging population means independence wouldn't work without an influx of tens of thousands of working/breeding age foreigners every single year" (http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php/topic,28209.msg843415.html#msg843415) applies just as much to England and I utterly condemn that political expedience and moral cowardice of mainstream British politicians of all stripes for failing to make a forceful case for the economic benefits of immigration.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 09 September, 2014, 08:44:32 PM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 09 September, 2014, 08:11:44 PM

In unrelated news, Channel Four's Paul Mason is currently taking pelters on social media for suggesting that discussion of technicalities and policy fly over the heads of ordinary people.

I saw that as well. If I hadn't paid a lot for my fancy Samsung telly I would have chucked it out my front window in disgust. >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 09 September, 2014, 09:53:16 PM
I know there is still a bit to go before voting starts, but Scotland is leaving, isnt it...






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 September, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
Yes more than likely. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 09 September, 2014, 10:10:05 PM
Just build a secret wall like the South Koreans did. With maybe secret machine gun nests. If you don't admit it's there it doesn't exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 09 September, 2014, 10:19:39 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 09 September, 2014, 09:53:16 PM
I know there is still a bit to go before voting starts, but Scotland is leaving, isnt it...

I was amused to see that the Three Amigos (Cameron, Clegg and Milliband) are coming up here on Wednesday, I suppose they might as well have one last look around. :D However, we Scots do have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory so we might just surprise you. :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 September, 2014, 10:45:00 PM
Cameron's getting the train.

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fuCaXepE8nE/UsWLBhX_DNI/AAAAAAAAEZQ/6jubK6D66rA/s320/Screen+Shot+2014-01-02+at+15.51.12.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 September, 2014, 10:53:08 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 09 September, 2014, 10:19:39 PM
we Scots do have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory

If the returning officer is from Costa Rica, we're fucked.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 09 September, 2014, 11:09:25 PM
I did hear that sensational news about the 'Yes' vote grabbing a small lead. I like to think it'll be the kind of sensational 'lead' that Kinnock's Labour enjoyed ('93?) and means not quite so much when people's standard of living is threatened and that big X in a wee box seems like a very big step...

(Yes, I know nationalists will argue that Scotland is wealthy; wealthier than the UK, etc...).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 09 September, 2014, 11:44:57 PM
You don't necessarily need to be a nationalist to argue the case for independence. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 September, 2014, 02:02:24 AM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 09 September, 2014, 08:11:44 PM

I had a friendly conversation with two guys at work today in which they told me they were voting YES and that the first thing they wanted Salmond to do was to get rid of immigrants. Informing them that officially stated SNP policy is the direct opposite (and that Scotland's aging population means independence wouldn't work without an influx of tens of thousands of working/breeding age foreigners every single year) didn't phase them at all.

In unrelated news, Channel Four's Paul Mason is currently taking pelters on social media for suggesting that discussion of technicalities and policy fly over the heads of ordinary people.

I'm assuming they're reffering to the English folk living and working there? aren't those folks entitled to vote as well? and are the Scottish folk living in England getting kicked out or all migrating north?

as for borders they already have hadrians wall,might need a spruce up though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2014, 03:46:56 AM
Is this the start of the Irn-Bru Curtain?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 September, 2014, 07:41:39 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 10 September, 2014, 02:02:24 AM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 09 September, 2014, 08:11:44 PM
I had a friendly conversation with two guys at work today in which they told me they were voting YES and that the first thing they wanted Salmond to do was to get rid of immigrants.

I'm assuming they're reffering to the English folk living and working there? aren't those folks entitled to vote as well?

No they weren't. Everyone living in Scotland is eligible to vote in the referendum, whether they were born here or not.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 September, 2014, 08:39:15 AM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 10 September, 2014, 07:41:39 AM
No they weren't. Everyone living in Scotland is eligible to vote in the referendum, whether they were born here or not.

Tricky things, those facts...

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 10 September, 2014, 09:00:51 AM
Quote from: Montynero on 09 September, 2014, 07:42:47 PM
I only realised today, there's going to be a closed border between Scotland and England isn't there.

Salmond says his target for an increase in net migration is 24,000 a year. The UK are zealously cutting net migration. The only way those two policies work is if the border is closed.

The Republic of Ireland's had an open border with the UK for 90 years, even through the Troubles. And - unlike Scotland - them leaving the Union was negotiated partly through armed insurrection rather than a democratic ballot.

But, yes, Jimmy, Scotland will have a closed border. Because, y'know....fear, intimidation and scare tactics work on the naive and uninformed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 10 September, 2014, 09:02:58 AM
Does anyone know anything about protectionism? Salmond says we're going to be more like Norway, rather than Iceland or Ireland. So, assuming he's right,  I'm trying to understand more about how that country actually works. One thing I notice is everything is 4 times the price it is in the rest of the Europe. A pint is £8.60. Newspapers are £3 etc. Obviously salaries are higher in the same ratio. But what is it that's caused such inflation? And how on earth do you grow manufacturing, and tourism - cornerstones of our economy - when costs are four times what they are in all the neighbouring countries?

It's of particular interest to me, because I generally get paid by American or UK companies. So the thought of that being worth four times less than it is now, as prices around me rise, is a matter of some interest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 10 September, 2014, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 September, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
Yes more than likely.  :D

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 September, 2014, 09:34:22 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 10 September, 2014, 09:00:51 AM
The Republic of Ireland's had an open border with the UK for 90 years, even through the Troubles.

As I mentioned above, Ireland has an exemption from Schengen that won't be available to Scotland.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 10 September, 2014, 09:50:46 AM
At least we won't have to sit through the Scottish football results.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 September, 2014, 09:55:45 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 10 September, 2014, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 September, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
Yes more than likely.  :D
FTFY

No more Tory governments- ever! No wonder your smiling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 September, 2014, 09:56:48 AM
I have a feeling that someone's going to get an egg thrown at them today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 September, 2014, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2014, 03:46:56 AM
Is this the start of the Irn-Bru Curtain?

I'm laughing too hard to be offended. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 September, 2014, 10:29:40 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 September, 2014, 09:56:48 AM
I have a feeling that someone's going to get an egg thrown at them today

Because we dinnae huv any o' the traditional fruit or vegetables tae throw at them? Racist.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 10 September, 2014, 10:35:28 AM
Quote from: Banners on 10 September, 2014, 09:50:46 AM
At least we won't have to sit through the Scottish football results.
Ha! Don't you just turn over after the Conference North scores like everyone else?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 10 September, 2014, 10:40:34 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 September, 2014, 09:56:48 AM
I have a feeling that someone's going to get an egg thrown at them today.

It sounds like you have intimate knowledge of this impending attack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 September, 2014, 10:51:04 AM
Quote from: Stan on 10 September, 2014, 10:40:34 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 September, 2014, 09:56:48 AM
I have a feeling that someone's going to get an egg thrown at them today.

It sounds like you have intimate knowledge of this impending attack.

James lives in Alan Partridge country; he'd need a strong throwing arm to score a direct hit on Cameron, Clegg, or Miliband from there. Egg throwing has become a motif of the campaign (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28969671), so it's not a risky bet we're going to see albumen dripping from someone's nose before the day is done.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 September, 2014, 11:22:16 AM
Conspiracy Theory time: Japan has been without nuclear power for over a year now thanks to universal public distrust after the Fukishima meltdown, becoming an ongoing advertisement (that you don't hear a great deal about, admittedly) for the feasibility of developed nations using renewable and non-nuclear power sources - because if one of the most energy-hungry nations in the world can get by just fine without nuclear power, so might everyone else.
The conspiracy theory element is this: for obvious reasons the nuclear lobby does not have much interest in this situation continuing and has given Japan's conservative PM his marching orders - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/japan-restart-nuclear-reactors-fukushima
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 10 September, 2014, 11:26:50 AM

George from the Daily CF:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/yes-vote-in-scotland-most-dangerous-thing-of-all-hope  (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/yes-vote-in-scotland-most-dangerous-thing-of-all-hope)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spaceghost on 10 September, 2014, 11:34:24 AM
Can we vote for an independant Yorkshire next? We'll get by alright without all you other buggers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 September, 2014, 11:35:43 AM
Quote from: Spaceghost on 10 September, 2014, 11:34:24 AM
Can we vote for an independant Yorkshire next? We'll get by alright without all you other buggers.

As long you make sure Geoff-fucking-Boycott doesn't do Test Match Special any more...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 September, 2014, 11:49:53 AM
Quote from: Spaceghost on 10 September, 2014, 11:34:24 AM
Can we vote for an independant Yorkshire next? We'll get by alright without all you other buggers.

That would be the inevitable consequence of the devo-max (sort of) option being touted by the NO campaign in the last few days. The economic aspects of it wouldn't actually be too dissimilar to the Northern economic area (http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/politics/video-osborne-promises-56bn-growth-plan-for-north-economy-1-6767347) idea Osbourne was floating a few weeks ago, where everything from Liverpool to Newcastle would be given responsibility for fiscal policy, transport, and economic development.

The idea was that it would allow 'The North' (ahem) to compete with the lure of London for investment capital, but devolving social and welfare policy to those areas might be even more of a lure for anyone who doesn't fancy taking on a million pound mortgage on a two bedroom flat in Hackney.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin Zeal on 10 September, 2014, 03:36:17 PM
My two-bedroom flat in Hackney was only ( :-\) £225,000, thank you very much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 September, 2014, 05:03:13 PM
Post Independence, what would happen to The Two Ronnies, and who would get which sketch?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 September, 2014, 07:12:06 PM
We're interested in developing a Ronnie/Krankie exchange programme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 September, 2014, 11:35:48 PM
Question as a diver, will I have to pay to get in now? I dive regularly in Oban and Mull so if it's gonna start charging extra you can stuff it and i'll take my business to Cornwall!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 September, 2014, 09:38:27 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29151026

Would they normally bring the armed unit out to deal with a knife?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 September, 2014, 12:28:39 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 September, 2014, 09:38:27 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29151026

Would they normally bring the armed unit out to deal with a knife?

Yes, they would.

They've even been known to bring out the Armed Unit to deal with Unarmed people who run while wearing backpacks!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 11 September, 2014, 12:44:22 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 September, 2014, 09:55:45 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 10 September, 2014, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 September, 2014, 09:57:51 PM
Yes more than likely.  :D
FTFY

No more Tory governments- ever! No wonder your smiling.

Guffaw!  SNP already toadying up to Murdoch and talking about lowering corporation tax.  Future right wing Scottish governments might not carry the Conservative name, but they'll pursue the same neoliberal policies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spaceghost on 11 September, 2014, 12:47:50 PM
Without the sensible guiding hand of an English government, every man, woman and child in Scotland will be dead in five years, poisoned by a diet consisting exclusively of strong lager, deep fried Mars bars, cheap heroin, shortbread and chips.

Come on all you Scotch folk! Stay with your superior 'sasanach' friends.

"Ye ken it makes guid sense!"

(This message brought to you by the No campaign)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 11 September, 2014, 12:52:35 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 September, 2014, 09:38:27 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29151026

Would they normally bring the armed unit out to deal with a knife?

It doesn't sound too unreasonable on the face of it. Not that I trust any investigation from these people.

A few months back I looked out the window to see a neighbour with what clearly looked like a small pellet rifle thing, and there was an 8ft armed police occifer giving him a talking to. I'm not exactly sure what went on there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2014, 12:54:02 PM
Am I the only one not surprised Pistorius has been acquitted? I've always found the "evidence" against him incredibly hyperbolic and superficial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2014, 01:02:30 PM
Quote from: Killer Hawk Queen on 11 September, 2014, 12:54:02 PM
Am I the only one not surprised Pistorius has been acquitted? I've always found the "evidence" against him incredibly hyperbolic and superficial.

They were never going to prove murder — murder is defined entirely by intent, and when you have a killing with no direct witnesses, I don't see anyone could prove intent under those circumstances.

A jury might well have convicted, but a judge is going to have that specific issue uppermost in their minds.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 September, 2014, 01:22:24 PM
Actus and mens rea. The guilty act and the guilty mind. If one or either is missing the charge falls. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2014, 01:25:33 PM
He committed man slaughter naturally, however going off what evidence (or pack their off against) their is, it was not premeditated murder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 September, 2014, 01:33:30 PM
On the bare facts - shooting at someone through the door - there could be enough for murder to stick. Obviously, it depends on the evidence and to be honest I didn't follow it. Shooting through a closed door into an enclosed space at someone could be indicative of an intention to kill, or at least a reckless disregard to the consequences of his action.

There's a thing here colloquially referred to as the "egg shell skull" rule, or "take your victim as you find him". The point is that if you hit someone on the skull with a hammer and they did because they have a fragile skull, it's not much of a defence to say "Oh, I didn't realise that was going to happen."

So, if you shoot through a door then is it an excuse to say you didn't know who was there?

The issue, for me, is whether or not he was acting in self-defence or at least thought he was. That depends on the facts
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2014, 02:29:27 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 September, 2014, 01:33:30 PM
The issue, for me, is whether or not he was acting in self-defence or at least thought he was. That depends on the facts

He claimed he believed he was. Given that the only other person in the room at the time is dead, I don't see how the prosecution ever thought they were going to disprove that...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2014, 05:37:23 PM
Just attended another of these stupid CPC courses so I can continue driving for a living (they really are crap - today we learned not to drive if you're tired and how to park without blocking the road, which most of us kinda' already knew).
.
One of the topics we discussed was Scottish independence - all those Scottish truck drivers who have already taken these courses; have they just wasted their time and money because it's an EU requirement? Will Scottish truck & bus drivers have to pay the £10 other foreign drivers have to cough up to drive in England? Is there going to be a toll booth at Gretna Green? Will English trucks have to pay to drive into Scotland?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 September, 2014, 05:37:56 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 September, 2014, 09:38:27 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29151026

Would they normally bring the armed unit out to deal with a knife?

It happened within hours of the guy with the machete who beheaded a granny because cats had stolen his lighter. If you're going to come the cunt, best not to do so immediately after an incident that made the Met SWAT unit look tardy. Pistorious is obviously guilty as sin, as any reasonable test of common sense demonstrates, but - like everyone says - proving that beyond doubt is difficult.

Fans of unlikely excuses offered by obvious murderers will love this one. Young black guy is stopped by cops investigating an affray he had nothing to do with. They pat him down TWICE, finding just some dope and a little coke, arrest him, cuff him with his hands behind his back, and put him in the rear seat of their car. By the time they show up at the station, young black guy is dead from a gun shot wound to the chest. Cops say he shot himself.

Do I need to tell you where this happened? (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/handcuffed-black-youth-shot-himself-death-says-coroner-n185016)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 September, 2014, 06:02:51 PM
Former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has indicated that he could return to front-line politics in Scotland to lock horns with Alex Salmond. During a speech in Kilmarnock, he accused the Scottish First Minister of deceiving voters about his current powers to improve the health service.Mr Brown said if Mr Salmond continued with this theme he would join the Scottish Labour Party leader in challenging the SNP. "I say this to Mr Salmond himself - until today I'm outside front-line politics," said Mr Brown."If he continues to peddle this deception that the Scottish Parliament, under his leadership, cannot do anything to improve the health service until he has a separate state, then I will want to join Johann Lamont in fighting him in securing the return of a Labour government as quickly as possible."




ooooooh!
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTFz8hYajtB08D35lEivfkT6imGCHeL3zxxHt5RbN0vfayDax7ahQ)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 September, 2014, 06:09:50 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2014, 02:29:27 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 September, 2014, 01:33:30 PM
The issue, for me, is whether or not he was acting in self-defence or at least thought he was. That depends on the facts

He claimed he believed he was. Given that the only other person in the room at the time is dead, I don't see how the prosecution ever thought they were going to disprove that...

Cheers

Jim


I always thought it far fetched the whole self defence thing .if I heard a noise and knew someone was in my bathroom I would assume it was my wife which would be easily confirmed by looking to my right or my daughter who would come and wake us up to tell us she was going . I'm assuming he would have had to put a light on to put his legs on? and find the cricket bat and gun and I woulda thunk the wife would've shouted something to him as he was bashing the door with a bat  before shooting???
but I aint a legal eagle...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2014, 06:20:55 PM
If Gordon Brown gets into Scottish politics, for Christ's sake keep him away from your gold reserves (you do have gold reserves, don't you?). Actually, any Scottish gold is probably held in London; so you'll be wanting to get that back. (Mind you, Germany asked for its gold back and the BoE basically told it to swivel, because the gold's been sold and/or leased out.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2014, 06:27:05 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 September, 2014, 06:09:50 PM
I always thought it far fetched the whole self defence thing.

What you think is completely irrelevant. What anyone thinks is irrelevant; all that matters is what can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and I don't see how the prosecution thought they would prove what the accused did or didn't believe at a given moment without any convincing physical evidence to contradict their version of events.

Also: you don't live in South Africa which, by all accounts, is a substantially more violent society than here — having spoken to some people who've lived there quite recently, a 'shoot first, ask questions later' approach to people breaking into your home is widely considered to be a sensible policy.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 September, 2014, 06:32:56 PM

Yeah, Gordon Brown would be a big vote winner, wouldn't he. Brown's just the last tenuous link to what older voters remember the Labour party once to have been. If this campaign has proven anything, it's that Labour are a spent force in Scotland. They're a sorry lot; characterised by their utter incompetence, fractiousness, hypocrisy, and desire for power at any cost. They have even less strength in depth than the SNP, and the thought of those two lots of jumped up wee pricks taking turns to rule over us fills me with despair.

They're the modern day equivalents of the idiots who got us into the mess that necessitated the union in 1707. I can see why the citizens of MC1 were so easily swayed by the idea of bypassing the serial fuck-up ruling elite which has brought their state to its knees, and contracting out government to evil alien overlords who at least know what they're doing.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 September, 2014, 07:44:49 PM
Gordon's power grab of the No campaign has been a bit odd.  A backbench opposition MP, with little respect in his own party never mind the electorate, he makes a sudden statement about what he calls "my plan" to push through unwritten legislation without any clear idea about what it might say.

The BBC, reporting live on the announcement, then apparently calls round the three man parties - none of whom appear to have any idea what he's taking about.

...Then suddenly, it's been the plan all along, and the three stoogies are in full agreement about how much they effin-love the Scots.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2014, 08:09:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2014, 05:37:23 PM
Just attended another of these stupid CPC courses so I can continue driving for a living (they really are crap - today we learned not to drive if you're tired and how to park without blocking the road, which most of us kinda' already knew).

Everyone knew that smoking was toxic to human health, but that didn't stop them lighting up in bars and nightclubs until legislation forced them to stop doing this thing (making a toxic cloud in a closed environment) that you would assume anybody would know not to do.  Likewise it's well and good to say anyone with a driving licence would know not to park a car in the middle of a road and block traffic both ways, but that didn't stop someone doing it outside our local shop on Monday evening on the basis that they'd "only be a minute."  See also: traffic wardens and speed cameras - if nobody was doing things wrong, we wouldn't have either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2014, 08:34:07 PM
In theory the CPC is indeed a good thing. However, it's being run by the government and is therefore badly organised, poorly implemented and, above all, expected to make a profit.
.
Anything + Government = Travesty
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 September, 2014, 08:43:21 PM
Are you calling for the privatization of a government service, Sharky?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2014, 09:15:27 PM
Ha ha ha! As if!
.
No, what I'm actually calling for is the de-Nazification of all government services.
.
And more beer.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 September, 2014, 09:55:45 PM
Yep Sauchie, but the Law Lords annoyed Dredd by the lack of gravity they displayed in their dealings with him! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 12 September, 2014, 01:10:41 AM
Gordon Brown was the best Prime Minister England had for a long time. He was never given his due clemency. No matter how you look at it. Since Thatcher to Cameron, he was the best. Oh go on say John grey face pea eater was by comparison. John the the revisionist ideal of a Chamberlain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 12 September, 2014, 02:03:15 PM
An interesting article on what would happen to the BBC if Scotland becomes independent.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/feb/29/how-would-the-bbc-be-divided-if-scotland-became-independent

Sounds like there are still a few things to work out. I'm surprised we haven't heard more about this actually.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 12 September, 2014, 09:34:03 PM
I used to have the greatest respect for the BBC.  Their political reporting of the last few days has been shocking. 

Here's Salmond comprehensively addressing issues raised by the BBC's Nick Robinson on the news that banks will move out of Scotland, broadcast live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHb_pBFGNEQ

Here's Nick Robinson, in his report later, flat out lying and claiming Salmond avoided the issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zFr9q-eGGE#t=651

Official BBC response to complaints:
"The BBC considers that the questions were valid and the overall report balanced and impartial, in line with our editorial guidelines."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 September, 2014, 10:03:16 PM
Yes, that is horseshit - it was edited to make it sound like he didn't answer at all, rather than not supplying a handy soundbite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 September, 2014, 10:10:02 PM

Mmm-yeah ... Robinson's not lying - Salmond didn't respond directly to the specific question of whether the public should listen to the him or the bosses of John Lewis and Tesco regarding their claim that consumer prices would rise in an independent Scotland (which is the question his news report showed Robinson posing).

Robinson certainly reported Salmond's entirely accurate response to the question of whether RBS and other financial institutions moving their head offices to London would result in a loss of revenue (it wouldn't), probably because Salmond's reply clearly illustrated that Robinson hadn't done even the most basic level of fact checking before posing that question.

When I arrange my dollies in a circle for a pretend Teddy Bear's Meeting of the BBC Board of Governors, the Mr Potato Head playing the role of Robinson is always the first for the chop. He only got the job because he's a Tory, and the BBC wants to avoid allegations of leftie bias in their news coverage from the likes of The Daily Mail.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 13 September, 2014, 12:13:01 AM
I couldn't give a bollocks about having anything of the BBC, tbh- no BBC, no licence fee. I'd be happy with it even as a paid channel option on digital TV- those who want it can stump up, those who don't bother with it will be able to stop subsidising something they don't use- seems entirely fair to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 September, 2014, 07:12:45 AM
I see a bunch of our local Neanderthals are heading over to Ecosse this weekend to march about and generally irritate the locals! Should garner a few more votes for the yes camp. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 September, 2014, 03:27:37 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 13 September, 2014, 07:12:45 AM
I see a bunch of our local Neanderthals are heading over to Ecosse this weekend to march about and generally irritate the locals! Should garner a few more votes for the yes camp. Z

sending them back now, thanks for the lend.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 September, 2014, 05:15:28 PM
Aaah keep them for a wee while, aaah qwan, gwan, gwan.... Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 13 September, 2014, 05:57:54 PM
Any chance they can take our homegrown knuckledraggers away with them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 13 September, 2014, 06:57:42 PM
For my sins, both my father and grandfather preferred the tangerine and white gloves look. Luckily for me I was never ask to join. Those people are doing their cause no favours. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 September, 2014, 07:07:36 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 12 September, 2014, 02:03:15 PMAn interesting article on what would happen to the BBC if Scotland becomes independent.
A highlight:

QuoteThe SBC, in short, would have half the budget of BBC2 for television.
Oh dear.

Still, uncle Alex says Scotland will, for some reason he doesn't seem interested in explaining, retain a foreign country's telly (and not via a commercial deal, which is what happens in Ireland), just like it'll retain access to its currency, 'lender of last resort' option, sports facilities, etc. It's a very odd model of 'independence' being mooted right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 September, 2014, 07:58:31 PM
Ack don't be apologising 8 ball, my side of the fence and indeed relations have thrown up a right few nasty skeletons. The sins of the forefathers are thankfully not visited upon us....and for that I'm truely grateful. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 September, 2014, 09:06:15 PM
I think Scotland will vote for independence on Thursday. I signed Dan Snow's bettertogether internet campaign thingy when it came to my E-Mail address last week but deep down I think it's virtually inevitable that the Union will be no more. We'll still call England and Wales the UK but it will be through habit rather than anything else.

Scotland has a chance to rid itself of Westminster for good. It can set it's own laws etc and yes there will be a period of financial pain and uncertainty but fifteen,twenty years from now it will seem worth it. The land of my birth will become it's own Country and a part of Europe while the land I was raised in will be withdrawing from the E.U completely. Bonkers eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 September, 2014, 10:05:02 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 September, 2014, 09:06:15 PM
Scotland has a chance to rid itself of Westminster for good. It can set it's own laws etc and yes there will be a period of financial pain and uncertainty but fifteen,twenty years from now it will seem worth it.

Aye, you will no longer be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Westminster, you'll just be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Holyrood. I suppose the shit will be a little warmer having less distance to travel, but apart from that I think it'll be 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.

And fifteen years from now the people responsible for the parliament building and the Edinburgh trams will probably have spunked all the oil money on something daft like a monorail to Skye and you'll be forced to sell the rest of the country to Donald Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2014, 10:11:59 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 September, 2014, 09:06:15 PM
We'll still call England and Wales the UK but it will be through habit rather than anything else.


...and Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: McNulty on 14 September, 2014, 10:51:50 AM
As a Scot, I don't have a problem with the English. I just want the people in Scotland to run their own country and get the weapons of mass destruction out. I truly believe that we will be better neighbours with our English friends when we don't have the opportunity to blame Westminster for unpopular laws imposed on us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 14 September, 2014, 11:06:49 AM
Quoteyou will no longer be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Westminster, you'll just be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Holyrood.

Well, that's a good reason to never do anything, ever.

Trust in your Government. Eat your Cereal.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 14 September, 2014, 11:21:07 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 13 September, 2014, 10:11:59 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 September, 2014, 09:06:15 PM
We'll still call England and Wales the UK but it will be through habit rather than anything else.
...and Northern Ireland.

That's a very southern/Londonium thing to forget about Northern Ireland! Sorry folks a very crude souther error there.  :-[ Anyway I still believe that this is too good an opportunity, particularly for the young voters to get away from the pro Freemarket lunacy of England and perhaps aim towards a little more socially cohesive strategies like the Scandinavians countries. Bit more expensive tax wise in Norway, Denmark but that's the trade off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 September, 2014, 11:27:50 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 September, 2014, 10:05:02 PM
the people responsible for the parliament building and the Edinburgh trams ... you'll be forced to sell the rest of the country to Donald Trump.

Scotland is astonishingly poorly served by its political elite. The idea of Lamont, Sturgeon, Swinney, Gray, or Curran representing Scotland on the world stage is laughable. Salmond's an able politician, but the Trump humiliation raises serious concerns regarding his ability to get what he wants from negotiations with a Westminster government which no longer has any electoral reason to play nice.

Opting for either Westminster or Holyrood rule is a choice between neglect and active incompetence.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 14 September, 2014, 11:34:00 AM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 14 September, 2014, 11:06:49 AM
Quoteyou will no longer be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Westminster, you'll just be shat upon by an unaccountable political/business elite in Holyrood.

Well, that's a good reason to never do anything, ever.

Trust in your Government. Eat your Cereal.

Spot on Temp, we're accustomed to negative sneering cynicism though, it's been the staple of Project Fear from the get go. It's become laughable- those who do nothing achieve nothing, and simply wallow in their own hopelessness. We'd all still be living in caves eating berries and hitting each other with bones if everyone took that attitude.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 14 September, 2014, 11:51:46 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 September, 2014, 09:06:15 PM

Scotland has a chance to rid itself of Westminster for good. It can set it's own laws etc and yes there will be a period of financial pain and uncertainty but fifteen,twenty years from now it will seem worth it.

Of course fifteen or twenty years might equally be when the damn Tory's reestablish power. These things tend to go in cycles, often with a recession in between. It might seem improbable now, but so did the SNP leading the country toward independence back when they had three seats in 1993. So did thirteen consecutive years of labour government during their wilderness years of 79-97. Anyone who thinks they're ridding themselves of conservative influence by switching to the Holyrood system of proportional representation doesn't pay much attention to history - or governments across Europe. The conservatives won over 50% of the vote in Scotland in 1955, a feat no party has repeated since, and support only truly atrophied in response to Thatcherism. Reinvention is part of politics, and that applies to the conservatives just as it does anything else in an independent Scotland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 September, 2014, 12:15:34 PM
Quote from: Montynero on 14 September, 2014, 11:51:46 AM
The conservatives won over 50% of the vote in Scotland in 1955, a feat no party has repeated since, and support only truly atrophied in response to Thatcherism.

True - Scotland's a deeply conservative society. Everybody looks at the dominance of the Labour party in recent times, but that has more to do with the horrors inflicted upon the country during the Thatcher years. Talk to most Labour or SNP voters calling for greater social justice and saving the NHS about topics like the economy, education, immigration, and criminal justice, and they'll sound indistinguishable from the folk down South who put their X next to a Tory candidate's name every five years.

What comes out of the party apparatchiks' lips and what goes on in the heads of their voters are two different things.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 12:45:03 PM
With independence at least you guys have a chance of doing something different. I have delighted in the debate both here and on the media. I am particularly taken by the astonishing insight and maturity of thought shown by the 16 - 18 year old school kids. They surely deserve more than that westminister have in store for them over the next 10 - 15 years (that is to be sacrficed on the altar of freemarket slash and burn greed). Scotland needs to decouple from this entirely negative ideology, which serves noone but those of means. So it may cost money; times may be tough for a while....is this something your forebearers haven't had to deal with. Better the initial pain with the chance to create something better. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 September, 2014, 01:00:29 PM
A Yes vote wont be easy for everyone in the UK, Z. 

This particular Englishman doesn't relish the years of cost and uncertainly either, Not least as to the effect it'll have on my wallet...





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 01:11:18 PM
Yes Spikes we will all pay for this. The point I'm trying to make I suppose is we are all pretty much f**ked irrespective. This is due to the kind of politico/ideological system which looks to be permently imbedded in westminister. There is, in my opinion, nothing down the road but more of the same as we've been getting ladled out this past 6 years. I feel we are being delusional if we think things are really going to improve....give the Scots a chance to possibly do something different. If it works out after a few bad years, is it not a motivator for the rest of us to ask our political classes to do the same. If it doesn't work out....well then we were going to be screwed out of the money in some other way. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 September, 2014, 01:18:24 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 12:45:03 PM
With independence at least you guys have a chance of doing something different.

Maybe, Z, but as far as I can see the plan is to reject Westminster and recreate it at Holyrood with a similar cast of characters. I don't really have any faith that doing the same thing and expecting different consequences is going to produce anything like the fairer, more inclusive form of government being promised.

If there was anything radically different on offer I might be interested, but it's just the opportunity to vote for the representative of one of two national parties every five years then watch them do exactly what they're told by their boss until they need your vote again


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 14 September, 2014, 01:27:31 PM
Westminster will only change if change is forced upon it, Z?

A 'yes' vote will do the job certainly, but so will a 'no' vote, imo. Especially after the promise of more powers being devolved to Scotland.


I'm not living in Scotland, nor am i registered to vote there, though I'd more than likely vote to preserve the union, but at this distance i can see merit, and fault in both camp's arguments.

Certainly i don't envy our Scottish friends having to decide, one way or another, on the 18th.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 01:33:33 PM
Your society is more than the current set of politicians ensconced either in Holyrood, Stormont, Cardiff or Westminister. I am not saying things will change; if there were a yes vote and nothing were done, then yes you would have the stasis in microcosm which we see at westminister. But the nature of the referendum has more than this choice hardwired into it.
I alluded earlier to the brilliant youth of Scotland, there is the potential to harness the momentum of a yes vote to effect real change. I have listened and read of the nature of how each respective campaign works: on the no side there is a hierarchical structure which bar 'scare' tactics has had little positive to offer the debate. On the 'yes' side you have a flat, self organising structure which is much, much more than just the SNP. The momentum if utilised by motivated people and subgroupings within this 'non hierarchical' group could just possibly move and consolidate real democracy in Scotland.
It is this chance of change which me and a lot of others without Scotland are watching intently and supporting in our thoughts and indeed prayers. There has to be something better than that with which we are being served now. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 September, 2014, 03:14:35 PM
Saw a guest on the Sunday Politics show today say to Andrew Neil that the No's are well ahead on the postal votes!  How would he know that?

So, you've had the Three Donkeys of the Apocalypse up, begging the Scots to stay, and the rest of the Establishment (media, business, etc.) threatening plague and pestilence if there is a Yes vote. Yet, the Yes vote still seems to be holding.  Go on Scotland!  Keep your nerve and go for it!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 03:19:05 PM
Well said by a proud englishman. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 September, 2014, 03:20:13 PM
Thank you, Sir!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 14 September, 2014, 08:28:19 PM
...just don't put the price of whiskey up. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 08:40:05 PM
As much as I respect and admire the Scots people the price of their 'whisky' isn't what would sell a no vote for me. A wee jeg of Jameson or Bushmills any day! Z ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 September, 2014, 08:47:41 PM


This is pretty much my own analysis, but 'it really doesn't matter' isn't much of a rallying cry:

Quotehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/brettarends/2014/09/12/would-scottish-independence-destroy-britain/

Most of What You're Hearing About Scottish Independence Is Wrong


Scottish independence would change almost nothing. It would have little long-term effect on the economy, or on the Scottish budget. Currently, Scotland is a largely self-governing nation of five million people within the European Union. If Scotland votes for independence, within a couple of years it will be... er... a largely self-governing nation of five million people within the European Union.

The Queen of England and Scotland would remain the Queen of England and Scotland. There would be no "iron curtain" at the border.

Most of what is being written about this issue is nonsense. The predictions of doom and gloom are sheer rubbish. The Scottish economy would be bigger than that of New Zealand. A few big banks have warned that they would move their headquarters from Edinburgh to London. In the event, there's a good chance they might reconsider. But even if not, so what? The "banks" wouldn't leave, just their headquarters.

A study conducted on behalf of the House of Lords found that an independent Scotland would keep about 90% of Britain's North Sea oil. That is money that would be forfeited by the British government. On the other hand, the British government would no longer have to spend extra money on Scotland. Guess what? The two numbers have almost completely matched for years. There would be little net effect.

Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister and the leader of the campaign for Scottish independence, has created a needless row about the currency an independent Scotland would use. Indeed, if he loses next week's vote it may be because of his foolish decision to make this an issue. Salmond wants to keep the English, or British, pound. Politicians south of the border say he wouldn't be able to. It was a foolish boast. He would have been much better off saying Scotland would have its own pound, and that it would simply peg that pound to the English one. In due course there is no particular reason Scotland couldn't adopt the euro if it wanted.

The main effect of Scottish independence, in fact, would be on England. Scotland is overwhelmingly left-wing when it comes to voting for the British parliament. David Cameron's Conservative party has just one member from north of the border. Nearly all Scottish MPs are Labour or Scottish Nationalist, a party that on most issues is well to the left of Labour.

Remove Scotland from the equation, and British politics ceases to be such a two-horse race. The Conservatives hold a substantial edge in the rest of the country. The main effect of Scottish independence, therefore, would be to deal a devastating blow to the British Labour Party, and almost certainly secure the Conservatives in power in Westminster for a generation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 14 September, 2014, 08:48:48 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 08:40:05 PM
As much as I respect and admire the Scots people the price of their 'whisky' isn't what would sell a no vote for me. A wee jeg of Jameson or Bushmills any day! Z ;)

Spraking of whisky, I'm pretty sure that the majority of grain used in its production is grown in East Anglia so prices could change on both sides of the border!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 08:57:40 PM
Interesting article sauchie. Shades of doom prevail! The arguments and observations are well thought and reasoned, but at heart they are argument and observation, we none of us are prescient. The Scots need to be brave and sieze this chance. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 14 September, 2014, 10:39:44 PM
The whisky industry has been complaining about high taxation on whisky for years- it is possible that the price would go down should whatever government we get decide to reduce the levy.
Most of the price of a bottle of whisky is tax.
Which goes to Westminster.
...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 September, 2014, 10:46:36 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 14 September, 2014, 10:39:44 PM
Most of the price of a bottle of whisky is tax.
Which goes to Westminster.
...

Aye, but I've heard the closest economic analogue to an Independant Scotland would be Denmark.

It's about a tenner a pint in Copenhagen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 14 September, 2014, 11:05:24 PM
QuoteAye, but I've heard the closest economic analogue to an Independant Scotland would be Denmark.

It's about a tenner a pint in Copenhagen.

Who's gonnae order a pint of whisky?  :)

Hysterical speculation- at the moment I reckon things won't change too much and it will depend on the shape of any government that gets elected- that will be for the parties to thrash out over the next year to prepare for the election. Prices are dictated by the market not by a countries independent/ dependent status.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 14 September, 2014, 11:12:55 PM
double post- sue me.
After 'reading some stuff' on 'the internet' it appears that Scandanavia's expensive alcohol  is due to very heavy taxation. There appears to be a move to 'protect people's health' by forcing prices up- something which has been happening over here too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 September, 2014, 11:13:12 PM
A pint of whiskey sounds pretty good. The market dictates prices of course, but with alcohol, cigarettes etc they are subject to 'sin' taxes. This is of course a major revenue stream for many governments. The problem I have with this is it screws me going to the pub for a pint or a whiskey in a social context but encourages drinking at home which I think isn't a good thing. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 September, 2014, 12:26:17 AM



http://www.gregpalast.com/scotland-should-declare-its-independence-from-alex-salmond/

QuoteScotland Should Declare Its Independence From Alex Salmond

By Greg Palast for Reader Supported News
Sunday, 14. September 2014

I mean, what's the bloody point? Why pretend to declare your independence only to chain yourself to a coin with a British snout on it and simultaneously beg to become a colony of Angela Merkel's Fifth Reich, aka the European Union?

I realize that, as an American and an economist, I carry into this debate a double dollop of disrespect from Scottish readers. But, with thousands of miles of salt water separating me equally from London and Edinburgh, I think I can see clearly what you miss from having your head inside the fish bowl.

There are two overwhelming and undeniable advantages for Scotland to declare its sovereign independence: to end both Scotland's damaging enchainment to the British pound and the debilitating tyranny of European Union membership.

Yet, weirdly, inexplicably and inexcusably, Alex Salmond promises to throw away the two most valuable benefits of national self-determination.

First, the pound. In all the hoo-hah over whether Scotland can keep the coin with the Queen's schnozzola on it, no one seems to have asked, Why in the world would Scotland want this foreign coinage?

The Bank of England's singular task at this moment is to figure out how to counteract the disastrous macroeconomic consequences of George Osborne's austerity fixations and the bleating demands of City bankers. The only time when the Bank of England gives any consideration to Scotland's economy is when a BOE governor checks the little gauge which tells them how much of Scotland's oil they have left to spend.

Why should the interest rates, exchange rates and monetary supply of a resource nation like Scotland be subject to the needs and whimsies of the rusting realm to your south? According to the well-accepted theory of Optimum Currency Areas, Scotland would be best off adopting the Canadian dollar, also a damp, salmon-choked oil exporter or, better yet, the Vietnamese dong.

No nation controls its economic destiny until it controls its currency--a concept easier to understand if you read it in Greek.

And Scotland's own coin, backed by taxing power over its oil extractors, would undoubtedly be stronger than sterling and more flexible alone. Control over its own currency will enable Scotland to cut interest rates when local manufacturing falters while the Bank of England is raising rates to fight a speculative bubble in The City.

To give you a head start, my daughter has designed your new currency (above).

Second, why this pathological need to remain subjugated by the European Union? Is there some extraordinarily wise legislation crafted by the solons of the European Parliament? Does Scotland need the guiding hand of Angela Merkel, Marie LePen and the Italian premier du jour? Does Scotland fear a sudden shortage of Bulgarian plumbers?

The USA trades with Europe without giving Lithuania veto power over trade terms. And as Swiss nationals will tell you, a lack of an EU passport will not cause you to be strip-searched on your way to the Costa del Sol. Disadvantages of EU membership: loss of control over terms of trade, and policies of industrial regulation, immigration and environmental control. And sorry, Mr. Salmond, you will indeed have to join the euro, at which point, Germany's finance minister will draft your budgets.

So that is my question to my friends north of Hadrian's wall. Why demand your independence from Britain only to insist on keeping your shackles? If you too find attachment to your chains nonsensical, then shouldn't your first referendum be a vote to declare Scottish independence from Alex Salmond?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 15 September, 2014, 01:35:47 AM
Alex Salmond is actually the only democratically elected leader with a majority in Britain. How that makes him some sort of 'dictator' is beyond me.

Also- as has been continuously repeated throughout the campaign- THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE SNP OR PARTY POLITICS.
The time for that will be on the first election. The Yes campaign is a broad spectrum popular movement, and it is not about independence from everything, it is about independence from the United Kingdom.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 September, 2014, 06:57:34 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 15 September, 2014, 01:35:47 AM
The Yes campaign is a broad spectrum popular movement

It's generally accepted that the huge swing towards YES in recent weeks has been a result of disaffected Labour party voters. From one of the best pieces of journalism I've read during the campaign:

QuotePolling evidence suggests most Labour voters will reject independence. But privately, Labour activists know that between one in two, and one in three, of their traditional voters have already decided to vote yes.

I asked one, an old friend I hadn't seen for at least 10 years, why he'd be voting yes. "I changed my mind quite a while ago. For me it's about the way Britain has gone - the extremes of wealth and poverty that people down south seem comfortable with, the dominance of the privately educated people in all walks of life, the rise of UKIP, the talk of leaving the EU and a Labour Party that I don't really recognise any more".

He is not alone. Social attitudes surveys reveal that Scottish public opinion, on any given question, is not very different to opinion elsewhere in the UK. The Scots do not seem to be more left-wing, issue-by-issue, than anyone else - at least not by very much.

Why, then, do the Scots vote so differently? Why is it that the central Edinburgh constituency that I live in returns a Labour MP dependably at every general election? When I moved here in the 1970s and 80s, it was a Tory seat and Edinburgh was mostly a Tory city.

What is happening in Scotland is a revolt against what is perceived to be the growing inequality of British society - the apparent retreat from the ideals of social mobility, from the social justice agenda that characterised post-war Britain from the 40s to the 80s. The need for independence is the desire that private endeavour and reward should be connected in some way to the greater public good.

There is clearly an appeal to some Labour voters that an independent Scotland could be a fairer, more just society; it is striking to me how often that is articulated by yes campaigners, much more than talk of the flag, or national identity.

One view is that the long-term direction of travel is clear and that independence will, one day, happen in a series of increments. Privately, Labour activists concede that that is something that they will need to address in the years ahead if they win.

There is another view that says 2014 is the high water mark of the independence aspiration that has been bubbling since the 1980s.

"It's your generation of Labour voters, Allan," one young Labour activist told me, implying that this disloyalty to Labour is largely confined to those with adult memories of the Thatcher years. "It's not my generation.

When next will the Nationalists' stars align so perfectly - an SNP majority at Holyrood, a Tory-led government at Westminster, the generation that came of age during the difficult and polarising Thatcher premiership still active and still angry?" he said.

"The pro-independence Labour vote," another activist said, "is middle-aged, scunnered, and male." This, he said, is its last chance.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/2014/newsspec_8699/index.html

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 15 September, 2014, 10:41:31 AM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 14 September, 2014, 08:47:41 PM


This is pretty much my own analysis, but 'it really doesn't matter' isn't much of a rallying cry:

Quotehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/brettarends/2014/09/12/would-scottish-independence-destroy-britain/

Most of What You're Hearing About Scottish Independence Is Wrong


Scottish independence would change almost nothing. It would have little long-term effect on the economy, or on the Scottish budget. Currently, Scotland is a largely self-governing nation of five million people within the European Union. If Scotland votes for independence, within a couple of years it will be... er... a largely self-governing nation of five million people within the European Union.

Anyone who thinks that Scotland will have an easy time entering the EU has been paying absolutely no attention to Spanish politics or to the hoops that new candidate countries have had to jump through.  Scotland's trajectory will be like New Zealand's in the 1980's once its preferential trading partnership with Britain was severed.  Yes, like New Zealand, it will probably eventually stabilise (albeit with lower median income levels), but the pain of reaching that outcome will drag on for more than a decade. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 03:56:02 PM
It is not all doom and gloom. Scotland is an extremly resource rich nation: The obvious is oil; massive seams of extractable coal; bountiful agricultural land; wind and water resources; rich coastal fisheries and to cap it all an industrious, well educated population, with a low popuoation to land area. Unlike New Zealand it has links to the boggest market place in the world.
All of these are factors in it's favour, and if properly managed in the interests of the Scottish people the aggegrate spread of potential revenue streams will benefit the people in general; not the 5% currently hoovering up the dividends. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 15 September, 2014, 05:32:08 PM
Anyay, since when was "It'll be hard!" a valid reason not  to do something? Yeah, we should only do easy stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 15 September, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 15 September, 2014, 05:32:08 PM
Anyay, since when was "It'll be hard!" a valid reason not  to do something? Yeah, we should only do easy stuff.

You see things; and you say, 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say, "Why not?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: LARF on 15 September, 2014, 07:42:12 PM
Quote from: McNulty on 14 September, 2014, 10:51:50 AM
As a Scot, I don't have a problem with the English. I just want the people in Scotland to run their own country and get the weapons of mass destruction out. I truly believe that we will be better neighbours with our English friends when we don't have the opportunity to blame Westminster for unpopular laws imposed on us.

Been sitting on the sidelines watching this, but after seeing the above quote and having a play around with this: http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ today I had to step in. Doesn't matter whether your nuclear arsenal is in Scotland or England, or Ireland or Wales - we are all doomed!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 15 September, 2014, 07:52:44 PM
hahaha!
'100mt Tsar Bomba'...
:D

"casualties could not be estimated"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 September, 2014, 07:54:09 PM
Quote from: LARF on 15 September, 2014, 07:42:12 PM
Doesn't matter whether your nuclear arsenal is in Scotland or England, or Ireland or Wales - we are all doomed!

You're never more than five feet away from a Scottish cliché:


(https://possil.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/frazerdm1112_228x374.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 07:59:42 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 15 September, 2014, 08:01:44 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 15 September, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 15 September, 2014, 05:32:08 PM
Anyay, since when was "It'll be hard!" a valid reason not  to do something? Yeah, we should only do easy stuff.

You see things; and you say, 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say, "Why not?"

Absolutely.  Problem is, as everyone who was enthusiastic about Barack Obama in 2008 can tell you, that feeling doesn't have staying power.  Great for the big one-off vote, but once the ugly reality of EU rule sets in (speaking as one who already lives in a small country which knows just how much more unsentimental the big EU countries are about smaller economies than the UK whenever things get tough), you're in for a fucking horrible hangover.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 08:25:32 PM
The resemblences with Obama are indeed there but the situation is different in some respects: Scotlands choice is independence or not. They have the ability to take the means towards a better future entirely within their own hands. People in the states in 2008 were voting a new president into an already established system with obvious status quos in place (namely the vested interests: bankers, hedgefunds, mega-corporations and the military industrial complex). Obama in the best scenario: got bogged down by the sheer inertia engendered by these interests and a wholly antipathic Republican party or in the worst scenario: was already bought and paid for by these interests.
In regard to the EU are we all not already in the EU. I'm not it's biggest fan in terms of lack of accountability and adherence to money TTIP springs to mind. There have been some good things the most obvious being the prote tions in place for people who work etc.
But again Scotland if it votes yes can then have an informed debate on whom it wishes to be linked to and what governance it will have, that will be the key to it's future prosperity, and the decisions to be made will be theirs and theirs alone. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 15 September, 2014, 09:31:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 08:25:32 PM
Scotlands choice is independence or not. They have the ability to take the means towards a better future entirely within their own hands.
and
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 08:25:32 PM
Scotland if it votes yes can then have an informed debate on whom it wishes to be linked to and what governance it will have, that will be the key to it's future prosperity, and the decisions to be made will be theirs and theirs alone. Z

Correctimundo.
Exactly why the current debate is NOT ABOUT the SNP or the LABOUR PARTY, regardless of what opinion you copy/paste on that subject. The party-politics discussion is a sideshow, which can't really take place until after the referendum (should the result be Yes) because the No campaign Parties have given no outline of what they would do should Scotland go independent- for blindingly obvious reasons- that would be so spectacularly stupid even THEY wouldn't do it.
It's not up to the SNP or the Greens or Solidarity or Scottish Socialist Party or any other party supporting the Yes campaign, or any of the activist groups such as or RIM or Yes LGBT, Yes NHS Workers, Farmers for Yes, to define what Labour/ Liberal/ Conservative policy might be.

I don't buy the Obama analogy- it's a flawed analogy in that it is nothing like what is going on. America was voting for a PARTY and a MANIFESTO represented by Obama. Scotland is not voting for ANY parties- neither Yes Scotland or Better Together are political parties.

Anyway- Yes, No, Not Voting... it's your vote, use it how you want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 07:14:28 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2014, 08:25:32 PM
the decisions to be made will be theirs and theirs alone. Z

I keep seeing this statement made over and over again.  Yet as a country you're intending to immediately outsource your fiscal policies via currency union, drastically limiting your choices.  The likelihood is that the EU will force you into signing up to the same policies as other new member states - that will be the price of admission - and you'll thus have even less room for manoeuvre than you have at present.  Bearing in mind that almost 50% of your population are not onside for this change, and many of those remaining have no idea of the costs in rising unemployment rates and real austerity (far beyond the relatively minor austerity of the present Tory government) you'll have to bear, and I can't see any good result in the short term (say the next decade). 

Mind you, a No vote on a slim margin followed by a negotiated devo max is also going to be pretty bloody awful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 07:45:51 AM
Dudley, we're going over old ground here. This is about more than balancing an accounts ledger. I have listened to the no camps increasingly frenetic arguments over the past few days and frankly I'm finding them much more risable than the yes camps. The politicians arrogantly thought a no vote was a sure bet and pretty much never bothered their backsides doing anything more than the bare minimum in this campaign. It is only after the polls narrowed over the  past week or so that it has dawned on these....for the  want of a better word: 'clowns' that their careers and status in power are on the  line.
The negotiations in what ever form they take may not pan out as you think, Scotland isn't by any streach a dead duck with no bargining power and naivety in negotiation is not in my opinion a Scottish trait.
The mention of 50% not on board is just that old democratic thingy....we are foisted with minority governments in Westminister in perputity (avereging 40%of the electorate) we just have to live with that.
I hope I'm not being too strident here by the way. Z
Ps I'm from NI now there's a real political train wreck for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 September, 2014, 08:09:10 AM
You are all forgetting the most important thing!

How much will it cost to put Scottish embassies around the globe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 September, 2014, 08:46:57 AM
DOOOOOMED! WE'RE AAAALLLL DOOOOOOMED!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 09:06:51 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 07:45:51 AM
naivety in negotiation is not in my opinion a Scottish trait.

Judging from the way the Yes campaign have responded to bad news, naiveté has become a Scottish trait.  Spanish Foreign Minister and Prime Minister both make unequivocal statements that Scotland will take minimum five years to join the EU (meaning a closed border with rUK for five years, BTW) - Salmond says they'll change their minds.  All UK parties and a considerable majority (3/4) of polled rUK voters say currency union with rUK is out of the question - Sturgeon says they'll change their minds.  This is madness on stilts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 09:58:25 AM
Okay, there's two days to go, I'm going to make a prediction!  No - 54%  Yes - 46%.  I think the combined assaults of Project Fear and Project Bribe will, in the end, be enough for a No vote.  I really hope I'm wrong!

The idea that a country like Scotland with its brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc., couldn't stand on its own is nonsense.  And that's from an Englishman! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 16 September, 2014, 10:00:24 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie
The idea that a country like Scotland with its brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc., couldn't stand on its own is nonsense.  And that's from an Englishman!

But were they brilliant because they were Scottish, or British?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 10:04:49 AM
Well, that's what they're about to decide!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 10:40:47 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 09:58:25 AM
The idea that a country like Scotland with its brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc., couldn't stand on its own is nonsense.  And that's from an Englishman!

Yes, clearly the poorer nations of the world are simply genetically inferior and unable to produce brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 16 September, 2014, 10:59:44 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 10:40:47 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 09:58:25 AM
The idea that a country like Scotland with its brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc., couldn't stand on its own is nonsense.  And that's from an Englishman!

Yes, clearly the poorer nations of the world are simply genetically inferior and unable to produce brilliant engineers, inventors, artists, designers, businessmen,  etc., etc.

Eh? Where in OT's post was there any insinuation of believing Scots to be racially superior as opposed to, say, having benefitted from a first world education system and infrastructure? I object to a lot of Tankie's views but this was scurrilous libel on your part.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 11:06:10 AM
What the f**k were you implying by that post, Dudley?  I believe all nations should be self-governing!

Thanks, JPMaybe.  At least you got my meaning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 12:05:53 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 16 September, 2014, 10:59:44 AM
Eh? Where in OT's post was there any insinuation of believing Scots to be racially superior as opposed to, say, having benefitted from a first world education system and infrastructure? I object to a lot of Tankie's views but this was scurrilous libel on your part.

Eh, I misunderstood.  Apologies. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 September, 2014, 12:17:46 PM
So Phones 4 U has gone down the swanny. Looks like there'll be a lot of empty units on the high street again.

I went in there once and some idiot tried to pressure sell to me, which resulted in me buggering off never to return.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 September, 2014, 12:21:18 PM
Nope...Spanish PMs position seems to be that Scotland would be a new state, and have to apply as such, taking a few years. Thing is, he doesn't get to decide what laws apply. EU president says Scotland wouldnt be a new member state and that the application would be much faster.
Spanish PM could vote against Scotland membership, but has suggested he won't.

Google Bang!

Good luck building that wall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 September, 2014, 12:31:47 PM
And of course the Spainish have no vested interest in discouraging wayward states from trying for indepenence...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 16 September, 2014, 12:37:10 PM
Wouldn't the cost of anything other than a currency union mean that rUK business leaders will be pretty sharpish in insisting we have one?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 12:40:58 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 16 September, 2014, 12:21:18 PM
Nope...Spanish PMs position seems to be that Scotland would be a new state, and have to apply as such, taking a few years. Thing is, he doesn't get to decide what laws apply. EU president says Scotland wouldnt be a new member state and that the application would be much faster.
Spanish PM could vote against Scotland membership, but has suggested he won't.

Google Bang!

Good luck building that wall.

Juncker simply said that Scotland would be treated as a special case and not included in the terms of the freeze on new members.  He has made no commitment on the crucial question of Scotland being forced to join the Euro, which would be as much of a disaster as it's been for everyone except Germany.  Representatives of several European countries (MEPs and national reps) have made it quite clear that euro membership and Schengen are preconditions for negotiation. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2014, 12:53:08 PM
Nicola Sturgeon today:
Quote"If we have our hands on the levers of economic decision-making, if we have access to our own resources, then we are able to design an economic policy to suit our needs.

But surely without their own currency, they WON'T have their hands on those levers - even less than they do now.

I read one commentator that thought Salmond has really shot himself in the foot with the the way he's handled the whole currency question - if he'd said from the outset "we'll have a Scottish pound, pegged to the British pound" it would never have become such a decisive issue, but his reluctance to give a plan B (and then to give three), and his insistence that Westminster and the BoE will simply change it's mind after a Yes vote, have simply been a gift to the BT campaign.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 September, 2014, 01:19:53 PM
The rules over who can, must, or can't join the Euro are, at best, labyrinthian.  Certain aspects of thelaw say any new states must join the Euro at some point, others that it is entirely voluntary. There is no precedent for part of an existing EU state to become a new EU state. The Yes campaign have said that Scotland would not have problems. The No campaign have said Scotland would be beset with insurmountable problems. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.  Just because it might be difficult doesn't make it worthwhile.

As for control over "economic decision making", the BoE sets interest rates as an independen body, and has done since Brown was chancellor. Doesnt that mean that Westminster doesn't have control of their levers either? An independent Scotland wouldn't  have control over its central bank. A non independent Scotland wouldnt either.

There was a Plan B since the SNP published its whitepaper. They didn't publicize it because you don't go into negotiations letting everyone know about your backup plan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 01:57:52 PM
On top of that, that's only the SNP's plan- if they don't get voted in at the first general election of an independent Scottish Parliament then, obviously, their plans are oot the windae straight off the bat.  Solidarity wants our own money (so do I), wants rid of the Queen and Civil list (so do I) and a new Nationalised Bank out of the hands of the corporate stranglehold. Clearly- a different proposal to the SNP. I'm sure there will be Yes Campaigners who want closer ties with Europe and the adoption of the Euro- dunno who those maddies are.
No-one knows what the Labour Party, Conservatives and Liberals plans will be and if you're waiting to hear them, don't hold your breath- that would be suicidal for them. If they released a 'what if' proposal and the Scottish electorate decided they liked those ideas better than what they offer as a Westminster British party- they will lose their own voters to 'Yes'. Not to mention the (righteous) indignation of rUK voters when they say 'how come the same party offers this to the jocks and not to us?' The rift would cause the break up of the British mainstream parties anyway. They CANNOT do that.
The fact remains - this debate is not about fiscal policies etc, it cannot be because not everyone is in a position to  clearly state their case until the referendum is won/ lost.

The debate is simply this- Are we CAPABLE of governing our own affairs or do we need Westminster to do it for us? The shape of that government will be campaigned for over the following year by PARTIES, and THEN will be the time for these discussions about the exact nature of independence- determined by a democratically elected gvt. AT THIS TIME, these arguments are a side-show distraction from the immediate question.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2014, 12:53:08 PM
Nicola Sturgeon today:
Quote"If we have our hands on the levers of economic decision-making, if we have access to our own resources, then we are able to design an economic policy to suit our needs.

But surely without their own currency, they WON'T have their hands on those levers - even less than they do now.

I read one commentator that thought Salmond has really shot himself in the foot with the the way he's handled the whole currency question - if he'd said from the outset "we'll have a Scottish pound, pegged to the British pound" it would never have become such a decisive issue, but his reluctance to give a plan B (and then to give three), and his insistence that Westminster and the BoE will simply change it's mind after a Yes vote, have simply been a gift to the BT campaign.

Again- you misunderstand entirely what is happening. WE ARE NOT VOTING FOR THE SNP FFS. That is their plan. YES SCOTLAND IS NOT A POLITICAL PARTY- they have no fiscal policy- they don't need one as THEY ARE NOT A PARTY. When you misunderstand what is happening at such a fundamental level, and continue along this line, you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 16 September, 2014, 02:15:03 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2014, 12:53:08 PM
Nicola Sturgeon today:
Quote"If we have our hands on the levers of economic decision-making, if we have access to our own resources, then we are able to design an economic policy to suit our needs.

But surely without their own currency, they WON'T have their hands on those levers - even less than they do now.

I read one commentator that thought Salmond has really shot himself in the foot with the the way he's handled the whole currency question - if he'd said from the outset "we'll have a Scottish pound, pegged to the British pound" it would never have become such a decisive issue, but his reluctance to give a plan B (and then to give three), and his insistence that Westminster and the BoE will simply change it's mind after a Yes vote, have simply been a gift to the BT campaign.

Again- you misunderstand entirely what is happening. WE ARE NOT VOTING FOR THE SNP FFS. That is their plan. YES SCOTLAND IS NOT A POLITICAL PARTY- they have no fiscal policy- they don't need one as THEY ARE NOT A PARTY. When you misunderstand what is happening at such a fundamental level, and continue along this line, you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.

The SNP will be the party in power throughout the independence negotiations and for the first few months of independence.  You are voting for them to have full charge of negotiations and to set all terms of reference for the future country, serious and significant commitments (such as currency union) that no future Scottish government will be able to change without breaking international treaties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 02:37:37 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.

Given that he doesn't have a vote, there's really no need for you be quite such a dick about it, is there?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 02:37:37 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.

Given that he doesn't have a vote, there's really no need for you be quite such a dick about it, is there?

Jim

Perhaps, but- given his sneering and inflammatory statements earlier which were little more than poking a hornets nest, DDD really shouldn't have expected any more. And whilst I certainly didn't need to be a dick about it, I felt justified in wanting to be. Feel free to differ in opinion on that, I can live with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 03:04:09 PM
Sorry lads, I'm very busy at work and am trying to follow this thread as best I can....let's keep this to the debate and not let acronomy get in the way of what had been a heated but civilised discussion, pretty please. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 03:07:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 03:04:09 PM
Sorry lads, I'm very busy at work and am trying to follow this thread as best I can....let's keep this to the debate and not let acronomy get in the way of what had been a heated but civilised discussion, pretty please.

NO! YUOR MOM!!1!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2014, 03:14:37 PM
I believe the YES campaign has invited our countrymen/women in the NO campaign to join Team Scoltand post vote.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 03:16:11 PM
Fair enough. People have to understand- you are one step away from it if you are not in Scotland. Here- it is the topic of conversation everywhere all the time- not for nothing have people been out in force on the street over this weekend. Passions are aflame and the debate is often very heated- the stakes are high and the level of dirty tricks from the UK establishment has plumbed the absolute depths. I mean no harm to DDD on a personal level, but his attitude on this topic was something I felt was little more than trolling- not that I am accusing Dan of being like that all the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2014, 03:17:51 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 02:37:37 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.

Given that he doesn't have a vote, there's really no need for you be quite such a dick about it, is there?

Jim

Perhaps, but- given his sneering and inflammatory statements earlier which were little more than poking a hornets nest, DDD really shouldn't have expected any more. And whilst I certainly didn't need to be a dick about it, I felt justified in wanting to be. Feel free to differ in opinion on that, I can live with it.

I hope that none of my posts were "sneering", that was certainly not my intent and I'll apologise if they came across that way, but I'll hold my hands up to inflammatory - it's an inflammatory issue for all of us.

I'll bite my tongue on this debate now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 03:18:39 PM
Ach well, sure I tried. Z  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 03:35:04 PM
No problem Dan, I apologise for being a dick about it. I (correctly) thought you were being inflammatory and called you on it, Jim felt I was being a dick about it- and I was, quite intentionally, and called me on it. Apologies have been swapped and everyone is happy again.

Please, feel free to continue, DDD. It's not on me to say what you can or can't do or say- there is no intention to stifle debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 03:16:11 PM
Fair enough. People have to understand- you are one step away from it if you are not in Scotland. Here- it is the topic of conversation everywhere all the time- not for nothing have people been out in force on the street over this weekend. Passions are aflame and the debate is often very heated- the stakes are high and the level of dirty tricks from the UK establishment has plumbed the absolute depths. I mean no harm to DDD on a personal level, but his attitude on this topic was something I felt was little more than trolling- not that I am accusing Dan of being like that all the time.

I'm not sure how you got to 'trolling' from DDD's post.

Salmond and the SNP are certainly the primary face of the Yes campaign and, as Dudley notes, theirs will certainly be the steering hands in the event of a 'yes' vote. Nothing wrong with that — independence for Scotland is their raison d'être, after all.

However, the more I look at this issue, the more convinced I am that Salmond and the Yes campaign's insistence that there will be a currency union serves their "everything will be basically the same, only better" rhetoric, which in turn serves his (entirely legitimate) independence ambitions, but does not actually serve the interests of Scotland particularly well.

Imagine, for example, the rUK and Scots economies diverge — the sovereign wealth fund and heavy investment in public services provides a stable employment base and steady economic growth in Scotland. rUK, possibly under a Tory government lead by that idiot Boris Yeltsin Johnson, possibly in a UKIP coalition, pursue yet more austerity: the public services are gutted, the minimum wage is abolished, we possibly leave the EU, and the rUK economy experiences a balance of trade crisis, or an unwanted surge in credit as everyone borrows to shore up their personal finances, or any number of other things that might necessitate a rise in interest rates that would serve the rUK economy and be catastrophic for the Scots economy. Do you honestly think the BoE is going to pause for even a moment to consider the interests of a separate, independent nation with 9% of the population of the rUK?

In fact, the only worse option would be the 'Panama' option, which should prompt all right-minded citizens to pursue any politician seriously proposing it for a developed, first-world nation through the streets pelting him/her with rotten fruit.

The more I look at it, the more I become convinced that the best option would be for Scotland to have it's own independent state bank, issue its own currency, and undertake to peg it to sterling for —say— five years to calm any nerves in the financial markets.

Charitably, I would say that the Yes campaign are being hopelessly optimistic on this issue. Less charitably, I would argue that they are being actively disingenuous. Whilst I fall — sentimentally, at least — on the side of preserving the Union, if you go (no, realistically, when you go... I don't think there's any way this genie goes back in its bottle) then I want you to go as a formative nation with a far clearer and more pragmatic idea of what you will become, rather than leaving crucial economic issues to "Fuck it, we'll get rid of the English and sort that shit out afterwards"...

Cheers
Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 03:49:33 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 03:36:04 PM
I'm not sure how you got to 'trolling' from DDD's post.
Quote

I felt he was poking a hornets nest with a deliberately inflammatory post, which I also took to be fairly sneering. Trying to get a reaction. Trolling.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 03:36:04 PM
The more I look at it, the more I become convinced that the best option would be for Scotland to have it's own independent state bank, issue its own currency, and undertake to peg it to sterling for —say— five years to calm any nerves in the financial markets.

I agree. Many others agree also. I also want rid of the Royals and a strengthening of trade unions. I want big business and 'interest groups' out of education- that is for after the referendum,the need for absolute unity and mutual support in both camps it is a necessary measure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Devons Daddy on 16 September, 2014, 04:16:23 PM
the BIG VOTE
calhab goes it alone, and Brit Cit invades for the OIL that one.
is it all  media hype it to be or is it really that close?

i don't live in BRIT CIT so its a genuine question. have not done so for 25 years
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 04:26:44 PM
It is very hard to tell, areas differ- on the ground it looks like a massive Yes in the South. We don't do mass mob stuff up this way. There's a lot of No signs around farmlands in Aberdeenshire- but who knows? They might all be the same two or three farmers, they might not.

The Yes campaign is certainly more visible up here, but I clock a fair few quietly going about their business with no badges, though possibly not as much the number of Yes ones- however we have an RAF base and an Army base (which may or may not be meaningful), here and I am unclear on how this will play out. Unfortunately the next couple of days are squeaky-bum time and there is a sense of frenetic tension- call it fear or trepidation, whatever. I'm not sure that anyone is particularly confident about how things will go- just nervous.

I'm sure other boarders have a clearer view of other areas of the country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 04:35:03 PM
Quote from: Devons Daddy on 16 September, 2014, 04:16:23 PM
is it all  media hype it to be or is it really that close?

All the polls have pretty much been within their own margin of error for at least a week now. On top of that, I've heard a couple of statisticians express concerns over the sampling methods so, at this point, you might as well toss a coin to call the outcome.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2014, 04:39:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 04:35:03 PM
Quote from: Devons Daddy on 16 September, 2014, 04:16:23 PM
is it all  media hype it to be or is it really that close?

All the polls have pretty much been within their own margin of error for at least a week now. On top of that, I've heard a couple of statisticians express concerns over the sampling methods so, at this point, you might as well toss a coin to call the outcome.

Cheers

Jim

or have a punt at ladbrokes  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 04:43:26 PM
I've been following this fairly closely from afar (Peterborough) for some time and I'm surprised that not many people seem to have picked up on the wording of the question being asked.  Surely, "Should Scotland be an independent country" invites a Yes vote amongst the undecided?  If I was a Unionist, I'd have been much happier with "Should Scotland remain part of the United Kingdom."  Or am I just talking nonsense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2014, 04:53:26 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 04:43:26 PM
I've been following this fairly closely from afar (Peterborough) for some time and I'm surprised that not many people seem to have picked up on the wording of the question being asked.  Surely, "Should Scotland be an independent country" invites a Yes vote amongst the undecided?  If I was a Unionist, I'd have been much happier with "Should Scotland remain part of the United Kingdom."  Or am I just talking nonsense?

You could say Mr Cameron wasn't really paying attention when he agreed this, but i couldn't possibly commet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2014, 04:59:34 PM
Ain't that the truth, mate, I think you've got it in one!  And, if the vote is as close as the polls are predicting, it could make all the difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 16 September, 2014, 05:01:05 PM
Were planning a trip to Scotland, hopefully towards the end of March next year. Fingers crossed all this hullabaloo will have died down by then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 05:06:02 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2014, 04:53:26 PM
You could say Mr Cameron wasn't really paying attention when he agreed this, but i couldn't possibly commet.

Well, it's an improvement on the SNP's original "Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country" but I'm going to reiterate my long-held theory that Cameron has (or rather had — see below) no interest in winning the referendum. Obviously, he has to pay lip service to the union, as leader of the Tory party, but a sudden 60-seat advantage and the opportunity ditch the LibDems in the next parliament is clearly going to be attractive.

Of course, what Call-Me-Dave had failed to consider until the last few days is that he's not actually well-liked in his own party, and there's a sizeable chunk that will happily take the electoral advantage of Scottish independence and then use the fragmentation of the union as a pretext to kick him out of the leadership and install Boris instead. I think it's this that has suddenly dawned on him and explains his sudden keenness to make the case for the Union.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 05:17:26 PM
Also a 'Yes' campaign has a more positive ring to it than a 'No' one- so some believe, and I think the SNP wanted to ensure they got the 'Yes'.
There was debate over a third Devo Max type option too, but that didn't happen- now it's trying to be pushed onto the table in the face of Tory and Labour backbench revolts, effectively changing the options as laid out in the referendum guide.
There will be no Devo-max, there will be no more powers. Cameron, Darling, Gordon, Brown and Ed Moribund can talk all they like, but...
1) The Labour Party are not in office and have no power to carry it out, so Darling, Brown and Miliband have no chips to deal with (Prescott likely ate them).

2) David Cameron is not a king. We are not ruled by his decree- new powers would have to be ratified in a democratically elected parliament and there are clear messages from both Conservative and Labour backbench mp's that they will block it. I don't blame them- meekly accepting the dictats of the party leader smacks of dictatorship.

I also agree that Jim is probably right in thinking about the Tory leadership that way- I too think Boris will be the UK's next Prime Minister in a Conservative/ UKIP alliance. This is one of the reasons, I feel, we HAVE to leave the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 05:30:19 PM
Is there any suggestion of Scotland becoming a republic? (Not been following this story, obviously, just asking.) Are there any Scottish royals you'd fancy as head of state or would you prefer a president or prime minister?
.
Will you be joining NATO? What about the UN Security Council - will you still retain your part of being a permanent member or demoted to the rank and file? I'm guessing you'll still want to be part of the Commonwealth but maybe you won't. Will you devise your own foreign policy or just do what the US tells you like the rest of us? What happens when, say, Cameron orders troops into Syria or somewhere? What will become of Scottish involvement in organisations like ESA or projects like CERN?
.
I'd also just like to don my hat of pedantry for a moment to point out that no country is really independent in this modern world. I'm wondering if the question should be about equal interdependence and be asked of everyone in the UK (and Europe, the rest of the world, etc.).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 05:34:53 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 05:17:26 PM
I too think Boris will be the UK's next Prime Minister in a Conservative/ UKIP alliance. This is one of the reasons, I feel, we HAVE to leave the UK.

I feel much the same.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 05:43:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 05:30:19 PM
Is there any suggestion of Scotland becoming a republic ...

Salmond says the Queen stays as head of state, he wants to remain in NATO (but doesn't want nukes to stay in Scotland), and how else would we win any medals in athletics if it wasn't for the Commonwealth games? This probably gives answers to most questions you or anyone else might have:

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 05:45:18 PM
Not from the SNP- Salmonds wants to keep the queen and a reduced civil list. Other parties have different ideas, or maybe similar- we don't know what Labour, Conservatives and Liberals will do in the event. Solidarity wants a republic, I daresay SSP want that too.

Jim- I feel for the English, Welsh and N. Irish electorate who are opposed to this, we at least possibly have some means to escape- but I have no faith in their numbers or ability to stop it. With BNP having been in the picture and now UKIP as the acceptable face of that type of politics- where all those EDL and BNP voters will go now their parties are broken. Farage is a serious threat now. Like Boris- sneaked up on us like a humorous goon we can all laugh at- not even an elected UK MP, but yet gets media-time on the indy debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 05:47:18 PM
Well said dog, the referendum has wide ranging repercussions and frankly a nation with Boris Johnson in charge on an user right ticked is unimaginable. He's a cute hour that boy....a dissembling buffon on the outside and a ruthless free marketeer on the inside.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 05:49:15 PM
For user right ticked. Read uber right ticket. :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 06:06:29 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 04:26:44 PM
It is very hard to tell, areas differ- on the ground it looks like a massive Yes in the South. We don't do mass mob stuff up this way. There's a lot of No signs around farmlands in Aberdeenshire- but who knows? They might all be the same two or three farmers, they might not. The Yes campaign is certainly more visible up here, but I clock a fair few quietly going about their business with no badges, though possibly not as much the number of Yes ones ...

I'm sure other boarders have a clearer view of other areas of the country.

Similar in the small former mining villages of rural central Scotland; every farmer's field has a NO sign and every council flat has a YES sign and a saltire flag hanging from the window. It's incredibly rare to see a NO sign, but - since most polls agree the result is too close to call - that probably tells you more about the psychology of the debate than it does about the likely outcome.

During a conversation the other day a YES voting pal made the observation that NO voters generally tend to belong to a higher income bracket and social/professional status. I'm not sure I'd disagree.

One of the guys at my work says his wife is counting the postal vote for our local authority area, and he claims she told him it's a fifty/fifty split.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 06:14:09 PM
So you, Dog Deever, proudhuff, 8 ball  and Trip will swing it for the yes camp then Sauchie? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 06:15:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 05:30:19 PM
I'd also just like to don my hat of pedantry for a moment to point out that no country is really independent in this modern world. I'm wondering if the question should be about equal interdependence and be asked of everyone in the UK (and Europe, the rest of the world, etc.).

It is about being independent of the UK, not of everything. And frankly, no- it's our countries sovreignty, it is down to Scotland to decide. London has had its say for 300 years- it's our turn now, because they have made a shambles of it.
We, as a country, don't want privatised NHS, prescription charges, bedroom tax, student fees. The rest of the UK already has that, except for the privatised NHS- which is beginning now and will be complete before you can say "hang on a mo...". There is a distinct possibility that if we remain in the UK we will lose all of that too soon after.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 06:16:10 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 06:14:09 PM
So you, Dog Deever, proudhuff, 8 ball  and Trip will swing it for the yes camp then Sauchie? Z

My three boys are all Yes and my wife is away on the 18th and I'm her proxy...  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 06:21:51 PM

I'm voting NO, neebs. Not because I think independence would be a disaster or that Scotland's incapable of governing itself *, but because I don't think replacing Holyrood rule with Westminster rule will make any difference at all. If something more radical was on offer I would be interested, but it isn't.



* although Scotland's current ruling elite are a sorry, sorry shower
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2014, 06:22:30 PM
Its a funny old game. In my experience the left is split 70/30 for YES, but there are unusual YES and NO voters all around, I have ex-Forces workmates who I would have assumed were NOs have been out working their socks of for YES and slipping The Wee Blue Book into everyone's pocket, meanwhile ex-punks from my old scheme are dead set against it. The rule book ready has been ripped up, the future is unwritten!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 06:15:12 PM
London has had its say for 300 years-

James I/VI could have moved the seat of government to Edinburgh, you know, but rather fancied the idea of lording it up over the London court.

I thought Radio 4's Now Show identified a crucial tactical error by the No campaign when they failed to recruit Christopher Walken to deliver the 'Better Together' message (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI7UrI5FvJQ&feature=youtu.be&t=15m56s)...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 06:32:21 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2014, 06:23:57 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 06:15:12 PM
London has had its say for 300 years-

James I/VI could have moved the seat of government to Edinburgh, you know, but rather fancied the idea of lording it up over the London court.

I thought Radio 4's Now Show identified a crucial tactical error by the No campaign when they failed to recruit Christopher Walken to deliver the 'Better Together' message (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI7UrI5FvJQ&feature=youtu.be&t=15m56s)...

Cheers

Jim

True, but that was before the Union of parliaments (1707) and is only relevant to the Crown not Parliament.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 06:43:04 PM
Sorry if my questions were obvious. I really can't get interested in this pantomime and I don't mean any ioffence by that - I know a lot of people are taking this very seriously. Of course I take it seriously too but for very different reasons, which I won't repeat here.
.
I really don't care about "Scotland" as, to me, it's just an artificial entity. That said, I don't care about "England", "Wales", "Northern Ireland" or any other of them for that matter. Now, the Scottish people, the English people - all people - I do care about. I think that personal independence is the goal for all of us.
.
Yeah, yeah - I know; shut up, Shark, you old idealist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 06:49:51 PM
Oh sharky you old idealist where ever would we be without you. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 07:24:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 06:43:04 PM
I really don't care about "Scotland" as, to me, it's just an artificial entity

Aye, that's pretty much my own outlook.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 16 September, 2014, 07:29:44 PM
Quote from: sauchie karate club on 16 September, 2014, 07:24:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2014, 06:43:04 PM
I really don't care about "Scotland" as, to me, it's just an artificial entity

Aye, that's pretty much my own outlook.

CONFIRMED - Scotland is the Matrix.

I'm voting yes even though I suspect it'll all go tits up pronto. If I find that my quality of life gets better that'll be great but if I'm bashing your head in for a can of beans while dressed like I just stepped out the thunderdome then thats good as well. Win/Win!

I HAVE to vote yes just so I can see what happens next. Thats about as far as Ive thought it through.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 07:37:01 PM
Sauchie, forgive me for trying to sway you this once, there is still time...

If you are looking for radical alternatives to the main thrust of where the debate is at, it depends greatly on whether you are radical Left, or radical right. The no vote has by far the Lion's share of the far right (UKIP, BNP, NF, Britannica, Scottish Defence League and the Orange Order, although the CPGB are in there too (clue in the name). If you are one of these (and I'm not asking) then, obviously- I cannot sway you.

Most of the radical left seem to be either 'abstain' or 'Yes'.
Anarchists I know are divided on this and will vote according to whether they see it as 'endorsing the politics of both nationalism on both sides and endorsing parliamentary democracy'; others see it as a vote for decentralisation of power and not at all about Nationalism. Some radical left see this as a chance to remove last vestiges of Imperialism.

You won't get a separate currency or an end to Royalty out of voting No, though. There are those in the Yes camp who want that and other radical reform- such as the early repeal of a parliament that does not meet its electoral promises from Solidarity (firmly Yes)- it depends what your 'radical' constitutes, I guess. I want more radical change than the SNP too, but see independence as one step in a struggle that will likely still be ongoing when I am dead; any progressive forward move is better than either none or a backward one. Just how I see it.

My daughter has now confirmed her Yes status too. I was worried about this as her boyfriend (really pleasant and likable guy) is an all-singing and dancing, unrepentant sectarian bigot and an entrenched No voter who cannot see beyond the football vote, despite the fact he is a literate and intelligent young man, and I daresay many of his friends are the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Montynero on 16 September, 2014, 07:56:58 PM
I've been doing my own research rather than listening to the bilge pumped out by leaders on both sides. Here's my thoughts on Thursday's vote:

http://montycomics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/thoughts-on-thusdays-independence-vote.html (http://montycomics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/thoughts-on-thusdays-independence-vote.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 08:21:13 PM
The troika of political parties from Westminster appear clueless and rudderless. I have seen nothing on news magazine programmes all evening but thinly disguised panic. This is truly indicative of the level of politician we are served by nowadays. I fear greatly not for my friends in Scotland rather for my friends in England, Wales and NI. We have been living in an era of total economic mismanagement over the past 6 years. Nothing has been done to learn from the mistakes made. The move for regulation of banks and interests has not been in any real sense even seriously considered let alone implemented. We see a chancellor who's main effort to revitalise the economy has not been the necessary investment in training and infrastructure rather an artificially created property bubble, the very thing which led to our near ruin in 2007-2008 and yet we accuse the Scots of economic naivety,  seriously!!
The Scottish people.have a real opportunity to create.something different and new and as a corollary possibly shift the dynamic back into the hands of the majority of people in the rUK. If there is a no vote on Thursday, nothing will change the neo monetarist paradigm will be strengthend as the ruling elites will see a genuine effort to do something different as being quashed and the common populace suitably demoralised and even more malleable or plyable for the next butchery they intend to inflict on us.
If you're for them they'll sell you out; if you're against them they'll buy you out. I hope Scottish people are brave and steadfast and vote for the possibility of change and thusly real freedom. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 08:35:05 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 06:14:09 PM
So you, Dog Deever, proudhuff, 8 ball  and Trip will swing it for the yes camp then Sauchie? Z

I never run from a fight so I will be voting NO. I will be standing with my leftist brothers and sisters in the rest of the UK to fight against Conservative State. The rest of the UK needs Scotland's benign hand to guide it. The rest of the UK needs to sort its shit out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 08:35:05 PM
I never run from a fight so I will be voting NO. I will be standing with my leftist brothers and sisters in the rest of the UK to fight against Conservative State. The rest of the UK needs Scotland's benign hand to guide it. The rest of the UK needs to sort its shit out.

With respect, 8-Ball, I don't see a No vote advancing the Left cause in any way. A Yes win will set the far right in Scotland back YEARS. A No will set the left back years. Think Globally, act locally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 08:44:52 PM
Hear, hear DD. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 08:50:18 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 07:37:01 PM
My daughter has now confirmed her Yes status too. I was worried about this as her boyfriend (really pleasant and likable guy) is an all-singing and dancing, unrepentant sectarian bigot and an entrenched No voter who cannot see beyond the football vote, despite the fact he is a literate and intelligent young man, and I daresay many of his friends are the same.

God, yeah. Some of the most outrageous pish I've heard from friends, family, and colleagues during the debate has come from those planning to vote in the same way as me on Thursday. I'm definitely on the side of the bad guys, but that's for pragmatic reasons rather than ideology.

I really can't go see an outcome of independence other than a replication of the institutions and power structures of Westminster in Holyrood, probably with an incompetent and morally bankrupt Scottish Labour party I want nothing to do with in semi-permanent residency, or the Nats displaying the same tactical acumen in international and economic affairs as they did when they rolled over for Trump.

The promise is always that we need to take this one unpalatable step to make radical change possible, but both of the parties likely to dominate the politics of Indy Scotland are promising nothing more revolutionary than the 'vows' to devolve certain levels of decision making unveiled by the three Westminster parties today, which (rightly) impressed no-one.



(Continued)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 08:55:09 PM
see now, THIS is the debate we SHOULD have been having instead of who's having what pound or where the RBS will be headquartered- that stuff is centrist mince.

If you want to strengthen unions you won't get that through voting No, only by voting Yes then campaigning for it. Tommy Sheridan (Solidarity) is also your leftist brother, as is the Radical Independence Movement and Scottish Socialist Party (all Yes). The idea is that a Yes will inspire the rest of the UK to start pushing for reform too, failure inspires nothing and no-one. One does not have to live in the same country as another for you to stand in solidarity as brothers and sisters- independence of Scotland, in that scenario, is a sideshow.

The Scottish Labour Party are finished.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2014, 08:56:03 PM
(Continued)


Nobody likely to wield any sort of power in an independent Scotland is promising to destroy party politics and change the relationship between the electorate and their representatives in the way I consider necessary to break the stranglehold powerful economic actors and vested interests enjoy over public life in the British Isles today.

It's been genuinely exciting to see a grass roots movement of folk talking about social justice and mutual help as more important priorities than immigration or benefits cheats, but I'm deeply sceptical about the chances of that translating into the genuinely different form of government necessary to sustain those priorities beyond the binge and purge cycle of the last four UK parliaments.

I'm not rejecting the genuine aspirations of those people, I'm sticking two fingers up to what I believe will be no more than an unnecessarily expensive rebranding exercise with ill defined outcomes. I'm sceptical about the prospects of change being cynically proffered by the same tired faces for the same reason you're presumably distrustful of similar assurances of change in the event of a NO vote from Westminster.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 08:59:33 PM
This is now officially an excellent debate. Some great posts from both sides in the argument. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:00:26 PM
Sauchie- I had you pegged as a bit anarchist!

I understand your position, but if I held your view, personally I would refuse to take part and just not vote- THAT position I have a full understanding and respect for. A two fingered vote is fun and all- I just see it as destructive for those on the far left. There is a chance to build a new radical movement within whatever system the fatcats devise- a legacy for those who follow to push further. A No vote will put us back to the terrible state of leftist politics all over Britain. It's your vote and your view- fair enough, but I could not endorse it personally.
:)
I also do not believe it is 'running away from a fight'- merely breaking into chunks more manageable for the sorry state of the radical elements in the left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 09:04:17 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 08:35:05 PM
I never run from a fight so I will be voting NO. I will be standing with my leftist brothers and sisters in the rest of the UK to fight against Conservative State. The rest of the UK needs Scotland's benign hand to guide it. The rest of the UK needs to sort its shit out.

With respect, 8-Ball, I don't see a No vote advancing the Left cause in any way. A Yes win will set the far right in Scotland back YEARS. A No will set the left back years. Think Globally, act locally.

I get what you are saying and I have no intention of patronising you Dog but I do genuinely fear an English neighbour that is even more to the right than it already is. Personally, I hate the way that Scots have to wrap themselves up in the Union Jack to be accepted (Gordon Brown and Andy Murray being to notable examples) down south and I worry what will happen to other Scots living in the UK. I suspect that life will be made very hard for them. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 September, 2014, 09:20:32 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:00:26 PM
Sauchie- I had you pegged as a bit anarchist!

I understand your position, but if I held your view, personally I would refuse to take part and just not vote-


An anarchist who votes?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 16 September, 2014, 09:20:32 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:00:26 PM
Sauchie- I had you pegged as a bit anarchist!

I understand your position, but if I held your view, personally I would refuse to take part and just not vote-


An anarchist who votes?

Of course- yes. There are many shades of anarchism. You cannot build based on mutual aid without some sort of participation in society. An anarchist works on empowerment from the bottom up- starting with yourself. Taking responsibility for your own political life, instead of leaving it for others to decide. Not all anarchists vote as I have said. Anarchism is not one whole ideology and no anarchist I know follows any anarchist ideology wholly and completely.
As such it is not about the advancement of an 'ideology' or manifesto, it is about taking whatever opportunities present themselves to try to forge a better life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:36:15 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 09:04:17 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 08:35:05 PM
I never run from a fight so I will be voting NO. I will be standing with my leftist brothers and sisters in the rest of the UK to fight against Conservative State. The rest of the UK needs Scotland's benign hand to guide it. The rest of the UK needs to sort its shit out.

With respect, 8-Ball, I don't see a No vote advancing the Left cause in any way. A Yes win will set the far right in Scotland back YEARS. A No will set the left back years. Think Globally, act locally.

I get what you are saying and I have no intention of patronising you Dog but I do genuinely fear an English neighbour that is even more to the right than it already is. Personally, I hate the way that Scots have to wrap themselves up in the Union Jack to be accepted (Gordon Brown and Andy Murray being to notable examples) down south and I worry what will happen to other Scots living in the UK. I suspect that life will be made very hard for them. :(

Can't argue with what you're saying at all man- I just believe you have come to the wrong conclusion about which way serves us best. Both of you- again only the opinion of one comic geek guy.

I am hoping the left radicals in England will see the value in unity- most of the workers revolts in history were initiated by a coming together of all elements the the left, including the Social Democrat parties. Makhno's anarchists in Ukraine were separatists; in the Spanish Civil War, the Catalan anarchists were separatist, and also in previous precursory uprisings.

I have no faith in the English leftist movement to wake up- they haven't so far, they are bogged down. The crux issue for the radical vote really centres around the rise of the right wing hard liners among the English electorate- it IS frightening. THAT is the radical vote south of the border- you and Sauchie, I'm absolutely certain, are in no doubt as to the Labour Parties status as a right of centre Red Tory party- everything this week and all they have done throughout the referendum proves it, if they hadn't already. There is no alternative to that really. Up here The SNP is the most left of all the mainstream political parties in Scotland now- Salmond, cleverly, picked up what Labour dropped and swung that vote his way- he outmaneuvered them politically and it got him into power (just) not because of support for him, but for independence- the only way for the leftist Labour voters to get away from the shambles of Blair, Brown and Ed Moribund. I see 'Yes' as a localised strategic vote with global ramifications. The dis-empowerment of the UK as an entity can never be a bad thing and the last gasps of imperial delusions, hopefully, will clear the decks for REAL change.
97% registered to vote in Scotland- 97% of the eligible population engaged in political debate and exchange- such an opportunity to reinvigorate the radical left will be utterly quashed by a No vote, IMO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 09:55:06 PM
Fair enough, Dog.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:57:57 PM
 :)
I had to at least try!
I hope I achieved some degree of success, but that's your business. I'm off for the night now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 16 September, 2014, 10:11:30 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:33:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 16 September, 2014, 09:20:32 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 16 September, 2014, 09:00:26 PM
Sauchie- I had you pegged as a bit anarchist!

I understand your position, but if I held your view, personally I would refuse to take part and just not vote-


An anarchist who votes?


Of course- yes. There are many shades of anarchism. You cannot build based on mutual aid without some sort of participation in society. An anarchist works on empowerment from the bottom up- starting with yourself. Taking responsibility for your own political life, instead of leaving it for others to decide. Not all anarchists vote as I have said. Anarchism is not one whole ideology and no anarchist I know follows any anarchist ideology wholly and completely.

Which, for me, is when things start to float more towards Libertarianism or Minarchism; I'd consider Anarchy to fundamentally concern abolition of statehood -before all else- and in the current context, the Yes & No vote represent the total opposite of, but that's a digression.

I've no runner in this race, but considering the variables, it's hard to make a wholly convincing argument for a Yes vote because it's ultimately a leap of faith: you can only ever know the outcome by doing it, whereas a No vote can only ever promise more of the same, so it will come down to whether the individual voter likes to gamble in the booth, or not.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 10:59:23 PM
As an example of what I fear here is a quote from the comments section on the Guardian website -

Don't think us Brits will be in anyway charitable to a new (foreign ) Scotland. You will become as close as France or Germany and we compete heavily with them ( and that will only increase -as the next 50 years of austerity bite). If Scotland goes it alone it will not only loose it's golden goose (Britain) it will find that a Rottweiler has taken its place. Modern survival is not a charity and countries will have to do lots of unthinkable things to protect their national interests - for Britain it will mean border controls for Scotland / no pound ( meaningful) for Scotland no customers for Scotland in England ( revenge will be sweet ) if you leave we will all suffer - who do you think will join the list of who to blame - it's human nature. Most divorces end in acrimony , a bit of hate and a lot of pain - don't think this won't happen - back to human nature again.

Scary, don't ya think. That there are people who think like this. Brrr.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2014, 11:06:04 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about the Guardian comments site, it is in the main populated by f**kits of the highest order. Although it does provide good light entertainment. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 September, 2014, 11:17:33 PM
I'm still somewhat conffused as to what they will be using as currency IF they get independence. They won't get to use either the Euro or the Pound so, what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 16 September, 2014, 11:28:12 PM
For now, it will be the pound.  There is nothing that prohibits any country who wishes to use it from using it, they simply have no control over it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 12:53:56 AM
I knew I wouldn't be able to resist it.  :)
Quote
Which, for me, is when things start to float more towards Libertarianism or Minarchism;

I'd consider Anarchy to fundamentally concern abolition of statehood -before all else- and in the current context, the Yes & No vote represent the total opposite of, but that's a digression.

yeah, as I say- anarchism comes in shades and hues like every other 'ideology'. When the idea is to take responsibility for your political life, it hardly serves to follow 'one way' resolutely.

I see using the best of what is on offer at any given time- particularly with regards to decentralisation of power as the way forward whilst trying to build from the ground up by whatever the best options available are. You cannot simply 'remove the state'- how can that be a reasonable option?
Removal of the NEED for a state is the only way and that has to be built from the ground up through community groups, the division of religion and state, the division of corporate interests and the state and some mechanism to reign in rogue governments. We have to stand with the Social Democrats if they are prepared to offer concessions by way of standing against global Corporate Fascism, because they are terrified of it too.

Leninist communism smashed the left all over Europe and in the Communist Block a new elite formed- nothing changed and millions died.
Armed revolution is NOT the way- guns, bombs and force are never progressive because the poorest always pay most, and it always ends in failure of some catastrophic variety. The history whole libertarian movement from the Paris Commune up to now has shown that. In the time that the left has been crying in its beer and talking of 'things must get worse before the conditions are right', global corporate fascism has been on the rise in the most insidious ways.
We have to fight it now, and if that means standing with the SNP, or SSP or Solidarity or even a proper Labour Party- I'll do it when it has to be done, because ultimately I don't care much about my votes in general elections. I vote for what I believe is best for the poorest at any given time and have allegiance to no-one, I belong to no 'groups' nor do I subscribe to anyone's particular ideology- I've also spoiled plenty ballot papers when there is no particular 'best option' to support. I feel the desperate state of things calls for unity with everyone on the left of centre, or we are all fucked.

I don't like having to stand beside Marxists, the Nationalist Scots (not the SNP nats- the anti-English brigade) or greedy Social Democrats looking to gain a slice of the pie- but I will because I am tired of the way things are and the entire political landscape needs a total shake up. We are not strong enough to do that globally, only locally- but it is a start. Of course it is a gamble- so is the No vote, but it just has to be taken, IMO.

I fully understand 8-balls fears, they are mine too- for myself, for my kids and for my grandchildren etc- but things like the section you emboldened are the politics of fear and we really need to be fearless and push on rather than hiding away in isolation taking no significant part in the political debate. Everyone anywhere on the left spectrum- we have ALL marginalised ourselves with our own failures. It hasn't worked and we have to change before we all crash headlong into another global war for corporate interests.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2014, 02:01:19 AM
Quote from: Killer Hawk Queen on 16 September, 2014, 11:17:33 PM
I'm still somewhat conffused as to what they will be using as currency IF they get independence. They won't get to use either the Euro or the Pound so, what?

If I can draw a cheery parallel, the Irish Free State continued to use stirling from its inception until 1927, after which it created its own pound which was pegged at 1:1 with stirling right up until the late 70's, when we joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism and had to leave parity behind.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 17 September, 2014, 08:46:34 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever
We are not strong enough to do that globally, only locally- but it is a start.

I'm enjoying reading your thoughts, DD, and I'm grateful for the effort you've gone to in expressing them. I'm not clever enough to reference so many political ideologies (despite my bulging collection of Ken Loach DVDs and books...!) and I'm reluctant to pick out such a small part of your thoughts to reference. But it seems to me that the best way of combating evil – whether that be from politics, social injustice or terrorism – is for like-minded people to come together. A "Yes" vote would divide a valuable (if imperfect) group of people who share a broadly similar culture.

Surely the ultimate aim of humanity is to have no countries. New Scientist recently ran an article asking if we're near the end of nations (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329850.600-end-of-nations-is-there-an-alternative-to-countries.html). I thought the article itself was more historical than forward-looking, and somewhat inconclusive, but I like a hypothesis thay says in order to achieve equality and fairness with our brothers and sisters around the world, we need fewer countries, not more.

That's an admittedly utopian vision – but irrespective of practical, cultural and emotional arguments, it seems to me that disenfranchised Scots, and those justifying their "Yes" vote for the supposed global good, would be better to vote "No" and fight the political system from within, rather than try to set up a smaller enclave.

--

On another point, given how close the polls show the vote is likely to be, shouldn't we call off the referendum and take some time to come up with something more sophisticated and mutually-beneficial than a simple binary Yes/No choice?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 September, 2014, 09:38:37 AM
There was going to be more choice on the ballot paper, Banners, but Davey Boy rejected it!

Polls still too close to call.  In one poll the Yes vote is going up.

I've been thinking about turnout.  Surely, a high turnout favours Yes.  At the last Westminster election, I think I'm right in saying that only about 50% of people in Scotland voted.  If the turnout in this referendum is 80%+, as is being predicted, surely the majority of the extra voters are going to vote Yes, as why would you come out to vote to maintain links with Westminster when you don't vote in Westminster elections?  Just a thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 September, 2014, 09:51:37 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 September, 2014, 09:38:37 AM
There was going to be more choice on the ballot paper, Banners, but Davey Boy rejected it!

Polls still too close to call.  In one poll the Yes vote is going up.

I've been thinking about turnout.  Surely, a high turnout favours Yes.  At the last Westminster election, I think I'm right in saying that only about 50% of people in Scotland voted.  If the turnout in this referendum is 80%+, as is being predicted, surely the majority of the extra voters are going to vote Yes, as why would you come out to vote to maintain links with Westminster when you don't vote in Westminster elections?  Just a thought.

I'm on the count on Thursday night. There's been a 97% sign-up for voting... it's going to be a busy night!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 17 September, 2014, 09:53:29 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements

I'm on the cunt on Thursday night. ...it's going to be a busy night!

Lol!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2014, 09:53:57 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 17 September, 2014, 09:51:37 AM
I'm on the cunt on Thursday night.

Something you're not telling us, Richmond?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 September, 2014, 09:54:52 AM
You're on the What on Thursday night?!!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 September, 2014, 09:55:31 AM
Ha! Superb!
I have fixed my post, but left the replies for the comedy value! ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2014, 10:24:06 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 17 September, 2014, 09:55:31 AM
Ha! Superb!
I have fixed my post, but left the replies for the comedy value! ;-)

Typo of the week!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 17 September, 2014, 10:40:10 AM
Quote from: Banners on 17 September, 2014, 09:53:29 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements

I'm on the cunt on Thursday night. ...it's going to be a busy night!

Lol!

We know a song about that
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 17 September, 2014, 12:51:42 PM
Is that a Scottish word for "park bench?"

I think there is a genuine opportunity for the parties in Scotland to become better socialist parties as a result of a Yes vote. And hopefully, that will spread outside of any borders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 02:41:43 PM
QuoteBut it seems to me that the best way of combating evil – whether that be from politics, social injustice or terrorism – is for like-minded people to come together. A "Yes" vote would divide a valuable (if imperfect) group of people who share a broadly similar culture.

Surely the ultimate aim of humanity is to have no countries. New Scientist recently ran an article asking if we're near the end of nations. I thought the article itself was more historical than forward-looking, and somewhat inconclusive, but I like a hypothesis thay says in order to achieve equality and fairness with our brothers and sisters around the world, we need fewer countries, not more.

That's an admittedly utopian vision – but irrespective of practical, cultural and emotional arguments, it seems to me that disenfranchised Scots, and those justifying their "Yes" vote for the supposed global good, would be better to vote "No" and fight the political system from within, rather than try to set up a smaller enclave.

Sure- I understand- but, if borders and countries are really just lines on a map for the privileged to share out the spoils amongst themselves (and this is the democratic left's failure- they will always look to their own pockets first, but they ARE willing to give a little back, they just have a penchant for jumping ship when vast sums of cash/ power/ status get involved), then borders and lines on maps are immaterial to the greater struggle- as I said earlier- you don't have to stand in the same country as your brother/ sister to stand with them in solidarity. Capitalist/ Corporate Globalisation does not necessarily further the cause of a global fight against them- indeed that very globalisation is their strength. It is what they want- it gives them larger and larger resources with which to enforce their ideology- surely the most sensible option is to fight that unification with separatism, without resort to  Nationalism (proper nationalism), whilst finding some means of unity amongst the left WITHOUT REFERENCE to borders. The recognition that borders are artificial, does not mean they cannot be used as a tool, and discarded when they no longer have any value. The corporations are strong because they have unified through globalism- whilst all of us have been sitting around watching and the left has been posted missing.
The problem for the left is basically that there is no popular support- division, betrayal, totalitarianism, revolutionary struggle, famines and mini-holocausts are not part of any society I want to live in, and I'd question the sanity of anyone who does. The solution, after the failures in Russia, China, etc seems to have been- 'wait til it gets worse. When it gets so bad, people might want what we offer'...
!
... WTF?

I can't subscribe to that, and I can't endorse revolutionary socialism or strong state control (as a side point to that- the CPGB stand with No, not because of their name, but because their agenda of strong state control has much in common with Global Corporatism whose 'ideology' includes many ideas from the full spectrum of political and social writing/ thinking, - it just comes down to who gets the cash- private owners, or the Dictatorship of the Proletariat party.
I want less state control, but I acknowledge that few people want to just simply 'remove the state', there are legitimate concerns over that kind of Utopian pipe dream society. I look at the two camps and I see that the Scottish far right, the Communists, big business and the democratic right of all shades lining up behind 'NO'- these groups, for different reasons, all want MORE control.
The full spectrum of the right is with No, as is the unacceptable face of Socialism. I can't side with that, not at all, not ever- not for anything- so I will vote 'Yes', and it was never going to be any other way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 04:08:21 PM
apologies, as an addendum for 8-ball and Sauchie, as it is the last day to swing yous...
Tommy Sheridan is a marmite guy and a controversial figure, say what you like about him or his politics, but he has some interesting things to say here about solidarity with the English working class and what lies ahead for the NHS. He's a great passionate public speaker, though I don't agree with everything he says.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=453094748164758&set=vb.433992340074999&type=2&theater (https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=453094748164758&set=vb.433992340074999&type=2&theater)

definitely my last try ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2014, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 16 September, 2014, 10:59:23 PM
As an example of what I fear here is a quote from the comments section on the Guardian website -

Don't think us Brits will be in anyway charitable to a new (foreign ) Scotland...

Scary, don't ya think. That there are people who think like this. Brrr.

I abhor the 'revenge' aspect of that thinking, but I also suspect there are some people who aren't really thinking through what the ramifications of independence mean. This isn't sticking two fingers up to Cameron and Westminster, but still having access to all the things Scotland likes in the UK — including its market; it's becoming the rough equivalent of Ireland.

Note that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Scotland will very clearly be a viable state, but it's plainly wishful thinking to imagine industries and commerce currently flowing to Scotland, and pricing (etc.) based on a UK-wide market, will all continue as-is. rUK will, inevitably, become a competitor as well as remaining an ally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 September, 2014, 04:56:23 PM
Scotland,  if, or hopefully when it votes for independence will like ROI remain a strong trading partner with rUK,  relations between the Republic and the UK have never been stronger than they have now. All three nations will have strong emotional and cultural ties as well. It is in these nations interests to co-operate.
The idea of an essentially borderless, nationless world has long been a utopian dream but it is a double edged sword. Unorganised masses of people are fodder for supra-national business as well, this is essentially what globalisation is in essence. An unregulated free for all in which the poor and disadvantaged are raw material for the seemingly bottomless greed brought by this Neo-monetarist creation. Unfortunately utopia literally 'no place' and that is potentially where billions will end up. Dog. Deever's analysis is in my opinion tot too far of the mark. Keep faith Scotland. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 September, 2014, 05:23:51 PM

There's a formalised rhetoric and sense of performance about Sheridan that's every bit as off putting as that employed by the professional political class he militates against. I find the following a more sincere and perceptive analysis of the ills Sheridan describes, as well as an explanation of why the codified language and ideological shell games of both Sheridan and Cameron leave ordinary people alienated from the regular political process.

If this guy was fronting the YES campaign they would be at 80% in the polls, and I'd be one of them:

Loki on Independence: http://youtu.be/9Ou7gudpb_0


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 06:49:10 PM
QuoteIf this guy was fronting the YES campaign they would be at 80% in the polls, and I'd be one of them:

Loki on Independence: http://youtu.be/9Ou7gudpb_0

He is good- watched a couple of his vids after  that one, thanks. It's good to see there is young life in the left. I'm sharing those.

Obviously, you identify with his message in a positive way, as do I. Culture change is essential, there has to be a counter-culture of some description, away from consumerism.
However, Loki is voting 'Yes'- "Vote Yes, don't fuck about"- his words.
This seems to defeat your reasons for voting 'No'. He is not fronting the campaign (mores the pity- oh we need more like him), but he is speaking for it- I don't care who's agenda fronts it. Why would you vote against the opinion that has inspired you in the whole debate? I'm not asking you to justify or anything- just that I don't understand why you would vote against the closest thing to your own viewpoint.

Thumbing the nose to party politics is fine- done it plenty myself with spoiled ballots, but do that at the general election because that is the meaningless party-political vote. This one really counts in a massive way, for all the reasons Loki talks about and I touched on (though perhaps not so well as him)- massive attitude change in people, acceptance that mutual aid is essential rather than the dog eat dog horror show we have today. Party politics is shite and we can tell that to the social democrats in 2016, but now's the time to shiftily stand behind them in order to advance people like Loki, ot to endorse the party politics of the SNP or Solidarity or the Greens or anyone else.

Loki's politics will not prosper at all under a Tory/ UKIP gvt led by Boris Johnson. Salmond can and will be stopped in a Scottish general election in 2016.

FFS Sauchie man- why the hell you voting 'No' when you're so damned politically switched on (IMO)!
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 September, 2014, 06:59:58 PM
After Friday this thread will be renamed 'The Scottish Thread' and it will be bad luck to open it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 17 September, 2014, 07:42:21 PM
I'm really undecided.

On the one hand, I worry that a "no" is a defeatist vote. Could Scotland be independent?

On the other, I worry that  "no" is going to lead to an little Engerlander backlash. I could see some taking umbrage that around half the Scots are not keen on the union, and so want to take action.

So maybe "yes"? Maybe it's best to take control?

Then I think, is it just a protest vote?

And then there are images like this (taken from the Independent's site, where I was trying to get some info):

(http://i100.independent.co.uk/image/30639-3d0yhs.gif)

No doubt that is carefully selected, but it highlights how many are reacting. Is it any wonder that I read today that many "nos" feel intimidated?

Does a yes pander to a perochial, nationalist, insular vote? Do I want Scotland to be the northern tip of the EU where all they care about is themself?

To be honest, I - and, I think, a silent majority - am bewildered as to how we got here. The SNP got a majority in the Scottish Parliament because of a protest vote against Labour. It seems incredible that some disgruntled voters could lead to a separation.

I didn't want a referendum. I was happy with things the way they were. Sure, there were problems. Sure, it wasn't perfect. But it didn't need wholesale change either.

And that is my beef. Now, it seems wholesale change is inevitable. That seems the result whether I say "yes" or "no". I don't want that and am powerless to stop it. Where is the option to keep things as they are?

I guess I need to work out which change will be the least damaging for me, my family and my friends.

And, bluster and propoganda aside, the terrifying reality is: no one knows the answer to that. That, I think, is why the country is split. Things are polarised because no one knows what is best.

I feel a quiet despair and loss, and will do so no matter what happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 September, 2014, 07:44:34 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 06:49:10 PM
FFS Sauchie man- why the hell you voting 'No

I see the present offer as a palace coup rather than a revolution, with one ruling elite co-opting the energy and genuine enthusiasm of good people to secure power for themselves. I don't believe we'll ever get the kind of change I described last night unless it's being offered by a representative of that elite, and I don't think that elite are desperate enough yet to offer radical change when they still think we'll accept the status quo as long as it's being articulated by someone with an accent similar to our own.

Salmond figures this as a once in a lifetime opportunity, and in terms of his political life span it probably is, but I don't need to accept the first compromise that's offered. I don't think the energy and mass engagement generated by the opportunity to vote in an election where our votes will actually count for something, and which takes place outside party political lines, will be lost on Westminster. As Jim Campbell observed the other day, even in the event of a NO vote this isn't going away.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 17 September, 2014, 08:13:29 PM
I think you and Jim are right with- it won't go away, it didn't in the 70's and it won't now. A large worry for me with a No result is what Dr X fears- a rise of REAL Scottish Nationalism (remember Settler Watch? OK not altogether serious, but they had the POTENTIAL to be- it was an idea that might have taken root and is still lurking about). Such sentiments could easily coalesce around the angry half of the country and the average, young, 'not-really-political', particularly working class males are fodder for being sucked into right wing groups. With the right on the rise in and a Westminster gvt that endorses those very ideologies in Tory/UKIP, and bitter anger on both sides of the border, it's a recipe for disaster.

It IS a palace coup- no doubt, but how long will the new tenants last? That disaffected Labour vote is not a vote for Salmond and I believe, in the event of a Yes, that the resultant split of Labour into two distinct and utterly separate parties, with leadership independent of each other and a different political landscape for each to work in, that the dissafected Labour vote will go back to Labour very, very quickly. Independence will kill the SNP stone dead within a few years- they will HAVE to reorganise and 'rebrand' because the single thing that united them all these years will be gone. There won't be any reason for anyone to vote for them over and above their ideological beliefs.

The right will use any flag, it's a propaganda device and always has been- a changeable banner. It doesn't really care- Scotland's right has always been decked out in either the Jack, the Saltire or both.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 September, 2014, 08:39:45 PM
The way I am approaching the referendum is this: the question is being put to me and I will give my answer. The most troubling thing for me is the apparent belief from outside commentators that the Scots operate on some kind of whisky-soaked hive mind. I have a particular world view and I will vote accordingly. I expect my fellow Scots to do likewise. My only wish is that we do so in good conscience and without fear or malice. See you all on the other side, peeps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 September, 2014, 08:43:45 PM
I was rather hoping the whiskey soaked hive.mind was gathering at DICE on Sunday. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 17 September, 2014, 08:48:38 PM
Less talking. More drinking.

Drink never caused a problem to anyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 September, 2014, 09:07:22 PM
It's killed four of my relatives - five if you count the one killed by a drunk driver.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: McNulty on 17 September, 2014, 09:08:19 PM
I've got to say this - the level of enlightened debate I've read in this thread is really encouraging. Well thought out arguments and comments instead of off putting slagging each other off and unnecessary name calling. You should see what they are writing in comments threads in Youtube and some newspapers. I always knew that 2000ad readers were special. Well done folks!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 September, 2014, 09:10:00 PM
Bear Me Bear, are you attending the discussion group tomorrow evening? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 17 September, 2014, 09:20:06 PM
What channel is Braveheart on tonight then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 September, 2014, 09:46:16 PM
I'll be signing off soon, can I just wish all of the Scottish boarders here the very best in your momentus day tomorrow. Get to the polling stations safely and cast your vote in what ever fashion your conscience dictates....hopefully a yes.  Slan agat Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 September, 2014, 10:10:12 PM
Here's some information I've collated to help you make up your minds when voting tomorrow...

(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/WilliamWallaceampHisMum_zps4d766bff.jpg)

(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/salmond_zpsbad4a785.jpg)

You're welcome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 17 September, 2014, 10:17:01 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 17 September, 2014, 09:20:06 PM
What channel is Braveheart on tonight then?

As someone who hails from Bannockburn/Stirling don't get me started on that fucking Hollywood confection. :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 17 September, 2014, 10:23:09 PM
Oh and Before sign off, can someone tell Richmond to go to bed, he has a very busy day at the c**t tomorrow. Z
Oh and seeing as he's from NI, keep an eye on him as he probably adheres to the well worn old NI habit of voting early and voting often (at the same election for the uninitiated).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 18 September, 2014, 12:57:30 AM
Oh, for fuck's sake! Halfway through a TL;DR screed to beat the band and only Slough Feg knows where it went.

Recap: good stuff guys; fuck geography, I'm a Bannersist internationalist but I still don't know how to vote; other stuff
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 18 September, 2014, 10:10:45 AM
I don't want to sound like a broken record but here is another example of the wrong-headed nonsense that Scotland will be up against come tomorrow...

If Scotland vote yes ( I hope so) the rUK will immediately take steps to defend the interests financially, socially and politically of the remaining 58 million people. If Scotland vote no (seems likely) the rUK politicians will begin the process of removing the current levels of advantage given to the Scots under the Barnett formula and to shift as many powers and assets as they can south of the border to ensure that the next time you have a vote ( and you surely will) there will be even less reason to make the leap of faith required.

The choice is with the Scots but one thing you can all be sure of is the rUK will be better off financially, socially and politically whichever way the Scots vote today.

Bleurgh. And the abuse that Andy Murray is currently getting for coming out on the YES side is sickening. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 18 September, 2014, 10:26:12 AM
Quote from: McNulty on 17 September, 2014, 09:08:19 PM
You should see what they are writing in comments threads in Youtube and some newspapers.

Not really interested. I thought we were agreed it was all angry, prejudiced, godawful abuse some time ago ?-)

Anyway, off tonight to vote. Good Luck Scotland and her neighbours today.
Keep the heid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 18 September, 2014, 12:44:01 PM
oh, and who mentioned oil?

http://www.robedwards.com/2014/09/big-oils-1bn-tax-breaks-should-fund-renewables-after-independence-say-greens.html#more (http://www.robedwards.com/2014/09/big-oils-1bn-tax-breaks-should-fund-renewables-after-independence-say-greens.html#more)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 04:58:51 PM

Voted at 7:35am, because I'm hardcore. They'd obviously made preparations for being more busy than usual with folk who don't ordinarily vote, because there were three desks of people doing the thing with the ruler and the list, and a nice lady who told you which desk you were supposed to use greeting you at the door.

According to the radio, the rate of return for postal ballots was as high as 89% in some areas; if the turnout today is within a few percent of that it would be the greatest response to a national ballot since the nineteen-fifties (http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm). If the turnout doesn't quite hit those heights it won't be the fault of the organisers - cars decked in YES or NO flags running folk to the polling stations go by every five or ten minutes.

If the vote's as close as the polls suggest, who wins might come down to which campaign can get most of their elderly and disabled voters out and into voting booths.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 September, 2014, 05:34:47 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 18 September, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
According to the radio, the rate of return for postal ballots was as high as 89% in some areas; if the turnout today is within a few percent of that it would be the greatest response to a national ballot since the nineteen-fifties (http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm).

Not sure if it's confirmed, but I've just seen a tweet saying that the polling station in Falkirk is already closed because they've had 100% turnout.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 05:41:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 18 September, 2014, 05:34:47 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 18 September, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
According to the radio, the rate of return for postal ballots was as high as 89% in some areas; if the turnout today is within a few percent of that it would be the greatest response to a national ballot since the nineteen-fifties (http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm).

Not sure if it's confirmed, but I've just seen a tweet saying that the polling station in Falkirk is already closed because they've had 100% turnout.

That would be incredible. A girl I know is working at a Falkirk polling station today. She's a rabid NO voter, so if that was her station I'd be worried she might just have stuffed the ballot boxes and shut up shop.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 September, 2014, 06:28:07 PM
Surely that's a wind up!  :)  What, no one in that part of Falkirk has died since polling card were sent out?  And no one in Falkirk has been taken seriously ill today and not been able to get to the polling station?  Hmmm?   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 18 September, 2014, 06:36:40 PM
I think Jim is testing your knowledge of Falkirk politics (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23999054) ? (Or the tweeter is)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 September, 2014, 06:40:01 PM
Fair enough.  :)  That's far too clever for me.  Although, as it happens, I'm right then!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 18 September, 2014, 06:42:23 PM
There was a guys comments had been copy/pasted from his fb and shared about a while back. He was saying he had just heard he was on the ballot count and would be bringing a pencil so there would be plenty of spoiled ballots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 September, 2014, 07:13:45 PM
Ah, well — that tweet I mentioned was clearly bollocks. My apologies.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 18 September, 2014, 07:41:41 PM
I've just been to vote and now I am reading the Judge Dredd story "Better The Devil You Know/Twilight's Last Gleaming." It gladdens my heart to see that, regardless of the outcome tomorrow, enough people gave a shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 18 September, 2014, 07:41:41 PM
I've just been to vote and now I am reading the Judge Dredd story "Better The Devil You Know/Twilight's Last Gleaming." It gladdens my heart to see that, regardless of the outcome tomorrow, enough people gave a shit.

Aye - that was the first time I'd encountered the statistics on how few folk actually bother to vote in general elections, and a crucial part of my political education.

To be fair to Jim Campbell, the huge voter turnout has left most political commentators amazed and scratching their heads in disbelief. Shetland reports (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2014/sep/18/scottish-independence-referendum-polling-day-live#block-541b1379e4b0b7a2dd59ec3d) their postal ballot returns were 92%, and the fact folk who have never bothered voting in an election before apparently means all the polling companies have to admit that their numbers could be hugely wide of the mark - since their modelling is based on looking at how folk voted in previous elections (http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/18/scotland-no-enters-polling-day-4-ahead/).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 10:04:46 PM

Adam Boulton on Sky News just said their unofficial polling puts it at 53% for NO.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 18 September, 2014, 10:11:04 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 18 September, 2014, 08:54:41 PM
To be fair to Jim Campbell, the huge voter turnout has left most political commentators amazed and scratching their heads in disbelief. Shetland reports (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2014/sep/18/scottish-independence-referendum-polling-day-live#block-541b1379e4b0b7a2dd59ec3d) their postal ballot returns were 92%
Don't suppose I've ever thought about it, but wouldn't you always expect that to be higher given that you have to go out of your way to arrange it? Unless, of course, you phone up to enquire about it some time in advance and are informed that they only actually send them out once a month or so. When you're already out of the country. But what sort of idiot would do that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 10:38:08 PM

YouGov say 54% NO:  http://yougov.co.uk/news/categories/politics/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 18 September, 2014, 10:59:36 PM
True, less than 95% for postal vote returns sounds bonkers. Put the shortfall down to "it's already won/lost" mindset I guess. Apart from the historic nature of the vote, nothing like a close fight to get people out. Bit of a perfect storm, vote-wise.

All of which kind of shows up the broken, frustrating first-past-the-post system for what it is. Think I've skipped some Westminster elections - Labour own the constituency - but never a Holyrood one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 September, 2014, 11:09:20 PM

You would think so, but returns of postal ballots in general seem to be around 80% (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/e718e2b8-3e59-11e4-a620-00144feabdc0.html), and that's in a referendum where there's supposed to be high interest and better than average voter turnout.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 September, 2014, 02:14:24 AM
It's all very exciting listening to the results come in on the radio!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 September, 2014, 05:01:00 AM
Radio 5Live are saying that it's all but certain that NO has won.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 05:38:03 AM

Aye, it's still not mathematically impossible for YES to win, but Edinburgh seems certain to end that remote chance. They turned out in big numbers, and where that has happened NO tend to have won.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 19 September, 2014, 05:39:43 AM
Yep with two hours left to go it seems NO is the winner.

Yah boo really - I've not said owt because it's not a vote I can take part in and I knew I'd just sound like some ideological sod over the border but I've read and heard a lot from folks over the last few weeks and NO always seemed to me like the dullest option. The boring one. The one our bollocks government wants. The "keep calm etc" one - heads down, move on, forget about it. Nae bother.

Sad to wake up to anything that says "PEOPLE VOTE YES TO MORE OF THE SAME"

Although actually it's not very likely to just be more of the same. It can't be. The very fact that it happened at all and it has been so close is a very big statement indeed and our Trout has tweeted tonight the most succinct observation I've seen about the inspiringly large turn-outs:

"Politicians take note. If people believe their vote will count, they will cast it."

Baby steps forward this Friday rather than giant leaps - change is the long game.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 19 September, 2014, 06:25:04 AM
I think we dodged a bullet...
but Salmond speaking now is moving all the same. Wow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 06:46:19 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 19 September, 2014, 05:39:43 AM
"Politicians take note. If people believe their vote will count, they will cast it."

Not a big surprise, really - reinforces my conviction that, contrary to the anarchist/nationalist/Marxist/fascist analysis of a population just waiting to have a better voting system and better media coverage before voting for (insert preferred option here), the low voting figures in general elections reflect a population broadly satisfied with the Westminster consensus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 06:49:00 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 19 September, 2014, 05:39:43 AM
NO always seemed to me like the dullest option. The boring one. The one our bollocks government wants. The "keep calm etc" one - heads down, move on, forget about it. Nae bother.

As you point out, that really isn't what happened; rejecting nationalism isn't the same as embracing or even accepting the status quo. That a people as practical as the Scots rejected the half arsed Homer-mobile compromise put forward by the Nats should come as a surprise to no-one.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 06:54:47 AM

Shit, man - did you just see the ash blonde Alistair Darling closing his speech by flicking on the strobe and raving to The Scream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3vvn2qOh58)? That was like the bits in Zenith where Tory Peter St John's eyes went Paisley pattern.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 19 September, 2014, 07:21:40 AM
Quote from: Fungus
I think we dodged a bullet...
but Salmond speaking now is moving all the same. Wow.

His jacket really needed some anti-alias.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 07:32:43 AM
Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 07:43:24 AM
Quote from: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 07:32:43 AM
Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 08:53:34 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 07:43:24 AM
Quote from: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 07:32:43 AM
Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.

Are you deliberately trolling now? I am genuinely trying not to get angry here but your general tone is not helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 September, 2014, 08:56:41 AM
I think a few board members are gonna need this today....
(http://cdn-s3-1.wanelo.com/product/image/9869359/x354.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 09:08:16 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 08:53:34 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 07:43:24 AM
Quote from: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 07:32:43 AM
Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.

Are you deliberately trolling now?

No.

QuoteI am genuinely trying not to get angry here but your general tone is not helpful.

Sorry, but as long as people are not making personal attacks or deliberately lying, they get to continue talking.  Even if the points they make don't line up with your views.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 19 September, 2014, 09:11:18 AM
The result's in but what we all really want to know is if Richmond did, in fact, get his leg over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 09:14:38 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 09:08:16 AM
Sorry, but as long as people are not making personal attacks or deliberately lying, they get to continue talking.

And sometimes even if they are.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 September, 2014, 09:46:01 AM
Quote from: Banners on 19 September, 2014, 09:11:18 AM
The result's in but what we all really want to know is if Richmond did, in fact, get his leg over.

:-) I can barely get my eyelids open..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 10:18:54 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 09:08:16 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 08:53:34 AM
Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 07:43:24 AM
Quote from: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 07:32:43 AM
Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.

Are you deliberately trolling now?

No.

QuoteI am genuinely trying not to get angry here but your general tone is not helpful.

Sorry, but as long as people are not making personal attacks or deliberately lying, they get to continue talking.  Even if the points they make don't line up with your views.

Fair enough. Just wanted to make sure. :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 September, 2014, 10:20:58 AM
QuoteNot a big surprise, really - reinforces my conviction that, contrary to the anarchist/nationalist/Marxist/fascist analysis of a population just waiting to have a better voting system and better media coverage before voting for (insert preferred option here), the low voting figures in general elections reflect a population broadly satisfied with the Westminster consensus.

Just goes to show how easy it is to make anything fit your own convictions. It's anecdotal evidence to be sure but I've not met any one who has decided not to vote who was satisfied with the Westminster consensus - not a single person. Seems an entirely empty correlation no matter how I look it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 10:33:02 AM
I,m sure you'll be impressed Dudley, that in some areas in South Sudan the voter turnout was even higher than 100%. Quite an achievement and boon to Sudanese democracy, i'm sure you'll agree.

Since both camps were promising the removal of power from Westminster and increased power to the Scottish parliament, the result hardly indicates a general approval of Westminster politics. 

The turnout, if anything, showed that despite what we are often told, people care passionately about politics. They just don't care about politicians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 10:45:45 AM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 19 September, 2014, 10:33:02 AM
The turnout, if anything, showed that despite what we are often told, people care passionately about politics. They just don't care about politicians.

I'm not even convinced it even shows us this. What it shows us (IMO) is that when you put an actual choice before the electorate, they engage, debate, become enthused and turn out.

When you present them with a selection of parties whose manifestos are all peddling broadly the same neolib, free market, austerity agenda with a few minor concessions to their traditional support base around the edges... well, why would you get enthused? You want to know why UKIP are getting so much support even though their policies are BARKING MAD? It's because they're the only party* not promising more of the same.

I've linked to it before, and I'm going to keep linking to it because it's so desperately relevant — if you've already read it, my apologies, but voter apathy is a direct result of the focus-group-driven political model that's given us the Beige Dictatorship. (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/political-failure-modes-and-th.html)

Cheers

Jim

*Well, there's the Greens, with whom I have a lot of sympathy and whose complete lack of media coverage speaks to systemic bias in the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 11:14:00 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 10:45:45 AM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 19 September, 2014, 10:33:02 AM
The turnout, if anything, showed that despite what we are often told, people care passionately about politics. They just don't care about politicians.

I'm not even convinced it even shows us this. What it shows us (IMO) is that when you put an actual choice before the electorate, they engage, debate, become enthused and turn out.

When you present them with a selection of parties whose manifestos are all peddling broadly the same neolib, free market, austerity agenda with a few minor concessions to their traditional support base around the edges... well, why would you get enthused? You want to know why UKIP are getting so much support even though their policies are BARKING MAD? It's because they're the only party* not promising more of the same.

I've linked to it before, and I'm going to keep linking to it because it's so desperately relevant — if you've already read it, my apologies, but voter apathy is a direct result of the focus-group-driven political model that's given us the Beige Dictatorship. (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/02/political-failure-modes-and-th.html)

Cheers

Jim

*Well, there's the Greens, with whom I have a lot of sympathy and whose complete lack of media coverage speaks to systemic bias in the media.

Absolutely agree with you - if I were dictator the first thing I'd do would be to outlaw all forms of opinion polling. 

Well, the first thing after the death of my enemies and the lamentations of their women, anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 11:28:37 AM
Something which I hadn't considered is that a proportion of the voters in the referendum are going to be ineligible to vote in the general election, aren't they?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 11:36:46 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 11:28:37 AM
Something which I hadn't considered is that a proportion of the voters in the referendum are going to be ineligible to vote in the general election, aren't they?

All the ones who voted 'yes' if the Tory back-benchers had their way...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 19 September, 2014, 11:49:36 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 11:28:37 AM
Something which I hadn't considered is that a proportion of the voters in the referendum are going to be ineligible to vote in the general election, aren't they?

Would make no difference, our votes count for nothing anyway.  Remove the Scottish votes from every general election back to the 50's, and not a single result would change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 12:06:09 PM
Quote from: Ghost MacRoth on 19 September, 2014, 11:49:36 AMmake no difference, our votes count for nothing anyway.  Remove the Scottish votes from every general election back to the 50's, and not a single result would change.

1: That's not true, and not even that Wings over Scotland page (http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/) that everyone uses to make that claim actually says that.

2: That's not actually a useful way to think about democracy. I lived for twenty years in a safe Labour seat. Because there was no chance it would ever change hands, it never materially affected the result of any general election. Does that mean my vote didn't count? What matters is whether or not I got the government I wanted. Sometimes I did, sometimes I didn't. That's how democracies work.

This (pro-independence, FWIW) page takes a more in-depth look at the same basic numbers (http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2014/04/getting-government-that-we-vote-for.html) as the Wings over Scotland one, and draws some interesting conclusions.

Saying your votes aren't the deciding ones, isn't the same as saying you never get the government you vote for.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 12:09:28 PM
That wasn't really what I was getting at.

More it seems a bit odd to have 16/17 year olds able to vote on something as important as independence, but not a 5 year term of government.

You also lose out on the momentum of having them vote one year, and not the other - the answer would seem to be to lower the voting age UK-wide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 September, 2014, 12:14:54 PM
I'd approve.

Average 16-year old is no more of an idiot than most 20 year olds, just in different ways. Certainly no more likely to either be idealistic or slavishly in thrall to their family's beliefs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 19 September, 2014, 12:33:21 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2014, 10:45:45 AM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 19 September, 2014, 10:33:02 AM
The turnout, if anything, showed that despite what we are often told, people care passionately about politics. They just don't care about politicians.

I'm not even convinced it even shows us this. What it shows us (IMO) is that when you put an actual choice before the electorate, they engage, debate, become enthused and turn out.

We were talking about this in the pub last night and it's interesting how this particular vote encourages participation.  Obviously, it's a subject that many Scottish people are interested in so if they felt strongly either way then there is the motivation to vote.  However, even if you are not sure and just think let's keep it as is, you are still motivated to go as you know that doing nothing could mean that it goes against you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 September, 2014, 12:36:20 PM
one thing I wondered if it had gone "yes" what would have happened to various things such as the nhs or even the armed forces based up there ? would everything have automatically become property of or would mr salmon have had to start charging for health services and start conscripting the locals? or as most politicians did they not think tat far ahead?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 19 September, 2014, 12:41:01 PM
Quote from: Grugz
one thing I wondered if it had gone "yes" what would have happened to various things such as the nhs or even the armed forces based up there?

We'll never know...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 01:05:19 PM
Intention was for the Armed forces to transfer to the Scottish Defence Force : no nukes, more small surface ships, conventional forces aimed at defending the coastline and oilrigs, less on fighting wars abroad, bsed in Faslane to make up for jobs lost in the area.

Nhs is already devolved, so little change was likely - although SNP championed free prescriptions and free personal care for the elderly. They ve also stood again TTIP in healthcare.

Its a wonderful dream, with shortbread and tartan rainbows for all.  But, hey-ho, time to pull together as a nation again...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 19 September, 2014, 01:16:11 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 19 September, 2014, 12:36:20 PM
one thing I wondered if it had gone "yes" what would have happened to various things such as the nhs or even the armed forces based up there ? would everything have automatically become property of or would mr salmon have had to start charging for health services and start conscripting the locals? or as most politicians did they not think tat far ahead?

It's to the credit of many that these were exactly the questions being put in the final days and weeks. The politicians were forced to at least squirm, as they were pressed on the detail. Head counts of soldiers, etc. all demanded answers and stones were unturned. Question evasion was called-out and
democracy won. I reckon, anyway. Compare this with Westminster elections...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 19 September, 2014, 01:44:06 PM
Quote from: Banners on 19 September, 2014, 12:41:01 PM
Quote from: Grugz
one thing I wondered if it had gone "yes" what would have happened to various things such as the nhs or even the armed forces based up there?

We'll never know...

According to someone over on MilitaryPhotos.net it's already been decided:-

c.2'500 troops + 500 reserves
"light" armour (Scimitar light tanks or similar)
2 stripped down (i.e. no missiles) frigates,
1 replenishment ship
a few mine-countermeasure vessels
a few patrol boats
12 Typhoons (ha-ha, not gonna happen unless their Tranche 1),
a small number of C-130 Hercules transports.

No mention of logistics units (engineers, transport units etc.) or where such forces would be based.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 01:58:41 PM
Looks like the net result of this referendum will be that Scotland gets the powers it wants, but at the expense of Scottish MPs having a say on English/Welsh/N. Irish affairs, and quite possibly also at the expense of the Barnett formula.  The result of which will be that the main economy of the UK will be run by the Conservatives in perpetuity.  Holyrood will have to set up its supposedly more Scottish large welfare state in direct competition with an England dedicated to low tax - meaning all businesses that can will flee south at very little cost.  This was never going to end well - and it hasn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 02:10:01 PM
Yesterday wasn't independence thwarted but rather independence deferred. I think Churchill put it best, "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 September, 2014, 02:24:38 PM
So who really won?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 02:35:35 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 19 September, 2014, 02:24:38 PM
So who really won?

Truthfully? Nobody.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 September, 2014, 03:44:38 PM
Those who support TTIP won, as did noted murderer David Cameron and others who jumped on the BT bandwagon when it became apparent there was screen time involved.  Everyone else gets to foot the bill for the referendum that achieved naff all, but hey, if we footed the bill without complaint for the billions lost on postal service privitisation and the Universal Credit white elephant, I suppose the illusion of democracy isn't such a bad way to piss money up a wall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 04:29:31 PM
Alec Salmond has resigned as FM and SNP leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 04:29:59 PM
Scottish First Minister has just announced intention to stand down. Not a big surprise, but a loss nonetheless.  Salmond is political marmite in Scotland (in that he's very yeast), but love him or hate him, he's a politician who inspires action - something seriously lacking in Hollywood as well as Westminster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 04:33:01 PM
Holyrood, obviously. Not Hollywood. Hollywood is very inspiring.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 04:37:58 PM

I'm sorry to hear that. I don't like Salmond but he's the most able politician in Scotland, and I have no problem with him as First Minister *. I honestly thought he would see out his term, but the symbolism of letting Sturgeon handle the incredible triumph of Glasgow wasn't lost on me.



* except the Trump thing, obviously
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 05:04:48 PM
Yup- right-spectrum politics won, those who support participation in global economic imperialism, the bankers, the corporations and the politics of greed won. Gains were made certainly and it will long be an issue yet. nearly half the country not even wanting to negotiate- just outright leave the UK is a big number. Should Westminster, regardless of its Red or Blue tie, fail to carry out on its promises in a significant way, that number will grow. As the older generation die off, more of the demographic that supported the UK will vanish.
We can only hope that the knuckle-dragging Yes voters don't rally round proper Nationalism as it has done all over the UK around British Nationalism.

And now my fb account has been locked, 'for security'. They want me to download a 'facebook malware  checker'- yeah right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 05:31:38 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 04:29:31 PM
Alec Salmond has resigned as FM and SNP leader.

ALEX... Alex...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 05:42:47 PM

According to Trump on BBC news, wind turbines lost the referendum for Salmond. Fucking deluded monomaniac.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 September, 2014, 05:44:47 PM
I was just watching that... I couldn't believe he came out with that as a reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 19 September, 2014, 05:57:05 PM
I think Salmond might well have won had joining the Euro been a viable proposition. As it is, he's done the right thing by resigning, it will be a long time before the SNP get another crack at splitting the union.

Quote from: Dudley on 19 September, 2014, 01:58:41 PM
Holyrood will have to set up its supposedly more Scottish large welfare state in direct competition with an England dedicated to low tax - meaning all businesses that can will flee south at very little cost.  This was never going to end well - and it hasn't.

This was always going to happen. England favours lower taxes, Scotland better public services. I think it's right that both countries get what they want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 19 September, 2014, 06:16:00 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 05:42:47 PM

According to Trump on BBC news, wind turbines lost the referendum for Salmond. Fucking deluded monomaniac.

Sheesh - sorry to miss that!

You can see why a man with his troubling barnet[t] has a wind fixation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 06:19:59 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 06:54:47 AM
Shit, man - did you just see the ash blonde Alistair Darling closing his speech by flicking on the strobe and raving to The Scream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3vvn2qOh58)? That was like the bits in Zenith where Tory Peter St John's eyes went Paisley pattern.

I know you thought I was kidding, but I'm really fucking not. Crazy bastard looks like he's coming up on an E, then he fires the glitter cannon and blisses out to nineties indie house:

http://youtu.be/xLa9meUcfOw?t=50s


(http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/m/mandala.jpg)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 19 September, 2014, 06:41:50 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 06:19:59 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 06:54:47 AM
Shit, man - did you just see the ash blonde Alistair Darling closing his speech by flicking on the strobe and raving to The Scream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3vvn2qOh58)? That was like the bits in Zenith where Tory Peter St John's eyes went Paisley pattern.
I know you thought I was kidding, but I'm really fucking not. Crazy bastard looks like he's coming up on an E, then he fires the glitter cannon and blisses out to nineties indie house:

http://youtu.be/xLa9meUcfOw?t=50s
Ha! Amazing. It's like that bit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcA86A0HdSg) in Human Traffic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2014, 06:46:05 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 19 September, 2014, 06:41:50 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 06:19:59 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 06:54:47 AM
Shit, man - did you just see the ash blonde Alistair Darling closing his speech by flicking on the strobe and raving to The Scream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3vvn2qOh58)? That was like the bits in Zenith where Tory Peter St John's eyes went Paisley pattern.

I know you thought I was kidding, but I'm really fucking not. Crazy bastard looks like he's coming up on an E, then he fires the glitter cannon and blisses out to nineties indie house:

http://youtu.be/xLa9meUcfOw?t=50s

Ha! Amazing. It's like that bit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcA86A0HdSg) in Human Traffic.

Quality! I haven't seen that in fifteen years ...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 06:52:46 PM
Quote from: Tempunaut on 19 September, 2014, 04:33:01 PM
Holyrood, obviously. Not Hollywood. Hollywood is very inspiring.

That was the biggest laugh I have had all day and it has been a very bad day. You should have just let it hang. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: sauchie polling station on 19 September, 2014, 04:37:58 PM

I'm sorry to hear that. I don't like Salmond but he's the most able politician in Scotland, and I have no problem with him as First Minister *. I honestly thought he would see out his term, but the symbolism of letting Sturgeon handle the incredible triumph of Glasgow wasn't lost on me.



* except the Trump thing, obviously

You know what is even more interesting? The three leaders of our main political parties will all be female. Nicola Sturgeon, Johann Lamont and Ruth Davidson. It will make a change from all that dick-swinging that passes for politics at Westminster. :cool:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:01:33 PM
Thatcher cubed.
.
Good luck with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 07:03:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:01:33 PM
Thatcher cubed.
.
Good luck with that.

Being female didn't make Thatcher the worst thing to happen to the UK since WWII.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:18:34 PM
It did for Denis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 19 September, 2014, 07:26:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:18:34 PM
It did for Denis.

Didn't the man like a drink? No bloody wonder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 September, 2014, 07:27:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:01:33 PM
Thatcher cubed.
.
Good luck with that.

Hard to see this statement as anything but sexism...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2014, 07:33:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:01:33 PM
Thatcher cubed.
.
Good luck with that.

Am I the only one who thought "iso-cubed"? Took me a moment to work it out
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 07:54:18 PM
Johan Lamont? She's done.
I quote
"We're not genetically programmed to make political decisions in Scotland"
Ergo we are genetically inferior.
A Labour MP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 07:57:56 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 19 September, 2014, 07:27:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2014, 07:01:33 PM
Thatcher cubed.
.
Good luck with that.

Hard to see this statement as anything but sexism...

Agreed.
Lamont is an imbecile because she is an imbecile her gender is immaterial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 19 September, 2014, 08:21:56 PM
When they announced the No vote win on the news on the radio this morning, they mentioned politicians in Northern Ireland and Wales would be looking very closely at what Scotland will get for staying in the Union - a windfall for those countries as well? Though would they get more if Scotland left anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 08:33:32 PM
Our united family of nations are falling over each other to make sure that they get as much power as the boys next door.  Scotland was promised additional devolved powers within a few months, which the three Westminster parties said they were agreed on. 

Turns out that the Tory leadership are happy to grant that as long as it means removing the power of Scot and Welsh MPs to vote on English issues - something I'm very much in favour of, although it essentially renders a UK parliament null and void, able only to vote on the bare bones of maintaining a single state.  This will, I'm sure entirely coincidentally, reduce Labour power.

Labour, marketing themselves as the party of the people, are happy to discuss this option...for as long as the possibly can.  In a glorious example of doublethink, they are apparently eager to comply with the timescale which backbencher Gordon Brown set without discussing it with anyone, whilst at the same time keen to ensure that there is a very, very long pubic consultation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 September, 2014, 08:34:42 PM
Holy hell.

Public consultation.  Not pubic consultation.  That's quite different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 19 September, 2014, 08:39:11 PM
If only there was a political party that spoke to the wants and needs of the increasingly disenfranchised in the post-industrial heartlands of Central Scotland and Northern England. Someone in Glasgow has more in common with someone in Liverpool than someone in Orkney or London.

If only there was a party that fastened itself to the ideals of the working man. You know, a labourer. It could name itself after them. "Worker Party", maybe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 19 September, 2014, 09:03:42 PM
That's crazy talk Dr X, quit talking crazy talk!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
I think anything with the word 'Socialist' or 'Worker' in it is a non-starter. For some reason, in the UK psyche (though far less so in Scotland) 'socialist'= 'communist' = 'fascist' = 'nazi' = 'death camps' = 'state censorship and control'. I think any name would need to be a bit less armed-revolutiony.  :)

The irony is- we actually have much of that under the democratic right. The idea is true enough, a new centre left. I don't know much about the greens- could they do what the SNP did in Scotland and woo left-Labour support over to stage a coup?
How well supported are they in England, Wales and N.I.?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 19 September, 2014, 10:28:05 PM
Socialist = Death Camps ? Eh ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 19 September, 2014, 10:33:29 PM
'National Socialism'....see where he's going?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 September, 2014, 10:48:30 PM
Or just 'socialism' -> 'communism' -> 'Stalin' -> 'Death Camps'.  Either is good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 12:18:54 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 September, 2014, 10:48:30 PM
Or just 'socialism' -> 'communism' -> 'Stalin' -> 'Death Camps'.  Either is good.

Oh yes, definitely! I was trying to get across how the 'nazi's' and 'commies' converge into one homogenous lump of death-camping.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 20 September, 2014, 12:58:01 AM
I suppose I was nit-picking, in my annoying way, about the use of 'equals'. 'Cos things are different, not equal. If you want to suggest things lead to other things, well yeah, they do.

But labels are interesting things, Dr X's point. On the face of it I've nothing bad to say about 'national socialism'. But... ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 September, 2014, 07:25:45 AM
Quote from: Dog DeeverI don't know much about the greens- could they do what the SNP did in Scotland and woo left-Labour support over to stage a coup?

Unless you're referring to the mighty Plymouth Argyle, then the answer to that is an emphatic no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 20 September, 2014, 08:29:05 AM
I fail to see how " communism didn't work " but fascism has its uses in modern capitalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 20 September, 2014, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
I think anything with the word 'Socialist' or 'Worker' in it is a non-starter. For some reason, in the UK psyche (though far less so in Scotland) 'socialist'= 'communist' = 'fascist' = 'nazi' = 'death camps' = 'state censorship and control'.

Arbitrary comments with no factual proof or point of reference, its like saying everyone in Scotland drinks Irn Bru and Buckfast tonic wine while stamping on each others heads; Which they don't, obviously!

Socialism has many different aspects which can be found here - http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism

As an Englishman/Citizen of the UK, I understand the difference between Socialism and the Gassing of individuals in Concentration Camps - because I'm not a fool!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 September, 2014, 09:00:20 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
The idea is true enough, a new centre left. I don't know much about the greens- could they do what the SNP did in Scotland and woo left-Labour support over to stage a coup? How well supported are they in England, Wales and N.I.?

1% of the vote in 2010 and a single MP in the liberal capital of Brighton:

QuoteNationally, the Green Party's share of the vote actually went down 0.1% to 1%. In terms of vote share, the BNP (1.9%) and UKIP (3.1%) both did better than the Greens. Nearly twice as many voted BNP as did Green, while three times more people backed UKIP. The BNP almost tripled its support compared to 2005, while UKIP received around half as many votes again as last time.

http://gu.com/p/2gpqj/tw


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 09:52:29 AM
I take back every thing I've ever said about Glasgow...and Dundee
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 September, 2014, 10:05:00 AM
The Greens are wasting their time trying to pick up imaginary votes from the hard left.

Respect and Militant Labour both ploughed that furrow before them and found it to be pretty barren. Sure enough, under the current, heavily left-leaning leadership Green support has declined during what should have been their golden opportunity to exploit LibDem unpopularity. The English & Welsh Greens taking the position to support a Scottish Yes vote was also electorally suicidal.

I would style myself an independent green, as I agree with pretty much everything they say about the environment, but I don't agree that the way to achieve their environmental aims is to tie them to an unpopular socialist and/or nationalist agenda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 10:08:21 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 20 September, 2014, 08:44:00 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 19 September, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
I think anything with the word 'Socialist' or 'Worker' in it is a non-starter. For some reason, in the UK psyche (though far less so in Scotland) 'socialist'= 'communist' = 'fascist' = 'nazi' = 'death camps' = 'state censorship and control'.

Arbitrary comments with no factual proof or point of reference, its like saying everyone in Scotland drinks Irn Bru and Buckfast tonic wine while stamping on each others heads; Which they don't, obviously!

Socialism has many different aspects which can be found here - http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism

As an Englishman/Citizen of the UK, I understand the difference between Socialism and the Gassing of individuals in Concentration Camps - because I'm not a fool!

Cheers

Yes, I realise that there are many who understand that Socialism is not the same as either communism or fascism- and you may well be one of them. But there are many more who see no difference between them. Socialism appears to be a dirty word amongst a broad mass of people, partly because of the nonsense that the gutter press spouts for their masters in Westminster- I'm not saying it should be a dirty word, quite the reverse.
I don't need to quote from books or copy/ paste statistics from a website to prove and verify this because I don't live in a bubble. Being a socialist supporter, it is my broad experience of life and the attitudes of people who 'don't really do politics'- because these people either don't vote at all or else just do what the man on the telly says. Not everyone in the country is interested- voting stats in recent general elections show this- roughly only half of the electorate bother to turn up.

Not the hard left- woo the centre-left. The hard left are revolutionaries, not voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 10:48:52 AM
The greens are one of the few parties that have a democratic struture, you know policy set by the membership etc, so it reflects their members views.
no other party does that any more, hence the huge blob of a blancmange wobbling along to the latest opinion polls that pass for Westmister politics now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 10:52:57 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 09:52:29 AM
I take back every thing I've ever said about Glasgow...and Dundee

Yup, well, apart from the Glasgow 25% that didn't bother their arse.
Spoiled ballots, I can respect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 11:08:24 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 10:52:57 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 09:52:29 AM
I take back every thing I've ever said about Glasgow...and Dundee

Yup, well, apart from the Glasgow 25% that didn't bother their arse.
Spoiled ballots, I can respect.

oh and this:

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77708000/jpg/_77708936_reuters.jpg)

if that had been YES supporters it would have been top o ever news report.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 September, 2014, 11:28:22 AM
QuoteSpoiled ballots, I can respect.

All they do is annoy the people counting and hold up the announcement of the actual result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 September, 2014, 11:29:10 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 10:48:52 AM
The greens are one of the few parties that have a democratic struture, you know policy set by the membership etc, so it reflects their members views.
no other party does that any more, hence the huge blob of a blancmange wobbling along to the latest opinion polls that pass for Westmister politics now.

Yes, and I may well one day join so I can have my say, which would be along the lines of "let's drop all this crap that has nothing to do with being Green (http://greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/05/02/green-party-leader-reaffirms-support-for-cornish-assembly/) and go about trying to actually achieve something."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 11:32:29 AM
and I'd defend your right to say it  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 04:34:54 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 20 September, 2014, 11:28:22 AM
All they do is annoy the people counting and hold up the announcement of the actual result.

Yeah, I bet it does, but- it is a vote of a sort- it's usually an active statement of rejection of all options, which is utterly different from just not voting- a tacit acceptance of whatever happens, not really caring about the result. So while I can see how it's a major hassle, I can respect it because they used the process to register their opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 20 September, 2014, 04:55:07 PM
I'd like to see an extra 'Box' added to the Voting form that simply says 'Revolution'!

If enough people put their cross on that, then maybe 'the powers that be' would be more inclined to listen to People.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 20 September, 2014, 05:22:24 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 September, 2014, 11:29:10 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 20 September, 2014, 10:48:52 AM
The greens are one of the few parties that have a democratic struture, you know policy set by the membership etc, so it reflects their members views.
no other party does that any more, hence the huge blob of a blancmange wobbling along to the latest opinion polls that pass for Westmister politics now.

Yes, and I may well one day join so I can have my say, which would be along the lines of "let's drop all this crap that has nothing to do with being Green (http://greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/05/02/green-party-leader-reaffirms-support-for-cornish-assembly/) and go about trying to actually achieve something."

On top of the whole left-right measure, there's also the Statist and Anti-Statist sliding scale- how much central control there is.
I suppose that policy shows they are pro-decentralisation of power. I'm guessing that those voters who want Social Democracy and more regional powers could look at them as an alternative to Farage and UKIP. I guess it depends on what people think of the Green candidates and policies really- but the alternative is there (if  it is a viable option).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 September, 2014, 04:32:39 AM
This whole thing has been like a really dull and boring version of Game of Thrones, with Alex Salmond instead of Robb Stark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 September, 2014, 08:19:41 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 21 September, 2014, 04:32:39 AM
This whole thing has been like a really dull and boring version of Game of Thrones, with Alex Salmond instead of Robb Stark.

There was much less sex.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 September, 2014, 10:00:40 AM

I wrote this piece for The Observer under my Armando Iannucci alias, one of the many internet pseudonyms I employ. It's worth reading in full, but here are the parts which most chime with my own opinions, even though I wrote all of it:

Quote

My suspicion is that a lot of Scots voted no on Thursday with a wearied sense of disappointment that they weren't doing something far more exciting instead. The yes camp always looked cooler, younger, brighter; no doubt they had the better parties at night. It's hard to dress up a negative as anything other than the rejection of someone else's argument and those voting no must have felt like the grown-ups coming in to switch the lights on and whisper it's time to go to bed.

And the extension of the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds was a triumph ... (V)iew our political landscape through the eyes of a 16-year-old and see how cumbersome and frankly barking mad it now looks. It's not just the men and women in massive rosettes standing outside brick scout huts every couple of years collecting polling cards. It's the whole show.

In a world where we can now source anything online, download anything we want to see from any country in the world, and where we can pick and choose individual tracks, whatever programme, whichever individual item we need from whatever outlet, they must be asking why on earth they're being forced to pick one party and its entire list of policies, rather than their own playlist of ideas. It simply doesn't make any kind of sense.

Disengagement from the public has been a conscious tactic of the political parties. They have concentrated aggressively on a minority in the middle, the 100,000 or so who make all the difference in key marginal constituencies. Forgotten now are people at the edges, the non-voters, the marginalised, the claimants. They won't vote, so why bother canvassing them? In fact, why bother targeting any policies at them? Far better to demonise them in the eyes of those who will vote.

The truth is, conventional politics has simply fallen out of use in front of us, so slowly at times we may not have noticed it. For the past two general elections, more people stayed at home and didn't bother than voted for the parties that went on to form the government. Meantime, party membership has collapsed and party loyalty has gone forever.

The current system by which Westminster conducts itself is unsustainable. No surprise, then, that people look for alternatives. 84.6% tells us that people aren't disengaged from politics. It's just that it is now personal politics that captivates us. People go on marches, they volunteer for pressure groups, they organise petitions, they connect and mobilise online and come out and vote for their country's future.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/21/scottish-referendum-massive-voter-turnout-means-politics-changed-for-ever

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 21 September, 2014, 04:38:03 PM
Brilliant. But what's the solution?

-Have regular weekly/monthly referendums?
-End party politics and so that every matter in the house of commons becomes a mini referendum?
-Or use the internet to avoid the high costs and allow voters to vote on all matters ourselves?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 September, 2014, 05:20:29 PM
Quote from: Banners on 21 September, 2014, 04:38:03 PM
Brilliant. But what's the solution?

-Have regular weekly/monthly referendums?
-End party politics and so that every matter in the house of commons becomes a mini referendum?
-Or use the internet to avoid the high costs and allow voters to vote on all matters ourselves?

I might be wrong, but the way you've formulated that post suggests you consider one or all of those suggestions to be self-evidently preposterous. Item two on your agenda could be done right now, at no cost and with no change to the present infrastructure of government. No argument explaining why political parties are necessary to the function of representative democracy has ever rung true to me.

It only really makes sense as an acknowledgement that corruption is inevitable, and an attempt to channel that bribe money more efficiently. If powerful vested interest groups are going to be bribing anyone to see things their way, I'd like the object of their blandishments to be me, rather than the Tories or New Labour. With an electorate of 46 million (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/electoral-statistics-for-uk/2011/stb---2011-electoral-statistics.html) to persuade, they'd better have deep fucking pockets

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 21 September, 2014, 07:02:23 PM
Quote from: sauchieI might be wrong, but the way you've formulated that post suggests you consider one or all of those suggestions to be self-evidently preposterous.

Quite the opposite of my intention - genuine questions not sarcasm. The outlawing of party politics in particular is something I've wondered about for a while.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 September, 2014, 06:44:02 PM
Whilst our political betters squabble over devolving power in a way that doesn't inconvenience those in charge, ordinary people try to make the world a slightly better place by providing food for their hungry neighbours:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-29307940

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 September, 2014, 06:49:26 PM
and the YES parties membership rises:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29311147 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29311147)

and rumours abound of the LP gaining a massive 37 members over the last few months.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 September, 2014, 07:48:54 PM

A Telegraph columnist asks why we aren't rising up in armed revolt against our economic and political masters:

QuoteMy current fury is occasioned the Phones4U scandal (and it really is a scandal). Phones4U was bought by the private equity house, BC Partners, in 2011 for £200m. BC then borrowed £205m and, having saddled the company with vast amounts of debt, paid themselves a dividend of £223m. Crippled by debt, the company has now collapsed into administration.

The people who crippled it have walked away with nearly £20m million, while 5,600 people face losing their jobs. The taxman may also be stiffed on £90m in unpaid VAT and PAYE. Instead of shrugging and saying, "This is the world we live in" you should be on the streets, you should be calling for this sort of thing to be a jailable offence, and you should want to see these guys up in front of parliament (or, better yet, in stocks) explaining why they made around £3,500 for every person they put out of a job.

It's just another example of people who build and make nothing gutting businesses, privatising the profits and socialising the losses. Slowly, it makes us all poorer. All these guys care about is money. They don't care about society. They certainly don't care about jobs and they don't care about you.

OK, you might say, but this has always been going on. But it hasn't. This sort of utterly amoral screw-everyone capitalism has become much more prevalent in the last 15 years. Our financial elite is now totally out of control. They learned nothing from the crisis, except that the rest of us were stupid enough to give them a second chance. And, now, having plucked all the "low hanging fruit," they're destroying the middle classes for profit.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11109845/Why-arent-the-British-middle-classes-staging-a-revolution.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 22 September, 2014, 08:17:04 PM
Good article on the campaign, Sauchie.
Certainly didn't feel empowering- quite the reverse. They will give us nothing and when Boris comes, he will screw us for even more, and the rUK too. We've been here before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2014, 08:26:00 PM
He's right but open revolution won't work - it rarely does when the opposition has all the firepower.
.
The most important thing is to understand the above problem and spread the word. I think Babylon 5 said it best, "he knows he can't fight his way out, he has to understand his way out" or something.
.
Anyway: Politicians/Celebrities = Vorlons.  Bankers/Corporatists = Shadows. The dumb schmucks caught in the crossfire = us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 22 September, 2014, 09:23:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2014, 08:26:00 PM
He's right but open revolution won't work - it rarely does when the opposition has all the firepower.

The state would happily gun us down in the blink of an eye at the merest hint of insurrection- take a look on you tube at the ruthless brutality of militarised US cops. Unemployment down, housing problems eased, introductions of even more controls. It's only when the armies (funded discreetly by foreign powers with corporate interests) join in revolt that the state is defeated, even then- it could go either way and its just a shitload of misery that no-one wants. Then some other bastards take over and it all begins again.

They who have the cash, call the shots- that's how kings came into being through paid warbands, how kings lost power to businessmen and the church with  more money than them and now businessmen have lost out to the big corporations, who now call the shots on governments through economic pressure and the fact that the governments are all in hock to them. History just repeats and repeats- utterly shambolic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 September, 2014, 10:00:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2014, 08:26:00 PM
Anyway: Politicians/Celebrities = Vorlons.  Bankers/Corporatists = Shadows. The dumb schmucks caught in the crossfire = us.

So you're saying a surprise nuking might be just the ticket? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 03:33:54 AM
Figuratively speaking - a surprise nuking might be a very good idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 September, 2014, 03:43:12 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 03:33:54 AM
Figuratively speaking - a surprise nuking might be a very good idea.

"If you go to Bil'Der'Berg, you will die".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 04:16:54 AM
Heh, I'm stealing that!
.
The kind of figurative nukes I had in mind were rolling strikes, applications and boycotts. For example: Monday - potato farmers strike, apply for a passport, boycott Tesco. Tuesday - toll booth workers strike, apply for driving license, boycott BP. Wednesday - taxi drivers strike, apply for a fishing license, boycott MacDonalds and so on.
.
When applying for stuff, don't enclose a cheque or photo - be deliberately awkward.
.
This way, everyone can do their bit separate from but in concert with everyone else, nullifying the dangers of organised demonstrations and mobs. The enemy is concerned only with money and control, so that's where we must attack. People need not be attacked or even shouted at in this form of peaceful rebellion. We have the power, not them.
.
Organise it right and we can eventually tell these elite muppets to get the Hell out of our galaxy - we don't need their "help" any more.
.
We live for them gone, we die for them gone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 05:33:30 AM
It's 5:15am and I'm watching BBC News 24. The anchor is interviewing John Garmendi, a US congressman, over the 'phone about his country's continued "Bomb Your Way to Peace" strategy in Syria.
.
Playing over this interview are "library pictures" - clips of rockets being launched from warships in the night, jet fighters screaming off carriers, radar screens, computer readouts and, I shit you not, the American flag fluttering in the rocket's glare. It looks like a US armed forces recruitment ad or a trailer for a new Steven Segal film.
.
I wonder how appropriate these kinds of images are on a news channel. I understand that current wisdom indicates that you have to keep audiences interested but I worry that such blatant bias, but so subtly done, harms our perceptions. To be impartial, should not these "library pictures" also show the aftermath of this glorious attack, the ruined communities and broken people?
.
By sensationalising these attacks there is a danger that the BBC, and all of us in the world's eyes, appear to condone and/or support them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 23 September, 2014, 10:05:23 AM
We tried revolution and it was a disaster. I for one am not keen to have another Lord Protector.

Democracy is the only way forward. IMHO, a devolved English parliament would be the most democratic solution to the current constitutional crisis. Boris could be English FM, and Ed the UK PM.

Or possibly we could elect somebody good instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 September, 2014, 10:55:06 AM
as the Genie says; its the Golden Rule, you know the golden rule? he who has the gold makes the rules.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 September, 2014, 10:56:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 05:33:30 AMTo be impartial, should not these "library pictures" also show the aftermath of this glorious attack, the ruined communities and broken people?

If I was to make one request of news media it would be this. 

It's the single greatest element of national (corporate) bias in reporting, where we see with horror every tragic second of (say) 9/11, but then when it's the other side's turn to bowl we are shown what are the effective equivalent of Al Qaeda fanatics gleefully piloting airliners across the blue skies accompanied by bombastic music, and marvel at their bravery and audacity in bringing God's justice to the benighted of a faraway land.  If 24-hour news gave us the human results of each drone strike anc aerial/missile bombardment with the same enthusiasm it gives us milporn, we'd think, and vote, very differently about the things done in our name.  I understand the impulse of government to present a one-sided view of conflict in their attempt to keep support and manpower flowing, but I despair at mainstream media's eagerness to play along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2014, 11:20:45 AM
Word.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 September, 2014, 12:22:34 PM
and FINALLY Esther... Can anyone explain to me why 200 celebrities can sign a letter and make pleas on national TV for Scotland to stay in the Union but Andy Murray has to apologise for one innocuous tweet supporting independence?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 September, 2014, 09:35:56 AM
India finally got a rocket into space. Thats great, maybe you could filter the next $75 Million to all your starving citizens now, that would be nice thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 25 September, 2014, 09:45:05 AM
unfortunately the starving people don't buy our tech and arms, so no money for them, and building dependacy on aid in the developing markets sorry countries rather than supporting self sufficancy is another minefield this thread has yet to enter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2014, 10:14:35 AM
There are hungry and homeless people in the USA, Russia and Europe too. Should their space exploration be cancelled as well in order to fund the poor?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 September, 2014, 10:37:16 AM
Short answer, IMHO, yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 September, 2014, 10:46:50 AM
There are far worse things to waste money on than understanding the universe and steps towards the future of the whole human race, and far, far more of it is poured down those many unsavoury drains. 

Once India/everywhere else have stopped doing all those things, I'll be better disposed towards eliminating spending on fripperies like art, science etc.  In the meantime, forward.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 September, 2014, 11:03:52 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 September, 2014, 10:46:50 AM
There are far worse things to waste money on than understanding the universe and steps towards the future of the whole human race, and far, far more of it is poured down those many unsavoury drains. 

Indeed. NASA's entire budget between 1952 and 2012 was just over half a trillion dollars. The Us government spent over a third of a trillion dollars on their military in 2012 alone. Also, through patents and whatnot, NASA has returned $18 for every $1 invested, but it has given us so much more. Can you put a price on all those highly entertaining conspiracies about faking the moon landings?

Also, we could have sent six rovers (complete with rocket-cranes) to Mars for the price of the London Olympics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2014, 11:05:02 AM
I think I'm with Tordels on this. Stop spending money on cluster bombing people and disemboweling the planet before cutting back on exploration. I'd much rather look at new pictures of Mars than new pictures of suffering.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 25 September, 2014, 11:06:31 AM
Farage reveals he's actually pro-Europe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXhLMIDscTI).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 September, 2014, 01:31:30 PM
When did he say he wasn't pro Europe?  It's the European Union he's against!

I've had some wonderful holidays in Europe.  Italy's my favourite place in the world.  I love Europe.  I just don't want to be ruled by it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 September, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
Space exploration is essential to the long-term survival of humanity, as well as being a noble and inspiring thing to do in it's own right. Well done, India.

As for Britain, we should increase our own space budget by a multiple of about a thousand, imho.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 25 September, 2014, 07:28:30 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 September, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
Space exploration is essential to the long-term survival of humanity, as well as being a noble and inspiring thing to do in it's own right. Well done, India.

Hearing this headline on the radio news I counted down, waiting for the inevitable "isn't this obscene when... blah-blah-blah?" Predictable and lame reporting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 September, 2014, 07:39:14 AM
Just heard on the news that someone's opened an Aggro-Dome in Hungary.
People are so frustrated that they need a place to let off steam.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 September, 2014, 09:28:44 AM
shouldn't that be in the '2000ad predicts the future' thread ?  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tombo on 26 September, 2014, 10:36:12 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 September, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
As for Britain, we should increase our own space budget by a multiple of about a thousand, imho.

I agree, but only if the government agency is called the British Rocket Group.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2014, 01:26:33 PM
Fuck that shit, we don't want our future in the hands of nerds.  Give more money to footballers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 September, 2014, 01:45:22 PM
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77829000/jpg/_77829249_spaceeconomy-moderndaygoldrushinfographic.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 02:07:57 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 September, 2014, 07:23:44 PM
Space exploration is essential to the long-term survival of humanity

I think not fucking up this planet is more essential to the long-term survival of humanity.

I remember reading a frustrated comment in response to an article that argued deep space travel was a pipe-dream, it went something like, "What do you mean deep space exploration is not possible, you mean we're stuck on this rock?"

As if that should really be a matter of concern for someone who would never set foot outside the Van Allen Belt.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 02:56:16 PM
We can't fuck the planet up, it's impossible. Even all-out nuclear war would only render the planet uninhabitable for a few thousand years and then there'd be a few more billion years of nature being nature.
.
The main thing we are fucking up is ourselves. We should change "Save the Planet" to "Save the Humans".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 03:10:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 02:56:16 PM
We can't fuck the planet up, it's impossible. Even all-out nuclear war would only render the planet uninhabitable for a few thousand years and then there'd be a few more billion years of nature being nature.

Sounds like a fucked up planet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2014, 03:34:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

NASA's day is sadly over, and the only hope for the space race is a corporation creating a cheaper way to exploit space travel and turn a profit, as the space race between countries is over thanks to politicians farming out contracts for transporting people and technology into space to corporate interests who have no motivation to innovate because 50 year-old Russian one-shot rockets already work and they get paid a tidy sum to keep using those rockets - the maths of creating re-useable or more efficient means of getting into space don't add up because creating such technology would mean revising their government stipends downwards.

All moot, of course, because the lizards that run the planet won't let us get off it - they'd have to be fucking mad to let us ruin their solar system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 03:43:56 PM
If there was money in a proper space industry that we could all apply for jobs in, there'd be an effort to invest a lot more instead of giving the Pentagon $50 billion every year, but it's just not there, and the energy expended overshoots any benefit while using up current dwindling resources.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 September, 2014, 03:47:58 PM
Read one interesting point in this coverage - Europe, Britain, China, Russia and India have lots of joint projects and cooperation going on, but Nasa is forbidden by US law from working with foreign agencies. There was an outcry last year when Nasa scientists threatened to boycott a major conference because Chinese colleagues had been banned from attending. Nasa later retracted this and blamed a "misinterpretation of the legal position"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 September, 2014, 03:51:51 PM
Any reason we can't try and save humanity and explore space? I know I know, but it's called vision something sadly lacking on the political class.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 September, 2014, 03:59:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 02:56:16 PM
We can't fuck the planet up, it's impossible.

Nonsense, we can acheive anything we put our minds to.

I'm amazed that India managed a successful mission to Mars on just $75 million. Movies like Gravity and Gaurdians of the Galaxy cost around twice as much and they were only pretending to go to space.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 04:05:40 PM
Funding space exploration would be a lot easier with publically created debt free money than with the currently used interest-bearing pretend money.
.
Just saying - fix money creation and suddenly a great many things become possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 04:18:01 PM



NASA should do a Kickstarter.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 September, 2014, 04:46:05 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 26 September, 2014, 03:59:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 02:56:16 PM
We can't fuck the planet up, it's impossible.

Nonsense, we can acheive anything we put our minds to.

GUFFAWS to infinity.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 September, 2014, 04:48:01 PM
Quote from: sauchie co-op on 26 September, 2014, 04:46:05 PM
GUFFAWS to infinity...

...And beyond!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 September, 2014, 05:14:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 02:07:57 PM
I think not fucking up this planet is more essential to the long-term survival of humanity.

Yes, but as Proudhuff so rightly says, that does not preclude space exploration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 05:44:41 PM
Good point. In order to explore space we need a place to explore it from, and Earth would seem to be the logical choice. Maybe we should designate the whole planet as a spaceport...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 05:57:32 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 September, 2014, 05:14:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 02:07:57 PM
I think not fucking up this planet is more essential to the long-term survival of humanity.

Yes, but as Proudhuff so rightly says, that does not preclude space exploration.

It probably should preclude all else if our only intention is to pillage the universe the same way.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 September, 2014, 07:13:30 PM

Some poor Australian spooks - possibly an entire section of them - have to read every single word Thryllseekr posts anywhere on the internet:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/terror-laws-clear-senate-enabling-entire-australian-web-to-be-monitored-and-whistleblowers-to-be-jailed-20140926-10m8ih.html


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2014, 07:23:45 PM
Now we have to encourage him.  And somehow get him onto the topic of terrorism and Australia's national defences.

Interesting that whistleblowers can now be jailed for admitting that Australia steals Aboriginal children to sell them to white families, but it's perfectly okay for me to say it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 September, 2014, 08:12:52 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 September, 2014, 02:07:57 PM
I think not fucking up this planet is more essential to the long-term survival of humanity.

Medium term survival, certainly. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 08:14:49 PM
Even short term would be nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 26 September, 2014, 08:20:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 September, 2014, 04:05:40 PM
Funding space exploration would be a lot easier with publically created debt free money than with the currently used interest-bearing pretend money.
.
Just saying - fix money creation and suddenly a great many things become possible.

Charles Stross asked should we just massage the egos of the plutocrats and get them to cough up the cash. (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2014/04/the-prospects-of-the-space-and.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 26 September, 2014, 11:11:39 PM
QuoteNow we have to encourage him.  And somehow get him onto the topic of terrorism and Australia's national defences.

And how it relates to Slaine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 27 September, 2014, 07:36:41 AM
Here's one Conservative policy we can all support...

(http://www.aptronym.co.uk/2000ad/torydisco.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 September, 2014, 11:30:21 AM
(http://hopes-and-dreams.net/img/despicableme-disco.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 27 September, 2014, 01:36:47 PM
What do we make of the latest development in French diplomacy? The geopolitical equivalent of snorting derisively when the manky kid in your class tries to make up his own nickname and continuing to call him Jobby-breeks Brown (http://mic.com/articles/99368/france-s-newest-weapon-against-the-islamic-state-hardcore-trolling).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 September, 2014, 03:00:36 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 27 September, 2014, 01:36:47 PM
What do we make of the latest development in French diplomacy? The geopolitical equivalent of snorting derisively when the manky kid in your class tries to make up his own nickname and continuing to call him Jobby-breeks Brown (http://mic.com/articles/99368/france-s-newest-weapon-against-the-islamic-state-hardcore-trolling).

I had an overactive colon, okay? I would have called them something genuinely childish - like Fanny Face - but this is still a great idea. Who would have thought the French, of all people, would arrive at a solution which just involved being fantastically rude  ...

This isn't without precedent either; the North Vietnamese Army never referred to themselves as Viet-Cong, it was a label popularised by the US military and media - although the purpose in this case was to make the enemy sound more threatening. See also the sudden widespread adoption of the fairly recondite term insurgent when referring to groups in Iraq who would be described as rebels in most other circumstances. That sounds too much like they're Luke Skywalker, who only beheaded folk who really deserved it.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2014, 03:03:10 PM
I like "ISIS" because it makes them seem a bit like COBRA from the old GI Joe cartoons, some of whose whacky schemes involved raising ships from WW2 to use them against the modern US military, creating a heavy metal band to brainwash the population of America, stampeding dinosaurs towards their enemies, and announcing that they were annexing bits of existing desert countries to create their own whacky nation of bullshit laws that could only exist in the mind of a cartoon villain.
Still, if it annoys them to call them Daesh, why not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2014, 04:33:42 PM
Noted murderer Dave Cameron wants to scrap Britain's commitment to the Human Rights Act, presumably because we don't need the safety net of redundant legislature seeing as Britain treats people so humanely, and not because David Cameron is a murderer:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/27/britain-not-fear-eu-exit-culture-secretary-sajid-javid?CMP=twt_gu
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 27 September, 2014, 05:49:16 PM
Quote from: sauchie co-op on 27 September, 2014, 03:00:36 PM
... the North Vietnamese Army never referred to themselves as Viet-Cong, it was a label popularised by the US military and media - although the purpose in this case was to make the enemy sound more threatening.
Way I understand it, Viet Cong were not the North Vietnamese Army. The Viet Cong were insurgents in the south and the NVA the military from the north, all with a common cause of course.

BTW on that theme, this is a very good graphic novel. I bought it for about £3 from a now closed bookshop a couple of years ago.

(http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/The%20Other%20Side%20Jason%20Aaron%20Cameron%20Stewart.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 September, 2014, 06:46:16 PM
A friend of mine lent me that a while ago. Great comic
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 28 September, 2014, 08:49:47 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 27 September, 2014, 06:46:16 PM
A friend of mine lent me that a while ago. Great comic

Agreed. It's interesting to see the war from both sides, with their accounts sometimes overlapping. Powerful comic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 September, 2014, 02:36:29 PM

Wall Street Journal's live feed from the protests in Hong Kong, where riot cops are currently making the place look a lot like prog 533:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/09/28/wsjs-video-stream-of-the-occupy-central-protests-in-hong-kong/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 30 September, 2014, 03:57:03 PM
Looks like the Milton Keynes ghetto is a goer:

Nuclear trucks that should have been scrapped more than a decade ago keep breaking down – and could cause a disaster on the roads.

A former senior safety official at the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has warned that an accident could trigger a fire and a leak of radioactivity.

Official documents have revealed that lorries that were scheduled to be retired in 2003 are still being used to transport dangerous and highly sensitive nuclear cargoes. Shipments of plutonium and uranium have been made between Britain's nuclear bomb factories in Berkshire, and across England.

Plans to replace the trucks with new vehicles were dropped in favour of adapting existing warhead carriers, but there have been delays in implementing this solution.

According to an official MoD log of safety incidents, the 20-year-old "high security vehicles" have stayed in service and suffered a series of equipment defects since 2010. The warhead carriers meant to take over from them have also had problems, with a total of 70 nuclear convoy incidents recorded by the MoD between July 2007 and December 2012.

Fred Dawson, a radiation safety expert with the MoD for 31 years, pointed out that the incidents included fuel leaks, which were serious matters. "They have the potential to lead to a fire and the loss of the vehicle together with its cargo," he said.

"This all smacks of a penny-pinching make-do-and-mend culture within the MoD's nuclear programmes. It also demonstrates that the MoD is willing to put cost-saving before public safety."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 October, 2014, 03:54:35 PM
Someone's added a music track to an actual David Cameron speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBumQHPAeU
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 October, 2014, 05:59:39 PM
Quote from: Bear McBear on 01 October, 2014, 03:54:35 PM
Someone's added a music track to an actual David Cameron speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBumQHPAeU

S'right - no editing whatsoever. Cameron changed his tie and grew more hair in-between lines just to really rub it in to Ed Miliband how much better he is at speaking without notes. He got through the whole rap without forgetting any of the lies he was supposed to tell.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 October, 2014, 06:06:22 PM
People were going on about Dave letting slip his true feelings in a speech, but I followed the link and was disappointed to find he wasn't openly admitting that he liked to murder people and get away with it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11133801/David-Camerons-FreudianSlip-Tories-resent-the-poor.html

Quote from: sauchie co-op on 01 October, 2014, 05:59:39 PM
Cameron changed his tie and grew more hair in-between lines just to really rub it in to Ed Miliband how much better he is at speaking without notes.

And he did it with a case of the hiccups, too.  The man is a trooper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2014, 05:39:12 PM
Chris Grayling - a man officially less qualified to perform his ministerial duties than his unpaid interns - has been branded a naughty boy by the British courts, for conspiring with the insurance industry to stop terminally-ill people from getting legal aid: http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/10/02/the-lord-chancellor-is-dismantling-the-rule-of-law
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 04 October, 2014, 11:04:08 AM
anyone else thinking the Argentinian response to the coincidental number plate on top gear is a tad two-faced as their president was threatening to invade the falklands again not that long ago.?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 04 October, 2014, 11:12:12 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 04 October, 2014, 11:04:08 AM
anyone else thinking the Argentinian response to the coincidental number plate on top gear is a tad two-faced as their president was threatening to invade the falklands again not that long ago.?

I'm no fan of Top Gear, but they clearly fell prey to a warmongering rent-a-mob. I am not really sure why we pretend Argentina isn't an enemy state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 04 October, 2014, 11:23:24 AM
The assertation that it is coincidental seems highly dubious considering their past form of denying intent (the slope thing in particular)

My hunch is that it was done intentionally, but someone on the crew actually pointed it out to generate a bit of controversy, but it got out of hand.

I hate mobs with a passion, but they go out of their way to provoke whichever country they're in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 04 October, 2014, 11:44:54 AM
I meant to put coincidental in quotation marks but was distracted by a hyper 3 yr old. ;) and the production crew does seem intent on getting them killed regularly (the decorate your cars one in usa was a favourite)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2014, 11:53:33 AM
I dunno, the entire Top Gear crew seem to share the South Park logic, that nothing sacred. I guess it's not so much the question as to weather it was intentional or not, more why the hell does anyone care.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 04 October, 2014, 01:47:43 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 04 October, 2014, 11:53:33 AM
I dunno, the entire Top Gear crew seem to share the South Park logic, that nothing sacred. I guess it's not so much the question as to weather it was intentional or not, more why the hell does anyone care.

The South Park folk usually do it as a means of highlighting hypocrisy or making some greater point about modern society, whereas the Top Gear folk do it because they're a bunch of childish pricks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2014, 02:01:17 PM
Thats the key difference. But still, why does anyone care?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 04 October, 2014, 03:12:36 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 04 October, 2014, 02:01:17 PM
Thats the key difference. But still, why does anyone care?
It's one thing to be aware of cultural and political sensitivities when abroad. But taking the piss over such a hot issue (in which hundreds lost their lives) was only going to invite such an over the top reaction.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2014, 03:22:35 PM
Fair point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2014, 03:25:36 PM
Of greater import to me is PM Rabid Maccaroon promising to "opt out" of the European Convention of Human Rights if he gets re-elected.
.
That convention states that everyone is entitled to a home and to uninterrupted enjoyment of their possessions. Both of these have been not only denied to me but actively ripped from me so it seems that local governments like my council have already opted out.
.
Dark times.
.
This Top Gear buffoonery is nothing but a shit-stirring distraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2014, 03:34:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2014, 03:25:36 PM
This Top Gear buffoonery

I had a long post ready to go on the subject, but Shark puts his pectoral fin on it there.  It's just the rudeness of the carefully-constructed buffoon.

The Human Rights thing is awful, listening to Any Questions yesterday I could hardly believe what I was hearing: a denial of common humanity in favour of the self-evidently-superior condition of being British (a far less clear category), and by dismissing the whole principle of universality undermining the legitimacy of one of the great conceptual leaps of the past two centuries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2014, 04:04:42 PM
The fact is that Cameron is technically correct to want to regard the ECHR as "purely advisory". I think I've explained here before that ALL legislation is technically advisory and that there is a huge difference between legislative and common law.
.
So let David Cameron opt out - that doesn't mean I have to. What it does mean is that it's okay for the British to opt out of any legislation they wish such as council tax, bedroom charge, tv license, fishing license, driving license etc. This could be a great, if inadvertent, leap forward in the cause of personal freedoms and responsibilities.
.
Then again, it might just turn into another clusterfuck.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2014, 09:10:42 PM
I find it increasingly harder to be appalled at the actions of someone who's still using their own dead child as a political football.  Still, it's good to have this subhuman slime in charge, as a reminder for the next time someone's in a voting booth thinking "well, they can't be any worse than Labour."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 October, 2014, 10:16:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2014, 03:25:36 PM
Of greater import to me is PM Rabid Maccaroon promising to "opt out" of the European Convention of Human Rights if he gets re-elected.
.
That convention states that everyone is entitled to a home and to uninterrupted enjoyment of their possessions. Both of these have been not only denied to me but actively ripped from me so it seems that local governments like my council have already opted out.
.
Dark times.
.
This Top Gear buffoonery is nothing but a shit-stirring distraction.

Well, if being in the convention didn't stop you from being thrown out of your house, Sharkey, what's the point of being in it?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 05 October, 2014, 10:40:18 PM
Fuckwitted logic in action:

We have laws against murder, but people still get murdered, so what's the point in having laws against murder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 October, 2014, 10:49:02 PM
"Fuckwitted logic in action:"

Twisting someone's words and behaving like the prick you are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 October, 2014, 10:50:55 PM
Ooops, forgot to put the smiley.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 October, 2014, 12:11:05 AM
Fuckwitted logic in action:
.
Murder is only wrong because it is against the law, therefore only the existence of laws prevents murder. As murder is clearly wrong the law must be right - and if one law is right, all laws must be right.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 06 October, 2014, 08:12:05 AM
I thought I warned everyone about personal attacks not that long ago.

Tankie, please consider yourself on a warning. The moderators are under instruction to ban you for a period of their choosing if you take another shot like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 October, 2014, 09:58:14 AM
Fair enough, I take on board what you say, completely.  I like being on this forum and don't want to be banned, so there'll be no more shots from me.

As a learning tool, I have re-read GordonR's post, (which I was responding to) and realise that there is a way of profoundly insulting people (i.e. me) that doesn't get you pulled up. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 October, 2014, 11:21:46 AM
I'm with Old Tankie Block. In my view, O.T.'s post was not so much an attack as an observation.
.
And to answer your question, Tankie, technically it makes no difference whether the UK's government is in or out of th ECHR. As I said, all legislation is technically advisory, meaning that anyone can either accept or reject it under their own authority.
.
And before the usual fuckwittery raises its empty head, everyone is free to disobey or ignore any law they choose but this does also mean that one must take responsibility for one's own actions. To rely entirely upon legislation to regulate morality and mete out the appropriate punishments undermines and marginalises personal responsibility, putting the onus on "the authorities" to catch and punish us rather than on our own abilities to act properly in society.
.
Virtually everyone knows right from wrong from a very early age but, as we grow older, we tend to ignore our own judicial instincts more and more, reasoning that what we think doesn't or even can't matter because other very clever people have already sorted all the laws out and written them down.
.
A further aspect of this field is that, even though individuals are free to treat legislation as advisory the government is not. Only the government, as author and enforcer, is bound by legislation. Therefore the government can't force us to comply with legislation but we can force the government to comply.
.
And, to forestall even further fuckwittery, actual crimes like murder, rape, assault and theft come under the control of common law first and legislative law second. Even if legislation emerged legalising murder, murder would still be contrary to common law and still subject to whichever punishment society deems appropriate.
.
Take road traffic legislation and such - do we drive on the left and stop at red lights because legislation tells us to or because that's the common law, the common practice, of drivers in this country? The foundation of driving on the left and stopping at red lights is the common law, legislation merely codifies and attempts to reinforce the practices and customs already in place.
.
In recent times, the bulk of legislative law seems to have been hi-jacked in the pursuit of raising revenue for the state in an attempt to pay off the unpayoffable government debt.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 October, 2014, 12:06:51 PM
Thanks for your support, Sharkie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 October, 2014, 01:36:27 PM
There is a clear and easy-to-understand distinction between calling someone's argument idiotic, and calling that person an idiot. I know lots of smart people who believe stupid and/or wrongheaded things. I have been guilty of doing the latter when I should have done the former and am trying to do better.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 October, 2014, 04:49:19 PM
You're welcome, Tankie - this is the Political Thread and it needs robust and vociferous raw curmudgeons like you, GRennie, Jim and me. It's all good!
.
Ah Jim - I love your posts and don't think you could do much better.  (Or, more accurately, I don't want you to do much better because, if you do, I'll never win an argument against you!)
.
That said, I think Molchie has a point. How about we don't outright ban personal jibes on This Thread but stipulate that they must be in Mega City One vernacular? Then we can all act like the stomm-drokkers we really are... :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 October, 2014, 05:09:34 PM
Was your grud-damn mouth!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 October, 2014, 07:20:23 PM

Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi ... why does it always happen to the good guys?



By Cheryl K. Chumley - The Washington Times - Monday 6th October


North Korea's supreme leader Kim Jong-un hasn't been seen in public for so long that talk is swirling he may have been deposed.

Mr. Kim's been absent from the public eye since Sept. 4, and is reportedly suffering from gout. He supposedly also underwent surgery for two broken ankles, United Press International reported.

"Mr. Kim wasn't present at the latest meeting of North Korea's congress, the Supreme People's Assembly — something experts say is a sign that he's experiencing something more serious than health problems, UPI reported.

A former counterintelligence official who held a high-ranking spot in Mr. Kim's regime, Jang Jin Sung, said he thinks the Organization and Guidance Department actually usurped the dictator last year and headed up the execution of their political rival, Kim Jong-un's uncle, Jang Song Thaek.

"When Jang Song Thaek was executed that was, basically, that totally broke everything," Mr. Jang said, Vice News reported. "You just can't touch a Kim family member publicly. ... It's the OGD's claim to legitimacy. It's them, saying no one is more legitimate than them. By Jang dying, Kim Jong-un is now surrounded by the OGD."

Mr. Kim is now little more than a figurehead for the OGD, which ordered his disappearance, Mr. Jang told Vice.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/6/talk-swirls-n-korean-dictator-kim-jong-uns-been-de/#ixzz3FODdOROc


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 October, 2014, 10:24:02 PM
maybe he just had one after dinner mint too many and blew up
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 October, 2014, 10:43:15 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 06 October, 2014, 10:24:02 PM
maybe he just had one after dinner mint too many and blew up

"I said gimme the pie"


(http://i.imgur.com/b87mKN6.jpg?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 October, 2014, 10:46:46 PM
Quote from: sauchie co-op on 06 October, 2014, 10:43:15 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 06 October, 2014, 10:24:02 PM
maybe he just had one after dinner mint too many and blew up

"now I will have the biggest  penis, decadent capitalist pigs!"


(http://i.imgur.com/b87mKN6.jpg?1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 October, 2014, 11:34:18 PM
He's so ronery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2014, 02:14:40 PM
come to think of it its probably his uncle in the mincer
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 October, 2014, 02:19:18 PM
Looks like soylent yellow to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 October, 2014, 05:18:32 PM
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jrUHoFJzVT4/Tf_ihSiGNkI/AAAAAAAAwD4/vzeb5ksCJb8/s400/Stuff%2B%252835%2529.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 06:42:01 PM
Thought I'd drag the slavery conversation from Threadjacking to here (have I just threadjacked the threadjacking thread?), where it will do less harm...
.
I'm always saying that we, as a people, are enslaved and so I thought I' expand on that a bit.
.
I don't think my views on slavery will make much sense unless I first explain what I think freedom is. I once read a definition of being rich as "having the resources to do what you need to do when you need to do it" and I think the best definition of freedom is roughly the same, having the ability to do what you need to do when you need to do it. Most people, I think, would say, correctly, that we already have that ability but I say that we do not.
.
Before I explain that last remark, a bit of a disclaimer. Although the rest of what I write will be from an idealistic viewpoint I do not believe in Perfect Freedom. Nobody is free to sprout wings and fly away, walk to the moon or swallow tornadoes. Everything is constrained by everything else and freedom is a relative thing, if Perfect Freedom exists then it is an aspect of God and a subject for discussion on the Deep Thought Thread. For us, freedom is like an old vinyl single; the single groove is your life, constrained by the physical form of the record in both dimensions and duration - but within that groove is the potential for infinite variation; the freedom to record any song you like.
.
The freedom I speak of is the freedom to choose my own path, to wander hither and yon as I choose. I have that now, of course I do, but does my society support me in that? In short, no. I think that it should. For what use is freedom in an enslaved nation?
.
Slavery is when one person owns another and their productivity. In our society, I see many slaves throughout all levels of society, with chains made of false money and credit - the more you have, the longer your leash. Our "Big House" is Westminster, where the overseers work, those who have first dibs on Everything. Under them are the Trustees, the utilities and services, who have first dibs on whatever's left. Finally, you pay for your own room, board and transport and then you can grab a couple of comics with whatever's left.
.
All over I see slaves doing jobs they hate just so they can tip up the vast majority of their earnings - their potential, their time, their lives - for the benefit of others, the Plantation Owners. Always the demands and edicts of the Owners comes first and our own needs come last - and they tell us that this is a virtue, that we are tightening our belts and working harder for each other. And we fall for it and willingly accept this slavery without seeing it for what it is. So long as we have X-Factor and microwave dinners and a good DVD collection that's all I need and all I want - just leave me alone and I'll be good.
.
But they don't leave you alone, do they? Prices rise, wages stagnate and services are cut and all the time the Overseers cry "More! More! More!" and we obediently bend our backs because that's what we're supposed to, because that's what we're told to do, because that's what good slaves do.
.
You cannot drive unless the Overseer says so. You cannot marry unless the Overseer says so. You cannot buy a house, own a car, fish the rivers, farm the land, own livestock, run a business, fly a plane, own a gun, drive a tank, execute criminals, broadcast a tv or radio show, hold a demonstration or run for office unless the Overseer says so.
.
That is not freedom. That is slavery.
.
Solutions? Many. Pick one. First, though, I think we have to give the idea that we've walked into slavery an inch at a time some serious thought. Before we can fix it, we need to see it - and I think I can see some of it. I should imagine many of you disagree but hey - that's politics!
.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 06:53:34 PM
So, we do not have the ability to do what we need to do when we need to do it because the demands of the Overseers come first.
.
Don't believe me?
.
Hands up how many of you need a holiday right now? So why don't you go? This is supposed to be one of the richest, most advanced and freest nations in the world.
.
Why don't you go?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2014, 06:56:30 PM
Your argument is a good one, but I still find the use of the term slavery to be inappropriate: no-one governs your relationships and your child-bearing, no-one sells you on away from your family, no-one prevents you running away - while your property and labour may be under the control of others, no-one genuinely owns you.  I understand how totally the modern world penetrates everyone's lives and curtails their choices, but ultimately I think it is quite distinct from slavery as the condition is generally understood (although again I accept that there have been many, many types and grades of slavery).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 07:12:00 PM
The DSS has "the right" to take children from their parents and does so with alarming regularity. This is as blatant an example of ownership, and thus slavery, as I can think of.
.
The question of ownership is an important one and I'm not sure there are any actual slave-society owners, at least not in the traditional sense. It may have started out that way but the more I think about it, the less likely that seems.
.
There are certainly those who benefit hideously from the system (remember that statistic of 85 individuals being more wealthy than the poorest 50% of humanity combined?), and those like us who benefit marginally from it and would do just about all we're asked to keep it running. I'm beginning to think that the system itself has become so complex that it is the "owner" - though not in a sentient "SkyNet" kind of way, more in the way of an ancient religious process which is kept going on faith rather than actual results. I'm not quite sure I'm seeing it clearly yet but it seems that, as we technically own the system, we are enslaving ourselves.
.
My brain hurts.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2014, 07:45:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 07:12:00 PM
The DSS has "the right" to take children from their parents and does so with alarming regularity. This is as blatant an example of ownership, and thus slavery, as I can think of.

Quite the opposite.  It is an example of society declaring that parents don't own their children, that children have a right to health and happiness independent of family circumstances, and society has an obligation to ensure this.  I certainly won't deny that state social services get this impossible job wrong too often, especially not living in the RoI, but the principle and much of the practice is a rejection of ownership in favour of the defenceless individual.   

Parents are people, not omniscient superbeings, and sometimes they fuck up and are fucked up.  That society can see individuals as well as families is a good thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 08:14:11 PM
It is a slippery slope. There may very well be a common law justification to take an infant away from its parents in extreme cases and as a last resort but more and more families are being split up because its easier and makes more money for the state.
.
If a family struggling to make ends meet (to pay for their own slavery) implodes and takes it out on a child, that is a deplorable crime worthy of punishment. So money is pumped into investigations and court cases and expert witnesses and care centres and foster homes and all that. Just a fraction of that expense, a fraction of all that resource, if put into easing the struggling family's burden, carrying some of the weight, I think far more could be achieved. Moreso if the professional social workers on the ground have more say than political and corporate policy makers.
.
In England, secret family courts are held quite regularly and many children are taken from their families never to be seen again. Some are sure to end up in very dark places indeed if recent news coverage is to be believed.
.
Like many government projects, the DSS has been perverted into a cash machine - once again taking something good and poisoning it from the head down. There's big money in foster homes and big money buys you fancy lawyers who can draft legislation and slick lobbyists who know how to sell it to MPs. You can't make money out of foster homes without kids to foster, so you hire expert psychologists and doctors to put forward your assertion that Parents Must Be Perfect Or Suffer The Consequences and that fostering children is good for them - Hell, all children should be fostered!
.
And in a council flat in Peckham social workers and police forcibly remove a day old infant from her parents because her mother has a history of depression and insisted upon an unassisted home birth.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2014, 08:29:08 PM
I can't argue with your examples of incidents, and I certainly wouldn't dispute that awful things happen once fallible people and brainless blame-phobic hierarchies get involved.  However, I don't want to live in a society which views what goes on behind closed doors as nobody's business but the pater familias: my own country blithely condoned spousal and child abuse since its inception, not to mention proudly handing over its women and children to almost inconceivable institutional evil.  That there are now people charged with protecting the vulnerable rather than ignoring or punishing them is a good thing, however much we would wish they never screwed up.  For me it's a case of needing to do it better, rather than not doing it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 08:34:29 PM
I completely agree that we must do better.
.
Here again, though, we hit the same old wall: "I'm afraid we just don't have the budget for that."
.
Social money creation. It's the only way. Do that and we can do better everywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2014, 09:43:28 AM
Best thing you'll read today, from the wonderful Grayson Perry:  http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/grayson-perry-rise-and-fall-default-man

(Aside: my life and home are infested with endless repetitive bits of broken pottery, and Perry's work makes the medium fresh and exciting for me, so I'm well-disposed to him from the start, for all that he is rather more an Uncle Tom-ish part of what he rails against than he might let on...).

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lmZjJZ6xtec/TW_1HxCQM1I/AAAAAAAACPo/hJyRVh0x0rY/s640/12a-19-urncut-415.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2014, 10:15:28 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 October, 2014, 09:43:28 AM
Best thing you'll read today...

Uhh, other than Prog 1902, obviously.

-keeps weather eye for Rigellian Hotshot-
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 October, 2014, 11:14:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2014, 08:14:11 PM
It is a slippery slope. There may very well be a common law justification to take an infant away from its parents in extreme cases and as a last resort but more and more families are being split up because its easier and makes more money for the state.
.
If a family struggling to make ends meet (to pay for their own slavery) implodes and takes it out on a child, that is a deplorable crime worthy of punishment. So money is pumped into investigations and court cases and expert witnesses and care centres and foster homes and all that. Just a fraction of that expense, a fraction of all that resource, if put into easing the struggling family's burden, carrying some of the weight, I think far more could be achieved. Moreso if the professional social workers on the ground have more say than political and corporate policy makers.
.
In England, secret family courts are held quite regularly and many children are taken from their families never to be seen again. Some are sure to end up in very dark places indeed if recent news coverage is to be believed.
.
Like many government projects, the DSS has been perverted into a cash machine - once again taking something good and poisoning it from the head down. There's big money in foster homes and big money buys you fancy lawyers who can draft legislation and slick lobbyists who know how to sell it to MPs. You can't make money out of foster homes without kids to foster, so you hire expert psychologists and doctors to put forward your assertion that Parents Must Be Perfect Or Suffer The Consequences and that fostering children is good for them - Hell, all children should be fostered!
.
And in a council flat in Peckham social workers and police forcibly remove a day old infant from her parents because her mother has a history of depression and insisted upon an unassisted home birth.
.

Sorry Sharky, but this time you're talking bollocks. I know a lot of stressed, underpaid and idealistic people who work in social services and child protection and your interpretation of their work is frankly insulting. They're not snatching children for profit, they are fighting tooth and nail to rescue children from appalling neglect and cruelty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 October, 2014, 12:25:55 PM
And the Social Workers I know often state that they often have to keep families together as much as possible; attempting to fix a broken family is preferable (and a better long term solution) than ripping it apart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2014, 12:40:21 PM
Of course they are, DDD. I firmly believe that the vast majority of social workers are doing the best they can in every sense. But their good works are being perverted - not all the time, to be sure, nor even for the majority of the time but for a significant time.
.
Those social workers and entrepreneurs involved in the social care industry are all human beings and will act accordingly. Most, I think, will be there due to a genuine human desire to do good. Some will be there to make a profit and a few will be attracted to the industry for other reasons entirely.
.
In what I laughingly call my researches I have come across many articles and reports that ask some uncomfortable questions and describe some uncomfortable cases around this issue.
.
I wonder how many unsavoury practices in the past have been sold to us as that nebulous phenomena of "Satanic Abuse" to cover up the activities of some perverts with access to parts of the system?
.
My point is that splitting up a family, and especially taking children away, must be a last resort and I'd wager most social workers would agree with that idea, at least in general. If children must be taken away, however, that process must be whiter than white and as well funded as the armed forces. Families are the core of society and we must make it easier for them to learn and thrive. We have to ease the pressure on everyone - that would be a good start to keeping families together, I think.
.
Turning social services over to private industry is not a wise thing to do. I know that "battery borstals" don't exist but I'll bet there's more than one wealthy sociopath out there who'd run one if he could get away with it - and more than one dedicated social worker who'd move mountains to shut it down.
.
I know I tend to look on the black side, seeing the worst in a thing, and tend to ignore the fact that the majority of human beings in any organisation are basically just and honest, wanting only what's best for themselves and others. Whilst this is a great strength, and arguably our greatest asset on the path to freedom, it also gives us a great weakness - a kind of moral blind-spot; you wouldn't do something that bad so you assume nobody else would, especially those closest and best known to you - at least not until you see proof. We all knew Jimmy Savile, after all. We all knew he was weird but we didn't know he was *that* weird. We, his audience, gave him a pass and chose not to see. Because we didn't look, the BBC didn't look and so the authorities didn't look. Nobody looked at what we all should have been able to see.
.
Privatising the social care industry draws it into the shadows, where none of us can see even if we wanted to.  That's the danger I see, that's the cancer - not the social workers who are only following their hearts and their orders.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 October, 2014, 01:27:43 PM
social workers are 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' - if a child is murdered by abusive parents there is an outcry as to why the signs were missed and why irresponsible social workers allowed it to happen. If they remove the child they're accused of ripping apart families.

There is an argument to be had about the resourcing of child protection services and private outsourcing of care homes, but the welfare of the child is the paramount concern of anybody working in the field - not only in their own personal approach (trust me, NOBODY goes into this area for the money) but also underpinned by law (the Children's Act)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 October, 2014, 01:38:25 PM
Being an old duffer, who can remember the outbreak of the AIDs panic and media coverage of the early 80s, I'm beginning to see parallels with the ebola situation.  Just seen on Sky News that a charity worker and her son have been banned from giving a talk at a school, because they've recently been in Sierra Leone.  Thousands of vulnerable people die every winter in this country through 'flu related illnesses, yet the media don't seem so keen to cover that.  Can we please keep the ebola situation in context.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2014, 02:56:49 PM
It's only a matter of time before someone suggests the possibility of ISIS child suicide bombers armed with ebola bombs running around rural Kent disguised in Hallowe'en costumes and looking for hospitals and supermarkets to go off in.
.
Y'all don't forget to be afraid now. Look at the terrible threats and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2014, 05:33:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 08 October, 2014, 01:38:25 PM
a charity worker and her son have been banned from giving a talk at a school, because they've recently been in Sierra Leone

Even if the speaker was infected (and at the specific stage of the life cycle of the virus where she was able to pass it on to others), unless she licked or pissed on the front row of her audience there wouldn't be much chance of her making them ill. Nothing that exciting ever happened at my school assemblies.

Did you hear Grayson Perry's Reith Lectures (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DtehJ3O3vMk#t=265), TordelBack?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 October, 2014, 05:41:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2014, 02:56:49 PM
It's only a matter of time before someone suggests the possibility of ISIS child suicide bombers armed with ebola bombs running around rural Kent disguised in Hallowe'en costumes and looking for hospitals and supermarkets to go off in.
.
Y'all don't forget to be afraid now. Look at the terrible threats and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

You just did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2014, 07:14:40 PM
Quote from: sauchie co-op on 08 October, 2014, 05:33:42 PM
Did you hear Grayson Perry's Reith Lectures (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DtehJ3O3vMk#t=265), TordelBack?

I surely did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 October, 2014, 04:44:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2014, 02:56:49 PM
It's only a matter of time before someone suggests the possibility of ISIS child suicide bombers armed with ebola bombs running around rural Kent disguised in Hallowe'en costumes and looking for hospitals and supermarkets to go off in.
.
Y'all don't forget to be afraid now. Look at the terrible threats and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Are you working for the Daily Mail?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2786433/Could-Ebola-used-weapon-ISIS-Terror-experts-raise-prospect-jihadists-infecting-spreading-virus-Western-countries.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2786433/Could-Ebola-used-weapon-ISIS-Terror-experts-raise-prospect-jihadists-infecting-spreading-virus-Western-countries.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 09 October, 2014, 04:46:24 PM
daily Mail? here's some balance  :D

'Windfalls like this are everywhere: think of the billion pounds the government threw into the air when it sold Royal Mail, or the massive state subsidies quietly being channelled to the private train companies. When Cameron told the Conservative party conference "there's no reward without effort; no wealth without work; no success without sacrifice", he was talking cobblers. Thanks to his policies, shareholders and corporate executives become stupendously rich by sitting in the current with their mouths open.'


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/07/bullying-corporations-enemy-within-business-politicians (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/07/bullying-corporations-enemy-within-business-politicians)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 October, 2014, 06:39:00 PM
Proudhuff: comment of the day on your last, I couldn't agree more. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 October, 2014, 03:01:35 AM
Labour ran close with their majority slashed in their heartland of Heywood and Middleton earlier, with a miserable turnout of 36%, while UKIP (which was really just the person) take Clacton with an equally poor turnout of 51%
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 October, 2014, 07:08:21 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 October, 2014, 03:01:35 AM
Labour ran close with their majority slashed in their heartland of Heywood and Middleton earlier, with a miserable turnout of 36%, while UKIP (which was really just the person) take Clacton with an equally poor turnout of 51%

UKIP now have as many MPs as the Green Party, and have replaced the Lib-Dems as the party of protest at by-elections. Vote Farage, get Miliband:


(http://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/ukip-source-voters.jpg?w=480&h=375)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 October, 2014, 08:22:47 AM
51% turnout for a by-election is actually pretty good.  And to get nearly 60% of the people who did vote is very good.  Can't be bothered to look it up but, if my memory serves me right, Labour got about 29% on a turnout of about 65% at the last general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 08:46:16 AM
England's lurch to the far-right is most worrying. What on earth is going on down there? :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 10 October, 2014, 08:54:40 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 08:46:16 AM
England's lurch to the far-right is most worrying. What on earth is going on down there? :o

Not exactly "England's" lurch, more like a certain percentage of Tories now deciding to vote UKIP.

I think you'll find that the majority of English people aren't 'Far-Right', (at least in my experience).

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 09:08:13 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 10 October, 2014, 08:54:40 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 08:46:16 AM
England's lurch to the far-right is most worrying. What on earth is going on down there? :o

Not exactly "England's" lurch, more like a certain percentage of Tories now deciding to vote UKIP.

I think you'll find that the majority of English people aren't 'Far-Right', (at least in my experience).

Cheers

As far as I can see they are taking votes from northern Labour voters as well as Tory votes in the south. That concerns me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2014, 09:13:38 AM
What's going on down here is that we're all idiots. We believe that voting for a political party is the Only Way to solve our problems and that the people we are allowed to vote for are decent and honest people with our own best interests at heart. We believe that the tyranny of the majority is a good thing and that anybody who doesn't vote has no right to complain.
.
That's what's going on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 October, 2014, 09:17:34 AM
I agree with NapalmKev.  A huge amount of the Ukip vote is coming from former lifelong Tories, (including me and the missus).  I dislike Cameron far more than I dislike the Labour Party and if that means five years of Ed in charge in order to get rid of Cameron then so be it, hardly a lurch to the Right.  Labour's share of the vote went up in the Rochdale by-election.  And Labour will win the next General Election with a clear majority because of the Ukip vote, again hardly a lurch to the Right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 October, 2014, 09:27:23 AM
Labour Party would be better with new leader than gormless Ed? Not too late to change the leader?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:43:11 AM
Well done England for voting in a racist party. This is why we wanted a yes vote. We don't want to be rules by nazis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 October, 2014, 09:47:46 AM
Too late I'm afraid.

Ed Miliband is woeful. Ed Balls doesn't convince me either.

It really annoys me that they're the opposition, although the Tories have held my local seat with a sizeable majority for the past decade, with 2 and 3 split between Labour and Lib Dem.

He just seems adrift, with his 'luck' being UKIP splitting the Tory vote, and the Lib Dems being hated over going into coalition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 October, 2014, 09:49:08 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:43:11 AM
Well done England for voting in a racist party. This is why we wanted a yes vote. We don't want to be rules by nazis.

Aren't moderators supposed to moderate, not Godwin threads, Rich?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 10 October, 2014, 09:50:38 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 10 October, 2014, 09:27:23 AM
Labour Party would be better with new leader than gormless Ed? Not too late to change the leader?

Yep, Labour should be cleaning up in these difficult times. Ed proving a terrible choice. Seems it's just too hard to find a principled AND popular leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:51:07 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 10 October, 2014, 09:49:08 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:43:11 AM
Well done England for voting in a racist party. This is why we wanted a yes vote. We don't want to be rules by nazis.

Aren't moderators supposed to moderate, not Godwin threads, Rich?

That was me being moderate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 October, 2014, 09:55:50 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 10 October, 2014, 09:50:38 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 10 October, 2014, 09:27:23 AM
Labour Party would be better with new leader than gormless Ed? Not too late to change the leader?

Yep, Labour should be cleaning up in these difficult times. Ed proving a terrible choice. Seems it's just too hard to find a principled AND popular leader.

It would have been interesting to see what his brother would have made of it, I can't imagine he'd try again.

I'm not sure if Chuka Ummuna will put his name up when Miliband goes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 October, 2014, 09:59:10 AM
I thought Scotland voted "No".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 10:10:25 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 October, 2014, 09:59:10 AM
I thought Scotland voted "No".

55% did. The rest had more sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 October, 2014, 10:31:12 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:43:11 AM
Well done England for voting in a racist party. This is why we wanted a yes vote. We don't want to be rules by nazis.

Oh dear...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
It makes me laugh when Scottish nationalists attack UKIP for espousing nationalist policies. I guess it looks like there's a difference to you guys, because hating the English is fine but hating Europeans is racist.

However, I am looking forward to engaging in the inevitable EU referendum in defence of the UK's membership.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:40 AM
Unfortunately, we are already ruled by Nazis - it's just that the "main parties" have learned to hide it more effectively.
.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the marriage of business and state." Mussolini.
.
Are Scottish Nationalists Snazis?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 10:56:46 AM
Quote from: Spikes on 10 October, 2014, 10:31:12 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 09:43:11 AM
Well done England for voting in a racist party. This is why we wanted a yes vote. We don't want to be rules by nazis.

Oh dear...

Oh dear indeed. Up here, north of the border, October 9th will forever now be known as England's day of shame.  :'(

By the way, before this gets out of hand, I am joking. I don't agree with the Clacton result but the people have spoken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 10 October, 2014, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:40 AM
Unfortunately, we are already ruled by Nazis - it's just that the "main parties" have learned to hide it more effectively.
.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the marriage of business and state." Mussolini.
.
Are Scottish Nationalists Snazis?

This is turning into absolute Nonsense! How is England ruled by Nazis? I don't like the Tories (or UKIP) but to suggest that we are governed by Nazis is just plain Crazy!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 October, 2014, 11:06:33 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 10 October, 2014, 11:01:05 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:40 AM
Unfortunately, we are already ruled by Nazis - it's just that the "main parties" have learned to hide it more effectively.
.
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the marriage of business and state." Mussolini.
.
Are Scottish Nationalists Snazis?

This is turning into absolute Nonsense! How is England ruled by Nazis? I don't like the Tories (or UKIP) but to suggest that we are governed by Nazis is just plain Crazy!

Cheers
I believe Sharky is refering to the powers that be being corporate fat cats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 10 October, 2014, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
It makes me laugh when Scottish nationalists attack UKIP for espousing nationalist policies. I guess it looks like there's a difference to you guys, because hating the English is fine but hating Europeans is racist.

This'll be news to all the English (and Polish, Irish, Swedish, Australian and American) people I know living here in Scotland who voted Yes last month.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 11:43:34 AM
The worst thing about the Independence debate was when it was hijacked by outside interests cough Nigel Farage cough who tried to reframe the issue as "Scotland versus England" for their own twisted shit-stirring purposes. Now, that is not to say that there weren't a few YES voters who went into the voting booth with an anti-English sentiment but that is their problem not mine.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 October, 2014, 11:46:21 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 10 October, 2014, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
It makes me laugh when Scottish nationalists attack UKIP for espousing nationalist policies. I guess it looks like there's a difference to you guys, because hating the English is fine but hating Europeans is racist.

This'll be news to all the English (and Polish, Irish, Swedish, Australian and American) people I know living here in Scotland who voted Yes last month.

Collaborators!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 October, 2014, 11:49:42 AM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 10:56:46 AM
I don't agree with the Clacton result but the people have spoken.

Unfortunately, what they've said is: http://youtu.be/2iXPMN_ys8w (http://youtu.be/2iXPMN_ys8w) "We're an uninformed gang of prejudiced fucktards who nothing about UKIP except that Nigel Farage will keep those nasty foreigners out of this 90%+ white English town and do something about all those stupid human rights we have."[/url]

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: -Dunk!- on 10 October, 2014, 11:54:31 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 October, 2014, 11:46:21 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 10 October, 2014, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
It makes me laugh when Scottish nationalists attack UKIP for espousing nationalist policies. I guess it looks like there's a difference to you guys, because hating the English is fine but hating Europeans is racist.

This'll be news to all the English (and Polish, Irish, Swedish, Australian and American) people I know living here in Scotland who voted Yes last month.

Collaborators!

Scotalists!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 11:54:52 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 October, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
It makes me laugh when Scottish nationalists attack UKIP for espousing nationalist policies. I guess it looks like there's a difference to you guys, because hating the English is fine but hating Europeans is racist.

However, I am looking forward to engaging in the inevitable EU referendum in defence of the UK's membership.

I hate English racists. But I also hate Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Indian, Russian, Chinese, American (and so on) racists...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 October, 2014, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 11:54:52 AM
I hate English racists. But I also hate Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Indian, Russian, Chinese, American (and so on) racists...

So, you admit you're a racistist, then?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 12:02:41 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 October, 2014, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2014, 11:54:52 AM
I hate English racists. But I also hate Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Indian, Russian, Chinese, American (and so on) racists...

So, you admit you're a racistist, then?

Cheers

Jim

I hate those guys most of all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 10 October, 2014, 12:04:05 PM
Speaking as a Norn Iron resident may I say how depressing it is to be depressed by all the politics of this disunited kingdom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
The only Race I hate is Roy.  I can never forgive him for defecting to Walford Rovers for the whole of the 1983 season.  Melchester 4 Life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 October, 2014, 12:21:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
The only Race I hate is Roy.  I can never forgive him for defecting to Walford Rovers for the whole of the 1983 season.  Melchester 4 Life.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 10 October, 2014, 12:43:57 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
The only Race I hate is Roy.  I can never forgive him for defecting to Walford Rovers for the whole of the 1983 season.  Melchester 4 Life.

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 10 October, 2014, 01:14:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2014, 12:13:08 PM
The only Race I hate is Roy.  I can never forgive him for defecting to Walford Rovers for the whole of the 1983 season.  Melchester 4 Life.

:lol:

A bandwagon that I am more than happy to jump on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2014, 02:59:27 PM
I don't hate anyone. I hate certain attitudes and certain ideas but hating people is just stupid and blinkered. (I have to take this attitude in order to rise above all those bastards who hate me...)
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 October, 2014, 04:15:45 PM
I have an issue with the term racist, we are the human race...all the other bits are a different breed of the same species ,so its speciesist. like my dog and jack russells
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Daveycandlish on 10 October, 2014, 05:16:27 PM
Jack russells are little bastards!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 October, 2014, 05:28:16 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 10 October, 2014, 04:15:45 PM
I have an issue with the term racist

It's not particularly helpful or truthful to label everyone voting for Farage a racist. I'm sure a good number of the disaffected Labour voters who made Heywood a close race were like the couple I heard interviewed who muttered "you aren't allowed to say these days, are you?" when asked why they'd switched from Labour to The 'KIP, but The Farage Party is winning in the kind of style the poor old openly racist BNP never did. Farage isn't a racist - he's a calculating opportunist.

What Farage has calculated - correctly, as it turns out - is that if you put together all the closet racists, mild xenophobes, folk who wish it could all be like the old days, those concerned that the Schengen Agreement was worked out on the back of a fag packet, and the underclass who feel aggrieved that a surplus of cheap labour has driven down wages/condemned them to a life on benefits, then you get a voter base large enough to buy yourself some influence on policy .

Challenging the assumptions upon which the last two of those groups base their voting intentions seems like a better way of convincing them that isolation and protectionism aren't realistic strategies in the modern world than tarring them with the same brush as the nutters with whom they share a platform


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 October, 2014, 05:58:26 PM
A great post, that Sauchie. More of this on here please!

UKIP making head way is a depressing affair though, and i do agree that Farage is, at present - at any rate, a calculating opportunist.

This is all going to run, and run i think. Like i said; A depressing affair.






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 10 October, 2014, 06:15:37 PM
I hope this latest ironic profile pic/name phase is a brief one Sauchie  :sick:

The Greens have had a single MP for years and you never hear this AMOUNT of noise about them. Quite depressing, quite disturbing. Car crash publicity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2014, 06:55:15 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 10 October, 2014, 06:15:37 PMThe Greens have had a single MP for years and you never hear this AMOUNT of noise about them.

That's because racists are more newsworthy if you're a phone-hacking, ambulance-chasing scaremonger.  Fear sells, fear makes us consume faster, fear makes us want hardline leadership - in other words, if you're part of the old-boy network that makes reports news, fear is what you want to plaster everywhere.  It's basically a bit like when the Columbine shooting happened and the news people started out by saying "no-one is linking this to Marilyn Manson, there is no link to Marilyn Manson" and obviously we know how that turned out in the long run.  The BBC covering UKIP and telling you that it would be awful if they got in, if they managed to hijack the news to garner themselves publicity, etc - that's no different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 October, 2014, 07:27:13 PM
Some really good posts on here as ever: the difficulty the political class has is that globalisation (in a raw free market sense) does produce exactly what Sauchie alludes to; that is, an influx of workers who either through choice or, sadly, coercion under-bid the indigenous labour force to an extent where you have a massive disaffected 'underclass' (how I despise that term.
The political class for whatever reason, probably because they are in link-step with, or bought by the perverse forces who are running the globalisation agenda, simply are not willing or indeed morally and intellectually equipped to regulate and shape globalisation to a force.for good. This has led to the void into which UKIP and their bedfellows throughout the west are adroitly filling and manipulating for their own ends Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 12:17:30 AM
He who has been named but no longer will be named "no longer works for the Council" for some reason. I've been emailing him regularly trying to get to the bottom of who authorized his actions but, of course, nobody seems to be responsible for anything. Eviction with an unsigned warrant, breaking and entering, kidnapping, theft - all perfectly legal and above board, according to the Council, but nobody is willing to admit to having authorized this completely innocent process. Nobody at the Council is willing or able to explain to me exactly what their jurisdiction or powers are and they won't show me the parts of their contracts of employment that outline their powers or jurisdiction. Oh, and the Council is no longer able to comment on the unsigned warrant (not that they ever did) because it is no longer available to them. Say drokkin' what?
.
Which political party, do you think, speaks for me? Maybe I'll start my own party - the "Foreigners, Underclass, Criminals & Kindred Yobs Open Union", maybe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2014, 01:50:22 AM
PC Plod had to break into your gaff and later charged you with an offence, so might your solicitor have a copy of the warrant?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 02:07:01 AM
My solicitor seems to be having trouble getting hold of several ordinarily easy-to-get documents, such as my detailed custody record. Cctv footage has already gone missing due to a "corrupt hard drive" (no back-up drive, no data recovery software?) so I'm not optimistic.
.
It's enough to make ya' paranoid...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2014, 02:49:26 AM
You're looking at this the wrong way, Sharky - the less paperwork they can produce to back up their version of events, the better for anyone looking to dispute that version of events.  Every little thing that doesn't quite line up helps you undermine their narrative, or at the very least come election time it'll help you trash incumbent Councillors.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 06:15:06 AM
You'd think so, wouldn't you? However, after sitting through one trial where Witness A claimed I assaulted her with my left arm whilst Witness B claimed to having a secure hold of my left arm throughout and I was still found guilty of something the CPC now doesn't seem to know the precise nature of, I have learned that the obvious is no defence at all.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2014, 08:54:59 AM
Hard to believe after everything we've heard, but your treatment is still able to shock me Shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 09:40:28 AM
Yeah, me too!
.
It's been hard work standing against it, one begins to sympathise with King Canute, and the thought of giving up is so tempting.
.
I'm so very sick and tired of it all - it's like fighting fog; the opponent is huge and amorphous and blurred and virtually silent and I'm so small and powerless. Yeah, I'm tired.
.
But the thought of giving up, whilst a massive temptation, also leaves me feeling hollow and weak. Maybe I'll lose (not that I have much left To lose) but at least I will have fought, will have stood up for what I believe in and for what I think is right. And so, unlike Canute, I learn to swim even as the tide comes in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 October, 2014, 10:07:17 AM
Shark this is a double edged sword: the authority who did this is just.as subject to the law as you're. If what you have outlined is correct then it simply need be that you pursue your course. The lack of adherence to correct procedure and the 'missing' data are sadly indicative of what passes for enforcement in the country today and rightly should be challenged. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 October, 2014, 10:58:17 AM
Good luck Shark, as you say like fighting fog, one rule for them a different one for you it seems.


Looks like the BBC have finally got their wish and have helped push Ukipper into the Westmister arena, their constant support and publicty for these clowns has been the most sickening aspect of the whole sad affair.

The first news I watched after the Scottish Indy Ref lead with Cameron's comments, then across to Frange for his view. 'oh that's how it is, we've had our fifteen mins now its back to business as usual and the agenda to get a Con/Ukip Govt' i thought and it seems to be heading that way.
 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 October, 2014, 12:32:15 PM


(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/78129000/gif/_78129134_uk_ukip_support_constituency_624.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 02:19:57 PM
Just had to drive past my flat on the way back from work. It's been empty since E Day, which kinda' gave me hope. Now there are new curtains up inside and a shiny new car parked outside. I can't afford a car, let alone a new one. I can't even afford to live in social housing, in the home that has been mine for the past three decades. Looks like these new people have plenty of money, though.
.
I'm not too proud to admit it. I feel like crying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 11 October, 2014, 02:42:06 PM
Hell, sorry to hear that Sharky. Been down the homeless route before - albeit not to the unfortunate and horribly rough extent as yourself - so you're in my thoughts, mate. Hope things improve for you, good luck and may Fortune favour you in your case.

- Paddy Kafka
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 03:16:13 PM
Thanks, Paddy, I appreciate it. I really should stop whining and man-up, though.
.
I think I've said already that before I started down this path I asked myself, several times, if I was prepared to put it all on the line and I was/am. It's just that while the place was empty there was a chance of me getting my Home back, now there is no chance.
.
Even if every little thing goes right for me from now on, even if it's proven that I'm right and everything since the tribunal was invalid, if the Court orders my Council to return my Home to me - how could I morally accept? Whoever's in my home now is innocent of all this, so how could I countenance their eviction so I can get back in? I couldn't. "Do not do unto others that which you would not have others do unto you," kind of thing.
.
God damn it, sometimes I wish I'd never heard of Tower Bloody Seven. I was much happier when I didn't know anything.
.
"In ignorance our comfort lies, the only wretched are the wise."
.
Or, if you prefer:
.
"From wisdom doth our comfort come, Shark ignored it and became a bum."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 October, 2014, 03:17:57 PM
Glad to see BBC's Panoramma are giving Ukip a free advert on Moday night, half an hours peak viewing. Will we be seeing the same for the Greens? and the third largest membership in UK; the SNP?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 03:40:15 PM
I can't get excited by any of the parties, I'm afraid. To me, they might as well be running for office on the Moon, their policies and ideas are so far removed from my experience and perspective. It's like watching a dozen differently painted buckets of shite trying to out-stink one another.
.
How anyone can still believe in any of them is a source of a genuine and frustrating mystification for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 October, 2014, 03:47:16 PM
I can and mostly do think similar thoughts but its policies, not parties or personalities that interest me....  so its the less stinky option and then 'hold heir feet to the fire' (which is why the big two got rid of their pesky conferences setting the manifestos, then wondered why they lost touch with their rank and file...go figure, as the yanks would say)   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 October, 2014, 03:55:20 PM
Half-a-dozen anti-Water Charges candidates to vote for, just 35% turn out in yesterday's Dublin South-West by-election, and yet all you hear from everyone all day is "we won't accept water charges".  Well get out and vote, you bloody muppets.  Two out of three of you don't give a fuck what they charge you.

On the entire registration page for our road, only one other person had turned up when the missus and I voted at 7pm.  Pathetic.

And I speak as someone who broadly supports the introduction of water charges, even as I object to the way their implementation has been structured as a flat, regressive tax, while our so-called austerity government  moves to cut the top rate of tax.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2014, 04:23:03 PM
You see, Tordels, I'd take charge of that personally - balls to giving the responsibility to some politician who doesn't know me from Adam.
.
I'd write to the Water Company and tell them what you're going to pay. If they demand more simply agree to pay whatever you have contracted with them to pay. As there is no contract and the water company has a legal responsibility to supply people with water (which is vital for life), you're in charge.
.
It's all about attitude. You have to be sovereign of your own world, your own life, and treat councils and utilities like the servants they are. Try to be a good sovereign, polite but firm - like the Lord of the Manor in those old black and white Ealing comedies.
.
But don't go too far or you'll end up sharing a ditch with me. As I said, this is what I'd do (roughly). Imagine 1,000 people in one town doing that. You vote for someone to do it for you and you have only one point of attack, one warrior who might well not be as keen to tangle with Big Business as they seem. And Big Business knows how to deal with political attacks - they simply fudge for as long as they can, knowing that you'll all keep paying in the meantime, until the attack runs out of steam.
.
Do it yourselves and you've got potentially unlimited points of attack and what practically amounts to an army. Don't form any official groups or any other targets, do it all by word of mouth and, before you start, remember to do three things; research, research, research.
.
That's what I'd suggest, anyway. Of course, you have to take my situation and history into account before considering this - but don't let that put you off. I pushed in a dangerous direction, and continue to do so, but water should be easier.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 12 October, 2014, 12:52:17 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 October, 2014, 03:55:20 PM
And I speak as someone who broadly supports the introduction of water charges, even as I object to the way their implementation has been structured as a flat, regressive tax, while our so-called austerity government  moves to cut the top rate of tax.

You may be the only member of the general public I've heard to support it. AFAIK water charges are usually a condition the IMF bring when they take charge of things, so our politicians would not have much say on it.

The Legendary Shark. have you heard for the Irish water charges, every household supplied by (semi-state company) Irish Water have to give the social security numbers of everyone living in the house to them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 October, 2014, 01:26:09 AM
Details which, correct me if I'm wrong, can be 'shared' with other non nongovernmental and indeed non Irish bodies. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 October, 2014, 04:39:03 AM
That sounds like legislation, Otter, and legislation is law given force by public consent - so don't consent. Just because the government says you must do a thing that doesn't make it so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 October, 2014, 08:35:51 AM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 12 October, 2014, 12:52:17 AM
You may be the only member of the general public I've heard to support it.

Well, I support the polluter-pays principle, and metering is a good way to develop conscious attitudes to resource usage: see also separating your waste, gas, electricity etc.  In addition, through mismanagement and underresourcing the Irish water network is a wasteful, awful mess, and needs an injection of funding to get it into the 20th C, never mind the 21st.  So the money has to be found somewhere.

What I object to passionately is what is in effect the flat standing charge built into the allowances, which I view as regressive, since it affects the poor massively in comparison to the wealthy.  The water network infrastructure should continue to be mainly funded by general taxation, primarily income tax, as it has been since the beginnings of the State.  A *sensible* sustainable consumption level should be established, and only excessive use above this level charged, and usage under this level rewarded.  When the wealthy's gardeners waste water on their begonias, they should be funding the desperately urgent upgrading of the system.  When the cautious use rainwater-collection, they should be rewarded with rebates on USC or property taxes. Awareness, revenue, stick, and carrot, all sounds good to me.

As things stand, the initial 'assessed' charge (prior to meter readings coming on line, but obviously indicative of what is expected) represents a ghastly burden to those of us scraping by (to put it in perspective, the 12-month charge is all the money we have put by for Christmas so far this year), and a non-event for those on 50K a year, the equivalent of one decent night out. 

So while I advocate the idea of raising funds through metering of water, I fundamentally object to the manner in which it is being executed.  Oh, and I hate privatisation, sorry 'semi-state bodies', and always have. But that ship sailed a long time ago as far as Irish utilities are concerned.  The PPS number thing doesn't really bother me, since of you're at the bottom of the heap you depend on the state making use of it on a weekly basis.

And yes, I do understand that all taxation in this state exists merely to pay off our creditors and keep our betters in the style to which they have become accustomed.  But you have to play along or you'd go mad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 October, 2014, 09:18:10 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 11 October, 2014, 03:17:57 PM
Glad to see BBC's Panoramma are giving Ukip a free advert on Moday night, half an hours peak viewing. Will we be seeing the same for the Greens? and the third largest membership in UK; the SNP?

On the other hand, last week's Panorama about ordinary families trapped in low paid jobs, whose employers are subsidised through the tax system, was the single most relevant TV documentary I've seen on domestic issues in an age, from any broadcaster:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04l6x1k


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 October, 2014, 10:54:38 AM
My partner looking over my shoulder "eww why does that forumer have the UKIP symbol as their avatar?"

Me "Not sure, I think he thinks it's funny"

"But it just looks like he supports UKIP"

"I think that's part of the joke"

"That doesn't seem like a joke"

"I'm not sure that it is - maybe that's the joke"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 October, 2014, 11:27:29 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 October, 2014, 10:54:38 AM
"I'm not sure that it is - maybe that's the joke"

My last avatar was the fairtrade sticker you peel from your banana, along with a username that referenced the workers' co-operative movement. If I was a sandal wearing leftie who also wanted to send them filthy foreigners back to the Muslim hell from whence they came, I would be a confused person. Like the BBC, the terms of my charter mean I'm obliged to reflect every development in public life.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 October, 2014, 01:39:02 PM
Hmmm, donno lads. 'We have four coloums marching on Madrid and a fifith coloumn waiting within': this amorphous sauchie charachter seems like just the sort of plant the forces arrayed against us would use to sow confusion and dissent in our ranks....someone call the peoples commissars, Comrades Deever and McBear to expose and deal with him. Comrade Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 12 October, 2014, 02:03:39 PM
Is the Sauchie charter a publicly viewable thing? How long is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 October, 2014, 02:11:42 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 October, 2014, 08:35:51 AMIn addition, through mismanagement and underresourcing the Irish water network is a wasteful, awful mess, and needs an injection of funding to get it into the 20th C, never mind the 21st.  So the money has to be found somewhere.

If someone says they'll build you a wall and then said they need more money to finish it weeks after it should have been done already you'd tell them to fuck off, and that's for a wall.  Why is it different because they're working on an essential service that your home requires to function?
The Irish government has had plenty of time to fix this, and it wouldn't need the money it does if they'd fixed it like they should have.  They can find a way to fix it themselves or they can fuck off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 October, 2014, 02:24:18 PM
I don't play along and I haven't gone mad.
.
Meep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 October, 2014, 12:59:21 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/yook_zps411db229.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 05:51:59 PM
Quote from: Bear McBear on 13 October, 2014, 12:59:21 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/yook_zps411db229.jpg)

That's pretty funny, but the media isn't at all responsible for UKIP's success and I'm getting a bit bored of people who say that it is.

UKIP are doing well because the Lib Dems are in government and the protest vote had to go somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 October, 2014, 06:04:41 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 05:51:59 PMthe media isn't at all responsible for UKIP's success

I strongly disagree - although they're not the only factor it's clear as daylight that the constant heavy bias with regards to covering them INCESSANTLY hasn't helped in the least. Not to mention the fact that the TV debates will feature them and not say... ANY OTHER PARTY WITH THE SAME OR MORE MPS THAN THEM

I signed this petition today:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/invite-all-small-parties-to-join-the-election-television-debates?bucket=fb&source=facebook-share-button&time=1413206709

It'll likely do diddly squat but the anti U K I P protest has to go somewhere (seemingly just the internet)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 October, 2014, 06:06:14 PM
well there are plenty other parties out there to vote for, but they don't have self-fullfilling cheerleaders in the media...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 October, 2014, 06:18:05 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 October, 2014, 06:04:41 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 05:51:59 PMthe media isn't at all responsible for UKIP's success

I strongly disagree - although they're not the only factor it's clear as daylight that the constant heavy bias with regards to covering them INCESSANTLY hasn't helped in the least. Not to mention the fact that the TV debates will feature them and not say... ANY OTHER PARTY WITH THE SAME OR MORE MPS THAN THEM

I signed this petition today:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/invite-all-small-parties-to-join-the-election-television-debates?bucket=fb&source=facebook-share-button&time=1413206709

It'll likely do diddly squat but the anti U K I P protest has to go somewhere (seemingly just the internet)

Done and forwarded!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 October, 2014, 06:22:58 PM
Here's another Green-specific one worth looking at as well:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/bbc-news-stop-this-media-blackout-of-the-green-party


The statistics are infuriating.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:25:51 PM
I get very worried with accusations of media bias, they strike me as calls for censorship.

The Green Party aren't a national party, and they aren't going to make any impact in the next election. Their best hope is to retain Brighton, and due to a mathematical miracle, get invited into coalition with Labour.

UKIP could very easily win a lot of seats, and hold the balance of power. The Lib Dems could very easily lose a lot of seats, and hold the balance of power. The broadcasters have to reflect that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:13 PM
I'm not calling for anyone to censor the BBC, but I would like it if they stopped publicising their school chums political projects and/or posting outright lies on their websites and Twitter feed even after Fox fucking News have debunked shit the BBC are still shovelling.

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 05:51:59 PMUKIP are doing well because the Lib Dems are in government and the protest vote had to go somewhere.

So you're saying that it's complete coincidence that that protest vote went to a party that 18 months ago no-one had heard of?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:33 PM
QuoteThe Green Party aren't a national party

How's that then?

QuoteUKIP could very easily win a lot of seats, and hold the balance of power.

Or they could collapse if and when people finally understand they are party with racist polices, lead by a racist.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/feb/06/otherparties.politicalcolumnists

QuoteDr Alan Sked, its founder, left in a huff, and said of his fellow party members 'they are racist and have been infected by the far right'. He backed-up his claim by telling the Mail on Sunday that Nigel Farage, the co-founder and leader of the Ukip group of members of the European Parliament, had once told him that 'we will never win the nigger vote. The nig-nogs will never vote for us.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 06:37:19 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:25:51 PM
I get very worried with accusations of media bias, they strike me as calls for censorship.

Greens: 1 MP. UKIP: Up until last week, ZERO MPs. How many times has Nigel Farage been on Question Time? And how many times has anyone from the Greens been on?

That's media bias. It's not censorship to suggest that the publicly-funded state broadcaster doesn't massively favour one minority party over another, regardless of how distasteful one might find one or other of those parties.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2014, 06:43:43 PM
Or they could secretly burn down Parliament, blame the immigrants and Muslims, sweep to power on national outrage, start building resettlement camps and designating quarantine zones...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:43:57 PM
Cameron trying to court the UKIP vote: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/david-cameron-in-race-row-after-posing-with-blackedup-morris-dancers-9791733.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:45:04 PM
Quote from: Bear McBear on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:13 PM
So you're saying that it's complete coincidence that that protest vote went to a party that 18 months ago no-one had heard of?

No, for several reasons, one of which is that they've been around a hell of a lot longer than that.

Really, there was nowhere else for the protest votes to go, but also the anti-EU, UK nationalist shit they spout plays well at Euro elections, and it snowballed from there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:46:28 PM
QuoteGreens: 1 MP. UKIP: Up until last week, ZERO MPs. How many times has Nigel Farage been on Question Time? And how many times has anyone from the Greens been on?

Twice as much. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/just-how-much-media-coverage-does-ukip-get
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:47:51 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:33 PM
How's that then?

They're actually three parties, one for England and Wales, one for Scotland and another for NI.

Quote
Or they could collapse if and when people finally understand they are party with racist polices, lead by a racist.

Maybe so. Certainly Question Time exposure didn't help Nick Griffin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 October, 2014, 06:48:44 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzmRIz9IIAAeAqb.jpg:large)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 October, 2014, 06:50:07 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:45:04 PM
Quote from: Bear McBear on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:13 PM
So you're saying that it's complete coincidence that that protest vote went to a party that 18 months ago no-one had heard of?

No, for several reasons, one of which is that they've been around a hell of a lot longer than that.

I didn't say they hadn't been around - I said no-one had heard of them.  They weren't even a bad joke on the political landscape when being fronted by Robert Killroy Silk, a spokesperson who didn't get them the kind of publicity they've garnered after being fronted by an old-school millionaire with connections to a lot of people in the media.

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:43:57 PM
Cameron trying to court the UKIP vote: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/david-cameron-in-race-row-after-posing-with-blackedup-morris-dancers-9791733.html

Don't underestimate Dave The Murderer's ability to appeal to other races, RAC - for a while now he's managed to get some humans to vote for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:50:56 PM
QuoteThey're actually three parties, one for England and Wales, one for Scotland and another for NI.

Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have any kind of representation in NI either - so by this logic, they are not national parties either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:55:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 06:37:19 PM
Greens: 1 MP. UKIP: Up until last week, ZERO MPs. How many times has Nigel Farage been on Question Time? And how many times has anyone from the Greens been on?

That's media bias. It's not censorship to suggest that the publicly-funded state broadcaster doesn't massively favour one minority party over another, regardless of how distasteful one might find one or other of those parties.

Jim

It would be censorship to try to force them to stop, though.

The BBC get's accused of bias a lot, but really I think the truth is they're pretty unbiased and the rest of us are not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2014, 06:56:22 PM
Do you believe in a particular party?
.
Do you believe in the party system?
.
Why and why?
.
Just wondering.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 07:01:12 PM
QuoteIt would be censorship to try to force them to stop, though.

No it wouldn't. It would be the opposite of that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:05:03 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:50:56 PM

Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have any kind of representation in NI either - so by this logic, they are not national parties either.

I think it wouldn't be an issue if any of the multi-Greens were in any danger of getting a significant amount of support. Apart from from me. I'll be voting for them. Even despite Farage being on the telly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 07:01:12 PM
No it wouldn't. It would be the opposite of that.

Great as a BBC that only reflected the views of Richmond Clements would undoubtedly be, I tend to think you'd actually enhance UKIP support by trying to silence them and a better idea would be to tackle the issues they raise head on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 October, 2014, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 06:37:19 PM
Greens: 1 MP. UKIP: Up until last week, ZERO MPs. How many times has Nigel Farage been on Question Time? And how many times has anyone from the Greens been on?

As I'm certain you already know, UKIP polled 3 times the number of votes the Greens managed at the 2010 general election (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010#Results). Poor, old, bankrupt, ugly, racist Nick Griffin's BNP won twice the number of votes as Caroline Lucas's lovelies.

Whether you think a show like Question Time should be a venue for politicians who speak for the greatest number of people or reflect the deliberately weighted nature of the UK electoral system are moot points - Dave Dimbelby's weekly roundtable almost certainly has less influence on the opinions and voting intentions of its 3 million viewers (http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/21/question-time-10-oclock-live) than newspapers, which have no obligation to be impartial, overwhelmingly back Farage, and are read by 8 million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation#Circulations_2010_to_present) people every single day.

All that's obviously a load of tendentious fucking bollocks though, because 22 million folk voted in the 2010 general election; at least half of them were obviously not influenced one jot by Question Time and/or the papers, and almost two thirds as many of them voted for the BNP - who weren't endorsed by any paper and managed just one, controversial appearance next to a Dimbelby - as media darling Farage.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2014, 07:22:11 PM
If I remember correctly, it's in the BBC's Charter that it must support the government. That doesn't just mean whoever's in power and the opposition, it means the basic framework and mechanisms, the very idea of the government. Minor parties have very little to do with the overall subject of government so it's easy for them to get swamped by everything else. It's no great conspiracy, just a poor system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 October, 2014, 07:33:48 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 06:47:51 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 October, 2014, 06:31:33 PM
How's that then?

They're actually three parties, one for England and Wales, one for Scotland and another for NI.

Quote


That's the same for Labour and The Tories and Lib Dems, they all claim to have separate parties organisation Scotland and I believe Wales.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:13:35 PM
Great as a BBC that only reflected the views of Richmond Clements would undoubtedly be, I tend to think you'd actually enhance UKIP support by trying to silence them and a better idea would be to tackle the issues they raise head on.

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or have you sustained a head injury recently? No one is saying that UKIP should be "silenced", we're saying that the clearly, provably disproportionate coverage of UKIP is certainly inappropriate from a state-funded broadcaster with a formal commitment to impartial political coverage.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:43:24 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:38:33 PM

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or have you sustained a head injury recently?
Jim

No, but you're being deliberately abusive.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 October, 2014, 07:49:08 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:13:35 PM
Great as a BBC that only reflected the views of Richmond Clements would undoubtedly be...

My unconditional support for this idea would be contingent whether this would be drunk-posting Underware[sic]-era RAC, or his mild-mannered alter ego of today.  The difference being between 'Adult Themes' and adult themes.  Shan't say which one gets my vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 October, 2014, 07:54:23 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
the clearly, provably disproportionate coverage of UKIP

If CFM's graph is accurate, UKIP have appeared around three times as often as the Green party, which is in line with the numbers of votes they attracted at the last general election:

(http://i.imgur.com/vHOshHx.jpg?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:57:57 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 07:43:24 PM
No, but you're being deliberately abusive.

Then why are you misrepresenting what's being said? If you're not stupid — and I know you're not — then the only other conclusion is that you're deliberately misrepresenting a fairly straightforward, easy-to-understand position, for purposes that would look a lot like trolling...

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2014, 08:26:19 PM
Wind. Close. Sailing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 13 October, 2014, 08:34:00 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
No one is saying that UKIP should be "silenced"

Though wouldn't it be lovely?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 08:36:19 PM
Quote from: Dudley on 13 October, 2014, 08:34:00 PM
Though wouldn't it be lovely?

Honestly? No. I want to see the left come out and tackle the shite UKIP are spouting. These arguments are pretty easy to demolish, but the mainstream parties are so driven by focus-group polling that they pander to the public's ignorance, rather than just try to make a better argument.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2014, 08:39:44 PM
No.
.
No it really wouldn't be lovely at all.
.
It would be terrifying.
.
(Several unnecessarily super-verbose paragraphs deleted here.) What Jim said.
Mostly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 08:41:04 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:57:57 PM
Then why are you misrepresenting what's being said? If you're not stupid — and I know you're not — then the only other conclusion is that you're deliberately misrepresenting a fairly straightforward, easy-to-understand position, for purposes that would look a lot like trolling...

Jim

It's not trolling to disagree with you, Jim. I don't think the BBC are biased in favour of UKIP, and I don't think editorial interference in BBC news reporting is a good idea.

Surely, though, we can find some common ground. I do think UKIP are a shower of bastards, if that's any help?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 08:50:40 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 08:41:04 PM
It's not trolling to disagree with you, Jim.

You weren't disagreeing with me, you were grossly mischaracterising my position by suggesting that I was advocating "silencing" UKIP when I was suggesting nothing of the sort and had said nothing that would give you cause to claim that I had.

QuoteI don't think the BBC are biased in favour of UKIP, and I don't think editorial interference in BBC news reporting is a good idea.

Wow. I don't know where to start with that. I'm just going to leave it — I have neither the time nor the inclination.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 08:57:27 PM
Okay, thanks I actually wanted to keep that olive branch anyway, so I'm glad you didn't accept it.

Mmm, lovely olive branch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 09:02:20 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 08:57:27 PM
Okay, thanks I actually wanted to keep that olive branch anyway, so I'm glad you didn't accept it.

You want to either explain what I said that gave you cause to accuse me of being pro-censorship, or apologise for misrepresenting my position, that's an olive branch. Leaving the assertion that I want to "silence" UKIP standing without any justification is a cheap shot.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 09:06:32 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 09:02:20 PM
You want to either explain what I said that gave you cause to accuse me of being pro-censorship, or apologise for misrepresenting my position, that's an olive branch. Leaving the assertion that I want to "silence" UKIP standing without any justification is a cheap shot.

Jim

Oddly, I want to do neither.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 09:12:50 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 09:06:32 PM
Oddly, I want to do neither.

Trolling it is, then.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 October, 2014, 09:14:03 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 09:12:50 PM
Trolling it is, then.

Jim

Must be the head injury.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 October, 2014, 09:22:55 PM
Reprise.

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2009/12/2/1259766485005/Women-in-Love-Oliver-Reed-001.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2014, 07:41:07 AM
I was just having a shave and grumbling, again, about the disappointingly few uses to be obtained from the modern disposable razor, when I was again reminded of how this horrid little instrument embodies everything that's wrong with us as a species today.
.
Consider, in this day and age of scientific wonders, quantum mechanics and metamaterials, that surely there is some substance capable of being forged into a blade that doesn't go blunt at the first whiff of a human frikkin' hair? But we don't want that, do we? We don't want to buy a razor that's going to last practically forever, that might be handed down from father to son or mother to daughter, do we? Oh no, we want to continue buying these pathetic objects and throwing them away. All that plastic and metal and transport and energy and money and effort - all for two good shaves and a couple of rotten ones.
.
The Disposable Razor is surely the work of the Devil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 October, 2014, 07:53:31 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2014, 07:41:07 AM
The Disposable Razor is surely the work of the Devil.

Unkempt face fungus is my means of protest at this failure to use efficient technology, not to mention a badge of my confident heterosexual maleness.  As the pic two posts up surely confirms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 14 October, 2014, 11:17:09 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2014, 07:41:07 AM

The Disposable Razor is surely the work of the Devil.

'Sright, built in obsolescence will be the undoing of the human race.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 October, 2014, 07:24:17 PM
Nice to hear that the Minister for Welfare Reform thinks that people like me are not worth the minimum wage!  We're all in this together!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 15 October, 2014, 07:34:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2014, 07:41:07 AM
The Disposable Razor is surely the work of the Devil.

You can scrape one up and down the leg of an old pair of denim jeans to remove nicks, re-sharpen the blade and make it last for (potentially) months.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 October, 2014, 07:42:01 PM
Nice tip, Jimbo, thanks - I must try that.
.
I heard about that too, Tankie. I can't say I'm shocked or surprised though, it's pretty much par for the course. We're all worthless these days - unless we're not, in which case we're priceless. Nice to know that the PM needs no lessons in how to care for the disabled, either. Nor, it seems, does he need any lessons in subtle spin. Now, all he needs is a soul and we might be in with a chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 October, 2014, 08:07:51 PM
That was one hateful comment from that lousy  prick. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 October, 2014, 08:19:02 PM
I wouldn't call it hateful really - I think it's more a mixture of greed and ignorance - greegnorance?
.
It's also quite a sociopathic viewpoint, so maybe he's just mentally ill and needs help.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 October, 2014, 08:53:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 October, 2014, 08:19:02 PM
I wouldn't call it hateful really - I think it's more a mixture of greed and ignorance - greegnorance?
.
It's also quite a sociopathic viewpoint, so maybe he's just mentally ill and needs help.

That's a generous reading, TLS!  How a Welfare ReformMinister could remain in his post after saying something as base as that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 October, 2014, 09:05:50 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if he does stay (I obviously fervently hope he doesn't). The mask is slipping on these guys,; but they don't really seem to care anymore....it's like that line in Platoon, where one GI tersely quips to another that the NVA arent even waiting anymore for night fall before they attack, such is their pride, confidence and sureness of victory. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 October, 2014, 05:48:00 PM
Quote from: sauchie outbreak on 13 October, 2014, 07:54:23 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 October, 2014, 07:38:33 PM
the clearly, provably disproportionate coverage of UKIP

If CFM's graph is accurate, UKIP have appeared around three times as often as the Green party, which is in line with the numbers of votes they attracted at the last general election:

(http://i.imgur.com/vHOshHx.jpg?1)

Yet the parliamentary system is about seats, not votes, so if electoral coverage is based on anything, it should be on that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 October, 2014, 06:53:51 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 16 October, 2014, 05:48:00 PM
the parliamentary system is about seats, not votes, so if electoral coverage is based on anything, it should be on that

Just because the electoral system doesn't reflect the opinions or will of the electorate, doesn't mean Question Time should make the same mistake.

Various sources project UKIP could win 15-25% of the popular vote at the 2015 general election (http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/oct/14/ukip-seats-general-election-2015); Labour managed just 29% at the 2010 general election (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010) - and could have held onto power in a coalition government with the Lib-Dems - yet there's absolutely no chance UKIP will win even half the number of seats as poor, old, lying hypocrite Gordon Brown managed.

I really hate UKIP and everything they stand for, but the bizarre disconnect between how people vote and the kind of government they get is one of the major reasons why folk are so disconnected and disaffected with politics. Reforming the system of representation would hand seats to arseholes like Farage, but the current system is also the reason why the Greens only have a single sitting MP.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 October, 2014, 07:33:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 October, 2014, 08:53:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 October, 2014, 08:19:02 PM
I wouldn't call it hateful really - I think it's more a mixture of greed and ignorance - greegnorance?
.
It's also quite a sociopathic viewpoint, so maybe he's just mentally ill and needs help.

That's a generous reading, TLS!  How a Welfare ReformMinister could remain in his post after saying something as base as that...

Remember this is the chap who said that it was "hard to know" why people used foodbanks and that's not his only form. When challenged that his vast wealth meant he could not understand the reality of life on benefits, he said "you don't have to be the corpse to go to the funeral"  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 October, 2014, 08:43:35 PM
Well, to be fair, the Tories are really, really concerned about lazy freeloaders sponging off taxpayers.

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/19/article-0-0CCFDCDC000005DC-684_468x286.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2014, 06:10:07 PM
Re: the discussion on the threadjacking thread... (http://www.southparkstudios.co.uk/clips/151849/the-free-eric-cartman-now-committee)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 17 October, 2014, 06:35:14 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2014, 06:10:07 PM
Re: the discussion on the threadjacking thread... (http://www.southparkstudios.co.uk/clips/151849/the-free-eric-cartman-now-committee)

excellent points by the little cartoon guys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 October, 2014, 06:51:58 PM
Can't get videos on my 'phone :(
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 October, 2014, 07:09:21 PM
Here's the relevant bit of the script...

Quote[The governor's office, day. An aide peeks in]

Aide:   Governor, the Free Eric Cartman Now Committee is here to see you?

Governor:   Naw, not another committee. Send them in. [Stan, Kyle, and Token enter. Kyle carries a boombox and Token an easel with their presentation on it. They set up] This is the Free Eric Cartman Now Committee?

Token:   Yeah.

Governor:   Well, boys, what can I do for you?

Stan:   [to Kyle] Okay, go ahead and start.

Kyle:   I don't start, you start.

Stan:   Oh, uhyeah. [walks to the easel and clears his thoat] Hello, Mr. Governor, and thank you for taking the time to hear our presentation on hate-crime laws, entitled, "Hate Crime Laws: A Savage Hypocracy." [shows the title page. Kyle presses the play button for some ambience] Yes, over the past few years our great country has been developing new hate crime laws.

Token:   [flips a page to depict a stabbing in progress] If somebody kills somebody, it's a crime. But if someone kills somebody of a different color, it's a hate crime.

Kyle:   And we think that that is [flips the page to reveal a copy of the title page] a savage hypocracy, because all crimes are hate crimes. If a man beats another man because that man was sleeping with his wife, is that not a hate crime?

Stan:   [flips the page to reveal a person tagging City Hall] If a person vandalizes a government building, is it not because of his hate for the government?

Token:   [flips the page to reveal a man being hit deliberately by a car] And motivation for a crime shouldn't affect the sentencing.

Stan:   [flips the page to reveal warring groups of people around a question mark] Mayor, it is time to stop splitting people into groups. All hate crimes do is support the idea that blacks are different from whites, that homosexuals need to be treated differently from non-homos, that we aren't the same.

Kyle:   [shows a rainbow of people holding hands] But instead, we should all be treated the same, with the same laws and the same punishments for the same crimes [Stan flips the page to reveal their hate crime proposal]. For in that way Cartman can be freed from prison, and we [flips the page to show them winning a sledding race] will have a chance to win the sledding race on Thursday.

Stan:   That is our presentation. An idea that we call...

Token:   [flips the page to reveal another copy of the title page] "Hate Crime Laws: A Savage Hypocracy." [Kyle turns the tape player off]

Governor:   Hm. That made the most sense of any presentation I've heard in the last three years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 October, 2014, 07:52:40 PM
Brilliant - thank you. :-D
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 October, 2014, 09:03:19 PM
I've been debating with myself for a while now as to whether to post this or not as it could, from a certain perspective, be seen as legal advice, which it kind of is. It concerns my recent trial and where I think I went wrong and what I might have said to save myself.
.
The trial had been going very well for me. The two police officers' testimonies didn't match, the cctv footage had gone missing and there was no evidence against me except the conflicting accounts of the two police witnesses.
.
When it came my turn to take the stand against the police prosecutor, though I say so myself, I started off rather well. The prosecutor had tried to trip me up several times and failed. He asked me if my attitude during the initial arrest had been adversarial and I said "no, sir." He then asked me to describe my attitude at this time. I thought about it for a moment and then inspiration struck. "I would use the same word that Constable G___ used in his testimony; I was determined." The prosecutor let that drop and moved on with the ghost of a frown. His next question was designed to make me look mentally ill. "When you were initially brought to this court after your arrest, were you confused?" I replied that yes, I had been confused as to why I was being accused of a crime I did not commit after being unlawfully arrested but, beyond that, no I wasn't confused at all. "But," the prosecutor continued, "did you or did you not ask if that was a criminal or civil proceeding?" I replied that I didn't recall, which was true, but seeing the look on his face and knowing that this truthful answer might seem a little shifty and evasive I added that it did sound like the sort of question I would have asked and enquired as to what the answer to that particular question of mine had been. The prosecutor ignored me and pressed on with "are you on medication?" I said that yes, I daily take aspirin for my heart. "Anything else?" I replied no, sir and he moved on. There were several questions like this and I knew I was fielding them okay as the prosecutor kept dropping one line of questioning after another until he was visibly floundering to find a way forward.
.
Then, seemingly as a last-ditch effort, he asked "is it possible that you struck Officer N___ accidentally through recklessness on your part?" It was my turn to pause and think as I knew this was a loaded question. I denied it. "So, that's not possible, then?" Trying to be honest I said that anything's possible. He leaped upon this very gently, so gently in fact that nobody noticed until the prosecutor's summing up, where he made a big song and dance about how I'd admitted that it was possible that I'd caused injury to Officer N___ through my own reckless actions, the result of which was me being found guilty of reckless assault.
.
I have been racking my brains trying to work out how one would honestly answer an "is it possible" question and I think I may have worked out the answer.
.
"That might be possible, sir, but that's not what happened" seems to work well. Ah well, live and learn, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 October, 2014, 09:38:38 PM
I can't say I've followed everything that's been going on with you, Shark, but that sounds unbelievably harsh, and a verdict based on semantics rather than evidence. I hope you're doing alright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2014, 03:39:49 AM
I'm doing fine thanks, Banners - down but not out. And yes, you're right - the focus seemed to be on getting a verdict against me, any verdict at all, presumably to 'cover up' the fact that I had been initially arrested and incarcerated without any proper charge.
.
Beware the police - they are more interested in keeping their job than doing it. That's what I've learned about our disgraceful thin blue line. It would also appear to be the role of magistrates to help the police keep their jobs at the expense of truth, justice and honour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 21 October, 2014, 10:06:02 AM
You can always use the answer the police use; 'I don't believe so'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2014, 10:25:24 AM
Good one, Huffy, but I don't like using the word 'believe' in such circumstances because it's too woolly and easy to challenge. "A child may believe in Santa Claus and Tony Blair might believe that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and the Pope may believe that condoms are against God - but mere belief doesn't make any of these things so," kind of thing.
.
Perhaps "that was not my experience" or something like that - something a bit more concrete than personal belief? I don't know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 October, 2014, 10:34:58 AM
I'm not sure that there was a wording that would have changed things there.  It seems obvious that the police version of events was taken as absolutely true, and you were presented as a confused and potentially violent weirdo. Even the questions asked, regardless of how you answered them, were creating a picture of how you should be perceived, and all the prosecutor had to do was to conjure the possibility that in your bewilderment you lashed out. 

After all, who would believe that someone could have their door broken down and their home seized, wrongly in their belief, and be roughly hauled to jail without taking at least one impulsive swing?

What a system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 October, 2014, 11:47:50 AM
F*** the police.

And this is why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2014, 11:50:37 AM
Indeed, Tordels, your words are, as usual, very wise. I'm sure there are many people who read this thread who don't believe me or, at best, believe that I'm not remembering things correctly.
.
I have a digital recording of the initial arrest which proves that I was non-violent but, as the trial was not about that particular incident, the court didn't want to see it, despite me offering to play it for them at least twice. It's as if everything that lent weight to my argument, like the missing cctv footage and my own recordings, were regarded as entirely irrelevant. It really is like trying to plait fog.
.
Because I cannot afford to appeal the magistrates' strange verdict, I have instead been arguing my position with the county police's complaints department. This too is hard work and for the initial several emails the person with whom I was in contact did his level best to dismiss my claims as irrelevant. Through persistence, however, I finally managed to persuade him to do a bit of investigating - and it was a bit, too.
.
He interviewed just one of the two officers, the civilian custody officer who claimed that I hit her, and decided that as her story was the same as she related in court then he couldn't see any problem with it and that I should basically shut up and let it drop. My response was along the lines of, "fine - if you believe this civilian officer then, logically, you must believe that PC G____ is  lying when he says that he was holding me securely throughout and witnessed no contact - therefore I'd like to know what you are going to do about him."
.
It went very quiet for a week. When I enquired eventually as to the current state of his investigation, I was informed that the investigator was in a "contemplative mood" and "unsure how to proceed." Apparently, after all this time, only now is my point beginning to be taken seriously and brought to the attention of the higher-ups.
.
Truth is not enough - persistence is vital.
.
It's the same with the Council, but in their case when they realised that they had no real legal argument against my assertion that all their actions were based on an ultra vires Administrative Tribunal, which is an entirely voluntary procedure for which my consent to participate in and accept the judgement of was required but not given, they simply said that they weren't going to talk to me any more. This happened just last week and my response was basically, "fine - I can't force you to reply but please note that it is one of the basic principles of English law that if you do not object to a thing then you must accept it and, as you have not objected to (nor even mentioned in passing) the fundamental illegality and unlawfulness of holding me to a Tribunal to which I did not consent, rendering all your actions after that 'fruit of the poisoned tree' and therefore intrinsically illegal and unlawful in their own right, then your silence, your refusal to respond, indicates your acceptance of my argument." I then gave them seven days to present a cogent objection or accept my accusations. They've got about four days left on that deadline, after which I will consider my next move.
.
My arguments are, of course, wider ranging and more complex than I have the space (or good will) to detail here but it does seem that the cracks are beginning to appear. I am cautiously optimistic at this stage but it is a wearing and stressful process - yet strangely satisfying.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 October, 2014, 03:15:00 PM
The first person to climb Everest was probably stressed about it, but at the end of it they'd climbed Everest.  Their climbing Everest also told other people that they could climb Everest too so there's probably day trips to the top of Everest these days as it seems like every eedjit's climbed it, even though there were probably loads of people telling the guy who did it first that it couldn't be done, or tried to dismiss him by asking him why he bothered.  They probably wished they had to balls to even try.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 October, 2014, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Phil McCracken on 21 October, 2014, 03:15:00 PM
The first person to climb Everest was probably stressed about it, but at the end of it they'd climbed Everest.  Their climbing Everest also told other people that they could climb Everest too so there's probably day trips to the top of Everest these days as it seems like every eedjit's climbed it, even though there were probably loads of people telling the guy who did it first that it couldn't be done, or tried to dismiss him by asking him why he bothered.  They probably wished they had to balls to even try.

1 in 15 of all summit-climbers have died in the attempt.  Them's rubbish odds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 October, 2014, 05:16:40 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 20 October, 2014, 06:10:56 PM
Former Radio 1 DJ Mike Read is not a racist, and people just simply need to lighten up... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xLbcIianBg)

Counter-campaign to get Mike Read's nemeses, Frankie Goes To Hollywood, to number one:

https://m.facebook.com/relaxagainstukip (https://m.facebook.com/relaxagainstukip)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2014, 05:19:39 PM
Thanks and, er, thanks...
.
I'd never looked at it like that before, Phil, it's a good perspective, thank you. At the very least, now when anybody asks me why I'm fighting the system I can answer with conviction; "because it's there." Which is kind of perfect, don't you think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 October, 2014, 05:20:57 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 October, 2014, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: Phil McCracken on 21 October, 2014, 03:15:00 PM
The first person to climb Everest was probably stressed about it, but at the end of it they'd climbed Everest.  Their climbing Everest also told other people that they could climb Everest too so there's probably day trips to the top of Everest these days as it seems like every eedjit's climbed it, even though there were probably loads of people telling the guy who did it first that it couldn't be done, or tried to dismiss him by asking him why he bothered.  They probably wished they had to balls to even try.

1 in 15 of all summit-climbers have died in the attempt.  Them's rubbish odds.

It costs some 5 figure sum to get permits to climb it these days, and apparently there are regular full on fist fights at base camp over who gets to go first. Also you have to bring back 30kg more than you left with on account of all the shite that's accumulated up there over the years. Mostly corpses.

Everest might be big and all, but the toughest climbing challenge is the North Face of the Eiger. A vertical mile of wind and snow blasted rock
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2014, 05:38:25 PM
I just tried to imagine a tougher climb, KP, and I think something went wrong with my mind because I found myself thinking about climbers of the future not going up mountains but down them - specifically some of those Titans that rise from the oceans' abyssal depths. Might make a good, if somewhat dark, movie...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 October, 2014, 02:10:09 PM
Quote from: sauchie welfare on 21 October, 2014, 05:16:40 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 20 October, 2014, 06:10:56 PM
Former Radio 1 DJ Mike Read is not a racist, and people just simply need to lighten up... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xLbcIianBg)

Counter-campaign to get Mike Read's nemeses, Frankie Goes To Hollywood, to number one:

https://m.facebook.com/relaxagainstukip (https://m.facebook.com/relaxagainstukip)

Never mind. Apparently someone's convinced Mike Read that singing about kicking out immigrants in a comedy Jamaican accent could - by some people determined to think the worst of him - be considered a wee bit racist. It's political correctness gone mad:

Ukip calypso song withdrawn by repentant Mike Read:  http://gu.com/p/42kxt


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 October, 2014, 05:24:51 PM
A pedant would comment that calypso's not from Jamaica  :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 October, 2014, 07:54:17 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 22 October, 2014, 05:24:51 PM
A pedant would comment that calypso's not from Jamaica

Neither's Mike Read - that's why it's racist. How hard can it be to find someone to investigate the organised rape of children by parliamentarians who isn't friends with the defendants and their spouses? I don't know Lord Brittan, and I certainly don't live in the same street as him, can I have a go?

QuoteFiona Woolf, a prominent QC and Lord Mayor of London, was brought in after Lady Butler-Sloss resigned from her role leading the inquiry when it emerged that her late brother Lord Havers was attorney general at the time of some of the historical allegations.

Ministers had hoped that Woolf would be able to draw a line under the previous controversy but a row erupted on Tuesday when it was revealed that Brittan was one of her neighbours, with whom she had dined five times since 2008. Woolf had also had coffee on "a small number of occasions" with Brittan's wife (most recently last year), sat on a prize-giving panel with her and sponsored her for a fun run.

http://gu.com/p/42jyk/tw
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 October, 2014, 08:43:30 PM
One would.almost think one lived in a state with a veneer of accountability, transparency and democracy, whilst underneath the.strings are pulled by a tight knit coterie of co educated, monied people with a sense of entitlement and overweening self interest and the ability to act in a networked fashion in order to protect said interest. Lucky we don't eh. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 October, 2014, 09:09:57 AM
I might have fowled up yesterday. Two plain clothed police officers turned up yesterday asking for my mother. It was my day off and I was cleaning the house while everyone was at school/work. One of the ladies showed me her ID and asked for my mother. I said she wasn't in and that she would have to come back later. I neglected to ask for her officer number. Kicking myself now because I can't phone to verify if they where legit or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2014, 10:05:55 AM
If they were legitimate, the police should have a record of their visit and reasons for doing so. A few polite 'phone calls should sort it out one way or the other. No need to panic at this stage, I'd guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 October, 2014, 11:18:38 AM
Birds of a feather, just got off the phone to the very nice staff at the Bolton central station.  And they gave me the ID's for said officers as well as a reason (well, it's to do with my parents so i'll not divulge details). Very much relieved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 24 October, 2014, 01:52:20 PM
Nice to see the establishment moaning about this new Euro tax bill. I think I'll threaten not to pay my tax and see how far that gets me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 October, 2014, 01:57:37 PM
Quote from: Banners on 24 October, 2014, 01:52:20 PM
Nice to see the establishment moaning about this new Euro tax bill. I think I'll threaten not to pay my tax and see how far that gets me.

TBH, I think if HMRC did what the EU has done — changed the rules, reviewed your tax returns back to 1995, and then presented you with a bill for 19 years back tax — I think you'd have an excellent case for not paying.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2014, 02:11:24 PM
Hands up how many people have signed a contract with HMRC promising to pay whatever they demand whenever they demand it? No? So why do you pay, especially if it's too much for you?
.
Mr Cameron should do what I do - ask to see the contract before he pays a penny. (An agreement is not the same thing.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 October, 2014, 02:16:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2014, 02:11:24 PM
Hands up how many people have signed a contract with HMRC promising to pay whatever they demand whenever they demand it? No? So why do you pay, especially if it's too much for you?

For the five hundredth time: not all British law is contract law.

Also: I have these crazy ideas about society, and schools, and hospitals, and stuff. I know you have this notion that there is another way of doing these things, but there is literally no way to get from where we are now to this fantasy land you propose without the complete collapse of society as currently constituted as an intermediate step.

I, for one, don't fancy that.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 October, 2014, 02:19:58 PM
Splitting the bill at the next board meet up/eat out is going to be fun...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 October, 2014, 02:20:07 PM
I wouldn't mind it. All those re-runs of Threads would be a good education.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2014, 03:34:06 PM
Jim, it would take one signature and the man in the street would hardly even notice the difference. This crackpot idea that it's either this way or Mad Max has really had its day. It's not like what I suggest hasn't been done before with great success.
.
Also, the very fundament of law in this country is the contract - without them there is just 'might is right', and That's the world I don't want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 October, 2014, 03:40:35 PM
Quote from: Banners on 24 October, 2014, 01:52:20 PM
Nice to see the establishment moaning about this new Euro tax bill. I think I'll threaten not to pay my tax and see how far that gets me.


Seems a bit odd that we're in the same boat as Greece.

Also including drugs and prostitution in GDP (I'm pretty sure my accountant would question that as legitimate expenses)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753529 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753529)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 24 October, 2014, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Jim_CampbellTBH, I think if HMRC did what the EU has done — changed the rules, reviewed your tax returns back to 1995, and then presented you with a bill for 19 years back tax — I think you'd have an excellent case for not paying...

In 2013, I paid more Corporation Tax than Facebook. There's an excellent case right there ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2014, 05:54:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 October, 2014, 01:57:37 PMTBH, I think if HMRC did what the EU has done — changed the rules, reviewed your tax returns back to 1995, and then presented you with a bill for 19 years back tax — I think you'd have an excellent case for not paying.

To be fair, retroactively changing existing laws so that what was done in the past is somehow wiped out Back To The Future Part 2 style is exactly what the Tories did with the workfare laws so that IDS couldn't be charged with crimes against humanity - since the old wording and legislature was technically slavery as defined by human rights laws similar to the one that the Tories for some reason now want to opt out of.

SOSS FOR TEH GOOS
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2014, 06:16:11 PM
This feels like an attempt to fracture the EU, maybe even to form a breakaway union with rules of its own. Mind you, it is hilarious to watch the PM thumping the lectern and being all outraged like me in the pub with a gas bill. It's due just before Christmas too, Dave - not feckin' nice, is it?
.
What happens if Dave doesn't pay? Will the EU send in the bailiffs to repossess Sheffield? The whole thing is nothing more than a mockery of a farce of a sham - but highly amusing!
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 October, 2014, 06:19:43 PM

What is it about the sudden appearance of this entirely made-up controversy - which allows Dave Cameron to thump his lectern for the cameras and insist he won't be handing over the hard earned cash of the folk who pay his wages to EU mandarins (at a time when he needs to out-Farage Farage) - which makes me think it's been cooked up by Dave and a Brussels establishment who see him as their best chance of keeping the UK and its cash inside the EU?

I suppose a phony press war with Herman Van Rompuy is preferable to engineering an actual war with a third world nation when you have an election to win.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 October, 2014, 10:10:21 PM
Costs less money as well only 2.1 billion for a petulant promenade before the serried ranks of the worlds press. Cheaper than eradicating poor people any day. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2014, 10:17:18 PM
Quote from: bank of sauchie on 24 October, 2014, 06:19:43 PM

What is it about the sudden appearance of this entirely made-up controversy - which allows Dave Cameron to thump his lectern for the cameras and insist he won't be handing over the hard earned cash of the folk who pay his wages to EU mandarins (at a time when he needs to out-Farage Farage) - which makes me think it's been cooked up by Dave and a Brussels establishment who see him as their best chance of keeping the UK and its cash inside the EU?

I suppose a phony press war with Herman Van Rompuy is preferable to engineering an actual war with a third world nation when you have an election to win.

We are of one mind on this matter.  Engineered controversy to a mutual aim, exactly like the various ones we in Ireland have endured over the past few years.  How stupid do they think we are?   Well, exactly that stupid, I suppose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 October, 2014, 10:17:40 PM

Scottish Labour party 'leader', Johann Lamont finally realises what was clear to everyone during the Referendum - Labour are finished in Scotland. I know we'll all miss her cheery smile and winning personality:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/exclusive-scottish-labour-leader-johann-4502273


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2014, 10:40:23 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 24 October, 2014, 10:10:21 PM
Costs less money as well only 2.1 billion for a petulant promenade before the serried ranks of the worlds press. Cheaper than eradicating poor people any day. Z

I think we're being unduly harsh and should consider that maybe Dave genuinely hasn't got that cash to spare after Universal Credit alone costing the better part of 13 billion pounds.  I suppose you could also count the huge increase in national debt since the Tories took power, but as Sharky points out, that's just imaginary money anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 October, 2014, 10:48:11 PM
I am again aghast at the absolute ineptitude demonstrated by western leaders over the past 20 years or so. They are bought and paid for by shadowy interest groups and evidently care nothing for their respective electorates. This is what we get when we pander to politicians and  policies formulated by focus group and lobbying  and not by conviction. I absolutely despair of it and am becoming increasingly apprehensive about where we are going with this bullshit...Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2014, 11:22:20 PM
"Ineptitude"?  Hardly.
They know very well what they're doing, it's just that they have to be crafty about it these days and not move too far, too fast, in case opposition forms, as they don't want to build pressure too quickly on people and cause them to openly rebel and organise.
Remember the Poll Tax riots?  That was things moving too fast, but slowly does it and twenty years later they get to have the Bedroom Tax, which is even better than the Poll Tax because the Poll Tax can only tax people that actually exist, while the Bedroom Tax can not only tax people that don't exist, but also the theoretical space that they might inhabit.  Dead mums in the news, starved and/or worried to death by the tax and not a single riot... they know what they're doing, all right.  It's not ineptitude that pisses 13 billion up a wall, because their mates still get paid and there's still a cushy job waiting for them after they get out of public office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 October, 2014, 11:49:06 PM
Dunno Phil,  Cameron, Kenny et al appear to be no more than messenger boys for the real rulers. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 October, 2014, 05:51:53 AM
Heh, I just misheard the news; "Ebola has spread to Narnia."  Better quarantine those wardrobes, folks!
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 October, 2014, 06:30:38 AM
Max Keiser reports that UK government borrowing has risen by 10% due to the people not earning enough to pay the level of income tax needed to keep up debt repayments.
.
If wages were raised to ease this situation it would require further public and private borrowing of interest bearing imaginary money, thus increasing interest charges and requiring higher repayment levels. So the wage raises would make things worse.
.
If wages were cut to ease this situation it would require less public and private borrowing of interest bearing imaginary money, thus increasing interest charges (interest charges always increase, plus cutting wages would result in further public borrowing to finance benefits, the NHS and so on) and requiring higher repayment levels. So wage cuts would make things worse.
.
Gee, if only the high I.q. boys down there in Westminster could figure out a way to fix this without using privately created, interest bearing imaginary money. But no. They're too busy faffing about with the engine to realise they've got the wrong fuel in the tank.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 October, 2014, 02:15:03 PM

Not really political at all, but folk get upset if you post anything contentious or upsetting on threads like Threadjacking. NY Times piece telling the story of US hostage James Foley and other US/UK hostages in more detail than I've read elsewhere - I didn't know, for example, that Foley had converted to Islam during his captivity (apparently genuinely), or even where and how he came to be captured in the first instance:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/world/middleeast/horror-before-the-beheadings-what-isis-hostages-endured-in-syria.html?referrer


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 October, 2014, 10:09:18 PM
I called in to see the boss this morning after another lettuce Odyssey over the weekend. He asked me if there had been any problems and had a natter about how smoothly everything had gone and what a bloody good bloke I am.
.
On my way out, as a genuine afterthought I asked, "oh, what's your policy on parking tickets?" I produced same to demonstrate the perils of Nottingham.
.
His eyes narrowed. I think he's been expecting this conversation, or one like it, for a while now. "More to the point," he said slowly, "what's your policy?"
.
I told him my policy and outlined my plan.
.
He sighed. "So, you're not going to pay it?"
.
"There's nothing To pay," I said, "the law on such matters is clear and simple and easy to... Hoy!"
.
He snatched the ticket from my hand. "I'll pay the bloody thing," he said. I tried to dissuade him but he'd have none of it.
.
I understand his fears, although I don't share them, and it upsets me that my personal policies have cost him money. I think it would be fair to meet him half-way and pay him half the money but, in order to assuage my morals, order him to spend it on something real like shopping or getting pissed. That way me trying to stick to my principles and him succumbing to his fears costs each of us only half of what it might have.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2014, 11:34:56 AM
Another excellent article from Adam Curtis over on his BBC blog: www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/HAPPIDROME-Part-One
.
I look around me, watch how people behave and listen to what they talk about and I know, I really know, that what Curtis writes is spot on - right down to being excluded from rewards if you don't play along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2014, 11:42:29 AM
Another excellent article from Adam Curtis over on his BBC blog: www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/HAPPIDROME-Part-One
.
I look around me, watch how people behave and listen to what they talk about and I know, I really know, that what Curtis writes is spot on - right down to being excluded from rewards if you don't play along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2014, 12:32:45 PM
That was a great read/watch Sharky, many thanks. He's a bright boy Curtis, and while his vaious analyses aren't massively original, the way he brings the different threads together definitely is.  Although one does permit oneself a cynical 'we are all individuals!'-type chuckle at the juxtaposition of these particular bits:


Quote...[A]ll systems of power create 'submissive persons', and that the only way to really create a true revolutionary world was to build one without any hierarchies. He ... proposed instead a completely decentralised system of government...

... Ocalan sent out instructions to all militants that they should read The Ecology of Freedom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2014, 01:02:00 PM
It is a good point, Tordels - how does one promote individual freedoms without some form of mass movement? It seems an insoluble conundrum. I suppose that everyone must be given, en mass, the tools and information they need and then just let them go - trust them to do the right thing. After that it's really just a question of mechanics and a leap of faith in Ourselves.
.
But we're still left with the biggest problem of all, how do you free people who don't know they're enslaved? This is where people like Curtis come in, contradictions and all, to say with far more eloquence and knowledge than I ever could the things we all need to hear and think about. The guy should have his own weekly half-hour show on prime time. That would be a great start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robert Frazer on 31 October, 2014, 01:29:24 AM
It must have been a slow day in the Independent news room on Tuesday, because they gave a front-page column and an entire interior page to the tiresome Argentine bleating over the Falklands (like when dog bites man, this is not news). I fired a letter off to the paper complaining about their hypocrisy because it's actually the case that today, with all the land stolen from Mapuche Indians, Argentina is a bigger colonial power than we are! They printed it as well (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-keeping-armistice-day-special-9826821.html?origin=internalSearch), which was a nice treat over this morning's cornflakes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 31 October, 2014, 04:00:05 PM
Sharky, is your policy on parking tickets that you haven't entered into a contract with the parking wardens so you can park where you like?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 October, 2014, 05:00:04 PM
Partially, yes, but mainly due to the fact that there is no due process. Technically, without being tried by a jury of my peers, nobody can arbitrarily impose fines on persons who have broken no law (no actual loss, harm or damage caused) - even if they are wearing costumes.
.
Another way to look at it is that governments, councils, etc., have no more powers under the law than you or I - how could they when they are a) non-living administrative entities, b) owned by you and I and c) made up of normal human beings with exactly the same powers under the law as you or I? If you were to paint double yellow lines on the road outside your house and issue private tickets to parking offenders, would that be lawful? Well, absolutely - if the council/government can do it then so can you - it's just a matter of scale, nothing more. Would the people to whom you issued your private parking tickets have to pay you? Nope, because it's a public highway (unless it's not - you'd have a much better chance extracting fines if you did the same thing on a private road). If the naughty parker has caused loss, harm or damage in some way, then that's a matter for the constabulary and the courts.
.
And yes, technically I can park wherever I want but common sense must prevail in the end. If I wanted to give an extreme example, I could park up on a motorway without incurring a fine. If, however, my parked vehicle caused an accident then I would be tried by a jury of my peers for that crime, and I think they'd throw the book at me. Also, in such a case, police constables (or anyone, really) would be within their rights to tow my vehicle out of the way and leave it somewhere away from the danger zone (but not impound it). I might also get taken to court for causing actual danger and receive a fine or imprisonment for that but, without any court sanction, nobody could arbitrarily fine me even for parking on a motorway (good luck arguing that, though!)
.
Another example - speed cameras. A mechanism assesses your speed and sends a message to a computer which prints out a speeding ticket and posts it to you. In this, again extreme, example not one human being is involved. Literally nobody is asking you for money. Even if a police officer is the one with the speed-gun and types your registration into the system which sends you the ticket, no judge or jury is involved so this officer, this person in a costume who has no more powers under the law than you have, is demanding money without any basis in either law or contract. Again, what would happen if you bought your own speed gun and started issuing private speeding tickets to police cars?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2014, 06:13:25 PM
They'd beat you up because they're the cops.

Getting ticketed isn't really a human rights violation, it's more of an avoidable inconvenience.  Driving slower near speed cameras and not parking where you're not supposed to park ought to take care of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2014, 01:10:37 AM
How blithely people seem to accept police brutality - like a dog resigned to yet another beating. Extraordinary.
.
The rest of your argument seems  to be that either one takes personal responsibility for everything or submits wholly to legislation with no middle ground. Legislation is meant to be advisory to one's exercise of personal responsibility, not a replacement for it. The two are meant to work hand in hand but somehow we've got it into our heads that legislation is the Word of God. Well, God has nothing to do with arbitrary fines - that's all about having to find ways of raising revenue to pay off the unpayoffable government debt. They therefore use legislation as a cash machine, subverting and abusing its lawful purpose. The government/councils are using the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law, in the vernacular, but have a great advantage in that they get to choose the wording of the laws they intend to abuse.
.
The law, just like our governments and councils, needs to be rescued from the malign influence of this crazy fakemoney system and put back to work properly.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 November, 2014, 11:31:01 AM
Whilst I respect the principled stand of our beloved Legendary Shark, I accept the rule of law, not because of fear of violence or subjugation, but because I believe in society.

My family is somewhat dependent on a functioning society, particularly for education and health provision, and I have no wish to (very slightly) endanger that by advancing highly unconvincing arguments as to why I am allowed to park where I want.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 01 November, 2014, 11:35:15 AM
and all this driving on the same side of the road malarky what's that about? oppression man, that's what.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 01 November, 2014, 11:37:49 AM
For those already concerned about corporate power a little bit about the cloud future. Predictive software giving you what you want or- what they believe you should like?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/opinion/david-brooks-our-machine-masters.html?action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&module=MostEmailed&version=Full&region=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2014, 11:44:53 AM
I also accept the rule of law - what I don't accept is law being subverted and used as a cash machine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 November, 2014, 11:59:06 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2014, 11:44:53 AM
I also accept the rule of law - what I don't accept is law being subverted and used as a cash machine.

I'm not an amazing fan of fines either, which are always open to the argument they're a tax not a deterrent.

Still, it's hard to think of a functional alternative. If we were talking about something really anti-social, such as allowing your dog to foul the pavement, a good tasering would seem the obvious* solution. However, am not sure that would really be appropriate for selfish parkers.


*by "obvious" I mean "ridiculously extreme but somehow satisfying".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2014, 01:11:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2014, 01:10:37 AM
How blithely people seem to accept police brutality - like a dog resigned to yet another beating. Extraordinary.

Just so we're clear, Sharky: you don't forsee any conceivable reason why a car full of policemen might become angry at a man who is clearly not delusional but fully mentally competent and yet is still running around with a gun-shaped object in public, pointing it at their car, and then demanding money?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2014, 03:07:56 PM
I have no idea how to answer that, Zombear, except to say that an angry policeman can only make things worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2014, 07:49:44 PM
Don't give him a parking ticket, then.  People hate that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 01 November, 2014, 09:33:20 PM
Ooh, that name change Prof Bear. Hope you're not intentionally trying to piss off those from an Islamic persuasion.  :-\

Try "Kalb Akbar", it'll be better suited to your message  ;)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 November, 2014, 09:38:23 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 01 November, 2014, 09:33:20 PM
Ooh, that name change Prof Bear. Hope you're not intentionally trying to piss off those from an Islamic persuasion.  :-\

He'd have used a picture of a pig and changed his user name to THE PROPHET MO-HOG-MED if that was his intention. Anyway, shut up - that picture of the dog wearing a fez is brilliant - I didn't think you could top a picture of a monkey wearing a fez for hilarity, but here we are.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 01 November, 2014, 09:50:47 PM
Quote from: sauchie library on 01 November, 2014, 09:38:23 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 01 November, 2014, 09:33:20 PM
Ooh, that name change Prof Bear. Hope you're not intentionally trying to piss off those from an Islamic persuasion.  :-\

He'd have used a picture of a pig and changed his user name to THE PROPHET MO-HOG-MED if that was his intention. Anyway, shut up - that picture of the dog wearing a fez is brilliant - I didn't think you could top a picture of a monkey wearing a fez for hilarity, but here we are.

No, hats off to the dog in a fez most definitely, did have a chuckle when I saw that. Apologies if I misread your intentions Prof Bear. As a moderate British Muslim myself I'm all for free speech and shit, but you can see how others can take offence. Some Muslims see Dogs as unclean*, and might take offence to seeing "Allah" connected with dog, etc.

* No where does Islam say that you can't keep a dog as pet, in fact, I know a lot of people from Muslim backgrounds who have dogs. I think it's more a cultural misconception. I find it bloody annoying though. I happily encourage my kids to stroke or pet a dog when they see one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 November, 2014, 10:07:51 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 01 November, 2014, 09:50:47 PM
I'm all for free speech and shit

Wise words, mate.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 01 November, 2014, 10:08:42 PM
Quote from: Cardinal Woofsey on 01 November, 2014, 10:07:51 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 01 November, 2014, 09:50:47 PM
I'm all for free speech and shit

Wise words, mate.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 02 November, 2014, 02:15:37 AM
Apologies again mate. Feel like a real knob. I know you didn't mean anything by it. This is by far the most open and friendly forum I've had the pleasure of being a part of. Long may it continue!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2014, 05:33:05 AM
Yep, this is the coolest part of the entire web. I love it - and the folk who make it what it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 November, 2014, 01:27:15 PM

For Ed Miliband to put out this video at this time is wrong, but parents and the public have been let down by his acting in a reckless and provocative manner. Both sides of his face need to get round a table and stop this happening again:

http://youtu.be/SVq2yMuAMVQ

Hilarious, but deeply depressing. Labour are finished because they no longer serve any actual purpose.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 November, 2014, 02:22:05 PM
Quote from: hardworking family on 05 November, 2014, 01:27:15 PM

For Ed Miliband to put out this video at this time is wrong, but parents and the public have been let down by his acting in a reckless and provocative manner. Both sides of his face need to get round a table and stop this happening again:

http://youtu.be/wCem9EZb-YA

Hilarious, but deeply depressing. Labour are finished because they no longer serve any actual purpose.


I might have accidentally posted the wrong video: http://youtu.be/wCem9EZb-YA


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 05 November, 2014, 04:10:29 PM
I did wonder if Justice was going to have a sly cameo in there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 November, 2014, 05:51:41 PM
Quote from: hardworking family on 05 November, 2014, 02:22:05 PM
I might have accidentally posted the wrong video: http://youtu.be/wCem9EZb-YA

But how great is that Justice video!  Really, really enjoyed that.

The other one, not at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 November, 2014, 07:25:02 AM

US telly news man fails at history, geography, economics, and current affairs:

http://youtu.be/T0IiVyFM4yo?t=7m1s


CNBC's Kernen: You have pounds anyway don't you still?

Shanahan: We have euros.

CNBC's Kernen: You have euros in Ireland?

Shanahan: Yes. We have euros, which is eh...

CNBC's Kernen: Why do you have euros in Ireland?

Shanahan: A strong recovery....

CNBC's Kernen: Why do use euros in Ireland?

CNBC's Kernen: Why wouldn't we have euros in Ireland?

CNBC: I'd use the pound.

Shenahan: We use euro.

CNBC: What about Scotland? I was using Scottish eh ... Scottish pounds.

Shanahan: They use Sterling.

CNBC: They use sterling?

Shanahan: They use sterling. But we use euro.

CNBC's Kernen: WHAT? Why would you do that?

Shanahan: Why wouldn't we do that.

CNBC's Kernen: Why didn't Scotland? No wander they wanted to break away.

Shanahan: They are part of the UK we are not.

CNBC's Kernen: Aren't you right next to er?

Shanahan: We are very close but entirely separate.

CNBC's Kernen: It is sort of the same, same island isn't it?

Shanhan: And in the North of Ireland they have sterling.

CNBC's Kernen: They do?

Shanhan: And in the North of Ireland they use sterling.

CNBC's Kernen: It is just too confusing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 November, 2014, 08:06:33 AM
I hope that CNBC guy isn't in charge of anyone's pension fund.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2014, 10:21:30 AM
Jesus christ, this man is a professional 'journalist'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 November, 2014, 11:05:43 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2014, 10:21:30 AM
Jesus christ, this man is a professional 'journalist'.

No he's on TV.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2014, 12:12:19 PM
It's no wonder the Daily Show is America's best news show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 November, 2014, 01:11:36 PM
That's so funny, sad and scary all at once.

All credit goes to Shanahan for 1) Not laughing hysterically at these people's absolute stupidity and walking out, and b) not leaping across the desk to slap Kernen up the head.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 November, 2014, 02:22:02 PM
The UK will only have to pay half of the £1.7bn budget surcharge demanded by the EU, Chancellor George Osborne says, according to the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29956289).

Cool. I'll only pay half my taxes, and we'll see what Chancellor George Osborne says then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 November, 2014, 03:50:33 PM
It's all just smoke and mirrors, the EU will get the money one way or another.  Dave is still heading for the exit door of No. 10.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 November, 2014, 03:56:50 PM
...and the knives out for his buddy Ed Moribund too, scared to think what muppet they will replace him with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2014, 04:09:36 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 07 November, 2014, 01:11:36 PM
That's so funny, sad and scary all at once.

All credit goes to Shanahan for 1) Not laughing hysterically at these people's absolute stupidity and walking out, and b) not leaping across the desk to slap Kernen up the head.

Wouldn't it be a much better world if these idiots were called on their idiocy though? What would Shanahan have lost if he'd said "Can you let the adults talk now?".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2014, 04:10:18 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 07 November, 2014, 01:11:36 PM
That's so funny, sad and scary all at once.

All credit goes to Shanahan for 1) Not laughing hysterically at these people's absolute stupidity and walking out, and b) not leaping across the desk to slap Kernen up the head.

Ach, I wouldn't blame anyone Out Furren for not grasping the whole UK/GB/NI/IRL/STG/EUR bollocks, it's ridiculously confusing in the first place and no-one can know everything about every poxy little group of countries.  What gets me is, despite having been exposed on air as being ignorant of every particular (which I've already absolved him of), he concludes with:  "you use the Euro, you should never have done that". While it's a point of view, it's one based on a no-doubt superior analysis drawing from his detailed knowledge of the economic situation 20 years ago of a country whose political and geographical location he's not even remotely clear on. 

Now that's stupid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 07 November, 2014, 04:35:58 PM
Yes, he has no clue about the subject matter. But it's the rudeness that's incredible - to tell Shanahan where he/Ireland are going wrong. Bizarre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2014, 07:10:00 PM
Quote from: Banners on 07 November, 2014, 02:22:02 PM
The UK will only have to pay half of the £1.7bn budget surcharge demanded by the EU, Chancellor George Osborne says, according to the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29956289).

Cool. I'll only pay half my taxes, and we'll see what Chancellor George Osborne says then.

Sorry, Banners, apparently you have to pay your taxes in full but you are perfectly welcome to lie to the public and say you only paid half. (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/07/uk-pays-full-eu-rebate-despite-osborne-claim-he-halved-it)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 November, 2014, 07:27:24 PM

So, a compromise has been announced which allows one side to announce they won a concession and the other to say things were always going to play out this way:

Quote from: sauchie parliament on 24 October, 2014, 06:19:43 PM
What is it about the sudden appearance of this entirely made-up controversy - which allows Dave Cameron to thump his lectern for the cameras and insist he won't be handing over the hard earned cash of the folk who pay his wages to EU mandarins (at a time when he needs to out-Farage Farage) - which makes me think it's been cooked up by Dave and a Brussels establishment who see him as their best chance of keeping the UK and its cash inside the EU?

I suppose a phony press war with Herman Van Rompuy is preferable to engineering an actual war with a third world nation when you have an election to win.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2014, 12:33:35 AM
An imaginary argument amongst  imaginary leaders over an  imaginary debt to be paid with  imaginary money for imaginary services.
.
I can't imagine why people are so upset about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2014, 05:20:33 AM
Next year sees the 800th anniversary of one of the most important events in English, and arguably world, history - the signing of the Magna Carta. This document, an original copy of which has just gone on display in Washington D.C., has influenced laws and rights all over the world and was, for example, one of the chief inspirations for the American Declaration of Independence.
.
Amongst the gems contained therein are the following lovely nuggets:
.
39 - No freemen shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him or send upon him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land.
.
40 - To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.
.
45 - We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs or bailiffs only such as know the law of the realm and mean to observe it well.
.
Which are good. It's far from a perfect document by today's standards, as adequately illustrated by the following clause:
.
54 - No one shall be arrested or imprisoned upon the appeal of a woman, for the death of any other than her husband.
.
Despite its many flaws and contemporary irrelevances, the Magna Carta is still a cornerstone of law and rights in this country and I wonder if the modern media will put as much enthusiasm into celebrating this 800th anniversary as they are putting into celebrating a century old slaughter.
.
Somehow, I doubt it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 November, 2014, 11:40:32 AM
Doesn't apply in Scotland.

Looks like TLS isn't alone:

http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/roundup/articles/2012/02/02/423124-tarot-reader-finally-accepts-court-authority?do=mobilesite&mode=on (http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/roundup/articles/2012/02/02/423124-tarot-reader-finally-accepts-court-authority?do=mobilesite&mode=on)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 November, 2014, 03:30:28 PM
Quote"Everything I do is sort of metaphysical"

Tell me about it, sister.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 06:59:31 AM
An intriguing article. I think that where she went wrong was in trying to play it both ways. She tried to deny the authority of the "court" over her and yet entered "Not Guilty" pleas. You can't do both. Imagine the whole "court" process (and in this instance the process was not a trial by jury but an administrative hearing - if I've read it correctly) as a game of Monopoly in which your plea is your token (top hat, little dog, battleship, etc.). As soon as you enter a plea, you're playing the game whether you know it or not. It seems like this lady was coerced into entering pleas through imprisonment - with which I can empathise.
.
Let's have a look at what's going on here.
.
First, the government decides to make it a "crime" to drive without insurance. Dressing-up their decision in all the correct words and phrases, stitched together with all the sound and practical benefits that insurance brings, legislation is passed. The government has just told you to spend your money on something IT thinks YOU must have. The government does not offer a cheap public alternative but gives the job (cash cow) over entirely to its friends and allies in the private sector. The government will take its own cut through fines on the uninsured enforced by officers.
.
So, now the system is in place; pay up, risk fines and imprisonment or don't drive. Isn't this exactly the same as a protection racket?
.
As for insurance itself, I don't think it's a particularly good or bad thing but mandatory anything is generally evil. Consider, two drivers of the same age, gender and experience, both good drivers with clean records and pointless licenses but, for whatever reason, one insured and one not.
.
Scenario A: Bad accident. The two drivers above are both injured, both cars are written off. Both drivers are treated by the NHS, although the insured driver may have the option of private care. The insured driver will have his car replaced, the uninsured driver will have to replace his own. The insured driver may receive an income during his recuperation, the uninsured driver will have state assistance. In the case of permanent disability or death, the insured driver's family might receive a large financial recompense, the uninsured driver's family would not. (There would, of course, be investigations, hearings and if necessary a trial - I'm just concentrating on the idea of insurance here.)
.
Scenario B: Fender bender. The insured driver has the headache of putting his garage in touch with his insurance company whilst the uninsured driver has the headache of finding the money for repairs himself. In the case of one driver being lawfully at fault the two headaches are essentially the same but doubled.
.
Scenario C: Third Party. Our drivers run somebody over. The victim may be cared for privately or by the state (much as in Scenario A). If appropriate, compensation may be claimed from the insurance company or the uninsured driver directly.
.
To make insurance mandatory is a nonsense but we've all been brainwashed by popular culture into the belief, a belief verging on blind superstition, that mandatory insurance is not only practically desirable but also morally vital.
.
It is the same with licenses, permits and taxation - you can pay up, risk imprisonment or not buy anything. Once again, we have been conned into seeing the paying of taxes as a not only necessary but moral act. "I am a taxpayer," is said proudly by many - and each and every one of them would pay less tax if they could. And to stand up and say "I am not a taxpayer" is to invite imprisonment and ruin.
.
If insurance and taxation are so obviously and fundamentally morally right, why are they mandatory? Why does not HMRC request instead of demanding? Why cannot they say "we'd like you to contribute £X" and why cannot you say "no, I will contribute £Y" - which might be more or less depending on whichever factors you decide are relevant? To say "I am a taxpayer" under those conditions might mean something.
.
Right now, when you say "I am a tax payer" you're really only saying "here - take my money, just please don't hurt me!"
.
That lady should be applauded for speaking up - for asking questions of those who claim to be her superiors and for asserting her own innate lawful powers. Who are they, these people, who tell us we must have this and we need to have that? Who are they, these people who claim to have first dibs on our earnings and hold themselves as the ultimate arbiters of we can and cannot have? Who are they, these people who think they know and are worth more than us?
.
I'll tell you who they are - they're nobodies - people of infinitely less worth than the lady in the article and of infinitely less worth than you.
.
You are the power base. Never forget that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 13 November, 2014, 07:55:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 November, 2014, 05:20:33 AM
Next year sees the 800th anniversary of one of the most important events in English, and arguably world, history - the signing of the Magna Carta.
Blimey. Pretty surprised to see you championing something whose only purpose was to enshrine in law the privilege of a wealthy few.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 08:11:07 AM
The seeds of Freedom are scattered in amongst many weeds and briars. If freedom must begin at the "top" then so be it - the important thing is that it begins so the rest of us can spread it.
.
For instance (and I haven't researched this so it's only conjecture), that clause about not imprisoning people on the word of a woman except in the event of her husband's murder, though it seems barbaric now, might have been the first great leap forward in women's rights. Before that, a wife might watch her husband murdered for his land before her very eyes and be unable to testify, leaving her destitute. It is, granted, a very niggardly concession but it is a concession - it's a start, anyway.
.
Many good things come from questionable places just as many questionable things come from good places. The hard part, as ever, is sorting the one from the other - in which endeavour I count myself a determined amateur.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 08:30:55 AM
If someone doesn't have car insurance it's likely because they say they can't afford it. If that's the case, the likelihood of them being able to fund compensation to an innocent third-party is probably zero. It's about taking responsibility.

Why should we (ie. we as a group of people sharing the same space) allow someone to drive a potentially deadly machine if they're not able to demonstrate some degree of responsibility, or if they lack the means of being able to make amends if the worst should happen?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 13 November, 2014, 08:33:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 06:59:31 AM
Scenario A: Bad accident. The two drivers above are both injured, both cars are written off. Both drivers are treated by the NHS, although the insured driver may have the option of private care. The insured driver will have his car replaced, the uninsured driver will have to replace his own. The insured driver may receive an income during his recuperation, the uninsured driver will have state assistance. In the case of permanent disability or death, the insured driver's family might receive a large financial recompense, the uninsured driver's family would not. (There would, of course, be investigations, hearings and if necessary a trial - I'm just concentrating on the idea of insurance here.)

Two drivers hit each other. Both are insured.  The insurer of the party at fault pays the costs of both cars, and then the party at fault pays that back through higher premiums etc.

Two drivers hit each other. The one at fault is not insured. The bill has to be met somehow.  The uninsured driver can be prosecuted, but may well not have the capital to cover the high costs of a road accident. Therefore the innocent party has to cover their own costs, or additional costs have to met met by the innocent taxpayer.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 06:59:31 AM
Scenario C: Third Party. Our drivers run somebody over. The victim may be cared for privately or by the state (much as in Scenario A). If appropriate, compensation may be claimed from the insurance company or the uninsured driver directly.

And if the uninsured driver can't pay for the very considerable costs of damage, medical treatment, etc, then the bill has to be picked up either by the person who was not at fault or by the government (i.e. the taxpayer, who also is not at fault, ends up paying out).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 08:40:22 AM
While we're on the topic of important documents and their meanings, I came across an interesting perspective on the meaning of the American Constitution during what I laughingly call my legal researches.
.
The theory goes that the cunning is all in the preamble and that "We the People" actually means "We the Undersigned" and that the document is actually the founding charter of a corporation owned, run by and for the benefit of those original few signatories. Only the signatories are the People, everyone else is merely an employee of the corporation - a mere citizen.
.
If this is so, then the United States of America is just one huge corporately owned continent populated virtually entirely by its workers and run for the sole benefit of a very few People. Exactly what the East India company strove for.
.
Now I'm not saying this idea's right and I'm not saying its wrong but, looking at the USA, it might explain a great many things.
.
Future generations might view this document as the most effective tool of oppression ever devised, despite its ostensibly noble content, because it made slaves of almost an entire continent of people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 08:55:44 AM
I don't disagree with the benefits of insurance. In a perfect world, either everyone would have it or nobody would need it. What I'm disputing is the legitimacy of enforcing insurance on a society. If you're going to enforce it then "National Insurance" should mean just that - a few quid a week towards a basic public insurance system covering everything. Anyone who wants more can go to a private insurer.
.
To enforce a requirement on everyone, regardless of means, without offering an alternative is anathema in a free society. My point is that there are alternatives to "pay up or else".
.
My illustrations were in no way meant to be exhaustive and described only part of reality. Of course there will always be cases that require much more thought and consideration - I'm reminded of that old Jasper Carrot line, "I drove into a drive that wasn't mine and hit a tree I haven't got."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 09:07:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
To enforce a requirement on everyone, regardless of means, without offering an alternative is anathema in a free society. My point is that there are alternatives to "pay up or else".

The alternative is to walk, cycle or take the bus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 09:10:17 AM
Thus do you willingly curtail your own freedoms, and the freedoms of your neighbours, for money.
.
And it's not even your money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 09:16:44 AM
No. By buying car insurance I'm protecting the freedoms of my neighbours - and strangers - by ensuring that if anything happens which is my fault, they'll be taken care of (to some degree at least). It's not an ideological tenet - it's the right thing to do.

If you can't afford to buy a car and keep it safe for you and others, then tough. A car, in most cases, is a luxury not a necessity. And I do buy my car insurance with my own money. All I get from my parents is socks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 10:04:24 AM
I disagree. By buying car insurance you are protecting the interests of your neighbours, not their freedoms. That demonstrates responsibility on your part, which I respect.
.
But you know that if you don't buy it, or forget to renew it, you face a fine, a driving ban or even imprisonment. So the question I ask, the same as with tax, do you pay because it's morally right to do so or because you fear getting caught without it?
.
Again, if it is morally right to have insurance, why do we need enforcement? It is morally right to refrain from theft, which most of us do anyway whether there's a constable watching or not. With the responsibility to do a thing must come the freedom not to do a thing - otherwise neither freedom nor responsibility have any meaning.
.
To deny people access to private transport on purely economic grounds is an aspect of our current enslavement. I keep saying it but, in the words of the late, great Bill Hicks, "you think you're free? Try going anywhere without money and see how fuckin' free you are."
.
And I'm not going to go into the whole money thing again here - I've posted far too much already on that subject - but it most certainly is not your money. How can it be when someone else has first dibs or can demand you hand it over for going too fast?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 10:31:52 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
Do you pay because it's morally right to do so or because you fear getting caught without it?

I pay for car insurance because it's morally right, and because it's a good product. I once had an accident in the outside lane of the M1 (it made the travel news on FiveLive) when I went into the back of holidaying Canadian family's hire car. The repairs to both cars, the money, their onward travel, their accomodation etc. got sorted with two phone calls, a letter and £250 excess. Brilliant. Essentially, by having insurance I took responsibility and made sure the family's freedom was taken care of.

Quote from: The Legendary SharkIf it is morally right to have insurance, why do we need enforcement?

Because a car is a dangerous machine that can kill or do serious injury. A car is not an abstract concept we can debate here – it's a tonne of steel hurtling towards my son at 70mph.

Quote from: The Legendary SharkTo deny people access to private transport on purely economic grounds is an aspect of our current enslavement.

People are not denied outright - no-one is saying that somebody in particular can't have a car. It's cause and effect. If you want a car, make it happen - get educated, get a job, get a loan, invest, save, speculate, work, ask your friends and family for help, borrow one, repair one.

(And then get car insurance, natch).

Quote from: The Legendary SharkAnd I'm not going to go into the whole money thing again here - I've posted far too much already on that subject - but it most certainly is not your money. How can it be when someone else has first dibs or can demand you hand it over for going too fast?

I went on a Speed Awareness course - didn't cost me anything.

Yes, it would be brilliant if we all did things altruistically for the betterment of our fellow man. Yes, I accept that the concept of money is a form of mass hallucination. However in the specific instance of car insurance and what it costs etc., I really don't think there can be any valid argument for not having it.

To go back to where I began, if I hadn't have had car insurance when I had my crash, both myself and the Canadian family would have been fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 11:03:12 AM
Again, no argument against the usefulness of insurance.
.
If we expand your position, is it fair to say that if you can't afford or don't want medical insurance you shouldn't get sick, if you can't afford or don't want holiday insurance you shouldn't go on holiday or if you can't afford or don't want home insurance you shouldn't have a home? I should guess not.
.
Having medical insurance doesn't make you go out of your way to fall ill. Having holiday insurance doesn't make you go out of your way to fall off a donkey in Madrid. Having home insurance doesn't make you go out of your way to burn it down. Having car insurance doesn't make you go out of your way to back into a traffic light.
.
If anything, the exact opposite to all the above is true - a lack of insurance makes people more careful because they know the shit they'll be in if something happens and they haven't got any.
.
The "Speed Awareness Course" cost you time and resources. In essence, you paid for your own lesson in obedience to the state.
.
And if some lunatic is (God forbid) driving a tonne of machinery towards your son at 70mph it probably won't be because of a lack of insurance. If this scenario is a genuine accident then I'd suggest that an uninsured driver is more likely to at least attempt to swerve whilst the insured driver may rely on that and not swerve quite so readily. It is possible then, however unlikely, that in certain circumstances a lack of insurance may actually save lives.
.
Altruistic behaviour is part of human nature, as an aside, it is an essential element in social species like ours. Authority discourages altruism because it wants us to rely on it for everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 11:41:16 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
If we expand your position, is it fair to say that if you can't afford or don't want medical insurance you shouldn't get sick, if you can't afford or don't want holiday insurance you shouldn't go on holiday or if you can't afford or don't want home insurance you shouldn't have a home? I should guess not.

No, it's not fair because the types of insurance you refer to don't directly affect other people. If I don't have home insurance then that presents no risk to anyone else but me and my family, but if I don't have car insurance then that could detrimentally affect someone else's wellbeing.

I like the idea that no car insurance would make us safer drivers. Indeed, instead of seatbelts, airbags, crush zones and myriad other innovations, perhaps the best thing to make us all safer drivers would be to have a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 12:18:28 PM
Home insurance should cover damage to your neighbours' homes should whatever evil besets your own cause collateral damage. If, when you fall off a donkey in Madrid, you land on the donkey wrangler and break his leg, your travel insurance should cover you for that. Can't really think of one for personal health insurance, so I'll give you that one.
.
It's all just a matter of scale - falling off a donkey is generally less hazardous than crashing a car - but they're essentially the same thing; risks we take. To make one form of insurance mandatory and the other not makes a nonsense of the whole thing - as if there are levels of personal responsibility beyond which you cannot be trusted and levels of personal freedom to which you are not allowed access.
.
The iron spike on the steering wheel does have a certain appeal - especially for those teenagers with supercharged sewing machines stuffed with speakers like sideboards and dangly things in all the windows. Unfortunately, they'll just have to learn from experience like the rest of us did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 November, 2014, 12:29:42 PM
Quote from: Banners on 13 November, 2014, 11:41:16 AM
[ perhaps the best thing to make us all safer drivers would be to have a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel.

That used to be part of my act.  If they really wanted to make cars safer, they'd build them out of bendy foam rubber with giant flashing lights on the top and limit the speed to twenty miles an hour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 12:35:10 PM
"Heh. It's funny because it's true," - Homer Simpson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2014, 03:07:59 PM
Something that always fascinated me about cars is that only a small percentage of the energy they produce is used to move the driver, something like 6-9 percent.  The environmental economics of that seems a bit shoddy when you consider how many cars there are, and how many people use them to go short distances.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2014, 04:02:11 PM
A prime symptom of mankind's current culture of waste and excess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2014, 04:05:15 PM
Or proof that Transformers are real and took over our planet a long time ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 06:23:08 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 13 November, 2014, 03:07:59 PM
Something that always fascinated me about cars is that only a small percentage of the energy they produce is used to move the driver, something like 6-9 percent.  The environmental economics of that seems a bit shoddy when you consider how many cars there are, and how many people use them to go short distances.

I guess you get to that number because cars are much heavier than people. It's also somewhat meaningless, the percentage of the energy produced to move bus and train drivers is much lower, and they don't even particularly want to go where they are driving to!

Cars are undoubtedly hugely wasteful, but the environmental damage is caused by the means of energy used to propel them. Electricity, produced in a sustainable manner, is the only form of vehicle fuel that has any sort of future on this planet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2014, 06:40:46 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 06:23:08 PMI guess you get to that number because cars are much heavier than people. It's also somewhat meaningless, the percentage of the energy produced to move bus and train drivers is much lower, and they don't even particularly want to go where they are driving to!

The same observation doesn't apply to public transport systems because the whole point of moving a bus isn't to transport a single occupant, it's to move the bus (and then people get on and off while it's going along its set route).  Thus buses/trains are far more efficient as a concept, even if they use more energy than a car does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 08:00:20 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 13 November, 2014, 06:40:46 PM
The same observation doesn't apply to public transport systems because the whole point of moving a bus isn't to transport a single occupant, it's to move the bus (and then people get on and off while it's going along its set route).  Thus buses/trains are far more efficient as a concept, even if they use more energy than a car does.

The observation isn't particularly meaningful in relation to cars, either, which was sort of my point.

Trains and buses are undoubtedly more energy efficient than cars, especially when horrifically overcrowded.

A public transport system that is reasonably-priced and reasonably-pleasant to utilise would be a fantastic benefit not just to the environment but to the UK in general. One of these days we should really give it a try.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 13 November, 2014, 08:14:49 PM
Apparently 90% of all transit in Hong Kong is done by public transit. Their 'octopus' cards are used for more than just transit. It can be used as currency in corner shops and restaurants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 November, 2014, 08:24:59 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 08:00:20 PM

A public transport system that is reasonably-priced and reasonably-pleasant to utilise would be a fantastic benefit not just to the environment but to the UK in general. One of these days we should really give it a try.

Well if we only let politicians claim against public transport for their traveling expenses, our public transport would be second to none within a month. It might even put them back in touch with the common man.

And pigs might fly..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2014, 08:31:45 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 08:00:20 PMThe observation isn't particularly meaningful in relation to cars, either, which was sort of my point.

Nonsense - now I have educated you, you know that Transformers are real.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 November, 2014, 09:38:26 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 13 November, 2014, 03:07:59 PM
Something that always fascinated me about cars is that only a small percentage of the energy they produce is used to move the driver, something like 6-9 percent.  The environmental economics of that seems a bit shoddy when you consider how many cars there are, and how many people use them to go short distances.

Similarly the amount of food that goes into producing a bit of meat. Cows are pretty inefficient food machines, they like to eat food to get energy for other things like moving about, keeping themselves warm, living in general etc.

It'd be much more sustainable to, I dunno, cut out the middle cow and grow fruit and veg for ourselves rather than for cattle. And ethical.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2014, 09:14:49 AM
Shark on about fake money, Tips on about vegetables, Prof Bear on about Transformers, Banners attempting reasoning - all we need now is someone to tell us we're on thin ice and it's the platonic ideal of a 2000ADOnline thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 November, 2014, 09:21:21 AM
Too much meta for this thread, Tordels.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2014, 10:18:36 AM
Watch it, Hawkie, you're on thin ice posting comments like that...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 November, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 November, 2014, 09:14:49 AM
all we need now is someone to tell us we're on thin ice and it's the platonic ideal of a 2000ADOnline thread.

But I haven't called anyone a [spoiler]cunt[/spoiler] yet...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 November, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
Is belief in government nothing more than a delusional and dangerous superstition?
.
Think about it. The believer in government looks around him and sees a world full of scheming, greedy, dangerous rogues all after getting one over on him and so believes that handing a subset of these self same  people - usually the *most* scheming, greedy, dangerous rogues of all - ultimate power over everyone in the hope that the responsibility of holding such immense power will influence them to do the right thing is actually a perfectly logical system to have blind faith in.
.
It makes no more sense than carrying around a rabbit's foot, avoiding the cracks in the pavement or praying to an invisible man who lives in the clouds.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 November, 2014, 08:31:11 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 13 November, 2014, 08:24:59 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 November, 2014, 08:00:20 PM

A public transport system that is reasonably-priced and reasonably-pleasant to utilise would be a fantastic benefit not just to the environment but to the UK in general. One of these days we should really give it a try.

Well if we only let politicians claim against public transport for their traveling expenses, our public transport would be second to none within a month. It might even put them back in touch with the common man.

And pigs might fly..
I misread this as saying that politician's werent allowed to claim against public transport... however I realise now that it means "let politician's only claim", and ruled out all the lovely black cab hire, then we'd have a better system. Very possible... make sure you ruled out the first class trains though, they may not move anywhere but those carriages are never overcrowded. Or even generally, occupied at all. Almost like some of them could be better used.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 11:16:09 AM
As nobody took me up on my last post about the basic insanity of believing in authority and/or government (which means I win...), I thought I'd present another argument in the same vein.
.
As a law-abiding human being, you have no right to smash your way into your neighbour's house, physically drag him outside, tie him up, kidnap him for 26 hours, prevent him from re-entering his home and then throw all his possessions away. If you tried it, you'd get locked up - yet this is precisely what "authority" did to me.
.
So, if you don't have the right to do these things, how can you bestow that right on other people? How can you pass on something that you do not possess?
.
You might say that the right to break the law is bestowed on the "government" by the collective will of the masses - but none of the individuals that comprise those masses have that right either. Not one of us, not even Lizzie Windsor or Dave Campmoron, have that right to bestow on anyone - so even if fifty million people support the "government" they still lack the ability to pass on the right to break the law - even though "authority" claims your support gives it precisely that right.
.
If you want something, you must ask - if "authority" wants something, it demands. Authority never asks, it always demands and, if you refuse, then you risk state-instigated immoral violence against you and/or your property.
.
From this perspective, the only thing "authority" and "government" contribute to society is legalised immoral violence - that's the One Thing government can do that you cannot.
.
Still a believer in "authority" and "government"? If so, why?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 November, 2014, 11:28:53 AM
A state's power has always derived from a rich cabal's monopoly on the use of violence, Sharky.  That doesn't change just because you live in the 21st century/the UK.  It's how we - and by extension the societies we create - are wired.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 11:33:42 AM
Yes, I agree - but my question was if you believed in this system. If so, why - and if not, why put up with it?
.
Addendum - I don't accept the notion that humans are "hard-wired" for violence. If that was the case then there'd be people scrapping on every street corner 24/7 and I, personally, have seen very, very few fights in my time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 November, 2014, 02:05:51 PM
I don't have to believe in it, it exists already.

You are very lucky to live somewhere where people are whipped and take it laying down, Sharky.  Where I live, people are scrappy bastards and it isn't always a good thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 02:27:22 PM
Okay, so it exists.
.
Is its existence a good thing or a bad thing? Is it acceptable that "authority" claims to have more powers and rights than those who support it?
.
If "authority" can steal all my possessions with impunity, does that make it right for "authority" to torture or kill me? Does it not worry you that "authority" makes its own rules up as it goes along and uses you as an excuse to legitimise its own criminality?
.
Does "authority" bring anything to society except legalised immoral violence?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 17 November, 2014, 02:40:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 02:27:22 PM
Okay, so it exists.

Does "authority" bring anything to society except legalised immoral violence?

Yes, it does. 'Authority' also encourages being a slave to 'Corporate Agenda' at the same time as promoting 'Greed is Good' and disdain for our fellow Humans.

I'm up for getting rid of the lot of 'em, but in the absence of a Political ideal that everyone agrees on or benefits from - well, we're Fucked.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 03:11:38 PM
Why do we need political ideals that everyone agrees with? We don't even have that now. There is nothing that "government" does that can't be done by other means.
.
Each and every one of us is capable of governing ourselves within the law - isn't that a good enough reason to simply stop believing? Fighting them isn't the answer - the best way is to simply ignore them and live the way you think is right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 November, 2014, 03:13:21 PM
I consider myself a reasonable man, but I know if I ran this third world shithole I would most certainly crush all opposition without mercy or compassion and there would be blood on the streets.
For your own good, you understand.

Quote from: NapalmKev on 17 November, 2014, 02:40:50 PMI'm up for getting rid of the lot of 'em, but in the absence of a Political ideal that everyone agrees on or benefits from - well, we're Fucked.

Cheers

The brilliance of the beige conspiracy is that there's no organised opposition, merely other rich white folks to choose from, because they're the only ones who can afford to join the political class.
One thing I've never been able to get my head around is the fact that there's never ever been an organised campaign to get MPs on the minimum wage or to to scrap their expenses, seeing as they're all rich cunts anyway (even Nigel "I'm not a racist, I just have racist views and front a racist party supported by racists" Farage is a toffee-nosed cunt for all his salt of the earth posturing) or have to join rich parties to get into parliament.  There's a couple of (closed) petitions on Change.org from years ago with about 900 signatories or something like that, which just disappoints me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2014, 03:44:26 PM
You can't tell "authority" what to do, so petitions are largely pointless. "Authority", on the other hand, tells us what to do all the time; and it don' need no steenkin' petition to do it, neither.
.
Even arguing about how much we should be paying these tyrants is recognising that they're doing a job of worth for society - which they ain't. "Authority" is inherently destructive, so why even discuss keeping it on the payroll?
.
You want to pay the Prime Minister? Why not pay him by the peace - so much for every day this country isn't at war, perhaps. Pay the Health Minister for the number of lives saved, the Sport Minister for the number of international trophies we win and pay the Chancellor of the Exchequer a fortune to just stay the fuck at home and stop pissing about with the economy.
.
But don't pay them just because they demand it. If we were so consistently piss-poor at our jobs and posed a danger to society because of that, how far do you think we'd get demanding to be paid?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2014, 04:58:46 PM
What can it hurt to try, Sharky?
When the Men In Grey rely upon us being disparate voices without unifying causes*, petitions are another way to centralise public feeling and sometimes they are even successful in their stated aims.  Mainly, though, it takes about ten seconds to sign one, and those ten seconds might be pretty much the only way some people will ever make any kind of political statement.  The alternative is to do actual and quantifiably nothing at all when it was a petition of less than 200,000 signatures that got rid of Maria Miller when she clearly had no intention of going anywhere.

In other news, the Tories surprise everyone yet again by actually finding ways to sink lower. (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/18/panic-room-woman-challenges-bedroom-tax)  In this case, though, I'm willing to give IDS the benefit of the doubt - I genuinely think he just heard the words "rape survivor" and instinctively went on the defensive before he realised it wasn't a bunch of kids who'd been raped by MPs trying to circumvent a superinjunction.  But hey, on the bright side he's saved the taxpayer £11.65.





* The Irish government didn't count on water taxes unifying opposition and public disquiet and now they're all but admitting that they're fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 05:17:14 PM
Petitions are like asking the Master for something and, no matter how sensible or moral the request might be, agreeing to abide by the Master's decision. The very act of signing a petition legitimises the myth that there are people above us who are our Masters - people whom we must beg for grace and favours.
.
If one must petition the government for a just and moral thing to be done, what does that say about the justice and morality inherent in government? It says that government sees itself as the arbiter and enforcer of morality and justice based on the opinions and interests of a handful of flawed rulers. It is like petitioning the local Mafia godfather to please not have his enforcers go around enforcing on a Sunday.
.
Petitions, then, rather than being a tool of freedom are actually a symptom of oppression, creating the illusion of freedom whilst still relying upon the grace and favour of the ruling class. "Please, Sir, can I have some more?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 19 November, 2014, 05:32:32 PM
That doesn't reflect the tone of any petitions I've ever read directed towards the government. Even less so some of the comments.

Those are more like a list of thousands of people telling them how crap and thick they are and how they should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, even though we all know that's impossible for them because putrescent lizard creatures don't experience any human emotions, or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 05:59:04 PM
The tone of the petition doesn't matter - nor does its content. A lighthearted petition to free a political prisoner and a vitriolic petition to ensure that the sun continues to rise every morning are equally ludicrous.
.
If authority wants to release the prisoner it will and if it doesn't it won't and if it wants to investigate keeping sunrises happening it will and if it doesn't it won't.
.
If you want the political prisoner released and you can get enough private support, and if your own conscience tells you that the cause is just, why not spring the political prisoner yourselves? If you are convinced that it is morally wrong for the prisoner to be held, how can it be morally right for you to depend on the immorality of the jailers to decide the prisoner's fate by asking the jailer to reconsider the decision?
.
If you want to investigate ways of ensuring continued sunrises - then get yourself an astrolabe and some notepads and pens and go for it.
.
Comments are just like slave gossip. Luckily, we live on a plantation that allows a certain level of gossip and grumbling - within reason. Mostly, they like you to gossip and grumble about irrelevant things like Corrie, X-Factor, celebrity bonk-a-thons, crackpot theories about shape-shifting lizards and politics. While the slaves are grumbling and gossiping about all that bullshit, they're not thinking about the most important questions, to whit - who are these Masters and just what makes them Masters over me, my life and my destiny anyway?
.
Petitions are a symptom of oppression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2014, 07:09:08 PM
Accepting and propagating the idea that people should make no effort at all because it's pointless so why bother even entertaining the notion that their opinion matters is also a symptom of oppression.

A petition, if nothing else, can be the first step in something larger - the person who signs a petition might one day think maybe it's time to up their game to attending an Occupy protest, and later they might end up sending letterbombs or go on a shooting spree on Wall Street, but none of that can happen without first daring to believe that their voice deserves to be heard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 07:43:41 PM
Heard by whom? There's still that unspoken assumption that you deserve to be heard by the Master so that he can decide whether what you're asking for is allowed or not.
.
Doing nothing can be a powerful tool. Doing nothing about a tax demand, doing nothing about voting, doing nothing to help raise campaign funds - doing nothing is often as valid a strategy as doing something. But, as with everything in life, the trick is knowing which one to do, or not do, and when. Suppose they held an election and nobody voted?
.
And, to be frank, nobody's voice "deserves" to be heard. One has the right to speak but nobody is obliged to listen. To say to government "I deserve this" is no different than the junior school pupil asking permission to go to the toilet - the teacher then decides whether you deserve to go or not. In a free society, if you want a piss you just go. If you want to speak, speak. If what you're saying interests people then they'll listen, if it doesn't then they won't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 November, 2014, 07:57:42 PM
Here's a 'for instance'...

I decide to go to 10 Downing Street to 'Have a word' with Dangerous Dave and his cronies. Ultimately it ends in a Bloodbath as I AK-my-way to the door. Now I don't have 'the Right' to do this, but I am 'FREE' to at least attempt it as I govern my own destiny.

People are Free to do whatever they want, but something needs to keep that 'in check' otherwise we'd have wiped each other out years ago.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2014, 08:13:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 07:43:41 PMDoing nothing can be a powerful tool.

The last petition I signed was to give cancer drugs to people in Wales.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 08:31:11 PM
The thing that keeps us "in check" is our own personal morality. Sure, there will always be lunatics who think that AKing their way to freedom is acceptable behaviour and it makes no difference to that heed-th-bau whether there's a government or not.
.
And still you assume that it is authority that needs to change - either via persuasion or coercion - and not you.
.
Your argument seems to be that, without an authority to tell everyone what to do and how to behave, human beings are intrinsically too savage and stupid to be trusted with running their own lives - you'd rather the ruling class Forced Everyone to live in ways which you find acceptable and to punish those who want to live in different ways than let people decide for themselves.
.
I find the idea that removing authority would automatically lead to complete and terminal anarchy. Well, newsflash - there is only ever anarchy and chaos, you deal with it every day. When you drive, you drive on the left and follow the rules of the road - not because authority tells you to but because you don't want to get maimed or killed. You pay the man in the shop for your comic not because authority tells you to but because you think it's proper to do so. When walking on a busy pavement you don't dodge around and negotiate paths with other pedestrians because authority tells you to, you do it because you don't want to go falling over people and spilling your shopping.
.
There are billions of human interactions every day that have no earthly need for government interference or authoritarian control, so this crackpot idea that government is necessary for peace and civilization really has had its day.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 08:41:45 PM
And you think that a system of government that has to be petitioned/begged to provide life saving medicine to the sick of Wales (or anywhere within its claimed jurisdiction) is a legitimate and moral entity worthy of your continued support? Seriously?
.
If you feel that strongly about it, buy the drugs yourself and take them to Wales. Don't just sign a petition and hope that other people are going to fix this for you because they aren't - not unless they can figure out a way to profit from it, anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2014, 09:08:06 PM
Well the petition has a comments section if you want to say all that:  https://www.change.org/p/give-all-cancer-patients-in-wales-access-to-a-cancer-drugs-fund

EDIT TO ADD: if anyone reading the thread for potential car-crash hilarity is considering signing that petition, please feel free to do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 November, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2014, 08:31:11 PM

Your argument seems to be that,without an authority to tell everyone what to do and how to behave, human beings are intrinsically too savage and stupid to be trusted with running their own lives - you'd rather the ruling class Forced Everyone to live in ways which you find acceptable and to punish those who want to live in different ways than let people decide for themselves.
.

I think you assume a Lot about other People, Shark!

Accusations of Facism aside; you think that People are intrinsically "Good" and Altruistic, but in many parts of the World that simply isn't the case; Irrespective of Goverment Involvement.

Cannibals-Exercising there "Right" to Freedom in the name of Eating each other!

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 November, 2014, 11:24:27 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 19 November, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
Cannibals-Exercising there "Right" to Freedom in the name of Eating each other!

Vast majority of cannibalism is ritual in nature, and occurs as a by-product of conflict killing or funerary ritual, or in starvation situations.  Very rarely are people killed specifically to be eaten, far more common is eating those who are already dead for other reasons - which aside from the infection risk never struck me as quite the nadir of human depravity that it's made out to be.  Vanishingly rare Damheresque psychopaths excepted. 

Using cannibalism as part of a 'look what humans get up to when Mummy isn't watching them!' argument is dangerously close to the imperialist narrative of base savages in need of subjugation by their betters to save them from themselves.  I'd find a less loaded analogy to support your (not unreasonable) argument if I were you.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 20 November, 2014, 12:17:31 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 November, 2014, 11:24:27 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 19 November, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
Cannibals-Exercising there "Right" to Freedom in the name of Eating each other!
Using cannibalism as part of a 'look what humans get up to when Mummy isn't watching them!' argument is dangerously close to the imperialist narrative of base savages in need of subjugation by their betters to save them from themselves.  I'd find a less loaded analogy to support your (not unreasonable) argument if I were you.

You're absolutely right, and I really shouldn't post while drunk to be quite honest!

I'll try again at the risk of making myself look a bigger fool than before.

People are not born with a hatred for each other (in as much as I've observed). But, some people will inherently err towards their own wellbeing over that of others even to the extent of causing pain/suffering just to ensure a comfortable existence for themselves.

People have always Warred over the right to exist whether there was Governing body or not, survival is hardwired. But, for some people "Survival" means Crushing anyone in your way just for the sake of a comfortable existence.

Cheers



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 04:58:17 AM
Some people are bad and selfish. Yes. Absolutely they are - and some people always will be. That has nothing to do with whether there's a government or not. In fact, it takes the involvement of governments for real nastiness to raise its ugly head.
.
The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Holocaust, Stalin's great purges, apartheid, too many massacres to count, world wars - each and every one of them caused by government.
.
I am more worried about our governments dragging me into a nuclear war than I am about getting cannibalised by my neighbours.
.
I think you'll find that the majority of people in the world are intrinsically "good" - it's in our nature as a social species to be so - no matter which part of the world they come from. Give some of those people guns and authority over their fellows and that's where the problems start (see the Stanford Prison Experiments). If you fell out of the sky, naked and injured, in any part of the world, I think that there's a much higher chance of the local people helping you rather than eating or just arbitrarily murdering you. If you fell out of the sky, naked and injured, into the hands of a government or authority, the chances of you being hurt rise dramatically.
.
So yes - there are bad people in the world who do bad things and most of them work for government where they can do the Most Harm. The bad people, being in "authority", pass legislations designed to help them and their fellows by stealing (taxing, fining, charging) from the majority of good people. Good people knuckle under, pay up and do as they're told - because good people obey the law irrespective of who wrote it or why. .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 07:43:32 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 04:58:17 AMIf you fell out of the sky, naked and injured, in any part of the world, I think that there's a much higher chance of the local people helping you rather than eating or just arbitrarily murdering you. If you fell out of the sky, naked and injured, into the hands of a government or authority, the chances of you being hurt rise dramatically.

Very interesting thought experiment that.  I can't quite weigh all the variables here, and while my instincts are to agree with you I do wonder.

And apologies to NapalmKev for my snitty remarks re: cannabilism.  It's one of my (many) hobby-horses, and I was in a belligerent mood. A quick episode of The Thick of It soon sorted me the f**k out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 08:44:55 AM
Well, I'm a human and I know lots of other humans and so I have a pretty good idea how humans think. If I, or the majority of people I know, happened upon somebody naked and injured then chances are that we'd help. And in the end it really isn't a question of what other people do (thinking that way is one of the reasons we're in this mess) but a question of what You do.
.
I am a firm believer in individual people and their ability to make rational and compassionate choices for themselves. This is not to say that individual people don't make mistakes or perform selfish and destructive acts, some people always will, but the damage a single person's mistakes or crimes can do are insignificant next to the damage done by the crimes and mistakes of authority.
.
On the other hand, the good done by individual people vastly outweighs any good done by authority. When was the last time authority helped someone change a flat tyre in the midnight rain? When was the last time authority gave someone who needed it a hug? When was the last time authority held a shop door open for someone? When was the last time authority set a broken bone?
.
Authority is like God - some mystical thing that lives above us in an invisible, unassailable realm of magic, whose Will is Law and whose Power is Absolute. The high priests of Authority live in the Great Temple at Westminster and decipher and enact the Will of Authority on our behalf because the rest of us peasants couldn't possibly understand the will and wisdom of the Great Authority God, nor are any of us permitted to wield its power. If we want something (to drive, to live in a house, to travel abroad, to work, to not work, to marry, to fish, to open a business, etc., etc., etc.) then we must pray to the Authority God, and sacrifice a portion of our wealth to its priests, and hope that our prayers are answered.
.
Anyway, back to our naked injured guy. Let's make the morality of it a little more clear cut: The naked injured guy has been found at the side of a remote road near a remote village at night in a blizzard by a local farmer who bundled him into the back of his tractor and took him to the local nurse's house because the 'phones are all out. When the guy comes around he's perfectly pleasant, thankful and no trouble at all. At some point you'll ask him who he is and what happened to him and he says, "I don't want to tell you that. I don't want to talk about it." You might think that's odd or frustrating or just rude but, so long as he acts in a decent manner, you don't mind helping him out for a couple of days until he gets back on his feet and moves on, never to be seen or heard from again.
.
Imagine, now, the same injured naked guy picked up by Authority. He'd probably still be rescued from the snow, put into an ambulance and whisked off to hospital. When he recovers he's the same decent guy but, when the police ask the same questions and receive the same reply, the wheels come off. This is because Authority does not ask questions, Authority demands answers. If those answers are not forthcoming, Authority will try to trick, bully or torture them out. Our mystery injured guy, if he wishes to maintain his right to personal privacy, is apt to find himself forcibly incarcerated for "obstructing a police investigation" or some other such nonsense.
.
People good, authority bad. Just ask E.T.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 09:10:13 AM
I'm definitely not denying the altruism of the average person, and I think we've all experienced (milder) examples of the scenarios you describe and can attest to their inherent truth. 

However, I wonder if what you're looking at is the different roles individuals and 'authorities' play, and at the same time playing down the fact that authority is of necessity made up of individuals, who do the hugging and the door-opening separate and in addition to their authority roles.  In the naked stranger scenario, where do the nurse and hospital and the tractor come from?  Who is providing technical education and regulating medical training, how is the tractor manufactured and fueled, how are all these fruits of the modern world achieved without some form of organising framework, and how does that framework operate without some form of authority?  Certainly the whole scenario depends on the decent farmer and the committed nurse, but there are other equally important elements there too which are difficult to explain without another level of organisaton.

Incidentally, in the E.T. analogy our man is already sick and dying because of his too-long separation from his spacefaring collective.  The US authorities really do nothing to exacerbate the situation, and are actively if fruitlessly trying to save both Elliot and E.T., and learn what they can about an alien lifeform, which is at worst a different type of good.  It's really only the kids' perception of the interference of the adult world that makes them seem like baddies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 10:16:17 AM
Excellent questions.
.
The tractor comes from a factory, the nurse was trained at a school. The tractor factory and the school were all manned by individual people co-operating willingly towards a mutual goal - useful tractors and competent nurses.
.
Authority knows nothing about manufacturing tractors or training nurses but, to each of these endeavours, it brings only two things - orders (legislation, curriculum, policies) and violence.
.
Consider Authority's role in financing these two endeavours. Authority, through taxes and licensing, offers both the factory and the school grants so long as they meet certain legislative standards. Both factory and school need these grants to survive and are glad of them. What neither factory owner nor head teacher want to face is the fact that their grant money is stolen money which has been conned, cheated or just plain stolen (in some areas even at gunpoint) out of the 'electorate'.
.
There are many ways to fund factories and schools that don't rely on extortion and many ways to regulate businesses that don't rely on force.
.
For example, let's say that the factory owner decided that he wasn't going to pay for mandatory government safety inspections any more but instead agreed to show anyone who was interested around the factory - customers, prospective employees and their families, journalists - anyone and everyone is invited to see how safe and healthy his factory is, anyone and everyone invited to make observations or suggestions.
.
The nursing school might do the same thing and hospital administrators from across the land, or their paid researchers, will be allowed access to inspect the school, its syllabus and staff for themselves without relying on the opinion of some government bureaucrat who knows nothing about either tractors or nursing and charges money for their approval.
.
If you don't like the way the factory is run, buy another brand of tractor and if you don't like the way the nursing school is run, recruit your carers from somewhere else.
.
I think that would be a much better system anyway. Imagine, for instance, that no restaurant had a government hygiene certificate but that the best ones allowed their customers to inspect the kitchens for themselves if they so desired. The customer makes up their own mind whether the restaurant is acceptable or not.
.
So the existence of the tractor and the nurse in this example are not dependent on authority. Authority brought nothing to the production of either except immoral violence (tax collecting, protectionism). In fact, if it wasn't for the interference of authority the tractor would probably be of a higher quality and the nurse would probably be a doctor.
.
It is people - vast interconnected networks of people - all working together for their own interests and yet conscious and (usually) respectful of the interests of others that get things done. Financiers, inventors, artists, builders, healers, entrepreneurs, destroyers, recyclers, producers, manufacturers, procurers - countless people with innumerable skills working in chaotic anarchy to get things done. Billions of people get fed, watered and clothed every day with absolutely no need for authority's interference. It really is a marvel, when you think about it.
.
Authority provides nothing of benefit to this roiling matrix of invention and production but instead seeks to milk it for all its worth - until the whole glorious mess becomes weak, anaemic and impotent.
.
Due to its misplaced belief in the superstition of authority, humanity has been driving along with the handbrake on for quite some time now. It's time we released the authority and banged it up a gear.
.
P.S.  I've only ever seen E.T. once, when it first came out, hated it and never saw it again. I therefore withdraw my E.T. observation as I am talking 'round my hat on that one, obviously based upon my imperfect memory of something I didn't enjoy. Sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 November, 2014, 10:34:38 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 10:16:17 AM
The unqualified customer has no idea whether the restaurant is acceptable or not unless it's visibly filthy or has rodents running round the kitchen, so contracts botulism and dies.

FTFY.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 November, 2014, 10:48:06 AM
Or the customer could look on their local council website where the inspection reports for every hotel and restaurant kitchen will be available to read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 10:50:48 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 November, 2014, 10:34:38 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 10:16:17 AM
The unqualified customer has no idea whether the restaurant is acceptable or not unless it's visibly filthy or has rodents running round the kitchen, so contracts botulism and dies.

FTFY.

Hmmm.  This I suppose is the nub of it for me.  I find it hard to accept that we'd have made the same advances in evidential medicine and disease control through vaccination, hygiene and sanitation, workplace HS&W, transport safety, water and air quality without some form of authority snooping on and scowling at us: the free market (or individual actors, if you prefer) just isn't equipped or motivated to make the kind of sustained expert studies, interventions and troublesome restrictions that enable these kinds of successes.  I'm not saying that authority can't be vested at a local level, that communities of individuals shouldn't be free to define their own methods and schemes, but there is definitely a benefit to scale and consistency that seems to be demonstrated by the progress in these non-trivial areas that has taken place in tandem with the development of (styles of) authority in human societies.

What TLS is describes in the self-serving, wasteful, dehumanising parasitic nature of authority is a real thing too, but I suspect that it's more analagous to the energy lost to disordered heat in any system through friction, a consequence that is independent of the mechanism and more of a rule of (human) nature.  That isn't to say that the mechanisms of authority can't or shouldn't be made far, far better and more efficient, through radical, restructuring just as any mechanism can be improved or rethought, just that there may be an inherent limit to how efficient it can be - but the existence of that limit shouldn't prevent us pushing against it. 

EDIT: Just realised that my studenty rambling seems to trivialise Sharky's ongoing appalling experiences with authority as mere corollaries of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. That's not what I meant to do - obviously these sorts of unfair situations are legitimate grounds to question the entire system that produces them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 10:51:52 AM
There is an inherent risk in almost everything, Jim. Rats pay no attention to certificates and neither does botulism. I'm sure Tesco, Sainsbury's and Asda all have valid authoritarian certificates hanging out of every orifice but that doesn't stop customers occasionally slipping in the aisles, getting run over on the car park or finding a scorpion in their bananas.
.
A lack of authority does not automatically mean a drop in standards. For instance, in the restaurant analogy there's nothing to stop you from voluntarily paying for membership of a professional hygiene inspection company to carry out the inspections you require. There's nothing to stop your local council from issuing hygiene certificates that you can believe in. The only difference is that everyone has a choice and nobody gets punished by authority for saying no.
.
Then, if you don't want to visit a place that a body you trust doesn't approve of, then don't go. Those places which remain unapproved will either survive because they meet the standards and get a good reputation anyway or they'll go under because they fail to meet standards and get a bad reputation. Would you rather eat in an establishment where the people who run it Want the place to be hygienic or an establishment where the people who run it must be told to be hygienic?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 11:24:17 AM
I think there's a misunderstanding here.
.
I am not against organization. Organization is good and necessary thing - you can't build a house, dig a ditch or span a river without some level of organization. The human ability to organize is one of our greatest strengths and has allowed us to build pyramids, put men on the moon, unlock the secrets of the atom and fuck up almost an entire planet. Organization is the key to our future.
.
It is "authority" I am against - that evil entity that strives to force A Particular Kind of Organization on Everyone, whether they agree with it or not, under pain of imprisonment, torture or even death.
.
To get rid of authority is not to get rid of organization. We can still have a Highways Agency to look after the roads, still have a Health and Safety Executive to provide advice And Help, still have an NHS, still have brass band practice down the Church Hall on a Wednesday night (weather permitting).
.
The only difference is that there will be no ruling class imposing their will on these things and no blanket criminalization of anyone who doesn't automatically comply.
.
Sure, it would be a pain in the arse and mean a lot more thought and responsibility would be required of us all - but we can do it. When we get rid of authority we'll have much more time anyway because we won't be working every hour God sends just to maintain their banking fraud. When we have to start thinking about solving problems for ourselves instead of relying on the self-serving interests of a gang of well-dressed thugs being imposed upon us, the world will explode with creativity.
.
I might not know how to organize a fire station without authority but there are plenty of people out there who do. Instead of trusting in one authority to run everything, putting all our eggs in one basket, why not let the myriad organizations we already have symbiotically in place run themselves? We can still keep an eye on them - probably even moreso as their government protectors will be gone. And we have one massive advantage that no other civilization in human history (so far as we know) has had before. A way to bring everything together without homogenising or exerting blind authority over any of it.
.
The internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 November, 2014, 11:51:21 AM
The beauty of your plan seems to rest on everyone being really into seeds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 11:55:26 AM
We plant them, nature grows them...
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 November, 2014, 12:17:55 PM
The internet splits focus.  Everyone is angry at something, but they're not angry at the same thing.
The internet and social media are a blessing for authority, who want us distracted rather than organised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 12:23:58 PM
I blame people who post funny cat images.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 November, 2014, 12:33:57 PM
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/785373a842803ff8a1d066f67895d991/tumblr_nbsxm3ohEN1tj7snro2_400.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 12:49:01 PM
Worse. Than. Hitler.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 November, 2014, 12:52:54 PM
Just so you know, that gif was both an example and a reaction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2014, 01:23:24 PM
Why do my mass debates always end with pussies?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 20 November, 2014, 02:12:42 PM
A common complaint of Hugh Hefner's, or so I've been told. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 20 November, 2014, 06:16:20 PM
I don't think hugh has a shortage of them so has no need to mass debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 November, 2014, 06:19:44 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 20 November, 2014, 06:16:20 PM
I don't think hugh has a shortage of them so has no need to mass debate.

Supoib. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 November, 2014, 03:25:16 PM
 :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 November, 2014, 03:26:52 PM
Drone Attack! (http://theconversation.com/mystery-drones-are-buzzing-around-french-nuclear-plants-should-we-be-worried-34447?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The+Weekend+Conversation+-+2114&utm_content=The+Weekend+Conversation+-+2114+CID_ba21b80b64da3e66a6ed6c48f0707f6e&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Mystery%20drones%20are%20buzzing%20around%20French%20nuclear%20plants%20%20should%20we%20be%20worried)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2014, 03:36:33 PM
Maybe it's power plant workers getting deliveries from Amazon.
.
I guess the next thing will be to imply that this is the work of Russia or ISIS, just to keep us afraid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2014, 03:53:26 PM
Hey, what's the problem?  After all, if you've nothing to hide, why do you need privacy?  Huh?  Huh?

If I ever get any dosh, I am so getting myself a drone.  Pestering the cats when they're out and about alone would be worth it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2014, 04:14:53 AM
Is the US just one big Alan Moore story?
.
m.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-30105412
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 November, 2014, 01:33:47 PM
Good to see our cousins in the ROI have rediscovered their heart and told the shysters to stick their f**king water levy and proposed TV levy where the sun dont shine....makes me proud to be Irish. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2014, 01:55:06 PM
A step in the right direction indeed.
.
Don't be proud to be Irish, though - or English, Scottish, Welsh, American, Polish, Russian, French, German or Chinese or anything. The imaginary lines on a map within the bounds of which you happen to have been born are just one aspect of you as a whole.
.
Be proud instead to be a free human being of infinite worth and potential - part of a family seven billion strong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 November, 2014, 02:23:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2014, 01:55:06 PM
Be proud instead to be a free human being of infinite worth and potential - part of a family seven billion strong.


Dow we have to try that hard?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 November, 2014, 02:30:01 PM
Nope. It's up to you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 November, 2014, 12:29:48 PM
Darren Wilson has been aquited for the murde of Mike Brown. Their is no justice in the world when a young unarmed man can be gunned down because the police don't like how he looks. Fuck the american police system and it's white supremacy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2014, 12:50:51 PM
I'm sure being black doesn't help your chances against a notoriously right-wing and brutal police force who have been proven racist liars many times over by the press in the last few months, but Brown wasn't killed because of how he looked, he was killed because he didn't obey.  That cop would have murdered killed a white kid if he'd done the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 25 November, 2014, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 25 November, 2014, 12:50:51 PM
...but Brown wasn't killed because of how he looked, he was killed because he didn't obey.  That cop would have murdered killed a white kid if he'd done the same.

Maybe, maybe not.  We've only got said trigger-happy coward's word on that.  And the fact is that a black person in the US is far more likely to be in that situation in the first place, i.e. obey or face summary execution, than a white person.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 25 November, 2014, 02:05:40 PM
Darren Wilson wasn't acquitted. He wasn't even indicted. They decided there wasn't even a chargeable offence to begin with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 November, 2014, 02:27:44 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 25 November, 2014, 02:05:40 PM
Darren Wilson wasn't acquitted. He wasn't even indicted. They decided there wasn't even a chargeable offence to begin with.
That is correct. Sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2014, 03:21:13 PM
When the prosecutor highlights inaccuracies in the witness testimonies but not in the testimony of Wilson, I think it's safe to say the fix is in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 November, 2014, 03:46:20 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/cleveland-police-shooting-boy-with-fake-gun-dies-after-being-shot-by-ohio-officer-9878700.html


QuoteA 12-year-old boy has been shot dead by police in the US as he played with a fake gun in a park.

Tamir Rice, who was black, died of his wounds yesterday in hospital after being shot twice in Cleveland, Ohio, on Saturday.

A member of the public had phoned police saying people in the playground were scared by someone brandishing what looked like a gun.

In a recording released by officials, the caller can be heard saying: "There's a guy with a pistol...you know, it's probably fake but he's pointing it at everybody.

"I don't know if it's real or not."

The 911 responder twice asked whether the boy was black or white before dispatching officers.

When police arrived at the Cudell Recreation Center park, they told Tamir to raise his hands, deputy police chief Ed Tomba said.

When he allegedly took the replica gun from his waistband, an officer fired twice despite the fact the suspected weapon was not pointed at them and no threats were made.

The SJS wouldn't stand for this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 25 November, 2014, 03:55:41 PM
At this point, I wouldn't point my finger and go pew-pew in the US.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2014, 04:15:32 PM
That's kind of what 12 year old boys do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2014, 04:35:24 AM
Devil's advocate time.
.
Let's say you want to increase the powers and equipment available to your police forces in order to tighten your grip on the country you control - how best to do that? The best way is to manipulate the people you want to control into *demanding* that you control them.
.
So you take a fatal police shooting - preferably involving a white officer and black victim (and note how these "racial killings" rarely involve Asians or Arabs, for example) - that has some ambiguity to it and then just let the media sensationalise it. Anger is stirred up amongst the people you want to control and, possibly with the aid of a few agents provocateur to kick-off the arson and looting, eventually you'll get some nice scary footage of a normal town looking like a war zone for rolling news. The people, through fear, demand protection and the velvet tyrant is only too happy to oblige with more and better armed stormcoppers.
.
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-evidence-supports-officers-account-of-shooting-in-ferguson/2014/10/22/cf38c7b4-5964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html
.
Rioting is precisely what our would-be tyrants want - like a police officer pushing for a fight so you can be arrested - they're winding us up, hoping we'll hit back hard enough (and spectacularly enough) to justify tightening their grip.
.
Morally, shouldn't the American people be protesting *every* police killing irrespective of the race of the victim? But no - just (or mainly) sensationalising the victims who happen to be from a certain race actually exacerbates racism and reinforces societal fractures. Divide and rule.
.
Oldest trick in the book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 November, 2014, 11:36:35 AM
QuoteMorally, shouldn't the American people be protesting *every* police killing irrespective of the race of the victim? But no - just (or mainly) sensationalising the victims who happen to be from a certain race actually exacerbates racism and reinforces societal fractures. Divide and rule

15% of the population but 1 in 3 'arrest-related deaths' are black. At a bare minimum; as I think has been previously mentioned on this thread, official statistics for police shootings are extremely unreliable in the states at every level of law enforcement. I recall particularly there is an absence of data on unlawful/unjustified shootings. And add to that most of the figures are second-hand as what data is kept by the US agencies is not particularly open to the public from all accounts. And never mind the cases like Zimmerman/Williams....

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-killed-police/19423


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/25/the-14-teens-killed-by-cops-since-michael-brown.html Is also interesting, if very sad reading.

My general impression is that a conscious attempt to foster these divisions and 'tighten your grip' is unnecessary at this point, it's all self-sustaining.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2014, 12:11:18 PM
Maybe you're right, I don't know, but the more people riot, the more weapons the police get, and the more weapons the police get, the more victims get shot, and the more victims get shot, the more people riot, and the more people riot, the more weapons the police get...
.
Authority can never have enough control and will always strive for more. It's very tempting to pour petrol everywhere when you're the one selling fire extinguishers, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 03:42:08 PM
Call me old-fashioned if you will, but I am always far more worried when people don't riot when the state murders its citizens.

I fully support rioting - it's more than just a time when you can upgrade to a better television, it's a great pressure valve.  I mean, plenty of governments manage to see out their time in office without a riot, so if one blows up on your watch, probably best to let them get it out of their system or you end up with spree shooters or domestic terrorists.  Probably.  I don't know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 November, 2014, 04:42:18 PM
Donno AA. Legitimate mass protest definitely....riots, you and I and probably a lot of others (after the riots in England) know what riot is and it aint nice. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2014, 04:53:26 PM
Yeah, I'd never say don't riot because it's a perfectly legitimate response to unchecked authority - but I think it must be a last resort because it so easily strengthens the velvet tyrant's hand. We have to be smarter than that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 November, 2014, 04:59:58 PM
Are these the riots that attack Parliment, Downing Street, Constituency offices, Police Stations, etc... Or are they the ones that smash up & loot shops and burn lots of cars!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 November, 2014, 05:03:13 PM
The very problem with riot is there is no focus or control. It is indiscriminate and truely frightening; it is for the want of a better word riot. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 06:41:53 PM
Either the use of violence against our fellows and their property is wrong or it isn't.  If it's wrong to use violence, then cops shouldn't be murdering citizens, and if it's okay to use violence, then rioters are just using what they've been taught by the state to be an acceptable method of pursuing a desired result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2014, 07:06:40 PM
I know it's an old complaint, but riots attract the sort of people you don't want on your side, and repel those that you do.  Although they are good for getting your complaint on the news, they allow authority to equate legitimate popular opposition with unthinking aggression. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 07:36:19 PM
Another way to look at it is that appearing to have the moral high ground doesn't help you much when they drag you from your home and lynch you from the nearest lamp post.  I have high hopes that water protests in Ireland will soon help illustrate this point for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2014, 08:19:00 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 26 November, 2014, 07:36:19 PMI have high hopes that water protests in Ireland will soon help illustrate this point for me.

Speaking as someone who has been mistaken for an Irish Water worker* and rather unpleasantly if verbally abused on several occasions, and whose work compound was burnt to the ground after one of the early water protest marches, I rather hope not.   That aside, I think it's the very fact that protests have been so peaceful that has allowed them to grow to the size they've achieved, and to a large extent made the state/media's criticism of them seem so pathetic - I don't condone my neighbours fecking a water balloon at an Tanaiste, but making it sound like it she was equivalent to being tarred and feathered and airlifted from her burning APC by Seal Team Six makes even the most right-wing Irish person laugh.  It'd be a very different story if someone had put in her windows or torched her car.  I'll always be more of a fan

All that said, our protests are about how the state gathers and wastes spends our money, not unpunished racist murders by the police.  I might have a different view were that the case.


*Anyone looking into a hole is suspect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 November, 2014, 08:54:51 PM
Rioting simply invalidates whatever point you were trying to make. When riots broke out in the UK following the death of Mark Duggan the public mood quickly changed from "why are the police executing drug-dealers?" to "why won't the police stop these bastards looting Sportsdirect?"

Peaceful protest is far more effective.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2014, 09:03:42 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 November, 2014, 08:54:51 PM
Peaceful protest is far more effective.

Except that when a million people march on Westminster to demand that there is no war on Iraq, the government takes no notice. The fall-out of the Poll Tax riots, by contrast, was the end of the Poll Tax and the removal of Thatcher from No 10.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 09:06:38 PM
I think you will find, Jim, that history records that The Poll Tax Peaceful Sit-Ins was what broke Thatcher's hold.

Quote from: TordelBack on 26 November, 2014, 08:19:00 PM
making it sound like it she was equivalent to being tarred and feathered and airlifted from her burning APC by Seal Team Six makes even the most right-wing Irish person laugh.

You are very lucky to know such people, TB, as I have personally never come across anyone in the political classes who had enough self-awareness or shame to care about looking foolish when they cry about being the victim in the equation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 November, 2014, 09:09:39 PM
I'm too young to remember the poll tax riots, although I heard Richard II came out of them quite well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 November, 2014, 09:17:17 PM
Hear hear. We had civil rights marches in NI in the late 60's and early 70's (in which my parents and countless others participated). It looked as though we were going to get the basic rights due to us a human beings: but bang! The forces of reaction stepped in. Mobs led by Ian Paisley beat and kicked people off the streets and that nasty rotting old corpse called blood sacrafice republicanism stepped right in and 20 years of tit for tat murder heartache and loss ensued. We got the rights we were entitled to 25 years, 3500 corpses and thousands of maimed citizens later.
Now we were well on the way to securing all this in the early 70's through peaceful, organised protest; but when random violence entered the equation a generation (mine) got pissed into the sand before the psychos and religious nuts had had their fill and generously decided to cut us a break. Violence is nasty, obscene and gives you nothing but a void where your soul used to be. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 09:56:49 PM
No-one is disputing that the Troubles were a totes bummer, though the enduring second-class status of various ethnic nationalist groups the world over might just as easily suggest that had things never progressed past the peaceful protest stage, there wouldn't have been any impetus to change things in Northern Ireland any more than for Native American or Australians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2014, 10:10:39 PM
To the tally you might add Ireland's 5 years of murder, destruction and the beginnings of decades of acrimony after good men like James Connolly somehow got it into their heads that a doomed armed insurrection was preferable to taking painfully slow steps towards Home Rule and beyond . 

Even if you stop short of occupying biscuit factories, parks and orphanages it's always hard for me to see how burning your fellow citizens' cars and smashing up people's livelihoods can be ever really be aligned with the objective to make things better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 November, 2014, 10:17:34 PM
The point is well made. The people who are burning the cars and thrashing the livelihoods of ordinary John and Jane Doe's are part of an unrestrained mob, given licence by the sense of anonymity and 'freedom' bequeathed on them by being part of groupings such as these.
There is no ideal, pristine riot where the kids put it up to the rich and powerful; instead it provides cover and opportunity for pricks to intimidate and rip off other people struggling to get by. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 10:58:31 PM
You won't sign petitions and you won't burn a Mickey D - is it any wonder things never change?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 November, 2014, 11:03:06 PM
Well I signed the Dredd Sequel petition! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2014, 11:06:46 PM
it's not three decades of futile bloodshed, but I suppose it's a start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2014, 01:03:18 AM
It doesn't matter if it's a vote, a peaceful protest or a riot - they are all simply methods of begging "authority" for the rights one is born with. They still reinforce the false idea that those "above us" get to decide what our rights are and when we can exercise them.
.
The best example of this nonsense I can think of is US Prohibition laws. One day authority regarded alcohol as morally and legally acceptable and the next it decided that alcohol was morally and legally unacceptable. This change led to violence and murder as the "authorities" attempted to impose its new morality on everyone. Then, the next day, "authority" decided that alcohol was morally and legally acceptable again and the bloodshed ended. Prohibition is also a fine example of how legislation can be ignored to death for even the most "law abiding" of people understood that nobody has the right to prevent another from enjoying the odd scoop or three.
.
Governments use rioting too, in a sense, but they employ targeted mini-riots and call them "enforcement".
.
When it comes to violence I think a good rule of thumb is that it's only ever right to engage in violence in defence of yourself or another. Initiating violence for any other reason, and by anybody - no matter what costume they happen to be wearing - is wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 27 November, 2014, 07:02:32 AM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 26 November, 2014, 09:56:49 PM
No-one is disputing that the Troubles were a totes bummer, though the enduring second-class status of various ethnic nationalist groups the world over might just as easily suggest that had things never progressed past the peaceful protest stage, there wouldn't have been any impetus to change things in Northern Ireland any more than for Native American or Australians.

I would strongly dispute the implication that the terrorist actions of both nationalists and loyalists contributed positively to the current political situation in Northern Ireland.

It's fantastic that both sides gave up violence and came together over the Good Friday agreement, but the Troubles were no blueprint for creating a cross-community utopia.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2014, 12:41:11 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 27 November, 2014, 07:02:32 AMboth sides gave up violence and came together

ahahaha

I know further up the thread I advocated giving violent murder a go as a political philosophy, but that should not be taken as an endorsement of the Troubles, which I experienced first-hand and were a bit of a downer.
My observation is that we have... whatever it is we have right now because of how things played out, and some in similar situations tried a different tack and they didn't end up with the same thing as we did, so it can be equally claimed either way that the Troubles helped or hindered progress based on other examples of ethnic nationalist conflicts.

There's probably a soft-rock song that explains it better than I do, possibly in terms of a winding road whose destination is always fixed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 November, 2014, 01:05:53 PM
The problem with riots is they tend generally involve a lot of hard rock(s). Z  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 November, 2014, 01:06:56 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 27 November, 2014, 01:05:53 PM
The problem with riots is they tend generally involve a lot of hard rock(s). Z  :(
You'd be amazed how many of those rocks are thrown by police plants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 November, 2014, 01:24:56 PM
Of that I don't know Hhawk...but as stated earlier by others: riot gives the 'powers that be' the perfect opportunity to demonize legitimate protest and as an intended by product, to increase their already well stocked arsenal of legislation and the means to enforce it. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 November, 2014, 01:28:34 PM
Well, the police would just say they will investigate themselves dur to such opperations, but they will only find themselves inocent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2014, 01:28:47 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 27 November, 2014, 01:06:56 PMYou'd be amazed how many of those rocks are thrown by police plants.

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Police_Plant_zps7dd70e13.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 November, 2014, 01:34:55 PM
"Mr Willson, how can you justify pulling a fire arm out on an unarmed child?"

'Shrugs shoulders' "I am Groot?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2014, 01:57:35 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 27 November, 2014, 01:28:34 PM
Well, the police would just say they will investigate themselves dur to such opperations, but they will only find themselves inocent.

"Oh my God!  That policeman just shot a child - someone call the police!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 27 November, 2014, 02:35:15 PM
Dead Kennedys had a good song about rioting - Riot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ1wGTEOOFM)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2014, 03:03:25 PM
And yet the telly seems to be full of piffle celebrating World Riot One and the rioter supreme of World Riot Two, Winnie, is one of our national heroes. Go figure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
well, one bit of news has cheered me up - Andrew Mitchell has just lost his "plebgate" libel action and it's likely to cost him about £2m.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2014, 05:43:22 PM
It probably won't cost him anywhere near that much. Rich people sell "shares" in their legal defence. Investors chip in to pay the legal bills in the hopes of getting a percentage of the winnings, just like trading on the stock market.
.
Doesn't this country just make you so proud?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 27 November, 2014, 07:02:55 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 27 November, 2014, 12:41:11 PM

I know further up the thread I advocated giving violent murder a go as a political philosophy, but that should not be taken as an endorsement of the Troubles, which I experienced first-hand and were a bit of a downer.
My observation is that we have... whatever it is we have right now because of how things played out, and some in similar situations tried a different tack and they didn't end up with the same thing as we did, so it can be equally claimed either way that the Troubles helped or hindered progress based on other examples of ethnic nationalist conflicts.

You have a good point. A few decades of violent stalemate probably did wear everyone down in the end.

These things are extraordinarily tricky because potential peacemakers have to take their whole community with them. It's why the Ulster Unionists and SDLP could never deliver peace but the DUP and Sinn Fein managed it (approximately). It's also why the peace process in Israel and Palestine is still such a clusterf*ck after all these years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 November, 2014, 07:48:28 PM
My analysis is a wee bit different. The centre ground did in fact deliver an agreement in 1998. The IRA were pretty much riddled with informants by the mid 1990's and their political wing were offered a way out by John Hume. The DUP were politically marginalised in the 1998 talks and subsequent agreement.
The difficulty (as I see it) for the centre ground parties was: when Adams et al got their feet under the table they used the disarmament (decommissioning) issue to destabalise the initial agreement; this coupled with Paisley playing on deepset unionist fears led to the centre parties being bypassed by the British and Irish administrations resulting in the agreement mark 2, the St Andrews agreement more suited to what Sinn Fein and the DUP wanted.
This has led to a state of affairs where there is a marginalised and demoralised centre ground and 2 more extreme parties holding the reigns of power.
My issue with this is that the 1998 agreement was destabalised by the extremes. That when the extremes then took up their roles in the government they have quite simply not governed. This is through a mixture of sheer innate inability to so govern and a complete arrogant ambivelance towards carrying out their electoral remit, that is, serving their community.  We now resultingly have an assembly which has passed no meaningful legislation in years and is near the point of collapse. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 27 November, 2014, 08:37:32 PM
As I'm not from NI I am sure you are better informed than me, ZenArcade.

I remember being somewhat appalled with the early DUP and SF Stormont victories, but I have since come to the view that the peace process without them wouldn't have much chance of success. Not that I've become a fan, I hasten to add, but it's clear they did/do represent a fair old section of each community.

Also, I would imagine it would be pretty hard for any government comprising of all elected parties to deliver too much in the way of legislation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 November, 2014, 09:21:58 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 27 November, 2014, 08:37:32 PM


I remember being somewhat appalled with the early DUP and SF Stormont victories, but I have since come to the view that the peace process without them wouldn't have much chance of success.

Only in the sense that they held the rest of us to ransom until they could get things their own way. It is not in either of these party's interests to genuinely reconcile the 2 communities here
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 November, 2014, 09:24:36 PM
Well said King Pops...Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 November, 2014, 11:29:09 PM
Thank you Mister ZenArcade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 November, 2014, 10:22:50 AM
You have to invite murderous bastards to the peace talks really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 November, 2014, 10:47:00 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 November, 2014, 05:08:53 PM
well, one bit of news has cheered me up - Andrew Mitchell has just lost his "plebgate" libel action and it's likely to cost him about £2m.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2014, 05:43:22 PM
It probably won't cost him anywhere near that much. Rich people sell "shares" in their legal defence. Investors chip in to pay the legal bills in the hopes of getting a percentage of the winnings, just like trading on the stock market.
.
Doesn't this country just make you so proud?

Metro says it's £3m, Guardian says £1.5m, but even if he doesn't have to pay it all he's been officially and publicly confirmed as a lying arrogant cockweasel bully (I think that was in the judge's summing up actually!  ;))
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 28 November, 2014, 11:51:54 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 28 November, 2014, 10:22:50 AM
You have to invite murderous bastards to the peace talks really.

My view also. You'll never get peace if you just talk to your friends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 28 November, 2014, 11:59:21 AM
True, but when you get them to the table, it is generally not good negotiating strategy to sell the pass to them. In no way helped by your 'facilitators' i.e. the British and Irish administrations undermining you as the extremists are the only ones who can deliver....deliver what we ask, we are then told to be grateful there are no bombings, murders and whatever other horror they can visit on us. So I am grateful that our new masters aren't slaughtering us anymore; but if they aren't kept permanently in power then this could happen again. I swear to Christ, you couldn't make this lunacy up. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 28 November, 2014, 12:29:54 PM
I don't think peace would have been possible without Paisley and Adams signing up to it (well, NI voters could have abandoned their parties en masse, but that has never seemed likely). I don't really agree that the British and Irish governments sold out to them, except that it was obvious everyone had to make serious concessions to make progress. Better that than continued violence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2014, 12:40:30 PM
The reason extremists hold sway in the political process is because Northern Ireland was polorised along religious and political lines long before the current Assembly came along, and as a result there simply wasn't any middle ground of significance in the voting population with which to present an alternative to the parties composed of convicted murderers and sectarian bigots - who are arguably what constitutes the actual middle ground of Norn Iron politics, no matter what sanity says should be otherwise.

To put it another way: this place is a fucking shithole and we got the politicians we deserved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 28 November, 2014, 01:57:14 PM
Oh AA on that point I'll agree...we got what we voted for in spades. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 November, 2014, 02:58:37 PM
a neo-nazi squaddie hoardes guns and ammunition and builds a pipe-bomb - he's just got 2 years as the prosecution said " it was accepted that rifleman McGee was not a terrorist or intended to help a terrorist group." Meanwhile people are being banged up for downloading books, travelling to other countries or simply expressing "radical" thoughts.

Glad to see that everybody is treated equally in this fair country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 November, 2014, 04:19:54 PM
Filibustering happens in Britain too??

God bloody strewth. Pathetic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2014, 05:49:27 PM
Yep. It's also similarly poisonous. I suffer from SAD in the darker months, and was absolutely thrilled when the Lighter Later campaign secured a surprising level of cross-party support for a private member's bill on looking into changing the British timezone. The bill, had it got anywhere, would have resulted in a report on feasibility, which itself could have eventually triggered a trial run of no clocks changing for a few years (i.e. always staying on summer time), or the UK moving to CET (matching France's timezone). Naturally, there are issues with that (not least morning darkness in the far north), but the benefits could also be huge (http://www.lighterlater.org/benefits.html).

The Tories, Lib Dems and Labour were all basically in favour of at least the report (if not terribly enthusiastic—there weren't really any major advocates), with the Tories then adding any change would require the agreement of every component part of the UK, clearly not wanting to piss off the Scots with the then looming referendum. But the Scots didn't scupper anything—instead, some fuckwit Tory from Cornwall used the bill as a means to argue Cornwall should have an opt-out and therefore become a UK region (or even country) by the backdoor. The bill was filibustered and died.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 03 December, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
George Osborne just saved us £375 on an imminent house move. I'm in danger of turning into a Tory!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 December, 2014, 02:27:58 PM
It's OK—you'll be rescued from that thought when the NHS is sold off and you have to sell your new house to pay for hospital treatment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 December, 2014, 02:52:00 PM
Quote from: Banners on 03 December, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
George Osborne just saved us £375 on an imminent house move. I'm in danger of turning into a Tory!

I don't see why Ozzy should be in any way congratulated for not robbing you, as most people can get through the day without doing that.  In fact, I am not robbing you as I type this - it's that easy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 03 December, 2014, 02:53:42 PM
He stills owes me a response to my letter which I wrote to tell him I'd only be paying half my Corporation Tax.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 04:04:49 PM
Try writing to him and asking for a copy of the contract  you signed agreeing to pay your corporation tax in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2014, 04:10:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 04:04:49 PM
Try writing to him and asking for a copy of the contract  you signed agreeing to pay your corporation tax in the first place.

NOT ALL LAW IS CONTRACT LAW.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 03 December, 2014, 04:15:22 PM
That one is a double-shot in the political thread drinking game.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 10:30:41 PM
Okay, Jim - let's imagine for a moment that you are correct.
.
Please explain to me by what right one person can demand a share of another person's earnings and/or wealth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2014, 10:56:56 PM
We don't have to IMAGINE I'm correct, because I FUCKING AM correct. Your tin-foil-hatted protestations to the contrary are irrelevant. You can disagree that the the world is round or that the sky is blue, and whilst you are entitled to hold those opinions, it doesn't change the fact that they are fundamentally wrong in a fashion that shouldn't even require debate. I'm instantly regretting unhiding your post and will never do so again. Your obtuse wrong-headedness seems to elicit the sort of inexplicable indulgence that Thrillseekyr (where is he just now, BTW?) or Godpleton enjoyed from this forum.

Well, I'm sorry. You're wrong. We've had this conversation so many times that it is plain that we're not having a discussion, but the world DOES NOT WORK the way you want it to, and every attempt on my part to engage with you, to ascertain how we get from how the world is now to how you think it should work has been met with stonewalling or evasion. I wish the world worked the way you think it should, but it DOESN'T. Your own life would have been far easier these last few months if you'd understood that.

Good night.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 11:24:26 PM
So, you don't know. I understand.
.
And the way to get from where we are to where we want to be is to take personal responsibility for running our own lives - as I have always said. I can't tell you how to run your life, Jim, as I have neither the right nor the expertise to do so.
.
And yes, my life would be easier if I "played the game" but it's a game I don't want to play. Do you think I should be made to play? By whom? By what right?
.
Now, you can evade my questions, call my answers evasive and ignore me all in a huff if you like - makes no difference to me - but that way, neither of us will learn anything.
.
By what right does one person have claim on another person's income, wealth or property? It's a simple enough question, isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 03 December, 2014, 11:34:17 PM
Actually Jim doesn't need to answer your questions, Shark - he didn't disagree with on the way should be or could be, he simply stated the way things are. He doesn't come across as evasive at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 03 December, 2014, 11:39:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 10:30:41 PM
Okay, Jim - let's imagine for a moment that you are correct.
.
Please explain to me by what right one person can demand a share of another person's earnings and/or wealth.

that's marriage innit? ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 02:59:09 AM
I'm not married to HMRC.
.
Jim doesn't have to explain anything to anyone. I only ask in case he can.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 04 December, 2014, 03:37:23 AM
But what does he have to answer? Again, he didn't disagree with what could be or should be. He stated a fact.

Man, you are so wrapped up and lost in yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 05:08:19 AM
What fact did he state? That he disagrees with me but can't explain why beyond some woolly allusions to tin-foil-hats and wrong-headedness? 
.
I'm not so wrapped up in myself as to PM people who disagree with me and have a go at them, Locusts.
.
And I'm pretty certain Jim can stand up for himself without you jumping in with your big spoon. If you want to answer my question, go for it - if not, then don't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 December, 2014, 07:26:08 AM
Boys, boys. If you can't speculate wildly about how the world is, might, will or should be on a 2000ad forum, then where? I've said it before many times, but while I seldom agree with the Shark on matters I've learned a huge amount from arguing with him or just trying to follow his ideas to their conclusions. You know by now what you're going to get in a Shark post, so if polite affable utopian conspiracies, stories of human decency and bureaucratic inhumanity, and bullheaded questionings aren't your thing then not reading his posts is a sensible option. Although almost inconceivable I'm sure there are people who don't read Jim's lettering tutorials or my whines about money and Star Wars either. The fools.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 04 December, 2014, 07:47:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary SharkBy what right does one person have claim on another person's income, wealth or property? It's a simple enough question, isn't it?

I don't think one person ever has the right, but we exchange individual freedoms and money for the sake of consensus and the benefit of the collective.

It would be very nice to live in an altruistic world where things happened thanks to the fuel of mere niceness. But until then, I am somewhat reluctantly willing to obey the state and pay its bills so that my bins get emptied, my son gets his medicine, and someone will try to save my house if it catches fire.

Similarly, by delegating all these decisions to a government (even one I may not agree with), I get to spend my time reading science fiction comics and playing video games, instead of worrying about Iran's nuclear weapons and road maintenance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 08:35:44 AM
The fools indeed, Tordels! Even I've read (some of) Jim's lettering posts and (some of) your Star Wars moans. I even seem to recall reading a thread about unicorns...
.
Banners, what if you don't want to exchange your freedoms for bin men? That's what grates with me the most - authority doesn't say "hey, we've got a fairly good bin-emptying scheme for £X per month (or less if you're poor) - you fancy joining in?" No - authority says "we've emptied your bins, made what we could selling recyclables on and farming the service out to my friends - now pay me or we'll lock you the fuck up."
.
It's the element of choicelesness that gets me - someone else, whom I've never met, has decided how much I MUST pay for ESSENTIALS and then punishes me if I dare to disagree. I will always resist that. Nobody else has to but I do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:40:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 10:30:41 PM

Please explain to me by what right one person can demand a share of another person's earnings and/or wealth.

Because they have the power to punish you if you do not give them what they want. And their power derives from the fact that people, explicitly or through capitulation, give their approval for our society to be like this. You may disagree with someone taking your money and feel it is unjust, but as I am sure you can see from a number of the responses this is not the case among all people.

I once got into an argument on a date because I argued that we should not be levying tax just for the sake of it as it had become an accepted norm that taxes would rise, but that this shouldn't be the case - tax should be gathered for a specific public use. She felt higher taxes were needed as the money was used to help old people. . . .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 04 December, 2014, 12:47:13 PM
And occassionally, people make life a little bit harder for themselves because they believe that, by way of example, it might lead to a better world for all concerned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 December, 2014, 12:51:27 PM
This thread is like Thunderdome in which Grennie is Master to Jim's Blaster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
True - you can keep butting your head against a wall to make your point, but everyone has to make their own choices and live with them. There are things that I really disagree with and will not do.

I have no issue with people opposing things, if we all accepted the status quo at all times then we would not have our current freedoms of sexuality.

On a related note I remember watching a news story about a guy who got parking tickets and refused to pay them. He had lost in court and they took everything from him. At the end of the story he was sitting in his (soon to be repossessed) house and they asked him.

'Knowing the outcome, do you wish you had not pursued this course?'

And he replied

'I would have done it anyway'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 04 December, 2014, 01:09:04 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 December, 2014, 07:26:08 AM
Boys, boys. If you can't speculate wildly about how the world is, might, will or should be on a 2000ad forum, then where? I've said it before many times, but while I seldom agree with the Shark on matters I've learned a huge amount from arguing with him or just trying to follow his ideas to their conclusions. You know by now what you're going to get in a Shark post, so if polite affable utopian conspiracies, stories of human decency and bureaucratic inhumanity, and bullheaded questionings aren't your thing then not reading his posts is a sensible option. Although almost inconceivable I'm sure there are people who don't read Jim's lettering tutorials or my whines about money and Star Wars either. The fools.

TB there are truly times when I wish you were President of the world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2014, 01:21:36 PM
The greatest lie that the political elite ever sold to us is that the political system is their way of controlling us rather than the other way around.

/sarcasm
ISIS didn't like their bin-emptying social collective and so overturned it and installed what they thought was a great alternative no matter what the western fatcats and their paid-for media say about it.  Soon, they'll even be making their own actual, physical coin and they're 100 percent against usury, so I look forward to seeing how their utopia pans out.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 01:35:00 PM
Skullmo, I have read numerous stories of people not paying parking tickets (for example) with impunity. It's not about not paying, it's about being willing to pay.
.
To say "I will not pay this parking ticket" drags you into a world of hurt because, by refusing to pay the ticket you are admitting to the validity of the ticket. You are admitting that the fine exists, that you have accepted that it (and all the rules pertaining to it) are valid but that you just don't want to pay up, for whatever reason. Then they have you in their world and no way will you win that game because it's rigged and they're all expert players. To win in their legislative world you must be a better player than they are - and that's unlikely.
.
So, from the off, you must drag them into your world.
.
What you do is return the parking ticket to the issuer with a note saying something like "I do not have a contract, treaty or agreement with you concerning this document and so return it to you for your files. If you wish to communicate further on this issue, my non-negotiable fees are £100 per letter."
.
I know that this works with TV Licensing, utility providers and - especially - debt collection agencies because I've done it myself.
.
The secret is to never refuse to pay. Instead, question the validity of the demand and impose your own charges (they never pay, but debt collection agencies give up after the third bill for £100 - one debt collection agency actually wrote Me a final letter telling me to stop writing to them and sending them bills because they weren't going to pay up! I wrote back saying that failure to pay might result in legal action being taken, which could cost them dearly in the long run, enclosed another bill for over £500 (I build in "late payment charges" of £25 per unpaid bill per week) and never heard from them again).
.
Common Law always trumps legislative law (at least in theory) and so that's the game you play - and you drag them into that game before they can drag you into theirs.
.
So says the homeless man, ha, ha, ha!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 December, 2014, 01:48:45 PM
Quote from: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:40:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 10:30:41 PM

Please explain to me by what right one person can demand a share of another person's earnings and/or wealth.

Because they have the power to punish you if you do not give them what they want. And their power derives from the fact that people, explicitly or through capitulation, give their approval for our society to be like this. You may disagree with someone taking your money and feel it is unjust, but as I am sure you can see from a number of the responses this is not the case among all people.

I once got into an argument on a date because I argued that we should not be levying tax just for the sake of it as it had become an accepted norm that taxes would rise, but that this shouldn't be the case - tax should be gathered for a specific public use. She felt higher taxes were needed as the money was used to help old people. . . .

Dates are supposed to be fun and you got into a debate about systems of taxation?
Was your date with George Lucas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 04 December, 2014, 02:19:38 PM
Quote from: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
'Knowing the outcome, do you wish you had not pursued this course?'

And he replied

'I would have done it anyway'.

Has anyone asked that question ever answered it any other way? Talk about a leading question  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 04:41:03 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 04 December, 2014, 02:19:38 PM
Quote from: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:56:42 PM
'Knowing the outcome, do you wish you had not pursued this course?'

And he replied

'I would have done it anyway'.

Has anyone asked that question ever answered it any other way? Talk about a leading question  :)

I would have said - No, of course i wouldn't. i didn't think I was going to lose. Who would fight a losing battle!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 04:42:23 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 04 December, 2014, 01:48:45 PM
Quote from: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 12:40:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2014, 10:30:41 PM

Please explain to me by what right one person can demand a share of another person's earnings and/or wealth.

Because they have the power to punish you if you do not give them what they want. And their power derives from the fact that people, explicitly or through capitulation, give their approval for our society to be like this. You may disagree with someone taking your money and feel it is unjust, but as I am sure you can see from a number of the responses this is not the case among all people.

I once got into an argument on a date because I argued that we should not be levying tax just for the sake of it as it had become an accepted norm that taxes would rise, but that this shouldn't be the case - tax should be gathered for a specific public use. She felt higher taxes were needed as the money was used to help old people. . . .

Dates are supposed to be fun and you got into a debate about systems of taxation?
Was your date with George Lucas?

These are what my dates are like! on one of them I got bored and so decided to see how many animals I could list. It was about 50.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 04:54:29 PM
Moose, cow, hen, shrew - yeah, I've been on dates like that too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 04:56:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 01:35:00 PM
Skullmo, I have read numerous stories of people not paying parking tickets (for example) with impunity. It's not about not paying, it's about being willing to pay.
.
The secret is to never refuse to pay. Instead, question the validity of the demand and impose your own charges (they never pay, but debt collection agencies give up after the third bill for £100 - one debt collection agency actually wrote Me a final letter telling me to stop writing to them and sending them bills because they weren't going to pay up! I wrote back saying that failure to pay might result in legal action being taken, which could cost them dearly in the long run, enclosed another bill for over £500 (I build in "late payment charges" of £25 per unpaid bill per week) and never heard from them again).


Based on my knowledge of debt collection companies they receive a lot of letters like that. Their legal team advise them that there is no validity in the bills, however what it usually does is wind the collection agents up and they lose their temper, which triggers a complaint.

Eventually the debt collection company decides to write off the debt because it is just too much trouble to recover unless: a) it is a particularly large amount, or b) they have a contract in place that they can enforce.

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 05:14:30 PM
Another interesting fact about debt collection agencies is that many of them *purchase* debts from suchlike as the utilities companies and so on for pennies in the pound. The agency then goes after people for the full amount or more, thus making a profit.
.
However, even in legislation (Bills of Exchange Act 188?), as soon as the debt collection agency buys your debt from whomever, they have technically discharged that debt for you. As you owed the utilities company money, for instance, as soon as they sell that debt to a third party (with whom you have no contract or agreement) then you're in the clear. The utilities company has been paid for the debt, technically clearing it. The debt collection agency takes a punt, just like buying shares, and if you know a little law and take the initiative from the start, they cut their losses and leave you alone.
.
The best part, though, is writing them amusing letters using the same robust and demanding style they do. They demand, I demand, each ignores the other's demands and the one with the most ink wins. It can be quite fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 04 December, 2014, 05:32:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2014, 05:14:30 PM
Another interesting fact about debt collection agencies is that many of them *purchase* debts from suchlike as the utilities companies and so on for pennies in the pound. The agency then goes after people for the full amount or more, thus making a profit.
.
However, even in legislation (Bills of Exchange Act 188?), as soon as the debt collection agency buys your debt from whomever, they have technically discharged that debt for you. As you owed the utilities company money, for instance, as soon as they sell that debt to a third party (with whom you have no contract or agreement) then you're in the clear. The utilities company has been paid for the debt, technically clearing it. The debt collection agency takes a punt, just like buying shares, and if you know a little law and take the initiative from the start, they cut their losses and leave you alone.
.
The best part, though, is writing them amusing letters using the same robust and demanding style they do. They demand, I demand, each ignores the other's demands and the one with the most ink wins. It can be quite fun.

What they generally purchase is a portfolio of debt for a percentage of the debt based on its perceived recovery. I have never heard of that being a discharge of the debt, it doesn't sound likely though.

I had a look online and there are loads of sites about it written in a sort of cod legalese which seem to fundamentally misunderstand how courts work so I gave up.

I guess it must remain a mystery. I'll have a chat to my debt collection friends if I remember to and let you know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 04 December, 2014, 05:34:01 PM
be nice if it was true ,I could ve saved myself 3 years of stress and gained a refund.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2014, 05:46:39 PM
It's worth pointing out that billed parties have to answer bills like the one Sharky sends whether they like it or not, as anyone can take their claims to court regardless of their chances of successfully seeing any money, and by default the court will rule on their behalf if the billed party don't present themselves.  Even if the judge is the biggest pro-capitalist Tory in creation, he can't actually rule in favor of someone who hasn't turned up, and until very recently the common practice was for billing companies to simply refuse to acknowledge people billing them, so you can likely guess what eventually happened there.


I am curious if anyone else on the board has had their student loan debt with Student Loan Company sold on to Erudio?  I got correspondence from the new owners of my debt asking for information I decided I shan't be providing to a shell company with a reputation for dishonesty and theft, but I was wondering what others' experiences might have been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 December, 2014, 02:43:30 AM
You have to answer every letter they send you - that is very important. This is because, legally, if you do not object to something then you must accept it.
.
www.getoutofdebtfree.org used to be a good site for this kind of thing - I haven't looked at it for ages but I did find it a useful for sparking research and ideas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 December, 2014, 02:54:35 PM
curious as to what you make of this Sharky: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30334812 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30334812)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 December, 2014, 05:49:41 PM
Well, DDD - you might be sorry you asked!
.
On the face of it, this is just a story about an ongoing process that happens all the time - clearing out the clutter from the statute books. (When I say 'all the time' I don't mean daily, weekly or even annually - but often.) New legislation, being couched in more modern terms, addressing more modern sensibilities and taking into account the contemporary state of custom, case law, previous legislation, modern attitudes and tradition, is often "better" than old, outmoded legislation. Modern legislation, having the benefit of history behind it, can say the same thing but say it better. It's a story about how efficient our legal system is.
.
Now, just pop your tinfoil hat on for me - we're going for a little ride...
.
Firstly, the title of the piece uses the word "Law" instead of the word "Legislation" (even though this is corrected in the sub-heading), perpetuating the myth that law and legislation are the same thing - which they are not. THOU SHALT NOT KILL is law, NO GUNS is legislation. Law is the most basic foundation of right and wrong - so simple that even children intuitively understand it - that sense of justice residing in us all. It can be called God's Law, Natural Law* or Common Law. Legislation began as man's attempt to codify Common Law - after all, even though everyone knows you shouldn't kill anyone sometimes it's unavoidable and even necessary, so legislation was needed to sort out the details of what is and isn't murder. This is why legislation can be so complex and tangled and self-contradictory and an ass. Thou Shalt Not Kill is easy to understand but when you start adding things to it (thou shalt not kill unless you're defending yourself, or a soldier, or an official executioner) it soon gets very, very complicated indeed.
.
So, that's the first and most obvious thing I saw, which ties in with the second - the myth that new legislation always trumps old law (if it didn't, how could they repeal anything, right?) which is not the case at all. New legislation may trump old legislation but Common Law trumps the lot - because Common Law is what legislation is trying to codify and the very foundation upon which all legislation is built. Legislation legalising murder could be passed tomorrow but it would have absolutely no effect on the Common Law forbidding murder that we all know instinctively.
.
I'd love to write more but I'm on the nightshift and have to go to bed. Maybe I'll write some more in the morning so - keep that tinfoil hat handy!
.
*Natural Law is not to be confused with the "law of the jungle" or "survival of the fittest" but rather that Law which comes naturally to human beings. Whether that Law is instilled in us by a deity or as the result of millions of years of instinct, behaviour and learning is immaterial because, whether we believe in God or not, we all know what is fundamentally Right and Wrong. This is the law which is part of our nature, what I call 'Common Law.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 05 December, 2014, 07:20:35 PM
Every dictionary ever written disagrees with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 06 December, 2014, 01:37:50 AM
Actually Shark speaks a form of truth . . . However I would say.


"On the face of it, this is just a story about an ongoing process that happens all the time - clearing out the clutter from the statute books. (When I say 'all the time' I don't mean daily, weekly or even annually - but often.) New legislation, being couched in more modern terms, addressing more modern sensibilities and taking into account the contemporary state of custom, case law, previous legislation, modern attitudes and tradition, is often "better" than old, outmoded legislation. Modern legislation, having the benefit of history behind it, can say the same thing but say it better. It's a story about how efficient our legal system is."


I'd say it's a slow news day.




"Firstly, the title of the piece uses the word "Law" instead of the word "Legislation" (even though this is corrected in the sub-heading), perpetuating the myth that law and legislation are the same thing - which they are not."

Probably just a lazy journalist.


"THOU SHALT NOT KILL is law"

It is religion not law.

In fact killing is allowed under many circumstances in the UK murder definition which only outlaws unlawful killing: abortion, switching off life support, war. If all of those were precluded by law then many people would be criminals.

", NO GUNS is legislation. Law is the most basic foundation of right and wrong - so simple that even children intuitively understand it - that sense of justice residing in us all. It can be called God's Law, Natural Law* or Common Law."

However this moral law is different depending on the society. Hans Kelsen calls this Grundnorm in his pure theory of law.

"Legislation began as man's attempt to codify Common Law - after all, even though everyone knows you shouldn't kill anyone sometimes it's unavoidable and even necessary, so legislation was needed to sort out the details of what is and isn't murder. "

Common law is the law made by judges. It is superseded by legislation.

"This is why legislation can be so complex and tangled and self-contradictory and an ass."

Legislation is like that because we have historically approached law with a literal approach to statutory interpretation. Whereas a purposive approach would look at the spirit of what the underlying purpose of the legislation was trying to achieve, english judges have twisted the words of the legislation to mean what they thought it should do to achieve their form of justice. This is often the case due to historical and political reasons and is part a result of the separation of powers in the UK. It is a long and interesting topic.


"Thou Shalt Not Kill is easy to understand but when you start adding things to it (thou shalt not kill unless you're defending yourself, or a soldier, or an official executioner) it soon gets very, very complicated indeed."

I could deal with those 3 exceptions :P
.
"So, that's the first and most obvious thing I saw, which ties in with the second - the myth that new legislation always trumps old law (if it didn't, how could they repeal anything, right?) which is not the case at all. New legislation may trump old legislation but Common Law trumps the lot - because Common Law is what legislation is trying to codify and the very foundation upon which all legislation is built. Legislation legalising murder could be passed tomorrow but it would have absolutely no effect on the Common Law forbidding murder that we all know instinctively."

We have legislation that provides defences for forms of killing, and that allows for abortion. Legislation supersedes common law.
.
I'd love to write more but I'm on the nightshift and have to go to bed. Maybe I'll write some more in the morning so - keep that tinfoil hat handy!
.
"*Natural Law is not to be confused with the "law of the jungle" or "survival of the fittest" but rather that Law which comes naturally to human beings. Whether that Law is instilled in us by a deity or as the result of millions of years of instinct, behaviour and learning is immaterial because, whether we believe in God or not, we all know what is fundamentally Right and Wrong. This is the law which is part of our nature, what I call 'Common Law.'"

Natural law is a jurisprudential concept.

If you try to apply moral absolutes to human behaviour you will get nowhere as they change over time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2014, 02:45:39 AM
That might be so, M.I.K., but my conclusions come from reading law and philosophy books and watching law lectures - not dictionaries.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 December, 2014, 03:22:38 AM
Well, dictionaries are certainly capable of containing incorrect information. Like that time the OED decided to include the word 'phwoar' but spell it differently to how everybody else on the planet had been writing it down for numerous decades beforehand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2014, 03:26:20 AM
Skullmo, Thou Shalt Not Kill is law and religion - both of which come from people. Quite simply, not killing one another is a basic and rather good species survival tactic, as both law (and legislation) and religion recognise.
.
Without attempting to define abortion (is it murder or the equivalent of having a parasite removed, manslaughter or the excision of a malfunctioning kidney, etc., etc.) I don't disagree that Common Law, legislation and religion have made exceptions to the fundamental rule over the years but not one word of it overrides the basic tenet Thou Shalt Not Kill.
.
There are three main ways that statute law is made. Firstly there is custom and tradition, things that have been working in a certain well established, well understood and widely accepted way. This is the purest expression of law as it springs from general society and is observed often without question.  Second there is case law, wherein facts are presented for juries to decide upon and judges to rule upon. All this is recorded and used to inform upon future cases. This is the second most valid expression of statute law as it comes from a public process involving a ley jury and expert actors. Thirdly comes legislation, wherein those people in charge of a society make up their own laws, for whatever reason. This is the process where the vast majority of problems lie as, if you've read my rantings for long enough you'll already know, those people are often more interested in helping themselves and their friends than society as a whole. Some of these people, unbelievably, use their self-given right to draft legislation in order to make it seem as if Thou Shalt Not Kill and Thou Shalt Pay Thy Bedroom Charge are laws carved on the same tablet, which clearly they are not.
.
Anyhoo, back to work for me! Ttfn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2014, 03:33:57 AM
M.I.K. - sorry if my dictionary quip was a little harsh. I'd only just got up and I'm always grumpy in a morning!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 December, 2014, 02:13:36 PM
That was a quip?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2014, 02:28:17 PM
Well, more of a dig than a quip, if I'm honest. Either way, I'm sorry,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 December, 2014, 09:09:34 PM
I am sure it is entirely possible that people in the UK are Tweeting 21000 times an hour about the latest episode of US cable drama The Newsroom that was shown in America last night, and so that's why it's trending in the UK while #CameronMustGo is not, but it's still amusing to think that a harmless bit of social media slacktivism might have got Fatboy running scared to the point that he bullied Twitter into blocking the hashtag from appearing in trending lists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 08 December, 2014, 11:22:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2014, 02:45:39 AM
That might be so, M.I.K., but my conclusions come from reading law and philosophy books and watching law lectures - not dictionaries.


...says the man who not so long ago was trying to argue that aether was a proper scientific principle, because it was a word in the dictionary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: BPP on 09 December, 2014, 01:41:50 AM
As someone with an actual law degree (1st class hons. UCL) and multiple masters in associated sub-disciplines I'd have to say I've rarely read such poppycock spoken 'authoritively' about law as by TLS. For example his discussion on statute / common law confuses many basic concepts including the scope of statutory law and the nature of 'natural law'.

Where to start?

In UK law if a statute expressly deviates from a previous law - be it 'common law' (judge made or convention) or a prior statute then that is the end of the matter. The previous law is impliedly repealed. There is no 'higher' common law that survives.

The only higher law than UK statute is are several forms of European law (such as directives) but not all as the type of European law is relevant. The only other form of higher law is, as of the late 90s, the European Convemtion on Human Rights. Previously it was academically argued we were bound by it but ole TB's govt. put the issue beyond debate with an express undertaking of its higher status. International lawyers will argue about other forms of binding 'global' law, such as the New York Convention but at that juncture you're into arcane specialist fields.

So to be clear if a statute unequivocally deviates from past common law practice then that ends the common law regulation of that practice.

A second major problem is invoking the term 'natural law' which has no place in UK legal practice and ,merely exists in academic debates as to the 'inherent' content of a legal system. Indeed the opposite (major) school to natural law jurisprudence is positivism. Positivism, at its most basic, asserts there is a scheme / system for producing rules, meta-rules, but that law has no inherent 'moral' content. So a 'natural lawyer' will argue it does - such as Sharks 'tho shalt not kill' but a positivist will argue that while that is a good rule there is no inherent reason why a legal system will contain it. English law and English lawyers are widely acknowledged as positivists. 'Natural law' is seen as a fairly discredited legal analysis (positivists now mainly defend themselves from postmodernists, critical legal scholars, feminists, race theorists, siologists). To invoke natural law as a analogue for common law would get your term paper flunked. Common law is 'convention and judge made law to fill the lacunae' in statutes, natural law is an old near dead analytic technique.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 December, 2014, 06:55:00 AM
Thanks, BPP, certainly some food for thought there.
.
I don't agree that "...if a statute expressly deviates from a previous law... that is the end of the matter." If that were true then no statute would or could ever be altered - all statute would, under those conditions, be both immutable and unchallengeable. (Even you yourself say the previous law is only "impliedly" repealed.) I like the fact that our laws and statutes can (in theory, at least) be challenged in our (in theory, at least) impartial courts.
.
Perhaps I did conflate common law and natural law, for which I apologise. Natural Law is, in my view, the most basic of all "law" - that law which is "built-in" to the human species, flowing from instinct and behaviour - the kind of inherent and specific "law" that all species have. Common law is, again in my view and I apologise if the terms I'm using are academically inaccurate, the most basic attempt to codify human natural law. At its most basic, common law is teaching toddlers not to steal - something so basic that it doesn't need to be written down for you. Indeed, common law is not written down anywhere - even Moses' stone tablets were not common law (or even natural or "God's" law) but the first statute law - or, from an EU perspective, the first "directives".
.
The statutes on those stone tablets were the first attempt to codify common law based upon natural law (without getting into the whole "reality or myth" argument concerning religious texts). Had humanity evolved from another species other than the apes then the text on those tablets might have been a lot different - Thou Shalt Not Suffer Any Other Males In The Pack Than The Alpha, for example.
.
That last leonine flight of fancy aside, I think that all our laws - no matter what we call them or how we make them - must be based on our fundamental human nature. Indeed, I cannot see how it could be otherwise. There would be little to be gained in basing our laws on the nature of a wolf pack or the life cycle of a beetle.
.
Let me explore the most famous inscription on Moses' tablets - Thou Shalt Not Kill. As I stated previously, this is a basic and excellent species survival tactic for social animals such as ourselves. We all know this Law without even being taught it - otherwise, on the very first day of kindergarten, all the kids would be going at one another with sharpened crayons until there was only one left, whom the teacher would then dispose of.
.
So we all know not to kill but we also all know that some people ignore this rule. Given the right (shared by virtually every living thing) to defend oneself from aggression we must, therefore, concede that even under natural law it must be sometimes acceptable to kill in extreme cases of self-defence, for example. Natural law, therefore, adapts to current circumstances and so too does common law, which is the most immediate manifestation of current law, irrespective of statutes. Once the immediate crisis is over, equilibrium is restored and Thou Shalt Not Kill applies once more. If Thou Shalt Not Kill was immutable (which I dearly wish it was) then in a kill-or-be-killed situation the very statute designed to protect one becomes a positive handicap.
.
So if natural law and common law allow for exceptions then statute law must, being a codification of them, also display the same flexibility - which it does. If someone has killed then the matter is examined in a (theoretically) impartial court using statutes (the established opinion) and common law (the jury's opinion) to arrive at a harmonious outcome.
.
I have no real problem with statute law and our court system, indeed I think our species is still too young and stupid to do without them yet, and I think that on the whole, and certainly on the more important cases, our system still works quite well.
.
But - these days, there's too much of it and too much of that has been 'weaponised', for want of a better term, by powerful interests intent on wealth and power. Our venerable system has been hi-jacked and is being used against us to strip us of our liberties and our wealth.
.
And before you scoff and hand me a new roll of tinfoil, please remember that Hitler's concentration camps, Stalin's purges and Apartheid were all perfectly legal and proper under their local contemporary legislation even though said legislation directly contradicted natural, common and previous statute law. This is what I see happening now - legislation diverging from natural, common and statute law being Imposed and Enforced with the same if not more vigour than our "good" statutes (i.e., those which have served society well).
.
It is all this economically motivated statute law, from whichever source, that is being imposed on us (using our own courts as a delivery system) and which flies in the face of all our other laws that I object to.
.
I can't fight bad statutes with good statutes because, quite frankly, I'm nowhere near clever enough. If I even attempt to go that way I'll just get bogged down in reams and reams of legislation and case law and bumf that I don't understand - although I do still try to read and comprehend at least some of it.  My core philosophy is quite simple - so long as I'm not doing anybody any harm, or putting anyone in danger of harm, then I can do whatever I choose and nobody under the sun has the right to tell me otherwise or demand my loyalty in any way.
.
What I can do is adhere to my own concept of natural law, which has led to my own single personal statute "cause loss, harm or damage to nobody; honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings."
.
If I ruled the world, I'd have that carved over the entrance to every court house, every school, every hospital and every home, I'd have it etched into every mirror, every windowpane and every pint pot, I'd have it engraved on the blade of every knife, the handle of every spoon and the barrel of every gun. I'd have it printed on the front page of every newspaper and magazine, embossed on every coin and stamped in every brick. Then I'd abdicate and leave the world to it.
.
My personal legislation, then, being based on fundamental natural and common law is at least as valid as the government's - in fact, my legislation and theirs agree on a great many things but disagree on fundamentals. My personal legislation applies only to myself and anyone else who freely chooses to adopt it. Government legislation sees itself as mandatory and, above all, Enforceable on everyone who happens to live within a set of artificial, invisible borders. I do not accept the government's right to enforce anything on me. The government works for us. We enforce *it*. Either as a group or individually - it makes no odds.
.
To be punished for breaking a law is one thing but to have legislation enforced upon a population as if it were punishment for breaking the law is wrong. The very idea of enforcement is anathema to natural, common and statute law and yet all over I see big, self-important vehicles with things like 'Traffic Enforcement' and 'Immigration Enforcement' written on them. Enforcement is shooting down an armed killer, not trawling the traffic looking for fines to impose.
.
I cannot, therefore, accept your assessment of common law as a moribund thing. Common law is the most contemporary of all laws - at its extreme it degenerates into mob rule - and is constant and vital. In fact, statute law must always lag behind common law because, just like humanity, common law constantly develops and suffers from fads and phases. In some ways, it is the job of statute and legislation to ride these fads and phases out, to harmonise what is now and what has been for the future. That's what the court system is all about, for me - not justice or revenge or reparations, but harmony.
.

Thanks for your post, DPP, it surely got me thinking and I do have enormous respect for your qualifications, though my blatherings may give a contrary view. In fact, I could do with somebody possessing your knowledge 'on my side' right now, as it were. I'm sure that nothing I say is new or particularly insightful and I'm also fairly certain that many of my current views are incomplete and even inaccurate - but I continue to learn and hypothesise and theorise.
.
What I really should do, I suppose, is learn how the courts work and bring them some of my arguments myself. Again, though, I'm not nearly clever enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 December, 2014, 07:08:06 AM
I don't remember that argument, GordonR, I'll have to look it up.
.
Did I win? ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 09 December, 2014, 12:18:42 PM
As with most things, the answer to that will depend upon in whose head the question is being asked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 December, 2014, 12:41:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 December, 2014, 06:55:00 AM

My personal legislation, then, being based on fundamental natural and common law is at least as valid as the government's

I think this might be where you're going wrong. UK judges/magistrates would struggle to accept that these two concepts have parity, with potentially somewhat unpleasant legal consequences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 December, 2014, 01:40:42 PM
Either I have the right to make my own reasonable laws or I don't. If I don't have the right then nobody does and, if nobody has the right how do we pass it on to government? How can the whole assume rights that the individuals do not possess?

If I do have the right to make my own laws and live by them then, so long as I cause no loss, harm or damage to anyone, then those laws are the ones I choose to live by. When my law and common law come into conflict, I cede jurisdiction to common law but when my law comes into conflict with statute law I have to uphold my own law - as every sovereign individual must and just as certain countries do in relation to EU law. And, just like those countries and the EU, I'm always willing to cut a deal but will not be dictated to.
.
If we have passed on our personal freedom to impose personal rules on ourselves then we have also passed on to the same agencies our personal responsibility to use those laws it creates morally - and also an understanding that we have No Right Whatsoever to impose our personal laws onto unwilling third parties.
.
But, as I've mentioned before, authority never asks - authority demands. And one of the weapons authority uses to make us bow to its demands is legislation made up to look like moral law. If I had to rely on the moral judgement of myself or David Cameron, which one do you think I'd choose? Which one would you choose?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 December, 2014, 02:56:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 December, 2014, 01:40:42 PM
If I do have the right to make my own laws and live by them then, so long as I cause no loss, harm or damage to anyone, then those laws are the ones I choose to live by.

"I will not watch more than an hour's TV per day" - your own law, perfectly acceptable

"I will not buy a TV licence" - this is not a personal law, you are causing loss to the TV licensing authority - not acceptable (at least in a legal sense)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 09 December, 2014, 03:08:23 PM
the reference to hitler's "solution" was a point well made I thought
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 December, 2014, 03:17:42 PM
The way I look at it is you don't debate with the schoolyard bully as that just gets the shit kicked out of you even if you are one hundred percent correct about the bully having no moral right to your lunch money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 04:38:41 AM
Funny - I always had precisely the opposite view; you should always stand up and debate with the bully, even if you do get the shit kicked out of you. It is better to have fought back and lost than never fought back at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 06:08:53 AM
For anyone who may be interested, I haven't given up debating with the bully - I have several email/postal debates going and a couple in the pipe questioning the validity of my "trial" before the magistrates.
.
A quick recap. At that trial I was accused of a crime I did not commit (assaulting a police officer) but, when it became abundantly clear that there was no evidence to support the charge, I was, unbelievably, found guilty of "reckless assault". There were several anomalies in the trial, such as missing cctv footage of the incident in question, but the main one was that the only two witness testimonies did not match. Constable G testified to having a firm grip of my left arm throughout the incident and witnessing no contact whilst Officer N claimed I hit her deliberately, twice, with my left hand. Clearly, one of them is lying - I know which one but that doesn't really matter. This is perjury, is it not?
.
Being skint, launching a legal appeal was out of the question and I understand that  Legal Aid, which I'd be loath to accept anyway knowing its provenance, is not available for appeals. So, what to do?
.
I had been fined £365 and ordered to pay it back at a fiver a week. Because I played their game through the magistrates' court and lost, at the time I felt that paying the fine was the right thing to do - if only to keep them off my back until I could figure something out. To date I've paid £243.50 off since August so I'm way in front.
.
Because I couldn't appeal, I chose a different tack using what I do best - writing arrogant, self-styled legalese claptrap like this. I have a two-pronged attack, one at the local magistrates' court itself and one at the HM Courts head office where my payment card came from.
.
My strategy with the local court was to basically complain about the service and the incompetence of their staff (the three magistrates) in failing to notice a clear incidence of perjury which rendered their judgement unsound. I know that directly before my trial there was some kind of award ceremony for one of the magistrates who was retiring that day - was there wine involved? Could that have impaired their judgement, perhaps?
.
My communications were, of course, met with a kind of bemused outrage - this isn't how things are done! Oh, piffle - all you have to do is check the transcripts and, if I'm wrong, I'll go away. If I'm right, I want my name cleared and my money back - that's not unreasonable, is it? Go away, stop pestering us. Oh well, if that's your attitude, here's the arrangement I suggest; I will suspend all further payments until this matter has been investigated, okay? No reply - they fall into the same trap often set for us because, in English law if you do not object to a thing then you must accept it.
.
The second prong concerns the wording on the letter that came from the payment centre, which described the offence as "assault and battery" which was not what the magistrates found me guilty of - they said it was "reckless assault". A nit-pick, but a way in. A jaunty enough letter questioning this. Go away, the wording is correct. No it isn't - I wrote down what the magistrates said on the day and the wording on your letter isn't it. Go away, my records show that the letter is correct. Well, then please send me a copy of those records so I can see for myself. No reply. If you can't prove what you're saying by showing me the records you claim to hold then you have no right to claim my money, therefore further payments will be withheld until said records are produced - oh, and here's the email address of the person at the magistrates' court with whom I've arranged to withhold payments pending an investigation. No reply. Did you get my last email? No reply. So, yesterday, one last payment on the card then a recorded delivery letter containing copies of my last two unacknowledged emails in case they accidentally fell into a spam folder.
.
Now I withhold my payments and see what happens. It's really kinda' fun, turning their own politely superior attitude back on them and watching them squirm.
.
You might be wondering what I hope to achieve by this and the truth is that I'm not sure. I'm exploring the limitations of the system, I suppose, exposing the hypocrisy and unfairness of it to the people who work in that system. Also trying to put into practice some of the arguments and theories I vomit out here, learning what works and what doesn't. Can you imagine the disruption that just 1,000 people deferring payment (for anything) until certain questions had been answered satisfactorily would cause?
.
Anyway, the exploration continues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 09:40:03 AM
Enjoying reading that with a healthy ration of 'aha!', then remembered that it's not a clever episode of The Practice, it's your one-and-only life.  Very best of luck as always, but do be careful with nonpayment of fines even if you are ahead. I know the heating probably works in the clink, but that's pretty much all it has to recommend it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 10 December, 2014, 10:20:26 AM
Yeah, hope it all works out. That sounds terrible that they just made up stuff, but I know it happens quite a bit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 10:21:45 AM
Heh, thanks Tordels & Skullmo :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 December, 2014, 11:39:47 AM
Jeez, Shark, remember when you started making up nonsensical legal reasons why you weren't going to get evicted, and then you ended up being evicted?

Try the same trick with the reckless assault fine and you will end up in prison.

It entirely up to you to make this protest, obviously, as long as you realise the likely consequences of your actions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 12:15:10 PM
I feel the consequences of inaction would be worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 10 December, 2014, 12:22:21 PM
Maybe, but the moral high ground can be a lonely place to end up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 12:25:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 12:15:10 PM
I feel the consequences of inaction would be worse.

I think what we're all trying to say is that may not the case, given the possible severity of said consequences. Not suggesting that you abandon your efforts to get your conviction overturned, but do tread carefully as to how you go about it. Whatever about the shite that's already happened to you, getting banged up would be far worse.

I'm in court next Thursday myself and I'm fecking shitting it, even if a prison sentence is a very distant possibility - with non payment of fine for a violent offense against a police officer it'd be a very strong probability.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 12:43:39 PM
There's a long way to go before they get to lock me up over less than £120 I've already demonstrated my willingness to pay. First there will have to be communications and arguments, all very logical, then there may be court - well, bring that on - but this time I'm more than willing to be taken before a judge and jury to explain myself and call the witnesses. I'll get my appeal without paying for it.
.
The question they have to ask themselves in this austerity driven world is, how many resources are they prepared to expend chasing a determined and reasonably articulate homeless heart patient for a hundred and twenty quid?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 12:58:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 12:43:39 PM... but this time I'm more than willing to be taken before a judge and jury to explain myself and call the witnesses. I'll get my appeal without paying for it.

Isn't there a real risk that the judge will simply look down at the morning's full docket and say 'this appearance is regarding nonpayment of a fine, and is not an appeals court for an earlier conviction: 30 days. Next case please'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 01:27:43 PM
Not if I get the groundwork right. This time, I won't just be taken to court I'll help them drive. I'll write to the court myself before the trial (which I will insist upon over a hearing) outlining my position and apologising for wasting the court's time with this when I'm perfectly willing to negotiate with the people I've already been in contact with. The prosecutors will submit bare facts and statutes - I will submit those too and more, a narrative backed up by a long and detailed paper chain. For every claim they make I will lodge a counter-claim. Ideally I want the argument to be won before the trial even starts.
.
Despite everything, I still think the courts and the law can be put to proper use - but I'm increasingly of the opinion that the more actively one engages with it, the better one's chances become. So long as I act honourably and with respect towards the law, the courts and the people involved then the only thing they possess which I do not is superior force. And if that's all their argument boils down to then this needs pointing out to the jury and the judge. I am confident, though, that intelligent discourse will prevail.
.
I mean, what else was I doing with my life anyway? Wasting it watching mind-melting telly and dreaming about being a professional comic writer? At least this might do some quantum of good for my society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2014, 01:41:44 PM
Can you go over their heads and take this up with higher courts if you believe the integrity of the local constabulary and judiciary to be compromised?  This may be region-specific advice as well being as I'm a Norn Iron dweller, but do you have a local vicar or priest you can get onside?  You might be surprised how like an attack dog a grassroots clergyman with their dander up can be, as it's not uncommon for people in my local community to call their priest instead of their lawyer when they smell a stitch-up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 01:46:37 PM
Sorry, Tordels, I meant to say good luck for next week, mate!
.
And, for what it's worth, the one thing I have learned from my experiences that might be of any use to you is that the only reasonably safe answer to any leading question beginning "IS IT POSSIBLE..." Is "it might be possible but that's not what happened."
.
I think I was caught out by that possibility, so just be calm, treat everyone with respect (it doesn't hurt to Google "court protocol" before you go in, think before you speak, don't let the lawyers rush you or wind you up and stay sharp for tripwires and booby traps.
.
I'm sure a man of your intelligence will be fine. And don't worry about the fear, that soon goes away when the whistle blows for kick-off...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 02:04:02 PM
Good suggestion, AA. As much as possible, I want to do this on my own - that's not to say that I don't need all the help I can get but I'd like to find out just how far a single person can legally and lawfully push before something gives. Just how far do my rights extend in working on my own behalf to clear my name and get a refund instead of spending money I don't have to let the very system that engineered this situation sort it out on its own terms? I guess I'm not making much sense, really.
.
Also, I think that trying by myself first might make the local vicar more amenable if I do decide to solicit his help, or maybe the help of a journalist or mad philanthropist for that matter, in the future.
.
I have to look at this in the long-term, expecting it to grind on and on in one form or another, and not exploit all my avenues at once.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 December, 2014, 06:36:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 12:43:39 PM
There's a long way to go before they get to lock me up over less than £120 I've already demonstrated my willingness to pay. First there will have to be communications and arguments, all very logical, then there may be court - well, bring that on - but this time I'm more than willing to be taken before a judge and jury to explain myself and call the witnesses. I'll get my appeal without paying for it.
.
The question they have to ask themselves in this austerity driven world is, how many resources are they prepared to expend chasing a determined and reasonably articulate homeless heart patient for a hundred and twenty quid?

If the law says you go to prison for £120, that's where you'll go. The payment of fines is an important and widely-supported principle, and the sanction of imprisonment for wilful non-payment is perfectly fair.

Trying to turn a cut and dried "non-payment of fine" case into an appeal against the original conviction is utterly doomed.

But I'm sure you know all this, really. The idea seems to be "noble failure" where you end up losing (again) but feel like you've scored some sort of moral victory in doing so. Like this guy:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/naked-rambler-could-face-a-lifetime-of-imprisonments-after-european-court-ruling-9823945.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/naked-rambler-could-face-a-lifetime-of-imprisonments-after-european-court-ruling-9823945.html)

It just seems so unnecessary :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 December, 2014, 06:44:24 PM
Some times you've got to stop reinforcing defeat. I understand your stance (may not agree; but respect it nonetheless); the problem is you are putting your face in front of a mailed fist. Best regards Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2014, 06:50:44 PM
Sharky has described blatant perjury, deliberate withholding of evidence, violation of judicial procedure and police corruption that has gone unchallenged - if not been explicitly endorsed by the courts and local council - and while I worry for his well-being, I wouldn't pretend those are things that don't need to be exposed.  Circumstances have elected Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 December, 2014, 06:53:28 PM
AA all true of course. But he is not setting himself up for a win. Z Ps are you interested in our 20/12/14 get together in the European? Love to see you there. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 December, 2014, 07:33:43 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 10 December, 2014, 06:50:44 PM
Sharky has described blatant perjury, deliberate withholding of evidence, violation of judicial procedure and police corruption that has gone unchallenged - if not been explicitly endorsed by the courts and local council - and while I worry for his well-being, I wouldn't pretend those are things that don't need to be exposed.  Circumstances have elected Sharky.

He's certainly alleged all of those things, but even if everyone involved acted entirely correctly he still would have been evicted for non-payment of rent.

I said this to Shark before he got kicked out of his house and I'll say it again: Make your protest if you want, and good luck to you, but go in with your eyes open.

Just as non-payment of rent led to eviction, non-payment of the fine will lead to prison.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 08:51:13 PM
My eyes are open and I think I know the risks - some of them, anyway.
.
I think you all know by now that I see a tyranny falling, inch by inch, over the world. I don't care if it's orchestrated, a side-effect of the systems we've built or a combination of the two - or something else. It has to stop.
.
I am not so arrogant as to think that I can stop this perceived tyranny on my own. But I can say no to it. Just me. I can't stop that tyranny from controlling the rest of the world but I can resist it controlling me.
.
And I've spent long nights wondering if I'm insane or not because very few people seem to agree with my approach and fewer still understand it. I dearly wish I could go back, unsee what I've seen, but I can't. How can you go back after you find out that Father Christmas doesn't exist? You can't - but you can learn that Christmas doesn't rely on the existence of Santa just as society doesn't rely on the existence of authority.
.
It is authority that has done this to me: evicted me, falsely accused me, stolen my stuff, destroyed my good name and condemned me to a life of destitution and ruin - all because I wanted to pay my way in my own way and do things my own way. And what's so terribly wrong with that? I want to do my bit, I don't want to live for free but I refuse to be a Debt Sherpa for the elites.
.
My life was given to me, by chance or God or whatever, for me to use as I see fit - not to waste toiling to support those who assume themselves my betters.
.
I refuse to kill or injure or threaten as I resist and ever strive to live by my personal code "cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings." They, of course, possess the ability to impose the ultimate sanction - not that I'm important enough for that (I hope). So all I can do is argue.
.
You know how much I piss you all off here with my insane yet hard to summarily dismiss bullshit? Well, imagine how much more it pisses them off when they have to give official responses framed within their own rules. If they have the right to impose rules on me then, as they get their authority to impose them rules from the electorate (me), then I have the same right to impose the same rules on them. They charge me £120 for something, I charge them £120 for dealing with their charging process. They don't consent to following my policies, I don't consent to following theirs ("policy is not law" is one of the most useful concepts I ever learned). They quote legislation, I quote legislation. They ignore me, I keep on at them.
.
It's either piss them off with words (which you all know is my forte) or take up arms - which I will not and cannot do.
.
And when they come after me, and they will come after me, they will do so in your name - whether you like it or not. But I know that's a lie because, even those people who really have no time for me like Jim Campbell and Gordon Rennie, would not see my home of 27 years and all my possessions stripped from me for the sake of a few quid. Only authority is that heartless.
.
It has to be stopped. I can't stop it for you but maybe I can stop it for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 09:56:16 PM
Absolutely no-one's doubting your sincerity, Shark , and a fair few agree with your aims, if not your methods.  But all of us worry about you, and it'd be wrong not to urge caution in considering what are deeply risky actions.  And I can't personally accept that the only alternative use of your time is watching TV and dreaming of being a professional writer - there are other ways of making a difference beyond risking your liberty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 10 December, 2014, 10:32:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 09:56:16 PM
Absolutely no-one's doubting your sincerity, Shark...

I do. Go all the way, or shut up.

You're on the Internet - get off immediately, because you're:

1. Paying for the right to do so, and what gives anyone the right to charge us for something that we should/could all use for free?

2. Using the Internet paid for by someone else, in which case you're making your friend/family member pay for your right to use the Internet - what gives you the right to leach off them?

3. You're using the Internet for free by stealing someone else's signal - in which case, you're doing exactly what the you feel the government is doing to you - stealing from someone.

Let's go even further. Do you buy vegetables/produce/milk/eggs/meat/bread from a grocer?

Well, you're paying someone else for food, a resource which we should all be entitled to - so go out there and grow and farm. You can grow vegetables in a little trough in the smallest of spaces - I grow a bunch of veggies every year.

So, again, prove you're a true anarchist and go all the way. Or save it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2014, 11:05:00 PM
I'm not quite sure where anarchy instead of vaguely-defined consensual egalitarianism came into the equation, but isn't broadband access provided in most towns in the UK as part of the library service?
Never used it meself, though - they can see you looking at donkey porn if you do so on a public network, and what I do in my special alone time is my business.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 10 December, 2014, 11:10:52 PM
Using internet a library is paying for falls under number 2, especially if he's just sitting around all day using their facilities and not chipping in.

Plus he was online a moment ago. I don't remember any UK libraries open at 23:00.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2014, 11:29:05 PM
I just looked at my tablet's wi-fi list and the public service is still active.  It's not a secure network, either, so I assume one does not pay for access.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 11:30:13 PM
Giff-Gaff, £7.50 per month.
.
I drive a lorry, distributing food. That's what I contribute. That contribution is turned into promissory notes, some of which I exchange for internets because that's how capitalism works. I exchange my work for the work of others. It's not rocket surgery, Locusts.
.
And I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else on this forum. You may not believe a word I say but that's your decision, not mine. I know I come across as arrogant but if you want to let that bother you then that's your decision again. If it's arrogant for me to think that my life belongs to me then I'm fucking well arrogant - as we should all be, in my view.

.
"Go all the way or shut up"? What do you mean? I may be a loon but I'm not about to set fire to myself on the Town Hall steps or go postal in the council offices. I'm not Karl Marx or Luke frigging Skywalker, I'm just some poor git who's tired of living his life head down, arse up, cheeks spread and gob shut. Going all the way isn't nearly as important as setting off in the first place.
.
You can doubt my sincerity all you like - I do it myself often enough so I really don't care. I'm not asking you, or anyone else for that matter, to join in, fund me or support me. I'm not asking you, or anyone else, to believe me or copy me or follow me. I'm not asking to be anybody's hero, villain or martyr. I'm telling you what I'm doing and what I think, that's all. If you don't like that, then I understand Jim can instruct you in the use of the ignore feature.
.
I don't know why you've taken against me all of a sudden, Locusts, I always regarded you as a friend.
.
Tordels - don't worry, I'm hoping to preserve my liberty for as long as possible. I'm well aware of the fact that I can't ever really win - but I can be a thorn or a splinter and cost them time and money. Every minute they have to spend dealing with my arguments is a little victory - it's a minute they won't be able to spend bullying somebody else, at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 December, 2014, 11:49:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 08:51:13 PM
My eyes are open and I think I know the risks - some of them, anyway.
.
I think you all know by now that I see a tyranny falling, inch by inch, over the world. I don't care if it's orchestrated, a side-effect of the systems we've built or a combination of the two - or something else. It has to stop.
.
I am not so arrogant as to think that I can stop this perceived tyranny on my own. But I can say no to it. Just me. I can't stop that tyranny from controlling the rest of the world but I can resist it controlling me.
.
And I've spent long nights wondering if I'm insane or not because very few people seem to agree with my approach and fewer still understand it. I dearly wish I could go back, unsee what I've seen, but I can't. How can you go back after you find out that Father Christmas doesn't exist? You can't - but you can learn that Christmas doesn't rely on the existence of Santa just as society doesn't rely on the existence of authority.
.
It is authority that has done this to me: evicted me, falsely accused me, stolen my stuff, destroyed my good name and condemned me to a life of destitution and ruin - all because I wanted to pay my way in my own way and do things my own way. And what's so terribly wrong with that? I want to do my bit, I don't want to live for free but I refuse to be a Debt Sherpa for the elites.
.
My life was given to me, by chance or God or whatever, for me to use as I see fit - not to waste toiling to support those who assume themselves my betters.
.
I refuse to kill or injure or threaten as I resist and ever strive to live by my personal code "cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings." They, of course, possess the ability to impose the ultimate sanction - not that I'm important enough for that (I hope). So all I can do is argue.
.
You know how much I piss you all off here with my insane yet hard to summarily dismiss bullshit? Well, imagine how much more it pisses them off when they have to give official responses framed within their own rules. If they have the right to impose rules on me then, as they get their authority to impose them rules from the electorate (me), then I have the same right to impose the same rules on them. They charge me £120 for something, I charge them £120 for dealing with their charging process. They don't consent to following my policies, I don't consent to following theirs ("policy is not law" is one of the most useful concepts I ever learned). They quote legislation, I quote legislation. They ignore me, I keep on at them.
.
It's either piss them off with words (which you all know is my forte) or take up arms - which I will not and cannot do.
.
And when they come after me, and they will come after me, they will do so in your name - whether you like it or not. But I know that's a lie because, even those people who really have no time for me like Jim Campbell and Gordon Rennie, would not see my home of 27 years and all my possessions stripped from me for the sake of a few quid. Only authority is that heartless.
.
It has to be stopped. I can't stop it for you but maybe I can stop it for me.
whaddya mean ..."father Christmas doesn't exist"  how could you? :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2014, 12:00:06 AM
Obviously that is just a hypothetical example, Grugz.  Sharky isn't saying that Father Christmas isn't real.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2014, 11:30:13 PM
I'm well aware of the fact that I can't ever really win - but I can be a thorn or a splinter and cost them time and money. Every minute they have to spend dealing with my arguments is a little victory - it's a minute they won't be able to spend bullying somebody else, at least.

That lass that won her court case against the DWP was probably being told from all sides that she couldn't win and had likely even resigned herself to the idea, but she did win.  IDS changed laws to protect himself from prosecution, and the government has been running scared from EU human rights laws since.
So it's worth a punt.  Just look after yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 11 December, 2014, 12:37:09 AM
If you have to follow your path then you have to follow your path, I wish you all luck on it and hope it turns out ok for you!

:)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 December, 2014, 02:34:30 AM
You drive a lorry distributing food. To put money in various corporations' pockets. Money taken from people who have a right to food without paying what they pay for it. You're contributing, all right - to companies like nestle, who feel people should pay dearly for WATER.

To me, you come across as concerned for yourself and only yourself. And that's fine, we all have to look out for ourselves. But don't cast yourself as a saint or a martyr trying to bring enlightenment to mankind.

I begin to understand why Jim and Gordon and others become so frustrated with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 07:09:45 AM
Here, did anyone hear the magnificent Malala Yousafzai on Woman's Hour yesterday?  Get thee to an iPlayer, go, if only to hear her quote her younger brother: [paraphrasing] 'you're a horrible person: you forgave the Taliban for shooting you, but you won't forgive me for borrowing your iPod!'. That lady there is why the human project will work out in the end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 08:39:43 AM
You know what, Locusts - you're absolutely right. I shouldn't drive a lorry until they figure out how to make them run on clean free energy, shouldn't deliver food until the corporations mend their ways, shouldn't access any of the infrastructure belonging to my society until the government stops financing it with toxic debt money, shouldn't eat meat until all cruelty in farming is eliminated, shouldn't vote until the government is perfect, shouldn't post anything anywhere without being 100% certain that it won't frustrate other people, shouldn't do anything at all until the world is perfect enough for me to do things in.
.
You're absolutely right again when you say I'm concerned for myself but incorrect in your assumption that I care for nobody else. (When you were going through tough times over the last couple of years I never offered you a shoulder to cry on or any words of comfort or encouragement, did I?) The whole point of my entire position is that I believe we should all take personal responsibility for own lives - which is a fundamentally arrogant position on the face of it.
.
Let's take your point about Nestle (or anybody) charging money for an essential of life. Leaving aside all the moral, economic and practical arguments concerning the sale of bottled water, I have no objection to the fundamental concept - people can sell anything they like because that's how capitalism works. As it happens, I am against the current practices involved with the sale of bottled water and so don't buy any. I also argue against it when the topic arises. I don't wait for a heroic politician to come along and ban it - I ban it myself, personally.
.
I think your problem with me, Locusts, is that you want me to do more. You want me to be the kind of loudmouth who stands up and says "I know what to do, leave it to me!" You want me to fix the world, somehow, for you and everyone else and, if I can't do that, I should sit down and shut up. But I can't fix the world for you and make it better, nobody can. Nobody ever has and nobody ever will.
.
Like most people, you're waiting for a hero to come along on a white horse and save us all. Believers in Authority await the coming of a new wise king just as believers in God await the second coming of an old wise king - in either case, people just wait and think it's okay to let things slide because someone with the wisdom and power to make everything right will be along soon. Politicians love pretending to be that leader and the people love buying into that pretence - just look at Obama's elevation to near godhood prior to his election and the vast disappointment left in his wake. Leaders don't work any more - the world's too complex for such an outmoded position to be useful.
.
Nobody is coming to rescue you. Nobody and nothing.
.
You have to help yourself and those around you. I believe the term is, or was, "enlightened self-interest".
.
I am humbled to learn that you see me as a saint or martyr, Locusts, but I wish you wouldn't. The desire for saints and martyrs is a symptom of the deep hero-need I mentioned earlier - someone whose job it is to make your life better, to fix the world for you. Well, I can't fix your world and it would be wrong of me to even try. I'm trying to fix my world, that's all - because my world is the only world out of seven billion that I have any right or responsibility to change. All I do here is try to explain what I'm doing and why in the hopes that at least some of it can be of help to others and the perspectives of others can be of help to me. Then, if you want to go off and change your own world then you can do it and I'll help as best as I can but, if that all seems too much like hard work or too dangerous, you can carry on as you are and wait for your Saviour to come along.
.
In my view, you are the One you've been waiting for.
.
So, everything you say is basically true, Locusts, except for the part about me not being concerned about others. I found that comment particularly hurtful, especially coming from you. Being a "saint", though, I forgive you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 December, 2014, 09:09:05 AM
Good god, you're like some kind of living personification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 09:26:06 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 11 December, 2014, 09:09:05 AM
Good god, you're like some kind of living personification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

You need to specify which side of the Dunning-Kruger effect applies for that to be a useful observation.  Perhaps you over-estimate your understanding of the application of the term?   ;)

More seriously, the Shark presents himself as a questioner and challenger of things, rather than assuming a level of expertise he doesn't have.  I agree, the rejection of positions held by vast numbers of dedicated experts might make it look like he's asserting a contrary and superior expertise, but I see it as significantly different: a refusal to accept the status quo, given the status quo's general shittiness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 10:16:06 AM
Well, I just Googled the Dunning-Kruger effect. Very interesting reading, thanks for bringing it to my attention.
.
I'm sure I do overestimate my abilities somewhat but, if I didn't, wouldn't I be held back by the "I can't do that" syndrome? (Which, to some extent I still am.) If I overestimated my abilities too much I'd be setting up campaigns and organizing rallies based on knowledge which I'm not even 100% sure is accurate.
.
So yes, I can recognise that part of the D-K effect in myself. I also recognise in me that part of it saying that if I find something easy to understand then others must find it easy also. I had not noticed that about myself, so now I have something new to think on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 December, 2014, 11:03:03 AM
What Tord said.


Though I think the compulsion to make a principled stance over a practical solution borders on the mad, the saddest thing is the hostility provoked in some by this. Doesn't hurt anyone other than himself and the fact that coppers lie and claim to have been assaulted to fulfill their own ends should be the real source of anger, no? V. sad that most of us will just accept underhanded tactics by the authorities as the norm. They could have kicked him out without the fabricated assault charge - and before anyone says it's Shark's word against theirs, I am never so credulous as to believe CCTV goes missing as a matter of convenience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 12:02:08 PM
Pshaw, there's only one logical endpoint of Sharky following through on his beliefs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJSOT83BX-U&feature=youtu.be
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJSOT83BX-U&feature=youtu.be)
Bring it on, TLS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 12:29:50 PM
Can't watch videos on this old 'phone, unfortunately.
.
Thanks for your understanding and tolerance, folks :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 11 December, 2014, 12:31:26 PM
I don't get the aggressive attitude towards Sharky - I say it's a good thing to speak out if you don't agree with something.
It reminds me of people slagging off Russell Brand on Facebook.
I don't agree with everything TLS or Russel Brand have to say but I think it's pretty clear that they are dissatisfied with society and are prepared to stand up and say so. There's a value to that. There's a value to sticking your head above the parapet, even if the only thing it proves is that the snipers are still there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 12:41:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 12:29:50 PM
Can't watch videos on this old 'phone, unfortunately.

This is what I was going for with that link, though no guarantees gifs will work for you either:

(http://bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/mmfr-suicide-attack-c.gif)

So:

(http://bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/mmfr-52-550x228.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 December, 2014, 12:52:41 PM
Indeed. I'm not a fan of this "Go all the way or get out" attitude. 

I won't quote the the famous example of the man and the beached starfish.

But this world is utterly stacked against you in terms of doing anything that goes against the status quo. To be truly vegan without going back to live in a cave and growing my own crops would be impossible. 

Animal by-products are used in a ridculous amount of things that don't need them. 

But by getting people to stop using animal products for food and drink and clothing will reduce the by-products available for use in other indistries and they will have to start using the alterniative, ethical and cruelty free versions of products.

It's the start of a trickle down effect that wouldn't happen if I just said "No, that's too hard, pass me the beef wellington."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 12:54:20 PM
I think the aggression might stem from discomfort. I'm asking questions about things most of us thought we understood, like the nature of freedom and authority.
.
From Day One in school we are taught one thing above all others: Obey and Trust Authority. If a child has a problem, any problem, it is trained to look first and foremost to authority for a solution. "Mi-iss! Sharky just pulled my hair!" "Mi-iss! Sharky's got his widgie out again!" "Mi-iss! Sharky's the worst classroom assistant we've ever had!" (Another failed career...)
.
That's all very well in youngsters but it never changes. Even up to the last year of school I was expected to ask for permission to go for a piss. Then, when you're out of school you've already been conditioned to go to authority with any problem or need as if only authority has the answers. We trust it because we've been conditioned to accept it largely without question, largely ignoring all the obvious disparities. Like finding out that Santa doesn't exist, finding out that authority doesn't exist is traumatic.
.
It's, maybe, caused by the death of a belief. What are the stages of loss, again? Disbelief, anger, pleading, Happy, Sneezy, Curly, Larry and misery, or something?
.
I reckon that's where the anger comes from, some of it anyway. The majority of it is probably just a side-effect of my winning f*cking personality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 11 December, 2014, 12:57:26 PM
...or perhaps to do with your use of full stops between paragraphs.

;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 01:00:31 PM
Heh, Tordels - is that me tied to the front of the car? :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 01:04:20 PM
If I don't put a full stop between paragraphs, for some reason this old 'phone posts everything as a single block of text with no paragraph breaks at all - which is more annoying.
.
Especially given how long-winded I am.
.
Sorry about that.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 01:05:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 01:00:31 PM
Heh, Tordels - is that me tied to the front of the car? :-D

Nah this is you, astride your delivery van:

(http://bitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com/slashfilm/wp/wp-content/images/mmfr-9-550x228.jpg)

Own the inevitable consequences of your anarchism, Shark, own them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 01:09:52 PM
I shall nail some speakers to my lorry and buy a Wagner cd immediately!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 December, 2014, 01:32:39 PM
QuoteI'm asking questions about things most of us thought we understood

That, I suspect is not the problem people have. It's the not listening to answers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 December, 2014, 01:36:47 PM
Riiiiiight.
.
So because I offer my point of view, I'm agressive and uncomfortable with what you're saying?
.
I don't need to defend myself against your long rambling opinion/personal attack of/against me* - because it's baseless. You know nothing about me. The only thing you know at this point is that when I see bullshit, I'll call bullshit (and calling bullshit doesn't mean I'm unfriendly, because if one of my good friends stopped me with this type of nonsense, I'd call him out on it; so it's not personal).
.
However, because you have felt the need to cast me as frightened, worried, agressive and uncomfortable with the "truth" you've exposed yourself as a very insecure individual. "If someone doesn't agree with me, it's because they're frightened of the enlightenment I have to offer" is what you seem to be saying.
.
(nevermind that I have not once disagreed with you about the way things SHOULD be or COULD be)
.
But let's get into this.
.
Had you posted, "in this particular city, in the particular burrough, from this particular police jurisdiction, this particular officer did such and such, this is a particular injustice against me and I'm going to fight it", that would have been fine, and we could talk about that particular issue.
.
However, you went on many many many rants about All Authority being wrong, and All Authority being dissolved, the Rights of Individual Man, ect - you expessed the sentiment that All Authority should be gotten rid of, not me. Those statements opened you up to all kinds of scrutiny. And that's why I absolutely had to call your bullshit. It's not rocket science, you know.
.
It comes down to practice what you preach. I could find hundreds of quotes from you in which you proclaim (paraphrasing) that all man should be free to do what he wil lso long as he doesn't hurt anyone else. And yet you serve corproations/authorities such as Nestle.
.
Corporations/authorities who are working to take water away from people - all water.
.
Corporations/authorities who are working to take away Common Man's Right to grow his own food in his own garden.
.
Corporations/authorities who have bullied and harrassed private farmers into using genetically modifed seeds/grain, blacklisting those who don't go with it.
.
All for, as you say, promisary notes.
.
In your eyes, Shark, in light of your comments - is you serving these corporations/authorities not...at least somewhat hypocritical?
.
My basic point is: don't disguise your desire for us to rally around you as you rallying for mankind.
.
.
*There was no need to make mention of hard times I've experienced in the past. You knew very little about what I was going through or what the outcome was, and I myself have chosen not to make mention of them on this forum because I would like to keep my private life private. So I'm not exactly what makes you think it's okay to bring that up in an argument/debate - possibly to cloud the waters.
.
I've noticed you're all about Squid Ink, Shark.
.
Of course, as we all know, when a squid is backed into a corner, it releases ink into the water to cloud or confuse a predator while it escapes a confrontation. Time and time again when confronted with an opinion or facts that go against what you WANT to say, you release your ink in walls of words that have very little to do with the direct point. That's how we've gotten to where we are.
.
.
I also feel it's a shame that a once-interesting thread has transformed into The Legendary Shark Thread. I for one propose that we start a new thread specifically for Shark to post in while the rest of us can come here and discuss all kinds of non-Shark-related political stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 01:38:03 PM
No it isn't.
.
;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 11 December, 2014, 01:47:06 PM
You two may be arguing, but it's sweet that you both have the same type of phone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 December, 2014, 01:51:57 PM
Quote from: Banners on 11 December, 2014, 01:47:06 PM
You two may be arguing, but it's sweet that you both have the same type of phone.

Oh, I just added the dots between paragraphs on the outside chance that maybe my thoughts would register with him a little better.

As you see...

I am fully capable...

Of breaking paragraphs up...

Without dots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 11 December, 2014, 01:55:56 PM
Are you both undercover Illuminati agents each trying to destabilize the other's arguments?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 01:58:56 PM
One of the things the internet hasn't yet managed to simulate is the ability for forumites to form a ring around two playground scrappers and chant 'fight! fight! fight!' in squeaky adolescent tones.  You'll just have to use your imaginations for the moment, but rest assured I am doing it in spirit.   

It's Crippen and Turk all over again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 11 December, 2014, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 10 December, 2014, 10:32:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 December, 2014, 09:56:16 PM
Absolutely no-one's doubting your sincerity, Shark...

I do. Go all the way, or shut up.


I think I was probably the first person to use the word 'aggressive'.

It was after reading this, which I thought sounded aggressive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 02:03:18 PM
Locusts, practicality makes hypocrites of us all. It's difficult to live a pure life in an impure world. There are only three options, so far as I can see - embrace the system fully, reject the system totally or navigate as best as you can between the two. I am aware of my own hypocrisy but I'm more irritated by it than ashamed of it. The way the world works forces all kinds of actions and situations on me that I can't get around is a pain in the arse. All I can do is try to make the least hypocritical choice in any given situation. Sometimes I get it right and sometimes I get it wrong.
.
I ask nobody to rally round me but I appreciate it when they do.
.
I ask nobody to believe me but I appreciate it when they do.
.
I apologise for bringing up our private conversations, that was wrong of me.
.
And you're right, there has been rather too much from me lately so I'll shut up and leave the driving to somebody else for a bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 December, 2014, 02:11:53 PM
Then if I was agressive, I was agressive. I simply meant "put up or shut up" or "practice what you preach".

But my point still stands: don't proclaim this or that, yet do the exact opposite. Somehow that's been overlooked by my fellow forumites. Shark has been allowed to stand up on his pulpit and dismiss anyone who finds flaws in his logic, has attacked others in a personal way...yet the words "shut up". I apologize to all thoise who I offended  ::).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 02:19:14 PM
This all seemed to start in the Writers' Block thread. Oh, and just so you know, you do not offend me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 December, 2014, 02:25:52 PM
No, it didn't. I find your logic here in this thread highly flawed. I don't express my opinion in this thread because I have a vendetta against you, or I'm picking on you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2014, 02:31:44 PM
Well, that's good to know.
.
Are we done pissing at one another now? I hope so, because I want to explain to you, in exacting detail, just precisely where you are going wrong in every conceivable area of your life...
.
;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 December, 2014, 02:42:38 PM
So, what's everybody doing for Christmas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spaceghost on 11 December, 2014, 02:45:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 December, 2014, 02:42:38 PM
So, what's everybody doing for Christmas?

I will be single-handedly destroying capitalist society and dismantling the oppressive systems which keep us all under control.

Then I'm watching Doctor Who and having a mince pie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 December, 2014, 02:53:52 PM
Just the one mince pie?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Skullmo on 11 December, 2014, 02:56:54 PM
Are you going to have it off someone else's plate as you don't believe in the concept of personal property?

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2014, 02:59:33 PM
Apparantly, some chaps from Detroit - an American city version of the third world, so far as I can tell - are coming over to explain to the Irish that once you use taxpayers' money to hand over your water supply to private companies, the quality of service goes downhill and then they cut you off.  It probably helps that Detroit is a town that once had a booming economy but then got fucked by Republicans and a government run by rich white folk happy to tell poor people to pull their boots up and we can all get through this "together" - I think those coming to have a listen might be able to relate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 December, 2014, 03:04:04 PM
What a load of ****.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 03:13:48 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 11 December, 2014, 02:59:33 PM...the quality of service goes downhill and then they cut you off.

The quality of water supply in many places in this country is so poor that I'm not sure we'd notice.  But that's what €1 billion of taxes managed by the public sector gets you.

A mince pie does sound good about now, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2014, 03:26:40 PM
After the big Irish Water sell-off you can also look forward to "we need more taxpayers' money to really fix things", "we need more taxpayers' money to get back on schedule", "we're behind schedule, but all is well", and the ever-popular "thanks for the bailout, Ireland" as Irish Water shareholders sail off into the sunset for a country not quite as fucked/on fire as the one they're leaving behind.

Also this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDGRL6eCx2k in which it occurs to me that to keep smiling through the abuse, Kenny must have a lot of experience of being called a cunt to his face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 December, 2014, 05:03:29 PM
I have seen Detroit via les gold's pawn shoppe , I do not want to visit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2014, 07:48:26 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 11 December, 2014, 03:26:40 PM
After the big Irish Water sell-off you can also look forward to "we need more taxpayers' money to really fix things", "we need more taxpayers' money to get back on schedule", "we're behind schedule, but all is well", and the ever-popular "thanks for the bailout, Ireland" as Irish Water shareholders sail off into the sunset for a country not quite as fucked/on fire as the one they're leaving behind.

Oh don't worry, we're experts at this.  We're the country that privatised road tolls, and told the company that if they didn't get as many vehicles as they expected we'd make up the difference, and made so that if we did succeed in changing that ridiculous agreement they'd be compensated to the equivalent amount anyway.  So all through the recession, as our shiny new roads stood empty, the taxpayer who couldn't afford to drive anywhere was paying his daily toll anyway, and the tolls for all the freshly unemployed neighbours who no longer had jobs to drive to.  Meanwhile, the government's stated objective is to reduce road use by subsidising public transport, but even if you do start getting the bus or train to work, you're still effectively paying the toll for that car you're no longer driving through the toll booth.  You could not make it up.  Well, maybe Pat Mills could.

So I have every faith that the semi-state body Irish Water will be firmly taken in hand by this and all future governments and put to work for the benefit of the citizenry.  Which is presumably why the coalition today voted against the proposal that it should require a 60% majority of the Dail to permit Irish Water to be sold off at some future date.

Incidentally, it does rather hack me off that one of the principle organisers of water protests is professional trade unionist Brendan Ogle, who would presumably be first to the barricades if the vast numbers of public sector staff transferred to Irish Water by government fiat, and a significant part of its ludicrous running costs, were in any way to be trimmed, either in numbers, quality or entitlements.  And I speak as a pro-union person.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 December, 2014, 07:58:19 PM
Yes their steely eyed resolve in the face of difficult, uninformed eejits who just don't get the big picture and are nastily trying to debar them from lamping us with the debt of the rich just gladdens my heart. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2014, 08:47:31 PM
Those poor millionaires.  If only there was more we could do for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 December, 2014, 09:15:50 PM
we could spend their money and relieve them of the burden
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2014, 10:32:32 AM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 11 December, 2014, 08:47:31 PM
Those poor millionaires.  If only there was more we could do for them.

Don't beat yourself up just because you only have one life to give  - remember that you have already donated your children and their children to the cause. I know it can never be enough (have you seen the price of marinas these days) but at least it's something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2014, 10:42:20 AM
The best we can do for them is the same as we can do for ourselves - rescue the system. Once we have a social currency instead of a private one we'll all have enough and those poor millionaires won't have to live in constant fear of their homes being stormed by mobs of starving peasants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 December, 2014, 11:42:57 AM
Adam Curtis on 'the democratization of luxury':

Quote...how one half of the world all began to live as though they were aristocrats, while the other half became their servants. And how this allowed the real elite aristocrats of our time - who had become wealthier than any group ever before in history - to disappear, and become invisible...

Been reading through the archives of his BBC blog and it's really, really good stuff. Draws the political to the personal and the social and the historical; a perspective that sheds light on the constructed representations offered by the media and offers eclectic insights into just why things happened the way they did and what led to this state. His blog begins with an in-depth look at the history of Kabul and the lack of historical context provided to the public throughout all of the 'war on terror' - mainly because when viewed, at least through Curtis's eyes, there is a complete lack of a clear narrative and the reality is just one of mistakes, bullishness, greed and lack of accountability.


The quote above is just the one that struck me today as a complete truism and again, a perspective often lost when discussing the first/third world divide. Check it out at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis and enjoy all the lovely archive material he uses throughout.

Also turns out he's working 2 floors above me right now on some non-linear interactive project, which is nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2014, 12:18:58 PM
You must go upstairs and shake his hand immediately! I love that guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2014, 01:55:45 PM
You must go upstairs immediately and shout at him that his pinko liberal sort will be the first into the camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 December, 2014, 02:16:58 PM
I think there are enough nerds here that it's best just to leave him alone. I've watched him make a cup of tea whilst pretending to read my book though.

Also I'm working in the Beeb (albeit the capitalist moneymaking part) - everyone here is going straight to the camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 12 December, 2014, 02:35:03 PM
QuoteI've watched him make a cup of tea whilst pretending to read my book though.

Well THAT doesn't sound creepy AT ALL! ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2014, 03:49:50 PM
Russel Brand made sense on tv.  What the fuck is the world coming to?

QuoteI enjoy seeing Nigel Farage in a boozer with a pint and a fag, laughing off his latest scandal about breastfeeding or whatever, I enjoy it - but this man is not a cartoon character. He ain't Del Boy. He ain't Arthur Daley. He is a pound shop Enoch Powell and we've got to watch him.

I was quite happy to dismiss Brand as one of a succession of comedians whose impact on popular culture is only momentarily notable*, but after seeing how much The Sun and the Telegraph are threatened by him, I'm kind of coming around even if I still find a lot of his act a bit grating.  There's a Youtube video where he responds directly to the Sun's attempts to villify him to their audience of Nazis and working class Uncle Toms and he makes perfectly good points that are largely unnecessary at that stage because he's already said "remember the 96", and with that - a soundbite tactic that fans of pro wrestling will recognise as "pops" - he'd already established himself as occupying the higher ground to a rag that isn't fit to wipe shit from an ass, though his pointing out Rupert Murdoch tax-dodged 350 million pounds this year alone - which is more than the city of Birmingham recently had to save from its budget by cutting six thousand jobs - was most welcome.
Brand is a frustrating celebrity presence to be sure, but on occasion he seems to be worth the effort, and it's good that he's turned his minor celebrity status into something that might be of use in highlighting the shortcomings of those who wield the majority of the country's wealth, as his being doorstopped by Channel 4's tabloid journalism has certainly proved the British media aren't up to the task, certainly not if there are softer targets available.


* See also: Graham Norton, Eddie Izzard, Ben Elton, Newman and Baddiel, and so on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 December, 2014, 05:02:45 PM
The problem I have with Brand is that with all of his 'avoid the system' stuff, he's actively promoting the current situation getting worse rather than better. Go back several decades and there was a much lower difference in voting figures between old and young, and to some extent policy reflected that. There's a good reason why today's politicians tend to skew everything so heavily towards pensioners and certain middle-England districts—because those people go out and vote in number.

Perhaps UKIP will shake things up a bit, purely on the basis of a whole lot of people wrongly thinking them to be something different. That might be enough to make the Tories and Labour rethink a bit (although the Labour leader's very recent austerity speech doesn't exactly fill me with confidence there).

So I'm in a sense happy Brand has at least got people more engaged with the idea of politics; I just wish he would say more than what boils down to "Screw the government! Don't vote! Don't pay your taxes!", which if people actually followed his idea would cause doom for them but wouldn't matter for him in the slightest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 December, 2014, 05:12:23 PM
I think people's problems with Russell Brand go back to the "Have all the answers or shut it" attitude that's so endemic. I think he makes some silly proposals but some very good ones too. And largely all he's ever proposed to my knowledge is something different, something that has a bit of bloody humanity and justice. Barring the idiocy about not paying taxes or voting.

Like Allah Akbark (I am sad to say name changes on forums confuse me I can never remember who they were before...) - I was largely apathetic, mostly due to not liking him as a comedian/TV personality and ignoring his political viewpoints. Until I saw the Sun try to claim he was a hypocrite because he rents an expensive flat and his landlord dodges tax.

The hypocrisy and cynical wording of that article infuriated me so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2014, 05:36:46 PM
The most telling moment on QT was when Brand was confronted by a disabled and very loud UKIP supporter and tried - and failed - to engage because he was clearly trying not to be dismissive or a bully.  I think that more than anything else proves Brand doesn't have what it takes to be an MP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2014, 06:00:44 PM
If Boris Johnson can be London Mayor, why not Russel Brand? He already looks and speaks like Dick Whittington - all he needs is a cat and he's cracked it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 12 December, 2014, 11:29:24 PM
No idea what he's done recently on FB or YouTube but Brand's appearance on QT looked mostly heartening. On the face of it. He seems to be in it for the right reasons. Thing is - and I may be misremembering this - but a few years back he was advocating Anarchy (????) So pleading now that we withhold our votes is really short-sighted. With voting skewed to the older population, what does more of the young (you'd think) not voting achieve? The opposite.

It's the system. We all - as near as damnit - voted in the Scottish Referendum, because each vote mattered. First Past The Post is a horse's arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:50:57 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 12 December, 2014, 11:29:24 PM
It's the system. We all - as near as damnit - voted in the Scottish Referendum, because each vote mattered. First Past The Post is a horse's arse.

I fear PR is further away than ever, the LibDem experience of coalition has been a disaster for them, even if arguably it has benefited the country by keeping the Tories worst instincts in check.

As an alternative I would certainly support more frequent referendums.

We've almost certainly got the EU exit one to look forward to (I'm voting to stay in) and I'm hoping to see something about English devolution or House of Lords reform appear before too many years have passed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 09:22:55 AM
I thought Brand got hammered by the audience.  I don't think his early sexist remarks helped him.  I think he knew he'd dropped a clanger, by the end he was almost mute.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 13 December, 2014, 10:12:37 AM
I fear people like Brand, however heartfelt and sincere, are more part of the problem, and less of the solution.
And it's OK delivering monologues to camera for Youtube and giving interviews to a smiling interviewer, but up against people who answer back - and UKIP plants at that, he looked caught in the headlights.

But plus points for the 'poundland Enoch Powell' summing up of Farage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 December, 2014, 10:33:27 AM
QuoteBut plus points for the 'poundland Enoch Powell' summing up of Farage.

Yup. Doesn't matter who is perceived the winner (for me they were as dull as each other) but this line is what people will remember.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 11:48:15 AM
Poundland is, and Enoch Powell was, very popular with the hoi polloi, so I wouldn't think Farage is bothered by that remark at all, probably lapped it up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2014, 12:06:59 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:50:57 AMI fear PR is further away than ever
Which is ironic for Labour, because FPTP is likely if polling stays consistent to return anything up to 50 SNP MPs for a vote share of around 4.5%. But with STV in Scotland, Labour would have fared far better. Of course, at the time, they were largely anti-PR, because they thought it would hit their MP share. OOPS. (The Tories, on the other hand, are probably better off with FPTP, because otherwise they would definitely lose a ton of seats to UKIP.)

Quotethe LibDem experience of coalition has been a disaster for them, even if arguably it has benefited the country by keeping the Tories worst instincts in check.
It's their own fault. They capitulated at every turn, including even the agreement regarding the Cabinet. They held the cards. They could have forced Tory hands several times but didn't. You wouldn't do this often (tail wagging the dog), but extremely strategically; in this parliament, they should have got one major Cabinet job (Business Secretary isn't really it, and Deputy Prime Minister is an entirely pointless position without any actual power), and also blocked the Health Bill. That said, with the number of Orange Bookers in the Lib Dem ranks these days, quite a few wanted that bill to go through, including Clegg.

What worries me more is that British people consider coalition to be a disaster, rather than this coalition to have not fared well. Plenty of other countries have grown-up politics that include a measure of compromise. But we lurch from Labour to Tory and back, rather than taking a more measured approach that would actually be more suitable for the UK as a whole. This is a country that demands a certain amount of free business and tight fiscal policy but at the same time has a reasonably liberal bent on certain issues, and a deep despite for a social welfare net (including the NHS). An ideal party would in fact combine a lot of policies from the three main parties, but instead we get a small number of those things, and rampant rejection of opposition ideas, even if they are in the UK's best interests.

It'll be interesting if the predictions made on that recent YouGov article on uniform swing (https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/12/01/uniform-swing-rip/) turn out to be in any way accurate though. That suggests Lab/Con almost neck and neck, with SNP as kingmakers. Electoral Calculus (http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html) doesn't go quite so far, but still predicts a Labour minority having to choose between a much-reduced Liberal Democrat contingent to get the required majority, or a bigger number of SNP MPs, who will want all kinds of deals that are actually good for Scotland, rather than the crap they're currently being offered. Interesting times.

QuoteWe've almost certainly got the EU exit one to look forward to (I'm voting to stay in) and I'm hoping to see something about English devolution or House of Lords reform appear before too many years have passed.
Lords reform is one of the very few things Labour's suggested of late that I really liked. Creating a British 'senate', with people pulled from regions makes much more sense than the extremely London-centric Lords as it stands. But the Lords shouldn't stand alone. Labour should put its money where its mouth is and pledge to reform the entire political system in the UK. It will be utterly preposterous if we continue to elect MPs via FPTP but end up electing a British Senate using STV or some other form of PR (which would be likely).

As for the EU, that's going to be a car-crash if we ever do get a referendum. Polling at least suggests the majority would sensibly stick with the status quo; the alternative is just too horrible to contemplate. (And you can bet Spain would gleefully boot out the million Brits living there, most of which have retired, given the chance. Of course, we could always cede Gibraltar to keep them sweet, which I'm sure UKIPers would 'love' the idea of...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 12:47:36 PM
Could you explain to me please why "Spain would gleefully boot out the million Brits living there, most of which have retired," if the UK left the European Union?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 13 December, 2014, 01:15:46 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 11:48:15 AM
Poundland is, and Enoch Powell was, very popular with the hoi polloi, so I wouldn't think Farage is bothered by that remark at all, probably lapped it up.

I was going to add something roughly along these lines to the end of my post.

But yes - rather unfortunately, Farage doesnt seem to become diminished in stature by anything thrown at him. Stuff like this, perversely, may work in his favour. Certainly his supporters may well find succour in it. Popular, he is.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 01:18:01 PM
To give the Spanish people the impression that their government is doing something to save money, presumably. Scapegoating, basically.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2014, 01:35:29 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 December, 2014, 10:33:27 AM
QuoteBut plus points for the 'poundland Enoch Powell' summing up of Farage.

Yup. Doesn't matter who is perceived the winner (for me they were as dull as each other) but this line is what people will remember.

I don't think anyone "wins" at Question Time, it's more just a platform for confirmation bias and those tuning in to watch their preferred candidate will always come away thinking they pasted the opposition.  Brand and Farage is a good example of this, as a lot of conservative media coverage claims Brand to have failed because he came off sexist, as if this was something the public weren't already aware of for years (if not arguably Brand's major claim to fame), or more saliently something that Brand himself apologised for at the time*.  The liberal media are over Farage for his dismissive tone, but again, this is not something we didn't already know about Farage.

Objectively, I don't think anyone came out ahead in QT.  Farage is always being mocked and called out on his racism, and Brand is always being mocked and called out on being a celebrity mouthpiece, this was just more of the same.




*Although one could just as easily point to panelists who were quick to tell Brand "women don't like being talked over" - even though he was talking over the male panelists just as much, and using gender-specific shorthand for men more often than he used gender-specific shorthand for women - and suggest that even before the debate was over, the conservative element was already preparing its - rather cheap - rebuttal narrative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2014, 02:17:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 12:47:36 PM
Could you explain to me please why "Spain would gleefully boot out the million Brits living there, most of which have retired," if the UK left the European Union?
Think about this in reverse: if we had a million people living in the UK, mostly a drain on the state, that suddenly had no right to reside, what do you think we would do? Of course, my point was extreme, but on leaving the EU, the two million or so Brits estimated to be living in EU countries have no legal right to stay there. They will either have to rely on treaties between countries being hammered out, or get visas. On the former of those things, treaties will only be simple if there's some kind of balance, but Brits in Spain massively outnumber Spanish in the UK. At the very least, the UK would have to heavily compromise or provide the Spanish an incentive to make a deal. If not, we could suddenly find ourselves with a load extra pissed-off pensioners. And on visas, you mostly only get those for permanent residency if you're employed somewhere, rich, or young enough for the receiving country to consider you being there advantageous.

Too many people forget that EU freedom of movement is a truly staggering thing. If you want, you can move to Italy tomorrow. Or France. Or Iceland (EFTA, but bound by the same regulations). Or Poland. Or Spain. Or Sweden. You can just go. You can't do that with, say, the USA, Canada, Australia, Brazil or Russia. People take this aspect of the EU for granted. UKIP seems to think that should the UK say "fuck you guys, then" to the EU, we'll then be able to rapidly hammer out massive trade and residency deals with specific countries. But why would they give a shit? What's in it for them? In a few cases, plenty, when you look at the economics and related circumstances; but only a few.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 02:37:12 PM
Well, presumably, at the same time as threatening to throw out a million plus law-abiding Brits, they will be withdrawing from the European Court of Human Rights, as their chances of being able to carry out their threat, whilst a signatory to that Court, are somewhere between zero and nil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2014, 03:20:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 02:37:12 PM
Well, presumably, at the same time as threatening to throw out a million plus law-abiding Brits, they will be withdrawing from the European Court of Human Rights, as their chances of being able to carry out their threat, whilst a signatory to that Court, are somewhere between zero and nil.

This fairly in-depth examination of the issue (http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/what-happens-to-british-expatriates-if.html) comes to the conclusion that the EU nations would be entitled to treat UK citizens in their country exactly the same way that the UK chooses to treat foreign nationals on its own soil.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 04:02:33 PM
Interesting article, Jim.  Why would the UK throw out citizens of the European Union, if we were to leave the Union.  There are many immigrants here who don't come from a European Union country, we don't throw those out as a matter of course.  I don't expect the UK to throw out EU nationals, anymore than I expect the UK to throw out Americans, Canadians, Australians, etc., etc.  It defies logic that we would throw out all EU immigrants and neither would the EU countries throw us out.

Why would Spain, with 23% unemployment, youth unemployment at over 50%, and hundreds of thousands of empty properties, throw out a million Brits, who are spending money in their shops, factories, bars, taxis and creating a lot of employment.  It wouldn't make any sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 04:07:41 PM
Since when did politics make sense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2014, 04:13:08 PM
Quotewe don't throw those out as a matter of course

The UK throws out people from non-EU countries all the time, some of which are gainfully employed, and some of which even have marriages and families to take into account. (The British position now is that keeping a family together alone isn't enough, as this news story of baffling idiocy on behalf of the UK government shows (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-30439592). If you're earning much under the national average wage—even though said average is hugely inflated by London—you're out. It's that simple.)

My point remains: why would EU countries continue treating British citizens in the same manner as they do today if those citizens were no longer members of the EU? And especially if right-wingers/anti-immigration people get their way and effectively block entry from all but a select few countries? At the very least, this a huge risk. And even if that weren't to happen, a British person's right to movement will nonetheless be sent back decades.

Fancy living in France for a bit? Tough shit. Like the look of Spain? Too bad. Fallen in love with a Danish person and want to live together? Get ready for the kind of paperwork that would make your eyes pop, and anything up to 18 months of administrative and bureaucratic hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 04:28:59 PM
We don't throw out people who are obeying the immigration laws.  Sure, we throw out people who aren't, as other countries throw Brits out if they aren't obeying the laws of those countries.  I'm talking about law-abiding citizens.

And, I'll go back to my point about the European Court of Human Rights.  Do you really believe the European Court of Human Rights would allow Spain to throw out a million law-abiding Brits?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 04:34:38 PM
Easy - Spain simply passes legislation and thus your "law abiding citizens" - if they wish to remain "law abiding" - obey the new "law" and accept deportation without question.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 04:40:27 PM
The EU can pass what ever laws it likes, Sharkey, but if the European Court of Human Rights don't agree with it, it ain't happening!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 04:46:31 PM
The ECHU says that people are entitled to a home and uninterrupted enjoyment of their property (amongst other things).
.
Here I sit as living proof that governments - and even local councils - don't give a shit about the ECHR.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 04:51:27 PM
I'll drop out of this conversation now, Sharkey, as I was talking about a general point rather than your own situation and I don't want to offend you.  Cheers, Mike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2014, 04:54:24 PM
Even if they do look like getting their collar felt for breaking EU laws, there's nothing to stop them changing the law retroactively, like IDS did to stop himself being charged with slavery.  It was around that time Dave "Fucking Cunt" Cameron wanted to ditch the ECHU altogether - funny, that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
 No offence taken, Tankie - please don't stop on my account.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 05:24:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 04:46:31 PM
The ECHU says that people are entitled to a home and uninterrupted enjoyment of their property (amongst other things).
.
Here I sit as living proof that governments - and even local councils - don't give a shit about the ECHR.

Little bit unfair. You got yourself evicted by refusing to accept housing benefit, and not having the means to pay your rent any other way.

I reckon the state's implicit offer to pay 100% of your rent was a pretty good indication they did want to support your right to stay in your house.

It's true that the Tories hate the ECHR, and the feeling is probably mutual, but I'm not so sure that even the European courts would have taken your side over that one...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2014, 05:50:35 PM
Sharky detailed at the time how he asked the benefits people to pay directly to his landlords without attempting to involve him as an intermediary, which while not technically how things are done, was neither unreasonable or beyond the abilities of those involved.  I know if I was in the position of kicking someone out of their house or filling in a form for them to make both our lives easier, I'd choose the latter course of action and not be an asshole about it.

I've probably mentioned this before, but my brother works in claims processing for the DWP, and he was told to write and sign a letter to a widower telling the man that his benefits were being sanctioned because his wife had been paid benefits when she was classed as "available for work", even though she had been bed-ridden with cancer at the time.  She had since died and so the DWP were taking the money back by sanctioning her spouse.  My brother refused to write the letter, as did many others in his office before the job of doing it quietly went away.*
People work in these organisations and they decide every day how much of an asshole they want to be.



* It's not really a great ending to this anecdote, but consensus was that someone in the office who wanted to suck up to management probably wrote the letter on the QT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2014, 06:02:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 December, 2014, 04:28:59 PMWe don't throw out people who are obeying the immigration laws.  Sure, we throw out people who aren't, as other countries throw Brits out if they aren't obeying the laws of those countries.  I'm talking about law-abiding citizens.
The point being, the law (or the regulations) are an ass. As per the linked article, that South African guy is going to be deported, sent away from his British wife and their child, because she wasn't deemed to have earned quite enough money last year, based on averages inflated by London wages, despite them living in Cornwall. He's broken no laws; they've only not matched required regulations (and not missed by much). She's earning. They're happy here. Now, they're essentially all being forced to move back to South Africa. That makes no sense to me.

QuoteAnd, I'll go back to my point about the European Court of Human Rights.  Do you really believe the European Court of Human Rights would allow Spain to throw out a million law-abiding Brits?
As already noted, I was being extreme. But the fact remains that if the UK leaves the EU, that obliterates any Brit's right to move/live in any EU country, and it raises serious questions regarding the right to reside. As per the analysis Jim linked to, the UK would largely be reliant on bilateral deals with specific countries, which would almost certainly require major concessions from the UK.

So we end up in the situation where we leave the EU but basically have the same freedom of movement that we do now, in order to keep the EU happy, or we leave the EU and end up with a shit-load of Brits moving back (the "the eggs that have to be broken to make the omelettes of those British politicians who feel uncomfortable living next to Romanians" as Steve Peers puts it).

Of course, many UKIPers and Tories will pretend this won't happen. Of course the rest of the EU will do what we want and make every Brit happy, while the UK's busy telling Europe to get fucked and excluding Romanians! But they also seem to labour under the misapprehension that the UK is still a major player on the world stage, rather than a country that could at most be one of the three major drivers in Europe, but doesn't want to be. I'd sooner see our government say "Right then!" and get its hands seriously dirty in Europe, truly defining its future, rather than being the arrogant little shit at the back of the class, flicking snot at its peers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:09:59 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 13 December, 2014, 05:50:35 PM
Sharky detailed at the time how he asked the benefits people to pay directly to his landlords without attempting to involve him as an intermediary, which while not technically how things are done, was neither unreasonable or beyond the abilities of those involved.  I know if I was in the position of kicking someone out of their house or filling in a form for them to make both our lives easier, I'd choose the latter course of action and not be an asshole about it.

I suspect allowing that kind of thing would make fraud pretty easy (eg. landlord claiming housing benefit when the tenant is in fact also paying the rent, and only the landlord knows they're being paid twice) but I do agree that it would have been possible, and of course preferable, had Mr Shark been allowed to stay in his house through some creative solution to his ethical difficulties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 06:16:08 PM
Well remembered, AA!
.
But even if I had been forcibly evicted for flatly refusing to pay my rent, that still means that money is more important than "law" - whether that be local, national, European or international law.
.
Like old M.A. Rothschild is reputed to have said, "give me control of a country's money and I care not who writes its laws."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:25:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 06:16:08 PM
But even if I had been forcibly evicted for flatly refusing to pay my rent, that still means that money is more important than "law" - whether that be local, national, European or international law.

It certainly means that the law that says you have to pay your rent trumps the law that says you get to stay in your house.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:28:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2014, 06:02:02 PM
I'd sooner see our government say "Right then!" and get its hands seriously dirty in Europe, truly defining its future, rather than being the arrogant little shit at the back of the class, flicking snot at its peers.

Seconded!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2014, 06:41:19 PM
Not exactly, JBA, as I was (and am) perfectly willing to pay what I can afford for my Social Housing. As being in debt is not a crime (if it was, virtually every government in the world would be in jail), the Council decided that being skint is a crime instead. I mean, people who can't afford to pay for social housing, housing meant for the poor and disadvantaged, aren't entitled to home and are not covered by any legislation whatsoever. I often wonder what might have happened if the officers involved had been armed.
.
What it seems to mean, from my perspective, is that the government/council only observes legislation when it falls in their favour and that any legislation that falls in my favour (and there is plenty) is irrelevant.
.
This is one of the reasons why I hold my personal law above government/council law. Under my law, I cannot lay my hands on anyone who tells me not to (except in extreme circumstances like self defence) and I most certainly cannot smash my way into somebody's home, throw them out and then steal all their stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2014, 07:07:20 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 December, 2014, 06:09:59 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 13 December, 2014, 05:50:35 PM
Sharky detailed at the time how he asked the benefits people to pay directly to his landlords without attempting to involve him as an intermediary, which while not technically how things are done, was neither unreasonable or beyond the abilities of those involved.  I know if I was in the position of kicking someone out of their house or filling in a form for them to make both our lives easier, I'd choose the latter course of action and not be an asshole about it.

I suspect allowing that kind of thing would make fraud pretty easy (eg. landlord claiming housing benefit when the tenant is in fact also paying the rent, and only the landlord knows they're being paid twice) but I do agree that it would have been possible, and of course preferable, had Mr Shark been allowed to stay in his house through some creative solution to his ethical difficulties.

I don't know if you have to be judged mentally incompetent or something first, but social workers actually do exactly that kind of thing all the time on behalf of members of the community - filling in forms and liasing between council departments to make sure money goes where it's supposed to and no-one gets kicked out of their home.  It's also worth pointing out that Sharky didn't have a private landlord, he was a social housing tenant, so the council was technically evicting him because they weren't paying themselves.  This was an avoidable situation for all concerned, and the heavy-handed police presence - and attendant perjury - is deeply troubling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2014, 07:30:48 PM
This is the fundamental point that seems to get missed in relation to SharkGate.  It's not really about whether we agree or disagree with Sharky's wordview and the decisions he makes in support of it, instead it's a question about how an individual could not be accommodated within the system at no additional cost because maintaining the rigidity of the system's procedures was apparently more important than providing the basic human needs of one of the people it exists only to serve. 

Then there's the manner in which this inflexibility was translated into heavy-handed action, and the allegedly false testimony used to demonise Shark and thus reinforce the supposed rightness of those actions by showing the subject to be a violent degenerate, said alleged perjury actually undermining the whole concept of objective law and inflexible policy that was being asserted by the whole sorry mess. 

And most importantly of all, that all these things were done by individual people to another person in their community, supposedly carrying out sanctioned orders in the name of the greater good because there was no better way. 

That's what keeps this story in my mind, not just another tale of self-inflicted woe from an internet pal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2014, 10:30:49 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 December, 2014, 07:30:48 PM
instead it's a question about how an individual could not be accommodated within the system at no additional cost because maintaining the rigidity of the system's procedures was apparently more important than providing the basic human needs of one of the people it exists only to serve.

All of which rather neatly overlooks the fact that the system couldn't function if it was reconfigured to match the needs of each and every person on a 1:1 basis. If we make an exception for TLS, why not the next person, who wants something subtly different, and the person after that, who wants something different again? Why not? Because the system will break down, and then it will serve no one.

The system is a machine and while I don't defend any number of flaws in both its mechanism and operation, doing so is not a requirement of recognising the fact that it is a machine that works in a specific way to deliver a specific result.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 December, 2014, 10:56:58 AM
I'm with Jim on the above. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 December, 2014, 11:04:46 AM
Comply or die, then?
.
I think the system is perfectly capable of treating everyone on a 1:1 basis - it already treats vast numbers of people "subtly differently". It doesn't treat a 68 year-old amputee from Newcastle in exactly the same way it treats a 68 year-old cardiac patient from Canterbury, for example.
.
The suggestion that, in this day and age of computerisation and instant communication, a system that can do anything from organising the construction of a suspension bridge to the replacement of a broken wheelie bin cannot adapt to the individual needs of a single human being without collapsing is, quite frankly, ludicrous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 December, 2014, 11:15:32 AM
Another day, another UKIP candidate reveals himself to be utter filth. Still, that Nigel, he's a character, eh?
I'm seriously at a loss as to how or why anyone could vote for this scum. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30467897
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 December, 2014, 11:51:13 AM
Shark, the difficulty is these systems aren't really modern. They are creations which stem partially from the mass systemisation of governmental departments in the late nineteenth century and more directly from further advances made in the mid twentieth century.
The computerisation we see today is essentically ad hoc, a bolt on (not Bolt 01) if you will, which partially augments extant processes. Moves towards truely 'smart' systems have been unsuccessful in the main; if not entirely - see the roll outs of governmental IT systems over the past 20 years - with the invariably associate 'massive overspend....not fit for purpose tags'.
An individual specific system or systems are in my opinion still in the realm of Science Fiction and in a way thank heavens they are. A system of this complexity would potentially do away with millions of jobs in the sense it would preclude the need for a decision making 'white collar group' (most of us) and again, in my opinion,  be the perfect tool for close control of the 'mass' individual, meaning you and I. Z. Ps I'll take my tiinoil hat off now. :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 December, 2014, 01:37:28 PM
Not sure I agree with that analysis, Z. The System does not (and indeed must not) stand apart from society but is an integral part of it, changing and evolving and becoming more complex along with all the rest of the constantly developing, networked systems that comprise our world. Sure, the system lags behind a bit but it is infinitely adaptable.
.
I do concede your point that computerisation and communications are only tools employed by the system, just like paper and pens, but they are powerful tools. The most important part of any system is the most adaptable and imaginative part - the human being - and everything else is just a mechanism to help those human beings operating the system.
.
The part of the system most often overlooked is the person that system was designed to help. In fact, so overlooked is the importance of "the customer" that they are routinely excluded from the decision making process. All the customer is expected to do is provide information and let mysterious "decision makers" decide what's best for them whether the customer agrees or not.
.
In my opinion, the fewer white-collar decision makers there are enforcing their opinions on the rest of us the better. That doesn't mean they all should be fired but, rather, have their jobs changed to something like decision facilitators or solution explorers, working With their "customers" on an equal basis to find the best solution in each specific case. In fact, there would probably be scope for more employment under these conditions than less as it would be a more involved process. Such a mutual and adaptable system would also be less likely to lend itself to oppression or tyranny by offering a great many adaptable options instead of just a handful of fixed ones. One of the main pillars of tyranny is limited choice - pay up or piss off, kind of thing.
.
The system is as flexible and smart as we ourselves are - if it wasn't it would be no use whatsoever. It's age, therefore, is not an indication of the system's weakness but of its strength and durability. Just at the moment, though, the system doesn't quite know which way to go - is it here to help us or to control us? I'd go with the former but most people I know seem to accept the latter without much thought (present company excluded).
.
I may be asking for something unusual but what I want is a very long way away from impossible, even for our present system - a couple of 'phone calls, letters and/or emails and a signed form or two and it's sorted. I reckon that the Council, the Government and myself could have sorted this out in under a week if we'd all been allowed to act like intelligent, thinking beings rather than bureaucratic automata.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 December, 2014, 02:06:02 PM
The issue pertinent to your situation Shark appears to me, and I have some experience of being on the other side of the process, to have been brought about by the very 'facilitator', 'customer' based culture you refer to.
I mentioned in my lenghty ramble (analysis is too flattering a term) the adhoc nature of modern governmental decision making processes. The very decision which has so badly impacted on you was quite possibly made by a customer service facilitator essentially ticking drop downs on a badly designed actulisation programme.
Had there been a properly trained decision maker reviewing the evidence before processing then the decision may have been different and more positive in respect to you. It is the very denuding of skill sets and independence of decision formulation and application brought about by adhoc 'cost effective', 'customer' based culturess now present in the public sector which has society in the morass we see on a daily basis. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2014, 02:08:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2014, 10:30:49 AM
All of which rather neatly overlooks the fact that the system couldn't function if it was reconfigured to match the needs of each and every person on a 1:1 basis. If we make an exception for TLS, why not the next person, who wants something subtly different, and the person after that, who wants something different again? Why not? Because the system will break down, and then it will serve no one.

This is  true of the system that we (in general western terms) have now.  However, I  honestly do not believe it is true of all possible systems, or that some level of flexibility can't exist in the ones we have now.  The system is operated by individuals, in the service of individuals: the possibility of doing things in a more human, less authoritarian, way automatically exists.  Exceptions shouldn't be seen as clogs chucked into the machine, but rather as a happy result of a system that is flexible and amenable to individual human outcomes.  There really are sufficient resources in all our economies to do things differently.

For all its academic and cultural gloss, my own line of work is essentially to mediate between the requirements of government expressed in planning permission and the needs/wants of individuals and companies who want to build things.  While I like to bleat about the stupidities and intransigence of both sides of this equation, the reality is that everyone involved is a human, most of whom you can talk to, and all of whom can understand the need to compromise For all that it's presented as a rigid system enshrined in statute and policy, no two outcomes are exactly the same, deadlines are massaged, footprints are altered, permissions are winked at, requirements are subject to change due to circumstance.   It's still a crap system, but once you can get humans talking things can usually be arranged to mutual advantage: and that's just buildings and roads.  The big difference from the social provision sphere is that the flow of money goes the other way and is constantly subject to outside pressure, but both represent a similar type of system.

If we look at the vast differences in the social welfare resources and methods of their deployment of near neighbours and close cultural and economic bedfellows (e.g. Ireland, the UK, France, Sweden, the US), it's obvious that there is no one way.  And that's just here and now: things have beenand are so very different elsewhen and where. 

So many things are impossible, until they are done: universal suffrage, universal healthcare, universal welfare, immunisation, social housing, recycling, renewable energies, lead-free petrol etc. etc.

A system that can allow individual decisions based on need and capacity must be within our capacity without the sky falling in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2014, 02:14:52 PM
They can't have it both ways: either they have to rigorously stick to rules and regulations - in which case they shouldn't be presenting unsigned warrants and stitching people up like kippers - or they have leeway to act outside the normal expectations of their office.

I saw this one and thought of Sharky: WARNING!!  LINK CONTAINS RUSSEL BRAND (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTkNaxHJ-d8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 December, 2014, 03:20:58 PM
Zen, you're correct. The terms I used (customer, decision maker, etc.) weren't quite right. Perhaps the word "partner" would be closer. "Hello, Mr Councilbod. I have a problem I need my system's help with. As you work for my system, let's sit down and hammer something out between us."
.
Also, I am trying to be less abrasive in deference to those people here I tend to upset by just being me - hence your "lengthy ramble(s)" will hereafter always be thought of as analyses. :-)
.
Tordels, as ever, makes some excellent points gathered from his first-hand experience. The flexibility in the system does not come from the system itself but from the human beings manning it. We all know of cases where rules have been bent or broken - I myself know of a young couple with a baby who were awarded an upstairs Council flat (which other parents with older children had been denied at least twice before) despite "inflexible" Council safety rules preventing people with offspring under a certain age moving into flats with staircases. Yes, it's a silly rule because a) lots of Council semis have staircases as well and b) there's no rule preventing anyone from having a baby After they've moved in to an upstairs flat. So there is flexibility already inherent in the system, as Tordels points out, but that flexibility comes from people.
.
AA - damn right. They either follow their own rules or they don't, which is an argument I've thrown at the Council many times over the years - "if you accept the validity of Legislation X then you must also accept the validity of Legislations Y and Z - if not, then you must, logically, be open to negotiation using legislation as a guide." The Council (and courts and police) have a very effective counter-argument to this: silence.
.
I think it was George Washington (or perhaps Abraham Lincoln) who said, "if you don't want to argue a point, don't bring it up."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 December, 2014, 10:12:21 AM
"When the machine breaks down, we break down"


Also in regards to all the nonsense about immigration laws; our laws are not fit for purpose, averages are used in this mighty machine at all levels and those averages only truly work for the top 5% that massively skew our nation's 'averages'. As an example among what still seems to be perceived as a privileged sub-section of society - the 'average graduate starting salary" is  supposedly £29,500. 5 years on from Uni, I'm at £24k - and the vast majority of entry-level jobs requiring a degree are lucky to be £20k minimum, particularly outside London.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 December, 2014, 10:16:54 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 15 December, 2014, 10:12:21 AM
As an example among what still seems to be perceived as a privileged sub-section of society - the 'average graduate starting salary" is  supposedly £29,500. 5 years on from Uni, I'm at £24k - and the vast majority of entry-level jobs requiring a degree are lucky to be £20k minimum, particularly outside London.

The first student loan came in during my final year at University. It was only a few hundred quid, but after ten years I had never earned anything close to the threshold for paying it back which, at that time, was (I think) just the national average wage. In the end, I paid it back regardless, just because I wanted rid of it.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2014, 11:16:11 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 December, 2014, 10:16:54 AM
The first student loan came in during my final year at University. It was only a few hundred quid, but after ten years I had never earned anything close to the threshold for paying it back which, at that time, was (I think) just the national average wage.

As previously noted here the pay for people in my 'profession' generally with 3-5 years of university behind them (BA, BSc MA, MSc etc), plus 5+ years of experience (25 in my case) is the same as the union-mandated rate for a 3rd year Apprentice in any recognised trade - few of whom would be out of their teens. And in case anyone thinks that it gets better further on in an archaeology career, the most coveted job opportunity to come up in recent years, one which multiple folks with PhDs, PostDocs and decades of experience were lining up for offered a salary at €10K less than the national average wage.  A mate of mine with 20 years third level teaching experience, several definitive books and numerous major research projects to his name has just secured his first ever full-time academic contract (for two years) at the age of 43.  He's done literally nothing else but work towards this since he was 17 - he has no house, no car, no family of his own.

Third Level is not a passport to untold riches, and nor should it be promoted and treated as such.

I used to proudly boast that I paid my own way through 5 years of university, through a combo of 2-3 jobs, bursaries and scholarships, ending up with a loan of only a couple of grand at the very end when I was just too busy finishing my thesis to hold down a job.  But I think the highest fees I had to pay were IRP£1900 a year (I needed to put aside less than £40 a week), so that was less than ten grand in total for my education. There's no way I could manage that starting now. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 December, 2014, 07:07:36 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 14 December, 2014, 02:14:52 PM
They can't have it both ways: either they have to rigorously stick to rules and regulations - in which case they shouldn't be presenting unsigned warrants and stitching people up like kippers - or they have leeway to act outside the normal expectations of their office.

It should be the latter, and generally is.

However, that doesn't mean that those with discretion are necessarily going to find in favour of a guy making an obtuse protest about the evils of accepting the government money that he needed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2014, 07:15:51 PM
Sharky did accept it.  He made a post about it at the time and everything.

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 December, 2014, 07:07:36 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 14 December, 2014, 02:14:52 PM
They can't have it both ways: either they have to rigorously stick to rules and regulations - in which case they shouldn't be presenting unsigned warrants and stitching people up like kippers - or they have leeway to act outside the normal expectations of their office.

It should be the latter, and generally is.

I am an Irish Catholic in a Nationalist town who lived through the Troubles.  Please explain this new concept you have invented.


In other news, I think I actually kind of admire this new idea of Iain Duncan Smith that will limit the amount of child benefit a person can claim to only their first two children (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/dec/14/child-benefit-limited-two-children-iain-duncan-smith), because even the Lord God Almighty only demanded the deaths of the firstborn sons of Egypt, so it takes balls of steel to ask for the in utero death of third male and female children alike just to continue punishing the estate-dwelling chav benefit cheats that only procreate in order to acquire state support for their addiction to cigarettes, alcopops and lottery tickets - oh, and that uses food banks only because the liberal media has told them that food banks exist and using one means more money for ciggies and Mickey D take-outs.
I am not sure what the numbers of such people are, but I am sure that there are millions and millions and millions and millions of people just like this justifying introducing a policy that even the Chinese government is currently thinking twice about, and it's not just that IDS is a cunt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 December, 2014, 07:38:21 PM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 15 December, 2014, 07:15:51 PM
Sharky did accept it.  He made a post about it at the time and everything.

Yeah, but he wouldn't do so in the manner which the machine required, which was effectively rejecting the help (whatever one's wishes about individual discretion, and the hope that this would be used for rather than against Mr Shark, as discussed above).

QuoteI am an Irish Catholic in a Nationalist town who lived through the Troubles.  Please explain this new concept you have invented.

The wriggle room I favour possibly doesn't work so well if it can then be used to enforce sectarianism, discrimination and generally being a bastard. However, that's the trade-off because if you cut out all risk of people making wrong decisions, you also remove their ability to make the right ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 December, 2014, 08:27:55 PM
Know where you're coming from AA: 'a small town, Church without a steeple, where whores and bitches lean over half doors and scoff at decent people'. I encountered that sort of site for the larger part of my life as well but times change....a wee bit more slowly over here alas; but changed they have. z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2014, 11:36:20 PM
The change is welcome, but I feel it might be even more so if lessons had been learned in the process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 December, 2014, 01:06:14 PM
What is the quote from Zen?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 December, 2014, 01:21:20 PM
Oh, it's an old piece of Irish doggerel  which encapsulates existence in a poor small town ireland. Or I suppose in many other places. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 December, 2014, 01:29:44 PM
UKIP hypocrisy of today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30486154

QuoteMr Helmer, head of the party's delegation in Europe, added that this was a way of "liberating money" that would otherwise have gone to pro-European parties.

How selfless of them - I look forward to seeing this money handed directly to the exchequer.

Roger Helmer, MEP, lest we forget: http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/10/12/ukips-roger-helmer-who-claimed-gays-undermine-marriage-calls-for-privacy-after-visit-to-alleged-brothel/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 December, 2014, 01:35:55 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 16 December, 2014, 01:29:44 PM
Roger Helmer, MEP

A man so repellant that I voted Conservative to keep the homophobic bigot out of Westminster.

That was a strange day, I can tell you.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 December, 2014, 04:10:26 PM
It was a strange day when I didn't vote for them!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2014, 06:15:22 PM
Helmer, Himmler, Hitler, Hess - heck!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 December, 2014, 03:46:07 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement

The difference in ideology between the US 'sovereign citizens' and oh, someone we might know who takes a similar stance on 'common law' (might be shark shaped, might just be mythical) is a funny one.

Anyway - was just interesting! Nothing too deep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 18 December, 2014, 04:45:11 PM
that's a fascinating read - I particularly liked this one example:

QuoteIn a criminal case in 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington noted:
Defendant [Kenneth Wayne Leaming] is apparently a member of a group loosely styled "sovereign citizens." The Court has deduced this from a number of Defendant's peculiar habits. First, like Mr. Leaming, sovereign citizens are fascinated by capitalization. They appear to believe that capitalizing names has some sort of legal effect. .....The Court therefore feels some measure of responsibility to inform Defendant that all the fancy legal-sounding things he has read on the internet are make-believe......On May 24, 2013, Leaming was sentenced to eight years in federal prison.[35]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 December, 2014, 05:12:36 PM
I admit that I have taken some ideas from "movements" like this and the "Freemen on the Land" but mostly I disagree with their overall approach. I am not against the government or legal systems as these movements tend to be. My personal belief is that our systems need to be rescued from untoward interference.
.
In particular, I find ideas such as having ones' name presented in ALL CAPITALS on official letters renders the letter unlawful because its actually addressed to ones' birth certificate to be foolish. Also, I find the arguments about language (birth = berth and court dock = ship's dock, for example) to be interesting but tenuous.
.
On the other hand, for reasons I've explained before, I have a lot of time for the idea that legislation is a lesser form of law than statute, case, common or natural law.
.
I do firmly believe in the rights and responsibilities of the individual and find that these movements tend to focus mainly on the rights and ignore, or downplay, the responsibilities of the individual. Many people also try to use these ideas to make money - which is, to my mind, unacceptable.
.
I am not a member of any group like these but I do find some of their ideas valid and worthy of development. (And I admit to having been beguiled by them in the past, before I started trying to figure things out for myself. Indeed, some of these ideas have stayed with me but many have fallen away. I don't have all the answers or even a comprehensive understanding of all the issues - despite my often robust diatribes - and my opinions and approach continue to evolve.)
.
The core of my approach is the question of whether the System is the ruler of the individual, the servant of the individual or the partner of the individual. I think the answer is the latter but many, many others disagree with me.
.
The parts of the system I oppose are those which, for whatever reason, act tyranically. As Mahatma Gandhi said, "The only tyrant I accept in this world is the still voice within."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 December, 2014, 11:31:50 AM
QuoteIf you and your mates were going out for a Chinese, what do you say you're going for?

Still think Nige isn't a flithy racist?

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/12/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-candidates-racist-remark
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2014, 11:49:15 AM
For some reason, that article makes me think of years ago - before their creative renaissance - when Marvel's Captain America book was full of stories where he'd fight white supremacists, only the baddies could never use actual racist slurs so they said things like "people of colour" like it wasn't just a descriptive term.  I remember thinking "they're not even trying here - this might be good enough for a child or someone who's mentally subnormal, but really, these are some very unconvincing racists."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 December, 2014, 11:50:45 AM
Wow. Most people just say "Fancy chinese?" though I do have some friends who might say the other thing. But only maybe not as a universal use. And they are not running for office anywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 19 December, 2014, 12:29:46 PM
Nobody says that anymore, you just say you're having a chinese takeaway or whatever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
If you don't mind me asking, how old are you, Richmond?  If you're 40+, in the past have you never used a derogatory term to describe someone?  I'm 57 and grew up on the East London/South Essex border and I can certainly remember using terms as a younger man that I wouldn't use now.  Haven't you?

We live in a far better society now and I'm ashamed when I think of some of the things that I used to say as a young man.  Of course, I could pretend that I didn't say them but I'd be lying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 December, 2014, 01:02:49 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 12:59:50 PM
We live in a far better society now and I'm ashamed when I think of some of the things that I used to say as a young man.  Of course, I could pretend that I didn't say them but I'd be lying.

How is this relevant to what Smith said recently, or what Farage said in his defence even more recently?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 01:07:11 PM
I'm not saying it's relevant, at all, Jim.  Just giving my twopenn'orth!  I didn't think everything we put on here had to be relevant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 December, 2014, 01:15:16 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 01:07:11 PM
I'm not saying it's relevant, at all, Jim.  Just giving my twopenn'orth!  I didn't think everything we put on here had to be relevant.

Rich made a post; you asked him a question that appeared to be in response to that post; I asked how your question was relevant to the post it appeared to be responding to. If you weren't responding to Rich's post, then why did you address him? If you were, then responding with a complete non sequitur seems... odd.

I'm not trying to police some arbitrary standard of relevance, I just didn't understand, which is why I asked you the question.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 01:24:39 PM
You're quite right, Jim, in the first paragraph I asked Richmond a question.  In the second paragraph I thought I was making an observation of my own past.

If my understanding of written English is not up to scratch, I apologise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 December, 2014, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 December, 2014, 01:24:39 PM
If my understanding of written English is not up to scratch, I apologise.

No apology needed. Again: I'm not having a go, I just didn't understand.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 December, 2014, 02:09:48 PM
QuoteIf you don't mind me asking, how old are you, Richmond?  If you're 40+, in the past have you never used a derogatory term to describe someone?  I'm 57 and grew up on the East London/South Essex border and I can certainly remember using terms as a younger man that I wouldn't use now.  Haven't you?

I probably did yes. As a child. Before I knew better. Not as an adult who was running for office and pretending not to be a racist. Or worse have the leader of the party DEFEND the racism. What I did or did not do AS A CHILD is hardly the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 December, 2014, 03:00:26 PM
They're the gift that keeps giving. http://www.channel4.com/news/ukip-janice-atkinson-welfare-child-support
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2014, 04:41:06 PM
They'll laugh it off like they did the "nigger vote" (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/26/ukip-founder-alan-sked-party-become-frankensteins-monster) comments, and secretly be thankful for the popularity boost this will give them.  What's important is that Farage is rich and he likes to blame the poor for the problems of the poor so he's sure to get the continued backing of the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 19 December, 2014, 06:55:50 PM
Annnnnd... another one!http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-19/ukip-branch-suspended-during-mystery-investigation/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2014, 07:07:43 PM
Funny how they never have a go at the foreigners that lend us pretend money, innit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2014, 07:36:23 PM
Be fair, Sharky, those are his close personal friends from his days as a stock market speculator - rich people have no nationality.

Or as Twitter put it:
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/aa_zps45644510.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2014, 07:50:40 PM
Heh, that's brilliant - I must remember that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 December, 2014, 10:06:08 PM
sod ukip, perhaps north korea is more of a threat right now.


and by even mentioning north korea I've inadvertently doomed us all...expect rebellion to be hacked and all the spoilers for the dark judge story to be released in the name of our great and glourious future leader :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 December, 2014, 10:14:47 PM
The pity is that Sony are such a bunch of snivelling, cowardly pricks. They hadn't even the balls to stand by their nauseatingly, shite film. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 December, 2014, 10:33:15 PM
aye, but it highlights that cyber "terror" attacks are possible and a reality and it may have been a shit film as so many American comedies are but if kim jung wotsisface gets worked up about that what else is he capable of? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2014, 10:36:37 PM
What gets me is that the yanks have admitted defeat after being challenged on their own turf.  I don't know if John Wayne would have even bothered getting out of bed in the morning if he thought this was the country he'd be leaving behind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 December, 2014, 10:39:19 PM
If he gets too uppity some of those grinning f**ks behind him with the gold braid will existentially reorientate him with a low calibre bullet in a dank, dark room. He is a freakish puppet acting as a figure head and the iconic infallible image of the figurehead must be protected hence the reaction. It is the North Korean equivalent of some corporation getting passed off and issuing a writ over image integrity. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 December, 2014, 10:40:11 PM
I think its because despite all their gung ho bluster the yanks don't know how to deal with an "enemy" that is crazy enough to carry out all his threats he has a massive army of indoctrinated zombies and nuclear cabibility and would use them because lets face it he aint all there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 19 December, 2014, 11:11:15 PM
I'm with Sony, on this. Take me, North Korea, im all your's....

(http://i.imgur.com/EeajbJh.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 December, 2014, 11:18:04 PM
Is she red, is she white, is she promised to the night. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 04:23:35 AM
That's if it was North Korea - from what I've heard (which is admittedly not a lot) the evidence is very tenuous - "similar" coding, for example. And why attack Sony? Why not the CIA, Pentagon, White House, Federal Reserve Bank, Army, Air Force, Navy, oil companies, Wall Street, air traffic control, the courts, the police, emergency services, healthcare companies, etc., etc., etc? But they attack an entertainment company? Smells like bullshit to me - a false flag attack to justify the further demonisation of a country the American elites don't like.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 December, 2014, 06:52:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 04:23:35 AM
That's if it was North Korea - from what I've heard (which is admittedly not a lot) the evidence is very tenuous - "similar" coding, for example. And why attack Sony? Why not the CIA, Pentagon, White House, Federal Reserve Bank, Army, Air Force, Navy, oil companies, Wall Street, air traffic control, the courts, the police, emergency services, healthcare companies, etc., etc., etc? But they attack an entertainment company? Smells like bullshit to me - a false flag attack to justify the further demonisation of a country the American elites don't like.

North Korea blatantly did this, for the reason their leader took personal offence at the film (which, let's face it, is actually pretty understandable).

Going off on a crazy conspiracy-theory tangent is all very entertaining, but I don't see any scope for it here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 December, 2014, 06:58:43 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 19 December, 2014, 10:40:11 PM
I think its because despite all their gung ho bluster the yanks don't know how to deal with an "enemy" that is crazy enough to carry out all his threats he has a massive army of indoctrinated zombies and nuclear cabibility and would use them because lets face it he aint all there.

It should be noted that North Korea is extremely good at insanely aggressive rhetoric, but they don't often carry out their more colourful threats and as such could be a bit more rational than they are generally given credit for.

Sony and the major US cinema chains were no doubt caught on the hop by the NK bluster, but it's somewhat doubtful that they would have started raining down fire on any cinema that showed the movie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 07:21:08 AM
What do you mean by 'conspiracy theory'? Isn't the FBI's theory about NK's conspiracy to attack Sony just that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 December, 2014, 07:36:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 07:21:08 AM
What do you mean by 'conspiracy theory'? Isn't the FBI's theory about NK's conspiracy to attack Sony just that?

No, that was the law enforcement officials reporting on the evidence.

Your post ignored the clear motive for the cyber-attack, and also listed a number of other supposedly superior targets which either seemed far harder to compromise (the CIA, Pentagon), or nonsensical (healthcare companies?).

I do see some cyber-security experts say the case against NK isn't proven, but it's a big leap from that to the whole thing is trumped up to justify American aggression (and, by the way, there won't be any, there's zero-chance of any military action against NK anytime in the near or far future).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 07:40:11 AM
Have you heard of the Gulf of Tonkin incident?
.
Also, the goal doesn't have to be military conquest. It's far more likely to be economic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 20 December, 2014, 07:52:27 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 07:40:11 AM
Have you heard of the Gulf of Tonkin incident?

I hadn't but just looked it up and it reminded me of The War of Jenkins Ear.

Just because there have been trumped up incidents in the past doesn't mean that every incident is trumped up (am pretty sure the attack on Pearl Harbour was real, for instance), but I take your point.

QuoteAlso, the goal doesn't have to be military conquest. It's far more likely to be economic.

Only if this is a proxy conflict with China, but I can't see any evidence for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 December, 2014, 08:33:03 AM
Quote from: Allah Akbark on 19 December, 2014, 10:36:37 PMI don't know if John Wayne would have even bothered getting out of bed in the morning if he thought this was the country he'd be leaving behind.

Jesse Custer?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 20 December, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
From what I've read, the whole Interview thing only started being mentioned by the GOP when the media linked the two.

It's not the first time Sony have been targeted without any North Korean angle.

It's also been suggested that having NK as the culprit suits Sony regarding any lawsuits from people affected by the hack.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 20 December, 2014, 10:24:53 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 04:23:35 AM
And why attack Sony? Why not the CIA, Pentagon, White House, Federal Reserve Bank, Army, Air Force, Navy, oil companies, Wall Street, air traffic control, the courts, the police, emergency services, healthcare companies, etc., etc., etc?

Wouldn't that be just an insane move by North Korea?

I suspect, like Russia - of late, they know exactly what they can, and can't, get away with at this time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 20 December, 2014, 10:55:41 AM
The North Koreans are just being sensible in their target selection and the level of intensity they want to ramp this up to. Sony like any corporation deal with the bottom line: money. The NK hackers just singled them out; split them from the herd and the reaction Sony has shown, is the reaction and panicky prey animal shows. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2014, 12:46:12 PM
Still not convinced it was NK. The goal could have been to drive a wedge between NK and China. The actual target could have been the internet itself - another excuse to lock it down and censor it (the US has form in this area with SOPA and PIPA and what have you).
.
I also found it funny to hear some US spokeswoman moaning about NK attacking American liberties and freedom of speech - like they aren't good enough at doing that themselves!
.
I suggested healthcare companies because it would harm American citizens and scare them to death. If the object was terrorism, what better terror than interfering with life-saving procedures?
.
And I never said that everything was a false-flag conspiracy (for which the US also has form - and a lot of it) but, by the same token, that doesn't mean that nothing is. The credibility of US claims has diminished considerably in this century and Everything that the FedGov says these days must be taken with a bucket of salt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 December, 2014, 12:51:58 PM
You know it pains me to agree with you on this thread Sharky, but I do think it's worth keeping an open mind about this one.  There are lots of potentially beneficial consequences for lots of groups in this fiasco, and the waters are by no mean clear. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 20 December, 2014, 02:34:54 PM
The party of free speech..? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/20/ukip-tells-members-dont-go-twitter-nigel-farage
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 December, 2014, 04:29:10 PM
Considering what Farage defended earlier this week, the mind boggles at what they consider to be 'jaw dropping'. Maybe it was something not racist?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11306693/Ukip-councillor-Rozanne-Duncan-expelled-for-jaw-dropping-comments.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 December, 2014, 04:41:57 PM
I don't know why people waste so much time on these irrelevant muppets. They're more like pantomime baddies than leaders of society.
.
And the UKIP politicians are no better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 22 December, 2014, 08:52:41 PM
I'm struggling to keep up with UKIP, Farage straying into Partridge territory - I almost expected him to say 'it's a racie of people, but also a food'...

So far today we've had the Jaw Dropping bit (whatever it is), a gay donkey raping a UKIP member's horse, and their Christmas Card typo.

This must be Chris Morris' most elaborate stunt yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 22 December, 2014, 10:58:16 PM
As someone posted on Twitter earlier - 'UKIP being UKIP gets fired for being UKIP by UKIP'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 December, 2014, 11:13:15 PM
Looks like North Korea's internet is down. Kim Jung Un must be using the landline.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hoagy on 03 January, 2015, 02:38:52 AM
Nothing is racist everything is permitted. Catholic doctrine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 January, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
The gunning down of 12 journalists,cartoonists and Police Officers in Paris by scum.

Discuss.

I can't because it certainly makes no sense to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 07 January, 2015, 02:30:44 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 January, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
The gunning down of 12 journalists,cartoonists and Police Officers in Paris by scum.

Discuss.

I can't because it certainly makes no sense to me.

Madness innit. Awful news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2015, 03:15:05 PM
Jesus, I hadn't heard about it by now. These people really are scum. When a doctrine drives its followers to do something as horrific as this, you know there's a serious problem with it. Stupid, murdering, brainwashed fucks
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2015, 03:42:25 PM
Going through the news channels, nobody seems to know much. It seems to have been a well organised attack by experienced perpetrators but beyond that they're just throwing out the names of the usual suspects. (My "usual suspect" is something like Gladio.)
.
While the world's watching this narrative unfold, in the House of Commons right now they're debating the 'Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill' at the report stage. They've just been talking about making it mandatory for teachers, healthcare workers, etc., to report any suspicions of radicalisation to the authorities.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 January, 2015, 04:02:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2015, 03:15:05 PM
When a doctrine drives its followers to do something as horrific as this, you know there's a serious problem with it.

I could be reading that wrong, but it seems just a tad Islamophobic
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 January, 2015, 04:32:36 PM
This was done in the supposed name of Islam. As are many evil things.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 January, 2015, 04:32:36 PM

FUCK FASCISM

(http://www.spittoon.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Charlie-Hebdo.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 January, 2015, 04:36:55 PM
Religion is used as a smoke screen by evil people. Religion itself is a flawed way of life, but it's a necessary one for some.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2015, 04:41:10 PM
Who said it was done in the name of Islam? That sounds like jumping to conclusions to me. Even the Glass Tit news channels I get are all just calling them "gunmen" or "terrorists".
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 January, 2015, 05:20:27 PM
Both BBC and Sky are reporting that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 January, 2015, 05:26:13 PM
Cowardly, murdering fucking vermin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2015, 05:35:07 PM
Sky, maybe, but I still have an affection for the BBC.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 January, 2015, 06:30:21 PM
Cowards. Shooting unarmed people for any reason is a cowardly act and deplorable no matter how they try to dress it up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2015, 06:52:30 PM
Amen. No matter who did it or why, murdering human beings is always wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 January, 2015, 07:53:30 PM
some great "two fingers" to the terrorists

http://metro.co.uk/2015/01/07/15-powerful-cartoon-reactions-to-the-charlie-hebdo-shootings-in-paris-5013346/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 January, 2015, 09:51:29 PM
Shark you are so right, we are being shot at by a bunch of variant scumbags who proport to represent a one of the five or six major religions in the world (I don't for a moment think they do) yet at the same time our particular species of control merchants attempt (by act of parliament) to throw another lead lined halter over our collective neck. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 January, 2015, 10:09:43 PM
I guess my issue here is that we should stop going out into the world shooting poor people and turn our (intellectal) guns against the real enemy. I am incandescent with the attack on free speech in France. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 January, 2015, 01:03:36 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 07 January, 2015, 04:02:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2015, 03:15:05 PM
When a doctrine drives its followers to do something as horrific as this, you know there's a serious problem with it.

I could be reading that wrong, but it seems just a tad Islamophobic

Fair enough,  it was a knee-jerk reaction. Frankly, though,  I'm tired of religiously-inspired atrocities and wish people would stop hurting each other using the imagined desires of some supernatural entity as an excuse.  On paper, at least,  I'm Catholic; I grew up in a Catholic society and still I abhor the Vatican for all the ways it has influenced and even instructed many followers to do horrible things.  Does that make me a catholophobe too?

And of course I know that these kinds of extremists are in a minority.  I know too that such people would probably find another form of extremist violence even if they had never been exposed to religion.  I know that the vast majority of Muslims are good people who have not been taught to murder. But I worry about whatever skewed version of Islam has been spread among bloodthirsty fanatics like these guys,  because it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 08 January, 2015, 09:27:02 AM
As a Muslim, I condemn these atrocities outright.  No one has the right to lose their lives no matter what. I was never a fan of those cartoons, as they seemed like an attack on the already marginalised Muslim community in France. A lot of the cartoons bordered on racism and homophobia in my view. But as I stated, no one has the right to lose their lives over a cartoon. What I find annoying though, is the fact that as soon as there is an terrorist attack, all of the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world are held accountable. A lot of the sentiments being shared around social media is quite troubling, this 'us' against 'them' talk, and 'let's punish those vile Muslims even more by displaying the offending cartoons in plain sight'. Instead of unity, we are creating disunity . 

I hope those murdering bastards are caught, but more so,  I hope we see reason and not give in to hate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2015, 09:31:37 AM
Well said, Muscleman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Daveycandlish on 08 January, 2015, 09:35:18 AM
Muscleman, that is the most sensible thing I have ever read on this thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 08 January, 2015, 09:36:26 AM
Thank you guys, btw, you can call me Mabs!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2015, 09:37:58 AM
Worth observing that one of the policemen killed in this attack was also a Muslim. It seems to me a very selective reading of the Qur'an that demands deadly retribution for a cartoon but blithely overlooks the prohibition on killing other Muslims.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 January, 2015, 09:47:17 AM
This is a brilliant article: http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2012/09/muhammad-survived-dantes-inferno-hell-survive-youtube-clip
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 January, 2015, 10:00:56 AM
Well said Mabs. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 08 January, 2015, 10:08:27 AM
I don't often comment in here.

People need to remember that not all mass murder is done using religion as an excuse. The Iraq War wasn't over religion it was over was Over oil. The French Revolution was about freedoms - pretty excessive body count. The American Revolution was more about fiscal matters than freedoms (abolishing slavery in the colonies had huge fiscal implications and that's the real reason in my Opinion). Animal rights activists have killed and maimed people.

The variety of reasons are numerous.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 January, 2015, 10:23:02 AM
Ghastly business. I love French satirical and humour cartooning (I fill the car with everything from Canard Enchaine to Fluide Glaciale any time I visit, pretending that this time I'm going to improve my French by translating them all) and Cabu in particular, it's beyond belief that he and his colleagues should come to this awful end. But almost as disturbing is the torrent of gleeful racism overwhelming every site I visit. Good to come here and find sane voices.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 08 January, 2015, 10:29:04 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2015, 09:37:58 AM
Worth observing that one of the policemen killed in this attack was also a Muslim. It seems to me a very selective reading of the Qur'an that demands deadly retribution for a cartoon but blithely overlooks the prohibition on killing other Muslims.

Jim

That's the thing Jim, these terrorists don't care. They do not even follow the Qur an because as ISIS have demonstrated so callously on many occasions, both Muslims and non - Muslims can be victims of their twisted ideology.  In fact, correct me if I am wrong, but there seems to be more Muslim victims of terrorist attacks around the world, than non - Muslims.  If we just look back on that heart breaking, attack on school children by the Taliban a while back. Their brand of Islam is like an ugly distortion, believe me, no other way to class them other than a bloody cult. They forego all reason, for hate, and the use of fear. And that is quite prevalent in a lot of cults. It's interesting to note that even during the time of the Prophet Muhammad, a group had arisen, separated from the main fold of Islam. They were preaching a religion distorted from the Prophet's teaching, what we would class as extremists today. And he said these words explicitly: "Those who practise extremism, is not one of us (ie, a Muslim)".

Clearly those fuckers such as ISIS today, need to be reminded of that.

They do not represent us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 08 January, 2015, 10:42:12 AM
Apologies for my language.  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zenith 666 on 08 January, 2015, 10:47:05 AM
No need for apologys.you have every right to be upset.these acts are just sickening and cowardly and these people need to be brought to justice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 08 January, 2015, 10:56:07 AM
Quote from: Muscleman on 08 January, 2015, 10:29:04 AM
even during the time of the Prophet Muhammad, a group had arisen, separated from the main fold of Islam. They were preaching a religion distorted from the Prophet's teaching, what we would class as extremists today. And he said these words explicitly: "Those who practise extremism, is not one of us (ie, a Muslim)".

Great quote, thanks for that.

I don't have religious faith myself, but those closest to me who do are, without exception, the most reasonable and least-crazy (you haven't met my family) of them all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 January, 2015, 11:03:02 AM
Of course, we know that these murdering scumbags do not represent Islam but surely the point is they think they do.  When challenged to publish the images of Muhammad, in the interest of free speech, the editor of The Jewish Chronicle, said, "Get real, folks."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 January, 2015, 11:06:11 AM
Not all atrocities are committed in the name of religion. However attacks on a satirical magazine that was firebombed shortly after publishing a satirical cartoon seen as blasphemous are.

The point of the cartoons are not to attack a minority community but to stand against the ludicrous idea of 'blasphemy' and those who would lethally enforce this dictate.

The witnesses state the usual God is Great yelling. Your paranoia about media will inform how much you trust that to be the truth.

I'm not trying to say these people represent all of Islam but let's stop trying to pretend these murders aren't religiously motivated. This wasn't the US embassy, it wasn't a personal thing, it was 12 people killed because of a cartoon - following through on the threats that have been made frequently since the cartoons were published.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2015, 11:10:36 AM
I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that groups like Al-Qaida and IS don't speak for all Muslims. This is because the British Government, and its armed forces, do not speak for me - no matter how much they claim it to be so.
.
This incident in France is a truly vile thing - but no more or less vile than a drone-strike carried out by our so-called allies. If we continue to allow our "leaders" to speak and act for special interests instead of wider society then this kind of thing is going to continue, worsen and end up dragging us all into a shitstorm of planetary proportions.
.
We need to rescue our governments, processes and systems from the clutches of these few selfish interest groups before they lead us to utter ruin. That doesn't just mean us in the UK or the EU or "the West" but all of us; North Koreans, Chinese, Russians, Israelis, Palestinians, Saudis, Iranians, Somalians, Americans, French, Greeks, Argentinians et-al - we all have the same problem; our "leaders" are all in the same pockets.
.
We need to pick those pockets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 January, 2015, 12:08:23 PM
Mabs / Muscleman, your well-informed and intelligent comments are very welcome. If I sounded Islamophobic earlier I apologise,  it certainly wasn't intentional. You're right,  of course: Far too many people are going to use this incident to divide the world even further. I never knew that Muhammed spoke against extremism, but it doesn't surprise me: If some Christians can ignore massive chunks of the bible and focus obsessively on in the parts that they think justify their own prejudices and hatred (which has occurred within this very thread), it makes sense that some Muslims would do the same with the Qu'ran.

And Sharky, you're right when you say that these deaths are no more or less vile than civilian deaths caused by Western military attacks.  I often wonder how Tony Blair, for instance,  can live with himself with the knowledge that so many innocent Iraqis have died in his name because of an assumption that was at best very shaky and at worst a lie. As a Westerner and a Catholic ( albeit one who has long since stopped believing), I would hope that people don't think Blair represents my views.

None of which is to try to take at from the horrors that happened yesterday in France of course.  It truly was an act of appalling savagery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 08 January, 2015, 01:38:17 PM
QuoteI often wonder how Tony Blair, for instance,  can live with himself with the knowledge that so many innocent Iraqis have died in his name because of an assumption that was at best very shaky and at worst a lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 08 January, 2015, 02:23:00 PM
No offence taken, Jayzuz. And I agree wholeheartedly with your points, as well as my fellow boarder's views. It's a sad state of affairs and it makes me really sad to see the division which is being perpetrated by a lot of the media, not to mention the extremists. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 08 January, 2015, 02:34:01 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 January, 2015, 11:06:11 AM
Not all atrocities are committed in the name of religion. However attacks on a satirical magazine that was firebombed shortly after publishing a satirical cartoon seen as blasphemous are.

The point of the cartoons are not to attack a minority community but to stand against the ludicrous idea of 'blasphemy' and those who would lethally enforce this dictate.

The witnesses state the usual God is Great yelling. Your paranoia about media will inform how much you trust that to be the truth.

I'm not trying to say these people represent all of Islam but let's stop trying to pretend these murders aren't religiously motivated. This wasn't the US embassy, it wasn't a personal thing, it was 12 people killed because of a cartoon - following through on the threats that have been made frequently since the cartoons were published.

I don't think anyone is really denying that this was, from the evidence, religious extremists.

I certainly aren't. I just don't think a blind eye should be turned to other forms of mass murder. Many thousands have been killed for nothing more than money. For example thousands have died for refusing orders from drug lords. Thousands have died for oil. Thousands have died for diamond mining. I am not talking a few accidents, I am talking deaths in slavery & out-and-out murder.

I think what happened yesterday is utterly abhorrent. It has no place in a civilised society. Islam is a civilised religion. Remember that during the Renaissance much regained knowledge came from Islam, they had preserved what the West had lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 January, 2015, 05:47:08 PM
Quote from: Bat King on 08 January, 2015, 02:34:01 PMRemember that during the Renaissance much regained knowledge came from Islam, they had preserved what the West had lost.

Also remember that one of the root causes of the Renaissance was the fall of Constantinople to Sultan Mehmed II, 'Allah's shadow on Earth'!  History is never simple.

Agree with the Shark that there's little distinction to be drawn between yesterday's murders and routine drone strikes, beyond the target being freedom of expression itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bat King on 08 January, 2015, 06:05:02 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 January, 2015, 05:47:08 PM
Quote from: Bat King on 08 January, 2015, 02:34:01 PMRemember that during the Renaissance much regained knowledge came from Islam, they had preserved what the West had lost.

Also remember that one of the root causes of the Renaissance was the fall of Constantinople to Sultan Mehmed II, 'Allah's shadow on Earth'!  History is never simple.

Agree with the Shark that there's little distinction to be drawn between yesterday's murders and routine drone strikes, beyond the target being freedom of expression itself.

Yes that is also true... but my point was that Islam retained much of the knowledge that helped reform modern western civilisation. Metal gears being one example that had we not regained we might not have harnessed steam power or the infernal internal combustion engine.

As you astutely point out picking one isolated part of history isn't ever clean - but my point remains, Islam is and always has been a civilised religion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2015, 06:29:54 PM
I'm not sure I buy this whole "the target is freedom of expression" line the media's pushing. It seems too pat an explanation, too simple, designed to demonise rather than to inform.
.
But it *was* an attack on freedom of expression, I hear you moan moodily - and so it was, on a certain level. On another level it was a revenge attack. On another an act of war. On another a blow for freedom. This despicable act does not stand alone or exist in a vacuum or have an abstract target. It has its roots firmly sunk into Western foreign policy and, as we reap what we sow, it bears the fruit of grenades.
.
"This is an attack on freedom of expression" is a sound-byte, putting a label on something to simulate understanding and create what a good friend of mine used to call a "thought-stopper." Thought-stoppers are little phrases designed to make you think that a subject has been understood and categorised by experts so that you don't have to think about them. Examples include terrorist, conspiracy theory, law enforcement and national security. As soon as you encounter these words and phrases you know exactly what you're supposed to think and feel so you don't look much deeper. Why bother, right? Far cleverer people than you have been working on this (whatever it is) and you've got more pressing matters to deal with so why not take advantage of the thought-stopper?
.
Beware labels is all I'm saying - they often say more about the label maker than the contents of the jar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2015, 07:23:48 PM
To change tack for a moment, I've downloaded the pdf of the report and I'll have to transfer it to my laptop before I can read it properly but there's a summary here: www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/relief-and-reconstruction-watch/breaking-open-the-black-box-increasing-aid-transparency-and-accountability-in-haiti
.
It's a damning report exposing the inefficiencies of the US Haiti aid program. For instance, over half the government aid contracts have been awarded to companies based around Washington who are represented by the same lobbying group and only 0.7% of aid contracts have been awarded to Haitian firms.
.
How long ago was the Haitian earthquake and the subsequent (and ongoing) outbreak of cholera supposedly inadvertently introduced to the island by UN relief troops? 2010, was it? And still the most important thing is to get your snout in the trough.
.
It's no wonder people shoot at us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 January, 2015, 08:41:26 PM
Take your point about soundbites Sharky, but despite the undoubted complexity of the context, I think the hat fits in this case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 January, 2015, 11:04:15 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 08 January, 2015, 01:38:17 PM
QuoteI often wonder how Tony Blair, for instance,  can live with himself with the knowledge that so many innocent Iraqis have died in his name because of an assumption that was at best very shaky and at worst a lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

That's something I've been thinking a lot about lately (not just about Blair; but about political leaders in general) - it's very disturbing, but in many cases, it's the only logical conclusion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 January, 2015, 11:48:15 PM
I have very negative experiences with a number of representatives for the big three religious sect's, specifically Catholicism, Islam and Judaism. I lap up satire at the expense of some daft 2000 year old slash fiction and how seriously people take it when their are real world issues that can't be solved by sitting on your nards and praying something will happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 January, 2015, 05:17:46 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 08 January, 2015, 11:48:15 PM
I have very negative experiences with a number of representatives for...

You do realize that the beginning of that sentence sounds like a bigot trying to justify their prejudices?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2015, 05:53:06 AM
Really? It didn't sound like that to me. To me it sounded like a reference to past personal experience which is, admittedly, hard to assess without a little more context. The idea of bigotry never entered my mind when I read it, although the shadow of the idea of victim did.
.
Strange, and wonderful, how we all see the same things differently.
.
I was also captivated by the image of someone sitting on his nards, which is a good but eye-watering trick if you can do it, and praying for the pain to stop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2015, 09:09:08 AM
My apologize. I had had quite a bit to drink last night and, yes, I said something that I don't believe is a fair representation of how I truly feel. I HAVE had dire experiences with religious folk, and I would never convert myself, but I do not hold any animosity towards the individual bodies in general and I won't hold a persons faith against them, as much as I might disagree with them.

I can only apologies for being, in the words of Jim, a cunt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 January, 2015, 09:58:24 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 09 January, 2015, 05:17:46 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 08 January, 2015, 11:48:15 PM
I have very negative experiences with a number of representatives for...

You do realize that the beginning of that sentence sounds like a bigot trying to justify their prejudices?

I don't see why expressions of negative personal experiences are seen as bigotry when it comes to religion. I hate that protectionism that forces any discussion to be entirely removed to the abstract. It's not like Hawks said "They're all like that" or even "In my experience, all..." ; he said "I have had bad experiences of a number of representatives of faith".

You weren't a cunt at all Hawks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2015, 10:05:44 AM
S'right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 January, 2015, 10:08:59 AM
I third the motion.  No cuntiness involved here
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 January, 2015, 12:04:48 PM
You find idiots within all religious denominations ,  and even non - religious ones (Dawkins comes to mind). What I'm basically trying to get at, is that there are good and bad people in every walk of life. Sometimes you have idiots, or so called religious leaders talking right old shite, but the same could be said of politicians, atheists, and yes, even those of a religious persuasion. The thing that I find a concern is the idea that a whole faith can be held responsible for the acts of a few. An example is the #KillAllMuslims hash tag currently doing the rounds on twitter. And some of the sentiments being shared on social media, borders on down right xenophobia. Even from those who supposedly believe in 'reason'. It's very dangerous to see, and being a person belonging to a minority, quite scary, and even saddening to see.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2015, 12:13:57 PM
I agree completely. Without going into too much detail, I went to a Christian primary school and to say they dealt with my autistic manifestations poorly would be...an understatement. They where what I would colloquially describe as neo-Westboro types and honestly the way they drilled my lack of self awareness and slow mental ability into me at a young age was probably a catalyst for my depression and anti-social tendencies.

It's a very irrational, dyed in the wood hatred that I should really get over but for some reason I can't find it in me to forgive them and judge religious people individually. That and having people of the cloth I am forced to call my colleagues constantly ridicule my mental disorder, my sexuality, and agnostic beliefs isn't helping much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 January, 2015, 12:34:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 09 January, 2015, 12:13:57 PM
I agree completely. Without going into too much detail, I went to a Christian primary school and to say they dealt with my autistic manifestations poorly would be...an understatement. They where what I would colloquially describe as neo-Westboro types and honestly the way they drilled my lack of self awareness and slow mental ability into me at a young age was probably a catalyst for my depression and anti-social tendencies.

It's a very irrational, dyed in the wood hatred that I should really get over but for some reason I can't find it in me to forgive them and judge religious people individually. That and having people of the cloth I am forced to call my colleagues constantly ridicule my mental disorder, my sexuality, and agnostic beliefs isn't helping much.

Hawk I am a Christian, albeit an often conflicted one and riven with deep seated doubt . Can I just say mate how angry and sick and repulsed I am at reading of your experiences at the hands of those who would identify themselves as my fellow believers? I wish I could say that I am surprised but I'm not and that's about as sad a statement as I could make on the subject.

As for the people who subject you to the ongoing abuse I wonder what account of Jesus they base their abuse on?  I have a strong attraction to pacifism but I'm wondering if a smack in the mouth for some of them might be therapeutic all round.

Best wishes Hawk.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 January, 2015, 12:35:12 PM
If they ridicule you, then they should be ashamed to call themselves Christians. Same applies to every faith, and even non - faith individuals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2015, 12:40:54 PM
I understand and i'm sorry. But as you saw by my post on the previous page sometimes I put myself in these situations and I say things much more bluntly than I would wish and tend to paint people with the same brush. That is MY fault and theirs nothing to apologies for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 January, 2015, 12:55:12 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 09 January, 2015, 12:40:54 PM
I understand and i'm sorry. But as you saw by my post on the previous page sometimes I put myself in these situations and I say things much more bluntly than I would wish and tend to paint people with the same brush. That is MY fault and theirs nothing to apologies for.

Hawk do you ever get the opportunity to confront your abusers and tell them in no uncertain terms that they are acting like a shower of turds rather than Christians or is that impossible in the circumstances?

Sorry if that is intrusive. Ignore if it is mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2015, 01:03:17 PM
I was 5 and I was at the school for little over 2 months. In addition to this the school was shut down and demolished (I would like to know what caused this as I don't believe Ofsted where around at the time, but a whistle was certainly blown) and I never saw the staff ever again. It's amazing that this was only in 2000 as you would assume shit like this was a myth nowadays. Honestly I went to a different school after that point and thought nothing of it. It wasn't till my mid teens that I started to reflect on my then current situation and realized it might have played a factor in my seemingly irrational inferiority issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 January, 2015, 01:07:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 09 January, 2015, 01:03:17 PM
I was 5 and I was at the school for little over 2 months. In addition to this the school was shut down and demolished (I would like to know what caused this as I don't believe Ofsted where around at the time, but a whistle was certainly blown) and I never saw the staff ever again. It's amazing that this was only in 2000 as you would assume shit like this was a myth nowadays. Honestly I went to a different school after that point and thought nothing of it. It wasn't till my mid teens that I started to reflect on my then current situation and realized it might have played a factor in my seemingly irrational inferiority issues.

I was thinking more of the crew that you are forced to associate with now Hawk

I have to say that's the most joy I have ever felt at the news of a  school being demolished.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 January, 2015, 01:13:11 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 09 January, 2015, 12:04:48 PMIt's very dangerous to see, and being a person belonging to a minority, quite scary, and even saddening to see.

Aye, it's disgusting - it's like bigots think they have been handed a free pass. I sincerely hope the indelible memory of the internet comes back to haunt them at some critical juncture of their future professional or personal lives.   

I find it particularly depressing from my own countrymen, who still 'enjoy' a virtual mono-culture in their own land, and clearly forget (or never knew) what it was like to be Irish in the UK or elsewhere during the worst of the IRA's campaign, actions which every poll and election showed they wanted no part of.

On another tack, while I respect people with religious faith as I would any individual, it is impossible for me to respect any organisation that acquires and exercises power and influence through the teaching of what are, at best, gross misapprehensions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 January, 2015, 01:22:18 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 January, 2015, 01:13:11 PM
Quote from: Muscleman on 09 January, 2015, 12:04:48 PMIt's very dangerous to see, and being a person belonging to a minority, quite scary, and even saddening to see.

Aye, it's disgusting - it's like bigots think they have been handed a free pass. I sincerely hope the indelible memory of the internet comes back to haunt them at some critical juncture of their future professional or personal lives.   

I find it particularly depressing from my own countrymen, who still 'enjoy' a virtual mono-culture in their own land, and clearly forget (or never knew) what it was like to be Irish in the UK or elsewhere during the worst of the IRA's campaign, actions which every poll and election showed they wanted no part of.

On another tack, while I respect people with religious faith as I would any individual, it is impossible for me to respect any organisation that acquires and exercises power and influence through the teaching of what are, at best, gross misapprehensions.

I am very much in sympathy with this stance TB. I do not think faith should be a matter for the public realm but rather a personal matter (my theology is largely anabaptist in origin) as it seems that if allowed to spill over  it quickly turns into a poisonous theocratic monster and there is no greater tool of oppression than a mis-used religion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 January, 2015, 06:36:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 January, 2015, 01:13:11 PM

On another tack, while I respect people with religious faith as I would any individual, it is impossible for me to respect any organisation that acquires and exercises power and influence through the teaching of what are, at best, gross misapprehensions.

'Sright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2015, 07:07:15 PM
First they came for the cartoonists,

then they came for the Jews,

and then they come for the ......................................... ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 January, 2015, 07:32:43 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2015, 07:07:15 PM
First they came for the cartoonists,

then they came for the Jews,

and then they come for the ......................................... ?

I think we're all in agreement that these extremists are not just against Jews, Cartoonists or Christians, but people in general. Everyone can be a victim of their twisted wrath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 January, 2015, 10:09:44 PM
Joe Sacco's thoughts on the Charlie Hebden masacre.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2015/jan/09/joe-sacco-on-satire-a-response-to-the-attacks
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 09 January, 2015, 10:52:06 PM
Sorry, meant Hebdo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2015, 11:04:28 AM
QuoteFive suspected al-Qaeda militants are awaiting trial for the attacks at a military tribunal at the US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
BBC News article on 9/11 debris found this week (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22319253).

There really can't be a worse abdication from the rule of law than what is contained in that statement.  Awaiting trial for 13 years.  America, what has become of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 12:29:29 PM
Frustrating, isn't it? The U.S. could be such a force for good in the world but instead it seems to want to be the biggest wanker on Earth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 05:02:05 PM
So, laughing at Muslims is freedom of expression but laughing at Jews is a hate crime:  www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/4351672/French-cartoonist-Sine-on-trial-on-charges-of-anti-Semitism-over-Sarkozy-jibe.html
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2015, 05:16:11 PM
A court case is at a healthy remove from being shot at your desk, but you're right that this reflects the difference in attitudes towards jibes against the powerful and the powerless. Much as the reaction to these awful deaths and suffering is so different to the reaction to the equally awful deaths of so many others elsewhere in the same ideological (?) struggle.

In this whole sad business a distinction has to be made between supporting the right to expression, and supporting the views expressed. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 05:43:57 PM
I agree there's a significant difference between a court case and a massacre but they are both attacks on freedom of expression, it's only the method that differs.
.
Your observation about the distinction between supporting freedom of expression and supporting the expression itself is astute. In my view, if a society wants freedom of expression then it can't pick and choose what can and cannot be expressed. Distasteful as it is, even racism, sexism and warmongering must be tolerated. To tolerate something doesn't mean one has to agree with it. (I'm sure there's a quote about that...)
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 January, 2015, 07:40:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 05:43:57 PM
To tolerate something doesn't mean one has to agree with it. (I'm sure there's a quote about that...)
.

Aye, I think Twain said something about disagreeing with what you say, but defending to the death your right to say it.

Society does curtail freedom of expression though. Views that incite violence or hatred can find you on the wrong side of the law. I think that's just sensible. In the States however, that is not the case. They have laws against inciting violence (fighting words),which I believe is why Chuck Manson will never get out of prison despite not technically murdering anyone himself, but the constitution covers you if you incite hatred, which is why Fox News is still on the air and the Tea Partyers still roam free. Interestingly, I read that if they did introduce laws against hate speech, the Westboro Baptists would still get away with it. They aren't expressing their own opinions, just representing God's. They're basically a cabal of scheister, flim-flam lawyers. They want people to attempt to silence them so they can sue for breach of constitutional rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 08:37:19 PM
Hmm, that made me think. I'm not entirely sure that there should be any limits whatsoever on speech. It really doesn't matter if someone gives a speech inciting violence, it's the people who listen and carry out the violence who are most guilty. Also, I think that by outlawing certain topics and words we give them power. Remove the taboo and remove the power. Of course, we'd first need to start teaching people (especially our children) how to think critically so they can tell the nutters from the psychopaths themselves before we lift all restrictions. A big job.
.
My next thought was along these lines: If I say "invade Wales and kill the Welsh!" I'd be inciting violence and get slapped. If David Cameron says "invade Syria and kill Syrians!" it's just foreign policy and he gets a cushy retirement plan. It's just one more example of authority assuming rights and powers that nobody else has.
.
Thanks, KP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 10 January, 2015, 08:52:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 08:37:19 PM
It really doesn't matter if someone gives a speech inciting violence, it's the people who listen and carry out the violence who are most guilty.

The 'most' implies you and the mob are both 'guilty'. Which is fair, incitement is real.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 08:37:19 PM
It's just one more example of authority assuming rights and powers that nobody else has

That's parliamentary democracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 January, 2015, 10:06:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2015, 08:37:19 PM
It really doesn't matter if someone gives a speech inciting violence

No. Growing up in Norn Iron taught me that it really, really, really does matter
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2015, 04:55:53 AM
Fungus, Parliament (ostensibly) derives its rights and powers from the electorate - none of whom has the right to commit theft, violence or murder (except under the most extreme circumstances). If the electorate does not possess these rights and powers then, logically, it cannot pass them on to government. Even if everyone in Britain voted for the same Prime Minister, 70,000,000 times nothing is still nothing.
.
KP, you're right of course. In a perfect world with an enlightened populace it wouldn't matter but in the Real World at the moment (and for the foreseeable future) it does matter. Point conceded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 11 January, 2015, 08:45:16 AM
Um... of course I wasn't suggesting that murder, etc. are legitimised in government. Very simply, that government and electorate are distinct; government alone declare war, raise taxes, etc. I can't. That's the deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 02:07:13 PM
Parliament dreclares war. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2015, 03:20:47 PM
I always think Sharky's argument that the electorate can't delegate powers that they don't themselves possess (perhaps as an inverted analogue of God devolving some of His powers to an earthly King) is a clever and thought-provoking one, but it only works if you assume that the electorate can't create powers 'greater' than their own.  In an age where we drive vehicles and operate machines with abilities we could never have, limiting legal powers to only those we ourselves enjoy seems quaint - and probably undesirable.

However, I can certainly imagine a world where all communal powers existed only where they also existed at the level of the individual (i.e. if it is illegal for an individual to kill, it is illegal for a community to kill), and it is an interesting place to ponder.  Not least because it draws me back again to the distinctions so regularly drawn between the acts of violence carried out be individuals in New York, London, Madrid, Sydney, Paris etc., and those carried out by states in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and stateless organisations in Pakistan, Iran, Nigeria et bloody cetera. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 03:32:07 PM
Murder is illegal on the individual level; the state reserves the right to kill in certain tightly defined and alas sometimes not so tightly defined situations.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2015, 04:54:37 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 03:32:07 PM
... and alas sometimes not so tightly defined situations.  Z

Therein lies the problem.  Ethics and legislation are not connected. Fair play to Pat Mills for making me aware of Harry Patch,  the last surviving WW1 Tommy, who claimed that if state leaders have problems with one another,  we should give them guns and let them sort it out themselves. Morally,  it's quite clearly the right thing to do,  even f it isnt even a remotely realistic possibility.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 05:00:01 PM
Our leaders play us like fiddles over and over again. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2015, 06:33:48 PM
They aren't my leaders, Z. I lead myself, as scary a thought as that may be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 06:49:02 PM
Unfortunately in most concrete senses they are our leaders.....that's the really scary thought. They may not yet control the few cubic cm between our ears, but I'd say they are going flat out 24/7 on that one. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2015, 07:50:25 PM
Yep.  And anyone who thinks the West is a haven of free thought should have a listen to this podcast:  http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-40-blitz-radical-thoughts/ (http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-40-blitz-radical-thoughts/)
It seems there's nothing quite like a crisis to inspire a political leader to crack down on thoughtcrime.  They did it with the rise of Communism, they did it after 9/11 and they're doing it right now.

Which reminds me; before last Wednesday, the only time I'd ever seen a depiction of Mohammed was years ago on South Park.  In the last few days, I've seen loads of them; they're cropping up all over the internet and on TV.  It seems the shootings were not only barbaric but also completely counter-productive.  You would hope religiously-inspired potential murderers would learn from this; but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 January, 2015, 08:37:09 PM
The purpose of power is power....the purpose of terror is terror. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2015, 10:44:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2015, 07:50:25 PMIt seems the shootings were not only barbaric but also completely counter-productive.  You would hope religiously-inspired potential murderers would learn from this; but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Only counter productive if the objective isn't to simultaneously anger and further marginalise young Muslims, which I suspect is the plan. It's the same game the IRA played: new atrocity = crackdown, abuse and rhetoric = fresh support. And like the predictable buffoons we are the great western public play along, while our press-censoring politicos look sombre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2015, 11:32:44 PM
That is an excellent point, my friend, and one I hadn't really considered before.  Jesus, we're in an even bigger mess than I'd realised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 January, 2015, 12:51:13 AM
Somewhere down the line it is incumbent on the young Muslim kids to take the leap of faith which both you and I did. We simply cannot hand feed reality truth forever. Somewhere down the line there has to be an epiphany and a comprehension of what i t is to engage. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2015, 10:43:48 AM
Not quite sure what you mean there,  Zen. Could you elaborate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 January, 2015, 01:10:47 PM
My apologies JBC'S. My last does come across as somewhat disjointed.
I guess what I am trying to say from personal experience of growing up in a pretty hard line republican area of NI where I like many young people in the 80's was subjected to pressures  by pretty radical elements. It was through my upbringing; my peer group and finally through myself that I was able to reject these approaches.
I have no doubt that many young Muslim men and women in Britain, Ireland and through out the West are currently subject to similar pressures, albeit from a different ideology.
The state and society as a whole can rightly attempt to offer an alternative, but, as with my experiences, the moral choice is better put across through family, friends and figures from within the community of true intent and standing.
However at heart it is an individual moral decision which these kids must make, lonely and hard though it may be.
This is not aimed generally at Muslim youth; but at those within who unfortunately subject to these stresses.
This also applies more generally to young people who are undergoing similar situations from other Right Wing and indeed Left Wing ideologies.
Hope that clarifies my thoughts. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2015, 01:20:54 PM
QuoteHope that clarifies my thoughts
.

Yes,  absolutely.  Thanks. And I agree with you 100 per cent, though I don't have the experience of growing up in the North.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2015, 01:45:04 PM
Excellent post, Z.
.
Teenagers joining ISIS and teenagers joining the Army, is there really any difference to the social pressures involved? All across the world nations scoop out great swathes of their youth and hurl them at one another like human bullets. All for goals and ideals these youngsters are often too immature or damaged to understand. What a heartbreaking fucking waste of youthful potential - by Everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 January, 2015, 04:31:35 PM
Quote
Teenagers joining ISIS and teenagers joining the Army, is there really any difference to the social pressures involved?

The latter always seems more of a financial pressure than anything else. The army pays, and it pays for lots of education that you may not get a chance to do otherwise. Of course that may be a similar pressure to those people actually living in areas dominated by ISIS forces, where it may also be a case of protection.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 12 January, 2015, 04:39:00 PM
No brummie's on here today?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 January, 2015, 05:05:01 PM
That made me laugh.

Until I read the reporter is someone who testifies in senate committees about terrorism.


The tweets of FoxNewsFacts were great though :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 January, 2015, 05:33:49 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 12 January, 2015, 04:31:35 PM
The latter always seems more of a financial pressure than anything else.

Financial pressure, or source of a sense of self-worth?  (Which I'm sure many of us have painfully discovered can be the same thing). I think we're talking about both push- and pull-factors here.  Having what you perceive as a useful even important role, cash in your pocket, respect of your peers, making a difference to the things you hold dear - things it's very hard to come by when you're on the margins, but which a military career (regular or underground) offers. 

In defence of those joining conventional national armies, at least the work you sign up to do is notionally approved by the democratic will of your fellows, and bound by international treaty and rules of conduct.  You are in theory at least serving and protecting those who have surrounded you from the cradle, with their blessing and thanks - something reinforced by national holidays, formal education and government rhetoric.

It must require an additional degree of faith, or possibly a lower threshold of doubt, to soldier for a minority cause, whose mandate is far less transparent and in the hands of the charismatic or the divinely inspired. However, I suspect those distinctions look pretty shaky when you're the person making the decision - it all comes down to what you see your community as, and how its interests can best be served.  The key to stemming the flow of recruits must be to minimise the differences between the core interests of all our communities, rather than setting them at odds, which every piece of anti-Muslim sloganeering does. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 January, 2015, 07:34:57 PM
Theblazeuk,does point out that armies (western) are subject to military jurisprudence and indeed the controlling body (us through parliament) are subject to parameters set by law eg the Geneva Convention. Now I had many experiences of a constituted Army (British) and an unconstituted army (PIRA) in my youth and had some shitty, degrading, pointless, futile, fucked up experiences from both. There are as ever shades of grey in these situations, irrespective of the legal status of the organisation you are dealing with. Didn't I am happy to state make me hate people, but the mailed fist isn't the way to sort this stuff out. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2015, 07:58:40 PM
The craft of age has long held the secret of bending the fire of youth to its will. Cultures may change and pressures may vary but the promise is always the same: Fortune and glory. Money and medals. Security and respect.
.
I watched the Brad Pitt war film 'Fury' the other day and, even though the climax should have been thrilling and inspiring all I could think was, is this it? Am I still getting pleasure from watching stories about people massacring each other? One of my favourite films of all time was Zulu - how brave were those handful of stout British soldiers! How inspiring! But how much braver were the Zulu warriors who threw themselves in waves at certain death? It's only a film, I know, but these things shape our minds in subtle ways.
.
Youth will always want to fight and age will always know of something worth fighting for. I've heard it said that the only way to stop war is to raise the minimum recruitment age for the armed forces to 35. I think that would probably do the trick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 January, 2015, 08:15:15 PM
We were sold an even more pernicious load of crap: if you don't do this we will at best be second class citizens in a land in which we have as a culture have lived for thousands of years or at worst be slaughtered in a 'krystal nacht' by a bunch of 'interlopers'. We wern't even given the option of death or glory; instead it was us and them and in order to protect our own it was die in the last ditch....cynicsm and manipulate wanking scumbags, I could give lectures on it. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2015, 08:55:05 PM
I think you just did ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2015, 08:46:12 AM
Replying to Hawk's comment on the RIP thread here, so as not to derail that one:

Quote from: Hawkmonger on 12 January, 2015, 11:03:51 PM
2000 Nigerian civilians massacred by Boko Haram. Sad, sad day for the world in general.

The world in general is always pretty sanguine about poor black people killing poor black people, possibly viewing it as a labour-saving device.  Every dead Nigerian is one less potential immigrant, pip pip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 January, 2015, 09:12:49 AM
Our media is pretty shit though aren't they? I'n contrast to Je Suis Charlie i've heard virtually nothing on this anywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zenith 666 on 13 January, 2015, 09:25:58 AM
Probably because no reporter wants to go near it.from the few reports it's been an indiscriminate massacre with haram killing anyone who stands in the way.There also been no reports of the al-Qaeda bomb in Yemen that killed 37 people and injured 66 more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2015, 09:29:21 AM
I heard some stuffed suit on the BBC (I think) saying how this Paris thing was the worst terrorist attack since London's 7/7. What about that thing on that Scandewegian island not long back, with 70 odd people gunned down? Oh right, but that guy was white so it was a massacre rather than terrorism.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 January, 2015, 09:42:07 AM
Nail. On Head.

Black man kills a person. The culture is stigmatised.
White man kills a person. He's a lone wolf with mental issues.

Fuck this society, seriously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zenith 666 on 13 January, 2015, 09:47:44 AM
Massacre,terrorisim lunatics it all come down to the same thing innocent people lose their lives.Sky's lack of coverage could be down to Murdoch.His views after Paris were disgraceful pointing the blame at all Muslims.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2015, 10:01:57 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 13 January, 2015, 09:42:07 AM
White man kills a person. He's a lone wolf with mental issues.

Or he's just Standing His Ground.

But yeah, nail on head there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2015, 11:09:14 AM
Another thing that barely gets a mention are anti-austerity demonstrations all over the world - unless they turn violent, that is.
.
Saudi Arabia, one of the richest countries in the world, is projecting a $39 billion dollar deficit for 2015, which shortfall it intends to cover by cutting wages. Around two thirds of Saudi Arabia's population work for the government and many are already struggling to make ends meet. Their politicians are quick to dismiss the idea as 'relative austerity'. As far as I can tell, there have been no 'relatively anti-relative austerity' rallies in that country. Not yet, anyway, but the population is about to be squeezed, relatively or not, just like the rest of us.
.
If even Saudi Arabia is having money problems that might lead to a popular uprising, why isn't our media piecing it all together? Every government in the world is in debt and scrabbling to make money to pay these debts off through taxes, cunning or wars.
.
But to whom are all these debts owed and where did they get the unimaginable amounts of money they lent us in the first place?
.
At this point, somebody usually yells "conspiracy theory!" as if I think the whole situation has been meticulously planned by some shadowy cabal with the secret compliance of every politician, scientist, journalist and civil servant in the world from the present day back to the time of the First Kings of Babylon. Well, let's imagine that there is a grain of truth in this and that it is my old target of a few powerful banking families who discovered and applied the secrets of money creation for their own ends. I mean, if you were born into a family that has possessed the power to print its own money and lend it to emperors at interest for generations, would you want to give that up? To anybody? Whom could you trust with that power and how would you explain how your family has used and abused that power?
.
The current banking scam started, as near as I can figure it, in the late 1500s or early 1600s when certain families of goldsmiths hit on the idea of the deposit bank, where they stored clients' gold, for a small fee, and issued 'bank notes' as surety. As it became more and more convenient to store gold and pay with bank notes more and more gold was stored and more and more bank notes issued.
.
Eventually the bank branched out into offering loans, at first using only 1:1 bank notes. That is to say, for every ounce of gold in the safes there was a corresponding bank note, not a note more and not a note less. The loans were repayable in gold, silver or bank notes or your property if you cocked up. That last bit is important.
.
The temptation proved too great and eventually the bankers began writing more bank notes than they held in gold to be lent out as interest-bearing loans. Needless to say, business soared and soon these family banks found themselves in the position to lend to emperors, kings, presidents and prime ministers, as well as industries, businesses and ordinary people. They had started on the road to owning everything - or if not owning it, at least wanting to own it.
.
Let's return to Saudi Arabia. An oil-rich country nevertheless in debt to the modern incarnation of that old system of imaginary money. Until now the country's been on-side, they sell us oil, take our loans, buy our weapons and keep their neighbours, and subjects, in-line. But now, because the current global monetary system is unsustainable and collapsing, ordinary Saudi Arabian people are going to start going without and maybe even losing their jobs.
.
Given that country's ruling class's human rights record and no-nonsense approach to dissent, the situation might rapidly deteriorate.
.
The bankers sit back and watch (what do they care? The interest's still ticking up) to see what happens. They'll fund anyone willing to maintain the status quo and their other clients will rush to agree. Governments and corporations will throw their weight at the problem, sending in troops and administrators and MacDonald's waitresses. So long as whoever takes over, or retains power, makes sure taxes continue to be paid to cover the debt, everybody's happy. Except for the people who have to pay it, though - ordinary, increasingly grumpy people like you and me.
.
But the media narrative is terrorism, always terrorism. We are at war with fundamentalists and never allowed to forget it. Our enemies are each other, not the handful of people we all owe so much imaginary money to.
.
Watch the blood, watch the death, watch the terror and the tragedy, watch the beautiful idiots and the posturing windbags, watch each other and watch yourself. Watch the gladiators, buy the peanuts and enjoy the circus - and under absolutely no account must you pay any attention whatsoever to the man behind the curtain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 January, 2015, 05:12:47 PM
In spite of our rage we're still just rats in a cage, to paraphrase the Smashing Pumpkins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 January, 2015, 03:16:07 PM
The Pub Landlord has just announced he's standing against Farage in the General Election. Sometimes I love this country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2015, 04:01:48 PM
...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 04:35:37 PM
Research suggests that nearly half of Britons hold anti-Semitic views, according to a poll by YouGov.  45% believed that at least one anti-Semitic view presented to them was probably or definitely true, according to The Times newspaper.  Can't say I'm surprised!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2015, 04:45:32 PM
But is it ant-semitism or just ignorance? If someone mistakenly believes that all Catholics are allowed to use condoms, does that make them anti-Christian? I don't think so.
.
You've got to be very careful what you say about the Jews, though, some of them are a bit prickly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 04:54:05 PM
Well, when a person answers a question with an anti-Semitic view, one assumes that person is anti-Semitic.  And, as for being a bit prickly, I can think of other religions that can be applied to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 January, 2015, 05:13:16 PM
Anti-semitism has become so deeply ingrained into western European culture that often people might not even realize that they're saying something offensive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 05:17:21 PM
Very true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 January, 2015, 05:18:38 PM
Not that that excuses it mind, I should have mentioned that (though where all sensible enough around here) but if ever their was a time to start challenging these opinions it should be now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 January, 2015, 05:26:45 PM
Such seems to be the sense of disquiet amongst millennia old Jewish communities in Europe that many are choosing emigration as an answer. Z  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2015, 06:00:42 PM
A good egg is a good egg and an arsehole is an arsehole. Both types come in a wide variety of forms, colours and programming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 January, 2015, 06:11:43 PM
By their actions and deeds shall you know them. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 January, 2015, 06:55:37 PM
There is never a valid excuse for racism,  despite how infuriatingly stubborn all bigots i know are when they insist otherwise.
I do object,  however, to IsraelI authorities holding up the anti-semitism card whenever another country condemns their more belligerent military actions. 
Disliking Jews because of some prejudiced racist notions is bigoted, anti-semitic and,  in my view,  wrong.
Not wanting to see innocent Palestinian families killed by IsraelI missiles is not anti-semitic. Israel is a country,  not a race - I'd hazard a guess that most westerners who protested against the Iraq war are not haters of the predominant races of the countries involved in the invasion.

That said: 
QuoteYou've got to be very careful what you say about the Jews, though, some of them are a bit prickly

Sharky, I'm surprised at you.  You know better than that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2015, 07:33:02 PM
Some people are prickly, though, don't you find? They'd rather find excuses to aggravate than educate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 January, 2015, 08:02:08 PM
Or troll rather than answer points.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 January, 2015, 09:40:59 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 14 January, 2015, 03:16:07 PM
The Pub Landlord has just announced he's standing against Farage in the General Election. Sometimes I love this country.

The real beauty of this is that I've long suspected more than a few of his targets don't grasp the point of Al Murray's comedy at all, and some may actually vote for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 14 January, 2015, 09:56:59 PM
surely jews muslims etc aren't a "race" they  are a religion .it does baffle me how some people get the two mixed up and I for one have never come across any anti semetism in my life so I don't know where these polls get there information
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2015, 10:14:27 PM
Wow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 January, 2015, 10:44:12 PM
I think you've been lucky with the company you keep, Mogzilla. I went to school in the closest thing Ireland has to a Jewish ghetto so had plenty of Jewish friends, and the frequent abuse they had to put up with was frightening. Leaving that environment I found myself around people who didn't know (that they knew) any Jews, and the things that otherwise perfectly decent people would come out with as supposed facts and racist assumptions were even worse. The dearly-held stereotypes of sly, avaricious, innately and underhandedly wealthy, secretive and manipulative are alive and well, right on up to 'they killed our Lord', 'Zionist banking cabal' and 'then there's the thing about the babies'. Now I appreciate that I grew up in a backward religious monoculture, but I doubt these attitudes were unique, or have magically disappeared.

Also, though it's a moot point, 'Semitic' is a racial description.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 10:50:55 PM
Hi Grugz, on many occasions we don't use language in a literal sense, do we, but we still know what it means.  For example, if a white person of one nationality insults a white person of a different nationality, based on their nationality, we call that racism, when, if you want to be literal, they've insulted their own race.

The word anti-Semitic, in it's modern use, is used to describe only Jews, but it's original use was very different.  Literally, a Semite is a member of any race supposed to be descended from Shem (Gen x. 21 foll.) including especially the Hebrews, Arameans, Phoenicians, Arabs, and Assyrians.

Language evolves.  And in the modern world we know what racism and anti-Semitism is don't we, and there's plenty of it out there.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 January, 2015, 11:09:13 PM
I think the term anti-semitism has become so diluted by overuse that its truly sad. Glimpsing the behemoth of the PR machine behind most uses of this word and its network of volunteer operatives is also truly sad.

I have witnessed far less anti-semitism than I have racism of all other forms, none of which have been lucky enough to deserve their own special sub-label.

I have yet to see any evidence of even a second-hand nature that anti-semitism is so ingrained in western Europe that people don't even realise it. I think that's absolute bollocks frankly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 14 January, 2015, 11:13:49 PM
Now I appreciate that I grew up in a backward religious monoculture, (//http://)

Come out west! I honestly can say I have never really heard any anti Jewish sentiment, it really is an unknown factor out here, plenty of other casual racism to pick from, they are well down the pecking order.
At work today we had a conversation about religion, most were shocked to hear that Muslims were not pagans, and follow the teachings of Moses and Jesus as Prophets (as I understand it anyway), and that 'their God' was 'our God'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 11:19:36 PM
With respect, sir, are you Jewish?  And if you're not, how do you know how much anti-Semitism is out there?  No need for the government funded guards at Jewish schools in the UK then, waste of public money?

You think historically the Jews have been lucky?  Well, that's a new one on me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 January, 2015, 11:26:31 PM
I always assumed stereotypes about Jews were deliberately perpetuated: an entire section of the population controlling all the riches and exploiting the poor?  I imagine there's a certain political and social class that finds that scapegoat comes in real handy.

Quote from: TordelBack on 14 January, 2015, 09:40:59 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 14 January, 2015, 03:16:07 PM
The Pub Landlord has just announced he's standing against Farage in the General Election. Sometimes I love this country.

The real beauty of this is that I've long suspected more than a few of his targets don't grasp the point of Al Murray's comedy at all, and some may actually vote for him.

Don't forget that UKIP just as likely only get votes because they're the protest option since the LibDems sold everyone down the river, and a high-profile joke candidate will most likely siphon off UKIP "support."
Farage has already shown he's pretty useless against comedians even if they're gormless twats, so it'll be interesting to see if there's any meat on this campaign, as it's often overlooked that Murray is a lot smarter than his public persona would suggest - the inverse of Farage, if you will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 January, 2015, 11:36:12 PM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 14 January, 2015, 11:13:49 PM
Now I appreciate that I grew up in a backward religious monoculture, (//http://)

Come out west! I honestly can say I have never really heard any anti Jewish sentiment, it really is an unknown factor out here, plenty of other casual racism to pick from, they are well down the pecking order.
At work today we had a conversation about religion, most were shocked to hear that Muslims were not pagans, and follow the teachings of Moses and Jesus as Prophets (as I understand it anyway), and that 'their God' was 'our God'.

To be fair, I've only met two Irish Jews in my life - one was a manager in a call centre where I used to work (a lovely lady who I believe converted in order to marry) while the other is Benjamin Loose, the bassist in the my favourite Irish band, Republic of Loose (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Loose (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Loose)).  In any case, we haven't exactly covered ourselves in glory when it came to our treatment of Jewish people in the past: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerick_Boycott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerick_Boycott)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 January, 2015, 11:45:01 PM
Sorry about the double post, but I thought I'd better add that I may well have met plenty of Irish Jews. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 January, 2015, 01:17:06 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 January, 2015, 11:36:12 PM
To be fair, I've only met two Irish Jews in my life

Were they Catholic Jews or Protestant Jews?

I'd like to pretend that we in The North are to preoccupied with sectarianism to be anti-semitic, but the secterian wans have chosen sides in the Israeli -Palestine conflict. It's fertile soil for over-ripe prejudice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 January, 2015, 05:26:34 AM
In the village where I grew up there are two 'sects' of religion, C of E and Methodists. I was Christened a Methodist though I don't remember being consulted on the options.
.
Although there is no open hostility between the two sects there is a kind of false-smile rivalry that does sometimes lead to people falling out (but very rarely). The God Botherers (C of E) look down on the Sky Pilots (Methodists) for being in thrall to this new fangled rubbish and the Sky Pilots look down on the God Botherers for being in thrall to that outdated piffle.
.
Mostly, of course, nobody cares (especially these days) whether you attend church or chapel and the tensions between the two were always mild to the point of invisibility. The differences, though, are there - no matter how deeply buried and it wouldn't take much to bring them to the surface, as has happened with Judaism and Christianity, for example.
.
One of the major reasons for the historical and continued persecution of Jews is Judaism's stance on usury, or the charging of interest on loans. (I can hear your eyes rolling from here but bear with me.)
.
Christianity, in common with Islam, from their very beginnings taught against usury but Judaism did not. This meant that if Muslims or Christians couldn't get loans, for whatever reason, in their own communities then they could go to the Jewish communities where they might get a loan but have to pay interest. Thus the Christians and Muslims demonised the Jews for being greedy and the Jews demonised the Christians and the Muslims for being hypocrites.
.
Couple that with the rise of the banks I described in an earlier post, which did begin with but is currently in no way the exclusive preserve of Jewish bankers, and we end up where we are today.
.
The low-level tensions between the God Botherers and the Sky Pilots in my village obviously fall far short of the tensions between Christianity, Islam and Judaism - but how long would this long-standing tolerance last if one sect hit upon the secret of creating money out of nothing whilst the other sect didn't? All of a sudden you get an unequal and divided community, one side wealthy and fearful and the other side poor and resentful.
.
The love of money is at the root of all evil, even (and maybe even especially) racism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 15 January, 2015, 08:03:23 AM
just proving you're never too old to learn ,I never knew that fact about the word Semitism ,I just thought it was a posh phrase for Judaism and not being a jew meself I never felt the need to look deeply into it or any religion beyond RE at school.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 January, 2015, 10:05:16 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 14 January, 2015, 11:09:13 PMI have witnessed far less anti-semitism than I have racism of all other forms, none of which have been lucky enough to deserve their own special sub-label.

The label thing is a fair point, and by attacking one form of racism no-one is defending all the others.  It is however worth remembering that only 70 years ago today Jews were being subjected to industrialised genocide, not (just) as a consequence of economic drivers like slavery or landgrabs, but having been specifically singled out as the primary cause of a nation's ills.  While there's no doubt that innumerable other groupings have suffered as much and more throughout history and into the present day, the repeated pattern of pogrom in European history does suggest that Judaism has at least the right to name its aggressor. It's also the case that modern Jews tend not to form part of an underclass in the way that many minorities do (at least partially because those Jews that survived the Holocaust were often the ones with wealthy international connections), and so have an increased influence on discourse and language that more marginalised groups don't have.

I completely agree that the state of Israel has co-opted the whole concept of anti-semitism as an excuse to behave like the biggest wankers on Earth - but that doesn't mean that anti-semitism doesn't exist independent of Israel (although the latter surely doesn't help).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 15 January, 2015, 04:50:59 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2015, 10:14:27 PM
Wow.

^ This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 January, 2015, 10:47:14 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 04:35:37 PM
Research suggests that nearly half of Britons hold anti-Semitic views, according to a poll by YouGov.  45% believed that at least one anti-Semitic view presented to them was probably or definitely true, according to The Times newspaper.

Interesting discussion of this on Radio 4 this morning. According one (Jewish) academic, the survey's methodology is fairly suspect and certainly contradicts the Anti-Defamation League's own survey data which rates the UK as one of the least anti-semitic in the world. (http://global100.adl.org/#map/weurope)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 January, 2015, 11:05:07 AM
That's good to hear at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 January, 2015, 11:28:03 AM
The propaganda machine has shown its hand so many times I'm too skeptical.

If we could separate Israeli from Jewish that'd be nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 January, 2015, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 January, 2015, 10:47:14 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 January, 2015, 04:35:37 PM
Research suggests that nearly half of Britons hold anti-Semitic views, according to a poll by YouGov.  45% believed that at least one anti-Semitic view presented to them was probably or definitely true, according to The Times newspaper.

Interesting discussion of this on Radio 4 this morning. According one (Jewish) academic, the survey's methodology is fairly suspect and certainly contradicts the Anti-Defamation League's own survey data which rates the UK as one of the least anti-semitic in the world. (http://global100.adl.org/#map/weurope)


Cheers

Jim

It's worth remembering that YouGov were founded and remain funded by prominent supporters of the Conservatives and their polls usually reflect a certain bias and are more often wrong than right, even by dint of statistical probability.  To be honest, though, I can't for a minute imagine why Tories would want Britons turning their focus upon a minority group that has traditionally been blamed for hoarding wealth at the expense of the poor, and I certainly can't see what a surge in this kind of opinion would serve in an election year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 January, 2015, 02:21:56 PM
Hi Jim, thanks for pointing out that site, I found it really interesting.  I do hope the figures on that survey are more accurate than the YouGov one, although I still have my doubts.  The sample size of the survey you pointed out was, I think, 510, whereas I think the YouGov one was much larger.  But, even if it is right, the fact that nearly 4 million people in the UK hold anti-Semitic views is still scary.

As for Theblazeuk's point about separating Israel and Jews world wide, I'm amazed that people don't do that.  We don't assume that all Muslims agree with the policies of the five Islamic republics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 January, 2015, 02:33:50 PM
QuoteWe don't assume that all Muslims agree with the policies of the five Islamic republics.

Well, there *are* a disturbingly high number of people - Rupert Murdoch amongst them - who think it is reasonable to demand that every living Muslim condems the actions of the very few nutters or else they must support them (or somethnig equally stupid).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 January, 2015, 02:45:14 PM
That's a fair point but people that do think that are not reasonable and are idiots.  There are a lot of seemingly reasonable people who think that all Jews are the same as Israelis.  Coming from a part-Jewish British family and having lived and worked in Israel, I would tell anybody who cares to listen that comparing your average British Jew to an Israeli is like comparing chalk with cheese.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 January, 2015, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 January, 2015, 02:45:14 PM
That's a fair point but people that do think that are not reasonable and are idiots.  There are a lot of seemingly reasonable people who think that all Jews are the same as Israelis.  Coming from a part-Jewish British family and having lived and worked in Israel, I would tell anybody who cares to listen that comparing your average British Jew to an Israeli is like comparing chalk with cheese.

And there's the problem right there. There are too many ill informed idiots. Not only in the public, but in the press and political sheres, in whos interest it is to keep us divided.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 January, 2015, 02:59:04 PM
True.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mabs on 16 January, 2015, 03:37:58 PM
I second that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2015, 04:25:17 PM
On the 9th of April, less than four months from now, this thread will be five years old.
.
I think we all deserve a pat on the back for not killing each other or setting fire to the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 January, 2015, 05:06:02 PM
Is this the real life, or is this just fantasy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 January, 2015, 05:30:11 PM
Well I havent seen Man 2 Man about this past fortnight....c'mon, Shark where have you hidden him? Z  :-*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2015, 05:56:03 PM
I don't know.
.
We didn't burn him...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 January, 2015, 06:28:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2015, 05:56:03 PM
I don't know.
.
We didn't burn him...

We'll have no trouble here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2015, 03:08:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 January, 2015, 04:25:17 PM
On the 9th of April, less than four months from now, this thread will be five years old.
.
I think we all deserve a pat on the back for not killing each other or setting fire to the internet.

My word.  This thread has the same birthday as me.  Would that I was 35 years younger.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2015, 04:06:45 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2015, 03:08:48 PM
My word.  This thread has the same birthday as me.

Err, and apparently me as well. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2015, 05:21:11 PM
How rum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2015, 05:35:21 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 January, 2015, 04:06:45 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2015, 03:08:48 PM
My word.  This thread has the same birthday as me.

Err, and apparently me as well.

Aliens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 18 January, 2015, 12:13:41 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/pH4UlAj.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2015, 08:28:09 PM
Dear unwashed masses,
.
No, you can't have any extra money to upgrade the NHS, social housing, education or care for the elderly (in fact, these things already cost too much so there are going to be cuts, I'm afraid) but you must pay me at least £15bn - £20bn (or maybe up to £130bn if certain sources are to be taken seriously) to upgrade Trident so we can nuke hundreds of millions of human beings.
.
Now stop complaining and get back to work, these weapons won't pay for themselves, you know.
.
Your loving overseer,
.
Dave C.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 January, 2015, 08:32:58 PM
I'm not really convinced Dave, Barak, Enda etc are our overseers: more like glove puppets for the money. Merkel seems the only western leader in control of her remit. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 January, 2015, 08:39:02 PM
We all know it's benefit fraudsters who are soaking up the country's cash, and not expensive nuclear programmes with no practical purpose beyond keeping certain companies with numerous ex-ministers on their boards rolling in lucrative government contracts for the next decade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 January, 2015, 08:47:26 PM
With that dumb, braying, 'facilitator', fuck HRH Andy right at the front of them at the annual Davos swill fest during the week. It just warms the cockles and all that jazz. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2015, 09:04:00 PM
It doesn't matter what you think because I'm not listening. I have to go and suck up to the newest Saudi Arabian tyrant. Try not to burn the place down while I'm gone - that's my job.
.
Dave.
.
P.S. That reminds me, I think you should all be forced to buy domestic fire extinguishers from my friend Mr Chubb. If you don't I'll have no choice other than to allow another of my friends, Mr Churchill, to ramp up your insurance premiums. I'll tell you all about it when I get back. D.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 January, 2015, 09:29:52 PM
This King Abdullah bollocks marks the last time I'm going to feel ashamed about DeValera's letter of condolence on Hitler's death.

Well, probably not, but sheesh, what a disgrace nonetheless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2015, 09:50:37 PM
Bloody predictive double posting >-(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2015, 09:51:09 PM
Quiet, you, or they'll turn our oil off and stop buying our warplanes and cities...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 January, 2015, 11:24:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2015, 09:51:09 PM
Quiet, you, or they'll turn our oil off and stop buying our warplanes and cities...

You do have to wonder what the point of the western world is if we have to play courtier to a regime like Saudi's in order to keep the lights on.  The idea that QE2, a woman who, for all the bizarrities of her existence, drove an ambulance in the war against Hitler, could countenance flags at half mast over her home for a dynasty that forbids women to drive and tortures people weekly for what they write.  Tell them to sort themselves out or piss off, and let the consequences play out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 January, 2015, 11:42:27 PM
Has Shark finally cracked and now thinks he's David Cameron? I've heard of people thinking they're Jesus or even Napoleon, but that gormless puddle of effluvia? Get well Shark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2015, 06:29:28 AM
Of course I don't think I'm David Cameron, that would be insane.
.
I *am* David Cameron.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 January, 2015, 10:51:15 AM
Here's a hell of a fine piece of analysis (http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/1824-frederic-lordon-syriza-faces-a-choice-between-capitulation-and-open-sedition) of the Greek situation and the future of the EU from Mike Watson. I mightn't agree with all of it, but I'm damned if I can put together anything resembling as cogent an argument.  The sharper echoes of what we endlessly discuss here in Oirland are painful to read. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 11:22:57 AM
Bring it down and start again. Hmmm lots to agree with there....it might even be Democratic and transparent the next time. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 January, 2015, 12:51:00 PM
Interesting to see headlines about the Greek result like "why isn't the market crashing?" and seeing how threatened media people are by the idea of lefties in charge of anything in case they nationalise it and make it start working.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 01:13:53 PM
Ah sure what ever way you look at it the instability over the next few days, weeks, months will make Goldman Sachs a few more tens of billions on the margins. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
Listening to the radio in the waggon I was struck by how these Greeks who object to austerity forced upon them by the elites are labelled "radicals." Since when has it been radical to not want to have all one's wealth stolen? Bloody BBC muppets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 02:30:37 PM
The sheer neck of these people; bought and paid for. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 26 January, 2015, 02:38:09 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 January, 2015, 09:29:52 PM
This King Abdullah bollocks marks the last time I'm going to feel ashamed about DeValera's letter of condolence on Hitler's death.

Well, probably not, but sheesh, what a disgrace nonetheless.

His half-brother and successor, King Salman is 79 years old. So at least they're giving Youth a chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 January, 2015, 03:02:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 02:19:07 PM
Listening to the radio in the waggon I was struck by how these Greeks who object to austerity forced upon them by the elites are labelled "radicals." Since when has it been radical to not want to have all one's wealth stolen? Bloody BBC muppets.

I think it's more that Greece is a highly conservative country, so a socialist party taking power is pretty radical - though hard left socialists in power is pretty radical in Europe anyways, thanks to rightwing scum media peddling the fear necessary to make people retreat into the illusion of stability offered by conservative political entities and the familiar comfort of consumer behavior.  Fear has been overridden by anger, and hopefully Greece won't be the last place this happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 03:21:30 PM
The bullshit system worked on keeping a large percentage of the populations if not happy at least content. Events post 2008 has blown that core component away in that the majority including the old middle class now see themselves being dragged squealing to the moneterist chopping block. It will be extremly interesting to see how the Greek 'problem' is 'managed'. Think along the lines of Ukraine as a possible scenario. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 05:05:30 PM
I expect back-door economic sanctions of Greece by the banks and their thralls to make things worse, maybe even some sabotage, so they can say, "Look! Look what happens when you try to ignore the good economic sense of bankers who know how economies work! Now come on Greece, stop messing about and have this generous loan to help put right everything you just cocked up through your financial ignorance."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 January, 2015, 05:45:42 PM
You need to have more faith in people, Sharky.
The revolution in Iceland was ignored because of the relative economic unimportance of the territory, but now Greece - a first-world country, EU member and the birthplace of gayness - has gone pinko on us, maybe we should view Iceland as the first domino to be toppled by rising public anger at the robber barons?  The right-wing media use every trick in the book to keep us afraid instead of angry and it clearly isn't working anymore, so maybe this is it.  Maybe this is the start of glacial-but-real change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 08:03:55 PM
I do believe in people, Bear, I truly and honestly do. For just as it was people who got us into this God-awful mess it's people who will get us out of it as well.
.
Maybe I am a woolly-headed dreamer but I believe that Everyone, even Cameron, Obama and Assad are all basically good at heart. The elites are afraid of us - we outnumber them millions to one - so we need a way forward for all of us. Somehow we need to work through their fear and ours. If we don't, we're screwed.
.
I've said it before - we need a global Truth and Reconciliation plan. It will be hard and there will be a lot of pain and anger but we need to get through it together so we can move forward together.
.
I know I might come across as some kill-all-the-bankers kind of lunatic but I'm really not, I'm a different kind of lunatic altogether. I'm the kind of lunatic who thinks Every human being is a creature of infinite worth and potential.
.
There's no way we're all going to be friends but we can at least all try to respect one another. But that kind of thing doesn't come from above, it can't be ordered or legislated into being. We all, each and every one of us, must do it ourselves, personally, and treat those who can't (and you know who you are) not as enemies to be reviled but as mental health victims to be pitied and helped.
.
Cameron isn't evil, he's a sociopath who's had his disability taken advantage of by the terrified 'elites.' Cameron, Obama, Assad and the rest are to be pitied, not reviled.
.
And yes, that is a hard thing to do and I often forget it myself, to my shame. It's the system that is the true enemy. Attack that, not the ignorant and damaged people who run it*.
.


.
*Not that I'm accusing you of attacking anyone, I hasten to add!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 08:10:13 PM
Hmmm, muses over Sharky's plea for clemency and understanding.....nah, fuck them, break out the pitchforks and bill hooks. Time we headed for the castle outside the village. Z  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 26 January, 2015, 08:18:52 PM
It's Hard to "Pity" someone like David Cameron when he seems determined to Dismantle the NHS!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 10:00:55 PM
Of course it's hard. If it was easy the world wouldn't need so much fixing.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 January, 2015, 11:40:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 10:00:55 PM
Of course it's hard.
.


Oh my!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 January, 2015, 11:56:26 PM
Been using the tool of your trade again Shark?? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 January, 2015, 06:09:13 AM
Chance'd be a fine thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 27 January, 2015, 09:01:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2015, 08:03:55 PM
I do believe in people, Bear, I truly and honestly do. For just as it was people who got us into this God-awful mess it's people who will get us out of it as well.
.
Maybe I am a woolly-headed dreamer but I believe that Everyone, even Cameron, Obama and Assad are all basically good at heart. The elites are afraid of us - we outnumber them millions to one - so we need a way forward for all of us. Somehow we need to work through their fear and ours. If we don't, we're screwed.
.
I've said it before - we need a global Truth and Reconciliation plan. It will be hard and there will be a lot of pain and anger but we need to get through it together so we can move forward together.
.
I know I might come across as some kill-all-the-bankers kind of lunatic but I'm really not, I'm a different kind of lunatic altogether. I'm the kind of lunatic who thinks Every human being is a creature of infinite worth and potential.
.
There's no way we're all going to be friends but we can at least all try to respect one another. But that kind of thing doesn't come from above, it can't be ordered or legislated into being. We all, each and every one of us, must do it ourselves, personally, and treat those who can't (and you know who you are) not as enemies to be reviled but as mental health victims to be pitied and helped.
.
Cameron isn't evil, he's a sociopath who's had his disability taken advantage of by the terrified 'elites.' Cameron, Obama, Assad and the rest are to be pitied, not reviled.
.
And yes, that is a hard thing to do and I often forget it myself, to my shame. It's the system that is the true enemy. Attack that, not the ignorant and damaged people who run it*.
.


.
*Not that I'm accusing you of attacking anyone, I hasten to add!

Shark, I don't disagree with what you're saying here, but the arbitrary capitalisation literally makes my toes curl.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 January, 2015, 10:55:22 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 27 January, 2015, 09:01:48 AM
Shark, I don't disagree with what you're saying here, but the arbitrary capitalisation literally makes my toes curl.

'Everyone'? That seems like a deliberate stylistic emphasis on inclusivity, a modern parallel for oft-capitalised 'Mankind' or 'the World'. I don't see any other examples of arbitrary capitalisation, unless this is actually a really clever joke about the world economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 27 January, 2015, 11:18:24 AM
The Everyone (and later Every [human being]) look fine to me, if a bit high-falutin'...

To bump this political stuff briefly  :o, misplaced emphasis is a comics bug-bear of mine. Possibly Marvel are worst offenders here, the more dramatic the exclamation, the dafter the use of bold fonts. I used to wonder if this was due to American intonation or that bold meant something other than emphasis but decided finally that it was often just random and wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 January, 2015, 11:35:26 AM
That's just a way for a writer to replicate accents or speech patterns.  Getting angry at it is like getting angry at Comic Sans, or a letterer using an upper case crossbar I in speech balloons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 27 January, 2015, 11:51:14 AM
I knew I'd need an example or 2. May dig something out...
My point is that it is often objectively wrong, and why go to the trouble of emboldening some words when you muddle the sense of it. Emphasis is William Shatner, this is something else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 January, 2015, 12:22:34 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 27 January, 2015, 11:51:14 AM
My point is that it is often objectively wrong, and why go to the trouble of emboldening some words when you muddle the sense of it. Emphasis is William Shatner, this is something else.

Not all writers get the emphasis thing. Bolding words to indicate naturalistic stresses as if the dialogue was spoken is a relatively recent thing. It was far more common for the rules of bolding to favour bolding character names and the most 'important' word in a sentence, rather than those that would be emphasised in natural speech.

Sometimes, the traditional way will coincide with the naturalistic, fooling you into thinking the words are being bolded for spoken emphasis, which makes it doubly confusing when it reverts back...

Cheers

Jim

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Dialogue_Emphasis_zps8kyj7svf.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 January, 2015, 12:32:22 PM
Every time I think I've read just about all I need to know about lettering, Jim comes up with one of these illustrations of just how complex and mutable a part of the medium it actually is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 27 January, 2015, 01:04:24 PM
Thanks Jim, I was going to invoke you but didn't want to derail the politics  :)
From here on I'll watch for those proper nouns as an explanation for boldness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 January, 2015, 01:53:36 PM
I will try to use more BB Code in future in order to emphasise words I want to stress.
.
Capitalisation's just easier and I'm a Lazy Bugger at heart...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 January, 2015, 01:58:31 PM
Quote from: Fungus on 27 January, 2015, 01:04:24 PM
Thanks Jim, I was going to invoke you but didn't want to derail the politics  :)

All speech bubbles are political. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 January, 2015, 02:05:14 PM
I seem to recall reading somewhere (I forget where) that bold lettering is used in comics to stress important words so that you can get the gist of the story at a glance, without having to do too much of that exhausting reading. I have no idea if that's true, or even plausible, though.
.
Jim has lettered enough of my scripts to know that I often overuse emboldening. It's something I'm trying very hard to limit. Sometimes I read the finished strips and even I have no idea why I embolden some words and not others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 January, 2015, 05:32:25 PM
Right, so what were we talking about? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 28 January, 2015, 03:27:32 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 27 January, 2015, 05:32:25 PM
Right, so what were we talking about? Z

The Belfast 2000AD discussion group provides a blue-print for a true peace and reconciliation strategy for Northern Ireland.

Discuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 28 January, 2015, 03:43:54 PM
Well it is a cross-community based forum. It focuses on alternate cultural interests, eschewing the traditional paradigm. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 January, 2015, 04:09:19 PM
And discussion is always better than fighting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 January, 2015, 04:24:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 January, 2015, 04:09:19 PM
And discussion is always better than fighting.

This explains your failed career as a boxing promoter.

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2015, 04:18:54 AM
That and my abject cowardice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 February, 2015, 02:55:41 PM
Adam Curtis' documentary Bitter Lake is available for viewing on the BBC iPlayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bitter-lake
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2015, 07:00:54 PM
Crap - I forgot the BBC iPlayer isn't available to the Mick.  It looks like a really good film, though; and I'm going to watch the bastard somehow
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2015, 07:17:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2015, 07:00:54 PM
Crap - I forgot the BBC iPlayer isn't available to the Mick.  It looks like a really good film, though; and I'm going to watch the bastard somehow

Where there's a will there's a Proxy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2015, 08:23:11 PM
Quite right, as my couple of months working in Beijing proved.  There is no Great Firewall for anyone in China with even a smattering of computer knowledge, and as such, a tidal wave of information will someday wash their paranoid government away.

Also, one of this board's finest (who asked me not to name him) has just PM'd me a proxy link.  Wahey!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 February, 2015, 08:37:31 PM
Dear People's Republic of China internet monitor, the guy you're looking for probably wears a cardigan and is probably from Tallaght in Dublin, Republic of Ireland. Yours Anon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2015, 08:53:48 PM
You're wrong.  It was another of this board's finest  :)

Mind you, Obama will know by now, and will probably sell Red China the information sooner or later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 February, 2015, 09:09:17 PM
Alas, the proxy servers themselves are trackable IP addresses. So the Great Firewall does exactly what it sets out to do, screening the majority and identifying the minority, then barring some real trickery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 08:50:43 AM
Rumours of a nuclear explosion in the Ukraine. I can't watch videos on this 'phone, so I don't know what (if anything) to make of this.
.
beforeitsnews.com/international/2015/02/nuclear-explosion-near-donetsk-eastern-ukrainemultiple-videos-2484856.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2015, 08:53:14 AM
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1243441-did-a-tactical-nuke-just-go-off-in-ukraine-big-explosion-rocks-donetsk/ (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/1243441-did-a-tactical-nuke-just-go-off-in-ukraine-big-explosion-rocks-donetsk/)
Not nuclear,  apparently
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 09:03:18 AM
RT's reporting it as a missile strike on a factory.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 February, 2015, 10:33:45 AM
Yep, it's just been confirmed.  Major nuclear strike launched from the Mars area, apparently aimed at a group called "The Gullibles".  Now, where did I put my old Army-issued NBC suit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 February, 2015, 02:09:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 09:03:18 AM
RT's reporting it as a missile strike on a factory.
.

Ukraine is one area where I wouldn't trust RT one iota - they're still peddling the line that all those identically uniformed Russians with tanks and missile launchers are 'civilian volunteers'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 02:49:02 PM
I only remember that the former Ukranian ruler didn't want any IMF loans and didn't start a civil war whilst this new lot accept all the loans they're offered and have soldiers killing their own people.
.
The only thing of any importance is that people are dying and neither side is telling the whole truth. As usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 February, 2015, 03:05:17 PM
I second Adam Hills suggestion that Islamic State be renamed Combined UNited Territories of Syria.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 03:18:07 PM
I would rather call them humans who disagree with other humans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 February, 2015, 03:35:36 PM
If that was all they where then I'd agree. But murderers are below that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 09 February, 2015, 03:39:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 02:49:02 PM
The only thing of any importance is that people are dying and neither side is telling the whole truth. As usual.
Yes yes yes

I'm a bit of a leftie, and meet people from all sorts of wacky groups at meetings and on demos and so on - the people who say, still, that we should be cheering on Putin because he's at least not friendly with America is more than I expected (more than none, in other words).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 February, 2015, 08:24:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 02:49:02 PM
I only remember that the former Ukranian ruler didn't want any IMF loans and didn't start a civil war whilst this new lot accept all the loans they're offered and have soldiers killing their own people.
.
The only thing of any importance is that people are dying and neither side is telling the whole truth. As usual.

And they have soldiers from Russia killing their own people, and some of their own people killing their own people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 08:33:16 PM
Well, somebody's killing somebody. I don't suppose it really matters who or why - whether someone's shot by a Russian, Ukrainian or Western Mercenary they're just as dead.
.
I know, I know; that's not very useful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2015, 08:45:13 PM
Quote- the people who say, still, that we should be cheering on Putin because he's at least not friendly with America

Now that's just ridiculous.  A warmongering megalomaniac is a warmongering megalomaniac,  even if he doesn't come from the countries you're supposed to hate more. 
The older I get,  the less time I have for 'devil's advocate' political discussions,  where provoking extreme reactions takes precedence over discussing one's genuine opinion in an honest an open-minded way.
I remember listening to a young Lithuanian clown rabbiting on about how communism (which he could scarcely remember) was better for his country,  while sitting in Copenhagen airport (where he would not be sitting if the USSR hadn't collapsed).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 09 February, 2015, 10:36:27 PM
I worked with a Lithuanian man for years, a man in his late fifties, he had seen a bit, a very interesting man. His view was that both Communism and Democracy were crap.
Under communism, everyone worked, pensioners got there pensions, no one was hungry. He had no personal freedom, if you got any sort of minor promotion there was a gaggle of people that were jealous and more than willing to hang you to get the position. There was a real atmosphere of 'fear' (his word) there was someone always out to get what you had.
Democracy for him was the biggest disappointment, he got personal freedom of expression and travel, but the trade off was mass unemployment, privatisation of state assets to former communist party/police meaning a very few people got very rich and pensions and public services were cut to the bone, resulting in huge immigration for the country. So he was not a fan of either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 February, 2015, 12:06:52 PM
Fair point,  and I think he's right - I find myself leaning more and more towards a system of enlightened anarchy, impractical as it is in the world we know.  I just think the young guy I knew was talking out his proverbial for effect,  not having had the experience of communism and benefiting quite well from capitalism,  not least using his freedom to study in a foreign country and travel the world in general.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 04:50:09 PM
Why not give communism a go; it's never truly been tried before. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2015, 04:56:30 PM
Neither has democracy if we're honest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 04:57:35 PM
No disagreement there. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 05:37:13 PM
What we need is a democratic government, a communist society, a capitalist economy, an anarchic media and a free individual. I call it Demgovcomsoccapecoanamedfreindism - but I doubt it'll catch on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 05:49:59 PM
What we need is proper application of the law. Yes penalise people who abuse the welfare system; but penalise both the bastards such as HSBC who facilitate tax dodging and those who avail them selves of the ILLEGAL service provided. Transparency, accountability and equality under the law would be a help....it's not like I'm paying thousands of pounds a year in direct and indirect tax for the entertainment value.
The government need only act like the impartial broker we expect, in order to improve the situation and engender some societal buy in.
Not that it's likely to happen with the venal shower of garbage running the game now. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 06:15:09 PM
The trouble stems from the debt. Ministers are more afraid of the money than they are of us. Change that and they'd soon come over to our side.
.
"When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow," as a far wiser man than I once said. To bastardise Mr T, we gotta' grab us some nuts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 06:38:47 PM
I would say the trouble is with the debt but from an opposite direction. This government and all possible governments within the whit of this current insane system  need the populace in general to be in debt. This tightens the noose of control over us: people in debt i.e. mortgages, loans etc don't revolt or even squeak for that matter.
Were the majority of the western populace not in some form of debt they would give a resounding 'go fuck' to the government and their Goldman Sachs/HSBC/hedge fund masters.
Debt is a prerequisite of the moral swamp we find ourselves currently mired in. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 10 February, 2015, 06:53:22 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 February, 2015, 02:09:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2015, 09:03:18 AM
RT's reporting it as a missile strike on a factory.
.

Ukraine is one area where I wouldn't trust RT one iota - they're still peddling the line that all those identically uniformed Russians with tanks and missile launchers are 'civilian volunteers'

Didn't one of RT's reporters quit on air due to their coverage of the Ukraine Crisis? I used to tune into RT every now and then, but I've avoided it ever since the start of the crisis in Ukraine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 07:01:47 PM
Exactly.
.
Rise up - you have nothing to lose but your debts.
.
The more people who figure out these debts are illusory, the less their power over all of us. Strike back using their own weapons - if the bank charges you £25 for sending you a letter, charge them £25 for reading it and another £25 for replying. When you get sent a Council Tax bill, tell them that you'll consider the Council's tender and then make them a counter-offer. Refuse to pay nothing but do not accept demands - wrangle and offer to pay what you think is fair. Read the letters and forms they use against you, copy the style and mirror it back to them. If the council/government want to see you - YOU make the appointment for them, at your place, at a time to suit you. If they get pissy, start charging them for your time and inconvenience.  These buggers work for you, not the other way around, and they have no more rights than you do. Be a mirror - treat them how they treat you; with authority.
.
(Says the homeless man...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 07:09:43 PM
Larry King now works for RT.
.
His show is called PoliticKing and his teeth don't seem to fit properly any more but there he is. RT has a very interesting mix of content, I find. While BBC News 24 is wiffling on about the Oscars or some other puff, RT tends to be concentrating on more important things.
.
I wouldn't take anything RT (or any news channel) says at face value but I do find their style and coverage to be far more substantial than BBCN24.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 10 February, 2015, 07:18:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 07:09:43 PM
Larry King now works for RT.
.
His show is called PoliticKing and his teeth don't seem to fit properly any more but there he is. RT has a very interesting mix of content, I find. While BBC News 24 is wiffling on about the Oscars or some other puff, RT tends to be concentrating on more important things.
.
I wouldn't take anything RT (or any news channel) says at face value but I do find their style and coverage to be far more substantial than BBCN24.

There's undoubtedly some very interesting programmes shown on RT, but their coverage of the news, particularly the Ukraine crisis, does show a strong bias towards Russia. Obviously it is a Russian channel, but it makes for uncomfortable viewing. When that passenger jet was shot down over Ukraine RT's coverage seemed to mostly involve the reporters saying "It was nothing to do with us. Honest".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 07:22:32 PM
That is the ideal way forward. However the majority of people have cares, woes, husbands, wives, children and are debilitated and stripped of their heart by the flow of bullshit which persumably flows through their letterbox on a daily basis. There needs to be an alternative put forward which allows people to hecome free and not the slaves they are made to be at the moment. This is wistful in the sense that, again, and I do over paraphrase Orwell: in his prole spiel he states they can never be free untill they are conscious and can never be conscious untill they are free. I feel we are pretty much in an analogous fashion, in the same position. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2015, 07:31:10 PM
Unsurprisingly for a state led by the head of a frighteningly competent personality cult, RT receives a huge amount of funding - almost in parallel to the BBC's World Service (and Global News) cuts to funding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 08:27:14 PM
Well yes, the strategy has not worked so well for me so far but I'm not giving up - much as I might want to. I risked my all on this strategy and lost, as most of you know, but I only lost because the council cheated and acted beyond its jurisdiction and beyond its powers. Of course, you all only have my word for this and many of you think I'm full of shit anyway so I don't blame anyone for taking no notice of me.
.
I find I cannot tolerate the system's invasive and ruthless nature any longer. Whatever they throw at me I reflect right back at them - co-operation reflects co-operation, demands and ultimatums reflect the same.
.
I think of the guy from the film Network (Howard Beale?) - the "mad as Hell" man - and his speech about "just leave us alone in our own homes!" But they don't leave us alone, do they? The system pushes its way into everything we do and I for one have had enough. F*ck the system - I don't belong to it - it belongs to me and I'll call on it when I need it and help it when it deserves it. I'm damn well going to treat it that way until it starts treating me with the respect a human being deserves. Or until it crushes me. Either way, f*ck it.
.
As to that downed passenger jet over Ukraine, there was an interesting documentary about that on RT recently which raised some interesting points. None of the eye-witnesses saw a missile, or the telltale exhaust plume of the missile the West assumes was used. Crash investigators were kept away from the site by the Ukranian government and NATO. Bodies were left where they lay for nearly two days. Photos of the wreckage appeared to show bullet holes in the cockpit of the passenger jet, suggesting it was gunned down by a Russian-made fighter jet. And just why was a civilian airliner flying over a war zone?
.
Something's not right in the Ukraine. Something going beyond, and behind, the obvious. The Ukranians and I are fighting against the same vampire squid; unfortunately for them, they have more tentacles to cope with than I do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 February, 2015, 08:43:32 PM
They flew a plane near a war zone. Well I'm subject to correction but warzones are replete with the two things inimical to passenger jets those being hyped up adolescent/post adolescent males with an I'm not gonna die and this is all a game anyways; coupled with a surfeit of western/soviet bloc weaponry
In additionto that we have an east west 'juxtaposition' with a russian nut and an americn cypher who ain't Kennedy and Kruschev.

And nothing was going to happen? Z

I love the way the only real politician in the world (like or love) Angela Merkle looks like a rabbit in headlights at the moment.....it may possibly have dawned on her that these semi literate pricks actually have the capacity to kill us all. Z

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 10 February, 2015, 09:10:55 PM
For those who want to see it, here's the video of the RT reporter who resigned on air over RT's coverage of the Ukraine crisis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55izx6rbCqg
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 February, 2015, 10:14:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 February, 2015, 08:27:14 PM
As to that downed passenger jet over Ukraine, there was an interesting documentary about that on RT recently which raised some interesting points. None of the eye-witnesses saw a missile, or the telltale exhaust plume of the missile the West assumes was used. Crash investigators were kept away from the site by the Ukranian government and NATO. Bodies were left where they lay for nearly two days. Photos of the wreckage appeared to show bullet holes in the cockpit of the passenger jet, suggesting it was gunned down by a Russian-made fighter jet. And just why was a civilian airliner flying over a war zone?
.
Something's not right in the Ukraine. Something going beyond, and behind, the obvious. The Ukranians and I are fighting against the same vampire squid; unfortunately for them, they have more tentacles to cope with than I do.

Crash investigators were kept away from the site by the militia originally, I believe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 February, 2015, 02:28:45 PM
and the fact that militia commanders were bragging about shooting down a plane for a few hours before it became clear it was a passenger jet - then all the tweets were deleted and they began denying it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 07:25:21 PM
Not forgetting that the Ukranian government absolutely does not drop cluster-bombs in civilian areas.
.
m.hrw.org/news/2015/01/15/test-new-ukraine-s-commitment-reform
.
Complexities of the situation in Ukraine:  www.forbes.com/sites/stratfor/2014/03/11/ukraines-increasing-polarization-and-the-western-challenge/
.
If the US is so desperate to prove Russian forces are invading Ukraine, where's their proof? They have really good spy satellites and aircraft, don't they? Or are the Russians using highly advanced invisible tanks? There were satellite images released on 28/08/14 by NATO, so I thought I'd track them down.
.
I started here,  www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/press_releases.htm?query=Ukraine&date_from=20.08.2014&date_to=30.08.2014 and searched "Ukraine" between 20/08/14 and 30/08/14 and got two results, neither of them relating to satellite images. Hmmm, no doubt a simple oversight or I'm on the wrong NATO page.
.
So I went to the NATO home page ( www.nato.int/ ) which I can only get to go back as far as 02/09/14 - maybe you folks with proper pcs can look back further.
.
Okay, so let's look for a report of the report and choose one at random ( www.businessinsider.com/nato-satellite-photo-evidence-russia-lying-about-ukraine-2014-8?IR=T ). Hurrah! Satellite images of something. So, following the source link I got; usnato.tumblr.com/post/96003086125/new-satellite-imagery-exposes-russian-combat# but this page belongs to the United States Mission to NATO and is not the source of the initial press release.
.
A link from that page ( aco.nato.int/new-satellite-imagery-exposes-russian-combat-troops-inside-ukraine.aspx ), titled "SHAPE Public Affairs" leads to an Allied Command Operations page, which turns out not to be the source of these images either. The ACO is responsible for the planning and execution of NATO operations, so I'm getting close to the source now - but still no link to the original press release. Grrr.
.
Okay, I'll pick another site at random reporting the press release in the hopes of getting to the source: www.stopfake.org/en/fake-the-russian-army-did-not-invade-ukraine/ And, hurrah, a link to the NATO website: www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_112103.htm
.
404 - page cannot be found.
.
Okay then, the BBC - their report is bound to contain a link to source, right? Wrong. In fact, this article barely mentions the satellite images at all. m.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28972878
.
One last try, then. The images were supplied by www.digitalglobe.com/ Can't find any mention of the images here ( https://www.digitalglobe.com/resources/case-studies ) even under the Defense & Intelligence heading and I can't get the search box to work. And what is DigitalGlobe? A private satellite imaging company the Wiki page of which lists the US Department of Defense as one of its clients but not NATO. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigitalGlobe
.
Anyway, my excuse is that doing this kind of hunting on my 'phone is a pain in the arse and I've had enough. Surely there must be more satellite proof than this handful of hard to track down images from nearly six months ago but I can't be arsed looking for it.
.
Maybe you* can find the source or the original press release, or maybe you can't be arsed either.
.
*This is the "Royal You" - as in any you, not a specific you. Oh, you know what I mean...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 07:43:07 PM
Thats because it is another crock of horse shit whereby we get to pay to have our proxies kill people. They aren't being killed for any noble moral reason; simply because we have to punish those pesky Russians for screwing us around in our efforts to completely destabilize any functioning governmental entity in the fertile crescent. Btw the Russians are cynical pricks as well, but at least they have the excuse of being controlled by a post communist ex KGB oligarchy. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 07:52:35 PM
Well, I don't know. Just because I can't find the images doesn't mean they aren't there - and, in all honesty, absence of evidence isn't necessarily evidence of absence.
.
My point is that if this evidence was so compelling, where is it, who presented it and why isn't there more?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 February, 2015, 08:06:50 PM
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Ukraine+tanks&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=G7bbVPuHNaKe7gam8YDoBA#q=Ukraine+russian+tanks


Tis not too hard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 08:14:03 PM
It is a TU 80 tank with a support echelon. It is a proxy war. There are huge amounts of this material extant in the Ukraine and doubtless there are just as many Russian 'technical advisors' as there are NATO personnel present in this morass. I just blanch at devining any 'right or wrong'/'good guy- bad guy' in this situation. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 08:36:45 PM
Just found this on the downed airliner: www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814
.
TheBlaze - which result am I looking at?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 08:36:54 PM
DP - sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 08:59:48 PM
The airliner was probably targeted by a Ukranian separatist anti aircraft artillery system controlled by a rudimentary system function orientated crew. The evidence does show catastrophic destruction by an air burst close proximity warhead. But again this is beside the point...Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 09:05:51 PM
That's not what the article says.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 09:11:22 PM
I know Shark.....but being realistic I think it was on the balance of probability shot down by the 'pro Russian' faction. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 09:17:57 PM
I hasten to add: balance of probability would not lead to a decision in this instance: beyond all reasonable doubt is the only show in town. This is a conversation in an extremly non expert sense and one I am kind of loathe to be too deeply engaged in. Z :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2015, 09:19:55 PM
I don't. They'd have nothing to gain from it and the evidence doesn't seem to stack up. I think it was the Ukranian government, possibly with US/NATO covert help, who did it to demonise Russia and the rebels.
.
But you're right, there's no way to know for sure at the moment. It could just as easily have been the Chinese, the Belgians or Dr Doom.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2015, 09:33:46 PM
Possibly so, this is a cynical, amoral, middenheap. I am alas beyond any ' theological' support or 'mind' in this artificial construct. My mind and heart is with the women and children in Lugansk, Miapol, Homs, Mosul and others in day by day list of once beautiful, historic and noteworthy places which feature in an increasingly lengthening devestation and loss list. All paid for by us. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 February, 2015, 10:33:53 PM
Surprised that no-one from Ireland has waded into the multiple early-morning arrests of water protesters in their own homes by what the Guards and politicians are saying is a completely above board round of perfectly legal and reasonable arrests of - among others - 16 year-old children, and in no way an attempt to make non-payers afraid to be in their own homes if they don't toe the line.  On top of the government refusing to prosecute Irish tax evaders named in the HSBC leak, it's good to see the whole revolution thing to chuck that oppressive government out of the country worked out in the long run.  99 years and things come full circle.  Ah well.

Joking aside, if that happened up here in the North* there'd be riots and blood in the street**, and I'm amazed that people are taking it laying down and haven't strung Kenny up by his balls already.



* Which of course it did - many times.
** And there was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 February, 2015, 11:04:05 PM
Similar goings-on in the UK: http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Suspected-benefit-cheats-arrested-early-morning/story-26002712-detail/story.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2015, 11:27:40 PM
Quote from: Bear (PhD) on 11 February, 2015, 10:33:53 PM
Joking aside, if that happened up here in the North* there'd be riots and blood in the street**, and I'm amazed that people are taking it laying down and haven't strung Kenny up by his balls already.


To be fair, I was kind of pleased to see Irish people finally coming out and protesting in their thousands with the cack-handed handling of the water charges introduction.  We seem to tolerate being shat on quite a bit, but this seemed to be the straw that broke the camel's back - and at least we can vote Fine Gael out (not that it'll make much of a difference).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 February, 2015, 12:20:33 AM
Quote from: Bear (PhD) on 11 February, 2015, 10:33:53 PM
Surprised that no-one from Ireland has waded into the multiple early-morning arrests of water protesters in their own homes by what the Guards and politicians are saying is a completely above board round of perfectly legal and reasonable arrests of - among others - 16 year-old children, and in no way an attempt to make non-payers afraid to be in their own homes if they don't toe the line.  On top of the government refusing to prosecute Irish tax evaders named in the HSBC leak, it's good to see the whole revolution thing to chuck that oppressive government out of the country worked out in the long run.  99 years and things come full circle.  Ah well.

Joking aside, if that happened up here in the North* there'd be riots and blood in the street**, and I'm amazed that people are taking it laying down and haven't strung Kenny up by his balls already.



* Which of course it did - many times.
** And there was.

TBH seeing bandwagoneer extraordinaire and all round colossal knob Paul Murphy - my very own public representative - arrested almost made it all worth while, but alas not even a single length of rubber hose was employed against his Student Union Sabatical Officer arse during his unenhanced questioning, and he emerged smirking into the media frenzy and generally looking like a man who had slipped the Guards 50 quid to ensure his political career forever. Middle class tourists in Jobstown usually pay a lot more for that kind of street cred.

That'll teach Kenny to play ball with the GRA in future.

False flag! False flag!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2015, 05:26:42 AM
I've already had violent police at my door through lack of money and can only say that people would rather stand and watch than help.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2015, 10:15:27 AM
"Lord Fink."
.
Somebody's having a laugh, surely? Wasn't he one of the baddies in Dangermouse?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 12 February, 2015, 10:34:28 AM
I womder if he has a brother who's a Professor
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2015, 10:43:50 AM
Or one with a mechanical arm and a dial on his head?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 12 February, 2015, 11:08:04 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 February, 2015, 10:15:27 AM
"Lord Fink."
.
Somebody's having a laugh, surely? Wasn't he one of the baddies in Dangermouse?

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 February, 2015, 09:14:08 PM
I don't know what Benefits Britain is, but it's really brought out the Daily Mail readers on Twitter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: AlexF on 13 February, 2015, 10:37:56 AM
I was in Orbital comics near Leicester Square last night and I picked up a new anthology called 'Cross', from Disconnected Press, which turns out to be a call to arms encouraging people to take the upcoming election seriously, and to vote, goddammit, vote! Many of the stories are written and drawn by 2000 AD stalwarts, and I recognized a few names from the forums, too...

First off, I recommend the book – lots of great cartooning in there. But I have to say, it also made me cross, and not really in the way it intended.

So, a confession/admission. I care about politics. I am interested. I vote. (Which therefore means I'm not the ideal audience for the book; preaching to the choir and all that.) But I don't buy into the rhetoric that ALL politicians are power-hungry bastards, that ALL politicians are only interested in lining their pockets and keeping things great for the wealthy at the expense of everybody else. (Of the comics pushing this angle, I did rather like Williams and Holden's Money-Bucket Head - clever, funny and so darkly cynical I almost cried.)

I know the book is satire, that people are exaggerating for effect, but I worry that people think not voting is a valid idea because there's not a single politician worth voting for. I respect the comic for not coming out in support of any one party, and for promoting the idea that it's worthwhile voting for any of the 'smaller' parties. And certainly I'll champion anything that encourages people to vote! (And, yes, I applaud the Farage-bashing, too (Best in show for that were Clements and Dyer). Sure, UKIP and Farage are easy targets, but goodness me they're targets that deserve being hit*)

So here's the thing, the admission – I'm a card-carrying Lib Dem. I'm even married to someone who works for the Lib Dems. (My wife is one of several Special Advisors to the Deputy Prime Minister – or Clegghounds, as I like to call them). So I have something of an inside track into what's been going on for the last few years of the Coalition government. Here's one of the more salient facts – it's an incredibly difficult job to do, and between the ministers, their advisors and the Civil Servants who do the actual work, many of them struggle just to keep on top of the day's demands, with very little time to do any sort of conspiracy / pocket-lining activities. And yes, it IS rather a lot like 'the Thick of It', only with less creative swearing.

A lot of statements get issued, even bills tabled before the House, because people mess up. Politicians all seem to have their own pet projects they like to push, some noble, some less so, but the system is in place to make it really hard for them, even the Prime Minister. But yes, some individual politicians really are twats who have no idea how most people actually live, and they shouldn't be allowed to make decisions on our behalf!**

I've not met Nick Clegg (or any Tory ministers). I do believe that the current crop of leaders are all career politicians who, in part, got their jobs because of a privileged Public School / Oxbridge education and connections. This is annoying, no doubt – so by all means vote for someone else if you think they'd be a better fit for the job, but of course it doesn't work like that, does it? (And although I agree there is something wrong about leaders not themselves being a fair representation of society, I don't agree that being a career politician is a bad thing. One doesn't complain about career doctors, lawyers or even comics creators.) We all can only vote for someone who happens to be standing for election where we happen to live. To some extent, the only real choices are:


I can't resist a little political push, but I do apologise if it's inappropriate. You think the Tories are only interested in helping the rich and hurting the poor? It's not quite that simple, but it's definitely fair to say that the Lib Dems have held them back from doing far worse, and they wouldn't have been able to do it if they'd stayed in opposition. Be grateful. And if there's one thing I do think has tarred both parties unfairly, it's the 'privatization of the NHS' nonsense. No politician even wants that, and they certainly wouldn't dare to do it because itd' be one o fthe biggest vote-losers going as a policy. The reason why the NHS isn't as good as people seem to think it was back in the olden days is simple. There are lots more people per dcotor/nurse/hospital than before, and they are more ill than they used to be - because the NHS is working well enough to keep them alive!

Anyway, back to Cross, the comic! I was all fired up and annoyed about my perception of its overall message, but then came Cy Dethan and Matt Timson's Pulling the Plug. Far and away the best story, a fascinating re-evaluation of what satire is, and a real corker of a call to arms to get political.

*If you're really so desperate for the UK (even England) to be independent of Europe, think about the fact that this would make it harder for the likes of Carlos Ezquerra to get work from a British publication. Or Michael Carroll, for that matter. Not to mention squashing most of the Premiere League, if there are any sports fans buried deep in the 2000AD online forum.

**Yes, I'm talking about unnamed members of the Conservative Party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 13 February, 2015, 10:48:05 AM
First off, glad you liked our story!

I'll repond to this:
QuoteYou think the Tories are only interested in helping the rich and hurting the poor? It's not quite that simple, but it's definitely fair to say that the Lib Dems have held them back from doing far worse, and they wouldn't have been able to do it if they'd stayed in opposition.

by pointing out that the ONLY REASON the Tories where in power and able to damage the NHS so much is because Clegg chose them over Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 13 February, 2015, 10:59:16 AM
I'm not sure this shouldn't be in to politics thread cos it might well stir up a hornets nest in these parts BUT the fact that you wrap it all very nicely in comic talk means it certainly gets a pass from me. I'm intrigued by the sound of 'Cross' so thanks for the heads, as I'd not heard of it before.

On other matters I'm actually in Nick Clegg's constituency, in fact the first X-Mas card we got this year was from Cleggy, who all of a sudden has become incredibly visible in our parts in a way he wasn't for the last 4 years in any way shape or form. He seems to spend an incredible amount of time hanging around campanions for my daughters school or its partner Junior school. He also leaves me with a voting dilemma. I can't see him getting in and certainly have no intention of voting for him, I'm a life long Labour voter (just living in middle class Yorkshire these days, chunks of Sheffield defy the sterotype!), but one who no longer believe if he's being honest can vote for them again in good faith. Its going to be a right old ding-dong our way come the election so tactically I should vote labour but suspect I'll go Green (though I need to do some more reading first) by doing so will I be helping someone else sneaking in? So do you vote with your head or your heart?

To bring it back on topic, maybe I should read Cross to help me get my thinking straight!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 13 February, 2015, 11:00:26 AM
Yes, please move this over to the politics thread. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 February, 2015, 11:01:00 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 13 February, 2015, 10:48:05 AM
by pointing out that the ONLY REASON the Tories where in power and able to damage the NHS so much is because Clegg chose them over Labour.

I'm not about to defend the LibDems but Paddy Ashdown gave a pretty candid interview on R4 last year in which he was very clear: their default instinct was coalition with Labour, and all the initial talks were with Labour, but the electoral maths was such that the resulting coalition couldn't command a majority.

TBH, I'd have said "To hell with it", let Cameron form a minority government and then tried to bring them down on a vote of confidence at the first opportunity, but if I cared that much then I'd be in politics.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 13 February, 2015, 11:06:01 AM
Interesting stuff Alex. Hadn't heard of the comic. Might give it a look.

I certainly agree that the Millsian view that every politician is an Oxbridge paedo on the make gets pretty tiresome. On some of your other points I'm less convinced.

- For me, a conscious decision not to vote (as opposed to simple apathy) is just as valid and, in fact, far more representative of critical political thought than pitching up to vote for the same party as last time without thinking about it.

- One doesn't complain about career doctors, lawyers or accountants because their background and beliefs are divorced from the function they perform. While I would agree that complaining about the makeup of parliament vs society is partly down to a deliberate conflation of the different meanings of the "representative" in representative democracy, I do think that drawing all politicians from a relatively narrow social strata has a negative impact on the possibility for debate and engagement.
It's not a problem I have an answer to either as it's clear that it's something that requires sufficient engagement at a lower level to drive. The old path of the union rep or whatever is dead because of the change in patterns of employment and organisation and the idea that you're not a prole because you work in an office rather than a factory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 February, 2015, 11:11:54 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 13 February, 2015, 11:06:01 AM
Interesting stuff Alex. Hadn't heard of the comic. Might give it a look.

You can order a copy here. (http://www.comicsy.co.uk/disconnectedpress/store/products/cross-a-political-satire-anthology-2/)

Lots of great work by lots of familiar names. It's the lettering that really makes it, though.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2015, 12:17:51 PM
I'll have to get me a copy of that.
.
As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter who I vote for. All I'd be doing is expressing a preference for the person I think will do best at doffing his cap to the bankers and corporatists. In essence, all I'm being asked to choose is the colour of the cap to be doffed.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 February, 2015, 12:27:14 PM
without getting into the political argument, I can recommend the comic. It's published by Liz & Connor Boyle and is up to their usual high standard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2015, 01:00:02 PM
We vote mearly mor degrees of venal bastards....but the vote and right to withhold our labour are amongst the most important we have. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2015, 01:52:06 PM
How can our votes be important when we're only allowed to spend them when we're told, where we're told and on whom we're told?
.
Our votes should be important but, in truth, they are currently worse than useless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 February, 2015, 01:54:11 PM
Russell Brand has the right idea - not in taking himself seriously*, but in urging people to consider what they do with their vote** and to not be taken in by the lies of the media that there's any difference between the main political parties, or that they haven't got a mutual vested interest in maintaining a divide between their own privileged elite and the underclasses of serf scum they have to humor every day with the illusion of democracy by sitting in a room shouting at each other like an unruly classroom.
When someone starts a political party with the stated manifesto pledge of "getting some bricks, bottles, and bits of wood with rusty nails sticking out of the end and going down to Parliament and wreck the fucker and kneecap any cunt in a suit we find" I'm totally there, but until then I'll stick to moaning about 40 year old comics, as that seems to be a much better way to spend my time.





* Although from what I can tell, years of stand-up performing have left him with too much self-awareness for that to be what has happened, it only seems to be his - mostly conservative - critics that are taking him seriously.

** He is constantly cited in the media as saying not to vote, when in fact he's saying that nothing you vote for will make any difference - which is quite a distinction, fooling even noted butter salesman John Lydon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2015, 02:11:49 PM
Without wishing to insult anyone, I think Bear has hit upon a very important point.
.
Most people are waiting for a saviour - for some new personality or party to come along in order to put things right for them. It's the atheist's equivalent of waiting for the Second Coming.
.
There's no point in me doing anything about anything, I'm just one insignificant speck and Jesus will be along soon to sort it all out anyway.
.
Well, Jesus ain't coming. It's up to you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 February, 2015, 03:54:01 PM
I stand by my assertion that your dog should have run for office - I even have his slogan ready to go: "I won't lick the balls of big business, I'll lick my own."  I know he doesn't have the support of the BBC like Nigel Farage does, but I think he's in with a good chance of at least beating UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2015, 04:17:08 PM
Not disagreeing Shark. I probably should have made it clearer that I was referring more to the concept than the actuality. Bear, Dickhead'll get my vote if you put her up in the Euro election next time around. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2015, 05:00:24 PM
You can't vote for my dog - he's in way to deep with the lobbyists from Winalot...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 February, 2015, 10:29:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 February, 2015, 02:11:49 PM
Well, Jesus ain't coming.

Just so long as he phoned ahead to let us know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2015, 10:36:27 PM
Well we can do without Jesus as long as God and the Holy Spirt show. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 February, 2015, 11:34:50 PM
I like the Holy Spirt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 February, 2015, 11:47:29 PM
He has sprit centurion, he what?! Z :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 February, 2015, 08:13:58 AM
Bwavado. A touch of dewwing do.

Um, about 11, sir.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2015, 08:14:53 AM
Is this what we pay our local councils for? 1,400 children abused over 16 years? The victims, as young as 11, being blamed for tricking their abusers by dressing to look older and being described as little sluts by the police?
.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2939129/Two-local-councillors-corrupt-police-officer-accused-having-sex-victims-Rotherham-abuse-scandal.html
.
In other news, and loosely connected to my abandoned search for the original satellite images presented by NATO as proof of Russians invading Ukraine, here comes more falsified proof:
.
beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2015/02/ukraine-busted-fake-proof-given-to-us-senator-to-push-world-war-3-video-3107586.html
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 February, 2015, 08:54:35 AM
Looks like Ms Nyland and her backers may possibly be overplaying their hand? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 07:44:50 PM
6 arrests as protesters make stand for the poor in the Aylesbury Estate. More property being sold off to speculators to be hoovered up by the power elites for their investment portfolios. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 18 February, 2015, 07:48:27 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 07:44:50 PM
6 arrests as protesters make stand for the poor in the Aylesbury Estate. More property being sold off to speculators to be hoovered up by the power elites for their investment portfolios. Z

Thank Grud the police where there to protect the rights of the innoc...

Wait, where was I going with this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 07:49:50 PM
Well in this instance 'There ain't no justice'! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 February, 2015, 08:03:38 PM
And the property they don't own to sell to speculators, they'll just steal (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/great-gran-forced-out-home-5180794).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 08:04:31 PM
Our property! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 18 February, 2015, 08:14:34 PM
Quote from: Bear (PhD) on 18 February, 2015, 08:03:38 PM
And the property they don't own to sell to speculators, they'll just steal (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/great-gran-forced-out-home-5180794).

If you had

(http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2013/134/c/c/loadsamoney_gif_2_by_scruffy0105-d65973o.gif)

you could steal too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 08:20:27 PM
It is my fervent wish that these greedy f**king pricks get a 5am knock on the door from plod over the blatant chicanery going on on an 'industrial scale'. It would be a welcome change from them arresting a bunch of passive activists. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 February, 2015, 08:28:51 PM
Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob a country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 February, 2015, 09:34:43 PM
This makes my blood fucking boil.

Racism trigger warning.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/video/2015/feb/17/chelsea-fans-prevent-black-man-boarding-paris-metro-video
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 09:41:35 PM
How fucking stupid and wrong were those bunch of arrogant, ill reared shitbags. Throw the book at them....nah we have more important things to do over in Aylesbury: people are getting uppity over there, thinking they have rights and a stake in society. Z >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 February, 2015, 09:40:44 PM
Odd that one of them - who relies on a human rights organisation for his income - only thought to "set the record straight" after he was identified and named days after the event.  A cynical man might think he only acted after his livelihood was threatened rather than when it was the right thing to do.

In local racist news, someone was kicked out of UKIP for saying that racism was wrong. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WErexf0vPDc)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2015, 08:30:32 AM
A very interesting article over at Positive Money's website: Who should have the power to create money? (http://www.positivemoney.org/2014/05/power-create-money/)
.
I know most people think banking and money is the most boring subject on Earth but that's because of all the technical crap surrounding it. The long and short of it is; whoever creates the money controls the money, and whoever controls the money controls You. Who would you like your controller to be?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 February, 2015, 08:57:31 AM
Those who control the spice; control the universe. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2015, 09:03:52 AM
Bob on, Z.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 25 February, 2015, 11:19:51 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 18 February, 2015, 09:41:35 PM
How fucking stupid and wrong were those bunch of arrogant, ill reared shitbags. Throw the book at them....nah we have more important things to do over in Aylesbury: people are getting uppity over there, thinking they have rights and a stake in society. Z >:(
Bloody hell.

I know it's a small start, but if everyone who was this pissed off voted for a left-of-Labour party, it would make a difference. Labour might just realise they'd completely abandoned their base, left-wing parties would have a huge boost of confidence, and things might change.

Or we could keep going the way we have been going. Seems to be working.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 February, 2015, 11:33:06 AM
Dey tuk err jeeebs!

(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view3/1257246/they-took-our-jobs-o.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2015, 05:17:52 AM
I just found this essay, "Practising Islam in Short Shorts (http://truestories.gawker.com/practicing-islam-in-short-shorts-1683991294)," and think it is worth sharing.
.
I believe very few, if any, of the people who use this thread are anti-Muslim or Islamophobic but still it's good to remind oneself why from time to time. The comments are also interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2015, 07:26:54 AM
My solicitor has finally drafted a letter to the police, detailing the illegal things they subjected me to. It's only taken eight months but things finally seem to be moving...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 March, 2015, 07:36:35 AM
Cameron say's he won't run for a third election? Let's see he doesn't get in the second time either!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2015, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2015, 05:17:52 AM
I just found this essay, "Practising Islam in Short Shorts (http://truestories.gawker.com/practicing-islam-in-short-shorts-1683991294)," and think it is worth sharing.

It is. Thank you for that — I've also shared it on FB and Twitter. Sadly, I suspect it will be read by very few of the people who need to read it most.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 March, 2015, 08:00:02 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2015, 07:26:54 AM
My solicitor has finally drafted a letter to the police, detailing the illegal things they subjected me to. It's only taken eight months but things finally seem to be moving...

Good to hear, Shark. Has it really only been 8 months? Blimey.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2015, 08:00:36 AM
Hawks, I think Cameron will leave politics as soon as he loses or steps down and accept his reward in the banking sector just like Tony Blair (etc.) did. If he was properly interested in our country, he'd stay on as an MP. But he isn't so he won't.
.
Jim, you're welcome and thanks for sharing the article around. I do think you're correct, though - those people who would benefit the most from reading it simply won't bother, which is frustrating and sad.
.
8 looooooong months, Tordels - and probably at least as long to go. Good thing I'm stubborn!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 March, 2015, 11:47:08 AM
I still reckon my idea of keeping all politicians in jail for the duration of their time in office has legs.  Apart from anything else, they can only bum or murder each other instead of 8 year old boys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 March, 2015, 06:44:22 PM
They never did that surley. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 March, 2015, 07:19:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2015, 05:17:52 AM
I just found this essay, "Practising Islam in Short Shorts (http://truestories.gawker.com/practicing-islam-in-short-shorts-1683991294)," and think it is worth sharing.
.
I believe very few, if any, of the people who use this thread are anti-Muslim or Islamophobic but still it's good to remind oneself why from time to time. The comments are also interesting.

Thanks Shark.  What I found most interesting was the parallels with certain aspects of Christianity.

"My Islamic studies teachers taught me how to how to obsess about the mundane—about all the things I'm doing incorrectly and therefore my prayers will not be accepted. They taught me guilt. They taught me fear. They taught me that being a good Muslim is difficult."

As a practicing Christian I can seriously relate to this.  I know there is a lot in the Bible that is hard to get to grips with.  I read some parts with a sense of incredulity and listen to some Preachers with a sense of concern.  It's nice to know that fear and guilt are not uniquely Christian experiences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 25 March, 2015, 07:41:09 PM
Quote from: Bear "Bear" McBear (bear) on 25 March, 2015, 11:47:08 AM
I still reckon my idea of keeping all politicians in jail for the duration of their time in office has legs.  Apart from anything else, they can only bum or murder each other instead of 8 year old boys.

Leads us Leader- the Golden tomorrow awaits!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 March, 2015, 07:46:51 PM
That was a sweet link Shark, and is a worthy insight into an old and considered belief system from a modern perspective; opposed though I am generally against pangyerics in relation to religion (ex-catholic - proud athiest).

I fee there is a need in the world for reflection and (dare I say) introspection, but we have little if any need for a diety or extraperception system in order to internally or externally facilitate a state of mind. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2015, 07:56:36 PM
Heh, I get into enough trouble on this site without going into my views on God, faith and religion! Suffice to say, there is only one of those three I reject...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2015, 12:56:42 PM
Come on, Ireland - it's time for you to start showing the world how to save itself:
Local Public Banking System for Ireland
'Concept Document' is released. (http://www.fliuch.org/8292/local-public-banking-system-for-ireland-concept-document-is-released)
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2015, 01:50:57 PM
Does it inconvenience Enda Kenny's corporate employers?  If "yes", it's never going to happen.

Whatever it is - I can't tell what the point of that page is, or what they're pushing, let alone why it's supposed to be a good thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2015, 03:26:44 PM
Basically, it's better to have hundreds of small banks working for their local businesses/communities than a handful of massive banks working for themselves. Credit and money (and humanity is still too greedy and stupid to admit we don't need either) are therefore concentrated and, crucially, recycled around local communities instead of being drained away by distant executives.
.
It's similar to the idea of a local shop versus a national chain. The local shop sells local produce and the money stays in the community, going from customer to vendor to farmer to worker - the worker spends the same money in the local shop to buy another local product and so on and on. The national chain shop sells national and international goods so the money leaves the community altogether; from customer to head office.
.
Of course in reality it's more complex and shops should sell a mixture of local and non-local products but it explains the basic principle quite well.
.
Now, couple local public banks with local public money creation and destruction (money created and retired without interest) and we've got a Winner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2015, 03:59:53 PM
I see.  I remain unconvinced and am increasingly coming to think we need a violent murder-based revolution rather than a financial one.  I am old fashioned and want my pound of flesh and heads on spikes.

Also, I was discussing the banking bail-out and it came up that by being given loads of public money, the bankers were directly benefiting not from capitalism but socialism, which I thought was interesting given they're not usually too keen on that kind of thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 April, 2015, 04:09:14 PM
The debt of the rich is socialised and the debt of the poor is privatised, there lies the nub of the entire issue. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2015, 05:18:58 PM
The banks are all for socialism - providing it only applies to them. It is, however, a limited and twisted form of socialism in which profits are privatised and risks are socialised. They do well and make a profit, we pay for it - they screw up and make a loss, we pay for it.
.
I'll drop in the casino analogy here, if you know it just skip ahead a couple of paragraphs. Imagine the economy is a casino run by the government. Joe Bloe and Jane Doe have fun in the place, betting fivers and tenners, mostly. Let's fantasise even further and imagine the government makes sure all the games are fair and on the level. Joe and Jane lose a bit, win a bit and go home happy. Then the banker turns up with his fat wallet.
.
He plays the tables like everyone else but with one crucial difference - if he loses he expects the house (government) to cover his debt and if he wins he keeps the cash. This is obviously unsustainable and will eventually result in the house being unable to pay out on Joe and Jane's winnings, at which point all bets are off.
.
I do so disagree about the need for bloody revolution and heads on pikes, with the hangings and the disembowellings and the general beastliness. One bloodbath inevitably leads to another, as we well know. There are still many humans on this planet who hate other humans because of events taking place thousands of years ago to people who may not even have existed. We need to be smarter than that.
.
I would not rule out bloody revolution as a last, a very last resort, but there is a much better way - lawful rebellion. The ruling elites are acutely aware of one fact most of us often overlook - they're vastly outnumbered. They rule only so long as we allow them to do so. This is why they pretend to be indispensable (as a whole), the pinnacle of civilisation and the only thing standing between us and barbarism. They are not.
.
We don't need to attack them, we need to attack their main weapons of control - money and unchecked legislation. To me, it's all about taking control of your own choices and not accepting the one or two on offer. About being king or queen of your own life. About personal freedom and, perhaps most importantly of all, personal responsibility.
.
I can't change the world and I can't rule over anyone. The only world I have the power or responsibility to change is my own and the only person I have the power or freedom to rule over is myself. I believe that to be true of almost everyone. That's where the revolution has to be - in your world. And the rebel can only be you.
.
But I blather. Instead of bloody revolution I'd push for a species of Truth and Reconciliation process. We know these buggers have been shafting us for centuries and we're all pretty pissed off about it. That's what they're afraid of and, like any cornered animal, the more afraid they become the more likely they are to lash out. So, in my opinion, we have to a) stop co-operating with them and b) offer amnesty for anyone willing to come forward and testify, say for an amnesty period of 2 to 5 years. Any of them who haven't come clean or given themselves up after that - well, I guess that'll be the time to feed them to the bears!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2015, 06:11:50 PM
Revolutions don't happen because people are bored and fancy giving something else a go, revolutions happen because people want blood.  That's why police forces are militarising the world over with military-grade equipment and training, and why pretty soon that whole numbers advantage thing we have over the elite isn't going to matter a fuck.
Lynch the fuckers now while we've still got a chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2015, 06:26:03 PM
Before you rise up to fight them, ask yourself who's got the most guns. Violence plays right into their hands, gives them all the excuse they need to come down hard. Lawful rebellion, which I believe is our duty under Magna Carta (it's been a while since I read it so I'm not 100% sure), is by far the best way.
.
Although it is not the only way. It's at least how we should start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 April, 2015, 06:36:59 PM
The difficulty with the elites stance is that they have discarded any veneer of fairness and morality: the police and security forces probably despise them as much as the rest of us do. When you are a scumbag who makes no bones about nor offers any justification for pauperising entire societies, there will be very, very few people to stand by you. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 April, 2015, 06:44:34 PM
Exactly. So offer to stand by any of them who come over to "our side" and just watch the Armani rats abandon that sinking golden ship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2015, 08:36:24 PM
They'll just build themselves a bigger, more luxurious ship to live on, and we'll pay for it even if there's no money left.

When it comes to revolution, you can have the violent one with murders and heads on sticks, or you can wait decades for piecemeal change and pray that there's a planet left for you by the time any of it happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 April, 2015, 09:59:33 PM
Just hang the lot of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 April, 2015, 10:15:54 PM
You'd only get the stupid ones; the smart ones would get richer out of tip offs to invest in rope factory shares. Z

Hit them in the pocket, money is the totality of existance to these vermin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 April, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
Revolution is much more likely to produce a blood-thirsty tyrant as head of state than an enlightened genius. We tried this once and got Oliver Cromwell. He cancelled Christmas.

This coming election is going to produce a hung parliament, and is a fantastic opportunity to effect positive change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2015, 04:53:03 AM
The election will change nothing, unfortunately. It's doing the same thing, again, and expecting a different result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2015, 10:58:57 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 06 April, 2015, 10:15:54 PM
You'd only get the stupid ones; the smart ones would get richer out of tip offs to invest in rope factory shares.

All murders will be by fire, and none will be spared.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 April, 2015, 02:31:34 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 06 April, 2015, 06:36:59 PMWhen you are a scumbag who makes no bones about nor offers any justification for pauperising entire societies, there will be very, very few people to stand by you. Z

And yet here we are, in the same situation as always - and the party that played a huge part in plunging Ireland into a deep abyss of debt are gaining popularity again.  I believe in voting, but it's a case of choosing the least worst cunts. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 02:36:44 PM
Y'know, I don't even think these guys have right started with us yet. Collapsing the banks might well have been mearly a field test. They have surely figured by now that infinite growth within a finite resource system is for the birds and the best thing to do is to asset strip the rest of us back to the caves. Bear mightn't  a million miles off the mark on this one. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2015, 03:18:13 PM
Okay, so some folks want to start a shooting rebellion. Fine. Go for it. Are you going to organise this yourself or are you waiting for a "hero" to tell you what to do? Also, are you willing to get gunned down alone or do you expect others to join you?
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 03:35:39 PM
Easy there Sharky, I don't even think Bear's polishing up the squirrley gun yet. However there was a real political opportunity over the past 7 years to implement fair measures on the money men and hey what do you know, the opposite has happened. We are shackled with debts not our own and slash and burn speculation is the new sine qua non according to the prostituted political mouthpieces for the new world order. Sooner or later this will blow and it won't be pretty
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2015, 03:51:07 PM
Some comrades will be honored to water the fields of freedom with their own blood, some will be there for the free TVs, others still will have simply taken the family into town for a day out in the sun that went horribly awry, but many others will most likely be sitting with their thumbs up their holes talking about how awful things are and hoping for the magic love rainbow to come along and make everything better.

Politicians are already starting to get mobbed by the plebs they're stepping on.  It's only a matter of time before it gets ugly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 07 April, 2015, 04:17:18 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 03:35:39 PM
Easy there Sharky, I don't even think Bear's polishing up the squirrley gun yet. However there was a real political opportunity over the past 7 years to implement fair measures on the money men and hey what do you know, the opposite has happened. We are shackled with debts not our own and slash and burn speculation is the new sine qua non according to the prostituted political mouthpieces for the new world order. Sooner or later this will blow and it won't be pretty
I just get more and more sad every time I see the Labour Party - they seem really insistent on being as awful as possible. Whether there's a tipping point or not soon, decent people need to vote for better candidates. If Labour start losing to the Greens, then I think (just like Tories jumping ship to UKIP) the good Labour politicians will move to a more left-wing party. If we don't get someone in charge who thinks our well-being is more important than the profits of multinationals, then we're screwed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 05:43:21 PM
Hear, hear. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2015, 05:50:11 PM
There was some parliamentary session where Dave was shouting at Ed, and he was saying something along the lines of "yeah, well, you can't talk to me about me getting money from rich people who dodge tax, because you get money from trade unions and you represent their interests as best you can" and he said it like it was an insult rather than Ed's job description, but the odd thing was, Ed seemed to take it as an insult, a really bad one, and I honestly haven't a clue what those useless cunts are actually doing in that fucking place.  They just shout at each other like the Newman and Baddiel "that's you that is" routine, then occasionally they have a show of hands and raise VAT.

Look me in the eye and tell me you don't understand why I want blood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 April, 2015, 06:24:33 PM
I'm very interested in Syriza at the moment, because they made quite a few big promises which didn't seem particularly credible but which, if they can deliver on them, would obviously open up the hard left as genuine potential parties of government all over Europe.

So far I'm not amazingly convinced ("Germany owes us twelfty billion squillion Euros because.... Hitler!") but the jury is very much still out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2015, 06:42:43 PM
Germany owes Greece 300 billion because Germany took out a loan they never repaid - that's an oddly familiar-sounding scenario, isn't it?  Germany says they already paid 113 million marks (42 million pounds) so they insist this makes them quits, hence the disbelief that they're being held fully to account for the money they owe - again, a rather familiar scenario.

You try doing what Germany is doing with a bank loan and see how long you hang onto your house.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2015, 07:07:52 PM
Why do we need politicians anyway?
.
I wasn't having a go at Bear, by the way, it just annoys me when people (any people) suggest hangings, decapitations or other violence as a solution to our problems. That's the kind of solution Alex Jones likes to rave and rant about. There are plenty of things we can do before it gets to that stage.
.
It's the money men we want rid of so it's them we should target. Prolonged rolling strikes and boycotts would be a good start, for example: Monday, boycott MacDonalds; Tuesday, MacDonald's staff/suppliers' strike; Wednesday, boycott BP; Thursday, everyone sends a letter to the DVLC asking for information; Friday, strike of BP staff/suppliers - have the weekend off then start on something new on Monday. Don't even bother targeting the politicians because that's what they're there for.
.
Every time you get a utility/council/government bill - be awkward. Don't just pay up straight away; ask for confirmation of the amount, ask for proof of debt, return the bill unopened and without explanation so they have to send it back to you - all shit like that to cost them time, resources and money.
.
The Revolution of a Thousand Cuts...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 April, 2015, 08:34:46 PM
Quote from: Bear "Bear" McBear (bear) on 07 April, 2015, 06:42:43 PM
Germany owes Greece 300 billion because Germany took out a loan they never repaid - that's an oddly familiar-sounding scenario, isn't it?  Germany says they already paid 113 million marks (42 million pounds) so they insist this makes them quits, hence the disbelief that they're being held fully to account for the money they owe - again, a rather familiar scenario.

You try doing what Germany is doing with a bank loan and see how long you hang onto your house.

Not really, Germany's war debts were settled decades ago. We may as well present them with a bill for the NHS, Trident and, whilst we're at it, Moonbase Brittania.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2015, 08:42:14 PM
Leaving aside that Greece never conclusively settled the war debt hash with Germany and it's been a largely-sidelined bone of political contention for decades, Greece is asking Germany to settle debts ran up by previous governments but which the current government considers unreasonable.

I suspect there might be a purpose in their doing this particular thing at this particular time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 April, 2015, 08:51:14 PM
Perhaps the people of Greece should've paid their taxes, instead of everyone seemingly living in the black economy but still expecting services to be paid for by who knows who!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 April, 2015, 08:52:56 PM
Quote from: Bear "Bear" McBear (bear) on 07 April, 2015, 08:42:14 PM
Greece is asking Germany to settle debts ran up by previous governments but which the current government considers unreasonable.

Yeah, and I certainly agree that a proportion of the debt should be written off. I don't think that's got anything to do with the Nazis, though, but more the moral responsibility of lenders to ensure borrowers can afford to repay the debts they incur.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 09:03:50 PM
Perhaps if our own uber wealthy paid their fair share of taxes we wouldn't be in the leaky boat we presently find ourselves afloat and rudderless in and frenziedly bailing out.

This is a problem of social elites let alone not shouldering their part of the burden, but victimising and vilifying the weakest in our several societies in order to shift the finger of blame away from where it rightly should be pointed.

At the minimum there needs to be a new social contract drawn up both here and across the Western World, if this does not happen we will have 1788 all over again. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2015, 09:06:54 PM
The debts don't exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 09:08:12 PM
Anything exists as long a both parties to the issue believe so. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2015, 09:17:06 PM
Not really. We could both believe Elvis is hiding out in a double-decker bus on the Moon but that don't make it so.
.
The "elites" want us to believe that what they're lending us is real just like Paul Daniels wants us to believe he can saw Debbie Magee in half and then put her back together.
.
It's all just smoke and mirrors - but the tragedy here is this particular trick (pulling "money" out of a hat) is literally and currently killing people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 April, 2015, 09:25:27 PM
 :lol:oh Shark! I didn't mean in the sense of solid, earthy perception, more in the sense of intangible intellectual constructs. Money and debt is sufficiently nebulous a thing that any snake oil merchant (read for that Banker, hedge fund manager etc) can bullshit a large majority of the populace around to his/her way of thinking very easily. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2015, 07:32:28 AM
True, Z - but becoming less true every day as more and more people realise the pyramid scheme we've all been drawn into.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 April, 2015, 07:43:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2015, 07:32:28 AM
pyramid scheme
Illuminate confirmed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2015, 07:54:17 AM
Heh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 April, 2015, 09:42:32 AM
Tories entertainingly wrong-footed by Labour's announcement on non-dom tax this morning. Having used 'fairness' as a mantra for beggaring the poorest and most vulnerable in society, hearing them trying to argue it's not fair that very rich people living in this country should pay all their tax in this country exposes their hypocrisy in a hugely amusing fashion. Tory Education Secretary Nicky Morgan managed to get herself hilariously off-message on Radio 4 this morning by pursuing the fairness issue to its logical conclusion.

Or rather, seeing the logical conclusion looming large like a metaphorical cliff edge she then deployed deflection, evasion, hand-waving and outright flannel with an audible sense of panic.

Brilliant.

(Non-dom tax status is calculated to be worth at least £90K/pa in tax savings to those registered, and there are at least 100,000 of them, so properly closing the loophole (which I'm not convinced is what Labour are actually proposing) would be a minimum £9bn bonus to the Treasury.)

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 April, 2015, 10:36:03 AM
It would be if video hadn't just surfaced of Ed Balls saying that abolishing non-dom status would cost the economy.

https://amp.twimg.com/v/7cb7f0ad-0fbc-4481-9837-987c3dc593fb (https://amp.twimg.com/v/7cb7f0ad-0fbc-4481-9837-987c3dc593fb)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 April, 2015, 10:46:06 AM
Ed Balls is a fucking idiot.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 08 April, 2015, 05:26:49 PM
The dream team of Joey Essex (I kid you not..), and Nigel Farage hit my home town today on the election trail....

It's the end times, people.  :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 April, 2015, 05:56:17 PM
Obviously, Ed Balls is right and pursuing non-doms will end up costing the treasury money rather than making any, but as a piece of "fuck the rich" populism it's quite a good policy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 April, 2015, 06:01:34 PM
Ach, to be fair he was 'mis-quoted'....still a fucking ganch (idiot) mind you. z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 April, 2015, 07:59:04 PM
Doesn't matter - plenty more tax-dodgers to (pretend to) go after in the run-up to the election to chase that working class vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 April, 2015, 08:02:33 PM
In spite of our rage we're still just rats in a cage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 April, 2015, 08:04:52 PM
I'm up for violent murder-based revolution even if the rest of you commie hippies aren't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 April, 2015, 08:12:17 PM
Possible bloody revolution meet next week man. This week me and Dreamflower are birthing some pulses from amongst the busom our earth mother. So like do we need to bring like swords or stuff, or some dandelion wine and cus cus ok? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 April, 2015, 09:07:18 PM
Bring petrol and a lighter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 April, 2015, 09:13:30 PM
Ah fuck it! Ok Bear, we meet up outside Augher and head North. We'll come back as fire; burn all the liars and leave a blanket of ash on the ground! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2015, 10:45:49 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 April, 2015, 05:56:17 PM
Obviously, Ed Balls is right and pursuing non-doms will end up costing the treasury money rather than making any, but as a piece of "fuck the rich" populism it's quite a good policy.
Possibly. But really if there was a major overhaul of how tax was dealt with, the treasury would likely benefit. Companies make idle threats, but they're hardly going to quit the UK if forced to pay taxes. The same's largely true for individuals. Some will flee. Fuck them. As previous negative to the rich changes in the tax system have shown, most don't go—they just threaten to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 April, 2015, 11:50:55 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2015, 10:45:49 AM
Possibly. But really if there was a major overhaul of how tax was dealt with, the treasury would likely benefit. Companies make idle threats, but they're hardly going to quit the UK if forced to pay taxes. The same's largely true for individuals. Some will flee. Fuck them. As previous negative to the rich changes in the tax system have shown, most don't go—they just threaten to.

Well, I agree that multi-national companies that dodge tax with their various scams need to be brought to heel, and that they would simply cough up if push came to shove.

Non-doms, however, are individuals that pay a large fee in order to have their non-UK earnings excluded from UK tax. Many aren't actually British at all and will leave rather than pay, which will cancel out any gains from those that stay. This is why Balls was opposed to abolishing the non-dom status in January, before other political considerations came into play (i.e. they needed a populist left-wing policy, quick).

To actually raise any serious tax money, we need to go after Google, Apple, Vodafone, Amazon, etc. I'm not seeing a lot of movement from anyone on that front, sadly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 April, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
If these bloody immigrants are using non-dom status to dodge paying tax but are still using our emergency services and enjoying the security of living in a first world nation, how is their being here not a drain on our economy?  How much caviar or Lamborgini petrol do you think they're buying from the local Tesco?

If they want to leave, then fuck 'em.  Let's call their bluff and hire a minibus to drive the lot down to Dover - they like free stuff, after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 April, 2015, 12:20:14 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 April, 2015, 11:50:55 AM
To actually raise any serious tax money, we need to go after Google, Apple, Vodafone, Amazon, etc. I'm not seeing a lot of movement from anyone on that front, sadly.

As I said earlier, there are well over 100,000 non-doms estimated to be saving at least £90K each. If they all stayed and paid their proper tax, the Treasury benefits by £9bn. If 90% of them fuck off, the Treasury still benefits £900 million quid. Knock off the £300M they currently pay for their exemption and there's still a fairly tidy extra half-billion in the bank.

That's not to say the tax avoiding companies shouldn't be targeted aggressively, but the non-doms are dodging a non-trivial amount of tax.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 April, 2015, 12:57:37 PM
I'm not saying I don't support abolishing nom-doms, just that I don't think it will be very lucrative.

Let's try it and see!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2015, 01:22:20 PM
If it comes close to breaking even, great. It shouldn't be one rule for the fraction of the one per cent and another for everyone else. As for the payments they make, that kind of thing doesn't sit well with me. Same with Google, which tried to play the 'Look how great this company is' card when paying a 'voluntary' donation, having somehow made zero money in the UK, due to funnelling cash elsewhere.

Still, I'm surprised Labour's even gone this far. It seems pretty craven on the whole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 09 April, 2015, 01:30:05 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 April, 2015, 11:50:55 AM
Non-doms, however, are individuals that pay a large fee in order to have their non-UK earnings excluded from UK tax. Many aren't actually British at all and will leave rather than pay
Ah well.

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 April, 2015, 11:50:55 AMTo actually raise any serious tax money, we need to go after Google, Apple, Vodafone, Amazon, etc. I'm not seeing a lot of movement from anyone on that front, sadly.
Agreed. That Vodafone were allowed to negotiate how much tax they paid is a disgrace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 April, 2015, 02:49:06 PM
The Tories know they poll good on defence (despite Labour waging more wars whose stated or strategic goals were accomplished) so have decided to accuse Labour of maybe thinking of perhaps not spending billions on those nuclear weapons Britain won't ever use. (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/09/ed-miliband-trident-election-labour-snp-nuclear)
I'm sort of in two minds what the strategy is there, because Labour have rather infamously done more wars and stuff than the Tories to the point it was a deciding factor in a lot of people taking their voting business elsewhere and letting the Tories slither in under the door with a hung parliament last time, and making people think they'll dispense with a huge drain on public funds seems more like something that's a good - if not great - thing for Labour, especially considering their big weakness last time was arguably with anti-war sentiment in the voting public.  There's also the additional factor of older voters probably not even remembering that Trident was even a thing anymore, yet here the Tories are drawing attention to it and the huge fucking cost involved and saying "we're going to protect this thing you don't like and don't need" - no matter how much Rupert Murdoch and his chums with holdings in media and defence companies try, people don't view Russia as a Cold War-level threat anymore, so what Trident is supposed to be apart from an albatross escapes me.



I have been reading about the Letters of Last Resort (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_of_last_resort) that successive PMs have signed and which are to be opened - in the event of their being killed in a nuclear strike - by the captains of Britain's Nuclear Ballistic subs.  They're written by the PM and destroyed when they leave office, and they're identically-worded and contain four distinct options as to what the captain and their crew must do next - ranging from a retaliatory strike to ending hostilities and finding a safe harbour - and while PMs like Gordon Brown, John Major and Tony Blair have supposedly chosen to sign the "do not retaliate and instead take your crew and find a way to live" option, Maggie T and Call Me Dave have chosen to sign the "Bomb The Bastards and then wait to die" one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 09 April, 2015, 03:12:10 PM
Quote from: Bear "Bear" McBear (bear)Maggie T and Call Me Dave have chosen to sign the "Bomb The Bastards and then wait to die" one.

Just like Dredd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 April, 2015, 04:25:00 PM
There's a big difference between a ludicrous right-wing caricature of a human being that couldn't possibly exist in the real world and Judge Dredd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2015, 06:51:41 PM
Quote from: Bear "Bear" McBear (bear) on 09 April, 2015, 02:49:06 PM
The Tories know they poll good on defence (despite Labour waging more wars whose stated or strategic goals were accomplished) so have decided to accuse Labour of maybe thinking of perhaps not spending billions on those nuclear weapons Britain won't ever use. (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/09/ed-miliband-trident-election-labour-snp-nuclear)


Yeah, this has always confused the hell out of me.  Every major defense cuts in the last twenty odd years have been under Tory governments.  In fact my Dad who has longer memories and more experience (lifetime in the RAF) has made the comment in the past that it goes back further than that.  They tend to have tough rhetoric but lack the capacity to make it happen (anyone fancy a hardly used Aircraft Carrier, you'll have to supply your own planes though!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 09 April, 2015, 06:55:26 PM
Sorry if I've said this before, but the problem with voting is that you always end up with the Government.

EDIT:  I do vote, though. And got a slap on the wrist for discussing it with the missus in the adjacent booth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 09 April, 2015, 07:17:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2015, 10:45:49 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 April, 2015, 05:56:17 PM
Obviously, Ed Balls is right and pursuing non-doms will end up costing the treasury money rather than making any, but as a piece of "fuck the rich" populism it's quite a good policy.
Possibly. But really if there was a major overhaul of how tax was dealt with, the treasury would likely benefit. Companies make idle threats, but they're hardly going to quit the UK if forced to pay taxes. The same's largely true for individuals. Some will flee. Fuck them. As previous negative to the rich changes in the tax system have shown, most don't go—they just threaten to.

And so what - if they take their business elsewhere, then that opens up an opportunity for enterprise to fill the gap - isnt that what capitalisms all about? If they keep their business here but as an individual piss off... well we havent lost their taxes.... because they werent paying any!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 April, 2015, 07:35:45 PM
Yes seemingly if we force out a few greedy non contributory rich people the country will economically collapse. Jesus wept, you guys faced down Hitler after 6 years of heartbreak and sacrifice and then had the heart and will to create the NHS and so much else and now your rulers think so poorly of you that they are in the process of selling the pass to a loose grouping of foreign oligarchical despots, criminals and multinational asset strippers. Incredible! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 April, 2015, 09:05:06 PM
The Irish can't really throw stones, Z.  The Northern Irish even less so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2015, 09:30:28 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 09 April, 2015, 07:17:30 PMAnd so what - if they take their business elsewhere, then that opens up an opportunity for enterprise to fill the gap - isnt that what capitalisms all about? If they keep their business here but as an individual piss off... well we havent lost their taxes.... because they werent paying any!
Quite. We hear scare stories about Starbucks and Amazon leaving. They won't. But if they did, who cares? Local companies will fill the void. (Mind you, we have to take care there as well—Boots, for example, does a lot of offshore bollocks.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 06:59:15 AM
The BBC Trust has named BAE chairman Sir Roger Carr and banker Mark Florman as new trustees. A weapon maker and a con man. Expect more support for austerity and war from the increasingly egregious BBC!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2015, 07:48:19 AM
That's pretty depressing stuff. When it come's to news channels I only ever use Al Jazeera and Russia Today for any level of reliability anyway but still, the beebs heading towards dark times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2015, 07:58:14 AM
Gotta derail the thread a little bit so I can briefly update my feelings on PETA. They're still a bunch of shisters and this add campaign is not only pretentious but only an American who has never seen a sheep in their life would think this is how sheering works.
(https://36.media.tumblr.com/7f0884a49904de504480790d4bed068e/tumblr_inline_nmiheoGSR91rlkf3f_540.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 April, 2015, 09:21:29 AM
a bit underdone for my taste...and this has just reminded me I promised my mum in law a lamb roast, cheers for reminding me hawk! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2015, 09:22:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 06:59:15 AM
The BBC Trust has named BAE chairman Sir Roger Carr and banker Mark Florman as new trustees. A weapon maker and a con man. Expect more support for austerity and war from the increasingly egregious BBC!
The right moans the BBC is too left-wing. The left moans the BBC is too right-wing. The BBC must be doing something right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 09:59:29 AM
Hawkie's post on PETA reminds me of something I've posted about before, either in this thread or the "Truth...?" thread about "The Frankfurt School," which came up with subversion techniques to conquer and enslave nations without war. Those techniques include political correctness (to control language and concepts in order to stifle meaningful debate), the elevation of nature and animals to put human beings at the bottom of the pile (through organizations like PETA) and normalisation of sexual proclivities such as paedophilia (to undermine the family unit). I seem to recall being scoffed at. I mean, how could any right-thinking individual suggest paedophilia is perfectly normal and why am I posting this idiocy here instead of the "Truth...?" thread?
.
Well, this is why: 'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males.' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10948796/Paedophilia-is-natural-and-normal-for-males.html)
.
Expect VIP paedophiles to start using this 'defence' soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 10 April, 2015, 11:29:16 AM
I swear only you could jump from PETA to child-molesters. Are you trying now to freight your posts with as many right-wingnut whackaloon buzzwords as possible? "...came up with subversion techniques to conquer and enslave nations without war"- for the love of god man, do you honestly think this is what a bunch of fusty interwar pomo-enthusiast academics were doing?  And a nice dose of dogwhistle homophobia ("undermine the family unit"), which is always always code for hatred of gay-rights in the kind of sources you're reading.

Yet again upon hearing hoofbeats you've jumped right past zebras to unicorns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2015, 11:36:36 AM
What's the family unit anyway? Surely it's just ideally the people you consider closest to you, and possibly those who raised you? "Mum and dad" is all very well, but grandparents can be in the mix, or aunts and uncles, or two men or two women. The only way to undermine the family unit is when people dismiss these things as somehow not being good enough for children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 April, 2015, 11:39:39 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 10 April, 2015, 11:29:16 AM
Yet again upon hearing hoofbeats you've jumped right past zebras to unicorns.

I don't think I've come across a better description of Sharky's well meaning internet "research"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 10 April, 2015, 11:41:43 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2015, 09:22:11 AM
The right moans the BBC is too left-wing. The left moans the BBC is too right-wing. The BBC must be doing something right.
Not really - and the difference is, when the right moans it's in the form of one of the newspapers owned by super-wealthy Tory supporters, and they're doing it to force the BBC even further to the right; when the left moans, it's in places like this, and the BBC completely ignores it. I've been on a couple of leftie demos that started from outside Broadcasting House in the past few months, neither of which were so much as mentioned by the BBC.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 April, 2015, 11:50:27 AM
Capitalism destroys more family units than pedophiles ever could - just look at the families being made homeless and getting split up right now thanks to London's social cleansing.  Councils have even given up on the pretense of doing it for the good of anyone but the rich.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 09:59:29 AMThose techniques include political correctness (to control language and concepts in order to stifle meaningful debate),

Whether or not you approve of it, in challenging attitudes, stereotypes and entitlements, surely political correctness is responsible for expanding the lexicon and subjects open to debate?  If anything, Text messaging and Twitter are limiting our discourse, and unlike Political Correctness, we both want and willingly embrace social media, even finding their corrosive effects on debate and education to be charming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 11:54:03 AM
The family unit is simply the primary social group - of which there are many different kinds.
.
JPM, the answer to both your questions is no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 April, 2015, 11:56:31 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 11:54:03 AM
The family unit is simply the primary social group - of which there are many different kinds.

That's okay, capitalism doesn't discriminate.  It's destroying communities and nations, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2015, 12:10:29 PM
Bear, capitalism is a good thing and isn't destroying families. What is destroying families, and just about everything else, is - imv - corporatism.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 April, 2015, 05:11:22 PM
Sorry Bear, my comments on our British cousins were in no sense a casting of stones exercise; if anything they were a complement to the people and a decry on their leaders. You are quite right in respect to what can only in the loosest sense be referred to as leadership both North and South of the Border over here. If anything we could only but look in envy at administrations in Westminister and that's saying something. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 April, 2015, 10:33:49 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 April, 2015, 05:11:22 PM
If anything we could only but look in envy at administrations in Westminister and that's saying something. Z

Westminster has one of the highest concentration of Fools on the entire Planet, and the few that aren't Fools are drowned out by the hoo-hah and bluster of the Unthinking Majority.

Violence might not always be the answer, but sometimes you have to kick-off to get your voice heard.

Vote Bear!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 10:58:26 AM
But why does your voice have to be heard, and heard by whom? MP's are nothing more than priests, belonging to a handful of cults (the Tory Cult, the Labour Cult, the Lib-Dem cult, the Green Cult, the UKIP Cult, etc., etc.), whom we are expected to petition to speak to the mythical god called "Authority" on our behalf.
.
Putting one's mark on a ballot paper every four or five years and expecting this act to make "government" change things for the better is like sacrificing a goat every four or five years and expecting "God" to change things for the better. It's not only absurd but corrosive, stupid and very, very dangerous.
.
The sooner we see "authority" and "government" for what they really are - ignorant superstitions - the better off we'll all be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 April, 2015, 11:21:28 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 10:58:26 AM
But why does your voice have to be heard, and heard by whom? MP's are nothing more than priests, belonging to a handful of cults (the Tory Cult, the Labour Cult, the Lib-Dem cult, the Green Cult, the UKIP Cult, etc., etc.), whom we are expected to petition to speak to the mythical god called "Authority" on our behalf.
.
Putting one's mark on a ballot paper every four or five years and expecting this act to make "government" change things for the better is like sacrificing a goat every four or five years and expecting "God" to change things for the better. It's not only absurd but corrosive, stupid and very, very dangerous.
.
The sooner we see "authority" and "government" for what they really are - ignorant superstitions - the better off we'll all be.

Are you being serious? You've regularly complained about not being acknowledged by the powers that be, but at the same time you don't believe my voice (and presumably, your own) should be heard?

You don't agree with Voting, and as far as I can tell (from your posts) you're not up for a Violent solution; What exactly do you want and how do you hope to achieve it?

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 11:44:40 AM
What I want is to exercise my own personal freedoms and responsibilities without seeking permission from anyone. I want to achieve this on my own and not beg for it from others.
.
I want the same thing for everyone but only if they want it for themselves. Those who feel more comfortable being told what to think, how to behave or whom to obey are, of course, free to do so.
.
So long as I cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, pay my lawful bills, honour my lawful contracts and am honest in my dealings, what right does anyone have to dominate me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 April, 2015, 12:03:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 11:44:40 AM

So long as I cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, pay my lawful bills, honour my lawful contracts and am honest in my dealings, what right does anyone have to dominate me?

Lawful bills/contracts! So the law does have some uses then?

What you are stating is an ideology without substance. You don't want authority to govern you but still expect everyone to behave in a civilized manner in the absence of authority. Some people will always be Cunts, authority isn't always to blame.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 12:28:57 PM
Of course law has its uses and I have never claimed otherwise.
.
People do not need some mythical, overarching "authority" to act in a civilised manner. There is no government official moderating this very conversation, for example, and even if we disagree I have no fear of you rooting me out and murdering me in my sleep.
.
"Authority" is the thing with no substance. It commands the "governed" to do all kinds of things, from handing over money to murdering "foreigners" to kidnapping (arresting and imprisoning) anyone who doesn't play the game its way with absolutely no moral or logical right to do so.
.
If I were to say to you "pay me or I'll lock you up" I'd be guilty of extortion and you'd feel morally and logically justified in refusing and resisting my demands. If the "government" says the same thing to you, you'd feel morally and logically obliged to comply - but why? If I don't have the right to extort you and you don't have the right to extort me, where does our "government" derive the right? It doesn't get it from me and it doesn't get it from you because we cannot pass onto it rights that you and I don't have.
.
It is "authority" that has no substance, not us. The way I see it, "authority" is as big a myth as a God who lives in the sky deciding what's going to happen to everyone, punishing the heretics and rewarding the faithful.
.
You and I have substance but "authority" has none.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 April, 2015, 12:45:25 PM
Authority has the right to govern because we refuse to overthrow it, kill those responsible and redistribute their wealth.

In other news, the Tories promise they'll put £8bn of money in that there NHS that absolutely everyone knows they want to destroy (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/10/george-osborne-conservative-party-election-pledge-extra-8bn-nhs) on account of their spending the last five years doing so with that reorganisation they promised they'd never do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 April, 2015, 01:19:33 PM
Again with the killing!
.
Government has NO right to govern anyone.
.
Take, for example, the oxymoronic phrase "consent of the governed." There are two basic ways in which people interact with one another; either by mutual consent in which the parties agree to cooperate or by government in which one party forces the other to comply. Bowing to the demands of a ruling class just because they've been "elected" (usually by an overall minority of brainwashed "believers") is like saying "I agree to do whatever you tell me to do whether I want to do it or not," which is patently foolish. When people consent to cooperate, there is no government and when people are governed there is no consent.
.
There's no need for bloodshed - all we need to do, as individuals, is to withhold our consent from doing those things we don't want to be made to do against our wills.
.
This flies in the face of everything we've all been brainwashed from infancy into believing, which is why so many people think they can't do anything without permission. What's the very first thing you learn at school? If you want something, anything, you have to put your hand up and ask authority for permission - even if you want to go for a piss. This false belief sticks with us throughout our lives as we seek permission to have a home, drive a vehicle, get a job, get married and so on and on. We eat only what we're allowed to eat, drink only what we're allowed to drink, live only where we're allowed to live, go only where we're allowed to go, buy only what we're allowed to buy, vote only for people we're allowed to vote for and so on.
.
If one stops believing in God then one is freed from the controlling commands and demands of the priests. To defeat "government" requires only the same cancellation of faith. You don't need bullets or gallows for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 April, 2015, 10:20:07 AM
I've been trying to do some research on the Palestine conflict and i'm finding certain basic aspect hard to wrap my head around.

First off, Muslim citizens claim it's not a war on Jew's but on Zionists. OK, I get that. But then how come many non-extremist Jew's have suffered as a result of the debacle? Jew's then claim it's a war on radicalized Islam, but even more Muslim bystanders have been harmed. Source after source one side is pointing the finger at the other and it appears to just be one giant stalemate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 13 April, 2015, 12:01:00 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 13 April, 2015, 10:20:07 AM
I've been trying to do some research on the Palestine confIt's t and i'm finding certain basic aspect hard to wrap my head around.

First off, Muslim citizens claim it's not a war on Jew's but on Zionists. OK, I get that. But then how come many non-extremist Jew's have suffered as a result of the debacle? Jew's then claim it's a war on radicalized Islam, but even more Muslim bystanders have been harmed. Source after source one side is pointing the finger at the other and it appears to just be one giant stalemate.

Humans + Religion = Nonsense! If any of them truly believed their religion then they wouldn't blow up Hospitals, Schools and Children.

It's just People being Pricks about their beliefs, and the fact that we're now in the Twenty-First and this Shite still goes on is a bit depressing.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2015, 12:38:34 PM
Indeed. I'm beginning to think religion is a mental disorder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 April, 2015, 01:00:47 PM
Religion is just the tool, not the cause.  Rich Saudis bankroll the jihads of Muslim radicals which leads to dead Jews and martyred Muslims - win/win for the money men and fuck the poor as usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 13 April, 2015, 07:31:58 PM
This brightened up my day (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11532323/Polish-Prince-Challenges-Nigel-Farage-to-a-swords-duel-over-immigration-comments.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 April, 2015, 12:14:00 PM
Racist Nigel's meltdown live on TV last night was rather fun.
I genuinely believe there is not a single thing he doesn't blame brown people for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 17 April, 2015, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 13 April, 2015, 12:01:00 PM

Humans + Religion = Nonsense! If any of them truly believed their religion then they wouldn't blow up Hospitals, Schools and Children.


I dislike statements like this (and Shark's ultra-dumb follow up). While not religious myself, I know many religious people who do very good things in the name of religion. My former fiancé, a very good-hearted girl, has gone to Africa three times with her church to build schools for African children. I have a good friend from New York who was involved in gangs and drugs who used God and religion as a source of strength to be build his life; he now ministers at a local church and runs a soup kitchen - on his own dime - for homeless people through his church.

Blanket statements like this - although I'm sure napalmkev didn't mean it this way - are reverse bigotry, no worse than saying "all black people are criminals" or whatever. But it's fashionable to bash religion so no one jumps all over these types of comment right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 April, 2015, 12:49:26 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 17 April, 2015, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 13 April, 2015, 12:01:00 PM

Humans + Religion = Nonsense! If any of them truly believed their religion then they wouldn't blow up Hospitals, Schools and Children.


Blanket statements like this - although I'm sure napalmkev didn't mean it this way - are reverse bigotry, no worse than saying "all black people are criminals" or whatever.

Are you quite sure these two things are equivalent?

I'm not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 17 April, 2015, 12:53:35 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 17 April, 2015, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 13 April, 2015, 12:01:00 PM

Humans + Religion = Nonsense! If any of them truly believed their religion then they wouldn't blow up Hospitals, Schools and Children.


I dislike statements like this (and Shark's ultra-dumb follow up). While not religious myself, I know many religious people who do very good things in the name of religion. My former fiancé, a very good-hearted girl, has gone to Africa three times with her church to build schools for African children. I have a good friend from New York who was involved in gangs and drugs who used God and religion as a source of strength to be build his life; he now ministers at a local church and runs a soup kitchen - on his own dime - for homeless people through his church.

Blanket statements like this - although I'm sure napalmkev didn't mean it this way - are reverse bigotry, no worse than saying "all black people are criminals" or whatever. But it's fashionable to bash religion so no one jumps all over these types of comment right now.

You're correct, I didn't mean all followers of Religion. I was referring directly to the Israeli/Palestine conflict that Hawkmonger mentioned previously. If that wasn't clear then I apologise for the lack of context in the original statement.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 17 April, 2015, 12:55:23 PM
The way I read it, yes. I could be wrong about kev's intention, which is why I mentioned that.

Or maybe it was Shark's comment that made it seem worse, I'm not sure.

In any case, I keep telling myself not to come back to this thread. I really need to adhere to that. I don't think I've read as many ridiculous posts in all my other internet reading in all my life as I have read right here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 17 April, 2015, 02:01:35 PM
It's pretty clear you're not talking about all members of religion, just the ones who "blow up hospitals, schools and children."

In no way is religion equivalent to race.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 April, 2015, 04:54:21 PM
I dislike the basic foundations of religious ideology. The belief in a deity and that worshiping said daity somehow allow's you to get away with all kinds if shit. Also the fact that you have to ignore so much racist, sexist, homophobic, and transphobic (the list can go on) within the Bible, Qu'ran, and others before you can even have the cheek to claim it's the ethos on how you live your life that I honestly think many self proclaimed people of peace are just bigots deep down.

That and my experience with religious institutens has NEVER been positive. We are the sum of our experiences, and frankly from my time in a Christian school to having a tour of a local Mosque i've never been impressed with what i've found. So yes, I will claim that at their core most religious structures are rotten, and calling out bullshit like that is not equivical to cassual racism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 April, 2015, 05:01:50 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 17 April, 2015, 04:54:21 PM
That and my experience with religious institutens has NEVER been positive.

And if your personal interactions with black people had been overwhelmingly negative, would it be OK to make broad brush generalisations about them, too?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 April, 2015, 05:16:24 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 April, 2015, 05:01:50 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 17 April, 2015, 04:54:21 PM
That and my experience with religious institutens has NEVER been positive.

And if your personal interactions with black people had been overwhelmingly negative, would it be OK to make broad brush generalisations about them, too?

Jim

I think this is where the equivalency argument falls down.
There are basic tenets that the religious organisations Hawkmonger describes subscribe to. If the bad experiences Hawkmonger has had are a direct result of behaviour born out of those tenets then it seems reasonable (or at least understandable) that he would decry all followers as broadly similar in terms of certain behaviours.
I think it's an impossible argument to claim that all black people subscribe to some core set of behaviours even if you've only had bad personal experiences with black people.
Or to put it more simply, there's a rule book for being a Christian, there isn't a rule book for being a black person (discounting Mr T's seminal 'Rules for Fools', obviously).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 April, 2015, 05:45:43 PM
What JamesC is more or less what I was trying to say in my far than perfect OP, Jim. Black individuals are, globally, a hodge podge of various cultural attitudes. Christianity, for an opposite example, I have experienced in the UK, Northern Ireland, France, Italy, The US (though only in New York and Florida, I will admit), South Africa and Turkey and it's all more or less the same cultural attitude. And I wasn't taken by the zealous attitude of it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 17 April, 2015, 06:13:48 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 17 April, 2015, 05:45:43 PM
What JamesC is more or less what I was trying to say in my far than perfect OP, Jim. Black individuals are, globally, a hodge podge of various cultural attitudes. Christianity, for an opposite example, I have experienced in the UK, Northern Ireland, France, Italy, The US (though only in New York and Florida, I will admit), South Africa and Turkey and it's all more or less the same cultural attitude. And I wasn't taken by the zealous attitude of it all.

What the flip were you doing to encounter Christian zealotry in all those places? A world tour of churches and cathedrals on a bus full of monks?

(Incidentally, I think you'll find Northern Ireland's actually in the UK an' all.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 April, 2015, 06:21:09 PM
I am a member of a Christian family. My father wanted to visit the church's. It was either go or do nothing.

And yeah. I messed up with Northern Ireland. Ah well, splitting hairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 18 April, 2015, 02:44:28 PM
I'm a Christian (though conflicted and often septic with doubt). I wish Hawk's stuff didn't resonate so strongly with me. I wish I didn't share some of his experiences having traveled extensively within our little sub-culture- but I have and it's often been near ruinous to my faith.

What I can offer is something of a counter-balance. Believe it or not there exists out there Christians who have left wing political views and who have been involved in good deeds inspired by faith and who do not hide racism, homophobia etc behind the caustic veneer of a rancid and hypocritical smile. They engage honestly with Biblical texts that do their nut in and put their hands up when toxically confused.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 April, 2015, 11:08:24 AM
The straw man of religion = race spontaneously combusted at birth. Probably an act of god.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 April, 2015, 07:48:51 PM
To my chagrin QUB pulls out of a prearranged Freedom of Expression discussion in support of Charlie Hebro, on the grounds of being unable to secure the speakers and audience safety (subtext dont wanna lose Mid-East finance and generally don't wanna rock the boat). As an ex QUB sudent I can only say I'm aghast at this cowardly decision. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 April, 2015, 10:34:49 PM
In defence of QUB, Northern Ireland is where the terrorists won so they probably figure "why bother?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 23 April, 2015, 10:03:30 AM
Quote from: Bear on 22 April, 2015, 10:34:49 PM
In defence of QUB, Northern Ireland is where the terrorists won so they probably figure "why bother?"

Bear I have worked with Republican ex combatants and their analysis differs a fair bit from the above it has to be said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 April, 2015, 10:23:46 AM
Ireland - Where The Terrorists Won


Now that's a slogan that'll catch the eye! And probably some explosives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2015, 10:51:44 AM
All they won was the right to be the same kind of screwed as the rest of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 23 April, 2015, 11:02:24 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 23 April, 2015, 10:23:46 AM
Ireland - Where The Terrorists Won


Now that's a slogan that'll catch the eye! And probably some explosives.

My wife works in tourism-I'll pass that one on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 23 April, 2015, 11:52:10 AM
Terrorists didn't win in NI, two groups of combatants laid down arms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 April, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
They got to be in government and yet the murders continue - if that's not having your cake and eating it, I don't know what is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 April, 2015, 07:28:48 PM
Yeah, and we can't really blame anyone else. Time after time murdering, sectarian trash top the poll. You couldn't design a more fucked up situation. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 24 April, 2015, 12:30:35 PM
Quote from: Bear on 23 April, 2015, 11:56:52 AM
They got to be in government and yet the murders continue - if that's not having your cake and eating it, I don't know what is.

I think you are getting your Republican groups mixed up Bear mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2015, 02:27:57 PM
I do have trouble telling scum apart, it's true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 24 April, 2015, 03:55:46 PM
I see Mr Nice Guy Pope doesn't really  like gay people after all...   ---  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32316603
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 April, 2015, 04:48:29 PM
Nor, seemingly, does local NI political luminary Jim Wells, Minister of Health and Assembly Member for the mid sixteenth century. He drew strong inferences that children in same sex families are more liable to abuse. The sad thing is that this will double the pricks vote. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2015, 05:31:49 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 24 April, 2015, 03:55:46 PM
I see Mr Nice Guy Pope doesn't really  like gay people after all...   ---  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32316603

All that's been confirmed is that the Vatican hasn't commented either way, and the media have done some speculation acrobatics to justify it even being a story rather than a lack of one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 25 April, 2015, 06:24:22 PM
It strikes me as a bit like Netanyahu - the best way to win votes (or whatever support Popes rely on) is to tack right and please the "traditionalists", or whatever they're calling bigots these days.

A couple of my friends are standing under the TUSC banner (Trade Union & Socialist Coalition) and although they're very very unlikely to win, there needs to be a group which shows how far right Labour have gone in recent years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2015, 12:07:59 AM
Sounds like winning isn't important so much as siphoning off votes as a reminder who the fuckers work for.

Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 25 April, 2015, 06:24:22 PM
It strikes me as a bit like Netanyahu - the best way to win votes (or whatever support Popes rely on) is to tack right and please the "traditionalists", or whatever they're calling bigots these days.

Pope Frank has notably been doing the opposite since he was elected, that's why the media want the snubbing of a gay diplomat to be a story so they can return to their usual narrative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 26 April, 2015, 12:54:02 PM
Tusc is an interesting one.  To thing that SNP are now actually your best chance of getting anything slightly left leaning shows how far right Scottish Labour have gone. The SNP!

I am beginning to think the best we can hope for is SNP kick Scottish Labour's arse. Scottish Labour become a left of centre party again And show the way to the National Labour party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 26 April, 2015, 12:57:55 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 26 April, 2015, 12:54:02 PM
the best we can hope for is SNP kick Scottish Labour's arse.

Think that's a given.  Would be nice to believe it's give SL a boot up the arse to remind them who they are supposed to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 26 April, 2015, 06:05:00 PM
My punctuation probably didn't make it clear that this was very much the point I wanted to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 April, 2015, 07:16:14 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 26 April, 2015, 12:54:02 PM
I am beginning to think the best we can hope for is SNP kick Scottish Labour's arse. Scottish Labour become a left of centre party again And show the way to the National Labour party.

Well, if the SNP force Labour to the left they concede the centre ground to either LibDems or Tories. Obviously that wouldn't matter in Scotland at the moment, but in England and Wales it would be worth quite a lot of seats to the ConDems.

My hope is that the inevitable nationalist landslide north of the wall leads directly to a federal UK, with each country accorded the same level of devolution, and the Commons as a federal parliament to deal with UK-wide issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 26 April, 2015, 09:46:31 PM
As I've said before, it doesn't matter who you vote for, you end up with the Government.

Might as well decide between frying pan and fire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 27 April, 2015, 01:39:40 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 26 April, 2015, 09:46:31 PM
As I've said before, it doesn't matter who you vote for, you end up with the Government.

Might as well decide between frying pan and fire.

No, I think you should vote according to your conscience.
The Political Thread is angry shoutiness much of the time, but don't waste your vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2015, 02:06:28 AM
Whilst the unelected private banks have final say on government spending and borrowing, all votes are wasted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 27 April, 2015, 02:14:40 AM
Not helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 April, 2015, 03:03:03 AM
Here;

(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/t31.0-8/s960x960/11114265_10153284160690948_7706162205717055783_o.jpg)

Seriously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2015, 06:13:43 AM
You're right, Fungus, it's not helpful at all. Fixing this idiocy is the Best Thing any government could possibly do.
.
KP - I can't make that out on my 'phone; what is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 April, 2015, 07:14:02 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 27 April, 2015, 03:03:03 AM
Here;

(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/t31.0-8/s960x960/11114265_10153284160690948_7706162205717055783_o.jpg)

Seriously.

She sounds delightful!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2015, 08:13:07 AM
She won't do too well now that her views have come to light - we don't usually vote for liberals in Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 27 April, 2015, 08:32:54 AM
I wonder why she wants CCTV in all slaughterhouses. She might be one of those freak-out vegetarians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2015, 08:47:37 AM
I'd rather have cctv, streaming online 24/7, in every MP's office so we can see who they're meeting and what they're up to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2015, 09:19:58 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 27 April, 2015, 08:32:54 AMI wonder why she wants CCTV in all slaughterhouses.
As proof they're not using halal methods, presumably. She's a nutcase, but as others have been saying, the DUP often think similarly, but just aren't stupid enough to state all these things outright. The UK's own little Tea Party (even more so than UKIP).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 27 April, 2015, 10:29:38 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 27 April, 2015, 07:14:02 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 27 April, 2015, 03:03:03 AM
Here;

(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xta1/t31.0-8/s960x960/11114265_10153284160690948_7706162205717055783_o.jpg)

Seriously.

She sounds delightful!

This woman will receive my vote and I am also delighted to read that she is white as well.

Get in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2015, 11:16:19 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2015, 09:19:58 AM
As proof they're not using halal methods, presumably.

Which is particularly ironic, because the vast majority of halal meat in the UK is produced from pre-stunned animals and, if the animal is stunned, then there is no significant difference between the 'normal' slaughtering process and halal, other than the requirement for a muslim to do the slaughtering with a specific knife. (Regular slaughter is still done by a bloke with a knife.)

Kosher meat, on the other hand, must be produced from the slaughter of an un-stunned animal. Odd how keen people are to attack Islamic religious tradition and simultaneously reluctant to condemn the same practices in Judaism.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2015, 11:44:08 AM
Yet Jews, Christians and Muslims kill each other with the same, un-blessed bullets. It's a crazy world!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2015, 01:29:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2015, 11:16:19 AMthere is no significant difference between the 'normal' slaughtering process and halal

I've worked in slaughterhouses, and while admitting that every factory doesn't have the same standards*, the Halal process sounds a lot more humane than the processes I witnessed firsthand.
CCTV in a slaughterhouse is also a fucking stupid idea that betrays what a political tourist that woman is**: the industry won't go for it because even the most stringently-run factories still has the odd mistake and the footage would be used forever by animal rights groups, unions won't want it because it's an invasion of privacy, and workers won't want it because few people want to be filmed at work, let alone slaughterhouse workers, some of whom may be working a second or third job on top of claiming benefits just to make ends meet.


* Although I gather there might be pesky laws requiring that they do.
** Although I do like the juxtaposition she's going for by asking for tougher sentences for animal cruelty on one hand and the criminalisation of homosexuality on the other, like when old Adolf put out that election flyer calling for (1) the industrialised genocide of jews, and (2) vegetarian sausages to be offered in the canteen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2015, 02:55:03 PM
Well, bear in mind her own commitments are about a return to 1920s family living (MEN should provide MONEY, and women should stay in the kitchen), yet she's trying to be an MP. So if she were elected, presumably she'd have to immediately resign and have a man take her job. Or something.

If nothing else, this last week has been a revelation regarding NI. I never realised quite the level of crazy there when it comes to politics. The UK's own little slice of Tea Party in action (and, as it turns out, with laws that even make it so the UK's recent changes to satire/fair use are essentially meaningless because NI didn't go for them).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 April, 2015, 02:57:37 PM
"Oppose feminism" and this was written by a female politician? What world am I living in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
To go slightly to the side of this, I think there's a valid opposition to Halal along the lines of the industrial religious discrimination. As in I don't care how people like their meat to be prepared even if it's for a reason I don't comprehend, and I don't mind eating Halal meat, but I object to Butchers having to join a cult to stay commercially viable due to the big businesses switching to halal for expediency.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2015, 03:50:03 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
but I object to Butchers having to join a cult to stay commercially viable due to the big businesses switching to halal for expediency.

There is no difference between standard UK-legal slaughter and halal slaughter of pre-stunned animals, other than the use of a 'blessed'* blade and the fact that the wielder must be muslim. None. The difference is that I can eat either, but muslims can only eat one.

That's not 'joining a cult', that's picking one of two processes that are indistinguishable in all practical senses but which serves the largest number of customers.

Cheers

Jim


*For want of the correct word, which I'll confess I can be arsed to google.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 27 April, 2015, 03:58:48 PM
Re.  CCTVs in abattoirs.

Maybe she's just after the animal snuff movie vote.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 27 April, 2015, 04:15:43 PM
I'm surprised her husband allows her out, nothing there about stoning people who mix cotton with other material, or shellfish bans so she won't be getting my vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 April, 2015, 04:42:39 PM
CCTV in abattoirs the only policy I'd support on that list - it would save the need for the undercover infiltration and filming which always finds scenes of horrific abuse in this "well regulated" industry.

Halal, Kosher and "western" methods can all be humane if done properly or can all be cruel if botched, but using animal welfare as a thinly veiled cover for her obvious islamaphobia is disgraceful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 April, 2015, 05:58:43 PM
Aye she's the quare fucking eejit that one. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2015, 08:35:12 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2015, 03:50:03 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
but I object to Butchers having to join a cult to stay commercially viable due to the big businesses switching to halal for expediency.

There is no difference between standard UK-legal slaughter and halal slaughter of pre-stunned animals, other than the use of a 'blessed'* blade and the fact that the wielder must be muslim. None. The difference is that I can eat either, but muslims can only eat one.

That's not 'joining a cult', that's picking one of two processes that are indistinguishable in all practical senses but which serves the largest number of customers.

Cheers

Jim


*For want of the correct word, which I'll confess I can be arsed to google.

Jim - just reworded what I said and what I don't like: "wielder must be muslim" which will happen because  "picking one of two processes that are indistinguishable in all practical senses but which serves the largest number of customers."

Not sure what you think I'm confused about?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2015, 08:38:56 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2015, 08:35:12 PM
Not sure what you think I'm confused about?

I didn't say you were confused. I felt that "joining a cult" was inflammatory language and inappropriate in what is really very much a non-issue. You are entitled to feel differently.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 April, 2015, 12:00:19 PM
Only [Religion X] can be [Trade] because the non-religious don't care but the religious do.

I think that's an issue. I'm not sure how you resolve it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 April, 2015, 12:31:42 PM
I would like to think that even if you had a brilliantly regulated and run slaughter houses, having CCTV in themwould still lead to an increase in vegetarianism.

BUt she does sound... conflicted and confused.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2015, 11:58:12 PM
In the past, farmers would slaughter their own livestock, avail themselves of travelling slaughtermen or use local abattoirs. Farmers would know, either personally or through professional networks, the people tasked with the job. They were unlikely to use cruel or clumsy people for this task.
.
Nowadays slaughterhouses are large affairs and kill hundreds or even thousands of animals every day. The slaughterman has become an anonymous figure and the slaughter itself is carried out behind closed doors.
.
Whilst there is a certain twisted logic in the idea of having cctv in abattoirs, I don't think it's the answer at all. To my mind, the problem is the sheer scale of modern operations and the dehumanising effect it has on slaughtermen. I don't even want to imagine what it must be like to have to kill a hundred animals every day.
.
I'll hold up my hand and admit that, when I was a kid, I had an air rifle and did for many sparrows and the like. I was once even paid by a local mechanic to wipe out two families of bluetits because they'd built nests in his workshop and were shitting on his clients' vehicles. This "job" was the last time I ever killed anything on purpose because it suddenly, and for the first time, overwhelmed me with guilt. Only a few years later I accidentally hit a duck with my car, injuring but not killing it. I pulled over with the intention of putting the duck out of its misery but simply couldn't bring myself to do it. The farmer whose duck this was appeared and, with infinite gentle care, picked up the animal and broke its neck quickly and cleanly. He was upset but not angry and treated the duck with compassion and respect,
.
By industrialising slaughter I think we have minimised that compassion and respect. In my view, the answer is not cctv or magic knives but a return to smaller scale operations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 29 April, 2015, 09:43:51 AM
Well said Sharky, I completely agree with that.
I think I'd also add that there's become a disconnection between food and where it comes from in the minds of the public.
I've tried to think a little more deeply about where my food comes from of late. I often pop over to the local M&S for lunch and where I'd once have picked up the first chicken or ham sandwich I came across I'm now searching out the vegetarian choices. I'm not vegetarian but I can't quite get my head around the sheer amount of chickens that must be killed just for M&S sandwiches alone. It seems crazy. Of course the vast amount of people buying these products will never think about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 April, 2015, 10:10:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 April, 2015, 11:58:12 PM
In my view, the answer is not cctv or magic knives but a return to smaller scale operations.

I absolutely agree, and have said so in the past on this very forum.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 April, 2015, 10:51:12 AM
Much as I love being able to make a ham sandwich for relatively cheap, that would be for the best. Maybe even just back a few decades.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 April, 2015, 11:14:11 AM
Mrs G used to work for a place that manufactured industrial ovens. One day, they had a major fast-food chain in, and nipped out to a supermarket to get some chicken to mess about with. The chain noted that while the ovens were good, they'd need to do the tests again, because the "wrong calibre of chicken" had been bought.

You also see similar in Nando's, which hand-wrings statements about animals by arguing people have a certain expectation regarding costs. If only the west could be encouraged to eat bugs. That'd solve a lot of problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 April, 2015, 11:57:04 AM
The Daily Mail is why God invented suicide bombers.  I shan't link to it because I don't want them getting the clicks - they get plenty of those from pedophiles searching for pictures of underage girls - but the Mail Online apparently has a big story rubbishing the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon for building a hospital.  It gets better - they're furious that they built a hospital when the English NHS "faces its most difficult year in history" (can't imagine why that might be).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JudgeOiNK! on 29 April, 2015, 12:07:00 PM
A few years ago a young school girl was killed by a large, thick branch falling from a tree she was sitting under.  It was a tragic accident and a horrible thing to happen.  The Daily Mail had a huge headline on their website blaming her teachers for her death as they were out on strike that day, so "the girl should've been in school".  Horrible, Hitler-loving rag, that "news"paper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 April, 2015, 12:25:19 PM
The Mail's owner, Viscount Rothermere, is a tax dodger whose money goes out of the country to accrue interest in other territories rather than re-entering the UK economy, so those who buy the Daily Mail are helping him to literally destroy Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JudgeOiNK! on 29 April, 2015, 12:31:51 PM
Yet it'll be the first paper to "expose" tax dodgers, unless of course it's themselves or Conservative Party members, just people they don't actually like.  My word, recently they ran a (very inaccurate - surprise, surprise) story on the new Thunderbirds Are Go kids' show.  They called it a CGI cartoon and reported they'd changed everything, and didn't include any information on all the respectful things it does for the original's fans.  They brutally attacked it as it was "destroying a British institution", and the comments from its readers - my god!  Such hatred!  It's a TV show.  A children's one at that.  Just shows the calibre of people who buy it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 April, 2015, 12:44:48 PM
Quote from: Bear on 29 April, 2015, 12:25:19 PM
The Mail's owner, Viscount Rothermere, is a tax dodger whose money goes out of the country to accrue interest in other territories rather than re-entering the UK economy, so those who buy the Daily Mail are helping him to literally destroy Britain.

Rothermere's main company, DMGT, also owns Northcliffe Newspapers. I have never been treated as badly by an employer as I was when I worked for Northcliffe, and I saw numerous employees treated far worse than I was. I was flat-out lied to by a manager at director level about employment rights; saw employees sacked in breach of employment law...

Their entire corporate ethos is predicated on hiring staff young,* breaking jobs down into the simplest possible tasks to minimise training expenses, belittling and abusing the staff to ensure that they never feel valued, grinding the maximum amount of work out of them for the smallest amount of pay until they break and quit.

They are, in short, scum.

Cheers

Jim

*I wasn't young, and I didn't want to work for them. They took over a publication I worked for and made it very clear from the outset that they didn't approve of my hands-on management style, ongoing training programmes, or belief that instilling in my staff a sense of self-worth and pride in a job well done was beneficial to the company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 April, 2015, 01:20:37 PM
People are agreeing with me.
.
That doesn't feel right, stop it at once! :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 April, 2015, 01:32:04 PM
If you want them to disagree with you again, tell them to go out and murder MPs, as they don't seem very responsive to the idea (not this side of the election, anyway).

I am shocked by Jim's revelations that the people who produce the Daily Mail are provably scum.  SHOCKED.  I expected better of the people who deliberately attract pedophiles to their website to drive up their advertising rates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 April, 2015, 02:17:37 PM
Favourite daily mail pun?

Mine has always been the Daily Fail due to their gross (wilful) incompetency. But my friend leans towards the Daily Heil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 May, 2015, 01:08:33 AM
I keep reading stories about whom the various parties are willing to make deals. Doesn't give me a great deal of faith in democracy. It's like it doesn't matter who we vote for, the government we will get shall be hashed out in backroom deals. The notion of a minority party being kingmakers is bunk. The libdems proved that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 01:43:12 AM
Yep, you're absolutely right, KP. None of them seem to think that making a deal with the electorate is the way to go.
.
But then, it was ever thus. The only deal they ever make with the people is that they won't steal our wealth or throw us in jail if we do as we're told.
.
Fuck 'em, I say. Fuck 'em with a bent spanner and govern yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 09:59:08 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 01 May, 2015, 01:08:33 AM
I keep reading stories about whom the various parties are willing to make deals. Doesn't give me a great deal of faith in democracy. [...]  The notion of a minority party being kingmakers is bunk. The libdems proved that.
Well, we have one of two options: we can hope the small parties vanish into the ether and lurch between Con and Lab every election or two, despite Con and Lab both shifting right; or we can recognise the fact politics has finally shifted in the UK towards the kinds of systems enjoyed elsewhere. Germany's a country of coalition, and seems to do fine. Scandinavian/Nordic countries also.

But judging by recent events, it looks like Labour's position is to rather dangerously call the SNP's bluff while simultaneously hoping the Lib-Dems will back it and that the numbers won't be there for Con/LD/DUP.

QuoteIt's like it doesn't matter who we vote for, the government we will get shall be hashed out in backroom deals.
In terms of voting this time round, the bigger problem is that it's a lottery. FPTP is too unpredictable in the current climate, meaning whatever happens, we're going to end up with huge discrepancies between vote share and MP numbers—even more so than last time round, where if seats had been allocated on a broadly proportional manner, British politics would be very different (http://reverttosaved.com/2010/05/08/uk-2010-general-election-what-you-voted-for-and-what-you-got/).

We're almost certainly going to see two parties—the Greens and the SNP—have roughly the same national vote share, but the former will be fortunate to retain a single MP while the latter will likely have between 30 and 59. UKIP will probably get between zero and a half-dozen seats, despite securing 15% of the vote. The Lib-Dems may cling on to about half of their seats, having 30 with about 8%. Con and Lab will approach half the seats in the Commons with a third of the vote. It's a mess and it needs fixing, along with replacing the Lords.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 May, 2015, 10:12:15 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 09:59:08 AM
But judging by recent events, it looks like Labour's position is to rather dangerously call the SNP's bluff while simultaneously hoping the Lib-Dems will back it and that the numbers won't be there for Con/LD/DUP.

I've been saying for some time that Ed Miliband, whilst I am certain that he is an intelligent man and a decent human being, is a terrible politician.

I agree entirely with the sentiments of our own Mr Clements over on Twitter: a Labour leader who would rather see the Tories in power than work with a left-of-centre party should be run out of office.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 10:19:42 AM
I think that, in principle, the House of Lords is a good idea. When it works as intended, as a collection of apolitical experts and "wise heads," it should stop any purely political bad legislation making it onto the statute books. However, it rarely seems to work that way and should ideally be abolished with the rest of our antiquated and self-serving government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 May, 2015, 10:33:19 AM
I suggest we storm Westminister and kill everyone.  Failing that, a proportional voting system is long overdue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 10:41:38 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 May, 2015, 10:12:15 AMI agree entirely with the sentiments of our own Mr Clements over on Twitter: a Labour leader who would rather see the Tories in power than work with a left-of-centre party should be run out of office.
I suspect, despite his claims to the contrary, that he's petrified of the press and (likely wrongly) thinks he'd lose a ton of seats if he suggested a Lab/SNP government, coalition or even confidence & supply arrangement. It's stupid, really, because plenty of Labour voters would be happy with a party that might nudge Labour leftwards again. And even Trident wouldn't be under threat, given that Lab and Con whips would ensure it got through the house.

It really does look like he's playing a dangerous game, in betting on the SNP 'supporting' Labour regardless, because otherwise they would also be complicit in enabling the Tories to rule again. It's a bad move, and after he'd been improving somewhat of late in many people's eyes.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 10:19:42 AM
I think that, in principle, the House of Lords is a good idea. When it works as intended, as a collection of apolitical experts and "wise heads," it should stop any purely political bad legislation making it onto the statute books. However, it rarely seems to work that way and should ideally be abolished with the rest of our antiquated and self-serving government.
If we're going to have a government, we need a second house as a sanity check, and the theory of unelected experts is fine; but the reality is too many of them have fingers in business pies, are out of touch and/or corrupt, and aren't accountable to anyone. The Lords is also rammed full of London-centric members, and there are currently a mammoth 783(!) seats, which is crazy.

The Greens, Labour and SNP have suggested the idea of a regional senate, and that seems more sensible. There's a danger of US-style gridlock, but we get that anyway now and again; at least rethinking the second chamber as a properly regional assembly would reduce the emphasis on London-focussed policy. (And STV for the Commons, too, please.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 May, 2015, 11:32:26 AM
I assumed Ed doesn't want anyone who would be more popular than he was in a position where they could supplant him much as he did his brother - "most of all a thief fears he will be robbed" and all that, but then there's the fact he wouldn't be running the country if he teamed with Sturgeon.  Clegg, as we now know, is spineless and capitulates easily when confronted with a bully like Cameron, but Sturgeon is both Scotch and a woman, so Ed would never get a single concession for all his corporate commitments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 12:19:33 PM
I assume you're just poking at the hive, because it's pretty clear the SNP's 'power' is being massively overplayed anyway. Yes, they would have influence in a Lab/SNP deal, but not to the degree the shrieking 'papers are making out. (And, frankly, why shouldn't 50+ democratically elected MPs supporting the government have influence of some kind?) It's hardly likely that the SNP would red-line to the point of bringing down the government and ushering in the Tories again—it would absolutely destroy their credibility and any hope they'd have of getting anywhere near the same vote levels again in subsequent elections.

This is of course what Miliband is relying on, but it seems spiteful and just plain dishonest to attempt to pretend the SNP doesn't exist and assume it will or should nod through Labour policy. Funny how 'better together' has turned into 'better together... but only if you elect the 'right' MPs'...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 12:42:31 PM
Can't we just wing a few, Bear? Failing that, just turn the system upside down - top of the pile becomes your local or parish council, which tells your local county or district council what to do, which in turn tells Westminster what to do. This arrangement brings the power back where it properly belongs - to you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 May, 2015, 01:44:54 PM
Wounding them would be unnecessarily cruel - this is extermination, not a fox hunt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 01:45:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 12:19:33 PM

This is of course what Miliband is relying on, but it seems spiteful and just plain dishonest to attempt to pretend the SNP doesn't exist and assume it will or should nod through Labour policy. Funny how 'better together' has turned into 'better together... but only if you elect the 'right' MPs'...

Well, Labour has to make it clear that a vote for the SNP is not a vote for a Labour UK government.

However, the problem with SNP votes on English-only issues is the same problem that would occur if Labour used their own non-English MPs to force through legislation applying only to England, that a majority of English MPs oppose. In a constitutional sense it makes no difference which party the Scottish MPs represent, only that they could overrule a party with an English majority on English-only votes.

English devolution would fix this disparity (which I appreciate was in place in reverse before devolution in the other parts of the UK was introduced in the late 90s).

Of course SNP MPs should (and will) have the same mandate to vote on UK-wide issues as all other MPs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 01:51:00 PM
Did you know that some people breed foxes specifically for the hunt? I only found this out recently in conversation with an old huntsman from the St Helens area.
.
So, maybe we should breed politicians specifically to be hanged...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 02:44:52 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 01:45:30 PMEnglish devolution would fix this disparity
Only if regional devolution was enacted. 'England' as a bloc is too big, and will be entirely London-centric if it ends up with its own parliament. (English votes for English laws also strikes me as something of a stitch-up—it's no coincidence such an argument always comes from the right. Maybe post-PR, when we've a more representative government, such as thing might make a bit more sense.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 03:43:43 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 02:44:52 PM
Only if regional devolution was enacted. 'England' as a bloc is too big, and will be entirely London-centric if it ends up with its own parliament. (English votes for English laws also strikes me as something of a stitch-up—it's no coincidence such an argument always comes from the right. Maybe post-PR, when we've a more representative government, such as thing might make a bit more sense.)

Devolution to the English regions was the original idea, but there are no such places. England is a country, South-East England is a phrase on a weather forecast.

"English votes for English laws" and indeed Labour's wonkish "English committee stage for English laws" don't really solve the problem because they don't treat England and Scotland (and Wales and Northern Ireland) as the same. I believe that until there's parity there's inevitably going to be bitterness on all sides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 01 May, 2015, 05:09:27 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 03:43:43 PM
Devolution to the English regions was the original idea, but there are no such places.

Are you sure on that?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 05:36:28 PM
Quite. Using that argument, why don't we vote England-wide for MEPs? Also, if we move to STV, it'd be hideous England-wide. Would need to be local to some extent: region or county. Same if the Lords became a senate. I'd hate to see the senate comprising Welsh, NI, Scottish and English senators—would need to be the first three and English regions or it would be Wales, NI, Scotland and London.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 05:36:57 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 01 May, 2015, 05:09:27 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 03:43:43 PM
Devolution to the English regions was the original idea, but there are no such places.

Are you sure on that?

Am I sure that was the original idea, or am I sure there are no such places?

Yes to the former, here's what happened:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm

Yes to the latter, I live in one of those supposed regions, and it forms no part of my identity (I believe the people of the North East felt the same, hence the 2004 result).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 05:41:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 05:36:28 PM
Quite. Using that argument, why don't we vote England-wide for MEPs? Also, if we move to STV, it'd be hideous England-wide. Would need to be local to some extent: region or county. Same if the Lords became a senate. I'd hate to see the senate comprising Welsh, NI, Scottish and English senators—would need to be the first three and English regions or it would be Wales, NI, Scotland and London.

England is much bigger, in term of population, than the other UK countries. Trying to break it up is not going to work. I also don't get the hostility to London.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 01 May, 2015, 06:28:31 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 05:36:57 PM
I live in one of those supposed regions, and it forms no part of my identity

Sure, the English regions are a man-made construct, but so is England itself
But you seem to be saying that the English regions dont even exist at all, is that what you are saying?
Just curious as to your original post is all.







Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 06:40:25 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 01 May, 2015, 06:28:31 PM
Sure, the English regions are a man-made construct, but so is England itself
But you seem to be saying that the English regions dont even exist at all, is that what you are saying?
Just curious as to your original post is all.

They certainly don't exist as nations comparable to Scotland, Wales and NI.

The whole point of devolving to regions rather than England as a whole is to try to avoid a national government becoming so powerful that it rivals the UK government. I can understand that is a legitimate concern, but I think it's highly unlikely that the English will vote for regional devolution in preference to a national version.

I should also make it clear at this point that I am not a Conservative or UKIP voter (I float, but mostly between Greens & LibDems) and that I was persuaded of the case for a Federal UK by a Scottish Yes voter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 07:33:12 PM
Aren't most of our "laws" drafted behind closed doors in Brussels anyway? If so, what does it matter whether the regions have their own assemblies or not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 01 May, 2015, 07:40:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 07:33:12 PM
Aren't most of our "laws" drafted behind closed doors in Brussels anyway?

No.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 May, 2015, 08:01:54 PM
Okay, then. Assemble away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 May, 2015, 10:01:36 PM
Am I the only one that finds it hilarious that Ed Milliband manged to talk Russell Brand out of his "don't vote" policy - only for Russ to tell everybody to vote Green.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 10:34:27 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 06:40:25 PMThe whole point of devolving to regions rather than England as a whole is to try to avoid a national government becoming so powerful that it rivals the UK government
Not really. The point of devolving to regions is so said regions can make adjustments to policy that directly benefit the people who live there, depending on local economies and other factors. What works for Manchester doesn't necessarily work for Truro.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 10:43:48 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 10:34:27 PM
What works for Manchester doesn't necessarily work for Truro.

Well okay, I'll give you Cornwall!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 May, 2015, 04:12:38 AM
Even I am susceptible to propaganda, especially when it chimes with or reinforces my personal world view. I had it in my head that most of the UK's legislation originated in, and was imposed by, the European Parliament. So I've done some quick and shallow research on the matter.
.
According to this article (http://www.euromove.org.uk/index.php?id=9479), the proportion of EU legislation utilised in the UK is 8 - 10%; but this seems to be a pro-EU site, so they would say that, wouldn't they? This article (http://talkbusinessmagazine.co.uk/2015/03/02/eu-rules-account-for-65-of-uk-law-study-reveals/), however, puts the figure at 65%; but this seems to be an anti-EU article, so it would say that, wouldn't it?  Finally, this site (https://fullfact.org/europe/eu_make_uk_law-29587) estimates figures between 15 and 53%. So, basically, I don't know how many of the UK's "laws" come from Brussels and I think that trying to figure it out properly might well drive me insane!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 May, 2015, 11:16:02 AM
A glimpse into a possible KIPperry future (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/undercover-with-paul-lewis-and-rob-evans/2015/may/01/police-monitored-political-movements-of-candidate-standing-against-nigel-farage)...

keep that be-foil'd helmet on Shark. All subversive minds and opponents to the status quo will be monitered!!

No word on opponents to Status Quo but I imagine Nige likes to get down down deeper and down to a bit of Rossi & Parfitt
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 May, 2015, 04:44:47 PM
The police and I will be facing each other in court soon*.
.
*This is, of course, the legal definition of the word 'soon' - which is months and months and months off yet...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 May, 2015, 06:07:56 PM
There was at least one baby born today who will never know hunger, sub-standard education, deprivation, a poor diet, a cold bedroom, poverty, crappy healthcare, police brutality, lack of opportunity, crippling debt, food banks, second-hand clothing or homelessness. Rejoice!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 May, 2015, 12:11:57 AM
So there's this 17 year old who has a Twitter account called #Millifan or something, and she tweeted in support of Ed Milliband and got mentioned by Guardian writers once or something like that - more grist for the three-ringed election mill and not really much of note, if we're honest.  Anyway, her real name wasn't on the Twitter account, nor was her location, it wasn't synched with any other social media accounts, there was no information on who or where she was, but tonight journalists from the Sun show up on her doorstep.
Good to see Rupert Murdoch put the kibosh on all that hacking, although in Murdoch's defence, maybe he thought she'd been murdered and just wanted to check her voicemail for a scoop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 03 May, 2015, 12:18:41 AM
He's a good man, that Murdoch. He properly cares.

About his obscene volume of money, into which he dives, Scrooge McDuck-like, on a daily basis. Spattered as it is with blood.

And cum.

Loathsome cunt.

Yeah, that'll teach her to care about things. Never mind, she'll grow out of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 May, 2015, 12:25:01 AM
They'll probably just claim she was asking for it, what with the way she was flaunting her opinions and all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 May, 2015, 12:25:37 AM
She's 17, he's 85.  The maths on who'll be having the last laugh are pretty straightforward.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 03 May, 2015, 12:28:47 AM
Only if you disregard Cold Lazarus-style science and inevitable remembrances of encounters with tramps in the woods.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 03 May, 2015, 07:06:53 PM
I keep hearing Labour say they are the party of hard-working families, and now Steve Coogan's at it (https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/594921867703492608), but as the main breadwinner (currently) of this hard-working family, my combined income tax and NI bill in 2010/11 was 3.8 times more than it was in 2014/2015.

I'm not pro-Tory – I'd vote Left Unity (http://leftunity.org/) if I could – but I just don't get it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 May, 2015, 08:11:27 PM
Two scenarios suggest themselves:
1 - you are the primary and deliberate beneficiary of Tory cuts and legislation and their policies are working a treat for working families, or
2 - you're better off completely by accident of their doing something that benefits themselves, their mates, or lobby groups with deep pockets.

I don't know your personal situation, Banners, but my instinctive loathing of the Tories and their track record of shafting everyone who's not filthy rich makes me think it's probably #2.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2015, 03:34:27 AM
"Hard working families" is code for "tax paying muppets financing HMRC's pyramid scheme." It makes my skin crawl and my bile rise every time I hear one of those Westminster parasites use this phrase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 04 May, 2015, 11:16:03 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 10:43:48 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 10:34:27 PM
What works for Manchester doesn't necessarily work for Truro.

Well okay, I'll give you Cornwall!

Who's giving us away to what now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 04 May, 2015, 11:18:12 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 May, 2015, 10:34:27 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 May, 2015, 06:40:25 PMThe whole point of devolving to regions rather than England as a whole is to try to avoid a national government becoming so powerful that it rivals the UK government
Not really. The point of devolving to regions is so said regions can make adjustments to policy that directly benefit the people who live there, depending on local economies and other factors. What works for Manchester doesn't necessarily work for Truro.

ah yes indeed.  There has been a substantial voice for an Assembly here for years now.  It's something I can see happening as the UK devolves more.  The libs have promised it..  but their promises count for nothing when it comes down to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 04 May, 2015, 11:20:07 AM
Quote from: Banners on 03 May, 2015, 07:06:53 PM
I keep hearing Labour say they are the party of hard-working families, and now Steve Coogan's at it (https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/594921867703492608), but as the main breadwinner (currently) of this hard-working family, my combined income tax and NI bill in 2010/11 was 3.8 times more than it was in 2014/2015.

I'm not pro-Tory – I'd vote Left Unity (http://leftunity.org/) if I could – but I just don't get it.

mostly as a result of one of the few liberal policies that did pass i'd guess , as they got the personal allowances raised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 May, 2015, 03:11:26 PM
UKIP have launched their Scottish manifesto in my local constituency, where the MEP David Coburn is running for parliament.

Coburn, who is possibly Scotland's most offensive man, has claimed that UKIP will win up to 50% of the vote here in Falkirk, demonstrating a complete lack of attachment to reality that will serve him well in the party.  He's also a bloke who compared an asian Scottish Labour frontbencher to Abu Hamza, has called those in favour of gay marriage "Equality Nazis", has publicly called Ed Milliband "a w****r and an ar*****e ", and apparently worries that the Scottish Government will cancel christmas and have him shot.

UKIP have tended not to poll well in Scotland (probably since we have additional parties who can pick up the traditional protest votes), so how do they intend to woo the Scottish voters? 

By cutting the Scottish budget, so that England no longer "shovels money over Hadrian's wall".

By cancelling the "Named Person" scheme, which ensures that every child in Scotland is given a contact at social work who can help them if they need assistance.

Fracking.

Less immigrants.  They are apparently a problem. 

This is, in Mr Coburn's words, "what William Wallace would want".  It's also important to vote UKIP, because the SNP want to return Scotland "to the days of William Wallace". 

He would love to give you a copy of the manifesto to take home with you, but he doesn't have any because they haven't been delivered by the printers yet, because its a bank holiday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 May, 2015, 04:30:01 PM
I've not read the Scottish UKIP manifesto, but have read the standard one. It's not as mental as I expected. Still, anyone voting for that party is either someone I don't want to ever meet or someone who really doesn't know what it stands for (which is mostly an extreme form of the Conservative Party, with the odd exception here and there).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jock Savage on 04 May, 2015, 04:59:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 May, 2015, 04:30:01 PM
I've not read the Scottish UKIP manifesto, but have read the standard one. It's not as mental as I expected

No party's manifesto bears the slightest relation to what they'd actually do if given power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 04 May, 2015, 05:00:32 PM
But, but, the 8'6" stone tablet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jock Savage on 04 May, 2015, 05:06:58 PM
Stone is a maleable medium, Steve

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--oJQmr1-t--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/1823c9wassiqljpg.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 May, 2015, 05:08:41 PM
Quote from: Jock Savage on 04 May, 2015, 04:59:25 PMNo party's manifesto bears the slightest relation to what they'd actually do if given power.
Have you read them all? I have, from cover to cover. I'd say all of them this time round are a broad reflection of what a party will do if it found itself in power with no limitations. The snag is when that doesn't happen, which means, for example, the SNP won't get its way on all its policies, even if takes every Scottish seat, and the surprisingly impressive Liberal Democrat manifesto will see its major policies ignored but minor ones potentially creep in, if the party ends up in coalition again. (There is of course a certain amount of Bullshit Button required while reading manifestos, not least with Tory cheerleading about the NHS, and indeed UKIP doing the same.)

If you disagree, it'd be interesting to know why and in what areas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2015, 10:40:05 PM
Here's a thing that's been baffling me of late. I have a lot of gay friends... no, really, a LOT. And of my social media crowd, the number of strongly right wing supporters among my gay friends is waaay higher as a percentage than any other. Now I'm not claiming statistical significance or anything, but how the fuck does that work? They must know that these people —UKIP, for fuck's sake!— actively despise them. It's like black people voting BNP. I do. Not. Get. It.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 May, 2015, 10:46:28 PM
My knee-jerk, silly theory: For a long time, gays have been actively despised and victimised, even by governments. This reaction may be a (possibly subconscious) fight back. Revenge, almost - a show of strength, maybe. (Or I may be talking bollocks.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2015, 11:47:11 PM
Conservatism makes you gay.  It's mother nature's way of making sure you don't reproduce.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 May, 2015, 12:19:46 AM
Perhaps they're secretly left wing, hiding their true political preferences for fear of how they'd be perceived by the society they were brought up in. Or something.

(Slightly unrelated, and not an entirely relevant observation, but I've, (somehow), got loads of vegetarians among my friends, and it often concerns me how many of them are obsessed with zombies, even dressing up as them on occasion. Makes me a bit worried that they're acting out their true, hidden nature and the only reason they're abstaining from flesh-eating is because they know that once they start, they won't be able to stop at mere ham and eggs.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 May, 2015, 08:02:42 AM
My MP is a Conservative who came out as gay a few years back. He's basically been at war with his local association ever since (their code for homophobia is that they sympathize with his wife). He managed to avoid de-selection by the skin of his teeth.

I won't be voting for him, but he'll win by miles and I'm of the view he's actually not that bad a guy for a Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2015, 08:23:03 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 May, 2015, 08:02:42 AM
My MP is a Conservative who came out as gay a few years back. He's basically been at war with his local association ever since (their code for homophobia is that they sympathize with his wife). He managed to avoid de-selection by the skin of his teeth.

I won't be voting for him, but he'll win by miles and I'm of the view he's actually not that bad a guy for a Tory.

Whereas my folks' conservative MP is openly gay and has massive support in the constituency, despite him being tried (and acquitted) on multiple sexual assault charges recently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2015, 09:40:20 AM
I know a very openly gay man from Sweden (and he really, really fits the 'bitchily camp' stereotype) who believes that Gay Pride marches should be banned.  His rationale is that all this whacky, flamboyant showiness gives the wrong impression of gay people, the vast majority of whom dress and behave in a perfectly ordinary way.  Which is a fair point, I suppose, and one I hadn't even considered till I met him.

(He also hated Brokeback Mountain.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 06 May, 2015, 10:07:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2015, 09:40:20 AMthe vast majority of whom dress and behave in a perfectly ordinary way

...blimey this is all really opening my eyes guys you mean people who identify as gay might be individuals with their own opinions?!

:|

Sorry let's make this more sarcastic:

I too hope one day to actually meet one of those fine gay folk and find out from them what all of their kind think about Tories/hammers/cheese but until then I will just have to put up with all us straights and our identical thoughts on politics, religion and culture generally. Oh us straights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2015, 10:29:39 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 06 May, 2015, 10:07:22 AM
Sorry let's make this more sarcastic:

To be clear: I am not suggesting that The Gays should have a homogenous opinion on anything, any more than The Blacks or The Whites or The Straights, and fuck you in the eye if you were suggesting otherwise, Owen, because that's a cheap fucking shot.

I was/am simply baffled by the fact that a disproportionate number of my friends on social media (and in real life, now that I think about it) who actively espouse a political stance that I would consider right-wing, up to and including voting UKIP, are gay. I would struggle to support a party of any persuasion if a fundamental part of their platform was the active denigration, the vilification, of a basic part of my identity. It seems to me that there's a cognitive dissonance easily of the same order as someone of afro-caribbean origin voting for the BNP.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 06 May, 2015, 11:12:39 AM
Oh Jim there were QUITE a few posts between what you said and what I was saying it wasn't a dig at you just a general snarky forumcomment (tm), it IS a bewildering phenomenon that ignores facts (and history) and one I've seen alarmingly first hand. Let's not fight eh, as Whedon said in his "I didn't quit Twitter because of feminists you knee-jerk nutters" interview:

"Every sub-section of liberalism is always busy attacking another sub-section of liberalism, because god forbid they should all band together and actually fight for the cause."

So come on, eh. Let's get together and destroy the crossbar I or something. Let's fuck them in the cross-bar I.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 May, 2015, 11:16:59 AM
Don't forget to Vote tomorrow. Make sure the Tories get hammered into the dirt.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2015, 11:19:16 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 06 May, 2015, 11:12:39 AM
Oh Jim there were QUITE a few posts between what you said and what I was saying it wasn't a dig at you just a general snarky forumcomment (tm)

Mmm. Yes. I've just had my first direct encounter with the charmless bunch of misogynist motherfuckers who cluster under the Gamergate banner, so I may be over-touchy just now. My apologies.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2015, 11:33:05 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 06 May, 2015, 10:07:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2015, 09:40:20 AMthe vast majority of whom dress and behave in a perfectly ordinary way

...blimey this is all really opening my eyes guys you mean people who identify as gay might be individuals with their own opinions?!

:|

Sorry let's make this more sarcastic:

I too hope one day to actually meet one of those fine gay folk and find out from them what all of their kind think about Tories/hammers/cheese but until then I will just have to put up with all us straights and our identical thoughts on politics, religion and culture generally. Oh us straights.

All I was doing was quoting a gay man's opinion which for me personally was surprising as I hadn't heard it before.  The part you quoted was me paraphrasing him - I wasn't trying to open anyone's eyes to anything; I just thought it was an interesting point of view and decided to share it here.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 May, 2015, 12:34:01 PM
The difficulty in being 'liberal' is that you care what other people think/feel.

It's much easier to be a ****, just see Fox/UKIP. You don't even need to try and be internally consistent.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 06 May, 2015, 12:40:55 PM
Quote from: NapalmKevDon't forget to Vote tomorrow...

Or if you're voting UKIP, the vote is on Friday.

;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 May, 2015, 12:41:58 PM
Why would anyone be baffled that gay people would want to vote for a political party that wants to control immigration and to leave the European Union.  I find it strange when people support a political party that, when in government, entered into what many people considered an illegal war and, because of that political decision, contributed to the deaths of thousands of people.  Now, that's baffling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 May, 2015, 01:13:30 PM
I don't think it's baffling that gay people would vote conservative. UKIP, that's one I can't get my head around. Conservatives - well just because there's a bunch of old bigots who speak loudly about it doesn't mean there all like that. But by the same token the party's voting record speaks for itself; more Conservatives voted against same-sex marriage than for it. The numbers are really quite revealing.

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2013-02-05&number=151&dmp=6686


I haven't met a Labour supporter happy about the Iraq war. And 146 of 148 tory MPs voted 'aye' there; proportionally speaking, more Labour MPs voted against their own government in this regard. The tories also had 100% turnout whereas many Labour MPs abstained rather than rebel against the whip. If the Tories had opposed it, it wouldn't have happened. David Cameron voted for it for one. And to return to gay issues, David Cameron voted against the repeal of Section 28 in 2003, along with the majority of Tory MPs - http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-10&number=109. 

(For completeness sake here is the Iraq one http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-18&number=118&display=allpossible)

A parliamentary system is more complex than portrayed and could be a relatively good democracy if we'd use it properly. It's far from ideal though; my own MP, Jim Dobbin of Heywood/Middleton, was a devout Catholic and as such voted in ways I found completely reprehensible on occasion.

It's baffling how the information is out there but the rhetoric is all that seems to matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 May, 2015, 03:48:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 May, 2015, 12:41:58 PM
Why would anyone be baffled that gay people would want to vote for a political party that wants to control immigration and to leave the European Union.

Because of this sort of thing:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-25793358
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 May, 2015, 04:02:18 PM
Or this

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-conference-homophobic-leaflet-claims-5243610

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2015, 04:32:10 PM
It's not that we're baffled why gay people would vote UKIP, we're baffled why anyone with an ounce of sense would vote UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 May, 2015, 04:56:16 PM
Well, I'm baffled why anyone with an ounce of sense would vote for a party that when in government was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.  But, that's just me!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 May, 2015, 05:12:00 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2015, 10:29:39 AM


I was/am simply baffled by the fact that a disproportionate number of my friends on social media (and in real life, now that I think about it) who actively espouse a political stance that I would consider right-wing, up to and including voting UKIP, are gay. I would struggle to support a party of any persuasion if a fundamental part of their platform was the active denigration, the vilification, of a basic part of my identity. It seems to me that there's a cognitive dissonance easily of the same order as someone of afro-caribbean origin voting for the BNP.

Jim

I always remember one episode of West Wing where Josh is trying to convince a congressman to vote a particular way.  He finally bursts out with the point that the aforementioned congressman is gay an asks why he would be a member of a party that despises him.

The congressman responds by asking why Josh doesn't join the NRA.  '2 million members.  Get 2 million and 1 opposing members to join then call a vote!'  Undermine what they stand for from the inside.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 06 May, 2015, 05:14:16 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 May, 2015, 04:56:16 PM
Well, I'm baffled why anyone with an ounce of sense would vote for a party that when in government was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.  But, that's just me!
It's not a binary situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2015, 05:30:30 PM
I quite like the idea that the Tories wouldn't have started the Iraq War in the same way I like that Transformers story where they go to an alternate universe where Megatron is a hero.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 May, 2015, 06:07:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 May, 2015, 04:56:16 PM
Well, I'm baffled why anyone with an ounce of sense would vote for a party that when in government was responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.  But, that's just me!

The second Iraq War was wrong, and the UK should definitely not have gotten involved. Both Labour and the Tories backed it, and were wrong to do so.

Having said that... Iraq is not a reason to vote UKIP. Iraq is not even a reason to boycott Labour. Iraq is a reason to retain the monarchy, and thus ensure we never have to suffer under President Blair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 May, 2015, 06:11:12 PM
Get out and vote boys and girls. Preferably Labour, Green or anything but UKIP/Conservative/Lib Dem....I swear to Christ, another 5 years of looking at those self entitled; self serving; smug, callous fucks is more than I can bear. And if you don't you'll probably have some neanderthal zealot from the DUP influencing how you and your loved ones live. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 07:02:17 PM
It's so sad to see intelligent people everywhere indulging in this foolish and toxic superstition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 May, 2015, 07:25:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 07:02:17 PM
It's so sad to see intelligent people everywhere indulging in this foolish and toxic superstition.

I appreciate the fact that you don't agree with Voting but if everyone took that stance then eventually, I believe, the right to Vote would be taken away and we would be governed by a Fucking Dictatorship. And I'm sure you wouldn't want that.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2015, 07:26:08 PM
The fools - fancy believing that they have a say in their own lives!  Everyone knows the way you change things is by standing outside the democratic process doing nothing.  That's how slavery went away and women got the vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 07:44:48 PM
If everyone took my stance, there would be nobody left to be a dictator.
.
Women got the vote because voting is irrelevant and the "authority" society worships deigned to allow it. Slavery never went away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 07:47:18 PM
Purely on the basis of the single issue of the NHS, this election is a massive deal. Either the NHS will survive or it won't. If it doesn't, the future will almost certainly be a US-style system that means you'll be fucked if you don't have insurance. That alone is reason enough to vote tomorrow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 May, 2015, 07:50:40 PM
That. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:04:47 PM
And you can envisage no other options than the ones offered by your masters? How about locally controlled medical services, run by local administrators, doctors and nurses you know and trust, tailored to local requirements and funded by locally created, social money?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 08:16:28 PM
"funded by locally created, social money?"

The NHS works and is affordable primarily because of economies of scale. How would your system be funded, so healthcare is effectively free at the point of use? (And if it isn't, you're back to a US-style system where people are bankrupted because they have a heart attack or break some limbs.)

We need bigger nationalised systems, not smaller and fragmented ones, but the politics and accountability needs to be more local.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2015, 08:18:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:04:47 PM
And you can envisage no other options than the ones offered by your masters? How about locally controlled medical services, run by local administrators, doctors and nurses you know and trust, tailored to local requirements and funded by locally created, social money?

Not what's on offer. Right now, you have two choices: the ones IndigoPrime just outlined. I know you'd like to wave a magic wand and erect entirely new socio-political structures, but that's not going to happen.

Right now, one of two people will be the next Prime Minister: David Cameron, who is ideologically committed to the end of the NHS as a state-funded provider of care, funded by general taxation and free at the point of use, or Ed Miliband, who isn't.

If you don't vote, you get to complain about what happens to the NHS over the next five years.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:32:34 PM
Social money would allow all healthcare (including dentistry, prescriptions, opticians, etc.) to be free. That's what social money does - it works for society and not, as is currently the case with private money, the other way around.
.
No magic wand is required for this - only the signature of the Prime Minister (if you want to carry on with such a position) or the will of the people. There is no need whatsoever to choose only "what's on offer." I mean, look at the people offering it. It's like me saying to you "I can punch you in the nose for a fiver or I can punch you in the throat for free. Choose one or the other." If I made you this offer, you'd quite rightly tell me to piss off.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 May, 2015, 08:37:26 PM
At which point you get punched in the throat and mugged.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:39:49 PM
Exactly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:40:17 PM
DP - sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 06 May, 2015, 08:42:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 07:44:48 PM
If everyone took my stance, there would be nobody left to be a dictator.

I would only be pretending to take your stance, in order to seize power after democracy had been abolished.

Sorry about the NHS, education and social security budgets guys, but my Imperial Space Fleet isn't going to build itself for free.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:49:45 PM
In that case, I bags the position of Darth Shark...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 May, 2015, 08:57:26 PM
I didn't mean you you, Shark, I meant the folk you were offering to wallop would probably end up getting punched in the throat anyway and potentially end up even worse off. At least they would if you acted like one of them politicaltician types.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 09:08:33 PM
Damn. And I do so enjoy punching people and stealing their money. :-D
.
Vote Shark for violent crime! Heh.
.
Seriously, though, I think you're right there, M.I.K.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 09:09:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:32:34 PM
Social money would allow all healthcare (including dentistry, prescriptions, opticians, etc.) to be free. That's what social money does - it works for society and not, as is currently the case with private money, the other way around.
I have literally no idea what you're talking about now. What specifically do you mean by 'social money'? Are you talking about local taxation that is then spent specifically on local healthcare? If that's the case and you end up with a ton of little fiefdoms, you lose the economy of scale that makes the NHS work. At best, you end up with a system colossally more expensive to people (via NI or direct payments) than what we have now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 May, 2015, 09:11:29 PM
what if you want to vote for a party and there isn't a candidate in my ward?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 09:15:50 PM
1. Vote tactically for the next best option.
2. Consider a 'vote swap', such as this one for Labour/Green: http://voteswap.org
3. Spoil your ballot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 06 May, 2015, 09:15:58 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 06 May, 2015, 09:11:29 PM
what if you want to vote for a party and there isn't a candidate in my ward?

Constituency, not ward.

And yer stuffed. Vote for one of them standing - or stand for those you support next time!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 06 May, 2015, 09:20:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 09:15:50 PM
1. Vote tactically for the next best option.
2. Consider a 'vote swap', such as this one for Labour/Green: http://voteswap.org
3. Spoil your ballot.

Please not 3!

As someone who counts the votes this does nothing but annoy and slow down the tired folks sorting the papers..!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 May, 2015, 09:21:26 PM
see, a flaw in t'system we should have just a system where we can just vote the party we want and leave the constituancies for a later date especially as we have two people each for the big two in one ward and two of them are married!

  i'll draw a dredd head instead stating democracy don't work,vote the judges!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 09:30:16 PM
I.P., social money is money created by social institutions (local banks, credit unions, etc.), interest-free, and spent into society. Private money (which we currently use) is money created by private institutions (global and national banks), at interest, and lent into society.
.
I have posted on this issue many times on this thread. If you don't want to hunt through all my previous posts to read what I've written (and, let's face it, who would?), you might find this link (http://www.positivemoney.org/) useful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2015, 09:58:59 PM
Surely it's far more sensible for the banks to just create money when they need it?  Wouldn't that have stopped the financial crisis from happening?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 10:51:03 PM
Good question, Bear. I'll do my best to answer it as clearly as I can. In reality, the process of money creation is quite convoluted but I'll explain in simple terms in the interests of clarity. I'll also focus on the banks/government relationship, because of the election, but the same basic process applies to a single person's or a business's (or any third party's) relationship with any bank.
.
The government needs £10M to build a hospital. The private bank creates £10M on an Excel spreadsheet and lends it to the government. The government spends that £10M on building the hospital.
.
The bank wants paying back. The bank wants the initial £10M plus interest of say, £1M (for ease of reckoning in this example). So, the bank wants £11M. The only way the government can get this money is through taxes. The £10M can be recovered because it was initially created and exists in the system. However, and this is the truly toxic part, the £1M the banks want in interest was never created - it simply doesn't exist.
.
The government must find this extra £1M from somewhere and so it must either raise tax rates, cut spending, impose fines and levies, borrow more money or sell off public utilities to find it.
.
If building the hospital using this privately created, interest-bearing money was a one-off then society as a whole could cover the debt. However, as soon as this cycle begins in earnest, it can never stop. The government borrows from these private banks to pay for everything. It becomes like trying to bail-out a leaky boat with a too-small bucket; the government can never catch up and eventually finds itself owing more than can ever be repaid because there is simply not enough money in the system.
.
Now, let's take the same scenario, the government needing £10M to build a hospital, but this time allow the government to create its own money. The government creates £10M and spends it on building the hospital.
.
That's it. There's no need for this money to be paid back and no interest charge.
.
The only pitfall is that too much money might then find its way into the economy. If the government created money irresponsibly then society would be awash with the stuff and it would lose its value. (Diametrically opposite to the debt which is currently sinking our country under the present system.)
.
This is, again, where taxes come in but at a much lower rate. Where governments create their own money, taxes become a kind of pressure valve on the economy; if there's too little money in the economy taxes fall and money creation rises and if there's too much taxes rise and money creation eases off.
.
Taxes also become, in this scenario, a kind of 'pump' redistributing money to where it is needed most.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2015, 11:46:28 PM
Right, so that's similar to Green policy on rethinking banking, but it still doesn't address my query to you about how this would work with localism. Say this thinking was practiced in Council A. Are Council A's people and institutions expiated to fund local medical care in its entirety? How would this be remotely balanced, given the gulf between regions of the UK regarding income, amount/size of local business/institutions? How would you foresee buying power from local institutions working for medical care, compared to a fully nationwide service?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 07 May, 2015, 12:18:40 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2015, 08:04:47 PM
And you can envisage no other options than the ones offered by your masters? How about locally controlled medical services, run by local administrators, doctors and nurses you know and trust, tailored to local requirements and funded by locally created, social money?
Your recent yen for localism is one I find baffling. Are you basically saying here that public health should be at the mercy of whether or not someone in the same street chose to study medicine instead of law? What if I don't know any doctors? What if I move to a new city and don't know who to trust? What about important national programmes like, say, vaccination? What about specialisation? What about the geographical imbalance of city vs country?

Doesn't get any better if you apply it to civic/political life either. Just means small-minded parochialism in my view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 07:57:11 AM
Here's the whole problem with our system boiled down to two posts - you expect me to sort it all out for you instead of creating your own solutions. This kind of lazy thinking, this abdication of your own intelligence and judgement to a handful of distant MPs, is what has led us to the mess we're in today. Voters are rabid about 'making their voices heard' but when I suggest a system where their voices actually count, they run a mile.
.
Local. NHS solutions might involve running local practices, dentists and small cottage or micro-hospitals yourselves, through your local elected councils. This does not preclude larger, regional or even national facilities which could quite easily be both independent and networked.
.
The same is true of local, regional or national banks.
.
If you don't know who to trust; find out! If nobody down your street wants to be a doctor, nurse or specialist - recruit from somewhere else - just as happens today.
.
Local management in no way effects regional, national or even global cooperation. What it does do is bring your own powers, freedoms and responsibilities to the fore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 May, 2015, 08:28:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 07:57:11 AM
Here's the whole problem with our system boiled down to two posts - you expect me to sort it all out for you instead of creating your own solutions.

I would like to formally state that I do not expect TLS to come up with any solutions.

However, I'm not at all sure that expecting him to do so is the whole problem with our political system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 07 May, 2015, 08:33:22 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 07 May, 2015, 12:18:40 AM
Your recent yen for localism is one I find baffling...

Doesn't get any better if you apply it to civic/political life either. Just means small-minded parochialism in my view.

The thing is how far do you extend that logic. Nationally, as in our current nation, federally across Europe? I'm a big fan of coming together and more pertinently staying together. The thinking you recognise there appeals to so many who wish to split up into smaller groups that are easier to understand and where some perceive they are able to define themselves and there is less compromise as to who they are.

We're all getting to be a big sticky lumpy mess of humanity as technology refuses to allow us to hide behind either natural, or cartographic barriers, its seems a hard change for many to embrace...

...more importantly what the hell am I doing posting in the Political Thread, this only leads to pointless squabbling... I'm off to hide behind my self imposed barrier again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 08:54:04 AM
Like the Shark, I'm something of an idealistic anarchist; and believe that most people in government are self-serving egotists with little regard for the good of their people.  But like I always say, democracy is choosing the best of the pricks, which is always better than choosing the worst of them. 
The UK is not my country, of course, but if it was up to me, I'd choose an NHS over no NHS every time.  And anyone who'd vote Tory because Labour supported the Iraq war really doesn't know their party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 09:05:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 07:57:11 AM
Here's the whole problem with our system boiled down to two posts - you expect me to sort it all out for you instead of creating your own solutions. This kind of lazy thinking, this abdication of your own intelligence and judgement to a handful of distant MPs, is what has led us to the mess we're in today. Voters are rabid about 'making their voices heard' but when I suggest a system where their voices actually count, they run a mile.

Your response is both patronising and pompous and does you no favours, Shark. You sit there, fantasising 'solutions' that will simply never happen, all the while criticising people who accept that, no matter how imperfect they find the current situation, the current situation is what they have to deal with and the only 'solutions' that matter a damn begin from recognising the real world.

Your 'getting punched' example is a perfect illustration of this: in one respect, you're right, it's an unappealing choice. You're being asked "Would you rather be shot in the head or shot in the foot?" What you seem incapable of recognising is that you're going to get shot no matter what, there are no other options.

The problem is that you think you're being clever when you reply "Aha! But I'd rather have cake!" ...except that there is no fucking cake. It's not on the menu. There's only getting shot. You can ask why there are no other options; you can assert (usually speciously) that there's no good reason why there aren't other options; but none of that changes the fact that you will still be shot in either the foot or the head and there's a chance —albeit a tenuous one— that actively opting for foot will mean that you avoid being shot in the head. Of course, you may only get shot in the foot if you do nothing, but only because the rest of us have made a concerted effort to engage with the process and push for the least bad option.

In the abstract, I can admire your determination to consider only the best (in your opinion) options, but the reality is that rest of us have to knuckle down and grapple our way to a decision that reflects the least bad option and that is neither an abdication of responsibility, nor lazy thinking.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 09:08:44 AM
I didn't mean that expecting me to come up with solutions is the problem, or expecting others to come up with them is the problem either. Many people have solutions, both good and bad. My problem is with the blanket imposition of these solutions. I credit you all with the intelligence to choose which solutions you think are correct and to implement them for yourselves. You're not dumb idiots or mindless sheep, though you seem to have no problem supporting a system that treats you so, but thoughtful and intelligent beings. You don't need 'elected representatives' to do your thinking and imposition for you.
.
This is not to say that the whole system should be destroyed - there are many useful systems already in place (NHS, Civil Service, fire brigade, police, Highways Agency, etc., etc.) - but we should be electing people to manage these systems not control them. You control them and the people we elect should simply help to run them properly and nothing more. We should be electing true public servants but we are not - we (well, not me) are electing rulers.
.
If I were prime minister, I would issue one law, "cause loss, harm or damage to no-one; honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings,". I'd authorise social money creation then I'd abolish parliament, set up elections for managers of the various public services (including banking), and then step down and leave you all to it.
.
You don't need any leader to do more than that. You're all perfectly capable of leading and organising your own lives and communities. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 07 May, 2015, 09:14:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 07:57:11 AM
Here's the whole problem with our system boiled down to two posts - you expect me to sort it all out for you instead of creating your own solutions. This kind of lazy thinking, this abdication of your own intelligence and judgement to a handful of distant MPs, is what has led us to the mess we're in today. Voters are rabid about 'making their voices heard' but when I suggest a system where their voices actually count, they run a mile.
In other words, you're a busy guy and don't have time to think about the details. I'm not really sure how it's my responsibility to think through the ramifications or possible solutions to your hair-brained pronouncements.

To rephrase this whole quoted paragraph for you: you're just in the line of dispensing koans from your mountaintop and we lucky disciples should spend the requisite time meditating upon the details until we are afforded the same blinding flash of enlightenment as you?


Edit: what Jim said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 09:24:41 AM
The question "would you rather be shot in the head or the foot" automatically assumes the agency offering that 'choice' has the moral right to do so and, by extension, suggests that certain people have the right to rule over others. In my view, they do not.
.
And if cake isn't on the menu presented by these agencies, bake your own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 09:45:46 AM
Cosh, no. In other words, I have no right to tell you how to live your life. Nor does anyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 09:46:04 AM
Cosh, no. In other words, I have no right to tell you how to live your life. Nor does anyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2015, 10:03:39 AM
So, I'm still undecided. I have just four candidates to choose from here in Crewe & Nantwich and Judge Dredd has told me to vote, so I can't abstain. To summarise my thoughts...

Tories. My tax has come down significantly, and the NHS has treated us well, countering many arguments against them. Business leaders and the markets seem to prefer them. But I don't like how they equate wealth with fairness, and there seems to be a general lack of compassion in their outlook – surely I'm not just voting from a selfish point of view, but for the betterment of the country (and the people in it) as a whole. The local candidate seems okay, and replied to a recent letter, albeit his response was fairly useless. George Osborne didn't reply to a letter. I've not seen any Tories campaigning which smacks of complacency, and there aren't any cool people urging me to vote Tory.

Labour. The idea of Ed Milliband and Ed Balls running the country is terrifying to me – I can't imagine either of them achieving anything in a professional capacity in the real world. I like Labour's old socialist values, but they're long gone and all I've heard this time is that they're about hard-working families and saving the NHS, but under the last Labour government my taxes were higher and they burdened the NHS with lots of PFI debts. The stock-market seems to have gone down as the chance of Labour getting a majority has increased, and I think they want to raise Corporation Tax, which as a small business, I find unacceptable already. I don't like the idea of a coalition with the SNP, although – admittedly – they've ruled that out. Labour are the only party who've actually come to our house and tried to talk to me, which I appreciate, although I confess I was a bit rude as the lady tried to accost me as I was struggling to get our crying baby out of the car. Lots of people I like and respect – including many creative types, musicians, people on here and the majority of people in my Twitter feed – are urging people to vote Labour. The local candidate is a doctor which has advantages, but he is a little underwhelming imho.

Lib Dems. I like Nick Clegg and think he has been unfairly scape-goated over Tuition Fees (it's not like the Lib Dems won last time, after all). I've voted Lib Dem before, but we're in what has according to polls become a Tory/Labour marginal, so I don't want to 'waste' my vote this time.

UKIP. I confess I kind of like Nigel Farage, even though I don't like or agree with what he says (if that makes sense!) But, no.

So, just four to choose from. No Green candidate, no Left Unity (http://leftunity.org/) candidate (sadly), and no Independents, which I think is a huge shame as even if their policies aren't entirely convincing one can respect their drive and ambition (as long as they're not too extreme).

It's not like a favourite band I'm passionate about, where I want to wave a flag and run around telling everybody how cool they are. There's no candidate or party whose t-shirt I want to wear – there's no-one I actively want to vote for. But I don't want to not vote, nor spoil my paper. So, I've got 12 hours left to decide, but whichever way I choose, sadly, it will be with some reluctance.

Maybe next time I'll stand myself...(!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 10:36:20 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2015, 10:03:39 AM
Labour. The idea of Ed Milliband and Ed Balls running the country is terrifying to me – I can't imagine either of them achieving anything in a professional capacity in the real world.

I feel broadly similar myself. However, I've boiled it down to NHS/No NHS. That's not scaremongering: that's a basic fact of political ideology. Healthcare will still cost billions and, while the service is being privatised piecemeal, those billions will disappear behind the cloak of 'commercial confidentiality' and we will have literally no idea how that money is being spent. In the end, 'NHS' will become state-backed insurance system competing in a health 'market' with private insurance schemes and all actual provision will be done by private companies.*

I felt no pride making my X this morning but, as I say, least bad option.

Cheers

Jim

*Except the expensive, unprofitable stuff, which the tax payer will probably still end up directly footing the bill for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 11:04:12 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 09:08:44 AM
If I were prime minister, I would issue one law, "cause loss, harm or damage to no-one; honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings,". I'd authorise social money creation then I'd abolish parliament, set up elections for managers of the various public services (including banking), and then step down and leave you all to it.


That's the thing, though, Sharky - it's an 'if...would' situation, thus a hypothesis. I would do something very similar if I were prime minister.  But the reality is I'm not; I can't be; and thus I have to work with the tools I have, flawed though they may be.

There is a referendum on gay marriage coming up very soon in my country - do you vote in referendums (referenda?), Sharky?  I do not support my government; I have always voted against them; but I believe very strongly in equality and am not going to ignore this referendum because they put it in place.

The system is fucked, I'm not denying that, but in the short term, what's the alternative?  A coup? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2015, 11:08:59 AM
I'm not terrified of Ed Milliband running the country, as all this negative propaganda has simply underlined that he's human and malleable when it comes to policy, as opposed to an intractable lizard-thing from space that wears the skin of a human but never quite convinces you of the illusion.

Also I couldn't wrap my head around why his Sad Keanu-ing his way through a sarnie was that big a deal until someone suggested that drawing attention to his eating pork was just a way to remind people of Ed's Jewish heritage, "which he is betraying" kind of thing.  I would normally consider this a bit of a stretch, but I genuinely wouldn't put anything past the Murdoch press these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 11:26:46 AM
Balls is a cretin, but no worse than George Osborne, who I wouldn't trust to manage a piggy lank. I think Miliband's all right, though. But then you're not voting for individuals: you're voting for a local representative, who'll also likely be whipped into voting for policy in a party's manifesto.

On personal taxes, I always find them a bit of a red herring. My taxes could go down under a Tory government, but as a self-employed person, I'd sooner the NHS exists. Otherwise I'll be paying less tax but end up with a second mortgage-sized hole in my bank account every month as a US system takes hold. Also, higher taxes for the more wealthy can be used to take people who have less out of the system entirely. Trickle down is bullshit, but the reverse has a net boost to the economy has many more people suddenly find themselves with the means to pay for things.

As for Clegg, I like him on telly (he was great both times on the Last Leg), but he can get fucked for his scaremongering over the SNP, and his recent arguments that a Labour minority government would not be legitimate if it had fewer seats than the Conservatives. He bloody well knows the way the UK parliament works, and it has NOTHING to do with seat count if you don't have a majority—it's about the confidence of the house. Hell, his own party's history found that out last century.

I would say that the Liberal Democrat manifesto was broadly very good, and far stronger than Labour's. But we don't get to see that party because of Orange Bookers taking over. Still, had we got what we voted for last time round (http://reverttosaved.com/2010/05/08/uk-2010-general-election-what-you-voted-for-and-what-you-got/), Lab/Lib would have been viable and interesting. Alas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 11:34:51 AM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2015, 10:03:39 AM
So, I'm still undecided. I have just four candidates to choose from here in Crewe & Nantwich and Judge Dredd has told me to vote, so I can't abstain. To summarise my thoughts...

http://democraticdashboard.com/constituency/crewe-and-nantwich/

Seems a rather tough race in your constituency there Banners - hmmmm, not a lot of choice! I think forming your own party would be pretty healthy for the area, it needs an alternative!

The whole election lark is an interesting one - with everyone there seems to different amounts of it they are willing to swallow. I've said previously the only real option with the second hung parliament election in as many years is to open up the voting a bit more - whether through PR or some other means orsumfink (see - I'm at least open about not having thought-out a proper solution) but the first-past-the-post-system is clearly archaic and encourages deep apathy and indifference. No system that can't change will work forever.

Aaaanyway - I'm lucky to be in a very active constituency with lots of super-engaged folk and the Greens even have a relatively strong shot against brilliantly-named Labour candidate THANGAM DEBONNAIRE. So today I'm going to be voting Green - and knowing that by doing so I'm not "wasting my vote" or "leaving the door open" for anyone worse than Thangam who seems alright and plays the motherfucking cello.

HOWEVER - many folk nationally are in Banners or Jim's position where they just have a few local candidates and it boils down to the binary "blue or red" choice - plumping for the least bad thing. Which has never seemed very democratic to me. So whatever happens tomorrow I hope that nationally there is a re-think of how the system actually engages individuals in the street who are, y'know, meant to be the people being represented.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 11:39:45 AM
There is no wasted vote. Say 5% vote Green and they get one seat. Then 5% vote SNP but they get 50. 15% vote UKIP and they get maybe three. The calls for electoral reform will become a cacophony that even Lab/Con cannot ignore. Well, hopefully.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 11:41:45 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 11:34:51 AM
So whatever happens tomorrow I hope that nationally there is a re-think of how the system actually engages individuals in the street who are, y'know, meant to be the people being represented.

I strongly suspect that this may be the last general election we see under first past the post — whatever government we end up with, it's going to bear so little resemblance to how people have actually voted that the current system may have to be written off as unsustainable.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 11:44:36 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 11:39:45 AM
15% vote UKIP and they get maybe three.

A similar number vote LibDem and they get about thirty.

I agree. I don't think the current system will stand.

Tangent: independent Scotland within ten years, I reckon. rUK leaving the EU too close to call.

And yet the election has hinged on bashing benefit scroungers, immigration and who looks least like a twat eating a bacon cob.

This is what happens when politics is led by focus groups and not leaders.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 11:49:09 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 11:44:36 AM
And yet the election has hinged on bashing benefit scroungers, immigration and who looks least like a twat eating a bacon cob.

This is what happens when politics is led by focus groups and not leaders.

And there we have a great election quote of the day!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 May, 2015, 11:55:08 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 11:41:45 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 11:34:51 AM
So whatever happens tomorrow I hope that nationally there is a re-think of how the system actually engages individuals in the street who are, y'know, meant to be the people being represented.

I strongly suspect that this may be the last general election we see under first past the post

Indeed - an alternative system was never going to happen when the two top parties were just swapping power every few years, but if, as the pollsters predict, we're going to get hung results almost permanently from now on, they'll quickly change their tune. We must beware though -they will ONLY support whatever system they think is going to keep them in power, however fair or unfair it may be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 11:59:08 AM
JBC, you're absolutely correct. I will never be prime minister for three (at least) very good reasons. Firstly, I don't want to be and even running for office would be against my personal beliefs. Secondly, nobody would vote for me. Thirdly, the changes I'd want to implement would be too drastic to undertake all at once - there would be panic, mistrust and unrest. The changes I'd like to see must be introduced gradually, from the bottom up. The people must first realise their own power and learn to use it properly and wisely - which is still a huge ask but necessary none the less.
.
To your second point; no, I would not vote in a referendum for anything, including gay rights. I don't believe in gay rights (cue gasps of horror). I don't believe in straight rights, either. Nor do I believe in women's rights, men's rights, children's rights, adults' rights or seniors' rights. I believe in human rights. Period.
.
The problem, in my view, of voting for gay rights is no different from voting for a political party. What the voter is doing is begging the people who believe themselves to be the final arbiters of which rights we can and cannot have for more. I know what my rights are - I was born with them, just like everyone else. I don't have the right to tell anyone else what their rights are (except visitors to my own home; my home, my rules) and nobody, not even a prime minister, president or monarch, has the right to tell me what my rights are. A referendum requesting more rights is nothing of the sort - it's simply a request for privileges; Oliver Twist with his bowl asking politely for more.
.
If a person wants to discriminate against certain people in their personal lives then that's up to them; but that person has no right whatsoever to expect the rest of society to condone or agree.
.
Rights, just like charity and freedom, begin at home. They cannot be endowed or removed by anyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grey M@a on 07 May, 2015, 12:39:02 PM
Quote from: Banners on 07 May, 2015, 10:03:39 AM
So, I'm still undecided. I have just four candidates to choose from here in Crewe & Nantwich and Judge Dredd has told me to vote, so I can't abstain. To summarise my thoughts...

Tories. My tax has come down significantly, and the NHS has treated us well, countering many arguments against them. Business leaders and the markets seem to prefer them. But I don't like how they equate wealth with fairness, and there seems to be a general lack of compassion in their outlook – surely I'm not just voting from a selfish point of view, but for the betterment of the country (and the people in it) as a whole. The local candidate seems okay, and replied to a recent letter, albeit his response was fairly useless. George Osborne didn't reply to a letter. I've not seen any Tories campaigning which smacks of complacency, and there aren't any cool people urging me to vote Tory.

Labour. The idea of Ed Milliband and Ed Balls running the country is terrifying to me – I can't imagine either of them achieving anything in a professional capacity in the real world. I like Labour's old socialist values, but they're long gone and all I've heard this time is that they're about hard-working families and saving the NHS, but under the last Labour government my taxes were higher and they burdened the NHS with lots of PFI debts. The stock-market seems to have gone down as the chance of Labour getting a majority has increased, and I think they want to raise Corporation Tax, which as a small business, I find unacceptable already. I don't like the idea of a coalition with the SNP, although – admittedly – they've ruled that out. Labour are the only party who've actually come to our house and tried to talk to me, which I appreciate, although I confess I was a bit rude as the lady tried to accost me as I was struggling to get our crying baby out of the car. Lots of people I like and respect – including many creative types, musicians, people on here and the majority of people in my Twitter feed – are urging people to vote Labour. The local candidate is a doctor which has advantages, but he is a little underwhelming imho.

Lib Dems. I like Nick Clegg and think he has been unfairly scape-goated over Tuition Fees (it's not like the Lib Dems won last time, after all). I've voted Lib Dem before, but we're in what has according to polls become a Tory/Labour marginal, so I don't want to 'waste' my vote this time.

UKIP. I confess I kind of like Nigel Farage, even though I don't like or agree with what he says (if that makes sense!) But, no.

So, just four to choose from. No Green candidate, no Left Unity (http://leftunity.org/) candidate (sadly), and no Independents, which I think is a huge shame as even if their policies aren't entirely convincing one can respect their drive and ambition (as long as they're not too extreme).

It's not like a favourite band I'm passionate about, where I want to wave a flag and run around telling everybody how cool they are. There's no candidate or party whose t-shirt I want to wear – there's no-one I actively want to vote for. But I don't want to not vote, nor spoil my paper. So, I've got 12 hours left to decide, but whichever way I choose, sadly, it will be with some reluctance.

Maybe next time I'll stand myself...(!)

Banners, I firmly agree with what you have said, I do have a Green candidate in the Tynemouth area and they are one of the parties that would stand in the way of the TTIP which would hopefully help our public services not becoming an eBay bidding war for private investors.

Issue I have is I am in one of those safe seats for Labour, it has been Lib Dem and Cons once in the last 20 years but always mainly Labour.

I am still undecided, do I vote with the Greens who have a lot of good policies but some I don't agree with, or do I chuck it at one of the main parties and hope it helps with aiming towards a majority.

Personally I think we will all be back at the polls on November, rinse and repeat until either people mass vote to stop the polls or turn out is so low it barely matters. At present with way the system works, you could have the likes of Greens with 5% of the vote and get a seat, then other parties with 5% overall vote but numerous seats (especially in the case of SNP etc) hopefully the system will be reformed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2015, 12:48:45 PM
Sitting on your arse saying things should be different has not changed anything ever.  "They're all the same and voting just encourages them" is a great Billy Connolly joke for 1982, but not an actual plan for 2015.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 11:59:08 AM
If a person wants to discriminate against certain people in their personal lives then that's up to them; but that person has no right whatsoever to expect the rest of society to condone or agree.

Right - let me see if I've got this bang to rights - your right (if I'm right) is to write what you think is right in terms of rights. But that us (if this is right) may also rightly write what we think is right such as: in the right light it might look slightly fighty to imply that gay rights aren't rightly as importantly as "human rights".

Which is bollocks. Frankly. IMO obvs m8.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 01:39:07 PM
Quote from: Bear on 07 May, 2015, 12:48:45 PM
Sitting on your arse saying things should be different has not changed anything ever.  "They're all the same and voting just encourages them" is a great Billy Connolly joke for 1982, but not an actual plan for 2015.

Well, quite - to quote Noam Chomsky (a self-professed anarchist):  'People live and suffer and endure in this word, not in some world we imagine; and all the means available should be used to safeguard and benefit them, even if the long-term goal is to displace these devices and construct preferable alternatives.'

Gay people should have equal rights in my country, but in the current framework they don't.  I'm voting because as it stands, they have fewer benefits than others, financially and otherwise.

In the same way, political prisoners and repressed minorities abroad should have equal rights and freedoms to other people, and in an ideal world they would.  But as it stands they are imprisoned and repressed, and thus there is a need to act in their interests even if it is only through lobbying and donating (and before you ask, yes, but not nearly as much as I know I ought to do).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 May, 2015, 01:54:47 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 11:59:08 AM
If a person wants to discriminate against certain people in their personal lives then that's up to them; but that person has no right whatsoever to expect the rest of society to condone or agree.

Right - let me see if I've got this bang to rights - your right (if I'm right) is to write what you think is right in terms of rights. But that us (if this is right) may also rightly write what we think is right such as: in the right light it might look slightly fighty to imply that gay rights aren't rightly as importantly as "human rights".

Which is bollocks. Frankly. IMO obvs m8.

I just assumed that Sharky's Human Rights include the right to do whatever type of consensual sex you want without fear of discrimination.  So his gay rights (and every other type of right) are built into his right for all humans to be treated the same and just as important.  But this was just my reading of what it - and may also be bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 01:55:42 PM
Quote from: Grey M@a on 07 May, 2015, 12:39:02 PMI am still undecided, do I vote with the Greens who have a lot of good policies but some I don't agree with, or do I chuck it at one of the main parties and hope it helps with aiming towards a majority.
Depends how safe the seat is. If it's knife-edge, I'd go Labour; if it's unlikely to swing towards Conservative, go Green if you think the party largely aligns with your own beliefs. (Having read the manifestos, I'd say the Green one has some issues but was broadly impressive. Labour's was comparatively meek and disappointing, but I'd sooner have Miliband in #10 than Cameron.)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 11:59:08 AMWhat the voter is doing is begging the people who believe themselves to be the final arbiters of which rights we can and cannot have for more.
It's collective decision-making, but said decisions are made purely by those who vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 07 May, 2015, 02:08:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 11:41:45 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 11:34:51 AM
So whatever happens tomorrow I hope that nationally there is a re-think of how the system actually engages individuals in the street who are, y'know, meant to be the people being represented.

I strongly suspect that this may be the last general election we see under first past the post — whatever government we end up with, it's going to bear so little resemblance to how people have actually voted that the current system may have to be written off as unsustainable.

Cheers

Jim

I'd agree except that the only people who could pull it down are the people who directly benefit from not doing so - if we arent going to take to the streets over something like the Bedroom Tax, and are sleep walking into mass privatisation of just about everything including the previously sacrosanct NHS, what hope of a big enough popular protest on what to a lot of voters is a side issue? It's not to me, but we had a coalition with a party whose principle appeal was PR - how did that go and how much closer are we to it after they have "been sharing in the power"? *stifles snigger*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 07 May, 2015, 02:30:23 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 01:55:42 PM
Quote from: Grey M@a on 07 May, 2015, 12:39:02 PMI am still undecided, do I vote with the Greens who have a lot of good policies but some I don't agree with, or do I chuck it at one of the main parties and hope it helps with aiming towards a majority.
Depends how safe the seat is. If it's knife-edge, I'd go Labour; if it's unlikely to swing towards Conservative, go Green if you think the party largely aligns with your own beliefs. (Having read the manifestos, I'd say the Green one has some issues but was broadly impressive. Labour's was comparatively meek and disappointing, but I'd sooner have Miliband in #10 than Cameron.)


This was broadly the tack I was going for. I was going to vote Green in the belief (however misguided) that the greater their percentage of the vote the more chance they'd push Labour back towards the left a little. In the way UKIP have dragged the Tories further right. As it happens I live in Cleggies constituency (posh Yorkshire!) and its looking too much of a close thing and so voted Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 02:50:29 PM
Yes, Tips, that's what I meant.
.
I.P., like the collective decision the voters made to bomb Iraq?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 03:22:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 02:50:29 PM
.
I.P., like the collective decision the voters made to bomb Iraq?

Point.  </Preacher>

Doesn't change my views about voting, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
Just and FYI, Shark, as a straight cis-man you don't get a say in matters related in sexual or gender identity. The 'it's OK to be gay' mantra spouted by straight people, ignoring bi, pan or aro orientations, is so disgusstingly self gratifying and arrogant. We know it's OK, it's straight people who need to learn it's OK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 04:01:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 03:22:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 02:50:29 PM
.
I.P., like the collective decision the voters made to bomb Iraq?
Point.  </Preacher>
Not really, unless I somehow missed a referendum on the decision to invade Iraq.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 04:19:16 PM
Hawks, I know that. Other people's sexual orientation is none of my concern or anyone else's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 May, 2015, 04:22:39 PM
There was a big sign in our polling station that said no photos to be taken inside! Looked like the normal turnout, from looking at the names crossed out on the pad, as we passed over our cards.

It's gonna be extremely close in my town between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats. I'm wondering if the Liberals have done enough to squeeze the Tories out. Pity I'm not at work, as I enjoy listening to the results come in but not enough to stay up on my time off :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 07 May, 2015, 04:26:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
The 'it's OK to be gay' mantra spouted by straight people... is so disgusstingly self gratifying and arrogant. We know it's OK, it's straight people who need to learn it's OK.

Surely it isn't the 'gay' community who are being targeted by those well-meaning folk who say 'It's alright to be gay', but those people who don't think it's okay?

Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
Just and FYI, Shark, as a straight cis-man you don't get a say in matters related in sexual or gender identity...

Hmm... Not so sure about that, Hawk. Isn't it a bit like saying I'm not allowed to have an opinion on whether the Holocaust was bad because I'm not Jewish? Or the recently-reported anti-racism rally at a UK University that white males were asked not to attend in a stupefying bit of irony that it must have delighted the Daily Mail no end to report on.

If you only have equality for some, or even say that only certain demographics are allowed an opinion on equality... well, by definition it's not equality, surely? 'All animals are equal but some are more equal than others', to quote Animal Farm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 07 May, 2015, 04:32:13 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
Just and FYI, Shark, as a straight cis-man you don't get a say in matters related in sexual or gender identity. The 'it's OK to be gay' mantra spouted by straight people, ignoring bi, pan or aro orientations, is so disgusstingly self gratifying and arrogant. We know it's OK, it's straight people who need to learn it's OK.

This may be a thread I shouldn't pull at and I may be getting the wrong end of the stick but I don't think that this kind of aggressive ring-fencing of a social issue is at all helpful.
There are plenty of places in the world where any kind of sexual activity (or preference) that isn't between a married man and woman will put you in extreme personal danger. I think the more people that are spreading a message of acceptance, the better. Certainly better than saying what amounts to 'you're straight, so fuck off and mind your own business'.

Apologies if I've misunderstood. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 04:46:48 PM
Appeal to support the Resisting Greek
people and its truth Commission on Public
Debt (http://cadtm.org/Appeal-to-support-the-Resisting)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 04:47:07 PM
Appeal to support the Resisting Greek
people and its truth Commission on Public
Debt (http://cadtm.org/Appeal-to-support-the-Resisting)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 04:51:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 04:01:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2015, 03:22:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 02:50:29 PM
.
I.P., like the collective decision the voters made to bomb Iraq?
Point.  </Preacher>
Not really, unless I somehow missed a referendum on the decision to invade Iraq.

I think that was the Shark's point, no? If I'm not mistaken, he was being ironic. Not every governmental decision is democratic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 May, 2015, 04:58:34 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
Just and FYI, Shark, as a straight cis-man you don't get a say in matters related in sexual or gender identity. The 'it's OK to be gay' mantra spouted by straight people, ignoring bi, pan or aro orientations, is so disgusstingly self gratifying and arrogant. We know it's OK, it's straight people who need to learn it's OK.


i'm old and naïve (obvs) but pan and aro?  do I have to keep you from inappropritness with my wok and bubbly chocolate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 May, 2015, 05:00:57 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 07 May, 2015, 04:32:13 PM
This may be a thread I shouldn't pull at and I may be getting the wrong end of the stick but I don't think that this kind of aggressive ring-fencing of a social issue is at all helpful.
There are plenty of places in the world where any kind of sexual activity (or preference) that isn't between a married man and woman will put you in extreme personal danger. I think the more people that are spreading a message of acceptance, the better. Certainly better than saying what amounts to 'you're straight, so fuck off and mind your own business'.

Good, good. There's a bigger enemy to gay/human rights here. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-hit-with-homophobia-accusations-ahead-of-general-election-over-fags-joke-10230896.html) One who might be in a coalition government soon as well. Yay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grey M@a on 07 May, 2015, 05:11:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 01:55:42 PM
Quote from: Grey M@a on 07 May, 2015, 12:39:02 PMI am still undecided, do I vote with the Greens who have a lot of good policies but some I don't agree with, or do I chuck it at one of the main parties and hope it helps with aiming towards a majority.
Depends how safe the seat is. If it's knife-edge, I'd go Labour; if it's unlikely to swing towards Conservative, go Green if you think the party largely aligns with your own beliefs. (Having read the manifestos, I'd say the Green one has some issues but was broadly impressive. Labour's was comparatively meek and disappointing, but I'd sooner have Miliband in #10 than Cameron.)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 11:59:08 AMWhat the voter is doing is begging the people who believe themselves to be the final arbiters of which rights we can and cannot have for more.
It's collective decision-making, but said decisions are made purely by those who vote.

It's not knife edge in my constituency, it's firmly a Labour seat and has been for years, cons got it several years back but that was short lived.

I think I know who I am voting for and it will be the manifesto I agree with most.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 May, 2015, 05:11:56 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/06/how-to-spoil-your-ballot-paper-general-election-2015_n_7224660.html?utm_hp_ref=tw (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/06/how-to-spoil-your-ballot-paper-general-election-2015_n_7224660.html?utm_hp_ref=tw)

(http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/423586/slide_423586_5444516_free.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 May, 2015, 05:28:59 PM
Well that's the vote cast. Always enjoy voting. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 May, 2015, 05:47:48 PM
What's that second choice column all about?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 May, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
Sorry guys, but i've experienced way to many instances if straught people claiming to be allys to the LGBT community only to make themselves look eligable for a sainthood from soneone. I know not all straight folk are like that, I shouldn't have to point tat out, i'm just sick of the (more than you think) arse holes who think where a fad that needs pandering to rather than being treated as humans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 May, 2015, 10:11:51 PM

FIVE MORE YEARS! Thank fuck nobody needs to stay up all night to find out the result anymore.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 May, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
Sorry guys, but i've experienced way to many instances if straught people claiming to be allys to the LGBT community only to make themselves look eligable for a sainthood from soneone. I know not all straight folk are like that, I shouldn't have to point tat out, i'm just sick of the (more than you think) arse holes who think where a fad that needs pandering to rather than being treated as humans.

OK, so could you please explain how denying someone's opinion on a subject based on their gender and sexuality is treating them like Human Beings?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 May, 2015, 10:15:13 PM
Quote from: Butch on 07 May, 2015, 10:11:51 PM

FIVE MORE YEARS! Thank fuck nobody needs to stay up all night to find out the result anymore.

Depressing as fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 May, 2015, 10:15:44 PM
So it's going to be Tories plus LibDems plus maybe a bit of DUP and/or UKIP for insurance.

Fuck. I mean just FUCK.

If this the country the people want, it's not the country I want.

Jesus.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 07 May, 2015, 10:15:51 PM
Well that's that then. Scotland is officially out of the United Kingdom. I'd like to take this opportunity to say a big cheerio to all my English, Welsh and Northern Irish chums. It's been a fun few centuries. Shame that it had to end this way. Good luck with those Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 07 May, 2015, 10:19:34 PM
Well that's just beyond depressing. I'm shocked, which seems to be the general feeling.

Off to bed in the hope some magic fairies do something overnight which seems about our best hope right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 07 May, 2015, 10:20:28 PM
Jesus fuck. This must be how my parents felt for all of the eighties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 May, 2015, 10:23:12 PM
I blame Russell Brand
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 May, 2015, 10:35:40 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 07 May, 2015, 10:20:28 PM
Jesus fuck. This must be how my parents felt for all of the eighties.



2000AD thrives in such conditions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2015, 10:37:45 PM
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8fI7zm7RXHs/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 May, 2015, 10:38:05 PM
Yep, we're fucked! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 07 May, 2015, 10:43:29 PM
Anybody else drowning their sorrows in Aberdeen? Fuck me I could use some wallowing company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 May, 2015, 10:46:19 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 07 May, 2015, 10:35:40 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 07 May, 2015, 10:20:28 PM
Jesus fuck. This must be how my parents felt for all of the eighties.



2000AD thrives in such conditions.

There's the silver lining.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 May, 2015, 10:46:45 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 07 May, 2015, 05:11:56 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/06/how-to-spoil-your-ballot-paper-general-election-2015_n_7224660.html?utm_hp_ref=tw (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/06/how-to-spoil-your-ballot-paper-general-election-2015_n_7224660.html?utm_hp_ref=tw)

(http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/423586/slide_423586_5444516_free.jpg)

Surely a council election somewhere? I want two votes!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 May, 2015, 10:48:07 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 07 May, 2015, 10:35:40 PM
2000AD thrives in such conditions

... and there was never a soap shortage in Germany between 1942 and 1945. Nobody wanted a Tory victory, but the truth is that Labour did not deserve to win in any way. They're an incompetent and pathetically craven, shambling zombie version of the horror that was New Labour.

They haven't changed at all, and they needed a humiliating failure on this kind of scale to reinforce the message that the Blair schtick isn't working anymore. Maybe now they'll stop trying to claim the centre ground and offer the electorate a genuine alternative, instead of Tory-lite, but I wouldn't bet on it.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 May, 2015, 10:49:55 PM
Seems to me that the Tories have successfully argued a vote for anyone else is a vote for the SNP, so Labour have been disowned across the country.

Still, it's a bit early to tell.

I'm off to bed, so I'll find out in the morning.

Good luck to anyone staying up!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 07 May, 2015, 10:55:35 PM
If anyone's looking for some light relief from a blackly comic vision of a dystopian future, Robocop's on SyFy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 May, 2015, 11:13:06 PM
have heart comrades better the devil you know and at least Gordon brown and tony blair aint nowhere near by ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2015, 11:17:22 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/CEbzW-9WYAANbHE_zpswpfop07k.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 May, 2015, 11:42:56 PM
For exit polls, they ask 22,000 people?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2015, 11:51:35 PM
That exit poll had better be an almighty fuck-up or... good God.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin Zeal on 07 May, 2015, 11:54:10 PM
I feel like the cab driver from Zenith phase IV. "bloody tories have walked it again." Or words to that affect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 12:03:31 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 07 May, 2015, 10:20:28 PM
Jesus fuck. This must be how my parents felt for all of the eighties.

Jim had the quote of the day - this is now the quote of the evening. What, I wonder, will be the quote of tomorrow...

Quote from: TheLegendaryShark on 08 May, 2015, 09:45:39 AM
This is what happens when you eat all the corn they feed you, little chickens. Although don't ask me for an alternative answer because surely... you  already know it.
.
Think about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 12:09:41 AM
When I say I find the numbers unbelievable, I do not mean that figuratively, I mean I find the numbers literally unbelievable.  If the result had been a squeaker, then maybe... but the numbers as they are don't really seem plausible, as if the country had really swung so significantly to the right, UKIP would have done a lot better considering the low-risk campaign the Tories were running.

Eh.  Beer time.  And lots of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin Zeal on 08 May, 2015, 12:16:05 AM
I've run out of beer so I'm going to bed. It's too depressing to watch without alcohol.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 12:27:56 AM
Don't worry, after three results, Labour are in the lead by three!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 01:12:24 AM
It's Labour FOUR, Conservatives TWO now, everybody else ZERO
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 01:29:46 AM
It's now Labour SIX, Conservatives THREE and DUP ONE, everyone else ZERO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 02:15:29 AM
Labour are pulling away (surely it's theirs for the taking) NINE, Conservatives FOUR, DUP THREE, Sinn Fein ONE, Social Democratic & Labour Party ONE and Ulster Unionist Party ONE. Everyone else ZERO.

Must say I'm impressed at the speed of counting over in Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 02:38:38 AM
Goodbye Douglas Alexander enjoy the wilderness :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 03:11:48 AM
I'm bored now! Labour 24, SNP 16, Conservatives 15, blah, blah, blah!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 May, 2015, 05:21:18 AM
Looking at the predictions now.  Tory majority.

Oh S***!

Loved Boris Johnson's - "People have rejected a return to the 1970's" line.  The rebuttal is clear: they've embraced a return to the 1870's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 May, 2015, 06:31:47 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 07 May, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
Sorry guys, but i've experienced way to many instances if straught people claiming to be allys to the LGBT community only to make themselves look eligable for a sainthood from soneone. I know not all straight folk are like that, I shouldn't have to point tat out, i'm just sick of the (more than you think) arse holes who think where a fad that needs pandering to rather than being treated as humans.

OK, so could you please explain how denying someone's opinion on a subject based on their gender and sexuality is treating them like Human Beings?
Until straight people stop thinking that way neither shall LGBT people. Straight people are not an oppressed minority around the world, they have all the privileges we are often denied, don't get upset when we start to not give a fuck what you all think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 May, 2015, 07:16:15 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 08 May, 2015, 06:31:47 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 07 May, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
Sorry guys, but i've experienced way to many instances if straught people claiming to be allys to the LGBT community only to make themselves look eligable for a sainthood from soneone. I know not all straight folk are like that, I shouldn't have to point tat out, i'm just sick of the (more than you think) arse holes who think where a fad that needs pandering to rather than being treated as humans.

OK, so could you please explain how denying someone's opinion on a subject based on their gender and sexuality is treating them like Human Beings?
Until straight people stop thinking that way neither shall LGBT people. Straight people are not an oppressed minority around the world, they have all the privileges we are often denied, don't get upset when we start to not give a fuck what you all think.

Shit attitude there mate - 'What you all think' - not at all constructive.



Back to the topic in hand. What a depressing result. I'm with Bear in that it seems a bit unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:18:05 AM
The WLBC villain who forcibly evicted me from my home of 27 years and stole the majority of my possessions didn't care that I'm straight. Nor did the police officers who dragged me away in handcuffs for the crime of refusing to open my front door and fabricated false charges of assault against me. The magistrates who ignored the evidence presented to them and saddled me with a false criminal record didn't care, either. The people at the food bank and others who have helped me out during my homelessness also don't care about my sexuality.
.
I don't deny that sexuality is used as an excuse for persecution and even murder around the world but then so is skin colour, religion,  politics and, as in my case, poverty.
.
To blame aspects of a person's life for their oppression is missing the point. It's the oppressors who are to blame, not aspects of the oppressed. No matter the person, no matter the location, no matter the excuse, it's the persecution itself that must be destroyed.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 May, 2015, 07:18:31 AM
Makes you wonder what would've happened had David Milliband been running the show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:21:48 AM
The same but with more red.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 08 May, 2015, 07:29:52 AM
 Another 5 Fucking Years? Well I certainly didn't vote for the Cunts so they can Fuck Off!*

Cheers

*I actually convinced myself that Labour were going to win with a Landslide. Poor deluded fool that I am thinking the British Public would want to keep the NHS!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 May, 2015, 07:38:51 AM
I've already pointed out it's not all straight people, that should be obvious. So long as you check your privilege and are honest with yourself then by all means, so long as your not one of those types who believe you should deny medical treatment to LGBT folk for religious reasons then I don't care, just so long as your as nice a person as possible. I'm not angry with anyone in particular, just so very weary of having to legitimise my existence beyond my sexual preference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:58:12 AM
I wouldn't deny anyone medical treatment for any reason.
.
You don't have to legitimise your existence to anyone. You exist and that's that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 08 May, 2015, 08:06:14 AM
Quote from: NapalmKevAnother 5 Fucking Years? Well I certainly didn't vote for the Cunts so they can Fuck Off!

I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 08:13:34 AM
Yep, that's how it works alright. You have to spend the next five years living your life under the dictatorship of a cult you don't believe in.
.
How does the idea of ignoring them and running your life your own way sound this morning?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 08:21:58 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 12:03:31 AM
Jim had the quote of the day - this is now the quote of the evening. What, I wonder, will be the quote of tomorrow...

Quote from: TheLegendaryShark on 08 May, 2015, 09:45:39 AM
This is what happens when you eat all the corn they feed you, little chickens. Although don't ask me for an alternative answer because surely... you  already know it.
.
Think about it.

Well at least I predicted TLS's smug morning after reply!

Cold comfort though, and I don't mean to be an arse anyway as the "Divide and conquer" strategy is how we got into this mess. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 08 May, 2015, 08:31:19 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 02:38:38 AM
Goodbye Douglas Alexander enjoy the wilderness :lol:

Bit harsh?
I switch on the radio and hear 'Paisley' which was nice :-) I'm no fan of the SNP but a 20 year old girl from the SNP is my new MP? Good on them, I don't think I've ever voted Labour in my life and disaffection there is LONG-standing.

That'll be it for the UK then, referendum, round 2.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2015, 08:38:02 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 08:13:34 AM
How does the idea of ignoring them and running your life your own way sound this morning?

Like the same enormous pile of horseshit it was when you were peddling it yesterday.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2015, 08:39:05 AM
So... I went to bed thinking things couldn't be any more depressing than that BBC exit poll. Just goes to show how wrong you can be.

Ho hum...

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 08:43:16 AM
Well, at least you can grow roses with horseshit. You can't grow much with austerity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 08 May, 2015, 08:59:43 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 08:43:16 AM
Well, at least you can grow roses with horseshit. You can't grow much with austerity.

You should write Labour campaign slogans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 09:12:58 AM
I waited up till 4 to see how close the town was and in the end it was a walkover, which surprised me. I thought it was gonna be mighty close but it wasn't!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 09:27:03 AM
What I write doesn't make much difference, Fungus, but I feel I have to write it anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 08 May, 2015, 09:34:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary SharkHow does the idea of ignoring them and running your life your own way sound this morning?

I take your point but, as I think I've said before, I'm happy to trade a degree of liberty in exchange for having someone come and empty my bins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 09:39:16 AM
You and the rest of England, it seems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 09:41:07 AM
5 more years of having that gammon-faced posh cunt in charge - my sympathies.  You can live your life on your own terms, but you still have to pay for things; including healthcare, the way things are going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 09:46:08 AM
Or you could be free and empty your own bins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 09:48:40 AM
Where?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 08 May, 2015, 09:49:27 AM
Exeter: 1 tiny red dot in a sea of South-west blue. Labour may not be perfect but they're a better prospect than David "Bellend" Cameron and his bunch of 'Fuck the Poor' cronies!

Crap situation, to say the least!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 08 May, 2015, 09:53:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary SharkOr you could be free and empty your own bins.

Where I live there are lots of people who need their bins emptied. So it makes sense for us to have a system where all of us can empty our bins together. We can't all be like Henry David Thoreau – I'd miss broadband.

Anyway, I'll leave it there as I'm sure you can take my point too. :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 May, 2015, 09:57:04 AM
All I'll add this morning is this: fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 May, 2015, 10:04:41 AM
Yes indeed.

Left is always split and has more non-voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 08 May, 2015, 10:05:51 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2015, 08:39:05 AM
So... I went to bed thinking things couldn't be any more depressing than that BBC exit poll. Just goes to show how wrong you can be.

Ho hum...

Jim

I turned on the tele this morning and my stomach literally lurched. I went to bed last night profoundly depressed at the exit poll, slept little due to a banjaxed spine and got up to that.

This day is pure turd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 10:16:59 AM
Well, you could pay some kind of local system to empty them, like you do now. Or you could cut down on your own waste, or donate recyclables to local charities or rubbish-burning power stations.
.
Since when has it been a choice between government or nothing? Oh yeah, since government started claiming it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 May, 2015, 10:50:56 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 08 May, 2015, 06:31:47 AM
Quote from: King Pops on 07 May, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 06:30:34 PM
Sorry guys, but i've experienced way to many instances if straught people claiming to be allys to the LGBT community only to make themselves look eligable for a sainthood from soneone. I know not all straight folk are like that, I shouldn't have to point tat out, i'm just sick of the (more than you think) arse holes who think where a fad that needs pandering to rather than being treated as humans.

OK, so could you please explain how denying someone's opinion on a subject based on their gender and sexuality is treating them like Human Beings?
Until straight people stop thinking that way neither shall LGBT people. Straight people are not an oppressed minority around the world, they have all the privileges we are often denied, don't get upset when we start to not give a fuck what you all think.

Ok, well, what if the 'straights' (seeing as we're balkanising identities) stopped giving a fuck what 'you all think'? Hmmm?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 10:53:50 AM
...at least Thangam Debonnaire can play a MEAN cello solo.

(http://www.jonathancooper.com/images/ThangamDebbonaire.jpg)

In other news - Farage lost in his own constituency and promises to battle for voting reform. Wouldn't it be nice if UKIP stopped pissing on immigrants and focussed on that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 08 May, 2015, 11:02:36 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 10:53:50 AM
...at least Thangam Debonnaire can play a MEAN cello solo.

With a name like Thangam Debonnaire I'd be more surprised if she couldn't.   :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 May, 2015, 11:15:20 AM
The newsagent I buy my paper from had a good joke this morning. 'Did your Party get in?' Me; 'No.' 'Neither did mine,' he replied 'the Loonies didn't get in either.' It seemed funny but the loonies did get in and now we'll have to endure more austerity from Cameron and Co. Goodbye free NHS, bye BBC, hello permanent pay freeze.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JudgeOiNK! on 08 May, 2015, 11:18:44 AM
Was Farage not meant to leave the party if he lost his seat?

Voting reform... pfft, like the DUP here in Northern Ireland what that means is "let's fix it so we can win".  The DUP formed a pact with another so-called "Unionist" party (read - sectarian party) so that they'd only field one candidate in two key areas they lost out on last time to more moderate and forward-thinking ones.  This meant they'd get two party's worth of voters voting for their candidate.  Even then they didn't win by a huge majority., but they still did and are celebrating today.  Sickening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 08 May, 2015, 11:22:09 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 09:46:08 AM
Or you could be free and empty your own bins.

Yeah and extract and detoxify your own sewage and teach your own kids and purify your own drinking water and test your own food for botulism and maintain your own roads and set your own minimum wage without being told to do one by capitalists and cure your own cancer and fine people whose dogs shit everywhere yourself and detain your own drunk drivers and detox smack addicts yourself and do all the other thousand and one complicated things necessary for a modern society to function that no one person could possibly have the time or intellect to have an informed opinion on.

Every time you post on the subject makes me intensely grateful that I live in a parliamentary democracy, with all it's massive faults, instead of the living hell that your juvenile fuck-you-got-mine anarcho-capitalist utopia would be, and that every Joe schlub doesn't currently have the right to haggle over every damn thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2015, 11:26:09 AM
I predict strikes and riots a-plenty before 2020 - and possible mass emigration to Scotland
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2015, 11:27:47 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 08 May, 2015, 10:53:50 AM
...at least Thangam Debonnaire can play a MEAN cello solo.

That is indeed a fabulous name!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 11:30:08 AM
Or, JPM, you could leave all that pesky responsible stuff to some local and/or national system like, ooh, maybe a council or civil service or something. Or you could just moan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 08 May, 2015, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: JudgeOiNK! on 08 May, 2015, 11:18:44 AM
Was Farage not meant to leave the party if he lost his seat?
Well, he didn't have a seat to lose in the first place but he's just stood down as leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 12:27:37 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 08 May, 2015, 11:55:00 AM
Quote from: JudgeOiNK! on 08 May, 2015, 11:18:44 AM
Was Farage not meant to leave the party if he lost his seat?
Well, he didn't have a seat to lose in the first place but he's just stood down as leader.

At least something good has come of the whole sorry mess.  He'll probably be back, but I'll enjoy a break from seeing his smug, bigoted face everywhere I look.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 May, 2015, 12:29:20 PM
yup, and so has Nick Klegg

EDIT - and while I was typing Millitwat has gone too!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 May, 2015, 12:52:22 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 07 May, 2015, 04:26:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 May, 2015, 03:54:26 PM
Just and FYI, Shark, as a straight cis-man you don't get a say in matters related in sexual or gender identity...

Hmm... Not so sure about that, Hawk. Isn't it a bit like saying I'm not allowed to have an opinion on whether the Holocaust was bad because I'm not Jewish?

I think Hawk may be saying that sexual and gender identity are not a choice (like your political persuasion is). You are born how you are born and don't have a say in the matter. Hawk is not saying we can't comment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 08 May, 2015, 01:05:24 PM
What a miserable day. Still, perhaps now the Labour Party might be convinced there's better strategy than saying "we'll do what the Tories do, only a little slower".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 May, 2015, 01:17:52 PM
Just a bit of advice If you're gonna riot in the streets, can you please do it in your own streets and damage your own property. Thank you very much!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 01:34:22 PM
Clearly you are new at rioting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JudgeOiNK! on 08 May, 2015, 01:51:57 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 12:27:37 PMAt least something good has come of the whole sorry mess.  He'll probably be back, but I'll enjoy a break from seeing his smug, bigoted face everywhere I look.

This is a quote from the Euronews website:

QuoteFARAGE QUITS... FOR NOW

Nigel Farage has resigned as leader of anti-EU party UKIP after failing in his bid to be elected as an MP.

He adds however that he may stand again as the party's leader in September.

Hope that's clear.

So basically I'm reading that as he hasn't resigned but can't lose (more) face after making the promise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: hippynumber1 on 08 May, 2015, 03:58:36 PM
I don't usually post in this thread but always enjoy reading it; I do, however, feel the need to bring home the reality of what has just happened.  It has just been confirmed by our principal that, due to Tory government cuts to Further Education, 237 of my colleagues are to be made redundant, 179 of whom will be teaching and teaching support staff. Only 3 members of Senior Management are going. Well done Britain on voting in a party that clearly doesn't give a fuck about your children's education.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 May, 2015, 04:01:57 PM
Now the Tories have no one else to blame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 May, 2015, 04:26:04 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 08 May, 2015, 04:01:57 PM
Now the Tories have no one else to blame.

Apart from the poor, the immigrants, al Quaida, ISIS, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 May, 2015, 04:52:58 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 08 May, 2015, 04:01:57 PM
Now the Tories have no one else to blame.
Except Labour. I bet they won't stop, all the way to 2020.

Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 08 May, 2015, 01:05:24 PM
What a miserable day. Still, perhaps now the Labour Party might be convinced there's better strategy than saying "we'll do what the Tories do, only a little slower".
Don't bet on it. I hope the next Labour leader doubles down on progressiveness. My guess is we're heading to a US-style two-party system, gradually shifting right. Well, apart from Scotland, which now has a party that's possibly a bit left, despite doing some decidedly non-progressive things really very recently.

hippynumber1: Horrible. And just the beginning, I fear. The Conservative manifesto's section on education was dreadful. My daughter will begin school during this parliament. I can only hope someone else shows up in 2020 to repair the mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 May, 2015, 04:58:49 PM
If fear it'll be too late by 2020 to repair the damage about to be writ large over our several nations. With TTIP coming, it will be truely brutal if your not very well off. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 May, 2015, 05:21:22 PM
Quote from: hippynumber1 on 08 May, 2015, 03:58:36 PM
Well done Britain on voting in a party that clearly doesn't give a fuck about your children's education.

It's your own fault for not being rich enough to afford a proper education for the little darlings.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: BPP on 08 May, 2015, 05:28:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 12:27:37 PM

At least something good has come of the whole sorry mess.  He'll probably be back, but I'll enjoy a break from seeing his smug, bigoted face everywhere I look.

He won't be off your bloody telly. 'Nigel does 9/10 Cats'.... 'Farage on Have I got News for you'.... 'Nige on 'UKIP: My Story So Far book tour'... 'The REAL Nigel Farage: The Sunday Times Big Interview'. Now he can be casually racist without the need to pretend before he buckles back down to running the cult in september.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Recrewt on 08 May, 2015, 06:22:40 PM
Well, I did not foresee that we would be in this position after the election.  I suspect many people went with the 'devil you know' choice in the end.   

Ignoring political persuasions, one of my major gripes about this election was all those smart arse reporters who declared that there was absolutely no chance of any party securing a majority this election.  They would not even entertain the idea and laughed at any politician who said they could.   >:( - of course there was a chance as has been shown today so I think if I was Mr Cameron then I would set up interviews with all those 'experts' so he can blow raspberries and give them the v's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 06:25:38 PM
Nah, he's just successfully rigged an election, so he doesn't want to draw attention to it until after the ballots have been destroyed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:06:39 PM
"Rigged election"? Heh, you're starting to sound like me! Still, it was an odd result...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 07:29:02 PM
Quote from: BPP on 08 May, 2015, 05:28:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 May, 2015, 12:27:37 PM

At least something good has come of the whole sorry mess.  He'll probably be back, but I'll enjoy a break from seeing his smug, bigoted face everywhere I look.

He won't be off your bloody telly. 'Nigel does 9/10 Cats'.... 'Farage on Have I got News for you'.... 'Nige on 'UKIP: My Story So Far book tour'... 'The REAL Nigel Farage: The Sunday Times Big Interview'. Now he can be casually racist without the need to pretend before he buckles back down to running the cult in september.

Fuxake.  It was bad enough when Willy Hague somehow became cool for a bit.  I can't really see Paul Merton or Ian Hislop being Nige's biggest fans though
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 07:36:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:06:39 PM
"Rigged election"? Heh, you're starting to sound like me! Still, it was an odd result...

"Unbelievable" is the term I prefer, given that the supposed swing to the right wasn't reflected in success for other right wing parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 08 May, 2015, 07:39:03 PM
Quote from: hippynumber1 on 08 May, 2015, 03:58:36 PM
I don't usually post in this thread but always enjoy reading it; I do, however, feel the need to bring home the reality of what has just happened.  It has just been confirmed by our principal that, due to Tory government cuts to Further Education, 237 of my colleagues are to be made redundant, 179 of whom will be teaching and teaching support staff. Only 3 members of Senior Management are going. Well done Britain on voting in a party that clearly doesn't give a fuck about your children's education.

Hippynumber1 - which College is that? I too work in FE (how the hell do you afford all that cool stuff on an FE salary?!?) and we're going through a relatively minor restructure at the moment. Today it feels like the most horrible dress rehearsal ever. The tories don't like FE in principal and the future of our sector, one that provides opportunity for so many for whom 'mainstream' education doesn't work is looking pretty bleak. I'm giving us about 2 years (mainly due to a possible up coming merger) before we get our big hit. Whether I and countless other talented colleagues survive that is anybodies guess.

You have my absolute sympathy.

The terrible truth is we in FE won't be the only ones who go through this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2015, 07:44:47 PM
Wasn't one of our very own Squaxx a vote counter last night? Did he notice anything 'unbelievable' about the proceedings? I'm guessing not, otherwise he'd have said.
.
So, in this case, I'm content to leave the 'conspiracy theories' to others - if there are any.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2015, 08:23:53 PM
Whether or not he could shed any light on such skullduggery would depend where he did the counting, as the fix only needed to be in the marginal seats, I would think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 May, 2015, 08:42:10 PM
Seems like the appropriate thread:



(http://i1.wp.com/www.badtaste.it/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/london_has_fallen_xlg.jpg?resize=691%2C1024)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 08 May, 2015, 08:49:01 PM
Very sad to hear about college job losses.

The college I worked in until last summer got rid of hundreds and is now losing more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 08 May, 2015, 10:03:49 PM
I think they clearly rigged the election so the map could look like this.  :lol:

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-05-08/what-the-simpsons-can-teach-you-about-the-uk-general-election-results
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 12:23:56 AM
There was no rigging. People broadly voted to try and keep things the same, and they simultaneously punished the Liberal Democrats. The end result was a Tory majority. It's a collective fuck-up exacerbated by our ridiculous electoral system.

Note that while the polls were wrong, a few commentators have for weeks now quietly been warning about a Tory win (although not quite to the tune of 331 seats—most thought they'd need the DUP) and a Lib-Dem massacre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 May, 2015, 02:06:12 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 12:23:56 AM
There was no rigging. People broadly voted to try and keep things the same, and they simultaneously punished the Liberal Democrats. The end result was a Tory majority. It's a collective fuck-up exacerbated by our ridiculous electoral system.
most thought they'd need the DUP) and a Lib-Dem massacre.

After 72 hours of relentless political shitemongering, that's about the best summation I've heard
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 05:11:15 AM
"It Doesn't Quite Feel Right": The British Election Result
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/it-doesnt-quite-feel-right-the-british-election-result/5448120)
.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 07:59:32 AM
I just saw a stat on the Grauniad saying that under Proportional Representation UKIP would have won 83 seats.

Say what you like about First Past The Post, but it has it's good points.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: hippynumber1 on 09 May, 2015, 09:20:28 AM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 08 May, 2015, 07:39:03 PM
Quote from: hippynumber1 on 08 May, 2015, 03:58:36 PM
I don't usually post in this thread but always enjoy reading it; I do, however, feel the need to bring home the reality of what has just happened.  It has just been confirmed by our principal that, due to Tory government cuts to Further Education, 237 of my colleagues are to be made redundant, 179 of whom will be teaching and teaching support staff. Only 3 members of Senior Management are going. Well done Britain on voting in a party that clearly doesn't give a fuck about your children's education.

Hippynumber1 - which College is that? I too work in FE (how the hell do you afford all that cool stuff on an FE salary?!?) and we're going through a relatively minor restructure at the moment. Today it feels like the most horrible dress rehearsal ever. The tories don't like FE in principal and the future of our sector, one that provides opportunity for so many for whom 'mainstream' education doesn't work is looking pretty bleak. I'm giving us about 2 years (mainly due to a possible up coming merger) before we get our big hit. Whether I and countless other talented colleagues survive that is anybodies guess.

You have my absolute sympathy.

The terrible truth is we in FE won't be the only ones who go through this.

I can't tell you Colin (the college is notorious for putting stuff through the disciplinary procedure for saying anything on social media that can be seen as 'bringing the college into disrepute') but I can tell you that I live in a small town called Coleshill, about 12 miles outside of Birmingham and that the story made 'Private Eye' this week!  ;)
What I will say is that the campus I work at used to be a small college in its own right, had a bank balance of several million in the black and is situated in a leafy suburb. We then went through three major mergers in very few years, now have no money and are being hit by our second round of redundancies. This is horrible for those staff made redundant obviously but the knock on effect is larger class sizes, less time to support students on a one-to-one basis, more teaching hours, more marking, more admin and the over-riding message from management that 'you should be grateful you've still got a job'. For anyone in FE, especially those undergoing 'restructuring' or under threat of merger, I would  say start looking for a new job now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 09 May, 2015, 09:54:00 AM
Sad situation, and that Private Eye article seems to imply some very high salaries to senior staff!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2015, 10:00:01 AM
Quote from: Banners on 09 May, 2015, 09:54:00 AM
Sad situation, and that Private Eye article seems to imply some very high salaries to senior staff!

It's all part of the great Tory scheme to shovel as much public money into private pockets as possible. The schools/colleges themselves are not-for-profit but the senior, non-teaching, managers are taking obscene sums of money out of the education budget.

But it's more 'efficient' than the evil, wasteful public sector, right?

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 10:07:55 AM
I would think we'd be a bit more upbeat as 2000ad fans, as the book's only really been at its best when the country's been at its worst.  It was playing a blinder during the Thatcher years but as soon as she's out of office someone commissioned Outlaw.  Creatives need a machine to rage against.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 12:23:56 AM
There was no rigging.

Richmond Clements was a ballot counter, so you can understand why I would assume the worst.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 May, 2015, 10:20:19 AM
QuoteRichmond Clements was a ballot counter, so you can understand why I would assume the worst.

Why I oughtta..!

To answer the questions above briefly (because I haven't really got the time right now) it is impossible - impossible - to alter the course of any ballot once the voting slip is in the box.
The checks and balances in place work and work brilliantly. There are no mistakes. There is no conspiracy. The truth is more frightening: people voted in a Tory government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 11:01:48 AM
Which is exactly what you would say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 May, 2015, 11:03:14 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 09 May, 2015, 10:20:19 AM

There are no mistakes. There is no conspiracy. The truth is more frightening: people voted in a Tory government.

Now that is frightening! In 1992 when Neil Kinnock lost the election I believe they discovered afterwards the reasons why the polls where so inaccurate about voter intentions. Some people had told their wives,their work colleagues and pollsters they were never going to vote Tory but secretly had decided to do so since they felt it served their own best interest. Perhaps these 'Ghost Tories' have struck again. Against voter deceit there is very little pollsters can do in order to obtain accurate data.

Our ability to deceive others is often admired in society and is often considered a sign of high intelligence. I have no doubt an awful lot of people are smirking over the cornflakes how they stuffed it to the left once again. Sad but then I always believed human nature was mostly rotten!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 11:14:08 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 09 May, 2015, 10:20:19 AMThe truth is more frightening: people voted in a Tory government.
Worse than that: they voted in a manner to try and keep out the SNP, who were never going to get into government anyway, merely potentially having some influence over the budget. And by attempting to stop the SNP gaining any influence and 'breaking up the UK', we now have a toxic Tory government that will plunge us into two years of EU 'will we or won't we' hell, potentially ending in breaking up the UK anyway. GOOD JOB, EVERYONE.

(Even senior Tories—including Euro-sceptics—know leaving the EU is a dumb move, but the way the Scottish referendum was handled gives me no faith whatsoever Cameron will urge the electorate into taking the sensible decision. And I can't imagine he'll go for Sturgeon's country lock, only allowing an exit if ALL four UK countries vote in favour. Bizarrely, however, that was his argument for something rather less dangerous: time-zone changes. I just hope Juncker is a lot smarter than Cameron and can figure out a way to give Cameron meaningless changes that he'll be able to yell are the HUGE REPATRIATION OF POWERS he's been demanding.)

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 07:59:32 AMI just saw a stat on the Grauniad saying that under Proportional Representation UKIP would have won 83 seats.
Say what you like about First Past The Post, but it has it's good points.
Not really. 3.5 million people voted UKIP and they have barely any representation in parliament. I read every manifesto. Theirs is occasionally toxic, but beyond some oddball nostalgia and a hateful stance on immigrants, it was no worse than the Conservative one. About three times as many people voted Conservative, yet they got 331 times as many seats. That's just wrong in a democratic society.

I see quite a few people arguing the election was unfair on the Greens, but: "Phew! At least we don't have 80 UKIP MPs!" Yet the thought of 25 Greens would make many on the right a little sick. We should just own the political situation in our country—UKIP supporters and all—and ensure the representation in parliament actually corresponds reasonably well to how people voted. Right now we have the following situation:

Party (number of candidates): votes required for each seat

UKIP (624): 3,881,129
Green Party (568): 1,157,613
Liberal Democrat (631): 301,986
Labour (631): 40,290
Conservative (647): 34,244

That doesn't look a lot like a reasoned and fair democracy to me—and it's only going to get worse when this government cuts down the number of MPs (under the guise of 'saving the UK money'), gerrymanders the new constituencies and makes it harder for non-Tories to get elected.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 11:23:44 AM
I agree that Ghost Tories struck again. It's no wonder really, as a Conservative vote is generally seen as a vote for self-interest, hardly the noblest of motivations but obviously it's going to be important to very many people.

Personally I also voted for self-interest, but I voted Green because I'd rather not boil to death from the effects of environmental destruction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 May, 2015, 11:03:14 AM
Sad but then I always believed human nature was mostly rotten!

I believe that people are better than that - the world we live in is proof that we want stability and kindness as the norm, and not to be serfs who subsidise the extravagant lifestyles of a small group.  The steamroller result in Scotland is proof that people want viable and palpable change from how things are currently done, and if anything, people in England simply bought into the idea that Labour were some sort of risk, rather than a party just as elite and illiberal as the Tories.  If there was a real alternative to the Tories - a rabid anti-austerity and pro-NHS party operating on a national level, things could have been significantly different, but sadly, true lefties would rather snipe and argue among themselves than create such a united front.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 11:28:37 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 11:14:08 AM
I can't imagine he'll go for Sturgeon's country lock, only allowing an exit if ALL four UK countries vote in favour.

I support this version of the EU referendum, and I hold out hope Cameron will support it too (which is possible, particularly if he ends up coming down on the pro-EU side).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 03:27:07 PM
Quote from: Bear on 09 May, 2015, 11:24:08 AMIf there was a real alternative to the Tories - a rabid anti-austerity and pro-NHS party operating on a national level, things could have been significantly different
The Green Party ticks all those boxes, and a million people voted for them. But it means fuck-all under FPTP. (They should have over 20 MPs today.)

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 11:28:37 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 11:14:08 AM
I can't imagine he'll go for Sturgeon's country lock, only allowing an exit if ALL four UK countries vote in favour.
I support this version of the EU referendum, and I hold out hope Cameron will support it too (which is possible, particularly if he ends up coming down on the pro-EU side).
There is literally no chance this will happen, since his backbenchers would go mental, the press would nail him to the wall, and it was an idea first brought up by the SNP. Like I said, it's a bit fucking rich that he wouldn't press ahead with a trial on shifting our time-zone, unless Scotland agreed, but leaving the EU would apparently be fine. (And he will hopefully come down on the pro-EU side, although he's quitting after this parliament, so I wonder if he'll also step down as an MP and flee to the corporate world...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 04:00:05 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2015, 03:27:07 PMThe Green Party ticks all those boxes, and a million people voted for them.

They might have had more votes if people knew the Greens were actually standing in their area.  I didn't hear a peep about our local Green candidate, and I don't know anyone else who did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2015, 04:31:05 PM
Then those people should've read all the names on that piece of paper before they put their cross on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 05:04:30 PM
In Northern Ireland we have proportional voting, so we don't put crosses on our ballots - we draw cocks on them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 09 May, 2015, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: Bear on 09 May, 2015, 05:04:30 PM
In Northern Ireland we have proportional voting, so we don't put crosses on our ballots - we draw cocks on them.

As it's proportional, does that mean a larger picture depending on how you rate the candidate?  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 09 May, 2015, 05:29:30 PM
Quote from: Bear on 09 May, 2015, 05:04:30 PM
In Northern Ireland we have proportional voting, so we don't put crosses on our ballots - we draw cocks on them.

For what its worth my daughter really likes the politics of Northern Ireland.When we were discussing the electon and showing her the interactive BBC map thingie she said. 'Oh I like it there, can we live there' when looking at Northern Ireland. I asked her why and she replied.

"I like their politics, their politics are like Christmas colours."

Arh ain't the naivity of small children cute!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 09 May, 2015, 07:02:27 PM
That's interesting as that's what the marginal parties are baying for over here -

obviously the drawback to proportional would be the higher UKIP turnout in the current election but knowing that likely more than half of those THREE MILLION voters probably had no idea what exactly UKIP would really do if they had power (BURN ALL KITTENS etc) - I wonder if just KNOWING that your vote counted would lead to more than say... 66% of the voting population even bothering (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-highest-turnout-since-1997-10235076.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 07:54:28 PM
(https://fbcdn-photos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-0/s320x320/11165326_944051752311896_6923829541830539726_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&oh=c0736d8d6b7f19beb70cb3c1272b3628&oe=55C742EA&__gda__=1440669108_d6554aa935e4686465a2fe84a151ff8e)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 08:25:39 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 09 May, 2015, 07:02:27 PMI wonder if just KNOWING that your vote counted would lead to more than say... 66% of the voting population even bothering (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-highest-turnout-since-1997-10235076.html)


Knowing it wasn't a binary choice would, I think, drastically improve turnout, as a lot of abstentionism can be laid at the feet of a belief that Tory and Labour are essentially the same thing.  It's also worth noting that under PR, the Greens (for example) would have more than the votes they got this time out, because a lot of people would give their secondary vote to the Greens after they'd voted Tory or Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 09:09:32 PM
Quote from: Bear on 09 May, 2015, 08:25:39 PM
Knowing it wasn't a binary choice would, I think, drastically improve turnout, as a lot of abstentionism can be laid at the feet of a belief that Tory and Labour are essentially the same thing.  It's also worth noting that under PR, the Greens (for example) would have more than the votes they got this time out, because a lot of people would give their secondary vote to the Greens after they'd voted Tory or Labour.

I'm pretty sure you don't get a secondary vote under PR. Votes are counted in regions and then seats are distributed according to the proportions of the vote each party achieved. This is the system we already have for Euro elections. it's also how Nick Griffin got elected, so not by any means perfect.

However, I think the system you're describing is STV, used IIRC for mayoral elections, where you get to pick your first and second choices. Typically you would firstly choose the person you really want but has no real hope of getting elected (eg Jenny Jones) and then secondly the person you somewhat want whom has an actual chance of winning (eg. Ken Livingstone).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 09:19:07 PM
I find it's best to just draw cocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 09:51:58 PM
Anti Tory protests: Hundreds march against new Conservative government. (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anti-tory-protests-live-updates-5670515) And not a word on the BBC which, less than a week ago, thought that half a dozen protesters shouting at Jim Murphy and Eddie Izzard was news (http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2015-scotland-32581803).
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 10:06:23 PM
Live coverage for those interested in seeing why it's not news just yet. (http://bambuser.com/v/5500095)  From what I can see, it's just some hippies laughing and joking, often with (admittedly a stupidly large amount of) coppers.

edit to add: I suspect the protest banner being "fuck the Tories" might be a contributing factor in the BBC not showing footage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2015, 10:09:05 PM
It's on the radio, 5 arrests, some police injured and the War memorial defaced.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 May, 2015, 10:14:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 May, 2015, 10:09:05 PM
It's on the radio, 5 arrests, some police injured and the War memorial defaced.

I saw the defaced war memorial. Astonishingly stupid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 10:18:33 PM
It's on RT - the poor reporter was trying desperately to get away from a woman waving a banner saying "Fucking Omni-Shambles," which was quite funny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2015, 10:24:27 PM
The war memorial thing was just stupid - it's going to be what the Murdoch press and the BBC concentrate on reporting to undermine the protest - but on the protest itself, I'd say get used to this kind of thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 10:35:13 PM
Ah, it just got a mention on BBC News 24 - a few seconds of video of police having smoke bombs and a traffic cone thrown at them and a bit of tut-tutting over that war memorial thing before going straight into how bad things are for the Labour Party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 May, 2015, 10:36:31 PM
A small piece of easily cleanable graffiti. How does that really stack up against Harry Patch, a man who actually fought in WWII, standing up and denouncing government policy. I'd suggest that the people represented by that monument might be appalled by the wholescale destruction of our hard-won liberties that we defended in the face of a massive war but abandon when threatened by a tiny number of bearded men with explosives in their rucksacks.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2015, 10:52:43 PM
I agree, Jim. This trivial incident will be used to demonstrate how mindless and naughty the protesters are and justify the "government's" moral right to send the riot police in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 May, 2015, 11:34:25 PM
Trivial maybe, but it just alienates people the protesters need to be reaching out to and having a conversation with. We get enough of this vandalism in NI and it just pushed people into negative entrenched positions.
Protest against those who send young men and women to the slaughter but to deface something which people see as a memorial to those who were butchered seems to me to be morally wrong and incredibly short sighted. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 09 May, 2015, 11:38:32 PM
Trivial?  Try selling that line to a bunch of military folk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 May, 2015, 11:41:02 PM
Quite so, it is devisive when unity is paramount. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 07:29:00 AM
I wonder if those "military folk" who lost arms and legs and minds and returned to Britain for inadequate healthcare and unaffordable housing would be so outraged at a bit of easily scrubbed-off graffiti on a hunk of inanimate stone? I should imagine these people have far more important things to worry about, as do we.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 08:21:40 AM
I can understand why a few people would be so appalled by a Tory victory they might go on a rampage in Central London, but considering what they were actually protesting about it is a free and fair election result, and how they protested against it was by defacing a memorial to the "Women of World War Two", they have no chance whatsoever of taking the country with them.

Oh, and Harry Patch actually fought in World War I, and he died in 2009, the year before the coalition came into power. If he's ever denounced the Cameron government's policies he's done it from the spectral plain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 May, 2015, 08:25:41 AM
Dissapointed that protesters with such clear motives would stoop so low as to deface a memorial, assuming it was them at all and not a coincidence of poor timing. Not furious, just dissapointed.

I'm not happy with theresult, and will be proactive in bringing change. Honestly, i'm seeing more of a point to Bears argument to cull the bastards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 08:39:35 AM
The protests were actually mostly peaceful but reported as anything but, with incidents like the graffiti blown out of all proportion. Strange how the violence only starts when the police weigh in.
.
As I've said before, the only thing "authority" brings to these situations is immoral violence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2015, 08:54:22 AM
My apologies: confused my Harrys. I was thinking of Harry Leslie Smith, a WWII veteran who did do what I said, not Harry Patch, a WWI veteran who didn't.

I should have checked before posting and I didn't. Apologies, once again.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 09:02:04 AM
Jim's right, it's absolutely true that Harry Leslie Smith is a left-leaning WW2 veteran who isn't too bothered about the vandalism:

Quote
The tories have defaced society with austerity and that is something that unlike the war memorial won't wash off soon

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 10 May, 2015, 09:22:28 AM
In response to the protesters' demands, the Government has announced a national election where everyone gets to have a vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2015, 10:23:37 AM
I suspect people are angry that we now have a toxic Tory majority government that got there with under 37% of the vote (meaning 57% voted for something else). They've already said now the Lib Dems aren't a barrier, they can "quickly" get on with rushing through all the laws and changes they really wanted to. We'll see sweeping changes to the NHS, the effective death of the BBC and Human Rights Act, boundary changes to stitch up every other party in 2020, disabled and homeless people getting less help, the Snoopers' Charter and other restrictions on communications, an increasingly Victorian education system, the possible withdrawal from the EU (not least given that remember Cameron is resigning before 2020—he won't give a shit), and then a likely end to the UK.

Yes, we had a democratic election. Yes, it wasn't rigged. But the system is broken and this government scares the hell out of me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 10:29:33 AM
Don't be scared. Frightened people are easier to control.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 10:33:39 AM
It's very important that pro-Europeans win the vote to stay in the EU.

I agree that the UK is doomed in all sort of ways if we let the xenophobes take us out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:39:55 AM
There's a petition going round for proportionate representation:

https://www.change.org/p/david-cameron-reform-our-voting-system-to-make-it-fair-and-representative-makeseatsmatchvotes

Change can only be achieved through democracy, not through a protest by a few hundred vandals demanding that their opinion is worth more than the several million that participated in the election.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 11:01:13 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 09:02:04 AM
Jim's right, it's absolutely true that Harry Leslie Smith is a left-leaning WW2 veteran who isn't too bothered about the vandalism:

Quote
The tories have defaced society with austerity and that is something that unlike the war memorial won't wash off soon

It's in very poor taste. Disrespecting the people who ensured that you have a democracy to enjoy is just bullshit, especially in such close proximity to VE day. You may have found one vet trying to make a point, but the rest certainly won't let it slide. They supported the prosecution and imprisonment of this useless little shite: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8195146/Tuition-fees-riots-Pink-Floyd-stars-son-could-be-prosecuted-over-attack-on-Cenotaph.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8195146/Tuition-fees-riots-Pink-Floyd-stars-son-could-be-prosecuted-over-attack-on-Cenotaph.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 11:08:52 AM
QuoteThe protests were actually mostly peaceful but reported as anything but, with incidents like the graffiti blown out of all proportion. Strange how the violence only starts when the police weigh in.

UK police are pussycats. You really don't know how good you have it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 11:18:52 AM
If change can only be achieved through democracy, why did we bomb Afghanistan and Iraq without a public vote? Why privatise the NHS without public consent? Why sell publically owned services without a referendum? Etc., etc., etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 May, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
WF, all really valid points, that is why there needs to be mass, organised petition and protest against the truely dreadful agenda this administration fully intends to push through. We have a mass communication network (internet) with which to organise and coordinate these actions. But they must be peaceful and respectful. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 11:34:59 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 11:18:52 AM
If change can only be achieved through democracy, why did we bomb Afghanistan and Iraq without a public vote? Why privatise the NHS without public consent? Why sell publically owned services without a referendum? Etc., etc., etc...

With whose money and with what infrastructure? You can't micromanage a government with endless referendums. The time, cost and human capital needed to to this would be prohibitive to running a country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 11:36:08 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 10 May, 2015, 11:25:30 AM
WF, all really valid points, that is why there needs to be mass, organised petition and protest against the truely dreadful agenda this administration fully intends to push through. We have a mass communication network (internet) with which to organise and coordinate these actions. But they must be peaceful and respectful. Z

Like the Occupy Movement? Fat load of good that did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 12:23:35 PM
All good points. There's no need to micromanage every decision but big ones (do we go to war, for example) can easily be put to the country with the internet/media. There could be "telethon" style events - in-depth presentations from all sides on BBC1, superficial presentations on Channel 4 and presentations for the hard of thinking on ITV - at the end of which, everyone votes using their personal voter number via internet, text, phone-in or the Red Button. If we can organise Children in Need and Red Nose Day we can certainly organise this.
.
The day to day minutiae of running public services and institutions could be left largely to bodies like the civil service and local councils, much as happens today but with greater transparency and accountability.
.
As to funding, I'm not going to go through the private versus public money creation argument again but funding will not be a problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 01:16:14 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 12:23:35 PM
All good points. There's no need to micromanage every decision but big ones (do we go to war, for example) can easily be put to the country with the internet/media.

Going to war is a strategic decision best left to an authority that has the benefit of full military intelligence, knowledge of international support treatise and our available resources, not joe public. Also, define 'going to war'. Regulations and legislation and the associated room for challenge by anti-war bodies would open up a huge can of worms.

Also, leaving the decision on war to the public will not always result in an anti-war stance.

Anyway, that's just war, but it would apply to any higher level decision requiring specialist insight.

Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 12:23:35 PM
There could be "telethon" style events - in-depth presentations from all sides on BBC1, superficial presentations on Channel 4 and presentations for the hard of thinking on ITV - at the end of which, everyone votes using their personal voter number via internet, text, phone-in or the Red Button. If we can organise Children in Need and Red Nose Day we can certainly organise this.

For smaller decisions. Like what? You would also have to run a campaign like these organisations every time. There's also a massive risk of fraud and what's to stop activist hackers from crashing servers when they realise that the numbers aren't on their side?

Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 12:23:35 PM
The day to day minutiae of running public services and institutions could be left largely to bodies like the civil service and local councils, much as happens today but with greater transparency and accountability.

More manpower = increase in government size = more taxation, and all because certain politicians can't be trusted.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 01:27:16 PM
So, in short, you like being told what to do by a small group of people who think they have more intelligence and rights than you. That's your choice, of course, but I don't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 01:32:08 PM
I don't know that government can be trusted to decide to go to war if they have to lie to the public to justify it and have a clear conflict of interest in that they personally stand to make money from doing so.

Quote from: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 11:36:08 AMLike the Occupy Movement? Fat load of good that did.

Occupy is a movement, not a campaign, and activism isn't about waving a magic wand and then things change forever - it's about the long slog and perseverance, which is why most people in a I WANT IT NOW NOW NOW culture don't like it.
Occupy made those disgruntled with multiple issues seen and heard, showed that they weren't alone and that mass protest and inconveniencing the financial and political elite was more possible than ever.  Occupy had no single goal, no axe to grind, no aim that once achieved would cause those involved to dissipate and go away, but in the short term it was a successful recruitment tool for hacktivists, while in the long term it showed that activism wasn't the preserve of college kids with iPhones anymore, and that social media can be used to quickly organise mass protests.
Occupy was, in short, the prologue to something else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 01:49:09 PM
Well said, Bear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 01:53:53 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 01:27:16 PM
So, in short, you like being told what to do by a small group of people who think they have more intelligence and rights than you.

Armchair anarchists?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 02:02:57 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 01:32:08 PM
I don't know that government can be trusted to decide to go to war if they have to lie to the public to justify it and have a clear conflict of interest in that they personally stand to make money from doing so.

Yeah, the Labour government was wrong in going to war. We get that. We voted them out, didn't we?

Quote
Occupy made those disgruntled with multiple issues seen and heard, showed that they weren't alone and that mass protest and inconveniencing the financial and political elite was more possible than ever. 

It didn't inconvenience anyone save for the council who had to clear up all the human excrement and used hypodermic needles left by these people.

QuoteOccupy had no single goal, no axe to grind, no aim that once achieved would cause those involved to dissipate and go away, but in the short term it was a successful recruitment tool for hacktivists, while in the long term it showed that activism wasn't the preserve of college kids with iPhones anymore, and that social media can be used to quickly organise mass protests.
Occupy was, in short, the prologue to something else.

A sharp swing to the right?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 02:10:56 PM
"Armchair anarchists"? If you like.
.
All protesters are drug addicts? If you like.
.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were Labour's fault? If you like.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 02:17:36 PM
Quote from: Frank Miller on 10 May, 2015, 02:02:57 PM
"'Occupy' is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness,"

Strange but true: my brother works for the local council, and he says the dirtiest bastards he has to clean up after are born-again christian crowds and Orange Lodge marches - basically the most right-wing types the country has to offer, though he doesn't grumble much about them as he's incredibly grateful for the overtime in these uncertain times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 10 May, 2015, 02:25:06 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 01:27:16 PM
So, in short, you like being told what to do by a small group of people who think they have more intelligence and rights than you. That's your choice, of course, but I don't.

He's saying, as I think you know, that he likes having country-wide and international decisions on war, the economy, et al, delegated on his and the country's behalf to an democratically elected representative body of officials and experts. So do I.

That isn't to say I think the system's perfect, (it isn't) or couldn't be improved; but I don't have any alternatives to offer that would work better. If I did, and I believed in them that strongly, I would have gone into politics and worked to make it a reality rather than carp about it on the internet forum of a sci-fi comic.*

*Not a personal snipe at you, Sharky, although i know it sounds like one!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 02:31:49 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 02:17:36 PM
Quote from: Frank Miller on 10 May, 2015, 02:02:57 PM
"'Occupy' is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness,"

Strange but true: my brother works for the local council, and he says the dirtiest bastards he has to clean up after are born-again christian crowds and Orange Lodge marches - basically the most right-wing types the country has to offer, though he doesn't grumble much about them as he's incredibly grateful for the overtime in these uncertain times.

To be fair, it's rare to see ANYONE in this country clean up after themselves whether it be for a demo, a festival or camping outside an Apple store overnight for the new Iphone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 02:44:28 PM
He's quite insistent that the communists and fringe hippy types clean up after themselves just fine to the point they often take their rubbish with them instead of stuffing it in the bins dotted around the street (recycling enviromentalist posers!).  It's the clean-living-and-Sunday-best crowd that tend to take packed lunches and then throw everything at their arses that he's going on about.

As a dog owner, my peeve is those who won't clean up after their dogs have shit on the pavement.  Worse still are those who act like it's the dog's fault.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 May, 2015, 02:51:04 PM
Protestants. Up to no good as usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jock Savage on 10 May, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 10 May, 2015, 02:51:04 PM
Protestants. Up to no good as usual.

Protestants have been shitting on the pavements?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 03:13:33 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 10:29:33 AM
Don't be scared. Frightened people are easier to control.

No. Big misconception. The slightly worried and literally petrified may be easier to control, but too much fear is just as likely to set off the fight or flight response, which leads to unpredictability.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 03:18:21 PM
I think Sharky McFalcon meant that when people are afraid they look for comfort and certainty, hence they act conservatively.  It's why right-wing media fosters fear instead of just telling you all the good things that conservatism has achieved.

Quote from: Jock Savage on 10 May, 2015, 03:01:35 PM
Quote from: King Pops on 10 May, 2015, 02:51:04 PM
Protestants. Up to no good as usual.

Protestants have been shitting on the pavements?

I wouldn't put it past them - over here, prods are almost as bad as the taigs.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 03:24:45 PM
No problem, Dark Jimbo, no offence taken. I know my views are a bit inflammatory at times so I never take counter-comments personally.
.
I don't have a perfect solution either, nor do I know all the answers - but I do have suggestions.
.
My main problem is with being told what to do. Take tax, for example. I'd be far more likely to pay up if taxes were voluntary, but they aren't. "Authority" demands its cut of my wages, its cut of virtually everything I buy as well. And this tax gets taken out before I get my cut of the work I've done, the money I've earned, and I can have what's left? Fuck. That.
.
If a mugger came up to me and demanded just a percentage of everything I had on me, I wouldn't consider him/her to be a decent mugger. If someone asked me for money, I'd be more likely to tip up a few quid. "Authority," like a mugger, doesn't ask, it demands - and if I say no it takes it anyway, any way it can.
.
"Authority" thinks it has the right to demand a cut of my wealth to spend however it pleases. That means that some of my money has been used to kill people. Fuck. That.
.
"Authority" never asks for anything (except my vote) but makes demands and threats. It's nothing more than Mafia-type extortion and it's illegitimate. I have no real problem with government as a concept but, if I can't say "no" to it then it can get lost. If it wants to work with me, I'm all for it. If it wants to rule me, it can fuck right off.
.
But, as I've said before, I can't change the world - I can only change my world. So that's what I'm trying to do and the first step, the hardest step, is to start saying "no."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 03:25:42 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 03:18:21 PM
I think Sharky McFalcon meant that when people are afraid they look for comfort and certainty, hence they act conservatively.  It's why right-wing media fosters fear instead of just telling you all the good things that conservatism has achieved.

Yes, but the post previous to Shark's Falcon's was about being scared of the government itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 03:31:04 PM
Yes, and government controls people through fear - "do as you're told or else."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 03:34:50 PM
Kicks government in unmentionables and runs away.

This has been a Party Political Broadcast by the SNP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 May, 2015, 03:37:31 PM
I think that most ex service men and current ones will disagree about the 'trivial incident ' and 'small piece of easily cleanable graffiti' being of no bother. No matter what the problem is, there is no reason to do such a thing. Obviously I can understand why and having actually talked to veterans from The Great War and numerous conflicts since, while visiting these men and women in old peoples homes and Royal British Legion villages.

I await somebody saying it was a Tory activist who did it, to stir it up!

By the way I asked Harry Potter, Harry Hill, Harry Houdini, Harry Belafonte, Harry Styles and Harry S Truman and they were all against the actions of that idiot. Don't worry, I checked my facts and that's a fact!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2015, 03:41:52 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 May, 2015, 03:37:31 PM
I think that most ex service men and current ones will disagree about the 'trivial incident ' and 'small piece of easily cleanable graffiti' being of no bother.

I didn't say it was 'no bother'... I said that, in the scheme of things, a bit of easily removable paint was hardly worth the outrage being whipped up when no one seems to give a fuck about the active destruction of the NHS and the wholesale removal of our human rights.

But then, you have a habit of wilfully mis-reading my posts. Either that or you struggle with basic English. Troll or idiot... let the people decide!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 May, 2015, 03:53:19 PM
It is worth the anger from people who have lost friends and loved ones due to conflicts, especially if they have no grave to visit. When you understand the meaning of that, TORY voter Jim (Fact) then I'll be bothered about what you say!

And yes people do get upset about the NHS but obviously not enough to vote against the conservatives who, forgive me if I'm wrong, won a legal election in a democracy. If you don't like that, then tough shit, it's democracy. You know, the thing people fought and died for!

Now if we have PR, things would be different but then you'd have quite a lot of UKIP MP's, so you can't win either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2015, 04:03:25 PM
Quite a lot of UKIP MPs would be representative of quite a lot of UKIP votes. So be it. We need to own our votes in a country-wise basis, not sweep extremism under the carpet. But also the UKIP vote was quite clearly in part a protest vote. Lots of LD votes went to UKIP, since LDs became part of the establishment in people's eyes. If we had some flavour of PR—AMS or STV, say—I imagine people would vote quite differently. Maybe that'd result in a big bloc of UKIP MPs, and maybe it wouldn't. But at least we wouldn't have the absurd imbalance seen in parliament today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dancornwell on 10 May, 2015, 04:07:36 PM
As he said, it was an election, by vote. The people voted. The Tories won. If they fuck it up then they'll be voted out as Labour were 5 years ago. And so on and so on. Democracy. If the minority won then there would be a whole other crowd of protesters. You can't please everyone. And defacing war memorials is just wrong. My opionion only. One of millions it would seem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 May, 2015, 04:13:39 PM
The graffiti wasn't smart. I wouldn't have done it and I don't condone it but it said something like "fuck the Tories" and not "fuck the fallen." If it had said the latter then I'd be disgusted and maybe even a little angry but it said the former. That's why I think it's trivial in the grand scheme of things. Although I agree with Jim's stance on this issue, I am more perturbed (but only very slightly) by his penchant for accusing people of trolling - but that's only because I don't know exactly what trolling actually is and it's not something that bothers me - like the graffiti, it's trivial. No offence meant, Jim, it was just the handiest comparison I could think of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 04:15:25 PM
Through PR we've been electing murderers and religious bigots for years, CF, and Northern Ireland's no bigger a shithole than usual.  People forget that - though viewed as extremists - UKIP are just Tories who haven't mastered spin yet, and the UK would be in no bigger a hole than it is right now if UKIP had won more seats.

And Saddam Hussein was the only candidate in Iraqi elections but he still got the majority of the vote, so that means he was totally a legitimate leader and the choice of the people.  Likewise, even though the UK got only a narrow band of choices of people who were allowed to stand - and could afford to - the vote was still totally representative of the people's wishes.  That's why those protests we're talking about didn't actually happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2015, 04:23:53 PM
Quote from: dancornwell on 10 May, 2015, 04:07:36 PMIf the minority won
It did win. The Tories were elected on 36.9% of the vote, with only a 66.1% turnout. So we have a majority government in power due to under a quarter of the electorate, and just over a third of those who could be bothered to vote. The system contrives to make it a majority because of our voting system, but 63.1% of voters did NOT vote Conservative.

Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 04:15:25 PMThrough PR we've been electing murderers and religious bigots for years, CF, and Northern Ireland's no bigger a shithole than usual.  People forget that - though viewed as extremists - UKIP are just Tories who haven't mastered spin yet, and the UK would be in no bigger a hole than it is right now if UKIP had won more seats.
Maybe, maybe not. But saying "PR doesn't work in X" doesn't mean it doesn't work. In Nordic countries, it's generally successful. Germany is probably the most successful country in Europe by most measures, and they use MMP with a threshold (5%). What we have here now, though, is a system where literally millions of people know what they don't want, and so they attempt to vote against it, rather than voting for what they do want, knowing that vote will actually count in a positive (from their standpoint) manner. We have safe seats everywhere. We have parties trying to swing a tiny handful of knife-edge constituencies and setting policy accordingly. It's Victorian and it's absurd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dancornwell on 10 May, 2015, 04:34:13 PM
With the rules as they are now. I'm not saying they're right. And maybe they should change. Been like it for years. As I said, whoever wins someone's going to be pissed off. Itll all change in 5 years, again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 May, 2015, 04:38:30 PM
The difficulty is that it may not change. Boundry changes could mean a stasis (permanent Conservative majorities in England). The SNP have played a good hand. If the Conservatives implement what we all in our hearts feel they will, the Scottish people will be chomping at the bit for another referendum. A Labour minority administration did not suit the SNP's longer term aims. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 04:45:14 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 04:13:39 PM
Although I agree with Jim's stance on this issue, I am more perturbed (but only very slightly) by his penchant for accusing people of trolling

I've been on the end of the "you're either trolling or you're an idiot" line from Jim myself, it's not particularly nice but you get over it. I do enjoy/admire a lot of Jim's posts, and I'm not shy of lobbing the odd rhetorical grenade either, so I can't complain too much.

However, it's hardly surprising that Commando Forces (the clue's in the name) wouldn't be too impressed with the protesters who desecrated a war memorial, nor anyone attempting to justify their actions. He's clearly not trolling or an idiot, but genuinely upset about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 04:59:34 PM
Jim is the absolute worst - remember when he attacked that passing cyclist without provocation?

More cuts announced, the bedroom tax is to be raised and applied more vigorously (so more dead mums on the way), a free vote on overturning the fox hunting ban, scrapping the human rights act, more snooping powers, goodbye torrenting tv shows, no benefits for anyone under 25 - and they aren't even back in work yet.
Get used to riots protests.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2015, 05:06:09 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 10 May, 2015, 04:45:14 PM
He's clearly not trolling or an idiot, but genuinely upset about it.

He's entitled to be upset about it. It was a stupid, ugly thing to do that benefits their cause not one jot and upsets entirely uninvolved people for no good reason. I merely observed that I felt the outrage was disproportionate.

However, actively misrepresenting my words in order to provoke a response from me is trolling* and it's not the first time CF has done it. Either he understood my meaning and chose to to misrepresent it in order to try and aggravate me, or he didn't understand my meaning, in which case he should, perhaps, work on his reading comprehension before joining conversations with the grown-ups.

I don't see how any part of that is unreasonable or controversial.

Jim

*I've been very clear on numerous occasions that I use the term in its very specific sense of attempting to extract a reaction from someone by provocative/contrarian/intransigent posting rather than its more general usage as a synonym for a broad range of internet douchebaggery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 May, 2015, 05:26:20 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 04:59:34 PM
Jim is the absolute worst - remember when he attacked that passing cyclist without provocation?

More cuts announced, the bedroom tax is to be raised and applied more vigorously (so more dead mums on the way), a free vote on overturning the fox hunting ban, scrapping the human rights act, more snooping powers, goodbye torrenting tv shows, no benefits for anyone under 25 - and they aren't even back in work yet.
Get used to riots protests.
Nah - there won't be any riots.  A riot would mean there's a loss of control of the situation by the police, which would mean the government would have to pay insurance claims.  That's why a lot of things which you might mistakenly think are riots are, in fact, disturbances.  Just so that that's clear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 May, 2015, 05:38:32 PM
(http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxjo2cjA4g1qi8laso1_1280.jpg)

yeah...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 May, 2015, 07:12:25 PM
When's that from?

Turnout is only a little higher than 57%...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 10 May, 2015, 07:47:03 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 10 May, 2015, 03:24:45 PM
No problem, Dark Jimbo, no offence taken. I know my views are a bit inflammatory at times so I never take counter-comments personally.
.
I don't have a perfect solution either, nor do I know all the answers - but I do have suggestions.
.
My main problem is with being told what to do. Take tax, for example. I'd be far more likely to pay up if taxes were voluntary, but they aren't. "Authority" demands its cut of my wages, its cut of virtually everything I buy as well. And this tax gets taken out before I get my cut of the work I've done, the money I've earned, and I can have what's left? Fuck. That.
.
If a mugger came up to me and demanded just a percentage of everything I had on me, I wouldn't consider him/her to be a decent mugger. If someone asked me for money, I'd be more likely to tip up a few quid. "Authority," like a mugger, doesn't ask, it demands - and if I say no it takes it anyway, any way it can.
.
"Authority" thinks it has the right to demand a cut of my wealth to spend however it pleases. That means that some of my money has been used to kill people. Fuck. That.
.
"Authority" never asks for anything (except my vote) but makes demands and threats. It's nothing more than Mafia-type extortion and it's illegitimate. I have no real problem with government as a concept but, if I can't say "no" to it then it can get lost. If it wants to work with me, I'm all for it. If it wants to rule me, it can fuck right off.
.
But, as I've said before, I can't change the world - I can only change my world. So that's what I'm trying to do and the first step, the hardest step, is to start saying "no."

Isn't this grossly naive? It's like something a 14 year old would put in an English essay. By that, I mean that it is too simplistic and makes a superficial argument without considering the issues it would create or leave unsolved.

Tax, and politics, is incredibly nuanced. There are, I think, very few - if any - tax or political ideals that don't grow from a kernel of decency and a proper idea. The issue is how far those ideas go before the become a corruption of what they were intended to be. In the medium term, left-right swings (I'm talking over decades) tend to correct any real issues.

Tax, at its simplest, is a levy intended to allow government to function. It is deducted from the individuals in society as part of a social contract for the order and structure that government brings. Without tax, there would be no government. Without government, there would be anarchy.

Some of the things a government does are unpalatable to some of the people. Spending on war, or defence, or on the NHS or on benefits may not be what some people want. But, sometimes it is for the greater good.

Tax, in all its forms, is intended to extract wealth from society to allow society to function. That's not mugging, where the money is stolen to benefit the criminal.

As a society, we can argue over the level of tax, and discuss what where it is spent. Political parties have differing views on this.

What we cannot do is have no tax. That idea simply erodes the validity of any other point you make.

Yes, let's discuss where the money goes. Yes, let's look at who pays tax and how much.

But you cannot get rid of tax. It's like getting rid of pencils because you don't like what someone has written.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 08:39:43 PM

QuoteMy main problem is with being told what to do. Take tax, for example. I'd be far more likely to pay up if taxes were voluntary, but they aren't. "Authority" demands its cut of my wages, its cut of virtually everything I buy as well. And this tax gets taken out before I get my cut of the work I've done, the money I've earned, and I can have what's left? Fuck. That.

What happens when your boss decides he isn't going to pay you your salary that month? You take him to court, right? Sorry, the court system is provided by the government and so is legislation enforcing your basic employment rights. So you go home, only to find that your house has been burgled. Call the cops, yeah? No, sorry, that's provided by the government too. All this stuff gets paid for by tax money and there are many other examples.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 08:48:21 PM
Quote"Authority" thinks it has the right to demand a cut of my wealth to spend however it pleases. That means that some of my money has been used to kill people. Fuck. That.

The fact that you aren't speaking German now and living* under a dictator is all thanks to your government killing people with tax money.

*assuming you're the right creed and colour!

(http://rlv.zcache.co.uk/sir_winston_churchill_says_shut_up_hippie_flyers-rba290e05bb5c45bd9b9176e1999a06ae_vgvyf_8byvr_512.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 09:00:08 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 02:44:28 PM
He's quite insistent that the communists and fringe hippy types clean up after themselves just fine to the point they often take their rubbish with them instead of stuffing it in the bins dotted around the street (recycling enviromentalist posers!).  It's the clean-living-and-Sunday-best crowd that tend to take packed lunches and then throw everything at their arses that he's going on about.


Reading and Glasto are Christian events now?

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/08/27/article-2403467-1B7BB282000005DC-785_964x803.jpg)
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/69520000/jpg/_69520066_davewhite_r4.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/30/article-2674781-1F43D30000000578-727_964x641.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 May, 2015, 09:06:12 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 10 May, 2015, 07:12:25 PM
When's that from?

Turnout is only a little higher than 57%...

Turnout in my town was 53%
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 09:12:43 PM
And here's some of the mess left by those clean hippies from Occupy Movement at Finsbury Square:

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/06/15/article-2159353-139B6D78000005DC-328_964x557.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: hippynumber1 on 10 May, 2015, 09:20:08 PM
Can we cut the hippy bashing now please?! These people aren't hippies...  :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 09:21:13 PM
See?  The protestors are keeping council workers in jobs that the Tories would - and have - cut in a heartbeat.  It's just a shame that firefighters or nurses couldn't pull double duty as street cleaners.

Further proof that protesting helps the populace where the government not only fails, but is waging war against us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 09:37:53 PM
Conservatives to scrap human rights act. (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/10/michael-gove-to-proceed-with-tories-plans-to-scrap-human-rights-act)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 10 May, 2015, 10:07:39 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 09:37:53 PM
Conservatives to scrap human rights act. (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/10/michael-gove-to-proceed-with-tories-plans-to-scrap-human-rights-act)

Yes, but only the bits that involve an unelected body stretching the meaning of law beyond what was originally intended, thereby doing away with the democratic principle that the legislature should be answerable to the electorate.

I've never voted Tory, and am not an apologist for them in any way, but I think there is a clear argument about the scope of the law in this area. Simply because a piece of legislation mentions "human rights" does not in and of itself make it inviolate. It creates difficult questions about crime and punishment, about balancing the greater good against the indvidual, and about freedom. I think it is sensible that the UK looks at these issues and works them out for itself and, if we (the people) don't like it then we can vote on it - not be told by a European court, which has its own political tune, that we are wrong.

There are no right and wrong answers here.

Again, it's easy knee jerk to equate doing away with a piece of human rights legislation as meaning they want to do away with human rights. You need to look at what the issues are, how they are currently addressed, what the problem is with the current situation, and then you try to sort the issues and the problems.

It is a moveable feast, this kind of thing. A permanent tinkering is needed.

(That said, I suspect the shift might be too far to the right but it's a bit off to make that assumption).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
Just posting links with no thought of your own is just being alarmist. There is no debate to be had, so I really can't be bothered to engage. Goodnight all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:23:46 PM
Quote from: hippynumber1 on 10 May, 2015, 09:20:08 PM
Can we cut the hippy bashing now please?! These people aren't hippies...  :'(

*sigh* No true Scotsman
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 10:31:51 PM
Quote from: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
Just posting links with no thought of your own is just being alarmist.

Is it just me, or does this make absolutely no sense whatsoever?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 10 May, 2015, 10:43:40 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 10:31:51 PM
Quote from: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
Just posting links with no thought of your own is just being alarmist.

Is it just me, or does this make absolutely no sense whatsoever?

It makes sense. 'Scrapping human rights' sounds atrocious. It's a valid viewpoint in terms of the EU's undemocratic hunger for ever greater power. See Dr X.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 May, 2015, 10:57:18 PM
Oh right. It's the lack of context thing. Fair enough. Carry on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 11:06:10 PM
I didn't say "scrapping human rights", I said "scrap human rights act" which is not the abolition of rights but redrawing of legislation pertaining to those rights and how they are applied, an area in which this government has already proven itself untrustworthy.  Gove is an especially odious choice to tamper with it given he's on the record as favoring a return to corporal punishment.

Quote from: Karl Stephan on 10 May, 2015, 10:22:50 PMThere is no debate to be had

You've made that abundantly clear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2015, 11:13:32 PM
Quote from: Bear on 10 May, 2015, 11:06:10 PM
Gove is an especially odious choice to tamper with it given he's on the record as favoring a return to corporal punishment.

Wrote a pro-hanging piece when he was a journalist for the Times, too. The Human Rights Act extends to capital punishment, I believe. So... pro-death penalty politician is tasked with getting rid of legislation that prohibits death penalty.

That doesn't make me in any way nervous. Nosireebob.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 May, 2015, 11:17:54 PM
I was more thinking of the backwards-looking pig's ear he's made of education in trying to make it like it was when he was wee not being the best resume for someone tasked with reforming arguably the single most important bit of legal protection enjoyed by citizens of the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2015, 11:19:26 PM
The Mirror (http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/13-basic-rights-youre-going-5673763) lists the basic rights:

The right to life
The right not to be tortured
The right not to be a slave
The right to a fair trial
The right NOT to be punished if you haven't broken the law
The right to private family life
The right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
The right to freedom of expression
The right to marry and start a family
The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions
The right to education
The right to free elections
The right NOT to be given to death penalty

It then adds that while Cameron and Gove have said there's little wrong with the HRA, the Tory bill will include a "threshold below which Convention rights will not be engaged". If that doesn't send chills down your spine, nothing will. Add to that scrapping the HRA will plunge the UK into constitutional crisis due to devolution agreements and you have the first Tory mess of this parliament well in the making.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 11 May, 2015, 12:23:03 AM
I think I was less alarmed when it was just links.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 02:32:34 AM
Dr X, you say that "(tax)...is deducted from the individuals in society as part of a social contract for the order and structure that government brings. Without tax, there would be no government. Without government, there would be anarchy."
.
Firstly, taxation is nothing more than legalised theft. There is no getting around this. Taking money from individuals without their consent is almost the very definition of theft. The fact that it's dressed up as law is merely deception. If a local street gang issued a proclamation that it was going to extract money from the local residents under pain of violent retaliation, almost nobody would regard that as law. If a government issues a proclamation that it is going to extract money from the population (via legislation) under threat of violent retaliation (i.e. robbery (forced confiscation of goods or fines) or kidnapping (imprisonment)), almost everyone does regard that as law. The only differences are in scale and belief.
.
The 'social contract' to which you allude is likewise nothing more than a belief. Have you ever signed this mythical social contract? I'm fairly sure I have not. Some argue that merely by being born into a certain abstract region, or 'country,' a person is bound by the country's social contract but this is absurd. Simply being born is in no way indicative of having signed a contract (unless you want to get all esoteric and claim a 'contract of existence' with God or the universe or other grand power).
.
Thirdly, the idea that "government" brings order and structure is also a myth. One would hardly call the massive and complex process of mass food production and distribution "government" but this process goes on all the time and is simply the result of co-operation between people. One could argue that "government" streamlines this undertaking somewhat but in that case it is not government but facilitator. The main things government brings to this process are taxation, levies and fines which, as I say, are simply theft.
.
You finish your point by saying that without government there would be anarchy, which is absolutely and undeniably true. However, I think you may equate anarchy with Mad Max and not consentual and mutually beneficial societal cooperation - which happens all the time. This very forum is anarchic but doesn't lead to criminality and chaos - we all know the rules and (largely) stick to them. There is no "government" here and neither is one needed.
.
You go on to say, "Some of the things a government does are unpalatable to some of the people. Spending on war, or defence, or on the NHS or on benefits may not be what some people want. But, sometimes it is for the greater good." At what level does it become wrong for one set of people to override the rights of another set of people? If it's just one person whose rights are ignored, does that make it okay? How about ten, 100, 1,000 or a million? And who decides that level other than government itself? It's the same with levels of taxation. If it's legitimate for the government to decide to steal 1% of a person's wealth then it's logically legitimate for it to steal 2%, 17.5% or even 100%, is it not? Again, at what level does this legalised theft become illegitimate? Either a thing is legitimate or it is not, fractions of legitimacy is an absurd idea. One cannot commit 12% of a fraud, 25% of a rape or 62% of a murder.
.
"...you cannot get rid of tax. It's like getting rid of pencils because you don't like what someone has written." Yes, you can get rid of tax. One can replace it with voluntary contributions or with a restructured banking and money creation process or a combination of the two. Of course, while we continue to run our economy in such a primitive way (using money), taxation will always be the easiest solution to certain problems but it is by no means the only way.
.
Finally, to answer your first question; no, I don't think I'm being grossly naive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 May, 2015, 07:31:10 AM
"They say that to do injustice is, by nature, good; to suffer injustice, evil; but that the evil is greater than the good.

And so when men have both done and suffered injustice and have had experience of both, not being able to avoid the one and obtain the other, they think that they had better agree among themselves to have neither; hence there arise laws and mutual covenants; and that which is ordained by law is termed by them lawful and just. This they affirm to be the origin and nature of justice; – it is a mean or compromise, between the best of all, which is to do injustice and not be punished, and the worst of all, which is to suffer injustice without the power of retaliation; and justice, being at a middle point between the two, is tolerated not as a good, but as the lesser evil, and honoured by reason of the inability of men to do injustice.

For no man who is worthy to be called a man would ever submit to such an agreement if he were able to resist; he would be mad if he did. Such is the received account, Socrates, of the nature and origin of justice."

I'm fighting with Plato Block. There has to be a policed compromise or else what we get is worse than what we have.

A social contract, btw, is a socio-political concept to distinguish theft from tax. The analogy of gangs etc is wrong and doesn't hold, because a gang has no accountability to its victim.

And the needs of the many outweigh those of the few for the greater good. Granted, it's s thin line then to discrimination but, again, the legislature should enact protections where needed.

I'm not saying the system is working. I'm saying it could work and four energy should go into policing what we have rather than ripping up something that is effective for a ill-thought through alternative.

Edit: for clarity, a social contract is about the basis of government power, not merely tax.

Edit, edit: it is naive to assume voluntary contributions would work. You need to govern to the lowest common denominator and that, I'm afraid, is that most people are selfish and greedy and wouldn't pay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 May, 2015, 07:42:31 AM
I also told myself never to get engaged in this thread.

In short, no matter what, we end up with a shower in charge.

So I'll bow out with a question:

In UK elections, the electoral officer records your voter roll number and the number of your ballot paper. They then give you the ballot.

How, then, is it a secret vote?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 May, 2015, 08:53:06 AM
I like a good conspiracy as much as the next man, but I assumed the numbers are to stop ballot-stuffing and to be able to verify each vote in the event of highly-contested results.  I don't think they actually connect the numbers to the individual voters as normal practice, only in extreme circumstances, and even then, the voting process in the UK is still pretty low-tech, so it would be an effort to create a central archive of who votes for who.

Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 02:32:34 AM
You finish your point by saying that without government there would be anarchy, which is absolutely and undeniably true. However, I think you may equate anarchy with Mad Max and not consentual and mutually beneficial societal cooperation - which happens all the time.

Society is a work in progress, and while Anarchy in the political sense does seem appealing on paper, I think it would mean Mad Max times if we tried to implement it right now because a lot of people only act in a civilised manner because they fear reprisals from government agencies. Anarchy would most likely result in feudalism and warlords and I'd rather have some kind of overarching authority in place to prevent that.
Maybe one day when we're a bit more evolved it might be a possibility, but right now we still need taking in hand, no matter how much we might want to believe otherwise.  Just look at Iraq when power changed hands - we might not have liked that Saddam would have people murdered or his sons would abduct children from the streets and rape them to death, but now that they supposedly have a much better kind of government/democracy, ISIS does the murdering and raping on a much larger scale but don't even pretend to keep the utilities working.  You might not like a government - they might even be provably evil - but just abandoning that system and hoping people who rely upon it will be okay doesn't have a great track record of success.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 May, 2015, 09:25:08 AM
Quote from: Bear on 11 May, 2015, 08:53:06 AM
I don't think they actually connect the numbers to the individual voters as normal practice

They fill out a table. One column is your ballot number, and beside it your voter role number.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 May, 2015, 09:30:23 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 May, 2015, 09:25:08 AM
Quote from: Bear on 11 May, 2015, 08:53:06 AM
I don't think they actually connect the numbers to the individual voters as normal practice

They fill out a table. One column is your ballot number, and beside it your voter role number.

"Michael James Meadowcroft clarifies the background of the ballot system in the UK. Meadowcroft emphasizes that in order to maintain secrecy of the votes whilst having ballot numbering, the results are declared at the whole electoral area level, instead of at the individual polling stations level. However, if an individual would lost his or her vote through being impersonated, the numbering enables that he or she will be given a "tendered" ballot paper of different colour than the normal ones (for more information, see ACE article on Provisional or Tendered Votes). These ballots are not being counted unless the majority of the winning candidate is less than the number of tendered ballots. According to Meadowcroft the Parliament and the courts have initiated this process exceptionally rarely."

http://aceproject.org/electoral-advice/archive/questions/replies/912993749
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 09:35:06 AM
I would argue that the gang analogy holds because where is Tony Blair's accountability for the deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq he is responsible for? Whence the accountability of Ian Duncan Smith for the deaths he has caused? To say that their accountability is merely to be voted out of office (which you did not say) is not enough.
.
I would also say that the 'social contract' is not about the basis of governmental power. Governmental power derives from the people - and if the people (you and I) have no right to force our demands on other people, have no right to force our morals on other people, have no right to force other people to give us their wealth - then how can we possibly pass these rights on to the "government?" We cannot give away that which we do not ourselves possess. The social contract, then, like government itself, is no more than a mythical entity.
.
The needs of the many may well outweigh the needs of the few on a like-for-like basis, for example a medical quarantine may sacrifice the need for life of a few quarantined souls to protect the need for life of many. It is when needs are confused with desires that things go wrong. Take my own particular example, my need for a home was outweighed by the desire of many council officials, politicians and bankers to balance the books. When desires are presented as needs, as they are with breathtaking arrogance in our current society, the equation becomes unbalanced and the centre does not hold. My need becomes subservient to the desire of others.
.
Perhaps it is naïve to expect voluntary contributions to work, especially under society's current mindset. However, people are only greedy today because they are driven to it. The need of the many ordinary people to make ever more money to satisfy the desire of a few elites to maintain their wealth and dominance is at the root of this greed problem. "The love of money is the root of all evil," as the Bible says (there is some wisdom in there), and that's as true today, maybe even moreso, as it's ever been. Fix the money creation scam and a whole world of possibilities will open up before us. That is why I always say we should fix that first - freedom and creativity will automatically follow.
.
I have never, and would never advocate ripping up everything we have achieved - there is much that is good and decent and useful in what we have created. The problem is that most of it has been hi-jacked by the greedy desires of a very few people. This is what must be ripped up.
.
I for one am glad you engage in this thread, Dr X, I enjoy the perspective and intelligence you bring.
.
If we fix the money creation scam, thereby ensuring our institutions, our services and ourselves have enough, and then begin to exercise our right to govern our own lives as free individuals, then if we are governed by a shower we only have ourselves to blame.
.
And in answer to your last question - I suppose it isn't a secret vote. But then, your vote doesn't matter anyway. No matter who you vote for, it's the few unelected bankers who hold the power. If you don't believe me, just look at what the Greeks voted for and how the IMF won't let them have it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 09:36:25 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 02:32:34 AM
The 'social contract' to which you allude is likewise nothing more than a belief. Have you ever signed this mythical social contract? I'm fairly sure I have not. Some argue that merely by being born into a certain abstract region, or 'country,' a person is bound by the country's social contract but this is absurd. Simply being born is in no way indicative of having signed a contract (unless you want to get all esoteric and claim a 'contract of existence' with God or the universe or other grand power).
.

Yeah you didn't sign a damn contract, why don't you walk out of the restaurant without paying next time you eat out because you didn't sign a contract before you had your starter.  From the moment you were born you've been the beneficiary of a society built on taxation, you owe society as a whole, as we all do.  Even if your protestations that you personally would be more likely to contribute if there was no manadatory contribution (yeah, right) were true, do you look at the efforts the rich go to to avoid giving the paltry sum they're asked for and think the same?  If so you are, indeed, hopelessly naive.  Either way, your philosophy boils down to nothing more than identikit fuck-you-got-mine internet lolbertarianism.  Given your own financial straits I find it perverse that your ideal system would strip away what little protection we have from unfettered capitalism, and leave every single public service reliant on the capricious largesse of plutocrats. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 11 May, 2015, 11:00:01 AM
Honestly, it boils down to me being a cynic and any other view being optomistic.

That said, I do think that constantly changing your forum name should be a hanging offence. No, scrap that. Hanging's too good for the likes of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 May, 2015, 11:16:14 AM
Gove's got your back, DX.

/goes off to change his name to "Dr X is smelly."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 11 May, 2015, 12:05:13 PM
I'm just glad 'White Falcon' does the dot thing in his long posts so I could immediately identify his previously big fishy identity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 03:43:30 PM
I love your restaurant analogy, JPM, because it allows me to make my point perfectly.
.
If I walk into a restaurant, I do so of my own free will. If the meal is inedible and the service is dire then I have no obligation to pay. If I decide I don't like the menu, I can walk out before ordering. If the meal is super delicious and the service is excellent then I'll definitely pay and may even leave a tip. If the restaurant owner doesn't like the look of me or if I behave poorly in his/her establishment then I can be refused service or asked to leave - it is a mutually consensual arrangement.
.
Let's take your analogy further. If the restaurant owner employed a couple of gorillas to grab people off the street and force them inside to eat and then forced them to pay, irrespective of the quality of the food, would that be right? I'd say no.
.
Let's go a little further into the realms of fantasy. Imagine your restaurant is publicly owned and the only one in town; and that if you wanted to eat out this place was the only option. But the manager, for whatever reason, only buys the cheapest cuts of meat and fish which he knows are a bit iffy. People get sick and some may even die. You'd want that manager sacked, wouldn't you? But you can't sack him for up to five years, during which time he just carries on as he is. Would you consider that to be fair? Even when he is sacked after his tenure expires, you'll only get someone else like him and so it continues.
.
So you decide to open J. P. Maybe's Diner and provide a better service. This new place is the same size, offers the same dishes and the same portions at the same price but uses fresh ingredients, properly cooked and served by staff who enjoy their job and don't sneeze into the soup or spill gravy all over the place. Most people, given the choice, would rather go to your diner.
.
But the manager of the first restaurant has a brother who's the mayor of your town and so taxes, levies, requirements and fines are imposed on your new diner. So much so, in fact, that the JPM Diner can't make a profit and eventually goes under, leaving you with massive debts, no house and a criminal record. The first restaurant, not bothered by such restrictions, carries on as it always has. Would you consider this to be fair or even lawful? Well, this is exactly how government works.
.
Thanks for that analogy, JPM, I couldn't have thought of a better one myself and will use it often from now on!
.
I don't really get the rest of your post. You seem to think that, because I am part of society, I must pay for it with money. Helping people out directly or having a socially useful job doesn't seem to be enough for you.
.
If I were to turn up at your home, uninvited, and mow your lawn, wash your car and clean the windows then demand payment, would you think that fair? But this is exactly what government does. "We've built you a school, pay us," "we've bombed Iraq for you, pay us," "we've invited the King of Europe over to a banquet for you, pay us," "we've increased our salary for you, pay us," "we've incarcerated a petty criminal for you, pay us" and so forth and on. Taxation is nothing but a con job but we've all been conditioned to see it as entirely reasonable and honest when it is, in fact, the complete opposite of those things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 May, 2015, 03:56:14 PM
In this anarchist utopia how is money defined?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 11 May, 2015, 03:58:49 PM
F***. As if the election news couldn't get much worse:

http://news.sky.com/story/1481942/ukip-rejects-nigel-farages-resignation
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 04:05:16 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 03:43:30 PM
I love your restaurant analogy, JPM, because it allows me to make my point perfectly.
.
If I walk into a restaurant, I do so of my own free will. If the meal is inedible and the service is dire then I have no obligation to pay. If I decide I don't like the menu, I can walk out before ordering. If the meal is super delicious and the service is excellent then I'll definitely pay and may even leave a tip. If the restaurant owner doesn't like the look of me or if I behave poorly in his/her establishment then I can be refused service or asked to leave - it is a mutually consensual arrangement.
.
Let's take your analogy further. If the restaurant owner employed a couple of gorillas to grab people off the street and force them inside to eat and then forced them to pay, irrespective of the quality of the food, would that be right? I'd say no.
.
Let's go a little further into the realms of fantasy. Imagine your restaurant is publicly owned and the only one in town; and that if you wanted to eat out this place was the only option. But the manager, for whatever reason, only buys the cheapest cuts of meat and fish which he knows are a bit iffy. People get sick and some may even die. You'd want that manager sacked, wouldn't you? But you can't sack him for up to five years, during which time he just carries on as he is. Would you consider that to be fair? Even when he is sacked after his tenure expires, you'll only get someone else like him and so it continues.
.
So you decide to open J. P. Maybe's Diner and provide a better service. This new place is the same size, offers the same dishes and the same portions at the same price but uses fresh ingredients, properly cooked and served by staff who enjoy their job and don't sneeze into the soup or spill gravy all over the place. Most people, given the choice, would rather go to your diner.
.
But the manager of the first restaurant has a brother who's the mayor of your town and so taxes, levies, requirements and fines are imposed on your new diner. So much so, in fact, that the JPM Diner can't make a profit and eventually goes under, leaving you with massive debts, no house and a criminal record. The first restaurant, not bothered by such restrictions, carries on as it always has. Would you consider this to be fair or even lawful? Well, this is exactly how government works.
.
Thanks for that analogy, JPM, I couldn't have thought of a better one myself and will use it often from now on!

The point, which I guess must have been deflected into the stratosphere given how far it sailed over your head, is that one doesn't have to sign a piece of paper to be subject to a contract.  Though please do use it, as it will make clear the utter self-centredness and abrogation of any notion of responsibility to society that your philosophy entails.

Quote
I don't really get the rest of your post. You seem to think that, because I am part of society, I must pay for it with money. Helping people out directly or having a socially useful job doesn't seem to be enough for you.

Depends how much you earn.  If you make enough to cover your basic needs then yeah, you absolutely should put something back in to improve the lot of the society that let you make that money in the first place.  And having a system of mandatory graduated income tax means that, however much people hate it, at least it's fair as anyone of a given income gives as much as anybody else.

Quote
If I were to turn up at your home, uninvited, and mow your lawn, wash your car and clean the windows then demand payment, would you think that fair? But this is exactly what government does. "We've built you a school, pay us," "we've bombed Iraq for you, pay us," "we've invited the King of Europe over to a banquet for you, pay us," "we've increased our salary for you, pay us," "we've incarcerated a petty criminal for you, pay us" and so forth and on. Taxation is nothing but a con job but we've all been conditioned to see it as entirely reasonable and honest when it is, in fact, the complete opposite of those things.

Except we're not talking about washing your car, are we?  We're talking about the things that keep people alive like clean water and sewage disposal, the things that everyone has a duty as members of society to contribute to, the things that need a steady, predictable source of income to be able to plan and not leave people swimming in their own faeces.  You can keep stating that taxation is equivalent to theft as much as you like (and I'm sure you will) but it doesn't make it so.  The absolute moral necessity of wealth redistribution, for one, trumps your obsession with where exactly value gets extracted from the work you do to pay for the good of your fellow human.  I agree that Iraq was an obscenity, and would strip military spending to the bare minimum if I could.  Doesn't mean that taxation itself is the evil that you're obsessively saying it is. 

To quote Clement Atlee "Charity is a cold grey loveless thing. If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly, not dole out money at a whim."  Putting aside your ludicrous utopian fantasies of social money instantly doing away with corporate greed and the profit motive, that's what you'd reduce us to, being at the mercy of the whims of the wealthy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 May, 2015, 04:13:09 PM
Shark,  your argument is perversely similar to those rich wanders who say "I earned this through hard work and never relied on anyone for a handout so why should I pay tax to help others".

But they, like you, did not emerge from the womb as a fully functioning adult. There was a whole infrastructure in place to help get you from being a crawling baby dependent on everything, through childhood, through rebellious teenage years and into adulthood.

A fuck load of people paid for by taxes have helped you. You can't just say "Ah but I didn't want them to".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 May, 2015, 04:15:50 PM
Quote from: Tim Tailz on 11 May, 2015, 03:58:49 PM
F***. As if the election news couldn't get much worse:

http://news.sky.com/story/1481942/ukip-rejects-nigel-farages-resignation

Well, as pointed out elsewhere, UKIP did actually achieve unprecedented success for an independent party even if they didn't get much in the way of seats.  If they ever stop being a punchline by making their members not say stupid things in public, get their shit together and master spin, it'll be like that bit in Rise of the Planet of the Apes where the monkeys figure out how machine guns work - WE'LL ALL BE COMPLETELY FUCKED.

All the same, I think this has more to do with Farage being a known quantity with voters, and without him UKIP have to get someone else in and make them a household name.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 May, 2015, 04:32:39 PM
Yeah I think without Farage they would sink quickly. Remember Nick Griffin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 May, 2015, 04:40:52 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 May, 2015, 04:32:39 PM
Remember Nick Griffin?

No!

Actually, now that you mention it, wasn't he Oliver Hardys Stunt-double in the old black and white movies?

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 11 May, 2015, 04:53:28 PM
Aren't Shark's boring, one-note and delusional contributions often typed out on a computer at his local library; a service available free to all members of the community, thanks to local council taxation.

Stop me when you see where we're going with this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 May, 2015, 05:25:54 PM
Is our White Falcon (famous fish) setting the Political Thread aflame again??? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 05:56:15 PM
TheBlaze, in this "anarchist utopia" I would define money as a medium of exchange.
.
JPM, I know one doesn't have to sign a piece of paper to be subject to a contract. The very act of entering a restaurant and ordering a meal constitutes a contract. The point that seems to elude you is that all contracts, whether written or unwritten, must be a) mutually consensual and b) contain reasonable expectations - a combination of the two ideas of agreement and obligation. A contract really is a pretty basic concept which, as you do not seem to grasp, cannot be forced by one party onto another.
.
I'd like to know how you think taking control of one's own life is an abrogation of personal responsibility when I have said, time and time again, that one cannot have personal freedom without personal responsibility. Handing over one's power to a small bunch of politicians in the vain hope that they will wield those powers wisely and for the benefit of all, then watching them piss away that power to rob you and help their friends, is the ultimate abrogation of responsibility.
.
So long as a society is run for profit then what you say will remain true - if you don't have enough money then you deserve a slice of someone else's. And if that someone else doesn't want to give up their hard-earned wealth then it should be forcibly taken from them. Social money creation still allows for people to work hard and become rich but it doesn't demand it. "Look at him, he's got lots and I've got nothing, boo-hoo" seems to be the norm today. Give everyone enough - a roof over their heads, public services and enough to eat - and things will be better. Not perfect, granted, but better. The very idea that people must be treated like rats in a pit, fighting each other for every scrap they can get, seems to be the only kind of society you can envisage. I think that kind of society is abhorrent. One can contribute to society in very many ways - but these ways entail hard work and thought. To just throw a few bob into a big pot to be administered by greedy and duplicitous politicians
is the least of these ways and represents yet another abrogation of personal responsibility.
.
The things that keep people alive, like clean water and sewage disposal, would not instantly cease to be if government and taxation suddenly disappeared. Indeed, these are the very things that social money creation is designed to fund. (Rome built an empire with socially created, interest-free money and lost it when the money creation transferred to private hands. What I'm suggesting is neither radical nor new.) Money is created by society, with no interest, and in order for it to enter society and do its job (which is not to earn more money for the rich, as is its purpose today) it has to be spent on these things. Today, the things that keep people alive are run for profit when they should, in fact, be run for the benefit of society.
.
The  absolute moral necessity of wealth redistribution is only an absolute moral necessity in this world of haves and have nots you defend so vehemently. In a society of haves, it is much less important.
.
We have so many fantastic systems and technologies in this world of ours. Imagine if we used them for people instead of profit. The only things stopping us from building that world are privately created money and politicians.
.
It is privately created money and politicians who leave us at the mercy of those wealthy individuals you despise so much (again, look at modern Greece). Social money and personal freedoms and responsibilities free us from those whims. If you have enough food, how will the rich starve you out?
.
Tips, you are correct, we do have a lot that we all benefit from. My argument is not about that - indeed, we should all treasure and help maintain these things, which a switch to social money creation would do in spades - my argument is that these things have been hi-jacked for profit. We all think that our taxes pay for these vital things but the truth is that they do not. Debt pays for these things, which is precisely why they are all under so much unnecessary strain today.  Our current system, which we have all been brought up to believe is the only system possible, is destroying them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 06:07:38 PM
No, Mr R. I type them out on an old 'phone using a £7.50 per month GiffGaff internet and 'phone service which I pay for out of the wages I earn from my job. I claim no benefits, tax credits or grants from the government as these things come from government borrowing and are bad for the country. My beliefs in this area mean that I sometimes have nothing at all in my pocket and very little in my belly. I also have no debts for the same reason. I wonder, do you claim any of these toxic benefits, credits or grants which do more harm than good? If not, then I honestly and humbly salute you.
.
And yes, I see exactly where you're going with this - down another one of your beloved blind alleys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 06:51:01 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 05:56:15 PM
TheBlaze, in this "anarchist utopia" I would define money as a medium of exchange.
.
JPM, I know one doesn't have to sign a piece of paper to be subject to a contract. The very act of entering a restaurant and ordering a meal constitutes a contract. The point that seems to elude you is that all contracts, whether written or unwritten, must be a) mutually consensual and b) contain reasonable expectations - a combination of the two ideas of agreement and obligation. A contract really is a pretty basic concept which, as you do not seem to grasp, cannot be forced by one party onto another.

You accede to the social contract implicitly every single day you stay here and don't move to Somalia.  Maybe there should be a state fund for people like you to leave and see what life without a state is like.

Quote
I'd like to know how you think taking control of one's own life is an abrogation of personal responsibility when I have said, time and time again, that one cannot have personal freedom without personal responsibility. Handing over one's power to a small bunch of politicians in the vain hope that they will wield those powers wisely and for the benefit of all, then watching them piss away that power to rob you and help their friends, is the ultimate abrogation of responsibility.

Jesus, that's the problem with arguing with anti-statist absolutists like you, it makes it sound as if I particularly like the current system.  Your version of personal responsibility amounts to nothing but rhetoric, and is utterly meaningless without a state to enforce against people who breach it.  Your version of "taking control of your own life" amounts to letting selfishness run rampant.

Quote
So long as a society is run for profit then what you say will remain true - if you don't have enough money then you deserve a slice of someone else's. And if that someone else doesn't want to give up their hard-earned wealth then it should be forcibly taken from them. Social money creation still allows for people to work hard and become rich but it doesn't demand it. "Look at him, he's got lots and I've got nothing, boo-hoo" seems to be the norm today. Give everyone enough - a roof over their heads, public services and enough to eat - and things will be better. Not perfect, granted, but better. The very idea that people must be treated like rats in a pit, fighting each other for every scrap they can get, seems to be the only kind of society you can envisage.

Absolutely false and your ideal society would be far more vulnerable to the excesses of capitalism than mine.

Quote
I think that kind of society is abhorrent. One can contribute to society in very many ways - but these ways entail hard work and thought. To just throw a few bob into a big pot to be administered by greedy and duplicitous politicians
is the least of these ways and represents yet another abrogation of personal responsibility.

Horseshit.  I guess Nye Bevan counts as a greedy and duplicitous politician in your world?  And, ad nauseum you never ever acknowledge how complicated our society is, in particular the kind of society we want, where people get health care and clean water.  Your system would be fine for a commune.  But for 60-odd million people some form of technocracy is vital.  Unless you think that you, White Falcon, internet-researcher extraordinaire, have the knowledge to make a valuable input on every one of the things the state provides.

Quote
The things that keep people alive, like clean water and sewage disposal, would not instantly cease to be if government and taxation suddenly disappeared. Indeed, these are the very things that social money creation is designed to fund. (Rome built an empire with socially created, interest-free money and lost it when the money creation transferred to private hands. What I'm suggesting is neither radical nor new.) Money is created by society, with no interest, and in order for it to enter society and do its job (which is not to earn more money for the rich, as is its purpose today) it has to be spent on these things. Today, the things that keep people alive are run for profit when they should, in fact, be run for the benefit of society.

No shit.  Explain how your stateless utopia would prevent those vital services falling prey to the profit motive, given that by your own admission you think every single one should be open to competition.  And evidence of how the Roman plunder-economy relates to the UK today please.

Quote
The  absolute moral necessity of wealth redistribution is only an absolute moral necessity in this world of haves and have nots you defend so vehemently. In a society of haves, it is much less important.

Absolutely measurably false, every single metric you can think of for the overall health of a society indicates that its overall well-being is intimately tied to the internal distribution of wealth, even when the poorest in that society have the basics.  Your system is social cyanide. And yeah, I vehemently defend the have-nots, as opposed to your perverse defense of plutocrats and rent-collectors.


Quote
We have so many fantastic systems and technologies in this world of ours. Imagine if we used them for people instead of profit. The only things stopping us from building that world are privately created money and politicians.

Yet more evidence-free utopian horseshit.  I'd like a system like Iain M Banks' culture, doesn't mean I think we'll get it as soon as we have a strong AI. 

QuoteIt is privately created money and politicians who leave us at the mercy of those wealthy individuals you despise so much (again, look at modern Greece). Social money and personal freedoms and responsibilities free us from those whims. If you have enough food, how will the rich starve you out?

The water cartel will demand that you pay twice what you did before for water that you can only get on alternate Tuesdays and which might give you Legionnaires.  Or they'll bulldoze your house while you're out because there's no-one to stop them.



Quote
Tips, you are correct, we do have a lot that we all benefit from. My argument is not about that - indeed, we should all treasure and help maintain these things, which a switch to social money creation would do in spades - my argument is that these things have been hi-jacked for profit. We all think that our taxes pay for these vital things but the truth is that they do not. Debt pays for these things, which is precisely why they are all under so much unnecessary strain today.  Our current system, which we have all been brought up to believe is the only system possible, is destroying them.

Yet you have never, ever shown how in your system any of these services would be protected from the depredations of capitalism.  Not once.  You just state that it would, over and over again.  You're incapable of grasping a source of oppression that isn't the state, hence in your laughably simplistic worldview we'd have an instant utopia without them.

I was probably wrong to call you an identikit libertarian, you're a curious hybrid of left- and right-anarchism really, given that most anarcho-capitalists are just motivated by base greed- you obviously aren't, though you'd like making society prey to those who are for some reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 11 May, 2015, 07:03:02 PM
The tyranny of private money is back I see. Those who voted for it may find they are its victims as much as the state they profess to loathe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 07:14:52 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 06:51:01 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 05:56:15 PM

Quote
The  absolute moral necessity of wealth redistribution is only an absolute moral necessity in this world of haves and have nots you defend so vehemently. In a society of haves, it is much less important.

Absolutely measurably false, every single metric you can think of for the overall health of a society indicates that its overall well-being is intimately tied to the internal distribution of wealth, even when the poorest in that society have the basics.  Your system is social cyanide. And yeah, I vehemently defend the have-nots, as opposed to your perverse defense of plutocrats and rent-collectors.

Misread what you wrote here Shark/Falcon, apologies.  My point, expressed more pithily, is that your ideal society is still one of haves and have-nots, as the definition of a have-not is entirely tied to the relative differences between levels of personal wealth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 08:07:04 PM
So, JPM, you now advocate a state fund to deport undesirables? I think that's been tried before. People didn't like it much.
.
If by "letting selfishness run rampant" you mean enlightened self-interest, then I agree. If you mean "I got mine so the rest of you can piss off," then you are dead wrong.
.
"...your ideal society would be far more vulnerable to the excesses of capitalism than mine." Have you not been paying attention? Global debt has grown by $57 trillion to reach $199 trillion in the seven years following the financial crisis - a 40.1% rise. Austerity, crumbling public services, unemployment, homelessness, wealth inequality... Yeah, your society is just peachy.
.
Perhaps the fact that you have to go back to a man who died in 1960 to make a point about all politicians not being greedy and duplicitous says more than I could. I'm sure there are a few who want to do as much good for as many people as possible - but only a few. Of course our world is complex, wonderfully so, but that doesn't mean it can't be funded and run in a more sensible manner. I think you may be under the impression that I want to sweep everything away and start again from the ground-up. Nothing could be further from the truth. The best way to alter a system is to make the minimum required changes. I suggest only two; the switch to social money creation and the replacement of elected politicians with elected managers. All these other changes you fear are entirely in your own head.
.
Vital public services would be managed by elected managers and funded by publicly created money, thus removing them entirely from the profit motive. The fall of Rome was in a very large part caused by massive debt which facilitated the need for more plundering wars, high taxation and the erosion of public services. I'll leave you to draw your own parallels with what is happening in our society today.
.
What's wrong with people being rich if they want to work for it? What's wrong with buying something and renting it out? Capitalism isn't inherently evil. Hotel rooms are rented out, bicycles, cars, tuxedos, boats, aircraft, fields. If you just want a weekend in London, should you buy a house and then sell it when you're done or just rent a hotel room? Capitalism is the best of a set of imperfect choices but it should be kept away from necessities like water, sewage treatment and housing. If you wanted to buy a house, would you rather take out an interest-bearing mortgage, which profits private banks, or an interest-free mortgage, which benefits you?
.
Nor do I. Utopia is an ideal to strive towards, not a fixed end point.
.
I don't know where you get the idea that running the water system properly will give us all drinking water with turds floating in it or that law and order will suddenly evaporate into nothingness if we work towards making the two major changes I advocate. This kind of rhetoric smacks of fearmongering, I'm afraid. Have you ever considered running for parliament? You'd fit right in.
.
That last bit's just rubbish, I'm afraid. You seem to regard any changes to the system as insanely dangerous and regard anyone who proposes such changes as a dangerous lunatic. That's your prerogative, of course, and indeed there are dangers with any change. This does not mean that changes should not be explored. I also find your suggestion that I think some kind of Utopia could be created overnight with no problem at all to be misrepresentative not only of reality but of what I say. I also think that you are incapable of grasping that oppression begins with consent. The state, or religion, or capitalism, or debt, or the Lord Humungous, can only oppress a society through the consent and willing cooperation of sections of that society. You round off with a bit of name-calling, which you'll forgive me if I don't reciprocate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 May, 2015, 08:13:37 PM
Quote from: Bear on 11 May, 2015, 08:53:06 AMSociety is a work in progress, and while Anarchy in the political sense does seem appealing on paper, I think it would mean Mad Max times if we tried to implement it right now because a lot of people only act in a civilised manner because they fear reprisals from government agencies. Anarchy would most likely result in feudalism and warlords and I'd rather have some kind of overarching authority in place to prevent that.



But it's the only likely sci-fi scenario we have left to look forward to.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 08:17:28 PM
To your correction, no apology is necessary as I am enjoying our debate immensely, although I do appreciate it - thank you. It is impossible, I think, to have a world without haves and have nots. Some people will always have things that others do not. This is not necessarily a bad thing (see my comment about renting things). The absolute worst part of that, of course, is when it boils down to necessities. I hope you would agree that it is utterly and fundamentally wrong for some people to have clean water, food, shelter, clothing etc. when others do not. It is these fundamentals which I propose be "ring-fenced" (to use an awful political phrase) away from capitalism. Luxury yachts, sports cars, Gucci handbags, even comic books and statues of Judge Dredd are not essential - so capitalism can have all that stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 May, 2015, 08:53:35 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 11 May, 2015, 08:07:04 PM
So, JPM, you now advocate a state fund to deport undesirables? I think that's been tried before. People didn't like it much.
.
If by "letting selfishness run rampant" you mean enlightened self-interest, then I agree. If you mean "I got mine so the rest of you can piss off," then you are dead wrong.
.
"...your ideal society would be far more vulnerable to the excesses of capitalism than mine." Have you not been paying attention? Global debt has grown by $57 trillion to reach $199 trillion in the seven years following the financial crisis - a 40.1% rise. Austerity, crumbling public services, unemployment, homelessness, wealth inequality... Yeah, your society is just peachy.

In what universe have I implied that that's "my" society?  I'm a socialist.  I want to eliminate capital as a deciding force in anybody's life.  The reason I take so much issue with your view is that it would make things immeasurably worse.


Quote
Perhaps the fact that you have to go back to a man who died in 1960 to make a point about all politicians not being greedy and duplicitous says more than I could. I'm sure there are a few who want to do as much good for as many people as possible - but only a few. Of course our world is complex, wonderfully so, but that doesn't mean it can't be funded and run in a more sensible manner. I think you may be under the impression that I want to sweep everything away and start again from the ground-up. Nothing could be further from the truth. The best way to alter a system is to make the minimum required changes. I suggest only two; the switch to social money creation and the replacement of elected politicians with elected managers. All these other changes you fear are entirely in your own head.
.

This is incredible.  Because you put the number "two" on the changes you want to make as if everything you can label a change is equal in magnitude, then it's the "minimum required" change?  As if completely changing how society works can just be done overnight with no state to back it up?  Note that I don't have a problem with the idea of social money.  I think it's a fairly good one.  It's the idea that it would mean a fucking thing without a state to back it up that I take issue with.

Quote
Vital public services would be managed by elected managers and funded by publicly created money, thus removing them entirely from the profit motive. The fall of Rome was in a very large part caused by massive debt which facilitated the need for more plundering wars, high taxation and the erosion of public services. I'll leave you to draw your own parallels with what is happening in our society today.

Why would it remove them from the profit motive?  Would or would not public utilities be open to competition in your ideal world?  And if not how is that any different to a state monopoly?  And, no don't leave me to draw my own parallels, you raised ancient Rome as a paragon of the use of social money, you can explain it.

Quote
What's wrong with people being rich if they want to work for it? What's wrong with buying something and renting it out? Capitalism isn't inherently evil. Hotel rooms are rented out, bicycles, cars, tuxedos, boats, aircraft, fields. If you just want a weekend in London, should you buy a house and then sell it when you're done or just rent a hotel room? Capitalism is the best of a set of imperfect choices but it should be kept away from necessities like water, sewage treatment and housing. If you wanted to buy a house, would you rather take out an interest-bearing mortgage, which profits private banks, or an interest-free mortgage, which benefits you?

There are a number of things wrong with people being rich, or more precisely much richer than the people at the bottom.  Read  The Spirit Level (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_Level:_Why_More_Equal_Societies_Almost_Always_Do_Better).  I'm talking about the runaway accrual of wealth that the rich in this society indulge in, which we've got little and insufficient defence against now, but to which we'd have no defence at all under your system.  And thanks for the admission that you do want centrally controlled monopolies on vital services, the governance of which wouldn't be a de facto state... how?  And they'd be protected from private interests undercutting them and driving them out of business... how?


Quote
Nor do I. Utopia is an ideal to strive towards, not a fixed end point.
.
I don't know where you get the idea that running the water system properly will give us all drinking water with turds floating in it or that law and order will suddenly evaporate into nothingness if we work towards making the two major changes I advocate. This kind of rhetoric smacks of fearmongering, I'm afraid. Have you ever considered running for parliament? You'd fit right in.

Well now you've admitted that a state monopoly on it is the way to run a water system, then we've no problem.

Quote.
That last bit's just rubbish, I'm afraid. You seem to regard any changes to the system as insanely dangerous and regard anyone who proposes such changes as a dangerous lunatic. That's your prerogative, of course, and indeed there are dangers with any change. This does not mean that changes should not be explored. I also find your suggestion that I think some kind of Utopia could be created overnight with no problem at all to be misrepresentative not only of reality but of what I say.

You've repeatedly said yourself that you could make the changes you want overnight.  Do you want me to dig up a quote from you in this thread?  The thought of scrutinising your turgid ramblings doesn't fill me with delight, I'm afraid, but I will if you want.  Again I need to reiterate that as a socialist I think that social money isn't a bad idea, I just don't think it would be the absolute panacea you think it would be.

Quote
I also think that you are incapable of grasping that oppression begins with consent. The state, or religion, or capitalism, or debt, or the Lord Humungous, can only oppress a society through the consent and willing cooperation of sections of that society. You round off with a bit of name-calling, which you'll forgive me if I don't reciprocate.

Your oppression is my defence from the tyranny of the rich.  In fact your definition of oppression has such a ridiculously low bar that only fringe cases like you hold to it.  And please tell me how the victims of the Bhopal disaster consented?  Or any victim of insufficient state control against capitalism, for that matter?  Who, exactly, steps in to protect people from the feckless or the greedy in your world?  Forgetting that, without politicians and money, everyone will of course be good human beings.

Modified to repair broken link—IP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2015, 09:04:38 PM
I have to go to bed. I'll respond in the morning. G'night!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 May, 2015, 09:06:21 PM
QuoteIf I walk into a restaurant, I do so of my own free will. If the meal is inedible and the service is dire then I have no obligation to pay.


QuoteThe very act of entering a restaurant and ordering a meal constitutes a contract.

Pick one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 12 May, 2015, 07:43:45 AM
Three days ago this thread was quite interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 12 May, 2015, 08:39:48 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 12 May, 2015, 07:43:45 AM
Three days ago this thread was quite interesting.

This thread gets skipped for long spells these days. The point scoring and nit picking is very grating  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 09:09:55 AM
Erm, in this universe. I began with a direct quote from you in which you specifically called it "my society" and, as you have not put forward any vision of the society you would like to help build, and have admitted to defending at least aspects of this one, I assumed that's what you meant. Apologies if I misunderstood. Besides, to be pedantic, this society is your society, just as it is mine and everyone else's equally.
.
I too am disdainful of capital. My ideal society, at the risk of attracting more howls of derision, would not use something so primitive as money at all and would be more along the lines of the 'Star Trek' society. But such a society is a long way off and the changes I propose simply a step along the way - not designed or meant to last forever. And how eliminating debt, meeting everyone's basic needs and empowering the individual makes things "immeasurably worse" is, I admit, beyond me. What changes to society do you propose to make things measurably better?
.
There are many changes I'd like to see but vomiting out a long laundry list of them would be pointless. There are many changes other people would like to see as well but I wouldn't presume to know what they are. In my opinion, after listening to the people around me, the two major factors behind their discontent are debt and oppressive rules. Many changes are required but changing where money comes from and curtailing the imagined power of our "rulers" is the minimum amount of those required changes. Minimum in number, not minimum in impact or complexity. Such changes will make it easier for people to change their own lives, and society, as they see fit. The idea that you need a state (by which I assume you mean an authoritarian parliament) to "back up" these changes is not one I subscribe to. We don't need politicians to force us into making our own lives better but facilitators to manage the tools we need to do it for ourselves.
.
No, public utilities would not be wide open to competition under the changes I propose (see my later comments). They would be social monopolies, run by society in any way it chooses (my suggestion is elected managers), funded by social money and with the aim of providing the best service possible. Profit would not come into it. There would still be plenty of scope for private enterprises to provide assistance and support for these utilities through the manufacture of parts and the provision of specialist labour etc.
.
I raised ancient Rome as an example of the power of social money, not a paragon. I would not want to use social money to build a war machine to go out and rebuild the British Empire at the end of a billion guns. Ancient Rome shows us that vast changes can be made using this system and also offers a sobering lesson as to the dangers of using private money. In order to pay off the money lenders, Rome had to engage in ever more plundering wars (as we do now, riding on the US's coat tails) and tax the life out of its citizens (as we are doing now), which in turn led to the state viewing its own citizens as the enemy, to be controlled and kept down (US, UK, EU). In the end, Rome imploded and fractured apart (independent Scotland), a fate I would like to see us avoid. I don't want to write a long essay on the similarities between Ancient Rome and the modern world and so I hope these superficial parallels will suffice.
.
"The runaway accrual of wealth that the rich in this society indulge in" is a symptom of private money creation which would be throttled by a switch to socially created money. Take away from these people the ability to create fortunes at the stroke of a pen, or these days at the click of a mouse, and they'd have to work for their fortunes like everyone else. There would still be relatively rich and relatively poor people (in a monetary sense) but the gap between the two would be significantly lessened. The poor would be less likely to resent the rich if their basic needs were met and the rich would be less afraid to end up hanging from a golden lamp post. People would still be able to start their own businesses and strive for greater monetary wealth than their fellows if that's what they want, and be able to employ people who want to work for them to give them a higher income than just the basics. In fact, I'd expect entrepreneurs and creatives to flourish under a social money system as they won't lose their houses or end up on the streets with nothing if they fail. I have no problem with having a diverse society containing both relatively rich and relatively poor people. I do, though, like you, have a big problem being part of a society containing obscenely rich and obscenely poor people.
.
Public utilities would not be protected from competition as such but their nature would safeguard them to a large extent. Imagine some genius puts his hand up and says, "hey, I've invented a way to draw free energy from the fifth dimension without the need for fuel but I'm not going to tell you how to do it unless you pay me ten billion quid!" The elected manager of the National Grid would, in that instance, be advised to first verify such claims and then put the offer to the people. If the people accept the offer, or he accepts society's counter-offer, all well and good. The technology could be purchased and a period of transforming existing public power stations undertaken. If the offer is rejected, the inventor is perfectly free to construct his own safe power plant and offer the energy he generates for sale - but if he wants to do so using existing public power lines then he'd have to pay rent to society for using those power lines. If his electricity is cheap enough then there's no problem but if it's too expensive the public won't buy it. Without unchecked rulers presiding over the country's power system, he'd be unable to bribe people into accepting his system and charges. It becomes more sensible to cooperate than compete.
.
Not state monopolies, social monopolies. The state monopoly is wide open to corruption due to the few people involved in making decisions on contracts, secret dealings and what have you. The social monopoly, whilst still open to a certain level of corruption, would be far less vulnerable due to the transparency required (all decisions and accounts must be available for any member of society to view at will, most likely on the internet). If it's ours, then its our responsibility to keep an eye on it. This does not mean that every one of us must spend 18 hours a day studying the accounts of every public utility. People will naturally keep an eye on the things of interest to them and flag up any discrepancies to social media, reporters, each other, the rest of society and so on. Local, regional or national elected councils could even employ people to specifically monitor these accounts on our behalf. (Yes, there would still be elected bodies in place to help run the show - the difference is that all decisions made in the running of society's vital services and infrastructure would be transparent and not virtually invisible. You would have the facility to see it all and object, support or suggest as the situation requires.)
.
These changes could be made overnight. It really is that simple. The question as to whether they should be made overnight is a different one. I said earlier that I would never want to be prime minister and one of the reasons I gave is that I would make these changes overnight, leading to confusion, misunderstanding, mistrust and unrest. It would be far more sensible to work towards these changes, to plan ahead and to prepare. It might take us ten years or more to sort out the details and explain the ramifications. Society, indeed, might not go for it - but if it does, when we're ready, these changes can be made overnight. There are pros and cons for both making these changes tomorrow and in ten years. Doing it tomorrow invites fear and unrest and doing it in a decade invites sabotage and exploitation. And although the fact fills me with unease, if society decides it wants to do this then it really must be done through our existing imperfect and corrupt political system. I honestly hate that fact and wish there was a peaceful and sensible way around it but there really isn't. At least none that I can see. We'd be asking an entrenched ruling elite to give up their power and hand it over to the people - and they are not going to do that willingly just because a handful of people like me think it's for the best.
.
The victims of the Bhopal disaster did not consent; their rulers consented for them using powers they are not entitled to. Removing parliamentary power does not automatically destroy existing structures such as civil services, police forces or court systems. There would still be protections in place - protections that would become stronger with the removal of undue authoritarian influence. Remove that undue influence and one example of benefit would be the situation where the government decides who is and is not entitled to legal aid and therefore access to the judicial system. Police and courts would be much freer to investigate and prosecute such hideous crimes as the Bhopal disaster without the interference of government or the protection of vast wealth.
.
Rich, as I said, contracts, both written and unwritten, have only two fundamental requirements: they must be mutually consensual and contain reasonable expectations. If I walk into a restaurant and order a meal, that's the consensual part. I therefore have the reasonable expectation, the second part, that the meal provided will be edible because, why would I possibly expect otherwise? If the meal turns out to be inedible, that is a breach of the second fundamental base of contract, therefore the contract is void and I have no obligation to pay. If the restaurant owner wants me to pay for an inedible meal then that is an unreasonable expectation and outside the law of contract. The same is true for every contract; if you ask a mechanic to fix your car and he promises to but doesn't, and then wants you to pay anyway, the mechanic has an unreasonable expectation and the contract is void. Conversely, if you drop your car off at a garage for a basic service and the mechanic decides to charge you for replacing the engine without asking you first, that is a breach of the consensual part of the contract, voiding it, and you have no obligation to pay him for work or materials which you didn't authorise. I trust this clears things up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 09:29:59 AM
You're right, James. I do try not to engage in nit-picking and point-scoring but often fail. I apologise and will try harder to avoid such things in the future.
.
Mr R, I apologise for my earlier snipe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 May, 2015, 09:45:49 AM
In practical and straightforward terms, what is it you want, and what can we do to help you make it come about?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 09:56:51 AM
In practical and straightforward terms, I want to be in control of my own life. I want to be able to negotiate with authority in order to reach agreements acceptable to us both. When I say "no" I want it to mean just that. I want to be free to live my life as I choose, following the simple code 'cause loss, harm or damage to no-one; honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings.'
.
If you want to help me, just do the same. Live your life as you see fit and do no harm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 May, 2015, 10:03:53 AM
Unfortunately the definition of lawful is what leads to 1,000 word debates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 10:10:20 AM
Lawful - not murdering, raping, hurting, stealing, lying or cheating.
.
Legal - legislation.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 12 May, 2015, 10:32:20 AM
whilst i miss the "legendary shark" I do like the white falcon...it reminds me of one of those 30's serials .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 May, 2015, 10:44:22 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 10:10:20 AM
Lawful - not murdering, raping, hurting, stealing, lying or cheating.
.
Legal - legislation.
.

'Moral'

Legal = Lawful. With no claims to Justice.

Legendary Shark & White Falcon - puts me more in mind of a Kung Fu movie :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 11:08:34 AM
Legal is not the same as lawful. What was lawful 1,000 years ago remains lawful today. What is legal changes almost on a daily basis.
.
Take Prohibition in the US as a prime example. Alcohol was legal, then it was illegal, then it was legal again. It remained constantly unlawful, however, to kill someone whilst pissed (or sober).
.
Shall we talk about this? I'm up for it but people seem to be getting a bit bored of me.
.
Grugz, you should see my flared nunchucks and killer quiff!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 11:32:54 AM
Stolen from the internet.

*An example may explain the difference:

In is unlawful to build a house in breach of planning permission.

But it is not illegal to do so.

Murder is illegal.

It is unlawful to employ someone without a formal contract.

It is not - however - illegal.

Illegality attracts criminal sanctions.
Unlawful activity attracts civil sanctions.* 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 May, 2015, 11:37:40 AM
Quote from: White FalconIf you want to help me, just do the same. Live your life as you see fit and do no harm.

So, nothing tangible.

You don't want our help to start a campaign, establish a charity or something like that? You don't want to urge us to join Liberty (https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/), Left Unity (http://leftunity.org/), or suggest we attend the People's Assembly Demo (http://www.thepeoplesassembly.org.uk/) on 20 June. You don't want us to contribute to your campaign fund ahead of standing at the next election?

I don't understand everything that's been written on here, but I think there are some great points. However, having read all of it, I'm still confused as to what I'm actually supposed to do now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 May, 2015, 11:47:49 AM
A quick search on the difference between legal and lawful shows that in practical terms they are the same thing, in armchair debate terms Sharky/Falcon has many compatriots :) It seems that it is almost entirely a case of pedantry to make a distinction between the two.

The distinction between civil and criminal courts does not seem to be of direct relevance and more a case of severity than inherent definition. Certainly I can't find any legal professionals making any claims on this in the first four pages of search results, which implies to me it's probably just pedantry.

As Google reveals this debate occurring across the web (particularly in a certain Mr Icke's forums) without conclusion, I would say it's a bit of a waste of time and I certainly have nothing to contribute on the matter other than to state the lack of a readily available definitive answer.

[EDIT - It only just occurs to me how fitting a Dredd one-off featuring a 'common law' argument presented to Old Stony Face would be :) ]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 11:54:06 AM
Pretty much every answer I found by any legal professional stated that the distinction was a semantic one latched onto by pedants, fantasist and trolls.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 12 May, 2015, 11:58:54 AM
Quote from: Banners on 12 May, 2015, 11:37:40 AM
Quote from: White FalconIf you want to help me, just do the same. Live your life as you see fit and do no harm.
standing at the next election?

A Legendary Great White Shark may get my vote anyway.

(http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/britishcomics/images/a/a8/Barry_penge.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2015, 12:09:20 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 11:54:06 AM
Pretty much every answer I found by any legal professional stated that the distinction was a semantic one latched onto by pedants, fantasist and trolls.

Which does not necessarily mean that it isn't a valid legal tactic to argue that semantic difference in a court of law - if you have the money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 12:16:48 PM
I have no idea weather it would be worth arguing in court or how useful an argument it would be. I'm sure if it was some one would have, and there would be recorded examples but that would take way more time then I have to research. If Google wont tell me concisely (in under a paragraph) I'm unlikely to ever find out.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:34 PM
Some legal arguments are just that - arguments.  If you have the money and an indulgent judge, you can pay your barrister to effectively filibuster with semantics until the other guy runs out of cash.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:56 PM
In is unlawful to build a house in breach of
planning permission.
But it is not illegal to do so.
Murder is illegal.
It is unlawful to employ someone without a
formal contract.
It is not - however - illegal.
.
Each one of those is the wrong way around!
.
Banners, that's my point - you have to do what you feel is right. You can't change the world - you can only change your world. I can't tell you how to change your world or which parts of it need changing, if any.
.
One of the things I did was with the Council Charge. When I got a bill I basically said, sure, I'll pay it - just show me the contract I signed with you to pay it and I'll pay it. Of course, there was no contract so all the council could do was keep sending demands to which I always responded in the same way. The same with the TV License, sure I'll pay, just show me the contract first. If there isn't one (there isn't), then let's make one. If they threaten to take you to court, and they will, ask for what crime and if they actually mean an ultra vires administrative tribunal (they do). Then decline the invitation on the grounds that you are, and always have been, willing to negotiate. The police will not turn up because it's a civil matter, not criminal. You can back down and pay up any time if your nerve fails you - and it will fail you at some point as you're going against decades of conditioning.
.
This might sound petty (and you should properly research your position if you want to do this) but it's how to begin exercising your own power. I basically picked one demand (in my case the TV License) and refused to bow to it. I'm not an unreasonable man, I'm always willing to negotiate, but I will not be bullied or conned by "authority" any longer.
.
Your first step, though, must be research. Learn the difference between law and legislation, between rights and privileges - that much is vital. Then apply your knowledge in the way that suits you best. And always be polite and respectful, but firm, in your letters - remember you're dealing with human beings who have been trained and conditioned into a certain way of thinking. They should be pitied rather than abused.
.
If what I've done doesn't appeal, find another way. The internet is full of ideas but be careful, there's a lot of crap out there as well. A good place to start your research is getoutofdebtfree.org
.
Just take control of something, anything, that "authority" thinks it has the right to control for you. Change your world. It's as simple, and as difficult, as that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 12:31:18 PM
Get yourself a copy of Black's Legal Dictionary, I seem to remember that the 4th edition is the best. Don't rely on the internet - for law, proper old-fashioned books are the best thing, although pdfs of actual books will do at a pinch.
.
And by the time one gets to court, it's too late to start arguing semantics. The judge will have no patience for it. You have to have won your argument before you even get to court. It's the job of the court to weigh the arguments, not become involved in them. You have to have won your argument before you even unleash it on whomever you're arguing with.
.
This is why research is vital.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 12:33:33 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:34 PM
Some legal arguments are just that - arguments.  If you have the money and an indulgent judge, you can pay your barrister to effectively filibuster with semantics until the other guy runs out of cash.

Digression. the ability to argue a case to a standstill isn't relevant to weather arguing if an offence is referred to as illegal or unlawful is useful. The concept itself is also not a specific example.

 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 12:40:36 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:34 PM
Some legal arguments are just that - arguments.  If you have the money and an indulgent judge, you can pay your barrister to effectively filibuster with semantics until the other guy runs out of cash.

You've seen too many films.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 12:44:34 PM
I get all my legal advice from Franklin and Bash
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 12:53:16 PM
The place to argue your case to a standstill is at the initial stage. "Authority" will most likely ignore your arguments and continue to demand. Don't agree to fill in a complaint form, you don't have a complaint, you have questions/suggestions/requirements. In-house complaints procedures funnel you in a certain direction and are designed to tie you up in legalese. State your position, over and over again if need be, to the same person. Ideally the same person who wrote to you in the first place. Don't even demand to communicate with that person's line manager or the overall boss. No matter who writes to you, always address your response to the same person - the person who made the initial demand. And never, ever, ignore a letter or demand. In their legalese world, if you don't object to something then you must accept it - so ignoring a letter/demand is regarded as acceptance. They can then get you for failing to honour something they consider you have accepted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 01:05:16 PM
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/legal-miscellaneous/difference-between-illegal-and-unlawful/

I doubt the distinction between the two words is actually that important, if it was then I'm pretty sure their legal meaning would be clearly defined with cited example of appropriate and inappropriate use. (possible with case numbers)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 May, 2015, 01:20:24 PM
Goddammit, Falcon Shark—you don't have to have signed something to be under effective obligation to pay. Regarding the TV licence, you also do NOT have to pay, assuming 1) you don't have a TV capable of receiving broadcast television, and 2) *morally speaking* you do not use any BBC/C4 services whatsoever. As for Council Tax, I trust you're not at any point using any council services, since you're against paying for them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2015, 01:30:16 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 12:40:36 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:34 PM
Some legal arguments are just that - arguments.  If you have the money and an indulgent judge, you can pay your barrister to effectively filibuster with semantics until the other guy runs out of cash.

You've seen too many films.

Then so have Avril Lavigne's lawyers - and it didn't stop them sending the Rubinoos packing with a token settlement. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvKNL3g0m0A)

Although in fairness I think Lavigne probably heard the LUSH cover. (https://youtu.be/-kX7DV8-Vxg?t=39s)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 May, 2015, 01:53:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 May, 2015, 01:20:24 PM
you don't have to have signed something to be under effective obligation to pay.

(http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2015/02/groundhog-day.jpg)

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 02:02:51 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 12 May, 2015, 01:30:16 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 12:40:36 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 12 May, 2015, 12:21:34 PM
Some legal arguments are just that - arguments.  If you have the money and an indulgent judge, you can pay your barrister to effectively filibuster with semantics until the other guy runs out of cash.

You've seen too many films.

Then so have Avril Lavigne's lawyers - and it didn't stop them sending the Rubinoos packing with a token settlement. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvKNL3g0m0A)

Although in fairness I think Lavigne probably heard the LUSH cover. (https://youtu.be/-kX7DV8-Vxg?t=39s)

I'll see your YouTube and raise you Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Others v Fattal & Others [2009] EWCA Civ 297.

This is the quickest case I could find on abuse of process where you bring successive actions in respect of the same subject matter. That, practically, is how you would filibuster. And, normally, it's not allowed. You cannot go back over old ground and re-open arguments, not without some pretty good reason to do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 02:05:34 PM
The distinction between the two words is important but not as important as the distinction between legislative law and common law. Legal relates to legislative law and lawful relates to common or natural law. These two branches of law have conflated over the years, muddying the definitions.
.
No, you don't have to have signed something to be under effective obligation to pay - but you have to have agreed to it. One person cannot arbitrarily impose a charge on another, there has to be some form of agreement, either by action or written or verbal contract. Take my earlier example of doing uninvited gardening for somebody and then demanding payment. It doesn't work like that.
.
Regarding the TV License, you are quoting legislation, which is fair enough, but common law trumps legislation every time. Under common law, I can't charge someone for something I'm doing in general if they don't want to pay. Just because the BBC is broadcasting signals openly and I have a TV that doesn't give them the right to arbitrarily charge anyone. If they don't want me to receive their signals they should scramble them and charge me for a decoder. If they can't fund themselves with all the money they make from international services, DVD sales, programme sales and such then that isn't my problem. I'm willing to contribute, sure, ask me for something and I'll consider donating what I can afford (that kind of thing works for hospices and lifeboats and air ambulances) but come after me with a demand backed up by force then I'm not interested. It's the same as me saying "I put my posts on this public forum and I need money so you owe me £X per year for reading them and if you don't pay I'll force it out of you." The difference is only one of scale. Same with the Council Charge (it's not a tax) - I have no problem donating what I can afford, hell, I'll even give you a few hours of work a week sweeping the streets or scrubbing graffiti off walls in return, but the council has no lawful right to demand anything. It's the council's job to do these things, if they cannot meet their obligations with the ostensible tax money they receive from central government, that's not my fault. I don't go to work, receive my wages and then charge my employer a Me Tax because I can't make ends meet and, if my employer refuses to pay my Me Tax, send in the bailiffs. Maybe the council would like to borrow some money off me to help it out but no, it demands and threatens and is that I object to. They work for me, not the other way around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2015, 02:11:45 PM
The Licence Fee is a terrible example, as I haven't paid it in years by simply removing the aerial (the BBC decoder, if you will) from my house and thus no longer qualify.  You don't want to pay the LF, then you can't watch terrestrial telly, that seems perfectly fair to me.
I'd pay the LF on principle, though, if the BBC stopped being such a mouthpiece for rich right wing cunts.

Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 02:02:51 PM
I'll see your YouTube and raise you Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Others v Fattal & Others [2009] EWCA Civ 297.

It's not that I think you're lying, it's just that either you're right or Good Wife is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 02:16:06 PM
It might be different in the States, granted, but I doubt it. No sane judge would allow it. They have targets to meet and very little time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 02:17:19 PM
Good point, Seagull, and there are other factors including the private company set up to collect the LF, deposit the money off-shore to avoid tax, give the BBC some of it and use the rest to make more tax-free money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 May, 2015, 02:25:58 PM
I am not sure if that is entirely what happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 02:54:40 PM
Actually, nor am I now. It's a few years since I read about Capita doing that and now I can't find any reference to it. To be on the safe side, I retract that statement.
.
There are shennanigans, though:
.
www.tvlicenceresistance.info/bbc-accused-of-tv-licence-rip-off/
.
conversation.which.co.uk/money/tv-licence-fee-payment-plan-direct-debit-charges-government/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 May, 2015, 03:04:52 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 11:08:34 AM
Legal is not the same as lawful. What was lawful 1,000 years ago remains lawful today.

Yes but legislation SUPERSEDES historical lawfulness - or would you consider child marriage, rape and a dozen types of animal cruelty to be perfectly lawful activities that the state should not be able to stop you from doing? 1000 years ago you'd be seen as a freak for even raising an objection to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 03:26:15 PM
No, DDD, legislation does not automatically supercede common law. The main planks of common law remain solid. It was always unlawful to cause harm but the definition of harm does change over time and is defined by case law and common attitudes of society. Case law, evolving through the courts, does gradually extend the scope of common law and is more valid than legislative law. Just because certain legislation happens to agree with the common law, or attempt to refine definitions, that's not the same a superceding it.
.
If the government passed legislation tomorrow making murder, rape or theft legal, that legislation would not supercede common law. The first court challenge would strike down this legislation instantly.
.
I'm not saying that legislation is all useless and invalid, far from it. Legislation can be useful in defining law but, as the lowest form of law, is most useful in an advisory capacity.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 03:39:12 PM
Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament; murder, for example, now carries a mandatory life sentence rather than the death penalty.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 03:51:34 PM
Again, no. What you are talking about there is punishment. The common law says that murder is wrong and that's it. The punishment for transgressing that law is decided seperately by societies and their judicial systems and beliefs. Though the punishments may change, thou shalt not kill remains constant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 May, 2015, 03:55:42 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 02:05:34 PMJust because the BBC is broadcasting signals openly and I have a TV that doesn't give them the right to arbitrarily charge anyone.
YOU. ARE. USING. THE. SERVICE. I assume if you're against paying council tax, which in part pays for road maintenance, you think the council should employ someone to ensure you don't leave your house and step on (and thereby use) said roads?

QuoteIf they can't fund themselves with all the money they make from [...] DVD sales
The DVD sales from BBC Worldwide, you mean, which is a commercial subsidiary and that supplements the income received through the licence fee, thereby making it lower? Good grief. Still, the BBC probably won't be a problem for everyone soon. There will be cheering in the streets as the hideous £145.50 fee vanishes, along with most of the BBC. That we'll likely respond in a similar way to other countries who've lost their public broadcaster within a decade or so (essentially: "Fuck.") is neither here nor there.

QuoteSame with the Council Charge (it's not a tax)
So don't use the services. It really is that simple. Find out what the council does for you, and don't use any of it if you won't pay. Anything else is hypocrisy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 03:56:17 PM
nope. what I'm saying is 'Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament' the example was an element of a law so you latch onto and interpreted that. you then categorised it as a punishment and disregarded the whole statement based on that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 May, 2015, 04:00:59 PM
Only in Britain do we take the noble things everyone else admires completely and utterly for granted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 May, 2015, 04:26:19 PM
I was going tom have another go at explaining why that common law argument is bollocks, but I can't be arsed.

I knowe that the sharky falcon's motives are right but his boneheaded misinterpretation of constitutional law and refusal to be corrected makes any discussion pointless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 May, 2015, 04:56:57 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 12 May, 2015, 04:00:59 PM
Only in Britain do we take the noble things everyone else admires completely and utterly for granted.
- Fantastic public broadcasting, but people want it gone.
- A world-class health service that costs a fraction of privatised equivalents elsewhere.
- Freedom of movement and settlement in any EU country (and, by extension, typically any EFTA country).
- HUMAN RIGHTS.

Watching the right-wing right now is terrifying. Hell, watching plenty of normal people is terrifying because they have no fucking idea what's happening. "We can't let in the people who caused the financial crash." That's right. But then US banks weren't on my ballot.

And every Cabinet appointment sends a clear message. We even have an equalities minster who voted against gay marriage. FFS x infinity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 04:57:04 PM
This is the problem with "authority" and its "laws."
.
We can all come up with very logical and sensible reasons why we should pay for this or that. "Authority" enshrines these things in legislation and imposes punishments on anyone who fails to pay.
.
It begins in school. Students are praised and rewarded for being where authority tells them to be when authority tells them to be there and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for being anwhere else.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for doing what authority tells them to do and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for doing anything else.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for speaking when and how authority tells them to speak and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for speaking at any other time, in any other way or about any other subject than what authority tells them to speak about, or by failing to speak when authority tells them to speak.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for repeating back whatever ideas the authority declares to be true and important and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for disagreeing, verbally or on a written test, with the opinions of those claiming authority, or for thinking or writing about subjects other than those authority tells them to think or write about.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for immediately telling authority about any problems or personal conflicts they encounter and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for trying to solve these problems on their own.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for complying with whatever rules, however arbitrary, authority decides to impose on them and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for disobeying any such rules. These rules can be about almost anything; what to wear, haircuts, facial expressions, what words to use, what to have on a desk, which direction to face or even how to sit in a chair.
.
They receive approval, praise and reward for telling authority when another student has disobeyed the rules and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for failing to do so.
.
The students are taught that there are two classes of people in the world; masters (teachers) and subjects (students), and that the rules of behaviour are drastically different for each class. The masters constantly do things the subjects are told not to do; boss people around, control others through threats, confiscate property, create arbitrary rules and so on and on. This reinforcement of master and subject continues throughout (mandatory) schooling. The end result is a whole class of people who accept the master/subject divide without question and carry that conditioning through to adulthood and beyond. We find it very hard to shake off.
.
This is why, when "authority" tells us to do something like pay your TV license, we just do it without question. When somebody like me says "no," all that conditioning kicks in. How many of you feel angry at me? Where does that anger come from?
.
We all know that theft and violence are unacceptable but don't bat an eyelid when somebody who says "no" is forcibly arrested or has their property stolen because "authority" is doing it under the guise of any "law" it chooses to write down.
.
Yes, there are many good reasons why I should pay for a TV license but not one for forcing me to do so. TV license, Council Tax, parking fine - the charge and ostensible reasons behind it are irrelevant. It's the force I object to - and will do so to my dying day (which won't be very long if some of you get your hands on me! :-)).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 May, 2015, 05:03:54 PM
 :o right I've lost the plot here....who th  fuck is Lesbian Seagull??? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 12 May, 2015, 05:13:05 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 04:57:04 PM
It begins in school.

Been in a classroom lately, have you? I generally stay off this thread (unless a bit drunk) but the whole Pat Mills-y take of wicked fascist teachers crushing hopes, dream and individuality seems rooted in some 1950s reality and is a far cry from the job I actually do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 May, 2015, 05:30:46 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 04:57:04 PMThis is why, when "authority" tells us to do something like pay your TV license, we just do it without question. When somebody like me says "no," all that conditioning kicks in. How many of you feel angry at me? Where does that anger come from?
I don't feel hostility towards you, but I am frustrated in your argument that comes down to "I should only have to pay for stuff if I feel like it and have specifically agreed to it in some kind of contractual basis," regardless of whether you use the service. Public broadcasting exists to the betterment of everyone. The UK would be a poorer place without the BBC, regardless of its shortcomings. The only way it can exist is through public funding. When that funding disappears, so will the BBC. To use the services because, hey, the BBC didn't spend colossal amounts of money encrypting its content, thereby hugely increasing complexity at every single step from broadcast through to dealing with your telly, is simply hypocritical and dishonest.

It's also very weird how closely your arguments tally with far-right equivalents in the USA. "I shouldn't have to pay taxes for anything!" Well, what about when your house is on fire? Even the voluntary stuff just repositions every public service as a charity at the whim of people who'll pay, which would be the minority and lead to breaking-point cuts across the board.

Anyway, [Jim's picture].
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 05:48:35 PM
ummmm, I don't think people are angry at you for challenging their conditioned perceptions of authority. from what I have seen as a long term but largely passive observer; I Think people are trying to point out that you are wrong about an awful lot of things and that you suffer from run away conformation bias. picking up on fragments and misinterpreting them to your own ends. discarding anything that doesn't re-enforce your point of view it's entirely pointless conversing with you on almost any subject because of how fundamentally flawed every thing you say is and how utterly entrenched every idea has become in your mind.

This thread is notionally for political discussion but you have reseeded so far into your own mind, into a world of your own construction that I'm not sure how many people would recognise our social landscape in yours.

Perhaps you should ask yourself what exactly it is you are hoping to achieve by dominating this thread?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 05:52:15 PM
Do I have to start going on about how privately created, interest bearing money needs to be eradicated so these authoritarian demands for payment will become unnecessary... again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 May, 2015, 05:55:40 PM
Aye Shark, give the rest of the posters a chance. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 05:56:02 PM
No you need to accept that that statement is meaningless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 May, 2015, 06:18:02 PM
Okay, okay. Point taken. It's hard to say the right thing when everyone thinks you're wrong and I honestly don't want to upset people, so I'll bug out of here for a while and just read. No hard feelings, okay?
.
One last thing before I take a rest; irony of ironies, I've just won in a vote!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 12 May, 2015, 06:34:29 PM
Meanwhile, in actual political news, UKIP's one MP has fallen out with UKIP.

It's like Robert Kilroy Silk all over again. Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 12 May, 2015, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 12 May, 2015, 05:13:05 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 04:57:04 PM
It begins in school.

Been in a classroom lately, have you? I generally stay off this thread (unless a bit drunk) but the whole Pat Mills-y take of wicked fascist teachers crushing hopes, dream and individuality seems rooted in some 1950s reality and is a far cry from the job I actually do.

No it is actually true.  All we live for is to see the dreams of young people crushed and them to live their lives out in abject poverty and despair.  Exam results days we hold parties to celebrate all those students who failed to get their GCSE's and now are condemned to a lifetime of zero hours contract work or the dole.

(Sorry, is this not the troll baiting thread.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 May, 2015, 08:14:37 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 06:18:02 PM
Okay, okay. Point taken. It's hard to say the right thing when everyone thinks you're wrong and I honestly don't want to upset people, so I'll bug out of here for a while and just read. No hard feelings, okay?
.
One last thing before I take a rest; irony of ironies, I've just won in a vote!

You don't have to bug out. the ideas you are currently expressing have been discussed and rejected. most people accept that society is a thing and the best way to govern a society is with some kind of government. Currently your understanding of UK law is catastrophically flawed.

contribute but contribute with new, relevant, content. Derailing every discussion with giant blocks of self referential text that we have seen 10 times before is not helping any one, in my opinion.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 10:06:26 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 03:51:34 PM
Again, no. What you are talking about there is punishment. The common law says that murder is wrong and that's it. The punishment for transgressing that law is decided seperately by societies and their judicial systems and beliefs. Though the punishments may change, thou shalt not kill remains constant.

Sorry, I am trying to steer away from this thread. But this is plain wrong.

There are two sources of law: common law and legislation.

Common law has nothing to do with being "common" in the sense that it is either ubiquitious or fixed. Rather, it is the generic term for that part of the legal system which is derived from custom and practice. It is not a constant. It is an evolving body of law based on precedent - that is, cases heard by court. A judicial opinion based on the circumstances before it applies principles established by previous cases. In some ways, it is an endless finessing of circumstances but it is often possible to create entirely new principles or overturn old decisions. The decision of a higher court (ie on appeal) can overturn the decision of a lower court.

It is not inviolate, it is not fixed.

Legislation can supercede common law. It imposes the will of the people (in theory) as determined by an elected legistlature, which (in theory) operates as a check and balance on the will of an unelected judiciary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 12 May, 2015, 10:31:17 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 10:06:26 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 03:51:34 PM
Again, no. What you are talking about there is punishment. The common law says that murder is wrong and that's it. The punishment for transgressing that law is decided seperately by societies and their judicial systems and beliefs. Though the punishments may change, thou shalt not kill remains constant.

Sorry, I am trying to steer away from this thread. But this is plain wrong.

There are two sources of law: common law and legislation.

Common law has nothing to do with being "common" in the sense that it is either ubiquitious or fixed. Rather, it is the generic term for that part of the legal system which is derived from custom and practice. It is not a constant. It is an evolving body of law based on precedent - that is, cases heard by court. A judicial opinion based on the circumstances before it applies principles established by previous cases. In some ways, it is an endless finessing of circumstances but it is often possible to create entirely new principles or overturn old decisions. The decision of a higher court (ie on appeal) can overturn the decision of a lower court.

It is not inviolate, it is not fixed.

Legislation can supercede common law. It imposes the will of the people (in theory) as determined by an elected legistlature, which (in theory) operates as a check and balance on the will of an unelected judiciary.

Pfft! What do you know!? You're just an actual solicitor!
A guy on the internet says different!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 May, 2015, 10:50:30 PM
So let's consider other political subjects – like how I can't take Chuka Umunna seriously because his name always makes me think of the theme tune from Chuggington (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jme9WGifHdU).

Chukington, Chuka, Chuka, Chuka, Chuka, Chukkington...! etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 13 May, 2015, 12:06:40 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 12 May, 2015, 10:31:17 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 May, 2015, 10:06:26 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 12 May, 2015, 03:51:34 PM
Again, no. What you are talking about there is punishment. The common law says that murder is wrong and that's it. The punishment for transgressing that law is decided seperately by societies and their judicial systems and beliefs. Though the punishments may change, thou shalt not kill remains constant.

Sorry, I am trying to steer away from this thread. But this is plain wrong.

There are two sources of law: common law and legislation.

Common law has nothing to do with being "common" in the sense that it is either ubiquitious or fixed. Rather, it is the generic term for that part of the legal system which is derived from custom and practice. It is not a constant. It is an evolving body of law based on precedent - that is, cases heard by court. A judicial opinion based on the circumstances before it applies principles established by previous cases. In some ways, it is an endless finessing of circumstances but it is often possible to create entirely new principles or overturn old decisions. The decision of a higher court (ie on appeal) can overturn the decision of a lower court.

It is not inviolate, it is not fixed.

Legislation can supercede common law. It imposes the will of the people (in theory) as determined by an elected legistlature, which (in theory) operates as a check and balance on the will of an unelected judiciary.

Pfft! What do you know!? You're just an actual solicitor!
A guy on the internet says different!

All you really need is wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2015, 12:44:02 AM
The SNP are apparently not going to allow the repeal of the Human Rights Act, and will be coordinating a vote in tandem with the Tories' own backbenchers - but it turns out they might not need to bother, as some armchair lawyers on Twitter pointed out that the UK government repealing the HRA would invalidate the terms of the Good Friday Agreement that had been agreed to in a referendum, so some wet liberal law types have taken the ball and ran with it. (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/12/scrapping-human-rights-act-would-breach-good-friday-agreement)
It all sounds very anti-democratic to me, enforcing the will of the people.  How will we make slaves of the unemployed now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2015, 10:42:15 AM
There's a way around this. Federalism. Then you just remove these rights from the English while simultaneously screaming about ENGLISH VOTES FOR ENGLISH PEOPLE, drinking warm beer and jumping around with an English flag, while Gove literally bounces around with excitement at the prospect of hanging whoever doesn't 'earn' their human rights.

(I hear the Welsh have figured out how to get around HRA repeal too, note.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2015, 10:53:46 AM
See now, you joke, but remember when the Scotch built that hospital that worked and the right wing press went apeshit calling it "Sturgeon's Death Star" and wailing that it was unfair that the Scotch got a new hospital when the English NHS was so fucked?  The people of England bought that argument.
I foresee the Mail and their ilk complaining that this was what Cameron was warning them about all along - the Scotch imposing their will on the English (the other way around being completely fine).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2015, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: Scotch boarders whenever I jokingly use the term 'Scotch' to describe them
I'm not quite sure who you're talking about there.  Who are the 'Scotch'?  Scotch is a drink.  And eggs.  And broth.  And tape. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2015, 11:19:54 AM
Lesbian Seagull: The craziest front page was the one on the Mail, banging on about the HORROR OF SNP LABOUR OH NO DOOM, while the lead story was basically: "The NHS appears to be in the shit... for some reason".

Still, I 'look forward' to five years of the Tories still somehow blaming Labour for everything, and continuing to do so at the next election. I just hope the voters don't bloody well buy it next time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2015, 11:31:56 AM
I look forward to the "extremism" Dave is trying to ban being legally defined as "strike action by unions" or "peaceful protests", as I think the sooner we go back to rioting as a nation, the sooner these times will pass.


JBC: Scotch is from Scotland, so it is called Scotch.  I think you will agree the science there is pretty airtight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 May, 2015, 02:02:09 PM
An American friend of mine Tweeted with mild bemusement last Friday: "I think the UK just elected those guys from V for Vendetta."

I laughed.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'." — David Cameron

Today, not so much.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 May, 2015, 03:28:07 PM
This is doing the rounds on teh internetz...

https://www.change.org/p/the-uk-government-allow-the-north-of-england-to-secede-from-the-uk-and-join-scotland

Unlikely to ever happen, but it'd be flippin' hilarious if it did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jock Savage on 13 May, 2015, 06:13:58 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 13 May, 2015, 03:28:07 PM
https://www.change.org/p/the-uk-government-allow-the-north-of-england-to-secede-from-the-uk-and-join-scotland

Unlikely to ever happen, but it'd be flippin' hilarious if it did.

This is basically what's behind the idea of creating The Northern Powerhouse (http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/david-cameron-puts-mp-james-9244049) and devolving power to the regions.  Anywhere that doesn't vote Tory gets their own regional government to blame for everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 13 May, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2015, 11:19:29 AM
Quote from: Scotch boarders whenever I jokingly use the term 'Scotch' to describe them
I'm not quite sure who you're talking about there.  Who are the 'Scotch'?  Scotch is a drink.  And eggs.  And broth.  And tape. 

And mist.
But definitely not 'people'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2015, 11:27:48 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE5ErWvWAAARfS5.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rogue Earthlet on 14 May, 2015, 01:54:41 AM
I voted for Torquemada's Terran Independence Party, as, like all civilised people I fully support their policy of cleansing the galaxy of deviants, especially that green skinned comics editor known as the Mighty Tharg!
I say this in the confident belief that Tharg the Thick Skinned won't take offence, and will refrain from sending Rigellian hot shots in my direction.

Yours etc, from a very pure, very vigilant and exceptionally well behaved earthlet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 14 May, 2015, 09:54:40 AM
At last it can be revealed! Where all these new Conservative voters really come from. Beware! They could be anyone you know...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3cZJ3iURzk

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 May, 2015, 10:24:06 AM
at least there's some good news on TTIP - democrats in congress have defied Obama and voted against it (and the equivalent Asian deal).  Bizarrely, the republicans voted WITH Obama on this at the same time as slagging him off for being a weak leader. It doesn't mean it's totally dead as there are too many vested interests in both parties (and on both sides of the pond) who want it passing

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32717241 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32717241)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 May, 2015, 10:51:25 AM
GoP showcasing, there, that it's not remotely for personal liberty, or even US democracy. Nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 May, 2015, 11:17:57 AM
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long  as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'." (http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/how-obeying-law-no-longer-5688690)
.
And so it begins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 14 May, 2015, 12:10:18 PM
How many Scottish Labour MPs does it take to change a lightbulb?

All of them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 May, 2015, 12:33:34 PM
It's like something Doctor Doom would say:

(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/dave%20doom_zpsbzkmx4wa.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 May, 2015, 01:20:51 PM
I keep going back to that quote - it's fucking chilling and will come back to haunt him in the same way that the "no money left" joke did to Liam Byrne. Here's me thinking that tolerance and being left alone as long as you're not breaking the law was one of those "British Values" that we're supposed to be promoting.

What the fuck is "passive" tolerance anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 14 May, 2015, 02:23:59 PM
It pretty terrifying- who defines 'extremist'?

Ahh... wait... that'll be the tories, won't it?
We're way closer to fascism than I thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 May, 2015, 08:59:14 PM
So long as we keep the Stamford Prison Experiment and the Millgram Experiments in mind, we'll be fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 May, 2015, 09:41:53 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 14 May, 2015, 08:59:14 PM
So long as we keep the Stamford Prison Experiment and the Millgram Experiments in mind, we'll be fine.

Whenever anyone makes a documentary which mentions either of those, they usually try and recreate the experiments and it always bothers me that nobody taking part ever goes "hold on... haven't I seen this in a documentary?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 May, 2015, 08:45:42 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 14 May, 2015, 11:17:57 AM
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long  as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'." (http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/how-obeying-law-no-longer-5688690)
.
And so it begins.

Jesus.  All to counter terrorism, they say.  Once again, fear is used as an excuse to cast aside human rights and freedoms.  Hats off, Osama; job well done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 May, 2015, 09:05:18 AM
We need more extremist huskies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2015, 02:24:16 PM
HERE IS HOW THE Uk 2015 ELECTIONS WAS RIGGED! (http://www.exposetheestablishment.com/2015/05/here-is-how-the-uk-2015-elections-was-rigged/)
.
Some of the links in the above article won't load for me, at least one is a year old and some report only minor infractions. Still, I post it here in case anyone's interested.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 May, 2015, 02:48:18 PM
I could go through that and explain point by point why it is so very wrong, but there would be no fucking point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 May, 2015, 02:59:34 PM
Here is how the UK Elections were rigged, ahem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 May, 2015, 03:37:40 PM
Gnh. This kind of conspiracy bullshit helps no-one. We need to fight for electoral reform—that is how we can potentially usher in a shift towards more moderate and progressive government (given that even now, with an overt swing to the right, UK voting patterns are still 50/50 progressive/conservative), not by blathering garbage about how an election was somehow stolen by the kind of relatively minor fuck-ups that affect every single election, ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 May, 2015, 03:56:37 PM
Makes no difference to me. I've already said how I believe "government" itself is an invalid concept. I posted that link because I thought some of you might be interested more than I am.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2015, 08:18:10 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 May, 2015, 02:48:18 PM
I could go through that and explain point by point why it is so very wrong, but there would be no fucking point.

Instead of shattering dreams as usual, Clements, you could chip in and offer an explanation how the ballot could have been rigged based on your personal experience.
My money's on the Freemasons placing key people in marginal seats that swapped out the ballot boxes, but I'm also quite partial to Reptilians being in the mix somewhere if you think you can manage it.  I heard that some people's suspicions about the election's validity were aroused when a ballot counter turned his head 180 degrees when he thought he saw a hawk sneaking up on him, and when challenged on it  by some UKIP supporters, he crawled up the side of a three story building to get away, and all they could hear from the ground was him shouting things in Hebrew until the police came and moved everyone on.  True story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 May, 2015, 08:49:15 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 May, 2015, 02:48:18 PM
I could go through that and explain point by point why it is so very wrong, but there would be no fucking point.

I've jut typed and deleted two different long posts, but you're right. It's just too tiring and I can't be arsed.

The summarised version: - Sharky - you're a righteous dude, but you need to install a bullshit filter when doing 'research'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 15 May, 2015, 11:21:04 PM
Presumably you've all seen this?

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x32/scowling_monkey/8C3EC8DB-BB70-49F3-8B06-7B2B5CA55A67_zpsqgj6u6k3.jpg) (http://s186.photobucket.com/user/scowling_monkey/media/8C3EC8DB-BB70-49F3-8B06-7B2B5CA55A67_zpsqgj6u6k3.jpg.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2015, 12:33:53 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 May, 2015, 08:49:15 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 May, 2015, 02:48:18 PM
I could go through that and explain point by point why it is so very wrong, but there would be no fucking point.

I've jut typed and deleted two different long posts, but you're right. It's just too tiring and I can't be arsed.

The summarised version: - Sharky - you're a righteous dude, but you need to install a bullshit filter when doing 'research'.

To be fair to Sharky, he's actually dismissed the idea of conspiracy theories about the election being rigged and left that link for others - possibly me, seeing as I've mentioned the idea a lot more than Sharky has.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 May, 2015, 06:45:52 PM
A bloke got no votes in a seat that went to a Tory, despite voting for himself. (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-know-voted-me-angry-5703584#ICID=sharebar_twitter)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2015, 08:50:36 PM
"Ivor Riddle," heh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 16 May, 2015, 09:38:14 PM
Haha, that's cockup not conspiracy, and it's unproven who made the mistake, the candidate or the returning officer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 May, 2015, 05:48:58 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 15 May, 2015, 11:21:04 PM
Presumably you've all seen this?

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x32/scowling_monkey/8C3EC8DB-BB70-49F3-8B06-7B2B5CA55A67_zpsqgj6u6k3.jpg) (http://s186.photobucket.com/user/scowling_monkey/media/8C3EC8DB-BB70-49F3-8B06-7B2B5CA55A67_zpsqgj6u6k3.jpg.html)

I doubt very much that messrs Wagner and McNeil would object to this.  Of all the mash ups I've seen on this, this is far and away the best, and most chillingly apposite. 

It seems at the moment that a sense of dread has descended.  Sticking with the media mash ups, it's a bit like the Babylon 5 episode, Hour of the Wolf.  There's a sense that something brutal is coming and all we can do is steel ourselves against the onslaught.  If the Liberals truly did restrain the worst excesses of 'compassionate conservatism' then it is anyone's guess as to what is coming next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 May, 2015, 06:05:38 PM
It was only because the Tory vandalism of society went so slowly that anger didn't boil over in the last five years, but now that the Lib Dem brakes are off the crazy train, they won't be able to help themselves trying to grab too much, too soon.  Remember that anti-Tory riot the day after they got in?  That was when nobody had any specific beef beyond that the Tories got back in, so think what's going to be like once TTIP, anti-union and anti-protest laws are on the books and start affecting people's lives adversely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2015, 02:55:46 PM
One brave Republican is finally taking on the might of the bicycle lobby and challenging them about the environmental pollution caused by cycling (http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2013/03/02/state-lawmaker-says-bicycling-is-not-good-for-the-environment-should-be-taxed/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 May, 2015, 04:41:33 PM
Well you can't argue with science.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2015, 05:22:53 PM
This must mean that Commando Forces is actually a radical leftie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 May, 2015, 05:33:20 PM
When the next Progcast goes online, you'll all know who I vote for, as we chat about the democratic election at the start. I'm sure some of you may be surprised :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 May, 2015, 07:48:43 PM
Whilst this may be more appropriate for the What are you listening to Thread, I've been enjoying Floyd's The Final Cut.  Digging into the lyrics a bit more I cam across this quote from Waters:

"The Final Cut was about how, with the introduction of the Welfare State, we felt we were moving forward into something resembling a liberal country where we would all look after one another ... but I'd seen all that chiselled away, and I'd seen a return to an almost Dickensian society under Margaret Thatcher. "

Now thirty years later it seems that we can remove the word almost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HdE on 19 May, 2015, 03:55:40 AM
Discussion of politics isn't usually my bag, hence I tend to stay out of this thread. But I did see something today that mde me sit up and go 'really?'

Apparently, Cameron wants to put unemployed young people into work for 30 hours a week.

Now, this has already drawn some commentary online focusing on the 'unjust' aspect of this, some people likening it to slave labour, etc... but really, I think it's more interesting to consider how it shows just how clueless Cameron et al are.

Fact: Young people are leaving our schools incapable of working.

Really What skills do the country's schools teach youngsters? Even when I was in secondary school (I left in 1993) my generation were being told 'none of the stuff you learn here is useful. You'll have to go into further education and then further training to become employable.' Part of that was a sales pitch to push us deeper into the education system... but it wasn't half true.

I can't imagine WHERE these unemployed youngsters are going to work. I can't imagine many institutions or agencies wanting to deal with raw recruits they'll need to spend time training, and quite possibly replacing frequently.

To say nothing of the fact that, unfortunately, you cant force anyone to work who doesn't want to. And no, that doesn't wash as a description of all young folks by any means - but realistically, it WILL describe a lot of people clogging up that particular avenue into work.

Coincidentally, I see Prince Harry has spoken favourably about the idea of bringing back national service.

I shudder to think what could be on the horizon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 19 May, 2015, 08:31:30 AM
On top of that the Tories are cutting deep into FE so even if folk want to go to a place to learn those skills the options for doing so in a well resourced local environment are diminishing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2015, 10:11:54 AM
Quote from: HdE on 19 May, 2015, 03:55:40 AMmy generation were being told 'none of the stuff you learn here is useful. You'll have to go into further education and then further training to become employable.'

People on work training are being told that explicitly by the people who who run the programs - though further education has now been removed as an option by mandate from the DWP so you are explicitly forbidden from FE during your workfare courses, never mind getting a discount.  I've been on several work training programs, and not a single person involved in running them has ever said that those programs were in any way useful - the closest was when one suggested that we talk amongst ourselves and exchange details in case we ever had an odd job going.  The staff were uniformly useless and clueless, with one or two exceptions who seemed lovely but were far too honest about what went on behind the curtain: in a nutshell, they're told that the people they'll be dealing with were dregs and that they should do their best to dissuade anyone from making an effort.  Each year, the companies that run these programs - they're run privately, naturally - either renew their contracts somewhere else or change their names so that complaints or business reviews can't catch up with them.  One of the staffers was even saying how someone had got fired for ordering too much company stationary, as they'd never be around long enough to need more than two of everything apart from pens, which have to be ordered in boxes, so if you go into a Workfare program and they're giving out pens like they won't be needing them soon, now you know why.
The staff generally seem to be just as trapped as the people on the programs, too, as one was saying that she and her colleagues were just temp workers with no training in management or teaching, and that their temp agencies got paid more for them taking the courses than they did for actually taking the courses.
So basically, more money is being spent than before, for less return, and the end result is not trained or motivated workers but angry (boy were the people forced onto those programs angry!) and increasingly bitter people who have no reason to believe they'll ever get a fair deal from an employer so they're probably better off sponging off benefits instead.

As for who's going to train untrained and unmotivated staff, why other untrained and unmotivated staff will do that, of course!  How much training do you think you need to stack a shelf?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 May, 2015, 10:25:34 AM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 19 May, 2015, 08:31:30 AM
On top of that the Tories are cutting deep into FE so even if folk want to go to a place to learn those skills the options for doing so in a well resourced local environment are diminishing.
Aye, and don't we know it!  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 19 May, 2015, 11:54:03 AM
The most important asset any candidate for employment has is experience.

Obviously, those leaving education won't have any, and it doesn't really matter how practical or otherwise their education was, it doesn't carry the same weight.

Therefore employers needs to identify suitable candidates in this group by looking at their qualifications, interviewing them and working out if the long months of training required are going to be worth it.

The natural inclination amongst businesses is not to bother as it's too much trouble, but taking on new members of the workforce is a social responsibility. Therefore, I would prefer the government to be focusing on making businesses, as well as public-sector organisations, do the right thing and not try to punish kids for being young, which seems to be the current plan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2015, 12:15:37 PM
An experienced worker knows what they're worth, which might not be ideal for new or struggling businesses.  Or corporations.
I don't think kids are being punished so much as being trained to occupy the lowest rung on society's ladder so that there's a viable underclass of slaves available to prop up corporate workforces.  The DWP is making people work for nothing, helping normalise the idea of slavery in the easiest way possible - by villifying the poor and the unemployed so that as a society we think they deserve it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 May, 2015, 12:55:43 PM
S'right. School's there to teach you only two things; a bit of general knowledge and your place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Stan on 19 May, 2015, 03:41:19 PM
Swearing in as a lowly MP. It must be soul destroying for a few seconds, before pondering 'What other jobs in Britain guarantee me a whopping five year salary regardless of how crap I am at the job?'.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CFYCT-fWgAA1J3Z.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 May, 2015, 04:17:12 PM
Quote from: HdE on 19 May, 2015, 03:55:40 AM


Fact: Young people are leaving our schools incapable of working.

Really What skills do the country's schools teach youngsters?


This is a much repeated complaint that goes back a lot further than the nineties.  The problem is it is precisely that, a complaint.  It is trotted out as a fact and to be fair there are youngsters that give a lot of credibility to the complaint.  My big problem is that it ignores another development over the last several decades:  companies have decimated their training budgets and now have sometimes excessively high expectations of new staff. 

I can think of several jobs that I have held in which I was expected to be able to do the job completely independently and competently after a few hours (if that) of 'training'.  Being experienced enough this was not a major issue.  School leavers are not completely prepared for this, as are a number of people who have left school several years previously.  Are employers' expectations realistic in light of the current widely held belief that they have no obligation to provide effective support and training to new staff?

What skills do schools teach youngsters?  A wide range that provide the basis for them to be able develop more specific skills in the future.  Literacy, numeracy, basic historical, geographical and social awareness, a basic understanding of science, ICT skills, problem solving, team working, creativity ....  There are youngsters that fail to develop these skills effectively and they are a significant minority but they are not the whole picture. 

It is a shame that we as a society no longer value our obligation to help them get started, a situation that is highly likely to accelerate over the next five years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 19 May, 2015, 05:22:26 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 May, 2015, 04:17:12 PM
Quote from: HdE on 19 May, 2015, 03:55:40 AM


Fact: Young people are leaving our schools incapable of working.

Really What skills do the country's schools teach youngsters?


This is a much repeated complaint that goes back a lot further than the nineties.  The problem is it is precisely that, a complaint.  It is trotted out as a fact and to be fair there are youngsters that give a lot of credibility to the complaint.  My big problem is that it ignores another development over the last several decades:  companies have decimated their training budgets and now have sometimes excessively high expectations of new staff. 

I can think of several jobs that I have held in which I was expected to be able to do the job completely independently and competently after a few hours (if that) of 'training'.  Being experienced enough this was not a major issue.  School leavers are not completely prepared for this, as are a number of people who have left school several years previously.  Are employers' expectations realistic in light of the current widely held belief that they have no obligation to provide effective support and training to new staff?

What skills do schools teach youngsters?  A wide range that provide the basis for them to be able develop more specific skills in the future.  Literacy, numeracy, basic historical, geographical and social awareness, a basic understanding of science, ICT skills, problem solving, team working, creativity ....  There are youngsters that fail to develop these skills effectively and they are a significant minority but they are not the whole picture. 

It is a shame that we as a society no longer value our obligation to help them get started, a situation that is highly likely to accelerate over the next five years.

I agree with this.
Having said that, I think we really fail a lot of youngsters in that we don't give them enough awareness of what to expect, and what life is, outside of the work/home bubble.
There are many youngsters that barely see the world outside of their home, their school and the roads in between. I'm not saying this is the school's fault and I'm not saying it's the parent's fault but I think it's something that needs to be improved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 May, 2015, 06:37:44 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 19 May, 2015, 05:22:26 PM

There are many youngsters that barely see the world outside of their home, their school and the roads in between. I'm not saying this is the school's fault and I'm not saying it's the parent's fault but I think it's something that needs to be improved.

This is a massive challenge, even greater in communities such as some of ours in the Welsh valleys that still haven't recovered from the eighties and the loss of the mining industry.  Despite millions in European funding having been thrown at the problem there is still little or nothing to show.  The opportunities for kids to develop this understanding is virtually non existent as there is no business or industry left (even the dole office is slowly going ironically enough). 

Don't get me started on school work experience.  This is a colossal waste of time and effort.  The vast majority of kids spend a week watching employers work.  No effort is made either before or after to prepare the kids properly for the experience, help them to draw out any learning from the experience and learn how to apply it.  The lucky ones get a week in somewhere like Mcdonalds or telco's where they can get practical experience and employability skills.  The unlucky ones end up with solicitors or architects watching them work and making tea or coffee, all so they can 'experience' the job.  Really, experience a job that requires a degree, a postgraduate qualification and years of training?  All without a GCSE to your name!  [.... and breathe!, sorry rant over]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 19 May, 2015, 11:19:11 PM
There's a Half Price on Humanity (https://healerofbastards.bandcamp.com/track/half-price-on-humanity).

(And a killer bass line).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 May, 2015, 08:30:37 PM
Tomorrow I'll find out whether my country is moving out of the Dark Ages, or whether it's still run by the bone-rattling bigots and their head-in-the-sand followers.
Me, I hope it's the latter, and if it's the former, I'll get Big Dave over, because I hate them poofs, me.  [spoiler](Of course I don't.)[/spoiler]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/22/irish-voters-set-to-make-history-in-gay-marriage-referendum (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/22/irish-voters-set-to-make-history-in-gay-marriage-referendum)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 May, 2015, 01:04:37 PM
Well, fair play to us.  It's looking like we're finally unhooking ourselves from the bishop's crozier.

http://www.rte.ie/news/vote2015/2015/0523/703205-referendum-byelection/ (http://www.rte.ie/news/vote2015/2015/0523/703205-referendum-byelection/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2015, 01:52:04 PM
Great to see. Here's hoping it can lead to a few more progressive policies, such as Ireland sorting out its draconian abortion laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 May, 2015, 02:14:32 PM
Good news on the referendum front. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 23 May, 2015, 02:43:51 PM
Go on yersel, Ireland!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 May, 2015, 03:16:55 PM
Wonder what Beaky Smoochies woul have made of all this?  It's times like this I wish he was still around (mainly because I feel a sort of guiltily sadistic pleasure in seeing bigots reacts to being swamped by fairness and equaity).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 24 May, 2015, 07:34:47 PM
I've shed tears over this - imagine the generations of gay people either forced to live other lives or subject to all sorts of draconian laws, and now they've done what no country in the world has ever done. Well done Ireland!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 May, 2015, 10:35:07 PM
A poud moment indeed. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 24 May, 2015, 11:02:32 PM
I was astonished to learn that Ireland didn't decriminalise homosexuality until the 1990's. In that respect it's an amazing turn around to go from illegal to able to marry in the space of 25 years. Well done Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2015, 11:06:14 PM
This month the English voted to be ruled by elitist sociopaths.  Ireland voted to be fabulous.

We won again, Brits.  WE WON AGAIN.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 May, 2015, 09:26:44 AM
Ireland voted to do what the UK (minus the Tea Party bit) had already done, and still has some of the most draconian abortion law around. I like Ireland and vehemently dislike the Tories, and I'm very happy Ireland is to update its constitution, but it's not a progressive utopia just yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 May, 2015, 12:15:12 PM
Brits got tossed a scrap from the table that can be taken away at any time much like a ban on fox hunting could, but the Paddies have it enshrined in their Constitution after a vote that clearly showed the majority of the country weren't secretly conservative jackasses.
I also still have high hopes that someone will snap over the water charges and murder some politicians, making Ireland even more progressive and pleasant to live in.

Also you may not want to take my comments so seriously.  Especially not that bit about murdering politicians in case you're reading this, MI5.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 May, 2015, 08:46:46 PM
I was shocked when I read the news about Peter Robinson this morning. The man actually has a heart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 May, 2015, 09:01:51 PM
Yep he keeps it in a box in his dungeon. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 May, 2015, 09:17:39 PM
America is Behind ISIS: Washington Confesses to Backing "Questionable Actors" in Syria. (http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-is-behind-isis-washington-confesses-to-backing-questionable-actors-in-syria/5451556) Interesting article by Tony Cartalucci. What can't be controlled and exploited must be smashed then exploited?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 May, 2015, 09:40:48 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 25 May, 2015, 12:15:12 PMI also still have high hopes that someone will snap over the water charges and murder some politicians, making Ireland even more progressive and pleasant to live in.


Don't hold your breath for Furiosa O'Toole to kill Denis O'Brien.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 26 May, 2015, 05:57:13 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 25 May, 2015, 09:17:39 PM
America is Behind ISIS: Washington Confesses to Backing "Questionable Actors" in Syria. (http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-is-behind-isis-washington-confesses-to-backing-questionable-actors-in-syria/5451556) Interesting article by Tony Cartalucci. What can't be controlled and exploited must be smashed then exploited?

No way I'm wasting any time by clicking on a link entitled "America is Behind ISIS", but points for not "jokingly" calling for people to be murdered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2015, 06:34:32 PM
Who's joking?

ISIS is the result of the fragmentation of other extremist groups, alliances formed against the US presence in the Middle East, and a power vacuum caused partly by the recent US withdrawal from the region, so it's not much of a stretch to say the US is behind ISIS.  The sad fact is they left the region with a corrupt and unmotivated political and military system in place, and extremist nutters took advantage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 May, 2015, 07:38:43 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 26 May, 2015, 06:34:32 PM
The sad fact is they left the region with a corrupt and unmotivated political [ ] system in place, and extremist nutters took advantage.

Sorry, are we still talking about the middle east or has the conversation shifted to this country?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2015, 07:52:43 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/numbah%2010_zpscewg5vic.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 May, 2015, 08:00:03 PM
nuff said!  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 May, 2015, 03:50:00 PM
There was a protest of some sort outside my local Tesco last night.  I thought it might be about Tesco using forced labor in the UK through workfare, or their buying seafood harvested by slaves in Thailand, but what really got people motivated to be political was that Tesco bought eggs laid by chickens that weren't kept in big enough cages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 May, 2015, 07:30:15 AM
We can be concerned about more than one thing at a time though, can't we?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 May, 2015, 11:16:03 AM
I question only if marginally less discomfort for chickens is more pressing a concern than kidnapping people and working them to death at gunpoint so that Tesco can pay marginally less than the wholesale price for prawns.
Kind of moot anyway, because Tesco don't give two fucks and a protest won't change anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2015, 11:20:56 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 28 May, 2015, 07:30:15 AM
We can be concerned about more than one thing at a time though, can't we?

This.

It's something that irritates me, I have to say, when a stance against something I perceive as unjust or detrimental is met with something like 'don't you even care about (insert other unjust or detrimental thing)?'.
Aren't you allowed to protest or lobby against something without having to include everything you don't like in one go?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2015, 11:27:53 AM
I saw someone recently rally against people complaining about abortion law with something along the lines of: shouldn't we concentrate on more important matters, such as ending genocide in war-torn nations? And this was without irony. Clearly, the entire human race can only do a single thing at once.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 May, 2015, 11:59:35 AM
While I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that someone's priorities might be off if their greatest complaint about Hitler was that he burned some books and so they decide to only protest about that one thing, it isn't really an either/or situation.  You can protest about everything Tesco does rather than just that the cages in battery farms they buy eggs from could be a few centimeters bigger, and this protest was specifically - and only - about that issue.

Edit to add: I should probably admit I fucking hate Tesco and haven't shopped there in a while for some of the reasons mentioned, thus my reasoning faculties may be somewhat clouded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 28 May, 2015, 12:07:43 PM
Missing out on Clubcard points then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 May, 2015, 12:16:42 PM
I know.  Now I'll have to pay full price for that tin of beans in six months' time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 28 May, 2015, 01:26:13 PM
I quite like Tesco. The Clubcard points come in handy.

Oh, but I buy free range eggs and I don't eat prawns, so my conscience is clear.

I hope Lesbian Seagull's forthcoming murderous rampage doesn't disrupt my weekly shop.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 28 May, 2015, 01:32:29 PM
Let us hope that none of the devices that we're using to post this stuff have been made in countries with a poor human rights records, or by firms that pay terrible wages!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 May, 2015, 02:13:38 PM
Aren't most affordable PCs made here in the UK oh wait now I see what you're doing - well played, that man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2015, 03:42:31 PM
I CONNECT TO THE INTERNET WITH A ZX SPECTRUM

(Possibly a lie.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jock Savage on 28 May, 2015, 04:53:25 PM
Quote from: Lesbian Seagull on 27 May, 2015, 03:50:00 PM
There was a protest of some sort outside my local Tesco last night.  I thought it might be about Tesco using forced labor in the UK through workfare, or their buying seafood harvested by slaves in Thailand, but what really got people motivated to be political was that Tesco bought eggs laid by chickens that weren't kept in big enough cages.

You'd be singing a different song if it was DOGS Tesco were keeping in small cages. You wouldn't buy an egg laid by a dog.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 May, 2015, 05:06:40 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 28 May, 2015, 01:26:13 PM
Oh, but I buy free range eggs and... , so my conscience is clear.

Well, that's what the producers of free range eggs would like you to think. But trust me, it isn't like they make out in those Happy Hen Farm commercials and there's still the thing where they kill hundreds of thousands of male chicks because they aren't any use to them...  but we had that debate a few months back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2015, 02:02:55 PM
Let's just make all our protests abuot 'Bad things people do' from now on and be done with it  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2015, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 28 May, 2015, 05:06:40 PM
and there's still the thing where they kill hundreds of thousands of male chicks because they aren't any use to them...

Did I mention the time I worked in a poultry slaughterhouse and saw the chicks that some chickens were hiding?  I suppose they must have hidden and then hatched eggs in their coops, then kept their chicks hidden under their wings all the way to the slaughterhouse.  It's kind of touching, really.
The bit after the chicks get found in the slaughterhouse and stamped on not so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2015, 07:22:04 AM
Biggest crime you've never heard of: when US and UK killed half a million children. (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/biggest-crime-against-humanity-you-ve-never-heard-of-when-us-and-uk-killed-half-a-million-children)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 May, 2015, 11:34:23 AM
Okay, I clicked on that link. It's about UN sanctions. I found it highly unconvincing, because it takes a good point about the unintended consequences of peaceful measures against pariah regimes, and transmogrifies it into a genocide accusation. I don't buy it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2015, 12:56:06 PM
Yes, it's much more comforting to kill 500,000 children by mistake than on purpose. Sanctions hardly ever hurt regimes but always hurt innocents.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 May, 2015, 01:09:28 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 30 May, 2015, 12:56:06 PM
Yes, it's much more comforting to kill 500,000 children by mistake than on purpose. Sanctions hardly ever hurt regimes but always hurt innocents.

Because the alternatives of unilateral military intervention and isolationism have been such tremendous successes, I can see there is a strong argument against the enforcement of UN resolutions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 May, 2015, 01:33:49 PM
To see the efficacy of UN resolutions, just look at Israel.
.
If a dictator is starving his/her people, why don't we (for example) use our fantastic air forces to drop seeds, spades, ploughs and suchlike on the victims? Also, it might be an idea for us to stop selling weapons to anyone with a thick enough wad and allowing international private banks to deal with the 'bad guys.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 May, 2015, 01:45:56 PM
The counter argument is look at Iran.

In any case, how do you propose to do anything about Israel? Write them a stern PS at the bottom of a letter explaining to Netanyahu how they don't need money or government?

Your suggestion of love-bombing has its merits, although it would have the side-effect of to strengthening the targeted regime rather than weakening them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2015, 02:10:09 PM
If charity towards captive populations suffering at the hands of tyrants was any kind of effective tactic, food banks wouldn't have made the Tories stronger, yet here we are.

Quote from: White Falcon on 30 May, 2015, 01:33:49 PMIf a dictator is starving his/her people, why don't we (for example) use our fantastic air forces to drop seeds, spades, ploughs and suchlike on the victims?

Because Monsanto wouldn't let governments enable the creation of motivated farming collectives somewhere they couldn't monopolise the seed supply?  You can't let poor people provide for themselves without corporations getting their cut - it sends the wrong message.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 30 May, 2015, 02:32:22 PM
Here yah go. A super entity of 147 companies run the world. The Cyper Punks were right after all! 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html#.VWm53c9VhBc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 01:51:58 PM
I don't know the answer, JBA - I wish I did. I do think that the solution begins at home, though. I've said I can't change the world so many times now I'm sure you're as sick of reading it as I am sick of typing it. All I can reasonably do is refuse to support anyone (including "my government") who wants to sow death and destruction. I can't stop them but I can stop helping them willingly. That means not voting, not forking over money to them and not listening to their stupid rhetoric.
.
To quote Babylon 5, all I have to do is say "no I won't" one more time than they can say "yes you will." They can try to force me; take away my home, my property, my liberty or even my life but those consequences are all on me. To vote for anyone is to shift those consequences onto other people, people in different countries who I do not and will never know.
.
I know most people think my views are stupid and ineffective, and maybe they are, but non-compliance on a personal level really is the only way I can think of to make any kind of difference, no matter how tiny, in the face of all this madness threatening to drown our species in its own blood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 31 May, 2015, 03:23:56 PM
Quotenot voting

Consistently shown to have the exact opposite effect. Literally doing precisely what is wanted of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 May, 2015, 03:28:01 PM
The published demographics of the 2015 UK election were interesting. Essentially, if the under-35s had have turned out in the same numbers as older voters, there's almost no way we'd have ended up with a Conservative government. Not that this was a surprise. And naturally those people who don't vote are most likely to get fucked over by this Conservative government. It's crazy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 03:31:06 PM
TheBlaze, I would argue the exact opposite is true. What is wanted of me is to validate the system - and a vote is a validation, even a spoiled vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 03:31:43 PM
DP - sorry
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 31 May, 2015, 05:09:01 PM
Astonishingly, the system does not require your validation.

Lets put it another way - ****s like Guido Fawkes are actively trying to disillusion people with the entire premise of democracy. Massive vested interests campaign to discourage you from participating.

Why let them win so easily?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 07:23:48 PM
Then whose validation does the system require if not yours and mine? If the system wants to tell me what to do, and to tell other people what to do in my name and on my behalf, then why does it not require my validation and my consent? The tyranny of the majority?
.
Democracy no longer works, if it ever did to begin with. If it worked then those who got fewer than 40% of the votes would wield less than 40% of the power, surely? I don't know who this Fawkes fellow is, nor the vested interests he represents, and I don't know what he wants or why he wants it. I only know what I want, which is to be left alone and to do my bit for my society in my way.
.
If the system works for other people then fine, go with it and the best of luck to them - but must they drag me into it as well? I thought this was supposed to be a free country. Evidently, I was wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 07:24:33 PM
Frikkin' DP again, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 31 May, 2015, 07:30:57 PM
Non-voters are expressing no preference either way. They are tacitly endorsing every candidate, because they didn't wish to actively vote against any of them. I've never been a non-voter because I'm not that contented with the status quo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 May, 2015, 07:36:56 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 31 May, 2015, 07:23:48 PMDemocracy no longer works, if it ever did to begin with. If it worked then those who got fewer than 40% of the votes would wield less than 40% of the power, surely?
That depends on the system of government, and the system of government will only change if enough people demand it and/or vote in one or more parties up for reform. (Labour, frustratingly, seems keen to ape the Green Party's idea of an elected senate, but bafflingly and stubbornly sticks to FPTP for the Commons, despite almost certainly never likely to again win a majority.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 07:45:18 PM
Or tacitly not endorsing any of them. By not buying any brand of fizzy pop, am I therefore tacitly endorsing every brand?
.
However, that is a good point and I'll have to think about it given that, as I'm sure I've already said, under English law if one does not object to something one is considered to accept it. (I may be covered on this point, though, as the last letter I sent to the local MP a couple of years ago made clear that I did not consider the government to be valid or working on my behalf and therefore I was removing my consent from its actions - actions which logically must include organising elections.) Hmmm...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 31 May, 2015, 08:09:33 PM
I'd suggest two changes:

1) Compulsary voting. You don't like the system, vote for a candidate that shares your dislikes. But vote you sorry fecker because people died to give you that right. If it was worth dying to get it from The Man, then why give it back without even a whimper?

2) National Proportional Representation. Because if 10% of the people want a right wing UKIP candidate then, sorry folks, but that is what we should have because that is the nature of the country in which we live. And, by the way, your vote counts no matter where you lived (becuase people died to give you that vote. If it was worth dying to get it from The Man, then why let him devalue it without even a whimper?)

Not perfect. But better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 31 May, 2015, 08:13:57 PM
While I agree that people should vote, I'd say people died to give them the freedom of choice on whether to vote or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2015, 08:29:27 PM
Vote or go to jail? Where's the freedom in that unless I can vote for absolutely anyone I choose instead of a handful of pre-selected candidates?
.
People also died for fascism, communism and apartheid. Also, many of the people who died for freedom were conscripted.
.
I think Ghost is right - I think I have the right to choose whether to vote or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 31 May, 2015, 08:30:38 PM
Quote from: Ghost MacRoth on 31 May, 2015, 08:13:57 PM
While I agree that people should vote, I'd say people died to give them the freedom of choice on whether to vote or not.

Agreed, and compulsory voting would only lead to a big increase in spoiled ballots, not to mention people ticking a box at random.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 May, 2015, 08:46:07 PM
I'd be happy to see compulsory voting, as long as there was a No Confidence/ None of the Above option at the bottom of each ballot paper.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 31 May, 2015, 09:28:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 May, 2015, 08:46:07 PM
I'd be happy to see compulsory voting, as long as there was a No Confidence/ None of the Above option at the bottom of each ballot paper.

Cheers

Jim
But what happens if the 'None of the above' vote wins..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 May, 2015, 09:35:10 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 31 May, 2015, 09:28:19 PM
But what happens if the 'None of the above' vote wins..?

New vote. All candidates on the previous ballot automatically barred from standing in the new vote.

I've been a fan of "No confidence" since I saw an absolute shithead stand for a student union post and lose to the "No confidence" option.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 May, 2015, 09:58:27 PM
Also, I can't imagine 'none of the above' would win very often, if at all. If people had a version of PR that resulted in a broadly representative Commons and Senate, that means no safe seats. Parties and politicians will make more effort. People will want to vote for someone, rather than nothing, to a big enough extent that 'they're all bastards' won't do that well.

As for the issue of right-wing nutters, I covered that in Do you want 80 UKIP MPs? (http://reverttosaved.com/2015/05/11/pr-in-the-uk-or-do-you-want-80-ukip-mps/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 07:50:51 AM
I would be far more inclined to vote in a republic than a monarchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 10:37:37 AM
I'm fine with the idea of mandatory voting. As long as there's the 'no' option. No confidence would be a grand thing. I've campaigned for the 'none of the above' vote to be marked on ballots even without any kind of inherent power - just officially recording 'spoiled ballots' as intentionally spoiled rather than cackhanded, as right now no distinction is made, so spoiled ballots may simply have never been entered at all - in fact they almost work less (than nothing) as they still count towards electoral turnout....

QuoteThen whose validation does the system require if not yours and mine? If the system wants to tell me what to do, and to tell other people what to do in my name and on my behalf, then why does it not require my validation and my consent? The tyranny of the majority

Yeah. The tyranny of the majority. A simple glance back at just the last 200 years will show you how preferable it is to the tyranny of the few. Which is with only the slightest exception what has existed across most of recorded history.

As for republic rather than monarchy... Well, let's hope that spontaneously happens as your desire for constitutional reform will seemingly never be expressed democratically.

QuoteNon-voters are expressing no preference either way. They are tacitly endorsing every candidate, because they didn't wish to actively vote against any of them. I've never been a non-voter because I'm not that content with the status quo.

Yup.

(Guido Fawkes is a right-wing 'political blogger' whose tattle regularly feeds the right-wing media. The guy does nothing but cover politics and political scandal and has publicly expressed that he is happiest when people don't vote, because that way the peasants can't complicate the discussions between the rich and the powerful. )
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2015, 10:54:06 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 01 June, 2015, 07:50:51 AMI would be far more inclined to vote in a republic than a monarchy.
Given your replies to date, I can't imagine if the Royals were ousted tomorrow that you'd be any more inclined to vote. And given how little power the Royals have, I'm not sure they matter. Frankly, given the choice between PR Commons/Senate/Royals forever and FPTP Commons/Lords/Republic, I'd go for the former every single time.

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 10:37:37 AMAs for republic rather than monarchy... Well, let's hope that spontaneously happens as your desire for constitutional reform will seemingly never be expressed democratically.
Exactly. There's a lot of fuss right now about electoral reform. People hiding away and saying "that doesn't affect me" won't result in change. Millions of people being VERY PISSED OFF about the systems in the UK might instigate change. It's a long road and a tough battle (the Tories are already doubling down; Labour remains broadly silent), but if Labour gets on board, there's a possibility we could finally see a mature and modern system where very many more votes actually count for something by 2025.

Regardless, I just find the non-voting thing very sad, because, as I said, it's by and large those people who get hit hardest. Had the under 35s voted en masse at the same rate as pensioners, and the trends remained broadly as they were in the actual vote (unlikely—those who don't vote are less likely to vote conservative/Conservative), we'd almost certainly have a minority Labour government right now. The only way that could have survived is by support of the SNP, which would have either forced Labour to commit suicide by bringing its own government down, or to reduce austerity measures. But, well, people didn't vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 11:08:13 AM
Right-wing thinktanks campaigned heavily against the most significant form of constitutional reform proposed within my lifetime, the AV referendum. Their most successful tactic? "Would you rather we spent £250,000 on an incubator or putting body armour on a soldier - or on an AV compatable voting machine? We can't afford it right now".

There are groups actively trying to get people less involved and actively preserving the status quo, and the fact they resort to such deceitful tactics is all I've ever needed to be an active participant. Without getting too far into it, my basic instinct is to do the opposite of what The Daily Mail or the Sun wants. Sure you'll get the odd false negative but if you want a sure-fire method, simply take the opposite position of Richard Littlejohn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 11:22:24 AM
You're correct, of course - just "ousting the royals" would not be enough. I'm talking about a proper republic, where the crown is passed from one hereditarily privileged family to the public as a whole. Simply passing the crown to an elected president, as happens in the US, would be pointless.
.
The president would be a non-political role, mainly one of oversight of the elected prime minister and government. At present, our prime minister is simply the Queen's proxy, weilding the power of the monarch (to deploy armed forces, sign international treaties, etc.) without needing the consent of parliament.
.
Only when the crown is with the people can there be a true republic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 01 June, 2015, 02:08:53 PM
With my limited understanding it seems to me that PR is not a good option as it doesn't allow you to choose a specific local candidate. Rather, you choose a party, and then the parties' preferred people are allocated around the country. Is that right – if not, how would it work?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 02:56:47 PM
Proportional representation would, in its most basic form, only work as a form of national representation and would mean national elections are decided by a national voting system.

However there is a kind of workaround nicking aspects from the AV system, 'the single transferable vote' method, which would allow for the continuation of constituencies. http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/single-transferable-vote

Personally I am ambivalent about the benefits of constituencies. In theory all well and good, in practice at the heart of most of the problems, including the massive disconnect between what people think they are voting for (a government and a PM) and what they end up with (a parliament). Plus they are rendered nigh meaningless thanks to the party whips and the inconceivable lovecraftian horror that greets the prospect of a coalition or minority government, i.e. one which makes some nods towards the actual will of the electorate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 01 June, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
Compulsory voting's idiotic.  As already said, democracy also means the right not to vote.

And you're going to - what? - fine people or lock them up for not voting?  That sounds like a society you want to live in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 June, 2015, 03:20:26 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 01 June, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
Compulsory voting's idiotic.  As already said, democracy also means the right not to vote.

Seems to work OK in Australia... and the 'None of the Above' option means that you emphatically do have the right not to vote, just that you're obliged to actively express that preference.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 03:25:15 PM
FPTP or PR are largely irrelevant under our "constitutional monarchy." It's not about how the government is elected but what it's allowed to do once in office.
.
A prime example is the Queen's Consent* (and the Prince's Consent) which essentially gives the monarch a veto on any bill effecting her or his personal circumstances or powers. No bill can pass through Parliament, be debated, without the Queen's or Prince's Consent. In practice, these consents are rarely withheld because Privy Councillors tend to weed out anything affecting the royals at the drafting stage. This kind of unelected and unaccountable power effectively hobbles the "government" of the day.
.
See this article (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills) for some further details.
.
*This is entirely different from the Queen's Assent, which every bill passing through Parliament must receive before becoming "law."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 03:40:01 PM
Correction - Royal Assent, not Queen's Assent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 01 June, 2015, 03:52:01 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 June, 2015, 03:20:26 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 01 June, 2015, 03:13:30 PM
Compulsory voting's idiotic.  As already said, democracy also means the right not to vote.

Seems to work OK in Australia... and the 'None of the Above' option means that you emphatically do have the right not to vote, just that you're obliged to actively express that preference.

So you'd be allowed not to vote, but it'd be illegal not to mark your non-vote down on a bit of paper?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 June, 2015, 03:57:48 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 01 June, 2015, 03:52:01 PM
So you'd be allowed not to vote, but it'd be illegal not to mark your non-vote down on a bit of paper?

Presumably. As I say: seems to work in Australia, so it's not quite as 'out there' an idea as you seem to want to make it.

The point is: a lot of people who like to say they're non-voters actually just can't be arsed. If they're obliged to haul themselves into the polling centres there's a chance —albeit a slim one— that some of them might engage with the process fractionally more.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 04:00:08 PM
Taxes, birth certificates, schools, licenses....

Many mandatory things you have to do. What kind of fascist forces you to register your innocent newborn on some kind of 'register'?!?

And so on. Mandatory voting could simply mean 'registering to not vote' at its simplest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 June, 2015, 06:11:43 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 01 June, 2015, 03:25:15 PM
FPTP or PR are largely irrelevant under our "constitutional monarchy." It's not about how the government is elected but what it's allowed to do once in office.
.
A prime example is the Queen's Consent* (and the Prince's Consent) which essentially gives the monarch a veto on any bill effecting her or his personal circumstances or powers. No bill can pass through Parliament, be debated, without the Queen's or Prince's Consent. In practice, these consents are rarely withheld because Privy Councillors tend to weed out anything affecting the royals at the drafting stage. This kind of unelected and unaccountable power effectively hobbles the "government" of the day.
.
See this article (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills) for some further details.
.
*This is entirely different from the Queen's Assent, which every bill passing through Parliament must receive before becoming "law."

We're a constitutional monarchy, and this is very widely supported. The Queen doesn't participate in politics, and even if she did she'd have no need to interfere to preserve her position, which is already completely secure. Any notion that parliament is chomping at the bit to bash the royals if only the privy council would permit it is blatantly nonsense.

Any government returned using PR or STV or whatever would have the same extensive powers that the present FPTP-elected government does. Obviously.

In the mainland UK, combining electoral reform with republicanism would be a great way of ensuring there's never any electoral reform, ever, and should be avoided like the President Blair-inspired nightmare it so clearly is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 01 June, 2015, 07:15:35 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 June, 2015, 06:11:43 PM
In the mainland UK, combining electoral reform with republicanism would be a great way of ensuring there's never any electoral reform, ever, and should be avoided like the President Blair-inspired nightmare it so clearly is.

Why, exactly, would an elected head-of-state entail that? Seriously, "President Blair" vs monarchy is such a common false-dilemma bandied about by monarchists, explain why it would automatically be the case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 June, 2015, 07:31:10 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 31 May, 2015, 09:28:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 May, 2015, 08:46:07 PM
I'd be happy to see compulsory voting, as long as there was a No Confidence/ None of the Above option at the bottom of each ballot paper.

Cheers

Jim
But what happens if the 'None of the above' vote wins..?

Brewsters Millions?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 07:32:41 PM
JPM, I think that particular misconception is based on the flawed US model. In a true republic, the elected prime minister and parliament make the legislation and the president only signs it into law, as the Queen does now. The president is a neutral position, not allowed to get involved in party politics.
.
And Tony Blair could well become president, if he got enough votes - as could Elizabeth Windsor, Stephen Hawking or even Russel Brand. Presidential votes would be entirely separate from governmental votes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 June, 2015, 08:43:59 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 01 June, 2015, 07:15:35 PM
Why, exactly, would an elected head-of-state entail that? Seriously, "President Blair" vs monarchy is such a common false-dilemma bandied about by monarchists, explain why it would automatically be the case.

President Blair is a concept which highlights that if you have elections you get politicians.

But in any case, my actual point was that supporters of electoral reform would do well to avoid combining their preferred new voting system with an attack on the monarchy if they want their proposals to succeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 09:02:04 PM
I think so far the only person espousing the abolition of the monarchy as a pressing concern is the one who has no need of voting systems new or otherwise.

(The rest of us will probably just bide our time)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 June, 2015, 09:13:35 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 01 June, 2015, 09:02:04 PM
I think so far the only person espousing the abolition of the monarchy as a pressing concern is the one who has no need of voting systems new or otherwise.

(The rest of us will probably just bide our time)

Heh, you're absolutely right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 09:23:48 PM
I'd prefer to be sovereign of my own life; failing that I could live with being a citizen in a modern republic but I object to being a subject in an outmoded, self-serving monarchy. But that's just me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 01 June, 2015, 09:28:10 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 01 June, 2015, 09:23:48 PM
that's just me.

Nah, not just you.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Sideshow Bob on 01 June, 2015, 09:52:29 PM
Nope, definitely not just you !!
Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 June, 2015, 09:56:08 PM
I say keep the monarchy. Except it changes family every week by random lottery, and the winning family gets the monarchy's budget for that week and full use of the crown's properties.

It would make an excellent reality TV Show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2015, 10:01:22 PM
Not just me? Thank God for that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 June, 2015, 01:11:14 AM
In no way do I condone the monarchy BUT bigger fish to fry. And sadly lots of people do really rather like them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 08:01:05 AM
I agree, there are bigger fish to fry - but the Queen has all the pans.
.
Removing her from her role as head of state wouldn't mean chucking her out on the street. She'd still have her private residences (we'd just take back the public ones like Buckingham Palace and such) and incomes. The people who like the royals would still be free to support them, maybe through a charity. Also, the Queen's getting on a bit now so it would be a kindness to relieve her of all the "work" she does. And poor old Charles wouldn't have to worry himself silly with all that interminable waiting any more. It really would be the kindest thing to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 10:21:23 AM
All the pans? Hardly. Yes, this is a family supported by the state, but the civil list has been stripped right back, and there's plenty of evidence to show that they bring in (as a living, breathing, active monarchy) a shit-load of tourist money in return for that minor outlay per tax-payer. That wouldn't be the case if we headed towards republicanism, and you can bet a British president would be closer in nature to a US one than, say, the Icelandic one. (i.e. loads of money for campaigning, overtly political regardless of whether they are technically so, etc.) However, we'd still be paying the taxes.

Objectively, I recognise the monarchy is an archaic, outdated concept, but the Queen's done a decent job as head of state and also has effectively no power anyway. Charles... well, he needs to step back regarding lobbying, but there are plenty of worse bodies lobbying the British government. As I said earlier, I'd sooner see electoral reform than an attack on the monarchy. PR + senate + Queen seems a perfectly decent 'compromise' to me. And if Charles turns out to be rubbish, you'll see growth in republican sentiment anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 June, 2015, 10:25:43 AM
Reality check - the monarchy had little to do with any of the major social developments of the last century, all of which were enacted by our political system, including the positive ones, flawed as it is. I am pretty sure the Queen said nothing about gay marriage for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 10:35:21 AM
Monarchy Myth Buster. (https://republic.org.uk/what-we-want/monarchy-myth-buster)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 10:47:52 AM
Lots of hand-waving and "that isn't even true, but even if it were" on there. Also, it's utterly laughable, as that site does, to compare the costs of the British monarchy to that of the Irish presidency. It's also notable that "It has no power – it's just for decoration" sidesteps the problem of power consolidation, in that certain powers have historically been transferred from the monarch to MPs or the PM. But the monarchy has fuck-all power now.

Also, as others have rightly said, tying reform to republicanism would kill the former stone-dead remarkably quickly. Plenty of people are perfectly happy with the Royals but like the idea of a more representative democracy. I don't really give two hoots either way about the Royals, but am desperate for political change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2015, 10:53:45 AM
Seeing as we're a capitalist society, let's keep the monarchy but privatise them so they have to support themselves through all this tourist money they seem to be generating - that way they'll be even better off than they are now.
What true monarchist wouldn't want the royals to be better off?  If you think about it, it's unpatriotic not to privatise the royal family.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 June, 2015, 11:01:20 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 02 June, 2015, 10:25:43 AM
Reality check - the monarchy had little to do with any of the major social developments of the last century, all of which were enacted by our political system, including the positive ones, flawed as it is. I am pretty sure the Queen said nothing about gay marriage for example.

True.  Now, I live in a republic and prefer to do so (simply because I don't feel that an accident of birth should give people a right to rule, even symbolically) but I don't feel that having a royal family gives anyone an excuse not to vote.  Just wondering, Sharky, if you DID live in a republic like the one you describe, would you vote then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 June, 2015, 11:03:15 AM
All or nothing will usually leave you with nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 11:11:21 AM
In a modern republic I would be far more inclined to vote, yes. At the moment I don't have a government - that's why the Queen always refers to it in speeches not as 'your government' or 'our government' but "my government."
.
Also, I'll post this link (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills) to a Guardian article on the Royal Veto (Queen's/Prince's Consent) again, just in case anyone missed it before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 11:35:33 AM
QuoteA Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said: "It is a long established convention that the Queen is asked by parliament to provide consent to those bills which parliament has decided would affect crown interests. The sovereign has not refused to consent to any bill affecting crown interests unless advised to do so by ministers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 12:28:34 PM
Now you're getting it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 02 June, 2015, 12:56:58 PM
Quote from: Drinking Problem on 02 June, 2015, 10:53:45 AM
Seeing as we're a capitalist society, let's keep the monarchy but privatise them so they have to support themselves through all this tourist money they seem to be generating - that way they'll be even better off than they are now.
What true monarchist wouldn't want the royals to be better off?  If you think about it, it's unpatriotic not to privatise the royal family.

I'd buy that for a dollar!

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 02 June, 2015, 02:51:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 10:21:23 AM
...there's plenty of evidence to show that they bring in (as a living, breathing, active monarchy) a shit-load of tourist money in return for that minor outlay per tax-payer.

Putting aside the issue of deciding our constitutional arrangements on the basis of how much money we can fleece from tourists, evidence for this please.  Especially given the pitiful showing of royal properties in the most profitable tourist attractions list.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 02:52:36 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 12:28:34 PM
Now you're getting it.
Not entirely. That's not an argument for the abolishment of the monarchy or a move to a republic per se, but for general reform. But we won't ever get to that stage while one right-wing party calls the shots on a tiny amount of the vote from middle England, largely because huge numbers of people can't be bothered to get off of their arses and vote. It just another case of:

- Oh, bloody hell, the Tories are in again, being wankers. We might have to move out, because of the bedroom tax.
- Who did you vote for, then?
- Oh, I didn't vote.

And even in the current system, some votes do have a hell of a lot of power (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/general-election-results-just-900-5682492).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 02 June, 2015, 02:51:46 PMPutting aside the issue of deciding our constitutional arrangements on the basis of how much money we can fleece from tourists, evidence for this please.
The briefest of Googling immediately finds:

• Is the Britigh Royal Family Worth the Money (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-the-british-royal-family-worth-the-money/278052/) (The Atlantic)
• Mention of money passed to the Treasury from the Crown Estate, in The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html)
• Some interesting figures on Full Fact (https://fullfact.org/factchecks/the_royal_family_are_we_getting_our_money_s_worth-27330)

Perhaps naturally, The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/news/reality-check/2014/jan/28/how-much-do-the-royal-family-spend-and-are-they-down-to-their-last-million) counters with a pure 'strip it back to literal money pulled from visitors to Buckingham Palace, which is a bit mental.

The most obvious problem is it's hard to say for certain what the impact would be until a change is made. But, as I've said, I just don't see a great benefit in replacing the monarchy with a republic, given the nature of the British, and especially unless we have a massive overhaul of the electoral systems. Even if we did get those, it remains to be seen how tourism to the UK would change with the Royals being punted into the long grass and replaced by President Boris or President Jordan. Delving into the horrors of personal anecdotal 'evidence', it's clear a lot of Americans visit the UK in part because of its living monarchy. Maybe they still would anyway, because 'castles'. Maybe not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghost MacRoth on 02 June, 2015, 03:09:33 PM
Heh, amusing and worrying at the same time.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/01/david-cameron-moriarty-downing-street-radical-thatcher
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2015, 03:19:16 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
The briefest of Googling immediately finds:

• Is the Britigh Royal Family Worth the Money (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-the-british-royal-family-worth-the-money/278052/) (The Atlantic)
• Mention of money passed to the Treasury from the Crown Estate, in The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html)
• Some interesting figures on Full Fact (https://fullfact.org/factchecks/the_royal_family_are_we_getting_our_money_s_worth-27330)

The amounts in those articles are speculative or based on the monarchy's own numbers, which are dubious when you consider the speculative accounts of somewhere like Republic.org don't take long to get nine-figure numbers from only the briefest tally of expenditures - who are we to say whose speculation is valid?
What we do know is that Stonehenge makes more than Windsor Castle and costs less to upkeep.  To me that says the druids and their native religious rituals should be our monarchy and pagentry, not some shower of inbred Krauts in Disney costumes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 June, 2015, 03:19:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
• Mention of money passed to the Treasury from the Crown Estate, in The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html)

As an aside, the coalition essentially privatised the Crown Estate a couple of years ago, changing its charter to make the sole obligation of all property disposals the realisation of a profit. Previously, Crown Estate disposals were sensitive to community concerns and the change has not been for the better, in my experience.

In the small town where I live, in the last three years a pub that no one wanted to close, including the landlord, has been sold and demolished to build houses; a grazing paddock, the last undeveloped piece of open land in the town, is under pressure from other property developers who want —surprise— to build houses on it; and a fantastically ill-judged 1500 house development has been green-lit on farmland adjacent to the town boundary (for context: if fully occupied, it will represent about a 25% increase in the town's population). All of these in the face of overwhelming opposition from the local community.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 02 June, 2015, 03:32:29 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 02 June, 2015, 02:51:46 PMPutting aside the issue of deciding our constitutional arrangements on the basis of how much money we can fleece from tourists, evidence for this please.
The briefest of Googling immediately finds:

• Is the Britigh Royal Family Worth the Money (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-the-british-royal-family-worth-the-money/278052/) (The Atlantic)
• Mention of money passed to the Treasury from the Crown Estate, in The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html)
• Some interesting figures on Full Fact (https://fullfact.org/factchecks/the_royal_family_are_we_getting_our_money_s_worth-27330)

Perhaps naturally, The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/news/reality-check/2014/jan/28/how-much-do-the-royal-family-spend-and-are-they-down-to-their-last-million) counters with a pure 'strip it back to literal money pulled from visitors to Buckingham Palace, which is a bit mental.

The most obvious problem is it's hard to say for certain what the impact would be until a change is made. But, as I've said, I just don't see a great benefit in replacing the monarchy with a republic, given the nature of the British, and especially unless we have a massive overhaul of the electoral systems. Even if we did get those, it remains to be seen how tourism to the UK would change with the Royals being punted into the long grass and replaced by President Boris or President Jordan. Delving into the horrors of personal anecdotal 'evidence', it's clear a lot of Americans visit the UK in part because of its living monarchy. Maybe they still would anyway, because 'castles'. Maybe not.

Getting involved in this implies that I think there's any value at all to this argument; frankly I'd find the existence of a hereditary monarchy an obscenity regardless of how much wealth they brought in.  That said:


Haven't pored through that fullfact link but it looks like a load of mushbrained dogshit.

Frankly given the tiny number of royal properties open to the public, and the billions of pounds worth of artwork the feckless parasites have sequestered for private viewing, I don't see why the argument that getting rid of them could increase tourist revenue holds any less water than the opposite.

I should make clear that I obviously think there are bigger fish to fry than the relatively neutered modern monarchy- we've not been in a position where armed revolution would have been justified or worth it for at least 100 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 02 June, 2015, 03:38:35 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 03:04:21 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 02 June, 2015, 02:51:46 PMPutting aside the issue of deciding our constitutional arrangements on the basis of how much money we can fleece from tourists, evidence for this please.
The briefest of Googling immediately finds:

• Is the Britigh Royal Family Worth the Money (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-the-british-royal-family-worth-the-money/278052/) (The Atlantic)
• Mention of money passed to the Treasury from the Crown Estate, in The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html)
• Some interesting figures on Full Fact (https://fullfact.org/factchecks/the_royal_family_are_we_getting_our_money_s_worth-27330)

Perhaps naturally, The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/news/reality-check/2014/jan/28/how-much-do-the-royal-family-spend-and-are-they-down-to-their-last-million) counters with a pure 'strip it back to literal money pulled from visitors to Buckingham Palace, which is a bit mental.

The most obvious problem is it's hard to say for certain what the impact would be until a change is made. But, as I've said, I just don't see a great benefit in replacing the monarchy with a republic, given the nature of the British, and especially unless we have a massive overhaul of the electoral systems. Even if we did get those, it remains to be seen how tourism to the UK would change with the Royals being punted into the long grass and replaced by President Boris or President Jordan. Delving into the horrors of personal anecdotal 'evidence', it's clear a lot of Americans visit the UK in part because of its living monarchy. Maybe they still would anyway, because 'castles'. Maybe not.

That's true.  After all, France is a republic, and hardly anyone goes there on holiday as a result.

Former royal palaces like the Louvre and Versailles lie empty and derelict, and their 14 million paying visitors a year wander round them, bemoaning the lack of a living monarchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 03:52:51 PM
Simply changing from monarchy to republic is not the only thing we need to do, in my opinion. We also need to reform the voting system, switch to publicly created money, give local communities more say in their own affairs, reverse the cancer of corporatism, smash paedophile rings, establish a more enlightened penal system, stop bombing seven shades out of other countries, foster personal freedoms and responsibilities, wean ourselves off fossil fuels, improve the education system, upgrade the vast majority of our infrastructure and public services, give everyone who creates comics a guaranteed income for life and paint a huge union flag on the moon so everyone can see how fucking awesome we are.
.
Then I'll stop moaning. Possibly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 04:01:10 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 02 June, 2015, 03:38:35 PMThat's true.  After all, France is a republic, and hardly anyone goes there on holiday as a result.
Last I knew, France had been a republic for quite some time, not had a change within living memory. We don't know how a switch now would affect the UK. (And, as noted, I'm not thrilled at the prospect of voting in some shitbag every five years, who'll quite possibly be a much worse head of state, yet still cost us a ton of money in security and campaigning? Maybe—just maybe—the UK could mirror the likes of Ireland and Iceland, and have something quiet and simple, but I just get the feeling we'd want to be the USA, just a bit more rubbish.)

Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 03:52:51 PMSimply changing from monarchy to republic is not the only thing we need to...
And those things all happen either via some kind of mass revolt that will lead to lots of people getting killed and imprisoned, or by voting in a progressive government that would initiate those changes. But too many of the people who want to see change don't vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 04:58:29 PM
You're absolutely right, IP - we certainly could have something better than the US or France. Iceland worked out a new constitution on the internet, in full public view and with full public participation. The US constitution was worked out by a handful of rich white men and imposed on the country - sure, there are some good ideas in there but it's all gone to shit. There are lessons to be learned so our constitution would be better, stronger, fairer.
.
The powers of the new president and parliament would be worked out in advance, with everyone able to contribute. The problems you envisage would be dealt with before the first presidential candidate even runs for the position, and clauses put in place allowing for the immediate removal of a president if he or she breaches the rules WE have put in place.
.
I would most certainly get involved in and vote for that process, and all the other things I mentioned, but none of the parties are offering anything like that. I'm not going to vote for any of the wankers who constitute the present system because they're all singing different verses of the same hymn. And this idea of voting for somebody you don't believe in just to stop somebody else you don't believe in achieving power is just insane.
.
Give me something worthwhile to vote for and I'll vote for it. If not, just go away and leave me alone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 05:37:54 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 04:58:29 PMIceland worked out a new constitution on the internet, in full public view and with full public participation.
Which basically amounted to shit, sadly. (http://studiotendra.com/2013/03/29/icelands-crowd-sourced-constitution-is-dead/)

Quotebut none of the parties are offering anything like that
The Greens constantly talk about a blank-slate for constitutional reform. But until the electoral system changes, they will 'be' Caroline Lucas (unless the boundaries change, in which case they'll maybe have zero MPs); even under STV, they'd only have a few. (Under list PR: 20.)

Still, perhaps you should read their manifesto (https://www.greenparty.org.uk/we-stand-for/2015-manifesto.html). At the very least, it might give you food for thought, and an inkling that not all politicians are the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 05:54:02 PM
Of course they're all the same - they all believe that this inhuman system we're saddled with can somehow magically lead to a humane society. All you're asking me to do is read the Koran instead of the Bible. There might be wisdom in there but it's all basically praying to an illusion in the sky. Until that illusion ("authority") is dispelled, anything suggested in its name is pointless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 June, 2015, 06:24:07 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 03:52:51 PM
paint a huge union flag on the moon so everyone can see how fucking awesome we are.

I disagree with most of what you post here, but I strongly support this policy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 June, 2015, 06:29:29 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 03:52:51 PM
give everyone who creates comics a guaranteed income for life
I can think one or two who shouldn't get an income from comics (most of whom put out a lot of material in the 1990s)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 06:32:29 PM
The income the Queen receives from the public purse is to come under severe scrutiny by the Treasury after taxpayer funding of the monarchy rose by nearly a third to £40m. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/queens-income-to-face-scrutiny-after-public-funding-for-monarchy-rises-to-40m-10287829.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2015, 07:55:29 PM
Quote from: White Falcon on 02 June, 2015, 05:54:02 PM
Of course they're all the same - they all believe that this inhuman system we're saddled with can somehow magically lead to a humane society. All you're asking me to do is read the Koran instead of the Bible. There might be wisdom in there but it's all basically praying to an illusion in the sky. Until that illusion ("authority") is dispelled, anything suggested in its name is pointless.
In which case, I think I'm done with this discussion. Green policy might not be Shark's Perfect Utopia, but there's a hell of a lot of overlap with a whole load of things you talk about, but if you can't even be bothered to read a single manifesto (yet pepper this thread with a range of content), and hand-wave it away with "of course they're all the same", that's unhelpful. Also, any suggestion you would ever engage with the system is clearly laughable if you wave away the bloody Greens as being basically the same as the Tories, Labour, et al.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 June, 2015, 08:13:59 PM
We none of us see things as they really are, I suppose, and can only express our own perspectives. I don't think there's any such thing as a Perfect Utopia. My society will never be perfect, my life will never be perfect.
.
Just because the Greens happen to believe some of the things I do, or at least aspects thereof, I don't find that a compelling enough reason to throw myself at them. I also happen to agree with GordonR's last post, and I enjoy his writing, but I doubt very much those two facts will ever make us bosom buddies. I can respect him, just as I can respect the Greens, but that's not enough, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AM
I fancy being Shark for a day. What do you all reckon to Chemtrials or has it been discussed at length already.

Naturally I just Google something and am now posting a link to the first article I could find that says they are bad and evil.

Can't get link to work from phone but it's along the lines of Think these are con trails? Think again.

As an added bonus, it notes that meat consumption is the worst contributer to climate change but you already know that but just refuse to admit it because bacon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 June, 2015, 12:03:08 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AM
I fancy being Shark for a day. What do you all reckon to Chemtrials or has it been discussed at length already.

Naturally I just Google something and am now posting a link to the first article I could find that says they are bad and evil.

Can't get link to work from phone but it's along the lines of Think these are con trails? Think again.
They are condensation trails, and those who claim they're chem trails believe that there's a world-wide conspiracy between wildly disparate governments (US, Russia, middle east, etc) and rival companies (British Airlines, Virgin, Lufthansa, Aeroflot, Ryanair, American Airlines, United Airlines, Easyjet) to seed the atmosphere with whatever chemicals they claim are in them.  They believed this even during the height of the Cold War and despite the bitter rivalry between the airlines.  If you have to explain why that's ridiculous then I suspect the person you're trying to explain it to would never see sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2015, 01:21:38 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AMmeat consumption is the worst contributer to climate change but you already know that but just refuse to admit it because bacon.

Soya makes you fart, so veggie food is contributing to climate change much more than the cholesterol-throttled rectums of bacon lovers everywhere.


I joke, of course.  Climate change isn't real.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 June, 2015, 01:38:04 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 06 June, 2015, 12:03:08 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AM
I fancy being Shark for a day. What do you all reckon to Chemtrials or has it been discussed at length already.

Naturally I just Google something and am now posting a link to the first article I could find that says they are bad and evil.

Can't get link to work from phone but it's along the lines of Think these are con trails? Think again.
They are condensation trails, and those who claim they're chem trails believe that there's a world-wide conspiracy between wildly disparate governments (US, Russia, middle east, etc) and rival companies (British Airlines, Virgin, Lufthansa, Aeroflot, Ryanair, American Airlines, United Airlines, Easyjet) to seed the atmosphere with whatever chemicals they claim are in them.  They believed this even during the height of the Cold War and despite the bitter rivalry between the airlines.  If you have to explain why that's ridiculous then I suspect the person you're trying to explain it to would never see sense.

Heh, first encountered this on a walk around Glastonbury on the last day. Took a seat at a friendly stallholder, some old crustie, he gave me a cup of tea and I shared my smoke, we looked up at a plane flying overhead and the crazyness began. Turned out to be quite widespread among people of a certain generation too who all firmly believe "They didn't use to look like that" "There didn't use to be so many of them" "They didn't stick around like they do now". None of whom had the slightest understanding of how jet engines work or how that might interact with clouds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:39 PM
Nice but I was after some proper science refutation.

The jist of the article I failed to link to was that big Agri or big pharma was up to no good which would negate anti theories based on borders.

Come on, who can prove that big corporate things are not seeding the clouds for their own benefit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 07 June, 2015, 08:16:34 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AM
As an added bonus, it notes that meat consumption is the worst contributer to climate change but you already know that but just refuse to admit it because bacon.
Now, lumping this particular idea in with the "woo" brigade is unfair. If we didn't farm animals for their meat, there'd be a lot less CO2 in the world. I don't expect this fact to change peoples' minds (it didn't change mine when I ate meat) but it's hardly on the same level as "chemtrails are evil".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 09:22:58 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:39 PM
Nice but I was after some proper science refutation.

Well, you'd have to explain what they're supposed to be doing before anyone can refute anything, surely? "Their own benefit"? What benefit?

Quote from: Famous MortimerNow, lumping this particular idea in with the "woo" brigade is unfair. If we didn't farm animals for their meat, there'd be a lot less CO2 in the world.

Unquestionably true. As a fairly determined carnivore, I can agree unequivocally that people eat too much meat, and farming it is bad for the environment and not particularly good for us (the food yield per hectare farming crops compared to farming meat animals is ridiculous). My personal solution, were it within my power to affect massive change, would be the most draconian animal welfare standards in the developed world — people cry "it would make meat too expensive" but 1) we eat too much meat and 2) we waste too much food, so I see no downside to treating animals humanely and paying substantially more for meat.*

Cheers

Jim

*We're rapidly approaching the point where animal protein suitable for, say, Tesco Value Mince can be grown in vats anyway...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 June, 2015, 10:42:48 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 09:22:58 AM

*We're rapidly approaching the point where animal protein suitable for, say, Tesco Value Mince can be grown in vats anyway...


Apologies if this has been asked before, but would any of the vegetarians/vegans here be interested in eating lab grown meat? I understand that some choose not to eat animal flesh because they don't like the taste, but otherwise, would you still object?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 10:53:36 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 09:22:58 AM
so I see no downside to treating animals humanely and paying substantially more for meat.

I can- meat will only be for the privileged in society once more.
I agree with pretty much all of what you're saying, just not the whole 'make meat more expensive' bit. I don't see how further dividing society based on wealth, creating an even bigger gap between rich and poor, is in any way progressive. Presumably, under this new price regime, you'd still be able to afford some meat when the urge took; but what about those not so well off? Hardly a good base for a just society, IMO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 11:05:32 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 10:53:36 AM
Presumably, under this new price regime, you'd still be able to afford some meat when the urge took; but what about those not so well off? Hardly a good base for a just society, IMO.

Then what mechanism would you propose to achieve all the benefits I mentioned?

The price of meat is driven down by methods of mass production that trade animal welfare for the cost of production. At the same time, that cheapness encourages waste. I know people —irrespective of their relative affluence— who will roast a chicken for Sunday lunch, carve the breast meat and throw the rest away. If a chicken cost £15, I suspect there would be more inclination to use the leftovers and realise better value from the purchase. Rich people would still have more luxury to be wasteful, but it was ever thus.

People's food purchases are already driven by their incomes — if your cry is "Rich people will be able to afford nicer food than poor people" ... well, I don't have a fix for that.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 June, 2015, 11:13:19 AM
Quote from: Doctor Pops on 07 June, 2015, 10:42:48 AM
(W)ould any of the vegetarians/vegans here be interested in eating lab grown meat? I understand that some choose not to eat animal flesh because they don't like the taste, but otherwise, would you still object?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "object". I'm part of the YUCK (!), IT TASTES ICKY crowd, so I wouldn't choose to eat mince again, even if Brian Cox grew it himself. Meat is just protein, vitamins, and minerals I can get elsewhere, so fillet of Procter & Gamble doesn't interest me.

Pretend meat (like Quorn) only appeals to those who are veggie out of a misplaced sense of guilt and self denial, secretly craving the taste and texture of Farmfoods value chicken dippers, so if pretend meat lets them have their (beef)cake and eat it I can't see any grounds to "object".


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 11:25:26 AM
I don't offer any proposal- I merely point out the shortcomings in your proposal, that's the nature of discussions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 11:45:34 AM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 11:25:26 AM
I don't offer any proposal- I merely point out the shortcomings in your proposal, that's the nature of discussions.

Well, if you don't have a better suggestion, I'm not sure what you're bringing to the discussion — are you arguing that because it's not a perfect solution, nothing should be done?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2015, 11:49:51 AM
In theory your objections sound reasonable, DD, but in reality I can't see the shortcomings you mention applying to the modern world.  People will just accept that they can't have meat in the same way they've not only accepted but - with the General Election result - endorsed that people's mums should kill themselves rather than have a spare room, the physically disabled take up too much space in their own homes, and the mentally ill should be stacking shelves in corporate supermarket chains without getting paid.
The poor want to eat meat?  Too bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2015, 12:21:39 PM
Replace corporate-level farming and retail with a localised model. Return to smaller farms and locally owned shops; encourage standards and job creation in these areas through socially created money injections - grants and interest-free loans. Local supply met by local demand and trade. Education - maybe even a whole new subject for schools to add to geography, maths and English Lit - "farming." Encourage citizens to raise their own livestock or crops, again with the help of social money injections. Phasing meat out would be the long term goal; through education and helping farmers switch from livestock to crop farming as demand declines. The short term goals would be to reduce the number of animals wasted and thus the number of animals farmed, and to improve their environments. Kinda' deflate the whole business slowly, if you see what I mean. Instead of banning meat or making it prohibatively expensive, make it unfashionable - let it die down to lower levels, but support the farms as this happens.
.
Or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:33:06 PM
What I'm bringing is a different perspective on your proposed solution to your own- entirely necessary in any debate (even 'what if' musings like this one).

'Having a solution' is not the only positive that can be brought to the table, particularly if any critique could be shown to have a broad base of support (which I presume a broad base of meat-eating poor suddenly being forced to be veggie because some well-off guy says 'its for the best' would do).
I don't think "no solution, eh? Oh well, fuck you, despite you being the most affected by it. It's nothing to me, I'm off for my bird inside a bird inside a bird with duck pate horses duvet" is in any way progressive.

As you rightly said- our food choices are divided by our economics anyway, this is another expression of the inequalities in society created by the gap between rich and poor. I simply do not buy into the idea that increasing that gap will create a better society. Better for who?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 12:47:20 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:33:06 PM
I don't think "no solution, eh? Oh well, fuck you, despite you being the most affected by it. It's nothing to me, I'm off for my bird inside a bird inside a bird with duck pate horses duvet" is in any way progressive.

Wow. What a confrontational little prick you can be. I've been dirt fucking poor for several extended periods of my life and you can stuff your assumptions up your arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 June, 2015, 12:53:21 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 12:47:20 PM
What a confrontational little prick you can be. I've been dirt fucking poor for several extended periods of my life and you can stuff your assumptions up your arse.

3 posts. Who had 3 posts? PM me to claim your prize. it's not a record, but it's impressive nonetheless.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:57:10 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 12:47:20 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:33:06 PM
I don't think "no solution, eh? Oh well, fuck you, despite you being the most affected by it. It's nothing to me, I'm off for my bird inside a bird inside a bird with duck pate horses duvet" is in any way progressive.

Wow. What a confrontational little prick you can be. I've been dirt fucking poor for several extended periods of my life and you can stuff your assumptions up your arse.

Well, I was attempting to inject a little humour into the conversation as it happens- in order to attempt to diffuse any ill feeling.
It most certainly was not an attack on you personally, or a supposition that you are currently the 'rich man' in question- given the scenario that you 'had the power' to bring in the draconian laws, etc; you would then be the 'rich man' in the example- that's all. Just because I don't agree with your opinion fully on this matter, does not mean I'm out to confront you personally.

The fix I offer is to look for a better solution than the one you proposed, it may well be that it turns out to be you who comes up with one which I do support; because it isn't personal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Drinking Problem on 07 June, 2015, 11:49:51 AM
The poor want to eat meat?  Too bad.

We're talking about a commodity whose cheapness is a direct product of how poorly other living creatures are treated. If you don't want to accept the inherent cruelty, I'm open to suggestions as to how you can improve standards of animal care, with the attendant drop in volume as well increased basic costs, without increasing the cost of the product.

I'm pretty sure cotton got more expensive once the cotton farmers couldn't use free slave labour in the fields. The one thing is a consequence of doing the other and I'm more than happy to entertain scenarios where that isn't the case, but I can't think of any.

Plus, as I noted, we're approaching a time when no animal need die to provide basic animal protein. One logical conclusion of this argument is to simply end meat production — that would be fair to everyone, and my objection to that is not political or sociological but rather that I balk at the planned extinction of hundreds of species.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 June, 2015, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: Doctor Pops on 07 June, 2015, 10:42:48 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 09:22:58 AM
*We're rapidly approaching the point where animal protein suitable for, say, Tesco Value Mince can be grown in vats anyway...
Apologies if this has been asked before, but would any of the vegetarians/vegans here be interested in eating lab grown meat? I understand that some choose not to eat animal flesh because they don't like the taste, but otherwise, would you still object?
Won't anyone think of the cyboons?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 01:04:54 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:57:10 PM
Well, I was attempting to inject a little humour into the conversation as it happens- in order to attempt to diffuse any ill feeling.

Then I apologise unreservedly for snapping at you. There are some people on this forum —not you, I should stress— who persistently misrepresent pretty much anything I say to the extent where it feels a lot like trolling and I may be a little oversensitive on that score.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 01:08:11 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2015, 01:04:54 PM
Quote from: Dog Deever on 07 June, 2015, 12:57:10 PM
Well, I was attempting to inject a little humour into the conversation as it happens- in order to attempt to diffuse any ill feeling.

Then I apologise unreservedly for snapping at you. There are some people on this forum —not you, I should stress— who persistently misrepresent pretty much anything I say to the extent where it feels a lot like trolling and I may be a little oversensitive on that score.

Cheers

Jim

No problem. Tis teh internet. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 June, 2015, 01:14:55 PM
Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 07 June, 2015, 08:16:34 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2015, 11:38:47 AM
As an added bonus, it notes that meat consumption is the worst contributer to climate change but you already know that but just refuse to admit it because bacon.
Now, lumping this particular idea in with the "woo" brigade is unfair. If we didn't farm animals for their meat, there'd be a lot less CO2 in the world. I don't expect this fact to change peoples' minds (it didn't change mine when I ate meat) but it's hardly on the same level as "chemtrails are evil".

Apologies I didn't mean to be dismissive of the idea, I picked my words very badly. The terrible environmental impact of the meat and dairy industry and sustainability is one of the reasons I am vegan and I genuinely meant that it was a bonus that the issue was being mentioned.

Here's the chem trail article now I am sober enough to do links...
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/10/27/geoengineering-aka-chemtrails-should-be-included-when-talking-about-climate-change-heres-why/ (http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/10/27/geoengineering-aka-chemtrails-should-be-included-when-talking-about-climate-change-heres-why/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 June, 2015, 01:27:59 PM
Pretend meat is not always about cravings. Sometimes it's just about convenience. I know that a quinoa and kale salad with pumpkin seeds is really the best thing to eat but it's sunday morning and I am hung over so some tempeh rashers in a roll wikl do nicely.

As for vat grown meat, it really does depend on your reason for being vegan/vegetarian. The stricter vegans would presumably have no truck with it because somewhere at the start of the process at least one animal would be killed or mistreated to harvestvstem cells or some such. I wouldn't go for it myself on those grounds plus "Yuck!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2015, 02:15:27 PM
I'll probably never give up meat. Despite being an animal lover I also acknowledge my place in the food chain and as an omnivore.

I will say though that I only buy my meat from a local butchers that I KNOW give's their cattle a shit ton of space for a free range lifestyle and a quick death.

As a result I only eat meat two or tree times a week now, so not much of a shift towards vegetarianism as much as a greater understanding of where my food comes from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2015, 02:24:01 PM
Interesting article, Tips, thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 07 June, 2015, 02:53:55 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 07 June, 2015, 01:14:55 PM

Apologies I didn't mean to be dismissive of the idea, I picked my words very badly. The terrible environmental impact of the meat and dairy industry and sustainability is one of the reasons I am vegan and I genuinely meant that it was a bonus that the issue was being mentioned.
Not at all - I'm as guilty of being an angry idiot on here as everyone, and I thought what you said didn't really fit in. The whole meat farming = "fossil fuel" argument is pretty simple, and I hope it changes minds, but even though I'm a vegetarian now, and will never eat meat again (having dabbled in my mid 20s), I could have been presented with that argument when I was younger and I'd have gone "but the Thursday night mixed grills at my local pub!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2015, 02:56:49 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 June, 2015, 02:15:27 PMDespite being an animal lover I also acknowledge my place in the food chain and as an omnivore.

Humans are not a part of the food chain.  We eat meat not as part of our natural hunter/gatherer instincts, but because it's convenient.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2015, 03:08:00 PM
So are plants not part of the food chain? Are humans not consumed by other animals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2015, 03:20:01 PM
No, most of our dead bodies, at least in the overdeveloped western world, are selfishly and expensively burned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2015, 03:20:20 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 June, 2015, 03:08:00 PM
So are plants not part of the food chain? Are humans not consumed by other animals?

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3577/3650743091_2da9a888d2.jpg)

Only if opportunity arises, and not because of specific evolutionary traits which allow the hunting, killing and consumption of humans in their own habitat.  I don't discount that there might be large predators where you live that regularly hunt and kill people in their homes, but if that's the case, it doesn't mean that this is how the food chain works in relation to humans, it means you need to move.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2015, 03:33:11 PM
Erm....bacteria? Fungi? Even in ash's we contribute to the food cycle. Humans are not some magical creature that exists separately from the rest of the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 June, 2015, 03:39:39 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 June, 2015, 03:08:00 PM
Are humans not consumed by other animals?

None of the things you think eat humans actually prey upon humans. Worms certainly eventually eat humans, but otherwise, no. None of the animals humans eat are part of the food chain either, since we've taken them out of the food chain and bred them exclusively for a closed system where all the travel is in one direction.

It's a question of proportion too. The occasional shark makes off with someone's leg, but humans slaughter 190 MILLION * animals for food every single day:

Louis CK on the food chain: https://youtu.be/uur0e7zbRGU



* 14 minutes 10 seconds here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05w8dnj (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05w8dnj)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2015, 03:41:27 PM
I was never refering to anything other than worms and other small organisms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 07 June, 2015, 03:51:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 07 June, 2015, 03:08:00 PM
So are plants not part of the food chain? Are humans not consumed by other animals?
Okay? But it doesn't really advance the argument to make a point like that. Yes, a few humans are occasionally consumed by worms or bacteria. What next?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2015, 03:54:42 PM
Thats it. Even a few and where are still objectifly a part of the world food chain. Humans are animals, all animals are part of the food chain. We have an intake (plant amtter, fungi, other animal matter) and a waste peoducts (fecal matter, waist food, our corpses). Thats's it. What are you all trying to get at?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 June, 2015, 04:21:52 PM
You sound a bit like Mufasa from Disney's Hamlet The Lion King
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2015, 04:48:27 PM
For humans, the food chain is less an overview of an interdependent biological ecosystem and more of a menu.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 June, 2015, 10:24:08 AM
Brilliant video in the link by Bernie Sanders as to why apothetic non-voters are actually helping the government they are supposedly objecting to.

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/09/bernie_sanders_perfectly_sum_up_why_elites_love_apathetic_voters_partner/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2015, 10:46:07 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 12 June, 2015, 10:24:08 AM
Brilliant video in the link by Bernie Sanders as to why apothetic non-voters are actually helping the government they are supposedly objecting to.

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/09/bernie_sanders_perfectly_sum_up_why_elites_love_apathetic_voters_partner/

Good stuff.  As I've always said, at least you can stop the worst of the pricks from running your country.  And I'd say Russell Brand's stance has done the Tories' cause no harm whatsoever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 June, 2015, 10:02:01 AM
......after the march in London I've found a lot of my deeply apathetic FB friends popping out of the woodwork

If I see the phrase "champagne socialist" again I'm going to pop a bollock. I hate it.

It implies that if you're in any position of power or wealth like the biggest names at the march yesterday Brand, Church, etc. You have no right to be talking about Austerity or social issues.

So... who should? People in actual social positions of influence have no right to. OK. Not politicians they're hypocrites. Middle class? No. No, you're a weekend socialist. You're simply dallying in ethical thought to pass the time before your next relatively big paycheck.

But the people who use the phrase think they're being so fucking witty like "AH HAH. That'll learn you - now get back to punching the poor like everyone who isn't poor should be doing. Vote? No I didn't, no one represents me mate. I represent myself. And my champagne importing business"

[/rant]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 21 June, 2015, 11:11:09 AM
That line of reasoning is such bollocks. If rich people shouldn't have the right to decide on what happens to poor people, then that's the entire Tory cabinet and most of their MPs shit out of luck (millionaires one and all).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2015, 11:24:52 AM
If you're poor and you hate poverty, they call you bitter or jealous.  If you're rich and hate poverty they call you a champagne socialist or a hypocrite.  If you're young and you hate poverty, they call you naive.  If you're old and you hate poverty, they call you a dinosaur.  If you're a politician and you hate poverty they call you out of touch.
They are the problem.

The upshot is that doing nothing isn't really an option for them any more than it is for us, because if you create a palpable divide between classes of people and then let one of those classes have all the perks that society has to offer while the other gets fuck all, what follows - as proved time and again down throughout human history - is not mass resignation to the situation but extremism and last I checked, there's a lot more of us than there is of them.  Austerity protests act like a sort of release valve for building tensions, so if anything, all the Daily Mail readers should be grateful they're happening - the alternative is riots and those murders I keep joking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 June, 2015, 12:07:27 PM
I prefer prosecco myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 June, 2015, 12:24:05 PM
Quote from: Doctor Pops on 21 June, 2015, 12:07:27 PM
I prefer prosecco myself.

You and Church are fighting on the same side then! (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/12/charlotte-church-prosecco-socialist-protest-peoples-assembly-cardiff)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eamonn Clarke on 21 June, 2015, 12:47:01 PM
Me, I'm a Buckfast socialist
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 June, 2015, 12:54:37 PM
A buckfast bolshevic surely
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 June, 2015, 01:08:30 PM
Does this make me a Thwaites Socialist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 June, 2015, 01:34:35 PM
European Parliament committee proposing copyright restrictions on commercial photographs of buildings.

http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2015/06/european-parliament-committee-adopts-controversial-pro-user-copyright-reform-report/?comments=1 (http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2015/06/european-parliament-committee-adopts-controversial-pro-user-copyright-reform-report/?comments=1)

Seems stupid to not just go with the freedom of panorama exemption.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2015, 02:29:29 PM
that article says "commercial use of recordings of works in public spaces should require express permission from the rightsholders." - so I don't think it means photographing a public building but things like recording a performance by a band or artist in a public square. The rest of it seems eminently sensible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 June, 2015, 02:36:22 PM
On the Daily Politics this morning, it was stated to include more than that.

There are already instances like the Atomium in Belgium which are protected which has led to Wikipedia censoring it's page on it, or showing a photo of a model rather than the actual building.

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atomium (https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atomium)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 June, 2015, 02:37:23 PM
http://petapixel.com/2015/06/20/alert-freedom-of-panorama-under-threat-in-europe/ (http://petapixel.com/2015/06/20/alert-freedom-of-panorama-under-threat-in-europe/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2015, 04:18:33 PM
yeah that is a bit crap - guess it all depends on the definition of "works" - I didn't think you could copyright a building, but seems I'm wrong. I think if every guidebook and tourist brochure did blank out stuff like the atomium or London eye, the owners or city authorities would soon be very upset!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 June, 2015, 04:58:08 PM
Yep, the Hollywood sign is another one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSSAOa-UUgA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSSAOa-UUgA)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 23 June, 2015, 05:45:45 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 23 June, 2015, 02:36:22 PM
On the Daily Politics this morning, it was stated to include more than that.

There are already instances like the Atomium in Belgium which are protected which has led to Wikipedia censoring it's page on it, or showing a photo of a model rather than the actual building.

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atomium (https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atomium)

That is rather bizarre, isn't it? I'm off to Belgium in a few days. I'll try not to photograph it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 July, 2015, 03:44:56 PM
I know some of the board are self-employed or small business owners, so was wondering if they've made out as well in today's budget as all those kids who are now no longer living in poverty - admittedly because the government abolished the definition of "poverty" that would have meant two million more children would have been classed as such after today's budget, but it still counts.  The Tories have stopped two million children from living in poverty and no-one can take that away from them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 08 July, 2015, 04:01:43 PM
Quote from: Problem Solved
I know some of the board are self-employed or small business owners, so was wondering if they've made out as well in today's budget as all those kids who are now no longer living in poverty...

Speaking as someone rebelling against 'the man' rather than a greedy capitalist, Corporation Tax is going down, and my family at least is better off under the Tories (I know that's not a popular thing to say), but the maths and gobbledy-gook from today and implications for my business are too complicated for me to fathom.

What I'd really like from Govt is some awareness of 'micro' business ie. one-man bands or creative types of company with <10 employees – as when the Govt talk about 'small business' they are generally referring to companies that employ 100s of people (rather than 1000s), and whose needs are somewhat different.

For example, it is fair that my business is taxed at the same rate as Unilever, but because I can't afford creative accounting (nor would I want to), we pay more Corp Tax as a proportion?

Anyway, at least IDS was pleased. I wonder what the Subtitles did say?

(https://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ids-fisting.gif?w=540&h=304)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 July, 2015, 04:07:25 PM
I was not surprised in the slightest to see that many on Twitter have drawn cocks in IDS' hands in that gif, and remember thinking it's a pity he didn't get quite as passionate about not killing vulnerable people as he did about cuts in tax rates for millionaires.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 July, 2015, 04:08:30 PM
Quote from: Banners on 08 July, 2015, 04:01:43 PM
(https://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ids-fisting.gif?w=540&h=304)

(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/2286690/chatterer-hellraiser-o.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 08 July, 2015, 04:08:45 PM
Unfortunately I caught some of Osbourne's speech as broadcast. He was proudly proclaiming that as working people are suffering due to some recent measure or other, he would rectify this inequality by reducing benefits to those out-of-work in the same degree.

Followed by Tory cheers.

I switched the radio off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 08 July, 2015, 06:42:32 PM
They'll build more and more walls around themselves and their wealth, and laugh as we kill each other for crumbs...but still vote for absolute scum like them.

Five years of this is going to doom us all. IDS will be told "you cheering on the end of a safety net for the least fortunate in society has become a meme" and he just won't care. Because he's going to keep getting elected. If they can fuck us over as much as they did in the last five years and increase their majority, the British people are the turkeys who voted for Christmas.

I'd love to say I'm going to leave and find somewhere more compassionate, but I'm not sure too many of those places still exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 July, 2015, 06:59:09 PM
It's like this the world over, though, with conservative capitalist forces consolidating power through things like TTIP and austerity.  Hopefully the Scotch and the Greeces can stand as an example that resistance is possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 July, 2015, 08:34:33 PM
As a single working man with a dicky ticker who claims no benefits and has been reduced to living in a second-hand army tent, I detected nothing in the ritual pleb fucking budget for me. Maybe if my tent was made from solid gold and I owned a chain of campsites I might get some much-needed help. But it's not and I don't, so there isn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 July, 2015, 09:40:12 PM
With all three above, this is a greedy bunch of scum bags devouring us because they can. You can never fill or satisfy this kind of. Rapine....it is beyond our comprehension. It must be fought against. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 July, 2015, 10:03:12 PM
Resistance is vital.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 08 July, 2015, 10:57:23 PM
Frankie Boyle continues his run (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/07/humanity-chancellor-emergency-budget-george-osborne-austerity) of being shit-hot on point in the Guardian:

QuoteThere's a lot of projection among our elites. Perhaps they have to imagine the people they prey on as having their own worst qualities, so currently we hear a lot about scroungers and parasites and frauds, as a class of yacht-owning, show jumping, off-piste-skiing, incestuous monsters projects the shame it feels at its own greed on to a population whose idea of decadence is probably bath bombs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 09 July, 2015, 10:45:33 AM
Quote from: White Falcon on 08 July, 2015, 10:03:12 PM
Resistance is vital.


Resistance is futile.

You will be Assimilated.

(But a belated Happy Birthday to ya, anyway). Cheers from Paddy Kafka

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZEJ4OJTgg8
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 July, 2015, 11:01:27 AM
Thanks, Paddy :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 09 July, 2015, 01:06:10 PM
The only thing we can do, short of launching every Tory MP into the heart of the sun, is to get organised. Join a group that opposes austerity - any group at all - and let's make sure this shit never happens again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 01:10:22 PM
I thought overall the Budget was very good.  Introduction of living wage - excellent.  Raising of personal allowances - good.  Cuts in tax relief for high earners pensions schemes - good.  More money for apprenticeships - great news.  Disability benefits left alone - really good.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 July, 2015, 02:02:45 PM
I don't think austerity can be laid solely at the Tories' door, but fair play to them for turning a simple mugging into an art form.  We'll all be Greeks in a year or two.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 July, 2015, 03:17:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 01:10:22 PM
Disability benefits left alone - really good.

From The Independent:
Quotesick and disabled people on Employment and Support Allowance  (ESA)  who are likely to be able to return to work will see their payments reduced by about £30 a week to the level of Jobseeker's Allowance, currently £73.10 a week for those aged 25 and over. The change will affect new claimants from 2017 but not existing ones.

Mark Lever, chief executive of the National Autistic Society, said: "The Government has broken its promise to protect disability benefits. Most autistic people on out-of-work benefits want to work, but struggle due to employers' misunderstandings and a lack of support. They need ESA to pay for basics like food, heating and clothing."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 July, 2015, 03:39:51 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 08 July, 2015, 10:57:23 PM
Frankie Boyle continues his run (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/07/humanity-chancellor-emergency-budget-george-osborne-austerity) of being shit-hot on point in the Guardian:

QuoteThere's a lot of projection among our elites. Perhaps they have to imagine the people they prey on as having their own worst qualities, so currently we hear a lot about scroungers and parasites and frauds, as a class of yacht-owning, show jumping, off-piste-skiing, incestuous monsters projects the shame it feels at its own greed on to a population whose idea of decadence is probably bath bombs.

Fair play; I've actually come to like him since he started talking about important things, rather than laughing at Down's syndrome and the queen's vagina.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 03:55:10 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 July, 2015, 03:17:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 01:10:22 PM
Disability benefits left alone - really good.

From The Independent:
Quotesick and disabled people on Employment and Support Allowance  (ESA)  who are likely to be able to return to work will see their payments reduced by about £30 a week to the level of Jobseeker's Allowance, currently £73.10 a week for those aged 25 and over. The change will affect new claimants from 2017 but not existing ones.

Mark Lever, chief executive of the National Autistic Society, said: "The Government has broken its promise to protect disability benefits. Most autistic people on out-of-work benefits want to work, but struggle due to employers' misunderstandings and a lack of support. They need ESA to pay for basics like food, heating and clothing."

Employment and Support Allowance for those in the Support Group, which would generally cover the people with a disability rather than those with an illness, has not been cut and is not going to be cut.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2015, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 03:55:10 PM
Employment and Support Allowance for those in the Support Group, which would generally cover the people with a disability rather than those with an illness, has not been cut and is not going to be cut.

So disabled people are OK, and ill people can go fuck themselves...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Albion on 09 July, 2015, 04:13:00 PM
After the budget our rent could go up a hell of a lot if Mrs Albion finds another full time job. (She lost hers at the end of March).

Is it worth her bothering?
She may do better to get something part time, stay below the amount that determines the rent and work less for her last few years before retirement.
We will have to cope with it in a few years when she does retire anyway. Age gap love eh?

Isn't this the government that wants people working?

The rich get rich, the poor get poor. Again.
Same old song and dance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2015, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: Albion on 09 July, 2015, 04:13:00 PM
Isn't this the government that wants people working?

Working single parent. 'Doing the right thing' according to Osborne, rewarded with a £1400 p/a cut in income:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/New_Min_Wage_zpse1wqrkhq.jpg)

Meanwhile, if you've got a million quid to leave to your kids: rejoice! No inheritance tax!

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 04:20:02 PM
Hi Jim, you're really quick off the mark to jump down someone's throat and to demand an apology when you think you've been misquoted.  Where did I say that "ill people can go fuck themselves....?"  I was politely replying to DDD.  In my original posting, all I said was that disability benefits had not been cut and I stand by that.  People with severe disabilities are put into the Support Group, which, I say again, has not and will not be cut.  There are also ill people in the Support Group and their benefits have not been cut either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2015, 04:24:09 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 04:20:02 PM
Hi Jim, you're really quick off the mark to jump down someone's throat and to demand an apology when you think you've been misquoted.  Where did I say that "ill people can go fuck themselves....?"

You'll notice the question mark. That's a question, not an attribution of a position. I was asking if that was your position. If it's not, fair enough, but your original post did smack a bit of "I'm all right, Jack", which was what prompted my question.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 04:30:43 PM
I was just stating what I thought of the budget.  If you think I was saying, "I'm all right Jack!" that says far more about you than it does about me.  It wasn't just disability benefits that I mentioned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Albion on 09 July, 2015, 04:31:19 PM
Crikey. That's a big kick where it hurts for a working single parent.
Not surprised though and I bet it's the same for many others. You don't often win for "doing the right thing" these days.  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 09 July, 2015, 04:31:31 PM
QuotePaul Johnson, director of the IFS, said households receiving tax credits would be "significantly worse off" by the changes unveiled by the Chancellor, even taking into consideration a boost in wages.

The IFS estimated that the four-year freeze to tax credits will hit around 3 million families, making them worse off by an average of £1,000.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/budget-2015-george-osbornes-welfare-reforms-set-to-make-13-million-families-significantly-worse-off-says-institute-for-fiscal-studies-31364718.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 July, 2015, 04:35:36 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 July, 2015, 03:39:51 PMFair play; I've actually come to like him since he started talking about important things, rather than laughing at Down's syndrome and the queen's vagina.

Yeah, I didn't have time for Russell Brand or Frankie Boyle until their latter turn towards social commentary - Boyle's Election Autopsy where he looks into the camera and tells Tory voters in a deadpan voice "you ruined this country" was especially hilarious, and there's a couple of good Youtube vids of him talking to Chunky Mark where he seems a lot less belligerent and caustic than you'd expect, almost expressing pity for the political classes.
Russell Brand has been a little harder to fully get behind because he's still Russell Brand, but what put me onside was seeing his hugging an emotional Mark Thomas at an FBU rally - a man no stranger to pissing away a promising alternative comedy career in pursuit of social justice - and the hilarious middle class outrage of the armchair liberals of the Guardian railing against him in exactly the same way teenaged metalheads expressed outrage that a member of Steps had been seen at Donington.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2015, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 July, 2015, 04:30:43 PM
It wasn't just disability benefits that I mentioned.

Well, here's a handy chart from that hotbed of leftist propaganda, the Institute of Fiscal Studies, which shows very clearly whose shoulders are bearing the brunt of the costs of Osborne's budget. Clue: it's not those with 'the broadest shoulders':

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Income_Changes_2015_zpsspojzb7k.jpg)

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 July, 2015, 06:58:49 PM
Fitba / Butch (that is you, isn't it, sauchie?) -
My only major issue with Russell Brand, though it is a big issue, is that he's an advocate of the centre left politics who tells like-minded people not to vote. He can't have hurt the Tory landslide anyway
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 July, 2015, 07:29:11 PM
Fitba isn't Butch....at least I think?? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2015, 07:36:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 July, 2015, 06:58:49 PM
Fitba / Butch (that is you, isn't it, sauchie?) -

The Artist Formerly Known As Bear, surely?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 09 July, 2015, 07:39:09 PM
The mighty Bear and his trusty canine side kick, Dick Head. Gotta be. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 July, 2015, 07:46:22 PM
I like how everyone sees a ridiculous Scotch stereotype and immediately thinks of Sauchie/Butch.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 July, 2015, 06:58:49 PMMy only major issue with Russell Brand, though it is a big issue, is that he's an advocate of the centre left politics who tells like-minded people not to vote. He can't have hurt the Tory landslide anyway

The Tories rigged the election, so you can hardly blame that one on Russ.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 July, 2015, 06:15:39 PM
Sorry, all Scotches look the same to me, bear
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 July, 2015, 11:12:10 PM
Sooooo.....

Bonfires in Northern Ireland.

Don't build houses beside them... (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-33472808)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 July, 2015, 06:56:17 AM
Territorial pissings. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 01:20:15 PM
Government proposes enquiry to explore the possibility of an end to a free NHS (https://opendemocracy.net/ournhs/richard-grimes/government-moves-to-consider-nhs-user-charges).

I hate to say "I told you so", but I fucking told you so.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 16 July, 2015, 02:16:49 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 01:20:15 PM
Government proposes enquiry to explore the possibility of an end to a free NHS (https://opendemocracy.net/ournhs/richard-grimes/government-moves-to-consider-nhs-user-charges).

I hate to say "I told you so", but I fucking told you so.

Jim

I like to imagine that the 'General Public' will rise up and smash these Clowns into the dirt but the majority of people don't give a Fuck, which itself is a very sad state of affairs.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 02:36:51 PM
The NHS is not and never has been "free".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 July, 2015, 02:37:24 PM
The right issue hasn't come along just yet, is all, Kev, but luckily, this lot seem keen to push their luck.

I'm kind of hoping some bright spark at the BBC cottons on that all they have to do is announce that the government is forcing them to stop competing with prime-time channels so they're cutting all their dancing and medical shows.  A few days without Doctors or The Archers and those pensioners won't be Tory voters anymore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 02:37:57 PM
All to pay back an imaginary debt to the biggest criminal organisations on the planet. If we are not careful, one day we will wake up as serfs in the lands our forefathers fought and died to keep free. And the saddest part is that, as NapalmKev says, most people don't care. How can they care when economics and banking are so boring while X-Factor and Sport are so exciting? It's like a massive magic trick - look at the sparkly things and on no account pay any attention to the men behind the curtain.
.
Truth? We can't handle the truth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 July, 2015, 02:38:49 PM
I would. The sooner the lot of them are stripped bare to hammer home how corrupt they truely are the better.

(http://33.media.tumblr.com/2c4a53a9267d3e686645eb1f9f856b2d/tumblr_npzz1ij7H11txe091o6_400.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 02:45:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 02:36:51 PM
The NHS is not and never has been "free".

No. But they're talking about funding it through direct insurance and patient payments rather than general taxation with no payment at the point of use.

I understand perfectly well how the NHS works, and your pedantry doesn't change the fact that this government is ideologically committed to ending the NHS as we know it.

As I pointed out, repeatedly, in the run up to the last election.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 02:51:41 PM
The enemy is not the immigrants, the Jews, ISIS, Russia, shape-shifting alien lizards or even the politicians.
.
Rothschild Too Big To Jail? Russia, Egypt, Iceland, Iran, China, & Hungary Say No! (http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/10/18/rothschild-too-big-to-jail-russia-iceland-iran-china-hungary-say-no/)
.
ROLLING STONE : ROTHSCHILD CORRUPTION GOES MAINSTREAM (http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/05/10/rolling-stone-rothschild-corruption-goes-mainstream/)
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 02:57:57 PM
Jim is correct. What most people don't realise is that the problem isn't how things like the NHS, police, roads etc. are paid for but what they are paid for with. To pay for things with actual, honest-to-God money is fine - but to pay for them with debt is madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 03:07:15 PM
In the Tory manifesto, didn't they pledge to spend an extra £8 billion on the NHS during this parliament?  I don't believe for one second that they will get rid of free at source treatment on the NHS.  Time will tell if either you or I are right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 July, 2015, 03:13:19 PM
Yes, but what's the alternative, Falcy?  A fairer system that works better and doesn't unfairly distribute a finite amount of wealth?  No such system exists and never will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 03:17:22 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 03:07:15 PM
In the Tory manifesto, didn't they pledge to spend an extra £8 billion on the NHS during this parliament?  I don't believe for one second that they will get rid of free at source treatment on the NHS.  Time will tell if either you or I are right.

Again: they have said they are ideologically committed to it. They were saying it before the 2010 election. They were briefing private healthcare companies to expect fundamental changes to the NHS, that the NHS would cease to exist as a provider of care and become an umbrella 'brand' under which private companies provided services.

Your faith in Tory manifesto pledges is rather touching, however.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 July, 2015, 03:31:29 PM
Universal Credit, if implemented on the current schedule (it won't be), will end up costing 14 billion, the exact amount the Tories are cutting from welfare.  There's an odd coincidence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 July, 2015, 03:53:57 PM
Isn't Tory Manifesto a porn star?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:05:05 PM
Where did I say I had faith in the Tory manifesto pledges, Jim?  The reason I don't believe the Tories will get rid of the NHS in its current state and introduce any more charging at point of use is that it would be political suicide and I simply don't believe that they're that stupid.  But again, only time will tell.  I don't know what's going to happen in the future anymore than you do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 04:11:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:05:05 PM
Where did I say I had faith in the Tory manifesto pledges, Jim?  The reason I don't believe the Tories will get rid of the NHS in its current state and introduce any more charging at point of use is that it would be political suicide and I simply don't believe that they're that stupid.  But again, only time will tell.  I don't know what's going to happen in the future anymore than you do.

Other than the fact that they have said what they intend to do?

Also: you were the one who quoted the Tory manifesto pledge as if it meant something — if you don't have any faith in it, why did you bring it up?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:16:10 PM
I put a question mark.  It wasn't a statement of support.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 04:20:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:16:10 PM
I put a question mark.

You don't actually understand how question marks work, do you? If you ask me —rhetorically— whether the Tories pledged £8bn as a rebuttal to my point, it tends to mean that you're offering this as a counter to my original argument. Which would suggest, given your general position in opposition to my point, that you think you're supporting your own argument.

I can't believe I'm having to explain your own posts to you. Please learn the basic techniques of logic and argument and have another go when you've got a clue.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 04:26:54 PM
Bear, the alternative is very simple. The government (or other public body) takes over the banks' role and creates money out of nothing for itself/the country. Money could still be created as debt but, crucially, be lent out at 0% interest. As the debts are repaid, government money reserves grow so that, over time, less and less money needs to be created to keep the economy/country going. In short, we make the monetary system work the way most people think it works now.
.
This solution, as I have said all along, is so simple that it could be instituted virtually overnight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:31:19 PM
Jim, why do you have to be so nasty?  I don't believe I've insulted you in any way in this discussion and I don't intend to start now.  Go to the top of the class, your knowledge of written English is better than mine.  It doesn't mean I can't have an opinion though, although maybe in your world it does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 04:58:58 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:31:19 PM
Jim, why do you have to be so nasty?  I don't believe I've insulted you in any way in this discussion and I don't intend to start now.  Go to the top of the class, your knowledge of written English is better than mine.  It doesn't mean I can't have an opinion though, although maybe in your world it does.

I'm not being nasty. If you join in a political discussion (and no one was forcing you to chip in with your point about the NHS "not being free") then it's incumbent upon you to be able to put up an argument worth the name. There's a reason why you don't see me joining in many 100 meter races — I can't run very fast. You have to pick your battles.

I have never said you can't have an opinion, and nor would I. You were attempting to present some kind of counter-argument or rebuttal to my post, but that argument didn't hold up. It is neither rude nor nasty to point that out on a discussion forum.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 05:15:02 PM
Okay, Jim, I'll bite!!  As far as I'm aware, you don't have sole control of the board.  I'll post what I like, when I like, until I'm told not to by the moderators.  You don't think my argument stands up, I obliviously do.  It's called a difference of opinion and I'll continue to answer your posts when I think you're talking nonsense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 05:16:52 PM
You need a thick skin on this thread!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 05:18:08 PM
 :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 July, 2015, 05:21:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 04:05:05 PM
The reason I don't believe the Tories will get rid of the NHS in its current state and introduce any more charging at point of use is that it would be political suicide

I don't reckon this government will dismantle the NHS either, Tankie. It'll be a Labour government who do that, because only they can get away with it. Thankfully, the chances of Labour regaining power anytime soon are as remote as the odds on Andy Diggle getting a Christmas card from Pat Mills.

Dave and Gideon are definitely laying the groundwork for it though, and the other side are helping too. This morning, the Today programme discussed plans to make consultants work weekends, and the terms of the debate were the same as usual - both the government and the NHS itself frame it as a service in crisis, which will collapse completely if change doesn't come soon.

The longer that narrative continues being pushed by both sides, the more everyone will get bored listening to it and plump for the easiest option to end the constant bad news. If, twenty years ago, you'd asked me what the chances were of student grants being replaced by loans, I'd have said it was unlikely. A decade of bad headlines (about the system being broken and financially unsustainable) later, and all parties suddenly arrive at a consensus - then the Labour party stick the knife in.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 05:24:48 PM
Fair point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 July, 2015, 05:28:27 PM

The BBC is about five years into the same process of constant negative press (from commercial rivals ,who stand to gain from its demise), and the opposition parties' polling tells them that there are few votes to be won championing a tax that prevents folk being able to buy all the Sky channels they want and which pays leftie executives to cover up the abuse of children.

Whenever you tell folk something is too expensive, the only solution they (public or politicians) can come up with is privatisation, because that's been the dominant narrative for the last three decades. People can't even conceive of solutions which don't involve throwing in the towel and letting markets sort it out.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 July, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Well said Butch. On the mark. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 July, 2015, 06:06:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 05:15:02 PM
You don't think my argument stands up, I obliviously do.  It's called a difference of opinion and I'll continue to answer your posts when I think you're talking nonsense.

Which is fine. And I'll continue to point out when your arguments don't make a lick of sense. Discussion forum, you see?

Also:

QuoteI obliviously do.

Typo of the week.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 July, 2015, 06:11:22 PM
I encountered a decent idea the other day. Every driver spotted by a camera driving within the speed limit is entered into a monthly lottery, prizes to be awarded out of the money gleaned from speeding fines.
.
In a world without privately created money this would be a great idea but, of course, local authorities need every penny they can lay their hands on to service their imaginary debts. It is nevertheless a good example of the kinds of things we'll be able to do once we've seen off the Rothschilds and their greedy ilk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 July, 2015, 06:47:33 PM
Thanks for pointing out the typo, Jim, you're such a gent.  I'll be following your future posts with even more interest than I have done up until now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 July, 2015, 06:48:20 PM
I have to be honest I am becoming increasingly concerned about what exactly the present government are likely to do over the course of the present parliament.  It seems that the worst fears of opponents are not even close to what is actually going to happen.  I think Butch is bang on the money in terms of the discursive framework within which they are working and the manner in which it is appealing to large swathes of the electorate.

The proposed changes to the tax credit system and welfare seem on the surface reasonable, particularly in light of the 'revelation' that larger corporations that have benefited significantly from subsidised wages.  The changes to Union law requiring higher turnout, higher thresholds, introducing criminal liability for certain breaches to challenge perceived abuses  appeal to a perception that unions are out of control and need to be reined in.  As has been mentioned, the review of the BBC is feeding on the view that it is effectively a tax for services that are rarely used in many cases.  All of these are tapping into the twin concerns of recent years, that large corporations and organisations are benefiting at the expense of the 'little person' and that militant unions are itching to return to the heyday of union power in the 70's.

This is all in the last month and they have barely started.  Lacking an opposition and benefiting from largely content and unified backbenchers the likelihood of the government failing to get any of these changes pushed through seems remote.  With that in mind, is it completely unreasonable to fear the worse in terms of a universal 'free at the point of access' health care service being replaced by an American style insurance service? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 July, 2015, 07:00:38 PM
There is little hope of an embargo on the government's manifesto. The Labour party are utterly supine and in general not trusted. The administration has free reign to push through what they so choose.  The potential constraints on the right to strike are truly worring in the sense that any organised.opposition to what is about to befall us will be guided or informed by organised labour unions. If those teeth are pulled L, where then are we? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 July, 2015, 07:09:48 PM
Could not agree more.  What is more concerning is that it truly does appear that the Tories pulled their punches in the manifesto on the off chance that they ended up with another term in coalition.  They are currently in the middle of a wet dream in which not only do they have a majority (albeit it slim) and a fairly unified parliamentary party, they also, as you say Zen, have a Labour opposition that is, to put it bluntly, in complete meltdown.  What was the old Chinese curse? "May you live in interesting times!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 July, 2015, 10:52:57 PM
Quote from: Butch on 16 July, 2015, 05:21:45 PM
Thankfully, the chances of Labour regaining power anytime soon are as remote as the odds on Andy Diggle getting a Christmas card from Pat Mills.
Certainly - I'd bet it's all Yule cards in the Mills household...

Quote
If, twenty years ago, you'd asked me what the chances were of student grants being replaced by loans, I'd have said it was unlikely. A decade of bad headlines (about the system being broken and financially unsustainable) later, and all parties suddenly arrive at a consensus - then the Labour party stick the knife in.
A decade?  Last time I was a student was in the 1990s, and grants were nowhere to be seen...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2015, 11:24:09 AM
Even the most entrenched capitalist can see capitalism is struggling, many of us can see the current system is actually doomed. But does this mean an automatic return to barbarism and a post-Apocalyptic Mad Max world? I have never believed that but what's the alternative? I don't know, but I believe a great opportunity is right there in front of us, staring us in the face. It's difficult, even for optimists like myself, to perceive the new Golden Age coming our way. We can't see the wood for the trees and, furthermore, we can't always differentiate between the rotting trees and the healthy ones.
.
The writer of the article I'm linking to below also can't see the wood for the trees but has, I think, realised there is a wood to see and may have glimpsed at least a copse.
.
The end of capitalism has begun. (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2015, 11:57:29 AM
We're a people who won't even sign online petitions, Falcy.  There'll be no revolution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2015, 12:31:10 PM
The avalanche has already started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2015, 01:31:35 PM
Meaningless platitudes.  People will do what they're told even if it means curfews, rationing, and labor camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2015, 01:53:36 PM
Not all people. The more people who help each other and find their own solutions, the less relevant "authority" becomes. As the article I linked to says, people are finding their own ways to deal with the current situation - as they always have and always will. Going to an entrenched "elite" on bended knee and begging for them to do things another way isn't going to work. Revolutions, likewise, tend not to work - if they fail the rulers simply become more entrenched and if they do work one elite class is simply replaced by another.
.
The avalanche is social change powered from the base of society and it's already underway. It cannot be stopped from above. You have the power - whether you decide to use it or not is a decision only you can make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2015, 04:03:45 PM
You are basically saying "do nothing".  That is exactly what they want you to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 18 July, 2015, 04:45:21 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 18 July, 2015, 04:03:45 PM
You are basically saying "do nothing".  That is exactly what they want you to do.
Absolutely. Revolutions do work, of course (our country has had a couple of rather big ones that completely changed things) - but you can't just opt out of the system with some vague idea of establishing connections outside "authority". The people with all the police and guns will see to it that you can't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2015, 04:55:48 PM
Helping one another and devising your own solutions is not doing nothing. My comment on revolutions stands - they may improve things in the short term but you still end up with a ruling elite, just one of a different flavour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 July, 2015, 08:35:27 PM
Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 18 July, 2015, 04:45:21 PM
Revolutions do work, of course (our country has had a couple of rather big ones that completely changed things) - but you can't just opt out of the system with some vague idea of establishing connections outside "authority". The people with all the police and guns will see to it that you can't.

The point made by the (excellent) article (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun) the Legendary Falcon linked to is that neither the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02x97k6)) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives. It's the potential for a revolution of that order and magnitude which Paul Mason sees in the replacement of capital by information as the coin of the realm.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 July, 2015, 08:39:29 PM
Quote from: Butch on 18 July, 2015, 08:35:27 PM
The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02x97k6)) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives.
By enslaving millions of native African people! Hurray for the British Empire!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2015, 10:36:49 PM
Didn't the industrial revolution lead to the abolition of slavery?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 July, 2015, 11:10:11 PM
Well they weren't picking all that cotton so it could sit in warehouses in its natural state. Slavery provided the vast private capital and many cheap raw materials for industrialisation - and industrialisation in turn was a key driver of the triangular trade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 19 July, 2015, 12:52:48 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ZZ9gBtH.jpg)




They're all at it.. (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/07/18/sun-exposes-queen-as-secret-nazi_n_7824482.html?utm_hp_ref=uk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Famous Mortimer on 19 July, 2015, 10:21:27 AM
Quote from: Butch on 18 July, 2015, 08:35:27 PM
Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 18 July, 2015, 04:45:21 PM
Revolutions do work, of course (our country has had a couple of rather big ones that completely changed things) - but you can't just opt out of the system with some vague idea of establishing connections outside "authority". The people with all the police and guns will see to it that you can't.

The point made by the (excellent) article (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun) the Legendary Falcon linked to is that neither the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02x97k6)) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives. It's the potential for a revolution of that order and magnitude which Paul Mason sees in the replacement of capital by information as the coin of the realm.
But they happened, though (as did the Industrial Revolution, as did the French, and so on) so saying "revolutions don't work" is being rather reductive, and quite wrong.

As soon as I can pay my mortgage with information, I'll be happy to talk to you about whatever odd plan this Paul Mason fellow has for the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 July, 2015, 10:32:21 AM
Um, he doesn't have a plan for the future. Perhaps you should read the article again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 July, 2015, 11:13:55 AM
To us, it's an obscure shift of tax law. To the City, it's the heist of the century. (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/feb/07/tax-city-heist-of-century?CMP=share_btn_fb)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 July, 2015, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: Butch on 18 July, 2015, 08:35:27 PM
Quote from: Famous Mortimer on 18 July, 2015, 04:45:21 PM
(N)either the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

But they happened, though (as did the Industrial Revolution, as did the French, and so on) so saying "revolutions don't work" is being rather reductive, and quite wrong.

Who they worked for is the point. 5 or 50 years after the English and French monarchs were violently replaced by another lot of absolute monarchs, how had the lives of their subjects changed (if at all)? 50 years after the Industrial Revolution, most Britons had gone from indentured servants, forced to work the land of their feudal lord, to literate, urbanite voters*.

You're taking the general's or the statesman's view of history, but those kind of musical chairs don't make much material difference to the lives ordinary people. The point of that excellent article (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun) is that all the presidents and potentates in charge today might still be in place tomorrow, but the nature of our lives and how we relate to each other could be transformed completely by the destruction of the power of capital by information.


* 1918-1928, if you were female. I'm not arguing the change from a feudal society to industrial capitalism was good or bad, just that it transformed the lives of ordinary people and the nature of society in ways regime change never has
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 July, 2015, 12:02:41 PM
Bob on, Butch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 19 July, 2015, 12:36:08 PM
Quote from: TotalHack on 18 July, 2015, 11:10:11 PM
Well they weren't picking all that cotton so it could sit in warehouses in its natural state. Slavery provided the vast private capital and many cheap raw materials for industrialisation - and industrialisation in turn was a key driver of the triangular trade.
Huzzah!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 July, 2015, 01:23:54 PM
The indirect effects of the Industrial revolution led to eventual universal sufferage; education acts; health care; basic workers rights etc. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2015, 05:19:23 PM
Labour leadership election unexpectedly mildly entertaining shockah!
What most sensible people assumed would be something akin to an office reshuffle in a bank has become a bit more lively when someone decided to let what looks like a passing maths teacher on the ballot for a laugh.  The maths teacher has dry opinions, notoriously never jokes or slings mud at political opponents, and this for some reason sent the right and left wing press completely fucking bananas saying no-one must ever vote for him ever because it would be the worst thing to happen in the history of ever ever ever - which in turn has caused thousands of people who weren't voting (or had abandoned the Labour Party years ago) to join the Labour Party so they can vote for the maths teacher, probably hoping to encourage the idea of a politician espousing anti-austerity sentiment, but to be honest it's most likely they just want to watch political vapor like Liz Kendall and Andy Burnham squirm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 July, 2015, 05:24:08 PM
I get the feeling he won't be allowed to win and/or will meet with a perfectly innocent accident. Hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2015, 06:29:09 PM
Hey, Tony Blair had John Smith killed - the first of many! - so it's a perfectly acceptable means of succession in Labour circles.  I think too many people are already suggesting he'll have an accident of some sort (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/27/labour-is-now-so-passive-it-might-as-well-be-led-by-an-out-of-office-email), so my money's on a smear campaign based on all those nonces the Labour party have been covering for all these years, probably a whispering campaign that JC was one of them, or that he was the only person in the whole of the Labour party that covered anything up in the first place.

At this point, though, if he doesn't win, Labour are absolutely fucked, as the practiced blandness of the other contenders just isn't cutting the mustard anymore with Labour members or voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 July, 2015, 07:17:11 PM
Murdered by a "lone gunman," then, who will himself be assassinated before he gets to court. If it's good enough for JFK...
.
But yeah, a smear campaign's favourite. And vote-rigging just to make sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 July, 2015, 08:05:52 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 July, 2015, 06:29:09 PM
Hey, Tony Blair had John Smith killed

That Peter St. John, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 July, 2015, 08:10:57 PM
Well, Tony Bliar never did like Indigo Prime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 29 July, 2015, 10:40:01 PM
The shooting of Cecil the Lion is a horrible reminder of the grim reality of globalisation. Rich, white American Walter Palmer goes on a hunting holiday and pays poor African locals to find him a Lion to kill. The locals duly lure Cecil into the sights of Mr Ego who delights in killing the animal taking photos and has the Lions head severed as a trophy. We all need a conversion piece like that over the mantlepiece don't we?
When the awfulness of what he has done leaks out Mr Palmer mouths some unconvincing regrets, blames the locals for misleading him and goes into hiding. Meanwhile the two hired Africans face a considerable jail sentence and though not innocent are unlikely to have the resources Mr Palmer has when it comes to any trail.
This ghastly event sums up the state of the world at the moment. The wealthy seem to initiate actions that cross into illegality yet use the law, subterfuge and their wealth to avoid any retribution and it's the hired hands of Africa, who like the rest of us seem to pay the price for the egotism, blood lust and bloody minded larceny of the rich.
Viva la Revolution!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 July, 2015, 10:45:16 PM
We can still reverse this tide if we privatise the NHS and dismantle the BBC.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 July, 2015, 11:42:45 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 July, 2015, 10:45:16 PM
We can still reverse this tide if we privatise the NHS and dismantle the BBC.

Don't forget building a giant fence. There now, everything better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 29 July, 2015, 11:50:49 PM
Is that the proposed Hungary/Serbia fence!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2015, 01:42:52 PM
Barbed wire on top of Hadrian's Wall, machine-gun turrets at Calais, and mines in the Irish sea, that's the ticket.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2015, 03:55:28 PM
Just give them all EU passports.  Trains will run normally again, no hold-ups on motorways.  Sorted!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2015, 04:11:18 PM
When Corbyn's in charge, no-one will need passports, just a piece of paper that says I AM IN ISIS and they can go anywhere they want.  That's where we're headed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 July, 2015, 04:17:46 PM
I look forward to that!  At least there will be no need for your idea to divide England up by putting barbed wire on Hadrian's Wall!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 July, 2015, 04:21:38 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 30 July, 2015, 04:11:18 PM
When Corbyn's in charge, no-one will need passports, just a piece of paper that says I AM IN ISIS and they can go anywhere they want.  That's where we're headed.

My thing is, much as Corbyn is fairly innocuous he is the only one that recognises that there is a need for an alternative to the policies of this present government.  In about 4 years time when everything has had time to bed in and people realise how monumentally screwed they actually are, a lightweight Tory party along the lines we have seen the last few decades is not going to cut the mustard.

In many respects the behaviour of the other candidates in rubbishing Corbyn says more about their character.  Nobody is even remotely surprised at the press reaction which is overwhelmingly negative.  The bigger issue though is that until they sort out this internecine scrapping our beloved government is going to hammer home their agenda with all the subtlety of a battlefield nuke. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 July, 2015, 08:35:50 PM
15 times when Jeremy Corbyn was on the right side of history. (https://theworldturnedupsidedownne.wordpress.com/2015/07/29/15-times-jeremy-corbyn-was-on-the-right-side-of-history/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 July, 2015, 08:57:50 PM
The more I read about Corban the more I like him. The difficulty is the scum media in the UK would destroy him. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 July, 2015, 12:24:44 PM
Justice now too expensive for UK citizens. (http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/north-tyneside-magistrate-resigns-over-9752472)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 August, 2015, 11:14:48 AM
Stuck in traffic in Kent?  That's clearly the fault of immigrants trying to get into Britain, rather than the striking french workers who are setting up illegal roadblocks and blockading ports.  What we need is a strong government which can make a show of getting tough on immigration just before a referendum on Europe.  Best to avoid any mention of how a small number of French citizens are to blame.   Trust your government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 August, 2015, 02:01:30 PM
It's a bit of both really, as many times when an illegal immigrant has died on the train, that closes that for hours, if not half a day.
The striking French closing an international border crossing, yes that's illegal and causing chaos in the county as well.

My town is gridlocked at certain times of the day but it's much worse for the people living to the east of us. It's an absolute farce with both countries blaming each other for the problem.

I actually get bored watching the local news because it's the same thing every night, for what seems like ages now!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 03 August, 2015, 09:19:43 AM
it seems to me the French have been doing nowt about them for ages now including providing help for the genuinely needy. I wonder how many others have got the blinkers on to get to blighty cos we're a soft touch? surprised the French just don't give them a boat to come over here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 11 August, 2015, 09:28:22 PM
So, has anyone signed up to vote in the Labour leadership election?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 August, 2015, 10:13:23 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 August, 2015, 10:21:23 PM
Me too and Bear and I don't even live within the applicable area. That is Labour have no presence in NI Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 August, 2015, 10:24:39 PM
Yep. I'm not convinced by Corbyn's agenda, but I AM convinced that democracy is better served by having parties whose policies can actually be distinguished from each other. Plus, TBH, when I hear the fatuous, self-serving shit that pours from the mouths of the other candidates, I'm moved to feelings of homicidal rage.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 August, 2015, 10:45:48 PM
Burnham and his two cloned female 'opponents' are facets of the same polished turd that modern day machine politics extrudes through its fear and hate encrusted clocea maxima. Corbyn for all his myriad faults is at least perceivable by the man/woman on the Clapham omnibus. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 11 August, 2015, 10:57:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_CampbellYep. I'm not convinced by Corbyn's agenda, but I AM convinced that democracy is better served by having parties whose policies can actually be distinguished from each other.

Spot on—pretty much my thoughts exactly.

I'd been thinking of signing up in order to vote for Jeremy Corbyn for a while, but finally took the plunge when I saw this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBbsU9VkRvQ) video of him sat there in his shorts and woolly jumper, both looking and talking like a real person. Furthermore, he has done more in just a few weeks to articulate a credible Labour viewpoint than I heard in the entire lead up to the election (or indeed for many years).

I'm sure the other candidates are lovely people, but they're not saying anything distinctive (nor indeed, hardly saying anything at all) that seems to me would better the country in any way. JC has lots of ideas and talks directly—from the heart and off the cuff. I don't agree with all of his ideas, but it's a great discussion to be part of.

I see my hero Ken Loach won't get to vote (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33868771) after reading the small print which states you have to "sign up to Labour's aims and values". That's the problem—since Miliband came in I've never known what those aims and values are supposed to be. Now, Corbyn personifies a clear set of values I can engage with, whether I ultimately decide to agree with them or not.

If JC gets in, it's maybe unlikely he would win in 2020, but the country will hopefully get a better and more credible opposition in the meantime—one which may temper the Tories and hold them to account a bit more, making things a bit less shitty. And come the next election, well who knows—what a debate we'll be having across the country, between two vastly different ideologies each with its own strengths and weaknesses. This can only be good for democracy.

And hey, if JC gets to be leader and it all goes wrong, as lots of Labour higher-ups are warning against, well it'll at least have been a progressive bit of social experimentation (and a little bit of fun).

Anyway, saying all that I haven't had a confirmation email yet so expect I'm being vetted by MI5...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 August, 2015, 11:02:37 PM
That's post of the year material Banners. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 August, 2015, 11:14:59 PM
I'm just curious to see what happens when a Labour politician is running the Labour party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 August, 2015, 11:18:53 PM
I keep hearing the argument from the three scabs other candidates  "It doesn't matter if you're right if you're not in power to do anything" - am I the only person who thinks that sounds like a line from some 1980s satire?

I don't think the political strategy of "the tories won so people must like tory policies so if we have tory policies they'll like us" has any long term prospects. Jim's right - even if they don't get elected, in fact ESPECIALLY if the political mood this decade is quite far the other way, democracy needs an opposition that is distinct and opposed, not just hiring the same fucking pollsters to abandon all principles to appeal to the same demographic.



EDIT: spent about half an hour editing that and trying to find a particular Guardian quote about Ken Loach being banned, and Banners beat me to it and said it all so much better.

Come the revolution, he'll be first against the wall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 08:20:18 AM
I think it would be wonderful if Corbyn were to win the Labour leadership election contest for two reasons.  One, people will have a genuine choice between Tory and Labour.  Two, Labour will lose the next general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 12 August, 2015, 09:02:29 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 August, 2015, 11:18:53 PM
I keep hearing the argument from the three scabs other candidates  "It doesn't matter if you're right if you're not in power to do anything" - am I the only person who thinks that sounds like a line from some 1980s satire?

Not me, I fear it's a perfectly valid point. However, it's also not much of an argument for Labour supporters to vote against what they believe in.

That's why I think Corbyn is going to win easily, but I doubt he'll even get to fight the next general election. There are too many sitting Labour MPs who are to the right of him, and I suspect he'll be toppled just as soon as they calculate they can prevent Jezza from being immediately re-appointed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 August, 2015, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare...spent about half an hour editing that and trying to find a particular Guardian quote about Ken Loach being banned, and Banners beat me to it and said it all so much better.

Come the revolution, he'll be first against the wall.

Eek! Me or Ken Loach...?!?

;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 August, 2015, 10:06:47 AM
Quote from: Banners on 12 August, 2015, 09:51:44 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare...spent about half an hour editing that and trying to find a particular Guardian quote about Ken Loach being banned, and Banners beat me to it and said it all so much better.

Come the revolution, he'll be first against the wall.

Eek! Me or Ken Loach...?!?

;-)

Or the floor...

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2230663/Judge_Minty_A_Judge_Dredd_fan_film.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2015, 10:45:00 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 08:20:18 AM
I think it would be wonderful if Corbyn were to win the Labour leadership election contest for two reasons.  One, people will have a genuine choice between Tory and Labour.  Two, Labour will lose the next general election.

Corbyn is considerably more Euro-sceptic than a substantial chunk of the Conservative party. Given your willingness to give your vote to a party of racists, homophobes and anti-semites on the basis of your (bafflingly wrong-headed*) list of grievances with the EU, I would have thought you'd be a lot keener on any politician who wasn't very keen on the EU but simultaneously was a lot more kindly disposed towards the system of socialised medicine which you have said more than once you are reliant upon.

Jim
*You never did explain how the EU made you walk further to your bank, BTW.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 10:47:06 AM
One of the main problems facing a Corbyn leadership would be getting the Parliamentary party to fall into line.  Not just because so many of them have already openly spoken out against him (his "Well, we would just have to manage somehow" reply to Chuka Umunna's declaration that we wouldn't serve in a Corbyn shadow cabinet was a classic bit of understated put-down) but because of the example he himself has set.

He's defied the party whip more than 500 times as an MP.  That's great, if you want to be the perennial rebel backbencher, but how as leader can you expect anyone to respect and follow your leadership instructions  and values when you've routinely ignored those of previous leaders?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2015, 11:27:54 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 10:47:06 AM
He's defied the party whip more than 500 times as an MP.  That's great, if you want to be the perennial rebel backbencher, but how as leader can you expect anyone to respect and follow your leadership instructions  and values when you've routinely ignored those of previous leaders?

I don't see Corbyn as leading the party for the next five years and taking them to a 2020 election victory.

He certainly does seem to be the catalyst for a grass-roots determination to resist the Blair-ite faction of the parliamentary Labour party to move the party still further to the right. Given that there are going to be five years before the next election, if ever the Labour party has time for a serious and, if necessary, discussion about what it stands for, it's now. If the Blairites win, it may well be the signal for the Labour left to decamp to en masse to a party more closely aligned with their values, like the Greens.

OTOH, it might be hugely amusing if Corbyn wins the leadership and the party's polling improves dramatically. After all, the Blairites have been saying that getting elected is more important than actual policies. Presumably, that must cut both ways — if they could win an election on a significantly more left-wing platform than their natural instincts would prefer, presumably, they'd be OK with that. After all, it's all about getting elected, isn't it?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 12 August, 2015, 12:04:41 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2015, 11:27:54 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 10:47:06 AM


OTOH, it might be hugely amusing if Corbyn wins the leadership and the party's polling improves dramatically. After all, the Blairites have been saying that getting elected is more important than actual policies. Presumably, that must cut both ways — if they could win an election on a significantly more left-wing platform than their natural instincts would prefer, presumably, they'd be OK with that.

Cheers

Jim

On the other hand I'm sure they're acutely aware that a large number of votes can be attributed to the personality (or image) of the man, not the policies.
As first time voter when Blair got in I can attest that a significant number of my peers weren't voting based on policies or ideology but on the fact that Blair 'used to be in a band' and was getting matey with Noel Gallagher.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 12:39:16 PM
QuoteAs first time voter when Blair got in I can attest that a significant number of my peers weren't voting based on policies or ideology but on the fact that Blair 'used to be in a band' and was getting matey with Noel Gallagher.

But Cameron hanging out with One Direction and Gary Barlow - and citing The Smiths as his favourite band - wasn't enough to sway you toward the Conservatives?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2015, 12:52:23 PM
All this talk of rebellious MPs and splits is based on the rather unconvincing notion that away from its leftie wing the Labour party has the balls for that kind of in-fighting, never mind the desire.
The last time it happened was the Milliband vs Milliband pagga that haunted Ed all the way to his resignation - how may times did we see jabs about how he "stabbed his brother in the back for power"?  The party core have already dragged representatives from the three contenders and Liz Kendall's campaign teams to tell them there won't be any legal challenges and the vote result will be binding, so that tells you the party body doesn't want to be seen as factional even if some MPs are grumbling their discontent about potentially having to do some work in their immediate future - they'll keep their heads down after the new boy gets in, just like they did after saying they wanted David Milliband as leader instead of his brother all through the leadership contest where it looked like David was winning.  They got in line after Ed squeaked in by manipulating the union vote, and like the spineless cunts they are, they'll get in line if Corbyn gets elected, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 01:28:43 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 12 August, 2015, 12:52:23 PM
All this talk of rebellious MPs and splits is based on the rather unconvincing notion that away from its leftie wing the Labour party has the balls for that kind of in-fighting, never mind the desire.
The last time it happened was the Milliband vs Milliband pagga that haunted Ed all the way to his resignation - how may times did we see jabs about how he "stabbed his brother in the back for power"?  The party core have already dragged representatives from the three contenders and Liz Kendall's campaign teams to tell them there won't be any legal challenges and the vote result will be binding, so that tells you the party body doesn't want to be seen as factional even if some MPs are grumbling their discontent about potentially having to do some work in their immediate future - they'll keep their heads down after the new boy gets in, just like they did after saying they wanted David Milliband as leader instead of his brother all through the leadership contest where it looked like David was winning.  They got in line after Ed squeaked in by manipulating the union vote, and like the spineless cunts they are, they'll get in line if Corbyn gets elected, too.

There doesn't have to be any legal challenge to a Corbyn victory.  Under the party's own internal rules, it only needs 20% of the Parliamentary party - that's just 47 MPs - to call for a vote of no confidence in the leader.  A Corbyn leadership could be over by Christmas.

As for the non-left of the party having no balls for a fight, Labour are the only major party in modern UK political history to have suffered a genuine schism, when four senior members of the party's right broke away to form the Social Democrats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 12 August, 2015, 01:39:57 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 12:39:16 PM
QuoteAs first time voter when Blair got in I can attest that a significant number of my peers weren't voting based on policies or ideology but on the fact that Blair 'used to be in a band' and was getting matey with Noel Gallagher.

But Cameron hanging out with One Direction and Gary Barlow - and citing The Smiths as his favourite band - wasn't enough to sway you toward the Conservatives?

As a Smiths fan I took it as a personal insult!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2015, 01:46:30 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 01:28:43 PMThere doesn't have to be any legal challenge to a Corbyn victory.  Under the party's own internal rules, it only needs 20% of the Parliamentary party - that's just 47 MPs - to call for a vote of no confidence in the leader.  A Corbyn leadership could be over by Christmas.

As for the non-left of the party having no balls for a fight, Labour are the only major party in modern UK political history to have suffered a genuine schism, when four senior members of the party's right broke away to form the Social Democrats.

That was in 1981, and look at what happened to what was left of the party in the last election.
If a vote of no confidence is to pass, it would still mean biding time so that it could be justified, so Christmas is unlikely.  Easter at the earliest, though the lobbying will no doubt be well-underway behind the scenes by then.

I also look forward to the culling of Labour MPs from their seats once the large numbers of Labour supporters - a significant amount of which are freshly-politicised activists - who want Corbyn in charge turn on anyone who supports the no-confidence vote, because the dumbest thing that could be done right now is to assume that Corbyn is the beginning and the end of the left-wing tendency in modern Labour, because whatever centre-right parody it's become of late, it's still the Labour party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 02:14:23 PM
Hi Jim, I'm genuinely touched that you can remember what I posted months ago, bearing in mind, I can't remember what I did yesterday!

Back to the Labour Party, I'm not interested in voting for a party that's Euro-sceptic, that doesn't mean anything.  I'll vote for a party who's policy is to leave the EU and if neither Tory nor Labour will commit to that, I'll vote for Ukip again.

Oh, and regarding your point relating to my bank account, I'd banked with Lloyds for forty years and had been very happy with them.  The EU in all its wisdom decided that Lloyds Bank was too big and told them to dispose of some of their branches, one of which was my local branch.  So, I was left with a choice, change to TSB, which had taken over my branch, or, if I wanted to stay with Lloyds, move to a Lloyds branch which was further away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2015, 02:33:48 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 02:14:23 PM
Oh, and regarding your point relating to my bank account, I'd banked with Lloyds for forty years and had been very happy with them.  The EU in all its wisdom decided that Lloyds Bank was too big and told them to dispose of some of their branches, one of which was my local branch.  So, I was left with a choice, change to TSB, which had taken over my branch, or, if I wanted to stay with Lloyds, move to a Lloyds branch which was further away.

You also don't remember that I addressed this point, assuming that this would be what you would say. Your bank wasn't a Lloyds, it was a Lloyds TSB and the EU regulations on fair trade and anti-competitive practise ruled that the merged bank breached those regulations and should de-merge. The UK also signs trade agreements with these sort of stipulations. I asked you then, and I'll ask you again, do you think we shouldn't sign trade agreements that have 'level playing field' stipulations?

So: your branch wasn't a Lloyds,* and it wasn't 'taken over' by the TSB. It was owned by the merged Lloyds TSB, whose assets were divided when they de-merged. There was a branch in the exact same place that there had been one before, it's just that the word Lloyds had disappeared from the name Lloyds TSB over the door. You chose to take your business elsewhere and that's your prerogative, but you could have continued to use the exact same branch, with the exact same staff, and a slightly different name over the door. Oh, curse the evil EU!

Jim

*It may have been a Lloyds before the merger, but it stopped being one when it became a Lloyds TSB.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2015, 03:09:03 PM
I stood on a Lego brick today, and by God did it hurt!  I've never stood on a Lego brick before, so if you ask me, bloody immigration in this country has a lot to answer for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 03:16:54 PM
So my old branch is no longer a Lloyds Bank then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 August, 2015, 03:31:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 03:16:54 PM
So my old branch is no longer a Lloyds Bank then.

But it wasn't a Lloyds before the de-merger, either.

But you're right. Having a different logo on your cheque book is definitely a good reason to vote for a party full of bigots and homophobes, whose leader* is certainly philosophically disposed towards replacing the NHS with a system of health insurance, of the type we see in the US and are all so keen on moving to.

Jim

*Ex-leader? I lose track of whether he's in or out. Figuratively speaking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 04:06:02 PM
Come on Jim, don't be daft, I didn't vote Ukip because of my cheque book, I voted for them because I would like to be in a self-governing democracy, like many other countries in the world.  And, as for the alternatives to voting Ukip, I suppose I could vote Labour or Tory or even Liberal but Labour when in power authorized the killing of many people by military action and the Con/Lib Coalition carried it on.  So, no, I'll give them a miss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 12 August, 2015, 05:42:19 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 04:06:02 PM
Come on Jim, don't be daft, I didn't vote Ukip because of my cheque book, I voted for them because I would like to be in a self-governing democracy, like many other countries in the world.  And, as for the alternatives to voting Ukip, I suppose I could vote Labour or Tory or even Liberal but Labour when in power authorized the killing of many people by military action and the Con/Lib Coalition carried it on.  So, no, I'll give them a miss.

The idea that UKIP are the party of the conscientious objector is somewhat ludicrous. They may have opportunistically criticised a conflict they basically couldn't care less about to hoover up some protest votes, but that's about it.

Besides, Jeremy Corbyn is chairman of the Stop the War Coalition. Oddly I don't see Nigel Farage's name on the list of officers: http://www.stopwar.org.uk/officers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 August, 2015, 06:11:53 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 12 August, 2015, 05:42:19 PM
The idea that UKIP are the party of the conscientious objector is somewhat ludicrous. They may have opportunistically criticised a conflict they basically couldn't care less about to hoover up some protest votes, but that's about it.

Besides, Jeremy Corbyn is chairman of the Stop the War Coalition. Oddly I don't see Nigel Farage's name on the list of officers: http://www.stopwar.org.uk/officers

Indeed.  UKIP's manifesto promises a 40% increase in defence spending to bring it up to 2% of the country's GDP. 

One of their promises is to build three new aircraft carriers.  Aircraft carriers aren't weapons of defence; they're weapons of force projection, allowing you to safely bomb people very, very far away from your home turf.  i.e. they're all about maintaining the kind of nasty overseas military adventures that Old Tankie says he's against.

If you're trying to claim that UKIP is some kind of non-interventionist party of peace then you need your fucking head examined.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 August, 2015, 06:38:42 PM
Well, in response to both recent posts, I'm not sure I said that Ukip were conscientious objectors, please show me where I said that.

And in regard to needing my fucking head examined, you might have a point if that was what I was saying, which it wasn't.

To join in wars thousands of miles from your own country for no logical reason seems a mad, bad and dangerous thing to do.  Isn't that what the then Labour Government did, which was then continued by the Con/Lib Coalition?  Why would I vote for any of them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 August, 2015, 08:06:45 PM
I see Tony Blair is warning Corbyn will annihilate the Labour Party with his WMDs (Worshippers of Meaningful Democracy).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2015, 09:23:08 PM
One of two scenarios is playing out right now:
1 - it's all a double-bluff to encourage people to vote for a blatantly socialist politician by conning them into believing that "the time is now", thus ensuring a blatantly socialist politician is in place to take the blame when the IMF fucks the economy like it did in Greece and leaves the blatantly socialist politician(s) to carry the can while also discrediting the growing feelings of discontent with the wealthy right wing elite that run the world.
2 - Tony Blair and others like him are terrified of the prospect of the general public getting to vote for a blatantly socialist politician.  The narrative is that people don't want socialism, but to be honest I'm having a think here and I'm not sure where this notion came from.  I don't know where the notion that Corbyn couldn't win a general election came from, either, because people have voted for a lot worse than a man in a grey suit.

Either way, we're being played.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 August, 2015, 09:45:59 PM
So why shouldn't I vote Corbyn?'Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 August, 2015, 10:15:03 PM
You should vote Corbyn.  After two defeats in a row against a mostly-hated government led by a man with a face that looks like it's been drawn on a frying pan, I think we can safely say the New Labour experiment is over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 August, 2015, 10:25:25 PM
Yep I'm goin for the guy who doesn't like killing poor people or any other sort of people for that matter. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 12 August, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
David Cameron permanently looks like he's on the verge of an attempt to swallow his own nose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 August, 2015, 04:02:26 PM
Remember when I said that the Labour party would get in line if Corbyn won?  Burnham is already hedging his bets by rolling back on his claim he'd never serve in a Corbyn cabinet:

QuoteIn an interview with the BBC's World at One, which was dominated by questions about Corbyn, Burnham warned against Labour figures dismissing the frontrunner and suggested he could serve in the team of any of his rivals if they were to win. (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/13/jeremy-corbyn-tony-blair-warning-responds-i-dont-do-personal-i-dont-do-abuse)

To be fair, an MP's salary is pretty fat and it would be a shame to lose it over something as trifling as dignity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 13 August, 2015, 10:23:29 PM
What's the process with signing up? Now I've had an automated confirmation from Ian McNicol, and the £3 has gone from my bank account, how long until I receive the coveted "Registered Supporter" status?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 13 August, 2015, 10:24:38 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 12 August, 2015, 09:23:08 PM
One of two scenarios is playing out right now:
1 - it's all a double-bluff to encourage people to vote for a blatantly socialist politician by conning them into believing that "the time is now", thus ensuring a blatantly socialist politician is in place to take the blame when the IMF fucks the economy...
2 - Tony Blair and others like him are terrified of the prospect of the general public getting to vote for a blatantly socialist politician....

Either way, we're being played.

I think you provided the more likely scenario yourself...

Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 12 August, 2015, 10:15:03 PM
After two defeats in a row against a mostly-hated government led by a man with a face that looks like it's been drawn on a frying pan, I think we can safely say the New Labour experiment is over.

...Which is simply that the Party is a clueless, rudderless shambles. I never cease to be amazed by the intricate, machiavellan intrigues which folk like our own Legendary Shark so regularly ascribe to the Government and major parties, which credit them with an astounding level of skill and intelligence that I've yet to see any evidence of in day-to-day politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 August, 2015, 10:45:45 PM
Quote from: Banners on 13 August, 2015, 10:23:29 PM
What's the process with signing up? Now I've had an automated confirmation from Ian McNicol, and the £3 has gone from my bank account, how long until I receive the coveted "Registered Supporter" status?

You still need to be thoroughly vetted for Labour Values - and if they find any, you won't get to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2015, 01:53:22 AM
I do not ascribe 'intricate, Machiavellian schemes' to governments but to small factions within and behind governments. The vast majority of parliamentarians and civil servants are, in my view, as clueless as the rest of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 14 August, 2015, 07:40:22 AM
Just had an email from Jeremy, which I guess means I'm in and seems remarkably well organised compared to the other three candidates. However, the email is inconsistent in its use of en dashes and hyphens, so he's not getting my vote now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 August, 2015, 09:52:06 AM
Grammer nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 August, 2015, 11:43:47 AM
Nazis and communists are natural enemies.

And yet Corbyn is the only one with a plan to improve education - oh cruel irony!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 August, 2015, 12:58:01 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 14 August, 2015, 11:43:47 AM
Nazis and communists are natural enemies.

And yet Corbyn is the only one with a plan to improve education - oh cruel irony!


That proves it - if he'd had an improved education he'd have got the hyphens and en-dashes in the right places!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 August, 2015, 01:53:34 PM
WELLCOM TO CAMERONS' BRITTAN
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2015, 08:04:01 AM
One of my favourite podcasters, James Corbett, produced this podcast (https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-292-century-of-enslavement-the-history-of-the-federal-reserve/) on the history of the US Federal Reserve, which is of course (like all central banks) modelled on our very own Bank of England.
.
Of course, most of you won't want to listen to it because you've been conditioned to regard the subjects of finance, money and banking as boring. But fear not,  this podcast (https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-296-how-to-herd-your-tax-cattle/) tells you how you've been conditioned - even if you think you're too strong-minded to fall for such things.
.
Enjoy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 August, 2015, 03:23:45 PM
I don't know, Falcon, I think most can follow finance talk easily enough, it's when people start talking about the integrity of the blockchain and fluctuating interrelated cryptoratings that I start to tune out   The Kaiser Report was banging on about crypto until I had to stop watching, as Max K was basically reassuring viewers that his online payment system was completely sound and much better than real currency without ever explaining - in a financial programme - where crypto is initiated, how it accrues value, how it retains it, or how/why the values fluctuate - essentially decrying traditional financial systems as "criminal" while asking us to believe in one that may as well be magic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2015, 04:02:32 PM
Just have a listen to the first podcast and tell me what you think. Digital crypto-currencies are mentioned near the end - I admit I don't fully understand them myself but, from what little I do understand, they do seem far safer and more stable than the properly magic money we all use at the moment. Whilst I think old Mad Max is on the right track, in my view he doesn't go far enough; he seems to think that if we just clear up all the corruption in the system everything will be fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2015, 04:46:44 PM
Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives.
.
All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you.
.
Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had not cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves?
.
You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them; you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows — to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check.
.
From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free.
.
Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces.
.
Extract from "The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude, (https://mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude/html/c/114)" by Étienne de La Boétie (1530 - 1563)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 August, 2015, 03:45:13 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 14 August, 2015, 09:52:06 AM
Grammer nazi.

Can't... resist...

Grammar Nazi.

Does that make me an orthography Communist?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 August, 2015, 08:39:16 AM
Ortholigarch?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 August, 2015, 12:10:47 AM
I thought you might like this one (http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/08/23/medieval-slaves-oath-now-applicable-to-workfare-beastrabbans-weblog/), Falcon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 August, 2015, 01:04:13 AM
Heh, nice one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 24 August, 2015, 02:21:57 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 23 August, 2015, 03:45:13 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 14 August, 2015, 09:52:06 AM
Grammer nazi.

Can't... resist...

Grammar Nazi.

I hear you. The internet is a constant struggle.
Your weakness here means you lose 2 points.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2015, 02:37:40 PM
Personally, something doesn't quite sit right with the idea of gender-specific carriages on trains and I'm not sure I can articulate why, but I imagine if I was a young woman heading home at night I might like the option - or if I was a dad of a young woman who had to commute through a yobby area or two.
That boring Labour man met some women concerned about the rise in assaults on women on public transport and they asked if women-only carriages were feasible and he agreed to consult with the public about the matter.
Naturally, Guardian readers are now going apeshit saying that giving women the option of a woman-only carriage is exactly the same thing as Apartheid, and that women should not be allowed the option of a woman-only carriage on trains under any circumstances.  I must admit, the nuance of this particular smear campaign has been lost on me, as the boring one only agreed to a discussion with women's advocates about the rise in public harassment.  I imagine it all makes sense to someone, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 August, 2015, 02:43:27 PM
It's a perfect showcase in why most politicians do not talk about policy. Corbyn says he would consult on ideas. One of them becomes the headline, and he gets slammed by idiots. Naturally, the other candidates then respond with generic rubbish rather than specifics, in an attempt to take the high ground.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2015, 03:01:36 PM
Men must fear women, women must fear men. Divide and rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 26 August, 2015, 04:27:13 PM
Surely the easy answer would be for train companies to provide some form of Security for their passenger's. If attacks are happening then why not put a Guard or two on the offending trains/platforms?

In fact, I know why. The greedy bastards don't want to spend any money, that's why!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 26 August, 2015, 04:56:23 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 26 August, 2015, 04:27:13 PM
Surely the easy answer would be for train companies to provide some form of Security for their passenger's.

...and without security, gender specific carriages would be completely pointless anyway, (and possibly more dangerous if it means less people in one place).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 26 August, 2015, 05:07:30 PM
...or 'fewer' people or whatever...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 August, 2015, 05:10:32 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 26 August, 2015, 04:27:13 PM
Surely the easy answer would be for train companies to provide some form of Security for their passenger's. If attacks are happening then why not put a Guard or two on the offending trains/platforms

It's not always as blatant as 'attacks', sometimes it's just being creepy, sometimes it's crossing the line into unnecessary in the whole squeezing/brushing past someone scenario.

I'm not saying a women-only carriage is necessarily the answer, but I can see how it might be made to work. If equality demands a men-only carriage as well, then that's fine because the sort of dicks who'd insist on sitting in it would be ones I'd be only too pleased to avoid.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 August, 2015, 05:22:44 PM
^Wot 'e said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 26 August, 2015, 05:44:02 PM
    I understand a lot of attacks happen in crowded carriages but segregation surley isn't the answer, it tars all blokes with the same brush as the perverts and what about same sex attacks? we'd need a carriage for gay men and women as well , at least he didn't suggest one to protect people from racial hatred or we might as well be back off to jo'burg!
  I think women should get their own carriage but only when theyre on a hen do to protect the rest of us from the incessant cackling
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 August, 2015, 06:18:55 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 26 August, 2015, 05:44:02 PM
    I understand a lot of attacks happen in crowded carriages but segregation surley isn't the answer

Nobody's talking about segregation. What Corbyn's saying (and keep in mind that this issue has been raised with him by women's groups and he's only said he'd consider it) is that if women feel unsafe on public transport, might it not be an idea to have a place on a train where they CAN feel safe? Might a women-only carriage fulfil that need?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2015, 06:58:50 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 26 August, 2015, 05:44:02 PMbut segregation surley isn't the answer, it tars all blokes with the same brush as the perverts

Please explain.

It's worth pointing out that Japan has had these lady-only carriages for years now on privately-run lines because there was a commercial demand for them, and many female travelers (particularly schoolgirls and single women commuting during rush hour) find them indispensable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 August, 2015, 07:06:48 PM
There I was thinking only Ukip wanted to live in the 1950s again.  "Ladies Only" coaches, presumably next to the guards van like they were in the 1950s.  I know he's keen to go back to the 70s with his policies, but the 50s!!!??

Joking aside, there have been plenty of women saying that it's a stupid idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 August, 2015, 07:22:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 August, 2015, 07:06:48 PM
Joking aside, there have been plenty of women saying that it's a stupid idea.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that women who don't want to use them should be forcibly herded into women-only carriages.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 August, 2015, 07:29:53 PM
Oh!  That's all right then.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 August, 2015, 07:45:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 August, 2015, 07:06:48 PMJoking aside, there have been plenty of women saying that it's a stupid idea.
And plenty who've also said that it's at least worth considering, and it's good to have more of a discussion about the regularity of assaults (not least at a low level). But, hey, good to see the media once again ignoring the topic and using it to slam a loony leftie!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 August, 2015, 08:51:01 PM
Don't know how crowded the trains are outside the Southeast but if there's a women only carriage with only a few ladies inside and the rest of the train is chockablock, I think tempers might flare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2015, 10:48:25 PM
Right good example of 'when did you stop beating your wife?' fallacy there. Choice of either 'Corbyn advocates return to Islamic-style gender apartheid' or' 'Corbyn dismisses safety concerns of women's groups', take your pick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2015, 10:50:35 PM
If trains are that overcrowded, then surely an extra carriage is a good thing?  Also it is probably sexist to assume that the majority of commuters will be men, so I expect the internet will be along to be outraged at you shortly.

I think it's worth reiterating that these carriages wouldn't be compulsory, and that UK trains are commercial enterprises - any decision would be based on demand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 August, 2015, 11:37:59 PM
Demand and consultation, through finding out what people want and need. Fancy that. Still, he won't win anyway, and we'll instead get empty platitudes and meaningless phrases instead of policy from Cooper (or, less likely, Burnham).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 August, 2015, 01:01:56 AM
How about cheaper train carriages for the financially assaulted?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 August, 2015, 01:15:55 AM
Using public transport tends to be an unpleasant business. That's why I opt for the 35 minute trek every day instead. I reckon if you took away the politicians' chaffeurs, forced the lazy parasites to use public transport and invested the money saved back into the infrastructure, things would vastly improve within weeks.

But these are the gibbering delusions of a fantasist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 27 August, 2015, 05:17:28 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrimeStill, he won't win anyway...

Why don't you think Corbyn will win?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 09:25:21 AM
Hopefully, he will win, Banners, and, therefore, keep the Labour Party out of power for a generation!  I'm old enough to remember Michael Foot speaking to packed halls of enthusiastic supporters and look what happened to him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 27 August, 2015, 09:57:02 AM
Quote from: Old TankieI'm old enough to remember Michael Foot speaking to packed halls of enthusiastic supporters and look what happened to him.

He became the world's oldest footballer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Foot#Plymouth_Argyle) at the world's greatest football team, Plymouth Argyle. Is that what you mean?

(http://i1074.photobucket.com/albums/w413/ADoPA/e8ea69c6-dcdb-46c9-af0c-e32dbdcecc6a_zpsv3zbycrz.jpg)

ps. the original of the above is currently going for auction (http://pasoti.co.uk/talk/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=90391) at £700.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 10:14:21 AM
Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 27 August, 2015, 10:22:42 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 09:25:21 AM
Hopefully, he will win, Banners, and, therefore, keep the Labour Party out of power for a generation!  I'm old enough to remember Michael Foot speaking to packed halls of enthusiastic supporters and look what happened to him.

It would be wonderful for the Right's complacency with regards a "Left" (though not really) Labour to bite them come the Election - But then you also have to ask why so much bile is being aimed at Corbyn and why the SNP were able to annihalate all opposition on an anti-austerity ticket. There is a definite change in mood, and an apathetic electorate with no real choice marginally voted in the Tories - they hardly have much to crow about other than being able to scare enough old people to turn out in slightly higher numbers than the younger vote.  Invigorate those younger voters with a real alternative? Then you might see a proper contest.

But even without that, democracy would be better served by an effective active opposition than by the bunch of nodding dogs we have now.


Quote fixed—IP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 10:38:58 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 27 August, 2015, 10:22:42 AM
But even without that, democracy would be better served by an effective active opposition than by the bunch of nodding dogs we have now.

All of that, but especially this.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 10:50:06 AM
I think it's ironic that Corbyn gets it in the neck for supporting homeopathic medicine as a placebo treatment when so many of his critics are gazing into their crystal balls or consulting the goat's entrails to discover that he's definately not going to win anything.  The reasoning is impeccable: if he gets elected on a surge of support for the Labour party, this is proof that he cannot be elected and that people don't support the Labour party.
I like that the right has employed this mindset, and I hope it continues for at least the next five years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 10:56:05 AM
(Originally posted to FB, but relevant to the direction of the discussion at hand...)

The continued description of Jeremy Corbyn as a 'candidate of the hard left' speaks to nothing so much as the relentless rightwards drift of the British political establishment over the last thirty-odd years. To be clear: there is very little in Corbyn's agenda that would have troubled the Conservative party pre-Thatcher. That's how left wing Corbyn is.

The problem is that the notion that there is no part of society for which the introduction of private capital and an ostensible free market market would not be beneficial is now entrenched as the political orthodoxy. This, despite the fact that we are looking at the demonstrable failure of thirty years of privatisation. The railways, the energy market, the utility companies, these are all failing the public because of privatisation, not despite it. All of these privatisations have done very nicely thank you for their senior management, executives and shareholders, and the plight of the customer has been very much a secondary consideration, which, of course, is precisely how a publicly traded company is supposed to work.

Apparently, the fact that handing a de facto monopoly (or slice of a cartel) to a publicly traded company and then not regulating them very much might lead to that company not behaving very well didn't occur to the finest political minds in the nation over the last three decades.

The housing crisis? This is a direct consequence of successive governments abdicating housing policy to the market, when what the market wants is the diametric opposite of what the country needs. The price of any item offered for sale or rent (including houses) is a function of perceived value and also scarcity. How anyone can seriously believe that property developers and private landlords want to see vast swathes of cheap housing erected across the country defies belief. This is simply not how the free market works.

And yet, raise a solitary voice in opposition to the madness of this slavish belief in the benevolent power of the free market and one is automatically labelled some kind of Trotsky-loving throwback, pining for the bad old days of the 70s.

And when the roads, the courts, most of the BBC, as much of the police and emergency services as the Tories think they can get away with, and, God help us, the NHS, are all turned over to the mercies of the untrammelled free market, and the same thing happens there...

...Will we recognise the folly then?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 11:03:10 AM
Did anyone else know the NHS has been subcontracted to the private sector already?
  when your gp refers you for an orthapedic appointment it goes to virgin medical so I had a woman trying to get me to go to a private hospital for an appointment...found this out last Friday when I was in a and e the spinal clinic bod told me to bypass them and ring her instead when I'd had my scan , so I did and have an appointment next week!

  mind you, if/when I need an op I imagine the grub will be better in't private sector.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 11:12:59 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 11:03:10 AM
Did anyone else know the NHS has been subcontracted to the private sector already?

Yes. I've been banging on about it for years. The Tories laid all the groundwork they needed for it in 2012 with the Health & Social Care Act. People like 38 Degrees claimed victory when the Tories stripped out the most controversial stuff on private tendering and the government's statutory responsibility for national health provision, but in fact the Tories just stuffed it all into a Statutory Instrument (SI) which (being a 'regulation' and not a 'law') doesn't automatically require a full vote in the Commons and pushed it through on the quiet.

Quotemind you, if/when I need an op I imagine the grub will be better in't private sector.

I doubt it. Catering services are largely contracted out to the private sector throughout the NHS already.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 27 August, 2015, 11:28:25 AM
To be fair Jim - privatisation has only failed the public and those organisations affected.  MPs and their cash grabbing mates have found it to be 100% successful in lining their pocjets with Public money.. one might almost all them... scroungers off the public purse?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 12:11:17 PM
"Every photo of the candidates looks like the staff room of a failing comprehensive feigning amusement at being photobombed by the janitor." (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/27/how-will-labour-top-losing-the-election-by-losing-its-own-leadership-contest)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 12:17:07 PM
Nearly four months in to this evil government and I'm still not being charged on the door to see my doctor or consultant.

I don't care who treats me as long as I'm well looked after and the NHS pays for it.  Nice single en-suite room with wide screen TV and decent food in a private hospital, all paid for by the NHS, yes please.

It's even better when the University College London Hospitals puts you up in their own 4 star hotel, for no charge (oh! and the carer gets to stay for no charge as well). 

Yeah, the NHS is definitely going down the pan!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 12:34:31 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 12:17:07 PM
Yeah, the NHS is definitely going down the pan!

The Conservative party is ideologically committed to ending the NHS as we know it, preferring it instead to be a state-branded form of insurance within a private market of competing healthcare companies, a market like they have in the US.

The tendering process which the NHS is now obliged to apply to every aspect of its service provision is already driving up the administrative/legal costs of running the service — it may produce an on-paper saving if the X-ray department in a hospital costs less to run when it's contracted out to Virgin or Circle, but elsewhere on the balance sheet is hugely expensive tendering process which, despite swallowing public money that would otherwise be spent on healthcare, is opaque to public scrutiny because it is protected by 'commercial confidentiality'.

QuoteI don't care who treats me as long as I'm well looked after and the NHS pays for it.  Nice single en-suite room with wide screen TV and decent food in a private hospital, all paid for by the NHS, yes please.

You know that's not free, right? Hospitals are running deficits on their budgets doing this sort of thing because under-funding means that they lack the capacity to provide the service directly to you. They have to do this, because the fines* imposed on them for missing targets are even greater than the cost of contracting out to the private sector, but the government then points to those deficits as proof that the NHS is in crisis.

(I know someone who held a very senior management post at one of the largest teaching hospitals in the country. I've had some eye-opening conversations with them.)

Jim

*"Fines?" you may ask. Yes, fines. Deductions from the money a hospital receives from government to punish them for... not having enough money in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 August, 2015, 12:43:08 PM
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/08/27/known-number-of-deaths-while-claiming-incapacity-benefits-nears-100000/

"Known number of deaths while claiming incapacity benefits nears 100,000."

There's your Tory government right there. Scum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 12:52:07 PM
And to think Tankie voted for UKIP because the Tories weren't right-wing enough.

To be fair, Richmond, those are the raw numbers.  The DWP's own figures reveal that only something like twenty thousand died as a direct result of sanctions.  In 2014.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 12:56:37 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 27 August, 2015, 12:43:08 PM
There's your Tory government right there. Scum.

Iain Duncan Smith, a man who I heard say, without a hint of irony, on the Today programme: "I believe that work sets you free". He'd not long returned from a visit to Auschwitz, and so cannot have been unaware of the resonances of the words Arbeit Macht Frei.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 12:59:30 PM
Quote from: Iain Duncan SmithIt was when we walked into Auschwitz through the gate with its infamous statement, Arbeit Macht Frei, that I realised how little I really knew about this place of cruelty and death
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 01:43:21 PM
Hi Richmond, I'd take that link more seriously if there weren't factual errors in it.  It says the work-related group are expected to recover from their illnesses within a year and in that group there should be no deaths at all barring accidents.  What nonsense, you can be in the work-related group and get another illness or your current illness gets worse and you can die.  Also you can claim work-related activity group ESA for longer than a year.

What were the winters like over the years that are being compared?  Far more sick people die in a bad winter.

People die in the support group?  Surely that's not a surprise!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 27 August, 2015, 01:55:25 PM
I don't really care of you take it seriously or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 02:00:27 PM
Oh!  That's mature!  I thought you were joining in the debate, shame you couldn't post something factual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 02:08:33 PM
I was going to recommend the ignore function, Richmond, but then I realised that as a moderator you have to read everyone's posts.  I want to laugh at your predicament, but pity prevents me from doing so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 02:17:40 PM
No, but you can ignore me, if you wish.  Please do!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 02:40:14 PM
who said that? ;)

seems ages since we had one of those! cheers tankie me old mate  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 August, 2015, 02:41:58 PM
Is that ignore on the house or do you charge interest?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 02:51:01 PM
No, I think it's a freebie.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 03:06:53 PM
The problem with the ignore function is that it makes it look like Jim Campbell is often shouting at the wind in this thread - or at the very least is talking to himself at length.  Which I suspect he may as well be doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 03:09:03 PM
Did someone say something?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 03:17:51 PM
No.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 03:19:29 PM
Who said that?™
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 03:23:25 PM
wassat?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 August, 2015, 03:45:55 PM
Your all the village drunk. Sitting their talking to yourselves! Disgusting!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 August, 2015, 04:29:15 PM
The ignore function is fairly redundant because, as has been pointed out before, this forum is only about half a dozen people using a variety of sock puppets. F'rinstance, the Mayor and the Bear are one in the same. Rhymes y'see? What more proof d'ye need? Huge swathes of users are probably just Clements winding up Campbell*.


*Which isn't hard. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 04:34:15 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 27 August, 2015, 03:45:55 PM
Your all the village drunk. Sitting their talking to yourselves! Disgusting!
i resent that comment young man! i am on morphine so cannot partake of the demon drink :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 04:38:06 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 27 August, 2015, 04:29:15 PM
*Which isn't hard.

Fuck you!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 August, 2015, 05:07:57 PM
Ah the Political Thread, home of the sharp posters....and me. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 27 August, 2015, 06:14:22 PM
it always gets too boringly seriously on here so I thought it needed some silliness
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
What's really zany is that even if you dispute that there is no proven correlation between the actions of the DWP and the mortality rates of sanctioned benefits recipients, the fact that numbers of deaths have jumped dramatically in line with increases in sanctions is indisputable and is proven by the DWP's own figures.  One or two people would be a coincidence, but ninety-one thousand?  Ninety-one thousand people are dead and no-one cares.
Though to be fair, Taylor Swift sang a cover of Smelly Cat with the actress who played Phoebe from Friends, so it has been a pretty hectic news day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 August, 2015, 06:55:29 PM
Well said Bear. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 07:08:38 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 27 August, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
One or two people would be a coincidence, but ninety-one thousand?  Ninety-one thousand people are dead and no-one cares.

I crunched the raw data from the last set of figures a while back. On those figures, it turned out the mortality rate of people on the various sickness/disability benefits was roughly twice the average of the general population.

There are really only two ways to read that statistic: either these people were really sick, in which case IDS and his little ATOS gestapo should have been leaving them alone, or the bureaucratic machine they were being ground through was causing the increased the mortality rate, and IDS and his gestapo should be held accountable for it.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 August, 2015, 07:39:30 PM
A cause effect argument for the number boffins with real pain and death as the data....well done you baseball cap wearing fuck.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HdE on 27 August, 2015, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 27 August, 2015, 12:56:37 PM
Iain Duncan Smith, a man who I heard say, without a hint of irony, on the Today programme: "I believe that work sets you free". He'd not long returned from a visit to Auschwitz, and so cannot have been unaware of the resonances of the words Arbeit Macht Frei.

Yes, this government is an absolute abomination.

'Work sets you free?' So much bitter irony in that. Work, by this government's definition, does anything but.

The reality of the current system is that, very simply, we're all being reduced to little more than cattle. We're spending our working lives on a teadmill that, so long as we continue to subscribe to capitalist ideals, is only ever going to reard us by making us work harder, for longer, and for shitty money. And as if that wasn't bad enough, the insistance that we all of us - irrespective of health concerns annd personal circumstances - should be active parts of this system has gone beyond asinine and into terrifying.

And people are still buying into it and accepting it.

Baffling.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 August, 2015, 10:49:38 PM
Dunno, I'm told by the media people are buying this shite....haven't met one yet. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2015, 11:02:47 PM
People don't buy it at all, it's just that only the interests of a select few are represented by the media and the political establishment and they don't publicise people's discontent or give them an outlet or means of changing anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 August, 2015, 11:20:01 PM
Guess they really hate that whole vote Corbyn thingy then. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2015, 12:18:35 AM
You will note how the supposedly "liberal" media outlets like the Guardian and Huffington Post are hostile towards Corbyn to the point it doesn't really make sense... until you remember that Corbyn has put taxing the rich and closing tax avoidance loopholes high on the agenda, which kind of sucks if you're The Guardian and are funded by tax avoidance and your board of directors are ex-bankers and corporate lobbyists who will be personally out of pocket - at that point, the hostility and openly lying headlines make much more sense.
There's no such thing as unbiased media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 28 August, 2015, 12:23:19 AM
The Guardian have did little but reinforce defeat since May 2010. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 August, 2015, 07:22:45 AM
Am  I reading a thread where 'bad winters' are presented as an explanation for massively increased deaths amongst the long term sick and disabled, and this is NOT seen as the government's responsibility?  I'd aspire to live in a society where the vulnerable are provided with the warmth, food and attention that ensures they are protected from the vagaries of the seasons and I'd try to elect a governing body that shares that aim.

Not picking on you in particular Tankie, but it seems that a shrug of the shoulders and 'it was the cold, not the cuts' seems like a pretty scary perspective.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 08:12:02 AM
In the 1960s, US psychologist Martin Seligman conducted experiments on dogs (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness). What he discovered was a phenomena called "learned helplessness." There is a school of thought that says our societies are suffering from a mass form of this phenomena because, no matter who we vote for nothing changes. If they come for our money, we fork it over; if they sell our public services, we let them; if their policies kill people, we shrug it off and blame the weather. There's nothing we can do, we have learned, so we do nothing.
.
The other side of this coin, however, is learned optimism. I think we need a bit of that right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 28 August, 2015, 08:24:16 AM
'Morning, TB.  Look, I have no truck with this Tory government or IDS.  I am one of the long term sick and disabled that you are talking about and have been affected by benefit changes.  I pointed out the factual inaccuracies on one thread about Employment and Support Allowance.

Even a spokesperson for disabled people against the cuts said it would take time to analyse the figures.  You can't blame any government for all winter deaths.  My own 85 year old seriously ill father, who has COPD and is attached to a breathing machine (provided by the NHS) in his house decided, (despite being told by us time and time again not to go out of the house in winter), to get on his mobility scooter in December and drive round the village dressed in just trousers and a cardigan.  Guess what, he caught an infection and almost died!  He was saved by the NHS.  But, if he had died, would that have been the government's fault?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 09:35:45 AM
To be pedantic, it wasn't the NHS that saved your dad; it was doctors and nurses - human beings who have decided to give their lives to medicine and healing. The NHS is a thing, a construct, a network.
.
Yes, in theory the NHS is a Good Thing but, in practice, is increasingly becoming a tool for social control and a redistributor of wealth. So long as "governments" control it, the NHS will continue to spiral out of control and restrict the treatments and services available, no matter how heroically the doctors and nurses constrained by it work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 August, 2015, 10:34:46 AM
Meh. Lies, damn lies and statistics.

But since one of the most widely used statistics is always complete bollocks (Average income), and could be easily offered in a more accurate way (mode rather than mean, which is skewed by the vast disparity in ranges), it is just as valid to use broad, senseless figures to condemn as it is to justify. The only crime is the motives behind your interpretation.

Personally I don't think the blood is on the government's hand in a direct fashion but it's as good an indicator as any that little to nothing is being done to mitigate harm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 August, 2015, 11:11:48 AM
Catching up a bit...

Quote from: Banners on 27 August, 2015, 05:17:28 AMWhy don't you think Corbyn will win?
Because he has to get 50%, and I don't think he will. Either he simply won't have that level of support (polling is almost certainly overstating it) or Labour will ban enough people that Cooper wins. I hope I'm wrong.

Quote from: Leigh S on 27 August, 2015, 10:22:42 AMand why the SNP were able to annihalate all opposition on an anti-austerity ticket
The SNP's election run was audacious. Just by appearing to be a bit leftie and human, they cleaned up. Says a lot. (SNP policy on the whole isn't especially leftie, but then nor is quite a lot of what Corbyn's saying, as per Jim's earlier post.)

Quote from: Old Tankie on 27 August, 2015, 12:17:07 PMI don't care who treats me as long as I'm well looked after and the NHS pays for it.
The point is the path we're on is heading towards the point the NHS won't pay for it. At best, the NHS becomes a shield for private corporations who can take a load of cash and leg it when things go south. At worst—and this is likely—we will within another decade end up with a US-style—NOT a European-style—insurance-based system. Basically, if you're not fairly wealthy, you'll be totally fucked, and unless you're not rich, you'll only be slightly fucked. And the care won't get any better, obv.

As for IDS, I've had people arguing with me about the new "few hours a week idea", because, hey, plenty of disabled people would probably like the opportunity to work for a few hours a week. I'm sure many would. But that's clearly not what this legislation will be designed for.

I'm sick of all of the hard-working people bullshit. It's so transparently designed to set people who are currently in financial shit against those on benefits. It's about educating the working class to be against people who should be their allies, which politicians and their friends take all of the money. The sooner we somehow manage to get these arseholes out of power, the better. (But then even Corbyn's not exactly been strong on electoral reform, and that's about the only thing that would see majority Conservative governments gone forever.)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 09:35:45 AMSo long as "governments" control it, the NHS will continue to spiral out of control and restrict the treatments and services available, no matter how heroically the doctors and nurses constrained by it work.
Better government-led than Richard Branson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2015, 12:26:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 August, 2015, 11:11:48 AM
Quote from: Banners on 27 August, 2015, 05:17:28 AMWhy don't you think Corbyn will win?
Because he has to get 50%, and I don't think he will. Either he simply won't have that level of support (polling is almost certainly overstating it) or Labour will ban enough people that Cooper wins. I hope I'm wrong.

I hope Corbyn wins, too, but in the same way I got an odd feeling when David Cameron out of the blue started talking about "shy Tories" a day before the General Election, I got an odd feeling reading the hustings and seeing Cooper suddenly talking about "creating a narrative", and can't shake the feeling the fix is in.

Strange but true: a mate tells of how 9 members of his family signed up to vote for Corbyn, and of them all, the only one to get sent a ballot was his dad - whose only online presence is the Facebook page where he posts right-wing and often politically incorrect things that border on racism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2015, 12:46:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 August, 2015, 11:11:48 AM
The point is the path we're on is heading towards the point the NHS won't pay for it. At best, the NHS becomes a shield for private corporations who can take a load of cash and leg it when things go south. At worst—and this is likely—we will within another decade end up with a US-style—NOT a European-style—insurance-based system.

A timely article from the inside, on the NHS's stealth privatisation (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/how-the-nhs-is-being-dismantled-in-10-easy-steps-10474075.html).

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 August, 2015, 12:51:23 PM
90-odd million A YEAR! for the house of lords...

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSUA6nNvHKmS254e3FfI8nu3SJ3wvah7XDQoQssXWBRp9WxPIqyABpp2A)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 August, 2015, 01:35:57 PM
The Lords is a joke. Hack it down to the same numbers as the Commons. Perhaps do with Menzies Campbell says and retain a small proportion for special interests/expertise (he says 20%, but I think that's high), and have the rest become an elected body, elected via regional PR in thirds.

Or stitch everyone up in the way Burnham's talking about, by voting for Lords on the basis of PR from the GE vote. (Bye-bye, cross-benchers! Mind you, cross-benchers would find the going tough in a kind of regional senate.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:14:59 PM

QuoteBetter government-led than Richard
Branson.
.
How about doctors, nurses and members of
the local community served by the hospital or
surgery in question?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 August, 2015, 04:26:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:14:59 PM
How about doctors, nurses and members of
the local community served by the hospital or
surgery in question?

We've been through this before. I'm not explaining why this wouldn't work again. Notions such as economies of scale, or centres of excellence really are lost on you, aren't they?

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:32:17 PM
And the idea that governments don't have the right to interfere with people's health is lost on you, Jim, isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 August, 2015, 04:39:22 PM
I recently read Jon Ronson's *Lost at Sea. It's a collection of his columns. In one, he travels to America and interviews someone from every economic bracket, from a Haitian dishwasher on minimum wage right up to a Californian billionaire. Sharks attitude to government mostly matches the billionaire's

*Fantastic journalist
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2015, 05:21:37 PM
Yes, that's understandable. The billionaire has far more freedom, by dint of his wealth, than the dishwasher and is therefore more likely to notice and strain at the constraints of governments. The dishwasher, on the other hand, has very little wealth and therefore very little freedom and is far more likely to mistake government control for government help.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 29 August, 2015, 05:36:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:32:17 PM
And the idea that governments don't have the right to interfere with people's health is lost on you, Jim, isn't it?

It's certainly lost on me, but then I support the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2015, 10:12:01 AM
Al Ewing wins the internet: http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/marvel-villains-are-now-quoting-david-cameron--WklhQIWs0Nx
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 August, 2015, 10:50:06 AM
Brilliance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 August, 2015, 10:56:43 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:32:17 PM
And the idea that governments don't have the right to interfere with people's health is lost on you, Jim, isn't it?

It's an idea, but it's not one I'd support. States where government 'interferes with', or to put it another way, 'provides for', people's health are almost universally the ones with the healthiest populations.  Healthcare is something that, in aggregate, really is best when supported by a state structure. In fact if I was to pick out one single benefit of the modern state (an organisation I have relatively little love for) it would be public health.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2015, 11:18:38 AM
The key policies on pre election manifestos are invariably health and education. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 August, 2015, 11:30:05 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2015, 04:32:17 PM
And the idea that governments don't have the right to interfere with people's health is lost on you, Jim, isn't it?

Yes. The eradication of Smallpox was a gross and disgraceful trampling of civil liberties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 August, 2015, 11:30:54 AM
Are they? My impression would have been taxation (in all its forms), and to a lesser extent proposing legislative changes.EDIT: In reply to Zen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 August, 2015, 11:36:52 AM
Just to elaborate a bit, I think that organising healthcare is one of the biggest hurdle faced by the kind of quasi-anarchist localised/individualised society Sharky advocates. Many aspects of that vision appeal to me, but I find it very hard to see how specialisms, research, hyper-specific equipment and global approaches can be supported. Sometimes universal policy and centralised resources have benefits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2015, 12:08:38 PM
In the interests of clarity, health and education are the touch paper issues....immigration has stolen up the list as well. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 30 August, 2015, 12:45:36 PM
anyoone who wants to educate themselvf and perform their own health care - or barter in exchange for medical care from someone else (trained or untrained) - can already do that
same for education 

don't moan about being forced to payning tax either - millions of hairdressers, dog walkwers, widow cleaners, tradesmen, artists etc already operate cash in hand - outside tax system
you could do that TOMRORROW

anarchisysts are just looking for excuses - they can't do make their fantasies real unless EVERYBDODY else signs up to their system .....
which is what they complain the guvrenment are doing to them
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2015, 12:58:04 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2015, 12:08:38 PM
In the interests of clarity, health and education are the touch paper issues....immigration has stolen up the list as well. Z

Health and Education are definitely two of the big ones, and the areas I lean most left-wards (I don't know which I'd abolish first, faith schools or private schools).

The issue which won the last general election was probably "the economy", which is where Labour cocked up, and where Corbyn is going to struggle, if indeed he does defeat the vested-interests who seem to be gathering to the Cooper flag....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 30 August, 2015, 01:07:51 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 August, 2015, 12:58:04 PM
if indeed he does defeat the vested-interests who seem to be gathering to the Cooper flag....

Corbyn: 76.9%
Burnham: 16.0%
Cooper: 6.4%
Kendall: 0.7% http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-labour-leader (http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-labour-leader)

a YouGov poll of 1,400 eligible voters for The Times put Mr Corbyn on 53%, 32 points ahead of his nearest rival, Andy Burnhamhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34087829 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34087829)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2015, 01:16:51 PM
They'll have to wack him the way things are going. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 August, 2015, 02:20:32 PM
Labour do have a good track record with fake heart attacks when it comes to shifting inconvenient lefties from the top of the party.  Although Tony Blair, in his memoirs, insists that such things are in fact the work of God:

QuoteI remember waking up the first morning and then waking Cherie. I said to her "If John dies, I will be leader, not Gordon (Brown). And somehow I think this will happen. I just think it will."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2015, 03:12:25 PM
Governments do not provide healthcare, they preside over it. Governments take your money and then spend it how they wish, not how you wish. The government tells the NHS how much money it can have and the NHS has to deal with it. In a better world, the NHS would tell the government what it needs and the government would deal with it.
.
The idea that doctors, nurses and local people cannot run their own hospitals is insulting. Just because a hospital or surgery is locally run does not mean it pulls up the drawbridge and operates in a vacuum. The idea that ordinary people cannot grasp ideas like economies of scale and centres of excellence is silly. Locally run hospitals can still be part of a wider, national network and to think otherwise is simply wrong.
.
It's strange how ordinary people are unable to run anything unless they go through some arcane ceremony, emerging at the other end with the letters "M.P." appended to their names as if this ludicrous rite instils them with some superhuman knowledge or power.
.
The worst part is that most people believe in the divine right of the M.P. to rule. Even if you didn't vote for them, even if you disagree with everything they want to do you, you still think they have the right to do it.
.
Governments issue threats and call them laws, they steal your money and call it taxation and they tell you how to live and call it representation. Imagine if I came to your home, issued threats and stole your money and told you I was representing you. You'd call me insane and kick me out of your house - and so you should.
.
In my view, if we must have a government then it must serve the people, not rule them. It must serve the NHS, not rule it.
.
Even though Jim disagrees with just about everything I say, if I ran a local hospital I'd have one Jim on the board of directors before I'd have a hundred of those self-serving, deluded and frankly psychotic M.P.s. At least Jim would talk straight and use his not inconsiderable mind for the good of the hospital (and its partners in the network) and not himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 August, 2015, 04:26:10 PM
Leaving aside the basic principle that people (in the majority) voluntarily cede these powers of taxation etc. to government because they believe centralised authority is a useful system, rather than evil government actively 'stealing' them...

In your scenario Sharky, HOW do the local hospitals get together to organise, fund and standardize training, equipment, specialists, large-scale programmes like immunsation etc?  Who decides how these necessarily communal resources get prioritised and distributed? I just can't see how it would work without at least regional structures composed of representatives from the constituent localities, at which point you may as well give in and call it a governing body indistinguishable from a government department.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 August, 2015, 04:29:28 PM
They all meet in a tent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 August, 2015, 04:33:11 PM
At what stage do we think those locally run hospitals would start telling government that they have quite enough money to be going on with, thank you? 

Would the savings brought about by the sharing of resources and economies of scale perhaps be better organised if there was a body responsible for overseeing the whole deal at a national level?

Does giving authority to a particular local person/doctor/nurse/professional to make decisions over healthcare give those people the right to make decisions I disagree with? Do we hold a vote to decide on this person? How is that different from electing an mp?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 August, 2015, 05:56:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2015, 05:21:37 PM
Yes, that's understandable. The billionaire has far more freedom, by dint of his wealth, than the dishwasher and is therefore more likely to notice and strain at the constraints of governments. The dishwasher, on the other hand, has very little wealth and therefore very little freedom and is far more likely to mistake government control for government help.

Not really the case. The dishwasher was so far down the system he barely registers. No healthcare benefits or food stamps. The government is barely aware of him so he doesn't get any help. The billionaire on the other hand claims he shouldn't have to pay as much tax because he contributes to charities. Which is admirable but doesn't really help the dishwasher does it? Or the middle class family who couldn't afford to do anything for their wedding anniversary because of the cost of things like health insurance. Interestingly one of Amazon's chief investors (from day one) believed he should be paying MORE taxes so that the middle class family could do something, therefore creating more jobs at restaurants/hotels and helping improve the economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 August, 2015, 06:16:25 PM
It's not about improving economies anymore. What we have seen this past few years, post 2008 has been a myopic cash grab by seriously fucked up, greedy globalised interests and individuals. They are indemnifying themselves for the future on the backs of the rest of the global population.
There is little if any concern amongst.the globalised rich for national economies. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2015, 06:27:12 PM
Organization is simply a matter of communication. We have the internet, telephones, fax machines, letters, carrier pigeons and so on. We also have the Civil Service, which has a long history of organizing things. I'll gladly lend my tent as a communications hub but I fear it's not big enough to service the whole of the NHS.
.
I understand that the NHS is a huge and complex entity but that doesn't mean there's only one way it can be run. Of course, the whole system (not just the NHS but all our public services and institutions) are so deeply mired in the matrix of imaginary finance and corrupt politics that it will take a lot of effort and imagination to drag them out and clean them up. If we're going to wait for one person or one party to come along with all the answers we'll be waiting forever.
.
We do need a revolution before anything can change for the better. Not a revolution of blood and bullets but a revolution of the mind. That's the only kind of revolution that's worth a damn anyway. All the questions asked are valid - but they are asked of an external source; just as we have been trained to do. If we have a problem, we have been indoctrinated all our lives to ask the "powers that be" for a solution. The questions we should be asking are "how would I/we solve this problem?" That's the first step to dispelling the learned helplessness I mentioned in an earlier post.
.
Electing local people to run a local hospital in its capacity as a single node in a wider network is different from electing an MP in that the local hospital manager won't be able to vote in favour of bombing Foreignistan or spending the budget on nuclear warheads. Their purview would be the hospital and its services, nothing more.
.
Many, many things have to change but, first and foremost, our attitudes must shift. We need people to run things for the wider benefit of society, absolutely we do, but the time of leaving it all to a few hundred power-hungry pillocks must come to an end before anything meaningful can be achieved. We must run as much of our own lives as we can and trust the rest to people who are qualified, not just a handful who happen to have won a popularity contest.
.
It's your future - own it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 August, 2015, 06:33:39 PM
Wait 'til the billionaire dies of a disease contracted from a dirty dish...
.
Don't get me started on money - you all know where I stand on that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 August, 2015, 06:54:18 PM
The Nhs is run by civil servants.  Hospitals are run by boards, with non political organisations providing oversight.  Politicians organise the budget after consultation with these bodies.  Politicians only exist because someone has to decide policy and provide oversight of the whole country - that's not asking an outside agency to make the decision, that's deciding that the system of elected democracy, whilst invariably flawed, is better than having no leadership.  Just ask the countries that have tried existing without it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 August, 2015, 11:52:14 AM
Lots of cuts to state-run NHS, social security and BBC, but contracts worth half a billion are being doled out to private industry pals of the Conservative party. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34105701)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 30 August, 2015, 04:26:10 PM
Leaving aside the basic principle that people (in the majority) voluntarily cede these powers of taxation etc. to government because they believe centralised authority is a useful system, rather than evil government actively 'stealing' them...

In your scenario Sharky, HOW do the local hospitals get together to organise, fund and standardize training, equipment, specialists, large-scale programmes like immunsation etc?  Who decides how these necessarily communal resources get prioritised and distributed? I just can't see how it would work without at least regional structures composed of representatives from the constituent localities, at which point you may as well give in and call it a governing body indistinguishable from a government department.

Just put some gratuitous swearing in the above and pretend I said it, eh?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 August, 2015, 02:05:17 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 31 August, 2015, 03:57:20 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2015, 12:00:08 PM

Just put some gratuitous swearing in the above and pretend I said it, eh?


Consider this Stolen!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2015, 04:38:35 PM
Quote...someone has to decide policy...
.
Like this? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/11385709/Prince-Charles-trusted-Jimmy-Savile-on-everything-from-marriage-guidance-to-checking-speeches-book-claims.html) "Savile, who died in 2011, was for years a visitor to Highgrove and St James's Palace. He also had the run of Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Leeds General Infirmary and Broadmoor, which "to the Prince made Savile an obvious person to tap for advice on navigating Britain's health authorities".
.
"Mayer recounts an occasion at Highgrove where health officials were "gobsmacked" to arrive for a meeting about the proposed closure of emergency services at a local hospital to find Savile at the table.
.
"He was said to have threatened the health bosses after the Prince left, saying that making them unhappy could cost them a knighthood."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
Fortunately, colossal fuck-ups and errors never happen at a local community level!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2015, 06:00:50 PM
That's not what my parents said...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2015, 06:31:54 PM
Oh... here's a colossal and ludicrous herring. I wonder what colour it is...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 31 August, 2015, 07:30:04 PM
Yes. Exactly like that.  All government policy is exactly like a predatory necrophiliac rapist paedophile.  Well done. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 August, 2015, 10:09:24 PM
I wish we had a healthcare system like the NHS here in Ireland.  Despite that Billy-Roll-faced cunt PM and his chums' best efforts to derail it, for the moment it remains far superior to our shambles of a public healthcare system. My Dad always travels across the border to get his blood circulation prescriptions; unpatriotic perhaps but the only way he can realistically manage it on a pension.

Edit: sorry, sharky, but I can't see the Savile case as anything other than an (admittedly horrific and shameful) anomaly and a strawman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 August, 2015, 10:24:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 August, 2015, 10:09:24 PM
I wish we had a healthcare system like the NHS here in Ireland.

Amen to that. As with the BBC, its UK detractors don't realise what they have. Try €60 every time you or your kid visits the GP unless your total household income is below the minimum wage - and that's before you pay for your prescription. What larks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2015, 10:28:33 PM
Blimey. I'd always assumed Ireland basically had its own equivalent of the NHS, with much the same levels of 'free' use. I had no idea it was so different. (In Iceland, they had a quite-good equivalent, when I lived there. You did pay for GP visits, but the fee was the equivalent of a fiver. Prescriptions were paid for, but subsidised. Interestingly, they weren't fixed-fee, though. I recall some decongestants costing about 50p, but antibiotics being about 20 quid—and that was over ten years ago.)

As for the NHS, I think like a lot of things over here, it's just something Brits take for granted and will be gutted about when it's gone. See also: the BBC; state schooling; a reasonably robust benefits system; EU membership.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 31 August, 2015, 10:47:43 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2015, 10:28:33 PM
Blimey. I'd always assumed Ireland basically had its own equivalent of the NHS, with much the same levels of 'free' use. I had no idea it was so different.


Effectively we have the equivalent of a 'socialised' (as the Yanks call it) health-system - but it's a chimera: Irish healthcare is somewhere in-between the privatised healthcare of America and the universal state healthcare of UK and Scandinavia. There is public health to cover some basics and private insurance for the better quality treatment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 August, 2015, 11:02:14 PM
Christ, I can't believe I didn't know that - I suppose I have been very lucky to never have come a cropper while in the South.
Also WHY DO YOU PUT UP WITH IT?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 31 August, 2015, 11:06:52 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 31 August, 2015, 11:02:14 PMAlso WHY DO YOU PUT UP WITH IT?


Then we'd have less to moan and do nothing about.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 September, 2015, 08:05:17 AM
Apparently, it's been a very hot summer in Poland, so to cool down visitors to Auschwitz instead of offering them each a bottle of water, the camp authorities decided to put up a line of misters to shower their guests as they entered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 September, 2015, 08:11:06 AM
As my parents are good Union types, I'd been raised to believe that our Republic's healthcare system was the same for everyone, and private insurance was only for getting an ensuite private room, convenient appointment times and the Irish Times and croissants for breakfast. Then my Dad became very ill (undiagnosed diabetes leading to critical heart disease), and we traipsed around hospitals, sitting in endless queues, waiting endlessly for test results that were as often as not misplaced, only to be told by two successive Consultants that there was nothing that could be done, that a bypass operation wouldn't work and would most likely kill him, he would probably be dead by the end of the year and he should enjoy his remaining time instead (bearing in mind he could no longer walk and barely talk at this point).

So in desperation we went to the private Blackrock Clinic for a third opinion, with little expectation of anything but more waiting and more disappointment. At the first appointment the actual heart surgeon who would do the operation confirmed that she would operate as soon as possible, and 3 months and one quadruple bypass later it was done. The operation was in the same hospital we visited for the first consultation, with the same ICU team, and the guy in the public bed beside him had been waiting 3 years for the same treatment by the same staff.

That was 14 years ago. My Dad has seen all his kids happily married, dotes on four grandchildren, and continues, at 72, to enjoy a decade-long second career as a tour guide.  All because, and only because, he went private - in the public system he'd be dead at least a dozen years.. That is utterly and completely and on every level WRONG.

That's anecdotal of course, but it has entirely shaped what I think about a quasi-privatized health system. I have maintained private health insurance for my family, even through those times we could afford  either fresh food nor current Prog.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2015, 08:34:57 AM
Really glad your Dad is in good health, and it's made me seriously consider health insurance.  A friend of mine with liver cancer strongly advised it too - sadly he didn't make it, but he was looked after with utmost care and spent his last months in peace and comfort (his only real complaint being that they filtered his internet porn...).
We're not quite in Breaking Bad territory in Ireland yet, but we have a lot to learn from the NHS, a system to cherish, be proud of and fight for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2015, 04:11:39 PM
Well, I thought it was a good metaphor anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 01 September, 2015, 11:31:55 PM
QuoteThat's anecdotal of course,

Anecdotal and true. I have health insurance, and would not be without it.  The public system is fine, even brilliant once you get past A&E for most run of the mill hospital needs, breaks, maternity etc. IF you need a consultant, in my experience you need health insurance.
It gives priority to all procedures and access to doctors above everyone else in the public system, In the FXXKING public hosptial. The whole system is on its head and IMO there is only one winner, the consultants.
Having insurance, I am part of the problem, but I have four kids, and I have had the misfortune to have to use the insurance, and the luck to have it.
I don't get overly excerised about most political stuff, I see thousands on the street protesting over a utility bill for a service received, and that an awful lot of people in the country have been paying for for years, but no one protesting over the A&E overcrowding or the fact that I can have my child's tonsils taken out next week, but my neighbour with no insurance will have to wait months for their child to be seen IN THE SAME HOSPITAL.
GRRRRRR.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 September, 2015, 07:09:40 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 01 September, 2015, 11:31:55 PM
I don't get overly excerised about most political stuff, I see thousands on the street protesting over a utility bill for a service received, and that an awful lot of people in the country have been paying for for years, but no one protesting over the A&E overcrowding or the fact that I can have my child's tonsils taken out next week, but my neighbour with no insurance will have to wait months for their child to be seen IN THE SAME HOSPITAL.
GRRRRRR.

Exactly my thoughts. If it wasn't causing the government such hassle. I'd honestly believe Irish Water was a deliberate smokescreen to distract from the real issues in health. Meanwhile the HSE asks for an additional 2 billion in its budget projections, and despite plainly being crippled over the last decade and not fit for purpose at the A&E end, everybody just tuts and heads out to the next water protest.

I should probably clarify that I feel like an utter hypocrite for having health insurance, I understand the distorting impact it has on the service and queue jumping  is anathema to me, but I can't risk my kids' health to a system I know to be so unfair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 September, 2015, 09:05:05 AM
Is your health insurance means-tested or fixed rate?
.
Back to the policy issue, things like the TTIP (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)61492-6/fulltext?rss%3Dyes), which you weren't supposed to take much interest in or even know about, drive policy to a large extent and from behind closed doors.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 September, 2015, 08:58:15 PM
For all you Statists out there: Jeremy Corbyn's "Quantitative Easing for People": The UK Labour Frontrunner's Controversial Proposal. (http://www.globalresearch.ca/jeremy-corbyns-quantitative-easing-for-people-the-uk-labour-frontrunners-controversial-proposal/5473650)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 September, 2015, 10:28:13 PM
What economists don't like about Quantitative Easing is that it prints money with no worth - but the beauty of doing so in this instance is that the debt it's to be used to pay off is equally imaginary.

Anyone bother with the Labour leadership debate last night?  If not, it can be found HERE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdT1Mz1cYqA), although it's not terribly interesting until near the end when Yvette Cooper starts to lose the rag as it becomes apparent that the audience has got behind Corbyn big time, so she attempts to subtly manipulate the situation to her own advantage by shouting over Corbyn - and the other candidates, and the guy moderating the debate - by going on a lengthy rant that stops short of name-calling and which pointedly ignores Kendall and Burnham.  So not at all frustrated by the way the contest is going, then...

She needn't worry, though, as word from Labour HQ is that less than half of the new sign-ups have returned their ballots, so it looks like they're already building their narrative: "people signed up but they didn't vote."
The fix is in, I tells ya.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 07:34:18 AM
And what happens if Corbyn wins? Let's imagine that Corbyn, or some other 'good' politician miraculously defies all the machinations of the Powers That (Shouldn't) Be and gains office. Then let's imagine that parliament cares about what he has to say. What then?
.
Will we have a ruler who sits down and issues a piece of paper saying that you won't be bossed around quite as much and will be allowed to keep more of what you earn? Isn't that simply a case of softer slavery? A slightly more benign slavemaster up at the big house?
.
And when he's gone, what's to stop a worse slavemaster taking his place and returning us all to exactly where we are today, or worse?
.
Things will never change until we see democratic government for what it really is - a merry-go-round of tyrants designed to give us the illusion of choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 September, 2015, 10:50:27 AM
There's an anthropological study somewhere where scientists taught monkeys to push a button inside a cage with an electrified floor.  The button switched off the current to the floor of the cage, but only for a few minutes at a time, and the monkeys eventually learned that pushing the button every so often made their lives a bit less horrible - but in the interests of "science", the buttons were removed from the cages of some monkeys to see what they'd do.  Devoid of the one bit of power they had over their conditions, they would become frustrated and tear at their fur, bite themselves in acts of self-harm, attack each other - and eventually they just laid down on the floor, accepting the situation for what it was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 September, 2015, 10:54:31 AM
Whats wrong with getting some torches, pitchforks, a disgruntled mob and burning the local castle anyway? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 11:21:46 AM
That's called 'learned helplessness,' Bear. There have been several studies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness) on it.
.
Z, burning the castle never works - someone always comes along to rebuild it with thicker, higher walls.
.
The solution is to realise that you are one out of seven billion people. Nobody is above you and nobody is below you. Nobody has the right to boss you about or take your stuff and you don't have the right to boss anybody about or take their stuff. You have the rights you have and the resources you possess and that's it.
.
As for everything else, you have the right to organise with your neighbours, community and society to address whatever needs addressing in whichever way you see fit within the limits of your rights. That's all you need.
.
We have to stop thinking that everything that needs addressing must be addressed by an infinitesimally small group of thieving, villainous bullies who think it's all right to force their solutions on you.
.
If we stop playing their game, stop supporting them and find our own solutions, what are they going to do? They will be demoted from bullies to a mere nuisance. That's how I look at the "authorities," as nothing more or less than a nuisance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 05 September, 2015, 11:32:16 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 07:34:18 AM
And what happens if Corbyn wins? Let's imagine that Corbyn, or some other 'good' politician miraculously defies all the machinations of the Powers That (Shouldn't) Be and gains office. Then let's imagine that parliament cares about what he has to say. What then?
.
Will we have a ruler who sits down and issues a piece of paper saying that you won't be bossed around quite as much and will be allowed to keep more of what you earn? Isn't that simply a case of softer slavery? A slightly more benign slavemaster up at the big house?

No, because literally nobody but other internet lolbertarians share your hyperbolic, ridiculously myopic, definition of slavery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 11:55:53 AM
Definition of slave in English:
noun
1(Especially in the past) a person who is the
legal property of another and is forced to obey them.
.
1.1A person who works very hard without proper remuneration or appreciation. (Nurses, firemen, police, you?)
.
Oxford. (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/slave)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 September, 2015, 12:22:34 PM
Modern slavery exists, even in the UK, but to suggest the default position of a citizen is being the legal property of another is absolute hogwash. As for the second point, that's stretching the meaning to—possibly beyond—breaking point. It's about literal bondage and exploitation, without compensation and, frequently, rights. Nurses might be underpaid, but they are not slaves. To suggest that is ridiculous and also insulting to people in that profession.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 12:45:47 PM
I understand your anger, JPM and IP. I've been through it myself. I'm questioning your deepest religious beliefs (Statism). I might as well tell Muslims that Allah doesn't exist or a Christian that Jehovah doesn't exist. At least with traditional religion it's difficult to prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural deity living on some higher plane of existence. Disproving the existence of government is fairly easy - it's just a small group of people pretending to have rights the rest of us don't in the name of a supernatural entity, "authority," which nobody can point to and say, "there it is."
.
You can't travel abroad unless they allow it, can't drive unless they allow it, can't live somewhere unless they allow it, can't earn money unless they take their cut, can't run a business unless they allow it, etc., etc., etc. All in the name of a fiction. That sounds more like slavery than freedom to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 05 September, 2015, 01:02:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 12:45:47 PM
I understand your anger, JPM and IP. I've been through it myself. I'm questioning your deepest religious beliefs (Statism). I might as well tell Muslims that Allah doesn't exist or a Christian that Jehovah doesn't exist. At least with traditional religion it's difficult to prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural deity living on some higher plane of existence. Disproving the existence of government is fairly easy - it's just a small group of people pretending to have rights the rest of us don't in the name of a supernatural entity, "authority," which nobody can point to and say, "there it is."
.
You can't travel abroad unless they allow it, can't drive unless they allow it, can't live somewhere unless they allow it, can't earn money unless they take their cut, can't run a business unless they allow it, etc., etc., etc. All in the name of a fiction. That sounds more like slavery than freedom to me.

For the love of... I thought you'd hit peak sanctimony, obviously I was wrong. Please though, keep characterising people you disagree with as doing so out of religious (i.e. irrational) commitment, and yourself, obviously, as the internet bodhisattva whose exhortations aren't the trite, sub-sixth-form philosophy, google-scholarship derived homilies they appear to be.  I reject your ideas for how society should be organised because they're fucking stupid, not because you're like, shaking my worldview, maaaaan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 September, 2015, 01:06:43 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 05 September, 2015, 01:02:41 PM
I reject your ideas for how society should be organised because they're fucking stupid, not because you're like, shaking my worldview, maaaaan.

Put some extra swearing in that and pretend I said it, eh?

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 September, 2015, 01:09:07 PM
Nothing wrong with a bit of swearing. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 01:10:22 PM
Yep, I'm only saying this to annoy you - not because I credit you with enough decency and intelligence to run your own lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 05 September, 2015, 02:14:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 01:10:22 PM
Yep, i'm only saying this to annoy you - not because I credit you with enough decency and intelligence to run your own lives.

Here's a question - if every Government in the World disappeared (for whatever reason) what should we (as an all-loving collective) do first?

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 September, 2015, 02:25:33 PM
Call Miracleman? I have quite a few anarchist views myself, but if what you describe happened overnight, we'd be fucked.  Work with what you have,  I say,  and there are some very good benefits there, a half-decent healthcare system and a welfare system being two of them .
And sorry, Shark,  but I have to agree that it's extremely patronising to suggest that dissenters to your world view are only arguing because they can't handle you challenging theirs.

And
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 September, 2015, 02:37:18 PM
Excuse the lonely 'and'. That was all I decided to say
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 September, 2015, 04:06:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 September, 2015, 12:22:34 PM
Modern slavery exists, even in the UK, but to suggest the default position of a citizen is being the legal property of another is absolute hogwash.

Actually, no.  Technically we are all subjects of the crown and therefore HRH's 'property' rather than citizens. Granted the reality is that if she turned up on our doorstep and demanded our house there might be a bit of a kerfuffle over it but then when you consider the bowing and scraping / obeisance demanded every time she or one of her offspring show up you can see part of the problem.  This is why I have a problem with 'citizenship' in schools as it perpetuates this lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 07:53:27 PM
NK, if every government in the world disappeared overnight, we wouldn't get dragged into wars we didn't want for a start. Then we'd have to carry on living our lives and getting on with whatever needs doing. A lack of government does not mean that organisation and cooperation cease to exist.
.
Anyone who thinks I'm being patronising is free to prove to me that 'authority' and/or 'government' actually exist in as patronising a manner as you wish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 September, 2015, 09:03:41 PM
government and authority can only exist if the are accepted by the people being governed, or who authority is held over.
The last UK general election saw a turnout of 66.1% of the electorate.  Since the number of deliberately spoiled ballots is negligible, I think its safe to assume that at least two thirds of the people in the country accept, in principle, the notion of elected government.

Two thirds are so in favour of the notion of democracy and elected government that they took time out of their day to go to a voting place, maybe stand in a queue, gave their names, and made their mark.  They may not have a huge amount of influence in how the country is run, but if they were unwilling to accept the very principle of authority, I think its unlikely they would do that. 

The acceptance of the notion of government is the acceptance of the authority of that government.  Therefore, government holds authority. 

Sharky, you also didn't answer Kev's question.  What would we do first? 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 10:08:29 PM
If 66.1% of the tribe pray to the Volcano God asking for it to please not erupt and to bestow blessings on the tribe, that does not prove the existence of the Volcano God. Voting is the Statist's equivalent to praying to government asking it not to hurt us and to bestow blessings on the people and does not prove the existence of government.
.
Government requires authority otherwise it would not be government - but how do 66.1% of the voting population pass on authorities they do not themselves possess (to take other people's money and push them around) to those they voted for? Even if 100% of eligible voters voted, they cannot delegate rights and authorities they do not possess to anyone else. Government, then, logically has no authority and, without authority, cannot exist.
.
Belief in government, therefore, is not proof for the existence of government - just as belief in God is not proof for the existence of God.
.
And I can't answer Kev's question, "what would we do first?" That question is rooted in the religion or superstition of Statism; ie, asking someone else for answers. A far better question is "what would I do first?" And nobody can answer that question but the questioner. The first thing I'd probably do is celebrate with a beer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 September, 2015, 10:20:48 PM
I'm so lost and confused as to how to even understand how to deal with the so called "migrant crisis". It's just such a touchy and awful subject i'm not certain i've enough worldly experience about me to have an opinion on the matter despite it being a hot button topic right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 September, 2015, 10:24:50 PM
You also said that organization and cooperation would continue.  So presumably there is a "we".  If "I" do something, there is no need for organization.

Out of curiosity, what would prove the authority of government to you?  Because if nothing would, then there's little point in discussion.

The problem Sharky, is that you worship the God of Recidivism. 
You believe that there is a powerful force in the world, which cannot be seen or controlled by traditional mean.  This force controls everything behind the scene, leaving most people in a powerless state. 

You are unwilling to accept the existence of any rules placed upon you which you are not in favour of. 

You are happy to ignore any form of evidence which doesn't agree with your pre-defined beliefs, ignoring experts and science alike.

But you believe strongly that we can all be free...if only we see the light and accept our personal responsibility and believe what you believe.  Only then will a new world be formed, in which everything is fair and good and right (in so far as you have defined it).  And a new dawn will come, and all the people of the world will be free.  And not have to pay tax, which is of course the devil-camerons work and would probably only be spent on war anyway.

Of course, everyone else is entitled to their opinion.  As long as they accept that they are uninformed and that only followers of the God of Recidivism know the true way.  If only they would spend more time on the internet, reading the wisdom of people who truly understand how oppressed we all are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 05 September, 2015, 10:34:37 PM
Hey there, Shark.  Have you ever gotten checked for Bipolar Disorder?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 05 September, 2015, 10:43:53 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 05 September, 2015, 10:20:48 PM
I'm so lost and confused as to how to even understand how to deal with the so called "migrant crisis". It's just such a touchy and awful subject i'm not certain i've enough worldly experience about me to have an opinion on the matter despite it being a hot button topic right now.

the uk share of refugees would be around 10 thousand (http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-09-05/more-than-40-councils-offer-help-for-syrian-refugees/)
there are 43 thousand (http://www.uktownslist.info/) towns & cities in the uk

if half those 10 thousand are families with 2 children
1 in 7 towns or cities would have to take either a single refugee or a family of four

the idea that uk economy & society couldnt cope with that is silly
the nearest Syrian refugee to me would be 9 miles away - in a city of 90 thousand people
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 11:37:40 PM
I can be part of an organisation and I can cooperate with others. Or not - it's my choice, the same choice we all have.
.
If you can prove the authority of government to me, I'll shut up.
.
I don't know what you mean by "worshipping the God of Recidivism."
.
I believe there are various powerful forces in the world which can be seen. Some of them can be controlled (the human agencies) and some cannot (the natural ones). The human forces have limited but strategic control of some things and influence over others. I further believe that the only powerless people are those who believe themselves to be powerless.
.
Yes, I do dispute the authority of rules I don't believe to be fair or legitimate. Don't we all?
.
I'm happy to examine any form of evidence which doesn't agree with my beliefs, listening to experts and science alike. I don't know everything and I'm certain that some of the things I do know are wrong.
.
If the only way for you to be free is to believe what I believe, then you won't be free, will you? You must find your own freedom in your own beliefs just as I find my own freedom in mine.
.
The world will not change overnight; there isn't a big switch somewhere with "Pull For Utopia" written on it. The world evolves slowly, erratically and unpredictably. Only those who pretend to be in charge would have us believe otherwise.
.
Taxes are not inherently evil and can be used positively to solve a great many problems - just like any societal tool. Like any societal tool, however, taxes can be misused. It's the misuse I object to, not the tool itself.
.
All of us are uninformed and nobody knows the True Way. All we can do is the best we can with what we know and strive to learn more from whatever sources are available to us.
.
No, Dilbert, I haven't. Have you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 05 September, 2015, 11:56:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 11:37:40 PM
No, Dilbert, I haven't. Have you?

I've struggled with manic depression at various points in my life, yes.

Just saying I get the impression you might be having a manic episode and maybe you should talk to someone about it.  Your GP is probably the best place to start.

All the best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 September, 2015, 03:22:41 AM
Some gorgeous writing on both sides of the argument here. Particular mention to JPM for concise brutal eloquence.

Great to see these ideas teased out, although always worth remembering that for better or worse (okay, definitely worse) Sharky walks the walk, so is not just some keyboard philosopher bashing out anarchist idealism over a venti soy latte.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 September, 2015, 07:35:08 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 06 September, 2015, 03:22:41 AM
Sharky walks the walk...

As do a lot of people, and usually in a more constructive fashion rather than "my own private Idaho will work and Fuck any evidence to the contrary".

The question I asked was more than valid, Shark. You are the one who talks in terms of what we can and should do. And when pushed on the matter you turn it around putting the onus onto others.

I actually think we do need a revolution, but it would be nice to have something to put in its place, other than words.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 08:55:22 AM
Nothing needs adding, Kev. We have all we need to run society how we want. Take supermarkets as an example; thousands of people from suppliers to delivery drivers to warehouse workers to checkout staff to managers all work together in order to bring food to society - and they manage this without any direction from government. There is no coercion involved, only cooperation. There is not one single law forcing anyone to produce a single morsel of food, but food there is in abundance.
.
Indeed, government only makes the process more difficult by demanding money for licenses, demanding its cut from wages and profits and purchases of land, building, equipment and vehicles. And if these demands are not met, government sends around uniformed thugs to hurt people.
.
Nothing needs to be added to society, Kev. Just one thing needs taking away - the irrational belief in the authority of "government." The sun doesn't stop rising when one stops believing in God just as society doesn't collapse if one stops believing in "government."
.
Dilworth, apologies for getting your name wrong, I don't think I'm insane - but then people never think they are, I suppose. I used to suffer from depression a lot but, since turning my back on those who wanted to control me (the "government") I have found within myself a resilience, confidence and peace I never knew I had. I don't deny that in a materialistic sense I have lost out massively (home, furniture, my book and comic collections, etc., etc.) after the "authorities" stole virtually everything from me for the "crime" of disagreeing with them but, in myself, I am happier and profoundly less prone to depression than I've been in over a decade. Once I freed myself of the learned helplessness (largely, anyway - that conditioning ran deep and I still run across vestiges of it within myself from time to time) my depression went with it.
.
Ceasing to believe in the "authority of government" is a scary thing to do but has many and varied benefits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 September, 2015, 10:03:05 AM
QuoteI don't know what you mean by "worshipping the God of Recidivism."
I was referencing your "worship of State" nonsense.  You also compared the legal and moral argument about accepting the role of government to a strawman believe in volcano gods.  It's not nice when someone compares your considered viewpoint to a baseless religious faith.

Quotegovernment only makes the process more difficult by demanding money for licenses, demanding its cut from wages and profits and purchases of land, building, equipment and vehicles.

and health and safety laws, and food standards, and building roads and schools and hospitals. And paying the nurses and firefighters you compared to slaves. Luckily...

QuoteTaxes are not inherently evil and can be used positively to solve a great many problems - just like any societal tool. Like any societal tool, however, taxes can be misused. It's the misuse I object to, not the tool itself.

however, we can't collect them since

QuoteGovernment requires authority otherwise it would not be government - but how do 66.1% of the voting population pass on authorities they do not themselves possess (to take other people's money and push them around) to those they voted for?

because even though a bunch of individuals is happy to decide that they, as a group, should have more power that they do as individuals, and that this acceptance of authority is all that is required for authority to exist...

Quotethey cannot delegate rights and authorities they do not possess to anyone else. Government, then, logically has no authority and, without authority, cannot exist.

so we should all just make up our own minds about stuff and do whatever we please.  Buts that's okay since...

QuoteA lack of government does not mean that organisation and cooperation cease to exist.

after all...

QuoteTake supermarkets as an example

large, multinational organisations run by millionaires who sell food grow by people who often scrape by, working long hours to provide for their families.  There is no contradiction here, since...

QuoteThere is not one single law forcing anyone to produce a single morsel of food

and without government, there would also be no single law preventing anyone from working in a toxic environment for 18 hours a day, or employing four year olds, or increasing profits by adding sawdust to your bread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 September, 2015, 11:02:57 AM
Say it like it is Modern Panther. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2015, 11:07:12 AM
While it's gratifying to see public support for refugees, is anyone else wondering why we're supposed to care about dead babies on the beach all of a sudden?  Only last week, hundreds of refugees drowned and I didn't notice any front page headlines declaring OH THE HUMANITY then - Katie Hopkins didn't even bother deleting that tweet where she said that she wanted to see dead immigrants floating in the sea.
But now we care for some reason - even the Daily Mail is banging on about doing something for the plight of the refugees - and the media is closing ranks to push this narrative.

The refugees seem to be from Syria, so are we fixing to go bomb that now or something?  I assume there must be oil there, as well as a reason to get embroiled in a military action with IS - gotta keep that war money flowing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 September, 2015, 11:08:20 AM
One picture tells a thousand stories. Cliché I know. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2015, 11:21:01 AM
That picture of a dad cradling his infant son who only had his face left on his head said plenty about the bombing of Gaza, but I didn't notice outrage then.

It's not that I don't think people are capable of this kind of compassion, it's that I don't see why the media is enabling it in a united front.  We're being sold something again, and if dead kids is what we like to see on front pages, we'll get plenty of that once our government starts feeding teenagers to the IS propaganda machine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 September, 2015, 11:23:27 AM
Struggling to avoid slipping into our island malaise (whatabouttery) myself, but look, whatever gets it done.  I found myself moved to tears in the newsagent during the week, and it's not like I've been insensible to this business prior to this.

What still disturbs me beyond reason is the knowledge that this isn't even the top of the peak of the tip of the iceberg that we're sailing towards this century. Accommodating 10s of 1000s of refugees in your country? Oooh, tricky. Well it's going to be many millions within a handful of decades, as Africa's population doubles and the trebles and the global climate goes to shit. Time to get our head around the longterm, and stop whining about the merest hint of what's to come. No wall, no camp, no blockade is going to help - we need to change how we think about resource and space and 'national territory', and NOW.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 September, 2015, 11:31:11 AM
We need to stop fucking wrecking these places (or being facilitators for the wrecking); we need to assist the people in need with our aid money, not hand it to corrupt scumbag third world leaders (or use it as a sweetner for arms deals with said scumbag third world leaders). I don't think for one moment forcing these nations best qualified and most able citizens to take their much needed skills out of countries which desperately need them into countries which frankly seem antipathic to them is any answer either. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 06 September, 2015, 11:58:37 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 10:08:29 PM
If 66.1% of the tribe pray to the Volcano God asking for it to please not erupt and to bestow blessings on the tribe, that does not prove the existence of the Volcano God.

This seems apt (http://comicskingdom.com/shared_comics/25d018bf-9a25-4353-87ef-a86b9c27439f)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 12:15:58 PM
I see. So, it's "not nice" for me to compare belief in the magical entity of "government" with belief in the magical entity of a "volcano god" but it's okay to call my "considered viewpoint" nonsense?
.
H&S and Food Standard laws? Do you really need someone else to tell you when an activity is dangerous or whether something is safe to eat? The core of your argument here is that people cannot be trusted. If a butcher continually sells rotten or substandard meat, his customers will punish him by shopping elsewhere or suing him in court. It is in the interests of every butcher to trade in the best quality products for the best prices he can. Similarly, it is in the interests of employers to provide as safe a working environment as they can otherwise nobody will work for them.
.
Furthermore, there is nothing to stop a group of people, like the H&SE, from assessing such things and making their findings public in, for example, local or national media. With this information you can decide for yourself whether or not to patronise certain establishments. Such bodies might be organised through local councils and funded via social money creation. It does not require government coercion, only social cooperation and organisation. Removing the only thing that "government" brings to the table, the threat of immoral violence, in no way diminishes the will of the people for safe services.
.
Yes, we should all take responsibility for our own minds and decisions. This is the concept of self-ownership. I own me and you have no right to boss me about or take my money but that's okay because you own you and I have no right to boss you about or take your money. This is true for us all, I think.
.
The rest of your argument hinges on the evils of multinational corporations fixated on profit over people. Here we are mostly in agreement, yet consider this: often the greatest supporters of the myth of government are these corporations themselves. They fund election campaigns, throw millions, if not billions, of pounds at lobbying and pen legislation for the high priests of government MPs to push through parliament and generally do everything they can to increase their profits. Remove "government" and suddenly they have to operate on a level playing field. If a supermarket is found to be putting sawdust in bread, lack of "government" control will allow for a thousand local bakeries to spring up, bakeries owned and run by people from your own community in whose interest it is to bake the best bread they can containing the best ingredients they can procure. Removing government would, therefore, be a boon to employment and the economy.
.
But, to be brutally frank, any ideas I have are just that - ideas. There are over seven billion people on this planet, each and every one of us a creature of infinite worth and infinite potential. Out of all those minds will emerge ideas and inventions far superior to anything I can come up with, and far superior to anything some deluded politician can come up with. The rest of us will assess and consider those ideas and inventions for running parts of our societies and implement the ones that make sense. This is the direct opposite of having ideas and systems forced on us under threat of violence.
.
In a world without government there will still be leaders - but these will be people who lead by example, with voluntary followers, not people who lead by implied right and threats of violence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 September, 2015, 01:04:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 12:15:58 PM
H&S and Food Standard laws? Do you really need someone else to tell you when an activity is dangerous or whether something is safe to eat? The core of your argument here is that people cannot be trusted. If a butcher continually sells rotten or substandard meat, his customers will punish him by shopping elsewhere or suing him in court. It is in the interests of every butcher to trade in the best quality products for the best prices he can. Similarly, it is in the interests of employers to provide as safe a working environment as they can otherwise nobody will work for them.

And the people who just plain die from fucking botulism are just an acceptable price to pay in your Brave New World, are they?

Jesus.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 01:56:02 PM
DP, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 01:57:03 PM
Certainly not, Jim. Every human life is priceless and irreplaceable.
.
However, the deaths caused by the irrational belief in "government" do seem insignificant to most of us.  It has been estimated (https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM) that the number of people killed by their own governments between 1900 and 1999 is 262,000,000.
.
"Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5', then they would circle the earth ten times."
.
Botulism can be cured by modern medicine (http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Botulism/Pages/Treatment.aspx) (not modern politicians) but democide cannot be cured by continued belief in "government."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2015, 02:05:18 PM
I suggested we get together and murder our government in a series of terrorist atrocities, but you weren't having it.  I put it to you that you are as invested in the status quo as the government is - you're certainly getting plenty of mileage out of discussing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 02:35:44 PM
Even the life of a politician is important and priceless, so my position against violence stands. I think it would be hypocritical of me to say, "you shouldn't kill anyone except these people..."
.
And you're right. Heh, maybe I should apply for a government grant to explore these ideas... ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 September, 2015, 03:23:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 08:55:22 AM
I don't think I'm insane

When did you change your mind?

You were pretty adamant you were completely mental a couple of years ago, (and rather dismissive of any views to the contrary, if I remember correctly). Not trying to be smart - I'm genuinely interested. Did you reach the conclusion that it was all just down to depression?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 September, 2015, 03:26:51 PM
Quotebut it's okay to call my "considered viewpoint" nonsense?

You started it.  Would you prefer "magical"?  "Irrational"?.  Both terms you have used in the last page to describe the opinions of others, whose differences of opinion you value and appreciate.

QuoteIt is in the interests of every butcher to trade in the best quality products for the best prices he can.

Its in the interests of any company to make profit.  I'm sure you could quickly compile a list of companies who have fucked over their customers, polluted the planet and abused their workers.  I'm sure that this list would include a very large number of companies which continue to run at a sizeable profit.

Quotehis customers will punish him by shopping elsewhere or suing him in court

Suing him in court would require an acceptance of the authority of that court.  Authority does not exist.

QuoteThe rest of your argument hinges on the evils of multinational corporations fixated on profit over people. Here we are mostly in agreement

So the butcher stuff was nonsense...sorry, "irrational".

Quoteoften the greatest supporters of the myth of government are these corporations themselves. They fund election campaigns, throw millions, if not billions, of pounds at lobbying and pen legislation for the high priests of government MPs to push through parliament and generally do everything they can to increase their profits. Remove "government" and suddenly they have to operate on a level playing field.

Because they would suddenly start being nice if they didn't have to pay bribes anymore? 

QuoteIf a supermarket is found to be putting sawdust in bread, lack of "government" control will allow for a thousand local bakeries to spring up, bakeries owned and run by people from your own community in whose interest it is to bake the best bread they can containing the best ingredients they can procure

Because of all of the legislation currently limiting small businesses.  Free from having to pay a decent wage, meet any standards, or, more importantly, pay any taxes, suddenly the small business man will flourish and work for the benefit of his community. (It's true, just ask all the thriving bakers in Eritrea.) 

QuoteBotulism can be cured by modern medicine

if you can afford it.  Since we're not funding a health service through national taxation anymore, you better hope you live in a nice area and the small council running your hospital think you're worth saving.  Failing that, there's always Kickstarter.

QuoteSuch bodies might be organised through local councils

or "government", as we called it in the Before Times.

QuoteRemoving the only thing that "government" brings to the table, the threat of immoral violence

or "Acts of Parliament" as we called them in the  Before Times.

QuoteIn a world without government there will still be leaders - but these will be people who lead by example, with voluntary followers, not people who lead by implied right and threats of violence.

These will be the people with money, who can afford the biggest army.

QuoteIt has been estimated that the number of people killed by their own governments between 1900 and 1999 is 262,000,000

That article consists mostly of a list of non-democratic, totalitarian governments.  Unelected leaders who seized power through force and fear.  We elect our leaders and have very few concentration camps.

You're entitled to your opinions, Sharky.  But the whole libertarian, free man of the land thing was old when Ayn Rand was selling it.  People aren't disagreeing with you because they are uninformed, or brainwashed, or have a religiously dogmatic learned obedience to authority.  Everyone else has the same reasoning power as you and, as free and reasoned people, we have chosen to agree with the notion of government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 September, 2015, 04:06:44 PM
Even if you accept those numbers at face value, by every measure aggregate levels of violence and violent death have declined and declined as the global dominance of the state has grown, and the state has grown more democratic.  There's a LOT needs fixing about the way the modern state operates, and how decision making and - yes - authority work, with how personal freedom and accountability play out, and with really big problems like long-term planning and (for me) the humanity-obscuring identification of nation and race with state and borders, but these can be addressed as they almost always are, within the existing framework of law and democracy - it's just bloody hard to do, but easier one imagines than starting all over again. Babies, bathwater,all that.

On the other hand I'm not sure I agree that the majority have ever considered and weighed the alternatives in the way many posters here obviously have - so the lone voice crying in the wilderness still has a role in promoting that process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 September, 2015, 04:22:53 PM
I'm going to throw in a discussion point here,  mainly because I know very little about it and would like to hear some more informed opinions than my own.

Catalonia, according to Noam Chomsky,  had a functional anarchist society before the Spanish Civil War.  It wasn't a libertarian,  Capitalist one (as was expounded by the aforementioned and dreadful Rand and is now being alluded to by Sharky) but one founded on Marxist principles - shared property, rotational allocation of unpleasant labour etc. Chomsky claims this system did not collapse from the inside but was crushed by opposing fascists from the outside.

George Orwell spent time living in Anarchist Catalonia, and was impressed enough to join its people against the fascists (though to be fair,  he really,  really hated fascism.)

It seems to be a functional  system (apart from the near-inevitable risk of invasion) but my information only really comes from the two lefty writers in question.

Just had a flick through tb's post; totally with you on the malevolent effects of national borders.  The thing is, there is absolutely no way we could just instantly vaporise the status quo and begin at, well,  Year Zero if that was our wont.  So we have to work within the framework we've got - changes can only realistically be made incrementally but they can be made.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 06 September, 2015, 04:26:45 PM
The POUM control of Barcelona and outlying areas was quickly crushed by the nascent Republican government at the urging of the NKVD agents prevalent within the said government.
In relation to your latter point, Angela Merkel has trashed the border agreements last week. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 04:49:18 PM
Good question, M.I.K. I think the depression did have a lot to do with it but wasn't the sole cause. Some of it was my inability to make much sense of the world. I was always jealous of people like Modern Panther and Jim who seem able to make sense of things that elude me. The choice then seemed to be between either the world being insane or me being insane and it seemed arrogant and foolish to blame the world. I guess now I'm of the opinion that half of it is the world's insanity and half of it is my own.
.
Take Panther's last post, for example. It seems perfectly sane to me to expect people to cooperate for mutual benefit and it seems perfectly sane to Panther that people must be forced to cooperate. I agree that more people take Panther's view than mine but that doesn't prove anything either way.
.
Panther mentions Eritrea, completely disregarding its external debts to one of the most criminal entities on the planet, the world's central banking network. The same network making life difficult for so many other countries and peoples. The same network so vehemently supported by governments at the expense of their peoples' welfare and future. But no, it's the poor, stupid Eritreans at fault, not the governments who signed them up to such crippling and unpayable debts. But Panther seems to understand it so it must be me who's insane.
.
Panther further seems to understand that forced taxation is the only way to fund essential services and that social money creation, for example, is a complete non-starter. That only governments are capable of organising things, and that anything needing organisation must be organised under threat of violence. That the British government doesn't kill its own people by, for instance, stopping their benefits. That certain people have the right to rule over others, whether by consent or not. That courts in a world without government have no right to examine evidence and act on society's behalf where actual loss, harm or damage has been caused. That everything which is good and decent and right in the world exists only because governments will it and that everything bad and indecent and wrong in the world exists only because of a lack of government.
.
I question all these things so, yes, I have to at least consider the possibility that I might be insane.
.
I don't think I am, though. Well, at least no more than anyone else.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 September, 2015, 05:11:33 PM
JBC, I agree that changes must necessarily be incremental. Sweeping, overnight changes tend to lead to things like the USSR - and we all know how well that went.
.
I can't find the transcript, annoyingly, and Youtube doesn't work on this 'phone, but speaking of Noam Chomsky, in the video Chomsky on Hitchens, Harris and Skinner (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zt9QCAUPPeY) he also refers to belief in government as a religion (about two and a half minutes in, if this is the correct video - apologies if it's not. If it's not, let me know and I'll try to locate the correct one).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 September, 2015, 10:25:40 PM
Got it, thanks, sharky. Interesting stuff;  think I may have watched it before at some point. I was never a fan of Christopher Hitchens personally; as an atheist myself I'd prefer a less smug and arrogant spokesman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2015, 01:31:23 AM
You're welcome. Gotta' say I'm not an atheist. I think there is a God - and its name is Universe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 September, 2015, 11:22:47 AM
(http://www.talkcomic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/spider-man-20071204051233083-000.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2015, 02:09:32 PM
So, I've been thinking about this and, while I still think belief in government is an irrational superstition the only thing that really needs changing is its imagined right to initiate violence against the people.
.
Do that and you can still have all the organisational mechanisms of government - your Department of Health, DVLA, DWP and what have you - but it won't have the right to demand anything of anybody under threat of violence any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 September, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
Sharky, you magnificent swine...

I certainly didn't mean to imply that I understand or have a hold on how the world works (but you know that).  I don't think anyone does.  I do think, though, that you have a very positive view of the human race at large.  It's always seemed to be your belief that, one day, we shall overcome the things that divide us and just all get along.

I genuinely hope that that is true, but I work everyday for an organization that seeks to protect vulnerable people from those who would steal from them - often their "friends" and families, so no, I don't believe that most people will just co-operate.

We're all just trying to get by.  My attempts to turn your logic (seriously, "volcano God"?) back at you may have been overly harsh, for which I sincerely apologise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 September, 2015, 07:39:07 PM
Apologies?  Changing opinions?  The internet seems to be broken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 September, 2015, 07:54:30 PM
Now that I think about it, I haven't seen a loveable kitten all day...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 September, 2015, 08:06:24 PM
You both disgust me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2015, 08:52:21 PM
It won't last!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 07 September, 2015, 09:21:46 PM
The hate will soon return. It will rain down on you, yes -YOU as thick as ski pants!

Um... :-\

I think I'll change my name back to Zarjazzer. So I can have a selfish thread devoted to myself where I announce " did you miss me" like they used to in old forums. And invariably no one had missed me and hoped that I'd died of some tropical disease.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2015, 07:22:25 AM
There's no need to apologise, Panther, I generally deserve all the criticism I get for my blunt style of argument. That said, I do appreciate it - it kinda' validates my belief in basic humanity when people like us can froth and foam and argue at one another then retain a basic mutual respect at the end of it.
.
The work you do also validates my faith in humanity - you're actually helping people and I imagine that such work takes its toll, yet you do it anyway. It's not surprising that such work makes you doubt humanity's capacity to ever just get along. But we already do get along, largely.
.
Take the roads as an example; millions of people drive every day and do so with relatively few problems. As a further example of how people tend to get along even better with fewer arbitrary rules, check out equalitystreets.com where they campaign for the removal of most traffic lights. It's a counter-intuitive idea but experiments have proven that removing traffic lights actually improves safety, reduces congestion and makes road users more cooperative and considerate. This idea is a microcosm of the kind of changes I'd like to see across wider society.
.
The question of dealing with crime in an anarchist society is a thorny one. When it comes to serious crimes such as murder or rape it's pretty straightforward. While nobody has the right to initiate violence against another person, we all have the right to defend ourselves with violence should the necessity arise. As this right is mine, I can pass it on to my neighbour and defend him with violence if need be. So in the case of murder or rape, society as a whole can delegate its right of defensive violence (which doesn't just mean punching someone but as little as issuing a threat or physical restraint) to a police and/or court and penal service.
.
It is lesser crimes where the problem lies. How does one deter people from speeding, hate speech or shoplifting, for example? I honestly don't have much of an answer to this beyond education and social attitudes.
.
But all this is meaningless in the here and now. The most important thing is to take the first step of changing our mindset. We must realise, as a matter of some urgency, that the power "government" holds over us exists in one place and one place alone - our own minds. It is our own personal belief that government has the right to make demands of us, demands backed up by nothing but violence and the threat of violence, that must be dispelled. After that, anything is possible.
.
The Tiny Dot (Video, 6:49) (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H6b70TUbdfs)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 08 September, 2015, 11:38:15 AM
The burden of Youth is Idealism. The burden of Middle-Age is Reality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 September, 2015, 11:45:52 AM
Quote from: paddykafka on 08 September, 2015, 11:38:15 AM
The burden of Youth is Idealism. The burden of Middle-Age is Reality.

You are Yoda paddykafka!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2015, 02:07:47 PM
The burdens of my youth and middle-age transpire to be identical: not enough minge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 September, 2015, 02:21:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2015, 02:07:47 PM
The burdens of my youth and middle-age transpire to be identical: not enugh minge.

Pleease Shark. As we often point out to others, there are polite ways to express such woes that don't reduce our splendid female counterparts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2015, 04:37:29 PM
I like to think I'm a modern man possessed of a modest intelligence but with my last post I really have let myself down. I unreservedly apologise for spelling the word 'enough' incorrectly. I'm so ashamed :-(
.
P.S. The joke was in the choice of words, not the sentiment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 08 September, 2015, 05:05:45 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 01 September, 2015, 08:05:17 AM
Apparently, it's been a very hot summer in Poland, so to cool down visitors to Auschwitz instead of offering them each a bottle of water, the camp authorities decided to put up a line of misters to shower their guests as they entered.

please tell me this was a joke!?!?!?!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 September, 2015, 06:31:57 PM
No it is true but apparently it was not compulsory so that's all right then!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 09 September, 2015, 09:21:31 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2015, 04:37:29 PM

P.S. The joke was in the choice of words, not the sentiment.

Ah, I see. A bit like one of those chaps that says: "I'm a really nice guy and I respect women. Everybody says so. Even the girls I know. But not one of the whore bitch sluts will sleep with me!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 September, 2015, 10:02:40 AM
The amazing thing about THOSE chaps is the complete lack of irony. Scum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2015, 03:04:41 PM
Yes - like saying, "those bastarding, brainless, gobshitty, perverted morons wouldn't let me join the Diplomatic Corps."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 09 September, 2015, 05:20:48 PM
So the simple reply to all of those Britian Furst/Reclaim Australia posts saying "Why should we help refugees when Saudia Arabia et al are plenty rich and refuse to take any refugees" is "Just because somebody else is being a cockwomble doesn't mean you have to be".

But where do I find a proper measured rebuttal to it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 09 September, 2015, 05:51:14 PM
syria has a rotten goverment
but its a moderate & modern nation

if you had a daughter
would you take her somewhere
shed have to dress like a ninja
wasnt allowed to drive
& could be stoned to death for being raped?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 09 September, 2015, 06:03:34 PM
This hits the nail on the head (http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/we-need-to-look-after-our-own-first-say-people-who-would-never-help-anyone-20150907101741)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2015, 07:09:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 September, 2015, 10:08:29 PM
If 66.1% of the tribe pray to the Volcano God asking for it to please not erupt and to bestow blessings on the tribe, that does not prove the existence of the Volcano God. Voting is the Statist's equivalent to praying to government asking it not to hurt us and to bestow blessings on the people and does not prove the existence of government.
.
Government requires authority otherwise it would not be government - but how do 66.1% of the voting population pass on authorities they do not themselves possess (to take other people's money and push them around) to those they voted for? Even if 100% of eligible voters voted, they cannot delegate rights and authorities they do not possess to anyone else. Government, then, logically has no authority and, without authority, cannot exist.
.
Belief in government, therefore, is not proof for the existence of government - just as belief in God is not proof for the existence of God.
.
And I can't answer Kev's question, "what would we do first?" That question is rooted in the religion or superstition of Statism; ie, asking someone else for answers. A far better question is "what would I do first?" And nobody can answer that question but the questioner. The first thing I'd probably do is celebrate with a beer.

I know this was a while ago but that's not an argument... well it is it's a really bad one based on false equivalence.

worshiping a volcano god is more similar to wearing a the same hat for luck when you watch your chosen sports team, in that its the illusion of control over events you have no control over.

Voting/protesting/rebelling en-mass is exercising a measure or group control. In may ways participating politically is the exact opposite of your example and there in lays the problem with almost every attempted 'discussion' you have recently been involved in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 02:11:29 AM
The point is, Steven, that the "volcano god" and the "government" have exactly the same level of authority - none. The only authority either one has is the authority you imagine them to have over you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2015, 07:32:40 AM
Or to put it another way, ni dieu ni maître, eh? Blanqui (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Auguste_Blanqui) was a socialist, mind, of a particularly authoritarian stripe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 08:01:19 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 02:11:29 AM
The point is, Steven, that the "volcano god" and the "government" have exactly the same level of authority - none. The only authority either one has is the authority you imagine them to have over you.

Not really.

quick test:

Does preying to a volcano god effect the eruptions of a volcano?

Does petitioning the government have any effect (like increasing the numbers of refugees we will take or scrapping the poll tax or the Arab spring or the Russian/ Chinese revolution) ?

Governments have the authority of the people. how people deal with that as a group is up to them. If a volcanic island was run by a volcano cult then the cult could have power. the cult could be the government, but the cults authority would be real until the people over turned it. But you didn't use an autocratic religious group (which many governments are formed by) as your example you used a volcano god which is false equivalenceglossed over with a glib dismissiveness. (the intention of making anyone who 'believes' in government look as ridiculous as an island cult based on specific and disprovable superstation)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2015, 08:15:05 AM
Perhaps a stumbling block here is the notion of authority as absolute. We cede authority in limited wags in almost every interaction - I don't shout instructions at the bus driver; I chop onions the way my missus instructs when she's doing the cooking (even though she is plainly deluded)and vice versa; I keep my voice down in the library (even when I'm the only one doing it). In all cases a limited delegation of authority has taken place. The authority of government is no more absolute - we assign it  as we see fit as individuals and as a group.  There are things government could never make me do, and things it could never make the population do, because its authority is not (or at least no longer) absolute: it is negotiated and assigned, through the democratic process.

Now how that process operates, the level and extent of authority we cede, how that affects personal responsibility and how we deal with situations where individuals and groups are harmed by the authority the majority assign, those are the bastardly tricky bits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 10 September, 2015, 11:04:25 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 08 September, 2015, 06:31:57 PM
No it is true but apparently it was not compulsory so that's all right then!!!

dear lord! someone wasn't paying attention in that meeting were they? I'm surprised they bothered setting up the misters when they had some pupose built showers already there! mind.boggled!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 September, 2015, 01:29:15 PM
Is it legal for politicians to lie to get elected?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34190439  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34190439)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 02:16:10 PM
Okay.
.
1: The tribe knows the "Volcano God" exists because there's a huge great volcano near the village in which the god lives. We know the "government" exists because there's a huge great palace in the middle of London in which it lives.
.
2. The Volcanic Priests interpret the rules and wishes of the "Volcano God" and tell the people of the tribe what it needs and requires. The Members of Parliament interpret the rules and wishes of "government" and tell is what it needs and requires.
.
3. The "Volcano God" wants the people of the tribe to tip up a portion of their wealth to support the Volcanic Priests (because they generate no income of their own) to keep them in Vimto and crisps and because they need something more impressive than a mud hut in which to meet the priests of the Sea God. The "government" wants us to tip up a portion of our wealth to support the MPs (because they generate no income of their own) to keep them in Champagne and caviar and because they need something more impressive than a London semi in which to meet the MPs of France.
.
4. The Volcanic Priests are honest in that they do not claim to be the "Volcano God" themselves; they claim to represent its power. It's fairly hard to disprove this unless one can email the "Volcano God" to ask, 'hey, did you give those dudes in the long robes who paint their faces red and plait black cotton wool in their hair your divine authority over me?' The MPs are dishonest in that they claim to be the "government" themselves and to represent your authority. This is easy to disprove as all I have to ask you is, 'hey, did you give those dudes at Westminster authorities you don't possess over me?'
.
I appreciate that you don't like me comparing your precious "government" to the villagers' precious "Volcano God" but they are the same thing - illusions based entirely on faith. The villagers can pray all they want to the "Volcano God" but it, and its priests, will act as they choose anyway. We can pray (vote, petition, lobby) all we want to "government" but it, and its MPs, will act as they choose anyway. Remember when 1,000,000 people prayed to the MPs to stop "government" declaring war but war came anyway? That's exactly the same as the villagers praying to the "Volcano God" to stop erupting.
.
But we are in a better situation than the villagers. If they stop praying to the "Volcano God" that won't stop the top coming off the mountain from time to time; but if we stop praying to "government" we can prevent a great deal of human destruction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 10 September, 2015, 02:57:32 PM
Are you unwilling or actually unable to recognise any nuance whatsoever in your opponent's viewpoint?  Genuine question. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 03:13:01 PM
They aren't.

your entire wall of text is irrelevant.

volcano gods have zero effect.

governments have tangible effect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 September, 2015, 03:28:43 PM
The volcano will not change one iota irrespective prayers, but a government must make decisions that will prevent it being voted out.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 03:33:44 PM
what you are referring to in your own verbose way is a religious state. which we don't have but some country's do. Then attempting to conflate the idea of a 'church' based government with the deity itself then you are then assuming that everyone is excepting that assumption and equating the straw man deity with the government.

They key flaw here is that your volcano god is not a mechanism of rule it's at best a theology. the closest analogy in our system would be the volcano god is democracy and the volcano church is the government.

But all that's saying is aren't we lucky to have a democracy over a volcano god based theocracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 03:35:08 PM
But we're not talking about effect, we're talking about belief. The priests of the "Volcano God" have an effect just as the MPs of "government" have an effect. Neither the "Volcano God" nor the "government" can have any effect whatsoever because neither one exists, even if belief in them does.
.
No, JPM. I'm a blunt instrument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 03:36:41 PM
You know that MP's are the government don't you? Civil servants are the cogs of government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 03:40:06 PM
No, the MPs are people claiming authorities they do not possess and calling it "government."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 September, 2015, 03:55:05 PM
You're like one of those folk who say they don't believe in UFOs.

Just because they're not aliens, doesn't mean they're not there.

Semantics, in't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 03:56:12 PM
you could be referring to this: 'A government is the system by which a state or community is controlled.' if you read that and think it actually says 'Illusory religion of control used by the elite to subjugate the sheeple' you probably need new glasses.

I was referring to this: 'the word government is also used more narrowly to refer to the collective group of people that exercises executive authority in a state.'



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:13:10 PM
 'the word government is also used more narrowly to refer to the collective group of people that exercises executive authority in a state.' But where do they get the authority? You and I do not have the authority to demand money from other people under threat of retaliation, so how do we pass on that authority to this 'collective group of people'? We cannot, so they must make it up and call it "government." Anything made up does not exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 04:20:49 PM
If I worshipped the Volcano God I'd pray to Him to command His cult to throw this thread in the lava.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 04:31:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:13:10 PM
'the word government is also used more narrowly to refer to the collective group of people that exercises executive authority in a state.' But where do they get the authority? You and I do not have the authority to demand money from other people under threat of retaliation, so how do we pass on that authority to this 'collective group of people'? We cannot, so they must make it up and call it "government." Anything made up does not exist.

We do, It's called the small claims court.

your 'logic' path seems to be that you and I do not have collective power, individually, to pass on so collective power cannot be real.

But we have also circled back to one of your many 'creationist' staples, which build the foundation of your philosophy. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:45:08 PM
Of course we have collective authority (and power). Any authorities we individually possess (the right to self-defence, the right to eat and drink, the right to speak and think as we please, as examples) can be passed on and delegated to  others. Any authorities we do not individually possess (the right to assault our neighbours, the right to deny other people food and drink, the right to limit another person's speech or thought, as examples) cannot be passed on or delegated to others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 September, 2015, 04:47:54 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 04:20:49 PM
If I worshipped the Volcano God I'd pray to Him to command His cult to throw this thread in the lava.
A) Where do I sign up.
B) Do you have complementary mugs?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 September, 2015, 04:51:08 PM
You could try praying to Tharg instead. He doesn't exist either, but I got a Futurama DVD from him once.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 September, 2015, 04:52:02 PM
Foolish earthlet! Tharg exists! He recently hosted that advert for a Zombo toy, what more proof do you need??!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:54:41 PM
Tharg is a different kettle of fish altogether. Tharg definitely exists - and anyone who says otherwise deserves a fatal Rigellian Hotshot!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 September, 2015, 05:08:32 PM
I did wonder how he managed to sign his name with a felt tip pen if he had incorporeal fingers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 05:36:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:45:08 PM
Of course we have collective authority (and power). Any authorities we individually possess (the right to self-defence, the right to eat and drink, the right to speak and think as we please, as examples) can be passed on and delegated to  others. Any authorities we do not individually possess (the right to assault our neighbours, the right to deny other people food and drink, the right to limit another person's speech or thought, as examples) cannot be passed on or delegated to others.

What you have done there is confused your idea of morality with authority and then conflated authority with power. Groups have the authority that groups decide they have that they can then enforce. A group or individuals ability to enforce their rules or social structure is the limit their authority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 September, 2015, 05:39:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 04:45:08 PM
Any authorities we individually possess (the right to self-defence, the right to eat and drink, the right to speak and think as we please, as examples) can be passed on and delegated to  others.

And who gives us that authority?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 10 September, 2015, 05:48:58 PM
I'M WITH VOLCANO BLOCK! I'd certainly vote for/worship it in preference to the bunch of blurts in/out of Stormont.

Incidentally, you do know all volcanoes aren't mountains that can have their 'top blown off' don't you? Though I immediately had an image of an island nation worshipping said deity, which may well be part of a destructive plate boundary system, though obviously we must remember Hawaii as an example of intra plate effusive eruptions whose origin is still a reasonably controversial debate.

I'm not getting much chance to talk geology these days. Did I interrupt something?

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 10 September, 2015, 05:56:28 PM
Burn the heretic!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 10 September, 2015, 05:58:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2015, 03:35:08 PM
No, JPM. I'm a blunt instrument.

Okay.  Yes or no, do you understand that:
(a) nobody in this thread actually thinks that government has some metaphysical existence independent of the people who compose it, and that when they use the word government, it's a synecdochic shorthand for that group of people?
(b) some people genuinely think that some form of government is necessary or desirable?

I'm asking whether you understand what other people actually think, not whether you agree with the sentiments themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 06:52:53 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 10 September, 2015, 04:47:54 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 04:20:49 PM
If I worshipped the Volcano God I'd pray to Him to command His cult to throw this thread in the lava.
A) Where do I sign up.
B) Do you have complementary mugs?

Volcano mugs will be fun. They can get all fizzy at the top.

Yes, we'll have complimentary mugs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 September, 2015, 09:30:40 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 06:52:53 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 10 September, 2015, 04:47:54 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 10 September, 2015, 04:20:49 PM
If I worshipped the Volcano God I'd pray to Him to command His cult to throw this thread in the lava.
A) Where do I sign up.
B) Do you have complementary mugs?

Volcano mugs will be fun. They can get all fizzy at the top.

Yes, we'll have complimentary mugs.

Will the volcano be the god or are we to worship a god who controls the volcano? because I could totally get behind a volcano but I'm not sure I could worship some jerk who has a remote control volcano.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:57:57 AM
"Groups have the authority that groups decide they have that they can then enforce. A group or individuals ability to enforce their rules or social structure is the limit their authority."
.
Good heavens! So, how many people does it take to form a group with the right to enforce their views on people outside that group? 2? 5? 17? And if the only means they have to apply their rules is enforcement, does that mean you believe that might makes right? Those with the biggest stick get the moral right to rule whomever they can, regardless of what the ruled think?
.
There is a probably apocryphal story that Hitler, when told the Pope disagreed with his policies, snapped, 'and how many tanks does the Pope have?' Is that the only yardstick for the right to rule you can come up with? Really?
.
The latest ONS analysis (http://ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Population) shows that the population of the UK is 64,596,800. There are 650 UK MPs.  (http://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/members-faq-page2/) So, 99.998994% of the population are ruled by 0.00100624% of the population (if my maths are correct, which they may not be because I'm shit at it).
.
This forum has 24,295 members. This means that I (as 0.004116% of the forum population) could declare myself the Ruler of the Forum and have over four times more legitimacy than the UK "government." As your ruler, I could then demand you pay me money, to spend as I wish, and to do as I say. If anyone disobeys, I have the right to send my enforcers to your door to take your money and force you to act as I decree. If you still refuse, my enforcers have the right, given to them by me, to hurt you - but if you hurt them, even in self-defence, you'll be in deep shit. I can do this because I'm representing you and assuming your authority. That's how it works, right?
.
DDD - That's exactly the correct question. Does someone have to give you a right (which makes it a privilege, not a right) or are we born with certain rights?
.
JPM - A) yes. I have already said that it's people who call themselves "government" and not "government" that calls itself people. People can exist without a belief in "government" but "government" cannot exist without the belief of people. B) yes, I understand that most people believe some form of "government" is necessary. (I believe that organisation and cooperation are not dependent on "government".)
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2015, 07:22:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:57:57 AM
...I could declare myself the Ruler of the Forum and have over four times more legitimacy than the UK "government." As your ruler, I could then demand you pay me money, to spend as I wish, and to do as I say...

You could so declare, but we (or at least >50% of us) have already elected Thryllseekyr to this role, and chose not to assign him revenue gathering powers (fearing he would use them to buy more weirdstones and bring the Death Winter down on our world).  Does however hint at flaws in both our arguments, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: W. R. Logan on 11 September, 2015, 07:31:33 AM
I feel a coup d'état approaching.
There is only one ruler of the board and that is King Trout.
All praise his royal Fishness!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2015, 07:57:51 AM
Ming is the creator of life on this here board. He was given worthless yet mailable plastic gadgets and produced joyous wonders with them. Praise be Ming!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 08:06:38 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:57:57 AM
"Groups have the authority that groups decide they have that they can then enforce. A group or individuals ability to enforce their rules or social structure is the limit their authority."
.
Good heavens! So, how many people does it take to form a group with the right to enforce their views on people outside that group? 2? 5? 17? And if the only means they have to apply their rules is enforcement, does that mean you believe that might makes right? Those with the biggest stick get the moral right to rule whomever they can, regardless of what the ruled think?


I can't tell if this is a genuine argument or if your just that stupid

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:57:57 AM

There is a probably apocryphal story that Hitler, when told the Pope disagreed with his policies, snapped, 'and how many tanks does the Pope have?' Is that the only yardstick for the right to rule you can come up with? Really?
.
The latest ONS analysis (http://ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Population) shows that the population of the UK is 64,596,800. There are 650 UK MPs.  (http://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/members-faq-page2/) So, 99.998994% of the population are ruled by 0.00100624% of the population (if my maths are correct, which they may not be because I'm shit at it).


Basic error (probably intentional). We are governed by elected representatives. SO your numbers should be every one who has a vote. Not every one who DID vote, every one who Could vote.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:57:57 AM

This forum has 24,295 members. This means that I (as 0.004116% of the forum population) could declare myself the Ruler of the Forum and have over four times more legitimacy than the UK "government." As your ruler, I could then demand you pay me money, to spend as I wish, and to do as I say. If anyone disobeys, I have the right to send my enforcers to your door to take your money and force you to act as I decree. If you still refuse, my enforcers have the right, given to them by me, to hurt you - but if you hurt them, even in self-defence, you'll be in deep shit. I can do this because I'm representing you and assuming your authority. That's how it works, right?


Yes if, for example, you choose not to pay your rent then fight the bailiffs/police when they turn up. that's exactly how that works.

All your arguments are the same. Giant wall of rambling anecdotes filled with a bespoke pseudo religion designed to absolve you of responsibility for some of the bad choices you have made.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:16:55 AM
Heh, of course I would never attempt to replace the Right Honourable Thryllseeker (or anyone else) in any way. But you bring up an important point, Tordels - Thryllseeker may have been elected on the understanding that he wouldn't raise any revenues out of it.
.
When it comes to "real" politics, how many times have leaders been elected on the understanding that they won't do this and will do that but end up doing this and not doing that? Yet even after broken promises, these people are still believed to have authority? Is this not madness on a huge scale?
.
Oh, and before anyone complains (thanks for the email) - I am not comparing anyone to Hitler. That was simply a story to illustrate a point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AM
It's a genuine argument. Do you believe that might makes right? It's a simple enough question.
.
And your basic error is confusing the method of assuming authorities which you and I do not have with the enforcement of authorities which you and I do not have. It doesn't matter whether one assumes these authorities by birthright, coup, declaration or election - the authority of anyone to initiate force over others exists in nobody. Unless, of course, you believe that might makes right. Do you think this?
.
And your arguments are all based on assumptions with no logical basis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 September, 2015, 08:58:23 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark link=topic=28209.msg890527#msg890527 date=14419567

.
And your arguments are all based on assumptions with no logical basis.
/quote]

Yeah, because comparisons with "Volcano Gods" is Logic in its purest form.

This "all helping collective" you believe can be established (without a form of Government) is still reliant on people doing the right thing.

Remember "Black Friday"? People getting trampled to death trying to buy cheap TV's. Imagine that was the last few tins of food on the shelf, what do you think would happen then?

The Human Race has a long way to go before your Utopia can be established.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 September, 2015, 09:02:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AM

.
And your arguments are all based on assumptions with no logical basis.

Yeah, because comparisons with "Volcano Gods" is Logic in its purest form.

This "all helping collective" you believe can be established (without a form of Government) is still reliant on people doing the right thing.

Remember "Black Friday"? People getting trampled to death trying to buy cheap TV's. Imagine that was the last few tins of food on the shelf, what do you think would happen then?

The Human Race has a long way to go before your Utopia can be established.

Cheers

Apologies for the double-post, my phone went haywire
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:17:30 AM
The helping collective already exists. Look around you. For example, no one person could possibly know everything there is to know about organising, running and maintaining a postal service - from making envelopes to printing stamps to maintaining vehicles to knowing the delivery foibles of every delivery address, to name but a few - but countless letters and parcels get delivered all over the world every hour of every day. And nobody has to force anybody into making this work.
.
Not all my arguments come in the form of logic but they are based in logic: Nobody has the authority to coerce another human being into acting against his or her will. Therefore no person can pass on to another authorities he or she does not possess. Therefore "government" has no authority to make demands under threat of violence. Even if 100% of the population vote for a prime minister. 65,000,000 times nothing is still nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2015, 09:23:12 AM
Finding this diagram oddly relevant right now.
(http://cdn.riveraveblues.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/miss-the-point2.jpg?80d84d)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 09:27:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:17:30 AM
Not all my arguments come in the form of logic but they are based in logic: Nobody has the authority to coerce another human being into acting against his or her will. Therefore no person can pass on to another authorities he or she does not possess. Therefore "government" has no authority to make demands under threat of violence. Even if 100% of the population vote for a prime minister. 65,000,000 times nothing is still nothing.

There's no such thing as society, eh? That sounds familiar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:32:13 AM
"Government" and society are not the same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 09:33:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AM
It's a genuine argument. Do you believe that might makes right? It's a simple enough question.
.
And your basic error is confusing the method of assuming authorities which you and I do not have with the enforcement of authorities which you and I do not have. It doesn't matter whether one assumes these authorities by birthright, coup, declaration or election - the authority of anyone to initiate force over others exists in nobody. Unless, of course, you believe that might makes right. Do you think this?
.
And your arguments are all based on assumptions with no logical basis.

no. I never mentioned force. (Force of will force of argument or force of military might) you made an assumption and fell fowl of Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies.

Also excellent use of the 'no you are' defence. followed by cycling back to your same argument that has failed even the most basic of logical test so many times on so many levels.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 September, 2015, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AM
It's a genuine argument. Do you believe that might makes right? It's a simple enough question.

No consensus makes right - and however flawed, democracy is the best method we've come up with for gauging that consensus.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AMno one person could possibly know everything there is to know about organising, running and maintaining a postal service - from making envelopes to printing stamps to maintaining vehicles to knowing the delivery foibles of every delivery address, to name but a few - but countless letters and parcels get delivered all over the world every hour of every day. And nobody has to force anybody into making this work.

Good example - to use this service we must all accept certain conditions - the post is collected at certain times and delivered at certain times, you have to put a stamp on it, the cost of which I have no control over. I can't just waylay a postie and demand he take my letter to someone, I have to play by the rules of the system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 11 September, 2015, 09:58:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:17:30 AM
The helping collective already exists. Look around you. For example, no one person could possibly know everything there is to know about organising, running and maintaining a postal service - from making envelopes to printing stamps to maintaining vehicles to knowing the delivery foibles of every delivery address, to name but a few - but countless letters and parcels get delivered all over the world every hour of every day. And nobody has to force anybody into making this work.
There's a fairly large contradiction in that at least part of the security and reliability of this service comes from the relatively serious legal sanctions for interfering with the mail. Or, to put it in your terms, the exercise of unwarranted force by an agency with no authorisation or basis for doing so.

And that's just if you don't subscribe to the broader notion that we live in a society which effectively coerces us all into undertaking jobs which we don't really want or need to...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:04:14 AM
Steve, if you'd been following my argument you'd know that it's the "government's" assumed right to use coercive force to make people do as they say and give them money that's at the root of its illegitimacy. If it's okay to force people to act against their will (the people who voted for the losers or didn't vote at all) then "government" is legitimate. If it isn't, it's not. This is not a difficult argument to grasp, is it?
.
Would anyone advise their children, on their first day at school, to form a gang in order to push the other kids around and steal their dinner money, and to call themselves "government" to legitimise their bullying and theft?
.
It was consensus that killed millions of Jews, Gypsies and other groups in 1930s and 40s Germany. Consensus is no guarantee of rightness.
.
The Post Office doesn't send uniformed goons 'round to hurt you if you don't want to use it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 11 September, 2015, 10:11:37 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:04:14 AM
The Post Office doesn't send uniformed goons 'round to hurt you if you don't want to use it.
But what right does it have to expect the state to stop me from opening someone else's letter if I want to and how is that not the exercise of force by your definition?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 10:15:07 AM
And he busts out another Nazi analogy and another 'if this then that' anecdote in an attempt at an emotional appeal.   


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2015, 10:21:53 AM
The whole Nazi analogue in your last post is bullshit anyway, Sharky. Your forgetting that Germany was in deep shit at the time and people where naturally looking for someone to blame. That doesn't make it right, but the average Brit these day's is to lethargic to give a toss and most of the population is incredibly left and open minded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 September, 2015, 10:21:53 AM
The whole Nazi analogue in your last post is bullshit anyway, Sharky. Your forgetting that Germany was in deep shit at the time and people where naturally looking for someone to blame. That doesn't make it right, but the average Brit these day's is to lethargic to give a toss and most of the population is incredibly left and open minded.

Hawkmonger you have fallen into the trap of being side-tracked. Shark likes to argue that a thing is bad thus all things he can connect to that thing are bad. So when arguing that governments are bad/illegitimate he will avoid the concept of government as the rest of us understand it and instead propose an anecdotal example of a bad government and say 'so if you support the [insert item] then you support this. often attached to an emotional appeal and a question such as. so if you support this concept you support bullying in schools, do you support bullying in schools?'

by changing the specifics from the idea of collective responsibility to Nazii Germanys use of collective responsibility the entire conisation shifts down an irrelevant cul de sac
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 September, 2015, 11:13:40 AM
Which is why it's a bullshit example and can thus be discarded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 September, 2015, 11:17:46 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 September, 2015, 10:21:53 AM
and most of the population is incredibly left and open minded.
Erm ...who just voted David Cameron and his nasty Party into power? Not a bunch of leftists I hope? The Guardian, the Mirror and other left of centre papers sell about 1.5 million copies combined but the Daily Mail, Sun etc, right and right of centre papers sell over 5 million in combined sales. That strikes me as indicating a fairly right wing trend in the Country one that has been established over many decades. Upsetting maybe but that's reality. Englishmen in particular dislike large Governments and seem to vote continuously for Parties that promise smaller ones hence the Tory hegemony. I blame Cromwell !
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 11:21:17 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 September, 2015, 09:45:49 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 08:31:48 AM
It's a genuine argument. Do you believe that might makes right? It's a simple enough question.

No consensus makes right - and however flawed, democracy is the best method we've come up with for gauging that consensus.


I think this is really the nub of the issue.  Most people recognise that there will be conflicts between the rights of an individual and the good of the collective, and where exactly you draw the line between them is the basis for most political discourse.  This approach acknowledges that even though the harm of a given action might not be evident on an individual level, its effects on aggregate can be deleterious to society: sequestration of wealth necessitating taxation, for example, or car emission standards and punishments for breaking them.

Shark doesn't seem to recognise any circumstances whatsoever in which the collective can truncate the rights of individuals for the good of the whole.  It's such an extreme position that I come across as some kind of Stalinist when I respond to him.  I think it's basically a childish, antisocial philosophy, that most people grow out of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 11:37:24 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:32:13 AM
"Government" and society are not the same thing.

Well, that's perfectly true, but you rejected the right of a democratic society to elect a government on the basis it had no authority to do so. This is actually quite a right-wing position, more similar to the US  libertarians than to any progressive movement that I am aware of. This is possibly why I am reminded of Thatcherism by some of the things you say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
Hi Jimmy Baker's Assistant, your wall of text including random parables and implications of complicity/tacit approval of abuse will be along shortly...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2015, 01:25:27 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 September, 2015, 11:17:46 AMThe Guardian, the Mirror and other left of centre papers

Neither the Mirror nor the Guardian are left-leaning papers.  That is simply the PR spin they use to differentiate themselves from the other conservative dailies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 01:30:54 PM
My wall of text will be along in a few hours, when I get back from work! (I bet you can't wait, lol.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 11 September, 2015, 02:45:41 PM
Any Yorkshiremen here? Do you hated us? As PM said this;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34222801 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34222801)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Third Estate Ned on 11 September, 2015, 03:39:41 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 11 September, 2015, 02:45:41 PM
Any Yorkshiremen here? Do you hated us? As PM said this;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34222801 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34222801)

Perhaps it's just a generalisation he made after spending time with William Hague. Actually, I'm from Yorkshire and I hate him too, so there's some truth in it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 September, 2015, 05:37:53 PM
I hate anyone who doesn't worship the volcano god.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 06:16:30 PM
There seems to be no argument from anyone against the idea that one person has no right to force another person to act against their will. It's only when we apply the same logic to a group of people acting in the name of "government" that some form of mysterious alchemy occurs. Might does not make right unless, it seems, a government claims it to be so. Nobody seems to know how the population passes on rights it doesn't have to a tiny subset of deluded and self-serving individuals but are happy that it does.
.
Instead we get a lot of frothing about it being for our own good, it's democracy, and how nothing would work without "government." If this is the case, why don't we put the buses, trains and taxis under "government" control? Let it run the trains and lorries and aircraft and ships as well. Put it in charge of all the farms and shops, all the factories and cinemas. All the drains and ditches and cesspits. All the churches, mosques and synagogues. Give it sole control of the courts, the police and the armed forces. Let it manage all the football clubs, rugby teams and cyclists. Let it be in charge of everything - heck, let's even give ourselves to it because nothing, not even our own families or our own selves, can run properly without the direct or implied threat of violence.
.
Never mind the fact that everything, including departments and other bodies created in the name of "government," are all run by people who would still be perfectly capable of running the same things without "government." Never mind that children have been educated for thousands of years without "governments." Never mind that caring for the sick, the dispossessed and the hungry has been the province of human charity for millennia before "governments" monopolised welfare. Never mind that inventors have been inventing, painters painting, sculptors sculpting and writers writing for all recorded and prehistoric history without "governments" telling them what to invent, paint, sculpt or write. Without "government," there would be no creativity.
.
Without "government" standing over them with a big stick, scientists wouldn't see the worth in curing cancer, exploring the cosmos or researching new materials. Without "government" standing over them, teachers would not see the need to teach, nurses would not see the need to nurse and firefighters would not see the need to stop buildings burning down. No, without "government" forcing people to do things, nothing would get done or, if it was done, it would be done in a dangerous and half-arsed way.
.
Nobody would pay taxes without "government" to force them - because taxes are such a self-evidently useful and magnificent thing that only coercion can extract them. Voluntary taxes or fees for specific services just wouldn't work because nobody wants to pay for anything.
.
Only "government" can oversee banking, because without oversight there might occur the most catastrophic banking crisis in human history, bringing entire countries to their collective knees whilst transferring trillions of dollars/pounds/euros to the culprits and ensuring that not one of them is held accountable or goes to jail.
.
Without "government" in charge, people wouldn't be able to marry or drive or watch television. All trade, industry and innovation would cease. Law and order would cease to have any meaning whatsoever. Society would collapse under the weight of its own incredible complexity. Apocalypse!
.
Well, I think that's all bollocks.
.
I think - I know - we can do better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 06:30:03 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
Hi Jimmy Baker's Assistant, your wall of text including random parables and implications of complicity/tacit approval of abuse will be along shortly...

Well indeed that's exactly what happened.

I know there's no point in arguing, though, and I look forward to the Labour leadership result tomorrow, at which point the topic of this thread might revert back to politics!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 06:36:46 PM
I know before I even start on this that answering anything you say point-by-point will just generate an even longer stream of even more fractally wrong gobbledygook. I guess I'm a masochist.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 06:16:30 PM
There seems to be no argument from anyone against the idea that one person has no right to force another person to act against their will.

Yes they do.  You said it yourself in your comments about a police force, whose sole purpose is to curtail the actions of another.  Wanting a state and a government just extends that principle to forcing people to act against their will when what they want to do would harm the collective.

Quote
Never mind the fact that everything, including departments and other bodies created in the name of "government," are all run by people who would still be perfectly capable of running the same things without "government." Never mind that children have been educated for thousands of years without "governments." Never mind that caring for the sick, the dispossessed and the hungry has been the province of human charity for millennia before "governments" monopolised welfare. Never mind that inventors have been inventing, painters painting, sculptors sculpting and writers writing for all recorded and prehistoric history without "governments" telling them what to invent, paint, sculpt or write. Without "government," there would be no creativity.

Yeah, that's what lolberts like you want us to revert to.  Relying on the patronising munificence of charity for healthcare and education.  You obviously know that the majority of children throughout human history weren't given any education whatsoever, and what they did get was utter shit, before state intervention.  Ditto healthcare.  You know this- you must- but you still claim the opposite to defend the idea of your dream plutocratic hell-hole.


Quote
Without "government" standing over them with a big stick, scientists wouldn't see the worth in curing cancer, exploring the cosmos or researching new materials. Without "government" standing over them, teachers would not see the need to teach, nurses would not see the need to nurse and firefighters would not see the need to stop buildings burning down. No, without "government" forcing people to do things, nothing would get done or, if it was done, it would be done in a dangerous and half-arsed way.
.
Nobody would pay taxes without "government" to force them - because taxes are such a self-evidently useful and magnificent thing that only coercion can extract them. Voluntary taxes or fees for specific services just wouldn't work because nobody wants to pay for anything.

Yeah, yeah, zero understanding of human psychology.  As always with you.  No concept of your own or other people's intellectual limitations.

Quote
Only "government" can oversee banking, because without oversight there might occur the most catastrophic banking crisis in human history, bringing entire countries to their collective knees whilst transferring trillions of dollars/pounds/euros to the culprits and ensuring that not one of them is held accountable or goes to jail.

Yep, the answer to the shameful lack of state oversight of the banking industry is no state oversight at all.

Quote
Well, I think that's all bollocks.
.
I think - I know - we can do better.

No you don't.  Your Randian utopia would be a living hell in which people like you would be the first casualty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 06:38:28 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 06:30:03 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
Hi Jimmy Baker's Assistant, your wall of text including random parables and implications of complicity/tacit approval of abuse will be along shortly...

Well indeed that's exactly what happened.

I know there's no point in arguing, though, and I look forward to the Labour leadership result tomorrow, at which point the topic of this thread might revert back to politics!

God damn it, I bit.  Fucking siwoti syndrome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 06:43:35 PM
You do know the difference between collectivism (Ayn Rand's view) and individualism (my view) don't you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2015, 06:54:09 PM
This is a good robust exchange, and I'm pleased to see that Sharky is bloodied but unbowed beneath the writhing dogpile (even as I'm dismayed by some of his arguments), but I again have to comment on the savage eloquence of JPMaybe's writing - "fractally wrong gobbledygook", damn that's a cool phrase. This thread brings out the best in you, JPM!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:07:29 PM
It's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself. Claiming that the role of the police is to curtail the actions of others without discriminating between curtailing lawful and unlawful actions is simply moronic. The role of the police is to protect people from those who would do them harm. As I said earlier, one right everyone does have is the right to self-defence, either individually or collectively. As we do have this right, we can delegate it to the police.
.
He also thinks that removing "government" control from education and healthcare constitutes reversion - as if it means throwing out every advance made in the last hundred years. It's just shallow rubbish designed to hide his inability to find any deeper arguments against my position or in favour of his own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:07:40 PM
It's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself. Claiming that the role of the police is to curtail the actions of others without discriminating between curtailing lawful and unlawful actions is simply moronic. The role of the police is to protect people from those who would do them harm. As I said earlier, one right everyone does have is the right to self-defence, either individually or collectively. As we do have this right, we can delegate it to the police.
.
He also thinks that removing "government" control from education and healthcare constitutes reversion - as if it means throwing out every advance made in the last hundred years. It's just shallow rubbish designed to hide his inability to find any deeper arguments against my position or in favour of his own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:07:50 PM
It's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself. Claiming that the role of the police is to curtail the actions of others without discriminating between curtailing lawful and unlawful actions is simply moronic. The role of the police is to protect people from those who would do them harm. As I said earlier, one right everyone does have is the right to self-defence, either individually or collectively. As we do have this right, we can delegate it to the police.
.
He also thinks that removing "government" control from education and healthcare constitutes reversion - as if it means throwing out every advance made in the last hundred years. It's just shallow rubbish designed to hide his inability to find any deeper arguments against my position or in favour of his own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 11 September, 2015, 07:10:15 PM
Hey, do you think it's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:17:31 PM
Shit! Triple post, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 07:18:20 PM
Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 11 September, 2015, 07:10:15 PM
Hey, do you think it's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself?

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:20:54 PM
Heh, I know - somehow managing a triple post when accusing someone else of idiocy! Don't I feel a right berk about now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 07:22:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 06:43:35 PM
You do know the difference between collectivism (Ayn Rand's view) and individualism (my view) don't you?

...

..sure, do you want to tell me about Martin Luther King's activism for the KKK as well?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:26:50 PM
Martin Luther King was a KKK activist? I hadn't heard that - do tell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 07:34:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:07:50 PM
It's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself. Claiming that the role of the police is to curtail the actions of others without discriminating between curtailing lawful and unlawful actions is simply moronic. The role of the police is to protect people from those who would do them harm. As I said earlier, one right everyone does have is the right to self-defence, either individually or collectively. As we do have this right, we can delegate it to the police.

Yeah, unlawful stuff like not paying your taxes, exercising the rights of the population as a whole to defend itself against harmful actions, like runaway wealth inequality, lax food safety, air pollution ad infinitum.   Please, without reference to your inanely sophomoric conception of what constitutes "law", demonstrate this right doesn't exist.  Given that any argument over rights will at some point involve subjective appeal to opinion, I'll note that every single political theorist ever except pure anarchists recognise the right of society as a whole to curtail individual actions when the sum of those actions would be harmful.

Quote
He also thinks that removing "government" control from education and healthcare constitutes reversion - as if it means throwing out every advance made in the last hundred years. It's just shallow rubbish designed to hide his inability to find any deeper arguments against my position or in favour of his own.

So intervention of the state, was, in fact, beneficial, and your argument was pure bullshit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 07:36:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 07:26:50 PM
Martin Luther King was a KKK activist? I hadn't heard that - do tell.

I... just... you genuinely disquiet me.  Your post: "You do know the difference between collectivism (Ayn Rand's view) and individualism (my view) don't you?".  Please tell me some more about Ayn Rand's advocacy of collectivism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 September, 2015, 07:38:47 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 11 September, 2015, 05:37:53 PM
I hate anyone who doesn't worship the volcano god.

Per igneous ad victoria brother.

You know what the key issue I have with much of the Sharky view? It's as if no one has ever thought about the nature and role of government and come to their own conclusions as to how they deal with it. It sometimes reminds me of people who reckon because they just thought of something inside their own head, it must be a new idea.

I tangentially agree with some of the points of principal, but really feel that overall, rampant individualism isn't my cuppa synthi-caff.

There's sort of no gubmint in Norn Iron Sharky - you might like it!



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 08:08:30 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 September, 2015, 06:30:03 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
Hi Jimmy Baker's Assistant, your wall of text including random parables and implications of complicity/tacit approval of abuse will be along shortly...

Well indeed that's exactly what happened.

I know there's no point in arguing, though, and I look forward to the Labour leadership result tomorrow, at which point the topic of this thread might revert back to politics!

Without the 598 preceding pages I may have assumed irony from the verbose one.

Quote from: locustsofdeath! on 11 September, 2015, 07:10:15 PM
Hey, do you think it's just a pity he relies on idiocy himself?

This made me laugh out loud.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 September, 2015, 08:28:56 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 11 September, 2015, 06:54:09 PM
This is a good robust exchange, and I'm pleased to see that Sharky is bloodied but unbowed beneath the writhing dogpile (even as I'm dismayed by some of his arguments), but I again have to comment on the savage eloquence of JPMaybe's writing - "fractally wrong gobbledygook", damn that's a cool phrase. This thread brings out the best in you, JPM!

I also missed your insightful meta-commentry on other boarders TB which helps me navigate these here thread minefields.


DON'T LEAVE EVER AGAIN >:( >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:04:15 PM
JPM - there are more ways to discourage and punish illegal behaviour than violence. I can't answer your point on tax because your admonition that I shouldn't go into the difference between illegal and unlawful precludes it; also, you're asking me to apply solutions to any problems that might arise with a proposed voluntary or other taxation or fee system to an existing compulsory system. At present, furthermore, most if not all taxes go towards paying off illusory debts, and I don't think you want me to go into that again here. Suffice to say, "government" and the current banking system are a symbiotic cancer that both need dealing with.
.
So, if you'll forgive me, I'll give a couple of examples. Firstly, individuals or groups of criminals - let's say muggers, for argument's sake. The muggers use violence or threats of violence to steal property. This is a direct violation of the law against causing harm to others and so the victim's right of self defence, by violence if necessary, kicks in. The police, then, having been delegated the right to defend the victims, using violence if necessary, can use appropriate force against the muggers to stop them and bring them to whatever appropriate justice society deems fit. Although I am uncomfortable with the idea, which seems to stretch the meaning of self defence, this may include incarceration. The question of punishment in an idividualist anarchic society is a difficult one - but that's true of any society. No whipping, amputation or execution, though, I'm certain of that. As human beings are social animals, in a small community being 'sent to Coventry' is a good punishment for lesser crimes. Anyone who has experienced that, and I have (a few times with good reason and once or twice in error), knows how miserable a punishment that can be. It's not a fitting punishment for everything, though, and not really practicable in larger population centres.
.
Runaway wealth inequality is not exactly a crime, as I see it, but a consequence of our current monetary system so I'll skip over that as well.
.
Lax food safety and air pollution can be dealt with in several ways. Firstly, there is the idea of a number of arbitrated databases. In this idea, businesses pay a fee to a private company to be added to a databse, for restaurants as an example. If customers, employees or suppliers have a complaint against a restaurant on the database they pay a fee for a specialist arbitrator to consider the evidence and make a ruling. If the restaurant is found to be in the wrong and makes the reparations ordered by the arbitrator, that is kept private in the database. If the restaurant refuses to put things right, that is recorded in the publicly accessible portion of the database or even made public in the media for more serious infractions. For a small fee, or even no fee, anyone can consult the database to study the arbitrated record of the restaurant to see if it is worth dealing with, working for or patronising or not. For serial offenders, the punishment is to naturally go out of business. Of course, there would be a great many specialised arbitrated databases covering every form of business and service and higher level databases to arbitrate the databases themselves - it'll also give all those currently despised lawyers something useful to do!
.
Large corporations, or even small businesses, are also things and not people. Because of this, businesses which act badly can be 'executed,' as it were. They can be confiscated and passed on to more reputable businesses in the same line or stripped apart and given away or sold off. The business owners are punished not by violence but by a form of business excommunication and the assets of the "executed" business are recycled in a way that benefits society.
.
Your last point - no. Whilst I admit that a few things may have been improved over the years by the involvement of "government," most advances came about in spite of or independent of it. "Government," for example, did not invent the internet, the mobile 'phone or heart transplants.
.
I'll let you do your own research on the horrid Ayn Rand and her advocacy of collectivism. I read her books The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged and found them to be very depressing from a humanitarian point of view. Individuals don't seem to matter in her view, as if we're all just fungible cogs in an unfeeling machine. She did, however, write one line I loved and have used myself: "I refuse to engage in an argument whose ultimate expression is the barrel of a gun."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2015, 09:27:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:04:15 PM
"Government," for example, did not invent the internet

ARPANET was commissioned and funded by the US government.  Tim Berners Lee worked for CERN, funded by more than 20 governments. All that money extracted with menaces led directly to this very medium.

Not picking on you Sharky, but most of the significant advances of the past 9,000 years have in some way been enabled by a redistributive authority. Most of the bad shite too, of course, but seeing as things are getting better in aggregate we'll call that a win. I'm all for you view of personal freedom from coercion, but I feel sure it is best achieved with some form of collectively endorsed and empowered adminstration running in the background.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 11 September, 2015, 09:40:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:04:15 PM
I'll let you do your own research on the horrid Ayn Rand and her advocacy of collectivism.

Um...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO3p1VHMcI0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO3p1VHMcI0)

...and...

http://fare.tunes.org/liberty/library/toptt.html (http://fare.tunes.org/liberty/library/toptt.html)

Quote from: Ayn Rand in 1944Collectivism is not the ``New Order of Tomorrow.´´ It is the order of a very dark yesterday. But there is a New Order of Tomorrow. It belongs to Individual Man — the only creator of any tomorrows humanity has ever been granted.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:47:50 PM
Mikey, I don't pretend these are my ideas - they most assuredly aren't. I may put my own spin on some of them but that's all I claim.
.
Like many people, I became disillusioned with the current state of politics and searched for solutions in the ideas of others. I've read lots of stuff that didn't help much; from Ayn Rand to Thoreau and Plato to Socrates. (This sounds more impressive than it is because most of it either went over my head or bored me to tears.)
.
Then I discovered the writings of people like Larken Rose, Lysander Spooner, Mikhail Bakunin and Etienne de la Boetie and the idea that "government" itself, or rather the blind faith in it, is the core problem started to make complete sense to me. I understand that it doesn't make sense to everyone, or even most people, but it does to me. Maybe I'm pissing in the wind talking about the idea here but, what the Hell? It's my piss.
.
If anyone's interested (and you probably aren't), the latest thing I read was an excellent essay by Leonard E. Read entitled, I, Pencil. (http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/112). It's a very good piece explaining how incredibly complex the world is, and how irrelevant "government" is the midst of that complexity, by concentrating on seemingly the most simple of objects: a pencil.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:01:51 PM
Ha! So I obviously read Rand's books condemning collectivism from the wrong perspective. I told you a lot of this stuff went over my head. Sometimes, it's good to be wrong. Thanks, M.I.K. :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:09:48 PM
Sorry, Tordels, but the ends don't justify the means. If a woman is raped and a child ensues who grows up to cure cancer, the cancer cure does not legitimise the initial rape. Similarly, stealing money to fund what eventually becomes the internet does not legitimise the theft, even though the internet is brilliant.
.
Luckily, we now have things like crowd-funding, which is a much more morally acceptable way to finance new inventions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 September, 2015, 10:11:28 PM
My point was that you argue against others as if they are not familiar with the ideas. I'll maintain that you sometimes espouse the notion that all ideas are equally valid if someone has thought them up. They're not.

I shouldn't drink early.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:19:39 PM
Well, at least you can be thankful I haven't gone off on one based on today's date.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2015, 10:25:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:09:48 PM
Sorry, Tordels, but the ends don't justify the means. If a woman is raped and a child ensues who grows up to cure cancer, the cancer cure does not legitimise the initial rape. Similarly, stealing money to fund what eventually becomes the internet does not legitimise the theft, even though the internet is brilliant.
.
Luckily, we now have things like crowd-funding, which is a much more morally acceptable way to finance new inventions.

I was responding to your assertion that government didn't invent the internet. My point was that governments collected, directed and distributed funding that enabled it to be invented. My lesser point was one that I've made any number of times: the overall lot of humanity has objectively improved in tandem with the rise of democratic government. A positive correlation is tempting.

Crowd funding is great, but II really doubt enough people care about my essential living expenses to kick in to cover them  - luckily when I was unemployed the state-enforced tax system didn't require me to offer enticing stretch goals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 10:29:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:04:15 PM
most advances came about in spite of or independent of it. "Government," for example, did not invent the internet, the mobile 'phone or heart transplants.

Quote from: Tordelback on 11 September, 2015, 09:27:13 PM


ARPANET was commissioned and funded by the US government.  Tim Berners Lee worked for CERN, funded by more than 20 governments. All that money extracted with menaces led directly to this very medium.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:09:48 PM
Sorry, Tordels, but the ends don't justify the means.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 10:49:36 PM
I'd suggest that the overall levels of war have also increased in tandem with governments. Also levels of debt.
.
If taxes were voluntary and taxpayers could specify what their money was spent on, people like me (and I assume you as well) would direct our funds to social necessities, scientific research and the like and not weaponry, war or quantative easing. So, in my view, voluntary taxation would be just as likely, if not moreso, to lead to breakthroughs like the internet and heart transplants.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 11 September, 2015, 11:27:43 PM
God damn it, I just can't help myself.  I can't believe you tap this twaddle out on a blackberry.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2015, 09:04:15 PM
JPM - there are more ways to discourage and punish illegal behaviour than violence. I can't answer your point on tax because your admonition that I shouldn't go into the difference between illegal and unlawful precludes it

No, it's because you can't; your conception of both those things, and your constant, cretinous equation of taxation with theft, is utterly childish and simplistic, as has been pointed out to you repeatedly in this thread, by trained solicitors amongst others. 

Quote
...also, you're asking me to apply solutions to any problems that might arise with a proposed voluntary or other taxation or fee system to an existing compulsory system. At present, furthermore, most if not all taxes go towards paying off illusory debts, and I don't think you want me to go into that again here. Suffice to say, "government" and the current banking system are a symbiotic cancer that both need dealing with.

Naked assertion, no evidence, magical let's print money fantasising- yeah, please don't go into that one.

Quote
So, if you'll forgive me, I'll give a couple of examples. Firstly, individuals or groups of criminals - let's say muggers, for argument's sake. The muggers use violence or threats of violence to steal property. This is a direct violation of the law against causing harm to others and so the victim's right of self defence, by violence if necessary, kicks in. The police, then, having been delegated the right to defend the victims, using violence if necessary, can use appropriate force against the muggers to stop them and bring them to whatever appropriate justice society deems fit. Although I am uncomfortable with the idea, which seems to stretch the meaning of self defence, this may include incarceration. The question of punishment in an idividualist anarchic society is a difficult one - but that's true of any society. No whipping, amputation or execution, though, I'm certain of that. As human beings are social animals, in a small community being 'sent to Coventry' is a good punishment for lesser crimes. Anyone who has experienced that, and I have (a few times with good reason and once or twice in error), knows how miserable a punishment that can be. It's not a fitting punishment for everything, though, and not really practicable in larger population centres.

Yet again, you're completely ignoring the very basic concept of individual actions that appear harmless aggregating to cause harm to society as a whole.  Your society of lolbert Übermenschen has absolutely no way of dealing with it.

Quote
Runaway wealth inequality is not exactly a crime, as I see it, but a consequence of our current monetary system so I'll skip over that as well.

No, it's not a crime.  That's the entire point that you keep ignoring- a given behaviour might not be criminal but society still might need to curtail it.  And it would be an even greater property of your anarcho-capitalist system.  No wealth redistribution at all. 

...and please save yourself the trouble of typing the inevitable, evidence free, economically illiterate "but social money with no state to back it up that people will all magically agree to cos they're all so nice and only GUVAMENT is capable of avarice!" reply.

Quote
Lax food safety and air pollution can be dealt with in several ways. Firstly, there is the idea of a number of arbitrated databases. In this idea, businesses pay a fee to a private company to be added to a databse, for restaurants as an example. If customers, employees or suppliers have a complaint against a restaurant on the database they pay a fee for a specialist arbitrator to consider the evidence and make a ruling. If the restaurant is found to be in the wrong and makes the reparations ordered by the arbitrator, that is kept private in the database. If the restaurant refuses to put things right, that is recorded in the publicly accessible portion of the database or even made public in the media for more serious infractions. For a small fee, or even no fee, anyone can consult the database to study the arbitrated record of the restaurant to see if it is worth dealing with, working for or patronising or not. For serial offenders, the punishment is to naturally go out of business. Of course, there would be a great many specialised arbitrated databases covering every form of business and service and higher level databases to arbitrate the databases themselves - it'll also give all those currently despised lawyers something useful to do!

Drivel.  Capitalist wank-fantasy.  Fuck you if you die of botulism cos this system is completely reactive, hey at least somebody who just gets really sick might sue on your behalf.  And you're a bureaucracy hater who's making me consult a database if I don't want salmonella from my lunchtime burger.

Quote
Large corporations, or even small businesses, are also things and not people. Because of this, businesses which act badly can be 'executed,' as it were. They can be confiscated and passed on to more reputable businesses in the same line or stripped apart and given away or sold off. The business owners are punished not by violence but by a form of business excommunication and the assets of the "executed" business are recycled in a way that benefits society.

Confiscated by whom?

Quote
Your last point - no. Whilst I admit that a few things may have been improved over the years by the involvement of "government," most advances came about in spite of or independent of it. "Government," for example, did not invent the internet, the mobile 'phone or heart transplants.

Drivel.  Every single one of those used government funding.  You've also just gutted every single avenue of research or culture that doesn't have an immediate profit incentive, cos your non-nation of dickhead hagglers isn't going to kick in for, say, the particle physics research they don't understand or care about.


Quote
I'll let you do your own research on the horrid Ayn Rand and her advocacy of collectivism. I read her books The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged and found them to be very depressing from a humanitarian point of view. Individuals don't seem to matter in her view, as if we're all just fungible cogs in an unfeeling machine. She did, however, write one line I loved and have used myself: "I refuse to engage in an argument whose ultimate expression is the barrel of a gun."

Bwahahahaha, yeah you've already eaten your humble pie on this one, but still.  For somebody else this might be an egregiously dumb thing to say, but for you I doubt it'd crack the top twenty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 September, 2015, 11:54:40 PM
JPMaybe I always enjoy your responses so TLS's claptrap. I particularly enjoyed his plan to replace heath and food safety with checkatrade.com

you can't argue with some one who thinks this is an argument or contains any logic

TLS; 'governments haven't had anything to do with scientific progress [gives examples]'

person with adult reasoning skills; 'Yes they have in fact your examples were government funded (gives verifiable information)'

TLS; 'well tax funded research is just Like rape babies!'

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 07:31:03 AM
Ah, JPM, you do make me sad. You have nothing to offer but vitriol with glitter in it. You think the world is perfect as it is and there's no need to change any of it, no point even trying, no point even thinking about it. You have zero faith in or trust of humanity and think the natural state of mankind is enslavement to others, living on our knees - and you're so consumed by your own anger that you can't even conceive of a world beyond one where everyone buttfucks everyone else for whatever they can get. You offer no solutions beyond "more of the same please, Master." I pity you, really. No, that's not entirely true. I pity the world that has people like you in it. People who refuse to turn their not inconsiderable intellects towards improving the world and instead choose to pour eloquent shit all over it and any ideas for improvement.
.
I also can't argue with you, Steve. Didn't we have a discussion on Facebook where you flat out refused to accept that money is created out of nothing despite the fact that I linked to a Bank of England document explaining that this is exactly what happens? Instead of admitting that you were wrong and thinking about the implications of this new information you simply ended the conversation. (Unless that wasn't you I was conversing with on Facebook, my memory's not 100% on that, in which case I apologise unreservedly.) Your vitriol is less powerful than JPMs and has no glitter in it but still you're cut from the same cloth.
.
You both continually and wilfully ignore my point that it's not the systems, organisations and institutions put into place (yes, sometimes by "government" - gasp!) that are the problem - indeed, many of them are extremely useful to society as a whole - but that the "government" assumes the right to bully and threaten anyone it chooses and to declare that its word is Law, even if you don't agree with it either intellectually or morally. You assume that people only act in a decent way or do good and useful things because they are forced to do so by morally ambiguous politicians. You mistake rulers for representatives and are seemingly glad to do so. Our country is ruled by bullies who chuck the occasional crumb at you and, like hungry dogs, you sit drooling, gazing up fixedly at the table waiting for the next crumb to be tossed your way. The concept of sawing the legs off the table doesn't even occur.
.
So, you two wait for your political saviour to come along - someone who's going to improve the world for you so that you don't have to do anything yourselves. Someone who'll toss you more or bigger crumbs. One day he'll come, just like Jesus, to save you - just keep on voting every four or five years like fruit machine addicts waiting for the jackpot to come up and ignore all the bastardry and human wreckage strewn in the wake of "government." You can ignore all that because its not your fault, is it? You just vote, do your civic duty, it isn't your fault that the rich are getting richer at your expense, that sanctioned benefits claimants are committing suicide or that British weapons are blasting innocents in Foreignistan into little pieces. Not your fault at all.
.
No, the world's good enough as it is and there's no need to change course. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 September, 2015, 07:48:34 AM
The Shark's ability to duel largely politely with a dozen opponents at once while maintaining a hearty demeanour has to offset some kettle logic deficencies. It's very easy to trot out fallacies while outgunned and under pressure, less easy to stay amiable while doing it.

The fact that the root of all his cogitatin' appears to be a belief that individuals are basically good, and can co-operate at various scales to mutual advantage while retaining agency and personal responsibility,  whereas distant groups that take on roles of policy and enforcement can be cruelly self-interested and self-sustaining at the expense of those they claim to act for, is hardly a bad starting point either.

Somewhere along the way however we part company, probably at the point where it's asserted that because governments do bad things, all government is bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 September, 2015, 07:58:54 AM
I think the problem most people are having is your (Shark) steadfast refusal to acknowledge another's point of view. And yes, I understand you could turn that around and say the same about others.

You seem to believe that without 'Government' the majority of people will help one another in a completely altruistic manner. This simply is not the case. There will always be those that want to force their opinions/way of life onto others.

A person grows some food and wishes to trade. You have a service you can offer in exchange for some food. You offer your service and are told "no, that's not enough. I want more!" What do you do then? Starve, that's what!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 September, 2015, 08:01:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 07:31:03 AMYou think the world is perfect  ....You have zero faith in or trust of humanity ..... and you're so consumed by your own anger...

Aha ... the old "I can't argue with what you actually say, so I'll tell you what you're saying and argue against that instead."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 12 September, 2015, 08:02:21 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 12 September, 2015, 07:48:34 AM
The Shark's ability to duel largely politely with a dozen opponents at once while maintaining a hearty demeanour has to offset some kettle logic deficencies. It's very easy to trot out fallacies while undermanned and under pressure, less easy to stay amiable while doing it.

This is true. He's also a pretty good comics writer, whilst we're discussing Shark's virtues.

However, his views are so far away from anything that might be adopted collectively in the UK that the only power they have is to hurt him when he tries to put them unilaterally into to practice. Which they have done, as historians of this thread will be only too aware. I think a considerable portion of the disagreement he attracts his down to genuine concern for his wellbeing, rather than any particular mass-appetite to trot the same arguments out again and again.

Shark, I shall ends with an appeal. If we can't change your mind, then please just allow self-interest to override your convictions a little bit more. At least that way you can be wrong in comfort!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 September, 2015, 08:07:48 AM
Can't argue with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 08:10:31 AM
I wouldn't say that all governments are bad. As I assert, "government" doesn't actually exist - it's an artificial construct and therefore can be neither good nor bad. As always, it's the bad people who do bad things in the name of "government" who do the most harm. Even good intentions can turn bad when backed up by violence.
.
It's the same with our social systems. Hospitals are obviously good things but, when someone in the name of "government" cuts a hospital's budget, bad things can happen in them - such as a lack of staff or equipment leading to people dying on trolleys in corridors.
.
We stopped believing that emperors were aspects of God on Earth, then we stopped believing in the Divine Right of Kings. As our societies evolve, we must at some point stop believing in the Implied Right of Governments as well.
.
We can still have the 650 people down in Westminster if we want them, just remove from them the right to initiate violence and turn them truly into what they presently claim to be - representatives who organise our public services.
.
In my view, "government" often gets confused with organisation and cooperation when they are not the same things at all.
.
And I'm sorry for the name-calling. I feel bad about that now and wish I'd been more level-headed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 08:39:30 AM
Kev, I think there is truth in what you say. As I've said before, society is not going to change overnight. It must evolve at its own pace. The ideas I put out aren't meant to be implemented tomorrow or on some specific date but to be considered and worked towards.
.
I also believe that most people are at least a little altruistic. The problem at the moment is that Draconian legislation and a horrendous monetary system are forcing all of us to act, in at least some ways, against our own consciences. We are forced into doing things we don't want to do and prevented from doing things we do want to do. How many of us would like to tip up a few bob to help this person or support that group but just can't afford it?
.
And yes, there will always be miscreants. There always have been and always will be, but their numbers are few and, whilst they are undoubtedly a pain in the arse, they have been, are and will be dealt with in some way.
.
DDD - if you can't beat 'em...
.
Tordels and JBA - thanks for the kind words - I was beginning to forget what they looked like :-)
.
Whilst my views and opinions are undoubtedly coloured by my personal experiences, I try not to moan about how "they have done this to me, the rotters!" I'm big enough to know that it takes two to tango. I want as little to do with the "government" as possible. I'm not dancing with them any more. I do not recognise its authority over me and will not support it. Nor will I initiate violence against it or strive to topple it. I see it simply as a nuisance. True, it's difficult to live or do much without "government" approval but it's by no means impossible. If that means I have to live in a tent for the rest of my life then so be it. I won't be the first person on Earth to do that, or the last.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 12 September, 2015, 08:50:48 AM
I think The Shark knows me enough to know it's all just a conversation, but my last comment comes over as more abrupt than I really intended, but ye know in vino veritas an that.

But I will add that you also take the tone of the recently converted religious zealot (see 'i pity the fool' above) which doesn't help your point, to me at least. In your own words, them planes sent you down the rabbit hole, and to lapse into analogy, some people maybe dug out the rabbit and skinned it rather than finding Wonderland.

I'll finish with a quote for you Sharky. You could use it to summarise your thoughts sometimes?

'Boring fucking politics will get us all shot. Left wing, right wing, you can stuff the lot. Keep your petty prejudice I don't see the point. Anarchy and freedom is what I want.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 07:31:03 AM
.
I also can't argue with you, Steve. Didn't we have a discussion on Facebook where you flat out refused to accept that money is created out of nothing despite the fact that I linked to a Bank of England document explaining that this is exactly what happens? Instead of admitting that you were wrong and thinking about the implications of this new information you simply ended the conversation. (Unless that wasn't you I was conversing with on Facebook, my memory's not 100% on that, in which case I apologise unreservedly.) Your vitriol is less powerful than JPMs and has no glitter in it but still you're cut from the same cloth.
.

Was that the made up quote? I suspect I may just have disagreed with your interpretation or you misunderstood it (like you did with Ayn Rand for example)  but chose to move on with my life rather than argue with you.

I have attempted to draw your attention to the way you argue. you have pointed out I (probably more than once) gave up arguing with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 09:07:27 AM
No problem, Mikey, it is all, like you say, just conversation. And yeah, I can be evangelical at times. Thanks for the quote, where's it from?
.
What "made up quote" are you referring to, Steve? I shared this link with you: www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/news/2014/051.aspx explaining how money is created out of nothing after you said that you didn't think this was the case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 09:13:45 AM
No problem, Mikey, it is all, like you say, just conversation. And yeah, I can be evangelical at times. Thanks for the quote, where's it from?
.
What "made up quote" are you referring to, Steve? I shared this link with you: www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/news/2014/051.aspx explaining how money is created out of nothing after you said that you didn't think this was the case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 12 September, 2015, 09:24:05 AM
It's Crass Sharky.

https://youtu.be/FCDUhR8vK70 (https://youtu.be/FCDUhR8vK70)

Have another!

https://youtu.be/MP-UtaWQcLA (https://youtu.be/MP-UtaWQcLA)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 09:25:03 AM
Ah yes.

I refer you to my former point about your misunderstanding things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 09:37:11 AM
Thanks, Mikey.
.
Thanks, Steve. I refer you to my former point of how you deal with being wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 09:55:42 AM
Can't find the post but you posted a quote that was from a book full of made up quotes to back up polemic. but as the first fact checking of the book I found online was from an expert in economics/banking you dismissed that as biased.

your argument If I recall correctly was that debt is an illusion created by banks to collect interest and ultimately assets from people. Which I disagreed with. 

Banking is quite complicated. The gold standard broke down in part because of the first world war and in part because of the problems with raped economic expansion being pinned to a rare metal. current banking creates money to represent physical assists and potential earnings. (both or individuals and company's). this creates an issue with liquidity. quantitative easing (which can seem like money created out of nothing) is a gamble intended to improve liquidity in the short term thus stimulate the economy by helping (banks need to lend business money but in hard times they become more hesitant to issue debt as more of their over al value being held in non-liquid assets increases the chance or a run and a collapse) but quantitative easing is debt that will have to be repaid, unless the economy expands to cover the debt.

This banking system is still relatively new and open to abuse, like in china recently where lots of company's inflated their assets and intentionally exaggerated their future growth to drive up their share prices. Which then tumbled when they were found out. I believe in our historic conversation. Lying about your assets is fraud and an inherent problem with humans not a system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 10:13:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 09:37:11 AM

Thanks, Steve. I refer you to my former point of how you deal with being wrong.

The article is not 'proof' that banks create money out of nothing, that's your interpretation of the article, and as I said on Facebook all those months ago my problem isn't so much with the things you say but the way that you argue.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 11:03:07 AM
Banking is not complicated, it's made to seem so in order to conceal its basic fraud.
.
This fraud initially started very small. A bank would accept people's gold, deposits, for safe keeping, because people didn't want to keep it in their own homes in case they got robbed. As the banks had strong safes and guards, it made sense for people to store their gold there.  In return, they would issue bank notes to represent that gold.
.
In time, people began using the bank notes themselves in trade because they were 'as good as gold' and easier to manage than the gold itself.
.
The banks began to realise that only a very few people ever came in to exchange their bank notes for gold. So they hit upon a cunning plan - they could issue more notes than they had gold. They introduced these new notes in the form of loans. People, believing these notes represented actual gold, were happy to borrow them and to pay interest for the privilege. If the person couldn't pay, the banks seized their assets and sold them for real gold. The banks rapidly grew very rich and were soon in a position to start lending, both real gold and created bank notes, to royalty and governments.
.
They would frequently lend to both parties in a war, with the stipulation that even the loser would have to repay their debts - reparations.
.
Over time, this practice of creating bank notes with nothing to back them up became institutionalised and given a fancy name - fractional reserve lending.
.
This method led to many banking crashes throughout history, as before centralised banking local banks issued their own bank notes. In the normal course of events, few people went to the banks to exchange their notes for gold and the system worked quite well. However, occasionally, through outside events, too many people would want to exchange their notes for gold at once.
.
Then the whole scam was exposed. There would not be enough gold to cover all the notes, banks would go out of business and people would lose all their savings.
.
In order to prevent this, the bankers decided not to stop fractional reserve lending but to centralise the banking system in the hope that bank runs would be prevented by increasing the scale of their operations.
.
This happened most notably in the United States. The bankers tried and failed in the 1880s (I think) to create the Bank of America, modelled on the Bank of England (which was created in around 1695 when Scottish businessman William Patterson and his partners formed a private company to lend the king £2,000,000 to rebuild his navy). The people rejected the idea, being more savvy about such things than we are today. The Bank of America, a private bank owned by domestic and European bankers) did come into existence for a while but was eventually abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who ran for his second term of office on the slogan "Jackson and no Bank."
.
The bankers had been foiled but not defeated. In about 1908, several of the richest bankers in the world, including JP Morgan and others whose names escape me for the moment; Rockerfeller, Rothschild and the like, met aboard the private train carriage of a Senator Aldritch. They repaired to an exclusive private club on Jekyl Island, off the coast of Georgia, I think. There they wrote legislation to recreate the Bank of America, using recent bank runs as an excuse to argue for its necessity. Sanator Aldritch proposed the legislation and it was voted down.
.
The bankers, foiled again, engineered more bank runs and re-wrote the legislation. They picked a more popular, more trusted politician (whose name again escapes me) to re-present the legislation, this time calling it the Federal Reserve Act and containing the provision that this entity would assume the right to issue the nation's currency. Thus it was that, in around 1915, the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank was born and fractional reserve lending really began to take off. So much so that it became increasingly difficult to justify the sheer scale of lending against the miniscule amount of gold owned by the banks. So, again instead of ditching the fractional reserve system, the Gold Standard was abandoned, which really took the brakes off.
.
Cut to recent times and the fractional reserve system has got too big. Only around 3% of money is backed by anything tangible. Repaying all the false debt, and the interest too, becomes impossible. So, again, instead of abandoning the fractional reserve lending system, the bankers come up with quantitive easing. Basically, this is how it works:
.
The banks don't have enough money to keep circulating around the economy, so they go to the "government" with this problem. "If we stop circulating money, the economy will collapse and everyone will starve." The "government" is persuaded to print bonds, which are promises to use your taxes to pay back debts, and sell them to the banks. The banks create money out of nothing to purchase these bonds and then the government gives that money back to the banks to use to "boulster the economy."
.
But the banks do not use this money in that way. If they lent it to the public as loans and mortgages and suchlike, they'd have to wait years for a return. It makes more sense to them to keep it in savings accounts, earning a tiny bit of "safe" interest. Thus, QE does not work and the banks go back to the "government" again with the same deal. It is a disgusting, circular process which exists outside society and the economy as a whole. As a consequence of this madness, which is based on a fundamental fraud, remember, there are children as yet unborn who are in debt. They are leveraging our very future to enrich themselves and hide the central fraud - or flaw, if you want to be kind.
.
That's how banking works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 September, 2015, 11:12:16 AM
Is it fraud if all parties are aware of the situation, as has surely been the case for some time now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 11:23:22 AM
That's a damned good question, Tordels. I can believe that most people, even most politicians, don't realise what fractional reserve lending is. The whole industry of banking is swathed in complex language and obfuscating gobbledegook, making it seem next to impenetrable. Experts on loans, taxation, regulations and so on are extremely knowledgeable about their own areas but tend not to look at the basics.
.
I find it difficult to believe, however, that not one politician understands how it works at heart. The problem is that when one tries to explain the simplicity of the core problem it simply seems too simple.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 September, 2015, 11:46:27 AM
Jeremy Corbyn elected as head of the Labour Party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2015, 11:53:02 AM
Absolutely wonderful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 September, 2015, 11:54:10 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2015, 11:53:02 AM
Absolutely wonderful.

I knew you'd say that! ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 11:58:33 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 September, 2015, 11:46:27 AM
Jeremy Corbyn elected as head of the Labour Party.

Well now, this is going to be interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 12 September, 2015, 12:11:16 PM
Reed has just posted his resignation letter ( as shadow health minister ) on Twitter.  Reading it he comes across as a narcissist of the highest order.  Releasing it just as Corbyn is announced speaks volumes for the guy.  My thing is though, that this election campaign has really shown exactly how great a divide there now is between the general party membership and the Westminster party.  I'm not completely convinced that Corbyn is the best man to lead the party but he is emblematic of the need to reinvigorate debate about what the party should stand for and what it should be working towards. 

Blair drove the party off the ideological abyss and into the morass of self serving, power hungry politics.  The current generation of politicians really do not seem to understand the concept of service any more, except as an obligation on the part of others.  Reed really does seem to epitomise this mindset.

Mr Denton, I would agree with you wholeheartedly.  This is going to be very interesting.  Unfortunately if Reed is indicative of the future then we are all well and truly screwed.  The Tories will achieve in a very short space of time everything that they have been trying to.  Who was it that said "don't fall ill, don't grow old, don't grow needy?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2015, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 September, 2015, 11:46:27 AM
Jeremy Corbyn elected as head of the Labour Party.
'Grabs popcorn'

Now to await the Daily Fail vitriol...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 12 September, 2015, 12:31:45 PM
Yes, wonderful.
And if im reading Old Tankie correctly, we both think so for different reasons.


A shake up was desperately needed. And for those leaving, I tempted to say 'good riddance'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 12 September, 2015, 12:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 07:31:03 AM
Ah, JPM, you do make me sad. You have nothing to offer but vitriol with glitter in it. You think the world is perfect as it is and there's no need to change any of it, no point even trying, no point even thinking about it. You have zero faith in or trust of humanity and think the natural state of mankind is enslavement to others, living on our knees - and you're so consumed by your own anger that you can't even conceive of a world beyond one where everyone buttfucks everyone else for whatever they can get. You offer no solutions beyond "more of the same please, Master." I pity you, really. No, that's not entirely true. I pity the world that has people like you in it. People who refuse to turn their not inconsiderable intellects towards improving the world and instead choose to pour eloquent shit all over it and any ideas for improvement.

Ugh, yet again, that's the problem with debating you.  Anyone who doesn't agree with the nature of your desired changes doesn't want any change at all, so you can characterise them as witless servants of the status quo.  As I've said before, and as you know, I'm a republican and a socialist, leaning towards left-libertarianism for social issues, so you know that accusing me of not wanting any change is utterly, demonstrably false.  I could give you a loooong list: I want workers' co-ops and full scale democratic reform; complete abolition of drug laws and for drug-addiction to be treated as a sickness not a crime.  I don't even think all your ideas are completely off kilter- Jez Corbyn has, as you know, proposed something very similar to your favoured means of money production (with a state to actually back it up so it means a damn thing, however).

So really you can take your pity and constant, blatant strawmanning and misrepresentation of people who don't agree with your brand of hopelessly naive anarcho capitalism, and stick it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 September, 2015, 12:42:00 PM
59% percent of the vote, with 50% of the Labour members's vote - that is not only a clear mandate from Labour supporters, but from its membership, thus scuppering any coups or internal resistance attempts before they've even started - they could still happen, of course, but the public will see it as little more than the right wing of the party trying to seize control and go against the wishes of the electorate.
The wind has drastically changed in the Labour party - even Tony Jesus Blair Christ only got 57% percent of the vote when he descended from Heaven upon a blanket of doves as a choir of angels wept in undisguised joy as he took the reins of the party in 1997.  Of course, I can't quite shake the feeling that what's really won this is the complacency of the right, both inside Labour and in the media, so long may their "a Corbyn win is a victory for us" crowing continue - hopefully for the next five years at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 12 September, 2015, 12:45:45 PM
Yeah, I'm well chuffed by the result, but terribly apprehensive as well.  This whole thing has revealed such a gulf between the parliamentary LP and the party rank-and-file that I worry terribly that he'll be paralysed by the Blairites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 12:51:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 11:03:07 AM
Banking is not complicated, it's made to seem so in order to conceal its basic fraud.
.
This fraud initially started very small. A bank would accept people's gold, deposits, for safe keeping, because people didn't want to keep it in their own homes in case they got robbed. As the banks had strong safes and guards, it made sense for people to store their gold there.  In return, they would issue bank notes to represent that gold.
.
In time, people began using the bank notes themselves in trade because they were 'as good as gold' and easier to manage than the gold itself.
.
The banks began to realise that only a very few people ever came in to exchange their bank notes for gold. So they hit upon a cunning plan - they could issue more notes than they had gold. They introduced these new notes in the form of loans. People, believing these notes represented actual gold, were happy to borrow them and to pay interest for the privilege. If the person couldn't pay, the banks seized their assets and sold them for real gold. The banks rapidly grew very rich and were soon in a position to start lending, both real gold and created bank notes, to royalty and governments.
.
They would frequently lend to both parties in a war, with the stipulation that even the loser would have to repay their debts - reparations.
.
Over time, this practice of creating bank notes with nothing to back them up became institutionalised and given a fancy name - fractional reserve lending.
.
This method led to many banking crashes throughout history, as before centralised banking local banks issued their own bank notes. In the normal course of events, few people went to the banks to exchange their notes for gold and the system worked quite well. However, occasionally, through outside events, too many people would want to exchange their notes for gold at once.
.
Then the whole scam was exposed. There would not be enough gold to cover all the notes, banks would go out of business and people would lose all their savings.
.
In order to prevent this, the bankers decided not to stop fractional reserve lending but to centralise the banking system in the hope that bank runs would be prevented by increasing the scale of their operations.
.
This happened most notably in the United States. The bankers tried and failed in the 1880s (I think) to create the Bank of America, modelled on the Bank of England (which was created in around 1695 when Scottish businessman William Patterson and his partners formed a private company to lend the king £2,000,000 to rebuild his navy). The people rejected the idea, being more savvy about such things than we are today. The Bank of America, a private bank owned by domestic and European bankers) did come into existence for a while but was eventually abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who ran for his second term of office on the slogan "Jackson and no Bank."
.
The bankers had been foiled but not defeated. In about 1908, several of the richest bankers in the world, including JP Morgan and others whose names escape me for the moment; Rockerfeller, Rothschild and the like, met aboard the private train carriage of a Senator Aldritch. They repaired to an exclusive private club on Jekyl Island, off the coast of Georgia, I think. There they wrote legislation to recreate the Bank of America, using recent bank runs as an excuse to argue for its necessity. Sanator Aldritch proposed the legislation and it was voted down.
.
The bankers, foiled again, engineered more bank runs and re-wrote the legislation. They picked a more popular, more trusted politician (whose name again escapes me) to re-present the legislation, this time calling it the Federal Reserve Act and containing the provision that this entity would assume the right to issue the nation's currency. Thus it was that, in around 1915, the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank was born and fractional reserve lending really began to take off. So much so that it became increasingly difficult to justify the sheer scale of lending against the miniscule amount of gold owned by the banks. So, again instead of ditching the fractional reserve system, the Gold Standard was abandoned, which really took the brakes off.
.
Cut to recent times and the fractional reserve system has got too big. Only around 3% of money is backed by anything tangible. Repaying all the false debt, and the interest too, becomes impossible. So, again, instead of abandoning the fractional reserve lending system, the bankers come up with quantitive easing. Basically, this is how it works:
.
The banks don't have enough money to keep circulating around the economy, so they go to the "government" with this problem. "If we stop circulating money, the economy will collapse and everyone will starve." The "government" is persuaded to print bonds, which are promises to use your taxes to pay back debts, and sell them to the banks. The banks create money out of nothing to purchase these bonds and then the government gives that money back to the banks to use to "boulster the economy."
.
But the banks do not use this money in that way. If they lent it to the public as loans and mortgages and suchlike, they'd have to wait years for a return. It makes more sense to them to keep it in savings accounts, earning a tiny bit of "safe" interest. Thus, QE does not work and the banks go back to the "government" again with the same deal. It is a disgusting, circular process which exists outside society and the economy as a whole. As a consequence of this madness, which is based on a fundamental fraud, remember, there are children as yet unborn who are in debt. They are leveraging our very future to enrich themselves and hide the central fraud - or flaw, if you want to be kind.
.
That's how banking works.

I seem to remember when banks first started using paper money, when they needed more they just printed more which caused a few crashes (a run on the back having to exchange what ever the paper money is issued against outstrips liquidity causing a crash) and I'm pretty sure when stock exchanges first opened the same kind of thing happened. fortunes being made and lost every day, company's shooting up in value then going bust. I can't remember the program I watched but the pattern of boom and crash was almost comical. The expansion into a global economy appears to me to be causing a re-peat of this pattern.

I interoperate this controlled chaos in a different way to you, as do many others. But that's not to say I don't find your view here interesting.  it's not that people can't see how it works, it not that no politician can see what you can see, it's most likely that people are interpreting things differently.

In this post you didn't accuse people who disagree with you of worshiping the false god of government, you didn't make dodgy analogies followed by moral appeal and I haven't done any fact checking but everything seems perfectly plausible so as a reader I'm perfectly happy to differ to your knowledge without a trip to Google. all of these things please me and my 'vitriol'

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 September, 2015, 12:55:03 PM
The Corbyn victory is fascinating stuff alright, hell of a media-based war coming: hope it isn't as one sided as I fear it will be. Speaking as an outsider, there hasn't been anything as immediately engaging in British internal party politics since John Smith.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 01:04:28 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 12 September, 2015, 12:55:03 PM
The Corbyn victory is fascinating stuff alright, hell of a media-based war coming: hope it isn't as one sided as I fear it will be. Speaking as an outsider, there hasn't been anything as immediately engaging in British internal party politics since John Smith.

Watching the Tory's under IDS was entertaining.

I give Corbyn 18 months before his first leadership challenge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 September, 2015, 01:12:27 PM
The "upcoming media war" will be very interesting, because it will basically be the last chance for old media to prove they can take control of new media narratives.  They proved they were completely out of touch during the Labour leadership campaign, to the point that most think "oh no, they mustn't even have started yet" - except they have, it's just that they're a victim of an alternate narrative they created and which is now ingrained: the media cannot be trusted to tell the truth about Jeremy Corbyn.
I wouldn't underestimate the damage to the Guardian's reputation from their coverage, much as I wouldn't the damage to the BBC's after their Panorama episode about Corbyn was outed by one of their own staff members as being specifically commissioned as a "hatchet job", and the BBC have now refused to say how many complaints they received about it, citing that the complaint procedure was - I shit you not - inflitrated by entryists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 02:28:11 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 12 September, 2015, 12:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 07:31:03 AM
Ah, JPM, you do make me sad. You have nothing to offer but vitriol with glitter in it. You think the world is perfect as it is and there's no need to change any of it, no point even trying, no point even thinking about it. You have zero faith in or trust of humanity and think the natural state of mankind is enslavement to others, living on our knees - and you're so consumed by your own anger that you can't even conceive of a world beyond one where everyone buttfucks everyone else for whatever they can get. You offer no solutions beyond "more of the same please, Master." I pity you, really. No, that's not entirely true. I pity the world that has people like you in it. People who refuse to turn their not inconsiderable intellects towards improving the world and instead choose to pour eloquent shit all over it and any ideas for improvement.

Ugh, yet again, that's the problem with debating you.  Anyone who doesn't agree with the nature of your desired changes doesn't want any change at all, so you can characterise them as witless servants of the status quo.  As I've said before, and as you know, I'm a republican and a socialist, leaning towards left-libertarianism for social issues, so you know that accusing me of not wanting any change is utterly, demonstrably false.  I could give you a loooong list: I want workers' co-ops and full scale democratic reform; complete abolition of drug laws and for drug-addiction to be treated as a sickness not a crime.  I don't even think all your ideas are completely off kilter- Jez Corbyn has, as you know, proposed something very similar to your favoured means of money production (with a state to actually back it up so it means a damn thing, however).

So really you can take your pity and constant, blatant strawmanning and misrepresentation of people who don't agree with your brand of hopelessly naive anarcho capitalism, and stick it.

His least charming trait is the way he's recently taken to ascribing a series of beliefs to people who disagrees with him and then admonishing them for those beliefs. especially given his repeated assertion that he doesn't have any authority over anybody else.

I think that's what's wound me up recently, TSL has gone from a man politely but firmly refusing all arguments to the country of his ideas to a fairly rude crank who thinks nothing of calling you a foolish deluded religious fanatic for challenging him and will add the implied support of any number of transgressions (such as school yard bully or Nazi) to your list of offences for your troubles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2015, 03:12:19 PM
Quote"And I'm sorry for the name-calling. I feel bad about that now and wish I'd been more level-headed."
.
Guess you missed that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 September, 2015, 03:20:07 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2015, 01:04:28 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 12 September, 2015, 12:55:03 PM
The Corbyn victory is fascinating stuff alright, hell of a media-based war coming: hope it isn't as one sided as I fear it will be. Speaking as an outsider, there hasn't been anything as immediately engaging in British internal party politics since John Smith.

Watching the Tory's under IDS was entertaining. I give Corbyn 18 months before his first leadership challenge.

I think they have to let this one play out, as they did with Miliband. If Corbyn crashes and burns at a general election in anything like as spectacular a fashion as Miliband did, the argument for that style of presentation is as dead as New Labour is after the 2015 fiasco.

Like you say, though, it'll be a laugh.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 September, 2015, 08:01:36 PM
Can't but agree with JP. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 September, 2015, 01:46:27 AM
I thought it was strange personally that given the news today I was like "I have to get on the political thread". You guys, despite your disparate views and multitudinous conflicts are the debate for me.

I trust ye. Ye of the cynical mind and the progbrain. Who have known odd shit.

Maybe find comfort or don't that the young (relatively) mind seeks your council. Madness is to come, and we are finally at the mercy of own lack of experience. Everything is new.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 13 September, 2015, 07:32:15 AM
I think Corbyn is essentially going to have to purge the New Labour refuseniks who won't serve in his shadow cabinet.

It's not very inclusive,but those people are going to be chomping at the bit to depose him the second his honeymoon-period wears off. Besides, given they don't appear to share any particular beliefs with the Labour membership I suspect they're only in the Labour Party because it gives them a shot at achieving power and influence. Politicians like that have a natural home elsewhere. A blue home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 13 September, 2015, 10:36:16 AM
I have seen a few people say 'now the Tory's have no credible opposition they will really cut loose.' That kind of backwards fuckup ant-logic fails to take into account that Labour weren't just a poor opposition they had turned into actively no opposition at all. And a government that's opposed at every turn finds it a lot harder to achieve anything. Labour doesn't even have to win to effect change they just have to show that there is a large voice for change in the country.

The point of a political party isn't to get power at any cost it's to represent a section of society. If you represent the largest section* (by convincing them though argument) then you are end up in charge.

Also the other 3 candidates were less use then obviously unelectable Ed Miliband.

*those who don't vote are not represented so although they number in the Millions, without data, they may in fact be many extremely small groups.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 September, 2015, 10:59:16 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 September, 2015, 01:46:27 AM
I trust ye. Ye of the cynical mind and the progbrain. Who have known odd shit.

...do I win an award for least aggressive heavily drunkpost? lol  :-[ :-[ :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 September, 2015, 11:08:09 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 13 September, 2015, 10:36:16 AM
The point of a political party isn't to get power at any cost it's to represent a section of society. If you represent the largest section* (by convincing them though argument) then you are end up in charge.

This. Fucking THIS.

At some point in the last twenty years, the main political parties decided that rather than winning an argument, it was possible to achieve power by gaming the system. A parliamentary majority can be engineered from a tiny number of voters in a relatively small number of seats, so it was decided that the best tactic was to stand on the blandest, most focus-group friendly platform of policies imaginable (so as not to spook the 'herd') and target effort on the key marginals.

As a result, all three of the former main political parties ended up with largely interchangeable neo-lib platforms, distinguished only by a bit of window-dressing as a sop to their core demographics.

Enough of that. Leadership means having a coherent philosophy and arguing it well. You don't follow public opinion by worrying about the focus groups, you make a fucking argument and try to move public opinion.

Edit: as an aside to the above, I'm unclear why Nigel Farage's (supposed) separation from the bland, focus-group-defined political pack is often cited as one of his political advantages, but is somehow a crippling weakness in Corbyn.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 13 September, 2015, 11:27:41 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 September, 2015, 10:59:16 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 13 September, 2015, 01:46:27 AM
I trust ye. Ye of the cynical mind and the progbrain. Who have known odd shit.

...do I win an award for least aggressive heavily drunkpost? lol  :-[ :-[ :-[

Yes, Have a cider to celebrate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 September, 2015, 11:45:45 AM
I just heard a quote by British playwright, William Archer: "Drama is anticipation mingled with uncertainty." It seems to me that this sentiment could be applied equally well to politics. (Not a criticism, an observation.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 13 September, 2015, 12:08:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 September, 2015, 11:45:45 AM
I just heard a quote by British playwright, William Archer: "Drama is anticipation mingled with uncertainty." It seems to me that this sentiment could be applied equally well to politics. (Not a criticism, an observation.)

it could equally apply to standing on an office chair.

But yes, Politics is far more interesting when there is the opportunity for change and uncertainty as to weather change will come about and if it does how that change will work out. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2015, 01:02:14 PM
Jeremy Corbyn has appointed someone as Shadow Chancellor - holy crap it's like something out of Warhammer - who is on the record as saying he wants to travel back in time to the 1980s and assassinate Margaret Thatcher, was once barred from the House after trying to grab a ceremonial mace during a heated argument, and thinks Corbyn is not confrontational enough.  Naturally, the Guardian is outraged, as he was apparantly not born with a vagina - and no, I am not actually joking there, this is something they are genuinely angry about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 September, 2015, 01:33:50 PM
the right wing press haven't wasted any time with the hatchet job -  the Sun says he's going to abolish the army, and the mail and Express aren't much better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 01:36:42 PM
Scolaighe Ó'Bear: Given McDonnell's stance on a number of issues, I'm not surprised some people went batshit about this announcement. As for the gender angle, I imagine much of this is down to Corbyn's promises to make 50 per cent of the shadow cabinet women, and then giving men all of the top jobs. This has been dismissed by Corbyn's team as an "old fashioned view", but there can be no doubting that there are different tiers of jobs, and all of the 'main' ones are filled by men.

Frankly, I'm a little surprised Angela Eagle isn't Shadow Chancellor, although she at least got the consolation prize of business, in much the same way Cable did in the ConDem coalition. Interesting, though, to see Diane Abbott as shadow secretary of state for international development, after saying she was happy as a backbencher. I kind of hoped she'd get a role, because when else will she get to properly put her money where her mouth is? (I sometimes find Abbott difficult to deal with, but she's smart, and was notably so during this campaign.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 September, 2015, 02:47:38 PM
It doesn't really matter who is in his shadow cabinet as they are never going to be in the cabinet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 September, 2015, 03:06:34 PM
I see the Conservatives now have grainy black and white footage of Corbyn on youtube being quoted out of context while scary music plays in the background.

L is for Labour - L is for Lice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2015, 03:35:38 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 01:36:42 PMthere can be no doubting that there are different tiers of jobs, and all of the 'main' ones are filled by men.

This is a deeply misleading reading of the situation, as it's the fucking shadow cabinet - all the jobs are equally useless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 03:50:58 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 14 September, 2015, 03:06:34 PMI see the Conservatives now have grainy black and white footage of Corbyn on youtube being quoted out of context while scary music plays in the background.
That 'friends' thing is going to haunt him. Guru-Murthy desperately wanted that quote and threw a massive hissy-fit when he didn't get it. Still, that video's easy to reframe by Labour:

- Believes Bin Laden's death was a 'tragedy' — It was, for any kind of person who believes in democracy and fair trial.
- Describes known terrorists as 'friends' — In the most general generic sense, not in the sense of actually liking them.
- Wants to surrender our nuclear defences — The ones essentially run by the USA, and which we are about to spend a shit-load of money on for no good reason. They aren't a deterrent against anything these days.
- Wants to dismantle our Armed Forces — This is the one point they have, although it's inaccurate, in that he wants a review of spending with a view to dropping the amount the armed forces get. Frankly, I'd ditch Trident and use some of that savings to properly fund our armed forces, but also have said forces primarily repositioned as peacekeepers, rather than following the US whenever Obama, Bush and co. say "jump". But then, according to Tories, I'm probably some kind of Commie Leftie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 14 September, 2015, 04:27:32 PM
The mud's being slung, but nothing's really sticking yet.

The sexism charge is hilarious, and the idea that Corbyn's a terrorist sympathiser is risible.

Indeed, the more the media focuses on baseless lies and the less it actually looks at what Corbyn really does want to do the better for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2015, 05:21:37 PM
I don't think they've quite cottoned on yet that a gulf has begun to open between old and new media, and new media has taken Corbyn as its own.  Facts are simply too easy to check these days because it can be done on the same device people are using to receive the initial misinformation, so it's fast reaching the point where the blowback from having disinformation revealed outweighs the potential gains of it going unchallenged - many news sites, for instance, only ran with the Tories' "Corbyn is a threat to your security" stuff as part of a story about how it was being ridiculed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 05:40:35 PM
McDonnell, though, is going to be a tougher sell. Feels like rewarding your chum and kicking the PLP when it's down and not really putting his money where his mouth is regarding women in the most senior positions. It's a massive risk, given Angela Eagle was an option.

Still: early days. And given the options, I'd sooner see Corbyn in number 10 in four years than G.O. or, God forbid, Boris.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 September, 2015, 06:22:06 PM
Dennis Skinner FTW. Watch it right to the end. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHGDDMAP5qU&feature=share
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 14 September, 2015, 06:56:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 05:40:35 PM
McDonnell, though, is going to be a tougher sell. Feels like rewarding your chum and kicking the PLP when it's down and not really putting his money where his mouth is regarding women in the most senior positions. It's a massive risk, given Angela Eagle was an option.

I admire Corbyn for appointing a Shadow Chancellor who actually agrees with him, rather than a New Labour "big name" who would spend the next four and a half years trying to stop Jezza from doing what he's been elected to do.

The number one risk to Corbyn's leadership is disillusionment, the longer he keeps that at bay the longer he stays Captain of the ship.

Corbyn specifically promised a 50/50 gender split in the shadow cabinet, and he's delivered it. Pretty good going, especially since Cooper and Kendall, who should have bagged top posts, have selfishly refused to serve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghastly McNasty on 14 September, 2015, 07:39:31 PM
I've had me a hoot these last few weeks on The Guardian comments section. The whole Corbyn coverage from The G has been, apart from a small handful of articles, an all out attack on the bearded one and everything he stands for. Lies, misinformation, skewing the facts to support its agenda. The paper has disgraced itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2015, 08:12:15 PM
The Guardian has been creating clickbait in order to drive up their web traffic, which entails baiting their lefty readership so they keep revisiting pages for the debates in the comments sections, but the end result has been to destroy their reputation for impartiality.  If I was in their shoes, I'd be praying like Hell that no-one starts a new liberal news/comments hub anytime in the near future, because there are a lot of disgruntled lefties over there right now, and the Tory trolls won't stick around without them.

Their worst offence for me wasn't anything Corbyn-related, though - it was their adolescent baiting of Terry Pratchett fans with a string of articles following-up on complaints about their spoilering events in his final novel in their review, which caused a spike in visits to their arts section.  They comissioned more articles about Pratchett (you will notice how few they had before the incident) explaining that their readers weren't bright enough to understand how criticism works - unironically followed by an article where someone who had never read a Terry Pratchett novel explained why Terry Pratchett was a mediocre writer of a ghetto genre.
It was pretty shameless stuff, reaching its apex when one Guardian writer tried to drag Pratchett's daughter into things.  Last time I looked, though, the guy who rubbished Pratchett's writing had a follow-up article entitled something like "I've read Pratchett now and he's middling at best", but I figured why reward the twat with clicks?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2015, 08:18:02 PM
Ghastly McNasty: The hand-wringing op-eds by Polly Toynbee were a highlight. "I agree with almost everything Corbyn is campaigning for, but we should vote for someone else."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghastly McNasty on 14 September, 2015, 08:49:38 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 14 September, 2015, 08:12:15 PM
The Guardian has been creating clickbait in order to drive up their web traffic, which entails baiting their lefty readership so they keep revisiting pages for the debates in the comments sections, but the end result has been to destroy their reputation for impartiality.

I think you've nailed it there.

To be honest I'd pretty much given up on politics until Corbs came along. I was increasingly starting to believe that we are in fact fucked. That a corporate controlled Blade Runner-esc future was really coming our way. The hope he offered got me interested again and I've been devouring The Guardian and Independent websites daily. The click baiting works but they've sold their soul. Just like the Blairites themselves, who needs a Guardian if they ain't for the left.

I think they've kinda realised that too, IndigoPrime. Already you can see the slight change of tack on the site. Even Toynbee is trying to back peddle slowly. In a months time they'll be claiming they were with Jezza all along. Fuckers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 15 September, 2015, 02:49:12 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 14 September, 2015, 03:06:34 PM
I see the Conservatives now have grainy black and white footage of Corbyn on youtube being quoted out of context while scary music plays in the background.

L is for Labour - L is for Lice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hgJokgNJHo)

Video no longer available due to a copyright claim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 September, 2015, 02:55:36 PM
Reading the Standard last night, I am sickened by the blatant hatchet jobs already underway. On the same page as a huge article slamming Corbyn's lack of female representation in his cabinet, there is a smaller article saying "Labour MPs on the Rise" showing two female MPs appointed to senior roles.

The contradiction is right there on the same page. And lets not even get started on a cabinet with more women than any other cabinet, ever. A fact not mentioned once.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 September, 2015, 06:08:06 PM
An awful lot of mps who joined  socialist labour party now seem convinced that socialism is a terrible idea. Alistair Darling ( former marxist) in the paper today warning the party against moving left, seems to have missed that it already  has. The people who thought they were in charge  just haven't  caught up yet. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 September, 2015, 06:17:49 PM
I genuinely like The Badger, he was a very good chancellor and he led Better Together with considerable fortitude. He backed Liz Kendall for the leadership, though, so it's fair to say he's not a fan of the move from New Labour to New Syriza.

I can understand that Labour moderates are concerned that if the party moves too far left it becomes unelectable. However what I don't get is why anyone would join the Labour party if they genuinely don't believe in social justice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 September, 2015, 06:19:49 PM
What amazes me is that people keep describing Corbyn as Far Left.
He's not even close to being Far Left, which just illustrates hoe far Right the Labour party has drifted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 September, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 15 September, 2015, 06:19:49 PM
What amazes me is that people keep describing Corbyn as Far Left.
He's not even close to being Far Left, which just illustrates hoe far Right the Labour party has drifted.

I should have written "too far to the left", which is what I meant, and I agree that Jezza is not "far left", although I think "hard left" would probably be fair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 15 September, 2015, 06:37:43 PM
Wasn't having a go at you there - I was merely making an observation about the reporting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 September, 2015, 08:53:07 PM
While we're at it, can we stop calling right-wingers "moderates"?  They really aren't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 September, 2015, 10:24:51 PM
If anything Corbyn is a moderate left. It's just left, rather than centre/right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 September, 2015, 10:56:55 PM
The time servers and careerists in the Labour Party must be in a blind funk at the moment. Stick it to them JC. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 September, 2015, 11:03:21 PM
What the TUC are up to feeding the right-wing media their lines is anyone's guess. I know this EU referendum policy goes back months (although you wouldn't get that impression from the Beeb, who paint it as an anti-Corbyn reaction), but is this a good week to muddy the waters?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 08:18:40 AM
Why the fuss about Corbyn not singing the national anthem? Why would he? He is a republican.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 09:31:04 AM
Yeah, that one is hilarious. Apparently we all prefer our politicians to be hypocrites who play along for the sake of an easy life. As any atheist at a church service knows, you keep your mouth shut, stand and sit as instructed and look respectful. There's nothing more disrespectful than a non-believer chanting along.

I know I should keep my nose out of this whole business, but as a lifelong Irish Labour Party voter I can't help but try to live vicariously. A Labour leader who's left of centre? A wonderful dream to be sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 16 September, 2015, 09:43:25 AM
Wow, never see so much hated in media for one guy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 10:33:03 AM
What we're seeing right now is old media trying to reassure itself it can be a silver bullet.  I don't think they've quite realised yet that they're fighting a war on two fronts: one against Corbyn's growing popularity, and the other against anger at the Tories, and one feeds the other.
I think it might also be that they're panicking because it looks like Corbyn might be blanking old media outlets that smeared him in the past.  I don't know if it's a strategy or if he just doesn't think it's worth bothering with them, but it might be pretty canny in the long run, as if there's one thing that a younger social media using base can relate to, it's the need to block a troll every now and then to make sure you aren't distracted from getting more followers.  Younger voters especially will understand what it's like to be bullied through the media, so this may very well backfire spectacularly when those millions of young voters come of voting age between now and the next GE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 16 September, 2015, 11:00:16 AM
Really hope Corbyn introduces his 'crowd-sourced' questions at PMQs like he's a local radio presenter eg.

"Mr. Speaker, Derek from Godalming has written in – thanks, Derek – and as a keen allotment owner, he would like to know what is the Prime Minister's favourite vegetable, and does the Right Hon. Gentleman have any tips for dealing with unwanted aphids? Mr Speaker, he also says 'Hi' to everyone who knows him, and requests a track by Barclay James Harvest. But first, the Travel News..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 11:57:27 AM
I think the crowdsource thing is smart, if it's doable. Cameron might shit all over Corbyn, but he's going to look like a dick when roundly dismissing voters every PMQ. As for Corbyn's TERRIBLE DISSING OF THE QUEEN, it's fantastic to see that across almost every newspaper front page this morning. After all, there's nothing more important going on, such as MPs passing £4.4 billion in tax credit cuts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 16 September, 2015, 12:02:53 PM
(https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/12009579_587704018034597_4561682861048684030_n.jpg?oh=684feb51d44966e77ce5d5b3b0b81879&oe=56644B81)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2015, 12:10:48 PM
well I was a committed Corbynite (wasn't that a Star Trek episode?) but he has gone too far now, and I have finally come to accept that he should never PM.

nationalisation, pacifism and republicanism are fine but (*choke*) he DIDN'T FASTEN THE TOP BUTTON OF HIS SHIRT!!!! What a bastard!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 September, 2015, 12:12:26 PM
Quotebut he's going to look like a dick when roundly dismissing voters every PMQ.

Exactly - it's a masterstroke of an idea because of that. If Cameron employs his usual semi-sarcastic remark and no answer, I look forward to an interview with the little old lady who posed the question and how she was insulted by the gammon faced twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2015, 12:29:55 PM
Quote from: Banners on 16 September, 2015, 11:00:16 AM
Really hope Corbyn introduces his 'crowd-sourced' questions at PMQs like he's a local radio presenter eg.

"Mr. Speaker, Derek from Godalming has written in – thanks, Derek – and as a keen allotment owner, he would like to know what is the Prime Minister's favourite vegetable, and does the Right Hon. Gentleman have any tips for dealing with unwanted aphids? Mr Speaker, he also says 'Hi' to everyone who knows him, and requests a track by Barclay James Harvest. But first, the Travel News..."

Which would be more productive that what happened previously  :D

One paper ignored the nonsense: http://www.thenational.scot/ (http://www.thenational.scot/) and lead with news shock!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 12:32:14 PM
Cameron kept his cool, but in the end it was his party that let the side down, sniggering every time a member of the public's name was mentioned because common people asking questions of their betters is an inherently hilarious scenario.  Of course, then DC went and lost the rag at an SNP member - must have been simmering below the surface.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 12:40:29 PM
The idea of crowd-sourced PMQs is good in theory but who decides which questions get asked and how long before we get, "Rupert from Kensington asks, 'would the Prime Minister agree with me that the government is fantastic in every way?'"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 12:40:38 PM
DP - sorry. Having problems with my 'phone service recently
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 12:42:45 PM
It's a shame the leader of the opposition party didn't have a question of his own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 12:45:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 12:40:29 PM
The idea of crowd-sourced PMQs is good in theory but who decides which questions get asked

I imagine once they've vetted out people asking "why is the PM such a fucking cunt?" they randomly pick one of the five questions they have left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 September, 2015, 01:24:28 PM
QuoteIt's a shame the leader of the opposition party didn't have a question of his own.

Heh, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 01:59:26 PM
One of my usual less welcome street correspondents (not every talkative al fresco beardy can be Robin Williams or the Legendary Shark) decided to unburden himself on the subject of migrants today (he was sorry for the drowning kids, not so much the ones that made it to shore). From the relative comfort of his Council apartment he naturally objects to scroungers and socialists (unless they're former terrorists), and so moved seamlessly onto a sustained attack on Corbyn and his shameful snubbing of the Queen, which I had trouble squaring with his tricolour-painted walking stick and previous lengthy dissertations on the appalling vista of the state visit in 2011 and the desperate imperative that she not be invited to the 1916 celebrations next year. Powerful stuff, the media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 02:06:47 PM
According to the daily politics Corbyn is now a monarchist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2015, 02:21:38 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 16 September, 2015, 12:45:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 12:40:29 PM
The idea of crowd-sourced PMQs is good in theory but who decides which questions get asked

I imagine once they've vetted out people asking "why is the PM such a fucking cunt?" they randomly pick one of the five questions they have left.

This is something I just can't get my head around: Who the fuck votes for this meat-faced prick? The vast majority of British people I've met (and my mother is one) are decent, sensible people who aren't wealthy enough to benefit from Tory policies, and the rise of Corbyn despite the media smear campaign proves it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 02:28:25 PM
Aye, it is a mystery to us outsiders. I was listening to coverage of his proposals to 're-negotiate' the various protections EU employment law affords, and I found myself pondering the proportion of business owners/shareholders to employees in the electorate as a whole, and how the feck that works in his favour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 02:37:52 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2015, 02:21:38 PMThis is something I just can't get my head around: Who the fuck votes for this meat-faced prick?
The selfish and the rich. The xenophobes scared of "brown people" and those who believe that taxes are evil and BY GOD I WON'T PAY MORE LIKE THOSE LABOUR BASTARDS WANT, despite pissing 20% VAT into every purchase.

I don't get it myself, although we should never forget this government has a majority from under a quarter of the electorate—something most people don't get either. (I hear a lot of "well, the majority voted Tory, so there". They really really didn't.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 16 September, 2015, 02:39:18 PM
A combination of ill informed arseholes who read the Fail and the Sun and believe the utter shit fed to them there because it confirms their racism and their many other prejudices. That along with an I'm-alright-jack mentality and a, baffling to me, illusion that some working or middle class people have that somehow if they vote Conservative then, because they are all public school millionaires, I will somehow be as rich as them (I suspect the same mentality that makes shit poor Americans vote Republican).
Combine that with younger people not being inclined to vote, and older people being more incline to vote for vicious Right Wing parties, then you have the perfect storm.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 02:44:32 PM
I love the Far Left, they can't win the argument, so they resort to insults.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2015, 02:55:31 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 02:44:32 PM
I love the Far Left, they can't win the argument, so they resort to insults.

because the Far Right don't do name calling....


on a separate note about your national anthem from that lefty YouGov: But while 68% of Britons know at least the first verse by heart, some 43% of 18-to-24-year-olds don't, according to a 2014 YouGov study.

Looks like he might be currying favour with the digital Gen  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 03:04:08 PM
I like that quote doing the rounds that better (and more respectful) to stand in silence and honour the dead than to look around for cameras so you people can definitely see you SINGING YOUR HEART OUT, like Insincere Dave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 03:04:25 PM
Didn't they do a huge scientific study a few years back into why people voted for conservative politicians?  As I recall, they discovered it was a combination of poor education and an inability to utilise critical evaluation that eventually resulted in a kind of functional but delusional state - and what was truly amazing was that this study was published in the Daily Mail.  This was described by Charlie Brooker at the time as being "like Loaded publishing an article about how only gay men want to look at Hollyoaks actresses in their underwear."

I'm probably dating myself there - is Loaded even still a thing now people can get actresses' sex tapes on their (wipe-clean) iPhones?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 03:08:21 PM
See.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2015, 03:38:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 03:08:21 PM
See.

'poor education and an inability to utilise critical evaluation' As name calling goes its pretty lame  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 03:43:07 PM
That's easy to say if it's not being aimed at you :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 03:45:07 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 16 September, 2015, 03:04:25 PMAs I recall, they discovered it was a combination of poor education and an inability to utilise critical evaluation that eventually resulted in a kind of functional but delusional state
Clearly, most people vote on the basis of barely understood information. I saw a bunch of interviews online recently, with one young lad asked about Labour and the Conservatives. He said they were mostly the same, but he at least knew one was "better for the rich" and the other "better for everyone else". He was asked which was best for the poor. After a long pause, he quietly asked: "The... Conservatives?"

But perhaps Corbyn, by some miracle, can keep things going. Barrel along until the election and change enough people's mindset to the point Labour can squeak enough sets to govern with support of the SNP. I think it's unlikely, but then even a week ago I didn't believe he'd be elected leader.

Quoteis Loaded even still a thing now people can get actresses' sex tapes on their (wipe-clean) iPhones?
Loaded went splat a while ago, didn't it, after yet another buy-out?

EDIT: Wikipedia says last issue was March 2015: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_(magazine)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 04:40:26 PM
Poor old Loaded.  Softcore grumble mags were the first casualty of the internet age.

Quote from: Proudhuff on 16 September, 2015, 03:38:21 PM'poor education and an inability to utilise critical evaluation' As name calling goes its pretty lame  ;)

Hey, don't blame me, I don't write for the Daily Mail!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 05:01:34 PM
A Change.org petition to get the BBC to refer to David Cameron as "the right wing Prime Minister" in the interests of balanced coverage. (https://www.change.org/p/bbc-request-for-the-bbc-to-refer-to-david-cameron-as-the-right-wing-prime-minister)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2015, 05:14:52 PM
Thanks, all, some interesting insights there. (Hope that doesn't sound sarcastic; it's not.)

Tankie; I'm guessing you're a Tory voter - any chance you could explain why?  I do understand if you don't want to go into it; just wondering.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 05:20:37 PM
Just about to have tea Jayzus, I will let you know later!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 06:04:17 PM
I'm fairly right wing meself - (one of several reasons that I rarely contribute to this thread, feeling fairly at odds with the prevailing tone) - and I have to say it's always hugely interesting, in any context, seeing left-wingers try to comprehend why anyone would vote Conservatives or similar. Of course it's never as simple as 'that's what they happen to think is best for the country' or the like but 'indoctrination, selfishess, violent racism, blind stupidity, media bamboozling, etc'. And for whatever reason it's a fairly one-way thing - as a right-winger I can see perfectly well why someone would vote Labour, Lib-Dem, etc, even if I don't happen to agree with the policies. But flip that back the other way and voting for the right just seems utterly inexplicable to the left.

I have no interesting conclusions to draw from this, just always fascinated me is all!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 16 September, 2015, 06:07:16 PM
QuoteClearly, most people vote on the basis of barely understood information.

There's also a herd mentality. I remember a few years ago a friend of my girlfriend was blathering on on facebook about how she was going to vote for the BNP. When my girlfriend, who is mixed-race, challenged this, it very quickly transpired that she didn't truly understand what the BNP stood for and was just very impressionable and had been influenced by her friends and family.

QuoteA combination of ill informed arseholes who read the Fail and the Sun and believe the utter shit fed to them there because it confirms their racism and their many other prejudices. That along with an I'm-alright-jack mentality and a, baffling to me, illusion that some working or middle class people have that somehow if they vote Conservative then, because they are all public school millionaires, I will somehow be as rich as them (I suspect the same mentality that makes shit poor Americans vote Republican).
Combine that with younger people not being inclined to vote, and older people being more incline to vote for vicious Right Wing parties, then you have the perfect storm.

I always just assume its because people generally get more right wing (ie less idealistic and more selfish and set in their ways) as they get older, and older people tend to vote more than young people. I think that right wingers tend to think of themselves as realists, but in a lot of ways they are just as naive as lefties.

I will never understand the right wing mentality, nor why people resent paying taxes so much. I mean, how do these people think things like infrastructure gets paid for? We live in a society. America's situation is especially bonkers. The concept that you as an individual might be contributing slightly over the odds and that your tax dollars might be helping others is an outrage to most folks here.

As I see it, an example of the direct result of this kind of blinkered world view is the sheer number of homeless people here. Every single city I've visited here seems to have a vast subculture of drifters and hobos, ten times more than you'd see in a city like London. Mentally ill people and drug addicts walk down the streets screaming and miniature tent cities spring up mere blocks from luxury boutiques. A dishevelled drifter pushing a shopping trolley containing all their worldly possessions is as common a sight as someone walking a dog. And everyone turns a blind eye and genuinely seem to believe that people are living like this through choice, and not because there's a fundamental lack of support and welfare.

And my worry is that Britain will be exactly the same in a few years time.  :|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 16 September, 2015, 06:10:35 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 06:04:17 PM
I'm fairly right wing meself - (one of several reasons that I rarely contribute to this thread, feeling fairly at odds with the prevailing tone) - and I have to say it's always hugely interesting, in any context, seeing left-wingers try to comprehend why anyone would vote Conservatives or similar. Of course it's never as simple as 'that's what they happen to think is best for the country' or the like but 'indoctrination, selfishess, violent racism, blind stupidity, media bamboozling, etc'. And for whatever reason it's a fairly one-way thing - as a right-winger I can see perfectly well why someone would vote Labour, Lib-Dem, etc, even if I don't happen to agree with the policies. But flip that back the other way and voting for the right just seems utterly inexplicable to the left.

I have no interesting conclusions to draw from this, just always fascinated me is all!

Genuinely curious Jimbo, do you think the NHS is a bad thing that should be dismantled?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 06:14:58 PM
Why would he think that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 16 September, 2015, 06:19:24 PM
Oh no, just heard on the news, Corbyn is going to sing the National Anthem from now on. Why would he change his stance so soon after standing up for his beliefs.
Let's hope the ITV news have got this wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 06:24:40 PM
Without putting words in anyone's mouth, I'd assume that (following a personal analysis of the options) favouring the right-wing end of the political spectrum essentially means believing that a rising tide lifts all boats; that a society that encourages and rewards personal effort and success is itself enriched as a whole; that applying a meritocratic business-led approach to the supply of and receipt of public services results in efficencies and incentives; that valuing personal freedom and individual responsibility over collective dependence on the state is empowering for all; and that a society/economy that operates on these principles is better for all its members.

What I find confusing us how anyone can square these undoubted  positives with the hateful rhetoric and selfish avaricious behaviour that seems to be the actual results of right-wing government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 06:27:04 PM
Yes, CF, I heard that on the Daily Politics program, surely it can't be true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 06:29:33 PM
No, of course not - quite the reverse. I didn't vote Consv. in the General Election, and the NHS was actually one of the big sticking points as to why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 16 September, 2015, 06:32:17 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 06:24:40 PM
What I find confusing us how anyone can square these undoubted  positives with the hateful rhetoric and selfish avaricious behaviour that seems to be the actual results of right-wing government.

Nailed it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 06:34:25 PM
I've just read TB's post and have to say he's pretty much hit the nail on the head, as far as I'm concerned, apart from the last sentence!  So no need to reply to Jayzus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2015, 06:39:21 PM
Wasn't it loaded that featured those 2 disastrous ads for the.prog in the late 90's? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2015, 06:50:51 PM
Quote from: radiator on 16 September, 2015, 06:10:35 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 06:04:17 PM
I'm fairly right wing meself - (one of several reasons that I rarely contribute to this thread, feeling fairly at odds with the prevailing tone) ... I can see perfectly well why someone would vote Labour, Lib-Dem, etc, even if I don't happen to agree with the policies. But flip that back the other way and voting for the right just seems utterly inexplicable to the left.

Genuinely curious Jimbo, do you think the NHS is a bad thing that should be dismantled?

You're not going to look back on that as your finest moment on this board, Tom. If Jim was looking for someone to prove his point, your reply would be perfect.

I hope Corbyn can reframe the terms of the debate in UK politics, but as far as winning 2020 is concerned Labour die hards have  performed the equivalent of buying a Top Gear CD from a service station and ordering corduroy slacks with an adjustable waist band. It feels comfortable to be true to yourself, but it also means you've abandoned all attempts to appeal to anyone else*.

In five years time, Corbyn loyalists are going to be singing the same refrain as The 45 following the independence referendum - blaming the media and accusing everyone who didn't fancy the deal the deal that was on offer of some kind of betrayal.


* given how useless the other candidates were, I'd have opted for Corbyn too
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 06:55:00 PM
I think that when a "government" of any stripe is driven by unrealistic expectations of paying back an ever-increasing and unpayable (and illusory) debt in order to keep the spectre of catastrophic "economic collapse" at bay, they can't help but take the route of avarice and general beastliness.
.
Conservative, Labour, Lib-Dem, SNP, UKIP - it makes no difference. The First Priority of them all is getting your wealth, either out of your pockets, your communities or your services, and giving it to the banks.
.
I can see a time coming when they'll try to outlaw cash and force us into a cashless economy where everyone has to pay the banks to look after their "money" and use their cards. A 0.5% interest rate rise and something like this becomes almost inevitable; just like the gold confiscations in 1933 USA.
.
It's not really the politician's fault; they're simply doing as they're told based on faulty information.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 07:02:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 06:55:00 PM
I think that when a "government" of any stripe is driven by unrealistic expectations of paying back an ever-increasing and unpayable (and illusory) debt in order to keep the spectre of catastrophic "economic collapse" at bay, they can't help but take the route of avarice and general beastliness.

Strawmanning like a bad 'un here, but those governments that rejected existing debts and obligatiins seem to mainly include characters like Pol Pot, Robspierre and that fella that sets the QI klaxon blaring.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 07:29:48 PM
I know most people don't believe me. But consider this:
.
In an earlier post I talked about governments abandoning the Gold Standard so that fractional reserve lending could continue. Right now, only about 3% of money is in actual cash - nowhere near enough to justify the 97% of "loan money" backed up by it. Their solution will not be to abandon frl but to abolish that which backs it and introduce something like zero reserve lending. The last vestiges of the farce of backed money will be swept away and all money will be issued digitally, by private banks, with absolutely nothing behind it but faith and complicated processes.
.
And if and when the banks decide to impose negative interest rates, charging you 5% per month to look after your savings, how are you going to withdraw that and keep it in your mattress? You will have the choice of either investing your money in something (stocks, shares, land, property, comics) or watching it slowly drain away to nothing.
.
This is an extreme example, of course, but I think it is the inevitable end of the current path of wealth redistribution we are on and that no "government" who doesn't attempt to break its, and our, dependence on and addiction to the current system can only assist the process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 September, 2015, 07:44:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 07:29:48 PM
I know most people don't believe me. But I'll just keep hammering away at the same tedious points I've making in pretty much every post in this thread for well over a year now.

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2015, 07:54:19 PM
Well over five years, actually, Pops:
.
Quote« Reply #61 on: 12 April 2010, 19:21:21 »
Fix the economies of the world by taking back
the right of governments to print their own
money and the cost of immigration and the
reasons behind it (and most other problems
such as housing, health care, public spending
etc) tend to evaporate. Keeping everyone
arguing about the problem (in this case,
immigration) and not the cause (hollow
banking) is just one example of what all
political parties are about. This is the politics of
distraction.
The Prime Minister can be seen as the captain
of the ship of state. Once the passengers (the
electorate) elect a captain and crew (PM and
MPs), the ship is redecorated, the way the ship
is run is altered, the shift patterns and
responsibilities of the crew are tweaked, new
rules and regulations are put into place, the
decks are swabbed etc, etc, etc - but the course
of the ship is not altered. Some years later, a
new captain and crew are elected who change
everything back again, but the course of the
ship is still not altered. This is the politics of
distraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 08:00:40 PM
That's brilliant, Sharky - now you can just copy and paste from earlier in the thread - that's got to be a tremendous timesaver.


Corbyn just sent me an email asking me to join the Labour party as a full member.  Nothing - not even slavery - makes me angrier than spam so I have gone off him now.
Although I notice they've dropped the requirement that you sign a "I am not a dirty entryist Trot" declaration during the signup process, even though it was mandatory only last week.
I wonder what's changed since then?

Jimbo - there's plenty of debate on the thread about the failings of the left, it's just that the debate in British politics has drifted to the right over the years, so naturally if you have people grumbling about politics, chances are they'll be doing so about the dominant orthodoxies in current practice rather than conceptual notions of an end of the political scale that hasn't been in ascendance for three decades.  I don't think anyone would begrudge you being on the right of the political spectrum given there are a few armed forces types knocking about and we're all sci-fi fans and thus by nature are conservative and deeply distrustful of change and anything new.
Please don't confuse our occasionally blatant wind-ups with any kind of unspoken restriction on contributing to the other side of a discussion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 16 September, 2015, 08:03:40 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 06:24:40 PM
...essentially means believing that a rising tide lifts all boats; that a society that encourages and rewards personal effort...

And the reason I'm not on the right of the spectrum is because I don't think there's a real example of any of that being the case without some people really losing out. If it were so, by now everyone would be doing fine.

I'm fuckin sick of making personal effort if I'm honest - it's got me nowhere overall.

M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 08:09:03 PM
Quote from: Butch on 16 September, 2015, 06:50:51 PMI hope Corbyn can reframe the terms of the debate in UK politics, but as far as winning 2020 is concerned Labour die hards have  performed the equivalent of buying a Top Gear CD from a service station and ordering corduroy slacks with an adjustable waist band. It feels comfortable to be true to yourself, but it also means you've abandoned all attempts to appeal to anyone else*.
But in what sense? How is Corbyn not appealing to anyone else? Who is that "anyone else"? The narrative, possibly accurate, is that Corbyn's selection means abandoning trying to make a play for moderate Tories who might switch sides, but then that's been the problem with British politics since Blair. Everything hinges on literally a few thousand voters, in swing seats, when there should be so much more to play for.

Would it be better for Labour to not be true to its core values? Continue to embrace austerity? Continue to nod along to privatisation? At what point do you just throw in the towel and merge the two main parties? (And while that might sound absurd, the last Labour manifesto read like a moderate Conservative one. It was one of the most depressing political documents I've ever read. No wonder the party lost a significant portion of voters to the Greens and UKIP.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2015, 08:18:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 September, 2015, 06:34:25 PM
I've just read TB's post and have to say he's pretty much hit the nail on the head, as far as I'm concerned, apart from the last sentence!  So no need to reply to Jayzus.

Fair enough.
Though my own view would very much include that last sentence (living as I do in a country whose government never strays from centre-right and as such focusses its efforts far more on the priveleged, and wishing I had Tordelback's eloquence and intelligence to express the opinions I pretty much always share with him ).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 08:24:08 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 16 September, 2015, 08:00:40 PM
Jimbo - there's plenty of debate on the thread about the failings of the left, it's just that the debate in British politics has drifted to the right over the years... I don't think anyone would begrudge you being on the right of the political spectrum...
Please don't confuse our occasionally blatant wind-ups with any kind of unspoken restriction on contributing to the other side of a discussion.

Oh, no worries Bear. I've not got any problems with people sticking it to the right (God knows it does ask for it, more often than not) - and I wouldn't for a minute think anyone here would hold it against me out of hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2015, 08:28:53 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 16 September, 2015, 08:03:40 PM
I'm fuckin sick of making personal effort if I'm honest - it's got me nowhere overall.

Testify.

Should perhaps clarify that I do not hold the beliefs expressed in my previous post- but I can see how they are noble, attractive and even rational. I just don't ever see them working in practice, due to people and their weaknesses, and a default position that seems to be 'I'm alright Jack'. The selfsame human failings undermine left-wing ideals, but at least societies based on those have a safety net built in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 08:43:40 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 08:28:53 PM
Should perhaps clarify that I do not hold the beliefs expressed in my previous post- but I can see how they are noble, attractive and even rational. I just don't ever see them working in practice, due to people and their weaknesses...

See, that's almost eerily similar to how I feel about many Left ideals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 September, 2015, 09:03:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 08:09:03 PM
How is Corbyn not appealing to anyone else? Who is that "anyone else"? The narrative, possibly accurate, is that Corbyn's selection means abandoning trying to make a play for moderate Tories who might switch sides, but then that's been the problem with British politics since Blair. Everything hinges on literally a few thousand voters, in swing seats, when there should be so much more to play for.

I basically agree with the sentiments you express, but I'd question the idea that the aim of Labour blanding was to attract moderate Tories. The aim in those key marginals you mention is to attract the votes of the relatively small number of people who don't vote according to some kind of tribal loyalty and Corbyn (regardless of policies) is probably too polarising a figure to do that.

What that leaves him with is the option of trying to turn out inactive Labour voters and folk who don't normally vote at all. The BBC's More Or Less did a fantastic show about that very subject and it turns out non-voters aren't any more likely to be Labour voters than folk who do vote and that Labour inclined non-voters tend to live in areas Labour already wins.

Turning out non-voters would likely only result in even bigger Labour majorities in seats they would have won anyway. Worth a listen: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06950lm


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 09:32:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2015, 08:09:03 PM
But in what sense? How is Corbyn not appealing to anyone else? Who is that "anyone else"? The narrative, possibly accurate, is that Corbyn's selection means abandoning trying to make a play for moderate Tories who might switch sides, but then that's been the problem with British politics since Blair. Everything hinges on literally a few thousand voters, in swing seats, when there should be so much more to play for.

Bear in mind that the Tories plan on redrawing the boundaries around safe Conservative seats before the next election, so swinging a few on-the-fence voters becomes at best a more unsound strategy, at worst it becomes suicidal acknowledgement of never regaining power in this generation.  This, of course, probably suits the Blairites because pretending to be underdogs feeds the martyr complex they displayed during the leadership contest - but for Corbyn, it's about actual change, and by necessity I think he'll look outside to get people who don't normally vote.  For that, I think it helps that he's so reviled, because the more they bully and smear, the more the Blairites, the Tories, and the media make him look more and more like an alternative to what they've been offering.
Polorising as he might be in isolation, they seem incapable of realising that their actions only make a martyr of him to otherwise apathetic onlookers - a good example is the PMQ question by the DUP's Nigel Dodds about Corbyn & Co's IRA sympathies in the past framed around murdered MPs: before, this would have been electorate Kryptonite, but it's barely been noticed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2015, 09:32:56 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 08:28:53 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 16 September, 2015, 08:03:40 PM
I'm fuckin sick of making personal effort if I'm honest - it's got me nowhere overall.

Testify.

As a very busy 'entrepreneur', I suppose I'm the type of person that is supposed to be the Conservative ideal made real. Trouble is, I'm broke half the time, bring fuck all to the economy and am currently homeless*, while my Civil Service friends seem to spend half their lives on holiday, have no trouble getting mortgages, and get plenty of other bonuses (boni?) along with it. I'm just a stubborn bastard who really hates my work hours being dictated by other people.

*But not quite on the streets, thanks to the many dear friends who have given me spare rooms and sofas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 September, 2015, 09:39:20 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 06:24:40 PM
Without putting words in anyone's mouth, I'd assume that (following a personal analysis of the options) favouring the right-wing end of the political spectrum essentially means believing that a rising tide lifts all boats; that a society that encourages and rewards personal effort and success is itself enriched as a whole; that applying a meritocratic business-led approach to the supply of and receipt of public services results in efficencies and incentives; that valuing personal freedom and individual responsibility over collective dependence on the state is empowering for all; and that a society/economy that operates on these principles is better for all its members.

What I find confusing us how anyone can square these undoubted  positives with the hateful rhetoric and selfish avaricious behaviour that seems to be the actual results of right-wing government.

And it presumes that the last 30 years of a glbal steer to the right just needs anbother 30 or so before the trickle/tide gets anywhere.

The economy crashed and burned on Labours watch - was this because they were enacting left wing policies?  Given it was a global crash that affected countries to a greater or lesser degree irrespective of their current Gvts leaning, that probably doesn't stand up as the only factor, and could well not be the case at all.  Britain was always going to be hit hard by a banking crisis as we are one of the major players in that Arena - we put our eggs in this basket, and the Right wing would have put even more.

And if we go back 30 years or less, wealth was much more equally spread - surely that proves that trickle down is a fallacy?  As someone brighter than me pointed out, we should have zero unemployment given the free reign markets have had, yet here we are still, seemingly unable to afford basic safety net services that were perfectly viable in the supposedly unproductive and comparatively leftist 50s, 60s and 70s
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2015, 10:07:41 PM
Great debate....remember our Shark did create this thread. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2015, 10:17:16 PM
It's worth remembering that "trickle down" isn't actually a specific economic strategy thought up by Milton Friedman in the 1980s and repackaged as "Reagonomics", but an already-discredited economic approach from the 19th century known as "Horse and Sparrow Theory" - after the notion that if the horse eats all the oats it wants, some will end up being shit into the street for the sparrow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 September, 2015, 10:42:50 PM
Aaah the nineteenth century or as us natives call it: the early 21st century. If we're patient in the next few months we'll get an enhanced revisitation of the aftermath that 18th charmer: the South Sea Bubble. Again,  yippee!!  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 September, 2015, 11:01:08 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 08:43:40 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 16 September, 2015, 08:28:53 PM
Should perhaps clarify that I do not hold the beliefs expressed in my previous post- but I can see how they are noble, attractive and even rational. I just don't ever see them working in practice, due to people and their weaknesses...

See, that's almost eerily similar to how I feel about many Left ideals.

This interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTu3gVvm_K8) between Hitchens and Jones of the left and right had me thinking about the fundamental personal viewpoint differences between the so-called left and right and it seems to me (OVERSIMPLIFICATION ISN'T GOOD) that political affiliation is more than anything just about positivity, realism, negativity and our very personal experiences with those subjects. If you see people and the world as fundamentally straightforward then you'll tend toward the right I imagine - systems work the way they do and people are the way they are. If you see the world as complicated and changeable you'll tend towards the left - people aren't so bad really, systems are flawed etc. That will depend quite heavily on your own life, how you see other people and how (most importantly) you feel you've come out of experiences with other people and that will vary heavily as the world and people are indeed neither lovely nor horrible but both at the same time. Chock full of monstrosities and unspeakable horrors as well as lovely things and happy times. According to your depiction of both. You may not see both in your own lifetime, you may see neither of one at all or feel you've felt the entirety of only one. That's what makes you who you are.

Therefore - I suppose, I think the most logical position politically - as life in a society of many people with myriad experiences must be one of balance and as Bear correctly says the narrative since the mid-eighties has been a predominantly selfish one where the 'left' (so called) are on the back footing and the savage corporate thing is in full dominance. There's a logic to this view, but it's a harsh one that really clearly doesn't function properly in isolation (evidence = reality). So I'm deeply glad that there seems to be actual opposition growing and I'll chuck my weight there as it is. However the mistake of anyone in belief of the current dominant dogma is that those "opposed" to it want to usurp their own utter dominance and (as in the Hitchens interview) create an all-consuming glorious utopia where everyone hugs and isn't an arse. However - that's madness. I don't think anyone who can form sentences believes that could ever happen.

I'm currently a serious Green supporter (contradiction in terms AHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA SELF AWARENESS) and someone recently told me emphatically that parts of their manifesto are bollocks and therefore the whole party was a joke and weren't worth the effort. I thought - yeah - some of the manifesto is bollocks but I've met a lot of them and they're quite nice reasonable people that weren't cruel or disrespectful to their opponents and listened to the people around them. Including those that said their manifesto was bollocks and they were a joke. Things get changed if enough folk agree. And I thought... well that seems fairly good really. I like 'em for that. At no point did I think that the greens would ever get majority government and implement their entire manifesto on everyone. There'd be like... homoeopathy on the curriculum or some other shite. whut. I voted for them because locally they had a shot (more green councillors than other city, nearly got us an MP) and I'd met those people and they were nice. That's it. No conspiracy, no grand plan.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS:

Nobility, attractiveness, rationality, practicality and weakness - are ALL subjective things and vary from person to person according to their wordview and experiences. From TB to Jimbo to me and onward - the point I imagine is the framework. I say think more locally - meet your local candidates - make it a person to person thing. That's what politics is really - on very basic fundamental level. They REPRESENT YOU. Your experiences, your ambitions, your life-plan, your area. It's no crime to take an interest and there's no ideal final vision or actual winner.


:-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 16 September, 2015, 11:15:22 PM
Owen, where do you get off being so considered and reasonable?

The thing about the people who say this (or these) few policies are insane so all their policies must be insane is it's basically the Argument from fallacy (or fallacy fallacy) and one of the most popular media/sound bite arguments.

It's also important to separate crazy from disagree. I disagree with a lot of stuff but that doesn't make it crazy it just means that my idea of a successful outcome is not the same as that of the person proposing the policy I disagree with. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 16 September, 2015, 11:36:49 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 September, 2015, 11:01:08 PM
I say think more locally - meet your local candidates - make it a person to person thing. That's what politics is really - on very basic fundamental level. They REPRESENT YOU. Your experiences, your ambitions, your life-plan, your area. It's no crime to take an interest and there's no ideal final vision or actual winner.

Funnily enough I voted Lib Dem, for the first time ever, at the last election (obviously that worked out AMAZINGLY). Never thought I would, but although I didn't care overly for the party the Lib Dem candidate genuinely seemed the best one for our town.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2015, 12:15:04 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 September, 2015, 11:01:08 PMsomeone recently told me emphatically that parts of their manifesto are bollocks and therefore the whole party was a joke and weren't worth the effort
I read every one of the major party manifestos (Con; Lab; LD; UKIP; SNP; PC; Green) cover to cover. The Green one was one of the best, I thought. It was frequently radical, but only very rarely strayed into 'bollocks' through the odd bit of dubious reasoning regarding policy. I also felt they believed it, unlike, say, the Lib Dems, who had a generally very impressive manifesto that I trusted about as far as I could throw the entire party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ghastly McNasty on 17 September, 2015, 10:31:05 AM
It's this fallacy nonsense that really gets me back up, and probably a lot of other left leaning people too.

The right and the media readily dismiss sensible left-wing ideas based on the principle that the socialist utopia is unachievable, therefore all left ideas are a joke. Using the extreme views of a small splattering of hard-lefters to discredit the moderate left is just bollocks. Grrrrr. Really make me loony!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2015, 10:51:42 AM
What's more galling is that moderate socialist ideas are rapidly falling by the wayside, and even moderate centrist ideas are under threat. If this Conservative government continues the way it is, the NHS will at best become a service of last resort (i.e. a literal emergency service alone) in areas where no private companies want to work, or where they cannot profit enough. It will elsewhere be a shield brand. Naturally, these private companies will expect the 'actual' NHS to take over when they quit in a hissy fit, and will also be subsidised by taxation, much like the current train system.

What worries me at least equally is when you see Conservatives talking about offloading other services and infrastructure from government. There've already been rumblings about privatising not just new but also existing roads and motorways. Beyond that, lots of talk around education is pretty scary, putting the building blocks in place to free all schools from government, and enabling privatisation there. Conservative education policy is, at best, extremely troubling and hugely misunderstands the world we exist in, but the notion of offloading schools (under the guise of local control, but in reality corporate control) seems like something from a hideous dystopian novel rather than a reality that could conceivably happen.

And ultimately, it all comes down to money—what people believe we have, and what politicians can convince people we should do with it. The Greens are laughed at for their idea of a citizen's income. The idea there is to essentially eradicate the benefits system alongside radically overhauling taxation, and just pay everyone a 'living wage'. Those who earn would obviously enjoy a better quality of life, and once you're some way up the ladder, your living wage would be taxed back out of you.

This is the kind of thing that sends Daily Mail readers into apoplectic fury, because SCROUNGERS and WORKSHY LAYABOUTS. But it's just a simplification of what we have combined with a safety net, and with an eye on the future where it's pretty damn clear there will be far fewer jobs available. Most importantly, it's also a system that has been tried, albeit only on city scales. Under such circumstances, it was usually a success, but also bulldozed out of existence by people on the right. (See also: just building houses for the homeless rather than trying to deal with people without housing in other ways.)

I think my hope with Corbyn is that he makes more people think about the wider situations. He's clearly not nearly as radical as the Greens, but he has a sense of social justice, and his policies on the whole look to be beneficial for the country as a whole. If that means I take a personal hit myself, in order to assist a few people who have far less, so be it. I'd sooner that than end up with an extra few hundred quid at the end of the year, knowing that many millions of people are now worse off and facing even tougher struggles to survive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 September, 2015, 10:55:51 AM
Quote from: Ghastly McNasty on 17 September, 2015, 10:31:05 AMThe right and the media readily dismiss sensible left-wing ideas based on the principle that the socialist utopia is unachievable, therefore all left ideas are a joke.

A guy on the CBR forum responded to my criticism of the monarchy by saying if I loved communism so much I should go live in a communist country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 17 September, 2015, 10:59:42 AM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 17 September, 2015, 10:55:51 AM
Quote from: Ghastly McNasty on 17 September, 2015, 10:31:05 AMThe right and the media readily dismiss sensible left-wing ideas based on the principle that the socialist utopia is unachievable, therefore all left ideas are a joke.

A guy on the CBR forum responded to my criticism of the monarchy by saying if I loved communism so much I should go live in a communist country.

Gosh. I didn't realise they were the only two choices...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2015, 11:19:55 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2015, 10:51:42 AM
What worries me at least equally is when you see Conservatives talking about offloading other services and infrastructure from government.

Osborne is desperate to meet his deficit promises so he's selling off every national asset he an get away with - it's like selling your fridge and cooker because you're a bit short on the mortgage that month.

wrt various party manifestos, I always find that website useful at elections (can't remember for the moment what its called) - it basically quotes each party's line on various topics like defence, immigration health etc, but without identifying the party to remove any tribal prejudices. You tick the ones that you most approve of, and then at the end it tells you which party's manifesto most closely matches your opinions - it usually tells me Green, which has been true for the last decade or so - it'l be interesting to see if it guides me back to labour next time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 17 September, 2015, 11:37:32 AM
https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ <-- a good one this, and can highlight surprising elements of some parties manifestos that you may not have considered!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2015, 02:12:34 PM
Those sites always show a huge disconnect. The majority of people THINK they are for social justice and equality. The reality is a great number vote for something that is far more about selfishness or, at best, in theory about 'them'. What always strikes me is how few people see the bigger picture. I'm sure we'll head to 2020 with the Conservatives promising income-tax breaks, and deftly ignoring spiralling energy costs (and a lack of UK investment in renewables), employment issues, underinvestment in key services, education being reduced to churning out drones rather than children and teenagers with balanced skills, and so on.

Not that Labour will necessarily have the answers. I just have hope now that there's a chance we'll head into the next election with genuine choice among the two largest parties, and the sense Labour actually stands for something again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 September, 2015, 06:54:19 PM
OWen makes many good points - on that topic, I think the appeal of the Right is that it talks about tangible, experienced things... that is, it is much easier to get someone het up about the guy sitting on his arse falsely claiming beneifts that they know lives at number 32, than it is to talk about hidden crimes of a ridiculously higher magnitude.  Look at the photo of that poor refugee child - personalise and issue and bring it home and you see FB friends who had the previous week been sharing Britain First stuff start talking about teh difference between Migrants and refugees and (whilst still trying to hold on to their previous ratehr nasty worldview), accommodate something else because they have been touched by having to confront the reality of somehting, and not the "let them all drown" 'funz' of the Hopkinites...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 18 September, 2015, 12:52:01 AM
Personally, I don't believe the Right to be superior to the Left, or vice cersa. You need two wings to fly. The fostering of tribalism between the two is a bigger problem than any idealogical flaw from either side.

Right/Left
Liberal/Conservative
Protestant/Catholic
Republican/Monarcist
Republican(again)/Democrat
Republican(once more)/Loyalist
Socialism/Capitlism
Man/Woman
Black/White
Gay/Straight


Us/Them




Divide/Conquer





Drink/Drink again

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 September, 2015, 09:01:31 AM
Prog/prog
Slaine/Slaine
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2015, 09:08:59 AM
Is it really possible to be left and right wing at the same time?
I'm not counting the likes of China, which is Communist only through virtue of being a dictatorship (other than that, it's the most insanely capitalistic society I've ever visited).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 September, 2015, 09:24:10 AM
It's possible to be left and right - Blairites have managed it for years, apparantly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 September, 2015, 10:03:40 AM
And America got North & South...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 18 September, 2015, 11:39:39 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2015, 10:51:42 AM
What's more galling is that moderate socialist ideas are rapidly falling by the wayside, and even moderate centrist ideas are under threat. If this Conservative government continues the way it is, the NHS will at best become a service of last resort (i.e. a literal emergency service alone) in areas where no private companies want to work, or where they cannot profit enough. It will elsewhere be a shield brand. Naturally, these private companies will expect the 'actual' NHS to take over when they quit in a hissy fit, and will also be subsidised by taxation, much like the current train system.

What worries me at least equally is when you see Conservatives talking about offloading other services and infrastructure from government. There've already been rumblings about privatising not just new but also existing roads and motorways. Beyond that, lots of talk around education is pretty scary, putting the building blocks in place to free all schools from government, and enabling privatisation there. Conservative education policy is, at best, extremely troubling and hugely misunderstands the world we exist in, but the notion of offloading schools (under the guise of local control, but in reality corporate control) seems like something from a hideous dystopian novel rather than a reality that could conceivably happen.

And ultimately, it all comes down to money—what people believe we have, and what politicians can convince people we should do with it. The Greens are laughed at for their idea of a citizen's income. The idea there is to essentially eradicate the benefits system alongside radically overhauling taxation, and just pay everyone a 'living wage'. Those who earn would obviously enjoy a better quality of life, and once you're some way up the ladder, your living wage would be taxed back out of you.

This is the kind of thing that sends Daily Mail readers into apoplectic fury, because SCROUNGERS and WORKSHY LAYABOUTS. But it's just a simplification of what we have combined with a safety net, and with an eye on the future where it's pretty damn clear there will be far fewer jobs available. Most importantly, it's also a system that has been tried, albeit only on city scales. Under such circumstances, it was usually a success, but also bulldozed out of existence by people on the right. (See also: just building houses for the homeless rather than trying to deal with people without housing in other ways.)

I think my hope with Corbyn is that he makes more people think about the wider situations. He's clearly not nearly as radical as the Greens, but he has a sense of social justice, and his policies on the whole look to be beneficial for the country as a whole. If that means I take a personal hit myself, in order to assist a few people who have far less, so be it. I'd sooner that than end up with an extra few hundred quid at the end of the year, knowing that many millions of people are now worse off and facing even tougher struggles to survive.

I don't think its correct to say Corbyn is less radical than the Greens. He's just a different type of radical.

The difference between Bennites (which is what Corbyn and McDonnell really are deep down) and the Greens is that the former still believes in economic growth. In the best case scenario, they believe their policies will cause the economy to grow, and in the worst case scenario, they'll still ensure that working people get a fairer share.  The greens on the otherhand don't believe in economic growth, believing that mankind's obsession with getting more and more stuff has damaged the planet, and that if we don't learn to live within our means we'll eventually kill the planet.

This philosophical difference has interesting consequences for how they approach the unpopularity of their ideas. The Greens can argue that its people putting their selfish desires above the needs of the planet, but Bennites can't say that because they seek to meet the material needs of the working classes. So instead they fall back on 'false consciousness', the idea that people have been tricked to vote against their own interests.   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 September, 2015, 12:08:26 PM
To clarify, I mean radicalism in the sense of policy that differs markedly from the status quo—or at least existing general policy. Corbyn wants to renationalise certain industries; Greens would prefer significantly more public ownership than that. Corbyn's keen on more equality regarding incomes; Greens want to entirely overhaul the benefits and income system, with a citizen's income as the base level. And so on. I'm not saying one is necessarily better than the other, but from a radical standpoint, the Green manifesto goes far further from what we currently have than what Corbyn proposes.

Still, on that basis I would also argue that the Greens are essentially unelectable en masse in the current political climate (as much as I'm fond of some of their policies), with Lucas being an outlier on the basis of simply being such a bloody great MP. (If there's a Labour surge or seat boundary changes come 2020, I hope she manages to hang on.) Corbyn, on the other hand, could do fine if his party stopped being such utter pricks. But then you have Mr Eyebrows (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34288568) banging the stupid drum, and that really doesn't help. If you don't know what Corbyn stands for, Darling, you have not been paying attention.

Still, Labour's not quite descended to the comedy show of the Lib Dems, with Farron planting his flag in his foot, trying to differentiate his party by saying they'll be moderate centrists, and that Labour MPs are sending him sadface texts. If he was smart, he'd be running on an anti-austerity and fairness ticket, trying to take back much of the south-west, and gearing up for coalition with Labour. Perhaps he should read his party's own manifesto from 2015 and seek to implement that. I fear instead he'll run on LABOUR ARE EVIL for four-and-a-bit more years, which will help precisely no-one. (I'm also hoping the SNP will calm down a bit as we approach the next election. Otherwise we're in for another depressing repeat as the non-Tories squabble among themselves, leading to another Conservative majority.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 September, 2015, 01:10:04 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 18 September, 2015, 09:01:31 AM
Prog/prog
Slaine/Slaine
Slaine/Sláine
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 September, 2015, 01:16:41 PM
The LibDems have a terminal PR problem of perceived ineffectiveness when in power that will take literally years to go away - if it ever does - so Fallon has nothing to lose by aggressively pissing on Labour's chips any way he can in the hope of at least stopping them from making gains, but also because an advertisement for how ruthless the Tories can be helps him sell the notion that the LibDems were a counterbalance to Tory excesses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 18 September, 2015, 02:46:41 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 September, 2015, 12:08:26 PM
To clarify, I mean radicalism in the sense of policy that differs markedly from the status quo—or at least existing general policy. Corbyn wants to renationalise certain industries; Greens would prefer significantly more public ownership than that. Corbyn's keen on more equality regarding incomes; Greens want to entirely overhaul the benefits and income system, with a citizen's income as the base level. And so on. I'm not saying one is necessarily better than the other, but from a radical standpoint, the Green manifesto goes far further from what we currently have than what Corbyn proposes.

Still, on that basis I would also argue that the Greens are essentially unelectable en masse in the current political climate (as much as I'm fond of some of their policies), with Lucas being an outlier on the basis of simply being such a bloody great MP. (If there's a Labour surge or seat boundary changes come 2020, I hope she manages to hang on.) Corbyn, on the other hand, could do fine if his party stopped being such utter pricks. But then you have Mr Eyebrows (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34288568) banging the stupid drum, and that really doesn't help. If you don't know what Corbyn stands for, Darling, you have not been paying attention.

Still, Labour's not quite descended to the comedy show of the Lib Dems, with Farron planting his flag in his foot, trying to differentiate his party by saying they'll be moderate centrists, and that Labour MPs are sending him sadface texts. If he was smart, he'd be running on an anti-austerity and fairness ticket, trying to take back much of the south-west, and gearing up for coalition with Labour. Perhaps he should read his party's own manifesto from 2015 and seek to implement that. I fear instead he'll run on LABOUR ARE EVIL for four-and-a-bit more years, which will help precisely no-one. (I'm also hoping the SNP will calm down a bit as we approach the next election. Otherwise we're in for another depressing repeat as the non-Tories squabble among themselves, leading to another Conservative majority.)

Yeah I still think you're downplaying how much of the economy Corbyn would want to take back into state ownership - I mean he implied he'd want to renationalise BT! Indeed the whole subtext of the argument over EU membership is that 'People's QE' would almost certainly be illegal under EU laws.

I fear the problem with Corbyn is that he's such a nice man who naturally wants to reach a consensus that he'll compromise too much with those in the party that simply don't want him to succeed. The danger is that deflates those who voted for him so much that they man the barricades to protect him when the moderate putsch comes. Something very similar happened to Iain Duncan Smith.

The Lib Dems are so unbelievably fucked it doesn't really matter what Farron does. I have a nice metaphor that since Labour replaced them as the progressive party of government the Liberals have been like Zion in Matrix. They rise to a certain level but then become so big that they have to be destroyed back to their previously smaller level. Then the survivors spend 20 years rebuilding them back to a certain level only for them to be destroyed again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 September, 2015, 02:55:28 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 18 September, 2015, 01:16:41 PMbut also because an advertisement for how ruthless the Tories can be helps him sell the notion that the LibDems were a counterbalance to Tory excesses.
His problem is that Labour is now positioning itself to be a severe counterbalance, whereas the LDs are "well, we'd only change the bad bits". That's more or less how they positioned themselves in government, and I hear plenty of LD activists banging on about how they as junior partners could "only be a brake" and tried their best.

Utter horseshit. I don't doubt the LDs did actually curb the worst excesses of a harsh Conservative intake, but by the same token, they were horribly naïve. They should have fought for one senior position (Clegg as foreign sec would have been smart, e.g.); they should have stuck to their guns re proportional representation, rather than caving and offering an option no-one ever wanted; and they should have held firm for at least one major battle. Had they derailed the health bill, rather than eventually nodding along, that would have been a tangible win. In the end, they just became a nothing party, and were bizarrely hostile as the election campaign went on. (Personally, I'd say it looked a lot like they assumed they'd lose half their seats but would still end up back in a ConDem coalition. That would explain the vehemently anti-SNP sentiments.)

Quote from: Will Cooling on 18 September, 2015, 02:46:41 PMYeah I still think you're downplaying how much of the economy Corbyn would want to take back into state ownership - I mean he implied he'd want to renationalise BT!
True. And that would be idiotic, given that there is effective communication in the telecoms and broadband space. (Mobile's starting to become a concern, but that's more a job for the competition lot, rather than state ownership.) My thinking on these things is we should only be talking about state ownership for absolutely fundamental services (the bulk of the health service, for example) or where there is no effective competition (trains, water, possibly energy—but I'm not yet entirely convinced about that).

I think you're perhaps right regarding consensus, but I suppose it depends how much of a compromise is reached. Trains: there's really no argument there, because even 50% of Tory voters want them renationalised or in some kind of single-company trust. Defence, however, will be a much harder sell. (That said, it would be interesting if he shifts towards retaining funding, but being much more about peacekeeping, and twins that with binning Trident.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 18 September, 2015, 03:44:08 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 18 September, 2015, 02:46:41 PMI have a nice metaphor that since Labour replaced them as the progressive party of government the Liberals have been like Zion in Matrix. They rise to a certain level but then become so big that they have to be destroyed back to their previously smaller level. Then the survivors spend 20 years rebuilding them back to a certain level only for them to be destroyed again.

That's the geekiest political metaphor I've ever seen - well done that man!

I've been musing on the Start Trek episode "The Corba(y)nite manoeuvre" which revolves around Kirk's use of bluff and lies to defeat an overwhelmingly powerful opponent - who then becomes a friend. Are there any lessons we can draw form this? (probably not, but it amused me  :D)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 September, 2015, 04:17:02 PM
I've been trying to figure out a metaphor using that same Trek episode, but possibly the time for using it was when Tony Blair was giving his dire warnings about electing Corbyn, as my reading of the episode is that his opponent is being led to believe that engaging Kirk will lead to total destruction - except it's all a bluff by a man who claims to represent the egalitarian ideals of utopia despite going around destabilising loads of ancient cultures that were doing just fine before a shipload of Americans came along and started blowing things up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 September, 2015, 05:38:01 PM
Corbyn appoints convicted arsonist as education spokesman.  This is getting better and better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 September, 2015, 05:47:57 PM
I know, it's almost as if he doesn't care how things look in the scandal sheets. It's not terribly likely that Watson is going to go around burning down schools, is it? Maybe Corbyn selected him because he thought he'd do a good job, who knows - it's a novel idea, certainly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 September, 2015, 05:59:12 PM
Well he did set fire to a set of curtains during the Scottish Politician of the Year ceremony in 2004.  Who'd have thought he'd have done that.  Wonder if his middle name's Guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 18 September, 2015, 07:16:18 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 18 September, 2015, 05:47:57 PM
I know, it's almost as if he doesn't care how things look in the scandal sheets. It's not terribly likely that Watson is going to go around burning down schools, is it? Maybe Corbyn selected him because he thought he'd do a good job, who knows - it's a novel idea, certainly.

spot on. the right wing media have written their filth and already put their message in the minds of those who vote that way anyway (the bulk of them who read that press being elderly and very set in their views now).

So Corbyn can just get on with opposing and formulating policy whilst directly engaging the electorate now and who knows what might happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 September, 2015, 07:52:36 PM
Cameron appointed a man who lied about his academic qualifications and is happy to be described as a Capt in the Scots Guard when he left the service as a 1st Lt as employment secretary. Not to mention Grant Schapps' lying about using a different name to operate his dodgy Internet "consultancy" business whilst in Parliament, and using Tory party funds to browbeat a constituent into reiterating that lie. Before we get anywhere near the seemingly endless parade of racists and homophobes that keep crawling out of UKIP's ranks that are hand waved away as 'bad apples' when it's abundantly clear that it's the fucking barrel that's rotten.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 September, 2015, 07:54:55 PM
The media have pretty much made Corbyn bulletproof.  If he appointed a convicted nonce* as education secretary, most people would probably open with "well, he still can't be worse than Gove."



* Although this would imply that Labour MPs could actually get convicted as nonces.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 18 September, 2015, 08:29:58 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2015, 09:08:59 AM
Is it really possible to be left and right wing at the same time?

Someone told me once that supporters of the political philosopher Hegel split into two opposing groups. Young Hegelians (or Left Regelians) and Right Hegelians. These two groups are supposedly where the term Left Wing and Right Wing come from. If the two groups of his supporters had such opposing ideas, would Hegel have entertained both left and right ideas? *

*Or I am just talking rubbish?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 18 September, 2015, 08:39:55 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 18 September, 2015, 08:29:58 PM
These two groups are supposedly where the term Left Wing and Right Wing come from.

Totes going to butt in here and mention that "left wing" and "right wing" come from the French Revolution, and referred to where politicians sat in the French Parliament. Those who sat to the right broadly supported the old monarchist Ancien Régime, those on the left tended towards more radical points of view.

/historygeek
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 18 September, 2015, 08:42:20 PM
That's why I come to these boards -to be correctly informed..  :lol: Thanks Molch-r!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 September, 2015, 08:52:35 PM
Quote from: Molch-R on 18 September, 2015, 08:39:55 PM
Totes going to butt in here and mention that "left wing" and "right wing" come from the French Revolution, and referred to where politicians sat in the French Parliament. Those who sat to the right broadly supported the old monarchist Ancien Régime, those on the left tended towards more radical points of view.

/historygeek

This is the internet — there's no place here for you and your so-called-facts!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 19 September, 2015, 09:43:42 PM
Quote from: Vroomfondel on 18 September, 2015, 08:52:35 PM
This is the internet — there's no place here for you and your so-called-facts!

"What we demand is a total absence of solid facts!"

(http://themetricmaven.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Metric-Philosphers.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 September, 2015, 12:42:05 AM
(http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article10229573.ece/alternates/w460/v3-Sun-Miliband.jpg)

....a leader could do much worse things with a pig...


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPYe4fXWwAACE8_.jpg)

Black Mirror promo 2011
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 September, 2015, 01:41:47 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 September, 2015, 12:42:05 AM
....a leader could do much worse things with a pig...

Black Mirror promo 2011
Charlie Brooker?  Who did some early work for Oink! from IPC Magazines?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jDE4ltJ3C5s/VSVkayEt1kI/AAAAAAAADIY/nHfXVi4SHI0/s1600/Cover58.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 September, 2015, 08:14:58 AM
Surely that's Cameron done?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 08:26:07 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 September, 2015, 08:14:58 AM
Surely that's Cameron done?

You'd hope so - but as the BBC aren't even reporting it at the moment...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 08:27:11 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 September, 2015, 05:38:01 PM
Corbyn appoints convicted arsonist as education spokesman.  This is getting better and better.

Better or worse than having sex with a dead pig?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 September, 2015, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 08:27:11 AM
Better or worse than having sex with a dead pig?

I would have thought the cannabis and cocaine allegations are at least as damaging politically as sticking your cock into a dead pig's mouth.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 September, 2015, 08:48:19 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 08:26:07 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 September, 2015, 08:14:58 AM
Surely that's Cameron done?

You'd hope so - but as the BBC aren't even reporting it at the moment...

They're pretty slow these days. Still, it's an unnamed source, with charter renewal coming up, and after the kicking they got over McAlpine, I'm sure they're happy to see where it goes - I wonder how they covered the newspaper reviews last night, guessing it was on the front cover of the Mail?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 September, 2015, 08:49:51 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 September, 2015, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 08:27:11 AM
Better or worse than having sex with a dead pig?

I would have thought the cannabis and cocaine allegations are at least as damaging politically as sticking your cock into a dead pig's mouth.

Cheers

Jim

I doubt anyone gives a shit about cannabis, and the coke and dominatrix stuff hasn't seemed to dent Osborne.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 21 September, 2015, 09:02:26 AM
Hameron!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 09:15:42 AM
Just found out about this. Holy fucking shit. I suppose, to be fair, it's a victimless crime, assuming the pig was pre-slaughtered. But it's horrible, lord of the flies shit, and if it sinks Cameron I believe Britain will be better off for it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 September, 2015, 09:18:57 AM
Its a load of porkies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 September, 2015, 09:18:57 AM
Its a load of porkies.

Ahhh, you could well be right. Still, interesting morning on twitter for a change
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 10:40:06 AM
Can't wait for the public questions on PMQs this week!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 11:02:50 AM
Y'know, I'm kind of resisting the temptation to gloat and revel in Cameron's shame, because to be honest I've always thought we of Ireland and Britain have always been far too obsessed with what other people do with their private parts. 

If Cameron did this (and that's a big 'if'), well, it's repulsive, ugly and gruesome; but as far as I know it's not a crime, there was non-consenting victim and nobody was harmed (except for the pig, of course, but you can hardly blame Cameron for its death).
 
I think Cameron should be far more ashamed of the elitist, self-serving and divisive policies he is gradually inflicting on the UK than something stupid he did years ago as a student.  If this scandal finishes his career, well, frankly I'll be glad to see the back of him - it's a shame, though, that people are more scandalised about his sticking a part of his body into a piece of discarded meat than they are about the actions of his government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 September, 2015, 11:13:42 AM
What Jayzus said.  If your PM wants to act out goyim-versions of scenes from Portnoy's Complaint, that's his business.  It's everything else he says and does that bothers me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 11:13:51 AM
Yes, whilst the Cameron Pig Love scandal is hilarious, it's completely trivial and should have no political significance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 11:13:51 AM
Yes, whilst the Cameron Pig Love scandal is hilarious, it's completely trivial and should have no political significance.

From a political stand point the question is, would this scandal undermine his ability to negotiate domestically and internationally. Say he was trying to enter talks with Russia over their worrying expansionist ambitions and Putin decided to answer his concerns by asking if Dave had stuck his dick in any dead pigs recently' Iran could refuse to be lectured by a man that stuffs his pork sword into a pig cadavers gob. Al-Assad could publicly enquire as to weather is was just his flaccid member our PM stuffed into the waiting ham or if it was his balls too.

Maybe they would be above that kind of thing and maybe they wouldn't (I know I'm not and I'm not even 100% sure he did it)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 September, 2015, 11:44:27 AM
It won't finish him. And while there's the spectacle of that act, the bigger issue that is specific to this story surrounds drugs. He took them. Then he fought for their legalisation. And then it became clear he would be a big voice in the Conservative Party, at which point he suddenly fell silent, apart from occasionally saying THINK OF THE CHILDREN after becoming a parent. Frankly, I'd rather think of the drug addicts who would be better served with a Portuguese-style system, the recreational cannabis users who aren't harming anyone (and perhaps wonder at the rank hypocrisy of alcohol and tobacco being freely available), and the people who genuinely find cannabis assists with horrible medical conditions.

But then that's always the way with politics, and with our system where elections swing on a few thousand conservative (small C) votes. Get into power and your policies surrounding drugs always become hardline, no matter where you start. That still doesn't get Cameron off the hook, though, the hypocrite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 11:30:19 AM
From a political stand point the question is, would this scandal undermine his ability to negotiate domestically and internationally. Say he was trying to enter talks with Russia over their worrying expansionist ambitions and Putin decided to answer his concerns by asking if Dave had stuck his dick in any dead pigs recently' Iran could refuse to be lectured by a man that stuffs his pork sword into a pig cadavers gob. Al-Assad could publicly enquire as to weather is was just his flaccid member our PM stuffed into the waiting ham or if it was his balls too.

Maybe they would be above that kind of thing and maybe they wouldn't (I know I'm not and I'm not even 100% sure he did it)

They might indeed say that stuff (who could blame them?) but it wouldn't change the outcome of the negotiations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 12:02:26 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 11:52:25 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 11:30:19 AM
From a political stand point the question is, would this scandal undermine his ability to negotiate domestically and internationally. Say he was trying to enter talks with Russia over their worrying expansionist ambitions and Putin decided to answer his concerns by asking if Dave had stuck his dick in any dead pigs recently' Iran could refuse to be lectured by a man that stuffs his pork sword into a pig cadavers gob. Al-Assad could publicly enquire as to weather is was just his flaccid member our PM stuffed into the waiting ham or if it was his balls too.

Maybe they would be above that kind of thing and maybe they wouldn't (I know I'm not and I'm not even 100% sure he did it)

They might indeed say that stuff (who could blame them?) but it wouldn't change the outcome of the negotiations.

Undermining someone's credibility weakens their position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 01:03:10 PM
I'm just going to take a five second break from being mature about the whole thing and point out that before Cameron was involved with the Big Society, he was part of the Pig Society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 21 September, 2015, 01:39:00 PM
David Cameron something something ham-ass!

Sorry I'm very tired today and this story deserves better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 01:45:45 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 12:02:26 PM
Undermining someone's credibility weakens their position.

Yes, but this story doesn't remotely undermine Cameron's credibility. It's essentially just a bit of fun.

By contrast, if he loses the EU treaty vote he will almost certainly have to go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 01:45:45 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 12:02:26 PM
Undermining someone's credibility weakens their position.

Yes, but this story doesn't remotely undermine Cameron's credibility. It's essentially just a bit of fun.

By contrast, if he loses the EU treaty vote he will almost certainly have to go.

That's why I asked 'would this scandal undermine him', rather then stating that it would. I think as a rumour its harmless enough but if there was proof or if the public refuse to let it go of if any one were to start legal action then it could become damaging. He could very easily find any attempt to storm international moral high ground totally demolished.

I understand that you think it won't harm him but that doesn't mean it can't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 September, 2015, 02:33:54 PM
Plus the drugs thing, as noted. His stance used to be surprisingly laudable. Then... not so much. Now: hypocrite central.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 02:51:15 PM
Today I have added my name to a petition in support of Free school meals for infants because scrapping them is the actions of a Dickensian villain. I haven't started any kind of petition to stop the PM gob knobbing dead pigs because it was probably a one off. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 02:55:27 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 01:45:45 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 12:02:26 PM
Undermining someone's credibility weakens their position.

Yes, but this story doesn't remotely undermine Cameron's credibility. It's essentially just a bit of fun.

By contrast, if he loses the EU treaty vote he will almost certainly have to go.

Really? Looking at that man and knowing he may have once committed an act necrophilliac beastiality doesn't undermine his credibility?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 02:56:17 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
That's why I asked 'would this scandal undermine him', rather then stating that it would. I think as a rumour its harmless enough but if there was proof or if the public refuse to let it go of if any one were to start legal action then it could become damaging. He could very easily find any attempt to storm international moral high ground totally demolished.

I understand that you think it won't harm him but that doesn't mean it can't.

Legal action based on what? Nothing illegal is alleged to have taken place. I guess it's vaguely possible that national outrage could force him to go, but would that really happen? A lot of people that really don't care would have to pretend very hard that they do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DaveGYNWA on 21 September, 2015, 02:57:07 PM
I know it's not mature, but feck it:

Tory-pig.
Tory-pig.
Does whatever a Tory-pig does.
Did he care what David did?
No he didn't cos' he's a pig.
Look out.
He is the Tory-pig.

Fucked a pig.
Fucked a pig.
David Cameron fucked a pig.
Will he ever live this down?
No he won't cos he's a clown.
Look out.
He fucked a pig.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 03:03:21 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 02:55:27 PM
Really? Looking at that man and knowing he may have once committed an act necrophilliac beastiality doesn't undermine his credibility?

I can genuinely say it makes no difference to me whether he did or didn't do it.

Unless I've underestimated your love for Cameron quite considerably, I'm pretty sure you don't think any less of him after this story broke either ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 September, 2015, 03:08:12 PM
At least Miliband didn't fuck the sandwich.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 03:10:20 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 03:03:21 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 21 September, 2015, 02:55:27 PM
Really? Looking at that man and knowing he may have once committed an act necrophilliac beastiality doesn't undermine his credibility?

I can genuinely say it makes no difference to me whether he did or didn't do it.

Unless I've underestimated your love for Cameron quite considerably, I'm pretty sure you don't think any less of him after this story broke either ;)

Surprisingly, I didn't *think* I could think any less of him, but hey! I do now! ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 02:56:17 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
That's why I asked 'would this scandal undermine him', rather then stating that it would. I think as a rumour its harmless enough but if there was proof or if the public refuse to let it go of if any one were to start legal action then it could become damaging. He could very easily find any attempt to storm international moral high ground totally demolished.

I understand that you think it won't harm him but that doesn't mean it can't.


Legal action based on what? Nothing illegal is alleged to have taken place. I guess it's vaguely possible that national outrage could force him to go, but would that really happen? A lot of people that really don't care would have to pretend very hard that they do.

Slander. It would be a mistake for DC to start legal action (plebe gate is a good example of attempting to clear your name just making things worse)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 03:20:51 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:14:13 PM
Slander. It would be a mistake for DC to start legal action (plebe gate is a good example of attempting to clear your name just making things worse)

I hope it happens, and that Cameron's defence is that he did everything that is alleged, but it was beautiful and natural and that anyone who says he wasn't deeply in love with the pig's corpse is a despicable liar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:40:07 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 03:20:51 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:14:13 PM
Slander. It would be a mistake for DC to start legal action (plebe gate is a good example of attempting to clear your name just making things worse)

I hope it happens, and that Cameron's defence is that he did everything that is alleged, but it was beautiful and natural and that anyone who says he wasn't deeply in love with the pig's corpse is a despicable liar.

I know I would be more likely to vote for him if he did that. I wouldn't vote for his policies but I would vote for his man/dead pig love platform...

I want a lawyer to ask him exactly how much of his genitailer he forced, like greasy pink play dough, into the pigs accepting maw.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 03:46:59 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 03:20:51 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:14:13 PM
Slander. It would be a mistake for DC to start legal action (plebe gate is a good example of attempting to clear your name just making things worse)

I hope it happens, and that Cameron's defence is that he did everything that is alleged, but it was beautiful and natural and that anyone who says he wasn't deeply in love with the pig's corpse is a despicable liar.

Fair play, that made me laugh more than any other piggate comments on the interweb today, which is saying something. 
I'm kind of deeply disturbed by the madness of the whole thing, but retain my original stance - his political actions are far, far more scandalous than a posh wank with a bit of offal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 September, 2015, 03:50:48 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:40:07 PM
I want a lawyer to ask him exactly how much of his genitailer he forced, like greasy pink play dough, into the pigs accepting maw.

The internet, today you bestride it as victor. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 04:02:34 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 21 September, 2015, 03:50:48 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:40:07 PM
I want a lawyer to ask him exactly how much of his genitailer he forced, like greasy pink play dough, into the pigs accepting maw.

The internet, today you bestride it as victor.

I don't know why everyone keeps implying he was flaccid at the time. Have some respect: It's a serious allegation to imply he wasn't aroused by his cold, meaty lover.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 04:14:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 04:02:34 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 21 September, 2015, 03:50:48 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 21 September, 2015, 03:40:07 PM
I want a lawyer to ask him exactly how much of his genitailer he forced, like greasy pink play dough, into the pigs accepting maw.

The internet, today you bestride it as victor.

I don't know why everyone keeps implying he was flaccid at the time. Have some respect: It's a serious allegation to imply he wasn't aroused by his cold, meaty lover.

I guess how aroused he was depends on how much it looked like Margaret Thatcher
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 21 September, 2015, 04:26:18 PM
I can't believe that you lot are all focussing on the trivial and insignificant aspects of this story and are ignoring the most serious allegation – that we are being ruled by a man that listened to a Supertramp album.

What's wrong with this forum these days?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 September, 2015, 05:24:11 PM
This is how far we've gone.  Corbyn's a far left lunatic for daring to suggest that newly printed money should be used for the public good.

The snp are extremists for suggesting that a referendum should be held if the majority are in favour of it. 

The lib dems have fallen down a hole never to be seen again. 

The prime minister might have defiled a dead pig...but what the heck, never mind, it's just one of those things, a jolly jape, boys will be boys.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 21 September, 2015, 05:55:12 PM
People who vote Tory shouldn't be allowed to read 2000ad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 21 September, 2015, 05:55:30 PM
Just saying...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 September, 2015, 06:16:36 PM
Just catching up on the news now. An act of necrophiliac bestiality had me in stitches. You literally couldn't make this stuff up. The press have poured buckets of excrement innumerable over Corbyn; yet our future is in the hands of this shower of arrogant, debauched fucking vermin. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 September, 2015, 06:34:54 PM
I think it's a ploy to make Osborne look more palatable for only being a coke fiend who likes to snort blow off hookers' tits.

And for those of you not already aware of it via Twitter: https://youtu.be/FBpQJ98rR4o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 21 September, 2015, 06:40:36 PM
I find it really interesting that the least-reported part of this story by everyone is the most significant and it was the "biased beeb" that illuminated it to me.

If this is true, or if it's not true - it's the basis of a seriously miffed piece by Lord Ashcroft - the billionaire tax-exile feller who has basically bankrolled the entire party for the last decade or so (until he quit in a huff in 2010). Beyond the pig there's something quite big going on here - a massive and growing split in the heart of the party. Ashcroft also claims that Cammy Boy is resolutely "only in it for the power and doesn't seem to want to use it to do anything". No honour amongst thieves and swine-fuckers, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 September, 2015, 06:43:06 PM
Negative interest rates on currency.
That brings me to the third, and perhaps most radical and durable, option. It is one which brings together issues of currency and monetary policy. It involves finding a technological means either of levying a negative interest rate on currency, or of breaking the constraint physical currency

imposes on setting such a rate (Buiter (2009)).
.
These options are not new. Over a century ago,
Silvio Gesell proposed levying a stamp tax on
currency to generate a negative interest rate
(Gesell (1916)). Keynes discussed this scheme,
approvingly, in the General Theory. More
recently, a number of modern-day variants of
the stamp tax on currency have been proposed
– for example, by randomly invalidating
banknotes by serial number (Mankiw (2009),
Goodfriend (2000)).
.

A more radical proposal still would be to
remove the ZLB constraint entirely by
abolishing paper currency. This, too, has
recently had its supporters (for example,
Rogoff (2014)). As well as solving the ZLB
problem, it has the added advantage of taxing
illicit activities undertaken using paper
currency, such as drug-dealing, at source.
.
A third option is to set an explicit exchange
rate between paper currency and electronic (or
bank) money. Having paper currency steadily
depreciate relative to digital money effectively
generates a negative interest rate on currency,
provided electronic money is accepted by the
public as the unit of account rather than
currency. This again is an old idea (Eisler (1932))
, recently revitalised and updated (for example,
Kimball (2015)).
.
From a speech (http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/speeches/2015/840.aspx) given by Andrew Haldane (Chief Economist and the Executive Director of Monetary Analysis and Statistics at the Bank of England) on 18 September 2015 at the Portadown Chamber of
Commerce, Northern Ireland.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 06:55:28 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 21 September, 2015, 06:16:36 PM
Just catching up on the news now. An act of necrophiliac bestiality had me in stitches. You literally couldn't make this stuff up.

Let's be fair though: you could if you wanted.  A large part of me is enjoying the idea of Cameron squirming, but we don't know if this story is true or not. 
I believe if you want to lay the groundwork for a fairer society, you have to be fair to everyone, awful fuckers like Dave included. 

The problem with a Twitter-storm like this one is that a person has lost the battle before they even know they have to defend themselves.

By all means judge the man on his policies (and I think he's a near-sociopathic,  privileged little fuck with no regard whatsoever for the less privileged) but this pig thing, entertaining and all as it is, is unsubstantiated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 07:02:47 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 21 September, 2015, 05:55:12 PM
People who vote Tory shouldn't be allowed to read 2000ad.

Yes, absolutely, because it's important that only people that agree with you are allowed to read it.

I just hope you can afford to make up for any shortfall this might create in Rebellion's accounts...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 September, 2015, 07:35:35 PM
Dunno if Rebellion can take a £5.90 hit. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 07:38:23 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 21 September, 2015, 05:24:11 PM
This is how far we've gone.  Corbyn's a far left lunatic for daring to suggest that newly printed money should be used for the public good.

The snp are extremists for suggesting that a referendum should be held if the majority are in favour of it. 

The lib dems have fallen down a hole never to be seen again. 

The prime minister might have defiled a dead pig...but what the heck, never mind, it's just one of those things, a jolly jape, boys will be boys.

Heh, this is the first time I've ever seen this combination of (seemingly unrelated) views expressed, so I'm not sure who is supposed to have gone as far as you say.

For my own point I don't agree with any of the statements, except possibly number 3.

Corbyn's economic policy probably would have some nasty side-effects. but then so does Osborne's.

The SNP only exist to achieve independence, so obviously whatever their campaign promises they are going to want a second referendum (and if it comes to it a third, and a fourth, and so on). It's not an extremist view, it's just tiresome to replay the same arguments all the time.

The LibDems might comes back as a Centre Left party. There's certainly a gap now. Personally I think the brand is toxic for a generation and social democrats are better off making peace with the Corbynistas.

Cameron's alleged transgression wasn't at all a jolly jape, it seems more likely he was the victim of some pretty horrible public school-style bullying (I guess if you really, really hate Cameron you could construct a scenario in which the initiation ceremony was more like "eat a tin of cold beans" but a young Cam was adamant he was going to fuck the dead pig, come what may. However I think it more likely that if it happened at all he was more or less forced to do it at the risk of some pretty dire social consequences should he refuse). Not that I'm saying I sympathize with him over this, just that I can't summon up the energy to be angry with him for it, or indeed really to care at all.

It's his politics that are the problem, and that's all I am actually concerned about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 September, 2015, 08:12:14 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 07:38:23 PM
However I think it more likely that if it happened at all he was more or less forced to do it at the risk of some pretty dire social consequences should he refuse).

Because, of course, actually going through with it would have no dire social consequences whatsoever.

I think it's obvious why he doesn't just deny it if it isn't true. If he says it's rubbish, the next question is "what about all this other stuff, then?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 September, 2015, 08:24:26 PM
Actually, scrap that last bit. Just noticed that they've decided that they are denying it now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 September, 2015, 08:55:40 PM

Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 07:38:23 PM
Because, of course, actually going through with it would have no dire social consequence whatsoever.

Never thought I'd be sticking up for Fuckface* Cameron, but when did we all start believing the Daily Mail anyway?

*I've just realised how apt that title would be if this rumour was substantiated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 September, 2015, 09:10:43 PM
QuoteHeh, this is the first time I've ever seen this combination of (seemingly unrelated) views expressed, so I'm not sure who is supposed to have gone as far as you say.

It was just an inarticulate rant.

It annoys me hugely that the opposition parties have either destroyed themselves, or are so viciously treated by the media that even sensible policies are regarded as lunacy.

Meanwhile, the government introduces policies which devastate the lives of the most vulnerable but are pretty much untouchable.  The prime minister could literally fuck a dead pig and the whole debacle can be easily dismissed as irrelevant, because there is simple no alternative.  I agree that policy should be the only thing that matters, but I also think that we should be led by the best of us. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 21 September, 2015, 09:20:09 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 21 September, 2015, 09:10:43 PM
It annoys me hugely that the opposition parties have either destroyed themselves, or are so viciously treated by the media that even sensible policies are regarded as lunacy.

Meanwhile, the government introduces policies which devastate the lives of the most vulnerable but are pretty much untouchable.  The prime minister could literally fuck a dead pig and the whole debacle can be easily dismissed as irrelevant, because there is simple no alternative.  I agree that policy should be the only thing that matters, but I also think that we should be led by the best of us.

You make a good point. I didn't vote for Cameron before, which is one reason I don't care. It'd be interesting to hear from any 2010 and/or 2015 Conservative voters to see if the pig-fucking has made a difference to them.

Only, Tory voters are banned from buying 2000AD, so they probably won't read this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 September, 2015, 10:15:56 PM
Coincidentally, this is what greeted me when I logged in to Facebook this afternoon...

(https://scontent-bru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/313191_10150378342177792_1855877824_n.jpg?oh=a35df2fa93eca81b3b7b9ff0f9fb916c&oe=56601CF7)

I got it four years ago to this very day apparently. It was a free gift with a Simpson's comic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 September, 2015, 10:59:05 PM
Double post, not to acknowledge annoying stray apostrophe in last post, but to point out that this sort of thing does seem to run in Cameron's family...

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2013/12/exclusive-cameron-the-great-pm-is-related-to-catherine-ii/ (http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2013/12/exclusive-cameron-the-great-pm-is-related-to-catherine-ii/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 21 September, 2015, 11:11:40 PM
Quote from: SpikesPeople who vote Tory shouldn't be allowed to read 2000ad.

The values that the Labour Party espoused ahead of losing the General Election – when even its Shadow Chancellor was booted out by his own constituents – have been subsequently rejected wholeheartedly by the vast majority of the party's own membership, proving that there were no compelling reasons to vote for Labour whatsoever.

With no other credible candidate here (ie. just Con, Lab, Lib-Dem and UKIP), because of lower taxes, because of a basically good local MP, and because I didn't see Ed Miliband being able to run a bath let alone a country, I voted Tory at the election rather than waste my vote. However, liking a lot of what Jeremy Corbyn was saying, I also signed up to the Labour Party to vote for him a few weeks ago.

I guess I'll reconsider my vote again in a few years, but in the meantime I hope Labour can offer a more worthwhile and robust opposition which can temper the Tories' extremes and benefit our democracy, and come up with reasons to vote for them – reasons which people across the country ultimately found so lacking last time.

With that in mind, am I allowed to read 2000 AD again now...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 21 September, 2015, 11:19:11 PM
Quote from: Banners on 21 September, 2015, 11:11:40 PM
Quote from: SpikesPeople who vote Tory shouldn't be allowed to read 2000ad.

The values that the Labour Party espoused ahead of losing the General Election – when even its Shadow Chancellor was booted out by his own constituents – have been subsequently rejected wholeheartedly by the vast majority of the party's own membership, proving that there were no compelling reasons to vote for Labour whatsoever.

With no other credible candidate here (ie. just Con, Lab, Lib-Dem and UKIP), because of lower taxes, because of a basically good local MP, and because I didn't see Ed Miliband being able to run a bath let alone a country, I voted Tory at the election rather than waste my vote. However, liking a lot of what Jeremy Corbyn was saying, I also signed up to the Labour Party to vote for him a few weeks ago.

I guess I'll reconsider my vote again in a few years, but in the meantime I hope Labour can offer a more worthwhile and robust opposition which can temper the Tories' extremes and benefit our democracy, and come up with reasons to vote for them – reasons which people across the country ultimately found so lacking last time.

With that in mind, am I allowed to read 2000 AD again now...?

For the time being, yes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 21 September, 2015, 11:21:13 PM
I'll consider myself on probation ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 September, 2015, 12:44:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 September, 2015, 06:43:06 PM
Negative interest rates on currency.
That brings me to the third, and perhaps most radical and durable, option. It is one which brings together issues of currency and monetary policy. It involves finding a technological means either of levying a negative interest rate on currency, or of breaking the constraint physical currency

imposes on setting such a rate (Buiter (2009)).
.
These options are not new. Over a century ago,
Silvio Gesell proposed levying a stamp tax on
currency to generate a negative interest rate
(Gesell (1916)). Keynes discussed this scheme,
approvingly, in the General Theory. More
recently, a number of modern-day variants of
the stamp tax on currency have been proposed
– for example, by randomly invalidating
banknotes by serial number (Mankiw (2009),
Goodfriend (2000)).
.

A more radical proposal still would be to
remove the ZLB constraint entirely by
abolishing paper currency. This, too, has
recently had its supporters (for example,
Rogoff (2014)). As well as solving the ZLB
problem, it has the added advantage of taxing
illicit activities undertaken using paper
currency, such as drug-dealing, at source.
.
A third option is to set an explicit exchange
rate between paper currency and electronic (or
bank) money. Having paper currency steadily
depreciate relative to digital money effectively
generates a negative interest rate on currency,
provided electronic money is accepted by the
public as the unit of account rather than
currency. This again is an old idea (Eisler (1932))
, recently revitalised and updated (for example,
Kimball (2015)).
.
From a speech (http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/speeches/2015/840.aspx) given by Andrew Haldane (Chief Economist and the Executive Director of Monetary Analysis and Statistics at the Bank of England) on 18 September 2015 at the Portadown Chamber of
Commerce, Northern Ireland.
.

You'll be wanting the OTHER politics thread. This one's strictly piggy-fiddling for the foreseeable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 08:24:25 AM
Politics is all piggy-fiddling as far as I can make out...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 10:38:00 AM
Those of you who have been disappointed by certain of the media's Corbyn coverage might enjoy the following editorial in The Grauniad:
.
Why I take issue with the Observer's stance on Jeremy Corbyn (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/20/ed-vulliamy-jeremy-corbyn-observer-editorial), by Ed Vulliamy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 September, 2015, 10:53:08 AM
The Guardian was especially rubbish. Trying hard to claw back lost readers now the mask's slipped. Pretty clear they were for a long while expecting a Cooper win and presenting coverage accordingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 September, 2015, 11:11:39 AM
Sort of reminds me of the piss-awful Irish Independent, which before the Marriage Equality referendum was full of dire warnings about the breakdown of traditional Irish society* but afterwards decided it was pro gay marriage all along. Pathetic.

At least the Guardian is letting journalists acknowledge their prior misgivings rather than desperately trying to airbrush out history Engsoc-style.

*Like being poor and pissed on by priests while country leaders buy islands were such great traditions to preserve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 September, 2015, 11:44:51 AM
The Independent is perhaps worse. Backing the coalition before the election (with the laughable hope it would be more 'liberal' and less 'conservative'), haemorrhaging readers, and then desperately trying to claw them back with countless anti-government articles.

The Lib Dems hardly covered themselves in glory, but specifically backing them would have been one thing, but the coalition as a whole? Even worse when some of the paper's staff noted they had no idea this would happen and the orders came from the owner.

If things don't change dramatically come 2020, it'll be interesting to see where allegiances lie then. Papers will have a stark choice between backing a Conservative Party hostile to anyone but the rich, or an untested Labour administration that could be a big risk but also a big win. (Farron will of course be jumping up and down, yelling NOTICE ME!, but, well, he can get knotted.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 September, 2015, 11:46:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 10:38:00 AM
Those of you who have been disappointed by certain of the media's Corbyn coverage might enjoy the following editorial in The Grauniad:
.
Why I take issue with the Observer's stance on Jeremy Corbyn (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/20/ed-vulliamy-jeremy-corbyn-observer-editorial), by Ed Vulliamy.

That's one of the things about the gariand I dislike, its so London/Westminster focused, their treatment of Corbyn is similar to their treatment of the SNP/Nicola, they just can't get their head round popular opposition, unless its a continent away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 September, 2015, 12:21:54 PM
What?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/09/20/22/2C8C1B4400000578-3242504-A_distinguished_Oxford_contemporary_claims_Cameron_once_took_par-m-25_1442785115159.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 12:31:57 PM
You can actually see the evil rubbing off his thumb onto the pig...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 September, 2015, 12:41:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 10:38:00 AM
Those of you who have been disappointed by certain of the media's Corbyn coverage might enjoy the following editorial in The Grauniad:
.
Why I take issue with the Observer's stance on Jeremy Corbyn (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/20/ed-vulliamy-jeremy-corbyn-observer-editorial), by Ed Vulliamy.

Note the comments section is full of people telling the Gurnidig where to stick its apology.  They know it's not only insincere, it's going to be linked to again and again in articles in the coming weeks to justify their claims of impartiality and/or self-awareness, and that is the only reason they're publishing it at all - so they can continue to spam their articles with links to Gurndian content in a self-flagellating quest to drive up their web traffic.
I dunno who this guy is, but apart from sounding uncannily like the Mark and Lard Show impression of Cliff Richard, he makes some salient points about the lives of privilege enjoyed by Guardian writers that in turn insulates them from the concerns of society: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jydvEimopA
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 22 September, 2015, 01:04:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 12:31:57 PM
You can actually see the evil rubbing off his thumb onto the pig...


Notice how he wasn't wearing his wedding ring for this porcine encounter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 22 September, 2015, 01:38:56 PM
brings a whole new meaning to pulled pork dunnit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 September, 2015, 02:00:50 PM


(http://theorwellprize.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/animal-farm1-248x300.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 September, 2015, 02:13:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2015, 12:31:57 PM
You can actually see the evil rubbing off his thumb onto the pig...

Is that what they're calling it now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 September, 2015, 02:40:09 PM
I liked a version of that Orwell quote I saw earlier:

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was— OH MY GOD WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 22 September, 2015, 04:07:27 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/OymI4QQ.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 22 September, 2015, 04:37:48 PM
^^^^^^
Effing :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 22 September, 2015, 07:10:15 PM
From the Rubberbandits:

"I'm waiting for a journalist to talk about the real reason David Cameron stuck his mickey in a pigs mouth. Here's why.

To facilitate corruption. He did it in the Bullingdon club in Oxford. A club full of rich boys who end up ruling British politics. They do mad shit like that to strengthen fraternity and most importantly, so everyone in the club has dirt on each other. Protecting them all from whistleblowers when they become corrupt bastard politicians. No different to what the Hells Angels do to keep undercover police away."

From the Leveller, a very worthwhile (and much shared today) article by Lawrence Richards:

"David Cameron's nasty little scandal speaks to a suspicion many people already have: that in British society, you don't get to become Prime Minister because you're talented or because you work hard. You don't even get there just because you're rich. You get there by traumatizing the homeless and skull-fucking a dead pig, and that ritual gives you power because you have demonstrated utter, pathetic submission to your fellow oligarchs.

That is why we're laughing."

http://theleveller.org/2015/09/british-really-laughing/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 September, 2015, 08:40:47 PM
I was on a stage weekend with one of the rubberbandits once, before he was a rubberbandit. Had loads of craic with him.  We both inadvertently  took the same joke away from the weekend to use in our respective standup routines (his comedy career being far more successful, long lived and indeed funny than mine).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 September, 2015, 10:44:20 AM
Hilda Murrell, Dr Kelly, I fully expect the MP who is/was holding that pic of the Pig's Head to meet with  a nasty accident...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 September, 2015, 11:00:34 AM
(http://41.media.tumblr.com/ba2b841b007385a13a4b4a65c8f280d3/tumblr_nv38k5qpYK1s6ylubo1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 24 September, 2015, 11:05:19 AM
Such a shame there was no PMQs yesterday. MPs only seemed to be back for one week and now they're off again...!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 September, 2015, 01:42:48 PM
he aint denied it yet has he?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 September, 2015, 02:54:21 PM
That's why it's such a brilliant piece of political back stabbing, how can the Prime Minister confirm or deny that he stuck his private parts in a pigs head.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 24 September, 2015, 03:26:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 September, 2015, 01:42:48 PM
he aint denied it yet has he?

And when did you stop beating your wife?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 September, 2015, 04:14:54 PM
It's a tricky one.  If he denies it he obviously takes it seriously enough to be worried about it, so it's probably true. If he doesn't deny it,  it's still probably true because he didn't deny it.  He's fucked either way.  I've just finished reading Catch-22 by the way.

Don't get me wrong though,  Cameron is a prick.  I'm very skeptical about the pigfucking allegations but that doesn't make him any less of a pigfucker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 September, 2015, 04:27:15 PM
Well, the end of days are truly upon us as the forum finally believe something that has been published in the Daily Mail and have turned on the Guardian.

Just for balance, I'm sure you've all seen the co-author being interviewed about this, with a smirk on her face. She said something along the lines of, it's up to the reader to believe this or not.

One thing we can all take from this, if Lord Ashcroft wants a job, make sure you cave in and give him what he wants, or else get ready for a story!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 September, 2015, 04:38:59 PM
Yep,that's about right CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 September, 2015, 04:41:01 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 September, 2015, 04:27:15 PM
Well, the end of days are truly upon us as Forum finally believe something that has been published in the Daily Mail and have turned on the Guardian.


No, not really. A few people hardly constitutes 'The Forum'.

For what it's worth - I don't know if the allegations are true but I still believe Cameron is a massive Cunt for a lot of reasons. Pig-Fucking is the thin end of the wedge.

The newspapers you mentioned are Shit. Quite a lot of the Media, in general, could be considered Shit. Truth seems to be irrelevant these days.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2015, 04:41:59 PM
We believe the Mail because they've printed something on their level, while we've turned on the Guardian because it's not liberal enough.  Seems like business as usual to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 September, 2015, 05:46:53 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 24 September, 2015, 04:41:01 PM
For what it's worth - I don't know if the allegations are true but I still believe Cameron is a massive Cunt for a lot of reasons.

Ditto.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 September, 2015, 07:52:05 PM
I'm just here for shits and gigls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 September, 2015, 08:01:00 PM
Mmm, a quick review of this thread shows a healthy level of scepticism from most posters as to the truth of the story.At the same time most of us believe Cameron more than capable of getting into this situation, because it's only a plausible sidestep from his documented college activities. And nearly all of us find the whole disaster absolutely hilarious. Which it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 24 September, 2015, 08:38:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 24 September, 2015, 07:52:05 PM
I'm just here for shits

That would explain the smell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 September, 2015, 12:20:09 PM
Substitute "Pig-Fucker" for "Pheasant-Plucker" and you've got yourself an interesting addition to Elocution lessons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 25 September, 2015, 12:27:57 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 September, 2015, 04:27:15 PM
Well, the end of days are truly upon us as the forum finally believe something that has been published in the Daily Mail and have turned on the Guardian.

Just for balance, I'm sure you've all seen the co-author being interviewed about this, with a smirk on her face. She said something along the lines of, it's up to the reader to believe this or not.

One thing we can all take from this, if Lord Ashcroft wants a job, make sure you cave in and give him what he wants, or else get ready for a story!

Can I just say I've never been a fan of either, as far as I'm concerned this is simply a case of 'when thieves fall out'.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2015, 01:37:21 PM
Meanwhile, behind the curtain, The case for retiring another 'barbarous relic.' (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/cashless-economy_the-case-for-retiring-another--barbarous-relic-/41620968)

The arguments in favour of abolishing cash are starting to come to the fore. If past experience is anything to go by, first the idea will be floated as a bit of a crackpot scheme. There might be good reasons for it, but abolishing cash is just absurd. It'll never happen. Then there'll be storylines in the media; some Eastenders character getting busted for using cash "I thought it was suspicious, Officer!" Little old ladies on Crimewatch and Rogue Traders getting done out of cash when a simple little swipe-card would have rendered the con useless. People fiddling with change, holding up the queue. They'll get us used to the idea that cash is fraught with problems. Then they'll look for a bigger excuse, a terrorist attack or other crime made possible by cash. That won't be quite enough to abolish cash at a stroke but it's the first nail. All they have to do is ban fifty quid notes and they're in.

However, it seems that the High Priest's Prime Minister's antics with a pig take precedence...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2015, 01:39:39 PM
I read this and thought of you, Sharky: https://www.facebook.com/philip.mahoney.9/posts/10153016373712397
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2015, 01:59:36 PM
Ouch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 25 September, 2015, 04:59:50 PM
Maybe we just like to see the Tories get a taste of their own medicine... or should that be oink-ment..... especially as this has all come from within.

Whether its true or not..... there is a interesting photo doing the rounds on Twitter.... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 September, 2015, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: Spikes on 25 September, 2015, 04:59:50 PM
Maybe we just like to see the Tories get a taste of their own medicine... or should that be oink-ment..... especially as this has all come from within.

Whether its true or not..... there is a interesting photo doing the rounds on Twitter....

It's a fake. Someone had to make one
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 29 September, 2015, 04:50:20 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 24 September, 2015, 03:26:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 September, 2015, 01:42:48 PM
he aint denied it yet has he?

And when did you stop beating your wife?

  I asked a question ,instead of answering it "yes he has" or "no he hasn't" you post this?
If the Mods can actually be bothere to do their jobs can we get this comment of gordons removed? I find it highly offensive and perhaps a bit libellous
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 29 September, 2015, 04:56:29 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 29 September, 2015, 04:50:20 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 24 September, 2015, 03:26:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 September, 2015, 01:42:48 PM
he aint denied it yet has he?

And when did you stop beating your wife?

and the point of this is?

It's a tried and true journalistic technique.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
Andrew Marr was doing this very thing at the weekend in his interview with Comrade Corbyn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 September, 2015, 05:03:32 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 29 September, 2015, 04:50:20 PM
I asked a question ,instead of answering it "yes he has" or "no he hasn't" you post this?
If the Mods can actually be bothere to do their jobs can we get this comment of gordons removed? I find it highly offensive and perhaps a bit libellous

I know the British courts are a very favourable venue for pursuing accusations of libel, I'm not entirely sure using a well-known rhetorical device in reply to someone who isn't using their real name is going to qualify as libellous.

Cheers

Jim

(For hard of thinking: Gordon isn't suggesting that you either do or don't beat your wife, but pointing out that there is no answer to that specific phrasing of question which wouldn't make you look guilty.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 September, 2015, 05:26:45 PM
Never go to law (unless you're loaded). Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 29 September, 2015, 06:06:53 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 29 September, 2015, 04:50:20 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 24 September, 2015, 03:26:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 September, 2015, 01:42:48 PM
he aint denied it yet has he?

And when did you stop beating your wife?

  I asked a question ,instead of answering it "yes he has" or "no he hasn't" you post this?
If the Mods can actually be bothere to do their jobs can we get this comment of gordons removed? I find it highly offensive and perhaps a bit libellous

As has already been pointed out, it's a very well known rhetorical question trap that makes you look guilty if you try to answer it.

here's a  more on the nose reply to your original question:

Lyndon B Johnson once wanted his staff to spead the rumour that a political opponent fucked farmyard animals.  (Accounts vary exactly what kind.). When his appalled staff refused to smear someone like this, LBJ explained "Yes, but then the sonuvabitch will have to deny he's ever fucked a pig."

Do you see why it isn't suspicious that Cameron hasn't denied this yet?

Let us know how the libel case comes along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 September, 2015, 07:38:58 PM
He has now.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/david-cameron-denies-lord-ashcroft-allegations-call-me-dave-dead-pig (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/david-cameron-denies-lord-ashcroft-allegations-call-me-dave-dead-pig)

In my book, he did the best he could in an extremely difficult situation - not dignifying it with a response for a while, and leaving it for a while before the denial.

Don't judge the man for a Mail 'scoop' / Twitter rumour.

Judge him because he's a smug, stuck-up, elitist prick who only gives a flying fuck about people as privileged as he is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 September, 2015, 08:36:07 PM
We should still be allowed to call him a pigfucker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 September, 2015, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 September, 2015, 08:36:07 PM
We should still be allowed to call him a pigfucker.

Don't worry, it has stuck. He'll never shake it.






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 September, 2015, 09:58:48 PM
Well if Dave's really down in the mouth, he can always get a hansom cab down to the club and order a hogs head of chateau neuf. Rather! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 September, 2015, 10:13:36 PM
Grayling and Gove's dismantling of legal protection for the poor continues unopposed as a magistrate paid a fine for a destitute asylum seeker and gets suspended for it. (http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/29/magistrate-nigel-allcoat-resigns-after-paying-destitute-asylum-seekers-court-fine?CMP=share_btn_tw)
Britain is now a country that punishes kindness and charity.  Is it any wonder that so many of us now see our only hope is getting a fucking commie into No 10?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 September, 2015, 10:33:58 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 September, 2015, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 September, 2015, 08:36:07 PM
We should still be allowed to call him a pigfucker.

Don't worry, it has stuck. He'll never shake it.

Jeebus, he was shaking it too?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 29 September, 2015, 10:42:47 PM
Christ he's only a commie.... I was hoping for a Stalinist. Damn! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 September, 2015, 11:10:23 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 29 September, 2015, 10:33:58 PM
Jeebus, he was shaking it too?


He was well brought up.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 September, 2015, 11:13:16 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 29 September, 2015, 10:33:58 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 September, 2015, 08:53:03 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 September, 2015, 08:36:07 PM
We should still be allowed to call him a pigfucker.

Don't worry, it has stuck. He'll never shake it.

Jeebus, he was shaking it too?

And it's stuck?  I always thought his trousers looked a bit baggy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 September, 2015, 12:23:17 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 29 September, 2015, 10:13:36 PM
Grayling and Gove's dismantling of legal protection for the poor continues unopposed as a magistrate paid a fine for a destitute asylum seeker and gets suspended for it. (http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/29/magistrate-nigel-allcoat-resigns-after-paying-destitute-asylum-seekers-court-fine?CMP=share_btn_tw)
Britain is now a country that punishes kindness and charity.  Is it any wonder that so many of us now see our only hope is getting a fucking commie into No 10?

Outrageous. The person in question was an asylum seeker who isn't allowed to work and doesn't receive any cash benefits, just £35 per week in vouchers to use at certain stores. How the hell is he supposed to pay a fine?

My experience of reporting on magistrate court cases many years ago was totally depressing - an endless parade of "£80 fine - paid at £2 per week - added to all your other fines and fines for non payment of fines"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 30 September, 2015, 02:00:26 PM
Corbyn now being critisised for saying he's not prepared to start a nuclear war... is there no end to his evil?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 30 September, 2015, 02:09:42 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 30 September, 2015, 02:00:26 PM
Corbyn now being critisised for saying he's not prepared to start a nuclear war... is there no end to his evil?

The Bastard! Before you know it he'll be giving handouts to scrounging Biddies and 're-nationalizing Public Services taking money away from hard working Shareholders. The Bastard!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 September, 2015, 02:39:46 PM
I've been reading a bit about the Vietnam War lately, and according to most sources a large proportion of soldiers actively try not to kill; and those who do can be utterly debilitated for years with guilt. 

Apparently guilt is a major factor in PTSD; if not for killing then for surviving while comrades die.  This guilt can be a life-destroying problem even if the veteran believes he was fighting for a good cause.

Anyway the point is I've never heard of a hawkish political leader express guilt over either of these factors when starting wars, despite being personally responsible for ALL the deaths caused.

Corbyn, it seems, is not being seen as a potential PM because only a sociopath can lead a country.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 September, 2015, 04:09:44 PM
I think Corbyn has totally outmanoeuvred the pro-nuke wing of his party.

"Sure, vote for Trident if it excites you sexually, but don't expect me to pretend to consider using it."

Where has this guy been hiding all these years, he's wonderful!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 September, 2015, 07:05:36 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 30 September, 2015, 04:09:44 PM
I think Corbyn has totally outmanoeuvred the pro-nuke wing of his party.

"Sure, vote for Trident if it excites you sexually, but don't expect me to pretend to consider using it."

Where has this guy been hiding all these years, he's wonderful!
In my manor, Islington North, actually doing his job as an MP (how many can you say that about?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 September, 2015, 11:17:56 PM
At least now when those people jump in and say WELL JEREMY CORBYN WON'T EVER BE IN A POSITION TO MAKE THAT DECISION they'll probably be right, just not for the reasons they thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 01 October, 2015, 12:00:24 PM
I hope the next time Trident is debated with Cameron (and all others who want it), that the BBC give them a thorough grilling and don't finish the interview without knowing:
a) if they would push the button and more importantly
b) exactly which countries they intend to destroy with these nukes? And don't accept a vague answer of "those who threaten us". Get them to name names.

That would be fair and balanced.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 01 October, 2015, 12:29:52 PM

Of course the thing that is often ignored is that there is no country in a worse position to survive a nuclear war than Britain. Small, densely populated and large population centres in costal areas (Oh and we're right next to Russia).

A country like the USA could in theory survive the first wave of a nuclear war...Britain would be dead within a day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 October, 2015, 12:50:54 PM
The point isn't if we'd survive, it's whether or not we'll kill everyone else before we go.

Hilariously, papers are running with "Corbyn's a madman for saying he'd never launch nukes!" on the exact same fucking day they're running with "North Korea says it'll launch nukes at a moment's notice - what madmen!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 October, 2015, 01:06:13 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 01 October, 2015, 12:29:52 PM
Of course the thing that is often ignored is that there is no country in a worse position to survive a nuclear war than Britain. Small, densely populated and large population centres in costal areas (Oh and we're right next to Russia).

Netherlands? Singapore? Bangladesh? Japan? Israel? Don't think the UK as a whole is even in the Top 50 Countries in the Worst Position To Survive a Nuclear War, never mind Britain.  It is however high in the Top 18 Countries Who Could Actively Participate in A Nuclear War.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2015, 07:03:36 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 01 October, 2015, 01:06:13 PMNetherlands? Singapore? Bangladesh? Japan? Israel? Don't think the UK as a whole is even in the Top 50 Countries in the Worst Position To Survive a Nuclear War, never mind Britain.  It is however high in the Top 18 Countries Who Could Actively Participate in A Nuclear War.

Wouldn't a nuclear strike on The Netherlands go for the dykes and just submerge the whole country?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 October, 2015, 07:15:13 PM
Quote from: Ancient Otter on 01 October, 2015, 07:03:36 PM
Wouldn't a nuclear strike on The Netherlands go for the dykes and just submerge the whole country?

Either you've been reading too much Apocalypse War or you're a raging homophobe. Which is better?  There's only one way to find out...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 October, 2015, 08:38:30 PM
If Greece where to be hit by a nuclear strike, would the national debt be dispersed to neighboring countries in a marble effect? Or does nonexistent money burn as well?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 October, 2015, 08:44:27 PM
No, but it would be a tragedy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 October, 2015, 10:35:13 PM
Austerity has doubled the wealth of the 1% who own and run our countries, there's no way they'll pass on a chance to reintroduce or expand it whenever they can and I'd even suggest that it would be in their interest to cause a depression or set off a nuke somewhere - so I imagine we'd all have to chip in and pay for the humanitarian effort to clean up what's left of Greece, triggering Austerity Measures Mk2.  Naturally, the Tories will blame Labour for causing the attack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2015, 01:33:32 AM
Yep, that's pretty much how it works. First we reduce a country's infrastructure to rubble on the pretext of it, for example, possessing WMDs, then we lend it lots and lots of money so it can afford to pay our contractors to put it all back together again. Sweet. Nukes aren't really any good for this because you need a few survivors to pay the debts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 October, 2015, 10:52:49 AM
If they did blow the dykes in the Netherlands (oh er), you'd be fine after all you're an otter!! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2015, 12:17:57 PM
In a nuclear strike on Europe, we'd ALL be a little 'otter.

Sorry, I'm leaving now
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2015, 12:26:19 PM
When I heard there'd been another school shooting in the US, I genuinely couldn't believe it - it's Friday again already?  Where did the week go?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2015, 01:09:30 PM
Some of the witness vox-pop was deeply weird. When a student's first reaction to gunfire on a college campus is to wonder whether it's a low calibre weapon or using a suppressor you really have to question the culture. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 October, 2015, 01:26:44 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 02 October, 2015, 01:09:30 PM
Some of the witness vox-pop was deeply weird. When a student's first reaction to gunfire on a college campus is to wonder whether it's a low calibre weapon or using a suppressor you really have to question the culture.


Also, believed to be a copycat shooting, so let's give this one lots of publicity, shall we?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 02 October, 2015, 02:00:00 PM
And then there the local Christian minister interviewed who said that - and I actually heard this on the radio - if the students had been armed, this wouldn't have happened... I cannot get my head around that at all...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2015, 02:39:25 PM
I seem to remember that in Columbine, the students were armed.  They were the ones who did the killing.  Cracked did an interesting podcast about the American fascination with guns; it's here if anyone wants to listen. http://www.cracked.com/podcast/the-gun-show/ (http://www.cracked.com/podcast/the-gun-show/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2015, 02:40:48 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 02 October, 2015, 02:00:00 PM
And then there the local Christian minister interviewed who said that - and I actually heard this on the radio - if the students had been armed, this wouldn't have happened... I cannot get my head around that at all...
When that cinema shooting happened, people said it would have been better had everyone been armed, ignoring what would have likely occurred had dozens of people been shooting in a dark cinema.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 October, 2015, 03:44:51 PM
and when the police turn up to a reported school shooting to see a student with a gun ... well, I think I'd rather take my chances with the original shooter than a bunch of trigger-happy militarised cops, and I'm white.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2015, 06:00:10 PM
Hot on the heels of announcing that "work will set you free", the Conservatives have taken yet another play from successful political organisations of the past by announcing they will be offering a completely voluntary alternative to "militant" unions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front) in the form of "conservative trade unions": http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-trade-union-conservatives-robert-halfon-a6674621.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 01:40:07 PM
The political thread has fallen silent as everyone goes off to the Conservative Party Conference...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 October, 2015, 02:05:26 PM
Quote from: Zombear on 07 October, 2015, 01:40:07 PM
The political thread has fallen silent as everyone goes off to the Conservative Party Conference...

They wouldn't let me in! Must've been because of the 3 pallets of Rancid Tomatoes I brought.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 02:14:01 PM
Greengrocer must've loved you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 October, 2015, 02:45:35 PM
Interesting that Cameron had to resort to telling an out and out lie in order to attack Corbyn. At least he didn't wheel out his dead son when talking about dismantling the NHS like he usually does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 02:57:22 PM
What was the lie?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 October, 2015, 03:03:28 PM
Well, there were many, but the specific one I'm referring to is in his claim that Corbyn is a 'traitor' to his country for saying it was a tragedy Bin Laden was shot. But of course he didn't say that. And the pig lover knows he didn't. He's a liar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2015, 03:03:54 PM
Spin on Corbyn saying the killing of Bin Laden was a tragedy. It was the lack of due process and death penalty by way of de-facto assassination that he stated was a tragedy. Not only is he right, in my opinion, this view was once shared by none other than Boris Johnson, and so it's not like Tories were all at one point gung-ho about that. Mind you, even Cameron might not be—he's just using an out of context quote to score political points. But then half this Tory conference has been about the veneer of moderate policy while actually skewing further right. (The housing thing is almost genius. More people should own! 200,000 homes! Big number! Ignores the fact most people won't be able to afford them, and that this will happen instead of further investment in council homes, despite record-low interest rates continuing.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2015, 03:04:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLb15UPqwxw sums up the actual quotes quite nicely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:11:58 PM
So he did say, "and is yet another tragedy".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 03:14:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:11:58 PM
So he did say, "and is yet another tragedy".

You can't shear the context from someone's words and pretend that they said something they didn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 03:20:22 PM
You can if you're a Tory, Jim.

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 07 October, 2015, 03:03:28 PM
Well, there were many, but the specific one I'm referring to is in his claim that Corbyn is a 'traitor' to his country for saying it was a tragedy Bin Laden was shot. But of course he didn't say that. And the pig lover knows he didn't. He's a liar.

It's actually tragic if you stop and examine what he's doing: Corbyn gets stronger and his support base grows the more he's attacked, and Cameron's strategy is to go back to the same old tactic of attacking him through repetition of a lie that's already been disproved even by the right-wing press - from a fortress beseiged by an 80,000-strong mob, while his speech is picked apart in real-time for inaccuracies via a social media platform used by 80 percent of the population, the vast majority of which are making pig references.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:21:01 PM
So he didn't say that then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 03:27:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:21:01 PM
So he didn't say that then?

This is just trolling, Tankie. You know perfectly well that Corbyn wasn't expressing support for Bin Laden, or sympathy for his cause. He was describing the extra-judicial killing of a man who should have been hauled through the justice system and held to account for his actions as one more tragedy in a succession of tragedies. As has been explained to you already, it's the lack of due process he's talking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:35:06 PM
No, Jim I am not trolling.  I just needed the context to be explained to me in a reasonable manner, which you have now done.i
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 October, 2015, 03:46:01 PM
Flagrant dishonesty isn't exclusively a Tory character flaw, but deploying it against Corbyn is only going to make him stronger.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 03:54:15 PM
It comes to something when asking for due process and not executing people without trial is seen as political extremism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:54:42 PM
I thought the most interesting thing about the speech was the audience, people of all races and religions. You wouldn't have seen that a few years ago. I thought it was brilliant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:11:19 PM
Of course bin laden shouldn't have had a fair trial,he was a terrorist and for one ,I believe any one who commits acts of terror have willingly given up their "right" to be treated fairly as I believe that anyone from this country (or any other) has given up their nationality and rights when they travel abroad to be part of ISIS. They are fair game and should be shot accordingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 October, 2015, 04:14:26 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:11:19 PM
Of course bin laden shouldn't have had a fair trial,he was a terrorist and for one ,I believe any one who commits acts of terror have willingly given up their "right" to be treated fairly as I believe that anyone from this country (or any other) has given up their nationality and rights when they travel abroad to be part of ISIS. They are fair game and should be shot accordingly.

Surely any person is entitled to fair trial, otherwise it wouldn't be fair.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:19:35 PM
Now that's trolling by NapaimKev!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 04:19:52 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:11:19 PM
Of course bin laden shouldn't have had a fair trial,he was a terrorist and for one ,I believe any one who commits acts of terror have willingly given up their "right" to be treated fairly as I believe that anyone from this country (or any other) has given up their nationality and rights when they travel abroad to be part of ISIS. They are fair game and should be shot accordingly.

One of the key ways to defeat terrorism is to not be terrorised. If you abandon the principles for which you are supposed to be fighting, what's the point? You've become your enemy, and you've lost. This isn't about them and what they've done, it's about us and what we do.

Also: governments of all political stripes are becoming increasingly keen to slap 'terrorist' as a label on all sorts of domestic political direct action, so the idea that a government can summarily execute you simply by declaring you a terrorist (as is already happening to British and US citizens overseas) should be fundamentally resisted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 October, 2015, 04:20:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:19:35 PM
Now that's trolling by NapaimKev!

In what sense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:30:14 PM
Sorry, I thought it must have been a windup. So can the state shoot anybody under any circumstances or not? The soldiers who went in wouldn't have known whether the nutter was armed or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:32:04 PM
Al Qaeda and ISIS (isil...whatever) are hardly domestic political whatnots,and not challenging them head on is surely what has made them stronger? All the muslim countries horrified by their warped take on islam haven't exactly been pro active as far as I know . Iraq seemed to either drop their weapons and ran away or I assume many joined them ,I don't think that inviting them or whoevers in charge of bin ladens lot now would really be open to our having them round for a cuppa and talking it through, they want us dead. end of. I don't see how and why we would want to not wipe the buggers out ,its natural to want to defend our borders and homes from nutters wether they were from a legitimate nation (Nazi Germany) or the nut jobs in what used to be Syria and Iraq. We'll only lose if we allow those groups to roam unchecked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:34:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:30:14 PM
Sorry, I thought it must have been a windup. So can the state shoot anybody under any circumstances or not? The soldiers who went in wouldn't have known whether the nutter was armed or not.

well,if the reports of all the dirty mags he had are true he certainly would have had a hand on his weapon, the dirty boy! ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 04:34:56 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:32:04 PM
I don't think that inviting them or whoevers in charge of bin ladens lot now would really be open to our having them round for a cuppa and talking it through, they want us dead. end of.

You really don't read anything anyone else writes, do you? I'm not sure how you go from "we shouldn't abandon the values we claim to be defending" to "inviting Al-Qaeda round for a cup of tea" — either you didn't read what I wrote, or you didn't understand it. Please try harder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:36:01 PM
 :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 October, 2015, 04:36:56 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 03:54:42 PM
I thought the most interesting thing about the speech was the audience, people of all races and religions. You wouldn't have seen that a few years ago. I thought it was brilliant.

yeah, what a spontaneous and representative turn out that must have been, I'm sure their front row invitations had nothing to do with any kind of stage-management: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/06/female-mps-complain-of-being-camerons-conference-arm-candy (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/06/female-mps-complain-of-being-camerons-conference-arm-candy)

Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:11:19 PM
Of course bin laden shouldn't have had a fair trial,he was a terrorist and for one ,I believe any one who commits acts of terror have willingly given up their "right" to be treated fairly as I believe that anyone from this country (or any other) has given up their nationality and rights when they travel abroad to be part of ISIS. They are fair game and should be shot accordingly.

That's just mindless beyond belief. How can you stand for the rule of law and society and then conduct policy via assassination? But I can see where you're coming from - maybe we should just murder all the politicians and generals who started this war, and the drone-operators who've just blown up a Medecins-sans-frontieres hospital - we don't need any inquiries or court martial, let's just drag them out of their offices and shoot them.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 07 October, 2015, 04:38:40 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:30:14 PM
Sorry, I thought it must have been a windup. So can the state shoot anybody under any circumstances or not? The soldiers who went in wouldn't have known whether the nutter was armed or not.

I assure you I'm not trolling.

In reference to Bin Laden - stun grenades and knockout gas are a viable alternative to machine guns.

If the "State" has the right to " shoot anybody under any circumstances" then can I not claim the same (not that I would want to).

Laws/Rules either get applied across the board or not at all.

Cheers

I don't have a stack of porn mags, Grugz, there's plenty on the Net. Also I'm not a sex obsessed perv.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 04:39:17 PM
That smiley should have been after grugzs post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:40:54 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 04:34:56 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:32:04 PM
I don't think that inviting them or whoevers in charge of bin ladens lot now would really be open to our having them round for a cuppa and talking it through, they want us dead. end of.

You really don't read anything anyone else writes, do you? I'm not sure how you go from "we shouldn't abandon the values we claim to be defending" to "inviting Al-Qaeda round for a cup of tea" — either you didn't read what I wrote, or you didn't understand it. Please try harder.

   sorry,what? I wasn't listening... please enlighten us to the values we are defending by not stopping the likes of ISIS .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:42:11 PM
kev, I was referring to reports that when they found bin laden he had a huge stash of porn ,sorry if it came across as meaning you.
Dan. mindless beyond belief is flying planes into offices for no reason,or strapping explosives on children and sending them to kill people. I sometimes wonder if hitler had been around today if he would have got away with it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 04:55:39 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 04:40:54 PM
sorry,what? I wasn't listening... please enlighten us to the values we are defending by not stopping the likes of ISIS .

False dichotomy. We can have due process, freedom of speech and the right to privacy and oppose these people at the same time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 05:09:47 PM
How? just telling them "no" won't work . The only thing they understand is violence and sometimes that is the only answer , it'd be lovely if we didn't have to and I'd love my daughter to grow up in a world without violence but the world isn't like that and going back to my original point isis and al quaeda are not normal countries with membership in the U.N. and are not themselves bound by law they are evil twisted fanatics that will not be satisfied 'til you and your children are dead all the LGBT are chucked off tall buildings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 October, 2015, 05:18:30 PM
Fight fire with fire. Pretty sure that's never worked. Ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 05:28:36 PM
Really! How comes we're all on here then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 07 October, 2015, 05:33:03 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 05:09:47 PM
How? just telling them "no" won't work . The only thing they understand is violence and sometimes that is the only answer , it'd be lovely if we didn't have to and I'd love my daughter to grow up in a world without violence but the world isn't like that and going back to my original point isis and al quaeda are not normal countries with membership in the U.N. and are not themselves bound by law they are evil twisted fanatics that will not be satisfied 'til you and your children are dead all the LGBT are chucked off tall buildings.

Jean Charles de Menezes says hello.

Or actually doesn't as he was executed by the state in error and then publically smeared by the cops and press to cover their arses.

Surely better to try and capture, interrogate and prevent future atrocities rather than "Hey Ive got a bigger dick than you". I know that's not always possible but suspect in Bin Ladens case it was but the murican public was in full blood lust.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 October, 2015, 06:04:46 PM
I was typing out a response and then I realised what the fuck
I was doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 06:22:12 PM
Shoot to kill is a great policy with no drawbacks whatsoever.  That 8 year old kid who was shot to death less that 300 yards from where I'm sitting won't be hijacking planes or doing September Elevens anytime soon I can tell you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2015, 06:27:06 PM
If you behave like the bad guys, you are the bad guys.

Imagine if some grouping or nation, claiming validity by its own definition, had its elite fighters kill a western person fingered as a war criminal - Tony Blair, say, to pick a name from the air - dropped into Blair's 'compound' in Buckinghamshire by night, maybe getting Euan, Leo and an under-butler as acceptable collateral damage.

You see how that would be wrong, however much you hate the satanic bastard himself? Same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 06:30:32 PM
Remember when all those Jewish people didn't fight back, look where that got them. Sometimes you have to fight back, as we don't live in a perfect world.

As for trying to arrest Bin Laden, stun grenades and knock out gas, sorry you've been watching too many shite films. The assault team carry certain items for specific situations and once the element of surprise is gone, then it's a determined and fast progression to the target. I won't bother with a load of scenarios, as I'm busy.

As for trying to capture him, I wouldn't risk my troops lives on such a fraught task, unless it was easily achievable with no chance of any loss to my assault teams.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2015, 06:36:10 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 06:30:32 PM
Remember when all those Jewish people didn't fight back, look where that got them. Sometimes you have to fight back, as we don't live in a perfect world.

Again: how do you get from what I posted to 'passively doing nothing in the face of aggression'...?

Also: Godwin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 06:43:09 PM
The bit about the Jewish people comes from numerous interviews that I've heard and seen. One of the main things many of them point out is look where being a pacifist got them.

I don't know why you think I'm only answering you Jim, I'm looking at the last three pages and giving a general answer to the flow of the comments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2015, 06:53:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 06:30:32 PM
Sometimes you have to fight back, as we don't live in a perfect world. .

As seen on an ISIS recruiting poster, no doubt.

The thing about the risks in a snatch operation is that the US has made it quite clear that the lives of its military personnel can be spent on whatever it deems important: 13,000 of them since 9/11, for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 06:56:28 PM
No one forced them to sign up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 07:08:56 PM
I'm sure you'd be okay with a relative being beheaded for working as a contractor, aid worker or anything similar. How about those Christians crucified the other day, or gay people being killed, for being gay.
What is the line that has to be crossed before you think something is wrong and think something should be done. I mean in the real world, rather than posting in cyberspace!

I'll say that most of those military deaths are from snipers, IED's and contact situations, all part of a soldiers life in a war zone. Doing a 'snatch op' as you mention is completely different and the life of the person you are going for will never come above your own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 07:14:44 PM
I agree with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 07 October, 2015, 07:15:56 PM
Quote from: Satanist on 07 October, 2015, 05:33:03 PM

Jean Charles de Menezes says hello.

Or actually doesn't as he was executed by the state in error and then publically smeared by the cops and press to cover their arses.

Surely better to try and capture, interrogate and prevent future atrocities rather than "Hey Ive got a bigger dick than you". I know that's not always possible but suspect in Bin Ladens case it was but the murican public was in full blood lust.

Now, this is the nub of the matter.

Whilst I agree with you (and Jezza) about OBL I don't entirely agree with what you say about Jean Charles de Menezes. I believe he was tragically mistaken for an actual suicide bomber and killed to prevent a detonation that would very likely have taken out the arresting officers and dozens of bystanders.

The guy that de Menezes was confused with had just attempted to bomb Shepherd's Bush tube station (only a couple of weeks after 7/7), so it's not hard to see why the police were so jumpy.

It's absolutely correct to say that the Met said and did some very stupid things in the immediate aftermath of this accident, as well as disastrously fucking up over their suspect identification in the first place, but I pretty much agree with the policy that you don't give a suicide bomber time to blow themselves up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2015, 07:32:27 PM
ISIS/ISIL is a weird organization.
.
It was founded in Iraq in 1999 and originally called "The Organization of Monotheism and Jihad." In 2004 it changed its name to "The Organization of Jihad's Base in the Country of the Two Rivers," or "Al Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI). In 2006 it became the "Islamic State of Iraq" (ISI), but changed again in 2013 to "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" (ISIL) or "Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham" (ISIS). It's been the "Islamic State" (IS) since June 2014, presumably because it's easier to remember.
.
Weirder still is the organization's founder, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Sunni militant from Jordan. In April of 2003 al-Zarqawi was killed in the Sulaimaniyah mountains of northern Iraq (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4446084/) before being arrested in 2004 (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/official-al-zarqawi-caught-freed/), re-arrested in  Baakuba in January 2005, (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-01/04/content_405831.htm) killed and  buried in Fallujah four months later (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/102012/zarqawi-rip-james-s-robbins) and then killed one last time in 2006. (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/whats-next-after-zarqawis-death/)
.
His replacement, Abu Omar al- Badhdadi (Hamid Dawud Mohamed Khalil al Zawi, also known as Abu Abdullah al-Rashid al- Baghdadi and Abu Hamza al-Baghdadi), was captured in 2007, (http://web.archive.org/web/20070314153618/http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/09/iraq.main/index.html?eref=rss_latest) killed in 2007, (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.main/) declared non-existent, (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL1820065720070718?rpc=92)  arrested in 2009 (http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/190455) and killed again in 2010. (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63I3CL20100419)
.
No wonder everyone's so scared of these guys - it seems to take a lot to discourage them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 October, 2015, 07:37:46 PM
Fuck it...

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 07:08:56 PM
I'm sure you'd be okay with a relative being beheaded for working as a contractor, aid worker or anything similar. How about those Christians crucified the other day, or gay people being killed, for being gay.
What is the line that has to be crossed before you think something is wrong and think something should be done.

From what I've gathered, you were/are a soldier.

Would summarily executing a prisoner* and dumping the body in the sea count as crossing the line?

*regardless of how big a shithead they were, a prisoner as in someone in your custody who has been pacified.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 07:48:25 PM
Let me see, would murdering someone be wrong, I think I'll agree that would be wrong. I'd love to know how we came to this but I'm sure I'll soon see. (I'll apologise in advance if I don't answer straight away, as I'm off to work soon).

It's against the Geneva convention and would be classed as a war crime but that only ever effects the lower ranks in reality. You do a comprehensive bit of training about what is allowed and not allowed but nigh on all of it is common sense.

Before you ask, a shiny bayonet stabbed into the enemy is good. A dirty/rusty bayonet stabbed into the enemy is bad! So if you haven't managed to clean yours due to whatever and the enemy rushes you and you stab him, you could be in the crap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 October, 2015, 08:10:21 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 07:48:25 PM
Let me see, would murdering someone be wrong, I think I'll agree that would be wrong. I'd love to know how we came to this but I'm sure I'll soon see. (I'll apologise in advance if I don't answer straight away, as I'm off to work soon).


It's just that's what happened to Bin Laden. Sorry if I sounded obtuse or if it sounded like I was picking on you specifically, but I think the way Osama Bin Laden was dealt with was wrong. It seemed more like an act of brutal revenge, rather than any kind of justice.

Had he been given a trial the ultimate outcome would be most certainly the same, and rightly so, I just feel that the way he was ultimately dealt with sunk us all to his level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2015, 08:20:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 October, 2015, 07:08:56 PM
What is the line that has to be crossed before you think something is wrong and think something should be done. I mean in the real world, rather than posting in cyberspace!


As I recall Obama and Co basically did have Bin Laden killed via cyberspace, or at least video feed - I don't recall the Commander in Chief pulling any triggers. And your statement is just as applicable to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and ISIS - presumsbly they feel something should be done too, and see all means as justified. And how much better for everyone if they too adhered to international law.

At no point did I say 'nothing should be done'. Am I glad that murdering fuck Bin Laden got his just desserts? Oh yes indeed. Do I think it should have been done according to the rule of law? Yes to that too.

I'd never question the importance of your insight and experience as a former military man, CF, but happily the military don't make the laws (here). You say US casulaties were the normal consequence of being a war zone - but it wasn't a warzone and they weren't there until someone made it so, largely using the casus beli of Bin Laden and 9/11. That was a decision that directly cost thise lives (and lets not even get into civilian lives), just as the decision to murder Bin Laden did, or the decision to capture him would have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 09:04:35 PM
I'm not really surprised that a squaddie might be in favor of direct military solutions, though I am quite interested to know what CF thinks of the General who said he'd condone a military coup in the UK if Jezza was democratically elected as PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 October, 2015, 09:10:35 PM
What general was that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2015, 09:17:49 PM
General Dredd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 09:27:49 PM
Quote from: Zombear on 07 October, 2015, 09:04:35 PM
I'm not really surprised that a squaddie might be in favor of direct military solutions, though I am quite interested to know what CF thinks of the General who said he'd condone a military coup in the UK if Jezza was democratically elected as PM.
I think he's got that new series for amazon prime first ,but at least nobody dare go hungry if he got in. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 07 October, 2015, 09:38:02 PM
It appears that the man cannot stop lying.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-conference-speech-woman-prime-minister-mentioned-says-she-is-a-full-throttle-jeremy-a6685131.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2015, 09:44:47 PM
What is it with him and porkies?


(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/0cd2fff89480c0b09bb1d90d91fb0d9f3e0dd15b/0_0_650_444/master/650.jpg?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=6974115d130bf9144ebf1eef2df083b4)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 09:47:39 PM
I just realised, the hotel advert with the puppets... the one coming out of the shower looks like Cameron!
a random thought I know but I just had to share.now if any clever folk can post a pic so you can see what I mean?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 October, 2015, 09:59:32 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/O2qAwNW.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 10:04:04 PM
cheers! now you won't be able to unsee!!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 October, 2015, 10:22:19 PM
That's too human looking to be Cameron.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 07 October, 2015, 10:28:41 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 October, 2015, 10:04:04 PM
cheers! now you won't be able to unsee!!!!!

I've always thought that to, ever since the first time I saw it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 07 October, 2015, 10:33:07 PM
By the time Bin Laden was killed it's been suggested that he was little more than a figure head. If he had been taken alive a trial would have been something of an ideological coup as it would probably have been a more effective way of dealing with whatever tactical importance he had left to the organisation. Arresting him would have been fantastic but he was rather asking to be shot in the face. I haven't really read into it, was it a hit or was it an operation to capture or kill him that just went down the kill road? 

When it's OK to kill is one of any society's core moral questions. The argument, unfortunately, tends to quickly descend into one side saying when you fight monsters you should take care not to become monsters yourself and the other saying so you want to give (insert mass murderer/ genocide regime) a cup of tea and a hug you god damn hippy, see how much you like it when they shoot your mum in her face and then punch a kitten. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 08 October, 2015, 07:21:47 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/sfM2End.png)

(nabbed from twitter)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 October, 2015, 07:22:12 PM
That's work finished and sleep over with, so on with the replies!

First up, the way the US went after Bin Laden. Any type of mission is fraught with danger and these types are ranked quite highly in the list. From start to finish numerous things can go wrong (the helicopter going down didn't help for a start). No matter how much tactical info the assault teams have, it will never be enough.

The soldier who entered the room Bin Laden was in had to instantly take in the situation of all potential threats in the room and decide which is the most dangerous to himself and the mission. For instance, someone holding a pistol is less dangerous to someone holding a submachine gun. What direction they are facing (take into account lighting, flickering telly, smoke, etc....) and if they are raising the weapon to attack.

Then you have the possibility of a Dead Man switch, is someone reaching for what could be a device like that, which would bring the building down. As we've seen, certain people don't mind killing themselves, so long as it takes down more of the enemy. It's a different mind set.

There are other things to take into account but in the end, it all boils down to the person who went through that door putting his life on the line to capture or terminate, we will never truly know, so all we can do is speculate. If it had been me and I saw any threat to myself or the team I would not hesitate to take down the threat, no matter what it was!

Sadly too many people have seen too many films and think everything happens like what is shown in them.

If you want to see tactical fire and movement, then watch the bank robbery in Heat as that is perfect.
If you want to watch British soldiers moaning constantly while they are on exercise, then watch the first part of Dog Soldiers, as that was spot on.

If you want to watch absolute bollocks the watch something like Hurt Locker as nobody would be allowed in a Bomb Disposal unit behaving like that. I was in such a unit for about 4 years and the shit would hit the fan if anyone behaved like that.

Now on to the laws and whys and wherefores. The leaders give out the orders and the people below follow those orders (obviously not in a Nazi sort of way) but this conflict was and is classed as a war. We could go into a massive debate on if these are illegal or not but if that's above the pay scale of the people on the ground.

As for the civilian deaths, I can assure you that the British military don't just go shooting streets up to take down a target but sadly during a war innocent lives are lost. I wonder what the breakdown is of deaths by suicide bombs in market places, mosques, etc... is compared to allied actions. The British military go out of it's way to not inflict civilian casualties.

Another point was mentioned about a General saying that the army should stage a coup if old JC got into power. I can assure you that the British military would never do such a thing. You have to remember that all 'squaddies' are civilians first and they do a job for the country, even if you don't believe in the military, they will, if needs be lay down their lives defending the UK.

Looking back at all my mates, I couldn't see anyone ever thinking it would be right for the UK to be run by a military dictator.

One final thing. As daft as it seems, none of my mates looked forward to going into a conflict zone. We would watch the news and hope that it would be resolved peacefully but if you volunteer to sign up then if you are ordered to do your job, then off you go. It's a job (can become a way of life for some, who then cannot adjust back to civilian life) and the better trained you are the better you become at the job. The amount of training takes you so far and if the shit hits the fan, then relying on your skills and teamwork helps a lot.

That last paragraph is a bit mixed up but the point is in there somewhere!

I think that about covers it all. I must dash as I'm about to watch my copy of 10 Years of 2000 AD

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2015, 08:11:09 PM
Thanks for that thoughtful post, CF. If I seemed to imply that I thought arresting Bin Laden would be like something off the telly, I didn't intend it. I know very well military personnel would probably have died in what would be a difficult rocess, my point was that a very large number of people have died in pursuit of a different response to 9/11.  I struggle to understand why their thousands of lives could be expended as a matter of course in the 'war on terror', but arresting the bastard who kicked the whole bloody mess off was deemed too costly. The approach adopted can be seen as the legitimization of summary execution, and a rejection of due process. That's all I was trying to say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2015, 08:15:27 PM
Or to put it another way: 13,000 dead, 30,000 wounded, 100s of 1000s of dead civilians, trillions of expenditure, but capturing Bin Laden was the thing that was deemed too risky?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 October, 2015, 09:56:49 PM
It's been apparent for a long time Bin Laden was low priority amongst the swarming, gestating agendas that finally got pushed through the window of opportunity 9/11 had opened for so many interested parties - as is often expressed, never waste crisis.

I've no doubt there are many people with noble intentions caught up in all this mess but I fail to see how Shock & Awe, Camp X-Ray, permanent mega-bases in the Middle-East; Starbucks and Freedom Fries; Abu Ghraib and systematic sexual torture are intended to be about 'policing the world' - seems more like an industry of uranium shells, snacks and snuff-porn.

And then there's the Russians and ISIS.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 October, 2015, 10:59:21 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 October, 2015, 07:22:12 PM
That's work finished and sleep over with, so on with the replies!

First up, the way the US went after Bin Laden. Any type of mission is fraught with danger and these types are ranked quite highly in the list. From start to finish numerous things can go wrong (the helicopter going down didn't help for a start). No matter how much tactical info the assault teams have, it will never be enough.

The soldier who entered the room Bin Laden was in had to instantly take in the situation of all potential threats in the room and decide which is the most dangerous to himself and the mission. For instance, someone holding a pistol is less dangerous to someone holding a submachine gun. What direction they are facing (take into account lighting, flickering telly, smoke, etc....) and if they are raising the weapon to attack.

Then you have the possibility of a Dead Man switch, is someone reaching for what could be a device like that, which would bring the building down. As we've seen, certain people don't mind killing themselves, so long as it takes down more of the enemy. It's a different mind set.

There are other things to take into account but in the end, it all boils down to the person who went through that door putting his life on the line to capture or terminate, we will never truly know, so all we can do is speculate. If it had been me and I saw any threat to myself or the team I would not hesitate to take down the threat, no matter what it was!

Sadly too many people have seen too many films and think everything happens like what is shown in them.

If you want to see tactical fire and movement, then watch the bank robbery in Heat as that is perfect.
If you want to watch British soldiers moaning constantly while they are on exercise, then watch the first part of Dog Soldiers, as that was spot on.

If you want to watch absolute bollocks the watch something like Hurt Locker as nobody would be allowed in a Bomb Disposal unit behaving like that. I was in such a unit for about 4 years and the shit would hit the fan if anyone behaved like that.

Now on to the laws and whys and wherefores. The leaders give out the orders and the people below follow those orders (obviously not in a Nazi sort of way) but this conflict was and is classed as a war. We could go into a massive debate on if these are illegal or not but if that's above the pay scale of the people on the ground.

As for the civilian deaths, I can assure you that the British military don't just go shooting streets up to take down a target but sadly during a war innocent lives are lost. I wonder what the breakdown is of deaths by suicide bombs in market places, mosques, etc... is compared to allied actions. The British military go out of it's way to not inflict civilian casualties.

Another point was mentioned about a General saying that the army should stage a coup if old JC got into power. I can assure you that the British military would never do such a thing. You have to remember that all 'squaddies' are civilians first and they do a job for the country, even if you don't believe in the military, they will, if needs be lay down their lives defending the UK.

Looking back at all my mates, I couldn't see anyone ever thinking it would be right for the UK to be run by a military dictator.

One final thing. As daft as it seems, none of my mates looked forward to going into a conflict zone. We would watch the news and hope that it would be resolved peacefully but if you volunteer to sign up then if you are ordered to do your job, then off you go. It's a job (can become a way of life for some, who then cannot adjust back to civilian life) and the better trained you are the better you become at the job. The amount of training takes you so far and if the shit hits the fan, then relying on your skills and teamwork helps a lot.

That last paragraph is a bit mixed up but the point is in there somewhere!

I think that about covers it all. I must dash as I'm about to watch my copy of 10 Years of 2000 AD



I like this post.

My feelings on armed conflicts are probably the most morally complex of any of my political views and probably where, in some ways I sit furthest to the right. I am in principle a pacifist but pragmatically less so. Extra Judicial killing concern me and I'm extremely weary of drone strikes for that purpose for reasons typified by this http://www.businessinsider.com/alwaki-son-yemen-16-drone-2012-10?IR=T (http://www.businessinsider.com/alwaki-son-yemen-16-drone-2012-10?IR=T)

In many ways our meddling in the middle east in the past makes this shit storm our problem, how to deal with that shit storm with the lest lost of life and the least suffering is an excellent question. America fails pretty much every time because they want to set up a puppet government sympathetic to their ideology and because we tag along, to a lesser extent us too). It doesn't matter if the people we leave in charge hate us as long as the people want them they, don't hate their own population (preferably not even segments of their own population) and they have a decent human rights record and they don't want to start any wars.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 October, 2015, 11:41:14 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 October, 2015, 07:22:12 PM
If you want to watch British soldiers moaning constantly while they are on exercise, then watch the first part of Dog Soldiers, as that was spot on.

So you're saying the second half of that film isn't so accurate?  If only they had some Cassidium!

p.s. thanks for the in-depth reply.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2015, 10:03:02 AM
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/tag/the-four-dark-judges/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 October, 2015, 10:38:18 AM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2015, 10:03:02 AM
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/tag/the-four-dark-judges/

"I win. I always win. Is there no one on this planet to even challenge me?"

(http://i.imgur.com/J25rF8w.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 10 October, 2015, 10:47:06 AM
And I'll raise you a:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQvgfxnWcAA0XI_.jpg:large)

From Andrew-Mark Thompson on Twitter. https://twitter.com/Andydrewz
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 October, 2015, 11:20:38 AM
99p may sound like a bargain, but the full set will be a terrible price to pay....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 October, 2015, 05:32:54 PM
Now that is funny Spikes :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2015, 05:35:50 PM
Jonathan Pie: Reporter gets angry about Matt Damon, David Cameron, Alan Sugar...etc. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=167&v=P979HaI5qlk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 11:30:54 AM
This is what the Tories mean when they say they are 'protecting the NHS' — budget surplus turned into massive deficit over the time they've been in government. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nhs-deficit-crisis-one-chart-that-shows-how-the-nhs-is-headed-for-financial-ruin-a6687926.html) When they bring their new immigration rules in, thousands more nurses will be forced to leave the UK because they don't earn enough to meet the residency requirements.

The next stage of the argument will be that the NHS is unsustainable in its current form and only more private capital will save it.

If you voted Conservative, you voted for this. You can't pretend you didn't know, because people —me included— have been banging on about this since before the 2010 election. Still think it's leftie scaremongering? You're a fucking idiot if you do...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 October, 2015, 12:03:59 PM
Hear, hear....a death by one thousand cuts well underway.  TTIP will deliver thr coup de grace. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 October, 2015, 12:10:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2015, 05:35:50 PM
Jonathan Pie: Reporter gets angry about Matt Damon, David Cameron, Alan Sugar...etc. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=167&v=P979HaI5qlk)

Good man! Probably the finest (and truest) news report I've ever seen.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:13:19 PM
TTIP would that be the trade deal the wonderful E.U. is negotiating on our behalf?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 11 October, 2015, 12:15:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 11:30:54 AM
This is what the Tories mean when they say they are 'protecting the NHS' — budget surplus turned into massive deficit over the time they've been in government. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nhs-deficit-crisis-one-chart-that-shows-how-the-nhs-is-headed-for-financial-ruin-a6687926.html) When they bring their new immigration rules in, thousands more nurses will be forced to leave the UK because they don't earn enough to meet the residency requirements.

The next stage of the argument will be that the NHS is unsustainable in its current form and only more private capital will save it.

If you voted Conservative, you voted for this. You can't pretend you didn't know, because people —me included— have been banging on about this since before the 2010 election. Still think it's leftie scaremongering? You're a fucking idiot if you do...

Indeed. In fact, quite a few Tory voters I've spoken to seem to fail to acknowledge/understand what they've actually voted for, in the long term. 5 minutes of "I'm alright, Jack"  and years of "oh, Fuck! What have we done?"

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2015, 12:21:44 PM
Just been watching this documentary on Britain First on the iplayer. Truly sickening. Blind ficking racism. I'm shaking with anger after watching this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06g59c3/we-want-our-country-back
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 12:22:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:13:19 PM
TTIP would that be the trade deal the wonderful E.U. is negotiating on our behalf?

National governments can choose to exempt state industries and institutions from the provisions of TTIP, as the French have done. Cameron has explicitly rejected calls for him to do the same with the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:35:01 PM
National governments can opt out at any time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 October, 2015, 12:37:58 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2015, 12:21:44 PM
Just been watching this documentary on Britain First on the iplayer. Truly sickening. Blind ficking racism. I'm shaking with anger after watching this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06g59c3/we-want-our-country-back

I watched about 5 minutes of that and had to switch off - I already know they're cunts, didn't feel there was anything new to learn and it was making me too angry
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 12:39:03 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:35:01 PM
National governments can opt out at any time.

Yes, and Cameron says he's not going to exempt the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2015, 12:41:20 PM
Yet still the overwhelming majority of people think the "Tories" have the right to do this. It's the equivalent of a bent storesman flogging NHS gear out of the back door. The storesman gets six months but the politician gets a six figure corporate salary when he retires.

I don't think it's scaremongering at all. I think it's business as usual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:43:37 PM
Cameron says lots of things,doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2015, 12:56:14 PM
Here's a petition here (http://moneyweek.com/wp/hands-off-our-cash-petition-em) for the "government" to guarantee cash will neither be abolished or subjected to negative interest rates. I think it's very important to raise awareness of this issue now, just when they're trying to quietly introduce the idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 12:56:21 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 12:43:37 PM
Cameron says lots of things,doesn't mean it's going to happen.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying that despite explicitly stating that he won't exempt the NHS from the provisions of TTIP, a course of (in)action that suits the Tories ideological commitment to opening the NHS up to ever more market forces, he actually will do precisely the opposite?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:00:22 PM
"I won't cut tax credits."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 01:02:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:00:22 PM
"I won't cut tax credits."

I didn't ask whether he's ever said one thing and then done another, I'm asking whether you're saying in this specific instance that he will pursue a course of action that he has not only ruled out but which would run counter to his and his party's ideology.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:08:32 PM
"I will cut net immigration to the tens of thousands." With Cameron you never know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 01:13:15 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:08:32 PM
"I will cut net immigration to the tens of thousands." With Cameron you never know.

Complete non-sequitur. How does his failure to implement policies to bring this about have any bearing on the subject at hand? Cameron has two options: do the thing he said, which involves doing nothing and produces a result that aligns with his party's ideological position, or do the opposite of what he said, which involves actively creating impediments to the implementation of that ideology.

It seems bizarre in the extreme to suggest the latter in the face of all available evidence of the Tories' ongoing assault on the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:28:37 PM
Yep! You've won, Jim, you've lost me! But I would have thought that controlled immigration was the Tory party's ideological position, and he certainly changed his mind on that, based on the figures.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 October, 2015, 01:36:18 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 October, 2015, 11:30:54 AM


The next stage of the argument will be that the NHS is unsustainable in its current form and only more private capital will save it.


[/quote/]

  emphasis on the "more" I found out recently that when a g.p. refers you to an orthapedic/spinal specialist it automatically goes to a private provider "virgin care " in my case . I had to turn them down on advbice from the spinal clinic in the hospital as they could see me quicker as I was an urgent case.
  We'd seen this coming longer than that ,at a trust "training week" we were given hints that that was how it was going...and all the managers avoided answering our question as to whether we were already being privatised by the back door.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2015, 01:46:13 PM
Once a government becomes a signatory of TTIP, they cannot opt out of it at a later date.
Even Hillary Clinton has said this is a step too far and has withdrawn her support for TPP - and TTIP and that other one I can't be arsed looking up - even though this puts her in direct disagreement with Obama and her major campaign donors.  Also worth remembering that she didn't actually withdraw her support until the text of TPP was released by Wikileaks - she didn't have access to the agreement until it was leaked onto the internet.
Ironically, TPP expressly makes it criminal to allow the spread of information detrimental to the profits of corporations even if it's in the public interest, so not only would it have prevented Wikileaks from releasing the TPP, it would have meant no VW scandal, no reporting on climate change, no releasing medical information on the effects of tobacco, and so on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 October, 2015, 01:46:30 PM
TTIP is unfortunately a right of centre moneterist political party's wet dream. If the conservatives were in power and outside the EU, this would still be one of the first things pushed through parliament. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:47:00 PM
Was it the then Labour government that started using private companies in the NHS?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 October, 2015, 01:49:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 October, 2015, 12:56:14 PM
Here's a petition here (http://moneyweek.com/wp/hands-off-our-cash-petition-em) for the "government" to guarantee cash will neither be abolished or subjected to negative interest rates. I think it's very important to raise awareness of this issue now, just when they're trying to quietly introduce the idea.

No way I'm signing this. I'd personally benefit from negative interest rates and I don't see a reason to stop the BoE implementing them, in the unlikely event they decide it's the best thing for the UK economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 11 October, 2015, 01:51:25 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:08:32 PM
"I will cut net immigration to the tens of thousands." With Cameron you never know.

Cameron's failure to implement this cut is one of his best features!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2015, 01:53:16 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 October, 2015, 01:47:00 PM
Was it the then Labour government that started using private companies in the NHS?

Yes. And it has been accelerated by the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 11 October, 2015, 01:53:48 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 October, 2015, 12:37:58 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 11 October, 2015, 12:21:44 PM
Just been watching this documentary on Britain First on the iplayer. Truly sickening. Blind ficking racism. I'm shaking with anger after watching this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06g59c3/we-want-our-country-back

I watched about 5 minutes of that and had to switch off - I already know they're cunts, didn't feel there was anything new to learn and it was making me too angry

"This is a Christian country, and it always has been..."

I made it to about the 5 second mark....

I find the perfect antidote to 'Britain first' is 'Celtic Britain first' - which you can find over on facebook.

No more Saxon's! We are full!!
Saxon's? Scroungers! Christian's? Scroungers! Roman's? Scroungers!  etc, etc...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 October, 2015, 01:56:01 PM
Nu-labour would fit handsomely into my definition of a right wing moneterist set up....had any of the gang of three won the leadership of the Labour Party, I feel they would have been at best tacitly sympathetic to TTIP. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 October, 2015, 02:29:20 PM
They've been quiet about it since, but Kendall and Cooper were openly supportive of TTIP before the public opposition became unavoidable.  Burnham was likely waiting to see what way the wind was blowing before committing either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2015, 04:46:38 PM
Fresh from election victory, the Portugese left has been forbidden from forming a government because of their anti-austerity policies: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11949701/AEP-Eurozone-crosses-Rubicon-as-Portugals-anti-euro-Left-banned-from-power.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2015, 05:33:23 PM
I don't find this, if it's true, to be surprising. The majority of governments have been hi-jacked and watered down until they're little more than local parish councils. They allow us the illusion of control by giving us a vote but if we use it in a way they don't like it's called spoiled or invalid. The Greeks voted for anti-austerity and were told no. Now the Portuguese. Nor is our own government exempt from these higher deciders, whoever they are, or whoever they think they are.

If the government you vote for isn't allowed to do what you told it to do, what good is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 October, 2015, 05:56:57 PM
No good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2015, 03:24:00 PM
Who Will Fix the Roads?
.
In trying to imagine a stateless, anarchist society, the above question always pops up and I never had an answer I found convincing, until now.
.
(Before I begin, a note about context. The idea I'm about to explore is done so from the viewpoint of an imagined future where the state as we know it has already evaporated and the flaws in the money creation and handling systems have been solved. There is no arbitrary taxation (theft) or license fees - every penny a person earns belongs to that person, nothing can be taken without contract and/or consent.)
.
So, without a coercive state, who will fix the roads? The answer is simple - the same people who fix them now: privately owned and run companies specialising in road maintenance.
.
But who pays for it?
.
You do, of course. But, without a central coercive state to collect taxes (under threat of punishment for refusing), how to sort out your payment?
.
I propose what I'm going to call the Social Infrastructure Donation, or SID. If you decide to pay "taxes" towards the roads, you do so through a private SID company. These companies calculate what an individual's "fair share" of the nation's, or local region's, running costs are. This figure is purely a suggestion - you can pay more, less or not at all. Payment can only be encouraged, not enforced.
.
The SID company collects your voluntary contributions as and when you decide to make them (standing order, directly from your wages, check or cash payments, a neighbourhood SID collector, etc.) and splits it amongst public services to your specification - although the SID companies will be able to tailor your donations individually, they will probably offer standard packages where more of your donation goes into the NHS than the roads, or vice-versa. The SID companies profit by charging a small percentage off your donation.
.
So all the basics can be covered the same way.
.
But there's one more wrinkle to SID companies. You can pay for just the basics if you want but there might be an option for more. For example, you may wish to subsidise the arts or sciences as well. Let's imagine a specialist SID company springs up called "Scientific SID" which does all the things a normal SID company does and also offers specialised scientific subsidies. You might choose to use some of your money to subsidise physics research, pharmaceutical research, weapons research, SETI, archaeology or whatever.
.
Of course, you wouldn't have to be aware of all the research projects in the world and pick the ones you like as Scientific SID employs experts to seek out worthwhile projects and good bets. You choose the area you want to subsidise an Scientific SID handles the specifics. This leads to the possibility of your subsidy donation buying into a scientific breakthrough on the ground floor and paying you a return on your investment, which you can spend, invest, save or donate as you choose.
.
Other specialist SID companies might cater for donators (the Libertarian equivalent of "tax-payers") who wish to lean more towards the arts (maybe gaining dividends from a successful album, film, tv show or book), sports (dividends from gate-takings/prizes/other deals), business (dividends from successful start-ups) and so on.
.
I can't think of many coercive government tax systems that not only give the tax payers control over how their money is spent but also offer the prospect of making a profit!
.
So anyway, that's one way for an anarchist society to fund its infrastructure without centralised coercive theft (taxation). The truly free market can do everything government does - and it can do it cheaper, smarter and faster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 01 November, 2015, 04:15:05 PM
I understand what you're saying but I still believe you put too much faith in the prospect of everyone behaving reasonably towards one another.

If some people refused to pay into this system would they be barred from using the roads? And if not, wouldn't those that have paid be entitled to kick up a fuss about it?

I'm all for a radical change in the Political System but the thing that gets in the way of it is 'Humanity' in general. Not everyone's a greedy Fucker, admittedly, but there's enough that are, and without some form of 'Authority' (that is subject to the wishes of the people) who would decide what happens?

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 November, 2015, 04:41:59 PM
There are people who refuse to pay right now, there always will be. The SID companies I propose can't be set up tomorrow, they are a concept to be worked towards. Entrepreneurs will find a way to make SID companies attractive to as many people as possible, perhaps through running lotteries or something.
.
As I said, the above idea is an end-point down the line some. For it to work, the idea must first take hold and be debated and improved.
.
Who would decide what happens about what? Generally speaking, the people decide by giving their custom to the SID company with the best reputation. A prestigious SIDco would send out trained inspectors to check the road maintenance company is doing its job properly. They do this on your behalf as part of the service they offer (just as supermarkets today send out inspectors to suppliers' factories and farms). A company found wanting might be dropped in favour of a better one, especially if several SIDcos had issues with the same companies.
.
Decisions come down to economics and the political shielding of friends in high places no longer exists. You pick the SIDco you trust the most to make sure your donation's well-spent. If you're not bothered about that, you can play the SID Lottery. And if you can't or won't pay, you don't have to. That's freedom, I'm afraid. There will always be a few.
.
Right now, the vast majority of people describe themselves as honest tax-payers; they take pride in the fact that they let the state rob them without making a fuss. It would only take a tiny nudge, a small change in perspective, for those people to start calling themselves proud donators, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 November, 2015, 04:49:44 PM
The problem is, once you start viewing infrastructure money as effectively charitable donations, income would fall off a cliff. Many people wouldn't pay for what 'they' don't use, even if it was for the greater good. Fundamentally, too many people are selfish — and I don't discount myself from that. I don't support every website I read, for example, via Patreon or other funding. Same thing, ultimately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 01 November, 2015, 04:55:37 PM
This sounds verymuch like the Big Society

Essentially, I get to choose where to spend what would have previously been taxes under this system, or keep it to myself.

Look at how the poor are demonised now - How many people would say "I'll pay to the Pensions SIDco, but not the job seekers one"  or "I'll pay to the Street Cleaning SIDco, but not to the Defence one" and so on and so on

Having an over arching "authority" that can apportion the money raised allows for the cash to go where it is most needed, if not efficiently, granted,  a hell of a lot more efficiently than the whims of millions of potentially prejudiced and biased and plain old refusnik individual choices.

Even if everyone was grown up enough to do this, they would also need to be informed enough about what costs they incur - maybe each person could be given a "you cost this much to these services" suggested spend... but then they say - "but I dont want to support x/y/z" and we are back to what seems an unworkable system
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 November, 2015, 08:02:45 PM
Ah, Shark, that looks very much like a totally unworkable solution to a complete non-problem.

In actual political news, Scottish Labour just voted to support Corbyn and ditch Trident. I think a purge of the Blairites just edged closer, and to my mind one is essential if Jezza is going to avoid being deposed by right-leaning colleagues at the first sign of trouble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2015, 10:46:50 PM
I don't think a purge is likely.  The Blairites are a minority in the Labour party, and an increasingly unpopular one the more they undermine their own party and insult their own voters - I think Jezza is just going to sit back and let that problem take care of itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 02 November, 2015, 08:22:06 AM
It's World Vegan Day (apparently).

May whatever is on your plate today be healthy, tasty and full of compassion for this planet and all the beings that live on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 November, 2015, 08:35:31 AM
Now that's too political for me!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 November, 2015, 12:03:55 PM
Typical vegan, always banging on about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 05:27:42 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 November, 2015, 04:49:44 PM
The problem is, once you start viewing infrastructure money as effectively charitable donations, income would fall off a cliff. Many people wouldn't pay for what 'they' don't use, even if it was for the greater good. Fundamentally, too many people are selfish — and I don't discount myself from that. I don't support every website I read, for example, via Patreon or other funding. Same thing, ultimately.

As I said, you couldn't set this kind of thing up now, it's too early. People have to believe in it first, which shouldn't be a problem. After all, people can be convinced that the banks must create all the money, that 19 hi-jackers defeated four airliners full of passengers flown by combat-trained pilots and the combined resources of the most sophisticated civil air defence systems in the world with Stanley knives, that your vote is important and that David Cameron is qualified to tell us all what to do - so convincing people to fund their own services (at a much cheaper and more efficient way than we do today) should be a piece of piss.
.
Quote from: Leigh S on 01 November, 2015, 04:55:37 PM
This sounds verymuch like the Big Society

Essentially, I get to choose where to spend what would have previously been taxes under this system, or keep it to myself.

Look at how the poor are demonised now - How many people would say "I'll pay to the Pensions SIDco, but not the job seekers one"  or "I'll pay to the Street Cleaning SIDco, but not to the Defence one" and so on and so on

Having an over arching "authority" that can apportion the money raised allows for the cash to go where it is most needed, if not efficiently, granted,  a hell of a lot more efficiently than the whims of millions of potentially prejudiced and biased and plain old refusnik individual choices.

Even if everyone was grown up enough to do this, they would also need to be informed enough about what costs they incur - maybe each person could be given a "you cost this much to these services" suggested spend... but then they say - "but I dont want to support x/y/z" and we are back to what seems an unworkable system
.
You are absolutely correct that people would retain the right to spend their money how they choose - why should they not? It's their money.
.
Nobody tells you to use your house, or part of it, to support the public. You don't have to use your car to ferry tramps around or share your clothes with the disadvantaged. By the same token, you don't have to spend your money on anything you don't want to. That's freedom.
.
But you can't have freedom without responsibility and I think the vast majority of people can easily understand that. The SIDcos will invent incentives to encourage people to cough up and it would be very simple to attach stigma to non-payment. People like to fit in and it would not take long at all to replace our current antediluvian tax system with a modern and efficient SIDco network.
.
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 01 November, 2015, 08:02:45 PM
Ah, Shark, that looks very much like a totally unworkable solution to a complete non-problem.

.
How is it unworkable? The SIDco system requires no new inventions or innovations. Everything required of it can be accomplished with existing technology and know-how. There's no science fiction, magic or praying required.
.
Indeed, the SIDco system has two more advantages that I thought of at work today. Firstly, say there's a pot-hole in the road outside your house and the road mending firm "John Wayne Ltd." has fixed it, poorly, three times. You might call your SIDco and tell them, 'I still want to pay my share but I don't want any of my money to go to John Wayne Ltd.' It's your money so the SIDco has to comply and your money goes to an alternate company. If John Wayne Ltd. really is that bad, they'll lose income like this steadily until they either buck up or go broke.
.
A second advantage, again sticking to roads as an example, is in the speed the SIDco system can react to the unexpected. Say there's a much harsher and more prolonged winter than usual and the local (or national) road maintenance companies need to buy more grit for spreading. The SIDcos can instantly reallocate a small percentage of payments away from "non-stressed" services, or from emergency funds, or from increased contributions, or from the "luxuries" contributions (sciences, arts, sports, etc.) for the duration of the crisis. The money would be there, almost instantly, with no need for the road maintenance company to get into debt waiting to get paid.
.
Being decentralised, but networked together, the SIDcos would react quickly and efficiently to local, regional and national crises in a way our current flabby system finds difficult.
.
And which "non-problem" are you referring to? The unmanageable current government debt? The inefficiencies and waste endemic in the current system? Politicians' mates getting first crack at the tenders? Having no say whatsoever in the companies hired to do public work? Having no say whatsoever in how your money is spent? Wining and dining and lobbying politicians to get the plum contracts? Seeing your money wasted on Millennium Domes and obsolete computer systems? Watching your services getting cut, discontinued and sold off because the money that does get stolen from you isn't enough? High taxes hobbling small businesses, thereby gutting rural areas of their traditional small family firms and leaving high streets like wastelands? The cheapest job at the highest price? Etc., etc., etc.
.
However, I can understand that a statist might not necessarily recognise these as problems at all - just imperfect aspects of the system. A statist's view is often, "fix the imperfections, fix the system." Well, maybe that's possible but I honestly don't think so. In my view, the system as it stands is fundamentally broken and needs to be scrapped.
.
And don't forget, I came up with the SIDco idea (although it's so simple it can't be an original idea) in response to the question about an anarchist society that always stumped me - "but who will fix the roads?" The fact that SIDcos could also (and primarily) serve as a totally anarchist taxation system (previously an oxymoron) turned out to be an added bonus.
.
In conclusion, then, you can have an anarchist society with a publicly funded infrastructure that meets the requirements of the Libertarian philosophy, the open market and the general public.
.
Who'd a thunk it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 November, 2015, 05:59:59 PM
Libertarian piffle. I have no idea how you get from your starting position and end up at your current position, which is more or less the Thatcherite "no such thing as society" wet dream.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 06:19:54 PM
I don't know how you can say "no such thing as society" when I believe society is the highest human necessity. Society is essential, it's everything.
.
I do not see the state and society as the same thing. The state cannot exist without society but society can exist (and exist perfectly well) without the state.
.
The state might have achieved useful things but it achieved every one of them through force or the threat of force. It is a scaffold, nothing more. Time to take it down and lay it up. The only people who need the state are the parasites who run it - not us. The state merely tolerates us - so long as we keep our heads down.
.
Society, I believe, needs to cure itself of the state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 November, 2015, 06:36:54 PM
people will NEVER pay voluntary taxes, it's no good saying you have to make the argument first - you may be able to gather a commune of like-minded souls, but you couldn't even run a city let alone a country of 70 million under that system.

Using hospitals as an example, what happens when the income isn't enough to cover basic expenditure (which is vast in the field of modern medicine)? Do you cut services (eventually leading to refugee-camp style treatment that only offers the most basic facilities) or do you give priority to those who've paid in, in which case you've just reinvented private healthcare?

Many people have tried, but apart from a totalitarian state/communist approach, nobody has come up with a workable alternative to mandatory taxation enforced with penalties, and I'm afraid neither have you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 November, 2015, 06:38:52 PM
Can I ask what it might cost to select and appoint a company to mobilize to fill a single pothole?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 November, 2015, 07:17:55 PM
Oh God. Wake me when we're talking about politics again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 07:25:52 PM
DDD - I believe that, under the right conditions, people will pay voluntary taxes. There are three reasons for this.
.
Firstly, the logic is inescapable - if you want something, you have to pay for it. The more people who are willing to pay, the cheaper it gets for everyone. Those are facts everyone can understand.
.
Secondly, by the time fully-formed entities like SIDcos are required, the debt currency issue will have been fixed. Prices will have stabilised and things like inflation, license fees and V.A.T. will no longer exist. This will unlock more of society's wealth across the board, leading to burgeoning entrepreneurialism and a truly free market. A long way off, yes, but by no means unattainable. This is the world of the pure SIDco and, whilst not everyone is monetarily rich, nobody need go short. The economy, then, must be tasked with generating and spreading enough wealth so that everyone can afford to pay it. If you can afford to pay it, and if you know that you should, and you know your mates will take the piss and that old bat down the offie won't serve you if you don't, you'll pay.
.
Thirdly, most people go with the flow. They don't worry about this kind of stuff until they have to. At the moment, it's just lone nutters like me howling at the internet. Maybe, in the years to come, there'll be a few more of us. Then somebody's going to try something like a proto-SIDco - maybe making a deal with a local council to convince defaulting council tax payers to at least pay something on the strength of saving legal costs and at least getting some income. Maybe the attempt will fail or maybe they'll make a go of it and inspire other companies and ideas. All these things will initially grow alongside the current system over years and decades. By the time we're ready to ask one another to tip up a few bob for the roads, the majority will understand the necessity.
.
There are no short-cuts, unfortunately. Much as it might be comforting, and easy, to sit back and wait for someone to come along and fix everything for us (the mythical "benevolent dictator," maybe), it's not going to happen. We have to get there ourselves. Those 650 deluded maniacs down Westminster aren't going to lead the way, they're all too easily distracted by shiny things and loud noises.
.
Tordels, I don't know. I assume road maintenance companies have "pot-hole patrols" - a dedicated workforce in a little van who zip about doing little jobs like that. Or they may sub-contract to small local firms for the more remote or awkward places.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 November, 2015, 07:38:02 PM
Taxes for some, miniature flags for others
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 07:39:18 PM
...And crazy paving for me!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 November, 2015, 07:45:03 PM
I can't fault your optimism, but I'm too cynical to believe it could ever happen - there will always come a point where someone will find a way to exploit the system for their own personal gain (thus reinventing capitalism), or simply be happy to be a free-loader on everyone else's contributions (leading to resentment and discord).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 07:57:16 PM
You are absolutely correct, DDD - people are people. The free market is kind of there to be exploited. Somebody finds a wrinkle, society has a look and either irons it out or presses it into a proper crease.
.
People are anarchic by nature, always arguing and shagging one another and pissing about. Trying to force all that into a "one size fits all" state doesn't work. People get crushed. Set it free, I say - set it free and watch it soar!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 November, 2015, 08:39:04 PM
Option B: pay your taxes.

Pros: it's how every organised nation on earth has operated for hundreds of years.  It brought us the welfare state, universal education and clean running water.

Cons: The Man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 08:50:40 PM
Cons: War. Genocide. Inequality. Slavery. Exploitation. Poverty. Corruption. Corporatism. Coercion. Deceit. Oppression. Suppression. Repression. Depression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 November, 2015, 08:52:48 PM
Society and capitalism are not mutually inclusive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 November, 2015, 09:16:08 PM
Absolutely true, Hawkie. The ultimate goal, as I see it, is to get rid of money, stock markets and Economics altogether.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 November, 2015, 08:14:38 AM
We here at John Wayne Enterprises, repairing roads since 1876, have diversified.  Set free from the shackles of government oppression, we'd like to offer the people of these islands a solution to your on going problem of poor people and immigrants.  For the low price of £5 a month, we intend to offer a private security force, which will gather together all the unemployed skivers and immigrants in your neighbourhood, transport them to another location and ensure that they never return.  Sign up now to this one time offer.  Once we reach our financial goal, work will begin in your area immediately!  Make the world a better place, with John Wayne Enterprises - here for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 November, 2015, 08:21:07 AM
Sign up now and you (or your Daddy) will receive a free zippo lighter inscribed with 'Fuck Communism!'. Novelty purposes only. Warning: John Wayne Enterprises deny responsibility for any self-righteous deicidal crusade or random Laurel and Hardy appreciation that may ensue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 November, 2015, 08:40:12 AM
Forget John Wayne Enterprises; the Clint Eastwood Company is the way to go. Did we just fix five pot-holes or was it six? In all the excitement, we kinda' forgot. Also, we need you to apologise to our bulldozer.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 November, 2015, 07:47:57 PM
Okay, I am really bored now.

Shark, you've hijacked this thread. Again.

Why don't you start your own thread so that those who want to engage with you about your endlessly recycled pseudo-utopian fantasies could join you over there, but those of us who are only tuning in for political discussion can do so without having to skim-read pages and pages (and pages and pages and pages) of your manifesto?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 November, 2015, 07:53:51 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 November, 2015, 07:47:57 PM
Shark, you've hijacked this thread.

Can the OP hijack his own thread?

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2010, 03:59:03 PM
As the "election" is coming up, when we'll all be asked to vote on the people the Power Elite tell us to vote for, I thought we might as well have a political thread for this and other political comments
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 November, 2015, 08:03:58 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 03 November, 2015, 07:53:51 PM
Can the OP hijack his own thread?

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2010, 03:59:03 PM
As the "election" is coming up, when we'll all be asked to vote on the people the Power Elite tell us to vote for, I thought we might as well have a political thread for this and other political comments

Those early posts are interesting. Shark was talking about politics back in the day, but he's not doing that any more. If this is his thread then I guess he can writes what he likes here, but can we just rename it to something more representative of what it's about now?

Then when that's done, I would start a new Politics thread the subject of which would be politics. Furthermore, I would happily relinquish any rights to change that subject later down the line should I find anything I'd be more interested in talking about. Even homebrew anarcho-libertarianism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 November, 2015, 08:39:46 PM
It is politics. It's just not current politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 03 November, 2015, 08:41:11 PM
Why don't we all... like. Start our own threads. And only comment on those ourselves.

It'd work out fine somehow, I'm sure of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 November, 2015, 08:51:02 PM
(http://i2.wp.com/www.clutchmagonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PresObama.png?resize=523%2C277)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 02:00:34 AM
JBA, why not write out a comprehensive list of Banned Political Topics and email (http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/10/14/contact-us.html) it to someone?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 04 November, 2015, 09:52:05 AM
Or just start a new thread called something like 'The Contemporary Politics Thread' for discussing contemporary politics?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 November, 2015, 12:26:04 PM
The Political Thread (Expedient Edition)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 01:40:10 PM
The Political Thread (Sharkless Edition).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 November, 2015, 02:40:12 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 03 November, 2015, 07:47:57 PM
Okay, I am really bored now.

Shark, you've hijacked this thread. Again.

Why don't you start your own thread so that those who want to engage with you about your endlessly recycled pseudo-utopian fantasies could join you over there, but those of us who are only tuning in for political discussion can do so without having to skim-read pages and pages (and pages and pages and pages) of your manifesto?

So why not make some posts about other political topics and start a discussion? And you can always skip Sharky's posts and the responses if they are of no interest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 02:45:56 PM
Or he could put me on "Ignore." That seems to work for lots of people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 November, 2015, 02:52:23 PM
Who said...etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 03:02:42 PM
(http://www.sanfernandovalleynra.org/wp-%3Cbr%20/%3Econtent/uploads/2014/02/shocked-baby-%3Cbr%20/%3Eface-300x182.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 04 November, 2015, 03:52:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 02:45:56 PM
Or he could put me on "Ignore." That seems to work for lots of people.

Doesn't ignore hide every post from a person, rather than just their posts in one thread?

As for just ignoring the posts themselves, in my experience that's easier said than done.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2015, 04:45:39 PM
I have to say I don't know. I've never used the ignore function. I know Jim has me on ignore (or he did at one spell) and found the experience to be rather calming. He could see my posts if somebody quoted them, however, which rather soured his idyll.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 November, 2015, 05:15:00 PM
Don't be f##king with Jim. I hear he's lose weight and is feeling lean and mean. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 06 November, 2015, 11:00:08 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 04 November, 2015, 05:15:00 PM
Don't be f##king with Jim. I hear he's  feeling  mean. Z

as opposed to what? :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 15 November, 2015, 03:53:11 PM
And here we go.....shoot guys. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 November, 2015, 05:49:14 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 15 November, 2015, 03:53:11 PM
And here we go.....shoot guys. Z
I think the whole point is not too shoot guys, thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2015, 05:53:49 PM
At least not until the Director tells you it's time.  That's the secret.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 November, 2015, 06:54:14 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 04 November, 2015, 05:15:00 PM
Don't be f##king with Jim. I hear he's lose weight and is feeling lean and mean. Z

Well he was, but lean and mean both complained so he's stopped it now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 November, 2015, 11:22:41 AM
Labour MPs are openly defiant of Jezza because he's gone too dang far this time: he opposes state-sanctioned murder within UK borders and the illegal bombing of a foreign power.
This is clearly the wrong approach, because hijacking a terrorist atrocity to push for an illegal war in the Middle East and introduce greater security measures that infringe civil rights at home worked out so great for Labour last time around.  So much for the Blairite faction learning the lessons of the past.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2015, 11:06:23 PM
Everything seems to be going breasts aloft.
.
Maybe we should start a Religion Thread as there seems to be little left to do but pray.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:13:53 PM
I think people who pray to one diety or another constitute a considerable component part of our problems over the past few decades or so. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2015, 11:28:00 PM
I disagree. I think it's the people who manipulate the people who pray to one deity or another who constitute a considerable component part of our problems over the past few millennia or so.
.
And as you know, I equate voting with praying. I have voted in the past, so some of that blood is on my hands. My vote, which was always for a losing party, was nevertheless taken as some kind of "permission slip" to drop bombs on human beings.
.
Similarly, manipulators turn prayers into "holy obligations" to convince human beings to blow themselves up.
.
I don't know what the answer is. Education, maybe - but then, who gets to teach?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:38:16 PM
So that's the thread bck on-line again. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2015, 11:43:21 PM
You should read my latest blog post.
.
Or maybe you shouldn't.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:45:23 PM
I would but I'm watching Father Ted, as good an observation on religion as ever there was. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2015, 11:51:02 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:45:23 PM
I would but I'm watching Father Ted, as good an observation on religion as ever there was. Z

These sins are small. Those sins are far away...

Cheers!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:57:08 PM
Entertaining Father Stone. Bliss! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 November, 2015, 12:14:10 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 21 November, 2015, 11:57:08 PM
Entertaining Father Stone. Bliss! Z

I've long maintained that the quintessence of the capital-G Great sitcom is 'trapped with a monster'. The brilliance of Father Ted... one of the brilliances of Father Ted, is that you can pick ANY of the key characters and, from their POV, they're trapped with a monster...!

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 November, 2015, 12:24:44 AM
S'right y' know. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 November, 2015, 12:33:59 AM
Given the choice, I think I'd prefer Father Ted as well - that would not, of course, be an ecumenical matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 November, 2015, 02:54:39 PM
Just going to leave this link here, for the benefit of those forum members who think that talk of creeping NHS privatisation is just alarmist propaganda from lefties...

Wiltshire's entire range of NHS Child Services privatised without public consultation (http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Wiltshire-s-entire-NHS-Children-s-Services/story-28192161-detail/story.html).

I don't like to be the guy who says "I told you so", but I fucking well did tell you so.

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2015, 03:51:56 PM
It's only child services, and I don't live in Wiltshire anyway.  As long as I'm alright I don't care.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 04:57:39 PM
If it provides a better service  for the patient and they are not having to pay any more, great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 November, 2015, 05:02:27 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 04:57:39 PM
If it provides a better service  for the patient and they are not having to pay any more, great.

So you're changing your position from: privatisation isn't happening to privatisation is a good thing? Take a minute or two to familiarise yourself with the UK and US healthcare systems, then come back and tell me which you'd prefer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 November, 2015, 05:08:37 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 04:57:39 PM
If it provides a better service  for the patient and they are not having to pay any more, great.

:lol: :lol: yeah good one ... oh wait you're serious?  :o.

Virgin have such a good reputation for customer service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 05:25:29 PM
When did I say there was no privatisation? I thought I have said that as long as the service is good and it is payed for by the NHS I am happy.  After all, most GP surgeries are private businesses, and have been for years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 November, 2015, 05:43:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 05:25:29 PM
When did I say there was no privatisation? I thought I have said that as long as the service is good and it is payed for by the NHS I am happy.

Right... so all the available evidence says that the publicly-funded, publicly-run NHS has delivered some of the most efficient healthcare in the world, and that privately-driven systems, such as the US system for which the Tories have expressed much admiration, are far more expensive. On top of that, as soon as a private company becomes involved, the actual spending of public money disappears behind a cloak of 'commercial confidentiality' and our money, tax-payers' money, is spent with zero accountability.

I genuinely cannot believe that even intelligent people are unable to see the problem with the following scenario: you have (let's say) £10M to run a particular health/care service for a year. You can give it to a publicly-run body whose workings are, by legal necessity, required to adhere to standards of transparency and accountability, and who will spend £10M delivering that service. OR you can give it to Virgin, or Circle, or whoever, and say to them "Here's £10M to run this service. Anything that's left over at the end of the year you can keep."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 November, 2015, 05:58:58 PM
The bottom line here is that the current administration is ideologically determined to destroy the NHS. The concept of a publicly funded, publicly run organisation is an utter anathema to a party predicated on free market economic principles.
Cutting the funding; the potential introduction of TTIP will literally result in death by 1000 cuts. The situation now is a monied 1%er 's wet dream ; for the rest of us it is another step on the road to societal oblivion. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 24 November, 2015, 06:05:29 PM
I see PFC Trolly McBridgelurker has already reported for duty here, in double-quick time.  Good work, private!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 November, 2015, 06:15:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 November, 2015, 02:54:39 PM
Just going to leave this link here, for the benefit of those forum members who think that talk of creeping NHS privatisation is just alarmist propaganda from lefties...

Wiltshire's entire range of NHS Child Services privatised without public consultation (http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Wiltshire-s-entire-NHS-Children-s-Services/story-28192161-detail/story.html).

I don't like to be the guy who says "I told you so", but I fucking well did tell you so.

Bah.

Jim

That Deborah Elliott, who often seems to spell her name Debra Elliott, appears on many medical boards' records. I haven't read them all, of course, just doing an initial snoop around, but a fair few instances of her involvement seem to be in connection with contracting out NHS services. She may be worth looking at.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 06:19:33 PM
Thank you for the insults, always a pleasure to chat to you, GordenR.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 November, 2015, 07:04:58 PM
There's nothing wrong with a mixture of public and private health care. It would be how it's implemented that would be the thing!

The insanity of procurement definitely needs to be sorted out like a business but the people in charge do it for no bonuses or profits. It would still be ran by the government.

The government should use their power to stop the rising costs of drugs by making a stand and threatening the use of a generic cheaper alternative. Obviously I would expect that to not cover all drugs. BUT I would hope the message got out quickly that companies couldn't take the piss anymore.

The problem is that all governments have friends in the industries involved, or family members or even members of the government themselves.

Enough of all that though, I've been surprised at the quietness on here as the EU has gone into meltdown over borders, terrorists, etc...

Countries closing borders down, razor wire going up, Germany reducing the numbers allowed in now. Does this mean that the Big idea is falling apart. Discuss!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 November, 2015, 07:14:11 PM
Yeah there is no way the EU can continue the way it is. I saw in the Indy this morning that a majority of those polled want out of the European Union. Not that surprising since a large part of British history has been antagonistic towards or even fighting with centralizing European powers through the ages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 08:01:47 PM
SNP down to 54.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 November, 2015, 09:10:18 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 24 November, 2015, 05:58:58 PM
Cutting the funding; the potential introduction of TTIP will literally result in death by 1000 cuts. The situation now is a monied 1%er 's wet dream ; for the rest of us it is another step on the road to societal oblivion. Z
Do you have statistics to support this claim? Because if not i'm calling bullshit, as i've met a great many people in my life tus far and i've only ever met the one person who thinks dissolving the NHS into private institutes to line the pockets of our fat cat dictators, and thats you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 November, 2015, 09:27:44 PM
Welp, I quoted the wrong post, I meant to quote the below.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 05:25:29 PM
When did I say there was no privatisation? I thought I have said that as long as the service is good and it is payed for by the NHS I am happy.  After all, most GP surgeries are private businesses, and have been for years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 09:59:43 PM
What is your point?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 November, 2015, 10:04:55 PM
Privatisation is bad, irregardless of the quality of the individual clinic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 November, 2015, 10:09:14 PM
Fine, but I don't agree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 25 November, 2015, 07:18:48 AM
The way I see it - Privatisation is about making the owners of the 'provided service' richer. In a publicly funded scenario all funds go towards providing the service itself.

It really is that simple!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 07:33:30 AM
Privatisation isn't necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, in my view - like everything else, it either works well or it works badly.
.
Corporatisation, however, is a different beast altogether. Corporatism is virtually identical to Fascism and must be stopped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 November, 2015, 08:06:17 AM
We're talking about terrestrial health privatisation Shark.; not sub-aqueousl privatisation in Monterry bay! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2015, 10:00:11 AM
Quite. And I'm struggling to think of many cases of privatisation where the public has benefitted.

- Our train fares are among the highest in Europe, and franchises are often owned by foreign states, yet the British state is legally barred from bidding on them. The net result is a severe reduction of economy of scale, higher prices, and subsidising commuters overseas. (I recall reading pricing a couple of years ago, where it showed you can get an 'all Germany' annual pass for less than a typical London-Brighton commuter pass.)

- Water and other essential utilities also suffer from a lack of scale, and from having to ensure a certain amount of cash flows back into shareholder pockets. Water in particular suffers from low investment regarding leaks and infrastructure leaks. Locally, sewage repair is a major problem, to the point problems known about for years are essentially ignored until streets start collapsing. Naturally, bills then rise to deal with the added costs.

- Telecoms might be an exception. In things like broadband, we have a fairly robust level of competition, albeit primarily due to local loop unbundling. (Otherwise I suspect we'd have a duopoly or at most three companies competing.) Even so, it's hard to see how the base infrastructure being privatised has been hugely beneficial.

The elephant in the room, of course, remains taxation. If the services are to be nationalised, the money has to come from somewhere. Mind you, people don't seem to recognise how much they're already paying in subsidies anyway, such as for trains.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 10:32:43 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2015, 10:00:11 AM
Quite. And I'm struggling to think of many cases of privatisation where the public has benefitted.

Quite. We pay more to subsidise our railways now than we ever did when it was British Rail, and yet all the train operators are profitable. A big chunk of those profits feeds into the coffers of the French and German national rail companies, effectively subsidising the fares of European rail passengers.

As for the utilities, they were handed businesses with very clear cycles of profit and investment but they have chosen to take the profits and make no provision for the investment phases of their businesses.

See: all the power stations that are about to go out of service with no replacements even in the planning stages. All of these stations had known 'life expectancies' and the power companies chose to take profits rather than make provision for their replacements, because they know that no government of any political persuasion will be the one to let the lights go out. Result? Massive profits for the power companies and their shareholders, whilst the taxpayer is going to have to offer a huge subsidy to get the fucking Chinese to build new nuclear power plants in the UK.

I'm old enough to remember the 70s, and I'm not pining for some rose-tinted, misty-eyed version of the nationalised industries of the 70s, but we are looking at the demonstrable failure of thirty of years of the neo-liberal privatisation agenda. There has to be a better way of doing this, and yet suggesting that the unfettered free market isn't the solution to everything gets you labelled as some kind of Militant Tendency throwback.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 10:35:11 AM
I agree with everything you say, IP, but the fact remains that the most efficient economic system so far devised is the true free market, or 'agora' (I think it's called).
.
In the true free market, competition and quality (and equality) go hand in hand leading to efficient and competitive services.
.
The trouble is that we don't have a free market, we have a corporatist or fascist market. Large corporations call the shots through legislation, monopoly and sheer size. There is no real competition (a few pennies here and there on this or that hardly qualifies) and therefore no real efficiency (except in the maximisation of profits).
.
Remove state interference with the Economy and allow the free market to operate on a level playing field* and privatising any services would be a good idea. So would nationalising them but to a lesser degree.
.
*This does not imply a lack of law or oversight, a 'Mad Max Economy,' so to speak.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2015, 10:52:06 AM
They say it's a free market until it fails - which we now know it always will - at which point it's time for socialism to save the day with a bailout.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 25 November, 2015, 11:45:14 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 10:35:11 AM
I agree with everything you say, IP, but the fact remains that the most efficient economic system so far devised is the true free market, or 'agora' (I think it's called).
.
In the true free market, competition and quality (and equality) go hand in hand leading to efficient and competitive services.
.
The trouble is that we don't have a free market, we have a corporatist or fascist market. Large corporations call the shots through legislation, monopoly and sheer size. There is no real competition (a few pennies here and there on this or that hardly qualifies) and therefore no real efficiency (except in the maximisation of profits).
.
Remove state interference with the Economy and allow the free market to operate on a level playing field* and privatising any services would be a good idea. So would nationalising them but to a lesser degree.
.
*This does not imply a lack of law or oversight, a 'Mad Max Economy,' so to speak.

Shark, we've talked enough about this to know that on this point our worldviews are pretty much orthogonal, but can you name a real-world example of such an idealised free-market working, for essential utilities and on a national scale?  Likewise, some evidence of "competition and quality [going] hand-in-hand" would be appreciated- otherwise it's just a platonic ideal that doesn't mesh at all with observed human behaviour and psychology.  There's also the practical impossibility of having such an idealised "true" free market with services that require vast amounts of fixed infrastructure.

I also fail to see how removing government oversight would create a level playing field without some kind of year-zero abolishment of existing companies and redistribution of wealth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2015, 12:19:58 PM
Continuing from what JPMaybe notes, I'd also argue that in some cases, there simply is no space for effective competition. With, say, supermarkets, it would be absurd to nationalise. Even if there's more than a whiff of cartel these days, there is clear competition. You can take your business elsewhere. But what of trains? I live near a station where I can take a South West Trains service east, towards London, or west, towards Basingstoke. That's it. I have no choice. There is no competition. Simply taking bids for the franchise every decade isn't competition — it's a lowest-bidder frenzy for a regional monopoly.

This is much the same elsewhere, too. Utilities are run in a manner that beggars belief, and Jim's note about power stations showcases how ridiculous the situation in Britain now is. (Is it still just the Chinese? I thought we at one point were getting the Chinese to pay the French to build power stations, in a country that could pretty rapidly convert almost entirely to renewables, given the light, wind and tidal clout we have.)

And, yeah, it would be good to have some concrete examples of privatisation (in the UK especially) that has been hugely beneficial, and without ignoring context and the fact time has moved on. (With trains, I'm sick of people banging on about British Rail in the 1970s. Yes. Great. That was over 40 years ago. Things have changed. And given that plenty of other countries have superb nationalised rail, are we simply saying the Brits are somehow too incompetent or stupid to make something similar a success here too?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:01:26 PM
Lot's of extra money for the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 01:04:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:01:26 PM
Lot's of extra money for the NHS.

Explain, because the tendering process is driving up the basic running costs of the NHS at the expense of service delivery, whilst the actual spending of the money delivering privatised services is entirely hidden behind 'commercial confidentiality'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:15:28 PM
So boy George is lying on live TV?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2015, 01:16:30 PM
That all sounds very technical, Jim.  The main thing is I'm alright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:20:38 PM
No, I don't think you are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2015, 01:28:48 PM
G'wan the Brits - once that nasty old NHS thing is out of the way you can scrap the BBC, and then no-one in the world will view your country with envy ever again.  You're a surprisingly egalitarian lot for a constitutional monarchy, but I suppose it is one way to stem the flooding brown hordes that besiege you.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:31:17 PM
Why would we get rid of the NHS and the BBC?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 01:32:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:15:28 PM
So boy George is lying on live TV?

Again, you point to something the Tories are saying as if it proves your point. I'm not watching the TV (I'm—mostly—working) but at this point, I wouldn't believe a single word any of them says on the NHS. From the top-down re-organisation they promised not do*, to repeated claims to have 'protected' the NHS budget when they've shrunk it in real terms every year they've been in power.

So, no, I don't believe him, whatever he's saying.

Which isn't my point, and is simply a deflection tactic you've used before.

How does privatisation mean "more money for the NHS"? Specifically. You made that claim, so back it up or withdraw it.

Jim

*And which has resulted in the government, by a minister's own admission, 'losing control' of the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 01:37:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:31:17 PM
Why would we get rid of the NHS and the BBC?

Are you genuinely this stupid, or do you honestly have no clue what this government's explicit agenda is? This isn't leftist propaganda, this is what the Tories say about themselves: state provision (of services, of broadcasting, of anything, really) distorts the natural order of the free market. Private healthcare is preferable to state-provided; commercial broadcasting is preferable to state-provided. There are local councils that are outsourcing every single aspect of service provision to private contractors and reducing themselves to a tiny number of elected officials and administration staff.

I fear we may have reached Old Tankie's equivalent of the dinosaur juice moment.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:43:20 PM
You don't believe him, I do. Resort to insult as much as you like.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 01:54:04 PM
I can give two examples of "... such an idealised free-market working, for essential utilities and on a national scale..." Well, sort of. I'm not aware of any society to have so far adopted a fully free market except native "pre-civilized" communities such as in Australia and America, and none have been ideal. My two examples, then, are imperfect but, I think, pertinent.

Firstly, the food industry. Many specialist interests and businesses come together in complex networks and myriad interactions each day - and that's just for one supermarket chain. The overall food system in this country is unimaginably complex and resilient. I would describe the creation, manufacture and distribution of food as an essential utility on a par with the essentialness of water or power. Yet this essential service works perfectly well without being owned and run by central government or the state. Indeed, when the state seizes control of such utilities it tends to end in empty shops and little choice.

The second example is this thing we're using now - the internet. Due to it being built on open architecture, which anyone can improve, develop or produce, it is the ultimate free market. Think of the software updates you receive every day without even knowing about it, for example, updates provided by companies and people working primarily individually to improve their own systems with the side-effect that you benefit too. Websites and services come and go, according to internet users' need for them. The old constantly replaced by the new in a rolling process of creative destruction, just as in a true free market. I hesitate to call the internet an essential utility on a par with healthcare, food distribution or the water and power networks but, in our technological world, it is at least a crucial utility if not purely essential.

Examples of competition and quality are all around us. You might know a person who fixes cars cheaper than a local garage and who does an adequate job. That person offers quality in the competency of their work and competition in offering that competency for a cheaper price than the garage. The garage, to tempt business away from the lone mechanic, might use economies of scale, skill expansion or advertising. In the end, you're free to choose which of them to entrust your poorly motor to.

Store's own biscuits alongside brand-names on the same shelf is another prime example of quality and competition. If the store's own biscuits taste better and are cheaper, you'll buy them. If they taste better and cost the same, you'll probably still buy them.  If they taste the same and cost the same, you might still buy them. If they taste worse and cost more, you won't buy them. If they taste worse and cost the same, you probably still won't buy them. If they taste worse and cost less, you might buy them. Or you could throw your hands up and buy an apple instead.

Now, you might say that biscuits and the National Grid, for example, are vastly different things. And so they are, but only in scale and nature. In an economic sense, they are indistinguishable. They have foundations (farms, mines), facilities (bakeries, generators), conduits (power cables, packets) and products (biscuits and electricity). There is no more reason to have only one biscuit manufacturer than there is to have only one electricity generation company. In fact, the more the merrier. If there's only one biscuit manufacturer and it goes bust, that's all your biscuits gone. If there are just a handful of big biscuit manufacturers, they might absorb the remains of their defunct competitor - if they can afford it. In a free market, there are hundreds of biscuit manufacturers of all sizes which will, in the biscuit ecosystem, recycle the corpse and take advantage of the gaps. The more companies there are, the less the impact on wider society of one of them going under.

Similarly, hundreds of smaller, private or publicly owned power stations would provide a more robust system than a few big behemoths.Molten salt reactors. (http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Molten-Salt-Reactors/)

Lastly, the removal of government oversight does not imply the removal of oversight altogether. There are ways in which oversight can be retained and even improved but I think exploring those at this time would be straying beyond my current point, which is that government is not necessary for, and in most aspects an impediment to, a true free market. Anything after that is projection, speculation and fantasy, sure, but that's the nature of the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 01:55:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:43:20 PM
You don't believe him, I do. Resort to insult as much as you like.

I didn't insult you, I presented you with an either/or statement that a basic spreadsheet or a ZX81 would be capable of parsing but which, apparently, defeats a non-trivial proportion of this forum's users.

EITHER you are completely unaware of the Tories' explicit pro-market stance, OR you are so stupid that you cannot understand how that stated political philosophy impacts on its attitude to large state-run organisations like the NHS or the BBC.

If you have a third explanation for the statement:

QuoteWhy would we get rid of the NHS and the BBC?

...Then I'd be happy to hear it.

Also: the last time you cited the Tories' claims on the NHS as a supposed rebuttal to a similar argument on my part, you then said that you didn't believe a word of that they were saying, hence my confusion.

Also, do you dispute any of this:

Quotewouldn't believe a single word any of them says on the NHS. From the top-down re-organisation they promised not do, to repeated claims to have 'protected' the NHS budget when they've shrunk it in real terms every year they've been in power.

If you do, please explain on what basis. If you don't, please explain why you believe they are telling the truth now in light of the above.

Also, please explain how privatisation means "more money for the NHS".

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 02:04:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 01:54:04 PM
Now, you might say that biscuits and the National Grid, for example, are vastly different things. And so they are, but only in scale and nature.

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Yoda-Meditating_800px_zpsdhwe1mwq.jpg) (http://s211.photobucket.com/user/jimcampbell2000/media/Yoda-Meditating_800px_zpsdhwe1mwq.jpg.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 25 November, 2015, 02:12:41 PM
Shark, this is just opening the same can of worms it always does.  Neither of those examples is relevant to the utilities we specifically mentioned-the ones that need huge amounts of fixed infrastructure.  There is physically no way to have meaningful competition for, say, the trains, as IP specifically pointed out.  And both the services you mentioned rely on massive state-maintained infrastructure anyway.

Likewise irrelevant are your examples of competition automatically producing quality.  What you've named are small-scale personal interactions, for services the quality of which the average person might be reasonably able to judge.  For stuff like, say, healthcare, the average individual is completely unqualified to discern whether they're getting quality service or not: take, for example the US healthcare system's massive overuse of diagnostic CT tests which has come about purely due to it being a profit driven system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 02:31:43 PM
Well, Jim, where to start.  Sure, I've been called many worse things but where I come from asking me if I'm stupid is an insult.  But, hey, water off a duck's back and all that, as I couldn't give a toss what you think of me.

As regards to the NHS, I think we've had a Tory or a Tory lead government for 23 of the last 36 years, plenty of time to flush the NHS down the toilet if they'd wanted to.  As I've said before, they won't do it because it would be political suicide.  As for privatisation within the health service, great, if the service is good.  I go to a private company for my diabetic eye screening.  In the past, I've been to a private clinic for depression, brought on by my illness.  A couple of months ago, I had a colonoscopy in a private clinic.  All of the above treatments were paid for by the NHS and provided excellent service, although the colonoscopy was a pain in the arse.

My wife worked in the NHS as a pen-pusher for eleven years and the examples of wasting money within the system had to be seen to be believed!  If a private company can cutback on the waste and provide those savings to be pumped back into the front line of health care and, at the same time take some profit for themselves out of cutting back on waste, then I don't have a problem with that at all.

I don't want the NHS to be privatised but I can see where private companies can help the NHS.

I don't normally do long posts these days, as the old fingers are packing up, so I apologise in advance for any spelling or grammatical mistakes.  I don't have one of these spelly checky things!



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 02:46:26 PM
Jim, once again, ignores the content of the argument itself to concentrate on a narrow aspect of its form - which in this case was partly to demonstrate how Economics tends to reduce vastly different things into fungible entities - which can be a good or bad thing. If I had written, "...you might say that atoms and the Milky Way, for example, are vastly different things. And so they are, but only in scale and nature. In a mathematical sense, they are indistinguishable," which was the general point. Given his response, I can only assume that he's either not seen that, didn't read as far as "...in an economic sense, they are indistinguishable," or is helping me point out the very foolishness of the dichotomy I was so clumsily attempting to present.

JPM, I have no real-world examples to give you but I don't think that means there is no alternative. Furthermore, I recognize that the internet relies on currently state-funded infrastructure, and that this current situation of certain parts of society being 'state owned' and some not can make it difficult to see where one ends and the other begins. Essentially, it doesn't matter who owns the infrastructure so long as it works properly.

I disagree that there is no way to have competition on the railways. If two rail companies can compete, then two hundred can. It's just a question of organization.

I don't think my examples are irrelevant. Our entire lives consist of small-scale personal interactions, which is economics with a small "e." Your example of healthcare being all but impenetrable to the lay-person has some merit but seems mainly an appeal to authority. I think most people are capable of deciding the treatment they want for themselves and that most doctors want what's best for the patient and that most patients trust their doctors. It is the patient who must decide and needs information to do so. Take my local practice, for example. Up to a teenager, my family GP was Dr E. I was not impressed with Dr E., even though I know nothing about medicine I never trusted him. As soon as I was able I switched to another doctor, with whom I have been satisfied. Just because I have no medical training, that doesn't mean I am "completely unqualified to discern whether (I'm) getting (a) quality service or not."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 02:59:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 02:46:26 PM
I disagree that there is no way to have competition on the railways. If two rail companies can compete, then two hundred can. It's just a question of organization.

Umm. Wow. Just a question of organisation.

Wow.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 03:02:55 PM
Well, you can rely on magic if you want. I prefer to rely upon the experience, professionalism and organization of ordinary human beings. Just like I do now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 November, 2015, 03:09:43 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 02:31:43 PM
I don't normally do long posts these days, as the old fingers are packing up, so I apologise in advance for any spelling or grammatical mistakes.  I don't have one of these spelly checky things!

I appreciate you taking the time to clarify that.

Where I think you have absolutely missed the point, is in the relentless drift to the right of the UK political spectrum. This government is, in many ways, further to the right than the wildest dreams of Thatcher. Remember that this generation of Tories privatised the Royal Mail without batting an eyelid, which Thatcher considered a red line.

I'm not making this stuff up, as you plainly think I must be doing, I'm reiterating the explicitly stated political thinking of the current generation of Tories.

I don't know how much clearer I can be on this. Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS. (http://www.greenbenchesuk.com/2012/09/jeremy-hunt-co-authored-book-in-2009.html)

If that doesn't convince you of the free-market-over-everything instincts of this government, then I don't know what will.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2015, 03:18:46 PM
The drift to the right is so complete in the UK that someone saying he wouldn't sanction state-sponsored murder without judicial oversight or review is branded a leftwing extremist by the Guardian.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 November, 2015, 04:10:58 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 November, 2015, 01:15:28 PM
So boy George is lying on live TV?

Quick test: Are his lips moving?

And on a less facetious note, this government has indeed lied through it's teeth about the NHS - take for example this bogus figure of 11,000 deaths caused by weekend under-staffing that Heremy junt keeps quoting to justify his attack on junior doctor's contracts - the authors of the report from which he took this figure specifically pointed out in the introduction to the research that to use it in the way he has been would be inaccurate and a distortion of what the research actually shows - hasn't stopped him though. They did a similar statistical sleight-of-hand with the figures about the Mid-Staffs deaths. The government body that checks the accuracy of statistics has censured this government more than any other over their deliberate twisting of statistics to mislead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 25 November, 2015, 06:15:17 PM
The Tories better not ever try to fuck with the prog..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 07:06:36 PM
C.A.M.E.R. 1?
.
*shudders*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 25 November, 2015, 09:45:48 PM
Sharky,  you seem not to have noticed that the food industry is intent on making profit at the expense of ethics and environmental impact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 November, 2015, 10:01:24 PM
That damn potato industry!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 November, 2015, 10:05:54 PM
And a convoluted,  but less than cryptic fuck you from Rupert 'ride down a serf' fitzfuckyou. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 10:11:38 PM
And you seem not to have noticed that it is "government" which empowers and enables such economic and environmental negligence in the first place. I seem to remember we've already agreed in the past that, so long as animals are bred for food, smaller traditional-style farms are better than huge factory farms for various reasons.
.
It is large corporations who need large factory farms, the kinds of corporations with the money and clout to influence legislation to get those factory farms. The "government," then, with the encouragement and aid of shareholders,  skews the food industry towards profit over welfare, not the food industry itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 November, 2015, 10:30:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 10:11:38 PM
And you seem not to have noticed that it is "government" which empowers and enables such economic and environmental negligence in the first place. I seem to remember we've already agreed in the past that, so long as animals are bred for food, smaller traditional-style farms are better than huge factory farms for various reasons.
.
It is large corporations who need large factory farms, the kinds of corporations with the money and clout to influence legislation to get those factory farms. The "government," then, with the encouragement and aid of shareholders,  skews the food industry towards profit over welfare, not the food industry itself.

But without any legislation, the big corporations will just evaporate and the small farms will prosper? You can argue that Governments fail to do the job of governing due to corporate interests and I would agree with you, but to then follow that with get rid of governments and everything will be fine?  Thats a bit like saying that a lot of boats float away from the harbour because no-one ties the ropes properly - the solution is to ban all rope
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 11:27:53 PM
It's not "government" as a whole I want to get rid of - it can and does perform various useful administrative and organisational tasks. It is immoral "government" power I object to; the perceived right of certain people to initiate force against other people in order to maintain the skewed system.
.
As I've said before, there is no magic bullet, no big switch marked 'UTOPIA' waiting to be thrown. It may well be the case that human beings cannot function without coercive direction but I simply do not believe this.
.
Whatever the future holds isn't given to me to see, I can only suggest solutions just like everyone else. I don't think the fact that I don't have a Little Grey Book outlining how a perfect society can be practically constructed and run is any reason to disregard my observations of the present (not that you were).
.
Whatever future any person wants to build for themselves and those around them, I'm all for. However you want to proceed, so long as you don't harm anyone else in the process, I'm with you all the way. But you take one penny from one person against their will* and you're on your own.
.
But that's all theory. Before solutions can be found I think we must first define the problems. I think the major problem with "government" is its perceived but wholly unlawful "right" to initiate violence against whom ever it chooses for whatever reason it chooses.
.
Whatever the implications of turning that "right" off or phasing it out might or might not be, my contention is that the "government" cannot logically possess this "right" at all. Irrespective of the consequences of the answer, which can be more effectively discussed once the answer is better understood, I think the question has to be asked - does the "government" have the right to initiate force against the people? If so, in which situations and to what degree? If not, what are the alternatives? I'm in the latter camp, though I grew up mostly in the former.
.

*Unless you were reclaiming a penny that person initially stole from you, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 26 November, 2015, 02:08:26 AM
I can't wait to visit this utopian society you're all working so hard to help build.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 November, 2015, 06:56:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2015, 11:27:53 PM

does the "government" have the right to initiate force against the people? If so, in which situations and to what degree?


I'm not 100% sure what you refer to by this phrase but I am going to work on the assumption that you mean exercise authority to some degree or another.  If that is the case then I would suggest that there is a need for society as a whole to exercise authority over what it considers appropriate standards, as agreed by society as a whole, and that action needs to be taken to enforce those standards where members of society choose to act contrary to those standards.

I think we can agree that, as a specific example, paedophilia is a reasonable standard that should be maintained and that individuals with a predatory tendency should be restricted for the protection of individuals.  In such an instance would it not be appropriate for the government to 'initiate force' to ensure that such individuals are protected from those unhealthy individuals who would inflict harm?

If I have misunderstood what you mean by the phrase then I apologise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2015, 07:27:00 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 25 November, 2015, 04:10:58 PM
They did a similar statistical sleight-of-hand with the figures about the Mid-Staffs deaths.

Indeed. The Hospital Standardised Mortality Ratio (HSMR) is not, and never was intended to deliver a figure for 'avoidable' or 'excess' deaths,* and yet the government and every single mainstream media outlet insisted on quoting the figures as if they did.

Even the oft-cited Francis Report into Mid Staffs explicitly stated in its introduction that this was the case, and yet this completely incorrect number, plus the account of a whistle-blower whose claims were difficult to square with established fact** or other relatives' description of Mid Staffs' treatment of patients,*** was used as justification for essential services to be relocated to a different hospital, further away, and for the hospital's eventual closure in the face of massive opposition from local people.****

Cheers

Jim


* The number of avoidable deaths at Mid Staffs during the period discussed was "probably one". (https://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/the-real-mid-staffs-story-one-excess-death-if-that/)

** It's unclear how Julie Bailey's mum, or any other patient, could have been forced to drink water from vases when vases containing water had been banned from wards for several years by that point due to the risks from the pseudomonas bacterium.

*** Didn't see this story in the papers. (https://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2013/06/13/mid-staffs-ward-10-2007-relative-shatters-julie-baileys-story/)

**** 'Tens of thousands' march in support of Mid Staffs (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-22233260)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 08:10:29 AM
By 'initiate force' I mean everything from issuing threats to murder; forcing someone to do anything they don't want to do.
.
The example you give is an interesting one. I'm going to assume that the hypothetical paedophile here is or has been active. Our society has decided paedophilia is a crime and most individuals think so too - it is an example in itself of the initiation of force.
.
This being the case, any person at all has the right to initiate preventative force against said paedophile. You don't have to be a politician or a police constable to protect a child from harm.
.
"Government," has no more rights than the rest of us in this regard.
.
But what if the paedophile is inactive and has vowed always to remain so for moral or emotional reasons? Does the "government" in that case have the right to initiate force against the self-suppressing paedophile in case he or she succumbs to paedophiliac urges?
.
I say no - no matter the repugnance of the crime, if it hasn't been committed then it can't be punished.
.
Furthermore, it is not given to "government" to apprehend, prevent or punish anyone - that's what our police and courts are for.
.
Here's a little fantasy to try and clarify my position on "government" power or the exercise of "authority" - the government issues legislation requiring that all privately owned cars must be painted red under penalty of fines or imprisonment for non-compliance. Does the "government" have the right to do this? The Red Car Bill is, in and of itself, the initiation of force; it is a demand backed up by greater force. A threat, basically.
.
Does the "government" have the right to force everyone to drive only red cars? Again, I say no. As a general rule of thumb, I proceed from the standpoint that if I do not have the right to do a thing to another person then nobody else has the right to do that same thing to me, or anyone. It doesn't matter if they're in jeans and a tee, a three-piece bespoke suit, a police constable's or judge's costume, a crown and ermine cape or even stark bollock naked - they have no more or fewer rights than you or me.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2015, 08:22:14 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 08:10:29 AM
This being the case, any person at all has the right to initiate preventative force against said paedophile. You don't have to be a politician or a police constable to protect a child from harm.

This pre-supposes that "any person at all" has the ability to correctly identify a paedophile and initiate an appropriate response to protect that child. What if the paedophile is the child's sole parent or guardian? Is this hypothetical individual supposed to take on responsibility for the care of that child once they have enforced an appropriate sanction against the paedophile? What if they think the appropriate sanction is to hang the paedophile from the nearest tree? What if they were wrong and supposed paedophile was nothing of the sort?

As usual, Shark, your supposed solutions are hopeless fantasies that begin from a supposition that world works, or can be made to work, in a way that all human history demonstrates is simply never going to happen.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 09:00:21 AM
You confuse rights and responsibilities, Jim. Just as everyone has the right to initiate protective force they have the equal responsibility to ensure, as far as they reasonably can, that force is properly used. Just like today.
.
The emotive questions you ask are all valid and can be asked of the "government," courts, police and individuals today. I presume you ask these questions in order to deflect attention away from the fundamental question of the legitimacy, or otherwise, of "government" rights and powers.
.
As usual, Jim, you avoid the core issue and ignore the fact that several billion people more or less get along with each other every day of every year of every century. You ignore the fact that human beings are social animals with innate social instincts. You ignore the fact that it is people who run the world, not abstract entities.
.
You instead choose to see your world through the polarising eye of the glass tit, listening to those people who are so desperate to stay in power they'll say anything and promise anything and take credit for anything to justify their position - the people who promise to keep you safe from the nasty and evil rest of us.
.
You mistake the fundamental societal organisation of human beings, all networked together in a complex web of transactions and interactions that has existed since time before memory, as the work of "government." You see the natural order of humanity and mistake it for the imposed order of a ruling body (the fact that this body takes credit for as much of society's natural order as it can helps foster this misperception).
.
It is you, I think, who live more in a fantasy world - or nightmare. What the current "government" is doing to the NHS enrages you, and rightly so, but still you believe they have the right to do it. "I don't want you to beat me, Master, but I believe you have the right to do so."
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2015, 09:15:06 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 09:00:21 AM
It is you, I think, who live more in a fantasy world - or nightmare. What the current "government" is doing to the NHS enrages you, and rightly so, but still you believe they have the right to do it. "I don't want you to beat me, Master, but I believe you have the right to do so."

No, I don't believe that, because they have no mandate to do it. If the democratically elected will of the people expressly mandated the end of the NHS, then I would accept that my choices would be: put up with it, or emigrate to country with publicly-funded healthcare free at the point of use.

My anger is not just at the government's actions, but at their Orwellian ability to say one thing and demonstrably, visibly, do another, with the complicity and, in many cases, the active assistance of the mainstream media.

You can present people with the fact that the current Health Secretary co-wrote a book on privatising the NHS and people will still maintain that the government won't privatise the NHS. All I can do, as a participant in the democratic process, is try to change people's minds. I can only try to do that one person at a time, but if enough of us try to do that then maybe, just maybe, we can create some resistance to the fiction on this issue peddled by the government and distributed by much of the media.

So, no, I am engaged with world as it is and once again you resort to accusations of sheep-like subservience and submission at anyone who doesn't share your worldview.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 November, 2015, 09:25:26 AM
Ah the "good nigger' argument never fails to shoot itself in the foot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2015, 09:49:13 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 26 November, 2015, 09:25:26 AM
Ah the "good nigger' argument never fails to shoot itself in the foot.

Wait, he's that Jim? Well it's a blame ridiculous, Huckmonger, and no mistake.




(EDIT: now I'm thinking I should clarify this post, suspecting that Huckleberry Finn might not have the universal currency that it once did).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 November, 2015, 10:18:10 AM
Digging deep their Tordels, as Huckleberry Finn sailed right over my head. Looking it up online I can see why, a product of its time to say the least!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 10:49:54 AM
"If the democratically elected will of the people expressly mandated the end of the NHS, then I would accept that my choices would be: put up with it, or emigrate..."
.
How many of "the people" need to be in favour of abolishing the NHS against your will for you to accept it? If the current "government" had been elected with that mandate, would the numbers (of voters, non-voters, etc.) as they stood at the last election stack up to a majority decision by the people to mandate the dismantling of the NHS?
.
Nevertheless, to dismantle the NHS would be an initiation of force - forcing people to do without potentially life-saving treatment. You and I do not have the right to do that to others and so neither does the "government."
.
The one person has no right to initiate force against the 999,999 people and the 999,999 people have no right to initiate force against the one person, so election results don't matter. Nobody can be elected to do an unlawful thing. Unfortunately, votes are seen as just that - permission slips to act beyond the normal limits of law.
.
You must see it that way, otherwise why would you bother to vote? You must believe that if a person gets enough votes, they automatically assume rights and responsibilities superior to yours - the right to demand money (taxation and licensing) and issue threats (legislation) and the right to interfere with society however they see fit.
.
All these superhuman rights you grant them through your vote - even though these rights are not yours to grant (how do you give someone else something you haven't got?) nor theirs to claim. Then you moan, not because of their actions, but because they told lies. Your vote, in somehow magically transferring mythical rights from you to your preferred candidate, gave them permission to lie.
.
I agree with you about the media and apologise for my "glass tit" remark. I have a deep mistrust of television, especially the news channels, and tend to demonise it. I apologise if this came across as an attack on you. I have no idea about any minister's co-authorship of any book or what stance was taken in the book. I'm happy to assume you've done your homework on this and that the minister in question favours the Dark Side.
.
"All I can do, as a participant in the democratic process, is try to change people's minds. I can only try to do that one person at a time, but if enough of us try to do that then maybe, just maybe, we can create some resistance to the fiction on this issue peddled by the government and distributed by much of the media."
.
I couldn't have put that better myself, except that I'd have used the word "social" instead of "democratic" and put quotation marks around the word "government." Apart from that, and on a general level (i.e., not just on the level of the NHS situation but as a general principle) I agree with every word.
.
"So, no, I am engaged with world as it is and
once again you resort to accusations of sheep-
like subservience and submission at anyone
who doesn't share your worldview."
.
The "world as it is" does not include the super-powers you believe your vote confers upon ordinary people. You believe in these super powers, I do not. Which one of us is right about how the world is, if either, doesn't really matter.
.
I don't think you're a sheep - I always hated that description, it's so demeaning and dismissive - nor would I say you are particularly subservient. The fire you show is not an ovine or obsequious attribute and I genuinely admire it, even though I don't always agree with what you say.
.
I do think that you are distracted by the puppet show, however, and this is not meant as an insult. We've all been distracted by it since the day we were born.
.
In the end, though, I believe you and I want the same thing - a society that works. We might not yet agree on the shape that working society might take but I think we both know it has one, if we could but see it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2015, 10:58:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 10:49:54 AM
Nevertheless, to dismantle the NHS would be an initiation of force - forcing people to do without potentially life-saving treatment. You and I do not have the right to do that to others and so neither does the "government."

The fundamental problem with your argument is that you point to the NHS and are unable or unwilling to recognise that such a thing is the creation of the system you reject. If the democratic state has no right, under any circumstances, to dismantle the NHS, neither did it have the authority to call it into being.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 11:35:12 AM
That's absolutely correct, Jim.
.
To deny the advances made possible in the name of "government" would be ludicrous. It's also ludicrous to say these advances happened because of government. It's also ludicrous to say these things can only be maintained through "government."
.
Take the NHS as an example. Healthcare has existed for millions of years in one form or another - even horses know which weeds to eat if they're feeling poorly. Herbalists, doctors, medical philosophers, nurses and pharmacists existed long before governments did.
.
But pre-NHS medical care in this country was disjointed and uneven and so it made sense to organise everything to better serve society. So people in Parliament did this, they drew the existing infrastructure together and stole money off the population to fund it. So yes, MPs did, in the name of "government," have a hand in the creation of the NHS but that's all.
.
Your last point is an intriguing one. You are correct to point out that the "government" didn't have the right to construct the NHS in the first place, and this is true because it involved forcing thousands of people to run their facilities in a certain new way.
.
That aside, the NHS was built and did come into being. Whatever its origin, the NHS now belongs to society. I suppose it can be looked upon as a gift from our ancestors. If my grandfather gave a gift to your grandfather, I have no right to claim that gift back from you.
.
Similarly, even though "governments" of the past might have played an organisational role in many beneficial services, that in no way gives them the right to take those services, those gifts, or even part of them, back.
.
Moving forward, we have to decide what to take with us into the future and what to leave behind. There's no point throwing the baby out with the bathwater so we need to figure out how to take the organisational role played by "government" with us and leave the coercive elements behind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 November, 2015, 03:06:36 PM
John McDonnell is a fucking moron. I know the point he was trying to make (about "comrade" George flogging off UK's assets to the Chinese) but such a ham fisted stunt has backfired spectacularly - nobody will remember the context, they'll just think that the Shadow Chancellor's a communist who quotes from Mao. Almost as boneheaded as Liam Byrne's "there's no money left" joke.

serously, Labour MPs shoyuld be banned from attempting comedy as they just hand ammunition to the tories and their tame press vultures.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 November, 2015, 04:02:14 PM
Yep!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2015, 05:05:23 PM
I'll just point out that Iain Duncan Smith justified forcing disabled and poor people into unpaid labor by quoting the phrase he read on the gates of Auschwitz and the press has never so much as mentioned it, but otherwise I completely agree: if John McDonnell had never quoted Mao, the press would have gone easy on him and Labour and they wouldn't be mocking or criticising him for anything whatsoever.

Funny thing, the Little Red Book, though: officially declared an anachronism by the Chinese government decades ago, it's still held in affectionate esteem by a huge proportion of the Chinese population, and criticism of it or Mao (the current Chinese head of state is affectionately referred to as "Mao Jinping" in some media) is actually a criminal offense in mainland China.
And McDonnell just maneuvered Osborne and his media chums into lambasting it and Mao all over the press while the Tories are negotiating multi-billion pound trade deals with the Chinese government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 05:49:55 PM
QuoteThe one person has no right to initiate force against the 999,999 people and the 999,999 people have no right to initiate force against the one person

Quoteany person at all has the right to initiate preventative force against said paedophile

Two and a half hours between direct contradictions.  A new record.  If I'm allowed to imprison paedophiles in my basement, can I fine shoplifters?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 November, 2015, 06:14:30 PM
Oh look, a political discuss....nope.

Nope.

Shark's hijacked it again. Not so much flogging a dead horse as smearing a Tesco lasagne over everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 06:23:56 PM
oh, we'll get back on track...

Labour's main problem appears to be a complete lack of presentation skill.  Strangely, the Labour party has a multitude of people who excel in the field, since self promotion has been the party's primary function since the mid 90s.  Either those in charge are deliberately ignoring those in the know (ironic, given the Mao quote used), or the marketing people are feeding the leadership duff information.

The author Alan Bissett said a few years ago that the Labour party would happily destroy Scotland so it could reign over the ruins.  Plenty of senior party figures appear to be applying the same reasoning the organisation itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 November, 2015, 06:24:21 PM
How does one hijack one's own thread? And to diacuss the matter at hand, at that, if in a somewhat....roundabout manner.

I might not agree with everything (if anything) Sharky puts forth but i'm sure glad to have SOME kind of alternative view on things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 06:55:38 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 05:49:55 PM
QuoteThe one person has no right to initiate force against the 999,999 people and the 999,999 people have no right to initiate force against the one person

Quoteany person at all has the right to initiate preventative force against said paedophile

Two and a half hours between direct contradictions.  A new record.  If I'm allowed to imprison paedophiles in my basement, can I fine shoplifters?
.
Not hot on detail, are you? In this case, the detail you conveniently ignore in order to invent an argument which to criticise, is the difference between the initiation of force and the initiation of defensive force. Still, if you can't argue the point presented I guess it makes sense to invent your own.
.
Not content with one spurious argument, you then invent the right to imprison people in your own property and compare that with fining shoplifters for some incomprehensible reason. Then you imply that this must be my view, once again framing your own false argument and presenting it as my own.
.
I don't mind defending my views but I'm not going to defend views you have invented for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2015, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 06:23:56 PMLabour's main problem appears to be a complete lack of presentation skill.

I would argue that the complete dissolution of even the remotest pretense of impartiality in the media during the GE has simply carried over into the business-as-usual period between elections.  As a result, it doesn't matter what Labour do, they're going to get it in the neck anyway.  I would usually trot out amusing hyperbole at this point to illustrate my point and say something like "he could dress in a thousand pound suit and sing God Save The Queen and the press would still crucify Corbyn" except we actually live in a world where this is what actually happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 November, 2015, 08:10:39 PM
They could unite. They could spend the next four years fighting against everything the Tories stand for, as people finally en masse realise what this government is doing. They could then enter the next election with a reasonable fighting chance of at least being able to form a minority government, or a majority with the support of the SNP. Instead, we're more likely to hit 2020 with Labour having either ousted Corbyn and shed most of its new members, or infighting making the party look like a terrible bet. And then we get Osborne as Prime Minister, which is so horrible it doesn't even bear thinking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2015, 08:24:05 PM
The Blairite wing will never let the party unite while lefties are at the helm.  All the recent polling and surveys have shown their influence and popularity with the membership and voters has been drastically overestimated, so a leftie win at the next GE would mean the end of the Blairites as a power within Labour.  They're far more interested in sowing discord and burning the party down, then claiming that the disunity is because of the lefties.  Kind of like farting loudly and then turning to the only other person in the room with you and saying "EURGH DID YOU JUST FART?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 November, 2015, 08:24:42 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 26 November, 2015, 07:07:35 PM
I would usually trot out amusing hyperbole at this point to illustrate my point and say something like "he could dress in a thousand pound suit and sing God Save The Queen and the press would still crucify Corbyn" except we actually live in a world where this is what actually happens.

Case in point being the Remembrance Day 'didn't bow low enough' outcry.  You would think that we would reach a point where the media dug itself into a credibility grave so deep they could never get out of it.  They can't be far off at the moment.  Then I listen to some of my younger colleagues in work and just cringe.  (oops, sorry, wrong thread again)   :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 08:39:01 PM
Quoteis the difference between the initiation of force and the initiation of defensive force.

What is the difference? Am I able to defend my property and business by using force? Where is the line drawn?  Is the government allowed to use force if it feels that your behaviour is a threat, or might become a threat? For example, if essential services required to save life and limb must be funded by taxes, and you refuse to pay your taxes, can the government use defensive force to compelling you?

Frankly, it feels like a massive gray area.  Luckily, we've been developing a system which actually works for the last ten thousand years.

You;'ve said in the past that society has no right to do anything that individuals don't have the right to do. If society is allowed to imprison sex offenders, presumably that stems from the right of the individual to imprison sex oftenders.  I don't have a prison, so I'll be using my basement.

If society has no right to enforce its morality upon me, why am I  required to drawing the line at sex offenders? What if I regard shoplifting to be a morally repellent crime, and feel that perps should be harshly punished?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 November, 2015, 09:31:15 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 26 November, 2015, 08:24:05 PM
The Blairite wing will never let the party unite while lefties are at the helm.  All the recent polling and surveys have shown their influence and popularity with the membership and voters has been drastically overestimated, so a leftie win at the next GE would mean the end of the Blairites as a power within Labour.  They're far more interested in sowing discord and burning the party down, then claiming that the disunity is because of the lefties.  Kind of like farting loudly and then turning to the only other person in the room with you and saying "EURGH DID YOU JUST FART?"

I've said it before, farts are funny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 10:13:31 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 08:39:01 PM
Quoteis the difference between the initiation of force and the initiation of defensive force.

What is the difference? Am I able to defend my property and business by using force? Where is the line drawn?  Is the government allowed to use force if it feels that your behaviour is a threat, or might become a threat? For example, if essential services required to save life and limb must be funded by taxes, and you refuse to pay your taxes, can the government use defensive force to compelling you?

Frankly, it feels like a massive gray area.  Luckily, we've been developing a system which actually works for the last ten thousand years.

You;'ve said in the past that society has no right to do anything that individuals don't have the right to do. If society is allowed to imprison sex offenders, presumably that stems from the right of the individual to imprison sex oftenders.  I don't have a prison, so I'll be using my basement.

If society has no right to enforce its morality upon me, why am I  required to drawing the line at sex offenders? What if I regard shoplifting to be a morally repellent crime, and feel that perps should be harshly punished?
.
The difference, as I suspect you well know, is simple and plain. If Person A punches Person B for no good reason, that is unacceptable. If person B throws a counter-punch to deter Person A, that is acceptable. If Person B then continues to punch Person A after the threat is neutralised, that is unacceptable. If Person B is unable to defend against Person A, then Person C has the right to use defensive force on behalf of Person A against Person B.
.
This kind of knowledge is so basic in humans that it may well be innate. Primary school children get it and I'm virtually certain you do too.
.
The right to self defence extends to include the right to defend lawfully obtained property.
.
Punishment, however, in a truly enlightened society, would not exist. If someone steals something from you, you have the right to recompense in the return of the stolen property or its equivalent and the costs incurred in sorting everything out. The minute you try and add punishment on top of this, even to the tune of a single penny, you are initiating force. In a free society, there could be no prisons as we know them today.
.
In the case of physical assaults or sex crimes, solutions are - as ever - both practically and morally challenging. The first step, of course, must be investigation and arrest. Presuming the correct culprit is apprehended, the force used in the process is justified as defensive force. Then the courts and juries hear the case and make their decision, just like today.
.
If the crime was relatively minor or an act of passion or temporary madness or was otherwise less serious in some way, the sentence might be simply to pay compensation to the victim with no prison time, just like today.
.
If the crime was relatively excessive or an act of malice or long-term madness or was otherwise more serious in some way, the sentence might be compensation to the victim and segregation from society until such time as the criminal poses no further threat, just like is supposed to happen today.
.
Part of the segregation infrastructure might have to include what are, to all intents and purposes, prisons to house the most dangerous members of society. These prisons would only differ from contemporary facilities in their approach: to protect, not to punish.
.
No, the "government" has no right to initiate force to collect taxes. To say "but people will die if you don't pay" might sound like a good moral justification, it might even be true. But it's no reason to initiate force. If Person A's spouse was dying, Person A would have no right to demand Person B pay for treatment unless Person B was somehow responsible or contractually obliged to do so. Person A can beg or borrow from Person B, but that's all. I know that this stinks but it's a consequence of freedom. In any case, non "government" solutions to such problems do exist.
.
You can feel that shoplifting is a morally repugnant crime all you want but the fact is you're only entitled to reclaim what was taken or lost and not a penny more. Be content with that and leave justice to God and the perp's conscience.
.
The area of law and order and crime and punishment may be grey, but it always has been and seems set to continue so for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 November, 2015, 10:23:59 PM
Ah Sharky, if only real scuffles where ever as simple as your Persons A, B, and C scenarios. But they aren't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2015, 10:26:03 PM
How abut this weather, huh?
And hey, you guys heard about Pluto?  That's messed up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 10:46:49 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 26 November, 2015, 10:23:59 PM
Ah Sharky, if only real scuffles where ever as simple as your Persons A, B, and C scenarios. But they aren't.
.
That's why we have courts and juries.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 10:47:46 PM
It's far from innate and child friendly, Sharky.  In fact, your system appears bizarre and based largely on hoping that people just don't commit crimes.

QuoteIf someone steals something from you, you have the right to recompense in the return of the stolen property or its equivalent and the costs incurred in sorting everything out.

The only punishment for theft is to have the thing you stole taken away from you, with a small admin fee?

The basis of this philosophy appears to be that society cannot enforce rules upon the individual, since society's authority is no greater than an individual person's authority...except sometimes, when someone (but who knows who), decides otherwise. 

There's no need for this to be defined further, since everyone just knows and will agree.  It'll be funded by donations and we can all take turns being judges.  I don't know why we're not doing it already. 

I appreciate that your hopefully outlook is based largely on believing the very best of mankind, but since you can't get a bunch of blokes on the internet, (who gain nothing from disagreeing with you,) to agree, is it likely that an entirely united world (where people actually have something to win or lose), might be beyond our reach. 

Consider also that the only other people who believe in removal of government, abandoning taxation and relying on an unregulated capitalism are billionaire businessmen who made their money through sweatshops and pollution, or gun-nuts convinced that Obama is a terrorist.
Maybe you've been convinced that these things are a good idea because you've fallen for their lies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2015, 11:47:25 PM
The system is partially based on the hope that people will not commit crime. Of course it is. That's no different from today in any way - hope for the best but plan for the worst. Do we not all hope that the people around us will not commit crimes? So yes, guilty as charged - hope is a component. Why should it not be?
.
Yes, society cannot enforce rules on an individual in the free society. This is not as bad as it sounds. The kinds of rules we're talking about are legislation-type rules, such as the earlier Red Car Bill example. The more important rules, actual laws, forbidding murder, rape, theft and so on are pretty much "enforced" by social convention and education.
.
But if I want to drive around in a blue car, stark-bollock naked, who's to stop me so long as I'm not doing any harm?
.
Okay, then you spiral off a bit into nonsense - disregarding the existence of police, courts and juries in an attempt to inject vagueness where non exists. Then you take a couple of previous ideas and present them in the most dismissive and simple manner possible then we're into sarcasm.
.
I do have faith in mankind but I don't think everyone's a saint. The faith I have in mankind is that they will act like humans, for good or ill.
.
Whether the people here agree with me or not is neither here nor there. There will never be a united world, a single Global Utopia (Glutopia?) - how can there be?
.
Utopia, like most things in life, is subjective. If a Utopia is forced on people, it's not a Utopia. Yet I believe that each of us has the right to strive for our own Utopia. Isn't that what we try and do now, making our homes and lives as good as we can make them?
.
The ideas I put forward are not about imposing a single subjective Utopia on everyone but creating and fostering conditions more conducive to the task of chasing personal Utopian ideals. I believe our colonial cousins called it "the pursuit of happiness."
.
Most billionaire businessmen rely on "government" for helpful legislation and monopolies, for plum contracts, for grants, bail-outs and subsidies through taxes, through bribes and deals to run sweat-shops and pollute the environment. There may be a few billionaires who want what you claim but most are firmly on the side of "government."
.
Then you compare me to a hypothetical gun-toting Obama-hater with mental health issues. Thanks.
.
And conclude with the suggestion that I am gullible enough to be taken in by lies spun by imaginary stereotypes. Thanks again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 November, 2015, 08:47:35 AM
You often claim that those who disagree are gullible enough to rely on "government" or "authority".  I think that you've fallen for the lie perpetrated by rightwing politicians and billionaires, who under the pretence of support for small business and individual rights, lobby for the removal of laws, the removal of taxes and the privatisation of services.

As soon as government start making laws as ridiculous as the examples you're keen to give, such as insisting cars should be red, then I and many others would be happy to remove them.

  Vote for someone else.  Join a party and influence policy.  Hell, start your own party and run for office.  If you don't like the world, then find a bunch of people who agree and work to change it.  But in the world you envisage, although you hope that it would be all about cooperation, the truth is that the only way you could change things is by having enough money to control a company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2015, 10:21:44 AM
Your personal fantasies concerning the foundation of my perceptions aside, I can't see any clear counter-argument to the assertion that elected people, by some unexplained process involving votes and the abstract concept of "government," assume super-human rights and powers.
.
It's not the ridiculousness of legislation that matters, nor even the apparent good sense of it, it's the fact that it can be enforced on the unwilling. As soon as you accept the word of politicians as The Word of Law you open the door to the gas chambers. All those millions murdered by Robespierre, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and so many others were all committed with the permission of legislation. How many genocides have been legitimised through legislation? How many native peoples subjugated, displaced or eradicated? All perfectly legally. This is why legal must never mean the same as lawful and why legislation must never be confused with law.
.
Form my own party? Seriously? That would imply that I know what's best for you, that I should seek permission to run your life in the way I see fit. I have no idea what the best way is for you to run your own life, how could I? The only opinion I have concerning your life is that it's yours and you can do what you want with it. Beyond that, and on the understanding that you're not setting out to hurt anyone, it's none of my business. The only thing I want to change about your life are the restrictions holding you back from fulfilling it. These restrictions are largely in our own heads, matters of faith - a prime example being the faith placed in a member of parliament's super-powers.
.
I do think we have become too dependent on the "government" when, if we really must have one (which it seems we must, at least for now), it should be dependent on us.
.
I'm not trying to change the world. That simply can't be done. Well, it can but the results are never what's expected. Properly clever people have written books describing ideal societies, books so good that people have tried to enforce their ideas and systems on other people. Then the quibbling over wording, context and meaning starts and before you know it, again, there's another 100,000 human beings dumped in mass graves. Change the world? Me? Not bloody likely, mate.
.
The only world I have any power, desire or right to change is my own. That's all I want, to be King of Me. If you want to be King of You then that's great. If you want to be ruled by others then that's okay, it's your choice. Just don't think that because you are content to live that way I should be forced to live that way too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 November, 2015, 10:25:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2015, 10:21:44 AM
by some unexplained process involving votes and the abstract concept of "government," assume super-human rights and powers.
Peter Saint John confirmed for only legit prime minister.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2015, 10:56:08 AM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 27 November, 2015, 10:25:57 AM

Peter Saint John confirmed for only legit prime minister.
.
Heh. Excellent example.
.
Maybe I should shut up for a while now - I know how this stuff irritates people even though I enjoy the topic quite a bit.
.
Sorry to the irritated.
.
Normal programming* will now resume.
.
.
*see what I did, there? Oh, suit yourselves...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2015, 06:35:14 PM
In other news, Labour are torn on whether or not to support the deliberate and pointless killing of thousands of people.
That this is an actual discussion they are having is mind-blowing enough all on its own, but then you factor in that they did this before in Iraq and we are still seeing the fallout.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2015, 07:55:30 PM
"We aren't sure that simply bombing people is the best solution to this problem".  Plainly evil, probably insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 November, 2015, 08:47:50 PM
Another brilliant example of the blairites at work.  Cornyn doesn't enforce the whip, the media can claim he's lost control of the party...he does, and he's enforcing his own unpopular views and supporting terrorists. 

Ideally, he would have come out a few days ago and said that he would be allowing a free vote, but that his mp's should remember that he was swept to power on an anti-war stance.  Let the fuckers vote for war, then publicly humiliate them as tory-lackies.

On a side note, the media in Scotland is having a field day because Alex Salmond didn't go to the debate, instead going to the unveiling of his official portrait, the selfish bastard.  They've mostly ignored the fact that he actually spent most of the day hosting an official function for armed services personnel and veterans.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 November, 2015, 08:50:02 PM
It's sad but inevitable when the guarantee of a misquote and a hatchet job is always there if you say truthful things. It's safer to be torn than to stand against the accepted wisdom. Ken Livingstone just got a load of stick for saying that religiously motivated suicide bombers "died for their beliefs", as it's presented as though he's defending their actions.


And I don't like Alex Salmond particularly but yeah, took 5 articles before any mention of that day was made whatsoever. Ergh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 30 November, 2015, 07:10:16 PM
The argument that we should bomb Syria because ISIS are a threat to us really, really puzzles me.  I can at least understand the moral argument that they're particularly, egregiously evil and thus military action might be necessary, even if I think bombing cities would be a piss-poor method. 

But the idea that there's a direct link between bombing there and reducing the chances of an attack here I find risible; it's something straight from WWII where you could draw a direct link between degrading the enemy's force projection capabilities and protecting your own people.  When your enemy has no force projection, other than haphazard, sporadic suicide attacks then there's fuck all link I can see between the two.  And given that, at worst, they can manage to kill a few hundred people potentially, I fail to see how the inevitable hundreds of civilian deaths bombing will cause justify it, even if there is a link.

I guess I'm just massively puzzled by what triggers people's threat detection.  It's like there's something worse about somebody dying from a terrorist attack maybe than, say, thousands of pensioners freezing to death because they can't afford fuel, or a woman being beaten to death by a partner she's stuck with because she can't afford to leave.

I realise I'm probably largely preaching to the choir here, but I'd appreciate people's thoughts. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2015, 07:22:45 PM
It does seem like a monstrous flaw in group psychology - 'we have to do something, let's kill some people' - without any analysis of what the outcome will be."Just make 'them' dead": a more misguided approach to asymmetric war cannot be imagined, and the accusation that any criticism of this represents namby pamby liberal weakness is equally fatal. I want these feckers dead and buried as much as the next man, but I'd like to see a plan that explains how this will be achieved before I started dropping bombs.

It makes me acutely conscious that the Cold War fear of tit-for-tat nuclear annihilation was well founded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 November, 2015, 07:37:35 PM
Something must be done. That's the mantra for pretty much everything. People swapping hideous child abuse images? CENSOR THE INTERNET, because something must be done, even though that course of action will not help. Terrorists bombed an ally? DROP A LOAD OF BOMBS, because something must be done, even though that course of action will not help. And so on.

There's no logic here. It's just lashing out, because a friend got hurt. Worse, it will cause further rifts in the international community, given that bombing will be an excuse to deal with each country's own grievances. And loads of innocents will die, unless you're Michael Fallon, who claims there have been no civilian casualties at all in Iraq this past yer as a result of air strikes.

It's also worth noting to anyone who says we should be bombing: it didn't help France. (And note how this is further fuelling the Tory plans to wreck the British state, with Matt Hancock now suggesting the public might have to choose between nuclear weapons and public services. We should have a telethon for Trident. That'd show just how 'popular' the bloody thing is.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2015, 08:23:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 November, 2015, 07:37:35 PMIt's just lashing out, because a friend got hurt.

The sad part of this is that we have developed a vast and ancient system of justice to prevent exactly this (wholly understandable) reaction happening within our own borders - but for some reason the burden of proof, the impartiality of a judge and jury, the measured punishment (that for most of us actually excludes death), the aim of rehabilitation (although that last seems rather unpopular and prone to be forgotten), it all stops there once that border is crossed. 

Obviously I'm not suggesting that it's possible to meet international mass aggression with the restrictions of a domestic legal system, but surely the broad principles of restraint, of rational analysis, of calmly considered judgement should transfer when the stakes are so much higher than the life of one individual suspect or justice for a handful of victims.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 30 November, 2015, 08:53:49 PM
It's just panic, we must do something! Well I don't agree with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 December, 2015, 04:31:43 AM
In the same way that Hitler's target wasn't the Jews but the German people and Stalin's target wasn't the dissidents but the Russian people, the current target isn't terrorism - it's you.
.
These sad and appalling terrorist attacks, whatever their root, provide the perfect excuse for "governments" to curtail your powers, freedoms and rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 December, 2015, 12:39:44 PM
Anyone see the astonishing Metro cover today, which is blaming Corbyn for the UK possibly going to war? It's because he's not a leader, see, and didn't force his party to vote as he wanted! Let's all ignore Cameron desperately wanting to blow things up, and the vast majority of Tories being onside! This is all Corbyn's fault, the bloody hippy warmongering pacifist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2015, 12:48:14 PM
The Guardian is pushing the same line, despite splashing stories about demands for a free vote all over their paper for the last week.

I have a lot of time for Corbyn, but enough is enough - I want to see some deselections to see how these "lone voices of sanity" manage without the Labour brand to prop them up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 01:18:38 PM
So you want Labour to deselect some of their members who were voted in by Labour voters. Sounds like a less violent version of the Night of the Long Knives.

I'd like to see this as well, so then we can really see if this old version of Labour can stand on its own two feet.

I think that some people need to remember that only a fraction of the potential Labour voters out there actually voted for Corbyn in the Leadership event a couple of months ago.

I also find it hilarious that certain people are ripping into any Labour MP who dare say something against old Jezza, especially after how many times he voted against his own party!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 December, 2015, 02:56:17 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 01:18:38 PMI'd like to see this as well, so then we can really see if this old version of Labour can stand on its own two feet.
If it can't, British society is utterly fucked. Imagine if Liz Kendall was running Labour. We'd have two parties effectively fighting for two versions of the same thing. Corbyn at least provides opposition and an alternative.

I can't see it lasting. He'll be ousted in some manner, and whoever wins the next few elections (on gerrymandered FPTP, meaning the mandate will be even weaker), the press will without irony be slamming the government for eradicating benefits, killing the BBC, privatising the NHS, Channel 4 and even the roads, and letting big business and the rich get away with whatever the hell they please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2015, 04:11:39 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 01:18:38 PMSo you want Labour to deselect some of their members who were voted in by Labour voters.

Shirley if they're "Labour voters" they voted for the party and not the candidate?

QuoteI think that some people need to remember that only a fraction of the potential Labour voters out there actually voted for Corbyn in the Leadership event a couple of months ago.

"Only a fraction of potential voters actually voted for the Tories", "only a fraction of potential voters voted for Tony Blair's Labour" and so on.  I can equally claim that "potential" Labour voters want our soldiers to take ballet lessons and prance into battle waving a sparkly wand in order to win ISIS over with The Power Of Love, but no-one can speak with certainty for the silent majority - the last election proved that.  Those who are signed-up Labour members, however, have made their feelings on Syria known with a certainty, and the vote at the Labour conference reflected that.  These MPs already agreed to oppose bombing Syria less than a month ago and what they're really bitching and whining about is being held to their word.
Leaving aside the moral arguments about war, if they emphasise more with their opposition than their own party leadership, if they actively undermine their party's chances to win, and if their word is worthless, then yes, why shouldn't they be deselected?

edit: God Damn You To Hell, Coloured Text
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 December, 2015, 04:25:52 PM
Who's Shirley?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 04:57:56 PM
If that's the way forward then they should've deselected Jezza ages ago as he wasn't part of the way the party was. It would be slightly hypocritical if he went this way.

As for voting, some people vote Labour because of the party, some because of their candidate (some local (probably many) MP's do sterling work in their local community) and some because of the leader. Obviously this doesn't include the die hard voters, who will only ever vote Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 December, 2015, 05:29:01 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 01:18:38 PM
I also find it hilarious that certain people are ripping into any Labour MP who dare say something against old Jezza, especially after how many times he voted against his own party!

This. Very much this. You either think Corbyn was a treacherous snake for voting against the party leadership for three decades or you think every MP should be allowed to vote with their conscience. Can't have both.

Also, the vote doesn't really matter. The handful of Tornados the UK can muster aren't going to make any practical difference to the outcome, especially as the US doesn't even really seem to be trying to topple ISIS. The vote's purpose is entirely symbolic, political, and cynical.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2015, 06:17:18 PM
Yeah, the online Corbynites are sometimes a bit of an enigma.  I've encountered a few of the good ones via The Twitter, but it's otherwise a puzzler how so many bullies end up supporting a vegetarian pacifist who hangs out with Billy Bragg, never mind why they think online abuse will in any way be helpful to their cause - especially at the moment, when the sad tale of Elliott Johnson is so prominently in the news.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 01 December, 2015, 04:57:56 PM
If that's the way forward then they should've deselected Jezza ages ago as he wasn't part of the way the party was.

That's moving the goalposts quite a bit, as we're talking about deselecting MPs who have repeatedly worked against the interests of the party, their constituents and the electorate in direct collusion with the party's enemies in the media and on the opposing benches, and not MPs who vote how they see fit as you seem to be suggesting.

QuoteIt would be slightly hypocritical if he went this way.

Very true, which is why it's worth pointing out that only commentators have ever floated this as a possibility, usually while ignoring that Jezza was only ever a backbencher.  The fairest thing for him to do with rebel MPs would therefore be to remove them from the front benches and let them vote however they want, though I don't see many of these valiant men and women of conscience and principle lining up for that, oddly enough.

It's good to see you arguing on behalf of the Blairites, though, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 December, 2015, 08:02:29 PM
Quote from: Butch on 01 December, 2015, 05:29:01 PMAlso, the vote doesn't really matter.
It does in the sense the government simply doesn't have the numbers. Even with the DUP and Lib-Dems, it might still be a fight without some Labour rebels.

QuoteThe handful of Tornados the UK can muster aren't going to make any practical difference to the outcome
Which outcome? The one where the situation in Syria doesn't change, or the one in which direct action from the UK is used as the catalyst for a Paris-like terrorist attack in the UK?

Scolaighe Ó'Bear: agreed. All of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 01 December, 2015, 08:54:24 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/01/cameron-accuses-corbyn-of-being-terrorist-sympathiser (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/01/cameron-accuses-corbyn-of-being-terrorist-sympathiser)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 December, 2015, 09:08:37 PM
Gotta admit the terrorist sympathisers comment is a new low in this abysmal debate. The media and politicians leave me near speechless at times such as this; but then I guess that's what they want. And they talk of disconnect! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 01 December, 2015, 09:20:28 PM
Sky are already in Call of Duty mode, racking up what missiles/planes/aircraft carriers are on offer...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 December, 2015, 09:31:25 PM
You know, we manufacture those, by the way...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2015, 10:51:46 PM
Even the Tories don't have a full house in favor of bombing, but apparantly every last one of the Lib Dems are for it.  They're not done with being Cameron's lapdogs just yet, it would seem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 01 December, 2015, 10:56:25 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 01 December, 2015, 10:51:46 PM
Even the Tories don't have a full house in favor of bombing, but apparantly every last one of the Lib Dems are for it.  They're not done with being Cameron's lapdogs just yet, it would seem.

Charles Kennedy will be turning in his grave. He and Alex Salmond were the only two Westminster party leaders to oppose the invasion of Iraq.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 December, 2015, 11:00:23 PM
Farron has been a crushing disappointment from the start. It's VERY clear he sees the future of his party as somehow curbing the worst excesses of the Conservatives, which is truly crazy. Perhaps he's forgotten what happened to his party the last time it tried that.

As for Syria, the stage is set.

If the vote is lost, Cameron will brand Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser again, and everything bad, ever, will be ALL CORBYN'S FAULT.

If the vote is won and it all goes well, Cameron will be THE HERO, but Corbyn will be the EVIL COMMIE who nearly stopped heroism and amazingness.

If everything goes tits-up, the press has already started arguing this will be ALL CORBYN'S FAULT.

If a Paris-style attack happens here, in response to bombing, that will presumably be ALL CORBYN'S FAULT.

Because Corbyn, with perhaps 50 rebel Labour MPs that he refuses to control, COULD HAVE STOPPED THIS. No-one else could have stopped this. You know, like David 'I WANT TO BOMB SOMEONE' Cameron. There is NO WAY WHATSOEVER that Cameron could have stopped this happening. Apart from, you know, not making the policy, having the vote, and luring dipshit Labour MPs towards the flame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2015, 04:25:32 AM
So, Jeremy Corbyn will allow Labour MPs to vote with their conscience on the plan to begin bombing ISIL in Syria. All very nice but MPs aren't supposed to vote with or against their own consciences - they're supposed to represent the conscience and will of their constituents.
.
I hope everyone here is going to write to their MP and tell them how to vote.
.
Qui tacet consentire videtur (he who is silent is taken to agree).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2015, 04:54:46 AM
https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/email-mp-syria-airstrikes



.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 December, 2015, 08:20:51 AM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 26 November, 2015, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2015, 06:23:56 PMLabour's main problem appears to be a complete lack of presentation skill.

I would argue that the complete dissolution of even the remotest pretense of impartiality in the media during the GE has simply carried over into the business-as-usual period between elections.  As a result, it doesn't matter what Labour do, they're going to get it in the neck anyway.
I'm not entirely sure what presentation skills the current crop of Labour MPs have, largely because of the skewed reporting we get.  As someone else pointed out, when a Tory MP can directly quote Nazi slogans as policy shortly after visiting Auschwitz without this being highlighted in the mainstream press then you know the dialogue isn't being fairly reported.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 December, 2015, 08:28:27 AM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 01 December, 2015, 04:11:39 PM
I can equally claim that "potential" Labour voters want our soldiers to take ballet lessons and prance into battle waving a sparkly wand in order to win ISIS over with The Power Of Love, but no-one can speak with certainty for the silent majority - the last election proved that. 
Ah, but which version?  The Frankie Goes to Hollywood song, the Huey Lewis and the News song or the Jennifer Rush song?  There are actually a lot of other songs that go by the same title, but I had to narrow down the options somewhat...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2015, 02:13:48 PM
The ACTUAL Power Of Love bequeathed to us by a benevolent God.

I see the Blairites are in the news again, explaining how Corbyn supporters have invented this new thing called "abusive correspondence", and how only Blairites have been the recipients of it.  I now choose to believe that their political strategy is derived from a horrible misunderstanding that came about when one of them misread the famous slogan as "everybody loves a WHINER."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 December, 2015, 06:36:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 December, 2015, 09:31:25 PM
You know, we manufacture those, by the way...
(http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/alienanthology/images/a/ab/Carterburkealiens.gif/revision/latest?cb=20120120093507)

Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 02 December, 2015, 02:13:48 PM
The ACTUAL Power Of Love bequeathed to us by a benevolent God.

Ah, so either the Huey Lewis or Frankie Goes to Hollywood versions then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 December, 2015, 09:34:33 PM
My prediction for next week: "cybersocialist" - the very worst kind of Corbynite, spreading lies and rumour online, flooding message boards with propaganda and saying nasty, nasty things.  A dossier will be compiled of people on Twitter who have, at some point, used swear words to describe former cabinet members, and Corbyn will be expected to denounce each and every one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2015, 10:35:40 PM
Nah, it'll blow over quick enough, much as all the other smears have - remember sexism and antisemitism?  Best to move on to the next smear before people start debunking the ones already out there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 December, 2015, 10:39:45 PM
397-223. Fucking hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 December, 2015, 10:57:56 PM
Great speech by Benn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 December, 2015, 11:08:31 PM
Jingoism from Benn Jr - pure and simple. Wins votes, ignores that pesky pesky context.

"They hold our belief in tolerance and decency in contempt"

So these will be tolerant and decent air strikes then?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 December, 2015, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 December, 2015, 10:57:56 PM
Great speech by Benn.

For a warmongering cunt pissing on the memory of his father.

And I say that as NO fan of Anthony Wedgewood Benn.

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 December, 2015, 11:14:32 PM
"Not just their calculated brutality, but their belief that they are superior to every single one of us in this chamber tonight and all of the people we represent."

Says someone literally calculating brutality with a belief that he's superior to those he represents.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00873/hilary-benn-460_873205a.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 December, 2015, 11:33:25 PM
As I understand it from following as much of this shite as I could stomach, yiz are going killing people with the only clear aim being that you can 'have a seat at the table'.  Is this some kind of WWI centenary re-enactment thing?  Or can you just not get enough of those refugees?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 02 December, 2015, 11:36:17 PM
I post this on Facebook;

"That's it, yes, it's War!" It was on spoof The Day Today and now it became serious on media 😞 ‪#‎thedaytoday‬ ‪#‎worldnotlaugh‬

(http://i.imgur.com/k4ZvzAw.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 December, 2015, 12:12:21 AM
I can't shake the feeling that the cheering and clapping as the result was announced somewhat undermines the "voting with my conscience" angle that some MPs were aiming for.

Still - now Britain's back at the front of things we'll show them we're still a power on the world stage.  We'll show them all we're still great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 December, 2015, 06:40:57 AM
QuoteWe don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too ...

Except we don't any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 December, 2015, 08:11:42 AM
Come now, it's obvious that nothing reduces the capacity of a tiny number of aggrieved European nationals with guns and suicide belts to attack other European civilians in public places like dropping yet more bombs on Syria. And you also can't deny that it represents a lateral-thinking approach to solving the geopolitical and humanitarian consequences of a civil war caused by 5 years of devastating drought and the vicious actions of a corrupt authoritarian asshole.  You should all be proud for electing a parliament capable of such a subtle and farsighted analysis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2015, 09:29:29 AM
The BBC has a list of the people who voted in favour of murdering foreigners and posted it here. (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34987921)
.
Criminals all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 December, 2015, 10:07:59 AM
Every article I've seen goes on at length about how many of Corbyn's lot voted for war, but I haven't seen any mention anywhere of the seven Tory MPs who their leader regards as terrorist sympathisers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 December, 2015, 12:54:20 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't Cameron's lot done exactly what Isis want them to do? By bereaving innocent citizens they're pretty much guaranteeing isis fresh anti-West recruits.

The whole thing seems to lack any real direction, and can only result in more terrorist attacks.  Bombing a country won't make much difference to an international organisation that operates without any deference to national boundaries.

It just smacks of 'you blew up our people - well, two can play at that game', and can only serve to deepen divisions between Islam and the West (which, again, seems to be exactly what Isis wants).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 December, 2015, 01:01:25 PM
PS I don't have an alternative solution.  I'm just not sure whether bombing Syria is a solution at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 December, 2015, 01:09:50 PM
From the Archbishop of Canterbnury's speech in the Lords:

"our bombing action plays into the expectation of ISIL and other jihadist groups in the region, springing from their apocalyptic theology. The totality of our actions must subvert that false narrative, because by itself it will not work.

If we act only against ISIL, globally, and only in the way proposed so far, we will strengthen their resolve, increase their recruitment and encourage their sympathisers."

and yet he still voted yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2015, 01:19:35 PM
Can't help but wonder if Call-Me-Dave has badly misjudged the public mood on this one. Been following a discussion on a community FB page for my town, which is both small and large 'c' conservative, and literally no one is in favour of military action.

Slightly more surprising is that everyone seems against it for the same, eminently sensible reasons: it won't work; it'll strengthen the IS 'Western war on Islam' narrative; it will inevitably kill innocent people; and how come we can find millions of pounds for this when we're told there's no money for police, nurses or libraries...?

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 December, 2015, 01:46:24 PM
A Yougov poll that found nearly 70 percent of the population agreed with Jeremy Corbyn's foreign policy, so Yougov titled the results "Labour has lost touch with popular opinion" and qualified their own data by saying it was obviously wrong.  The Guardian ran the polls and accompanying "analysis" not once, but twice - the second time claiming it was a different set of polls conducted by a different Yougov employee than the first, despite utilising exactly the same data and having tracts of the analysis that were repeated verbatim.

Polls will prove Call Me Dave is on the side of public opinion even if he isn't.
Especially if he isn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 December, 2015, 01:59:38 PM
The more you look at this mess, it feels like a combination of shit:

- A proxy war, so NATO and the Russians don't have to go at it for real. They can air their grievances by bombing people they don't like.
- An actual war, which is generally profitable for corporations and the wealthy.
- A means of distracting the public from all the other crap going on in key countries (USA; UK; France; Germany), not least economically.
- Lots of career politicians yelling SOMETHING MUST BE DONE rather than recognising they are public servants.
- Countries misjudging the situation AGAIN in a region that comprises lots of people who fucking hate each other, yet assuming they'll all get along fine in Daves Big Ground Troops Buddy System.

This is a hideous fucking mess, and I just hope it doesn't get any worse.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2015, 01:19:35 PMand how come we can find millions of pounds for this when we're told there's no money for police, nurses or libraries...?
Yep. Funny, isn't it, how a cash-strapped country can always find billions of pounds to waste on war? Trident is an utter waste of time, but still we're spending billions on it. What is it even for? Which state-sized actor would DARE to start anything nuclear? How would Trident even be an effective deterrent if one did? And for those muppets arguing "But what if ISIL set off a dirty nuke or something in London?", how would Trident work then? You cannot bomb an ideal. Mind you, NewsThump summed that up nicely with David Cameron to make case for bombing Climate Change (http://newsthump.com/2015/11/30/david-cameron-to-make-case-for-bombing-climate-change/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 December, 2015, 02:12:51 PM
Trident does actually make sense if you accept that Britain is the rogue state too big for its boots.  How many countries on Earth could roll over the British army by dint of numbers alone?  It makes sense for such a militarily vulnerable power to have a doomsday weapon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 December, 2015, 02:23:58 PM
Who'd invade? The Volgs?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 December, 2015, 02:39:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 December, 2015, 02:23:58 PM
Who'd invade? The Volgs?


The Duchy of Grand Fenwick are just waiting...

(https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.digication.com/M985c770e0110822a929f16e17003880e.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 03 December, 2015, 08:29:48 PM
Latest (Pravda) Guardian headline: Cameron warns of a lengthy campaign.  That is Cameron hands his arms dealing chums a lengthy profit window.
Hillary Benn is beneath contempt. I have heard few voices amongst the public giving any support to this juryrigged murder exercise; but so what, does anyone for a moment think these cynical fucks care what we think. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2015, 12:27:47 AM
I believe they're secretly terrified of what we think. Luckily, they have their pals in the media to pump us all full of acceptable thoughts and opinions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2015, 01:04:39 AM
The kippers aren't too happy about the unambiguous Labour victory in Oldham West, citing everything from a rigged postal vote to Labour flooding the area with immigrants to vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 December, 2015, 05:22:56 AM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 04 December, 2015, 01:04:39 AM
The kippers aren't too happy about the unambiguous Labour victory in Oldham West, citing everything from a rigged postal vote to Labour flooding the area with immigrants to vote for them.

Unambiguous?  Not to read half the reporting on this.  'Falling majority', 'low turnout', 'Corbyn rejected' .... 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2015, 10:08:30 AM
The spin is incredible—and absurd. By-elections always have terrible turnout. Still, at least the main BBC story appears to provide some actual context (noting that the majority was lower, but the party got a higher vote share than at the GE), and The Guardian for a second dropped its anti-Corbyn bullshit with "Labour sweeps to conclusive victory". The Telegraph, naturally, is falling over itself to paint this victory as a "minimum". OK, so what should Corbyn have done yesterday? Won 17 by-elections? Staged a coup? Won Strictly?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2015, 10:15:39 AM
The problem is that the media got ahead of themselves and have been reporting for weeks how this was a test of Corbyn's leadership, so they're now victims of the narrative they created.  The end result of slanted reporting at this stage will simply be to cement the British media establishment's ingrained bias as a running joke and further make Corbyn some kind of plucky underdog story - and we all know how much people hate plucky underdog stories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2015, 11:59:52 AM
You can just imagine the scene in 2020. Corbyn has somehow managed to keep Labour together, and while its voice doesn't always act as one, the toxic, caustic policies enacted by the Tories are now biting hard on anyone with the sheer audacity to earn under £100,000 per year. The working class have recognised they are fucked. The middle classes have also woken up to being royally screwed.

The GE is a mess. Boundary changes, allegations of gerrymandering, and a press imploding all result in a chaotic vote that leaves the Tories with big losses, but still as the biggest party. They're 27 short of a majority, but there are now just three Lib Dems in the Commons (Farron and Clegg having been ousted by a gleeful electorate), and not enough DUP support to make up the numbers. Meanwhile, Labour's impressive 267 seats leave Corbyn tantalisingly close to a victory of sorts, not least given the SNP's strong showing, dropping only to 38, despite the boundary changes.

A deal is hammered out. The SNP recognises that being pragmatic and able to have strong influence beats leaving the UK at the mercy of a minority Conservative government. Labour promises full-scale electoral reform and, in effect, a federal Britain, carved up along EU voting regions. The Lords revolt, but 2024 sees the first elections for the British senate. Every single newspaper apart from The Mirror leads with CORBYN IS EVIL AND WILL DESTROY THE UK, every single day. The Mirror simply prints a massive sadface emoji on its cover, because it's given up.

Corbyn's Labour doesn't destroy Britain. Change is slow, but the economy gathers some strength, the NHS slowly recovers from its beating, and education policy sees dying flames of creativity flicker back to life. Rail services start to be nationalised, and the result is no worse than what went before, and, in some cases, sees marginal improvements. Corporations start being held to account regarding taxation. The press remains aghast. Come 2025, every editor in the land is essentially calling for Corbyn's head, because Prime Minister Boris Johnson would "make Britain great again!" It's national brainwashing on an unprecedented scale, and it finally fully takes hold.

Unfortunately, Labour's blind spot remains: electoral reform of the Commons. Corbyn's reluctance to switch to AMS or STV finds Johnson's Conservatives win in a landslide. It takes Johnson precisely eleven seconds into his victory speech to make a major gaffe that leads to the UK being at war with Canada, Germany, Switzerland, and Burger King. The press blames this on Corbyn, and notes that at least Johnson sounds and looks like a real Prime Minster. The UK loses the war. Every Briton is forced to eat a Whopper for every meal, until the end of time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 December, 2015, 12:07:34 PM
Mummy... I'm scared.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2015, 12:44:19 PM
The actual chain of events will be much less complicated: Corbyn is ousted before 2020, the new Labour leader is a Blairite whom the papers crucify just as much as Corbyn, the unions desert Labour, the hundreds of thousands of new Labour members and supporters abandon the party overnight, and all the while the press has a field day.  Labour lose the GE by a huge majority and blame it all on Corbyn - who has been retired from politics for years at this point - and his supporters - who haven't been involved with Labour for years - citing "the damage they did was too great."  Every failure that follows is also blamed on Corbyn, until another scapegoat comes along.
Eventually - in 2030 or 2035 - there is absolutely no doubt that someone other than the Tories will win, and so the Blairites decamp Labour and swarm to that party, using pressure groups, bullying and intimidation to force their preferred candidate into the now-vacant top job (the previous leader having suffered a sudden and fatal heart attack) just in time for the election win, then they claim it was their centrist philosophy that won the day for the party and not 20 years of Tory misrule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 December, 2015, 03:22:03 PM
I'm always up for a good game of What Happens Next...

I can see the labour party coming apart at the seams, possibly before 2020. In  it's place the blairites will form a new centre-left party attracting what's left of the lib dems and a handful of tories who object to their own leader calling them terrorist sympathisers. The remaining leftwingers and unions, will rebrand themselves as "true labour" and be attacked, smeared and misrepresented by all sections of the press and establishment. They will be written off as unelectable militants, but in 2020 (or 2025) will stun the pollsters as vast swathes of the country, fed up with minor variations on austerity, sweep them to power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2015, 04:19:38 PM
I do find the whole "there will be another SDP-style split" argument throughout chunks of the press baffling. Because that worked SO well for the 'gang of four' and co-conspirators! Ironically, though, it would be the absolute best thing for Labour if we had AMS or List PR instead of FPTP, because people could vote for 'their' Labour, and chances are the two Labours would form coalition (with or without the likes of the SNP or the Liberal Democrats, should they one day remember they're not Tories). But even today, Commons reform's not seen as a priority by Labour. (The party really messed up by believing its own press when Blair swept to power and throwing the Lib Dems under the bus. There should have been constitutional reform then, when they had colossal power, which by 2005 may have at least resulted in Lab/Lib rather than Con/Lib.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2015, 05:18:15 PM
The rich continue to accumulate wealth from the masses, using whichever puppets the electorate favour to facilitate the transfer. Cash is demonised as a tool of terrorism, rape, murder, drug dealing and general beastliness. The public fall for it and, after another Gladio-style attack in Canada, start to look suspiciously on anyone using cash.

The economy continues to be measured using biased and unrealistic mechanisms resulting in actions being taken to cause further decline, which will be disguised as growth. The NHS is sold to Richard Branson and the money generated used to pay down the unmanageable government debts. Not one penny can be spared for investment in the country's infrastructure. The bankers use the profits to have large ocean-going palaces constructed and to buy up whatever isn't nailed down. Whatever is nailed down they get the government to legislate over to them. Then they take the nails as well.

A train derails near Glasgow, killing dozens and injuring many more. Network Rail engineers blame the tragedy on a length of track known to be old and fragile, pointing to months of ignored emails to the Chief Safety Officer. The engineers are ignored and then fired. Terrorism is blamed and the Prime Minister is urged to declare Casey Jones an international terrorist and bomb North Korea.

Cash is outlawed in response to the vicious Glasgow Railway Attack, driving everyone to use electronic cards and finally killing off the car boot sale. With every financial transaction now monitored and logged, barter enjoys a brief resurgence in popularity until outlawed by the government on Health and Safety grounds. Still losing money, the banks blame the cashless system's mechanisms, cards, software and, most especially, the general public for not using the system efficiently. To offset their losses, the banks begin to charge everyone a fee for the use of their services. Savers must now pay the banks to look after their money, leading to an accelerated upwards transfer of wealth.

A celebrity is killed by a drunk driver. Terrorism is blamed and the Prime Minister is urged to seize control of the road network, building fortified checkpoints at every major junction and manning them with armed sentries hired from Blackwater and to bomb the Moon.

Before the people of Britain can realize what's going on the Moon has retaliated, leaving the world in ashes. Only the cream of the kakistocracy survive unscathed, safe in their floating palaces way out at sea. Floating palaces that will sustain them and their kind until it's time to return to the land and take the reins of power once more. Floating palaces that we paid for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 December, 2015, 08:11:04 PM
An RAF bombers is shot down over Syria.  Cameron announces that additional measures are needed and begins moving troops into the country to provide "support and training" to rebel fighters. 

A BBC journalists is passed information that the plane was brought down by Russian forces.  A full investigation is filmed, but blocked from broadcast.

Turkey seizes the border area with ground troops, which are regularly bombed by the Russians.  Rumours abound that they are purchasing oil from IS.

The Labour Party votes in favour of increase troop numbers.  Corbyn resigns and goes into local politics. Benn becomes party leader.  Trade unions stop supporting the party, the transport workers union announces the formation of a new party.  London is brought to a standstill by illegal tube strikes.  Even moderate unions are demonized by the media.

In Scotland, there are increased calls for a second referendum, which the Westminster government refuses.  There are several large protests.  The devolved government s have their budgets cut and most are encouraged to raise income tax to meet the shortfall.

The camera pulls back to reveal Tommy Westphall staring into a snow globe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 December, 2015, 08:14:36 PM
Well shark, I for one am happy to give a supportive grunt to our future land recolonising neo masters. I hope there will be still a few sharks about to interdict the operation. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2015, 08:41:45 PM
IF the current attack on Syria is legitimate because it's the result of a few people voting, would the same hold true IF a handful of people had voted to conduct the Paris massacre? Are both attacks legal because a few people voted on whether to launch them or not? One legal and one not? Both illegal?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2015, 10:00:46 PM
"Hilary Benn, the product of his father's tempestuous affair with Lembit Opik, showed a fighting spirit that was direct proof of Johnny Cash's A Boy Named Sue." (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/04/isis-wants-an-insane-medieval-race-war-and-weve-decided-to-give-them-one)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 December, 2015, 06:07:07 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2015, 08:41:45 PM
IF the current attack on Syria is legitimate because it's the result of a few people voting, would the same hold true IF a handful of people had voted to conduct the Paris massacre? Are both attacks legal because a few people voted on whether to launch them or not? One legal and one not? Both illegal?

My big thing with the logic behind the air strikes is that it has all the logic of trying to sort out a scrap between a pair of 5 year olds:

"So why did you punch him in the face again?"

" 'cos he said Spiderman is a wimp."

"So what did you do?"

"I kicked him in the balls, din I!"

Or if you prefer a more literary allusion"

QuoteTweedledum and Tweedledee
    Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
    Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2015, 08:09:03 AM
I've said it once and I'll say it again: Psychopathy is a requirement to be an MP (or the equivalent thereof in other countries).  I'm not exaggerating; this is my honest belief.

By voting for the bombing of Syria, you become directly responsible for thousands of innocent people dying (and I think it's pretty safe to say that ISIS will retaliate horribly, so those deaths will extend to our side of the world).  This is not a case of killing the few to save the many:  it will almost without question lead to many, many more deaths.

Maybe I'm being naive, but I think most of us couldn't sleep at night with that on our conscience. But MPs? No problem at all for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2015, 08:30:25 AM
You're probably not wrong, JBC - but sometimes the ability to dispassionately make unpleasant decisions MIGHT be an advantage in an administration: sometimes the best choices don't make for restful sleep*. The problem seems to arise when you take your high-functioning psychpaths and rather than encouraging rational analysis to guide their actions, you make them perform for their supper to the choreography of corporations, their media and the assorted small-minded bigots they both create and feed off so that the currency of approval is appealing to the basest fear, avarice and ignorance.


*Although personally I'd love to see what sort of a job people with actual consciences would make of running the world, just for a change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 December, 2015, 09:59:25 AM
I have noticed, not on this thread, that there seems to be an embryonic witch-hunt for psychopaths developing.
.
I seem to recall from Jon Ronson's book, The Psychopath Test, that around 1% of humans are what might be termed "true psychopaths" although we all fall somewhere on the psychopathy scale. From an evolutionary point of view, the psychopathic person might be invaluable for, as Tordels points out, their ability to make rational and emotionless decisions in irrational and emotional situations.
.
I also agree with JBC that the "top jobs" in the corporate and government arenas do attract (and in some cases actively so) the psychopathic personality type.
.
All that being said, I think we must be wary of blaming and hounding the psychopath. It's not as if most psychopaths are evil or actively setting out to hurt people, or that they don't understand emotions or the concept of right and wrong. Many psychopaths are decent people who have learned to mimic emotions in order to fit in.
.
A story I heard on a podcast (this was a few months ago and I can't remember the source, so you can ignore this if you want) of a female psychopath who always wanted to kill somebody just to see what it's like. Being psychopathic and not stupid, she understood full well that society doesn't hold with this kind of thing and so decided to join the army. She was rejected and so had to pick another job where the opportunity to fulfil her desire might arise.
.
So she became a nurse.
.
And a very, very good nurse she became - able to engage with and mimic her patients' emotions whilst acting in a calm and clinical way. In many ways, psychopaths can be exceptionally good at jobs like that which the rest of us would find emotionally draining.
.
Did this nurse ever kill anyone? She hinted that yes, she had "eased certain terminal, suffering patients on their way" but would never just kill someone at random because she knew that doing so was wrong without fully understanding why.
.
Isn't that what we want from a nurse? The ability to put patients at their ease whilst retaining the ability to perform onerous tasks (any painful medical procedure, not just euthanasia)?
.
Psychopaths, especially high-functioning psychopaths, have played and can continue to play important roles in human society. They should, however, just like the rest of us, have an eye kept on them and operate within the confines of the law.
.
To blame the state of the world on a few psychopaths in positions of power (which nobody on this thread is doing) is to ignore the fact that it is we who put them there and keep them there and regard their pronouncements as law.  It is we who support and idolise the systems through which psychopaths achieve and maintain power, we who allow the worst of them virtual free-reign and it is we who suffer as a consequence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2015, 10:28:17 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 05 December, 2015, 08:30:25 AM

*Although personally I'd love to see what sort of a job people with actual consciences would make of running the world, just for a change.

I think this is why Corbyn is being attacked by Tories and Blairites alike: Despite being a political leader, he's normal. Like the vast majority of us in non-political positions, he's got a normal conscience and is averse to killing.

I do believe the world would be better off in the hands of such normal, conscientious people and as such probably could be branded an anarchist - but I'll always vote.

It's all well and good for Russell Brand to scoff at the idea of choosing the 'least worst', but the alternative is sitting back and letting the worst of the worst into power. Which is precisely what the pipecleaner- legged arsehole* has done.

* with thanks to Viz for the description.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 December, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 04 December, 2015, 05:22:56 AM
Unambiguous?  Not to read half the reporting on this.  'Falling majority', 'low turnout', 'Corbyn rejected' .... 
Nothing ambiguous about the reporting I've seen, though I keep away from the Daily Heil website, so maybe that's where I'm going right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 December, 2015, 12:21:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2015, 11:59:52 AM
The UK loses the war. Every Briton is forced to eat a Whopper for every meal, until the end of time.
Utterly ridiculous scenario.  You missed out the bit where Ronald McDonald declares war on the Burger King.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2015, 01:30:37 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2015, 10:28:17 AM
* with thanks to Viz for the description.

Ever the First Pope of the Church of Viz!

Here, can you imagine having a party leader like Corbyn in the RoI?  Instead over on the supposed left we get Burton, Murphy and Adams. Grud on a greenie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 December, 2015, 02:27:53 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 05 December, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 04 December, 2015, 05:22:56 AM
Unambiguous?  Not to read half the reporting on this.  'Falling majority', 'low turnout', 'Corbyn rejected' .... 
Nothing ambiguous about the reporting I've seen, though I keep away from the Daily Heil website, so maybe that's where I'm going right?

The Beeb and Grauniad.  The days of honest and unbiased journalism seem to be well and truly dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 December, 2015, 03:23:38 PM
It's now at the point where Corbyn's critics within Labour are agreeing with Nigel Farage - the Gruniad quotes someone as downplaying the Oldham vote because "too many" non-whites voted for the Labour candidate.
If true, it's a disgraceful comment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 December, 2015, 03:52:41 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 05 December, 2015, 03:23:38 PM
It's now at the point where Corbyn's critics within Labour are agreeing with Nigel Farage - the Gruniad quotes someone as downplaying the Oldham vote because "too many" non-whites voted for the Labour candidate.
If true, it's a disgraceful comment.

It's becoming abundantly clear that the Blair-ite wing is quite happy to burn the Labour Party to the ground, as long as they get to be in charge of the ashes.

Bah.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 December, 2015, 03:54:28 PM
Physically able model Kylie Jenner posed in a gold wheel chair while paraplegic models struggle to find work. And people say classicism and ableism are lie's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 December, 2015, 04:46:15 PM
While I don't disagree with the sentiment, that proves only that (1) Jenner is tasteless and desperate for attention, and (2) "money" and "class" are entirely different things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2015, 08:00:40 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 05 December, 2015, 01:30:37 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2015, 10:28:17 AM
* with thanks to Viz for the description.

Ever the First Pope of the Church of Viz!

Here, can you imagine having a party leader like Corbyn in the RoI?  Instead over on the supposed left we get Burton, Murphy and Adams. Grud on a greenie.

:lol: I love Viz with a passion, I truly do.

A Corbynesque politician here is a very hard thing to imagine. He's neither a publican nor a cunt, and thus wouldn't stand a chance.

But before you lament the loss of our political left, don't forget about the last great socialist!  My word, it was like Lenin-era Russia when comrade Bertie was in power..http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/world/europe/irish-leaders-unexpected-embrace-of-socialism-is-causing-a-stir.html?_r=0 (//http://://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/21/world/europe/irish-leaders-unexpected-embrace-of-socialism-is-causing-a-stir.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 07 December, 2015, 11:24:50 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2015, 11:59:52 AM
You can just imagine the scene in 2020. Corbyn has somehow managed to keep Labour together, and while its voice doesn't always act as one, the toxic, caustic policies enacted by the Tories are now biting hard on anyone with the sheer audacity to earn under £100,000 per year. The working class have recognised they are fucked. The middle classes have also woken up to being royally screwed.

The GE is a mess. Boundary changes, allegations of gerrymandering, and a press imploding all result in a chaotic vote that leaves the Tories with big losses, but still as the biggest party. They're 27 short of a majority, but there are now just three Lib Dems in the Commons (Farron and Clegg having been ousted by a gleeful electorate), and not enough DUP support to make up the numbers. Meanwhile, Labour's impressive 267 seats leave Corbyn tantalisingly close to a victory of sorts, not least given the SNP's strong showing, dropping only to 38, despite the boundary changes.

A deal is hammered out. The SNP recognises that being pragmatic and able to have strong influence beats leaving the UK at the mercy of a minority Conservative government. Labour promises full-scale electoral reform and, in effect, a federal Britain, carved up along EU voting regions. The Lords revolt, but 2024 sees the first elections for the British senate. Every single newspaper apart from The Mirror leads with CORBYN IS EVIL AND WILL DESTROY THE UK, every single day. The Mirror simply prints a massive sadface emoji on its cover, because it's given up.

Corbyn's Labour doesn't destroy Britain. Change is slow, but the economy gathers some strength, the NHS slowly recovers from its beating, and education policy sees dying flames of creativity flicker back to life. Rail services start to be nationalised, and the result is no worse than what went before, and, in some cases, sees marginal improvements. Corporations start being held to account regarding taxation. The press remains aghast. Come 2025, every editor in the land is essentially calling for Corbyn's head, because Prime Minister Boris Johnson would "make Britain great again!" It's national brainwashing on an unprecedented scale, and it finally fully takes hold.

Unfortunately, Labour's blind spot remains: electoral reform of the Commons. Corbyn's reluctance to switch to AMS or STV finds Johnson's Conservatives win in a landslide. It takes Johnson precisely eleven seconds into his victory speech to make a major gaffe that leads to the UK being at war with Canada, Germany, Switzerland, and Burger King. The press blames this on Corbyn, and notes that at least Johnson sounds and looks like a real Prime Minster. The UK loses the war. Every Briton is forced to eat a Whopper for every meal, until the end of time.

This is quite brilliant in a darkly humorous fashion.

PS Scared too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 07 December, 2015, 06:50:18 PM
We are at the top.

Of a seriously slippery slope.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/12/07/muslim-thrown-off-coach-after-passengers-said-he-looked-shifty-5549929/?ito=facebook
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 December, 2015, 08:25:27 PM
The top? We're half-way down and gathering speed...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 December, 2015, 09:48:08 PM
Wasn't there a similar story a bit ago? Of 2 Muslim guys being asked to leave a plane by a load of chavvy types coming back from Benidorm, or some such.

Always strange times on planet Earth...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2015, 10:19:11 PM
I know it's wrong, but I really, really want Donald Trump to run for president.  Trump vs Clinton would basically be Kang vs Kodos, but Trump vs Sanders would be a battle for America's soul, the result of which would leave no doubt for the world that the US is either an ongoing and brave experiment in crafting a nation for all, or proof that ISIS are right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 December, 2015, 10:23:08 PM
Not even as a joke. Never. Trump is the manifestation of everything I hate about humanity, keep him as a curiosity piece but as soon as his presidential candidacy becomes void give him the boot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 December, 2015, 10:37:09 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 11 December, 2015, 10:19:11 PMI know it's wrong, but I really, really want Donald Trump to run for president.
I don't. He might win. The only possible silver lining would be the GoP possibly tearing itself apart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2015, 11:06:48 PM
Trump's time is now:

Quote48 percent of respondents said the American dream is dead (https://www.rt.com/usa/325671-millennials-american-dream-isis/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 December, 2015, 11:11:55 PM
I keep saying I want him to be the candidate because he's clearly an unelectable moron but then I recall that I had similar feelings about Reagan and George W Bush
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2015, 11:37:18 PM
1 Corinthians 15:52:  "In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last Trump: for the Trump shall sound off, and the dead shall be Muslims and dissenters, and we shall be changed into piles of radioactive ash."
.
Who says there's nothing in it? ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2015, 11:59:34 PM
Trump looks and sounds more like Robert L Booth every time I see his ghastly lips flapping.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 December, 2015, 12:49:50 AM
American democracy died.with smilin Harry back in the.early 50's before the MIC took over. You could potentially put two shaved monkeys up and have no discernable change. At this stage the elites are just laughing at us. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 December, 2015, 07:42:40 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 11 December, 2015, 11:59:34 PM
Trump looks and sounds more like Robert L Booth every time I see his ghastly lips flapping.
Bad Don Trump. Seem's legit, when can we tie him to a car and fill him full of hole's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 21 December, 2015, 05:37:48 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 21 December, 2015, 04:41:49 PM
Whats your stance in microfarming, Tips?

Probably as  ill informed as every other stance I take.

The ethics of animal treatment are as important to me as the environmental arguments so I wouldn't have animals in my back yard or use their produce.

They a dress this in COWSPIRACY as well by doing some rough sums on back yard farming (after some rather graphic duck slaying) and didn't reckon it stacked up as a sustainable solution either. But I haven't double checked the figures or read any articles on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 24 December, 2015, 09:40:56 AM
Somalia banning Christmas for being too Christian?! Nonsense, it's rooted in paganism and frankly it's more of a poster-day for capitalism than anythin-

Cameron's Christmas speech:

""It is because they face danger that we have peace. And that is what we mark today as we celebrate the birth of God's only son, Jesus Christ – the Prince of Peace"

(http://media1.giphy.com/media/6OWIl75ibpuFO/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 December, 2015, 02:08:04 PM
FFS... (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/22/us-stops-british-muslim-family-flight-disneyland-david-cameron)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 December, 2015, 02:40:38 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 24 December, 2015, 02:08:04 PM
FFS... (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/22/us-stops-british-muslim-family-flight-disneyland-david-cameron)

Winning hearts and minds there alright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 December, 2015, 03:16:07 PM
We are a Christian country - and we'll bomb the living crap out of anyone who disagrees.
.
I think the phrase I'm searching for rhymes with "sucking lip of grit."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 December, 2015, 06:44:50 PM
Cameron can suck a (pig) dick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 09:53:55 AM
A Carol from Flanders

by Frederick Niven (1878-1944)


In Flanders on the Christmas morn
The trenched foemen lay,
the German and the Briton born,
And it was Christmas Day.

The red sun rose on fields accurst,
The gray fog fled away;
But neither cared to fire the first,
For it was Christmas Day!

They called from each to each across
The hideous disarray,
For terrible has been their loss:
"Oh, this is Christmas Day!"

Their rifles all they set aside,
One impulse to obey;
'Twas just the men on either side,
Just men — and Christmas Day.

They dug the graves for all their dead
And over them did pray:
And Englishmen and Germans said:
"How strange a Christmas Day!"

Between the trenches then they met,
Shook hands, and e'en did play
At games on which their hearts were set
On happy Christmas Day.

Not all the emperors and kings,
Financiers and they
Who rule us could prevent these things —
For it was Christmas Day.

Oh ye who read this truthful rime
From Flanders, kneel and say:
God speed the time when every day
Shall be as Christmas Day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 December, 2015, 01:24:19 PM
Love it, Sharky.  I've been listening all week to a multipart Hardcore History podcast about WW1.  I've always found that Christmas truce to be one of the most inspiring and beautiful stories I've ever heard - the moment when the lions began to realise it was the donkeys leading them who were the real enemies.

Every day is indeed like Christmas for us modern Europeans; compared to our great grandfathers we're rich and comfortable beyond imagining. (And right on cue, a robin has just landed on a post outside my window.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 02:33:33 PM
Too true, JBC - but imagine the world we'd have today if that "mutiny" had spread. A curtailed WWI, no Russian or US involvement, no Stalin, no Treaty of Versailles, no WWII...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 December, 2015, 05:35:12 PM
By Christmas 1914, Sharky, the Russians were well and truly involved in WWI.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 07:04:26 PM
You're absolutely correct, Tankie. I don't know why I typed that - I blame the Christmas ale!
.
It's all conjecture anyway. An early end to the war might easily have led to a worse future (or present). Still, at least millions of lives might have been spared, lives that might have wasted in other ways.
.
But I'm an optimist and like to think we would now live in a better world had the lions decided to ignore the donkeys.
.
Doesn't excuse my basic mistake, though, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 December, 2015, 07:29:14 PM
No need to apologise, hope you've had a good day. I'm starting to flag, too much Christmas pud!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 07:34:44 PM
I've had a very good day, thanks. Hope you have, too - and everyone who comes arguing on this thread.
.
Let this day forever be known as the Great Political Thread Armistice of 2016. Footie, anyone?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 07:42:25 PM
2015, even.
.
Not doing too well today, am I? :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 December, 2015, 08:54:22 PM
Footie in No Man's Land it is.  Merry Christmas to the Brits and Bosch alike!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 December, 2015, 09:12:36 PM
Football is for losers.  I'd have just gone back to fighting instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 26 December, 2015, 01:53:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 December, 2015, 07:04:26 PM
It's all conjecture anyway. An early end to the war might easily have led to a worse future (or present). Still, at least millions of lives might have been spared, lives that might have wasted in other ways.
.
But I'm an optimist and like to think we would now live in a better world had the lions decided to ignore the donkeys.
.
Doesn't excuse my basic mistake, though, sorry.
Might be misreading that, but wouldn't an optimist believe that we're currently living in the best of all possible worlds?

Merry Boxing Day, everybody!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 December, 2015, 04:33:06 PM
Only a deluded one.
.
I believe people are capable of great good (the optimistic part of me) but are too scared to try (the realistic part of me).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2016, 04:57:09 PM
Was gonna post something about the spate of Labour resignations, but they've all been replaced already.  Whoever it was who resigned this morning being replaced within hours - by someone who seems suspiciously more qualified for the position.

For something long-touted by Blairites as their nuclear option, it's not exactly seismic stuff thus far, anyway.  Maybe I'm getting old, but it seems to me that commies purging the ranks used to be interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2016, 05:14:43 PM
Might turn out to be cannier politics than people are giving credit for, if the Blairites are reshuffling themselves out of the front bench.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 January, 2016, 05:17:00 PM
And yet the BBC and others banged on about the reshuffle for ages, ignoring pretty much everything else going on in the political arena. This is a gift to the Conservatives, and it's the gift that keeps on giving. McKinnell today was baffling: supposedly dismayed at internal conflict and so added to it. I genuinely don't understand what the Blairites are trying to achieve now, beyond bringing down the entire Labour party in flames.

(Also, odd that Corbyn's Labour was ridiculed by Cameron at actually taking a bit of time to do a reshuffle, suggesting that Conservative ones are done in about three minutes.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2016, 07:03:32 PM
Gervais certainly doesn't deserve all the flack he's getting. Caitlynn Jenner is a vile person to begin with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2016, 07:27:53 PM
I thought we were all on board that Caitlyn Jenner is an amazing beautiful woman who had the exquisite bravery of a beautiful butterfly flying against the wind - and then this shit flies out of people's mouths.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2016, 07:34:19 PM
it's nothing to do with their relative merits as human beings - I don't think the the joke was offensive, it was a good gag!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2016, 08:12:32 PM
Nah, Caitlyn Jenner is a disgrace of a human being. Jervais was right to say what few would dare.

OK, speaking as someone who fall's into the LGBT spectrum I decree it right here, any and all bashing of Caitlyn Jenner is a-ok. I HAVE SPOKEN!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 12 January, 2016, 08:09:03 PM
Why is that then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 January, 2016, 08:17:43 PM
I dunno, maybe people who drink drive and kill a person but then bribe judges off in order to get away with it tend to rub me the wrong way? ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2016, 08:18:11 PM
Divide and conquer. All they have to do is stir up our differences and we do the rest ourselves. It's how we are kept impotent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 January, 2016, 08:21:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2016, 08:18:11 PM
Divide and conquer. All they have to do is stir up our differences and we do the rest ourselves. It's how we are kept impotent.
With all due respect, Sharky, if you think Jenners corrupting of federal court is in anyway linked to governmental regime or the illuminate (joke, I joke!) then your over estimating her power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2016, 08:30:08 PM
I meant in general. Some buffoon spouts off about differences (sexuality, race, class, means, intelligence, gender, worthiness, honesty, humour, whatever) and we find ourselves drawn into arguing those same points instead of thinking about what's important.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 January, 2016, 08:31:22 PM
So....Jenner being a republican anti-gay rights pro gun law maniac who bribes and flaunts contempt of court ISN'T an issue worth rebuking?  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2016, 08:38:45 PM
Correct.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 January, 2016, 09:27:21 PM
I think your starting to let your own vendetta and paranoia blind you a little bit,  Just because certain issues don't effect your personally or reflect badly on you or people you know doesn't make them unworthy of debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2016, 10:04:26 PM
Debate is fine, even necessary, but you said "rebuking." To me, debate comes from logic and a willingness to understand whilst rebuking comes from emotion and an unwillingness to understand.
.
Whilst emotion is basic and often unavoidable - and necessary in human beings* - it must be tempered with reason.
.
*Certain types of brain damage can virtually eradicate emotion in victims and these people find their ability to make logical, rational decisions impaired. If a person doesn't feel something, one way or another, about a decision or conclusion, they tend to be unsure of those decisions or conclusions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 12 January, 2016, 10:08:18 PM
From what I've heard, Gervais made a joke about women drivers with regards to Jenner. That's not offensive or controversial, that's tired and hackneyed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 January, 2016, 10:35:36 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 12 January, 2016, 10:08:18 PM
From what I've heard, Gervais made a joke about women drivers with regards to Jenner. That's not offensive or controversial, that's tired and hackneyed.

And yet still the best gag in his set! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 January, 2016, 11:02:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 January, 2016, 08:12:32 PMthe LGBT spectrum

It was never as good as the LGBT C64.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 January, 2016, 11:06:48 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 12 January, 2016, 11:02:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 January, 2016, 08:12:32 PMthe LGBT spectrum

It was never as good as the LGBT C64.
I kept it old-school with the LGBT81.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 January, 2016, 11:40:17 PM
I always wondered if the BBC Micro was any good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 12 January, 2016, 11:48:17 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 12 January, 2016, 11:02:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 11 January, 2016, 08:12:32 PMthe LGBT spectrum

It was never as good as the LGBT C64.

Yes it was. Especially the +2 model that was bundled with the LGBT gun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 January, 2016, 07:38:07 AM
Oh, sorry. LGBT Spectrum is the old model. It was superseded by the ZX Spectrum in 1982. ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2016, 08:00:04 AM
So that's why it had rainbow stripes in the corner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 13 January, 2016, 09:49:58 AM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 11 January, 2016, 07:27:53 PM
I thought we were all on board that Caitlyn Jenner is an amazing beautiful woman who had the exquisite bravery of a beautiful butterfly flying against the wind - and then this shit flies out of people's mouths.

Southpark has been saying this for the last 3 months and has Jenner run over several people every week. Buckle up Buckaroo!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 January, 2016, 02:06:03 PM
Gays, politics, ZX Spectrums - if we can get werewolves, cheese and Manimal into this conversation, we basically have the perfect 2000ad Online thread.
A discussion about Knightlore ought to cover it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 05:33:45 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 12 January, 2016, 08:17:43 PM
I dunno, maybe people who drink drive and kill a person but then bribe judges off in order to get away with it tend to rub me the wrong way? ::)

That is bad. I don't know much about Jenner as I don't watch or keep up with (see what I did there?) the TV shows or gossip mags.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 January, 2016, 06:37:26 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 05:33:45 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 12 January, 2016, 08:17:43 PM
I dunno, maybe people who drink drive and kill a person but then bribe judges off in order to get away with it tend to rub me the wrong way? ::)

That is bad. I don't know much about Jenner as I don't watch or keep up with (see what I did there?) the TV shows or gossip mags.
I must say though, that post of mine isn't half snide and condescending, is it? Sorry Tips, was only trying to point out my source for disliking Jenner so bitterly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 07:17:41 PM
No worries - I always try (but sometimes fail) give a little more slack on the internet and email because it's hard to read tone and intent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2016, 07:28:37 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 07:17:41 PM
No worries - I always try (but sometimes fail) give a little more slack on the internet and email because it's hard to read tone and intent.

Sheesh Tips, no need to be so bloody sarcastic.  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2016, 08:00:17 PM
How dare you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 January, 2016, 08:08:42 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 07:17:41 PM
No worries - I always try (but sometimes fail) give a little more slack on the internet and email because it's hard to read tone and intent.
We don't need no reasonable talk here, boy! Get outta me' forum!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2016, 11:54:53 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 13 January, 2016, 07:28:37 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2016, 07:17:41 PM
No worries - I always try (but sometimes fail) give a little more slack on the internet and email because it's hard to read tone and intent.

Sheesh Tips, no need to be so bloody sarcastic.  >:(

You're pretending to be angry, TB, but your body language says something else entirely.


P.S. Knightlore! Yayy! That was our GTA back in the 80s.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2016, 04:21:55 PM
Knightlore is teh boss, but our GTA was Shirley Werewolves Of London - you could even go in the London Underground to lose the rozzers (but don't touch the electric rail).

I am beginning to think Comrade Corbyn is smarter than people give him credit for - possibly he even knows what he is doing - as today he went on telly and said "perhaps we could have nuclear submarines, but not have nuclear warheads in them" and now his critics are unironically announcing that this is a silly plan because you can't spend billions on nuclear submarines that will never be used to launch a nuclear weapon.
As The Sun might unironically say: "you couldn't make it up."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 January, 2016, 05:12:58 PM
"The Japan option", according to the Shadow Defence spokesperson, (said without a trace of irony).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2016, 09:46:11 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 17 January, 2016, 04:21:55 PM
Knightlore is teh boss, but our GTA was Shirley Werewolves Of London - you could even go in the London Underground to lose the rozzers (but don't touch the electric rail).

This passed me by completely - which is very strange, given the breadth of my knowledge of Spectrum games.

(As for Corbyn, I'd take warhead-less nuclear submarines over counterproductive bombings of the Middle East any day.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 05 February, 2016, 12:54:20 AM
You know that stuff about (possibly but probably not) biased Google search results recently? Well, this is currently in the news bit of Yahoo...

(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/YahooDC1_zpsa4m7onid.jpg)

...but when you click on it, this happens...

(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j260/MalcolmKirk/YahooDC2_zpswymbppql.jpg)

The article is easy enough to find elsewhere, but why would it be removed from the Yahoo news section?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 06:57:54 AM
Isn't Yahoo currently in lumber over allowing ivory trading?  I'm sure I either read that somewhere - or possibly dreamt it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2016, 07:30:19 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 06:57:54 AM
Isn't Yahoo currently in lumber over allowing ivory trading?  I'm sure I either read that somewhere - or possibly dreamt it.

No, I read that too. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 09:16:35 AM
Either that or we're sharing dreams. I find both options vaguely disconcerting...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 February, 2016, 10:36:53 AM
Terrifying polling on the UK EU vote, from my point of view. YouGov now puts 'out' NINE points ahead, which will delight The Sun, The Mail and The Express, those bastions of British values and freedom. I can only hope YouGov's polling is no better than it was during the election, or that there are lots of 'shy' yes voters, but binary predictions are a hell of a lot easier than GEs. It really does look like the UK's about to jump into the void, for no good reason.

Still, I'm sure the UK will return to how it used to be in those halcyon days of [insert year where you inexplicably think the UK was all green fields and amazingness here] when we tell the EU to get stuffed. And we'll magically somehow still have unrestricted access to our biggest trading bloc and freedom of movement and residency throughout EU countries, rejoin and gain control over EFTA (which will, according to UKIP somehow drive and shape EU policy), retain all the companies (including financial institutions) that have said they'll move to the EU if the UK leaves, keep our status in the world despite the USA and China both saying EU membership is vital, and stop evil immigration even though it has fuck all to do with the EU.

Brilliantly, I'm also seeing a lot of people saying they're going to vote no because: HA HA! It will make Cameron look like a right idiot! Yes. That's a great reason to vote for that option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 11:13:57 AM
And the best bit is that you'll still have a 500km-long open land border and dual citizenship agreement with an EU state (admittedly a non-Schengen one). How's that going to work?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 February, 2016, 11:20:26 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 05 February, 2016, 11:13:57 AM
And the best bit is that you'll still have a 500km-long open land border and dual citizenship agreement with an EU state (admittedly a non-Schengen one). How's that going to work?

And quite likely another one with Scotland, who almost certainly will have to sign up to Schengen if they want to join the EU as an independent nation.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 February, 2016, 12:14:11 PM
My Mam's English.  Will a Brexit make me more exotic, off-continent genes?  Seriously though, the border thing does seem a bit weird (though I suppose Switzerland manges).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 01:24:51 PM
Here we go Project Fear starting on the forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 February, 2016, 01:37:55 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 01:24:51 PM
Here we go Project Fear starting on the forum.

Every opinion you've mouthed on this subject has turned out to be unsupported by actual facts. Every time I've challenged you on something, you've been unable to make a halfway competent job of supporting your position.

One of us is appealing to fear and prejudice from a position of ignorance, and it's not me.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 01:46:49 PM
Makes no difference whether the people stealing your money and pushing you around are based in London or Brussels. A state is a state - there's not one to mend another - they all expect you to bow before them, whether they deserve your fealty or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 01:50:53 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 01:24:51 PM
Here we go Project Fear starting on the forum.

Well, yeah - as an Irish citizen I'm afraid of the economic implications of our largest trading partner and only land-linked neighbour leaving our economic and political union, even though we do have historic bilateral agreements regarding free movement, employment etc. - although it would be amusing to see how this affects the 11,000 UK benefit tourists citizens claiming the dole in this State. Or indeed the other 20,000 claiming elsewhere in the EU. Would you like them back, perhaps?

I'm also genuinely interested in the status of residents of Northern Ireland, who can choose to be Irish or UK citizens at will under the GFA, and thus Schrodinger's nordies when it comes to being EU citizens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 February, 2016, 02:27:24 PM
If the Daily Mail gets its way, just wait until a few years down the line when its readers suddenly realise:

- Brits no longer have any automatic right to reside anywhere outside of the UK. No more retiring to Spain and France, unless you're stinking rich. No moving overseas for a bit, just because you fancy it.
- Going to France for a quick booze cruise now requires at the least a visa waiver, and everything must be declared upon your return.
- Holidays in Spain dump Brits in the non-EU line, which moves at a snail's pace.

And the big one:

- They can no longer blame the EU for stuff, which may or may not include a deranged permanent Tory government of the newly downsized state of 'England' busily turning the country into a tax haven for the rich, and eradicating human rights.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 01:46:49 PMMakes no difference whether the people stealing your money and pushing you around are based in London or Brussels. A state is a state - there's not one to mend another - they all expect you to bow before them, whether they deserve your fealty or not.
EU membership is about a hell of a lot more than who runs the show. Hell, I'm married to an EEA citizen, and although even UKIP has said it would grudgingly 'allow' existing EEA citizens to remain in the UK, there has been talk merely of grace periods. That is terrifying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 05 February, 2016, 02:41:06 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 01:24:51 PM
Here we go Project Fear starting on the forum.

The original Project Fear was the weight of the entire British Establushment - politicians, media, corporate interests - being brought to bear to bring those unruly jockos into line during the Scottish IndyRef.  that job done, we saw its machinery clanking into motion again last year (and still going now) to reduce and rubbish Jeremy Corbyn.

You don't get to use that phrase for anything anti-euro sceptic, not when the Establushment that uses the Project Fear tactics - the Murdoch empire, UKIP, a large part of the Conservative Party - are firmly on your side of the debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 02:50:04 PM
TB, why would the EU want to stop trading with an independent United Kingdom when the UK had a trade deficit with the EU in 2014 of 61 billion pounds?  And why would the eleven thousand UK citizens claiming the dole in your country be affected?  After all, the UK would continue paying unemployed Irish citizens in the UK.

I'll use whatever phase I want.  I happen to think that Project Fear will work again.  I predicted 54 to 46 on the Scottish Referendum on here and I'll predict the same figures for the EU Ref. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 February, 2016, 03:21:33 PM
At no point leading up to Scotland's referendum was there the kind of lead seen in polling now. I hope Brits will do their usual thing and stick with the status quo. Sterling's already taken a massive kicking as it is, and the UK's so reliant on financial industries that quitting the EU is a colossal and unnecessarily reckless risk. I just don't see it though. And if we think our economy's in the shit now, it'll be nothing compared to the years of uncertainly that will follow an 'exit' vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 03:44:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 February, 2016, 02:27:24 PM

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 01:46:49 PMMakes no difference whether the people stealing your money and pushing you around are based in London or Brussels. A state is a state - there's not one to mend another - they all expect you to bow before them, whether they deserve your fealty or not.
EU membership is about a hell of a lot more than who runs the show. Hell, I'm married to an EEA citizen, and although even UKIP has said it would grudgingly 'allow' existing EEA citizens to remain in the UK, there has been talk merely of grace periods. That is terrifying.

Exactly my point. Somebody else telling you who you can and can't marry, where you can and can't live, who you can and can't trade with, where you can and can't go and so on. And that somebody, whether they be in London, Brussels or Mega City One has no more right to dictate those things to you than I do.

The truly terrifying part is that so many people believe these "rulers" do have those rights while the rest of us must obey.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 03:50:40 PM
Hi IndigoPrime.  The polls are all over the place at the moment but I am convinced the vote will be to stay in.  You've got Dave and Boy George, the CBI, and many others in the Establishment on the In side.  Plague and Pestilence will spread across the land if we dare to leave the EU!!!!  Isn't the weak pound good for exports?  The scare stories from some in the In camp really make me smile.  As I've said before, why would the EU stop trading with us.  We are a massive net importer from the EU.  And as for people getting thrown out of various countries, we have many non-EU migrants living here and across the EU.

Leaving the EU doesn't mean we leave the European Court of Human Rights.  The UK or any EU country wouldn't just be allowed to throw millions of people out on a whim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 February, 2016, 04:00:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 03:44:15 PMThe truly terrifying part is that so many people believe these "rulers" do have those rights while the rest of us must obey.
In an ideal world, we'd be able to move anywhere we like and do — within reason — whatever we want. Tearing down the EU make that ideal a little further away.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 03:50:40 PMThe polls are all over the place at the moment but I am convinced the vote will be to stay in.  You've got Dave and Boy George, the CBI, and many others in the Establishment on the In side.
Boris could be key. But much of the press is viciously anti, and I'm seeing a lot of people saying they'll vote no just to stick it to Cameron. What japes!

QuoteIsn't the weak pound good for exports?
Depends what you're exporting. We export a ton of financial and other services, based in corporations that have been quite clear they'll leave the UK if the UK leaves the EU. In the case of finance, they may have to for legal reasons.

Quotewhy would the EU stop trading with us
It wouldn't. But the point is that it may trade with us less and trade is likely to be more complex, thereby reducing profits and increasing administration.

QuoteAnd as for people getting thrown out of various countries, we have many non-EU migrants living here and across the EU.
Which is meaningless in the context of what I said. I don't really fancy the prospect of an extremely stressful, time-consuming and uncertain procedure to remain here with my wife if the UK (or, more accurate, England, because the second Brexit happened Scotland would kick off) went full batshit. And the way things are heading, full batshit in this area seems very possible indeed.

QuoteLeaving the EU doesn't mean we leave the European Court of Human Rights.  The UK or any EU country wouldn't just be allowed to throw millions of people out on a whim.
Not immediately, no. And why would the UK remain in the ECHR if it quits the EU? Isn't the ECHR considered one of the big bads by many of the Brexit crowd, including the MPs?

Also, the EFTA suggestion (not by you, but by a great many commentators and UKIP dolts) is truly mind-boggling. The idea EFTA would even let in the UK is quite astonishing, given how totally dominant the UK would be. But UKIP's argument regarding steering committees and the importance of the organisation is just astonishing. It's four small countries that still pay a shit-load of cash to the EU, get almost no say, and have to implement the majority of policy anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 February, 2016, 04:06:22 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 02:50:04 PM
TB, why would the EU want to stop trading with an independent United Kingdom when the UK had a trade deficit with the EU in 2014 of 61 billion pounds? 

has anyone said they'll stop trading with us?

Leaving the EU just means that existing trade treaties will have to be renegotiated and since we need them more than they need tiny old Britain, they will be in a position negotiate these deals to their own advantage. And also, all the trade deals that the EU has with the aft east and the Americas will also have to be renegotiated - do you honestly think the UK will be in as strong a negotiating position as the whole of Europe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 04:13:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 02:50:04 PM
... why would the eleven thousand UK citizens claiming the dole in your country be affected?  After all, the UK would continue paying unemployed Irish citizens in the UK.

Well there's only about 2,000 of those, in a state with 15 times the population, so fair's fair - proportionally there are twice as many UK claimants in Ireland as there are EU claimants in the UK.  But we struggle on, somehow. 

As noted, we have bilateral agreements regarding all this anyway, but I mentioned it in the light of repeated claims in the long lead in to this referendum about the huge burden of EU 'benefit tourists' when in fact the UK holds its own in this regard. And yet leaving the EU will not prevent the arrival of one single non-EU illegal immigrant.

And incidentally, if you think trading outside the EU is the same as trading within it, I suspect you've never tried to do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 04:31:36 PM
Hi DDD  Trade negotiations go on all the time.  A huge amount of EU red tape costs small and medium sized businesses a fortune.  The EU certainly would want to trade with us, its share of World trade is falling fast. And the idea that the EU, with over 15 million of its citizens unemployed, would not want to trade with a well-established trading nation of 64 million people doesn't ring true.  It would make trading with the UK as easy as possible or have to tell many of its citizens why they've lost their jobs!

Hi IndigoPrime  Thanks for your reply.  We're going round in circles, we're not going to agree.  I respect your position although I don't agree with much of what you're saying, but thanks anyway for an interesting debate.

Hi TB  My main gripe with the EU isn't about immigration, I've only mentioned it because other people have.  My argument against the EU is that it's undemocratic.  With majority voting in many areas, people that I had a chance to vote for can be out voted by people I didn't have a chance to vote for.  At the end of the day, I believe in the nation state and I do not believe in a European union.  Sort out the democracy question and I might change my mind.

At no point have I said that leaving the EU would be easy but overall I think it's the best course for the United Kingdom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 February, 2016, 04:47:01 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 04:31:36 PM
Hi DDD  Trade negotiations go on all the time.  A huge amount of EU red tape costs small and medium sized businesses a fortune.  The EU certainly would want to trade with us, its share of World trade is falling fast. And the idea that the EU, with over 15 million of its citizens unemployed, would not want to trade with a well-established trading nation of 64 million people doesn't ring true.  It would make trading with the UK as easy as possible or have to tell many of its citizens why they've lost their jobs!

again in case you missed it NOBODY HAS REMOTELY SUGGESTED THEY WILL STOP TRADING WITH US. The point is, they will be in a much stronger position to dictate the terms than we will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 04:55:31 PM
And l have just explained why I don't agree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 05:41:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 04:31:36 PM
At the end of the day, I believe in the nation state and I do not believe in a European union. 

As I don't believe in the nation state, generally regarding it as a divisive and limiting conceit, I suspect we're unlikely to agree!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 February, 2016, 06:00:19 PM
One more thing the 'out' brigade never seem keen to address: there are more British ex-pats in Europe than there are EU migrants in the UK. Those taking the hardest line on EU immigrant post-exit are seriously talking about deporting hundreds of thousands of working, tax-paying people and in return accepting the repatriation of a couple of million largely retired ex-pats, with the attendant implications for the NHS and social care services.

There is literally no upside to EU exit, other than pandering to the isolationist fantasies of Little Englanders.

Would I invent the EU as it is now, if I was starting from scratch? No. Do I think it could use root-and-branch reform? Yes. Do either of those things make a convincing case for leaving? No.

As an aside, there was an interesting piece tucked away in the later part of the evening on Radio 4 a few weeks ago where they were talking to politicians and business people from Norway, whose non-membership of the EU is often cited as an example of how we could continue to trade with Europe exactly as before. Turns out, the Norwegian experience is exactly what's been suggested would happen to the UK — they still have to jump through all the legislative hoops that would come with EU membership, but without any ability influence the legislation. All the disadvantages and none of the benefits.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 06:03:46 PM
Here you go with the insults again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 February, 2016, 06:05:26 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 04:31:36 PM
My argument against the EU is that it's undemocratic.  With majority voting in many areas, people that I had a chance to vote for can be out voted by people I didn't have a chance to vote for.  At the end of the day, I believe in the nation state and I do not believe in a European union.  Sort out the democracy question and I might change my mind.

Hi, Tankie. The irony is, everything you say applies equally (and more so) at the level of the nation state.

I don't think it really matters much either way; I share your distrust of tales claiming life outside the EU will be a barren, howling wilderness, but the Eurosceptic argument contains within it the admission that we'd require a series of independently negotiated agreements with the EU that replicate those which are already in place.

I think the OUT vote could win, simply because those against the EU are filled with a passionate intensity that will carry them to the voting station, determined to deliver a bloody nose to Donald Tusk. I'm basically in favour of something like the EU, but I'd be lying if I said I can work up much enthusiasm for its current form.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 06:10:51 PM
Thank you, Butch, for your comments, done without insult. I appreciate it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 February, 2016, 06:17:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 06:10:51 PM
Thank you, Butch, for your comments, done without insult. I appreciate it.

Why do you assume I was talking to, or about, you? We've long-since established that no rational argument will sway you on this matter, so discussing it with you is literally an exercise in futility.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 06:27:33 PM
Bye bye, Jim, have a lovely evening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2016, 06:36:07 PM
Welcome to question time and the debate for the night is, is Old Tankie an elaborate troll or just a right wing fool?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 06:50:14 PM
Ah he's no troll - just a man with strong convictions. Wrong convictions, but that's by the by.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 06:58:18 PM
Thanks TB l think!  So I am a fool and a troll because  I have a different view to other people on here, wow!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 06:59:06 PM
For me, the problem with nation states and the EU is the problem of power - the power to force people to do what they don't want to do or to punish anyone who disagrees or fails in their "duties."

If all "governments" did was administer the public mechanisms, provide the facilities and services we all need and generally work for society as a whole without showing grace and favour to a vanishingly small few, then I'd be for them, on the whole. Unfortunately, "government officials" at all levels see themselves as rulers, with  rights and privileges denied to the rest of us, like modern feudalists, and so I cannot and will not willingly support or bow down before any of them.

A body of people who can funnel untold millions into the coffers of a few lackeys whilst at the same time grinding the majority into the dust just don't deserve my loyalty, obedience or respect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 February, 2016, 07:56:35 PM
You're not a troll or a fool OT. You have strongly held views which a lot of us on the forum politically don't agree with. You are.entitled to postulate these views and indeed comment on views contrary to your own. The downside is that you'll get a barrage.of rebuttals and alternate points of view. The joys of Internet discussion forums. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 08:04:42 PM
Thanks Z, I am more then happy to have a debate and for people to disagree with me, they may even be right! I just don't understand some people's rudeness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 05 February, 2016, 08:13:04 PM
On a side note - and the terminology I'm about to question has already been used in this discussion - why are Brits living abroad 'ex-pats' while foreigners living here are immigrants?  Shouldn't ex-pats be termed immigrants too?  (Or, from our point of view, emigrants.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 08:14:31 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 08:16:23 PM
It's all down to the people who frame the arguments. Linguistic precision is not generally welcome in propaganda.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 February, 2016, 08:18:34 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 05 February, 2016, 08:13:04 PM
On a side note - and the terminology I'm about to question has already been used in this discussion - why are Brits living abroad 'ex-pats' while foreigners living here are immigrants?  Shouldn't ex-pats be termed immigrants too?  (Or, from our point of view, emigrants.)
I'm not an expert but my personal view is that they are the same thing. So just call brits living abroad immigrants for all I care.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2016, 08:56:39 PM
Whenever you read a headline with a word like "immigrant," "homosexual," "Conservative" or "terrorist" (for example) in it, replace it with "human being" and see if it still makes sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 February, 2016, 09:02:56 PM
If you take all the Brit's out of the area of Spain that they live in, then that area would collapse financially. It's been mentioned by the Spanish leaders of those areas, in a few interviews on the radio that I've heard.

As for the EU, it wastes money hand over fist and hasn't had the books passed fit, since it started. If this was a company, I would expect to see all the leaders on trial and in jail.

It has its good points and it has its bad points. You choose which side you would prefer.

Personally I'd like to see it ripped apart at the seams and rebuilt with the people's wishes and not in the nest feathering politicians way.

I mean what fucking company up sticks, with everything they've got and moves up the road every month for a few days and does the same to go back. Every month, sheesh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 February, 2016, 09:52:29 PM
TTIP is the EU's future, not open and accountable democratic processes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 February, 2016, 10:03:26 PM
I'm an Anglo Scot born in Scotland raised in England so here's my tuppenny bit.

Surely history must play a part in this. England, a protestant Nation spent the past 400 years fighting centralizing European Powers the vast majority of whom were catholic. The fear of invasion became a lasting worry for of England the legacy of which can be attested to in the forts that ring these islands shores.This gave England a particular identity that tended to stress individual Liberty from the State, self reliance and thanks to the Normans, Bloody Queen Mary and Oliver Cromwell a deep mistrust of big Government. Pompous  ' Little Englanders' some Englishmen must be but these 'little Englanders' saw off the two deliberately genocidal societies that came to menace Europe-Nazi Germany and the USSR. These were achieved within living memory yet that merely reinforces the knowledge that England could be threatened by invasion from the near continent. The threat from 'over there' never quite recedes in the English mind set since events like the Armada, the French Revolution and WW2 have reinforced it, century upon century, year after year strengthening the sense of English difference to it's neighbours.

So an organization like the EU would never be met with joy amongst certain Englishmen. It would seem to be, in their minds, just another attempt to achieve a centralizing European power by stealth this time commanded by Bureaucrats from Brussels rather than Panzer divisions or Communists. Euro skeptics might not care for the finer points of the European debate that reform is possible if very difficult etc but they don't have to care or understand it. Englishmen know what they don't like -and they don't like Europe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 February, 2016, 10:15:28 PM
Some of that is close to the mark with this Englishman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 February, 2016, 10:37:35 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 05 February, 2016, 09:52:29 PM
TTIP is the EU's future, not open and accountable democratic processes.

Given the Tory's enthusiastic support for TTIP, presumably it's an 'independent' UK's future too.

As to IAMTHESYSTEM's cogent observation, I'm sure there's more thsn a grain of truth there, but as an outsider from a far less diverse culture I don't recognise the pluralist inclusive England that I see whenever I'm over there.  I suspect dislike is of a specific idea of Europe created by relentless media,  rather than Europe itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 05 February, 2016, 10:56:03 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 February, 2016, 10:03:26 PM
I'm an Anglo Scot born in Scotland raised in England so here's my tuppenny bit.

Surely history must play a part in this. England, a protestant Nation spent the past 400 years fighting centralizing European Powers the vast majority of whom were catholic. The fear of invasion became a lasting worry for of England the legacy of which can be attested to in the forts that ring these islands shores.This gave England a particular identity that tended to stress individual Liberty from the State, self reliance and thanks to the Normans, Bloody Queen Mary and Oliver Cromwell a deep mistrust of big Government. Pompous  ' Little Englanders' some Englishmen must be but these 'little Englanders' saw off the two deliberately genocidal societies that came to menace Europe-Nazi Germany and the USSR. These were achieved within living memory yet that merely reinforces the knowledge that England could be threatened by invasion from the near continent. The threat from 'over there' never quite recedes in the English mind set since events like the Armada, the French Revolution and WW2 have reinforced it, century upon century, year after year strengthening the sense of English difference to it's neighbours.

So an organization like the EU would never be met with joy amongst certain Englishmen. It would seem to be, in their minds, just another attempt to achieve a centralizing European power by stealth this time commanded by Bureaucrats from Brussels rather than Panzer divisions or Communists. Euro skeptics might not care for the finer points of the European debate that reform is possible if very difficult etc but they don't have to care or understand it. Englishmen know what they don't like -and they don't like Europe.

Did you cut and paste this twaddle from some Britain First thing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2016, 12:02:54 AM
I think Europe's great, just like everywhere else. It's the tits in charge I don't care for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 06 February, 2016, 08:29:18 AM
Personally, my main concern about leaving the EU is mainly around the Habitat and Birds Directives. I can't see areas that have been protected through ratification of these Directives faring well without some obligation to protect them, as if they are downgraded to national status with the best will in the world they won't have the same status. This connects to the way agriculture currently operates in my fringe area of the UK- a lot of farms only exist with EU subsidies, so without them livelihoods will disappear and relatively small holdings will be consumed by bigger enterprises or developers that without robust regulation might not be too concerned with conservation. Not that many landowners or developers give a shite now, but I'm sure you get my point.

See also the effect of having a border with an EU country that had ratified the Waste Directive long before the UK.

So I'm voting in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 06 February, 2016, 09:39:54 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 05 February, 2016, 10:56:03 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 February, 2016, 10:03:26 PM
I'm an Anglo Scot born in Scotland raised in England so here's my tuppenny bit.

Surely history must play a part in this. England, a protestant Nation spent the past 400 years fighting centralizing European Powers the vast majority of whom were catholic. The fear of invasion became a lasting worry for of England the legacy of which can be attested to in the forts that ring these islands shores.This gave England a particular identity that tended to stress individual Liberty from the State, self reliance and thanks to the Normans, Bloody Queen Mary and Oliver Cromwell a deep mistrust of big Government. Pompous  ' Little Englanders' some Englishmen must be but these 'little Englanders' saw off the two deliberately genocidal societies that came to menace Europe-Nazi Germany and the USSR. These were achieved within living memory yet that merely reinforces the knowledge that England could be threatened by invasion from the near continent. The threat from 'over there' never quite recedes in the English mind set since events like the Armada, the French Revolution and WW2 have reinforced it, century upon century, year after year strengthening the sense of English difference to it's neighbours.

So an organization like the EU would never be met with joy amongst certain Englishmen. It would seem to be, in their minds, just another attempt to achieve a centralizing European power by stealth this time commanded by Bureaucrats from Brussels rather than Panzer divisions or Communists. Euro skeptics might not care for the finer points of the European debate that reform is possible if very difficult etc but they don't have to care or understand it. Englishmen know what they don't like -and they don't like Europe.

Did you cut and paste this twaddle from some Britain First thing?

Ah on the button. Calm yourself sir for this is merely my observations on my fellow countrymen. It is  difficult. My head says stay but my heart says it's probably time to leave. Brussels for all it's faults was going to try and restrain the worst excesses of the square mile which is only a good thing in my book but having EU Commissioners pushing for a joint foreign policy, apparently without any consultation with the European public does seem a bit far as I'm concerned. Power does ride hard for itself sometimes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 February, 2016, 01:03:19 PM
Mikey makes an excellent point about the Birds and Habitats Directives. I recently did a job where impact on sloblands was a major issue and it was seriously impressive the way the Council trod so carefully around SACs - in total contrast with the way they treated other zoning. Our old Wildlife Acts stressed balance with the concerns of landowners (read: developers) - the EU directives assert the primacy of the needs of wildlife within SACs.  It's somewhere the EU has had a hugely positive effect, but would probably have been politically impossible solely at a national level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 February, 2016, 01:58:35 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 05 February, 2016, 10:37:35 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 05 February, 2016, 09:52:29 PM
TTIP is the EU's future, not open and accountable democratic processes.

Given the Tory's enthusiastic support for TTIP, presumably it's an 'independent' UK's future too.

It's a trade agreement specific to the USA and the EU.
At least, I presume it is, given the wording of what little details have emerged about this binding legal trade agreement we aren't getting a vote on and can never withdraw from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 February, 2016, 02:09:53 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 06 February, 2016, 08:29:18 AMPersonally, my main concern about leaving the EU is mainly around the Habitat and Birds Directives.
There's quite a lot of stuff along those lines where the UK is being 'forced' to do something against 'its' wishes, by which I mean the worst excesses of Tory government are knocked back slightly. I suspect if we left the EU under a Labour-led government, things wouldn't be quite so bad. But under a Tory one, God only knows what state we'd be left in, bar rich people who, naturally, would be fine. One thing's pretty certain: there won't be a UK for much more than a decade if we do vote out. And perhaps that'll suit people just fine. But an isolationist country of 50+ million people, few natural resources, and diminishing diversity in industry doesn't exactly strike me as a savvy way forward.

As for the EU itself, I agree with those who believe it needs huge reform. But then perhaps the UK should attempt to instigate that. Get into the driving seat, in the manner many EU nations have been asking for a good long time now, rather than behaving like a petulant child, flinging its toys away when demands aren't met or exceeded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 February, 2016, 02:12:45 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 06 February, 2016, 01:58:35 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 05 February, 2016, 10:37:35 PM
Quote from: Scolaighe Ó'Bear on 05 February, 2016, 09:52:29 PM
TTIP is the EU's future, not open and accountable democratic processes.

Given the Tory's enthusiastic support for TTIP, presumably it's an 'independent' UK's future too.

It's a trade agreement specific to the USA and the EU.
At least, I presume it is, given the wording of what little details have emerged about this binding legal trade agreement we aren't getting a vote on and can never withdraw from.

Indeed, but it's clearly something of which the current UK government approve, so you'd imagine it's an agreement you'd see replicated or at least aspired to on a UK/US basis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 February, 2016, 08:40:11 PM
Staggering to watch a neo-Nazi organisation opposed on the streets of my city today, and then watch social media and comment threads full of support for them, at a rate of about 10 to 1. Worse to see the same decades-old excuses trotted out, like something out of a history book.  Is this crap ever going to go away?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 February, 2016, 10:25:32 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 February, 2016, 02:09:53 PM
But under a Tory one, God only knows what state we'd be left in, bar rich people who, naturally, would be fine.

The EU has done more for workers' rights in the last twenty-odd years than every UK political party and trade union put together. Pay very careful attention to the 'out' proponents who talk about making the UK economy 'more competitive' because what they mean by that is 'more like America'.

Let that sink in for a minute.

No sick pay. No maternity leave. The ability of managers to fire you at will. No upper limit on your weekly working hours. Ten days' annual leave.

I haven't had a 'proper' job for six years, but my work/life balance significantly improved over the decade or so preceding that, largely due to EU-mandated improvements in the treatment of employees.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 11:43:58 AM
Just what Jim said there. If we left We'd be jumping on the local bus back to the Victorian era on to the high speed express. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:06:38 PM
"Back to the Victorian era" oh! please! And we'll all have scurvy!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 12:09:16 PM
Yep the NHS, Public health information, decent wages and education arrest that sort of thing.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:14:41 PM
What all because we leave the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 12:25:11 PM
Do you want to be left alone in a rump English/Welsh state (with NI thrown in and its associate political nematodal governing class). All under the care of a permanent conservative government, who's only aim is to perpetuate the wealth maximization of the class from which it derives. Good luck if you're of the poor or middling sort or if you are ill or hungry. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:38:50 PM
But we are already living under a permanent conservative government! M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 12:45:29 PM
You are also living within a supra-national political construct (The EU) which has strictly defined social and economic legislation (a lot of which is beneficial to the vast majority of us who didn't pop out of Mater with a silver spoon inserted fully between our lips).
David pork rodgerer and his merry bunch still have to accept and implement the laws i alluded to.
If there was an exit, things (bad as they are now) would guickly get a lot worse. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 01:01:38 PM
Would that be the same EU that has imposed severe austerity, suffering and pain onto millions of its citizens, all in the name of competitiveness?

Look Z, you're a good guy and I totally respect your views and I am happy to concede that the EU does some good things. For me it's a balance between UK and EU sovereignty and I think it's shifted too much towards the EU. Cheers, Mike.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 01:08:50 PM
Just putting my view across. Like many others here, a lot of what is currently happening in the EU causes me some dismay, but (there's always a but) it is infinatly preferable to what lies in wait for us outside if it. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 February, 2016, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:38:50 PMBut we are already living under a permanent conservative government! M
Not yet, but we're in a position where it's hard to see how Labour could win a majority in 2020. Even a Labour/SNP coalition or supply/demand agreement is a huge stretch, given the way the media goes nuts whenever anyone suggests the Scots might have a sniff of the Cabinet.

Now add in the current government's attempts to declaw the Lords, the boundary changes that will work significantly in their favour, and the way in which the government is attempting to change law on party funding. An EU exit will almost certainly trigger a second Scottish referendum, at which point 2020 or 2025 will not mean we have a permanent Conservative government, but a situation where it would be nigh on impossible to oust them.

It's interesting to note Jim's points. The UK is clearly torn between people who genuinely believe the US model is the way forward, and those who would prefer something more Scandinavian. The two sides simply have incompatible ideologies, and so lots of people are going to be pissed off one way or the other. Personally, I'd sooner the UK remain inside the EU and push heavily for reform of the shit bits, while we keep the good bits (not least worker rights). The reality is the country's been heading in the other direction since Thatcher (who, today, it's claimed would not have wanted to leave the EU—probably accurate, given that she also thought privatisation of Royal Mail was a crazy idea).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 07 February, 2016, 02:34:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 February, 2016, 01:58:23 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:38:50 PMBut we are already living under a permanent conservative government! M

Not yet, but we're in a position where it's hard to see how Labour could win a majority in 2020.

conservatives in power since 1979
labour win in 2020 wont change that
labour win in 1997 didnt
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 07 February, 2016, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 12:06:38 PM
"Back to the Victorian era" oh! please! And we'll all have scurvy!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35380716

pj
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 February, 2016, 10:12:46 PM
Yes, well, you can prove anything with facts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 10:16:55 PM
Yes and we are in the EU but if we leave everybody will get it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 February, 2016, 10:25:55 PM
There you go then! The Tories and wanting to exit Europe gives you scurvy :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 February, 2016, 10:30:07 PM
  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 February, 2016, 10:29:03 AM
Yes Cf according to Old Tankie. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 08 February, 2016, 11:18:12 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/91sn32Q.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 February, 2016, 12:31:08 PM
Yep! That's me!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 08 February, 2016, 12:45:15 PM
Did that cloud blow over from Europe OT? Z ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 February, 2016, 12:52:12 PM
I don't know Z, my sense of direction was never any good! But I'll happily admit to raging against the storm!! I'll get these old legs of mine working again some day.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2016, 12:56:20 PM
Cumulonimbys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2016, 01:21:43 PM
Oh, well played, sir.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 February, 2016, 01:31:31 PM
I had to look that up! And I am still not sure if it is an insult although I'm guessing it is!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2016, 01:38:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 08 February, 2016, 01:31:31 PM
I had to look that up! And I am still not sure if it is an insult although I'm guessing it is!  :)

Not one aimed at you, Tankie.  Amusing myself at the expense of the human condition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 February, 2016, 01:40:42 PM
No problem!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rogue Earthlet on 09 February, 2016, 12:09:34 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 07 February, 2016, 01:08:50 PM
Just putting my view across. Like many others here, a lot of what is currently happening in the EU causes me some dismay, but (there's always a but) it is infinatly preferable to what lies in wait for us outside if it. Z

I was a europhile but have had doubts for a while, and then my mind was made up by the stomping on Greece. How Ireland, Portugal and Spain were treated was bad enough, but with Greece the EU stepped outside of humanity. Google Greek debt and you'll see there were concerns about the countries finances in the nineties, yet German and French banks kept lending it more. Why? Because the loans were short term, so as long as Greece repaid banks made a profit and it was bonuses for bankers. When Greek debt reached the stage where it couldn't repay, the banks demanded the EU give them the money, from tax payers, and then chase Greece for the debt. The EU should have told the banks to get lost, but instead it gave them the cash, then told Greece it must repay, and make brutal spending cuts and raise taxes. People are dying in Greece because of lack of medical care, thanks to cuts to their health service. Syriza had given help to those who couldn't pay their mortgage, and last December the EU demanded this help was withdrawn so the banks could repossess their homes.
That's the ugly beast the EU has become, and I want nothing more to do with it, so I'll be voting to leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2016, 07:32:34 AM
Quote from: Rogue Earthlet on 09 February, 2016, 12:09:34 AM
How Ireland, Portugal and Spain were treated was bad enough, but with Greece the EU stepped outside of humanity.

I don't blame the EU in Ireland's case.  Our banks went mental and our government gleefully assisted them.  We're paying back their debts now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2016, 09:09:50 AM
Iceland's imprisoning the bankers who demolished their economy. The EU's worshipping the bankers who did the same to Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus (whose prime minister was basically made to wait in another room while bankers carved his country up), etc.
.
Rescue the EU from the bankers, then it might be worth something. Until then, it's just a monstrous financial rape engine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2016, 10:38:29 AM
The whole financial crisis thing is too complex to even begin discussing on my tea break except to note that the UK isn't in the Eurozone, so many of those ECB issues don't directly apply to supporting a Brexit (feck me what a word) - but I do agree that Greece has been treated very shabbily indeed, even while accepting that many of its underlying problems were its own fault (as with Ireland). However I'd argue that things could well be worse without the EU (if not the Euro) - Greece at the sole mercy of the international money markets would be in a much worse position now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 February, 2016, 10:53:03 AM
Quote from: Rogue Earthlet on 09 February, 2016, 12:09:34 AMThat's the ugly beast the EU has become, and I want nothing more to do with it, so I'll be voting to leave.
Are you going to vote to leave the UK, too? Our government demanded significantly more from Iceland than legally entitled to, because councils and individuals had stupidly sunk ridiculous amounts of money into Icesave without performing anything remotely close to due diligence. And then the Tories are now busy building on Labour's using taxpayer money to bail out British banks by selling everything that's now state-owned at a massive loss to their mates, adding to nationwide cuts that leave the poorest and most needy in appalling situations.

I agree that the EU acted abhorrently towards Greece, but to leave purely on that basis would be like quitting the EU because they cut disability benefits, while our own government's doing much the same. And given the other protections we'll probably lose (human and worker rights), it's a dangerous gamble.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2016, 09:09:50 AMIceland's imprisoning the bankers who demolished their economy.
Most of them haven't been imprisoned. Those that have mostly got sentences that won't affect them significantly. Many are under basic house arrest. The Icelandic economy remains in free-fall, with the kind of capital controls you'd more expect of somewhere like Cuba.

I was there over the holidays, and intended to close my account there (from when I lived in Reykjavik). I was told I could not transfer money to my UK account without an invoice. In other words, no transfers allowed unless you have a bill to pay—and even then, being able to transfer funds would not be guaranteed. Buying foreign currency also still has major restrictions. (My workaround, fortunately, was to close the account and simultaneously convert the money to Sterling, but that was only possible because of the relatively low balance that remained.)

Family in Iceland have been hit hard. Most of the country has. Yet people here continue to perpetuate the myth that the country is doing fabulously, when it really isn't. (In fact, many of the same people who caused the mess are now in government. And, amazingly, the ex-PM is now EiC of the country's one remaining major newspaper.)

I love Iceland, but the reality is very different from the PR, and the various reposted crap spreading across social networks like an untruth virus. Some of the best reading on this is What is really going on in Iceland (https://studiotendra.com/2012/12/29/what-is-actually-going-on-in-iceland/), which is from 2012. His piece on the trainwreck regarding the crowdsourced constitution (https://studiotendra.com/2013/03/29/icelands-crowd-sourced-constitution-is-dead/) is worth a read. Also, notably, the current Icelandic government killed stone-dead EU ascension talks without giving people a say, thereby wasting even more money. (The general consensus from Icelanders was that they probably wouldn't have voted yes, but would have liked to complete talks and get the offer first. My reading is that the main stumbling blocks were in fact currency and fishing—and even the former's something few Icelanders care about these days, which wouldn't be surprising when you consider the country's attempt to adopt the Canadian dollar at one point.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
I agree there's a lot of bullshit flying about concerning Iceland. The latest pile is that the Icelandic government has forgiven all debts (mortgages etc.). I really wanted this to be true but further investigation led me to conclude that it is, sadly, bollocks. It seems to source back to a 2008 article about how a debt jubilee/debt forgiveness could work in a country like Iceland. It's a neat idea, but too many of the 0.01% would lose out - and, of course, that would never be tolerated.
.
At least the Icelandic courts seem to be trying to do something about the bankers, or at least give the appearance of being seen to be trying, but the rest of the world seems to think it's okay for a small elite to hold entire countries to ransom over pretend money.
.
At some point we're going to have to decide what's more important, life or loot. At the moment, most governments think it's loot - so that's what they serve. I don't think that's acceptable and, furthermore, while the current mindset exists, I don't think any government adhering to it is legitimate - whether that be a local parish council or the U.N. They're all illegitimate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 February, 2016, 12:11:15 PM
Mortgages and other debts were one of the big issues in the country, since many of these things were tied heavily to foreign currency. That's fine when your currency is doing well (such as when you were lucky to get 120ISK per GBP around 2005), but not so much when your currency tanks (to the level of about 220ISK per GBP at the worst—it's of late hovering between 180 and 200). Many people lost homes. The rich soldiered on, as ever.

As for the bankers, I should note that doing something is better than effectively doing nothing. What always gets me is the daily crap I see online that Iceland's somehow transformed into a utopia with bankers being lobbed into jail, resulting in everything being all right now. Broadly speaking, very little has in fact changed. And the government that was trying hard under appalling conditions to effect changes of course got voted out in a reactionary swing to the right, as always seems to happen when money's tight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 February, 2016, 12:50:30 PM
Thanks for your insight. It's always good to listen to someone with first-hand experience.
.
I can understand why people want to believe Iceland has sorted itself out. They want to believe because it would mean that somewhere out there exists at least one government which puts the people first. Because if there's one government doing that it means others have the potential to do the same.
.
But that's never going to happen.
.
People want to believe in government because it's so easy. Someone else will ride into town wearing a big white hat and make things right for everyone. All they have to do is pick the correct hero and vote for him/her and all their troubles will be over. Like those folk out there waiting for Jesus to come back.
.
But that ain't gonna' happen.
.
It's easier to sit back and wait than to sort yourself out, easier to give over the running of your country, your community, your family and you to others than to take responsibility yourself.
.
But people wait, and wait, and wait. And all the time, inch by inch, policy by policy, legislation by legislation, what little we have left is stolen, right by right, freedom by freedom, choice by choice, penny by penny, until there's nothing left to do, nothing left to say, nowhere left to go, nothing left to spend. And the sad part is, the part that truly breaks my heart, is that most people believe this is the only way.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 February, 2016, 02:23:32 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYtIbD9WYAEY-pX.jpg)

Hairy Hunt.

What he has done today won't be forgotten for a looooong time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 February, 2016, 02:27:18 PM
Slap a pair of specs and a mug of whatever-you're-having-yourself on that nightmare and it's CFM's self-portrait avatar! Coinkydink?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 February, 2016, 02:59:36 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 February, 2016, 02:23:32 PMWhat he has done today won't be forgotten for a looooong time.
Laying the groundwork to kill the NHS. Public support is dropping rapidly. The government presumably hopes that by 2020 there will be enough support for privatisation to 'save' the NHS that has failed despite the 'best efforts' of the Conservatives.

I suspect that unless by some miracle Labour (probably backed by the SNP) squeaks in, the NHS (and probably the BBC) will cease to exist in their current forms by the end of the 2020–2025 term.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 February, 2016, 03:00:36 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 11 February, 2016, 02:27:18 PM
Slap a pair of specs and a mug of whatever-you're-having-yourself on that nightmare and it's CFM's self-portrait avatar! Coinkydink?

Right... that's just the incentive I need to change my avatar  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2016, 03:02:44 PM
Contracts cannot be imposed on anyone. The very nature of a contract is that it must be voluntary, otherwise it's a command, an edict. Is this what our "government" is now? Our commander, our boss?
.
Forgive my bluntness, but fuck that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 11 February, 2016, 03:34:35 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 February, 2016, 02:23:32 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYtIbD9WYAEY-pX.jpg)

That's fake. It's just an old photo of Pat Sharp with Hunt's face stuck on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 February, 2016, 03:38:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2016, 03:02:44 PMContracts cannot be imposed on anyone.
My understanding of this is junior doctors leap from job to job extremely regularly, and re-sign contracts often. So this means that if the contract is enforced for new sign-ups, it will become what most junior doctors 'agree' to regardless. Their other options are to quit, go overseas, or flee to Scotland or Wales, which mysteriously appears to not be having the same kinds of issues, presumably due to devolution and non-psychotic people in charge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 February, 2016, 04:05:17 PM
Cider drinking, mullet wearing art competition geniuses are an essential component of our forum. Stay strong CFM. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 February, 2016, 04:32:11 PM
I.P., that's true. However, the government doesn't have a monopoly on contracts. They can be proposed by individual hospitals, local "authorities" or even between doctors and patients, for instance.
.
"My way or the highway" is no basis for honest contracts - even those supposedly proposed on our behalf - and in this case seems to be a weapon designed to starve public medicine of new doctors. Private medical facilities will offer better contracts, of course, making them appear preferable.
.
There's more than one way to privatise a health service and more than one weapon in the privatisers' arsenal.
.
They offer a shitty choice or a less shitty choice and call it democracy or freedom. It's neither.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 11 February, 2016, 05:21:46 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 11 February, 2016, 03:34:35 PM
That's fake. It's just an old photo of Pat Sharp with Hunt's face stuck on it.

Yeah...

(http://modny.spb.ru/sites/default/files/imagecache/article_teaser/Pat-Sharp.jpg)

Shame. There are no researchable pictures of the young Hunt, but given he's a contemporary of the Bullingdon boyz it's a bit of a relief. Who knows what you'd turn up...

(https://49.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3kmw0tMrE1r946klo1_400.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2016, 08:49:09 AM
From Avaaz:

Dear friends,

They bomb schools, hospitals, even wedding parties. What Saudi Arabia is doing in Yemen is disgusting -- and they're doing it with weapons they buy from Europe, the US, and Canada. But in just a few days we can do the unthinkable -- win a landmark decision that could stem the flow of weapons to the Saudis.

The European Parliament is days away from voting on a proposed EU-wide arms embargo -- but under heavy Saudi lobbying, some politicians are wavering.

Now more than ever, these leaders need to see that people from every corner of the Earth are looking to them to stand up and say "NO" to Saudi Arabia and their atrocities. Sign the urgent petition calling for an arms embargo -- we need to show the EU champions overwhelming public support:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/saudi_arms_deal_uk (https://secure.avaaz.org/en/saudi_arms_deal_uk)

This is how we can help end wars -- by cutting off the supplies that fuel them. Calling for an embargo would have been unthinkable a few years ago because of western governments' tight relationship with the regime, but this total disregard for human rights has made it impossible for them to look the other way. Europe could vote for an embargo in days -- they just need to feel the public is watching and cares.

I'm not a fan of government, as you know, but as we're stuck with it (for now, at least) we might as well try and make it do something useful from time to time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 February, 2016, 10:17:06 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2016, 08:49:09 AMI'm not a fan of government, as you know, but as we're stuck with it (for now, at least) we might as well try and make it do something useful from time to time.

It's that time of year again - I agree with one of your political comments!  *Opens champagne; sets off fireworks*

Nice one, Sharky, I've signed the petition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2016, 11:33:20 AM
Heh - this is how it begins; one agreement at a time. At this rate, I'll be In Charge in about 37,000 years. Luckily, I'm a very patient man. Bwa ha ha haaaa...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 February, 2016, 12:51:25 PM
I would say it was a conversion on the road to Damascus Shark: Alas the only conversions going on near that benighted city are the living to the dead. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2016, 07:51:21 PM
Seeing as petitions are on the table, consider signing this one to make MPs work Saturdays for no extra pay, seeing as apparently Saturday is part of the regular working week now. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120753)  It's only got 70,000 signatures so far, and needs 100,000 before MPs are forced to bring it up in Parliament.
My one solace in his dismantling of the NHS is that sooner or later, someone who loses a loved one or gets diagnosed with something terminal is going to snap and smash Jeremy Hunt's brains in with a claw hammer, but while we're waiting/preying to Jesus for it to happen, you can try signing this petition calling for a vote of no confidence. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/121152)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2016, 09:36:44 PM
Perhaps there should be a petition to force MPs into working only half a day a week (time to be used exclusively for the filling in of expenses chitties) for double the pay. That way, they can do far less damage and still get to live like the useless pigs in shit they are...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 February, 2016, 09:48:27 AM
The no-confidence vote idea strikes me as a bad idea. It won't happen, obviously. But even if it did, he would win. I really wouldn't want to see anything the Tories would use to claim he has some kind of mandate for all the horrors he's inflicting on doctors and the NHS.

A better one going around was the petition to force Hunt to resume meaningful dialogue with the BMA. Alas, the no-confidence one's sailed past 250,000 signatures now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 10:18:32 AM
I doubt any petition will have much effect. Even if the one to stop supplying Saudi Arabia with weapons succeeds, another way will be found. European arms manufacturers will simply set up proxies, selling tho the U.S. (for example) instead and then on to Saudi Arabia from there.

The main point of these petitions, to my mind, is to communicate to "governments" that the people are getting sick of the way they do things. Even dyed-in-the wool statists, of whom there are a majority, are beginning to realise that democracy is currently little more than a sham - a veil designed to promote the illusion of public control over governmental behaviour and mask the reality of the small special interest groups who really call the shots.

In themselves, individual petitions are fairly meaningless but, taken as a whole, they do put pressure on "governments" to at least think about beginning to consider the needs and desires of the public at large. This can only be a good thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2016, 12:26:00 PM
These sentiments are somewhat at odds with what you've been saying up until now, Sharky.
Myself, I am on record as preferring the claw hammer solution, and if people are marginalised long enough, I'll get to see it implemented.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 12:35:24 PM
Belief in the false god of "government" will not be swept away overnight, nor would such a thing be particularly helpful. Government must be dismantled in stages. First it needs to be exposed for what it is, then tamed towards what it pretends to be, then replaced by public organisations, then devolved to individuals.

Gonna' be a long job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 February, 2016, 01:31:53 PM
I really can't get behind the analogy of government as 'God', sharply. Government as inefficient as it may be is a very real and tangible concept, God is puerile nonsense created to pacify the unimaginative and easily led.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 01:59:48 PM
If I ask a deist to show me "God," my attention will be directed to a flower, an emotion, a sunrise. If I ask a statist to show me "Government," my attention will be directed to a road, a law, a health service. The former are nothing more than the products of fairly well understood physical and biological processes needing no supernatural entity to force their existence. The latter are nothing more than the products of fairly well understood human interactions and cooperations needing no supernatural entity to force their existence. I don't need God to force the sun to rise for me and my society any more than I need government to force me into cooperating with other individuals for my personal and wider societal benefit. The only things those people who believe in God or "government" bring to the table is violence. "Do it this way, or else..." Both are abstract concepts with no intrinsic power or tangible form.

Pointing to a road and saying, "because government" is as simplistic as pointing to a flower and saying, "because God."

To me, it is "government" that is puerile nonsense created to pacify the unimaginative and easily led.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 05:43:55 PM
Because roads and national health services of course evolve naturally over time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 06:01:57 PM
And of course the only way to maintain national health services and roads is to turn them over to a small group of profit-oriented bullies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 06:07:46 PM
I'd suggest that the best way to manage them would be to have democratically elected representatives who we can remove from power when they lie to us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 06:08:57 PM
Yeah, and how's that working out for you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 February, 2016, 08:27:31 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?

I hear the view from the shed is lovely this time of year...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 February, 2016, 08:29:18 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?
No but have you ever drank baileys from a shoe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 08:42:20 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?

No. I have never seen a moonbase, either, but that does not mean such a thing is impossible.

My core argument is not about how things could be organised but how they are currently organised. It is my position that the current structure is inefficient, undemocratic and harmful. Your counter-argument seems to be that my position is wrong simply because I do not put forward an alternative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:56:29 PM
As someone once said "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others".

I don't expect you to put forward an alternative, Sharky. My big concern is that no-one has ever, in the complete history of mankind, ever come up with a functioning alternative.  We've experimented and ended up with catastrophic failures. 

I'm happy to consider an alternative and agree entirely that the current system is in need of severe improvement. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2016, 09:33:43 PM
I've been a UK citizen all my life, but I'd quite like to try democracy one day to see if it would work here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 10:03:00 PM
There have been functioning alternatives such as The Paris Commune of 1871, the Syndicalist Unions of Europe and North and South America from about the 1890s onward, the beginnings of the 1917 Russian Revolution and, perhaps most successfully, the Spanish Revolution of 1936.

Granted, none of these lasted very long - crushed by statists of one stripe or another - but they suggest that anarchist or agorist societies are perfectly functional in every way. The "catastrophic failures" always occur due to elitist statists sending in the troops and/or waging economic warfare on the anarchists.

The best example of anarchism in action in the modern world I can think of is this very thing I'm using right now - the internet. No government forces me to use it or forces me not to (though they do try to control it). I can go to any message board I like and say whatever I like; if I act against the local rules of those message boards in any way I can be booted off by local moderators. No police, no fines, no courts*. I can buy stuff from countless online stores, each of which has its own rules of conduct and dispute resolution processes. I frequent those message boards and stores which I believe treat me fairly and avoid those which do not. There is no "virtual government" because it is not needed. Yes, the internet is not the real world, merely an interface, but from it, and from the above real-world examples, lessons and ideas for moving towards a better society for all can be studied, adapted and implemented. There are as many solutions as there are people willing to invent them, not just one solution to be imposed in some overnight revolution.

The only revolution worth anything is a revolution of the mind - to begin considering the idea that individual freedoms and responsibilities are more beneficial to society than privileges and obligations enforced upon everyone under threat of violence by a small ruling class.

Only a revolution of the mind can lead to an evolution of society. Carrying on the way we are is leading to stagnation at best and de-evolution at worst.

*Of course, sometimes real-world police do, and indeed should, get involved where actual loss, harm or damage is caused - but when one considers the trillions of interactions occurring across the internet every day, these involvements (just like in real-life) are proportionally very rare indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2016, 10:54:59 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 15 February, 2016, 08:29:18 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?
No but have you ever drank baileys from a shoe?

...says the man who mocked me for making a Boosh reference in 2016.

I like Noel, though; I heard an interview with him recently and he seems a really nice chap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 10:56:50 PM
The internet isn't an anarchy, it's just not regulated.  It's infrastructure is owned and controlled by powerful individuals, they just aren't elected and they don't answer to you. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 February, 2016, 11:14:00 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2016, 10:54:59 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 15 February, 2016, 08:29:18 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 08:13:21 PM
Ever seen a functioning alternative?
No but have you ever drank baileys from a shoe?

...says the man who mocked me for making a Boosh reference in 2016.

I like Noel, though; I heard an interview with him recently and he seems a really nice chap.
Well I bet he told you to stay away from the occult. Very bad for the indigestion apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2016, 11:26:58 PM
A lot of people call me occult, for some reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 16 February, 2016, 01:28:17 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2016, 11:26:58 PM
A lot of people call me occult, for some reason.

(http://i.imgur.com/XV6q7Ti.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 08:52:01 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2016, 10:56:50 PM
The internet isn't an anarchy, it's just not regulated.  It's infrastructure is owned and controlled by powerful individuals, they just aren't elected and they don't answer to you. 



Lack of centrally imposed regulation (government) is anarchy. Individual websites regulate themselves locally, which is anarchy. The infrastructure is a mixture of private and publicly owned assets, from servers to ISPs to 'phone lines to individual computers. I was, however, referring to content and interaction rather than infrastructure - sorry for not making that clear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 09:06:24 AM
Nope, you've lost me.  I don't see how content (ie. Activity) on the internet is any different to activity (i.e. Content) in the 'real world'.  Both environments are regulated and partly privately and 'publicly' owned, both environments host a mix of commercial and non-commercial activity within the restrictions of regulation and ownership.

I'm no freer to act without state-sanctioned consequence 'here' than I am 'there', it just happens that the things I do 'here' are of less importance and have less impact, so no-one really cares. If I chose to do something illegal online that had the same impact as something I could do in the real world, I would expect a visit from officers of the state. The internet is regulated, it's regulated by the laws of the states in which its users and owners reside. When I can use the interent to remotely send my drone to Calais for some cheap plonk, you can be damned sure I'll still need a licence, tax and insurance. Driving around Liberty City in GTA, not so much- but only because there are few real-world consequences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 10:40:32 AM
That's my point. There is no difference between content/activity online and in the real world. The difference is in regulation. If I wanted to set up a shop or library in the real world, I'd need to buy a property and get permissions and licenses from, and pay taxes to, the ruling class do so. If I want to set up a website (the online equivalent of a shop or library) then I still might have to pay for hosting (unless I have my own dedicated server) but I don't need to apply for permission or licenses to the King of the Internet. I can trade with other web users in bitcoin, barter or even give content away for free with no Virtual Monarch extracting taxes from my interactions. If my online activities cause actual loss, harm or damage then real world law can be brought to bear through real world courts. Real world courts do not require government backing (except in police states), only the faith of the communities they serve.

I disagree with the idea that online content/activity has little importance in the real world. There are many instances of real world injustices being brought to light over the internet. The Arab Spring comes to mind. It is also a great tool for exposing lies and propaganda. For example,during a speech given on the floor of the U.S. Senate last February, GOP Senator Jim Inhofe presented a series of photos which he claimed showed Russian troops advancing in the Ukraine. Inhofe used the photos as justification for his senate bill, which would authorize the U.S. to provide "lethal military aid" to the Ukraine. The photos Inhofe used, however, were not what he claimed. Two were taken in 2008, during Russia's war with Georgia and the other, which was taken in October, shows Russian-backed separatists in the Luhansk town of Krasniy Luch. Without independent internet researchers uncovering this fact, Inhofe might well have got away with it, especially given the bias of the MSM.

Knowledge, they say, is power - and the internet (beneath the piles of Facebookery nonsense) is a wealth of knowledge allowing countless opportunities for innovation, education, cooperation and accountability. It is, in my opinion, one of the greatest social assets in human history. Because of this, it is dangerous to the ruling class - who like nothing better than framing arguments themselves and keeping certain knowledge under wraps. The internet is important and many people do care. You are freer to post your opinions and knowledge on the internet than you are in the real world. If you stand with a sandwich board protesting something and handing out leaflets outside a government building, a police station or a factory, chances are you'll only reach a few people and probably find yourself moved on or even imprisoned. If you take the "official" route and write to your MP, chances are you'll be ignored or fobbed off. No, the internet is of great importance.

When you can use the internet to send your drone to Calais for cheap plonk by remote control, it would make sense for you to have an adequate level of training first (otherwise you might crash your drone, losing it and your plonk, and maybe even causing loss, harm or damage to others)- but this training does not have to be government sanctioned. You could just as easily enroll in a private training course run by experienced drone operators. Given the access to information the internet provides, the best courses will attract the most students and the worst will either fail or improve. Government is not needed to license them - especially given how licenses can be purchased through lobbying and corruption of those in charge of licensing. Organisation does not require government but government requires organisation. Insurance, likewise, does not need state sanction to be prudent. Tax is simply theft, the ruling class demanding a cut of your income under threat of violence.

Your GTA observation is a good one. The vast majority understand the difference between a game and its arena and the wider world. Few people think they can bring GTA rules to everyday motoring on real roads and those who do generally end up smeared all over trees, or their victims do. Similarly, I've never played GTA but I assume that if one plays that game adhering to real world traffic regulations, one wouldn't be very good at it. Footballers do not make a habit of running full pelt down busy streets, slide-tackling pensioners and elbowing people out of the way. People understand that what's acceptable in the game arena is not necessarily acceptable in wider society. That's down to personal responsibility and nothing to do with government control or regulation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 11:44:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 10:03:00 PM
There have been functioning alternatives ... perhaps most successfully, the Spanish Revolution of 1936.

That would be the one that led to four decades of fascist rule then? You have an odd definition of successful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 11:48:49 AM
So it would appear, when taken out of context like that. I believe my next paragraph touches on your observation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 12:28:17 PM
QuoteYou are freer to post your opinions and knowledge on the internet than you are in the real world. If you stand with a sandwich board protesting something and handing out leaflets outside a government building, a police station or a factory, chances are you'll only reach a few people and probably find yourself moved on or even imprisoned.

Apples and oranges. The only circumstance in which the cops (here) would intervene in a personal protest is if I was being obstructive of a thoroughfare, violent or causing significant public offense - none of that can apply to a blog.  If I was to be obstructive or disruptive on the 'net I would have to do it through a DDS or threats of violence, and I would then be pursued and if possible prosecuted. No-one (in Ireland) is going to be arrested or even moved-on for a passive protest - it's only where persistent abuse or physical obstruction enters the picture (as with water protests - and even the the extreme harassment of meter installers was handled by a small exclusion zone around the works).  I fully accept that the internet is powerful, if randomly so, but I just don't see a fundamental difference, other than the elimination of propinquity from association.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 01:48:47 PM
Okay then, some other examples.

You are free to use whichever search engine or website you wish. Government does not force you to use any 'licensed' engine or site. In the real world, you can only use services approved by government.

You are responsible for your own security, with anti-virus and firewall software which you are free to choose as you wish. Your choice is not limited to those approved by government.

You are free to make your own rules on your own website, those rules do not have to be approved by government. Facebook doesn't allow pornography because it would lose members (no pun intended!) and not because some government forbids it.

Fundamental Non Aggression Treaty. No government forces us to not act aggressively towards one another, unlike in real life where government officials and police are routinely aggressive, and by and large the majority of people adhere to this NAT as a matter of personal responsibility.

Free society. Nobody is forced to be here, to contribute or to engage with people or websites they don't want to. In the real world, people are forced to fill in census forms, contribute to things they don't agree with and engage with officials they'd rather have nothing to do with.

The right to privacy. There is no compulsion to give up personal information, unlike in real life where government thinks it has the right to demand any information it wants. You can give out personal information on the web if you want but nobody's going to fine you for refusing.

Free speech.

Non-interventionism. People don't generally interfere with the private lives of fellow internet users, allowing for anonymity and privacy. In real life, governments don't like you being anonymous or private.

The right to broadcast. You can make as many movies or podcasts as you like and upload them to Youtube or a personal server with no need for government permission, censorship or extortion (broadcast license).

Lack of centralised control. There is no Virtual Parliament, no VMPs or Virtual Monarchs to decree how you must and must not behave.

The right to secrecy. You can encrypt your emails, use a Tor Browser or anonymisation software to keep your sensitive communications away from prying eyes. In the real world, governments believe they have the right to bug your 'phone calls, intercept your text messages and open your letters.

Circumvention of regulations you don't agree with. For example, Pirate Bay. (Although these circumventions do exist in the real world as well.)

The right to ignore. You can ignore people you don't like or find intimidating or offensive at the push of a button. Try doing that with Inchmale of the Council.

The right to learn. You can study anything you want and not have to rely on government approved syllabuses or texts or pay a fee for the privilege.

The right to innovate. The internet grew, and continues to evolve, in a spontaneous and uncoordinated, unplanned fashion. No government devised, molded or authorised it and no government can control its continued evolution.

I agree that the internet is not a perfect anarchy (I don't believe there's any such beast) but it is an excellent example of how an anarchic system can work without the meddlesome, predatory and restrictive mechanisms of government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 01:56:32 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 11:44:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 February, 2016, 10:03:00 PM
There have been functioning alternatives ... perhaps most successfully, the Spanish Revolution of 1936.

That would be the one that led to four decades of fascist rule then? You have an odd definition of successful.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 11:48:49 AM
So it would appear, when taken out of context like that. I believe my next paragraph touches on your observation.

Indeed, but I maintain that a revolution that is so quickly and thoroughly swept away is not successful at all - if it doesn't have the physical means and/or popular support to survive it's just a well-meaning but doomed experiment.

(Edit - I can see the discussion has moved on ....  :D)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 02:07:36 PM
So, by that logic, imposed fascism is more successful, and therefore more desirable, than a grass-roots system instituted and run by the people? Might makes right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 16 February, 2016, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 01:48:47 PM
Okay then, some other examples...


Whatevs.  None of that trivial shit has anything to do with people being fed, roads being maintained, children not being sent up chimneys, minority rights being enforced, food not poisoning people, schools not being utter shit, endangered species being protected, or any of the other thousand and one things that actually matter and require central planning and the coercion of authority to stop greedy myopic dickbags stomping all over.  So yeah, the internet is a great example of anarchy if you think fucking 4Chan is equally as beneficial as any of those things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 02:17:39 PM
Don't mean to dismiss your points Sharky, but I haven't got time to address them properly at the mo - but I would make the general observation that you seem to be equating the internet with a single state or society, whereas in fact it is closer to a world of many states and societies - thus this forum, for example, is akin to one 'state of the internet' wherein you are obliged to give a valid E-mail and abide by a CoC to participate - much as  you need to provide data to a real-world state in which you are resident.  It might be an easier choice to rage-quit 2000adonline than the UK, because the consequences are vastly different,  but the choice remains.

Meanwhile, while using the internet for all the purposes you list, you need to reside within the real-world and use real-world infrastructure while doing so,much of stemming from the state and all of it regulated by the state: these are pre-conditions of the internet, and I'd argue that the freedoms that follow are largely an illusion.  Your putative internet trader has to use real world banking to realise their assets, has to pay tax, has to abide by trading standards...Further, if I wish to gaze upon Pamela Anderson's charms on the internet I have to go to considerable effort to prevent my perversion being permanently recorded, whereas in the real world all I have to do is pay cash and use a newsagent a few streets over and no-one is any the wiser.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 02:22:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 02:07:36 PM
So, by that logic, imposed fascism is more successful, and therefore more desirable, than a grass-roots system instituted and run by the people? Might makes right?

Bullshit - stop putting words in my mouth. I never said desirable and  I don't believe might is right.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 02:22:58 PM
I apologise. It was wrong of me to write "more desirable."

I think it's about how one measures success. In terms of longevity, the events in question were certainly not successful. In terms of what can be learned from them, in the fact that they could exist at all, is a measure of some success. Just because something doesn't last very long at first, that doesn't mean it's useless. The first powered flight lasted 12 seconds and covered 120 feet. Less than a century later, Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon (probably).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 02:30:57 PM
In fairness to the 2nd Spanish Republic, it was born in the depths of the Great Depression, and aggressively opposed by the fascist and religious powers of Europe.  To what extent the people could have seen off the nationalist falange and the syndicalists in less hostile times and made a go of their project we'll never know, but reports of the activities of the usual homegrown bullyboys that traipse around after every revolution don't make for happy reading.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 02:31:24 PM
No probs, Tordels. There are obviously many differences between the real and virtual worlds. I would hold up this site as an analogue to a cooperative rather than a nation state and the servers, computers, websites and what have you as analogues to real world infrastructure and services. It is not a direct correlation in any way - merely an example of differing attitudes and exploration of ideas.

And when the bankers abolish cash, which is definitely what they're trying to do next, they'll know exactly what you spend your money on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 04:47:31 PM
You're not wrong there. The number of people I know who now exist almost entirely without cash is amazing - whereas having no access to credit myself, my daily life is almost entirely cash-based, so I find the use of credit cards to buy a cup of coffee or even a pint quite bizarre (although my regular bills are all internetted EFT now, gawds bless the idiot banker who decided that me having a sole-trader business account isn't the same as 'me' having a bank account). That said, seeing the vast sums of undeclared cash that change hands on even a closely-supervised state-funded construction project, I imagine there are huge vested interests in maintaining its existence - especially in a state where politicians live in the pockets of developers, or are such themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 05:18:08 PM
I don't know. What you say about crooked politicians and cash-stuffed envelopes sounds true but - there's always a way around it for the certain few. Anonymous debit cards, perhaps? Buy a card, similar to a 'phone sim, with a few grand on it? Stuff that won't be available to or affordable by the majority. Those who make the rules can more easily break the rules.

But having everyone forced to use digital money is so dangerous. Your pay goes straight into the bank and you can't draw it out to keep a stash in your underpants drawer for emergencies (keep £1,000 in cash in your sock and it's yours; put it in a bank and it can be leveraged to create nine grand or more in loans to other people victims). Tax men and magistrates and any government toady able to just dip in at will. Negative interest rates gnawing away at your deposits. No way of throwing a couple of coppers' worth of change into the charity box. All those overcharging "mistakes" made under direct debits that cost you time and effort to rectify, if you even notice them, will at least double. And the next time a bank needs bailing out, they cut out the government and just take what they want from you. Run afoul of the authorities and they can just switch your account off. Track everything you buy, everywhere you go. No more cash in hand work.

Not good. Not good at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 05:37:54 PM
Quote
You are free to use whichever search engine or website you wish.
You are using the services of largely unregulated corporations, who sell your information to advertisers.

QuoteYou are responsible for your own security, with anti-virus and firewall software which you are free to choose as you wish. Your choice is not limited to those approved by government.
You can purchase software from a variety of companies, who have a vested interest in keeping you afraid.

Quote
You are free to make your own rules on your own website, those rules do not have to be approved by government
You are free to purchase server space.

QuoteNo government forces us to not act aggressively towards one another, unlike in real life where government officials and police are routinely aggressive, and by and large the majority of people adhere to this NAT as a matter of personal responsibility.
Have you used the internet?

QuoteThe right to privacy. There is no compulsion to give up personal information, unlike in real life where government thinks it has the right to demand any information it wants.
Unless you use a search engine. Or go to any website which places cookies on your device.  Or use social media.  Just about everything is tracked and sold to advertisers.

QuoteThe right to broadcast
Purchased services.

Quote
Lack of centralised control.
Other than that of corporations who own the infrastructure and whose services you are purchasing.

Anarchy isn't just a lack of regulating central government.  It's a people without leaders.  The internet has leaders - they're the people whose services you're buying, or the people who are selling your information to advertisers.

This isn't anarchy, this is rampant and unregulated capitalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 06:02:20 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 05:37:54 PM
Quote
You are free to use whichever search engine or website you wish.
You are using the services of largely unregulated corporations, who sell your information to advertisers.

QuoteYou are responsible for your own security, with anti-virus and firewall software which you are free to choose as you wish. Your choice is not limited to those approved by government.
You can purchase software from a variety of companies, who have a vested interest in keeping you afraid.

Quote
You are free to make your own rules on your own website, those rules do not have to be approved by government
You are free to purchase server space.

QuoteNo government forces us to not act aggressively towards one another, unlike in real life where government officials and police are routinely aggressive, and by and large the majority of people adhere to this NAT as a matter of personal responsibility.
Have you used the internet?

QuoteThe right to privacy. There is no compulsion to give up personal information, unlike in real life where government thinks it has the right to demand any information it wants.
Unless you use a search engine. Or go to any website which places cookies on your device.  Or use social media.  Just about everything is tracked and sold to advertisers.

QuoteThe right to broadcast
Purchased services.

Quote
Lack of centralised control.
Other than that of corporations who own the infrastructure and whose services you are purchasing.

Anarchy isn't just a lack of regulating central government.  It's a people without leaders.  The internet has leaders - they're the people whose services you're buying, or the people who are selling your information to advertisers.

This isn't anarchy, this is rampant and unregulated capitalism.

1: There are search engines that don't record information. Any personal information they have about me I'm happy for them to sell. 2000ADonline, for example, thinks I'm a 240 year old male.

2: I use Linux, so have little use for anti-virus or firewall software.

3: Or use a free service.

4: Have you?

5: There are plenty of plug-ins and such to limit/stop this. Also, learn how to protect yourself. It's not rocket surgery.

6: Or free services.

7: Or the Open Source alternatives. (Yes, you generally have to pay to get online but that's the interface between reality and virtuality - the only bit they can monopolise and so, of course, they do.)

Yes, anarchy is from the Greek, prefix an (or a), meaning "not," "the want of," "the absence of," or "the lack of", plus archos, meaning "a ruler," "director", "chief," "person in charge," or "authority." A leader is only a leader to those who follow. It's easy enough to not follow. Strange how you equate the word "leader" with the concept of capitalism.

There is capitalism on the internet but, unlike real life, it's not mandatory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 06:52:13 PM
I don't equate capitalism with the concept of leaders.  I also don't equate anarchy with purchasing services from the small group of people powerful enough to sell it, under terms I can either accept or go without.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 05:37:54 PMThe internet has leaders - they're the people whose services you're buying, or the people who are selling your information to advertisers.


Quote from: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 06:52:13 PM
I don't equate capitalism with the concept of leaders. 

Okay. Um.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2016, 06:52:13 PM
I also don't equate anarchy with purchasing services from the small group of people powerful enough to sell it, under terms I can either accept or go without.

Guess you missed this:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 01:48:47 PM
I agree that the internet is not a perfect anarchy (I don't believe there's any such beast) but it is an excellent example of how an anarchic system can work without the meddlesome, predatory and restrictive mechanisms of government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 07:13:15 PM
Hey Sharky I'm (genuinely) interested in your views on End User Agreements - you often mention that X or Y cannot do something without you having signed a contract - the internet usually requires you to click I AGREE after a huge spiel of small print which nobody reads - but you've signed a contract, so that's fair game?

There are consumer laws to protect us - if I agree to T&Cs which are blatantly unjust because I haven't read the small print, a court can override them - would you say this a good thing, or a controlling state interfering in my willingly signed contract without authority?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2016, 07:21:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 05:18:08 PM
No more cash in hand work.

I sympathise greatly with the problem of all earning, holding and spending being transparent - I've spent the last 5 or 6 years having my every income and outgoing scrutinised and tutted over by my mortgage bank every 4 months or so, with the threat of my payments being increased in line with my 'disposable income', and it has been not a little nightmarish. Trying to create little secret pools of cash for days out and stuff for the kids through all sorts of bizarre transactions and exchanges has been a big part of my life. However, cash-in-hand work is where so much tax evasion and dodgy practices start that I'm not sure I can ever really support it.

For example, a big issue where I'm working at the moment is lads working the night shift for cash-in-hand.  This sounds like a great perk (side from over a grand of untaxed earnings) but because they aren't on the books they can exceed their safe working hours: so you have plant operators on busy city streets that have worked 20 hours a day for 4 or 5 days, with only a couple of hours kip in their cars between 0500 and 0730. No record of the sub-contractor employing them, no problem.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 07:35:26 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 February, 2016, 07:13:15 PM
Hey Sharky I'm (genuinely) interested in your views on End User Agreements - you often mention that X or Y cannot do something without you having signed a contract - the internet usually requires you to click I AGREE after a huge spiel of small print which nobody reads - but you've signed a contract, so that's fair game?

There are consumer laws to protect us - if I agree to T&Cs which are blatantly unjust because I haven't read the small print, a court can override them - would you say this a good thing, or a controlling state interfering in my willingly signed contract without authority?

In my view, all you're doing is clicking acceptance of an agreement, not signing a contract. An agreement has far less force than a contract.

The way it was explained to me:

If you and I make an agreement to go for a walk tomorrow, then all we've done is make a loose arrangement. If, when the time to go for a walk comes and it's raining, or I have a sore leg, or I've changed my mind, either of us can cancel the agreement with no reprisals.

If, on the other hand, we have both signed a contract to go for a walk together despite the weather and I cry off because it's raining or I've changed my mind, you have recourse to the courts for breach of contract. If I've hurt my leg in the interim and use this as a reason to cry off, you probably won't have recourse to the courts for breach of contract because it's a reasonable excuse for breach.

When I click on "agree" to those voluminous EUAs, I do so with the expectation that the contents are reasonable. You'll also note that they are generally replete with phrases like "may lead to," "possibly require" and "could mean" - these phrases generally mean something like "if you do Thing A and we don't like that, we'll sue you for it if you agree to be sued."

This is true of many things. Mobile 'phone contracts, council tax bills and such are generally not contracts but agreements. You can break the mobile 'phone agreement if you want but all they'll do is cut you off. They'll then try to trick you into "going to court" - which it isn't, it's attending a voluntary administrative hearing which, by agreeing to attend, you've agreed to abide by. This trick is also widely used by debt collectors, which is why they're so easy to get rid of - as I know from personal experience.

That's how I understand it, anyway.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2016, 07:39:55 PM
Heh, I bet you can guess my position on cash-in-hand work, Tordels!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 10:23:59 AM
Mildly surprised that no one's linked to this before...

Four decades of year-on-year fall in UK death rates reversed by Tories. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/death-rate-in-england-and-wales-rising-at-fastest-pace-for-50-years-due-to-cuts-to-social-services-a6876486.html)

Yup. A greater proportion of the population have been dying every year since 2011 than the 1960s. Do you think it's the cuts to benefits? Social care? The NHS? All of the above? Some remarkable coincidence that can be hand-waved away?

Amazing that the Health Secretary can point to hospital mortality statistics and say, authoritatively*: "it's the weekend staffing levels" and yet when confronted with numbers like these, the government's response is "it's too complicated to identify a cause."

Cheers

Jim

*Except that the actual authors of the reports cited explicitly stated that this conclusion could not be drawn from their work. Ho hum...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 10:35:57 AM
My view on the above is this: due to the way current monetary systems are set up, around 35% to 40% of all "money" spent goes into the banking system. That's private and public spending. Over a third of everything spent is effectively wasted. That means less resources all 'round going into heating, housing, healthy food, medicines, hospitals etc. It's a wonder the death toll isn't higher.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 10:51:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 10:35:57 AM
My view on the above is this: due to the way current monetary systems are set up, around 35% to 40% of all "money" spent goes into the banking system. That's private and public spending. Over a third of everything spent is effectively wasted. That means less resources all 'round going into heating, housing, healthy food, medicines, hospitals etc. It's a wonder the death toll isn't higher.

And all that only started in 2011, did it? Give it a rest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 10:59:33 AM
Don't be daft. It's a steadily worsening situation, exacerbated by the 2008 "financial crisis."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 11:19:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 10:59:33 AM
Don't be daft. It's a steadily worsening situation, exacerbated by the 2008 "financial crisis."

Except that it's not a steadily worsening situation, as you'd know if you'd read the article. This is the reversal of forty-year trend of falling death rates that happens to coincide with a government coming to power that has proceeded to savage the budgets for benefit claimants, disability support, social care and the NHS. Absent a pandemic, a succession of incredibly cold winters, or a major war, one is left looking for other explanations for the reversal of the trend, and it's hard not to make a connection with the Conservatives systematic removal of safety nets for the most vulnerable in society under the twin mantras of 'fairness' and 'austerity'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 February, 2016, 11:20:31 AM
Looking rocky for the EU. I'm not sure what Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Czech Republic have to gain by digging in. If the UK leaves, their people here are even more screwed. (The suggestion appears to be that this solution might be palatable if it's restricted specifically to the UK.) Absurd that Brexit is now looking likely over such a nothing issue that costs naff-all. Also depressing that other figures are being lobbed around regarding the EU 'costs' to the UK, ignoring faming subsidy, EU rebates, and that a non-EU UK would have to pay for access to the market it quits.

And I wish people would stop going on about sodding Norway. The UK won't rejoin EFTA, and it would be in a much worse position than today if it did. ARGH.

In more positive news, Apple CEO Tim Cook fights for privacy (http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/). Nice to see lots of other tech leaders backing him, such as, er, hang on, um... oh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 February, 2016, 11:36:20 AM
The UK will not vote to leave the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 05:27:57 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 11:19:33 AM

Except that it's not a steadily worsening situation, as you'd know if you'd read the article. This is the reversal of forty-year trend of falling death rates that happens to coincide with a government coming to power that has proceeded to savage the budgets for benefit claimants, disability support, social care and the NHS. Absent a pandemic, a succession of incredibly cold winters, or a major war, one is left looking for other explanations for the reversal of the trend, and it's hard not to make a connection with the Conservatives systematic removal of safety nets for the most vulnerable in society under the twin mantras of 'fairness' and 'austerity'.

I decided to have a look at the figures myself.

Firstly, the "provisional" figures quoted in the article aren't available for download yet so I can't comment on them.

The article claims, "Death rates in England and Wales have been steadily falling since the 1970s but this trend has been reversed since 2011."

In 1970 there were 655,385 UK deaths, which equates to 1.18% of the UK population.
In 1975  there were 660,690 deaths - 1.17% of the population.
In 1980, 659,632 deaths - 1.17%
In 1985, 668,611 deaths - 1.18%
In 1990, 639,836 deaths - 1.12%
In 1995, 640,154 deaths - 1.10%
In 2000, 609,229 deaths - 1.04%
In 2005, 581,811 deaths - 0.97%
In 2010, 560,538 deaths - 0.90%
In 2011, 551,153 deaths - 0.87%
In 2012, 567,974 deaths - 0.89%
In 2013, 576,458 deaths - 0.90%
In 2014, 570,341 deaths - 0.88%

Even if the figure of 528,340 deaths for 2015 given in the article is correct, it's lower than all the UK figures mentioned above. I suspect, therefore, it may just be the figure for England and Wales, which seems to be generally around 70,000 lower than the Whole UK total. This would make it around 598,340 - the highest since 2003 (610,871 - 1.03%) - which would be around 0.91% of the population, at a quesstimate.

The article then goes on to compare the present state with the 60s and the end of the Second World War.

1960 - 603,328 deaths - 1.16%
1962 - 636,051 deaths - 1.20%
1964 - 611,130 deaths - 1.14%
1966 - 643,754 deaths - 1.18%
1968 - 655,998 deaths - 1.19%

As to the end of WWII:

1944 - 573,570 deaths - 1.17%
1945 - 567,027 deaths - 1.15%
1946 - 573,361 deaths - 1.16%
1947 - 600,728 deaths - 1.21%
1948 - 546,002 deaths - 1.09%
1949 - 589,876 deaths - 1.17%

And just for a bit of historical comparison:

1857 - 481,721 deaths - 2.16%
1866 - 572,037 deaths - 2.35%
1881 - 564,260 deaths - 1.90%
1900 - 695,867 deaths - 1.97%
1914 - 611,970 deaths - 1.47%
1920 - 555,326 deaths - 1.31%
1930 - 536,860 deaths - 1.17%


The first time the ratio dropped below 1% was in 2004.

I think that article might just be a little bit of scaremongering - which I initially fell for - as death rates have been pretty stable for a long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 February, 2016, 07:06:17 PM
I haven't crunched any numbers here, but surely those figures lack a vital piece of information: demographics. Your current population is far older than it was only a few decades ago, so you would expect far more deaths: that the death rate has remained roughly constant despite an ageing population probably represents a significant improvement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 07:09:44 PM
I'd expect the Office for National Statistics, whose numbers these are, to be more proficient at statistical adjustments than I am.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 07:41:01 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 17 February, 2016, 07:06:17 PM
I haven't crunched any numbers here, but surely those figures lack a vital piece of information: demographics. Your current population is far older than it was only a few decades ago, so you would expect far more deaths: that the death rate has remained roughly constant despite an ageing population probably represents a significant improvement.

Absolutely.

However, it took me long enough to gather all those numbers together as it is (the ONS website isn't the easiest thing to navigate and use) - I'm not going to start trying to break them down or I'll end up loopy. And possibly drunk.

In the most basic terms, as the population rises and the percentage of deaths stays roughly the same, that has to indicate an overall improvement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 February, 2016, 09:08:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2016, 07:09:44 PM
I'd expect the Office for National Statistics, whose numbers these are, to be more proficient at statistical adjustments than I am.

Heh! Wasn't arguing against the recent shameful reversal, instead noting that a constant rate of death in an ageing population reflects a far greater trend towards improving health than the bald percentage in Shark's numbers might suggest. And like both of you, I'm inclined to leave more complex analysis than that to the professionals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 17 February, 2016, 09:19:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 05:27:57 PM

I decided to have a look at the figures myself.
...

The article specifically states it's the figure for England and Wales. And where did you get these figures?  Googling "Deaths Registered in England and Wales [Year]" gets a page like this (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob1/death-reg-sum-tables/2014/sb-deaths-first-release--2014.html), which gives a figure of 501,424 deaths in 2014. So the figure in the article is correct and it's a fucking huge increase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 February, 2016, 09:49:31 PM
Those deaths are the result of Labour mismanagement of the economy finally catching up with the population.  Things will improve now that doctors will be working more hours, more days a week, and for less money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 17 February, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
Quote from: Ollamh Iompróidh on 17 February, 2016, 09:49:31 PM
Those deaths are the result of Labour mismanagement of the economy finally catching up with the population.  Things will improve now that doctors will be working more hours, more days a week, and for less money.
Now that you don't get your death certificate free on the NHS the number of scroungers claiming them is bound to dry up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 February, 2016, 11:24:44 PM
Lazy bastards will be wanting their own private coffins next. And who's going to be paying for the crem-gas, eh? Bloody selfish swines, dying all over the place without permission. Bring back the death penalty for 'em, I say!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 20 February, 2016, 12:35:01 PM
So Cameron's negotiated deal with Europe consists of less tax credits for some immigrants and, most importantly, less banking regulation. (Damn banking regulation, ruining our economy).  The government is in disarray, corbyn is probably to blame and Malcolm Rifkin is in tv reminiscing about Thatcher whilst dressed like a spy.

Referendum is go! Initiate Project Fear Mark 2! Activate the Farage-bot!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 February, 2016, 07:05:21 PM
I hope you all saw Channel 4 news tonight, as I was on in Judge uniform, talking politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2016, 07:50:51 PM
"In the interests of balance here on Channel 4, here's leftwing comics character Judge Dredd to give his opinion."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 20 February, 2016, 09:14:11 PM
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid601325122001?bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAEabvr4~,Wtd2HT-p_Vh4qBcIZDrvZlvNCU8nxccG&bctid=4765705129001 (http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid601325122001?bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAEabvr4~,Wtd2HT-p_Vh4qBcIZDrvZlvNCU8nxccG&bctid=4765705129001)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 February, 2016, 01:31:05 AM
I finally saw it. Damn, I didn't say send a couple of TAD's into Europe, I must be slacking!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 21 February, 2016, 08:51:59 AM
Oh dear the media biase has got out of hand already. Clear reference to DC so where the balance for Marvel?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 February, 2016, 01:00:01 PM
And of course the young lady in the black latex was definitely given so much time to air her views because of the strength of her arguments.  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 01:15:04 PM
Mm.

As for 'corruption' in Europe, I don't see things being better here. If anything, EU regulations have stifled a lot of sell-offs and hideous decisions, but there you go.

It'll be interesting tonight to see what Boris decides is best for Boris and the future of Boris, given that a lot of people will follow his lead. (My guess is he'll campaign to leave, which will obliterate DC/GO and Goldsmith, but give Boris a run at a very senior cabinet post on before 2020. But, hey, screw London, which will be hit hard.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 February, 2016, 01:23:58 PM
It won't matter what Boris  does "better the devil you know"  will keep the UK in the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 February, 2016, 01:35:43 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 01:15:04 PM
Mm.

As for 'corruption' in Europe, I don't see things being better here. If anything, EU regulations have stifled a lot of sell-offs and hideous decisions, but there you go.

It'll be interesting tonight to see what Boris decides is best for Boris and the future of Boris, given that a lot of people will follow his lead. (My guess is he'll campaign to leave, which will obliterate DC/GO and Goldsmith, but give Boris a run at a very senior cabinet post on before 2020. But, hey, screw London, which will be hit hard.)

Goldsmith is campaigning to leave.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35625097 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35625097)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 01:48:10 PM
Yep. Astonishing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 February, 2016, 02:18:00 PM
Louise Mensch tweeted 13 million voted for UKIP, then when called up on the figure (closer to 3 million), she claims a typo.

Unfortunately she actually typed "Thirteen"

Some typo.

https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/701384445237010432?lang=en-gb (https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/701384445237010432?lang=en-gb)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 February, 2016, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 01:48:10 PM
Yep. Astonishing.

Astonishing that the son of rabid europhobe (and founder of the Referendum Party - remember that)  Sir James Goldsmith would turn out to be anti-EU, or astonishing that he thinks this is going to boost his chances in his bid to become mayor of the most pro-EU part of England?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 03:16:19 PM
Astonishing that he thinks it will help his bid. Sadiq Khan's looking like a very good bet now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 21 February, 2016, 03:31:35 PM
One of the reasons why I'll be voting to stay in, is the calibre of the people that want us leave...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 February, 2016, 04:13:32 PM
Farage. Galloway. Grayling. IDS. Murdoch. Now Boris.

I think the main question people should ask is why most of these are in favour of quitting. *cough*moneyandmakethericherricher*cough*

Mostly, we just keep hearing nebulous comments about getting control of our country back, but there's little concrete. (IDS has, I see, decided to rampage down the 'EU means terrorist attacks' route. Classy. What an absolute shit.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 21 February, 2016, 04:46:47 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 21 February, 2016, 03:31:35 PM
One of the reasons why I'll be voting to stay in, is the calibre of the people that want us leave...


Indeed.  In fact the though of the rights for working people that Europe have delivered being stripped by nasty cretins like IDS and Gove has pretty much made my mind up now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 22 February, 2016, 12:16:48 PM
So, with the Nevada caucus over another lowlife is defenestrated from the Republican clown car with Jeb Bush's concession.  With him goes the perverse schadenfreude of watching Trump wail on him (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR1FRqvn-4A), like a big dumb bully wedgying a little creep.

On the other side the brazen con-job the Clintons have managed to pull on black America paid off, and the mass-incarcerating racist (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/8/1467336/-Hillary-Clinton-Gangs-of-kids-are-super-predators-with-no-conscience-no-empathy), bellicose, asset-stripping neolib, beats the decent socialist.  The USA could have a decent person as president for the first time since 1977; that it will probably be yet another supine corporatist is heartbreaking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2016, 01:16:55 PM
It's pretty clear the Democrats will never let Sanders win the nomination, as the caucas/superdelegates system has already rigged things in Clinton's favor, making vote-tampering a part of the actual process.  For example, busloads of older voters were shipped into Nevada early and then the voting was halted at noon so that younger/working people couldn't vote during their lunch - and guess who younger and working people vote for, and who older conservative people vote for?  The superdelegates system is also similar to the UK's FPTP system in that counties/states' representatives decide who to support without having to reflect the will of the electorate - Sanders can win the popular vote, but still not get the presidential nomination.

The sad thing is that Sanders is the only Democrat who polls well against the Republican candidates.  The popular notion is that Clinton simply isn't trustworthy compared to Trump's bluntness, and her only hope of making gains against him will be if she can elicit sympathy during the inevitable car-crash debates with Trump where he keeps throwing her husband's infidelity while in office in her face - because let's face it, there's no way that isn't going to happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 February, 2016, 12:33:11 PM
Ireland today goes to the polls to choose between one of two parties: the one founded by a terrorist, or the one founded by the terrorist that killed him.  The vote can go either way, as the parties are on opposite ends of the Irish political spectrum: one is on the right, the other is on the center-right.  Meanwhile, the EU runs the country anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2016, 01:26:45 PM
I'm not sure it's even that complex. This time we just get to influence the makeup of the coalition that will keep the party that implemented water charges in power. Will it involve the party who helped implement water charges, the party who originally agreed to implementing water charges, the party who installed water meters in NI but doesn't think they'll ever be used, or the various who say they'll abolish water charges and not much else? Nail-biting stuff. As long as you think all this is more important than getting an MRi in less than a year,  a hospital bed, a non-religious school or somewhere for your kids to sleep.


(My favourite bit is where it turns out that out of the 200 million allegedly raised so far by water charges, only 6 million will be left after 'costs' to actually upgrade and maintain the water supply. So we could all just have chucked in a handful of change into a collection bucket marked 'Dear Liza' and it would have amounted to the same thing).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2016, 01:39:53 PM
Water charges are great. We got our meters here in Hampshire upgraded with no right to refuse. We were told in some glowingly written copy that are bills would likely fall with average usage. Immediately, our direct debit almost doubled. The meters are only checked twice yearly. Classy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2016, 06:58:38 PM
Reading Irish online responses to the bulldozing of the Jungle and teargassing of children on the Greece/Macedonia border makes me feel ill. You would think that we of all nations would understand mass emigration as a response to crisis. I never want to read another hypocritical fucking word from any of these vile people about coffin ships, 'no dogs, no Irish' or the Famine as deliberate genocide, not fucking ever again. If you can't express sympathy, you can't seek it from others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 February, 2016, 08:01:13 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 29 February, 2016, 06:58:38 PMIf you can't express sympathy, you can't seek it from others.

I think we both know that all illegal Irish in the US should be given an amnesty; while immigrants to Ireland can fuck off.  It's only fair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 29 February, 2016, 11:15:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2016, 01:39:53 PM
We got our meters here in Hampshire upgraded with no right to refuse. We were told in some glowingly written copy that are bills would likely fall with average usage. Immediately, our direct debit almost doubled. The meters are only checked twice yearly. Classy.

Huh. Conversely, our water bill plummeted to only half of what it had been before the metering, and only recently started increasing. I just wish they'd put the meter in sooner!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 March, 2016, 02:43:51 AM
Looking at the coverage of the burning of the refugee camp by riot police at Calais, I was thinking... well, I was thinking what any rational human being would be thinking when viewing something that would later lead them to type the words "the burning of the refugee camp by riot police".
When I said I couldn't believe I lived in times where people would vote for a Tory government such as ours, I probably devalued the currency of that sentiment, but I genuinely can't believe I live in times like these where people cheer as those who live in homes made from garbage - who literally live in trash on our doorstep - are turfed out of their hovels with less compassion than is shown in a badger cull.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 March, 2016, 07:46:14 AM
Two preppy young engineers from my work went over to Calais for a fortnight to build prefab housing, bringing over bedding and teaching a bit of English in the process. To say they returned changed men is no exaggeration. To reduce human suffering and desperation on this scale to talk of vermin and 'economic migrants', as if none of us could only hope to do the same in the same situation, and to actually celebrate the current brutality, is the saddest reflection of the idea of a nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 March, 2016, 08:49:03 AM
Caught a snippet of a report from the Calais camp on the BBC news this morning, where they were reporting that the vast majority of the 'migrants' they'd spoken to were from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Oh, you mean they're refugees from countries effectively destroyed by the policies of western nations, then? No reason at all for us to feel in any way responsible for these people's plight.

We should be feeding them, housing them, and begging their fucking forgiveness for ruining their countries to the point where they have to gather up their families, make arduous, dangerous journeys of many hundreds of miles, only to end up sheltering under plastic sheets in a muddy field.

Instead, we complain when they pile up on our borders, and turn our faces away when their corpses wash up on our beaches.

I'm ashamed.

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2016, 10:16:54 AM
The BBC gets a lot of stick of late, but its explanation regarding usage of 'migrants' is appalling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 March, 2016, 10:26:18 AM
What solutions are available?

Would people with back gardens be willing to allow a family of refugees to camp there until more permanent arrangements can be devised and implemented? I'm sure many people would be willing to do this but I'm just as sure local "authorities" would forbid it.

Should we start viewing people who work for arms manufacturers as "bad people" on a par with child molesters, using social pressure to curtail the arms trade from the ground up?

Give over waste ground to refuge areas?

Leave it to politicians to sort out?

How are we to help our fellow human beings?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2016, 10:44:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 March, 2016, 10:26:18 AMWhat solutions are available?
Some basic humanity. I remember someone recently crunched numbers on this. In the end, something like one family taken in to every medium-sized British town or larger would be enough to deal with everything, which would hardly put a major strain on resources of any one region, or even local council.

Right now, though, immigration is too convenient a stick for conservatives to beat people with, and it's winning in the PR war. Too many people see the UK as being about the size of Slough, and at least as built up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 March, 2016, 11:12:28 AM
RoI, which accepts about 200 applications for asylum per year (into a population of 4.6 million) and prevents asylum seekers from working, preferring to dole them out 19 euro a week to live on (or about 10% of what we pay Irish job seekers), and 'enjoys' a 92% Christian population, is apparently overwhelmed and about to have its 'culture' subsumed by the arab hordes. Good, I say, because a culture that generates the kind of thinking I see daily doesn't deserve to survive.

As I've said before, what really terrifies me is that this is the tip of the iceberg. If people can't be persuaded to accommodate these tiny numbers of their fellows, what is going to happen when the real climate-driven migrations start? It's going to be billions on the move by the end of the century, by anyone's reckoning. Good luck with your fences and teargass then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2016, 11:51:32 AM
I'm sure plenty of people merrily berate immigrants, while wolfing down a curry and texting a Polish builder to start on their house extension. It does my head in. It's also horrifying to see the descendants of previous immigrants pull up the ladder. My MP is one such person. He's basically anti-immigration and anti-EU, despite his parents settling here some decades ago.

The Irish situation sounds like around here, too. People complain about immigrants, despite there being hardly any. I hear the odd Polish voice when walking the dog, and there are some Asians in the community. But at a rough estimate, I'd say 99% of the locals are white British. Plus it's not like immigrants don't benefit the community. In a rather crass example, local restaurants would be rather rubbish if removing immigrants and/or descendants of immigrants from the equation. Our town's full of Indian and Chinese restaurants, and I imagine the same's true in a lot of 'white' towns horrified at the prospect of a few thousand people who've been through hell trying to find a better life. (And you can bet the vast, vast majority want to immediately immerse themselves in work, pay taxes, and 'pay back' to the country that takes them in. 'Freeloading' seems to be astonishingly rare among immigrants, despite what the tabloids scream.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 March, 2016, 12:36:10 PM
There are lots of immigrants around here. When I was a kid the majority were Spanish and Italian, now mostly Eastern European. They work on the farms and drive the lorries. The firm where I work has about six Polish and Romanian drivers and a Polish lass working in the office. They're just normal people and nothing either angelic or demonic. The only people I ever hear whining about them are the people on benefits who can't be arsed getting jobs themselves or lazy jobsworths who don't want to work as hard as they do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 March, 2016, 01:26:33 PM
About the only observable effect of migration locally is that the next town over is jokingly referred to as "Poland" because of its huge Portugese population, and recently it also emerged that nearly three quarters of kids in the town's primary school didn't speak any English.  Mind you, that's why we send them to school.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 01 March, 2016, 01:40:55 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 01 March, 2016, 11:12:28 AM
...what really terrifies me is that this is the tip of the iceberg. If people can't be persuaded to accommodate these tiny numbers of their fellows, what is going to happen when the real climate-driven migrations start? It's going to be billions on the move by the end of the century, by anyone's reckoning. Good luck with your fences and teargass then.

Children of Men, that's what.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 March, 2016, 02:02:17 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 01 March, 2016, 01:40:55 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 01 March, 2016, 11:12:28 AM
...what really terrifies me is that this is the tip of the iceberg. If people can't be persuaded to accommodate these tiny numbers of their fellows, what is going to happen when the real climate-driven migrations start? It's going to be billions on the move by the end of the century, by anyone's reckoning. Good luck with your fences and teargass then.

Children of Men, that's what.

or the greatest opportunity in the history of mankind. It's up to us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 01 March, 2016, 02:20:29 PM
Well the office I work in is about 75% filthy sexy foreigners who were hired specifically for their language skills that us filthy not-sexy weegies don't speak. On the other hand I cant walk down the street without  tripping over east-european beggers every other block. So just like us some are great and some are not. It's almost as if they're real humans.

I even hear there are filthy not-sexy Scots moving about Europe taking the jobs off law abiding Swiss folk so fairs-fair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2016, 10:13:05 AM
The JetBlue Democracy Experiment. (https://mises.org/blog/jetblue-democracy-experiment)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2016, 03:20:43 PM
Quote from: Satanist on 01 March, 2016, 02:20:29 PMIt's almost as if they're real humans.



I was chatting to my old flatmate (a Polish woman) the other day, about how the grey squirrels have largely taken over from the red ones.  She pointed out that the same thing is happening to white people. 
I told her I totally disagreed and that I prefer a mix of races in my country anyway, which is true. She said 'we don't mix'.  I told her she doesn't mix.  Then I changed the subject, because my blood was boiling and I didn't want to say anything I regretted.

For fuck's sake.  We're hardly an endangered species, us white people.  Well, unless you count what we're doing to ourselves with pollution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 March, 2016, 04:01:00 PM
I've always thought it was a shame that heterosexual white men didn't have their own cultural holiday.  Truly we are the only minority it's okay to oppress.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2016, 04:39:33 PM
Heh! It does mystify me, this desire for sameness. I'm a pretty conservative very boring sort of spode, currently scrabbling around the bottom of the financial pile, and I really, genuinely, enjoy the (limited) diversity that we've managed to acquire. I can also declare that no black kid, Eastern European kid or middle-eastern kid has ever randomly punched me, started a massive ruck, or stolen my hat off my head on the tram on the way home, all of which happens fairly regularly with the delightful offspring of local whitey.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 02 March, 2016, 05:20:39 PM
Tordels, I had the exact same argument with a mate who now lives in London who complained about the increase of foreigners in Glasgow. I stated that as I still live here it makes the place a hell of a lot more interesting and that every single time I've ran into trouble it has been a fellow Glaswegian acting like a twat!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 02 March, 2016, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: Ollamh Iompróidh on 02 March, 2016, 04:01:00 PM
I've always thought it was a shame that heterosexual white men didn't have their own cultural holiday.  Truly we are the only minority it's okay to oppress.

Isn't that steak n blowjob day?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 March, 2016, 05:29:12 PM
Quote from: Satanist on 02 March, 2016, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: Ollamh Iompróidh on 02 March, 2016, 04:01:00 PM
I've always thought it was a shame that heterosexual white men didn't have their own cultural holiday.  Truly we are the only minority it's okay to oppress.

Isn't that steak n blowjob day?
Wasn't that a joke racist/mysogynistic white guys started that got out of hand?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2016, 05:36:37 PM
Quote from: Ollamh Iompróidh on 02 March, 2016, 04:01:00 PM
I've always thought it was a shame that heterosexual white men didn't have their own cultural holiday.  Truly we are the only minority it's okay to oppress.

Who asked you, you milk-drinking snow jockey?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 02 March, 2016, 05:46:44 PM
Quote from: Hawkmonger on 02 March, 2016, 05:29:12 PM
Quote from: Satanist on 02 March, 2016, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: Ollamh Iompróidh on 02 March, 2016, 04:01:00 PM
I've always thought it was a shame that heterosexual white men didn't have their own cultural holiday.  Truly we are the only minority it's okay to oppress.

Isn't that steak n blowjob day?
Wasn't that a joke racist/mysogynistic white guys started that got out of hand?

Just like Christmas I don't really know about the origins but only what I get from it.

Disappointment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 08 March, 2016, 10:32:31 PM
So, this European Union referendum caper.

I don't get it. I don't understand why we're having one.

I mean, yes, I understand how it came about: it was Tory policy for years and they got elected and they're doing it (although they seem happy to renege on other manifesto pledges, such as not screwing over pensions even more). But, rather, why?

It seems the whole thing is just blinkered opinion with no attempt to justify a position.

The "ins" just say how terrible it would be to be "out". The "outs" say how terrible it would be to be "in".

This is a tenable position to adopt when discussing the belly-button, but not my future and that of my kids.

I feel grossly ill-informed about the consequences of what feels like a pretty big decision. Am I the only one? And where can I go to get informed, as the campaigners don't seem to give a fig about facts.

My gut tells me that this whole thing has exploded out of Tory back-bench back-stabbing. If some right wingers want out of Europe then my gut also tells me that it's probably best to vote against that. But inverted snobbery is not necessarily the best basis for a big decision.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 March, 2016, 11:08:30 PM
Why? To reinforce the illusion of the people's democratic control over the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 March, 2016, 12:22:03 AM
You don't have to vote.  You can just draw cocks on the ballot if you want, I imagine it doesn't feel like a real vote until ballot-counters have seen a couple of dozen of those.

We lose a lot of rights and protections if we leave the EU, though we'll probably lose them in the EU, as well, as TTIP's not going away (we only found out about it by accident and we won't see the next one coming) and it enshrines the right of corporations to erode workers' legal protections even if the law already says different.  We're fucked if we stay and fucked if we go, so why not just take the day off work, have a pint and enjoy the fleeting pleasure of the walk in the sunshine to the polling booth, then draw cocks on the ballot paper and douse it in your impotent tears.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 10:25:42 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 08 March, 2016, 10:32:31 PMI don't get it. I don't understand why we're having one.
My take is it was a Tory ruse to bolster the right-wing vote, which threatened to go to UK*P. I suspect, given that every single pollster was predicting a hung parliament, the Tories imagined they would again be stuck with the Lib Dems, albeit with the junior coalition partner reduced in numbers. Clegg would veto the referendum as a coalition condition. The Tories would grumble, and the whole thing would be kicked down the road five years. (See also: the laughable idea of a British Bill of Rights and a bill to state the sovereignty of parliament, which is already sovereign.) I don't believe many strategists and senior Tories actually thought this would happen, which is in part why it's now such as massive clusterfuck.

As for feeling grossly ill-informed, current polling suggests you're not alone. In fact, it looks like the majority have little idea what's going on, and the mud-slinging by both sides does not help. I'm very much on the 'in' side, despite not really caring that much for the EU itself. My take is that no-one on the Brexit side is able to offer anything remotely concrete not only about what would happen, but regarding specifically how they see Britain's position post-Brexit. There's a lot of vague bullshit and sentimentality about being able to stand on our own, being 'free' from the EU, and such like, but no detail. Whenever anyone tries to inject some facts (such as Mark Carney's comments that Brexit is a bigger domestic risk than remaining in the EU), they are immediately accused of bias, which in that case was beyond ridiculous.

The EU is a mess. It is in desperate need of democratic reform. And yet it remains our biggest trading partner by far, we are the 'bridge' to the EU as far as the US and China are concerned (both countries having said they don't really care about the UK as an individual entity to anywhere near the same level), and it affords British people a great many rides that Conservatives may well strip from us in their attempts to transform the UK into a GoP-style state. But then I'm a leftie liberal, so I would say that.

What should be more concerning to those voting Brexit is that even those in the out camp admit leaving would not be much fun. We're looking at a minimum of two years of economic stagnation as the UK decouples itself from the EU, with the UK being outside of the initial negotiations. After that point, we'll have to renegotiate with the EU — the bloc we just said "fuck you" too — and everyone else we wish to trade with. The UK's still a big economic power, but a declining one, and one overly reliant on finance, which could have problems after Brexit, given that it's currently in part reliant on being within the EU. (Another option might be to turn the UK into a giant version of Monaco — a tax-haven state with a population of 70 million. That doesn't really bear thinking about, given what would have to occur to make that happen.) As the Swiss have noted, these things can take anything up to a decade to sort. During that time, we'd at best have a shaky economy, but could end up in a decade of recession. And all this is before considering the costs in terms of time and money of reworking the huge amount of legislation that's currently intertwined with EU law.

I also find it odd that although some Brexit people are perhaps wisely saying the UK would not follow another country's example regarding the relationship with the EU, you still have people arguing in favour of a Norway-style model (despite Norway enacting a lot of EU law, having freedom of movement with the EU, paying into the EU kitty, and having no say in EU legislation) or a Swiss one (despite that, according to Swiss businesses, essentially amounting to a five per cent or more handicap, for little obvious gain).

Within the EU, we have the status quo. We retain the rights the EU affords, including freedom of movement (which works both ways — something Brexit people fail to realise), maternity pay, public holidays, limited enforced working hours, environmental quality, and so on.

I'm sure there are Brexit people here who'll happily counter some of the above. But I'd really like to hear something concrete from that lot, and not just bombast that seems better placed in the aftermath of winning a World War. If we do leave, I'm waiting for the shock realisation from the Daily Mail that Brits no longer have the right to retire to Spain, and booze cruises to France are a thing of the past (along with the UK's deal with the French regarding immigration).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 March, 2016, 11:07:13 AM
You've touched on it very briefly in your post. I will be voting to leave the EU because the EU is undemocratic. Even if all the UK MEPs voted the same way, it would only amount to 8% of MEPs and they could, therefore, be easily out voted by people I did not have the opportunity to vote for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 March, 2016, 11:19:53 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 March, 2016, 11:07:13 AM
You've touched on it very briefly in your post. I will be voting to leave the EU because the EU is undemocratic. Even if all the UK MEPs voted the same way, it would only amount to 8% of MEPs and they could, therefore, be easily out voted by people I did not have the opportunity to vote for.

Presumably, Westminster is also undemocratic, since regardless of your MP's opinion, he could be outvoted by the 649 you had no opportunity to vote for. In fact, your MP represents only 0.15% of the MPs in Westminster.

Out of the UK now! Freedom for Tooting!

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 11:20:50 AM
Old Tankie: That's a fair enough reason to leave (although I do like Jim's take as well). I just hope you're as vehemently in favour of massive reform to the UK's anti-democratic systems for everything from the Lords and Commons down to local government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 March, 2016, 11:33:10 AM
Yes, Jim, but I can vote for an MP who belongs to a party and if that party gets enough MPs it's able to implement its manifesto.  That doesn't apply to the EU as the largest block of UK elected MEPs can be easily outvoted by people I did not have the opportunity to vote for.  The only way the EU system is democratic is if it has a political union basically what it says on the tin!

Yes, IndigoPrime, I am in favour of massive reform to the UK electoral system.  Scrap the Lords and introduce PR to Westminster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 March, 2016, 11:49:59 AM
I wouldn't normally speak in favour of something like the House of Lords but it's worth noting that they have stopped some major shenanigans being implemented by Governments, past and present. Without a counterbalance the ruling Government could get away with pretty much anything!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 March, 2016, 11:51:34 AM
Fair point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 March, 2016, 12:14:41 PM
All you have to do is watch and listen to numerous news outlets to garner all the info that you need to help you decide. Probably the best place, from the months that I've been listening to all the info, is the radio, were they actually push the facts more!

As for me, I'm wanting.............out, as I can NEVER see the EU reforming, no matter how much people wish it to reform. If our country votes to stay in, it'll be like a blank cheque that gives them the power to do what they like. But guess what, I won't be all over here or Facebook crying that it didn't go my way, I'll just say, that's democracy in action, albeit for the last time for the UK and get on with my life.

We can all list the pro's and cons on in and out but it boils down to a few things for me. If you truly believe in democracy then there is only one way that you can vote and seeing as many countries don't have democracy and their people have absolutely no say, I think it's hilarious that we would want to head in the opposite direction. Remember when other countries voted against something that the EU wanted, they were forced to keep voting, until they did what the EU wanted.

Obviously people can point out that Westminster is undemocratic but at least we can vote them out every 5 years and seeing as Scotland did just that last time, then you can't use the old bollocks that your vote doesn't count EVER AGAIN!

The EU keeps us safe, does it really. I thought NATO (mainly the power of the Great Satan) and governments behaving how they should has kept us safe since WWII. Obviously Yugoslavia and the horrendous things that happened there have been forgotten, which is handy! By the way, I saw part of that first hand, I only mention that, as certain people like to point out that some stuff may be hearsay and I think I believed what my eyes showed me on that one!

As for the continent now, I'm amazed at the lack of posts on here about it seemingly ripping itself apart over the, oh no John is going to mention it, so he must be a bigot or a racist! Immigration is ripping countries apart but the news is seemingly keeping most of it off the TV. Fences going up, borders being closed, bridges with border guards on, right wing groups rising up, rapes and sex offences, etc... Not really seen much about this on the telly and especially on here!

It's as if certain people due to the way they accuse people of being a racist or bigots have scared people into shutting up. You know, the right on PC brigade who even scared the police and councils in certain parts of the country that had those sex crimes. I say shame on those people, as a crime is a crime but worrying that you would be accused of something by those people...... but I digress!

The EU is paralysed, as yet again, one country the other day voted down certain measures and so that was that but hey ho, if we give it time the EU will be the thing we all hope it could be!

The trade deal (TTIP) which has been discussed here a few time, isn't that what the EU but mostly, America want and will be bad for us all but that's okay, as the EU is great and will get us little people a great deal.

Now I could list all the things that people say we will lose, working time directive, minimum wage, human rights, etc.... but I doubt very much that these things would truly change much and if they did, guess what. I think I could use my vote to push out that government and then Jezza can save the day!

Now I'm not saying Europe is bad, I enjoy going to certain parts of it on holiday, I'm not rich enough to see all of it just yet and there's one of the common mistakes. Just because you don't like the EU doesn't mean you don't like Europe. I wonder when some people will get this into their heads.

As for all those ex-pats in Spain, it's common knowledge that if Spain pushed them all out then that part of the country would go under. I got all that from the radio when they interviewed numerous people from those areas, including local government officials.

I'm sure many of you here will vote to stay in and guess what, good on you, as that is your right and I wouldn't want you to change your vote. I'm just putting down what I think but I'd be very surprised if I don't get accused of something, by someone!

REMEMBER SCOTLAND!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 09 March, 2016, 11:49:59 AMI wouldn't normally speak in favour of something like the House of Lords but it's worth noting that they have stopped some major shenanigans being implemented by Governments, past and present. Without a counterbalance the ruling Government could get away with pretty much anything!
Well, that's where we're heading anyway, with the reforms the Tories are shoving through. Now crossbenchers are a hindrance rather than an ally, the Lords is being redefined as little more than a revision chamber, rather than a check and balance. My take on this is the Lords has at times been good despite itself. But that doesn't mean it's not in need of massive reform.

My personal preference would be to replace the second chamber with a British senate, with those within elected on a regional PR basis, in staggered elections. My only concern would be the danger to crossbenchers and independents, given the UK voter's typical nature of voting for a party rather than a candidate. (The relatively 'neutral' stance of many Lords is beneficial when it comes to scrutiny of legislation.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 March, 2016, 12:14:41 PMObviously people can point out that Westminster is undemocratic but at least we can vote them out every 5 years and seeing as Scotland did just that last time, then you can't use the old bollocks that your vote doesn't count EVER AGAIN!
The problem is the system is rigged and it will only get worse after the boundary reforms. Right now, a lot of people make the assumption the Tories have a majority because the majority voted for them, when they in fact have a working parliamentary majority from a popular vote share of 36.9%. The argument we can "vote out a government" isn't accurate, because even a massive swing is rarely enough. And beyond the main two parties, it makes bugger all difference anyway. The Lib Dems long had 20–25% of the vote but single figures in seats. UKIP got one seat, despite getting over a third as many votes as the Tories, who got 330 seats. The Greens got one, despite having a tenth of the vote of Labour, who got 232 seats. The entire system is screwed, and those in power merely want to strengthen their hold.

QuoteThe EU keeps us safe, does it really.
From a military perspective, no. From a social perspective, in many ways yes. This is of course one of the reasons why certain Conservative politicians are gung-ho about leaving. Get rid of the EU 'forcing' laws on the UK and you can scrap all kinds of things regarding benefits and employment law.

QuoteThe trade deal (TTIP) which has been discussed here a few time, isn't that what the EU but mostly, America want and will be bad for us all but that's okay, as the EU is great and will get us little people a great deal.
TTIP is dreadful, and wholeheartedly backed by the Conservatives. If we leave the EU, you can guarantee any deal with the US will be even worse, because we will lack the collective clout the EU affords.

QuoteJezza can save the day!
I think there's more chance of Mark Millar taking over as lead writer on Dredd.

QuoteAs for all those ex-pats in Spain, it's common knowledge that if Spain pushed them all out then that part of the country would go under.
It's unlikely that existing residents would be pushed out, unless the UK decided to go batshit on those already resident here. There are existing treaties and laws that would have to be fully investigated in the event of Brexit to see what rights individuals would be afforded.

The point, though, is that from Brexit onwards, everything changes. Today, anyone from the UK can bugger off and live anywhere else in the EEA. You just get up and go. Post-Brexit, we'll be more isolationist by design. You'd perhaps be able to live in Spain, but only if you're stinking rich and get fast-tracked for a visa, or have a job ready and waiting and can jump through the various hoops. Even travelling abroad temporarily will become more of a pain in the arse. (I again await the Daily Mail's SHOCK and HORROR and Brits are forced into lengthy immigration queues at airports while all those EU people go through at speed.)

QuoteREMEMBER SCOTLAND!
I'm sure we will once it wrenches itself free from the UK if Brexit wins. Many of us will remember the chance we had to move there before that happened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 March, 2016, 12:37:52 PM
One thing I would say about your (John Burdis) comment "immigration is ripping countries apart" you fail to address the fact that it's because of 'our' rulers invading other nations on the bogus pretext of Democracy, when they're really only after the resources of the invaded nations. This has been proven time and time again!

Cheers

*edited because I was too slow replying
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 March, 2016, 12:44:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 12:35:22 PM
I'm sure we will once it wrenches itself free from the UK if Brexit wins. Many of us will remember the chance we had to move there before that happened.

An independent Scots government is likely to be very amenable to immigration — Scotland has a small and rapidly ageing population, worse than the UK as a whole, and they recognise (unlike the Westminster government) that an inward flow of working migrants is the most efficient way to address this.

I certainly have one eye north of the border in the event of an EU exit.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 March, 2016, 12:51:32 PM
I too think it's terrible the UK's notoriously liberal press won't report on all those roving immigrant rape gangs, much as I think it's terrible how they won't publish stories about Nessies because they're so afraid of upsetting the post-Triassic plesiosaur lobby.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 12:53:39 PM
The two options as I see them:
.
1) Remain in the EU, allowing the political and financial elites to continue stealing your money, privatising your public assets and enforcing legislation you neither voted for nor agree with.
.
2) Leave the EU, allowing the political and financial elites to continue stealing your money, privatising your public assets and enforcing legislation you neither voted for nor agree with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 09 March, 2016, 01:03:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 12:53:39 PM
The two options as I see them:
.
1) Remain in the EU, allowing the political and financial elites to continue stealing your money, privatising your public assets and enforcing legislation you neither voted for nor agree with.
.
2) Leave the EU, allowing the political and financial elites to continue stealing your money, privatising your public assets and enforcing legislation you neither voted for nor agree with.

You forgot 3) - Revolution!

Being ruled by Europe is no different to being ruled by a UK Government that you didn't vote for!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 01:08:13 PM
Exactly.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 01:50:11 PM
50 points for Ollamh Iompróidh.

Elsewhere:

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 March, 2016, 12:44:27 PMAn independent Scots government is likely to be very amenable to immigration [...] I certainly have one eye north of the border in the event of an EU exit.
Indeed. I'm also mulling over applying for an Irish passport (my dad's parents were both Irish, and I see that's a possible route to retaining an EU passport, etc., and it's something I've long wondered about anyway).

Post-Brexit, Lesser Britain would be very odd. Two land borders with EU states. Naff-all oil revenue. Cut off from a big chunk of renewable energy. Urgh. (I wonder how many Conservatives would be happy with the state of 'England'. Hard to tell. Many seem hugely 'patriotic' in the 'UK! UK!' sense, but you get the feeling they abhor Scotland and Wales, and pretend NI doesn't exist.)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 12:53:39 PMThe two options as I see them:
Sigh. I just... ... ... sigh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 02:26:51 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 01:50:11 PM

Sigh. I just... ... ... sigh.


Funny - that's exactly how I feel about it as well. Glad to see we have something in common.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 02:40:15 PM
Don't twist my words (even in jest).

I feel passionately about this subject matter, not least because it has massive potential impact on me and my family. Your casual hand-waving is not helpful and avoids the fact there are very real differences between both camps, even if neither adheres to your impossible dream of some kind of anarchist utopia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 March, 2016, 02:41:52 PM
I have two things to say about this.

Firstly, if Britain left the EU, there probably wouldn't be the same requirements to label stuff properly and I wouldn't know if certain foodstuffs, (such as the American macaroni and cheese I bought from a Poundland a couple of years ago with a sticker slapped on it), have tartrazine in them and tartrazine makes me go all wheezy.

Secondly, who came up with the word 'Brexit' and would it be possible to murder them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 March, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
If I could get one point across to the voting public of the UK it would be that there are roughly as many UK citizens enjoying their right to legally live, work and yes even sponge elsewhere in the EU as there are EU citizens enjoying the same rights in the  UK, and leaving the EU will not magically prevent the arrival of one single ILLEGAL immigrant.  So if that's what concerns you, the EU really is a non-issue as far as immigration goes.

On the more difficult 'democratic deficit' point, there is a stronger argument to be made about at what scale you see yourself as 'represented', but there are politial groupings within the European parliament which function like homegrown parties in bringing voting power to members' concerns.  The mistake is in imagining 'UK MEPs' as a voiceless minority, when in fact UK MEPs have signifcant clout through the groups: Torys find their muscle in the Conservatives and Reformists, Labour through the Socialists and Democrats etc. That 'you' haven't voted for other members in this group is really no different from the domestic constituency system, except from the level of public knowledge of these groups.  The policies and directions of Europe are still going to play a huge role in the UK's future, outside of the EU you just won't have any direct say in it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 03:51:50 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 02:40:15 PM
Don't twist my words (even in jest).

I feel passionately about this subject matter, not least because it has massive potential impact on me and my family. Your casual hand-waving is not helpful and avoids the fact there are very real differences between both camps, even if neither adheres to your impossible dream of some kind of anarchist utopia.

Who said I was jesting?
.
I feel passionately about this, too, but differently to you. Sorry if that upsets you.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 09 March, 2016, 04:55:21 PM
If the UK leaves the EU I wonder if the US is accepting any new states?

Might be a spare place if Hawaii goes its own way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 March, 2016, 06:23:59 PM


It's struck me how much the arguments in favour of leaving the EU are similar to the arguments for Scottish independence..

(we'd get a better trading deal from the outside/we put in more than we get out/we can't control our own immigration/its all about sovereignty/we're led by a government we didn't vote for/its undemocratic/it's corrupt/the union was a nice idea, but it doesn't work any more)

...but these points are being made by the same politicians who openly mocked these same arguments coming from their opponents just a couple of years ago.

Frankly, if the EU prevents Michael Gove from doing anything, I can only see that a potentially good thing.  We might be told over and over that the government is being prevented from leading effectively, but bear in mind that what they actually want to do is remove banking regulation, remove human rights legislation, spy on the populace, build over protected environments and cut workers rights. 

Expect it to go the same way as the independence referendum too..."Leave" will make over the top claims about how things will be better, "Stay" will push the fear of change.  In the end, we'll be promised that, if we stay, there will be genuine reform at some point...but no-one will agree what that means.  Then you can expect the rise of the eurosceptic right, as the disgruntled Out voters turn there backs on the traditional two party system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 March, 2016, 06:54:42 PM
I think it's also worth noting that one person's 'scare' is another person's 'realism'. Take the Scottish referendum, for example. At the time, there was entirely justified concern about the reliance of Scotland on oil revenue. Now oil has tanked, and if Scotland was independent under the same circumstances, there's no way it could fulfil the promises outlined by the out campaign without major adjustments (notably to taxation and/or spending).

It's similar now, with Carney's comments. He points out, rightly, that the out vote is a much more dangerous path. This isn't scaremongering—it's just reality. Two years of a frozen economy and then years—perhaps a decade in some cases—of rewriting laws and trying to carve out treaties. And at the end, would we be better off? Even some of the Brexit mob aren't claiming that—they're just saying "at least if we're not, those bally foreigns won't be sticking their noses in".

And that's the problem. It's a jump into the dark, and even the most optimistic outlook has us more or less where we are now, but in a decade and after years of economic nightmare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 09 March, 2016, 07:26:10 PM
I'm taking the view now that if the likes of Duncan-Smith and Gove think something is better, than it sure as hell won't better for the vast majority of us.

Makes in look a much safer bet for the working person.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 March, 2016, 08:09:33 PM
We're on page 666 of this thread, please note.  And I'm a bit pisht because I've missed my train and went for a couple of pints.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 March, 2016, 09:50:13 PM
ALL HAIL SATAN.

(http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Hillary-Clinton-Satanic-Hang-Sign.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 March, 2016, 10:00:50 PM
Some people think that hand gesture is the Horns of the Beast. In reality, I think it's more likely that Satan is a Hillary worshipper...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 09 March, 2016, 11:26:19 PM
Traditionally, that gesture was protection against the evil eye. Both Gaston Leroux and Ronnie James Dio said so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DaveGYNWA on 09 March, 2016, 11:47:02 PM
Point of order: the thumb is sticking out in the Hilary pic, which is not the commonly used 'devil horns' used by those of us of the Metallic persuasion. Thumb in = the Ronnie James Dio-associated sign. I believe that what Hilary is doing is the American sign language for 'I love you'

Carry on!! \m/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 March, 2016, 12:12:35 AM
You're quite right, of course. The thumb should be in.

Also, if the thumb was out and the forefinger down, it'd be the Hawaiian 'shaka' gesture, as commonly used within the surfing community. </uselessly informative>
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 10 March, 2016, 12:43:48 AM
The Beast? Metallica? Ronnie James Dio? I just see:
THWIP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DaveGYNWA on 10 March, 2016, 06:47:06 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 10 March, 2016, 12:12:35 AM
You're quite right, of course. The thumb should be in.

Also, if the thumb was out and the forefinger down, it'd be the Hawaiian 'shaka' gesture, as commonly used within the surfing community. </uselessly informative>

Gnarly dude!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 March, 2016, 09:32:51 AM
In for me.

EU not without its problems to put it mildly, but the dragged out decoupling, likely indyref 2 and jettisoning of working regulations etc mentioned above seals it for me.

Every time I watch PMQs and the archaic bullshit afforded parliament - the latest being the 'too afraid of satirists to use footage from parliament', they're not exactly winning me over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 March, 2016, 10:20:04 AM
(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M56a411b2979d47597dd36acb9cec200eo0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=370fea336f96378f19b3de5562cb4f86)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M14d3e73dd2cf2acf41e677c16b9ce208o0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=208231538ec63103a1780f2356134525)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M935f361b2ea57ba91e378cd583550043o1%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=67dab7f93ccdf7d27383b9586dae6fd5)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M81d7d15d42dfdafda2b31e32b20d4516o0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=7d86a587362cf1e92fa171f2f478b7d6)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M3c488efb80425736474f4474bfc545c4o0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=0873d0d5278fc3ce73fa827c4788c6e0)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M15126cb059fd1bee4c1faa84000f0d5co0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=a90db69ad14e6c82256b1f017eb332e6)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Ma3411b22764349ba95641c3c9b88cafeo2%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=1e8a59c0362d24d5289a7475833640da)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M134359ae3c7a1686dbef6942ed011b63o2%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=da7aa5e188117c81470077d67832cf17)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M2d1f23595e5140073bcf54d9df5c95a5H0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=36b0d0b5697f58d4a109b1cac026327b)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M78d11ffe4741c09b40d7e5f877fe6907o0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=eeb119bfb3af4ac5c97126343f95c1bb)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M379f7c64104e7d87a8560fb8be49774bo0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=7a3054d2858ec256bd73596500018123)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M042ecf7107079ce2c2e5cb1245243cafo1%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=62046e7d118b6b9e2f63d487ec84bcb6)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M4a563a038652bbe5bf41526eba4dbd3do0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=8598566e8f6b6863581d3e7b3aeba3da)(https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.M5f75def1f3826cec04217be1a7459daao0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=8154a76e11a38fd7bd3fd36fe7ca9495)

Rock fans all!

(Just a bit of fun - at least one of those images is probably faked.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 10 March, 2016, 07:31:02 PM
As a member of a world dominating cabal,  I must say I am unfamiliar with this coded hand signal. I much prefer a jutting middle digit Your homo sapiens. Sapiens Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 March, 2016, 07:39:00 PM
(http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2013/10/14/12/2638166.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2016, 08:19:42 AM
Ban the cut

Lisa Vickers - Avaaz - 06:27

Dear Friends,

Six-year-old Hibo Wardere was told, "You are
brave, you are courageous, tomorrow you are
going to be a woman," then she was led to a
makeshift hut in the Somali capital of
Mogadishu and a local 'cutter' used a razor to
remove her genitalia.

Hibo is one of 200 million women and girls in
30 countries across the world that have
undergone female genital mutilation (FGM).
But in Somalia, where an astounding 98% of
girls are cut, the Minister for Women is
developing a ban right now. Local experts say
that a global wave of support for nationwide
zero tolerance could help win an outright ban
on this cruel practice in weeks!

Puntland, in northeast Somalia, just proposed a
full ban, and there is precedent of the central
government adopting their progressive
legislation. If enough of us praise these bold
leaders for taking a stand for girls now, we can
bolster their initiatives, and help push through
a law in this next Parliament. Join the call now
and tell everyone:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/fgm_somalia_ban_
loc/?bvEAccb&v=73870&cl=9617198159
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 March, 2016, 08:49:42 AM
Your link needs its closer tags adjusted a bit Sharky, but very heartily endorsed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2016, 09:11:57 AM
Thanks, Tordels.

Sorry about the link problem. How's this:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/fgm_somalia_ban_loc/?bvEAccb&v=73870&cl=9617198159


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 March, 2016, 09:09:16 PM
IDS has resigned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 18 March, 2016, 09:35:07 PM
Like Boris' conversion to euroscepticism, it's just a symptom of internal Tory power-politics as the party tears itself apart over the  Europe vote and who's going to succeed to the shiny pigfucker. The idea that IDS gives a flying fuck about benefit claimants would be  laughable if it wasn't so offensive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 09:44:19 PM
Only down side is i'd rather have seen him shot on the street.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 10:13:04 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 09:44:19 PM
Only down side is i'd rather have seen him shot on the street.

Can't agree with that. The guy's a human being - not a very good one, admittedly, but a human being nonetheless. Just because he doesn't value our humanity, that doesn't mean we don't have to value his.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 March, 2016, 10:14:26 PM
Hope he out of job and would love to see how he try apply for benefits... :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 10:21:50 PM
He not out of job he still MP.... :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 10:29:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 10:13:04 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 09:44:19 PM
Only down side is i'd rather have seen him shot on the street.

Can't agree with that. The guy's a human being - not a very good one, admittedly, but a human being nonetheless. Just because he doesn't value our humanity, that doesn't mean we don't have to value his.
A human being who has the blood of over 4000 people on his hands when he withdrew ALL benefits from paraplegic, blind and mentaly disabled individuals leading to a spike in suicide rates not seen since the 1940's. And if ever their was a regime I would compare IDS's ideology to, it's nazism. The man is a fucking cretin, evil and degenerate to the core and has gone in question time multiple occations and has voiced his support for his reforms dven in light of those suffering. If he isn't a man worthy of death I don't know who is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 10:37:04 PM
Trying to delete post! Life's too short.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 10:40:47 PM
So why sink to his level? People like him are a base level we must strive to rise above.

He will die one day. So will we all. From that perspective, we all "deserve" death - it's one of the things we all have in common. I for one don't want to spend the time between now and then in hatred.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 March, 2016, 10:43:48 PM
Don't make me quote Gandalf at ya, 'Mumbler.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 10:46:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 10:37:04 PM
Trying to delete post! Life's too short.
Slave: I'm being oppressed.

Slave Driver: Source?!

Read this then go pile drive yourself into a concrete foundation.
http://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/library/type/pdfs/work-capability-assessment.html

And our man Jezza naturally has his two pence to say on IDS's general cuntishness.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iain-duncan-smith-should-resign-over-disability-benefit-death-figures-says-jeremy-corbyn-10475017.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 10:49:29 PM
You really are a nice person aren't you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 10:51:53 PM
I've just never met someone so ingorant to the blatent corruption and evil this one man posesses, let alone has the audacity to defend the prick.

I don't mince words as far as unnesecary death is concerned (and in that regard I find Sharky's flippancy very distatsful, i'm afraid to say) nor should you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 10:56:39 PM
Where have I defended him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 11:06:09 PM
I wasn't being flippant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 March, 2016, 11:08:16 PM
Ahhh

http://ukcampaign4change.com/2016/03/16/judge-orders-foi-release-of-universal-credit-it-reports/ (http://ukcampaign4change.com/2016/03/16/judge-orders-foi-release-of-universal-credit-it-reports/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 11:22:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 11:06:09 PM
I wasn't being flippant.
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 10:40:47 PM
So why sink to his level? People like him are a base level we must strive to rise above.

He will die one day. So will we all. From that perspective, we all "deserve" death - it's one of the things we all have in common. I for one don't want to spend the time between now and then in hatred.
THAT'S flippancy. Might not have been how you intended it to sound, but that's how it came off. IDS indirectly kill's a couple o' thousand people, but that's alright, they where going to die anyway, IDS will die eventually, no way should he be held accountable to he repercussions of his actions, nope not at all!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 March, 2016, 11:25:11 PM
Yes but where have I defended him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 11:29:54 PM
Poor wording on my part, Tanky me' lad, at no point have you proactively defended his views. But you've sure as hell not damned the scum either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 March, 2016, 11:32:23 PM
Hawkie, there is a massive difference between holding someone to account and shooting them in the street.

If you think it's okay to murder IDS, then it must, by logical extension, be okay for IDS to kill others. Either murder is wrong or it isn't. Either every human being has rights or none do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 March, 2016, 11:36:18 PM
You kind of forfeit your right to be treated like a rational human being when you withdraw 4000 people's benefits, from those who NEED THEM THE MOST, in order to line your own pockets.

And the shooting him in the street thing, a metaphor, a joke at his expense because fuck sake it's the least he bloody deserves. Because here's the thing Sharky, do you think the average disabled individual actually has the power over life and death over IDS? While he did over them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2016, 11:42:07 PM
Someone who quoted the motto on the gates of Auschwitz as justification for hounding the disabled to their graves through sanctions is an odd one to do something on the basis of "conscience".  Something else is afoot, I reckon, and IDS is jumping before he gets pushed.

And I don't think shooting IDS in the street would really do any good in the long run.  You have to stake him through the heart and cut off his head if you want to be sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 March, 2016, 12:04:57 AM
Ah, it was just a joke. Right. I see.

As I've said many times before, the only power any government or minister has over us is the power we give them. If you vote, for anyone, then you are condoning this power. Even by voting for the "good" politicians, you are empowering them all - the good, the bad and the ugly. You can blame and scapegoat the IDSs of this world all you want but it doesn't change a thing.

If you accept masters, you accept subjugation - not only for yourself but for everyone else as well. If you accept others having power over you, you can't complain when that power - which you gave away - corrupts them. That level of power would corrupt you too - and me and everyone I know.

It's the power we should be blaming, not the frail and flawed human beings we allow to use it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2016, 12:05:56 AM
Way to go and over simplify it Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 March, 2016, 12:08:26 AM
That's the thing - it is simple.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 March, 2016, 04:58:36 AM
Quote from: Professor Wolfgang Von Bear on 18 March, 2016, 11:42:07 PM
Something else is afoot, I reckon, and IDS is jumping before he gets pushed.

For the man who made a fist pump in a previous budget announcement about benefit cuts (IIRC) to suddenly decide that he cannot in 'all good conscience' preside over the implementation of what have to be the most insidious cuts contemplated by this government (or any in the last fifty years?) is curious to say the least.  This does smell of something else. 

This budget has been universally reviled from what I can see.  It seems that Osborne has taken a step too far and revealed the naked truth about the Tory party.  Is he jumping before he was pushed or is he distancing himself from a marked man?  The jostling for top position is now starting to take place and Cameron's legacy is starting to look a bit like Blair's.  Whoever becomes next Tory party leader will have to deal with that.  If that is what is behind this then I would suggest that it is too little too late.  IDS as with all of the present cabinet is now tainted worse than Thatcher. 

Anyone who voted for these guys better take a look at the Welsh Valleys because this government is doing to the country what Thatcher did to those communities.  That will be the UK in thirty years time.  Gutted and impoverished.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 March, 2016, 07:42:10 AM
There is something else happening.  As someone who has been in receipt of disability benefits for nearly twenty years and who knows the system very well, I know the current proposed cuts to PIP are small compared to previous cuts imposed on disabled people in the last few years, so why resign now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2016, 09:35:28 AM
Ouch, that was some harsh language I was using last night. Remind me not the forum whilst pished ever again chaps, not the first time tis has happened. Sorry to Tanky for....ahem...saying you should "pile drive yourself into a concrete foundation"* and for being a condesending prick to Sharky.  :-\

*Why can't I think of threats that imaginative whilst sobber?...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 March, 2016, 09:42:04 AM
I think he's positioning himself in case Britain leaves the EU. If Britain does leave, he can say "hey look, I stood up for you over these reforms - now vote for me to stand up for you in this new, free Britain," and continue the "welfare reforms" from the bosom of government. If Britain stays in, he can resign and take up a corporate job, probably on boards like Atos or similar, to continue the "welfare reforms" from the private sector.

No worries, Hawkie - this is an emotive thread and full of passion and I for one wouldn't have it any other way :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 20 March, 2016, 09:59:34 AM
He's on tv now, with mock indignation about how the most vulnerable are being put upon by the government.  I'm "a man without ambition" says the former leader of the opposition, Secretary for defence and Secretary of state for work and pension s.

His apparently moral decision to step down has, I'm sure, nothing to do with the court throwing out his appeal against a report into Universal Credits being published, just the day before. 
If we're in the EU, he'd be out anyway, and will join up with the other backbenchers to be led by the actor who plays Boris Johnson in trying to seize the votes of the fearful and wealthy.
If we're out, Cameron will stand down and PM Boris will name IDS as defence minister.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2016, 11:59:16 AM
I thought his comments about Cameron and Osborne deliberately targeting the working poor because they were a group that would never vote Tory was interesting (if true), but otherwise I just couldn't believe a word of what he was saying because of who was saying it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 20 March, 2016, 12:05:58 PM
Cutting benefits for the most vulnerable was a good thing when I was doing it, because I'm a good person.  When Osborne does it its a bad thing, because he's a bad person. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 March, 2016, 12:29:30 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 20 March, 2016, 12:05:58 PM
Cutting benefits for the most vulnerable was a good thing when I was doing it, because I'm a good person.  When Osborne does it its a bad thing, because he's a bad person.
They're all a bunch of man children anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2016, 07:42:23 PM
Tories' Disregard for the Law 'Legal Enough' Says Judge Dredd. (http://www.thehourlyterrier.co.uk/archives/1538)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 March, 2016, 05:00:19 PM
The Telegraph exclusively reports that a shadowy cabal of Labour Party hard-left communists are meeting in secret to plot the downfall of the right wing of the party, and to that end have drawn up a list of MPs classifying them as "loyal" or "hostile" to Jeremy Corbyn.
I know I mock the right-wing media when they invent stories, but I actually like this one for its sheer whimsy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 March, 2016, 07:15:20 PM
I wondered what all that Dungeons and Dragons guff was at PMQs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 March, 2016, 07:43:20 PM
By sheer coincidence, the story came just in time for PMQs.  Funny that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 March, 2016, 07:48:20 PM
What are the chances?

*rolls dice*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2016, 07:54:44 PM
Hang on, I need to consult the Minister Manual...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 23 March, 2016, 08:33:33 PM
Quote from: Professor Wolfgang Von Bear on 20 March, 2016, 11:59:16 AM
I thought his comments about Cameron and Osborne deliberately targeting the working poor because they were a group that would never vote Tory was interesting (if true), but otherwise I just couldn't believe a word of what he was saying because of who was saying it.

In 1997, just before Blair won his first election, I ws speaking to Caroline Spelman, Tory MP for the area I then lived in (still there, sadly as Minister for Agriculture). After speaking to her for just a minute, her hubby (bio-tech company director, purely coincidentally) came over and said "Come along dear, he will never vote for you anyway."  So it's good to see another Tory dispel the "all in this together" propaganda, even if I don't hold much stock in any morals leading to this grand admission
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 March, 2016, 12:01:54 AM
Just because I thought it was hilarious, I'd like to share this interview from the ukip leader in Scotland.  This is the reason ukip don't play well north of the border.

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/inside-politics/ukip-scotland-leader-david-coburn-sets-record-straight (https://www.holyrood.com/articles/inside-politics/ukip-scotland-leader-david-coburn-sets-record-straight)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2016, 05:54:11 PM
Another thing from 38 Degrees - for anyone who thinks the BBC is worth saving:

"Have a look at this:
http://38d.gs/1S254OI (http://38d.gs/1S254OI)

"This is the biggest threat to the BBC so far. John Whittingdale, the minister who's deciding our BBC's future, just announced he wants the government to choose the people who run the BBC. It means our most trusted news source could become government controlled.

"Whittingdale sneaked out his devastating plan at the weekend, to a newspaper that's behind a paywall. He knows that another scandal might put a stop to his plans to undermine the BBC for good. So he'll be hoping that 38 Degrees members aren't paying attention.

"We've got to act fast. If enough us sign an emergency petition in the next 48 hours demanding the BBC stays independent, 38 Degrees members can deliver it to him in person. And exposing his plans in public will shine a light on his real agenda to dismantle our BBC.

"Will you add your name to the petition to keep the BBC free from government control? Just click the link and it'll take less than 1 minute:
http://38d.gs/1S254OI (http://38d.gs/1S254OI)

"Thanks"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 April, 2016, 12:03:07 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ImUPhGs.jpg)

From Down the Upward Spiral. (http://www.downtheupwardspiral.com/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 April, 2016, 07:39:26 AM
Bloomberg: How to Hack an Election. (http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-how-to-hack-an-election/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 April, 2016, 08:02:17 PM
UKIP want to give you cancer and then run you over with their car. (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/07/ukip-nigel-farage-scotland-elections-manifesto-pub-smoking-ban#comment-71991568)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 April, 2016, 11:56:41 PM
The smoking thing I get. I hate it (my uni days were spent reeking of smoke, and I like that I can today go into a pub and not leave with eyes streaming and desperately needing to WASH ALL THE THINGS), but I get it. But raising the drink-drive limit? That is mental. I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that gem. Actually, on second thoughts, I probably wouldn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 08:48:00 AM
It appeals to those who long for the golden days of the 1970s, when a bloke could finish work, down a couple of pints of bitter and drive home.  A simpler time when life was fair, music had proper lyrics, and women and foreigners did as they were told.

Bloody government, trying to cut the number of road deaths.  Do away with all legislation, that's what I say. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 08 April, 2016, 09:44:40 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 08:48:00 AM
It appeals to those who long for the golden days of the 1970s, when a bloke could finish work, down a couple of pints of bitter and drive home.  A simpler time when life was fair, music had proper lyrics, and women and foreigners did as they were told.

Bloody government, trying to cut the number of road deaths.  Do away with all legislation, that's what I say.

I like how they're trying to appeal to the ned vote by wanting to reverse the ban on air rifles.  When I was growing up, no trip across.a bit ofl wasteland or the abandoned railway sidings was complete without the whistling crack of some 15 year-old psychopath taking a potshot at you with his air rifle, in between his valiant attempts t o murder the local birdlife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 April, 2016, 09:53:43 AM
Most of the policies—like most of those of Tories and Brexiters—can be nicely summed up thusly:

ARE YOU A SELFISH PRICK? VOTE FOR US!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 April, 2016, 02:27:33 PM
You have to be selfish to want to leave the EU? You must be getting desperate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 April, 2016, 02:39:28 PM
The smoking ban must be one of the most successful health initiatives of recent years - since our workplace ban came in in 2004, smoking rates have dropped from nearly 1 in 3 of the population to almost 1 in 5.  That's an incredible change in a decade, even allowing for the contribution of all the other elements of the anti-smoking campaigns. And obviously the ban has effectively eliminated secondhand smoking in the workplace. Why would anyone want to risk undoing all that in the name of personal convenience?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2016, 02:43:26 PM
What does Corbyn think of the EU, as he's very quiet, especially as from what I've read and heard, he's against it.
Who would've thought that people who believe in democracy and laugh at that Dredd story, for the Judges are very undemocratic, would actually prefer to want to be ruled by an undemocratic political power.
We do live in strange times!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 April, 2016, 03:11:52 PM
I agree that while Corbyn has already said he supports remaining in the EU, he simply hasn't done enough for my personal satisfaction.  Kind of like that time he bowed at the Cenotaph, but not by enough degrees.  Or that time he sung all the words to the national anthem at the appropriate time and in a dignified manner befitting the occasion, but probably had thoughts inside the privacy of his own mind that I wouldn't approve of if I knew what they were.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2016, 03:53:06 PM
Historically, Europe was a collection of nation states all competing and trading (and yes, sometimes warring) with one another. There was free trade and healthy economic and social competition between sovereign states and if the people didn't like what was happening in their own state they moved to another.

By trying to homogenize Europe, imposing blanket regulations on everyone, controlling trade and banking and eliminating sovereignty, it could be said that the most anti-European body in Europe is the EU...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 04:26:01 PM
Historically, people swore fealty to the king, and died of cholera no more than fifty furlongs from where they were born.  Travelling to distant lands was left to those with money and the privilege of a good education, or men in uniform tasked with killing foreigners. 

International trade and commerce requires international regulation, and whilst there may be many problems with the  set up of the EU, pretending it isn't there won't help. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 April, 2016, 04:51:06 PM
Not sure anybody is pretending it isn't there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 April, 2016, 04:54:27 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2016, 02:43:26 PMWhat does Corbyn think of the EU, as he's very quiet, especially as from what I've read and heard, he's against it.
His statement on Labour's position was very clear:

"We will be campaigning to keep Britain in Europe in the coming referendum, regardless of David Cameron's tinkering, because it brings investment, jobs and protection for British workers and consumers."

His own personal sentiments have said to be varied, but his current outlook in all interviews echoes that of the Greens, in that it makes more sense to remain in the EU and attempt reform than exit and be hurled into years of uncertainty.

I still find the exit thing baffling. Almost everything from that camp is rhetoric, bluster and nebulous bullshit. People are yelling that things will be better just because, and all the deals will be amazing BECAUSE BRITAIN. It reminds me of Trump saying the Mexicans will pay for a wall, more than sensible planning for a future relationship with the EU and other world powers post-exit.

QuoteWho would've thought that people who believe in democracy and laugh at that Dredd story, for the Judges are very undemocratic, would actually prefer to want to be ruled by an undemocratic political power.
Right now, we're ruled outright by a party that secured 37% of the vote, and is trying to curtail the power of the upper house, along with changing the electoral boundaries to its advantage. And despite people claiming otherwise, parliament remains sovereign, even though we are obligated to implement chunks of EU law. The EU needs democratic reform for sure, but the UK's no better in and of itself, from council level through to the Commons and the Lords.

Quitting the EU's not going to get us better democracy in the UK. Hell, I've no idea what would, given that the Tories are steadfastly against electoral reform and Corbyn's mob aren't yet united on the idea of some kind of proportional representation in the Commons (although Labour has at least budged on replacing the Lords).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2016, 04:55:21 PM
How on earth will we trade if we're not in the EU, I suppose we will shrivel and die!

Trade will happen if we are in or out, it's absolutely ridiculous to state otherwise. There are benefits to being in and out but if you like being told what to do by a corrupt and undemocratic body, then the EU is for you. (Best add before the usual say it, You can vote this government out and that is the difference)

People say that it will change but I would quite happily bet my house that the EU will never change and those books will NEVER be accounted for!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 April, 2016, 05:16:48 PM
I don't see how we can reform anything by staying in the EU if part of future trade deals like TTIP is that they can't be withdrawn from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 April, 2016, 05:39:23 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 08 April, 2016, 04:55:21 PM
if you like being told what to do by a corrupt and undemocratic body, then the EU is for you. (Best add before the usual say it, You can vote this government out and that is the difference)

You've never voted a government in or out of office, John; that's not how our political system works. You vote for a candidate to act as your representative in Parliament, with the forlorn hope that he'll vote in the same way you would.

If enough of your neighbours vote for the same candidate, he's returned to Parliament, and if enough of his mates get in they get to decide who'll be Prime Minister (then vote the way he decides). That's exactly what happens in the EU parliament too.

Brussels is undemocratic, but so is Westminster [1]. Where we agree is that voting in or out will make little difference to trade; in fact, I'd say it probably won't make any difference at all. It's the biggest nothing issue of my lifetime.


[1] See also, corruption.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 April, 2016, 06:04:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2016, 03:53:06 PM
It could be said that the most anti-European body in Europe is the EU...

"It could be said" is the most weaselly political cop out ever. Are you saying it or not? It could be said I'm dating Scarlett Johansen and that would be as true as that.

And yes, trade will still happen but we'll just be in a weaker position to dictate terms so we'll get screwed over
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 06:18:50 PM
QuoteHow on earth will we trade if we're not in the EU, I suppose we will shrivel and die!

No, i imagine we'll just have to come to trade deals with each of the other individual member states, which could be subject to taxes and restrictions. 



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2016, 06:29:22 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 04:26:01 PM
Historically, people swore fealty to the king, and died of cholera no more than fifty furlongs from where they were born.  Travelling to distant lands was left to those with money and the privilege of a good education, or men in uniform tasked with killing foreigners. 

International trade and commerce requires international regulation, and whilst there may be many problems with the  set up of the EU, pretending it isn't there won't help. 


I don't understand your point here.

Historically, Europe was an anarchy of competing states. Was everything in Europe's past good? Of course not. Was everything in Europe's past bad? Of course not. Yes, people died of things they don't die of today. Yes, the rich generally had an easier time of it, just like they do today. The states competed and traded and communicated; they helped one another and hindered one another and did all the things human beings do; they achieved magnificent things and plumbed Hellish depths together. They didn't need European Union regulations to achieve the great things or flout European Union regulations to commit the terrible crimes. Greatness and baseness will always exist, with or without regulations.

From the mixture of states, peoples and perspectives, Europe was a varied and vibrant community of communities capable of everything we are capable of today. By trying to force all these different states into some bland, centrally regulated mess of conformity and uniformity, the EU is destroying what Europe once was. That was my point. Whether this destruction is a good or bad thing is a matter for personal thought. I think it is on the whole a bad thing. I would prefer to see a European Alliance rather than a European Union, where states and people who want to work together can choose to work together, or not, as the case may be. This "Union" is coercive and, by forcing sovereign states and peoples to work together whether they like it or not, corrosive.

Europe wasn't perfect in the past, it's certainly not perfect today and is unlikely to be perfect in the future. The EU may do some good things in microcosm but, as a whole, it does more harm than good and, by forcing the French to be like the Germans, the Belgians to be like the Greeks, the British to be like the Spanish, everyone to be like everyone else, it stifles the very thing that Europe was  - a glorious anarchy. From this perspective, the EU is the most anti-European entity on Earth. I don't see how this observation is in any way "pretending it isn't there."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 April, 2016, 06:33:37 PM
More fantasy in that one post Sharky than the whole Disc World Series
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 April, 2016, 06:38:25 PM
"European Alliance"?

"Soverign States"?

Who are you and what have you done with Sharky?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 08 April, 2016, 06:47:58 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 08 April, 2016, 06:04:00 PMIt could be said I'm dating Scarlett Johansen and that would be as true as that.

Give it a few more years and we can all be dating Scarlett Johansson.

(http://res.cloudinary.com/engineering-com/image/upload/w_350,c_limit/Robot-Mark1-Bobby-Yip-1_fae2gu.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2016, 07:32:08 PM
(http://www.anglinggazette.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/sleepingfisherman.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2016, 03:19:19 AM
Don't forget to vote today and choose wisely!

Tories = Haters of the poor
Labour = Haters of the rich and Jews
Liberals = Lovers of everybody
UKIP = Haters of the EU
Greens = Users of fossil fuels
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 May, 2016, 07:52:51 AM
An important message about the democratic process from Neil Slorance

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1352971-the-neil-slorance-sketch-one-thing-all-politicians-agree-on/ (http://stv.tv/news/politics/1352971-the-neil-slorance-sketch-one-thing-all-politicians-agree-on/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2016, 01:25:04 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2016, 03:19:19 AM


Tories = Haters of the poor, doctors, firefighters, the disabled, Muslims, refugees, children, single parents, workers, unions, union members, and people who don't like sticking their cock in a dead pig's mouth

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2016, 01:51:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 05 May, 2016, 03:19:19 AMb]Labour[/b] = Haters of the rich and Jews
And the current Labour leader, half of the unions, and most Labour voters, seemingly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 05 May, 2016, 05:50:00 PM
Always nice to see the speaker giving people a telling off:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/04/john-bercow-tells-mps-off-for-fiddling-ostentatiously-with-their/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 06 May, 2016, 07:16:08 PM
Looks like Sadiq Khan is the new London Mayor and Goldsmith's campaign backfired.

6 police forces are looking to investigate election spending by the Conservatives from the 2015 election.

Lynton Crosby got a knighthood for his efforts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 May, 2016, 08:46:03 PM
... and the British population continue to be right royally screwed ... mainly by their own consent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2016, 08:52:37 PM
I've been reading in the Guardian how taking control of the capital and getting more seats than any other party is absolutely terrible news for Labour, with the majority of articles clinging to "they lost in Scotland" like a drowning man clings to flotsam.

One fleetingly-mentioned tidbit was interesting, though: because of the recent boundary changes, getting a majority of votes won't actually let Labour win the next General Election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 May, 2016, 09:09:37 PM
70 days of no Irish government (all on full pay), and our resulting new cabinet is the most depressing thing I've ever seen. Political cronyism and personal advantage, principles traded for fat pensions and a government that won't last a year. And almost time for their summer hols!

I may be fightin' with Legendary Shark Block soon enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: soggy on 06 May, 2016, 09:25:17 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 06 May, 2016, 09:09:37 PM
70 days of no Irish government (all on full pay), and our resulting new cabinet is the most depressing thing I've ever seen. Political cronyism and personal advantage, principles traded for fat pensions and a government that won't last a year. And almost time for their summer hols!

I may be fightin' with Legendary Shark Block soon enough.

To be fair TB they have to last at least 2 years to get the fat pension.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 06 May, 2016, 10:08:08 PM
I think you'll find they came behind the Tories in Scotland. Now if that isn't a failure I don't know what is Bear.
Obviously that news clip when I watched Corbynladen say it wasn't the best of performances was in my imagination.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2016, 10:23:57 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2016, 08:52:37 PMclinging to "they lost in Scotland" like a drowning man clings to flotsam.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 06 May, 2016, 10:29:59 PM
Here in Cheshire, an ex senior Copper with 30 years experience has been ousted as PCC by a failed businessman who is now in charge of a £200 million budget. Whether you think PCCs are a good idea or not, this is another example of why tribal party politics is flawed and needs to be abolished for the sake of the greater good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 May, 2016, 02:07:39 AM
Khan now officially the new Mayor of London (cue lots of versions of this picture):

(http://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/KhanSequel_FEAT-970x545.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2016, 08:23:57 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 May, 2016, 02:07:39 AM
Khan now officially the new Mayor of London

OMG, London under Sharia Law! At least Scotland remains loyal to Israel. Etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 May, 2016, 10:34:37 AM
Michael Fallon gracious in defeat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36235427 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36235427)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2016, 11:43:01 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 07 May, 2016, 10:34:37 AM
Michael Fallon gracious in defeat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36235427 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36235427)

It's at times like these that I can see the appeal of Trump. At least he'd say "no, an ISIS fanatic like the Mohammeden immigrant Khan represents an imminent threat to all the decent white people of this once great city". As opposed to just implying it with every pathetic evasion. And since when was housing and public transport the responsibility of the Defence Secretary?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 May, 2016, 01:23:02 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 07 May, 2016, 08:23:57 AM

OMG, London under Sharia Law! At least Scotland remains loyal to Israel. Etc.

I know that there are some that would love to see Britain as an Islamic state.  I've seen videos in the past.  That said, I've rarely if ever heard the sentiments repeated so I don't think that they are too credible.  Considering the number of councils in the UK that have muslim councillors already I'm not sure how much support there is amongst muslim politicians.

That said, it could be common sense kicking in.  Although we have a large muslim population in this country there are more that are not.  Are they really willing to pick a fight with radical atheists?  I don't see that happening in a hurry.

Having said all this, you could well have been joking and I've completely missed it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2016, 01:29:32 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 May, 2016, 01:23:02 PM
Having said all this, you could well have been joking and I've completely missed it!

I'm afraid it was the latter. My attempted jokes would probably be more obvious if they were actually funny.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2016, 02:49:59 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2016, 08:52:37 PMOne fleetingly-mentioned tidbit was interesting, though: because of the recent boundary changes, getting a majority of votes won't actually let Labour win the next General Election.
Labour really only have themselves to blame for this. Arrogance during their third term should have been countered by people noting that this wouldn't go on forever, and that they would very obviously be stitched up the second the Tories got back in. Then was the time to shove through, at the very least, AV+ (without a bloody referendum) or even STV/AMS. Now, we're basically fucked for any kind of electoral reform, because the Tories will be able to get a majority in 2020 with as little as a third of the vote. It's insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 May, 2016, 04:30:12 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 07 May, 2016, 01:29:32 PM
... My attempted jokes would probably be more obvious if they were actually funny.

Well, David Cameron is not that obvious and definitely not very funny so I wouldn't get too upset.

In fact there is little if anything funny about the current shower.  What is most disturbing is that we now have a generation of young voters coming through who never have experienced a full on Tory government and only have Blair / Brown's Tory lite as a comparator for Labour.  Fifteen years of this ... "Be afraid, be very afraid."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2016, 04:43:38 PM
I think people are suddenly realising what full-Tory means. (I also suspect people will look back on the coalition and realise that while the Liberal Democrats made a few massive blunders — most notably the AV referendum and the health bill — they did in fact reign in the worst excesses of the Conservatives.) But what they don't have is any understanding that an alternative even exists, not least given that the PLP is banging on about how Corbyn and pals are screwing up by suggesting such a thing even exists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 May, 2016, 06:37:16 PM
I couldn't agree more.  The Liberals thought they could do a deal with the devil and come out smelling of roses.  They got the (on some level accurate) blame for letting the Tories anywhere near Downing Street again but at the same time the PLP seems to be utterly determined to give the Tories a bigger mandate next time round.  The same arrogance that drove them out of power is keeping them from recognising what they need to do to become a credible force. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2016, 07:55:12 PM
There's a petition to independently investigate the impartiality of the BBC's political editor (https://www.change.org/p/james-harding-director-of-news-and-current-affairs-we-ask-that-the-bbc-review-the-current-political-editor-laura-kuenssberg-s-position?recruiter=46360577&utm_source=petition_show&utm_medium=copylink), should you be interested in signing such a thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2016, 10:17:39 PM
People vote for monkeys and then wonder why they get shit thrown at them.

(I hope I don't need to say that this isn't meant in a racist way but in a politicianist way.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2016, 10:30:44 PM
Racist.

/follows Sharky into the toilet and bangs on the door asking why he loves Hitler
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2016, 10:37:22 PM
It's that come-hither 'tasche.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 May, 2016, 11:43:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2016, 10:17:39 PM
People vote for monkeys and then wonder why they get shit thrown at them.

(I hope I don't need to say that this isn't meant in a racist way but in a politicianist way.)

That is quite offensive. Monkey's are adorable when they try to act like people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2016, 07:27:29 AM
Luckily, though, monkeys can't read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 May, 2016, 07:39:51 AM
I was also going to say, people trying to act like monkey's ... not so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2016, 07:45:08 AM
Ook.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 May, 2016, 07:46:23 AM
Which, if I remember my Librarian correctly means ... "Oi watch it you or I'll come over and rip your arms off?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 May, 2016, 07:49:18 AM
Oook ook.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 08:20:20 AM
On April 7th this year, the Arizona State Legislature passed a bill (http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/2r/bills/sb1141p.pdf) defining gold and silver as legal tender and encouraging its use as currency. This might not sound like a big deal, but it is.

Gold and silver are finite resources, unlike paper money which can be printed ad-infinitum. It is the constant creation of money (through printing, accountancy and debt creation) which drives inflation and rising prices. The more "money" there is, the more expensive things become. Home-owners are particularly blind to this, in my experience. "I bought my house for £20,000," they say, "and now it's worth "£50,000!" Well no - it's not your house that's worth more, it's your money that's worth less. Gold and silver doesn't have this problem as it largely keeps its value at a fairly stable level (except when compared to paper money, of course - where the same home-owners' paradox applies).

So - good on Arizona.

Except that, four days ago, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey vetoed (http://azgovernor.gov/sites/default/files/sb1141_veto_letter.pdf) the bill. Democracy, eh? Sounds like anything but to me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2016, 08:41:26 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 08:20:20 AM
Gold and silver are finite resources, unlike paper money which can be printed ad-infinitum. It is the constant creation of money (through printing, accountancy and debt creation) which drives inflation and rising prices.

Because, of course, prices never rose in the era when currencies were backed by physical gold reserves. And why, despite vast quantities of money having created over the last few years, inflation is running at historic lows.

If you start using gold as currency, who agrees its value? Who arbitrates over whether it's been weighed accurately in the course of offering it in a transaction? Who guarantees its purity, so its value can be assessed with confidence for each transaction?

Perhaps it would be better if some organisation turned gold into some kind of units of agreed size and quality, and thus at least notional value. But, gosh, gold is neither particularly durable (in as much it's very malleable, a disadvantage if you want it exist as recognisable tokens) and very heavy. Perhaps some kind of lighter proxy might be needed... a paper note to represent the value of the gold tokens...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 May, 2016, 09:22:32 AM
Also it's not like gold and silver can be easily gathered up by the rich and powerful, who probably already have several hundred thousand times the amount you or I have and ready access to much more, leading to an even greater gulf in class devide and eventual mass poverty...like, all the things modern currency has made strides to get away from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 16 May, 2016, 09:23:06 AM
What I hear from you--

- general and constant antipathy to the idea of centralised authority
- a few weeks ago, you wanted to bring back legalised slavery as a criminal punishment
- now you want us all to carry purses of silver and gold ducats instead of paper money and credit cards

Would it be fair to say that what you actually seem to want is a return to some kind of Dark Ages society?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 09:37:35 AM
Exactly, Jim.

Bank notes were originally backed by and based on gold and silver. These metals kept the value of the notes, and the amount of notes that could be issued, under control. When it became apparent in the 1970s that the number of bank notes in circulation far outweighed the amount of gold and silver supposedly backing and pinning them, the United States abandoned the Gold Standard. The dollar then became an essentially "floating currency" (i.e., untethered to anything) and, as part of the Bretton Woods agreement after WWII many other global currencies had been tied to the dollar in order to aid with reconstruction, this had the knock-on effect of untethering the rest of the world's currencies as well.

Of course, in order to counter this potentially catastrophic untethering, the U.S. hit upon the idea of the petrodollar instead (basically tethering the value of the dollar to oil).

You are absolutely right in what you say, that a bank note representing the value of gold and/or silver would be a good thing. A very good thing, in fact. Much better than the essentially valueless promissory notes we use today.

As to inflation, the fact is that it's money creation which causes it. Historically, prices were set by free market supply and demand and yes, they did fluctuate both up and down but not in a uniform manner. For example, in winter the price of wool might go up to reflect immediate demand for warm clothing whilst it would fall again in summer. Conversely, the price of silk might go up in summer and down in winter. This kind of thing was the original meaning of the term "business cycle" - a term which has been recently appropriated to the entirely artificial "boom and bust" cycle, which is caused by banking and governmental attempts to regulate and interfere with the natural economy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 09:41:30 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 16 May, 2016, 09:23:06 AM

Would it be fair to say that what you actually seem to want is a return to some kind of Dark Ages society?


No.

What I want is for society, using the knowledge, wisdom and technology we've amassed over the last couple of thousand years, to move forward out of this neo-serfdom we currently find ourselves mired in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 May, 2016, 10:03:49 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 09:37:35 AM
Exactly, Jim.

Bank notes were originally backed by and based on gold and silver. These metals kept the value of the notes, and the amount of notes that could be issued, under control.

Not really exactly, because that wasn't my point. My point was that inflation also existed when currencies were backed by gold reserves. The notion that if you wanted to have (arbitrary number for easy maths) £1bn in circulation in the economy you had to have £1bn worth of physical gold in a vault somewhere has no intrinsic benefits over the electronic system, certainly not the magical properties you ascribe.

The value of gold is also notional and abstract, and, crucially, subject to fluctuations. What happens if the value of gold on the world market tanks by 20% in a short time? Are you supposed to withdraw £200M from the economy? How do you propose to do that? Should the government buy more gold to bring the value of its reserves back up to £1bn? Note that either of these options has immediate and distinct economic consequences that are entirely outside the control of government and entirely unrelated to the health of the economy, or how it's being managed.

When does a pound stop being a pound? A wealthy citizen has £100M in UK banks. He moves the money offshore, but continues to be a UK citizen, paying UK tax. Do you remove £100M from the money supply to reflect the fact that this cash has been placed beyond economic use? Do you insist that wherever he moves it to also has sufficient gold reserves to underwrite that cash? Do you put the £100M back into the economy, deciding that now it's offshore they're not pounds any more? What happens if he moves that money back?

The problem, it seems to me, is that you have decided that the thing wrong with money is that it's an abstraction and if, somehow, we could make it 'real' many problems would be solved. But you can't. Money is an abstraction, it's fundamental to its nature, whether it's a five pound note, a gold ducat or a massive stone in your front garden. The point at which you stop being solely responsible for your own food, shelter, health and warmth, the point at which you abandon direct barter as the only means of exchange, you require arbitrary tokens of agreed value. That's money, and the 'agreed value' bit means that they will always be abstract.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 May, 2016, 11:09:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 08:20:20 AM
"I bought my house for £20,000," they say, "and now it's worth "£50,000!" Well no - it's not your house that's worth more, it's your money that's worth less.

If it worked like that, then prices would rise uniformly for all goods - why is my money worth significantly less when buying a house, but may be worth more when buying consumer electrical goods?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 May, 2016, 11:31:43 AM
Yes, of course inflation has always existed - even when we used shiny beads. If I produce Product X and it's popular, I can inflate the price to the level consumers are willing to pay. If Product X is unpopular, I can deflate the price to one consumers find amenable. That's free market inflation/deflation based upon supply and demand which type of inflation/deflation still exists today but is a minor player in modern inflation.

Having £1bn of gold reserves to cover £1bn of notes in circulation has one great advantage over the modern electronic system - no bank runs. Electronic and fiat money can be rendered worthless or even non-existent in a heartbeat - gold and silver (and other metals or commodities) cannot. Like all matter, gold can neither be created nor destroyed. It can be dug up and misplaced, sure, but it cannot be breathed into and out of existence at the stroke of a pen or the push of a button. It is the current electronic system which is more akin to magic than the tangible gold (etc.) system.

Technically, the value of gold cannot fluctuate - it is the value of commodities which fluctuate in relation to gold - although you are correct to say that the value of gold is abstract. (All values are abstract and subjective (except fiat currency, the value of which is kept objective by central banking and government manipulation). Take the cost of one thing we both know and love, the weekly Prog. To you, the Prog is worth more than the £2.55 you pay for it but to your newsagent your £2.55 is worth more than the shelf space the Prog takes up. If the price rises, you have to decide whether it's still worth the cost - but that's your decision alone. If many people stop buying the Prog, the newsagent will cease stocking it. You make a subjective value judgement. If the government were to objectify the price of the Prog (as they do with fiat currency) they might make it £1.55, which is good for you but bad for the newsagent, or £3.55, which is bad for you and the newsagent.) Once governments and central banks objectify the value of gold (or currency of any kind), they take away your choice - robbing you of the power to ask yourself "how much of my gold/currency is Product X worth to me?"

In the unlikely event that the value of gold falls by 20%, driven by, say, the discovery of a fantastically rich new gold mine to add to the world's supply, it would not mean eliminating 20% of the notes in circulation. Each note would be worth 20% less. Even in this event, it would not mean that you'd automatically be able to buy less with it - prices and costs would fall in tandem otherwise businesses would fail. Inflation prevents this basic free market mechanism from working as it should because, even if inflation falls, all that means is prices are still rising, just more slowly. Economics, at its most basic, is simply the science of human interactions - if you do this or give this to me, I'll do that or give that to you. It's only when governments and central banks step into that simple equation that it becomes expensive, confusing and counter-productive. For a start, you've got to start paying the wages of the middle-men and bureaucrats and their machinery through coercive taxes.

Your example of wealthy citizens moving £100 million offshore poses no problems. Indeed, it makes no difference whether their money (in a gold-backed economy) is off or on shore - it's still temporarily out of wider circulation and all it means is that the value of the rest of the money in circulation rises slightly to cover the gap, with the concomitant slight rise in the cost of goods and services. The money itself is the proof of extant gold and has no need to be further underwritten.

Money is an abstraction but that's not the problem. Money will always be an abstraction and, while we continue to exist in this primitive state, we will continue to rely on it to run our primitive economic system. The problem is that it has become an abstraction of an abstraction and is no longer an abstraction of anything solid or real. We don't have to base our money on anything - Bitcoin proves that - but we do need to have faith in it. The value of any money all boils down to faith in the end. The question is, do you want to place that faith in something real or in something somebody else can just make up out of thin air?

DDD - A house and a washing machine (for example) both continue to rise in "price" but at different levels and with different drivers. Whilst constructing a washing machine may include certain technologies and materials, and outsourcing to poorer countries, which make the machine cheaper to produce, houses are built on existing land (which also continues to rise in price as it becomes more scarce). There is also the question of taxes, fees, licenses, protectionism and so forth - of which a house incurs more than a washing machine. Each item consists of many sub-items, some have more (like the house) and some have fewer (like the washing machine), it is the addition of all these sub-items which make some things seem like they are getting more expensive faster than others and results in uneven price increases across the board.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 May, 2016, 10:44:40 AM
This nonsense with the BBC's recipe archive (of which I am a regular and happy user). Back when I was involved with unions on a daily basis we had a name for this too-common kind of shite: constructive dismissal.

Be a man, David, just give the BBC its notice and stop pissing around with this 'you're too elitist, no, now too populist, wait, wait, now too narrow, ah look, now you're too broad...'.  Waiting until David Attenborough dies* before turning out the lights might have a certain symmetry to it, but making their job untenable is a vile passive-aggressive tactic best suited to spineless managers, and a rotten way to treat the world's greatest broadcasting organisation. Give it a swift death, not this protracted decline.



*Darwin and/or all the gods of creation forbid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 May, 2016, 11:43:43 AM
And no prizes for guess who benefits (https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/who-benefits-from-the-tory-decision-to-axe-bbc-recipes/) from this turn of events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 17 May, 2016, 01:00:35 PM
The slow gutting of the Beeb begins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 May, 2016, 04:34:26 PM
To be fair, the Beeb has worked hard to make this happen through its political coverage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 May, 2016, 04:46:35 PM
The BBC in partnership with ITV is now thinking of going head to head with Netflix, Amazon, etc... WHY?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 17 May, 2016, 05:04:30 PM
You could ask yourself why should an internet shopping firm turn into a broadcaster?

The BBC and ITV have a huge back catalogue - wouldn't it make more sense for them to provide a service themselves rather than Amazon or Netflix taking a cut?

If the government is bent on eliminating the licence fee, then surely it would make sense to put something in place in the way of subscription to replace it.

Can't really moan if people are saying it's an archaic model, and then complain that they do something different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 May, 2016, 05:14:26 PM
All the BBC programs are paid for by the licence fee, so if you hold a licence then your subscription should be free for the back catalogue but the rest of the world can pay for it. I'll settle for that ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 17 May, 2016, 05:19:32 PM
What about royalties/residuals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 17 May, 2016, 05:34:19 PM
Good thinking there. Those will be paid for by the people who subscribe, as we still get it free with the licence. It'll have to be figured out by the money men.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 May, 2016, 06:02:21 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 17 May, 2016, 05:04:30 PM
If the government is bent on eliminating the licence fee, then surely it would make sense to put something in place in the way of subscription to replace it


Whatever value the BBC has resides in the fact it isn't subject to commercial pressures. It's not that anything the BBC does is particularly fantastic, but it's a useful yardstick to measure the privately owned competition against. The subscription model does away with that.

Whatever is wrong with the BBC resides in the fact it's subject to influence by the government of the day. Some future administration needs to put the corporation entirely beyond the reach of government and fold its funding into general taxation [1], like the NHS.

I don't think the deletion of an online recipe archive is a tragedy [2], but I don't think it makes any sense. The cost savings are counted in pennies; the only (fuzzy) logic behind it is that it will somehow allow other content providers to make more money and pay more tax.

That's clearly horseshit. The BBC belongs and is needed online more than anywhere else.



[1] I'd peg BBC funding to a percentage of pre-tax revenue generated by privately owned broadband, mobile and tv providers, which would do away with the argument that the BBC cannibalises their audience/revenue.

[2] Folding the mundane News Channel into World News is a great idea. I'd scrap them both and use the cash to give everyone in the UK basic broadband, since that's where they go when there's a breaking news story nowadays
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 May, 2016, 12:55:32 PM
Quote from: Butch on 17 May, 2016, 06:02:21 PM
I don't think the deletion of an online recipe archive is a tragedy [2], but I don't think it makes any sense. The cost savings are counted in pennies; the only (fuzzy) logic behind it is that it will somehow allow other content providers to make more money and pay more tax.

That's clearly horseshit. The BBC belongs and is needed online more than anywhere else.
There was something in early reporting about how it needed to be differentiated from newspapers - though I wasn't aware that newspapers were well-known for providing a recipe database...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2016, 02:29:23 PM
Have you never heard of the Daily Jellygraph, the Daily Quail or the Daily Stir?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 May, 2016, 03:00:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2016, 02:29:23 PM
Have you never heard of the Daily Jellygraph, the Daily Quail or the Daily Stir?

Ahh, now I see how reintroducing slavery as a punishment could be justified...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 May, 2016, 05:38:37 PM
Gravery. Life, with no possibility of rissole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 22 May, 2016, 11:49:38 AM
Good to see the Brexit debate has finally turned openly racist.

"Oh no!  Turkey might be an EU member in a few years, and if we're still in it, then all these brown-skinned people will move over here just to break into my house!"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2016, 12:09:21 PM
What would make me vote leave is stuff like TTIP, but for some reason the Brexit camp don't seem too keen on talking about the downside of trade deals that benefit the richest, victimise the poorest, and effectively destroy workers' rights and the power of unions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 May, 2016, 12:26:24 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 22 May, 2016, 11:49:38 AM"Oh no!  Turkey might be an EU member in a few years, and if we're still in it, then all these brown-skinned people will move over here just to break into my house!"

And don't forget all the raping.  Those poor brown folk do love their raping, and can't get enough of it in their own countries. Not like all those well respected white people at all.

One of my favourite 'leave' themes is 'I don't mind the EU now, but what's it going to be like in 50 years?'. Well who the feck knows. My guess would be 'still improving social conditions, but under horrific pressure from environmentally-driven migration and economic and political pressures resulting from same'.  Luckily the UK will be immune from such things. Somehow.

Still, I suppose that building that 500km fence along the NI/RoI border and staffing EU/UK customs and immigration will LPcreate some jobs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 May, 2016, 12:34:09 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 22 May, 2016, 12:26:24 PM
Still, I suppose that building that 500km fence along the NI/RoI border and staffing EU/UK customs and immigration will LPcreate some jobs.

Let's not forget the one they'd also have to build along the border with an independent Scotland that would almost certainly be part of the Schengen area.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 May, 2016, 12:37:52 PM
BBC boldly running with the headline:

"UK 'unable to stop' Turkey joining EU"

...over a story that quite clearly explains that, yes, the UK could.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 May, 2016, 02:59:20 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2016, 12:09:21 PM
... but for some reason the Brexit camp don't seem too keen on talking about the downside of trade deals that benefit the richest, victimise the poorest, and effectively destroy workers' rights and the power of unions.

Mainly because a lot of those that are in the BREXIT camp are a) amongst those most likely to benefit from TTIP and b) most interested in victimising the poorest and effectively destroying workers rights?

TTIP is a bloody scary piece of legislation which for some reason the Tories want to keep quiet about.  Not sure why?  <thoughtful hmmmm>
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 May, 2016, 04:12:37 PM
And if the UK leaves the EU house prices will plummet, great news for the grandchildren.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 May, 2016, 05:49:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 22 May, 2016, 04:12:37 PM
And if the UK leaves the EU house prices will plummet, great news for the grandchildren.

Heh, yeah I had to laugh at that one!  Oh noes, maybe the cost of accommodation will come down for those that don't already have a property portfolio!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2016, 06:21:48 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 22 May, 2016, 05:49:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 22 May, 2016, 04:12:37 PM
And if the UK leaves the EU house prices will plummet, great news for the grandchildren.

Heh, yeah I had to laugh at that one!  Oh noes, maybe the cost of accommodation will come down for those that don't already have a property portfolio!
Heh! I've just spent a week in Malta with a man, I discovered quickly, was a property shark buying up cheap flats and doing them up and selling tham at 6 times the original price. Wondered why me, an embitered student in need of affordable accommodation, took a dislikeing to him! :lol:

Lower property prices for all would be nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2016, 11:11:57 AM
Property prices plummeting won't be much help when the entire economy goes to hell. This was clearly GO appealing to investors, noting that if they vote out, their investments will be hit.

As for Turkey, the response to that is maddening. Turkey applied to join the EU in 1987. It has since completed ONE chapter. ONE. Chances of it completing the rest in a few years? Zero. Chances of that happening within a decade? Zero. Chances of it happening ever? Slim to none. By contrast, Iceland took about three years to rifle through nearly a dozen chapters and, had it continued with its EU membership, would probably have joined by now, or certainly within the lifetime of its current government. Likewise, you can imagine if Norway decided on full EU membership, it'd take a matter of a few years. You'd also think people in the UK would understand the basic concept of membership veto, given that the UK's own membership application was vetoed to begin with. ARGH.

Elsewhere, it's staggering to see the exit arguments. The little government leaflet that plopped through the door has no sources whatsoever for the claims (in marked contrast to the in side), and I'm seeing a lot of Brexit people now argue we should just go for it because "we can always rejoin later". Sure. I can't imagine there being anything other than unanimous support for the country that fucked the EU. And I'll bet we'll get all our exemptions back too, such as retaining Sterling! Because UNICORNS and MAGIC BEANS.

I'm now finding this whole process profoundly fucking depressing. So many people who clearly have made up their minds to vote out are fishing around saying it's SO CONFUSING trying to find out information about some obscure piece of EU funding and therefore the EU is evil. My wife's Facebook timeline is full of this kind of crap, often — most astonishingly — from people born overseas.

And then I finally got the question from my wife this morning (who is an EEA national): what will we do if Brexit is the vote? I have no fucking idea, and it makes me terribly upset about the thought of leaving this country due to a bunch of Tories wanting to fight a proxy war under the guise of a referendum, and some mop-haired arsehole switching sides because he realises he might just be PM because of it. I just hope the bookies and Bloomberg are on the money, because the alternative is too heartbreaking to contemplate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 11:46:46 AM
Make your mind up, the U.K. is either a poxy little country that could not survive outside the EU or it is so important that if it left it will have fucked the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2016, 12:07:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 11:46:46 AMMake your mind up, the U.K. is either a poxy little country that could not survive outside the EU or it is so important that if it left it will have fucked the EU.
I've never at any point stated that the UK cannot "survive" outside of the EU. Of course it can. The point isn't about survival, however, but whether or not we will be better off or even able to maintain the status quo. The vast majority of experts in the field from around the world quite clearly state that Brexit will be bad for the UK economy—it's just a matter of how bad.

And of course the UK leaving the EU would adversely affect it. Again, that's not something anyone appears to be arguing against. A great many predictions are painting a pretty awful lose-lose scenario, that may even have wider impacts on the world economy.

To my mind, much of the Brexit argument is veering dangerously close to anti-vaxx or climate change denial, with a nasty undercurrent of racism. A new report arrives stating that Brexit will have negative effects. It's a conspiracy! They're all out to get us! All of those carefully sourced documents are WRONG because BIAS! The establishment is forcing our hand! (Never mind that those on the out side include plenty of rich white men who are the definition of establishment.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 May, 2016, 12:52:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2016, 12:07:34 PM
To my mind, much of the Brexit argument is veering dangerously close to anti-vaxx or climate change denial, with a nasty undercurrent of racism. A new report arrives stating that Brexit will have negative effects. It's a conspiracy! They're all out to get us! All of those carefully sourced documents are WRONG because BIAS! The establishment is forcing our hand! (Never mind that those on the out side include plenty of rich white men who are the definition of establishment.)

Very much this. All my social media sources are full of this. If you asked me to guess right at this moment I'd say it will be a 'Leave' result, purely because aside from the xenophobe vote people are (yet again) rejecting complexity, or interpreting it as conspiracy, and just gobbling down lies to support this (not aiming this at Tankie or anyone else here).

The Turkey business is insane - even assuming such a thing is undesirable and/or vaguely likely, there's no way Turkey could join the EU against firm UK opposition, NONE, and anyone who tells you different is lying, but equally there is no way the UK could prevent Turkish accession if they leave - and in the fears of xenophobes, that's going to mean millions of those evil darkies piling up on your porous borders. Within the EU you get to influence its direction; outside you're just its neighbour, with its burger wrappers chucked over your wall.

Obviously my concerns as a non-UK citizen or resident are irrelevant, but as a small business in a closely-linked state I am envisaging economic  ruin in the short to medium term. We're still struggling under the last catastrophe and now you're willing another on us, with no clear vision of what it is you're actually going to achieve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
The UK will not vote to leave the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 23 May, 2016, 02:14:47 PM
dunno,if Austria does what it might be doing it might be a good idea...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 May, 2016, 02:56:11 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
The UK will not vote to leave the EU.

I think you're right - the brexitters and ukippers shout the loudest and fill up every news comments section, making it seem like everybody is keen to leave, but I think it is the quieter millions who will keep us in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2016, 03:37:23 PM
Perhaps. People talked in the general election about shy Tories. Who are the shy people this time? Tories who want to stay in? People who secretly want to vote out? Hard to tell. The Mail on Sunday's softening stance is very interesting though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 May, 2016, 03:58:35 PM
Article here from Roy Greenslade

http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/may/23/if-so-many-newspapers-back-brexit-why-will-remain-carry-the-day (http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/may/23/if-so-many-newspapers-back-brexit-why-will-remain-carry-the-day)

BTW, the independent edged out the far right candidate in Austria.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 May, 2016, 04:00:47 PM
If I cared about this, I'd vote to leave - purely because of my well-known views on centralized power. If asked to guess, however, I'd guess the vote will be to stay because people generally don't like change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 May, 2016, 04:42:08 PM
Of course, if the UK does exit the EU, Sterling will decline by 12% over the next two years because:
(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/formula_zpsnbxybmsz.png)

I trust this is sufficiently clear.
(Source.) (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524921/Weekly_shop_technical_note.pdf)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 May, 2016, 04:44:37 PM
The end of that equation I believe stands for Eijit*.  :lol:


*Stolen jokes are best jokes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 May, 2016, 06:00:09 PM
Stage two of "Operation: Eat Your Cereal"... explain to the electorate that the whole situation is far too complicated for them to understand, so they should probably do as they're told.

Stage 3...explain to the electorate that change is permanent and terrifying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2016, 08:46:39 PM
Given that I'm seeing people screaming that Turkey will be joining the EU soon and not understanding the difference between trade deficits and surpluses regarding physical goods and services...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 May, 2016, 09:12:58 AM
S'not often that I take a swipe at Radio 4, which I love above all other broadcast media, but I caught a chunk of an interview on Today this morning, but didn't catch the names. The interviewer was asking for specifics on the 'red tape' that Leave-aligned businesses were objecting to. Working Time Directive and REACH (Chemicals Regulation), apparently. A brief attempt at asking what about these rules were the issue revealed 'flexibility in working hours* ' and 'restrictions on pesticides'. Any further attempts to ask what exactly this meant was met with, repeatedly, 'what people want is more information'. But none was forthcoming, and there it was left. Why didn't the interviewer push on with 'so what Leave businesses want is the ability to make people work whatever hours suit them and use whatever pesticides suit them'.  Isn't that the actual point? And isn't that the information people need? That EU regulation,such as it is, generally protects them? Very weak journalism.



By way of balance: extraordinary episode of Just a Minute last night, where Giles Brandreth and John Finnemore each did the full minute one after the other. Arsom.

*It was noted that many fields of work already 'enjoy' exemptions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2016, 09:35:18 AM
Love Radio 4's entertainment output, despise its "journalism." Happy alternative; Radio 4 Extra!

I accidentally caught some Jeremy Vine on R2 the other day. His show should be re-titled Fearmongering in the Afternoon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 31 May, 2016, 10:02:25 AM
I've done an interview with the Guardian about the impact of an exit vote in Border areas in NI. I'll keep you all posted when it comes out. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 31 May, 2016, 10:23:28 AM
R4, and the BBC in general, are tiptoeing around at the moment in fear for their continued existence, especially regarding the EU vote - if you ever look at the comments section on the BBC news website for any EU story, it is just chock-full of people frothing about "left wing anti-brexit bias" - they're probably paranoid about appearing to be pro-remain, but such a neutered and fearful broadcaster is never going to ask the tough questions.

Any comments on stories that are not about the referendum or immigrants are usually full of "why are we allowed to comment on this and not Europe/immigration",

(and I can't understand why just a Minute is still on the air - as a game to play, it loses it's appeal quickly, as an entertainment show it reached that point about 20 years ago IMO)

Quote from: ZenArcade on 31 May, 2016, 10:02:25 AM
I've done an interview with the Guardian about the impact of an exit vote in Border areas in NI. I'll keep you all posted when it comes out. Z

There was one  l week or two ago about border villages that used to be separated by checkpoints but now benefit from all kinds of cross-border trade and who are worried about whether the border barriers will come back up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 31 May, 2016, 10:29:25 AM
Yep that was about Belcoo/Blacklion on the Fermanagh border. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 May, 2016, 10:32:14 AM
Just a Minute rocks!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 May, 2016, 10:44:12 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 31 May, 2016, 10:23:28 AM
(and I can't understand why just a Minute is still on the air - as a game to play, it loses it's appeal quickly, as an entertainment show it reached that point about 20 years ago IMO).

Seriously? I think it's still terrific, and I've been listening to it all my life - I ripped a few boxsets of CDs to my MP3 a few years back and seldom get tired of listening. Innocent fun, with no real topical satire to date it or distract from the verbal dexterity and flights of fancy. I will agree that the loss of some of the giants lessened it (Kenneth Williams, Peter Jones and the incomparable Clement Freud in particular), but there's plenty of new blood these days,  it's always fascinating to see comedy pros humbled by such an apparently simple task. It's great to see something endure, ans how Parsons keeps going is anyone's guess - he's nearly 95, and seemed to me to be an old man when I was a baby watching Sale of the Century!

But everything else in your post I agree with, DDD!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 May, 2016, 11:46:44 AM
The BBC has a big, big problem with balance or at least being seen to be balanced. In some cases, balance just doesn't exist, and yet the BBC dutifully trots out climate-change deniers in articles about climate change, or anti-vaccination dolts in vaccination features, giving 'both sides of the argument' roughly even space. I'm firmly pro-BBC, but this is one of the organisation's deep problems from a news standpoint, and we're very much seeing it in the EU referendum.

I'm also seeing a strange tendency for it to more often fact check the remain camp's arguments than those of leave. That might be because the latter is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel, but this stuff needs addressing. (For my part, I think I'm done trying to reason with leave voters. They keep parroting the same few things, and when you present some sourced material, everything suddenly becomes a CONSPIRACY from the ESTABLISHMENT. Fundamentally, for the majority, it's clear this all really comes down to immigration and, more specifically, a kind of little-Englander xenophobia. At times, I actually feel quite sorry for people on the Brexit side who are trying to fashion reasoned arguments, because they're being drowned out by racist idiots, including those like Farage and Johnson at the very top.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 08:52:21 AM
Hi IndigoPrime.  My vote to leave the EU has got nothing to do with immigration but I am interested to know your views on the immigration policy of the EU, as it seems that the EU's immigration policy is exactly the same towards non-EU citizens as the Leave campaign views are on immigration to the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2016, 10:15:17 AM
In advance of Indigo answering, could I throw your question back at you there Tankie: how do you feel about England, Scotand, Wales and all of Ireland having an even looser mutual immigration policy than the EU? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 10:33:09 AM
'Morning TB, I would have no problem with that at all, with all the historical connections between those countries it would seem a logical thing to do.

With regards to immigration overall, I'm a realist, you are never going to control immigration completely in the modern world.

I got a leaflet from the Remain campaign the other day stating how proud they were that they've imposed strict restrictions on non-EU citizens wishing to come to the UK.  On that basis, if the Leave campaign's racist surely the Remain campaign is as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 10:48:45 AM
There's a difference between the Leave campaign's outright xenophobia/stoking the flames and the EU's stance on immigration. Leave's been practically frothing about Eastern Europeans and OH NO TURKEY, when the former's had little effect on the UK and the latter just isn't going to happen. It's not a points policy per se that I'm against (in a theoretical sense—I do, though, think it's a big mistake for the UK and one that will impact a significant number of people in ways Leave does not expect) but the nature in which this is all being served up by Farage and Boris. There's wilful obfuscation about different kinds of movements, a lack of admission about any benefits of immigration (i.e. we get in young labour to fill skills gaps and ship off old people to the EU), and a general nasty undercurrent of keeping out those bally foreigners.

It also appears to be working, if the Guardian's report today is anything to go by. Again, Leave leads the polls. (Perhaps it's a blip. I bloody hope so.)

On the British and Irish isles, it'll be interesting to see what would happen in event of Brexit. I suspect Scotland would be independent within a decade and probably an EU member. God knows what will happen in Ireland. Would these isles still all opt out of Schengen? Would Scotland even get such an opt-out? How would two EU borders within these isles affect immigration and trade?

Also, Tankie, I'm not applying the same label to everyone. But everyone I know with a 'real name' (i.e. not anonymised on a forum) who's voting to leave has stated immigration is the reason, and the one thing that overrides everything else, including any and all economic arguments. It's likely to be the subject that swings this, and I'm sure if Brexit happens it'll nonetheless come as a massive shock to people that cutting immigration from the EU will make fuck-all positive difference to the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 10:57:09 AM
Well my real name is Mike Davis, so, there you go, a real named person who is voting to leave the EU for other than immigration reasons.  And, if you want, I'll send you even more information on a PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 June, 2016, 11:28:19 AM
I would say that the biggest problem with this whole referendum is that it is a complex and nuanced issue that requires a constructive and well reasoned campaign.  Unfortunately the political classes in this country would not know where to begin with this type of campaign.  As usual both sides are resorting to sensationalism and scare mongering, mainly because this is all they know.  The few sensible remarks get drowned out.

On the plus side the EU provides economic opportunities, regulation for the protection of consumers and employees (and some would argue at the same time employers), freedom of movement for those that want it, economic support for deprived regions, protection for industry (albeit poorly implemented with the help of our government).  Provides another level of legal redress in some instances.  I'm not completely sold on the 'helps keep the peace' argument.

On the negative side the EU costs money (whether we are actually net losers or winners is clearly an issue of contention), causes conflict and controversy when individual nations have to adopt rules and laws that run counter to long standing sensibilities (metrification, votes for prisoners), increases movement from member states with poorer economies and places pressure on destination nations.

Being physically disconnected gives us a different perspective in this country on EU issues.  Living and working in Germany near the Dutch / Belgian border years ago the benefits were real and tangible to many of those around us.  Our insular nature doesn't exactly help us.  Our engagement with the EU hasn't really helped us either.

I'm not 100% sure which way to vote if I'm completely honest.  Personally I do believe that the benefits outweigh the costs but at the same time I also think that we are squandering the opportunity that the EU provides.  I'm not sure that the worst fears of the naysayers of BREXIT will come true but I would be very surprised if, having voted to leave, we find ourselves having an easy ride of things at the negotiating table.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2016, 11:50:19 AM
Always presenting racism as being how the Leave argument is framed will just make Brexiters keep their opinions to themselves until the vote, thus missing the chance to debate with/sway them.

My initial impulse was to vote Leave, but immigration wasn't ever a factor in the decision - the EU now generating secret legislation to avoid public oversight is arguably enough to be concerned about, especially when that legislation specifically negates the stuff in the Pro column for Remain, like human/workers' rights, environmental protections and health/safety standards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 June, 2016, 12:12:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2016, 11:50:19 AM
- the EU now generating secret legislation to avoid public oversight is arguably enough to be concerned about,


Yep TTIP has to be the biggest home goal of the last few years.  That said, whilst there is support within the bureaucracy, there is a massive groundswell of opposition to it, including amongst MP's / MEP's of certain parties.  Considering that TTIP is a neoliberal' wet dream, is it reasonable to assume that we will be safe from the worst excesses if we leave under the current government?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2016, 12:31:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 10:33:09 AM
'Morning TB, I would have no problem with that at all, with all the historical connections between those countries it would seem a logical thing to d

Which is what I was getting at. Our attitudes to who is welcome are contingent on our shared history. All borders are artificial, even La Isla Britannia extends her boundaries overseas. Where we draw the line - or want to draw the line - is a matter of preference (for now - not very  much later we won't have a choice), be it street, postcode, county, country or continent. The countries within the EU share common minimum standards for social, democratic and economic aspects,  as set out in the Copenhagen Criteria. Those criteria effectively set the EU's bounds. Arguably the economic ball has been dropped (or professionally fouled), but for pretty low values of 'decent, modern, progressive', the social basis of our Union is sound. Thus within the EU, citizens enjoy broadly equal rights and equal freedom of movement.  We have a shared, miserable, history and rather better culture, just as we on these islands do. The argument being made - repeatedly - on the Leave side is that we don't, that Europeans are a teeming, rapacious, parasitic Other. There's only one term for that: xenophobia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 June, 2016, 12:35:45 PM
Couldn't agree more, El Tordelback. All countries are superficial boundaries and false senses of nationalism and patriotism are just veiled excuses to justify racism and duscrimination.


*Say's Zac as he sit on a beach on an off shore tax heaven stuck in the 1950's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 12:45:59 PM
But I'm not saying that TB, there are perfectly reasonable reasons for wanting to leave the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 June, 2016, 01:59:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 May, 2016, 11:46:44 AM
At times, I actually feel quite sorry for people on the Brexit side who are trying to fashion reasoned arguments, because they're being drowned out by racist idiots, including those like Farage and Johnson at the very top.)

Indeed, and I also feel sorry for those who want to remain who would like our leaders (from all parties|) to start making some positive arguments about staying rather than "if we leave we're all DOOMED"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2016, 02:15:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 12:45:59 PM
But I'm not saying that TB, there are perfectly reasonable reasons for wanting to leave the EU.

Wasn't saying you were, Tankie. But plenty have. And you're right, there are reasonable arguments for leaving the EU. i don't think they remotely outweigh the arguments for staying in, but there you go.  Unfortunately lies, bombast and hyperbole in the service of personal political advantage seem to have replaced almost all rational debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 02:46:48 PM
What Tordelback said.

Tankie: Regarding names, I wasn't referring to you, specifically, but more people I know (whether personally or from long-standing real-world connections online). Inevitably, for all those people, it's always come down to immigration and mostly a misunderstanding of immigration. (i.e. that once the EU borders are closed, job done. The UK will be amazing again! Etc.) It's pretty clear you're not thinking along those lines, as you've repeatedly said here. If you want to PM, that's entirely up to you.

Tjm86: From everything I've read across a range of newspapers (FT/Times/Daily Mail/Mirror/Guardian/etc.), online, and elsewhere in print, I'd agree that both sides are slinging shit at each other. But I don't see this as even. In the official leaflet, it's notable that none of the exit stuff is sourced. All the arguments are essentially just froth. By contrast, the remain side had one overt piece of nebulous crap, a couple of things that could have done with sourcing (even though they'd been all over the news that week), and five things directly sourced. And this continues: scientists; educators; business leaders; world leaders. The majority are all in favour of remain, which either means we're being trolled by the world's largest conspiracy (and that, despite being 'powerless', Downing Street is somehow the puppet master for the entire world), or, perhaps, there's that aspect of most of our friends and allies saying: "Don't do something really stupid."

QuoteI'm not completely sold on the 'helps keep the peace' argument.
I suspect there's something of an exaggeration there, but since the bones of the EU were formed, war has ceased between its members and governments have become less extreme, in the main. Whether that would have happened anyway is the obvious counterpoint.

QuoteI would be very surprised if, having voted to leave, we find ourselves having an easy ride of things at the negotiating table.
This is what gets me, the ongoing Brexit mob arguing it'll all be fine, because BRITAIN and FIFTH BIGGEST ECONOMY. So what? In manufacturing, we import more than we export. But in services, we export a whole lot more than we import. London could suffer. A rough ride seems likely, given that the EU will want to send a message. But even if we put that aside, what is the best possible deal we can hope for? A free trade agreement that still places tariffs on services? We certainly won't get full access to the open market without a Norway-style deal, and so that has to be off the table for both sides. Naturally, the exit campaign continues to serve nebulous and vague comments about this, using the 'free trade' wording fudge. That's not good enough. (As for the visa question, "we don't know" also isn't good enough. But then of course we don't know. What we do know is we don't need one now. Presumably that's not a reason to vote in for many, sadly.)

Professor Bear: I don't see how the UK is protected from TTIP by leaving the EU. The Tories are wholeheartedly in favour of this kind of legislation. Whatever offer the EU gets will be through its collective bargaining power, on being an economy on par with the USA. By contrast, most rankings set our economy as around a fifth of the size of the USA's. On that basis, anything we negotiate alone will find the UK having to more readily accept what it's offered, purely on the basis of having far less power. It's also notable that TTIP is stirring up opposition in the EU, most notably in France, and so staying might actually be safer to avoid ending up in part of a TTIP-style deal, if not TTIP itself. (And the main concern appears to be standards and the NHS, the latter of which should in theory now be protected, and the former of which will slide if the UK goes it alone anyway.)

EDIT: One possible place of 'safety' on voting out would be if we vote out and end up with a significant change of government in 2020. But those people who are banking on Brexit causing a snap election and Corbyn rising to power in October are deluded in the extreme. If Brexit happens, Corbyn's fucked, every progressive party will lick its wounds, and we'll without doubt see the Tories in power at the very least until 2025, and probably until 2030—and it'll be the worst Tories at the top, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 June, 2016, 03:33:42 PM
Hi IndigoPrime  What you and TB are saying could well be correct, after all, what do I know.  I'm a 59 year old retired, disabled bloke, proud father of a comic book artist son, living in a little 2-bedroom bungalow on the outskirts of the Fens, and am an expert on nothing!  I just wish both sides of the argument would calm down, so that people could make informed choices.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 03:40:25 PM
While we disagree on which path to take, I wholeheartedly agree with that particular sentiment. I have no love for the bulk of the remain politicians. They too often spout gibberish and aren't much better than the Leave mob. But then we get the 'news' we deserve, I suppose. Otherwise all of the coverage would be akin to Nicholas Barr's piece on why he's voting to remain, despite aligning with Hague on the EU as a whole (http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/) (and, presumably, 'leave' equivalents) rather than a shouting match.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 June, 2016, 05:03:33 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 03:40:25 PM
Nicholas Barr's piece on why he's voting to remain, despite aligning with Hague on the EU as a whole (http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/) (and, presumably, 'leave' equivalents) rather than a shouting match.

Useful link, I'll be quoting that next time the BBC comments section goes in to meltdown!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 June, 2016, 05:30:41 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 02:46:48 PM
What Tordelback said.
In the official leaflet, it's notable that none of the exit stuff is sourced. All the arguments are essentially just froth.

TBH I've come to pretty much the same conclusion.  Places like 38 degrees help as well, checking the facts and showing where the statements stand.  What is worrying though is that people are listening.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 02:46:48 PM

By contrast, the remain side had one overt piece of nebulous crap, a couple of things that could have done with sourcing [ ... ] The majority are all in favour of remain, which either means we're being trolled by the world's largest conspiracy [ ... ] or, perhaps, there's that aspect of most of our friends and allies saying: "Don't do something really stupid."


Again this is something that has got me wondering as well.  Bearing in mind this is the same crowd that pretty much missed 2008, it is still worth considering what they are saying.  Granted markets don't like unpredictability and the simple truth is that no one really has a clue what the true cost of BREXIT could be but still there does come a point when you have to stop and think "What are they so worried about?  What does that mean to me?"

Granted that the effects aren't uniform across the nation but it seems at times that immigration is a convenient excuse for wage depression and job insecurity.  Yes there are some areas where immigration has a significant impact but the fact of the matter is that if you have the wherewithal and self motivation to travel that far in search of a better life then you aren't going to waste that opportunity.  Conversely there are enough in this country that have an over developed sense of entitlement that could do with a rocket up there back side (unfortunately I teach quite a few of them).

Quote[they are] interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.
(or in this case, a referendum ... but it worked last year)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2016, 07:02:49 PM
The Eurosceptic's Handbook: 50 live issues in the Brexit debate. (http://www.civitas.org.uk/publications/the-eurosceptics-handbook/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 07:45:18 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 01 June, 2016, 05:30:41 PMBearing in mind this is the same crowd that pretty much missed 2008, it is still worth considering what they are saying.
Well, it's more than that. It's economists and scientist and world leaders and businesspeople and creatives, among others. But if we limit the naysayers to economists, you're right that most missed 2008's meltdown. And it's possible that the UK could somehow benefit from being outside the EU. My question is this: is that likely? We know what the status quo is, but don't know what would come next. And there are no deals that could be struck with the EU that would fully satisfy the Brexit mob and keep the EU happy. So I don't see anything beyond a lose-lose scenario for the UK and the EU (which will probably have shockwaves that will head worldwide, screwing everyone—after which point, the UK's not going to be overly popular). It's also notable that all the countries Brexit is apparently saying we should deal with instead of the EU are saying to stay in too. China wants the UK as a bridge, as does the USA. Hell, even Canada and Australia does. From an economic standpoint, we're really well positioned right now, but won't be if we vote out.

QuoteWhat does that mean to me?
I suspect few people are really asking that. They see economics as an abstract. But if the economy contracts, funding is cut or taxes go up. With a Tory government, you can guess in which direction they will head.

Quote
Quote[they are] interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.
(or in this case, a referendum ... but it worked last year)
Quite. And Boris and Gove are now fighting this as if it's a GE. The others haven't really caught on to that yet. Cameron needs to fight back, and Corbyn needs to throw his hat into the ring.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2016, 07:02:49 PM
The Eurosceptic's Handbook: 50 live issues in the Brexit debate. (http://www.civitas.org.uk/publications/the-eurosceptics-handbook/)

"Standing back from the spin and hyperbole of Project Fear"

Yeah. I'm sure someone using the phrase 'Project Fear' will have written the epitome of an unbiased read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 June, 2016, 07:59:39 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 June, 2016, 07:45:18 PM

Yeah. I'm sure someone using the phrase 'Project Fear' will have written the epitome of an unbiased read.


Oh, I'm sorry. I'll look for a completely unbiased study on this subject. I'm sure there are millions of them knocking about.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 June, 2016, 12:29:10 PM
Tony Blair is a fucking psychopath! (https://youtu.be/52vLnTgf5d8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 06 June, 2016, 03:39:07 PM
Can't see any honest explains in Vote on In or Out!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 June, 2016, 04:14:11 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 06 June, 2016, 03:39:07 PM
Can't see any honest explains in Vote on In or Out!

From the previous page:
https://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php?topic=28209.msg918235#msg918235 (https://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php?topic=28209.msg918235#msg918235)

I've already voted as I'll be sunning myself in Crete when it all kicks off. And as for today's mudslinging - Just when you thought Farage can't sink any lower...  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 June, 2016, 01:37:12 PM
Dear America,

What you need is a president who's been a soldier on Mars, traveled through time and advocates free access to teleporters for all. Vote for Andrew D. Basiago (http://andy2016.com/) in 2016 - he makes more sense than Trump and is safer than Hilary!

Thank you,

The Rest of the World.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 June, 2016, 02:22:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 June, 2016, 01:37:12 PM
Dear America,
What you need is a president who's been a soldier on Mars, traveled through time and advocates free access to teleporters for all. Vote for Andrew D. Basiago (http://andy2016.com/) in 2016 - he makes more sense than Trump and is safer than Hilary!
Thank you,
The Rest of the World.

Just when you think things couldn't get any crazier-they do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 June, 2016, 08:30:56 AM
Listening to all this guff about Queenys 90th as an anti-royalist is just painful. Who fuckin' cares*?!

*Me, obviously, becayse it's annoying the fuck out of me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 June, 2016, 10:20:08 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 12 June, 2016, 08:30:56 AM
Listening to all this guff about Queenys 90th as an anti-royalist is just painful. Who fuckin' cares*?!

*Me, obviously, becayse it's annoying the fuck out of me.

Yep, the worlds biggest benefit scrounger is having a multi-million pound, multi-part shindig. And you poor people best like it!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eamonn Clarke on 12 June, 2016, 12:44:38 PM
Likewise the Queen's speech to parliament which is always humourously summed up by other websites as pensioner wearing a £10 million hat, sitting on a chair made of gold tells us all to tighten our belts for more austerity polices.

Apologies if a variant of this is already posted on this thread
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2016, 02:25:13 PM
Having grown up in a republic, I used to think it was very difficult to understand why anybody would want an unelected ruler.  But on further reflection, that republic was Ireland in the 70s and 80s - at least the Queen's rule is largely symbolic (and she seems like a nice enough old lady as spoilt welfare-leeches go) ; but the weirdo Vatican bone-rattlers' rule was all too real.

I don't ACTUALLY want to see priests and kings strangled with entrails; I just think we'd be better off without them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 June, 2016, 03:33:03 PM
(http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p147/the_legendary_shark/queen_bitch_zps1zezuous.jpg) (http://childabuserecovery.com/queen-elizabeth-guilty-in-missing-children-case-whistle-blowers-incarcerated-again/)

Happy Birthday, Your Satanic Majesty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 June, 2016, 05:04:38 PM
Quote from: eamonn1961 on 12 June, 2016, 12:44:38 PM
Likewise the Queen's speech to parliament which is always humourously summed up by other websites as pensioner wearing a £10 million hat, sitting on a chair made of gold tells us all to tighten our belts for more austerity polices.
To be fair to her, she doesn't really have much choice, and whatever she's saying has been dictated by 'her' government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 June, 2016, 05:56:35 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2016, 02:25:13 PM
I don't ACTUALLY want to see priests and kings strangled with entrails...

What happened to you man, you used to be cool.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 June, 2016, 06:01:41 PM
The MPs' oath, which they must take: "I, (Insert full name), do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God."

No faithfulness or allegiance to the people - therefore it is her government, not ours.


Quote from: Tordelback on 12 June, 2016, 05:56:35 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2016, 02:25:13 PM
I don't ACTUALLY want to see priests and kings strangled with entrails...

What happened to you man, you used to be cool.

Heh - entrails for all!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 12 June, 2016, 06:52:12 PM
Did Jeremy Corben have his fingers crossed when he said this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2016, 11:08:48 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 12 June, 2016, 05:56:35 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2016, 02:25:13 PM
I don't ACTUALLY want to see priests and kings strangled with entrails...

What happened to you man, you used to be cool.

Well... maybe strangled with entrails in a nice, polite manner; so as not to upset them TOO much.
(I'm way too old to be cool.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2016, 08:57:48 AM
So, the EU - like all "governments" - is desperate for money. It produces nothing, engages in no trade and can only raise revenue through parasitic and coercive theft. Now it's come up with a new wheeze crime: the internet link tax.

Save the Link. (https://savethelink.org/eu)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 June, 2016, 12:14:43 PM
That'll be five pence, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2016, 12:17:27 PM
Put in on my bill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 June, 2016, 06:34:25 PM
I don't normally watch the BBC news but that tournament is on ITV at the moment.

Anyway, it seems that in the Labour heartland of Hartlepool, nearly all the voters are voting out next week. I wonder what this says about the typical labour voters that the party are trying to reach.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 June, 2016, 07:10:06 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 June, 2016, 06:34:25 PM
in the Labour heartland of Hartlepool, nearly all the voters are voting out next week. I wonder what this says about the typical labour voters that the party are trying to reach.

A seaside strategy is being deployed by the UK Independence party which will see the eurosceptic party target faded coastal areas of the UK.

Ukip voters are overwhelmingly white and poorer than the rest of the population, with nearly four out of five having total household annual income of less than £34,000. They were also older than the average among the electorate, and more likely to be retired.

The majority of England's large seaside towns have worse levels of deprivation than the country as a whole. Ranked by seven indicators of deprivation including income, employment and health, the three worst-performing areas were Skegness, Blackpool and Clacton.

In the 2010 general election, Ukip secured 9.5 per cent of the vote in Boston and Skegness – its best performance by far.

Most parliamentary seats in deprived areas are currently held by Labour. Of the 20 seats considered to be the most "demographically receptive" to Ukip by the British academic Matthew Goodwin, 18 have Labour incumbents.

http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2014/09/01/ukip-do-like-to-be-beside-the-seaside/


(http://w0.fast-meteo.com/locationmaps/Hartlepool.10.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 June, 2016, 08:25:25 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 June, 2016, 06:34:25 PMAnyway, it seems that in the Labour heartland of Hartlepool, nearly all the voters are voting out next week. I wonder what this says about the typical labour voters that the party are trying to reach.
Says more about people than parties. They're pissed off, angry and lashing out but can't in the main be arsed to engage with politics. So we're in the situation now where whichever populist arsehole promises the most magic beans wins votes. This is the UK's GoP/Tea Party moment, and it's about the dive all-in.

Priti Patel's performance on Today summed things up (https://soundcloud.com/alex-andreou/priti-patel-today-1462016). No real plan. Keep repeating the bullshit and people will believe it. And the poorest are going to suffer, having actually voted for it. I don't even.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2016, 08:34:39 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 June, 2016, 08:25:25 PM
Priti Patel's performance on Today summed things up (https://soundcloud.com/alex-andreou/priti-patel-today-1462016). No real plan. Keep repeating the bullshit and people will believe it.

No, no, no. She was perfectly clear. You can tell she was perfectly clear, because every second sentence she said was "Let me be perfectly clear". It's about takin' back control of our spendin'. It's about stopping the EU from spending our money on certain things, but then spending the exact same amount of money on the exact same things, but also spending the extra money we will then magically have on other things. Oh, and cutting VAT, which will reduce government receipts but will also somehow have the effect of the government having more money.

It was the most astonishingly dishonest chunk of political fantasy I've heard in ages. Until Osborne came along later and opened his mouth.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2016, 09:12:07 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2016, 08:34:39 PM
It's about stopping the EU from spending our money on certain things, but then spending the exact same amount of money on the exact same things, but also spending the extra money we will then magically have on other things. Oh, and cutting VAT, which will reduce government receipts but will also somehow have the effect of the government having more money.

I nearly crashed the car shouting at the radio during that interview. And it's not even my country she was talking about. Her inability to even estimate the revenue value of VAT on fuel when its abolition was one of only TWO concrete things she was proposing as benefits of leaving...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 June, 2016, 08:36:00 AM
Just been reading about Geldof vs Farage in the Battle of the Thames. Funniest political story I've read in ages  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2016, 10:22:32 AM
I'd find it funnier if it wasn't being spun as 'Nigel the hero' by many outlets, despite him doing the sum total of fuck-all to help those in the fishing industry during his time as an MEP. It's like at the GE—Farage is everyone's friend, and a great deal of the media loves it. But it's all surface. When anyone actually bothers digging for some evidence, it all goes to hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin Zeal on 16 June, 2016, 11:34:50 AM
Farage and Geldof on the Thames made me embarrassed to be a Londoner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2016, 10:21:23 PM
I was sickened to get a round-robin email from Avaaz (https://secure.avaaz.org/en/jo_cox_3/?bvEAccb&v=77946&cl=10213877365&_checksum=526cb8ea10db7880627a1618f8bd5681698fd9d466041d6cf5fdd9d160fe811f) using the murder of Jo Cox to get in a "Vote Stay" message.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 June, 2016, 10:36:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2016, 10:21:23 PM
I was sickened to get a round-robin email from Avaaz (https://secure.avaaz.org/en/jo_cox_3/?bvEAccb&v=77946&cl=10213877365&_checksum=526cb8ea10db7880627a1618f8bd5681698fd9d466041d6cf5fdd9d160fe811f) using the murder of Jo Cox to get in a "Vote Stay" message.
Nick Griffin can trump that in vulgarity, quite easily.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 17 June, 2016, 09:33:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2016, 10:21:23 PM
I was sickened to get a round-robin email from Avaaz (https://secure.avaaz.org/en/jo_cox_3/?bvEAccb&v=77946&cl=10213877365&_checksum=526cb8ea10db7880627a1618f8bd5681698fd9d466041d6cf5fdd9d160fe811f) using the murder of Jo Cox to get in a "Vote Stay" message.

Naw.

It's weird to see folk baulk at people 'using' her diabolical murder 'for political point-scoring'. SHE WAS A POLITICIAN. I think it'd be disrespectful to her tireless work in life to just separate her in death from it. She went down the bloody Thames the day before holding the "IN" flag. She clearly cared about it. Activisim websites like Avaaz mentioning her to forward progressive goals just isn't offensive to me. People storming through the streets using her name to bash up suspected fascists would, I feel, be a horrendous diversion of her goals as a person. Which seemed largely positive, largely non-violent.

Here's her tribute GoFundMe supporting relevant causes - if you care enough about her aims as an individual to be offended by an e-mail, spend your energy flinging some money there: https://www.gofundme.com/jocox
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2016, 01:23:32 PM
I agree. And note that those arguing against having her death twinned with a political message are usually making a political message themselves in doing so.

Her life was based around helping others and she was pro-remain. Honouring her includes these things, not eradicating them from her history.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2016, 02:01:43 PM
It's fine to campaign for the causes Cox supported and to do so in her memory, but doing it before she's cold does seem a bit opportunistic, and opens the door to her memory being hijacked by sections of the media: there's a few Guardian columns written within hours of Cox's murder that ascribe the act to anyone who supports Leave for any reason, and for good measure ties it all into the paper's (largely fictional) "investigations" into internet trolling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2016, 02:52:12 PM
I disagree. When acts like this happen is the perfect time to talk about why. Otherwise you end up in that state the US is in when a gun crime happens and they say they should talk about it later, but never do.

I haven't seen any articles ascribing the act to anyone supporting leave, but to the general atmosphere pervaded by that campaign and the media as a whole for years now. Things do not happen in isolation. People have tipping points. But I doubt anything will change, and nor, sadly, do I imagine her hopes will come to pass next week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 18 June, 2016, 10:16:44 PM
I really feel the tragic death of that poor woman is more to do with with the murderers mental health than 'Britain first', in the same manner that attacker in Leytonstone had nothing to do with 'Islamic State' and more to do with his mental health problems. The media make me absolutely sick the way in which they hijack these tragic events to sell stories and create more fear and hurt than already has been caused. 
Obviously both these individuals political beliefs were a factor but more of a catalyst than anything else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2016, 11:42:19 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2016, 02:52:12 PM
I disagree. When acts like this happen is the perfect time to talk about why.

I don't have a problem with talking about why a murder happened, I just have a problem with rushing to use that murder as a justification for a particular political viewpoint.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 18 June, 2016, 11:55:14 PM
couldn't agree more mate
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2016, 12:16:01 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2016, 11:42:19 PM


I don't have a problem with talking about why a murder happened, I just have a problem with rushing to use that murder as a justification for a particular political viewpoint.


Hear, hear.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 June, 2016, 01:42:33 AM
A desperatly sad loss. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 June, 2016, 02:05:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2016, 12:16:01 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2016, 11:42:19 PM


I don't have a problem with talking about why a murder happened, I just have a problem with rushing to use that murder as a justification for a particular political viewpoint.


Hear, hear.

Really? I'm surprised to see such a comment from someone who regularly uses human tragedy as a springboard for their ideology.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2016, 07:05:28 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2016, 02:52:12 PM


I haven't seen any articles ascribing the act to anyone supporting leave, but to the general atmosphere pervaded by that campaign and the media as a whole for years now.

I've backed off from reading a lot of what is being said since reading Toynbee's article this week about how we need to respect politicians more. Part of me is unsurprised.  We have a broken political system that is increasingly disenfranchising the population.  Granted you can vote but for what?  There seems to be a complete refusal to acknowledge how divorced from life and experience politicians now are. 

So many in this country are now in unstable employment, dire or challenging circumstances or worrying about what is coming next.  Yet all that seems to matter is that City of London is okay.  Is this event some indication of the underlying fears and tensions in Britain today?  Maybe it is too much to ascribe a generalisation to a single act  but at the same time I do wonder.  It's not just this campaign but the whole of our political discourse that seems so aggressively negative to me. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 10:44:58 AM
In a sense, this is why the 'democracy' angle regarding the EU is a red herring. Really, the people being most screwed when it comes to democracy are the English outside of London. Really, we need wholesale political reform at the very least, from local council level through to both chambers. If the Lords was a regional senate, that would be a start. If there were no safe seats, that would be a start. But there's no political will from the big two (bar Labour flirting with a watered-down version of Green/Lib suggestions for the Lords), and so it's hard to see what will change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2016, 10:57:38 AM
Not just the English but I take your point.  I would also suggest that there are quite a few in London that are excluded in this process as well.

Unfortunately the reform that we are getting with the changes to boundaries are more likely to entrench safe seats.  As you say, there is no political will since both of the big two parties are two afraid to take those risks.

What will change?  Pretty much nothing.  I'm willing to bet that before the week is out any talk of moderating political discourse will  have died out.  Sorry but I have no faith in the political classes in this country any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 June, 2016, 11:38:27 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 10:44:58 AM
In a sense, this is why the 'democracy' angle regarding the EU is a red herring. Really, the people being most screwed when it comes to democracy are the English outside of London. Really, we need wholesale political reform at the very least

I have a feeling that — however the referendum shakes out — future commentators may point to these last couple of years as the end of the two-party system as we know it. The euro-phobic right wing of the Tories is unlikely to go back into its box in the event of anything other than a crushing defeat* and are far more in tune with the mood of their grass roots party than the majority of their MPs; the Blairite right of the Labour party are apparently unwilling to cooperate in the sensible running of their party, despite being massively out of step with the rank and file.

Meanwhile, strange things are happening in grass roots politics — Corbyn has energised Labour membership, while card-carrying Tories are a dying breed. In my town council elections (we were gerrymandered out of Ken Clarke's constituency a few years ago, but this place is as blue as you could imagine), all the local councillors resigned from their political parties (Conservative and LibDem) and stood as independents. They were all re-elected over the candidates their former parties put up.

Strange days...

Jim

*Which looks pretty unlikely. Can you imagine their fury if they get a win, but can't get a vote to invoke Article 50 through parliament?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 19 June, 2016, 12:15:06 PM
Guy Fawkes was one of the few people to enter parliament with honest intentions!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2016, 12:57:19 PM
I get your point Jim.  There seems a massive disconnect between the PLP and the rest of the Labour movement.  There's a sense in which they think that those that supported Corbyn are either trouble makers who joined to implode the party or muppets who haven't a clue.  Not good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 01:53:14 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 June, 2016, 11:38:27 AM*Which looks pretty unlikely. Can you imagine their fury if they get a win, but can't get a vote to invoke Article 50 through parliament?
The question is whether they need one, and, worryingly, there is huge disagreement about this. Surely, this is the kind of thing that should be concrete. (The consensus I've seen is that Cameron probably can't act alone, but just the go-ahead from the Cabinet would be enough, even though they're mostly pro. There's no way in hell a vote would get through the Commons, unless MPs threw all of their convictions under the bus.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2016, 02:02:15 PM
Surely Article 50 should have been written into the referendum itself, i.e. '...Britain should leave the EU, activating Article 50". RoI referendum text always includes that kind of legalese.  Unwelcome though a Leave vote would be, you can't get more democratic than a plebiscite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 June, 2016, 02:31:34 PM
Article 50 is not automatically triggered by the referendum, which has no legal force. The referendum bill could have been written to automatically invoke it, but wasn't. I can't imagine the government attempting to begin the withdrawal process without a vote on the Commons.

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 02:36:43 PM
The irony, of course, is that Gove has repeatedly stated he doesn't want Article 50 triggered immediately or even for a very long time. It feels like he's playing chicken, hoping a slim Brexit vote will force the EU into concessions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2016, 03:23:51 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 June, 2016, 02:31:34 PM
Article 50 is not automatically triggered by the referendum, which has no legal force.

I get that, I just think it's bordering on the insane. When we have a referendum in Ireland the text is endlessly scrutinised for its legality, so that what is being voted on is what actually happens.  Sometimes this produces a complex wording that people complain isn't clear, and sometimes there are subsequent challenges, but the alternative seems like some sort of monstrous vox pop which is legally meaningless.

Once you're over your little xenophobic outpouring, maybe you chaps should think about getting a written constitution that sets out how this stuff works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 04:19:14 PM
The problem is Remain/Cameron were arrogant enough to assume the win would be easy. As lawyers have said, there should be other caveats too: minimum turnout and perhaps even a threshold above a majority.

As for our little tantrum, it won't be over for years, whatever the result this Thursday. (It'll be interesting to see how the Irish vote, too. Given interviews I've seen on the telly, some are labouring under the misapprehension that they themselves aren't immigrants here and are fiercely Leave.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2016, 05:17:34 PM
The Irish diaspora is a famous breeding ground for racists, nothing we hate more than another immigrant coming in behind us: this is our gig!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 June, 2016, 06:29:46 PM
Well not all Irish to be fair....only the ones from Mayo (excluding Mary and David and anyone else from Mayo). Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 19 June, 2016, 05:17:34 PM
The Irish diaspora is a famous breeding ground for racists, nothing we hate more than another immigrant coming in behind us: this is our gig!
The more, the merrier, I say. Frankly, if this all goes to shit—i.e. Leave—I'll be looking very carefully into whether I can get an Irish passport myself. Both of my dad's parents were Irish-born, although they had 'British subject' passports, for some reason. (My granddad was army, so that might have been part of it. Plus they were born about 90 years ago.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 June, 2016, 08:19:29 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 19 June, 2016, 12:15:06 PM
Guy Fawkes was one of the few people to enter parliament with honest intentions!  :lol:

'like' button needed

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 20 June, 2016, 12:17:57 AM
 :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 20 June, 2016, 12:33:09 AM
Quoteonly the ones from Mayo
Hey! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 June, 2016, 09:21:52 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2016, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 19 June, 2016, 05:17:34 PM
The Irish diaspora is a famous breeding ground for racists, nothing we hate more than another immigrant coming in behind us: this is our gig!
The more, the merrier, I say. Frankly, if this all goes to shit—i.e. Leave—I'll be looking very carefully into whether I can get an Irish passport myself. Both of my dad's parents were Irish-born, although they had 'British subject' passports, for some reason. (My granddad was army, so that might have been part of it. Plus they were born about 90 years ago.)

Sorry, the sign clearly says No Homers.

But this does raise the question of the GFA again - since all citizens of NI can be considered Irish or UK citizens at will, you suddenly have about 1.8 million people (and presumably Richmond too) who can immigrate and emigrate from the EU or UK whenever they like.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2016, 02:03:37 PM
Probably worth posting again: http://pmbuchan.tumblr.com/post/118104126806/bkip-was-co-created-by-p-m-buchan-and-phillip
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 20 June, 2016, 03:37:41 PM
Stumbled into a blog full of 'Jo Cox was a leftist extremist' 'her death wasn't political' 'let the woman rest in peace why should her murderer's intents and her words or anything have any meaning' 'only the most blinkered can't see that this is a plan by the lefty loonies'

FS.

The hypocrisy is what really gets me here. Always the bloody victim card even as they put the boot in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 20 June, 2016, 06:58:22 PM
Lovely to see some in Deaf group of "EU vote in or out" are racists and Xenophobic...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 20 June, 2016, 07:23:28 PM
Your post tells me you approve Goaty  :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 20 June, 2016, 07:26:38 PM
(http://scifiward.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/judgedredd_tonymoore.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 June, 2016, 01:28:11 AM
News is just breaking that a 19 year old UK national tried to kill Trump in Vegas on Saturday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 June, 2016, 06:48:26 AM
There's a considerable distance between 'arrested for trying to grab a cop's gun' and 'tried to kill Trump'.

A much more relevant Trump story is this one:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36579467 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36579467)

Not only is Trump's campaign not massively staffing up as it should be at this point, but he's actually losing senior campaign people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 June, 2016, 07:37:01 AM
BBCR4 seem's to be making a big deal out of this lad having autism. More strawmaning.  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 June, 2016, 08:15:36 AM
From what the police have said, he planned this for a year, so I'll go with what they say for now, that's until he goes back to court and everything comes out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 June, 2016, 09:43:47 AM
Chris Claremont says Captain Britain would vote remain - well that's enough for me.

As for Trump he simply isn't campaigning - raising funds, meeting special interest groups, making ads, organising telephone canvassers etc - he knows he can't win and has no intention of being president, he's already achieved his goal which is bigging up the Trump brand so he can cash in.

Gotta say though, after decades of watching the left continuously splitting and schisming it's fun to watch the Tories and the GOP tear themselves apart
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 June, 2016, 12:16:47 PM
The Republican Party must be delighted they're ending up with a candidate who's only using the presidential elections for personal showboating.  Oh well, there's always the 2020 election...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 21 June, 2016, 12:19:19 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 21 June, 2016, 08:15:36 AM
From what the police have said, he planned this for a year, so I'll go with what they say for now, that's until he goes back to court and everything comes out.

I heard them mention the "plan for a year" on the radio this morning.  I've got to say, if you live in a country where you can buy an assault rifle in fifteen minutes but your plan relies on nicking a gun from an armed and trained cop then your planning skills leave something to be desired.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 June, 2016, 12:43:17 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 21 June, 2016, 12:19:19 PM
if you live in a country where you can buy an assault rifle in fifteen minutes but your plan relies on nicking a gun from an armed and trained cop then your planning skills leave something to be desired.

Heh. I had the exact same thought — it's actually harder to legally surrender a firearm in the US than it is to buy one, and you decide your best move is to try and take one off someone who is a) trained how to use it, and b) conditioned and trained to resist exactly that scenario...?

Definitely not a criminal mastermind, that one. Possibly a time-traveller sent back from the future, however...

Cheers

Jim
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 June, 2016, 12:57:44 PM
As assassination plans go, this one's more Coco the Clown than Carlos the Jackal.

The guy's obviously got problems, and Trump was never in any danger.  (Although the cop and surrounding bystanders might have been.)! I hope they don't throw the book at him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2016, 01:18:06 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 21 June, 2016, 12:16:47 PM
The Republican Party must be delighted they're ending up with a candidate who's only using the presidential elections for personal showboating.  Oh well, there's always the 2020 election...

Clinton's support has consisted of those thinking "it's time" for a female president, those who believe her shift to the left to be real rather than a response to her rivals, and those who don't want Trump to win - all of whom will disappear from the political landscape if she's the incumbent in 2020.  Her high disapproval ratings even among those who intend to vote for her - combined with her bending with every wind where Bush or Obama would stand firm to their plan no matter how unpopular it was - give Clinton the stink of a one-termer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 21 June, 2016, 01:36:02 PM
I must say, I find the fact that a certain presidential candidate* is a friend and great admirer of Henry Kissinger rather scary.

*Clinton.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 June, 2016, 01:47:08 PM
The great thing about Trump is that he makes a Clinton presidency seem almost palatable. Very little else would.

Did we all see the Colbert skit where he revisits the infamous Quantum Leap episode where Sam gives the child Donald advice on real estate? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2016, 03:19:24 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 21 June, 2016, 01:36:02 PM
I must say, I find the fact that a certain presidential candidate* is a friend and great admirer of Henry Kissinger rather scary.

*Clinton.

On May 9th this year, Obama's Secretary of
Defense, Ashton Carter, honoured Heinz Alfred Kissinger (born in Germany on May 27, 1923) at the Pentagon by presenting him with the Distinguished Public Service Award, apparently the highest award the Department of Defense has for private citizens...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 21 June, 2016, 03:40:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2016, 03:19:24 PM
On May 9th this year, Obama's Secretary of
Defense, Ashton Carter, honoured Heinz Alfred Kissinger (born in Germany on May 27, 1923) at the Pentagon by presenting him with the Distinguished Public Service Award, apparently the highest award the Department of Defense has for private citizens...

Henry Killinger: "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2016, 04:49:32 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 21 June, 2016, 12:57:44 PM
I hope they don't throw the book at him.

Especially not Lance Constable Carrot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 22 June, 2016, 09:02:07 AM
Decent  article (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/21/waste-cash-leavers-in-out-land-subsidie) by the moonbat in the Groundhog on the obscenity that is the common agricultural policy.  Pretty much sums up my feelings on the ref; I'll be voting remain as an antiracist vote but with no great conviction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 22 June, 2016, 10:51:39 AM
Do you hate it when newspapers try to tell you whose you voting for?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 22 June, 2016, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 22 June, 2016, 10:51:39 AM
Do you hate it when newspapers try to tell you whose you voting for?

I stopped reading Newspapers a long time ago. Too much personal bias and not enough Facts for my liking. Like having a pub conversation with the resident Alcoholic who knows exactly what's wrong with the World and why immigrants are apparently the cause of all the Worlds ills.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 June, 2016, 05:39:43 PM
I'll glance through the I, seeing as it's next too free, every other day but the rest can sod off. Have to roll my eyes when ever me nan tries fobbing off something thats she's clearly quoting, word for word, from the Daily Hate Mail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 June, 2016, 07:00:58 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 22 June, 2016, 10:51:39 AM
Do you hate it when newspapers try to tell you whose you voting for?

It's not as bad as Facebook :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 01:13:37 AM
I am not petrified. The opposite of being frozen with fear. I am twitchy and enervated and absolutely terrified by the idea of the country I am from deciding en masse to leave the EU.

Nothing I say here is gonig to matter or influence anyone but pretty much everything IndigoPrime wrote in this thread resonates or makes sense.

I know we are all self-actualising media nodes now but how did it come to this? In real life I know precisely one person who is in favour of leaving the EU. Not to dismiss his opinion (he's a fruit loop) but the same guy believes in chemtrails, the MMR conspiracy and the healing power of crystals so I'm pretty happy to discount his views. Online I'm aware of OldTankie. Where does that leave us? Let's say I know (in varying degrees, like the ripples of a stone thrown into a pond) 200 people in the world. This gives us 1.0% in favour of BREXIT. I can accept some bias but where, in fuck's name, do the rest come from?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 01:17:21 AM
The Socialist Worker :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 01:24:37 AM
When a mummy Brexiter and a daddy Brexiter love one another very much, nothing happens because they insist on pulling out.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 01:46:19 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 01:17:21 AM
The Socialist Worker :lol:
No idea what this means.

What's your own position? I can't understand why any working man would vote to leave the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 02:27:28 AM
The Socialist worker wants out of the EU from all the stuff I've read about them lately. Just like Corbyn hasn't been truly on the trail for in, he's not a fan of it!

As for why any working man would want to leave the EU. At my place their are over 1400 and from about the 250+ that I have chatted to and heard talking over the last few months, they all want out and that includes some of the EU workers who now live here.

As for my position, I mentioned it on Channel 4 news and in one of the latest Progcasts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2016, 03:10:35 AM
Bizarre that EU workers resident in the UK would want out. Here's hoping they enjoy dealing with worker visas and residency permits. (As for everyone else, bizarre people would vote to eradicate worker safety nets and likely economic meltdown that will take a decade at best to recover from. Still, I bet Boris and co. will find another scapegoat—or just blame it on the EU.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 03:14:16 AM
Are Greece enjoying all the safety nets of the EU?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2016, 03:41:35 AM
Deflection! Ten Brexit points!
"Greece"! Ten Brexit points!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2016, 08:07:24 AM
Best of luck today UK chaps, vote with your heads. It's what Mean Machine would want.

And reflect that when Ireland, in the centenary year of the Easter Rising, wants to remain in a union with you, maybe you should take note.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2016, 08:41:10 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 03:14:16 AM
Are Greece enjoying all the safety nets of the EU?

Well their entire economy would've collapsed some years ago without the rest of us pumping in billions of euros to prop it up, so yes
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 June, 2016, 09:39:25 AM
Isn't it strange how UKIP/Brexit supporters rarely mention immigration when asked about their voting motivations, despite opinion polls saying it's one of their main concerns.

I guess the Leave campaigns must really be wasting a lot of money and energy focussing on an issue that so few of their voters seem to be concerned about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2016, 09:54:54 AM
Surely the most incredible thing is that the economy is being thrown to the wolves to 'tackle' the source of 25% of nett immigration over the last decades, while nothing has been done to address the 75% that is entirely within Parliament's control. As many long term immigrants come from China as from Eastern/southern Europe (15%). It's almost as if the whole campaign was a front for an internal party political squabble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 23 June, 2016, 09:39:25 AM
Isn't it strange how UKIP/Brexit supporters rarely mention immigration when asked about their voting motivations, despite opinion polls saying it's one of their main concerns.

In the news today: UK population increased by ~500,000 last year, which is pretty much bang on the average annual rise for the last decade. Still, those Balkan hordes, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: morpheas on 23 June, 2016, 10:13:47 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 03:14:16 AM
Are Greece enjoying all the safety nets of the EU?

Yes we do.

The EU tried to throw us out a year ago, isn't it? Well Germany tried its best.

And not understanding why Greece did and DOES everything to stay in, is you problem in a nutshell. And it's not only for the money coming from the EU, because that money goes directly to Banks.

Who is to gain if you go? For the poor People it's going to be a disaster.
You should stay IMHO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
Germany are the power behind enforcing the steep bailout on Greece, which looks like the repayments are gonna fail again in the next month or so.

I have read that suicides are up around 35% since all this began and that many people are sick of it all.

We all know that part of the problem was that taxes were not being paid across the board and that the retirement age was pretty impressive, to say the least.

It's numerous things like this that tell me Greece are not having a great time of it.

Obviously I could be wrong on all this but there's only so much time in the day to read up on everything, unless you are Legendary ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2016, 10:34:10 AM
Yup. If you're a polluter, unscrupulous employer, international lawyer or a born-again eurosceptic wannabe PM, vote Leave.  The rest of the UK, even the racists, sorry xenophobes, no wait, defenders of traditional 'culture' (is that one okay) won't like what they get.


CF: Greece's problems are largely internal and historical, but greatly exacerbated by its inability to devalue its currency.  The EUs poor treatment of the situation has been less than nuanced, but then nor was any other source of funds likely to be.  You'll note that the UK has its own currency which it's doing a great job of devaluing right now (my Prog less than Eur4 today, thanks Boris!), so the Greek relationship with the EU has little bearing on Leave/Remain.


I'll shut up now.  Not my fight, just a prospective victim of collateral damage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 10:37:47 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 02:27:28 AM
As for why any working man would want to leave the EU. At my place their are over 1400 and from about the 250+ that I have chatted to and heard talking over the last few months, they all want out and that includes some of the EU workers who now live here.
I believe you but it doesn't explain why.

I simply can't understand why normal working people are willing to support a movement which is being championed by people whose prime motivation is the desire to remove regulatory safeguards protecting those same working people. I know the Tories hate the whole concept of the EHCR but why would any normal person oppose the principle of basic equality?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 10:57:20 AM
The media barons are very much in favor of a Brexit, so they've made sure no-one in their papers or news programmes are talking about human/workers' rights or how the bureaucratic structures that created TTIP are still firmly in place.  Instead, the debate has been framed entirely in terms of the right, and they've replaced all that lefty talk with the right-wing friendly immigration strawman and pretending the only motivation of Leave campaigners is racism.

There is, of course, also the consideration that British people are traditionally quite conservative - though this just throws up the question why they'd support the current bunch of neoliberals currently passing themselves off as Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 23 June, 2016, 11:01:21 AM
I only know of one person who is voting Leave, and in any conversation about it you'll hear her mention several times that she isn't racist (nobody said she was) and that she has 'other reasons', but at no point have these other reasons ever become clear. I find it very peculiar that someone would feel strongly enough about the issue to vote leave, but wouldn't have the conviction to tell anyone why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:16:42 AM
You honestly believe that the Tories are gonna get rid of sick pay, maternity leave, workers rights, etc.... We agree to differ there.

For a start if such a thing was ever mentioned I would expect that the backbenchers, Labour, Liberals, etc... would have some say in that and then if it was put through, then the Tories would get booted out.

Oh by the way reference pollution, hasn't Germany just built a few Coal Fired Power Stations, so the environment means a lot some but not others. Take from that what you will.

I'm not gonna battle every point out (as I have to get some sleep in and pop along to cast my vote. Hang on, this is a ploy to stop me, well you can sod off) but I believe that all have a right to vote but it seems to me that only one side constantly slags off the other by somehow knowing why they are voting differently to them, which is impressive mind reading.

One last thing, Labour have a few people who are against the EU but I don't see much said about Corbyn (he has campaigned well) and Tom Watson. Perhaps it doesn't suit some peoples agendas.

If you believe that the EU are democratic, doesn't waste money, isn't corrupt, will change for the better, then good on you. I don't see it like that. Those books still haven't been audited but who really cares. People slag off the US with all those lobbyists but there are over 30,000 doing the same stuff in the EU. I found that number from the Guardian by the way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 11:27:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:16:42 AM
Those books still haven't been audited but who really cares

Yes, they have. (https://fullfact.org/europe/did-auditors-sign-eu-budget/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 11:32:55 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 10:37:47 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 02:27:28 AM
As for why any working man would want to leave the EU. At my place their are over 1400 and from about the 250+ that I have chatted to and heard talking over the last few months, they all want out and that includes some of the EU workers who now live here.
I believe you but it doesn't explain why.

I simply can't understand why normal working people are willing to support a movement which is being championed by people whose prime motivation is the desire to remove regulatory safeguards protecting those same working people. I know the Tories hate the whole concept of the EHCR but why would any normal person oppose the principle of basic equality?
Quote from: The Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 10:37:47 AM

I know the Tories hate the whole concept of the EHCR but why would any normal person oppose the principle of basic equality?


The ECHR (which I presume you mean - if not, ignore me!) is not an arm of the EU (although Article 17 of Protocol no.14 allows the European Union to become party to the Convention). It was established in 1959 on the basis of Article 19 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which has 47 signatories including the UK,  which was a founder member. Perhaps you mean the Court of Justice of the European Union?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 11:38:43 AM
Completely arsed that post up, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 11:40:44 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:16:42 AM
Corbyn blah blah blah - Perhaps it doesn't suit some peoples agendas.

You weren't so keen on mind reading a minute ago, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:42:58 AM
Have you ever mentioned that Corbyn doesn't like the EU, if not, then why not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:49:45 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 11:27:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:16:42 AM
Those books still haven't been audited but who really cares

Yes, they have. (https://fullfact.org/europe/did-auditors-sign-eu-budget/)

That's an interesting read and once you read the whole thing it's not quite as signed off as your post would indicate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 11:53:15 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:49:45 AM
That's an interesting read and once you read the whole thing it's not quite as signed off as your post would indicate.

It is interesting. And I didn't say they'd been signed off — you said they hadn't been audited, which they clearly have, because that's how they know there are discrepancies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 11:56:47 AM
I'm slightly puzzled at what (realistically) was expected of Corbyn over the EU vote. If he had performed a Johnson-like volte-face then the media would have (rightly) pilloried him for cynical opportunism and declared that he was an untrustworthy chancer who couldn't be trusted to lie straight in bed (in exactly the way they haven't done to Boris Johnson, for some reason).

Instead, he's opted to point out that this entire thing is a proxy war for two wings of the Tory party, enabling them to tear chunks out of each other whilst risking catastrophic damage to our economy and our international standing. Of the available options, 'Remain' is comfortably the best, maintaining the status quo and ensuring that the Tories can't sweep away what little remains of our workers' rights and environmental protections. One doesn't have to be an enthusiastic supporter of the EU to recognise 'Remain' as the least bad option by a mile. Remember that any substantive change to our relationship with the EU would trigger a referendum anyway.

(Which is broadly how I feel about it, too, funnily enough.)

Corbyn will also have seen what standing on the same platform as the Tories did to Labour in Scotland. Given that this was never a political hill he'd choose to die on in the first place, the idea that he'd do it to save Cameron's political skin is ludicrous.

However, those on the left thinking that voting 'Leave' is a way to stick it to Cameron are only correct to the extent that cutting off your foot is a way to stick it to sock-makers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 12:04:09 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 11:42:58 AM
Have you ever mentioned that Corbyn doesn't like the EU, if not, then why not?

Have you ever mentioned the atomic density of Osmium, if not, then why not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: morpheas on 23 June, 2016, 12:05:21 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
Germany are the power behind enforcing the steep bailout on Greece, which looks like the repayments are gonna fail again in the next month or so.

This is politics, I believe that everything will go on, as is. And Schäuble is very quiet these days because of the possible Brexit. This is the moment I have to state that I live in Germany.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
I have read that suicides are up around 35% since all this began and that many people are sick of it all.

Maybe, I don't know how high they are, and 35% what from? There are only 10 million Greeks. I haven't seen a total number of suicides yet.
The poor are indeed suffering. The people I know in Greece are not-so-poor. They are unhappy about the taxes and cuts, but have options.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
We all know that part of the problem was that taxes were not being paid across the board and that the retirement age was pretty impressive, to say the least.
Correct. But not everyone was so privileged. People had little income; not paying taxes helped them survive. The big ones don't pay and never will.  The whole government was corrupt for ages and generations.


Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
It's numerous things like this that tell me Greece are not having a great time of it.
Do you want to see Photos from my Facebook feed? Maybe you shouldn't...Its summertime over there. Why shouldn't they have fun after all, life is too short to worry over taxes and they live in beautifull Greece.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 23 June, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
Obviously I could be wrong on all this but there's only so much time in the day to read up on everything, unless you are Legendary ;)

Hi sharky...

The problem is not the EU, it's the rightwing conservatism and neoliberalism, that raves in every country/government in the last 15-25 years. They see everyone as a resource (there are so many of us) trying to increase the profit and decrease the cost of keeping us alive.

So, leaving the EU is not solving any problem. The People from our Governments are the ones sitting in Brussel and making decisions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 12:07:52 PM
The right wing can't the problem - Greece has a left wing government and look at the state it's in right now.  Clearly the problem is socialism and we need to go further to the right to correct this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 June, 2016, 12:08:22 PM
Sick of the whole thing - it's been like a feature length director's cut session of PMQs.

Kellner has remain taking it by 8.5% +/- 6%.

http://politicscounter.com/?p=95 (http://politicscounter.com/?p=95)

But you know... polls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 12:18:20 PM
I don't get why not being in the EU would automatically strip people of their rights. The European Convention on Human Rights is not an EU instrument - and even if it was, there's still the International Convention, UN conventions and even UK legislative law, UK court case law and Union rules.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 12:24:10 PM
Hi Morpheas,

I agree. The EU is nothing more than an elitist control mechanism, like just about every "government" these days. Leaving or staying makes no difference, we'll all still be serfs tomorrow no matter what happens today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 June, 2016, 12:40:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2016, 12:24:10 PM
we'll all still be serfs tomorrow no matter what happens today.

Do something about it then!

I'm a Leftie, by popular definition, but I try not to think of myself in such 2 Dimensional terms. I've voted to 'Remain' because I believe it's the best thing for Everyone, not just me. The Conservative party wouldn't give you the drippings from their nose, let alone anything of real value.

As far as "UK legislation" goes: it was Europe that reduced my working week from 48 to 44 hours for the same pay. The Tories will quite happily give everyone Zero hour contracts and no holiday entitlement! And without an overarching authority to watch over them they would have done this a long time ago!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mattofthespurs on 23 June, 2016, 01:02:15 PM
My politics too are fairly over on the left side and I too have voted to remain simply because it's what is best for everyone in my opinion (without getting too deep into it. I'm sick of it now tbh).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 23 June, 2016, 01:03:18 PM
People gone crazy, said you must bring pen as they would rubbing out your pencil mark!




Why there too many hate or Vote out comments on Daily Mail Online, I think many are trolls and not really vote etc. as they was same about vote for BNP or UKIP in election, and they didn't do well!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 01:08:09 PM
It doesn't matter what the Daily Mail readership wants to vote for - sex offenders aren't allowed near schools.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2016, 02:14:03 PM
Watch, I'm back here again.

So if you're NOT going to dispense with the employment legislation, the chemicals regulations, the wildlife directives etc etc, which of the stifling eurocratic red tape ARE you planning on getting rid of? Just the bendy bananas and the Poles, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2016, 02:23:04 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 23 June, 2016, 02:14:03 PM
So if you're NOT going to dispense with the employment legislation, the chemicals regulations, the wildlife directives etc etc, which of the stifling eurocratic red tape ARE you planning on getting rid of? Just the bendy bananas and the Poles, is it?

Yes, absolutely! CF protests that the Tories wouldn't get rid of employment protections (despite having floated just such a set of policies already (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/eu-brexit-tories-eu-succeed-beecroft-report-employment-a7083746.html) and been dissuaded by the LibDems) but safety standards, manufacturing procedures, all manner of burdensome regulation will still have to be observed if companies want to sell their products into the EU, so which red tape will be cut?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 June, 2016, 04:46:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 01:08:09 PM
It doesn't matter what the Daily Mail readership wants to vote for - sex offenders aren't allowed near schools.
Not when you have the internet anyway. Apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moly on 23 June, 2016, 06:53:19 PM
Well I've voted so let's see what the result is tomorrow
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 23 June, 2016, 07:43:36 PM
Seeing the loathsome Bliar creature back on the scene in this referendum was a laugh!
Who gives a s### what that mad f#### says anymore?
He not content with turning the Middle East into a s### hole. Trying to whip up support for more wars he really is something else. His foreign policy objectives didn't work out too well did they? The definition of a narcissist. Id love to see him go to Iraq now and see how popular he is! Can never understand How he escapes the criticism that Bush receives. He was still jabbering about WMDS way after the yanks had stopped.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 23 June, 2016, 08:30:24 PM
Some of that EU stuff can be pretty weird.

(http://i.imgur.com/0psiEbo.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 23 June, 2016, 09:48:27 PM
My thought process

"How fuckin' stupidly Han Solo having fisty cuffs with a giant weasel..."

"I mean why would Han fight a Weasel, a bejewelled one at that..."

"Well actually I wonder why Han is fighting the weasel... or why its big and bejewelled in the first place..."

"Although its kinda intriguing lookin'...."

"In fact its kinda pretty cool..."

"MOST READ HAN VS. GIANT BEJEWELLED WEASEL"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 23 June, 2016, 09:50:14 PM
Luckily before I couyld look it up to buy I slipped into the following thought

"Actually maybe its a ferret..."

"...or a stoat"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 June, 2016, 09:53:45 PM
I was thinking otter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 June, 2016, 09:54:20 PM
I'm POSITIVE it's an Otter.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 23 June, 2016, 09:59:48 PM
Oh bugger now I'm all of a quandry...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 10:10:07 PM
That's VOLEly unlikely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 10:33:41 PM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 23 June, 2016, 09:48:27 PM
"I mean why would Han fight a Weasel, a bejewelled one at that..."

Because he's HAN FUCKING SOLO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 June, 2016, 10:56:35 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 23 June, 2016, 10:10:07 PM
That's VOLEly unlikely.
Now that you've gone there...

If it's a weasel it'll be weaselly recognisable, but a stoat is stoatally different...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: morpheas on 23 June, 2016, 10:56:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2016, 12:07:52 PM
The right wing can't the problem - Greece has a left wing government and look at the state it's in right now.  Clearly the problem is socialism and we need to go further to the right to correct this.

This is a joke isn't it?

The dynasties of central PASOK / right ND governments rotating since 1970 are mainly responsible for the crisis. Whole generations of them are in politics since forever.

SIRIZA got elected 2015 and are a scapegoat. Every cut is dictated by Germany, IWF and Brussels.

But it's worth pointing out to you that the other Partner in government are ANEL, a is a conservative, national-conservative, and right-wing political party.

And they are good partners until now. Greeks, heh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2016, 10:58:01 PM
I'm delighted to see our political thread has once more found its natural level  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 June, 2016, 10:59:20 PM
And then morpheas brings it back to politics
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 June, 2016, 04:40:43 AM
Thatcher-Ghola is out-of-containment and thawing nicely.


Be seeing you, gentlemen. England Prevails.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 24 June, 2016, 04:46:49 AM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 05:43:06 AM
Well thanks for that, you fucking self-absorbed gullible xenophobic assholes. Led to disaster by power-hungry buffoons who only four months ago espoused completely the opposite view, by people who make Mosley look like he had a moral core, whose self-interest is so great that they can merrily shit on facts and smile while doing it. But they couldn't have done any of it without the narrow hatreds and jealousies buried just below the surface of the Great British patriot. Well done, all.  Not that you even know what you've done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 24 June, 2016, 06:14:24 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 05:43:06 AM
Well thanks for that, you fucking self-absorbed gullible xenophobic assholes. Led to disaster by power-hungry buffoons who only four months ago espoused completely the opposite view, by people who make Mosley look like he had a moral core, whose self-interest is so great that they can merrily shit on facts and smile while doing it. But they couldn't have done any of it without the narrow hatreds and jealousies buried just below the surface of the Great British patriot. Well done, all.  Not that you even know what you've done.

I'm sat here nearly in tears, at a bit of a loss. The horrible truth is what Tordelback says is true. I'm truly sorry and ashamed of the country I have to call my own.

Good luck Scotland, we no longer have the right to chain you to us as we descend.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 June, 2016, 06:22:17 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 05:43:06 AM
Not that you even know what you've done.

I know exactly what I did, I voted to Remain in Europe.

I've just woken, and come here first rather than watch what the TV people pass off as news. Going by the reactions here it seems we will be leaving.

I'm less than impressed but I'm sober - so I won't be typing out fifteen paragraphs of the word "Fuck"!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 24 June, 2016, 06:54:15 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 05:43:06 AM
Well thanks for that, you fucking self-absorbed gullible xenophobic assholes. Led to disaster by power-hungry buffoons who only four months ago espoused completely the opposite view, by people who make Mosley look like he had a moral core, whose self-interest is so great that they can merrily shit on facts and smile while doing it. But they couldn't have done any of it without the narrow hatreds and jealousies buried just below the surface of the Great British patriot. Well done, all.  Not that you even know what you've done.
I feel sick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 24 June, 2016, 07:18:36 AM
Apparently young people mostly voted to remain while older generations voted to leave.

I'm not sure if that's any comfort but it might suggest that young people are less likely to be persuaded by traditional forms of media (which is what I'd expect). Probably a good thing for the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 24 June, 2016, 07:19:22 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 24 June, 2016, 06:54:15 AM
I feel sick.

No problem! We're now saving £350 million a week. Free private health care for EVERYONE!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 07:22:49 AM
Don't worry. You'll still all retain the right to be subjugated by the same elites. They'll just do it to you nationally instead of continentally.

The bankers and corporations will now make things hard for us to discourage any other nations from leaving too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 07:25:26 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 24 June, 2016, 07:19:22 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 24 June, 2016, 06:54:15 AM
I feel sick.

No problem! We're now saving £350 million a week. Free private health care for EVERYONE!

Farage is ALREADY rowing back on that one and Johnson/Gove are urging PM not to trigger article 50: It won't be Brexit as the brexitters want, it'll be a fudge that satisfies nobody (but fucks the economy anyway)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 24 June, 2016, 07:28:24 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 24 June, 2016, 07:18:36 AM
Apparently young people mostly voted to remain while older generations voted to leave.

I'm not sure if that's any comfort but it might suggest that young people are less likely to be persuaded by traditional forms of media (which is what I'd expect). Probably a good thing for the future.

The only trouble is we've got to get there with smalled fools lead by self-interested master manipulators at the helm. A positive future seems a long, long way off. I look to my children and hope I can get them there, I worry that I might not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mattofthespurs on 24 June, 2016, 07:31:17 AM
The only phase I can think of rhymes with clucking bell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 07:32:01 AM
I've said my piece and I stand by it, but I should clarify that I hold the individual Leavers on this forum in some esteem as people who have repeatedly shown their quality and good character by their actions. I also respect your demcratic right to choose, while abhoring your choice. However you have been lied to by those who believe themselves your betters, and either you have been so gullible as to believe those lies or you have acted entirely irrationally and contrary to the common good.

Your countries gave us the rule of law, the greatest literature, the computer and the Web, the will to stand up to the Nazis, true functional multiculturalism, vaccination, the theory of evolution, Monty Python, Jenny Agutter and 2000AD. And the dream of peaceful European integration.

Yesterday you betrayed that legacy for no rational reason at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 08:02:26 AM
I'm utterly fucking fuming. Utterly fucking disappointed, and utterly fucking despairing at the same time. Tharg help us all. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 08:05:58 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 07:25:26 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 24 June, 2016, 07:19:22 AM
Quote from: The Cosh on 24 June, 2016, 06:54:15 AM
I feel sick.

No problem! We're now saving £350 million a week. Free private health care for EVERYONE!

Farage is ALREADY rowing back on that one and Johnson/Gove are urging PM not to trigger article 50: It won't be Brexit as the brexitters want, it'll be a fudge that satisfies nobody (but fucks the economy anyway)
Oh man, I fucking knew it. I'd like to say i'm surprised but im not. What a fucking omnishambles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 24 June, 2016, 08:36:43 AM
Dave on way out in October.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 June, 2016, 08:53:53 AM
Sterling in freefall. The value of all our contributions to the EU ever wiped off the FTSE in minutes. Open talk in Northern Ireland about leaving the Union, and with good cause, since leaving the EU torpedoes the Good Friday Agreement, Salmond talking about a new independence referendum in Scotland within two years.

So, to summarise: that's the end of the UK, the economy in the crapper, and the very real possibility of a permanent Tory government in Westminster. Never mind. All worth it, because we don't like foreigners.

Well done, 'Leave' voters. When can I expect the sunny utopia you promised, please? You were so certain this was the right move, so let's hear what you've got for us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 24 June, 2016, 09:04:36 AM
Everything Jim just said.
Meanwhile, the young (with a future) and Scotland voted Remain.
Feeling low.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 24 June, 2016, 09:07:55 AM
On my Facebook feed remain voters are posting links to articles by experts which explain in simple terms why we're all fucked and why the devaluation of the pound is a bad thing.
The leave voters are all posting pictures of union jacks and Winston Churchill.

I think that pretty much sums up how the debate has gone from the beginning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 24 June, 2016, 09:04:36 AM
Everything Jim just said.
Meanwhile, the young (with a future) and Scotland voted Remain.
Feeling low.
I've pretty much already decide I shant be staying. Disgraceful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 09:18:45 AM
(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/anaconda888/69AC653A-041D-45E1-B8D6-379FB44114D4_zpsl3stnubn.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 09:25:05 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 24 June, 2016, 09:07:55 AMWinston Churchill.

Churchill - no friend of mine - wouldn't have pissed on the Leave campaign. European integration was virtually his idea, and he was quite happy to staff his airforce with Poles, Czechs, Belgians and all manner of refugees. And a good job too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 24 June, 2016, 09:27:25 AM
Wow.  I don't do the political thread much but this is a shocker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 24 June, 2016, 09:43:25 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 24 June, 2016, 09:27:25 AM
Wow.  I don't do the political thread much but this is a shocker.

Me neither. And however historic in Real Life, I don't need to see that unaccountably dangerous goon on the cover of our own Meg this month. 'Political satire' is rarely an enjoyable read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 24 June, 2016, 09:49:17 AM
As someone who voted "Remain" from an ideological and cultural perspective, the result is quite heart-breaking.

One can only hope that things aren't as bad as they seem, that the more sober, positive and intellectual 'leave' arguments will come to fruition – and that this feeling of divisiveness will pass. Thankfully, much of what is good in the world tends to happen despite politics, not because of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 09:57:47 AM
Surely Johnny and Wulf should have showed up by now to unmask Boris as Nelson Bunker Kreelman and Farage as Sabbat and save the time stream?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 10:03:21 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 09:57:47 AM
Surely Johnny and Wulf should have showed up by now to unmask Boris as Nelson Bunker Kreelman and Farage as Sabbat and save the time stream?
My theory is Deadworld was a prophecy Dave Kendall had in his sleep. It's coming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 24 June, 2016, 10:06:13 AM
Beware populist demagogues. Sorry, but we are most definitely fucked. But at least we got a chance to stick two fingers up to Johnny Foreigner, eh? Pathetic. Fucking pathetic. My heart is breaking. :( :'( >:( :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 10:17:21 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 09:57:47 AM
Surely Johnny and Wulf should have showed up by now to unmask Boris as Nelson Bunker Kreelman and Farage as Sabbat and save the time stream?

*fan film reshoots*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2016, 10:32:06 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/c4jt321.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2016, 10:38:07 AM
Talk of a united Ireland referendum now.  I dunno: on one hand, Ireland is just awful, but on the other hand, it really is just awful.  People have voted to get away from what they claimed was an unaccountable, elitist, distant, corrupt government in the pockets of corporate lobbyists, and now they want to be ruled by the Irish government?  As the internet kids say: "I don't even."

Also: "this is a Catholic country."  Google it.  It's a delightful story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 10:40:07 AM
Hey, we don't want you any more that you want us. We're fully stocked up on medieval bigots, gangsters and impenetrable accents, thanks!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 24 June, 2016, 10:42:21 AM
The Jeremy Kyle Show generation won.

Sad I got many deaf friends whose is that. They kept said finally we get Britian back, happy independence day!  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Apestrife on 24 June, 2016, 10:43:06 AM
Will be interesting to see where this goes.

Good luck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Albion on 24 June, 2016, 10:43:49 AM
Our Dredd toys will get more expensive!  :-[

"buying goods or services from other countries will become more expensive"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 10:44:19 AM

(http://cfile2.uf.tistory.com/image/115A7B334EF987C1353789)

ENGLAND PREVAILS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 24 June, 2016, 10:51:22 AM
Surely Cameron will go down in history as Britain's worst ever Prime Minister.

A man who not only put the country through 6 years of needless, grinding austerity but then presided over its disintegration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 10:51:30 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 10:44:19 AM

(http://cfile2.uf.tistory.com/image/115A7B334EF987C1353789)

ENGLAND PREVAILS!

Is the N for Nigel?

Still, Storm Saxon'll be on soon, that's always good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 11:07:11 AM
Got it in one!

(https://www.yourprops.com/movieprops/original/yp562795ff410941.36820799/V-for-Vendetta-England-Prevails-poster-1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 24 June, 2016, 11:13:19 AM
QuoteHey, we don't want you any more that you want us. We're fully stocked up on medieval bigots, gangsters and impenetrable accents, thanks!
:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 June, 2016, 11:40:14 AM
We got Britain back! As my friend said we are GREAT britain and our tiny island once ruled the world so it's all sorted innit.

Quote from: 8-Ball on 24 June, 2016, 10:06:13 AM
Beware populist demagogues. Sorry, but we are most definitely fucked. But at least we got a chance to stick two fingers up to Johnny Foreigner, eh? Pathetic. Fucking pathetic. My heart is breaking. :( :'( >:( :o

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 11:48:23 AM
I love sarcasm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 24 June, 2016, 11:59:13 AM
Has to be said, hardly a good thing was ever said about the EU in this country. When did you ever see an EU flag flying? I've only seen three and that was during the Brexit campaign.

Back in the 80-90s when working in the Netherlands I explained to folks there that some of the press in the UK could be pretty bad. They insisted the Dutch press was as well. On a work trip to the UK this issue of the Sun was on sale on the newsagents on the ferry. Dutch colleagues couldn't believe it. The Sun was urging its readers at midday to look towards Brussels and stick their fingers up and to shout "Frog Off!". Things are not as overt as that now, but still...

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/149/437565574_eef58513c7.jpg)

So where do we find the Costa Coffee application forms? Because there won't be foreigners keeping us out of those jobs any more.

Or as someone said on Twitter: no more espresso. Back to Mellow Birds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 24 June, 2016, 12:00:56 PM
As a Scot I cannot wait for my next pointless "choice"

Do you want...

A- A nice cup of tea and a sit down

B - Entry to The Running Man

Well we voted A but another group want B so better get my lycra jumpsuit on and grab an iron bar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 June, 2016, 12:23:56 PM



Good news: you can still be part of the Eurovision.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 12:29:25 PM
Only if they introduce negative placing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 24 June, 2016, 12:30:27 PM
My partner has asked Leave voters to take her calls from abused children, and explain 'I'm sorry, I can't help you, as I voted Leave, and removed the funding for the service you require.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 June, 2016, 12:33:47 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 24 June, 2016, 12:30:27 PM
My partner has asked Leave voters to take her calls from abused children, and explain 'I'm sorry, I can't help you, as I voted Leave, and removed the funding for the service you require.'

Don't worry — we'll all be getting extra money from Priti Patel's magic money tree. Any time now. Annnny time now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 24 June, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
The lamps are going out all over the UK, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 01:41:07 PM
The mood isn't good in NI over this, that's for sure.  This could go pear shaped pretty quickly. Z  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 June, 2016, 01:42:04 PM
Well I voted remain but clearly the country thought otherwise. I think history, English nationalism, fears over immigration plus a desire to give the ruling elites of all political persuasions a bloody nose combined in the perfect storm. The storms and flooding that took place in London is a perfect allegory of what has occurred a wash out for the metropolitan s. Where to next eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 June, 2016, 02:09:48 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 June, 2016, 01:42:04 PM
Well I voted remain but clearly the country thought otherwise. I think history, English nationalism, fears over immigration plus a desire to give the ruling elites of all political persuasions a bloody nose combined in the perfect storm.

Let's not forget the main ingredients though: Gullibility, bigotry and ignorance.
Being half-English myself, I've always hated Brit-bashing. But this time... Fuck's sake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2016, 03:27:49 PM
I am genuinely kicking myself for not trying to put money on the whole thing being blamed on Jeremy Corbyn - a man we've been told for the last month hasn't been doing anything, and yet is somehow also now responsible for what has happened.  A vote of No Confidence has been tabled by Margeret Hodge MP, who claims Corbyn didn't do enough for the Remain campaign... Hodge's constituency of Barking and Dagenham voted to Leave the EU by a majority of 63% - the highest in the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 24 June, 2016, 03:42:58 PM
I just want to say, if you voted leave you're a fucking moron.

Did you vote leave and you're reading this? You're a fucking moron.

Did you vote Tory in the last election and then vote leave in the referendum and reading this? You're a double fucking moron.

I really fucking mean it.

I'm trying not to be too personal about this, but you're either of these people you're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron. Lack of education or brainwashing by the press is no excuse. You're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 03:53:41 PM
And now, back to the studio...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 04:04:04 PM
Quote from: Bogbrush on 24 June, 2016, 03:42:58 PM
I just want to say, if you voted leave you're a fucking moron.

Did you vote leave and you're reading this? You're a fucking moron.

Did you vote Tory in the last election and then vote leave in the referendum and reading this? You're a double fucking moron.

I really fucking mean it.

I'm trying not to be too personal about this, but you're either of these people you're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron. Lack of education or brainwashing by the press is no excuse. You're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron.

I'm sure that's the kind of rational argument that would have won over the Leavers.

I voted remain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 24 June, 2016, 04:17:15 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 04:04:04 PM
Quote from: Bogbrush on 24 June, 2016, 03:42:58 PM
I just want to say, if you voted leave you're a fucking moron.

Did you vote leave and you're reading this? You're a fucking moron.

Did you vote Tory in the last election and then vote leave in the referendum and reading this? You're a double fucking moron.

I really fucking mean it.

I'm trying not to be too personal about this, but you're either of these people you're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron. Lack of education or brainwashing by the press is no excuse. You're a fucking moron or a double fucking moron.

I'm sure that's the kind of rational argument that would have won over the Leavers.

I voted remain.

I fully agree, sarcasm and all.

And the genuinely rational arguments really worked out well, didn't they?

Just trying out some tough love.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 04:17:31 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 01:41:07 PM
The mood isn't good in NI over this, that's for sure.  This could go pear shaped pretty quickly. Z  :(

Judging by today's financial news it already is.

"Made a note in my diary on the way over.  Simply said: Bugger!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 04:20:27 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 11:48:23 AM
I love sarcasm.

You being sarcastic?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mattofthespurs on 24 June, 2016, 04:23:46 PM
This is what happens when you give important decisions to the common man.

And we all know the common man is a raving fucking idiot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 04:25:03 PM
Well the neo-nazi parties of Europe, Donald Trump and Iran are gloating - Putin however has been suspiciously quiet beyond the rather cryptic "no one should support weak economies"

I expect there'll be vodka and dancing in the Kremlin tonight though. All Britain's and Europe's enemies will be rubbing their hands and working out how best to exploit this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 24 June, 2016, 04:27:04 PM
No good whining that everyone got a vote. That's the point. I voted remain but once again im on the wrong side of history.  I see the plastic reds are whinging. How very reactionary of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 04:30:05 PM
Quote from: Mattofthespurs on 24 June, 2016, 04:23:46 PM
This is what happens when you give important decisions to the common man.

And we all know the common man is a raving fucking idiot.

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.  Churchill
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 04:38:57 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 04:20:27 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 24 June, 2016, 11:48:23 AM
I love sarcasm.

You being sarcastic?

Only if he wasn't  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 04:41:11 PM
Why are you all moaning?

This is what you believe in. This is democracy. This is what you all want - to be told what you're going to do, to be told who's going to rule you, to be told how you should live. Well, today you've been told. Anyone who voted, either for stay or leave, has absolutely no right to complain. You participated in a process you have been conditioned to respect and believe in. That process you so revere has done what you wanted it to do - given you a decision. You have no right to criticise or bemoan that decision because you participated in its imposition.

If you believe in the god of government, if you believe in the fantasy of democracy, you must now knuckle down and respect the decision. You must work to make the situation viable. You must bow before the majority, because the majority knows best. Your entire belief system is based on the fact that the majority knows best - even when you disagree.

The outcome is irrelevant. You got exactly what you wanted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 June, 2016, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 04:41:11 PM
The outcome is irrelevant. You got exactly what you wanted.

You colossal twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 04:48:06 PM
Yeah sorry Sharky, you missed the point by a rather extraordinary margin!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 24 June, 2016, 04:48:29 PM
So far this discussion has been (relatively) civil, but abuse or namecalling will result in some temporary bans being handed out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 04:50:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 June, 2016, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 04:41:11 PM
The outcome is irrelevant. You got exactly what you wanted.

You colossal legendary twat.


FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2016, 04:55:42 PM
Summing up so far:

- Sterling in freefall
- Billions wiped off of FTSE
- UK to lose top credit ratings
- Scotland and Northern Ireland likely to leave the UK
- US grimacing through it and saying through gritted teeth our relationship remains important
- EU desperate to kick off A50 and get rid of the UK as soon possible
- No open market access on the table
- Farage and others reneging on all promises made my Leave, from NHS funding to immigration stats

So 52% voted out for nothing. Worse, they voted to screw themselves.

Still, at least we settled that proxy battle for the direction of the Conservative Party, and got that socialist Corbyn out of the Labour hot seat!

The only crumb I'm clinging to is the EU showed its hand re open market suspiciously early. It does feel a bit like them bellowing "are you sure about this?" and giving the UK a chance to make this right. Either that, or they're so pissed off they want shot of us as soon as possible and hang the consequences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: esoteric ed on 24 June, 2016, 04:57:08 PM
Reading the posts here and on Facebook today in light of the news, this imgagery came to mind  ;)

Ed
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 05:05:46 PM
The EU will be keen to push British (English and Welsh to be blunt) egress through as quickly as ever possible.  They are clever enough in the sense that they will wish to isolate 'the contagion' as they see it; they will not want this to fester like a running sore and spread to other component nations (The Netherlands being a major worry). Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 05:08:20 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2016, 04:55:42 PM
Summing up so far:
....

- Boris Johnson possibly new PM.

Where exactly are we on a scale of 1 to Screwed?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 05:09:48 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on Today at 04:55:42 pm
Summing up so far:
....

- Boris Johnson possibly new PM.

Where exactly are we on a scale of 1 to Screwed?



11 . Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 24 June, 2016, 05:10:33 PM
Anyone got a screengrab of that panel of Dredd saying "Democracy is not for the people"? I need a new facebook profile pic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 24 June, 2016, 05:19:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2016, 03:27:49 PM
I am genuinely kicking myself for not trying to put money on the whole thing being blamed on Jeremy Corbyn - a man we've been told for the last month hasn't been doing anything, and yet is somehow also now responsible for what has happened.  A vote of No Confidence has been tabled by Margeret Hodge MP, who claims Corbyn didn't do enough for the Remain campaign... Hodge's constituency of Barking and Dagenham voted to Leave the EU by a majority of 63% - the highest in the UK.

63% was nowhere near the highest Leave result.  There were nine areas getting over 70%, and the 'winner' is Boston in Lincolnshire, with 75.6%
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2016, 05:21:29 PM
Of course, it's not over yet by a long chalk - as this BBC report (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120) from June 6th suggests.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 05:26:29 PM
Can't imagine that will happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 June, 2016, 05:27:53 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 24 June, 2016, 05:19:35 PM
There were nine areas getting over 70%, and the 'winner' is Boston in Lincolnshire, with 75.6%

Interestingly, I crunched the raw data on Boston a couple of years ago when they had a surprise swing to UKIP in some local elections. The swing was very much about immigration.

Boston does have a large immigrant population — about 10% according to the last census, almost all temporary workers doing seasonal agricultural labour.

What Boston doesn't have, is an unemployment problem. Its unemployment rate has traditionally run about half the national average for years. Assuming that the same proportion of migrants are unemployed as the general population (although, statistically, the percentage of migrants is likely to be lower) then the number of EU migrants claiming benefits in Boston was under 120. In a town of 60,000.

Additionally, there were only 1,800 unemployed people in Boston. Assuming they were all capable of doing back-breaking agricultural work, if you made all the migrant workers disappear, there'd be a shortfall of 4,000 and the crops would rot in the fields.

But, you know, foreigners...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 05:29:12 PM
Can't imagine that will happen.

Well neither can I in the main.  I can however confidently predict the Hedgefunds and speculators have and will continue to make a killing...a wee bit like vultures and a half dead man. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2016, 05:47:46 PM
I was kind of hoping for an interesting Conservative leadership campaign, but the process doesn't seem to allow elbow room for dark horses, so it'll likely be a run between Ozzy, Bojo, and maybe Gove and May.  One of those will be our PM in time for Halloween.  Great times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 24 June, 2016, 05:51:45 PM
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d339be4b08d2c56391aca?edition=uk& (http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d339be4b08d2c56391aca?edition=uk&)

QuoteThe news appears to back research which shows regions with the biggest votes for Leave are also the most economically dependent on the EU.

The great British - well, English and Welsh - electorate, ladies and gentlemen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 June, 2016, 06:19:29 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2016, 04:55:42 PM
Summing up so far:

- Sterling in freefall
- Billions wiped off of FTSE
- UK to lose top credit ratings
- Scotland and Northern Ireland likely to leave the UK
- US grimacing through it and saying through gritted teeth our relationship remains important
- EU desperate to kick off A50 and get rid of the UK as soon possible
- No open market access on the table
- Farage and others reneging on all promises made my Leave, from NHS funding to immigration stats

So 52% voted out for nothing. Worse, they voted to screw themselves.

Still, at least we settled that proxy battle for the direction of the Conservative Party, and got that socialist Corbyn out of the Labour hot seat!

The only crumb I'm clinging to is the EU showed its hand re open market suspiciously early. It does feel a bit like them bellowing "are you sure about this?" and giving the UK a chance to make this right. Either that, or they're so pissed off they want shot of us as soon as possible and hang the consequences.
Also - UK goes from fifth largest economy in world to sixth largest, within twelve hours of the result being declared.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2016, 06:26:51 PM
Quite, which given the Leave lot banging on about FIFTH-BIGGEST ECONOMY throughout this campaign is rather ironic. What a mess.

Any of the few Leave voters here happy? Or are even you surprised at the massive shitstorm now ensuing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 06:35:01 PM
Someone on twitter spotted that the guy in the blue shirt on the front page of the Sun celebrating Leave is a neo-nazi, posed in front of a Combat 18 banner etc.

He must be happy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 06:57:32 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2016, 05:47:46 PM
... so it'll likely be a run between Ozzy, Bojo, and maybe Gove and May.  One of those will be our PM in time for Halloween. 

So they finally found a way to make Halloween really scary then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 06:58:51 PM
I'm trying to get my head around all the "shitstorm"... we were governed by Europe who had a massive say in what we did and our economy and helped hundereds of criminals stay because of their human rights...
  all the majority of leavers are neo Nazis ,even the non white voters.
Now Scotland are talking about leaving the uk despite voting to stay in the last referendum knowing the leave remain vote was coming...
  in my simple mind I fail to see the difference in us wanting our independence form Europe and the scots wanting independence from the uk .
  would the usa accept a joining of the eu themselves and have brussels dictacting how to run there country? I doubt it.
  I doubt this will be the end of us as prophesised by the doom mongers ,yes it might be difficult during the transition as is any change but all the talk of financial ruin is silly, or did I imagine the last few years when,as a member state,we went into recession and had to cut massively to get out of it?  Did Europe give us financial help or did we have to manage on our own?
  And yes, we did manage ok before churchy signed us over ,we defeated the Nazi menace and had an actual empire for a wee bit before that...

and as the colossal sharky said earlier ,we voted for it in a democratic manner and the leave vote won.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 07:04:25 PM
"Had a wee bit of an empire for awhile" An empire that by all historical accounts was one of the most deplorable colonialisations of them all. "The glory days of old" is just a romantiscised image if slavery and discrimination, and for a little while the EU, as imprefect as it is, brought our egos down to the levels of everyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 24 June, 2016, 07:07:46 PM
A 'who won the war, anyway?' and a mention for our glorious empire.

Surely that's a full house shout if you're playing Idiot Bingo?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
ah,but it wasn't just the shit bits was it? (Germany has a couple of million of skeletons in its closet) we led the way in industry as I remember from loads of field trips to mills at school
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 07:10:01 PM
The dismissive attitude towards leave voters is probably one of the more uncomfortable aspects of the result.  I know one or two leave voters and they are intelligent, articulate and respectful (sheesh, that sounds like the old 'I know one or two gay people / blacks / insert group of your choice.  Any parallel is accidental and unintentional so sorry there).

That said, I'm not sure how much 'independence' we either needed or are likely to get.  There is rather unsurprisingly talk from Europe about expediting our exit and about ensuring that very little of what the leave campaign claimed about the negotiations on trade etc come about 'pour encourage les autres'.  As you say this at the very least is going to be a difficult time.  Sensible for such a fragile economy?  Not so sure.  Europe has provided financial assistance for many different parts of the UK through the recession.  Personally I find it ironic that the Welsh Valleys have rejected Europe, questioning what the EU has done for them.  (Answer: provided funding for a large number of projects to improve the economy, not always successfully).

You are absolutely right Grugz, we have voted for this, albeit by a slim majority.  Now we get to lie in this bed and find out how comfortable it actually is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:13:59 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 24 June, 2016, 07:07:46 PM
A 'who won the war, anyway?' and a mention for our glorious empire.

Surely that's a full house shout if you're playing Idiot Bingo?


   winning the war is a proud moment in our chequered history or angela merkel would be sporting a rather fetching moustache...

  call me an idiot if it makes you fell big and clever if you want despite molchers call for civility I don't care what you think but as a free and democratic country,respect your view even if it is different to mine ,we are supposed to value free speech so perhaps you could extend the same courtesy to others. thank you.

and tim, they are expediting our exit cos theyre scared other countries may follow suit(I believe the Netherlands are considering it?)  and vote for freedom rather than be governed by unelected wotnots in brussels...they are just afraid,i feel, that their power is threatened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 24 June, 2016, 07:17:41 PM
Much of what you say I stridently disagree with Grugz. There was a referendum,  in my eyes one that never should never have happened; a referendum caused by a bunch of 'little england' Tories more specifically a means to further a power struggle between a bunch of rarefied entitled pricks who frankly think the rest of you. (English and Welsh) are at best pawns and at worst undeserving peasants.i
Your views on cuts bringing your nation out of recession is farcical. The Nazi menace was defeated mainly by the blood and tears of 26,000,000 Russian dead and the industrial production of the continental USA. The Empire is looked upon by people like me as something which kept my ancestors in thalldom for hundreds of years ; which halved my countries population and has left a legacy of bitterness in Irish communities through the world. I speak for my own, your Empire and it's deeds effected many hundreds of millions of others just as badly.
The vote is 'democratic' in what sense....what is 'democratic' about a false flag to further the aims of extremists and the permanent rich class in your country? Respectfully. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:18:28 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
ah,but it wasn't just the shit bits was it? (Germany has a couple of million of skeletons in its closet) we led the way in industry as I remember from loads of field trips to mills at school

Yeah, I'm sure they were great.

http://spartacus-educational.com/IRaccidents.htm (http://spartacus-educational.com/IRaccidents.htm)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:20:38 PM
And I can't see anyone clamouring for a referendum on the unelected members of the House of Lords.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:24:50 PM
no worries Z, I know we,as many other countries have dropped the ball and committed many atrocities but hopefully in the 21st century I hope we learned from past mistakes and for what its worth ever since the "troubles" supposedly came to an end I often wondered why northern Ireland didn't say "we want out and want to be joined back with the other bit" and would wholeheartedly support that. But my political and financial knowledge is weak but I was under the impression we did claw our way out of ressecion with all the austerity measures etc. and wasn't it the people who demanded the right to vote on this in the first palce? or Cameron would have just carried on as before
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:25:50 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:20:38 PM
And I can't see anyone clamouring for a referendum on the unelected members of the House of Lords.


i'd go for that! do they get paid for sitting round decomposing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 07:29:58 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:08:17 PM
ah,but it wasn't just the shit bits was it? (Germany has a couple of million of skeletons in its closet) we led the way in industry as I remember from loads of field trips to mills at school
Blood diamonds. I am not proud of my English heritage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:32:50 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:25:50 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:20:38 PM
And I can't see anyone clamouring for a referendum on the unelected members of the House of Lords.


i'd go for that! do they get paid for sitting round decomposing?

£300 expenses - last time I looked some just clocked in to get that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25411182 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25411182)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:34:18 PM
I was thinking more of richard arkwright and his magnificent spinning machine but fair do's. as I said the past is past and we learn to get things right, yeah it might be a colossal balls up or shock it might not be...we'll find out in time won't we?

£300 eh? formaldehyde is expensive isn't it? mind you I bet they claim it all back in expenses for their expenses
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 07:35:51 PM
As always when watching Britain beat itself up, I wonder if ye appreciate all your actual largely untainted successes which are so obvious from outside.  Everything seems to be ignored in favour of your achievements in WWII (which while critical and laudable would have meant absolutely nothing without the rest of the Allies), and your dubious claims about a benevolent Empire. Your real achievements are things like comedy, literature, the NHS, gentility and civility, racial integration, religious tolerance, open friendliness, well presented heritage, science, endless patience, the BBC, bookshops, Cornish pasties and embracing eccentricity. That's the stuff you should take pride in, because a lot of it is bloody rare in the rest of the world.

Dunkirk was a class act too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:38:34 PM
can we start calling Cornish pasties "Cornish" even if theyre from wigan now were out? i'd eat a bent banana but I don't like them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 07:38:56 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:32:50 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:25:50 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 07:20:38 PM
And I can't see anyone clamouring for a referendum on the unelected members of the House of Lords.


i'd go for that! do they get paid for sitting round decomposing?

£300 expenses - last time I looked some just clocked in to get that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25411182 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25411182)
Thats just under my entire months wages. Diabolical!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2016, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 07:35:51 PM
As always when watching Britain beat itself up, I wonder if ye appreciate all your actual largely untainted successes which are so obvious from outside.  .....  That's the stuff you should take pride in, because a lot of it is bloody rare in the rest of the world.

Dunkirk was a class act too.

That I'll go with.

I have to be honest I've felt a bit bemused all day with the result.  Personally I think it was a mistake and, as has been mentioned, one that has been foisted on us by petulant tories.  That said.  It is the decision that has been made and now we need to make the best go of it.  As you say Grugz, the Europeans are now running scared of contagion and are going to do what they can to minimise the impact.  How we go about that remains to be seen.

The one thing that I do hope comes out of this is that politicians take a long hard look at how disconnected they are from the electorate and start addressing it.  Corbyn's selection as leader of Labour should have been a wake up call but I guess it appeared isolated as it only related to one party.  This is a bit of a larger shout out.  However much we agree or disagree, it needs to be acknowledged that too many people in this country now feel disenfranchised.  We may have the vote but we don't have politicians respect for it.  Too many safe seats.  Brown's 'horrible woman' gaffe was probably a poor articulation of what far too many MP's actually think of their constituents.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 07:46:52 PM
and we know how to do a royal wedding!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 24 June, 2016, 07:51:59 PM
Despite many early mumbles of Northern Ireland wanting to join the Irish republic, I think it's far more likely that most of us here who would've preferred to remain in will simply pick up an Irish Passport and continue to enjoy some of the advantages of being European citizens.

The rest of you are all fucked though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 June, 2016, 08:42:57 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 24 June, 2016, 07:51:59 PM
Despite many early mumbles of Northern Ireland wanting to join the Irish republic, I think it's far more likely that most of us here who would've preferred to remain in will simply pick up an Irish Passport and continue to enjoy some of the advantages of being European citizens.

The rest of you are all fucked though.

That's what we're worried about!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 08:54:38 PM
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/parliament-to-consider-debate-for-second-eu-referendum-as-100000-back-petition-5964769/


  democracy at work .

best of three?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 09:12:00 PM
I'm sure it will be as successful as the one proposing to ban Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 24 June, 2016, 09:32:41 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 24 June, 2016, 08:54:38 PM
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/parliament-to-consider-debate-for-second-eu-referendum-as-100000-back-petition-5964769/


  democracy at work .

best of three?

don't think it matters. The damage has been done. Companies have made and are beginning to activate contingency plans (if they have any sense) and the sense of this place no longer being the country you think it is is already in place.

-pj
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 09:49:19 PM
I'm so uncertain what the future holds for me. I have no job, no home, my savings as meager as they where are now worth even less. I'm just so uncertain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 24 June, 2016, 09:54:24 PM
Clutching at straws on a Dredd sequel scale.

https://twitter.com/DavidAllenGreen/status/746437025251868672?lang=en-gb (https://twitter.com/DavidAllenGreen/status/746437025251868672?lang=en-gb)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2016, 10:28:24 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 09:49:19 PM
I'm so uncertain what the future holds for me. I have no job, no home, my savings as meager as they where are now worth even less. I'm just so uncertain.

C'est la vie, mon brave. Everything else is death and taxes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 10:48:21 PM
Here's what grinds my gears: Both the brexiters in the UK and the Trump supporters in the US don't care about the lack of a cogent philosophy, or any actual policies, they're happy to ignore proven lies and contradictions, all under one consistent, all encompassing  mantra:  "we need a change".

These are two of the richest most influential countries in the world with the highest standards of living - just why are we so desperate for change?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 25 June, 2016, 01:15:38 AM
I'm regretting leaving you idiots unsupervised. I left the UK three years ago and already you've broken it completely.

I should have told Germany to babysit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 25 June, 2016, 07:36:17 AM
Quote from: Trout on 25 June, 2016, 01:15:38 AM
I'm regretting leaving you idiots unsupervised. I left the UK three years ago and already you've broken it completely.

Can you tell me in detail how you did that and how I convince my wife? Does Canada have a desperate shortage of librarains? I can find them two very good ones who need a change!

At least we know what to buy Scotland and Northern Ireland for their next birthday. An 'I'm with stupid' tee-shirt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2016, 08:08:39 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 24 June, 2016, 10:48:21 PM

These are two of the richest most influential countries in the world with the highest standards of living - just why are we so desperate for change?

Possibly because the gap between the richest and the poorest is growing with the middle being hollowed out.  Cameron bleated on about 'enemies of aspiration' without stopping to consider the effect that his policies were having on opportunities.  The growth in employment and the growth in people in self employment have run hand in hand and there is evidence that a lot of those 'companies' are barely making enough for their 'owners' to call a living wage. 

I'm still convinced that this is all part of the after shocks of 2008 and that when the History books are written it will all be described as one continuous crisis (kind of like the total war theory of 1914 - 1945) with a series of mini crises along the way.  I do agree though, we lack any political leadership with any credible vision.  They've spent so long slagging each other off they no longer know how to lead.

I think we are slightly along the way from 11 on the scale of 1 to screwed (unless a power of ten was missing).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 25 June, 2016, 09:27:09 AM
About the source of all this anger and disillusionment we've seen... I would trace it back to the 1980s.

The seductive but empty idea of "aspiration" started to be shoved in people's faces just as the industries that had given many working people purpose and dignity started to be broken up. Suddenly they were all meant to "get on their bikes" and work hard to thrive in the new economy. That's all they had to do, the narrative said, and if they didn't they were failures. People who had produced cars or worked down mines all their lives were suddenly somehow supposed to become entrepreneurs.

At the same time they were taunted by the idea of "aspiration". TV and movies fed them images of wealth while politicians blessed with wealthy families and expensive educations goaded them into thinking that, if they worked hard enough, somehow they would automatically deserve all the riches they saw around them. The rare examples of successes from relatively humble backgrounds (Thatcher the grocer's daughter, Norman Tebbit's father who got on his bike, a smattering of wealthy businessmen with the wrong accents) just made things worse because of the false hopes they raised. In reality the rigid class system stayed intact and the elites continued to look after their own.

This narrative continued through the 1990s and into the 21st century. Millions of people unlucky enough to be born into the right area or the right family being fooled into thinking all they have to do is work hard and everything will be okay. But all that happens is they work themselves into the ground. The people calling the shots, the people with the right accents and the expensive educations - they're the only ones who get rich from all that hard work. The expansion of higher education is part of that scam for me. The idea that all you have to do is get a degree in Media Studies and before long you'll be director-general of the BBC. Just give us all that money you don't have and we'll educate you up. Soon you'll have a column in The Spectator just like Boris.

Then came the post-Lehman Shock recession. It was caused by greed and idiocy in the financial sector and showed there was something incredibly rotten at the heart of this narrative we'd been fed for so long. And of course the people who suffered were the people who'd been fed the lie for so long. Their jobs gone as the business owners looked elsewhere to make their money. The services they relied on decimated by cuts. An underfunded health service barely catering to their needs. We're all in it together my arse.

There's an undercurrent of anger that's been there for years, and it's got worse since 2008. Xenophobes like Farage and opportunists like Gove and Johnson have done very well in channelling that anger towards easy targets. Those faceless bureaucrats in Brussels (FOREIGNERS!) who want to straighten our good, honest British bananas and take all our money. And somehow the narrative has been distorted to suggest they were the ones who caused the financial crisis rather than, um, the financial industry. And the media, owned by rich old white guys with offshore bank accounts, gleefully join in with the disinformation.

Then there's the immigration. It's always easy to get people whipped up into a frenzy about outsiders who don't look like them. It's the foreigners stealing all our jobs, because of course we all want to be breaking our backs on building sites and out in the fields. If those pesky foreigners weren't here we'd be out there ourselves, picking fruit! And of course the foreigners are to blame for our creaky public services. It's not because they're either chronically underfunded or broken apart and run by shitty private companies out to make a fast buck. It's the foreigners.

Anger borne of years of frustrated aspirations has been used by unscrupulous people wanting to legitimize their own prejudices or gain more power. But even they look pretty dismayed at what they're unleashed. The whole thing is very, very ugly. England wasn't much of a looker before Thursday. Now she looks like Wayne Rooney crossed with the Elephant Man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 June, 2016, 10:12:12 AM
Great post. Just skimmed it but I'll read it in detail later.
Does anyone remember an ex-Tharg, can't remember which one, saying something like 'Grud save us from the Eurozone'? Salvation is here, ex-Tharg. Enjoy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 June, 2016, 10:36:53 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 24 June, 2016, 10:28:24 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 24 June, 2016, 09:49:19 PM
I'm so uncertain what the future holds for me. I have no job, no home, my savings as meager as they where are now worth even less. I'm just so uncertain.

C'est la vie, mon brave. Everything else is death and taxes.
I'm sure i'll be able to make the best of it. I have considered doubling back on my stance of not living in the channel islands indefinitely, but i'd like to stay in the North West if possible. It all depends on rent prices, cost of living and other essentials, weather independence is a viable option. God I hope so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2016, 11:27:42 AM
Bog brush, I would say you've pretty much nailed it.  Particularly on the education expansion.  I think that there has long been a fundamental misunderstanding of why graduate qualifications led to higher value employment, to wit access was limited to those with the financial wherewithal.  Removing that restriction removed the currency that a degree carried.  Expanding education has more to do now with deferring entry into the diminishing labour market than it does with improving opportunities. 

As you say, the idea that a media studies degree will get you a directorship in a media company is at best delusional.  Personally I find the idea that we are meant to peddle educational achievement as the only option offensive.  Particularly when you now have call centres full of Masters graduates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dash Decent on 25 June, 2016, 05:18:13 PM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 25 June, 2016, 07:36:17 AM
Does Canada have a desperate shortage of librarains? I can find them two very good ones who need a change!

Can they spell 'librarian'?  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 June, 2016, 05:28:13 PM
No but then neither can Canadians, so he should be OK...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Misanthrope on 25 June, 2016, 06:52:09 PM
Never put the future of your country in the hands of people who think Ant and Dec are talented and that Made in Chelsea is worthwhile television.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 June, 2016, 06:57:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
The UK will not vote to leave the EU.

*cough*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 June, 2016, 07:39:52 PM
Quote from: Misanthrope on 25 June, 2016, 06:52:09 PM
Never put the future of your country in the hands of people who think Ant and Dec are talented and that Made in Chelsea is worthwhile television.

Have to disagree with you there, ordinary people aren't the problem. Those who lie to them without conscience or sanction in newspapers, interviews and billboards, stoking their everyday worries into ignorant fear, all for nothing more than their own personal wealth, power and fame. Those people are the problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2016, 09:24:59 PM
The ignorant working classes who don't know what's good for them are to blame, and the media won't waste time letting us know it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 25 June, 2016, 09:33:22 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 25 June, 2016, 06:57:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 May, 2016, 01:02:05 PM
The UK will not vote to leave the EU.

*cough*

Based on the few Leave voters I've spoken to this weekend - all friends and family - it seems their vote was not so much to do with the EU, but more that the referendum was the only available means with which they would be heard by the ruling classes.

It was a vote against inequality and unfairness, against the lack of cultural and financial capital outside London, it was a vote that said something has to change.

In effect, it was a vote about how shit politics (or rather party politics) has become.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 June, 2016, 09:43:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2016, 09:24:59 PM
The ignorant working classes who don't know what's good for them are to blame, and the media won't waste time letting us know it.

...and apparently there's no such thing as working class folk in Scotland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2016, 09:46:09 PM
Or Northern Ireland.  The educated London elites all voted to Remain, though, and we're certainly being reminded of that.

Quote from: Banners on 25 June, 2016, 09:33:22 PM
It was a vote against inequality and unfairness, against the lack of cultural and financial capital outside London, it was a vote that said something has to change.

In effect, it was a vote about how shit politics (or rather party politics) has become.

Nah, everyone voted that way because Jeremy Corbyn didn't tell them not to.  I know my track record automatically makes you think "he's using a sarcastic turn of phrase there as usual" but this is the actual reasoning being used by a lot of otherwise very sensible people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 25 June, 2016, 10:05:42 PM
Will Boris have the balls to invoke Article 50?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 June, 2016, 10:09:38 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2016, 09:46:09 PM
Or Northern Ireland.  The educated London elites all voted to Remain, though, and we're certainly being reminded of that.
Yes, London - all educated elites.  No working class people at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2016, 10:16:05 PM
Sorry but the idea that the 'working class' are sub normal / mongrels is probably half the reason that we are in this mess.  Just because they made a decision based on insanely poor information does not make them/us the culprits in this.  The information provided by the media, the guidance provided by the political parties, the campaigning quality of the in / out camps is of an insanely poor quality.

If nothing else comes out of this then I sincerely hope that we once and for all deal with the quality of political 'leadership' in this country.  At present they are absolutely feckin useless.  Blair once said that history would judge him.  What judgement will the present crowd get?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 25 June, 2016, 10:22:44 PM
Quote from: Banners on 25 June, 2016, 10:05:42 PM
Will Boris have the balls to invoke Article 50?

Won't matter either way. Come November 2020 he'll be POTUS elect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 25 June, 2016, 11:01:35 PM
Suggestion here (https://twitter.com/ijclark/status/746774581390745600) is that Boris is screwed and the Brexiters have actually lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 June, 2016, 11:32:17 PM



It's a perfect shite-storm; the incumbents are damned if they do, damned if they don't hit the nuclear button.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 25 June, 2016, 11:36:06 PM
These guys will tear each other to shreds....what a shower of utter fucking scum. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 26 June, 2016, 04:11:05 AM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 25 June, 2016, 07:36:17 AM
Quote from: Trout on 25 June, 2016, 01:15:38 AM
I'm regretting leaving you idiots unsupervised. I left the UK three years ago and already you've broken it completely.

Can you tell me in detail how you did that and how I convince my wife?

It's a long story which involves lots of paperwork.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 08:55:40 AM
Benn sacked by Corbyn, half the shadow cabinet resigned or set to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 09:04:29 AM
In my opinion, as you know, the basic "culprit" is statism and statists. It is the illegitimate coercive power employed by some human beings to bend other human beings to their will for whatever reason that is the core problem.

Statism relies on the fact that some human beings have more rights and responsibilities than others and on the illusion that the rights and responsibilities utilised by the few originate with the many. Yet this is patently untrue. I do not have the right or responsibility to demand money (tax) my neighbours, no matter how humanitarian my plans for that stolen money might be, under threat of violence - kidnapping, incarceration, confiscation of possessions. Yet the state assumes these rights and responsibilities as a matter of course, heedless of the misery and hardship left in their wake. Statists claim the right and responsibility to tax comes from the people, the voters, but how can it? How can one human being pass on something unreal to another human being? Taxation is just the obvious example demonstrating the mindset of the whole statist cult.

It is not only the politicians to be blamed for society's ills, they are victims too. Give any person rights and powers beyond the normal and they will use them in whatever way they see fit. So would anyone. You might be a fan of Jeremy Corbyn but, even if he gets elected to Prime Minister, he will still steal money from the people to fund his agenda. Anyone who cannot or will not pay will be crushed by the apparatus of the state.

The average statist is, at heart, a decent person but a wilfully ignorant one. A person who would not crush their neighbours for money to fund their own lives or projects but is happy to see the state crush their neighbours for them. A person who would not extort money from their neighbours to buy food, shelter or medicine yet is happy to accept state benefits comprising money extorted from those same neighbours by the state.

It is irrational.

The politicians' wages come from stolen money. Their expenses come from stolen money. Their trappings, furnishings and buildings are paid for with stolen money. They are thieves, pure and simple, yet statists set these thieves apart from others, even venerate and ennoble them. Even the highwayman gives his victims a choice - "your money or your life." The statist demands your money and your life. The highwayman, his work done, allows you to go on your way. The statist follows you home and keeps on robbing you in perpetuity, from cradle to grave. The highwayman issues his commands only when he's robbing you, the statist's commands follow you around always, from cradle to grave.

The statist is the problem. It was the statist who allowed Jesus Christ to be nailed to the cross, the statist who cheered wildly at Hitler's rallies, the statist who allowed untold thousands to end up in Stalin's gulags, the statist who made possible the genocides of aborigional peoples around the world, the statist who flung millions of armed men against one another in two world wars, the statist who caused two cities to be nuked, the statist who cheered in the seats of the Colosseum as the Christians were thrown to the lions - the statists who constructed the EU and now want to pull it apart. And those who agree cheer and those who disagree grumble a bit, shrug their shoulders and say, "that's just the way things are - the state has the right to do anything it wants."

Bullshit, say I. The state has no more rights than you or I have.

If you want to buy something from France or Germany or Holland, just buy it. You don't need  statists to tell you what you can and can't buy and to take a cut of your transaction to fund their interference. If you want to hire a Syrian or a German or a Venezuelan, just hire them.  You don't need  statists to tell you who you can and can't hire and to take a cut of your profits to fund their interference. If you want to be part of the wider European community of human beings, just be one. If you don't, don't. It's your choice and yours alone; it's not Dave's choice or Jeremy's or Nigel's or Boris's - even though you may or may not respect their advice - it's yours.

All the rights and responsibilities do not belong to the state, they belong to you. You must use them wisely, for the state, plainly, cannot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 June, 2016, 10:00:18 AM
I love your writing Sharky, it's passionate and eloquent, and so much of it touches on truths. But ultimately your argument  rests on the idea that populations lack the ability to consent. 

I consent to be taxed, I consent to delegate the spending of that revenue, I consent to others having an equal say in who is delegated. Not because I believe in the superior right of the state, and most particularly I abhor the nation state, or because I fear its coercive powers, but because I believe the complexities of human life are best addressed through a degree of centralised management of resources - be that at street, town, island, continent or global level. Some problems require a bigger brief than me and my neighbours can or wish to handle, and for that reason I consent to my absolute liberty being curtailed, in pursuit of the common good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 June, 2016, 10:13:37 AM
Forgive me spamming this thread with an external link, but I've had to try and get my thoughts in some kind of order about this whole referendum mess and they're possible a bit long to dump in a lengthy screed here, so I've typed them up on a separate page on my blog, away from the comics stuff:

EU referendum thoughts. (http://clintflickerlettering.blogspot.co.uk/p/off-topic-eu-referendum.html)

Happy to talk about any of that stuff here, however.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 June, 2016, 10:19:42 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 26 June, 2016, 10:00:18 AM
I love your writing Sharky, it's passionate and eloquent, and so much of it touches on truths. But ultimately your argument  rests on the idea that populations lack the ability to consent.

This is the fundamental point of disagreement with Shark and where we will never agree. He sees 'rule' but I see delegation. In fact, that same argument speaks to the fundamental flaw of referendums, TBH.

It would be possible, in this day and age, to dispense with both the Commons and the Lords entirely. Stick a dedicated Android tablet in every home, and let the public decide. On every decision. Elect an executive on a platform of policies every five years and then subject all their policy decisions to public vote.

Except that I don't want to make myself an expert on rural waterways. Or deep sea fishing. Or the finer points of widget manufacture. I don't have the time, and I don't have the energy, so what we do is pay someone else to do it on our behalf. If I (or anyone else in the electorate) can't or won't make themselves informed on a subject, then they shouldn't be making legislation on it. I'm more than happy with that principle.

Now, you could certainly argue that the current reality strays rather a long way from the principle, but my argument will always be to fix the reality, not assert a new one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 June, 2016, 11:07:00 AM
Reading that post Jim I can see where you are coming from and to be honest it bears up with my experience.  One of our Learning Support Assistants was talking about why she was voted Leave.  She is a single mother who works during the holidays as well.  She works damn hard term time as well.  She was talking about how she sometimes goes with little or no food to make sure she can afford food for the kids and new clothes.

This is 21st Century Britain.

Watching Labour implode at a time when we need a strong social democratic opposition to press home the points you make I can only despair.  This weekend is shaping up to be depressing for a whole host of reasons, not all of them related to the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 12:12:11 PM
Tordels, Jim: I have no argument against paying people to organise the things that need organising; healthcare, waterways, railways, roads, etc. Human beings are natural organisers - it's a skill we've harnessed to great and magnificent effect over the centuries. The need for and benefits of organisation are not in question.

But organisation does not mean "my way or the highway," nor does it mean having to become an expert on everything, having a say in everything. I am more than happy to leave decisions on what kind of bandages are best to the doctors, what kind of tarmac is best to the road menders, what kind of fertilizer is best to the farmers, and to have those industries have some form of national coordinating body.

It's the coercion I reject. That's one of the two basic things I would like to see changed immediately about the state as we evolve towards a properly enlightened, state-free society and world.

Yes, vote for representatives and prime ministers, by all means and good luck to them - but do not give them the powers to steal and cheat and coerce. They must ask, not demand. In most cases, they will ask for permission to run our public services their way at election time and permission is given - but not carte blanche - by the act of election to office. If the USA invites us into another war, the most the government will be able to do is ask the armed forces to provide volunteers and then make damned sure those volunteers are properly and adequately equipped and supported.

It's time that ministers and the people decided, once and for all, what they want government to be for, what it can and cannot do.

Imagine being asked for tax instead of having it taken from you. In the shop, for the checkout operator to tot up your bill and ask, "would you like to pay tax on that?" What would you say? "Actually, no, not today - this bombing of Syria has to stop," or maybe, "yeah, I'll pay 5% because I don't agree with government plan y but the hospitals still need the funds," or "yes, I'll pay the recommended x% because I'm broadly happy with how the government's doing things," or even, "absolutely, in fact the government's doing such a good job I'm willing to pay x% over the recommended rate." The same question could be asked by your employer on pay day. That's a little extra collective work for a potentially huge collective reward.

Sure, you'll get people who'll refuse to pay when asked but that number will dwindle as our services and government improve and as social attitudes evolve. Freedom and government, seemingly mutually exclusive ideas, working hand in hand for the greater good and it doesn't need blood in the streets or politicians dangling by the posterns to achieve it. All it requires is one, tiny shift - the right to say "no" and to have that respected.

(This does, of course, depend on the second needed change - the return of money creation to public (government, if necessary - at least to begin with) hands.)

If a government has to ask you for money it's going to have to be smarter, more efficient and better organised. If it just demands money, it can do what it pleases.

I suppose the question is, do you want to be a slave to the state or a partner to it? I opt for partnership every time and will reject slavery to my last breath on this good Earth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2016, 12:35:07 PM
Blairite sources in Labour have apparently been texting journalists telling them they're happy about the opportunities presented by the country going to utter fuckery:

Quote"everyone is so excited, it feels like Christmas morning, maybe today is the day!"

I should be surprised, but then you have to remember that these are the people who voted not to bomb Syria, but then changed their minds so they could turn the murder of 130 people into a stick to beat their leader with while enabling a bombing campaign that's killed hundreds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 June, 2016, 12:40:23 PM
I absolutely adore your confidence in humanities ability to knuckle down and get on, Sharky.

But it is highly deluded, either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 12:42:41 PM
QuoteIn the shop, for the checkout operator to tot up your bill and ask, "would you like to pay tax on that?" What would you say? "Actually, no, not today - this bombing of Syria has to stop," or maybe, "yeah, I'll pay 5% because I don't agree with government plan y but the hospitals still need the funds," or "yes, I'll pay the recommended x% because I'm broadly happy"

Hmmm...I'm happy with the policy of free health care and benefits for the vulnerable...but I don't like all the war.  I'll give them half.  I'm sure they'll spend it appropriately
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
That's the point, Panth - performance related pay.

Starve a government of funding, couple that with all the negative publicity and how long before the parties themselves react to force out the politicians costing them their credibility? You'll never stop them plotting against one another, backbiting and manoeuvring - so we might as well encourage them to do all that on the country's behalf rather than their own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 01:24:00 PM
Do I have to fill in a form with every purchase, so the government know what it is I'm approving of?

Okay.  After the initial economic shock of hugely reduced tax income, you're then left with the issue that government can't rely on future income, which greatly reduces the country's ability to borrow or plan for the future.  To negate this, you would have to stockpile savings, which with reduced income and no one willing to lend to you, could only be done by slashing spending. 

You're then left with the problem of ensuring future income.  Government can either try to appeal to several million working class people, who are more likely by now to have lost their jobs and are cutting their own spending so won't be volunteering to pay taxes they do have to, at least in any great numbers, or by appealing to a much lower number of the very wealth, who are largely insulated from economic downturns.  Provide the elite with what they want, you can prevent total meltdown. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 02:03:49 PM
So, that second referendum petition was set up by an Outer who thought Leave was going to lose...

http://news.sky.com/story/1717815/second-referendum-petition-was-set-up-by-outer (http://news.sky.com/story/1717815/second-referendum-petition-was-set-up-by-outer)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 June, 2016, 02:09:26 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 02:03:49 PM
So, that second referendum petition was set up by an Outer who thought Leave was going to lose...

http://news.sky.com/story/1717815/second-referendum-petition-was-set-up-by-outer (http://news.sky.com/story/1717815/second-referendum-petition-was-set-up-by-outer)
Whose a smart little boy then!

God save us I swear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 02:10:45 PM
It's a gift to post on those 'sore loser, move on' threads certainly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 June, 2016, 02:20:01 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 02:10:45 PM
It's a gift to post on those 'sore loser, move on' threads certainly.

And it emphasises yet again what a pointless farce online petitions are in general.

"I've set up this petition in advance, to complain about something that hasn't happened yet!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 26 June, 2016, 02:22:05 PM
I see the Blair rats have moved on Corbyn.  Shower of shite! Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 02:48:20 PM
First results weren't even in before Farage was declaring the whole thing a fix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 June, 2016, 03:11:00 PM
Huh.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 03:12:28 PM
Panth, I had not envisaged having to fill a form in at the checkout or deciding for yourself exactly how every penny of your contribution must be spent but you raise a good point. It would be fairly simple to get around this.

The first idea that springs to mind is a simple three or four digit code system, worked out and utilised by HMRC. For example, code 001 might mean "government decides," 002 might mean Health Service takes priority, 003 for policing taking priority and so on. If you don't want to pay out of protest, a similar code could be used, maybe comprising 2 or 3 letters instead. AA, war in Syria, AB, MPs expenses and so on. Punch these numbers into the till as you pay.

If that's too much trouble, there will be a shed load of out of work tax inspectors who could be re-tasked to find out who's contributing what and why.

I don't agree that would be a catastrophic drop in revenue. Maybe at first, as the people exercise their rights just for the hell of it, but I think it would even out in the long run as the system comes to be better understood.

Financial planning is never accurate anyway. The government always seems to end up with a deficit. Borrowing would be less of a problem with money creation shifting from private to public hands - which needs to happen anyway whether taxation is made voluntary or not.

In fact, instead of borrowing, or in tandem with it, HMRC could issue monthly reports calling for increased contributions to cover urgent shortfalls in whichever areas require it. This would save money for the country as such contributions would be just that and not interest bearing loans.

Certain areas of contribution would be more popular than others, possibly even leading to surpluses which could be kept in reserve, used for above and beyond improvements or call for decreased contributions.

This voluntary system could be made to work very easily through media, education and social programming. If you can convince people that the only way to stop terrorism is by terrorising terrorist countries and the only way to get a decent job is by getting a degree, convincing them to contribute to the upkeep of their own society should be child's play.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 03:47:17 PM
Tordels, thank you for your kind praise of my writing style (and also to Jim, if, indeed, by re-posting Tordel's words you were echoing them), I really appreciate it.

I meant to post this thank you in my immediate reply but, shamefully, it slipped my mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2016, 07:48:30 PM
Brexit is an engineered catastrophe meant to enable continuing austerity measures which have been revealed post-crash to be ludicrously profitable for the world's richest people, the poor can go fuck themselves.  Discuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 June, 2016, 08:23:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2016, 07:48:30 PM
Brexit is an engineered catastrophe meant to enable continuing austerity measures which have been revealed post-crash to be ludicrously profitable for the world's richest people, the poor can go fuck themselves.  Discuss.

That makes it sound like some kind of long-term plan was in place.  I see it more as a privileged fool gambling away his career and his own country's welfare for election points.  It's a fuck-up that's spiralled out of control, not a clever conspiracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 08:31:08 PM
Conspiracy theories are often attractive because they feed our deep seated hope that someone, somewhere, actually knows what's going on and is in control.

Brexit is little more than a series of fuck ups which started with a small group of people trying to entice the protest voters who grew in number when Labour stopped caring about the working class, and ended with a power grab from within the Tory party. 

Austerity will continue not because of a planned strategy, but simply because it's easy, and will continue to be easy unless the Labour party can appeal again to the disenfranchised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 June, 2016, 08:36:16 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 08:31:08 PM
Conspiracy theories are often attractive because they feed our deep seated hope that someone, somewhere, actually knows what's going on and is in control.

Brexit is little more than a series of fuck ups which started with a small group of people trying to entice the protest voters who grew in number when Labour stopped caring about the working class, and ended with a power grab from within the Tory party. 

Austerity will continue not because of a planned strategy, but simply because it's easy, and will continue to be easy unless the Labour party can appeal again to the disenfranchised.

Yes, as the Sky News political editor was astonished to find out, there is no longterm plan.  Just a bunch of chancers winging it. 

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576fe22ee4b0d2571149cffd?edition=uk (http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576fe22ee4b0d2571149cffd?edition=uk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2016, 09:19:08 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 June, 2016, 08:23:21 PM
That makes it sound like some kind of long-term plan was in place.

No no, I've mentioned in the past how I find Bojo highly amusing as a sort of comic character and have studied him over the years as one might any interesting specimen, and it is my considered opinion based on his past form that this has been a miscalculation on his part and that contrary to how it might seem right now, he thinks he's going to ride this out and go back to how things were after a certain interval.

I posited the conspiracy theory because I thought it might be interesting in the same way that total war theory mentioned above was.  If I was going to posit a conspiracy theory I thought was plausible, I would probably point out how the three or four people who just created a global recession have been given a free pass in the media by Blairite MPs not just missing the biggest open goal in political history, but doing so by running to the other end of the field and setting fire to their own goalposts whilst the entire thing is being commentated on Twitter by Ron Atkinson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HdE on 27 June, 2016, 05:49:10 PM
So, Cameron has ruled out a second referendum. That's interesting, as I was under the impression Parliament still had to consider / debate the petition now that it's well above the threshold of signatories required for that to happen.

I'm not especially hopeful that the petition would actually achieve anything. But it's been disheartening to see so much chatter along lines of 'we've made the decision, let's live with it.'

Personally, I'd be more in favour of saying 'We've made the decision, had the lies exposed and seen the dire consequences that were promised actually come to fruition, some of us who voted to leave realise we did so for terrible reasons, and we'd just LOVE to do this whole thing again, but differently this time.'

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2016, 05:50:10 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 June, 2016, 08:31:08 PM
Conspiracy theories are often attractive because they feed our deep seated hope that someone, somewhere, actually knows what's going on and is in control.


I always come back to what Pratchett said about conspiracy theories; some branch of government has managed to clandestinely organise a complex and secret plan when normally they can't even get the trains to run on time.  I think assuming that someone is in control at the moment is probably a stretch too far.  What is more likely is that the chancers at the top and in the city are taking advantage of this situation to make a few more bob.  Osborne is probably breathing a massive sigh of relief right now because the leave campaign has given him a fantastic new excuse for an imploding economy, increasing taxes, cutting spending and benefits and generally turning the screws up another five or six notches.

Prof Bear, I would have to agree wholeheartedly with your analogy.  I did wonder if the PLP were simply borrowing from the Northern Ireland football team playbook but as the day has developed it is fair to say that they have found some interesting new twists on the concept of shooting oneself in the foot.  I assume you meant Rowan Atkinson on commentating duties?  Now that would be worth paying money for.

How far past 11 are we now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 June, 2016, 05:55:12 PM
Safe in the knowledge that gullibility and ignorance have prevailed; Fuckface Farage knows he's safe to brazenly spout the following bullshit:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/nigel-farage-ukip-britain-recession-brexit (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/nigel-farage-ukip-britain-recession-brexit)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 27 June, 2016, 07:09:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 June, 2016, 03:12:28 PM
Panth, I had not envisaged having to fill a form in at the checkout or deciding for yourself exactly how every penny of your contribution must be spent but you raise a good point. It would be fairly simple to get around this.

The first idea that springs to mind is a simple three or four digit code system, worked out and utilised by HMRC. For example, code 001 might mean "government decides," 002 might mean Health Service takes priority, 003 for policing taking priority and so on. If you don't want to pay out of protest, a similar code could be used, maybe comprising 2 or 3 letters instead. AA, war in Syria, AB, MPs expenses and so on. Punch these numbers into the till as you pay.

If that's too much trouble, there will be a shed load of out of work tax inspectors who could be re-tasked to find out who's contributing what and why.

I don't agree that would be a catastrophic drop in revenue. Maybe at first, as the people exercise their rights just for the hell of it, but I think it would even out in the long run as the system comes to be better understood.

Financial planning is never accurate anyway. The government always seems to end up with a deficit. Borrowing would be less of a problem with money creation shifting from private to public hands - which needs to happen anyway whether taxation is made voluntary or not.

In fact, instead of borrowing, or in tandem with it, HMRC could issue monthly reports calling for increased contributions to cover urgent shortfalls in whichever areas require it. This would save money for the country as such contributions would be just that and not interest bearing loans.

Certain areas of contribution would be more popular than others, possibly even leading to surpluses which could be kept in reserve, used for above and beyond improvements or call for decreased contributions.

This voluntary system could be made to work very easily through media, education and social programming. If you can convince people that the only way to stop terrorism is by terrorising terrorist countries and the only way to get a decent job is by getting a degree, convincing them to contribute to the upkeep of their own society should be child's play.

I just want a Mars bar.

That's £80 and here is your HRMC purchase form filled with leading questions... will it be hospitals of will it be Prison outreach programs... it's going to be sick kids isn't it... it's always that or the puppies, or nothing at all.

Why is my Mars Bar £80?

As no one ticks the 'HMRC wages box' the burden of this complex voluntary system falls onto the retailers. I have two floors of accountants I have to pay.

Ah OK, well I suppose no matter who works this out it's remarkably large administrative task, but I'm just taking a break from filling in 90 pages of monthly returns for all of my other tax burdens such as council, car and income. I wouldn't normally use money because paying for or being paid anything has become a gigantic time drain.

This sure is a utopia

Yes sir, sure is.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2016, 07:11:55 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 June, 2016, 05:55:12 PM
Safe in the knowledge that gullibility and ignorance have prevailed; Fuckface Farage knows he's safe to brazenly spout the following bullshit:

Isn't there something he can be prosecuted for?  Got to be something under the trade descriptions act or advertising standards?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 June, 2016, 07:25:58 PM
QuoteThis sure is a utopia

Yes sir, sure is.

But just imagine how free you'll be.

QuoteIsn't there something he can be prosecuted for?  Got to be something under the trade descriptions act or advertising standards?

Regrettably the high courts have ruled that it's currently legal for your politicians to lie to you (curiously, unless they are specifically telling lies about their opponents during a general election campaign.  Watch this space).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 June, 2016, 07:49:37 PM
Overhead a large scouse family arguing about EU whilst on holiday - most were Brexiters, but the one dissenting chap came up with a brilliant analogy:

"it's like having a night out in a club that's a bit crap - Your mates persuade you to look for somewhere else, but it's raining, you can't find anywhere better and the bouncers won't let you back in. You end up at 2am in a shitty kebab shop arguing about why you ever left the club in the first place"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2016, 08:17:06 PM
You know, I think we are getting close to the point where we need to think about a separate referendum thread.  Perhaps entitled: "Off down the rabbit hole!"

Brexit leaders acting like a dog that has finally caught the cat it's been chasing and hasn't the first clue what to do, the Prime Minister throwing his teddies out of the plan because the vote didn't go the way he wanted and leaving the country leaderless, the Scottish Parliament saying that actually you can't leave the EU because we have to say yes but we won't, the Labour Party deciding that right now when the country actually needs some careful and considered leadership that this is the best time to burn down the house ....

Now Leanne Wood wants Welsh independence!  Seriously?  With all due respect the Welsh economy is in worse shape than most of England's.  There are parts that are no better off than Romania!

Has someone slipped me something and I'm on a totally bizarre trip?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 June, 2016, 08:50:24 PM
Nah, Tjm, this is the new reality. Sucks eh. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 June, 2016, 08:55:14 PM
Fucking hell nearly 700 pages of this shite?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 27 June, 2016, 08:57:28 PM
Don't blame us. Blame Corbyn, the EU,  Shark and the immigrants!  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 June, 2016, 10:45:41 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 27 June, 2016, 08:55:14 PM
Fucking hell nearly 700 pages of this shite?

Well, politics does tend to happen quite frequently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 27 June, 2016, 11:48:20 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 27 June, 2016, 08:55:14 PM
Fucking hell nearly 700 pages of this shite?
Only a matter of time until it's actually 700 pages :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 27 June, 2016, 11:53:03 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 27 June, 2016, 11:48:20 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 27 June, 2016, 08:55:14 PM
Fucking hell nearly 700 pages of this shite?
Only a matter of time until it's actually 700 pages :-)
...which leads me to wonder what the longest thread on the 2000AD online forum is/was...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 28 June, 2016, 12:03:39 AM
700 is still a lot less than the $3 trillion lost across the S&P Global Broad Market Index (BMI) in just two days. And all because my mother-in-law wants bendy cucumbers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 June, 2016, 12:24:28 AM
Oo-er, missus!  Etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2016, 04:24:46 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 27 June, 2016, 07:09:24 PM



Why is my Mars Bar £80?






Because you don't understand economics?

Because you think any change in the tax system will automatically cost trillions?

Because you cannot envisage a world where you don't have to be told what to do?

Because you're utilising absurdities in place of rational counter-arguments?

Because the shop assistant accidentally set the pricing gun to £ instead of p?

You seem to be mistaking suggestions and proposals for actual plans and missing the point that the state is a fundamentally criminal entity. This point you blithely ignore, as if it is unchangeable and unimportant. Or as if it's too difficult to disprove and so you fixate on the far easier target of proposed solutions.

That's really why your Mars Bar costs £80.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 June, 2016, 07:33:09 AM
So RoI SE is already down 10 billion/17% and that's after only two days of trading.  And you gobshites still have no-one at the wheel? Not even an opposition platform? Fingers out please, lads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 28 June, 2016, 07:50:59 AM
QuoteYou seem to be mistaking suggestions and proposals for actual plans

At seven hundred pages, the politics thread is finally complete. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2016, 07:54:49 AM
What are you talking about.  All this talk about a global financial meltdown and armageddon is just fear mongering from the Remain campaigners.  Everything will be fine once the referendum is over ....

... oh.

Sorry, got that one wrong.

On a more serious note it seems that Osborne has ruled himself out as a leadership candidate.  Probably the most sensible thing he has ever done.  Does he really want to be Gordon Brown to Cameron's Tony Blair?  The Leave campaign leaders have also decided to use the same strategy that worked so well in Iraq.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2016, 08:09:29 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 28 June, 2016, 07:50:59 AM
QuoteYou seem to be mistaking suggestions and proposals for actual plans

At seven hundred pages, the politics thread is finally complete. 

Post. Of. The. Week.

Love it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 June, 2016, 08:35:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2016, 08:09:29 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 28 June, 2016, 07:50:59 AM
QuoteYou seem to be mistaking suggestions and proposals for actual plans

At seven hundred pages, the politics thread is finally complete. 

Post. Of. The. Week.

Love it!

If you're talking a huge change in the political status quo to a new, untested system, you really need some concrete and conclusive plans in place.  As many people are discovering right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 28 June, 2016, 08:54:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2016, 04:24:46 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 27 June, 2016, 07:09:24 PM



Why is my Mars Bar £80?






Because you don't understand economics?

Because you think any change in the tax system will automatically cost trillions?

Because you cannot envisage a world where you don't have to be told what to do?

Because you're utilising absurdities in place of rational counter-arguments?

Because the shop assistant accidentally set the pricing gun to £ instead of p?

You seem to be mistaking suggestions and proposals for actual plans and missing the point that the state is a fundamentally criminal entity. This point you blithely ignore, as if it is unchangeable and unimportant. Or as if it's too difficult to disprove and so you fixate on the far easier target of proposed solutions.

That's really why your Mars Bar costs £80.

no. no. no. yes because your proposals are absurd and have no grounding in the real world. no. no
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 June, 2016, 09:12:25 AM
It occurs to me that supposedly regretful Leave voters may have thought that the referendum was analagous to voting for Boaty McBoatface, ie a bit of a lark, but Nanny would never let it actually happen.  If this is the case, have you considered simply replacing your parliament with David Attenborough?

On another note, listening to Cameron joking away on Today in Parliament as he eyes his pension, property portfolio and speaking engagements with glee, made me very, very angry. I'm all for gallows humour, but he isn't one of the ones that's going to hang.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 28 June, 2016, 09:48:41 AM
'On another note, listening to Cameron joking away on Today in Parliament as he eyes his pension, property portfolio and speaking engagements with glee, made me very, very angry. I'm all for gallows humour, but he isn't one of the ones that's going to hang.'

THIS!! Z  >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 28 June, 2016, 09:52:56 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 28 June, 2016, 09:12:25 AM
On another note, listening to Cameron joking away on Today in Parliament as he eyes his pension, property portfolio and speaking engagements with glee, made me very, very angry. I'm all for gallows humour, but he isn't one of the ones that's going to hang.

Yeah - brilliantly worded TB. It's a different world for him.

A Polish colleague of mine woke up after the referendum to a note on his car windscreen saying "Go home now" - this is the world that smug disaffected class has created for us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2016, 09:55:58 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 June, 2016, 08:35:17 AM

If you're talking a huge change in the political status quo to a new, untested system, you really need some concrete and conclusive plans in place.

Nah, it's much more fun taking a massive gamble with the economic, social and political future of a nation and all it's subjects' futures on a lark.  If labour have got any sense whatsoever (okay, I know the answer here) then they will force the Tories to see things through to 2020 by which time they will have done so much damage they will never be allowed anywhere near a ballot form again.  Unfortunately the damage that this is going to do for the next few generations is too much to risk so on a slightly saner note the bar stewards need to be shot of ASAP/INS.  Hunt is now eyeing a bid.  I am now seriously considering emigration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 June, 2016, 09:57:11 AM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 28 June, 2016, 09:52:56 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 28 June, 2016, 09:12:25 AM
On another note, listening to Cameron joking away on Today in Parliament as he eyes his pension, property portfolio and speaking engagements with glee, made me very, very angry. I'm all for gallows humour, but he isn't one of the ones that's going to hang.

Yeah - brilliantly worded TB. It's a different world for him.

A Polish colleague of mine woke up after the referendum to a note on his car windscreen saying "Go home now" - this is the world that smug disaffected class has created for us.
Worrying, very very worrying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 28 June, 2016, 12:27:54 PM
Quote from: CrazyFoxMachine on 28 June, 2016, 09:52:56 AM
A Polish colleague of mine woke up after the referendum to a note on his car windscreen saying "Go home now" - this is the world that smug disaffected class has created for us.
This is far from the first anecdote of this nature that I've heard and it's all just utterly horrifying, Lord of the Flies stuff. Is the veneer of civilisation really so thin?

I don't have much constructive to say about the referendum result (just imagine I've given Tordelback the authority to represent me) but, on a purely selfish personal level, I would just like to take the opportunity to say a big, individual thank you to each and every awful, witless cunt in the land who voted to destroy my livelihood and my nice, comfortable Mitteleuropean life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:31:28 PM
The parallels with how the jews were treated in Germany during the ascendency of the Nazi party are hard to ignore.

-PJ
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 June, 2016, 12:46:06 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:31:28 PM
The parallels with how the jews were treated in Germany during the ascendency of the Nazi party are hard to ignore.

-PJ
I ended up blocking a few people over this on social media recently. Apparently anyone who brings up Hitler or the Nazi party in a debate loses by default, as if Nazi Germany existed in a bubble universe or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:55:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 28 June, 2016, 12:46:06 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:31:28 PM
The parallels with how the jews were treated in Germany during the ascendency of the Nazi party are hard to ignore.

-PJ
I ended up blocking a few people over this on social media recently. Apparently anyone who brings up Hitler or the Nazi party in a debate loses by default, as if Nazi Germany existed in a bubble universe or something.

It's the Godwin argument. My counter to that is when the degree of seperattiin between and incident and invoking the nazis is just 1 the. Godwin doesn't apply.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 June, 2016, 01:07:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2016, 07:54:49 AM
What are you talking about.  All this talk about a global financial meltdown and armageddon is just fear mongering from the Remain campaigners.  Everything will be fine once the referendum is over ....

... oh.

Sorry, got that one wrong.
They haven't admitted they got that one wrong yet - latest claims are that everything will sort itself out in a couple of days (!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 28 June, 2016, 01:46:18 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:55:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 28 June, 2016, 12:46:06 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 28 June, 2016, 12:31:28 PM
The parallels with how the jews were treated in Germany during the ascendency of the Nazi party are hard to ignore.

-PJ
I ended up blocking a few people over this on social media recently. Apparently anyone who brings up Hitler or the Nazi party in a debate loses by default, as if Nazi Germany existed in a bubble universe or something.

It's the Godwin argument. My counter to that is when the degree of seperattiin between and incident and invoking the nazis is just 1 the. Godwin doesn't apply.

This is one of my pet hates, and I tend to direct people who misunderstand it to Wikipedia.

Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust"

Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.

People Who think it was ever intended to indicate the automatic loss of an argument do not understand Godwin's Law or arguments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2016, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 28 June, 2016, 01:07:47 PM

They haven't admitted they got that one wrong yet - latest claims are that everything will sort itself out in a couple of days (!)

And today Farage stands in the European Parliament and completely embarrasses the UK.  Can we please paint in massive letters on the White Cliffs of Dover:  "Farage does not speak for Britain."

The rest of Europe must be cringing at exactly how stupid we Brits are to have someone of his calibre claiming to represent us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 June, 2016, 06:26:16 PM
Corbyn loses his No Confidence vote and the media waste no time trying to figure out why someone they've spent a year telling us spent 30 years being stubborn and refusing to obey the will of the party is now out of nowhere being stubborn and refusing to obey the will of the party.  It's a real brain teaser.

Anyway, Corbyn now has nothing to lose in deselecting MPs en-mass just ahead of a snap election where those MPs will face the membership they've spent the last year alienating.  I know I am not great at politics, but this plan of Hillary Benn's increasingly seems to me like a plan Ned Stark would come up with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 June, 2016, 08:22:00 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2016, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 28 June, 2016, 01:07:47 PM

They haven't admitted they got that one wrong yet - latest claims are that everything will sort itself out in a couple of days (!)

And today Farage stands in the European Parliament and completely embarrasses the UK.  Can we please paint in massive letters on the White Cliffs of Dover:  "Farage does not speak for Britain."

The rest of Europe must be cringing at exactly how stupid we Brits are to have someone of his calibre claiming to represent us.

Well, kind of, to be honest. Farage disgraced himself and his country yesterday.  I may not live in Britain myself, but this little pocket of the world has felt a far uglier and meaner place since he and his ilk scored their pathetic little 'victory' last week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 June, 2016, 08:54:27 AM
Your not the only one, hate related crime up 35% in five days, in the middle of Ramadan and the beggining of Pride season. I'm genuinely afraid for some of my friends right now, a system we've set up involves FB messanger circles, after each day we just sign in a post a message just to show we're OK. I'M pretty safe, it's my Muslim and Jewish friends I fear for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 29 June, 2016, 11:21:04 AM
Very disappointed our local MP Edward Timpson is backing Stephen Crabb for PM, someone who voted against same-sex marriage in 2013.

That said, he could back any of the candidates and it would likely be just as disappointing for some other reason. With no outstanding nor progressive candidates, our next Prime Minister will be hugely compromised, but with Labour fighting amongst themselves there's no credible alternative.

How I wish Nicola Sturgeon was English.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2016, 02:09:12 PM
TVP Info, a Polish broadcaster, has leaked a 9-page document (http://www.tvp.info/25939587/europejskie-superpanstwo-zobacz-oryginalny-dokument), allegedly drawn up by the German and French foreign ministers calling for an EU superstate complete with an EU army, integrated border controls and common taxation. From the document:

"The EU will need to take action more often in order to manage crises that directly affect its own security. We therefore need stronger and more flexible crisis prevention and crisis management capabilities. The EU should be able to plan and conduct civil and military operations more effectively, with the support of a permanent civil-military chain of command. The EU should be able to rely on employable high-readiness forces and provide common financing for its operations. Within the framework of the EU, member states willing to establish permanent structured cooperation in the field of defence or to push ahead to launch operations should be able to do so in a flexible manner. If needed, EU member states should consider establishing standing maritime forces or acquiring EU-owned capabilities in other key areas."

Just what the world needs, another pan-European army. Maybe it'll be ready for action by 2039, just in time for the WWII centenary...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: morpheas on 29 June, 2016, 02:32:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2016, 02:09:12 PM
TVP Info, a Polish broadcaster, has leaked a 9-page document (http://www.tvp.info/25939587/europejskie-superpanstwo-zobacz-oryginalny-dokument),[...]

Not exactly a leak, reuters reportet at 25th of June: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-germany-france-idUSKCN0ZC0BQ (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-germany-france-idUSKCN0ZC0BQ)

"Acknowledging that the European Union is "being severely put to the test", Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Jean-Marc Ayrault said the bloc was challenged by a series of crises to its south and east while economic growth was on a slow recovery path. Work on the paper began before Britain voted on Thursday to quit the EU."

But interesting that UK isn't involved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 29 June, 2016, 06:25:38 PM
I didn't think I could be any more convinced of the utter and total disdain in which the PLP hold their members; it's like they looked at the US election as a playbook for how to alienate their left-wing base.  The divide between leftists and liberals has never been starker- I don't know if it's because we've won most of the legislative victories that united us (gay marriage, minimum wage etc.) or what, but the idea of handing the party over to another identikit third-way mediocrity who'll immediately tack right and throw immigrants under the bus almost physically nauseates me. 

I've come round to the view, rather painfully,  that Corbyn doesn't have the competence to push his agenda, but there's no way in hell now I'm not voting him straight back in given the scumminess of his opponents.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2016, 07:22:12 PM
UN Diplomat John Ashe Dies While Awaiting Trial To Testify Against Clinton Foundation Donor. (http://uspolitics24.com/un-diplomat-john-ashe-dies-awaiting-trial-testify-clinton-foundation-donor/) He apparently crushed his own windpipe with a barbell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 June, 2016, 07:27:22 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 29 June, 2016, 06:25:38 PM
I didn't think I could be any more convinced of the utter and total disdain in which the PLP hold their members;

I've got to admit to being in a real bind on this one as a Labour party member (long before Corbyn took over).  On the one hand he was, to my mind, the most credible candidate in terms of representing Social Democratic ideas.  On the other hand we now have a parliamentary party that seems more concerned with internecine rivalry than they do with challenging the complete and utter balls up that culminated in last week. 

Is it time to sensibly suggest that actually we need to recognise that although we don't agree completely with the PLP, we have to accept that they have to have a leader in the House that they can work with?  I'm not completely sold on this score since I do feel that there needs to be a recognition that they are 'representatives' which seems to have been a little lost along the way.  That said there needs to be a middle ground found.  It's not easy since this problem is pretty much guaranteed to hand over the next election to the Tories who will continue their scorched earth policy with regards to the British state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 29 June, 2016, 08:52:26 PM
My favoured solution is a negotiated resignation, with a left candidate guaranteed to go on the leadership ballot against whoever the third-wayers chuck up.  OF course, as with Corbyn himself, said candidate would probably walk  the resulting election, hence why the backstabbers haven't suggested it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 29 June, 2016, 09:24:05 PM
Is invoking Godwin's Law an invocation of Godwin's Law?

Oh my goodness.  It's Hitlers all the way down, isn't it?

(http://i.imgur.com/d4ddzo6.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 June, 2016, 09:38:03 PM
Quote from: James Dilworth on 29 June, 2016, 09:24:05 PM
Is invoking Godwin's Law an invocation of Godwin's Law?

Oh my goodness.  It's Hitlers all the way down, isn't it?

(http://i.imgur.com/d4ddzo6.jpg)
Invoking it the second anyone brings up modern far right politics in relation to the Nazi party is, yes.

It's basically the same as saying "Wel I support UKIP and i'm not a racist! Look, I have ONE black friend to prove that!".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 29 June, 2016, 09:55:49 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 June, 2016, 10:43:49 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 29 June, 2016, 06:25:38 PMI've come round to the view, rather painfully,  that Corbyn doesn't have the competence to push his agenda, but there's no way in hell now I'm not voting him straight back in given the scumminess of his opponents.

It's worth remembering that Corbyn's plan was always to bugger off in 2018 and hand the reins over to a party moderate, so what gets me about this laughably ineffective coup is: one of the most singularly stubborn bastards in Parliament, with three decades of digging his heels in even if it ruins him to do so, and they try to bully him into submission when he's made no secret of the fact that he doesn't even want the fucking job.
I honestly cannot fathom how this was expected to pan out.  Even if Corbyn went willingly - and he was never going to do that - the party membership would have gone apeshit and the recent converts and union support would have been in the wind.  The party would have been Labour in name only, defunded, mistrusted, and with zero credibility, and that's ignoring events outside the party like the rise of far-right sentiment and racist attacks that have come about in the wake of the country lacking a sense of unity that could have been countered by at least one of the main parties trying to reach out.

What a bunch of useless, blinkered, selfish cunts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 30 June, 2016, 11:58:19 AM
Seen politicians lose and resign, but to win the referendum and not step up to deal with the consequences? Shocking. Did Boris Johnson not want to leave the EU after all?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 30 June, 2016, 12:13:11 PM
Quote from: Banners on 30 June, 2016, 11:58:19 AM
Seen politicians lose and resign, but to win the referendum and not step up to deal with the consequences? Shocking. Did Boris Johnson not want to leave the EU after all?

That's the problem. The Remain side thought they couldn't lose (and therefore didn't plan for it) and the Leave side thought they wouldn't win (and therefore didn't plan for it). It's now clear that Johnson and Gove thought that they could scrape a narrow loss (51% Remain/49% Leave) that they could use to undermine and depose Cameron and scare the EU into greater reforms on the free movement of people. The only people who genuinely wanted to leave were that shower of shits UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 12:51:42 PM
Probably right 8 Ball, that still leaves us with a problem:  how on earth have we came to the pass, whereby the Political class are so removed that they will consider the people's safety both physical and economic; the integrity of the union between the nations and the status of the country internationally, as simple collateral in an internecine party feud?  Z  >:( >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 June, 2016, 01:27:22 PM
Quote from: Banners on 30 June, 2016, 11:58:19 AM
Did Boris Johnson not want to leave the EU after all?

Well nothing he'd said prior to March this year would have given the impression that he did. Perhaps he's just exercising his EU-mandated 14 day cooling-off period?

And yes, it is both disgusting, revealing and unsurprising that politicians see everything they claim to value as subordinate to their own career/financial interest.  And those that are burdened with actual principles and a complex perspective on complex questions are 'unelectable'.  Journalism and news media should be tasked with exposing this hypocrisy, rather than parroting the rabble-rousing lies of their chosen side.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 30 June, 2016, 01:40:04 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 12:51:42 PM
Probably right 8 Ball, that still leaves us with a problem:  how on earth have we came to the pass, whereby the Political class are so removed that they will consider the people's safety both physical and economic; the integrity of the union between the nations and the status of the country internationally, as simple collateral in an internecine party feud?  Z  >:( >:(

The claw hammer solution sounds more palatable as the days drag on! Either that or we elect some real-life Humans into power, and sack the private-school mob who seem to be living in the Nineteenth Century.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 30 June, 2016, 03:45:07 PM
Johnson goaded (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/05/you-must-vote-to-leave-the-eu-or-wake-up-with-the-worst-hangover/) people into voting Leave...

QuoteYou were about to strike your own small but vital blow for freedom and democracy – when you suddenly bottled it. You swerved; you shied; you jibbed; you baulked.

...and then "bottled it" himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 04:30:17 PM
Theresa May now effectively saying EU residents will be a bargaining chip in negotiations. So we now have a Conservative going beyond what even Farage wanted to happen. Marvellous. (And God knows what this would mean for all the Irish over here. How the CTA is to be affected, no-one has any idea.)

I want to stay in the UK less and less with every passing day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 June, 2016, 04:34:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 04:30:17 PM
Theresa May now effectively saying EU residents will be a bargaining chip in negotiations. So we now have a Conservative going beyond what even Farage wanted to happen. Marvellous. (And God knows what this would mean for all the Irish over here. How the CTA is to be affected, no-one has any idea.)

I want to stay in the UK less and less with every passing day.
I've always wanted the UK to stay united, having English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish ancestors in living memory.  This year for the first time ever I've come to think that if Scotland or Northern Ireland left the union my main thought would be 'good luck to you who have departed'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 30 June, 2016, 04:55:39 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 12:51:42 PM
Probably right 8 Ball, that still leaves us with a problem:  how on earth have we came to the pass, whereby the Political class are so removed that they will consider the people's safety both physical and economic; the integrity of the union between the nations and the status of the country internationally, as simple collateral in an internecine party feud?  Z  >:( >:(

Like most people, I have no idea, Z. All I do know is that right now our country has been hijacked by opportunists, egotists and xenophobes and I don't know how we get it back. :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 05:05:52 PM
So she's using immigrants as 'bargining chip's ' it is this deindividulising of humanising that is most disconcerting.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 05:11:59 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2016, 04:34:15 PMThis year for the first time ever I've come to think that if Scotland or Northern Ireland left the union my main thought would be 'good luck to you who have departed'.
Yep. I now find myself in favour of Scottish succession, in part because it may provide an alternate English-speaking country I can happily move to if England goes to hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 June, 2016, 05:15:00 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 05:11:59 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2016, 04:34:15 PMThis year for the first time ever I've come to think that if Scotland or Northern Ireland left the union my main thought would be 'good luck to you who have departed'.
Yep. I now find myself in favour of Scottish succession, in part because it may provide an alternate English-speaking country I can happily move to if England goes to hell.
Agreed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 05:25:32 PM
If they don't like yez,  pop on over to the hopefully post successful 'border poll's Ireland...the whiskey's nicer IMO. Z  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 June, 2016, 05:26:10 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2016, 04:34:15 PM
This year for the first time ever I've come to think that if Scotland or Northern Ireland left the union my main thought would be 'good luck to you who have departed'.

Mine would be "can I come with you"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trout on 30 June, 2016, 06:03:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 05:25:32 PM
Ireland...the whiskey's nicer IMO. Z  :D

Perhaps the wrongest post in a thread that redefines "wrong" into a new kind of superwrong developed by evil scientists. ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 June, 2016, 06:04:57 PM
QuoteTheresa May now effectively saying EU residents will be a bargaining chip in negotiations.

Give us what we want, or we'll send you three million, multilingual, hard working taxpayers!

Unless...she's not planning on shooting them, is she?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 06:29:59 PM
Now, now Trout, don't carp so. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 June, 2016, 06:32:34 PM
Quote from: Trout on 30 June, 2016, 06:03:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 05:25:32 PM
Ireland...the whiskey's nicer IMO. Z  :D

Perhaps the wrongest post in a thread that redefines "wrong" into a new kind of superwrong developed by evil scientists. ;-)
What you need is an unbiased opinion, that of an English man!



Scotish whisky is fucking awful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 June, 2016, 06:55:53 PM
Quote from: Banners on 30 June, 2016, 03:45:07 PM
Johnson goaded (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/05/you-must-vote-to-leave-the-eu-or-wake-up-with-the-worst-hangover/) people into voting Leave...

QuoteYou were about to strike your own small but vital blow for freedom and democracy – when you suddenly bottled it. You swerved; you shied; you jibbed; you baulked.

...and then "bottled it" himself.

Best bit of that is Boris's concern over the price of tampons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 30 June, 2016, 08:11:38 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 30 June, 2016, 06:55:53 PM
Best bit of that is Boris's concern over the price of tampons.
Someone moaned to me on Saturday that she regrets how she voted in the referendum as she found out that post exit she will only be able to bring into the UK from the EU a maxim of 200 fags.

Nothing like watching democracy in action.

So far from people I know:
• someone at work said kids at her sons' school were crying as they were told by other kids they would have to leave the country
• a Swedish acquaintance of a relative was told to get out of the country
• a friend of my brother who is of east Asian origin was punched in the face and she was told to get out of the country.

Last week we went to bed and woke up back in the 70s when immigrants such as my family had this crap hurled at them on a regular basis.

And a couple of weeks ago someone at work joked to me that he is voting exit "to get you lot out of the country". I took it as I'm sure it was intended – a clumsy joke. Wondering if I should make something of it when he gets back from holiday. Not officially but a word in his ear.

A few years ago someone told my mother in law to get out of "his country". Her response: "Ok, get your bases out of my country and then I will get out of your country".

I usually keep away from this thread but, there you go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 08:48:17 PM
Today truly has been astonishing.

I don't know what to add to the clusterfuck of the Tory party, but in the best tradition of a focus on Corbyn, here's a link explaining that Angela4leader.org was set up 1 day before Benn's sacking.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qmqyt/a_pr_firm_registered_angela4leaderorg_2_days/?st=iq2pwcfo&sh=de9835da (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qmqyt/a_pr_firm_registered_angela4leaderorg_2_days/?st=iq2pwcfo&sh=de9835da)

Not that I think that Corbyn is electable across the country, mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 30 June, 2016, 08:48:51 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 05:11:59 PMYep. I now find myself in favour of Scottish succession, in part because it may provide an alternate English-speaking country I can happily move to if England goes to hell.

Don't be under any illusion that things are better up here.

Turning a blind eye to racism in this country has become an artform.  Scottish nationalism is just as vile and ugly as anywhere else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 08:50:06 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 08:48:17 PM
Today truly has been astonishing.

I don't know what to add to the clusterfuck of the Tory party, but in the best tradition of a focus on Corbyn, here's a link explaining that Angela4leader.org was set up 2 day's before Benn's sacking.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qmqyt/a_pr_firm_registered_angela4leaderorg_2_days/?st=iq2pwcfo&sh=de9835da (https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qmqyt/a_pr_firm_registered_angela4leaderorg_2_days/?st=iq2pwcfo&sh=de9835da)

Not that I think that Corbyn is electable across the country, mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 09:03:40 PM
The reports doing the rounds are insane. Canadians and Americans getting abuse, Swedes and Spanish getting shit for "not talking English" on their phones, those Polish guys almost beaten to death in the street. This is fascism.

And now the EU's having fun, arguing no trade negotiations until after full Brexit. So if Article 50 was triggered today, we'd probably have a deal worse than the one we have now by, ooh, 2025. SOUNDS GREAT. Good job, everyone!

(And, yes, I know the EU's playing hardball, for whatever reason—either or perhaps both to stop others leaving and make the UK stay. But what's left of the UK government, the pretenders to the Tory throne, and the EU are now playing a terrifying game of chicken.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2016, 09:41:26 PM
The report of racism are incredibly disturbing.  My sister runs a school of English in Manchester, and her students have started getting racial abuse on the street for the first time since they arrived in the country.  God knows what'll happen her business now that foreigners know that this brave new country doesn't welcome their type.

This is your Day of Chaos, Britain.  The idiots are winning. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 10:32:27 PM
A British colleague who is part-Pakistani has found the same. He's now getting crap that he's not heard since the 1980s.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2016, 10:57:29 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 08:48:17 PMNot that I think that Corbyn is electable across the country, mind.

I don't think he ever was, but it was really nice of the party to go out of their way to make everyone else seem less electable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 10:59:04 PM
Chilcott's going to be a bit of an anti-climax after this week...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 30 June, 2016, 11:17:58 PM
Our current predicament reminds me of a Godspeed You! Black Emperor song called The Dead Flag Blues -
"The car is on fire, and there's no driver at the wheel
And the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides
And a dark wind blows

The government is corrupt
And we're on so many drugs
With the radio on and the curtains drawn

We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine
And the machine is bleeding to death"

OK, now I'm just depressing myself. :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DaveGYNWA on 30 June, 2016, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 June, 2016, 10:32:27 PM
A British colleague who is part-Pakistani has found the same. He's now getting crap that he's not heard since the 1980s.

I've been on the receiving end too - posted this on my own forum the other night....and I've not calmed down since.

QuoteDo you want to know how f***ing close this racism b****x is?

I've lived in the UK since August 2000. Prior to that I was brought up in Ireland from 1978 to that point. I was born in Aylesbury in 1974. I'm English by birth, to an Irish mother and an English father. I consider myself Irish, and anyone that has met me will know I am Irish.

Tonight, playing pool as I have done for the last 12 years every Tuesday night since I moved to a small town in Hampshire, I was met with a "Sorry mate, can't understand you. Can you get someone else to translate?" from an opposition player who I have played multiple times over the last few years.

Go and f*** yourselves anyone who has enabled this f***ing s****. f*** off.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2016, 11:48:21 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 30 June, 2016, 10:59:04 PM
Chilcott's going to be a bit of an anti-climax after this week...

Oh, is that coming out soon?  I'm sure nobody in the party even noticed.
Political blog The Canary has noticed a lot of links between Chilcott subject Tony Blair's good friend Alastair Campbell, though - particularly his Portland Communications Group and Blairite thinktank The Fabian Society's oddly numerous links to the current hubub in the Labour Party. (http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/30/pr-company-manufactured-labour-coup-part-i/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 July, 2016, 06:55:12 AM
Well the Leave campaign were right about one thing - Britain certainly seems like a less attractive destination for immigrants now. Or Britons of non-Anglo ancestry. Or anyone, really. Do you reckon any of the professional liars who orchestrated this give a shit? But no, let's focus on Corbyn's aside about one of the world's worst serial human rights abusers instead - can't let these bigots wander the streets, you know.

I laughed the first time I saw the 'England Prevails' meme. Not so much a week later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 July, 2016, 07:25:37 AM
Brexit is pike one of those really long jokes where the punchline doesn't justify the long set up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 01 July, 2016, 07:50:40 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmNguHHWIAAP_Bw.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 01 July, 2016, 09:14:26 AM
Heh. And Judge 'Project' Fear as Justice Secretary...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 01 July, 2016, 10:18:44 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 01 July, 2016, 07:50:40 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmNguHHWIAAP_Bw.jpg)


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Genius!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 30 June, 2016, 06:32:34 PM
Quote from: Trout on 30 June, 2016, 06:03:50 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 30 June, 2016, 05:25:32 PM
Ireland...the whiskey's nicer IMO. Z  :D

Perhaps the wrongest post in a thread that redefines "wrong" into a new kind of superwrong developed by evil scientists. ;-)
What you need is an unbiased opinion, that of an English man!



Scotish whisky is fucking awful.


  not a fan of ones like bells etc but love the islay ones with that lovely smoky peatiness...only had jamesons from the irish but I liked it...love bourbon and tenesee whisky the bestest.


   i'm waiting for the apocalypse before I take any doom mongering seriously ,like any break up it'll get messy for a bit but we are a strong country .  as for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.  what worries me more is the leadership race especially gove,he denied wanting the top job and supported boris but suddenly stabbed him in the back...is that the sort of fella we want leading us? I belive he's the sort to betray all of us to get what he wants...seems very untrustworthy (for a politician)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 10:59:21 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AMas for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.

Not good enough for me, sorry.  When racist incidents increase fivefold in the space of a week, there's something seriously wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 July, 2016, 11:01:12 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 10:59:21 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AMas for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.

Not good enough for me, sorry.  When racist incidents increase five-fold in the space of a week, there's something seriously wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result)
This i'm afraid. We should be pioneering tolerance and equity, not going back 80 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 11:10:58 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AMwhat worries me more is the leadership race especially gove,he denied wanting the top job and supported boris but suddenly stabbed him in the back...is that the sort of fella we want leading us?

Also, does a leadership race really bother you more than a sudden, massive outbreak of hate crimes that may last a very long time?  Yes, your country will be led by a power-hungry fuck no matter what happens, but that's been the case for a long time.
Farage is the true winner here - he has no real political responsibilities, but the immigrants are finally getting the treatment he's always wished on them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2016, 11:32:19 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 10:59:21 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AMas for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.

Not good enough for me, sorry.  When racist incidents increase fivefold in the space of a week, there's something seriously wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result)

While some knuckleheads might have been emboldened to become more brazen about their racism, so too might those who suffer it have been convinced to come forward and report it rather than stick their heads down or laugh it off, which I've seen a lot of over the years - racism being excused in the name of banter or the "unique British sense of humor".
At the very least, if someone sees a racist incident, there's a good chance they'll film it, even if only to get Youtube views.  It's not much comfort for the victims, but racism has entered the public debate and the implicit message is that it's not on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 01 July, 2016, 11:42:40 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AM
as for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.

Well, there you go.  There's racism elsewhere, so what can you do?  *shrug*  I mean, why bother trying to do anything about it?  Or even mentioning it?

Now I'm off to join Grugz in his personalised Anderson shelter, where we'll listen to Vera Lynn records, leaf through vintage copies of the Daily Mail ("Hurrah for the Blackshirts!" - 1934) and wait for this whole brouhaha to blow over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 11:44:03 AM
who said you're getting in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 July, 2016, 12:00:37 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 01 July, 2016, 11:01:12 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 10:59:21 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 10:21:15 AMas for all the maggots coming out of the woodwork, there's racism in every country we are no different.

Not good enough for me, sorry.  When racist incidents increase five-fold in the space of a week, there's something seriously wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/30/police-report-fivefold-increase-race-hate-crimes-since-brexit-result)
This i'm afraid. We should be pioneering tolerance and equity, not going back 80 years.

And you may not see it from inside, but as a visitor and outside observer, Britain is normally streets ahead of most when it comes to racial and religious tolerance and integration. I often compare UK and US media and despair at how far the States is mired in division.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 01:18:07 PM
'who said you're getting in?' :lol:

We'll call it a 'Johnson Shelter': Very dodgy foundations; two walls; no roof, and a big pile of shite in the corner. Z ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2016, 01:26:55 PM
To be a real Johnson Shelter, it has to have no roof or walls: someone has simply to have opened a sewer and climbed in.

If you're in Northern Ireland and can get to Belfast, there's an impromptu march - and not the eventful kind one might expect at this time of year - outside Stormont at 10:45 tomorrow morning, with speakers from the major parties and the SDLP addressing public concerns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 01:43:16 PM
Just a bit of creative licence: I had to add walls in order do define where the shite would be.

Alas, I'm down in Sunny south Tyrone tomorrow (Proud the area voted remain btw), but fully endorse all who attend at the march. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 05:18:57 PM
well,with all the shite,my rhubarb will come up lovely... it's all right Gordon having his little sarcastic snipes likening me to a Nazi sympathiser with his blackshirt comment..i don't care what he thinks, but he doesn't offer any solution to the rise in demonstrated racism...yes its been there and no it won't go away,you can't make people change their viewpoint even if it is wrong ... the eu had so many things wrong with it  including the act that allowed convicted criminals from other countries to stay in the uk even after continuing their activities here (i'm thinking of the fella who killed a child after being banned from driving) or the anti semetic /anti free thinking western rantings of things like abu Hamza and the other "cleric" who spout hate but the eu human rights act/court whatever wouldn't let us get rid of them and force us to keep them on the public purse for years)

  and as I asked in a previous post,how is the decision to leave the eu different to Scotland's desire to leave the uk?  I also notice that even though we haven't even initiated article 50 and are still technically part of the eu ,Europe has started sending us to Coventry by not allowing dave to attend a meeting but nic snuck into...

  on a final note it is sad that everyone who voted remain cannot accept the decision of the majority with good grace but instead  start hurling insults towards anyone who chose to leave.painting them as the fourth reich .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 05:24:47 PM
Grugs,  the general consensus a week or more after the vote, is that it has been a disastrous,  surreal trip into a hell of political chaos; social division; semi-legitimised racism and incipient economic chaos. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 01 July, 2016, 05:46:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 05:18:57 PMon a final note it is sad that everyone who voted remain cannot accept the decision of the majority with good grace but instead  start hurling insults towards anyone who chose to leave.painting them as the fourth reich

Thank fuck it wasn't anything important. Gotta go, though. Someone's still banging on about England's defeat to Iceland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 July, 2016, 05:50:03 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 01 July, 2016, 05:46:46 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 05:18:57 PMon a final note it is sad that everyone who voted remain cannot accept the decision of the majority with good grace but instead  start hurling insults towards anyone who chose to leave.painting them as the fourth reich

Thank fuck it wasn't anything important. Gotta go, though. Someone's still banging on about England's defeat to Iceland.
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 July, 2016, 05:58:00 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2016, 01:26:55 PM
To be a real Johnson Shelter, it has to have no roof or walls: someone has simply to have opened a sewer and climbed in.

If you're in Northern Ireland and can get to Belfast, there's an impromptu march - and not the eventful kind one might expect at this time of year - outside Stormont at 10:45 tomorrow morning, with speakers from the major parties and the SDLP addressing public concerns.
And if you're in London there's a small scale gathering on Highbury Fields, next to Highbury Corner tube station.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 July, 2016, 05:59:18 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 01 July, 2016, 11:42:40 AM

Well, there you go.  There's racism elsewhere, so what can you do?  *shrug*  I mean, why bother trying to do anything about it?  Or even mentioning it?


Well me, I'm off for a Chinese.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 July, 2016, 06:01:54 PM
Quoteand as I asked in a previous post,how is the decision to leave the eu different to Scotland's desire to leave the uk? 

If Westminster only existed because Brussels permitted it to, then you'd have a comparison.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 July, 2016, 06:46:10 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 05:18:57 PMit is sad that everyone who voted remain cannot accept the decision of the majority


I agree we have to follow the rules of the referendum, but describing that result as the decision of the majority requires mental and linguistic gymnastics.

46 million Britons registered to vote in 2016; 17 million of them voted to leave the EU - that's 37%.

63% of the electorate didn't vote to leave the EU. Almost three quarters of the UK population didn't vote to leave the EU.

The rules are definitely the rules, but the result of the referendum does not reflect the will of the majority of British people. It's not even the will of the majority of voters.



(http://i.imgur.com/6dq6T88.jpg?1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 July, 2016, 07:07:16 PM
More to the point, it's an absolute fucking disgrace that many of those who this would most impact were frozen out of the voting (in addition to those the Tories unwisely disenfranchised months before). It might have been palatable to mix-and-match GE and EU election rules, but to only allow those a say who could vote in a GE was disgusting, especially given the subsequent "EU people are now bargaining chips" stance of May.

Basically, if you're not middle-class or above, wealthy and white (oh, and don't have 'an accent' of any kind, as friends are discovering), you are now royally fucked. When Canadians, Swedes and Spaniards are getting abuse for talking on the phone, you know we're beyond the pale.

Quoteon a final note it is sad that everyone who voted remain cannot accept the decision of the majority with good grace
Fuck that. Seriously. I'm now in the position where the PM-in-waiting is saying my own wife is a bargaining chip so the UK can secure more from the EU. Beyond that, Poles have been beaten unconscious in the street, the economy is taking a whack, the UK is the laughing stock of the world and seen as being intolerant and backwards (bar by right-wingers like Le Pen), and we're only a week in. When Article 50 is triggered, that's when the real nightmare begins. And all for what, exactly? No-one on the Leave side seems to know any more.

Quotebut instead  start hurling insults towards anyone who chose to leave.painting them as the fourth reich .
With the sole exception of this place, I've not yet seen a Leave voter able to get through a conversation with me without resorting to insults, outright threats, or strange patronising responses (the last of those being leftie Brexit voters). I don't think Leave voters realise just how angry Remainers are at the result. Our economy has tanked. We are seen as racist throwbacks. Our science and film industries are already imploding. Our banking sector is fucked (which makes some lefties go HURRAH—wait until they realise how that impacts on tax receipts and public spending). There's now less money rather than more. The Tories are about to install the most vicious and right-wing leader to date. The Labour Party is in disarray. And if we're very, very, very lucky, the EU might grant us a relatively rapid trading deal within a decade that will be worse than the deal we had already.

What bright future? This is a total bloody disaster with no upside. People bought into lies, which unravelled on the very day of the vote, and most of them don't care. I'm angry at the 52%. I'm angry at two decades and more of reprehensible government policy that brought us here. I'm angry at the media for keeping the anti-EU fires stoked for no reason other than to sell newspapers, thereby making it so people didn't understand what the EU did and does. I'm angry at every British kid's future now being limited to the UK rather than the EU. I'm angry for all the people who have lost jobs and opportunities, both abroad and in the UK. So no good graces.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 01 July, 2016, 07:29:10 PM
Indigo - well said. I have met Leavers who put a reasoned non-racist argument but clearly it was the bigots who carried the day.
From a purely selfish perspective part of me wants to see the Leave voters come to realise just what they have done. I've got advanced cancer, packed in work and have moved up to the Lake District to live so I don't think I'll be too affected.
That said, I have a 17 year old son so damn you all to hell on his behalf!
No good graces- agreed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 07:39:05 PM
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/29/uh-oh-what-on-earth-is-happening-at-the-large-hadron-collider-5974846/


careful what you wish for...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 July, 2016, 07:50:41 PM
My problem with the "Not all Leave voters where racist" argument is, at this point it doesn't matter. All Leave voters ENABLED the members within the movement to elevate Farage to the position he desired, to inflict as much damage as he could.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 01 July, 2016, 07:54:04 PM
That's a tricky line Hawk. I think people were entitled to vote either way from genuine conviction. The fact that it has empowered the racist element and that this was totally predictable......yeah okay point taken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 July, 2016, 08:28:44 PM
Grud, Gove really is a dead ringer for Dr Scrotumski. Johnson knifing a speciality.

He genuinely does look like he's cosplaying a human. And not even a very nice human.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 08:39:00 PM
To be fair there were ample warnings given in explicit terms. Brexit will lead to economic decline; factionalism amongs us and a rise in racism, it pains me to say it but the point is made .  It is hard but here we are dealing with the aftermath. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 July, 2016, 08:48:49 PM
Quote from: Trent on 01 July, 2016, 07:29:10 PMI've got advanced cancer
Oh man. Sorry to hear that.

Quote from: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 08:39:00 PMIt is hard but here we are dealing with the aftermath.
What concerns me is we've only now seen the aftermath of the vote. We haven't yet seen the aftermath of triggering A50, a rampantly right-wing Tory government (whether May or Gove wins), and the response from Leavers when they realise they've been well and truly screwed over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:02:47 PM
Trent, my wishes and care go out to you.  IP,  what can I say. It won't get too much better (probably much worse)  anytime soon. I am at a loss at what to say. In relation to what I wish I would do: Get my small part of this country as far the fuck away from this poison as is ever possible.. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 09:09:57 PM
yep trent, all the best to you, being a cancer a survivor  is hard enough as it is so cannot imagine what you and your family are going through.,sorry for missing that in your post.


  as for all this "brouhaha" no one can accurately predict what is going to happen or, the recent reccessions the 70's and the 80's crash wouldn't have happened so I am just going to sit back (in my shelter) and wait to see what happens,if we end up in the dark ages or under the swastika i'm grown up enough to admit I made a mistake provided I haven't had to sell my computer or am eating my neighbours...ttfn!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 July, 2016, 09:29:30 PM
No-one can predict the future for sure, but we know about averages and likelihoods. The UK's not done a major trade deal alone since the 1970s. It hasn't the expertise. It hasn't the numbers. On that basis alone, we are on the back foot, but post-Brexit a whole ton of deals are dead (beyond just the EU one). And with even Labour now arguing freedom of movement is dead, Brits will very quickly find themselves with fewer opportunities than ever, which I find a crying shame, not just for my generation (doddering into our 40s) but also for the kids and teens who'll now be far more restricted than before.

Like I said, I just don't get it. All of the promises evaporated. We're getting basically nothing positive out of this, even from a Leave perspective.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 09:37:31 PM
I was just reading something  that apparently it might not happen anyway as apparently, article  50 cant be invoked unless the majority of politicians agree (?)
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/why-brexit-might-not-happen-after-all/ found the link..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 01 July, 2016, 09:41:02 PM
Straw clutching.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:41:10 PM
Pay through your nose (30k) for a university degree; go into a job market where you'll be challenged to say the least; no step on to the housing ladder and if you throw your arms up, no free movement to go somewhere else in ther hope of making a life. God help you if you're Young. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:42:35 PM
Grugz, the die is cast. There is no going back.  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 July, 2016, 09:44:10 PM
Come now, once they abolish VAT on fuel and get rid of those pesky human rights (did I read you right there Grugz? That's a positive?) you can aim for a sort of Fury Road setup. That'll brighten things up no end.

And at least you don't have the Mail agitating for you to leave the EU anymore. They've moved on to us now, more proof that the Irish Daily Mail really, really hates its readers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 09:47:01 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:41:10 PM
Pay through your nose (30k) for a university degree; go into a job market where you'll be challenged to say the least; no step on to the housing ladder and if you throw your arms up, no free movement to go somewhere else in ther hope of making a life. God help you if you're Young. Z

aren't those first 3 already true before brexit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 01 July, 2016, 09:48:02 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 09:09:57 PM
  as for all this "brouhaha" no one can accurately predict what is going to happen or, the recent reccessions

Apart, of course, from the many, many people who totally predicted the 2008 crash and its beginnings in the snowballing financial horror show of US sub prime mortgage market.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:49:02 PM
It's those seditious fucking paddys who're to blame. Paul Dacre must be having multiple orgasms as we speak. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 July, 2016, 10:02:58 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 01 July, 2016, 09:47:01 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 09:41:10 PM
Pay through your nose (30k) for a university degree; go into a job market where you'll be challenged to say the least; no step on to the housing ladder and if you throw your arms up, no free movement to go somewhere else in ther hope of making a life. God help you if you're Young. Z

aren't those first 3 already true before brexit?
May have misread it, but I think the point was that the first three are the current situation but what's changed is that their will be no escape for pastures new to try to make the best of a bad situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 10:05:35 PM
The first three courtesy of the scumbags who have just brought the youth of your nation the bonus treat of the fourth Grugz. You literally couldn't get that fancy new Chinese super computer to design a bigger more defining cluster fuck than the professional (I know...we're all a bit tired of professionals) classes of your nation have visited upon you.  I'd laugh but to be honest it is not funny. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2016, 10:24:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 July, 2016, 09:29:30 PMThe UK's not done a major trade deal alone since the 1970s. It hasn't the expertise. It hasn't the numbers.

What about that Chinese one we just did?  Surely that will save us?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 01 July, 2016, 10:33:06 PM
The Chinese will of course save the UK, why wouldn't they....it's not as if they don't have a memory of positive interventions in their country, such as the time British entrepreneurs tried to drug addict a huge portion of their population. Ding doing eh. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 10:51:24 PM
Very sorry to hear about your cancer, Trent. I really hope you're coping ok.   

I'm no expert on economics, but I doubt too many countries will be gleefully rushing in to trade with Britain for a long, long time.  You just don't have the resources to be successfully self-sufficient any more - I heard a lot of bullshit about a 'return to Britain's glory days' from the Leave campaign, but what were those glory days?  The working class and the colonies suffering to keep the upper classes in the opulent lifestyle they were used to? It doesn't work like that these days.

You had a healthy, modern economy and now you don't, and the Brexit process hasn't even started in earnest yet.  Things are not looking good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 01 July, 2016, 11:14:48 PM
Thanks for the kind words folks, I'm good and enjoying life more than ever. No plans to go anywhere soon - still got the Mega Collection (plus extension!) to complete.
It is certainly an interesting time, you just have to hope that decency prevails domestically but the economic mess is harder to reconcile. The tales of casual racism on the thread make me ashamed.
Overall though, it is the young who will be most affected sadly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 July, 2016, 11:18:27 PM
QuoteI'm good and enjoying life more than ever. No plans to go anywhere soon - still got the Mega Collection (plus extension!) to complete.

Nice one, Trent, and I'm glad you're enjoying yourself.  A friend of mine was recently diagnosed with a brain tumour after years of battling with skin cancer; but in the meantime he's met the love of his life and got engaged, and I've never see him more content with life.

I should point out that I am a very frequent visitor to the UK and have a lot of connections there.  My mother is English and I have more English relatives than Irish ones; and my brother and sister are both long-term UK residents with long-term English partners.  I like Britain and always felt at home there, and it pains me to see it turn quickly into an unwelcoming, isolationist economic backwater.

EDIT - though now I think of it, next time I go and stay with my brother in his forest cabin, my euros should get me a lot more cans of Karpackie to drink there.  :)

EDIT EDIT - If Poland still want to export beer to Britain. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 July, 2016, 08:18:58 AM
Quote from: Trent on 01 July, 2016, 11:14:48 PM

Overall though, it is the young who will be most affected sadly.

Actually I reckon it's our generation (40 - 50 something) that will be most affected.  The current generation of pensioners are probably the last best the way things are going.  Those of use who will be retiring in the next twenty or so years are looking to be most affected by the 'reforms' that have hollowed out pension provisions.  At the same time we have far less time to address those shortcomings and the costs are going to be far higher.

The young are likely to be affected but will have the most time to adjust to the situation.  They haven't generated the standards of living that need to be curtailed so much and have far fewer commitments.  They will only ever know that flat and challenging labour market that they come into whereas we have known periods of opportunity.

The next ten years are likely to be the hardest.  As Jayzus quite rightly pointed out, we joined the Common Market as our Empire was dismantling.  We no longer have the captive market we once had or the resources of other nations to exploit to the same extent.  How exactly are the current crop of politicians going to square that circle?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 04 July, 2016, 10:32:46 AM
And now UKIP leader Nigel Farage to stand down.

Are they leaving the sinking ship?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 July, 2016, 11:08:42 AM
In a word: yes.

Another fucking coward who won't face up to cleaning up his mess. That said, good riddance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 04 July, 2016, 11:46:45 AM
Oh, I don't think we've seen the last of Farage yet.

Which reminds me, where have our two brave resident UKIP warriors gone?  Their dreams have come true, and yet we haven't seen them here since before the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 July, 2016, 11:51:33 AM
I'm sorry, who? The boards been hoarding kippers? :|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 July, 2016, 11:53:02 AM
Probably still drunk...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 July, 2016, 12:05:36 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 04 July, 2016, 11:46:45 AM
Oh, I don't think we've seen the last of Farage yet.

Which reminds me, where have our two brave resident UKIP warriors gone?  Their dreams have come true, and yet we haven't seen them here since before the referendum.
[/quote

Which brings home how insane it all is - a referendum where so many winning campaigners and voters are either keeping their heads down or running scared.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 July, 2016, 12:41:54 PM
It looks as if the bean counters have let Boris, Nigel and all of the other sub-ameobas know what's lying (no pun) down the road for the rest of us; so in the best traditions of the spoiled, cossetted ruling classes, they have scarpered and left the commoners to deal with the aftermath. Ding dong old fellow and all that shite. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 01:34:03 PM
Nigel Farage - "I've done my bit".
Never a truer word - weasely fecker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 July, 2016, 01:46:20 PM
Boris Johnson's take on things (as shared on Facebook):




On Friday I heard a new dawn chorus outside my house. There was a rustling and twittering, as though of starlings assembling on a branch. Then I heard a collective clearing of the throat, and they started yodelling my name – followed by various expletives. "Oi Boris – c---!" they shouted. Or "Boris – w-----!" I looked out to see some otherwise charming-looking young people, the sort who might fast to raise money for a Third World leprosy project.
They had the air of idealists – Corbynistas; Lefties; people who might go on a march to stop a war. And so when they started on their protest song, I found myself a bit taken aback. "EU – we love YOU! EU – we love YOU!" they began to croon. Curious, I thought. What exactly is it about the EU that attracts the fervent admiration of north London radicals? It was the first time I had ever heard of trendy socialists demonstrating in favour of an unelected supranational bureaucracy.
In the old days, the Lefties used to dismiss the EU as a bankers' ramp. Tony Benn thought it was unacceptably anti-democratic. Jeremy Corbyn used to vote against it in every division. Why has it suddenly become so fashionable among our nose-ringed friends? I tried to think which of the EU's signature policies they were so keen on. Surely not the agricultural subsidies that make up most of the budget, and that have done so much to retard development in the Third World. They can't – for heaven's sake – support the peak tariffs that discriminate against value added goods from Sub-Saharan Africa. Nor can they possibly enjoy the sheer opacity of the system – the fact that there are 10,000 officials who are paid more than the Prime Minister, and whose names and functions we don't know.
They can't really be defending the waste, the fraud – or the endless expensive caravan of crémant-swilling members of the European Parliament between Brussels and Luxembourg and Strasbourg. Are they really demonstrating in favour of the torrent of red tape that has done so much to hold back growth in the EU? It seems an odd sort of campaign theme: what do we want? More Brussels law-making! When do we want it? Now!
Naturally, Lefties might want laws to protect the workforce – but they would surely want those laws to be made by politicians that the people could remove at elections. No: the more I thought about it, the odder it seemed. It was incredible that these young and idealistic people should be making a rumpus about the euro – the key policy of the modern EU – when that project has so gravely intensified suffering in many southern EU countries, and deprived a generation of young people of employment.
Perhaps, I mused, it was a general feeling that the EU was about openness, tolerance and diversity. But they must surely know that the EU's rules on free movement mean a highly discriminatory regime, one that makes it much more difficult for people from outside the EU to get into Britain – even though we need their skills.
So what was it about? People's emotions matter, even when they do not seem to be wholly rational. The feelings being manifested outside my house are shared by the large numbers of people – 30,000, they say – who at the weekend came together in Trafalgar Square to hear pro-EU speeches by Sir Bob Geldof. There is, among a section of the population, a kind of hysteria, a contagious mourning of the kind that I remember in 1997 after the death of the Princess of Wales. It is not about the EU, of course; or not solely. A great many of these protesters – like dear old Geldof – are in a state of some confusion about the EU and what it does.
It is not, as he says, a "free trade area"; if only it were. It is a vast and convoluted exercise in trying to create a federal union – a new political construction based in Brussels. But, as I say, I don't believe that it is psychologically credible to imagine young people chanting hysterically in favour of Brussels bureaucrats. The whole protest is not about the EU project, per se; it is about them – their own fears and anxieties that are now being projected on to Brexit.
These fears are wildly overdone. The reality is that the stock market has not plunged, as some said it would – far from it. The FTSE is higher than when the vote took place. There has been no emergency budget, and nor will there be. But the crowds of young people are experiencing the last psychological tremors of Project Fear – perhaps the most thoroughgoing government attempt to manipulate public opinion since the run-up to the Iraq War.
When Geldof tells them that the older generation has "stolen your future" by voting to Leave the EU, I am afraid there are too many who still believe it. It is time for this nonsense to end. It was wrong of the Government to offer the public a binary choice on the EU without being willing – in the event that people voted Leave – to explain how this can be made to work in the interests of the UK and Europe. We cannot wait until mid-September, and a new PM. We need a clear statement, now, of some basic truths:
1. There is no risk whatever to the status of the EU nationals now resident and welcome in the UK, and indeed immigration will continue – but in a way that is controlled, thereby neutralising the extremists.
2. It is overwhelmingly in the economic interests of the other EU countries to do a free-trade deal, with zero tariffs and quotas, while we extricate ourselves from the EU law-making system.
3. We can do free-trade deals with economies round the world, many of which are already applying.
4. We can supply leadership in Europe on security and other matters, but at an intergovernmental level.
5. The future is very bright indeed. That's what Geldof should be chanting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 July, 2016, 02:01:34 PM
The words of Boris Johnson, a man who was enthusiastically in favour of the EU, right up until he realised he wanted to be PM more than any principle he held? A man prepared to stand up for a cause he didn't believe in and spout outright lies, to legitimise racists and embolden the far right, to tank the economy and crash the currency, all in service of his personal ambition?

Pardon me if I pay not the slightest attention to anything he has to say. The ruination of his political career is the is one of the small crumbs of comfort I take from this whole sorry mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 04 July, 2016, 02:08:18 PM
I thought it was bit funny that after all of this his number one point is still to do with controlling immigration from the EU to 'neutralise the extremists'.
I can't remember reading about any extremists who were migrants from the EU anyway.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 July, 2016, 02:56:13 PM
Now,we all know that the easiest way for IS to attack Britain would be to hide amongst refugees, almost die trying to take a boat to Greece, walk hundreds of miles across the continent,  live for months in a refugee camp in France, hide in a truck, to finally arrive in England without a penny to their name. Far better we devastate our own economy than take that risk.

QuoteThey had the air of idealists – Corbynistas; Lefties;

I fucking hate this guy


Quote1. There is no risk whatever to the status of the EU nationals now resident and welcome in the UK, and indeed immigration will continue – but in a way that is controlled, thereby neutralising the extremists.
2. It is overwhelmingly in the economic interests of the other EU countries to do a free-trade deal, with zero tariffs and quotas, while we extricate ourselves from the EU law-making system.
3. We can do free-trade deals with economies round the world, many of which are already applying.
4. We can supply leadership in Europe on security and other matters, but at an intergovernmental level.
5. The future is very bright indeed. That's what Geldof should be chanting.

1. Yet to be decided.  They've already been described as bargaining tools, whilst xenophobic crime has shot up and racists have come to believe that the establishment is on their side.
2. No it's not, and we can't.
3. Awesome.  Well done.
4. We could do that anyway.
5. We're already poorer.  Scottish independence has gain unprecedented support, making the break up of the UK more likely. Corporate taxes will be slashed to try to stop us from sinking.  And that's all before PM May has decided to do away with workers rights and privacy laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 July, 2016, 05:48:24 PM
Also:

QuoteThe FTSE is higher than when the vote took place.

On the devaluation of Sterling, yes. And on the back of non-UK companies faring well. The 250, based on UK companies, is still getting a kicking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 July, 2016, 06:11:10 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 04 July, 2016, 11:46:45 AM
Oh, I don't think we've seen the last of Farage yet.

Which reminds me, where have our two brave resident UKIP warriors gone?  Their dreams have come true, and yet we haven't seen them here since before the referendum.

I presume you will be meaning me with that insinuation. Let's get this right, I vote for the Liberals and I'm sure that shocks your closed mind. Also I am way too nice to come back and gloat that I got the result that I wanted.

I wanted out of the EU for Democracy and for the basic fact that it was built on a lie. All you have to do is look at the way that Democracy is not encouraged across the continent.

I've watched quietly how the remain side have acted on facebook, especially with two of my favourite 2000 AD artists being hounded until one closed his account and another has taken a period of leave.  I did see the names from here pop up on those pages slating them with their cyber bullying and expected it from some people here but not certain other names.

Before you ask, no I have not seen any of the racist stuff on facebook, apart from the reports on others pages, probably as I don't go in search of stuff like that, as I see it on the news and hear about it on the radio. Those people are disgraceful.

After the vote result came in around 04:00, as I was listening to it on the radio I was obviously happy, as now we will see our government work for the referendum result. If it had gone the other way, of course I would have been annoyed but I can tell you a couple of things. I wouldn't have tried to undermine democracy. I wouldn't have gone on a social warrior rampage across the web because I didn't get my own way. I would never have gone onto peoples facebook pages and hounded them because their ideas are different to my own. I most definitely wouldn't have condoned violence, which I have seen board members do from here.

I had debates on facebook pages with mates and we did it politely as we put our points across without ending our friendships. It's quite simple doing it that way, unlike the pack culture sweeping across the web. It's like the Borg have burst into reality.

I watched people on here fall into the sad camp of saying that all who voted out are racists, which baffled me, as there can only ever be one reason that people voted out. I'm sure some did but not that many, even with all those reports coming in. It's a tiny percentage, otherwise there would be riots on the streets, as those people tried to force people to leave.

As for the economy, I knew it would take a hit straight afterwards (if you didn't believe that then that's your fault) but the doom and gloom scenario did not really happen. I feel that the politicians and the Whitehall lot now have to prove that they are worth their wages and do what is best for the country. Once negotiations are open we will see where we are headed!

Now I could tell you what two of my Eastern European friends at work have said to me but that wouldn't fit into what many believe on here.

I shall take my leave once again, as I need to spend some more of my money on Dredd tat!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 July, 2016, 06:19:33 PM
 :o Don't and won't agree with the Brexit vote CF, but I like a good honest from the heart post. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PM
Likewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality and get on with it or simply stand on the sidelines shaking our fists and saying I told you so.
The worry is that by doing so we let the politicos blame everything on Brexit for the next 10 years and they don't make the best fist of where we now are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 July, 2016, 07:04:35 PM
Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PM
Likewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality and get on with it

Fuck that. The Leave campaign lied time and time again. They lied about reducing red tape, they lied about extra money for the NHS and public services, they lied about reducing immigration and, worst of all they lied about having the slightest idea what they would do if they won.

The currency is in the shitter, the economy's stalled, all the major financial firms are eyeing up Dublin, Frankfurt and Paris as they get ready to leave London, and the Leave campaign's overarching strategy appears to have begun and ended at 'stick two fingers up to Johnny Foreigner'.

They broke it. They can fucking fix it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 07:11:16 PM
Not sure how that works Jim. Like it or in your case obviously not, the result stands. The one positive is that the cynical Leave frontsmen have gone as I would hate to think of any of them profitting from their duplicity.
In truth we need level heads now and every Remain voter who throws their toys out of the pram just lets others fill the void.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 July, 2016, 07:25:05 PM
Well said, CF.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 July, 2016, 07:40:19 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 04 July, 2016, 06:11:10 PMI wanted out of the EU for Democracy and for the basic fact that it was built on a lie. All you have to do is look at the way that Democracy is not encouraged across the continent.
Really? That's quite the claim, given that the EU in itself has been largely responsible for promoting democracy across Europe, to the point dictatorship governments have been replaced by actual democracies.

QuoteI watched people on here fall into the sad camp of saying that all who voted out are racists, which baffled me
I don't recall incidents of that here, although I may have missed some. I saw people saying that those voting out were siding with racists whether they were racist themselves or not. The common suggestion was that Leave voters weren't all racists, but pretty much all racists would vote Leave. Given the regular, constant shit I get on Twitter even now from Leave voters, there's definitely a nasty streak throughout. (As I've noted, I have not had a single conversation online with a Leave voter outside of this forum that hasn't ended up in a threat, insult or some kind of patronising "the left will now prevail" bollocks.)

QuoteAs for the economy, I knew it would take a hit straight afterwards (if you didn't believe that then that's your fault) but the doom and gloom scenario did not really happen.
Well, UK businesses are being hammered left and right, Sterling has been weakened, projects in science, education and entertainment are being cancelled all over the place, and we still haven't left yet. What we've seen so far is the response to the referendum, not leaving the EU. When Article 50 is triggered, that's when the fun begins, with economists (most of which got the hit to Sterling about right) predicting a further fall into the $1.10–$1.20 bracket, and for the FTSE 250 to take another hammering.

QuoteNow I could tell you what two of my Eastern European friends at work have said to me but that wouldn't fit into what many believe on here.
Let's home they feel the same when May's in command of the Tories and threatening their very right to stay in the UK.

Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PMLikewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality
We really don't. I find it bizarre how many Leave people trumpet democracy and yet fail to understand that people will continue to fight for what they believe in. THAT is democracy in action. And that's especially so when the gulf between the results was small, the referendum in question wasn't even legally binding, polls show those already wavering could swing the result the other way, and the UK is getting a kicking from everywhere.

I will say some damage is done. The UK's reputation is now in the toilet as far as being an open an tolerant society goes. Outside of the UK bubble, we are a laughing stock with everyone but the far right (our biggest fan now being Le Pen). This will regardless of what happens next take a decade or more to rebuild. (And if we do Brexit fully, the next decade will be economic hell, figuring out trade deals, given that we don't have the skills nor the numbers to do this at any speed whatsoever.)

QuoteThe worry is that by doing so we let the politicos blame everything on Brexit for the next 10 years and they don't make the best fist of where we now are.
I suspect that's going to happen anyway, although the Conservatives will blame it on Labour, somehow.

Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 07:11:16 PMLike it or in your case obviously not, the result stands.
Only it doesn't necessarily. Only a reckless political set would push things through. The logical step, as outlined by Clegg, would be to figure out a way forward, and set that to mandate in a GE, or assign conditions to Brexit, in the way the UK did regarding adoption of the Euro.

QuoteThe one positive is that the cynical Leave frontsmen have gone as I would hate to think of any of them profitting from their duplicity.
"Hey, we smashed up the country! BYEEE!" Yeah, great. Farage is truly astonishing today. He wants his life back, which for two years will involve getting his MEP salary, while slagging off the people we'll need to negotiate with. And naturally now whenever he's asked anything about Brexit, his response will be that it's no longer for him to comment on, because it's no longer his responsibility. (JHB on Twitter was equally mad in this area, saying that it's up to govt to fulfil Leave promises. Clearly, they should have promised everyone a fucking unicorn too.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2016, 07:12:01 PM
Tony Blair gave a press conference saying he was really sorry about Iraq, but Chilcott doesn't know what it's like to be prime minister and Tony did nothing wrong.
Corbyn tried to apologise in the Commons for the war but was heckled by the MPs who tried to oust him, so he apologised in a press conference later.  The MPs who tried to oust him are on Twitter right now telling us how they're going to fix this once they have their party back because the people are behind them on this.
David Cameron refuses to apologise for anything.  Not even the pig thing.

MPs are also currently patting themselves on the back for voting not to kick wives, mothers, husbands and fathers out of the country just because they were born elsewhere, rather than reassuring us all that this was a close scrape and we shouldn't even have had to have a fucking vote on the matter in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 July, 2016, 08:22:45 PM
Burnham was on Twitter earlier, crowing about the vote. I see he neglected to mention it is entirely non-binding and therefore means fuck all. EEA nationals remain in legal limbo. (I would hope even Theresa May isn't dumb enough to try and deport millions of people, but who knows these days? More likely she'll U-turn on this but use that position as an excuse to clamp down elsewhere.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 July, 2016, 09:23:18 PM
I'm presuming Theresa Von May will be happy to take back the ~2million UK citizens who we'd get back if we repatriated the EU citizens residents here? Swapping about 1.8M working people for 2.2M largely retired ones, many of whom don't have homes here. The NHS is prepared for a sudden shift in the population's demographic, right? We've got homes to spare for all those ex-pats (don't call them migrants) of course?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 July, 2016, 11:37:56 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 July, 2016, 07:40:19 PM

Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PMLikewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality
We really don't. I find it bizarre how many Leave people trumpet democracy and yet fail to understand that people will continue to fight for what they believe in. THAT is democracy in action. And that's especially so when the gulf between the results was small, the referendum in question wasn't even legally binding, polls show those already wavering could swing the result the other way, and the UK is getting a kicking from everywhere.

It's a tough one - I remember the Marriage Equality referendum here in Ireland last year; where I completely dismissed the idea of a petition for a second referendum - partly because the Yes side won by a fairly large margin, but mainly because I found the No campaign to be comprised largely of thinly-disguised bigotry.

However, the Nice Treaty referendum was voted against the first time here, before being thrown back at us again - but there was a little more information included the second time around and it was voted for the second time around.

So while I completely understand the hardline Leave campaigners being infuriated by the thought of a second referendum, it may not be a terrible idea now that more information has come to light.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 06 July, 2016, 11:59:19 PM
The UK's just going to become mini Russia isn't it?

Mafia politicians, escalating crime, hilarious dash-cam footage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 July, 2016, 01:03:24 AM
More like Dubai, if the Tories get their way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 July, 2016, 01:10:34 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 July, 2016, 07:40:19 PM

Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PMLikewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality
We really don't. I find it bizarre how many Leave people trumpet democracy and yet fail to understand that people will continue to fight for what they believe in. THAT is democracy in action. And that's especially so when the gulf between the results was small, the referendum in question wasn't even legally binding, polls show those already wavering could swing the result the other way, and the UK is getting a kicking from everywhere.

I live in Northern Ireland and I don't see why we should accept the result at all. We voted to stay, same goes for Scotland, but we're being dragged out of the EU by the Welsh and English regardless. At least Scotland has Nicola Sturgeon sticking up for them, that lady has balls. Arlene Foster on the other hand IS balls, her and her fucking DUPing cronies. They'll ignore the English and Welsh take on things like marriage equality, undemocratically abusing the petition of concern to block it, but are more than happy to go along with this, because it fits with their ideals. The UnDUP will probably try to block the inevitable border poll too. I find it hilarious that Paisley Jr. has applied for an Irish Passport. Big Ian's spinning in his grave, no doubt causing tectonic anomalies.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: HdE on 07 July, 2016, 03:52:48 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 July, 2016, 07:40:19 PM
Quote from: Trent on 04 July, 2016, 06:41:04 PMLikewise, I regret the result but the vote took place and now we have to embrace the new reality
We really don't. I find it bizarre how many Leave people trumpet democracy and yet fail to understand that people will continue to fight for what they believe in. THAT is democracy in action. And that's especially so when the gulf between the results was small, the referendum in question wasn't even legally binding, polls show those already wavering could swing the result the other way, and the UK is getting a kicking from everywhere.

Indigo, you just addressed one of the most baffling puzzles I've been seeing on social media of late.

I've gone on record as saying that, despite usually having next to no genuine interest in politics, leaving the EU feels like a HUGE mistake to me. The signs of the damage being done in the wake of the leave vote are the evidence I point to when called on to defend that position. I've seen with my own two eyes how the vote has emboldened those with racist tendencies in my locality. And the economic repercussions are likely to have a dramatic impact on me personally. For these reasons (amongst others) I didn't want the UK to leave the EU.

Democracy supposedly empowers the people. It should therefore also empower them to say 'wait - we think we made a mistake, and if the system we have allows us to acknowledge that and maybe undo it, we'd like to have another think about it.'

I think this is a reasonable point of view. It DOES NOT disrespect democracy, because it doesn't seek to deny anyone who genuinely believes that leaving the EU is the right decision their voice.

Being told, as I was by one dickhead on Facebook, to 'grow the f*ck up and deal with it' is NOT reasonable. That denies somebody the right to an opinion. I personally view THAT as an anti-democratic attitude.

But the problem there is that getting bogged down in how folks voted already is kind of missing the point. Discussion now needs to focus on the here and now, and what happens next - which includes legitimately questioning the referendum vote, as I see it. 

Folks who voted leave, whether the regret their vote or not - and plenty do - are still my friends. Folks who voted leave and are telling folks who wanted to remain that they should shut up, or label them unpleasantly for standing by their convictions, are not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 07 July, 2016, 09:47:45 AM
The Chilcot Report seems to say the country was wrong to enact a massive decision based on false information. Isn't that what has happened with Brexit? This time, let's save all the unnecessary heartache (and the money on an enquiry in 20 years time) and just reverse this massive decision now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 July, 2016, 09:52:16 AM
If a second referendum gives a different result, surely the next step would be to have the best of three!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 July, 2016, 10:05:30 AM
Surley the best decision would be to have a higher threshold for decisions of this sort of magnitude. Say 60% in order to leave? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 July, 2016, 09:01:41 PM
Just realise; in October, Theresa May could be Prime Minister of UK. In November, Hillary Clinton could be President of USA. So it bye bye to Mankind, it is WoMankind! Girl Power :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 July, 2016, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 07 July, 2016, 09:01:41 PM
Just realise; in October, Theresa May could be Prime Minister of UK. In November, Hillary Clinton could be President of USA. So it bye bye to Mankind, it is WoMankind! Girl Power :(

You're forgetting the Queen and Angela Merkel.  Is there no end to this cruel domination? Why only the other day I saw a woman doctor and a male nurse! Madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 July, 2016, 09:24:31 PM
There neither men nor women....just pistons driving the gas into the ignition chamber. We're the gas. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 07 July, 2016, 10:05:21 PM
The Tory leadership race is rather depressing - it's a contest between two Thatcherbots. There can be no doubt as to why Darth May and Andrea Loathsome are both contenders: the Tories want to return to their Thatcherite fantasy land of deregulation, privatisation and managed decline of the provinces. The majority of us lived through the Eighties, it was shit. I don't want to go back there again. Whoever wins MUST do the decent thing and call a General Election. That way we can have the opportunity to kick these bastards out for fucking up the country. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 July, 2016, 10:51:38 PM
Astonishing still to see how many lefties seem to think this is all fantastic. Their fantasy is the UK getting a kicking for a year or two and then CORBYN TO THE RESCUE. By then, it'll be too late to rescue anything. At best, Labour would end up like the post-crash leftie govt in Iceland that was booted out after one turn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 07 July, 2016, 11:14:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 July, 2016, 10:51:38 PM
Astonishing still to see how many lefties seem to think this is all fantastic. Their fantasy is the UK getting a kicking for a year or two and then CORBYN TO THE RESCUE. By then, it'll be too late to rescue anything. At best, Labour would end up like the post-crash leftie govt in Iceland that was booted out after one turn.

I'm a "Lefty" and the word "fantastic" is not one that comes to mind when I think of this country's parlous state. It's more along the lines of: "OHMYFUCKINGGODWHATHAVETHESEFUCKINGPRICKSDONEWEAREFUCKINGDOOMEDIHOPETHATTHESERIGHTWINGXENOPHOBICPRICKSALLBURNINHELL!!!!!!!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 July, 2016, 11:24:05 PM
The Blairite snakes really earned their silver on that front.

In other news, schoolchildren in England are being sent forms to fill out declaring their country of birth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 July, 2016, 07:49:23 AM
Bloody lefties, they've really taken this country to the edge...

Oh no, hold on wait.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 July, 2016, 09:35:13 AM
Fucking hell! You go to sleep an iver night Dallas becomes a war zone!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 08 July, 2016, 09:35:33 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 07 July, 2016, 10:05:30 AM
Surley the best decision would be to have a higher threshold for decisions of this sort of magnitude. Say 60% in order to leave? Z

That was exactly my thinking, for something as big as this (and considering the referendum isn't legally binding and is more a way to see how the country feel about an issue) anything less than an overwhelming majority just doesn't seem enough to be acted on.

My understanding was the referendum lets the government know what the people are thinking, and they then take that into account when making a decision either way. A lead of a few percent just shows that not enough of the country are committed to the idea for it to be a sensible thing to do (I reckon).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 08 July, 2016, 10:13:27 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 08 July, 2016, 09:35:13 AM
Fucking hell! You go to sleep an iver night Dallas becomes a war zone!

Horrible stuff.

I will watch, read and listen, until inevitably some talking head will blame the victims for not being armed. That'll be time to just wonder off and listen to some music or read a few comics. Such a depressing world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 July, 2016, 10:50:30 AM
Was the European referendum really about England and not Europe at all? A lot of leavers state that national sovereignty was a factor in their choice. The destruction of Labour in Scotland by the SNP might have proved to them that the Union was finished politically and by voting 'out' you effectively bring the UK to an end. Scottish MP's will call a second independence referendum and leave to re join Europe and the United Kingdom will become history. England will become an independent nation too but with few friends in the world since her power will be reduced the Army regiments splitting along National lines. London will of course carry on as a world city oblivious to this since it is powerful enough to be it's own country.

I think if the price of independence is the death of the UK then I'm afraid there are many English continuances who an live with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 July, 2016, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 July, 2016, 10:51:38 PM
Astonishing still to see how many lefties seem to think this is all fantastic.

I've yet to see 'All fantastic' but the number of idiots who think this is somehow going to get rid of racism because "UKIP won't have anything to fight for anymore" is incredible. I mean, 1 would already have been incredible but I've seen many more.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 July, 2016, 05:08:49 PM
To clarify, I'm not blaming the left for this, nor Labour. Labour has other issues (not least the terrible electoral system we have, which Labour arrogantly left in place, despite warnings not to from the Lib Dems and others). However, I know people who voted Leave, on the basis it would somehow bring down the Tories and fling Corbyn into Number 10, which is delusional at best. And they're still banging the drum that it's great the Tories will tear down the UK, thereby making a Labour win in 2020 more likely. (The numbers don't support this, of course, and it'll come at the expense of many lives. It's notably mostly well-off middle-class Labour supporters who take this view, and they apparently forget that UKIP is going to tear chunks out of Labour at the next GE. Frankly, the only hope this country and Labour has is to properly bury the hatchet with LD/GP/PC and approach the next GE in a pact system. If it doesn't, we're going to get another Tory majority as the non-Tory parties take chunks out of each-other's votes and as UKIP takes as much from Labour as the Tories.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 July, 2016, 05:41:42 PM
I find this deluded thinking even more depressing than the honestly right-wing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 July, 2016, 03:41:48 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 08 July, 2016, 09:35:13 AM
Fucking hell! You go to sleep an iver night Dallas becomes a war zone!

The worst of it is the horrible inevitability.

Unjustifiable but inevitable.

Shooting people never solved anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 July, 2016, 07:41:18 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 09 July, 2016, 03:41:48 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 08 July, 2016, 09:35:13 AM
Fucking hell! You go to sleep an iver night Dallas becomes a war zone!

The worst of it is the horrible inevitability.

Unjustifiable but inevitable.

Shooting people never solved anything.
Let's be frank, who needs a sub machine gun? Who needs a sniper rifle? Who even needs a freaking hand gun? People say they carry them for self defense...against other gun owners. This can all be rectified by amending the second amendment and confiscating everyone's guns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 July, 2016, 09:51:42 PM

The founding fathers intention was that people should have access to front loading single shot muskets, in case the king showed up and wanted them to pay taxes.
We now take that to mean that people should have unregulated access to assault rifles and sniper rifles.
If that's okay, then why can't you also have surface to air missiles, plutonium and weaponised anthrax?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 July, 2016, 09:53:55 PM
I think the debate is actually over at this point. Once America realised it could live with the deaths of children on it's hands, it was over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 July, 2016, 03:59:30 AM
Ordinary human beings cannot be trusted with any kind of weapon, from knives up. However, take any ordinary human beings and elevate them by means of a popularity contest every four or five years and they can have access to these,

(http://www.wakingtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/war-machine.jpg).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 07:33:02 AM
You can't conficate knifes, Sharky. Unlike guns, knifes have every day uses. Also, it's a hell of a lot easier to deffend yourself frim someone with a knife than someone with a gun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 July, 2016, 08:00:24 AM
Sure knives can be confiscated. If you don't believe me, try carrying one down the high street*.

*Actually, don't try that at all - you might end up shot! :-/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 08:23:48 AM
I do. It's my boot knife and line cutters used in diving.

I wouldn't be at any risk of being shot. I'm white.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 July, 2016, 08:27:15 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 08:23:48 AM
I do. It's my boot knife and line cutters used in diving.

Unless that knife has a folding blade less than 3in long, you're breaking the law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 11 July, 2016, 09:10:38 AM
Don't chefs carry sets of knives around in those leather pouch things all the time?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2016, 09:22:07 AM
They would have a reasonable explanation for having a knife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 July, 2016, 09:26:20 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2016, 09:22:07 AM
They would have a reasonable explanation for having a knife.

Yes. My bad. I omitted that caveat from my reply to Hawkmumbler because I'm fairly sure he's not expecting to have to free himself from any line-based entanglements on his high street.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 July, 2016, 09:37:45 AM
Don't have a pop I am agreeing with you! :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 09:38:58 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 July, 2016, 08:27:15 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 08:23:48 AM
I do. It's my boot knife and line cutters used in diving.

Unless that knife has a folding blade less than 3in long, you're breaking the law.
Both are 'T' formated 2 inch blades, perfectly legal to be carried on my person. They're stored in my dive dry rucksack which I use as an every day back as well. The point i'm making is theres always a reason to carry a sharp cutter or knife, but never a reason to carry a fire arm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 July, 2016, 09:44:53 AM
I carry a Swiss army knife all the time. I've carried it for so long that putting it in my pocket is automatic. It was taken off me when I went to court, presumably in order to prevent me corkscrewing the magistrates to death. Nobody seemed to consider the fact that if one of the magistrates had got a stone stuck in their hoof I would not have been able to help.

You're not allowed to carry a gun around, or a proper survival knife, however, unless authorised to do so by people assuming - because they've won a popularity contest - the right to arm or disarm whomever they desire. If nobody is allowed to carry a gun, where do the politicians get the right to decide that some can but most can't?

As someone far wiser than me once said, if only the police are allowed to be armed, who will protect us from the police?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 July, 2016, 10:05:27 AM
The difference between walking down the street and being in court is pretty evident... so why even make the comparison.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 July, 2016, 01:48:21 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 July, 2016, 10:05:27 AM
The difference between walking down the street and being in court is pretty evident... so why even make the comparison.

While I'm with Sharky on the unconscious pocketing of my Swiss Army knife, you're absolutely right.  I once got to the airport customs and remembered about it - had to pay for it to be put into storage.  Proper order, of course; it was a silly mistake on my part.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 11 July, 2016, 02:11:06 PM
England politic people are the joke.  :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 July, 2016, 02:30:32 PM
Leave voter: I'm so glad we got rid of those unelected EU reps!

'Same person does nothing as Theresa May becomes PM without an election'

Thanks, Brexit. Thats pretty much decided i'm not staying in the UK as long as I can help it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 July, 2016, 02:44:11 PM
Well I thought all the outcry was a bit overblown when Gordon Brown took over from Blair. But then the circumstances were a bit different... And before anyone makes any obvious but kind of empty comparisons between one oily destructive git and another, compare and contrast Spameron's exit with Bliar: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6243558.stm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 11 July, 2016, 02:50:58 PM
Plus, back in the Blair/Brown days voters in previous elections had long known that Brown was waiting around for his turn at the leadership.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 July, 2016, 09:22:42 PM
I have no major issue with May being Prime Minster now, in the sense of the way British democracy works. But Leave people are doing some pretty major mental gymnastics in claiming that's OK (on the basis of how the UK works) but suggesting the Commons vote on Article 50 isn't (because DEMOCRACY). It's one or the other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 July, 2016, 10:45:16 PM
It still baffles me that there isn't more outcry at all the prominent Leave campaigners / instigators fucking off and leaving it to the Remainers to clean up the mess.  Well, apart from Gove, but I think having that insipid, Pob-faced little fuck as unelected PM could just be the straw that broke the camel's back. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 July, 2016, 11:41:35 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 11 July, 2016, 10:05:27 AM
The difference between walking down the street and being in court is pretty evident... so why even make the comparison.

Really? Both public spaces, both populated by human beings, both policed, both ostensibly paid for by taxes, both under the same rule of law (allegedly), both governed by the same parliament, both subject to the same monarch, both expecting decent levels of behaviour.

The only difference is that the court is presided over by a servant of the ruling class (in judges/ magistrates). The penknife wasn't taken away from me because of its (minimal) threat - I could have done far more damage without it if I'd been so inclined - but to put me in my place.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 12:50:32 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 July, 2016, 10:45:16 PM
It still baffles me that there isn't more outcry at all the prominent Leave campaigners / instigators fucking off and leaving it to the Remainers to clean up the mess. 
I've seen plenty whining about May in that regard (and, bafflingly, suggesting she's too liberal), but it's unlikely she won't fire the UK into the heart of the sun. She was Remain in the same way Johnson was Leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 12 July, 2016, 02:44:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 July, 2016, 11:41:35 PM
The only difference is that the court is presided over by a servant of the ruling class (in judges/ magistrates). The penknife wasn't taken away from me because of its (minimal) threat - I could have done far more damage without it if I'd been so inclined - but to put me in my place.

No, the difference is that people with unpredictably violent tendencies and reason to be agitated are far more likely to be present in a courtroom. People try to smuggle actual weapons into court all the time. The figures are quite mental.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 10:37:26 AM
Sorry, M.I.K., I don't buy that. We're talking about a pen knife, not smuggling in an actual weapon. And people with "unpredictably violent tendencies" are just as likely to become agitated in the high street as in a court - which I presume is one reason why these unpredictably violent people end up in court in the first place.

In fact, my direct experience is that police officers actively encourage retaliation against them. When I was arrested (in my own home, after the police had smashed my door and windows in because I refused to acknowledge, politely and without harsh language, the invalid "warrant" of a council official), it was absolutely clear to me that their demeanour and actions positively invited physical retaliation. When I refused to rise to this, they manufactured an assault charge against me inside Skelmersdale police station. Of the six or so officers involved, who were attempting to physically force me to give fingerprints and such, only two turned up in court to give evidence. Their testimonies did not match and the cctv footage, which would have shown exactly what did and did not happen, had been lost due to a "corrupted hard drive." I was, despite all this, found guilty by three magistrates (one of whom was on his last day before retiring from the bench, one who couldn't look me in the eye and one who seemed to want to be somewhere - anywhere - else) of assaulting a police officer - and never charged with the alleged crime for which I was initially arrested.

I don't doubt that many people end up being portrayed as violent under such provocation. I would not be surprised, also, if having my penknife confiscated was added to the "attempt to smuggle a weapon into court" figures.

No, in my opinion we've all been brainwashed into regarding court rooms and court officials as being somehow above the common, public realm and therefore above normal forms of decent behaviour. To me our attitude towards them is on a level with our ancestors' attitude to churches and church officials. No matter what the church did or said, the common people bowed to it because it claimed to represent the Will of God. One modern equivalent is the court, which claims to represent the Will of Law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 July, 2016, 10:48:18 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 10:37:26 AM

I don't doubt that many people end up being portrayed as violent under such provocation.


It's my annual Agree-With-The-Shark Day.  You're right - I've heard of many cases of this that don't make the papers.*

The copper who is dealing with my property scam case right now is an absolute gentleman to me (if not particularly efficient, taking a statement three months after the crime and losing all the evidence I gave him), but I accidentally ended up on his Google page while emailing him - he posts videos of what looks to me like excessive police brutality, and comments on them with barely-disguised glee.

That said, I'm being very, very polite and pleasant to the chap - you never know, I might get my money back.

*I realise not all of them are to be believed, but some seem fairly reliable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 10:50:34 AM
QuoteBoth public spaces, both populated by human beings, both policed, both ostensibly paid for by taxes, both under the same rule of law (allegedly), both governed by the same parliament, both subject to the same monarch, both expecting decent levels of behaviour.

You've described everywhere in the United Kingdom...The penknife wasn't taken away to put you in your place Sharky, no one in that courtroom had a knife on them either and no one would have been allowed to. A high court judge can't take a knife into the courtroom. He can of course not be searched but that's a different matter. The logic behind this security measure is pretty self-evident. And honestly, the truth is you could not do more damage without it - a penknife in the eye or the throat is a better weapon than your hands will ever manage in a comparable amount of time. Unless you're Death Fist.


Of course, your 'place' was as an unwilling participant in the conventions of a society you never signed a contract with. So in that sense I suppose it did. And in any case this is completely incidental to the rest of the bollocks, which I agree is utter **** and a cravenly miscarriage of evidence and prosecution which is all too common. And yes I entirely agree their attitude encourages provocation to a great extent, I've met many officers with the inbred bouncer mentality.

Anywho! PM May will know how to deal with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 10:52:31 AM
I predict Angela Eagle will abandon her Labour leadership challenge in the next few days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 11:00:48 AM
With a hot pink banner, banners.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 11:19:15 AM
If the judge can not be searched but everyone else can, that seems to prove a double standard. Just because a human being is given a foolish wig and a costume to wear, that in no way makes that person any different - no better or no worse - than anyone else.

And you don't have to be Death Fist to do damage without a pen knife. With a shoe in each hand, I could have brained two people at once. I could have garroted one with my shoelace, strangled one with my tie, hanged one with my belt, suffocated one with my shirt, gassed one with my socks or infected one with my skiddies. I could have punched someone in the nose, blinded someone with a stiff finger, cracked someone's temple with my elbow, burst gonads with my knee, dislocated joints with my foot, cracked ribs with my heel, ruined expensive dental work with my forehead, chewed ears off with my teeth and so on and on.

The fact of the matter is that, if I'd been so inclined I indeed could have done more damage without my little Swiss army knife. In fact, using that as a weapon would probably have been a positive impediment - first I'd have to select the correct blade, fumbling about trying to find an undamaged fingernail to tease it out with, which would give everyone else time to react or scarper. Then, if I did dry to stab someone with it, chances are I'd just slice my own fingers as the blade tried to collapse back into place. I suppose I could have used some of the smaller tools sticking out from between my fingers as a kind of knuckleduster but, again, I'd still have to tease said tool out. Then I'd have to scramble over several lumps of hefty furniture to get at anybody without slipping and cutting my own fingers off.

Thinking back, the police officer who testified attended court in full uniform - complete with stab-vest and utility belt. My recollection may be wrong here as I had not thought of this before, but I don't think he'd been disarmed at all - even though he was, in theory at least, every bit as accused as I was.

Heh - I don't have a PM, so May can do what she wants. If she wants to go around claiming rights and privileges the rest of us don't have, then that's her business. If I did that I'd end up in a mental institution - if she does it, she'll end up on the Honours List. You can't fool me, TheBlaze, it's double standards all the way up! :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 11:19:20 AM
Would be pretty cool to have a leader called "Eagle" though...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 11:25:12 AM
"Foolish wig and robes" and 20 years or up education, career work and experience. They aren't going to be the ones taking weapons in, Sharky.

Oh, and May can do what she wants, huh? Thanks a fucking lot Sharky, that makes the bisexual man who now has a raving homophobe as a PM feel very secure!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 July, 2016, 11:47:09 AM
Perhaps both main parties will split into separate ones. More division rather than Unity. The Gods of Chaos rule I tell thee!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 11:56:03 AM
JBC - I think the police are being put in an impossible situation.

On the one hand, they're expected to act as constables, whose duties are to uphold the common law and to protect the persons, rights and properties of everyone on their patch. On the other hand, they're expected to act as officers, whose duties are to raise revenue for the state and to enforce legislative law. This leads to a fundamentally schizophrenic institution. For example, the officer can chase you down, imprison and fine you for "failing to stop" if you have a light out on your car whilst a constable must help you in the event that you are chased, kidnapped and robbed. Legislative law and natural law are, in the main, incompatible, and asking one person to do both jobs is a recipe for disaster.

Give any person, no matter how pure their original intentions, the right and power to demand compliance with their demands and sooner or later that person is going to overstep the mark. It is unavoidable. You'd do it. I'd do it. Many police, especially in the US, have resigned because the job was turning them into monsters.

We know this is true. One only has to remember the Harvard Prison Experiment, the Millgram experiments and the rise of German Fascism in the 1920's and 30's to understand how power corrupts perfectly ordinary people, replacing their own personal morality with top-down legislative imperatives.

When all is said and done, a police officer/constable is just a human being in a costume. It's not even a magic costume. We treat them as being above us because we've been taught to do so, they treat themselves as being above us because they've been taught to do so. Neither one is true. We are equals.

Hawkmumbler - education, career and experience has nothing to do with it. The judge is a human being, as likely to act irrationally, rationally, mercifully, unmercifully, wisely or unwisely as any other human being. Just assuming that they wouldn't do a thing based solely on their position is a double standard and the appeal to authority fallacy.

And don't worry about what May thinks. Me, and a very many people like me (who do not necessarily share my political views), will fight to the last breath to protect your rights as a human being. I don't care what your sexual preferences are, that's as entirely irrelevant as skin colour, religion, political views or gender, you deserve the same rights and freedoms as everyone else. Just remember that by voting, for anyone, you are condoning a system which allows for homophobes, maniacs, thieves, liars, piggy fiddlers and general scumbags rising to positions of power over other people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 12:00:16 PM
Well to be fair Hawk, she's probably not a raving homophobe (there's no percentage in that for her 'currently') She is however a fairly cold fish with some pretty draconian views, but I suppose the biggest problem is she is just a frontend for the interests who essentially run this country, and sadly in her brutal clamber to the top of the manure pile, she probably owes them a lot of favours. Favours which they won't be shy about calling in.
The nation now has a remain PM who irrespective of what she said yesterday, will be pretty busy resiling herself from a brexit. You will have a single market with right to free movement in all but name, but without the rights and the benefits of real membership of the EU. But what the fuck, britain has 'taken back control'. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 12:01:49 PM
Obviously the Judge could be searched too.... No one is exempt from that in those situations. They just might not, whereas they will search every defendant. For blindingly obvious reasons that have nothing to do with the individual. Sophistry Sharky!

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 11:19:15 AM
And you don't have to be Death Fist to do damage without a pen knife. With a shoe in each hand, I could have brained two people at once. I could have garroted one with my shoelace, strangled one with my tie, hanged one with my belt, suffocated one with my shirt, gassed one with my socks or infected one with my skiddies. I could have punched someone in the nose, blinded someone with a stiff finger, cracked someone's temple with my elbow, burst gonads with my knee, dislocated joints with my foot, cracked ribs with my heel, ruined expensive dental work with my forehead, chewed ears off with my teeth and so on and on.

Sounds like Death Fist to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 July, 2016, 12:45:25 PM
Blaze, you said, "A high court judge can't take a knife into the courtroom. He can of course not be searched but that's a different matter." Then you said, "Obviously the Judge could be searched too..."

As a Libertarian, I am entirely comfortable with and in favour of any property owner being within their rights to disallow any person or thing they don't like onto their property. This means only that I, or anyone else, has the right to request a search of any third party wishing to enter that property. I've been turned away from nightclubs because of my Swiss army knife and I have no problem with that. But that right is only to request compliance with a search. If the person requested refuses to be searched, that's fine - it simply means they don't get into the property. It's mandatory and arbitrary searches and confiscations that I believe are wrong. Treat me like an equal, ask to search me and everyone else, regardless of position, rank, class, colour, sex, race, religion or whatever (for the "obvious" reasons you mention) and in all likelihood I'll be happy to comply. Try to force me and you can piss off. Yes, this might seem like a minor, even trivial, position but it is the basis of proper freedom.  It's not so much why these things are done but how they are done.

As to fighting, I really don't know much about it as it's something I have very little experience with - nor do I want any - so I'd be content to leave such analyses to our resident commando!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 03:08:16 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 July, 2016, 11:47:09 AM
Perhaps both main parties will split into separate ones. More division rather than Unity. The Gods of Chaos rule I tell thee!
If we had a grown-up electoral system, they could do so safely and then rejoin in coalition. Right now, Labour voters arguing for a split or Con/Lab suggestions of a 'new centre party' are insane. The SDP never got anywhere. The Lib Dems barely made a dent, despite getting a decent chunk of the votes. If we had AMS or even STV, all these problems would go away; but then Labour's hubris in Blair's term put paid to that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 03:16:22 PM
Yeah, we are in dire need of some change to 1 non transferable vote and FPTP. Wish people had paid attention during that particular referendum (and if the usual idiots hadn't whined about it not being the 'right reform' when the alternative is always 'no reform')

And Shark... Oh give over  ;) Lets not be pedantic over synonyms. If I had an edit function I meant "A high court judge may not be searched" because he's statistically incredibly unlikely to carry a weapon into court. However he could be searched and would have no right to refuse to be searched if requested. You know the difference so let's not pretend you're not getting it for the sake of more circular sophistry.  They do search everyone else automatically, regardless of position, rank, class, colour, sex, race or religion*. Every single defendant. It's an attempt to provide security without prejudice to those qualities. Which can only be done so arbitrarily.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
I voted to leave the EU and am quite happy to have Mrs May as the new Prime Minister.  We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 04:55:23 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
I voted to leave the EU and am quite happy to have Mrs May as the new Prime Minister.  We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.
I'll be thinking of you whilst I swollow my cyanide capsules to "cure" myself, namely how i'd like to strangle every leave voter with their own intestines.

Full offence, but if you think this pathetic display is hoe democracy should work you need to shut the heck up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 12 July, 2016, 05:00:12 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
I voted to leave the EU and am quite happy to have Mrs May as the new Prime Minister.  We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.

Theresa May was elected by her constituents, not the majority of the Voting population. She was also in favour of remaining in Europe, which happens to be the opposite of what you believe.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 05:02:33 PM
Hawkmumbler - I do not wish to offend you in any way and, to be honest, I don't really understand your post.  We obviously have different political views, such is life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 05:05:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 05:02:33 PM
Hawkmumbler - I do not wish to offend you in any way and, to be honest, I don't really understand your post.  We obviously have different political views, such is life.
Then allow me to enlighten you! Theresa "Superbitch" May believes, amongst other equally repulsive things, that Lesbion, Gay and Bisexual folk should be treated chemicaly and with electro shock therapy to "cure" them.

Your happy with this kins of bigot in power?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 05:17:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.

Oddly enough, Mrs May took the exact opposite view to you when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair. She was very clear that she thought there should be a general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 05:20:36 PM
Quote from: HawkmumblerTheresa... May believes, amongst other equally repulsive things, that Lesbion, Gay and Bisexual folk should be treated chemicaly and with electro shock therapy to "cure" them.

Your happy with this kins of bigot in power?

Do you have a source for that...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 12 July, 2016, 05:24:43 PM
Quotethe judge is a human being,

Of course they are.  But like politicians, or police officers, they are also there to represent the will of the people, whereas an individual being robbed of their right to carry a weapon into a courtroom is a person.  Whilst the rights of a person are certainly important, any sort of society only functions by balancing those rights against the safety and security of the people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 05:36:19 PM
Quote from: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 05:20:36 PM
Quote from: HawkmumblerTheresa... May believes, amongst other equally repulsive things, that Lesbion, Gay and Bisexual folk should be treated chemicaly and with electro shock therapy to "cure" them.

Your happy with this kins of bigot in power?

Do you have a source for that...?
As ever, the brilliantly neutral Pink News has done an indeph analysis, and as much as Darth May might want to look like a saint, her mist resent act...

2016: Calls for withdrawl from European court of human rights*.

...She is far far hypocritical as to be unbelievable.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/07/11/from-gay-rights-opponent-to-unsung-hero-of-equal-marriage-theresa-mays-surprising-evolution-on-lgbt-rights/amp/?client=safari#

*Of which bans, amongst other things, gay conversion therapy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 05:36:19 PM
As ever, the brilliantly neutral Pink News has done an indeph analysis, and as much as Darth May might want to look like a saint, her mist resent act...

2016: Calls for withdrawl from European court of human rights*.

...She is far far hypocritical as to be unbelievable.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/07/11/from-gay-rights-opponent-to-unsung-hero-of-equal-marriage-theresa-mays-surprising-evolution-on-lgbt-rights/amp/?client=safari#

*Of which bans, amongst other things, gay conversion therapy.

I think it's quite a stretch to suggest that this is in anyway convincing as support for your first statement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 July, 2016, 05:57:01 PM
The ECHR forbids many nasty and unpleasant things. It's quite a jump, though, to say that anyone opposing it is therefore an advocate of one specific thing that it makes illegal.

Your claim that she's in favour of electro-shock therapy for LGBT people is still unproven and kinda hysterical-sounding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 06:13:53 PM
It probably is, to be honest, but i'm certainly not delighted to have somone with such a patchy history and potential to be disastrous for the LGBT+ community as PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 06:22:06 PM
I agree she is cold and as I've said before very authoritarian; if not potentially draconian....she did, I think, back same sex marriage.
The point about her comments around Browns accession to the PM position is a matter of record. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 July, 2016, 06:31:13 PM
Over half the PMs since 1900 were not actually elected in that role, including Brown, Major, Callaghan, Douglas-Home and ...err ...Churchill.

There are many faults with our electoral system but this is one of the lesser ones.

And Hawk to say that someone who disagrees that HR cases should go to an extra-national body does NOT mean that they must take the opposite position on every decision of that body, that's just dumb. Now look what you've made me do - I'm sticking up for a Tory you bastard!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 06:56:52 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 03:16:22 PMWish people had paid attention during that particular referendum (and if the usual idiots hadn't whined about it not being the 'right reform' when the alternative is always 'no reform')
I voted in favour of AV, but was also one of those "idiots". Frankly, it was a stitch-up, designed to silence for a generation the need for electoral reform. The Tories knew AV would dent them slightly at worst (it either benefits the third party or it benefits the top two), and that a loss would result in "you had the opportunity for change, but no-one wanted it". What gets me is how even pro-PR MPs say we had a referendum on PR. We didn't. We got the choice between two majoritarian systems, because the LDs caved. (It should have been FPTP vs AV+, which was the recommendation in the report at the time, even though that system's also problematic.)

Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PMI voted to leave the EU and am quite happy to have Mrs May as the new Prime Minister.  We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.
We do indeed have a parliamentary democracy, which means that fundamental changes to the fabric of society should come down to a vote and be backed by a majority of MPs. For example, a certain non-binding referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 07:32:51 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 06:56:52 PM
We do indeed have a parliamentary democracy, which means that fundamental changes to the fabric of society should come down to a vote and be backed by a majority of MPs. For example, a certain non-binding referendum.

On this subject (with apologies to anyone who's already read this on Facebook)...

I've been following some very smart constitutional lawyers chewing over 'Brexit' on Twitter, and here's how I think it may play out...

No way we leave the EU without a Commons vote. Article 50 only establishes the framework and timetable for a member to leave — in that respect, it's something of a red herring because, at some point, we will have to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 which took us into the EEC. There's no way that can happen without a vote in the Commons — Prime Ministers don't get to repeal primary legislation. If the referendum was meant to convey that authority, such authority would have been written into the bill that enabled the referendum in the first place.

(Even if Article 50 has been invoked, despite what Cameron says, there's nothing in the Article that says it's a one-way, irreversible process.)

So, the Commons vote...

At this point, MPs have the perfect opportunity to acknowledge the referendum result but argue (with some justification) that they have the benefit of hindsight. They cannot say with confidence that they are upholding the public will, now that we know there's no extra £350M a week for the NHS, that immigration won't be materially affected, that Boris Johnson's notion of a trade deal with all the benefits and none of the strings was just a fantasy...

So, they'll punt it back to a second referendum. In all likelihood, binding this time but with a 60% threshold on Leave. Remain will probably win, but...

...There's no way the EU will hand us any concessions. More likely, they'll punish us to stop other countries trying the same thing to extract more favourable terms. Expect either a reduction in our rebate, or enforced agreement to Schengen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 08:28:02 PM
I think a vote in the Commons on Brexit would be very interesting.  The current Prime Minister and the future Prime Minister have both said that Brexit will happen.  They could well carry the majority of the Conservative Party on that.  I don't go along with the idea that all Labour MPs will vote to stay in the EU, especially the ones whose constituencies are in the Midlands and the North, where in many of these areas there was a decisive vote to leave.  The only people to gain from those MPs voting to stay would be Ukip.

As for a second referendum, I think that would be a major problem for the Tories, if they're still in charge, as many of their voters in the South and in the East voted to leave.  Again, only Ukip will gain politically from a second referendum, in my view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 08:39:51 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 08:28:02 PM
I think a vote in the Commons on Brexit would be very interesting.  The current Prime Minister and the future Prime Minister have both said that Brexit will happen.  They could well carry the majority of the Conservative Party on that.  I don't go along with the idea that all Labour MPs will vote to stay in the EU, especially the ones whose constituencies are in the Midlands and the North, where in many of these areas there was a decisive vote to leave.  The only people to gain from those MPs voting to stay would be Ukip.

In that scenario, the MPs wouldn't be voting to stay. They'd be voting to put the matter back to the people, given the sheer range of promises that were resiled from, many within hours of the result being announced. They hadn't even finished counting the votes when Farage trashed the £350M/week pledge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 08:46:31 PM
Well, if the vote in the Commons was just to have a second referendum, then Labour would be in the same boat as the Tories with many of their voters.  People on both sides of the argument thought their vote would be decisive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 08:56:02 PM
Quote from: HawkmumblerTheresa... May believes, amongst other equally repulsive things, that Lesbion, Gay and Bisexual folk should be treated chemicaly and with electro shock therapy to "cure" them.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell
I think it's quite a stretch to suggest that this is in anyway convincing as support for your first statement.

Quote from: Hawkmumbler
It probably is, to be honest, but i'm certainly not delighted to have somone with such a patchy history and potential to be disastrous for the LGBT+ community as PM.

The Pink News article seems to show that her opinions have evolved along with society's, which is probably a good thing. It even quotes her as saying "I have changed my view" and "I have changed my mind".

Most significantly to my mind is that she voted for the 2013 Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, when two of her erstwhile challengers - Andrea Leadsom and Stephen Crabb - did not. Consider who we could have had.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 08:59:48 PM
My inkling is that a second referendum would result in broadly the same vote, or perhaps a 50/50 split. It certainly wouldn't be decisive. A Commons vote would be a crapshoot. In theory, there's a sizeable majority of pro-EU MPs in the Commons, but Tories tend to do what they're told, and Labour MPs will freak out about the possibility of losing seats (or at least votes) to UKIP.

Frankly, I think we're doomed to leave regardless now, and it's pretty bloody clear that this is at best going to be horrible for a decade or so. Industries are already suffering. Austerity is here to stay (and will almost certainly be used as an excuse for further privatisation of the NHS). Living standards will fall and poverty will rise. And the benefits? Hard to see any from here. Perhaps trade deals in a far-flung future, but then we lack the skills necessary for those anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 09:10:29 PM
But the entire premise upon which the vote was a: formulated and b: carried through was a crock of lying bullshit.
The political class both exit and remain never in a million years actually thought it would go through (hence the no plan B). As I have repeatedly stated over the past weeks both here and elsewhere: this was a 'jolly good idea' by Cameron to placate his restive backbenchers, to kill off UKIP and to consolidate his own position. Johnson cynically opted to go Brexit to place himself as leadership material a couple of years down the line.
This backfired in a big way when the public used this opportunity to tell the politicians to fuck off. We saw the frenzied rush of exit politicians to get as far away as possible from the mess they played a big part in creating; we saw Cameron getting off side as quickley as he thought expedient and we now see a remain Tory leader in Theresa May who is to the neck in the banker network (her husband?).
We will see some tokenistic brexit spiel where there is membership of a single market and free movement of labour and none of the benefits or a scenario where the voters get to go at this again with the scales heavily weighed in favour of remain.
A fiasco from start to finish; a country set at each others throats; component states (hopefully) moving to independence; a Labour Party lapsing into parody; a harder colder (if it were possible) Tory leadership. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 09:20:13 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 08:46:31 PM
People on both sides of the argument thought their vote would be decisive.

Equally, quite a lot of people thought there would be extra cash for the NHS, a material reduction in immigration, a sweetheart trade deal with the EU, that the pound wouldn't crash, and that there'd be no shock to the economy. They thought all those things, because 'Leave' told them so, and none of those things has turned out to be true.

No one can argue with any confidence that the vote would turn out the same with the benefit of hindsight, which hands MPs the perfect opportunity to put the matter back to the public. The EU has a history of re-running public votes until it gets the result it wants.

And, to be honest, if Leave didn't want this to happen then maybe they shouldn't have told so many blatant lies during the course of their campaign.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 12 July, 2016, 09:30:41 PM
Well, Corbyn's got a place in the next Labour leadership contest.  This is possibly the worst coup in political history.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 July, 2016, 09:46:08 PM
It's a shambles.

He seems like a decent guy for the most part, but it seems delusional that he can win over the wider electorate.

Eagle's attempt at a challenge looked absolutely pathetic though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 09:57:17 PM
Well there's one thing for sure we're all going to be a lot poorer. You couldn't have made this bullshit up. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 July, 2016, 10:01:36 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 09:57:17 PM
You couldn't have made this bullshit up. Z

I think that was the problem :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 July, 2016, 10:02:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 08:46:31 PM
People on both sides of the argument thought their vote would be decisive.

And it was. Doesn't matter which side you were on, win or lose your vote helped to decide the issue. That's the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 10:13:36 PM
Not if they have another go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 10:16:42 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther
Well, Corbyn's got a place in the next Labour leadership contest.  This is possibly the worst coup in political history.

Surprised Corbyn let them change the rules so only people who have been members since January can vote this time, but that will save me £3 I suppose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 10:34:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 10:13:36 PM
Not if they have another go.
So basically the plan to fix the economy and restore some sense into the mix is to..."Try turning it off and on again?!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 11:09:04 PM
Nope, sorry, for the second time today, I don't understand your post.  I gathered from a previous post you wanted to strangle me, I'm not sure what you want to do now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 July, 2016, 11:28:23 PM
No, no, HAVE YOU TRIED TURNINING IT OFF AND ON AGAIN!!!??? (https://youtu.be/nn2FB1P_Mn8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 July, 2016, 12:54:26 AM
Quote from: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 10:16:42 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther
Well, Corbyn's got a place in the next Labour leadership contest.  This is possibly the worst coup in political history.

Surprised Corbyn let them change the rules so only people who have been members since January can vote this time, but that will save me £3 I suppose.

It apparently wasn't on the agenda for that meeting, and they removed Corbyn from the room before discussing it, citing conflict of interest.

Which is just another sign of how terrible this coup has been, IMO, because it's more than likely that a good chunk of those joining were actually doing so to vote against Corbyn.  There's supposedly a workaround, though, as while fully paid-up Labour members can't vote, people who registered as supporters via trade union membership can.  I mention this to underline what a monumental cock-up this coup has been: the Chicken Coup set out to clip the wings of the left and has instead enabled a rise in trade union membership and made Labour the largest socialist party in the world.  They sure showed him who was in charge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 08:32:35 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 09:57:17 PM
Well there's one thing for sure we're all going to be a lot poorer. You couldn't have made this bullshit up. Z

Some of us get paid in dollars...

(Note: I'd trade the increased income for the opposite result in the referendum in a heartbeat, but you gotta find your silver linings where you can...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 July, 2016, 08:34:46 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 08:32:35 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 12 July, 2016, 09:57:17 PM
Well there's one thing for sure we're all going to be a lot poorer. You couldn't have made this bullshit up. Z

Some of us get paid in dollars...

(Note: I'd trade the increased income for the opposite result in the referendum in a heartbeat, but you gotta find your silver linings where you can...)
Lucky for some, you, Mr.Holden and Paul Grist should be quite comfertable!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 13 July, 2016, 10:53:37 AM
I think more than 3% of Leave voters have probably lost their convictions following the complete disappearance of all campaign promises and leaders in just a few weeks. And the complete reversal in headlines and claims.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 July, 2016, 05:17:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 July, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
We have a parliamentary democracy and Mrs May was elected to Parliament, so, in my view, no need for a General Election.
Oddly enough, Mrs May took the exact opposite view to you when Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair. She was very clear that she thought there should be a general election.

I know May supporters are in the minority here but honestly, wouldn't it be nice if the supporters ever actually compared what she says to what she does? I'd at least enjoy an attempt at a rationalisation. I don't quite agree there should be a general election but I remember the outcry when Brown took over from Blair - and as I mentioned, that was a much more...smooth...affair. This is pretty atypical of anything prior.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 July, 2016, 06:56:52 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 12 July, 2016, 03:16:22 PMWish people had paid attention during that particular referendum (and if the usual idiots hadn't whined about it not being the 'right reform' when the alternative is always 'no reform')
I voted in favour of AV, but was also one of those "idiots". Frankly, it was a stitch-up, designed to silence for a generation the need for electoral reform.

It was definitely a case of choosing between 'no change' and 'very little, almost inconsequential change'. However I'll take the latter over the former and in any case, either result silenced for a generation the need for electoral reform - but the former silenced it conclusively.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 11:24:42 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 13 July, 2016, 08:34:46 AM
Lucky for some, you, Mr.Holden and Paul Grist should be quite comfertable!

Not really. There's a brief honeymoon period before the exchange rate pushes the costs of everything else up and wipes the benefit out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 13 July, 2016, 04:15:26 PM
...and now they've took tipping point and the chase off to hang around waiting live for dave to come out to see the queen..and I bet the news will be full of it anyway. Why we need to see it unfold as it happens I dunno.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 08:18:00 PM
Boris Johnson is the new Foreign Secretary. Satire is dead.

(I'm starting to think the current prog's cover strapline is less a bit of cover blurb and more an accurate summation of the state of British politics.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 13 July, 2016, 08:29:47 PM
Boris Johnson, David Davies, Liam Fox, Michael Fallen has she taken leave of her senses....I heard of keeping your friends close but your enemies closer but this is now officially utter farce.
I quite liked her inclusive speech; brought back fond memories of Thatchers St Francis speech upon assuming power. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 13 July, 2016, 08:36:49 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/ItuYyTX.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 13 July, 2016, 08:37:51 PM
David Davies Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (SSEE U)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 08:56:35 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 13 July, 2016, 08:37:51 PM
David Davies Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (SSEE U)?

Ho hum... for one brief moment, I'd hoped she'd made him Home Secretary. He's one of the few senior Tory figures who's talked much sense on the balance between privacy and security in a modern state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 July, 2016, 09:09:58 PM
Probably worth noting it's David Davis, NOT David Davies, who's heading up Brexit. And judging by stuff he's written online, he's at least thought about it a bit, but has the same pie-in-the-sky dreams about how things can actually work (such as full open market access without freedom of movement).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 July, 2016, 09:25:44 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 08:18:00 PM
Boris Johnson is the new Foreign Secretary.

Surely you misheard. It must have been "..to be executed for treason". It must. You lie, lie and lie, undermine your own party, international relations and the interests of your country and they make you Foreign Secretary... I fancy being Minister for Children, how many babies do I need to eat...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 July, 2016, 09:32:33 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 July, 2016, 09:09:58 PM
Probably worth noting it's David Davis, NOT David Davies, who's heading up Brexit.

Oops! My mistake! These Tories all look the same to me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 13 July, 2016, 09:35:47 PM
I made this a few years ago. Seemed kind of apt.

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Hj-3fiNZQII/V4alUWLBNCI/AAAAAAAAAOQ/_z74v1BSSEAIgY7qtrCD6IVGuynFSKksQCLcB/s1600/PaxMan_Vs_Boris.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 July, 2016, 09:58:29 PM
Mrs IP, who spent much of the day looking into getting UK citizenship, has reacted to the Boris Johnson news with "fuck no" (as in, to UK citizenship, not just Johnson, although her reaction there was identical). Thanks, Theresa May! (Anxiety levels rising...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 13 July, 2016, 10:15:26 PM
Maybe with Bojo, Davis and Fox getting roles that involve our dealings with other countries she's saying to them "you made this mess, you fucking sort it out".
I seem to recall that sentiment on this thread more than once, well you got your wish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 July, 2016, 10:21:36 PM
I didn't get my wish. And I'm now listening to my wife saying that while she doesn't want to live anywhere else, she doesn't want to feel like maybe she needs to and maybe it would be better, that maybe she is no longer welcome, and that the UK is simply too bloody embarrassing to be in.

I fucking hate this. All of it. What a horrible mess these incompetents made and continue to make. And May's already showing her speech was bullshit, which must be some kind of record.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trent on 13 July, 2016, 11:12:13 PM
I can't disagree with you Indigo. My comments were more a case of 'be careful what you wish for' even in anger.
The view that those who made the mess should sort it out has certainly been expressed here, although in truth I don't believe those saying it would genuinely have wanted these self serving vermin anywhere near genuine influence if they had the choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 July, 2016, 12:40:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 July, 2016, 10:21:36 PM
I didn't get my wish. And I'm now listening to my wife saying that while she doesn't want to live anywhere else, she doesn't want to feel like maybe she needs to and maybe it would be better, that maybe she is no longer welcome, and that the UK is simply too bloody embarrassing to be in.

Same boat. I feel so ashamed I brought my wife here, and keep her here because I don't know any other language unlike her...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 July, 2016, 12:53:07 PM
Definitely time for me and the S.O. to brush up on our foreign languages (Berlin is nice this time of year - and will shortly be full of British tech ex-pats).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 14 July, 2016, 02:01:14 PM
Fuck leaving! Far better to stay and try and affect change from within.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 14 July, 2016, 02:47:59 PM
https://www.bas.ac.uk/jobs/

May not be far away though... Maybe we could all chip in for a Mars mission...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 14 July, 2016, 05:16:21 PM
QuoteBoris Johnson is the new Foreign Secretary. Satire is dead.

Good move, politically.  Creates the impression of consensus, but puts BawJaws is a role where he's likely to make a complete tit of himself very publicly.  A career in journalism will soon beckon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 July, 2016, 05:21:57 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 14 July, 2016, 05:16:21 PM
... puts BawJaws is a role where he's likely to make a complete tit of himself very publicly.

But isn't that exactly what he's done for his entire political career? Isn't it why he now has an important cabinet post? I'm not sure I see any imminent change in trajectory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 14 July, 2016, 05:57:16 PM
I can't see the clown role surviving much beyond his first trip to Turkey.  I think this was was calculated to be the end of him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 July, 2016, 06:52:48 PM
Quote from: Trent on 13 July, 2016, 10:15:26 PM
Maybe with Bojo, Davis and Fox getting roles that involve our dealings with other countries she's saying to them "you made this mess, you fucking sort it out"


Foreign Office: Boris Johnson

International Trade: Liam Fox

Brexit: David Davis

International Development: Priti Patel


Ferret trainers put their most feral animals in a sack and let them fight it out among themselves.

Making all the incredibly serious, heavyweight, and senior Brexiteers subordinate to Boris at the Foreign Office is the most hilariously passive aggressive political act since Cameron put IDS in charge of making disabled people homeless.

It makes May look serious about Brexit and ensures that lot stay (publically) loyal for a little while. Shouldn't take them long to destroy each other - none of them (or the public) agree on what Brexit actually entails.

The idea that 52% of the population all voted for the same thing doesn't stand up to much scrutiny, and once everyone realises only a messy compromise is possible, May will be standing there, like your mum, saying I told you so.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 14 July, 2016, 07:24:57 PM
How much did you say those tickets to Mars were Pyroxian?  Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2016, 08:00:45 PM
52% of the colonists will only vote to come home anyway - despite the fact that there's no rocket.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 15 July, 2016, 02:44:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 July, 2016, 08:00:45 PM
52% of the colonists will only vote to come home anyway - despite the fact that there's no rocket.

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 July, 2016, 07:15:14 PM
Starting to wonder whether May is playing chess. I honestly have no idea what her end game is any more. She talks tough when it comes to immigration and the EU in general, and yet is now stating that we will only leave when there is British consensus about a way forward and also an actual feasible plan in place. I want to feel there's a glimmer of hope for this being kicked into the long grass or us at least coming out of this with a half-decent deal, but politics is all over the place right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 15 July, 2016, 09:37:57 PM
It's all kicking off in Turkey now!

QuoteTurkey's PM has denounced an "illegal action" by a military "group", with bridges closed in Istanbul and aircraft flying low over the capital, Ankara.
Binali Yildirim said the military action was not authorised but it was not a coup. He said that the government remained in charge.
Traffic has been stopped from crossing both the Bosphorus and Fatih Sultan Mehmet bridges in Istanbul.
There are reports of gunshots in the capital Ankara.
Tanks are also said to be stationed outside Istanbul airport.
Mr Yildirim told NTV television by telephone: "We are working on the possibility of an attempt. We will not allow this attempt." He did not elaborate.
"Those who are in this illegal act will pay the highest price," he added, saying it would not be correct to describe the move as a "coup".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 July, 2016, 09:42:39 PM
The Chicken Coup was hilarious, the Turkey Coup not so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 July, 2016, 10:14:03 PM
So, Turkey has 40 deployment-ready nuclear weapons and the second-biggest military in NATO.  I feel really foolish betting all my money on North Korea being the rogue power that causes humanity's extinction, but on the plus side I won't have to worry about anyone being around expecting me to make good on my debt.

So long, everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 July, 2016, 10:46:18 PM
I'd be laughing if it wasn't genuinly terrifying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 15 July, 2016, 11:13:07 PM
...So that means there's no Turkey for Xmas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 18 July, 2016, 02:47:04 AM
The Turkish President is trying to turn Turkey away from being a Secular state that Ataturk created.
He is a Armenian Holocaust denier and a nasty piece of work it has to be said.
I met up with a Turkish mate tonight and he said there a conspiracy theory that Erdogan planned the failed coup himself as an excuse to further control both the Judiciary and Army both of whom have been seen as traditional defenders of secularism.
Its an interesting theory when one considers how Erdogan gave them the slip repeatedly that night.
 
 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 18 July, 2016, 06:46:11 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 15 July, 2016, 11:13:07 PM
...So that means there's no Turkey for Xmas?

290 people dead.  Any jokes about what happened in Nice as well?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 18 July, 2016, 10:34:15 AM
Erdogen using the coup attempt to cement his hold on power, cleanse the other Turkish institutions of non Erdogen supporters and turn the secularist state into a Sunni diktat. 'You win the Game of thrones or you die' so expect a quick series of executions followed by much International condemnation etc but Erdogen knows he holds the winning hand- with Europe over refugees and the Americans with cuddly Isis or Daesh or whatever they're called now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2016, 02:47:58 PM
I've just been chatting online with a Turkish girl i used to teach - she's a TV journalist in Denmark these days.  She and her family are firmly against the coup and support the president.  I must admit to being somewhat clueless about the whole situation; I'll look into it more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 July, 2016, 04:31:26 PM
ARM sold. Theresa May spinning its knock-down purchase as some kind of win for British business. I despair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2016, 06:00:19 PM
And yet also repeatedly refusing to actually tell us the cost of it.

She might be telling the truth about it being a bargain, though, as by the time Trident is actually replaced, it'll be outdated and vulnerable technology.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 18 July, 2016, 09:47:02 PM
very sad news on ARM, I was only just talking about to my wife two days back, explaining it was the jewel in our technological crown.

pound shop Britain.. everything is for sale.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 July, 2016, 06:20:27 AM
Quote from: Something Fishy on 18 July, 2016, 09:47:02 PM

pound shop Britain.. everything is for sale.

Bankrupt Britain ... everything going cheap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 July, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
You little Englanders!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 July, 2016, 09:06:42 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 July, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
You little Englanders!

You massive Tory!

In other news - Tennis balls make the banned list (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/14/politics/cleveland-convention-guns-event-zone/) at an American rally! The article is a couple of days old but the subject was talked about this morning on the telly. A lot of the items on the list make sense but some of it is blatent clownery. And guns are allowed!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 July, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 July, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
You little Englanders!
No irony in this, from a borderline kipper, is there? :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 19 July, 2016, 04:43:59 PM
It's a trite observation, but a country where people seem happier about the Prime Minister saying she'd have no qualms about ordering the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people than the leader of the opposition saying he would have no part of it as he finds the idea morally repugnant. A country like that doesn't seem like one I'm keen to be a part of.

What possible need does the UK have for continued possession of nuclear weapons and when did opposition to them cease to be a commonly held view. It seems absolutely shameful to me that the main opposition party can find any reason to support this.

For me, complete unilateral disarmament is both the only moral choice and, more importantly, sets an important, necessary precedent if the greater aims of internation non-proliferation are ever to be realised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 19 July, 2016, 05:32:36 PM
Vote for me! Vote for me! I resign.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 July, 2016, 05:46:24 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 July, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 July, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
You little Englanders!
No irony in this, from a borderline kipper, is there? :lol:

http://www.reddwarf.co.uk/merchandise/browse/images/KipperLarge.jpg
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 July, 2016, 05:59:00 PM
If a giant potato with a face drawn on it were to commit a crime, should Kelvin MacKenzie be allowed to write about it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 July, 2016, 06:14:26 PM
He should, yes, especially if the privilege against self-incrimination is ever repealed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 July, 2016, 07:51:53 PM
The nuclear argument makes little logical sense. There are only two times when the UK would use nuclear weapons: in a pre-emptive strike (in which case, we shouldn't have them), or in retaliation (in which case, they weren't a good deterrent). Moreover, how many state-sized actors are there where we would be likely to make such a response? I've heard people bleating about ISIS, but that's a distributed network within other countries. The UK's no more likely to respond to a dirty bomb by nuking a chunk of Iraq than it once would have bombing Dublin because of an IRA attack on the British mainland. (Plus, given NATO guarantees, if the unthinkable did happen and the UK was attacked with nuclear weapons, isn't NATO itself essentially forced to respond?)

It fundamentally comes down to willy waving—a status symbol of the UK's 'standing' in the world, standing that's been seriously impacted by Brexit. We can find tens of billions for weapons we'll never use, but not for essential infrastructure. We can talk about standing tall in the Security Council and NATO, but God forbid we have to remain a part of an organisation that benefits actual real people. And, yes, Labour's a fucking disgrace on this, but at least there's some level of honesty in a party split existing. Or does every Tory really believe nukes are the only way?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 July, 2016, 08:16:37 PM
As I recall, the Tories weren't unanimously in favor of Trident, and we can take some solace from the fact that Labour probably don't support it and just wanted to give Corbyn a kicking.
Most of Labour won't be around for much longer, though.  There's that, at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 July, 2016, 08:33:26 PM
I just checked the votes. One Tory voted against. Bah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 19 July, 2016, 09:28:08 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 July, 2016, 08:43:00 AM
You little Englanders!

Quite the opposite.  A proud European.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 July, 2016, 09:48:20 PM
QuoteMoreover, how many state-sized actors are there where we would be likely to make such a response?

This is the thing I genuinely don't understand about the pro-wmd argument.  Who are we defending ourselves from?  They're a weapon from an age of warring empire states

North Korea?  A poverty stricken nation with an army from the 1950s, desperately hoping the Americans don't kill them.

China? They need the rest of the world to buy their stuff.

The Russians?  Not really their style.  As they've demonstrated recently, a subtle war is much more efficient.

"Islamic" extremists managing to gain control in Pakistan or the mid east?  The people pulling the strings quite like the fact that the west exists, and the foot soldiers aren't going to be put off by a bit of mutually assured destruction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 19 July, 2016, 09:56:57 PM
Indeed. Either we're all dead or we're all dead and we kill a similar number ofequally blameless people. Not much of a choice but, if offered, the former is the only one I'd take.

MAD nuclear deterrent is just about plausible against a monolithic state. Faced with decentralised lunatic cells it's fucking idiotic. Might as well bomb the waning moon for making it dark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 July, 2016, 11:47:25 AM
Quote from: Banners on 12 July, 2016, 10:52:31 AM
I predict Angela Eagle will abandon her Labour leadership challenge in the next few days.

Meh. Almost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 July, 2016, 11:59:21 AM
Nuclear weapons have just one main selling point: the ability to instantly and indiscriminately murder the population of an enemy state. If you think this is a good idea in ANY conceivable circumstances, by all means, splash the cash.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 20 July, 2016, 12:14:18 PM
I quite like that during this time of austerity we can still find the cash to spend on something we should never, ever use. Maybe if theres a large enough terror attack in the UK we can nuke ourselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 July, 2016, 12:53:15 PM
Should probably spend that money on creating a world where people wouldn't want to nuke anybody in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 July, 2016, 01:09:43 PM
"Labour leadership candidate confirms that £40 billion will be made available for supporting vetearans, improving equipment and training for conventional military, and providing targeted international aid to areas worst affected by 'war on terror' ".

Wouldn't that be nice?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 July, 2016, 06:12:54 PM
There's big money in nuclear weapons, and where there's big money there are well paid lobbyists and pro-nuke think tanks and campaign contributions and all that jazz. So long as there's profit in constructing and maintaining nuclear arsenals, I'm afraid they're here to stay.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 20 July, 2016, 08:09:41 PM
Not that I would have paid £25, but as a so-called Registered Supporter who paid £3 to vote for Corbyn last year, I was surprised I never even got so much as an email about the forthcoming Labour leadership contest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 July, 2016, 09:18:00 PM
On Trident: TBH, I've always been more hawkish on defence than my (apparently) left-wing leanings would suggest to some, and I've always been more or less agnostic on our strategic nuclear deterrent, considering it (on balance) a probably necessary evil.

Recently, I've had some very interesting conversations with a friend who I consider at least equally hawkish and who is fairly well-connected in these matters (I'm pretty sure there's a copy of the Official Secrets Act in the bottom of a filing cabinet somewhere with his signature on it) that's made me reconsider.

Essentially: who are we deterring? North Korea? Their nuclear programme doesn't work and their target list begins and ends in South Korea. Plus, they're nutters, so likely wouldn't be deterred anyway. Iran? Again, we're nowhere on their list of potential targets, and were quite happy to walk back their nuclear ambitions. The biggest threat from Iran's nuclear programme is the Republican Congress's attempts to renege on the current agreements. Who's left? Pakistan? Don't see it. Again, we're waaaay down their possible target list. It's extremely likely that Saudi Arabia also has nuclear weapons (courtesy of Pakistan) but see the North Korea example; they're nutters and we're not on the list.

Who's left that we should be worried about? Israel? France? The United States?

No. We're left with Russia, and that's a mental argument for two reasons: 1) Russia regards the UK as a deposit account for uncounted billions of Russian money, and 2) take a moment to google "Russian anti-ballistic missile defence"... do it now, I'll wait... Done? Good. Then you'll have seen that Russia has missile defence systems we could only dream of. If they wanted, they could empty their silos at us and sit there in near-total confidence that they could bring down every single warhead we launched at them. Of course, there's a possibility that one or two might get through, but this is fucking Russia we're talking about. Have you seen how those guys go to war? You think they're not OK with a little retaliatory damage on their side?

And that's before we get anywhere near the fact that any new nuclear system would be slaved to the US military, almost certainly be running hackable software, and would be vulnerable to the rapidly advancing field of submarine detection.

And we still haven't considered that all the most potent threats against us aren't coming from nations whose cities we could threaten with annihilation but from terrorist enclaves in failed states. Some guy in the mountains in Pakistan sends a jihadi with a suitcase nuke into Leeds? You think he cares if we can annihilate Karachi?

Now, tacital nukes... that's a different matter. We can put a smart missile within a few hundred yards of your location that will obliterate everything in a one-mile radius of impact and liquefy rock to a depth of 300 metres? There's no cave or bunker that will protect you from that. That shit, they might be scared of. I'd argue that it'd be a far more effective deterrent against a hypothetical series of Russian incursions into border states, too, since it's a weapon we might conceivably use.

So... can we stop with the ridiculous assertions that being against the renewal of Trident means you're weak on defence, please? Spending a couple of hundred billion on a defence strategy that addresses a military situation that hasn't existed for a couple of decades is madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 July, 2016, 09:36:54 PM
Oh, and a final subsidiary point: our position on the UN Security Council is a historic one deriving from our status as one of the victorious powers of WWII. It pre-dates our nuclear capability and would be unlikely to be stripped away if we relinquished our strategic nuclear deterrent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 July, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
Nukes are out of date, of course. The latest is kinetic weapons - shaped tungsten rods more or less dropped from orbit. All the bang of a nuke without the radiation, and the added bonus that the strike can be blamed on an asteroid if need be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 July, 2016, 10:53:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 July, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
Nukes are out of date, of course. The latest is kinetic weapons - shaped tungsten rods more or less dropped from orbit. All the bang of a nuke without the radiation, and the added bonus that the strike can be blamed on an asteroid if need be.

Except that kinetic harpoons currently have to be hefted to orbit - and woukd have an explosive yield not that much greater than the equivalent mass of TNT. Since the cost to orbit is in and around $5K per kilo, an Hiroshima-equivalent 15 kiloton explosion would cost $75,000,000,000 per projectile -not even counting the support infrastructure or the difficulty of getting a 15,000 tonne rod (or more plausibly 1000×15 tonne rods) to orbit. So until we follow Heinlein's lead and start making them on the moon or further out, conventional explosives and nukes still hold most of the cards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 July, 2016, 11:08:42 PM
"Nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to make sure."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 20 July, 2016, 11:36:12 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 July, 2016, 09:18:00 PM
Of course, there's a possibility that one or two might get through, but this is fucking Russia we're talking about. Have you seen how those guys go to war? You think they're not OK with a little retaliatory damage on their side?
"The people? What have they got to do with it?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2016, 08:17:51 AM
Unfortunately, DARPA have access to more scientists and are far more devious than Heinlen. They figured out how to pack smallish pellets into ceramic (amongst other things) shells in such a way as to greatly reduce weight whilst maintaining, and in some configurations even increasing kinetic energy release. They even addressed the question of impact or airburst - the former being good for penetration and the latter for widespread surface destruction. Further, with a hypersonic bomber flying the correct path, these things don't even need to be fired from orbit.

I don't like these things any more than I do nukes, railguns or drones. Well, that's not entirely true - these technologies could be put to good use as parts of a planetary asteroid defence network, for instance. But, leave these technologies in the hands of "government" and they'll turn them into weapons to defend their own positions and not tools for the betterment of the whole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 July, 2016, 08:28:59 AM
Sharky just went full tin foil hat. XD
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 21 July, 2016, 09:13:16 AM
If current technology keeps expanding at the same rate we will have in less than a century AI Computing systems, bio weapons and Nano technology. Any of these are dangerous alone but together they are potentially devastating for the human species. Nuclear weapons though horrific tend to be air burst that flatten cities, Military communications centers and people. Tens to hundreds of millions will die, millions more afterwards of radiation from the inevitable ground strikes but it's not species wipe out. Bio weapons and Nano tech however are much more insidious since you'll never see them coming till it's too late. Genocide by test tube will be available to just about any government, state sponsored terrorist groups and even criminal gangs, such are the profits criminality can generate today and in the future. You know what I'm trying to say here...

WE NEED JUDGE DREDD! ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 July, 2016, 09:46:30 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 20 July, 2016, 10:53:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 July, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
Nukes are out of date, of course. The latest is kinetic weapons - shaped tungsten rods more or less dropped from orbit. All the bang of a nuke without the radiation, and the added bonus that the strike can be blamed on an asteroid if need be.

Except that kinetic harpoons currently have to be hefted to orbit - and woukd have an explosive yield not that much greater than the equivalent mass of TNT. Since the cost to orbit is in and around $5K per kilo, an Hiroshima-equivalent 15 kiloton explosion would cost $75,000,000,000 per projectile -not even counting the support infrastructure or the difficulty of getting a 15,000 tonne rod (or more plausibly 1000×15 tonne rods) to orbit. So until we follow Heinlein's lead and start making them on the moon or further out, conventional explosives and nukes still hold most of the cards. I

The 'rods from God' idea just doesn't stand up.  Atmospheric re-entry might burn them up too much, causing them to go wildly off-target.  You could fit them with retro-engines to slow them down and guidance systems to keep them accurate....by which point you've basically turned them into guided missiles, which pretty much negates the idea of them.

As for the fairly idiotic idea that you can blame the destruction on an asteroid strike.  Assuming the highly unlikely proposition that no-one knows you've got this technology or has noticed you putting it into orbit, you might get away with it once, but, if 'asteroids' keep on landing on top of people you want dead, I think everyone's going to figure out the truth quite quickly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 July, 2016, 12:31:02 PM
Ah yes, privately held nuclear weapons, for the 'benefit of the whole'.  I know I'll feel much safer when unregulated multinational corporations are the sole arbiters of who lives and dies.

WMDs in all types are an outdated and unnecessary relic of the past.  There is literally no possible scenario where vaporizing an entire city is an acceptable response.  Small scale, targeted weapons have a far greater potential for self-defence.  Unfortunately, they have the downside of making our leaders feel less important. 

Contact your mp and ask them how many innocents killed in a nuclear fire would be too many.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 July, 2016, 12:46:28 PM
To quote an observation I saw today:  we're told that possessing WMDs deters enemies from attacking us.  We attacked Iraq because we were told they had WMDs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 July, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 21 July, 2016, 12:31:02 PM
Contact your mp and ask them how many innocents killed in a nuclear fire would be too many.
I think I know the answer my MP would give already (in the last year he's become famous nationally and internationally and bears a resemblance to Ben Obi Wan Kenobi).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 21 July, 2016, 01:35:57 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 July, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 21 July, 2016, 12:31:02 PM
Contact your mp and ask them how many innocents killed in a nuclear fire would be too many.
I think I know the answer my MP would give already (in the last year he's become famous nationally and internationally and bears a resemblance to Ben Obi Wan Kenobi).

Well, when asked if she was prepared to authorize the killing of "a hundred thousand innocent men, women and children", Theresa May answered yes, so there's little doubt what she wrote in her letter of last resort.

What kind of a sociopath can calmly answer yes to that question?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 July, 2016, 01:45:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2016, 08:17:51 AM
...in some configurations even increasing kinetic energy release.

Increase kinetic energy how? Will always be same as / less than potential energy. You have to input kinetic energy to achieve desired orbit (stored potential energy) then get whatever hasn't been lost to friction/heat back when you drop it some poor bastard. Always less than you put in: which is where nukes break the rules. Otherwise we could use this 'kinetic release' tecnhique to accelerate our space probes to near-light simply by repeatedly bouncing them around the solar system, as opposed to the meticulously calculated gravity-assist slingshots we have to do now.  Anyway, citation needed!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 21 July, 2016, 02:05:20 PM
Let's bomb Russia.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BqXC7Q-IUAATTf5.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 July, 2016, 05:20:41 PM
Interesting little release from the national archives today...apparently the Thatchers considered suing the BBC because they didn't like a short story which was read out on air.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36847893 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36847893)

For the lazy, and because anything that questions the wisdom of political icons should be repeated at every occasion...

[spoiler] Ingenious: individual choice must be paramount. With growing confidence she legalised hard drugs. Prices fell sharply. Legitimate outlets replaced bankrupt drug syndicates. Crime figures plunged. Crematorium shares surged. City populations thinned as the weak spirited succumbed. Unemployment vanished. Only the worthiest survived. Nobody could complain. The unfit died of freedom.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 July, 2016, 10:19:28 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 21 July, 2016, 01:45:53 PM
Will always be same as / less than potential energy.

FTFY. You forgot the second law or thermodynamics. Entropy and that.  For shame Tordelback, for shame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 July, 2016, 10:25:52 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 July, 2016, 10:19:28 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 21 July, 2016, 01:45:53 PM
Will always be same as / less than potential energy.

FTFY. You forgot the second law or thermodynamics. Entropy and that.  For shame Tordelback, for shame.

Orry didn't read the rest of your post. Carry on, nothing to see here...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 21 July, 2016, 10:34:26 PM
Last time you'll take a pop at our Tordel!! Z  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 21 July, 2016, 10:45:38 PM
Bottled TordelPop. "I'd buy that for that for a dollar (£0.76)!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2016, 01:02:39 PM
Apologies - "increasing" was the wrong word, I should have written "maximising." It's something to do with the separate parts of tungsten within the ceramic shell hitting each other on impact.

I'm looking for a citation but I read about this yonks ago and can't remember where. Maybe I dreamed it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: James Dilworth on 22 July, 2016, 03:38:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 July, 2016, 01:02:39 PMMaybe I dreamed it...

(http://i.imgur.com/xrWITQB.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 25 July, 2016, 06:35:02 PM
Frankie Boyle discusses Theresa May.

(http://i.imgur.com/Y7ZZ7Ir.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 July, 2016, 01:09:41 AM
Anyone familiar with King of the Hill will enjoy this post that recently surfaced:

QuoteHank: "Yep."

Bill: "Yup."

Boomhauer: "Mmmhmm."

Dale (Wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat): "Gentlemen, I would like to cordially invite you to my post-Election, post-Apocalypse barbecue in November. I call it the Post-Electolypse." (Dale hands paper invitations to the others.)

Hank: "Okay Dale, I'll bite. What are you up to this time?"

Dale: "Me? Nothing. Donald Trump? EVERYTHING. He's gonna win this election in a landslide, and my vote will be but a drop in the coming storm."

Bill: "What does that have to do with the end of the world? He keeps saying he's gonna make America great again."

Dale: "Only to the fat, balding, untrained eye. But to the keen observer, it's obvious that Trump is planning to take America down from the inside. He's already taken down the Republican party and network TV. Now, he's after bigger game."

Hank: "Ugh. 'Make America Great Again'? America is already great. She doesn't need jackasses like Donald Trump dressing her up and parading her around like she's, well... I guess there's no polite way to say this... a marketing gimmick."

Dale: "You just don't get his strategy, Hank. He's a master manipulator, playing chess in seven dimensions. Most politicians only play chess in four dimensions, five at most. I've run simulations of every possible outcome of this election in my mind, and do you know how many he's won? Most of them."

Bill: "But wait a second. If Donald Trump is such a master at manipulating people, why don't I want to vote for him? I'm just the kind of easy mark politicians are looking for. I mean, you know how easily persuaded I am."

Dale: "Pfft. You wish, Bill."

Bill: "Oh. Okay."

Dale: "Trump's looking for strong alpha males, the type who can take leadership in the smouldering ruins of our former civilization. You know what alpha males call other, lesser males? 'Cucks', short for 'cuck-OLDs'. Definition: A husband whose wife cheats on him. (Chuckle) Now THAT'S a label that stings like no other."

(Hank, Bill and Boomhauer shift uncomfortably.)

Hank: (Nervously trying to change the subject) "So, uh, Bill, what have you been up to lately? Shave any interesting, uh, heads?"

Bill: "I've been following the Clinton campaign. I think it's high time we had a lady president. I mean, it is 2015..."

Hank: "It's 2016, Bill. It's been 2016 for months now."

Bill: "(Pauses while staring into space.) I missed my own birthday."

Hank: "I don't know how I feel about a woman president. I mean, a president needs to have a certain amount of upper-body strength. If Air Force One crashes, who's going to heroically pull the pilot out of the burning wreckage?"

Dale: "Hillary couldn't even keep Bill under control. How d'you expect her to run a country?"

Bill: "Y'know, I'd never cheat on a woman like Hillary. I'd like to think that under that tough exterior, she's probably warm, and soft, and..."

Hank: "Bill, you can't pick a president based on how, uh, handsome they are. Elections aren't supposed to be about popularity, or 'strategies', or who can come up with the best insult. I mean, sure, Ronnie Reagan got in a few jabs at the Democrats, but when push came to shove, he was a president EVERYONE could depend on. It used to be that a man could vote based on the candidate's character and their stances on the issues. But these days, everything's so gat dang crazy, I just don't know anymore."

(Pause)

Boomhauer: "Itellyouwhatman, dangol' 1776, themfoundingfathersgotthatdangol' WeThePeoplewiththemdangol' checksandbalances, man. Thempoliticians'llcomeandgo, man, longaswegotthedangol' ConstitutionandtheBillofRights, that'swhatAmerica'sallabout, man. It'slikethatdangol' BenFranklinsaid, 'Wegotadangol'republicifyoucankeepit', man."

Hank: "(Sigh) Boomhauer, as usual, you always know just what to say."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 30 July, 2016, 06:44:28 PM
Whats the betting if Corbyn gets replaced there will be no call for Blair to be brought before the House of Commons to explain himself. I worry for democracy in this country not a fag packet between the 3 main UK parties anymore. At least Corbyn offers something different.
Cant believe how media didn't make more of Cameron's apathetic response to Chilcott.
Then he again he the self proclaimed 'Heir to Blair' and the majority of the Tories were as foolhardy over Iraq as Blair and Co.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2016, 07:40:51 PM
Someone pointed out that more people turned up to help set up for Corbyn's engagement in Leeds than actually turned up to Owen Smith's rally in Liverpool.  I suspect this is not going to be a tight result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2016, 07:44:34 PM
And sadly that will be the same come the next General Election, when Corbynladen destroys the Labour party, as he's determined to take it away from the centre ground and those are the voters that he needs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2016, 07:52:43 PM
When Corbyn wins, here's hoping he starts offering some policies with actual details, rather than grudges. We know a lot of what he doesn't want and doesn't like, and what he's opposed to, but too often he's light on details about what he's actually do. That all said, if a GE was called tomorrow, the Tories would likely increase their majority by at least 30 seats; and Labour across the board remains arrogant enough to think it can somehow win the UK back alone, despite Scotland being lost, Wales being a scrap with PC, and the LDs and Greens taking up to 15% of the vote away from Labour across England. If only there was some way of, I dunno, unifying with some kind of pact!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 30 July, 2016, 07:56:46 PM
I do agree With you Commando Forces. Whilst i do like Corbyn and think he a decent man, I dont think he ever be elected.
Personally I blame Blair/Campbell for wrecking Labour Party with spin and their toxic legacy. I honestly believe in years to come when more dirt comes out about Blair's time in Number 10 he will undoubtedly be viewed as the most corrupt Prime Minister this country ever elected. Without even taking Iraq/Afghanistan into the question.
That man outtorried the Tories with some of his policies/sleaze
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2016, 08:00:54 PM
The depressing thing is that the 'centre ground' has shifted so far right in the past two decades that even moderate socialism is now branded as extreme. Even the notion of renationalising the trains — something that 50% of Tory voters agree on when asked — was in Labour's 2015 manifesto considered a bit too radical, so they fudged the proposals. (And God forbid anyone consider things like an actual living wage or something like the citizens wage proposed by the Greens — that's apparently outright madness, for... reasons.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2016, 08:13:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2016, 07:44:34 PM
And sadly that will be the same come the next General Election, when Corbynladen destroys the Labour party, as he's determined to take it away from the centre ground and those are the voters that he needs.

It's easy to claim that the electorate is right-leaning when their only choice is one of two right-leaning parties, but you'd still have to explain why the Blairites have lurched completely to the left in the last two weeks, why Theresa May's first speech to the country dangled the "left-leaning" manifesto that everyone says lost Ed Miliband the 2015 election, and how the SNP took Scotland on a largely left platform.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 July, 2016, 10:43:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2016, 08:13:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2016, 07:44:34 PM
he's determined to take it away from the centre ground and those are the voters that he needs.

It's easy to claim that the electorate is right-leaning

Do you see what you did there, Pro?

It's bizarre that neither Tories nor Labour look likely to go into the next election proposing any serious kind of electoral reform.

The only people who can't see the Labour party will never win a majority again are currently running the Labour party, but the Tories are headed down the same road.

If the twattery of Brexit has proven anything, it's that the people who actually turn out at elections can't really be accommodated under the broad definitions of left or right anymore.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2016, 11:29:41 PM
The Tories are fine. No problems for them winning a majority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 July, 2016, 11:54:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2016, 11:29:41 PM
The Tories are fine. No problems for them winning a majority.

Except for the last election, when they had a majority of just 12 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=45&v=miGUnKWcYeo), And the election before that, when they couldn't win a majority. And the three elections before that, when they couldn't win a majority.

Apart from that, they're fine.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 July, 2016, 12:02:29 AM
I am in two minds about the Tories' chances in a general election: right now they have a very good chance of winning, but the further away it happens from right now, the more chance for something to go seriously tits-up for which they can't pass the buck.  Brexit currently looks pretty harmless, its after-effects easy to brush off as a temporary blip, but once Austerity MK2 starts kicking in there's going to be a lot of pissed-off people out there blaming the Tories alone for their misfortunes.

Quote from: Butch on 30 July, 2016, 10:43:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2016, 08:13:22 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 30 July, 2016, 07:44:34 PM
he's determined to take it away from the centre ground and those are the voters that he needs.

It's easy to claim that the electorate is right-leaning

Do you see what you did there, Pro?

I do.  I should have made it clear I was continuing IP's point about the right being rebranded as center ground by mainstream politicians and the media - New Labour are neither centrist nor moderate.

QuoteThe only people who can't see the Labour party will never win a majority again are currently running the Labour party, but the Tories are headed down the same road.

Clive Lewis' recent comments made it clear that Labour are aware they need to form some sort of coalition with other progressive parties, though he didn't mention the recent voting boundary changes making it a necessity, he seemed to focus more on the fact that the party held more common ground with Caroline Lucas than with Hillary Benn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 31 July, 2016, 12:22:51 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 July, 2016, 12:02:29 AM
I am in two minds about the Tories' chances in a general election: right now they have a very good chance of winning, but the further away it happens from right now, the more chance for something to go seriously tits-up

Yeah, May won't fuck anything up, but events (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3577416/As-Macmillan-never-said-thats-enough-quotations.html) ... Political parties never really win elections, they're just waiting for the electorate to feel bad enough about the incumbents they decide they might as well give the other lot a go.

Everyone who's just spent 25 quid to decide which idea vacuum leads them into the 2020 election could have spent it on quinoa instead, for all the difference it will make.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 July, 2016, 07:47:48 AM
The biggest danger to the Prime Minister are the 120-plus Tory MPs who voted for Brexit.  If she doesn't deliver that, those 120-plus could make the country ungovernable.  There was an example of what they could do when they stopped Osbourne's proposed so-called emergency budget in its tracks.  I'm certainly not taking any more notice of opinion polls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 July, 2016, 08:43:43 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 30 July, 2016, 07:56:46 PM
Personally I blame Blair/Campbell for wrecking Labour Party with spin and their toxic legacy. I honestly believe in years to come when more dirt comes out about Blair's time in Number 10 he will undoubtedly be viewed as the most corrupt Prime Minister this country ever elected. Without even taking Iraq/Afghanistan into the question.

For me this was the reason I didn't vote labour for the best part of a decade.  New Labour made an insane amount of mistakes, many of which will take decades to undo / run out.  A recent conversation with a young colleague (in their twenties) brought home the truth of what you are talking about though.  A lot of us are part of the generation that grew up in Thatcher's Britain and saw some of the worst the Tories are capable of.  The same is true now of his generation.

They grew up under a Labour government that appeared beholden to neoliberalism, to the city of London, to power for it's own sake.  The drippings of a complicated and often incompetent tax credit system to subsidise a low wage economy didn't help.  They watched as the financial services industry was allowed to run rampant and un checked, once again causing international damage.  Granted the Americans bear the largest blame here but the British banking system didn't help matters.  They believed the lie that labour mismanagement of the economy is the reason for Austerity Britain because it fits with their experience. 

The same dissembling that brought us Brexit (the careful positioning of complex statements with simplistic soundbites) brought the Tories back into power and then decimated the liberals who foolishly believed that they could do a deal with the devil and escape unchecked.  His generation has now unfortunately been convinced of the truth of the situation in the same way that ours have been convinced of the truth of ours in the nineties after 18 years of Tory Britain.

The only decent thing that has come out of the post Brexit Labour coup is a recognition that they need to think a bit more carefully about who they front as leader.  All three (before Eagle dropped out) have at least made the pretence of appealing to the social democratic tendency of the membership.  Whether Paratrooper Smith truly believes it remains to be seen.  Having listened to a lot of what he has said over the years I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt although his voting record doesn't always help him.  Corbyn has the right instincts but his leadership skills leave an insane amount to be desired for my money. 

The party membership need to reflect on the fact that the PLP need a leader that they can form around but at the same time the PLP also need to reflect on the fact that they need a leader that is representative of the membership, as to be honest they should be as well.  This disconnect is going to be the greatest challenge to the labour party over the next few years.  At the same time, as you say, they need to reflect on the damage of Blair's legacy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 July, 2016, 10:54:34 AM
Quote from: Butch on 30 July, 2016, 11:54:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2016, 11:29:41 PM
The Tories are fine. No problems for them winning a majority.

Except for the last election, when they had a majority of just 12 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=45&v=miGUnKWcYeo), And the election before that, when they couldn't win a majority. And the three elections before that, when they couldn't win a majority.

Apart from that, they're fine.
Last I saw, it's 2016, not 2015, 2010 or 1997. Labour is in meltdown. The LDs have collapsed. Scotland is basically just SNP. As things are NOW, the Tories are fine, as they are for the foreseeable, especially if the boundary changes happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 July, 2016, 11:18:34 AM
"He felt as though he were wandering in the forests of the sea bottom, lost in a monstrous world where he himself was the monster. He was alone. The past was dead, the future was unimaginable"

   George Orwell, 1984
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 July, 2016, 01:37:18 PM
I still hold out hope that Trump will kill us all before things take a turn for the worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 04 August, 2016, 08:17:15 PM
Bloody optimist Bear with your rose tinted glasses. I for one hope for a murderous law enforcer from another universe to appear and end it all for us.

And his unpleasant chums.

Here's hoping!




(And they make a Dredd 2)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 August, 2016, 11:00:57 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 July, 2016, 08:43:43 AM
Having listened to a lot of what he has said over the years I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt although his voting record doesn't always help him.  Corbyn has the right instincts but his leadership skills leave an insane amount to be desired for my money. 

Agreed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 August, 2016, 08:52:22 PM

(http://www.thepoke.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CpqmJFvWEAA1fyy.jpg)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 August, 2016, 09:32:15 PM
 :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 13 August, 2016, 07:31:54 AM
Quote from: Butch on 12 August, 2016, 08:52:22 PM

(http://www.thepoke.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CpqmJFvWEAA1fyy.jpg)

Manuel looks good for his age. Is Fawlty Towers returning to the screen?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 13 August, 2016, 01:27:43 PM
Preparing early for the evil moustache twiddling when article 50 is activated.

"I've doomed you all...muwhahaha!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2016, 12:52:27 AM
It is a terrible thing to live in awe of your own government; to pay taxes for fear of what it'll do to you if you don't, to regard its enforcers as beasts, to believe its commands are laws and to live in terror of upsetting it.

But it's infinitely worse to see it for what it really is.

Bloody whisky, making me all maudlin. They should ban the stuff. Um...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 August, 2016, 12:49:01 PM
I don't fear paying taxes, I see them as a necessary system for quick and effective health care, easy access to education for young 'uns, and vital investments in fire and police services, which we all use at some point in our lives. Would you rather have the shocking and extortionate system America has? $30,000 or more for basic surgery, even more for "none essential" surgery, all too often used to discriminate against those most in need of it?

I don't fear our government, they're by and large a bunch of numbskulls no more fearful than a spider. Any fear you may have you've fabricated yourself to justify your contrarian views.

And I most certainly do not fear the police. Your own personal experiences where as a result of you not complying to the terms and conditions of living in a council property (it was, I presume, a council house). You where in the wrong. Get over it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 August, 2016, 02:19:22 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 14 August, 2016, 12:49:01 PMAnd I most certainly do not fear the police.

Out of curiosity, are you a white guy?  I grew up Catholic in Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2016, 02:40:52 PM
It's not about what the taxes are for. I do not have the right to demand money from you, to spend as I see fit, and steal your stuff or throw you in a cage if you refuse. Nor do you have the right to do the same to me. In fact, I'd bet that the thought of you doing such a thing to me, or to your neighbours, or to anyone, is as repellent to you as it is to me. I believe most people hold a similar attitude. Why, then, do people allow other people to act like monsters for them? People with no more rights than themselves? If either of us wants something from the other, we have the right to ask and nothing more.

As to my interaction with the council, my crime was in having no regular job and no money at that time - to not want to claim "benefits" because I think that's just as bad as demanding money from my neighbours to pay my way, or employing a thug to do it for me. I refused to pay nothing, I asked - indeed begged - to negotiate a settlement with it. It responded by lying, threatening, bullying and ultimately with physical violence and theft.

Yes, I was wrong. Wrong to expect human beings like myself, with no more or fewer rights and responsibilities than you or I have, to act lawfully and with humanity.

I don't fear the government any more. To do so would be as insane as fearing unicorns. I don't kneel before unicorns either. If a person wants to believe in unicorns then that's fine, great, knock yourselves out. Just don't demand my belief as well, don't demand my money to buy them straw, stables and horn polish or penalise me for being a unicorn-denier. Why should I suffer for their beliefs? I don't expect them to suffer for mine.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 August, 2016, 04:44:55 PM
You were wrong to make those cops break into your house despite that being illegal, Sharky.  You were wrong to make them hide evidence and lie in court.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2016, 04:52:30 PM
Heh. I'm such a bad man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 August, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
Hawk v Shark: Whoever wins we all end up covered in spume and dander...

Pretty sure I saw a trailer for this on Discovery. Equally sure Hawkmumbler got out of bed on the wrong side, probably the same side that Shark got out of contemporary society...

You're both daft as feck, but we love you all the same. Kiss and make up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2016, 06:40:26 PM
Oops - didn't mean to come across as confrontational but I guess I was a bit intense.  Sorry, Hawkie. Politics, eh? Who'd have thought it could be such a divisive subject?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 14 August, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 14 August, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
spume

Giggle
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 14 August, 2016, 10:06:20 PM
Combine forces

(http://www.daxx-web.de/bilder/shawkbeauty2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2016, 01:24:35 PM
Quote from: Colin_YNWA on 14 August, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 14 August, 2016, 06:16:55 PM
spume

Giggle
Settle down at the back!

And aye, reading back over that last post of mine I haven't a clue why I was being such a cunt, Sharky! I knew full well the circumstances of your eviction and sympathized as the time, still do. Haven't a clue what I was on yesterday so apologies due I believe.  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2016, 03:25:35 PM
Thank grud for the Art Comp thread, or I wouldn't know if I was online at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2016, 04:36:25 PM
No harm, no foul, Hawkie. Let's show that nasty art thread how to behave with civility and decorum :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2016, 05:06:57 PM
Kind of surprised Tom Watson/The Guardian's recent red scare stories about Trotskyist spies infiltrating UK politics have gone unnoticed by the political thread.  I would have thought this kind of batshit tinfoil hattery would have been right up our street.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 16 August, 2016, 08:15:05 PM
Evening Comrade Bear. No need to sweat it, JC 's got it in the bag (sitting in an over crowded train with his fellow travellers (no pun) didn't hurt). The Guardian has turned into a 'lick spittle' mouth piece for the entrenched establishment on this issue....shame, shame.
Long live the ideals and aims of international Trotskyism.
Comrade Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2016, 08:38:02 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/dans_zpsuoyhfrvk.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2016, 10:03:25 PM
That really is a worrying turn of events. This kind of information undermines just about everything all right-minded people everywhere believe in - the whole foundation of the modern intellectual, moral and financial matrix could crumble to dust as a result. I for one find it intensely worrying and fear for the future of our independence and sanity to discover that you read the Guardian...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2016, 10:53:15 PM
I thought the whole point of the Trots was that they infest every political or public body, gaining influence and power, and generally biding their time. I'd be very surprised if the Labour party doesn't have the usual small allowance, but the idea that this is any different from any other interest group or low-profile lobby in politics is what fascinates me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2016, 10:56:29 PM
Wasn't this article from The Guardian the entire plot to Heil Ceaser!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 17 August, 2016, 10:18:24 AM
in other news radical cleric clam chowdery has been got...and about bleeding time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2016, 10:48:31 AM
And yet Tony Blair, who, based on a harvest of lies, invited support for attacking a whole nation in parliament and all over the media, remains free.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 August, 2016, 10:38:20 AM
Wow!  This wasn't supposed to happen!  Retail sales up almost 6% year on year, unemployment claim count down in July, cheaper mortgages for millions of people, Stock Market doing well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 10:44:35 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2016, 10:48:31 AM
And yet Tony Blair, who, based on a harvest of lies, invited support for attacking a whole nation in parliament and all over the media, remains free.

patience my young(ish) padawan
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 August, 2016, 11:49:17 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 August, 2016, 10:38:20 AM
Wow!  This wasn't supposed to happen!  Retail sales up almost 6% year on year, unemployment claim count down in July, cheaper mortgages for millions of people, Stock Market doing well.
Retail sales up from lows and still not great. Companies noting forward forecasting remains horrific, especially if we end up without single market access. Unemployment claims now harder, and more people forced into zero-hours or unsustainable freelance. Mortgage costs not being passed on by all banks, and any savings offset by rising fuel, food and consumables prices. Sterling still in the crapper. And this is still not a response to leaving, just the UK's intention to.

So counting chickens seems premature. If it all works out, great. But right now, those sorting the exit doesn't even know what the hell they want, and nor, seemingly, do a great many people who voted out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 August, 2016, 12:56:58 PM
Why stop there at listing the UK's many growth areas since Brexit was announced? Islamophobia is also at an all-time high, and racist attacks are increasing in frequency.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 August, 2016, 01:04:59 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 August, 2016, 12:56:58 PM
Why stop there at listing the UK's many growth areas since Brexit was announced? Islamophobia is also at an all-time high, and racist attacks are increasing in frequency.
Oh, but we don't want to make the UK look bad, do we?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 August, 2016, 01:07:52 PM
Spinning faster than the Earth's orbit there.

This isn't strictly political but in relation to some recent drama - Groups of nice people will always come off worse in any interaction with a minority of nastiness. When the nice people stand together and ever-so-gently stand against nastiness, they'll feel bad because they ganged up on someone.

It occurred to me that in more complicated ways this is one of the many reasons why politics is such a pain. Civility and kindness protect those who abuse it most.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 August, 2016, 01:20:57 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 18 August, 2016, 01:04:59 PM
Oh, but we don't want to make the UK look bad, do we?!
When there are any downsides to the economy, it's baffling that Brexit voters seem to think this is down to Remainers 'talking down' the UK. Nothing to do with spooked markets, the UK being kicked out of science projects, the film and TV industry suddenly finding itself in some pretty serious shit, exporters freaking out about the prospect of cargo inspections when sending anything outside of the UK.

But people also forget the shit hasn't hit the fan. It's been fired, but it's now soaring across the air in slow motion. It would be possible to catch before the worst happens, but I doubt there's the political will. Plus there are at least a chunk of 17 million people out there who'd be furious if we didn't quit the EU after all — although I suspect at least as many will fume at whatever the end result happens to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 August, 2016, 02:02:41 PM
When the hell has 'Talking down' ever amounted to anything other than injuring the pride of the overly sensitive.

And plenty are already fuming at the minor issues experienced so far. Local comic shop has to raise its prices because pound has dropped 15c against the dollar. Local brexiteer is very annoyed he has to pay more now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 02:42:03 PM
You lot should be listening to 'Wake up to Money' each working day at 05:15 on Radio 5 Live. That'll give you a more factual account of what's going on in just 45 minutes, each day.

When the Brexit vote came in certain people were quick to post up how the stock markets had gone down, along with the pound. The 100 bounced back straight away, the 250 is back above pre-brexit levels as well. The Pound hasn't recovered but it will and having it at the current value is good for other reasons, as you well know.

If you truly think that the government aren't doing their job and sorting out what is going to happen next then keep thinking that.

From what I have heard on the radio, seen on the TV etc... they have already started sorting trade agreements out with Australia, New Zealand, Canada, USA, India, Pakistan, The Commonwealth, etc.... Yes it's a long process but not as long as what some people negatively hope.

Remember when Obama said we would be back of the queue for trade, that changed overnight after the vote.
Remember when GlaxoSmithKline said they would not be good for them if the vote went leave, well they changed their tune overnight as well and put in a 275 million investment after the vote.
The German car manufacturers have warned Merkel of messing up their sales to the UK.
The French farmers are along the same lines with their government.

I see the government have said that they will back the money to the sciences, that they had from the EU.

There are good and bad things about the EU and Brexit and I'm a positive person and see a bright future for all in the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 August, 2016, 02:51:11 PM
Positivity is all well and good but can it save the NHS from overwhelming privatization should May agree to sign TTIP (which she almost certainly will)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 02:58:45 PM
Have you got proof that she will do that, or are you just guessing?

I have to say that if the NHS is this shining beacon that says to the world, this is the best way to do it. Then why is no other country using the same model.

There are parts of the NHS that need to be privatised as far as I'm concerned. Procurement for one, as that's a bloody joke.

Front line staff, equipment and infrastructure should be heavily invested in and not managers and the non-job lot with their insane pay-packets and lovely pensions. The NHS needs to be looked at. I'm sure you saw the other day how much was wasted on prescriptions for paracetamol. That's the sort of thing that is a joke.

Yes the NHS is brilliant but not at everything, so new thinking needs to be brought in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 August, 2016, 03:17:24 PM
I am a very positive person - I was very positive about the EU and the benefits it has brought to not just my life but millions of others.

That New Thinking has been around for a while. Look how well it sorted out the trains! Certainly put paid to high wages and fat pensions and cut out managers...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 03:25:45 PM
There you go, the EU is great. It's so great that borders and fences are going up all over the continent. Places are banning the burka but not here in dear old Blighty. It's so great that Germany has just built a load of COAL powered power stations (Climate change anyone).

As far as I'm concerned the EU can't fall apart quick enough. Replace it with what it was supposed to be in the first place and then everyone will be happy, apart form the powerful people!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 04:00:01 PM
i'm with block positive burdis...as for the nhs thing that has been on the cards for years only they won't admit it even when I was at a conference where residential support workers were being told they were being moved to a ...private company naturally we questioned the 100k a year "managers" but blow me if they wouldn't do well as politicians by not answering the question.  I reckon most of the vitriol from Europe is that we're taking money out of their pockets and they have no real concern for us or our wellbeing in the happy club of the eu or did they bail us out of debt the last couple of recessions? or help by sending personell to the recent floods? etc

   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 04:27:17 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 04:00:01 PM
or help by sending personell to the recent floods? etc

You know there were EU funds specifically available for flood relief that Cameron pointedly refused to claim, right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 06:23:57 PM
 I didn't mention funds, I thought more actual boots on the ground would've been more helpful
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 August, 2016, 06:29:52 PM
But where will these extra boots come from when you've cut back emergency services funding, Grugz?

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 02:58:45 PMI have to say that if the NHS is this shining beacon that says to the world, this is the best way to do it. Then why is no other country using the same model.

What are you talking about, man?  Most countries in the world are actively copying the UK's NHS model: defund it and run it into the ground and then announce "SEE?  SEE?  Free medicine doesn't work!  Only paid healthcare can fix this problem!"

Even in the sorry state the current government have reduced it to, the NHS remains the world's highest-rated healthcare provider by standards of care.  Privitisation will not fix it, it will make it worse like it has every other public service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 06:45:03 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 06:23:57 PM
I didn't mention funds, I thought more actual boots on the ground would've been more helpful

Whose boots? How would that have been helpful? We have an army that steps in when the emergency services are strained... what personnel could the EU have sent that would have assisted?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 06:50:00 PM
Excellent answer there, I'm impressed that the world is following our lead!

As for privatisation, it will work in the areas that I have said, mainly procurement. You look at all options that are on the table, rather than just have a closed mind on such things. I'm not for the privatisation of the NHS but the logical parts, where we all know money is wasted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 August, 2016, 06:52:52 PM
I'm currently despairing at the mainstream media's yearly coverage of A Level results.
There seems to be o reason for having A Levels other than to get accepted onto a University course. Many of the courses will take anyone, A Levels or not, through clearing. Many of the courses are absolute crap, purely in place for no other reason than to raise funds, effectively using students as a sacrificial cash cow.
There's a whole generation of young people who are starting their adult lives in debt that they'll never get out of. It's an absolute disgrace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 06:56:03 PM
I see more people than ever are going to university and if I remember correctly. You only start paying the money back if you reach a certain wage threshold and if you never do, you never have to pay it back. Also, after a certain amount of years it's written off. I'm just putting this up for balance, thank you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 07:03:14 PM
balance on the t'internet?  CF's finally lost it!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 07:13:22 PM
Well, I am one of the few Liberal voters left :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 07:37:28 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 07:13:22 PM
Well, I am one of the few Liberal voters left :lol:

  that's fine, some may think i'm a neo-Nazi, moonie blackshirt.with a bunker ...which is a lie, if I had a bunker i'd rent it to sharky
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 August, 2016, 07:49:19 PM
You have to pay it back once you are earning £21000 a year. That's less than the national average wage.

I've no doubt that some people should be educating themselves further and that they should be going to university to do so. I'm not sure 'record numbers' should be doing so and I think that many of the courses are set up almost purely to raise funds (or make profits).
It's scary how, over the last couple of years, the thought of young people staring their working lives £30000 or more in debt has been normalised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 07:51:37 PM
less than half the national wage? when I was working I was on half the half!!! mind you I am an ignorant  black pudding eating northerner
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 07:56:55 PM
I've copied this from Martin Lewis and his superb Money Saving Expert site. This was in the Student Loans Mythbusting article.

Once you leave university, you only repay when you're earning above £1,750 a month (equivalent to £21,000 a year) and then it's fixed at 9% of everything you earn above that. Earnings mean any money from employment or self employment and in some cases earnings from investment and savings.

Even if you've started repaying the loan, but then lose your job or take a pay cut, your repayments drop accordingly. To labour the point somewhat:

If you earn £22,000 in a year, what do you repay?

The answer is £90, as £22,000 is £1,000 above the threshold and 9% of £1,000 is £90.
And if you earn £31,000, what do you repay?

The answer is £900. £31,000 is £10,000 above the threshold and 9% of that is £900.
'How on earth will my child be able to afford to repay these debts if they get a poorly-paying job?'

This panicked question has been thrown at me by many parents – and it's really important to examine it in the light of the required repayments.

Someone on a low wage will be required to repay little or nothing at all. In fact, only higher earners will be shelling out large amounts.

It's important to note that not repaying much because you're just over the threshold isn't being bad. The system is, in reality, a graduate contribution, designed so that, in the main, those who gain the most financially out of university contribute the most.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 18 August, 2016, 07:58:22 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 06:23:57 PM
I didn't mention funds, I thought more actual boots on the ground would've been more helpful

Not so long ago, you were saying we didn't need the EU because we won WW2 and used to have an empire.  Now you're complaining that there weren't any EU 'boots on the ground' to help with flood response.

Which one of these completely contradictory but equally idiotic positions are you sticking with - that we're self sufficient enough to prosper away from the EU, or that we need EU help every time there's heavy rain?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 August, 2016, 08:05:48 PM
Student debt isn't written off, it's sold on to private companies who often change the terms and conditions of the original contract in order to trick debtors into paying back money regardless of how much they earn, or - in the case of some companies like Erudio - they just take money from your account anyway, call it "an honest mistake" and then don't give it back.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 06:50:00 PMAs for privatisation, it will work in the areas that I have said, mainly procurement. You look at all options that are on the table, rather than just have a closed mind on such things. I'm not for the privatisation of the NHS but the logical parts, where we all know money is wasted.

Money certainly won't be wasted once procurement is operated on the basis of contracting to the lowest bidder.  That's always ended up in a more efficient and cost-effective workplace with the most capable staff who absolutely want to be there, and absolutely never ended up a complete shambles that has to be bailed out with an influx of public funding to prop up the profit margins of private industry.  What's that?  What is this "public transport" you speak of I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALALA
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 August, 2016, 08:09:02 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 18 August, 2016, 07:56:55 PM
I've copied this from Martin Lewis and his superb Money Saving Expert site. This was in the Student Loans Mythbusting article.

Once you leave university, you only repay when you're earning above £1,750 a month (equivalent to £21,000 a year) and then it's fixed at 9% of everything you earn above that. Earnings mean any money from employment or self employment and in some cases earnings from investment and savings.

Even if you've started repaying the loan, but then lose your job or take a pay cut, your repayments drop accordingly. To labour the point somewhat:

If you earn £22,000 in a year, what do you repay?

The answer is £90, as £22,000 is £1,000 above the threshold and 9% of £1,000 is £90.
And if you earn £31,000, what do you repay?

The answer is £900. £31,000 is £10,000 above the threshold and 9% of that is £900.
'How on earth will my child be able to afford to repay these debts if they get a poorly-paying job?'

This panicked question has been thrown at me by many parents – and it's really important to examine it in the light of the required repayments.

Someone on a low wage will be required to repay little or nothing at all. In fact, only higher earners will be shelling out large amounts.

It's important to note that not repaying much because you're just over the threshold isn't being bad. The system is, in reality, a graduate contribution, designed so that, in the main, those who gain the most financially out of university contribute the most.

Which is all fine and dandy but it still effects things like mortgages and visa applications. It seems to me that we have far too many young people being shepherded down the A Levels and then University route for no real reason than that no one else knows what to do with all these young people and colleges and universities have money to make. It's even worse when you add academies into the mix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 08:11:35 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 07:51:37 PM
less than half the national wage? when I was working I was on half the half!!! mind you I am an ignorant  black pudding eating northerner

Well, reading clearly isn't one of your strong suits. JamesC said "less than the national average wage", nothing about "half".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:18:10 PM
...and maths isn't yours as half is less whichever way you look at it.

Gordon , with the amount of rain Scotland gets I assumed that was the very reason you want to stay in the eu ,but that was just an example off the top of my head , I wasn't on the phone calling merkel for a U-boat to get mrs higginbottom off the roof of her cottage or anything, you just like to pick nits and call people names which just seems petty and childish .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 08:23:36 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:18:10 PM
...and maths isn't yours as half is less whichever way you look at it.

For fuck's sake: you said JamesC had claimed £21K was less than half the national average wage. Your words are right there in your post, and above them, JamesC's post which demonstrably says nothing of the sort.

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me what 'boots on the ground' the EU could have provided to assist during the floods, and how they would have been helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:28:22 PM
now ,now language! I don't see why I have to explain anything to you. but I will, even if £21000 was the national wage I was still more than half that which is less. it was a throwaway comment dunno why you are insisting on making a deal out of it. you not had your tablets today?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 08:36:41 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:28:22 PM
now ,now language! I don't see why I have to explain anything to you. but I will, even if £21000 was the national wage I was still more than half that which is less. it was a throwaway comment dunno why you are insisting on making a deal out of it. you not had your tablets today?

You claimed another poster had said something they demonstrably hadn't and then acted as if the thing they hadn't said in someway supported your point. That makes you either an idiot or a troll. Or possibly both.

You could have just said "Oh, yeah, I mis-read that" but I know you'd rather pull out your own teeth than lose face to me, so you resort to cheap jibes about mental health.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:45:01 PM
no, I made a comment about the crap wages I was on, I was in no way trying to have a go at james or prove a point or anything like that.

  Lose face? seriously? if you think i'm bothered, scared or whatever of you then you clearly are delusional and what cheap jibes about mental health? if you meant the tablet comment I was actually making a cheap jibe about your blood pressure nurse. I have had and still have enough mental health issues without making jibes about anyones mental health which is why I started the black dog thread but can see the humorous side about myself and have learned to live with and accept and take the piss out of myself . You really do need to calm down and I do have some very strong ones I can recommend..

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 08:50:53 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:45:01 PM
  Lose face? seriously? if you think i'm bothered, scared or whatever of you then you clearly are delusional and what cheap jibes about mental health? if you meant the tablet comment I was actually making a cheap jibe about your blood pressure nurse.

So I'm delusional, but you're not making jibes about mental health? And my blood pressure is funny, is it? Any other medical conditions you want to bring in order to have a humorous pop at me?

Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to tell me what 'boots on the ground' the EU could have provided to assist during the floods, and how they would have been helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 August, 2016, 08:52:10 PM
Playing catch-up, I'm not sure what shows you're listening to, Commando Forces. From what I can tell from legal and political commentators, the government has no plan. The people in charge of Brexit are at odds with each other while simultaneously not making clear what kind of Brexit they want. Davis still doesn't seem to grasp the legal ramifications of trade deals within and outside of the EU. Others intentionally conflate free market ACCESS (which anyone has) with free market MEMBERSHIP.

Trade agreements have started with other countries? Really? I'd love to see citations of that, given that anything remotely productive is impossible until our final relationship with the EU is known, and whether it's possible for the UK outside of the EU to join the WTO. As for Germany, it's not just a garage. On other countries, I hope they can in some way rapidly come to an agreement with the UK, because we're going to need to massively ratchet up trade with non-EU nations to fill the void. (We will then see the relative merits or lack thereof of our economy, which has been heavily geared towards services and finance, both of which are taking and will continue to take a big hit.)

Government backing sciences: nope. Guarantees to back funding until 2020, and then discussions thereafter. Given that the likelihood of the UK leaving the EU before 2020 is low (and before 2019 is practically impossible), that's entirely meaningless. But what I am already hearing from people in business, science, education and media is that the UK is already getting a serious behind-the-scenes kicking.

QuoteAs far as I'm concerned the EU can't fall apart quick enough
Yeah, because that's something that's worked so well in the past.

I have no idea what's coming. I hope it ends well. But there is nothing we've seen so far that suggests this will be the case in the short or medium term, and a lot of damage could be done by the time we clamber up to something approaching the position we're in now. (Also, from a purely personal standpoint, this is a seriously shit time to be part of a mixed nationality family, where you're abruptly in the position of not knowing what the future holds. Will Mrs IP be allowed to stay in the UK? Who fucking knows? I'll be happily making my way to the Irish embassy next month, in the hope of getting the details to acquire an Irish passport, though, so at a least we've a plan B for if things do head into the abyss here regarding rights to reside.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:57:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 08:50:53 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:45:01 PM
 

Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to tell me what 'boots on the ground' the EU could have provided to assist during the floods, and how they would have been helpful.
[/quote

  good for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 August, 2016, 09:01:08 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 18 August, 2016, 08:57:27 PM
good for you.

Right. So, that thing you were complaining that the EU didn't do? You didn't want them to do it anyway. Right. That makes perfect sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 18 August, 2016, 09:23:14 PM
QuoteI'll be happily making my way to the Irish embassy next month, in the hope of getting the details to acquire an Irish passport, though, so at a least we've a plan B for if things do head into the abyss here regarding rights to reside.)

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/passport-office-hiring-hundreds-of-staff-to-deal-with-extra-demand-after-brexit-748450.html (http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/passport-office-hiring-hundreds-of-staff-to-deal-with-extra-demand-after-brexit-748450.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 August, 2016, 09:37:34 PM
Doesn't surprise me. I just count my lucky stars I'm (most likely) eligible. At least my future won't be restricted in terms of freedom of movement within the EU, and nor will my child's (since mini-IP holds a British passport and an EEA one as well).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 August, 2016, 09:39:26 PM
I've been considering applying for an Irish passport, but already having a New Zealand one I still have more options than some.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 August, 2016, 09:56:26 PM
My thinking is simple: whatever shit goes down here, I want the right to live anywhere in the EU/EEA, as I have now, without jumping through hoops. (As a freelancer – assuming that continues – getting a work visa would be complicated.) If we get a fairly hard Brexit and we decide to move back to my wife's country of origin, we can do so if I have an Irish passport, but won't be able to with a British one.

(I suspect this is also something many Leave voters are going to be quite surprised by five-to-ten years down the line. Brits seem to think they should have the right to free movement, but that this should not be reciprocal. I bet plenty of Brexit voters will fume when they realise they cannot easily buy property in and retire to France or Spain, or even that they'll have to languish in the slow queue when holidaying in Europe.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 August, 2016, 11:47:39 PM
Kiwimumbler it is, so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 12:15:22 AM
I'm at work on the phone, so won't be able to answer all the lovely points.

As for the everyone has to leave stuff, that was never on the cards, so all who are legally settled in Europe won't be booted out of any country. I'm sure some extreme UKIP people hoped for that but if I'm correct, it was all about controlled immigration and not a stop to it.

I will be absolutely amazed if the government starts to systematically throw legal residents out.

As for the trade stuff, if you really believe that the government haven't sent their feelers out for when Brexit is triggered, so that the negotiations can begin smoothly, well that's obviously your thinking. That's partly what our embassies do all the time all over the world. The only time it hits the news is when someone like Boris rugby tackles a small child on a trade mission.

As for queuing at airports. I'd class that as a first World minor irritant. Buying a house abroad to retire in, that's why you pay a lawyer to do all the hard work.

I'm sure there were more questions but I'm wanting to chat with the ladies at work now.

Oh, one thing. I'm gonna guess that wanting boots on the ground would mean helping out with manpower. A bit like when the UK send specialist teams abroad to help, if it's required. That's just my take on that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 August, 2016, 04:25:29 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime
link=topic=28209.msg926253#msg926253
date=1471549930

Others intentionally conflate free market ACCESS (which anyone has) with free market MEMBERSHIP.


If everyone has access, what's the point of membership? Membership implies access limited to members only in the same way a members-only club or gym won't allow non-members to wander in off the street.

If it requires membership it's not a free market and if it's a free market it does not require membership.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 07:39:10 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 18 August, 2016, 11:47:39 PM
Kiwimumbler it is, so.
Moamumbler, giant and ungainly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 08:42:47 AM
QuoteAs for the everyone has to leave stuff, that was never on the cards, so all who are legally settled in Europe won't be booted out of any country.

Based on what?  They have not legal right to stay.  Not allowing foreign citizens to live and work in the UK might not be what you had in mind, but it's exactly what you voted for.


Quotewill be absolutely amazed if the government starts to systematically throw legal residents out.

Your right, there's no way the government would deport people allowed in under one rule, just because those rules change.

Quotehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36952652

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 August, 2016, 10:21:39 AM
when all the people who've retired to Spain and France lose their right to free healthcare under the EHIC scheme, I'm sure a lot will come home. So for all those who cited "immigrant burden on the NHS" as a reason for leaving, we'll be swapping (generally) young fit workers with few healthcare needs for returning elderly ex-pats with expensive and complex needs. And we won't be able to hire all the foreign staff to care for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 10:31:21 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 August, 2016, 10:21:39 AM
So for all those who cited "immigrant burden on the NHS" as a reason for leaving, we'll be swapping (generally) young fit workers with few healthcare needs for returning elderly ex-pats with expensive and complex needs. And we won't be able to hire all the foreign staff to care for them.

I've mentioned this before. Several times. Not to mention all those homes they're going to want to live in... because there's no housing crisis in the UK.

Glad the Brexit guys thought all this through. Oh, no, wait, they didn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2016, 10:33:44 AM
QuoteAs for the everyone has to leave stuff, that was never on the cards, so all who are legally settled in Europe won't be booted out of any country. I'm sure some extreme UKIP people hoped for that but if I'm correct, it was all about controlled immigration and not a stop to it.
Given that migration in general won't be heavily affected, Leave voters will be disappointed. (Also, the notion that blocking EU migrants will boost the economy is hilarious, given that Leave leaders are talking about imports from all over, in order to recover numbers required for manual labour. Congrats: you just swapped Polish people willing to work for less for people from further afield willing to work for far less!)

As for residency rights, those expire the second we leave the EU. Bar hand-waving "of course we hope to do a deal" type stuff, there has been precisely nothing from MPs and Brexit leaders about how this will be achieved, and how it will be policed. Are we talking existing residents being fast-tracked to some kind of reside status (which, at the current speed these things take, would require 140 years, without substantial extra investment)? What happens at ports? What will be the cut-off points, in terms of status?

My MP (a Brexit supporter) responded directly to me about this regarding people who have made use of their legal right to reside. That word is very telling. We've lived in the UK since 2004, but making legal use of your rights is a very different thing from just living in a country. It requires employment. My wife spent five years working hard to get from a uni entry course to MA in a subject she wants to start a career in. That doesn't count. We've since had a child, and so she's spent two years looking after mini-IP. That also doesn't count. Her total employment is about four years during this time, which could cause issues with residency according to various documentation we've been looking at. This is the kind of shit that now affects millions of people who never dreamed they might be removed from their home.

And the UK doesn't exactly have a sterling history when it comes to residency. We've seen academics turfed out for no obvious reason; we've seen hardline Tories place absurd demands regarding salary levels, forcing people to otherwise leave. This might not happen with the EU, not least because two million largely elderly Brits would be ejected in response, but 'might not' and even 'probably not' is just not enough for people in this situation.

On trade, of course some discussions will be happening, but nothing more than the basics. You can't get into any depth about this until the final relationship between the UK and EU is sorted. Beyond that, you're talking about a decade for most trade deals of any complexity to be concluded – and that's if you have the expertise (which the UK really doesn't right now). So perhaps by 2030 we will be in the position to create an economic situation that has the potential to equal or surpass our current one. There's no guarantee, however. Many countries are joining – not leaving – trading blocs, because it gives them more power. The UK alone will suddenly find itself in a very different position when going up against the likes of the USA and the Chinese. People who voted out because of TTIP will get a very rude awakening when any USA/UK trade deal happens.

QuoteAs for queuing at airports. I'd class that as a first World minor irritant. Buying a house abroad to retire in, that's why you pay a lawyer to do all the hard work.
I'm not saying these are big things, and the latter is not widespread. The point is that Brits assume they have the right to do these things. I bet even most Leave voters aren't aware of the ramifications. I await Daily Mail fury about the EU horribly 'forcing' Brits to wait in line in the slow queues, and how this is heaping misery on Brits as a nasty response to Brexit (as opposed to us no longer being part of the system that allows freedom of movement). As for lawyers, that won't mean anything for buying overseas – it's money that counts. It'll be little different from moving to the USA and getting the relevant status. If you have several million dollars and can set up a company: green card for you! If not, tough.

(And, yeah, good point about the healthcare side of things, Dandontdare. Yet another pillar of stupid from Brexit that no-one really thought through.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 August, 2016, 11:34:54 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 12:15:22 AM

As for the trade stuff, if you really believe that the government haven't sent their feelers out for when Brexit is triggered, so that the negotiations can begin smoothly, well that's obviously your thinking. That's partly what our embassies do all the time all over the world. The only time it hits the news is when someone like Boris rugby tackles a small child on a trade mission.

My colleague's brother is the UK diplomat for a rather section of central & eastern Europe. I met him last week. His word on Brexit is "No one's got a damned clue". If you really believe that 'sending the feelers out' amounts to a damn thing, well that's obviously your thinking. The naivety of Leave is that other countries have some kind of obligation to give Britain a better deal, which clearly...they don't.

Quote
A bit like when the UK send specialist teams abroad to help, if it's required. That's just my take on that.[/color]

Pretty sure we haven't done that with flooding in France, Germany, etc... like in so many natural disasters (see Canada fires earlier this year) by the time you get 'boots on the ground' it's all over and in any case, the first-world country should really be able to handle it by itself. Certainly the resources are there and adding more doesn't solve the lack of will to get them deployed correctly.

In short if the offer had been made, it would have been refused - and it may well have been made for all we know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2016, 12:32:11 PM
I'm getting a strong "we have no plan but we're British so we can't fail" vibe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2016, 12:58:21 PM
"We're British so those bally foreigns should give us what we want, by jove!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 01:01:42 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2016, 12:58:21 PM
"We're British so those bally foreigns should give us what we want, by jove!"
We had an empire, don't you know!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 August, 2016, 01:27:06 PM
We went through two world wars, we are GREAT Britain!!!

I think we should stop now I've had my chance to be childish and quote my mates single line of logic though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 02:31:15 PM
What a negative lot. It's as if you want the country to fail, while  you're sitting at the bar with your half empty pint glasses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2016, 02:38:17 PM
I don't see anything to be positive about, from the overall economic chances of the UK through to my family's circumstances, which are now hard to predict. And all for what? (Hard to know. Ask 100 Brexit voters what they wanted or expect and you'll get dozens of answers, many of which are incompatible with each other or reality.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 02:57:23 PM
Negative? No, jaded by nationalistic trollop and a general lack of things to be proud of? Yeah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 August, 2016, 03:02:21 PM
Bit hypocritical and lets be honest, meaningless. Leave was nothing but years of negativity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 August, 2016, 04:00:07 PM
I'm with Burdis Block! Cheer the drokk up between you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 August, 2016, 04:29:34 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 01:01:42 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2016, 12:58:21 PM
"We're British so those bally foreigns should give us what we want, by jove!"
We had an empire, don't you know!

Yep!  :-X  (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/18/uncovering-truth-british-empire-caroline-elkins-mau-mau)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 05:24:11 PM
QuoteWhat a negative lot. It's as if you want the country to fail

That'd be funny if it wasn't the entire basis of the leave campaign.

Millions of ordinary people have no idea whether or not they might be deported at any time. The UK government has done nothing to assuage their fears and instead refers to them as "bargaining chips". It's nothing less than shameful. 

But anyone who doesn't want to go along with this self important, uninformed, nationalistic wave just doesnt love old Blighty enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 06:32:51 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 05:24:11 PM
But anyone who doesn't want to go along with this self important, uninformed, nationalistic wave just doesnt love old Blighty enough.

Are you one of them communists Tom Watson is warning us about?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 06:36:06 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 06:32:51 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 05:24:11 PM
But anyone who doesn't want to go along with this self important, uninformed, nationalistic wave just doesnt love old Blighty enough.

Are you one of them communists Tom Watson is warning us about?
The Guardian was right all along!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 07:14:58 PM
QuoteAre you one of them communists Tom Watson is warning us about?

Well, someone must be.  There's no way a bunch of members of the Labour party just want a left-wing leader with left wing policies, who doesn't pander to the 24 hour news cycle.  An evil conspiracy must be underway. 

Corbyn doesn't even know who Ant and Dec are, which is certainly the first quality I look for in a leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 07:23:44 PM
I like Corbyladen, he's a Brexit voter :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 August, 2016, 07:28:22 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 07:14:58 PM
Corbyn doesn't even know who Ant and Dec are...

Probably Trots, hanging out in a foreign jungle carrying out endless trials of suspected media types.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 07:41:44 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 07:23:44 PM
I like Corbyladen, he's a Brexit voter :thumbsup:
Please tell me you used that phrase ironically...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 07:45:14 PM
What! Are you not one of his disciples, as he's all for Brexit and always has been. At least he has that going for him :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 07:49:55 PM
I find it incredibly unpleasent when someone juxtaposes an unpopular politician with an actual terrorist, come mass murder. It's the very disrespectful to the individuals in question, say nothing of the people effected by the comparing person. Corbynladen, Hitllary...urgh.

Please don't do that, CF, your better than that rabble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:05:20 PM
So it's okay for other forum members to call other politicians murderers but not get called out!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 08:07:47 PM
I presume your referring to Blair, who's actions can be directly attributed deaths on insane scale, Corbyn can not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 08:09:14 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:05:20 PM
So it's okay for other forum members to call other politicians murderers but not get called out!

Liberal Democrat, and a Tony Blair fan. The surprises just keep coming...

(And yet, somehow, the suggestion that I have voted Conservative in the past is cause for CF to cast doubts on my honesty...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
Well done Jim. You know who I am a fan of now, you amaze me with your ability to read my mind. I'm not a Blair fan but he's not a murderer, otherwise after all these findings, wouldn't he be in prison by now.

You said you'd voted Tory if I'm correct, to stop UKIP in your area. You voted Tory, that's it really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 08:24:32 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
You said you'd voted Tory if I'm correct, to stop UKIP in your area. You voted Tory, that's it really.

Not the first time. I grew up in Ken Clarke's constituency, and voted for Fat Ken twice in General Elections. Clarke's Euro-friendly, laissez-faire brand of liberal conservatism is not unappealing. As I have said repeatedly, my apparent shift to the left over time is partly a reflection of the demonstrable failure of neo-liberal market economics in the last thirty years, and, much more, an artefact of the massive shift to the right in what is commonly defined as the 'centre ground' of UK politics.

As was noted by some political commentators at the time of his election as leader, there is relatively little in Corbyn's policy platform that would have appalled Edward Heath's Tory party. He's a centre-left social democrat. It's everyone else that's moved to the right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 August, 2016, 08:29:56 PM
QuoteSo it's okay for other forum members to call other politicians murderers but not get called out!

I suppose the big difference is that Blair led us into a war, under false pretenses, which has killed and maimed countless thousands of people... whereas Corbyn just has a name that ends with a "bin" sound, leading to your hilariously comparing him to a mass murdering terrorist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:48:15 PM
Best I get a new dictionary as the definition of murder must've changed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 19 August, 2016, 10:06:33 PM
Nope. It still means to premeditatively kill folk in an unlawful way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 19 August, 2016, 10:47:24 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:15:36 PMI'm not a Blair fan but he's not a murderer, otherwise after all these findings, wouldn't he be in prison by now.

People are trying (http://www.arrestblair.org/war-crimes-reports)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 August, 2016, 10:54:53 PM
irrespective of any blame, intelligence or what ever,would we have been better leaving saddam Hussein alone to murder his own people while he shat on a gold bog and not gotten involved? granted it didn't go down quite as well as it could with more murderous sods coming out of the woodwork to claim the power as their own but then again I cannot honestly think of a time in my 45 years on this earth when the middle east hasn't been at war with each other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2016, 11:06:03 PM
Perhaps if we didn't constantly stick our oar in and sell arms to various actors in the region, Grugz, things might be a bit calmer.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:15:36 PM
I'm not a Blair fan but he's not a murderer, otherwise after all these findings, wouldn't he be in prison by now.

You seem to be suggesting he doesn't enjoy the protection of the office of Prime Minister.  He is indeed a murderer many thousand times over, it's just that no-one will allow him to be arrested or prosecuted.
See also: mass murderer and Auschwitz fan Iain Duncan Smith.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 August, 2016, 11:08:09 PM
Was Hitler a mass murder despite probably never going near let alone activating a gas chamber?

I think we can all agree he was. Blair doesn't get to be any different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 19 August, 2016, 11:11:44 PM
Bear, I very much doubt it, they'd get their hands on weapons no matter what.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 August, 2016, 11:22:02 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 19 August, 2016, 11:11:44 PM
Bear, I very much doubt it, they'd get their hands on weapons no matter what.

So it's all right that we sold them, then? Seems like a complete abdication of moral responsibility to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2016, 11:24:29 PM
The UK and others deliberately destabilise the region on a regular basis so they can loot it, and they do this by means other than arms sales.  Every so often, for instance, we like to toss a generation of our kids at the place to see what happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 August, 2016, 11:27:34 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 19 August, 2016, 10:54:53 PM
I cannot honestly think of a time in my 45 years on this earth when the middle east hasn't been at war with each other

Might as well bomb the fuck out of the civilian population, then.

I cannot honestly think of a time in my 100 years on this earth when the UK hasn't been at war with another country, which means anyone who fancies destroying our civil infrastructure and economy should feel free:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_involving_the_United_Kingdom#United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Northern_Ireland_.281922.E2.80.93present.29


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 August, 2016, 11:58:49 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 19 August, 2016, 08:15:36 PMI'm not a Blair fan but he's not a murderer, otherwise after all these findings, wouldn't he be in prison by now.


An inquiry is not a prosecution which is why others must investigate the findings for a possible case against -

THE LEGAL CASE:

As the Chilcot Report says, the lawfulness of state officials' actions can "only be resolved by a properly constituted and internationally recognised court". However:

A referral to the International Criminal Court is not possible.

The British state almost certainly will not carry out any arrests or bring criminal proceedings.

Parliamentary action such as impeachment or contempt of parliament will not result in a conviction.

https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/chilcot/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 August, 2016, 10:15:03 AM
Iraq was safer and much wealthier before any American intervention. It was Americans, their support for Saddam, and later their war and sanctions on him that made Iraq such a terrible place to live. It then shouldn't come as a surprise that Iraqis had grown sick of their way of life. So much so that they sat back and watched America "save" them from its own doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-what-life-in-iraq-was-like-under-saddam-hussein-2014-7?IR=T

There's a lot of similar stuff about. It's interesting to see how regressive the places we've liberated become.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
(http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Farage.jpg)

"It's time for the USA to exit the Earth and move to Mars - only then will y'all be safe from terrorism, financial crises and reality. USexit - you know it makes sense..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 August, 2016, 12:40:45 PM
I wouldn't rush to the hoses if someone where to set fire to that stage...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2016, 12:44:53 PM
You couldn't set fire to them - they're too wet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 August, 2016, 02:02:47 PM
Fuming when foreigners 'told' Brits how to vote; happy to 'tell' Americans how to vote. Classy, as ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 August, 2016, 02:18:11 PM
Huh.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1474828/Guardian-calls-it-quits-in-Clark-County-fiasco.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1474828/Guardian-calls-it-quits-in-Clark-County-fiasco.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 August, 2016, 02:50:38 PM
Good god. Who thought that was a good idea? The Daily Show wouldn't dare do that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 August, 2016, 03:06:29 PM
They learned their lesson and now they're sticking to destroying British democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 August, 2016, 03:47:21 PM
Finally falling in line with the rest of the press then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 August, 2016, 05:18:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
(http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Farage.jpg)

"It's time for the USA to exit the Earth and move to Mars - only then will y'all be safe from terrorism, financial crises and reality. USexit - you know it makes sense..."

I'm starting to believe the theory that Trump is trying to completely sabotage his campaign.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 25 August, 2016, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 25 August, 2016, 05:18:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
(http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Farage.jpg)

"It's time for the USA to exit the Earth and move to Mars - only then will y'all be safe from terrorism, financial crises and reality. USexit - you know it makes sense..."

I'm starting to believe the theory that Trump is trying to completely sabotage his campaign.

As much as I believe that Trump is a monumental arse I still think he'll win the Election! And let's not forget that Farage (Knob almighty) was on the winning side in the Brexit fiasco.

Dark times lay ahead!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 August, 2016, 06:43:37 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 25 August, 2016, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 25 August, 2016, 05:18:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 August, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
(http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Farage.jpg)

"It's time for the USA to exit the Earth and move to Mars - only then will y'all be safe from terrorism, financial crises and reality. USexit - you know it makes sense..."

I'm starting to believe the theory that Trump is trying to completely sabotage his campaign.

As much as I believe that Trump is a monumental arse I still think he'll win the Election! And let's not forget that Farage (Knob almighty) was on the winning side in the Brexit fiasco.

Dark times lay ahead!

Cheers
Where can we hire a good hit man?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 August, 2016, 06:59:18 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 25 August, 2016, 06:39:19 PM


As much as I believe that Trump is a monumental arse I still think he'll win the Election! And let's not forget that Farage (Knob almighty) was on the winning side in the Brexit fiasco.

Dark times lay ahead!

Cheers

"Made a note in my diary on the way over.  Simply said: 'Bugger!'"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 August, 2016, 07:02:07 PM
I'm resigned to Trump winning even though I'm not sure he even thinks he's going to win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 26 August, 2016, 12:06:37 PM
Is that JK ROWLING and the chap from MR ROBOT also in that picture?  Surely not!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2016, 12:10:06 PM
I knew JK had become pretty conservative lately, but I didn't realise she'd gone that far down the rabbit hole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2016, 12:15:51 PM
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8195/28620686613_9d8a81493b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 27 August, 2016, 01:19:57 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2016, 12:15:51 PM
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8195/28620686613_9d8a81493b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12)

I am so stealing that.

(Hope that's ok Proudhuff-won't post until permission granted).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 August, 2016, 02:36:24 PM
Telegraph reporting May to trigger Article 50 alone (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/26/theresa-may-will-trigger-brexit-negotiations-without-commons-vot/). Cat. Pigeons. Lawyers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 August, 2016, 03:52:31 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 27 August, 2016, 01:19:57 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2016, 12:15:51 PM
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8195/28620686613_9d8a81493b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12)

I am so stealing that.

(Hope that's ok Proudhuff-won't post until permission granted).

:) Steal away I think Prodigal, that's from the artist Stephen Byrne.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 31 August, 2016, 10:57:31 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 30 August, 2016, 03:52:31 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 27 August, 2016, 01:19:57 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 26 August, 2016, 12:15:51 PM
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8195/28620686613_9d8a81493b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12) (https://flic.kr/p/KB7v12)

I am so stealing that.

(Hope that's ok Proudhuff-won't post until permission granted).



:) Steal away I think Prodigal, that's from the artist Stephen Byrne.

Good man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 31 August, 2016, 12:26:12 PM
That's good to know as it came to me uncredited!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 August, 2016, 02:13:41 PM
Looking forward to receiving my €2888.89 of Apple's unpaid taxes.  Cheers, Irish government!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2016, 02:19:14 PM
Brexit idiots now saying companies like Apple will be welcome in a post-EU UK. Yeah, great. Let's become a huge tax haven where corporations don't pay their taxes. Also, if we're not in the single market, Apple wouldn't be able to operate here anyway. GAH.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 04:31:33 PM
Why?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2016, 04:42:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 04:31:33 PM
Why?

The company in question is "Apple Europe". The clue is in the name.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 04:59:03 PM
Surprising as it may seem to you, Jim, the EU and Europe are not the same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 31 August, 2016, 05:05:54 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 04:59:03 PM
Surprising as it may seem to you, Jim, the EU and Europe are not the same thing.
Not even going to bother pulling up the meme, just this....'YOU DON'T SAY!!!!'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2016, 05:09:48 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 04:59:03 PM
Surprising as it may seem to you, Jim, the EU and Europe are not the same thing.

It's the corporate entity Apple created to trade in the EU, so they're not going to relocate it to a country outside the EU.

I knew that, so my original statement was perfectly reasonable. Your post, however, is born either of ignorance or obtuseness to the point of trolling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 05:15:28 PM
Bearing in mind that the tax advantages of being based in the EU are being stopped, why couldn't they come to the UK? Or are you saying that Apple won't be able to trade anywhere outside the EU?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2016, 06:25:40 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 05:15:28 PM
Bearing in mind that the tax advantages of being based in the EU are being stopped, why couldn't they come to the UK? Or are you saying that Apple won't be able to trade anywhere outside the EU?

No. I'm saying precisely the opposite of that. Apple (Europe) is separate entity in Apple's corporate structure for trading with the EU. The idea that they would relocate that entity to a country outside the EU is nonsensical. Post-Brexit, it's far more likely that they would create an additional company for UK operations, the same way that they have subsidiary corporations for the Pacific and the Far East.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 August, 2016, 08:14:58 PM
Thanks for that Jim, I can see the sense in that.  I wasn't asking whether Apple should or would come to the UK, I was asking IndigoPrime why they couldn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 12:50:24 AM
Folks I dont think its fair called Brexit voters Idiots all the time. The Irish government couldn't afford a modest increase in pension for theit citizens but could afford to submit to Merkels demands. There is a growing resentment amongst people in Ireland where i spend a lot of time at fact their political establishment are all overwhelmingly pro EU federalism. The EU leaders seems to have a death wish in that they alienating and pissing off a lot of their own citizens. I fear for Europe i really do. You've got Europhile Clowns like Tim Farron that are as every bit as bad as the Anti EU fanatics. They so far up their own arse they cannot so the the machinations of the EU might just have something to do with the rise of extreme left/extreme right parties across the mainland of Europe.
   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 September, 2016, 01:11:38 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 12:50:24 AM
You've got Europhile Clowns like Tim Farron that are as every bit as bad as the Anti EU fanatics.

I don't really agree with much in your post (I'm massively left wing and  pro-remain) except this particular point and you've nailed it - what the fuck are the Lib Dems doing?  What is their role now? A man leading party that used to represent the middle ground between Thatcherite tories and militant labourites is now positioning itself as "the party that ignores a democratic vote"

Their only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.

Maybe they'll capture the public vote and Corbyn and his followers will be relegated to a 3rd place position, I don't know, but the current party set up is surely fucked beyond repair  .... BEWARE THE BRITISH TRUMP!  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 08:34:58 AM
This Apple thing. As I understand it, Apple came to an agreement with the Irish Mafia government to channel large lumps of its profit through Ireland in return for low tax rates on those profits. Apple was happy. Ireland was happy. Then the Fourth Reich EU decided it didn't like sovereign countries managing their own sovereign taxation affairs and imposed an anti-trust type fine on Apple.

So, if the EU can do this, what does it matter which party you vote for? One of the fundamental scams duties of any criminal gang government is to manage its own sovereign tax system. If the EU can override taxes, legislation and plans you essentially voted for, your vote is worthless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 September, 2016, 10:08:27 AM
QuoteTheir only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.

The Labour that was, if you believe the rhetoric, focused on vote-winning compromise did spectacularly badly at either winning votes or making constructive compromises. And had the least electable leader of all time to boot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 10:21:52 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 12:50:24 AMFolks I dont think its fair called Brexit voters Idiots all the time.
I was referring to this specific case. The UK exploded when Vodafone wiggled around corporation tax to the tune of £6 billion, but, hey, let's welcome Apple over here. And the very business model of Apple Europe is entirely dependent on membership of (not access to) the single market. Given May's current stance appears to be withdrawing the UK from the that (hello, massive tax hikes and public service cuts), Apple Europe could not exist in a post-EU UK and it would be politically insane to turn the UK into a massive tax haven, given how against that kind of thing the bulk of the public is. But Brexit people are in favour because it's against the EU. (It's almost like if someone in the EU said they like kittens, Brexit people would go about the place punching kittens, just because.) Hence: idiots, in this case.

As for Farron as a "Europhile Clown", I see a man desperately trying to differentiate his party and stop electoral wipe-out. Post-boundary changes, the Lib Dems are predicted to max out at four seats. They're a whisker away from going under, but there are 16 million people who voted Remain and a third of Brexit voters apparently wanted a soft Brexit that retains a lot of existing EU benefits. If your opening gambit is softish Brexit anyway (i.e. Corbyn, most of Labour and, increasingly, the Liberal Democrats – notably Vince Cable), that puts you in a crap position to argue. Whatever compromise you reach will be further away from your ideals.

Quote from: Dandontdare on 01 September, 2016, 01:11:38 AMA man leading party that used to represent the middle ground between Thatcherite tories and militant labourites is now positioning itself as "the party that ignores a democratic vote"
A non-binding referendum. It was basically a massive opinion poll. And it was about membership of the EU – nothing else. We seem to have accepted so much as a fait accompli. Freedom of movement? Gone. Single market membership? Gone. London passporting? Gone. If we want any of these things – or a reasonable compromise on them – we have to fight. At least the Lib Dems are standing up for what they believe in, while even the more liberal component of Labour's capitulating. (And the less said about Open Britain's early days, the better.)

QuoteTheir only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.
Which won't happen. Labour won't split. It's simply too dangerous. But I suspect at the next GE, we're going to see a depressing flip of 1997, with about 130–150 Labour MPs at most, and a rampant Tory majority able to do whatever the hell it pleases.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 08:34:58 AM
This Apple thing. As I understand it, Apple came to an agreement with the Irish Mafia government to channel large lumps of its profit through Ireland in return for low tax rates on those profits. Apple was happy. Ireland was happy. Then the Fourth Reich EU decided it didn't like sovereign countries managing their own sovereign taxation affairs and imposed an anti-trust type fine on Apple.
Oh, give over. Ireland knew the rules and it broke them. Apple knew the rules and figured out a workaround in law, but that is morally bankrupt – and I say this as a big fan of Apple in general. It's one thing – even though I'd argue it's dodgy – to assign your digital purchases to one location. But to do the same with bricks-and-mortar stores? That's just bloody stupid.

QuoteSo, if the EU can do this, what does it matter which party you vote for? One of the fundamental scams duties of any criminal gang government is to manage its own sovereign tax system. If the EU can override taxes, legislation and plans you essentially voted for, your vote is worthless.
I'm sure that line of thinking will come as great solace in a decade's time to people who are sick but cannot afford health insurance in the UK, once the Tories privatise the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 11:14:23 AM
I don't see any difference between the EU concentrating its power in Brussels and Apple concentrating its power in Ireland. They may be different types and levels of power but each entity concentrates as it deems preferable.

I'd be surprised if the EU doesn't have some kind of local agreements with Belgium so why should not Apple have local agreements with Ireland?

I am not a fan of corporatism, government or mandatory taxation, as you all know, but so long as these things exist they should be as voluntary as possible. As far as I am concerned, Apple and Ireland did nothing wrong in coming to a mutually acceptable arrangement. All taxation should be negotiable because if it isn't it's just extortion, plain and simple.

Your last paragraph is simply an appeal to possible consequence and does not address the issue I raised, which was the question of the  sovereignty and value of your vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2016, 12:27:45 PM
Sharky, the enforcement of taxation on Apple is actually a good thing, as the Irish government have been running the Republic's finances into the ground by skimming off the top, middle and bottom for years.  The only bad thing about this is that all of that £13bn will go into private hands and paying off Irish debts to the EU while Ireland will still end up with privatised utilities like water and healthcare.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 10:21:52 AM
QuoteTheir only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.
Which won't happen. Labour won't split. It's simply too dangerous.

Dangerous for the party, perhaps, but a lot of MPs have made it clear that the interests of the party - if they register at all - are a distant concern well behind the interests of the MP.  Between the boundary changes and the more-than-likely demands from members and CLPs to deselect coup particpants after the leadership contest is over, you have figure there are a few MPs staring into an abyss where their career used to be and figuring that a split is a risk worth taking, while others with higher profiles - like Benn - may simply cross the floor.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 12:56:22 PM
Bear, I agree that tax revenue is sorely misused. This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary. If it's mandatory, more and more can be taken to cover and/or exacerbate the poor choices of the past. If it's voluntary, people can decide for themselves whether they want to contribute to bloated, inefficient, unethical, abused institutions or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 September, 2016, 01:00:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 12:56:22 PM
This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary.

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2016, 01:03:19 PM
Corporations also aren't people, and thus should - and are - taxed on different terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 September, 2016, 01:09:42 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 September, 2016, 01:00:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2016, 12:56:22 PM
This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary.

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.
And on a similar note, you may not to pay for your neighbour's kids to be vaccinated, but the upshot of that is you end up surrounded by people with disease (some of which we thought we'd eradicated from first world countries a century ago).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 01 September, 2016, 01:54:49 PM
Excellent news from Markit manufacturing survey which measures activity in UK factories, which is now at a ten month high.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 01 September, 2016, 02:16:24 PM
As said, the UK choosing - in this wonderfully unfettered position it will inhabit shortly - to become a tax haven* would be utterly pointless. The Revenue would then find people very reluctant to file their own tax returns as normal. Me included.

* 'Haven'... as if they're not vital to making societies work. Sigh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 02:52:05 PM
Professor Bear: You might be right. It feels like Labour's doomed for a generation, in much the same way as the Lib Dems are. (The Lib Dems are just one cycle 'ahead'.) If they stick with Corbyn, MPs will be deselected and the party is screwed. If Corbyn loses, Momentum will throw a wobbly and cause untold problems. If there's a split, whichever bit is no longer called Labour is done for, and the remaining bit will be hit hard. Even crossing the floor is risky. If, say, 100 MPs decided to join the Lib Dems (assuming that's even possible), how many would vanish in 2020? What a horrible mess, and all entirely avoidable in so many ways.

Old Tankie: such reports are good to hear, but we need to find out the context behind this. According to the FT, Sterling getting a kicking has helped SOME factories bounce significantly. Presumably, those are the ones not affected heavily by the increased costs of import. However, if we exit the single market and don't enter any kind of customs union, we'll see a massive downswing again. (Also, the banking sector is looking shaky for the future; education is in disarray; science is having significant problems with funding and inclusion; various media industries, including film, are finding life tough; and so on. And we still haven't left, and don't have a plan for leaving — although the words coming from May now suggest the worst-case scenario for economic and societal impact. Buckle up.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 September, 2016, 04:49:36 PM
I'm just going to go and suggest something utterly bonkers and unthinkable, but maybe Labour wouldn't be doomed for a generation if the MPs didn't keep throwing wobblies about the leadership election of 2015 and just got on with things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 September, 2016, 05:49:08 PM
Silence, Communist!  The only role of the Labour Partytm is to win power, and the management consultants they employed insist that only Citizen Smith can become the next PM.  Policy and principle be damned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2016, 06:05:34 PM
MPs get paid a salary, expenses, get to travel, stay in relative luxury, and all regardless of whether or not there's a recession, so it's not unreasonable to assume that this is a job to some, rather than a calling, and once you accept that, it's not really that much of a stretch to then consider it plausible that maybe some MPs don't want to be elected to higher, more demanding office, they just want to be opposition MPs for as long as they can.  As opposition MPs, they get to promise the moon without ever having to deliver, and they get to live a pretty sweet life of relative importance - and in some cases minor celebrity - on the taxpayer's penny.
Certainly there's the odd good MP who'll put in more effort than the minimum required, but if you can tell me what Jess Phillips or Chukka Umunna actually do, you've clearly been paying a lot more attention than I have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 07:34:24 PM
The EU seeks to impose Tax harmonisation in 2 years time across the EU. This is what the whole 'apple' saga is about.
Please look at the wider picture and the EU's end game of a single Political state.
This is what this is really about.
Im not 'left' wing or 'right' wing. Meaningless labels to divide people and keep them squabbling until the end of time, whilst the bastards that ruin our planet getaway with it.
I respect peoples right to have a different opinion to my own and dont resort to calling them names etc like some 'adults' I happen to work with.
Whether your Pro EU or Anti EU thats perfectly fine,  all i ask is why arseholes like Blair and Cameron still say its merely an economic Union when they are actively seeking an EU army and police force?
Why the need for stealth and deception by arseholes like Junker etc? 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 08:20:07 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 01 September, 2016, 04:49:36 PMI'm just going to go and suggest something utterly bonkers and unthinkable, but maybe Labour wouldn't be doomed for a generation if the MPs didn't keep throwing wobblies about the leadership election of 2015 and just got on with things.
Honestly, I think they've got a point. I'm glad Corbyn shifted the debate about policy, but he bumbles along, does stupid stuff without telling even his shadow cabinet (like the appallingly timed Chakrabarti peerage), has seemingly one idea for PMQs, and is proving himself tactically inept when it comes to the EU. I say this is as a one-time Corbyn fan. He at the very least needs much better advisers and to stop thinking the support of the converted means a damn in the wider scheme of things.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2016, 06:05:34 PMthey just want to be opposition MPs for as long as they can
There was a sense of that when Labour lost in 2010 and some said "well, it's time for someone else to have a go". That kind of thinking should be anathema to any MP. Handing over to the Tories because the public are, what, bored? Fuck off. You should want to be there, in power, for good. That you aren't means you've screwed up along the way.

Quote from: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 07:34:24 PMPlease look at the wider picture and the EU's end game of a single Political state.
Further integration, perhaps, but there's nothing to suggest the end game is a United States beyond paranoia. The same goes for security and defence. And the UK would have just dug its heels in anyway and been obstructionist until the idea went away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 09:44:10 PM
Indigo Prime mate we can agree to disagree but i don't think its just Paranoia that they want member states to mere provinces. The Founders of the original project and its Cheerleaders now like Junker etc are actually pretty transparent about it if you do some research. This aint coming from the daily mail either!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2016, 10:59:49 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 08:20:07 PMthe appallingly timed Chakrabarti peerage

There was never going to be a good time for the Chakrabarti peerage as it was always going to be seized upon to revive and further the antisemitism narrative regardless of when she was nominated.  She was marked from the moment she failed to deliver what the media wanted, and it says a great deal about the UK that it so readily agreed to the media's version of events about a woman of colour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 September, 2016, 01:26:39 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 September, 2016, 01:00:50 PM

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.


I'm not a murderer -- why should I pay for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.? I'm not a royalist -- why should I pay for throne polish?

The idea that people simply will not voluntarily pay for the services they use, or do not use, is demonstrably ludicrous. If people only paid for what they used, how do you explain charitable contributions? Many animal rescue centres, air ambulances and hospices, amongst countless others, rely on charitable donations. In Jimworld, people who do not intend to abandon their dogs do not contribute to the RSPCA, people who do not wish to ever use the air ambulance will not donate to it and people who do not wish to die will not purchase goods from hospice charity shops. In the real world, people pay into these things through choice, not because government forces them to. People leave tips for restaurant staff, barpeople and taxi drivers because they want to, not because they must. Government doesn't force people to pay for gym memberships, healthy food, toothpaste or improving literature, yet people happily pay for these things voluntarily because they know it makes sense to do so.

The core of my argument, which you have again conveniently ignored, is that our taxation system is coercive and that coercion is wrong. Instead, you have basically said that you do not like this argument because, if true, it must lead to outcomes you also do not like and so my argument must be wrong. Which is piffle.

We don't all pay because we all benefit (which sounds great in theory, I admit) but because we are forced to. We are forced to pay into services which the government then drives into the ground through several means. I would rather pay £X per period directly into the NHS voluntarily than be forced to pay £Y per period to a middle-man (government) who then decides how much of my money it's going to give to the NHS and how much to bankers, assorted cronies, the military industrial complex and any number of other things I absolutely and fundamentally disagree with.

The OED definition (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/society) of society is, "The community of people living in a particular country or region and having shared customs, laws, and organizations." There is no mention of coercion. Societies do not require coercion to work - well, tyrannical ones do. I do not for one moment think that you are in favour of tyranny, Jim, but by supporting a coercive government that's just what you are advocating, whether knowingly or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 September, 2016, 06:34:12 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 September, 2016, 01:26:39 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 September, 2016, 01:00:50 PM

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.


I'm not a murderer -- why should I pay for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.? I'm not a royalist -- why should I pay for throne polish?

The idea that people simply will not voluntarily pay for the services they use, or do not use, is demonstrably ludicrous. If people only paid for what they used, how do you explain charitable contributions?

The idea that everyone would voluntarily pay tax, despite not using certain facilities, is a complete fallacy! Yes, some people would contribute, a lot wouldn't.

I don't drive but if some of my Taxes aren't used for roads how can I expect emergency services to get to me? I'm hardly ever ill but it's nice to know that if I am there is a service that has been put in place by what you class as "Forced taxation"!

I'd love to see an altruistic world where everyone helped each other but it isn't going to happen! And it's not just the rich causing the problems. I know plenty of dossers who do nothing with their lives and still moan about where their non-existent tax payments have been spent!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 September, 2016, 07:03:38 AM
I'm not sure it's true to say it'll never happen, as human societies continue to improve, but I certainly don't want to live through the transition. I'd look terrible in leather chaps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 September, 2016, 08:25:14 AM
QuoteThe idea that people simply will not voluntarily pay for the services they use, or do not use, is demonstrably ludicrous. If people only paid for what they used, how do you explain charitable contributions?

The fact that corporations like Apple go out of their way to pay as little tax as they can get away with shows exactly how a voluntary system would go.  The fact that they're the most profitable company in the world shows that the market does not regulate for moral behaviour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 September, 2016, 08:39:59 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 September, 2016, 01:26:39 AM
The idea that people simply will not voluntarily pay for the services they use, or do not use, is demonstrably ludicrous.

No, it isn't. You cite charitable giving, but this simply isn't the same thing. I'm done here, because, yet again, you're arguing from a position so tangential to actual reality as to make no sense and yet you argue as if it is self-evident, unarguable truth.

I should know better, really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 02 September, 2016, 09:02:13 AM
The argument that tax is coercive is irrelevant.

Like it or lump it, we live in a society structured around  social contract (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract). While this is most certainly not without its  fundamental problems (http://trolleyproblem.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/why-social-contract-arguments-are.html), there is a factual rather than theoretical kernal of truth in the arrangement: certain centralised functions in society are either necessary if unpopular (ie some form of policing, with the attendant restrictions on liberty) or easier to administer centrally (ie schooling). These functions of society are for the benefit of all, even if they impinge on some individuals (ie an action is categorised as a crime, whether you like it or not, or you pay for a child to be educated, whether you have children or not).

To illustrate this, look only at those countries where the centralised delivery of core services has failed: countries emerging from conflict (http://users.ox.ac.uk/~econpco/research/pdfs/RethinkingtheProvisionofPublicServicesinPostConflictStates.pdf). Note the "the key benefit of central planning: resource allocation can be coordinated rather than being simply the aggregation of individual donor decisions."

Tax, therefore, is not coercive but it is a necessary evil to pay for these functions. They are centrally administered and require centralised payment.

Arguing against tax is arguing in favour of greed and naked self interest, dressed up as libertarian hand-wringing with a veneer of social conscience and outrage. A description that could be applied to a lot of the points made on this thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 02 September, 2016, 10:53:14 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 01 September, 2016, 09:44:10 PM
Indigo Prime mate we can agree to disagree but i don't think its just Paranoia that they want member states to mere provinces. The Founders of the original project and its Cheerleaders now like Junker etc are actually pretty transparent about it if you do some research. This aint coming from the daily mail either!  :lol:

I studied European Community institutions and law way back in the day and maintained an interest. I am pro-EU but I don't think you have to look too far to see federalist aspirations in some quarters principally and historically the European commission.

That doesn't necessarily mean it was going to happen but the thinking wasn't completely alien in all quarters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 02 September, 2016, 11:01:05 AM
Instead of moaning about my tax paying for that scrounger up the street I like to imagine I'm actually paying back for my healthcare, education, etc I received as a child. Seems fair.

Also there is not a fucking chance that voluntary tax could ever work. Have you met people? They're terrible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 September, 2016, 11:43:31 AM
I can think of one solid concrete example of a person who makes their living via driving around the country but is extremely unlikely to be able to afford any kind of meaningful voluntary contribution towards paying for the roads and assorted infrastructure that makes this possible, even if they didn't pay any tax whatsoever.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2016, 08:20:07 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 01 September, 2016, 04:49:36 PMI'm just going to go and suggest something utterly bonkers and unthinkable, but maybe Labour wouldn't be doomed for a generation if the MPs didn't keep throwing wobblies about the leadership election of 2015 and just got on with things.
Honestly, I think they've got a point. I'm glad Corbyn shifted the debate about policy, but he bumbles along, does stupid stuff without telling even his shadow cabinet (like the appallingly timed Chakrabarti peerage), has seemingly one idea for PMQs, and is proving himself tactically inept when it comes to the EU. I say this is as a one-time Corbyn fan. He at the very least needs much better advisers and to stop thinking the support of the converted means a damn in the wider scheme of things.

I think he does stupid stuff from time to time. I think they all do. I think the stupidest thing any Labour MP could do though - if they were really concerned about the party being electable - is spend all their energy for over a year publicly attacking their leader (in the Sun, the Mail, the Telegraph...), crying wolf everytime someone slightly admonishes them for encouraging infighting, and completely ignore their role as opposition so they can slander all of the new people attracted to the Labour party (and lump everyone who disagrees with them as entryists, trots, greens in disguise whatever). Who are they appealing to? What new voters have been gained by this soap opera of their own making? Compare with the number of jaded voters who have been firmly alienated after thinking for a brief moment that they might actually join a political party and have more of a say than pissing in the wind every 5 years.

I really don't think Jeremy Corbyn is the savviest of politicians, and I could never be part of Momentum. I think all this parties within parties is the height of stupidity (though would love Progress to be looked at so closely for balance). However his opposition have really lost any respect I had for them over the last few months - because they do far more damage to everything whilst claiming they are doing both the right thing and the clever thing. The sheer hypocrisy is just so depressing. All these Labour councillors, MPs, etc who slag off the new membership completely undermine the already-sketchy foundation of representation by a political party. And so much poison on both sides - but again, hypocrisy there as some of the nastiest trolling nonsense against 'momentum' goes without comment - it's depressing to think these are all people who actually agree with each other.

It's all so bloody stupid and it's being conducted in a particularly repellent, myopic fashion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 September, 2016, 12:18:20 PM
I agree, although with a few exceptions I've lost all respect for both sides of Labour. Corbyn's handling of the post-referendum situation has been dire – the sort of thing akin to a blundering backbencher rather than the leader of the opposition. Every other party leader to the left of the Tories, be it Sturgeon, Farron, Wood, or Lucas (yes, I know she's not Green leader again yet, but she's effectively the one Green that matters), have grappled with this and at least have a basic understanding of the facts. Some of the quotes from Corbyn have been eye-openers (including a total misunderstanding of how Article 50 works).

I suppose this is the problem with a protest politician winning and the PLP not realising how far it had strayed from its ideals in the public eye (even if, fundamentally, Corbyn's policies aren't significantly different from Miliband's direction).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 September, 2016, 12:27:23 PM
The idea that Corbyn is any more or less gaffe-prone than Gonk in human form Ed Milliband is an odd one, but he's currently taking his media advice from someone who works at the Guardian.  From thence, things have proceeded as one might expect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 September, 2016, 01:58:44 PM
Yeah that's another one that really irritates me. I voted for Labour at the GE but honestly, Ed Milliband? Honestly.

(how stupid is the British system though where in practice our participation in democracy is a vote for an MP who may or may not  be part of a party that then needs to make a significant majority - more than say 3.8% - in a parliamentary system for any of it to make any jot of difference... *BUT* we spend all of our time arguing over party-level politics and leaderships and make every vote of even minor consequence part of the whip)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 02 September, 2016, 03:36:48 PM
Prodigal2 This is my point. Like you I have studied it at degree and Masters level and it's just the lies being fed by certain leaders particularly in the UK and Ireland that its merely an Economic Union that I loathe. When the EU has a naval attachment operating under its flag combating pirates off the horn off Africa, it ceases to be merely an economic union by any stretch of the imagination.
Why the need for deception and lies thats all? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 September, 2016, 04:27:32 PM
I don't imagine it's anything sinister, they're probably just taking precautions in case they need to impose martial law somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 September, 2016, 10:28:20 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 02 September, 2016, 03:36:48 PM
Prodigal2 This is my point. Like you I have studied it at degree and Masters level and it's just the lies being fed by certain leaders particularly in the UK and Ireland that its merely an Economic Union that I loathe. When the EU has a naval attachment operating under its flag combating pirates off the horn off Africa, it ceases to be merely an economic union by any stretch of the imagination.
Why the need for deception and lies thats all?

I'm lost. Who exactly says the EU is ' just an economic union'?  Who would make such a claim? I'm not sure I've heard that asserted since it was the EEC, possibly even before. How come we vote for members of the European Parliament to represent us? How come we ratify policy and legislation that impacts our Constitution domestically in referendums? How come we feel the benefits of enlightened social, environmental and equality legislation?  What does any of that have to do with an 'economic union'? 

Quite obviously to anyone the EU acts at a political and legislative level, the only question being to what level, or whether you approve.  I can't help feeling you're creating a strawman when you describe these 'leaders' and their deceptions. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 September, 2016, 10:37:16 PM
Incidentally, I believe I just heard Theresa Villiers MP on Any Questions asserting that Brexit will permit the UK to get rid of some of that pesky planning legislation that impedes all those wealthy lobbies from pursuing their unfettered dreams.. Hooray for fracking!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:07:57 AM
Check Blair and Cameron denying its not becoming a single political state mate. Not hard to find.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:24:49 AM
ps. My issue is why the need to lie about their endgame. A political Union where member states are mere provinces pooling together. The architects of the project wanted this from day one.

It hilarious hearing some political commentators claiming the EU 'Apple tax saga' is a almost a moral issue on behalf of the EU.

The only reason they highlighting this is because they do not want nations like Ireland setting their own tax rates to attract business and jobs. The EU seeks tax harmonisation in 2 years time and its a warning they wont tolerate this.

The same organisation that cruelly sacked senior accountant and actually tried to debase her character for exposing how their accounts haven't been signed off in years.

The EU is meant to be a collective where all are equal but it simply doesn't work like that in practice.

No system is perfect Westminster and the Dail for example both are bureaucratic beyond measure.

All i'm saying is the EU does seem to be writing its own suicide note. I travel a lot in my work and I listen to a lot of people expressing outright hostility to the direction the EU is travelling in. It just worries me that extreme groups are tapping into this discontent.     

Said before I fear for Europe I really do. The EU/NATO stoking tensions with Russia Sabre rattling. The Soviet Union collapses, We welcome Russia in from the fold and then spend years pointing missiles in their direction. The Wests hypocrisy sickens me.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:32:24 AM
 :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 September, 2016, 05:38:29 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:07:57 AM
Check Blair and Cameron denying its not becoming a single political state mate. Not hard to find.

Quite a gap between claiming it's just an economic union and denying it's becoming a single political state. A gap in which the truth fits rather neatly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 03 September, 2016, 01:19:18 PM
Quote from: Tordelback on 03 September, 2016, 05:38:29 AM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:07:57 AM
Check Blair and Cameron denying its not becoming a single political state mate. Not hard to find.

Quite a gap between claiming it's just an economic union and denying it's becoming a single political state. A gap in which the truth fits rather neatly.


The history of the EU is full of often discordant voices and perhaps obfuscation as to what the end game is. However, it's not anywhere near full federalism as yet.

I find it a very interesting entity in terms of governance tbh but then people say I should get out a lot more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 September, 2016, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:24:49 AM. The architects of the project wanted this from day one. 

Any chance of a citation for this claim? A fairly solid and credible one if possible?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 September, 2016, 02:42:05 PM
I would imagine the Reptilians have removed it from the internet by now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 September, 2016, 03:38:01 PM

QuoteThe only reason they highlighting this is because they do not want nations like Ireland setting their own tax rates to attract business and jobs.

So the EU, which includes the RoI, is deliberately trying to tank the Irish economy by increasing the amount of funds that are in that economy and can be spent on improving the lives of the people there, in order to push companies out of EU countries, thereby making the EU richer and and more powerful?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 06 September, 2016, 10:40:26 AM
Keith Vaz moral crusader!

Ha, ha, ha!

What a drokking hypocrite!   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 06 September, 2016, 11:17:59 AM
Quote from: dweezil2 on 06 September, 2016, 10:40:26 AM
Keith Vaz moral crusader!
Ha, ha, ha!
What a drokking hypocrite!

I've often wondered why so many rich and powerful men seem to have double standards when it comers to their own behavior. Perhaps and this is only my opinion those attracted to power are a personality type, highly driven individuals with vast energy and sometimes an over optimistic belief about their own ability to control events and themselves. An office fling, meeting with prostitutes, seeking out more extreme stimulus, drugs etc all seem to recurre again throughout the years and I'm afraid Keith Vaz appears to be only the latest casualty in a long line of politicians who have succumbed to their own over indulgence. Our leaders-what a bunch.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 September, 2016, 11:47:48 AM
Probably because the UK's voting system is such that you have to appeal to a small number of middle-England vote seats and pensioners to win elections. It's notable that pretty much everyone in opposition advocates a sensible drugs policy, for example, but the second they're in power they do a 180.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 September, 2016, 03:53:56 PM
What in particular earns Keith Vaz the term 'Moral Crusader'?

Has he ever campaigned for the sanctity of married life, heteronormal society and sobriety?

As far as I can see he's sat on a committee and recommended changes to keep sex workers safe and relax 'moral crusading'. So.... hypocrite shoe is really on the other foot there, at least as far as such things as http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774587/Keith-Vaz-accused-hypocrisy-committee-s-inquiry-prostitution-included-4-000-fact-finding-trip-Copenhagen.html goes.

Sitting on the committee isn't hypocritical. Saying whats good for the goose isn't good for the gander is.

(Not that I approve it's a load of silly f***ing nonsense)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 06 September, 2016, 07:08:03 PM
lol. Keith Vaz is one of the most pious pontificating MP's of modern times. Has a history of making up allegations against people that challenged him, His wife too. Please check out back history of sleaze and allegations against this scumbag.
Chief cheerleader for Greville Janner too. Strange character is Keith Vaz.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 06 September, 2016, 08:12:38 PM
No great knowledge of Vaz's history, but he has always been among the most pompous and self-important oafs at Westminster. What a turn-up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 September, 2016, 08:58:24 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 06 September, 2016, 03:53:56 PM
Has (Keith Vaz) ever campaigned for the sanctity of married life, heteronormal society and sobriety?

Vaz's offence isn't being gay or cheating on his wife; it's paying vulnerable people to let him rape them.

I'm mostly familiar with Mr Vaz through his opportunistic scapegoating of games (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/video-games/9272774/MPs-call-for-violent-video-game-ban-after-Breivik-claims-that-he-trained-on-Call-of-Duty-Modern-Warfare.html). I may be guilty of murdering millions of pixels in my lifetime, but I draw the line at selling out Salman Rushdie (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1808901.stm).

I don't know if censorship and free speech are moral issues per se, but it's certainly sticking your oar into other people's business because you think you know better (or are better) than them.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 06 September, 2016, 09:00:21 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 06 September, 2016, 03:53:56 PM
What in particular earns Keith Vaz the term 'Moral Crusader'?

Has he ever campaigned for the sanctity of married life, heteronormal society and sobriety?

As far as I can see he's sat on a committee and recommended changes to keep sex workers safe and relax 'moral crusading'. So.... hypocrite shoe is really on the other foot there, at least as far as such things as http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774587/Keith-Vaz-accused-hypocrisy-committee-s-inquiry-prostitution-included-4-000-fact-finding-trip-Copenhagen.html goes.

Sitting on the committee isn't hypocritical. Saying whats good for the goose isn't good for the gander is.

(Not that I approve it's a load of silly f***ing nonsense)


https://www.theguardian.com/technology/gamesblog/2012/may/03/keith-vaz-controls-violent-video-games

Although he probably learned a lot from GTA!  :lol:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 06 September, 2016, 09:02:08 PM
You beat me to the punch there Frank!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 06 September, 2016, 09:33:50 PM
Well said Frank mate!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 07 September, 2016, 12:41:43 AM
Quote from: Frank on 06 September, 2016, 08:58:24 PM
I don't know if censorship and free speech are moral issues per se, but it's certainly sticking your oar into other people's business because you think you know better (or are better) than them.

"I'm morally superior so it's okay for me to."

The spirit of James Ferman remains firmly corked.









Ooh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 07 September, 2016, 06:58:49 AM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 07 September, 2016, 12:41:43 AM
Quote from: Frank on 06 September, 2016, 08:58:24 PM
I don't know if censorship and free speech are moral issues per se, but it's certainly sticking your oar into other people's business because you think you know better (or are better) than them.

"I'm morally superior so it's okay for me to."

The spirit of James Ferman remains firmly corked.


James Ferman! What dark days of censorship his BBFC tenure was!

I bumped into him once-he positively oozed self righteousness!








Ooh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 September, 2016, 11:15:33 AM
Thanks all :) So he's a sanctimonious prick for sure, and a massive hypocrite in general, even if not on the issue of this particular type of hedonism.

QuoteVaz's offence isn't being gay or cheating on his wife; it's paying vulnerable people to let him rape them.

I'm not sure I agree with that as a statement for all sex workers, but it's an unpleasant business to be sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 September, 2016, 11:21:55 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 07 September, 2016, 11:15:33 AM
Thanks all :) So he's a sanctimonious prick for sure, and a massive hypocrite in general, even if not on the issue of this particular type of hedonism.

QuoteVaz's offence isn't being gay or cheating on his wife; it's paying vulnerable people to let him rape them.

I'm not sure I agree with that as a statement for all sex workers, but it's an unpleasant business to be sure.
Indeed, contrary to what many of you may believe a large number of sex workers do it out of there own free will for various reasons, so lets not shame a neutral party here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 September, 2016, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 07 September, 2016, 11:21:55 AM
contrary to what many of you may believe ...

Beliefs are distinct from facts. 95% of prostitutes have a problem addiction, 70% of them were in care, and 75% of them started as children:

http://www.demandchange.org.uk/prostitution-the-facts/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 01:23:49 PM
By the same token, writing the above (as in, the bit Theblazeuk quoted) as a statement like that is libellous and actionable. Please refrain from making such accusations on this forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 September, 2016, 02:22:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 01:23:49 PM
By the same token, writing the above (as in, the bit Theblazeuk quoted) as a statement like that is libellous and actionable. Please refrain from making such accusations on this forum.
Agreed and much more eloquantly put than I ever could.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 02:28:44 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 02 September, 2016, 08:39:59 AM

...you argue as if it is self-evident, unarguable truth.


I've been thinking about this a lot and you're right, I do.

My claim that taxation is coercive and therefore must be voluntary may be both simplistic and flawed and, furthermore, contains the unspoken inference that coercion is wrong. I think it's time for me to re-evaluate my position which, with your indulgence, I will now do.

Firstly, the premise that taxation is coercive. HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will take 'enforcement action' to get the money if you don't pay your tax bill. (https://www.gov.uk/if-you-dont-pay-your-tax-bill/overview) The OEDonline definition of coercion (http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/35725;jsessionid=868DD2435FF45F38B4FCF5CA3FC6BE32?redirectedFrom=coercion#eid) is "Constraint, restraint, compulsion; the application of force to control the action of a voluntary agent." 'Enforcement action,' then, is synonymous with coercion. I think it is clear that taxation is coercive. (It is not my intention at this stage to comment upon the legitimacy or otherwise of this but merely to establish it as a factual premise.)

Secondly, my unspoken inference that coercion is wrong. This is a value judgement on my part. However, the legal definition of coercive power (http://thelawdictionary.org/coercive-power/) is, "Authority or power acquired by the employment of fear, suppression of free will, and/or use of illegal punishment or threat," which seems to reinforce my judgement that coercion is wrong. There may be extreme cases where coercion could be employed for good ends, for example in coercing a murderer, rapist or assaulter to stop indulging in unlawful acts. I do not think, though, that coercion should be used as a matter of course simply because it is expedient to do so. To me, then, coercion is, in almost all circumstances, wrong.

Thirdly, my assertion that taxation should be voluntary. This is another judgement call on my part and is flawed. The initial premise and consequent inference do not automatically lead to this assertion. There are several other possibilities which may be considered such as a combination of coercive and voluntary mechanisms, the turning over of public services to pure capitalistic (not corporatist) entities or direct funding through money creation mechanisms.

Despite my assertion that taxation should be voluntary is flawed, I still think it is preferable to a coercive system. This is not to say that transformation from one to the other will be easy or can be accomplished overnight. There are many factors to take into account and many mechanisms which must be changed alongside. A prime example is the current, deeply flawed monetary system. (I have already written about this at length and so will not revisit those arguments here except to say that when money is treated and used as a tool instead of a commodity, many of society's problems will be eased or disappear altogether.) The second major system which needs to be changed is the nature of government itself (again, I've written extensively on this subject and so do not need to reiterate here). As I have said before, society is a process and I believe we should all be thinking about how to continue that process and not how to maintain inertia.

In conclusion, then, I do think the facts that taxation (and government in general) is coercive and that coercion is almost always wrong are self-evident, unarguable truths. My conclusion, that taxation should be voluntary, not so much. The question remains, though - do we want to live in a coercive society and hand such down to those who will follow us or should we begin to think about building something better?

I opt for the latter, and that process begins with identifying the problems and obstacles posed by the current system. Only when we have done this can we begin to formulate solutions - which is where, I admit, I have a tendency to jump the gun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 September, 2016, 03:28:46 PM
Brexit: the Japanese aren't impressed. (http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-brexit-note-to-britain-2016-9?r=UK&IR=T)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 07 September, 2016, 03:31:17 PM
Very strange man is Keith Vaz. There is a wider story here. Some of you probably know to what i'm talking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 03:42:49 PM
Service industry data holding up very well after Brexit vote.  No need for an emergency budget then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 September, 2016, 03:49:28 PM
Stop posting positive things Old Tankie
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 03:53:04 PM
 :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 September, 2016, 03:56:41 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 03:42:49 PM
No need for an emergency budget then.

The emergency budget was only ever ridiculous scare-mongering by Osborne.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
For once we agree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 04:02:38 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 03:42:49 PMService industry data holding up very well after Brexit vote.
Not a huge shock, given that we've not left yet. I suspect the markets are all in a holding pattern until May vs Hammond vs Davis finishes and a victor emerges, and we know what the future direction will be — soft or hard Brexit. If the latter, we've had some pretty clear warnings about the level of screwed we're going to be by the world's major economies. (The current thinking from Tories appears to be to turn the UK into a kind of giant Singapore. That'll be fun for the rich and not so much for everyone else. Mind you, I say 'thinking', but the likes of Davis and Redwood don't even appear to know the basics of EU law and our current obligations.)

Still, Sterling remains in the crapper and the BoE now has naff-all wiggle room to further shore up the economy (which is something that Brexit people tend to ignore happened).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 04:13:55 PM
Sterling in the crapper, as you put it, is probably helping exports and encouraging many extra tourists to come to the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 September, 2016, 04:17:58 PM
So you think a devalued pound is a good thing then Tankie?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 04:19:02 PM
Tourism: perhaps. Exports: only for companies whose import costs haven't just shot through the roof. Hence why reporting from exporters is extremely mixed right now. Moreover, though, what Sterling's position does say, having settled, is that the entire world markets now believe UK PLC to be worth less than it was before the vote. Whether that changes and Sterling strengthens to any degree remains to be seen. If it drops sharply again should A50 be activated, we're going to be in some serious trouble, due to costs ramping up on everything from fuel to food. (Right now would be an astonishingly good time to have a massive energy surplus from governments having hugely invested in renewables. Alas.)

EDIT: It's probably also worth noting that Sterling wasn't exactly seen as being especially strong of late. Against the US dollar, bobbling along in the high 1.40s isn't stellar. The low 1.30s is pretty dire, though; predictions appear to range about 20 cents either side of that over the coming years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 September, 2016, 04:23:27 PM
Hi Theblazeuk, it's like most things in life, there's a good and bad side to it.  Inflation is going to go up but it's got a long way to go before it hits the Government's inflation target.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 September, 2016, 04:33:44 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 01:23:49 PM
By the same token, writing the above (as in, the bit Theblazeuk quoted) as a statement like that is libellous and actionable. Please refrain from making such accusations on this forum.

to be libellous the following must be true:

Someone made a statement;
that statement was published;
the statement caused you injury;
the statement was false; and
the statement did not fall into a privileged category.

I'm not sure this is the case here ...;
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 September, 2016, 05:39:03 PM
QuoteService industry data holding up very well after Brexit vote.

Or alternatively...

Service sector shrinks at fastest rate since financial crisis
 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-eu-referendum-uk-service-sector-financial-crisis-markitcips-pmi-survey-a7169506.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-eu-referendum-uk-service-sector-financial-crisis-markitcips-pmi-survey-a7169506.html)


Service industry contracts sharply after brexit vote.

http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/08/03/uk-services-industry-contracted-sharply-after-brexit-vote/ (http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/08/03/uk-services-industry-contracted-sharply-after-brexit-vote/)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 05:41:18 PM
One thing about Brexit is that it may have crippled the TTIP, as the UK was one of its staunchest advocates. Now, with France, Germany and Austria showing opposition and neither Trump nor Clinton in favour of it, the TTIP may finally be dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 05:47:38 PM
TTIP was screwed anyway, and now it's on life support at best. Why? Because British Tories were some of TTIP's strongest advocates. So now what happens? We probably try for a deal with the US ourselves, but as an economy a fraction the size of the EU's. That is not going to end well for us, not least when rampant Tories will be gleefully "free of red tape" (i.e. regulations).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 06:14:48 PM
I don't think size matters much. So long as the UK can trade with the USA at proportionate levels, who cares? There's no point trying to take a bigger percentage than we need. The danger, one of the dangers, is that Washington and London will negotiate a deal that makes the TTIP look good to Europe. This may be good for the UK, giving it deals and concessions better than it would have got as part of the EU to sugar the pill, but bad for our neighbours on the continent.

Although I am against the very idea of free trade deals (free trade means just that, not regulated trade), it will - in theory at least - be easier for the British people to scrutinise and influence any local deals than deals made by faceless bureaucrats hidden away in Brussels. It brings any "government" dealings one step closer to the people they are meant to serve, which is a good thing in my view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 07 September, 2016, 06:47:12 PM
Just for clarity that there are always two sides to the story

UK's Service Sector Grows (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37274279)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 06:58:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 06:14:48 PM
I don't think size matters much. So long as the UK can trade with the USA at proportionate levels, who cares?
It matters because of leverage. The smaller parties always get crapped on in these deals. The UK's about to find out just how small it is compared to the US, China, Japan and the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 08:44:53 PM
Small has its advantages. One nation is able to react quicker, reach agreements and compromises more easily and maneuver with greater freedom. Larger blocs are more cumbersome, more prone to competitive in-fighting and require the consent of all members to make a decision.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 09:21:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 September, 2016, 08:44:53 PMOne nation is able to react quicker, reach agreements and compromises more easily
Reach compromises is the problem. Look at this just from the view of the NHS or food and doing a deal with the USA. They're, respectively, likely going to want full access for private heath and a reduction in UK standards to US levels. We can either push back (but have no leverage and will therefore not get a deal) or compromise. The US won't be doing any compromises though, in the same way massive corporates don't tend to compromise when buying out tiny indies.

Meanwhile, Ryanair is the latest company to say "fuck the UK", stating it will base all 50 of its new planes elsewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 07 September, 2016, 10:29:52 PM
Is that preening cock of a boss at Ryan air going with the planes? Strange how all these supposed lefties are now worrying about capitalist pigs and their movements.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 11:00:41 PM
Supposed lefties care about the ramifications for the economy when companies are upping sticks and entire countries are making threats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 07 September, 2016, 11:15:17 PM
And, just this week, EasyJet announced they're moving their entire fleet maintenance operations - which were mostly based in the UK - to Malta.

Brexit specifically reported as a reason for the relocation.

Still, the devalued pound and extra tourist income, eh?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 September, 2016, 11:52:39 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 07 September, 2016, 10:29:52 PM
Is that preening cock of a boss at Ryan air going with the planes?

Preening cock he may be (or publicity genius, your call), but before he showed up it used to cost several hundred pounds to fly Dublin to London. Life for those if us with the need to make that journey often was a succession of hideous 12+ hour ferry and coach journeys that still cost more than a return flight booked a few weeks in advance does 25 years later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 08 September, 2016, 03:44:42 AM
Agreed Tordelback. Having uncovered a few tickets from Brit cit to Emerald Isle from when i a lad recently i know what you mean.
For all the criticism they get i always find Ryanair staff to be nothing but polite and helpful. Certainly more cheerful than some of the staff at my local supermarket anyways.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 September, 2016, 06:42:18 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2016, 09:21:50 PM
The US won't be doing any compromises though, in the same way massive corporates don't tend to compromise when buying out tiny indies.


... and the truth of that statement is evidenced in our extradition treaty.  The success rate for US requests compared to UK requests is disturbing and has been for decades.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 08:46:12 AM
You're right, I.P., everything is shit, there's no hope, we're all doomed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 10:14:54 AM
"Lefties"

Why don't we go around saying "Righties"?

Because it would be bloody childish and sound incredibly silly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 10:22:01 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 07 September, 2016, 11:52:39 PMbefore he showed up it used to cost several hundred pounds to fly Dublin to London
It's also worth noting that other airlines are hardly great on that route. When I flew to Dublin on BA, it was one of the absolute worst travel experiences I've had.

Quote from: GordonR on 07 September, 2016, 11:15:17 PMStill, the devalued pound and extra tourist income, eh?!
It's OK, because apparently we don't need EasyJet. Or the money from the banking sector. Or trade with the US, EU, Japan and China. I hear we might soon strike a trade deal with Australia! Well, in two and a half years. Maybe. That will surely fill the void.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 08:46:12 AMYou're right, I.P., everything is shit, there's no hope, we're all doomed.
Oh, give over—I never said anything of the sort. My contention, which aligns with the vast majority of people who actually do this stuff for a living, is that we have a stark choice to make. We can either go it alone, at which point we won't be doomed but will have to prepare for having a vastly different place in the world (less influence; lower living standards; heavy compromises in order to secure trade deals), or we can seek a deal that leaves us more fully immersed in the web of international relations.

Right now, we have all of our larger allies saying we should stay in the EU or at least the single market. Without doing so, we will lose countless billions. This isn't imaginary money. If London gets a smack, some will cheer, right up until they realise the massive hole in tax receipts this represents provides legitimate justification for further stripping back the state. Someone recently on Facebook posted a photo from Jersey with "see your doctor for only £30" as though this was a good thing. That could be our reality.

There is a middle ground: if Norway and others will accept it, we jump over to EEA status. We untangle some of the red tape that no-one seems to explain beyond the vaguest of terms. We get an emergency brake on EU immigration that we'll probably never actually use. And we retain our position in the single market that means our economy won't be wrecked. Or we hard Brexit and find out just what it means to be isolationist in an increasingly interconnected world, along with the harsh, stark reality that trade isn't about two countries having a chat, but massive complex webs of supply chains that benefit countries that reduce friction, not increase it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:33:01 AM
The standard iPhone 7 will cost £60 more than its predecessor. The price in dollars hasn't risen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 08 September, 2016, 11:34:10 AM
I think the "phoney war" brexit analogy is probably the most apt to describe the situation. So much left to unfold/unravel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 September, 2016, 11:43:08 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:33:01 AM
The standard iPhone 7 will cost £60 more than its predecessor. The price in dollars hasn't risen.

I don't know why people buy this shit. I've got a contract at about £15 a month with a non-snazzy Samsung that seems to work absolutely fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 11:49:26 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:33:01 AM
The standard iPhone 7 will cost £60 more than its predecessor. The price in dollars hasn't risen.
Many other Apple prices have gone up—existing iPads, for example. And before people go "Oh, Apple! Idiots buying iPhones! Get Android!", plenty of Android devices with provisional RRPs have seen those go up before hitting the UK as well. Elsewhere, the new Marvel Panini line is up from £3.50 to £3.99, specifically mentioning Sterling's crash as the reason. So cheap stuff through to high-end tech. The pound in your pocket is simply worth less now — this is the new reality. We'd just best hope Sterling doesn't fall more. (Meanwhile, the Telegraph is trying to put a brave face on a £15bn hold in public finances prediction (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/07/brexit-blows-15bn-hole-in-public-finances-says-new-watchdog/), since that's "still just half the size" of what Osborne predicted. Just half! That's OK! I'm sure we can find £15bn down the back of the sofa while multinationals relocate, investment drops like a stone, and industries we excel in from science to medicine to telly find Brits are no longer welcome.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 11:49:32 AM
Coming out of the EU is not isolationist. There's nothing to stop, for example, France and the UK from forming a one-off, mutually beneficial trade deal with China or the US on a specific object. Being out of the EU is good for free trade because it means we can organise our own deals without having to compromise based on what our "partners" want.

Free trade is just that, free trade. Belonging to a group of partners can have advantages in some situations and disadvantages in others. The trick is to recognise which is which, to go it alone in some situations and to form alliances in others. To be tied to an increasingly authoritarian behemoth limits options to true free trade whilst being shot of it presents new opportunities.

The USA is already distancing itself from Obomber's "back of the queue" threat which was made, presumably, to keep the UK in the EU to support the TTIP. Now that's failed, the USA is being forced to deal with the reality, which you pointed out, that we live in an interconnected world where we buy stuff from them and they buy stuff from us.

The Common Market, which is what "we" signed up for in the first place, was not a completely terrible idea but it has morphed into something else; a ruling class for Europe. We're better off out of it. If the EU is truly pro-free trade it can have no arguments against the UK trading freely with Germany, France, Holland, the USA, China or Russia beyond its purview. If, however, the EU were to impose tariffs and taxes on such trades then it is anti-free trade and a protectionist body intent on controlled trade. This will push prices up and, when the people in Europe see prices rising merely to fill the coffers of the EU, more and more of them will see the sense in exiting the EU in favour of getting back to the values and advantages of a true free trading system.

The EU is only good for large corporations and elitist interests as it allows them to consolodate their power and increase profits, not through efficiency and good business practices but through tariffs, taxes and corporate handouts. A Common Market, on the other hand, is good for the vast majority of ordinary people as it increases competition and choice and does away with arbitrary tariffs and taxes, corporate protectionism and a monopolistic superstate.

The vast majority of the "problems" Brexit is causing are artificial; large corporations, banks and elitist interests throwing spanners in the works to make it look like exiting the EU is a mistake. Because of this, the road ahead may be difficult but we must persevere. The next country to exit the EU will have it worse, as the protectionist EU interests will be getting desperate to preserve their power. The country after that will have learned from our mistakes and have an easier time of it. Thereafter, the EU will be seen for what it really is and either implode or devolve back to the useful thing it started off as being.

So yes, there may be trouble ahead - but while there's dealing and working and we get paid, let's face the music and trade...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 September, 2016, 11:50:33 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 08 September, 2016, 11:43:08 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:33:01 AM
The standard iPhone 7 will cost £60 more than its predecessor. The price in dollars hasn't risen.

I don't know why people buy this shit. I've got a contract at about £15 a month with a non-snazzy Samsung that seems to work absolutely fine.
Well once my £20 Iphone inclusive contract is up in 2018 i'm jumping off the apple bandwagon save for my tablet, the air is still the best digital device for reading comics on bar none IMHO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:52:22 AM
Think the point there might be getting lost :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 September, 2016, 12:02:05 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 11:52:22 AM
Think the point there might be getting lost :P

Yep, I think it did briefly!
You're absolutely right though, we can see prices steadily creeping up all around us without having triggered Article 50 yet. I think many of us can expect a reduction in living standards (or at least in disposable income) in the near future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 12:09:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 11:49:32 AM
There's nothing to stop, for example, France and the UK from forming a one-off, mutually beneficial trade deal with China or the US on a specific object.
Apart from the EU rules that specifically forbid EU members from doing that, no, there isn't.

QuoteBeing out of the EU is good for free trade because it means we can organise our own deals without having to compromise based on what our "partners" want.
Being out of the EU is not good for free trade, because trade is not about talking to one other country about an object. We're not living in the 1800s. As the Japanese very carefully noted in their recent document, trade is about a frictionless web. Remove yourself from that and you cause friction. Then multinationals leave. It really is that simple. We leave the single market and tariffs shoot up. We leave the customs union and our goods become subject to inspections within the EU. If you're a multinational based in the UK specifically to sell to the EU, you no longer have a reason to stay. If you're a small British exporter, you're suddenly subject to massive fees regarding storage while your items are being inspected, along with costs associated with delays in a 'just in time' economy.

QuoteFree trade is just that, free trade. Belonging to a group of partners can have advantages in some situations and disadvantages in others.
The point is most countries are part of trading blocs. Even the giant that is the USA is forging major alliances. The entire world is baffled at the UK thinking it can somehow be a hub for trade, like we're still the centre of an empire, given that our current benefit is in being a bridge between the EU and various other major economies. This will be lost for no obvious benefits. (You keep mentioning advantages: so perhaps provide examples of what they are. In what way will leaving the EU be advantageous from a trade standpoint when it comes to dealing with economies that actually matter when it comes to our living standards? I'm sure Australia's quite excited about a new trade deal, but then trade with Australia amounts to piss-all in the scheme of things.)

QuoteThe USA is already distancing itself from Obomber's "back of the queue" threat which was made, presumably, to keep the UK in the EU to support the TTIP.
Except that it isn't. At the G20, this was repeated. The USA stated its priority is the EU. The UK was — almost uniquely in modern history — 'out of the room' in various discussions between the US and EU. Germany and France are being checked out as the new go-to countries.

Quotewhen the people in Europe see prices rising merely to fill the coffers of the EU, more and more of them will see the sense in exiting the EU in favour of getting back to the values and advantages of a true free trading system.
Only this isn't happening. Brexit is teaching the entire EU that leaving will push down living standards. For those countries not part of the Eurozone, it'll likely devalue your currency too. Since the referendum, support for the EU has grown rapidly. Countries where there was interest in a Brexit-style referendum have broadly lost interest. There's still a big element of dissatisfaction, but that's mainly from the far-right, using Brexit as a flag for what they perceive as a better future. When the UK is being held aloft as a shining example for the likes of Le Pen, we should really consider what the hell we stand for.

QuoteThe EU is only good for large corporations and elitist interests as it allows them to consolodate their power and increase profits
And yet many people I know who run small businesses say the exact opposite. They say it's enabled them to trade more easily, to find workers more easily. Paperwork has dropped. Ease of trade has increased. Many are now looking to a more problematic future. A couple have already started making contingency plans for if the UK exists the single market. (One is relocating to the EU. Another is going to close if they have to.)

QuoteThe vast majority of the "problems" Brexit is causing are artificial; large corporations, banks and elitist interests throwing spanners in the works to make it look like exiting the EU is a mistake.
This is absolute bollocks. This is the sort of thing I keep hearing from a certain Leave voter: you're talking Britain down! You want the country to fail so you can yell I told you so! What utter tosh. The reason people are trying desperately to cling on to the single market is because we know what a huge clusterfuck leaving it is going to be. And the same's true for the EU as a whole. We are too entangled. We have a civil service that's been pared back. Do we really want to spend an entire decade on sorting an avoidable mess out, on the basis that we might get some benefits of some kind that, frankly, all seem a bit vague and wooly? And your point about the EU favouring the rich — what do you think's going to happen if we hard Brexit? Right-wing Tories are thrilled at the prospect of turning this country into a Singapore-style experiment.

QuoteThe next country to exit the EU will have it worse, as the protectionist EU interests will be getting desperate to preserve their power.
I predict we won't see that happen in our lifetimes if the UK hard Brexits. If we shift to the EEA, we might see other economies follow suit, leading to a 'core' and 'outer' EU, but I suspect that's unlikely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 12:10:23 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 08 September, 2016, 12:02:05 PMI think many of us can expect a reduction in living standards (or at least in disposable income) in the near future.
Which are essentially the same thing. And unless you don't buy fuel, electricity or food, it's already happening, unless you're fortunate enough to have had a pay rise recently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 01:05:03 PM
"Apart from the EU rules that specifically forbid
EU members from doing that, no, there isn't."

Which is protectionism and not free trade.

"We leave the single market and tariffs shoot up. We leave the customs union and our goods become subject to inspections within the EU."

Which is protectionism and not free trade.

"If you're a small British exporter, you're suddenly subject to massive fees regarding storage while your items are being inspected..."

Which is protectionism and not free trade.

"For those countries not part of the Eurozone, it'll likely devalue your currency too."

Currency values set by the privately owned central banks with a vested interest in consolodating their power. Works. Spanner.

"And yet many people I know who run small businesses say the exact opposite."

Because they are coming outside the EU's protectionist mechanisms and being unilaterally punished for it. Works. Spanner.

"One is relocating to the EU. Another is going to close if they have to."

In order to take advantage of EU protectionism. Works. Spanner.

"This is the sort of thing I keep hearing from a certain Leave voter: you're talking Britain down! You want the country to fail so you can yell I told you so!"

Now, that is bollocks. I'm talking EU protectionism down, not Britain.

"Right-wing Tories are thrilled at the prospect of turning this country into a Singapore-style experiment."

Which, if you believe in democratic government (which you clearly do), should be easily avoided.

"I predict we won't see that happen in our
lifetimes if the UK hard Brexits."

I predict that we will. The EU experiment has run its course and now the challenge is surviving its death throes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 01:15:24 PM
"As the Japanese very carefully noted in their recent document, trade is about a frictionless web. Remove yourself from that and you cause friction."

What a horrendously poor analogy. Webs are sticky and if you get caught in one you get eaten by the spider, if you escape, you're safe. This analogy suits my argument far more aptly than yours.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 08 September, 2016, 01:21:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 01:15:24 PM
"As the Japanese very carefully noted in their recent document, trade is about a frictionless web. Remove yourself from that and you cause friction."

What a horrendously poor analogy. Webs are sticky and if you get caught in one you get eaten by the spider, if you escape, you're safe. This analogy suits my argument far more aptly than yours.

Talking of bad analogies...

How do you feel about the Internet? The World-wide web that links even the remotest nations of the World. Is that something we should remove ourselves from?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 01:33:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 01:05:03 PMWhich is protectionism and not free trade.
It is the situation within which the UK currently exists. I know you have some utopian mindset of a perfect future where everyone gets along, donates taxes, and so on, but we do not live in that world. Right now, we live in a world where the existing blocs matter. We're about to leave one, to which our entire economic and political structures are entangled through decades of legislation and deals. At best, even optimists reckon we might claw our way back to where we are now in the best part of a decade, with the in-between times being extremely tough. And at the end of it there is no guarantee whatsoever there will be any concrete benefits.

QuoteCurrency values set by the privately owned central banks with a vested interest in consolodating their power. Works. Spanner.
It. Doesn't. Matter. You act as though none of these things exists, because you don't want them to. That banks have vested interests is true. That countries have vested interests is true. But the net result is the money we now earn is worth less. Savings are worth less. Possessions are worth less. Wages are worth less. I know you love to hand-wave these things away and say something libertarian, but that means fuck-all to people who are now finding it tougher to support their families, pay bills, and looking towards a future where basic state services will be further stripped back.

QuoteNow, that is bollocks. I'm talking EU protectionism down, not Britain.
You misunderstand. Your responses are echoes of Leave voters saying those criticising leaving the EU are causing the problems.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 01:15:24 PMWhat a horrendously poor analogy. Webs are sticky and if you get caught in one you get eaten by the spider, if you escape, you're safe. This analogy suits my argument far more aptly than yours.
Really? You're just being an arse for the sake of it now. 'Web' doesn't just mean a sticky arachnid's happy home. It can mean a mesh, a lattice, a network, and a nexus. We have been warned, multiple times, that our current position in the single market is the main reason for a great many companies being located here. It is a red line. If we remove ourselves from that, many of these companies will leave, because there will not only be no benefit to them being here, but also it would adversely affect their business dealings with the EU through tariffs and customs issues.

This isn't negativity. This is reality. (And even people bleating about WTO fallback being good should be aware we are currently members through the EU. Our accessing even the WTO isn't guaranteed without a ton of concessions by countries that want something from us, and who could otherwise veto our membership.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 01:59:22 PM
Oops. Turns out the Aussies don't give a shit about the UK once it leaves the EU either: http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/09/08/australian-trade-minister-says-special-relationship-with-uk

Oh well. I'm sure someone else might consider the UK a priority. Tuvalu, perhaps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 02:41:40 PM
"It is the situation within which the UK currently exists."

Which is not to say that just because this situation does exist, it must continue to exist or is the only option. Brexit presents an opportunity to both establish proper free trade and curtail unwarranted government oppression. Conversely, it also presents an opportunity for protectionists and corporatists to present their own opinions and solutions. Neither option is without problems.

"It. Doesn't. Matter. You act as though none of
these things exists, because you don't want
them to."

It does matter. It matters a great deal. If I acted as though these things didn't exist, why would I be so vociferous in my opposition to them? If what you say is true, it would be like me arguing to condemn unicorns.

"... the money we now earn is worth less. Savings are worth less."

This is not a Brexit phenomena. Money has been losing value for a very long time due largely to an over-creation of it. One only has to watch the Antiques Roadshow to have this confirmed. "My Granny bought this doodad in 1920 for £5 and now it's worth £150!" True, but in 1920 £5 was a week's wage and in 2016 £150 is a week's wage. The devaluation of money is an ongoing flaw in the system, not a consequence of Brexit. In fact, the next round of QE (where the banks create money to lend to governments to give to banks, leaving taxpayers with the bill) will exacerbate this problem far more. One thing we do agree on is that the average Joe or Jo Consumer doesn't care why their money is worth less, they only know that it is and that it's making their lives harder. That's the real tragedy here, irrespective of whether you are right or I am; the fact that ordinary people are suffering under political, financial and/or corporatist monoliths.

"You misunderstand. Your responses are echoes of Leave voters saying those criticising leaving the EU are causing the problems."

Then I apologise for my misunderstanding. I do not own a tv, read newspapers or pay very much attention at all to the MSM and so my comments come from independent sources and my own thoughts on the matter. To be clear, I do not think that it's the people criticising the Leave vote who are the problem. In my view, the problem is the EU itself and the protectionist mechanisms and bodies it has created.

"Really? You're just being an arse for the sake of it now. 'Web' doesn't just mean a sticky arachnid's happy home. It can mean a mesh, a lattice, a network, and a nexus."

Well, if your Japanese source is going to use a word without defining its meaning, then I am perfectly entitled to interpret it for myself and turn the analogy around. And enough with the name calling, already. You're better than that. We're both trying to get our points across as best we can and just because our positions are at odds, that doesn't mean we have to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 03:03:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 02:41:40 PMWhich is not to say that just because this situation does exist, it must continue to exist
On that at least we agree. But the choices now are the status quo and jumping off a cliff, without knowing what's below, but with the best option being some kind of safety net that will leave us clambering up to where we were, and the worst of which is jagged rocks.

What to you does "proper free trade" actually mean? Where in the world is that actually done and achieved? We currently have ALL our allies saying this is a colossal mistake. The only countries broadly in favour of Brexit are the likes of Russia. That in itself says a lot about "an opportunity to both establish proper free trade and curtail unwarranted government oppression".

QuoteThis is not a Brexit phenomena.
You conflate inflation with a sudden devaluation of currency. They are not the same thing. Yes, £5 in 1900 and £5 now are entirely different things. But in 1900, people were paid rather less than now. What happened with Brexit is that relative to the rest of the world, the entire UK had about 10 per cent wiped off its value. This didn't happen gradually over time – it happened overnight, practically in an instant. And this was the response purely to the vote, not actually leaving.

QuoteOne thing we do agree on is that the average Joe or Jo Consumer doesn't care why their money is worth less, they only know that it is and that it's making their lives harder.
And every single expert states this will get worse if we quit the single market.

QuoteWell, if your Japanese source is going to use a word without defining its meaning, then I am perfectly entitled to interpret it for myself and turn the analogy around. And enough with the name calling, already. You're better than that. We're both trying to get our points across as best we can and just because our positions are at odds, that doesn't mean we have to be.
Fair enough on the name-calling – I apologise and take that back. However, it would be absurd to think we need to define every single word in a debate, and it's picky to take a word and use that as an argument against a concept or idea rather than the concept or idea itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 03:31:24 PM
I think almost exclusively 'web' is used as a metaphor for complex structures built around separate nodes, rather than their sticky or non-sticky nature. As rather famously illustrated by the WWW. No need for sophistry ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 04:05:49 PM
"But the choices now are the status quo and jumping off a cliff..."

Maybe those are the choices presented to us from above but they are not the only choices. Only through conversations such as the one we are having now can other options be developed and explored. When a politician says there are only two options, I have learned that ninety nine times out of a hundred it's simply the presentation of a false dilemma. I do not accept that such a complicated and nuanced situation presents only two options.

"What to you does "proper free trade" actually
mean? Where in the world is that actually done
and achieved?"

Proper free trade is the ability for people to trade with whomever they like without outside interference. It is done all over the world by ordinary people every day of the year. If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", that's free trade. I either buy it or I don't.  If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", and some outside force steps in to block or tax that trade, that's not free trade. I suppose the thing that comes closest to proper free trade is ordinary people buying and selling second hand goods on Ebay. (And no - this doesn't mean turning over the entirety of international trade to Ebay - although it might be a good place to start designing a better trading system.)

"What happened with Brexit is that relative to the rest of the world, the entire UK had about 10 per cent wiped off its value."

Granted, but sudden dips are not uncommon and are generally instigated in the upper reaches of our economic system by the richest investors moving their money around for one reason or another. Nothing of real value was affected; 10% of the potatoes didn't evaporate from the fields, 10% of roads weren't swallowed by the Earth, 10% of the people didn't commit suicide. Real, tangible assets were completely unaffected, only the unreal markers suffered. Admittedly, this has a trickle-down effect on the rest of us and is, in my view, one of the major reasons why artificial (fiat) money must be disconnected from the real world, or at least re-tethered to some tangible asset like precious metals.

"And every single expert states this will get
worse if we quit the single market."

Every single expert? There's not one who disagrees? Even if this is true, I still have to be harsh and say that it might be necessary. It's a sad fact of life that most people live in a state of inertia - so long as they're relatively okay they see little need for change. Whilst I detest the idea of people suffering, maybe it'll jolt people out of their complacency and force them to develop new ideas and better systems. Furthermore, even though I have very little faith in government I cannot deny that it has a major effect on society. So maybe, just maybe, a government will come along that actually puts the people first - but this will only happen if the people exercise their God-given powers and demand it. I won't hold my breath.

"Fair enough on the name-calling – I apologise
and take that back. However, it would be
absurd to think we need to define every single
word in a debate, and it's picky to take a word
and use that as an argument against a concept
or idea rather than the concept or idea itself."

Humbly accepted and thank you. I haven't questioned every word in this debate, just that one. Perhaps I was being picky, but you can't deny that I hijacked that particular analogy to good effect! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 04:24:57 PM
I think we just won Legendary Politics Bingo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 04:40:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 04:05:49 PMProper free trade is the ability for people to trade with whomever they like without outside interference. It is done all over the world by ordinary people every day of the year. If you said to me, "hey, Shark, I've got this book I want to sell, are you interested?", that's free trade. I either buy it or I don't.
Hey, Shark, I'm a multinational corporate building cars with components from all over the world, with a view to selling those cars in the EU.

Hey, Shark, I'm a medical company, entirely reliant on cross-border support, research, development and free movement.

Hey, Shark, I'm an electronics manufacturers, building highly complex parts from elements part manufacturers elsewhere, and part designed and manufactured in the UK.

It's not about selling a book (and even that can be more complex than people realise). It's about the way in which modern business and trade works. People like Redwood keep bringing it down to "hey, let's just bin the EU and get back to country-to-country deals for specific things". Like I said, that's fine if you're living in the 1800s.

QuoteGranted, but sudden dips are not uncommon
In Western nations, rapid devaluation of this sort is extremely uncommon.

QuoteNothing of real value was affected; 10% of the potatoes didn't evaporate from the fields, 10% of roads weren't swallowed by the Earth, 10% of the people didn't commit suicide. Real, tangible assets were completely unaffected, only the unreal markers suffered. Admittedly, this has a trickle-down effect on the rest of us and is, in my view, one of the major reasons why artificial (fiat) money must be disconnected from the real world, or at least re-tethered to some tangible asset like precious metals
Which is all lovely in a utopian future, but we live in the present. Yes, all the things that existed before still exist, but they are deemed to be worth less now. That's the fact of it. And the trickle-down effect is an immediate hit on everyone's own income and ability to buy. Beyond that, we have additional issues, in terms of tax receipts falling if we hard Brexit, which will mean either tax hikes or dramatic cuts to already stretched public services.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 04:42:46 PM
And your prize is either a free TLSco lecture on socioeconomic praxiology and its relationship to historical interpretations of pseudopsychological religiosity with a special emphasis on our Draco reptilian overlords or some clouds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 05:43:35 PM
"Hey, Shark, I'm a multinational corporate building cars with components from all over the world, with a view to selling those cars in the EU."

Cool. Are you asking me to invest, purchase a franchise or buy a single car?

"It's about the way in which modern business and trade works."

Which is in essence the same way it's always worked. Party A produces or stocks something that Party B is willing to buy or rent. Negotiations are entered into and, if mutually acceptable, money changes hands. The major differences between 1800 and now are designed obsolescence (which really needs to be crushed), the distances involved (taken care of by modern transportation companies) and scale (useful as there are now more people).

"In Western nations, rapid devaluation of this
sort is extremely uncommon."

Germany - 1929
UK - 2008
Iceland - 2012
Um, okay - I'll give you that one.

"...which will mean either tax hikes or dramatic
cuts to already stretched public services."

Or reforming the banking system. Or switching to the Austrian economics system. Or stopping wasting money on foreign wars. Or turning the whole country into an international holiday camp (which was actually Hitler's plan if he won the war!). Or to become a tax haven. Or to become a US state (noooooo!). Or to lead the Commonwealth into world economic domination. Or to join forces with North Korea. Or to rebuild our manufacturing base. Or to become more self-sufficient. Or to keep entering every other country's national lottery until we've won everything. Or to become the world's foremost supplier of weed. Or to rebuild the Empire, this time on ethical grounds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 07:46:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 05:43:35 PMWhich is in essence the same way it's always worked. Party A produces or stocks something that Party B is willing to buy or rent. Negotiations are entered into and, if mutually acceptable, money changes hands. The major differences between 1800 and now are designed obsolescence (which really needs to be crushed), the distances involved (taken care of by modern transportation companies) and scale (useful as there are now more people).
A major difference now is the manner in which many products are made and sold. You rarely have a complete 'widget' being made in country A solely through its own resources and then sold to country B. Today, a car manufactured in the UK, designed to be sold in the EU, may have parts, materials and components imported from any number of countries. Our current position within the EU makes a huge amount of trade viable that simply wouldn't exist without it; and it simplifies trade in key areas for UK companies, as noted earlier, who'd otherwise be subject to stringent and costly goods inspection. (And this is just talking about physical goods. Once you hit virtual, services and banking, we're in serious trouble on leaving the EU. And that's a ton of our economy and tax base.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 10:31:35 PM
I'm not sure that makes any difference, projects have always used materials and components imported from other countries right back to Stonehenge, the stone for which (provided it wasn't glacially transported) came from Wales.  The Trafford Park factory in Manchester started assembling Model T Fords in 1911, importing the major mechanical parts from Detroit and using local suppliers for bodies etc. Neither of these projects required the existence of the EU. With today's communication and transport technologies, such projects as car assembly are much easier than they were in the past. The only thing the EU contributes is taxes and tariffs to fund its own existence. Without the EU, things would be a lot smoother and businesses would be free to trade with whomever provided the best in what they need. As to the virtual world, the internet's only borders are those imposed by bodies such as the EU - again, remove the EU from the equation and it would run a lot smoother.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 September, 2016, 11:09:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 September, 2016, 10:31:35 PMWithout the EU, things would be a lot smoother
How?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 09:19:55 AM
Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 09:19:55 AM
Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 09:30:50 AM
No, you have no idea what I'm talking about. Big difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2016, 09:59:51 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 09:19:55 AMLack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.
How, specifically, would eradicating the EU make things smoother for the UK economy, UK businesses and overseas business investing in the UK in those regards?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 September, 2016, 10:12:41 AM
I suspect TLS is thinking big - the end of EU trade regulations as prelude to the end of ALL trade regulations. Again, it's an I retesting idea in the abstract, but I want nothing to do with the reality of such a transition, especially on a unilateral basis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 10:27:30 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 09:19:55 AM
Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.

You have literally no idea what you're talking about.

I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 10:31:38 AM
I.P., Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.

T.B., More or less. In the interim, though, sovereign nations would probably return to their own rules. Due to the well known excesses of corporatism, the general public does not yet understand what pure capitalism is and believes that all business is inherantlly evil and must be kept in check by "government." This is not true. The vast majority of private businesses want to make money - and they can't do that by gouging, conning or harming their customers. Only "government" protected businesses (such as water companies, for example) can do those things with relative impunity. Again, the transition cannot, indeed must not, happen overnight. The first step is in understanding the differences between capitalism and corporatism. Capitalism is good for the majority and bad for the elite minority (as evidenced by the MSM's demonisation of certain protesters by calling them anti-capitalists when, in reality, a more apt label would be anti-corporatists, which you never hear) whilst corporatism is bad for the majority and good for the elite minority. There is nothing done by corporatism that cannot be done cheaper, more efficiently and more fairly by basic capitalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 10:45:14 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 10:27:30 AM


I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.


Then you're not looking hard enough. A lot could go wrong. These things cannot and must not be eradicated overnight. First must come study, education, reflection and planning. Then a gradual phasing out over a reasonable period of time. You seem to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that I want pull a big switch marked "Instant Revolution" and just change everything immediately. That's the last thing I want. The only revolution worth a damn is a revolution of the mind, a revolution of attitude. Only from that kind of revolution will true and universally beneficial change emerge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 11:00:03 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 10:45:14 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 10:27:30 AM


I can't see what could possibly go wrong with removing all regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.


Then you're not looking hard enough. A lot could go wrong. These things cannot and must not be eradicated overnight. First must come study, education, reflection and planning. Then a gradual phasing out over a reasonable period of time. You seem to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that I want pull a big switch marked "Instant Revolution" and just change everything immediately. That's the last thing I want. The only revolution worth a damn is a revolution of the mind, a revolution of attitude. Only from that kind of revolution will true and universally beneficial change emerge.

You are wrong. If you remove the section where you decide to tell me what I'm thinking your post contains the same content minus the irrelevant assumption and personalisation. As a rule of thumb you shouldn't be trying to tell me, or any one else, what I think or why I think it, but what you think and why you think it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2016, 11:34:43 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 10:31:38 AMI.P., Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.
Given that our leaving the EU (or at least the EEA and also the customs union) will increase all of those things, nope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 11:41:45 AM
Which is what I generally do, unlike others who try to tell me what they think I'm thinking. I specifically and overtly speculated as to what you might be thinking and invited you to correct this speculation.

All you've done here is pull me up for guessing at what I thought was the thinking behind your initial sarcastic comment, which added nothing to the debate. I therefore tried to address your comment by explaining what I think and, as you have not revealed your thinking yet, attempted to guess what your thinking might have been based on my experience of the thinking behind similar previous comments, which I think is fair. I did not, after all, assert that you definitely thought what I thought you might be thinking and invited you to clarify your thoughts.

I am well aware that I might have misinterpreted what I thought you were thinking and be wrong in thinking that what I read was not what you thought.

I think...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 11:45:04 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2016, 11:34:43 AM

Given that our leaving the EU (or at least the EEA and also the customs union) will increase all of those things, nope.


Which leads me back to the assertion that the EU, by throwing up these barriers for no good reason other than to assert its power, is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 11:56:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 11:41:45 AM
Which is what I generally do, unlike others who try to tell me what they think I'm thinking. I specifically and overtly speculated as to what you might be thinking and invited you to correct this speculation.

All you've done here is pull me up for guessing at what I thought was the thinking behind your initial sarcastic comment, which added nothing to the debate. I therefore tried to address your comment by explaining what I think and, as you have not revealed your thinking yet, attempted to guess what your thinking might have been based on my experience of the thinking behind similar previous comments, which I think is fair. I did not, after all, assert that you definitely thought what I thought you might be thinking and invited you to clarify your thoughts.

I am well aware that I might have misinterpreted what I thought you were thinking and be wrong in thinking that what I read was not what you thought.

I think...

Actually I pointed out that if you remove your assertion about what I was thinking you answer my assumed position but without claiming any insight to my thoughts.

My original comment may seem to you to add nothing but that's because it was not an invitation to debate it was an expression of support for the opposing view point. That in itself is not without value as it helps the participants to gauge support and audience engagement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2016, 11:58:55 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 11:45:04 AMWhich leads me back to the assertion that the EU, by throwing up these barriers for no good reason other than to assert its power, is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body.
To summarise, then:

Me: Leaving the EU would seriously hit the UK's economy.
You: "remove the EU from the equation and it would run a lot smoother"
Me: How?
You: Lack of tariffs, taxes, regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation.
Me: How, specifically?
You: Removal of barriers, delays and excess costs.
Me: The opposite of that is true.
You: AHA! EU is an anti-free trade and pro-protectionist body!

Look, I get that you have your ideal of the future, but there's a world of difference between that and today's reality. Moreover, there's a disconnect between what you're stating in the above in terms of said reality and the ideal you have in your head.

Perhaps in an amazing future world where there's no protectionism or borders, this idea of fully free trade can exist. But we don't live in that world. My point, throughout, has been that leaving the EU is dangerous for the UK economy. You stated things would run smoother without the EU, but that's demonstrably false. And your counterpoint then becomes to note one of the negative things about the EU in your eyes but that doesn't actually answer the key points:

- How will removing ourselves from the EU benefit British businesses and foreign businesses based in the UK?
- How would eradicating the EU overnight also benefit said businesses in terms of all the things you mention?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 12:31:31 PM
S.D. Well, pardon me all over the place.

May I enquire as to the thinking behind your support of the opposing viewpoint?

I.P. 'Without the EU' and 'outside the EU' are not the same thing. To be without the EU (i.e., if it did not exist) would make things easier both for countries currently under its control and other countries wishing to trade with them. To be outside the EU, whilst it still exists, does indeed pose problems - problems devised, created, executed and maintained by the EU.

One of the main arguments for wishing to return to the EU seems to be access to the free market, but the EU is not a free market. If it was, there would be no requirement to join it in order to gain access.

"How will removing ourselves from the EU benefit British businesses and foreign businesses based in the UK?"

In the short run, it won't. Sanctions and tariffs imposed by the EU will make trading with its members more difficult as this faux free trade body punishes us to protect itself. In the medium term, solutions will be found to mitigate some of these problems and in the long term, hopefully, other countries will see the EU for what it is and dismantle it. By this time, all former EU countries will benefit from real free trade.

"How would eradicating the EU overnight also
benefit said businesses in terms of all the
things you mention?"

It wouldn't. To eradicate the EU overnight would be next to impossible and extremely dangerous. It would leave a vacuum into which something even worse could potentially step. As I already said, the best way is to first understand the EU for what it is and then dismantle it piece by piece and/or devolve it back to what it was originally intended to be - a loose alliance of trading partners, each of which is free to trade either with the bloc, apart from it or a combination of the two depending upon local requirements.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 12:58:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 12:31:31 PM
S.D. Well, pardon me all over the place.

May I enquire as to the thinking behind your support of the opposing viewpoint?


Sure, I find  IndigoPrime's argument more convincing.

relating more specifically to the reason I picked the method of expression is did and knocked tariffs and taxes off the list before making my 'sarcastic' comment, (not because I don't believe they are necessarily a bad thing) was because I think that regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation are different to tariffs, taxes although tariffs, taxes are often used as a method of imposing regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation. I don't think that requiring things to meet certain ethical, ecological and practical requirements is a bad thing. The content of the regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines and requirements is always up for debate but as concepts they have been developed to answer many needs. (like not selling snake oil as a cure for cancer or passing off painted led as gold, or importing cheep products produced by slave labour.) I believe them to fundamentally be useful administrative tools.   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 01:16:57 PM
Thanks, Stephen. I too find the rationale behind these things to be generally sound. However, they do not need to be imposed by authoritarian bodies.

Businesses are perfectly capable of deciding these things for themselves. For example, there may be a regulation somewhere forbidding the sale of diseased or contaminated fruit - but removal of that regulation would have little to no effect as no greengrocer or supermarket would want to trade in such items and if they did they'd soon find themselves out of business or in court. The free market is largely self-regulating, especially in a modern world full of word of mouth, newspapers, radio, television and the internet.

It's a lot harder these days for small companies to get away with shady behaviour but, conversely, a lot easier for large, government protected corporations to get away with the same things due to lobbying for exemptions, protective and monopolistic legislation and just plain bribery.

Doing away with regulations, licenses, permits, certificates, restrictions, allowances, guidelines, requirements and legislation does not automatically do away with the rationale behind them, nor does it do away with the rationale's impact on business. What it does do away with is the opportunity for "government" to wet its beak by charging money for these things or to engage in coercion, theft and violence against those lacking the correct piece of paper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 01:19:11 PM
I mean Steven, sorry. My 'phone browser won't allow me to correct my posts. Apologies for the mis-spelling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 01:39:37 PM
Although I partially agree with you, in so much as Regulations (as for brevity I shall now refer to the entire list) are open to abuse but I think the need for regulation prompted the creation of the system and if you look at practices before and outside of robust regulation you tend to find a lot more abuse then from inside regulated products and industry's.

We already have the power to punish companies through individual purchasing power and although it helps, Businesses do not, as a rule, fail because they are cruel, dishonest, or environmentally catastrophic. Public opinion affects regulations and regulation holds more weight then un-focused purchaser power but I wouldn't give either up. collective bargaining always holds more weight than individual but is also less nuanced.

I understand your position (as I have read many of your previous posts) But I disagree with the foundations your argument is built on. Which led to the brevity of my original post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 01:59:20 PM
Fair enough. Every system is open to abuse.

There are other options aside from top-down authoritarian imposition. The same regulations can be imposed voluntarily through membership of trade associations, for example as with the Federation of Master builders.

I like to view government as a scaffolding which helped us build society to its current point - but scaffolding is not permanent and, at some point, must be taken down because its job is done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 02:11:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 01:59:20 PM
Fair enough. Every system is open to abuse.

There are other options aside from top-down authoritarian imposition. The same regulations can be imposed voluntarily through membership of trade associations, for example as with the Federation of Master builders.

I like to view government as a scaffolding which helped us build society to its current point - but scaffolding is not permanent and, at some point, must be taken down because its job is done.

I don't necessarily disagree as change is constant but I think the job of government's as we know them is far from done and I think that our ideas for how the world would look after our current system has evolved are radically different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 02:18:02 PM
Too true. One thing I have learned, though, is that the future never unfolds entirely as expected. I'd be happy to see any progress in the directions I prefer but that will never stop me wanting more.

I love humanity, despite our flaws, and firmly believe we are capable of doing, and being, so much better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 02:29:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 02:18:02 PM
Too true. One thing I have learned, though, is that the future never unfolds entirely as expected. I'd be happy to see any progress in the directions I prefer but that will never stop me wanting more.

I love humanity, despite our flaws, and firmly believe we are capable of doing, and being, so much better.

On the most basic level I would like to see a future where we are a planet not a series of states. I would like to see humans solve the problems of the planet and the species, not jostle for regional power. basically I would welcome an earth that looked a bit like the Original Star Trek Federation. For me the EU was a step in the right direction, admittedly a first fumbling step, but a step non the less.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 September, 2016, 02:47:27 PM
Totally with you on the Star Trek vision. As to the EU, or any government body, if we leave those things in the hands of the worst among us, who usurp everything good they could achieve for personal gain and see their positions in terms of unaccountable power over others, these institutions become toxic and dangerous and anathema to human freedom and development.

If I could have one thing out of all those I propose, it would be the ability to say "no" to these people without being crushed into the dirt. So long as I cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, honour my lawful contracts, pay my lawful bills and am honest in my dealings, what right has anybody to force me to act in ways they decide?

"No," that would be enough. Just "no."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 September, 2016, 03:04:15 PM
Very few actions exist in isolation, it would always depend on what you are saying no to, why, and how you are saying it as to weather saying no should be enough.

Crushing people into the dirt however, by escalation minor transgressions (like the naked rambler) leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as well it should.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 September, 2016, 06:54:12 PM
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, 2015
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 September, 2016, 06:54:41 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 09 September, 2016, 06:54:12 PM
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, 2015
p.s. I bet that quote has appeared somewhere in the preceding 741 pages of this thread :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 September, 2016, 07:42:29 PM
(https://regmedia.co.uk/2015/08/20/david_cameron_dr_doom.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 09 September, 2016, 10:00:04 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 September, 2016, 10:14:54 AM
"Lefties"

Why don't we go around saying "Righties"?

Because it would be bloody childish and sound incredibly silly.

We only do it to annoy you. And I do say Righties-it is a perfectly acceptable term lumping right wingers/liberals (the economic kind) and other anti- trade unionists together.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 September, 2016, 10:29:48 PM
I always assumed "righties" wasn't a thing because "lefties" was meant to be derogatory, not descriptive.  There's loads of insulting terms for right wingers, though: Tories, Nazis, LibDems, Blairites - Bennites will probably be one when the Labour party splits at the end of the month, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2016, 12:03:54 AM
They're all just labels which split and dehumanize, making it easier for us to categorise, mistrust and even hate one another. The only label which means anything is "human." That's what I am and that's what you are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 September, 2016, 12:19:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2016, 12:03:54 AM
They're all just labels which split and dehumanize, making it easier for us to categorise, mistrust and even hate one another. The only label which means anything is "human." That's what I am and that's what you are.
Oh Sharky, if only it where that simple.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 September, 2016, 12:55:58 AM
Shut it, nerds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 September, 2016, 08:35:07 AM
"Stop talking the UK down, remainers"

Oh.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/uk-business-is-too-lazy-and-fat-and-prefers-to-play-golf-says-liam-fox-tbqpt5r97?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-TWITTER-_-timespolitics-_-20160909-_-Politics-_-579189718&linkId=28584786 (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/uk-business-is-too-lazy-and-fat-and-prefers-to-play-golf-says-liam-fox-tbqpt5r97?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-TWITTER-_-timespolitics-_-20160909-_-Politics-_-579189718&linkId=28584786)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2016, 09:07:18 AM
"Dr Fox said that companies were not ready to take advantage of the trade deals he was planning is not ready to negotiate."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2016, 09:35:39 AM
The name 'Conservative Party' has always amused me: entirely independent of politics, in my head 'conservative' is a universally negative descriptor, reserved for the dull, intellectually lazy and unimaginative. It's like calling yourself the 'Everything's Grand As It Is Party, no need to do anything really,  I'll just be over here alpahabetising my Cliff Richard records. Oh and Vote Me, the others are commies and they want to make you eat lentils'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 September, 2016, 09:53:14 AM
True, but Labour sounds pretty dull as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 10 September, 2016, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: Tordelback on 10 September, 2016, 09:35:39 AM
The name 'Conservative Party' has always amused me: entirely independent of politics, in my head 'conservative' is a universally negative descriptor, reserved for the dull, intellectually lazy and unimaginative.
Very much this. I was relatively old before I figured out that they themselves didn't necessarily share that interpretation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 10 September, 2016, 09:58:02 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 10 September, 2016, 09:53:14 AM
True, but Labour sounds pretty dull as well.
Works better as a description of who they represent (or represented, at any rate) rather than what they stand for.

Bring back the Whigs, I say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 September, 2016, 11:26:28 AM
So that's two of the three people basically in charge of Brexit having been slapped down by May, who's stated they offered personal opinions rather than government policy – and one of those was in the bloody Commons, when answering questions from MPs. Shambles doesn't really cover it. (Oh, and if Brexiters are keeping track, Boris officially climbed down on his key pledge of the points system for immigration, which now joins EU funding matches and £350/week for the NHS in the Brexit promises bin.)

Of course, it's hard to blame Davis and Fox entirely, given that May clearly doesn't actually have a policy. Nor any idea about how Brexit should be. Nor, increasingly it seems, a clue or any vestige of actual competence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 10 September, 2016, 11:37:39 AM
I know Fox is getting a lot of stick for this and is no paragon of virtue, but in terms of big business, he's right isn't he? In my experience, the bigger the company, the less agile they are, and the less interested they are in doing anything progressive or disruptive.

And surely as a supposed leader, he should kick butt every so often. Alex Ferguson wasn't successful because he was sycophantic and fawned over his players all the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 September, 2016, 12:17:31 PM
First, he's supposed to be representing British trade and fighting for our future, and he's essentially just branded British business as lazy and not hungry. So immediately that's cost the UK in terms of deals. Secondly, he seems to have taken a template that he's perhaps used to (the fat-cat exec playing golf) and used that as a label for British business as a whole. It's bullshit. Heads of companies are rightly reacting with fury at such generalisation, and the inference about British working culture is deeply insulting. We work longer hours for worse pay and with worse holiday than the majority of equivalent EU countries. In return, we have efficiency and moral issues.

He could choose to address this. He could talk about solutions and new ways of working. Instead, he doubles down on the MUST WORK HARDER mantra that underpins practically everything this government says. Not, also, that it's Someone Else's Fault. Failure of the economy won't be down to Brexit, but "lazy" execs who won't ramp up exports because "it might be too difficult or too time-consuming or because they can't play golf on a Friday afternoon", rather than, say, them not having the time, or conditions being crap, or the future being entirely uncertain, or their business being unsuitable for export.

Also, given the Remainers keep getting shit for "talking down Britain", it's pretty fucking rich for this to come out of one of a Brexit leader mouth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 September, 2016, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 September, 2016, 11:26:28 AM
Of course, it's hard to blame Davis and Fox entirely, given that May clearly doesn't actually have a policy. Nor any idea about how Brexit should be.

As a notional remainer, she has to keep her hands off Brexit, or the Leavers will howl that she's deliberately sabotaging it. She's put the thing in the hands of explicitly pro-Leave politicians so, when they completely fail to deliver, she can point to their enthusiasm for the cause and say that even the people who really, really wanted this couldn't make it work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 September, 2016, 12:54:53 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 September, 2016, 10:29:48 PM
I always assumed "righties" wasn't a thing because "lefties" was meant to be derogatory, not descriptive.  There's loads of insulting terms for right wingers, though: Tories, Nazis, LibDems, Blairites - Bennites will probably be one when the Labour party splits at the end of the month, too.
Well, half of those are self-descriptions, so can hardly be termed insults...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 September, 2016, 08:37:21 AM
Tories hedge their bets on scrapping EU worker protection. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-workers-rights-cuts-ministers-margot-james-eu-holiday-a7249716.html) Who could possibly have seen that coming?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2016, 10:35:24 AM
Davis argues the referendum wasn't advisory, sending lawyers I follow on Twitter into simultaneous headdesking. No provision now to keep NHS funding pledge, nor, for that matter, any other pledge made by Leave. Workers rights bonfire on the way. My own MP has responded that he "hopes" existing nationals "using their legal rights to reside" should be able to stay (which is more sinister than it sounds — the inference is those who've lived AND worked here for five years, meaning my wife wouldn't necessarily be eligible by default, despite us having lived in the UK for over a decade). Davis has also ruled out any kind of EEA/EFTA option, yet still doesn't seem to understand the basis of international trade, EU law regarding trade, and the manner in which business exports are conducted.

I had at least some optimism about this process initially, on the blind hope May would prove to be competent. She's rapidly proving otherwise, even managing to piss off a chunk of Tories with inept evidence-free policy such as grammar schools and allowing faith schools to actively discriminate while her party simultaneously has a go at immigrants for not integrating (and for Muslims having their own Muslim-only schools). And although I've finally had conversations with non-swivel-eyed Leave voters, whose own acceptable scenarios at least crossover with my own, it's pretty clear this government has no interest in such compromise.

Prior to the vote, we were told this was all about sovereignty. Bullshit. We now have a government aiming to bring more power to our own parliament by excluding it from the most important process to happen to this country since WW2. (Parliament will also not be told about the discussions being had. No transparency, which is insane. We will have to rely on the EU giving us information about the future of our own damn country.) We were told it wasn't about immigration. Yet now the righter-wing of the Conservatives doubles down on the 'fact' that OF COURSE people were voting to curb immigration. (Really? I didn't see that on my ballot paper.)

And then there's the likes of The Sun screaming about "EU spite" because the EU's ESTA-style system will block Brits travelling to the EU. The reasoning, apparently, is that while it's perfectly fine to have a highly restrictive points system for coming to the UK, British tourists shouldn't be inconvenienced, because we're bloody well British, dammit. And without irony, the same piece says it makes no sense to have such restrictions, because Germany and France have been border-free for decades, and applying that to the UK would be crazy. GERMANY AND FRANCE HAVEN'T JUST VOTED TO LEAVE THE EU, YOU SHITHEAD 'JOURNALISTS'. Gah. Meanwhile, we have government sources simultaneously saying that the revised immigration system will at one be limited only to high-skilled labour yet will also provide the farmers the low-skilled labour they need to ensure British crops don't all rot in the fields.

No-one has a clue. Or, even more worrying, they do know what they're doing, and seek to make a small minority of wealthy people very happy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 September, 2016, 10:45:54 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2016, 10:35:24 AM

No-one has a clue. Or, even more worrying, they do know what they're doing, and seek to make a small minority of wealthy people very happy.


More or less my entire argument in a nutshell.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 September, 2016, 11:46:06 AM
Inflation continues to be very low, employment continues to be very high.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 September, 2016, 11:58:13 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 September, 2016, 11:46:06 AM
Inflation continues to be very low, employment continues to be very high.

Because we haven't done anything yet. Wait until that exchange rate feeds through into raw material and energy costs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2016, 12:00:06 PM
Plus employment figures are bolstered by people in jobs that aren't providing enough to make ends meet (zero-hours; people taking multiple shitty jobs; self-employed averaging non-sustainable incomes), while unemployed figures are lowered by it being increasingly tricky to be classified as a 'job seeker'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 September, 2016, 12:05:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 September, 2016, 12:00:06 PM
Plus employment figures are bolstered by people in jobs that aren't providing enough to make ends meet (zero-hours; people taking multiple shitty jobs; self-employed averaging non-sustainable incomes), while unemployed figures are lowered by it being increasingly tricky to be classified as a 'job seeker'.

Indeed. Under-employment is a very real element in these figures. Two people wanting forty hours a week but only getting twenty are functionally equivalent to one person in full-time employment and one unemployed, but the figures only show two employed people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 September, 2016, 02:10:13 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/15/riz-ahmed-typecast-as-a-terrorist

Interesting article on the farcical nature of security and the grinding effect it has on even the relatively privileged when their face isn't the right colour.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 September, 2016, 03:16:29 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 September, 2016, 12:05:46 PMIndeed. Under-employment is a very real element in these figures. Two people wanting forty hours a week but only getting twenty are functionally equivalent to one person in full-time employment and one unemployed, but the figures only show two employed people.

Are these numbers calculated by tax contributions or a reduction in the number of claimed unemployment benefits over a certain period?  I only ask because I'm curious how many cash-in-hand workers pay their taxes, and how many sick and disabled people might have successfully found work since dying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 September, 2016, 04:02:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 September, 2016, 03:16:29 PM
Are these numbers calculated by tax contributions or a reduction in the number of claimed unemployment benefits over a certain period?  I only ask because I'm curious how many cash-in-hand workers pay their taxes, and how many sick and disabled people might have successfully found work since dying.

The stats are usually described as 'unemployed and claiming benefits' so I assume the unemployment figure is a straight count of active claimants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 15 September, 2016, 04:41:37 PM
"The level and rate of UK unemployment measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) using a definition of unemployment specified by the International Labour Organisation. Unemployed people as those without a job who have been actively seeking work in the past 4 weeks and are available to start work in the next 2 weeks. It also includes those who are out of work but have found a job and are waiting to start it in the next 2 weeks."

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 September, 2016, 08:07:42 AM
(http://www.wakingtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Resistance.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2016, 09:27:14 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 15 September, 2016, 02:10:13 PM
Interesting article on the farcical nature of security and the grinding effect it has on even the relatively privileged when their face isn't the right colour.

(http://lolsalot.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Family-Guy-Racist-Jokes.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 September, 2016, 11:31:58 AM
Yup!

Being dragged off by security services at Luton airport because he appeared in a Michael Winterbottom movie about Guantanamo made me realise our side is as crap at this intelligence stuff as the Iranians were when they believed that a man publicly announced he was a secret agent on The daily show (As featured in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewater_(film))
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 September, 2016, 12:27:56 PM
Dublin Bus are on strike (and my scooter is out of action).  I believe in trade unions; i believe in industrial action when workers are being treated badly. 
However, Dublin bus drivers are often late, and occasionally don't turn up at all with little or no explanation.  I've seen them be needlessly rude, and even openly racist, to passengers.  The fares are extravagant, and I truly hate taking the bus.
Take your pay rise, drivers; but let it reflect the job you're doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2016, 12:50:52 PM
I'm better disposed to Dublin Bus drivers, it's a tough job (especially over the last couple of years with the city centre a 5km long building site) and they generally do it well. I'm also a trades unions man by birth, inclination and subscription, and support people's right to seek  better pay and conditions if they can.

However the seeming rush to serious levels of strike action has seemed very harsh, especially completely drokking up Culture Night for many of us last night. The strike programme appears more driven by a desire to outdo the Luas drivers, whose messing up of the Easter centenary admittdly took some beating. A more proportionate programme might have been better received by the travelling public, and instead it feels unhappily like everyone is going through the expected motions towards an inevitable end result, and the rest of us have to suffer while well-paid men on both sides wave their willies about to justify their parasitic existence.

And I do hate the careerist Ogle on a visceral level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 17 September, 2016, 03:22:30 PM
Agree with the sentiments above regarding the strike lads. I too a Union man at heart  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
Britain's most unelectable politician has won another election - much as one might be said to have won the contents of a Christmas cracker.  Many ex-Labour members have rejoined the party so they can quit in disgust at this turn of events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2016, 06:13:33 PM
As a Labour member I'm really torn on this.  On the one hand there are a lot of Corbyn's views that I think the party needs to get back to.  On the other hand I'm not convinced that he is the man for it.  Whilst he has the backing of the party membership, he also has a responsibility to the PLP as well and needs to garner their backing.  This is the real schism in the party and the politicians need to get their head around this.  They have a responsibility to their electorate, to the party members and to the PLP.  The internecine rivalry that has generated this situation has given the Tories carte blanche and they are taking advantage of it to the detriment of the nation.  Mrs May has further muddied the waters by making the sort of noises that Labour should have been making for a long time.  She now needs to be called on it in the same way that she was over Grammar schools.

The most depressing thing at the moment is that politicians of all parties really do not seem to be getting their head around the divide between their views / actions and those of the electorate in general.  We've hd this, the referendum vote and the rise of UKIP but they continue to act as if it is the population that is the problem rather than them.  Cognitive dissonance?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 24 September, 2016, 06:45:38 PM
I think Corbyn is decent man of integrity. Which cant be said for many disciples of Blair that tried unsuccessfully to oust him in this contest.
Blair wasn't true 'Labour' by any of stretch of the definition. More Tory than the Tories on may issues. I'm not sure if Labour can get elected as sadly this country seems more in hoc to big business than ever.
I've got friends that were ardent supporters of Blair that now cant stand the man, and whilst they might not be fans of Corbyn they can see why the party has taken such a swing to the left to remove themselves from the last vestiges of New labour.
Personally I hope Corbyn continues to call for Blair's prosecution. It would go some way to restoring the image of this Country across the Globe. I'm truly saddened to see the continuing chaos Blair and his self proclaimed 'heir' Cameron have unleashed across the Middle East.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2016, 07:50:13 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2016, 06:13:33 PMOn the other hand I'm not convinced that he is the man for it.

Nor was Owen Smith, but the PLP put him forward as their great white hope anyway, and said he'd be PM one day.  DISCUSS.

Despite all their protestations to the contrary, perceptions of electability are clearly not something they are concerned with, nor is serving their party, their constituents, or even the wider electorate, as evidenced by their basing their voting on welfare or military action on how it can allow them to inconvenience their leader.  At some point this became less about how bad Corbyn might be for Labour down the line and how bad the PLP demonstrably are for both Labour and the country right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 September, 2016, 08:20:50 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2016, 06:13:33 PM
politicians of all parties really do not seem to be getting their head around the divide between their views / actions and those of the electorate

People don't really have views. They flap from one plausible sounding idea to another.

Most people can't honestly report (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-weighting) the way they voted in the last election, never mind face up to the truth regarding what they thought about Saddam Hussein or 'Europe'.

People get to forget their fuck ups and pretend they were always right in a way politicians can't. It's one of the reasons they hold us in such contempt.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 September, 2016, 09:08:23 PM
The only thing Labour appears to be united on right now is red-lining anything that might result in a decent settlement with the EU. It's astonishing to see Corbyn and so-called moderates alike effectively in a pact with hardline Conservatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 September, 2016, 09:09:34 PM
I don't think they care enough about the people to hold us in contempt. They seem to regard us as a necessary evil at best and an impediment to their ambitions at worst.

You all know what kind of person seeks political power, what kind of person the establishment presents for election. One of the oldest jokes you know is, "how can you tell when a politician's lying?" Yet you keep on voting for these assholes anyway. Picking the one who seems the least assholey. Then you complain at the inevitable ensuing assholery.

If you vote, you can't complain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 September, 2016, 09:20:47 PM
I genuinely doub't Corbyn is that kind of bloke, Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 September, 2016, 09:21:10 PM
Labour right now certainly gives off the impression of caring about votes rather than the people it claims to represent. It's running scared of UKIP. Given that 65% of Labour voters went for Remain, it's astonishing to see Welsh Labour effectively vote against single market membership, and even prominent Remain campaigners now say freedom of movement is a red line (thereby wiping out any chance of anything other than a full hard Brexit). This is clearly to shore up votes in those seats that otherwise might be a bit UKIPpy, despite screwing over the country as a whole.

(I'm now resigned to leaving the EU. But it's utter madness to not at least use the EEA as a starting point, given that even WTO membership is not remotely guaranteed.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 08:23:23 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 24 September, 2016, 09:20:47 PM
I genuinely doub't Corbyn is that kind of bloke, Sharky.

So, let's everything goes right for him and he becomes P.M. He's still going to expect the people to pay for his ideas (and his wages), and if people don't want to pay they'll be bullied into doing so, even have their property stolen. He'll want things done his way, and anyone who disagrees faces being fined or locked up.

I don't doubt that Corbyn is a nicer bloke than most of the rest but the system itself won't allow that niceness to trickle down. If one person says, "I'm not paying for that," he'll have no choice but to allow that person to be bullied and robbed. If he doesn't, it's a direct challenge to his power, and if there's one thing no MP or PM can abide, good, bad or indifferent, it's a challenge to their power.

All politicians seek power over others for one reason or another. Granted, some reasons might be more laudable than others but those reasons still require power, still require the obedience of the population, still require those who disagree to be bullied into compliance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 09:04:59 AM
Far better we do away with taxation and just privatize everything.  A world run by unelected billionaires who only have to worry about keeping their customers happy is a much better idea that democratically elected leaders.  If they don't run the world in the public interest we can just establish our own multinationals and overthrow their monopolies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 09:18:26 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 09:04:59 AM
Far better we do away with taxation and just privatize everything.  A world run by unelected billionaires who only have to worry about keeping their customers happy is a much better idea that democratically elected leaders.  If they don't run the world in the public interest we can just establish our own multinationals and overthrow their monopolies.

So, can I infer that you agree with what I posted and this is the only alternative you can envisage?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 09:47:33 AM
No, Sharky, I was joking.

Look at the great lengths people and companies go to to avoid paying taxes, or to pay as little as possible.  If there is no reasonable means of compelling people to pay taxes, national services would collapse. In order for society to function, the rights of the people must be put before the property rights of a person.  Anarchist societies don't by build hospitals and motorways. 

If you don't vote, and encourage others not to vote, it doesn't limit the power of an unrepresentative government, or bring the power of that government into question.  It just makes it easier for an unrepresentative government to hold power, since they just have to appeal to a smaller base of support. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 September, 2016, 10:05:52 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2016, 07:50:13 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2016, 06:13:33 PMOn the other hand I'm not convinced that he is the man for it.

Nor was Owen Smith, but the PLP put him forward as their great white hope anyway, and said he'd be PM one day.  DISCUSS.


This for me was the biggest challenge.  He's our local MP to boot and I've not been blown away by him.  He's only been around for about a decade as a politician and is most likely only one because he was parachuted into Kim Howells insanely safe old seat when he retired.  To go to leading the opposition / future PM in that short a space of time?  Sorry but really not sold.  On the other hand Corbyn's performance to date leaves a lot to be desired at a time when the government really does need to be held to account.  Talk about Hobson's choice.  When you factor in the calibre of politicians full stop in any of the parties you really have to wonder what the hell is going on in this country.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 10:18:55 AM
My biggest concern about Smith was the fact that he seemed to come from nowhere to suddenly be the guy the whole PLP was behind the whole time.  I can imagine he got a tap on the shoulder one day and was told "now is your time...you're the least offensive  and most marketable mildly left wing man for the job.".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 10:47:54 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 09:47:33 AM

...the rights of the people must be put before the property rights of a person. 


This, for me, is the fundamental point of disagreement.

It is only a small step from "the people" holding more rights than one person to holding more rights than two people, or a hundred, or a minority. This is the argument of tyrants through the ages - "give me the power to crush the Communists/Jews/Gypsies/Gays/Palestinians/Blacks/Muslims/Immigrants (etc.), and I will save the rest of you."

The rights of the One must be sacrosanct and inviolable under and within the Common Law. If just one human being living within the Common Law can be crushed, then anyone can be crushed. As James T. Kirk said, "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many." The many is simply a collection of individuals, each with the same rights and responsibilities. The many, therefore, have only the same rights and responsibilities as the one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 September, 2016, 10:58:07 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 10:18:55 AM
My biggest concern about Smith was the fact that he seemed to come from nowhere to suddenly be the guy the whole PLP was behind the whole time. 

Not so sure it was the whole PLP but I know what you mean.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 11:31:31 AM
QuoteIt is only a small step from "the people" holding more rights than one person to holding more rights than two people, or a hundred, or a minority.

The key point is reasonable.  When the government uses overwhelming force or unfair methods, they no longer deserve our support.  The great thing about representative democracy is that the arbiters of what is "reasonable" is us. 

A willingness to sacrifice the whole crew to save his mate might have felt noble to Kirk, but I doubt the guy with the wife and three kids whose job it is clean the gunk out of the transporter filter felt the same way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 11:52:57 AM
Who decides what's reasonable? You say it's "us," but is that us as individuals or us as a whole? Again, if we all had the same rights there'd be no problem deciding what is and is not reasonable. Leaving the right to decide to a nebulous "us," or worse still to a handful of elected people, muddies the issue. If it is wrong for me to push you around and take your stuff and force you to live how I think you should live, then it's wrong for two people to do that to you, or a hundred, or a minority of leaders.

The government uses overwhelming force and unfair methods as a matter of course, for example by sending in riot police to break up peaceful demonstrations or by passing legislation and disguising it as law. Or by issuing dodgy dossiers. Or by telling lies and avoiding questions.

To me, the arbiter of what is reasonable for you is you - not me and my friends or the people I vote for. So long as you live within the simple and straightforward strictures of the Common Law, what right have I to stop you?

The point about Kirk taking his crew to rescue Spock is that they all volunteered, none of them were ordered to go or forced to comply. They willingly followed his lead and, if the guy with the wife and three kids whose job it is clean the gunk out of the transporter didn't want to go, he didn't have to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 12:18:49 PM
"Common Law" is a mixture of decisions of court which further define legislation, or matters which have never been legislated for, or there is limited legislation for, because there's never been a need. 

The first requires the authority of a court, the second requires a shared responsibility - a collective "us". 

The collection of taxation and its use for the public good is one of the simple and straightforward strictures of common law.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 September, 2016, 12:22:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 10:47:54 AM
As James T. Kirk said, "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many." The many is simply a collection of individuals, each with the same rights and responsibilities. The many, therefore, have only the same rights and responsibilities as the one.

You must have seen a different edit of that film - the one I saw had "Sometimes the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 September, 2016, 12:23:24 PM
Hi there - I am a serial killer - my idea of reasonable is to kill you and wear your hands as antlers!

You have to have a set of agreed rules of reasnableness about anything - if you leave tax to "reasonableness", then people will reason to their own benefit - they do at the moment even within the constraints of a supposedly rigid system.  I know it would be nice to think a sea change in attitudes would happen and everyone would be competing to be the most generous - that is certainly a blue sky version of humanity.... Wasnt there a reality type programme on recently where people were "ship wrecked" and immediately broke into self serving tribalism?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 01:18:16 PM
Panth - By Common Law, I mean the basic fundamentals of all law, which is basically very simple - cause loss, harm or damage to no-one, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings. These are the foundations on which all case law is built.

Legisalative law is distinct from common law and subservient to it. For example, if a government passes legislation declaring that all blonde-haired, blue-eyed babies born in July must be euthenised that legislation would be instantly rendered null and void by the common law, which forbids causing harm to others. Technically, legislation enforcing taxes is also null and void because it violates the common law need for contracts and also endorses the forcible extraction of money, goods and property - which is theft.

Common law does not require imposition by a court as the overwhelming majority of people understand it. Courts become involved only after transgression in order to examine what law, if any, has been violated and how harmony between the parties in dispute can be achieved.

Legislative law is an evolution of maritime law or business law. Initially, a sailor would "sign up" for a voyage, waiving his common law rights and instead agreeing to place himself under the specific rules of the particular ship or shipping company he wished to work on or for. This practice expanded massively under the British Empire, propogated by such bodies as the East India Company and survives today in the form of contracts of employment. Governments have appropriated the idea for themselves, conflating legislative law with common law (the "law of the land"), thereby pretending that legislative law and common law carry the same weight, which they do not.

It is important to remember that most genocides have been perfectly legal as they were enacted through legislation of one type or another. However, that which is legal is not necessarily that which is lawful. The Nazi trials at Nuremberg definitively proved this with the succinct verdict that "I was just following orders" is no excuse.

Taxation law is not common law, it is legislative law.

Sheridan - it's a while since I watched the film but you are correct. Law is not always black and white. For example, in extreme cases (what is sometimes referred to as a "lifeboat situation") Spock's "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" may be perfectly valid. But hard cases make bad law, and that which applies in a lifeboat does not necessarily apply in everyday life.

Leigh S - I think you're confusing personal rights and responsibility with chaos. Killing people is against the common law (but not against legislative law, as all the dead in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., sadly and mutely demonstrate). Respecting and honouring the rights and responsibilities of the individual does not imply that courts and police will cease to exist, nor that everyone will automatically devolve into savagery. Human beings have evolved as a social species, cooperation is hard-wired into us. For example, I don't need the government to tell me to drive on the left hand side of the road, I do it because that's the custom and because I don't want to kill myself or anyone else.

If there was a revolution tomorrow and the new Glorious Leader decided to impose anarchical policies such as voluntary taxation, then there would indeed be chaos and greed. This is because most people have been brought up with the idea that we all need somebody else to tell us what to do. The very first thing we learn in school is not that 1+1=2 or the alphabet, but that if we want anything we must first ask permission and that we must do as we are told. It's very hard to shake that off. What is needed, in my view, is a long period of public discussion on these issues so that people can see for themselves the potential benefits and pitfalls of living in a truly free society. Storming Parliament and hanging politicians from lampposts is definitely not the answer. Never has been, never will be.

I don't own a television and so did not see the program you refer to. However, I'd be willing to bet that the situation was engineered to be good entertainment, from the selection of contestants to the geography of the arena and the availability of resources. If the contestants had all just got along and cooperated, it would have been a very boring show.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 25 September, 2016, 01:20:07 PM
I don't think anyone - even Owen Smith himself - seriously expected him to win.  I think he was essentially a stalking horse, standing and taking  a bullet for the party (as he would see it) in order to see how much support there was out there for a Not Corbyn candidate.  And now he and the people behind him have their answer - 38%.

As I've said elsewhere, I suspect cold, hard eyes are looking at the numbers and figuring how much of the anti-Corbyn section of the party - most of the MPs and more than a third of the membership - might follow them the pastures new.

Peace is not about to break out in the Labour Party, now that the leadership contest is over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 02:12:07 PM
QuoteSpock's "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" may be perfectly valid. But hard cases make bad law, and that which applies in a lifeboat does not necessarily apply in everyday life.

You just argued that "putting the individual before the many" is valid.  Now "putting the many before the individual" is a bad law because it's too extreme? 

Rather that worry about hypothetical of the government murdering babies (or Nazism, which is founded on the supremacy of the individual) lets talk only in realities. 

The reality is that if the government didn't compellingly people to pay taxes, hospital and schools would close.  Once the bodies had been cleared away private companies would take over .

If the government follows policies the people don't like, the people can remove them.  Private companies can only be removed by investing huge sums of money. 

In removing authority of government (which is answerable to the people) power is handed to the wealthy (who are answerable to their investors).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 September, 2016, 02:25:07 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 25 September, 2016, 01:20:07 PMAs I've said elsewhere, I suspect cold, hard eyes are looking at the numbers and figuring how much of the anti-Corbyn section of the party - most of the MPs and more than a third of the membership - might follow them the pastures new.
And yet under FPTP, any split would be electoral suicide for both bits of Labour. Which is kind of poetic justice in the sense Labour reneged on promises to the LDs when Blair got in and has ever since that point gone against any idea of electoral reform in the Commons (Corbyn and Smith included), although I note they're more than happy to suggest we should have PR elections for the second chamber.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 September, 2016, 02:36:24 PM
Quote from: Molch-R on 15 September, 2016, 04:41:37 PM
"The level and rate of UK unemployment measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) using a definition of unemployment specified by the International Labour Organisation. Unemployed people as those without a job who have been actively seeking work in the past 4 weeks and are available to start work in the next 2 weeks. It also includes those who are out of work but have found a job and are waiting to start it in the next 2 weeks."

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment)
Interesting, so all those times I thought I was unemployed between jobs that my temp agency had passed my way, I wasn't (even if I only had one day's work followed by a few weeks not-work)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2016, 03:21:02 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 02:12:07 PM

You just argued that "putting the individual before the many" is valid.  Now "putting the many before the individual" is a bad law because it's too extreme? 

Rather that worry about hypothetical of the government murdering babies (or Nazism, which is founded on the supremacy of the individual) lets talk only in realities. 

The reality is that if the government didn't compellingly people to pay taxes, hospital and schools would close.  Once the bodies had been cleared away private companies would take over .

If the government follows policies the people don't like, the people can remove them.  Private companies can only be removed by investing huge sums of money. 

In removing authority of government (which is answerable to the people) power is handed to the wealthy (who are answerable to their investors).

Putting the rights of the individual before the rights of the many is valid. I said that "hard cases make bad law." This means that general law should not be based on extreme situations, "lifeboat situations." For example, if there are ten people in a lifeboat and one of them has a deadly infectious disease, the nine might throw the one overboard to save the majority. Moral discussions of this decision aside, a sound legal argument of self-preservation could be put forward to defend this act. However, if a group of people in a village did the same thing, say casting an infected person off a cliff, the same defence could not be employed as there are other options - isolation, hospitalisation, etc. This is what is meant by "hard cases make bad law."

If you want to talk only in realities, I refer you again to the "dodgy dossier" - a pack of lies put forward as truth in order to justify a war of aggression*; a direct contravention of the common law requirement to be honest in one's dealings. (Nazism is based on the superiority of race, not the individual. If it was based on the superiority of the individual, it would include all individuals but it demonstrably did not.)

The reality of your claim that " if the government didn't compellingly (sic) people to pay taxes, hospital and schools would close," is conjecture (as is my claim that voluntary taxation would have the opposite effect). There are other ways to fund, or partially fund, such things. If you want to keep government involvement, how about the process of seigniorage? When the government, under the treasury, issues paper money, it costs between three to five pence to print each note, which it then sells to the banks at face value. That means that for every fiver the Treasury prints it gets around £4.95, for every tenner £9.95, for every twenty £19.95 and for every fifty £49.95. However, over 97% of the money in circulation today is digital, created by private banks at the grand cost of fuck all. Allow the Treasury to take back that 97% and charge seigniorage on it and that's a big chunk of money that could go into hospitals and schools. It probably wouldn't cover everything but it would be a significant start. The rest could be made up in other ways, one of which could be voluntary contributions.

Further, having private companies involved (not governmentally protected monopoly corporations) would reduce costs by introducing free market competition into the mix.

Once a government has been removed due to policies "we don't like," the policies generally stay in effect under the new government, such as the War in Iraq, Council Charges and Tuition Fees. Private companies can be removed by public sanctions - you don't like Coca-Cola, buy something else.

Government is only answerable to the people in theory, in practice it answers to the wealthy. Take away the authority of the government and you take away one of the biggest advantages the wealthy have. The wealthy then become answerable to, and dependent upon, the goodwill of their customers and natural market forces.

*Incidentally, this war was also a contravention of the Kellogg-Briand Pact, which the United Kingdom signed August 27th 1928. This pact, which remains in force today, has over sixty signatories which  promised not to use war to resolve "disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them." This is another breach of the common law requirement to honour one's lawful contracts and further demonstration of the moral bankruptcy of governments and their legislations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2016, 05:29:06 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 25 September, 2016, 01:20:07 PM
I don't think anyone - even Owen Smith himself - seriously expected him to win.  I think he was essentially a stalking horse, standing and taking  a bullet for the party (as he would see it) in order to see how much support there was out there for a Not Corbyn candidate.  And now he and the people behind him have their answer - 38%.

A minimum of 200k Corbyn supporters (though the NEC's own numbers say 100k more than that is more likely) were prevented from voting and the true percentage of support for the Labour right is likely lower than 38%.
Smith also sniped the original candidate against Corbyn, Angela Eagle, and made it clear via homophobic comments that he was willing to go on the attack against rival candidates, while staunch Corbyn critics like John Mann openly attacked Smith for putting his name forward.  Smith wasn't a stalking horse candidate - he genuinely thought he could win, though admittedly this was likely because the initial plan was to exclude Corbyn from the ballot and make the actual contest a formality. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 September, 2016, 05:35:33 PM
QuoteThe wealthy then become answerable to, and dependent upon, the goodwill of their customers and natural market forces.

If this is a fair and equitable way for a society to function, can you explain to me why the companies which are the most profitable and popular are frequently the ones which are responsible for human rights abuses?  Why is it that Apple continue to run at a massive profit despite their mistreatment of factory workers?  Why are there Starbucks on every corner despite their unwillingness to pay towards the well-being of society?  Why are Wal-Mart the most profitable company in the world despite their willingness to mistreat employees?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 25 September, 2016, 06:14:00 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2016, 05:29:06 PMSmith wasn't a stalking horse candidate - he genuinely thought he could win, though admittedly this was likely because the initial plan was to exclude Corbyn from the ballot and make the actual contest a formality.

If that were truly the case, then a much stronger and more identifiable - i.e. someone people had actually heard of - candidate  than Smth would have come forward to take theur shot at it*.  As it is, Dan Jarvis, Chuka Umunna and (even, god help us) Tristram Hunt are all still there, watching and waiting.


* unless Smith was always supposed to be an interim leader, there to ride out the storm of Corbyn's removal until someone more capable and electable thought the omens were right for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2016, 07:55:04 PM
I think Eagle was supposed to be an interim leader, that the more recognizable names knew that being the one who deposed Corbyn after the party's shift to the left would do them more harm than it would favors.  They were more than likely waiting for the next leadership contest - in their minds, they had four years to line up their ducks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 26 September, 2016, 08:12:59 PM
Dear God Chuka Umuuna please no. Pompous, vain snobby nosed bastard. Common knowledge amongst those in Labour circles. Please no! Blairite though and they still not gonna back down and recognise this result/mandate!
Bit rich May mocking Corbyn at last PMQ's bearing in mind the Pope was was actually more 'elected' than her.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 September, 2016, 08:20:34 PM
Chuka "we should sacrifice single market membership to axe freedom of movement" Umuuna. And then "clarifying" things by saying his position was impossible (retain membership while having an alternative to FoM). So basically the same position as Boris Johnson, then. And he was on Remain, too, and is now part of Open Britain, despite apparently wanting Not Actually Open In Fact Fuck Off If You Are A Foreign Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 September, 2016, 08:44:12 PM
At least good old Jezza stood his ground on Trident today :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2016, 09:08:31 PM
I would have thought a Liberal voter would appreciate someone selling out their principles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 September, 2016, 09:20:02 PM
I detest all who do such a thing but Jezza is supposed to be the Messiah and above such things. Obviously he's just like the rest :'( :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2016, 09:26:11 PM
If you detest such things why are you a Liberal voter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 26 September, 2016, 09:40:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 September, 2016, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 03 September, 2016, 02:24:49 AM. The architects of the project wanted this from day one. 

Any chance of a citation for this claim? A fairly solid and credible one if possible?

Try googling European Political Community and European Defence Community. Both were advanced by Jean Monnet as the logical development of the European Steel and Coal Community but were scrapped after De Gaulle led a nationalist backlash. The European Economic Community was a retreat back to economics after this setback.

As to why pro-European mocking of Eurosceptic 'scare stories' are not taken seriously it's worth looking at is the Roy Jenkins vs. Tony Benn debate in the 1975 Referendum. Jenkins mocked Benn's talk of the Commission wanting a Single Currency, saying it would never happen in his lifetime. The first attempt of currency harmonisation was made within five years (the 'snake' protype for ERM) and within sixteen years agreement had been made to proceed with full EMU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 26 September, 2016, 09:51:36 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 25 September, 2016, 01:20:07 PM
I don't think anyone - even Owen Smith himself - seriously expected him to win.  I think he was essentially a stalking horse, standing and taking  a bullet for the party (as he would see it) in order to see how much support there was out there for a Not Corbyn candidate.  And now he and the people behind him have their answer - 38%.

As I've said elsewhere, I suspect cold, hard eyes are looking at the numbers and figuring how much of the anti-Corbyn section of the party - most of the MPs and more than a third of the membership - might follow them the pastures new.

Peace is not about to break out in the Labour Party, now that the leadership contest is over.

I think they hoped to force Corbyn to quit. When that failed they hoped to keep him off the ballot paper. When that failed they were stuck with challenging him. While stalking Horse isn't the right metaphor* I imagine Smith knew he couldn't win once Corbyn was on the ballot. He probably hoped to do well enough that he'd become the leader of the moderates and would have the credibility to stand again in eighteen months time. That obviously didn't happen (not just the result but also the fact that he ran a gaffe-prone, uninspiring campaign).

*A stalking horse is a diversionary tactic to cover an advance. In elections it made sense to describe an ideological challenger under the old Tory election rules because the winner needed to get more than 50% to prevent a second round and there was no bar on additional candidates joining in later rounds. Therefore a hopeless candidate could stand in the first round to bloody the leader in the hope of inspiring more credible candidates to enter the next round (this was Redwood's strategy). Doesn't really work with the Labour rules because the effort involved in getting onto the ballot means its not practical to run hopeless challengers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 September, 2016, 10:57:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2016, 09:26:11 PM
If you detest such things why are you a Liberal voter?

Are you saying I shouldn't have a vote anymore?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2016, 11:28:04 PM
I'm asking why, if you detest those who abandon their principles, you vote for a party that was wiped out in the last election for doing just that in coalition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 September, 2016, 03:17:04 AM
Are you talking about the tuition fees, as that was explained by the party after they got crushed. As soon as they knew what it was like to be in government, they should've explained the reasoning behind it.
The liberals for their tiny size did quite well during their time in government. There are a few articles out there that confirm this but I'll pick something from the Guardian

Hitting above their station (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/15/how-much-of-the-liberal-democrats-2010-election-manifesto-was-implemented)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 September, 2016, 10:50:13 AM
The Lib Dems did actually manage to get a large amount of their manifesto into policy, along with derailing a fair chunk of bad Conservative stuff, such as the IP bill. The problem is they screwed themselves with that daft pledge on tuition fees (which people on my Twitter timeline still bang on about whenever the Lib Dems are mentioned), forever ruining their credibility as something different. That the reality of coalition means you have no choice but to compromise is irrelevant – although the party should have stood fast against any rise in fees, because that made them all look ridiculous.

For my money, they made three bigger mess-ups: Clegg should have had as a red-line one major position of state (ideally him as Foreign Sec.); the referendum on voting reform should have been AV+, as per the recommendation (although I suspect it would still have lost); and the Health Bill should have been killed in the Lords (rather than Lib Dems helping it through). 2015 would still have seen the party get a serious kicking (not least due to the Lib Dems being inept from a press standpoint and the Conservatives taking all the credit for everything the Lib Dems did, not least, brazenly, gay marriage), but not quite to the extent we saw.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 11:25:48 AM
Tories taking the credit for the gay marriage bill* and avoiding any blame for Iraq** is the reason we can't have nice things.

*134 against vs 126 for, vs Labour's 217/22 and Lib's 44/4. So really I'd say it's taking credit for what Labour did.
**146 for and 3 against, though in this case it's simply that Labour couldn't have done it without them tho.

I liked the Lib Dems enough to vote for them in 2010. Compromise would have been one thing but the Dems rolled and surrendered where they didn't actively assist.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2016, 11:32:46 AM
The LibDems could have put their money where their mouths were and attempted a broad coalition of parties of the center and left, but the coalition happened because of them and they have to take full responsibility for that coalition's failures - which Tim Farron hasn't.
Clegg - even though I don't believe for a moment that he's learned anything - at least knows to fake it now he's got a book coming out.  He seems relatively on-point about Brexit, too, which is quite disheartening seeing as he's not actually in any position to do anything about it - though his time as deputy PM suggests it wouldn't much matter if he was.

Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 September, 2016, 03:17:04 AM
Are you talking about the tuition fees, as that was explained by the party after they got crushed. As soon as they knew what it was like to be in government, they should've explained the reasoning behind it.


I see - you contest that when people do something at odds with what they previously stated, there might be a reason for it.  I understand.

QuoteThe liberals for their tiny size did quite well during their time in government. There are a few articles out there that confirm this but I'll pick something from the Guardian.

Much as I trust the Guardian to report objectively on the Liberal Democrats despite one of their editors once standing as one, I'll take your word for it that article is great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 11:25:48 AM
Tories taking the credit for the gay marriage bill* and avoiding any blame for Iraq** is the reason we can't have nice things.

*134 against vs 126 for, vs Labour's 217/22 and Lib's 44/4. So really I'd say it's taking credit for what Labour did.
**146 for and 3 against, though in this case it's simply that Labour couldn't have done it without them tho.

I liked the Lib Dems enough to vote for them in 2010. Compromise would have been one thing but the Dems rolled and surrendered where they didn't actively assist.

But that's not how politics works - oppositions can't push laws through, only Governments can. Gay Marriage would never have become law if the Tory Government hadn't support it. So whilst you note/criticise the Tory party for having a large proportion of homophobes...Cameron's Government clearly deserves credit for supporting the measure (i.e. drafting bill, championing the cause, allotting parliamentary time and allocating resources to implementation).

Likewise on Iraq. You can attack IDS as a blithering idiot who failed to hold Blair to account (unlike Milliband over Syria), but no matter how much the Tories supported the war, it would never have been considered if Blair hadn't have wanted British involvement. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 September, 2016, 12:23:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2016, 11:32:46 AMThe LibDems could have put their money where their mouths were and attempted a broad coalition of parties of the center and left
How realistic would that have been? Political figures from the time have said Labour itself was deeply divided and during talks couldn't nail down key elements of its own policy, let alone how it would work in coalition. And Lab/Lib combined would have been 11 seats short of a Commons majority. So who fills those spaces, and how much effort would have been required to get any policy through the Commons? How much misery would backbenchers have caused?

This was, note, nonetheless my preferred route at the time, and I was gutted when it didn't happen. Yet even on the day of the results, you had Labour capitulation, with MPs suggesting people had had enough of Labour and that it was time to let someone else have a go. (Surely, any MP should want their party to always be in power, to do good things!)

I also suspect people hadn't realised quite how far the Lib Dems had shifted. Under Ashdown and especially Kennedy, they had shifted into a somewhat socialist position, and certainly a fairly libertarian one. By 2010, they had lurched rightwards and also become more authoritarian, which was even more evident by 2015. (Oddly, their manifesto, at least, seemed true to the party's roots and ideals, but their actions did not.) So perhaps people didn't realise we had a soft-right/authoritarian-right coalition, rather than something more centrist in nature.

On Brexit, I do think it's a pity even despite everything the Lib Dems did or didn't do, many people are unwilling to do anything other than dismiss Clegg. He's in it for the money, apparently, or to get some kind of cushy EU job if we somehow stay in. Or, you know, he actually has loads of experience in this and is for the most part talking and writing sense.

Quote from: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:14:45 PMGay Marriage would never have become law if the Tory Government hadn't support it. So whilst you note/criticise the Tory party for having a large proportion of homophobes...Cameron's Government clearly deserves credit for supporting the measure (i.e. drafting bill, championing the cause, allotting parliamentary time and allocating resources to implementation).
The problem is more that they took all of the credit, despite this all being a legal requirement from the coalition agreement. In other words, the Conservatives had no choice to do all those things, otherwise the government would have fallen. I think Cameron deserves some praise – it's one of the few things he got right, despite not having the support of the majority of his part – but the Conservatives as a whole? Not really. And them whitewashing this being Lib Dem policy was pretty distasteful, but then that also showcases the naivety of the Liberal Democrats – as Clegg as mulled since, they simply didn't realise how ferociously the Conservatives would gobble up every piece of good news and frame it as their own, rather than the coalition (and certainly never the coalition partners).

What's most depressing about this is it knocked back electoral reform yet again. The choices in the referendum were ridiculous (FPTP vs AV), and then the broadly disliked coalition put loads of people off of the general idea, further cementing the reactionary and partisan nature of British politics. I fully believe we would be a better country politically with more coalitions, with smaller parties that could then join together to form government. In Iceland, for example, you have two parties that broadly map with the UK Conservatives, and they sometimes form coalitions. But they each have their own identities and policies to fight with. (And, most importantly, that country as PR voting, so every vote actually matters.)

Er, but off topic there, but, hey, it's the politics thread...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:23:47 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 September, 2016, 10:50:13 AM
The Lib Dems did actually manage to get a large amount of their manifesto into policy, along with derailing a fair chunk of bad Conservative stuff, such as the IP bill. The problem is they screwed themselves with that daft pledge on tuition fees (which people on my Twitter timeline still bang on about whenever the Lib Dems are mentioned), forever ruining their credibility as something different. That the reality of coalition means you have no choice but to compromise is irrelevant – although the party should have stood fast against any rise in fees, because that made them all look ridiculous.

For my money, they made three bigger mess-ups: Clegg should have had as a red-line one major position of state (ideally him as Foreign Sec.); the referendum on voting reform should have been AV+, as per the recommendation (although I suspect it would still have lost); and the Health Bill should have been killed in the Lords (rather than Lib Dems helping it through). 2015 would still have seen the party get a serious kicking (not least due to the Lib Dems being inept from a press standpoint and the Conservatives taking all the credit for everything the Lib Dems did, not least, brazenly, gay marriage), but not quite to the extent we saw.

I think the coalition exposed two much broader problems for the Lib Dems. Firstly there's no avoiding the fact that the party is divided between Tory and Labour leaning voters, with only a hardcore that genuinely has no preference for which major party leads a Government. Throughout their history as a third party, the result of a hung parliament or coalition arrangement has always been to hurt them (1924, 1931, 1974, 1979) because the act of choosing offends a significant part of their support base. In 1924, Tory-leaning Liberals were outraged they let Labour into power, in 2010, Labour-leaning Liberals were outraged they let the Tories into power.

However they made this natural dynamic much worse by mismanaging the coalition. Rather than spread themselves across the entire Government, they should have concentrated their ministers in key departments. They should then have used these ministries to protect their supporters from the worst of Tory Rule. This is why going along with the rise in tuition fees, Gove education reforms and NHS reorganisation was so toxic - if the LibDems had a base of support it was the type of middle class centrist that predominates the public sector. Being the protectors of Health and Education would have also given them a much greater sense of positive identity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:38:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 September, 2016, 12:23:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2016, 11:32:46 AMThe LibDems could have put their money where their mouths were and attempted a broad coalition of parties of the center and left
How realistic would that have been? Political figures from the time have said Labour itself was deeply divided and during talks couldn't nail down key elements of its own policy, let alone how it would work in coalition. And Lab/Lib combined would have been 11 seats short of a Commons majority. So who fills those spaces, and how much effort would have been required to get any policy through the Commons? How much misery would backbenchers have caused?

This was, note, nonetheless my preferred route at the time, and I was gutted when it didn't happen. Yet even on the day of the results, you had Labour capitulation, with MPs suggesting people had had enough of Labour and that it was time to let someone else have a go. (Surely, any MP should want their party to always be in power, to do good things!)

I also suspect people hadn't realised quite how far the Lib Dems had shifted. Under Ashdown and especially Kennedy, they had shifted into a somewhat socialist position, and certainly a fairly libertarian one. By 2010, they had lurched rightwards and also become more authoritarian, which was even more evident by 2015. (Oddly, their manifesto, at least, seemed true to the party's roots and ideals, but their actions did not.) So perhaps people didn't realise we had a soft-right/authoritarian-right coalition, rather than something more centrist in nature.

On Brexit, I do think it's a pity even despite everything the Lib Dems did or didn't do, many people are unwilling to do anything other than dismiss Clegg. He's in it for the money, apparently, or to get some kind of cushy EU job if we somehow stay in. Or, you know, he actually has loads of experience in this and is for the most part talking and writing sense.

Quote from: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:14:45 PMGay Marriage would never have become law if the Tory Government hadn't support it. So whilst you note/criticise the Tory party for having a large proportion of homophobes...Cameron's Government clearly deserves credit for supporting the measure (i.e. drafting bill, championing the cause, allotting parliamentary time and allocating resources to implementation).
The problem is more that they took all of the credit, despite this all being a legal requirement from the coalition agreement. In other words, the Conservatives had no choice to do all those things, otherwise the government would have fallen. I think Cameron deserves some praise – it's one of the few things he got right, despite not having the support of the majority of his part – but the Conservatives as a whole? Not really. And them whitewashing this being Lib Dem policy was pretty distasteful, but then that also showcases the naivety of the Liberal Democrats – as Clegg as mulled since, they simply didn't realise how ferociously the Conservatives would gobble up every piece of good news and frame it as their own, rather than the coalition (and certainly never the coalition partners).

What's most depressing about this is it knocked back electoral reform yet again. The choices in the referendum were ridiculous (FPTP vs AV), and then the broadly disliked coalition put loads of people off of the general idea, further cementing the reactionary and partisan nature of British politics. I fully believe we would be a better country politically with more coalitions, with smaller parties that could then join together to form government. In Iceland, for example, you have two parties that broadly map with the UK Conservatives, and they sometimes form coalitions. But they each have their own identities and policies to fight with. (And, most importantly, that country as PR voting, so every vote actually matters.)

Er, but off topic there, but, hey, it's the politics thread...

A few things.

100% true people hadn't realise the change in the Lib Dems. It makes sense really, if counter-intuitively. Ashdown, Kennedy, Campbell and Cable are all centre-left politicians who joined the Liberal Democrats because of how left-wing Labour was in the 1970s and 1980s. Whereas the likes of Clegg and Laws are centrists or even centre-right politicians who joined the Liberal Democrats because of how right-wing the Tory Party was in the 1990s and 2000s.

Reason the manifesto was significantly to the left of the leadership is that Liberal Democrat members through conference still have significant control over writing it. Indeed, one of the issues with tuition fees, is that Clegg and Cable had been fighting to water it down since they took control of the party, but activists kept rejecting their proposals. Significantly they did leave it out of the pledge card the leadership issued as their key red lines. Alas for them the NUS brilliantly seduced them into making a much bigger deal of the policy.

Anyone who says the LibDems could have avoided going into Coalition with the Tories is insane. A Lib-Lab pact would have had no majority without the nationalists and the Brownite approach to politics just didn't overlap with Clegg's.

As several issues proved, the Coalition Agreement had no legal force. In any case Gay Marriage wasn't included in the original Coalition Agreement.

The Coalition massively set back the cause of electoral reform by enshrining the idea that even a pretty miserable change such as switching to AV needed to be approved by referendum. Sadly, a referendum on AV+ would never have escaped the Commons (Milliband struggled to stop rebels on the AV Referendum, and some Tories would surely want to kill it) and in any case with Labour supporter sore about the Coalition it would have lost similarly badly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 01:01:58 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 27 September, 2016, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 11:25:48 AM
Tories taking the credit for the gay marriage bill* and avoiding any blame for Iraq** is the reason we can't have nice things.

*134 against vs 126 for, vs Labour's 217/22 and Lib's 44/4. So really I'd say it's taking credit for what Labour did.
**146 for and 3 against, though in this case it's simply that Labour couldn't have done it without them tho.

I liked the Lib Dems enough to vote for them in 2010. Compromise would have been one thing but the Dems rolled and surrendered where they didn't actively assist.

But that's not how politics works - oppositions can't push laws through, only Governments can. Gay Marriage would never have become law if the Tory Government hadn't support it. So whilst you note/criticise the Tory party for having a large proportion of homophobes...Cameron's Government clearly deserves credit for supporting the measure (i.e. drafting bill, championing the cause, allotting parliamentary time and allocating resources to implementation).

Likewise on Iraq. You can attack IDS as a blithering idiot who failed to hold Blair to account (unlike Milliband over Syria), but no matter how much the Tories supported the war, it would never have been considered if Blair hadn't have wanted British involvement.

Agree entirely, I am just amazed at how many people throw shit around but get away without anyone noticing the brown stuff on their hands. Cameron's government pushed through Gay marriage, but the Conservative party voted against it. And likewise (inversely) on Iraq. Blair's government pushed it through, but the tories voted for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 September, 2016, 01:30:08 PM
Will: I agree with much of that. The smarter move would have been to secure 'control', so to speak, of key areas, but then you wonder how much the Conservatives would have allowed. Clegg was a natural Foreign Secretary, but he'd never have got that post. Cable was the most popular choice for Chancellor, but there was no way a junior coalition minister would have been given that post. Clegg in health could have been interesting, but might have been considered too junior. I guess we'll never know. For me, the Lib Dem Lords really killed everything by supporting the health bill. Too many fingers in pies; then again, Lib Dem support for the NHS as a whole is split, no only among MPs but also the membership – another thing people as a whole are unaware of.

On electoral reform, though, I lay the majority of the blame with Labour. Of course the Conservatives will never go for any meaningful reform. That party has always benefited hugely from FPTP. But Labour hubris from 1997 onwards made that party think everything had changed, when in reality they just saw a rare switch in circumstances (and then used that to crap all over the Lib Dems and all promises made prior to the election).

The smart move would have been for Labour to see the writing on the wall and shove through a PR bill. This would naturally have been seen as self-serving, but could have been argued was necessary due to changing in voting patterns, which had been obvious for a good long while. It would have passed with LD support, and 2010 would have seen a radically different election that could have resulted in a Lab/Lib coalition with a majority.

But even now, Labour is cool on electoral reform, under the misguided thinking that it can win alone. I have friends on Facebook convinced of a 2020 GE win. I ask: how? The numbers are not there. How can Labour win? Scotland isn't coming back. Welsh Labour just shat all over the electorate by voting with hardline Tories over the EU (which the Welsh are rapidly realising was really good for Wales). England? Labour seems unable to decide whether to go for a broad voter base or out-UKIP UKIP in order to secure its heartland. Either way, it's basically fucked. But under PR, we could feasibly have two Labour parties that could join forces in coalition, and where the 'split' non-Conservative vote would result in feasible governments rather than one party having absolute control with little over a third of the popular vote.

My wife's Icelandic and she looks on in horror at our electoral system. She thinks it's a bizarre relic, horribly unfair, and doesn't promote anything other than reactionary politics. I don't disagree. But it won't change when the Conservatives want no changes and Labour essentially supports that viewpoint (yet, bizarrely, is happy to try and force through PR-based Lords reform, which isn't needed nearly as badly).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 04:08:49 PM
With you entirely on that Indigo - the electoral system is badly broken. I can't believe that people campaigned against that referendum because 'it wasn't enough'. Some positive change is better than no positive change... and Labour really messed it up there. I get why the Tories will resist that forever but FPTP is an incredibly limiting system which makes voting an even more frustrating exercise than it would inherently be.

I am very happy that the London mayoral election uses SV and that small difference would still go a long way to improving our democracy. It would at least be an end to 'If you vote X you are wasting your vote", the explicit acknowledgement that the system is ****ed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 September, 2016, 06:08:40 PM
    "That's the real issue this time," he said. "Beating Nixon.  It's hard to even guess how much damage those bastards will do if they get in for another four years."

    The argument was familiar, I had even made it myself, here and there, but I was beginning to sense something very depressing about it.  How many more of these goddamn elections are we going to have to write off as lame, but "regrettably necessary" holding actions?  And how many more of these stinking double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils?

    Now with another one of these big bogus showdowns looming down on us, I can already pick up the stench of another bummer.  I understand, along with a lot of other people, that the big thing this year is Beating Nixon.  But that was also the big thing, as I recall, twelve years ago in 1960 – and as far as I can tell, we've gone from bad to worse to rotten since then, and the outlook is for more of the same.

    —Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 29 September, 2016, 09:53:01 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 September, 2016, 04:08:49 PM
With you entirely on that Indigo - the electoral system is badly broken. I can't believe that people campaigned against that referendum because 'it wasn't enough'. Some positive change is better than no positive change... and Labour really messed it up there. I get why the Tories will resist that forever but FPTP is an incredibly limiting system which makes voting an even more frustrating exercise than it would inherently be.

I am very happy that the London mayoral election uses SV and that small difference would still go a long way to improving our democracy. It would at least be an end to 'If you vote X you are wasting your vote", the explicit acknowledgement that the system is ****ed.

There's plenty of good reasons why Labour don't support PR:

Labour is an incredibly tribal party. I went from right to left whilst at university and I was amazed at how much more passionately committed to the party even moderate Labourites were. So many people don't want PR because they want a single-party Labour Government rather than having to compromise with other parties...especially the Liberal Democrats!

There's then the traditional Bennite argument against PR. That's basically that's its almost impossible to get 50% of the country to vote for a radical platform but its more than feasible that a radical majority could be elected on 35%-42%. So the hard-left support FPTP, even though it makes an independent hard-left party impossible, to keep alive the dream of securing a majority that would push through their programme.

Perhaps the more important argument is that it would probably hurt the centre-left. The idea that PR helps the 'left' is wrong. Let's remember in the last election the Tories and UKIP actually got 51%. If you look across Europe, without the protection of PR it's likely that Labour would lose even more of its working class base to UKIP. It's worth pointing out that without the European Elections moving to PR in 1999, UKIP would probably never have broken through as a major party.

So for all these reasons it does make sense for Labour to oppose PR.

In terms of AV - it's both not that big a change and huge change at the same time. As someone who once run Students' Union elections that use AV, I can say from personal experience that it really is extremely rare that the person who is top on the first round doesn't ultimately win in the end. That has certainly been true of the London Mayoral Elections.

Where AV would be a huge change is that it would encourage people to vote for minor parties, safe in the knowledge they could vote for their preferred major party. That would mean the votes of parties such as the Greens and UKIP would be inflated without their chances of winning MPs actually increasing. That would strengthen the argument for PR. 

Personally, I would like to see a directly elected Prime Minister. That gives you the benefit of PR (every vote counts) and the benefit of FPTP (clear decision on who forms the Government guided by voters). I would then personally use STV to elect the parliament but I'm not too precious about that point.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 September, 2016, 11:35:19 AM
QuoteIn terms of AV - it's both not that big a change and huge change at the same time. As someone who once run Students' Union elections that use AV, I can say from personal experience that it really is extremely rare that the person who is top on the first round doesn't ultimately win in the end. That has certainly been true of the London Mayoral Elections.

The Mayoral elections where despite clear guidance, lots of people didn't know how the system worked. The major argument to me is as simple as removing the idea that votes can be wasted. And once we've made the most minor improvement we might be able to get people more engaged with politics, when they don't just have to choose the best of two bad options - they can choose the best choice for them without effectively handing a vote to the worst option. And then we can maybe cross the bridge of getting politicians to grow up a bit and stop depending solely on the party whip.

Anything would be better than FPTP in terms of engaging people with politics. Your proposed system has a lot of benefits. I am dubious about electing a head of government directly but personality politics seem to be more important to most people than details or facts.

(And not to knock your point but Student Politics differ greatly in every way from a general or even local election for a lot of obvious reasons :P )
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 12:49:10 PM
I think Labour's pretty united on being anti-PR, in the sense that all wings of the party hate the idea of compromise. The only difference is the so-called moderate wing still seems to labour under the misapprehension that the party can actually get a majority in the Commons. Mind you, plenty of Corbynites I know also think that, because, apparently, all polling is some kind of anti-left conspiracy.

Where I wonder, Will, is in your figures. If you rattle through elections over the past few decades, you very regularly find parties securing an absolute majority with about 40% of the vote, which then dips post-2005 to the mid-30s. We find ourselves in a weird situation where we could feasibly find the Conservatives with a huge majority on a third of the vote, which feels inherently undemocratic. And although the threat of UKIP does mean a Con/UKIP pact of some kind might push everything over 50%, there have been plenty of times where Lab/Lib could have formed a coalition under PR to oust the Conservatives.

Moreover, the assumption in such guesswork is always that people would vote the same way under PR, when that's unlikely to be the case. If you know your vote counts, tactical voting becomes broadly meaningless. I suspect we'd probably unfortunately see quite a few UKIP MPs under a PR system, but we'd also see a smattering of Greens and, for the first time in recent history, Liberal Democrats getting an actually representative number of MPs. In Scotland, MP numbers would be more representative too, rather than the absurd situation of the SNP claiming almost every seat on half of the vote.

So I'd like to see some change. I'm open to arguments about which system, being it AV+, STV or AMS, but what we have now is ridiculous. But the Conservatives and Labour also know that without FPTP, the chances of either party every securing a majority again is slim. What they don't factor in is that if voting trends continue, we will probably increasingly see hugely unpredictable swings that cannot be planned for nor controlled.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 September, 2016, 02:40:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 12:49:10 PMMind you, plenty of Corbynites I know also think that, because, apparently, all polling is some kind of anti-left conspiracy.

When Yougov did a survey whose findings suggested Corbyn was more popular than previously believed, they wrote lengthy qualifications to their own polling data explaining how and why the results were probably wrong, while the Guardian ran three separate articles by academics explaining why the polling was misleading - two of whom were Yougov employees - and all of this was within months of the disastrous 2015 polling fiasco, so you can't really blame lefties for the current distrust of polling.  Polling companies got themselves into that mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2016, 03:00:17 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 30 September, 2016, 11:35:19 AM
QuoteIn terms of AV - it's both not that big a change and huge change at the same time. As someone who once run Students' Union elections that use AV, I can say from personal experience that it really is extremely rare that the person who is top on the first round doesn't ultimately win in the end. That has certainly been true of the London Mayoral Elections.

The Mayoral elections where despite clear guidance, lots of people didn't know how the system worked. The major argument to me is as simple as removing the idea that votes can be wasted. And once we've made the most minor improvement we might be able to get people more engaged with politics, when they don't just have to choose the best of two bad options - they can choose the best choice for them without effectively handing a vote to the worst option. And then we can maybe cross the bridge of getting politicians to grow up a bit and stop depending solely on the party whip.

Anything would be better than FPTP in terms of engaging people with politics. Your proposed system has a lot of benefits. I am dubious about electing a head of government directly but personality politics seem to be more important to most people than details or facts.

(And not to knock your point but Student Politics differ greatly in every way from a general or even local election for a lot of obvious reasons :P )

I really don't think AV will engage more people in politics. AV allows people to go through the charade of voting for a minor party but makes it no more likely for that vote to mean anything. Because the minor parties are still unpopular they will be eliminated before the climatic round of voting. So those annoyed that Greens and UKIP can't get into parliament will still be annoyed - although there will probably be more of them. The only possible benefit is that it would make it even harder for extreme candidates to come through a divided field with a low share of the vote (although anti-Farage tactical voting shows that probably already happens) - but that would actually increase hard-right/hard-left disillusion.

Again AV is only useful in terms of political reform as a staging post for PR. It would do that by inflating the minor party vote and breaking (this ludicrous, untrue) notion that the electoral system is this ancient system that has served the country well since 1066. Reality is that elections were very different before 1918 (lots of multi-member seats) and was still fairly different until 1950 (some surviving multi-member seats plus the various fancy franchises).

On directly the Head of Government - I just think its something that's going to have to happen if we're to stop devolved Government cannablising the country or done by second-rate politicians. When you think about it - its kind of absurd that the Mayor of London has less right to stand to be Prime Minister than some random backbencher. A directly elected PM would allow a broader range of people to stand for parliament. It would then empower parliament to hold the executive to account without the Government MPs being worried they were hurting their own chances of re-election.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2016, 03:05:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 12:49:10 PM
I think Labour's pretty united on being anti-PR, in the sense that all wings of the party hate the idea of compromise. The only difference is the so-called moderate wing still seems to labour under the misapprehension that the party can actually get a majority in the Commons. Mind you, plenty of Corbynites I know also think that, because, apparently, all polling is some kind of anti-left conspiracy.

Where I wonder, Will, is in your figures. If you rattle through elections over the past few decades, you very regularly find parties securing an absolute majority with about 40% of the vote, which then dips post-2005 to the mid-30s. We find ourselves in a weird situation where we could feasibly find the Conservatives with a huge majority on a third of the vote, which feels inherently undemocratic. And although the threat of UKIP does mean a Con/UKIP pact of some kind might push everything over 50%, there have been plenty of times where Lab/Lib could have formed a coalition under PR to oust the Conservatives.

Moreover, the assumption in such guesswork is always that people would vote the same way under PR, when that's unlikely to be the case. If you know your vote counts, tactical voting becomes broadly meaningless. I suspect we'd probably unfortunately see quite a few UKIP MPs under a PR system, but we'd also see a smattering of Greens and, for the first time in recent history, Liberal Democrats getting an actually representative number of MPs. In Scotland, MP numbers would be more representative too, rather than the absurd situation of the SNP claiming almost every seat on half of the vote.

So I'd like to see some change. I'm open to arguments about which system, being it AV+, STV or AMS, but what we have now is ridiculous. But the Conservatives and Labour also know that without FPTP, the chances of either party every securing a majority again is slim. What they don't factor in is that if voting trends continue, we will probably increasingly see hugely unpredictable swings that cannot be planned for nor controlled.

I'm not arguing against PR - just the idea it would help the left. And again - you can't count all LibDems as left-wing voters. Throughout the 20th Century the Liberals have been just as much an anti-socialist party as a anti-Tory one. Indeed whereas we have many occassions of Liberals and Tories sharing power without Labour, we've yet to see any Liberal MPs enter a Labour Government.

And actually my gut is that we've entered the opposite to wild swings. You listen to political scientists and the big problem is geographical polarisation, with Labour and Tory parties both overwhelmingly strong in their heartlands but weak outside. This has been made worse by the implosion of the Liberal Democrats who by default had been the natural party of opposition all over England. Unless Corbyn really tanks Labour's numbers (which is should be stressed hasn't happened yet - they're bad but they've been bad for much of the past seven years) its likely that even a snap election would only see the Tories gain a handful of seats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2016, 03:06:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 September, 2016, 02:40:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 12:49:10 PMMind you, plenty of Corbynites I know also think that, because, apparently, all polling is some kind of anti-left conspiracy.

When Yougov did a survey whose findings suggested Corbyn was more popular than previously believed, they wrote lengthy qualifications to their own polling data explaining how and why the results were probably wrong, while the Guardian ran three separate articles by academics explaining why the polling was misleading - two of whom were Yougov employees - and all of this was within months of the disastrous 2015 polling fiasco, so you can't really blame lefties for the current distrust of polling.  Polling companies got themselves into that mess.

True but they got themselves into that mess by massively overestimating Labour's share of the vote. So you can forgive them for being a bit nervous about any pro-Labour outliers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 03:41:51 PM
Professor Bear: I think there's a gulf between reality and their thinking, really. It's one thing to claim the polls are off or fixed, but they've historically overestimated Labour support. Even if they don't now, the Conservatives typically have anything up to a ten-point lead, when Labour needs to be some way ahead to have even a slight chance of a majority, given that Scotland's not coming back any time soon (a point seemingly lost on the more rabid Corbyn fans).

Will: Regarding AV, there's again the issue of assuming that people would vote in the same manner, but all the figures I've seen support the notion that it wouldn't make much difference regarding the current state of play. Chances are, we'd see a few wild cards (Caroline Lucas, for example), but in the main it only sometimes benefits a very large third party (20%+ Lib Dems, for example), and even then can sometimes bite all but the top two.

I'm not sure it'd work as a staging post, though. I suspect we'd see a round, little change, and general support for electoral reform fall through the floor. Plus in the unlikely scenario we did get AV, we'd see no further change for a generation, on the basis this was apparently what people wanted (and you can bet the Conservatives would be arguing it's a proportional system, as many do now when talking about the AV referendum).

On direct elections of a head of government, how would that happen? Do you wait until you know the party in power and then have some kind of reality show phone-in? Or are you saying that the head of government is an entirely separate things? Because that sounds an awful lot like a president to me (and also provides for the fairly absurd situation where you might end up with a Labour head of government but a Conservative majority, or vice-versa).

As for PR, I should probably clarify regarding my thoughts on the positions/relative positions of parties. I'm fully aware the Lib Dems aren't left. They've wiggled back and forth across that line, although if you track from authoritarian to liberal, they mostly stay below the halfway mark there. But whatever their failings, they aren't Conservatives, and from a manifesto standpoint, they appear to have more crossover with Labour than the Conservatives. (In fact, having read all of the 2015 ones at the time, it was pretty clear that if there was enough political will and egos were left aside, you could have feasibly knocked together a government or at least broad agreement with Labour, LD, the two nationalist parties, and the Greens – mostly, the devil was in the details, but all were running on broadly progressive platforms, with a lot of the same ideas.)

In terms of wild swings, I wasn't thinking between Con and Lab, but due to the spoiler effect and FPTP. Predicting a GE outcome has become increasingly tough, and that could continue if the Greens and UKIP continue to fare well and there's any kind of LD resurgence. That said, political scientists suggest quite a lot of UKIP voters have now returned home, strengthening the Conservatives. And I suspect Greens will fritter away at the party's lack of success beyond Lucas. Even so, I can see a 2020 GE being closer to 1997's in reverse than the Conservatives gaining only a handful of seats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2016, 06:51:45 PM
The point for the Corbynites is they don't need to worry about Scotland. The SNP would actually be happier to make Corbyn PM than the old Scottish Labour contingent because they know Jezza's hard-left politics would ultimately drive the English doolay.

The polls show it wouldn't make much difference because it wouldn't - on the final round. But the logical conclusion is that people would use the first round to register a protest vote (either to the right or left). The reality is that it would actually make wild cards marginal less likely because centrist Tory/Labour/LibDem voters would gang up on any UKIP or Green who manage to make it to the final round. 

The LibDems are an interesting party. Despite their opposition to FPTP they only exist because of it. As Paddy Ashdown said (way before the Coalition) if PR ever happened then the LibDems would loose much of their support to rival parties who suddenly became competitive. And indeed the LibDems have always done remarkably badly in European Elections.

I would exactly suggest a direct-election for Prime Minister. The General Election would basically be to a) elect the Prime Minister and b) elect an independent Parliament. There's nothing ridiculous about a Tory Prime Minister being held accountable by a left-wing majority Parliament if that's what the people want.

The LibDem politicians may overlap with Labour but the voters don't. Look at what happened in 2015 - what caused their devastation was tory-leaning voters across Southern England freaking out about the possibility of Labour coming into power. And now its liberal conservatives migrating back due  to Brexit that is causing the parties revival.

I disagree that predicting a General Election outcome has become tough - look at how well the Exit Polls have done. The issue is with making sure the polls don't capture too many enthusiastic young Labourites.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 September, 2016, 08:18:57 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 03:41:51 PMIt's one thing to claim the polls are off or fixed, but they've historically overestimated Labour support.

Yougov's survey of half a million GMB members was through a phone sampling of 58 people who claimed (but were not confirmed) to be members.  Yougov refused to carry out the Sun's infamous "1 in 5 Muslims" poll because the questions supplied by the Sun were weighted and misleading, but this didn't stop Survation doing so.
The means by which polling data is collected is flawed, and the means by which it's occasionally weighted and even dismissed to suit the client's preferred narrative is dishonest and harmful - insufficient polling regulation isn't a lefty conspiracy, it's a genuine concern for a country whose media is concentrated in the hands of five billionaires, especially when polling data is used to support claims like a spike in weekend deaths in the NHS.


Quote from: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2016, 06:51:45 PM
The point for the Corbynites is they don't need to worry about Scotland. The SNP would actually be happier to make Corbyn PM than the old Scottish Labour contingent because they know Jezza's hard-left politics would ultimately drive the English doolay.

Scotland may be seen as Labour's "heartland", but the SNP are a provably conservative party and left-wing ideas may just not be popular with the Scotch electorate right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2016, 08:54:56 PM
Professor Bear: I get all that. My point remains that I seriously doubt polling is out to the point that if a general election happened tomorrow, Labour would romp to victory. Polls can be inaccurate, but not to that extent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 September, 2016, 10:43:53 PM
My issue was only with the assertion that people would have to be tinfoil hatters to distrust the motivation or accuracy of polling companies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 02 October, 2016, 05:43:25 PM
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/10/02/may-speech-makes-it-clear-we-re-leaving-the-single-market (http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/10/02/may-speech-makes-it-clear-we-re-leaving-the-single-market)

Looks like Cameron's 'worst prime minister' record may be under threat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 02 October, 2016, 07:28:54 PM
I agree, May looks as though she's going to truely fuck things up. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 October, 2016, 09:00:48 PM
Announcing that its definitely the plan to leave the single market, just a few weeks after refusing to tell the House if they were even going to negotiate trying to stay in.  Sounds like she already been told to piss off.

Deciding we're definitely going to allow Europeans to stay in the country, whilst removing any legal framework that allows them to be here.  Sound like she's making this stuff up.

Blaming "petty nationalist" for damaging Britain, whilst appealing to the separatist in her own party and giving senior jobs to the fuckers who dragged us into this mess to further their own careers. Expect four more years of project fear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2016, 09:08:46 PM
At least she admits the most important thing, the thing people actually voted for, is sorting out those stinking immigrants. Never mind that May served a full term as Home Secretary when she could have addressed the majority of all immigration to the UK, as per her government's stated objective, but did absolutely nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2016, 09:20:07 PM
The way you whining lefty ninnies lot go on, you'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something - you need to stop panicking and cheer up: we have our country back, the NHS is 350 million pounds a week better off, and no more immigrants will be moving in next door.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 02 October, 2016, 09:51:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2016, 09:20:07 PM
The way you whining lefty ninnies lot go on, you'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something - you need to stop panicking and cheer up: we have our country back, the NHS is 350 million pounds a week better off, and no more immigrants will be moving in next door.

As someone who works in a university, I can heartily say that she certainly didn't do nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2016, 11:16:20 PM
At least I now have a hard deadline by which to get my second passport sorted. Alas, not much we can do re Mrs IP other than either go for full citizenship (extremely costly) or hope things don't go entirely to shit. On the basis of today, hard to not see worst case scenarios.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 October, 2016, 08:31:01 AM
Quoteyou'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something

I'm sorry, I'm a bit slow and only just got this.

Oh my God, what are we doing?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 October, 2016, 12:41:12 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 October, 2016, 08:31:01 AM
Quoteyou'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something

I'm sorry, I'm a bit slow and only just got this.

Oh my God, what are we doing?!

Deserting our closest allies and making new alliances with people who are a) only in it for themselves and b) are ideologically opposed to our way of life.  What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2016, 01:12:39 PM
But but but... trade deal with Australia! *infinte headdesks*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2016, 01:23:49 PM
Don't worry, in its drive to create a single world currency the IMF formally added the Chinese renminbi (a.k.a. the yuan) to their "Special Drawing Rights" basket on Saturday, October 1st. The move boosts the yuan to the status of global reserve currency alongside its basketmates, the pound, the euro, the yen and the dollar. So now we're all tied to the same monster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2016, 01:38:10 PM
I don't think anyone sensible considers Sterling a reserve currency now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2016, 02:40:18 PM
Who said the IMF was sensible?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2016, 04:50:14 PM
Stumbled across this image and thought some of you might enjoy it  :D

(http://philosophyofmetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/cropped-Banner2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2016, 07:28:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2016, 01:38:10 PM
I don't think anyone sensible considers Sterling a currency now.

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2016, 07:30:41 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 03 October, 2016, 12:41:12 PM
Deserting our closest allies and making new alliances with people who are a) only in it for themselves and b) are ideologically opposed to our way of life.  What could possibly go wrong?

Hey, it worked out in the 1940's didn't it?



Oh .... sorry!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 October, 2016, 09:53:51 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 October, 2016, 08:31:01 AM
Quoteyou'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something

I'm sorry, I'm a bit slow and only just got this.

Oh my God, what are we doing?!

Sorry, I'm either a bit thick or have missed some major news.  Probably both.  Can you explain this to me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 October, 2016, 10:08:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 October, 2016, 09:53:51 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 October, 2016, 08:31:01 AM
Quoteyou'd almost think commies were building a nuclear bomb inside our borders or something

I'm sorry, I'm a bit slow and only just got this.

Oh my God, what are we doing?!

Sorry, I'm either a bit thick or have missed some major news.  Probably both.  Can you explain this to me?

Our government seems too want to get out of partnerships which were formed (partially) to prevent repeats of the two world wars, and instead get in bed with communist China and let them play around with nuclear power within our borders.  What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2016, 06:54:41 AM
Thanks for explaining!
But Jesus wept... is this really independence from an undemocratic bureaucracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 October, 2016, 08:18:10 AM
Of course!  We have a healthy democracy, with a capable opposition.  We have a prime minister who was fairly voted into power.  We no longer have any say in EU trading regulations, which we're still going to have to meet.  We've got rid of those dastardly foreigners who form the basis of our taxation system.  Our currency is so strong, our government has abandoned any hope of digging us out of the hole they started digging eight years ago.  And now, we don't have to worry about being accused of war crimes. 

Britain Prevails.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 09:34:09 AM
We've gone from worrying to terrifying. Every mask has slipped from these Conservatives. Given the announcements we're getting, I'm confident the NHS will begin to exist only as a brand for private corporations before the end of the next Conservative majority (which won't be in the manifesto, but will happen regardless, in the name of viability).

And Sterling at $1.27. How much lower can it go? How much longer will Leave people be bullish about the FTSE 100, given that its rise is an indicator of Sterling's weakness, not Britain's strength? GAH. This stuff isn't difficult. Sterling being this weak affects pretty much everyone negatively. Fuel goes up. Power goes up. Imports go up. Even exports based on imported material don't benefit. And soon we'll find our exports to the EU sitting waiting for inspection for days or more. 'Just in time' will no longer exist for British companies, who will have to write off grind, delays, storage and waste. Manufacturing and the city will become uncompetitive as the EU states pick over the UK's corpse.

Still, we'll probably get a trade deal with Australia (pop: 23 million vs the EU 27's 679 million), so THAT'S ALL JUST FINE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 October, 2016, 10:09:56 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 09:34:09 AM
We've gone from worrying to terrifying. Every mask has slipped from these Conservatives.

I suspect when 'hard brexit' flatlines the economy, we'll be treated to Austerity 2, every bit as harsh as Gideon's version but with the added tagline "Well, you voted for it..."

I think the Tories sniff an opportunity to roll back half a century of progressive/liberal advancement under the cover of an economic crash, and are positively rubbing their hands with glee. Remember that Thatcher believed that mass unemployment and the decimation of British heavy industry was a price worth paying for decimating the unions, so this is pretty much the standard MO for Conservative governments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2016, 10:54:19 AM
Irish (tendance Republique) mate of mine working in a British university received a form-letter from admin saying the university would make 'every effort' to protect the residency of EU staff.  Very reassuring thing to get from your employer, I'm sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 11:08:23 AM
I recall Irish people being interviewed about Brexit, voting in favour, seemingly entirely oblivious to the fact they are EU nationals. It was mind-boggling. (And, yes, I know about the CTA, but that may not survive, at which point we'll have a rather large number of Irish nationals startled that they have to apply for residency, and a hard border in Ireland — a clusterfuck of truly epic proportions.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2016, 12:43:00 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 11:08:23 AM
I recall Irish people being interviewed about Brexit, voting in favour...

Nobody hates immigrants quite like emigrants do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 02:07:52 PM
One, without irony, started bitching about "all those immigrants coming over here to take our jobs". You. Are. An. Immigrant. ARGH.

I hope whatever we salvage from this mess retains at least some freedom of movement within the EU or, failing that, a full, irreversible residency status for existing residents. I just see this government right now thinking it can blaze full steam ahead into some kind of arch-Tory nirvana though, so am losing hope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 04 October, 2016, 05:12:31 PM
Today's the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Cable Street, when trade unionists, socialists, Jewish groups and anti-fascists clashed with police and the Union Of British Fascists when Oswald Mosley tried to match his blackshirts through a then predominantly Jewish area of the east end of London.

Thank goodness nothing like that could happen again today, and that suspicion and fear of immigrants, foreigners and people of different religions has been consigned to our country's cultural dustbin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 05:50:24 PM
Quite. It's be hideous if the home secretary was stirring up nationalist bullshit by, say, suggesting migrants should be prevented doing jobs Brits could do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 04 October, 2016, 07:48:48 PM
It's a hard time. Watching those asocial fucks pulverising all so many of us hold true is devestating.  Irish passport guys and gals and hope there's the will that Scottish/ Northern Irish/London feelings de rail this cluster fuck. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2016, 07:59:38 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 04 October, 2016, 07:48:48 PM
It's a hard time. Watching those asocial fucks pulverising all so many of us hold true is devestating.  Irish passport guys and gals and hope there's the will that Scottish/ Northern Irish/London feelings de rail this cluster fuck.
Irish passports only go so far, depending on your place on the register. So my family would be OK, since it's pretty likely I can get one (two Irish grandparents), and my wife and kid both have an EEA passport. But my cousin and his English missus couldn't do anything, not even for their kid, unless he was already on the register before she was born. So for individuals, it's an option; for Brits married to an EEA national, it's an option; for many, it still isn't.

I just hope there's some kind of row back. Have us join EFTA or have some kind of equivalent deal. Retain FoM, but with an emergency brake if we must.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2016, 09:42:25 PM
Spaniards, Exhausted by Politics, Warm to Life Without a Government. (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/world/europe/spain-socialists-sanchez-rajoy.html?_r=1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 04 October, 2016, 10:22:46 PM
UKIP leader to stand down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 October, 2016, 10:31:46 PM
Quotefor now things are fairly stable in part because Spain grants considerable powers to its 17 regional governments.  They have continued to provide health care, education and other pillars of daily life
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2016, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 04 October, 2016, 10:22:46 PM
UKIP leader to stand down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485)

Smart woman.  She realised that there's no point her working hard to push racism into the mainstream when the rest of the country is managing it just fine without her.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 05 October, 2016, 01:32:01 AM
Well said GordonR! Nice to see people remember the commemoration of this event!  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2016, 03:14:51 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 04 October, 2016, 10:31:46 PM
Quotefor now things are fairly stable in part because Spain grants considerable powers to its 17 regional governments.  They have continued to provide health care, education and other pillars of daily life


I know, interesting, eh? While the rest of Europe scrambles to cede power to one central supergovernment, Spain functions fairly well on 17 regional microgovernments. Keeping power closer to the people, then, does not seem to result in total chaos. Who'd o' thunk it?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 October, 2016, 05:15:59 AM
The counter argument might be that the local governments are able to function precisely because they operate within a supra-national framework that takes care of currency, regional development, international trade, quality regulation, environmental safeguards etc etc

Anyway, after listening to a long vacuous evasive interview with May yesterday, I'm starting to miss Cameron.

(Not really).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2016, 07:54:43 AM
Maybe so, but that framework can be organisational rather than authoritarian.

Of course, the Spanish situation (providing the article linked to is accurate) proves nothing in and of itself but, I think, it does serve as an indicator that Big Government isn't the only viable option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 October, 2016, 09:37:31 AM
I would have been more on board with that in the past. But if it's not Big Government in a capitalist culture, it's Big Society.  And we both know who loves that concept.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2016, 09:47:53 AM
A society that doesn't include immigrants isn't big. Or clever...

Not saying that's what you believe or sanction, just that "big society" is a meaningless political buzz-phrase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 05 October, 2016, 10:25:12 AM
Anyway, after listening to a long vacuous evasive interview with May yesterday, I'm starting to miss Cameron.

Kuennsberg doesn't even pretend at objectivity anymore....what a cringing, facilitating POS!!

Z  >:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 October, 2016, 02:35:52 PM
Farage returns, like a shit you can't scrape off of your shoe. Although he's now basically irrelevant since the Conservatives are enacting policies even UKIP wouldn't touch, and Labour's press team is wholeheartedly laying into the Tories for not being strict enough on immigration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 October, 2016, 03:00:22 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 04 October, 2016, 10:22:46 PM
UKIP leader to stand down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37558485)

That's got to be a record, even for UKIP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 October, 2016, 03:14:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2016, 09:47:53 AM
A society that doesn't include immigrants isn't big. Or clever...

Not saying that's what you believe or sanction, just that "big society" is a meaningless political buzz-phrase.

Definitely not what I believe or sanction, as I'm sure you know by now.  I would have thought (mainly using information I gleaned from this thread, I should point out) that 'Big Society' as Fucko Cameron used it referred to an increase in power being given to local authorities and businesses and less so to the government.  Whether that's happened or not is a different matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 October, 2016, 07:28:02 PM
I love it when we don't argue. We might not agree on the details but I think we're (here, at least) on the same page, or at least on the same book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 October, 2016, 03:38:12 PM
Pound drops to $1.24. Another trip to the US for expensive medical reasons for the wife in January. Guess we will be at 1:1 if we are lucky.

Pound is nearing less than a Euro as well by the way.

And astonishingly I am seeing many people wonder on the back of the UKIP punch-up if the EHIC health coverage will go in the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2016, 05:07:30 PM
What's most worrying about the Sterling thing last night is the commentary surrounding the article. The drop was clearly a screw-up – at least when it went way down, bottoming out around $1.13 before a 'rogue' transaction was nixed. But those in the industry noted how few buyers there were. And now, the next day, Sterling has seemingly had another permanent drop, which leaves it in the unenviable position of being a crash currency. (Sterling has dropped more than 15% against the USD in one year – almost unheard of for a major currency.)

Sterling's lowest ever valuation was $1.05. We're on $1.24 now, trending downwards, and without having triggered Article 50 yet. This isn't over. And for all those people crowing about an export boon, be mindful how much stuff we buy in (such as food and fuel), and that major trades are tied to the dollar. Everything is going to get more expensive. Everything is going to get harder for those who aren't rich. And we haven't even left the EU yet.

Short of the government performing some kind of fudge or U-turn, this is going to be an unmitigated disaster. And these politicians are the kind who think SOMETHING MUST BE DONE rather than getting evidence to find out whether something should be done. (Only Hammond seems to be a voice of reason. My guess is he'll be reshuffled and gone within six months – possibly sooner – for not towing the line.)

Meanwhile, schools are demanding parents say if their kids are foreign (which Clegg's chief of staff today said Conservatives attempted to start during the coalition days, as a means to cause a "hostile environment" regarding immigration). So much for openness. But I'm sure the racists and xenophobes will be happy when we lock the doors, even if there's fuck all money about after we do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 06:18:00 PM
We're one step away from giving foreigners special badges to wear.

A guy at work today was complaining about the state of the economy since the vote.  When it was put to him that he had actually voted to leave, his response was that, yeah, he had...but he had voted to leave for the right reasons.

Let's face it, we're comic book geeks.  But an affinity for sci-fi comes with a penchant for thinking about the future and considering the alternatives.  I fear that this country, seriously lacking in imagination, is drifting towards a particularly grey dystopia as our glorious leaders race to mop up votes from the lowest common denominator.

If any boarders live in Conservative constituencies, or even constituencies held by other parties where the mp might be likely to be looking for a way to give their boss a kick in the nuts...please, write to your mp, and let them know that you're more concerned about blood and soil government policy than the fact that you might meet a foreigner on your way to the shops...and ask them what they plan to do about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2016, 07:02:49 PM

Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 06:18:00 PM

...an affinity for sci-fi comes with a penchant for thinking about the future and considering the alternatives. 


Do you mean the limited alternatives presented to us by the handful in charge or proper alternatives? I ask because you dismiss every alternative I present because it doesn't lead to some Utopian perfection.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 06:18:00 PM

...and ask them what they plan to do about it.


A better question is to ask yourself what you're going to do about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 October, 2016, 07:11:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2016, 07:02:49 PM

Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 06:18:00 PM

...an affinity for sci-fi comes with a penchant for thinking about the future and considering the alternatives. 


Do you mean the limited alternatives presented to us by the handful in charge or proper alternatives? I ask because you dismiss every alternative I present because it doesn't lead to some Utopian perfection.


I think it's more because your alternatives already require a level of utopian perfection (at least in people's behaviour) in order to work
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2016, 07:25:49 PM
No, just bog standard human nature. No Utopianism required.

The current system relies on the worst aspects of human nature. What's wrong with starting to encourage some of the better aspects?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 October, 2016, 07:28:40 PM
encourage? yes, always

Rely on with no coercion? Unworkable
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 October, 2016, 07:50:03 PM

When people are no longer forced to pay for goods and services, they will gladly fund them on a voluntary basis, as the internet has proven.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 October, 2016, 08:37:35 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 06:18:00 PM

If any boarders live in Conservative constituencies,  ....

Our MP is Owen 'the scarlet pimpernel' Smith.  TBH I'm seriously embarrassed as a Labour Party member with the way they are going at the moment.  One the plus side a generation is about to discover why the Tories are the most abhorrent thing to happen to this country.  Unfortunately it is going to take them, their children and their grandchildren this time to get over the shock.  All while the 'opposition' is turning themselves into a joke.  Someone has now described this country as a one party state.  I'm just thinking about how other nations have been described in that instance.  What was the old Chinese curse again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:00:14 PM
QuoteDo you mean the limited alternatives presented to us by the handful in charge or proper alternatives? I ask because you dismiss every alternative I present because it doesn't lead to some Utopian perfection.

No, I dismiss the visions of the world you present because your starting point requires a near utopian society in which each individual is willing to work for the good of the whole, where all disputes are settled with reasoned logic and where everyone is imminently sensible.  When this is opposed, you claim that this isn't a utopia. You frequently fall foul of the nirvana fallacy.

Every economist in the world appreciates that economics is a flawed science because it's laws require that individuals act rationally.  Your alternatives require that people not only act rationally, but morally. 

I dismiss your alternatives because I don't believe that a world run by corporate monopolies would be an improvement on this one.  Because I believe in the basic democratic concept that we are equal and deserve an equal say, not a say based on how many shares we can buy.  Because government should exist to protect the weak from the strong, and when it fails, you replace it.  Because I would rather have taxes collected and enforced through reasonable punishment that watch people die of preventable diseases.  I dismiss your alternatives because corporations kill people to make a profit, and without regulation, they would kill a lot more.

If an unregulated market is the most effective way for a society to function, why is it that the most profitable and popular corporations are frequently the the most successful? 

Who is responsible for the workers who die because of poor conditions in Apple factories?

Quotebetter question is to ask yourself what you're going to do about it.

Maybe is should tell people not to vote, that authority isn't real, that the government is just a criminal conspiracy and that I don't have to follow their laws.  That's bound to help.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:02:14 PM
If an unregulated market is the most effective way for a society to function, why is it that the most profitable and popular corporations are frequently the the most corrupt?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2016, 11:37:36 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:00:14 PM

No, I dismiss the visions of the world you present because your starting point requires a near utopian society in which each individual is willing to work for the good of the whole, where all disputes are settled with reasoned logic and where everyone is imminently sensible.  When this is opposed, you claim that this isn't a utopia. You frequently fall foul of the nirvana fallacy.

Every economist in the world appreciates that economics is a flawed science because it's laws require that individuals act rationally.  Your alternatives require that people not only act rationally, but morally. 




The starting point is now. You seem to think that I think that nothing can change until everything has changed. I don't think that at all. Nothing can change until people begin to think about change. Even now, disputes are often settled with reasoned logic - that is what the courts are for. True, the courts often fail but, just as often, they succeed. One of the major problems with our courts is that they are run as that which you profess to despise; a monopoly. A government monopoly. You infer that monopolies are undesirable and yet expound the idea of government monopolies in policing, healthcare, courts, government, trade, roads, imprisonment, money creation and God knows what else. You despise the idea of monopolies and yet, at the same time, you love them.

You might be advised to read up on Austrian economics, which treats humans as flawed and self-serving individuals. To be self-serving does not mean selfish, for that which serves the one also serves the many. Human beings do not always act rationally or morally. I never claimed they did, so far as I recall. If I, as a private person, act irrationally or immorally, then I must bear the consequences of such actions myself. If, however, I were to win the four-yearly popularity contest and become prime minister and enforce my irrationality and immorality on the general population, then the general population must bear the consequences of my actions until the next popularity contest rolls around. Then, and only then, can you "punish" me by voting for somebody else. You'll despise me ever after but I won't care - I'll still be living off the pension you're paying for and supplementing my income through being on the boards of the government protected corporations I helped whilst "in power." 


Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:00:14 PM


Who is responsible for the workers who die because of poor conditions in Apple factories?



I assume (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you are referring to the suicides in Foxconn factories. These factories are suppliers to Apple, not Apple companies in and of themselves. Without wider data on suicides in the area, with a data set limited only to Foxconn employees, it is impossible to come to any solid conclusion as to the cause of these suicides. There could be many factors involved.

Let us, though, for the sake of argument, present the thesis that it is the working conditions in the Foxconn factories alone which drove these suicides. What's the alternative to suicide? Perhaps workers' rights or the right to strike for better working conditions, which we take as legitimate forms of applying pressure for change. These rights are not nearly as well recognised by the Chinese government, which would rather send in riot police to break up any such demonstration. Our own country is not immune to this horror, as Mrs Thatcher proved during the miners' strike. (How many miners committed suicide?) In nature, many animals have defence mechanisms: the hedgehog has its prickles, the rabbit has its speed and the deer has its antlers. The worker has the ability to withhold labour - but governments make this natural defence mechanism illegal.

Who, then, is responsible for the workers who die because of poor conditions in Apple factories? The governments who deprive the workers of their rights to protest.

That said, I understand that Apple shares some of the blame. However, it's not as simple as just going to another supplier. Apple will have invested a great deal of money and time and effort in Foxconn, there will be specialist equipment, proprietary technology  and processes involved. I would not imagine that Foxconn would have informed Apple that, "oh, by the way, we're going to treat our workers like slaves," and that Apple would have said, "that's okay, knock yourself out." What would you have Apple do? Simply abandon the money and resources already invested and invest more millions into another supplier, or try to fix the deal they're already locked into? If Apple were to simply abandon this supplier for another, what's to stop Foxconn from ripping off Apple designs and innovations to produce "pirated" goods? I'm confident the Chinese government would welcome such a move - it would be more tax money in their coffers, after all.

Is it a coincidence that Apple is accused of guilt by association at the same time as it has the temerity to negotiate its tax (theft) bill? The uncomfortable truth is that we can all negotiate our tax bill. One cannot simply demand money from another person without a contract. if that were so, then I could approach you and demand your money for whatever reason I desired. I need an operation, pay for it. I need food, pay for it. I need transport, pay for it. I need a home, pay for it. I need a wage, pay for it. But I can't do that; nobody can. Yet "governments" all over the world assume that right - and where do they get that right? From you. But if you don't have those rights, how in God's name can you pass those rights to a handful of people who win a popularity contest every four years? It makes no logical sense at all, yet you take this fallacy and believe it to be true. You're a clever guy, you really are, and I respect that - but how the Hell can you not apply your intelligence to the reality of the situation? You're accepting that some people have more rights and responsibilities than you because you voted for them. You're saying, "I can't do these things but I'm giving you permission to do them for me. I can't break the law but I authorise you to break the law in my name." It makes no sense.

Let's imagine you wanted to murder somebody (me, in all probability) for saying something you don't agree with. You know that murder is wrong, you know it in your heart, your soul and your bones. Then let's say that you get a million people to agree with you that I should be murdered. A million times nothing is still nothing, yet you think that a million times nothing is something. Is legitimate. You have me murdered and feel justified because a million people agreed with you even though not one of those million people had the right to murder me on their own. Or turf me out of my home. Or steal my belongings. Or take my money. Or force me to do that which I find abhorrent.

It should be noted that Foxconn do not only supply Apple. They also supply Samsung and  some of the world's best-known brands, which the company declines to publicly name. Foxconn  is the largest private employer in mainland China with some 1.4 million workers. Can you imagine 1.4 million Chinese workers on strike? No, neither can I, unfortunately.


Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:02:14 PM

If an unregulated market is the most effective way for a society to function, why is it that the most profitable and popular corporations are frequently the the most corrupt?

Government protectionism.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:00:14 PM

...I don't believe that a world run by corporate monopolies would be an improvement on this one. 


Neither do I. Monopolies require government enforcement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 October, 2016, 08:22:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2016, 11:37:36 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 October, 2016, 09:00:14 PM
...I don't believe that a world run by corporate monopolies would be an improvement on this one. 

Neither do I. Monopolies require government enforcement.

No they don't - haven't you read dystopian corporate sci-fi?  It's like cyberpunk never happened...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 October, 2016, 08:46:15 AM
I always thought it was more a case of monopolies required either government inaction or complicity rather than enforcement.  That said, regional encoding and the UK energy market might be seen as arguments in support of TLS's conceit here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 October, 2016, 08:55:27 AM
As I've said, a government "monopoly" can be removed by enough ordinary people. It's laws can be changed by enough ordinary people. A corporate monopoly can only be removed with enough money.  That's the difference and why I believe in democracy.


Without government protectionism, Apple workers would strike, and Apple would voluntarily improve their conditions?  Wouldn't it be more cost effective to just fire then, and employ some slightly more desperate people?  The world's full of them.

QuoteNothing can change until people begin to think about change.

Well, I hope it happens in the next few years, because pretty soon this country is going to start deporting doctors.  When the hospitals start closing and the supermarket shelves are getting empty because the country can't afford to import anything, when homelessness rockets because you can get kicked off benefits for not accepting a zero hour contract, when companies are being fined for employing too many foreigners, when the rioting starts...maybe then people will think "hey, maybe the democracy we spent the last few hundreds years building was a mistake.  Maybe we should all just act in our own self interest."

Hell, maybe we're on our way already.  Almost half of the American electorate are considering voting for a guy who boasts of his own self-serving attitude.  Although I'm not entirely sure how many hospitals that self interest has built, it's certainly bankrupted a few casinos and slowed the building of a wind turbines.

I would quite like the country to not turn to shit in the next few years, and I'm positive you would too.  I would encourage people to use the system we already have in place and which we know can affect change.  Encouraging people to remove themselves from that process isn't going to make things better. It's going to make them much, much worse.

Hundreds of thousands of people removed themselves from the democratic process in the late 90s - early 00s, because they didn't feel the parties spoke for them.  It didn't make their lives any better.  In fact, it made them much worse and let to the almighty balls up that we're in today.

Encouraging people to be the change they want to see in the world is great, Sharky, and I salute you for it.  However, we sort of have more immediate problems which can only be fixed by using the system we already have.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 October, 2016, 09:37:14 AM
Both Free market Capitalism and State Communism have been seen to fail. None of them delivered what they promised though Capitalism being much more adaptable than Socialism has lasted longer in the West. Perhaps, grim though this sounds if both doctrines failed to deliver is Nationalism the last bulwark or indeed the start of a fightback against globalization that seems to only benefit a rich 1%? Political elites are always targeted by the populous press yet these papers owners are themselves part of the 1% who have grown very wealthy over the rest of us. Nationalism is clearly rising here, there and everywhere and since the forces of globalization believe its 'business as usual' I cannot help but think that we are all in for an increasingly nasty time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 October, 2016, 08:54:55 PM
Monopolies don't require government enforcement. coercion and corruption of government power benefits a monopoly but its not required. That the mechanisms for preventing exploitive monopolies are subverted is to me, a clear argument for why those mechanisms were needed in the first place.

Of course, you can call public services a government monopoly if you want to be really obtuse. The free market would of course be much better, just like it has never been. As always the libertarian schtick is great at picking holes in the problems we're all aware of but the only alternative it offers is so profoundly naive and flawed it's almost not worth going into. All this hypothetical 'if I was prime minister under your system' vs 'if I was a private citizen' is purest sophistry. The two scenarios are of no relevance to each other. Let's not pretend that private citizens don't escape the consequences of their actions all the time; look at the bloke trying to win the biggest popularity contest of all at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 October, 2016, 09:08:13 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 October, 2016, 09:37:14 AM
Political elites are always targeted by the populous press yet these papers owners are themselves part of the 1% who have grown very wealthy over the rest of us.

I would argue that the press typically targets political elites, rather than financial ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 October, 2016, 10:13:20 PM
Is it end of Trump?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 08 October, 2016, 11:28:03 PM
Goaty i think it maybe. I have thought from the start that this Election will be more of a coronation, and it looks that way at the moment. Clinton herself is not much better than Trump in my book. No shocking conclusion there lol. Its just she is not a 'decent' person by any measure of the book. The definition of a modern politician who will say anything to get elected, flip flop on major issues, etc etc.
I think the world will see much of the same when she elected. More crazy foreign incursions that just breed more terrorists, more catering to the banking, media elites that back her to the hilt and zero accountability.
I find it astonishing how she can delete emails en mass like that and destroy countless mobile phones with hammers etc and still call for Edward Snowden to be prosecuted. We dont even know what she was hiding.
My american friends, the vast majority of which always vote Democrat seem to despise her and are voting with a heavy heart to keep Trump out.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 October, 2016, 11:39:19 PM
https://www.wired.com/2016/09/actually-clinton-destroyed-phones-better/ pretty much sums it up outside of the hysterical narrative.

Clinton is more of the same, bad as that is. Trump is incomparably worse in every regard. And the fuss over the whole email 'hiding' things is ridiculous. What do you know of Bush's emails or private correspondence? Nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 08 October, 2016, 11:44:49 PM
Agree with you Blaze. Its just her conduct over 'Benghazi' and the 'Clinton Foundation money' etc. Not that i expect much better from any of these political elites.
My God a Country the size of the USA and these muppets are best they can present as a choice lol.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 October, 2016, 08:02:44 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 October, 2016, 11:39:19 PM
Clinton is more of the same, bad as that is. Trump is incomparably worse in every regard.

That puts it absolutely perfectly. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2016, 09:50:03 AM
I'll say this for xenophobes, they get up good and early on a Monday.  A suggestion that all of the Republic's entry points become a 'hard border' for and operated by the UK receives instant online approval: dominant response "about time". Be great to see Her Maj's forces guarding our shores against Johnny Foreigner once again, what what?

Any political party that endorses this awful retrograde notion will lose my vote. Don't make me vote for the Shinners, you bastards. I truly don't understand Irish people's fears of those horrid Muslims (which is what this is), given that during my lifetime we grew and funded our own terrorists to execute and explode us, and at the same time lived under a state not unlike the much-mooted Sharia law, so would hopefully know how to see it off again on the off-chance that 3 million hard-line Islamic activists showed up to outvote us right-thinking folk.  I think I'd rather see the CTA go than this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 October, 2016, 10:07:49 AM
Hang on – the Irish are in favour of this policy? I would have thought the pushback against such British arrogance would have been so severe it would have had Whitehall reeling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2016, 10:12:46 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 October, 2016, 10:07:49 AM
Hang on – the Irish are in favour of this policy? I would have thought the pushback against such British arrogance would have been so severe it would have had Whitehall reeling.

Online approval. The comment threads of just about every Irish news site and board are heavily policed by right wing racists. And when what we laughably refer to as the Irish left is mainly concerned with not paying for water twice, their ranting is pretty much all you hear.

All this said, it's rock-hardplace time: "Where do you want us to leave your fortified border, Mr Murphy?". "I don't recall ordering a border... in fact I clearly remember cancelling the one you gave us last time..".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 October, 2016, 10:52:33 AM
The sad fact is, Panth, that a government monopoly can only be removed by a government. It's all very nice in theory to believe that if enough ordinary people vote for a change, that change will happen. We know that governments ignore the wishes of the people as a matter of course, or interpret those wishes in a way which suits their own narrow interests.

It is far easier to break a monopoly without government, using a purer form of democracy - the money in your wallet. Each penny you own is a vote. If you don't like a monopoly, don't give it your pennies. If enough people agree with you, that monopoly will either change its ways or starve to death. That's in a capilastic free-trade model, of course. In the corporatist monopolistic world we inhabit, though, governments reserve the "right" to use your tax money to subsidise a struggling monopoly or even pass protective legislation (which is then presented as "law") to limit fair competition. The most blatant contemporary example of this is the banking system - a government enforced monopoly in constant need of bail-outs and quantitative easing, which the general population is forced to pay for. There are several alternatives available for fixing the banking system, none of which is currently being considered seriously by any political party.

Foxconn (a Taiwan-based Apple (amongst others) supplier, not an "Apple factory") could indeed fire all its workers and replace them with a fresh crop, but that would not be very cost-effective. Who would train the new workers with the entire current crop dismissed, for example? How long would the factory be shut down, costing money rather than making it, whilst this transition took place? How much business might Foxconn lose because of this tactic? And what if the new crop of workers turn out to be as disgruntled as the last lot? Fire them and start the process again? And again? And yet again?

Apple (and the other Foxconn customers) would not want this any more than Foxconn itself. It is far more economically sensible, and humane, for all the parties to work towards a mutually beneficial arrangement. The Chinese government's attitude towards strikes limits the options necessary for fairness, leaving the handful of Foxconn executives/shareholders with the ultimate "like it or lump it" tactic.

I think your hopes are already beginning to bear fruit, Panth, because it is in conversations like this one that you and I, and the people who read this thread, pay attention to that begin the process of thinking about change. We do indeed have a system in place which is capable of effecting great change. However, between my ultimate vision of sweeping it all away and your vision of letting it carry on as-is there lie a virtual infinity of possibilities. Keep some bits, change others, abolish the rest.

To my mind, the first step is to understand what government is actually for and what its rights and responsibilities are. My view is that it's government's job to organise and serve, not to preserve and command.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 October, 2016, 11:17:17 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2016, 10:12:46 AMOnline approval. The comment threads of just about every Irish news site and board are heavily policed by right wing racists.
Ah, right. Even so, it's still surprising that general racism trumps "let the British control aspects of our ports".

My dwindling hope is someone wrenches some kind of botched and very British compromise from all this madness. The chance of Brexit being stopped is zero, but some kind of EEA fudge (retaining much of FOM/single market/open border with Ireland) would I think piss off everyone, but make enough people not entirely angry that it could sit there as an 'interim' solution in much the same way as the UK's 'interim' use of Sterling before switching to the Euro. Mind you, if there really are 80 Tory MPs looking to kick up a fuss about Brexit, that could be a really big deal. May's majority isn't very big. If even a quarter of them decide to fuck up the government unless it dials down the bullshit, she could be in real trouble (well, assuming Labour actually gets its act together).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 October, 2016, 12:40:56 PM
Right wing racists tend to crop up in pretty much every online opinion venue to attempt to police all dissenting opinion, so I wouldn't read much into that in itself. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 October, 2016, 07:44:41 PM
True, true, but Gruddamnit I hate the way every discussion has to start with their hateful nonsense. And people do believe it when they see it trotted out in B&W: my mother, for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 October, 2016, 11:25:51 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 October, 2016, 07:44:41 PM
True, true, but Gruddamnit I hate the way every discussion has to start with their hateful nonsense. And people do believe it when they see it trotted out in B&W: my mother, for example.

I think a lot of the older generation haven't quite grasped the fact that the internet is essentially a giant toilet wall. (Except this forum, obviously.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 October, 2016, 06:59:40 PM
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-FH449Qr4p1I/V4t6sJYP5eI/AAAAAAAAPyg/RCIe-J_Mfx8NwtiBPDiAR_HuKT7iw1UHw/w640-h400-p-k/Kissing%2BBatman%2B%2526%2BSuperman.jpg)

Manchester's gay village, seen on the right wing BBC News in the context of the decision to pardon gay men convicted of buggery and gross indecency. Yes, Zac; it looks like Batman really does V Superman. Maybe even >< and >0 (but only on his birthday).

This is also from the dirty, fascist BBC (no better than The Mail). It's not immediately obvious how this year's compassionate, erudite, and funny Reith Lectures (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00729d9) are undermining Jeremy Corbyn, but there's another three talks on the topics of race, nationalism, and gender for the shameful inherent bias to reveal itself. BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00729d9) and itunes (https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-reith-lectures/id318705261?mt=2).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 October, 2016, 07:08:53 PM
Heh. I find the notion of "pardening" gay and bisexual men ridiculous, insinuating they did anything wrong to begun with. Horrible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 October, 2016, 07:23:50 PM

I take your point, but I'm not sure we should be allowed to forget that we were locking people up for having a boyfriend at the same time my dad was chatting up my mum at the dancing.

An official pardon keeps the conviction in the cultural conversation as well as on the permanent record. Whitewashing history does no-one any favours.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 October, 2016, 04:00:28 PM
Filibustered

http://attitude.co.uk/tory-minister-branded-a-disgrace-as-he-obstructs-new-gay-pardon-bill-in-parliament/ (http://attitude.co.uk/tory-minister-branded-a-disgrace-as-he-obstructs-new-gay-pardon-bill-in-parliament/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 October, 2016, 04:16:47 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 October, 2016, 07:23:50 PM

I take your point, but I'm not sure we should be allowed to forget that we were locking people up for having a boyfriend at the same time my dad was chatting up my mum at the dancing.

An official pardon keeps the conviction in the cultural conversation as well as on the permanent record. Whitewashing history does no-one any favours.
It wouldn't be white washing, however. It would the establishment accepting they passed a discriminatory law, cocked it up and apologizing. A pardon on your criminal record can still effect people looking for work, the records should be wiped clean.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 October, 2016, 04:58:13 PM
What a joke. Parliamentary conduct has slid rapidly downhill from an already precarious position over the last few terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 October, 2016, 05:27:24 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 21 October, 2016, 04:16:47 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 October, 2016, 07:23:50 PM

I take your point, but I'm not sure we should be allowed to forget that we were locking people up for having a boyfriend at the same time my dad was chatting up my mum at the dancing.

An official pardon keeps the conviction in the cultural conversation as well as on the permanent record. Whitewashing history does no-one any favours.
It wouldn't be white washing, however. It would the establishment accepting they passed a discriminatory law, cocked it up and apologizing. A pardon on your criminal record can still effect people looking for work, the records should be wiped clean.

Realistically, how many people convicted under laws that were (mostly) repealed 49 years ago do you think are still out there in the jobs market today?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 October, 2016, 05:31:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 21 October, 2016, 04:16:47 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 October, 2016, 07:23:50 PM
An official pardon keeps the conviction in the cultural conversation as well as on the permanent record. Whitewashing history does no-one any favours.

It wouldn't be white washing ... the records should be wiped clean

Despite our different metaphors, it certainly sounds like the same thing, Hawk. If you wipe the record clean you remove primary source (http://research.library.gsu.edu/primaryhistory) evidence of the historical injustice perpetrated against a section of society.

The youngest any adult convicted of using their funparts without authorisation from Her Majesty could be today is 66 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Offences_Act_1967); I'm not sure job seeking is much of a concern.

Given the turn of events Steve linked to, this discussion is academic. Tory Justice minister Sam Gyimah (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24789/sam_gyimah/east_surrey) sounds like a right charmer.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 22 October, 2016, 03:55:48 PM
(http://dangerousminds.net/content/uploads/images/made/content/uploads/images/TRUMPCRUMB_07_465_407_int.jpg)

Meanwhile, Robert Crumb draws Trump getting swirlied. Explains the hair at least.

Source (http://dangerousminds.net/comments/robert_crumb_and_friends_flush_donald_trump_down_the_toilet_1989)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 November, 2016, 12:38:47 PM

Brexit means ... at least one more vote (probably several): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785


Before the hallelujahs and goading begin, please remember how obnoxious you found it when Brexiters did so a few months ago.

If there's one thing this and the repellent US election should teach us it's that folk who want everything entirely their own way are the real enemy, and that grown ups resolve their differences by discussing the facts, listening to opposing views, and arriving at a compromise.

Which is what should have happened here in the first place.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 November, 2016, 12:55:29 PM
Quote from: Frank on 03 November, 2016, 12:38:47 PM

Brexit means ... at least one more vote (probably several): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785


Before the hallelujahs and goading begin, please remember how obnoxious you found it when Brexiters did so a few months ago.

If there's one thing this and the repellent US election should teach us it's that folk who want everything entirely their own way are the real enemy, and that grown ups resolve their differences by discussing the facts, listening to opposing views, and arriving at a compromise.

Which is what should have happened here in the first place.

Absolutely spot on, Frank.

Have to say, maybe its age, but i am sick and tired of people who should know better behaving like children, calling names etc. That applies to both sides of the arguement.

Dignity seems to have bypassed a few of our elected representatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2016, 08:32:47 PM
Can't realistically see Brexit not happening at this stage of the game.  Though I'm far from happy with the referendum result (after all, it's going to affect our economy, too) , democracy is democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 November, 2016, 09:02:12 PM
What gets me is all the people banging on about parliamentary sovereignty and taking back control now having a massive hissy fit after the BRITISH courts afford the sovereignty of parliament over the executive. That should be a good thing, but of course it's only a good thing when it's to push through something you want rather than what you don't.

But, frankly, tough shit to the whiners. This ruling, assuming it's not overturned on appeal, now at least gives us a shot at a discussion and a compromise rather than the nutcase wing of the Conservatives directing the UK's future. I'm not sure what kind of compromise can be reached (not least given that Corbyn still doesn't seem to give a shit about Single Market membership), but I'm at least a little hopeful today, which has been something missing politically from my life for months now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 03 November, 2016, 09:03:56 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2016, 08:32:47 PM
Can't realistically see Brexit not happening

Yeah, it just means the Fortress Britain fantasy version is impossible. Neither side gets what they wanted.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 November, 2016, 09:07:49 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2016, 08:32:47 PM
...democracy is democracy.

Except where it's a glorified opinion poll on issues which aren't even on the table; or when the question being voted on is so vaguely worded as to be essentially meaningless in terms of mandated actions and likely consequences. Had an actual proposal been put to the vote, outlining a timetable and envisaged outcome (say, to restrict movement but retain free trade, and how that would be achieved), then the people's decision could be respected.

As it is, it makes about as much democratic sense as 52% saying they don't like Mondays. Do you then have a mandate for a four day week, or the national anthem to be sung by Bob Geldof, or is it a vote for Jim Davis to replace the Queen. Who could tell?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2016, 09:11:01 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 November, 2016, 09:07:49 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2016, 08:32:47 PM
...democracy is democracy.

Except where it's a glorified opinion poll on issues which aren't even on the table; or when the question being voted on is so vaguely worded as to be essentially meaningless in terms of mandated actions and likely consequences. Had an actual proposal been put to the vote, outlining a timetable and envisaged outcome (say, to restrict movement but retain free trade, and how that would be achieved), then the people's decision could be respected. As it is, it makes about as much democratic sense as 52% saying they don't like Mondays. And....?

Fair point...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2016, 09:24:18 AM
The Leave side more often than not reminds me of evangelical Christians. They cherry pick all the time about what the vote meant, but discard what they no longer like. I've been yelled at that OF COURSE it meant leaving the Single Market, even though prior to the vote many Leave figures were advocating (temporarily or otherwise) a Norway-style deal. But that £350m to the NHS? That was just an example, or, if you're Farage, something that should never have been stated in the first place.

There's also false equivalency everywhere. "But both sides lied!" Sure, but one more than the other. It's like Trump vs Clinton, trying to say all the former's hideous failings are equivalent to messing up with an email server and doing the odd dodgy thing with a charity. I keep hearing about the emergency budget, too, even though that was based on Cameron immediately activating Article 50, and the shock that would result in. (That Sterling has now fallen almost to the 'worse case' many economists predicted is lost on many of the Leave side, or dismissed as a good thing. Whether they still think the same when goods and services catch up – as they will over the next few months – remains to be seen. I suspect many fence-sitters will be furious, but the EU or 'Remoaners' will somehow get the blame for our higher bills.) People also ignore the stabilising effect Carney had – and instead vilify him.

And now all across social media, people are openly calling for the legal team behind the defeat to be shot, and for the judges – at best – to be fired. What the fuck has this country become? Probably nothing different from how it was, bar scumbags now thinking it's OK to very publicly and continually call for such outrageous responses. And elsewhere, UKIP leadership candidates call for the return of the death penalty and people scoff. Yet UKIP is doing very well when it comes to making its headline desires actual policy. We cannot be complacent when extremists are trying to transform the very fabric of our country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 November, 2016, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2016, 09:24:18 AM
We cannot be complacent when extremists are trying to transform the very fabric of our country.

I'm very seriously contemplating leaving. The Britain that I've always believed in: a tolerant, good-humoured, mildly anti-authoritarian nation of basically decent people has been exposed as a fantasy that never existed outside my head. I'm tired of swimming against the tide: I can earn my living anywhere I can plug in a computer and get on the internet. I'd rather pay my taxes in a political system where there's at least a chance of living under a government whose values vaguely coincide with my own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2016, 09:43:53 AM
We're mobile, too. We've had discussions. We feel complicit in all this shit if we stay. But also we've heavily invested in various areas (not least pumping a ton of money into our house), and aren't sure precisely where we'd go. Almost the available locations have at least some measure of awfulness related to the current shift in politics. (At our age, and with mini-IP, the EEA is basically it for us – and then only if I can secure an Irish passport, which is still an unknown, although something a few people have said is very unlikely to not happen when I apply.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2016, 10:53:55 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 November, 2016, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2016, 09:24:18 AM
We cannot be complacent when extremists are trying to transform the very fabric of our country.

I'm very seriously contemplating leaving. The Britain that I've always believed in: a tolerant, good-humoured, mildly anti-authoritarian nation of basically decent people has been exposed as a fantasy that never existed outside my head. I'm tired of swimming against the tide: I can earn my living anywhere I can plug in a computer and get on the internet. I'd rather pay my taxes in a political system where there's at least a chance of living under a government whose values vaguely coincide with my own.

I think that would be a shame, Jim. The vast majority of people I meet on my travels are basically normal, decent folk who just want a quiet life. Sure, most of them are grumpy because they just can't seem to get that quiet life and some of them are downright rude - but almost all are decent enough. They just latch on to the explanations given to them by media and politics and groupthink, the ones that make sense to them, and go with it. I'm not saying that's right and I'm not saying it's wrong, it's how things are.

I know precisely how you feel, Jim. Suddenly things look very different, darker and meaner, more dangerous, harder to understand. And it hurts because of all the faith invested in it over the years. It's like realising you've just been conned. It's natural to want to turn your back on it and walk away. My destination of choice was going to be Poland, a modest town fifty miles south of Warsaw. With the finest woman I ever knew.

Anyway. Nothing in reality had changed, though, only my perspective. It's not the fault of the people, they're bombarded with bullshit 24/7 so it's not surprising they're angry and confused. It's no good telling them that, of course, because humans are stubborn and love to cling to the familiar. Just as I did.

This country isn't its trade deals or its market memberships or its share price, it's not country, county and borough borders, it's not corporations or councils and it certainly isn't government. It's me. It's you. It's the human beings. Human beings being manipulated, deceived and exploited all over the shop. It's a huge problem, but how can one bloke stop it? Well, one bloke can't stop it - but one bloke can refuse to join in. It's all that's within my rights and within my power that I can do.

I know you and I see the world very differently, Jim, but I'd be sad to see you go. You should be using your passion and your talents in the trenches, living Your Life in whichever way you think is right and leading by example. That's why the countries we imagined didn't exist, because they're just a bunch of people trying to get through the day. Exactly like everywhere else. What the world needs is passion, passion to cut through the terrible universal inertia and get civilisation rolling again.

And, for all that we disagree, I think you have passion in spades. Use it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 04 November, 2016, 12:19:36 PM
The Vote on Article 50 Gives Labour a Chance to Make Brexit Less Terrible (http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/article-50-sam-kriss-parliament): decent article by Sam Kriss in Vice. As much as it sucks that we're leaving, the EU has always been an oligarchic worker dicking machine that brutalised Greece and gives billions to homozygous aristocrat fucks and subhuman Saudi royals under the CAP. If in some magical, contrite for its imperialist enormities alt UK this had been a win for Lexit, I have to admit I'd be happy about the result.  I don't know if there's actually any chance of of keeping freedom of movement, one of the few unambiguously good bits of the EU, given only the hard left of Labour gives a fuck about the concept of itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2016, 01:28:44 PM
Bizarrely, Corbyn seems to want to keep FOM but remove the UK from the SM, which is a rather... unique approach. As for Labour, alongside everyone else who was pro-Remain, there's no reason now that we can't strive for a decent end result. Well, bar Labour actually getting its shit together.

Oh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 05 November, 2016, 02:43:56 PM
well at least we don't have trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2016, 03:37:49 PM
True. That said, we can't vote out "leaving the EU" in four years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goosegash on 05 November, 2016, 07:34:00 PM
There was at least one funny thing to come out of the last few weeks(nicked from Facebook, credit to Richard Pearce)

(http://i.imgur.com/FfJXjuu.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Amstor Computer on 06 November, 2016, 02:36:34 PM
Quote from: Goosegash on 05 November, 2016, 07:34:00 PM
There was at least one funny thing to come out of the last few weeks(nicked from Facebook, credit to Richard Pearce)

(http://i.imgur.com/FfJXjuu.jpg)

Ha, that's me  :) Fascinating seeing how this has spread - I posted it under Public setting, as a friend wanted to share it (my FB stuff is usually just for friends and family) and it just kept on getting shared. I saw a brilliant Dalek one too, but I've been kicking myself for forgetting to put a "Photos by Brian Bolland" on this. Glad you liked it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2016, 03:17:18 PM
It's a great pic. I would have bunged it on Twitter, but didn't want to steal it and couldn't find a link to the original source.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2016, 03:58:46 PM
To be an accurate representation of the Mail, it needs a photo of Vienna Dredd as a child, with a caption about how grown up she looks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2016, 05:22:21 PM
At the age of 16 and with her 'All grown up!' figure perhaps, though I'm not sure if Vienna is standing in for baby george or for the usual paedophilic voyeurism the DM salivates over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 November, 2016, 06:59:55 PM
He's going to get in, isn't he...

I can feel it in my water.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 November, 2016, 07:25:13 PM
....Shite balls I hope not, for all our sakes...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 07 November, 2016, 07:34:11 PM
Pillory Clinton being the alternative, who has grovelled to Wall Street all her career. She's still better than El Hairdo , but then a dick broke dog's better. Democracy's the worst form of government apart from all the other kinds. That's what i keep telling myself.  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 November, 2016, 08:05:45 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 07 November, 2016, 06:59:55 PM
He's going to get in, isn't he...

Doesn't matter whether he does or not; his aim was to destroy the system. If Clinton wins, she won't be able to govern*.

Once the principles of cooperation and common interest are abandoned, everything is fucked. And as Prince Metternich said (http://www.britannia.com/history/euro/1/3_2.html), when the US gets fucked, the UK catches Chlamydia.


* Look at the shutdowns Congress pulled on Obama, who (unlike Clinton) was at least popular with his own supporters. Nobody likes Clinton.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2016, 08:20:47 PM
If he loses, we'all get a new Trump network that'll make Fox look like The Observer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 November, 2016, 08:44:13 PM
What to expect if Trump actually wins.

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--GW3EvS72--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/brozrfwngq6wj2b6todt.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 07 November, 2016, 11:21:20 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2016, 05:22:21 PM
At the age of 16 and with her 'All grown up!' figure perhaps, though I'm not sure if Vienna is standing in for baby george or for the usual paedophilic voyeurism the DM salivates over.


  maybe they'd be better relocating to Germany as the age of consent is 14! and I belive lower than 16 in a lot of the civilised EU ,and they say were better off remaining! aye, if your a perv wanting to be able to freely move about and get your underage fix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 November, 2016, 10:12:47 AM
What a stretch Grugz.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 10:26:14 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 November, 2016, 11:21:20 PM
  maybe they'd be better relocating to Germany as the age of consent is 14! and I belive lower than 16 in a lot of the civilised EU ,and they say were better off remaining! aye, if your a perv wanting to be able to freely move about and get your underage fix.

A ridiculously reductive and uninformed piece of anti-European nonsense. Germany's low age of consent is intended to decriminalise sex between teenagers as part of a strategy to reduce unwanted teenage pregnancies — a successful one, it would seem, since their rate is 9.8 per 1000 women aged 15-19, where the UK's is 26.4. Further, Germany's law takes specific account of age difference — if you're over 21, you can still be prosecuted for sex with a 14 or 15 year old.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 November, 2016, 10:31:59 AM
Germany'a policies are shared with Japan, another example of low teenage pregnancy rate and high quality of sex education.

This add'a nothing to the debate, I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 November, 2016, 10:45:44 AM
The proper response would be look up European ages of consent and lo, you will see it is more nuanced than ours. Of course looking practically anything up about the EU would reveal that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2016, 11:33:39 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 08 November, 2016, 10:31:59 AM
...Japan, another example of low teenage pregnancy rate and high quality of sex education.

If only they covered the misuse of tentacles!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2016, 11:39:31 AM
They do - but only on a squid pro quo basis.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 November, 2016, 12:01:50 PM
Say nothing of the used panty vending machines.


Yes, these exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 08 November, 2016, 07:12:15 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 10:26:14 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 07 November, 2016, 11:21:20 PM
  maybe they'd be better relocating to Germany as the age of consent is 14! and I belive lower than 16 in a lot of the civilised EU ,and they say were better off remaining! aye, if your a perv wanting to be able to freely move about and get your underage fix.

A ridiculously reductive and uninformed piece of anti-European nonsense. Germany's low age of consent is intended to decriminalise sex between teenagers as part of a strategy to reduce unwanted teenage pregnancies — a successful one, it would seem, since their rate is 9.8 per 1000 women aged 15-19, where the UK's is 26.4. Further, Germany's law takes specific account of age difference — if you're over 21, you can still be prosecuted for sex with a 14 or 15 year old.


http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/03/girl-15-and-her-47-year-old-uncle-win-right-to-have-sexual-relationship-6232627/


apparently you're wrong jim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 November, 2016, 07:35:24 PM
No he's not.

"There are provisions in German law to protect abuse of a minor who is over the age of consent by a much older partner, but only where the child concerned files a complaint with police."

From the original Telegraph article.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 07:38:48 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 08 November, 2016, 07:12:15 PM
apparently you're wrong jim.

Your reading comprehension skills haven't improved. I said: "you can still be prosecuted for sex with a 14 or 15 year old."

I didn't say you would be. I'm not a German lawyer, but the (easily Google-able) articles I have read suggest that provision for prosecution in age mis-matched relationships considers exploitation by the older person, and some form of legal complaint from the younger.

All of which seems fairly specific and undermines your implied suggestion that mainland Europe is some kind of Far-East-style haven for paedophile sex tourists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2016, 07:56:00 PM
It'll never happen, but imagine how delicious it would be if the EU enabled British citizens to retain EU citizenship somehow (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-citizenship-freedom-of-movement-passport-how-to-keep-parliament-live-move-abroad-a7405196.html). Plenty of Leave slippage and toy-throwing at this one, showcasing it's all about control. (i.e. We're jumping off this bloody cliff, and those Remoaners are coming with us, dammit. This bit about discrimination is astonishing.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 08:15:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2016, 07:56:00 PM
This bit about discrimination is astonishing.

"That thing we explicitly said we didn't want? Well, if someone else gets it, that means we're being discriminated against and it's JUST NOT FAIR and we WON'T PUT UP WITH IT."

You honestly couldn't make this up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 08 November, 2016, 09:36:10 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 07:38:48 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 08 November, 2016, 07:12:15 PM




All of which seems fairly specific and undermines your implied suggestion that mainland Europe is some kind of Far-East-style haven for paedophile sex tourists.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/apr/09/labour.immigrationpolicy

its good that google,innit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 November, 2016, 09:56:30 PM
Quote from: Grugz link=topic=28209.msg935972#msg935972 date
its good that google,innit?

A ten-year old article which has nothing to do with Germany, whose age of consent you cited in your original, risible point. Well done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 08 November, 2016, 11:16:54 PM
Germany is in Europe last I looked,and the point is those "people" are doing what you said they didn't and were doing it 10 years ago as well. I don't know what you hope to achieve arguing with me other than arguing with me but I dunno why, I voiced my opinion in a political thread about a subject that disgusted me and proved my original point you tried to discredit with a ten year old article.

which proved my point that I originally tried to make...

I thought anyone would want to condemn the low consent age in a lot of European countries but instead try to justify it with statistics when the absolute truth is there are men (and women) who are exploiting children in Europe using the lower ages of consent to get away with it.
   it is ok for men to have sex with children on the basis of a countries law? no,of course not. what if one country had the age of consent lowered to 9? or 12? would that be ok? no, of course not .
anyway,nice debating with you jim,a pleasure as always .
   
ttfn

  g'night.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 09 November, 2016, 05:20:22 AM
Woke up at 4am and made the mistake of looking at the news. This is a car crash. Who knows where we're all heading now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 09 November, 2016, 06:27:04 AM
Its hardly snowed up here and I live on high ground in Sheffield and we were meant to get 10cm. Weather people and pollster hey who the fuck can trust them.

Fuckin' hell what the fuck just fuckin' happened?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 November, 2016, 06:30:23 AM
FX have just announced the title for the next series of American Horror Story: election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 09 November, 2016, 07:27:15 AM
i knew I should have bet on a Trump win
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 09 November, 2016, 07:34:00 AM
Associated Press calls it Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: terryworld on 09 November, 2016, 07:46:58 AM
I blame you CF. went to the gym this morning with the podcast on. you said it would be a good laugh if he won. left the house and according to the polls, no way was trump gonna win. get home and.... WTF??!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 08:01:49 AM
I've felt sure this was an inevitability for weeks now. It was a vote against a complacent establishment, instead of voting for either Kang or Kodos again, they voted for Homer. Maybe this will lance the boil?

And we thought 2016 was a scunner of a year - it'll be bloody nostalgia territory soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2016, 08:11:34 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 08:01:49 AM
I've felt sure this was an inevitability for weeks now. It was a vote against a complacent establishment, instead of voting for either Kang or Kodos again, they voted for Homer. Maybe this will lance the boil?

I've been trying to tell my American friends this for months: that the forces in play here are almost identical to those in the EU referendum. The choice on offer was 'more of the same' versus 'something different' — the reason why Trump was immune to any fact you could throw against him was the same as many 'Leave' voters' indifference to obvious, indisputable facts: they weren't voting for something, they were voting against the status quo, for anything that wasn't that.

Trump, like 'Leave', was a hole into which people who (rightly or wrongly) felt threatened and disenfranchised could pour their frustration, dissatisfaction and fear. Nothing you can say about what he is could counteract the unquestionable fact of what he isn't, in the voters' minds, at least.

Ironically, Sanders would have destroyed Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 08:38:50 AM
I'm crying. I'' so worried what this means for my minority friends across the pond, how the fuck could this happen? Where did we go wrong?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 09 November, 2016, 09:04:17 AM
why do i keep thinking he reminds me of bob booth?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 09 November, 2016, 09:07:30 AM
Time to end the disastrous democratic experiment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 09:08:20 AM
The issues for all those Americans who aren't abusive billionaire sacks of suet are very serious, but what really bothers me about this is the wider trend: at this critical moment in the human story, when we need to think selflessly and long-term and act collectively to make difficult choices about mass-migrations and the climate change that drives them, we've decided instead to pledge our allegiance and bind the fate of our planet to the most selfish, the most ignorant, the very shoutiest chimps.

See also, the 52%.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 09 November, 2016, 09:12:13 AM
chimp? would prefer an orang-utan....we could call him Dave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 09:13:08 AM
Quote from: Grugz on 09 November, 2016, 09:12:13 AM
chimp? would prefer an orang-utan....we could call him Dave.

With you on that. Dave knows.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2016, 09:13:13 AM
It was a forgone conclusion after the DNC shanghaied the most popular candidate, Bernie Sanders.

The DNC threw all in with Hillary due to the Clintons' control of mass amounts of dodgy private funding and the DNC wanting to keep their jobs, jobs they would inevitably lose under a Trump or Sanders victory. This was never about the 'people', but like Trump, totally self-serving and in hock to big-business.

A Trump win is the best thing that could've happened as it will likely galvanise a stronger outside opposition to the right-wing corporatist faction the DNC have become; an opposition that otherwise would've slept through another Clinton presidency, stealthily passing all the shitty policies previous Republican governments failed to do which inevitably leads to an even worse public reaction - the election of a smarter Trump-like figure that seems less crazy and more attractive, on the outside.

It's amazing that even with the full support of the media, The Republican Party and the establishment, Clinton still failed to get elected against Trump. That's how weak a candidate she was.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Radbacker on 09 November, 2016, 10:13:15 AM
so I guess it will be that rapper guy married to that Kardashian chick with the big arse for 2020?
politics has turned into a joke in all countries, even here in OZ we currently have an elected PM who has a popularity or something like 30-35%, I'm guessing Shame Warne for PM 2019 (i'd rather Ms Minouge personally).

CU Radbacker
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 11:11:27 AM
"Do you, Donald Booth Caligula Trump, solemnly swear or affirm to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and will, to the best of your ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?"

"Who the Hell are you talking to, Pipsqueak?"

"I beg your pardon?! I am the Chief Justice of the United..."

"Yadda, yadda. Got a Green Card, pal?"

"What? No! Of course I haven't, I was born in Maine!"

"Sergeant, take this immigrant away and toss it over the Great South Wall."

"Er, we haven't got a Great South Wall yet, Sir."

"No wall?"

"Sorry, Sir."

"Damn this complacent country! Somebody fetch me a peasant to punch!"

"We could, er, build a bit of wall, Sir?"

"What?"

"Get the Engineering Corps to build a section of wall, Sir, on the border, then we could throw him over that."

"Good thinking, Sergeant. You get right on that - and make sure you build it on the Mexican side so we can charge the motherf*ckers rent on it."

"Yes, Sir."

"Right, pressing on. So, this is the White House, is it? Pfft. It's a bit tacky but I guess it'll have to do for now. We'll finish the tour later, I want to get started. Take me straight to the Throne Room."

"Um, there is no throne room, Sir. This place is largely a legislative..."

"By thunder! No Great South Wall? No Throne Room? Next thing, you'll be telling me there are no dungeons, either!"

"Ahm... I... Um. I'll get some builders in, Sir."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 November, 2016, 11:23:41 AM
Just waiting on everything starting to shimmer and waking up from a ugly dream.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 November, 2016, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 09 November, 2016, 11:23:41 AM
Just waiting on everything starting to shimmer and waking up from a ugly dream.

'This ain't America anymore kid, this is Mega City One and you and your old man have got a lot to learn.' Ah Judge Dredd America. Might be a jump in the sales for that great book. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 09 November, 2016, 11:50:02 AM
(http://i68.tinypic.com/rqx5zq.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2016, 11:52:43 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2016, 09:13:13 AMA Trump win is the best thing that could've happened as it will likely galvanise a stronger outside opposition to the right-wing corporatist faction the DNC have become
Which is basically the argument people made here about Labour swinging left with Corbyn, and the polling puts the Tories even higher than they were. (And, yes, polling is shit, but it generally underestimates the right.) It's also not the best thing for any minorities, women, equality, climate change, world stability, and even European safety.

QuoteIt's amazing that even with the full support of the media, The Republican Party and the establishment, Clinton still failed to get elected against Trump. That's how weak a candidate she was.
Full support of the media? You mean the media that spent months merrily hammering Clinton about trustworthiness, and somehow equated all the shit Trump had done with her relatively low count of shit? Or how "they both lie" ignored the actual facts.

We're in post-truth politics for real now. We're in nationalism for real. Anyone who's remotely progressive should be terrified about the future. All eyes on France to see how Le Pen's mob do. As I saw someone state earlier, bizarre to see the UK and USA swing towards fascism just as Germany has become the smart hope of the world. (Although one wonders how the German elections will go now.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 November, 2016, 12:07:00 PM
This idea that the worst outcome is somehow going to be a galvanising effect for positive change in the long-term is.... well, sorry. Deluded. Naive. Idiotic.

And yes, this idea that Clinton 'Had the media in the bag' is at odds with the reality of the past couple of years. All you can really say on that front is that Trump didn't have the support of the media but also to a great extent didn't have their hostility either, certainly not to the extent the email server debacle had.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 12:47:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2016, 11:52:43 AM
We're in post-truth politics for real now. We're in nationalism for real. Anyone who's remotely progressive should be terrified about the future. All eyes on France to see how Le Pen's mob do.

QFT.

It's as if every comment thread I've ever screamed at in frustration has suddenly been incarnated as a swarm of puffed-up homunculi and taken over the world.  I wonder how much of this counter-factual self-destructive groundswell is born of the new media and its relentless culture of baseless mutual-masturbatory affirmation, where every unsubstantiated statement can be given the status of eternal truth, and every bigoted throwback is an enlightened crusader for a world free of the burdens of decency.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 09 November, 2016, 12:48:44 PM
Surely now we at least get to see him admit it was all shit talk and he's not actually going to build a wall, lock up Clinton, ban muslims etc.

right?


right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:54:05 PM
If only Trump was half as pantomime as Sharky writes him, it would be the best comedy of the 21st century. Sadly, i'm left with a feeling of impending horror for my friends. A world of uncertainty, of horror and violence, of neo-nazi values and misery.

I weep. This is the beginning of the end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 12:57:13 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:54:05 PM
This is the beginning of the end.

Nothing ends, Adrian.

I have a plan to mix up our own (no sarcasm, I assure  you) beloved President Higgins and the vile PotUS-elect Trump in Seth Brundle's teleporter.  As polar opposites in every respect, the resultant Tuvix character should end up perfectly average in size, intellect, morality and warmth, but have the combined popularity of both men and thus become President of the world in perpetuity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:58:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 12:57:13 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:54:05 PM
This is the beginning of the end.

Nothing ends, Adrian.
Most frequently used quote whenever I try to finish Dune...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 01:07:28 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:58:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 12:57:13 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:54:05 PM
This is the beginning of the end.

Nothing ends, Adrian.
Most frequently used quote whenever I try to finish Dune...

Wait until you try the 'Round the Bend' chapter of Jerusalem.  I've been at it for almost two weeks now and I've managed to decipher 18 pages. There are 25 more!  It's not just the American people that make bizarre decisions...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 November, 2016, 01:40:13 PM
The 'strong man' seems to be back in favour. Putin in Russia, Erdogan in Turkey, Duterte in the Phillipines and now Trump in America. These men all seem to share the same anti establishment claim that they're the solution to complex economic and social problems and they all use, or have threatened to use violent force in order to get their way. They have tapped into a bitter anti globalist mood that has swept the world since the 2008 crash. Attempts at consensus on Social rights, climate change etc will now be abandoned for pure economic self interest which might, ironically be a form of protectionism in all but name. The belief that globalization offered hope, work and prosperity for all looks dead and in the West multiculturalism will find itself facing a resurgent Nationalism with all the potential ugliness that entails. Grim.   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 02:44:26 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 12:54:05 PM

This is the beginning of the end.


The beginning of the end of old-fashioned corporate politics, maybe. All around the world people are growing ever more dissatisfied with their rulers and casting about for something different.

In my view, most people are looking at the broken systems to heal themselves, to somehow throw out candidates actually worth voting for. But year on year the candidates presented by the system for (s)election get ever more egregious and the choice becomes nothing more than the endorsement of the lesser of two evils. And nothing changes. The Fascistic alliance of corporate and state power increases inch by relentless inch, bombs fall like rain, our freedoms and enjoyments get chipped away inch by relentless inch. We live in an age of technological marvels and this is the best our governments can do? Wars and food banks?

You all know what I think. I think belief in government is nothing more than the most dangerous superstition, as Larken Rose puts it, and that "government" should be stripped of its mystique and revealed as the gaudy puppet show it's increasingly becoming. But it doesn't really matter much what I think. It matters what you think. Do you want to keep relying on our present system to fix itself? Because, if you are, I don't think that's going to work.

For all their obvious faults, governments have helped humanity in their transition from cave to ISS. They have been like society's scaffolding, helping us to build our worlds. But now I think the structure of society is nearing the point where it can stand on its own and that it's time to start dismantling that scaffolding. And the way things are going, if we don't take it down there's an increasing danger of it being knocked down.

From cave to ISS, in the Grand Scheme of Things, didn't take us very long. And all that which is, to our limited minds, unfathomably deep time is just an early phase of our development. Now we're gathering to move on to another phase. So, maybe this isn't the beginning of the end.

Maybe it's the end of the beginning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 02:49:39 PM
With all due respect Sharky, it's a little hard to care for the bigger picture when the US just elected in a man and his running mate who think gay men and women should receive electro shock therapy to "cure" them. I'll care about the logistics of democracy after the two of them are no longer a problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 02:57:41 PM
The point is, there will always be people like that, who believe everyone else should do as they say and think as they think. Get rid of these two and four more are waiting to take their place. They're like Hydra.

Take away the power to enforce and Trump can believe whatever twisted bullshit he wants, he won't be able to make anyone do the same. None of them will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 03:03:09 PM
Self government is a nice idea Sharky, impossible to instrument upon 7 billion people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 November, 2016, 03:08:17 PM
Lets not go down the road of the practicalities of Sharky's system in the actual real world, it's a well worn path and it only goes in a circle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 03:29:27 PM
Seven billion people already know how to self-rule, they rule most of their own lives. Just like you do. You obey your own rules and stick to your own morality, you decide who you want as your friends and who you want to work for, you decide what to eat and what to drink, you decide whether to lie or cheat or steal or murder or not. 90% of your life is self-ruled.

I have noticed this circular path, Blaze. It tends to go like this: 1)People moan about the system. 2) I suggest an improved system. 3) It is pointed out that my suggestions do not deliver a perfect, Utopian solution. 4) Any imperfect solutions are regarded as valueless and discarded. 5) Goto (1.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2016, 03:42:42 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 November, 2016, 09:13:13 AM
It's amazing that even with the full support of the media, The Republican Party and the establishment, Clinton still failed to get elected against Trump. That's how weak a candidate she was.


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2016, 11:52:43 AMFull support of the media? You mean the media that spent months merrily hammering Clinton about trustworthiness, and somehow equated all the shit Trump had done with her relatively low count of shit? Or how "they both lie" ignored the actual facts.


The 'trustworthiness' issue recently became larger and unavoidable mostly due to wikileaks' intractable Clinton content but in this election Clinton was evidently far better supported than Trump by the mainstream media, politics and financiers on both sides of the spectrum.

This article was published by progressive media criticism organization Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (http://fair.org/home/the-anti-clinton-media-are-big-donors-to-clinton-foundation-and-to-clinton/) -

"The media industry, which many claim is out to get Clinton, is actually made up mostly of donors to the Clinton Foundation. These donors are also actively supporting Clinton's campaign with donations and even fundraising. Indeed, while Clinton's potential conflicts of interest at the State Department are thought-provoking, her financial ties to Big Media are a concern in their own right. These close ties are especially unsettling on the heels of a primary season in which the corporate media attacked Bernie Sanders constantly, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) was caught manipulating the media on Clinton's behalf.

It is understandable that many want to avoid criticizing Clinton, out of fear of giving the reckless, racist, authoritarian Donald Trump fodder to attack her. However, this type of suspension of critical thinking will not prevent a Trump presidency; Trump will attack Clinton no matter what "fodder" is or isn't provided. However, the backlash against any critique of Clinton's donor relationships may have long-term political consequences. Every time liberals do cartwheels trying to defend Clinton on this issue, they are undercutting their own fundamental arguments against Citizens United and the influence of the likes of the Koch brothers."

From Zero-Hedge - Koch Brothers Now Supporting "Often Confused" Hillary Clinton (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-23/koch-brothers-now-supporting-often-confused-hillary-clintonKoch%20Brothers%20Now%20Supporting%20"Often%20Confused"%20Hillary%20Clinton)

"The Koch-led network of billionaires (who rely upon hiring academia and media for manipulating voters), and the Rove-led network of billionaires (who rely far more heavily upon garnering Wall Street money and Evangelical clergy for manipulating voters), have long been the two financial mainstays of the Republican Party. The Kochs have now made unmistakably clear that they want Hillary Clinton to become the next President (and, thus, academics and the media will overwhelmingly support Hillary). Previously, there was question as to whether the Kochs would go so far as to help a Democrat; but, now, there is no serious doubt about it: they already do (though as quietly as possible, and not in their own — often lying — mere words)."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Ursula K on 09 November, 2016, 03:43:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 03:29:27 PM
Seven billion people already know how to self-rule, they rule most of their own lives. Just like you do. You obey your own rules and stick to your own morality, you decide who you want as your friends and who you want to work for, you decide what to eat and what to drink, you decide whether to lie or cheat or steal or murder or not. 90% of your life is self-ruled.
The flaw in your argument would be that it is only partly true and does not take into account when those partial truths of mine or yours collide with those of someone else. We all self-rule to an extent but we also do not all self-rule in the same way. There are laws I think are ridiculous but I am forced to follow them. Likewise, I follow some rules even though there are no laws enforcing them. We have limited choices, in friends, family, work, food.

That's the flaw. Not that you're wrong in saying we're all 90% self-ruled, that's probably true, but rathe that my 90% could be very different to your 90%.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 09 November, 2016, 03:51:11 PM
well, i just want to know what the cat he keeps on his heads called and why do we never see it move?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 November, 2016, 04:42:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2016, 03:29:27 PM


I have noticed this circular path, Blaze. It tends to go like this: 1)People moan about the system. 2) I suggest an improved system. 3) It is pointed out that my suggestions do not deliver a perfect, Utopian solution. 4) Any imperfect solutions are regarded as valueless and discarded. 5) Goto (1.

2) You suggest an entirely self-governing system enacted solely through individual action based solely upon theory that ignores all of the complexities of the world 3) everyone points out that such a world will not work on any level of scale beyond a small entirely self sufficient village with no external connections where everyone starts on a level playing field and somehow has no selfish bastards in it 4) go to 2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 09 November, 2016, 07:18:53 PM
I admit it. I've been indulging in schadenfreude (oo-er missus).  Trawling through right on luvvie web sites and laughing my evil black heart out as the losers lament their loss. How could working class Yanks not be swayed by the political giants of er Jay Z and um, Katy Perry? Quite.  The demoflats should have stuck with Bernie Sanders who did quite well in the mid american towns. But they wanted their bit of history too much. Clinton failed miserably because she was Clinton, unconvincing and too reliant on Hollywood etc.

She could never escape from herself.

Now the world is stuck with a political pygmy for a president. Four more years...  :o

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2016, 07:37:51 PM
Sharky's idealogy hinges on the theory that everyone has an integrated objective moral compass.

It doesn't take a genius to prove that that simply isn't the case and is tus utterly moot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 07:50:17 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 09 November, 2016, 07:18:53 PM
I admit it. I've been indulging in schadenfreude (oo-er missus).

Is it still schadenfreude if you share in the misfortune?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Banners on 09 November, 2016, 09:10:48 PM
An American private prison company, Corrections Corp, has seen their share price rise an astonishing 42% today. The introduction of iso-blocks can't be far away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 09 November, 2016, 09:23:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2016, 07:50:17 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 09 November, 2016, 07:18:53 PM
I admit it. I've been indulging in schadenfreude (oo-er missus).

Is it still schadenfreude if you share in the misfortune?

As I felt a visceral thrill of evil the answer has to be yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 November, 2016, 09:48:14 PM
Today has been a bad day. I'm sure glad I won't have to relive this day again- or this year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 09 November, 2016, 10:22:55 PM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 09 November, 2016, 07:18:53 PM
I admit it. I've been indulging in schadenfreude (oo-er missus).  Trawling through right on luvvie web sites and laughing my evil black heart out as the losers lament their loss. How could working class Yanks not be swayed by the political giants of er Jay Z and um, Katy Perry? Quite.  The demoflats should have stuck with Bernie Sanders who did quite well in the mid american towns. But they wanted their bit of history too much. Clinton failed miserably because she was Clinton, unconvincing and too reliant on Hollywood etc.

She could never escape from herself.

Now the world is stuck with a political pygmy for a president. Four more years...  :o

I think people are seriously kidding themselves on if they think Sanders would have beaten Trump. The Republicans pretty much swept the board - White House, Congress, Senate. 

Sanders' own state of Vermont put a Republucan into the governor's mansion. Where was Bernie's magic shield of political invincibility to stop that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 09 November, 2016, 10:58:01 PM
Look at the bright side, we won't be going to war against Russia any time soon.

I must say I'm quite amazed at how a lot of people (not here) seem to be baffled as to why Hilary Clinton is so disliked.

Someone where I work went against the tide of conversation today and summed up her own thoughts about Clinton with: "She likes war too much".

I'm also baffled to some degree at how people were so outraged at what the West inflicted on Iraq (rightly so) but are seemingly indifferent to what the US under Obama and Hillary (with the UK and France) inflicted on Libya. The footage of Clinton rejoicing over the death of Gadaffi was quite repulsive. The repercussions from that intervention have been horrific on so many levels, including contributing to the refugee/migrant crisis.

Trump talked bad. Clinton did bad.

"Post-truth politics"? When was politics about truth?

This John Pilger article is well worth a read:

INSIDE THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT: WAR, PROPAGANDA, CLINTON & TRUMP (http://johnpilger.com/articles/inside-the-invisible-government-war-propaganda-clinton-trump)

"To the militarists in Washington, the real problem with Trump is that, in his lucid moments, he seems not to want a war with Russia; he wants to talk with the Russian president, not fight him; he says he wants to talk with the president of China.

In the first debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump promised not to be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into a conflict. He said, "I would certainly not do first strike. Once the nuclear alternative happens, it's over." That was not news.

Did he really mean it? Who knows? He often contradicts himself. But what is clear is that Trump is considered a serious threat to the status quo maintained by the vast national security machine that runs the United States, regardless of who is in the White House.

...Clinton has the form, as she often boasts. Indeed, her record is proven. As a senator, she backed the bloodbath in Iraq.  When she ran against Obama in 2008, she threatened to "totally obliterate" Iran. As Secretary of State, she colluded in the destruction of governments in Libya and Honduras and set in train the baiting of China.

She has now pledged to support a No Fly Zone in Syria - a direct provocation for war with Russia. Clinton may well become the most dangerous president of the United States in my lifetime - a distinction for which the competition is fierce.

Without a shred of evidence, she has accused Russia of supporting Trump and hacking her emails. Released by WikiLeaks, these emails tell us that what Clinton says in private, in speeches to the rich and powerful, is the opposite of what she says in public.

...Today, the greatest build-up of American-led forces since World War Two is under way - in the Caucasus and eastern Europe, on the border with Russia, and in Asia and the Pacific, where China is the target.

Keep that in mind when the presidential election circus reaches its finale on November 8th,  If the winner is Clinton, a Greek chorus of witless commentators will celebrate her coronation as a great step forward for women. None will mention Clinton's victims: the women of Syria, the women of Iraq, the women of Libya. None will mention the civil defence drills being conducted in Russia.

...George Bush's press spokesman once called the media "complicit enablers".

Coming from a senior official in an administration whose lies, enabled by the media, caused such suffering, that description is a warning from history."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2016, 12:27:14 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 09 November, 2016, 10:22:55 PMSanders' own state of Vermont put a Republucan into the governor's mansion. Where was Bernie's magic shield of political invincibility to stop that?

Clearly you missed the memos from the political establishment since May: Sanders supporters and Trump supporters are the same thing.  When Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination, his supporters switched to Trump, so it's actually Sanders' fault that Trump won.  And also the fault of anyone who voted for a third party.  All their fault.

Clinton?  Utterly blameless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 November, 2016, 11:30:44 AM
There are actually a surprising (which admittedly would be anything greater than 1) number of Bernie voters who did switch to Trump after all of the fuss with the Dem PAC became more public. Logically it makes no sense. Logic does not enter into things as much as we hope, as is the case with 3rd-party voters. I get what they're attempting but just like over here, you can't pretend anything other than a wasted vote.

I am skeptical Sanders would have won, but then not entirely so either. It's easy to underestimate just how tainted Clinton is a candidate, to a great extent unfairly but you can see where and why these opinions are formed. She is the wife of a president who was disgraced in office. And due to sexual indiscretion, which plays badly amongst a huge section of Americans. The taint of deceit is even more All those disaffected that Obama didn't bring about Utopia are probably annoyed with her as well (again, illogically). She is part of one of America's great political dynasties, which isn't a problem for the Reps but doesn't earn any favours with the liberals - and certainly not with the (self-destructive) die-hard fans of Bernie.

I don't think Bernie would necessarily have convinced more swing voters to vote Dem than Rep.

But I am pretty confident everyone who voted Hilary would 1) still vote and 2) not vote Trump, and 3) Bernie would likely have got a good chunk of those missing 14,000,000 democrat voters who seemed not to bother showing up this time around. The turnout was really poor when you consider how many non-traditional voter Trump must have gathered, and most of that went missing from the democrat vote.

So.... I think the result would at least have been better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2016, 12:28:56 PM
Sanders did bring in a lot of indy voters to the Democrats, so in theory he would have got a bigger vote share than Clinton for that alone - but in practice, Clinton supporters in particular were so absolutely dreadful during the primaries that I couldn't see people that shallow and arrogant ever voting for someone they viewed as not being a "real" Democrat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 November, 2016, 01:11:31 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 10 November, 2016, 11:30:44 AMIt's easy to underestimate just how tainted Clinton is a candidate, to a great extent unfairly but you can see where and why these opinions are formed. She is the wife of a president who was disgraced in office. And due to sexual indiscretion, which plays badly amongst a huge section of Americans.
Although not enough to stop many millions voting for a man who was caught on camera boasting about sexual assault, who is accused of several counts of assault and rape, and who denigrates women on a very regular basis (when he's not busy having a go at minorities and the disabled).

But then people have plenty of cognitive dissonance to go round. When I mentioned about sexism on Facebook, I got an angry retort about Bill Clinton's shenanigans. I noted he wasn't on the ticket. But his wife was! So you'd rather have a man who's done this shit than a woman married to a man who's done so? Subject then swiftly changed.

I'm sick of it all. I don't think I've ever felt so low about politics and the future. I love mini-IP dearly, but what fucking world is being created for our kids, by rich arseholes? (And, well done, poor Americans for sticking it to the man. It looks like Trump's entirely unsurprisingly surrounding himself with rich arseholes to run the USA for their own ends.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 November, 2016, 01:21:26 PM
Didn't realise Brendan McCarthy was pro-Trump. Calling him out on it has put me in his personal bad books for a very long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Radbacker on 10 November, 2016, 01:57:11 PM
so what will AMerica do with all those Tanks, APC's, Planes, Jets and general weapons of war that keep the country afloat (well the Billionairs in the country with Scroge Mcduck like Money vaults) now, they build em, they stock pile em sometimes they sell em (I know Australia just bought several $B worth of these M1s recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAQQ7kdqmlU ) probably from this very stock pile, pitty Tanks are all but useless in modern warfare.  Thats what it 's all about, I dont like Trump I think he is a buffon and obviously hates alot but honestly he may actually help his own country with his isolationist stance and put a dent in the whole military idustrial complex that runs and has run america since WW2.  Unfortunatly what this will mean for Oz I dont know, Australia realise on America to keep us safe we talk about our own boarder security but if push ever came to shove down this part if the world (I am of course thinking about the massive Chinese Military build up in the South China sea all those lovely man made islands full of Chinese hardware they've been building the last 10-15 years) without American intervention I think Australia would be a nice easy target for some warmongering country to just take, we have lot of resources still in the ground here and while we happily sell it to anyone with a $ to give but wouldn't it just be easier to come in and take it?  That was the Japanese plan in WW2 after all.
So i dunno I kinda like the idea of America not being the world police anymore and just think what they could possibly achieve if they ewent back to making toasters and ovenslike before WW2 but Im piss scared what it'll mean for countries like Australia that really do rely on the big bad US of A to keep us safe.
As you see from that babble above i am very confused by the whole situation and really have no idea what is going to happen I just hope for the best and hope the media have been winding us up over the possible Chinese threat to the whole South East Asian area, we all no what happened last time shit went down in that reagion and it wasn't good for anyone. 

CU Radbacker
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2016, 02:08:52 PM
Whatever difference Trump makes, or Hillary might have made, will be, I expect, purely superficial. The important decisions will continue to be made behind closed doors.

Remember the wave of excitement and optimism that swept Obama to office? What a great president he promised to be. Two terms later and things are no better. Guantanamo's still open for business and corporate interests are still paramount.

Now Trump is swept to office on a wave of dissatisfaction and disillusionment. Almost an Anti-Obama. I'd expect Trump to have no more power to change things than Obama did. His role, like that of most presidents back to at least Nixon, is to sell corporate government to the people. He'll bluster about this and rail against that and offend the other, cause mischief and headlines and arguments. And while everybody's watching the prime-time Trump Show, the business of corporate government will continue on one of those dull public service channels nobody watches at 2 a.m. on a Wednesday.

Trump, I suspect, will prove to be largely irrelevant in and of himself. The idea of Trump, though, might prove a threat to social harmony if so manipulated - but that's true of all ideas. Trump, the man, is a sideshow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 November, 2016, 02:12:55 PM
"Purely superficial" as only a straight, white, cis male could ever say in such circumstances.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2016, 02:22:08 PM
"Purely superficial" from the perspective of
his effect on the plans of the deep
government. His effect on living society might
not be so insignificant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 November, 2016, 02:25:23 PM
Right now, Shark, stuff the deep government can shove it. Right now i'm concerned for civil rights, all else is irrelevant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 10 November, 2016, 02:51:59 PM
Some would argue the increase in tensions with China have been created by the US.

By all means call out Trump for the nasty things he has said. And do so for Hillary.

Why not look up online what Hillary has said about black men in the past, about "obliterating Iran", her position in the past on gay marriage (and if some reports on Wikileaks emails are to be believed her current non-public position), about her in the not too distant past calling for a wall between the US and Mexico, about her being prepared to hit the nuclear button first (Trump says he would not), about Native Americans, about Ghandi. And the 'accusation' that Obama is of the Muslim faith. Her campaign team is accused of instigating that in her previous Democrat election campaign.

There are videos online on some of the above. 

Might make for uncomfortable reading and viewing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 November, 2016, 03:18:49 PM
This is how far to left Hillary Clinton's politics is:

                                                    Neutral                               Hillary Trump
Far Left |-------------------------------|----------------------------^--^--| Far Right
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 November, 2016, 03:29:09 PM
Speaking as someone from Norn Iron I think it is hugely progressive for the Americans to have voted in someone who is both orange and republican
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 November, 2016, 04:16:53 PM
Aye but at the same time Hillary was attacked on many occasions for not being strong enough. Which is obviously just sexism but vicious circle of trying to prove it wrong and ending up as a bit of a warmonger.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 November, 2016, 01:11:31 PM
Although not enough to stop many millions voting for a man who was caught on camera boasting about sexual assault, who is accused of several counts of assault and rape, and who denigrates women on a very regular basis (when he's not busy having a go at minorities and the disabled).

All I can say is that to the Yanks, there's a difference between what you do before the Office and what you do in there. Or even outside of it.

Between Bill Clinton and Anthony Wiener*, the Democrat party keeps sticking its Lyndon B Johnsons in everything. Dicks really did ruin it for the Lady candidate, just as much (if not more) as her own flaws did IMO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 November, 2016, 06:59:03 PM
I think Sharky is right (My God.  Typing that...actually...hurt), in that the role of president is largely superficial.  The president's job is essentially to be the final check on the powers of congress and Senate, but also, and possibly more importantly, to act as a figurehead, to ,lead the people.

Trump is different.  Hillary may well be an awful human being, but if the president's main role is to inspire, then what she inspires is generally positive, if maybe naive.  Trump is also an awful person, but he actively revels in that awfulness.  He rose to power on the back of the alt-right, encouraging white supremacists and homophobes, deliberately inspiring hate and fear. 

The brexit vote saw a spike in hatecrimes because bigots (rightly or wrongly) saw the vague and noncommittal policies of Ukip and the public support they gained  as a public acceptance of racism.  Trump deliberately encouraged hate.  That's going to have a massive fallout.

He's also has a republican Senate behind him.  A Senate who have been shown that the best, easiest and cheapest way to get the support of the American electorate is fear.  They'll push discriminatory laws, ensure that an extremist is in the supreme court, and they'll do it all with the support of a media happy help because the new leaders of the free world provide ratings.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 November, 2016, 07:41:02 PM
What he said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 November, 2016, 07:41:43 PM
Paraphrasing and uncomfortably apt:

The President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.

An orange tan is what the President traditionally wears.

On those criteria Zaphod Beeblebrox Donald Trump is one of the most successful Presidents America will ever had. He will spend two of his eight Presidential years in prison for fraud. Very very few people realize that the President and the Government have virtually no power at all, and of these very few people only six know whence ultimate political power is wielded. Most of the others secretly believe that the ultimate decision-making process is handled by a computer. They couldn't be more wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Apestrife on 10 November, 2016, 07:50:51 PM
I think this more or less settles it why Stump is the president 'Murica needs!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMKFIHRpe7I
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 November, 2016, 07:51:41 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 10 November, 2016, 06:59:03 PMThat's going to have a massive fallout.
I agree with everything you say apart from this, purely on the basis that it's already having a massive fallout. My feeds are littered with people talking about minorities being fucked over, women being assaulted on public transport, and so on. Just as we saw in the UK, this election has opened the floodgates to normalise abhorrent behaviour. After all, if the president-elect can do these things, surely that's just the way of things? Ugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2016, 07:53:01 PM
Adams was a very wise man.

I have to agree with Panther. What Trump actually does in office remains to be seen, but what he has done on the way there can't be undone. Taking pride in ignorance, abuse and selfishness, wooing an electorate with fear, hate and blame, and showing others how that's the way forward... that's his legacy before he's even sworn in.

It's okay to be a colossal shit. In fact, that's how you get to the top. Fantastic lesson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 November, 2016, 07:56:34 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 10 November, 2016, 07:41:43 PMThe President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever.

Considering a president can order a missile strike, I don't think that's true.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 10 November, 2016, 08:06:14 PM
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/10/the-big-split/ (http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/10/the-big-split/)

"Trump is not the answer, of course. He is the symptom. He is the symptom of the virus of neo liberal Capitalism."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 November, 2016, 08:08:29 PM
It's gonna be interesting with the French and German elections next year (along with the rest in Europe). If anything the last year has proved that the establishment can't rely on the public for their status quo anymore!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 10 November, 2016, 08:22:08 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/6NlRCmo.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 November, 2016, 09:20:21 PM
I'd just like to recommend the documentary Hypernormalization, by Adam Curtis.  It should be on the BBC iPlayer.  Curtis is the guy whose creepy, not-quite-real short films appear in Charlie Brooker's Newswipe, with the droning voice over and stock footage.

Hypernormalization was the term used to describe the Soviet union in the 70s, when everything was falling to shit, but the people and government had an unspoken pact that everyone would pretend that things were going great. 

The documentary covers the shift in power from the state (as a representation of the people), to corporations and the financial elite.  It follows the increasing willingness of politicians to present an artificial reality rather than confronting complex problems.

  It also follows the rise of Trump, the use of organized chaos as a political tool, suicide bombings, Gadaffi as an international supervillian, and how the internet started as a dream of an anarchist utopia before corporations realised how much money could be made by repeating your opinions back to you.

And heh, who doesn't love a three hour long documentary?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 November, 2016, 10:00:03 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 10 November, 2016, 09:20:21 PM
I'd just like to recommend the documentary Hypernormalization, by Adam Curtis.  It should be on the BBC iPlayer.

It's on youtube for those without iplayer -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM

QuoteAnd heh, who doesn't love a three hour long documentary?


Not quite sure how much "documentary" might cover Curtis' politics/pop-art collage approach to his films but he's always compelling and it's interesting to see how his own randomised style of communicating a message intersects with what he says about modern Russian propaganda - it's no surprise he was one of the first to see this happening.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 10 November, 2016, 10:27:56 PM
True, 'documentary' doesn't quite feel the right term, more like idea-soaked essays in video form. Haven't got around to this one yet, but really looking forward to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 November, 2016, 11:04:22 PM
One of the unsettling aspects of Trump's election is the elevation of Alex Jones.

On Election Day Trump's campaign advisor Roger Stone (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/donald-trumps-debate-dirty-trickster-121098) was the special guest who sat beside Jones as the votes came in for his election special (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEkGtX6sNPY&index=5&list=PLKkSfhYk-XBiRaSCmUCvOJjO-38VCU3NJ) and Trump had previously endorsed and done an interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJqLAleEnKw) with Jones during the campaign.

(http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2016/06/05/6.5_jones_stone_curiel.png)

The possibility of someone like Jones taking meetings at the White House is not something to look forward to.

The 1957 film A Face in the Crowd shares parallels with both Jones and Trump -

"A boisterous braggart is given a TV show, where his unfiltered coarseness soon makes him a star. His audience, primarily hovering around the poverty line and predisposed to mistrust, regard him as a straight-shooter and man of the people, even as he looks down on them from his penthouse, where his personal wealth and circle of aristocratic supporters grows. Soon, his popularity is such that he begins to entertain political ambitions. At first, he's just a tough-talking mouthpiece for an establishment candidate—the guy who says what the "responsible elite" aren't able to say, but surely would if they could. But his ego cannot be contained. Soon he's no longer under their control, believing that his is the true power behind the power. And nothing—not his own inexperience, his spotty personal record, nor his own scandalous dealings with women—will stand in his way." (http://www.avclub.com/article/not-even-movie-cynical-face-crowd-could-predict-do-245666)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjO5jQy0wDI

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 November, 2016, 07:10:43 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 10 November, 2016, 11:04:22 PM
"A boisterous braggart is given a TV show, where his unfiltered coarseness soon makes him a star. His audience, primarily hovering around the poverty line and predisposed to mistrust, regard him as a straight-shooter and man of the people, even as he looks down on them from his penthouse, where his personal wealth and circle of aristocratic supporters grows. Soon, his popularity is such that he begins to entertain political ambitions. At first, he's just a tough-talking mouthpiece for an establishment candidate—the guy who says what the "responsible elite" aren't able to say, but surely would if they could. But his ego cannot be contained. Soon he's no longer under their control, believing that his is the true power behind the power. And nothing—not his own inexperience, his spotty personal record, nor his own scandalous dealings with women—will stand in his way."[/i][/url]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjO5jQy0wDI

MA-A-A-A-TLOCK!

Cheers, SOAP. Read about that, never seen it before.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 November, 2016, 07:26:22 AM
There'll be the breaking of the ancient western code
Your private life will suddenly explode
There'll be phantoms
There'll be fires on the road
And the white man dancing.

You'll see a woman hanging upside down;.
Her features covered by her fallen gown .
And all the lousy little poets coming round
Trying to sound like Charlie Manson
And the white man dancing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 08:58:29 AM
We're one of the last three or four generations of humanity as a species, maximum.  Only the anthropic principle stops that fact from sinking in.  I hope there's some other life left when we go; it'll be better off without us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 November, 2016, 09:07:44 AM
Christ, don't jinx it, Jayzus!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 November, 2016, 10:07:08 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 08:58:29 AM
We're one of the last three or four generations of humanity as a species, maximum.  Only the anthropic principle stops that fact from sinking in.  I hope there's some other life left when we go; it'll be better off without us.

Humankind forever seems to be heading for destruction our culture is filled with doomsday scenarios but we are the great survivor outlasting Ice ages and sever climate change so we'll endure Trumpism.  Perhaps his success is an indication that the globalization as we have known it is either temporarily on hold, or indeed finished, it's contradictions and contrasts, extreme wealth at the top, very little at the bottom of the socio economic heap have done it to death. Resentment against the Political elites, anger at the top earners largess and a suspicion that mass immigration was really a way of downsizing host nations to provide a never ending cheap source of labour for the rich have been fatal for the current crop of politicians who spoke of a shared future for all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 04:34:08 PM
Are you refering to the Carter Catastrophy Jaysus? Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 November, 2016, 04:50:58 PM
Quote from: Frank on 11 November, 2016, 07:10:43 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 10 November, 2016, 11:04:22 PM
"A boisterous braggart is given a TV show, where his unfiltered coarseness soon makes him a star. His audience regard him as a straight-shooter and man of the people, even as he looks down on them from his penthouse. Soon, his popularity is such that he begins to entertain political ambitions"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjO5jQy0wDI

MA-A-A-A-TLOCK!

Cheers, SOAP. Read about that, never seen it before.

Great movie; up there with Network and Ace In The Hole. The Trump parallels break down at the end, when [spoiler]his audience discover what he's like when the cameras aren't rolling[/spoiler]. Trump got over that one by acting like it never happened.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 05:29:56 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 04:34:08 PM
Are you refering to the Carter Catastrophy Jaysus? Z

Never heard of it till now, I'm afraid, but it's an interesting topic that I'll look at at length later today. 

Apart from the fact that my early morning thoughts are very pessimistic and frightening at the moment; I was reading interviews with Noam Chomsky regarding this election result (I can't bring myself to type the new President's name) - it's not looking good for us in terms of potential war or catastrophic climate change.

I also came across this:  https://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/press/press-releases/2015/december/global-warming-disaster-could-suffocate-life-on-planet-earth-research-shows (https://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/press/press-releases/2015/december/global-warming-disaster-could-suffocate-life-on-planet-earth-research-shows) - and what with the most influential man in the world denying the existence of global warming, humanity's future is looking very bleak indeed.

Best we can do is lobby to try and change minds, impossible though it seems right now, and try to make the most of things while we still can.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 November, 2016, 05:59:37 PM

President Elect Trump's tweet from yesterday:

"Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!"

It's incredible the complete lack of selfawareness demonstrated by him and his loyal army of tweety followers.  If that wasn't bad enough, it gets followed this morning by...

"Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!"


This guy would be hilarious if he wasn't going to control the largest military in the world in a couple of months.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 07:11:51 PM
Fuck's sake. What happened to the election being 'rigged', anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 07:37:48 PM
If you're in bad form Jaysus, I'd avoid the Carter hypotheses. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 November, 2016, 07:53:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 07:11:51 PM
Fuck's sake. What happened to the election being 'rigged', anyway?
It's never rigged when you win. Just as the Electoral College was a disaster that should inspire revolution, according to Trump last time round. Now he wins with it, despite losing the popular vote: silence. SURPRISE!

Modern Panther: clearly he's back tweeting himself now, but his staffers are too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2016, 08:13:17 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 07:37:48 PM
If you're in bad form Jaysus, I'd avoid the Carter hypotheses. Z

Thanks Zen. Maybe now is not the time for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 November, 2016, 08:34:55 PM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 07:37:48 PM
If you're in bad form Jaysus, I'd avoid the Carter hypotheses. Z

Yeah the Maths alone made my eyes hurt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 11 November, 2016, 11:06:53 PM
It is a bit mathy but the hypothesis is sound....we're f**ked. Z  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 12 November, 2016, 03:25:06 AM
An American guy who dislikes Clinton as much as he dislikes Trump sent me this scathing account of the role of "the left" in Trump's victory. It's pretty foul-mouthed so probably good to use headphones. I think I've seen this guy's vids before. Basically it's an actor who plays a news anchor who goes off on these satirical rants once he's done his report for the camera.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=GLG9g7BcjKs
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 12 November, 2016, 03:51:27 AM
I think there's a lot of truth in the rant I just posted although I disagree that "the left" is completely to blame (I mean, how could it???) and I'm pretty doubtful Sanders would have destroyed Trump. Overall I see Trump as the culmination of 30-odd years of selling people an aspirational dream and allowing them to despair when the dream doesn't come true for them and they find there's no safety net to catch them when they fall.

There's a great quote about the US in an article I read (in Rolling Stone, I think) about Trump's victory: "America is like a giant manor estate where the aristocrats don't know they're aristocrats and the peasants imagine themselves undiscovered millionaires." It's all the "undiscovered millionaires" (angry that they haven't been discovered yet) who were at the core of the vote.

But the guy in the video raises an important point about how the left tends to shut down debate and ridicule people if they have what seems to be an unacceptable view rather than debating with them. I guess it's a symptom of the Internet age. I admit I got a little like that when I was drunk and on the internet after the Brexit result  :-[

These days it seems liberal-leaning discourse focuses way too much on calling people out for getting their identity politics wrong. These are all important issues but it distracts people from overriding issues like the predicament of the poor and healthcare. The confrontational nature of the discourse fractures the left. At the same time, the "left-of-centre" political parties have spent so long trying to imitate their counterparts on the right they can no longer come up with a credible alternative to what the right are offering.

It's so much easier for the modern right to have a simple, coherent message, ironically because of the sheer lack of thought that goes into the position. It's basically this: "I work hard so I deserve to be well off but the government and foreigners are stopping me from being well off."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2016, 10:39:27 AM
Quote from: Muon on 12 November, 2016, 03:51:27 AM
There's a great quote about the US in an article I read (in Rolling Stone, I think) about Trump's victory: "America is like a giant manor estate where the aristocrats don't know they're aristocrats and the peasants imagine themselves undiscovered millionaires." It's all the "undiscovered millionaires" (angry that they haven't been discovered yet) who were at the core of the vote.

It's a Steinbeck quote/misquote: 'Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires' (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Steinbeck#Disputed).

I agree with almost everything in your post. There are two kinds of people who discuss politics; those who wish to explain their reasoning to others and those who just want to inflict fulminating abuse upon those too stupid to already agree with them.

It is our tragedy that those in that latter group were born pish at sport, or they'd be somewhere else, hurling wildly accusatory, divisive invective at each other about football or cricket, or something else that doesn't have real life consequences for millions of people.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 12 November, 2016, 10:40:16 AM
You are making some sensible points there muon. The crass demagogue has stolen what should be the democrats core support grouping, that is the blue collar working class. When those Great Lake states turned red my heart dropped.
The shift of focus from fair distribution of wealth; fiscal regulation; real affordable health care and education towards a strict emphasis on identity politics (important as they are) and being seen as hand in glove with the '1%' and the organs of globalised corporate business and finance have cost the party dearly in the US; cost the left of centre dearly in the UK and disconcertingly will be repeated throughout Europe in a macabre domino effect.
Hilary Clinton as I have said many, many times before on this forum is closely linked with all of the negatives which I have outlined above. She paid the price for her sheer sense of entitlement, arrogance and worst of all her complacency.  People and groupings have said Bernie Saunders was too extreme for the US electorate (despite indications that his message connected with core working class views and was also impacting strongly on young motivated men and women); how was he adjudged to be extreme when the next encumbent president is to all intents and purposes an unqualified, misogynistic racist?
There is a new harder edge amongst voters in westren democracies.  The globalisation, neo-liberal experiment has failed and in my opinion as it was constituted and executed, a good thing too. The left must offer answers to the questions being put by this phase change and at the moment, in spite of the harsh lessons being handed out, they are still in utter denial of the facts and consequently are continuing to pay a high price. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 12 November, 2016, 10:52:15 AM
If anyone thinks that "the left" us to blame because it only seeks to shut down political debate, I'd suggest they watch PM's questions. 

People on both sides seek to shut down debate, "the left" because they regard some opinions as unacceptable and "the right" because they regard some opinions as weak.  For every "leftist" complaining about mansplaining and triggers, there's someone on the far right complaining about SJWs and feminazis.  The far right's argument is an easier sell, because it's easier to have uncontrolled rage in 140 characters than explain the social history that led us here.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 November, 2016, 10:27:52 AM
We give the Far Right a platform because we think you should let people say their piece in public, and be opposed. However the Far Right would not allow their opponents the same privilege. They're not interested in what other people have to say, and that's always going to be to their strength, no matter how reprehensible and contradictory that might be to our own values.

And on a related note, it is sickening how 'balance' always means bring in the Far Right, but pretend anything to the left of Labour doesn't exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 November, 2016, 04:07:40 PM
The reality of his situation seems to be ever-so-slightly sinking in for the Great Cunt, who has already made serious modifications to some of his most prominent pre-election promises (including Obamacare, gay marriage and the fucking wall).


It's not much, but it's a miniscule glimmer of hope in a massive,  unholy global mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 14 November, 2016, 06:05:00 PM
Convicted liar and Trump Buddy, Conrad Black on the news there, explaining to us simple leftists  that Trump supporters all knew that The Wall was only ever a metaphor. 

Apparently "I will build a wall.  A great wall.  Mark my words." Means "I will enforce reasonable border controls, using existing laws and budgets".

Here's an interesting essay on the rise of fascism, written in 1995, by Umberto Eco, who grew up in fascist Italy.  The parallels between the 20s and 30s and what is happening now is terrifying.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/ (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/)

"Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 November, 2016, 07:30:15 PM
Seem's the far right media continues to make up lies about Jezza, long past any of their readership believing them anyway...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2016, 08:58:19 PM
How did we get to this point though?  Where media, politicians and even presidential candidates can just tell any old lie that suits them, and not even blush when caught out, and there are apparently no consequences whatsoever? 

I know we all used to believe the joke "how do you know when a politician is lying", but wasn't there a time when they had to be clever about it, because getting caught in a lie would screw with their election chances in the short term at least.  Now, any suited shit can spout any old shite, and no-one cares that they are provably lying.  How does any hypothetical kind of opposition based on truth, and its inevitable unpleasant complexities and compromises, have a hope of succeeding? If facts don't matter, how do you construct any kind of counter?

My first reaction on seeing Trump's victory on a phone screen, after a brief moment of hope that it was a poor joke, was to reflect that I really was the 'libtard' I'd been called so often.  How stupid must we be?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 November, 2016, 10:31:11 PM
I personally believe Obama was fully determined to shut down Guantanamo; but eventually realised it was a task beyond even the POTUS.

The Cunt-Elect and the Brexit-mongers, though - shameless liars.  Because, as TB says, in these dark times, they can be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Muon on 14 November, 2016, 11:56:49 PM
I think lying has become easier because of the proliferation of information over the internet. It sounds ironic but maybe there's so much information people end up seeking the little corners of the internet that reinforce their own worldview, like their Facebook news feeds. They spend so much time cocooned in their own echo chambers they don't even notice when lies are exposed. And when people's lies are called out, that fact is quickly drowned out by a torrent of new information. The traditional media make it worse by reporting every word of people like Trump as if it's gospel in a desperate attempt to survive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 November, 2016, 12:10:32 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 November, 2016, 10:31:11 PM
The Cunt-Elect and the Brexit-mongers, though - shameless liars.  Because, as TB says, in these dark times, they can be.


They all lie (sometimes intentionally/sometimes not) but of course some do it more than others:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2016, 06:39:08 AM
Worse than I thought , really.  According to that 70% of Trump utterances fall between. 'Mostly False' and 'Pants on Fire', versus Clinton's 26%. Even allowing for Politifact bias, those are depressing numbers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2016, 10:07:49 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 November, 2016, 06:39:08 AM
Even allowing for Politifact bias, those are depressing numbers

The BBC's More Or Less concluded the bias of Politifact and Factcheck.org was more evident in the number of checks performed than in their assessment of the candidates' statements.

Despite Clinton declaring her candidacy before Trump and serving as Secretary of State for most of the time that organisation has existed - through Wikileaks, through Benghazi, through South Ossetia - Politifact has checked 100 more instances of Trump logorrhoea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logorrhea_(psychology)) than pronouncements by Grandma Nixon [1].


[1] Trump just can't stop talking, and if he's ever uttered a factual statement it's because someone has stuck it on a teleprompter and warned him not to go off script, but Clinton's practiced schtick- like that of most politicians - doesn't necessarily make interns reach for Wikipedia. Those kind of distortions and evasions are usually sort of comforting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2016, 10:32:21 AM
Human beings lie. Sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly; sometimes for selfish reasons and sometimes not. We've all done it and we'll all do it again. Lying isn't the problem, we all know how to deal with liars and lies.

The problem stems from giving one liar more power than any other. A lie with power behind it is a dangerous thing, as is power with a lie behind it. To mend this situation we need to either get rid of the lies or get rid of the power. As power tends to encourage lies for its own maintenance, it's power that should be removed or, at the very least, severely curtailed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 November, 2016, 03:21:19 PM
Work & Pensions Secretary thinks insecure, underpaid employment is exciting. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-gig-economy-damian-green-speech-holiday-minimum-wage-sick-pay-hours-a7421071.html)

Just wait until we get rid of all those pesky employment rights the EU made us give the workforce, eh? Imagine how much more... exciting it will be trying to keep a roof over your head and food on the table.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 November, 2016, 03:40:37 PM
Jeremy Hunt thinks the NHS should look to the US healthcare system (https://www.bma.org.uk/news/2016/november/learn-from-us-clinics-and-their-marble-foyers-says-health-secretary) for solutions to its problems. The BMA notes that US healthcare costs twice as much as the NHS per capita, delivers lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality and, obviously, leaves many millions without any kind of care at all, because they can't afford it.

Meanwhile, Tory MP Edward Leigh wants Parliament to discuss charging NHS patients for services and junior Health Minister Phillip Dunne refuses to rule it out. (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/anger-as-health-minister-refuses-to-rule-out-future-nhs-charges_uk_582b0adde4b0e18d11a6b1da?utm_hp_ref=uk)

How can this not be a red line for just about anyone who lives in this country? Are we really so apathetic that we can sleepwalk into this? People have been flagging up various measures, beginning with Lansley's Health & Social Care Bill, as quiet, covert steps towards the end of the NHS as we know it* and those warnings have been dismissed as lefty scaremongering** but the Tories are breaking cover now, trying to make the unthinkable, thinkable.


*I'm not saying that the NHS couldn't use reforms, that there aren't any number of things that desperately need fixing, but in respect of the general principle: universal healthcare free at the point of use funded from general taxation? That's something worth defending.

**Despite Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary having, y'know, actually co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 November, 2016, 03:45:55 PM
They were talking about the 'Gig Economy' on the radio earlier.
The main advocate (not sure who he was as I missed the beginning) seemed to have one single argument for the benefits of being paid on a job by job basis with no security, holiday pay, sick pay etc. His argument was that if you're a window cleaner or a black cab driver you're in the same situation and 'it's been that way for years'.
It all sounds like horseshit to me.
For a start, if you run your own business or are self employed you can still get a mortgage based on your historic and projected earnings. Good luck trying to get a mortgage based on the number of Deliveroo jobs you've done!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 November, 2016, 03:46:35 PM
I'm intrigued.  How does having the right to do something (earn paid holidays, for example) in any way restrict people from not earning them if they don't want to? Whereas conversely not having that right means most of those who do want those benefits will never get them... 

Unnecessary anecdote time:  I recently took on some PAYE work with my major client, since it had become obvious I was going to be full-time on a single project for them with no clear end-date and was thus ridiculous to claim I was anything other than employed, and while the Bank Holidays and TOIL stuff is certainly nice, I still can't wait to get back to working solely for myself (I'm keeping the business ticking over with existing contracts, but not taking on any new contracts until I have the time).  It's a pleasant novelty, but it's not for me at this point in time.  But why would I want to deny other people the chance? 

The only argument I can see is a reduction employer costs, but if we assume businesses need people to do the work, then these super-flexible micro-entrepreneur shelf-stackers will presumably be charging more for their services so that they can afford to give themselves the benefits they have surrendered... I certainly charge more for my time as a self-employed person than I get paid as an employee for this very reason. 

One can only imagine that the intention is that the one-time employee does not do this, keeping business costs down, and having the knock-on effect of putting downward pressure on existing employee wages. And therefore that the hope behind this bollocks is that quality of life will be driven down for everybody but the usual suspects.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 November, 2016, 07:58:14 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 17 November, 2016, 03:45:55 PMFor a start, if you run your own business or are self employed you can still get a mortgage based on your historic and projected earnings.
Although, as we discovered recently, that's not exactly simple now. We wanted a remortgage, to build an extension. I had years of bank statements, a letter from my accountant about projected earnings, and a comprehensive list of expenses and outgoings. The lender was not remotely interested. As I was PAYE with one company at the time, that was all they cared about. The other income was almost dismissed. (All non-UK income was dismissed, including all royalties from book writing.) In the end, we got the money, but as a home-investment loan or some such. We were told we basically only got it because we'd been with the lender for 15 years, never missed a payment, and weren't asking for insane money. As a new customer in such circumstances, we'd have been shit out of luck.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2016, 03:41:03 PM
You Are Still Crying Wolf. (http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/) Long but very interesting blog post exploring Trump's association with racism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 November, 2016, 05:08:51 PM
I'm sorry Sharky but that article is the biggest load of bollocks i've read all week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 November, 2016, 05:49:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2016, 03:41:03 PM
I realize that all of this is going to make me sound like a crazy person and put me completely at odds with every respectable thinker in the media, but luckily, being a crazy person at odds with every respectable thinker in the media has been a pretty good ticket to predictive accuracy lately

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/ (http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/)

I broadly agree, but posting that here is like tossing a grenade into a grenade factory staffed entirely by grenades.

Alexander's numbers - Trump got more votes from minorities/fewer votes from caucasians than Rommney, and ethnic minority voters outnumber the alt-right by a factor of 2000 - are more convincing than the suggestion that no racist would ever pose with a bowl of chili.


(http://i.imgur.com/tOwjNOJ.png?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 05:57:43 PM
There's a massive amount of effort being put into rewriting history to make Trump seem reasonable. 

We're being told that the rise of the hateful right is the fault of the complaining left, who spent too long calling racists racist, and not long enough listening to how difficult their lives are.

We're being told that, hey, the shitty things that Trump says were just to get into power, so now we don't have to worry, cause he's really a decent guy.  We're being told that its irrational to complain about racism, sexism, antisemitism, because it's just words and Mill's fighting for our civil rights when he launches hate campaigns at black actresses.

First off - Trump received more of the black vote than Romney?  So what?!  Romney was up against Obama. 

The idea that the alt-right isn't a powerful movement and so can be discounted?  And as evidence for that, we're told that /r/altright has only 5000 users.  Have a look at /r/altright...it currently has 6,855,000 subscribers.  It also helpfully says that it is devoted to white supremacy.

(Can we stop calling them "alt right".  We all have a word for what they are)

Enough understanding.  Enough apologies.  Fuck these people and their hateful little opinions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 05:59:01 PM
Milo, not Mills.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 November, 2016, 06:18:38 PM
Alt-reich.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 November, 2016, 07:12:14 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 05:57:43 PM
we're told that /r/altright has only 5000 users.  Have a look at /r/altright...it currently has 6,855,000 subscribers

That conflates daily users and total subscriber numbers:

(http://i.imgur.com/RqtQzRd.png?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/sHzdu2c.png?1)

I don't like Trump; I think he's a vulgar idiot who is motivated entirely by egotism. But he won a similar number of votes (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/president) to the previous successful GOP candidate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004), who wasn't running on a KKK ticket.

Given the rising US population since 2004, Trump actually lost voters, but the Democrats fielded a divisive candidate who was unable to turn out their base in the same states that voted for a mixed race dude for the last eight years*.


* but are now suddenly frothing Nazis?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 19 November, 2016, 07:38:15 PM
I broadly agree, but posting that here is like tossing a grenade into a grenade factory staffed entirely by grenades

And we take our lead from the Pat Mills bomb!  :-\ Z




[/quote]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 08:02:12 PM
Of course their claimed figures are nonsense.  But this is the post truth future.

I certainly don't think that republican voters are frothing Nazis.   I do think that Trump deliberately appealed to the bigotted minority, drawing attention to himself by race baiting. He was supported by racists.  He was also supported by a disgruntled majority, who decided that having a morally bankrupt  billionaire conman who boasted  about sexual assault was better than Clinton.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 November, 2016, 08:04:32 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 05:57:43 PMWe're being told that, hey, the shitty things that Trump says were just to get into power, so now we don't have to worry, cause he's really a decent guy.  We're being told that its irrational to complain about racism, sexism, antisemitism, because it's just words and Mill's fighting for our civil rights when he launches hate campaigns at black actresses.

Racism and sexism have always existed and as issues should always be denounced but to me they are only covering the real underlying problem that is not being addressed and is helping elevate those who harbour such hateful opinions while conflating them with those who don't but find the only other establishment party who could genuinely be progressive is also against their own interests of survival.

Mark Blyth sums it up better than I ever could -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWMmBG3Z4DI&t=13m11s




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 November, 2016, 08:49:29 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 November, 2016, 08:02:12 PM
(Trump) was supported by racists.  He was also supported by a disgruntled majority, who decided that having a morally bankrupt billionaire conman who boasted about sexual assault was better than Clinton.

That's far too reasonable and nuanced an argument to make here, Panthro.


Quote from: JOE SOAP on 19 November, 2016, 08:04:32 PM
Mark Blyth sums it up better than I ever could -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWMmBG3Z4DI&t=13m11s

That guy's fantastic; cogent, articulate and persuasive. I couldn't help waiting for the drum machine to kick in (https://youtu.be/g9Krvl7AEAs?t=18) though.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 November, 2016, 09:02:52 PM
Quote from: Frank on 19 November, 2016, 08:49:29 PM

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 19 November, 2016, 08:04:32 PM
Mark Blyth sums it up better than I ever could -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWMmBG3Z4DI&t=13m11s

That guy's fantastic; cogent, articulate and persuasive. I couldn't help waiting for the drum machine to kick in (https://youtu.be/g9Krvl7AEAs?t=18) though.


He devastates - his lecture Global Trumpism (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkm2Vfj42FY) is worth a watch.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 November, 2016, 12:44:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 November, 2016, 03:40:37 PM
How can this not be a red line for just about anyone who lives in this country? Are we really so apathetic that we can sleepwalk into this?

Coming hard on the heels of that other stuff: Tories to privatise key NHS agency. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nhs-privatisation-charges-professionals-in-house-agency-a7426966.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 November, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
I find it hard to understand how anyone would want a privatised health service over a public one, bar the very rich who truly don't give a flying fuck about anyone not in their financial stratum.  You're going to end up with a healthcare system as shitty as ours (though even here Walter White could apply for a medical card and save a lot of hassle).

On a tangent, is it just me or do the Daily Express's cover lines seem more desperate by the day? 'BREXIT WILL WORK.' 'NO, IT WILL.' 'WHAT? SHUT UP. IT WILL, RIGHT? '

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 21 November, 2016, 06:26:16 AM
Breaking Bad would have been a very boring show if it was set in Canada.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 November, 2016, 07:41:36 AM
Please don't give opportunity to pedantically observe that Walt's big motivation was to provide for his family after his death, not to pay for medical expenses*. And of course to apply his underused genius (and unsuspected ruthlessness) in creating a life of significance for himself. Neither of which problem would have been helped much by socialised healthcare on its own.

All other points stand.



*A misconception of which I myself was disabused possibly on this very thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 November, 2016, 08:11:32 AM
You're right; you're absolutely right; you couldn't be more right.  And so am I. </Partridge>

Also, he enjoyed the living shit out of being a gangster.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 21 November, 2016, 08:17:10 AM
I know the story.I just couldnt resist saying that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 November, 2016, 10:19:47 AM
The common argument in favour of private healthcare is that people don't want to pay for other people's care. Bar the astonishingly selfish line of thinking there, it's cognitive dissonance in the sense of what insurance-based systems actually do. Even in the USA, private healthcare involves you paying for other people's care. It's just that the pool is smaller and the market is profit-oriented, thereby pushing up your costs. Compare that to the NHS, where many millions pool resources, making the thing relatively affordable for everyone (and also providing a safety net for those who cannot pay).

But again the British hear mostly only bad news about the NHS. Like the EU, there's a constant drip of horrible stories, as injected into the press by those with vested interest in private health. The way things are heading, we'll actually get the worst of it: privatised healthcare sitting under NHS branding. So it would end up being government subsidised, but run by private companies who aren't accountable, and who'll flee (thereby leaving locals in the shit) the second things get dicey. Hell, this is already happening.

It's notable that whenever you find people who've used systems in the US and UK, you quite often find Americans pleasantly surprised by the NHS, rating it at least as favourably as back home. (In the case of the reverse, I imagine you'd find somewhat similar "surprisingly good" from Brits on holiday, assuming they have masses of insurance and don't see the bill. An exception there is perhaps dental, which can often be cheaper in the USA than the UK – but then that's something in the UK that's long been some what separated from state funding. And when I was recently at the dentist and say someone in floods of tears because they could not afford the work they so desperately needed, it did make me wonder where the rest of our system is going to end up.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 November, 2016, 11:16:51 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 November, 2016, 10:19:47 AM
And when I was recently at the dentist and say someone in floods of tears because they could not afford the work they so desperately needed, it did make me wonder where the rest of our system is going to end up.)

There are still NHS dentists, although it's a bugger finding one who's taking new patients — the services are chargeable, but only in fairly broad, cheap, payment 'bands'. The NHS walk-in centres usually have a dentist on-site. A friend of mine had some fairly extensive dental work done at a walk-in centre for a nominal NHS fee.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 November, 2016, 09:47:47 PM
The NHS is proof that the UK can be amazing when it tries. It's an institution to be proud of and one that I am extremely envious of. Please don't let the fuckers take it from you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 22 November, 2016, 08:30:44 AM
Dr Hillary was on the TV this morning complaining about 'Johnny Foreigner' apparently abusing theNHS. I'm guessing he's a Tory because he makes no mention about the lack of investment or possible privatisation of this most cherished of public services.

He also suggested people show "two forms of ID" to prove their nationality before being given treatment.

The man is an arse!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 November, 2016, 08:50:05 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 22 November, 2016, 08:30:44 AM
Dr Hillary was on the TV this morning complaining about 'Johnny Foreigner' apparently abusing theNHS.

The Dept of Health has declined several FOI requests for the figures on this in recent years. Given that there are no commercial or national security implications releasing this information, there are only two conclusions: 1) They have no data, or 2) they have data, and it doesn't support their assertions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 November, 2016, 10:47:25 AM
Likely a rounding error. As for two forms of ID, that couldn't surely be something used to exclude people — including Brits — who just don't happen to have ID, could it? *LOUD COUGH*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 November, 2016, 10:50:55 AM
Tony Fucking Blair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 November, 2016, 04:49:58 PM
Terrorism, hybrid threats and cyber- and energy-insecurity leave EU countries no choice but to step up their security and defence cooperation efforts, thus paving the way to a European Defence Union, say MEPs in a resolution passed on Tuesday. They suggest devoting 2% of GDP to defence, establishing multinational forces and EU headquarters to plan and command crisis management operations, and enabling the EU to act where NATO is unwilling to do so. (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=IM-PRESS&reference=20161117IPR51547&format=PDF&language=EN)

Time for Obi Wan to visit Kamino it is.

Am I alone in finding the idea of an EU army disquieting?

Who will be in charge of this Grand Army of the Union? Will it have nuclear capabilities? (Given that some of its member states have nukes, this seems likely.) Will member countries who don't want or can't afford to contribute 2% of their GDP to fund this army be sanctioned? Will it be empowered to carry out Afghanistan/Syria/Iraq-style "peacekeeping operations"? (The idea of launching "a CSDP training operation in Iraq to support member states involved in the coalition against Daesh" suggests a possible answer to this question.) Will those operations be restricted to areas outside the EU or will it have a domestic mandate also? What kind of "real threats" will it respond to, and how? Will it reserve the right to institute conscription? What if Tony Blair becomes President of the EU and is handed a dodgy databar containing information about nasty things afoot in Latveria?

Would BREXIT have been seen as a "real threat" to the Union's security? If this army had been created two years ago, would there now be German, French, Spanish, Belgian, Dutch, Scandinavian and Italian troops, all in the same natty berets, preparing to protect us ordinary British people from the evil, racist and greedy Sepratist Government in Westminster and its once-proud Rebel Army? What will happen in the future if talks of ESPEXIT, FRANXIT or DEUXIT arise? Will just the threat of this new, homogenous force be enough to deter such movements? CSDP "peacekeepers" defending gallant pro-EU parliament buildings against filthy seperatists? Or, by the time a country gets its (jobs and economy boosting) brand-spanking new Common Security and Defence Policy facilities (probably dubbed something like "Freedom Centres" and manned by well-armed pan-European troops), will it be too late to secede?

Maybe the above is a black view and this project is intended to protect the EU from Anonymous, ISIS and Russia. Maybe it is just a precaution in case Trump makes good on his waffling about pulling out of NATO to save money. Those just feel like excuses, to me. As a general rule, armies are not created merely for decoration. An army has only two purposes; attack and defence. The only question is whom do they attack and whom do they defend? The EU started as a simple trading club and now look at it - an authoritarian monolith sucking up power and influence a drop at a time, but sucking up those drops 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and, thanks to computers, 36,525 days a year. An army is the next logical step. The vast majority of governments, sooner or later, need to find ways to defend themselves and their power. This is the reason behind the creation of many, but admittedly not all, armies - to protect or gain the throne. This CSDP army is being created to protect the structures, institutions and mechanisms of the EU, not the ordinary people. It is easy to forget, for example, that the first country invaded by the Nazi army was Germany. It's the 1930s all over the place.

If an army has to kill one person to protect the stability of the state, the state will order it. If the army has to kill 10,000 people to protect the stability of the state, the state will order it. If an army has to destroy one town to protect the stability of the state, the state will order it. If an army has to devastate an entire region to maintain the stability of the state, the state will order it. If an army has to destroy one country to protect the stability of the state, the state will order it. Civilian casualties factor in only as a matter of p.r., to the army's owners and directors if not the troops on the ground - who might see themselves as doing their duty to their people, serving something bigger than themselves or just drawing a paycheck. Following orders.

No army is benign, except maybe that one with the bassoons and the soup, and neither will this one be. It will contribute to the already bloated military industrial complex. It will invite attack from its stated enemies and others. At some point, it will be used. The world might not be actually on fire but it's certainly smouldering like a grumpy volcano. Do we really need to add another army to the mix?

If ever there was a time to actually replace the EU's current anthem with The Imperial March from Star Wars, this would be it.

The only ray of hope I can find is that the resolution was passed by 386 votes to 237, with 74 abstentions. If it's not just for show, that's a pretty hefty split. Maybe this madness can still be stopped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 24 November, 2016, 05:11:14 PM
I guess we bailed out just in time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 November, 2016, 05:48:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 November, 2016, 04:49:58 PM
Am I alone in finding the idea of an EU army disquieting?

Only if you find the notion of the EU in some way troubling to begin with, I suspect. If all the countries of Europe share an army, it seems vanishingly unlikely that they could ever go to war with each other.

With Russian sabre-rattling on the eastern borders, Trump's pally relationship with Putin and somewhat unclear level of enthusiasm for, or commitment to, NATO, I can see quite a lot of sense in it, TBH.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 November, 2016, 06:46:32 PM
People seem to be developing an increased preference for people isolation without acknowledging the inherent dangers historically have been demonstrated through it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: soggy on 24 November, 2016, 07:08:04 PM
Shark did you even read the article you linked to? Nowhere did it suggest an EU army, the only shared resources mentioned were transport aircraft. The 2% spend on defence is the NATO standard. The EU defence procurement cooperation already exists.

And anyway until the UK finally leaves the British government would still have a veto in Europe, so how the hell could troops be ordered into the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 November, 2016, 10:17:44 AM
Given the choice between an American vassal or chipping in with our neighbours....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 November, 2016, 10:18:49 AM
Glancing at the "family" copy of the mail today i'm struck by how absolutely disgusting it's lowered itself once again. Victim blaming aimed at Jo Cox is utterly disgusting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2016, 10:37:11 AM
I've no idea about the paper copy, but the online story was literal terrorist sympathising. Instead of noting a right-wing lunatic murdered an MP, it essentially said: but what if he thought immigrants were going to take away his house (the one he actually wasn't really entitled to anyway, due to the 'bedroom tax'), and what if the MP in question had not been hugely sympathetic to this WHITE BRITISH MAN?

It's hard to think how that rag could sink any lower. It must be clawing at the core of the Earth by now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 November, 2016, 10:43:28 AM
HOW IS THIS A THING?!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyBnk2RW8AARHAG.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 November, 2016, 10:44:08 AM
Vermin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2016, 12:04:33 PM
Fucking. Hell. He has NO RIGHT to that role. Why is everyone playing up to this arsehole? Gah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2016, 12:53:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2016, 12:04:33 PMHe has NO RIGHT to that role.

Standing in for Katie Hopkins?  As Thorin Oakenshield might say, he has the ONLY right.

More seriously, it's fecking disgraceful.  I still can't quite convince myself that Farage isn't just one of Mainwearing's petty antagonists in Dad's Army.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 November, 2016, 04:42:05 PM
I've heard him referred to as our "shambassador" today
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 25 November, 2016, 06:30:38 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 25 November, 2016, 10:43:28 AM
HOW IS THIS A THING?!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyBnk2RW8AARHAG.jpg)


I keep seeing him as saddam Hussein in satans pocket a la south park the movie!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 November, 2016, 08:06:23 PM
See my thing is this.  We have Boris Johnson as foreign minister.  Tony Blair as Middle East Peace Ambassador. Exactly how much further is it stretching credibility to think that Nigel Farage would make a good ambassador to our Lords and Masters in the states.  Certainly you can understand why other countries might think it was a contender for 'sound thinking by those Brits'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 November, 2016, 09:11:56 PM
(http://i.quoteaddicts.com/media/q3/571549.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 November, 2016, 09:52:09 AM
Decades of Hugh Grant films have worked.  The Americans have been convinced that an English accent and stuttering delivery mean you're talented and intelligent. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 26 November, 2016, 05:09:40 PM
The Twitterverse is alive with strawmen - it's like a miniaturize-the-Wickerman-finale contest out there and there.

The criticisms levelled at Fidel's Cuba are only interesting in what they reveal about the tolerance the person levelling them has for their own countries flaws. For instance - some folk saying "WELL... HE MET WITH GADDAFI IF THAT'S NOT PROOF OF HOW BAD HE IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS"

But
(https://atlanticrightdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/gaddafi-sarkozy.jpg)

who
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/02/25/article-1360472-00BEAA10000004B0-27_468x316.jpg)

didn't?
(http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/obama-gaddafi-handshake-091709-lg.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2016, 07:36:20 PM
Raul looks more like the old bloke who kids steal booze off in the corner shop than the swashbuckling Liam Neeson clone who's just shuffled off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 November, 2016, 01:22:23 PM
Trump makes his debut in Grapler Baki, and it's every bit as hilarious as the series has built it up to be. (https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/interest/2016-11-27/donald-trump-already-makes-an-appearance-in-baki-dou-manga/.109202)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2016, 10:36:17 AM
The wall will be partly made of fencing (which it is already).
Hillary will not be locked up.
Accusers of sexual assault will not be sued.
There will not be a blanket ban on Muslims entering the USA.
There will not be millions of deportations.
Climate change is not a Chinese lie.
Waterboarding ('and worse') is highly unlikely to return to the US.

While the above are positives in my (and any right-thinking human being's) book, that's a lot of broken promises for a man who isn't even president yet.

Fuckface Von Clownstick is very rapidly doing the one thing he was elected not to do: Towing the line. And none of his supporters seem to notice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 10:54:00 AM
Your telling me a politician lied just so he would be elected?Wow,thats hard to process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 December, 2016, 10:56:28 AM
Not just that, but a right wing nutter LYING to his target demography in order to get easy votes? What a shocker!

Let this not discourage us though, he's still a violently dangerous man with a cabinet of hard line bigots on his side. This is going to be a terrible four years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:02:09 AM
Just to be a devils advocate here,things arent so simple.One man doesnt run the whole USA on his own.He wont be allowed to tweet without going thru 5-6 commisions and what not.
Things will continue to run as they  always have.Buisness as ussual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 December, 2016, 11:05:47 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2016, 10:36:17 AMThere will not be millions of deportations.

I'm sure there'll be plenty of those but he has a way to go to beat the present incumbent.

"With the clock ticking down his final months in office, Obama appears to be running up the score in an effort to protect his title as deporter-in-chief from future presidents. To pad the numbers, Homeland Security is now going after the lowest-hanging fruit: women and children who are seeking asylum from violence in Central America."

http://fusion.net/story/252637/obama-has-deported-more-immigrants-than-any-other-president-now-hes-running-up-the-score/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 11:07:57 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:02:09 AM
He wont be allowed to tweet without going thru 5-6 commisions and what not.

He won't move into the White House or surrender his personal phone. This is a man who can find time to meet Kanye West but refuses to take intelligence briefings. This is a man who has no conception of what the office he's been elected to actually entails but, terrifyingly, doesn't appear to have any interest in actually finding out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:12:06 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 11:07:57 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:02:09 AM
He wont be allowed to tweet without going thru 5-6 commisions and what not.

He won't move into the White House or surrender his personal phone. This is a man who can find time to meet Kanye West but refuses to take intelligence briefings. This is a man who has no conception of what the office he's been elected to actually entails but, terrifyingly, doesn't appear to have any interest in actually finding out.
Just an example.However you look at it,the president isnt the ONLY guy making ALL the decisions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 December, 2016, 11:59:32 AM
Every single thing he has said he will do so far, he has criticised his political opponents for doing (even when they weren't actually doing what he seemed to think they were doing, such as Obama's own attendances of intelligence briefings).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2016, 01:54:02 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:02:09 AMOne man doesnt run the whole USA on his own.

There are checks and balances to stop this Republican fruitloop doing whatever he wants, unfortunately all of those checks and balances are also currently controlled by Republicans.

It's worth remembering that the CIA and NSA have openly briefed against Trump, and these are not what you would call fluffy liberal organisations with a history of rocking the establishment boat - these are organisations that not only prosper when then is discord and unrest in America but will directly benefit from Trump's agenda, and yet they still clearly don't want him near the White House.  You have to wonder what they know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:01:15 PM
Maybe because better relations with Russia would screw up their plans?
Not that I really believe relations will improve.American foreign policy doesnt change so easy.And Donny isnt keen on keeping promises,as we see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2016, 02:15:19 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 10:54:00 AM
Your telling me a politician lied just so he would be elected?Wow,thats hard to process.

It's the fact that all of his major promises were disregarded almost the instant the election was over that baffles me. That and the utter apathy of his voting base towards his blatant dishonesty.

One thing that John Wagner got wrong in Origins was the idea that the masses actually care whether their leaders are lying or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
Its just politics.His harshest critics are bending over backwards now to get a piece of the action.
Because at the end of the day,only thing that matters is getting your fat ass into a chair.

Now just to say it,even if a lot of you will hate me for it-I think for most voters the memories of Clinton era were still a bit too fresh,and I doubt anyone is nostalgic for it,so it might have been more of a case of voting against Hillary.But that's just my theory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 02:43:51 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
so it might have been more of a case of voting against Hillary.But that's just my theory.

Except that they didn't, did they? Clinton's —what?— 2.8 million (http://cookpolitical.com/story/10174) up in the popular vote. The result is a peculiar artefact of the US electoral college system, that makes a vote in Wisconsin worth about 4x more than a vote in California and, in a particularly vicious bit of irony, was intended as a safeguard against precisely this situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 December, 2016, 02:51:18 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2016, 01:54:02 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 11:02:09 AMOne man doesnt run the whole USA on his own.
It's worth remembering that the CIA and NSA have openly briefed against Trump, and these are not what you would call fluffy liberal organisations with a history of rocking the establishment boat

Seems to me like there are different political factions in the intelligence services, especially the FBI - hence the announcement of further investigations into irrelevant but damaging e-mails before the election but nothing about Russian hacking.

As for refusing the usual intelligence briefings, many of trump's promises (eg on banning Muslim immigrants) were always qualified with "until we figure out what's going on" - and now he says he's smart so he doesn't need anyone to tell him what's going on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:56:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 02:43:51 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
so it might have been more of a case of voting against Hillary.But that's just my theory.

Except that they didn't, did they? Clinton's —what?— 2.8 million (http://cookpolitical.com/story/10174) up in the popular vote. The result is a peculiar artifact of the US electoral college system, that makes a vote in Wisconsin worth about 4x more than a vote in California and, in a particularly vicious bit of irony, was intended as a safeguard against precisely this situation.
Clearly,those memories affected decisions of at least some people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 December, 2016, 02:59:15 PM
this did seem to be an election where people were voting against the candidate that they hated more rather than for the candidate they liked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2016, 03:19:10 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 14 December, 2016, 02:59:15 PM
this did seem to be an election where people were voting against the candidate that they hated more rather than for the candidate they liked.

I've voted in a fair few elections now, and this is almost always what I've had to do*; yet I've still managed not to vote for any ambulant turds.


*Exception being Irish presidential elections, where I've been lucky enough to vote for some downright sound folks - whatever you might think of our executive, we've had three gold-star Presidents in a row, the current being a genuine sweetie who may just be the most beloved politico in our history.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 December, 2016, 03:20:51 PM
Ah - just like a British election then!

Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:56:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 02:43:51 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
so it might have been more of a case of voting against Hillary.But that's just my theory.

Except that they didn't, did they? Clinton's —what?— 2.8 million (http://cookpolitical.com/story/10174) up in the popular vote. The result is a peculiar artifact of the US electoral college system, that makes a vote in Wisconsin worth about 4x more than a vote in California and, in a particularly vicious bit of irony, was intended as a safeguard against precisely this situation.
Clearly,those memories affected decisions of at least some people.

Yep - the ones in Winsconsin I suppose. It's always weird how we talk about the electoral systems (everywere) as though they are won by popular vote, when FPTP makes it much more circumstantial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 03:29:10 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:56:35 PM
Clearly,those memories affected decisions of at least some people.

Your ability to read minds is very impressive.

Nonetheless, it doesn't change my point: every presidential candidate ever with a share of the popular vote this big has gone on to become president, except this time. (And if 38,000 Trump voters over four swing states had voted Clinton instead, she'd have won the electoral college, too.)

It's just not possible to paint this as a rejection of Clinton at the ballot box; it's an unintended outcome of the electoral college system which, as I said, was supposed to be a safeguard against exactly this situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2016, 03:37:50 PM
Those depressing if-only numbers ignore the fact that no-one but his immediate cronies should have voted for Trump: it was in no-one else's interests, especially those of his core supporters.  They've been gulled good and proper by a waste of useable volume.  Homer's inanimate carbon rod ("In Rod we Trust") running against Trump should have got 100% of the vote. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 03:42:00 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 03:29:10 PM
Quote from: Smith on 14 December, 2016, 02:56:35 PM
Clearly,those memories affected decisions of at least some people.

Your ability to read minds is very impressive.
Well,thank you,it took years of practice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2016, 08:00:02 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 02:43:51 PMExcept that they didn't, did they? Clinton's —what?— 2.8 million (http://cookpolitical.com/story/10174) up in the popular vote.

Arguably those millions of Democrat Sanders supporters that the Clinton campaign went out of its way to alienate would have been pretty helpful on election day, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2016, 08:21:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2016, 08:00:02 PM

Arguably those millions of Democrat Sanders supporters that the Clinton campaign went out of its way to alienate would have been pretty helpful on election day, too.

Arguably, yes. Doesn't change the fact that no one has ever lost the popular vote as badly as Trump and won the electoral college before. If Clinton had been a black man called Obama, she could have done even better, and if fish had fur and feet, they'd be mice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2016, 09:27:11 PM
Stitching fur and feet on a fish to make a new mouse species is madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2016, 08:01:09 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 December, 2016, 03:19:10 PM

*Exception being Irish presidential elections, where I've been lucky enough to vote for some downright sound folks - whatever you might think of our executive, we've had three gold-star Presidents in a row, the current being a genuine sweetie who may just be the most beloved politico in our history.

Yes, it's odd, really, he's a politician but he's fucking sound (and quite probably an atheist, which would have been a national scandal when I was a kid). It's a pity he doesn't have any actual political power; he'd do.a better job of running the country than the current bunch of leeches and scumbags.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2016, 10:06:45 AM
While I've always respected MDH, and greatly admired his speeches on social equality and economic justice etc., it was the sheer brilliance of his work over the 1916 celebrations that floored me. Event after event, speech after speech, each different, each passionate, each nuanced, reflective, inclusive, informative and inspirational. Not one was tub-thumping nationalism, not one was weasley postcolonoal apologia. How the feck did he do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 15 December, 2016, 10:31:12 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 December, 2016, 10:06:45 AMHow the feck did he do it.
Micheal D lectured me in sociology (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYg2IX0OdY0)!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 17 December, 2016, 09:15:19 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 14 December, 2016, 02:59:15 PM
this did seem to be an election where people were voting against the candidate that they hated more rather than for the candidate they liked.

I think that's sort of true for Republican voters, but certainly not for the Dems: as the boys on the Chapo Trap House podcast have pointed out, HRC's campaign was an awful, tin-eared mess that amounted to little more than "Donald Trump is a big meanie, it's my turn". The hope was obviously for a negative mobilisation against Trump, but it utterly failed to materialise on election day. Huge swathes of people who had voted Obama twice just didn't bother this time- the relative difference in popular vote count is stark, but obviates how much her share as a total of the population tanked.

And frankly, fuck her. Seeing hubris and incompetence like hers punished is a tiny silver lining to the fact that she let a protofascist beat her.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 17 December, 2016, 09:23:20 AM
...realised I kinda misread your post DDD and of the people who *did* vote Dem I think you're right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 January, 2017, 02:13:20 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C1GGDxhVIAIUHuu.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 January, 2017, 05:42:17 PM
Raping a 13 year-old girl is not a molehill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 January, 2017, 05:46:49 PM
Also...
1) Hillary was not responsible for Benghazi
2) Her emails where cleared of any wrong doings, it was a private account after all.
3) Trump has run a dozen companies into the ground and slimmed the profits into tax havens, imagine what he'll do with the whole US economy.

And yes, there's the fact he's a known sex offender.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 January, 2017, 06:18:07 PM
Thank God you don't make the laws. I just checked up on the rape claim on the Guardian website and it seems that allegation has been dropped.
Obviously there's no such thing as innocent till proven guilty here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 January, 2017, 07:23:39 PM
No but theirs a lot of victim blaming, apparently, by the self same newspaper. Hardly impartial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 January, 2017, 08:24:26 PM
His guilt or innocence are irrelevant, the point was that the accusation was publicly made and wasn't the fabrication of a liberal media conspiracy.

Although I do approve of this "innocent until proven guilty" ethos for unpopular political figures.

/awaits the next made-up Corbyn scandal
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 02 January, 2017, 10:33:16 PM
While I wouldn't trust Mrs. Clinton as far as I could throw her, I doubt anyone'd even be able to get Mr. Trump off the ground. That molehill should be the size of Olympus effin' Mons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 12:18:46 AM
Poor Trump,picked on by those nasty journalist just because he called Mexican immigrants rapists, announcefd he would ban muslims from entering the country, named a man who supports "gay conversion therapy" as his running mate, boasts about not paying taxes , lies about  charity donations, says it okay to call a woman a slut for disageeing with him,mocked a disabled journalist, bases his net worth on how he "feels", openly lied about 9/11, lied about the iraq war,lied about campaign funding, threatened  to imprison  his opponent despite there being no charges against her, refuses intelligence briefings because he's 'smart', boasts about misuse  of bankruptcy laws, boasts about sexually assaulting women, boasts he could commit murder and still win, admires Putin, paid off his political opponents, supports nuclear proliferation, spent eight years spreading a rascist lie about Obama before lying and saying he didnt, says women should be imprisoned for having an abortion, puts far right extremist in positions  of power and spends more time retweeting nazis than is healthy.   Its a molehill, folks...This far right lobby group says so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 02:19:44 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther
link=topic=28209.msg941271#msg941271
date=1483402726
Poor Trump,picked on by those nasty
journalist just because he called Mexican
immigrants rapists, announcefd he would ban
muslims from entering the country, named a
man who supports "gay conversion therapy"
as his running mate, boasts about not paying
taxes , lies about charity donations, says it
okay to call a woman a slut for disageeing
with him,mocked a disabled journalist, bases
his net worth on how he "feels", openly lied
about 9/11, lied about the iraq war,lied about
campaign funding, threatened to imprison his
opponent despite there being no charges
against her, refuses intelligence briefings
because he's 'smart', boasts about misuse of
bankruptcy laws, boasts about sexually
assaulting women, boasts he could commit
murder and still win, admires Putin, paid off
his political opponents, supports nuclear
proliferation, spent eight years spreading a
rascist lie about Obama before lying and
saying he didnt, says women should be
imprisoned for having an abortion, puts far
right extremist in positions of power and
spends more time retweeting nazis than is
healthy. Its a molehill, folks...This far right
lobby group says so.

And yet he's been presented to the American people as one of a very few individuals worthy of high office. The Powers That Shouldn't Be think this kind of man (and that kind of woman), having ostensibly won a national popularity contest, is perfectly adequate to rule ordinary Americans.

I find it rather difficult to believe that, out of 325 million Americans, these two were the best they could find. Personally, I wouldn't want either of them as a friend or employer and certainly not as a ruler. Unfortunately, US citizens now have no choice other than to accept this individual as their president whether they voted for him or not, whether they agree with him or not, whether they trust him or not.

Under the current "democratic" system (not just in the US), if TPTSB present a Dr Crippen and a Gary Ridgway as the only two candidates for the presidency, then one of those two must be voted for. This is not democracy, this is like-it-or-lump-itism (like it or Trump it?).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 January, 2017, 04:31:24 AM
Either way up, don't you think that clearly pro-Trump cartoon is inaccurate as a metaphor? Or do you really see Trump's list of scandals as trifling and insignificant?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:34:49 AM
Heck, no.

I don't think either Trump or Clinton are worthy of the presidency. Hell, I wouldn't even leave them in charge of my dog, let alone a nuclear superpower.

To my eye, that cartoon is more a comment on media bias than an endorsement of Trump.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 10:54:39 AM
The Americans for Limited Government are keen on Trump as a president because they don't want[/i ] a government.  Trump will likely be so damaging to the very nature of representative democracy that more and more people will happily accept that government should have a smaller and smaller role, opening the way for big companies to have greater control and less responsibilities. 

Representative democracy requires an informed electorate.  in increasing number, people no longer want to be informed - they want to be reassured that their gut feeling of fear of a changing world is entirely justified and that there are simplistic answers to complex questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 01:55:54 PM
"in increasing number, people no longer want to be informed - they want to be reassured that their gut feeling of fear of a changing world is entirely justified and that there are simplistic answers to complex questions."

I agree with this entirely - it's the attitude peddled by governments everywhere to justify their existence; "don't you worry yourselves about all this complicated, boring, changing stuff - we'll sort it all out for you, just enjoy X-Factor and leave all the worrying to us."

As a slight aside, I watched Labyrinth for the very first time the other day (glad it only cost me 50p from a charity shop because it's a bit "meh") and liked Bowie/the Goblin King's plea for power - "let me rule you and I'll do as you say." That's precisely what every government spouts.

"...opening the way for big companies to have greater control and less responsibilities." I don't agree with this at all. Big companies only get greater control and fewer responsibilities through working hand-in-glove with governments. Take away a company's government protection, open up the marketplace to true competition and society will thrive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 02:34:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 01:55:54 PM
Take away a company's government protection, open up the marketplace to true competition and society will thrive.

This? Again? All available evidence suggest you are entirely wrong about this. All businesses are, by fundamental inclination, wannabe monopolists and the platonic ideal of any company with shareholders is one that makes no product, provides no services, but finds a way to directly extract exactly the amount money from everyone's bank accounts that they have enough left to not starve. That is maximising shareholder value at its logical conclusion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 03:40:54 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 02:34:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 01:55:54 PM
Take away a company's government protection, open up the marketplace to true competition and society will thrive.

This? Again? All available evidence suggest you are entirely wrong about this. All businesses are, by fundamental inclination, wannabe monopolists and the platonic ideal of any company with shareholders is one that makes no product, provides no services, but finds a way to directly extract exactly the amount money from everyone's bank accounts that they have enough left to not starve. That is maximising shareholder value at its logical conclusion.

Yes, again.

What evidence? There's no need to produce all of it, just five examples, say?

Not every company is a wannabe monopolist - the majority of small businesses I know are happy to run at enough profit to pay the bills, invest in the business, save for a pension and provide for the owners/workers.

There's no way any company can build a protected monopoly without government shielding. I can see nothing wrong with an unprotected, meritorious, naturally occurring monopoly. For example, let's say that Acme Co invents the Omniwidget and produces it to the highest standards and at a lower price than anyone else can manage. In that case, if nobody else wants to or is able to produce Omniwidgets of the same quality and price, then Acme Co is perfectly justified in cornering the market in Omniwidgets. Under the present protectionist system, Acme Co can lobby the government to legislate against competition, for example by granting Acme Co a government monopoly to produce all the country's Omniwidgets, requiring any other company to purchase licenses or pay production taxes, declaring "unofficial" Omniwidgets illegal, requiring prospective Omniwidget engineers to pay for government approved certificates, imposing an Omniwidget tax, etc., etc., etc. Thus protected, Acme Co has little incentive to improve the Omniwidget, streamline production methods or even provide sales promotions such as 25% off or BOGOF. (When was the last time, for example, you saw an introductory offer, a January sale or any other kind of promotion on water, gas, electricity or car tax?) The Omniwidget therefore stagnates as protected profits continue to roll in regardless of quality or price. This is bad for the customer.

Under a non-protectionist system, Acme Co can only keep its monopoly as long as it deserves to. If Whizzo Co comes up with a better Omniwidget or an Omniwidget of the same or better quality for a lower price, then Acme Co can either compete, try to buy out or merge with Whizzo Co, be content with having a market share instead of a monopoly, improve its own methods of production, sell out to somebody else or go bust. The competition between Whizzo Co and Acme Co is good for the customer.

There's no way any company can directly extract money from your bank account without a) your permission, b) a valid court order, c) through government created legislation or d) through theft.

Finally, the absolute apex of the "...company... that makes no product, provides no services, but finds a way to directly extract exactly the amount money from everyone's bank accounts..." is government. Government adds nothing at all to society except violence and the threat of violence and sees itself as having carte blanch to take your money and/or possessions whenever it wants and for whatever it desires. Private companies or corporations cannot do that on their own - but if they hitch themselves to government they can. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 04:02:21 PM
Once again, you argue from a position so tangential to observable reality that there is literally no way to engage with your argument.

(I will note, however, that you seem to have missed the word 'platonic' when I was describing the logical conclusion of shareholder-based companies in a capitalist free market.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 04:33:17 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 04:02:21 PM

Once again, you argue from a position so tangential to observable reality that there is literally no way to engage with your argument.


So, no five pieces of evidence, then? How about just one? If this evidence you have is so firmly a part of observable reality, it should be easy to produce and therefore provide you with a way to engage with my argument.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 04:02:21 PM

(I will note, however, that you seem to have missed the word 'platonic' when I was describing the logical conclusion of shareholder-based companies in a capitalist free market.)


(Ah, so you're talking about the perfect form of a shareholder-based company's ultimate goal; an ideal, a paragon - an imaginary thing? This seems to me to confuse the drive to succeed and expand with a mania for total dominance of the marketplace by any means possible. Or do I misunderstand? Further, as I have pointed out before, any market in which the government interferes (through taxes, tariffs, penalties, fees, restrictions, protections, licensing, legislating and so on and on) is not a free market. How can any market, be it capitalist, communist or whatever else, be free if there are certain transactions you are forbidden or forced to make and certain people or companies you are forbidden or forced to trade with?)

Perhaps it would help us to agree upon a definition of "free market." I suggest the following definition from Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/free-market): "An economic system in which prices and wages are determined by unrestricted competition between businesses, without government regulation or fear of monopolies."

Is this definition acceptable or do you have a preferred alternative?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 04:36:22 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 02:34:48 PM
the platonic ideal of any company with shareholders is one that makes no product, provides no services, but finds a way to directly extract exactly the amount money from everyone's bank accounts that they have enough left to not starve. That is maximising shareholder value at its logical conclusion.

Surprisingly easy to achieve, lend small amount of money with astronomical interest rate, set the minimum repayment as exactly the amount money from the 'customer's' that they can give and have enough left to not starve. receive payment by direct debit, repeat and expand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 04:33:17 PM
So, no five pieces of evidence, then? How about just one? If this evidence you have is so firmly a part of observable reality, it should be easy to produce and therefore provide you with a way to engage with my argument.

Right. OK. I'm on top of today's work, so here's an example. I'm certainly not fucking about giving you five, when this is just the way capitalism works:

Cadburys. A family-run company with a hundred-plus-year history of worrying about its workers' welfare and caring about the quality and ethics of their products.

Kraft bought the company out from under the family. There was considerable pressure for the government to intervene in the takeover and, at the very least, extract some binding assurances about how the business would be run. Government did not intervene and it turns out the assurances Kraft gave the shareholders weren't worth the paper they (weren't) printed on, because they very quickly closed UK manufacturing capacity and moved it Poland. They also changed the formulation of a lot of their chocolate, using cocoa and palm oil to produce that gritty crap the Americans have been calling chocolate for years.

Aha! Goes the Shark version of economics. Then they will lose dissatisfied customers and their loss will be the gain of some other company, manufacturing better chocolate. Well, no. Kraft just bought Green & Blacks as well.

How about Tyrell's Crisps? A potato farmer so sick of having his margins squeezed to the point of bankruptcy by the big supermarkets realised he could install a couple of industrial deep fryers in the farm outbuildings and make posh crisps himself, which he sold to pubs and small retail outlets and not supermarkets. A heartening success story.

The business was sold on to an investment company on two conditions: they continued to use British potatoes, and they didn't sell to supermarkets. In a very short space of time, Tyrell's were on sale in supermarkets, and the downward pressure on margins demanded by those big retailers sent the company sourcing potatoes from outside the UK.

Big companies eat small companies. They are only interested in the brand as a means of securing market share. Big companies merge with other big companies, or get swallowed up by even bigger companies. This is the natural progression of the free market and is the exact reason we have laws to prevent anti-competitive practise, and the establishment of monopolies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 04:53:08 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 04:36:22 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 02:34:48 PM
the platonic ideal of any company with shareholders is one that makes no product, provides no services, but finds a way to directly extract exactly the amount money from everyone's bank accounts that they have enough left to not starve. That is maximising shareholder value at its logical conclusion.

Surprisingly easy to achieve, lend small amount of money with astronomical interest rate, set the minimum repayment as exactly the amount money from the 'customer's' that they can give and have enough left to not starve. receive payment by direct debit, repeat and expand.

Excellent example. And why is this possible under today's system? Because banking is hugely government regulated and controlled. This regulation (and the very nature of money creation, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish) means the high street banks and other lenders have little need to compete with each other. Indeed, if a bank fails (as more and more are doing, including the oldest bank in the world (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/23/italy-approves-state-bailout-for-worlds-oldest-bank.html)), they don't go out of business or lose customers to competing banks (because there are none) but simply get bailed out with taxpayer (your) money.

Remove government regulation and return to a system of countless small, private, local banks and competition instantly arises between them - not to mention a much easier and cheaper opportunity for a bank to insure itself against a run or ally with others to mitigate the effects of such a failure. If one fails, it fails, and only a small number of customers are affected instead of the population of an entire country or superstate. It is, of course, government that makes the rape of economies, communities and countries by protected banks so breathtakingly easy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 04:56:51 PM
Actually, this is a loan shark's system and not really legally possible because of laws and regulation but would be entirely possible without them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 03 January, 2017, 05:28:00 PM
Getting rid of Government seems at best like trying to save a drowning man by removing the water from the river rather than just removing the man himself! More realistically, it would be like pouring a hose on him

If Government has got itself corrupted by corporate interests (and no doubt it has to a dangerous degree), the reason this has happened is so that the corporate interests can operate free of Government interference.

So tomorrow, there are no bail outs and everyone competes on an even playing field.  Except the giant corporations that have the money to squash any competition, free from any regulation.  To cut corners and maybe poison their customers, but hey - if they poison enough, they will go out of business  I look forward to the compensation I will get for my loved ones when they die from such malpractice... except, there is no Government, so no consequences for that company.  Sounds like a paradise
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:01:26 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 04:49:28 PM

Cadburys. A family-run company with a hundred-plus-year history of worrying about its workers' welfare and caring about the quality and ethics of their products.

Kraft bought the company out from under the family. There was considerable pressure for the government to intervene in the takeover and, at the very least, extract some binding assurances about how the business would be run. Government did not intervene and it turns out the assurances Kraft gave the shareholders weren't worth the paper they (weren't) printed on, because they very quickly closed UK manufacturing capacity and moved it Poland. They also changed the formulation of a lot of their chocolate, using cocoa and palm oil to produce that gritty crap the Americans have been calling chocolate for years.

Aha! Goes the Shark version of economics. Then they will lose dissatisfied customers and their loss will be the gain of some other company, manufacturing better chocolate. Well, no. Kraft just bought Green & Blacks as well.

How about Tyrell's Crisps? A potato farmer so sick of having his margins squeezed to the point of bankruptcy by the big supermarkets realised he could install a couple of industrial deep fryers in the farm outbuildings and make posh crisps himself, which he sold to pubs and small retail outlets and not supermarkets. A heartening success story.

The business was sold on to an investment company on two conditions: they continued to use British potatoes, and they didn't sell to supermarkets. In a very short space of time, Tyrell's were on sale in supermarkets, and the downward pressure on margins demanded by those big retailers sent the company sourcing potatoes from outside the UK.

Big companies eat small companies. They are only interested in the brand as a means of securing market share. Big companies merge with other big companies, or get swallowed up by even bigger companies. This is the natural progression of the free market and is the exact reason we have laws to prevent anti-competitive practise, and the establishment of monopolies.

The sale of Cadbury's shares to Kraft became compulsory on March 29th 2010 under section 979 of the Companies Act 2006. Cadbury's could have avoided this by making sure they kept 11% of shares and/or 51% of voting rights away from Kraft. Cadbury's fell foul of government legislation, Kraft took advantage of it. Everything else, from closed factories to gritty chocolate, stems from the same thing. Furthermore, Cadbury's was not a government protected monopoly and any company who trades its shares is open to the same kind of attack.

The Grocer found Cadbury's best-selling seasonal lines were £10m lower in 2015, cutting the confectioner's market share from 42% to 40%, so that's an example of market forces right there - as you pointed out, they lost dissatisfied customers and their £10M loss was the gain of some other company. That's how the market works. Mondelez (formerly Kraft), knows how to milk governments and was given nearly £638,000 of tax money by Innovate UK from 2013 to 2015 to help the multinational giant develop a process to distribute nuts and raisins more regularly in its chocolate bars. It doesn't even fund its own innovations - you do.

So, your first example is a standard government-based clusterdrokk.

Your second example is simply a case of sour grapes and a poor grasp of business. The founder of Tyrrell's crisps was a farmer who sold the business because it was getting too big for him to manage. He was happy to supply smaller pubs and whatnot and, presumably, happier still to accept £30M for the brand in 2008. It seems naive to expect a large corporation to fiddle about with individual small businesses - it makes no sense in the area of economies of scale, of which I know you are a fan. If his insistence on keeping the small customers he cultivated had been properly set out in a proper contract, he could have sued Langholme for breach of contract and I can find no evidence that he did so or even considered the option.

While the founder of Tyrrell's, William Chase, was unwilling to sell his crisps to Tesco he now makes vodka and sells it at up to £38 a bottle. Does he still hold to his ideals of not selling to Tesco? "I'll sell it to Tesco," he says. I'll sell to anybody if they're interested." (The Tyrrell's brand was sold on by Langholme in 2013 for £100M and again in 2016 for £300M. Like it or not, big companies have caused Tyrrell's to thrive far beyond the capabilities of a struggling potato farmer.)

So your second example has no bearing on anything except the usual buying and selling of companies with the goal of making a profit. It does seem to be, however, a decent example of how business works perfectly well (even if some parties grumble a bit) without government interference.

Big companies eat small companies, financing the founders of small companies to either retire or start another small company. Small companies innovate and challenge big companies. Big companies sell off or close down unprofitable, unpopular and/or obsolete products and services. Small companies grow big. They are only interested in the brand as a means of securing market share, which is what brands are for. Big companies merge with other big companies, or get swallowed up by even bigger companies. Small companies merge with small companies. Companies of all sizes thrive and go bust all the time. A thriving company encourages the creation of other small companies to outsource certain tasks to (such as cleaning services, maintenance services and suppliers, amongst others) and big companies going bust or retiring from a certain arena also encourages entrepreneurs to step into the gap. This is the natural progression of the true free market and is the exact reason we have legislation to prevent anti-competitive practice - because to government protected companies, "competition is a sin," as David Rockerfeller said - and the establishment of non-government monopolies.

Oh, did you settle on a definition of "free market" that works for you?

Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 04:56:51 PM
Actually, this is a loan shark's system and not really legally possible because of laws and regulation but would be entirely possible without them.

QuickQuid (https://www.quickquid.co.uk/payday-loans-uk.html)
PayDayUK (https://www.paydayuk.co.uk/)
WizzCash (https://www.wizzcash.com/payday-loans/)
And so on. (These companies borrow ledger money from large banks, and the BoE, at pifflingly small interest rates, sometimes under 1%, and lend it out at APRs of 1300% or more. Remember, the loaned money was created from nothing to begin with. Even loan sharks have the decency to lend hard cash.)

Quote from: Leigh S on 03 January, 2017, 05:28:00 PM
Getting rid of Government seems at best like trying to save a drowning man by removing the water from the river rather than just removing the man himself! More realistically, it would be like pouring a hose on him

If Government has got itself corrupted by corporate interests (and no doubt it has to a dangerous degree), the reason this has happened is so that the corporate interests can operate free of Government interference.

So tomorrow, there are no bail outs and everyone competes on an even playing field.  Except the giant corporations that have the money to squash any competition, free from any regulation.  To cut corners and maybe poison their customers, but hey - if they poison enough, they will go out of business  I look forward to the compensation I will get for my loved ones when they die from such malpractice... except, there is no Government, so no consequences for that company.  Sounds like a paradise

Getting rid of government is more like making sure everyone can swim and looking out for those who can't.

Corporations get in bed with governments not only to avoid government interference but also to take advantage of government power, money and legislation.

You do know that removing government power in no way diminishes, and in many ways actually increases, the power and efficacy of courts, right? You do know that you can have police, doctors, hospitals, safe food and clean water without government power?

It's government power that's the toxic ingredient. We can keep the organisational infrastructure which has grown up around government, mostly in spite of it, as it is in many instances quite useful but we don't need the violence and shadows that come with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 07:16:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:01:26 PM
The sale of Cadbury's shares to Kraft became compulsory on March 29th 2010 under section 979 of the Companies Act 2006. Cadbury's could have avoided this by making sure they kept 11% of shares and/or 51% of voting rights away from Kraft.

They could have protected themselves using laws and regulations? Is that what you're saying, because it looks an awful lot like you are. Where do those laws and regulations come from? Who enforces them? How, in your red-in-tooth-and-claw free market, do you prevent large companies simply establishing vast monopolies and crushing any competition with economies of scale and cross subsidies from other parts of their business (the latter of which being illegal*)?

*Unless you're Rupert Murdoch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 07:25:02 PM
The Bank of England don't create money from nothing.

regulation isn't the same as banning.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 07:27:52 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 07:25:02 PM
The Bank of England don't create money from nothing.

They kind of do. The money supply hasn't been directly backed by gold reserves for a long time, now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:43:27 PM
They could have protected themselves using existing laws and regulations, yes, of course they could! Under the current system, it's one way that they could! If someone shoots at you with a gun it makes no sense to not shoot back because you don't believe in guns! The solution, in this analogy, is to take all the guns away.

Legislative law and regulations come from the minds of human beings, not some mysterious, invisible, all-powerful force called "government." Legislative law applies with the consent of the governed. That is, it applies to human beings with their consent. A company is not a human being, it is an artificial person, and I have absolutely no problem with a legislative or regulatory body applying legislation and regulation to companies.

You can employ police, regulators, inspectors or whomever to enforce legislations on companies. You can name and shame bad practices on national tv, for example, this seems to work.

You don't prevent large companies from trying to establish monopolies, as I said earlier, if they can do it and the public allows it then have at it. Why not? If they try to do so unlawfully then that's what the courts are for, and the police, and public groups, and the media, and market forces, and societal attitudes, and education, and monetary democracy, and organisation, and local pressure groups, and Anne Robinson.

That last mention of Murdoch is very telling - how close is he to governments around the world? Governments that turn a blind eye to - thus enabling and even tacitly endorsing - his nefarious activities. If old Rupe couldn't get through the door of Number 10, or if the Prime Minister living there had only the same rights, powers and responsibilities as the rest of us, he'd be buggered. He's one of the best examples of a government protected corporatist you could have mentioned - but far from the only one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 07:45:36 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 07:27:52 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 07:25:02 PM
The Bank of England don't create money from nothing.

They kind of do. The money supply hasn't been directly backed by gold reserves for a long time, now.

Warning, gross simplification on the way...

Even when they used the gold standard the value of gold was dependent on economic growth and GDP of the country's with that gold. All removing gold did was unpin money from a rare metal. Money does not need a phisical representation as, especially now wealth has little to do with goods, money represents far more then objects in a barter system.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 03 January, 2017, 07:48:05 PM
But WHY is Murdoch close to Governments - because he knows they potentially stand in his way!  You seem to be suggesting removing any weak and potentially corruptible barriers and replacing them with a chalk mark will improve matters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 07:52:39 PM
QuoteAcme Co can only keep its monopoly as long as it deserves to.

Acme Co keeps its monopoly for as long as it has the most money.  Acting immorally reduces overheads, producing a cheaper product and raising income.  Acme Co loses its advantage only if the consumer is willing to make moral choices to their own financial detriment. 

Consumers tend not to do that.

Badly paid consumers, with no workers rights, no consumer rights, no state funding education system, no state funded health system, whose only information about the world comes to them through communication channels owned by Acme Co and companies like it, would do it even less.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 07:55:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:43:27 PM
You don't prevent large companies from trying to establish monopolies, as I said earlier, if they can do it and the public allows it then have at it. Why not?

How would the public stop it? Let's say Google raises the capital to buy Microsoft and Apple. They now control all the major desktop and mobile operating systems in the world. They then simply close MS and Apple and insist that all mobile devices will run Android, and all desktops will run some shiny new Chrome-style OS they've been working on. Where is the public interest represented in this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 07:55:54 PM
QuoteI have absolutely no problem with a legislative or regulatory body applying legislation and regulation to companies.

Wouldn't this legislation require some sort of...I don't know...government?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 08:22:21 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 07:25:02 PM

The Bank of England don't create money from nothing.


Yes they do, it's called Fractional Reserve Lending. The US dollar used to be the world's reserve currency after the Second World War. The US promised to honour every dollar it printed, exchanging them for gold (which exchanges almost always never happened, because cash is easier to deal with than metal). In about 1971, it became apparent that the US had printed so many dollars that there was nowhere near enough gold to cover all the dollars. This could have caused a bank-run on an entire country, utterly bankrupting the United States.

So, in about 1971 (if memory serves) the US decided to untether the dollar from gold, essentially making it backed by nothing. This meant they could redouble their dollar printing and had the knock-on effect of untethering other global currencies from gold. With this tie cut, the printing of money exploded and inflation (which is not a measure of prices rising but of the value of money declining) took off. It's become a vicious circle - the more money gets printed, the less it's worth, so more gets printed to try and keep up with the falling value. It's like trying to keep a leaky rubber raft inflated with a hand pump while the holes get bigger and bigger and you have to pump harder and harder. Eventually, bits of the raft start to sink (banks going under), and not too long after that the whole damn thing goes down.

Quote from: Leigh S on 03 January, 2017, 07:48:05 PM
But WHY is Murdoch close to Governments - because he knows they potentially stand in his way!  You seem to be suggesting removing any weak and potentially corruptible barriers and replacing them with a chalk mark will improve matters.

Of course they potentially stand in his way, as they potentially stand in everyone's way. His choices are simple: 1) Ignore them and try to build his empire without them - if the government and its mates don't get a share, he won't get far. 2) He can fight the government - but it'll crush him. 3) Suck up and hide behind its power.

If you have one town planner, say, in a large town, that one person is easy to corrupt or threaten so a big company can build a car park on a public garden. Take that one person away and return the power to the people and suddenly that company might have a whole town full of people against them - or for them, if they decide they need a car park more than a garden. Or in partnership with them, if there's a better site.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 07:55:24 PM

How would the public stop it? Let's say Google raises the capital to buy Microsoft and Apple. They now control all the major desktop and mobile operating systems in the world. They then simply close MS and Apple and insist that all mobile devices will run Android, and all desktops will run some shiny new Chrome-style OS they've been working on. Where is the public interest represented in this?


Linux. Open source software. Networked mobile 'phones (basically turning every 'phone and laptop into an internet hub, making the internet truly uncontrollable). I for one would not buy a Google system in this scenario, many wouldn't and many would. With that anti-Google gap in the market, other companies - new and old - would offer services they know people want. Google might remain big, and many people might like how it works, but there will still be choice. And if Google oversteps, well, the public can soon fall out of love with things. MySpace.

With government protectionism, internet "laws" would be passed, at the request of Google (with sweeteners, of course), to protect and consolidate its grip. Without government, it's as open to competition as surely as an open wound is open to infection.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 07:55:54 PM
QuoteI have absolutely no problem with a legislative or regulatory body applying legislation and regulation to companies.

Wouldn't this legislation require some sort of...I don't know...government?

Nope, just human minds. Courts. Public opinion. Trade associations. That kind of thing. But yes, government is one option but, as I thought I said, a type of government with power over non-human entities only.

Stop it now - I need to go to bed - an' bain't no durn gubment gonna stop me!  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 08:22:21 PM
Linux. Open source software. Networked mobile 'phones (basically turning every 'phone and laptop into an internet hub, making the internet truly uncontrollable).

Cloud cuckoo land. A tiny, tiny fraction of people would be able to do this. The vast majority either wouldn't have the technical skill, the time or the inclination to go down such a route and would just have to bend over and take it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 08:41:14 PM
Money not being backed by gold does not mean it's created out of nothing. Golds value was not based on the value of gold, but on the value of the country's that pinned their currency to gold. Gold was slow to react to expanding economys, making capital slow to access. Unpinning money from gold just removed the artifice of paper money representing gold coins. Paper money is now giving way to digital.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 08:45:27 PM
QuoteCourts

Where a single person, or small group of people, hold authority over others.

Which is, of course, morally wrong and completely impossible, since
legislative law and regulations come from the minds of human beings, not some mysterious, invisible, all-powerful force called "government." Legislative law applies with the consent of the governed ...unless the governed are shareholders, or the owner of a company, in which case this Gordian knot will suddenly fall away because...

...well, because doing otherwise would be damaging to society, which means this contradiction is permitted and "authority" is suddenly created from nothing, despite it only existing through transit before, in order for the system to continue to exist.

And that's ignoring the writing of legislation in an ever changing world, appointing a judiciary, ensuring they have authority and practical system to enforce rules, arranging inspections, having an adequate system of punishment for those who fail to follow the rules, informing consumers, funding the whole shebang...There's a reason why so many billionaires are libertarians, and its not the love of their fellow man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 January, 2017, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:01:26 PM
The Grocer found Cadbury's best-selling seasonal lines were £10m lower in 2015, cutting the confectioner's market share from 42% to 40%, so that's an example of market forces right there - as you pointed out, they lost dissatisfied customers and their £10M loss was the gain of some other company. That's how the market works.

Just because their lines were £10m lower, doesn't mean all that money was spent elsewhere.  People may have lost their jobs, not had a pay rise while having to pay more rent or just saved it.  Maybe they cut down on chocolate and started a gym membership?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 January, 2017, 10:13:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 03:40:54 PM
There's no way any company can build a protected monopoly without government shielding. I can see nothing wrong with an unprotected, meritorious, naturally occurring monopoly.

The East India Company?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 11:08:46 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 January, 2017, 08:36:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 08:22:21 PM
Linux. Open source software. Networked mobile 'phones (basically turning every 'phone and laptop into an internet hub, making the internet truly uncontrollable).

Cloud cuckoo land. A tiny, tiny fraction of people would be able to do this. The vast majority either wouldn't have the technical skill, the time or the inclination to go down such a route and would just have to bend over and take it.

Rubbish. Linux Mint and Ubuntu, for example, are just as easy to use as MS Windows -in some aspects, even easier. They don't require anti-virus software, either. If you doubt this, download an installation file for Linux Mint and install it on an old laptop, if you have one. If not, burn the downloaded file to a disc or thumb drive and run it from there. LibreOffice, the GIMP and Inkscape (as just three examples) are just as easy to use as MS Office, Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator. And, with each new iteration, these programs get easier and easier to use. Sure, there's a learning curve but then the same is true of all software. To believe people are too dim to learn how to use these programs does not reflect reality. People of all kinds have learned to use Windows, even if they don't understand it in any great depth, and Linux and open source software are no different in this regard. I do agree, though, that many people don't have the inclination to change at present and would rather stick with what they're used to than try something new.

Quote from: Steven Denton on 03 January, 2017, 08:41:14 PM
Money not being backed by gold does not mean it's created out of nothing. Golds value was not based on the value of gold, but on the value of the country's that pinned their currency to gold. Gold was slow to react to expanding economys, making capital slow to access. Unpinning money from gold just removed the artifice of paper money representing gold coins. Paper money is now giving way to digital.

Gold's value, indeed the value of everything, is based largely on faith. Gold is a rare metal, doesn't corrode and is also useful in many technologies, making it an ideal store of value. It is, however, bulky and problematic to keep safe. This is why bank notes were invented. A bank note was originally a certificate issued by a bank to represent the gold and/or silver people stored in the bank's vaults for safety. At some point, the goldsmiths (who first devised this system because their vaults were very secure) realised that people who deposited gold with them rarely came to remove their gold from the vaults, preferring to trade in bank notes which were "as good as gold." They began creating bank notes without receiving any gold to base them on and lending them out at interest. What a brilliant scam! When the public began to realise what was happening, the bankers justified this fraud by coining the term "fractional reserve banking," which simply means banks gave themselves the right to lend out more bank notes than they had gold to back them up. This was the beginning of inflation and a debt-based monetary system. Without this fraudulent system, there would be no such thing as bank runs. (A bank run occurs when people, for whatever reason, decide to redeem their notes for gold in larger than ecxpected numbers. Let's say Farmer Giles has worked all his life and amassed a modest amount of gold with which to fund his retirement and deposited it in a bank. Then a rumour starts that the farmer's bank is in trouble and everyone rushes to get their gold - of course, in that situation it's first come, first served - and the first to come are those people (other bankers and the "elites," usually) in the know. They get theirs but the poor farmer has lost everything he's worked for over the years. With fractional reserve banking such monstrous abuses are made increasingly likely. It still happens today, from time to time, with people's hard-earned savings diminished or even eradicated at a stroke.) It's not the gold or the bank notes that's the problem, it's how and by whom the system is run.

Now, none of this means very much because, as you say, paper money is just an artifice. It's worth what people believe it's worth, which is why banks work so hard to project an image of competence, trustworthiness, solidity and stability. Gold is a real, tangible thing that has to be located, dug up and refined - its existence cannot be simply wished or magicked into reality by writing in a ledger. This is the core of the problem - not what we use as a money but how it is created and by whom. At present, all money in the world is created by a core cartel of private bankers who make a profit from this monopoly and decide who can have some and who can't - they even decide how much money entire countries can have, making a mockery of the governments people love and trust so much. Most people labour under the illusion that central banks, such as the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve, are part of the government and therefore owned by the people but this is not so. The people might own the building, and be responsible for funding its upkeep, but everything inside is owned by private shareholders - of which you are not one. Even governments must "borrow" from the central bank - and you get to pay it all back. In this way, profits are privatised whilst losses are covered by the general public. This is the imbalance which has done so much damage through the centuries and continues to this day.

In this modern age, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are an important development. The amount of bitcoins available is determined by a mathematical formula, meaning they cannot be created at a whim and the profits resulting from that creation snaffled up by a handful of entities or individuals - the profits of Bitcoin creation are evenly distributed throughout the system, so every Bitcoin user benefits in a small way and those benefits are not consolodated into the hands of a few. Bitcoin also shows that money does not have to be tethered to gold, silver, copper or any other metal. Bitcoin has value because people have faith in the currency - and that's the only thing ultimately backing any currency.

The solution to the world's debt problem is easy - make money creation a public service. The fact that governments have shied away from taking control of money creation is one of the main reasons why I believe they are parasitic, toxic, immoral and invalid. A true state-owned central bank could create money "at cost," as it were, and drastically decrease the need for high interest rates, the majority of taxes and rampant debt. And yes, you're right, it doesn't ultimately matter what the value of money is based on, you can base it on gold, silver, mathematical equations or even the number of birds in that tree over there - the fundamental test of a currency's worth boils down to just two questions - do I have faith in it and can I pay my taxes with it? Answer "yes" to both of those questions and, hey-presto, you've got a national or even international currency. The problem isn't with money itself, in whatever forms it takes,(though one day, in the not too distant future (I hope), humanity will grow up and realise that we don't need money at all) but with those few who monopolise its creation to the general detriment of everyone and everything else.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 January, 2017, 08:45:27 PM
QuoteCourts

Where a single person, or small group of people, hold authority over others.

Which is, of course, morally wrong and completely impossible, since legislative law and regulations come from the minds of human beings, not some mysterious, invisible, all-powerful force called "government." Legislative law applies with the consent of the governed ...unless the governed are shareholders, or the owner of a company, in which case this Gordian knot will suddenly fall away because...

...well, because doing otherwise would be damaging to society, which means this contradiction is permitted and "authority" is suddenly created from nothing, despite it only existing through transit before, in order for the system to continue to exist.

And that's ignoring the writing of legislation in an ever changing world, appointing a judiciary, ensuring they have authority and practical system to enforce rules, arranging inspections, having an adequate system of punishment for those who fail to follow the rules, informing consumers, funding the whole shebang...There's a reason why so many billionaires are libertarians, and its not the love of their fellow man.

Where a single person, or small group of people, hold authority over others hear complaints and decide whether one party, or the other, or neither, or both, have caused loss, harm or damage. We each and every one of us hold the authority to refuse to accept that which is unlawful and to defend ourselves, our families, our neighbours, our communities, against unlawful acts. The jury in a court hold only that authority and no more. I've written about the libertarian court and prison system before so I won't go into it again here except to say that a legal system does not require government to operate. Indeed, seperating the courts and police from government, making them independent of undue political influence and not reliant on state funding, would make them a lot more balanced. I've been in a magistrates' court and know first-hand how biased towards the authorities they are. Courts under the control, either wholly or partially, of governments simply cannot be unbiased.

Legislation can still be written without an authoritarian government. Much of it will come from ongoing case-law. The legislation already in existence need not be abandoned and will prove useful in informing ongoing cases - it's just that it won't be enforced as The Law, which tends to put parking fines in the same arena as murder. Juries, whilst considering the actions of lawbreakers, will be perfectly free to take into account existing legislation and apply it where they judge it to be fair and/or relevant and discard or amend it if it's not.

There's a reason why so many billionaires are libertarians (so you claim), and its not the love of their fellow man. It's because they misunderstand the nature of libertarianism, mistaking anarchy for chaos as, it seems, do you.

Quote from: sheridan on 03 January, 2017, 10:08:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 07:01:26 PM
The Grocer found Cadbury's best-selling seasonal lines were £10m lower in 2015, cutting the confectioner's market share from 42% to 40%, so that's an example of market forces right there - as you pointed out, they lost dissatisfied customers and their £10M loss was the gain of some other company. That's how the market works.

Just because their lines were £10m lower, doesn't mean all that money was spent elsewhere.  People may have lost their jobs, not had a pay rise while having to pay more rent or just saved it.  Maybe they cut down on chocolate and started a gym membership?

Fair enough.


Quote from: sheridan on 03 January, 2017, 10:13:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2017, 03:40:54 PM
There's no way any company can build a protected monopoly without government shielding. I can see nothing wrong with an unprotected, meritorious, naturally occurring monopoly.

The East India Company?

The same East India Company that was backed by the British Crown, which passed laws to imprison and seize the assets of anybody who dared compete with it? The same East India Company which basically invaded other countries, raped their resources and subjugated their people with the tacit approval of the British Crown, who treated them as commercial heroes and not criminals? The same East India Company that was given permission to embark on its adventures by the British Crown? The same East India Company that merged with the English Company Trading to the East Indies and the British state in 1708 by a tripartite indenture and lent the Treasury £3,200,000 in return for exclusive privileges for the next three years? The same East India Company that got caught smuggling opium into China and persuaded the British government to send warships to fight the first opium war?

Unless you're talking about another East India Company, your example is the perfect illustration of the extremes a company can reach with government shielding and a protected monopoly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 11:25:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 11:08:46 AM
To believe people are too dim to learn how to use these programs does not reflect reality.

I didn't say that. In my Google/Android/Chrome example, people are offered an easy choice of accepting a monopolist's imposed option, or choice that is demonstrably more technically difficult and/or more work. The lack of widespread adoption of Linux at the consumer level demonstrates its basic unattractiveness to the man/woman in the street. Doesn't matter if that's a result of technical inability, ignorance of the options, or lack of time/inclination to pursue it, the result is the same.

Amusing that you should mention Photoshop and Illustrator. For a significant subsection of their user base, none of those free/open source alternatives are fit for purpose. Adobe has those people (including me) over a barrel.

Want to see an unfettered monopolistic instinct in action? Adobe bought up Aldus, then Macromedia, mopping all their significant competitors barring Quark Xpress. Then they used the sales clout of Photoshop to leverage InDesign into the DTP field — the first two iterations of the CS suite cost the same for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign as a single license for Quark.

As soon as Quark was effectively dead, the Creative Suite price went up. Then, a few years later, they hit on the Creative Cloud wheeze, which goes like this: Curse those pesky customers for not instantly upgrading every time we put out a new version. Wouldn't it be better if we changed to a subscription model that forces every customer wanting more than one application to pay what wasthe old upgrade price for ALL the applications, each year, every year in perpetuity if they want to open their own files?

As much as I like Affinity's Illustrator and Photoshop competitors, I have significant clients who insist on getting live AI documents. So far, I've been voting with my wallet and not moving to CC, but at some point my copy of CS6 will stop working and I will have literally no option other than to upgrade to the vastly more expensive Creative Cloud, or take a significant financial hit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 12:05:14 PM
As I said, there's nothing wrong with trying to build a monopoly through the buying and selling of other companies.

Of course, I'm no expert on Illustrator and Photoshop as you and your contacts are and have used them as an amateur only. The programs I mentioned are more than adequate for me and I suspect that some (but by no means all) bias against them stems from brand snobbery or loyalty - like people who refuse to shop in Aldi for whatever reason.

These programs do continue to improve, however, and if Adobe continue on the route you describe then Open Source options will steadily begin to encroach on their market share. At which point, Adobe will have to reassess their business model. Some Adobe users might like the way their system works, enjoying paying for constant upgrades and having old software stop working so they don't get stuck in a rut or suddenly find themselves with obsolete software. Nothing wrong with that, if that's what they want and what they can afford.

If you had a choice, though, between paying through the nose for the most up to date Adobe software or using an Open Source alternative which is the equivalent, say, of last year's (or even the year before's) Adobe software, and which will update constantly anyway, for free - which would you choose? (This is not meant as a challenge, I'm just interested in the professional's view.)

I don't know what a "live AI document" is - I presume it's an Adobe Illustrator document that can be put online and worked on by several different people from several different computers at once - but if there was a decant OS alternative, would you try it out?

I know that Inkscape can open and export AI documents but I'm not certain these are the same thing as live AI documents.

One advantage of OS programs like Inkscape and the GIMP is that it removes the financial bar to getting started, at least. One can begin with the free stuff (and donate, if you want) and then move to Adobe if and when the money starts coming in sufficient quantities to justify the expense.

I would not say that Linux/Open Source programs are more technically difficult, although in the past this was undoubtedly true (I once ruined a hard drive trying to get Linux Red Hat to work in the late 90s), just different. The truth is that people generally don't like change, they stick with what they know until something forces or inspires them to change. The marketing bods at companies like Adobe know this and so, hopefully, impose change gradually - like boiling frogs - because they know if they go too far too fast people like you and your clients will find alternatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2017, 02:35:53 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 11:25:57 AMAs much as I like Affinity's Illustrator and Photoshop competitors, I have significant clients who insist on getting live AI documents. So far, I've been voting with my wallet and not moving to CC, but at some point my copy of CS6 will stop working and I will have literally no option other than to upgrade to the vastly more expensive Creative Cloud, or take a significant financial hit.

This, to me, just sounds like a cottage industry waiting to happen, where people with CC subscriptions take a fee in return for converting files into the AI format.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 January, 2017, 02:41:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 12:05:14 PMThe programs I mentioned are more than adequate for me and I suspect that some (but by no means all) bias against them stems from brand snobbery or loyalty
It's nothing to do with that. It's down to approachability, accessibility, stability and features.

QuoteThese programs do continue to improve, however, and if Adobe continue on the route you describe then Open Source options will steadily begin to encroach on their market share.
Only that is never going to happen. The only time I can recall there being significant impact on Adobe's pro-level software is when a product lagged for a very long time (Dreamweaver), thereby essentially making itself redundant. Photoshop and Illustrator, however, remain at the forefront of their respective fields, and even though there are impressive competitors, they are simply not going to cut it for a significant portion of the market.

QuoteIf you had a choice, though, between paying through the nose for the most up to date Adobe software or using an Open Source alternative which is the equivalent, say, of last year's (or even the year before's) Adobe software, and which will update constantly anyway, for free - which would you choose? (This is not meant as a challenge, I'm just interested in the professional's view.)
This isn't an option, because the open source alternative isn't even equivalent to Adobe's software a decade ago, in many cases. But with open source, you are also reliant on altruism and goodwill. Perhaps the stuff will be regularly updated, or perhaps it won't. Who knows?

(I'm not, incidentally, against open source, but there are limitations to that model, and they slam nastily into a wall whenever you approach pro levels. The same's broadly true of free/freemium software on mobile.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 02:44:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2017, 02:35:53 PM
This, to me, just sounds like a cottage industry waiting to happen, where people with CC subscriptions take a fee in return for converting files into the AI format.

Can't do it. Designer makes a decent fist of importing AI files, but there's no workable path from Designer back into AI — AI, I suspect intentionally, gubs third-party EPS and PDF files so that they're not editable in any useable fashion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 03:12:54 PM
Fortunately, I'm a writer so all I really need is any old text editor.

The CS6 Jim uses is 13 years old, so bleeding-edge software isn't necessarily essential. Even if what you say about Open Source software being a decade out of date is true, he could update his software for free and still be more up to date than he is now. (Not that he should have to, he likes his CS6 and paid for it, so should be able to use it for as long as he likes.)

Yes, Open Source is reliant on altruism but then so are lots of things from Christmas to cancer research. Altruism is not a dirty word or some woolly airy-fairy pipe dream, it's a real human trait that manifests all over the world all the time.

I could just as easily point out that Adobe's software is reliant on the economy; maybe it'll be economically viable to issue regular updates and maybe it won't. Neither way is guaranteed to succeed 100% of the time but I have noticed that the things people do for the love of it tend to keep being done regardless, whilst the things people do for money tend to dry up when the money runs out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 03:15:53 PM
Correction, CS6 was initially released 13 years ago and last updated four years ago.

That'll teach me for skim-reading!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 January, 2017, 03:33:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 03:12:54 PMFortunately, I'm a writer so all I really need is any old text editor.
As a writer myself, I can do my job in "any old text editor", but I'm most efficient in one that's actually good. And since time is money and rates are increasingly awful, efficiency is to be prized. Unsurprisingly, I don't favour free software for such work.

QuoteYes, Open Source is reliant on altruism but then so are lots of things from Christmas to cancer research.
What? Cancer research is not reliant on altruism. It's reliant on funding that comes from all kinds of sources, only some of which is charity.

QuoteAltruism is not a dirty word or some woolly airy-fairy pipe dream, it's a real human trait that manifests all over the world all the time.
I never said it was a dirty word. What I'm suggesting is most professionals would be taking a massive risk to base the future of their own ability to complete projects on the whims of people updating software whenever they fancy.

QuoteI have noticed that the things people do for the love of it tend to keep being done regardless, whilst the things people do for money tend to dry up when the money runs out.
Tell that to Mint's customers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 04:01:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 03:12:54 PM
The CS6 Jim uses is 13 years old, so bleeding-edge software isn't necessarily essential. Even if what you say about Open Source software being a decade out of date is true, he could update his software for free and still be more up to date than he is now. (Not that he should have to, he likes his CS6 and paid for it, so should be able to use it for as long as he likes.)

I'm not sure you're reading what I wrote. I have, for now, chosen to stick with CS6 because I think Adobe's monopolist imposition of a subscription model is an outrageous abuse of their market dominance, and also vastly more expensive than the old perpetual-license-and-update-when-you-want model. If I could pay Adobe the usual £350-ish to upgrade to a perpetual license CS7 version of the old Design Standard bundle, I'd do it in a shot.

I'm constantly evaluating alternatives, because there will come a point where an OS update will break the software and I won't be able to use it any more. Consequently, when I say that only one alternative (Affinity Designer) is fit for purpose in my profession (which is functionally identical to any graphic designer for print), it's because that's the way it is. If you want a colour-managed CMYK workflow, with trapping options, and fine typographic controls, none of the shareware/open-source options pass muster. None.

And this is why Adobe won't release the above-mentioned hypothetical CS7. They make far more money from Creative Cloud, and their complete market dominance means that my only option is to keep using CS6 until it stops working, then I'll have no choice other than to pay through the nose for their subscription model.

(Just to clarify my previous point about 'live' AI documents: most clients are happy to have an exported output from Illustrator — TIFF, EPS, PDF — so any software that gives me the features mentioned above would be an acceptable alternative. However, Titan and 451 want me to send them the actual Illustrator lettering documents, meaning that I have use Illustrator, simply because there is no way to supply them the files that they need.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 04:04:43 PM
First off I apologise for the formatting on this post.


Gold's value, indeed the value of everything, is based largely on faith. Gold is a rare metal, doesn't corrode and is also useful in many technologies, making it an ideal store of value. It is, however, bulky and problematic to keep safe. This is why bank notes were invented. A bank note was originally a certificate issued by a bank to represent the gold and/or silver people stored in the bank's vaults for safety. At some point, the goldsmiths (who first devised this system because their vaults were very secure) realised that people who deposited gold with them rarely came to remove their gold from the vaults, preferring to trade in bank notes which were "as good as gold." They began creating bank notes without receiving any gold to base them on and lending them out at interest. What a brilliant scam! When the public began to realise what was happening, the bankers justified this fraud by coining the term "fractional reserve banking," which simply means banks gave themselves the right to lend out more bank notes than they had gold to back them up. This was the beginning of inflation and a debt-based monetary system.

Histories and interpretations may vary.

Without this fraudulent system, there would be no such thing as bank runs. (A bank run occurs when people, for whatever reason, decide to redeem their notes for gold in larger than expected numbers.

I don't need a summary of the bank scene from it's a wonderful life to understand what a run is. Sometimes it comes across like you think you are talking to idiots.

Let's say Farmer Giles has worked all his life and amassed a modest amount of gold with which to fund his retirement and deposited it in a bank. Then a rumour starts that the farmer's bank is in trouble and everyone rushes to get their gold - of course, in that situation it's first come, first served - and the first to come are those people (other bankers and the "elites," usually) in the know. They get theirs but the poor farmer has lost everything he's worked for over the years. With fractional reserve banking such monstrous abuses are made increasingly likely. It still happens today, from time to time, with people's hard-earned savings diminished or even eradicated at a stroke.) It's not the gold or the bank notes that's the problem, it's how and by whom the system is run.

Bank runs happen when banks do not have the liquid assists to cover withdrawals. This does not mean the assets are bad (although with the sub-prime mortgage crash they were indeed bad) what it means is the bank's assets cannot be freed up upon request. This can cause huge problems with asset transferal and essentially led to the Icelandic bank crash. In the case of the Icelandic banks it wasn't that their assets were bad it's that too much of their capital was tied up in investments and not enough in cash. (Farmer Giles Spent all his monopoly money on hoovering up as much property as possible but now he's landed on green grocer Mabel's Hotel on Mayfair and he's fucked.)

Now, none of this means very much because, as you say, paper money is just an artifice.

Run's are still incredibly important. Conceptually it can be extended to any business and as far as personal budgeting. If you don't have enough operating capital and you suddenly have a bill to pay, you are probably going to find it tricky to e-bay your graded captain America back issues for a decent price in time to get your Car fixed for work the next day.   

It's worth what people believe it's worth, which is why banks work so hard to project an image of competence, trustworthiness, solidity and stability. Gold is a real, tangible thing that has to be located, dug up and refined - its existence cannot be simply wished or magicked into reality by writing in a ledger. This is the core of the problem - not what we use as a money but how it is created and by whom. At present, all money in the world is created by a core cartel of private bankers who make a profit from this monopoly and decide who can have some and who can't - they even decide how much money entire countries can have, making a mockery of the governments people love and trust so much. Most people labour under the illusion that central banks, such as the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve, are part of the government and therefore owned by the people but this is not so. The people might own the building, and be responsible for funding its upkeep, but everything inside is owned by private shareholders - of which you are not one. Even governments must "borrow" from the central bank - and you get to pay it all back. In this way, profits are privatised whilst losses are covered by the general public. This is the imbalance which has done so much damage through the centuries and continues to this day.


Money isn't magicked into existence, Banks use maths, they don't just pull things out of their asses, even when it seems most like they do (quantative easing). Quantative easing is a good example because it's an emergency measure and extreme test of the system. The economy has stalled, banks aren't lending money. Businesses need to borrow money against future profits or current assets to have the liquid assets to purchase the goods or services they require to make money. Without access to these funds they will definitely go bust, putting an end to this future money. Quantative easing gambles that by putting more money into the system now businesses will convert that money from possible capital/profits to actual capital/profits. The down side if they don't then all of the currency will be devalued to cover the new money. And that's the test. If you can create new money on future earning then not realise those future earnings with no repercussions then the money is based on nothing (thin air if you like) if however, creating new money with no new assets devalues all of the money until the money represents the assets again, currency IS tied to something.

In this modern age, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are an important development. The amount of bitcoins available is determined by a mathematical formula, meaning they cannot be created at a whim and the profits resulting from that creation snaffled up by a handful of entities or individuals - the profits of Bitcoin creation are evenly distributed throughout the system, so every Bitcoin user benefits in a small way and those benefits are not consolodated into the hands of a few. Bitcoin also shows that money does not have to be tethered to gold, silver, copper or any other metal. Bitcoin has value because people have faith in the currency - and that's the only thing ultimately backing any currency.

cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are indeed really interesting. It's most interesting not because it can be traded for goods and services where Bitcoin is accepted but because it can be traded for traditional currency and has become a tranferable asset in the same way as traditional currancy(the ability to mine Bitcoin and it's finite nature is an entertaining mimicking of the dynamics gold as currency.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:09:02 PM
I think the software discussion is wandering off topic so I'll leave that for now. Suffice to say that both open source and closed source programs each have their pros and cons. There's risk also
in basing the future of a professional's own ability to complete projects on the whims of people updating software whenever it's profitable.

Medical research funding from government (using stolen money*, of course) in the UK is around £2.5 billion a year, charitable donations for the same amount to around £1 billion a year, so I'd call that pretty reliant.

Who or what is Mint?

*And if it's not stolen, it's freely given and therefore an altruistic donation too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:56:11 PM
Jim, I don't understand the intricacies of Illustrator as compared to Open Source options and so I accept your expert opinion in the matter as I'm sure you will have experimented. You cannot be the only one, however, unhappy with Adobe's monopolistic practices and so I'd assume many professionals such as yourself are pressuring Adobe to change their ways. Indeed, I guess what you'd need to do is remind them of all that government anti-monopoly legislation...

Steven, no. The economy has not stalled. The economy cannot stall, that's a physical and philosophical impossibility. There is no computer with "The Economy" stencilled on it, no fundamental equation that governs it, no ministry or department running it. The economy is simply the interactions, many and varied, between human beings (another word for it is 'praxeology'). When a politician promises to fix the economy, they're living in a universe so far removed from reality they might as well be promising everyone a free unicorn. What has stalled is money creation, which is a tiny but significant aspect of the economy. It's like putting crap oil into an engine - the mechanics are all fine but still the engine's going to fail.

I'm sure I've posted this link (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity) for you before but there it is anyway in case you want to ignore it again. If the Bank of England admitting it creates money out of nothing is not enough to disabuse you of your weird view that it's not created out of nothing but somehow created tomorrow to be waiting for us when the sun comes up, then I guess nothing will.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:04:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:56:11 PM


Steven, no. The economy has not stalled. The economy cannot stall, that's a physical and philosophical impossibility. There is no computer with "The Economy" stencilled on it, no fundamental equation that governs it, no ministry or department running it. The economy is simply the interactions, many and varied, between human beings (another word for it is 'praxeology'). When a politician promises to fix the economy, they're living in a universe so far removed from reality they might as well be promising everyone a free unicorn. What has stalled is money creation, which is a tiny but significant aspect of the economy. It's like putting crap oil into an engine - the mechanics are all fine but still the engine's going to fail.

I'm sure I've posted this link (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity) for you before but there it is anyway in case you want to ignore it again. If the Bank of England admitting it creates money out of nothing is not enough to disabuse you of your weird view that it's not created out of nothing but somehow created tomorrow to be waiting for us when the sun comes up, then I guess nothing will.

Yes I was referring to growth stalling and teetering on the brink of recession then talking about a method of stimulating growth. it was a statement specific to the motivation for quantitative easing. but feel free to rant condescendingly.

I read the link. It's an opinion piece.

but thank you for again reminding me why you are so unpleasant to converse with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 06:14:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:09:02 PM
I think the software discussion is wandering off topic so I'll leave that for now.

Unintended de-rail aside, I brought it up because it's another example of precisely the kind of behaviour I was talking about: large company buys up smaller competitors, then uses market dominance to kill its only remaining competitor. Once it has the field to itself, it proceeds to act in a manner directly intended to benefit its shareholders, to the detriment of its customers. The subscription model flattens out the peaks and troughs of the company's cashflow, releases them from the onerous task of actually improving their software*, and locks their customers into using their software (theoretically) forever, whilst costing all but a minority of their customers more money than the old perpetual license model did.

It's a fundamentally customer-hostile action enabled by market dominance.

*I can't find a single feature added to Illustrator or InDesign in three and a half years that looks remotely compelling, although Photoshop does seem to have had some work put in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:19:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:56:11 PM
omy. It's like putting crap oil into an engine - the mechanics are all fine but still the engine's going to fail.

I'm sure I've posted this link (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity) for you before but there it is anyway in case you want to ignore it again. If the Bank of England admitting it creates money out of nothing is not enough to disabuse you of your weird view that it's not created out of nothing but somehow created tomorrow to be waiting for us when the sun comes up, then I guess nothing will.

I have also read the Bank of England Paper that David Graeber is arguing his opinion from and came out wit ha differn't opinion. but go ahead and accuse me of being ill informed and wilfully ignorant for not sharing the same opinion as you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:20:17 PM
 

There is a link in that "opinion piece" to the actual pdf put out by the BoE, so you can read the actual facts straight from the horse's mouth, if you like.

That unpleasant feeling you're getting is largely due to the knowledge that you're wrong but unwilling to admit it (although in all fairness about 11% of it is probably down to me being a c*nt).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:31:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:20:17 PM


There is a link in that "opinion piece" to the actual pdf put out by the BoE, so you can read the actual facts straight from the horse's mouth, if you like.

That unpleasant feeling you're getting is largely due to the knowledge that you're wrong but unwilling to admit it (although in all fairness about 11% of it is probably down to me being a c*nt).

I read the PDF, it doesn't say 'we create money from nothing' I read quite a lot believe it or not.

The unpleasant feeling I'm getting is from talking to someone who thinks 'you're wrong but unwilling to admit it' is an augment. Maybe look at yourself before accusing others of blind denial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:38:21 PM
I understand and agree with what you say, Jim, and I think it's a piss-poor way to treat your customers. (Not you, Adobe.)

And yet, and call me naïve if you like, if Adobe stagnates its innovation and development for too long, there is every possibility that Open Source software designers may outstrip them.

Of course, Adobe may use its money to lobby governments to make OS software illegal - insuring its own income stream through protectionism rather than quality. It's the modern penchant for "rent seeking" - the idea that one can invent and/or produce a single thing and not sell it but hire it out indefinitely with as little costly maintenance and innovation as possible. The ideal, as I think you said in other words earlier, is to find a way of getting money for nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 05 January, 2017, 06:42:50 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 January, 2017, 06:14:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 05:09:02 PM
I think the software discussion is wandering off topic so I'll leave that for now.

Unintended de-rail aside, I brought it up because it's another example of precisely the kind of behaviour I was talking about: large company buys up smaller competitors, then uses market dominance to kill its only remaining competitor. Once it has the field to itself, it proceeds to act in a manner directly intended to benefit its shareholders, to the detriment of its customers. The subscription model flattens out the peaks and troughs of the company's cashflow, releases them from the onerous task of actually improving their software*, and locks their customers into using their software (theoretically) forever, whilst costing all but a minority of their customers more money than the old perpetual license model did.

It's a fundamentally customer-hostile action enabled by market dominance.

*I can't find a single feature added to Illustrator or InDesign in three and a half years that looks remotely compelling, although Photoshop does seem to have had some work put in.

See also Autodesk.

They had 3DS Max, bought Maya, and Softimage - which gave them the big 3 3D apps, and ended up killing Softimage because they didn't know what to do with three of them.

Their rental prices are something like £200+ a month these days - crazy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:48:45 PM
Okay, Steven, so we disagree. Fine. You don't believe me and I don't believe you. It's not the end of the world, is it?

I obviously don't read anything and am as thick as pig sh*t as well as being unpleasant to converse with and condescending to boot. Boo-frikkin'-hoo.

So we'd best just call it quits, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:51:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:20:17 PM


There is a link in that "opinion piece" to the actual pdf put out by the BoE, so you can read the actual facts straight from the horse's mouth, if you like.


The idea in the opinion piece that seems to be at it's core, but obviously false, is that banks can create as much debt as people are willing to take on because all the borrowed money will end up in a bank any way seems to completely ignore the banking crisis caused by banks abusing the lack of regulation by over lending against poor assets. We have in recent memory an example of exactly what happens if banks over value assets or lend against earnings that are a lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:55:53 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 05 January, 2017, 06:42:50 PMSee also Autodesk. They had 3DS Max, bought Maya, and Softimage - which gave them the big 3 3D apps, and ended up killing Softimage because they didn't know what to do with three of them. Their rental prices are something like £200+ a month these days - crazy.
I hear Blender (https://www.blender.org/) is quite good but I don't really know. I've faffed about with it but all it ever did was make my head spin (as did just about every over 3D program I've ever faffed with).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:56:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:48:45 PM
Okay, Steven, so we disagree. Fine. You don't believe me and I don't believe you. It's not the end of the world, is it?

I obviously don't read anything and am as thick as pig sh*t as well as being unpleasant to converse with and condescending to boot. Boo-frikkin'-hoo.

So we'd best just call it quits, eh?

There you go putting words in my mouth AGAIN! I didn't call you thick, I didn't say you don't read things, but yes inventing ways I have insulted you as a defence mechanism does make you unpleasant to converse with. You however did say I ignored your link (that I'm not obligated to read) and you did say I was wrong and intimated that I was some how suffering angst over the cognitive dissonance of being empirically wrong but unable to admit it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 07:03:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 06:55:53 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 05 January, 2017, 06:42:50 PMSee also Autodesk. They had 3DS Max, bought Maya, and Softimage - which gave them the big 3 3D apps, and ended up killing Softimage because they didn't know what to do with three of them. Their rental prices are something like £200+ a month these days - crazy.
I hear Blender (https://www.blender.org/) is quite good but I don't really know. I've faffed about with it but all it ever did was make my head spin (as did just about every over 3D program I've ever faffed with).

Blender has a very powerful, hugely customisable interface but it's unusable until you set the working environment up to your taste. it's not really ready to go 'out of the box'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2017, 08:29:35 PM
On the "any old text editor"/open source software thing, across at least six different PCs, I've found Openoffice to be far more reliable than Word, so I don't think Sharky's too far off the mark with his open source fruitopian fantasy idea about monopolies being threatened by crowd-sourced software at some future point - just not any time soon, and certainly not while people have access to perfectly functional copies of Photoshop/Illustrator.

On a related note, I found Ubuntu to be a pretty great alternative to Windows, I just wish it ran the software and drivers that I have a PC for in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 08:46:18 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:31:01 PM

...I read quite a lot believe it or not.


Why would I not believe that? Why even say that if not to imply that I do not read or read inferior things or do not understand the things I read? I think it's a bit low to chuck out passive aggressive statements like that then cry your eyes out when they come back to bite you.

I don't need a summary of the bank scene from it's a wonderful life (and you call me condescending!) to understand what a run is. Sometimes it comes across like you think you are talking to idiots.

Simply because I'm trying to be clear, and keeping in mind that it's not just you reading this, does not mean I think everyone is an idiot. Why would I even engage with you in the first place if I thought you were an idiot? If you think I think that then I suggest you examine your own sense of self-worth.

I think you are wrong in your beliefs about money creation, fundamentally and spectacularly wrong, and I have tried to explain, in as simple and entertaining a way as I can (which, I admit, is not very much of either at times) why I think so. Being wrong is not a sign of idiocy, no matter what you think. My thinking you are wrong is not an indication of my opinion of your overall character or intelligence.

Finally, this is the Political Thread and no place for thin skins or fragile egos.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 January, 2017, 08:46:14 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 January, 2017, 08:46:18 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 05 January, 2017, 06:31:01 PM

...I read quite a lot believe it or not.


Why would I not believe that? Why even say that if not to imply that I do not read or read inferior things or do not understand the things I read? I think it's a bit low to chuck out passive aggressive statements like that then cry your eyes out when they come back to bite you.

I don't need a summary of the bank scene from it's a wonderful life (and you call me condescending!) to understand what a run is. Sometimes it comes across like you think you are talking to idiots.

Simply because I'm trying to be clear, and keeping in mind that it's not just you reading this, does not mean I think everyone is an idiot. Why would I even engage with you in the first place if I thought you were an idiot? If you think I think that then I suggest you examine your own sense of self-worth.

I think you are wrong in your beliefs about money creation, fundamentally and spectacularly wrong, and I have tried to explain, in as simple and entertaining a way as I can (which, I admit, is not very much of either at times) why I think so. Being wrong is not a sign of idiocy, no matter what you think. My thinking you are wrong is not an indication of my opinion of your overall character or intelligence.

Finally, this is the Political Thread and no place for thin skins or fragile egos.
I said I read quite a lot because you implied I didnt read your link where as I had read the link and the connected article. Yet somehow, in your head, what I actually did was acuse you of not reading then cry my eyes out because of my fragile ego.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 January, 2017, 10:03:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 January, 2017, 08:29:35 PMOn the "any old text editor"/open source software thing, across at least six different PCs, I've found Openoffice to be far more reliable than Word, so I don't think Sharky's too far off the mark with his open source fruitopian fantasy idea about monopolies being threatened by crowd-sourced software at some future point - just not any time soon, and certainly not while people have access to perfectly functional copies of Photoshop/Illustrator.
I think it depends on various factors. With office-oriented apps, the reality is the majority of people even in professional circles use only a tiny number of the features. For most, the more basic apps can do the job, unless they're delving into very specific Excel functionality or certain editing features of Word. And at that point, you're talking about (like Illustrator) using a specific piece of software rather than a tier (because even the likes of Apple's suite won't be compatible enough). But in the creative filed, usage skews far more towards a large range of the less covered features, making such a transition much less likely.

Even so, Microsoft's shifted quite heavily of late towards a service model, and I see a lot of people in my industry getting sick of free/open alternatives for various reasons (such as Google Docs ronching insane resources for a web app, often bringing entire computers to a standstill). To my mind, writing is also one of those areas where we see a lot of genuinely healthy competition: on the Mac, there's iA Writer, Ulysses, Scrivener, Byword and a number of other products, all at varying price-tags and with a range of targets in mind. Word couldn't squash the competition, due to the nature of writing itself. On other areas – notably high-end creative fare – it's much easier for money to talk, and for companies to buy up all the competition, knowing that it's essentially impossible (or at least very, very unlikely) for a rival to ever emerge. Frankly, I'm slightly surprised Adobe never bought out Quark.

But then all this is where I run into a wall when it comes to leftie/libertarian thinking (despite being broadly in that area politically): I don't think this model can work in creative fields. On a more political sense, I had a discussion on Twitter about copyright recently. Back in 2015, the Greens had plans to radically overhaul copyright law (although seemingly had absolutely no understanding of how to make the ideas work internationally). The crux was to help creatives, at least ostensibly; but in reality their plans would have destroyed livelihoods, because they involved a much reduced term of copyright, after which point creations became public domain. They argued this would benefit creative people, by taking content from large corporations and making it available to all. This ignored individuals being able to profit from their work. The response I got from Greens was: "Well, creatives should just make something new then."

The bloke on Twitter still has this stance, arguing that copyright is an outdated concept and should just be done away with. He seems to have a similar line of thinking to Sharky about how people would broadly do the right thing, rewarding 'official' versions of content. I see such a model purely benefitting the rich – those with enough clout to get 'their' version of anything in front of enough people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 06 January, 2017, 01:35:46 PM
My god, I sign into this forum for the first time in two years and people are actually still trying to talk sense into Shark! I'd say it's like I'd never left, but Shark is two years more delusional.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 January, 2017, 02:19:33 PM
Hay Matt, good to see you again! happy New Year.

No political stories of any interest on your side of the pond these says though.... ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 06 January, 2017, 02:49:18 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 06 January, 2017, 02:19:33 PM
Hay Matt, good to see you again! happy New Year.

No political stories of any interest on your side of the pond these says though.... ;)

Hi Dan! How are you?!

Yeah...there have been a few things going on here. It's been...something else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 January, 2017, 08:51:55 PM
Hey, Locusts - good to see you again. This old place hasn't been the same without you and I'm glad you're back. Hope things have gone okay while you were away and that they get as good as they can be in 2017.

And don't worry about people talking sense into me - it's never gonna happen. The reason for this is that the Universe likes to have some fundamental (emphasis on the mental) constants to rely on!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 06 January, 2017, 10:51:19 PM
I pretty much gave up after Antarctic Elvis duck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 09:17:08 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 06 January, 2017, 08:46:14 AM

I said I read quite a lot because you implied I didn't read your link where as I had read the link and the connected article. Yet somehow, in your head, what I actually did was accuse you of not reading then cry my eyes out because of my fragile ego.



The second sentence in the overview of that BoE issued report reads, "Whenever a bank makes a loan, it simultaneously creates a matching deposit in the borrower's bank account, thereby creating new money." This is why I don't believe you when you claim to have read it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 09:36:27 AM
Third sentence, not second, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 10:40:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 09:17:08 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 06 January, 2017, 08:46:14 AM

I said I read quite a lot because you implied I didn't read your link where as I had read the link and the connected article. Yet somehow, in your head, what I actually did was accuse you of not reading then cry my eyes out because of my fragile ego.



The second sentence in the overview of that BoE issued report reads, "Whenever a bank makes a loan, it simultaneously creates a matching deposit in the borrower's bank account, thereby creating new money." This is why I don't believe you when you claim to have read it.

No I read it. In terms of say a personal loan, the money is still based on something. The person creating the debt is securing debt against future earnings. the bank then has the asset of that debt. although the bank has to cover the debt if asked it can also sell the debt as an asset. the asset being not only the original loan but the interest. The bank still has to verify the person can reasonably cover the loan and that it hasn't taken on more debt then can be covered by liquid assets. If the bank does not make sure of these things you get the 2008 crisis and the Icelandic bank crash.

This is one of the reasons Population growth is often linked to economic growth, new people represent new money. The is what allows people to access their future earning potential for things like Mortgages. the fact that the debt and if applicable the asset the debt is covering becomes the banks asset does not mean money is created out of nothing nor does it mean the bank can just create debt without real world repercussions/impact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 11:08:52 AM
I understand why you think what you think, and I consider you to be mistaken, just as you consider me to be mistaken. That's really the end of it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:03:52 PM
"The person creating the debt is securing debt against future earnings. the bank then has the asset of that debt."

The future does not exist. Future earnings do not exist. All they can ever be are projections or guesses. There is nothing tangible, nothing real, to base the money creation on. That is, by definition, creating money out of nothing. You can't strike a gold coin today out of metal you expect to dig up tomorrow. You can't eat a loaf of bread today that won't be baked until tomorrow.

Money is created out of nothing by a monopolistic banking cartel. This is not intrinsically a bad thing - anyone can create money out of nothing. If I wanted to buy something from you, and you trusted me, I could write you an IOU on the back of an old envelope or a beer mat, thus creating money (a medium of exchange) out of nothing more than a bit of paper and some ink. But what if I went through life doing nothing else but write IOUs? If you came to me to cash in your IOU and I just replaced it with another one, freshly written? I'd be locked up for fraud but, when bankers do it, it's somehow not fraud but business.

The one thing we do seem to agree on is that banks cannot create money out of nothing indefinitely without causing real world repercussions. In fact, the repercussions are all around us, the most obvious being the ongoing crises which began in earnest nine years ago and show no signs of abating.

I also understand why you believe what you believe - we've all grown up thinking that the banks are honest and trustworthy. But they aren't. It baffles me how so many people can decry and rail against big corporations and monopolies and yet still believe that big banks are somehow above it all, existing only to help people and make a little modest profit out of it. If only that were true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 12:09:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:03:52 PM
It baffles me how so many people can decry and rail against big corporations and monopolies and yet still believe that big banks are somehow above it all, existing only to help people and make a little modest profit out of it. If only that were true.

Who has said that on this thread? Quote someone, please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:21:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 12:09:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:03:52 PM
It baffles me how so many people can decry and rail against big corporations and monopolies and yet still believe that big banks are somehow above it all, existing only to help people and make a little modest profit out of it. If only that were true.

Who has said that on this thread? Quote someone, please.

Sorry, I meant in general, not specifically on this thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 12:29:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:03:52 PM
"The person creating the debt is securing debt against future earnings. the bank then has the asset of that debt."

The future does not exist. Future earnings do not exist. All they can ever be are projections or guesses. There is nothing tangible, nothing real, to base the money creation on. That is, by definition, creating money out of nothing. You can't strike a gold coin today out of metal you expect to dig up tomorrow. You can't eat a loaf of bread today that won't be baked until tomorrow.


you can however pay for a loaf of bread with work you will do tomorrow.

If you have given the loaf of bread to some one for the promise of work you can transfer that work for alternative goods or services. Trading a thing you have for a thing you need may take several steps.

A part of banking is about mitigating future risk against different kinds of assets. so not all of a banks assets are either investments, debt, or currency but a mixture.

Debt is both an asset and a risk. the quote you have interpreted ad money out of nothing I just see as double entry accounting.

If you inflated your earning, or the worth or your collateral to obtain a loan that would also currently be fraud. If you defaulted on loans you're credit rating would be such as to make future loans unlikely as you would be too high risk to lend to. You would find it tricky to pass off IOU's for ever as would a bank company or nation.

I'm not sire any one thinks banks exist only to help people and make a little modest profit out of it, I'm pretty sure bakers have never been popular.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 12:42:38 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 12:29:44 PM
You would find it tricky to pass off IOU's for ever as would a bank company or nation.

Notable exception: the US dollar. As the default currency for trading oil, the US has been able to print many billions of dollars for many decades, secure in the knowledge that those dollars will simply circulate round the international oil markets and never come within a thousand miles of a US bank. There's a quite persuasive argument that America's determination to crush Saddam Hussain was as much about his decision to trade Iraqi oil in Euros rather than dollars as anything else.

(It's interesting note the US's haste to endorse an abortive coup against Hugo Chavez a few years ago, given his decision to trade Venezuelan oil in Euros.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 January, 2017, 12:50:56 PM
QuoteIt baffles me how so many people can decry and rail against big corporations and monopolies and yet still believe that big banks are somehow above it all, existing only to help people and make a little modest profit out of it. If only that were true.

QuoteSorry, I meant in general, not specifically on this thread.

Not an opinion I've heard anyone express, ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 01:06:26 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 12:42:38 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 12:29:44 PM
You would find it tricky to pass off IOU's for ever as would a bank company or nation.

Notable exception: the US dollar. As the default currency for trading oil, the US has been able to print many billions of dollars for many decades, secure in the knowledge that those dollars will simply circulate round the international oil markets and never come within a thousand miles of a US bank. There's a quite persuasive argument that America's determination to crush Saddam Hussain was as much about his decision to trade Iraqi oil in Euros rather than dollars as anything else.

(It's interesting note the US's haste to endorse an abortive coup against Hugo Chavez a few years ago, given his decision to trade Venezuelan oil in Euros.)

yeah, it's tricky but not impossible and it could still bight America on the ass. The money is still created by the oil trade rather than thin air but there is a very real risk that the dollar could loose that trade thus loose value.  I suppose America would be shielded by the fact very little of that money makes it back into their system and they could channel it to international American banks (that would collapse if the stream evaporated)

I think it's hard to overstate how important regulation of the banking especially trading/investments sector is. The global economy is still relatively young and as such far more open to abuse then it will be in 50 or a hundred years time. (If we don't send the world back to the dark ages in the mean time)

banks/countries could build a pyramid scheme but they tend to collapse, and they are illegal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 01:11:34 PM
You can pay for a loaf of bread with anything the baker will accept. My point was not about loaves of bread and how to purchase them but about what is real and what is not.

You've been using IOUs as money for as long as you can remember. On every bank note it clearly states, "I promise to pay the bearer, on demand, the sum of X pounds." You take that note to a bank and try to cash it in and all you'll get is a replacement IOU.

Double-entry bookkeeping (considered fraud if anyone else does it) is the mechanism through which money is created out of nothing.

If debt were an asset, then banks should be falling over themselves to open accounts for people who already owe money - the more the better. Can you imagine going to a bank for a loan and trying to offer a million pound debt as security? You'd get laughed out of the building - but this is how banks do it. They are the only business entities which regularly claim debts as assets. It's like saying, "hey, we've extracted all the gold from this mine, leaving us with a big, empty hole in the ground, and now it's worth more than it was before we began mining." It's like saying an empty shop is worth more than a fully stocked one. Only in the smoke-and-mirrors world of banking does this kind of madness pass as sanity.

In many ways money has to be created out of nothing as it is not a naturally occurring substance (though naturally occurring substances can have values assigned to them and be used as money).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 01:13:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 12:21:31 PM
Sorry, I meant in general, not specifically on this thread.

So... given your general antipathy towards governments and the regulation of business, how do you propose to restrict the unethical behaviours of the banking establishment? Your base position seems to be: let everyone get on with it with as little regulation as possible and the the market will sort it out. Are you of the opinion that less regulation of the financial sector would lead to better outcomes?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 01:22:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 01:11:34 PM
of X pounds." You take that note to a bank and try to cash it in and all you'll get is a replacement IOU.

Double-entry bookkeeping (considered fraud if anyone else does it) is the mechanism through which money is created out of nothing.


The double entry system of accounting or bookkeeping means that every business transaction will involve two accounts (or more). For example, when a company borrows money from its bank, the company's Cash account will increase and its liability account Loans Payable will increase.

It's not fraud and you won't go to prison for it, whether you are a bank or an individual. it's a method of tracking outgoings and assets.

I think you are wrong in your understanding of how banking and wealth creation works in principle and I believe every subsequent point or argument you make is based on this mistake, thus inherently flawed. We are talking in circles because we cannot agree on our initial definition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 January, 2017, 01:46:41 PM
Quotehow do you propose to restrict the unethical behaviours of the banking establishment?

Jim, Jim, Jim... you clearly think like a statist.  It's not your faults. You've been brainwashed by the government.  The banks only act immorally because the government allows them to act immorrally.  If the government wasn't there to let them, they wouldn't. And if they did, market forces something something. 

New banks, running at less profit would appear or be kickstarted or something, funded by ordinary working people and providing a lower level of service, using cash the workers won't have because we've done away with legislated workers rights, because we don't need them because if people didn't want to be paid shit wages they would quit their jobs and set up their own companies something something invisible hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 02:05:13 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 01:13:15 PM

So... given your general antipathy towards governments and the regulation of business, how do you propose to restrict the unethical behaviours of the banking establishment? Your base position seems to be: let everyone get on with it with as little regulation as possible and the the market will sort it out. Are you of the opinion that less regulation of the financial sector would lead to better outcomes?


Let me turn that appeal to consequences argument around.

Given your general belief in governments and the regulation of business, how do you propose to restrict the ongoing unethical behaviours of the banking establishment? Your base position seems to be: let everyone do as they're told and the bankers and politicians will sort it out in an unbiased and widely beneficial way. Are you of the opinion that more in-house regulation of the financial sector and meddling by self-serving politicians will lead to better outcomes?

Quote from: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 01:22:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 01:11:34 PM
of X pounds." You take that note to a bank and try to cash it in and all you'll get is a replacement IOU.

Double-entry bookkeeping (considered fraud if anyone else does it) is the mechanism through which money is created out of nothing.


The double entry system of accounting or bookkeeping means that every business transaction will involve two accounts (or more). For example, when a company borrows money from its bank, the company's Cash account will increase and its liability account Loans Payable will increase.

It's not fraud and you won't go to prison for it, whether you are a bank or an individual. it's a method of tracking outgoings and assets.

I think you are wrong in your understanding of how banking and wealth creation works in principle and I believe every subsequent point or argument you make is based on this mistake, thus inherently flawed. We are talking in circles because we cannot agree on our initial definition.


The way double-entry bookkeeping works in everyday business is simple. Say I own a shop and sell you a bottle of pop for a quid. The entry in my stock ledger will decrease by one bottle and the entry in my cash ledger will increase by £1. This is the proper way to do it.

The way banks do it is different. Their cash ledger would go up by £1 and their stock ledger go down by one bottle. Then, in a second set of books, the empty space where the bottle was will be counted as an asset because there's room there for another bottle. It counts the space, the nothingness, as being something.

If one person puts £1,000 into a bank* and another person borrows £1,000, that bank's actual balance sheet is £0. However, the bank will claim to have £2,000 on its books. It will claim the £1,000 invested as an asset and also claim the £1,000 owed as an asset. Not only is the bank claiming assets it hasn't got but, thanks to the application of fractional reserve lending, it can lend out even more money based on that fraudulent £2,000. Money created from nothing.

I think the fact that you refer to wealth creation when we are talking about money creation is rather telling. Money is a medium of exchange, wealth is property and assets above and beyond the levels required for basic survival. Money is a part of wealth but wealth is not just money. This is fundamental stuff and if you don't know the difference between the two, or consider them fungible, then I suppose you're right when you say we're talking in circles.

*Imagining a vastly simplified bank with only two customers for clarity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 02:53:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 02:05:13 PM

Are you of the opinion that more in-house regulation of the financial sector and meddling by self-serving politicians will lead to better outcomes?

No, my position is that we need better politicians, ones who are not slavishly dedicated to the neoliberal economic agenda of the last thirty years that's got us into this mess in the first place. I'm of the opinion that the investment banks need to be decoupled from the retail ones, so that the financial institutions can't use the general public and small businesses as a human shield against the repercussions of their investment arms' ruthless gaming of the financial system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 03:43:25 PM
No there is nothing telling about my use of the word wealth, as I'm refering to your philosophy in general and not just money creation.

Even if I had used it in the previous convastion it would be a stretch to draw any kind implication.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 05:32:47 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 02:53:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 02:05:13 PM

Are you of the opinion that more in-house regulation of the financial sector and meddling by self-serving politicians will lead to better outcomes?

No, my position is that we need better politicians, ones who are not slavishly dedicated to the neoliberal economic agenda of the last thirty years that's got us into this mess in the first place. I'm of the opinion that the investment banks need to be decoupled from the retail ones, so that the financial institutions can't use the general public and small businesses as a human shield against the repercussions of their investment arms' ruthless gaming of the financial system.

Where are we going to find these "better politicians" to build your utopia for you? We seem to have been looking for them for an awfully long time and not found many, if any at all, so far. And even if these better people can be found and voted into power, what happens four years later when the usual suspects return to change things back again? How long should we be prepared to wait for some messiah to show up? How will we recognise this person when he or she does turn up? I really don't think that waiting for somebody to come along and fix everything for us is going to work - it's never worked yet and I see no reason why it should suddenly start working now.

Yes, investment and retail banks probably should be decoupled, but who's going to do that and how will it be done? The bankers will fight tooth and nail to keep things as they are and they have all the power. All they need do is threaten to leave Britain and the politicians will cack themselves. If that doesn't work, they can seize the monetary system up overnight and terrify people into not thinking such foolish thoughts. The banks want control over every single transaction, they want a percentage of every trade and gift you make. This is why, backed by their government poodles, they're trying to get rid of cash altogether so that you have to pay to use their digital systems. It's got nothing to do with terrorism or crime - it's about controlling the marketplace and increasing profits and absolutely cannot be done without government collusion.

Quote from: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 03:43:25 PM
No there is nothing telling about my use of the word wealth, as I'm refering to your philosophy in general and not just money creation.

Even if I had used it in the previous convastion it would be a stretch to draw any kind implication.

Now I'm confused. Do definitions matter or not? Money creation and wealth creation are not the same thing. Have I been talking about one thing while you've been talking about the other? Which one do you want to talk about? Or would you like to talk about the role banks play, or should play, in wealth creation? I don't think it's much of a stretch at all to draw the implication that you misunderstand basic economics if you regard wealth and banking as the same thing.

I've been talking about money creation. Wealth creation is a whole 'nother conversation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 08 January, 2017, 07:03:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 05:32:47 PM

Now I'm confused. Do definitions matter or not?

What I said was 'Even if I had used it in the previous convastion it would be a stretch to draw any kind implication.'

If you are having trouble with the use of a particular word by all means ask for clarification. basing assumptions on something you are unclear about without clarification will tell you nothing. In other words 'it would be a stretch to draw any kind implication.'

I'm genuinely unsure as to why I keep responding to you. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I get nothing from your replies and in pretty sure no one else is reading any of this. I think I need help.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2017, 07:27:34 PM
Indeed. There seems to be little point in continuing with an argument that goes, "money is created from nothing," "no it isn't."

The word Pythonesque springs to mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 08 January, 2017, 07:32:40 PM
in the 20th Century, we built a welfare state and the NHS.  We created a once proud public broadcasting organisation.  Would these things have spawned into existence naturally without a Government?

I understand and agree that the flood barrier of Government may have become corroded and weakened by contact with all that water of commerce, but if you think the answer is removing the flood barriers and letting the water spread and wash over us all so we can all learn to swim seems to where we part company LS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 January, 2017, 08:13:01 PM
"Companies will regulate themselves to gain market share, because by regulating companies the mafia of government have only empowered them.  Consumers will make moral decisions even when those decisions damage them financially, since people are generally good.  Our healthcare and education system can run effectively on charitable donations from kind hearted millionaires.  Small councils will spontaneously spawn to deal with disagreements, despite have no regulatory authority or overarching rules. Money isn't real.  Doing away with government will cause the collapse of the evil financial institutions, which people seem to think are entirely good because they've been brainwashed, who use this fictional money to enslave us.  This is not a utopia, and I've never claimed it is."

"Or, we could elect some decent politicians..."

"Absurd!  Where on earth would we find such people to build this utopian vision of society?!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 January, 2017, 09:05:40 PM
I love the idea that Shark thinks that completely restructuring the entire political and economic system of the whole world is a more realistic ideal than supporting a left wing politician and trying to get them elected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 January, 2017, 12:13:07 AM
You don't understand, Jim: people won't vote for left wing politicians.

The BBC have found that its political editor - who recently used the BBC website to publish a love letter to Theresa May (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37308850) - deliberately edited footage of an interview with Jeremy Corbyn to make it appear that he was answering a question other than the one he had been asked: specifically, he was asked if he believed that police in the UK should operate on an indiscriminate Shoot To Kill basis, but the question was edited for broadcast to make it appear that his answer was in response to the question if police should be allowed to shoot at rampaging terrorists such as those who had (then-recently) attacked Paris.  The BBC have said there was "no evidence of any intent to deceive or distort." (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/laura-kuenssberg-bbc-political-editor-jeremy-corbyn-bbc-row-impartiality-a7514581.html)
Which is presumably why they've sent their own report back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 07:00:29 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 08 January, 2017, 07:32:40 PM
in the 20th Century, we built a welfare state and the NHS.  We created a once proud public broadcasting organisation.  Would these things have spawned into existence naturally without a Government?

I understand and agree that the flood barrier of Government may have become corroded and weakened by contact with all that water of commerce, but if you think the answer is removing the flood barriers and letting the water spread and wash over us all so we can all learn to swim seems to where we part company LS!

Government also gave us industrialised warfare, concentration camps and a world full of nuclear weapons, amongst other things.

I don't deny that government has had a hand in some good things but it's also spawned a lot which we can do without. I really don't believe that places like Auschwitz and events like the nuking of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the genocide of Native Americans and the subjugation of homosexuals are the price we have to pay for the NHS, space exploration and the BBC - and I doubt anyone else does, either.

Nor do I think everything must be, or even can be, changed overnight. The process should take decades and go hand in hand with education and experimentation - as happens all the time anyway. The core of my argument is that government has too much power and that is wields this power mainly to maintain its own position. Governments are intrinsically violent, greedy and dishonest, no matter who leads them. This is all that needs to change. The only thing I want everyone to have is the right to say "no."

Yet this seems to be interpreted as the obligation to say no. The obligation to say no to progress, the NHS, education and the BBC. The right to say no somehow seems to translate as "let's throw away everything we've learned and built in the last 2,000 years and go back to living in mud huts," which is plainly ridiculous. I think this might be why so many people bring up this fallacy*, because it's easy to argue against instead of thinking about what the limits of one human being's power over another should be.

Maybe every "intelligent" species in the universe goes through a Government Phase as they evolve, and maybe only the dumbest ones do, or the smartest, who knows? Waiting for the perfect person to come along and fix everything for us is daft. Christians have been waiting for that very thing for two thousand years instead of taking responsibility for their own souls. Statists have been waiting for the perfect ruler for just as long, and even longer, instead of taking responsibility for their own freedoms and obligations.

If you (this is the royal you, not a specific individual) want to be ruled, if you want to be told what to do and how to act by people you detest, then go for it - that's your choice. But do you have the right to force other people, people you've never met and know nothing about, to bow alongside you? The biggest difference between us seems to be that I don't believe I have the right to tell you how to live or who to obey but you seem to think it's your duty to do so - even if you don't like or believe whomever it is you expect me to unquestioningly obey. Instead of addressing this kind of point, many people say, "I can't possibly accept this because it will lead to [insert preferred souped-up doomsday scenario here]."

I know that we can do better than we are doing and I think the removal of government's coercive, monopolistic powers is one of the biggest tasks we have to achieve.


*It's actually generally one of two logical fallacies; appeal to consequence and appeal to ridicule. Panth is particularly good at combining the two into an appeal to ridiculous consequences, which is why his posts are amusing and entertaining but ultimately devoid of any real argumentation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 January, 2017, 09:41:41 AM
I'm sorry that you find me quoting you back to you, often using the same words, to be devoid of argument.

I believe that government exists, in principle, to protect the weak from the strong.  The issue with people being able to remove themselves from the authority of government is that the people who would choose to do that would in all likelihood be the strongest.  If they decide to take their abundant resources and go live in their metaphorically gated communities, writing their own rules to their own benefit, the rest of us suffer.  They will not regulate themselves and the market will not control them.

To demonize state authoritarianism while ignoring identical albeit contract-consecrated subservient arrangements in the large-scale corporations which control the world economy is fetishism at its worst.

I agree entirely that government, especially of the last few decades, has failed in its duties to protect ordinary people - usually because they have spent more time empowering the already powerful.  They have systematically removed the rules that keep us safe.

Recent events show us that removing yourself from the system, simply saying "this is not my government, they do not represent me nor have authority over me" doesn't improve the system but rather makes it entirely worse.  When the Labour party decided it didn't need to appeal to the working class any more, hundreds of thousands of people stopped voting, which lead to the rise of the far right and the uncaring and unrepresentative government we have now.  When both Democrats and Republicans stopped working for the American working class (who have been fooled into thinking they don't exist), we see the rise of Trump and his hateful ilk. 

Yes, government has done terrible things in our name.  We allowed them or stopped paying attention.  If the power structures were different - if unregulated corporations were the most powerful authority - I have no doubt that wars would continue to be waged under corporate logos rather than national flags.

Yes, you can quit your job, but you still need a job, and the company you work for will give you more "or else" demands in a week that the government will give you in a year.  More still without the legislated rights, delivered by governments answerable to their people, which protect us and make us stronger. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 09:53:24 AM
So, does all that mean you agree government is coercive, or not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 January, 2017, 10:42:03 AM
Yes.

Government is coercive.  It coerces people into following laws like not speeding through residential areas or smoking in public places.  It coerces people into paying taxes to pay for health and education. 

Sometimes its coercion is dangerous.  It coerces people into war, it misuses our money and sticks its nose into our lives.

It comes to us every four years and tries to coerce us into voting for it.  And of we feel its gone too far, if we've been paying attention, we can change it. 

Oil companies coerce us too.  They work together to force up prices, coercing us to make them richer.  They insidiously integrate themselves into our government.  The corece us into war and humanitarian disasters.  They make their products indispensable.

But they not going to come to us at any point to ask our opinion.  I have to buy a vote, using money I don't have, and doing that only makes them richer.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 11:42:40 AM
And what is your attitude towards coercion?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 January, 2017, 12:14:06 PM
That it is sometimes necessary for the greater good.  That those who use coersion for the greater good should be held to account, and that rules and established structures are required to ensure this.  Representative democracy isn't perfect, but it has brought us the most stable, healthiest and wealthiest society in history.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 12:32:10 PM
I agree, broadly, with the first half of what you say. I think coercion can be justified in extreme situations, for example the enforced quarantining of persons infected with a deadly disease, but even then the coercion has to go hand in hand with humane treatment.

I don't agree with the second part at all. The 20th Century was probably the bloodiest, most war-torn and unequal period in all human history - though if we're not careful the 21st might turn out even worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 January, 2017, 01:19:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 12:32:10 PM
The 20th Century was probably the bloodiest, most war-torn and unequal period in all human history - though if we're not careful the 21st might turn out even worse.

Except that the idea that the 20th C was any of those things has been robustly challenged, particularly when absolute numbers of violent deaths are viewed as a proportion of world population . And the other side of the see-saw, improvements in health, longevity, education, suffrage, leisure time, gender and racial equality, are absolutely unmatched in any other period.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 January, 2017, 01:25:10 PM
An interesting infographic from the data is beautiful people.

http://www.lumibyte.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/major-causes-of-death-infographic.jpg (http://www.lumibyte.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/major-causes-of-death-infographic.jpg)

The 20th century saw more than three times as many people die of smallpox than through war.

People don't die of smallpox anymore.  Governments forced people to be vaccinated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 01:40:04 PM
So, all those gassed Jews and vapourised Japanese don't really count because they were just a statistical blip?

That's monstrous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 01:45:51 PM
Utterly reprehensible. Reported.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 January, 2017, 01:52:19 PM
Yes, that's exactly what I said.  Well done.  Gather round everyone, Sharky has revealed me as a hateful monster for pointing out that more people died of a now eradicated disease than in war.

Your argument was that the 20th century was the most bloody in history, due in large part to the rise of democratically elected government which have done more harm than good.

That argument is wrong. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 09 January, 2017, 02:02:20 PM
We generally operate with a light hand on this thread. However, recent posts have started to become a concern. Please spend extra time considering the content of your comments before posting them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 02:22:07 PM
I would respectfully suggest that drawing equivalence between another poster's difference of opinion with you and indifference to the Holocaust is the specific outlier here, even by the standards of the Political Thread. This is not a case everyone needing to play nicely, it's a case of Legendary Shark needing to take a long hard look in the mirror if he thought for one second that his post was acceptable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: locustsofdeath! on 09 January, 2017, 02:37:45 PM
Shark's post is a common internet argument tactic:

"He proved me wrong, so instead of accepting that I'll vilify him."

It goes like this: two people argue, one person wins the argument, the other person makes a crazy leap like "YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST!"

Later, others skimming the conversation key in on the very short and to the point (if crazy) accusation and that becomes real - Shark looks good (and therefore must be right) because Modern Panther doesn't care about certain atrocities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 02:57:28 PM
Unbelievable.

I challenge the idea that something like the Holocaust can be offset by something like vaccination, as if it's just a numbers game, and I'm the bad guy?

Every human life is precious, every single one, and I will not apologise for believing that nor forgive the millions taken in the name of government - in the name of anything.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 09 January, 2017, 03:00:33 PM
http://nypost.com/2017/01/07/marvel-executive-set-to-join-trumps-veterans-affairs-staff/ (http://nypost.com/2017/01/07/marvel-executive-set-to-join-trumps-veterans-affairs-staff/)
Ike Perlmutter joins the Trump administration.Im not all that surprised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 03:03:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 02:57:28 PM
Unbelievable.

Yes. You are. You've crossed a line, Shark. Doubling down on the stupidity and adding some faux outrage into the bargain over a reprehensible position you invented and attributed to another poster simply because they disagreed with you isn't helping.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 03:17:22 PM
"...when absolute numbers of violent deaths are viewed as a proportion of world population."

Invented?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 03:21:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 03:17:22 PM
Invented?

"Wilfully misinterpreted", if it makes you feel any better about yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 03:41:54 PM
I feel just fine about myself, thank you. Not that it has anything to do with the argument. Still, if that's all you've got...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 January, 2017, 03:46:26 PM
Meanwhile, in politics, Theresa May has caused another currency nosedive by indicating that the UK is likely to exit the single market.

Personally, I welcome this. The fiction that we're going to get some kind of favourable deal - or any kind of deal - has been underpinning Brexiteer claptrap for years. It's about time this was exploded.

The sooner the reality of EU exit is laid bare, the sooner we can have a second referendum and end this nightmare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2017, 04:01:33 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 January, 2017, 03:46:26 PM
Meanwhile, in politics, Theresa May has caused another currency nosedive by indicating that the UK is likely to exit the single market.

Personally, I welcome this. The fiction that we're going to get some kind of favourable deal - or any kind of deal - has been underpinning Brexiteer claptrap for years. It's about time this was exploded.

The sooner the reality of EU exit is laid bare, the sooner we can have a second referendum and end this nightmare.

I really doubt that will happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 January, 2017, 04:04:03 PM
And Martin McGuinness has resigned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38561507 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38561507)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 January, 2017, 04:06:49 PM
Quote from: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 January, 2017, 03:46:26 PM
Meanwhile, in politics, Theresa May has caused another currency nosedive by indicating that the UK is likely to exit the single market.

Personally, I welcome this. The fiction that we're going to get some kind of favourable deal - or any kind of deal - has been underpinning Brexiteer claptrap for years. It's about time this was exploded.

The sooner the reality of EU exit is laid bare, the sooner we can have a second referendum and end this nightmare.

Doesn't matter. For it make any difference: people would have had of voted for economic reasons, they would have to accept they were wrong, and they would have to change their mind.

Check any comments thread on any news story and you'll find any number of Brexit supporters dismissing any and all bad news as 're-moaner' whinging.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 09 January, 2017, 04:14:30 PM
It's either a second referendum on leaving the EU now, or a first referendum on joining the EU later.

At some point enough of the outers will die off that the demographic balance will swing back the right way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 04:17:45 PM
The financial repercussions will be very slow – and that's the problem. Prices are rising now, but it's not impacted that heavily on people. It's when Brexit causes prices to spike after we actually leave that at least some people will – privately at least – be thinking: well, shit.

From what I see now, there's basically no chance of anything sensible coming out of this. We'll be in for a hard Brexit and probably 10+ years of hardship, for no obvious benefits. And I still don't even know whether I'll be able to stay in the country of my birth (and my kid's birth) with my own family, so that's just fucking peachy.

As for rejoining the EU, I can't see that happening. We wouldn't get the deal we have now – we'd have to join with the Euro and Schengen and that would swing a lot of people in the direction of nope. What so many people fail to realise is we have a pretty good deal now. Many EU institutions are based on British law. We got a number of major opt-outs. And yet when push comes to shove, we throw it all back in the EU's face, so we can strive for a better time that never existed, ignoring the UK's post-Empire position as the poor man of Europe before joining the EU and becoming far more prosperous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2017, 04:31:15 PM
The next referendum will be the general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 09 January, 2017, 04:31:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 04:17:45 PM
The financial repercussions will be very slow – and that's the problem. Prices are rising now, but it's not impacted that heavily on people. It's when Brexit causes prices to spike after we actually leave that at least some people will – privately at least – be thinking: well, shit.

Lego's gone up 10% already :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2017, 04:40:51 PM
Am I unpatatriotic for sincerely thinking a second Scottish independence referendum is well in order?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 January, 2017, 04:44:40 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2017, 04:40:51 PM
Am I unpatatriotic for sincerely thinking a second Scottish independence referendum is well in order?

I think staying in Europe was a big part of the better together message. (as was further devolution)

Independence wouldn't guarantee Scotland's European Union membership, but remaining in the union looks a lot like it would guarantee not being part of the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 January, 2017, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 03:17:22 PM
"...when absolute numbers of violent deaths are viewed as a proportion of world population."

Invented?

Just to clarify, lest I be thought an unfeeling monster,  by what metric would you suggest we evaluate the claim that the 20th C was the "bloodiest" etc. century?  A smaller proportion of people died a violent death in the 20th C than in about half the centuries of the last 1000 years, whereas hugely greater number (in absolute and proportional terms) enjoyed the benefits previously listed.

Awful, awful things happened, but in aggregate things got better. Would you rather have been born of random gender, race, orientation ,religion and locale in 1300, 1500, 1700 or 1900 - or 2000 for that matter? I think the answer is obvious, maybe you don't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 05:51:58 PM
I don't think you're an unfeeling monster, Tordels, far from it.

In the interests of board harmony, I'm dropping this subject. I don't enjoy seeing things the way I see them and it's apparent that few people, if any, are interested in my perspective - which is all it is; my perspective.

Read into this what you will but I'm drawing a line under it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 06:09:54 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2017, 04:40:51 PM
Am I unpatatriotic for sincerely thinking a second Scottish independence referendum is well in order?
Nope. Westminster seems to be doing its level best to say it'll fashion a Brexit for everyone and then telling Scotland to get fucked. So indie 2 will happen, but most likely not until the UK's left the EU. (Scotland would, I suspect, get into EFTA reasonably easily. The EU would be somewhat tougher.)

As for prices, I hadn't noticed that about Lego. Wish I'd bought the Brick Bank in JL at £110 now. Bah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 06:36:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 05:51:58 PM
Read into this what you will but I'm drawing a line under it.

"I'm definitively wrong and have made myself look like a total c*nt in the process of trying to deny this, so I'd like to talk about something else now."

YMMV.

Not even the first time this has happened, but a new low in terms of mis-characterising those who disagree with you, even for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 January, 2017, 06:37:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 05:51:58 PM
Read into this what you will but I'm drawing a line under it.

Fair enough Sharky, but your perspective is always welcome with me, however much I may disagree with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 07:12:42 PM

Thanks, Tordels. It's good to know there are some people here who realise that entertaining an argument is not the same as accepting it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 January, 2017, 07:19:51 PM
The worst thing about the whole Brexit scenario is that it has done so much damage to the political process.  Allowing the rise of pretty unsavoury types that operate by scaremongering and distortion and sidelining reasoned debate.  By the time this fully plays out they will have scarpered off back into the old dark holes that they infested, leaving those who believed them to deal with the fallout.

It would be nice to think that everything is going to be rosy and that all of the predictions about fantastic opportunities will come true.  That said, I would also like a Unicorn.

To top it all off the White House now has a socially maladjusted teenager in residence and Boris the clown is off to make nice with him for our benefit.  Is it time to stock up on the tinned goods yet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 07:57:32 PM
Brexit and Trump essentially gave racists and xenophobes an excuse to spout their hideous thinking and label those opposed to it as snowflakes, while repositioning the term 'politically correct' as something overtly negative. Meanwhile, as you say, the political process has been thrown out, and anything left of the middle-right does not understand how to deal with it. Outright bullshit is now fine, as is constantly rewriting history. No-one is held to account.

With Brexit, apparently the £350m for the NHS was "just an idea", obviously, and yet anyone voting in favour was also voting in favour of quitting the single market and customs union, obviously. Brexit has become like extremist Christians referencing the Bible – you take the bits you want as sacrosanct and ignore the rest. Meanwhile, anyone but the very rich will be royally screwed, especially the regions who voted in favour. (If anyone thinks the Tories are going to give a flying shit about Wales and the North-East, given the kicking Labour will get at the next GE, they've got another thing coming. Matching EU spending? Yeah, right. And I'd bloody hate to be a farmer now. Agriculture in the UK is going to be destroyed.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 08:04:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 07:57:32 PM
And I'd bloody hate to be a farmer now. Agriculture in the UK is going to be destroyed.

Particularly alarming, given that we already import over a third of all our food, and Sterling is going to be devalued still further in the event of Brexit (given that it's over-valued and insulated in large part by being the de facto reserve currency of Europe, thanks to the UK being in Europe, but outside the Euro). A non-trivial chunk of the UK population is already struggling to put food on the table... a substantial hike in food prices is hardly likely to help that situation...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 08:14:05 PM
Pre-Brexit estimates mostly put Sterling's low after leaving at $1.20. That's one cent lower than where it's already fallen to. Last I looked, people aren't even talking about parity any more – they reckon Sterling will be worth less than a dollar by the time this is done. In effect, food, fuel and everything else will be a third or more pricier, and in return we'll have got fuck all.

Still, I might be somewhere else by then, trying to figure out how to start a new life in Ireland, or grappling with Swedish or Danish.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2017, 08:33:48 PM
Inflation up:- down to Brexit. Sterling down:- down to Brexit.
Unemployment down:- we've not left yet. Interest rates down:- we've not left yet.
Employment up:- we've not left yet. House prices steady:- we've not left yet.
Wages up:- we've not left yet. Economy growing:- we've not left yet.
Stock market booming:- we've not left yet.

Ice caps melting:- down to Bre........
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 January, 2017, 08:36:45 PM
Nice bit of straw manning their, Tankers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 09:44:15 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 06:36:40 PM

"I'm definitively wrong and have made myself look like a total c*nt in the process of trying to deny this, so I'd like to talk about something else now."

YMMV.

Not even the first time this has happened, but a new low in terms of mis-characterising those who disagree with you, even for you.

More name calling, Jim? Tell me, were you a bully at school?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 09:44:15 PM
More name calling, Jim? Tell me, were you a bully at school?

I didn't accuse anyone of being indifferent to the Holocaust, Hiroshima or Nagasaki just because they disproved my rather shaky rhetorical point. You don't get the moral high ground on this one, Mark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 09 January, 2017, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2017, 08:33:48 PM
Inflation up:- down to Brexit. Sterling down:- down to Brexit.
Unemployment down:- we've not left yet. Interest rates down:- we've not left yet.
Employment up:- we've not left yet. House prices steady:- we've not left yet.
Wages up:- we've not left yet. Economy growing:- we've not left yet.
Stock market booming:- we've not left yet.

Ice caps melting:- down to Bre........

Fair comment,there is a lot of conformation bias on both sides.

Every mention of Brexit has had a direct effect on the value of the pound, and the stock market and economy may actually be experiencing a short term gain as a sort of fire sale takes place... but I would say that as a remain voter. However a leave support could say Brexit hasn't happened yet and the pound will bounce back when it does, and the economy will not crash.

I don't think either side predominately voted because they thought it was the best thing for the economy, so both are just looking for proof that the other has made a terrible tangible mistake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 12:52:47 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2017, 09:56:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2017, 09:44:15 PM
More name calling, Jim? Tell me, were you a bully at school?

I didn't accuse anyone of being indifferent to the Holocaust, Hiroshima or Nagasaki just because they disproved my rather shaky rhetorical point. You don't get the moral high ground on this one, Mark.

See, I didn't accuse anyone of that either, as you well know, but don't think such things can be diminished through the application of statistics. Governments kill people, that's my point, as you also well know - or would if you were paying attention. But you can't accept this idea as you are a statist, nor can you disprove, mitigate or defend it, so what's left? Name calling, of course!

You always end up calling people names, don't you, James? How many times is this for you now? "I don't like what you say, therefore you're a c*nt."  It must be depressing to be trapped in a shackled mind incapable of producing or processing an original thought, a mind incapable of recognising its own hypocrisy (government is divine but gives us evil Brexit, evil politicians, evil laws and supports evil businesses - but hey, if we keep doing the same things over and over again, keep elevating the most egregious people we can find, keep allowing our money to be used to buy bullets and bombs, keep putting up with the empty promises and lies, keep paying attention to the vacuous rhetoric, keep being taken in by the blatant fallacies,
keep watching the political floor show instead of looking backstage, keep doing what we're told by people we detest and distrust, keep being scared of terrorists, keep watching the banks and corporations getting what they want while the rest of us can go hang, keep listening to billionaires telling us to tighten our belts, keep watching as our forests and farmlands get fracced, keep allowing our hospitals, schools and services to be eroded, keep waiting for the Messiah of Government to turn up and save us, keep mistaking organisation for government, keep being afraid of the state, keep bestowing rights and powers we don't have on lunatics who don't deserve them, keep our heads down and our arses up, keep believing in the unbelievable  - then, someday and somehow, it's all going to miraculously start working properly and we'll all be saved). It's utter madness. This monstrous thing called government, no matter what it claims to be or claims credit for, bullies you and steals from you and you love it, as if transfixed by Stockholm Syndrome. As if all the behaviours you find reprehensible in individual human beings are somehow made tolerable, or even elevated to virtues, when displayed by ordinary people who happen to win a pointless and rigged popularity contest every four or five years. It's insane and you know it is - but you can't admit that because you've invested so much in this insanity already that all you can think to do is save face by continually betting on the same numbers and bullying anyone who disagrees.

Were you a bully at school? Or were you bullied? Whichever you were seems to have stripped you of all sense of decorum and left you with the idea that all you have to do is parrot whatever you happen to have heard on Question Time or Any Answers or read in the Daily Mail and pass it off as your own considered opinion, calling anyone who doesn't agree with your comfortable little borrowed views a c*nt, when your comfortable little borrowed views have little or no foundation in reality.

This, to you, is the moral high ground? Come off it, it's all based on fear - the fear of children contemplating being separated from their parents. Who will look after me if my mummy and daddy won't? It's pathetic.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 10 January, 2017, 02:44:41 AM
(Looks at this thread)

(Looks at threadjacking thread)

(Looks back at this thread)

Mmm-hmm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 06:41:16 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2017, 07:57:32 PM
Meanwhile, anyone but the very rich will be royally screwed, especially the regions who voted in favour. (If anyone thinks the Tories are going to give a flying shit about Wales and the North-East, given the kicking Labour will get at the next GE, they've got another thing coming. Matching EU spending? Yeah, right. And I'd bloody hate to be a farmer now. Agriculture in the UK is going to be destroyed.)

Aye, here in the South Wales Valleys it has been interesting considering the amount of EU funding that gets thrown this way considering the pockets of poverty around here.  That said Cardiff Bay County Borough Council (Sorry, the Welsh Assembly) has done a particularly poor job in its use so it doesn't always look like anything is being done by the EU.  Corus closed in Ebbw Vale.  Rather than using funds to regenerate the local economy and develop jobs in the community they spent it on a single track rail line to Cardiff.  Blaenau Gwent has some of the highest levels of unemployment in the valleys now and that is saying something.  Improvements to the Heads of the Valleys have come 10 years too late.  As you say, bit like Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 January, 2017, 11:42:46 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 January, 2017, 08:33:48 PM
Inflation up:- down to Brexit. Sterling down:- down to Brexit.
Unemployment down:- we've not left yet. Interest rates down:- we've not left yet.
Employment up:- we've not left yet. House prices steady:- we've not left yet.
Wages up:- we've not left yet. Economy growing:- we've not left yet.
Stock market booming:- we've not left yet.

Ice caps melting:- down to Bre........
People will cherry pick, but Sterling is down due to the markets freaking out about uncertainty and that's leading to price increases across the board. Employment is doing fairly well, although you'd have to delve into the TYPE of employment to see whether that's beneficial. Figures suggest a lot of people may be 'employed' but not to the point they can actually support themselves. They're just not counted as unemployed.

That we're seeing ~5% price rises when we haven't even left yet is worrying, since that was the commonplace guess after we'd left. It seems Sterling still has a long way to slide, and even optimistic Brexiters are saying there could be a decade of turmoil. That's probably OK if you're in a secure job, with savings, and the means to make cuts that won't adversely affect your life. It's not so great if you're already living from paycheque to paycheque, with nothing you can sell, and perhaps relying on foodbanks to not go hungry (foodbank use having skyrocketed in recent years).


Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 06:41:16 AMThat said Cardiff Bay County Borough Council (Sorry, the Welsh Assembly) has done a particularly poor job in its use so it doesn't always look like anything is being done by the EU.
Yeah, I don't doubt funds have been used poorly a lot of the time, but at least they are there. (From what I saw during the Brexit campaign, it was also very rare that people had any idea EU-funded things were funded by the EU. That tends to be clearer on the mainland.)

QuoteAs you say, bit like Turkeys voting for Christmas.
England was always going to vote out, bar London, and Scotland was always going to vote in. But Wales was the big surprise for me. Wales elects Labour or Plaid Cymru for the most part, so you do wonder whether this government will give a crap about Wales. (The Conservatives could lose all 11 Welsh MPs and it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.) Mind you, everyone seemed to act all surprised post-vote when it was revealed existing funding levels couldn't be guaranteed beyond 2020 or even at all. (See also: Cornwall; the North-East; the agriculture industry...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 04:08:35 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 06:41:16 AM
Rather than using funds to regenerate the local economy and develop jobs in the community they spent it on a single track rail line to Cardiff.

They would argue that they did the latter to achieve the former.

What do you think they should have spent money on? It's easy to create subsidised, uneconomic jobs but that's not a long term solution. Business relies on transport links so it's not uncommon for regeneration to involve investment in roads and railways.

I do think the Welsh voters were shooting themselves in the foot though . I saw an interview with some locals moaning about how deprived their area is and how Europe has never done anything for them - all filmed outside a huge leisure centre that had a big sign explaining how it was built with European money
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 04:20:38 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 04:08:35 PM

What do you think they should have spent money on?


Hookers and crack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 January, 2017, 04:50:18 PM
I wonder how many of the locals could afford to use that leisure centre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 05:17:18 PM
The locals interviewed obviously didn't think the leisure centre was for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 January, 2017, 05:53:12 PM
I saw one of those interviews. It was like Life of Brain.

Oh, well, yes, but apart from the leisure centre...
Well, the leisure centre and [something else]...

...

Well, sure. But apart from [long list], what has the EU ever done for us? *embarrassed expression*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 06:01:53 PM
so we don't want evil Europeans taunting us with their state of the art leisure facilities, we don't want the local council improving railway links to attract business ....What DO we want?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:06:49 PM
You give me a tenner and I'll give you a fiver back, that's a great deal for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 10 January, 2017, 06:12:42 PM
The big issues like passport colours and stamps on pint glasses according to Paul Nuttall.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukips-paul-nuttall-accused-insulting-9592280 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukips-paul-nuttall-accused-insulting-9592280)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 January, 2017, 06:14:53 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:06:49 PM
You give me a tenner and I'll give you a fiver back, that's a great deal for you.
Your anecdote is not a statement of fact. Let's try that again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 06:15:08 PM
I can't believe nobody's done the "what's a Welsh leisure centre?" joke yet...

It's almost as if offensive racial stereotyping was a thing of the past!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 10 January, 2017, 06:38:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.

I beleive we would get £6.66 back from our £10 (or thereabouts) but your point remains on a National scale... what would be more interesting would be to see Region by Region how much money is given to the EU and how much money is given - I suspect that London would be closer to that "give a tenner get a fiver" and some areas would be at least as well of- ironically, London voting to stay, with the poorer regions  that may well actually benefit voting to leave..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 January, 2017, 06:44:58 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 10 January, 2017, 06:38:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.

I beleive we would get £6.66 back from our £10 (or thereabouts)

Is that taking into account the cost of the EU services we use and the funds we could access but don't? 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 January, 2017, 06:46:27 PM
All discussion and deflection aside, I trusted you with a tenner and you did this with it.
(http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=2Y)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 January, 2017, 06:49:29 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.

I think it would be amazing if we gave £10 to the EU and got nothing back because our country was so free of poverty and had such a good infrastructure that we just didn't need it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:54:09 PM
But we are not so why give the tenner in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 January, 2017, 06:55:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.

In the same way that I'm a net contributor to every club, journal or service I subscribe to. But I do it because I receive non-financial benefits that outweigh the cost. Anything else is a pyramid scheme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 January, 2017, 07:00:13 PM
Why give at all? why try to make the world a better place? why try to improve the quality of life for every one?

Probably the simplest answer is the EU were, for a long time, able to sell the advantages of the EU to the rich over it's 'generosity'. It has been worth more to those giving the tenner to give it than not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:06:49 PM
You give me a tenner and I'll give you a fiver back, that's a great deal for you.

the fiver/tenner argument is irrelevant - so assuming that by not sending money to EU to be sent back to us in project funding, let's say the UK/Welsh government are spending it directly - if leisure centres and rail links are useless, how would YOU spend all this Brexit windfall to regenerate S Wales?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 07:23:41 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 04:08:35 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 06:41:16 AM
Rather than using funds to regenerate the local economy and develop jobs in the community they spent it on a single track rail line to Cardiff.

They would argue that they did the latter to achieve the former.

What do you think they should have spent money on? It's easy to create subsidised, uneconomic jobs but that's not a long term solution. Business relies on transport links so it's not uncommon for regeneration to involve investment in roads and railways.


Maybe in the short term with the longer term view of growing a local economy, keeping money and talent in the community and giving kids a future that doesn't involve leaving their homes?  Granted effective communication links are essential for a modern economy.  This is why Beeching has to be the greatest act of political vandalism of the post war era in Britain.  We are now reaping the benefits of that decision.  Having said that, what was put in has clearly been shown to be anything but a long term solution.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 06:15:08 PM
I can't believe nobody's done the "what's a Welsh leisure centre?" joke yet...

It's almost as if offensive racial stereotyping was a thing of the past!

Still considered appropriate when it comes to the Welsh for some reason.  I know its a bit dated but think of all the old Blackadder references.  There was also a run on the West Wing of anti Welsh sentiment for some strange reason.  Never did get that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:25:59 PM
I didn't say the leisure centre or the rail links were useless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 07:32:58 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 07:20:04 PM

...how would YOU spend all this Brexit windfall to regenerate S Wales?


Machine gun nests to keep the English out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 January, 2017, 07:35:39 PM
That's why the Severn Crossing only has charges one way.  No one wants to pay to go to England.   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 07:36:50 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:25:59 PM
I didn't say the leisure centre or the rail links were useless.


Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 05:17:18 PM
The locals interviewed obviously didn't think the leisure centre was for them.

okay let me rephrase that:

So what WOULD be for them assuming we can stop those evil European dictators giving us squash courts that we don't want?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:45:53 PM
I didn't say anything about evil European dictators either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 January, 2017, 07:57:09 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 January, 2017, 06:55:17 PMIn the same way that I'm a net contributor to every club, journal or service I subscribe to. But I do it because I receive non-financial benefits that outweigh the cost.
This. But also beyond this, because membership fees provide full access to a massive market of people, eradicate rules of origin for manufacturers, enable Brits to punch well above their weight in sciences, and many more things besides.

The argument I heard from Leavers is akin to Tankie's: we give them a tenner and get a fiver back! Retainers  went with: we give them a tenner and get considerably more back (values varying depending on the person saying it). The real issue is that when we leave, we won't have the tenner to send anyway, because we'll be poorer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:45:53 PM
I didn't say anything about evil European dictators either.

Oh forget it. I've obviously misinterpreted every one of your pearls of wisdom and can't be arsed trying to wheedle out what you actually ARE saying. Easier to just post snarky comments about what infrastructure and regeneration have been provided rather than actually discuss the subject constructively. I wwas trying to encourage some ideas about what SHOULD be done to regenerate south Wales, whether in or out of Europe, but let's have a traditional Brexit pedantry contest instead..

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 09:30:04 PM
Hang on, I am happy to have a good discussion with you but don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2017, 09:40:23 PM
To regenerate South Wales: Allow a free market.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 January, 2017, 09:43:46 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:45:53 PM
I didn't say anything about evil European dictators either.

Oh forget it. I've obviously misinterpreted every one of your pearls of wisdom and can't be arsed trying to wheedle out what you actually ARE saying. Easier to just post snarky comments about what infrastructure and regeneration have been provided rather than actually discuss the subject constructively. I wwas trying to encourage some ideas about what SHOULD be done to regenerate south Wales, whether in or out of Europe, but let's have a traditional Brexit pedantry contest instead..
Tanks doesn't debate. He takes a hit and run technique that reveals nothing about what he thinks and very little about what he doesn't think, then plays the victim card. Rinse and repeat, none of us will ever be any the wiser.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 09:49:25 PM
Victim card  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 January, 2017, 10:16:05 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 09:07:35 PM
Oh forget it. I've obviously misinterpreted every one of your pearls of wisdom and can't be arsed trying to wheedle out what you actually ARE saying.

Welcome to the Political Thread -- you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 10:25:48 PM
Very true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 January, 2017, 10:31:38 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mm_niiQfeWc (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mm_niiQfeWc)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 January, 2017, 11:00:23 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 10 January, 2017, 09:43:46 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 10 January, 2017, 09:07:35 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 07:45:53 PM
I didn't say anything about evil European dictators either.

Oh forget it. I've obviously misinterpreted every one of your pearls of wisdom and can't be arsed trying to wheedle out what you actually ARE saying. Easier to just post snarky comments about what infrastructure and regeneration have been provided rather than actually discuss the subject constructively. I was trying to encourage some ideas about what SHOULD be done to regenerate south Wales, whether in or out of Europe, but let's have a traditional Brexit pedantry contest instead..
Tanks doesn't debate. He takes a hit and run technique that reveals nothing about what he thinks and very little about what he doesn't think, then plays the victim card. Rinse and repeat, none of us will ever be any the wiser.

It's not a great debating technique but at least he's brief and too the point. It's been my impression that Old Tankie is further right than most on this thread and no one wants an echo chamber.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 January, 2017, 11:05:51 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 09:49:25 PM
Victim card  :lol:
I'd rather have a typo to my name than have the shame of eating out of Nigel's hand as my reputation, Tonker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 January, 2017, 11:15:36 PM
Good use of the card there I must say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 January, 2017, 11:27:06 PM
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Saint Corbyn and his excellent work today.
I thoroughly enjoyed his interview on breakfast telly before I went to bed and luckily after I got up, he was giving his reboot speech.

Very enjoyable and now we all know where he stands, just a pity it's a wee bit muddled. Never mind, I'm sure that when he's the PM he'll have sorted out all his ideas by then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 10 January, 2017, 11:28:52 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 10 January, 2017, 06:44:58 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 10 January, 2017, 06:38:02 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 10 January, 2017, 06:25:52 PM
The UK is a net contributor to the EU.

I beleive we would get £6.66 back from our £10 (or thereabouts)

Is that taking into account the cost of the EU services we use and the funds we could access but don't?

Well yes there is that on top -

We give them £10 (probably diproportionately gathered from teh richer parts of the country such as London -well, lets just say London!) and they spend £6.66 directly back on projects that benefit the poorest (hopefully)

On top of that, the removal of barriers to trade and movement reduce other costs by a less quantifiable amount, but arguably at least as much as the £3.34 being quibbled about, possibly a bit more.  Anyone who thinks operating outside a single market is going to reduce costs is just deluded.

We can keep our £10 and maybe we could spend all that £6.66 on the poor just as well or better than the EU.  But then we have lost the £3 or £4 or £5 quid benefit we had from co-operating, so we are down overall.  So the extraa 3 or 4 quid goes to covering those costs and at best we are no worse off.  Chances are a lot of this money will end up being used as bribe money come the next election and will benefit neither the poor, or those trying to trade with Europe
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2017, 12:10:03 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 January, 2017, 11:27:06 PM
Very enjoyable and now we all know where he stands, just a pity it's a wee bit muddled. Never mind, I'm sure that when he's the PM he'll have sorted out all his ideas by then.

Amusingly, even Alastair Campbell couldn't find a copy of Corbyn's speech anywhere in the media as of 6 hours after it was delivered, and so took to Twitter to ask for a link to it.  Considering Corbyn was the big story to keep the NHS humanitarian disaster out of the news, you'd think the speech would have been a bit easier to come across.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 11 January, 2017, 08:38:11 AM
QuoteNever mind, I'm sure that when he's the PM he'll have sorted out all his ideas by then.

Luckily that's not a requirement for the job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 11 January, 2017, 09:50:07 AM
#watersportsgate
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2017, 10:05:19 AM
I knew Trump would take the piss but this is ridiculous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 10:25:43 AM
Brexit is going to be a disaster*. I have yet to find any Leave supporters who have even been prepared to engage with the issue of sterling, never mind offer any course of action which will prevent or mitigate that disaster unfolding. Everything in the top part of this post is fact. It's not controversial, it's not disputed by any credible economist.

The sterling is massively over-valued. It's over-valued in relation to the fundamentally weak UK economy. The economy staggers on funded by huge levels of consumer debt, built on the foundation of an over-valued housing market. The UK runs a massive trade deficit — we hardly make anything, and what we do make is made from imported raw materials, using imported energy.

(Here's a handy graph (http://cdn.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-kingdom-balance-of-trade.png?s=uktbttba&v=201701110938r&d1=20070101&d2=20171231) of the UK balance of trade over the last ten years. Note that the top of the graph is zero. Every point on that graph is a negative trade balance, the only difference is how big the deficit has been.)

Sterling maintains its largely undeserved value due to two factors: 1) the deficit is masked by the UK's disproportionate financial services market, and 2) by virtue of being in the EU, but outside the Euro, it has become the de facto reserve currency of Europe.

If you're going to reject the following, you have to address the above.
_______________________________

Come Brexit, at least one of those factors will cease to be true — we'll leave the EU. Judging from the current noises emerging from the government, it's hard to see how we'll retain City of London passport arrangements for financial services, so in all likelihood both will cease.

Deprived of those two props, sterling's natural level will be less than parity with the dollar. There is simply no way to look at sterling's value solely in terms of the UK economy and conclude it's worth more, we're easily looking at a further 25% fall in the value of the pound.

Now, there is a gung-ho corner of the Brexit camp that asserts that it will be a good thing if the pound finds its natural value, but that simply ignores the catastrophic balance of trade deficit. It only makes 'exports more competitive' for the short period of time before the increased input costs of raw materials and energy feeds into the cost of manufacture.

Add to that, the fact that we import about 40% of our food. UK farmers are going bankrupt up and down the length of the country due to the supermarket cartels forcing the wholesale prices down below the cost of manufacture. Either we accept that the imported food will cost more due to the exchange rate, or we try to increase domestic food production, which will of necessity cause prices to rise on the shelves.

(Note: none of this takes into account changed trading relationships with the countries we import all that stuff from. I'm personally sceptical that any of those sweetheart trade deals we were promised will ever materialise, and this will make imports yet more expensive.)

So... we're looking at literally everything becoming more expensive, in an economy where real-term wages have stagnated or fallen. Add to that a hit to the financial services sector, which contributes 12% of GDP (for comparison, the banking crisis contracted the UK economy by about 8%).

If the Bank of England wants to try and defend sterling's value, it only has two options: it can spend billions of pounds of public money propping up the currency (which, historically, has never worked) or it can put up interest rates. At which point, I refer you to the horrendous levels of private debt in the UK.

Sovereignty never put food on anyone's plate but, still, those immigrants, eh?

*Irony alert: as someone whose income is 80%+ US dollars, with a relatively small amount of personal debt and reasonable chunk of savings currently earning as close to nothing as makes no difference, a scenario in which sterling's value plummets and, potentially, interest rates increase is literally the best thing that could happen for me financially. Depending on exactly how that plays out, I could be thousands of pounds a year better off, and I still don't want this to happen, because I'm in a tiny minority and the people it will hit will suffer terribly. Doubly ironic, the vast majority of Leave voters are in group that will be affected by this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2017, 10:32:43 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2017, 10:05:19 AM
I knew Trump would take the piss but this is ridiculous.

Come now, this is just locker-room watersports. You're naive if you don't think all real men have multiple teen prostitutes pissing on hotel beds whenever they're away on business: only an elite libtard cuck would even raise an eyebrow.

Caveat: burden of proof goes both ways.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 January, 2017, 10:54:58 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 10 January, 2017, 11:27:06 PMVery enjoyable and now we all know where he stands, just a pity it's a wee bit muddled.
It's astonishing. We have a PM with clear ideas, but not wanting to admit to them, given that said ideas will derail the economy. And we have the leader of the opposition flip-flopping around, to the point legal experts I follow on Twitter have no bloody idea what Labour's actual position is. (The current thinking: Labour's now probably hit on what it should have gone for in the first place: some kind of EEA-style deal, either as an interim position or a possible destination. Which means single market 'full access' and retaining freedom of movement while attempting to reform it in some way – although EFTA members do have an emergency brake there.)

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 10:25:43 AMI have yet to find any Leave supporters who have even been prepared to engage with
Anything, in my case. OK, that's not entirely fair, but I can count those who have so far on one hand, versus those who have insulted me online or made outright threats – of which there have been more than five this month alone. (And while I have a social media presence, I'm not that prominent.)

What the more moderate Leavers have shown me, though, is that there is no crossover. They champion EFTA, but only as a stop-gap, not as a destination. So that can't work.

As for your other points, Jim, they just get hand-waved away. Any attempt to meet most Leavers with actual facts is dismissed as you "talking down the UK" or them saying: "Why don't you go and live in the EU if you love it so bloody much?" (Well, I might have, but you just removed my ability to do so longterm.)

Even a basic grasp of the way the modern world works showcases the benefits to be few in number at best. People cite exports growing under a weak Sterling, but there's little evidence of this, and much of manufacturing relies on imported components anyway. Worse: when we leave the EU, the UK will be removed from the 'network' within which many goods and components are made. We will no longer be a 'just in time' economy. Instead, our goods will sit in customs, and manufacturing and export costs will rise. Great.

QuoteSo... we're looking at literally everything becoming more expensive, in an economy where real-term wages have stagnated or fallen. Add to that a hit to the financial services sector, which contributes 12% of GDP (for comparison, the banking crisis contracted the UK economy by about 8%).
Some commentators suggest this is in part why Brexit is being rushed through. Sooner or later, all this is going to bite. Even many of those who voted to Leave will about-face and be angry at the outcome. But by then it will be too late – unless the EU itself is canny enough to let the UK teeter on the brink and then chalk the entire adventure up to being a stupid waste of time and the destruction of much goodwill towards the UK and our standing in the world. Certainly, those I'm hearing from both sides suggesting we could always rejoin if everything goes to shit seem to miss the fact that the UK is already positioned in a kind of soft Brexit anyway – we do not use the Euro and are not part of the passport-free zone. In other words, we have full control over our own currency and borders – not that many people on the Leave side seem to understand that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 11 January, 2017, 03:40:19 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 11 January, 2017, 10:54:58 AM

Some commentators suggest this is in part why Brexit is being rushed through. Sooner or later, all this is going to bite. Even many of those who voted to Leave will about-face and be angry at the outcome. But by then it will be too late

I don't think the leave voters will change their mind on mass. Even if they directly suffer it will still be the EU's fault for punishing us for leaving, or remain voters fault for not pulling together and making it work. Leave based it's campaign on lies, lots of leave voters bought those lies. reality hasn't troubled them so far and I have no doubt it won't start troubling them any time soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 05:34:57 PM
i'd be interested to hear exactly what benefit remaining would have done for us as a whole nation? especially going on the last few years of recessions, high unemployment, overstretched nhs etc etc etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2017, 05:36:54 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 05:34:57 PM
i'd be interested to hear exactly what benefit remaining would have done for us as a whole nation? especially going on the last few years of recessions, high unemployment, overstretched nhs etc etc etc.
All three of which observably had nothing to do with the EU...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 05:53:42 PM
 that answered my query clearly hawk, thanks.... I do however think that all the fuss over something that hasn't happened yet and may well be the best thing to happen to us,may not be but what is the point worrying until something bad actually happens? 

  I'd be more worried about bad bob boot.....sorry...president elect fart and what he's going to do to the world ,or rather what putin is going to tell him what to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2017, 05:56:25 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 05:34:57 PM
i'd be interested to hear exactly what benefit remaining would have done for us as a whole nation? especially going on the last few years of recessions, high unemployment, overstretched nhs etc etc etc.

That's a bit like asking what benefit does a coat give you because you're still cold. Is taking it off going to improve things? Does forcing everyone else to take theirs off make you any warmer? It might make sense if someone was handing out better coats, but sadly they aren't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 06:00:42 PM
i'm usually taking my coat off cos i'm too hot even in winter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2017, 06:17:37 PM
I can see three options for Trump. First, he somehow never makes it to be president - there's enough bad will against him to be Lee Harvey Oswalded and enough Russiaphobia for the DHS to declare his election null and void, especially now they've designated Election Infrastructure as a Critical Infrastructure Subsector (https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/06/statement-secretary-johnson-designation-election-infrastructure-critical). Second, he's allowed to go ahead so that the corporations and banks have a scapegoat to blame for the coming economic collapse in order to implement the measures they're working towards anyway. Third, I'm wrong and he'll do as good a job as any president has or will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 06:19:20 PM
his toupee will turn on him in a violent and bloody way and the cia will deny any knowledge of what made it so aggressive...unless it was all the wee.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 07:07:55 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 05:53:42 PM
but what is the point worrying until something bad actually happens? 

Because it is demonstrably going to happen for all the reasons I gave, and the people who told us that they had a plan demonstrably have not the least fucking idea what they're going to do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 07:32:53 PM
then perhaps you should stop bleating about it  and join parliament to put the world to rights  as you clearly have all the answers and a plan. i'll even vote for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2017, 08:01:00 PM
His only "plan" is name-calling, swearing and sometimes taking the piss out of the size of people's hands.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 08:03:12 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 07:32:53 PM
then perhaps you should stop bleating about it  and join parliament to put the world to rights  as you clearly have all the answers and a plan. i'll even vote for you.

Here's the thing: if you don't agree with me, why don't you engage with what I said? If you don't understand what I said, why did you reply at all? If you don't have time to make a coherent, engaged response, why did you waste everyone's time with a half-arsed potshot from the sidelines?

You voted for this, and it's going to fuck you up. It's going to be fucking Christmas for me, and yet I'm not saying "Don't do this" (although I desperately want us not to do this), I'm saying "Can't one of you people who thought this was a good idea explain to me how we stop our currency going off a cliff?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 11 January, 2017, 08:10:32 PM
Agree with you, Jim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 08:22:07 PM
fuck fuck fuckity fuck fuck ...see I can use big boy words too!

  its gonna fuck me up is it? and your gonna relish in that are you? would love to meet you in person and see if you have the balls to speak to me like that face to face... you don't half talk big for some keyboard politician who doesn't know whats going to happen how could you unless you are mystic meg? you don't know how I voted if I even did and how , if I said on here would you know I was telling the truth?

  I believe I am engaging with you by having this half arsed potshot ...I asked you what your plan is as you have written in stone that they don't know what theyre doing and you clearly must do or you wouldn't be so bloody mindedly sure that what you say is gospel ... as I said coherently (perhaps my lack of reading comprehension is rubbing off on you) join the real political world  and prove you do know what you are on about put your money where your sizeable mouth is rather than filling in time between making speech bubbles for comics by slagging off anyone who has (god forbid ) an opinion different to yours .

   and our currency was already going off a cliff or did I imagine the recessions? Greece was in the single currency and it didn't work for them too well did it? 
And do we have to bring up the rise in the popularity of the far right in Europe in recent times ,yep, Europe wonderful place.
   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2017, 08:44:03 PM
When did this thread turn into Redit!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 08:59:17 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 08:22:07 PM
  its gonna fuck me up is it? and your gonna relish in that are you?

Wow. You really are incapable of parsing basic English sentences. Go back. Read what I wrote. Perhaps get a grown-up to help you with the long words, because I said the exact opposite of that. Twice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 08:03:12 PM
it's going to fuck you up. It's going to be fucking Christmas for me

oh,yes you didn't use the word relish and "going to" instead of "gonna" .my mistake btw perhaps you should ease back on the nasty jibes regarding reading or understanding as for all you know there may be some on here who do have a genuine problem and aren't just lazy speed readers like me your comments could be seen as discriminatory.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 10:00:55 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 09:08:23 PM
oh,yes you didn't use the word relish and "going to" instead of "gonna" .my mistake btw perhaps you should ease back on the nasty jibes regarding reading or understanding as for all you know there may be some on here who do have a genuine problem and aren't just lazy speed readers like me your comments could be seen as discriminatory.

Ahem. The quote you have your knickers in a twist about is a direct follow-on from this, which you plainly didn't read:

"Depending on exactly how that plays out, I could be thousands of pounds a year better off, and I still don't want this to happen, because I'm in a tiny minority and the people it will hit will suffer terribly."

I honestly don't think that could be clearer. If you missed that due to 'speed-reading', you might want to take a few minutes to read posts more attentively before you respond.

(Also, FWIW, I have only ever used my real name on this forum, and I've never made a secret of which comic-related events I intend to attend, so if you ever want to have a civilised conversation about about nerd-related things, you should easily be able to find out which convention bars I'll be present in. Hopefully, you'll be able to keep some of that mis-directed anger of yours control.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 10:15:38 PM
oh, i'd love to have a nerd related discussion about anything with anyone at anytime which is why I come on here and you'd find I would never treat anyone with any sort of disrespect or nastiness as the few members and creators (let alone anyone who knows the real world me.) I've met would attest to....

grugz
   xxx

   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 January, 2017, 10:18:43 PM
Quote from: Grugz on 11 January, 2017, 10:15:38 PM
oh, i'd love to have a nerd related discussion about anything with anyone at anytime which is why I come on here and you'd find I would never treat anyone with any sort of disrespect or nastiness as the few members and creators (let alone anyone who knows the real world me.) I've met would attest to....

And are you going to acknowledge that you grossly misrepresented my position when you accused me of 'relishing' your (potential) misfortune?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 500 on 12 January, 2017, 10:13:24 AM
Thread temporarily locked!

Abusive / disrespectful behaviour will not be tolerated on this forum!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2017, 05:17:25 PM
This is the first time I've listened to a Trump speech. Some good sentiments, I think, but sounds unfortunately like all other such speeches - like an address by the President of Cloud Cuckoo Land.

"Do as I say and I'll serve you."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 20 January, 2017, 05:33:53 PM
Paraphrasing here:

The President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.

An orange tan is what the President traditionally wears.

On those criteria Zaphod Beeblebrox Donald Trump is one of the most successful Presidents America will ever have. He will spend two of his eight Presidential years in prison for fraud. Very very few people realize that the President and the Government have virtually no power at all, and of these very few people only six know whence ultimate political power is wielded. Most of the others secretly believe that the ultimate decision-making process is handled by a computer. They couldn't be more wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2017, 05:44:54 PM
I broadly agree with that, as I said in 2010:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 April, 2010, 07:21:21 PM
Keeping everyone arguing about the problem... and not the cause... is just one example of what all political parties are about. This is the politics of distraction.

The Prime Minister (or president) can be seen as the captain of the ship of state. Once the passengers (the electorate) elect a captain and crew (PM and MPs), the ship is redecorated, the way the ship is run is altered, the shift patterns and responsibilities of the crew are tweaked, new rules and regulations are put into place, the decks are swabbed etc, etc, etc - but the course of the ship is not altered. Some years later, a new captain and crew are elected who change everything back again, but the course of the ship is still not altered. This is the politics of distraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2017, 07:22:27 PM
It was as I suspected. Utter drivel. I weep for the next 4 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 20 January, 2017, 07:59:40 PM
Pray it's only 4.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2017, 08:00:47 PM
Aaaand the LGBTQ+ code of human rights has been removed from the white house website. Jesus...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 20 January, 2017, 08:06:44 PM
Removed to give it a good polish maybe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 January, 2017, 08:22:54 PM
Oh FFS, we do NOT have THE TIME for this shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2017, 08:00:47 PM
Aaaand the LGBTQ+ code of human rights has been removed from the white house website. Jesus...
As has all reference to climate change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2017, 08:38:46 PM
But you aren't worried, right? Because "government" is the only thing standing between civilisation and barbarism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2017, 08:41:44 PM
Sharky, with all due respect, I sincerely AM worried. I have friends in the states who will suffer if this downward spiral continues, flippancy and rhetoric are not needed right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 January, 2017, 09:15:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 January, 2017, 08:22:54 PM
we do NOT have THE TIME for this shit

Quite. The Obama era content on Whitehouse.gov (https://www.whitehouse.gov/) was archived (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/presidential-memorandum-international-initiatives-advance-human-rights-l), leaving the site a blank slate for Team Trump to fill as they please. The Trumphouse haven't specifically removed content about gay issues - or anything else.

The kids at Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/white-house-web-site-trump-changes/) are going to be surviving on caffeine and working in shifts for the next eight years.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2017, 09:17:39 PM
Hawkie, I'm not being flippant. I've been saying for a long time that this kind of thing is the Number One danger of government - you get some dick who doesn't like Minority X and so thinks he/she has the RIGHT to victimise them or strip them of their rights. And because it's "democratic," you have to put up with it because, if you don't, you're some kind of anti-civilisation loon.

Well, maybe that's exactly what I am but you will never, ever, find me believing the rights of another human being to be less than mine - or anyone else's - based on sexuality. It's wrong. I know it, you know it. I don't need some orange muppet telling me otherwise and neither does anyone else.

I too am concerned about human beings effected by this and other "government" inspired hatreds, not just in the US but throughout the world. We have to grow beyond the current idiotic system before it tears us apart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 January, 2017, 09:27:21 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2017, 08:00:47 PM
Aaaand the LGBTQ+ code of human rights has been removed from the white house website. Jesus...
As has all reference to climate change.

Seems more of a blank slate - like the man himself - than specifics.


Just as the @POTUS Twitter account transitioned to the Trump administration today at noon, everything that was previously on the White House website has been removed and replaced by new pages. All of the old content from President Obama's administration can still be found at the Obama White House archive. Similarly, all tweets from the Obama administration that were previously on @POTUS are now located at @POTUS44.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/trumps-white-house-website-deletes-climate-change-lgbt-pages/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 20 January, 2017, 10:01:43 PM
Trawling through this hypocrisy so you don't have to...

QuotePresident Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.

QuoteProtecting clean air and clean water, conserving our natural habitats, and preserving our natural reserves and resources will remain a high priority.

Remove environmental protections preventing the Dakota pipeline. The CEO of the company building the pipeline donated to the Trump campaign and Trump is a shareholder.

Quoteour military dominance must be unquestioned.

Yikes!

Quotelower rates for Americans in every tax bracket, simplify the tax code, and reduce the U.S. corporate tax rate,

Quotea moratorium on new federal regulations

I hope you like less schools and more lead in your paint...

Quotea state-of-the-art missile defense system to protect against missile-based attacks

Sounds familiar...

Quotedevelop defensive and offensive cyber capabilities at our U.S. Cyber Command

Hacking, of course, is a real threat. 

QuoteOur job is to make life more comfortable for parents who want their kids to be able to walk the streets safely. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.

Trump has previously said the best way to increase racial harmony was increasing stop and search.  I hope none of those people waiting for that bus look...y'know...suspicious to the boys in blue.

QuoteSupporting law enforcement means supporting our citizens' ability to protect themselves.

Folks, the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.  Of course, the best way to stop a good guy of any kindis a bad guy with a gun.

Quotedeporting illegal aliens with violent criminal records

Change of policy there.

QuoteMelania is also a successful entrepreneur.  In April 2010, Melania Trump launched her own jewelry collection, "Melania™ Timepieces & Jewelry", on QVC.

No link, unfortunately. 

QuoteMrs. Trump cares deeply about issues impacting women and children, and she has focused her platform as First Lady on the problem of cyber bullying among our youth. 

I'm sure...

If your an American citizen you might want to head over to the Whitehouse petitions page, where they're calling for Trumps tax returns to be released and for his business assets to go into blind trust, since a US president accepting money from foreign powers is a constitutional breach.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 January, 2017, 10:09:00 PM
We must now hope our American friends rediscover their founding virtues of violent anti-establishment domestic terrorism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 05:04:13 AM
With Bush it was "let's see his hanging chads because he stole the election!" With Obama it was "let's see his birth certificate because his real name's Barry Sotoro!" With Trump it's "let's see his accounts because he's a crook!"

Meet the New Boss, same as the Old Boss.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 January, 2017, 07:11:35 AM
No.

None of the old bosses sent unhinged hate mail to Selina Scott for months on end until she threatened legal action.

None of the old bosses whine on Twitter every, single, time, somebody impersonates them on telly.

None of the old bosses denied ever having met Samuel L. Jackson after Samuel L. Jackson accused him of cheating at golf, even though there are photos of him with Samuel L. Jackson right there beside him, FFS.

None of the old bosses tried to obtain a compulsory purchase order in an attempt to force people off their own land, simply because he thought their homes spoiled the view from his golf course and hotel, then proceeded to block their view with tons of soil.

None, (well, not many), of the old bosses have demonstrable ties to organised crime, going back several decades.

Then there are the fake universities, attempts to force people out of their flats using various forms of intimidatory behaviour including turning their heating and hot water off, testimony under oath that he knew he was hiring illegal Polish immigrants as builders, his numerous refusals to pay contractors, and  the numerous accusations of sexual assault including one from his ex-wife in a sworn deposition during divorce proceedings.

And that's not even the half of it. The list has been ongoing for years, with a steady stream of unrelated individuals constantly popping up to point out what a decidedly dodgy & horrible git he is. Yet, somehow, he's President now.

...and I didn't even mention all the bankruptcies.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 January, 2017, 07:16:37 AM
Oh, and none of the old bosses is the actual, confirmed, real-life basis for the main baddie in the Back To The Future films.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 09:26:54 AM
Well sure, he wasn't a member of Skull and Bones, didn't dodge the draft for Vietnam, didn't give free beer to college students to win their votes, didn't sell 212,140 shares of Harken for $848,560 just before the company announced poor quarterly earnings, wasn't arrested for cocaine possession in 1972 but used his father's political connections to get a little community service instead of a cotton-picking jail sentence and his record expunged, didn't have his driver's license number changed because he was worried about a DUI arrest record surfacing, didn't mock a woman he'd put on death row, didn't authorise the executions of 152 people to make himself the second most bloodthirsty Texas Governor in history despite being described as a "person of interest" himself in a Texas murder investigation, didn't use his connections to cover up a vehicular homicide committed by his wife and was never arrested for stealing a Christmas tree (and these are just some of the allegations against GW Bush alone), but yes, new boss - old boss, basically the same thing: one flawed human being pretending to represent/rule over 325 million other flawed human beings.

Even if Jesus had been elected to the office of President there'd be a campaign to stop it based on his questionable parentage, unreasonably violent reaction to temple money changers and claims about being dead for three days.

I'm not defending Trump, or Bush, or any of them. They're all the same. They're all flawed - as are we all - and none of them, and none of the rest of us, is fit to hold such a position. That's what I mean when I say the old boss is the same as the new boss, just as the next boss will be the same as the new one we just got.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 January, 2017, 09:30:15 AM
Emphatically untrue in so many ways.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 January, 2017, 04:09:21 PM
I'm not saying that none of the rest of them have dodgy stuff in their past. I'm saying Trump has the most dodgy stuff in his past, continues to have dodgy stuff in his present and will continue to have dodgy stuff in his future. He's the dodgiest of the dodgy, (and did dodge the draft).

Trump isn't just another bad boss, he's the worst boss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2017, 04:14:02 PM
There's no point in arguing with Shark on this. And, frankly, if someone can't see the difference between, say, Obama and Trump, there's no reasoning with them whatsoever. You might was well just argue with a wall.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 January, 2017, 04:34:37 PM
Arguing with walls is a handy way to get information to folk on the fence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 04:48:16 PM

I'm saying that they're both flawed, as are we all, and that we are all the same in that respect. Given this fact, Obama and Trump are both the same, and they are both the same as the rest of us in that NOBODY is fit to wield such power. If people want to vote for what they perceive as the least-worst option and call that acceptable then that's fine, they can do so and suffer the consequences. Me? I don't believe any of them has the right to make me, or you, or anyone else act against their conscience or will.

It doesn't matter who is President or Prime Minister - Obama, Clinton, Trump, you or me - at some point we'd all have to act in the same manner, act with force to impose our will or policies. None of us could tolerate a single person saying "no" because that undermines the position. If we do tolerate people saying "no" then our power evaporates and the position becomes pointless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 January, 2017, 04:52:21 PM
With respect, I'd suggest that there litle point in arguing with "Sharky" about anything.  I've had him on ignore and paid no attention to his posts since he called me a holocaust apologist for pointing out that governments paid an important role in eradicating smallpox.  The idea that a beneficial discussion can be held?  Well...it hasnt worked before, so why would it now?

Repeatedly insisting "the world is broken and I know how to fix it" whilst offering no actual solution or pathway is the easiest game in the world.  Its the same tactic used by the people now shaping our society. 

Insisting that the current system is wrong...offering increasing absurd "examples"..disappearing off on tangents when confronted and then resorting to " I can't be expected to know all the answers, i'm not one of those expects, govnor"...then, when shown to be completely incorrect launching into insults whilst declaring himself the victim...  We've seen Trump and Farage use it a hundred times.  How much better our world could be if we had alll just ignored them until the come up with viable alternatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 January, 2017, 05:01:08 PM
Shark's argument isn't that there is no difference between the two men, it's that the position of Supreme Leader itself should not exist, and that conclusion isn't materially changed by the fact that one is a classy, intelligent and downright affable human being, and the other a loathsome sack of diarrhea with a voicebox programmed with random phrases from 1930s speeches going off incessantly somehere in its noisome depths. Both are just mortals, and have done or will do shameful things in order to succeed in the system they rose to the top of, and in accordance with the role they sought and won. It's the system and the role that is the great wrong.  It's less moral relativism on Sharky's part than it is moral absolutism.

And I think that's a fair argument to make.  I wouldn't agree with it, however.

EDIT: bah, ninja'd by the Shark himself.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 05:14:31 PM
It's okay to have a Supreme Leader. I just think it should be okay to say to that leader, "no thanks - I'm not doing that," without being punished for it. That, in essence, is all I'm arguing for -  the right to say "no" and have it mean just that. It's just that some people seem to think that being able to make one's own decisions about what's right and wrong based on one's personal morals and social conventions somehow means that we must ditch everything we've learned and achieved in the last 40,000 years and go back to living in caves to murder and rape one another with impunity, which is ludicrous.

If, for example and God forbid, we get a Farage for PM and he goes all Hitler on us, we'd all want to say no to him, wouldn't we? Well, we need to start thinking about how to say "no" and what to say "no" to now, especially the way politics seems to be going, otherwise by the time we really need to say "no" we won't know how.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2017, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 04:48:16 PM
- at some point we'd all have to act in the same manner, act with force to impose our will or policies. None of us could tolerate a single person saying "no" because that undermines the position. If we do tolerate people saying "no" then our power evaporates and the position becomes pointless.

At the risk of sounding completely insane, this is where I join company with the late and much reviled Mrs Thatcher.  When she said, "there is no society, there is only the individual"; as much as this was grossly distorted she did have a valid point.  It is our individual agency that shapes society, our responsibility for our own action in the face of external forces that matters most.  We have a responsibility first and foremost to ourselves and then to those around us; our family, those we work both for and with those we come into contact with.

To me this fits in with Chomsky's argument that "optimism is a strategy for building a better future.  If we believe in the instinct for freedom we are more likely to step up and take responsibility for making it so."  It is way too easy to look at the forces around us and say that we are powerless.  This is a complete distortion of the truth.  The power may be limited but if each of us act with agency then it increases the chances of us shaping a better world.  The likes of Trump, Farage, May and Corbyn gives us the impression that we are completely powerless.  They would have us believe in the opposite of Popper's Open Society.

It strikes me that Trump may be the best thing that has happened to American, and even British politics in a long time.  We have grown apathetic, handed over the reigns and stepped back.  We are now sowing what we reap.  Maybe now we will wake up and realise that we need to challenge our decision makers to make better decisions, to recognise their responsibility and to hold them accountable.  As the old curse goes; "may you live in interesting times."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 January, 2017, 09:38:19 PM
#WomansMarch is the biggest coordinated protest in the history of the world. We saw history today guys, astonishing.

Just a pity I was working for most of it but by god i'll not miss another!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2017, 10:16:42 PM
Well said, TJM86.

Nobody can do everything but everybody can do something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 January, 2017, 10:09:15 AM
Aside from being genuinely heartened by the amazing spectacle of the Women's March, I adore the Carrie/Leia/Resistance sub-theme. Just perfect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 22 January, 2017, 10:47:31 AM
My cousins, their kids and all of their friends went on the Washington march. Really proud of the US side of the family. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 22 January, 2017, 11:21:38 AM
Quote from: ZenArcade on 22 January, 2017, 10:47:31 AM
My cousins, their kids and all of their friends went on the Washington march. Really proud of the US side of the family. Z

My US side of the family - my sister, her extremely dull husband, simpering idiot of a daughter and future clocktower sniper candidate of a son - all voted Trump.

Thank goodness I already wasn't talking to her in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2017, 01:58:17 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 22 January, 2017, 11:21:38 AM

Thank goodness I already wasn't talking to her in the first place.

Only a pot-smoking commie beatnik would write something as anti-American as Storming Heaven ;)

EDIT: I'm way behind the times, aren't I? SJWs and cucks are the bad guys now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2017, 02:16:27 PM
Trident doesn't work properly (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38708823) and the government covered it up because there was a parliamentary vote coming up on renewing it that was worth 200bn pounds to Tory donors and foreign governments, some of whom are basically our enemies (the foreign governments, not the Tory donors - although now I think about it...).
And thank goodness they did so - I for one have never felt safer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 January, 2017, 04:44:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 January, 2017, 10:09:15 AM
Aside from being genuinely heartened by the amazing spectacle of the Women's March, I adore the Carrie/Leia/Resistance sub-theme. Just perfect.
The largest protest in US history. And it was cobbled together in less than 24 hours. Wonderful!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dunk! on 22 January, 2017, 06:01:12 PM
Liked the pink pussy beanie hats lots of folks had knitted.

They gave me a smile and a some small hope.

Dunk!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 January, 2017, 08:09:18 PM
Sorry Hawkmumbler it was organised from the November 9, 2016 and not within 24 hours
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 January, 2017, 08:18:31 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 January, 2017, 08:09:18 PM
Sorry Hawkmumbler it was organised from the November 9, 2016 and not within 24 hours
I believe a smaller scale protest was orchestrated in Washington alone yes, but the broader protests both throughout the US and globally where spontaneous reactions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 22 January, 2017, 08:19:46 PM
Excellent :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 22 January, 2017, 08:30:18 PM
(http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/best-protest-signs-womens-march-washington-donald-trump114-5884c596320ae__700.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2017, 10:18:49 PM
 I wonder how Fuckface Von Clownstick feels about at least 4 years of being (arguably) the most hated man on the planet? Because he really seems to get upset when people criticise him. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 January, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
'Gasp' Jayzus! Thats a truth! Why aren't you speaking in alt-truths?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 22 January, 2017, 10:56:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2017, 10:18:49 PM
I wonder how Fuckface Von Clownstick feels about at least 4 years of being (arguably) the most hated man on the planet? Because he really seems to get upset when people criticise him.

Good. Fuck him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2017, 11:02:52 PM
Quote from: blackmocco on 22 January, 2017, 10:56:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2017, 10:18:49 PM
I wonder how Fuckface Von Clownstick feels about at least 4 years of being (arguably) the most hated man on the planet? Because he really seems to get upset when people criticise him.

Good. Fuck him.

Oh God yes. I hope he hates every second of it. He's made his shit-encrusted, fake-tan-stained bed and I hope he lies sleeplessly in it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 January, 2017, 10:55:56 AM
(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Alt-Dalek_zps0om16zkn.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 23 January, 2017, 12:58:52 PM
Alternative facts?! That phrase would bites back heavy to Trump team!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 January, 2017, 01:09:10 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 23 January, 2017, 12:58:52 PM
Alternative facts?! That phrase would bites back heavy to Trump team!

You'd think so, but the way things are going Von Clownstick could be filmed wanking onto the original draft of the Constitution and guys supporters would love him all the more for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 January, 2017, 08:07:56 PM
Do you know what they call Alternative Facts up north? Utter fucking bollocks!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 January, 2017, 08:13:17 PM
There's a twitter account for half and onion in a bag trying to get more followers than the tangerine clown.

https://twitter.com/HalfOnionInABag?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor (https://twitter.com/HalfOnionInABag?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 January, 2017, 09:19:08 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 23 January, 2017, 08:13:17 PM
There's a twitter account for half and onion in a bag trying to get more followers than the tangerine clown.

https://twitter.com/HalfOnionInABag?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor (https://twitter.com/HalfOnionInABag?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor)

I'm in
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 January, 2017, 10:45:05 PM
21.6m looooong way to go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 23 January, 2017, 10:57:31 PM
Well it's good to see the mainstream media holding a US president to account. Let's hope this continues when it comes to foreign policy, as the previous administration almost had a free pass on that count.

In some respects, the Western press left that job to the likes of RT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 24 January, 2017, 09:16:58 PM
Leave it to the Dutch.

https://youtu.be/mX_uFqc3WHI (https://youtu.be/mX_uFqc3WHI)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 January, 2017, 12:03:15 AM
Just out of curiosity...is the RHI scandal in Northern Ireland much of a news story outside of our wee country?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 January, 2017, 12:49:05 AM
It's on the radio relatively a lot but only came to prominence on the TV with the collapse of the power sharing executive and even then they don't go into too much detail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 26 January, 2017, 01:34:14 AM
OK.

If you don't mind me asking, what's your opinion on the whole thing?

And on a side note CF, did you ever serve in Norn Iron?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 26 January, 2017, 02:02:37 AM
I'm not fully up to speed but from what I gather, the renewable scheme was flawed from the start and when a whistle-blower stepped forward nothing happened initially, as the scheme ploughed on.
It seems that everyone is blaming others but Arlene Foster is the one in the running for the blame.

It's obviously a lot more complex than that but that's off the top of my head.

As for serving in NI, I did a bit and found the countryside very enjoyable. Just a pity I never got to enjoy the sights, which I intend to do with the family sometime over the next couple of years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 January, 2017, 07:33:29 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 26 January, 2017, 12:03:15 AM
is the RHI scandal in Northern Ireland much of a news story outside of our wee country?

Like every other story right now, it depends what Donald Trump wrote on twitter the night before.

TV news went big on McGuiness's resignation and Foster having to stand for re-election, but they seem more interested in the personalities than the granular detail. I've heard about that guy and his empty barn dozens of times, but I'm not sure how the subsidy worked or why it went wrong.

In typical hand wringing fashion, the BBC ran an item worrying it hadn't given the story due prominence, because the dissolution of the power sharing agreement wasn't the top item on the running order that day.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 January, 2017, 09:46:49 AM
Been following along down here, but to be honest as long as you nordies keep (most of) your shootings below crotch-level, we don't pay much attention to your largely incomprehensible doings.  Main interest would be what happens to SF priorities in the South, and what effect the superior McGuinness' manoeuvrings might have on the distinctly inferior Adams. 

Other than that, it's the Trumpxit duet, all day, all the time.  Our own professional political class must be ecstatic at the complete lack of scrutiny. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 January, 2017, 10:23:18 AM
Rich Spencer got smacked in the maw again. Beautiful.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3Eb3vUVUAAaODR.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 January, 2017, 06:05:14 PM
There's an on going comedy sketch to be made out of that.

Rich Spencer, down the shops, waiting for that inevitable moment...Rich Spencer, in the park, still waiting...Rich Spencer, taking out the bins, hurrying in the fading dusk light...Rich Spencer, running a bath, when BLAM...another smack in the face.


If any of you Remoaners have a whole ten seconds to spare away from your on going attempts to undermine the sovereignty of the British people by insisting that British laws, enforced by British courts should be debated in the British parliament, the Bill the government spent a fortune trying not to publish is now available.  It's a corker.  Hold onto your hats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 January, 2017, 06:16:34 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 January, 2017, 06:05:14 PM
the Bill the government spent a fortune trying not to publish is now available.  It's a corker.  Hold onto your hats.

The Bill (and vote) are widely being discussed as if this is a vote to invoke Article 50. It isn't (https://edinburgheye.wordpress.com/2017/01/26/parliament-is-sovereign-vote-on-article-50/). The Bill gives back to Theresa May the powers the Supreme Court said she didn't have.

And Corbyn is going to put a three-line whip on his MPs to make them vote for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 January, 2017, 09:17:28 PM
Yup.  After so much effort and upset just to try to have a sensible debate over it, it turns out that there's little to say.  The lid dems will have a good old moan, but nobody cares about them anymore 'cause it turns out they'd sell their granny for a shot at power.  The SNP will raise some points, but be shouted down and declared dangerous secessionist.

In a few years time, when it's the '80s again and citrus fruit only comes in cans and the Russians have conquered Finland, we'll look back on this and laugh through our Trump-brand radiation filter masks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 January, 2017, 09:59:16 PM
You may joke about the FibDems' chances, but their refusal to acknowledge the damage their time in coalition did to the party actually seems to be bearing fruit - despite their leader stating on the record that he would enter into coalition again.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 26 January, 2017, 06:16:34 PMAnd Corbyn is going to put a three-line whip on his MPs to make them vote for it.

And thanks to the Guardian fabricating that very story earlier in the week, it meant when the 3-line whip thing actually happened, people had been inoculated to the idea for several days.  Compare and contrast the angry reaction to the (fake) Guardian story to the resignation and sadness that greeted the announcement today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 January, 2017, 12:11:19 PM
Ah this is good http://www.areyousorryyet.com/

Getting me through my day of wondering why there's no headlines about a three-line whip on the Tories (Mrs May is ignoring her constituency... but you'll never know) and despair at Labour and the Lib Dems. Oh for electoral reform where I could vote for the Greens, just like in the mayoral election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 January, 2017, 12:52:01 PM
Everyone knows the best way to fight a government is to attack its opposition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2017, 12:24:34 AM
Come on, Beadle, it's time to take the mask off. The hands gave you away months ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 09:19:45 AM
Facebook's worrying me. I've seen a lot of otherwise decent people actively calling for Trump to be assassinated. Eight years ago, these same people would have been outraged at all the similar threats to Obama but now, apparently, calling for the premeditated murder of an "elected official" seems fine.

Isn't this dehumanization the kind of thing usually presaging a civil war? "This person, and by extension anyone who voted for or supports this person, is too stupid, bigoted and evil to be treated as human and can only be dealt with through force." I find this mindset to be intensely dangerous - I mean, can't the people spouting this rubbish see that they're being manipulated into spreading it just as perfectly reasonable people were manipulated into spreading similar opinions and rhetoric in 1930s Germany? Have we learned nothing?

It's okay to disagree with Trump, it's okay to disobey him - but to call for his murder? Absolutely and categorically not.

I am heartened, however, that such bloodthirsty idiocy has not infected this particular political thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 09:45:30 AM
I requires impeachment, but i'll take an assassination if it's what it takes to get the job done.

(Sarcasm/end)

But no, seriously, the man wasn't democratically elected. The 3 Million in Hillary's favor shows that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 09:57:53 AM
So most UK governments have not been democratically elected then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 10:07:54 AM
Oh hey Mr.Strawman, knew I hadn't seen you about for awhile!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 10:11:38 AM
Why do you insult me? Why not just disagree with me in a decent manner?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 10:13:40 AM
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SINzmuT4oiw/UJWnESCgSdI/AAAAAAAAGXU/FKnuY_91hBw/s640/facepalm-Godzilla.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 10:24:39 AM
Is that your answer? How old are you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 10:30:02 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 09:57:53 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 09:45:30 AM
... the man wasn't democratically elected. The 3 Million in Hillary's favor shows that.

So most UK governments have not been democratically elected then?

There have only been three instances in modern times when a UK government has been formed by a party that won fewer votes than their main opponent. Churchill's post-WWII administration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1951#Campaign) was one instance.

Only the present incumbent and George W Bush (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elections_in_which_the_winner_lost_the_popular_vote) have done the same in modern day USA, but - unlike Bush in 2000 - there's absolutely no reason to claim Trump wasn't democratically elected.

You're both demonstrably wrong.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 10:42:48 AM
Different system of course, but very few UK governments in modern times have had the majority of the popular vote, that was the point I was trying to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 January, 2017, 11:20:07 AM
I'm not sureI am misreading something here (in the world of alternative facts s easy to do!), but hasn't Frank just said that most modern UK gvts (and US ones for that matter) DID have the majority?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 January, 2017, 11:39:45 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 12:01:06 PM
If he is saying that about the UK popular vote he is wrong, very few UK governments since the Second World War have been elected with the majority of the vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 12:06:09 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 29 January, 2017, 11:20:07 AM
hasn't Frank just said that most modern UK gvts (and US ones for that matter) DID have the majority?

We're getting deep into the realm of stuff that nobody gives a shite about, but in terms of the popular vote, most governments are formed by the party that earns a plurality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality_(voting)) rather than an outright majority. They win more votes than any of their opponents, but not more than all their opponents combined.

Tankie's correct to say no UK government has ever won a majority, but the vast majority of UK governments are formed by a party that won more votes than the second placed party.

All this is doubly academic, since the outcomes of UK and US elections are not based on the popular vote.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 12:12:18 PM
2010.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 12:30:49 PM
Quote from: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 12:06:09 PM
All this is doubly academic, since the outcomes of UK and US elections are not based on the popular vote.

This focus on Trump's 'popular vote' defeat is a ghastly red herring - he played the game and he won the Presidency by the electoral rules of the country.  It's about the only uncontestable thing about the whole vile lying cheating mess that is his very existence. By banging on about this his opponents are placing themselves squarely 'against the Constitution and the democratic will of the people', which is right where Bannon et al want them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 12:37:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 12:30:49 PM
Quote from: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 12:06:09 PM
All this is doubly academic, since the outcomes of UK and US elections are not based on the popular vote.

This focus on Trump's 'popular vote' defeat is a ghastly red herring - he played the game and he won the Presidency by the electoral rules of the country.  It's about the only uncontestable thing about the whole vile lying cheating mess that is his very existence. By banging on about this his opponents are placing themselves squarely 'against the Constitution and the democratic will of the people', which is right where Bannon et al want them.
Hhhmmm, very true. It does smart a little bit that it WAS the Electoral College that saved him, after a year of him constantly bashing the system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 12:39:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 10:24:39 AM
Is that your answer? How old are you?
You clearly have no idea what a Strawman is. Fix that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 12:46:49 PM
Yes, yes, yes - this is all very interesting (in its way), but what about the current vogue for advocating assassination? Is it okay too call for the murder of a president one doesn't agree with? And how about that president's supporters? And why was calling for Obama's assassination less acceptable than calling for Trump's?

A similar but less drastic phenomena seems to surround Brexit/Remain voters. People who voted one way seem to be regularly reduced to caricatures by those who voted the other way, completely ignoring the inherent complexity of traits comprising every human being in favour of a simplistic cartoon thumbnail.

I find this increasing and accelerating trend towards dehumanization to be deeply worrying. Of course, I am only human and have been swept up by such trends in the past and, although I try to keep an eye on myself, know I'm in constant danger of being swept up again if I'm not careful.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 12:50:57 PM
You are right TB, Trump wasn't saved by the Electoral College he was elected by it, he knew exactly where to campaign to win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 12:55:37 PM
My Mike two pence would be that it's never right to call for the assassination of anyone. If we believe in free-speech/free-thought then we must also offer the same to those we disagree with.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 01:01:41 PM
Think it goes without saying that calling for assassination is reprehensible, and again plays into the hands of those who would marginalise opposition. That said, both the US and UK have adopted assassination as a core tool of asymmetric war, so an underlying climate of acceptability has been created.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 January, 2017, 01:08:12 PM
I wonder how much social media has to play in this.  Thinking about it, one of the reasons I won't use Facebook is because of issues surrounding cyberbullying that I've had to deal with in the past.  The thing is though, that generation is now becoming adult but continuing that behaviour.  Online discourse seems to be inherently aggressive and adversarial at times in a lot of places.  User names and opinions are dehumanised words on a page rather than humans that we interact with properly. 

Politicians are distant figures that we only really see on the telly.  Granted that has pretty much always been the case but I feel like in the past they didn't quite stage manage their interaction with the great unwashed to the extent they do these days (or perhaps I'm harking back to a fictional halcyon day.  The only politician I ever remember meeting was Nicholas Ridley and I upset him asking for his ID!) so there seems to be an even greater disconnect.

I guess the real question is, has it changed or has it always been like this and the internet has now become the equivalent of the rant in the pub with a far greater audience and even less self control.

Anyway, feel free to disagree and castigate my lack of intelligence, dodgy ethnicity / country of origin / residence, inferior class, mental health, dubious parentage and questionable sexuality in true online fashion.   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2017, 01:10:51 PM

Assassination usually makes things worse, not better. Displacing Trump could result in an even worse option - Mike Pence, for instance.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 January, 2017, 01:13:10 PM
Five days ago: "YAY PUNCHING NAZIS!"
Today: "Violence has no place in politics."

All swings and roundabouts, innit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:13:59 PM
Nah, lets keep to punching Nazi's. They fucking deserve it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 01:15:04 PM
Punching Nazis is what makes us human.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:17:08 PM
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/214/267/fed.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 01:19:52 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:17:08 PM
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/214/267/fed.jpg)

Golden.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 01:22:02 PM
Excellent comments all 'round, thank you!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 01:26:01 PM
Violence! To some a way of life, to others utterly abhorrent, but should only ever be a last resort!

Was it ok for the Nazi's to do what they did? Fuck no! Is it ok for me to punch a Nazi because I disagree with them? Fuck no!*

Cheers

*except during War where apparently, by modern standards, everything is far game. Watch out for those landmines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:32:03 PM
To associate yourself in 2017 with nazisim is to take their actions in the 40's as fair or accountable. It is not. Never will be.

A smack across the jaw isn't even in the same league as condoning genocide. Don't even begin to rationalize or tolerate nazism. Don't do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 01:34:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:32:03 PM
To associate yourself in 2017 with nazisim is to take their actions in the 40's as fair or accountable. It is not. Never will be.

A smack across the jaw isn't even in the same league as condoning genocide. Don't even begin to rationalize or tolerate nazism. Don't do it.

You need to read my post again! I have not endorsed genocide and do not tolerate Nazism!

I thought better of you Hawk!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 01:36:18 PM
Additionally: this is why people don't talk about anything anymore. Accusations and willful miss-reading gets in the way of fair and balanced debate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 01:36:48 PM
People choose to be Nazis. In doing so they choose to be abhored, boycotted, ignored and, yes, punched. That's what allying yourself with the de facto symbol of evil entails.  If they don't like that stuff they could choose some other less sub-human pastime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 01:42:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 01:36:48 PM
People choose to be Nazis. In doing so they choose to be abhored, boycotted, ignored and, yes, punched. That's what allying yourself with the de facto symbol of evil entails.  If they don't like that stuff they could choose some other less sub-human pastime.

Whether I, you, or anyone else agrees with them is largely irrelevant. If we accept free speech in the literal sense then that means tolerating and listening to others. If we're happy to punch someone with views that differ from our own that makes us Fascists.

FOR THE RECORD: I have not, do not, tolerate bigotry in any form. And I won't be accused of such!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:49:44 PM
Nazism had it's chance at free speech. It didn't end well. That argument is moot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2017, 01:50:46 PM
If, in a ludicrously improbable hypothetical situation, the decision to have Trump assassinated was entirely down to me, I wouldn't do it. I don't believe in killing and I'd be a hypocrite if I had someone murdered.

That said, if someone else did it, I wouldn't mourn the cunt one bit.  But I'd also worry about the presidency being handed to a man who thinks homosexuality can be 'cured' by referring to the hallucinatory ravings of Bronze Age desert tribes.

I wouldn't punch a nazi unless he unprovokedly attacked me or someone else, but (whether I am morally in the right or wrong, I don't know) it gave me pleasure to see it happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:51:20 PM
"We shouldn't hit nazi's! We should debate them!"

Meanwhile literal nazi's want folk dead. That's the difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:51:20 PM
"We shouldn't hit nazi's! We should debate them!"

Meanwhile literal nazi's want folk dead. That's the difference.

For the FUCKING RECORD: I was referring to modern day Nazi's, not Hitler's murderous regime!

And I stand by my previous post: if it's OK to punch someone with different views to yourself that makes YOU a Fascist! No ifs or buts, a fucking fascist!

The modern definition of free speech: "say what you like but if I disagree I'll kick your head in"!

If Jesus existed he surely did weep!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 02:00:20 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:51:20 PM
"We shouldn't hit nazi's! We should debate them!"

Meanwhile literal nazi's want folk dead. That's the difference.

Agree. Nazism has had its shot. There's no debate to be had, no value in engagement, nothing to be gained from affording them a platform. History happened, lesson learned, move on, punch away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:01:41 PM
And for the fucking record also...
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 01:32:03 PM
To associate yourself in 2017 with nazisim is to take their actions in the 40's as fair or accountable. It is not. Never will be.

You can't just separate "modern" nazism from "old" nazism. It's the same fucking thing. Especially when you consider the nazi that got twatted, Rich Spenncer, has published dozen of articles advocating black genocide. Yeah, a punch across the face isn't even remotely in the same league. Check your freaking privilage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 January, 2017, 02:05:31 PM
Ah, so we shouldn't be punching the modern more cuddly Nazis.

For the record I wouldn't punch a Nazi. I'd give them a swift slap with the back of my hand. My left hand.
If that makes me a fascist, so be it.

And hawk, don't say check your privilege, it's horribly cringey
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 02:07:00 PM
.
The only useful definition of fascism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism) is the use of violence to enforce political will. If you use violence to silence or intimidate a non-violent opponent you are a fascist. Slavoj Zizek (https://qz.com/896463/is-it-ok-to-punch-a-nazi-philosopher-slavoj-zizek-talks-richard-spencer-nazis-and-donald-trump/) kick it up one time:

QuoteIs it OK to punch a Nazi? No! If there is violence needed, I'm more for Gandhian, passive violence. I once made a statement, maybe you know it, which cost me dearly. I said the problem with Hitler was that he wasn't violent enough. Then I said, in the same statement, that Gandhi was more violent than Hitler.

If a guy talks like that jerk [Richard Spencer], you should just ignore him. If he hits you, turn around. Don't even acknowledge him as a person. That's the type of violence I would call for. Not physical violence.

I'm not saying we should greet everyone, embrace them. Be brutal at a different level. When you encounter a guy like the one who was punched, act in such a way that even hitting him, even slapping him is too much of a recognition.

(The alt-right) represent the decay of common morality and decency. Hegel calls it Sittlichkeit. It's not simple morality, it's a set of thick unwritten rules which makes our social life bearable. And, paradoxically, I think that progressives should become the voice of common decency, politeness, good manners and so on.

Trump is an effect of the failure of the liberal-left. Everybody knows this knows this now. The only way to really beat Trump is to radically rethink what does the left mean today. Otherwise he will be getting ordinary people's votes.

My fear is not that Trump will fail and there will be chaos, but what if he succeeds? In Poland, the Law and Justice party, they did such a tremendous social transfer to the poor that no elected European government would dare to do it. They lowered retirement age, they made better conditions for health care, more help for mothers with children and so on. No wonder that people like them. They did something that no left government dares to do.

When I was young I remember when former US president Nixon went to China. The idea was that only a right-winger can do something like this. If a left-winger, or a Democratic president had done this, he would have been attacked as a traitor. A left-winger would have been considered a traitor. And we are at the end of this crazy logic. If you want better conditions for the working class, you have to be populist right wing


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:07:18 PM
To be fair, if someone thinks slapping a nazi is equatable to genocide they kinda do have some privilege issues going on.

Edit: By useful, Frank, I presume you mean the one that fits your definition. Convenient.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:10:16 PM
It's an EXAMPLE! Rather than list every evil movement that ever existed I chose the one we had the most experience in dealing with. Substitute 'Nazi' for any group you want, the point about free speech stands. We don't have to like it but it's the price we pay for our tolerant society.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:15:06 PM
Someone needs to un-twist their knickers, sit down and realize you can't isolate Nazism and expect us to just roll with the 'free speech' speal. Free speech my arse. They're entitled to say what the fuck they want but the second they start advocating genocide they can expect physical resistance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:18:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:15:06 PM
Someone needs to un-twist their knickers, sit down and realize you can't isolate Nazism and expect us to just roll with the 'free speech' speal. Free speech my arse. They're entitled to say what the fuck they want but the second they start advocating genocide they can expect physical resistance.

At the risk of sounding as rude as yourself: you need to learn to read properly!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:19:28 PM
Pot, meet kettle.

It's funny how folk can get so offended when their bullshit gets called out on. But of course, continue to equate resistance to genocide if they're both 'equally wrong', i'll just wait here.
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/783/443/d1b.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:27:28 PM
Because have you ever noticed how it's always CisHet White/Christian MEN, who stand up for so called 'Free speech'. A nazi can do or say anything in the name of free speech but the second anyone retaliates 'Oh no, you cant be doing that!'. Cunts.

(https://media.tenor.co/images/f3e122df6dbf15f03f2585bac8086a40/raw)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:29:23 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:27:28 PM
Because have you ever noticed how it's always CisHet White/Christian MEN, who stand up for so called 'Free speech'. A nazi can do or say anything in the name of free speech but the second anyone retaliates 'Oh no, you cant be doing that!'. Cunts.

(https://media.tenor.co/images/f3e122df6dbf15f03f2585bac8086a40/raw)

I'm an atheist so how do I fit into your cis/white Christian Bullshit!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 January, 2017, 02:31:16 PM
Quote from: A PRECIOUS LIBERAL SNOWFLAKE on 29 January, 2017, 01:36:18 PM
Additionally: this is why people don't talk about anything anymore. Accusations and willful miss-reading gets in the way of fair and balanced debate!

Ironically, this is how Trump won.  When those of opinions contrary to the mainstream aren't engaged with but attacked and driven underground on social media and away from polling company surveys, it doesn't actually make them stop voting, and more than likely will just give them a persecution complex that reinforces their original views.

Or to put it more simply: whoever Twitter hates most, wins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:32:43 PM
Work it out sweety, it's the same entitled, obnoxious shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:35:24 PM
Fair and balanced debate, you can't beat it. And don't call me sweetie, condescension is weak! Darling!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 02:37:48 PM
I agree with Kev on this.

If people are not allowed to say egregious things in public, and be challenged, ridiculed and disproved, those egregious things will go underground and fester. Open speech is vital for reasoned debate.

To punch someone for something they've said or voted for is not particularly civilised and only a short step away from glassing someone in a pub for supporting the wrong football team or fancying the wrong person.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 29 January, 2017, 02:40:43 PM
Okay- This is the second time in the last hour I've been summoned.

Hawk- take five minutes to think before posting- make sure you are not just being reactive.
Kev- step away- you pressed the button so you should stand back and stop winding other boarders up.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 02:43:01 PM
Read and understood Bolt, apologies for the heated nature of my posts recently. This particular affair has some personal bearing on me I'm sure you are all aware of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 02:43:39 PM
Furthermore, when did "I disagree with you" mutate into "I hate you"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:44:39 PM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 29 January, 2017, 02:40:43 PM
Okay- This is the second time in the last hour I've been summoned.

Hawk- take five minutes to think before posting- make sure you are not just being reactive.
Kev- step away- you pressed the button so you should stand back and stop winding other boarders up.

I will abide of course, but I'm not sure how me having an opinion is "winding other boarders up".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 02:55:58 PM
Quote
To punch someone for something they've said or voted for is not particularly civilised and only a short step away from glassing someone in a pub for supporting the wrong football team or fancying the wrong person.

A very, very long step I'd say.  We're talking about actual Nazis here, relativism has its limits, and that to me is reductio ad absurdum.

I agree, shouting down right wingers and truthers/birthers/pro-lifers/brexiteers etc and abusing and belittling them rather than trying to acknowledge their views and persuade through engagement is utterly counterproductive, as everyone must know by now.

But no-one will ever persuade me that punching an actual  Nazi is somehow wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 29 January, 2017, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:35:24 PM
don't call me sweetie, condescension is weak! Darling!

Kev-This sort of comment is what I mean. It doesn't help and weakens your position.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 03:01:32 PM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 29 January, 2017, 02:58:48 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 02:35:24 PM
don't call me sweetie, condescension is weak! Darling!

Kev-This sort of comment is what I mean. It doesn't help and weakens your position.

Fair enough.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2017, 03:03:03 PM
Quote from: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 02:07:00 PMTrump is an effect of the failure of the liberal-left. Everybody knows this knows this now. The only way to really beat Trump is to radically rethink what does the left mean today. Otherwise he will be getting ordinary people's votes.


Again, this is the real problem that needs to be addressed. If there's no potent alternative to the Trumps of this world, we'll be getting more of the same from now on. What's left of the Democratic party, after it has been thoroughly hollowed out by the Clinton Foundation, is certainly not it.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2017, 03:09:52 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2017, 03:03:03 PM
Again, this is the real problem that needs to be addressed. If there's no potent alternative to the Trumps of this world, we'll be getting more of the same from now on.

I think it bears repeating that Trump didn't win because of a more popular ideology, he won because someone (at this stage it doesn't matter if it was the GOP or the Russians) worked out how to game the Electoral College.

Clinton, despite being a self-evidently terrible candidate, polled almost 3,000,000 more votes than Trump, but he took the Electoral College by 79,000 votes spread over four states. If forty thousand Trump voters had voted the other way, Clinton would have taken the Electoral College as well as the popular vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2017, 03:21:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2017, 03:09:52 PMClinton, despite being a self-evidently terrible candidate, polled almost 3,000,000 more votes than Trump, but he took the Electoral College by 79,000 votes spread over four states. If forty thousand Trump voters had voted the other way, Clinton would have taken the Electoral College as well as the popular vote.

Whatever way it was gamed is academic now; the fact is enough people still supported him to secure a win, democratically, against a weak candidate - a lot of that is due to democrats being out of touch with working class Americans.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 03:23:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 02:55:58 PM
Quote
To punch someone for something they've said or voted for is not particularly civilised and only a short step away from glassing someone in a pub for supporting the wrong football team or fancying the wrong person.

A very, very long step I'd say.  We're talking about actual Nazis here, relativism has its limits, and that to me is reductio ad absurdum.

I agree, shouting down right wingers and truthers/birthers/pro-lifers/brexiteers etc and abusing and belittling them rather than trying to acknowledge their views and persuade through engagement is utterly counterproductive, as everyone must know by now.

But no-one will ever persuade me that punching an actual  Nazi is somehow wrong.
Tordels know whats up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 03:25:15 PM
Agreed. There is no way human filth like Trump should have come within a mile of any elected position. That's the failure that needs to be addressed.

EDIT: agreeing with with Joe there, not agreeing with Hawk agreeing with me! Although I do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2017, 03:30:53 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 January, 2017, 03:25:15 PM
That's the failure that needs to be addressed.

Ironically, the Electoral College that system that put him in the White House was, in part, designed to stop unfit candidates from taking the office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 03:41:06 PM
If by actual Nazi you mean someone who is going around causing actual bodily harm or putting people in real peril then yes, absolutely I agree that a good, hard punch to the face is in no way unreasonable.

If somebody's just talking about it, however, physical violence is - to my mind - not justified.
I would also like to point out (yet again, heh) that another central plank of Nazism is the amalgamation of business and state, which our government (and the USA and EU amongst many others) is a strong believer in. I, as most of you know, do not believe in this and am, instead, a strong believer in the Free Market. I don't think it would be acceptable for me to punch people in the face over this issue or to accuse people of being Nazis if they support state regulated markets - despite the real and actual misery this system causes

Violence has to be a last resort in a civilised society. Unfortunately, governments can't exist without violence and so violence is what we become used to as the norm. Governments, and violence, are what we were put on this planet to rise above.

All that being said, human beings are still animals and many of us enjoy the odd punch-up just for the fun of it. Maybe there was something truthful in Fight Club after all...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 03:45:14 PM
Furthermore, I am also in complete agreement that Trump is not in the least bit deserving of his current position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 January, 2017, 03:48:29 PM
Link to the petition for government to prevent Trump from making an official state visit.  For anyone who thinks her Maj shouldn't be embarrassed by the difficult decision on whether to sock him one. (She definitely should). It at least brings attention to the issue.

Quotehttps://petition.parliament.uk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 29 January, 2017, 03:57:29 PM
Problem with the punch a Nazi approach is what happens when they punch back? And then there are reprisals. And then we are all in the shit.

Bill Maher
"Liberals must examine all the reasons why we keep losing elections"
https://www.facebook.com/Maher/videos/10154395089942297/
NSFW
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 03:59:58 PM
As opposed to violence as I am, throwing Trump, Charles and a single length of lead pipe into a greasy, rat-infested pit does hold a certain guilty appeal...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 January, 2017, 04:07:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 03:59:58 PM
As opposed to violence as I am, throwing Trump, Charles and a single length of lead pipe into a greasy, rat-infested pit does hold a certain guilty appeal...

All of those poor rats drowning in a sea of orange bile.
Seriously though, and without any actual evidence: I believe someone will have a good go at assassinating him.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 04:16:25 PM
Nah, only the good guys get assassinated, as the late, great Bill Hicks pointed out, "We always kill the guys that try to help us, always, and let the little demons run amok: John Lennon murdered, John Kennedy murdered, Martin Luther King murdered, Gandhi murdered, Jesus murdered.....Ronald Reagan....wounded."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2017, 04:18:53 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 29 January, 2017, 03:57:29 PM
Problem with the punch a Nazi approach is what happens when they punch back? And then there are reprisals. And then we are all in the shit.

Liberal punches neo-Nazi: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkw_ybhY7eo&feature=youtu.be&t=20s) global debate; much hand-wringing.

Neo-Nazi shoots liberal: (http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/uw-shooting/) modest coverage in local press.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 29 January, 2017, 04:36:38 PM
See, yer actual Nazis don't get to have the benefits of a liberal society in my book as they're pretty much against it. Free speech - certainly, it either exists or it doesn't - but if one of them gets decked then maybe it's down to using that free speech to disseminate hatred and a dream of a resolutely non liberal social structure.

The old right wingers just love to play the victim. They'll appeal to leniency when they're getting decked either literally or figuratively, but they will absolutely never offer the same to anyone else. And they misunderstand that 'liberal' does not mean 'not angry'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 January, 2017, 04:49:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 04:16:25 PM
Nah, only the good guys get assassinated, as the late, great Bill Hicks pointed out, "We always kill the guys that try to help us, always, and let the little demons run amok: John Lennon murdered, John Kennedy murdered, Martin Luther King murdered, Gandhi murdered, Jesus murdered.....Ronald Reagan....wounded."

On the other hand... Rasputin, Julius Caesar, Lee Harvey Oswald, Mussolini, Reinhard Heydrich...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2017, 04:50:38 PM
Jim and Mikey have it right. The far right complain about how violent the left have become, totally ignoring the fact the right has always been violent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 29 January, 2017, 06:25:43 PM
Half million signed :)

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 January, 2017, 08:11:23 PM
Another added.  Now at over 600 000.  Wonder how long its been up.  Should look and see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 08:27:58 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 29 January, 2017, 04:49:03 PM

...Lee Harvey Oswald...


Now there's a can of worms...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 January, 2017, 08:53:36 PM
We can be pretty sure that the same voices who declare "the people have spoken" in reference to the referendum will be declaring this petition irrelevant and elitist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 29 January, 2017, 09:06:55 PM
Bit of a difference between a government held referendum and a petition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 29 January, 2017, 10:12:40 PM
There is, but the push for a sudden and brutal brexit at any cost is largely due to the much-voiced view that "the people have spoken", and what the right wing media and politicians of this country really care about is the opinion of ordinary, hard working people.  So much do that the government considered it utterly unnecessary to debate the issue, or even follow our nation's laws.

Such a caring and considerate attitude towards the will of the nation is unlikely to extend to this particular issue. In fact, expect it to be completely brushed under the carpet.

763,000 signatories and rising.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 January, 2017, 10:51:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2017, 04:18:53 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 29 January, 2017, 03:57:29 PM
Problem with the punch a Nazi approach is what happens when they punch back? And then there are reprisals. And then we are all in the shit.

Liberal punches neo-Nazi: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkw_ybhY7eo&feature=youtu.be&t=20s) global debate; much hand-wringing.

Neo-Nazi shoots liberal: (http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/uw-shooting/) modest coverage in local press.

Point well made but will go ignored by those who need it.

This is week one. Steve Bannon is on the security committee and the joint chiefs are on the outs. A racist and flagrantly callous order has been put into immediate effect.

It's all the more horrific because it's so... stupid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 29 January, 2017, 11:08:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 02:43:39 PM
Furthermore, when did "I disagree with you" mutate into "I hate you"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2017, 11:12:07 PM
 I think it's time to remind all civil servants and government employees that "I was just following orders" is NOT a valid excuse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 January, 2017, 11:18:04 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 29 January, 2017, 10:12:40 PM
763,000 signatories and rising.
827,301 (except the webpage keeps automatically updating every eight or nine seconds and now it's 829,122 831,370).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 January, 2017, 11:30:57 PM
I expect there will be a perfunctory debate over this in parliament. In the highly unlikely event that Tangerine Palpatine is banned, Jaffa cake the Hutt is petulant enough to ban all Brits from Murkah in retaliation
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 11:53:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 January, 2017, 11:30:57 PM
I expect there will be a perfunctory debate over this in parliament ...

We already had one in response to the last petition to ban Trump from the UK, last Summer (587,000 signatures).

The petition that attracted the greatest number of signatures in the history of that site (4 million) pointlessly called for a change to the rules of the Brexit referendum (after the vote). And that's why we aren't leaving the EU anymore.

Looking down the list of that site's most popular petitions - two calls to sack Jeremy Hunt, legalise dope, close all UK borders immediately (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions) - I can't see a single one that's changed government policy.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 12:07:07 AM
Since when did The People's opinion on anything change government policy? All it ever does is change labels, like turning the Poll Tax into the Council Charge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 January, 2017, 12:13:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 12:07:07 AM
Since when did The People's opinion on anything change government policy?

Have you heard of that brexit* thing?

The word "brexit" is in my predictive text. The name of my hometown isn't, along with several other proper nouns. I don't know what to make of that
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 January, 2017, 12:14:56 AM
Quote from: Frank on 29 January, 2017, 11:53:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 January, 2017, 11:30:57 PM
I expect there will be a perfunctory debate over this in parliament ...

We already had one in response to the last petition to ban Trump from the UK, last Summer (587,000 signatures).
This one is not to ban Trump, just not to treat him to a full state visit with meeting with the queen.

QuoteThe petition that attracted the greatest number of signatures in the history of that site (4 million) pointlessly called for a change to the rules of the Brexit referendum (after the vote). And that's why we aren't leaving the EU anymore.

The one that was started by a Brexiteer who thought he was going to lose the referendum and started the petition before it had happened, and was then upset when it took off after his side 'won'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 January, 2017, 12:44:34 AM
There's enough dirt to go round - not just for Donnie Tinyhands.

"You can bomb the shit out of them but as soon as you try to bar them from coming into the country...you're a monster."

Trump Muslim Ban Made Possible By Obama Admin & Media Won't Tell You (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FTFB9GDfls)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 01:13:50 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 30 January, 2017, 12:13:33 AM


Have you heard of that brexit* thing?



It ain't changed nothing yet...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 02:59:36 AM
I haven't fact-checked this link (because it's silly o' clock in the ay-em)  and therefore present it without comment one way or the other:

Trump's Executive Order on Refugees — Separating Fact from Hysteria. (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444370/donald-trump-refugee-executive-order-no-muslim-ban-separating-fact-hysteria?utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_content=588d3ffb04d301222d018387&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook)

Make of it what you will.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2017, 07:05:54 AM
I make of it a heap of racist horseshit.  Framed as a thoughtful response to "hysterical rhetoric" its central thrust is hysterical rhetoric:

QuoteUnless we want to simply accept Muslim immigrant terror as a fact of American life....

Or to paraphrase, a Final Solution is what we need, but this is a useful first step.

And then my current favourite line of argument, "But Obama!", wherein the former communist Muslim foreigner terrorist and actual founder of ISIS is now presented as having been at least as hard-line on immigrants as Trump, if not more.

Always good to start the day wanting to vomit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 January, 2017, 08:32:15 AM
Fuck sake, who put Immortan Joe in charge if the states?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 January, 2017, 08:39:09 AM
"Hilary took money from the Saudis"

Proceeds to close borders for Muslim nations except the ones Trump has businesses in.

"Hilary will be weak on the Russians"

Decides that Russian sanctions should be lifted.

"Hilary is in the pockets of elitist businessmen"

Both is an elitist billionaire, and fills a cabinet with them.



They've now decided the executive order says something that it does not say, and that it doesn't apply to travellers with joint citizenship.  There are, of course, no European terrorists.

Meanwhile, Farage of the Ukips agrees with the travel ban, and Paul Nuttals of the Ukips seems to think it just prevents "Jihadis" from traveling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 30 January, 2017, 11:31:21 AM
Should President of the United States don't got personal Twitter as notice his moaning tweets about Media and people!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2017, 11:33:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 01:13:50 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 30 January, 2017, 12:13:33 AM
Have you heard of that brexit* thing?

It ain't changed nothing yet...

Sharky, it has. At the very least look in a comic book shop and ask them how their margins are doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 11:55:18 AM
Is that down to Brexit, though, (which hasn't happened yet) or fear/speculation over the future? I suppose that, in a nit-picking kind of way, Brexit is having some effect but that effect is caused by the prospect of it and not the reality. It seems to me that nobody knows when or even if Brexit will happen or what form it will take when it does and so I think the apparent current effects are more about uncertainty than anything else.

However, I honestly don't care about Brexit and so haven't looked at it very closely - so you may well be correct in what you say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2017, 12:29:32 PM
Your ability to focus on the abstract in defiance of the material is always of interest Sharks :) 'In a nitpicking sort of way', you may have noticed most things in the supermarkets have gone up by 10p as well. Let's not have a rehash of the eternal currency-is-a-lie debate though.

Anywho.

Part of my job is helping people file visas and so on for different countries around the world. Today is a very sad day as I see so much human suffering caused so callously. The uncertainty now troubling so many people's ability to return home, see family, live their lives (never mind all the tourists and visa holders).... all for what? And the misinformation infuriates me as even my manager, who fucking runs a team giving advice on Visa applications, doesn't understand the difference between this order and the DHI's existing list of sensitive countries, and doesn't care to find out beyond saying 'They've simply tightened it'.

There he goes, 'shaking things up'. Like a fucking earthquake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2017, 12:35:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 11:55:18 AM
However, I honestly don't care about Brexit and so haven't looked at it very closely - so you may well be correct in what you say.

I outlined the problem with sterling's over-valuation and the more-or-less inevitable impact on that due to brexit (http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php?topic=28209.msg942311#msg942311) and invited some kind of cogent response from any pro-bexiters, in reply to which we got some flagrant trolling and a temporary thread lock, which implies a certain lack of answers.

I'd still be interested to learn what anyone from either side of the argument thinks can be done to avoid or mitigate the crash, or offer an explanation (beyond "well, it might not happen" or "what do you know about it") as to why sterling isn't over-valued.

Sterling's loss in value is already feeding through into food prices. Larger retailers are, to an extent, absorbing the worst of it in their margins, for now, but if sterling continues its current slide against the euro (http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=EUR&view=1Y) and the dollar (http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=1Y) you're going to start seeing significantly increased prices on the shelves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:05:32 PM
I'm so glad we have our wasteland back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 01:21:10 PM
Sorry, Blaze - the nit-pickery was all mine, I used it to demonstrate (I thought) my lack of understanding of the Brexit thing which is, to me, an entirely artificial problem and unworthy of much attention. But yes, just because it's an artificial problem that doesn't mean its effects on people are unreal. Sometimes (often) I allow my disdain for such things to carry me away. (That 10p added to supermarket prices, and the fluctuations in the "value" of Sterling are also artificial problems, the results of bureaucratic interference with the markets and exchanges, which have real world effects. But, as you say, let's not rehash all that.)

At heart, most problems caused by governments are artificial, the result of somebody's idea of how things should work being imposed on everyone else. This current US immigration thing is a good example - somebody thinks X,Y and Z are good ideas and so imposes them regardless of impacts on individuals. It makes my blood boil, I can't help it, and only adds fuel to my dislike of government authority. Every time, or almost every time, some privileged buffoon in government puts his name to a piece of legislation (artificial law, in my view), somebody suffers in reality. I know few people sympathise with my view of government and that my style of argument wins me no support but I do proceed from a foundation of treating human beings (all human beings, from Trumps to tramps) with humanity. Government is unable and unwilling to do the same, it simply has to be callous or else lose its authority, which is why I detest it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2017, 01:54:10 PM
Quote- somebody thinks X,Y and Z are good ideas and so imposes them regardless of impacts on individuals. It makes my blood boil, I can't help it, and only adds fuel to my dislike of government authority. Every time, or almost every time, some privileged buffoon in government puts his name to a piece of legislation (artificial law, in my view), somebody suffers in reality. I know few people sympathise with my view of government and that my style of argument wins me no support but I do proceed from a foundation of treating human beings (all human beings, from Trumps to tramps) with humanity. Government is unable and unwilling to do the same, it simply has to be callous or else lose its authority, which is why I detest it.

Well made points. You already know what I'll ask next, and I know what your answer will be so let's not bother, but there's no denying my sympathy for this part  of your position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:55:03 PM
Tinfoil hattery of the worst kind. (https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.9ybq7q3ub)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 January, 2017, 01:59:43 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:55:03 PM
Tinfoil hattery of the worst kind. (https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.9ybq7q3ub)

I'd believe every word of that, but my knowledge of all this isn't good enough to trust.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2017, 02:08:05 PM
Thanks, Tordels.

Although I disagree with the reason given for my recent seven day banishment, I am determined to take it on the chin and reel myself in a bit. As has been said before, we come here for enjoyment and I don't want to spoil that for anyone, least of all myself. All I ask is that you cut me a bit of slack and let me know if, or when, I start frothing again.

I apologise, therefore, unreservedly and to everyone for the upset I have caused.

Just because you're all idiots*, that doesn't mean I despise you...  :| :) :D :lol:


*No you're not, I'm just pulling your legs!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:05:32 PM
I'm so glad we have our wasteland back.

FWIW, I shouldn't have responded to the trolling and am suitably contrite about that. I thought that the original (linked) post was detailed and (I don't think) worded in an inflammatory manner, which is why I brought it up again, since it seemed relevant to the current line of discussion.

The possibility of still-further devaluation of sterling concerns me deeply, it concerns people far smarter than me deeply*, and I'm very keen to know why it doesn't seem to concern brexit supporters or, if it does, what solution they think is available that eludes me.

*I have one friend whose job involves the mechanisms that facilitate trading shares and currency. As such, he is prevented from having financial interests in such things, so watches the movements thereof with a dispassionate eye; another whose primary role is doing 'big data' work for a very large bank. Conversations with them, even limited to what they can talk about without disclosing privileged information, are quite revelatory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2017, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:55:03 PM
Tinfoil hattery of the worst kind. (https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.9ybq7q3ub)

To be fair, it's getting kind of hard to know where the tinfoil hattery begins and the actual raving madness ends, given that Trump has sidelined the Joint Chiefs of Staff and put national security in the hands of a white supremacist with no governmental, military, diplomatic or intelligence community experience. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/stephen-bannon-donald-trump-national-security-council.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 January, 2017, 05:45:04 PM
Grima Wormtongue
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2017, 06:21:44 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 30 January, 2017, 05:45:04 PM
Grima Wormtongue

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Alt_Mordor_zpsfsw1xemo.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 January, 2017, 06:36:19 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2017, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2017, 01:55:03 PM
Tinfoil hattery of the worst kind. (https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.9ybq7q3ub)

To be fair, it's getting kind of hard to know where the tinfoil hattery begins and the actual raving madness ends, given that Trump has sidelined the Joint Chiefs of Staff and put national security in the hands of a white supremacist with no governmental, military, diplomatic or intelligence community experience. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/stephen-bannon-donald-trump-national-security-council.html?_r=0)

Plus the news that his team has effectively 'sacked' the top echelon in the state department, culling it of any experience.  Can we check that listing from the Scottish newspaper about the inauguration?  This is really starting to feel like they were soft pedalling it just a little.  Ronald Reagan is starting to look like a reasonable and knowledgable statesman about now!   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 30 January, 2017, 07:43:31 PM
Time for some truth about the inauguration from the Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/01/24/the-true-correct-story-of-what-happened-at-donald-trumps-inauguration/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/01/24/the-true-correct-story-of-what-happened-at-donald-trumps-inauguration/)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/06/14/how-to-cover-donald-trump-fairly-a-style-guide/?utm_term=.4737114408f1&tid=a_inl (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/06/14/how-to-cover-donald-trump-fairly-a-style-guide/?utm_term=.4737114408f1&tid=a_inl)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 31 January, 2017, 12:39:41 AM
Fascinating CNN 'gigapixel' which doesn't seem to be working at the moment. My ancient browser might be at fault.

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

Frankly, I don't trust much of the press as I believe they sold us some real stinkers, in particular over Syria. But that's another story for another day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 31 January, 2017, 09:08:10 AM
Oh dear...

Trump sacks defiant acting attorney general
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 31 January, 2017, 09:39:11 AM
She was leaving anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2017, 09:43:31 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 31 January, 2017, 09:39:11 AM
She was leaving anyway.

It's less the sacking, TBH, since she was the outgoing AG, but rather Trump's worrying declaration that she had 'betrayed' the justice dept by expressing concern about the constitutional validity of the banning order.

Both she, and Trump, swore oaths to uphold the constitution and to declare observing that oath to be treachery is troubling, to say the least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 10:25:55 AM
Corruption Perceptions Index 2016. (https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016#regional)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 31 January, 2017, 11:14:42 AM
George Orwell's 1984 has suddenly become a bestseller! It's a shame more people didn't read it in the past, if they did the chances are the world wouldn't be run by Twats!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 12:03:27 PM
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a Trump blowing into a human face — forever."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 03:20:52 PM
47% Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track_jan30)

51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump's job performance. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jan31)

There's so much hatred for Trump in the media, both mainstream and alternative, but these numbers don't seem to reflect this. It's all very odd. Could it be that Trump is going after the Deep State and the Deep State's fighting back with all the pressure groups, politicians and media outlets at its disposal? I hope this is the case but I doubt it. Could it be that Trump is the monster everyone seems to think he is? I don't know that, either - I hope this isn't the case but, again, I doubt it. There seems to be an awful lot of noise and motion but not much progress.

(https://media2.giphy.com/media/O7l4qIUtS9IbK/200.gif#10)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2017, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 03:20:52 PM
Could it be that Trump is the monster everyone seems to think he is?

I defy you to look at photos of five year old children in handcuffs at American airports and answer that question in anything other than the affirmative.

Besides, it looks a lot like Steve Bannon is actually running the show, and he's an honest-to-God white supremacist. Even if Trump isn't a monster, he's empowered one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 31 January, 2017, 03:47:18 PM
Bannon is the Himmler to Trump's Hitler.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 04:03:28 PM
To be fair, children have been handcuffed in this country (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sussex-police-put-11-year-old-disabled-girl-in-handcuffs-and-leg-restraints-ipcc-finds-a7070176.html) as well.

But handcuffed children doesn't technically make Trump a monster - unless he's the one who physically slapped them on. The monster in such cases is the person who carries out the action. "I was just following orders" is not an excuse. I think it's imperative that this message gets out - it should be printed on tee shirts, written into song lyrics, be on everyone's lips and have the Hell memed out of it all over the interweb. Then it wouldn't matter who was calling the shots quite as much.

Everyone, repeat after me: "I was just following orders" is not an excuse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 31 January, 2017, 04:12:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 04:03:28 PM


Everyone, repeat after me: "I was just following orders" is not an excuse.


Absolutely! However, it can be very difficult and even dangerous to be the lone voice asking questions when surrounded by a multitude who think you're wrong.


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 04:14:33 PM
Tell me about it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 31 January, 2017, 04:38:57 PM
I see where you are coming from Sharky, but consider, they're are both monsters. Trump for being for being the racist, xenophobic hate monger, and the cop for enabling his hate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2017, 04:49:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 04:03:28 PM
But handcuffed children doesn't technically make Trump a monster - unless he's the one who physically slapped them on.

Pretty sure Hitler didn't personally kill any Jews. 'Technically' not a monster?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 January, 2017, 04:53:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 03:20:52 PM
There's so much hatred for Trump in the media, both mainstream and alternative, but these numbers don't seem to reflect this.

He is a monster, long before he became President, but as he is currently keeping his campaign promises it's unsurprising that his domestic support remains strong. He's giving the mob what it thinks it wants, in the manner of fascists everywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: auxlen on 31 January, 2017, 04:55:15 PM
I try....probably more than 'people I know' loom at thinks from all perspectives as best i can and it seems, not surprisingly, that nobody agrees with anybody.

I follow the BBC, SKY, HUFFINGTON, The young Turks and J Dore(for regressive left), RUBINREPORT, CNN and PJW, Rebel media, TOMMY SOTO et al for right wing

I mean, look at this  (forgive his nauseating use of Jump cuts) but even this video gave mrs auxlen some pause.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNu4xU9qOEM

I just try to see things from all angles and end up not knowing anything.

if anyone has any news sources to add please let me know.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: auxlen on 31 January, 2017, 04:56:11 PM
auto correct mauled the above....hope it makes sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2017, 04:58:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 03:20:52 PM
47% Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track_jan30)

51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump's job performance. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jan31)

There's so much hatred for Trump in the media, both mainstream and alternative, but these numbers don't seem to reflect this. It's all very odd.

I would have thought a committed tinfoil hat enthusiast would have at least considered the possibility the polls could be loaded or flawed.
Yougov came in for a kicking for always seeming to find numbers that corroborated the right-wing views of its founders, but when checked against observable outside factors that couldn't be manipulated or qualified by their staff - elections, for instance - the numbers don't seem to line up with public opinion at all.  QED.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 31 January, 2017, 06:06:53 PM
If "I was only following orders" isn't an excuse then surely those who give the orders aren't guilt-free either.

Conversely as well:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/201158/skeptical-trump-handle-presidential-duties.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/202811/trump-sets-new-low-point-inaugural-approval-rating.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 31 January, 2017, 06:27:05 PM
Quoteif anyone has any news sources to add please let me know.

In response to the "it's not a Muslim ban" argument...

Trump, prior to election stated that he would introduce a ban on Muslims immigrants.  Here he is doing it...


Quotehttp://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/06/13/donald-trump-orlando-attack-muslim-ban-nr.cnn

So shortly after election, Trump assembles a team to look at how to do it.  Here's Rudolph Giuliani explaining it it was put to him as part of a propaganda broadcast...

Quotehttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jPnKYyjIRcw

"He first announced it and said "Muslim ban".  He called me up and said "put a commission together and show me how to do it legally.".



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 31 January, 2017, 06:39:02 PM
In local news, I've just received a glossy, full colour, A4, four page leaflet from a local politician.  There is only one mention of the party they a member of.  It's about size six font at the foot of a block of text and it says...

(Scottish Conservative and Unionist)

It's a little reassuring that they're ashamed of themselves.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 31 January, 2017, 06:43:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2017, 03:20:52 PM
47% Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track_jan30)

51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump's job performance. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jan31)

There's so much hatred for Trump in the media, both mainstream and alternative, but these numbers don't seem to reflect this

Rasmussen only contact confirmed voters, rather than a representative sample of the general population, since their aim is to predict the results of elections, not take the temperature of the nation as a whole. Their final poll had Clinton ahead of Trump (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html) by 2%, which is what actually happened, although they got the totals wrong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016).

All of that is perfectly legitimate, but their data doesn't support the idea that the US population in general is supportive of the new administration. Even Rasmussen's own numbers show 35% of those polled Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing versus 41% who Strongly Disapprove. The other quarter are presumably Meh.

Different pollsters use different methods; for what it's worth, Rasmussen's numbers are outliers (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html):


Economist  -   46  49   -3
PPP (D)      -   44  50   -6
Quinnipiac  -  39   52   -13
Fox            -  42   55   -13
Rasmussen -  52   48   +4
Reuters      -  50   50   Tie
CBS           -  32   42   -10
ABC           -  40   54   -14
CNN           -  44   53   -9
NBC           -  38   48   -10
Monmouth  -  35   45   -10


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2017, 07:46:39 PM
Scotland has other parties?  When did this happen?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 31 January, 2017, 08:05:13 PM
Scotland in fact has 3 political parties.  The "SNP", the "Greens" and the "Not the SNP Party".

The Not the SNP Party is divided into three main factions:

The Ruth Davidsons (whose principle Ruth is the Ruth of more Ruth), the rotting corpse of Labour, and Willie Rennie.  The main goal of the Not the SNP Party is to oppose every single thing the SNP proposes, even when they agree with it. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 03:00:24 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2017, 04:49:02 PM

Pretty sure Hitler didn't personally kill any Jews. 'Technically' not a monster?


Nice trolling, there - trying to get me to say something you can misrepresent as a defence of Hitler when you know very well I was pointing out the difference between ordering murder and actually committing murder.

"You are both a Grade-A nutcase and a colossal
arse. Welcome to my 'ignore' list. Doubtless,
you will be proclaimed the new Mayor of the
forum in short order."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 01 February, 2017, 03:27:13 AM
Shark, you are reading far too much into Mr. Campbell's posts based on your pre-existing opinion of him. That is not what he was doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2017, 06:55:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 03:00:24 AM

Nice trolling, there - trying to get me to say something you can misrepresent as a defence of Hitler when you know very well I was pointing out the difference between ordering murder and actually committing murder.

I was doing no such thing. I was asking whether responsibility for those carrying out an order rests solely on the shoulders of those carrying out that order, or whether those issuing the order bear responsibility for  knowable and/or intended consequences of those orders. I believe that they do.

After the previous mess this thread got us all into, I'd be very careful where you go with this. I was treated to a one-week ban also, despite having been on the receiving end of some flagrant trolling (not by you, I hasten to add) which I reported and on which no action was taken. I'm not keen to repeat the experience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 09:40:36 AM
Previous experience, M.I.K., I'm afraid - he knows how to push buttons and I'm sick of it.

Whatever, my online experience is now Jim-free, something I've resisted for ages because it feels like a poor option but now it seems like the only sensible thing to do - probably for everyone's sake.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 February, 2017, 10:32:34 AM
QuoteBut handcuffed children doesn't technically make Trump a monster - unless he's the one who physically slapped them on.

All this was doing was applying your logic to another well-known case of 'only following orders' rather than an attempt to push buttons. Missed a pretty amicable response from Jim by the way.

I think wielding executive power so callously is worse than being the tool that must carry out those orders. Trump has clearly never heard Uncle Ben's pearls of wisdom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 01 February, 2017, 11:10:56 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2017, 06:55:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 03:00:24 AM

Nice trolling, there - trying to get me to say something you can misrepresent as a defence of Hitler when you know very well I was pointing out the difference between ordering murder and actually committing murder.

I was doing no such thing. I was asking whether responsibility for those carrying out an order rests solely on the shoulders of those carrying out that order, or whether those issuing the order bear responsibility for  knowable and/or intended consequences of those orders. I believe that they do.

After the previous mess this thread got us all into, I'd be very careful where you go with this. I was treated to a one-week ban also, despite having been on the receiving end of some flagrant trolling (not by you, I hasten to add) which I reported and on which no action was taken. I'm not keen to repeat the experience.

The judgement at Nuremberg would strongly confirm your judicial analysis.

On an aside from Jim's post and referring back to some earlier posting, as someone who had a serious dalliance with the extreme right in his youth I am extremely grateful for people engaging with me and discussing the issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 01 February, 2017, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 09:40:36 AM
Previous experience, M.I.K., I'm afraid - he knows how to push buttons and I'm sick of it.

Whatever, my online experience is now Jim-free, something I've resisted for ages because it feels like a poor option but now it seems like the only sensible thing to do - probably for everyone's sake.

The ignore function is actually ok. It just hides the persons posts when you are logged in, but you can see they have posted and expand if you wish. I was pretty disappointed at first but then realised that the extra time it takes actually slows me down. I still read as many posts as I ever did but now that replying has that extra step, I find I'm a lot less quick to get involved and to be honest it's only this thread that winds me up. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:15:26 PM
Blaze, this is at the core of what I believe. Yes, ordering a person to commit a crime is bad but not as bad as committing the crime because of orders. If I told someone* to stick his finger in the fire, whose fault is it if their finger gets burned? If I tell someone to pull a trigger, whose fault is it when the trigger is pulled? The main fault is in the action itself. It doesn't matter if the person telling you to do something is me, your priest or your president - what you do is your own personal responsibility. Nobody has the right to order you to do an unlawful thing - all they can do is ask, suggest, cajole, lie or hint.

This, of course, leads to some pretty disturbing implications - at least it does for me. It means that supporting government means supporting all government does. There are things in this world I cannot and will not support - from turning people out on the streets in this country to dropping bombs on people in other countries. "Yes, but, libraries and hospitals" is not a valid counter-argument. No matter how much I support the existence of libraries and hospitals I cannot lump that support together with the rest. The second a government or leader commits violence against another person - be that theft or murder - then it/they have no more rights than any common criminal. This is why I cannot and will not support the government in its current form, for to do so means supporting actions that go against my personal morality. I won't steal or murder and certainly won't support any person or body doing these things in my name or on my behalf. Yes, I like hospitals and libraries but I won't condone or support people stealing from others in order to provide them for me - to support a thief, to benefit from theft, is as bad as being a thief.

If some government official orders me to do something against my will or morality then I'm not going to do it. Period. I'll go to jail first. I'll die first. That's because the officials issuing the orders aren't using their own powers to achieve whatever goal they want, they're trying to usurp my personal power. And if it is in my power to commit whatever crime I'm being ordered to commit then it is also within my power to not do as I'm told. Indeed, individuals saying "no" is the greatest power there is and the only thing governments are afraid of, which is why they present themselves as being "in power" so vigorously.

The act is worse than the order to act. People know this (if I told you to stick your finger in the fire...) but choose to believe otherwise because it's easier, more convenient. As soon as people believe that others have the right to order them to do anything at all, they abdicate all responsibility for their own morality, their own rights and their own powers. Then along comes a Hitler, or a Stalin, or a Trump and the weak-willed fall under their spells like Pavlov's dogs.

Well, not this dog. This dog bites back.

Thanks for mentioning Nuremberg, Prodigal. Although it was in some ways a show trial it did raise significant points and demonstrate the importance of not blindly following orders.


*When I say "someone" here I refer to a normal, properly functioning human being. Ordering someone with a mental disability, or an undeveloped mind, to do wrong is a different argument in which the order is worse than the action.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2017, 12:25:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:15:26 PM
Yes, ordering a person to commit a crime is bad but not as bad as committing the crime because of orders.

I didn't suggest that being ordered to do something reprehensible absolves the person carrying out that act of responsibility. I was saying that ordering people to do monstrous things makes the person issuing the order a monster, not that the people carrying out those orders aren't.

(Edit: I know Shark won't see this, but I feel it's important to clarify my position given that I think he's mis-characterising what I said. Also: the suggestion that I would somehow lay a 'trap' in order to claim that someone, anyone, supported Hitler is one to which I take particular exception.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 01 February, 2017, 12:27:41 PM
In the Times today;

(https://scontent.flhr3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16473054_10154143185935896_2252419034718100944_n.jpg?oh=4ce492578fe60fb3111d5ecc16455d93&oe=59107B07)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:33:53 PM
What the drokk is Joe doing to Donald??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 February, 2017, 01:05:17 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 01 February, 2017, 12:27:41 PM
In the Times today;

(https://scontent.flhr3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16473054_10154143185935896_2252419034718100944_n.jpg?oh=4ce492578fe60fb3111d5ecc16455d93&oe=59107B07)



Metal shin guards and dangling belt fasteners? This is what happens when you google 'Judge Dredd + bike' for reference images and end up with Le Juge Dredd:


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LUXuFkNJm84/TbazmnFgzOI/AAAAAAAACiQ/AAqXYY-gr3c/s400/JUDGEDREDDinteg02.jpg)

Image by Sebastien Grenier. Pete Wells's excellent blog on Le Case Files au Francais (http://2000adcovers.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/judge-dredd-il-est-le-loi.html)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 February, 2017, 01:17:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:33:53 PM
What the drokk is Joe doing to Donald??

Not half of what the Donald is doing to the Law.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mWyEayAVpWE/UM1iSQlePDI/AAAAAAAABSQ/R_ErZE6zeHg/s1600/1532boocookbooth.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 03:27:48 PM


Numpty Trumpty built a great wall,
Numpty Trumpty thought Muslims were small,
His bazinging Tweets and his feverish pen,
Showed only how needed was his examen.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 February, 2017, 03:50:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:33:53 PM
What the drokk is Joe doing to Donald??
It's a trap!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 February, 2017, 04:04:46 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2017, 12:25:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 February, 2017, 12:15:26 PM
Yes, ordering a person to commit a crime is bad but not as bad as committing the crime because of orders.

I didn't suggest that being ordered to do something reprehensible absolves the person carrying out that act of responsibility. I was saying that ordering people to do monstrous things makes the person issuing the order a monster, not that the people carrying out those orders aren't.

(Edit: I know Shark won't see this, but I feel it's important to clarify my position given that I think he's mis-characterising what I said. Also: the suggestion that I would somehow lay a 'trap' in order to claim that someone, anyone, supported Hitler is one to which I take particular exception.)

Yes all round.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 February, 2017, 05:13:02 PM
Quotethe suggestion that I would somehow lay a 'trap' in order to claim that someone, anyone, supported Hitler is one to which I take particular exception.

Only a terrible person would do such a thing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 01 February, 2017, 05:16:55 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 01 February, 2017, 05:13:02 PM
Quotethe suggestion that I would somehow lay a 'trap' in order to claim that someone, anyone, supported Hitler is one to which I take particular exception.

Only a terrible person would do such a thing...
Alternative emotions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 10:37:00 AM
Oh look Milo, all those poisonous seeds you sowed have sprouted and started expressing themselves.  Eat up your greens now, snowflake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 February, 2017, 11:24:26 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 10:37:00 AM
Oh look Milo, all those poisonous seeds you sowed have sprouted and started expressing themselves.  Eat up your greens now, snowflake.

He certainly is an odious clown with abhorrent views. My only concern, and touching on what I said the other day, is that he is now in a position to play the victim. He, and his ilk, will use this as a way of defending their views!

I still think the best way of dealing with people like that is to tell them that their views are bigoted and have no place in society. Convince them they are wrong*

Cheers

*some people won't ever listen but some will. Additionally: violence can be contagious, like a virus. People can end up doing things they would normally find reprehensible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 02 February, 2017, 11:57:36 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 02 February, 2017, 11:24:26 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 10:37:00 AM
Oh look Milo, all those poisonous seeds you sowed have sprouted and started expressing themselves.  Eat up your greens now, snowflake.

He certainly is an odious clown with abhorrent views. My only concern, and touching on what I said the other day, is that he is now in a position to play the victim. He, and his ilk, will use this as a way of defending their views!

I still think the best way of dealing with people like that is to tell them that their views are bigoted and have no place in society. Convince them they are wrong*

Cheers

*some people won't ever listen but some will. Additionally: violence can be contagious, like a virus. People can end up doing things they would normally find reprehensible.

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 12:31:08 PM
I had to Google Milo Yiannopoulos as I'd never heard of him. Reading through some of the news reports of what went on at U.C. Berkeley, it seems a small group of masked, black-clad "demonstrators" kicked off the violence in an otherwise peaceful protest - as seems to happen rather a lot. (Meanwhile, largely unreported, militarized police, armoured cars, sound cannons and the National Guard moved in on protesters at Standing Rock. The crimes of government once again ignored in favour of the crimes of a handful of protesters - go figure.)

I wouldn't be surprised if this apparently odious man's appearances are being used as deliberate flashpoints for those who are working towards a police state in the U.S. He should perhaps change his name to Milo Reichstag and be done with it.

One wonders if the deep state has some more authoritarian legislation ready to go and is just aching for an excuse to roll it out. Former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke told Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig: "After 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.

"The Patriot Act is huge and I remember someone asking a Justice Department official how did they write such a large statute so quickly, and of course the answer was that it has been sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out."

Trump, and the extreme reactions surrounding his election, seem to me like one big hyperReichstagclusterfuck bursting to be used as an excuse for martial law.

Whether the above speculations are true, untrue, semi-true, alt-true or pseudo-false aside, the U.S. seems to be in a very dangerous place at the moment. Americans, and the rest of the world, can only demand that cooler heads will prevail.

Also, what Tordels and Kev said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 February, 2017, 02:12:22 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 02 February, 2017, 11:24:26 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 10:37:00 AM
Oh look Milo, all those poisonous seeds you sowed have sprouted and started expressing themselves.  Eat up your greens now, snowflake.

He certainly is an odious clown with abhorrent views. My only concern, and touching on what I said the other day, is that he is now in a position to play the victim. He, and his ilk, will use this as a way of defending their views!

I still think the best way of dealing with people like that is to tell them that their views are bigoted and have no place in society. Convince them they are wrong*

Cheers

*some people won't ever listen but some will. Additionally: violence can be contagious, like a virus. People can end up doing things they would normally find reprehensible.
With all due respect mind, it never works. Bigots don't operate on a rational level and will find any means to justify their ideals, no matter how observably wrong they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 02:31:49 PM
With all due respect, that's treating all people with bigoted views the same way. There are always some who can be convinced to change just as there are always some who cannot. To dismiss the idea of dialogue from the outset drastically curtails our options.

I grew up in the 70s when bigotry was rife, not because of any real animosity but simply because it was "the done thing," learned behaviour or "just a bit of harmless fun." I've seen many of my contemporaries change their views over the years and very few indeed who have not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 February, 2017, 02:33:36 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 02 February, 2017, 02:12:22 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 02 February, 2017, 11:24:26 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 10:37:00 AM
Oh look Milo, all those poisonous seeds you sowed have sprouted and started expressing themselves.  Eat up your greens now, snowflake.

He certainly is an odious clown with abhorrent views. My only concern, and touching on what I said the other day, is that he is now in a position to play the victim. He, and his ilk, will use this as a way of defending their views!

I still think the best way of dealing with people like that is to tell them that their views are bigoted and have no place in society. Convince them they are wrong*

Cheers

*some people won't ever listen but some will. Additionally: violence can be contagious, like a virus. People can end up doing things they would normally find reprehensible.
With all due respect mind, it never works. Bigots don't operate on a rational level and will find any means to justify their ideals, no matter how observably wrong they are.

Admittedly you won't convince everyone but it's worth noting that some bigots have only ever been surrounded by other bigots. When presented with irrefutable facts some have, and will, change their mind.

By Prodigal's own admission he had a dalliance with the far-right and was convinced by others that his beliefs were wrong.

On the other hand some people will never change but I like to think such closed minded thinking is dying out. Wishful thinking on my part perhaps.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 February, 2017, 02:57:54 PM
I used to think so Kev, but a quick look around confirms that it's very much alive, well and more vocal than it has been for a long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 February, 2017, 03:29:23 PM
Just to clarify, I don't support violent protest like the UCBerkeley stuff at all.  And I fear for the fuel this gives all sorts of parties (to the point at which my False Flag radar is tingling).  But I'm afraid I do find it absolutely bloody hilarious to see someone whose entire career has been based around denigrating anyone that isn't him as weak and over-sensitive, as well as being a smirking face behind the real-world threats made to individual women and others, being subjected to this kind of aggression. You can't go around inciting contempt and focused hatred and then complain when it finds you.

He's always played the victim of the 'extreme left', now he actually is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 03:35:35 PM
Hear, hear.

I think this Milo guy is what's known as a "useful idiot" - a person whose actions generate situations that can be used by The Powers That Shouldn't Be to further their own agendas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 February, 2017, 04:53:09 PM
Theory: there's no more bigots than usual, and they're no more bold than usual, what's changed is that now the media is putting them front and center more often.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 February, 2017, 04:55:52 PM
I'd like to think so but you don't have to look at those given prominence in the media to see the hundreds of chuckle****s bellowing their support.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 February, 2017, 05:55:49 PM
QuoteBut I'm afraid I do find it absolutely bloody hilarious to see someone whose entire career has been based around denigrating anyone that isn't him as weak and over-sensitive, as well as being a smirking face behind the real-world threats made to individual women and others, being subjected to this kind of aggression. You can't go around inciting contempt and focused hatred and then complain when it finds you.

The Faragists can through a strop over a joke sign being held up in parliament making fun of him, but it wasn't too long ago he was throwing insults at his follow MEPs, including telling a former surgeon that he'd never had a real job. 

"Help, help, I'm being oppressed" said every bigot ever. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 February, 2017, 06:44:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 03:35:35 PM
I think this Milo guy is what's known as a "useful idiot" - a person whose actions generate situations that can be used by The Powers That Shouldn't Be ...

Specifically, Breitbart (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitbart_News) proprietor and Bob The Galactic Bum lookalike Steve Bannon, Trump's unrelected defacto co-President (http://uk.businessinsider.com/trump-steve-bannon-national-security-council-2017-1). Yiannopoulos is no pawn though; he's a self declared troll, following the Katie Hopkins play book (the same tactics that put Trump in the White House).

I've no time at all for Millennial Glenn Beck [1], his predictable schtick or his stupid hair, but I defy anyone to read the words of his tormentors and not come to the conclusion that this is a real world demonstration of Team America (https://youtu.be/zcAaertdaQk?t=28)'s metaphor concerning the utility of dicks deriving from their ability to fuck arseholes:

Protest organiser Yvette Felarca defended the demonstration, describing the actions of students as "self-defence". "We have the right to defend ourselves," she said, adding: "This shutting down Milo Yiannopoulos, and doing whatever's necessary to do that, is our right to self-defence."
BBC News 02/02/2017 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38837142)


[1] I predict a similar career trajectory to Beck. Five years from now, Yiannopoulos will have undergone a Damascean conversion so he can work the opposite side of the ideological divide for dollars.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 07:12:08 PM
It's not a case of being a pawn, it's a case of taking advantage of situations he causes all by himself. To a certain extent I think Trump is the same - just sit back and take advantage of the things he does. There's no need for either of them to be controlled or directed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 February, 2017, 07:17:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2017, 07:12:08 PM
It's not a case of being a pawn, it's a case of taking advantage of situations he causes all by himself ... There's no need for (him) to be controlled or directed.

It's not worth arguing over, but agency and awareness would mean he wasn't a useful idiot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 February, 2017, 07:52:15 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 02 February, 2017, 05:55:49 PM
The Faragists can through a strop over a joke sign being held up in parliament making fun of him, but it wasn't too long ago he was throwing insults at his follow MEPs, including telling a former surgeon that he'd never had a real job. 

"Help, help, I'm being oppressed" said every bigot ever.


Didn't he announce in European Parliament that none of them had done a day's work in their lives (sitting right behind him was a Nazi concentration camp survivor).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 February, 2017, 04:54:38 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 February, 2017, 04:53:09 PM
Theory: there's no more bigots than usual, and they're no more bold than usual, what's changed is that now the media is putting them front and center more often.

I've anecdotal evidence which would suggest otherwise.

On the 12th of November last year, I unfriended someone on facebook because I noticed my "people you may know" section was suddenly packed to the effin' gunnels with friends of his with Pepe the frog (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepe_the_Frog) and blatant nazi imagery all over their profile pictures. I didn't need to look far to discover that a few of these were clearly actual neo-nazis/white supremacists, with troubling views on race, a penchant for jewellery shaped like swastikas, and not a hint of irony.

Whether my facebook acquaintance was aware of this fact, I do not know. He'd previously demonstrated mildly right-wing views, had quoted Milo Yiannopoulos a few times and had a growing obsession with Donald Trump, (most of this conveyed via annoying memes), but he also had plenty of friends of varying ethnicities and cultural backgrounds and had only just recently broken up with his black girlfriend, so I took him for a slightly trollish half-wit who mistakenly believed himself to be a full-wit.

Anyway, suddenly that facebook section was flooded with frogs and Trumps and nazis to an alarming degree. I hadn't noticed them before, so I assumed he must've recently added a load of them in one go. Upon checking out his profile, I saw Trump's victory had sent him into hyper-troll mode, spouting irritating guff about "liberal tears" and "collecting salt". Advertent friend of nazis or not, I decide he's certainly an annoying prick, and unfriend him.

Having found the sequence of events somewhat worrying, I mention it in a public facebook status update.

Couple of days later, I learn Trump has appointed Steve Bannon as his chief strategist. A few days after that, Richard Spencer's nasally yelling "Hail Trump" in a room full of folk doing nazi salutes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 February, 2017, 06:03:39 AM
This will no doubt come as unsurprising, certainly its a view i've held for a long time.  It seems that South Park have decided to  'back off' (http://www.cbr.com/south-park-will-back-off-lampooning-donald-trump/) from lampooning trump because its too ridiculous.  It does seem like a pretty bad black comedy, sort of Monty Python meets Dr Strangelove. 

The more I read about the new American President and his team, the more I think that a really juvenile bunch of college kids have taken over and are determined to show the adults up.  Unfortunately they also have a nuclear arsenal. 

Then again, we've got BoJo and Farage.  Not fully in the same league to be sure, sort of the geeky kids that try to hang around pretending to be cool and sucking up all the time.  You know, the more I think about it, the more I can see where they're coming from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 February, 2017, 10:09:22 AM
Multiple reports coming out that Trump's White House staff turned off the recording equipment while Trump was on the phone to Putin.

If we are blessed to look back on this period of history, the Trump White House, and all the nasty, seething hatred that seems to have finally overflowed these last few years, i can only hope we don't repeat the same mistakes again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 February, 2017, 02:12:28 PM
Tweet from neo-Nazi punchee, Richard Spencer.

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/Spencer_Tweet_zpsrryujt59.jpg)

I don't even know where to start with this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 February, 2017, 02:29:51 PM
What a colossal twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 03 February, 2017, 02:49:56 PM
 :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 February, 2017, 03:03:10 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 February, 2017, 02:12:28 PM


I don't even know where to start with this...

Finding myself asking that every other minute i check the news nowadays.

Grim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 February, 2017, 03:33:06 PM
Now he needs a kicking too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 February, 2017, 05:35:12 PM
Jesus Christ.  As arguments go, defending your right to free speech with "I am literally a Nazi" is poor even by 2017 standards.

I used to be worried that there was some sort of plan to damage the concept of democratically elected government through a series of unpredictable actions designed to cause chaos and invoke a feeling of despair in the electorate.

Now I'm just worried that these people don't have a fucking clue what they're doing.  They lack any sort of understanding of the world, or the ability for self reflection.  The Americans have chosen a president who may never have actually read a book.  The UK is being governed by people who just voted for something they didn't want, because roughly half of an uninformed electorate told them it might be so good idea. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 February, 2017, 07:40:38 PM
"Uninformed electorate", speak for yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 February, 2017, 07:50:14 PM
If more than 1.89% of the people who voted to leave were voting because of laws about bananas, or thought that there would be a windfall for the nhs, or because of a fear of middle eastern immigrants, or any other number of lies they were told, then we are leaving the EU because of an uninformed electorate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 03 February, 2017, 07:56:17 PM
You've called everybody uninformed, whatever way they voted! Read your original post again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 February, 2017, 08:09:15 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 03 February, 2017, 07:56:17 PM
You've called everybody uninformed, whatever way they voted! Read your original post again.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 February, 2017, 05:35:12 PM
The UK is being governed by people who just voted for something they didn't want, because roughly half of an uninformed electorate told them it might be so good idea. 
Pretty sure this doesn't mean "everybody". ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 February, 2017, 08:53:20 PM
The electorate, in large part, are uninformed.  Certainly not "everyone", but a sizeable group. 

There was no real debate about leaving the Eu, because the people running remain didn't regard leaving as a possible option, and the people running leave were doing so largely for selfaggrandisement.  Any disagreement came down to one side shouting "you're racist!" while the other side shouted "stop calling us racists!", and Farage stood before an enormous picture of desperate looking foreigners he was trying to scare us with.

We need an informed electorate, particularly if we're going to make such huge decision by referendum.  We instead have deliberate misinformation, a hostile media, voter apathy and uninspiring politicians mouthing soundbites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 February, 2017, 09:50:54 PM
So, remember when Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize - and then became the only U.S. President in history to be at war for every single day of his two terms in office, expanded wire-tapping after promising to stop it, authorised the assassination of countless Americans and non-Americans via drone strikes without anything like due process and sold more weapons than any president since the Second World War?

Well, now it may be Trump's turn (http://www.ibtimes.com/could-donald-trump-win-nobel-peace-prize-pope-francis-vladimir-putin-aclu-nominated-2484860), as (rumoured to be) nominated by Israel.

He won't win, though. Surely not. It's impossible. Unthinkable. Jim Campbell's got a better chance. Shit, even I've got a better chance and I'm a complete who once punched a pro-life protester in the face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 February, 2017, 11:42:39 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 03 February, 2017, 08:53:20 PM
There was no real debate about leaving the Eu, because the people running remain didn't regard leaving as a possible option, and the people running leave were doing so largely for selfaggrandisement.  Any disagreement came down to one side shouting "you're racist!" while the other side shouted "stop calling us racists!", and Farage stood before an enormous picture of desperate looking foreigners he was trying to scare us with.

Trying?  Numerous friends of mine with darker skin than I, and have reported an increase in racist abuse hurled in their direction suggest that Farage did a good job of stirring race hate...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 04 February, 2017, 12:21:59 PM
The Judges and The Justice Dept are now lining against Bad Bob Trump...

John Wagner I hold you personally responsible for these unfolding events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 February, 2017, 12:28:16 PM
Ukip has been around since the early '90s, pushing this single issue, but they at no point appeared to put together a plan for how a seperation from the EU might actually work, to the extent that Farage was willing to openly mock the people we were about to start negotiating with, before buggering off.  The government put together a referendum, without any plan for what would happen next.  Months after the result, they were even wiling to tell us if the wanted to be in the single market or not.  The whitepaper, a series of vague statements, gets published after the government confirs it will be going ahead.

Trump boldly announced that he would transform America, but didn't even involve his security agencies in discussions about changing border controls. He launches an attack in Yemen which kills several civilians, including children, as well as killing a SEAL, and the head of the military wasn't even in the room.  He may not have even been told about it.

They don't know what they're doing. 

And all of these things, across the political divide and regardess of which party is responsible, happened in large part because the electrorate have become so distanced from the concept of politics, so eager to believe that "they're all the same", and "it doesn't matter anyway", and whatever "news" facebook feeds us, that politicians can spout whatever lies and badly thought-out ideas they want and gain power provided they have enough money to afford the ad campaigns.
In the end, the vulnerable will suffer.  The poor, the dispossessed, minorities.  They'll suffer because they're the easiest to blame when it all goes wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 February, 2017, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 04 February, 2017, 12:28:16 PM
Ukip has been around since the early '90s, pushing this single issue, but they at no point appeared to put together a plan for how a seperation from the EU might actually work, to the extent that Farage was willing to openly mock the people we were about to start negotiating with, before buggering off.  The government put together a referendum, without any plan for what would happen next.  Months after the result, they were even wiling to tell us if the wanted to be in the single market or not.  The whitepaper, a series of vague statements, gets published after the government confirs it will be going ahead.
The disorganisation was at an early stage - compare and contrast the following two questions in recent referendums / plebiscites - the first clearly shows what the effect of the vote will achieve (a change to the statute books), the second doesn't define what it's about...

"marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex"
RTE (http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0121/674602-marriage-equality/)

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
Electoral Commission (http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and-referendums/upcoming-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/eu-referendum-question-assessment)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 500 on 06 February, 2017, 08:40:21 AM
All read!

http://forums.2000adonline.com/index.php?topic=44126.0
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dunk! on 06 February, 2017, 10:34:21 AM
Foo-foo?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2017, 10:42:27 AM
CLiNT?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 February, 2017, 10:46:06 AM
Frank Miller?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 February, 2017, 11:04:11 AM
In a horrifying bit of synchronicity my 7 year old daughter has just embarked on a quest to find an informal name for her privates that she can live with. She is able to reel off an hilarious list of cute names for the male equivalent ('pickle' being my personal fave), but after the distinctly dull "front bottom" and "girl bits" she's at a loss. It's a telling situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 06 February, 2017, 11:12:00 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 February, 2017, 11:04:11 AM
In a horrifying bit of synchronicity my 7 year old daughter has just embarked on a quest to find an informal name for her privates that she can live with. She is able to reel off an hilarious list of cute names for the male equivalent ('pickle' being my personal fave), but after the distinctly dull "front bottom" and "girl bits" she's at a loss. It's a telling situation.

When I were a lad they were known as Minnies. I don't know where the term first came from, maybe it's a West country thing.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2017, 11:13:56 AM
When I was little the family's word for the male part was "widgie." Not having any sisters, the female equivalent was a mystery - although my primary school friend Kelvin Ridgeway insisted they contained teeth and were called "snappers." I've never summoned up the courage to check...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 February, 2017, 12:25:44 PM
A list of acceptable synonyms might be an idea, just for the sake of clarity.  Perhaps it could be the first thing that newcomers to the board see, just so as to avoid any mishaps?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 February, 2017, 06:42:29 PM
My wife and daughter tends to refer it as the bottom and I find mental translation often necessary!

As an aside, how on earth did we manage to descend into this discussion in the political thread?  I mean, it's taken some interesting turns over the years and the political landscape is currently being redesigned by Salvador Dali to be sure, but still ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 February, 2017, 04:53:56 AM
See You Next Tuesday.

:-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2017, 06:55:57 AM
I believe that life is happy and death is sad.
I believe my mum was married to my dad.
I believe that things that aren't good tend to be
bad.

I believe...

Yes, I believe.

I'm prepared to believe that Nixon wasn't a
crook.
I'm prepared to believe love story is a readable
book.
I believe that "The Dirty Dozen" weren't really
dirty.
I believe that Lucille Ball is still under 30.
I believe Gerald Ford is clever!
That Bob Hope will live forever.
And that lever [lee-ver] is pronounced leh-ver.
And the best film ever made is "Saturday Night
Feh-ver!"
I am prepared to say Col. Sanders can fry!
And that pigs and even DC-10s can fly!
I'm prepared to believe that things go better
with Coke.
And that the Ayatollah tells a darn good knock-
knock joke.
I believe that some folks can hear what Bugs
Bunny is saying.
And that Salt Lake City is a real nice place to
stay in.
I believe that J.R. really loves Sue Ellen!
I believe that things sound better when you're
yelling!
And I believe that the devil is ready to repent!
But I can't believe Ronald Reagan is president!

Not the Nine O'Clock News, 1980.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 07 February, 2017, 06:46:12 PM
I think Kev might be right.  The word "mini" was used down here too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 February, 2017, 08:36:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 February, 2017, 11:13:56 AM
When I was little the family's word for the male part was "widgie." Not having any sisters, the female equivalent was a mystery - although my primary school friend Kelvin Ridgeway insisted they contained teeth and were called "snappers." I've never summoned up the courage to check...

Anyone else see the irony inherent in somebody whose username is 'the legendary shark' regaling us with this tale of 'snappers'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2017, 08:48:35 PM
Mod! Mod! He's calling me a snapper!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 February, 2017, 09:22:28 PM
Surely when satire writes itself, we are in the worst of times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 February, 2017, 09:49:20 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2017, 08:48:35 PM
Mod! Mod! He's calling me a snapper!
One oppression card for you, Sharky!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2017, 10:00:10 PM
Woo-hoo! Another two and I've got a flush!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2017, 01:55:30 PM
So is that it, then? Your vague non-binding opinion poll trumps our meticulously worded legally binding multinational referndum? The greatest political achievement on this island in my lifetime dismissed as just one more speed bump to be avoided in the UK's suicidal descent? What the f**k is wrong with you people?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 February, 2017, 01:56:34 PM
If May is the Emperor then Corbyn is Jar Jar to her Palpatine. Just, hand out those emergency powers already. Muppet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 February, 2017, 04:07:59 PM
We're building a wall to keep the Irish out - and Ireland is going to pay for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 09 February, 2017, 04:18:03 PM
Wasn't that already done with the Scots? How successful was that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2017, 05:11:30 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 February, 2017, 04:07:59 PM
We're building a wall to keep the Irish out - and Ireland is going to pay for it.

And how.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Woolly on 09 February, 2017, 05:51:53 PM
Maybe the rest of the world should club together and build a wall around America?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 February, 2017, 02:47:03 PM

"Most of the gags in (Zombo) aren't specific to Trump – the President's hair is lush and full, he looks vaguely healthy, and he gains some measure of humanity and decency over the course of the strip ..." 
Al Ewing, The Independent, 11/02/2017 (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/2000ad-40th-anniversary-comic-book-pop-culture-status-judge-dredd-sci-fi-graphic-a7568511.html)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 February, 2017, 09:58:21 AM
Labour shortages (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/13/uk-labour-shortages-brexit-as-eu-worker-numbers-fall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Facebook) being reported in various industries thanks to the Brexit vote and resulting uncertainties for migrant workers. Of course, there won't be any economic impact from this, and how about that sovereignty, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 February, 2017, 12:48:30 PM
Economy growing faster after the referendum than before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 February, 2017, 12:56:10 PM
He say's without a source.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 February, 2017, 01:04:13 PM
FT suggests that the best we can hope for is that the slowing in the economy isn't as bad as previously predicted:

Where is the UK going?
Economic growth has not slowed as sharply following the vote as many economists had predicted but most independent forecasters still predict growth will slow further in 2017.
(https://ig.ft.com/sites/numbers/economies/uk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 13 February, 2017, 01:11:07 PM
Office for National Statistics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 February, 2017, 01:17:14 PM
And yet our currency is the lowest its been in 31 years (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/pound-sterling-euro-dollar-currency-exchange-theresa-may-hard-brexit-a7528866.html%3Famp?client=safari). Doesn't exactly look good for trade with these "friends" May is grubbing up to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 February, 2017, 01:56:25 PM
Speaking of online articles based on anecdotal evidence and manipulating scant - if any - facts to reflect a narrative, "F**king dream job my hole." (http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/02/09/did-kylie-jenner-get-a-boob-job-why-am-i-being-paid-to-write-about-this-shite/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 February, 2017, 02:02:31 PM
Well it informed me. That the Jenners haven't vanished up their collective arses after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 February, 2017, 12:19:13 PM
Still yet to see anything other than heads firmly in sand whenever this is brought up:

(http://exchangeconversions.com/charts/GBP-USD-chart-20-years.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 February, 2017, 02:16:26 PM
Quote from: Woolly on 09 February, 2017, 05:51:53 PM
Maybe the rest of the world should club together and build a wall around America?

As my uncle said: Mexico should pay for their wall, Canada should pay for one along the northern border, and then the rest of the world can chip in for a roof.

Also, a four day stag do bender ended with a big drunken sweary outburst here that resulted in a week ban. I'm fed up having to apologise for my drunk alter-ego
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 14 February, 2017, 06:39:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 February, 2017, 01:11:07 PM
Office for National Statistics.

God forbid you ever working out how to provide a link to back up your characteristically pithy statements...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 14 February, 2017, 06:48:29 PM
It's all on their website, all you have to do is look.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 February, 2017, 07:03:01 PM
I'm sure you all listened to the radio this morning and heard about how terribly our economy will do up to 2050. If not, here's one of those links that you all love and there are even links from this link, so just follow them and enjoy the doom for Britain. This bits from an opinion piece with the facts included, because if I linked up even the Guardian, now people don't believe it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/02/07/uk-to-be-fastest-growing-rich-economy-for-next-30-years-says-pwc/#2b8947ef7ceb (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/02/07/uk-to-be-fastest-growing-rich-economy-for-next-30-years-says-pwc/#2b8947ef7ceb)

Obviously you can look for the bit about Brussels doing a U-Turn over our economy as well, 50% higher from their stats. Also the IMF and the Bank of England have a positive outlook on the economy. I won't bother with loads of links, just search for them yourselves, as you love the politics, so you must've seen this news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2017, 08:33:27 PM
A 30 year forecast?  Sounds cast-iron legit to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 February, 2017, 11:15:37 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 14 February, 2017, 07:03:01 PM
I'm sure you all listened to the radio this morning and heard about how terribly our economy will do up to 2050. If not, here's one of those links that you all love and there are even links from this link, so just follow them and enjoy the doom for Britain. This bits from an opinion piece with the facts included, because if I linked up even the Guardian, now people don't believe it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/02/07/uk-to-be-fastest-growing-rich-economy-for-next-30-years-says-pwc/#2b8947ef7ceb (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/02/07/uk-to-be-fastest-growing-rich-economy-for-next-30-years-says-pwc/#2b8947ef7ceb)

Obviously you can look for the bit about Brussels doing a U-Turn over our economy as well, 50% higher from their stats. Also the IMF and the Bank of England have a positive outlook on the economy. I won't bother with loads of links, just search for them yourselves, as you love the politics, so you must've seen this news.

Strange that this is only being reported now, because if you click through to the report itself (http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/the-economy/assets/world-in-2050-february-2015.pdf), you'll see that it's two years old.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 February, 2017, 11:55:29 PM
Ah... No it isn't. Forbes has posted a link to the wrong report.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 February, 2017, 10:36:00 AM
I refer to my previous post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2017, 11:41:11 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 14 February, 2017, 11:15:37 PMStrange that this is only being reported now, because if you click through to the report itself (http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/the-economy/assets/world-in-2050-february-2015.pdf), you'll see that it's two years old.

That still means that it has 28 years of validity left in the tank.

Just out of curiosity, why didn't the scientists that make these economic forecasts do something about the 2008 crash since they had 30 years' notice about it happening?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 February, 2017, 11:55:25 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 15 February, 2017, 10:36:00 AM
I refer to my previous post.
"The value of the pound cant possibley get any worse!"

Wanna bet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 February, 2017, 11:59:08 AM
I think we may be confusing economists with Hari Seldon, when in fact they are closer to Harry Styles, i.e. I've no idea why anyone listens to them voluntarily.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 February, 2017, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 14 February, 2017, 06:48:29 PM
It's all on their website, all you have to do is look.

I don't see it.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/grossdomesticproductpreliminaryestimate/octtodec2016

Quote from: ONSUK gross domestic product (GDP) was estimated to have increased by 0.6% during Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2016, the same rate of growth as in the previous 2 quarters.
Growth during Quarter 4 was dominated by services, with a strong contribution from consumer-focused industries such as retail sales and travel agency services.
Following falls in Quarter 3 (July to Sept) 2016, construction and production provided negligible positive contributions to GDP growth in Quarter 4 2016.
UK GDP was estimated to have increased by 2.0% during 2016, slowing slightly from 2.2% in 2015 and from 3.1% in 2014.
GDP per head was estimated to have increased by 0.4% during Quarter 4 2016 and by 1.3% during 2016.

That doesn't suggest an increase in the rate of growth. Which statistics are you referring to?

In any case, I would say it's far too early for the result of Brexit to be apparent in ONS statistics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2017, 01:40:23 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 February, 2017, 11:59:08 AM
I think we may be confusing economists with Hari Seldon, when in fact they are closer to Harry Styles, i.e. I've no idea why anyone listens to them voluntarily.

Although, of course, not quite as perfect for the role of Sláine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 01:51:41 PM
Exactly, some of the ones you are quoting, even with my basic maths, I can work out that, if growth for the year is 2 percent and the last two quarters of the year have growth of 1.2 percent, the growth in the six months after the referendum must be more than the six months before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 February, 2017, 02:13:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 13 February, 2017, 12:48:30 PM
Economy growing faster after the referendum than before.

Growth in Q4=Q3=Q2. i.e. there was no increase in growth following the referendum.

In any case, ONS statistics are only useful in the long term.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
What about Q1? I'm comparing the six months after the referendum with the six months before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 February, 2017, 02:31:58 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
What about Q1? I'm comparing the six months after the referendum with the six months before.

Why?

If you're really interested, you could look at the longer-term trend:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/ihyq/pgdp

I don't see an uptick. I'd be happy if there was, but it's not there at the moment.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:42:57 PM
Why would you compare two quarters with one? The economy has grown faster in the six months after the referendum than the six months before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 February, 2017, 02:47:23 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:42:57 PM
Why would you compare two quarters with one? The economy has grown faster in the six months after the referendum than the six months before.

Have you looked at the chart? What does the line look like?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:56:47 PM
You are just on a wind up now :D I'm off to gaze at the art in The Wild Storm comic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 15 February, 2017, 02:59:31 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
What about Q1? I'm comparing the six months after the referendum with the six months before.

It's more helpful to make an apples to apples comparison (q4 this year to q4 last year) and more helpful still to view it as a trend (Q4 for the last 10 years) and then to view that trend in relation to the socio economic events form the time.

The Leave vote has not had the effect often cited in the perditions from the run up to the referendum but that may well be because the predictions were based on David Cameron instantly triggering article 50, which he didn't.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 February, 2017, 03:30:17 PM
I refer to my previous, previous post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 February, 2017, 06:21:00 PM
I'm just glad we have a new positive report, which means we can disregard all the previous negative ones.  It was well worth getting rid of those rights we had.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 February, 2017, 06:25:01 PM
The Church of England is once again trying to claim monopoly on how 'love' must be perceived, at the expense of myself and other queer folk. Bunch of out of touch old twats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 February, 2017, 07:06:24 PM
Totally agree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 February, 2017, 12:42:07 AM
Oh Hawky, my sweet summer child, you should count yourself lucky that you don't live in a region where the DUP carry any political weight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 February, 2017, 04:56:22 AM
Maybe not myself, but empathy makes me feel utterly low for my gay brothers and sisters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 February, 2017, 09:33:46 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2017, 12:42:07 AM
Oh Hawky, my sweet summer child, you should count yourself lucky that you don't live in a region where the DUP carry any political weight.

Hopefully the upcoming election will prove a humbling experience for the DUP. Hopefully they at least get a bloodied nose, and learn the cost of continued arrogance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 February, 2017, 09:55:29 AM
Marvel's Kamala Khan
http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever (http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 February, 2017, 10:54:21 AM
Some rumblings of low morale within the DUP of late from well informed non-Duper political types. Whether this translates into anything useful politically remains to be seen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 February, 2017, 12:08:04 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 16 February, 2017, 10:54:21 AM
Some rumblings of low morale within the DUP of late from well informed non-Duper political types. Whether this translates into anything useful politically remains to be seen.

We can but hope.

Would have hoped by now they realised that the political landscape is changing, and the empty threats of them against us are more and more, thankfully, falling upon deaf ears.

About time we had some responsible leaders, whatever their religion / allegiance, actually doing something to improve the situation in the country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2017, 01:08:13 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 16 February, 2017, 09:55:29 AM
Marvel's Kamala Khan
http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever (http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever)

Ms Marvel is a solid character, and as far along as I've read of it her own book is good clever stuff.  It has the genuine feel of early Spiderman, but told in a modern manner: and while that article makes it seem a bit po-faced and worthy it actually does the trick mentioned of normalising and humanising its subject through fun, interesting stories.  However the comments below it would make you weep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 February, 2017, 01:33:02 PM
"Bring back Carol Danvers!"

She hasn't fucking gone anywhere you muppets!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 February, 2017, 03:05:01 PM
Well the two comments on there are at the moment are fun, and seem to be unaware Kamala has been around for a few years at this point.

I just like that someone, somewhere, got to open a comic book and see a hero they can relate to. And it is a fun book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 February, 2017, 03:19:12 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 February, 2017, 01:08:13 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 16 February, 2017, 09:55:29 AM
Marvel's Kamala Khan
http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever (http://theconversation.com/why-america-needs-marvel-superhero-kamala-khan-now-more-than-ever-72401?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20February%2016%202017%20-%2067734961+CID_9d3154f02a7abdb098e90f7bdea0854a&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Why%20America%20needs%20Marvel%20superhero%20Kamala%20Khan%20now%20more%20than%20ever)

Ms Marvel is a solid character, and as far along as I've read of it her own book is good clever stuff.  It has the genuine feel of early Spiderman, but told in a modern manner: and while that article makes it seem a bit po-faced and worthy it actually does the trick mentioned of normalising and humanising its subject through fun, interesting stories.  However the comments below it would make you weep.

I never read below the line...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2017, 04:23:59 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 16 February, 2017, 03:05:01 PM
Well the two comments on there are at the moment are fun...

I dunno about that, man...

QuoteI don't think this will be a big hit in the stores outside Jersey City or Gaza.

QuoteI doubt it will be popular there either... no niqab or hijab and a form-fitting costume.

QuoteIn most Muslim countries she'd be caned.

QuoteOhhhhh.... NOOOOO.... she's shamelessly exposing her HAIR to me, thus stimulating my UNGOVERNABLE LUST! Heeeelp!

But you are spot on when you say people can read about a hero they can relate to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 February, 2017, 05:23:29 PM
I may have meant 'fun' rather than fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 February, 2017, 05:59:44 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 16 February, 2017, 05:23:29 PM
I may have meant 'fun' rather than fun.

Gotcha, my apologies for doubting you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2017, 08:13:42 PM
If any further evidence was needed for the importance of 2000ad's role in the medium, its that for decades it's been producing quality stories featuring a diverse range of characters and almost nobody cared.  Heroes of colour, female characters who rarely end up in fridges, and defiantly camp homosexual exorcists way back in 1992 (eight years before it was legal to tell school chidren that gay people exist).  Sure, its had its less enlighted phases ("wait...did Dredd just call that guy a "Nip""), but on the whole its been a comic that says, "we dont care who you are, or where you're from...you seem as weird as us... come on in".  Meanwhile, elsewhere in comic fan land, the existance of a young muslim woman is controversial.  Essentially, a comparatively low number of you guys are dicks.  Well done. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 17 February, 2017, 10:02:19 AM
Breakfast news this morning had a vox pops section on the Stoke-on-Trent By-Election. Depressing to see people still saying they voted Leave because the NHS is being overrun with foreigners*. Must be counting the days until the NHS gets that sweet £350 million a week and gets rid of all those foreigners**. Also interesting to see Labour voters deserting because Labour had given them nothing and they were a party for the pits and ship yards, and younger voters just don't see voting as important.

*personally I don't believe this is their real motivation.

**The NHS is being underfunded by the Tory's and it's care of the elderly and long term conditions that are driving the exponential cost rise, not overwhelmingly Tax paying people who so happen to have been born in a different country, who are also statistically less likely to use services.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 17 February, 2017, 10:30:05 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 16 February, 2017, 08:13:42 PM
If any further evidence was needed for the importance of 2000ad's role in the medium, its that for decades it's been producing quality stories featuring a diverse range of characters and almost nobody cared.  Heroes of colour, female characters who rarely end up in fridges, and defiantly camp homosexual exorcists way back in 1992 (eight years before it was legal to tell school chidren that gay people exist).  Sure, its had its less enlighted phases ("wait...did Dredd just call that guy a "Nip""), but on the whole its been a comic that says, "we dont care who you are, or where you're from...you seem as weird as us... come on in".  Meanwhile, elsewhere in comic fan land, the existance of a young muslim woman is controversial.  Essentially, a comparatively low number of you guys are dicks.  Well done.

Mate, you should have seen the backlash we got over Psi-Judge Hamida, the practicing Muslim judge. Most or all of was on the 2000AD Facebook page, which has a far larger reach than here, although I'm fairly convinced that a lot of the people there have Liked the page for nostalgia reasons and haven't read the comic in years/decades.

Anyway, the intellectual powerhouse that is the  "it's political correctness gone mad!" brigade were out in force on that one.  My favourite was the guy demanding that, because the comic had featured a positive depiction of a practicing Muslim, that there then be "balance" in a later story.  I think he's probably still waiting for his Dredd versus the Evil Suicide Bomb Muzziies story,. But then he can get his fix of that stuff from about 95% of the popular media depictions out there of Muslim characters.   'Balance', indeed.

Rob's gay Dredd story received a similar Daily Mail splutters of outrage reaction from some of the denizens of the FB page.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 February, 2017, 10:36:32 AM
The FB 2000AD pages are a boiling pot of far less pleasant folk than those present here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 February, 2017, 10:37:17 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 17 February, 2017, 10:30:05 AM
Rob's gay Dredd story received a similar Daily Mail splutters of outrage reaction from some of the denizens of the FB page.

There are still several members of this forum residing permanently on my 'ignore' list due to their reaction on here to the press release about that story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 17 February, 2017, 10:44:48 AM
The old "I'm not ****ist but why do you have to shove it down my throat by acknowledging their existence and depicting them in any way"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 February, 2017, 07:20:59 PM
Which reminds me: when are we getting another Judge Hamida story? Or do we have to wait for her to be the surprise guest in a Mike Carroll Dredd?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 February, 2017, 04:32:36 AM
I'm not arguing against diversity, but* off the top of my head I can't think of any character in anything with whom I have identified, based on ethnicity alone. My favourite characters are a Giant Green Nuclear Rage Monster, an Authoritarian Clone, a Girl Who Went Out, an Alien Deviant or a Randy Russian Swashbuckler.

I think it's more important to have an interesting character than to pander to a demographic.

*hmmm, sounds a bit like "I'm not racist, BUT..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 05:14:01 AM
All white males, except for 2000AD's first (white) female-led strip, and a male alien.  If there were no white males depicted in key roles at all in the prog, or the bulk of the medium, or across all media, I'd say you might feel differently about 'pandering'. Especially when you were a child.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 08:03:54 AM
Representation is important to appealing to a wider demograph, not pandering to a more niche one (which ironically is exactly whats being done by have almost entirely white leads).

In all 2000AD history only Black Sidha jumps out at me as having a POC lead and cast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 08:10:26 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 08:03:54 AM
In all 2000AD history only Black Sidha jumps out at me as having a POC lead and cast.

Sinister Dexter (half), Blackhawk/Aquila (the lead character at least), Asylum (I'm reaching here) and, errr, Outlaw.  Any others?  And don't suggest Rogue Trooper.

Our comic, despite all its progressive strengths, is a prime example of pandering to a demographic, that demographic being the white male of broadly anglophone judeo-christian origin. Aliens too, I suppose.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 February, 2017, 08:14:13 AM


Tribal Memories

http://www.2000ad.org/?zone=prog&page=profiles&choice=588
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 08:15:17 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 22 February, 2017, 08:14:13 AM
Tribal Memories

Damnit!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 08:30:36 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 08:10:26 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 08:03:54 AM
In all 2000AD history only Black Sidha jumps out at me as having a POC lead and cast.

Sinister Dexter (half), Blackhawk/Aquila (the lead character at least), Asylum (I'm reaching here) and, errr, Outlaw.  Any others?  And don't suggest Rogue Trooper.

Our comic, despite all its progressive strengths, is a prime example of pandering to a demographic, that demographic being the white male of broadly anglophone judeo-christian origin. Aliens too, I suppose.

Or Strontium Dog. Mutants aren't diversity you muppets.

There's also Pan-African Judges but we....don't talk about that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 08:45:32 AM
Harlem Heroes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 08:54:30 AM
Theres a lot of rather unpleasent stereotyping going in in HH that makes me hesitent to put it on a platform with the likes of Sin/Dex or Aquila.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2017, 09:30:33 AM
That'll be Pan-African judges, drawn by a black artist who wanted to to expand beyond the stereotype sketched out on the World Judges poster, and changed the direction of in the second series?

But we 'don't... talk about that'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africa_(comics)#Design_and_criticism_of_Pan_African_Judges (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africa_(comics)#Design_and_criticism_of_Pan_African_Judges)

I wouldn't mind giving it a revisit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 09:32:32 AM
Good one Sharky- both versions of HH plus Inferno really.  And Pan-African Judges.Killer too, I think? Okay, so there are several strips in our 40 year history that have non-white leads, and even a handful with (gasp!) girls. Bravo us, I think.

But this isn't comparable to the Ms Marvel situation. The thought experiment that best models that one for me  is to imagine that I'm a kid when almost EVERY comic hero is a Muslim girl of middle-eastern descent, as are most politicans and pubic figures, and the only time a white character shows up in fictio is when he or his brother/father is a member of a terrorist organisation, and his dialogue is peppered with 'Begorrah!' or '...arr flegs!' as he fondles some rosary beads/gathers bonfire tyres. And then an Irish superhero (note: not Banshee)  shows up in a good comic and people complain about 'pandering' to my demographic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 10:04:05 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 22 February, 2017, 09:30:33 AM
That'll be Pan-African judges, drawn by a black artist who wanted to to expand beyond the stereotype sketched out on the World Judges poster, and changed the direction of in the second series?

But we 'don't... talk about that'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africa_(comics)#Design_and_criticism_of_Pan_African_Judges (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africa_(comics)#Design_and_criticism_of_Pan_African_Judges)

I wouldn't mind giving it a revisit.
Whoa, thats something I wasn't aware of. Maybe a revisit IS in order...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 22 February, 2017, 10:50:26 AM
As a young Scots lad the appearance of Kenny Who in Dredd (and the tartan logo) blew my mind. At that age I had no idea about where the artists and writers were from but just the very existence of this character made me keenly aware that people in the larger world knew that my tiny country of origin existed and that made me even more of a fan than before. I can only imagine that for anyone in an actual minority seeing themselves represented this feeling would be experienced tenfold.

It also helps that the script and art was fantastic.  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 22 February, 2017, 11:56:52 AM
Always a joy to hear straight white males - and I'm one myself - complain about "pandering to a demographic", when the overwhelming content of our popular culture already panders to them, and they're not even a majority demographic themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 01:00:00 PM
I wonder if most heroes are white heterosexual males because most of the writers and editors are white heterosexual males? When I'm devising stories, the default "skeleton" of my hero is a white heterosexual male because that's who I am. I could try writing about a black disabled lesbian Sikh but then would I be guilty of racism and/or pandering? Also, what do I know about that particular demographic? I could write about a female hero but might fall into the trap then of being sexist - although I have written stories with female leads - because all I can think of is that being female isn't all that much different from being male, or being homosexual isn't all that much different from being heterosexual, or being raised in a Christian environment isn't all that much different from being raised in a Muslim environment. Except that maybe there are huge differences, or subtle differences I couldn't hope to grasp well enough to base a character on. So it's safer for me to write from my point of view. I don't think this makes me racist, sexist or religionist - just ignorant.

That said, J. K. Rowling wrote about Harry Potter and not Hermione Potter. I wonder if so-called "positive discrimination" might have seen her manuscript accepted sooner if her hero had been female - or would it still be sitting in her drawer? If John Wagner had been Jane Wagner, would we still have Joe Dredd or would it have been Jo Dredd? Would Patricia Mills have given us Billi Savage? Even Shako was a (very) white male when a female could have been much more fierce. Hookjaw was male (I think), Bonjo was male and King Kong was male.

I think it's a reflection of the fundamental male/female imbalance prevalent throughout the world. I want to see more stories (more everything, really) from the female point of view. I can't write these stories and, with the best will in the world, I don't think Alan Moore really can either - although such luminaries might produce works with a certain verisimilitude. The best female character a lowlife like me could ever hope to create would be a man with tits, which doesn't really help anybody. Maybe that's where editors go wrong as well - can any work from a female  be properly evaluated by a male? If Tharg had employed Marg more, might we have seen a better mix of stories inspiring a better mix of writers?

At the risk of being booed off, I'm also quite confused by the general reluctance to portray certain crimes such as rape (of any sex) and violence against women. Don't get me wrong, these are despicable crimes but rape is a marginally lesser crime than murder. Action heroes, including our own beloved Twoothy characters, have killed millions of their fellow humans in countless vicious and imaginative ways and we have cheered them on. They have ended lives, murdering their way through stories, and the deaths are seen as nothing much - just bad guys getting their just desserts, portraying such acts as "meh" events. Portray a wife-beater, however, or a rapist, and the reaction is visceral.

Columbo has pursued and incarcerated any number of murderers but has never, to my memory, gone after a rapist. Rape is a horrible, horrible crime but, as I said, a marginally lesser crime than murder. Why, then, is murder glorified and sanitised so that even Miss Marple can bumble her way through an amicable investigation whereas rape, a crime which happens in reality all too often, is virtually ignored? When was the last time Judge Dredd pursued a serial rapist? It's almost as if popular culture's ignoring of this crime will make it go away. Arnold Schwarzenegger can take the lives of a thousand silver screen bad-guys and nobody bats an eyelid but if he killed as many silver screen bad-girls there'd be ructions. A single silver screen rape, with a victim of any sex, and there'd be riots. Why? Why do we cheer a merciless killer but revile a merciless rapist? Why don't we revile both?

According to the Office for National Statistics (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/yearendingsept2016), there were 695 homicides in England and Wales between October 2015 and September 2016, whilst there were 37,813 rapes in the same period. Yet it seems that just about every t.v. cop show is about hunting down murderers, hammering home to us how bad murder is. 695 murders is not a good statistic but pales into relative insignificance next to a number like 37,813 - which seems like an epidemic. Shouldn't there be more stories about hunting rapists and bringing them to justice? Hammering home to us all just how wrong and evil a crime rape is instead of huffing and puffing and complaining about its portrayal? If we went off the statistics, for every single story about chasing a murderer there should be 54 about chasing a rapist but a parity would do, wouldn't it?

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating the glorification of rape in the same way that murder has been glorified. What I'm saying is that it should not be ignored or swept under the carpet in the media because that suggests this hienous crime belongs under the carpet in the real world. Art, after all, should hold up a mirror to reality. One wonders if this particular crime doesn't make it into cop shows so often because of attitudes from the past which shielded, and even tacitly encouraged, rapists in the upper echelons. Or it could be another symptom of the male/female imbalance. Murder is generally seen as a male on male crime, men killing men seems almost natural, as if that's what men were born to do, and so in a male-dominated world murder is just one of those things that men do and are proud of. Rape, on the other hand, is generally a male on female crime, men dominating women seeming like a secret right, as if that's what men were born to do, and so in a male-dominated world rape is just one of those things that men do and are secretly proud of. I don't think either perspective is correct and that both crimes deserve to be treated as such and exposed, pursued and punished with equal vigour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 01:20:13 PM
Ye gods, here we go again.  I'm sure most variation in depiction or murder v. rape has its source in a historical context of selective religious prudishness about sex, but...

I always come back to this: how many people do you know who have been murdered, versus how many have been raped?  It's a fair bet that if you're watching a dramatised murder on telly you haven't been murdered yourself.  But there's a significant chance that you or loved one have been subject to some form of serious sexual assault, with potential for genuine non-snowflakey offence and upset.  Murder is a rare crime (in most places), rape is almost ubiquitous.

Perhaps more significantly, murder is taken seriously by society, and (usually) punished accordingly.  The areas of doubt that exist tend to be about intent, responsibility and premeditation (an in some jurisdictions, race).  It is clearly a fundamentally more serious crime than rape, and is treated as such.

Rape, by contrast, was legal in my country until 1990.  And the almost monotonous issues of doubt and victim blaming with rape are so familiar as to require no further comment. Not long ago, I regularly heard people arguing that it wasn't even possible to rape a healthy, mobile woman. 

In the rich west at least the adult victims of rape are mainly women (I'm aware of the wartime exceptions and variations globally).  Where one group is disproportionately affected, there has to be concern.

Further, there is an undeniable issue of potential sexual titillation* involved in depictions rape.  As a sexual crime, that has to be a concern in using that to boost takings.

I personally have no real issue with depiction of rape in fiction, except for the fact that I have no desire whatsoever to read/watch it as it makes me deeply, deeply uncomfortable.



*I'm not sure I entirely buy the argument that rape is about power, not sex - I used to firmly believe this, but now I think that a selfish desire for sexual gratification has a role to play in many cases.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 01:30:51 PM
Tordels saved me from smashing my keyboard against my monitor in frustration there.

Seriously Sharky, claiming rape is "marginally" less evil than murder is incredibly disingenuous to the victims.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 22 February, 2017, 01:56:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 01:00:00 PMColumbo has pursued and incarcerated any number of murderers but has never, to my memory, gone after a rapist.

He's a homicide detective, that's why we don't see him arresting shoplifters either. There's a lot of tosh in that post but this annoyed me the most  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 February, 2017, 02:11:54 PM
I think we can all be grateful that Agatha Christie didn't write rape stories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 02:38:46 PM
Rape, like murder, destroys lives but rape is a less serious crime than murder. But murder, the worst of crimes, is portrayed, especially by Hollywood, as nothing much - gangs of baddies being mowed down by the "hero" or a case for some kooky and irascible detective who drives a weird car and wears an odd hat - and if murder is portrayed as being so matter-of-fact it cannot help but diminish the perceived seriousness of rape. To dilute the perceived seriousness of one automatically dilutes the perceived seriousness of other crimes through comparison.

It's the very fact that murder is so rare and rape so ubiquitous that upsets me. I know of one person from my village who was murdered, and I did not know her personally, and this was at least twenty years ago. I know several who have been raped. My point is that the media has a part to play in attempting to make rape as rare as murder. By ignoring it, by making it seem like nothing much, the crime is pushed out of the public consciousness and kept in the dark. My thought was that, as rape is a crime generally perpetrated by men against women and that our society is currently so male dominated, it doesn't get treated as seriously as it should, which I think is utterly wrong.

I'm not saying that every story currently involving murder should be switched over to involve rape (and certainly not in a titillating way) but that, I think, the media has a duty to tell such stories (and to portray murder as the ultimate crime it actually is), to help educate us as to how wrong it is and help remove the stigma of reporting such horrid crimes. Just talking about it raises vehement knee-jerk anger and that's good, it's the first step on the path to stamping it out, which is what we all want.

Hawkie, I did not say rape was marginally less evil, I said it was a marginally lesser crime, which is not the same thing at all. The margin, thin as it is, comes from the fact that one is survived and the other is not. Tordels, that's what you get when you let governments put their legislation above the Golden Rule...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 February, 2017, 02:51:32 PM
I'll agree that murder has been somewhat sanitised in our culture and the concept of the cosy murder mystery may seem very odd to a visiting alien.
There's no denying that some subject matter is more palatable than others in our culture and it has little to do with the supposed 'seriousness' of the crime. You could say that animal cruelty is a lesser crime than murder or rape but I don't see many tea time dramas or films tackling puppy farms either. It's another subject that's just far too emotive and upsetting to be the basis of a character drama.

It's deeper than how the media portrays murder too. Murder is a word used flippantly throughout our culture. You may say you could murder a cold beer but you're unlikely to say you could rape one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2017, 02:52:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 02:38:46 PM
Hawkie, I did not say rape was marginally less evil, I said it was a marginally lesser crime, which is not the same thing at all. The margin, thin as it is, comes from the fact that one is survived and the other is not. Tordels, that's what you get when you let governments put their legislation above the Golden Rule...
I think the ratio of rape victims suffering with long term PTSD and the percentage of whom commit suicide is a pretty firm indicator that this is utter tosh.

http://www.rrsonline.org/?page_id=944
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 03:10:01 PM
Hawkie, what is it - specifically - that you think is "utter tosh"?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2017, 03:34:51 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the phrase 'one is survived and the other is not' might be the point of offence.  I'm guessing that, as Hawkie notes, there is a significant incidence of mental health issues with debilitating effects up to and including loss of life, that there may be a slight semantic issue with the word 'survived'.  Considering how sensitive an issue it is, language that might be perceived as demeaning rape as a crime is always going to be difficult to navigate.  As you say, in the eyes of the law rape is considered a lesser crime perhaps due to the immediate cessation of life.  That is not the same as saying it is a lesser crime in the sense of potential impact.

Perhaps we need to rename this thread the "Light Blue Touchpaper" thread?

Only a slightly tangential note, I've always found murder programmes mildly bemusing.  You'd think considering the population of a village like Midsomer (okay, fictional I know) that the incredibly high murder rate would make anyone think twice before moving there.  Plus, wouldn't any halfway rational psychologist be seriously questioning the level of psychosis in the area generating so many murderers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 03:52:30 PM
That's what I was thinking, Tjm, but didn't want to presume.

Logically and dispassionately speaking, rape victims have a better chance of recovery than murder victims. Thus my assertion that rape is a marginally lesser crime. To say so does not diminish the overall seriousness (or "evil" if you want to use an emotive word) of either crime.

Midsomer would probably be of interest to Professor Quatermass!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2017, 04:00:15 PM
I think the simple fact of the matter is that it is such an emotive subject largely due to a, regrettably, higher level of familiarity people have with it.  Statistically speaking there are probably a large number of forum members that have either direct or indirect knowledge of the subject, as Tordels points out.  Particularly when you take into account under reporting due to the rather pleasant attitude of some members of the criminal justice system.  That is not to say that this limits those who can speak on the topic.

Mulder and Scully might have fun in Midsomer too.  (hmm, title for a book perhaps?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2017, 04:09:18 PM
Agreed.

And agreed!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2017, 09:18:42 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2017, 09:32:32 AMThe thought experiment that best models that one for me  is to imagine that I'm a kid when almost EVERY comic hero is a Muslim girl of middle-eastern descent, as are most politicans and pubic figures, and the only time a white character shows up in fictio is when he or his brother/father is a member of a terrorist organisation, and his dialogue is peppered with 'Begorrah!' or '...arr flegs!' as he fondles some rosary beads/gathers bonfire tyres. And then an Irish superhero (note: not Banshee)  shows up in a good comic and people complain about 'pandering' to my demographic.

You miss the major component of the thought experiment: that you shouldn't be reading comics for Muslim girls of middle-eastern descent in the first place because those comics are not for you, they're for people who've been reading them for years already and those people alone.

I have a certain amount of empathy for the fanboy's point of view - clumsily articulated as it is and occasionally tinged with cultural, racial, and politically-insensitive thoughts and language - because on some level he has a point that these are "his" comics, as he's been supporting them for decades and thanks to Diamond and the Big Two publishers (and, of course, the seemingly endless supply of titty comics like Vampirella), the industry has focused on making him feel like the center of the world (and anyone else feel unwelcome) to the point of near-destruction.  Why wouldn't he feel that comics are "his" when the industry has gone out of its way to encourage this viewpoint?

Having said all that, if they really don't like Ms Marvel that much, you'd think if they were that big a comics fanboy they'd know to just wait a few years and things will run their natural course when everyone goes back to buying Wolverine or Deadpool.  Remember non-Caucasian teenage female superhero Arana and her quirky, occasionally topical title that dealt with then-relevant teen issues as well as the usual NYC superheroics?  It's okay if you don't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 22 February, 2017, 11:09:11 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5S9-qnWYAA9CkH.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 February, 2017, 11:38:49 PM
Forgetting which government was in power at the time was the very LEAST of the Mail's hypocrisy - as these Daily Mail headlines show:

(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/anaconda888/2DF4CAF300000578-3296382-image-a-170_1446242510616_zpsnizrxgsl.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 February, 2017, 12:19:47 AM
furthermore...

Is it any surprise that after being kidnapped, tortured, and imprisoned without trial for years that you may be a little but hostile?

It may be counter-intiuitive but often measures to "crack down on terrorism" only serve to drive people to extremism, just as "banning" abortion usually leads to a rise in abortions, not to mention maternal death and infanticide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2017, 04:51:09 PM
You'd think after nearly centuries of trying to crack down on terrorism (Peoples Front of Judea!) that someone with half a brain cell might have finally twigged that it works the way you suggest.  Unfortunately you don't tend to find that type of person in government.   :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 February, 2017, 05:09:46 PM
Has someone here already pointed out that Wikipedia no longer accepts the Daily Mail as a ligitimate source?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 05:14:29 PM
Governments love terrorism; it keeps us divided and at one another's throats, gives them an excuse to implement legislation that benefits the status quo and, perhaps most importantly, distracts us from watching what they're up to. Divide and rule. Oldest tactic in the book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2017, 05:43:15 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 February, 2017, 05:09:46 PM
Has someone here already pointed out that Wikipedia no longer accepts the Daily Mail as a ligitimate source?

Unfortunately way too many people in this country do!  Yet they still deny Climate Change.  Go figure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 23 February, 2017, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 05:14:29 PM
Governments love terrorism; it keeps us divided and at one another's throats, gives them an excuse to implement legislation that benefits the status quo and, perhaps most importantly, distracts us from watching what they're up to. Divide and rule. Oldest tactic in the book.

Did you get many bombings and murders round your from the late sixties to late nineties? Or was the bomb yesterday on your street? How about friends and family members killed or injured?

Fuck sake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 06:24:56 PM
If you believe that, Mikey, I have a magic rock here that keeps tigers away. Want to buy it?

Fuck's sake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 February, 2017, 06:30:54 PM

That's a completely meaningless, antagonistic post. You're headed for another ban.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 06:56:39 PM
No, it's a perfectly valid example of the same Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy that Mikey used.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 February, 2017, 07:18:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 06:56:39 PM
No, it's a perfectly valid example of the same Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy that Mikey used.
Wasn't that the last Michael Moorcock novel?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 07:57:41 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 23 February, 2017, 07:18:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 06:56:39 PM
No, it's a perfectly valid example of the same Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy that Mikey used.
Wasn't that the last Michael Moorcock novel?

I think that was The Corum Hoc, Elric Propter Hockers at the End of the Fireclown's Runestaff Time...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 23 February, 2017, 08:35:39 PM
Yeah, fold your arms and shake your head sure.  After all if it's your opinion it's the same as knowledge or direct experience isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 09:25:03 PM
Mikey, I get that you have suffered terrible things in your country. I'm not insensitive to that and in no way wish to belittle, marginalise or ignore the damage done and the lives lost.

My position is that governments of all stripes thrive on such horrors, bend them to their advantage and use them to justify their own existence. Governments cannot exist without violence, either threatened or applied. This is my contention and I have seen no argument to disabuse me of what, to me, is a solid fact.

I understand and accept that most people see government as a good thing, a civilised thing, but I do not. I see inter-human cooperation as a good thing and personal responsibility as the height of civilisation. Government must impose itself on the population, whether the population wants that imposition or not, whether that imposition will damage the population or not. The current debacles of Brexit and Trump only reinforce my view - the people have spoken and subsequently regret the words they have spoken. It's okay to have a small group of people force their will upon the masses but, just at the moment, we find ourselves labouring under the wrong small group of people.

To believe that government brings peace and order is wrong. Just because government and peace (or at least a lack of violence) exist side by side does not indicate that one is responsible for the other. I could just as easily say that no city has been destroyed by an asteroid since governments have existed, therefore governments prevent asteroids falling on cities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 23 February, 2017, 10:41:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 09:25:03 PM
Mikey, I get that you have suffered terrible things in your country. I'm not insensitive to that and in no way wish to belittle, marginalise or ignore the damage done and the lives lost.

My position is that governments of all stripes thrive on such horrors, bend them to their advantage and use them to justify their own existence. Governments cannot exist without violence, either threatened or applied. This is my contention and I have seen no argument to disabuse me of what, to me, is a solid fact.

I didn't exclude governments in my post did I? You have no idea. You'll never see an argument to disabuse you. A solid fact? Is that one of those alternative ones?

Your opinions do not equate to experience. It's not true because you thought it. And while I'm at it, it didn't take me as long to realise  the world was fucked as it did you. Maybe it was something that actually happened rather than what some half wit 'researched' and stuck on a blog.

I was on a bit of a high after the 2000ad 40th bash and had started to spend more time here again, but like an arsehole I had to look here and let myself get wound up again. But to hell with it, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 11:22:57 PM
I have no idea what your argument is. I said:

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 05:14:29 PM
Governments love terrorism; it keeps us divided and at one another's throats, gives them an excuse to implement legislation that benefits the status quo and, perhaps most importantly, distracts us from watching what they're up to. Divide and rule. Oldest tactic in the book.

To which you answered:

Quote from: Mikey on 23 February, 2017, 06:02:22 PM

Did you get many bombings and murders round your from the late sixties to late nineties? Or was the bomb yesterday on your street? How about friends and family members killed or injured?

Fuck sake.


To me, that indicates you disagree that governments act in the way I asserted but the way you frame your counter-argument is by way of a woolly fallacy. Now your argument seems to be that because I haven't experienced what you have experienced, my opinion is invalid. Congratulations, however, on realising the world was fucked before I did, I didn't realise it was a competition. I do not, however, believe that the world is fucked. I believe that the world is eminently good and can be made so very much better - chiefly by stripping governments of their violent aspects. What is it, exactly, that I have "no idea" about? I did not say I'd never see an argument to disabuse me of my current opinion, just that I haven't seen one yet - which is an entirely different thing.

It is a solid fact that governments rely on violence. Try not going along with one of their orders and see how far you get before you start getting threatened. That is not an alternative fact, it is an actual, real-world fact. I know, because I've tried it.

And, although I have not experienced actual gunshots or bombs, I have experienced the violence of government and resisted it. My views and opinions come from both research and direct physical experience as, I imagine, do yours. We live in different countries, walk different paths and live different lives. One is no more or less valid than the other and the lessons we each have learned are obviously different. This does not mean that I hate you nor, I believe, does it mean that you hate me.

You disagree with my viewpoint; excellent, great - tell me which parts you disagree with, and why, and let's have a rational discussion from which we both might learn something. To disagree does not mean to hate or to deride or to belittle. Don't get wound up, that doesn't help and it's certainly not what I want to do. I don't want to insult you or wind you up, I want to get my point across in a clear and rational way. That does not mean I expect you to agree with it or are stupid if you disagree. Sure, I freely admit that sometimes I can get a bit carried away and frothy, be emotional and unclear, but then so can we all.

So, to begin again: Governments rely on violence, misdirection and lies and cannot function in their present form without them. If you want to discuss that, then I'm up for it. If you don't, well I can live with that, too. Either way, it's no big deal and certainly not worth getting upset about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 February, 2017, 02:53:12 AM
Not since '82 has an incumbent government taken a seat from the opposition in a by-election. Well done Corbyn!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2017, 09:42:00 AM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 February, 2017, 02:53:12 AM
Not since '82 has an incumbent government taken a seat from the opposition in a by-election. Well done Corbyn!

Sometimes I doubt his commitment to Sparkle Motion.

Despite having been pretty excited to see the British Labour Party electing a principled leftie (it wouldn't happen here!), I now find myself comparing him to the Warren Clarke character in Sleepers and only half-jokingly wondering if Putin's resurrected KGB has called in its marker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 February, 2017, 09:49:27 AM
That's some mental gymnastics to be doing at nearly 3 in the morning, CF!
Amusing to see pundits trying to paint Copeland as a safe Labour seat when it's been hemorrhaging support for Labour since the Blair years, which you can tell because occasionally someone will mumble something about not blaming Blair or New Labour before they're quietly shooed along by their media handlers.  "We shouldn't blame Tony Blair or the New Labour government?  What an oddly specific thing to say..."

I'm interested in what this means for Ukip, though.  They haven't translated Brexit into any gains, so is there a petition somewhere to finally get them the fuck off the BBC?  I think we can finally call it a day with these single-issue losers and their Hillsborough-hijacking scumbag of a leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 10:55:13 AM
They might be "single issue", but they won the single issue. Job done, I'm back in the Tory fold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 February, 2017, 11:38:33 AM
The Tories won the single issue - although they didn't intend to do so, which is reassuring.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 11:43:43 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 10:55:13 AM
They might be "single issue", but they won the single issue. Job done, I'm back in the Tory fold.

The 'single issue' on which their official line was to stay in the EU? The referendum they effectively lost?

You're happy to support a party ideologically committed to (and actively carrying out) the destruction of the NHS, on which you rely, and decimating the benefits system, from which you presumably also receive support*, who are now pursuing a Brexit course that will demonstrably make almost everyone poorer (by virtue of the the plummetting pound) and lead to yet more austerity as government receipts fall from contractions to the economy**...

...All to free us from the tyranny of the EU, whose impact on the day-to-day lives of most UK citizens are so tangential as to be non-existent, beyond a significant improvement in workers' rights and substantial economic assistance to some of the poorest areas of the UK.

Not to mention the lack of any of the promised extra money for the NHS or public services, or David Davis' admission that Brexit will make not one jot of difference to immigration, since the UK relies on those immigrants economically.

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/C5OOChbWAAAw_UU_zpswernnxof.jpg)

I've tried. I've really tried, but this makes not a lick of sense to me.

*No judgement implied here. I'm assuming that since you legitimately can't work, you receive some kind of state assistance?

**Remember that the UK financial services sector is almost certain to lose its passporting privileges and contributes 12% of GDP for a start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 12:23:57 PM
Yes, Jim, I do receive state disability benefits. In fact, from a purely personal point of view, they are my only income (not counting my partner's pensions). Unless my muddled old brain is playing tricks on me, I'm pretty sure that some of the sickness and disability payments cuts were introduced by the last Labour government.

I did not vote to leave the EU because of immigration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 12:28:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 12:23:57 PM
I did not vote to leave the EU because of immigration.

Then why did you? Anything more concrete than 'sovereignty', which the Govt's own white paper on triggering Article 50 admits is something that was never an issue, but that some people "felt that it was"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 12:38:35 PM
Well, it was an issue for me, and continues to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 12:54:18 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 12:38:35 PM
Well, it was an issue for me, and continues to be.

That's it? Sovereignty? You're happy to impoverish yourself and almost everyone else in the country* over something which has literally no impact on your day-to-day life...? Surely there must be something more to it than that?

*Plus, you know, the very real possibility of unravelling the Union, and fatally undermining the Good Friday Agreement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 01:01:02 PM
Well, you asked me and I answered you, maybe we should leave it at that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 01:04:34 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 24 February, 2017, 01:01:02 PM
Well, you asked me and I answered you, maybe we should leave it at that.

I'm not having a go at you, I don't understand. I don't understand what benefits you think we'll be getting that outweigh the risk any of the things I've mentioned, never mind all of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2017, 01:15:53 PM
For me, the crucial sticking point with trying to make the best of it is NI and to a lesser degree Scotland.  If we want to make ourselves poorer, knock yourself out, we will either realise the stupidity of it and vote the Tories out along the line, or more depressingly not and keep taking the kicking that we really dont need to be giving ourselves (but that was likely to happen anyway). 

Losing the Union though, and reigniting the Troubles? (I know there is more than enough smouldering going on anyway, but)...

But we will be able to have those bendy bananas that we could have had anyway? Is it a political version of the Mid Life crisis?  Feeling trapped in a marriage that is in all reality perfectly functional and overall beneficial, but wanting to be free to walk around in our underpants all day, spend money on that car you always wanted but spent the cash on the wedding and chase after unobtainable women?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 February, 2017, 06:32:02 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 24 February, 2017, 01:15:53 PMIs it a political version of the Mid Life crisis?  Feeling trapped in a marriage that is in all reality perfectly functional and overall beneficial, but wanting to be free to walk around in our underpants all day, spend money on that car you always wanted but spent the cash on the wedding and chase after unobtainable women?

Best analogy I've heard yet. I'm currently in Wetherspoons having some fish and chips, and am disappointed to find that once again their magazine's editorial is devoted to gloating over the Brexit result.
Yet another spiel about the non-democratic nature of the EU but not a single mention of any of these laws they're supposedly always making without our consent.

The UK has made its bed and now must lie in it, for better or for worse  (and let's face it, it's looking very like the latter) but for fuck's sake, Wetherspoons, just sell beer keep your toxic, divisive and financially suicidal isolationism to yourself.  Long may the EU last, and long may Ireland be a part of it.  Even if Brexit is going to put our borders back to the awful state they were in when I was a kid, I sincerely hope that we will continue to progress while others regress.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 25 February, 2017, 11:40:49 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 24 February, 2017, 06:32:02 PMbut for fuck's sake, Wetherspoons, just sell beer keep your toxic, divisive and financially suicidal isolationism to yourself. 

Yeah, just HOW would a pub chain profit from pushing toxic, divisive and financially suicidal isolationism........

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/n3LoH2Wv154/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 12:02:44 PM
Whatever happened to the old - and wise - tradition of never discussing politics or religion in pubs?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2017, 12:38:19 PM
Just wondering if it wouldn't be a bad idea to extend that idea to this forum?   ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 01:15:50 PM
Is Trump trying to use a hastily arranged manned NASA flight around the Moon (http://nasawatch.com/archives/2017/02/nasa-tries-to-e.html) to bolster his popularity and make it look like he's getting things done?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 25 February, 2017, 01:33:10 PM
Of course I'm back.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2017, 06:24:56 PM
If you believe that, Mikey, I have a magic rock here that keeps tigers away. Want to buy it?

Fuck's sake.

You can shove that up your hole for starters.

QuoteI have no idea what your argument is

Exactly.

The essential core, for the hard of comprehension, is that you contributed absolutely nothing to any discussion about terrorism and all your arguments come down to 'gubmints are bad, m' kay' or 'we need a jury to look at cases of littering because a court is a ship under contract law' or 'money's a bit mental, innit?' no matter what the topic. All delivered with and air of patronage followed with some cod martyrdom when someone reckons you're being a nob. Or even when they clearly demonstrate flaws in your reasoning or grasp.

Or to put it another way, it's always themuns and you poor unenlightened people *sigh* just can't accept it. You sound like a religious zealot and I'm fed up hearing it irl and online.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 01:43:04 PM
Bluster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 25 February, 2017, 02:29:50 PM
Precisely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 02:45:53 PM
Having popped back in after a slew of moderation requests (a reminder: be civil. This thread is clinging on by its fingernails), I flick through a few pages anyway and see:

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 01:04:34 PMI'm not having a go at you, I don't understand. I don't understand what benefits you think we'll be getting that outweigh the risk any of the things I've mentioned, never mind all of them.

That's it for me. I just don't understand Brexit. We're at the point where we're without doubt going to be massively poorer, place the country in a state where it will take decades to recover to the point we're at now (if ever), that will almost certainly lead to the end of universal healthcare, that will begin a bonfire of rights, and that will make us hugely reliant on an unstable USA. Meanwhile, we piss off all our closest allies, in terms of politics and geography.

There's no extra money for the NHS. There will be little or no impact on immigration. The government's own white paper admitted that sovereignty was never an issue.

So it seems we're going to blow up our economy, risk peace in Ireland, lose the UK, end up paying through the nose for health insurance, possibly tear apart hundreds of thousands of families, and more, for – what – a vague feeling that we weren't always in control when we in fact were? That is absolutely mental. Like Jim, I don't get it. This is the political equivalent to having a health minister decree that no cancer patients are to receive chemotherapy because of a 'feeling' it doesn't work right (against all the evidence) and they'll now instead get some homeopathy sugar pills.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 25 February, 2017, 03:24:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 02:45:53 PM
Having popped back in after a slew of moderation requests (a reminder: be civil. This thread is clinging on by its fingernails), I flick through a few pages anyway and see:

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2017, 01:04:34 PMI'm not having a go at you, I don't understand. I don't understand what benefits you think we'll be getting that outweigh the risk any of the things I've mentioned, never mind all of them.

That's it for me. I just don't understand Brexit. We're at the point where we're without doubt going to be massively poorer, place the country in a state where it will take decades to recover to the point we're at now (if ever), that will almost certainly lead to the end of universal healthcare, that will begin a bonfire of rights, and that will make us hugely reliant on an unstable USA. Meanwhile, we piss off all our closest allies, in terms of politics and geography.

There's no extra money for the NHS. There will be little or no impact on immigration. The government's own white paper admitted that sovereignty was never an issue.

So it seems we're going to blow up our economy, risk peace in Ireland, lose the UK, end up paying through the nose for health insurance, possibly tear apart hundreds of thousands of families, and more, for – what – a vague feeling that we weren't always in control when we in fact were? That is absolutely mental. Like Jim, I don't get it. This is the political equivalent to having a health minister decree that no cancer patients are to receive chemotherapy because of a 'feeling' it doesn't work right (against all the evidence) and they'll now instead get some homeopathy sugar pills.

The politics of the demagogue involve convincing people that what they believe is more important than what can be proved. Unfortunately large groups of human are easily lead and do not actually require coherent arguments. Without a coherent argument there is very little hope of a coherent answer. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 03:30:18 PM
Yeah. And this has been planned. You get people like Gove laying the seeds for this way in advance, saying we should just believe in ourselves rather than experts. But this is also a worrying area of politics, because it becomes about rousing the mob with bullshit, and being able to say whatever the hell you like with no comeback.

With Brexit, all rationality has gone. There are no concrete benefits. And yet people still support it. Do they hate being wrong? Do they see something I don't? Or do they genuinely put a vague feeling about something that the government itself said wasn't an actual fact above all else?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 03:32:10 PM
To bastardise Eric Hoffer, "The game of Brexit is usually played by the best and the worst over the heads of the majority in the middle."

Also:
Quote from: Steven Denton on 25 February, 2017, 03:24:08 PM

The politics of the demagogue involve convincing people that what they believe is more important than what can be proved. Unfortunately large groups of human are easily lead and do not actually require coherent arguments. Without a coherent argument there is very little hope of a coherent answer. 


Yes, well said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 03:35:21 PM
Just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it is wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 03:38:56 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 03:35:21 PM
Just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it is wrong.

Then why can't you explain it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 03:44:41 PM
I have, you don't agree with me,that's fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 03:48:29 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 03:35:21 PM
Just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it is wrong.

But if you don't understand something, how do you know if it's right or wrong? If someone tells you that 1+1=2 and you accept that without understanding the basic mathematical processes involved, what happens when someone else tells you that 6x9=42?* Most of us have only limited understanding of things simply because there are so many things to understand.

It's okay to listen to authorities on subjects but dangerous to accept what they say without question. It's always as well to at least try to understand the subject at hand, I think.

*Well, you get a best-selling book, obviously, but that's about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 03:50:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 03:44:41 PM
I have, you don't agree with me,that's fine.

You haven't. You've said 'sovereignty'. I asked whether that was it, whether you could point to one tangible benefit that might outweigh all the very real repercussions of Brexit, and you said "Let's just leave it there, I don't want to talk about it."

I can't disagree with you, because you haven't offered one single point of substance with which I can agree or disagree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2017, 03:55:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 03:30:18 PM
... You get people like Gove laying the seeds for this way in advance, saying we should just believe in ourselves rather than experts. But this is also a worrying area of politics, because it becomes about rousing the mob with bullshit, and being able to say whatever the hell you like with no comeback.

I think that this is the most disquieting thing about Trump and something that the media have failed to see coming.  For along time there have been complaints about editorial bias and excessive influence of media owners.  Rather than dealing with it properly and trying to come to a balanced position, some news outlets have played up to it thus reinforcing that perception. 

Now we have a president ramping up that distrust.  The claim of 'fake news' is amusing on one level as it comes across as the whining of a petulant child who is not getting there own way.  The question is how is this fitting in to the narrative of biased media and what will this mean in the long term for our trust in the reliability of the information we receive.  This is where it starts to get worrying.  It is easy enough to guide people toward making poor choices if they are doubting what they know.  The information age seems to be rapidly giving way to the 'disinformation age'.  Some folks have wondered what it would have been like under Hitler or Stalin with modern propaganda tools.  It's probably a bit hysterical to think that we might be about to find out but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 25 February, 2017, 03:57:23 PM
No Europe courts means no human rights and they will cut many benefits.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 04:06:14 PM
Let's just say that I don't believe some of the things you say will happen, will happen, and I don't care about some of the others.
Employment is at record levels, interest rates are low, the economy is growing, inflation is below the Bank of England target, where is the disaster? Oh I know we haven't left yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 04:07:45 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2017, 03:55:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 03:30:18 PM
... You get people like Gove laying the seeds for this way in advance, saying we should just believe in ourselves rather than experts. But this is also a worrying area of politics, because it becomes about rousing the mob with bullshit, and being able to say whatever the hell you like with no comeback.

I think that this is the most disquieting thing about Trump and something that the media have failed to see coming.  For along time there have been complaints about editorial bias and excessive influence of media owners.  Rather than dealing with it properly and trying to come to a balanced position, some news outlets have played up to it thus reinforcing that perception. 

Now we have a president ramping up that distrust.  The claim of 'fake news' is amusing on one level as it comes across as the whining of a petulant child who is not getting there own way.  The question is how is this fitting in to the narrative of biased media and what will this mean in the long term for our trust in the reliability of the information we receive.  This is where it starts to get worrying.  It is easy enough to guide people toward making poor choices if they are doubting what they know.  The information age seems to be rapidly giving way to the 'disinformation age'.  Some folks have wondered what it would have been like under Hitler or Stalin with modern propaganda tools.  It's probably a bit hysterical to think that we might be about to find out but I'm not sure.

This is why I think it's important that we all brush up on the many logical fallacies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies) (it's surprising how many there are and also how easy it is to fall into the trap of using them oneself - I know I have been guilty but try my best not to be any more, with varying levels of success) so that we can all judge for ourselves whether what a politician, expert, the legacy media or the alternative media says is anything like substantial, let alone truthful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2017, 04:13:48 PM
Perhaps what is most important is that we are able to keep an open mind, consider alternative view points and understand the limitations of the methodology that produces the information that we are given.  Economists and meteorologists are touted as expert when they deal with possibilities and probabilities.  Doctors are touted as infallible when in fact they are just highly skilled, particularly in risk management.  It just seems that we have strayed into total tinfoil hat territory rather than intelligent skepticism territory.  Mind you, watching baby Trump in the White House it is understandable as to why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 04:24:48 PM
Absolutely.

Always remember, though, that an open mind is like an open wound; if you don't look after it, it'll get infected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2017, 04:26:02 PM
I always thought it was 'A mind is a wonderful thing to waste!'   ;)

In the same vein as "reality is a state of mind brought on by lack of alcohol."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 04:34:46 PM
Heh.

That Wikipedia list of fallacies is a bit daunting and so here's (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/) one that's easier to use, for anyone who's interested.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 04:51:56 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 04:06:14 PMEmployment is at record levels
Largely bolstered by a huge number of people on zero-hours contracts, freelancers not making nearly enough to survive, and with wages in general having long been decoupled from inflation. So, yes, lots of people have jobs, but many cannot survive with them, and many others have seen stagnant wages for years – and this isn't improving.

While this is occurring, sterling is getting a kicking, adversely affecting anything purchased in dollars, and imports. The net result is people already squeezed have seen increases in fuel, power, and food. (And anyone fairly well off will find luxuries cost more – books; software; technology.)

Moreover, as the UK removes itself from the EU, there is no evidence whatsoever that we will have a net increase in employment opportunities. Instead, removing ourselves from Euratom will likely lead to a great many job losses. And the same goes for many other agencies that we'll no longer be a part of, or that will be removed.

The last of those things is, of course, speculation. But the others are happening right now. I suppose Brexit proponents will still cling to the belief that short-term hardship will result in a big improvement down the road. But given that we'll knacker the best-possible deal with the world's largest market, god knows how.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 05:12:52 PM
I seem to have more confidence in the EU leadership than you do. The idea that they won't want a good deal with the UK I just find bizarre. The UK has a massive trade deficit with the rest of the EU, are they really going to risk the jobs of many of their own citizens just to punish the UK? I know the EU, along with others, has ruined Greece but surely they won't want to do it again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2017, 05:30:38 PM
From Rationalwiki:
Quote
The backfire effect occurs when, in the face of contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get stronger. The effect has been demonstrated experimentally in psychological tests, where subjects are given data that either reinforces or goes against their existing biases - and in most cases people can be shown to increase their confidence in their prior position regardless of the evidence they were faced with.
In a pessimistic sense, this makes most refutations useless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 February, 2017, 05:40:21 PM
Two years of negotiations and a 60 Billion Euro price tag
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 05:41:22 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 04:06:14 PM
Let's just say that I don't believe some of the things you say will happen, will happen, and I don't care about some of the others.

Specifically, what don't you think will happen, and what do you consider unimportant? We seem to be locked into a course of action that seems like lunacy to me (with the proviso that, personally, a lot of my predicted outcomes will work out fantastically well for me) and if we're stuck with it, I'd like to know.

Also, I asked you for one tangible benefit. Right now, your response seems somewhat evasive. This is your preferred course of action: reassure me, please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 05:56:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2017, 05:30:38 PM
From Rationalwiki:
Quote
The backfire effect occurs when, in the face of contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get stronger. The effect has been demonstrated experimentally in psychological tests, where subjects are given data that either reinforces or goes against their existing biases - and in most cases people can be shown to increase their confidence in their prior position regardless of the evidence they were faced with.
In a pessimistic sense, this makes most refutations useless.

Good one, Prof - one for us all to be aware of. Humans do so hate to be wrong about things, I know I do, it's probably one of our greatest, and most dangerous, faults.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 06:30:16 PM
Hi Jim, this will be my last post of the day, as I am getting tired. I don't believe that the economy will suffer in the long run, in fact, I think it will prosper. The ability to make trade deals, getting rid of pointless  regulations, ability to control our borders, our own fishing and farming policies, our tax rates, and many other things.

The democratic side is important to me, if the people that I can vote for can be out voted by people I can't vote for, that is unacceptable to me.

As for the things you spoke about, that I am not bothered either way, the make up of the UK is the main one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 06:32:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 06:30:16 PM
As for the things you spoke about, that I am not bothered either way, the make up of the UK is the main one.

I don't think you can wave the patriotic flag and then say that you're unconcerned about the break-up of the Union or re-igniting the Troubles in NI.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 February, 2017, 07:44:46 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 06:30:16 PM
Hi Jim, this will be my last post of the day, as I am getting tired. I don't believe that the economy will suffer in the long run, in fact, I think it will prosper. The ability to make trade deals, getting rid of pointless  regulations

Pointless regulations like human rights?  Or like all the 'straight banana' lies that were made up by the British press?

Oh, and that thing about the economy - which politician was it the other week boasting about how we, as the sixth largest economy in the world, would be able to dictate our own terms on trade deals (forgetting that this time last year we were fourth largest)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 February, 2017, 10:12:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 04:06:14 PM
Let's just say that I don't believe some of the things you say will happen, will happen, and I don't care about some of the others.
Employment is at record levels, interest rates are low, the economy is growing, inflation is below the Bank of England target, where is the disaster? Oh I know we haven't left yet.

Why is low interest rates a good thing? I live within my means and have meagre savings - I'm getting screwed while people who live on loans and credit are doing great, even though rising inflation makes it harder and harder for them ever to repay the debt - wasn't that what caused the last financial crash?

Inflation is not "below Bank of England targets" - it is below what the Bank of England predicted it might be by now - it's shit, but they predicted it may be shitter. But it's still shit - inflation has been higher than wage growth for the past 9 years - so that's 9 years while most working people have had am effective wage cut year after year. Only bosses who set their own pay have had a wage increase.

High employment isn't great if people are on sub-minimum wage, zero hours, gig-economy contracts.

And I've never understood this obsession with "growth" - nothing can keep growing forever, if economic growth is your only target, you're just setting yourself up for boom-and-bust (and no, I didn't believe Gordon Brown when he said Labour had ended that)

And as you say, that's before we've even left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 February, 2017, 10:43:59 PM
jsut noticed later post:

Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 06:30:16 PM
I don't believe that the economy will suffer in the long run, in fact, I think it will prosper. The ability to make trade deals, getting rid of pointless  regulations, ability to control our borders, our own fishing and farming policies, our tax rates, and many other things.

Ability to make trade deals : Why would our former partners (now competitors) want to give us a good deal? Any countries that are deeply invested in the European ideal (ie the most powerful ones, Germany/France) have a vested interest in screwing us to discourage others from following our example. Others will just screw us because they know we NEED a deal and they'll dictate the terms. SO yes, we will be able to negotiate our own deals - but instead of negotiating as a massive powerful block, we'll be a small fish and therefore ina  much weaker negotiating position.

Getting rid of pointless regulations - these are not pointless, they stop companies from selling us dangerous goods, employers from killing their workers  and farmers from fucking the entire food chain by poisoning the bees. The govt has already said that we will KEEP all these regulations, until there is a case for changing them, so nothing will change on that front. If we want to sell goods or trade in Europe we'll still have to follow their regulations - but if we scarp them then dodgy companies abroad will be able to sell us dodgy goods that they could never get away with in Europe.

Fishing - yeah, that's not likely to get better - likely to be one of the "compromises" we agree to get the headliner items - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/28/british-fishermen-warned-brexit-will-not-mean-greater-catches (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/28/british-fishermen-warned-brexit-will-not-mean-greater-catches)

Farming policies - so the farm subsidies will come direct from UK taxation rather than from the money we send to Brussels. Woohoo. The British govt has been incapable of administrating he current system, will they do any better on their own? - farmers are experiencing delays of months or years in getting their money, not because of Europe, but because of DEFRA incompetence (see the last year's worth or "Old muckspreader" columns in Private Eye for the full info on that farce)

Tax Rates - these have never been controlled by Europe

W're running pout of positives here - maybe one of these "many other things" will make it all worthwhile?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2017, 10:47:29 PM
Farming is done for in the UK. The government has said it won't match EU subsidies beyond 2020, and we'll be soon in a position when it and the health service will be sacrificial lambs to get a deal with Trump's USA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 11:03:14 PM
I don't think farming in the UK can be "done for" - not as long as people need to eat, anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 February, 2017, 11:07:36 PM
In today's post-fucking-truth political climate, I am pleased to see that Paul Nuttall's lies are negatively affecting his reputation, and as such he's coming apart at the seams. It seems a rare thing these days, when people seem to be able to say what they want to get into power and nobody seems to care whether it's true or not.

Also, thanks for your post, DDD, seriously.  I have yet to see any arguments as clear and concise from any pro-Brexiters.  I would be pleased if you were wrong, but so far, you're not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:18:50 PM
Some pretty lmpressive factual bloopers there DDD, the Bank of England does have an inflation target and it is 2 percent, wages are growing faster than inflation, and the EU does control some aspects of VAT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 11:27:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 11:03:14 PM
I don't think farming in the UK can be "done for" - not as long as people need to eat, anyway.

The average age of a farmer in the U.K. is 59.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2017, 11:33:20 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:18:50 PM
the EU does control some aspects of VAT.

VAT is the government's third largest revenue stream. If you think some kind of sales tax is going to go away post-Brexit, or that the government is going to reduce it in any way, you're in for a rude awakening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:43:10 PM
I didn't say it would, I was responding to DDD saying the EU has no control over taxes, it does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 26 February, 2017, 12:08:54 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:43:10 PM
I didn't say it would, I was responding to DDD saying the EU has no control over taxes, it does.

Did you get that from same information as £350 million per week for NHS?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 12:21:07 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:18:50 PM
Some pretty lmpressive factual bloopers there DDD, the Bank of England does have an inflation target and it is 2 percent, wages are growing faster than inflation, and the EU does control some aspects of VAT.
I don't know much about Bank of England targets but "wages are growing faster than inflation" is pure bullshit

No Answer on the other points?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 12:35:06 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 25 February, 2017, 11:43:10 PM
I didn't say it would, I was responding to DDD saying the EU has no control over taxes, it does.
i
I'm not an expert on vat but if that's your only rebuttal against everything I said...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 12:46:13 AM
Actually, I'm trying to imagine a Brexit campaign where the best argument was "Europe controls some aspects of VAT"
If that the only argument left, then we're screwed
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 12:55:21 AM
I'll leave it thanks, have a good night.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 01:15:12 AM
Thought so.
I took the time, as others have done, to make detailed cogent arguments for debate and you just come back with one-line pedantic snipes
Goodnight
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 26 February, 2017, 01:23:33 AM
I really hate WUMs on this forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 01:24:35 AM
WUM?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 01:31:31 AM
What are you talking about, I was just trying to sign off in a friendly manner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 01:37:20 AM
If I have offended you, I apologise, I didn't mean to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 26 February, 2017, 01:37:32 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 26 February, 2017, 01:24:35 AM
WUM?

Wind-Up Merchant
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 01:39:49 AM
If that is aimed at me, please explain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 February, 2017, 08:36:41 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 01:39:49 AM
If that is aimed at me, please explain.

You:  "The economy's doing great, and I think everything's going to be fine."

Other people:  "Actually, that's not true at all, and here are facts to counter your characteristically trite remarks.  Can you please detail where your facts are coming from?"

You: "Well, I'm tired and said all I'm going to say.  Night, all."

Maybe stuff like this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 February, 2017, 09:16:43 AM
Tankers gets his political insight the same place a lot of Leavers do.

Off the side of a bus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 February, 2017, 09:16:43 AM
Tankers gets his political insight the same place a lot of Leavers do.

Off the side of a bus.

I'm appalled at the referendum result and I have yet to hear a convincing argument for leaving - it's your country of course, not mine, but it's going to make things difficult for us and everyone else too.  And as I've said before, I'm half-English by blood and have lots of family (including my brother and sister) who live in England and it hurts me to see the country voluntarily turn itself into an unwelcoming economic desert.

But I think what people here are doing is pushing Tankie for a reasonable explanation*, in order to understand the Leave vote, rather than dividing the public even further with sweeping generalisations like this.  Sorry, but I just don't think it helps matters one bit.

*and for what it's worth, I think Tankie is a good-natured sort but I'm not satisfied with his answers either.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 09:47:21 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
*and for what it's worth, I think Tankie is a good-natured sort but I'm not satisfied with his answers either.

No, neither am I, primarily because the entire Leave campaign was a series of lies, so it's almost impossible for anyone to defend the decision on the basis of facts: most honest Leavers should  just say the idea of foreigners touching their stuff makes them feel queasy and leave it at that.

But I do think Tankie was entitled to head off to bed at 1.30am without being called a stirrer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 09:56:01 AM
But I have explained my point of view, how many times do I have to say the same thing. I am asked my opinion and I give an honest answer. You disagree, I accept I could be wrong, but it is my honest opinion.

Thanks, TB.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 10:26:19 AM

I don't agree with Tankie, but the last couple of pages are this board at its ugliest. Stick to discussing facts, rather than making pointless personal attacks.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 10:55:32 AM
Quote from: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 10:26:19 AM

Stick to discussing facts, rather than making pointless personal attacks.


Hear, hear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 February, 2017, 11:00:37 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 09:47:21 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
*and for what it's worth, I think Tankie is a good-natured sort but I'm not satisfied with his answers either.

No, neither am I, primarily because the entire Leave campaign was a series of lies, so it's almost impossible for anyone to defend the decision on the basis of facts: most honest Leavers should  just say the idea of foreigners touching their stuff makes them feel queasy and leave it at that.

But I do think Tankie was entitled to head off to bed at 1.30am without being called a stirrer.

But we're still waiting from yesterday lunchtime for him to answer Jim's point on how he can be so concerned about the sovereignty of the UK and so strangely unconcerned about the prospect of the UK subsequently breaking up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 26 February, 2017, 11:06:33 AM
And, I am supposed to be the wind up merchant!!??
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 26 February, 2017, 11:18:29 AM
'The people have spoken, the bastards.' Dick Tuck Democratic candidate for senator in 1966 and we find ourselves facing a very uncertain future with Brexit and a thin, skinned successionist moron in the White House. The left and right seem polarized and also unable to offer anything but hopeless hang wringing despite claims of 'resistance' against the isolationist trend. It seems large numbers of people quietly loathed the Globalist order and they're all being thrown out of office across the world. That more integrated world recedes before us and a more puritan based Nationalism hovers into view with all the potential ugliness that might entail. We're seeing the possible defeat of one world view and it's replacement by another perhaps less tolerant one but that's that I'm afraid. The things we thought were certainties turned out to be phantoms, those implacable ideologies puffed out into smoke and in a suddenly uncertain world, people look to the past for order. So you'd better prepare yourself for a lot less multi- culturalism and a lot more White Anglo-Saxon Protestant which may not be very welcome in some parts.

     
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 11:35:56 AM

The Invisible Hand (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/us-billionaire-mercer-helped-back-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_BaconReader_Premium)


Robert Mercer, a hedge-fund billionaire, who helped to finance the Trump campaign and who was revealed this weekend as one of the owners of the rightwing Breitbart News Network, directed his data analytics firm to provide expert advice to the Leave campaign on how to target swing voters via Facebook.

Cambridge Analytica, which has 25 years' experience in military disinformation campaigns and "election management", claims to use cutting-edge technology to build intimate psychometric profiles of voters to find and target their emotional triggers.

The strategy involved harvesting data from people's Facebook and other social media profiles and then using machine learning to "spread" through their networks. The campaign used this information, combined with artificial intelligence, to decide who to target with highly individualised advertisements and had built a database of more than a million people, sending thousands of different versions of advertisements to people depending on what it had learned of their personalities..

Mercer and his daughter Rebekah are emerging as key figures in the ascendancy of Trump and the strategic disruption of the mainstream media. A brilliant computer scientist who did pioneering work at IBM in AI, Mercer made billions with Renaissance Technologies, a hedge-fund that specialises in automated trading.

As well as financing Trump's campaign, he encouraged Trump to take on two key advisers – Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway – and on Saturday the Washington Post revealed him as one of the owners of Breitbart. Bannon's role within the Trump administration is being increasingly examined but, until now, Mercer's connection has escaped the same sort of close scrutiny – particularly with regard to the media.

Breitbart, which has become the leading platform for the alt-right, is only one of a series of investments that aim to change the media landscape and political views not just in the US but also in Britain. A British version of Breitbart was launched in 2014, Bannon told the New York Times, explicitly to try to influence the upcoming general election.

Until now, however, it was not known that Mercer had explicitly tried to influence the outcome of the EU referendum.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 February, 2017, 11:37:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 10:55:32 AM
Hear, hear.

Worth pointing out again that I am genuinely interested to understand on what basis Leave supporters blithely assert that things will turn out OK. I have outlined in some detail the seemingly inevitable collapse of sterling to somewhere below parity with the dollar; the impact on the UK economy of losing the City of London's passporting privileges; the implications for the Good Friday Agreement; and I have yet to hear one cogent response (here, or anywhere else for that matter) as to why these things won't play out as predicted, or what might be done to mitigate those things. Or, failing that, a single tangible benefit would be nice, and we haven't heard any of those, either.*

Tankie keeps saying 'I've explained, let's just agree to disagree' but I haven't heard anything to disagree with. The Leave voters have locked us all into a course of action that seems, to me, be an insane path to economic ruination and I don't think it's unfair to ask someone from their side of this argument to explain to me why it's all going to be OK.

*Note, for example, that Tankie's objection to VAT appears to be that the EU has some control over setting the bands at which it's chargeable. He accepts that leaving the EU won't get rid of VAT, or even see it cut, he just objects to the notional idea that the UK government doesn't have 100% control over how it is applied.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 26 February, 2017, 11:56:50 AM
Hey TLS - judging by the pm you sent me, I suspect that you think I called in the Mods about our spat. I can assure you I didn't. Also, I'd have been more than happy to respond here if you had put it on the thread, so...


QuoteHi Mikey,

I'm sorry you're so upset.

There is no point continuing our discussion on the Political Thread - one cannot address an emotional argument with a rational one so I'm not even going to try.

All the best to you.

TLS.[\quote]

Unfortunately, that attitude to the issues in Northern Ireland and their lasting effect on people is one I've encountered more than once over the years and, I admit, informed my own responses up thread.

I'll use the ignore function and do my best to steer away in future sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 12:25:44 PM
Mikey, I have had no communication from any mods and therefore did not think you had called on them at all.

I PM'd you because you were obviously getting very upset and thought it best to try and defuse the situation in private rather than continuing at what seemed to be cross-purposes. I can see how upsetting my opinions are to you over what my government did in your country, things that make me ashamed and add fuel to my opinion that governments rely on violence and are therefore illegitimate.

I admit that my understanding of what happened over there is inadequate, based largely on the fact that for many years the only information I got was from the biased British media.

If you want to put me straight on the facts then please do so - I might be blunt but I'm not a monster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 February, 2017, 12:57:52 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 February, 2017, 09:16:43 AM
Tankers gets his political insight the same place a lot of Leavers do.

Off the side of a bus.

But I think what people here are doing is pushing Tankie for a reasonable explanation*, in order to understand the Leave vote, rather than dividing the public even further with sweeping generalisations like this.  Sorry, but I just don't think it helps matters one bit.

*and for what it's worth, I think Tankie is a good-natured sort but I'm not satisfied with his answers either.
Well the intentions behind my post where purely for the sake if a self undulgent laugh at Leavers expense but I cant say I completely disagree despite finding Tankers answer dodging enfuriating on the Alistair Campbell level. It all smacks a little if Leavers covering their ears and repeating the same half a dozen lies in order to try and force them into reality.

Bah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 01:14:02 PM
Interesting article, Frank. It seems to indicate how the Powers That Shouldn't Be are using their wealth and influence to get what they want irrespective of the wishes or situation of the great unwashed. (See also George Soros, who makes billions from chaos (as when he broke the Bank of England (http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/george-soros-bank-of-england.asp) in 1992) and is now funding the refugee crisis (https://www.forbes.com/sites/kerenblankfeld/2016/09/20/billionaire-george-soros-earmarks-500-million-for-migrants-and-refugees/#32343ef53888) in Europe (his Open Society Foundations were also apparently responsible for printing the "Welcome to the EU" refugee handbooks found on Lesbos in 2015 by Sky News (http://news.sky.com/story/sky-finds-handbook-for-eu-bound-migrants-10346437)). Of course, his goals can only be guessed at - but the chaos stirred up by rampant immigration, both real and imagined, presents a man used to profiting from disaster, and who wants sovereign governments to fail so larger globalist institutions (like the EU) can take their place, a great many financial opportunities.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 01:47:32 PM

Shami Chakrabarti (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04v2n4f)'s taking pelters for blaming the weather, telly, and public transport for Labour missing out on a clean sweep at the by-elections, but nobody else has an answer to why a vulnerable and divided Tory party are having such an easy time of it.

Whatever you think the answer is, the UK's been operating without a functional opposition for almost a decade. That isn't good news for any democracy.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 February, 2017, 02:15:12 PM
Audiences at Scottish Labour conference is embarrassing.  Whilst the SNP fill stadiums, Scottish Labour have a half empty theatre.  And how do Labour plan on winning over these SNP voters?  By calling them all racists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 02:17:58 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 26 February, 2017, 02:15:12 PM
Audiences at Scottish Labour conference is embarrassing.  Whilst the SNP fill stadiums, Scottish Labour have a half empty theatre.  And how do Labour plan on winning over these SNP voters?  By calling them all racists.

Scotland's been operating without a functional opposition for almost a decade. That isn't good news for any democracy.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 02:24:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 11:03:14 PMI don't think farming in the UK can be "done for" - not as long as people need to eat, anyway.
They don't have to eat food farmed here. Increasingly, they won't be able to. British farming is heavily subsidised and currently relies on EU funding the Tories have said will only be guaranteed through 2020. By then, we'll know for sure what path Brexit is taking, but if it's "let's cosy up to the USA", that requires a major shift in agriculture. Mostly, we'll end up importing an awful lot from the USA (with a corresponding reducing in food standards – we already see American producers lobbying for the dreadful meat products from that country, such as chlorinated chicken and beef with hormones), and British farmers won't be able to compete. That won't mean the end of EVERY British farm, obviously, but an industry already on its knees will become a relative niche.

Elsewhere on this, I certainly don't want people laying into Tankie. It's clear he's very much on the 'other side' of a debate most others here are unified on. My responses here are rather more general: I just don't understand why so many people appear resolute in their convictions regarding a Leave vote. It seems broadly based around vague feelings and optimism with literally nothing to back it up. Purely in trade, the UK is poised to do something that has never been done before, in terms of FTAs, to then spend anything up to a decade fighting hard to secure a worse deal with the EU (while losing scientists, doctors, and academics by the hundreds of thousands), and also to try and secure deals with a great number of countries we already have deals with through the EU. Leave people bang on about South Korea. We already have a deal with them. And any deal we get alone is likely to be worse, given there relative size of our economy and the EU's.

Even if not, Leave people are I think going to be surprised by the required compromises. We're already seeing India push back unless immigration systems are relaxed to allow far more Indians into the UK. Australia, meanwhile, which is the country most often paraded by Leave people, has now started talking a lot about shifting business to Ireland, and that Ireland will soon become the most important nation in Europe (not the EU – Europe) that's English-speaking. The point being the UK was a bridge into the EU, but is about the set fire to the bridge. Others are hoping Ireland will rebuild it and just point it west a bit instead.

I suppose the ultimate issue I have with all this is that I'm a rational person, and so find it mind-boggling and depressing that the country as a whole made a decision based on irrationality. Brexit is mostly about vague feelings about a relationship that was always a fiction and nostalgia for a period that never existed. But we're all going to suffer for it – already, bills and costs are way up but wages aren't heading the same way. What magic will save us in two years? Five? Ten? What's out there beyond pat phrases like "stop talking down Britain?", "I'm optimistic about the future, and I don't know why you aren't?", and "Don't you think it'd be better if we could secure our own trade deals?"?

It's mad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 02:53:16 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 02:24:45 PM
I'm a rational person, and so find it mind-boggling and depressing that the country as a whole made a decision based on irrationality ... It's mad.

Let's not pretend that 48% of the electorate were studying IMF reports and weighing evidence. Just like any general election, a significant number of those voting for both sides arrived at their decision through instinct and tribal affiliation.

I've been watching the excellent Made In America (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04st1yv/oj-made-in-america-part-1) documentary on the racial background to the OJ Simpson trial, and what impressed me most was the way it identified the power of appealing to the way people feel, as opposed to facts or argument.

It's probably always been that way, but it's certainly vital to understanding what's happening right now. Whatever you think of Trump and Farage, they've correctly understood the primacy of deeply held emotions over statistics and studies.

That's not how I want public life to operate, but that's my hard luck. The opposition won't start winning again until they identify how that raw, emotional appeal to something voters feel to be true can work for them.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 03:16:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 02:24:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 February, 2017, 11:03:14 PMI don't think farming in the UK can be "done for" - not as long as people need to eat, anyway.
They don't have to eat food farmed here. Increasingly, they won't be able to. British farming is heavily subsidised and currently relies on EU funding the Tories have said will only be guaranteed through 2020. By then, we'll know for sure what path Brexit is taking, but if it's "let's cosy up to the USA", that requires a major shift in agriculture. Mostly, we'll end up importing an awful lot from the USA (with a corresponding reducing in food standards – we already see American producers lobbying for the dreadful meat products from that country, such as chlorinated chicken and beef with hormones), and British farmers won't be able to compete. That won't mean the end of EVERY British farm, obviously, but an industry already on its knees will become a relative niche.


The European CAP was introduced to combat food shortages after WWII but these shortages are no longer an issue. Subsidies remain in order to keep prices high enough for farmers to earn a decent income - taxing the majority to benefit a minority. A farm is a business, just like any other, and if it cannot be run at a profit then it must fail. Gradual reduction and eventual removal of subsidies will drive efficiencies in the industry, those farms doing it right will survive and those doing it wrong will not. Instead of shaking down taxpayers to keep fields fallow, plough crops under, dispose of livestock or otherwise limit production, new innovations will be discovered and implemented. With the gloves off, farmers with too much land will no longer be artificially restricted in production, which may even lead to an increase in exports.

Not having to contribute to European butter mountains and wine lakes and being unable to fraudulently claim public money to heat empty barns or care for phantom cattle because of subsidies and restrictions will pave the way for a proper free-market in farming. With monopolistic government interference relaxed, entrepreneurs will step up - as they have done throughout history when allowed to do so - and the farming industry will thrive.

Importation is not necessarily a bad thing, there are foodstuffs we don't grow so well in this country, but the gradual reduction of restrictive policies like farming subsidies and the European CAP will drive some farmers to experiment with growing crops like bananas under glass, which will lessen the need for imports somewhat.

Furthermore, not being signatories to those Draconian "Free Trade (ha ha) Agreements" will allow us to turn away those chlorinated chickens and hormone-drenched beef as a point of national sovereignty if we so desire.

The above is, of course, an absolute best-case scenario but I feel sure there will be benefits as well as problems, as there always are when societies change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 03:22:59 PM
Going to fire some anecdote-derived opinion here, amongst all the sensible facts, just to prove both sides are capable of it.  Obviously I'm a bystander, collateral damage at best, in this debate, but from where I'm watching it the "irrationality" IP describes appears to simply be small-c conservatism. 

My own much-cited mother, as a former-royalist current-Mail-reader often an unwitting barometer for my assessments of such matters, was recently heard to say that she 'didn't mind' the probable consequence of a hard border returning to the island of Ireland.

Even as used as I am to her favourable opinions on Brexit, I was a bit shocked: she and my father are very frequent travellers to the Six Counties, as cricket fans and birdwatchers; one of her sons has a great job that only exists because of cross-border funding of an all-island organisation; my Dad works as a tour guide whose work regularly includes Belfast and the Antrim coast; Dad twice had an IRA gun put to his head when he worked in a bank; she once sheltered me and my baby brother on the floor of the car as the British ambassador was blown up by a landmine on the road behind her aunt's house while we were playing in the garden.

"WHY the hell would you not mind?" I asked.  Her reason for wanting to risk all that:  "It'd be nice if things went back to the way they were: when countries were properly different and not all the same". 

I sometimes like to remind my mother that in the past to which she lovingly refers, her own mother was abandoned to be raised in a ghastly children's workhouse home and never recovered emotionally or physically; her uncle who ran away from that home was blinded when his merchant ship was sunk during the second war; one great uncle died of dysentery at Salonika during the first war, another in the Somme; she herself was crippled by TB as a child; she was forced to give up her Bank job when she got married; she was forced to give up her subsequent (and very much beloved) job with RTE when she had me; she lived much of her adult life in a country with no contraception, no divorce and no prohibition on a man raping his own wife; despite the fact that one of her sons emigrated she can talk to him and her grandkids almost every day on Skype and either visit or be visited by them every year, something her own parents' generation could never have dreamed of...

...and yet still she aspires to return to "the way it was, when things were nice".  From this small sample and supporting observation, I believe that's what drives Brexit, that bloody nonsense: misplaced nostalgia for a past that was far shittier than the human mind seems capable of remembering. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 February, 2017, 03:35:19 PM
I must say I do like the "the economy will be great" line of defense for any criticism of the glorious victory and unquestionable success that is Brexit, as the Tories' track record and all available evidence seems to paint a pretty clear picture of what the economy will be like with the Tories under the best of circumstances, never mind when the rest of the world is mad at us and wants to make us live in Mad Max times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 03:45:02 PM
Interesting perspective, Tordels.

I think it's important to remember that, not too long ago, the world was a very much smaller place. The majority of people were born, lived and died in the same geographical area and knowledge of and communication with the rest of the world was severely limited. Our modern abilities to communicate almost instantaneously, to see what's going on in other countries in real time and travel anywhere in a few hours are relatively very new phenomena. The world has gone from being a fairly simple thing to a whole confusing bag of complex in a handful of decades and that's very confusing to us as a species, I think.

The young, of course, take all this in their stride - they have grown up knowing nothing else - but to people like your mum, and even people like me to a slightly lesser degree, it's still a fairly novel situation and we can't see all the ramifications of it yet. Tensions between the old ways of doing things and the new are, it seems, approaching a breaking point - it's as if humanity is straining to break free of the old restrictions of the past but doesn't yet know which direction to take.

It's a confusing, dangerous and exciting time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 04:45:22 PM
Quote from: Frank on 26 February, 2017, 02:53:16 PMLet's not pretend that 48% of the electorate were studying IMF reports and weighing evidence.
To clarify, a lot of my bafflement surrounds ongoing irrationality. Prices are going up. People who were squeezed before are even more so now. Yet people still double down on the decision they made, even while whining that their funding is being cut.

I agree about the nature of how Farage and Trump tapped into emotions, and I find that terrifying. This is precisely why we're also seeing Labour slowly rebrand itself as a working class party for Leave voters. (Although Labour itself might want to check on the data – even in Labour leave seats, there's no guarantee the leave voters were mostly Labour, and plenty of evidence to in fact suggest in most cases the reverse was true.)

QuoteThat's not how I want public life to operate, but that's my hard luck. The opposition won't start winning again until they identify how that raw, emotional appeal to something voters feel to be true can work for them.
Which means we're in the era of the despot. It doesn't matter what people say, because you can promise the earth and people will vote for it. (This is like an election we had in junior school when I was 11. My party won because we were the biggest bullshitters. Quite the lesson.) Well, unless you're Nick Clegg, apparently.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 03:16:06 PMA farm is a business, just like any other, and if it cannot be run at a profit then it must fail.
Quite. And that's the point I'm making: British farming WILL fail, en masse, because it will not be able to compete with US produce. Who will that benefit? American farmers. Certainly not British people. (In reality, what we really need in the UK is for food prices – which are on an international level pretty low – to go up in key areas, rather than supermarkets being able to screw farmers into the ground. But then that would need more of that government intervention you don't like.)

Quotethe gradual reduction of restrictive policies like farming subsidies and the European CAP will drive some farmers to experiment with growing crops like bananas under glass, which will lessen the need for imports somewhat.
I see it more the other way: even farmers farming product that works perfectly well in the UK simply won't be able to compete.

QuoteFurthermore, not being signatories to those Draconian "Free Trade (ha ha) Agreements" will allow us to turn away those chlorinated chickens and hormone-drenched beef as a point of national sovereignty if we so desire.
If we so desire, but the Tories will desire. An FTA with the USA is a priority. Agriculture and health will be thrown under the bus.

Quote from: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 03:22:59 PMFrom this small sample and supporting observation, I believe that's what drives Brexit, that bloody nonsense: misplaced nostalgia for a past that was far shittier than the human mind seems capable of remembering.
That's it entirely. Farage and co. did this, too – going on about a Britain that NEVER WAS. It's insane. Even into the Con/LD coalition, we were seen as a tolerant, modern society – a country punching above its weight. Now we're seen as a bunch of xenophobes punching ourself in the face. And short of a miracle, even the country as it stands is unlikely to still exist within my lifetime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 04:53:57 PM
QuoteAgriculture and health will be thrown under the bus.

By that government you have so much faith in?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 05:17:18 PM
I never said I had faith in this government. My argument here has always been that government in general is useful and necessary in various circumstances and that your utopian alternative is not viable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 05:46:45 PM
I don't have a Utopian alternative - there's no such thing as Utopia, which I have said innumerable times yet still find this lie levelled against me.

It is not the organisational aspects of "government" I am against, it is it's presumption of rights and powers to which it has no right. How many times must I say this?

Strip government of these superhuman rights and powers and it doesn't matter if the 'wrong one' gets voted in or not - the damage it could do would be extensively limited.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 06:23:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2017, 04:45:22 PM.
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 03:22:59 PMFrom this small sample and supporting observation, I believe that's what drives Brexit, that bloody nonsense: misplaced nostalgia for a past that was far shittier than the human mind seems capable of remembering.
That's it entirely. Farage and co. did this, too – going on about a Britain that NEVER WAS. It's insane. Even into the Con/LD coalition, we were seen as a tolerant, modern society – a country punching above its weight. Now we're seen as a bunch of xenophobes punching ourself in the face. And short of a miracle, even the country as it stands is unlikely to still exist within my lifetime.

Well, precisely. The glory days of the British Empire were glorious for a rich few in England, and shit for the unwashed masses. And particularly shit for the "inferior' colonised countries such as my own. Furthermore, you haven't actually got those countries to exploit any more, which was why EU cooperation came in handy.

And it's not hard to see how this attitude has led to the election of a certain loofah-faced fascist shitgibbon across the Atlantic. Whether Trump would have happened without Brexit we'll never know but his rise is certainly a product of the same mindset.

Make America great again: which great time was that exactly? When black people were segregated by law? When they were slaves? When innocent people of Japanese extraction were incarcerated for no reason but their race? When the country teetered on the tightrope of nuclear destruction with no visible way out? When the depression left normal people in third-world conditions? When GIs were soundly beaten by rag-tag Vietnamese geurrillas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 February, 2017, 06:43:08 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2017, 06:23:06 PM

Make America great again: which great time was that exactly?


Any time before 1492.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 February, 2017, 07:12:06 PM
...bloody beaker people.  Whats wrong with just cupping water in your hand and lapping it like a cat, like in the old days?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 February, 2017, 07:38:37 PM
Screw that, things were better before the cats got here, taking jobs from ordinary rat catchers. Whole thing went wrong when that ice age came along, unrestricted hordes of non-native species pouring across the sea floor... Could have used some glbal warming to settle their hash!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2017, 04:53:07 PM
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd74/redhotchillis/ccc_zpshzw9s78l.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 27 February, 2017, 05:43:25 PM
Very tasteful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2017, 06:06:20 PM
I wonder who paid for that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2017, 07:34:14 PM
We all will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 February, 2017, 08:18:20 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2017, 07:34:14 PM
We all will.
Wakka Wakka Wakka!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2017, 08:19:33 PM
May and her rich chums won't.

Still, Brexit, eh? Today's fun turn of events was my wife in tears at lunchtime over the latest developments over the status of EEA migrants (given that she's one), and our two-year-old toddler looking scared and asking what was wrong with mummy. But, hey, SOVEREIGNTY.

Fucking hell. I hate this so much. And there's nothing I can do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 February, 2017, 08:30:48 PM
It like this, really. Not all folk who voted to Leave are racist. But they sure enabled ose who are to act upon their bigotry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2017, 08:40:04 PM
You can't be the only person in your area facing the same problem, IP, can you find others to join forces with? Could you use the current anti-Trump sentiment in some way, pointing out how the people dealing with your wife's case are obviously as racist as Donald? I'm sure there are plenty of people on this forum who would email whomever's causing you all this grief, or local media or even (grits teeth) MPs with messages of support for you and condemnation for them - me included. IIRC, Dr X is a solicitor and may have some legal arguments you could use. We have artists and writers who could parody your tormentors.

There are ways, IP, you are not helpless, and I know we've butted heads on this thread in the past but, as God is my witness, if I can do anything to help I will - and I'm certain I'm not the only one.

I'm with IndigoPrime Block!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2017, 11:19:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2017, 08:40:04 PMYou can't be the only person in your area facing the same problem, IP, can you find others to join forces with?
There are various groups (such as the 3million) trying to figure out how to approach things from a legal standpoint, and to provide support. But it's the uncertainty of everything that's causing anxiety and worse. The UK's position is unknown, bar a vague "hope" to secure a reciprocal deal of some sort on residency. The details may not be known for a long time, and the deal may fail. In the meantime, EEA nationals are left fearing for their status here, while simultaneously getting fed all kinds of rubbish from people and even media organisations who don't know the law. (For example, living in the UK for five years does NOT grant you permanent residency rights. Being married to a British national – even one earning over the government's ridiculous and arbitrary threshold – does NOT grant you permanent residency rights.)

Quotehow the people dealing with your wife's case are obviously as racist as Donald? I'm sure there are plenty of people on this forum who would email whomever's causing you all this grief, or local media or even (grits teeth) MPs with messages of support for you and condemnation for them - me included. IIRC, Dr X is a solicitor and may have some legal arguments you could use. We have artists and writers who could parody your tormentors.
My wife doesn't have a case because we didn't make an application for residency. Although we've lived here since 2003, are married, have a kid, and she's worked a number of years in that time, such an application may fail on certain technicalities (notably CHI), and so until we speak to a lawyer, there's no point in taking things forward. So our best-case scenario beyond doing nothing and hoping for the best is depleting our life's savings and getting advice that may end up with us having to hope for the best anyway.

But if anyone does feel strongly about the situation in general, shout about it, tell friends, and, yes, write to your MP. A groundswell of popular opinion that says people who settled here under FOM should either be given permanent residency or fast-tracked to some form of citizenship would make a difference. And it may even get the current lot to think twice about cases beyond EEA nationals, like that of Irene Clennell.

QuoteThere are ways, IP, you are not helpless, and I know we've butted heads on this thread in the past but, as God is my witness, if I can do anything to help I will - and I'm certain I'm not the only one.
I'm with IndigoPrime Block!
Thank you. It's been a shitty day, but this post added a touch of brightness to the end of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 February, 2017, 11:12:52 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/nigel-farage-calls-for-douglas-carswell-to-be-expelled-from-ukip?CMP=share_btn_tw (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/nigel-farage-calls-for-douglas-carswell-to-be-expelled-from-ukip?CMP=share_btn_tw)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 February, 2017, 11:31:30 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 28 February, 2017, 11:12:52 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/nigel-farage-calls-for-douglas-carswell-to-be-expelled-from-ukip?CMP=share_btn_tw (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/28/nigel-farage-calls-for-douglas-carswell-to-be-expelled-from-ukip?CMP=share_btn_tw)
I have strong doubts the party will last the year if this kind of internal sniping is becoming positivly common place.

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of folk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2017, 11:34:27 AM
In light of the despicable situation facing IndigoPrime, I've just signed both of the following 38 Degrees petitions. I hope others will join in and help to spread the word.

Protect the rights of E.U citizens living in the UK (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/guarantee-no-change-in-the-status-of-e-u-citizens-currently-living-in-the-u-k)

Guarantee All Migrants in the UK the Right to Stay! (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/guarantee-all-migrants-in-the-uk-the-right-to-stay)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2017, 11:43:58 AM
Thanks. The more, the merrier on those petitions. Meanwhile, the Home Office isn't helping matters (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-latest-eu-national-right-to-live-uk-theresa-may-panic-a7602191.html). This is, natch, all about the Home Office trying to get rid of people they see as undesirables. That in itself is reprehensible, but the collateral damage may be severe also: stay-at-home parents; carers for relatives (such as one woman I know who's lived here for decades but spent time away from work looking after her ill British husband); retirees; students.

(In related news, I approached an immigration solicitor for the first time about this subject. He charges £600 per hour. So, um, yeah. We have fairly substantial savings, but for 600 quid an hour they wouldn't last all that long.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 February, 2017, 11:50:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2017, 11:34:27 AM
In light of the despicable situation facing IndigoPrime, I've just signed both of the following 38 Degrees petitions. I hope others will join in and help to spread the word.

Protect the rights of E.U citizens living in the UK (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/guarantee-no-change-in-the-status-of-e-u-citizens-currently-living-in-the-u-k)

Guarantee All Migrants in the UK the Right to Stay! (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/guarantee-all-migrants-in-the-uk-the-right-to-stay)
Ditto. It important we make our voices heard on this matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2017, 12:07:21 PM
You maybe need to get a group of you together to spread the legal costs. To my mind, though, you need to learn as much about the fundamentals of law as possible for yourself - fighting this in the legislative arena means you have little chance of success as the government can change legislation, or its interpretation, at a stroke. The authorities also cheat. The best legal arena is, in my opinion, the common law - for all law is based on common law.

Don't be afraid, though, that's the most important thing. They bank on your being too afraid to say no, to meekly do as you're told. Don't.

I don't think it will come to forced deportations, even in this current climate, because that would look very bad on the news, but it might start to happen quietly. To guard against this, you need a plan to make sure this quiet thing doesn't happen to you or your friends. Quite simply, all you need is to approach a few people you trust and ask them to just show up at your home, preferably with cameras and instant upload to Facebook capabilities, should you need them. A group of people who will drop everything and come to bear witness if they receive a specific "99-Red" text from you, and vice versa. There's no need for violence, just a human presence and maybe even a human shield. This is an extreme precaution, obviously, but one worth putting in place as soon as possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2017, 12:22:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2017, 12:07:21 PM
I don't think it will come to forced deportations

What, like this one? (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/woman-irene-clennell-uk-deport-singapore-british-husband-durham-immigration-detention-centre-a7601441.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2017, 03:32:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2017, 12:07:21 PMYou maybe need to get a group of you together to spread the legal costs.
The problem is that lawyers will work on an individual basis, because all people's situations are different. That said, if there is a group option at some point, I will of course take it.

QuoteTo my mind, though, you need to learn as much about the fundamentals of law as possible for yourself
We are, to some extent, but you can't become an immigration lawyer overnight. Moreover, part of the issue is the government and Home Office positions are not clear. For example, they say you need CSI/CHI, but won't actually state what that is. So you may end up splashing out on expensive health insurance and it still doesn't help. Also, without a time machine, you can't pop back five years and get the insurance when you needed it, in order to apply for residency. Nor can you 'make good' if the HO deems that you've not paid your way.

QuoteDon't be afraid, though, that's the most important thing. They bank on your being too afraid to say no, to meekly do as you're told. Don't.
It's not about being afraid (although that is a part of it) so much as massive anxiety and, increasingly, depression. I'm getting snappy. I'm too often tearful. I have good days, but then days where I just feel totally powerless. This weight has been hanging over us since the referendum was first announced. Now, it seems every month there's a new hammer blow, along with a slew of unhelpful advice.

"Just move, then!" people say, as though it's easy to leave everything behind and that I myself then won't end up in basically the same situation as my wife. "Get citizenship for her, then!" they holler, even when that's not possible. And as much as it's nice to hear "Don't worry – I'm sure it'll all be fine", I won't stop worrying until the day I hear my family can without doubt stay in this country for as long as they want to.

QuoteI don't think it will come to forced deportations, even in this current climate, because that would look very bad on the news, but it might start to happen quietly.
It's already happening to non-EEA citizens in the same sort of situation. That they've been here for years, employed, married, had kids, and have literally nothing to go to in another country? Doesn't matter. The case Jim linked to is the one I mentioned earlier in the thread: Irene Clennell. She has some circumstances different from most (notably having spent a long time overseas), but her actual ejection is nonetheless baffling. Polling also suggests all of seven per cent are in favour of the decision, but the Home Office apparently doesn't care about such things. All that seems to matter now is shaving off the numbers to get immigration down to an impossible arbitrary number. I don't doubt that unless a deal is done for EVERY EEA national here on a certain date, the same will start happening to them.

As for your plan, it's a nice idea, but if the Home Office wants you out, they'll do it in the middle of the night and it'll happen in an instant. My social reach is such that I might within hours be able to get word out to some extent, but none of that matters if my family has already been torn apart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 February, 2017, 05:07:16 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-nissan-uk-business-jobs-7000-employees-car-plant-sunderland-a7603721.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-nissan-uk-business-jobs-7000-employees-car-plant-sunderland-a7603721.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2017, 05:50:27 PM
IP: Thoughts are with you and your family.  I really hope you can get through this.

Jesus Christ, Brexit is looking more and more like a step towards Adam Susan's Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2017, 07:16:01 PM
Incidentally, before this topic naturally veers towards another subject, sincere thanks to those people on here who've offered well wishes and support. I'm a snappy, frequently sullen sod of late because of all this, but I wanted to say I am grateful for the kind words.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 01 March, 2017, 07:03:38 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39133400 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39133400)

"The government has been defeated after the House of Lords said ministers should guarantee EU nationals' right to stay in the UK after Brexit.

The vote, by 358 to 256, is the first Parliamentary defeat for the government's Brexit bill.

However, MPs will be able to remove their changes when the bill returns to the House of Commons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 March, 2017, 10:16:45 AM
A good start, although there are issues. There were far superior amendments, and the wording is a major concern for hundreds of thousands, since it stipulates a legality and the HO is at present redefining who is a legal resident. (Basically, if you're not in work, tough – which means the many thousands of stay-at-home parents, the ill, retirees, and so on, could be caught in the net.) Also, it's notable the government will seek to overturn even this measure, which is simply about guaranteeing a plan for immigrants within three months, not even having the actual measures in place. Classy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 March, 2017, 11:44:49 AM
My wife is an EEA national too Indigo. It is hard to be civil with brexiteers when they have attacked my family.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 12:45:09 PM
Well, yes. It's the vagueness and intangibility of the pro-Brexit crowd's arguments that drive me mental; where as the Remain side can usually back it up with facts, figures, and very real examples like IP's.

I was thinking yesterday of how Ireland must have a very different view of the EU from the UK's (obviously this is a generalisation).  I seriously doubt that a similar referendum here would have the same results - I remember years ago Tharg himself was warning Earthlets of the Eurozone 'threat', and even the 3000AD mock-prog had EU invaders taking the place of Volgans.  Even at the time I was wondering what the Tharg in question's problem was - As far as I was concerned, my country was getting better roads, more jobs, better-protected human rights, easier international travel procedures and more money.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2017, 12:57:18 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 12:45:09 PM
I was thinking yesterday of how Ireland must have a very different view of the EU from the UK's (obviously this is a generalisation).  I seriously doubt that a similar referendum here would have the same results

Then I wouldn't recommend reading the comments on TheJournal.ie or ANY thread that mentions the EU or Brexit on Boards.ie.  The right-wing termites are burrowing away there full time, undermining reality and creating the impression of 'grassroots' hatred for the evil Eurocrats from all but the political classes with their eyes on a lucrative MEP or Brussels gig:  the usual, effective, tactics. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 01:29:41 PM
Thanks, TB. I shall avoid it like the plague - but then I generally do when it comes to boards.ie, except when it comes to very practical questions rather than philosophical or political ones.
Jesus wept, do they really believe Ireland can make it on its own?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 March, 2017, 02:08:52 PM
How does New Zealand manage to do it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 March, 2017, 03:02:32 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 March, 2017, 02:08:52 PM
How does New Zealand manage to do it?

Do what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 03:04:50 PM
If you mean survive economically, then to be honest, I don't know. I'm no expert on economics.
But I would guess it's not by spending years building up good trading relationships with its neighbours and then throwing them away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 March, 2017, 03:07:55 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 March, 2017, 02:08:52 PM
How does New Zealand manage to do it?
By welding itself to Australia from an economic standpoint, forming strategic alliances with (relatively) nearby countries, and looking forward to the likes of RCEP.

Ireland and the EU isn't directly equivalent, but then many would argue it's better, on the basis of the comprehensive nature of the agreements and trade situations in place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 03:11:33 PM
No country exists in a vacuum but neither does any country need to be part of an authoritarian superstate. There are myriad positions between these two extremes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 02 March, 2017, 03:27:08 PM
Spot on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 March, 2017, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 02 March, 2017, 02:08:52 PM
How does New Zealand manage to do it?

Well, it doesn't have a significantly over-valued currency and is about to throw away the two key factors that are propping it up without so much as clue as to how to mitigate the effects, for a start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 02 March, 2017, 03:33:36 PM
The EU isn't an Authoritarian Superstate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 March, 2017, 03:34:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 03:11:33 PMThere are myriad positions between these two extremes.
Being in the EEA would be one such position, but May and co. have thrown that option away. When even the Australians are saying (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ireland-can-be-gateway-to-eu-for-australia-35481300.html) "Hey, Ireland's going to be a great bridge to the EU! UK? Pfft", you know the UK's in serious trouble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 04:08:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 03:11:33 PM
No country exists in a vacuum but neither does any country need to be part of an authoritarian superstate. There are myriad positions between these two extremes.

I would argue that Ireland exists comfortably* within one of these in-between positions.  I don't remember ever being forced to do anything I didn't agree with because of EU directives - as theblazeuk points out, the EU is not an authoritarian superstate.

*EDIT - Though slightly less comfortably now that Brexit is destabilising our position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 02 March, 2017, 04:12:23 PM
There's not a huge amount to be gained from economic comparisons between the UK and New Zealand.  New Zealand is actually larger than the UK, but has a population of less than Scotland's.  Its chief exports are - unsurprisingly, with that abundance of unpopulated land - agricultural, and it's part of the Pacific Rim economy.

The relevant part for any comparision is - as already noted by someone else - that its most important trading partner is its closest neighbour Australia, with which it maintains close economic, political and cultural ties.

You know, like the ones we're going to piss down the drain with our largest and closest trading partner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 04:43:29 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 02 March, 2017, 03:33:36 PM
The EU isn't an Authoritarian Superstate.

Yet...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2017, 04:58:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 04:43:29 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 02 March, 2017, 03:33:36 PM
The EU isn't an Authoritarian Superstate.

Yet...

If that's the argument then maybe the time to quit would have been if it becomes one, not before, when you have democratic representation there and can influence its direction. 

Now you're just going to be the minor neighbour of 'an authoritarian superstate' that you have no representation in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Actually...

Authoritarian (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/authoritarian). (Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.)

Superstate (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/superstate). (A large and powerful state formed from a federation or union of nations.)

So, I was wrong - the EU isn't an authoritarian superstate yet, it's an authoritarian superstate now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 March, 2017, 05:27:56 PM
But under your thinking, wouldn't the UK also be an authoritarian superstate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 06:02:35 PM
No - just an authoritarian state, or an authoritarian union.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 March, 2017, 08:42:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 04:08:14 PM
I would argue that Ireland exists comfortably* within one of these in-between positions.  I don't remember ever being forced to do anything I didn't agree with because of EU directives - as theblazeuk points out, the EU is not an authoritarian superstate.

I don't remember the UK being forced to do anything I didn't agree with because of EU directives either, apart from all those made-up stories that have featured in the red tops for as long as I can remember.  I also remember Farage complaining about fish quotas even though he was on the board responsible for setting them just so he could continue to complain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 March, 2017, 09:00:23 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 02 March, 2017, 08:42:39 PM
I also remember Farage complaining about fish quotas even though he was on the board responsible for setting them just so he could continue to complain.

The quotas are (broadly) sensible measures to counter depletion of the fish stocks. The reason British fisherman can't land those fish has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with the UK government privatising the agency that assigns fishing rights, which then immediately flogged them off to the highest bidder. The big trawler/factory fleets handily outbid the smaller UK operations.

Nothing to do with the EU, and if UK fishermen are expecting their lot to improve post-Brexit, they're in for a rude awakening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 09:00:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Actually...

Authoritarian (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/authoritarian). (Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.)



Which personal freedoms exactly are denied by EU membership and will be restored by leaving?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2017, 09:23:14 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 09:00:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Actually...

Authoritarian (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/authoritarian). (Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.)



Which personal freedoms exactly are denied by EU membership and will be restored by leaving?

Well if you're keen on polluting rivers, building on protected habitats, using hazardous chemicals without restriction, poducing substandard goods, abusing workers and dictating where your citizens can live and work, the EU can definitely cramp your style.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 09:26:13 PM
Fascists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 March, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Well, I've done my democratic duty and I think this is the first time I've properly understood how to use the STV system.

Yeah there's an election today. Hopefully it will get rid of a bunch of oversea kleptocratic authoritarians who cost the British tax payer millions and deny citizens civil rights that have been previously approved by Westminster. No, not the EU, the DUP/Sinn Fein power sharing assembly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 02 March, 2017, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 02 March, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Well, I've done my democratic duty and I think this is the first time I've properly understood how to use the STV system.

Yeah there's an election today. Hopefully it will get rid of a bunch of oversea kleptocratic authoritarians who cost the British tax payer millions and deny citizens civil rights that have been previously approved by Westminster. No, not the EU, the DUP/Sinn Fein power sharing assembly.

Fingers crossed, fella.

We may not get the change we want this time, but a few bruised egos and bloody noses are on the way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 02 March, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Well, I've done my democratic duty and I think this is the first time I've properly understood how to use the STV system.

Did you draw a wee cock and balls in all the boxes?

Joking aside (or not - it is about the Assembly after all) was interesting to hear that initially voter numbers were up. Haven't heard the news this morning so don't know if that's been confirmed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 03 March, 2017, 10:27:15 AM
The EU is not Authoritarian, other than by the woolly standards of the abstract anarchist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 March, 2017, 11:05:39 AM
As Sharky rejects the authority of all states (he has not granted them power to coerce etc.), the EU is unlikely to be judged fairly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 March, 2017, 11:33:14 AM
Quote from: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 07:11:30 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 02 March, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Well, I've done my democratic duty and I think this is the first time I've properly understood how to use the STV system.

Did you draw a wee cock and balls in all the boxes?

Joking aside (or not - it is about the Assembly after all) was interesting to hear that initially voter numbers were up. Haven't heard the news this morning so don't know if that's been confirmed.

Early numbers and reports saying it's the biggest voter turnout in a decade.

We might be in for a few shocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 March, 2017, 01:04:05 PM
Lots of foreign voters prompted the comment "there's no Prods in Poland" in my local Supervalu - where I get all my political news, FYI - and I believe this is a nuanced comment on the potential percentage of first-preference Nationalist votes that may have been cast in the election, though obviously not being a politics scientist I wouldn't personally have expressed this observation so succinctly.  Or at least I would have kept it to myself while I was working.

The only real shock would be a centrist party taking a lead over one of the Big Two, but I think the high turnout might just as likely have been hardline voters scared that their party might lose ground over the Assembly collapse.  Though I'd be happy to be proven wrong, it's hard to see any SNP-style upset happening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 01:12:00 PM
Yeah, it's tempting to think it's a sign people want to change the make up of the Assembly, but it's as likely just trying to stop Themuns as usual. Honestly think the same two parties will be returned to OFMDFM but with a fair wind, the petition of concern will hopefully be limited to its original intent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 01:23:48 PM
Just saw the turnout was 64.78% - up from 54.9% at the last election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 03 March, 2017, 05:11:14 PM
Urgh!  :thumbsdown:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-take-13-minutes-to-decide-to-double-the-royal-familys-income-a7607986.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-take-13-minutes-to-decide-to-double-the-royal-familys-income-a7607986.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 05:47:41 PM
Looks like the Shinners and Alliance have done well then. Pretty chuffed Alliance were top of the pops in my constituency, despite All The Dup standing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 March, 2017, 07:06:43 PM
So Mrs May decides to stand up in Scotland and slag off the SNP for being more concerned with politics than making sure Scottish public services are run properly.  I am assuming that this is satire of the highest order since the Tory Westminster government is running public services in England (and to a lesser extent Scotland and Wales through it's budget) into the ground.  A crisis in pretty much every aspect of public services at present as a result of political choices made by the party in power.  Never mind the impact that privatised services are having.  Southern Rail 'customers' victims must be particularly impressed.

On the Stormont election vote, as a former legitimate target of the IRA it is a little galling to find that Sinn Fein are moving ahead.  That said, I understand from our Gaelic Boarders that the alternative is not great either so I guess that makes a bit of sense.  I think describing our political classes as hopeless is probably the most charitable option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 03 March, 2017, 07:59:00 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 March, 2017, 07:06:43 PM
On the Stormont election vote, as a former legitimate target of the IRA it is a little galling to find that Sinn Fein are moving ahead.  That said, I understand from our Gaelic Boarders that the alternative is not great either so I guess that makes a bit of sense.

Far be it from me to sound like I'm defending Sinn Fein, but my take on it is they are actually better at politics than the DUP as in they at least appear to be prepared to compromise and dare I say it, move on. The DUP are as far away from my hopes and social outlook as you can probably get in NI what with the hating the gays, the environment and atheists to name a few, never mind the impression they'd sell yer granny for a few quid.

Didn't tick a box for either of them in case you're wondering!

As it stands at the moment, it looks like it could be a Sinn Fein First Minister. They have said before the election that they will not go into government with Arlene Foster, so I could see the DUP putting her forward as Deputy First Minister, meaning no Assembly will be formed which will lead to direct rule again. I really don't think the DUP really want that either, so it'll be a laugh to see what happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 March, 2017, 08:06:44 PM
Brought to mind Lord Foulkes' comments on the Scottish government from a few years back...

"The SNP are on a very dangerous tack. What they are doing is trying to build up a situation in Scotland where the services are manifestly better than south of the border in a number of areas.

"Is that a bad thing?"

"No, but they are doing it deliberately."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 March, 2017, 08:19:36 PM
I'm pulling for the Shinners to take the lead, as it means that the DUP won't have the majority necessary to use a Petition Of Concern to block marriage equality anymore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 09:21:31 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 March, 2017, 09:23:14 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2017, 09:00:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2017, 05:14:58 PM
Actually...

Authoritarian (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/authoritarian). (Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.)



Which personal freedoms exactly are denied by EU membership and will be restored by leaving?

Well if you're keen on polluting rivers, building on protected habitats, using hazardous chemicals without restriction, poducing substandard goods, abusing workers and dictating where your citizens can live and work, the EU can definitely cramp your style.

The personal freedoms to, for example, refuse to fund an EU army or contribute to the ruination of Cyprus, Ireland, Greece, Portugal and currently Italy and Spain. However, none of these personal freedoms will be restored by leaving as we're simply leaving an authoritarian superstate for an authoritarian state, which could just as easily force us to do anything and everything in just the same way.

The EU could protect the environment if it wanted but it doesn't want. Where I live, fraccing companies are moving back in - intent on carrying out a process that has already caused one local earth tremor and ruined large swathes of land in other countries, not to mention poisoning crops, livestock, aquafers, rivers and people. And where is the EU? Looking the other way, of course, too busy counting the big piles of money it extracts from the fossil fuel industries. So, who's protecting the environment? Not the EU, not DEFRA - it's ordinary local people, spending their own time and resources to do a job that we supposedly pay the EU and DEFRA to do for us. So yeah, it's lovely to think that the EU protects people and the environment but it just doesn't (it didn't prevent a recent widespread radiation leak (http://www.sciencealert.com/no-one-can-figure-out-what-s-behind-a-mysterious-radiation-spike-across-europe), after all) - all it protects is its own position and revenue stream, and woe-betide anyone who threatens either.

The EU does not prevent the manufacture and sale of substandard goods - how many times have you purchased something like earphones or speakers that lasted only a few months? More than once, I'll wager. Nor does the EU prevent fake designer goods appearing on market stalls - you can find such stalls all over the place. When it comes to abusing workers, the EU hasn't stamped that out, either - nor has it eradicated such horrid practices as the ongoing sex-trafficking rings, some of which even include children. Just because the EU happens to pen a directive saying "making fake Gucci handbags is illegal" or "working your employees to death is illegal" or "sex-trafficking is illegal" or "manufacturing Teddy bears with razor blades in their eyes is illegal" or "spilling cyanide into rivers is illegal" means next to nothing. All of these activities could be prosecuted by police and courts without the permission of the EU. As for dictating where people can live and work, where was the EU with its Article 7 respect for my home when I was thrown out on the street? Where was it with it's respect for and right to my personal property while the council was throwing my stuff on the tip? Nowhere to be seen, that's where. But when I wanted to get a job driving, it was there with its hand out, demanding money for a series of five mandatory courses - and it didn't matter if I took the same course five times so long as the EU got its money. The EU's never there when you need it but, boy, is it quick off the mark when it needs you!

But what's the point of me saying any of this? I'm a libertarian and you're all statists. We will never see eye to eye on the fundaments of society:

Libertarians believe in freedom, statist believe in freedom of choice; libertarians believe in violence as a last resort in self defence, statists believe in violence (or at the very least tolerate it) as a matter of course; libertarians trust their fellow humans, statists distrust their fellow humans; libertarians believe in  exercising personal responsibility, statists believe in abdicating personal responsibility; libertarians believe in cooperation, statists believe in coercion; libertarians believe we should all stand together, statists believe we should all kneel together; libertarians believe in voluntarily following leaders who set good examples, statists believe in following the least bad leader from a small pre-selected group; libertarians believe all humans have equal rights, responsibilities and powers, statists believe that a small group of humans have more rights, responsibilities and powers than the majority; libertarians believe in free markets, statists believe in controlled markets; libertarians believe that which is not forbidden is allowed, statists believe that which is not allowed is forbidden; libertarians believe in voluntary participation, statists believe in mandatory participation; libertarians prefer trivium style education, statists prefer the Prussian method of education; libertarians believe in freedom of speech, statists balieve in politically correct speech; libertarians believe in the property rights of the individual, statists believe in the property rights of the state; libertarians believe the vast majority of people can be trusted, statists believe the vast majority of people cannot be trusted; libertarians believe government promotes brutality, statists believe government promotes peace; libertarians believe governments are barbaric, statists believe governments are civilised. In virtually every area, libertarians and statists are at odds. This is a shame, I think, as each perspective can learn from the other and neither perspective is perfect. There may be some lessons to be learned from each under current growing interest in the field of spiral dynamics which does, I think, offer both statists and libertarians hope for understanding, integration and growth. (I've only been looking at spiral dynamics (which is not an especially new idea but recently gaining wider attention) for a month or six weeks, and then not in any significant depth, but it is an intriguing idea with potential.)

Being the only (it seems) libertarian in a sea of statists is tiring but I don't intend to give it up because of that - nor is it my intention to convert anyone. Human beings should not be converted, they must convert themselves, or not, as they desire. Statism and libertarianism are very similar to religions, both are based on deep-seated beliefs and when one is questioned or derided it can feel like a personal attack. Rest assured, though, just because I regard statism in much the same way that Richard Dawkins regards creationism, that doesn't mean I regard statists themselves as stupid, evil or in any way inferior. When I oppose or attack statism, I am not opposing or attacking the person, integrity or intelligence of the statist - at least, I try my best not to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 04 March, 2017, 09:34:45 AM
I'm not a "statist". I analyse information and garner opinions from many walks of life, then I arrive at an (hopefully) informed opinion. Stats and Polls are useless, as has been evidenced to great degree - " Hilary is going to win" being a prime example!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 09:47:49 AM
Statism. (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/statism) A political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs.

If you support statism you are a statist; if you don't, you're not. Simples.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 March, 2017, 09:51:26 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 09:21:31 AM

The personal freedoms to, for example, refuse to fund an EU army or contribute to the ruination of Cyprus, Ireland, Greece, Portugal and currently Italy and Spain. However, none of these personal freedoms will be restored by leaving as we're simply leaving an authoritarian superstate for an authoritarian state, which could just as easily force us to do anything and everything in just the same way.

The EU could protect the environment if it wanted but it doesn't want. Where I live, fraccing companies are moving back in - intent on carrying out a process that has already caused one local earth tremor and ruined large swathes of land in other countries, not to mention poisoning crops, livestock, aquafers, rivers and people. And where is the EU? Looking the other way, of course, too busy counting the big piles of money it extracts from the fossil fuel industries. So, who's protecting the environment? Not the EU, not DEFRA - it's ordinary local people, spending their own time and resources to do a job that we supposedly pay the EU and DEFRA to do for us. So yeah, it's lovely to think that the EU protects people and the environment but it just doesn't (it didn't prevent a recent widespread radiation leak (http://www.sciencealert.com/no-one-can-figure-out-what-s-behind-a-mysterious-radiation-spike-across-europe), after all) - all it protects is its own position and revenue stream, and woe-betide anyone who threatens either.

Obviously I don't believe environmental protections are remotely strong enough, if it was me calling the shots on the environment you'd know the real meaning of 'authoritarian', and you'd never have heard the word fracking outside of BSG, let alone been subjected to Cuadrilla's homemade quakes. But I can assure you - because I make my living, such as it is, from environmental compliance - that the EU imposes far more stringent and effective measures than either of our national governments have or would. Everyone who studies or works in the environment sector will tell you the same, while insisting it should be better. And it isn't the EU that's granting licences for fracking, that's your own central and local governments.

Your preferred model of commendable community opposition exists in parallel with environmental legislation, as it should, but as a replacement all you get is unfettered NIMBYism that often runs counter to sustainable planning. I prefer the argument 'no fracking at all, it's a shit solution' to 'no fracking near me, I don't like it', and there's more chance at arriving at that from an international perspective than a local one.

Anyway, as you say, you'll be at the mercy of your smaller (more) authoritarian outfit soon, so not to worry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 10:07:47 AM
How does the EU enforce environmental compliance? (Just wondering, I'm guessing it's through paid licenses and fines.)

QuoteAnd it isn't the EU that's granting licences for fracking, that's your own central and local governments.

Agreed - which means the EU is either unable or unwilling to intercede, which begs the question, what good is it in this case?

Quote...you'll be at the mercy of your smaller (more) authoritarian outfit soon...

We already are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 04 March, 2017, 10:18:51 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 09:47:49 AM
Statism. (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/statism) A political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs.



Apologies. When I first read your lengthy post I was under the impression you were talking about "Statistics" not "States".

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2017, 10:21:47 AM
63.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot! :-D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 04 March, 2017, 10:46:43 AM
Not a fanny hair between the DUP and Sinn Fein then. The good news could be that no single  party can use the petition of concern to block socially progressive proposals, the bad news is there could be a third election if they don't manage to form an Executive. Still, good to see Alliance get some backing and there's still a Green Party presence no matter how small. Speaking of which...

Quote from: TordelBack on 04 March, 2017, 09:51:26 AM
Obviously I don't believe environmental protections are remotely strong enough, if it was me calling the shots on the environment you'd know the real meaning of 'authoritarian', and you'd never have heard the word fracking outside of BSG, let alone been subjected to Cuadrilla's homemade quakes. But I can assure you - because I make my living, such as it is, from environmental compliance - that the EU imposes far more stringent and effective measures than either of our national governments have or would. Everyone who studies or works in the environment sector will tell you the same, while insisting it should be better. And it isn't the EU that's granting licences for fracking, that's your own central and local governments.

*fistbump*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 March, 2017, 02:47:53 PM
What is the fucking wrong with Trump? His ranting tweets last two days was crazy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 March, 2017, 04:07:02 PM
He's a blowhard narcissist who for years has had very few people actually say "no" to him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 05 March, 2017, 04:10:21 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 March, 2017, 02:47:53 PM
What is the fucking wrong with Trump? His ranting tweets last two days was crazy!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Essentially: "what I accuse you of being, I am."

For instance: "I'm being investigated by the intelligence agencies because I'm a lying sack of shit but Obama should be investigated because it's all his fault."

But more worrisome: "Projection tends to come to the fore in normal people at times of personal or political crisis but is more commonly found in the neurotic or psychotic in personalities functioning at a primitive level as in narcissistic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 05 March, 2017, 04:27:42 PM
Or in schoolyard terms...

He who smelt, dealt it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 March, 2017, 05:03:45 PM
Whoever said the rhyme, did the crime!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2017, 05:37:37 PM
I've a much more simpler explanation than that.

He's a narcissistic twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 March, 2017, 06:01:43 PM
Dead cat strategy.  Say something absurd and abusive to distract attention for the real issues.  Trump has read something on Breitbart, who were repeating something from a far right radio show, which will appeal to his core supporters whilst discrediting the security services.  Most importantly, it distracts attention from Jeff Sessions and contact with Russian officials.  If we look too long at that, we'll see a sorry tale of corruption and greed involving a $500 billion contract which couldn't continue as long as post-Crimea sanctions were in place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 March, 2017, 06:16:12 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2017, 05:37:37 PM
I've a much more simpler explanation than that.

He's a narcissistic tw*t.

Or a huge big distraction. While everyone's watching the Trump Show, here are some of the things going on behind the curtain:

HR 861 Terminate the Environmental
Protection Agency
HR 610 Vouchers for Public Education
HR 899 Terminate the Department of
Education
HJR 69 Repeal Rule Protecting Wildlife
HR 370 Repeal Affordable Care Act
HR 354 Defund Planned Parenthood
HR 785 National Right to Work (this one ends
unions)
HR 83 Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Bill
HR 147 Criminalizing Abortion ("Parenatal
Nondiscrimination Act")
HR 808 Sanctions against Iran

But, you know, maybe all the above are just benign parts of a larger plan to Make America Great Again that just look bad taken out of context. And maybe not.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 March, 2017, 06:38:59 PM

People around Trump have an agenda, but he's a game show host who quit because his ratings tanked by more than half (http://www.vulture.com/2017/01/celebrity-apprentice-ratings-were-down-for-years.html). 

He's selling the same Anne Robinson schtick he's shipped for a decade and a half - saying mean things about other minor celebrities (The Terminator) and has-beens (Obama).

The presidency is Trump's less popular spin-off show, where he trades unsuccessfully on the character audiences used to like. It's his Joey (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIdkf5oa130).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2017, 09:14:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 March, 2017, 06:16:12 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2017, 05:37:37 PM
I've a much more simpler explanation than that.

He's a narcissistic tw*t.

Or a huge big distraction. While everyone's watching the Trump Show, here are some of the things going on behind the curtain:

HR 861 Terminate the Environmental
Protection Agency
HR 610 Vouchers for Public Education
HR 899 Terminate the Department of
Education
HJR 69 Repeal Rule Protecting Wildlife
HR 370 Repeal Affordable Care Act
HR 354 Defund Planned Parenthood
HR 785 National Right to Work (this one ends
unions)
HR 83 Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Bill
HR 147 Criminalizing Abortion ("Parenatal
Nondiscrimination Act")
HR 808 Sanctions against Iran

But, you know, maybe all the above are just benign parts of a larger plan to Make America Great Again that just look bad taken out of context. And maybe not.
It's possible to do all these things and still be a narcissistic wanker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 05 March, 2017, 10:41:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 March, 2017, 06:16:12 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2017, 05:37:37 PM
I've a much more simpler explanation than that.

He's a narcissistic tw*t.

Or a huge big distraction. While everyone's watching the Trump Show, here are some of the things going on behind the curtain:

HR 861 Terminate the Environmental
Protection Agency
HR 610 Vouchers for Public Education
HR 899 Terminate the Department of
Education
HJR 69 Repeal Rule Protecting Wildlife
HR 370 Repeal Affordable Care Act
HR 354 Defund Planned Parenthood
HR 785 National Right to Work (this one ends
unions)
HR 83 Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Bill
HR 147 Criminalizing Abortion ("Parenatal
Nondiscrimination Act")
HR 808 Sanctions against Iran

But, you know, maybe all the above are just benign parts of a larger plan to Make America Great Again that just look bad taken out of context. And maybe not.

I doubt he could finish reading that list without getting distracted. I also doubt he even knows or cares what any of this stuff even means. It's an agenda, he's the mouthpiece but not the power player. Sign here, here and here, Mr. President. You go watch Fox News. We got this from here.

But as already pointed out, that doesn't stop him from being a waste of a human soul.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 March, 2017, 09:23:38 AM
Although I do believe that there are diversion tactics going on here, it also seems that Fuckface is getting even more paranoid and delusional, on top of an already sociopathic personality. And this is the man who could order the destruction of civilisation in six minutes. Sleep tight, children.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 March, 2017, 09:44:18 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 March, 2017, 02:47:53 PM
What is the fucking wrong with Trump? His ranting tweets last two days was crazy!


Not following him, but what in particular has he been tweeting (that's worse than what he's been spouting previously)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 06 March, 2017, 11:20:05 AM
At a guess, the Obama wiretap accusation without any proof, or wobbling around like a knackered shopping trolley onto the topic of Schwarzenegger and the Apprentice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 March, 2017, 11:46:23 AM
Whenever you watch a TV show or movie or read a comic book where the Leader Of the Free World is in danger, has a motivational inspiring speech, challenges the nasty villains or has a direct line to the heroes (thus showing their heroic nature).... replace it with The Donald.

Hell Nixon's Head in a Jar is more presidential.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 March, 2017, 01:45:42 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 06 March, 2017, 11:46:23 AM
Hell Nixon's Head in a Jar is more presidential.

Jack Nicholson in Mars Attacks! is more presidential.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 March, 2017, 01:51:07 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 06 March, 2017, 11:46:23 AM
Whenever you watch a TV show or movie or read a comic book where the Leader Of the Free World is in danger, has a motivational inspiring speech, challenges the nasty villains or has a direct line to the heroes (thus showing their heroic nature).... replace it with The Donald.

Hell Nixon's Head in a Jar is more presidential.

As an aside, I find the way Hollywood consistently portrays presidents as heroic and noble quite nauseating.  I also wonder whether that kind of attitude has had any bearing on the US electorate regularly picking actors, celebrity generals from their last war and now a reality tv star as their head of state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 March, 2017, 01:58:15 PM
There's a lot of truth in that, but the protagonists in heroic fiction do tend to be heroic, and you could also argue that roles like Morgan Freeman in Deep Impact and Dennis Haysbert in 24 made the very idea of a black president conceivable. Reality following art isn't always a bad thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 March, 2017, 10:28:35 AM
Pound is slipping its way back down again, eradicating the SURGE in a couple of days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 March, 2017, 11:06:11 AM
A shade under $1.22 right now. One-year low is $1.20. Average level for the past 25 years has been between the low 1.40s and high 1.60s, with the odd like higher (topping out at over $2 in 2007).

The only solace right now is the we still haven't reached the record low of $1.05, plunged to in 1985. That said, economists are predicting below parity within a few years, the Sterling eventually clambering back to a new natural level of below $1.10. Still, lots of opportunities for British people there – if they get their earnings in US dollars.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 March, 2017, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 06 March, 2017, 01:51:07 PM
... Hollywood consistently portrays presidents as heroic and noble ...


Not since Nixon:


(http://i.imgur.com/d54XWil.png?1)(http://i.imgur.com/8tAAmxw.png?1)(http://i.imgur.com/6No7tzd.png?2)
(http://i.imgur.com/UfRXRfO.png?1)


One each, from the eighties, nineties, noughties, and teens. Ivan Reitman's Dave (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taDreDT3E6A) is about a nice guy staging an illegal coup against an asshole POTUS, Harrison Ford realised The Thing (https://youtu.be/sWwN-yDCjOM?t=40) had infiltrated the Oval Office, and this prick was going to let his press secretary take a heat ray to the face (https://youtu.be/UKDFop0aqYQ?t=65).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 07 March, 2017, 05:49:50 PM
Not always.Take for example Air Force One.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_One_(film) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_One_(film))
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2017, 05:56:16 PM
And don't forget the Sarah Palin parody from Iron Sky (http://cdn.ientry.com/sites/webpronews/pictures/ironskypalinnazi_616.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 07 March, 2017, 06:45:24 PM
Iron Sky doesn't count. Not Hollywood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 March, 2017, 07:01:53 PM
Leaked tape of Surrey's council tax government 'deal'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-39198308 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-39198308)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2017, 07:14:43 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 07 March, 2017, 06:45:24 PM
Iron Sky doesn't count. Not Hollywood.

Pfah! Everybody knows Hollywood just makes fake movies with the sole purpose of undermining the Finnish, German and Australian movie industries. As the Donald probably said, "When Hollywood sends its movies, they're not sending the best. They're not portraying you, they're portraying people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems to us. They're portraying drugs. They're portraying crime. They're portraying rapists... And some, I assume, are portraying good people. It's time to make Australia, Finland and Germany great again! Ooh, that reminds me, have my Dutch DVDs arrived yet?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 March, 2017, 11:00:27 AM
Quote from: Frank on 07 March, 2017, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 06 March, 2017, 01:51:07 PM
... Hollywood consistently portrays presidents as heroic and noble ...
One each, from the eighties, nineties, noughties, and teens. Ivan Reitman's Dave (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taDreDT3E6A) is about a nice guy staging an illegal coup against an asshole POTUS, Harrison Ford realised The Thing (https://youtu.be/sWwN-yDCjOM?t=40) had infiltrated the Oval Office, and this prick was going to let his press secretary take a heat ray to the face (https://youtu.be/UKDFop0aqYQ?t=65).

The thing that baffles me at the moment is that despite all these heels as POTUS, they all still seem to be more believable characters than the real incumbent... more rational, more reasonable, more convincing (whatever secrets or flaws they hold). President Trump would celebrate his great deal with Zod, wonderful guy. The best. Honoured to be talking to the REAL PEOPLE of Krypton.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 March, 2017, 11:46:39 AM
It's often the way, Nige, when you're a banned word.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 10 March, 2017, 11:57:06 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 10 March, 2017, 11:46:39 AM
It's often the way, Nige, when you're a quoted banned word.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156)
As always, it's hard to know if these pricks mean anything that comes out of their mouths but this seems to be so mind-bogglingly lacking in self awareness that it's probably genuine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 March, 2017, 10:42:58 AM
Shared by our own Richmond Clements on Facebook. Read the whole thing before you smash your computer / phone in disgust

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/justiceforkatiehopkins (https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/justiceforkatiehopkins)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 March, 2017, 11:31:28 AM
Heh. Nice twist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 March, 2017, 12:10:02 PM

Are you baffled that - despite spending hours of every day telling people who disagree with you on the internet they're stupid and/or terrible people - the world doesn't appear to be coming round to your way of thinking? This is for you (https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_the_westboro_baptist_church_here_s_why_i_left).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2017, 05:35:07 PM
Good talk, I enjoyed that. How she felt when she left her church (Westboro) particularly resonated with how I felt when I left mine (Statism). Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed. In fact, she's convinced me to take Jim off ignore.

Thanks for the link, Frank.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 March, 2017, 06:46:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2017, 05:35:07 PM
Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed.

Thanks for taking the time to click on the link (https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_the_westboro_baptist_church_here_s_why_i_left/transcript?language=en#t-905625). Here are those four guidelines and the edited highlights of her short but affecting talk on how to make the world better, rather than venting anger to make yourself feel better:



1/ Don't assume bad intent

2/ Ask questions

3/ Stay calm

4/ Make the argument



Quote

I grew up in the Westboro Baptist Church. Here's why I left, by Megan Phelps-Roper (@meganphelps (https://twitter.com/meganphelps?lang=en))

I was five years old when I joined my family on the picket line for the first time. Life was framed as an epic battle between good and evil. The good was my church and its members, and the evil was everyone else. This was the focus of our whole lives and I believed what I was taught with all my heart.

Initially, the people I encountered on Twitter were just as hostile as I expected. They were the digital version of the screaming hordes I'd been seeing at protests since I was a kid. But in the midst of that digital brawl, a strange pattern developed.

Someone would arrive at my profile with the usual rage and scorn, I would respond with a custom mix of Bible verses, pop culture references and smiley faces, but then a conversation would ensue. And it was civil — full of genuine curiosity on both sides.

There was no confusion about our positions, but the line between friend and foe was becoming blurred. We'd started to see each other as human beings, and it changed the way we spoke to one another.

It took time, but eventually these conversations planted seeds of doubt in me. My friends on Twitter took the time to understand Westboro's doctrines, and in doing so, they were able to find inconsistencies I'd missed my entire life.

The truth is that the care shown to me by these strangers on the internet was itself a contradiction. It was growing evidence that people on the other side were not the demons I'd been led to believe.

In spite of overwhelming grief and terror, I left Westboro in 2012. People who had no reason at all to give me a second chance after a lifetime of antagonism. And yet, unbelievably, they did. People had every reason to doubt my sincerity, but most of them didn't. Given my history, it was more than I could've hoped for — forgiveness and the benefit of the doubt. It still amazes me.

That period was full of turmoil, but one part I've returned to often is a surprising realization I had during that time — that it was a relief and a privilege to let go of the harsh judgments that instinctively ran through my mind about nearly every person I saw. I realized that now I needed to learn. I needed to listen.

This has been at the front of my mind lately, because I see in our public discourse so many of the same destructive impulses that ruled my former church. We celebrate tolerance and diversity more than at any other time in memory, and still we grow more and more divided.

We want good things — justice, equality, freedom, dignity, prosperity — but the path we've chosen looks so much like the one I walked away from four years ago.

We've broken the world into us and them, only emerging from our bunkers long enough to lob rhetorical grenades at the other camp. We write off half the country as out-of-touch liberal elites or racist misogynist bullies. No nuance, no complexity, no humanity.

Even when someone does call for empathy and understanding for the other side, the conversation nearly always devolves into a debate about who deserves more empathy. And just as I learned to do, we routinely refuse to acknowledge the flaws in our positions or the merits in our opponent's.

Compromise is anathema. We even target people on our own side when they dare to question the party line. This path has brought us cruel, sniping, deepening polarization, and even outbreaks of violence. I remember this path. It will not take us where we want to go.

What gives me hope is that we can do something about this. The good news is that it's simple, and the bad news is that it's hard. It's hard because righteous indignation, that sense of certainty that ours is the right side, is so seductive.

I will always be inspired to do so by those people I encountered on Twitter, apparent enemies who became my beloved friends. There was nothing special about the way I responded to him. What was special was their approach.

I thought about it a lot over the past few years and I found four things they did differently that made real conversation possible. These four steps were small but powerful, and I do everything I can to employ them in difficult conversations today.

The first is don't assume bad intent. My friends on Twitter realized that even when my words were aggressive and offensive, I sincerely believed I was doing the right thing. Assuming ill motives almost instantly cuts us off from truly understanding why someone does and believes as they do.

The second is ask questions. We can't present effective arguments if we don't understand where the other side is actually coming from and because it gives them an opportunity to point out flaws in our positions. It signals to someone that they're being heard.

When my friends on Twitter stopped accusing and started asking questions, I almost automatically mirrored them. Their questions gave me room to speak, but they also gave me permission to ask them questions and to truly hear their responses. It fundamentally changed the dynamic of our conversation.

The third is stay calm. Dialing up the volume and the snark is natural in stressful situations, but it tends to bring the conversation to an unsatisfactory, explosive end. People often lament that digital communication makes us less civil, but this is one advantage that online conversations have over in-person ones. We have a buffer of time and space between us and the people whose ideas we find so frustrating. Instead of lashing out, we can pause, breathe, change the subject or walk away, and then come back to it when we're ready.

And finally ... make the argument. This might seem obvious, but one side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is or should be obvious and self-evident, that we shouldn't have to defend our positions because they're so clearly right and good that if someone doesn't get it, it's their problem — that it's not my job to educate them.

My friends on Twitter didn't abandon their beliefs or their principles — only their scorn. They channeled their infinitely justifiable offense and came to me with pointed questions tempered with kindness and humor. They approached me as a human being, and that was more transformative than two full decades of outrage, disdain and violence.

Each one of us contributes to the communities and the cultures and the societies that we make up. The end of this spiral of rage and blame begins with one person who refuses to indulge these destructive, seductive impulses. We just have to decide that it's going to start with us.

https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_the_westboro_baptist_church_here_s_why_i_left/transcript?language=en#t-905625 (https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_the_westboro_baptist_church_here_s_why_i_left/transcript?language=en#t-905625)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 March, 2017, 06:57:09 PM
I only listened to that yesterday. Great stuff. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 13 March, 2017, 05:39:56 PM
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the second round of the popular gameshow...Lets All Leave A Union.

In this round, you'll gain points for counting the number of times the following phrases are thrown at you over the next two years.  Are you ready?  The Words Of Fear are...

Spanish Veto.  Dependence on Oil.  Separatist.  Deficit Worse Than Greece.  Scoxit.  Will of the People.  Narrowminded.  Dangerous.  Kilt.  Once in a Generation.  One Party State.  Petty Nationalism.  Hadrian's Wall.  Anti-English.  Complicated.  Queen Nicola.  Subsidies. Cybernat.   Jock.  Porridge.  Junkie.  Ruled by Brussels.  JK Rowling.  Braveheart.  Ukip.  Flooded by Immigrants.

Good luck everyone!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 March, 2017, 05:56:16 PM
I love that every news channel I've listened to says The First Minister is threatening Indy2, it maybe a threat to you, but its a lifeline to us.

ps we can move the border south a bit so the world's biggest Dredd collection is in Jockland. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 13 March, 2017, 05:58:18 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 13 March, 2017, 05:39:56 PM
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the second round of the popular gameshow...Lets All Leave A Union.

In this round, you'll gain points for counting the number of times the following phrases are thrown at you over the next two years.  Are you ready?  The Words Of Fear are...

Scoxit. 

Good luck everyone!

:lol:

That one made me spew tea over my computer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 13 March, 2017, 07:07:56 PM
Listening to Mrs May on the radio on the way home, I couldn't help but laugh at how she was condemning the SNP.  Suggesting that the referendum would cast the nation into doubt and uncertainty, that the Holyrood government would better serve the Scottish people by concentrating on their needs rather than playing politics.  This coming from a woman who's party did precisely that on a national scale.  There is now no longer a line between farce and British politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 March, 2017, 07:32:05 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 13 March, 2017, 07:07:56 PM
This coming from a woman who's party did precisely that on a national continental scale.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 March, 2017, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 13 March, 2017, 07:07:56 PM
Listening to Mrs May on the radio on the way home, I couldn't help but laugh at how she was  ... (s)uggesting that the referendum would cast the nation into doubt and uncertainty

Aye, that caused more tea spitting in my house.

To be fair, the same contradiction is inherent in the argument that Scotland needs to leave the UK because nations know how best to govern in their own interests and lack influence in any relationship with a larger power ... but we need to stay in the EU at all costs.

I'm open to both arguments, but if one's valid the other isn't.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 March, 2017, 07:40:47 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 13 March, 2017, 05:39:56 PM
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the second round of the popular gameshow...Lets All Leave A Union.

In this round, you'll gain points for counting the number of times the following phrases are thrown at you over the next two years.  Are you ready?  The Words Of Fear are...

Spanish Veto.  Dependence on Oil.  Separatist.  Deficit Worse Than Greece.  Scoxit.  Will of the People.  Narrowminded.  Dangerous.  Kilt.  Once in a Generation.  One Party State.  Petty Nationalism.  Hadrian's Wall.  Anti-English.  Complicated.  Queen Nicola.  Subsidies. Cybernat.   Jock.  Porridge.  Junkie.  Ruled by Brussels.  JK Rowling.  Braveheart.  Ukip.  Flooded by Immigrants.

Good luck everyone!


Stolen and turned in to Scottish Independence Bingo (hope you don't mind?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 13 March, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 13 March, 2017, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 13 March, 2017, 07:07:56 PM
Listening to Mrs May on the radio on the way home, I couldn't help but laugh at how she was  ... (s)uggesting that the referendum would cast the nation into doubt and uncertainty

Aye, that caused more tea spitting in my house.

To be fair, the same contradiction is inherent in the argument that Scotland needs to leave the UK because nations know how best to govern in their own interests and lack influence in any relationship with a larger power ... but we need to stay in the EU at all costs.

I'm open to both arguments, but if one's valid the other isn't.

It is only a contradiction if you buy into the EU stealing your "sovereignty"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 March, 2017, 08:00:51 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 13 March, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
It is only a contradiction if you buy into the EU stealing your "sovereignty"

It isn't * and - for the sake of clarity - I don't, Leigh.


* Knowing how best to govern yourself and lacking influence (see above) are not the same as having sovereignty stolen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 08:05:06 PM
Both amendments defeated. One was to ensure parliamentary sovereignty over the final deal, and the other was to within three months come up with a plan guarantee the rights of EEA nationals living here. Both turned down. Labour rumoured to now throw in the towel in the Lords.

Fucking hell. Both of these are obvious concessions that should be made. That the government won't budge on EEA rights to even this level has now shifted from worrying to terrifying. They keep talking about tying up rights in the final deal (which sources suggest the Tories are going to storm off from anyway) and/or reciprocality (which is literally impossible to do en masse). No idea what the future is for my family now. I hate this so much, and all of this stupidity by the government was so easily avoidable.

(On the reciprocality 'deal', the UK will be a third country. EU nations only have to allow various freedoms to each other. They can do whatever the hell they like to anyone else. So the UK at best will have to do deals with every EU27 nation AND the EFTA nations. And this will be a problem, because Spain isn't going to give a shit about the UK, given how few Spaniards are here, compared to how many Brits are in Spain, say. What a horrible mess.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 13 March, 2017, 08:56:56 PM
Never mind, at least Boris is up for building another royal boat...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 13 March, 2017, 08:57:20 PM
Never thought you did, Frank!  But worth pointing out as I can see Brexiters taking a line running "they want to give up being ruled by the UK to be ruled by the EU" taking root pretty soon, when it isnt really equivalent

Quote from: Frank on 13 March, 2017, 08:00:51 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 13 March, 2017, 07:43:45 PM
It is only a contradiction if you buy into the EU stealing your "sovereignty"

It isn't * and - for the sake of clarity - I don't, Leigh.


* Knowing how best to govern yourself and lacking influence (see above) are not the same as having sovereignty stolen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 13 March, 2017, 09:04:55 PM
At this point the only logical conclusion is that Westminster have decided the naughty voting public need a lesson in why referendums are not a good idea, so are actively working to make this as disastrous as possible...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 09:43:31 PM
And now Labour's capitulated, somehow arguing that the Lib Dems were using this as an excuse to boost their membership. What is the point of Labour these days?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 13 March, 2017, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 09:43:31 PM
And now Labour's capitulated, somehow arguing that the Lib Dems were using this as an excuse to boost their membership. What is the point of Labour these days?

A question many voters will be asking themselves at the council elections this May, I suspect.

Here in Scotland it must be like the last days in the Fuhrerbunker at Glasgow City Chambers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 March, 2017, 10:00:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 08:05:06 PM
That the government won't budge on EEA rights to even this level has now shifted from worrying to terrifying.

Bloody hell IP, how appallingly, unnecessarily stressful for you guys. The pigheaded backwards fuckery of your current parliament never ceases to horrify. Still, May apparently has a 75% approval rating with the over 65s (versus 7% for Corbyn), so she's obviously playing to the right audience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2017, 10:07:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 09:43:31 PM

What is the point of Labour these days?


Same as it's always been - to maintain the illusion of choice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 March, 2017, 11:05:10 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 13 March, 2017, 09:54:25 PMA question many voters will be asking themselves at the council elections this May, I suspect.
And 2020's GE, which may no longer involve Scotland. It's going to be a bloodbath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 March, 2017, 11:18:21 PM
Funny how all this has worked out for the far right.
Globally, I mean.  Things were going slowly but steadily in the other direction, but then all this "disparate" outlier behavior comes along and creates a perfect storm not just for the re-emergence of fascism, but the active embracing of it by the West.

RE: Labour - Harriet Harmon, before Corbyn even entered the leadership race, stood before Parliament and told the British people that it was Labour's duty to back the Tories' welfare cuts and Austerity measures.
There's a reason Thatcher called New Labour her greatest achievement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 13 March, 2017, 11:47:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 13 March, 2017, 11:18:21 PM
Funny how all this has worked out for the far right.
Globally, I mean.  Things were going slowly but steadily in the other direction, but then all this "disparate" outlier behavior comes along and creates a perfect storm not just for the re-emergence of fascism, but the active embracing of it by the West.


The left were always edging more and more in the direction of the right; happy to co-opt the policies of the right that suited their interests until the the voter base got sick of it, abandoned them in return, and paradoxically –at least on the surface– ran to the other side.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 12:38:58 AM
Compromise is a longstanding part of any political landscape, but that's not what we're seeing: what we're seeing is polorisation and extremism ultimately favoring only the right, with the left attacking itself from the bottom up.
And inevitably: "It is utterly unacceptable to condemn a generation of our young to unemployment by maintaining all the rights and privileges of those currently in work." (https://t.co/QxT2I6MGzO)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 March, 2017, 01:41:27 AM
Aye, but it got to a point where no one knew what separated the parties from each other, and the left became a party of lesser substance by becoming the party of the big cities and the liberal middle-class. With the resurgence of far-right ideologues –who are far more organised than the left– the old polarisation no longer functioned in the familiar way it used to because the left has been hollowed-out. Reverting to an old ideological version of itself instead of being pragmatic will no longer cut-it in opposition. This, as you point out, is global, and the previous global alliances have been dissolved to favour the new, stronger alliances between neo-nationalists.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 March, 2017, 06:25:42 AM
The core of all this for me is the shift in the organisation and control of grassroots dissatisfaction and anger from left to right.

Rather than lefties being able to articulate and leverage frustration with treatment by employers, backwards laws and self-serving governments, we've ended up (again) with protest directed at nebulous outsiders who 'strong' governments are exhorted to protect us from, with the desirable status quo being something in an in imagined past rather than an imagined future. To what extent this is a function of ongoing demographic shift and the quite shocking relative affluence of older generations versus the ever-extending childhood of younger generations, and to what extent this is something cleverly engineered by an international corporate elite I don't know: but probably a bit of both. 

This at a time when we desperately need to pull together and think only of the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 09:46:11 AM
You Mexicans better make room, as us 'uns are moving back in. (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/sinn-fein-demand-irish-unity-referendum-as-brexit-trigger-looms-35526466.html)
May's Ministry is so blinkered and weak it's probably going to happen, and while the politics of the South are as big a horror show as up here, I'll probably vote for this.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 14 March, 2017, 01:41:27 AMReverting to an old ideological version of itself instead of being pragmatic will no longer cut-it in opposition.

That's the kind of thing that I mean: the idea that being pragmatic is the opposite of holding left wing views.  I thought we were past that when Carry on At Your Convenience bombed at the box office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 March, 2017, 09:59:49 AM
The British left is insane right now. Momentum is aligned with hard-right Con/UKIP on key issues, in the naive belief that it will usher in a grand new era of socialism. How we get to that from economic devastation and a hard-right Tory government likely to get a majority of 50+ seats at the next GE, I don't know.

And then we see Corbyn asking people to protest with him for EEA national rights, shortly after his Lords fucked over the very same people, at which point he presumably thought better of it and didn't show up.

In England, what happens next? The Lib Dems are still polling very low (10 per cent or so), on the basis of people thinking them traitors for the coalition. They're the only properly national English party to now support Remain, but I can't see that being enough, and even if they matched Labour at a GE, they'd only get a handful of seats. Labour's seemingly halfway to becoming the UKIP of the left. At best, they're ineffectual capitulators. "We'll take the fight to the Conservatives in new and imaginative ways." Oh do fuck off. You had your chances to block, and Corbyn three-line-whipped everyone away from that. This also makes an electoral pact impossible, which is just great. Beyond that, there's the Green Party (one MP, fairly likely to retain her seat; possibly the chance of one other, in Bristol). And a new party simply won't work, on the basis it'd be knackered  by FPTP.

In short: bleurgh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 11:01:53 AM
As far as I can see, the LibDems are pretty happy bottom-feeding lapsed Labour supporters by pretending to be left-wing despite constantly reiterating that they'd power-share with the Tories again and Tim Farron's inability to deny that he's a homophobe.  The latter is a bonkers turn-up for the leader of a party widely credited with getting the Tories to implement marriage equality - the one palpable lasting success of their time in coalition that they can point to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 March, 2017, 12:20:33 PM
Have political parties outlived their usefulness? Are they more problem creators than problem solvers? Is it time to rethink the role, indeed the whole need for, political parties?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 March, 2017, 12:27:23 PM
Not that we needed them in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 14 March, 2017, 12:42:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 March, 2017, 12:20:33 PM
Have political parties outlived their usefulness?

Possibly, but I'd rather others run the Nation than have to do it myself. My major concern with Politics/Politicians is that nobody's ever accountable for anything!

Illegal Wars are started with false evidence as the cause - nobody cares!

Paedophiles apparently infiltrated Government and TV stations years ago - nobody cares!

I could go on but I'll end up winding myself up!

Anyway, accountability, or lack of, is what concerns me. People can be in charge but they need to take proper responsibility.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 12:42:39 PM
"Apart from all of Western civilisation and everything we see and experience all day every day, what have coalitions of people of like intent ever done for us?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 March, 2017, 03:37:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 11:01:53 AMAs far as I can see, the LibDems are pretty happy bottom-feeding lapsed Labour supporters by pretending to be left-wing despite constantly reiterating that they'd power-share with the Tories again and Tim Farron's inability to deny that he's a homophobe. The latter is a bonkers turn-up for the leader of a party widely credited with getting the Tories to implement marriage equality - the one palpable lasting success of their time in coalition that they can point to.
The problem with the left/right axis is that it isn't nuanced. In terms of economics, the LDs have never been left. In terms of social justice, they are liberal in nature rather than authoritarian. The second of those things puts them squarely at odds with Labour on a number of subjects, as, to some extent, does LDs not being as left as traditional Labour regarding the economy.

Regarding power-sharing with the Tories, why wouldn't they if it's the only viable coalition? This is what happens in countries with a mature approach to politics. But here we throw our toys out of the pram at any idea of collaboration and cooperation. Of course, had Labour actually made good on its promises regarding electoral reform before getting its 1997 landslide and kicking Ashdown's LDs in the balls, most of these issues wouldn't exist anyway. 2010 would have returned a viable Lab/Lib option.

Farron: I can't disagree there. He at least puts a lid on some of his worst viewpoints, but then it's hard to know how should lead that party now. Clegg had no option but to quit, given what happened in 2015, but he's still the grown-up in that party. (Miliband, however, shouldn't have resigned, to my mind. This is another bonkers thing about British politics now – that notion that the leaders must quit when they don't win. It's like football rather than measured forward-looking politics.)

In a more general sense about political parties, the problem isn't so much that they exist, but that our political framework for most layers of government is so skewed as to make only large parties viable nationally in England. In countries with PR, it's feasible for parties to split without destroying half or all of the original; it's feasible for new parties to show up and take a bunch of seats. People keep talking about a new centrist party for the UK – somewhere LDs, and moderate Labour and Cons could decamp to. But what would be the point? They'd never get anywhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 04:26:39 PM
Sarah Olney is probably the best candidate for LibDem leader, as she has both the benefit of relative anonymity and a political career so short that it not only precludes any skeletons in the closet, but it also succeeds the Coalition, which people are not going to forgive no matter how much Farron and the few remaining LibDem faithful hope otherwise.  Not much experience as a politician, but these days that's more of a bonus with voters than a hindrance - not that she'd be going to be leading a party that's got any heavy lifting in its future, anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 14 March, 2017, 05:41:29 PM
Didn't George Washington believe there was no future in political parties? 

What we desperately need is for people to become more involved in politics and in defining the parties.  Join up, tell your MP what you want, remind them that they work for you.  Politics has become the realm of eccentrics on television, changing the world to the shape that suits them while quietly sowing the lies "they're all the same" and "nothing will every change". 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2017, 08:50:14 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 14 March, 2017, 05:41:29 PMWhat we desperately need is for people to become more involved in politics and in defining the parties.  Join up, tell your MP what you want, remind them that they work for you.

Americans tried that and literally millions of new voters signed up to be Democrats, and when it was clear they were going to vote for Bernie Sanders, the Democratic party used every trick in the book to drive them away, vilify them and make them feel unwanted, right down to accusing them of crimes and open hostility at political rallies - even now, Sanders is vilified for the slightest of offences real or imagined (he recently jabbed his finger at someone to punctuate what he was saying and this means he hates women, apparently) and the American left runs with it.  See also: Labour's increased membership, Brickgate, "Corbyn caused Brexit", etc.
Nor is this confined to the left - American conservatives who felt the GOP were going too far under Trump tried to bring it up at their regular town hall meetings, only to be denounced by representatives as ignorant liars - the "death panel" clip doing the rounds on social media is a prime example.

Proles need to be silent and know their place.  If nothing else, it'll be good practice for the coming police state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 14 March, 2017, 09:42:14 PM
Us Scots. Whit we like, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 March, 2017, 12:24:42 AM
I'm reading all these comments about how the left is so unorganized, but I'm sitting in Nothern Ireland where the recent snap election produced massive losses for the right* and massive gains for the left**. Too bad our wee country is so insignificant that these results have barely registered on most British news oulets.

*The Unionists
**The Fenians***

***Fair enough, they're responsible for a helluva lotta death, unlike British political parties such as........nope, I've come up blank****

****Tu quoque
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 March, 2017, 07:10:48 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 14 March, 2017, 09:42:14 PM
Us Scots. Whit we like, eh?

I'm looking forward to two years of journalists who know f-all about Scotland and its politics telling me what I should think. Not to mention two years of lovely comments BTL on every newspaper website. Whee.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 March, 2017, 08:05:43 AM
Day one:

Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/nicola-sturgeon-liar-traitor-head/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/nicola-sturgeon-liar-traitor-head/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw)

"Treacherous Queen of Scots has miscalculated"

My favourite bit is when the SNP are socialists who are subsidized by hard working Londoners.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 March, 2017, 08:09:10 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 15 March, 2017, 12:24:42 AM
I'm reading all these comments about how the left is so unorganized, but I'm sitting in Nothern Ireland...

It struck me after the EU Referendum it was probably the first time a lot of people in GB had experienced truly devisive politics - when you see the result of a vote and realise half the people you know have an entirely different outlook, seemingly incompatible with your own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 March, 2017, 08:18:54 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 March, 2017, 08:05:43 AM
Day one:

Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/nicola-sturgeon-liar-traitor-head/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/nicola-sturgeon-liar-traitor-head/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw)

"Treacherous Queen of Scots has miscalculated"

My favourite bit is when the SNP are socialists who are subsidized by hard working Londoners.

Bloody hell. I've never been a fan of the Telegraph but I thought they were a little bit better than publishing Katie Hopkins level columnists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2017, 08:35:14 AM
On the plus side, I can start using the phrase "Irn Bru Curtain" again :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 09:46:55 AM
The Telegraph piece was actually worse for a while. (https://twitter.com/strathearnrose/status/841774773789184000)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 09:58:36 AM
Employment up, unemployment down, yep it's all going pear shaped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 March, 2017, 10:02:19 AM
Depends on the job.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39196056 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39196056)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2017, 10:22:04 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 09:58:36 AM
Employment up, unemployment down, yep it's all going pear shaped.

Record number of people on pernicious, inequitable zero-hour contracts, so many people now self-employed that the Tories want to hike the NI rate out of 'fairness' despite the self-employed being ineligible for many benefits open to traditionally-employed people.

These figures are built out of low wages and job insecurity. What a triumph.

(Not to mention under-employment — two people on 20hrs a week and both wanting 40hrs are functionally equivalent to one working person and one unemployed, but the figures only show two working people.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 10:25:24 AM
Quite. Employment stats alone are not an indicator all is well. There have been other stats for years now showing that among the G20, the UK has some of the worst wages/wage growth. And everything Jim says about zero-hours/self-employed.

Still, that seems rosy compared to what's currently happening in the Brexit committee, with David Davis basically admitting that he has no idea what's going to happen. "A bad deal is better than no deal," we've been told. Has that been quantified? Nope. So the reasoning? "Sometimes in business you know a deal is better even when you don't have the numbers."

We are all fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 March, 2017, 10:29:48 AM
I'm intrigued. I know it's only the Telegraph, but how can a democratically elected minister, operating within the existing political mechanism, and calling for a plebiscite under that system, possibly be construed as a 'traitor'? I can see how our own various armed insurgencies over here could be called treasonous (from most PoVs they were), but it does make you wonder if they weren't on the right track if ANY move towards secession or independence can be equally considered treason.

Anyway, you would think after Jo Cox people would have apply a bit more moderation to their hyperbole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 March, 2017, 10:32:01 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 10:25:24 AM
"Sometimes in business you know a deal is better even when you don't have the numbers."

The financial policy that built Las Vegas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
And all those things have happened whilst we have been in the EU Jim, maybe better off out then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 15 March, 2017, 11:03:31 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
Maybe better off out then.

I doubt it.

My working week was reduced (over a couple of years) from 48 hrs to 44 hrs, for the same pay! This was down to the EU, bringing the UK into line with more enlightened nations who had better working regulations and higher wages.

From the Tory's we're going to get - less money for public services - less protection from unscrupulous employers - and a whole lot of "I'm alright, Jack. Fuck the rest of them!"

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2017, 11:04:03 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
And all those things have happened whilst we have been in the EU Jim, maybe better off out then.

All those things have happened under the Tories. The vast majority of workers' rights in the last twenty years have derived from EU legislation. If you think the Conservatives want to strengthen workers' rights, you simply haven't been paying attention to anything they've said in the last three decades.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 11:08:16 AM
Exactly. I keep hearing the same "well, that happened under the EU, so therefore we should leave" rubbish. The EU doesn't have a say in everything. We were and are a sovereign nation. Most of the crap inflicted on people has come from Tory governments making tax cuts, in order to help their rich donors and friends. The NHS is a great case in point: it was broadly fine under Labour, but as soon as spending got knifed, the service is in free-fall. It can't be any coincidence that the health minister is a strong advocate of privatised health. Still, I'm sure people will act all surprised when the Tories axe enforced worker rights and enshrine austerity permanently, because of self-inflicted stupidity.

Quote from: TordelBack on 15 March, 2017, 10:29:48 AMI'm intrigued. I know it's only the Telegraph, but how can a democratically elected minister, operating within the existing political mechanism, and calling for a plebiscite under that system, possibly be construed as a 'traitor'?

Because anyone who doesn't agree with what May (and also Brexiters) is saying is a traitor now. That's how it works. Dissenters are "dividing the country", despite May and co. making absolutely no effort to even throw 48% of us a bone, nor to give the slightest shit about 3.5 million EEA nationals here, nor valuing the union in anything but the most abstract sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 15 March, 2017, 11:39:52 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 09:58:36 AM
Employment up, unemployment down, yep it's all going pear shaped.

You did this just a few weeks ago, and were told exactly the same thing as today.

Do you really not remember any of this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 March, 2017, 11:53:40 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 09:58:36 AM
Employment up, unemployment down, yep it's all going pear shaped.
Until recently the only work I could get, and indeed the only competition I could in the face of my current employment, was zero hour contracts. This is NOT employment as you would defne it, it borderline slave labor.

Again, This is the fault of the Tories, not the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 March, 2017, 12:03:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 09:46:55 AM
The Telegraph piece was actually worse for a while. (https://twitter.com/strathearnrose/status/841774773789184000)

Absolutely horrific, particularly in the wake of the murder of Jo Cox. I'm not a fan of heavy regulation of the press but there needs to be some comeback for publishing material like this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2017, 12:11:47 PM
And now the Tories have done a u-turn on taxing the self-employed, which probably outrages me even more than their taxing the self-employed in the first place, as the only difference between this and Brexit is that the right-wing press supports Brexit.
I suppose we at least know for certain who pulls this government's strings, now.  Good job taking back control we did there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 15 March, 2017, 12:54:41 PM
The comments sections of these articles are fucking shameful on all sides but especially the English comments. Cries of racism (surely xenophobia) while trotting out the same auld stereotypes. I really don't think I can handle another indy-ref as the run up to the last one was soul destroying.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 02:56:03 PM
As someone who's self-employed, I wasn't exactly overjoyed about the NIC changes. It wasn't the extra money, but the notion of how taxation was being done, and the argument it was about fairness. (Give people like me maternity/paternity leave somehow and then we'll talk. I basically dropped my income in a manner someone who's under standard employment wouldn't have to do when mini-IP arrived. I'm glad I did, but it caused a lot of problems, not least in how taxes were subsequently dealt with.)

That said, I'm also not celebrating this 'win' for me, given that it's more power to the Brexit backbenches. Mind you, I don't have much pity for Hammond now either. I suspect he's under a lot of pressure, but he buckled in a major way from fighting for the single market to going full Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 March, 2017, 03:43:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 09:58:36 AM
Employment up, unemployment down, yep it's all going pear shaped.

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 14 February, 2017, 12:19:13 PM
Still yet to see anything other than heads firmly in sand whenever this is brought up:

(http://exchangeconversions.com/charts/GBP-USD-chart-20-years.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 04:00:08 PM
It's OK, because Brexit people tell us we want a lower pound, because of exports, even though they for some reason start crowing every time Sterling claws back a couple of cents against the dollar. It's almost like they have no fucking idea about the importance of Sterling's strength, nor of the massive impact this is having on everyone from people buying technology through to fruit from overseas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2017, 05:04:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 04:00:08 PM
It's OK, because Brexit people tell us we want a lower pound, because of exports

*coughcoughcoughmassivebalanceoftradedeficitcough*

I saw a Leave voter, completely unironically, say that we could materially improve our balance of trade by resuming coal mining and steel production. I had to break it to her that we let the coal mines flood and that steel foundries can't be re-lit once they go cold. Those industries aren't coming back.

That's the really frightening thing: when you can actually get a Leave-er to expand on their reasons why everything will be OK post-Brexit (beyond 'sovereignty' or 'but foreigners') they turn out to be completely ill-informed, occasionally the point of complete delusion.

(See also: the Leave voter on R4's You And Yours yesterday who was complaining about the negative impact on his business of the fall of sterling, which he blames on Remainers...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 05:20:34 PM
Yeah, I've seen Leave voters starting to turn – including so-called Liberal Leave people. I had one yesterday on Twitter – one of the few genuinely reasonable Leave voters I've had contact with – basically blame hard Brexit on the Remain side. His argument: that Remain didn't meet Leave halfway before the referendum and agree to a Norway option. That even the Liberal Democrats said they'd back that multiple times since seems to have been ignored. It's like the Wetherspoon guy, bellyaching about the EU all the time, and now demanding some kind of immigration deal happen, now he's realised his entire chain of pubs is basically screwed without EU staff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 05:22:23 PM
Funny that, I have had remainers say to me that if we voted to leave there would be a immediate recession, house prices would collapse, and unemployment would shoot up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 05:54:39 PM
The point being that Remainers are being blamed by Leavers for things that the government is doing NOW primarily to appease that side, which is different from "thing X didn't happen (yet)".

EDIT: Or to be very specific, the notion that it's somehow the fault of Remain voters that we're quitting the single market and customs union, and not considering joining EFTA is absolutely batshit. But that's what 'liberal' Leave voters are now yelling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2017, 07:41:17 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 05:22:23 PM
Funny that, I have had remainers say to me that if we voted to leave there would be a immediate recession, house prices would collapse, and unemployment would shoot up.

I didn't. I outlined a specific, well-sourced scenario that you engaged with to the extent of saying "I don't think that will happen" and then refused to expand on. So: sterling crashes to less than parity with the dollar, we lose City of London passporting, Scotland leaves the Union and the Good Friday agreement collapses. Explain to me why either: a) this doesn't happen, or b) how we mitigate the effects of this disaster if it does.

Bonus points on offer for not mentioning sovereignty and/or explaining how the NHS and the housing market copes with a couple of million mostly-retired ex-pats coming home plays out if we continue to deport EU residents with perfectly reasonable cases for remaining in the U.K.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 15 March, 2017, 08:07:39 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 15 March, 2017, 05:22:23 PM
Funny that, I have had remainers say to me that if we voted to leave there would be a immediate recession, house prices would collapse, and unemployment would shoot up.

And you think it not?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2017, 08:56:02 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 05:20:34 PMThat even the Liberal Democrats said they'd back that multiple times since seems to have been ignored.

To be fair, most people think the LibDems will say anything but then do fuck all about it.
I'm not saying the guy was right, but the media were selective about what they reported and when during the referendum.  The entire debate was framed around immigration, and not the "what happens to resident foreign nationals who are our neighbors and colleagues?" type of immigration debate.  If you were talking about the economy and workers' rights, then good luck getting on the teatime news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 15 March, 2017, 09:15:30 PM
Well done to Dutch people!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 March, 2017, 09:18:05 PM
I'm not getting my hopes up yet, despite exit polls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 March, 2017, 09:53:28 PM
The Libdems still exist?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2017, 10:27:30 PM
From where they were after the 2015 GE, the only way was up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 March, 2017, 10:41:15 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 15 March, 2017, 12:03:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2017, 09:46:55 AM
The Telegraph piece was actually worse for a while. (https://twitter.com/strathearnrose/status/841774773789184000)

Absolutely horrific, particularly in the wake of the murder of Jo Cox. I'm not a fan of heavy regulation of the press but there needs to be some comeback for publishing material like this.

Remember, days after the murder of Jo Cox, the referendum had passed "without a single bullet being fired".  Even for Farage, that line took the biscuit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 March, 2017, 08:33:09 AM
David Davis, the man in charge of Brexit had the following to say in committee:

(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb36/jimcampbell2000/C69fbdYWkAEFv3d_zpsgm5wo4w9.jpg)

These people have no clue what they're doing.

Step up, Leave voters. Tell me how this is all going to work out OK. Specifically note the final point about financial services. Again, financial services constitute 12% of GDP and are the main mitigator of our appalling balance of trade deficit.*

For comparison, the 2008 financial crisis shrank the UK economy by 8%.

*I'm not entirely sure Leave-ers are entirely grasping the significance of this with respect to sterling's downward slide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 16 March, 2017, 08:41:39 AM
If he has no clue what he is doing, why do you give what he says any credence?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 March, 2017, 09:14:13 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 March, 2017, 08:41:39 AM
If he has no clue what he is doing, why do you give what he says any credence?

BECAUSE IT'S HIS JOB. He is the man tasked with making leaving the EU work, and he's just outlined what everyone, pre-referendum, agreed was basically the worst case scenario and that everyone, even Leave campaigners, assured us wouldn't happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2017, 09:30:50 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2017, 08:56:02 PMTo be fair, most people think the LibDems will say anything but then do fuck all about it.
Probably, although I find it odd so many have a bee in their bonnet about that party when others are hardly covering themselves in glory. On Brexit alone, Labour's basically doing the opposite of what it's saying at every turn. At least the Lib Dems are staying true to their aim of some sort of functional relationship with the EU, using the mechanisms available. (Labour now argue that they will use "imaginative means" of fighting the Tories, which presumably means magical fucking unicorns, rather than their Lords. They also keep saying they'll fight every step of the way shortly after capitulating and enabling this Tory government. Still, student fees, eh?)

QuoteI'm not saying the guy was right, but the media were selective about what they reported and when during the referendum.
There's world of difference between selective reporting and "hard Brexit is the fault of Remain voters for not accepting a moderate version of Leave", not least given their aims are eventual hard Brexit anyway – they just want it to happen slowly. (This is why there was never a consensus to be had – quite a few Remain voters I know wouldn't accept anything other than EU membership, and those that would accept EEA would want it as a destination, not a stop-gap.)

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 March, 2017, 09:14:13 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 16 March, 2017, 08:41:39 AM
If he has no clue what he is doing, why do you give what he says any credence?
BECAUSE IT'S HIS JOB. He is the man tasked with making leaving the EU work, and he's just outlined what everyone, pre-referendum, agreed was basically the worst case scenario and that everyone, even Leave campaigners, assured us wouldn't happen.
Quite. All his answers either directly contradict the Leave campaign, are "we haven't looked into that", or go for that faith/religion-based approach. In other words, they "feel" that no deal would be better than a "bad" deal, even though they haven't done any research to back that up (Davis noting that perhaps wasn't possible at present, but commentators noting that because if they did and someone got at it through FOI, the shit would really hit the fan. Massive income tax rises or cuts would likely get a star role.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2017, 10:27:04 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 14 March, 2017, 12:42:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 March, 2017, 12:20:33 PM
Have political parties outlived their usefulness?

Possibly, but I'd rather others run the Nation than have to do it myself. My major concern with Politics/Politicians is that nobody's ever accountable for anything!

Illegal Wars are started with false evidence as the cause - nobody cares!

Paedophiles apparently infiltrated Government and TV stations years ago - nobody cares!

I could go on but I'll end up winding myself up!

Anyway, accountability, or lack of, is what concerns me. People can be in charge but they need to take proper responsibility.

Cheers


This is, fundamentally, my position as well.

We need people to run things, just like any organisation does, but the Minister for Whatever should have no more rights or powers than the CEO of my local newsagent - both have the power to run their businesses within the same lawful parameters. That's all. Make sure the same laws apply to everyone and the problem of non-accountability is solved.

If "government" automatically bestows superhuman rights and responsibilities upon its employees, and if we think that's fine and dandy, then we must accept non-accountability as a side-effect. One can either be a ruler and non-accountable or a manager and accountable.

It's way past time we started asking (1 what "government" is for, 2) how it should operate and 3) what the extent of its rights and powers should be.

My answers are; 1) to organise infrastructure and services, 2) within the common law, 3) no more or less than yours or mine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 March, 2017, 12:38:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2017, 09:30:50 AM
QuoteI'm not saying the guy was right, but the media were selective about what they reported and when during the referendum.
There's world of difference between selective reporting and "hard Brexit is the fault of Remain voters for not accepting a moderate version of Leave",


I don't recall there being a moderate leave option on the ballot paper - mine only had 'stay' or 'go' (paraphrasing).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 01:32:19 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2017, 09:30:50 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 March, 2017, 08:56:02 PMTo be fair, most people think the LibDems will say anything but then do fuck all about it.
Probably, although I find it odd so many have a bee in their bonnet about that party when others are hardly covering themselves in glory.

I suspect you've answered your own question there - "But Labour" is the beginning and end of Farron's recruitment strategy, and pretty much the entirety of the average LibDem supporter's political vocabulary.
For me, it's more the absence of "I don't hate gay people" coming out of Tim Farron's mouth that's a problem, as it's 2017 and even Nigel Farage had an openly gay man managing his EU campaign.

And yes, also Student Fees.  Labour - rightly - got a stuffing from the youth vote for putting higher education beyond the reach of most low-income families and they're still paying for it 20 years later, I don't see why the LibDems should get a pass on breaking a tentpole manifesto promise beyond the "But Labour" caveat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2017, 02:13:53 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 16 March, 2017, 12:38:30 PMI don't recall there being a moderate leave option on the ballot paper - mine only had 'stay' or 'go' (paraphrasing).
Well, quite. The argument appears to be that all Remain people should have rebranded themselves as 'sort of Remain' or something. I dunno. It just feels like 'liberal' Leave finally realised they've been played and won't get what they wanted either. (And also that they might have got much of what they wanted in a reformed EU.)

Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 01:32:19 PM"But Labour" is the beginning and end of Farron's recruitment strategy, and pretty much the entirety of the average LibDem supporter's political vocabulary.
Well, we can back and forth on this all week, but the Liberal Democrat manifesto in 2015 was broadly very good. Yes, the party clearly attempts to grab waverers from the Tories and Labour, and Farron's a bit shit, but I've time for the party as a whole, despite some of the fuck-ups they made while in government. (Notably, people don't seem to address the relative successes they had, nor that they very obvious did blunt a fairly extreme Tory government.(

QuoteAnd yes, also Student Fees.  Labour - rightly - got a stuffing from the youth vote for putting higher education beyond the reach of most low-income families and they're still paying for it 20 years later, I don't see why the LibDems should get a pass on breaking a tentpole manifesto promise beyond the "But Labour" caveat.
I'm not saying they should. I'm saying it's ludicrous to forever write off a political party entirely for breaking a manifesto pledge when they entered government as a junior partner. To my mind, it's more that people are pissed off at this particular thing, too. In which case, probably no-one should ever vote Labour again after the Iraq fiasco. (Which, for the record, I don't believe either.)

Even if the Lib Dems are taking advantage of this situation, it's actually quite nice to have one of the main four English parties giving a flying crap about the EU. By contrast, Labour folds at every available opportunity while Corbyn bangs on about the real right starting, or holding the government to account. (Last PMQs was an embarrassment on that scale. It's like he doesn't even know what he's doing.) Also, Labour's position now screws any remote chance of the kind of electoral pact that might just have stopped the Tories securing a massive majority in 2020. It probably wouldn't have happened anyway, but there was at least a slim possibility of cooperation. No chance now (except possibly – although I think it unlikely – between the English Greens and the Lib Dems).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 02:30:31 PM
In my day, "But Labour" was slang for what happens to people when they get sex trafficked, not a political argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 16 March, 2017, 02:49:46 PM
Sounds more like what happens at the end of a long bout of constipation to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJS6JtPpWCM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 16 March, 2017, 02:57:22 PM
Seen on twitter.

"Does Jeremy Corbyn think he is a time-traveller from the future who is allowed to observe us but not interfere with history? #primedirective"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 March, 2017, 04:00:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 02:30:31 PM
In my day, "But Labour" was slang for what happens to people when they get sex trafficked, not a political argument.

My colleagues wish to know why I'm shuddering with inadequately suppressed guffaws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 04:01:54 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 16 March, 2017, 02:57:22 PM
Seen on twitter.

"Does Jeremy Corbyn think he is a time-traveller from the future who is allowed to observe us but not interfere with history? #primedirective"


What an idiotic thing to say.  The Prime Directive and Temporal Prime Directive are entirely different things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 March, 2017, 05:18:13 PM
BREAKING NEWS

In a shocking turn of events, Brussels has told the British people that the Prime Minister is not allowed to enact Article 50, as she has no mandate to do so and it would cause too much fuss!  For how long will the British People put up with their sovereignty being denied by us bureaucrats we did not vote for!

Now is not the time! (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39293513)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2017, 07:50:42 PM
On the 'Plan for Britain' website, Theresa May states:

"Last summer's vote was not just an instruction to leave the EU.It was an instruction to change the way our whole country works, and the people for whom it works, forever."

Wow. And she says Sturgeon has no mandate...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 March, 2017, 10:27:49 PM
Makes no sense to not have another Indy referendum: by 2019, Britain will be an independent economic powerhouse just like the Leavers have been saying all along, and Scots won't want to leave that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 March, 2017, 08:38:24 AM
Perhaps the most amusing aspect of Mrs May's plaintiffs pleading is that

Quote"It would be unfair to the people of Scotland that they would be being asked to make a crucial decision without the information they need to make that decision."
The prime minister also said the country should be "working together, not pulling apart".  BBC news

So as a member a government that was content to do precisely that to the whole of the UK she feels she is now in a position to level the same criticisms against the SNP?  Sorry pot, what colour is that kettle over there?

Not really been a good week for her.  Sturgeon's belligerence on top of Hammond's balls up and this is the light weight stuff.  This is the woman entrusted with negotiating a strong and effective treaty with the EU after an exit treaty the meets the conflicting and multiple demands of the Brexit coalition.  The EU negotiating team must be watching this with unalloyed glee.  She couldn't even negotiate a bedtime story with a two year old.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 08:59:58 AM
She managed to negotiate the article 50 bill through both Houses of Parliament without amendment, great job prime minister, now let's get this show on the road.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 09:05:54 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 08:59:58 AM
She managed to negotiate the article 50 bill through both Houses of Parliament without amendment, great job prime minister, now let's get this show on the road.

The show that David Davis admits is going to turn into the worst case scenario that the Leave campaign promised us would never happen? That show?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:10:03 AM
What, that bloke who you say hasn't got a clue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 09:16:04 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:10:03 AM
What, that bloke who you say hasn't got a clue.

What part of: "it's his job" did you not understand? No one else is going to do this: it's his job. The fact that he's leading us off the cliff-edge that all but the most vehement Leave-ers promised us wouldn't happen is self-evident from his own words. But he's the man whose job it is to make this happen. That I'm appalled at his cluelessness doesn't change the fact that it's his job. He's the one in charge of this.

So, again: sterling crashes to less than parity with the dollar, we lose City of London passporting, Scotland leaves the Union and the Good Friday agreement collapses. Explain to me either: a) why this doesn't happen, or b) how we mitigate the effects of this disaster if it does.

Bonus points on offer for not mentioning sovereignty and/or explaining how the NHS and the housing market copes with a couple of million mostly-retired ex-pats coming home plays out if we continue to deport EU residents with perfectly reasonable cases for remaining in the U.K.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:26:46 AM
Of course someone else can do it, he can be replaced like anyone else. Which of the things you have listed have happened? You are just making predictions. Come back to me when the things you have listed have happened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 March, 2017, 09:30:04 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:26:46 AM
Of course someone else can do it, he can be replaced like anyone else. Which of the things you have listed have happened? You are just making predictions. Come back to me when the things you have listed have happened.

'Inserts Blaze's falling sterling statistics here because GET YO HEAD OUT OF THE SAND!'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 March, 2017, 09:34:07 AM
C'mon Jim, you know that winning the inalienable sovereign right to enjoy bananas with a variety of curvatures is all the mitigation anyone needs. Once those treasonous Scots have to subsist exclusively on Brussels-straightened fruit they'll be begging to submit to the rightful authority of the new Even Greater Britain.

Of course you could just continue to buy curvy bananas in the shops, and save everyone a truckload of grief. But that would be madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:37:10 AM
So Hawkmumbler, when did the pound drop below parity with the dollar since the referendum?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 09:47:36 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:37:10 AM
So Hawkmumbler, when did the pound drop below parity with the dollar since the referendum?

I've explained this in some detail. The UK runs a catastrophic balance of trade deficit that is solely mitigated by financial services and sterling's strength is bolstered by being the default reserve currency of the EU. Brexit as currently configured (and with indication of a change of course) will end both those things. Considered solely on the strength of the economy, there is simply no way to argue that the pound should be worth more than the dollar.

At this point, you're doing nothing more than trolling, repeating the same bone-headed assertions and refusing to engage in detail with any refutation or counter-argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:59:11 AM
Really! I'm "trolling" because I'm disagreeing with you Jim. Doesn't take much for you to resort back to insults, does it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 17 March, 2017, 10:03:52 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:59:11 AM
Really! I'm "trolling" because I'm disagreeing with you Jim. Doesn't take much for you to resort back to insults, does it?

Please read all your posts on here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 March, 2017, 10:07:39 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:59:11 AM
Really! I'm "trolling" because I'm disagreeing with you Jim. Doesn't take much for you to resort back to insults, does it?

Constantly disagreeing with reasoned arguments without offering any counter argument is pretty-much trolling I think.

You may as well be posting 'nah nah nah - can't hear you'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 10:08:00 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:59:11 AM
Really! I'm "trolling" because I'm disagreeing with you Jim. Doesn't take much for you to resort back to insults, does it?

But you're not disagreeing with me. You're just saying "nuh-uh" to every reasonable, well-sourced concern that's being raised. You're doing it again here. I'm not insulting you, 'trolling' isn't an insult: I'm using it specifically in its correct meaning (a deliberate intention solely to provoke an intemperate response) rather than it's more common usage for general internet douchebaggery.

If that's not what you're doing, point me at some indication that the government's current 'plan' for Brexit isn't the worse-case scenario we were all promised wouldn't happen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 10:14:49 AM
OK, if that's what you think, let the moderators decide, if they agree with you I will leave the forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 March, 2017, 10:18:52 AM
Hhhmmm....
(https://media.giphy.com/media/TrDxCdtmdluP6/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 10:21:45 AM
Who's trolling now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 10:36:16 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 10:14:49 AM
OK, if that's what you think, let the moderators decide, if they agree with you I will leave the forum.

Or you could, y'know, make just one detailed, informed response to any of the concerns I've raised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 17 March, 2017, 10:36:20 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 10:21:45 AM
Who's trolling now?

Still you! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 March, 2017, 10:39:28 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 10:14:49 AM
OK, if that's what you think, let the moderators decide, if they agree with you I will leave the forum.
You are not in breach of any rules, from what I can tell, so I don't know where that comment arrived from. Jim's point is that your responses to any reasoned concerns appear to be "that hasn't happened yet". Time may yet prove you to be right, if they never happen, but people are (in my opinion, rightly) concerned that the department for leaving the EU basically hasn't done any work on key areas, lacks contingency plans, and seems to now be offhandedly saying "yeah, you're probably right" when asked about the UK leaving all existing frameworks (now even including Open Skies and EHIC).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 17 March, 2017, 10:42:38 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 09:37:10 AM
So Hawkmumbler, when did the pound drop below parity with the dollar since the referendum?

As has been pointed out before The Leave vote has not had the often cited predictions from the run up to the referendum but that may well be because the predictions were based on David Cameron instantly triggering article 50 like he said he would*, which he didn't. repeatedly citing the specific negative perditions to hand wave away the actual negative impact without context is either ignorant or disingenuous.

*During the campaign, Prime Minister David Cameron said he would go to Brussels immediately after the referendum to trigger Article 50,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:33:45 AM
Well, if I haven't broken any rules, I shall carry on in my own merry way! Hasn't the stock market done well since the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 March, 2017, 11:36:28 AM
It is probably worth noting that in the run-up to the referendum, a great many economists were predicting a worst-case scenario of $1.20. As Steven noted, this was based on an immediate Article 50 notification. Cameron didn't do that, lessening the impact and drawing it out over a longer time. (This is also why many people probably don't realise the impact to date – it's happened very slowly.) Regardless, Sterling has already danced with that low bar, and seems to have settled in the low $1.20s, which has impacted on costs across every sector within the UK.

The 'below parity' thinking was not at all common prior to the referendum, but has been more so since, largely on the basis that economists are surprised how poorly Sterling has done BEFORE Article 50 has even been triggered. Also, the long-term prospects are bleak, too, given that the same estimates (which, note, were actually optimistic, unless Article 50 magically improves Sterling's fortunes) paint a permanent resting place for Sterling somewhere around $1.05 (i.e. permanently around the all-time historic low).

So, yes, the $1=£1 scenario might never come to pass, but $1.25=£1 is more or less where we're at now, meaning everything from iPhones and Lego to food and fuel has crept up in price.

Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:33:45 AM
Well, if I haven't broken any rules, I shall carry on in my own merry way! Hasn't the stock market done well since the referendum.
On the basis of Sterling being worth less, yes. I'm sure the average person now struggling to make ends meet will be thrilled that some traders are now worth more.

EDIT: This Indy piece sums the stock market situation up quite well (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ftse-100-record-high-why-pound-value-crash-brexit-a7502401.html). Notably, though, even The Telegraph is cautious about placing too much emphasis on the FTSE 250 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/15/has-ftse-250-hit-record-high-still-best-gauge-domestic-sentiment/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:43:18 AM
Average people don't have pension plans invested in the stock market then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 11:44:25 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:43:18 AM
Average people don't have pension plans invested in the stock market then?

And that's putting food on their plates is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:46:07 AM
Well, yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 17 March, 2017, 11:52:33 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:46:07 AM
Well, yes.

Except no, because the apparent rise is due to the weaker pound, the stocks are actually worth less. With the increased cost of living already the money is already goes less far. so it's actually taking food off the table.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Inflation is below Bank of England target.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 17 March, 2017, 12:06:22 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Inflation is below Bank of England target.

Yeah but you on benefits as you said before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:08:40 PM
What does that comment even mean?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 March, 2017, 12:17:05 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:46:07 AM
Well, yes.
No, it fucking isn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:21:21 PM
So people don't spend their pensions on food then, that's where I've been going wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 March, 2017, 12:33:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Inflation is below Bank of England target.

The inflation figure is an average. If the prices of some things go down while some others go up the rate is affected in a way that isn't reflected in people's standard of living. For example, a fall in the price of e-books and flat-screen TVs isn't much help if the prices of food and domestic energy goes up (which they are doing), because keeping warm and feeding yourself are areas where it's harder to economise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:49:25 PM
I agree with that Jim. I'm long term disabled, you don't have to tell me about rising heating costs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 17 March, 2017, 12:53:19 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 11:33:45 AM
Well, if I haven't broken any rules, I shall carry on in my own merry way! Hasn't the stock market done well since the referendum.

The FTSE100 and, to a lesser extent, the FTSE250 report in dollars. The tanking of the pound has been entirely to their benefit. If you're not a multi-national then it has been extremely painful.

I can't help but think that you've had this explained to you before, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 17 March, 2017, 02:37:13 PM
*sigh*

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7HUpZsWkAAelHE.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 March, 2017, 02:46:35 PM
Wow. That kind of mature and reasoned debate is sure to win the hearts of Scots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 17 March, 2017, 02:50:26 PM
It's that kind of thinking that got the Labour party where it is today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 March, 2017, 03:25:49 PM
And people wonder why I despise the current system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 March, 2017, 03:56:06 PM
When you're married to a bully who dismisses your opinion on their hare-brained schemes that affect you both, lords their control of the purse strings over you, belittles you and then won't even accept your right to consider the option of a divorce... Well, that should tell you all you need to know.

As an outsider I'd truly hate to see Scotland leave the UK, I'm convinced that you should all be stronger and better off together being British as well as Scots/Welsh/English (I'll hold my counsel on the other crowd), and I generally favour the largest possible political groupings of countries, but under the circumstances I'm not sure Scotland has much choice. I know i'd prefer to see the likes of Sturgeon in charge of my destiny than May and her kind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 17 March, 2017, 05:02:39 PM
QuoteWow. That kind of mature and reasoned debate is sure to win the hearts of Scots.

Sadly, you just have to win the hearts of the right Scots.  Given that Scottish Labour are dead, the Lib Dems are heading that way, and the Ruth Davidson Party are feasting on the remains, the electorate are polarized between those who will vote Yes and those who wouldn't vote Yes if Sturgeon personally gave them a kidney. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 March, 2017, 10:08:59 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:21:21 PM
So people don't spend their pensions on food then, that's where I've been going wrong.

The previous assertion was that pensions invested in the stock market put food on the table.  The time that pensions are invested in stocks and shares is generally at least five to seven years before expected to be drawn.  By the time you get close to retirement date you want it in more stable investments so you can actually plan your retirement.  That's the idea anyway.  I think we'll see a lot of people get a big shock in about twenty years time when they realise that their meagre pension won't even cover their rent (which won't be covered by housing benefit, at least not to the extent it would have been if they'd been a generation older).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 18 March, 2017, 07:13:29 AM
I'm finding it increasingly more hilarious how TV reporter's and Newspapers are trying to combat Fake News when they've been peddling the exact same shit for decades!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 01:22:38 PM
The BBC's political editor was caught editing footage to suit her narrative - the BBC declared through its own internal review body that there was "no intent to deceive".  The same political editor describes the Crown Prosecution Service's two-dozen separate investigations into Conservative election fraud in the 2015 General Election as "mistakes", despite whistleblowers coming forward and saying it was not only deliberate, but organised - on the national scale - by party HQ.

There is no fake news, only approved news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 18 March, 2017, 01:38:04 PM
Bring on the Ministry of Truth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 March, 2017, 02:52:05 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 01:22:38 PM
The BBC's political editor was caught editing footage to suit her narrative - the BBC declared through its own internal review body that there was "no intent to deceive".  The same political editor describes the Crown Prosecution Service's two-dozen separate investigations into Conservative election fraud in the 2015 General Election as "mistakes", despite whistleblowers coming forward and saying it was not only deliberate, but organised - on the national scale - by party HQ.

There is no fake news, only approved news.

What's amazing is that after the whole thing with the Queen being edited to look like she stormed out, I had to complete an online compliance test, because as a freelancer I was producing the titles for a light entertainment panel show.

But this description of the expenses fraud is fine, apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 March, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
.
Yes! Corbyn's general disapproval of a shoot to kill policy (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/18/bbc-trust-says-laura-kuenssberg-report-on-jeremy-corbyn-was-inaccurate-labour) is all anyone ever mentions with regard to Labour. That's why when you ask someone why they're not voting for Labour, their main reason is that Corbyn's weak on terrorism:


(http://i.imgur.com/dfSeRAq.png?1)

https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/Jeremy_Corbyn


Despite everyone - including his former supporters, in the wake of the Article 50 debacle - agreeing that Corbyn is a useless leader of the opposition, one tiny Scottish lady with Douglas Carswell's mouth saying exactly the same thing is why Momentum-era Labour have consistently polled around 30% [1] since September 2015, even though Tory fortunes have yo-yoed wildly during that same period (30% - 47%):


(http://i.imgur.com/bWOCV4z.png?1)


It's almost as if Momentum's message appeals to a rump of diehards but absolutely nobody else. Some Momentum loyalists are smart enough to realise this, which is why they console themselves with meaningless displacement activities, like finding fault with the editing of public service news broadcasts.

They're not blind to their own motivations, of course, which is why they accuse Channel Four's Gary Gibbon (https://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-on-brexit-and-top-earners), ITV's Robert Peston (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/754403/Peston-Emily-Thornberry-Corbyn-car-crash-interview), and Sky News' Faisal Islam (http://news.sky.com/story/labour-debate-shows-monumental-task-to-heal-party-wounds-10578448) of bias when they too offer the opinion that Momentum-era Labour is useless, rather than just harping on about the BBC and Laura Kuenssberg, as The Canary directs them to do (https://www.thecanary.co/topics/bbc-bias/).


[1] Plus or minus the 3 point margin of error all pollsters apply
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 March, 2017, 04:09:57 PM
For me the quote of the week has to be the gentleman on the BBC news this morning discussing the latest round of the Scottish Referendum and where Labour is.  On the subject of Labour he said "At the moment Labour couldn't deliver a Pizza."

The Tories keep serving up easy bowls but Corbyn keeps tapping them to the feet of the bowler.  You don't need bias in the media (although it is unhelpful) with the level of incompetence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 18 March, 2017, 06:24:04 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/18/nhs-eu-nurses-quit-record-numbers?CMP=share_btn_fb (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/18/nhs-eu-nurses-quit-record-numbers?CMP=share_btn_fb)

Probably nothing to worry about.  I'm sure the Sovereignty Wizard will be able to conjure up thousands and thousands of qualified and experienced medical professionals to replace the ones already being lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 06:43:26 PM
Quote from: Frank on 18 March, 2017, 03:51:02 PM
Despite everyone - including his former supporters, in the wake of the Article 50 debacle - agreeing that Corbyn is a useless leader of the opposition, one tiny Scottish lady with Douglas Carswell's mouth saying exactly the same thing is why Momentum-era Labour have consistently polled around 30% [1] since September 2015, even though Tory fortunes have yo-yoed wildly during that same period (30% - 47%):

I'm reasonably certain Corbyn can't be blamed for editing BBC news or fiddling Conservative election expenses to a degree that the CPS considers criminal, but okay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 18 March, 2017, 07:07:14 PM
If there's a realistic better option than Corbyn I'd be all ears.  Whoever the approved candidate of the PLP is is practically guaranteed to be a bellicose neoliberal ghoul though (cf Dan Jarvis).  If you'd trade in a pretty useless socialist for a competent (i.e. scores meaningless rhetorical points at PMQs) liberal, I don't know what you think an opposition to Toryism is supposed to be for, other than making some piddling incremental improvements, then watching all of them be dismantled when voted out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 08:32:15 PM
Most people - even Corbyn's supporters - would be all ears about a potential successor, but the party have been steadily pissing in their own supporters' faces for two years while telling them that Corbyn had made it rain.  It's a shame, as Clive Lewis and Andy Burnham seem alright - though fair warning I might be letting the fact that The Sun utterly fucking despises Burnham because of his Hillsborough campaigning colour my judgment.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 March, 2017, 09:47:13 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 06:43:26 PM
Corbyn can't be blamed for editing BBC news ...

Unedited video: https://youtu.be/YiI0OzSozTM?t=3m45s

Jezza was asked (3m 45s) if he'd order "the security services" onto the streets of the UK in the event of Paris-style attacks. His response (3m 55s) was that it's better the police do that job than the army.

Kuenssberg clarified (4m 16s) that she was asking whether he'd sanction lethal force in that scenario (not which agency should pull the trigger) and he chose to answer in the abstract (4m 23s) - that he's "not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general".

Jezza was given every opportunity to say it's okay to shoot terrorists if they're already killing people. He was later forced to clarify that it's probably okay (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34840708)*. The fact he didn't say so on screen wasn't the result of editorial choices.


* Although he still can't quite bring himself to say that
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 19 March, 2017, 02:34:47 AM
Yeah, fuck that dude not unequivocally condoning state executions. It's not like there's any context of police popping off vaguely brown people or anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 March, 2017, 10:23:10 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 08:32:15 PM
Most people - even Corbyn's supporters - would be all ears about a potential successor

I never imagined (and, I suspect, neither did he) that Corbyn would lead the Labour Party into a general election. In the 2015 leadership contest, he was literally the only option that didn't advocate rubber-stamping vast swathes of the Tories' austerity agenda. I voted for him (twice) as a place-holder for someone more electable, but with at least some left-wing credentials. The Blairite wing of the PLP, however, seems to be making it quite clear that it's their way or nothing, and they'll burn the party to the ground in preference to any alternative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 March, 2017, 11:03:26 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 19 March, 2017, 02:34:47 AM
Yeah, fuck that dude not unequivocally condoning state executions. It's not like there's any context of police popping off vaguely brown people or anything.

Or that shoot-to-kill does anything but hand your opponents a recruiting platform.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2017, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 March, 2017, 11:03:26 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 19 March, 2017, 02:34:47 AM
Yeah, fuck that dude not unequivocally condoning state executions. It's not like there's any context of police popping off vaguely brown people or anything.

Or that shoot-to-kill does anything but hand your opponents a recruiting platform.
Basically. The fact black folk are 9 times more likely to get shot by police in the US is a pretty solid reason for why the entire system needs redressing there and why we don't need such a policy here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 March, 2017, 11:33:52 AM
.
I realise thread drift's a way of life here, but nobody's arguing the merits of a shoot to kill policy*. The topic was whether a news report misrepresented an answer to a question.


* shit idea in general; only sane response to a Bataclan/Charlie Hebdo incident
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 19 March, 2017, 01:49:57 PM
Look, I don't think he's been effective with the media, but in this case he gave a nuanced answer to a contemptible question.  At best the reporting on his response was massively simplified.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 March, 2017, 02:47:51 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 19 March, 2017, 01:49:57 PM
... he gave a nuanced answer ... the reporting on his response was ... simplified.

I basically agree, minus the adjectives.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 20 March, 2017, 01:30:32 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2017, 11:30:53 AM
Basically. The fact black folk are 9 times more likely to get shot by police in the US is a pretty solid reason for why the entire system needs redressing there and why we don't need such a policy here.
"Official data on the number of people killed by the police turns out to be remarkably unreliable."
"about half are white, and about half are from minorities, but adjusting for the size of the populations...minorities are definitely being shot at a higher rate than whites" black people "are being shot at a rate that's 2.5 times higher than whites".
(http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1638F/production/_90432019_us_officer_killings_624.png)
US police shootings: How many die each year? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36826297)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 March, 2017, 09:02:48 AM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 20 March, 2017, 01:30:32 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 March, 2017, 11:30:53 AM
Basically. The fact black folk are 9 times more likely to get shot by police in the US is a pretty solid reason for why the entire system needs redressing there and why we don't need such a policy here.
"Official data on the number of people killed by the police turns out to be remarkably unreliable."
"about half are white, and about half are from minorities, but adjusting for the size of the populations...minorities are definitely being shot at a higher rate than whites" black people "are being shot at a rate that's 2.5 times higher than whites".
(http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1638F/production/_90432019_us_officer_killings_624.png)
US police shootings: How many die each year? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36826297)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/)
Undoubtably true, but in 2016 young black folk aged 15-35 where 9 times more likely than white counterparts to be klled by police.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/08/the-counted-police-killings-2016-young-black-men
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 March, 2017, 10:20:50 AM
Tom Watson and John Humphreys on Today this morning, and then Christine Shawcroft and Humphreys 10 minutes later... I'm a leftie and a member of Unite (and R4 fanboi) and I honestly couldn't work out which out of of the three of them was more intent on destroying the British Labour party.  No hint that there was anything going on anywhere that might maybe benefit from a bit of genuine opposition, it was like listening to an Ambridge parish commitee gleefully bitching about the person judging the jam competition while the village disappears into a sinkhole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 20 March, 2017, 12:15:11 PM
Entirely.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2017, 02:33:14 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 March, 2017, 10:20:50 AMI'm a leftie and a member of Unite

You're an entryist red infiltrator who loves Putin and it's people like you that are keeping the Tories In Power For A Generation™.

To be fair to Watson, he's done pretty well for a decade off of pressuring his party leader into quitting and then driving the party steadily into the ground by having zero long game, you can't really blame him for sticking with what he knows in uncertain times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 20 March, 2017, 09:25:18 PM
Still feelings like there's life version of Judge Dredd: Origins happens in US now....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 March, 2017, 12:28:07 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 18 March, 2017, 02:52:05 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 March, 2017, 01:22:38 PM
The BBC's political editor was caught editing footage to suit her narrative - the BBC declared through its own internal review body that there was "no intent to deceive".  The same political editor describes the Crown Prosecution Service's two-dozen separate investigations into Conservative election fraud in the 2015 General Election as "mistakes", despite whistleblowers coming forward and saying it was not only deliberate, but organised - on the national scale - by party HQ.

There is no fake news, only approved news.

What's amazing is that after the whole thing with the Queen being edited to look like she stormed out, I had to complete an online compliance test, because as a freelancer I was producing the titles for a light entertainment panel show.

But this description of the expenses fraud is fine, apparently.

It's all fine if you tow the party line. Not here to be fair anymore - just to keep the Tory wolves from the door. If we make things go their way, perhaps we'll keep the license fee for just one more day...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 21 March, 2017, 10:11:31 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 17 March, 2017, 12:03:40 PM
Inflation is below Bank of England target.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39337909
Quote
UK inflation rate leaps to 2.3%

Inflation, as measured by the Office for National Statistics' Consumer Price Index, jumped to 2.3% in February - up from 1.8% in January.
The rate is the highest since September 2013 and above the 2% target the Bank of England is charged with keeping inflation at.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 March, 2017, 10:26:52 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 21 March, 2017, 12:28:07 AM
It's all fine if you tow the party line. Not here to be fair anymore - just to keep the Tory wolves from the door. If we make things go their way, perhaps we'll keep the license fee for just one more day...

Astonishing nonsense about MPs accusing (threatening, let's be clear) the BBC of not being positive enough about the post-pre-Brexit economy... In the absence of ANY credible political opposition, who exactly are they supposed to be biased in favour of here? 

So for reasons known only to my off-licence I listened to Ken Livingstone and Humphreys on Today this morning, and yet again not a mention of anything relating to issues actually facing the real world: instead it degenerated into a 'debate' about how far to the left or right Neil Kinnock was, or was portrayed as.  Neil effing Kinnock. Finger on the pulse there, all the big issues of the day.  The closest it came to relevance was Livingstone's momentary enthusiasm for Labour coming up with (unspecified) coherent economic policies, presumably relating to more equal distribution of the deckchairs... I know he's out on his ear at the moment, but Cheeses H. Crust. 

I fear that both the BBC and the BLP are irrevocably fecked at this point.  Oh, and the UK (and by extension Ireland) too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 11:11:42 AM
Quote from: pauljholden on 21 March, 2017, 10:11:31 AM

Quote
UK inflation rate leaps to 2.3%

Inflation, as measured by the Office for National Statistics' Consumer Price Index, jumped to 2.3% in February - up from 1.8% in January.
The rate is the highest since September 2013 and above the 2% target the Bank of England is charged with keeping inflation at.

And, as I said, it's basically all food and fuel, thanks to sterling's post-referendum slide. That fuel hike will feed through into the costs of all physical goods, since they all need transporting.

That's the first rise in inflation for food after 31 straight months of year-on-year declines.

Still, thank God we took back control, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 11:27:34 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 March, 2017, 10:26:52 AM
instead it degenerated into a 'debate' about how far to the left or right Neil Kinnock was, or was portrayed as.  Neil effing Kinnock.

Yesterday, Humphreys wheeled Michael Foot as an an example of how left-wing leaders were never good for Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 02:43:18 PM
Pretty sure September 2013 was before the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 02:55:03 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 02:43:18 PM
Pretty sure September 2013 was before the referendum.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Would you please quote the relevant post you're replying to — your one-line non sequiturs are annoying enough without having to work out what it is you're not addressing.

Are you saying that prices have been higher in the past than they are now? If so, well spotted. Are you also saying that this current rise in food prices is unrelated to the exchange rate? And that the fall in the exchange rate is unrelated to the referendum result?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 02:58:19 PM
Yes and no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 03:03:10 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 02:58:19 PM
Yes and no.

You remember when I said that making obtuse/unhelpful/contrarian posts with the sole intention of provoking intemperate responses from other posters was the classic definition of trolling and you got all huffy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 21 March, 2017, 03:08:14 PM
Tankie- will you please stop winding Jim up? You may think it the hilarious but it never ends well.

Jim- take five minutes before responding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:19:08 PM
Sorry Bolt, I tend not to give long replies as it is painful for me to type. I was answering the two questions Jim asked me, I didn't mean to wind anybody up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 21 March, 2017, 03:24:24 PM
Tankie- thanks for clarity- and apologies for sticking my nose in.

Out of curiosity- is there anything you could use to translate speech to text that could help? Then you would just need to copy and paste?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:29:56 PM
Thank you, I do need to look into other ways of using computers, and do need to change how I sometimes post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 03:33:54 PM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 21 March, 2017, 03:08:14 PM
Jim- take five minutes before responding.

What?! How was anything I posted intemperate or unreasonable? It wouldn't matter if I took five minutes, ten minutes or all bleeding day, OT's response was obtuse and indecipherable, particularly since I asked him three questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 03:39:30 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:29:56 PM
Thank you, I do need to look into other ways of using computers, and do need to change how I sometimes post.

It doesn't require any more effort to tap/click on the 'quote' button than the 'reply' button, then at least people would know which post you were replying to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2017, 03:41:02 PM
www.capterra.com/speech-recognition-software/

https://www.labnol.org/internet/dictation-for-google-chrome/24719/

https://zapier.com/blog/best-text-dictation-software/

And so on. :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:46:59 PM
I have reread your post Jim and my updated answer is yes no and no. I have no other way of answering that question.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:48:16 PM
Thank you, Sharky
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2017, 04:21:47 PM
You're welcome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 March, 2017, 04:44:56 PM
Tankie, you are David Davis and I claim my five pounds  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 04:51:42 PM
Vroom!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2017, 05:45:56 PM
Trump and NASA (https://www.inverse.com/article/29294-trump-nasa-transition-bill-s442-mars-earth-science).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 06:01:40 PM
Hopefully Trump himself will be the first person to explore deep space.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 March, 2017, 06:16:04 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 03:46:59 PM
I have reread your post Jim and my updated answer is yes no and no. I have no other way of answering that question.

I'm not going to trawl the thread but I'm pretty sure you have used the 2% inflation figurer as a KPI that the leave vote has already been good (or at least not bad) for the UK a few times*? Which isn't surprising as it seems to be a standard part of the Leave voter argument arsenal. The fact it's above target (inflation has a way of creeping up) but somehow no longer relevant is I think what people may find vexing**.

*maybe you haven't and it's just because I read a lot of comments on news stories that I get the impression you have

**you haven't actually said it's not relevant, you have just noted that inflation had been this high in the past. This could mean anything form it's all good, to it's terrible news to it's now irrelevant. Unfortunately due to the understandable brevity of your posts it's down to us to intemperate your meaning as best we can, and my own method is to go by the general arguments on the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 06:29:23 PM
I have said that inflation was below Bank of England target, it was, now it's not, i never said inflation would not go up.  He says fingers crossed,we'll they would be if i could cross them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 21 March, 2017, 08:37:17 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 March, 2017, 03:33:54 PM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 21 March, 2017, 03:08:14 PM
Jim- take five minutes before responding.

What?! How was anything I posted intemperate or unreasonable? It wouldn't matter if I took five minutes, ten minutes or all bleeding day, OT's response was obtuse and indecipherable, particularly since I asked him three questions.

Jim, I was simply asking you to take five before getting into it, again, with Tankie. Simple as. I don't mean to imply that you were being "intemperate or unreasonable" and if I did think you were I'd tell you so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 March, 2017, 08:41:05 PM
Well to be fair Tankie and Sharks are the only ones here who argue the Leave case and by those standards Tankie is having to do a lot of the heavy lifting. The lack of engagement or articulation of argument in context of events, past statements, economics or well, anything, is mainly frustrating because it's not much worse than what the leading voices of Brexit from Westminster to Farage have to offer...

In short it's a lot to pin on one bloke with dodgy fingers, and if the responses make little sense then it's no worse than the leading minds of that viewpoint - and hence, I suppose, the maddening frustration of continuing any debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 March, 2017, 09:04:32 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 21 March, 2017, 08:41:05 PM
In short it's a lot to pin on one bloke with dodgy fingers, and if the responses make little sense then it's no worse than the leading minds of that viewpoint...

Hear hear. If anything Tankie does a better job than the pros, because he comes across as a genuine advocate of whatever it is that Brexit entails and is apparently willing to live with whatever the consequences will be,  rather than the self-serving professional populist wankers who only stand to profit from the disaster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 09:05:38 PM
"one bloke with dodgy fingers"? Up yours, pal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 09:25:55 PM
Take the piss out of my views, but don't take the piss out of my disability, that's out of order.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 March, 2017, 09:50:57 PM
I don't think anyone was taking the piss Tankie, just echoing your own remarks about the difficulty of composing lengthy replies, phrased in a light-hearted manner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2017, 10:46:57 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk
link=topic=28209.msg950491#msg950491
date=1490128865

Well to be fair Tankie and Sharks are the only ones here who argue the Leave case...


I advocate neither leave nor stay - I don't think it makes much difference either way - personal freedom/responsibility is my thing, not which set of elites to call Master.

That said, I would lean towards leave if pushed to choose, but only because it brings freedoms and responsibilities one step closer to the individual and not for any other of the reasons claimed by Brexiters, Bremainers, Brethinkers, Breturners, Breuniters or any Brugger else.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 March, 2017, 08:11:52 AM
Given the way things are going, the opposite is more likely. The executive is involved in a power grab.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 22 March, 2017, 09:53:29 AM
Champion of far-right Bullshit, Nick Griffin, wants to emigrate to Hungary (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nick-griffin-bnp-emigrate-hungary-next-six-months-british-national-party-a7638131.html%3Famp). "Good riddance!" I hear you cry but I think it's a bit rich of the clown to abuse migrants and then try to become one himself! The double-standard Twat! If any country has a case for 'building a wall it would be Hungary, if only to keep the gobby racist bellend out!

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 March, 2017, 10:06:49 AM
Ah but Kev, you forget that all inferior nations must inevitably benefit from the addition of even one Englishman.  I imagine Nick will bring parliamentary democracy, a love of Shakespeare, the Anglican communion and a decent train network to those benighted Magyars.  It's not so much hypocritical immigration as it is Uplift.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 22 March, 2017, 10:07:46 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 22 March, 2017, 09:53:29 AM
Champion of far-right Bullshit, Nick Griffin, wants to emigrate to Hungary (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nick-griffin-bnp-emigrate-hungary-next-six-months-british-national-party-a7638131.html%3Famp). "Good riddance!" I hear you cry but I think it's a bit rich of the clown to abuse migrants and then try to become one himself! The double-standard Twat! If any country has a case for 'building a wall it would be Hungary, if only to keep the gobby racist bellend out!

Cheers

I saw that story.  He also talks about the "emigre community" there.  Which sounds so much better than "immigrants", doesn't it?

Which is what Nick and his racist chums would be there.  Strange these grand titles - "ex-pats", "emigres" - only seem to apply to Brits moving abroad, and not anyone coming here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 March, 2017, 10:08:18 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 March, 2017, 10:06:49 AM
Ah but Kev, you forget that all inferior nations must inevitably benefit from the addition of even one Englishman.  I imagine Nick will bring parliamentary democracy, a love of Shakespeare, the Anglican communion and a decent train network to those benighted Magyars.

I think Hungary's increasing, and frankly alarming, lurches towards the right in recent years means that Dear Old Nick will find himself quite at home there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 March, 2017, 10:39:36 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 21 March, 2017, 09:25:55 PM
Take the piss out of my views, but don't take the piss out of my disability, that's out of order.

I'm not taking the piss out of you at all Tankie, I'm saying we should all cut you some slack on your frustratingly short and obtuse responses because:

Quote from: TANKIEI tend not to give long replies as it is painful for me to type

My point is you've got a good reason for expressing yourself in short statements and not engaging with the complex responses people give to those short statements.

Hope that clears it up, sorry that you think I'm taking the piss out of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 22 March, 2017, 11:17:12 AM
No problem, Thank you for responding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 March, 2017, 11:22:36 AM
Ah good, I hate it when it gets all acrimonious on here!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 March, 2017, 02:29:37 PM
Griffin becomes an immigrant:  The mind boggles.

Also, I thought he would have liked the new,improved, isolationist and unwelcoming Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 22 March, 2017, 02:33:43 PM
I think Nick did something really bad so he bugger off to Turkey!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 22 March, 2017, 04:50:13 PM
I was kinda hoping he'd fell off the Earth, as his profile of late had been pretty non-existent.

There is a word that perfectly sums up this piece of work, but I will not use it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Woolly on 22 March, 2017, 06:32:12 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 22 March, 2017, 04:50:13 PM
I was kinda hoping he'd fell off the Earth, as his profile of late had been pretty non-existent.

There is a word that perfectly sums up this piece of work, but I will not use it.

I always thought he looked like Sloth from The Goonies in a wig. What with that melty cheek-eye and everything.
But frankly, thats insulting to Sloth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 March, 2017, 06:44:27 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 22 March, 2017, 04:50:13 PMThere is a word that perfectly sums up this piece of work, but I will not use it.

Best not.  That word is banned on the forum now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 March, 2017, 06:59:09 PM
They banned the word "human"? Harsh...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 March, 2017, 07:57:48 PM
Disturbing news from central London.  Still, I'm sure that the simple act of politicians using social media to send their best wishes to those affected won't be turned into a bigoted, point-scoring shit storm by xenophobic fuckwits...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 March, 2017, 10:16:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 March, 2017, 06:59:09 PM
They banned the word "human"? Harsh...

I'm not sure if I've got the right end of the stick here, but i personally wouldn't excuse a long history of white supremacist views and inciting racial hatred in others by saying Griffin is 'only human'.

A human being he may be, but he's a vile example of one.  I think we both know what word Spikes alluded to.  I agree but I'm not going to get myself another ban for saying that word.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 10:27:19 AM
Well, yes. I've never met the man but he is certainly portrayed as a right Canute.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 March, 2017, 10:33:44 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the purpose of yesterdays attack in London was but it seems to have been a victory for Britain First and like-minded racist nutters.
Some of the shit they're posting on social media in the wake of yesterday is mind-boggling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 March, 2017, 10:36:18 AM
Pretty sure the purpose was to kill people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 23 March, 2017, 10:46:13 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2017, 10:33:44 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the purpose of yesterdays attack in London was but it seems to have been a victory for Britain First and like-minded racist nutters.
Some of the shit they're posting on social media in the wake of yesterday is mind-boggling.

Now the attacker is British-born, now hope it shut them up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2017, 10:58:17 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2017, 10:33:44 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the purpose of yesterdays attack in London was but it seems to have been a victory for Britain First and like-minded racist nutters.

That's exactly the purpose: to provoke ground-level hatred, and harsh legal/judicial responses, which serves to marginalise the muslim community and lends credibility to the arguments of those who would radicalise British muslims.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 March, 2017, 11:21:13 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 March, 2017, 10:58:17 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 23 March, 2017, 10:33:44 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the purpose of yesterdays attack in London was but it seems to have been a victory for Britain First and like-minded racist nutters.

That's exactly the purpose: to provoke ground-level hatred, and harsh legal/judicial responses, which serves to marginalise the muslim community and lends credibility to the arguments of those who would radicalise British muslims.

Yes I think you're right and it's incredibly depressing to see that people fall for it. Especially on social media where people you thought were pretty much decent, loving people are swept along on the tide of racism.
Sadiq Khan is being held up as responsible by some people - as if he's some kind of enabler to Islamic terrorism. It's nasty stuff.
I was wondering what the ultimate plan was though and how far the attacker thought he'd get with a frontal assault on Westminster. I suppose we'll probably never really know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 March, 2017, 12:22:35 PM
Yeah Sadiq, enabling someone to get in a car with a knife. Such an act would have been impossible under.... err....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 March, 2017, 12:31:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 10:27:19 AM
Well, yes. I've never met the man but he is certainly portrayed as a right Canute.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that unless the media has conspired throughout his whole life to invent everything he has ever said (including doctoring video and sound footage), then that portrayal is pretty accurate.

As for Sadiq Khan, it does seem like Prick Jnr's ridiculous and nasty tweet has backfired on him somewhat, judging by the general reaction around the world (leaving aside the appalling likes of Britain First).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 March, 2017, 12:45:41 PM
If the idea was to divide communities, it won't work in my street, we have English, Arabs, Pakistanis, Indians, Chinese, Italians, Polish, Turkish, Rumanian, among others and we all rub along fine. The actions of a nutcase will not change that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 23 March, 2017, 12:48:00 PM
I was pleasantly surprised that the BBC 10pm news took about 20 minutes of saturation coverage before the word "Islamist" was used. So that appears to be some progress.

And in an even bigger surprise, Political Correspondent Laura Keunssberg managed to get through TWO entire reports without diverting from the real story to blame/attack Jeremy Corbyn.

Dammit! I posted in The Political Thread!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 March, 2017, 12:53:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 23 March, 2017, 12:31:07 PM
As for Sadiq Khan, it does seem like Prick Jnr's ridiculous and nasty tweet has backfired on him somewhat, judging by the general reaction around the world (leaving aside the appalling likes of Britain First).


...and the US will be our saviour when we disengage from all previous EU trade agreements (when they're not accusing our mayor of... whatever... and our secret service of spying on their president.  What could go wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 March, 2017, 12:54:42 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 23 March, 2017, 12:45:41 PM
If the idea was to divide communities, it won't work in my street, we have English, Arabs, Pakistanis, Indians, Chinese, Italians, Polish, Turkish, Rumanian, among others and we all rub along fine. The actions of a nutcase will not change that.


I like the sound of your street.  No idea what the make-up of my street is, as it's one of the busiest roads in North London and not very pleasant to be on.  There is a mosque a few doors down though, and across the road some sort of christian meeting centre, plus an art centre at the far end.  Used to be a T.A. centre and a prison too, but they both closed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 23 March, 2017, 01:20:26 PM
Thank you, it is a good place to live. I forgot to list my lmmediate neighbours, one side we have a lovely Scottish lady and on the other side we have a family of settled travellers, who are very good to me and the wife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 02:26:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ
link=topic=28209.msg950714#msg950714
date=1490272267
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
link=topic=28209.msg950692#msg950692
date=1490264839
Well, yes. I've never met the man but he is
certainly portrayed as a right Canute.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and
suggest that unless the media has conspired
throughout his whole life to invent everything
he has ever said (including doctoring video
and sound footage), then that portrayal is
pretty accurate.


I'm neither defending or condemning the man. He can say and believe what he wants but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him. Neither does it mean I have to hate him. Hate is his thing, not mine. Just as the only thing to fear is fear itself, the only thing worth hating is hatred. I prefer to look upon such people with pity, for they cannot see and will never experience the breadth and depth of the human race. (Not that I'm accusing you of hating him, JBC, but I know that there are those who do.)

As for the events in London, the loss of life is, as always, tragic, and, as Jim suggests, the political point-scoring and grip-tightening is nothing short of sickening. As Tankie points out, most human beings know how to rub along in relative harmony - it takes "leaders" to f*ck things up properly, in my view.

I can never now learn of such events without the words "Operation Gladio" springing to mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 March, 2017, 02:34:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 02:26:02 PM
... the political point-scoring and grip-tightening is nothing short of sickening ... I can never now learn of such events without the words "Operation Gladio" springing to mind.

Sickening is correct. Your self-awareness has failed you.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 03:02:17 PM
Maybe. I'm not in politics, though, and don't expect anyone to believe in or agree with what I say. These words spring to my mind, that's all. If expressing a personal opinion on a public forum is now classed as political point-scoring on a par with elected officials using such tragedies to push their solutions on the people under their control, then we're all guilty.

Oh no. I did it again...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 03:04:48 PM
Removed double post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 March, 2017, 05:57:33 PM
Thanks, Bolt - I'm having horrible connexion problems recently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 March, 2017, 11:12:44 PM
I wonder how a President who has spent his life surrounded by yes-men is feeling after this latest NO? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 March, 2017, 12:58:28 PM
Carswell leaves UKIP, which leaves them with no MPs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 March, 2017, 01:46:05 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 25 March, 2017, 12:58:28 PM
Carswell leaves UKIP, which leaves them with no MPs.
Let the party fade away, let this be it's death wail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 March, 2017, 02:19:37 PM
Unlikely.  UKIP are a means to keep the Overton Window on the right for the likes of Sky News and the BBC - the latter even declined to let the long-established Greens have airtime during election season in favor of UKIP.  It's always been a fringe party, and that's never stopped it getting publicity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2017, 02:23:28 PM
Politics needs bogeymen to "protect" us from and to give the impression of freedom through controlled opposition. UKIP is one of those bogeymen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 March, 2017, 02:34:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2017, 02:23:28 PM
Politics needs bogeymen to "protect" us from and to give the impression of freedom through controlled opposition. UKIP is one of those bogeymen.
Again, a tad over simplifying the nature of human bigotry there Sharky but I know where you stand by now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 March, 2017, 04:27:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 March, 2017, 02:23:28 PM
Politics needs bogeymen to "protect" us from and to give the impression of freedom through controlled opposition. UKIP is one of those bogeymen.

UKIP are far more akin to witchfinders than witches.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 March, 2017, 10:46:39 AM
I hadn't heard of the Overton Window and had been stretching the word 'Hegemony' to explain the same concept. Cheers!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 27 March, 2017, 01:01:14 PM
So, someone was pointing out BBC bias on FB earlier - pointing at Paul Nuttalls of the UKIPs being invited on Sunday Politics despite being a party without a single MP (and by extension - just HOW much coverage the party gets in the media generally). A commenter then implied that UKIPs had the weight of numbers but First Past the Post was failing the actual state of representative politics and the BBC might be giving more balance ....weight of numbers....

So on a numbershunt I went - the last stable count of UKIPs membership is 39,000 people. A fair amount. Not the billions one always like to frighten themselves by imagining but still solid.

The last stable amount for, say, the greens is however 53,000. And they actually have an MP. You never seem them hippie fucks on TV though doya?

But they're boring I guess. Maybe it's not the party numbers that count... but the viewing figures.

(http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/woah.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 March, 2017, 01:07:10 PM
The Scottish Greens are also a separate party, so their numbers wouldn't be included in that figure, but it would be reasonable to add them when considering UK policy. They also have six MSPs, which is six more than UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 27 March, 2017, 01:12:43 PM
The response was of course, that UKIP got the larger vote share. Which is absolutely true - coming ahead of even the Lib Dems. Vote share is just one way to cut the coverage cake though. I propose a ludicrous but strenuously unbiased six-hour weekly politics show giving equal coverage to every single party that got over 500 votes in the UK. Including (my facts odyssey reveals) a Trotskyist party in NI that got 7,000 votes.  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 March, 2017, 04:08:27 PM
But that doesn't explain why BBC Scotland so frequently trot out the hilariously dim-witted kipper David Coburn. UKIP are pretty much the definition of a fringe party in Scotland. Even the Scottish Socialists have a better history of electoral success.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 March, 2017, 06:12:52 PM
Here he is, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of pretty much everything...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36134456 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36134456)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 27 March, 2017, 06:24:28 PM
Everything you need to know about David Coburn: an openly gay man who opposes same-sex marriage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 March, 2017, 12:19:58 PM
Astonishing. The Conservative and Unionist Party is perfectly happy to sacrifice the Union in pursuit of Brexit: David Davis says Northern Ireland can unify with Eire if they want to stay in the EU. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-northern-ireland-can-rejoin-eu-reunification-david-davis-stormont-a7653346.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 March, 2017, 12:51:35 PM
When they said "take back our country", they meant England.  Only England.
Also, rat-faced Word We're Not Allowed To Say On The Forum Anymore Nigel Farage has announced his future travel plans.  They are: Fuck You, Plebs - Enjoy Your Trash Fire Of A Country. (http://uk.businessinsider.com/nigel-farage-will-leave-britain-if-brexit-is-a-disaster-2017-3)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 March, 2017, 12:52:28 PM
Stop talking Britain down, Nigel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 March, 2017, 01:00:48 PM
Brexit well beyond satire now.

Just mindboggling that we are being marched off a cliff, fully aware of what we will lose due to dishonesty, and the manipulations of the likes of Gove, Farage, Johnson etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 28 March, 2017, 01:16:57 PM
Brexit this, Brexit there, Brexit everywhere...

I see they always talk about it, but I don't recall what would happens after we out of EU?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 March, 2017, 01:20:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 March, 2017, 12:51:35 PM
When they said "take back our country", they meant England.  Only England.
Also, rat-faced Word We're Not Allowed To Say On The Forum Anymore Nigel Farage has announced his future travel plans.  They are: Fuck You, Plebs - Enjoy Your Trash Fire Of A Country. (http://uk.businessinsider.com/nigel-farage-will-leave-britain-if-brexit-is-a-disaster-2017-3)


And there you have it. Proof, if anyone was still in any doubt, that his Brexit campaign was always about himself and his own ego.  He truly is a... well, you know.

In other news:  Goodbye, world.  Sorry.  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39415631 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39415631)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 March, 2017, 01:20:28 PM
But if only we could have predicted this would all happen! IF ONLY!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 March, 2017, 01:35:38 PM
reading the comments section on BBC about triggering Article 50, I did like one comment: "A50 will get you to Warrington not economic prosperity."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 28 March, 2017, 04:52:22 PM
QuoteBrexit this, Brexit there, Brexit everywhere...

Never mind Brexit...

http://m.imgur.com/a/DzXUd (http://m.imgur.com/a/DzXUd)

Phhhwwaaaarrrr!

Alternative headlines include:

"we are unable to defend our position"

"why can't it be the 1970s again?"

"take a look at this pair!"

"Something, something Jocks"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 March, 2017, 05:04:23 PM
Natch, the Daily Mail simultaneously suggested anyone who had a problem with that misogynistic bollocks was a humourless feminist, while sneakily updating it in later editions to add something about a light-hearted look at what was going on. Meanwhile, The Telegraph outlined six horror stories about the EU that will be fixed post-Brexit. One was about it becoming easier to kill newts. Another was about ensuring we could have lower quality bananas. Glad we're throwing millions of people under the bus and knackering our economy for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 March, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 March, 2017, 01:00:48 PM
Brexit well beyond satire now.


Can I just check that I'm understanding the current situation regarding Brexit please?


On the plus side we will ....


Have I missed much?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 29 March, 2017, 09:41:36 AM
Fascinating the narratives that present themselves.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8EhOvIW0AAmuAs.jpg:large)

A small clutch of well-off blokes genuinely think they single-handedly brought about this:

(https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SbmJb8VPL.jpg)

Why, here they all are in that gold lift with Trump:

(https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/11/14/10/donald-trump-twitter.jpg)

(Chap at the end is former F'rage advisor and editor of Breitbart UK)

It's a pot of cream to conspiracy theorists the money club that "rule the world" - but oddly enough not many seem willing to take the bait. Tis a bit of a cliche after all. Plus the whole applecart will be upset when reality comes crashing in as it tends to. Ho hum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 09:59:04 AM
I'm trying very hard to not spiral back into depression with this, but it's hard. Rumours continue to swirl about the ultimate fates of EEA nationals, and while it's unlikely deportations will happen, what about other rights? NHS? Being able to work? Being able to travel? My wife won't want to stay if she's basically a prisoner here – and neither will I.

But I'm also increasingly angry with this notion we should all now pull together and make this work. The PM keeps banging on about this, despite not giving the remotest shit about anyone who doesn't favour the most extreme version of leaving the EU. There's no interest in conciliatory action or consensus. And it's nuts that people are being branded 'unpatriotic' for not gleefully following a path that is now likely to see the break-up of the very country itself. English nationalism truly is the worst type on these isles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 29 March, 2017, 10:12:00 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 March, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 March, 2017, 01:00:48 PM
Brexit well beyond satire now.


Can I just check that I'm understanding the current situation regarding Brexit please?


  • the UK may possibly have to pay a significant sum of money for outstanding commitments.
  • the UK may end up with higher tariffs / poorer market access compared to its current arrangements.
  • the UK may still end up with similar immigration levels from the EU.
  • the UK will have less say over EU policy.
  • the UK will still have to comply with ECJ rulings but will have no say regarding them.
  • the UK may lose airlines and financial services companies to mainland Europe as companies are required to relocate.
  • there will be no additional money for the NHS as implied during the referendum campaign.
  • UK workers may lose employment protections they enjoy under EU law
  • UK farmers may lose financial support currently enjoyed under the Common Agricultural Policy.

On the plus side we will ....

  • no longer have Nigel Farage

Have I missed much?

Someone said this morning that the whole thing reminded him of people who "put in comically high bids on Ebay for random items for a lark, win, then have to pay £507 for a broken toaster."

I would bloody well hope, in the course of time, when the devastation of Brexit is measurable and completely transparent, that those responsible, the people who lied and misled, will take full responsibility. Shame on them.

God only knows what will happen with Northern Ireland now.

Sold a pup.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 March, 2017, 10:25:01 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 09:59:04 AM
But I'm also increasingly angry with this notion we should all now pull together and make this work.

To hell with that. I wash my hands of the whole thing. My work/income is portable and largely insulated from the fallout of Brexit, which puts me in a fortunate and very tiny minority, but if people want to brand me unpatriotic for not supporting the most catastrophic act of economic and social self-harm this country has seen in anyone's lifetime, they can take a running jump.

This is their stupid idea. They promised us it would be OK, they promised us they had a plan. To turn round now and say that we have to work hard to make their idiocy less awful than the worst of all possible worlds is ludicrous.

They're breaking it. They can fix it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 10:26:58 AM
Looks like they did it to please the right wing media?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 10:31:56 AM
Quote from: Rately on 29 March, 2017, 10:12:00 AMGod only knows what will happen with Northern Ireland now.
Hard to know precisely when, but if we stay the current course, it'll unite with Ireland and be back in the EU that way. The way things are going, it wouldn't surprise me if this happens very quickly. Scotland will also break away as soon as it can and join the EU or EFTA, leaving England and Wales alone. While Wales has generally had less enthusiasm about independence – and has less of a mandate on the basis of Brexit, given the vote there – you can bet that will change as well.

Quote from: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 10:26:58 AMLooks like they did it to please the right wing media?
To some extent. Thing is, watch this subtly shift over time. You can bet the media will not want the blame, and so they will shift it to the EU or Remainers. When that doesn't work, it'll be the fault of the government for doing Brexit wrong. The broadsheets are already testing that particular water, as has The Sun very occasionally. My hope is the civil service get what they want – a ten-year transition – and during that we come to our senses, and scrap the entire thing (or at least go for an EEA deal). Plenty of damage will have been done and trust will take another decade to win back, but at least the situation will be salvageable. Otherwise, this country (as in England – and possibly Wales) has a bleak future, unless you're stinking rich already.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 March, 2017, 10:59:16 AM
I enjoyed being part of Europe. I'm glad I got to grow up in the EU. I'm sorry people took that away from the next generation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 11:32:42 AM
The 'get behind/pull together' thing is bollocks.

At a day-to-day level, what do they expect Remainers to actually do which will have any bearing on the effects of it?

As with the media, it just seems to be looking for a scapegoat for if/when it goes badly tits-up.

"Aaaah, it would have gone brilliantly if it wasn't for you"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 11:34:57 AM
I notice Daily Mail label the Remainers as "Remoaners"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 29 March, 2017, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 11:34:57 AM
I notice Daily Mail label the Remainers as "Remoaners"

The big story in the 'Daily Crap' the other day was a comparison of Theresa May and Nicola Sturgeon's legs! How anyone can read this Horseshit rag is beyond me!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 29 March, 2017, 11:59:29 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 11:34:57 AM
I notice Daily Mail label the Remainers as "Remoaners"

I find that hilariously witty. What mastery of the English language.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 March, 2017, 02:53:29 PM
A mastery all the more surprising in that it comes from a paper that still openly regrets we aren't all speaking German.

Come to Northern Ireland if you fancy getting off the sinking trash barge that is the UK.  Move here, get an Irish passport, stay in the EU, then if you get homesick for the UK you can volunteer for one of the aid convoys we'll be sending in a couple of years.
LOL - "come to Northern Ireland if you want stability."  What a time to be alive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 03:09:49 PM
I've had no electricity for the past two and a half hours due to repair work being carried out on a nearby junction box.

God damn you, Brexit!

:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 March, 2017, 03:37:01 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 11:32:42 AM
At a day-to-day level, what do they expect Remainers to actually do which will have any bearing on the effects of it?


I think it comes down to this:  'Stop telling us we were wrong, even though it's becoming increasingly clear that we were wrong.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 05:51:52 PM
Wish I never reading Daily Mail Online, too many nasty articles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 March, 2017, 05:57:41 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 05:51:52 PM
Wish I never reading Daily Mail Online, too many nasty articles.
The scourge of the internet. Best left alne.

Amazingly, on the subject of yesterdays abominably sexist Fail cover, one member of my family who'se incredibly feminist to a point had no issue with it. That being said, she has no issue with the Fail in general so her sanity has always been in question...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 29 March, 2017, 06:00:14 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 March, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 March, 2017, 01:00:48 PM
Brexit well beyond satire now.


Can I just check that I'm understanding the current situation regarding Brexit please?


  • the UK may possibly have to pay a significant sum of money for outstanding commitments.
  • the UK may end up with higher tariffs / poorer market access compared to its current arrangements.
  • the UK may still end up with similar immigration levels from the EU.
  • the UK will have less say over EU policy.
  • the UK will still have to comply with ECJ rulings but will have no say regarding them.
  • the UK may lose airlines and financial services companies to mainland Europe as companies are required to relocate.
  • there will be no additional money for the NHS as implied during the referendum campaign.
  • UK workers may lose employment protections they enjoy under EU law
  • UK farmers may lose financial support currently enjoyed under the Common Agricultural Policy.

On the plus side we will ....

  • no longer have Nigel Farage

Have I missed much?

We will never be free of Nigel Farage. So it is all bad news.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 29 March, 2017, 06:43:12 PM
Quote from: Spikes on 29 March, 2017, 06:00:14 PM
We will never be free of Nigel Farage. So it is all bad news.

We now live in Faragist Britain. Despite never achieving any kind of electoral mandate, UKIP policies have been adopted wholesale by the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 March, 2017, 07:19:54 PM
Well, he is talking about doing a Cameron if it all goes wahoonie shaped.  Even to the extent of leaving the UK altogether.  Perhaps we can have a whip around and help him on his way.  I'm thinking a very leaky row boat and drop him off in a nice patch of shark infested water.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 07:34:18 PM
I find it abhorrent that someone who's banged on about immigration being the thing that's wrecked the country would even dare to become an immigrant elsewhere. Although I'm sure he'd call himself an 'ex pat' (whatever the fuck that means) or the 'right kind of immigrant'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 29 March, 2017, 07:50:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 07:34:18 PM
I find it abhorrent that someone who's banged on about immigration being the thing that's wrecked the country would even dare to become an immigrant elsewhere. Although I'm sure he'd call himself an 'ex pat' (whatever the fuck that means) or the 'right kind of immigrant'.

What about Nick Griffin moving to Hungary (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nick-griffin-bnp-emigrate-hungary-next-six-months-british-national-party-a7638131.html) because it's a more nationalistic country than Britain at present and actively has a Nazi town (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38881349)?

Those people's town meetings must make the Mail Online seem like a revolutionary party pamphlet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 07:59:03 PM
How a third-century Roman soldier named Marcus Aurelius Mausaeus Valerius Carausius was behind the first 'Brexit.' (http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/how-third-century-roman-soldier-named-carausius-was-behind-first-brexit-007797)

Not really relevant to the current situation but an example of how history can rhyme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 08:27:32 PM
After Brexit, 9 Reasons To Be Bullish On Great Britain. (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-29/after-brexit-9-reasons-be-bullish-great-britain)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 08:29:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 08:27:32 PM
After Brexit, 9 Reasons To Be Bullish On Great Britain. (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-29/after-brexit-9-reasons-be-bullish-great-britain)

Ahh, good luck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 08:34:14 PM
There will be bad things, there will be good things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 09:21:05 PM
http://news.sky.com/story/lloyds-set-to-choose-brussels-as-eu-base-reports-10817862 (http://news.sky.com/story/lloyds-set-to-choose-brussels-as-eu-base-reports-10817862)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 09:41:50 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 09:21:05 PM
http://news.sky.com/story/lloyds-set-to-choose-brussels-as-eu-base-reports-10817862 (http://news.sky.com/story/lloyds-set-to-choose-brussels-as-eu-base-reports-10817862)

"Lloyd's is shifting some operations to the continent in order to protect revenues generated within the European Union as the UK heads for the exit."

"Chairman John Nelson has previously said that Lloyd's had made a decision to act quickly because more than 10% of its revenues come from within the EU."

Hardly a disaster, even if you believe in the current corrupt system.

Also, that piece contains a link to; Deutsche Bank shows faith in post-Brexit City with new HQ plan.' (http://news.sky.com/story/deutsche-bank-shows-faith-in-post-brexit-city-with-new-hq-plan-10811705) So, swings and roundabouts.

There will be good things, there will be bad things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 09:56:47 PM
On the whole I believe it will be bad - it doesn't matter to the rich, they can afford it.

For the rest of society we are fucked, not sure if it's going to be the environment that kicks us in the arse first, or automation. I don't see how the current system can be sustained.

We're just marking time until it's impossible even for the most hard-headed to ignore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 10:01:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 08:27:32 PM
After Brexit, 9 Reasons To Be Bullish On Great Britain. (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-29/after-brexit-9-reasons-be-bullish-great-britain)
I'm too disheartened to pull that piece apart, but it doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny and logic regarding the UK's situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 March, 2017, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2017, 10:01:37 PM
I'm too disheartened to pull that piece apart, but it doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny and logic regarding the UK's situation.

Jesus. I've just read that piece. What a delusional pile of crap. Let's just put the "collapsing exchange rate will remedy Britain's balance of trade deficit" at the the top of the list and dismiss the rest as ramblings of an idiot, shall we?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 March, 2017, 10:22:11 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 29 March, 2017, 09:56:47 PM
On the whole I believe it will be bad - it doesn't matter to the rich, they can afford it.

For the rest of society we are fucked, not sure if it's going to be the environment that kicks us in the arse first, or automation. I don't see how the current system can be sustained.

We're just marking time until it's impossible even for the most hard-headed to ignore.

It's a zero sum game – to support automation we must afford to buy things they are making otherwise it's kaput.

It'll be a permanent, slow decline in living standards for the majority as systems become more chaotic and unstable. The best way I've heard it described is imagine your life getting a little bit worse every year for the rest or your life.

Happy days!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 March, 2017, 10:33:28 PM
Did anyone catch the BBC 1 News panel, featuring one particular jingoistic muppet who, when faced with how to cope with brexit could produce nothing more than "History" and "British Empire".

My remote is currently lodged in my TV monitor.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:34:43 PM
I think I liked "an Anglo Saxon trading area" best of all the good bits in that ZeroHedge junior school  debating transcript (defeated).  It's what Storm Saxon fights for after all,  isn't it?

No, wait, the bit I liked best was the idea that what Leave voters actually voted for was MORE immigration, so that UK population would grow faster than that of continental Europe (despite it being afflicted with uncontrolled immigration itself) . But only the qualified type of immigrant, you know, so that Brits can do all the menial zero hour shit while young brown foreign people have all the good jobs. I'm not so sure that is what Storm Saxon fights for...

Also, I really hope English isn't the author's first language.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:38:29 PM
Jesus wept.

Okay, let's all just give up and focus exclusively on all the bad worst predictions it's possible to make and completely extinguish even the most minute glimmer of hope. Let's act as if the entire rest of Europe the world has declared war on us and is just itching to crush us and pick at the bones. Let's act like we're the stupidest race on the planet and that there's absolutely no way we can go on. Let's just sigh and give in to the ruling wankers - who we trust to help us whilst simultaneously knowing that they intend to do no such thing - following them into whichever disaster they choose and obeying every ludicrous order they give us. Let's respect the disrespectful and follow the laws of the lawless. Let's offer our throats to the wolf with the red roses and then complain when we're torn to bits. Let's just give the fuck up and race as fast as we can for the bottom, complaining and moaning and pissing ourselves all the way down.

Let's all just lay down and die, shall we? That seems to be the mood here and it makes me fucking sick. We're human beings, for Christ's sake, capable of feats to take the breath away and make the soul soar higher than any Heaven and what are we doing?

Cowering and moaning.

Haven't you had enough of living on your fucking knees yet? Haven't you had enough of having other people screw you over and giving them permission to do so? Haven't you had enough fear in this beautiful world of bounty and wonder?

When will it be time to stand up?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
Your country voted for a pack of lies promoted by the vilest self-serving predatory fucks playing to your LCD xenophobia and ignorant notions of a fake history of vanished glory where in actual fact you murdered, robbed and raped your way around the world. The rest of the world knows it and despairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 March, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:38:29 PM
When will it be time to stand up?

Your messiah complex is showing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 March, 2017, 10:52:02 PM

"It's gonna be great." – George Lucas


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 March, 2017, 10:54:03 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
Your country voted for a pack of lies promoted by the vilest self-serving predatory fucks playing to your LCD xenophobia and ignorant notions of a fake history of vanished glory where in actual fact you murdered, robbed and raped your way around the world. The rest of the world knows it and despairs.

This. Shout it again for the folks at the back!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:59:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
Your country voted for a pack of lies promoted by the vilest self-serving predatory fucks playing to your LCD xenophobia and ignorant notions of a fake history of vanished glory where in actual fact you murdered, robbed and raped your way around the world. The rest of the world knows it and despairs.

Yes, "we" did, and we were not the only ones. We did some unforgivable things. We must learn from them because to do otherwise would be true evil.

Jim, your victim complex is showing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 11:14:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:59:58 PM
Yes, "we" did, and we were not the only ones. We did some unforgivable things. We must learn from them because to do otherwise would be true evil.

Learn by wishing it was the 17th C all over again?  All peoples have horrors in their past, but ASPIRING to them is another matter, and being gulled by greedy bastards pushing that line is yet another. It's hard for an outsider to see how turtling up and blaming Outsiders is moving the human race forward.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 11:16:41 PM
You really think that's what I'm advocating?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 March, 2017, 11:19:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:59:58 PM
Jim, your victim complex is showing.

So, only pretending to ignore me, then. Thought so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 11:22:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 11:16:41 PM
You really think that's what I'm advocating?

Of course not, but you're asking why people are resolutely negative about the UK heading down a backwards path for no better reason than imagined sleights and blatant untruths and sense of chauvinism and  destiny denied. It's very hard to see what good can possibly come of it when the FANTASY AIMS are so shit, never mind the cold reality.

Everyone knows Brits are better than this, except, it seems,Brits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 11:40:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 29 March, 2017, 11:19:58 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 10:59:58 PM
Jim, your victim complex is showing.

So, only pretending to ignore me, then. Thought so.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2017, 05:35:07 PM
Good talk, I enjoyed that. How she felt when she left her church (Westboro) particularly resonated with how I felt when I left mine (Statism). Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed. In fact, she's convinced me to take Jim off ignore.


... want to take that back, Jim?

Tordels, it's not the path, it's how we walk it. We can take the path the lunatic 0.1% tell us to take and walk it as they instruct or we can find the better ways ourselves. I'm all for ignoring them when they're wrong and finding the better ways. We don't need these idiots to tell us what's good or bad for us, and that doesn't just apply to the people in this country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 March, 2017, 12:01:25 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 11:40:39 PM
We can take the path the lunatic 0.1% tell us to take and walk it as they instruct or we can find the better ways ourselves. I'm all for ignoring them when they're wrong and finding the better ways. We don't need these idiots to tell us what's good or bad for us, and that doesn't just apply to the people in this country.

Are you still talking about brexit? That path was chosen by a grat deal more than 0.1%, lunatic or otherwise. How that path is navigated however...I'll grant you that.

And when you say this country, you really mean England don't you? The prime minister has shown little regard for Northern Ireland. She didn't bother to meet with our government before triggering Article 50.

Fair enough, we don't have a government at the minute, and ye want to know something Shark? Not having a government isn't a good thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 12:19:06 AM
The 0.1% put the choice before us, this or that, one thing or the other. No shades, no nuance, no other options. In or out. That's not a choice, it's a recipe for disaster, a formula for division. And it worked beautifully - it's kept us divided and at one another's throats, too busy accusing each other and arguing to even think about better, freer, more productive options. Freedom of choice is not freedom.

And once again, don't confuse organisation with government. Not having organisation is bad, not having a government - well, that's not so bad, especially when it's made up of the most egregious elements of society. You want to give your government the power to coerce, order, punish and regulate? Fine - give it those powers over artificial "people," corporations and the like, not individual human beings. So long as a human being is causing loss, harm or damage to nobody then what the f*ck right does anyone, or any thing, have to interfere? What right does anyone have, for example, to cause Indigo Prime and his family such misery? If it was his neighbours treating him in this way, or his family, or some random bunch of strangers, we'd all be up in arms but, because it's something called "government," we all shrug and say it's wrong but okay. And that's true of every stupid, callous or greedy thing any government does - it's wrong but okay. Well, it can't be both, can it? Governments need only the same rights and powers as the rest of us. Period.

So yeah, you want a government to organise nationwide projects and services? Well that's all fine and dandy and even I'll sign on for that - but the instant it forces one person to act against their own will or conscience, I'm out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 30 March, 2017, 12:25:21 AM
Sorry I got enough, you said many times about governments that and it for last few years, cos if I recall cos you kicked out of the place and homeless? What is to solve all the shit or you want the world to burning?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 12:56:40 AM
Yeah, I stood up and got kicked down. I don't think that's what governments are for, to kick down the people they claim to serve, do you? And no, I don't want to see the world burn, and I don't think you do either. You want to make a world burn, you allow governments to bomb whichever countries they please for whatever excuses they present and help them by paying for the bombs.

By standing up I lost my home, my family, my community, my reputation and my possessions - but I kept my self-respect and tamed my black dog (for the most part). Maybe I'm a bad person for doing so, that's not for me to decide, but I don't think so. But I'm not bowing to these f*ckers any more - I'll die first. I don't take any benefits or hand-outs from them, because that all comes from taxes and taxation is theft. I don't want to live off money stolen off you for me by state thugs and say, with a shrug, "well, that's wrong but it's okay." I'll beg first, which at least gives the person I'm begging from the option to refuse or accept as they decide for themselves. As long as I'm capable of working, that's what I'll do to earn my food and shelter. When I'm too old to work, I'll beg or bin-dive, but I absolutely will not turn to those criminals for help.

Call me mad if you want. Mad, loopy, insane, stupid, daft. Maybe I am but, at least, I don't bow to a bunch of people I disagree with and despise just because they might throw me a few crumbs when the going gets tough - crumbs stolen from your plate. Nor am I trying to change the world, I have neither the power nor the right to even try, the only world I have the right or power to change is my own - and that's all I want or need. All those respectable politicians and civil servants and police and council workers, all those fat cats on corporate welfare and subsidies and tariffs are living off money stolen from you, whether you like it or not, but me? I'm not costing you a penny - and I'm entertaining to boot! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 March, 2017, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
Your country voted for a pack of lies promoted by the vilest self-serving predatory fucks playing to your LCD xenophobia and ignorant notions of a fake history of vanished glory where in actual fact you murdered, robbed and raped your way around the world. The rest of the world knows it and despairs.

Well, quite.  And even if you do think it was a jolly splendid adventure for an empire to establish itself by violently helping itself to every bit of land it could find and ruthlessly exploiting the natives, there is no empire any more.  The way things are going, you'll be lucky to have a UK in a few years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 March, 2017, 08:21:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 March, 2017, 11:40:39 PM

So, only pretending to ignore me, then. Thought so.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 March, 2017, 05:35:07 PM
Good talk, I enjoyed that. How she felt when she left her church (Westboro) particularly resonated with how I felt when I left mine (Statism). Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed. In fact, she's convinced me to take Jim off ignore.


... want to take that back, Jim?

[/quote]

Of course. I don't religiously read everything you post, so I missed that. My apologies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 10:18:30 AM
Accepted, thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 March, 2017, 12:37:22 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 March, 2017, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:43:10 PM
Your country voted for a pack of lies promoted by the vilest self-serving predatory fucks playing to your LCD xenophobia and ignorant notions of a fake history of vanished glory where in actual fact you murdered, robbed and raped your way around the world. The rest of the world knows it and despairs.

Well, quite.  And even if you do think it was a jolly splendid adventure for an empire to establish itself by violently helping itself to every bit of land it could find and ruthlessly exploiting the natives, there is no empire any more.  The way things are going, you'll be lucky to have a UK in a few years.

To temper my intemperate rant just a bit, what bothers me most about the misguided nostalgia and small-mindedness that fuels Brexit is that Britain IS great: in humour, literature and theatre, TV and radio, relaxed multiculturalism, genuine heritage, music and comics, communal efforts, easy secularism and open friendliness it has few if any peers: and the heroic efforts of its people in WWII and afterwards will always be a source of awe.

Why segments of the population seem to favour, instead of these real and current achievements, an imagined past where Britannia ruled the waves, and women, wops and darkies knew their place I simply don't understand.  You've been sold a crock of shit by people who alone stand to profit from your misery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 March, 2017, 12:58:14 PM
Indeed Tordels. The things that made me proud about Britain are being crushed by those who want to return Britain to the 40s.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 01:03:18 PM
As a country I don't think we're all that special. We've had fine hours and dark nights just like any other. The majority of our people are decent enough with a few bad apples - just like everywhere else on the planet. I love this country, and the people in it, because it's where and with whom I was born and raised. People the world over feel the same way about their countries too. I don't love it blindly, though, there are bits I despise and wish would change. I can't change those bits, though - all I can do is refuse to go along with them.

Whether we're in or out or part-time members of the EU makes no difference to me, I'll still love my country and the people in it, still respect the French for feeling the same way about France and the Belgians for feeling the same way about Belgium. To me, it's the whole idea that countries can't get along and trade without some bureaucratic monstrosity sticking its oar in and demanding its cut that's the biggest crock of shit of all. I don't need the EU, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me that the average German is a perfectly decent human being.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 March, 2017, 01:15:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:34:43 PM
But only the qualified type of immigrant, you know, so that Brits can do all the menial zero hour shit while young brown foreign people have all the good jobs.


Qualified immigrants, like the 40 to 60% of European doctors (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/23/thousands-eea-doctors-may-leave-uk-after-brexit-survey-bma) who are considering leaving the UK due to increases in racism and general feelings of being less welcome...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 March, 2017, 01:20:23 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 29 March, 2017, 05:57:41 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 29 March, 2017, 05:51:52 PM
Wish I never reading Daily Mail Online, too many nasty articles.
The scourge of the internet. Best left alne.


I use Tea and Kittens (http://www.tomroyal.com/teaandkittens/) for Chrome and Firefox to avoid unwittingly handing money to the Daily Hate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 March, 2017, 01:23:57 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 March, 2017, 01:15:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 March, 2017, 10:34:43 PM
But only the qualified type of immigrant, you know, so that Brits can do all the menial zero hour shit while young brown foreign people have all the good jobs.


Qualified immigrants, like the 40 to 60% of European doctors (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/23/thousands-eea-doctors-may-leave-uk-after-brexit-survey-bma) who are considering leaving the UK due to increases in racism and general feelings of being less welcome...

"I-me-grants commin' over 'ere, stealing OUR jobs!"

Yes Tina Wedgewoth with one BTEC in PE, Dr. Fazila Talati with 2 PhD's is taking YOUR job as a neurosurgeon!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 March, 2017, 01:24:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 12:19:06 AM
And once again, don't confuse organisation with government. Not having organisation is bad, not having a government - well, that's not so bad, especially when it's made up of the most egregious elements of society.


I'm reminded of Belgium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%9311_Belgian_government_formation) (I suspect that would have been a topic of conversation on this thread at the time).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 March, 2017, 01:35:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 01:03:18 PM
Whether we're in or out or part-time members of the EU makes no difference to me,

Other than in your pocket, for a start. I refer, again, to Britain's catastrophic balance of trade deficit, and the sliding value of the pound.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 March, 2017, 01:55:41 PM
The EU didn't stop Greece's economy from going breasts aloft, Jim, and arguably made things worse. Portugal, Italy, Spain, all in the EU, all struggling like mad.

Here's one way I'd think more about being a supporter of the EU - give it control of money creation and the money supply so it could use sovereigncy to pay for itself and the European infrastructure, thereby cutting taxes and tariffs levied against corporations and businesses to a minimum and virtually eliminating all personal taxes. But no - the EU supports the profitability of monetary creation and control to be in private hands.

The EU is a damn fine thing in principle but it is not what it pretends to be - just like most of the world's "governments" and other religions it's a tool for social control, not a mechanism for social organisation.

So, in or out of the EU in its present form makes no difference to me. Prices are going to go up anyway through one mechanism or another - it's the unavoidable side-effect of privately created and controlled money - and the EU's going to punish the UK for leaving by ratcheting up prices through tariffs and fees, which is just common or garden government bullying and nothing more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 March, 2017, 01:58:18 PM
There's a world of difference between inflation-based rises and British prices shooting up significantly because our currency ends up worth far less/tariffs mess up imports.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 March, 2017, 02:01:36 PM
Off of twitter.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8KmJrNUQAQD3tp.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 March, 2017, 03:21:11 PM
That autograph is going to cost you all a lot more than a tenner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 March, 2017, 05:03:56 PM
Having moved overseas twice, I shudder to think how much it'd cost to move anywhere again. And that's even if we sold all our stuff (including all my 2000 ADs).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 30 March, 2017, 05:50:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 March, 2017, 03:21:11 PM
That autograph is going to cost you all a lot more than a tenner.

€5

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 March, 2017, 08:36:34 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 30 March, 2017, 05:50:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 March, 2017, 03:21:11 PM
That autograph is going to cost you all a lot more than a tenner.

€5

Heh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 April, 2017, 04:48:46 AM
This Brexit thing has caused me a massive identity crisis. Before, I always considered myself neither British nor Irish. Although most of my family lived south of the border (actually North since they were in Donegal) I was happy to be Norn Irish, and a pragmatic unionist. Yet, since last July, I've actually been thinking about a United Ireland. In my gut, I suppose I've always wanted it, but I didn't let the fire in my belly melt the ice in my head.

The notion of a hard border is horrible. I have many relatives whom I didn't get to know as a kid. The hard border tripled, even quadrupled travel times from Derry to Donegal.

The problem is, the biggest advocates for UI, Sinn Fein, have absolutely no plan for it. If they do they've kept it far to close to their chests. It's like when UKIP campaigned for Brexit, yet had absolutely no plan. Oh, there's Eire Nua, but that's an idea from the 70s. A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then, and there's a lot of blood in that water.

TLDR: United Ireland. Discuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 April, 2017, 07:50:15 AM
Not sure if it is in the same vein but I suppose thinking about the reunification of Germany in the eighties and nineties.  The challenges were significant with different economic systems, political systems etc.  Quite a few Germans were upset at the time at the cost and impact (I was stationed in Germany in the early nineties and took the time and trouble to get to know some of the locals) on them.  Then you look at Germany now.

I'm not saying the situation is identical although I'm sure there are some who would point to similarities between the English occupation and the communist government in terms of illegal and immoral actions.  The legacy of the security services is likely to be contentious, as is that of the paramilitaries.  That said, maybe now will give the impetus to politicians to be bold and visionary.  In stark contrast to British politicians who have a tendency toward insularity and regression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 02 April, 2017, 06:10:08 PM
*sigh*

http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-vows-to-get-best-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar-10822205 (http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-vows-to-get-best-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar-10822205)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 02 April, 2017, 06:37:54 PM
This feels like something the Telegraph alone are whipping up

(http://www.ecohustler.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/The-Day-Today-WAR-.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 April, 2017, 08:26:03 PM
You no longer wonder why Chris Morris doesn't do much these days. As for the Spain thing, that'd be 'interesting' from a NATO standpoint, to say the least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 April, 2017, 10:14:03 PM
If they're considering sending a task force against those who would undermine UK control of Gibraltar, I'm all for it. I have a list of names.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 April, 2017, 10:24:48 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 02 April, 2017, 04:48:46 AMThe problem is, the biggest advocates for UI, Sinn Fein, have absolutely no plan for it.


And the elected government of the Republic, even less.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 03 April, 2017, 11:07:50 AM
I did a fair bit of work with various political figures over the past 15 years and even Jim Wells firebrand DUP politician admitted that high level Republic governmental figures had told him that they had no real interest in securing Irish political union (In terms of governmental priorities it ranked about 20th in the list apparently).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 April, 2017, 12:43:02 PM
Well the mortal enemy of all other Irish political parties is SF, not because of ideology nor history, but because they are energetic and active at a local level in a way that  moribund Seat-warmers everywhere dread, so the idea of increasing their overall share of the vote at the same time as having to deal with the political savagery of hard-line Unionists and a minimum of 700K unwilling new citizens, plus 200K public sector positions to fund... Sure it'd cut into your drinking time at the Galway Races/Cheltenham something fierce.

Plus no-one down here really gives a feck, and until they give 'the diaspora' a vote no-one ever will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 03 April, 2017, 05:27:26 PM
Michael Howard is speaking about war with Spain. This is going well. FFS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 April, 2017, 06:05:02 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 03 April, 2017, 05:27:26 PM
Michael Howard is speaking about war with Spain. This is going well. FFS.

Theresa May has ruled it out already, but still; it hasn't exactly been a graceful and dignified process so far.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 03 April, 2017, 06:08:32 PM
Not when you've got Kelvin Mackenzie using the term 'Donkey rogerers' in a column for the Sun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 April, 2017, 06:11:33 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 03 April, 2017, 05:27:26 PM
Michael Howard is speaking about war with Spain. This is going well. FFS.

And people wonder why the jocks want nothing to do this this...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 04 April, 2017, 01:13:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 April, 2017, 12:43:02 PM
Well the mortal enemy of all other Irish political parties is SF, not because of ideology nor history, but because they are energetic and active at a local level in a way that  moribund Seat-warmers everywhere dread, so the idea of increasing their overall share of the vote at the same time as having to deal with the political savagery of hard-line Unionists and a minimum of 700K unwilling new citizens, plus 200K public sector positions to fund... Sure it'd cut into your drinking time at the Galway Races/Cheltenham something fierce.

Plus no-one down here really gives a feck, and until they give 'the diaspora' a vote no-one ever will.

Precisely and yet we still get the virulent political merry go round of orange and green repeated over and over again.

Personally I am warming to the idea of some form of political union between a united Ireland and Scotland followed swiftly by an invasion of the English.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2017, 01:39:21 PM
It's not an invasion when you're saving them from their own leaders, it's a peacekeeping mission.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 04 April, 2017, 01:43:19 PM
So no-one got fucking clues on what to do with Brexit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 April, 2017, 01:59:02 PM
Soverwankty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2017, 02:24:54 PM
I for one welcome our new Celtic overlords.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 April, 2017, 02:39:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2017, 02:24:54 PM
I for one welcome our new Celtic overlords.

Suck on my pasty Irish titties, serf.

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/bog-bodies-are-kings-sacrificed-by-celts-says-expert-129289548-237410131 (http://www.irishcentral.com/news/bog-bodies-are-kings-sacrificed-by-celts-says-expert-129289548-237410131)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 April, 2017, 02:47:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2017, 01:39:21 PM
It's not an invasion when you're saving them from their own leaders, it's a peacekeeping mission.

If you think I'm confronting lorry-driver turned resistance leader 'Zardoz' Burdis and his shootah at Hadrian's Wall...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 04 April, 2017, 03:11:47 PM
He's filling in the gaps with Dredd tat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 April, 2017, 03:59:15 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ
link=topic=28209.msg951968#msg951968
date=1491313167
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
link=topic=28209.msg951962#msg951962
date=1491312294
I for one welcome our new Celtic overlords.
Suck on my pasty Irish titties, serf.
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/bog-bodies-
are-kings-sacrificed-by-celts-says-
expert-129289548-237410131

Brings a whole new dimension to the phrase "going tits up"!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 April, 2017, 04:53:34 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 04 April, 2017, 03:11:47 PM
He's filling in the gaps with Dredd tat.
"Oi knew dis Dredd soap would never shift!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 04 April, 2017, 06:40:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 04 April, 2017, 04:53:34 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 04 April, 2017, 03:11:47 PM
He's filling in the gaps with Dredd tat.
"Oi knew dis Dredd soap would never shift!"

He's an Ork from Warhammer 40K?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 April, 2017, 06:45:16 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 04 April, 2017, 06:40:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 04 April, 2017, 04:53:34 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 04 April, 2017, 03:11:47 PM
He's filling in the gaps with Dredd tat.
"Oi knew dis Dredd soap would never shift!"

He's an Ork from Warhammer 40K?
CF used to collect old junk.

'Puts on coat and legs it'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 April, 2017, 06:56:51 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 04 April, 2017, 01:43:19 PM
So no-one got fucking clues on what to do with Brexit?

That is very much the general gist of it.  All that remains now is to figure out where we are on a scale of '1 to screwed'.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 April, 2017, 10:32:13 PM
Seeing the twisted fictional world of The Sun and The Daily Mail breaking through into actual reality sets a pretty terrifying precedent for a 2000AD fan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 04 April, 2017, 10:54:03 PM
Never see so many hate in Daily Mail Online :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 April, 2017, 10:58:33 PM
Haven't really looked at The Scum for a few years, and I may be wrong here, but the frothing homophobic rants of the likes of Gary Bushell and Richard Littlejohn (the latter possessing a fevered imagination that never ever seemed to cease tormenting him with frightening gays) seem to have thankfully had their day.

Sadly, though, they now have a new scapegoat - anyone who isn't British.  Or at least the right kind of British; given the 'Muslim community' (so-called because they all live together, and think exactly the same thoughts, and have exactly the same opinions) are so often called upon to apologise as a whole for the actions of one or two nutjobs.

By the way, sorry about all those 1970s IRA nail-bombings - I'm sure the rest of the Irish person community will be along to apologise soon too.  Hell, sorry about the Oklahoma bombing too; we in the white Westerner community should all shoulder the blame for that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 April, 2017, 11:25:19 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 April, 2017, 10:58:33 PM
By the way, sorry about all those 1970s IRA nail-bombings - I'm sure the rest of the Irish person community will be along to apologise soon too.  Hell, sorry about the Oklahoma bombing too; we in the white Westerner community should all shoulder the blame for that one.

Yet when 'we' unreservedly condemn Mrs. Brown's Boys 'we're' acting on individual taste and personal begrudgery...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 05 April, 2017, 01:13:44 AM
Maybe us Westerners should question what repeaters from the mass media are selling us a bit more?

Those White Helmet superheroes don't even need protective gloves when handling supposed sarin attack victims.

False flag?

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/04/04/syria-another-chemical-weapon-false-flag-on-the-eve-of-peace-talks-in-brussels/

https://twitter.com/VanessaBeeley
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 April, 2017, 08:55:15 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 April, 2017, 11:25:19 PM
Yet when 'we' unreservedly condemn Mrs. Brown's Boys 'we're' acting on individual taste and personal begrudgery...

Now there's an act of international terrorism if ever there was one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 April, 2017, 02:03:05 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 05 April, 2017, 01:13:44 AM
Maybe us Westerners should question what repeaters from the mass media are selling us a bit more?

Those White Helmet superheroes don't even need protective gloves when handling supposed sarin attack victims.

False flag?

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/04/04/syria-another-chemical-weapon-false-flag-on-the-eve-of-peace-talks-in-brussels/

https://twitter.com/VanessaBeeley

It wasn't too long ago, it feels like just a couple of years, that questioning the media and using terms like "false flag" caused one to be labelled a tinfoil hatted conspiracy theorist. These days it all seems normal, like "oh, we really knew it all along."

The matrix of control becomes more apparent to more people every day and the New Enlightenment is gathering momentum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 April, 2017, 02:05:51 PM
Guy Verhofstadt on Brexit (https://twitter.com/GuyVerhofstadt/status/849531889446789120), offering more class and hope than the entire Conservative Party. Meanwhile, Farage is doing his level best to destroy any chance of a half-decent deal by branding the EU "the mafia", before he inevitably escapes the smoking crater of England for new digs in the USA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 April, 2017, 02:10:48 PM
The White Helmet business is drokking with my head.  Honestly can't pick a way through the crap spewed by all camps.

But I'd still contend that accusations of False Flag actions in the Syrian "civil" war seem like they should be accorded a higher probability than the US crashing planeloads of civilians into the financial district of its biggest city live on TV  after rigging the place with demolition charges.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 April, 2017, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 05 April, 2017, 01:13:44 AM
Maybe us Westerners should question what repeaters from the mass media are selling us a bit more?

Those White Helmet superheroes don't even need protective gloves when handling supposed sarin attack victims.

False flag?

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/04/04/syria-another-chemical-weapon-false-flag-on-the-eve-of-peace-talks-in-brussels/

https://twitter.com/VanessaBeeley
Maybe they just didn't have the appropriate gear with them on the day?

First thing I did is checked the source - according to fakenewschecker.com "21st Century Wire publishes information that cannot be validated and that is anti scientific fact. The information provided should be regarded as speculative opinion or propaganda and cannot be substantiated by fact or evidence. It is among the most untrustworthy sources in the media."

They seem to be a pro-Trump, anti climate-change outlet, and they're rather ken on 9/11 conspiracies. Therefore I'll need a hell of a lot more than "they're not wearing gloves" to believe that this wasn't a gas attack
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 April, 2017, 05:46:24 PM
Well, one shitbag is out of the way at least.  Trump is still there and still awful, of course. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39508351 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39508351)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 April, 2017, 05:52:16 PM
He's still chief strategist, until Trump throws him under the bus because of Russia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 April, 2017, 07:32:33 PM
Judging by Rex Tillerson's comments on North Korea, we are all in for squeaky bum time. Unpredictable is an understatement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 April, 2017, 07:38:49 PM
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/04/04/politics/tillerson-north-korea-statement/index.html

Forgot to add the article!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 April, 2017, 08:16:21 PM
Quote from: Rately on 05 April, 2017, 07:32:33 PM
Judging by Rex Tillerson's comments on North Korea, we are all in for squeaky bum time. Unpredictable is an understatement.

Well Trump does need a good war ASAP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 April, 2017, 09:02:43 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/04/Robert_L_Booth_Illustration.jpg/200px-Robert_L_Booth_Illustration.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 April, 2017, 09:37:30 PM
The resemblance is rather unsettling.

(http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/wp-content/prog1518.jpg)

(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2015-09-29-1443550569-5683781-trumppucker.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 April, 2017, 10:21:06 PM
Post it at other thread a year ago...

(http://i.imgur.com/ajX5UAD.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 April, 2017, 10:42:53 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 April, 2017, 10:21:06 PM
Post it at other thread a year ago...

(http://i.imgur.com/ajX5UAD.jpg)

Scary.

As Tordelback says, nothing like a good old War to distract from issues at home.

I see he has finally come out to condemn Syria, though I've a feeling he doesn't need Cobgress or UN approval to make Syria an even more desperate case, he'll have to bend Putin's ear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 05 April, 2017, 10:43:51 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 05 April, 2017, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 05 April, 2017, 01:13:44 AM
False flag?

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/04/04/syria-another-chemical-weapon-false-flag-on-the-eve-of-peace-talks-in-brussels/

https://twitter.com/VanessaBeeley
Maybe they just didn't have the appropriate gear with them on the day?

First thing I did is checked the source - according to fakenewschecker.com "21st Century Wire publishes information that cannot be validated and that is anti scientific fact. The information provided should be regarded as speculative opinion or propaganda and cannot be substantiated by fact or evidence. It is among the most untrustworthy sources in the media."

They seem to be a pro-Trump, anti climate-change outlet, and they're rather ken on 9/11 conspiracies. Therefore I'll need a hell of a lot more than "they're not wearing gloves" to believe that this wasn't a gas attack
I've only read articles published on 21st Century Wire about Syria.

Arguments by journalists such as Vanessa Beeley (one of the very few journalists who have actually been on the ground in Syria) seem more convincing to me than much of what I have read in the MSM. Just how many reports from Syria and reactions from Western politicians can be based on information from one guy based in Coventry? Does that really stand up to scrutiny?

Why is the alleged gas attack reported as being by either Russia or Syria? Are there really no other possibilities? Why don't reports explore or even mention other possibilities?

Now with Trump seemingly starting to bang the war drum things could get even worse – as if things weren't Hellish enough in Syria.

I can't help feeling we are being steered into supporting another case of regime change.

Iraq and WMDs, the dodgy dossier, 'verified' stories about Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators etc. Such stories give me more than enough reason to be suspicious.

Quote from: TordelBack on 05 April, 2017, 02:10:48 PM
But I'd still contend that accusations of False Flag actions in the Syrian "civil" war seem like they should be accorded a higher probability than the US crashing planeloads of civilians into the financial district of its biggest city live on TV  after rigging the place with demolition charges.
I completely agree. 'Civil war' indeed. I do believe a major factor in this highly complex tangle of interests of various powers is an attempt to end Russia's presence in the region.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 April, 2017, 08:57:52 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 April, 2017, 10:21:06 PM
Post it at other thread a year ago...

(http://i.imgur.com/ajX5UAD.jpg)

Ah, so you did. Jesus, I really don't want any thermonuclear thrill-power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2017, 03:18:24 PM
British liberals are now arguing against free school meals.
Next: "why should we have to pay for libraries?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 April, 2017, 03:19:34 PM
I've seen people arguing against them not being means-tested, but not the general concept.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 06 April, 2017, 03:21:29 PM
tight bastards
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 06 April, 2017, 03:39:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 April, 2017, 03:19:34 PM
I've seen people arguing against them not being means-tested, but not the general concept.

It amounts to the same thing. Means testing is gross and stigmatising, these spreadsheet obsessed dorks do it compulsively cos they want a permanent supplicant class.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 April, 2017, 08:24:11 PM
Another issue with means-testing is the manner in which it doesn't make sense unless done properly. You see that with child benefits. The law is that if any parent makes over £50k, they need to start paying a portion of child benefits back, which increases with how much they make. No allowance is made for the number of parents, though. So you end up in the ludicrous situation where a family with one worker on £55k is getting less child benefit than two parents each making £50k. (You have to wonder how much the state saves at all with the child benefit thing, too.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 April, 2017, 11:56:00 PM
This is anecdotal and I haven't any links or anything to back it up, but... in your heart, don't you just know that means testing for oik dinners will cost more money than it saves?  Be honest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 April, 2017, 08:18:17 AM
means testing is bad enough, this new idea of rape-testing for tax credits is just ludicrous - amongst the many things wrong with it, the law is coming into effect with no training, organisation or clear idea of how it's going to be assessed, and also it may inadvertently put rape victims and civil servants in NI at risk of prosecution

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/16/tax-credit-clause-becomes-law-without-parliament-vote (https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/16/tax-credit-clause-becomes-law-without-parliament-vote)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/06/tax-credit-rule-puts-northern-irish-women-in-legal-peril-charities-say (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/06/tax-credit-rule-puts-northern-irish-women-in-legal-peril-charities-say)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 April, 2017, 08:32:45 AM
Quote from: Rately on 05 April, 2017, 10:42:53 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 April, 2017, 10:21:06 PM
Post it at other thread a year ago...

(http://i.imgur.com/ajX5UAD.jpg)

Scary.

As Tordelback says, nothing like a good old War to distract from issues at home.


And now we see the real thing ....
How strong are your sphincter muscles? (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/trump-syria-missiles-assad-chemical-weapons)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 April, 2017, 09:11:04 AM
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/11-24-2015/qQV4Nd.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 April, 2017, 09:13:36 AM
"We are going to be so accurate. We have the best rockets. Beautiful. So accurate."

Oh, look over there...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 07 April, 2017, 09:18:00 AM
God was mentioned a lot in his address last night.......
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 April, 2017, 09:27:11 AM
And like clockwork, supposedly wavering Republicans now say everyone should rally around the President. Perhaps that'll distract from them rewriting the rules to install a relative extremist justice, on the basis of those nasty Democrats planning to block him, despite the Republicans recently not even considering the appointment Obama was constitutionally entitled to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 April, 2017, 10:04:40 AM
Quote from: Spikes on 07 April, 2017, 09:18:00 AM
God was mentioned a lot in his address last night.......

"We have the best God. Wonderful guy, big supporter of mine. Huge Support. Huge."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 07 April, 2017, 10:08:01 AM
The response of our own bombfucking pencil-dicked centrist shitlibs has been a joy (cf Tom Watson, disgusting walking tuber Ian Dunt, almost certainly the entire New Statesman crew). A day ago Trump was a Russian agent, bomb some brown people and all is forgiven.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 07 April, 2017, 10:15:53 AM
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/roaming-charges-eu-data-europe-free-2017-a7557741.html%3Famp (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/roaming-charges-eu-data-europe-free-2017-a7557741.html%3Famp)

This June 23rd, why not celebrate We've Got Our Country Back Day by going abroad and using your no roaming charges cellphone to have a good old moan about how the EU never does anything for ordinary people?

Then watch your mobile bill soar upwards in two years time, when  EU price regulations no longer apply!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 April, 2017, 10:16:51 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 07 April, 2017, 10:08:01 AM
The response of our own bombfucking pencil-dicked centrist shitlibs has been a joy (cf Tom Watson, disgusting walking tuber Ian Dunt, almost certainly the entire New Statesman crew). A day ago Trump was a Russian agent, bomb some brown people and all is forgiven.

Disgusting. Oh, the poor children, whatever shall we do? Bombs away.

The coming weeks will be interesting as we see whether or not Trump is as compromised by Russia as we have been led to believe. If that Russian dossier bears out, and the assorted rumours surrounding it, we might soon be seeing something truly horrifying - A Trump sex tape!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 April, 2017, 10:27:35 AM
You couldn't make this crap up, except that it has been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 April, 2017, 10:31:07 AM
People on the ground in Syria asking for aid, fo refuge and an end to the viloence.

This is what they get.

I'm so cynical i well believe Trump could care less, and is using it to forward his agenda and quiet the critics and controversies at home. The man really is a despicable piece of scum. The fact that he has now tramped all over International Law, didn't make a case to the senate... such dangerous, dangerous times.

Those British politicians who support, or worse, remain silent on the issue should never be forgotten or fogiven.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 April, 2017, 11:31:58 AM
One of the issues that even advocates have been noting is precisely why this intervention occurred, and how worrying that might be. It appears Trump's mind was changed by... watching telly. So he sees some Syrian child victims on Fox and then says bombs away. Although that's probably something of a smokescreen, unless he has some serious cognitive dissonance (after all, blocking entry to the US for the exact same people).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 April, 2017, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 07 April, 2017, 10:15:53 AMThen watch your mobile bill soar upwards in two years time, when  EU price regulations no longer apply!
As I recall, this was a major problem for people on the coast, because phones would flick between networks without them realising. The EU regulations basically fix this. So they have two years of relative calm before the shit hits the fan again. A pity they're not all leave voters, really.

Still, at least the way things are going most Brits won't have to worry about roaming charges, given that most of us won't be able to afford to fly when the UK's participation in open skies ends. Sad to see such vitriol hurled at Ryanair on making perfectly reasonable points regarding aviation and forward planning. Naturally, this was brushed aside, by various parties, as "Ryanair is rubbish anyway" (ignoring the problem affecting all carriers), "Irish bloke should piss off" (ah, more lovely xenophobia), "they want our tourism money" (probably true, but not really relevant, given how open skies works), and the usual Brexit head-in-the-sand of "it won't happen anyway", as backed by David Davis practically simultaneously saying no work's been done on this, but the UK will get the "best possible solution" regarding aviation.

Actually, the government's saying that a lot recently regarding everything from the economy to Gibraltar. You know what would give us the best possible solution? STAYING IN THE EU. Gah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 April, 2017, 09:08:54 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 April, 2017, 11:36:09 AMYou know what would give us the best possible solution? STAYING IN THE EU. Gah.

I'm trying to cut way down on my Brexit griping, since it brings out the ever-present churl in me, but THIS^^^ hacks me off more than any one aspect of current government cant (on the subject). It's as if Brexit is some terrible natural disaster, or rather more apposite, a Nazi takeover of Europe, and the Great British People must stiffen their lips, dig for victory, keep calm and carry on: this is no time for the politics of appeasement, fight Godzilla on the beaches and your way of life will endure.  But it isn't some implcacble external horror that must be embraced and accepted in order to overcome, is it?

No, it's the result of a stupid failed gamble on Tory internal party politics, and the bizarre decision to have to have at least one Kipper on Any Questions/ Question Time / Newsnight FOREVER. Just STOP HITTING YOURSELF.

See? Insta-churl.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2017, 11:07:18 PM
So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 08 April, 2017, 01:01:28 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2017, 11:07:18 PM
So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.

So certain people have to work for society but you don't?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 April, 2017, 07:19:09 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 April, 2017, 11:07:18 PM
So now it's illegal to take your own children out of school in term-time because it's inconvenient for schools? Get the f*ck.

Note to teachers: You work for society, not the other way around.

Sharky.  Firstly, absolutely we do.  I don't know a single one of my colleagues that thinks any other way.  I think the problem is that do not always agree on what it is that we are supposed to be doing.  Or more to the point, society is not sure what we should be doing.  I am at one at the same time a Maths teacher, a social worker, a counsellor, a life coach, an entertainer, a results generator, a child minder and so on.  This is the perspective that society has on my role.

Secondly, it is not schools / teachers that have made this decision, it is society / government.  Up until a few years ago schools would apply common sense and the 'up to 10 days in term time' rule.  This was generally interpreted as a right but it allowed the flexibility that families needed to manage family holidays in a way that allowed for the constraints of work demands / financial resources.  Although a handful in any school abused this, it was the exception rather than the rule.

On the point of the impact that family holidays in term time have on teachers lives, to be honest it is negligible.  It might be a little awkward reintegrating a child that has returned in the middle of teaching a sequence of lessons that needs to be brought up to sped but it usually only lasts a lesson or two.  It is also the same as if a child is ill. There is also the issue of a child having difficulty mid way through a set of lessons with the work that needs to be addressed.   None of this is insurmountable and is generally managed without any major or lasting problems.

What appears to have been conflated is the issue of the link between attendance and attainment (as measured by a very narrow set of criteria) and the issue of term time holidays.  There is data to show a correlation between attendance and attainment but little analysis of the types of absence and attainment.  The data is being used in a very crude way to drive a policy that is affecting a disproportionate number of people that it wasn't designed to affect.  There is a difference between a family that takes children out of school once a year at the point of least impact for a family holiday that will benefit the child's growth and a family that allows irregular absences for spurious reasons that has a massive cumulative impact over the year.  Unfortunately, to quote James T Kirk "Like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target!"

I think that it is fair to say that your views regarding our current political arrangements are well documented and personally I fully respect them, even though I don't always agree with them.  I think this is one of those cases where the decision the government has made gives ammunition to your views.  That said, it is worth remembering that state schools are an option that parents do not have to avail themselves of.  All the law says is that children need to be provided with an appropriate education.  This includes home schooling or private schooling.  Plenty of parents take advantage of this.  A lot of them because it is 'convenient' for them in terms of the time and financial resources that it frees up.  For me this is one of the times where your view on the coercive nature of political power is accurate.  A more consensual approach would have avoided this furore but then I'm not sure that British politics is in a mature enough place for that at the present point in time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 09:25:00 AM
Lovely post, TJM, thanks.

Mr Pops, who says I don't work for society? Isn't that a large part of what every job is about? The mistake I made was forgetting to take my earphones to work yesterday and getting sucked into listening to all the piffle-mongers on the Jeremy Vine show. I should have written, "Note to government, teachers work for society..." Then again, so do MPs and that authoritarian judge who made this ridiculous decision; but you wouldn't think so by the way they act. If the education system they provide can't cope with flexibility (and TJM says it largely can cope well enough) then they need to organise and fund it better, not expect the people it's supposed to service to adapt to its shortcomings. Why not, for example, take on more educators and support staff and keep the schools open all year? If we can afford nuclear missiles and all crap like that, we can afford the kind of education system suitable for a free country, surely?

But that's all by the by. The real outrage here is in fining parents for taking their children away from school during term time, as if it's on a par with being AWOL from the armed forces or escaping from prison. Do MPs get fined for taking holidays during "term time," I wonder? (I honestly don't know - but it seems only fair that they should if they believe in fines for non-attendance.) And what good does the fine do, anyway? Where does the money go? Does it go into funding catch-up lessons for the effected pupils? Or is it just used to bolster a local council's general revenue stream? Is it just another government money-making scam?  And what's the message it sends - you're not allowed to take your own children out of school during term time unless you can afford to pay for it?

I think this ruling is monstrous in what is supposed to be a free society. What's next? Fines for being off work or missing doctor's appointments?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 April, 2017, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 09:25:00 AMAnd what's the message it sends - you're not allowed to take your own children out of school during term time unless you can afford to pay for it?

I think this ruling is monstrous in what is supposed to be a free society. What's next? Fines for being off work or missing doctor's appointments?

As always I feel slightly discombulated when I find myself agreeing with the Shark.   Obviously I understand the idea of ensuring that kids get a decent education by encouraging parents to take responsibility for keeping attendance up, and I do (sort of) appreciate the problem of teachers having to re-cover work from lessons missed, but addressing all this through an agreed system of flexibility seems far more likely to produce the desired results rather than what seems to be the current British vogue for applying sanctions that only hurt the proles. 

Both of our kids used to repeatedly win an end of year prize for Best Attendance, which I once felt a surge of parental self-satisfaction over, until I realised it was because the other kids were heading off on term-time holidays that we simply couldn't afford, and not just because of the inherent cost of a trip: we were treating school as a source of free childcare (and free food), and we needed all we could get. 

Since the financial situation has improved somewhat, and in particular my long blocks of nightshift work made childcare less oppressive, we've tried to squeeze in at least a couple of cheap off-season nights every year down the country, usually to either side of a weekend, and I don't regret it one bit: some of the best memories of my life, and hopefully theirs.  I can't emphasise enough that this wouldn't have been possible during school holidays or public holidays, when prices more than treble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 10:16:13 AM
There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 April, 2017, 01:14:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 10:16:13 AM
There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock :)

That will always be Withnail for me, I'm afraid. But it's that special time of year again when i agree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 April, 2017, 01:29:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 April, 2017, 01:14:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 10:16:13 AM
There's no need to feel too bad, Tordels, I am allowed to be right occasionally. If it helps, try thinking of me as the proverbial broken clock :)

That will always be Withnail for me, I'm afraid. But it's that special time of year again when i agree with you.
I always saw Shark as more of an uncle Monty myself...

After all, "Shat on by the Tories, shovelled up by Labour" is such a Sharkism!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 April, 2017, 02:13:28 PM
Comes down to money again, too. If all parents are going to get is a 60-quid fine, like a parking ticket, those who can afford to will take the hit. (Things become more complicated if this ends up with criminal convictions. But at that point, the local authorities have jumped the shark.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 April, 2017, 03:38:20 PM
The fine is small beer compared to the increased costs of taking kids on holiday in school holidays.  Unfortunately it is very much a case of market forces at work.  I was thinking about the increase to costs for Legoland last week compared to this week.  Then I thought about it from their point of view.  In term time the visitor numbers are lower so staffing is lower so costs are lower.  All of a sudden there is a significant increase in demand and you need to massively increase your staffing levels.  That has to be paid for from somewhere.  It's the same as with off peak rail tickets.  The prices are reduced later in the day to encourage people who really don't need to to make their journeys later.

The number of parents that have been prosecuted for failing to ensure their children attend school / some form of education is miniscule.  Those that do get prosecuted have really extracted the urine.  I think that as Indigo says, the moment we go down the road of criminalising parents for the odd holiday, the authorities have seriously lost the plot.

And as I've mentioned previously Tordels, the 'inconvenience' of kids missing a few lessons for a holiday is a complete non-starter  I've lost count of the number of times I've had to go over things with some kids even when they are physically present.  Family time is waaaaaay more important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 April, 2017, 03:42:45 PM
Uncle Monty? Nooooooo!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 April, 2017, 06:09:08 PM
Sharky, you terrible ... Never mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 April, 2017, 01:09:14 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 08 April, 2017, 03:38:20 PM
The fine is small beer compared to the increased costs of taking kids on holiday in school holidays.  Unfortunately it is very much a case of market forces at work.  I was thinking about the increase to costs for Legoland last week compared to this week.  Then I thought about it from their point of view.  In term time the visitor numbers are lower so staffing is lower so costs are lower.  All of a sudden there is a significant increase in demand and you need to massively increase your staffing levels.  That has to be paid for from somewhere.  It's the same as with off peak rail tickets.  The prices are reduced later in the day to encourage people who really don't need to to make their journeys later.

I was going to say that a £60 fine would be more than swallowed up by money saved by booking off-season.

The Legoland argument doesn't make sense - they can easily pay for the extra staff by the extra money that is brought in.  Same principle as shops which bring in Christmas staff - when you make three quarters of your annual earnings through one month's sales, the cost of those staff is negligible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2017, 02:36:49 PM
Fair point, mind your it is predicated on the assumption that the earnings are generating a profit.  That's why Christmas sales are so important to retailers.  It helps to pick up the slack of quiet periods.  Granted the likes of Tesco are making significant profits through the year but then again they seem to have significant difficulty counting at the best of times these days!

What makes me laugh at the end of the day with the whole 'debate' is that there is an assumption about entitlement that could do with reflection.  This is all arguing about the cost of an optional leisure activity.  In a world where children are being killed with nerve agents, starved to death or forced from their homes by religious extremists, what is the major talking point in the UK?  Why we have to pay so much for our holidays when the kids are all out of school.  What does that say about us as a nation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2017, 03:17:23 PM
I don't see it like that. Yes, people could do more about looking at and fighting against greater injustices, but it's possible for us to concentrate on multiple things at once. I've got a lot of stick in the past for writing about accessibility in mobile devices and equality in things like children's clothing and toys. People have berated me because there are wars in the world, and people are being raped and murdered. But I can't do anything about those things to any great extent, yet can seek to push for changes in small areas that matter in people's lives.

For me, the holiday thing is indicative of larger problems in British society. The education system is reverting to a place of rote and extreme rules. Also, there's the notion that if you're wealthy enough, you can afford a holiday and to take your children to new places. If not? Tough. I'm not saying that everyone should be entitled to such things, but should we really be cracking down on families who dare to take their children out of school for a week, in order to actually be able to afford to give them a potentially unforgettable experience with their family?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2017, 06:39:46 PM
Should we?  No way in hell.  It's bonkers.  Also, a valid point on being able to worry about more things than once.  My apologies for any offence caused on that score, it's just that to read some of the headlines from the Trashzines you would think the judgement was the greatest atrocity since Stock, Aitken and Waterman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 April, 2017, 07:14:22 PM
The judgement is, in my view, an atrocity - not for its specific content but for what it represents. It says that we're all no better than slaves to the system and must subvert all aspects of our lives to it. Must do as we're told.

The modern schooling system, being based on the Prussian Method of education, is primarily (again, in my view) about training the young to be subservient and dependent. The very first lesson taught, and the only constant lesson throughout, is that permission must be sought for everything - from going to the toilet to speaking up - and that one must follow orders without question. To say "no" to a teacher is unthinkable (at least, it was in my day). With some general knowledge thrown in to make it look good, our education system is more about producing dependent citizens than self-reliant people. (The old saying went along the lines of, "making us smart enough to work the machines but not smart enough to ask why.")

The ruling in question is merely an extension of this permission-seeking, do as you're told culture. It's another quarter turn of the screw crushing us into mindless obedience by degrees.

I think, when it comes to education, it's time for the Trivium (http://www.triviumeducation.com/) to make a comeback.

Also interesting, Dorothy L. Sayers's 1947 essay, The Lost Tools of Learning. (http://www.gbt.org/text/sayers.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 April, 2017, 08:29:20 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2017, 02:36:49 PM
This is all arguing about the cost of an optional leisure activity.  In a world where children are being killed with nerve agents, starved to death or forced from their homes by religious extremists, what is the major talking point in the UK?  Why we have to pay so much for our holidays when the kids are all out of school.  What does that say about us as a nation?

That the UK is a great place at a great time, and that all people should yearn to have it so good?  That's got to be better than wishing it was the 1790s or the 1950s, which seems to be the other main talking point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 April, 2017, 11:54:47 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 April, 2017, 03:17:23 PM
I'm not saying that everyone should be entitled to such things, but should we really be cracking down on families who dare to take their children out of school for a week, in order to actually be able to afford to give them a potentially unforgettable experience with their family?

Search me - I went on three family holidays in my childhood (the furthest afield being a day trip to the continent).  I always get surprised when people I work alongside go on more holidays each year (and for longer) than I did in my entire childhood.  I don't remember if those holidays were during term time or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2017, 08:26:08 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 April, 2017, 08:29:20 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2017, 02:36:49 PM
This is all arguing about the cost of an optional leisure activity.  In a world where children are being killed with nerve agents, starved to death or forced from their homes by religious extremists, what is the major talking point in the UK?  Why we have to pay so much for our holidays when the kids are all out of school.  What does that say about us as a nation?

That the UK is a great place at a great time, and that all people should yearn to have it so good?  That's got to be better than wishing it was the 1790s or the 1950s, which seems to be the other main talking point.
Mainly from straight white dudes who want to go back to a time where women and darkies and dykes and queers and japs knew their place.

Sounds glorious, right? Nah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 April, 2017, 10:30:53 AM
I miss the 1950s. I was certainly less stressed then, in the dark void before existence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 April, 2017, 12:06:36 PM
Great photo, remind me of Preacher moment.

(https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/A591/production/_95558324_18234e61-8263-4413-9ada-cabc60d94ba2.jpg)

(https://gobbledygeekbtr.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/preacher48.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2017, 12:20:16 PM
HA! Brilliant! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 10 April, 2017, 12:48:12 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 10 April, 2017, 12:06:36 PM
Great photo, remind me of Preacher moment.

(https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/A591/production/_95558324_18234e61-8263-4413-9ada-cabc60d94ba2.jpg)

(https://gobbledygeekbtr.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/preacher48.png)

Absolutely love it.

As someone said earlier to me, "the future and the past!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 01:41:14 PM
Saffiyah Khan: my current hero.

Elsewhere:

Quote from: Tjm86 on 09 April, 2017, 06:39:46 PMAlso, a valid point on being able to worry about more things than once.  My apologies for any offence caused on that score, it's just that to read some of the headlines from the Trashzines you would think the judgement was the greatest atrocity since Stock, Aitken and Waterman.
No apology needed, and I agree with the way the media reports stuff. In a general sense, though, I think our worlds are better when people try to make lots of little changes as well as big ones. (I've already noticed our 3yo talking about her favourite colour being pink, for example. That's not come from us. But, hey, girls should know their place, right? At least according to a great many places selling goods for kids or directing media at them.)

As for other posts about the UK going back in time, it is odd how short memories are. Pre-EEC, we were – as various EU people have pointed out – the "sick man of Europe". Through EEC membership (and latterly EU membership), we've punched above our weight. Now we get to spend 20 years attempting to claw our way back economically to the point we're at today, while shedding human rights, environmental standards, food safety, compassion, and a raft of other great things the UK was known for.

Emphasis on was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2017, 02:40:26 PM
Being out of the EU does not mean economic chaos. It means trading under well established global rules already in place, such as those of the WTO - many of which offer better deals and lower tariffs. When trading with us, the EU will also be bound by those rules. It's not as if there's absolutely no rules outside of the EU. Similarly, UN, etc., rules in all the areas you mention, and more, will come into play as the EU rules fall away - rules which both the EU and GB adhere to already when dealing with non-EU countries.

Don't fall for the scaremongering - it's just pro-EU factions trying to frighten us, and other member states, in order to protect their gravy train.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 10 April, 2017, 02:48:51 PM
There's a peculiar brand of naivety in the anarcho-skeptic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2017, 02:53:42 PM
It always seems to hinge on "Our Terms".

Which begs the question, why would they? We hold none of the cards, we import more than we export, why should any world power wish to trade with us on OUR terms?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 03:29:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2017, 02:40:26 PMBeing out of the EU does not mean economic chaos. It means trading under well established global rules already in place, such as those of the WTO - many of which offer better deals and lower tariff
That's just not the case. Outside of the EU, we lose our direct and deep access to the market right on our doorstep, which is by far the most important one. Complexity will go up, tariffs to our biggest market will for some goods skyrocket, and non-tariff barriers are a huge concern too. Add to that losing a ton of businesses here specifically because we are in the EU and you absolutely will get economic chaos. (And that's before you consider the customs mess for physical goods. The UK's days of being a 'just in time' economy will evaporate, which means we will lose a big chunk of what's left of manufacturing.)

QuoteDon't fall for the scaremongering - it's just pro-EU factions trying to frighten us, and other member states, in order to protect their gravy train.
No. It's people saying: actually, you have a bloody good deal right now, including FTAs via the EU to markets the UK's now going to have to fight for alone, so why hurl that out of the window in the hope of getting better deals with much smaller and more distant markets (or tying yourself to US requirements in things like agriculture and healthcare)?

This isn't scaremongering. We're going to be in serious shit from an economic standpoint, and precisely no-one on the leave side is providing anything beyond "it'll all be fine – don't worry!" (As for WTO, that'll be fun when the likes of Argentina start making life difficult for the UK by making demands.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 03:32:19 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2017, 02:53:42 PMWhich begs the question, why would they? We hold none of the cards, we import more than we export, why should any world power wish to trade with us on OUR terms?!
The UK has cards and power today. We are a major power in terms of finance, for example. But we'll chuck a big chunk of that out of the window the second we leave the EU. (Euro clearing, for example, goes away.) We're big in science, but largely because we can be a leading power within the EU, and utilise its people and resources. In services, we have some great things going, but again we may lose a lot of that when the EU is suddenly a competitor rather than a partner.

And, yeah, from a manufacturing standpoint, we're screwed. Still, I'm sure everyone will be very excited about paying far more for their groceries, fuel, smartphones, clothes, and cars, so we can fashion a half-arsed FTA with a country halfway around the world that'll increase our trade by 0.3%, and that we probably already had an FTA with via the EU anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 April, 2017, 04:29:52 PM
Lets be honest, the only reason we are a financial power is because of our access to Euro clearing and our laundering of dirty money. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 05:10:23 PM
Well, there's lots of bad shit in finance. But we're also a world financial power because Sterling has until now been a reserve currency. It'll be a bloody miracle if that's still the case post-Brexit – at least for a very long while.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2017, 05:19:39 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 03:32:19 PM

...that we probably already had an FTA with via the EU anyway.


A Free Trade Agreement doesn't require a protectionist body like the EU to exist! The EU is NOT a free trade organisation - it's a protectionist body. Free Trade, by definition, is trade free of governmental interference.

Leaving the EU does not mean all trade with European countries must cease or become prohibitively expensive. What would be the point of that for either side beyond a nosectomy for spite exercise? Yes, tariffs imposed by the EU might increase but only in line with WTO regulations. Conversely, the UK will be in a position to trade with lower or no tariffs, making doing business in the UK potentially cheaper and more attractive for all our trading partners. There will be down sides, of course, but it won't be nothing but down sides as everyone seems to fear.

Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 10 April, 2017, 02:53:42 PM
It always seems to hinge on "Our Terms".

Which begs the question, why would they? We hold none of the cards, we import more than we export, why should any world power wish to trade with us on OUR terms?!

What does trade on "our terms" mean anyway? Trade on "our terms" means, to me, deals dictated by and beneficial only to us. That's not what trade's about, trade is about mutually beneficial deals. The EU might do deals based on "my way or the highway" which benefit one side more than the other and mean goods being cheaper than they should be - but are such deals morally right? Trading alone, the UK will be in a better position to yes pay a little more for certain goods - like we do for "Fair Trade" goods.

The biggest problem from Brexit will be punishment tariffs and barriers imposed by the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 05:40:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 April, 2017, 05:19:39 PMFree Trade, by definition, is trade free of governmental interference.
Yes, but back in the real world, you will not find any free trade area free of governmental interference and requirements.

QuoteLeaving the EU does not mean all trade with European countries must cease or become prohibitively expensive.
It does not mean it will cease. It does mean that if we fall back to WTO rules, we will end up with massive tariffs on exports. Without being in the customs union, we have rules of origin checks on everything. The just in time economy is gone. Anything that requires EU membership is gone. This is not a small thing.

QuoteConversely, the UK will be in a position to trade with lower or no tariffs, making doing business in the UK potentially cheaper and more attractive for all our trading partners.
And how will that benefit us, exactly? And, as noted, non-tariff barriers are also a major issue – bigger, in fact, than tariffs in many cases.

QuoteThere will be down sides, of course, but it won't be nothing but down sides as everyone seems to fear.
I don't see any upsides. Possibly being able to get some low-tariff deals with countries halfway around the world, rather than frictionless trade across everything from manufacturing to digital with the half-billion-population bloc on our doorstep? No contest whatsoever.

QuoteThat's not what trade's about, trade is about mutually beneficial deals.
The reality of trade, though, means minnows get eaten. Mutual benefit is all well and good, but when the UK goes up against any major economy, it's going to recognise that it's no longer a major world power, and will be treated accordingly.

QuoteTrading alone, the UK will be in a better position to yes pay a little more for certain goods - like we do for "Fair Trade" goods.
It won't be a little more. Current estimates on the basis of Sterling's value and other economic issues are that the average household will effectively be paying about a grand a year more on average, forever, just to maintain what we have now. And that's before our industries run into a wall of reality, and jobs start to evaporate.

QuoteThe biggest problem from Brexit will be punishment tariffs and barriers imposed by the EU.
"Punishment tariffs" makes you sound like someone like Daniel Hannan. The EU has import tariffs. They're not punishment. They're because the UK has made a decision to become a third country and on top of that has embarked on a course to separate itself from European institutions almost entirely. Perhaps this will change. But if not, none of this is the fault of the EU per se – it's down to the position the British government is taking, which could have been a much smarter compromise. Hell, even things like open skies haven't been considered yet, according to David Davis, but, hey, no-one needs to fly any more, do they? After all, we'll have that £100 million yacht instead. I'm sure all the norms will be welcome on that, right?

EDIT: On that last point, it's notable that the EU assumed the UK would go for a Norway or Norway-plus deal. More to the point, it would have accepted that, according to reports. It was ready to give the UK probably the best non-member deal around, but instead May trampled all over every last vestige of goodwill. Still, we all voted for that, so there you go. I mean, I'm sure we did. My vote form only had a single checkbox, but there must have been something on there about, as May says, changing forever the way the UK works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 April, 2017, 07:00:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 05:40:38 PM
. Still, we all voted for that, so there you go. I mean, I'm sure we did. My vote form only had a single checkbox, but there must have been something on there about, as May says, changing forever the way the UK works.

I think you nailed it on the head there.  We actually have no idea what we voted for and unfortunately the crowd now running the show are having orgasms over being able to define it to be whatever the hell they want and screw the rest of us.  This is Thatcherism on steroids, amphetamines, ecstasy, crack slab and slide.  I think the best vision for the future now is probably a combination of all of the worst dystopian nightmares we have seen over the years rolled into one and amped up to the nth degree.  I wonder if we can start a petition to try Cameron for treason against the British people?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 08:11:07 PM
It still sickens me that May wrote in that white paper: "And let us do it not for ourselves, but for those who follow. For the country's children and grandchildren too."

You're doing it only for yourselves, given that the margin in favour of Brexit among the under 40s was high, and it was colossal with those in their 20s and younger. They don't want this.

Also, it's notable why Brexiters want this change to be huge and swift, and to keep banging on about this being forever: they know that demographics alone would make it a 50/50 vote within just a few years, and shortly after that the result would be reversed. If we were still quite tied to the EU, we could potentially step back in. But if the bridges are all burnt, that process will be a lot harder.

Oddly, I'm now more optimistic in the long term about that. The EU itself continues to make clear it doesn't want the UK to leave, that it can stop the process (although perhaps not unilaterally), and could rejoin later. I suspect we will (or perhaps start with baby steps, like rejoining the EEA), but not for at least a decade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 April, 2017, 08:26:29 PM
Plus there is no way they will let us back in with the same level of influence as now, albeit dwindling.  Let's face it, British politicians have behaved like petulant school children at the EU table, particularly when the Tories have been in power.  I would suggest that if the campaign were to be rerun today with everything that has come out since last year then the vote may well go the other way already.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 08:40:21 PM
I think we'd get the same level of influence, in the sense that votes are broadly speaking driven by population size. But trust would certainly take a long time to rebuild, and we would be very unlikely to get the many opt-outs we currently enjoy (from not really having any obligation to use the Euro or join Schengen, to the large rebate).

Really, we've existed in a kind of soft Brexit for years, but people weren't aware of how good we had it. (Nor did many apparently have the slightest idea about projects funded by EU money, and the nature in which it redistributes funds – something Conservatives aren't too fussed about doing.) Almost every time the UK demanded something (including the single market), we got it. And then we threw our toys out of the pram over a rounding error on child benefit, and immigrants having the audacity to move to a prosperous country where people could get away with paying them fuck all for work natives didn't want to do anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2017, 10:55:22 AM
Trump Twitter Trolled From The Edge of Space (http://nasawatch.com/archives/2017/04/trump-twitter-t.html)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9PbVy8UAAEH_nL.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 April, 2017, 11:29:35 AM
"MOAB 's wuh-Warzone One".  And these 100 days feel like a century.

Next Prog: "For Ratwar one needs a Rat King".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 14 April, 2017, 11:31:28 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2017, 08:40:21 PM
I think we'd get the same level of influence, in the sense that votes are broadly speaking driven by population size. But trust would certainly take a long time to rebuild, and we would be very unlikely to get the many opt-outs we currently enjoy (from not really having any obligation to use the Euro or join Schengen, to the large rebate).

Really, we've existed in a kind of soft Brexit for years, but people weren't aware of how good we had it. (Nor did many apparently have the slightest idea about projects funded by EU money, and the nature in which it redistributes funds – something Conservatives aren't too fussed about doing.) Almost every time the UK demanded something (including the single market), we got it. And then we threw our toys out of the pram over a rounding error on child benefit, and immigrants having the audacity to move to a prosperous country where people could get away with paying them fuck all for work natives didn't want to do anyway.

I can't imagine a UK re-joining referendum winning if adopting the Euro was part of the deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 April, 2017, 11:34:51 AM
Apparently 6% of divorced couples remarry each other, so you never know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 01:02:15 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 14 April, 2017, 11:31:28 AMI can't imagine a UK re-joining referendum winning if adopting the Euro was part of the deal.
Likewise, unless there's wiggle room in a similar manner to Sweden.

Still, lots of fun happening with the Exiting the EU Dept Twitter account, which is akin to a parody now. One graph (https://twitter.com/DExEUgov/status/852534216025939968) speaks of the UK's "long and successful history as a trading nation", which people replying helpfully noted were twice bumped significantly around 1973 and 1992. GOSH, I WONDER WHAT HAPPENED THERE? It then bafflingly threw up this bar chart (https://twitter.com/DExEUgov/status/852539060891594752), managing to mis-spell Liechtenstein and simultaneously make out it's a major opportunity for trade (its population is under 40,000, and even from a dodgy GDP standpoint, someone pointed out it's a fifth of a Sainsbury's), while also ignoring that of the remainder, six have trade deals with the EU, two have EU association agreements, and five ARE ACTUALLY IN THE EU. Oh, and one of the countries doesn't actually exist any more.

This would be hilarious if this wasn't out country's future at stake. (Economists are now predicting anything up to a 25 per cent drop in trade post-Brexit. Sick man of Europe will be making a comeback, to say the least.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2017, 01:38:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 01:02:15 PM
speaks of the UK's "long and successful history as a trading nation ....

That would be Elizabethan piracy, the African slave trade, the South Sea Bubble, the East India company, the Opium Wars, ....

I'm assuming from the government's current policy that they are intent on pursuing the Great British tradition of Fraud, Larceny, Bribery, Exploitation and outright theft.  Perhaps that is why Farage and co are so optimistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 01:46:51 PM
To be fair, the graph they showed started at 1940. But, yeah, plenty of Leave nutters seem to think things were better in the old days while wilfully ignoring the nature of the British Empire. Still, I'm sure it'll all somehow be the EU's fault when our trade as a share of GDP nosedives from its modern-day highs back towards the 20s it was mired in pre-EEC.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2017, 02:01:21 PM
To be fair, Britain was one of the lesser affected nations in the Great Depression because it hadn't recovered as far after the First World War.  France and Germany came off worse because of their links with the States.  Considering 2008 I think that there is a lesson there.  In fact, thinking about it, how many major global financial problems have the Americans caused in the last 100 odd years? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 April, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2017, 01:38:10 PM
I'm assuming from the government's current policy that they are intent on pursuing the Great British tradition of Fraud, Larceny, Bribery, Exploitation and outright theft.

Well, quite.  I'm far from a rabid nationalist, and indeed half English by blood, but I'm glad my country stood up to the jolly old Empire and got out of there.
I certainly wouldn't like to be forced, like Scotland, into this Brexit shitstorm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 03:26:36 PM
The way things are going, I'm pretty sure half the Brexit mob still think Ireland is part of the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2017, 03:35:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 April, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
and indeed half English by blood,

My sister and I were discussing our ancestry yesterday after we realised her husband's family had lived in the Doncaster region for 500 years!  Mam from East End, Dad from West Country.  His father from America, mother from Wales, paternal Great - Great grandfather from Germany .... on Mam's side, one side of family from England (don't talk about them too much), other side from Ireland.  Bit more digging turns up Spanish and French (definitely not something to admit to) ancestry.  Me, I'm an English expat living in Wales.  Mongrel and proud of it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 04:01:21 PM
I imagine a great many people on these islands are a mix. I was looking online earlier, and it's interesting to see Irish reactions to Brits clamouring for passports. Not one of them was negative. A few, natch (and I think entirely reasonably) hoped it would lead to some people reconnecting more with their Irish past, rather than just grabbing another citizenship for convenience's sake. (From my own standpoint, it's something I planned to do 20 years ago, but for some reason never did. I probably should have done, too, since it would have been a whole lot easier when my grandparents were still here.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 April, 2017, 01:56:18 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 April, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
I certainly wouldn't like to be forced, like Scotland, into this Brexit shitstorm.

Not forgetting that a majority in Norn Iron also voted to remain - one genuine, cross community issue! On a related note, I was in the running for a job there, but the competition has been cancelled because the European funded part now won't happen. Cool, eh? I can now pick from the myriad other job opportunities here.

Oh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 April, 2017, 06:35:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2017, 04:01:21 PM
I imagine a great many people on these islands are a mix.

Everyone is a mix, everyone everywhere. With the possible (and contested) exception of a tiny handful of west African groups, everyone is descended from immigrants and mixtures of other migrants, other human species and sub-species. National or racial purity and claims to particular territories on basis of same are utter and complete bollocks. Anyone asserting anything along these lines is deluded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2017, 08:15:19 PM
I do so love the idea that we're all humongrels.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 April, 2017, 09:56:34 PM
It always seems ludicrous to me when people brag about their Viking / Celtic / Saxon / whatever heritage.  Basically it's a case of tracing one particular strand of an insanely complex web and stopping when it sounds cool.

That said, I'm immensely proud of my single celled primordial soup forebearers and put my fighting spirit down to their DNA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 16 April, 2017, 09:51:22 AM
It's far worse than simply deluded - it's utterly depressing. It's simply another mechanism whereby people desperately try to find cold hard evidence to explain away their significance and face up to their individual choices. If you can say "well something my ancestor did was good - I can be proud of that anyway" it's the ultimate "I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING I DO". It's extraordinarily intricate the shell of bullshit a human can construct around themselves to defend or explain away their poor decisions and failures.

HAPPY EASTER.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 April, 2017, 10:00:13 AM
Mmmm. All claims to 'rights' over territory amount to 'my great grandfather conned/drove off/infected/out-shagged/murdered someone else's great grandfather', and all assertions of national identity amount to 'why don't you talk exactly like what we do round here' sung to a catchy (or not) tune. 

Embrace the swelling pride in your nation's unique destiny, lest the great-grandchildren of different murderers with a bit of an accent but a better chorus sense weakness!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 10:59:13 AM
It's why "governments" wrap themselves in flags - you don't believe in it, you don't believe in your country, its people or its glorious history. It's scary how many people fall for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 11:48:27 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 10:59:13 AM
It's why "governments" wrap themselves in flags - you don't believe in it, you don't believe in your country, its people or its glorious history. It's scary how many people fall for that.
I think your confusing racial supremacy with cultural pride (not to be confused agan with nationalism) their Sharky. It's totally possible to be proud of ones culture, whilst acknowledging each's inherent privileges, witout being a nationalist or racial supremacist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 11:58:15 AM
No, that's the confusion the authorities want us to have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 12:15:20 PM
I think your giving "authorities" to much credit for racial (typically white) supremacy. If an individual believes themselves superior due to some genetic mumbo jumbo then they are resposnible for being shitty individuals, not so called "authorities".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 April, 2017, 12:22:57 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 12:15:20 PM
I think your giving "authorities" to much credit for racial (typically white) supremacy. If an individual believes themselves superior due to some genetic mumbo jumbo then they are resposnible for being shitty individuals, not so called "authorities".

Agreed, but those authorities don't half exploit the beliefs of those shitty individuals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 12:40:20 PM
Authorities enable those people, use "national pride" to justify everything from anti-littering campaigns to genocide. You are absolutely correct to say that each of us is responsible for our own actions -  "I was just following orders" is not a valid excuse.

The authorities, however, could not exist without people, as groups and individuals, believing that "I must follow orders" is a valid excuse. Nationalism, bigotry, racial supremacy of all kinds and pride in one's country, people and history are used to validate that excuse.

Nobody has the right to force another person to act against their own personal morality but governments do it all the time, using the excuse that "your country demands it," which implies that an individual's morality is unimportant and subservient.

As I've said before, the UK "government" insists that theft (taxation) is necessary for the good of the country. I'm not allowed to steal because it's against the common, natural law but it's fine for my country, in the guise of "authority," to steal from me because legislative, artificial law says so.

I disagree with that position although many do not. I would also much rather have pride in all the best parts of the Earth and humanity as a whole, rather than the parts enclosed within abstract lines on a map.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 01:03:52 PM
I never said national pride, I said cultural pride. They are not synonymous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 01:06:22 PM
Either can be subverted for political ends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 16 April, 2017, 02:09:55 PM
While in theory I sort of agree with Shark on this point, in practise I find it difficult, as I come from the country which invented both the hobnob and the jaffa cake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 April, 2017, 02:29:17 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 16 April, 2017, 02:09:55 PM
While in theory I sort of agree with Shark on this point, in practise I find it difficult, as I come from the country which invented both the hobnob and the jaffa cake.

Has anyone ever eaten a Jaffa Cake AND a Hobnob at the same time? I'm going to say it...DOUBLE WHAMMY! Forgive me, FORGIVE ME...Oh, the shame!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 02:36:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 01:06:22 PM
Either can be subverted for political ends.
Whilst I find your particular stance on this issue is equatable to culture erasure, which is a part of nationalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 April, 2017, 02:39:41 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 April, 2017, 02:29:17 PM
Has anyone ever eaten a Jaffa Cake AND a Hobnob at the same time? I'm going to say it...DOUBLE WHAMMY! Forgive me, FORGIVE ME...Oh, the shame!

Being quite partial to mixing Wine Gums or Haribo's with Dairy Milk chocolate all I can say is, I get where your coming from.

[BTW, have we now merged the Threadjacking and Political Thread?  I reckon it's going to make for a much more interesting conversation!]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 03:57:06 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 16 April, 2017, 02:36:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 April, 2017, 01:06:22 PM
Either can be subverted for political ends.
Whilst I find your particular stance on this issue is equatable to culture erasure, which is a part of nationalism.

What do you mean?

Jaffa-Nobs sounds like a damn fine idea - we must contact McVitie's immediately with a list of demands...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 10:39:48 AM
So Theresa May will stepped down, so we got no sodding leaders for Brexit?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 April, 2017, 10:47:36 AM
Snap General Election at a guess.

Some speculation a senior royal has died.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 11:13:43 AM
Oh shit, General Election on day before my birthday!

Is that biggest gamble?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 11:16:30 AM
Not even close to being a gamble.  Labour are nowhere and could conceivably haemorrhage support with the current level of ineptitude shown by Corbyn.  Liberal may make some gains but limited.  Most likely outcome is status quo but with a renewed mandate to negotiate what they want to.  This is not an election to sit out on no matter what you think of the current crop of politicians.  It almost has the potential to become a referendum on the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 April, 2017, 11:16:37 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 11:13:43 AM
Is that biggest gamble?

No. The Tories will walk it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 April, 2017, 11:18:43 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 11:13:43 AM
Oh shit, General Election on day before my birthday!

Is that biggest gamble?

I'm not sure your birthday was a consideration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 11:21:27 AM
It also now has the potential to be a real bummer of a birthday present, depending on your political persuasion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 11:28:24 AM
Anything could happens in next 6 weeks...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 April, 2017, 11:38:22 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 11:28:24 AM
Anything could happens in next 6 weeks...

The Labour right wing magically undo the effects of more than a year of in-fighting and self-sabotage; the mainstream press stop reporting ridiculous Corbyn smear stories and start covering his policies; Corbyn himself magically becomes an effective, charismatic leader with an effective media strategy?

In the absence of all those things, the Tories will walk it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 April, 2017, 11:41:13 AM
The Queen carks it the day before the GE?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 18 April, 2017, 11:44:11 AM



https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote (https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 18 April, 2017, 11:53:20 AM
QuoteThe Queen carks it the day before the GE?

Outpouring of maudlin public grief and patriotism, likely to result in even more Tories.  I also wouldn't put it past the Sun to photoshop Jeremy Corbyn standing over the corpse with a bloody knife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 11:55:14 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 18 April, 2017, 11:38:22 AM

The Labour right wing magically undo the effects of more than a year of in-fighting and self-sabotage; the mainstream press stop reporting ridiculous Corbyn smear stories and start covering his policies; Corbyn himself magically becomes an effective, charismatic leader with an effective media strategy?


Hey, Trump won, remember.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 12:01:43 PM
I'm actually quite interested in seeing the mental gymnastics of the coming weeks, though it'll probably just be variations of "can't vote Labour because they're unelectable" and then most people will just stay at home on polling day.

Although UKIP are fucked right now, so arguably this is the Greens' chance for glory.  Now if they can just get on tv...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 12:07:29 PM
What Jim said.

Also everyone will forget Teresa May's last 10,000 statements on this exact thing and about how it would be a terrible idea to hold a general election so quickly after the last.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 12:54:16 PM
It's such a foregone conclusion, let's not vote at all.

If nothing else, Russell Brand will be happy to have been proven right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 01:01:49 PM
Greens will get one MP (Lucas) and have a small shot of Bristol West. Otherwise, there's going to be a lot of people saying they can't vote for anyone and won't, a great many Con wins where the combination of Lab/LD/GP votes would have won the seat had they actually cooperated, a Labour mugging, and probably a few LD gains, but nothing that will make a difference.

On the basis of online predictions, we're probably looking at a Con majority of 100, during Brexit. Just fucking great. The slim hope: the other parties get over themselves, work together, and figure out how to stop this from happening. Given Labour arrogance in the past, this seems unlikely. Combine that with Green's doing things on a local level and the LDs having a bug up their arse about the SNP and, well...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 April, 2017, 01:14:02 PM
Another vote?

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7pHMyc7fpPI/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 02:24:23 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 12:54:16 PM
It's such a foregone conclusion, let's not vote at all.

The most depressing thing about it all is this is highly likely to be the general view.  The consequence is that we are going to end up with the screwing we deserve.  The First Past The Post system may be a complete balls up but with the current state of play we have the potential to put both major parties on the spot.  Labour's arrogance and Tory spite leave both of them with plenty of baggage.   That gives the opportunity to pressure them in to listening for a change since they can't take anything for granted. 

The local elections will give some indication of how vulnerable MP's of all stripes are.  I wouldn't be surprised to find loads of Labour MP's demurring on Corbyn support, preferring to galvanise local support, particularly in light of how well it has gone recently. I can see UKIP putting pressure on both parties, albeit ineffectively.  SNP will probably use it as a chance to hammer home their view of Westminster and we may well see the end of The Last Tory of Scotland.  Wales will be interesting considering the inroads both Plaid and UKIP have been making.  Not so sure the Red Rosetta Wearing Donkeys will be so successful this time round.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 April, 2017, 02:28:09 PM
Well this is a political shit storm waiting to happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 02:36:05 PM
It been shite storm since 24 June 2016!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 02:36:55 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 02:24:23 PMThe most depressing thing about it all is this is highly likely to be the general view.
I'm already seeing that. "There's no-one to vote for!" "I'm sick of elections!" "I can't vote for the Lib Dems after they sold out on student fees!"

This is one of the reasons why May has cynically timed this, and also yet another why Corbyn is a massive idiot, letting his weak party be checkmated in such rapid and decisive fashion.

QuoteThe local elections will give some indication of how vulnerable MP's of all stripes are.
The twin problems are arrogance and money. I covered arrogance earlier – that issue of a grand coalition making a win possible but the reality of such a thing being almost impossible. But money is also a factor: LDs could win a ton of seats back, if they could do a Richmond Park in every one. They just can't, unless some very rich people very rapidly fling a load of money their way. The Greens are in an even worse position, and needed to crowdfund in 2015 to stand in as many seats as they did. I don't know what the state of Labour's finances is these days, but I'm seeing a lot of life-long Labour voters I know now saying they're only going to vote for the party again if it's to keep out a Tory. Otherwise they're mulling which pro-Brexit part has the best shot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 02:50:54 PM
That's pretty much it isn't it.  You really do get a sense of what this crowd will be like if they get their way.  I was trying to explain to my daughter how important this all is.  Her generation are going to be the first to be seriously affected by this.

Maybe we need to do a Brewster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 03:04:10 PM
Tim Farron burned me on the Lib Dems immediately after the Richmond Park vote, where I voted for Sarah Olney but couldn't stand Farron's grandstanding attack on Labour (rather than say, the Tories or Zac Goldsmith in particular) - Give it over Tim. Stop pissing all over the goodwill that let you win a single seat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 03:06:21 PM
What the hell are you talking about, how did I piss on your goodwill?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 03:07:23 PM
(https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18033125_1641835689179302_7434042369814033836_n.jpg?oh=59895ad28e96792bbdef07a885a8bacf&oe=598B3B1F)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 18 April, 2017, 03:10:17 PM
Only an idiot would abstain.

I'm going to vote tactically for the LibDems in the slim hope that Remainers get our act together and galvanise behind the parties that are still fighting Brexit. Also, I basically agree with the LibDems anyway, I just don't trust them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 03:15:03 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 03:04:10 PM
Tim Farron burned me on the Lib Dems immediately after the Richmond Park vote, where I voted for Sarah Olney but couldn't stand Farron's grandstanding attack on Labour (rather than say, the Tories or Zac Goldsmith in particular) - Give it over Tim. Stop pissing all over the goodwill that let you win a single seat.
This would be after Labour repeatedly said that if there was to be any kind of deal in Richmond Park, it's the Lib Dems who should step aside, because Labour? I'm not surprised Farron then went off on one a bit. But this does showcase the problem: Labour and the Lib Dems keep beating each other up, but each party only tends to do well when the other does too. Labour and the LDs taking a few per cent off of each other will make no difference in June – they need to be taking votes from the Tories. And to do so, they need to be coordinated, or we'll be looking at loads of seats where they came second and third, with a vote share in excess of the Tory incumbent.

Again, this election is simply about Brexit and this Tory government being in absolute control AND saying it has the mandate to do whatever the hell it wants. Nothing else matters. So unless you want that, vote accordingly, no matter how much doing so stinks, and how much you might hate Corbyn, Farron or whoever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 03:16:05 PM
Saw a Twitter theory that May hasn't made a "strategic decision" to hold a GE, she's been forced into it because her majority is so narrow that if the CPS investigations into her party's election fraud make a series of byelections unavoidable, the government wouldn't have legal legitimacy.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 02:24:23 PMI wouldn't be surprised to find loads of Labour MP's demurring on Corbyn support, preferring to galvanise local support, particularly in light of how well it has gone recently.

It's likely the other way around, as the leadership contest of last year exposed - in some cases quite bitter - divisions between many Labour MPs and their constituents.  The one thing Corbyn unquestionably has on his side is grassroots and membership support, but social media bots can't actually vote, so you should look to see a lot of MPs ignoring the media and going cap-in-hand to groups like Momentum, or - probably more likely - the NEC suspending a lot of CLPs and taking direct control so that MPs can't be deselected and replaced with left-wingers with strong local ties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 April, 2017, 03:25:39 PM
Fair point but then that seems an argument in favour of Corbyn being asked to stay away. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 03:38:39 PM
That would just mean loads of "Corbyn didn't try hard enough in the election" headlines.  Although we'll get those anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 18 April, 2017, 03:40:27 PM
Ye never know, Trumps endorsement could scupper May
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 03:44:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 03:15:03 PM
But this does showcase the problem: Labour and the Lib Dems keep beating each other up, but each party only tends to do well when the other does too. Labour and the LDs taking a few per cent off of each other will make no difference in June – they need to be taking votes from the Tories. And to do so, they need to be coordinated, or we'll be looking at loads of seats where they came second and third, with a vote share in excess of the Tory incumbent.

Again, this election is simply about Brexit and this Tory government being in absolute control AND saying it has the mandate to do whatever the hell it wants. Nothing else matters. So unless you want that, vote accordingly, no matter how much doing so stinks

Indeed. I was frustrated by Labour's approach but felt like it was a sure 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation, where everything was Corbyn/Momentum's fault no matter what happened. Run a doomed-to-fail campaign that can only at best sabotage the least-worst option? Or acknowledge political and practical reality and be slated for conceding defeat and weak leadership?

Basically if Farron had just showed the slightest bit of class, he might have won me a bit further round after the shattering disappointment of the party's role in the coalition years.

As it is... well, the Richmond Park vote is going to be repeated once more I suppose? So soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 03:52:09 PM
Daily Mail Online are really shit, tell us to vote Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 04:18:31 PM
KATIE HOPKINS: The day Theresa gave Britain the chance to crush the Remoaners, Labour, the Libs AND the Nats once and for all and why I believe we WILL (despite the BBC's best efforts)

Is it just me or does it sound a bit fascistic to talk about 'crushing' political opponents ONCE AND FOR ALL.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 April, 2017, 04:22:01 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 18 April, 2017, 03:52:09 PM
Daily Mail Online are really shit, tell us to vote Tory.

Surprise, surprise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 18 April, 2017, 04:22:35 PM
Who is Katie Hopkins?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 April, 2017, 04:25:06 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 18 April, 2017, 04:22:35 PM
Who is Katie Hopkins?

She's an astute, impartial political commentator who tells it like it is.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 04:47:53 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 03:44:10 PMIndeed. I was frustrated by Labour's approach but felt like it was a sure 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation, where everything was Corbyn/Momentum's fault no matter what happened. Run a doomed-to-fail campaign that can only at best sabotage the least-worst option? Or acknowledge political and practical reality and be slated for conceding defeat and weak leadership?
Or just note that the Tories aren't standing, instead giving a free run to Goldsmith, and since this was a Lib Dem seat anyway beforehand, let them have a free crack at it. Talk up the idea of working together. Make it clear the Lib Dems would be expected to return the favour at a later point. Could have driven goodwill, and from a press standpoint would have been no worse then Wolmar getting a sad 3.67%.

And for what it's worth, there's a hell of a lot wrong with the Lib Dems, but I also firmly believe that the UK has not in the slightest benefitted from them being smashed from 60ish MPs to a few, and nor would, say, Richmond benefit if Goldsmith or another Tory won the seat back from Olney.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 18 April, 2017, 05:30:33 PM
I'm trying to work out if Corbyn's enthusiastic or just seems demob-happy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 06:04:48 PM
Given the wipeout the Blairites face after driving moderates away from the party until only lefties remain, I'd say he's been waiting for this day since 1997.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 April, 2017, 06:14:31 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 18 April, 2017, 03:40:27 PM
Ye never know, Trumps endorsement could scupper May

Not going to happen, sadly.  There just isn't the opposition. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 April, 2017, 08:03:26 PM
Channel 4 News have apparently been told that the Conservative party were informed by the Crown Prosecution Service that prosecutions were expected to proceed "against 30 individuals".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rogue Earthlet on 18 April, 2017, 11:52:04 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 April, 2017, 04:18:31 PM
KATIE HOPKINS: The day Theresa gave Britain the chance to crush the Remoaners, Labour, the Libs AND the Nats once and for all and why I believe we WILL (despite the BBC's best efforts)

Is it just me or does it sound a bit fascistic to talk about 'crushing' political opponents ONCE AND FOR ALL.

She writes in the Daily Mail, and that paper supported Hitler in the thirties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 12:16:08 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9unDSBXgAIS-pS.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 April, 2017, 09:09:55 AM
Scary...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 19 April, 2017, 09:33:33 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 12:16:08 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9unDSBXgAIS-pS.jpg)


Isn't that a scene from the movie V For Vendetta?

If so, highly apt!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 April, 2017, 10:31:09 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 12:16:08 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9unDSBXgAIS-pS.jpg)

Big Mother is watching you!

Seriously though, wouldn't it be hilarious if this backfired on the Tories and they end up losing! I'm optimistic enough (at the moment) that it could happen.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 April, 2017, 10:31:29 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9ux_WqXYAA7IAz.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 April, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
Today I am going to indulge in some good old fashioned hide the daily mail and the sun in every shop I enter. Utter shit rags.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 April, 2017, 04:47:53 PM
Could have driven goodwill, and from a press standpoint would have been no worse then Wolmar getting a sad 3.67%.

I really don't think it would have been "no worse". Though I'm not sure how much worse it would have been. Again, damned either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 April, 2017, 10:59:22 AM
Didn't May, this government, and most of the opposition, all campaign for Remain not even a year ago? And yet now it's only notional 'saboteurs' who question the wisdom of blindly charging into this pit. Absolutely bizarre - and dangerous - demagoguery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 11:10:18 AM
Quote from: dweezil2 on 19 April, 2017, 09:33:33 AMIsn't that a scene from the movie V For Vendetta? If so, highly apt!
What's scary is how little I had to change the actual Daily Mail cover to make that image.

Quote from: NapalmKev on 19 April, 2017, 10:31:09 AMSeriously though, wouldn't it be hilarious if this backfired on the Tories and they end up losing! I'm optimistic enough (at the moment) that it could happen.
Unless the not-Tory parties can stop slapping each other, it probably won't happen. That said, if enough voters can swallow their pride and vote tactically, it's possible we could at least end up in a position where we have a minority Tory govt unable to do what it wants. (The likelihood of a Labour-led coalition seems beyond the realm of possibility, I suspect.)

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 19 April, 2017, 10:48:20 AMI really don't think it would have been "no worse". Though I'm not sure how much worse it would have been. Again, damned either way.
Perhaps, but then showcasing a willingness to cooperate – especially in the event of a seat the Tories themselves declined to stand at – would have been better than throwing a candidate to the wolves, and could have set up some goodwill. Our alternative is, what, waiting until Labour is strong enough to win alone, which it will now likely have to do with redrawn electoral boundaries and possibly without Scotland? When will that be? 2030s? Longer? But the numbers might be there for a non-Tory deal of some kind right now.

Quote from: TordelBack on 19 April, 2017, 10:59:22 AMDidn't May, this government, and most of the opposition, all campaign for Remain not even a year ago? And yet now it's only notional 'saboteurs' who question the wisdom of blindly charging into this pit. Absolutely bizarre - and dangerous - demagoguery.
She doesn't care. It's Trumpism, British style. Keep saying something long enough and people will believe you. She's also the kind of politician sho makes her mind up and then that's it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2017, 11:29:25 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 19 April, 2017, 10:31:09 AMSeriously though, wouldn't it be hilarious if this backfired on the Tories and they end up losing! I'm optimistic enough (at the moment) that it could happen.

People vote for something the media didn't approve of?  Never happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 April, 2017, 11:37:11 AM
Shame as there's too many sheep in UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 April, 2017, 12:33:30 PM
So Theresa May in PMQs just defended the DM under the guise of defending a free press.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 April, 2017, 12:44:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 11:10:18 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 April, 2017, 10:59:22 AMDidn't May, this government, and most of the opposition, all campaign for Remain not even a year ago? And yet now it's only notional 'saboteurs' who question the wisdom of blindly charging into this pit. Absolutely bizarre - and dangerous - demagoguery.
She doesn't care. It's Trumpism, British style. Keep saying something long enough and people will believe you. She's also the kind of politician sho makes her mind up and then that's it.

Silly me, I've just remembered that you were always at war with Eurasia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 April, 2017, 01:14:08 PM
Crush the Saboteurs isn't as snappy as Big Jobs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 April, 2017, 01:23:35 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 11:10:18 AM
Perhaps, but then showcasing a willingness to cooperate – especially in the event of a seat the Tories themselves declined to stand at – would have been better than throwing a candidate to the wolves, and could have set up some goodwill... But the numbers might be there for a non-Tory deal of some kind right now.

Indigo, I agree with you that I would have preferred they played it that way - it would certainly have been more grown-up! But every single thing Labour does is spun as the wrong thing. Acts of co-operation are labelled as surrender. And it's not just from opponents outside of Labour but also from within, where the tea party of people like Tom Watson undermine every attempt at reaching out to the effectively disenfranchised. A token, meaningless gesture is the least worst option from this standpoint. I don't agree but I can understand it.

And in any case the Lib Dems keep ruling out coalitions with Labour but remain ever open to the Tories  (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vince-cable-rule-out-liberal-democrat-labour-electoral-pact-general-election-8-june-conservatives-a7690341.html). I think they get a surprisingly free ride on their own attitude towards Labour. And in their actual opposition to the Tories. They really squander their position as 3rd party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 01:32:28 PM
Vince Cable isn't the Lib Dems, but I suspect you're right anyway. We now have the Greens and the SNP saying they're up for a grand coalition of some sort, so the ball's in Labour and LD courts. I suspect they'll bat it away, and spend the next seven weeks fighting each other rather than the real enemy.

And, yeah, I agree they squander their position, although they probably wish they were still the third party rather than the fourth. (And the thing is, with a pact, they would have a shot at becoming the third party again, even if the SNP won every single Scottish seat.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2017, 01:38:50 PM
"We're all sinners."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 19 April, 2017, 01:48:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 01:32:28 PM
Vince Cable isn't the Lib Dems, but I suspect you're right anyway. We now have the Greens and the SNP saying they're up for a grand coalition of some sort, so the ball's in Labour and LD courts. I suspect they'll bat it away, and spend the next seven weeks fighting each other rather than the real enemy.

And, yeah, I agree they squander their position, although they probably wish they were still the third party rather than the fourth. (And the thing is, with a pact, they would have a shot at becoming the third party again, even if the SNP won every single Scottish seat.)

Farron seems more interested in not ruling out a coalition with the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 April, 2017, 02:03:09 PM
Well, if there is Brexit remorse as is often suggested on here the Lib Dems will win the election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 02:21:12 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 April, 2017, 02:03:09 PMWell, if there is Brexit remorse as is often suggested on here the Lib Dems will win the election.
I know you're being glib, but I can't imagine anyone thinks the LDs will do anything more than at the very best (and this would be a HUGE ask) flip most of their losses from 2015. My guess is they'll end up with somewhere between 10 and 15 seats.

But then FPTP doesn't help. For example, imagine there really is full-on Brexit remorse and the polling's just flat-out wrong. The LDs manage because of this to take 15% from the Tories and 5% from Labour. Here's what happens:

CON with 28%: 304 seats
LAB with 20%: 209 seats
LD with 25%: 57 seats

With a number of Richmond Parks, the LDs might not need that many votes to get a few dozen seats, perhaps, but FPTP rigs the vote for the Tories and a slightly lesser degree for Labour, and that's never going to change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 April, 2017, 03:06:25 PM
Who knew that after all those decades and centuries of political activity and debate, everything actually boiled down to something as simple as YES or NO to EU membership? Think of the time and energy we could have saved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 April, 2017, 03:08:21 PM
All those money waste to Elections should be to nursing or social care. Political today are all fucking joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 April, 2017, 04:39:40 PM
The Jokes on Teresa May, the Tories don't stand a chance in my constituency. North Belfast will either be won by DUP Hard Right Christian Fundamentalists, or Sinn Fein ex-IRA Abstentionists.

In other news, I was shopping in my local supermarket and they still had loads of Easter Eggs up, all reduced to clear. Normally they pack them all away to be sold the following year, but these must've reached the end of their shelf life. Every single one was from Nestle. Full Shelves of Nestle Easter Eggs that nobody wanted to buy. It gave me an odd feeling. I think it was community pride?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 April, 2017, 05:05:19 PM
QuoteAll those money waste to Elections should be to nursing or social care.

"I saw that just at this point, all pur energies should be focused on our negotiations with the European Union honour future relationship".

The Right Honourable Theresa May, in March 2017 shortly after the Scottish parliament voted to hold a referendum in 2018.  Just before it came to light that 30 conservative MPs are under investigation for fraud and, if convicted, would be prevented from holding office. 

Just as the Brexit vote was the by product of a Tory civil war, this general election is a product of that party desperately holding onto power despite its members being criminals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Spikes on 19 April, 2017, 05:48:23 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 19 April, 2017, 05:05:19 PM
Just as the Brexit vote was the by product of a Tory civil war, this general election is a product of that party desperately holding onto power despite its members being criminals.

^ This. A million times this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2017, 05:51:26 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 19 April, 2017, 04:39:40 PM
The Jokes on Teresa May, the Tories don't stand a chance in my constituency. North Belfast will either be won by DUP Hard Right Christian Fundamentalists, or Sinn Fein ex-IRA Abstentionists.

As far as I'm aware, the DUP exist as a rubber-stamp for Conservative policy, so it still matters who wins over here.

All the same, it is pretty bonkers to see the same people who've been solidly bitching for two years that they're stuck with the Tories now crying into their pillows at the prospect of a GE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 April, 2017, 06:10:28 PM
Over on fb I see an old school acquantance relishing the chance to put Labour into the ground once and for all.  Now, putting aside why anyone would want to live in a one party state of any stripe, what infuriated me most was her saying how her family were on benefits but they were hard working benefitistas not like these modern scroungers who don't deserve support like what her family did..... :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 April, 2017, 07:05:36 PM
http://www.prruk.org/why-v-for-vendatta-author-alan-moore-says-you-should-support-jeremy-corbyn/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2017, 08:11:39 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 April, 2017, 06:10:28 PMwhat infuriated me most was her saying how her family were on benefits but they were hard working benefitistas not like these modern scroungers who don't deserve support like what her family did
Same as ever. Trump supporters were all ranting about benefits claimants until they realised with a shock THEIR benefits would also be removed. (The nadir being dolts ranting about Obamacare and not realising that was a name for the Affordable Care Act. One of the big threads about that was faked, but plenty were not.) And, yeah, the 'kick away the ladder' mentality is common. I have that around here, with my MP – a second-generation immigrant – being broadly anti-immigration and not really giving a shit about the mess millions of EEA citizens are now in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 19 April, 2017, 08:27:43 PM
I'm not sure if this is a joke or not:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39570585 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39570585)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 19 April, 2017, 08:45:57 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 April, 2017, 07:05:36 PM
http://www.prruk.org/why-v-for-vendatta-author-alan-moore-says-you-should-support-jeremy-corbyn/

This just made me realise that Alan Moore had not yet disowned V for Vendetta.

I would read the article fully though if the title had been:

Alan Moore
Author D.R. & Quinch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 20 April, 2017, 12:05:34 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2017, 05:51:26 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 19 April, 2017, 04:39:40 PM
The Jokes on Teresa May, the Tories don't stand a chance in my constituency. North Belfast will either be won by DUP Hard Right Christian Fundamentalists, or Sinn Fein ex-IRA Abstentionists.

As far as I'm aware, the DUP exist as a rubber-stamp for Conservative policy...

Well, yes, unless it goes against their religion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 20 April, 2017, 01:28:20 AM
This must be the most depressing thread on the boards! Even more so that the R.I.Ps one.

Anyway this t-shirt gave me a smile and since this is the political thread it seems relevant to share it here

(https://www.redmolotov.com/images/designs/still-hate-thatcher-may-tshirt_design.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 20 April, 2017, 05:19:27 PM
So, Tim Farron... doubling down there eh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2017, 06:25:44 PM
To be fair, it was obvious he didn't think gays were sinners - they are, after all, turned gay by chemicals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 April, 2017, 07:06:11 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 20 April, 2017, 05:19:27 PM
So, Tim Farron... doubling down there eh.
In what sense? In the Commons, he was asked outright whether he thought being gay was a sin, and stated: "I do not". And his voting record and campaigning on LGBT+ has for the most part been very strong (https://miss-s-b.dreamwidth.org/1825800.html). If his own personal beliefs might be different, I couldn't give a fig about that if his political actions are for the best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2017, 07:38:46 PM
Some might argue that publicly being seen to vote for it when it's a lost cause and yet pointedly abstaining on the one occasion that it needs every man on deck to ensure it happens looks more like opportunism.

What they should have asked him was "do you believe frogs turn gay from pollution?"  Which sounds ridiculous as a scientific notion, but fabulous as a TMNT spin-off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 April, 2017, 08:02:38 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2017, 07:38:46 PMSome might argue that publicly being seen to vote for it when it's a lost cause and yet pointedly abstaining on the one occasion that it needs every man on deck to ensure it happens looks more like opportunism.
He fucked up that time. He's admitted as much and regrets the decision. His reasoning was because the bill was in a few key ways deeply flawed and he wanted to – but failed to – change that. That doesn't make him evil on toast. (I'm no major fan of Farron in general, but this all smacks of witch hunt. My feed is full of Labour people screaming about Farron being anti-gay, which is just bullshit. Bafflingly, I have Tories arguing the same, too, as if their party gives a flying fuck about LGBT+ when it comes to voting.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 April, 2017, 08:29:27 PM
Tories like a good mob as much as the rest of us.  Just be thankful there isn't a fox on the other end of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 April, 2017, 11:06:07 AM
I was specifically referring to the deflection of "If I was Muslim or Jewish, I wouldn't be under scrutiny for splitting my vote between my publicly stated position and my personal religious viewpoint".

Whilst I think abstaining on the vote is a bit cowardly, I am an atheist who believes politicians should be secular (and my old MP voted consistently catholic, which was always an issue when otherwise he was spot on with everything, at least till his sad demise), and I can understand the reasoning why. Doesn't mean it's not a perfectly valid weak point to be targeted for if you claim the position of championing equal rights for gay people.

It is complete hyperbole to be attacked as 'not liking gays' I admit.  But I think responding with What-about-ism and playing into the divisive rhetoric that claims Christians are some kind of persecuted group is a significant low. It's also inaccurate (A Muslim MP would certainly face scrutiny), and though it might be relatively harmless this kind of ****shit has been shaping politics for some time and it's not winning me over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 April, 2017, 12:52:53 PM
As one Twitter wag put it when Farron said the "If I was Muslim or Jewish" comment: "clearly Tim was not paying attention during the London mayoral election."

Me, I found his comments ill-advised and one step away from shouting about Social Justice Warriors, but more funny than harmful.
Mind you, it is pretty entertaining to watch him try to grasp why - after months of personally attacking politicians - those politicians' supporters are now attacking him personally.  That would be funny enough on its own, but then you remember that people are currently widely sharing a video in which he quotes Biblical verse about not judging others in case you are judged in turn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 22 April, 2017, 11:10:39 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 April, 2017, 06:10:28 PM
what infuriated me most was her saying how her family were on benefits but they were hard working benefitistas not like these modern scroungers who don't deserve support like what her family did..... :thumbsdown:
Some like that round here, there is nothing worse and more divisive then subservient working class people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 April, 2017, 11:29:07 AM
Aren't all "working class" people subservient (to their "middle class" and "upper class" masters) by definition?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 22 April, 2017, 11:57:10 AM
Apart from being the dweeb scion of a rump of Tory enabling fuckwits who'll go back into coalition with them in a heartbeat, Farron voted to allow registrars not to carry out same-sex marriages on the basis of their religious beliefs, and generally has a history of absenteeism on key votes on LGBTQ and reproductive rights (see here (https://stavvers.wordpress.com/)).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 22 April, 2017, 12:12:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 April, 2017, 11:29:07 AM
Aren't all "working class" people subservient (to their "middle class" and "upper class" masters) by definition?

I would say more powerless, there is parts of working class society that believe anything which is told to them by the press, politicians and tv like all unemployed working class people are scroungers etc, you can blame TV programmes like jeremy kyle and newspapers like the sun for this.

Its just deflection tactics to me, shift the blame to a more vulnerable part of society so they are not targeted, it was the trade unions and miners in the 70's 80's and now in the 2000's its the unemployed etc who are the target now.

Sorry for the rant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 April, 2017, 05:12:23 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 22 April, 2017, 11:57:10 AMTory enabling fuckwits who'll go back into coalition with them in a heartbeat

I just assumed I missed a new dictionary definition of the word "oppose" being introduced that means the opposite of what it used to.
They also quietly shifted from the anti Brexit party to the anti hard Brexit party without skipping a beat, I notice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 22 April, 2017, 07:01:29 PM
Say what you like about farron but down here in Cornwall I have learned the hard way the voting anything other than lib leads to Tories stomping the shit out of the place.  Fuck that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 April, 2017, 10:23:05 PM
A little reminder why it's important to vote in your local elections.  Gisela Allen is a genuine candidate and could soon be helping to run public services in your local area.

(https://i.redd.it/lf8ny6qtqzsy.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 April, 2017, 12:01:25 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 April, 2017, 05:12:23 PM
They also quietly shifted from the anti Brexit party to the anti hard Brexit party without skipping a beat, I notice.
Their policy is "single market membership at the very minimum", unless it changed since yesterday. In other words, their aim is the status quo but their fallback position is a Norway-style deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 April, 2017, 07:53:00 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 22 April, 2017, 10:23:05 PM
A little reminder why it's important to vote in your local elections.  Gisela Allen is a genuine candidate and could soon be helping to run public services in your local area.

(https://i.redd.it/lf8ny6qtqzsy.jpg)

She is, apparently, 85 years old and - I'll hazard a guess - not quite all there these days.

This certainly makes her hatred of the elderly a bit weird.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 08:33:06 AM
Self loathing is the key to bigotry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 23 April, 2017, 10:28:43 AM
Still, Gorillas, eh?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15240329.Ukip__39_s_new_Scots_candidate_backs_guillotines__castration_and_flogging_____and_you_should_hear_her_views_on_gorillas/ (http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15240329.Ukip__39_s_new_Scots_candidate_backs_guillotines__castration_and_flogging_____and_you_should_hear_her_views_on_gorillas/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 April, 2017, 10:45:09 AM
Do they not vet these people?  Did someone at Ukip manage to get through a five minute conversation with Gisela and think "yeah, this is the person we want representing our party.  This is the best person for the job."?  Maybe they just pick member names out of a hat.

Then we've got Thomas Williamson, Conservative By Accident Party.

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2017/04/21/dont-back-says-tory-sic-paper-candidate-lerwick-north (http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2017/04/21/dont-back-says-tory-sic-paper-candidate-lerwick-north)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 11:09:20 AM
If you want to live in a democracy, you must accept being led, or at least potentially led, by people whose views and ideals you despise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 11:11:44 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 11:09:20 AM
If you want to live in a democracy, you must accept being led, or at least potentially led, by people whose views and ideals you despise.
The only problem with that line of thought is when campaigns are led wholey on lies and misinformation (Brexit, Trump, Le Pen etc) where the democratic process is corrupted and blurred.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 11:30:54 AM
Given that the very basis of all government power is rooted in a lie ("I have the right to steal your money and push you around"), I reckon you're pretty spot-on there, Hawkie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 11:51:16 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 11:30:54 AM
"I have the right to steal your money...

Income tax was first brought in the help combat the Napoleonic War, (Pitt the Younger?).

Before that, most taxes were created by Royalty (Wool tax, Wine tax, etc).

Once upon a time there was a justifiable case of not paying taxes. For modern times though I prefer things to be kept running as smoothly as possible - if that means I have to pay Tax, so be it.*

Cheers

*Admittedly I would like my money spent on more constructive ventures (NHS, Education) and less on Capitalist Warmongering!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:07:20 PM
I don't think that theft can be justified simply by pointing at hospitals and roads. If I were to steal money because I need it (for whatever reason), that defence would not stand up in court and, I bet, you wouldn't support me either.

The argument is that taking someone's money without their consent is theft, no matter what you call it. If theft can be excused simply by arguing expedience, then we're all allowed to steal when it's the easier option - which is patently ridiculous.

Only once the reality of taxation being theft is accepted can the arguments of justifiable criminality and/or alternative systems be explored.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 12:08:36 PM
Yes. Taxation is not the problem, it's how an unacceptable percentage is being spent right now that is the problem.

Taxation pays for education, health care, emergency services. THIS is good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:19:01 PM
Okay, so if I steal money to buy myself a set of encyclopedias with which to educate myself, a first aid kit and box of medicines for my health and to pay for premium BUPA health insurance in case I have an accident, is that acceptable?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 12:38:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:19:01 PM
Okay, so if I steal money to buy myself a set of encyclopedias with which to educate myself, a first aid kit and box of medicines for my health and to pay for premium BUPA health insurance in case I have an accident, is that acceptable?

If you stole those things for yourself I'd say it was selfish behaviour. If you garnered money/resources to help those that have less (a bit like Government) and provided Healthcare and Education for all, I wouldn't think you selfish.

I understand your stance but until we get to a stage of limitless energy for all, no food shortages, etc, we're pretty much Fucked!

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 12:39:10 PM
Well considering the cost of all that on an individual scale is doubtlessly more expensive (fuck Bupa) than taxation on a national scale than they are none comparable
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:47:53 PM
So, stealing money to spend on others is acceptable? Okay, I might be able to get behind this Robin Hood approach. From whom is it acceptable to steal, upon whom is it acceptable to bestow the stolen money and who or what decides?

The sun produces practically limitless energy, add wind and hydro and there's more than enough for everyone. There is enough food on this planet to feed everyone. In both cases, government backed corporations manage these resources for profit and not humanity, resulting in an organisational and monopolistic matrix of systems dependent on engineering and promoting shortages.

There is abundance in abundance, the only barrier to us accessing it is government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 April, 2017, 12:54:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:47:53 PM
There is abundance in abundance, the only barrier to us accessing it is government individual greed and short-sightedness

FTFY

The problem is people. Governments are people, elected by people. The solution is for people to grow the hell up, so that the large scale collaborative and redistributive abilities of government can be properly directed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:56:09 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 12:39:10 PMWell considering the cost of all that on an individual scale is doubtlessly more expensive (fuck Bupa) than taxation on a national scale than they are none comparable
I'm not talking about cost but lawfulness. All you seem to be suggesting is that if it's cheaper to steal then stealing is acceptable - but I'm pretty sure I've got that wrong. If a thing (stealing) is wrong for an individual then it must also be wrong for two people, or six, or sixty, or six hundred, or six million. Theft is either generally acceptable or it isn't, numbers make no difference except in respect to power; might is right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 12:56:34 PM
Do you not use the NHS? Did you not go to school, or have family that do? Do you not require the mergency services at sometime or another? Inreally don't get this notion that we are all dependent on ourselves, instead of being a complex net of codependency. If I have a cut of my wages removed so my mates grandmother can have her chemo, I fine. If I have a slice of my income taken to get my brothers and sister stheough school, i'm chuffed. I will at sometime in my life have need of the police, the fire service, and ambulance staff, so I will gladly pay their wages so they can do their job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 12:58:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 12:47:53 PM
So, stealing money to spend on others is acceptable? Okay, I might be able to get behind this Robin Hood approach. From whom is it acceptable to steal, upon whom is it acceptable to bestow the stolen money and who or what decides?

The sun produces practically limitless energy, add wind and hydro and there's more than enough for everyone. There is enough food on this planet to feed everyone. In both cases, government backed corporations manage these resources for profit and not humanity, resulting in an organisational and monopolistic matrix of systems dependent on engineering and promoting shortages.

There is abundance in abundance, the only barrier to us accessing it is government.

As I said - "I understand your stance..." - but I fail to understand how you would address these problems.

Remove Government - OK, what then? How do we distribute goods at home or abroad. How do we liase with other Nations (that may decide to keep their Governments)? What if my next door neighbour decides to build a shed in my garden without permission? What if a far right group seizes my home/property, who should I complain to? And on and on and on...

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:02:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 April, 2017, 12:54:24 PMThe problem is people. Governments are people, elected by people. The solution is for people to grow the hell up.
I completely agree except, maybe, to say wise up rather than grow up. We have all been conditioned to see business as the game of Monopoly, with winners and losers and a score measured in money and yachts instead of what it really is; simple human interaction with the goal of making society accessible to and beneficial for all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 12:58:38 PM


As I said - "I understand your stance..." - but I fail to understand how you would address these problems.

Remove Government - OK, what then? How do we distribute goods at home or abroad. How do we liase with other Nations (that may decide to keep their Governments)? What if my next door neighbour decides to build a shed in my garden without permission? What if a far right group seizes my home/property, who should I complain to? And on and on and on...

Cheers

There are several answers to your questions which do not include government interference but these are not what I'm talking about. These are simply excuses used to short-circuit the argument on the table, which concerns the illegitimacy (at best) and criminality (at worst) of government power.

I say, "taxation is theft because..."

Most people ignore this and say, "but, roads and hospitals!" Instead of engaging with the assertion that government relies on crime, roads and hospitals - which everyone needs and values - are thrown out as an excuse, a distraction from the core argument. Once the core argument is settled we can start thinking about which solutions are necessary or practical.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:23:16 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 12:56:34 PM
Do you not use the NHS? Did you not go to school, or have family that do? Do you not require the mergency services at sometime or another? Inreally don't get this notion that we are all dependent on ourselves, instead of being a complex net of codependency. If I have a cut of my wages removed so my mates grandmother can have her chemo, I fine. If I have a slice of my income taken to get my brothers and sister stheough school, i'm chuffed. I will at sometime in my life have need of the police, the fire service, and ambulance staff, so I will gladly pay their wages so they can do their job.

All of these public services are very laudable and noble but no excuse for theft. If you want to contribute to these things then that's all fine and generous of you. But you're not asked to contribute, are you? You are forced to contribute and then have no say on how much of your money is spent on bandages and how much on bullets, bail-outs and banquets.

As I say, my argument is not about the value of public services but that they do not excuse theft,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 01:23:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 12:58:38 PM


As I said - "I understand your stance..." - but I fail to understand how you would address these problems.

Remove Government - OK, what then? How do we distribute goods at home or abroad. How do we liase with other Nations (that may decide to keep their Governments)? What if my next door neighbour decides to build a shed in my garden without permission? What if a far right group seizes my home/property, who should I complain to? And on and on and on...

Cheers

There are several answers to your questions which do not include government interference but these are not what I'm talking about. These are simply excuses used to short-circuit the argument on the table, which concerns the illegitimacy (at best) and criminality (at worst) of government power.

I say, "taxation is theft because..."

Most people ignore this and say, "but, roads and hospitals!" Instead of engaging with the assertion that government relies on crime, roads and hospitals - which everyone needs and values - are thrown out as an excuse, a distraction from the core argument. Once the core argument is settled we can start thinking about which solutions are necessary or practical.


People offering a counter to your arguments are not "Short circuiting the argument". Without wishing to sound rude - you are the one extolling the virtues of a brave new world but when asked how it could work you have no answer other than " people can cooperate without coercion" which is flim-flam to say the least.

I would like things to be different/better but it's a baby steps process rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:27:21 PM
Punctuation error rectification:

Most people ignore this and say, "but, roads
and hospitals," instead of engaging with the
assertion that government relies on crime.
Roads and hospitals - which everyone needs and values - are thrown out as an excuse, a
distraction from the core argument.

Sorry about that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 01:39:05 PM
I think its common sense that we need taxes to fund our services, the unfair bit i think is that some of the larger companies either do not pay tax at all or very little and do not contribute to society, and your average person sometimes pays too much.

I don't think people would pay taxes if they had the choice not to(some companies do not though circumventing laws with lawyers etc) and im personally happy to pay my taxes if it helps fund services and benefits etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 02:03:30 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 01:23:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 23 April, 2017, 12:58:38 PM


As I said - "I understand your stance..." - but I fail to understand how you would address these problems.

Remove Government - OK, what then? How do we distribute goods at home or abroad. How do we liase with other Nations (that may decide to keep their Governments)? What if my next door neighbour decides to build a shed in my garden without permission? What if a far right group seizes my home/property, who should I complain to? And on and on and on...

Cheers

There are several answers to your questions which do not include government interference but these are not what I'm talking about. These are simply excuses used to short-circuit the argument on the table, which concerns the illegitimacy (at best) and criminality (at worst) of government power.

I say, "taxation is theft because..."

Most people ignore this and say, "but, roads and hospitals!" Instead of engaging with the assertion that government relies on crime, roads and hospitals - which everyone needs and values - are thrown out as an excuse, a distraction from the core argument. Once the core argument is settled we can start thinking about which solutions are necessary or practical.


People offering a counter to your arguments are not "Short circuiting the argument". Without wishing to sound rude - you are the one extolling the virtues of a brave new world but when asked how it could work you have no answer other than " people can cooperate without coercion" which is flim-flam to say the least.

I would like things to be different/better but it's a baby steps process rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Cheers

I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. As I have said before, society is a process and there is no big switch with UTOPIA written on it.

Human cooperation is everywhere. Look, for example, at the roads. People follow the Highway Code because the rules make sense, not because Theresa May tells them to. People in this country drive on the left because of tradition and an aversion to dying in a head-on collision and not because they'll get a ticket if they drive on the right. People follow the rules, on the whole, because they make sense.

Do people bend or break the rules? Sure they do, all the time - they creep through red lights or drive over the speed limits on deserted or quiet roads all the time, not to cock a snook at law and order but because sometimes rules and regulations make less sense. For example, there is no difference between an ambulance with a badly injured person in the back breaking the Highway Code as safely as possible and a family car  with a badly injured person in the back breaking the Highway Code as safely as possible. If either vehicle gets to the hospital without accident then that's fine, if either one causes damage, injury or death on the way then that's not fine and why we have courts.

The problem with courts (and police) at the moment is that they are run as government monopolies, which gives the false impression that only government can provide law and order - which is patently untrue. People do not refrain from murdering one another because the government tells them not to but because human beings are social animals who have, to an overwhelming extent, evolved an aversion to murdering one another. Are there exceptions? Of course there are, but compare the numbers of people murdered by individuals on their own recognicance to the numbers of people murdered by order of governments or other authoritarian organisations.

Stripping governments of unlawful powers does NOT automatically mean abandoning law and order, public services, international trade, national trade, local trade, food hygiene, public safety, policing, a court system, hospitals, roads, shoes or anything else.

What you are putting forward is a kind of Utopia fallacy; because I cannot offer a perfect alternative for every minute aspect of society - despite the fact that what we currently have is also far from perfectly Utopian and that a great many things do not require abolition, replacement or alteration and can continue to function perfectly well under a non-criminal government system - then nothing I say or suggest can possibly be valid.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 02:13:22 PM
Quote from: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 01:39:05 PM
I think its common sense that we need taxes to fund our services, the unfair bit i think is that some of the larger companies either do not pay tax at all or very little and do not contribute to society, and your average person sometimes pays too much.

I don't think people would pay taxes if they had the choice not to(some companies do not though circumventing laws with lawyers etc) and im personally happy to pay my taxes if it helps fund services and benefits etc.

So long as we continue to base our societies on the primitive and selfish monetary model then yes, these things must be paid for.

Taxation, however, is not the only way.

As I have said here many times, taking the monetary system out of private hands and returning it to the public realm, even under the auspices of the current deeply flawed government system, would be a massive and fundamental game-changer and is a step we simply must take on the road to a fairer, healthier society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 02:28:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 02:13:22 PM
Quote from: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 01:39:05 PM
I think its common sense that we need taxes to fund our services, the unfair bit i think is that some of the larger companies either do not pay tax at all or very little and do not contribute to society, and your average person sometimes pays too much.

I don't think people would pay taxes if they had the choice not to(some companies do not though circumventing laws with lawyers etc) and im personally happy to pay my taxes if it helps fund services and benefits etc.

So long as we continue to base our societies on the primitive and selfish monetary model then yes, these things must be paid for.

Taxation, however, is not the only way.

As I have said here many times, taking the monetary system out of private hands and returning it to the public realm, even under the auspices of the current deeply flawed government system, would be a massive and fundamental game-changer and is a step we simply must take on the road to a fairer, healthier society.

I cant say i disagree with you but we live in capitalist society and have for the last 200 plus years, infact in my opinion society now isn't that different from feudalism which came before, apart from now we get to vote who will be in power, but things will not really change due to the society we live in general, this is why i have massive disillusionment with voting.

Everything would probably have to change if we wanted to live in a different and fairer society, and this from what i have gathered in the past would be a massive upheaval, and i actually think human nature in a way would have to change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 April, 2017, 02:32:48 PM
We've been here before, Sharky, voluntary taxes dont work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 02:38:46 PM
Voluntary taxes are only a small part of the solution, not the only option.

There's nothing wrong with capitalism, Suede, it's corporatism (government-protected monopolies) that needs to go; and the first of these to die must be the current banking system which simply must be returned to a capitalist foundation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 07:02:11 PM
I cannot agree that there is nothing wrong with capitalism, it has things which are inherent to the system such as unemployment and inequality in general, im not saying these problems don't exist in other systems, but it has been an issue with capitalism even before such things as corporatism.

And working conditions are continually getting worse too, just look at places like asos and amazon, i worked at both of those places and they are both sweatshops pretty much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 07:12:42 PM
They are sweatshops because governments introduce toxic, anti-capitalist schemes like the minimum wage and strip workers of their basic right to sell their labour for a fair price.

So long as we remain a primitive, money-based society we need capitalism, which I agree is flawed but less flawed than corporatism, which is only a couple of degrees away from classic slavery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 23 April, 2017, 07:22:04 PM
That does not explain the lack of trade unions, hire and fire employment tactics the the general precariousness of the work.

And no offence mate, but the minimum wage is the only thing what kept me from living in poverty, its very idealistic to think companies would suddenly give workers a fair wage, unless the workers in question had collective bargaining. which in the warehousing and manufacturing industries the majority do not.

And yeah there is good things to capitalism, but its still a flawed system to me, which still requires the exploitation of others to operate and make a profit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 07:41:46 PM
Like I said, it's a primitive system but government intervention just makes it worse.

The minimum wage, for example, sounds good but really isn't. In poor areas it keeps prices for goods and services artificially high and employment levels low because businesses have to charge more and/or claim more public funds to afford to pay it and in rich areas it encourages an underpaid class who cannot afford to live in the areas where they work because businesses don't have to pay more than the minimum. If the minimum wage was such a great idea, governments would insist that Third World countries took it up so that giving aid would not be necessary. They don't insist on it, of course, because it doesn't work.

It's not idealistic to think companies would suddenly pay decent wages if government intervention ceased, it's basic Austrian economics. Give workers and entrepreneurs and businesses the power to negotiate their own terms and the provision of labour, just like the provision of any other good or service, becomes subject to the basic rules of free market competition, which has been the bedrock of economies forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 April, 2017, 11:06:11 PM
Sharky, is there ANYTHING in the history of labour and the world of work that supports your contention that unregulated capitalist economies are anything other than machines for grinding a massive underclass into profitable paste? Can you cite one single example?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:21:28 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 April, 2017, 11:06:11 PM
Sharky, is there ANYTHING in the history of labour and the world of work that supports your contention that unregulated capitalist economies are anything other than machines for grinding a massive underclass into profitable paste? Can you cite one single example?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. If you want me to point to a perfect capitalist system which is completely free of regulation then no, I can't. What do you mean by 'unregulated'? To me, the word means freedom from government interference, not freedom from all laws or traditional constraints. For example, selling jam with splinters of glass in it or pies filled with rotten meat would be just as unacceptable in an unregulated market as a regulated one. There's also the aspect of self-regulation; if you buy jam with glass splinters in it or a pie filled with rotten meat you have recourse to law and the option to purchase from a different source next time. The Glass-Shard Jam Company and The Rotten Pie Shop are extremely unlikely to thrive in a competitive free or regulated market.

Also, what do you mean by "grinding a massive underclass into profitable paste"? If you mean turning a profit from goods and services sold to customers then, again, no I can't point to anything because turning a profit is part of what capitalism is about - the alternatives are running at a loss, which guarantees the failure of any business, or providing goods and services at cost, which cripples expansion and R&D. In my view, it is the government regulated market that grinds a massive underclass into profitable paste through general taxation, levies, license fees and fines which take from everyone in order to facilitate bureaucracy, subsidise unprofitably run services and bail-out irresponsible government backed monopolies.

When you ask me to point to "ANYTHING," do you mean a single, unregulated business or a whole unregulated economy? One unregulated business is the trade in cannabis, which - in my experience - offers goods of varying quality depending on the dealer and doesn't force its non-addictive, relatively safe product on anyone - they don't even advertise and rely on word of mouth and decent quality in order to survive. The only violence comes from authorities trying to stop it and caging people or demanding fines. Compare that with the legal trades in tobacco and alcohol, which are heavily regulated yet cause far more damage as well as being heavily taxed.

Speaking of alcohol, look at the violence, death and expense incurred by the extreme regulation of Prohibition in the U.S. Unregulated alcohol has been sold for centuries and continues to this day. Just because a bottle of moonshine comes from an untaxed and therefore unregulated still does not automatically make it poisonous or exploitative of the poor, downtrodden masses who can't decide for themselves whether drinking antifreeze with olives in it is advisable or not.

So yes, I can point to several unregulated parts of capitalist economies that work perfectly well and are not as exploitative as the regulated parts, as I suspect most people can, but I can't point to a totally unregulated capitalist market because I'm not sure there's ever been one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 24 April, 2017, 06:04:47 AM
So there are,if not laws,at least traditions to be followed in this unregulated market system of yours?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 24 April, 2017, 08:16:46 AM
Why is it people seem to forget the conditions of the industrial revolution, when governments in general had less interference, and people worked 18 hours a day.

Living in a place with unregulated capitalism sound just as bad to me as the stalinist dictatorships of of the east.

You need government and you need taxes,  if such things were optional why would people even pay, most people i know if they had the choice of buying something for themselves or paying there taxes, they would probably buy something for themselves every time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 24 April, 2017, 08:42:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:21:28 AM
One unregulated business is the trade in cannabis, which - in my experience - offers goods of varying quality

This i can confirm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 April, 2017, 09:38:39 AM
Thanks for your answer Sharky, the cannabis trade is a good one, although I wonder what that would be like without the inflated prices that nonsensical illegality imposes. I'm also not sure the argument stands up when extended to cover harmful substances.

However, what I was getting at is that elected governments make and enforce coercive laws regarding employment, and that (in my opinion) is the sole reason we have paid leave, HS&W (such as it is) and there aren't still children up chimneys and down mines chewing on phosphorus and radium in the western/First world. In the absence of state regulation, I believe the world of work would be every bit as horrid as it was before accountable governments got involved in the welfare of the citizens that elect them. I accept that laws are the basis of regulation, but governments are very much the institagtors  and implementers of laws.

It is the difference in governments worldwide that results in difference of conditions: although I fully accept the argument that our own governments collude to export misery in the workplace rather than have it at home. That needs to change. Happily a mechanism exists to mandate change. We are the drivers of the vehicle that is government, the issue of getting to our desired distant destination isn't solved by getting out and walking, it's by paying attention to the map and driving in the right direction.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2017, 09:48:24 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 07:41:46 PMIt's not idealistic to think companies would suddenly pay decent wages if government intervention ceased, it's basic Austrian economics.
The key here would be to look at what companies do now – how many go beyond the absolute minimum they have to? John Lewis is one, given that it's a co-op and therefore the bulk of employees share in the success of the company in real percentage terms (versus getting a 50 quid 'Christmas bonus' or whatever, when your company makes a ton of cash). But that system is very rare.

A recent Infinite Monkey Cage (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08bzcd1) touched on the idea of democracy and systems. The show was about science's epic fails, and arguing that failure within itself is critical not only to science but also life itself. Cox at one point argues that democracy itself could be considered an innate understanding that individuals are not equipped to run a society and so cede that control to a number of people who can and do. As has been noted here in the past, several times, having to take on responsibilities for all kinds of things government does would be onerous on the individual. And I say that as someone who right now has deep and unshakable concerns about the British government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 24 April, 2017, 09:52:12 AM
Quote from: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 24 April, 2017, 08:42:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:21:28 AM
One unregulated business is the trade in cannabis, which - in my experience - offers goods of varying quality

This i can confirm.

Cannabis is not an 'unregulated business' it's an illegal activity (I don't think it should be illegal, but that's another story).

I know a lot of people who are involved with one form of Drug or another, the majority aren't selling these products out of the goodness of their hearts, they're doing it to make money. I've purchased Weed of varying quality ranging from mind-blowing to downright shit. Sometimes Weed comes covered in small bits of glass or other crap designed to give the illusion of Weed crystals!

This is an example (from personal experience) of how people can be epic Twats when it comes to lining their pockets with money!

And these aren't the mega-rich, who would probably (IMO) be far worse if given the opportunity!

Yeah, what the World really needs is less regulations because people are great!

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 09:56:44 AM
Quote from: Suede1971 on 24 April, 2017, 08:16:46 AM
Why is it people seem to forget the conditions of the industrial revolution, when governments in general had less interference, and people worked 18 hours a day.

Living in a place with unregulated capitalism sound just as bad to me as the stalinist dictatorships of of the east.

You need government and you need taxes,  if such things were optional why would people even pay, most people i know if they had the choice of buying something for themselves or paying there taxes, they would probably buy something for themselves every time.

Who imposed the 18 hour working days? The ruling classes of the day. Who brought an end to it? Benevolent government? Nope, the people had to fight for emancipation themselves.

Unregulated capitalism sounds bad and scary because people associate the word "unregulated" with unfettered or uncontrolled and the word "capitalism" with rape or greed. The Austrian economic model simply describes a capitalist economy, one where capital is used to fund innovation and free market competition, free of government meddling and exploitation - a pure free market.

Government, meaning a small group of people who assume the right to force others to bend to their will irrespective of personal beliefs or morality, is not needed. Organisation is needed, of course, but organisation and government are not the same thing.

Here's a little sci-fi thought experiment for you:

Aliens come in the night and abduct 1,000 families. The families are dropped off on a nice Earth like planet on the other side of the galaxy and then the aliens leave, never to be seen again.

Each family finds a solar-powered home waiting for them, with all mod cons. Each has agricultural equipment, various tools, a vehicle, medical supplies and equipment and rifles for hunting and defence against predators. Each home is set in a large area of fertile land and there are roads connecting all the homes. In short, everything a society needs to thrive exists here.

Then Mrs Windsor stands up and starts talking.

"We need a leader," she says. "Many generations ago, God chose my family as the ruling clan and so your leader is now me. I am going to install a government for you. I will give you a choice of suitable candidates to vote for who will tell you what's allowed and what's not. Once elected, these MPs will swear an oath of loyalty to me, not you, but don't worry about that, it's just a detail as I will become just a figurehead once your Prime Minister is elected.

"You will all give your rifles to the PM and he will decide which of you can use them. You will also give up your medicines and medical equipment, and only those the PM decides are capable will be allowed to dispense or use them. You will not be allowed to use your vehicles until the PM is satisfied that you are qualified and you will not be allowed to live in the homes provided until you have registered them with the PM.

"I will also provide police and courts to enforce the decisions of the PM and his government and to stop you all from hurting and stealing from one another because, as you know, none of you can be trusted. These officers will also swear an oath of loyalty to me and not you but, again, don't worry about this - it's just an unimportant traditional detail. I will provide for you a bank, which will print money and lend it to you at interest so you can trade with each other.

"In order to pay for my figureheadship and all the other wonderful things I give you, a percentage of everything you earn will be taken from you. If you refuse to pay, my officers will take it. If you resist, you will be put into a cage.

"If you don't like this arrangement then that's fine. You are perfectly free to go off and live in the wilderness somewhere but, be warned, as our society evolves and expands we may have to steal your bit of wilderness in order to civilize it, so remember to move very far away."

How many of the 1,000 families do you think would be enthusiastic about Mrs Windsor's plan? A few, certainly - mainly the ones who'd get to be in the government, the bank or the other official posts. I think most of the families would rather choose a different way to organise themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 10:17:24 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 24 April, 2017, 09:52:12 AM
Quote from: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 24 April, 2017, 08:42:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:21:28 AM
One unregulated business is the trade in cannabis, which - in my experience - offers goods of varying quality

This i can confirm.

Cannabis is not an 'unregulated business' it's an illegal activity (I don't think it should be illegal, but that's another story).

I know a lot of people who are involved with one form of Drug or another, the majority aren't selling these products out of the goodness of their hearts, they're doing it to make money. I've purchased Weed of varying quality ranging from mind-blowing to downright shit. Sometimes Weed comes covered in small bits of glass or other crap designed to give the illusion of Weed crystals!

This is an example (from personal experience) of how people can be epic Twats when it comes to lining their pockets with money!

And these aren't the mega-rich, who would probably (IMO) be far worse if given the opportunity!

Yeah, what the World really needs is less regulations because people are great!

Cheers



Declaring something (in this case a naturally occurring plant) illegal is the ultimate regulation.

By declaring cannabis illegal, it deprives you of all legal recourse, through the state monopolised police and course, against those who would cheat you. Your personal experience in this area is a wonderful real-world example of how government regulation encourages bad behaviour. If cannabis were legal, you'd be able to sue the miscreants but as it is Cannabis has been regulated outside of legislative law.

Further, it has not been legislated out of common or natural law. Your attitude towards cannabis with glass in it proves this - you know it is wrong. I know it is wrong. Yet the state monopolised police and courts, even though they might know it is wrong too, are powerless to help because they are regulated into enforcing legislative law above upholding common or natural law.

That's a great example, Kev, thanks!

And yes, buying and selling anything is about making money - that's what the primitive activity of capitalism is all about. I would like nothing better than to live in a Star Trek-like voluntaryist economy (as, I suspect, would most people) but people aren't convinced it's possible because thousands of years of money enslavement and corporatism have skewed their view of what an economy is all about. If we're going to be stuck with this primitive money based economy then we should at least strive to make it free, fair and lawful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 April, 2017, 10:46:16 AM
And HOW did the people fight for it themselves and achieve their victory? The Law. Enforced by government. One might even say they *changed* the government position by their action and by doing so were able to say, collectively demand changes to a system of law without which the whole endeavour was meaningless.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 24 April, 2017, 10:51:19 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 April, 2017, 09:38:39 AM


However, what I was getting at is that elected governments make and enforce coercive laws regarding employment, and that (in my opinion) is the sole reason we have paid leave, HS&W (such as it is) and there aren't still children up chimneys and down mines chewing on phosphorus and radium in the western/First world. In the absence of state regulation, I believe the world of work would be every bit as horrid as it was before accountable governments got involved in the welfare of the citizens that elect them.

That is what i was trying to get across,thanks, it was groups of working class people forming unions and taking action so the government would implement these laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 11:04:34 AM
Tordels, IP, good posts, thanks.

I'm not disputing the fact that governments have contributed some good elements to society but I do think that many of these Good Things came about either by accident (a protection designed for the elites trickling down to protect the rest of us as well) or for the wrong reasons (give the people what they want so they don't burn down Westminster).

It's government's assumed and unlawful right to commit violence on whomever it chooses that I'm against. There can be regulations and rules without violence.

For example, when choosing a builder you know that picking a member of the Federation of Master Builders provides you with safeguards not offered by the much cheaper Sammy Slick from behind the gasworks. Similarly, most people would prefer to use an ABTA travel agent.

Companies go to great lengths to be part of such voluntary organisations, membership of which generally demonstrates a desire to provide an at least adequate service. Government is not the only arbiter of professionalism or excellence and, indeed, is often a poor judge of good practice due its remove from the workings and intricacies of businesses and processes it does not understand. Take away government protectionism and favouritism and allow businesses to operate as they see fit. Sure, you'll get some who take the piss but you'll get more who want to be excellent at what they do - and with our modern communications technology we'll all be just a few keystrokes away from finding out who's being naughty and who's being nice and supporting the businesses we believe in with our wallets.

By all means have a body that writes legislation and guidelines to help businesses operate with fairness and efficiency, by all means have this body approve businesses which live up to standards and not approve those which do not - heck, you can even call that body Government 2.0 if you like.

But do not allow that body to enforce its legislation and rules on society and the economy. Remove the police and courts from under the auspices of government monopoly and make them independent. Then, Government 2.0 can put its grievances before an unbiased court like everyone else, it can act as people want it to act; as a tool for the betterment of society and not a buffer between the people and the elites or the Mafia-like protector of large corporations.

It's not the end of civilization or a return to the Dark Ages I advocate but a step forward towards a brighter, fairer and more abundant future. Take away the government's assumed right to commit violence on its people, that's all. Simples. This path began long ago when we disabused ourselves of the right of gods to rule us, then the right of priests to rule us in the name of gods, then the divine right of kings went, then the traditional right of kings, then the popular right of presidents and prime ministers. The last of these illusory rights to rule is that which we have now - the assumed right to rule. This will go the same way as the divine right of kings, one way or another. I'd prefer for it to be brushed aside by reason rather than washed away with blood.

End the violence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2017, 11:22:05 AM
QuoteSure, you'll get some who take the piss but you'll get more who want to be excellent at what they do - and with our modern communications technology we'll all be just a few keystrokes away from finding out who's being naughty and who's being nice and supporting the businesses we believe in with our wallets.
Only the real world doesn't work like that, because of the inherent biases within systems, and also because those with more money can often flood the way in which online systems work, in order to make them come across as decent. You see this in everywhere, including app reviews, car hire, and places to buy products. And it's one thing to have a shitty experience with a car rental (and you have government-backed guarantees to get something back), but expanding that out to everything from worker rights to healthcare and everyone will need to be a lawyer to have a slightest understanding of where they stand at any given point, on any given subject that's currently taken for granted.

I think there's something in having an independence to certain bodies, but even there, you have to be deeply careful. Say the trains were single-entity, how would that be run, and from where? Now you mentioned the courts system. So is that national? Local? If you disagree with a court, where do you turn?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 24 April, 2017, 11:24:06 AM
Sharky,you have some good points;but dont you think the post-governmant transitional period would be very painfull?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:18:19 PM
IP, those biases have always been with us as long as there's been media - even as long as there's been word of mouth - and they only work for so long anyway before the truth comes out. In these here modern times the truth tends to come out quicker because the decent "Watchdog" type countermeasures are also evolving with digital speed.

Law, at heart, is really simple - cause loss, harm or damage to nobody, honour your lawful contracts, pay your lawful bills and be honest in your dealings. That's it. Everyone can understand that and know when they've done wrong or been wronged. It's only when legislative law masquerades as common or natural law that lawyers are required to make sense of it all. There was a saying in the "wild west" that if one lawyer moved into town he'd starve but if two moved in they'd make half a fortune apiece. Removing the backing of violence from legislative law and relegating it to its proper position, that of advisory material, will simplify the law immensely. The primacy of common or natural law will allow questions like was loss, harm or damage caused, was the lawful contract honoured or the lawful bill paid and were the dealings honest? These questions are much easier to address than was The Multivarious Obscurity in Mist Act, Paragraph 12, Section C, Subsection 9a properly adhered to under GNOB and TYTTI guidelines?

There was a time when only the feeble-minded needed lawyers, we should strive to return to that time.

I don't know the answer to your question about other options if you disagree with a court's decision. That's something society will have to ponder and evolve. The court system we have now struggles with that answer. Look at the latest "fine for taking kids out of school" saga. The first local court found in favour of the parent, the next court up found in favour of the parent but the "High Court" found in favour of the government. Democratically, that's a two to one win in favour of the parent but the government only accepts the verdict it agrees with. This is indeed a knotty problem but not an insurmountable one. Just because I don't know the answer either doesn't mean that divorcing courts from government and relegating legislation to an advisory capacity is a bad idea.

The bad car rental experience will still happen, I suppose, but what was the experience? Was the car not as promised (breach of contract), did it break down (causing loss), was it unsafe (causing harm or damage)? Deciding these things in court might be a ballache but is an option, as is the formation of a voluntary "Federation of Master Vehicle Renters" which promises to sort out such things for its members and doesn't allow poor businesses to join, thus offering some level of confidence and protection to the customer.

Smith, yes. If the transition was to implemented overnight it would be especially painful and frightening. Just look at the pain and fear Brexit is causing, and that's just over leaving a protectionist club. These changes should be completed in stages, beginning with a national conversation. The first practical step should be the return of the money creation and control system to public hands. This will probably be the hardest step as the trillionaires will pour considerable resources into defending their monopoly. Once this is done, however, the government will find itself beholden exclusively to the people and able to fund public services and institutions relatively easily and for a fraction of the cost. To be honest, that would do for me in my lifetime but the rest should definitely follow for the benefit of future generations.

Our generation will have the hardest time not only adjusting to a new paradigm but even believing it possible. All our lives we've been led to believe that human beings are horrid and violent things with no regard for each other or the planet and that only government keeps us from smearing ourselves in shit and bashing each others' heads in, even though the reverse is true. 

I'd love to walk straight into a Star Trek economy immediately after the next election but, as somebody said earlier, baby steps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Suede1971 on 24 April, 2017, 12:47:53 PM
So, what you are proposing then is some form of Anarcho-Capitalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2017, 01:23:32 PM
I think he's proposing some sort of anarcho-syndicalist commune where everyone takes it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 24 April, 2017, 01:25:50 PM
No way do syndicalists want to preserve capital and private property
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2017, 01:44:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:18:19 PMIP, those biases have always been with us as long as there's been media - even as long as there's been word of mouth - and they only work for so long anyway before the truth comes out.
But that's just not the case. You say that digital will solve issues of people knowing who to choose for service X, but that implies:

1. People have enough time to do the research
2. People have enough knowledge to understand the content they find
3. There are no inherent biases in the system regarding the content they are able to find

In #3, you have the issue that certain companies will have an active interest in people not being able to find unbiased content, and that ownership over some systems may tend towards monopoly or duopoly. I don't doubt that massive disasters sometimes find their way into the mainstream, but smaller systematic issues are less likely to break through and stay there. And, as I said, while that's one thing to have to deal with when, say, hiring a car or buying online, it's not when it comes to healthcare. (You see this in the USA – their system is closer to what you describe, and it's basically a minefield.)


As for courts, the system needs to at the very least work nationally, or you have a decision in Devon holding no water in Cornwall (or perhaps 'networks' of courts would hold sway in certain areas but not others). The tiered system admittedly has problems when it comes to appeals, but lobbing this all into an anarchist stew would rapidly become mind-bogglingly complicated. Lawyers, I suspect, would emerge winners though.

QuoteSmith, yes. If the transition was to implemented overnight it would be especially painful and frightening. Just look at the pain and fear Brexit is causing, and that's just over leaving a protectionist club.
The fear here is probably more down to: 3.5 million people being left in limbo; the economy predicted to take a nosedive of the likes never seen in modern history; basically nothing being done to retain the UK's place in key international projects; every nation we were supposed to be getting a great deal with stating that actually the much larger EU is a priority over the UK (this list now including the USA).

For what it's worth, I do agree with some of the basic broad sweeps you advocate, such as the notion of more local control. But pure pragmatism suggests individuals and even groups often don't have the capabilities to 'replace' central government on a great many issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 April, 2017, 02:25:42 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2017, 01:23:32 PM
I think he's proposing some sort of anarcho-syndicalist commune where everyone takes it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.

Or is it closer to demarchy or even sortition?  Which I think we discussed before, but am too lazy to search for it, which probably hints at what level of interest I'd take in negotiating complex service supply deals for my friends and neighbours...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2017, 04:34:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 12:18:19 PM
There was a time when only the feeble-minded needed lawyers

When?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 April, 2017, 06:21:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2017, 09:48:24 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 April, 2017, 07:41:46 PMIt's not idealistic to think companies would suddenly pay decent wages if government intervention ceased, it's basic Austrian economics.
The key here would be to look at what companies do now – how many go beyond the absolute minimum they have to? John Lewis is one, given that it's a co-op and therefore the bulk of employees share in the success of the company in real percentage terms (versus getting a 50 quid 'Christmas bonus' or whatever, when your company makes a ton of cash). But that system is very rare.

Not technically a co-operative, but close enough (don't ask me what the difference is but it's there).

All employees (Partners) share the bonus, which is the same percentage for everybody, from the lowest-paid shop assistant to the chairman (not CEO) of the company.  This year's Partnership Bonus was 6%.  A quick google of competitors (such as Sainsbury and M&S) suggest that their equivalent bosses get bonuses of between 100% and 700% - on top of pay rises and share options they seem to award themselves, even in the same weeks as cutting christmas bonuses to their retail assistants...

Now and again other companies have looked at the JLP to find out why partners seem more motivated than in other companies.  They quickly lose interest when they realise they'd have to give away their companies in Trust to their employees to copy the same business model.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 April, 2017, 08:12:31 PM
But since we're not living in a spontaneously organised, post-scarcity (but definitely not utopian) future there are important questions to answer...like will Muslim women be allowed to work as beekeepers once Doctor Paul Nuttall is prime minister?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 April, 2017, 08:38:29 PM
You'll have to ask the hive mind about that one...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 10:03:59 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2017, 01:44:23 PM

You say that digital will solve issues of people knowing who to choose for service X, but that implies:

1. People have enough time to do the research
2. People have enough knowledge to understand the content they find
3. There are no inherent biases in the system regarding the content they are able to find

In #3, you have the issue that certain companies will have an active interest in people not being able to find unbiased content, and that ownership over some systems may tend towards monopoly or duopoly. I don't doubt that massive disasters sometimes find their way into the mainstream, but smaller systematic issues are less likely to break through and stay there. And, as I said, while that's one thing to have to deal with when, say, hiring a car or buying online, it's not when it comes to healthcare. (You see this in the USA – their system is closer to what you describe, and it's basically a minefield.)


As for courts, the system needs to at the very least work nationally, or you have a decision in Devon holding no water in Cornwall (or perhaps 'networks' of courts would hold sway in certain areas but not others). The tiered system admittedly has problems when it comes to appeals, but lobbing this all into an anarchist stew would rapidly become mind-bogglingly complicated. Lawyers, I suspect, would emerge winners though.



I don't think the solutions are as insurmountable as you fear, nor do I think people can't learn to work with a new system. People are perfectly capable of choosing such potentially lethal objects as cars, for example, honing their choices through personal knowledge and experience, trusted sources like reputable review websites and consumer programmes, knowledgeable friends and acquaintances, Google searches, industry literature and even adverts. The same goes for just about every service or good.

And I think truth does come out more quickly in these days of internet communication. Compare the length of time it took for lead in petrol to be even acknowledged publicly as a problem with the length of time it took for BMW's dodgy emissions fudging (I think it was BMW) to come to light. The lead in petrol thing was easier to cover up, in one sense, because of the sheer number and wealth of the parties with interests in keeping it quiet, from redesigns and refittings of petrol refineries to engine manufacturers to petrol station tank and pump alterations. All that money and clout thrown in to covering up, debunking or dismissing the lead thing delayed the truth coming out for a long time, despite the sheer number of people who knew about it. The BMW emissions thing should have been much easier to cover up - just one company with a limited number of people in the know over one relatively small issue, yet it came to light quite quickly.

But.

Once again we have fallen into the Appeal to Consequences trap - talking about the problems with solutions to the root problem, which is the inherant coercive and violent nature of historical and current government and government systems.

Without wanting to appear insulting - nothing could be further from my mind - I simply do not understand your position.

On the one hand, you seem to advocate government using violence and coercion in order to maintain some things, like hospitals (which seem to be on the decline anyway) and roads because, I guess, you think people are too selfish and short-sighted to support these good things without the ultimate threat of being put in a cage while, on the other hand, you are vehemently opposed to what you and your family might be coerced into doing, again with the ultimate threat of being put into a cage or ejected from the country, should this Brexit thing go badly.

I don't understand how you can advocate violence and coercion for one thing and be utterly opposed to it for another - especially when the violent coercion comes from the same body of people who happened to win popularity contests.

You are happy to pay taxes for hospitals - as I think most of us are - yet you don't believe people would pay if they didn't have to. I think there are a few people who wouldn't pay if they didn't have to but that most would, and would experience a sense of accomplishment and/or moral satisfaction from doing so. Forget about everyone else, if taxation was voluntary, would you pay? I can tell you that I certainly would. I, and I suspect this is true of the vast majority of people, would much rather be asked to do something (by people with no more rights and responsibilities than me) than told to do the same thing under threat of violence if I can't or won't do it.

The initiation of violence and coercion are wrong in every case, not just in some cases.

Tordels, we've talked about solutions to voluntary taxation before and came up with the solution of brokers - you fill out a form indicating the infrastructure and services you're willing to support (which some brokers might break down into popular packages) and they do all the work. If you wanted to keep HMRC, then they could offer the same service either directly or through an employer or bank. It would not be a prohibitively complex process - the point being that you're being asked to support the things you believe in and not being made to support the things you don't, such as the forcible relocation of innocent human beings. It gives you the power to do what you see as good instead of ceding that power to an individual person who might be lying to get into power, bribed to change his mind once in power or doesn't understand what he's doing or respect what you want.

M.I.K., in the Athenian City States every man was expected to know and understand the basic law and be capable of using it properly. Hiring lawyers was not only seen as an admission of stupidity but actually illegal. It was much later when one of the Roman emperors (I forget which one) legalised the practice of hiring a lawyer. As legislative law became more and more complex, and governments realised that they could not only write legislation and present it as equal to or above common or natural law, rule through confusion (as it were) facilitated the rise and gradual acceptance of lawyering as a profession, which was allowed by governments both to give the illusion of fairness and to examine their own legislation for loopholes. A few losses in court, for a government, can be worth the fines in order to highlight and subsequently plug the gaps.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2017, 10:34:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 10:03:59 AMPeople are perfectly capable of choosing such potentially lethal objects as cars, for example, honing their choices through personal knowledge and experience, trusted sources like reputable review websites and consumer programmes, knowledgeable friends and acquaintances, Google searches, industry literature and even adverts. The same goes for just about every service or good
Thing is, people often make shitty decisions, despite having the evidence. Many just don't have the time. And going beyond consumer goods, it gets very complex when you're talking about, say, healthcare. In the US, making the wrong choice can very easily bankrupt you. Hell, even making what looks like the right choice can, given the many loopholes (such as you ending up being operated on by a doctor outside of your coverage). There are similar issues when it comes to things like the courts. Fragmenting services is just not beneficial. (Elsewhere, there are pragmatic concerns. With water, trains, etc., the UK would benefit from a centralised single service, in a mixed economy. Instead, these things are fragmented, adding complexity and lowering buying power for the relevant entities.)

QuoteAnd I think truth does come out more quickly in these days of internet communication.
Sometimes it does, yes. But also so does noise. And even messes fade into obscurity pretty rapidly.

QuoteOn the one hand, you seem to advocate government using violence and coercion in order to maintain some things, like hospitals (which seem to be on the decline anyway) and roads because, I guess, you think people are too selfish and short-sighted to support these good things without the ultimate threat of being put in a cage while, on the other hand, you are vehemently opposed to what you and your family might be coerced into doing, again with the ultimate threat of being put into a cage or ejected from the country, should this Brexit thing go badly.

I'm not against government. I'm against this government. And as I've said here in the past, I don't see a world in which people would fund all of the things they say they would. Also, in not having a massive pool of money and its buying power, things become more expensive. It's one thing for, say, BT to scoot about upgrading broadband. Now find out how much it'd cost to get the same thing to happen just on your street from a third party.

QuoteYou are happy to pay taxes for hospitals - as I think most of us are - yet you don't believe people would pay if they didn't have to. I think there are a few people who wouldn't pay if they didn't have to but that most would, and would experience a sense of accomplishment and/or moral satisfaction from doing so.
There's no evidence for that. What would more likely happen: people will pay for these things when they need them themselves, or for their families. See also schooling. The sheer number of people I see bellyaching about their taxes paying for schools when they themselves don't have kids... So what you end up with is a society that pays into things at the precise moment when they need them. Without that safety net, you end up with truly colossal costs for specific services – and a massive underclass for the people who cannot afford them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 11:43:13 AM
If a single person makes a poor decision, the damage is limited. If a government makes a poor decision, the damage is generally widespread and potentially catastrophic. People can be educated and helped to make better decisions, governments think they know best.

There is nothing to stop centralised or coherent services continuing in removing the power to initiate coercion and violence from government.

How can you be against this government when it supposedly provides hospitals, roads, police, courts, H&S, schools, clean water, clean food, farming, fire brigades, paramedics, doctors, nurses, dentists, general practices, benefits, soldiers, weapons, energy, telecommunications infrastructure, national parks, bird sanctuaries, sea defences, climate change mitigation initiatives, scientific research, arts funding, sports funding, anti-litter campaigns, the hilarity of PMQs and everything else? Or are you just against the way this current batch of popularity contest winners are doing jobs you think they have every right to undertake in any way they see fit anyway? It makes no sense to me, sorry. How can you elect and support a person to make decisions on your behalf, because you can't, for whatever reason, make those decisions yourself and then be upset when the decisions this person makes aren't the ones you'd have made? Then, when given the opportunity to think about a system which allows you to make decisions for yourself, refuse and continue to place that power in the hands of others who might allow you to live your life the way you want? And even if you do luck out and get a group of people who do everything you want doing in the way you want it done, the people who disagree with you can kick them out in the next popularity contest and you could end up back at Square One or worse. I honestly don't understand why so many people think this "I give you the right to beat me but please don't beat me" system is so brilliant and doesn't need changing.

Then there's the tax thing. As I've said before, many times, returning the right to create and control the money supply to public hands would go a very long way indeed to paying for all the things our society needs, even those things currently funded by voluntary donations like cancer research and air ambulances which, according to what you seem to believe, are only supported by people who have cancer or are bleeding to death in a remote field somewhere.

In this model, voluntary taxation is a luxury, not a necessity. The icing on the cake, the cherry on top. The flour, eggs, butter, oven and baker are already paid for but you might want to throw a few bob at your local school so it can have extra things; things it doesn't need but would be nice to have. And if you don't want to do that then that's fine too, the place isn't going to fall down because you'd rather save up for a holiday or a new car.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 25 April, 2017, 01:06:10 PM
Holy shit. Yes, I too think social money creation would work without expropriation of private wealth and the absence of a state. Private capital wouldn't then *be* effectively a state (without even the pretense of representation) or anything. State oppression is thethe only oppression that exists.

Also, wage labour and capital accumulation is Good, and my child's education quality being utterly dependent on the munificence of private donors is also Good.

Also, everybody wants to have to pull out a slide-rule and spreadsheet to get their bins collected. Everybody else is as monomaniacally obsessed with contracts and (capital-L) Law as I am. This isn't a living nightmare where everyone's a cash obsessed, petit-bourgeois monad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 01:29:28 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 25 April, 2017, 01:06:10 PM
Holy shit. Yes, I too think social money creation would work without expropriation of private wealth and the absence of a state. Private capital wouldn't then *be* effectively a state (without even the pretense of representation) or anything. State oppression is thethe only oppression that exists.

Also, wage labour and capital accumulation is Good, and my child's education quality being utterly dependent on the munificence of private donors is also Good.

Also, everybody wants to have to pull out a slide-rule and spreadsheet to get their bins collected. Everybody else is as monomaniacally obsessed with contracts and (capital-L) Law as I am. This isn't a living nightmare where everyone's a cash obsessed, petit-bourgeois monad.

Heh. Thanks, JPM. I always find your frothing straw men most amusing :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 01:30:51 PM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 25 April, 2017, 01:06:10 PM
Holy shit. Yes, I too think social money creation would work without expropriation of private wealth and the absence of a state. Private capital wouldn't then *be* effectively a state (without even the pretense of representation) or anything. State oppression is thethe only oppression that exists.

Also, wage labour and capital accumulation is Good, and my child's education quality being utterly dependent on the munificence of private donors is also Good.

Also, everybody wants to have to pull out a slide-rule and spreadsheet to get their bins collected. Everybody else is as monomaniacally obsessed with contracts and (capital-L) Law as I am. This isn't a living nightmare where everyone's a cash obsessed, petit-bourgeois monad.

Heh. Thanks, JPM. I always find your frothing straw men most amusing. This thread can be very dry and a good laugh is always welcome! :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2017, 02:19:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 11:43:13 AMHow can you be against this government when...
I'm not against the principle of government. I'm against the actions of this government. I'm also in favour or representative voting, which we do not have here. In countries that do, the lurching nature of government is generally much softened.

QuoteThen there's the tax thing...
OK, so here's what I don't understand about your system.

QuoteIn this model, voluntary taxation is a luxury, not a necessity. The icing on the cake, the cherry on top. The flour, eggs, butter, oven and baker are already paid for but you might want to throw a few bob at your local school so it can have extra things; things it doesn't need but would be nice to have.
So where does the rest of the money come from? How does a school meet its running costs? How does a new school get built? In your system, there is no centralised taxation, and so where does the money for basic services and amenities come from?

QuoteAs I've said before, many times, returning the right to create and control the money supply to public hands would go a very long way indeed to paying for all the things our society needs, even those things currently funded by voluntary donations like cancer research and air ambulances which, according to what you seem to believe, are only supported by people who have cancer or are bleeding to death in a remote field somewhere.
That's not at all what I said. My point was that people in general rarely give up money they don't have to. Right now, we have – to take medical – a system in the UK where everyone chips in (via, in your thinking, coercion), and that covers the majority of citizens for the majority of conditions. In other words, if I break a limb or get cancer, the state will take care of me, on the basis of this national insurance.

If we head over to the USA, the system is not nationalised for the most part. Instead, you pay insurers, and the net result causes all kinds of problems. Many cannot afford insurance. Even when people can, they often end up bankrupted because of doctors showing up who are outside of their plan.

If such taxation happened to be voluntary, how would you end up with something not unlike the US system? How would you get it closer to the British system, where you can enter a hospital anywhere in the country and rapidly receive treatment for a serious problem, safe in the knowledge you won't end up losing everything you own in order to pay for that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 25 April, 2017, 02:22:46 PM
You're right dude, people's credits would totally be able to compete with Virgin Crowns and not be undercut, loss-led, and undermined instantly, through positive thinking or The Secret or something
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 April, 2017, 02:59:20 PM
Ayn Rand for hippies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 April, 2017, 03:12:09 PM
Well, that's the thing.  It looks egalitarian at first glance but I can't see how it couldn't end in out-of-control, dog-eat-dog capitalism, with the poor and disenfranchised getting crushed as is normal*.  Catalonians established a fairly functional, if short-lived, anarcho-socialist society, but that's a different thing entirely.

*I'm not saying the normal system of crushing them is good either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 April, 2017, 04:30:47 PM
Chancellor: "we have 400 Billion for the NHS"

PM:"great!!!"

C:"aaaand... £5.70 for everything else"

PM: "Oh... Well if we let people get to the point where they need medical treatment for starvation, we can give some food out as medical supplies... - Could the nurses investigate the A&E GBH cases?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 04:53:55 PM
IP, simply by voting, paying taxes and believing in the right of MPs to rule the country, you are supporting the actions of this government. There is no way around this. You can't support and not support at the same time. You can either follow the leaders you believe in and ignore the ones you don't, which is the kind of thing anarchists promote, or follow all the leaders installed under the system you believe in (in this case democratic majority rule) whether you agree with them or not. If you believe in a government's right to rule, then you must believe in a government's right to enforce its rule by any means necessary. This is fundamental to the statist belief. I believe that following the instructions of government, especially in what are supposed to be free countries, can only ever be optional. The statist believes that all government instructions must be obeyed. One cannot just be a statist when one agrees with the state or only follow the statist rules one likes because that's not statism, it's anarchy. I'm not sure if it's possible to be an anarcho-statist but you seem to be giving it a good go! :)

Anyway, on to the taxation thing again - let me try and explain the way I see it and help you to understand where I'm coming from. I'll try and keep it clear and simple but not simplistic. If I fail, allow me to apologise in advance, for it is not my intention to insult anyone's intelligence or, conversely, baffle with bullshit.

As you know, the money creation business is probably the most profitable business on the planet. It was appropriated by private concerns hundreds of years ago. The Bank of England, for example, was set up by a consortium of private businessmen who purchased their shares with BoE money (created out of nothing) to buy them with, amongst other tricks. (Imagine how many things you could buy if you could create your own money and con kings and ministers and peasants into accepting it as real! Imagine how hard you'd fight to keep that ability, especially if it's been the "family business" for generations...)

The thing to keep in mind about modern money is that it is illusory - the only thing backing it is faith. It's worth something only because people believe it is worth something. I can spend, and indeed have spent, many hours and many words explaining this in detail and so I'm not going to do that again. All you have to remember when it comes to an alternative to general and widespread taxation is that modern money is not real.

This unreality is seen by some as a flaw and a fundamental weakness, which it is. It is also a great opportunity.

It costs a private bank virtually nothing to create any amount of money from nothing, say £1M for easy reckoning, and lend it into society. Society then must pay back the £1M plus interest. (The original million is generally "destroyed" upon being paid back but the interest remains "real" and acts as the bank's profit.) As you can see, this is a great way to make a fortune.

Now, imagine taking that right away from the private banks and returning it to either a nationalised central bank, myriad smaller public banks or a combination of the two. Money is created and lent in the same way but, as these banks are public, profits are used to support public services and infrastructure instead of being wasted on private yachts and stock market speculation.

Public money can also be created and spent into society, going directly to nurses, doctors, civil servants etc. as all or part of their wages or used to purchase equipment, supplies, buildings, etc.

But that's just one part of it.

Private banks could still play an important and profitable role, of both a lending and speculative kind. Private lending banks would not be permitted to create money as they do now*. They would have to purchase money created by public banks and trade it as trade in all commodities is undertaken. If they invest it and lose it, they lose it and don't get bailed out - there's no need, the money the private bank loses has already been paid for so the public banks are shielded from taking a loss. If they make a profit they make a profit and can afford to purchase more money from public banks and invest more in private enterprises. If they do well in their investments they will become a rich bank which, like any successful business, is good for society. If they continually make bad investments they will eventually run out of capital, be unable to purchase more money and fail without bringing down the rest of the system or being bailed out - an end to quantitative easing, which is basically throwing money into a black hole. A private bank will also no longer be able to lend its way out of trouble, shifting its debts into the public sector in order to survive.

Just these few aspects of a reformed monetary creation and banking system would buy us all the hospitals, roads, schools and whatever else we need. How that system is to be organised is not an especially complex question. I expect government will cling on to its power for some time before eventually dying a natural and hopefully peaceful death and so it could, and probably will be the initial organiser of this new system, much as it sticks in my craw to say. This would constitute the minimum required change, which is usually the safest way to go.

Even JPM's "Virgin Crowns" would be perfectly acceptable as a currency as they would have to be backed by money purchased from public sources or representative of fractions of Virgin's worth, like stocks and shares. Owning Virgin Crowns would be like owning investment bonds, the value of which could go up or down without drastically affecting the public pound.

With the monetary system now supporting society (instead of the other way around, which is the situation we find ourselves in today), personal taxes would be unnecessary** as any shortfall would be made up through low business taxes, but only as required. If, however, a person wanted to donate money to a local school or hospital, or to fund research or infrastructure projects, they could do so or not according to their own personal choice with zero risk of tanking the NHS.

There are, of course, technicalities to be addressed and the construction of a public money creation and control system would not be quite as straightforward as I've made it sound but it is entirely doable.

*They would be allowed to create their own money (see JPM's "Virgin Crowns") but it would have to be*** backed by already purchased public money or fractions of the creating body's worth.

**This is not entirely true. Taxes would still exist but serve a completely different purpose. The amount of money in an economy determines its worth, the more there is the less it's worth and vice versa. Taxation in this system would act as a kind of "pressure valve," rising to mitigate the effects of too much money in the system and falling to counteract the effects of too little. (Incidentally, as the private banks today create far more money (in the form of debt) than is destroyed, the value of money is constantly declining. This is the real cause of inflation and a horribly vicious circle - the more money is created, the less it's worth and the less money is worth, the more needs to be created. A public money system, properly managed, would have the natural side-effect benefit of ending inflation.)

***This does not require legislation or government enforcement (although I have few problems with one artificial entity (government) enforcing rules on another artificial entity (corporations), even to the point of "executing" a corporation for causing damage to society) as common or natural law covers what is and is not lawful and any humans caught causing loss, harm or damage or dishonouring contracts or bills or acting dishonestly are open to prosecution - only they won't be able to use government debt and the threat of torpedoing the economy as a shield to avoid justice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 09:51:55 PM
An essay by Leonard Read explaining the complexity of human interactions, economics, freedom and the ultimate pointlessness of coercive government based upon one of the simplest objects you possess, the humble pencil.

Go here (https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil-audio-pdf-and-html/) to download I, Pencil in pdf, epub, mp3 or html format.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 26 April, 2017, 10:01:19 AM
It's like, I dunno, trying to explain to an anime nerd that you don't want to think about Dragon Ball Z at all, and they write a 3000 word footnoted thesis about how you'd be able to cosplay as Super Saiyan Goku OR Son Gohan in their ideal society and how could you not want that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 April, 2017, 10:12:03 AM
Quote from: JPMaybe on 26 April, 2017, 10:01:19 AM
It's like, I dunno, trying to explain to an anime nerd that you don't want to think about Dragon Ball Z at all, and they write a 3000 word footnoted thesis about how you'd be able to cosplay as Super Saiyan Goku OR Son Gohan in their ideal society and how could you not want that?
A surreal analogy, but bloody hell it's an ancurate one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 10:34:50 AM
My reply was to IP.

The I, Pencil essay link was for anyone who might be interested.

Sorry if that was unclear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2017, 10:35:48 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2017, 04:53:55 PMAnyway, on to the taxation thing again
To break this down, then, you suggest:

- Creating a 'public' banking system that is more localised, and has to utilise profits to fund public services.
- Forcing the 'private' banking system to stand on its own.

in the latter case, you therefore greatly increase risk for investors of all stripes (including basic savers), who no longer have any guarantee in cases of banking collapse. In the former case, you're relying on local (or perhaps national – you weren't clear) banking profits to essentially pay for everything that's currently funded out of taxation, bar income from people willing to 'top up' local services on the basis of their generosity.

Is that the gist of it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 April, 2017, 10:51:42 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2017, 10:35:48 AM
in the latter case, you therefore greatly increase risk for investors of all stripes (including basic savers), who no longer have any guarantee in cases of banking collapse. In the former case, you're relying on local (or perhaps national – you weren't clear) banking profits to essentially pay for everything that's currently funded out of taxation, bar income from people willing to 'top up' local services on the basis of their generosity.

Is that the gist of it?

Total UK bank profits for 2016 = ~£12.4bn. Let's say they don't have to shell out £55bn in future years on PPI refunds, giving us a pot of £67.4bn. Total government expenditure for 2016 = ~£784bn, leaving us with only a 91% funding shortfall under this splendid scheme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 11:11:34 AM
Not exactly.

Public banks would be the safest as the creators of money. The ordinary members of society could store their savings here safely as these would not be risky investment banks. As well as offering safe savings accounts and services for the ordinary person, these banks would also be the source of all money (think of it as a gold mine) which can be used to fund public services and infrastructure, sold or lent to private banks at a profit and lent to ordinary people at very low to zero interest rates.

The private banks would be the main speculative investment banks which would offer a higher return for a greater risk - a risk the public banks would be effectively shielded from as the only money they can risk is their own, that money already borrowed or purchased from the public system.

The public BoE could be national and have branches all over. Private banks could be national or local. There could also be local public banks, which could act similarly to private banks but, being public (run by the equivalent of local councils and along the same lines as the Bank of North Dakota, for example) they would not indulge in risky investments.

The goal is to make the banks work for society.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 11:30:15 AM
Jim, total government revenue in the fiscal year 2015/16 was projected to be £673 billion, whereas total expenditure was estimated at £742 billion. Therefore, the total deficit was £69 billion. This represented a rate of borrowing of a little over £1.3 billion per week.

On top of this, as of Q1 2015, UK government debt amounted to £1.56 trillion, or 81.58% of total GDP, at which time the annual cost of servicing (paying the interest) the public debt amounted to around £43 billion (which is roughly 3% of GDP or 8% of UK government tax income).

Government creating its own money would save a fortune.

It's allowing private banks to create the money that leads to this situation of having a government and national debt which can never be paid off and can only continue to rise. (Remember the inflation cycle, the more money there is (represented by savings and debt) the less it's worth and the less it's worth the more is needed.)

Yes, initially the private banks would have to take a haircut, some, most or even all of that £1.56 trillion (which, remember, only exists as ledger entries anyway), but it would lead to a much more stable system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 April, 2017, 11:52:08 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 11:30:15 AM
Jim, total government revenue in the fiscal year 2015/16 was projected to be £673 billion, whereas total expenditure was estimated at £742 billion. Therefore, the total deficit was £69 billion. This represented a rate of borrowing of a little over £1.3 billion per week.

Yes, but we're not talking about making up the deficit. Where do you think that £673bn in revenue came from? The government's single largest income source is personal taxation, which your system claims is unnecessary. At the very least, in the 2016 comparison, you have to account for the ~£170bn in personal tax receipts that would no longer be received. Are we getting rid of NI as well? Because that's another ~£120bn that's not coming in each year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 12:26:20 PM
Yes, Jim, you are correct. However, these figures are generated using the current system - the system which caused the problem in the first place and skews the figures. The current system cannot be used to fix the current system.

Inflation, as I've said, is rampant and adding a large magnifier to the cost of everything.

I admit that the idea of the banking system paying for everything right off the bat is an extreme one and would require a financial re-set, which is just one option and the end goal of a mathematically "perfect" economy - an economy based entirely on carefully crafted and applied formulae and algorithms, which is quite possible in theory.

Other options exist which allow the banking system to pay for varying levels of public services and infrastructure - but all of them require outlawing private money creation and control. Even if we stopped at making the system pay just for the NHS and nothing else, I think that would be worth it - especially given that government debt and deficit would also cease to exist.

There's even the option of the old tradition of the seven year debt jubilee - where, after seven years, all debts are forgiven and everything starts again. I'm not really a fan of this option but it is a possibility and would mean that money creation could remain, at least partially, in private hands.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 April, 2017, 01:10:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 12:26:20 PM
Yes, Jim, you are correct. However, these figures are generated using the current system - the system which caused the problem in the first place and skews the figures. The current system cannot be used to fix the current system.

So you're proposing to replace one form of funding with another that's an order of magnitude smaller...? You need more than inflation effects and a bit of hand-waving about 'skewing' to explain that away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 01:46:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark
link=topic=28209.msg954647#msg954647
date=1493205980

Inflation, as I've said, is rampant and adding a
large magnifier to the cost of everything.
I admit that the idea of the banking system
paying for everything right off the bat is an
extreme one and would require a financial
re-set, which is just one option and the end
goal of a mathematically "perfect" economy -
an economy based entirely on carefully
crafted and applied formulae and algorithms,
which is quite possible in theory.
Other options exist which allow the banking
system to pay for varying levels of public
services and infrastructure - but all of them
require outlawing private money creation and
control. Even if we stopped at making the
system pay just for the NHS and nothing else,
I think that would be worth it - especially
given that government debt and deficit would
also cease to exist.
There's even the option of the old tradition of
the seven year debt jubilee - where, after
seven years, all debts are forgiven and
everything starts again. I'm not really a fan of
this option but it is a possibility and would
mean that money creation could remain, at
least partially, in private hands.

Given that I obviously know nothing about this subject, how would you propose to make things better?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2017, 03:44:21 PM
I propose making the thread about big butts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 03:47:00 PM
It would certainly be more enjoyable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 26 April, 2017, 04:30:24 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2017, 03:44:21 PM
I propose making the thread about big butts.

Well, there's already one giant arse permanently parked on top of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 05:28:43 PM


Bosh

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 April, 2017, 06:44:12 PM
Harsh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 06:55:08 PM
He never forgave me for the VVotV thread - nearly five years ago. Sad, really.

And Jim focuses on one small part of the solution, bank profits (under the current system), and ignores the other elements like the effects of nullifying inflation, destroying government debt, sovereigncy and, biggest aspect of all, creating money and spending it directly on public services, infrastructure, wages, energy and supplies. But no, he ignores all this because one small part of the solution won't pay for everything. It's like dismissing the concept of shoes because they don't cover the whole body.

Unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 26 April, 2017, 07:54:42 PM
This thread is already about big buts...a few unsubstantiated claims...some empty assertions...a complete lack of plans...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2017, 07:55:35 PM
Not really unbelievable, given that your solution appears to leave a massive shortfall in public finances, despite all of the potential advantages you talk about. Although that might just be the anarcho-statist in me talking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 08:33:58 PM
IP, the "anarcho-statist" crack was a joke to highlight a point I was making - I'm sorry if it went too far and became an insult, that certainly wasn't my intention.

If I did misjudge and insult you then I apologise and take it back.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 April, 2017, 09:45:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 06:55:08 PM
He never forgave me for the VVotV thread - nearly five years ago. Sad, really.


Was that the vaccination discussion?  (Which believe me, I have no intention whatsoever of resurrecting.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 09:50:10 PM
No, something else entirely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 April, 2017, 09:50:51 PM
Fair enough, I won't delve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 09:53:51 PM
Ta. That's probably for the best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 26 April, 2017, 10:09:17 PM
So for General Election, Whoever wins... We fucked?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2017, 10:12:14 PM
We can still be okay if people pull together and abandon the factional squabbliyeah we're fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 April, 2017, 10:39:24 PM
I'm not sure why Corbyn appeas to be refusing a TV debate unless May is involved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2017, 11:06:11 PM
I imagine because even Seamus Milne knows it would be idiotic to subject Corbyn to a televised dogpile.  May would be the one on the defensive in an all-leaders debate, but without the PM it's just the opposition parties attacking each other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 27 April, 2017, 07:43:31 AM
Still, if people are going for the May's a coward line, the Mirror breaking out the giant chicken and Corbyn supporters complaining about not enough media coverage, doing the same as May seems to me like the worst option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 27 April, 2017, 08:10:47 AM
In today's main news, professional distraction Boris Johnson has said a mean thing.  how does those bode for the future of society?
Why does everyone hate Corbyn? More at 10, 11 and 3. 

in other news, Tory supporters launch biological terror attack on their political opponents. https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/angus-mearns/413804/update-forfar-lockdown-was-due-to-politically-motivated-anthrax-threat-articleisfree/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 27 April, 2017, 08:30:49 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 27 April, 2017, 08:10:47 AM
In today's main news, professional distraction Boris Johnson has said a mean thing.  how does those bode for the future of society?
Why does everyone hate Corbyn? More at 10, 11 and 3. 


They had him on GMB* this morning calling Corbyn a 'Mugwump', or some such bollocks. What a crock o' shite!

Cheers

*GMB are massive Tory fans as is evident by their demonization of anyone that belongs to another party! I complained to the programme the other day about an interview in which the Labour guy (can't remember name) wasn't allowed to finish a single sentence. In the same  interview, Suzanne Reed picked up the guy's personal iPad and held it up to the camera, making a massive song and dance about a remain sticker. Because that's clearly all we care about! Shit programme, shit channel!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2017, 09:51:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2017, 08:33:58 PM
IP, the "anarcho-statist" crack was a joke to highlight a point I was making - I'm sorry if it went too far and became an insult, that certainly wasn't my intention.
Don't worry – I thought it was funny. As for my position, I want to see change in society, just not to the wholesale radical change you want. I'd be happy with a society sitting somewhere in a mash-up of SNP/GP/LD manifestos from 2015 – recognisable but also altered in terms of strong provision for services, a national basic wage, huge overhauls for energy, and so on. 

Quote from: Goaty on 26 April, 2017, 10:09:17 PMSo for General Election, Whoever wins... We fucked?
The problem is that with Labour unwilling to consider cooperation, there's almost no chance of anything other than a Tory majority – and a big one. So, probably, yes. I've seen people excited about the Lib Dems finally doing well under FPTP, but that's just not going to happen for a reasonable definition of well. They're polling between 8 and 12%. To do 'well' under FPTP (in the same way Labour and the Tories do), they'd need more than 52 and 78 seats. I'd be surprised if they end up with fewer than 15, but that seems a likely end point (which would mean on about 10% of the vote they'd get 2.5% of the seats. FPTP in action again.)

Quote from: Steve Green on 26 April, 2017, 10:39:24 PM
I'm not sure why Corbyn appeas to be refusing a TV debate unless May is involved.
PMQs would suggest because he's useless at debate. He's fine being a protestor and rattling off a speech. But in the Commons, he's a disaster. A remotely adequate politician would be tearing chunks off of May (who's also awful), but Corbyn bangs on with his 'questions from the public' (a good idea precisely once), and doesn't bother with follow-ups. Angus Robertson has been a more effective opposition in the Commons than Corbyn, which is bloody insane.

But here's the thing: Corbyn and Labour have said they want this election as a means to get their policies out there. Going on telly and arguing in favour of them would seem a decent way of doing that. The TV channels should bench the both of them – and still give their empty chairs time to answer the questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 10:13:01 AM
Thanks, IP. Although there's very little we agree on, I do enjoy our arguments ("arguments" in the classical sense) and appreciate the fact that you take the time to present counter-arguments instead of just hurling scorn, ridicule and insults.

Not long ago, someone said I was unpleasant to argue with. That upset me and I have, I hope, taken that criticism on board. That's not the person I want to be. I, like you and almost everyone else here, argue for a better society. That's my motive, not the belittling, ridicule or contempt of others. That we don't agree is probably a good thing because no one person can possibly have all the answers and the future must be comprised of many voices.

Now, I'll let you statists get back to arguing about which idiots to put in charge... ;-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 27 April, 2017, 10:48:46 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 10:13:01 AM
Thanks, IP. Although there's very little we agree on, I do enjoy our arguments ("arguments" in the classical sense) and appreciate the fact that you take the time to present counter-arguments instead of just hurling scorn, ridicule and insults.

Not long ago, someone said I was unpleasant to argue with. That upset me and I have, I hope, taken that criticism on board. That's not the person I want to be. I, like you and almost everyone else here, argue for a better society. That's my motive, not the belittling, ridicule or contempt of others. That we don't agree is probably a good thing because no one person can possibly have all the answers and the future must be comprised of many voices.

Now, I'll let you statists get back to arguing about which idiots to put in charge... ;-)

Things in here seem relatively cordial to me.

Shark, Have you considered writing a book based on your idea for the ideal future society, by which I mean your Ideal in the near future? your own Atlas Shrugged, if you like. (I'm  not trying to compare you to Ayn Rand, it's just that Atlas Shrugged is the only example I can think of.) Debates on a message boards are by necessity expressed in short chunks and as soon as you walk a longer path that a few steps from the news the ideas become to complex to break down into bite size chunks.     
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
I have thought about it, yes, even tried planning and plotting one out a few times but my ambition has always outstripped my talent, coming out either stupid and simplistic or pompous and impenetrable. I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged very much and regret losing my copy to "The Event."

Maybe one day I'll be up to doing justice to the subject but, in the meantime, I'm happy to be writing scripts for Zarjaz, DogBreath and Paragon - which are much more enjoyable! :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2017, 11:09:23 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 27 April, 2017, 07:43:31 AM
Still, if people are going for the May's a coward line, the Mirror breaking out the giant chicken and Corbyn supporters complaining about not enough media coverage, doing the same as May seems to me like the worst option.

Corbyn has been pushing for a debate with May since the GE was announced, May is the one who's ruled them out entirely.
As for getting media coverage, the only benefactors of an opposition-only debate would be the Tories and their "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative.  When Corbyn is dogpiled by the other leaders as they're egged on by the interviewer, Labour can kiss those recent polling gains goodbye.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 12:14:20 PM
If the other leaders had any sense, they'd empty chair and direct all of their venom at the empty chair. But no way anyone but the Greens would follow that plan.

I disagree that Corbyn is useless at PMQs. The whole affair is fucking stupid with all the jeering and point-scoring being the expected behaviour, rather than engaging with any questions or answers. I honestly don't know why we cede it any importance as the PM is able to simply ignore or throw back a personal attack rather than provide PMAs. It's basically this https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/video/2017/jan/22/theresa-may-dodges-question-trident-misfire-four-times-video but with many chortles, guffaws and other noises that should only exist in Beano-era onomatopoeia. It's a meaningless circus.

I think the questions from the public were a great idea, frankly. The fact they are sneered at so universally says more about the failings of our political class and our media than anything else.

Congratulations on being the first nice person I've ever met who enjoyed Atlas Shrugged Sharky!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 27 April, 2017, 12:14:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
I have thought about it, yes, even tried planning and plotting one out a few times but my ambition has always outstripped my talent, coming out either stupid and simplistic or pompous and impenetrable. I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged very much and regret losing my copy to "The Event."

Maybe one day I'll be up to doing justice to the subject but, in the meantime, I'm happy to be writing scripts for Zarjaz, DogBreath and Paragon - which are much more enjoyable! :)

I am far more likely to read Zarjaz, DogBreath and Paragon, but I am at once not your audience and very much your audience. And just because I'm not your audience doesn't mean I wouldn't encourage you to write your own 'Atlas Shrugged'. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 April, 2017, 12:19:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged very much...

-choke-

One of the most poisonous hateful tracts ever written, a bible for the selfish and self-absorbed, AFAIAC. Even given your libertarian streak, I'm shocked that someone as compasionate and community-focused as your good self found anything to like in there.  Care to elaborate?


.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 12:23:05 PM
Also - Zac Goldsmith to stand in Richmond Park as the Conservative candidate?

:|

This is just depressing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 12:33:10 PM
Thanks, Blaze - I really need to find another copy and read it again. I remember thinking how full of good observations and almost good ideas. My favourite line from it, which I have actually used on officials, is, "I will not engage in an argument whose ultimate expression is the barrel of a gun."

Steven, thanks to you too - we all need, and appreciate, a little encouragement from time to time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 April, 2017, 12:37:04 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 April, 2017, 12:19:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 11:08:36 AM
I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged very much...

-choke-

One of the most poisonous hateful tracts ever written, a bible for the selfish and self-absorbed, AFAIAC. Even given your libertarian streak, I'm shocked that someone as compasionate and community-focused as your good self found anything to like in there.  Care to elaborate?


.

I haven't read it - I got about two thirds of the way through The Fountainhead and found it deeply unpleasant too.  Basically a celebration of being a narcissistic sociopath (and a rapist, come to that).  Zack Snyder is welcome to it - Howard Roark is about as appealing as his murderous Batman and sniveling Ozymandias.  And the buildings he designs sound fucking horrible too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2017, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 12:14:20 PMI disagree that Corbyn is useless at PMQs. The whole affair is fucking stupid with all the jeering and point-scoring being the expected behaviour, rather than engaging with any questions or answers.

I honestly can't see what he does differently with May that he didn't do with Cameron - nor what May does worse than her predecessor - so can't understand why people say he has a good day every now and then.  As far as I can tell it's the same old shit every Wednesday and the only difference now is the gender balance.

All of which is irrelevant - PMQs exist only to give the illusion of accountability on the part of the PM.  Practically, they achieve fuck all except to keep the commentariat employed and reinforce existing bias.  Nothing good will ever come of the inbred panto that is PMQs... which is the whole point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 12:48:51 PM
Tordels, I read Atlas Shrugged because I found out it was Alan Greenspan's favourite book. AG is, of course, "the enemy" and I wanted to know why he liked the book so much. Reading it, I could see why. It is just as you describe, one of the most poisonous hateful tracts ever
written and a bible for the selfish and self-absorbed. If one intends to argue against the Bible, one must read it first.

As I said earlier (and please don't ask me to quote specifics because I can't remember), it's full of almost good ideas - selfish notions that are ghastly in individuals but would work well universally - a kind of small degree of separation from enlightened self-interest.

It's also invaluable as a resource for understanding how the powers that shouldn't be see themselves and the "useless eaters" they believe they rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 April, 2017, 12:59:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 12:48:51 PM
It's also invaluable as a resource for understanding how the powers that shouldn't be see themselves and the "useless eaters" they believe they rule.

Well I'm with you there!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
I enjoyed The Fountainhead in the same spirit but not as much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 02:04:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2017, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 12:14:20 PMI disagree that Corbyn is useless at PMQs. The whole affair is fucking stupid with all the jeering and point-scoring being the expected behaviour, rather than engaging with any questions or answers.

I honestly can't see what he does differently with May that he didn't do with Cameron - nor what May does worse than her predecessor - so can't understand why people say he has a good day every now and then.  As far as I can tell it's the same old shit every Wednesday and the only difference now is the gender balance.

I agree there! It's the same old shit. Seems as though the focus is always on the question, never the response.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2017, 02:48:42 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 April, 2017, 12:14:20 PMI disagree that Corbyn is useless at PMQs. The whole affair is fucking stupid
I agree with the latter, but on the former point, he almost never follows up. He so often goes with that device of "a concerned mother from Rotherham", waits for a non-answer from May, and then moves on. By contrast, Robertson often rattles May with his two questions (which, reportedly, have never overlapped with Corbyn's – suggesting the SNP and Labour leadership have zero overlap about the pressing issues of the day).

But really it showcases why neither of them wants to do a debate – they'd be crushed under the relative might of Sturgeon, Lucas, Farron, et al (and I use 'relative' there quite deliberately).

As for Goldsmith, was anyone really expecting anything else? Tories will be Tories. They're all closing ranks now, with the so-called moderates ditching Open Britain due to it being partisan (it isn't) and not seeing the irony in their partisan actions. I hope Olney wins and Labour steps aside. The former's possible; the latter's improbable, despite Labour's only chance in that seat being to drag enough votes from Olney to turn it blue again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 27 April, 2017, 04:17:34 PM
(http://i68.tinypic.com/eqa4pt.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 28 April, 2017, 12:55:39 PM
This could be fun - why just have a Westminster election and an Assembly election when you could make it a  triple bill with another 'in/out' referendum?  (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/27/eu-to-debate-recognising-united-ireland-to-allow-swift-return-for-north?CMP=fb_gu)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 April, 2017, 01:44:03 PM
Wow. Whereas a united Ireland could be a complete clusterfuck, I also don't want the return of the awful, intimidating borders of my childhood / early adulthood - and in my book, the more people we have left in the EU, the better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 28 April, 2017, 01:53:22 PM
Yeah, being able to go back and forth over the border without fixed or mobile checkpoints is handy alright (I remember many times having to go waay out of my way when encountering the mined roads too), but even though a majority of NI voted to remain, when it comes to the actual border, a lot people who voted remain on the EU referendum will I feel see UK citizenship as more important to them. There's also what the Republic think which isn't really focused on much I reckon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 April, 2017, 03:26:57 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 28 April, 2017, 01:53:22 PM, a lot people who voted remain on the EU referendum will I feel see UK citizenship as more important to them.

I suspect you're right.  But I wonder if the Brexit shit really does hit the economic fan whether they will think differently. 

In any case I'm not sure our government would be capable of keeping the six counties living in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.  The improvement in road quality, for example, is almost instantly noticeable as you cross the border Northwards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 03 May, 2017, 05:05:48 PM
I am listening to a podcast about a Role Playing Game called Red Markets, which is a 'game of post-apocalyptic economic horror. The dead have risen and the rent is still due'.

Why post this in the Politics Thread? Because one of the weird cults that have sprung up in the zombie apocalypse of this game is the Randians... despite other cults wilfully spreading infection, kidnapping children or performing wild field tests of experimental drugs, the Randians are the worst.

I recommend it!  (http://actualplay.roleplayingpublicradio.com/2016/06/genre/horror/red-markets-beta-the-brutalists-episode-11/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 May, 2017, 05:39:42 PM
I met a former colleague on the train yesterday, who works on RoI/NI cross border environmental planning issues. He reports that his entire working life is now 'fukkin Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit...' and nothing, absolutely nothing else. He looked like shit.

And it hasn't even happened yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 May, 2017, 07:26:44 PM
He sounds like a whining ninny.
Brexit will be great success for glorious leader Theresa May.  Tory Reich will last one thousand years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 May, 2017, 08:16:37 PM
She's lost it. I was worried before. I'm terrified for the future of my country now. If it wasn't so insanely difficult to get all the information required for the Irish birth register, I'd be clutching an Irish passport for dear life right about now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 03 May, 2017, 08:20:56 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 04 April, 2017, 01:43:19 PM
So no-one got fucking clues on what to do with Brexit?

Still nothing...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 May, 2017, 08:25:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 May, 2017, 08:16:37 PM
She's lost it. I was worried before. I'm terrified for the future of my country now.

Today's developments are truly terrifying but the question is what the feck can we do?  I mean, what is the alternative?  Corbyn?  Nuttall?  Farron?  How have we wound up in the position of having nobody in parliament that has the first clue how to run the country, other than in to the ground that is.  Voting in this election is the democratic equivalent of pointing a gun at your foot and pulling the trigger.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 May, 2017, 08:31:52 PM
We're fucked, basically. IF enough people voted in a sensible fashion AND the young en mass decided to vote AND people took proper notice of the tactical option, even if that meant holding their nose before scribbling that X, we might be able to avoid a massive Tory majority. With a ton of luck, we could even get a hung parliament. That's our best bet, really.

And, yes, despite everything I think about Corbyn, I'd sooner he was in number 10 next month than May. He has all kinds of problems from an ideological standpoint, but May is beyond the pale. It'll be interesting to see what the backlash is like next GE. If (big if) Labour gets its act together, we could easily see another 1997. Well, assuming the Tories don't stitch everything up to the point it's impossible for anyone else to win. Mind you, the way May's going, other parties will be outlawed by July.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moly on 03 May, 2017, 08:35:43 PM
Wait until June the 9th when she announces judge fish a deputy pm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 03 May, 2017, 09:17:00 PM
Pretty safe tory seat here in Wimbledon - Labour have been pretty absent, Lib Dems a bit more active. 70% remain - but the incumbent had twice as many votes as the second placed candidate last time.

Flip Flopping between the two - but I can't see much change happening here.

Farron dealing with the leaver today looked a lot better than May's stealth tour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 May, 2017, 10:23:32 PM
It only looks like she's lost it, because this xenophobic nonsense is bread and butter for the hard right Tory voters: "every setback is the fault of Johnny Foreigner out to settle a score with Blighty!"

Oh, and it goes without saying, but on no account vote.
It's too late already - some polls say so, and if some polls conducted by Tories and peers of the realm for conservative newspapers say so, then best just dig a hole and climb in.  It's a foregone conclusion.  Don't bother trying to mobilise or convince others to vote, just stay at home on the day or better yet, have a day out while you still can - the walls and security checkpoints haven't gone up yet, after all.  I hear the global warming that isn't happening has more or less guaranteed a sunny day, so a beach outing has to be a contender, though you should consider enjoying some countryside while you still have some, before fracking sinkholes swallow those parts of it not reserved for fox hunts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 May, 2017, 10:50:24 PM
I will vote tomorrow and I will vote in June. I don't think I've missed a vote since I turned 18 and I won't start now. And I hope the polling is vastly wrong so we can at least be a little happy the day after. But I feel like every week since last June has just been hammer blow after hammer blow, and I'm tired. Depressed, anxious and tired.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 May, 2017, 07:56:20 AM
VOTE!

It does matter.  They are not all the same.  It does make a difference. 

(And any any local candidate trying to convince you that voting them in to your local council will affect Brexit negotiations, or Scottish independence referendums, or anything else that isn't a local issue is a liar, an idiot, or thinks you're an idiot.)

VOTE!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 May, 2017, 03:29:31 PM
No Lib Dem for me, nor Green. My choices were:

- Actually really good Tory I'd have voted for, had he not been a Tory. (After what's happened of late, and May's idiocy yesterday, it was a step too far to put my X in his box, so to speak.)
- A paper kipper
- The fucking Monster Raving Loony Party. (Just go away already.)
- A Labour bloke who on Facebook sounded pretty good, but has literally no chance of getting elected
- A local 'community campaign' rep, from a party that has about a third of the local council.

The last of those _might_ stand a chance, and so I went with him. But: bleurgh. If nothing else, this showcases that Tory extremism can erode support in some places. Five years ago, I'd have voted for the local Tory without a second thought. He's a decent bloke, has views that align with my own (in terms of local politics), and is very willing to meet and chat to residents. But the Tories are too toxic now for me to go near that option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 04 May, 2017, 03:52:05 PM
Farron pt 2

http://news.sky.com/video/part-2-entente-cordiale-farron-and-voter-kiss-and-make-up-10861394 (http://news.sky.com/video/part-2-entente-cordiale-farron-and-voter-kiss-and-make-up-10861394)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 May, 2017, 04:05:17 PM
Farron did well, I thought, so it's only natural the Telegraph went with "here's the bloke who HUMILIATED Farron".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 04 May, 2017, 04:19:52 PM
He did employ the tried and tested method of simply shouting over any disagreement and throwing out insults.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 04 May, 2017, 04:44:30 PM
16 year old girl guide gets up in the face of neo-nazi protester in Czech Republic:

(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/anaconda888/download_zps8uml94kj.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 04 May, 2017, 04:56:03 PM
I think we should drop the neo. Calling them something other than just Nazis seems somehow to make them look a bit less than fucking pricks they truly are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2017, 06:07:04 PM
Meanwhile, behind the scenes it seems Operation Gladio might still be in effect (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/27/german-soldier-spent-year-posing-syrian-refugee-arrested-suspicion/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 May, 2017, 06:29:56 PM
QuoteI think we should drop the neo. Calling them something other than just Nazis seems somehow to make them look a bit less than fucking pricks they truly are.

These are people who can look back at Nazism and think, "yeah...that seems like a good idea.  What could go wrong?".

The good news is that, whilst the original Nazis could change their names and go hide in Argentina when their ideology was crushed, the NeoNazis have social media accounts which their great grandchildren will be able to look back on. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 May, 2017, 06:44:03 PM
Good point, Panth. Who could have imagined that Facebook might be useful one day?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 05 May, 2017, 07:14:10 PM
Diane Abbott Numberwang.

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-05-05/diane-abbott-suffers-another-numbers-gaffe-after-hugely-underestimating-labour-losses/ (http://www.itv.com/news/2017-05-05/diane-abbott-suffers-another-numbers-gaffe-after-hugely-underestimating-labour-losses/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2017, 09:04:25 PM
I told you not to bother voting.

Tories. Oh boy.  We are so fucked.
UKIP supposedly wiped out, but they've just colonised the Tory vote.  Or as others have put it "the racists came home."  Current joke doing the rounds is that their only safe seat is the one on Question Time.
Labour wipeout not as huge as everyone hoped, which basically means they found the one way to let down everyone who'd resigned themselves to complete disaster.  And by "resigned themselves to" I of course mean "were secretly hoping for".  And by "secretly" I mean "openly".
LibDems: fuck knows, but definitely better than they were doing this time last week.
Greens.  Who cares?  Arguably the Greens are more irrelevant than UKIP now, because let's face it, the Tories stand for nothing and there's not a single green policy that's going to get passed in the years to come.  Green MPs may as well go sailing - I think they'd like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2017, 09:56:54 PM
Best bit: UKIP calling this a "blip". Sure. Your party is dead now the Tories have consumed you.

Most cringeworthy bit: Diane Abbott either being rubbish or a terrible liar in another car crash interview

As for the parties, I largely agree with the above, bar for the Lib Dems. I think they're oddly now in a worse position, because the numbers kill their momentum. Sure, their vote share is up (to a projected 18%), but their seat count is down, and the narrative is now they are a wasted vote. Farron's now pledging to double their MPs, which is depressing if they do manage 18%, or even 10% of the vote. The risk is by June, the Lib Dems will be as irrelevant as the Liberals before them. And as much as they screwed things up for themselves, I don't think the UK benefits from them being removed from play entirely. (Hell, we need ONE liberal party.)

As for the Greens, I like Caroline Lucas and hope she stays an MP. Other than that, yeah, they're fucked too (and their projected share is WAY down on 2015, probably due to Lib Dems 'going home').
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 May, 2017, 10:00:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2017, 09:04:25 PM
Greens.  Who cares?  Arguably the Greens are more irrelevant than UKIP now, because let's face it, the Tories stand for nothing and there's not a single green policy that's going to get passed in the years to come.  Green MPs may as well go sailing - I think they'd like that.

They've gained six seats so I'm guessing somebody does (and how can a party with 40 seats be more irrelevant than a party that now has none?)  Not sure what green policies you're talking about there - these were local elections, not national.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2017, 10:26:42 PM
The locals are seen as a dry run because of their proximity to the GE, and there's no reason to assume there'll be much difference bar the scale of turnout - which would hopefully be a bit higher than the pitiful 35% that showed up yesterday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 05 May, 2017, 10:49:49 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 05 May, 2017, 10:00:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2017, 09:04:25 PM
Greens.  Who cares?  Arguably the Greens are more irrelevant than UKIP now, because let's face it, the Tories stand for nothing and there's not a single green policy that's going to get passed in the years to come.  Green MPs may as well go sailing - I think they'd like that.

They've gained six seats so I'm guessing somebody does (and how can a party with 40 seats be more irrelevant than a party that now has none?)  Not sure what green policies you're talking about there - these were local elections, not national.

UKIP still have several hundred council seats in England and Wales - only a fraction of English councils were up for election last night.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 06 May, 2017, 09:24:46 AM
QuoteGreen MPs may as well go sailing

You can have a Green MP sitting in opposition and actually standing against Tory policies...or you can have A Lib Dem MP in opposition who may well have sided with the Tories and put them in power... or a Labour MP in opposition who will vote however it takes to win Tory votes...or a UKIP MP desperately trying to draw attention to himself as his party collapses around him.

I'd rather have Green.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 May, 2017, 10:38:55 AM
Quote from: GordonR on 05 May, 2017, 10:49:49 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 05 May, 2017, 10:00:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2017, 09:04:25 PM
Greens.  Who cares?  Arguably the Greens are more irrelevant than UKIP now, because let's face it, the Tories stand for nothing and there's not a single green policy that's going to get passed in the years to come.  Green MPs may as well go sailing - I think they'd like that.

They've gained six seats so I'm guessing somebody does (and how can a party with 40 seats be more irrelevant than a party that now has none?)  Not sure what green policies you're talking about there - these were local elections, not national.

UKIP still have several hundred council seats in England and Wales - only a fraction of English councils were up for election last night.

The news report I'd seen didn't make it clear that there were still results to come in (and I was only talking about this week's elections).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 May, 2017, 08:31:38 PM
Well at least things didn't go as shit as they could in France, eh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 May, 2017, 09:27:20 PM
Nice to see Nazis aren't quite as popular in Europe as they are in the US. The EU will make it yet
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2017, 11:32:05 PM
Trump has fired the guy investigating Trump's links to Russia, FBI director James Comey - despite his only being 3 years into the 10-year fixed term of service in the role intended to stop just this kind of thing from happening.
Pretty sure this is how the opening credits montage of dystopian dramas begin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 May, 2017, 06:34:54 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2017, 11:32:05 PM
Trump has fired the guy investigating Trump's links to Russia, FBI director James Comey - despite his only being 3 years into the 10-year fixed term of service in the role intended to stop just this kind of thing from happening.
Pretty sure this is how the opening credits montage of dystopian dramas begin.

But something to bear in mind is that Snake Plissken isn't real. So if Trump builds a big wall around Manhatten and then falls in there'll be no one to get him out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 May, 2017, 10:13:20 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2017, 11:32:05 PM
Trump has fired the guy investigating Trump's links to Russia, FBI director James Comey - despite his only being 3 years into the 10-year fixed term of service in the role intended to stop just this kind of thing from happening.
Pretty sure this is how the opening credits montage of dystopian dramas begin.

This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 10 May, 2017, 10:14:20 AM
This is how democracies end, at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 May, 2017, 11:07:18 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 May, 2017, 06:34:54 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2017, 11:32:05 PM
Trump has fired the guy investigating Trump's links to Russia, FBI director James Comey - despite his only being 3 years into the 10-year fixed term of service in the role intended to stop just this kind of thing from happening.
Pretty sure this is how the opening credits montage of dystopian dramas begin.

But something to bear in mind is that Snake Plissken isn't real. So if Trump builds a big wall around Manhatten and then falls in there'll be no one to get him out.

Nonsense - he was in GotG2 only last week, and he's had that eye fixed and everything.  Although I had heard he was dead...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 15 May, 2017, 02:25:57 PM
David Squires moves to political cartooning. As funny as ever and I don't even need to look up the football references!:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/may/15/david-squires-on-theresa-may-meeting-voters-hip-hop-ids-and-aspirational-foxes
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2017, 11:56:41 PM
Tory manifesto published today. (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-tory-manifesto-2017-david-cameron-right-wing-social-care-a7743146.html)
Surprised no-one had anything to say about Labour's manifesto - I mean, the fuckers filled it with nationalisation talk and then published it as a little red book, you couldn't ask for better trolling than that - but the Tory one is genuinely confusing, as it seems to be some sort of declaration of war on pensioners, free school meals, foxes, that environment thing that foxes live in - oh, and it promises there will be no press regulator for the media, but instead, the state will establish a body to regulate the internet.  I mention this just in case you were wondering why old media types from the Mail to the Guardian will be wanking themselves daft over it.
Anyway, the pensioners thing is what gets me, as I was under the impression that the elderly were the Tories' core voter base, it seems a bit mad to go after them, but then it seems to be full of mad things: deregulated environmental protection, removing caps and freezes on rail fares - apart from billionaires and the UK press, there doesn't seem to be any actual beneficiaries of this thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 19 May, 2017, 05:57:35 AM
I think the Tories are going for broke! They've convinced themselves that they can't possibly Lose and are bringing all of their core principles prejudices to the fore!

I will laugh my ass off when this backfires on them and Corbyn strides boldly into 10 Downing Street!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2017, 09:32:09 AM
Given that most people will only read as much of the manifesto as makes it on to the front page of the Daily Mail, the Express, Telegraph, Standard and Metro.... I think they can  be pretty confident the empty promises will get all the talk and the hidden stingers will be buried if mentioned at all. Sadly even the BBC, whose head political staff just mere days ago were all suddenly about where will the money come from do these figures add up haven't really bothered with any follow ups.

On my walk to the docs this morning, Zac Goldsmith's face is all over some of the posher houses. Zero mention of 'KEEPING HIS PROMISE' in 2015. I wish I'd kept all his flyers from the byelection they would make great things to hand out now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 10:08:32 AM
Two things the Tories haven't done: there's nothing about cutting back the power of the Lords; and there's an admission we'll remain in the ECHR. The slimmest of silver linings, but they're both something. But, yes, the rest of the manifesto appears to be various degrees of abhorrent, but it'll be a 'mandate' for whatever the hell this party wants to do over the coming years. Everything's in there from the hardest of Brexits to potentially severe changes to the way the internet is dealt with in the UK (hello, Chinese-style British firewall!), and it's awful. Still, I was very slightly heartened to see a written manifesto commitment to safeguarding the rights of EU nationals, even if it was painfully slim on details.

As for other points above, Goldsmith is a disgrace, but could easily win back his seat. On current polling, the Lib Dems have precisely no safe seats – even Clegg and Farron might be out. And down in Brighton, even Caroline Lucas's position is looking very wobbly, thanks to Labour being morons and not standing down from a single seat they cannot win (despite the Green Party standing down to boost Labour's chances in the seat next door). Still, Labour hate the Greens, and so they'll probably prefer a Tory in that seat than Lucas, while they parade about on the telly boasting about 170 seats somehow being a success.

(Interestingly, Electoral Calculus has at least swung back to a Lucas lead. But six Lib Dems? Urgh. It would be lovely to have a party in England that actually cares about the EU and liberalism. It looks like Gideon Osborne's reported idea of setting up the Democrats party alongside what remains of the LDs and the right of Labour might have to be the way forwards next time round.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2017, 10:29:27 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 10:08:32 AM
Labour being morons and not standing down from a single seat they cannot win (despite the Green Party standing down to boost Labour's chances in the seat next door). Still, Labour hate the Greens, and so they'll probably prefer a Tory in that seat than Lucas, while they parade about on the telly boasting about 170 seats somehow being a success.

The attitude towards the Green Party (and to some extent the SNP) is one of the biggest own-goals of Labour in my experience as a member and a voter. It just boils down to Tribalism. And perpetuates the complete fiction we are told about how our electoral system and parliamentary representation actually works in practice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 10:38:01 AM
It showcases a baffling level of arrogance combined with a lack of understanding in the current state of play. Labour has the win here. It's the biggest party by far in terms of seats and votes, bar the Conservatives. It could dictate the state of play. Stand aside for Lucas. Perhaps cede Bristol West. In return (and possibly also for PR), the Greens would stand down in dozens of seats where it could make a difference. Now do the same with the Lib Dems. That party may be well down in voting terms on historical levels, but a Lab/Lib deal could have major repercussions on the fabric of this country. Had this happened, it might still not have been enough to stop a Tory majority, but it may well have stopped it growing, and it could have created a framework for a progressive coalition win next time round.

Instead, we get the usual tribalism bullshit, with a very real danger the Labour Party will be responsible for a decapitation end-game for at least one – and possibly two – other parties. (Presumably, the assume they'll scoop up the voters. But I imagine few Greens will cross, and Lib Dems are just as likely to go Tory as Labour – or to wait and see if another centrist party rises from the ashes.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2017, 11:15:52 AM
I get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.  If they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."
As for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2017, 11:28:25 AM
Yep, alas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 19 May, 2017, 11:40:46 AM
Labour's attitude towards the SNP has played a large part in their catastrophic showing in recent Scottish elections. In the first minority SNP Scottish government there was the bizarre sight of Labour blocking minimum pricing for alchohol, which was supported by the leadership of the UK Labour party, simply because it was an SNP motion. It was no surprise that the electorate thought they were a bunch of dullards who put party over country and gave them a severe kicking at the ballot box.

And now the UK Labour party is refusing to make pragmatic deals with smaller parties. They haven't learned any lessons over the past few years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2017, 11:59:49 AM
It's all a bit infantile. Yes there'd be bad PR and press. But you get that anyway unless your Tony Blair, and even then you only got 1 small portion of the press to change it's slander for a scant moment or two. So a strange hill to insist on iceskating up forever.

It's the sheer hostility within the party to even acknowledge the shared ground they have with other parties that really fucks things over. And its not just Labour, the Lib Dems do it too. Just... work together. In some kind of say, parliament. Where different viewpoints might be represented and decisions made by reasoned consensus rather than simple volume.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 19 May, 2017, 12:00:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2017, 11:15:52 AM
I get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.  If they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."
As for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.

The Tory press will crucify Labour no matter what. They are currently lauding policies that they screamed about when they came from "Red Ed".

If Labour really wanted to work with others then they could make a reasonable case that a centre-left coalition is actually the "strong and stable" choice. They don't, because they're too used to the winner-takes-all of Westminster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 12:04:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2017, 11:15:52 AMI get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.
Through standing down in one seat?

QuoteIf they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."
Already happening, so why make matters worse? And why isn't Labour fighting back every single second with the Tories effectively now being a coalition of bastards with UKIP (who are standing down in hundreds of seats to assist the Tories, which is apparently OK)?

QuoteAs for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.
Absolutely won't now, but it could have done had Labour's stance on Brexit not been maddeningly stupid.

Quote from: CalHab on 19 May, 2017, 11:40:46 AMAnd now the UK Labour party is refusing to make pragmatic deals with smaller parties. They haven't learned any lessons over the past few years.
That's it exactly. This all goes back to Blair, really. He wins and immediately reneges on the deals promised to the Lib Dems, because they're no longer needed. Two elections later and Labour's on shakier ground, yet refuses to implement the recommendations of the Jenkins report (which would have led to AV+), nor consider some kind of pact with the Lib Dems. The reasoning? Labour can win alone. Only it couldn't. Then the numbers simply weren't there for Lab/Lib in 2010, but more tellingly according to those there at the time (from both sides), neither was the interest. In 2015, we see the same mistake again, with arrogance leading to SNP dominance in Scotland. And in 2017, Labour will be lucky to get anywhere near 200 seats, even though people are already chalking that up as some kind of win. (It isn't: over half the MPs for Labour alone or possibly as a Labour-led coalition is the only victory. But then Corbyn seems very at home as a half-arsed protestor. How I wish Cooper was leading the fight now.)

Also, as Theblazeuk said, the Lib Dems are doing this too. In 2015, they threw their toys out of the pram whenever the SNP entered the equation, perhaps due to their manifestos being almost the same, which Farrron almost admitted to recently. Yet they can't get over the SNP wanting independence for Scotland, despite the SNP having stated it would accept federalism, which has long been Lib Dem policy. It's insane. There are compromise positions acceptable to all these parties just begging for the taking, but tribalism and pride stops them doing so. The end result: another five years, minimum, of harsh Tory rule, which will reshape this country possibly irrevocably.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 12:06:06 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 19 May, 2017, 12:00:56 PMIf Labour really wanted to work with others then they could make a reasonable case that a centre-left coalition is actually the "strong and stable" choice. They don't, because they're too used to the winner-takes-all of Westminster.
Quite. Compromise, coalition, consensus. These are all somehow dirty words in British politics. Instead, we have a PM intent on reshaping Britain in her own image, and woe betide anyone who dares think differently. Still, I'm sure we'll all have fun with our British firewall, ruined economy, and fox hunts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 19 May, 2017, 12:25:37 PM
With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 19 May, 2017, 12:26:27 PM
Minority governments and coalitions are great things for fending off extreme and ill-thought policies. I really don't understand Labour's position here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2017, 12:48:40 PM
Well if nothing else we can agree tribalism is a problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 May, 2017, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 May, 2017, 12:25:37 PM
With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.
On what basis? Perhaps if we had a representative electoral system, I'd be happier. But we may have two parties totally wiped out, one hit hard, and one getting a colossal majority despite not getting the majority of the votes. More to the point, the Conservative manifesto is regressive in almost every possible sense, such as the way in which they want to clamp down on internet freedoms, refusing to rule out VAT shooting up, and even removing references to ivory trade. Apparently, Conservatives hate elephants as much as foxes, for some reason. (Or, more likely: the few dozen insanely rich white men who control the Conservatives like going abroad and shooting elephants in the face because it makes them feel big about themselves.) 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2017, 02:07:40 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 19 May, 2017, 12:25:37 PM
With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.

This being an election specifically timed to forestall the election that would have taken place after/during the Brexit negotiations, when the real horror of what has been done should be apparent to even the cosiest xenophobe, and deliberately to trade on the fear and uncertainty that the prospect of Brexit has created. 'Strong and stable; strong and stable; awk! awk!'. 

I don't think anyone would welcome it, except those who had calculatedly put it in motion.

Anyway, I'm not in a position to talk: our ruling party's leadership contest is starting to look like a Hitler Youth talent show, albeit the branch that didn't get the memo about gays.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2017, 02:18:56 PM
Why would Remoaners welcome a General Election when it won't affect Brexit either way?
We are fucked and that is unavoidable no matter who's in charge on June 9.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 19 May, 2017, 02:22:02 PM
I am, as my birthday on 9th June.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 May, 2017, 03:25:54 PM
You can only have remorse for things you had responsibility for...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2017, 08:31:38 PM
Well, I must say I had some doubts about Trump becoming president, but everything seems to be going swimmingly in the White House.

No, hang on a minute, I'm wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 May, 2017, 09:41:47 AM
Bet he's glad to be out of the country for a few weeks, so he can see first hand the US isn't the only nation that things he's a complete kack handed git.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 May, 2017, 12:03:32 PM
I'm sure nothing bad can come of Trump blundering around the Middle East.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 May, 2017, 12:24:32 PM
Don't forget the Saudis are Good Muslims, who were never banned from the US.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 May, 2017, 12:35:46 PM
Good Muslims with lots of oil and warehouses stuffed with US-made weapons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 May, 2017, 09:11:22 AM
To vote in the upcoming general election, you need to be registered to vote before noon tomorrow.  Registering can be done online and takes about five minutes.

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

If you've just turned 18, or never registered, or moved house, make sure you are registered and make sure you vote.  It does make a difference.  They are not all the same.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 21 May, 2017, 10:22:22 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 21 May, 2017, 09:11:22 AM
To vote in the upcoming general election, you need to be registered to vote before noon tomorrow.  Registering can be done online and takes about five minutes.

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

If you've just turned 18, or never registered, or moved house, make sure you are registered and make sure you vote. 

It does make a difference. They are not all the same.

Too true, but trying to convince people their vote counts can be like banging your head against a fucking wall!

"It doesn't make a difference" - yes it does.

"whatever happens, it won't affect me" - yes, it will.

"Why should I bovver?" - because the outcome of this election could very well be the end of the society we have and usher in a new age of 'Fuck the Poor coz I'm alright, Jack!'

I'm still confident that Corbyn can get a win. Even more so now the Tories have released their bowels manifesto.

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 May, 2017, 10:28:39 AM
I don't know WTF their thinking is on the manifesto - a mixture of shit like the fox-hunting ban ending, ivory trade ban lifting and the inheritance tax policy that's got the backs up of the right-wing press.

Random theories going round they're trying to lose it, let Labour deal with Brexit, then come to the rescue.

That sounds nuts to me, more likely they've got such a lead they'll try any old stuff.

Most likely outcome? I'm guessing still a tory win but with little change in majority, which would have made the whole thing a colossal waste of time, and her 'mandate' meaning nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 May, 2017, 10:55:15 AM
Sorry, I won't be joining in with this latest popularity contest as I refuse to support such a fraudulent and violent system.

I love every human being who posts here dearly as persons of infinite worth and value but I couldn't disagree more with your support for the continuing enslavement of humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 May, 2017, 11:09:44 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 May, 2017, 10:28:39 AM
I don't know WTF their thinking is on the manifesto - a mixture of shit like the fox-hunting ban ending, ivory trade ban lifting and the inheritance tax policy that's got the backs up of the right-wing press.

I think they're so confident that they're going to win, they might as well go for broke jettisoning policies they don't like and stuffing unpopular ones in there so they can claim a mandate for them. Worst case scenario in their book is the unlikely event Labour scrapes a win or has to form a coalition and the Tories get to walk away from the car crash that is Brexit knowing that when it inevitably tanks the economy they can wheel out all their 'Labour's Mess' rhetoric in 2020.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 May, 2017, 01:47:15 PM
Courtesy of this week's Private Eye:

(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/anaconda888/fx_zpsoo3apar3.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 May, 2017, 02:24:48 PM
QuoteI love every human being who posts here dearly as persons of infinite worth and value

You called me a holocaust apologist for arguing in favour of representative democracy.  When Jim pointed out how inappropriate that was, you called him a bully. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 May, 2017, 02:55:10 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 May, 2017, 10:28:39 AMRandom theories going round they're trying to lose it, let Labour deal with Brexit, then come to the rescue.

That sounds nuts to me, more likely they've got such a lead they'll try any old stuff.

RE: poll numbers - Labour polling well means panicking Tory voters are more likely to turn up in droves and ambivalent leftie voters are less likely to vote for a party they think already have it in the bag.  Just saying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 May, 2017, 03:04:16 PM
Yeah, I had thought of that as well - someone mentioned Len McCluskey's comment as being similar from the other side.

Maybe that's giving both sides too much credit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 May, 2017, 03:42:00 PM
Panth, you can love people despite their flaws, you know. If I only loved perfect people I would love nobody, not even myself.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 21 May, 2017, 03:57:37 PM
You can pretend that laws and taxes and trade don't apply you all you like, but let's not pretend you have any sort of moral high ground.  You throw insults at anyone who questions your view of the world, then play the victim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 May, 2017, 05:04:30 PM
I'm sure that was true of my arguing style in the past, Panth, but I think I've learned not to use it any more - at least I hope I have. Like most people, I strive to improve and learn. I had no college or university education and I wasn't taught how to argue properly during my state school days. Indeed, I had no idea what a logical fallacy even was until a couple of years ago, nor that there were so many of them, and was horrified to learn that I had been using them myself without knowing it for most of my life - emulating teachers and politicians. I try now to be better than that because, you know, what's the point of me saying, "here's my opinion and I'm going to beat you over the head with it until you agree with me"? All that does is get people's backs up, which does nobody any good.

I will continue to stand my corner and write about what I believe in but that's it. Agree or disagree, that's your choice - as an anarchist, how could I possibly believe otherwise anyway?

Also, I'm pretty sure I never called you a "Holocaust sympathiser." I remember making the point that the Holocaust, being legislated for and undertaken by a perfectly legitimately installed government, was entirely legal and that to accept government rights/power is to accept the possibility of legal crimes against humanity occurring but accepting the possibility is in no way equivalent to condoning it.

I do not think you are a Holocaust apologist. I do not think anyone who posts here is a holocaust apologist.

I do, however, think that most people who post here believe that governments have and deserve more rights, responsibilities and powers than the ordinary people they are designed to serve and, furthermore, are above (or at least to one side of) the common or natural law that binds everyone else.

I do not. I think that politicians have no more or fewer rights and responsibilities than the rest of us.

If you, or anyone here, wants to follow Corbyn or May or anyone else then that's fine - follow away and good luck to you - I have absolutely no problem with that. Do you have to force me to follow the same person, though?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 May, 2017, 09:15:10 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 May, 2017, 03:04:16 PM
Yeah, I had thought of that as well - someone mentioned Len McCluskey's comment as being similar from the other side.

Maybe that's giving both sides too much credit.

Polling companies are used to shape public opinion, not measure it.  They're businesses, run by Tories and peers of the realm, and on the few occasions that they couldn't manufacture numbers to suit the prevailing narrative, they publicly trashed their own data.  Polling is just another one in the establishment's tools.

For what it's worth, I don't think the Tories are trying to lose the election, and "the Tories can only lose if they want to" sounds like something someone would say if they were heavily invested in an anti-Labour narrative but felt they had to hedge their bets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 22 May, 2017, 09:50:00 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 May, 2017, 05:04:30 PM
I remember making the point that the Holocaust, being legislated for and undertaken by a perfectly legitimately installed government, was entirely legal and that to accept government rights/power is to accept the possibility of legal crimes against humanity occurring but accepting the possibility is in no way equivalent to condoning it.


Without whishing to open a can of worms.

The collapse of the political system in Germany before the second world war is still a hotly debated topic. To gain power the Nazis essential had to dismantle the system so their legitimacy is an elected sense is up for debate.

It was, until after the second world war, entirely, internationally legal to inflict as much damaged as you liked on your own people. As a direct result of the Holocaust that ceased to be the case. No government Legitimate or otherwise can legally commit 'crimes against humanity'. The repercussions for such crimes depends on the scale and risk/reward for intervention.

It's possible for any group or individual to inflict harm and suffering on others. Democratic governments are, at least in part, an attempt to mitigate that danger. results may vary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2017, 11:17:23 AM
I get that governments might be trying, or at least trying to give the impression that they are moving in the right direction and in some small ways I suppose they are. The fact is that the Holocaust is at the extreme end of the spectrum of violence employed by all governments, with coercive theft at the other.

And no, I'm not claiming that taxation is the same as mass murder. I'm saying they're on the same spectrum of violence. There is no doubt that governments are violent. For example, what would happen to me if the tax man showed up on my doorstep and I refused to bow to his demands?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 22 May, 2017, 11:34:08 AM
A Bailiff could remove property. if you refuse with force then you would have instigated the violence. Violence in not inherent in the situation.

Violence is not limited to governments, neither is coercion. Governments are a form of control, that's true and that control can be negative or positive. Things that are positive for a larger group may be negative to some individuals. Humans  live in social groups that are now country sized, and will one day be world sized. maybe many worlds if we don't wipe ourselves out first.

Interestingly the EU, by being a larger group, by representing a more dispirit set of interests, tended to lean towards the common good as it's harder to push ideas that benefit the few at the expense of the many when those rules then have to be applied to a very large group of the many.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2017, 12:32:41 PM
So, the bailiff has the "right" to steal my possessions. Ordinary people like you and I do not have the right to steal property, so how do we authorise others to do it for us?

The violence is in the threat - pay up or suffer. It makes no difference whether payment is being demanded (without any contract or agreement) for bandages or bullets; it makes no difference whether the money is going to be used for something good or something bad; it makes no difference whether the person refusing to pay up is right or wrong - it's not okay to extort money from people under threat of violence.

I cannot see the difference between defending your person or property against a burglar or mugger and defending it against a bailiff or other officer. Both are just human beings like everyone else with the same rights and responsibilities. The only difference between the mugger/bailiff and the victim/taxpayer is in power - the mugger may have a knife or a gun and the bailiff a gang of police officers with tasers and truncheons - which is more than the victim/taxpayer has. Payment is then made in both cases not because of the mugger/bailiff's rights but powers. In both cases, the victim/taxpayer pays up to avoid further harm, not because of lawful obligation.

(This is all in respect of government taxation where payment is simply demanded under threat for whatever reason and not in relation to the breaking of a lawful contract or agreement.)

I agree that humans are social animals and live in social groups, millions of years of evolution and instinct help us live this way. People understand this and help each other all the time with no need for coercion. What "government" does is exploit our instincts and drives and pretend that we're all really destructive and violent savages who need to be ruled and policed and charged for the privilege - holding up the few miscreants as examples of how utterly terrible we all are. We do not need that.

I dispute the idea that pushing policies which benefit the few at the expense of the many is hard. Look at quantitative easing as a prime example; the few all but destroyed the banking system, and with it financially crippled several countries, and were (and continue to be) bailed out by the majority - who are taxed to pay for the mistakes of the few whether they like it or not. The majority are also taxed for weaponry which the few could deploy to devastating effect for the many. The few also impose restrictive and protectionist rules, tariffs and regulations on the free market, increasing prices and restricting competition which affects everyone negatively. The few also write legislation, which they pass off as laws, which benefits the few at the expense of the many.

But this is all academic and concentrates on the bad aspects.

I think what we should be focusing on is the common ground. I don't think anyone here will be voting to cause harm to others but to do what they believe is best for themselves and their society. It's a shame, in my opinion, that both left wing voters and right wing voters want to do good but approach that good in different ways and don't seem to realise that "the other side" is actually the same side. This makes for groups of people who argue and argue and argue, each one afraid to concede that the other may have a point on some things, and are so afraid to be wrong themselves that the very idea of cooperation or compromise is regarded as disgraceful defeat.

Division, along with violence, is what "governments" do best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 22 May, 2017, 12:48:44 PM
There's a clear and simple choice here - either vote Left and save the NHS, workers rights, care for the disabled and elderly, or... - vote Right and Lose the NHS, workers rights, care for the disabled and elderly. Plus we get to spend Billions on Nukes that will never be used, cosy up with Trump and give more money to those that are already fabulously wealthy!

I'm happily voting for Corbyn and I encourage you all to do the same!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 May, 2017, 01:07:09 PM
But "he can't win", Kev.  We have literally no choice but to vote for a fascist dystopia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 May, 2017, 01:11:14 PM
Kev you are preaching to the converted here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 May, 2017, 01:35:49 PM
My take: vote non-Torykip. If you live somewhere where Labour has a chance, vote for them. If you live somewhere the Lib Dems could potentially win but where Labour has historically done badly, vote for them. Exception: Brighton Pav. If you're a Labour voter there and don't vote Green, you should take a good, long, hard look at yourself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 22 May, 2017, 01:46:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 May, 2017, 12:32:41 PM
So, the bailiff has the "right" to steal my possessions. Ordinary people like you and I do not have the right to steal property, so how do we authorise others to do it for us?

The violence is in the threat - pay up or suffer. It makes no difference whether payment is being demanded (without any contract or agreement) for bandages or bullets; it makes no difference whether the money is going to be used for something good or something bad; it makes no difference whether the person refusing to pay up is right or wrong - it's not okay to extort money from people under threat of violence.

I cannot see the difference between defending your person or property against a burglar or mugger and defending it against a bailiff or other officer. Both are just human beings like everyone else with the same rights and responsibilities. The only difference between the mugger/bailiff and the victim/taxpayer is in power - the mugger may have a knife or a gun and the bailiff a gang of police officers with tasers and truncheons - which is more than the victim/taxpayer has. Payment is then made in both cases not because of the mugger/bailiff's rights but powers. In both cases, the victim/taxpayer pays up to avoid further harm, not because of lawful obligation.

(This is all in respect of government taxation where payment is simply demanded under threat for whatever reason and not in relation to the breaking of a lawful contract or agreement.)

I agree that humans are social animals and live in social groups, millions of years of evolution and instinct help us live this way. People understand this and help each other all the time with no need for coercion. What "government" does is exploit our instincts and drives and pretend that we're all really destructive and violent savages who need to be ruled and policed and charged for the privilege - holding up the few miscreants as examples of how utterly terrible we all are. We do not need that.

I dispute the idea that pushing policies which benefit the few at the expense of the many is hard. Look at quantitative easing as a prime example; the few all but destroyed the banking system, and with it financially crippled several countries, and were (and continue to be) bailed out by the majority - who are taxed to pay for the mistakes of the few whether they like it or not. The majority are also taxed for weaponry which the few could deploy to devastating effect for the many. The few also impose restrictive and protectionist rules, tariffs and regulations on the free market, increasing prices and restricting competition which affects everyone negatively. The few also write legislation, which they pass off as laws, which benefits the few at the expense of the many.

But this is all academic and concentrates on the bad aspects.

I think what we should be focusing on is the common ground. I don't think anyone here will be voting to cause harm to others but to do what they believe is best for themselves and their society. It's a shame, in my opinion, that both left wing voters and right wing voters want to do good but approach that good in different ways and don't seem to realise that "the other side" is actually the same side. This makes for groups of people who argue and argue and argue, each one afraid to concede that the other may have a point on some things, and are so afraid to be wrong themselves that the very idea of cooperation or compromise is regarded as disgraceful defeat.

Division, along with violence, is what "governments" do best.

Bailiffs do not steal property. They are court appointed agents who after a process (that is not always fair because, humans) are authorised to recover a debt that has been shown to be legally owed.

The next few paragraphs pre-suppose I accept that debt is false and rules/laws/society is equitable to violence. This has been discuses at length here before. I'm not bringing anything new to the discussion.

Humans are social animals they understand social groups of about 100. Even within those social groups there is conflict, allegiances and exploitation. Interaction between these groups is the root of the framework we have for society and governments. Bigger groups, like a society tend to need more impersonal, abstract thought.

You could argue that the banking bubble benefited the many and raised the quality of life (standard of living) across two continents. Buy bailing the banks out the governments chose to continue to prop up that bubble that will one day burst. From a perspective this is good for the many in the short team. You could also argue that saving the banks benefited the many. Although the rich few always benefit the most. What's good for the many is often counter intuitive and abstract.

I try to vote for what I think is best for society over what's best for me. But in the end what's best for society is probably better for me than any personal advantage I would gain by what's best for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 May, 2017, 02:39:43 PM
Yes. Vote tactically for anything but the Tories or UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 May, 2017, 03:28:58 PM
Unsure? Try https://www.tactical2017.com
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 May, 2017, 07:44:40 AM
QuoteI had no college or university education and I wasn't taught how to argue properly during my state school days.

Jesus, did you just blame the state for you behaviour?  I didn't go to university, and I was also state educated.  (Horray for the existence of taxation).  Someone I managed to pick up the important lesson of not throwing insults around along the way.

You said that I "did not care about the holocaust" and regarded its dead as an "acceptable price", because I believe in democracy.

Then you tell the forum how much you love and respect everyone. 

When your hypocrisy is pointed out, you say that its okay for you to throw incredibly offensive names at me, because you accept me despite my flaws. 

Believe whatever you want to believe this week, but don't pretend you treat anyone here with respect. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 May, 2017, 09:02:39 AM
 Meanwhile, in the real world, a deluded idiot murders dozens of kids and parents and probably hands May her increased majority (despite being in the hotseat at the time) in the process, with all the resultant treats for those who profit from closed borders, fear of the other, sectarian division and heightened security theatre. Oh, and the added treat of angry homilies from the leader of a country where 7 children are shot to death every day.

That's using violence to achieve your ends right there.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 23 May, 2017, 09:10:42 AM
My respects to those who were murdered and my sympathies with those who have to live with the loss over the next hours, days, months, years and decades.
It would be fairly obscene to make political capital out of the slaughter of children; but the Tories are nothing if not obscene.  'Strong on terrorism; strong on the causes of terrorism'....or some other meaningless, crass bullshit will be the overweening mantra of these incompetent, greedy bastards. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 May, 2017, 09:31:53 AM
I don't think they need to actively make capital out of this tragedy, and I wasn't accusing them of such: it just plays perfectly into their monotonic isolationist narrative of fear, without any spin necessary.

This is what remoaners want, after all.

Anyway, I had intended just to bemoan the world's horrors, and the awful power of violence when twinned with whatever circumstances cause such anomie, disconnect or fanatacism as to persuade a human being that this is a plan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 May, 2017, 12:11:52 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther
link=topic=28209.msg957879#msg957879
date=1495521880
QuoteI had no college or university
education and I wasn't taught how to argue
properly during my state school days.
Jesus, did you just blame the state for you
behaviour? I didn't go to university, and I was
also state educated. (Horray for the existence
of taxation). Someone I managed to pick up
the important lesson of not throwing insults
around along the way.
You said that I "did not care about the
holocaust" and regarded its dead as an
"acceptable price", because I believe in
democracy.
Then you tell the forum how much you love
and respect everyone.
When your hypocrisy is pointed out, you say
that its okay for you to throw incredibly
offensive names at me, because you accept
me despite my flaws.
Believe whatever you want to believe this
week, but don't pretend you treat anyone
here with respect.

I wasn't blaming anyone for my shortcomings. If I believe my state education was inadequate, which I do, then it's my responsibility to educate myself, which is what I'm aiming for. My knowledge and education are not fully formed (how could they be?) and are works in progress.

Can you remember the exact post(s) where I said those things? I really don't think I would accuse anyone of such a thing but I have asked the question "is the Holocaust an acceptable price to pay (or risk to take) for government power?"

I may have worded what I wrote clumsily or been too vague or something but I honestly don't think I'd accuse you of such things. If I actually did, however, then I'm shocked and dismayed in myself and can only apologise and unconditionally retract all such accusations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 26 May, 2017, 12:26:27 PM
Katie Hopkins got sacked. Karma's a bitch!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 May, 2017, 01:24:57 PM
A former UKIP candidate has an interesting punishment for suicide bombers (http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/british-politician-wants-death-penalty-for-suicide-bombers/news-story/0eec0b726cef5848baca05ed1022d2ca)....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2017, 04:27:25 PM
Is it just me or is LBC chocka with Tories suffering buyers' remorse these days?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 26 May, 2017, 08:32:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2017, 04:27:25 PM
buyers' remorse

Har!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2017, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 26 May, 2017, 12:26:27 PM
Katie Hopkins got sacked. Karma's a bitch!

Birds of a feather...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 May, 2017, 05:22:25 PM
Theresa May - cuts to services, cuts to benefits for the most vulnerable, tax cuts for the wealthiest.  The person who has cut police on the streets, said that complaining about it was just scaremongering, then introduced the most intrusive surveillance laws ever seen in a democracy to keep us safe.  A PM who falls to pieces when questioned, who has done her best to avoid actual humans, and who claims that walking away from Europe with absolutely nothing is better than walking away with less than perfect deal.  The leader of a party who produced a manifesto lacking any figures.  In favour of killing foxes for fun.  Believes in "girl jobs and boy jobs".  Who insisted calling an election would be bad for the country, then called an election.

Jeremy Corbyn - forgot a number in an interview.

Guess which one of these is headlining BBC news.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 May, 2017, 05:41:16 PM
How many of May's actions happened today?

The clue is in news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2017, 07:27:46 PM
BBC are reporting on things Corbyn did 30 years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 May, 2017, 07:28:56 PM
The closest we will get to a debate between the leaders of the two main parties, which was basically the only chance that the media was ever going to hold May to account, happened yesterday.

Political headlines today should be about their response to questioning about their policies.

Instead,  the BBC is running pictures of Corbyn looking confused and images of a triumphant May with the headline "I'm ready for Brexit".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 01 June, 2017, 12:57:51 PM
Ooh Nigel...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/nigel-farage-is-person-of-interest-in-fbi-investigation-into-trump-and-russia (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/nigel-farage-is-person-of-interest-in-fbi-investigation-into-trump-and-russia)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2017, 02:29:57 PM
So I'm muttering to myself about the current ridiculous distraction that is Trump's covfefe typo and its offspring of witty memes and tweets, while listening to the vapidity and cynical contempt for the electorate that is both the UK GE and our own government's leadership contest, and seeing all that energy directed into this irrelevant shite when there's so much of utterly vital time-critical importance to do.

Then I see Sean Spicer's 'defence' of Trump's typo. Of all of it, all the awful crap washing over us, this is actually the worst. The man mistyped a whine on his phone after midnight, just like every other person on the internet.  But instead he sends someone out to tell a lie so ridiculous that it encapsulates everything about current politics. It's probably the most important typo in living memory. Shows what I know.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2017, 02:53:36 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 30 May, 2017, 07:28:56 PMInstead,  the BBC is running pictures of Corbyn looking confused and images of a triumphant May with the headline "I'm ready for Brexit".

Was going to joke that the BBC could be running worse headlines, but it looks like I jinxed it. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40084280)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 June, 2017, 03:53:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2017, 02:53:36 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 30 May, 2017, 07:28:56 PMInstead,  the BBC is running pictures of Corbyn looking confused and images of a triumphant May with the headline "I'm ready for Brexit".

Was going to joke that the BBC could be running worse headlines, but it looks like I jinxed it. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40084280)

I fully accept that these people have no respect for human rights and the rule of law, but from a purely practical point of view do they ever open a history book?

Not for nothing was Frangoch (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-35876886) internment camp known as ollscoil na réabhlóide, the University of the Revolution. And that's just one example from their own island. What is the universal outcome of internment other than radicalisation and organisation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2017, 05:12:43 PM
I sort of want it to happen just so some of these fuckers will learn the lesson that being white won't save them from the camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 01 June, 2017, 05:31:55 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 June, 2017, 05:12:43 PM
I sort of want it to happen just so some of these fuckers will learn the lesson that being white won't save them from the camps.
What's skin colour got to do with it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 June, 2017, 07:14:50 PM
This libtard snowflake's current journalist of choice has a thing or two to say about internment.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/internment-argument-crumbles-james-obrien-question/ (http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/internment-argument-crumbles-james-obrien-question/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 01 June, 2017, 09:25:40 PM
Well done Trump to fucking up the next generation, the world is fucked!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 01 June, 2017, 09:28:18 PM
Cursed Earth is becoming more and more likely every day Trump is left in the White House unsupervised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 01 June, 2017, 11:50:38 PM
Since this giant orange turd is in the news every other day I thought there should be a thread where people can discuss their issues about the s***e job he is doing without having to worry about steering the thread off course.

Todays quote, after refusing to sign the Paris Climate Agreement

"We don't want other leaders and other countries laughing and us any more - and they won't be"

Kinda hard not to laugh at someone who is one big walking joke...

On a positive it's good to see Elon Musk leaving his role as an adviser after the announcement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 02:29:36 AM
No thanks. It's a comics forum. Please put your Trump quibbles in the Political Bit where I can ignore them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 June, 2017, 07:00:11 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 02:29:36 AM
No thanks. It's a comics forum. Please put your Trump quibbles in the Political Bit where I can ignore them.

I agree. This belongs on the Political Thread although I don't think you'll find much debate about the catastrophic uselessness of the giant orange shitgibbon round these parts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 June, 2017, 07:06:07 AM
"I have uh Dream! Uh.. Where the whole um... World becomes a 'Trump Hotel'! Oh yay, here me little people... Uh... Um... Twitter or something!"

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2017, 10:10:44 AM
Topics merged. One politics cesspool's enough for the forum, thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 June, 2017, 10:12:50 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 02:29:36 AM
No thanks. It's a comics forum. Please put your Trump quibbles in the Political Bit where I can ignore them.
Literally the only way to get Fungus around these parts is to merge threads. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 10:45:21 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 02 June, 2017, 10:12:50 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 02:29:36 AM
No thanks. It's a comics forum. Please put your Trump quibbles in the Political Bit where I can ignore them.
Literally the only way to get Fungus around these parts is to merge threads. :lol:

I feel... soiled.

Nurse!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 June, 2017, 10:52:14 AM
Poor little Barron, eh? One week he has to ask a question about a picture of a joke model of his dad's head, the next he and his whole generation are doomed to drought, famine, rising tides and possible extinction.  Honestly, i don't know which is worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 June, 2017, 11:19:35 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 10:45:21 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 02 June, 2017, 10:12:50 AM
Quote from: Fungus on 02 June, 2017, 02:29:36 AM
No thanks. It's a comics forum. Please put your Trump quibbles in the Political Bit where I can ignore them.
Literally the only way to get Fungus around these parts is to merge threads. :lol:

I feel... soiled.

Nurse!
Welcome to intensive, this thread has been on life support for 4 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2017, 06:17:26 PM
Jeremy Corbyn has landed the cover and endorsement of KERRANG! magazine - so that's the 8-13 year-old vote sewn up like a kipper, then.

Also, don't ask if Theresa May is under the weather at the moment.  Yes I know that's an oddly specific thing to say unsolicited.  Nothing to see here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 June, 2017, 07:32:40 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2017, 06:17:26 PM
Jeremy Corbyn has landed the cover and endorsement of KERRANG! magazine - so that's the 8-13 year-old vote sewn up like a kipper, then.

Also, don't ask if Theresa May is under the weather at the moment.  Yes I know that's an oddly specific thing to say unsolicited.  Nothing to see here.

Doctor Who reference?



(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv3t48oNLy1r20rgjo1_500.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2017, 08:01:29 PM
Yes/no.  A BBC insider messaged lefty gobshite Owen Jones and blew the whistle that the media had been "told" not to discuss Theresa May's health.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 June, 2017, 08:37:15 PM
Thor: Ragnarok trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpSIzx0Ta0Y) - the snap election version
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 June, 2017, 11:11:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2017, 08:01:29 PM
lefty gobshite

Nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 June, 2017, 11:21:11 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 03 June, 2017, 11:11:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 June, 2017, 08:01:29 PM
lefty gobshite

Nice.
Mhhhmmmm.... ::)

In other relevant news, yesterdays leader question time was a fucking shit show...for May, Jezza handled homself quiet well I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 03 June, 2017, 11:35:18 AM
I didn't think she was comparitively that bad, with Corbyn edging ahead - but I was expecting a much worse performance by May based on her last week or so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 June, 2017, 11:39:40 AM
but was she looking tired?  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 03 June, 2017, 11:50:55 AM
Hah.

My expectation is that she may get a slight increase in majority, and the whole thing will have been a colossal waste of time.

She doesn't get the 'mandate' she was banging on about, Corbyn doesn't do badly enough or well enough to satisfy either faction, the Lib Dems stuff up capitalising on the Remain vote, and UKIP disappear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 June, 2017, 01:35:21 PM
Why has no-one mentioned the giant lizards yet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 June, 2017, 02:26:53 PM
Things is, whatever majority she gets will be her 'will of the people' mandate for everything in that manifesto, from hard Brexit to stringent internet regulation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 June, 2017, 03:00:22 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 June, 2017, 11:21:11 AMIn other relevant news, yesterdays leader question time was a fucking shit show...for May, Jezza handled homself quiet well I think.

Fave moments were "Why won't you condemn people who bomb the innocent?" being closely followed by "Why won't you drop a nuclear bomb on people?", and the guy in a £200 Ralph Lauren top talking about how great Zero Hour contracts are for him because they're the only way a young person like him can get money to buy food - followed shortly by Twitter detectives posting pics of the same guy at Ascot wearing a tux and top hat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 June, 2017, 03:52:56 PM
When a faith or ideology is brought into question, or a way of life threatened, or simply feels under threat., there is always the risk that adherents to that believe system will be radicalized.  This is a very real and dangerous threat to our society.

Never have I seen this better demonstrated that by last night's question time audience.

For months, the British Right have been reassured that a conservative government will control this country indefinitely, that Brexit will result in a resurgent Empire.  They have been told that Labour are dangerous to their way of life, but that they are weak, disorganized, and easily dismissed.

In less that 45 minutes, we saw this ideology shift.  First, there were bizarre illogical statements as their reality fell away ("will you do a deal with the SNP?""No, I will not.""You didn't answer the question!"), but soon all reason was lost as members of the audience began insisting that any wine who wasn't willing to immediately murder the entire population of Iran was a coward.

Even if they lose, these people will not go away. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 June, 2017, 04:41:38 PM
They won't lose, tho.  Even if there's a hung parliament, the LibDems know which side their bread is buttered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 June, 2017, 05:09:20 PM
Question for the constitutional experts (on the politics thread!Ha!):

Can a party without a majority be supported to form a government by another party, without a coalition? In other words, if Labour + SNP + Lib Dem > Tory, but Labour < Tory,  could they support Labour in forming a  minority government from the opposition benches?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 June, 2017, 10:56:48 PM
I think a formal coalition is required, otherwise the single largest party without a majority can form a minority government and attempt to pass legislation on an ad-hoc basis until the majority opposition parties can get enough combined votes to force a no confidence vote against them. The question is whether, if the Tories came in a handful of seats short, the LibDems a) had enough seats to get the Tories over the 326 line and, b) they'd actually be stupid enough to that again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 June, 2017, 11:15:57 PM
Be great if the LibDems got in again: five years of people telling us things could be worse, which is just what you want to hear when your mum's walked into oncoming traffic because her benefits were sanctioned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 June, 2017, 11:29:41 PM
I believe the government is formed by whomever the Queen invites to form it. It is only tradition (and common sense) that she always asks the leader of the largest party to form her government, but technically she could ask anyone - pointless if they don't have enough votes to passs any legislation, but technically possible
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 June, 2017, 11:45:55 PM
News coming in about an "incident" on London Bridge, and follow-up police action in Borough Market.  Stay safe, London peeps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 03 June, 2017, 11:54:26 PM
Stay safe, just watching the news, worrying.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 June, 2017, 12:43:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 June, 2017, 10:56:48 PM
The question is whether, if the Tories came in a handful of seats short, the LibDems a) had enough seats to get the Tories over the 326 line and, b) they'd actually be stupid enough to that again.

Can't find anything more recent, but as of April 2017 the following had been reported on as views of the lib dem leader / senior lib dems (can't be bothered to post links, but the following were all in the top 10 on google for "liberal democrat coalition"):
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 June, 2017, 01:20:37 PM
The SNP are likely to win about 50 seats (which will be reported as a massive loss to the Tories), and whilst they wouldn't enter into a coalition with Labour, they would absolutely be in favour of  the formation of a Labour minority government.  My original query was around this idea - if the Tories were in a minority, the opposition could threaten a vote of no confidence, and call for formation of a minority Labour government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2017, 03:10:36 PM
Problem is, unless polling's way off, the only viable majority will be Con+SNP, which isn't going to happen. My guess is the polls are optimistic from Labour's standpoint and we'll see a 50+ Con majority, with the Lib Dems basically wiped out (signally the end of them as anything other than a rounding error). In the unlikely scenario we get a minority Tory government, it wouldn't surprise me if we go through all this shit again by the end of the year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 June, 2017, 05:55:41 PM
A whole series of general election beckon, each less informed than the last, all fought on the principle that you already had a vote on important issues and you're not getting another one.  The PM is seen less and less in each one, initial we're just led by an abstract concept -"MAY".  It has no policy other than it will never negotiate.

"strengthen my hand, damn you! "trengthen it!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 June, 2017, 02:08:32 PM
Wow, Theresa May is totally f**ked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2017, 02:19:48 PM
On what basis?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 June, 2017, 02:30:39 PM
Over police cuts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 03:10:25 PM
Go watch BBC coverage of the election, Goaty.  That's what most of the electorate are seeing.

We're fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 June, 2017, 03:44:01 PM
My birthday is on 9th June, yes I am fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 05:00:44 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 05 June, 2017, 02:30:39 PM
Over police cuts.

Its worth listening to Nick Ferrari's interview with Diane Abbott though (if you haven't already) to hear Labour's view on policing. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2017, 06:01:20 PM
I shudder to think. Or is it a rare 'not car crash' interview with her?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 06:23:05 PM
Its the one from a few weeks ago. Apologies if you thought it was a new interview with Diane Abbott. I'm a bit behind the times so you've maybe already heard it or read the transcript.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/diane-abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 June, 2017, 06:41:37 PM
Diane Abbot's meltdown on national media was an impressive performance.  Why the hell she felt the need to get into figures is beyond me but I guess coming from the back foot it was needed on one level.  As for May being copulated, as much as it would be incredibly satisfying I don't think she is there yet, just bloody close.  The whole election campaign has turned into a shambles and a half for the Tories but I don't think they've done enough to lose it completely.  Of course I could be wrong.  Part of me almost wishes it on the Tories because if they follow through on their instincts with Brexit  then it is likely to do them irreparable damage.  Unfortunately that will be because of the damage that they have done to the country that is going to relegate us to a status below that of your average banana republic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 07:22:08 PM
MP talks about bolstering police numbers days before a terror attack caused by low police numbers and what we take away is that she fudged a zero.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 07:28:15 PM
I thought the terrorist attack was caused by the terrorists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 05 June, 2017, 07:38:19 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 07:28:15 PM
I thought the terrorist attack was caused by the terrorists.

Now you are trolled this!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 June, 2017, 07:41:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 07:28:15 PM
I thought the terrorist attack was caused by the terrorists.

I would respectfully suggest that, whilst this is unquestionably true, when the police tell you that cutting their numbers materially impairs their ability to prevent terrorist attacks, and then you have three attacks in three months, one of them in the city whose police specifically told you that the cuts were endangering the public, you are culpably negligent for ignoring those warnings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 05 June, 2017, 07:43:07 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 June, 2017, 06:41:37 PM
As for May being copulated, as much as it would be incredibly satisfying...

:o Too much information, old chap!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 07:50:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 07:22:08 PM
MP talks about bolstering police numbers days before a terror attack caused by low police numbers and what we take away is that she fudged a zero.

I think most people who listened to that interview with Diane Abbott thought it was much more than fudging a zero.  It was probably the worst interview I have ever heard a politician give.

I also don't agree that terror attacks are caused by low police numbers. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 June, 2017, 08:12:54 PM
You don't think that having 20,000 less police officers means that police are less able to gather intelligence, less able to maintain a community presence, less able to investigate reports of suspicious behaviour? 

Never mind, we can always blame Facebook. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 June, 2017, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 05 June, 2017, 08:12:54 PM
Never mind, we can always blame Facebook.
Yeah May utilizing the other nights attack to push her policing of the internet agenda is incredibly squeaky, ESPECIALLY considering how often it's been proven to be a near impossible task (Private servers, Dark Net involvement etc).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 08:23:42 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 June, 2017, 07:41:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 07:28:15 PM
I thought the terrorist attack was caused by the terrorists.

I would respectfully suggest that, whilst this is unquestionably true, when the police tell you that cutting their numbers materially impairs their ability to prevent terrorist attacks, and then you have three attacks in three months, one of them in the city whose police specifically told you that the cuts were endangering the public, you are culpably negligent for ignoring those warnings.

His ignoring the obvious point of the post in favor of pedantry kind of made my point for me, tho.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 08:51:01 PM
You said the terrorist attack was caused by low police numbers, I disagree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2017, 09:04:01 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 08:51:01 PM
You said the terrorist attack was caused by low police numbers, I disagree.

I've tried to give youn the benefit of the doubt over the years but your vile, willfully misleading posts mean you are now on my igbnore list (out of all the people we've had on this board, you are unique in this).

and  don't give me that shit about typing short posts because you're disabled - you can be short and make a useful contribution, or short and be a trolling twat and you've finally crosssd the line
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 June, 2017, 09:08:29 PM
"Less teachers doesn't reduce literacy.  Kids not being able to read does."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 June, 2017, 09:12:10 PM
Fewer teachers...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 09:16:59 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 05 June, 2017, 08:12:54 PM
You don't think that having 20,000 less police officers means that police are less able to gather intelligence, less able to maintain a community presence, less able to investigate reports of suspicious behaviour? 

Never mind, we can always blame Facebook.

I agree with Old Tankie.

Of course if police had more officers they could do more but police numbers did not cause the recent terror attacks. The terrorists did. That's the point that is being made.

In Northern Ireland the RUC was the second largest police force in the UK (next to the Met) and was supported, throughout most of my life, by the British Army. It still couldn't stop everything the IRA and other proscribed groups did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 09:17:28 PM
Why, DDD, because I object to anyone other than the terrorist being to blame for a terrorist attack? Perhaps, if, like me, you've had terrorists try to kill you, you might think differently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2017, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 09:16:59 PM
police numbers did not cause the recent terror attacks.

Can you point to one single person who has claimed that?

Saying that we are less safe with fewer police is not the same thing at all - this PM (formerly Home Secretary) has made us LESS SAFE from the evil murdering bastards - and yet Corbyn is accused of doing this because of out of context comments he made in 20 year old interviews. Have you seen the tory attack ad on Facebook that claims he refused to condemn IRA bombings with an interview clip IN WHICH THEY HAVE DELIBERATELY EDITED OUT THE BIT WHERE HE CONDENMS IRA BOMBINGS?

Vile Hypocrisy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 07:22:08 PM
MP talks about bolstering police numbers days before a terror attack caused by low police numbers and what we take away is that she fudged a zero.

Dandontdare this is the post where it was claimed police numbers caused a terror attack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 09:35:36 PM
I do wonder whether ALL the police could ever prevent or protect us from terrorism - some pricks with a van and knives seems like an impossible thing to guard against regardless of resources.  I think you want to look to foreign policy and divisive rhetoric for that.

But equally I laugh with despair that the former Home Secretary and incumbent PM, with specific and now overall responsibility for this very thing seems to be immune from fallout, while someone who had never even held a ministerial post is in some nebulous way to blame. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2017, 09:39:40 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 05 June, 2017, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 07:22:08 PM
MP talks about bolstering police numbers days before a terror attack caused by low police numbers and what we take away is that she fudged a zero.

Dandontdare this is the post where it was claimed police numbers caused a terror attack.

Fair do's - although I imagine that was not his exact meaning, I stand corrected.

Any commenst on the rest of my points?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 09:42:35 PM
That was the sentence that I was replying to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 June, 2017, 09:46:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 June, 2017, 09:12:10 PM
Fewer teachers...
Fewer...
Füher...

My god...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 June, 2017, 09:52:20 PM
See guile...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 10:29:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 09:35:36 PM
I do wonder whether ALL the police could ever prevent or protect us from terrorism - some pricks with a van and knives seems like an impossible thing to guard against regardless of resources.

Some cunt will get through sooner or later, that is sadly inevitable, but in these last few attacks, the suspects were already flagged by police as high risk radicals after several direct warnings from within the Muslim community, including from immediate family members.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 June, 2017, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 09:35:36 PM
But equally I laugh with despair that the former Home Secretary and incumbent PM,

Completely read that as 'incompetent PM'...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 11:50:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2017, 10:29:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 09:35:36 PM
I do wonder whether ALL the police could ever prevent or protect us from terrorism - some pricks with a van and knives seems like an impossible thing to guard against regardless of resources.

Some cunt will get through sooner or later, that is sadly inevitable, but in these last few attacks, the suspects were already flagged by police as high risk radicals after several direct warnings from within the Muslim community, including from immediate family members.

True enough. Hiwever, if there's truth to the suggestion that the Manchester shithead was part of an anti-Gaddafi Libyan faction covertly encouraged and supported by the UK, it does seem like the problem starts at a policy level well beyond police resources.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 06 June, 2017, 01:22:55 AM
When it comes to the police numbers, terrorism should be a minor part of the argument. While it is current (and not to take anything away from any of the victims or their family's) the bigger issue in regards to police numbers should be the national murder rate (which sits at 500+ yearly and is on the rise), rape and domestic violence figures.

Yes terrorism is a problem that needs to be dealt with, but stopping it is going to require better intelligence, data gathering and data analysis, not having more police on the streets.

What will lower the crime stats is having more police on the streets who are able to respond to the crimes taking place every day in the U.K

Stopping terrorism should be a minor point in the argument of police numbers, not the whole argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 06 June, 2017, 02:23:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 11:50:27 PM
True enough. Hiwever, if there's truth to the suggestion that the Manchester shithead was part of an anti-Gaddafi Libyan faction covertly encouraged and supported by the UK, it does seem like the problem starts at a policy level well beyond police resources.

The destabilisation of countries such as Iraq, Libya and Syria by outside forces to bring about regime change of course allowed/encouraged violent extremist elements, previously kept in check, to assert themselves.

But let's not ignore the seething, hateful, intolerant ideology that fuels the blind hatred that some have of Western society. Foreign policy or not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 03:37:48 AM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 06 June, 2017, 02:23:41 AM
But let's not ignore the seething, hateful, intolerant ideology that fuels the blind hatred that some have of Western society.

No need to bring Trump into this (again).

No, you're absolutely right, there's a loathsome ideology at the root of all this, and there's no excusing it or the actions of its adherents, but it's an ideology that finds expression in the ruins that western meddling, enabling, political expediency and proxy wars have had a huge hand in creating. That's by way of an explanation, not an excuse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 June, 2017, 05:18:15 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 05 June, 2017, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2017, 09:35:36 PM
But equally I laugh with despair that the former Home Secretary and incumbent PM,

Completely read that as 'incompetent PM'...

Interesting and wholly accurate Freudian slip there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 June, 2017, 10:01:36 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 05 June, 2017, 07:28:15 PM
I thought the terrorist attack was caused by the terrorists.

Terrorist attacks are carried out by terrorists.

What causes terrorism is a far more complicated question. You could mean what caused a specific attack or what the rout to violence for a specific attacker was. When thinking about a specific attack you could look at the practicalities, breaking it down into what opportunities the terrorist took and what planning the attack involved. When looking at the philosophy you could ask how these people convinced themselves they were justified in doing what they did and what they think there is to gain.

You could mean what causes terrorism in any form. Or what kind of social structure has to exist before an act of violence can be considered terrorism.

I have a feeling the original post was attempting to draw a line between the level of policing and the opportunities that offered. As Jim said, The culpable negligence argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 12:08:54 PM
The original post was actually about pedantry as a means of deflection, so the willful misreading of the kind that put Tankie in my ignore file years ago has arguably been a bit of a gift.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 12:44:02 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 06 June, 2017, 02:23:41 AMThe destabilisation of countries such as Iraq, Libya and Syria by outside forces to bring about regime change of course allowed/encouraged violent extremist elements, previously kept in check, to assert themselves.

But let's not ignore the seething, hateful, intolerant ideology that fuels the blind hatred that some have of Western society. Foreign policy or not.

2 sides of the same coin but attacks committed by homegrown terrorists may also point to an underlying socio-cultural malaise among radicalised individuals.

In his recent book "Jihad and Death: The Global Appeal of Islamic State," Roy argues that about 70 percent of these young people have scant knowledge of Islam, and suggests they are "radical" before even choosing Islam. He dubs them "born again Muslims" who lead libertine lives before their sudden conversion to violent fundamentalism.

"It's the Islamification of radicalism that we need to investigate, not the radicalization of Islam," Roy says, begging the question of why radical youths would choose violent fundamentalist Islam over other destructive creeds to engage in terrorism.

These "new radicals" embrace the Islamic State's narrative as it's the only radical narrative available in the "global market of fundamentalist ideologies," Roy says. "In the past they would have been drawn, for example, to far-left political extremism." Half of violent jihadis in France, Germany and the United States also have criminal records for petty crime, just like Abedi, who appears to have been radicalized without the involvement of the local mosque or religious community, an element that mirrors patterns in the rest of Europe.

It's Not Islam That Drives Young Europeans to Jihad, France's Top Terrorism Expert Explains (http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/1.791954)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 June, 2017, 12:47:00 PM
Quote from: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 06 June, 2017, 01:22:55 AM
When it comes to the police numbers, terrorism should be a minor part of the argument. While it is current (and not to take anything away from any of the victims or their family's) the bigger issue in regards to police numbers should be the national murder rate (which sits at 500+ yearly and is on the rise), rape and domestic violence figures.

Yes terrorism is a problem that needs to be dealt with, but stopping it is going to require better intelligence, data gathering and data analysis, not having more police on the streets.

What will lower the crime stats is having more police on the streets who are able to respond to the crimes taking place every day in the U.K

Stopping terrorism should be a minor point in the argument of police numbers, not the whole argument.

What particularly worries me about the current van-driving tactic is that there's no way to differentiate them from the usual red-light-jumping, speeding, pavement-mounting drivers that you see multiple times every day.  The only difference is what happens after they hit somebody.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 01:45:15 PM
The police and the security services knew about some of the scum bags, yet the attacks still happened, how would more bobbys on beat have changed that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 02:03:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 01:45:15 PM
The police and the security services knew about some of the scum bags, yet the attacks still happened, how would more bobbys on beat have changed that?

Your obtuseness continually borders on trolling.

Still, probably pointlessly: slashing of police numbers is across the board. Armed officers are down, street police are down, detectives are down. Fewer police means less time for policing; means you have to make judgements about which scumbags to prioritise and which not to. Sometimes those judgements are wrong. The more often you have to do it, the more likely that you will make the wrong call. The fewer the police numbers, the more scumbags move from the 'actively keep an eye on list' to the 'worry about them when you have time' list.

It's true that there is no optimum number of police that will make us 100% safe, but as the number decreases, the more compromises have to be made in terms of what the police can actively deal with, and what has to be left on the backburner with a quiet hope that it turns out to be the right call.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 June, 2017, 02:07:32 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 01:45:15 PM
The police and the security services knew about some of the scum bags, yet the attacks still happened, how would more bobbys on beat have changed that?

Who said 'bobbies on the beat' would have stopped the attacks? Some have said the cuts severely hindered the polices ability to gathers process and react to intelligence. Police on patrol is just one of many aspects of policing and although it has a effect when it comes to reassuring the public with a visible face it is far from the only thing the police do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 02:15:17 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 12:44:02 PM
2 sides of the same coin but attacks committed by homegrown terrorists may also point to an underlying socio-cultural malaise among radicalised individuals.
It's Not Islam That Drives Young Europeans to Jihad, France's Top Terrorism Expert Explains (http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/1.791954)

Great read Joe, thanks. I've always suspected this to be the case, judging from chats over the years with people peripherally involved in our own terrorist communit(ies): there are those who justify doing terrible things for a cause they believe in, and those who join a cause to justify doing terrible things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 02:41:32 PM
Why is it Jim, when I make a point it's trolling but when someone else makes a very similar point it's not? 
We live in a free society, it doesn't matter how many people you are tracking if after a while they haven't broken the law you have to back off, which appears to have happened with at least one of the terrorists.

The other route would be internment, as some have suggested. But as someone who spent many a long hour up in the towers at Long Kesh, I can confirm that would be madness.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 02:56:07 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 02:41:32 PM
Why is it Jim, when I make a point it's trolling but when someone else makes a very similar point it's not?

I didn't mention your point. I mentioned your obtuseness. I'm not the only one who's mentioned it, so maybe, just maybe, it's not me, it's you. I have, BTW, explained more than once how easy it is to quote the post you're replying to, which would be a start.

QuoteThe other route would be internment, as some have suggested. But as someone who spent many a long hour up in the towers at Long Kesh, I can confirm that would be madness.

And that's the only other option is it? Cutting 20K police officers, including about 1500 firearms officers, has had no effect? Why not get rid of the police entirely if the absolute numbers make no difference?

There's no shortage of stories from frontline officers absolutely in despair because the lack of manpower and resources means they simply can't do their jobs. You know, a lot like the doctors, and nurses, and prison officers... are you starting to see a pattern here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 June, 2017, 03:26:47 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 02:41:32 PM
Why is it Jim, when I make a point it's trolling but when someone else makes a very similar point it's not? 
Perhaps because your posts often appear to be intended to provoke and goad others, rather than debate.

Jim isn't the only the person to make this point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 03:35:53 PM
Well sir, you and Jim and any others who think the same are mistaken, I am just posting my opinion, absolutely no offence is intended.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 June, 2017, 04:00:04 PM
You may not like what Old Tankie says, but I for one don't think its trolling. He's asks pertinent questions, he doesn't have the same assertions other here have, don't take it as a personal affront that he's willing to ask here, more timid souls have withered and withdrawn he choses to stay and ask, its good this thread isn't the echo chamber that the rest of the web seems to be.

Jim, you wisely point out the pattern developing here and ask your own questions. Can I suggest if you put that forward in a considered way, rather that calling out Troll! you might win over a few more converts to you POV?   after all that's how Lenin won over trainloads of squaddies in 1917  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 June, 2017, 04:02:44 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 03:35:53 PM
Well sir, you and Jim and any others who think the same are mistaken, I am just posting my opinion, absolutely no offence is intended.

Sometimes it can be a little tricky to work out what your opinion is, or why you believe it to be the case but in general I don't see your posts as trolling. Short statements without context are not really invitation to debate, but as one of the few right wing posters here, your opinion is usually of interest.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 04:09:44 PM
Thanks guys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 04:10:38 PM
Yep, I seldom agree with Tankie's PoV but he expresses it clearly, and if he is looking for a reaction it's no more than the rest of us do when we assert our opinions in public. I don't believe at all that he's trolling in the sense of being attention-seeking through being wilfully disruptive. He's also a long-standing squaxx dek Thargo, and that alone gives him the right to say his piece here.  It's not like he's the only one to hold these views, more's the pity, so it's worth hearing him out however much the content and delivery may annoy you.

And nor is he the only contrary old bugger roaming these halls!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 04:14:21 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 06 June, 2017, 04:00:04 PM
You may not like what Old Tankie says, but I for one don't think its trolling. He's asks pertinent questions, he doesn't have the same assertions other here have, don't take it as a personal affront that he's willing to ask here, more timid souls have withered and withdrawn he choses to stay and ask, its good this thread isn't the echo chamber that the rest of the web seems to be.

My objection isn't to what he says, as I have repeatedly explained, but to both the obtuseness and opacity of his contributions here.  I don't object to him asking questions, I'm frustrated by his refusal to engage with cogent, detailed answers to those questions.

QuoteJim, you wisely point out the pattern developing here and ask your own questions. Can I suggest if you put that forward in a considered way, rather that calling out Troll! you might win over a few more converts to you POV?   after all that's how Lenin won over trainloads of squaddies in 1917  ;)

As I am now very tired of explaining, I do not use the word 'trolling' in its general and inaccurate sense of broad internet douchebaggery, but in the specific and accurate sense of posting in a manner intended to provoke intemperate responses. I have explained repeatedly why Tankie's posts might create that impression and, if he genuinely does not intend that to be the case, I have also pointed out small and easy steps he could take to avoid that appearing that way. His long-running failure to oblige makes it quite difficult to avoid the obvious conclusion.

I am, for example, still waiting for Tankie to give us the benefit of his anti-terrorism experience up a tower in his tank, and tell us how many policemen we can afford to lose before public safety is imperilled. I'm interested, because Manchester Police said that level was reached two years ago and Theresa May accused them of (and I'm not making this up) "scaremongering".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 04:17:04 PM
And that's a fair response from Jim too. They both have lovely bottoms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 04:33:34 PM
Thanks TB.

Jim, I will take your last paragraph as a joke, but would point out that how ever little my anti-terrorisem experience is after two emergency tours in Northern Ireland in the mid 70's, I'll bet a pound to a penny it's more than yours.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 June, 2017, 04:36:33 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 04:17:04 PM
And that's a fair response from Jim too. They both have lovely bottoms.
'Snigger'...Bottom
(https://media.giphy.com/media/6v0lBsS72Hduw/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 June, 2017, 04:46:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 04:10:38 PM
And nor is he the only contrary old bugger roaming these halls!


(https://travsd.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/wg3q6cfgyn959yi3nmenvaryo1_1280.jpg?w=450&h=344)
Doh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 June, 2017, 04:52:46 PM
Helpfully some one has collected a bunch or quotes and a video about policing cuts Including (I think) the warning Jim is referring to.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-may-warned-by-manchester-police-that-cuts-risked-terror-attack-2017-5?r=UK&IR=T

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 04:55:23 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 04:33:34 PM
I will take your last paragraph as a joke, but would point out that how ever little my anti-terrorisem experience is after two emergency tours in Northern Ireland in the mid 70's, I'll bet a pound to a penny it's more than yours.

Or, you could give us the benefit of your experience and answer the question I've now asked you twice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:20:35 PM
My point was that the only people responsible for terrorist attacks are terrorists, I am not defending the government of course more police makes a difference, but the problem is that the terrorists just move on to softer targets as seen in Manchester. You can't stop them they always have the advantage. You wouldn't stop them with an extra million police you have to tackle their motives. We stopped many attacks but no matter what we tried other attacks still got through. That is my experience.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 05:25:00 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:20:35 PM
of course more police makes a difference

There. Right. Was that really so difficult?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:29:38 PM
Bollo
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 05:30:39 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 04:14:21 PM
I am, for example, still waiting for Tankie to give us the benefit of his anti-terrorism experience up a tower in his tank, and tell us how many policemen we can afford to lose before public safety is imperilled. I'm interested, because Manchester Police said that level was reached two years ago and Theresa May accused them of (and I'm not making this up) "scaremongering".

Jim. More police would be great but it's not just about police numbers.

Northern Ireland had a relatively small population (less than 2 million), the second largest police force in the UK and the resources of the British Army on the streets in the 70's, 80's and some of the 90's. Despite their best efforts they were unable to guarantee public safety from PIRA who continued a campaign of shooting and bombing throughout that time both at home, in the mainland UK and further afield.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 06 June, 2017, 05:33:06 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:29:38 PM
Bollo

Genuinely laughed out loud at that. Nice to see senses of humour being retained.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:35:38 PM
Yes, sorry about that, don't know what happened there, must be getting tired!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 05:40:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:29:38 PM
Bollo

Exhibit A in the "Is Tankie trolling?" discussion. I'm assuming that was meant to say "Bollocks", from Mister "I don't mean to offend anyone".

I asked a simple question, arising from Tankie's previous posts. I asked it politely and explained my reasoning. I had to ask twice for an answer, at which point we finally establish that Tankie wasn't actually disagreeing with me. It doesn't have to be like pulling teeth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:45:28 PM
Get over yourself Jim, if I had meant to post that I would have finished the word.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 June, 2017, 05:56:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 05:40:33 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:29:38 PM
Bollo

Exhibit A in the "Is Tankie trolling?" discussion. I'm assuming that was meant to say "Bollocks", from Mister "I don't mean to offend anyone".

I asked a simple question, arising from Tankie's previous posts. I asked it politely and explained my reasoning. I had to ask twice for an answer, at which point we finally establish that Tankie wasn't actually disagreeing with me. It doesn't have to be like pulling teeth.

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TDU3tGzaUzQ/UZw_l_tEvwI/AAAAAAAABlM/7-5uy-hAVws/s1600/letthatbeyourlastbattlefieldhd1313.jpg)

Jim and Tankie finally meet...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 05:58:41 PM
That's good!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 June, 2017, 06:01:22 PM
That's  proper trolling!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 06:17:15 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 05:30:39 PMNorthern Ireland

Is not an equivalence.  NI was a religiously and politically-polorised society under military occupation.
Although we're fine now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 06:26:47 PM
—EDIT: DELETED—

That was unhelpful but rather illustrates my point. I have been unswervingly polite and reasonable in this exchange, and then Tankie types half an insult, claims that what wasn't he meant (he must have been too tired to finish it, eh? Nudge, nudge, wink, wink)... well what was the end of that sentence, Tankie? Please enlighten me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 06:28:02 PM
 ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 June, 2017, 06:43:08 PM
...well what was the end of that sentence, Tankie?

"Bollo is an ape who lived in the Zooniverse during the first series of The Mighty Boosh and later joined Naboo in the flat and the Nabootique during the second and third series." ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 06:46:53 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 06:26:47 PM
well what was the end of that sentence, Tankie? Please enlighten me.

Actually, don't bother. You're just a wind-up merchant and I've got better things to do than elevate my blood pressure trying to extract the smallest amount of sense from you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 06:49:57 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 06:17:15 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 05:30:39 PMNorthern Ireland

Is not an equivalence.  NI was a religiously and politically-polorised society under military occupation.
Although we're fine now.

Aye, we've no government and there's uncertainty over how the border is going to work, but no one has been shot or blown up. I'll take that win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:01:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 06:17:15 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 05:30:39 PMNorthern Ireland

Is not an equivalence.  NI was a religiously and politically-polorised society under military occupation.
Although we're fine now.

An equivalence to what? I was making a point about police numbers.

I'm also not sure how you define "military occupation" but I don't think it is an appropriate phrase to use in respect of Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:02:27 PM
I was genuinely trying to have a joke with you Jim, we are just not going to get on are we? No ones fault, very different people I suppose, I won't respond to your posts in the future. All the best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 07:06:13 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:01:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 06:17:15 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 05:30:39 PMNorthern Ireland

Is not an equivalence.  NI was a religiously and politically-polorised society under military occupation.
Although we're fine now.

An equivalence to what? I was making a point about police numbers.

I'm also not sure how you define "military occupation" but I don't think it is an appropriate phrase to use in respect of Northern Ireland.

When you were 12, did you have fully armed military officers asking you where you were going and what you were doing, when you weren't going anwhere in particular and were just walking your dog? How would you define that? How many army watchtowers could you see from your bedroom window when you were a kid? Did you regularly see chinooks ferrying military hardware* hither and thither?

*That was kinda cool and in a funny way I miss it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 07:10:58 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:01:15 PMI'm also not sure how you define "military occupation" but I don't think it is an appropriate phrase to use in respect of Northern Ireland.


'Feck it sure it's grand'

(http://www.trend-chaser.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/01/featured-1.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:16:49 PM
Wow! That's an old photo, even before my time, looking at the kit I would say '69 or '70.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 07:18:29 PM

Spot on – it's 1969.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 07:20:00 PM
I got my first real six-string
Bought it at the five-and-dime
Played it 'til my fingers bled
Was the summer of '69

Me and some guys from school
Had a band and we tried real hard.
Jimmy quit, Jody got married
I should've known we'd never get far

Oh, when I look back now
That summer seemed to last forever
And if I had the choice
Yeah, I'd always wanna be there
Those were the best days of my life

Ain't no use in complainin'
When you've got a job to do
Spent my evenings down at the drive-in
And that's when I met you, yeah

Standin' on your mama's porch
You told me that you'd wait forever
Oh, and when you held my hand
I knew that it was now or never
Those were the best days of my life

Oh, yeah.
Back in the summer of '69, oh.

Man we were killin' time
We were young and restless
We needed to unwind
I guess nothin' can last forever, forever, no! yeah!

And now the times are changin'
Look at everything that's come and gone
Sometimes when I play that old six-string
I think about you, wonder what went wrong

Standin' on your mama's porch
You told me that it'd last forever
Oh, and when you held my hand
I knew that it was now or never
Those were the best days of my life

Oh, yeah.
Back in the summer of '69, oh.
It was the summer of '69, oh, yeah.
Me and my baby in '69, oh.
It was the summer, the summer, the summer of '69, yeah
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:28:57 PM
It was a military operation. It wasn't a military occupation as, since I was a kid, Northern Ireland has been part of the UK. Military occupation has a more contentious meaning.   

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:43:22 PM
Do you know where that is Joe, is it Derry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 07:50:00 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:43:22 PM
Do you know where that is Joe, is it Derry.

Well there's proof Tankie isn't a troll, he didn't call it Londonderry  ;)

Looks more like North Belfast to me
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 07:50:42 PM


I think it is Belfast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:53:50 PM
Thanks guys, it's been a long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 07:56:54 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 07:50:42 PM


I think it is Belfast.

Aye, looks like Gay Phil Cave Hill in the background
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 June, 2017, 08:22:09 PM
I remember a family holiday to Britain where we had to get the ferry back to Belfast instead of Dun Laoghaire.  My dad took a wrong turn and ended up in some military barracks.  Rifles trained on the car with kids in the back.  Not much fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 08:30:24 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:28:57 PM
Military occupation has a more contentious meaning.

Hmm, I don't have the lived-there experience of these nordie bastards, but as a Souther I can tell you that my experience of crossing that unmissed 'hard frontier' felt exactly like you were entering an area of this island that was under military occupation.  Kids barely old enough to shave pointing automatic weapons at you, and forcibly enquiring after your business in essentially foreign scouse/manc/estuary accents, watchtowers and sniper observation posts everywhere, RUC stations looking like the Lord Humungous' summer palace, and armed helicopters buzzing you when you went hillwalking...

It would have been hard to see the distinction between 'operation' and 'occupation', and that's speaking as someone whose family was largely Protestant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 06 June, 2017, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 June, 2017, 08:22:09 PM
I remember a family holiday to Britain where we had to get the ferry back to Belfast instead of Dun Laoghaire.  My dad took a wrong turn and ended up in some military barracks.  Rifles trained on the car with kids in the back.  Not much fun.

My mum and dad did similar, think it was a town used for training purposes... Was in the last 15 years or so, not quite as bad as it could have been...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 June, 2017, 09:06:51 PM
When I was growing up the situation in Ireland was portrayed as too complex for ordinary people to understand and frequently boiled down to a simple "us and them" thing (like apartheid, the Cold War and the Middle East). Adults I otherwise respected were suspicious of and sometimes downright hostile towards anyone from Ireland and when I asked them why the answers were always unsatisfactory.

I never understood it but even then I felt vaguely ashamed without knowing why. My heart goes out to everyone who suffered during The Euphemisms and I hope and pray we'll never be so stupid and inhuman again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 09:22:08 PM
A military occupation is something like Occupied France in WW2. It implies a foreign power taking over another country or similar. Some people take that view in relation to NI but in my lifetime, and about 50 years before it, NI has been part of the UK and it therefore wasn't a military occupation in 1969 or thereafter.

For various reasons the term doesn't sit well with me but if you guys want to use it go ahead as I don't think I'll be posting on here anymore.

I really didn't care if police or soldiers asked me my name or where I was going or had a look in my car boot as it was just part of life back then. People always mention the soldiers pointing guns at them but there were a lot more people killed by the terrorist groups than by the soldiers. 

You can go back in to British and Irish history (and ancient history) about NI and argue about who is right here and who isn't. Before anyone starts though I can 100% guarantee the argument will not be sorted out on this forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 06 June, 2017, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 06 June, 2017, 01:22:55 AM
When it comes to the police numbers, terrorism should be a minor part of the argument. While it is current (and not to take anything away from any of the victims or their family's) the bigger issue in regards to police numbers should be the national murder rate (which sits at 500+ yearly and is on the rise), rape and domestic violence figures.

Yes terrorism is a problem that needs to be dealt with, but stopping it is going to require better intelligence, data gathering and data analysis, not having more police on the streets.

What will lower the crime stats is having more police on the streets who are able to respond to the crimes taking place every day in the U.K

Stopping terrorism should be a minor point in the argument of police numbers, not the whole argument.

I stand by my comment made earlier with the PM saying today that she will change human rights laws to combat terror.

God forbid she changed them to make it possible to deport someone who is a "terror suspect" and then we get some Trump-esque loony in charge to whom a terror suspect is someone who's skin is a shade darker than their own.

The woman is insane and must be stopped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 09:31:56 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 09:22:08 PM
You can go back in to British and Irish history (and ancient history) about NI and argue about who is right here and who isn't. Before anyone starts though I can 100% guarantee the argument will not be sorted out on this forum.

I don't think anyone was arguing the rights and wrongs (we've all spent too long doing that), or gods forbid, the final score, and for myself at least I was merely noting that it felt like a military occupation: it's not like the soldiers were local boys, they were from over the water, and it was very hard to escape that.  When those of us from the south spent time Up North, the contrast with our part of the island was gobsmacking (even leaving aside the better roads, top-shelf porn and alien sweets and crisp flavours).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 09:42:40 PM
I have to admit at times it felt like a foreign land to us, at other times it felt very British.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 June, 2017, 09:53:53 PM
QuotePeople always mention the soldiers pointing guns at them but

Yeah, I'm done here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 06 June, 2017, 10:20:11 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 06 June, 2017, 07:06:13 PM
When you were 12, did you have fully armed military officers asking you where you were going and what you were doing, when you weren't going anwhere in particular and were just walking your dog?

Yes, but did they ever caution you? Because if not then 0bv10u5ly you were let off lightly if that photo Soap posted is owt to go by.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 June, 2017, 10:44:30 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 09:22:08 PMYou can go back in to British and Irish history (and ancient history) about NI and argue about who is right here and who isn't. Before anyone starts though I can 100% guarantee the argument will not be sorted out on this forum.

'It's over, Johnny. It's over.'

Hopefully with Brexit it stays that way and Nrn Irn is not living through just an interlude in what was the 'longest continuous deployment in the British military's history'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 June, 2017, 12:01:56 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 09:31:56 PM
...leaving aside the... crisp flavours).

Our Tayto is vastly superior to your free stayto. It's not even made in a feckin castle, no theme park or nahhin'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 07 June, 2017, 01:29:52 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 07 June, 2017, 12:01:56 AM
Our Tayto is vastly superior to your free stayto. It's not even made in a feckin castle, no theme park or nahhin'

–Ahem– (http://www.taytopark.ie/)

(http://www.taytopark.ie/img/brand_desktop.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2017, 01:35:41 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 09:42:40 PM
I have to admit at times it felt like a foreign land to us, at other times it felt very British.

That is the real beauty of NI - it's both and neither, and how could it be anything else?  The unlikely 'cheese and onion' combo of flavours is what makes it such a great place, once you shave off the headcases at each extremity. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 07 June, 2017, 07:13:44 AM
Daily Mail online is very nasty today. Desperate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2017, 07:17:13 AM
"We petition the UK parliament to establish a new oath of allegiance, so that MPs pledge their allegiance to the people, not to the Queen." (https://www.republic.org.uk/petition/peoples-oath?&amp;cid=43127&amp;cs=152536269314149d88df1c6ea2ff7ba2_1496815575_168)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 June, 2017, 08:28:45 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 06:46:53 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 June, 2017, 06:26:47 PM
well what was the end of that sentence, Tankie? Please enlighten me.

Actually, don't bother. You're just a wind-up merchant and I've got better things to do than elevate my blood pressure trying to extract the smallest amount of sense from you.

So I read that BOLLO as Tankie typing BOLLOCKS! as a curse ("Drat! You got me!") because you pointed out that he'd ended up agreeing that police numbers do make a difference.

That wouldn't be offensive would it?

Everybody should remember how much subtlety and intent gets lost in online communication and instead of thinking the worst, give people the benefit of the doubt. They probably didn't mean that exactly as you read it. Shrug your shoulders. Imagine a lighter interpretation and move on from there.

The rest of the board, the other poster and your blood pressure will all thank you for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 07 June, 2017, 10:03:18 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 June, 2017, 08:30:24 PM
Quote from: Tony Angelino on 06 June, 2017, 07:28:57 PM
Military occupation has a more contentious meaning.

Hmm, I don't have the lived-there experience of these nordie bastards, but as a Souther I can tell you that my experience of crossing that unmissed 'hard frontier' felt exactly like you were entering an area of this island that was under military occupation.  Kids barely old enough to shave pointing automatic weapons at you, and forcibly enquiring after your business in essentially foreign scouse/manc/estuary accents, watchtowers and sniper observation posts everywhere, RUC stations looking like the Lord Humungous' summer palace, and armed helicopters buzzing you when you went hillwalking...

It would have been hard to see the distinction between 'operation' and 'occupation', and that's speaking as someone whose family was largely Protestant.
[/quote



I can see how that was the genuine impression TB. Through my work I went to live in a republican area of north Belfast for years where that would have been the overwhelming experience and interpretation  of events. I knew what it was to be frightened by an assault (or maybe worse) from the British army for example and readily attest to the reality of what you allude to.

As a prod growing up in a largely proddie town I also have experience of the flip side- 1 ton semtex bombs blowing up that town and countless deaths leading to ever-increasing militarisation, oppression, collusion etc etc etc-a horrible circular little equation of utter chaos.

Horrible times all round.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 07 June, 2017, 10:12:08 AM
I have just realised that my last post might read as a "republicans started it" analysis. That was not my intent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 10:59:27 AM
Looking forward to tomorrow, think it will be a long night!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 11:15:08 AM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 07 June, 2017, 10:12:08 AM
I have just realised that my last post might read as a "republicans started it" analysis. That was not my intent.

I remember having it explained to us in high school that it was actually the French who started it by stirring the pot in Ireland to get at the British over something they did to the Spanish, but before I could learn the clearly-fascinating ins and outs, I quit history and did art instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 06 June, 2017, 07:16:49 PM
Wow! That's an old photo, even before my time, looking at the kit I would say '69 or '70.

Forgiven my lack of knowledge, but does the black berets mean those guys are Tank Regiment?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 June, 2017, 11:44:01 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 10:59:27 AM
Looking forward to tomorrow, think it will be a long night!
I'm dreading it, and what follows.

I wonder how long it'll be before Davis and May decide that the EU's reciprocal deal for EU citizens isn't acceptable because the EU wants them to retain rights (which the Conservatives promised, but now call "ridiculous"). Three months? Two? One? And then that's it: the hardest of Brexits. Still, I'm sure throwing six million people under the bus was always part of the plan. I mean, I don't recall anyone ever saying that (including every leading Leave figure from Johnson to Farage), but someone must have, right? After all, May said we all voted with our eyes open.

Still, I suppose if the worst comes to the worst, the house we built is just a house. And someone here might get a nice bargain when I have to flog all my comics on eBay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 June, 2017, 11:48:04 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 June, 2017, 11:44:01 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 10:59:27 AM
Looking forward to tomorrow, think it will be a long night!
I'm dreading it, and what follows.

I wonder how long it'll be before Davis and May decide that the EU's reciprocal deal for EU citizens isn't acceptable because the EU wants them to retain rights (which the Conservatives promised, but now call "ridiculous"). Three months? Two? One? And then that's it: the hardest of Brexits. Still, I'm sure throwing six million people under the bus was always part of the plan. I mean, I don't recall anyone ever saying that (including every leading Leave figure from Johnson to Farage), but someone must have, right? After all, May said we all voted with our eyes open.

Still, I suppose if the worst comes to the worst, the house we built is just a house. And someone here might get a nice bargain when I have to flog all my comics on eBay.

Can't help feeling the same. I'm just hoping it's not too much of a massacre despite the 'positive polls' for the opposition parties. I wonder what the secret focus groups have been telling the political pollsters?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 11:55:38 AM
Hi Proudhuff, I can't make out the cap badge, but in 69 either in Derry or Belfast it would probably be infantry.
Tank and artillery regiments didn't start re-training until 1970.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 12:02:22 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
Forgiven my lack of knowledge, but does the black berets mean those guys are Tank Regiment?

(http://www.steve-p.org/sm/menaswomenI.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2017, 12:09:04 PM
Jim, i'm gonna have to report you for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 June, 2017, 12:20:19 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 June, 2017, 11:48:04 AMCan't help feeling the same. I'm just hoping it's not too much of a massacre despite the 'positive polls' for the opposition parties. I wonder what the secret focus groups have been telling the political pollsters?
The problem with polling is quiet right-wingers. It seems Electoral Calculus has taken them into account (and also the likelihood young people won't bother to vote), hence their guess of a Tory majority that's been in the high double figures/low 100s. But even their 'low pollsters' model only just intersects with minority/hung parliament zones. Additionally, it looks like a mainstream liberal/pro-Europe party simply won't exist in England come Friday, which is a loss to British politics.

I just hope by some miracle my family won't now have to spend seven grand or so on a hugely expensive coin flip. I'm not optimistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 12:21:24 PM
No, he's not a Tankie, he's too clean!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2017, 02:27:40 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 07 June, 2017, 11:55:38 AM
Hi Proudhuff, I can't make out the cap badge, but in 69 either in Derry or Belfast it would probably be infantry.
Tank and artillery regiments didn't start re-training until 1970.

cheers! A colleague at my work has mentioned being stuck in the back of a landrover and driven around, but he was artillery, will show him that pic regardless.

Jim, Is that  Robert DeNiro from the Deerhunter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 02:37:04 PM
Dianne Abbott has stepped down after being diagnosed with a "serious, long term condition (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/diane-abbott-replaced-as-shadow-home-secretary-for-period-of-her-ill-health_uk_5937b3d8e4b0ce1e7408f4c0?)", so we can look forward to seeing plenty of "she's just faking it because she's so rubbish and shit" comments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 June, 2017, 02:49:19 PM
QuoteThe problem with polling is quiet right-wingers.

I honestly believe that the "shy Tory" issue is a thing of the past, from an era when people were actually embarrassed about voting to destroy public services for their own financial benefit.  With just about every media outlet shouting about what terrible person Corbyn is, I think that there are going to be plenty of shy Labour voters, worried about expressing their opinion lest they be called terrorist sympathizers. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 03:30:54 PM
I also don't see what's on offer to the soft left, centrist and floating voters who supposedly switched to the Tories in 2015.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 June, 2017, 03:31:37 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 02:37:04 PM
Dianne Abbott has stepped down after being diagnosed with a "serious, long term condition (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/diane-abbott-replaced-as-shadow-home-secretary-for-period-of-her-ill-health_uk_5937b3d8e4b0ce1e7408f4c0?)", so we can look forward to seeing plenty of "she's just faking it because she's so rubbish and shit" comments.

I think you're being pretty optimistic by not including comments on her race or appearance in those comments.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 03:33:29 PM
Oddly, we don't seem to have received our polling cards for tomorrow. If you haven't either, please remember that YOU DON'T NEED THESE TO VOTE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 03:50:20 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 07 June, 2017, 03:31:37 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2017, 02:37:04 PM
Dianne Abbott has stepped down after being diagnosed with a "serious, long term condition (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/diane-abbott-replaced-as-shadow-home-secretary-for-period-of-her-ill-health_uk_5937b3d8e4b0ce1e7408f4c0?)", so we can look forward to seeing plenty of "she's just faking it because she's so rubbish and shit" comments.

I think you're being pretty optimistic by not including comments on her race or appearance in those comments.

Was going to post some of the screengrabs of abuse directed at Abbott from social media that people are sharing, but figured they'd breach forum rules on offensive content.  Instead I'll just ask why much worse interviews from the likes of Karen Bradley haven't prompted the same level of examination as Abbott's - I mean, it's almost as if there were some immediately-apparent difference between these two women that made people immediately judge Abbot by a different, more demanding standard, though heaven knows what that difference might be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2017, 03:57:16 PM
I still don't understand the Corbyn IRA thing. Labour party contacts through Corbyn, Livingstone, Simpson & Co, and Tory contacts through folk like Brooke and Hurd were key to keeping channels open. John Hume, who repeatedly sought talks with the IRA Army Council throughout the worst of the '80s, and Mo Mowlam, whose positive relationships with IRA and Loyalist figures is credited with smoothing progress towards the GFA, are rightly venerated here. Take a spin in the fabulous Mo Mowlam Memorial Playground at Stormont if you don't believe it!

Are people so stupid that they think a lasting peaceful settlement could ever have been reached without negotiation between actual people, however difficult and distasteful that may have been for all concerned? Do they not realise that virtually every UK PM since the '60s - including Thatcher - authorised negotiations with the IRA, even if covertly? As Major, not usually much of a wordsmith, put it, he'd talk to the devil himself if it meant an end to violence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 June, 2017, 03:59:35 PM
To be fair I think member of the Conservative Party is the major one for not needing to actually provide anything other than a slogan or an attack piece when making a statement. Likewise, that's the Corbyn/IRA thing.

I wish this piece could be played to everyone drawn in by the idea 'human rights' are obstructing anti-terror operations.... (https://youtu.be/ptfmAY6M6aA)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 June, 2017, 04:00:48 PM
Take a photo of yourself on your way to vote, and Brewdog will give you a free pint...

https://www.brewdog.com/lowdown/blog/vote-for-punk

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 June, 2017, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 June, 2017, 04:00:48 PM
Take a photo of yourself on your way to vote, and Brewdog will give you a free pint...

https://www.brewdog.com/lowdown/blog/vote-for-punk



Fair play.  That's the pompadour-and-beard vote secured anyway - probably not a bad thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 June, 2017, 06:00:21 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 June, 2017, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 June, 2017, 04:00:48 PM
Take a photo of yourself on your way to vote, and Brewdog will give you a free pint...

https://www.brewdog.com/lowdown/blog/vote-for-punk



Fair play.  That's the pompadour-and-beard vote secured anyway - probably not a bad thing.
...

Have you been spying on me Jayzus?! :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 June, 2017, 07:42:51 PM
 :D  Never pictured you as having the DC Shaggy look.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSaqX5tTrw52XB4U2Tr5KKgBrXCMs9l-_SZqf0h7kICNAuTp6Zp)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:22:25 PM
For the first time, I find myself an undecided voter.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:22:25 PM
For the first time, I find myself an undecided voter.

NHS: yes or no? It's basically that simple, for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:39:08 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 09:28:22 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:22:25 PM
For the first time, I find myself an undecided voter.

NHS: yes or no? It's basically that simple, for me.

Not if you live in Scotland it isn't. There's a whole independence subtext. And I don't know how I feel about that as I am not sure how Brexit is going to pan out... but vote SNP and it'll be waved around like a vote to leave the UK, vote Labour and it ends up the same thing (as they'd give an independence referendum and Corbyn's left bollock to the SNP to support a minority government, I suspect), vote Tory and it makes no difference to the MPs you get but may affect independence.

As for independence, I flip around on it and would like to know what was going to happen.

It's all just so uncertain and I can't help but feel that, no matter what, my vote will be taken to signify something with which I disagree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 09:45:04 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:39:08 PM
Not if you live in Scotland it isn't.

Aha. Fair point. I'll be honest, from south of the border (but with strong family connections to Scotland) I was heavily on the Union side of the last IndyRef for, I concede, entirely selfish/sentimental reasons. Now I look at the state of the English electorate and I'm firmly convinced you'd be better off without us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 June, 2017, 10:10:52 PM
Whatever the result, there's no need to worry now that martial law Operation Temperer is in effect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 June, 2017, 01:43:48 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 07 June, 2017, 04:00:48 PM
Take a photo of yourself on your way to vote, and Brewdog will give you a free pint...

https://www.brewdog.com/lowdown/blog/vote-for-punk (https://www.brewdog.com/lowdown/blog/vote-for-punk)

Ah, brewdog, so punk that they sue real punks for calling themselves punk...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 June, 2017, 01:45:51 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 09:45:04 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 07 June, 2017, 09:39:08 PM
Not if you live in Scotland it isn't.

Aha. Fair point. I'll be honest, from south of the border (but with strong family connections to Scotland) I was heavily on the Union side of the last IndyRef for, I concede, entirely selfish/sentimental reasons. Now I look at the state of the English electorate and I'm firmly convinced you'd be better off without us.

Very similar here - I think of myself as first and foremost British (having all the sub-nationalities represented in my family tree) and I can't see much good coming from any of the four nations apart, but the last year has made me wonder why anybody in NI or Scotland would want to stay part of the union any more :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 June, 2017, 08:57:55 AM
God speed everyone. May Grud have mercy on us all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 08 June, 2017, 09:06:42 AM
Chin up. (And I say that before, and regardless, of the result).

As my old Grandad said: "It doesn't matter who you vote for, you always end up with the government."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 June, 2017, 10:52:56 AM
If I was in Scotland, I think I'd go for the SNP if they can win, if it'd keep out a Tory. Otherwise, if some other party has a good chance (Lib Dems have a decent shot at a few seats, apparently, for example), that might influence my choice.

Alas, I'm in Tory central, and have fuck-all chance of making any kind of difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 08 June, 2017, 10:58:54 AM
My concern regarding the Lib-Dems is that they will cosy up with the Tories just to get another taste of power!

Labour all the way for me!

Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 June, 2017, 11:31:01 AM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 08 June, 2017, 10:58:54 AMMy concern regarding the Lib-Dems is that they will cosy up with the Tories just to get another taste of power!
Given what happened last time, their manifestos pledge, and the nature of today's Tories, doubtful. And in seats with a Lib Dem incumbent or a near second-place, voting anything else makes a large Tory majority even more likely. (That said, the final polls out today make for pretty depressing reading, unless you're Conkip. Precisely one has the Tories not on a majority of over 40, and that's YouGov's oddball effort. The average is around 70. Plenty are predicting 100+.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 June, 2017, 11:33:37 AM
Honest, where polls came from?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 June, 2017, 11:49:36 AM
Just been to do my duty! If my polling station is typical, turnout will be less than for the EU referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 June, 2017, 01:05:40 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 June, 2017, 12:02:22 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 07 June, 2017, 11:18:59 AM
Forgiven my lack of knowledge, but does the black berets mean those guys are Tank Regiment?

(http://www.steve-p.org/sm/menaswomenI.jpg)
Another LOL. What is happening to this thread? :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2017, 01:06:44 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 08 June, 2017, 11:33:37 AM
Honest, where polls came from?

Polls say what the polling companies and/or the media outlets who commission them want them to say, and when they inevitably get things wrong, it's everyone else's fault.  Like when "shy Tories" were responsible for the bad 2015 polling, essentially saying that people were liars and polling companies were victims of a conspiracy.
Exit polls will be the first real barometer of how badly we're fucked, and we'll see them later today.  The rest is just guessing and then making it sound like it isn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 June, 2017, 01:43:18 PM
QuoteNot if you live in Scotland it isn't. There's a whole independence subtext

Whilst the Labour and Ruth Davidson Parties are selling the election as "vote for us, or Nicola will insist on referenda every three weeks until she wins", the truth is independence has pretty much nothing to do with this election. 

The SNP won all but three seats in Scotland in the last GE, and the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of a second referendum being held - and the government at Westminster ignored it.  It's not like the SNP winning every seat in Scotland will make any difference as to whether or not the PM decides Scotland should get another vote.  It's simply that the Labour party in Scotland have not a single policy they stand behind, and the Tories in Scotland have only one issue - to disagree with everything the SNP say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 June, 2017, 02:18:53 PM
Again, it showcases the ridiculous nature of British politics and how tribal it is. The SNP in Scotland is essentially the only thing that can stop Conservative creep in this election, yet you have the others all screaming about this. Now, fair enough for the Tories to do so. Labour, on the other hand, whine because they feel entitled to Scotland, despite basically ignoring it for years. The Lib Dems are in some ways even worse, with Farron admitting that 99% of the SNP manifesto is fine, but they want to destroy the UK! (Never mind that Lib Dem policy for years has been federalism, which the SNP would likely readily have accepted as a compromise in a non-stupid-Brexit scenario.)

Argh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 08 June, 2017, 07:19:24 PM
Can I be Prime Minister, please? So I can slash taxes, brutalize criminals and rule you like a King. Damn. Someone's beaten me to it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul Moore on 08 June, 2017, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 08 June, 2017, 01:43:18 PM
QuoteNot if you live in Scotland it isn't. There's a whole independence subtext

Whilst the Labour and Ruth Davidson Parties are selling the election as "vote for us, or Nicola will insist on referenda every three weeks until she wins", the truth is independence has pretty much nothing to do with this election. 

The SNP won all but three seats in Scotland in the last GE, and the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of a second referendum being held - and the government at Westminster ignored it.  It's not like the SNP winning every seat in Scotland will make any difference as to whether or not the PM decides Scotland should get another vote.  It's simply that the Labour party in Scotland have not a single policy they stand behind, and the Tories in Scotland have only one issue - to disagree with everything the SNP say.
unfortunately any decrease in SNP support will be used by the Tories as evidence of less support for independence even tho' the mandate was there at the last scottish election
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Paul Moore on 08 June, 2017, 08:21:51 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 June, 2017, 02:18:53 PM
Again, it showcases the ridiculous nature of British politics and how tribal it is. The SNP in Scotland is essentially the only thing that can stop Conservative creep in this election, yet you have the others all screaming about this. Now, fair enough for the Tories to do so. Labour, on the other hand, whine because they feel entitled to Scotland, despite basically ignoring it for years. The Lib Dems are in some ways even worse, with Farron admitting that 99% of the SNP manifesto is fine, but they want to destroy the UK! (Never mind that Lib Dem policy for years has been federalism, which the SNP would likely readily have accepted as a compromise in a non-stupid-Brexit scenario.)

Argh.
Exactly the London party branches are terrified of independence, and are clamping down on it, the libs wont negotiate with SNP to explore a scottish brexit 'buffer' (i know not much chance with a Tory govt) so Scotland suffers full brexit along with the rest of the UK, theyre only interested in a UK (anti?) brexit strategy...so much for the Scottish branch of the liberal party
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 June, 2017, 08:42:05 PM
It's infuriating. I didn't read the manifestos this time round, but in 2015, there was little difference between the SNP and Lib Dem ones, bar the obvious. They basically had the same policies. Yet (or perhaps because of this), the Lib Dems saw themselves at war with a natural ally. It's bloody stupid.

And yet again, we saw this over the past few weeks. It was nice to see the Greens rise above it, but they're going to be a rounding error in every sense this time. The SNP too seemed somewhat keen on a deal. But the Lib Dems decided to instead hasten their ride to oblivion, while Labour barrelled along with its usual entitled hubris.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2017, 09:19:02 PM
I don't know about the Greens, as there's a lot of young voters this time out and they're only ones daft enough to throw their votes away on a party for delusional hippy idiots.

Don't mind me, I'm just practicing being a Tory so I can avoid the camps.  Hold your loved ones close and if we're still alive in years to come, tell them this was the day hope died.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 June, 2017, 09:55:26 PM
I do really hope that you are wrong in that regard but I do know what you mean.  This election feels like .... Do you know, I can't find the words for it.  This is the second time that I've lived through a Tory government and both times I've seen that nation truly screwed.  That said, whilst there were positive times under New Labour there was also plenty to feel uncomfortable about. 

The idea that Blair sold his soul for power is not one that I feel I can challenge.  It really felt at times like a few more years of Thatcher, just not quite as extreme.   The only problem is that now there is a generation growing up that remember Blair's Labour the same way that I remember Thatcher's Conservatism.  The problem being that the Tories are waaaaay more destructive.  Unfortunately they are giving the Tories the power to do what Thatcher started but on steroids.  This means that our grandchildren are being left with an incredibly toxic legacy; environmental problems, social and educational problems, pension problems, employment problems.  Basically all of the progress over the last fifty odd years is being ripped to shreds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 June, 2017, 10:14:44 PM
Ha! Big mistake to decide election, Theresa May!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2017, 10:16:55 PM
The Major ministry happened between Thatcher and Blair, and is largely overlooked in history because by the time its legacy became apparent - the Good Friday Agreement, for example - Blair swooped in and grabbed all the credit.  Major also reversed the policy of introducing private contractors to the NHS, which Blair brought back even though it was a dead issue at the time.
Major also banged Edwina Currie on the PM's desk in No 10, which isn't a pleasant mental image but fair play to the lad, he can say he did that and it's a story that's probably good for a pint or two.

Exit polls currently predicting a hung Parliament - though we've been here before.  Fuck it anyway, I'm still rioting tomorrow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 June, 2017, 10:23:03 PM
If the exit polls are correct, I will eat Paddy Ashdown's hat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2017, 10:30:22 PM
In the years to come, these few hours of hope will be seen as the final twist of the knife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 June, 2017, 10:30:49 PM
Hasn't his headgear suffered enough?

I don't believe the exit polls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 08 June, 2017, 10:37:39 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 08 June, 2017, 10:30:49 PM
Hasn't his headgear suffered enough?

I don't believe the exit polls.

Well they ask 30,000 people. Can be wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 June, 2017, 10:51:03 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 08 June, 2017, 10:23:03 PM
If the exit polls are correct, I will eat Paddy Ashdown's hat.

On a 30K polling sample, that's a hell of a Labour gain to get wrong. I suspect the Tories will squeak a majority, but if Corbyn is the first Labour leader to gain seats in twenty years, he'll be bulletproof.

May, on the other hand, pissed away a 20-point poll lead in six weeks. She's history and, with Amber Rudd looking like she might lose her seat, does this mean Boris for PM?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DrRocka on 08 June, 2017, 11:20:51 PM
Early days yet, I'm waiting a couple of hours before I let my hopes rise....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 June, 2017, 11:57:41 PM
Boy oh boy did I pick the right night for a slow nightshift!  Doesn't sound like the exit poll is translating directky into votes, but it's still looking very interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 01:51:39 AM
Amber Rudd losing her seat could only be better if she petulantly demanded a recount, lost it, then burst into tears in front of everyone.  And behold a Tweet 40 years in the making:
(https://image.ibb.co/iAjCyF/wolfie.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 09 June, 2017, 05:01:48 AM
What a lovely day to celebrate my birthday! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 09 June, 2017, 05:13:19 AM
Not going to get carried away, after all we do have the Tories as the biggest party, not that it was ever going to be anything else BUT in the context of what's gone before and the absolutely VILE press campaign against a good and honourable man you're going to take that aren't you.

We live in interesting times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 June, 2017, 05:22:46 AM
Not surprised, just dissapointed in people today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DrRocka on 09 June, 2017, 05:25:49 AM
Gotta collapse now, but I'll take that, been down the local all night with various union boys. It was never gonna be a labour victory, but that'll do for me. Now let the horse trading and gnashing of teeth commence!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 09 June, 2017, 06:09:58 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 09 June, 2017, 05:01:48 AM
What a lovely day to celebrate my birthday!

Happy Birthday Goaty!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 06:23:34 AM
Well that passed the shift nicely, good effort UK peeps. Enough to force a bit of careful thought at last.

And oh to wonder where you'd be if Corbyn's own party hadn't expended so much energy on rubbishing him, or if SF took up their seats just to spite the DUP. Good night all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 09 June, 2017, 06:39:53 AM
Whilst it appears that the rest of the UK may be starting to come to its senses, Scotland, with our nation's usual contrariness, chooses this moment to pucker up and give evil a big wet snog. The resurgence of the Tories north of the border is utterly stomach-churning, though not actually that surprising: here, Satan wears the somewhat more affable face of Ruth Davidson, who, though I am opposed to everything she stands for, undeniably has more charisma in her little finger than May does in every inch of her cold undead form.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 June, 2017, 06:41:04 AM
Quote from: Goaty on 09 June, 2017, 05:01:48 AMWhat a lovely day to celebrate my birthday!
Happy birthday, Goaty - hope it's a good 'un!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 June, 2017, 06:53:06 AM
BBC news - Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called on Mrs May to resign - but she said the country needed stability and her party would "ensure" it was maintained.  Mrs May confirmed that she stood "four square for justice, good order, discipline and the rigid application of the law."  In a brief written statement, the Prime Minister stated that despite the result of the election, she intended to remain in the role. "The people, they know where I stand.  They need rules to live by.  I provide them", confirmed Mrs May.  Signaling the tough stance she is likely to take in her parties policy on replacing human rights legislation, she went on to say that whilst in favour of individual rights, this could never be at the expense of safety and security and that " justice has a price, and that price is freedom".



Happy birthday Goaty!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 09 June, 2017, 08:34:56 AM
Went to bed after Pete Wells' results came in.

Was expecting the YouGov poll to be way off - well done to Labour!

Just happy the Mail and the Sun's appalling hatchet jobs didn't work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Fungus on 09 June, 2017, 09:02:03 AM
Unusually, pleased with all that  :P
Tories misjudged the mood as did the SNP. Corbyn deserves this vindication and showed he can't stop 'winning' elections...!

My 20-year-old MP is now my 22-year-old MP. Let's call that progress. She still calls Westminster a 'waste of time', apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 June, 2017, 09:14:14 AM
Holding all the cards and you can't even play them right.

And jesus that statement from Theresa May is horrifying. For a start it's contradicted by her actual stance and for another, it's a typically authoritarian response to recent events - nothing related to her opening guff about a 'stronger hand for Brexit'. And lo, tis human rights that stopped our poor plucky home secretary/pm from doing anything but a shit job for the best part of a decade. Not lack of resources and zero accountability for piss poor strategy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 June, 2017, 09:21:50 AM
It's a rejection of the hard Brexit stand made by May-hem and her cronies. She'll hang on till the summer recess then the knives will be out for her. A softer Brexit is more likely now and that's a relief. Phew! On a sourer note, minority Government doesn't tend to last either so we'll be sitting through another General election later in the year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 10:30:23 AM
The Tories and the DUP is a horrifying thought. Vile. Two parties that could do with more compassion, less arrogance.

As somebody said, the DUP's manifesto is 'the Bible with fortnightly bin collections.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 11:46:33 AM
Write your own punchline: The Tories spent their campaign banging on about Corbyn appeasing violent Northern Irish extremists and that he'd form a coalition of chaos to hold on to power, but now they've
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 09 June, 2017, 11:49:07 AM
Whilst the DUP aren't quite as filled with fundamentalists as they once were, they've kept the clock back several centuries on any notions of equality for any weirdos like womens and The Gays. Not keen on environmentalists either. Or atheists. Or crocodiles. Or Themuns. They do keep warm homes I hear though.

That's palaticks so it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 12:11:10 PM
Lets just hope the media are as keen to point out the DUPs links to terrorist groups, and their hypocrisy on the subject.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 June, 2017, 12:16:11 PM
Ha!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 12:18:03 PM
The DUP are funny until you notice they're terrifying.  They think the world was created 4000 years ago, that dinosaurs are a conspiracy, and have colluded with the UDA, a drug-peddling terrorist organisation who are Northern Ireland's primary manufacturers of violent deaths in car parks.
You would literally be better off if the Tories had won this by a landslide than you will be for letting this fundamentalist cult into your lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 June, 2017, 12:38:29 PM
Meh. The Tory party behind closed doors.

The electorate said they didn't want to go further to the right. So the Tories signed up with the hardest right party around to help them shit the bed even further.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 June, 2017, 01:02:06 PM
Just realised I credulously believed Theresa May came out with a Judge Dredd quote :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 June, 2017, 01:26:57 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 09 June, 2017, 06:53:06 AM
BBC news - Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called on Mrs May to resign - but she said the country needed stability and her party would "ensure" it was maintained.  Mrs May confirmed that she stood "four square for justice, good order, discipline and the rigid application of the law."  In a brief written statement, the Prime Minister stated that despite the result of the election, she intended to remain in the role. "The people, they know where I stand.  They need rules to live by.  I provide them", confirmed Mrs May.  Signaling the tough stance she is likely to take in her parties policy on replacing human rights legislation, she went on to say that whilst in favour of individual rights, this could never be at the expense of safety and security and that " justice has a price, and that price is freedom".



Happy birthday Goaty!


I see what you did there ;)  Gotta watch Karl Urban's rendition when I get home!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 09 June, 2017, 01:30:02 PM
Fake News!!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 09 June, 2017, 01:31:44 PM
I'm seriously starting to think that Theresa May could be losing grip of reality. Not a joke. I think the pressure is making her lose it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 09 June, 2017, 02:38:40 PM
Quote from: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 12:11:10 PM
Lets just hope the media are as keen to point out the DUPs links to terrorist groups, and their hypocrisy on the subject.

"Weird Al", a terrorist? But UHF's a cult classic!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 03:10:02 PM
I'm sure the DUP are delighted that the UK press keep referring to them as "Irish Unionists."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 03:19:45 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 09 June, 2017, 02:38:40 PM
Quote from: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 12:11:10 PM
Lets just hope the media are as keen to point out the DUPs links to terrorist groups, and their hypocrisy on the subject.

"Weird Al", a terrorist? But UHF's a cult classic!

Ha!

I'd take Weird Al's manifesto over the DUP's!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 June, 2017, 03:45:52 PM
What is happening? I'm hugely confused.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 09 June, 2017, 03:53:24 PM
It's simple. The Tories have brought in some mercenaries to make up the numbers. Their expertise in blaming Themuns for everything will be put to good use I imagine in the forthcoming negotiations with the EU. It would be embarrassing if they were the largest party of a region of the UK that voted to stay in the EU, mind.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 03:53:59 PM
Theresa May is basically pretending the election never happened. Still, I'm sure the press would have been fine had Corbyn gone into Downing Street with the support of Sinn Fein.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 June, 2017, 04:15:28 PM
What a shameful, arrogant woman.

The right wing press have quickly turned on her, and if she manages to see out a few more weeks I'd be massively surprised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 June, 2017, 04:21:21 PM
'Kinell. She's worse than i thought.
So much for wiping Labour out. Clinton, Cameron and May: it's time to stop taking the voters for granted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 04:23:48 PM
 On the positive side, God has long indicated that his favour falls only upon the rich,  so the DUP are unlikely to endanger their holy business endeavours by supporting a hard customs frontier. Add to that the ability of any unhappy backbenchers or customs-union-minded Scots to feck up any hard-Brexit measures they don't like, and despite the addition of (more) medieval mindsets to thr government, things could be worse for we neighbours.

And if (big if) the PLP finally gets behind Corbyn after thid, things might look up for you Brits too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 04:31:26 PM
The few PLP comments I've seen so far on SM are along the lines of "we were responsible for this victory" and "we could have done better if the left hadn't sabotaged us".
The absolute stupidest thing that they could do right now is either another coup attempt, or try to split the party to form a new party with Tony B in it, so I fully expect one of those things to happen relatively soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 June, 2017, 04:57:46 PM
Never, ever bloody learn...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 04:59:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 04:23:48 PMOn the positive side, God has long indicated that his favour falls only upon the rich,  so the DUP are unlikely to endanger their holy business endeavours by supporting a hard customs frontier.
Their policy is to be outside of the customs union, but nonetheless to retain the soft border in Ireland. They don't seem to realise – or don't care – that you an't have both. Some Tories are edging towards a softer Brexit, however. Also, the Lords could put the boot in now – now majority government to block.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 04:31:26 PMThe absolute stupidest thing that they could do right now is either another coup attempt, or try to split the party to form a new party with Tony B in it, so I fully expect one of those things to happen relatively soon.
Yeah, probably. It's pretty obvious that Corbyn in some ways helped Labour, and in others ways didn't. But it's hard to see how they'd benefit from switching leaders now. That said, in five years it's hard to see him being PM material, especially if someone younger's in charge of the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 June, 2017, 06:16:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 04:59:52 PMThat said, in five years it's hard to see him being PM material, especially if someone younger's in charge of the Tories.

Can he really be worse than the last few?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 June, 2017, 06:20:00 PM
Lord Buckethead for PM!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 06:31:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 June, 2017, 06:16:10 PMCan he really be worse than the last few?
I don't think he'd be worse, but he would be 73. 78 by the end of five years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 06:53:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 04:59:52 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 04:23:48 PMOn the positive side, God has long indicated that his favour falls only upon the rich,  so the DUP are unlikely to endanger their holy business endeavours by supporting a hard customs frontier.
Their policy is to be outside of the customs union, but nonetheless to retain the soft border in Ireland. They don't seem to realise – or don't care – that you an't have both.

Indeed, but my suggestion is that the commandment to keep thy bank balance holy trumps even their hatred of the heathen, and no-one believes a new border would be anything other than financial disaster,  so combined with Ruth Davidson's pivotal troupe (seriously, Scotland, did you have to...?) there should be enough push-back against mindless isolationism to make a difference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 06:59:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 June, 2017, 06:53:37 PMRuth Davidson's pivotal troupe (seriously, Scotland, did you have to...?)

They didn't have to, but Kezia Dugdale told them to vote Tory rather than Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 June, 2017, 08:07:47 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 06:59:58 PM
They didn't have to, but Kezia Dugdale told them to vote Tory rather than Labour.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, that would be instant expulsion for any 'ordinary' member. She should be run out of the Labour Party at the earliest opportunity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 08:37:17 PM
Lefties wanting to purge moderates from the party?  So much for kinder gentler politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 June, 2017, 08:49:40 PM
Paull Nuttall failing to get elected in UKIP's heartland - funny
Paul Nuttal resigning after a total collapse in the ukip vote - funnier
Paul Nuttall cocking up his registration so he was unable to even vote for himself - stop it, it hurts
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 June, 2017, 09:13:32 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2017, 08:37:17 PM
Lefties wanting to purge moderates from the party?  So much for kinder gentler politics.

No, I'm suggesting the NEC applies the same rules to Kezia Dugdale as they used to boot to many hundreds of members off the party lists in the run-up to the last leadership contest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Zarjazzer on 09 June, 2017, 09:32:36 PM
Ukip destroyed, the SNP neutered, the ultra righties on the Conservative side humiliated. All good.

Whatever the negotiations for Brexit are it will not just be the strident voice of the newspapers/ "dear" Rupert that is heard.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 June, 2017, 09:45:23 PM
Tories with a waffer-theen majority... and Ken Clarke sitting there on a big fat majority with no intention of standing again, ready to rally pro-EU Tories. I expect to see some... interesting changes to the Tories' Brexit strategy, such as it is. I can't help but have a little chortle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2017, 09:11:08 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2017, 06:31:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 June, 2017, 06:16:10 PMCan he really be worse than the last few?
I don't think he'd be worse, but he would be 73. 78 by the end of five years.

Well, the President of the United States is nearly 71, and he's a completely rational, sensible and competent leader, isn't he?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 10 June, 2017, 09:21:42 AM
Quote from: Zarjazzer on 09 June, 2017, 09:32:36 PM...  the ultra righties on the Conservative side humiliated...

But they've brought in the DUP! Any more right and they'd be left!

I have to admit I'm finding a lot of the outrage about it (the DUP) quite funny. Maybe it's a defence mechanism, or maybe it's refreshing to see it's not just me who finds them repugnant. Hope it continues after this gubmint collapses but I doubt it!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 June, 2017, 09:28:42 AM
£140 millions spend on this election?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2017, 12:54:55 PM
And the same again in autumn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 June, 2017, 01:38:17 PM
I suspect there's no hurry for the Tories in their current form to go another round with Labour, especially while the UK media is desperately eating crow trying to claw back some credibility - the DUP/terrorist links alone in the wake of another terror attack would likely have journalists out for Tory blood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2017, 02:52:31 PM
I suspect we'll see most papers quietly ignore that particular elephant in the room. Along with the DUP's anti-science, homophobic, anti-abortion, pro-creationism, anti-public breast feeding (it's apparently "exhibitionism") stance.

People were concerned the Tories would become UKIP. It's worst. They've become the GOP. With luck, this is a step too far. Also, it's stupid. May had an ideal opportunity to detoxify the Tories and halt the Labour advance. Just say she's heard the result and the will of the people, etc., and will seek a more consensual approach to a few key policies, including Brexit. Cue: actual stability and leadership, a likely bounce in the polls, and Labour being stranded. Instead, we're now seeing Tories who warned against Corbyn's history doing the very things they claimed he might have done had he had the chance.

(I know it'll never happen, but I still wish Sinn Fein would say: "Fuck it. We know we never said we'd take our seats, but we'll make an exception." Kick the Tories and the DUP in the balls.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2017, 03:18:33 PM
This is not democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2017, 03:38:17 PM
It's disgusting. She's literally saying things about having to abide by the will of the people for a non-binding referendum a year ago, while ignoring the general election she called that happened this past week, which is apparently not the will of the people. (I trust people here saw one Tory arguing the voters had "got it wrong"? How fucking arrogant can you get? Hard to beat that, for sure.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2017, 04:40:05 PM
I would say her policies are being made out of desperation now.  I'm imagining her with Ian Curtis's voice in her head going 'Feel it closing in... feel it closing in...'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 June, 2017, 05:02:47 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2017, 02:52:31 PM
I suspect we'll see most papers quietly ignore that particular elephant in the room. Along with the DUP's anti-science, .
(I know it'll never happen, but I still wish Sinn Fein would say: "Fuck it. We know we never said we'd take our seats, but we'll make an exception." Kick the Tories and the DUP in the balls.)

I too would love to see that, for all that the less of either of those wanker-collectives I see in a position of power the happier I am. However, SF are smart politicians (although not smart enough to dump Adams in the south, apparently) and they have no mandate for this: if nationalists (and sane people) wanted to elect representatives to Westminster they would have voted SDLP.

I heard Tim Montgomerie still banging on about Corbyn's connections to the IRA... Is anyone in GB aware that there was a peace process, and most of the devolved assembly either have far closer links to terrorists or actually were terrorists (never mind former UK governments and collusion), as is the norm where a protracted civil war comes to an agreed conclusion?  Most notably those 'people' that now form of the Westminster government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2017, 07:08:47 PM
"Corbyn years ago had meetings with IRA!"
Like Thatcher.
"Yes, but CORBYN!"
Like Thatcher.
"And we could have had a COALITION OF CHAOS!"
Like the one we have, albeit with the SNP – who aren't fucking hideous – instead of the DUP.

And repeat until the heat death of the universe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 June, 2017, 07:24:14 PM
"Corbyn spoke with terrorists" is the British equivelent of Trump supporters screeching "But Hilary's emails!" whenever their glorious leader does something horrific.  To some, it doesn't matter what May does, or how much she has to rely on religious fundamentalists to retain power.

Dr Paul Nuttal summed up the reasoning of the right in this country during the televised debate.  When challenged, just scream "you're friends with Hamas!" at the left winger with an actual plan to help the country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 June, 2017, 07:28:04 PM
I think it's been said before that political satire is struggling to keep up because political reality is currently playing out as satire.  How on earth do you write comedy about everything that is going on?  Prior to embarking on the most complex set of negotiations in the best part of half a century the Prime Minister throws an election she didn't need to.  She then goes on completely mess up her parliamentary majority through the most antagonistic campaign we've seen for years (which takes some doing).  To top it all off she then tries to form a partnership with an insignificant (to the rest of the UK) party who's leader is currently embroiled in a scandal about financial irregularity.  And she claims that her's is 'strong and stable' leadership? 

I mean, think about it.  Doesn't it read like the plot of a comedy along the lines of Yes Minister or The Thick of It?  Talk about life imitating art.  It would be funny if it wasn't for the potential consequences.    I know there were a lot of insanely pessimistic predictions during the referendum but they don't seem to have come close to reality.  At the risk of sticking my head above the parapet here, I'm almost inclined to think that Sharky is actually spot on in his analysis of government (please note the almost).  A Tory Government: for the person in your life you really hate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2017, 08:11:00 PM
It's funny reading Ian Dunt's posts on Twitter. His Brexit book was seen by some as the essential volume on the subject. In hindsight, it's a failure in some ways, because he didn't predict how absolutely useless in every way this government would be. (Right now, the UK's in a worse position than his predicted worst-case scenario.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 10 June, 2017, 09:10:10 PM
"We need policies which look good, but don't actually cost anything"

"Umm...dog asbos, a national spare room database, and everyone has to carry a carrierbag."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 June, 2017, 11:34:52 PM
I find myself reflecting that the last half-decent elected PM of the UK was John bloody Major.  And while that's really not saying much, at least he had the decency not to shore his government up with the Political Wing of the 17th Century (not mine, but very much my favourite description), prefering to expend political capital on the Good Friday Agreement that Blair would eventually take credit for.

I take it everyone has read this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/election-dup-brexit-donations-saudi-arabia-tale-tories-theresa-may-a7782681.html) timely resurrection of a months-old story?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 June, 2017, 11:55:44 PM
It just goes to show that May and her cadre care not for the stability of the UK and especially the delicate politics of NI – seriously, siding with the DUP is a political disaster for everyone – but only for their own political survival.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 01:00:27 AM
My optician (a nordie who fled to Dublin some years back) had a bright take on things today as she unironically squirted orange goop into my eyes: "at least now Britain might realise what we've had to put up with: it's not all the Chuckle Brothers".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 June, 2017, 02:17:41 AM
Aye, that's how I'm looking at it Mister Tordels. The DUPers have taken a serious misstep into the spotlight. NAMA, Redsky, RHI and the abuse of the PoC, the mainstream British media might start taking an interest in all of it. Prominent DUPers may find find themselves in interviews, not with their old chums like Mark Davenport, but attack dogs like Paxman and Snow. I'm looking forward to watching them twist in the wind before being hung out to dry by whoever replaces May.

At the same time, I'm concerned that The Brits will think they are representative of us here in the North. Not an unreasonable assumption since the bastards keep winning elections here. A situation which is a source of constant bafflement to me. Then again, The Tories got the most seats in That election
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 June, 2017, 08:55:35 AM
That link from the Independent makes interesting reading, thanks Tordels.  I think the scrutiny that the DUP now receive is, as has been said, going to make for some incredibly interesting revelations.  And no, Mister Pops, we don't consider them representative of you guys.  Please remember Nigel Farage, Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, .... to name but a few.  As you say, some of the muppets we keep electing don't really cast us in a good light.

Everything that the Tories have done over the past few years, from the referendum to this election, has been about their own interests.  This deal with the DUP has nothing to do with what is in the best interests of the British people and everything to do with hanging on to their incredibly tenuous grip on power.  That said, it already seems that Arlene Foster is trying to do the same to May as she did in Stormont.  Last night: we have a power sharing agreement.  This morning: ah, no we don't.  I think however that she will find that playing with the big boys in Westminster is a whole different league, even with the level of incompetence that they are currently demonstrating.

So it seems that we have:
- a prime minister that has lost her party the majority she had in parliament.
- a prime minister that is now completely isolated in her own party.
- a junior partner in power that has a track record of blowing apart coalition deals through intransigence.
- a junior partner in power that has more skeletons in its colleague than a psychotic mortician.
- a government that has been potentially fatally weakened about to embark on insanely complex negotiations over the future of our relations with our main trading and political partners.

I think that when the history of this period is written, future generations are going to dismiss it as farce and refuse to believe it happened.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eamonn Clarke on 11 June, 2017, 09:22:36 AM
At least Nick and Fiona can take that holiday now.

(http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r182/Caliban_photos/sightseers_zpswcgsihbj.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 11 June, 2017, 10:04:07 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 11 June, 2017, 02:17:41 AM
Aye, that's how I'm looking at it Mister Tordels. The DUPers have taken a serious misstep into the spotlight. NAMA, Redsky, RHI and the abuse of the PoC, the mainstream British media might start taking an interest in all of it. Prominent DUPers may find find themselves in interviews, not with their old chums like Mark Davenport, but attack dogs like Paxman and Snow. I'm looking forward to watching them twist in the wind before being hung out to dry by whoever replaces May.

At the same time, I'm concerned that The Brits will think they are representative of us here in the North. Not an unreasonable assumption since the bastards keep winning elections here. A situation which is a source of constant bafflement to me. Then again, The Tories got the most seats in That election

So many good points.

Its embarassing to think they are the biggest party in Northern Ireland. The sad thing is, this is a lovely country, with the majority, whether Catholic or Protestant or other, being some of the kindest, most decent people you could ever meet. It's just a shame that some people feel that they are a viable option for a vote, though i'm sure many Catholics feel the same when voting for Sinn Fein.

Ah well, i can at least take some small, terrible joy from the inevitable Jeffrey Donaldson interview when the media ask him, the committed Christian, about his hotel room TV entertainment bill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Rately on 11 June, 2017, 10:04:07 AMThe sad thing is, this is a lovely country, with the majority, whether Catholic or Protestant or other, being some of the kindest, most decent people you could ever meet.

So very true. It's incredibly hard for an outsider to square the people you meet, and the beauty of the place, with what you see on the TV, and particularly its 'representatives': NI as a whole is one of my favourite places to go. Obviously as visitors we aren't delving into the darker corners where the monsters dwell, but that's true of every country, every city.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 11 June, 2017, 11:09:36 AM
I should have voted for Lord Buckethead all along. He'll save us! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 June, 2017, 12:21:25 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 10 June, 2017, 11:55:44 PM
It just goes to show that May and her cadre care not for the stability of the UK and especially the delicate politics of NI – seriously, siding with the DUP is a political disaster for everyone – but only for their own political survival.

This is the thing. I entirely understand the shock for people who haven't been interested or aware of what goes on in Northern Ireland, but it sticks in my craw a bit that it's really about that it's now had a direct and obvious impact on the Westminster government. It's likely that that government won't last through a normal term and the DUP will be cast back from whence they've come, but there is going to be a real and lasting impact in Northern Ireland - my feeling is it's a set back of years (again). It may harm the DUP to have UK wide scrutiny, but they are notoriously bullish regarding criticism, in common with many right wing politicians. They'll stay where they no matter what.

The latest round of bullshit sessions/talks were due to start on Monday. There's no way Sinn Féin will accept a Tory presiding as chair given the situation.  The election results have shown NI is probably more starkly divided than it has been in years with no moderate MPs returned, which demonstrates why our Assembly elections aren't FPTP. I can't see the Assembly returning any time soon so we're stuck with it again - I'm just glad I really don't think there's a real desire to start the killing from most quarters, but who knows. 

Pint anyone?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2017, 12:48:38 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 10:46:11 AM
Quote from: Rately on 11 June, 2017, 10:04:07 AMThe sad thing is, this is a lovely country, with the majority, whether Catholic or Protestant or other, being some of the kindest, most decent people you could ever meet.

So very true. It's incredibly hard for an outsider to square the people you meet, and the beauty of the place, with what you see on the TV, and particularly its 'representatives': NI as a whole is one of my favourite places to go. Obviously as visitors we aren't delving into the darker corners where the monsters dwell, but that's true of every country, every city.

Thirded from me.  I love Northern Ireland; it truly has some of the most beautiful scenery I've ever seen anywhere, and find the vast majority of the people really nice.  The DUP are frothing, ignorant bigots, and it's an awful shame that they will now be tainting the rest of the UK's view of our Nordies like never before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 12:57:14 PM
Mine's a Guinness, cheers Mikey!

It is fascinating to see the shift from the Brexit results, where it was very clear that the UK was to all intents and purposes just England, and small-town England at that, to a situation where the 'regions'  :rolleyes: hold the whip hand, and people have to acknowledge what the Union actually means. I wonder how many English voters had ever heard of the ghastly Arlene Foster or the frankly impressive Ruth Davidson before, let alone realised that they might have a say in their governance? And how will this realisation play into the English isolationism that gave us Brexit?

(Aside: May, Davidson, Sturgeon, Foster: now there's a change to ponder).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 01:52:23 PM
Scrutiny from the rest of the UK won't change the DUP one jot, partly as shame, irony and self-awareness aren't part of their emotional or political vocabulary, but mainly because they've been getting in front of cameras in the House for years spouting their daffy shite and the UK media didn't even bother covering it for lulz.  "I consider child abuse almost as bad as homosexuality" - Iris Robinson said this in public, in front of cameras in Parliament, and the UK media didn't give a shit.

This speculation is moot, though, as none of the usual outlets have said fuck all about the terror links.  Questioned about the DUP's support on the BBC, Michael Fallon said they were a legitimate party and then immediately moved on to talk about Corbyn and the IRA, so we can assume the media's period of introspection and self-evaluation has ended - at least as far as the BBC are concerned - and the DUP, as honorary Tories, will get about as much scrutiny as Theresa May does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 02:06:38 PM
Tut-tut Bear, everyone knows the Troubles were a straight fight between HM Armed Forces (tanks on the streets) and the IRA (bombs in the shopping centre), which Tony Blair won after Ian Paisley got tired of shouting 'No!' and Gerry Adams' voice actor retired. I can't see how the DUP fit in at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 June, 2017, 02:44:58 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 01:52:23 PM
Scrutiny from the rest of the UK won't change the DUP one jot, partly as shame, irony and self-awareness aren't part of their emotional or political vocabulary, but mainly because they've been getting in front of cameras in the House for years spouting their daffy shite and the UK media didn't even bother covering it for lulz...

Yeah, that's entirely my point about them being bullish, for want of any stronger word.

QuoteQuestioned about the DUP's support on the BBC, Michael Fallon said they were a legitimate party and then immediately moved on to talk about Corbyn and the IRA,

But that's it though - they are a legitimate party, same as Sinn Fein are (That's neither an endorsement or condemnation of either by the way). And frankly if you threw a lump of turf into a crowded room in Norn Iron, apart from causing a security alert, you'd likely hit either a paramilitary or someone with links to them.

The point I'm making is that any links the DUP may or may not have to proscribed organisations strikes me as there cannot ever be discussion about Northern Ireland MPs without bringing it down to terrorism. I understand why that is too, but as I've said in other places over the last couple of days, there's enough in their published manifesto and on record views and actions to criticise them for. Bringing it continually back to hoods I suppose just makes me realise how far we have to go to break out of the shadow of the past.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 June, 2017, 03:23:14 PM
Looks like Trump's state visit may never happen - apparently he phoned May and said he didn't want to visit if there'd be protests and he won't come until the British public supports him ... so that'd be never then
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2017, 03:55:06 PM
Fuxake, even Dubya was man enough to visit in the face of (entirely justified) protests. President Fuckface really likes to be liked, and i can't help relishing the thought of him hating to be hated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 03:59:23 PM
"Sir Nigel Farage"
Get used to that extra syllable.
"Sir Nigel Farage"
DUP want him to be a lord and be part of negotiations with the EU, apparently.
"Sir Nigel Farage"
And sure why not?  The EU fuckin loves Sir Nigel Farage.  After Brexit, they broke their usual routine in the European Parliament just so members could tell him what they thought about him now he was leaving.  I can just picture him coming in to negotiations and the EU negotiators interrupt their train of thought about what's possible for Britain and think "oh I know exactly what they're getting now."
"Sir Nigel Farage"
Roll it around your tongue until you can fucking taste it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 11 June, 2017, 04:52:36 PM
Banks sticking his diamond-mine owning face in there again I see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 June, 2017, 05:02:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 03:59:23 PM

DUP want him to be a lord and be part of negotiations with the EU, apparently.

For a moment I thought this was a joke or fake news.  Maybe it is.  Seriously?  I need to check the side effects of my medication.  Apparently Pregabilin can cause hallucinations. I've got to be based on some of the stuff I've read the past two days.

This weekend has seen politics enter the Twilight zone, pass through Oz, take a detour into Wonderland and is now in the same place that William Burroughs was when he wrote Naked Lunch.  Parliament hasn't even begun sitting again and the government is screwing things up insanely.  Any moment now it will be revealed that Theresa May is in fact James Jaspers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 June, 2017, 05:37:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 03:59:23 PM
DUP want him to be a lord and be part of negotiations with the EU, apparently.

Dear shitting Christ. Much as I like this to be made up, it sounds entirely like something they'd come up with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 11 June, 2017, 05:39:42 PM
Theresa May should know how massive fuck up everything is, and why she do it and what to gain from it? Was it to pleased her tax-avoid friends?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 June, 2017, 07:28:07 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 11 June, 2017, 05:02:11 PMAny moment now it will be revealed that Theresa May is in fact James Jaspers.

Quip of the week right there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 June, 2017, 08:09:26 PM
Oh FFS, now Gove's back
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 June, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
What the hell is going on?  Every time you think it can't get any more bonkers ....


.... seriously?


... just .....

... stop .... just ...

... no more.

Look.  The first one or two jokes were funny.  Nice bit of satire.  Struck the right tone and all that.  Little bit clever in places.  But then it started to get silly.  You just took it too far.


... you know what's going to happen.  Your little sister will get over excited, someone is going to get hurt, something is going to get broken.


... before you know it you'll be in your bedroom in tears crying about how unfair it all is.

Seriously. Learn when to stop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 June, 2017, 09:52:03 PM
Environment? Urgh. He was good at justice, but that's all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 June, 2017, 10:13:12 PM
"Less oppressively Dickensian than Chris Grayling" is arguably a long way from "good."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Supreme Pizza Of The DPRK on 11 June, 2017, 10:14:16 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 11 June, 2017, 09:52:03 PM
Environment? Urgh. He was good at justice, but that's all.

Nice to see someone with experience was chosen.....oh wait.....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 June, 2017, 09:07:55 AM
So... today I wrote an actual letter to my MP. I would plead with every one of you (those represented by a Westminster MP, at least) to write or email your own MP and say something similar. Regardless of your political allegiances, this is of critical importance.

I've pasted the text of the letter below. I won't apologise for its length, because this is so important.

Please feel free to swipe some or all of it, if you don't have time to compose a letter of your own from scratch. But, please, please let your MP know that you object to this dangerous course of action.


Dear Mr Jenrick,

I write to express my utter dismay at the actions of your party in seeking to make a parliamentary arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party in order to gain sufficient votes for the Conservatives to continue governing.

I won't dwell on the irony of the extensive attacks on Labour and Jeremy Corbyn and his 'terrorist' connections from a party that now seeks a political arrangement with DUP, which has the explicit and open endorsement of the UDA.

I won't focus on the DUP's unconscionable stance on LGBTQ rights, women's rights, reproductive rights, and climate change, nor even on the alarming popularity of 'Young Earth Creationism' amongst their MPs.
I wish, rather, to discuss with you the catastrophic failure of patriotic duty this marriage of convenience represents in your own party.

Whilst I acknowledge that the Conservatives emerged from the general election with the largest number of seats by some margin, and, indeed, that the very purpose of any political party is to form governments, it is incumbent on all political parties to put country before party.

David Cameron put party before country when he led us into the disastrous EU Referendum entirely as a ploy to placate the eurosceptic right of the Conservative Party. Theresa May put party before country when she held this entirely unnecessary general election with the sole and admitted intent of bolstering her party's parliamentary majority and her own position within the party.

Both of these actions were motivated entirely by internal party political concerns and have damaged the country.

Now, the Conservative party seeks to form an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party. I have to ask: is no one in the Conservative party paying attention to what is currently happening in Northern Ireland, or is it that you just don't care?

The Good Friday Agreement is fundamentally imperilled by the Conservatives' stated course of action for withdrawing from the EU. Free movement of people is essential to the GFA and the European Convention on Human Rights is a foundation stone of the agreement.

Take that very real threat to the Good Friday Agreement and add to it the deteriorating political situation in Northern Ireland. There is, effectively, no government at Stormont, and has not been for several months. James Brokenshire has singularly failed to break the impasse between the DUP and Sinn Fein and has instead, simply avoided dealing with the problem by extending the deadline by which a government must be formed or direct rule from Westminster imposed.

The political situation in Northern Ireland is precariously balanced; the Good Friday Agreement is under real and serious threat; there is an alarming uptick in ground-level sectarianism...

...And the response of the Conservative party is to make an electoral pact with one of the two disagreeing parties. Arguably, this is a dereliction of your responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement, which enshrines the impartiality of the Westminster government in its pages: Article 1 of the agreement states that the UK and Irish governments should act with "rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions".

Any argument suggesting that that a partnership/coalition/pact/arrangement with the DUP is not a flagrant dereliction of that responsibility relies on sophistry and pedantry and is fundamentally intellectually dishonest.

Even if you personally, or the Conservatives collectively, choose to convince yourselves that such an argument means you are respecting your GFA obligations, I am compelled to ask: How do you think this looks to the Catholic community in Northern Ireland? Not merely the Republicans, but the Catholic community in general. The Conservatives are explicitly and openly siding with the hard-line Unionist faction in Northern Ireland politics.

And you are are doing so for the narrowest of short term political advantage. The Conservatives have failed to take account of the threat to the Good Friday Agreement presented by leaving the European Union; failed to resolve the dangerous impasse that currently exists in Northern Ireland politics; and are now handing direct political influence to one faction within that impasse.

In addition to Theresa May's risible claim to be strong in her stance against new terrorist threats, the Conservative party appears quite happy to stoke up the fires of the old terrorist threats, heedless of anything other than shortest term political advantage.

This, sir, is fundamentally unpatriotic and brings disrepute to the already-tarnished reputation of British politics. If blood is spilled once more on the streets of Ulster or Belfast, then it will stain the hands of the Conservative party, who have put political advantage ahead of the well-being of the people of the United Kingdom.

I urge you to act with both your conscience and in the national interest and exert whatever influence you can bring to bear on the leadership of your party to persuade them to reconsider this reckless and dangerous course of action.

Yours sincerely,


Jim Campbell
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 12 June, 2017, 09:20:05 AM
This is perfect letter that explains it right. Well done, Jim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 12 June, 2017, 09:24:59 AM
Wait a minute, 14 millions voted for Tory Manifesto, and now they torn it up? Wise move, government(!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 June, 2017, 10:16:49 AM
Election!
Davis: *offers words suggesting possibly softening of Brexit*
McDonnell on telly: No to single market! Will of the people!
Davis, today: Labour wants the same! Hard Brexit back on! WILL OF THE PEOPLE!

FFS, Labour. Seriously. FFS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 12 June, 2017, 10:17:18 AM
Good for you Jim. I'd follow the same course of action, though as my MP is one of the Terrible Ten, I feel it would be an exercise akin to pissing directly into a strong headwind. That and he's so fuckin thick I doubt he can read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 12 June, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
If there is even an ounce of truth in the reports this morning that the DUP are leveraging for marching to be allowed in flashpoint areas like the Garvaghy Road, and if the Conservatives even consider it, they should hang their heads in shame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 June, 2017, 10:19:57 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 June, 2017, 10:16:49 AM
Election!
Davis: *offers words suggesting possibly softening of Brexit*
McDonnell on telly: No to single market! Will of the people!
Davis, today: Labour wants the same! Hard Brexit back on! WILL OF THE PEOPLE!

FFS, Labour. Seriously. FFS.

May as well be divining the will of the people via a fucking seance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 12 June, 2017, 01:30:41 PM
So the Queen's speech is delaying, that means no deal with DUP been sealed. Was Theresa May lied to the Queen when she formed the government?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 June, 2017, 01:58:17 PM
Sounds likely to me, Goaty, May can't open her mouth without lying or u-turning, that's why they gave her a three-word slogan to parrot instead.

I still don't understand this business of defining Brexit by reference to the referendum, which (bizarrely to one used to voting in constitutional referenda) contained no specifics at all.  Assuming that the 52% voted according to the dishonest crock of shit the official Vote Leave camp were selling, most of whose MP membership retained their seats, and given that the extreme outliers of the gang of Brexiteer clowns in UKIP couldn't even dredge up a single seat less than a year later, surely the formal manifesto of Vote Leave is the mandate for divining the type of deal the 'people' want(ed)?

Among other things in that document I note with interest, for example, the formal commitment to £100 million extra per week for the NHS (even ignoring the disowned £350 million).  How's that going?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 June, 2017, 02:44:16 PM
It has ben announce speculative fiction is now redundant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 12 June, 2017, 05:39:16 PM
I saw there's a petition doing the rounds to get Sinn Fein to take their seats in parliament. People that voted for Sinn Fein actually want the Shinners to turn their back on one of their cornerstone policies that they have ran in every westminster election.

The Northern Irish Electorate Ladies and Gentlemen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 June, 2017, 05:46:36 PM
Perhaps the Torys can do a deal with Them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 12 June, 2017, 06:22:57 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 June, 2017, 05:46:36 PM
Perhaps the Torys can do a deal with Them.

But would Sir Van the Man be up for it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 June, 2017, 06:47:19 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 June, 2017, 05:46:36 PM
Perhaps the Torys can do a deal with Them.

It's not even funny how right now this sounds vaguely plausible, for a second or two at least.

Not that it would get through an ard fheis in a month of Bloody Sundays, but if SF supporters wanted the balancing influence of MPs in Westminster they could have voted for the SDLP, or keriste, even the Alliance or the Greens.  Anyone but SF, basically: you know you're getting abstentionism when you tick that box, and that's fair enough. The better question is why the feck, at this point in history, you would waste your vote like that: vote SF in assembly/local/European, by all means, but the Westminster chips were well and truly down this time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 12 June, 2017, 07:13:51 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 12 June, 2017, 05:39:16 PM

The Northern Irish Electorate Ladies and Gentlemen.

Aye, because the rest of the UK electorate are a paragon of sanity.  Witness for the prosecution: BoJo, Gove, May, Cameron, Blair, Mandelson, Brexit, Farage, ....

Churchill had it bang to rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 June, 2017, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 12 June, 2017, 07:13:51 PM
Churchill had it bang to rights.

When he said "Pass me another gin!" ...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 12 June, 2017, 09:34:05 PM
++ This post deleted by Justice Dept ++

++ By viewing the original message, you have acceded (or were thought likely to accede) to a banned ideology ++

++ Justice Dept is right. Justice Dept is strong. The well-being of the citizens is a priority for Justice Dept ++

++ Please stay by your monitor, citizen ++

++ A Judge will be with you shortly and you will be escorted to a correctional re-education centre. ++
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 June, 2017, 10:35:38 PM
Though there were lulz to be had pretending otherwise to wind people up, I wasn't entirely convinced Tim Farron was a homophobe so much as he was just being an opportunist - but then he goes and resigns because he's "torn between being a faithful Christian and a political leader."  Erm.

Well anyway, I've no idea why this should be an issue in modern UK politics now, as if anyone is going to make a regular run of the mill evangelical Christian look liberal, it's arguably the fruitbats of the DUP that are setting up shop in No. 10.  Dunno what to make of this, as all criticisms aside, he was only in the job 2 years and probably did as well as could be expected in the middle of a commie resurgence that snagged all the protest and youth votes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 June, 2017, 12:55:30 AM
Maybe with the potential of the DUP wagging the dog, Farron saw a storm brewing over their politics in religion religion in politics and didn't want to get caught up in the media deluge.

My mate described the DUP's current relationship with Britain quite well. It like someone who really fancies this person to the point of obsession, but when this person finally takes notice, they find their admirer to be utterly repulsive.

John Major thinks this ad-hoc coalition is a bad idea and that's coming from a man who had sex with Edwina Curry
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 June, 2017, 08:04:49 AM
I think it's now clear that christianity is not compatible with Traditional British Values.  Some people aren't willing to properly integrate, to accept our way of life and respect the sovereignty of British law over biblical law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2017, 09:15:38 AM
Not sure if it is Traditional British Values so much as Modern British Values.  For a long time traditional values have had their roots in Biblical teachings, albeit selective.  For some people of faith, reconciling the teachings of that faith with the values of secular society present a significant challenge.  Christianity's biggest problem is perhaps best demonstrated by the episode of the West Wing in which President Bartlett rips into a fundamentalist Christian Talk Show host laying out all of the inconsistencies in her position interpreting the old testament, to whit that she chose to selectively privilege certain teachings whilst ignoring others.  It is this kind of hypocrisy that tends to alienate people. 

Similarly it is possible to understand the offence that is caused by saying that homosexuality is a sin.  This ignores the fact that it is attacking a constituent part of some people's make up / identity.  The lack of understanding and recognition of this further undermines any hope of achieving some sort of understanding.  There is a lot to be said for the separation of church and state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2017, 09:28:55 AM
Whilst making political capital out of the Tragedy of the Grenfell Fire is obscene, it is starting to look like a lot of skeletons are dropping out of closets.  Nice one from BoJo to ponder.Nice one from BoJo to ponder. (https://skwawkbox.org/2017/06/14/video-boris-johnson-telling-fire-safety-panel-get-stuffed-grenfell/)

At the risk of mixing metaphors, I do wonder if things are going to look even worse for the government once the smoke clears.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 15 June, 2017, 09:31:23 AM
Few things turn me off a politician more than hearing Cameron or May (just as a couple of examples) talking about 'christian values' or referring to Britain as a 'christian country', because in using that sort of language they're excluding many of the people (possibly the majority these days?) they're supposed to be speaking for and representing. Christianity doesn't have the monopoly on decency, and when politicians speak like it does it's insulting, and shows how massively out of touch they are.

Trump's inauguration speech, with all that 'ra ra ra christianity first' rhetoric was pretty vomit-inducing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 June, 2017, 09:38:50 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 June, 2017, 08:04:49 AM
I think it's now clear that christianity is not compatible with Traditional British Values.  Some people aren't willing to properly integrate, to accept our way of life and respect the sovereignty of British law over biblical law.
It'd be funny if it wasn't true (witness fundamentalist christians turfing out gay married couples or refusing to bake wedding cakes).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2017, 11:53:51 AM
Quote from: Keef Monkey on 15 June, 2017, 09:31:23 AM...referring to Britain as a 'christian country', because in using that sort of language they're excluding many of the people (possibly the majority these days?) they're supposed to be speaking for and representing.

In fairness to said politicians, they are serving as the parliament of an hereditary head of state who is un-coincidentally notional head of the Church of England: you can see how conflation might creep in. Even my own priest-ridden island doesn't go quite that far.

Quote from: Keef Monkey on 15 June, 2017, 09:31:23 AMChristianity doesn't have the monopoly on decency...

This is the one that really gets my goat: there's a huge overtone of moral superiority - worse, exclusive ownership of inherent of decency -that almost automatically alienates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 June, 2017, 01:13:43 PM
It says everything about the Conservatives that when my MP retired, he 'came out'... as an atheist. He noted that had he done that before, his chances would have been slimmer, although he in hindsight regretted misleading the voters. Obviously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2017, 05:05:44 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 June, 2017, 11:53:51 AM
Quote from: Keef Monkey on 15 June, 2017, 09:31:23 AM...referring to Britain as a 'christian country', because in using that sort of language they're excluding many of the people (possibly the majority these days?) they're supposed to be speaking for and representing.

In fairness to said politicians, they are serving as the parliament of an hereditary head of state who is un-coincidentally notional head of the Church of England: you can see how conflation might creep in. Even my own priest-ridden island doesn't go quite that far.

Quote from: Keef Monkey on 15 June, 2017, 09:31:23 AMChristianity doesn't have the monopoly on decency...

This is the one that really gets my goat: there's a huge overtone of moral superiority - worse, exclusive ownership of inherent of decency -that almost automatically alienates.

I remember reading a George Orwell book (The Road to Wigan Pier?) where he argued that socialism as an ideal was far more selfless than Christianity - the former (in theory) does benevolent acts for their own sake, while the latter always has the promise of a post-mortem reward that lasts forever.

I know history shows that neither of these ideas hold water entirely, just a bit of food for thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 June, 2017, 05:24:44 PM
Mutterings on social media about how senior LibDems have been having closed-doors meetings with senior Tories.  Tim Farron explicitly ruled out going back into coalition on his watch, so I guess this solves the great Did He Jump Or Was He Pushed? mystery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 15 June, 2017, 07:20:01 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 June, 2017, 05:24:44 PM
Mutterings on social media about how senior LibDems have been having closed-doors meetings with senior Tories.  Tim Farron explicitly ruled out going back into coalition on his watch, so I guess this solves the great Did He Jump Or Was He Pushed? mystery.

I also saw this and I find it totally perplexing. The LibDems are not going to do any deals with the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2017, 07:48:43 PM
I've got to ask.  Where has this been muttered?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2017, 07:58:00 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2017, 07:48:43 PM
I've got to ask.  Where has this been muttered?

Westminster rumour mill, via Twitter. Now emphatically denied by LibDem press office.

So probably true, then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2017, 08:06:00 PM
To quote Blackadder:

"made a note in my diary on the way over.  Simply said, 'Bugger'"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 June, 2017, 08:18:31 PM
Sounds unlikely but I'd rather see another Con/LD deal than con/DUP. But if the LDs are going to die on that hill, it'd better be for something worthwhile. At the very least, PR and EEA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 June, 2017, 09:52:35 PM
One would imagine a coalition agreement would also hinge on the LDs not supporting any no confidence vote by the other Westminster parties, whereas the one upshot of a DUP coalition would be their track record for collapsing governments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 June, 2017, 10:05:05 AM
It pains me that the overwhelming impression of anything carrying the label "Christian" is that of a right wing Christian jihadist steeped in self righteousness and bent on the establishment of a theocracy or at least the flirting with secular power. It pains me because you do not have to go far to see it borne out either historically or in the modern day.

Spare a thought for socialist Christians who read 2000AD, who believe faith is a personal thing, have no desire to batter anyone with what they believe ,who genuinely despise any notion of a theocracy as a poison and are all too aware of atheists and others who often make me feel like a moral pygmy.

And I'm not the only one out there who feels like this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 16 June, 2017, 10:10:58 AM
Solidarity my dude. Fwiw a religious comrade is infinitely preferable to me than an atheist capitalist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 10:15:27 AM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 16 June, 2017, 10:05:05 AM

And I'm not the only one out there who feels like this.


No, your not.  At the same time though, I tend to go with the view that some of the views expressed here are perfectly valid for the holders.  I may not agree with them but I don't think it is helpful to pick a fight over them.  Look for the common ground where it does exist and focus on that.  Like the good Lord said, "Blessed are the Cheesemakers."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 June, 2017, 10:17:19 AM
Unfortunately that's a road that needs to go two ways, and

Not sure I've parsed the last couple of posts properly. Certainly no one thinks *all christians* are like this, but then people like the DUP/etc claim to speak for all Christians. Or at least what they would say are all real Christians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 10:27:26 AM
I always say that the reason I call myself a 'practising' Christian is because I'm not very good at it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 10:33:17 AM
I was about to say 'some of my best friends are Christians!', but then I realised that ALL my closest friends are Christians, in various flavours and strengths. By default they put up with my evangelical atheism and I reciprocate. Although now I suspect I'm some kind of charitable/missionary outreach project. There may be a spiritual bounty posted in an ecclesiastical Doghouse* somewhere.


*The Godhouse?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 10:44:11 AM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 16 June, 2017, 10:05:05 AMSpare a thought for socialist Christians who read 2000AD, who believe faith is a personal thing, have no desire to batter anyone with what they believe
I have no problem with any of that. For me, the last bit is the most important. I have a kid who will start school soon. My options in the local area are Christian schools. That's it. I see no place for worship inside of a school, but there's no escape from it. Similarly, any notion any level of government should be directed by 'god' is anathema to me.

I recall Baroness Warsi arguing a while back that any religion was better than no religion. That's just bullshit. If you have faith in a religion, that's fine. But that doesn't make you 'better' than someone who does not. (By the same token, secularists should dial down on the ridicule of people who are religious, because there's no place in a liberal society for that either.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 June, 2017, 11:03:02 AM
I guess ultimately though we're always going to run into a conflict between the secular and the faith where faith is allowed to be a factor in making decisions beyond personal life, and one that can be held to different, unassailable standards of logic or reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 01:55:21 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 10:44:11 AMIf you have faith in a religion, that's fine. But that doesn't make you 'better' than someone who does not. (By the same token, secularists should dial down on the ridicule of people who are religious, because there's no place in a liberal society for that either.)

This last bit is really important.  There's a level at which blindly accepting atheism and/or the scientific method is just as much a result of faith-indoctrination as any religion*, if no thought or understanding has been applied in reaching that conclusion, and another more considered position at which intellectual rigour is confused with moral superiority.  Mockery of others' beliefs from this standpoint is reprehensible no matter who does it**. 

What matters is results: i.e. how your understanding of the world is expressed in the way you live in it.



*Apart from the bit where it's actually correct. But I would say that, wouldn't it.
** I find the hilarity with which the beliefs and organisation of LDS/Mormons or Scientologists are treated by mainstream Judaeo-Christianity to be staggering hypocritical given their identical levels of implausibility, and I extend that distaste to atheists.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 02:29:08 PM
That's a fair point.  Dawkins' "The God Delusion" makes for hard reading.  Not so much for the points it makes as for the rabid nature of his diatribe.  In some respects it is probably the best ammunition for theists which kind of undermines his intent.

Probably the best, or most well known, work on this topic was done by Carl Sagan.  Contact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 02:43:26 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 01:55:21 PM** I find the hilarity with which the beliefs and organisation of LDS/Mormons or Scientologists are treated by mainstream Judaeo-Christianity to be staggering hypocritical given their identical levels of implausibility, and I extend that distaste to atheists.
I'm not sure I'd put Scientology in the same camp. Sure, older religions have the benefit of distance, whereas we've seen Scientology play out in real time. The difference, though, is the nature in which Scientology operates: the vicious way in which it has people 'disconnect' from friends and family, the way in which it considers any critics 'fair game, the bizarre copyright aspects to its 'scripture', and the very fact its creator essentially said the best way to make money is to start a religion. It's seemingly mostly a property scam these days. (Downtown Clearwater was never the most exciting place, but it's now effectively dead, although Scientology mostly keeps of the beach key these days at least.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 June, 2017, 02:50:49 PM
I remember David Attenborough in an interview saying he wished he could believe in God since he felt the reassurance religion gave was something positive for the human psyche. Nature in her raw tapestry is pretty merciless so one can understand that sentiment, but religion requires faith, belief requires faith, and that's the problem. Most of the horrors of the past and this century have been committed by people who believed they were right either by some divine power bestowed on them by an invisible entity, ISIS, Al Queda or because of their system of Government. Hitlers Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union, both which held the State above all other institutions including Religion murdered millions in the name of purity, and we all know how history judged them. Humankind is apparently a tyrant with God and a beast without him and that's hardly comforting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 03:21:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 02:43:26 PMThe difference, though, is the nature in which Scientology operates: the vicious way in which it has people 'disconnect' from friends and family, the way in which it considers any critics 'fair game, the bizarre copyright aspects to its 'scripture',...

I might mention seminaries, monasteries and convents in a similar context, not to mention the Inquisition and the heresy of translating the Bible into common languages, and let's entirely sidestep tithing and First Fruits etc, but while I did indeed reference 'organisations', my main accusation of hypocrisy was more to do with mockery of the beliefs than the money-making controlling operation itself: I fail to see how the e-meter is any weirder a device than a thurible, or thetans any dafter than angels: for starting values of 'very', at least.

Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 June, 2017, 02:50:49 PM
I remember David Attenborough in an interview saying he wished he could believe in God since he felt the reassurance religion gave was something positive for the human psyche. Nature in her raw tapestry is pretty merciless...

I'm with Attenborough there (as in all things), for all that I embrace the thrilling existential vertigo and endless puzzle that the solely material world engenders, I'd also love to have the faith I had when I was a kid.  But I think that ship has long-since sailed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 03:48:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 02:43:26 PM
The difference, though, is the nature in which Scientology operates: the vicious way in which it has people 'disconnect' from friends and family, the way in which it considers any critics 'fair game, ...

Can I politely suggest you take a closer look at the Catholic Church? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 04:12:12 PM
I'm not suggesting other religions don't do things along the same lines, but the default stance of the organisations today is a long way from the position of Scientology, which keeps its 'scripture' under lock and key (the key being lots and lots of money), drip-feeding you the more you pay, and actively attempts to force people apart.

If someone wants to personally believe our ills are caused by the spirits of dead aliens (killed with nuclear weapons dropped on volcanos) clinging to us, so be it. But paying tens or hundreds of thousands to be provided with information about the very 'science' you're investigating is insane (verses popping into a bookshop and buying the book of whatever holy thing you subscribe to). I suppose religion has always had a business side; the difference I see with Scientology is that the business is pretty much the entire thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 05:08:06 PM
very true.  P T Barnum had it pretty much spot on didn't he.

BTW - I thought this was supposed to be the 'political thread.'  We seem to have morphed / jacked it to the 'religious thread'.

(and kept it fairly civil which is some kind of miracle considering the subject matter).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 June, 2017, 05:41:28 PM
Mark Thomas talks about how he loves going on anti-war demos with Quakers - police know how to deal with stone throwing students, but really can't cope when they've kettled a bunch of little old ladies with a heart condition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 June, 2017, 08:13:19 PM
If you're a Londoner, (1) I'm terribly sorry, and (2) be safe.  Hot weather and an angry crowd gathered outside the door of the country's least popular Prime Minister can't be a good mix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 16 June, 2017, 08:22:13 PM
I'm not optimistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 June, 2017, 08:25:17 PM
There's already a major protest scheduled for the capital tomorrow against the Con/DUP deal.  This feels like a powder keg.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 16 June, 2017, 08:29:37 PM
With Osborne on the sidelines with a 'me in government?' attitude and the world champ of misjudging public mood for 20 years losing out to the previous winner, it's not going to take much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2017, 09:24:27 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2017, 05:08:06 PM
...I thought this was supposed to be the 'political thread.'  We seem to have morphed / jacked it to the 'religious thread'.



In my view, statism is also a religion: "government" being the invisible and all powerful god and MPs its intermediary priests who interpret and enforce the divine will. Voters are the faithful who are promised "paradise" and worthy of praise and non-voters are the heretics who deserve Hell and derision.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 10:39:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 04:12:12 PM
I'm not suggesting other religions don't do things along the same lines, but the default stance of the organisations today is a long way from the position of Scientology...[...] ...I suppose religion has always had a business side; the difference I see with Scientology is that the business is pretty much the entire thing.

I take your point re: the main religions today, but I suspect that all religions have business (or power and wealth, which amount to the same thing) at their true core - that's what makes them religions, and not just systems of belief.  That isn't to dismiss the huge amount excellent work that is carried out by, through or in the name of various religious organisations.  One could say the same about many modern charities.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2017, 06:45:05 AM
Religions are all very well when organising people to do good through charitable works, for example. The danger, of course, is that they can also be used to justify and organise horrible things. Just like governments, religions can be easily hi-jacked by the rich and powerful to be used as instruments of social control.

"I was just obeying God's will" is as poor an excuse as "I was just following orders."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 17 June, 2017, 09:10:45 AM
I see the DUP have successfully got you all talking about religion and politics. Add walking about dressed like Mr Ben and wearing a sash then you've the set. 

WELCOME TO YOUR FUTURE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 17 June, 2017, 11:35:32 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 10:33:17 AM
I was about to say 'some of my best friends are Christians!', but then I realised that ALL my closest friends are Christians, in various flavours and strengths. By default they put up with my evangelical atheism and I reciprocate. Although now I suspect I'm some kind of charitable/missionary outreach project. There may be a spiritual bounty posted in an ecclesiastical Doghouse* somewhere.


*The Godhouse?

The "Godhouse"-genuine LOL and some bizarre mental imagery of such a place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 17 June, 2017, 11:37:03 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 10:44:11 AM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 16 June, 2017, 10:05:05 AMSpare a thought for socialist Christians who read 2000AD, who believe faith is a personal thing, have no desire to batter anyone with what they believe
I have no problem with any of that. For me, the last bit is the most important. I have a kid who will start school soon. My options in the local area are Christian schools. That's it. I see no place for worship inside of a school, but there's no escape from it. Similarly, any notion any level of government should be directed by 'god' is anathema to me.

I recall Baroness Warsi arguing a while back that any religion was better than no religion. That's just bullshit. If you have faith in a religion, that's fine. But that doesn't make you 'better' than someone who does not. (By the same token, secularists should dial down on the ridicule of people who are religious, because there's no place in a liberal society for that either.)

This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 June, 2017, 12:24:50 PM
Quote from: Mikey on 17 June, 2017, 09:10:45 AM
I see the DUP have successfully got you all talking about religion and politics. Add walking about dressed like Mr Ben and wearing a sash then you've the set. 

WELCOME TO YOUR FUTURE.

Boris Johnson, wearing the sash his erm, well...somebody's Father wore, delivering a letter of complaint to a Police cordon in middle of London after him and his brethren aren't allowed to march the road home?

I can just imagine the little caravan encampment. Gove and Johnson sat with Sammy and Edwin, tea and biscuits, surrounded by Union Jacks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 June, 2017, 03:36:15 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 June, 2017, 10:39:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 June, 2017, 04:12:12 PM
I'm not suggesting other religions don't do things along the same lines, but the default stance of the organisations today is a long way from the position of Scientology...[...] ...I suppose religion has always had a business side; the difference I see with Scientology is that the business is pretty much the entire thing.

I take your point re: the main religions today, but I suspect that all religions have business (or power and wealth, which amount to the same thing) at their true core - that's what makes them religions, and not just systems of belief.  That isn't to dismiss the huge amount excellent work that is carried out by, through or in the name of various religious organisations.  One could say the same about many modern charities.

Brings to mind induglences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence#Late_medieval_abuses), as satyrised in Nemesis the Warlock (book V or so, Vengeance of Thoth or Torquemurder/Time Wastes).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2017, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: Rately on 17 June, 2017, 12:24:50 PM
I can just imagine the little caravan encampment. Gove and Johnson sat with Sammy and Edwin, tea and biscuits, surrounded by Union Jacks.

Well they've already had the bloody bonfire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2017, 07:05:09 PM
"These are small, those are far away..."


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 18 June, 2017, 06:42:36 PM
We are talking about religion?!? When we are seeing the poor being burnt to death in their homes in part due to the negligence of our government?!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2017, 09:03:33 PM
Because lefties have hijacked the tragedy.
Meanwhile, Kensington's Tory-run council is rehousing Grenfell survivors outside Kensington despite Theresa May's assurance that this wouldn't happen, which is baffling until you remember that Kensington just elected its first Labour MP by a majority of 20.
But yeah, it's the lefties who have taken advantage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 18 June, 2017, 09:22:46 PM
Yes & those who don't take the relocation will be branded as 'intentionally homeless'. Shameful actions by a shameful government intent on class & ethnic cleansing of Kennsington
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2017, 10:59:39 PM
On social media I'm seeing the "paid protestors" narrative emerging already.  "They must be doing this only because they are paid to by lefties, because the survivors have nothing to be angry about and no-one has done anything wrong."  I want to believe this is motivated by malice because the alternative is terrifying: that these fuckers genuinely live in an alternate version of reality where over a hundred people (tbc) dying in a slum fire in one of the richest cities in the world is beneath their notice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 07:52:31 AM
According to Sky News, Sadiq Khan's already calling the incident at Finsbury Park 'a terrorist attack', which seems a little premature given the fairly moderate reporting so far. Might yet be a disgruntled fuckwit rather than a ideologically-motivated one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 19 June, 2017, 12:19:14 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 07:52:31 AM
According to Sky News, Sadiq Khan's already calling the incident at Finsbury Park 'a terrorist attack', which seems a little premature given the fairly moderate reporting so far. Might yet be a disgruntled fuckwit rather than a ideologically-motivated one.

"driver shouted 'I want to kill all Muslims,' witness says"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 19 June, 2017, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 19 June, 2017, 12:19:14 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 07:52:31 AM
According to Sky News, Sadiq Khan's already calling the incident at Finsbury Park 'a terrorist attack', which seems a little premature given the fairly moderate reporting so far. Might yet be a disgruntled fuckwit rather than a ideologically-motivated one.

"driver shouted 'I want to kill all Muslims,' witness says"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london

And drove all the way from Wales possibly just to run over some London Muslims.

But, as Eric says, let's not jump to conclusions.  Because he's white, he's probably just 'disgruntled' about something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 12:36:29 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 19 June, 2017, 12:31:04 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 19 June, 2017, 12:19:14 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 07:52:31 AM
According to Sky News, Sadiq Khan's already calling the incident at Finsbury Park 'a terrorist attack', which seems a little premature given the fairly moderate reporting so far. Might yet be a disgruntled fuckwit rather than a ideologically-motivated one.

"driver shouted 'I want to kill all Muslims,' witness says"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/19/several-casualties-reported-after-van-hits-pedestrians-in-north-london)

And drove all the way from Wales possibly just to run over some London Muslims.

But, as Eric says, let's not jump to conclusions.  Because he's white, he's probably just 'disgruntled' about something.


...and also the closest mosque to Jeremy Corbyn's house.  I wouldn't be incredibly surprised if it turns out to be a white, right-wing terrorist (though why has he been charged with 'attempted murder' and not 'terrorism'?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2017, 12:46:23 PM
He'll probably be diagnosed with "mental problems," as white Christians* are rarely terrorists...

*presumably.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 12:49:13 PM
The Met issued a statement belatedly, saying the act is being "treated as a terrorist attack" which isn't the same as it being one, despite what Sky News seems to think.

While no less deplorable, it's quite conceivable (as of writing with no other reliable information immediately available) a hate crime. "I want to kill all Muslims" doesn't really give us anything beyond said fuckwit's immediate intent. Until established it was a deliberate act intended to engender fear among UK Muslims I'm not comfortable with him being called a 'terrorist'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 12:52:31 PM
I missed the bit where his religion was mentioned in the news reports.  In fact I've yet to see anything about his skin colour.  Granted that may be something I have missed rather than it not having been reported. I know Pontyclun is a hot bed of fanaticism and radicalism, being at the heart of the EU hating, Brexit voting valleys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 12:57:03 PM
Sorry, just seen the video footage.  So he is white.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 01:10:20 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 12:57:03 PM
Sorry, just seen the video footage.  So he is white.

Far as I'm aware, there's wasn't any mention of his race prior to the phone footage. Or since, it seems. "We know what he looks like", as one talking head just said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2017, 01:42:21 PM
If a Muslim drove halfway across the country to run over people outside a Christian church, while shouting "I want to kill all Christians", I'm sure everyone would be giving him the benefit of the doubt in exactly the same way, along with toning down headlines, including describing his facial hair in a manner that's entirely not designed to push people to think better of him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 01:55:13 PM
A truly despicable sickening act that is rightly being condemned. I pass that mosque most days. Terrifying that such barbarous acts feel increasingly closer to home.

Seem to be wildly conflicting stories about police response time. Corbyn said they responded in a timely manner. Sajid Javid said two minutes. Some sources say within ten minutes. And yet one eye-witness on BBC News says it took 45 mins for an ambulance to arrive and one hour for the police to arrive and tries to draw a parallel with other recent attacks, implying there is bias by the police and ambulance service. He also says there were definitely three attackers while the police say it was one attacker. Why such a discrepancy? Who is wrong? Would the ambulance service and police say: it was against Muslims and we will not prioritise this?

Draw your own conclusions as to his skin tone. BTW all folks do not fall neatly into black and white, you know. Humans do come in variations. Even within families.

Not sure how Christian came into this. Why not bring that into the mix? Expected, really.

Was the police statement belated? Police were putting out information about this at 1am. At 8.30am they stated they are with an open mind treating it as a terrorist incident.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 19 June, 2017, 02:22:13 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 01:10:20 PM
Far as I'm aware, there's wasn't any mention of his race prior to the phone footage. Or since, it seems. "We know what he looks like", as one talking head just said.

I heard one eye-witness use the term "white supremacist" on the news, some time around 2am.

Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 01:55:13 PM
He also says there were definitely three attackers while the police say it was one attacker. Why such a discrepancy?

When the London Bridge attack was happening, some reports were saying there were 5 or 6 attackers.

I don't know about police response times, but I found the BBC's response a bit weird. It was being reported on their website at about 1.20am. I put the telly on, switched to the BBC News channel, but there was only some sports news programme on, with a ticker going along the bottom of the screen with no mention of any incident in London. I switched across to Sky News, and they were covering the attack with a shot of emergency vehicles and flashing lights. Switched back to the BBC, still sports, still nothing about the incident. At 2am the main headlines came on, none of which were the incident, and only after those had been read out was there the "breaking news" that they'd reported on their website 40 minutes previously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 02:59:09 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 12:49:13 PM
While no less deplorable, it's quite conceivable (as of writing with no other reliable information immediately available) a hate crime. "I want to kill all Muslims" doesn't really give us anything beyond said fuckwit's immediate intent. Until established it was a deliberate act intended to engender fear among UK Muslims I'm not comfortable with him being called a 'terrorist'.


Where is the line between a hate crime intended to kill people due to their race or religion and a terrorist attack?  Genuinely want to know where you draw the line.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 03:03:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2017, 01:42:21 PM
If a Muslim drove halfway across the country to run over people outside a Christian church, while shouting "I want to kill all Christians", I'm sure everyone would be giving him the benefit of the doubt in exactly the same way, along with toning down headlines, including describing his facial hair in a manner that's entirely not designed to push people to think better of him.

I agree. Equally, I would urge the same caution as I've been suggesting here. Note though the time of my original post: 0752. Khan had already declared it to be a terrorist attack, pre-empting the police statement.

Was the act one of Terrorism? Quite possibly, yes. And probable, but only if I assume everything I've heard so far is true.

Quote from: M.I.K. on 19 June, 2017, 02:22:13 PM
I heard one eye-witness use the term "white supremacist" on the news, some time around 2am.

An eyewitness statements in lieu of corroborated facts. Too often this is the problem with twenty-four hour news coverage with speculation and hearsay being used to pad airtime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 03:18:23 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 03:03:14 PM
I agree. Equally, I would urge the same caution as I've been suggesting here. Note though the time of my original post: 0752. Khan had already declared it to be a terrorist attack, pre-empting the police statement.

Via Twitter:
"Metropolitan Police @metpoliceuk  10 hours ago
LATEST on #SevenSisters Road #FinsburyPark incident. One person has died. Counter Terrorism Command investigating. http://ow.ly/9lDR30cH7Zq "

Metropolitan Police:
"04:46hrs on 19 June...
A number police units are at, and managing the cordons around, the crime scene, including local officers and those from neighbouring boroughs - supported by armed officers and the Territorial Support Group.

The investigation of the incident is being carried out by the Counter Terrorism Command."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 19 June, 2017, 03:19:16 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 02:59:09 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 12:49:13 PM
While no less deplorable, it's quite conceivable (as of writing with no other reliable information immediately available) a hate crime. "I want to kill all Muslims" doesn't really give us anything beyond said fuckwit's immediate intent. Until established it was a deliberate act intended to engender fear among UK Muslims I'm not comfortable with him being called a 'terrorist'.


Where is the line between a hate crime intended to kill people due to their race or religion and a terrorist attack?  Genuinely want to know where you draw the line.

Perhaps it's a matter of intent (another can of worms). If the intent is to do violence for some sort of quasi-political gain then it could be terrorism. If the intent is violence out of sheer malice and prejudice it's a hate crime.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 03:50:51 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 19 June, 2017, 03:19:16 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 02:59:09 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 12:49:13 PM
While no less deplorable, it's quite conceivable (as of writing with no other reliable information immediately available) a hate crime. "I want to kill all Muslims" doesn't really give us anything beyond said fuckwit's immediate intent. Until established it was a deliberate act intended to engender fear among UK Muslims I'm not comfortable with him being called a 'terrorist'.


Where is the line between a hate crime intended to kill people due to their race or religion and a terrorist attack?  Genuinely want to know where you draw the line.

Perhaps it's a matter of intent (another can of worms). If the intent is to do violence for some sort of quasi-political gain then it could be terrorism. If the intent is violence out of sheer malice and prejudice it's a hate crime.

If that's the case then isn't what Islamic extremists are doing simply a hate crime?  There does seem to be a lack of political gain, in fact they are achieving the opposite.  On the one hand they are alienating themselves within their own religion, on the other hand they are alienating everyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 03:58:47 PM
I believe hate crime and terrorism are to a degree synonymous. Take the Pulse Night Club shooting, now a long long year ago. The gunman in question was a radicalised ISIS perpetrator and rabid homophobe. He deliberatly targeted a safe zone for minorities and killed dozens. Thats a targeted premeditated hate crime, but it was also carried out in the name of radicalised Islam making it ideologically driven.

Their are a LOT of grey areas between the two, but ultimately I think it boils down to this. Not all hate crimes are acts of terrorism, but all acts of terrorism are hate crimes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 04:00:02 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 03:18:23 PM
Via Twitter:
"Metropolitan Police @metpoliceuk  10 hours ago
LATEST on #SevenSisters Road #FinsburyPark incident. One person has died. Counter Terrorism Command investigating. http://ow.ly/9lDR30cH7Zq "

Metropolitan Police:
"04:46hrs on 19 June...
A number police units are at, and managing the cordons around, the crime scene, including local officers and those from neighbouring boroughs - supported by armed officers and the Territorial Support Group.

The investigation of the incident is being carried out by the Counter Terrorism Command."

Your point being? The police were treating it as a possible terrorist attack with more than one assailant. Better that than assuming it was a 'lesser' incident and allowing anyone else conceivably involved go to ground.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 04:14:52 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 03:58:47 PM
Their are a LOT of grey areas between the two, but ultimately I think it boils down to this. Not all hate crimes are acts of terrorism, but all acts of terrorism are hate crimes.

Even that's a simplification. But then I thought Jim did a typically better-worded job clarifying what I thought I'd clearly said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 04:27:45 PM
Yeah I guess it IS a sinplification, but folk started talking about intentions which is really kind of moot from the start as far as murder is concerned.

Impact of Actions >>>>> Intentions of Actions
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 04:49:25 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 04:00:02 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 03:18:23 PM
Via Twitter:
"Metropolitan Police @metpoliceuk  10 hours ago
LATEST on #SevenSisters Road #FinsburyPark incident. One person has died. Counter Terrorism Command investigating. http://ow.ly/9lDR30cH7Zq "

Metropolitan Police:
"04:46hrs on 19 June...
A number police units are at, and managing the cordons around, the crime scene, including local officers and those from neighbouring boroughs - supported by armed officers and the Territorial Support Group.

The investigation of the incident is being carried out by the Counter Terrorism Command."

Your point being? The police were treating it as a possible terrorist attack with more than one assailant. Better that than assuming it was a 'lesser' incident and allowing anyone else conceivably involved go to ground.
I didn't know who you are suggesting might consider this a 'lesser' than terrorism incident. If it is me, then you are mistaken.

You stated that "Khan had already declared it to be a terrorist attack, pre-empting the police statement."

My point was about timing not whether it was a terrorist incident or not. I was illustrating that the Police were treating this as a suspected terrorist incident and I gave the times that they put out that information. I was pointing out that terrorist units were investigating and the Met stated this at 04.46.

The Metropolitan Police tweeted about the above one hour before Sadiq Khan, as far as I can see. 

There seems to be a narrative developing on social media and in the news that authorities were slow to react to and to condemn this despicable act. I fear that if claims are exaggerated then that will drive a wedge between communities, that it will fuel anger and a lack of trust.

People's fears must be acknowledged and acted on but people should err on the side of caution, as you suggest as well. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 06:33:36 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 03:58:47 PM
.... but ultimately I think it boils down to this. Not all hate crimes are acts of terrorism, but all acts of terrorism are hate crimes.

Amen.  It is a shame that the narrative, as SuperSurfer says, is developing along the lines of 'well, it was only Muslims so the met must have been asleep at the switch'.  Watching some of the commentary from the 'community' earlier on you can see where it is coming from.  Whoever this muppet is, as with those who bombed Manchester and let rip with vans and knives in London, his greatest success is in sowing discord.  That is what needs challenging more than anything else. 

Just as with those who committed those atrocities, I would suspect that the previously made assertion that he is going to turn out to be a disturbed individual who has bought into a specific narrative.  This is where the Brexit vote has turned out to be most pernicious.  As much as it galls me to turn it to this, we now have a national mindset of intolerance and isolationism that desperately needs to be challenged.

The anthem for this year really should be 'Weapons of Mass Destruction" by Faithless.  Cameron, Farage, Johnson et al have a lot to answer for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 19 June, 2017, 06:42:23 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 06:33:36 PM
This is where the Brexit vote has turned out to be most pernicious.  As much as it galls me to turn it to this, we now have a national mindset of intolerance and isolationism that desperately needs to be challenged.

Cameron, Farage, Johnson et al have a lot to answer for.

I really don't think the EU ref. created this mindset, if that's what you're suggesting - just emboldened those who already held certain views into expressing them more freely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 07:14:00 PM
That's pretty much where I've got to.  It's almost like a dam has been broken.  A lot of fear and resentment has been let loose but directed in such a negative way.  Rather than challenging and questioning, these views have been embraced and reinforced.  We have a level of maturity in the national conversation that would not be out of place on a primary school playground.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 June, 2017, 07:18:52 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 04:14:52 PM
But then I thought Jim did a typically better-worded job clarifying what I thought I'd clearly said.

Very kind of you, but I don't think I did!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 07:27:42 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 19 June, 2017, 06:42:23 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 06:33:36 PM
This is where the Brexit vote has turned out to be most pernicious.  As much as it galls me to turn it to this, we now have a national mindset of intolerance and isolationism that desperately needs to be challenged.

Cameron, Farage, Johnson et al have a lot to answer for.

I really don't think the EU ref. created this mindset, if that's what you're suggesting - just emboldened those who already held certain views into expressing them more freely.
Exactly this, remember the spike of hate crimes commited on ethnic and sexual/gender minorities that occured just hours after te polls closed? Still not really subsided since.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2017, 08:12:37 PM
I'm hearing of people with any discernible accent being abused and told to "go home". A long-time colleague of mine, born in the UK, and of partial Pakistani descent, for the first time ever after Brexit had the "Paki" insult lobbed his way and was told to go home, albeit not quite so politely. The network I've built up online is now full of people who thought this country was their home very suddenly finding it apparently is not, and that the UK is in fact packed full of zealots, bigots and xenophobes.

It's hard to tell the numbers. Perhaps it's even a minority, despite the Brexit vote. But the fact remains that, as stated, these people have been continually emboldened, while the rights of anyone who is not British continue to fester or at best be left in limbo.

Apparently, we'll hear next week about the "generous" deal the UK plans for EU citizens. I'll bet it's a bag of shit that doesn't actually deal with many of the problems ministers have been briefed on for a year now – but that will nonetheless play well with the press. (Prediction: expect lots of wording around "rights for workers" and "those legally resident". Anyone who doesn't meet those two things will be fucked.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2017, 08:20:32 PM
Yes, there are bad people in this world who do bad things - but there are more, far more, good people who do good things. One maniac in a van does not outweigh the hundreds who helped out after that appalling fire, for instance.

Evil is loud, goodness is quiet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 08:27:09 PM
Thats all well and good Sharky but thats not the point being made in combatting systemic opression and hate crime and terrorism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2017, 07:27:42 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 19 June, 2017, 06:42:23 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 06:33:36 PM
This is where the Brexit vote has turned out to be most pernicious.  As much as it galls me to turn it to this, we now have a national mindset of intolerance and isolationism that desperately needs to be challenged.

Cameron, Farage, Johnson et al have a lot to answer for.

I really don't think the EU ref. created this mindset, if that's what you're suggesting - just emboldened those who already held certain views into expressing them more freely.
Exactly this, remember the spike of hate crimes commited on ethnic and sexual/gender minorities that occured just hours after te polls closed? Still not really subsided since.

Yes - I have friends who reported a dramatic increase immediately after the Brexit result, freshly empowered by the government, media rhetoric and the 37% of the electorate who voted leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 08:50:40 PM
Although its origins are contentious, the quote attribute to Burke:

QuoteThe only thing necessary for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing

is incredibly apposite.  As a nation we are responsible for the current landscape and as a nation we can challenge it.  Although Britain has a long and pernicious history it has also sought to redeem itself.  The question then is are we going to give ourselves over to the hatred or are we going to challenge it?

It really does not matter whether it is Islamophobia, racism, homophobia or any other form of extremism.  Each and every one of us has a responsibility to stand up and challenge it.  The only way that is going to happen is by doing exactly the opposite of what hate mongers want us to do; hate.  Even those we find most offensive such as Mail and Express readers.  We have a simple choice, either buy into it and drag ourselves down or stand firm and say 'here is the line'.  If we 'turn the other cheek' then we have a chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2017, 09:08:33 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 June, 2017, 08:50:40 PM
Although its origins are contentious, the quote attribute to Burke:

QuoteThe only thing necessary for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing

is incredibly apposite.  As a nation we are responsible for the current landscape and as a nation we can challenge it.  Although Britain has a long and pernicious history it has also sought to redeem itself.  The question then is are we going to give ourselves over to the hatred or are we going to challenge it?

It really does not matter whether it is Islamophobia, racism, homophobia or any other form of extremism.  Each and every one of us has a responsibility to stand up and challenge it.  The only way that is going to happen is by doing exactly the opposite of what hate mongers want us to do; hate.  Even those we find most offensive such as Mail and Express readers.  We have a simple choice, either buy into it and drag ourselves down or stand firm and say 'here is the line'.  If we 'turn the other cheek' then we have a chance.

Hear, hear.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2017, 08:12:37 PM
I'm hearing of people with any discernible accent being abused and told to "go home".

I think some intellectually challenged people were under the impression that Brexit was a vote "to get them out". When the result went their way, I reckon they believed they could indulge themselves and let out what they were probably bursting at the seams to contain within themselves for years.

A day or so before the EU referendum the guy who was sitting next to me where I often work, said: "I'm voting leave. To get you lot out!" It was of course an ironic 'joke' as there is no way he meant it. But it was later on when I thought – huh? –am I meant to take jokes like that? Felt as if I had woken up back in the 70s to 90s.

The next day, it became clear that the work guy is a staunch remainer. He was appalled at the outcome of the referendum. As a liberal open minded guy who happens to be gay, I thought he should know better. But that's how people from immigrant communities were always meant to react – accept such jokes as "just banter".

Meanwhile, on the other side of the studio there is a constant barrage of generalisations about "straight white men" including a recent joke about banning them from a meeting and burning them. How funny.

It's all a laugh, you see. Got to be able to take a joke, don't you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 June, 2017, 10:17:51 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 June, 2017, 08:12:37 PM
I'm hearing of people with any discernible accent being abused and told to "go home".

I think some intellectually challenged people were under the impression that Brexit was a vote "to get them out". When the result went their way, I reckon they believed they could indulge themselves and let out what they were probably bursting at the seams to contain within themselves for years.

I don't know where they could have gotten that impression from...

(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/139/590x/Nigel-Farage-680545.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 19 June, 2017, 10:59:19 PM
And the scary thing is that this isn't going to just go away.  Our world is sliding further right and filling with rage and victimhood, blaming all its woes on someone, anyone, else.

  These people aren't going to see nurses leaving the country, or a collapse in EU negotiations leading to mass unemployment, or the welfare state becoming a distant memory, and think "gee, maybe fear and isolationism isn't the way to go".  They're just going to find someone else to blame it on.

Hate preacher for hire K*tie H**kins was only a few weeks ago telling her followers to "get angry and fight back", reposting far right Twitter accounts and blaming everything wrong with Britain on Sadiq Khan, Diane Abbot and fat folk.  Now she calling for calm and compelling daily mail readers to "step back from the brink and stop screaming at each other like children"...a problem with society that she promptly blames on the evil leftists destroying Britain with their liberalism.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 11:18:56 PM
Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 04:49:25 PM
I didn't know who you are suggesting might consider this a 'lesser' than terrorism incident. If it is me, then you are mistaken.

No. I'm saying that, irrespective of what -- ultimately -- the offense is confirmed to be (or has been, I've been doing Dad stuff since quarter-past three this afternoon), of course the police are going to treat it as nothing less than a possible act of terrorism until satisfied otherwise. Unfortunately, this gets interpreted as it being an actual act of terrorism, compounded by not only every single bit of hearsay and subjective opinion on social media but the news channels themselves. It's a self-perpetuating narrative that if later proven false people will rather cry 'foul' than admit they were wrong by jumping to erroneous conclusions.

Quote from: SuperSurfer on 19 June, 2017, 04:49:25 PM
You stated that "Khan had already declared it to be a terrorist attack, pre-empting the police statement."

My point was about timing not whether it was a terrorist incident or not. I was illustrating that the Police were treating this as a suspected terrorist incident and I gave the times that they put out that information. I was pointing out that terrorist units were investigating and the Met stated this at 04.46.

The Metropolitan Police tweeted about the above one hour before Sadiq Khan, as far as I can see. 

There seems to be a narrative developing on social media and in the news that authorities were slow to react to and to condemn this despicable act. I fear that if claims are exaggerated then that will drive a wedge between communities, that it will fuel anger and a lack of trust.

People's fears must be acknowledged and acted on but people should err on the side of caution, as you suggest as well.

Agreed. The Met may well have briefed Khan to say what he did but that's not how it was reported (hence me saying 'According to Sky News . . .'). Either way, it simply feeds into the aforementioned narrative. Which is why I urged caution. Not just regarding this event, but every other event involving possible terrorist activity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SuperSurfer on 20 June, 2017, 12:47:01 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 19 June, 2017, 11:18:56 PM
I'm saying that, irrespective of what -- ultimately -- the offense is confirmed to be... of course the police are going to treat it as nothing less than a possible act of terrorism until satisfied otherwise. Unfortunately, this gets interpreted as it being an actual act of terrorism, compounded by not only every single bit of hearsay and subjective opinion on social media but the news channels themselves. It's a self-perpetuating narrative that if later proven false people will rather cry 'foul' than admit they were wrong by jumping to erroneous conclusions.

...The Met may well have briefed Khan to say what he did but that's not how it was reported (hence me saying 'According to Sky News . . .'). Either way, it simply feeds into the aforementioned narrative. Which is why I urged caution. Not just regarding this event, but every other event involving possible terrorist activity.
Agree with your points, Eric. Of course the police had to respond as if this was an act of terrorism. It was clear in their tweets (as far as I could see) that they were doing just that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 20 June, 2017, 05:58:45 PM

DUP complain about the Conservative "lack of negotiating experience".  That bodes well for Europe.  Right Wing Unionists failing to sell right wing unionism to Right Wing Unionists, but don't worry about sorting out all those trade deals folks, that'll be fine.

What exactly could the DUP be asking for that the Tories, who happily out Ukipped Ukip, aren't willing to hand them to remain in power?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 20 June, 2017, 06:59:50 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 20 June, 2017, 05:58:45 PM

DUP complain about the Conservative "lack of negotiating experience".  That bodes well for Europe.  Right Wing Unionists failing to sell right wing unionism to Right Wing Unionists, but don't worry about sorting out all those trade deals folks, that'll be fine.

What exactly could the DUP be asking for that the Tories, who happily out Ukipped Ukip, aren't willing to hand them to remain in power?

End to austerity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 June, 2017, 07:03:38 PM
The Guardian is reporting that they are not overly impressed with the tenor of some of the comments coming from the Tory backbenchers.  It's a scary place to be, in agreement with them on something.  First day of Brexit negotiation saw DD fold on parallel negotiations.  While Grenfell gave us a degree of respite from this Cluster Flob (for those who have seen the sanitised version of Heartbreak Ridge), it looks like we are back to the Chaos and Mayhem show.  Unfortunately  it looks like their event management skills are seriously lacking!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 08:21:21 PM
What I'm not clear on is how the Tories can exercise the executive power of government if they haven't formed one?  Is this why they've cancelled the Queen's speech: because she can't yet acknowledge the government as legitimate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 20 June, 2017, 08:23:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 08:21:21 PM
What I'm not clear on is how the Tories can exercise the executive power of government if they haven't formed one?  Is this why they've cancelled the Queen's speech: because she can't yet acknowledge the government as legitimate?
I thought they'd cancelled next year's Queen's speech?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 June, 2017, 08:32:50 PM
From what I'm hearing from lawyers, the Tories are fine in that they know they can pass the speech, but after that they could be in the shit if the DUP goes for broke. A smarter move would have been a more moderate QS and a cross-party Brexit, so Lab/LD may have supported the QS. Zero chance now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 09:47:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 June, 2017, 08:23:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 08:21:21 PM
What I'm not clear on is how the Tories can exercise the executive power of government if they haven't formed one?  Is this why they've cancelled the Queen's speech: because she can't yet acknowledge the government as legitimate?
I thought they'd cancelled next year's Queen's speech?

Last I heard, the speech was postponed until after a deal was made, and as yet there's no deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 June, 2017, 10:33:57 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 09:47:34 PM
Last I heard, the speech was postponed until after a deal was made, and as yet there's no deal.

The 'deal' in question being 'forming a viable government'.  Bloody pig's ear, and I come from the land of dodgy coalitions.  The Queen should appoint Lord Buckethead as Arbiter of Succession, things will move along again once once all the ja'chuqs are complete.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 June, 2017, 10:58:23 PM
Amusingly, the constituency boundary review that was all about 'fairness' is now apparently dead in the water since the new electoral calculus suggests it wouldn't hand the Tories a 30-seat majority and might imperil the likes of Boris Johnson and IDS. Oh, and hand Sinn Fein a majority at Stormont.

So let's stop pretending that was ever about fairness, shall we?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 June, 2017, 11:09:25 PM
Meanwhile, in Prospero's castle... (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/theresa-may-savoy_uk_59493a8ce4b07499199ed1a6)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2017, 09:13:39 AM
I'm surprised they'd kill the review. Electoral Calculus reckons it's still benefit the Tories, albeit not. Early to the level it would have done before the last election. It'd also knaxker the Lib Dems  and decapitate the Greens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 21 June, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 20 June, 2017, 05:58:45 PM

DUP complain about the Conservative "lack of negotiating experience".  That bodes well for Europe.  Right Wing Unionists failing to sell right wing unionism to Right Wing Unionists, but don't worry about sorting out all those trade deals folks, that'll be fine.

What exactly could the DUP be asking for that the Tories, who happily out Ukipped Ukip, aren't willing to hand them to remain in power?

No, no, no. You've got it wrong - protracted negotiations with no real progress that you blame Themuns for is a national fuckin sport for NI politicians. I suspect the Tories hadn't been paying attention and thought getting agreement from the DUP would be a cake walk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 June, 2017, 09:33:22 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2017, 09:13:39 AM
I'm surprised they'd kill the review. Electoral Calculus reckons it's still benefit the Tories, albeit not. Early to the level it would have done before the last election. It'd also knaxker the Lib Dems  and decapitate the Greens.

Yes, it would benefit the Tories (although not to the amount originally thought) but it would disadvantage every other party, and hand Sinn Fein a majority in Ulster, meaning not even the DUP would vote for it. They'd never get it through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 June, 2017, 10:30:00 AM
Tories spent £12m in the 2017 election . Astonishing levels of money in comparison to the other parties, closest of which was Labour on £4m. And do you really need to spend anything when you've got all that spin and propaganda from the press for nowt?

Every day that passes by, I just think of "CRUSH THE SABOTEURS" from the Mail, and I smile a little. Hanging on against the odds can be enough in the face of such ****ery.


(Sadly none of this stops the pound from falling again after that tiny, pathetic little attempt to claw back some value.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2017, 11:28:34 AM
Sterling is fucked. About the only thing that can save a long-term slide to $1=£1 is for the UK to miraculously keeps its place within the single market and possibly also the customs union.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 21 June, 2017, 01:46:28 PM
Having seen Link Primes's soon to be home how many Britains will apply to live in Ireland since it is still in the EU? Could a big influx of foreign immigrants upset the Irish and the Northern Ireland Peace process?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 21 June, 2017, 01:51:12 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 21 June, 2017, 01:46:28 PM
Having seen Link Primes's soon to be home how many Britains will apply to live in Ireland since it is still in the EU? Could a big influx of foreign immigrants upset the Irish and the Northern Ireland Peace process?
As the old joke goes: "Aye, but urr ye a Protestant Muslim or a Cathlick Muslim?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2017, 01:56:06 PM
It remains to be seen whether the CTA can survive anyway. Chances are it's also fucked. (Yes, it was there before the EU, but then both Ireland and the UK have been in the EU for a very long time now.)

Still: the latest fun fact is the government will ask EU nationals to sign up to a register. THAT DOESN'T SOUND HIDEOUS AT ALL.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 June, 2017, 02:23:58 PM
It escaped my notice till now that this thread is on the final stretch to 1000 pages of utter bullshit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 June, 2017, 03:13:15 PM
IDK it's mostly 900+ pages of relatively civil conversation. As far as politics goes it's sadly head and shoulders above the typical standard of bullshit. Particularly in comparison to the Commons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 June, 2017, 04:15:22 PM
It's all bullshit a cynicle part of me says...

...Nah you're probably right TBH. :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2017, 04:55:13 PM
What do I win?

F*ck all, I guess :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 06:08:33 PM
Anyone else think its amazing that Germany the nation that instigated the last two world wars is pretty much in control of the EU now politically and economically. Every Photo call German leader centre stage. Surely speaks for itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 06:11:39 PM
I Am the system I take your point mate, but these people that threatened to leave UK if Brexit happened wont in much the same way those American 'Celebs' threatened to move to Canada if Trump won. Gobshites the lot of them., all mouth no trousers etc etc etc etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 June, 2017, 06:24:55 PM
There's a fair difference between something you can see the end of, in the case of Trump compared to a protracted unknown of Brexit.

But you know, I'm glad you've done a survey of everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 June, 2017, 06:34:29 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 06:11:39 PM
I Am the system I take your point mate, but these people that threatened to leave UK if Brexit happened wont in much the same way those American 'Celebs' threatened to move to Canada if Trump won. Gobshites the lot of them., all mouth no trousers etc etc etc etc.

It's not the 'celebs' I'm worried about, it's the massive financial institutions that are already making plans to move because the City of London outside the EU is effectively useless to them. For comparison (again), financial services contribute about 12% of UK GDP; the banking crisis contracted the UK economy by 8%.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:07:58 PM
I agree with you Jim Campbell and share same concerns. I just literally loathe these aforementioned 'celebs' and how no one calls them out on their hypocrisy. Same with the tragedy of tower block fire in London with people lauding Jeremy Clarkson for donating clothes (very publicly) and people forget what a bigoted b#####d he is. The guy got sacked for racially abusing a man because he didn't have a hot dinner prepared for him. That coupled with his other bigoted remarks about the disabled, Trade union members etc but a lot of folk now think he a top bloke again because he donated clothes. Still a vile scumbag to me. Can never understand the wider British publics love of him to be honest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:11:32 PM
'But you know, I'm glad you've done a survey of everyone'

Steve Green didn't think there any need to be sarcastic. I just cant think of any 'celebs' at all that said they'd leave UK if people voted Brexit or move to Canada etc if Trump elected.

Didn't state it was a 'survey' or scientific proof. But if sarcasm floats your boat so be it. I can accept others have different opinions. Was just an observation at end of day
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 21 June, 2017, 07:12:09 PM
Okay, think you don't like Jeremy Clarkson as you mention him seven times in one post...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:32:38 PM
Goaty mate he on my ranks alongside Tony 'Bomber' Blair, 'Call me Dave' Cameron, Boris Johnston and Rupert Murdoch for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 21 June, 2017, 07:38:58 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:11:32 PM
'But you know, I'm glad you've done a survey of everyone'

Steve Green didn't think there any need to be sarcastic. I just cant think of any 'celebs' at all that said they'd leave UK if people voted Brexit or move to Canada etc if Trump elected.

Didn't state it was a 'survey' or scientific proof. But if sarcasm floats your boat so be it. I can accept others have different opinions. Was just an observation at end of day

IATS was talking about general people moving to EU countries, you lumped them in with celebs as gobshites, one of my friends got a job in Germany and is staying out there because of Brexit.

"these people that threatened to leave UK if Brexit happened wont"

I've just given you an example of someone I know who has done exactly that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:53:07 PM
Steve Green I didn't mean to imply people like your friend, I was genuinely thinking of these 'celebs' here who have not moved like they said they would. I apologise if I offended you.

My firms future isnt looking too good at the moment with all this upheaval over brexit. I truly despair of the current political climate. I don't normally swear a lot but 'gobshites' seems appropriate for the bulk of our political class. Think ive been watching too much Father Ted.

I just hate the hypocrisy of the aforementioned celebs etc who are not challenged etc. Its like all those Labour MPs that been plotting and not backing Corbyn at all since he got elected by members (twice) and now all of a sudden they applauding him in Commons chamber. Has to be seen to be believed. Say what you want about the man but the constant criticism he receives from media is just frankly hysterical.       
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2017, 07:53:33 PM
Well, I'm not leaving. I love this place and I'm not letting a bunch of delusional, power-crazed psychopaths who seriously believe they can actually run an entire country and all the people in it scare me off.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 June, 2017, 10:18:59 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 21 June, 2017, 07:38:58 PM
IATS was talking about general people moving to EU countries, you lumped them in with celebs as gobshites, one of my friends got a job in Germany and is staying out there because of Brexit.

"these people that threatened to leave UK if Brexit happened wont"

I've just given you an example of someone I know who has done exactly that.

Here's another - a friend and his two children have had to go to Germany, as his wife (and mother of his children) is, apparently, the wrong nationality now, even though she'd lived in the UK for the past ten years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 June, 2017, 10:21:58 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:53:07 PM
Steve Green I didn't mean to imply people like your friend, I was genuinely thinking of these 'celebs' here who have not moved like they said they would. I apologise if I offended you.       

Can't say I recall any famous people saying they'd leave - perhaps I read different media to you?  Any examples?  I do recall Jim Davidson saying he'd leave the UK if Labour got in to power in 1997.  Unfortunately that appeared to be a lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 21 June, 2017, 10:26:26 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 June, 2017, 10:21:58 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 07:53:07 PM
Steve Green I didn't mean to imply people like your friend, I was genuinely thinking of these 'celebs' here who have not moved like they said they would. I apologise if I offended you.       

Can't say I recall any famous people saying they'd leave - perhaps I read different media to you?  Any examples?  I do recall Jim Davidson saying he'd leave the UK if Labour got in to power in 1997.  Unfortunately that appeared to be a lie.

Mark Millar said he'd move to Canada if we voted to stay in the EU.

Phew. That was a close one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 June, 2017, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: GordonR on 21 June, 2017, 10:26:26 PM
Mark Millar said he'd move to Canada if we voted to stay in the EU.

"If things in this country stay exactly the same as they are now, I'm leaving!"

Umm... OK...

(OTOH, the pound tanking has probably worked out quite nicely for MM.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 21 June, 2017, 11:58:52 PM
I don't think Jim Davidson leaving the country would be enough. Perhaps if he left Planet Earth that may far enough away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 22 June, 2017, 12:05:17 AM
Imagine Dredd's 'Titan' penal colony, only with instead of crooked Judges nasty 'celebs' there instead.

Jim Davidson, Katie Hopkins, Jeremy Clarkson, Justin Bieber we could go on.

Lets build this already!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 June, 2017, 09:59:26 AM
You can add Nigel Farage to the people who said he'll leave Britain if Brexit happens (OK he said "If it doesn't work out" and given he's got caveats about the whole thing I don't think there's much chance of a positive outcome)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QBGfFk43FI
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 June, 2017, 10:40:01 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 June, 2017, 10:18:59 PMHere's another - a friend and his two children have had to go to Germany, as his wife (and mother of his children) is, apparently, the wrong nationality now, even though she'd lived in the UK for the past ten years.
My Twitter feed is full of EU professionals leaving, many of which are taking tax-paying Brits with them, whose taxes will now feed into some other country. Meanwhile, immigration from the EU is plummeting, which the Tories are cheering about, despite it already having a massive knock-on effect on a number of key industries. And now those business folks who were pro-Brexit are suddenly waking up to what's happening, arguing that – for some UNKNOWN reason, THEIR particular industry should get a free-movement exception. What a colossal fuck up this all is.

It's also interesting to look back at the UK's history regarding free movement. In short, when it was ended from the Commonwealth, our economy went to shit pretty quickly. Free movement from the EEC/EEA rapidly and dramatically turned things around. How long before we realise the mistake that's being made this time, if ever? (It'd probably help if the UK actually admitted that regarding free movement, it never enforced any of the limitation laws available to it in the first place.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 June, 2017, 12:51:29 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 24 February, 2017, 02:53:12 AM
Not since '82 has an incumbent government taken a seat from the opposition in a by-election. Well done Corbyn!

ahem...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 June, 2017, 01:34:18 PM
LOL
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 22 June, 2017, 04:11:24 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 June, 2017, 10:58:23 PM
Amusingly, the constituency boundary review that was all about 'fairness' is now apparently dead in the water since the new electoral calculus suggests it wouldn't hand the Tories a 30-seat majority and might imperil the likes of Boris Johnson and IDS. Oh, and hand Sinn Fein a majority at Stormont.

So let's stop pretending that was ever about fairness, shall we?

It would hand Sinn Feinn a majority of Westminster seats. It wouldn't change anything in Stormonth because its a different parliament.

And sure it wasn't about fairness. But let's not pretend the opposition was about fairness either. Both sides looking at what they thought was best for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 22 June, 2017, 04:13:32 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 21 June, 2017, 01:46:28 PM
Having seen Link Primes's soon to be home how many Britains will apply to live in Ireland since it is still in the EU? Could a big influx of foreign immigrants upset the Irish and the Northern Ireland Peace process?

They're not applying to live in Ireland. They're applying for Irish passports. Rather than seek to travel across Europe with a British passport they could travel with their Irish one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 22 June, 2017, 04:16:05 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 June, 2017, 10:40:01 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 June, 2017, 10:18:59 PMHere's another - a friend and his two children have had to go to Germany, as his wife (and mother of his children) is, apparently, the wrong nationality now, even though she'd lived in the UK for the past ten years.
My Twitter feed is full of EU professionals leaving, many of which are taking tax-paying Brits with them, whose taxes will now feed into some other country. Meanwhile, immigration from the EU is plummeting, which the Tories are cheering about, despite it already having a massive knock-on effect on a number of key industries. And now those business folks who were pro-Brexit are suddenly waking up to what's happening, arguing that – for some UNKNOWN reason, THEIR particular industry should get a free-movement exception. What a colossal fuck up this all is.

It's also interesting to look back at the UK's history regarding free movement. In short, when it was ended from the Commonwealth, our economy went to shit pretty quickly. Free movement from the EEC/EEA rapidly and dramatically turned things around. How long before we realise the mistake that's being made this time, if ever? (It'd probably help if the UK actually admitted that regarding free movement, it never enforced any of the limitation laws available to it in the first place.)

This is a red herring.

The problem with the ways we could mitigate freedom of movement is that they are contray to have we've traditionally organised things in Britain. So we have a universal welfare state rather than the social insurance systems that exist on the continent. The state has far less ability to demand you prove your existence by presenting valid ID. The ability to police immigration in the context of Freedom of Movement would mean we'd have to adopt several unpopular measures that nobody within Britain supports.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 June, 2017, 05:02:20 PM
The UK has never bothered to enforce the various laws available regarding EEA nationals, because it was never in the UK's interest to do so. Now immigrants are being blamed for central funding failures from government. And it's not a red herring when you look at the figures. During free-movement phases, the UK has been economically strong off of the back of both cheap labour and also encouraging as many people as possible to come here. That's now at an end. We won't attract the best and the brightest – we'll be lucky to keep those we have. (And you can bet the so-called 'generous' offer to EU citizens will be a piss take when it eventually arrives.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 22 June, 2017, 07:01:11 PM
This whole sorry saga over fate of EU nationals living, working and contributing here is truly abysmal and just sums up the ineptitude of our government. The governments whole 'were holding our cards over this issue till negotiations begin' doesn't wash well.
I just hate the thought of innocent civilians being used as political pawns and bargaining chips. This has the potential to get nasty if its tit for tat across EU with fallout etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 07:30:10 PM
Government regards ALL "innocent civilians" as political pawns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 22 June, 2017, 07:33:11 PM
sadly true mate
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 June, 2017, 08:12:49 PM
Quote from: Michael Knight on 22 June, 2017, 07:01:11 PM
This whole sorry saga over fate of EU nationals living, working and contributing here is truly abysmal and just sums up the ineptitude of our government. The governments whole 'were holding our cards over this issue till negotiations begin' doesn't wash well.
And still I see in many places the same old shit about "Theresa May made an amazing offer the EU rejected" (not the case), and "the EU won't do anything" (false – their offer was dismissed by David Davis as "ridiculous"). I'm just glad this forum is rational on the subject.

I think it's reprehensible EU nationals who moved here in good faith – and were often recruited here – still have no guarantees about their future, and are suffering a government creating roadblocks to them staying, all while banging on about a "generous" deal that's almost certainly going to be anything but.

Actually, I can't even imagine what a generous deal would be for EU nationals. Anything less than what they have now is clearly not generous, and yet it's very, very unlikely they'll get that. The only possible thing that would be generous would be to freeze all rights forever, and to roll in EU nationals who haven't been here for the requisite amount of time, and to figure out a way to seriously fast-track people to citizenship should they want it.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 07:30:10 PM
Government regards ALL "innocent civilians" as political pawns.
Not to the same level. Post-Brexit, you're not living under the fear of deportation or the majority of your rights being removed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 08:43:12 PM
The way the pawns are played, and on what level, depends on the game of the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 08:51:09 PM
Further, I don't derive my rights from government and neither does anyone else. My rights, just like everyone else's, are inherent. They cannot be bestowed or revoked by human beings with no more or fewer rights than anyone else. What the delusionals in government call rights are nothing of the sort - they are privileges.

The sad part is that the majority of people (falsely) believe that government privileges trump personal rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 June, 2017, 10:01:42 PM
 My point is that you are not under threat of being forced from this country. My wife is. You might consider everyone a pawn, but some are more equal than others in Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 10:55:58 PM
You're right, IP, I'm not under that threat but I'm not insensitive to your family's situation.

My point, as ever, is that government has only the rights we give it. I do not and will never support government to deport anybody in your wife's situation. Period. I do not have the right to order her out of the country and neither does anyone else. I'm pretty certain that nobody here wants your wife deported either but the sad fact is that anyone who supports government's superhuman rights is enabling them in this threat.

I get that most folks hate what I have to say about government's rights and responsibilities and that makes me sad but I don't think a bunch of people, no different from you or I, have any say whatsoever over your family. If I can't tell you what to do then neither can they.

And yes, this may all seem like some abstract intellectual exercise or rhetorical trickery but it's actually a pretty solid logical argument. The government may have the power to force you but they don't have the right. This is the realisation the country, and the world, needs to attain.

The only rights they have are the ones we allow them, so why let them act in such a way as we'd find monstrous in each other?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 07:46:07 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 07:30:10 PM
Government regards ALL "innocent civilians" as political pawns.

And their definition of 'innocent civilian' is anyone who is not part of their party / able to give them something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 08:11:20 AM
Could be from their party, if they've outlived their usefulness and a public sacrifice is required.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 June, 2017, 09:01:22 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 08:11:20 AM
Could be from their party, if they've outlived their usefulness and a public sacrifice is required.

As that naïve woman on Question Time found out, after she'd voted for cuts to her own benefit in the illogical belief that they'd only affect other people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 10:00:42 AM
Valid point.  There is a very, very narrow definition of who might be included at times, particularly with this shower.  Quite a few naive supporters have discovered the 'truth' over the last few years.  Unfortunately not enough yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2017, 10:19:09 AM
I see most of the press is merrily parroting May's line about a fair and serious offer, and chalking it up as a win. Some are noting that this 'generous' offer would only be accepted if the EU offered a reciprocal deal. Would this be the deal the EU offered a while back, dismissed by the UK as ridiculous?

It's insane. Here we are an entire year later and the best the Tories can do is offer EU nationals some of the rights they already have, while also saying they'll have to sign up to a register, with presumably no guarantees. (And I was right about one thing: the early statement notes "lawfully" resident people will be covered. So that'll be fun to unpick...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 10:37:44 AM
Not entirely sure that May is offering EU citizens the rights they currently have.  She said 'the same as UK citizens'.  Worth remembering that there is no such thing.  We are all subjects of the crown.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 23 June, 2017, 10:40:09 AM
It's all a fucking joke. A year after Brexit, we got weak government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2017, 10:59:41 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 10:37:44 AMNot entirely sure that May is offering EU citizens the rights they currently have.  She said 'the same as UK citizens'.  Worth remembering that there is no such thing.  We are all subjects of the crown.
Neither of those are entirely accurate. Although British people are technically subjects of the crown, the status of British Subject and British Citizen are not the same. (My family had first-hand experience of this, when trying to send my grandparents of Irish descent to the USA. When it turned out they had British Subject passports, they were not allowed to board, and we had to jump through a number of extra visa hoops.)

As for the offer, it's little different from what exists now. If someone's been legally here for five years, they have indefinite right to remain, access healthcare, and so on. However, what May is offering now actually falls short of existing rights regarding things like family unification. And beyond that, there is no word on things like the heathcare insurance issue that affects hundreds of thousands of EU nationals. Also, it's certainly not the same as British citizens, given that EU nationals who get this status will not have the right to vote, for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 11:00:06 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 10:37:44 AMWe are all subjects of the crown.
I'm not. I am subject only to Nature, Common Law and myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2017, 11:29:56 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 11:00:06 AM
I'm not. I am subject only to Nature, Common Law and myself.

Break some laws. See how that works out for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 23 June, 2017, 11:57:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 June, 2017, 10:55:58 PM
You're right, IP, I'm not under that threat but I'm not insensitive to your family's situation.

My point, as ever, is that government has only the rights we give it. I do not and will never support government to deport anybody in your wife's situation. Period. I do not have the right to order her out of the country and neither does anyone else. I'm pretty certain that nobody here wants your wife deported either but the sad fact is that anyone who supports government's superhuman rights is enabling them in this threat.


If enough people tell them too, the government wouldn't deport people previously welcomed into the country. That's why we vote. Unfortunately the majority of people seem to be more than OK with mass deportation. which is why we argue, protest and petition as well as vote.

Saying I don't like this government is not the same as saying I don't like governments in any shape or form. Accepting the need for government is not the same as accepting or supporting the actions of any government irrespective of what that act is. Saying if you support this then you support that is often poor reasoning/argument. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2017, 11:29:56 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 11:00:06 AM
I'm not. I am subject only to Nature, Common Law and myself.

Break some laws. See how that works out for you.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2017, 12:27:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:22:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 11:00:06 AM
I'm not. I am subject only to Nature, Common Law and myself.

I would suggest that you don't get to choose which laws apply to you and if you choose to break some laws not covered by your nebulous notion of 'common law' you will find that you are still very much subject to those laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:37:44 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 23 June, 2017, 11:57:17 AM


If enough people tell them too, the government wouldn't deport people previously welcomed into the country. That's why we vote. Unfortunately the majority of people seem to be more than OK with mass deportation. which is why we argue, protest and petition as well as vote.

Saying I don't like this government is not the same as saying I don't like governments in any shape or form. Accepting the need for government is not the same as accepting or supporting the actions of any government irrespective of what that act is. Saying if you support this then you support that is often poor reasoning/argument. 

Like when a million people marched to protest the Iraq War, the instigation of which transpired to be based on lies but went ahead anyway?

It's the superhuman rights governments assume that I dislike, rights you and I do not have and so, logically, cannot delegate to others. Neither you or I have the right to order Mrs IP out of the country, so even if we both voted for Mrs May, how do we authorise her to do something neither of us can? That's not poor reasoning. What is poor reasoning is believing Mrs May when she says she has the right to deport Mrs IP because we voted her into the position of Prime Minister.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:46:44 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2017, 12:27:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:22:27 PM


I would suggest that you don't get to choose which laws apply to you and if you choose to break some laws not covered by your nebulous notion of 'common law' you will find that you are still very much subject to those laws.


I assume you're talking about legislation, which is law which applies with the consent of the governed, rather than common or natural law, which applies to everyone equally.

I was once arrested for possession of cannabis (a legislative law) but because I refused to sign a form accepting the charge (despite police pressure), that charge never got to court.

If I was to cause someone actual harm (against common or natural law) refusing to accept the charge would not matter in the slightest.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 June, 2017, 12:52:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 June, 2017, 11:29:56 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 11:00:06 AM
I'm not. I am subject only to Nature, Common Law and myself.

Break some laws. See how that works out for you.


As was detailed in the shark blog...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 23 June, 2017, 01:19:20 PM
A truly fascinating read.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 23 June, 2017, 01:45:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 12:37:44 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 23 June, 2017, 11:57:17 AM


If enough people tell them too, the government wouldn't deport people previously welcomed into the country. That's why we vote. Unfortunately the majority of people seem to be more than OK with mass deportation. which is why we argue, protest and petition as well as vote.

Saying I don't like this government is not the same as saying I don't like governments in any shape or form. Accepting the need for government is not the same as accepting or supporting the actions of any government irrespective of what that act is. Saying if you support this then you support that is often poor reasoning/argument. 

Like when a million people marched to protest the Iraq War, the instigation of which transpired to be based on lies but went ahead anyway?

It's the superhuman rights governments assume that I dislike, rights you and I do not have and so, logically, cannot delegate to others. Neither you or I have the right to order Mrs IP out of the country, so even if we both voted for Mrs May, how do we authorise her to do something neither of us can? That's not poor reasoning. What is poor reasoning is believing Mrs May when she says she has the right to deport Mrs IP because we voted her into the position of Prime Minister.

Yes, like the Iraq War protests that at the time represented a minority but has come to define the way we view both the war and Tony Blair's legacy. It didn't stop the war but it certainly reduced the UK's appetite for war.

I don't think the Prime Minister has the power to decide which individuals are deported even if she took a particular dislike to them. we have a structure that prevents that kind of power sitting with one person. so yes arguing that May has the right to deport people would be factually incorrect.

Demonstrably we both have a portion of power via a vote. we can chose to alight our potion of that power with others or not by voting or not. if enough people aligned their portions of power the outcome of that vote will have a direct real world consequence.

Proposing that if we do not individually have the same powers as the collective (the state) in there entirety, then we can cannot transfer those powers to the state thus the state can not have that power is an argument I have seen you foreword a number of times. It starts with an incorrect proposition and then builds around it, that's why its poor reasoning. It's been discussed at length on this thread before.





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 02:48:50 PM
The UK's appetite for war is irrelevant if it's force-fed - recently we've been  involved in conflicts in Afghanistan, Syria, Nigeria, Lybia, Yemen and Somalia and of course the wider "War on Terror." Then there's the UK's
annual ~£17bn income from being the second largest arms dealer on the planet. So, while I agree with you that the average person has little appetite for war, the elites and their puppets are veritable gluttons for conflict and the business opportunities that go with it. Whichever colour rosettes happen to be residing in Downing Street make no difference to this situation.

It is noteworthy that Blair tried to use the Common Law, albeit a twisted version of it, to begin hostilities by claiming that Iraq presented a clear and present threat to the UK. Most people would agree with the Common Law position that violence is only valid in self-defence and that the instigation of violence for most other reasons is wrong, which is why he tried to present the invasion of Iraq as a defensive move. Most people fundamentally understand what's right and what's wrong without necessarily being able to put it into words.

You are correct that a Prime Minister is unlikely to sit in his or her office arbitrarily deciding which individuals to deport and the way I presented my argument falsely suggested that this was indeed what Mrs May would be doing. It is far more likely that she would drive legislation through Parliament, setting up a committee or department to identify and evict subjects, thereby giving the process a veneer of legitimacy.

The act of voting is little more than a popularity contest which changes very little of real consequence. A change of governing party does not stop wars, reverse unpopular legislation or reform the monetary system but can have a direct and real effect on the decorations used in Number 10.

Your final assertion, that the individual has less power than the state is entirely correct but not what I'm saying. I'm talking about rights (and responsibilities), not powers. No human being has greater rights than another - nobody has the right to arbitrarily force their will on another person simply because they've won a popularity contest. They (government members) do, however, have the power (via the apparatus of the state) to enforce their will on others, which is a different thing entirely. This is simply the application of "might is right" and the ultimate expression of a circular argument: why must we do this? Because I said so.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 23 June, 2017, 03:30:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 02:48:50 PM
The UK's appetite for war is irrelevant if it's force-fed - recently we've been  involved in conflicts in Afghanistan, Syria, Nigeria, Lybia, Yemen and Somalia and of course the wider "War on Terror." Then there's the UK's
annual ~£17bn income from being the second largest arms dealer on the planet. So, while I agree with you that the average person has little appetite for war, the elites and their puppets are veritable gluttons for conflict and the business opportunities that go with it. Whichever colour rosettes happen to be residing in Downing Street make no difference to this situation.

Some elements of this I agree with. However it's been harder for 'hawks' to get parliamentary support for military action then it was and the fact we are massive arms dealers is one of the popular arguments for change forwarded by the left. New Labour was very similar to the Conservatives, post Corbyn Labour not so much. It's not always been the case that it made no difference who was in power and it looks like it's no longer the case again.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 02:48:50 PM
You are correct that a Prime Minister is unlikely to sit in his or her office arbitrarily deciding which individuals to deport and the way I presented my argument falsely suggested that this was indeed what Mrs May would be doing. It is far more likely that she would drive legislation through Parliament, setting up a committee or department to identify and evict subjects, thereby giving the process a veneer of legitimacy.

Whatever legislation makes it through parliament will be legal, legitimate and anathema to my beliefs. This I think is where we seriously diverge. I disagree totally with the direction our country is taking but I think it represents a majority view, it will be constrained by both domestic and international law so although it will be a appalling dick move if won't be an atrocity and I hope before long we come to our collective senses and undo all the damage we are currently inflicting on ourselves. 

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 02:48:50 PM
The act of voting is little more than a popularity contest which changes very little of real consequence. A change of governing party does not stop wars, reverse unpopular legislation or reform the monetary system but can have a direct and real effect on the decorations used in Number 10.

There are two points here. Voting is of consequence. It can stop wars although ending a conflict can take tame and is rarely the end of a commitment. It can change legislation (as can protest). It may change the monetary system, although that's a lot harder as it's a massively complex global house of cards. Changes are not often hugely dramatic or sweeping. They are far more likely to take time and be implemented incrementally. It's far easier to view social changes in hindsight.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 02:48:50 PM
Your final assertion, that the individual has less power than the state is entirely correct but not what I'm saying. I'm talking about rights (and responsibilities), not powers. No human being has greater rights than another - nobody has the right to arbitrarily force their will on another person simply because they've won a popularity contest. They (government members) do, however, have the power (via the apparatus of the state) to enforce their will on others, which is a different thing entirely. This is simply the application of "might is right" and the ultimate expression of a circular argument: why must we do this? Because I said so.

Rights are a social construct.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 June, 2017, 07:21:37 PM
Quote
I was once arrested for possession of cannabis (a legislative law) but because I refused to sign a form accepting the charge (despite police pressure), that charge never got to court.

I can pretty much guarantee that your refusal to accept that you were being charged is not the reason the charge didn't go to court.  Oh, and the very idea that government has authority, law enforcement exists and legislation should be followed is, surely, an important aspect of common law. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 23 June, 2017, 07:46:18 PM
I hope Donna does move out. The last thing the survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster need is an encounter with such a person.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 23 June, 2017, 08:07:40 PM
Quote from: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html

"I've lost everything I own, my neighbours horribly burned or asphyxiated to death, emergency service workers are still sifting through the charred wreckage trying to find their any identifiable human remains, and my family and I narrowly avoided the same fate."

"Yes, but now you're getting something for nothing!  WHAT ABOUT THE SERVICE CHARGES!!??"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 08:40:30 PM
I'm enjoying our debate, Steven, thanks for indulging me with such aplomb.

In this post I want to concentrate on your last sentence, "rights are a social construct," because I think this is the crucial point in this discussion. What are rights? Who has them and who does not - and why?

I think that the basic and possibly only right is to be what one is. That is to say, a tree has the right to be a tree, a penguin has the right to be a penguin and a human has the right to be a human. The right to be a tree includes the right to try and put down roots but this right is not a guarantee of success or an exemption from beavers. The right to be a penguin includes the right to try and eat fish but the right to be a fish includes the right to try to avoid penguins.

To my mind, then, the fundamental right of a human being is to be a human being. Human beings are social animals which, as far as we are aware, possess thinking abilities unique in this world. We each of us, then, have the right to try to integrate with the social whole and the right to try to think.

The idea of rights as a social construct is, I think, an entirely valid one - the result of human thinking attempting to put into words the fundamental characteristics of being human. A human being, then, has the right to try to do anything a human being is capable of doing just as a penguin has the right to try to do anything a penguin is capable of doing.

This is a worrying and potentially dangerous conclusion because it suggests that we all have the right to try and, for example, murder anyone we choose. I'm capable of stabbing someone, this line of thought runs, therefore I have the right to try it. Our human instincts towards sociability, however, run contrary to this right and, 999,999 times out of a million, stop us from going around arbitrarily stabbing one another. We mostly, then, exercise our fundamental right to not stab each other (which would probably more properly be called a responsibility rather than a right) rather than our right to stab each other.

A right, then, seems to me to be a contained phenomena, each one explainable and quantifiable externally throughout entire species and societies but applicable only within individual beings. You and I may have exactly the same rights and responsibilities but I cannot transplant mine to you nor you yours to me any more than we could swap fingers or feelings. My rights are therefore my responsibility and mine alone.

Thus any group of people calling themselves "government" has the right to tell me what they believe my rights should be but I have the right to disagree, just as they have the right to disagree with my assessment of their rights. If they exercise their right to force me to comply (a right most people eschew due to our social instincts) then I have the equally valid (perhaps more valid) right to resist. So long as I am not infringing on the rights of others then there is no reason for others to interfere with my rights.

I have said in the past, and still maintain, that I do not believe in black rights, white rights, gay rights, straight rights, women's rights, men's rights, children's rights, senior's rights, patient's rights, doctor's rights, prisoner's rights or officer's rights because all those are just bullshit designed to keep us apart and distract us from the fact that we all have the same individual rights and responsibilities as social, thinking human beings. Governments want us to believe that all our rights begin and end at their door and that without their approval we have no rights at all. Well, they have every right to try and convince us of that but we have every right to disagree, right?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 09:09:52 PM
Quote from: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html

Oh come on.  This has got to be trolling.  Are you honestly telling me that this Sloan Ranger mentality exists.  Seriously.  This has got to be the product of a fertile imagination.  The LBC presenter fell for it hook line and sinker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 June, 2017, 09:20:44 PM
"What's the naughtiest thing you've ever done?"

"Industrialized election fraud"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8RWPwdqpzO0 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8RWPwdqpzO0)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 June, 2017, 11:15:59 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 09:09:52 PM
Quote from: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html

Oh come on.  This has got to be trolling.  Are you honestly telling me that this Sloan Ranger mentality exists.  Seriously.  This has got to be the product of a fertile imagination.  The LBC presenter fell for it hook line and sinker.

Did you read the full article?  The first paragraph or two?  Or just the name of the link?  The article goes on to refer to other articles where (rich) Kensington residents have gone on about house prices and hard work and the usual tosh.  If you look at the comments you'll see more - accusing the dead of being illegal immigrants, scroungers and the like.  (and anybody who tries to defend the dead are 'playing the race card').
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 06:38:03 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 23 June, 2017, 07:21:37 PM


I can pretty much guarantee that your refusal to accept that you were being charged is not the reason the charge didn't go to court.





Okay, I'll bite - what's your theory on why events played out as they did?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 24 June, 2017, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 09:09:52 PM
Quote from: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html

Oh come on.  This has got to be trolling.  Are you honestly telling me that this Sloan Ranger mentality exists.  Seriously.  This has got to be the product of a fertile imagination.  The LBC presenter fell for it hook line and sinker.
Yes. I am honestly telling you that this Sloane Ranger mentality exists, & its wilfully naive to think that this mentality doesn't exist. Why has it got to be the product of a fertile imagination? Why do you think we are in the mess we are in?!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 24 June, 2017, 11:11:51 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2017, 08:40:30 PM
I'm enjoying our debate, Steven, thanks for indulging me with such aplomb.

In this post I want to concentrate on your last sentence, "rights are a social construct," because I think this is the crucial point in this discussion. What are rights? Who has them and who does not - and why?

I think that the basic and possibly only right is to be what one is. That is to say, a tree has the right to be a tree, a penguin has the right to be a penguin and a human has the right to be a human. The right to be a tree includes the right to try and put down roots but this right is not a guarantee of success or an exemption from beavers. The right to be a penguin includes the right to try and eat fish but the right to be a fish includes the right to try to avoid penguins.

To my mind, then, the fundamental right of a human being is to be a human being. Human beings are social animals which, as far as we are aware, possess thinking abilities unique in this world. We each of us, then, have the right to try to integrate with the social whole and the right to try to think.

The idea of rights as a social construct is, I think, an entirely valid one - the result of human thinking attempting to put into words the fundamental characteristics of being human. A human being, then, has the right to try to do anything a human being is capable of doing just as a penguin has the right to try to do anything a penguin is capable of doing.

This is a worrying and potentially dangerous conclusion because it suggests that we all have the right to try and, for example, murder anyone we choose. I'm capable of stabbing someone, this line of thought runs, therefore I have the right to try it. Our human instincts towards sociability, however, run contrary to this right and, 999,999 times out of a million, stop us from going around arbitrarily stabbing one another. We mostly, then, exercise our fundamental right to not stab each other (which would probably more properly be called a responsibility rather than a right) rather than our right to stab each other.

A right, then, seems to me to be a contained phenomena, each one explainable and quantifiable externally throughout entire species and societies but applicable only within individual beings. You and I may have exactly the same rights and responsibilities but I cannot transplant mine to you nor you yours to me any more than we could swap fingers or feelings. My rights are therefore my responsibility and mine alone.

Thus any group of people calling themselves "government" has the right to tell me what they believe my rights should be but I have the right to disagree, just as they have the right to disagree with my assessment of their rights. If they exercise their right to force me to comply (a right most people eschew due to our social instincts) then I have the equally valid (perhaps more valid) right to resist. So long as I am not infringing on the rights of others then there is no reason for others to interfere with my rights.

I have said in the past, and still maintain, that I do not believe in black rights, white rights, gay rights, straight rights, women's rights, men's rights, children's rights, senior's rights, patient's rights, doctor's rights, prisoner's rights or officer's rights because all those are just bullshit designed to keep us apart and distract us from the fact that we all have the same individual rights and responsibilities as social, thinking human beings. Governments want us to believe that all our rights begin and end at their door and that without their approval we have no rights at all. Well, they have every right to try and convince us of that but we have every right to disagree, right?

Defining what rights are, and if rights even exist in a form outside a human social construct is quite a tricky area of philosophie. You start with some biological survival imperatives of non human life and say theses are rights. but then rather than biological survival imperatives you define them as 'being the thing they are' which I disagree with, which allows you greater scope to build your logic pyramid for 'human rights'. it's at this very early point that I disagree with you.

If rights are defined by 'nature' then all we really have is the right to survive and reproduce at any cost. the rest of your argument is more speculative fiction than philosophie (one of the reasons that I have previously suggested you collect your ideas within a narrative). The human social construct of individual rights are almost the opposite of that, they define what as a society we will support beyond survival of the fittest. results may very depending on where and when you were born.

There has been an attempt since the middle of the last century to define the difference between Human rights and legal rights with a narrower remit for human rights that legal rights must adhere too. in essence it's the low bar for society. laws should not cause the treatment of individuals to fall bellow the human rights minimum. raising that low bar is often contentious and causes much wailing and gnashing of teeth.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 11:12:47 AM
QuoteOkay, I'll bite - what's your theory on why events played out as they did?

Really, there are two possible options here:

1) criminal legislation only works if the criminal in question is accepting of that legislation, and yet, no-one other than you and a handful of individuals, have noticed such a glaring omission in society's most fundamental tenants.  The police, indeed the entire criminal justice system, is aware that they have no authority other than that granted to it by those who have broken legislated laws, but no steps have been taken to address this powerlessness - they have simple hoped that no one would notice.

2) the police and crown prosecution service have better things to do that waste tax payers money and their precious time on a bloke with some weed. Such as prosecuting drunk drivers (under legislation), or , I don't know...arms traffickers (under legislation).

Now, I am willing to accept that I am possibly wrong, but on balance of probability I'm going to go with the underfunded system idea, rather that the one you proposed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 24 June, 2017, 11:43:02 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 11:12:47 AM
QuoteOkay, I'll bite - what's your theory on why events played out as they did?

Really, there are two possible options here:

1) criminal legislation only works if the criminal in question is accepting of that legislation, and yet, no-one other than you and a handful of individuals, have noticed such a glaring omission in society's most fundamental tenants.  The police, indeed the entire criminal justice system, is aware that they have no authority other than that granted to it by those who have broken legislated laws, but no steps have been taken to address this powerlessness - they have simple hoped that no one would notice.

2) the police and crown prosecution service have better things to do that waste tax payers money and their precious time on a bloke with some weed. Such as prosecuting drunk drivers (under legislation), or , I don't know...arms traffickers (under legislation).

Now, I am willing to accept that I am possibly wrong, but on balance of probability I'm going to go with the underfunded system idea, rather that the one you proposed.

You can totally be arrested for the possession of cannabis. Small amount for personal use, first offence is a warning, second a fine, third is being arrested.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JLC on 24 June, 2017, 11:55:51 AM
Grenfell fire survivors moved out of hotel with just hours notice. More disgusting behaviour.

http://news.sky.com/story/grenfell-fire-survivors-moved-out-of-hotel-with-just-hours-notice-10925401

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 02:18:28 PM
And several tower blocks evacuated overnight, without warning, and residents moved to sleeping on the floor of nearby leisure centres, because their homes are so dangerous.

Never mind, soon we won't have to follow those pesky EU safety rules.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 24 June, 2017, 02:41:41 PM
In the pantheon of lolbertarians thinking they've found the cheat codes to reality "I didn't get charged cos I didn't sign a form" is even better than "sir, that flag makes this an admiralty court!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 04:57:24 PM
The last few weeks have a distinct "Day of Chaos" vibe.  Wouldn't surprise me if it all ended with a mass emptying of the nation's prisons, as it's suddenly noticed that prisoners only have to stay locked up if they accept the authority of the courts
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 June, 2017, 05:20:29 PM
If you punch a policeman's helmet off, he's technically not in uniform so he can't arrest you for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 06:23:23 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 11:12:47 AM
QuoteOkay, I'll bite - what's your theory on why events played out as they did?

Really, there are two possible options here:

1) criminal legislation only works if the criminal in question is accepting of that legislation, and yet, no-one other than you and a handful of individuals, have noticed such a glaring omission in society's most fundamental tenants.  The police, indeed the entire criminal justice system, is aware that they have no authority other than that granted to it by those who have broken legislated laws, but no steps have been taken to address this powerlessness - they have simple hoped that no one would notice.

2) the police and crown prosecution service have better things to do that waste tax payers money and their precious time on a bloke with some weed. Such as prosecuting drunk drivers (under legislation), or , I don't know...arms traffickers (under legislation).

Now, I am willing to accept that I am possibly wrong, but on balance of probability I'm going to go with the underfunded system idea, rather that the one you proposed.

On your first point, the difference between legislative and common or natural law have been a matter of debate for as long as laws have existed. Government, of course, favours the primacy of legislative law and so this is the branch it prefers, promotes and teaches. It is not true that the state's legal/law institutions and employees all know it's a scam and are covering it up - to claim such a thing is a straw man. They are acting in good faith (on the whole) in the way they have been trained and educated by trainers and teachers who also (on the whole) are acting in good faith. The idea that it's all a big conspiracy is simply wrong. As an analogy, the idea that lead water pipes were perfectly safe persisted for a very long time despite a few people knowing (or at least suspecting) the truth. It would be foolishness to think that every plumber, pipe manufacturer, safety officer and architect (amongst dozens of other professions) were all part of a massive pro-lead conspiracy, just as it's foolish to believe all police, solicitors, bailiffs, clerks and judges are in on a big conspiracy.

Your second point (that prosecuting me would be too expensive or not cost-efficient) also does not hold water. An elaboration on what happened will illustrate this.

Two police cars and four officers attended initially. A van, manned by two more officers was called. I was handcuffed, put in the van and driven something like ten miles to a police station. I was interviewed about the possession charge and answered every question "no comment." (In the spirit of full disclosure, I also presented the argument that the cannabis was "fruit of the poisoned tree," which is a real legal thing, but the police don't let little things like legal points stop them and they ignored this - probably because it's not their job to address legal arguments.) The interviewing officer found this approach very frustrating. Once the interview was over, and this is the part I'm talking about, a desk sergeant with pink-eye presented me with a form to sign. I asked him what it was and he TOLD ME it was an ACCEPTANCE OF THE CHARGE of possession of cannabis. I asked for more information and he further explained that if I signed it I'd be released but also agreeing to attend the local magistrates' court - if I refused to sign I'd be returned to a police cell, which is what happened. By their own rules they can only keep one locked up for so long (24 hours, I think) and, once this time was up, the charge I refused to accept was dropped. Not very cost-efficient. Now, if I had capitulated and signed that document agreeing to the charge, my "fruit of the poisoned tree" argument would also have been invalidated - in effect, I would have been signing a confession, which means that whatever I said in court would have been largely irrelevant because I have already signed a confession and the only thing for the magistrates to do would be decide on a sentence.

(Your later post about emptying prisons would be extremely unlikely to happen as, by signing similar documents to the one I was offered, the prisoners have already agreed to stand under the police and courts' authority and accept sentence. This is why arresting officers always ask the arrestee, "do you understand?" In legalese (Black's Legal Dictionary, 10th Edition, if memory serves), the word "understand" is defined as "stand under" or "accept (the state's) authority." In more modern legal dictionaries (the last one I checked, iIrc, was the 2015 Oxford Legal Dictionary) the word "understand" was defined as having an unclear definition - I believe this word needs to be properly examined in court because if it does retain its original meaning then the arresting officer is actually asking permission to arrest a person. Under legislative law, where no actual loss, harm or damage has been caused but a fine can be extracted, this is not really a problem but if a person is arrested for causing actual loss, harm or damage - a "real" crime - and is asked permission by an officer then they could get away on a technicality, which nobody wants. You might think that my arguments are all about getting away with actual crimes (Jim seems to think this) but this is not so. Law, at its heart, is really very simple but governments have complicated the Hell out of it by promoting the perception that legislation is on equal footing with common or natural law, which is both unfair and extremely dangerous.)

That's what happened, whether you believe it or not. Still, it's always nice to give JPM the opportunity to trot out his favourite logical fallacy.

Steven, I accept a lot of what you say about my attempt to explore what rights actually are. I deliberately avoided reading what other people have concluded at this stage, preferring to try and explore the idea myself. Rightly or wrongly, I tried to base what I see as a right on real things, quantifiable aspects of the human being. I would not by any means claim that what I said earlier is a final position, indeed the approach may turn out to be incorrect or at least flawed, but for now I think the idea of a right being based on or arising from real human traits (whether physical or instinctive) is a good foundation on which to build.

I'd be interested to read what others think a right actually is and how it can be constructed or discovered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 06:36:22 PM
A police officer asking if you understand can charge is not asking your permission to arrest you.  They are checking you have heard the charges, and are not mentally ill. 

If a police officers released you because you were not willing to be charged, this would require said police officer to know, understand and accept that their authority to charge you was dependent entirely on your acceptance.  This means that they are not "acting in good faith" like a murderous plumber, but rather engaged in a massive, albeit paper thin conspiracy, to pretend that legislation is worth the goat skin it's written on. A conspiracy which you have apparently unearthed by being a bit of a dick in interview.

Alternatively, a guy smoked some weed then wasted police  time until they let him go, because taking the matter further was more effort than it was worth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 06:42:51 PM
Also...
QuoteI also presented the argument that the cannabis was "fruit of the poisoned tree," which is a real legal thing, but the police don't let little things like legal points stop them and they ignored this - probably because it's not their job to address legal arguments.) The interviewing officer found this approach very frustrating

I imagine he did, since its a term used in American law to describe illegally obtained evidence, but you've admitted possession, so its not really relevant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 June, 2017, 06:56:50 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 02:18:28 PM
And several tower blocks evacuated overnight, without warning, and residents moved to sleeping on the floor of nearby leisure centres, because their homes are so dangerous.

Never mind, soon we won't have to follow those pesky EU safety rules.

And one of those moved said it was "disgusting" that she was being moved out of her death-trap of a home while her local council (either Islington or Camden, I forget which) paid to make it safer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 07:05:21 PM
Okay, Panth. Never mind.

Wilful misunderstanding, name-calling, etc. Again.

I'm not going to put you on ignore but I won't be engaging with you any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 24 June, 2017, 07:10:16 PM
Sharky,I dont think you are off the hook there.Maybe your not the top priority,but they will get to your case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 07:18:24 PM
Nope, Smith, it's definitely dead. It's part of a larger situation and I know they've dropped it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 08:11:00 PM
QuoteWilful misunderstanding

Jesus.  No. I understand. "I was released without charge, because the police couldn't charge me, because I didn't accept the charge.  But that doesn't mean that they knew they couldn't charge me, because that would require the police to know that legislation is irrelevant, and that would be ridiculous.  I outwitted them using irrelevant legal terms used in a different country"

Quotename-calling, etc. Again.

Really? When was that?  Was it before or after the fucking horrendous things you called me for saying democracy was a good idea? 

Stop getting your legal advice from conspiracy theorist's blogs. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 08:29:55 PM
"A conspiracy which you have apparently unearthed by being a bit of a dick in interview." Wilful misunderstanding and name-calling in the same sentence.

Enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 June, 2017, 09:04:26 PM
If the authorities know that they cannot charge you without your consent, but they withhold that information from the public in order to retain control, how is that anything other than a conspiracy?

If no one knows about this conspiracy, but you do, and you came to reveal the conspiracy in the course of a police interview, how is that not your unearthing of a conspiracy?

If you are willfully refusing to accept the authority of the police, the court, the government and any legislation, and instead use foreign legal terms to frustrate the police and waste their time, then refuse to admit that you understand you are being charged and why, then that is by just about anyone's standards "being a bit of a dick". 

You didn't outsmart these people.  You didn't escape charge by refusing to believe they could charge you. They got sick of dealing with you, because taking you to court where you might have got a slap on the wrist for possession, wasn't worth their time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JPMaybe on 24 June, 2017, 09:27:22 PM
Sorry for doing the Belgian Milkmaid fallacy or whatevs on you dude.  How about you replicate your Magic Consent Haxxoring powers by going down to your local nick and doing a line off the front desk?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 June, 2017, 09:45:57 PM
Oh, you're such a card.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 June, 2017, 10:22:20 PM
Quote from: JLC on 24 June, 2017, 10:34:56 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2017, 09:09:52 PM
Quote from: JLC on 23 June, 2017, 07:37:30 PM
Disgusting

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/kensington-resident-tells-shocked-radio-host-if-grenfell-families-moved-in-id-leave-a3572066.html

Oh come on.  This has got to be trolling.  Are you honestly telling me that this Sloan Ranger mentality exists.  Seriously.  This has got to be the product of a fertile imagination.  The LBC presenter fell for it hook line and sinker.
Yes. I am honestly telling you that this Sloane Ranger mentality exists, & its wilfully naive to think that this mentality doesn't exist. Why has it got to be the product of a fertile imagination? Why do you think we are in the mess we are in?!?

You know what, I need to apologise.  Sarcasm doesn't work too well online at times.  You are absolutely right, the fact that this kind of mentality exists is why we are in such a bind at present.  That was my point, albeit badly made, that we could even consider such a caricature to be real.  Even more disturbing, that it was not a caricature but a real live 'human being' who would even consider such a point of view.  Clearly we live in parallel universes where such thinking is appropriate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 June, 2017, 09:40:14 AM
Tezza was just 97 votes (20 to 30 votes in four specific constituencies) away from being able to give the DUP their marching orders and sweeping into Brussels like Emperor Palpatine boarding Death Star 2*.

Remember Dave Cameron's redrawing of constituency boundaries, which was going to guarantee perpetual Tory rule in England? If those boundary changes had been applied before the 2017 election, the result would have been the same (thanks largely to the polarising effect of Brexit on the constituencies of the South East):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p056b7l1


* Jezza was 'several thousand' ballots away from even having the option of forming a coalition of chaos, but in the context of almost thirty million voters that's still surprisingly tight. You can see why parties target policy at the narrow sections of the electorate most likely to turn out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2017, 03:39:31 PM
Outraged wheat farmers swung it because they were tired of finding crop circles where Theresa May had been doing constant u-turns etc etc.

I don't know about boundary changes, but the Tories might want to get to work on outlawing byelections, otherwise it's just a matter of time now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 25 June, 2017, 08:14:44 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2017, 03:39:31 PM
I don't know about boundary changes, but the Tories might want to get to work on outlawing byelections, otherwise it's just a matter of time now.

Yes, although sadly they have every chance of clinging on for a couple of years, which is more than enough time to totally hose the Brexit negotiations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2017, 08:26:38 PM
Brexit is the beach they'll die upon, but it's not their main concern.  Their priority will most likely be a fire sale of publicly-owned works and infrastructure.  It's been nice having an NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 June, 2017, 08:36:47 PM
How's about some lovely poetry to celebrate independence day.

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/ng-interactive/2017/jun/19/brexit-shorts-permanent-sunshine-al-kennedy-scott-reid-video (https://www.theguardian.com/stage/ng-interactive/2017/jun/19/brexit-shorts-permanent-sunshine-al-kennedy-scott-reid-video)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 26 June, 2017, 12:35:07 PM
I see that the DUP are all big Black Lace fans, "Agadoo doo doo shake the magic money tree." So much for austerity being a necessary evil to bring public finances back under control. And we taxpayers are footing the bill for this blatant bit of bribery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 26 June, 2017, 12:58:58 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 26 June, 2017, 12:35:07 PM
I see that the DUP are all big Black Lace fans, "Agadoo doo doo shake the magic money tree." So much for austerity being a necessary evil to bring public finances back under control. And we taxpayers are footing the bill for this blatant bit of bribery.


As well as £1bn to the DUP Northern Ireland, another £6bn on two new aircraft carriers (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-40402153).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: 8-Ball on 26 June, 2017, 01:18:06 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 26 June, 2017, 12:58:58 PM
Quote from: 8-Ball on 26 June, 2017, 12:35:07 PM
I see that the DUP are all big Black Lace fans, "Agadoo doo doo shake the magic money tree." So much for austerity being a necessary evil to bring public finances back under control. And we taxpayers are footing the bill for this blatant bit of bribery.


As well as £1bn to the DUP Northern Ireland, another £6bn on two new aircraft carriers (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-40402153).

Pork-barrel politics are icky regardless of who is doing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 26 June, 2017, 09:16:42 PM
Conservatives and media demonise Corbyn during election campaign for alleged links to extremists. and then they form coalition with the DUP!????????????
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 June, 2017, 10:32:40 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDRW6PPXsAIKZ5Y.jpg)

Apologies this doesn't seem to like being resized.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 June, 2017, 10:46:08 AM
And in the ongoing horror for EU nationals, olive branches are now being dangled. CSI will probably no longer be a thing (although there's a curious secondary reference to it in the UK's document), but isn't being scrapped right now, for some reason. So while the UK could actually deal with probably many thousands of EEA nationals over the next year, it won't and will instead punt them into the imminent shitstorm of attempting to register and process over three million people in just two years. (And at the end of that two years, if you've not registered, you will have to leave. What if the government can't deal with everyone in time? It argues they'll be able to. Sure.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2017, 12:01:17 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 27 June, 2017, 10:32:40 AM
Apologies this doesn't seem to like being resized.


Bet you tried that line out on your partner, didn't you.

Sorry, childish I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 June, 2017, 10:21:59 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 June, 2017, 10:46:08 AM
What if the government can't deal with everyone in time? It argues they'll be able to. Sure.)

Yeah Theresa May is famously well known for getting things done on time and the home office is notorious as the most efficient branch of the government, moreso since she left her mark on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2017, 10:41:38 AM
Hang on a second .... this is the Political Thread, not the Squaxx telling jokes thread. 

Can we please have a sense of decorum?

Thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 June, 2017, 10:50:38 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 28 June, 2017, 10:21:59 AMYeah Theresa May is famously well known for getting things done on time and the home office is notorious as the most efficient branch of the government, moreso since she left her mark on it.
Now combine these things:

- A Home Office that has to process three million applications in a single year. (Assuming eight-hour work days and no holidays bar Christmas, that's over 1000 per HOUR or 17 per MINUTE.)

- A two-year cut-off point, where people no longer by default have the right to reside.

Yeah, this isn't going to be a clusterfuck at all. (And this is before you take into account the numbers are pure guesswork by the UK, and also don't take into account EFTA citizens – although they will at least be far less numerous, and probably 'only' number in the tens of thousands.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2017, 06:43:49 PM
Modern British politics:

(https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/%3Cbr%20/%3Et1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/%3Cbr%20/%3Eq65/19511158_10154833123307428_2897540%3Cbr%20/%3E651020615943_n.jpg?%3Cbr%20/%3Eefg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&oh=e265d1d1c54a4ddae3ef9%3Cbr%20/%3Eb8d4e107310&oe=59DEB39A)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 June, 2017, 03:00:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2017, 06:43:49 PM
Modern British politics:

(https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/%3Cbr%20/%3Et1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/%3Cbr%20/%3Eq65/19511158_10154833123307428_2897540%3Cbr%20/%3E651020615943_n.jpg?%3Cbr%20/%3Eefg=eyJpIjoiYiJ9&oh=e265d1d1c54a4ddae3ef9%3Cbr%20/%3Eb8d4e107310&oe=59DEB39A)


Does the unicat live under the magical money tree?  Can you ask it to look for that £1bn?  Not to mention the £350mn a day...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2017, 04:53:54 PM
Ask the private banks - they're the ones who magic all the money into existence, and they don't even need a tree!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 June, 2017, 07:59:40 PM
So there's Corbyn, firing four front-benchers for having the audacity to back Chuka Umunna's amendment on single market membership. Astonishing. Now the news cycle is shifted from Conservatives having to strike deals to keep the QS amendment-free to Labour being anything but strong and stable, and a govt in waiting. What a massive buffoon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 June, 2017, 08:10:43 PM
Umunna accepted that the UK would leave the SM in his pre-election Huffpo article, and it was a part of the Labour manifesto, so the access amendment was never going to get the votes to pass.  Tom Watson - not a Corbynite by any stretch - has publicly stated this was an attempt to engineer "split" headlines.
Mind you, he also did that reds under the bed thing.  YMMV.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 June, 2017, 08:21:58 PM
This being when everyone assumed the Tories would win in a landslide. Polling mapping shows people now expect Labour to offer something different or better, but Corbyn just waffles on about a "jobs-first Brexit", which is an impossibility. And if he wants to be the guy he claims, bringing together his party, firing three excellent frontbenchers is hardly the way to do that. What a mess.

Yet again, at a time when the weakest Conservative party in living memory is on a knife edge, Labour punches itself repeatedly in the face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 June, 2017, 11:46:37 PM
Corbyn and lefties in the party have been eating the unity shit sandwich since 2015 for all the good it did with Umunna & co.  They've had their chance to help party unity and they've made it clear they're not interested.

Sweet talk only lasts so long - now it's time some hoes tasted the back of the glove.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 07:11:07 AM
Another delightful tweet from the good old woman-hating POTUS, just as the clearly irrational and islamophobic travel ban lite comes into effect. Fuck you, Trump, and fuck anyone who still has the moral bankruptcy to support you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 01:03:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 07:11:07 AM
Another delightful tweet from the good old woman-hating POTUS, just as the clearly irrational and islamophobic travel ban lite comes into effect. Fuck you, Trump, and fuck anyone who still has the moral bankruptcy to support you.
So what was it he said?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 30 June, 2017, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 01:03:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 07:11:07 AM
Another delightful tweet from the good old woman-hating POTUS, just as the clearly irrational and islamophobic travel ban lite comes into effect. Fuck you, Trump, and fuck anyone who still has the moral bankruptcy to support you.
So what was it he said?
The Dead Man is [spoiler]TRUMP[/spoiler].
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
Say what you like about Trump, but he's exposed the Republican party for the spineless collection of entitled frat boys it always was, and forced media outlets to nail their colours to the mast one way or the other - no other president could have managed that, not even Sanders.
The damage Trump can do doesn't bear thinking about, but in the end it's like when kids burn their fingers on a hot stove or get stung by a bee after you tell them to stay away from the big buzzy things out by the shed: obviously it's not a good thing that this happened, but an invaluable lesson might have been learned.
I say "might have" because, of course, it remains to be seen if Americans take any notice and vote accordingly next year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 02:18:20 PM
Quote from: I, Cosh on 30 June, 2017, 01:08:50 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 01:03:51 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 07:11:07 AM
Another delightful tweet from the good old woman-hating POTUS, just as the clearly irrational and islamophobic travel ban lite comes into effect. Fuck you, Trump, and fuck anyone who still has the moral bankruptcy to support you.
So what was it he said?
The Dead Man is .
I saw a headline at lunchtime about 'Trump travel ban' but unfortunately I don't think it means that Trump has been banned from travelling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 02:19:08 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
Say what you like about Trump, but he's exposed the Republican party for the spineless collection of entitled frat boys it always was, and forced media outlets to nail their colours to the mast one way or the other - no other president could have managed that, not even Sanders.
The damage Trump can do doesn't bear thinking about, but in the end it's like when kids burn their fingers on a hot stove or get stung by a bee after you tell them to stay away from the big buzzy things out by the shed: obviously it's not a good thing that this happened, but an invaluable lesson might have been learned.
I say "might have" because, of course, it remains to be seen if Americans take any notice and vote accordingly next year.

they didn't learn from dubya.  What's happening next year?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 30 June, 2017, 02:42:10 PM
Ah, the hacylon days of Dubya.  He made or impossible for a rich white guy to get elected.  Following past trends, Trump will need to be followed by a beloved socialist superhero

It's a strange name..."Trump".  As close to "triumph" or "call out" as it is to "ostentacious display" or "fart loudly".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 30 June, 2017, 03:00:49 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 02:19:08 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
Say what you like about Trump, but he's exposed the Republican party for the spineless collection of entitled frat boys it always was, and forced media outlets to nail their colours to the mast one way or the other - no other president could have managed that, not even Sanders.
The damage Trump can do doesn't bear thinking about, but in the end it's like when kids burn their fingers on a hot stove or get stung by a bee after you tell them to stay away from the big buzzy things out by the shed: obviously it's not a good thing that this happened, but an invaluable lesson might have been learned.
I say "might have" because, of course, it remains to be seen if Americans take any notice and vote accordingly next year.

they didn't learn from dubya.  What's happening next year?

Trump will mortally offend the Chinese, who will call in their loans and essentially foreclose on the U.S., taking sole possession. Welcome to the socialist paradise America.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 June, 2017, 03:32:59 PM
https://audioboom.com/posts/6063140-maligning-mika-savaging-psycho-joe

If you'd like to hear the comment JBC is referring to, read by Mark Hamill in the Joker's voice. As usual this is about 3-4 tweets of a rant you wouldn't believe is being made by the President of the United States, at the very least whilst in Office.

On a similar note the first tweet read in the Joker's voice (https://audioboom.com/posts/5471405-the-trumpster-quote-1) really does sound like a supervillain's dialogue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 03:38:42 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 02:19:08 PM
they didn't learn from dubya.  What's happening next year?

The mid-term elections.
Lefties like to ignore Dubya's high approval ratings with working class Americans, though there was also nothing equivalent to the Obamacare repeal in Dubya's tenure.  As watered-down and awful as Obamacare is in comparison to healthcare provisions around the world that are cheaper, fairer, and more effective, Obamacare is still the only health coverage that an estimated 27 million Americans have ever had, and taking it away has made enemies of the working class slobs that can usually be relied upon to vote Republican come Hell or high water.  There are town hall meetings that were videoed and shared on social media where scarlet-faced rednecks screamed at their representatives as the room filled with angry cheers, and people aren't even dying yet.  Pro-Trump media is singularly failing to keep ahead of the blowback, and this is only going to get worse for the GOP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 04:36:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 03:38:42 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 30 June, 2017, 02:19:08 PM
they didn't learn from dubya.  What's happening next year?

The mid-term elections.
Lefties like to ignore Dubya's high approval ratings with working class Americans, though there was also nothing equivalent to the Obamacare repeal in Dubya's tenure.  As watered-down and awful as Obamacare is in comparison to healthcare provisions around the world that are cheaper, fairer, and more effective, Obamacare is still the only health coverage that an estimated 27 million Americans have ever had, and taking it away has made enemies of the working class slobs that can usually be relied upon to vote Republican come Hell or high water.  There are town hall meetings that were videoed and shared on social media where scarlet-faced rednecks screamed at their representatives as the room filled with angry cheers, and people aren't even dying yet.  Pro-Trump media is singularly failing to keep ahead of the blowback, and this is only going to get worse for the GOP.

Really? It looks to me as if a lot of the US working class are cheering on the removal of the best chance at half-chance healthcare they'll get.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 04:54:01 PM
*half-decent
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 June, 2017, 05:07:42 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 June, 2017, 04:36:06 PM
Really? It looks to me as if a lot of the US working class are cheering on the removal of the best chance at half-chance healthcare they'll get.

A non-trivial fraction of the US electorate still think the Affordable Care Act and ObamaCare are different things. They're enthusiastic over the demolition of ObamaCare, because it has his name on it and they're not because they're racists, nosireebob. By the time they realise they're cheering on the destruction of their own health insurance... well, never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate.*

*See: all the Brexit-supporting fruit farmers now saying "when I said I wanted an end to immigration, I didn't mean my immigrant workers..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 June, 2017, 05:29:24 PM
Change certainly takes time, but if people are at the "gunning down Republicans" stage of political discourse, it's a good sign that media brainwashing is increasingly less effective.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 01 July, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
I know from family in the USA the worry folks have over insurance or lack of.
I know our system aint perfect but thank God for the NHS and i despise those politicians continuing to privatise via stealth.
Its worth noting that it aint just the Tories doing this, 'New' Labour and the bleeding Blairites continued to privatise much themselves. Dont get me started on 'Private Finance Initiatives' saddling NHS trusts with debt. I've lost my local A+E and our nearest cannot cope since 2 local A+E also closed.
Hands off our NHS!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2017, 04:46:37 PM
PFI was dead in the water under John Major, with the Tories reaching a collective agreement that their brand was so toxic by the mid-90s that they couldn't survive gutting the NHS.  Blair revived PFI when there was literally not a single reason to do so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 July, 2017, 04:58:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 July, 2017, 04:46:37 PM
Blair revived PFI when there was literally not a single reason to do so.

I suspect Brown was keen on it. Although it's a ruinously expensive way of financing public expenditure, it lets you keep capital spending off the 'debt' side of the government balance sheet, contributing to the appearance of fiscal prudence, even though it's really just creating a whole raft of deferred problems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Michael Knight on 01 July, 2017, 05:04:14 PM
Jim Campbell Professor Bear. Good points lads. Its criminal how they did that. Really messed up my local NHS trust
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 July, 2017, 09:57:58 AM

QuotePresident Donald Trump has criticised the growing number of US states refusing to pass on voters' details to his commission on electoral fraud.

"What are they trying to hide?", Mr Trump tweeted.

QuoteThe panel, described by Mr Trump as "very distinguished," is chaired by Vice-President Mike Pence.

On Wednesday its vice-chair, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, sent a letter to the 50 US states and the District of Columbia requesting details from voter rolls including: names, addresses, dates of birth, political affiliation, last four digits of social security number, voting history since 2006, criminal convictions and military status.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 July, 2017, 01:20:34 PM
That's probably nothing to worry about, they just need the information for voter suppression like they implemented in 2016.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jimmy Baker's Assistant on 02 July, 2017, 04:54:27 PM
I can't imagine Trump accepting defeat in 2020. Much more likely that he'll do everything he can in the meantime to deny Democrats and moderate Republicans the vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 July, 2017, 05:23:01 PM
I don't think Trump is capable of conceiving defeat in 2020.  I honestly believe the man is unable to differentiate between "real" and "popular", so there simply must be massive electoral fraud underway, because the alternative is that he isn't loved by all right minded Americans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 July, 2017, 11:57:22 PM
Buzz Aldrin (http://i.imgur.com/sC2VPhp.gifv)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 July, 2017, 10:39:42 AM
An easy-to-read, illuminating dissection of the Conservative lie about our 'crippling' national debt. (http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/07/06/the-national-debt-costs-us-in-net-terms-precisely-nothing-a-year-but-thats-apparently-too-costly-for-the-next-generation-to-bear/)

Well worth a few minutes of your time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 August, 2017, 11:06:41 PM
I'm glad to see this thread lay fallow for long periods, because it means everything is okay.

So okay that Donald Trump is just chilling now, quoting Dragonforce lyrics during press conferences. (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/08/donald-trump-north-korea-missile-threats-fire-fury)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 August, 2017, 11:40:40 PM
But surely if these are WMDs that can target our cities in (say) 45 minutes, the west is morally obligated to invade and institute regime change... I thought that's how it works.  Isn't that how it works?

Cheeses H Crust though, at 37% approval that orange shitfuck needs to wave his tiny cock at someone, and it clearly isn't going to be Putin.  Terrifying to be in the miniscule hands of two egomaniacal people you wouldn't let run the bric-a-brac stall at the parish fete.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: DaveGYNWA on 09 August, 2017, 01:14:04 AM
Trump = Robert L Booth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2017, 07:52:58 AM
Not one shred of proof one way or the other in that article, just lots of assessments and opinions. You'd think the CIA or MI6 or any number of the west's supposedly shit-hot intelligence agencies would have more than that to offer. Some kind of proof, perhaps?

This strikes me as same shit, different day - leaders stirring up trouble to keep us all afraid and justify their position as our "protectors."

It is interesting to note that, while western leaders froth at the mouth over North Korea, President of South Korea, Kim, Dae-jung, has recommenced pursuit of his country's "Sunshine Policy" towards NK which was derailed earlier this century by (surprise, surprise) the United States.

Will our politicians back this peaceful, co-operative approach to normalising relations between NK and the rest of the world or will they side with Trump in his ceaseless search for bogeymen?

I reckon they'll side with Trump because the more peaceful the world, the less we need "leaders."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 August, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2017, 07:52:58 AM
I reckon they'll side with Trump because the more peaceful the world, the less we need "leaders."

I reckon you reckon right. We all work/live with these types of people: create a crisis that disrupts everything, strut around pissing on everyone for a bit, announce that either (a). you and only you have solved the crisis, or that (b). 'others' have prevented you solving it. Then go play golf.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2017, 10:44:52 AM
Eek - someone agreed with me!

Quote from: TordelBack on 08 August, 2017, 11:44:04 PM
Quote from: SIP on 08 August, 2017, 08:57:23 PM
The world is ending! The world is ending!

Mods: please move this to the Political Thread.

Aaaaahh... Normality returns! :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 August, 2017, 12:35:37 AM
Here we go again.  I refuse to accept that there is any hypocrisy in a liberal or a leftie stating that Nazis should be consistently silenced and mercilessly driven from the streets. I would as soon afford cholera or typhus the dignity of a public platform.  The last time we had this 'debate', 60 million people* died - and they didn't even win that time.  Stamp on them hard, no hesitation, no equivocation, no excuses. And if the arse in the White House could experience that emotion, shame on him.



*That's out of just over 2 billion people globally in 1939. The same relative proportion of the 2017 population would be 220 million. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 August, 2017, 09:06:45 AM
'Drops the mic'

Zero tolerance for nazism, bigotry, or white nationalism and supremacy. Just fucking stamp it out right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 August, 2017, 10:12:37 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 August, 2017, 12:35:37 AM
Here we go again.  I refuse to accept that there is any hypocrisy in a liberal or a leftie stating that Nazis should be consistently silenced and mercilessly driven from the streets. I would as soon afford cholera or typhus the dignity of a public platform.  The last time we had this 'debate', 60 million people* died - and they didn't even win that time.  Stamp on them hard, no hesitation, no equivocation, no excuses. And if the arse in the White House could experience that emotion, shame on him.



*That's out of just over 2 billion people globally in 1939. The same relative proportion of the 2017 population would be 220 million. 
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 14 August, 2017, 09:06:45 AM
'Drops the mic'

Zero tolerance for nazism, bigotry, or white nationalism and supremacy. Just fucking stamp it out right now.

Couldn't agree more.

Identify them. Shame them. Treat them with the contempt and vile that they happily dish out to others.

Someone identifies you from a photograph, you lose your job? Cry about it? Fuk off. You don't deserve a job, or to be able to interact with decent people.

Zero tolerance.

Seeing them run off by people of all colours and religions is deeply satisfying, and makes me hopeful for the future of America.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 August, 2017, 10:34:47 AM
 :-[

Apologies for the swearing, folks! Got a little worked up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 August, 2017, 11:00:01 PM
Fine by me, fuck em.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 15 August, 2017, 09:34:05 AM
I have already posted about my youthful dalliance with the extreme right and so hesitate to post anything that might reek of a softly softly approach-but having worked within the territory of attitudinal change in Northern Ireland (and with some experience of working with international groups in a similiar field) I also think that additional approaches need to happen (where at all possible) than driving them off the streets as understandable a reaction as that might be.

My attitudes were changed by brilliant people talking to me and by engagement. I recognise however that is not always possible.

The above should not be interpreted as some passive, insipid approach. The response should be multi-faceted and robust and legislative responses, protest etc should be part of that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
Well said, Prodigal. I find this "it's okay to punch a Nazi" idea to be hypocritical, distasteful and dangerous. As you say, it's not always possible but reason and talk should always be the first, best solution.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 10:39:25 AM
Nazi's don't inderstand reason, people calling for ethnic and racial cleansing are not on the same level as reactionary violence in defence of civil rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 10:44:37 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
As you say, it's not always possible but reason and talk should always be the first, best solution.

If someone in 2017 has chosen to identify as a Nazi and publicly extol that ideology, reason is a completely wasted approach.  Tolerating their public flaunting of racial superiority and genocidal aspirations as if it were one side of a debate, a point of view to be rebuffed, with facts to be refuted, is unacceptable. The discussion is over, if there is one ideology that is the enemy of all others, it is this particular historic manifestation of fascism. 

Of course Prodigal is correct, concerted, legislated, funded multi-pronged approaches are the best way to change attitudes.

But public celebrations by Nazis?  No, sorry, I make an exception:  whatever it takes to beat them down is what needs to be done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 10:49:50 AM
We had this 'debate' 80 years ago. 10's of Millions died. There is nothing to debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:04:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 10:17:38 AM
Well said, Prodigal. I find this "it's okay to punch a Nazi" idea to be hypocritical, distasteful and dangerous. As you say, it's not always possible but reason and talk should always be the first, best solution.
I agree there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 12:10:47 PM
No.  How is it hypocritical to support punching a Nazi?  That would require that the act in some way goes against someone's stated beliefs or position on punching people.  It's entirely consistent with my belief that Nazi ideology should never again be allowed expression, and that anyone aligning themselves with Nazis deserves a good punch.  So whatever else it is, it ain't hypocrisy.

This is not an open discussion of conflicting views, this a demonstrable evil that does not deserve a hint of recognition. With Nazis we've already moved on from what is quite obviously 'the first best solution' (unfortunate resonances for that phrase) of engaging in reason and talk.  We're 80 years beyond that.

Again, I respect Prodigal's particular experience in this area, and his always-reasonable approach, and Sharky's determination to examine everything from first principles without being guided by the 'wisdom' of the herd, but I've thought long and hard about this and I believe the visual semantics of these utter c*nts being driven from their podiums is a positive thing in this world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 12:17:30 PM
I probably mean 'semiotics', not 'semantics', but it's all the same when the red mist descends...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:28:32 PM
Problem isnt punching nazis,problem is when they start punching back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:30:32 PM
Don't...fucking...let them then. Remove their platform, drive them back into their internet hovels, make it COMPLETELY clear that in 2017 their is no room for their far right brand of bigotry.

And fuck an centrists who would apologise for them either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFWdvahUwAQnZEk.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 12:37:04 PM
Just to be clear, I am totally against punching anyone just for their beliefs, no matter how vile or toxic those beliefs might be - Naziism, communism, statism, etc. The best way to counter those is always through reason, debate and even ridicule.

Only when these beliefs threaten actual harm to others would I tolerate the use of force. Force, in my view, is only ever acceptable in defence. I realise I am in the minority with this view as most people are statists and watch, and tolerate or even actively support, the propensity of the state to initiate offensive violence whenever it wants.

One might argue that this issue was "settled" 80 years ago with an unimaginable amount of death and suffering but it clearly wasn't. If setting half a planet on fire and eradicating millions of people didn't sort this out 80 years ago then further violence is obviously not the answer - no matter how tempting a target a spouting hatemongering bigot might be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:00 PM
I'n anti fascist activist was killed at the protests this weekend, Sarky. It's already gone beyond the point of harm being a worst case scenario, and in greater terms of the very ideology harming people....fucking hell, do I have to spell it out?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:44:48 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?
If it's a literal toss up between denouncing civil rights and advocating them then dear god yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 August, 2017, 12:46:37 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?

No, someone who thinks that people at risk of being lynched can compromise with people who want to do the lynching are idiots.  There is no half-way place for those to groups to compromise, one wants the other exterminated or in slavery, the other wants to be alive and free.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:54:33 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:44:48 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?
If it's a literal toss up between denouncing civil rights and advocating them then dear god yes.
Only a Sith deals in the extremes. :)
I was really asking in general,not just in this case.I realize that sometimes a compromise cant be reached,but violence shouldn't be our first response.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 12:57:32 PM
Who deserves civil rights? Everyone or just some?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 01:12:00 PM
Are they really Nazis though?
Surely to be a Nazi you have to understand the ideology?
I think a lot of these people are just uneducated, disenfranchised and have nothing to aspire to. It's 'putting someone down to big yourself up' writ large.
It's radicalisation. I think the only way to combat radicalisation of any form is with education.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 August, 2017, 01:16:45 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 01:12:00 PM
Are they really Nazis though?
Surely to be a Nazi you have to understand the ideology?
I think a lot of these people are just uneducated, disenfranchised and have nothing to aspire to. It's 'putting someone down to big yourself up' writ large.
It's radicalisation. I think the only way to combat radicalisation of any form is with education.

Yep - it is possible to be an ex-nazi (in the BNP / NF / EDL sense), and it usually is through education.  Let's face it, many of those who are most vehemently anti-foreigners live in areas without much immigration.  If they actually knew more people from different backgrounds they wouldn't be so afraid of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 01:22:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 01:12:00 PM
Are they really Nazis though?
Surely to be a Nazi you have to understand the ideology?
I think a lot of these people are just uneducated, disenfranchised and have nothing to aspire to. It's 'putting someone down to big yourself up' writ large.
It's radicalisation. I think the only way to combat radicalisation of any form is with education.
I think brandishing flaming torches, waving swastikas, and giving nazi salutes to the beat of 'Heil Trump' is a pretty good indication your a nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 01:31:22 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 01:22:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 01:12:00 PM
Are they really Nazis though?
Surely to be a Nazi you have to understand the ideology?
I think a lot of these people are just uneducated, disenfranchised and have nothing to aspire to. It's 'putting someone down to big yourself up' writ large.
It's radicalisation. I think the only way to combat radicalisation of any form is with education.
I think brandishing flaming torches, waving swastikas, and giving nazi salutes to the beat of 'Heil Trump' is a pretty good indication your a nazi.

You could say that waving a copy of the quran and shouting Allahu Akbar is a good indication that you're a Muslim but a lot of people would argue against it.

Waving flags and torches just means you're a silly fucker who hates stuff.

I'm not by any means condoning or excusing any of this but the fact that these people are forming these opinions in one of the world's richest and most privileged countries isn't just an indictment on the perpetrators themselves.
We (or they) need to get better at showing up this stupid bullshit for what it is and the only way to do that is to talk about it candidly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 01:32:33 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?

You are literally using an extreme ideological standpoint, to whit: the left and the right are equally as bad.  I would counter that it is actually centrists who are the worst kind of political sectarian.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 01:41:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 01:32:33 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?

You are literally using an extreme ideological standpoint, to whit: the left and the right are equally as bad.  I would counter that it is actually centrists who are the worst kind of political sectarian.
What I said was EXTREMES of any ideology.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 01:45:01 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 01:41:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 01:32:33 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 12:35:41 PM
Beware the idiot in the middle.
Because anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extremes of any ideology is an idiot?

You are literally using an extreme ideological standpoint, to whit: the left and the right are equally as bad.  I would counter that it is actually centrists who are the worst kind of political sectarian.
What I said was EXTREMES of any ideology.
The extreme of the left is civil rights for all, the extreme of the right is civil rights for the select few 'pure' people selected by ethnicity, sexuality, and creed. Truly these are atrociously equal.

I swear to fucking god sometimes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 01:57:08 PM
We could go thru some examples of how great communism was,but I hate to interrupt you while your building a strawman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 02:04:13 PM
(https://m.popkey.co/b91743/DQ3Rx.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 02:15:03 PM
Nice,mature.
Look,Im not your enemy.Im not against you,but I dont have to agree with you 100%.There is no need for a "with me or against me" approach.
Thats all Im going to say on that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 02:16:00 PM
I wouldn't go pinning my colours to a "left wing means communism" standpoint while simultaneously claiming I wasn't dealing in extreme viewpoints and accusing others of straw men arguments, but that's just me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 August, 2017, 02:21:49 PM
Which is again something I never said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 02:22:06 PM
I find this whole "if you disagree with me you must hate me" reasoning reaction terribly irritating - it's almost as if the Appeal to Emotion fallacy has somehow become a respectable rhetorical device.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 02:22:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 02:16:00 PM
I wouldn't go pinning my colours to a "left wing means communism" standpoint while simultaneously claiming I wasn't dealing in extreme viewpoints and accusing others of straw men arguments, but that's just me.
^^This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 August, 2017, 04:08:15 PM
C'mon guys.  It's not all bad.  Sometimes politics is nice.  Look!  Baby boxes!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40929355 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40929355)

Lovely little boxes for lovely little babies!  Who could disagree with that?  Lovely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 05:10:03 PM
If those babies want boxes they should work harder, but instead we're teaching them to freeload from birth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 15 August, 2017, 05:33:20 PM
One of the things that really bothers me about any kind of political discourse online nowadays is that everyone seems to have decided if they're 'left' or 'right' and use that as an excuse to just ignore opinions or information that doesn't fit the agenda they've chosen. If I had a pound for the amount of times I've been told 'oh you would think that though because you're a leftie' then I'd have several pounds.

I truthfully don't think of myself as having picked one side which I'll align myself with in any situation that arises, instead I see a situation and decide how I feel about it. I'm sure that in most cases that does mean that I wind up falling on the side of the left, but it's not like I automatically adopt that stance before having a think about things first.

The whole 'both sides are as bad as one another' and 'taking one extreme viewpoint is bad either way' argument is pretty nonsensical when the two extremes are 'being openly evil' and 'not liking people being openly evil', so seeing people go through incredible mental gymnastics to find the logical loopholes they need to defend racists without openly stating they sympathise with them is insane to watch.

None of that is a complaint about anyone here, this is genuinely the only place I've found on the internet where people tend to have reasoned, balanced discussions about these things with a minimum of mud-slinging and barely any aggression. Sure, things can get a tad heated but it's nothing compared to every other public forum out there. Twitter and Facebook are absolutely maddening, seeing the way people talk about these subjects.

So yeah, not having a go at anyone here at all, but after reading a lot of comments threads elsewhere today I guess I needed to vent a bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 05:46:22 PM
Talking of following flags, according to foreignpolicy.com (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/09/donald-trump-is-dropping-bombs-at-unprecedented-levels/), "Under Trump, the United States has dropped about 20,650 bombs through July 31, or 80 percent the number dropped under Obama for the entirety of 2016. At this rate, Trump will exceed Obama's last-year total by Labor Day."

If accurate, this makes punching Nazis look like a sideshow at a village fete and shows who the real monsters are.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 15 August, 2017, 05:59:29 PM
I actually don't understand why they are wearing swastikas? I mean they have that crap frog as an icon already but no lets wear a swastika so folk will really, really hate us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 06:06:36 PM
Quote from: Keef Monkey on 15 August, 2017, 05:33:20 PM

...everyone seems to have decided if they're 'left' or 'right'...


I agree and I think that this is no accident. The Powers That Shouldn't Be love to simplify everything as much as possible and reducing people to left wing or right wing makes it easier to polarise society, to divide and rule us, by boiling down complex issues to two or three simplistic options from which we are expected to pick the one which appeals to us the most and reject the others. 

The left/right choice is entirely false and succeeds only in stifling reasoned debate, promoting tribalism and stirring up emotions.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 06:22:46 PM
I'm still not sure anyone's response to a gang of white folk strutting around with torches and swastikas giving Hitler salutes could be materially affected by self-identification as one side of the false dichotomy of left or right, or how anyone could fail to have a pre-existing opinion about the matter.

Nazis, and people that fancy themselves Nazis, are BAD.  Yes, ALL Nazis. Yes, ALL of them, even the ones that like dogs and are vegetarians.   If you subscribe to an ideology that actively asserts your manifest racial superiority at the systematic expense of other groups you claim as inferior obstacles to your destiny, you are A BAD PERSON.  Because there can be no-one on the planet that is more than two clicks away from understanding in the most graphic detail what that ideology represents in practical, human terms: this isn't political theory, this is factual history.  There are other equally terrible things done in the name of other equal awful ideologies, but this is the one that everyone knows about.

It genuinely is the yes-or-no black-or-white exception to a balanced nuanced assessment of human perceptions and attitudes that proves the rule. You need to be for or against.

With the greatest of respect Shark, this is indeed a sideshow, as most of the things that fill our daily diet of news (the actual show is climate change and coping with population growth and migration): but that doesn't mean it can be allowed to continue and grow and strut its stuff on the public stage.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 07:08:49 PM
I'll try to give a scenario which illustrates why I think punching Nazis (or people who think they're Nazis, which may not be the same thing) is maybe not the right thing to do.
You have to assume that some of these nutters have kids at home. The kids are too young to understand what's going on but if you punch their dad, you're the one who looks like a hate filled nutter!
"What happened to daddy?"
"Daddy got his face broken by someone who thinks we should all love each other."

I tend to favour a 'Louis Theroux' style approach which is to try to understand people and ask them lots of questions. I think sometimes they'll come to the conclusion that their answers don't make sense.
There are people who have left the Westboro Baptists but they say that they came to a realisation through patient discussion rather than by being attacked.

You have to play the long game. I think punching Nazis just makes for more Nazis and strengthens the resolve of an 'us against them' attitude.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 07:13:22 PM
It is a bad ideology, I completely agree with that - but I cannot agree that every person who self-identifies as a Nazi is a bad person. Take, as a hypothetical example, a sixteen year old person who has been brought up as a Nazi, indoctrinated and brainwashed. Is he or she a bad person? I would say no - just a person infected with a bad ideology (and there are many similar ones, from Catholicism to statsm). So long as there is the opportunity to educate the bad doctrine away, the infected person is not intrinsically or irredeemably bad. A person only becomes bad, in my view, when they act badly. So long as there is the opportunity to change the way a person acts, that person is not unsalvageable.

Naziism, like so many evil ideas, is just that - an evil idea. It's an infection of the mind which we must strive to eradicate. I do not think that the way to eradicate this evil is to eradicate the infected. If history teaches us anything, it's that eradicating people based on their beliefs - based on any difference - only leads to more hatred and more bloodshed down the road.

I'll tell you the truth, I don't know what the answer is and I don't particularly like the idea of tolerating these evils until solutions can be found and implemented but I do feel, quite strongly, that the hard path of education and leadership through example is the preferable route. It might be tempting, and far easier, to burn the heretics but humanity really must start leaving this kind of thing behind.

(I do not for one second believe that you would advocate burning people at the stake (for example), Tordels, and I don't want you to think I'm suggesting such a thing. What I'm saying is that there are people who would support such a bloodthirsty (final) solution and that I think those people are utterly wrong. If humanity is to grow, it needs to grow up.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 07:21:04 PM
Nah, every Nazi is bad. By the very belief they support that ideology makes them a bad person.

Only good nazi is a dead nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 August, 2017, 07:24:14 PM
Unfortunately as much as I'm behind the words of the Dead Kennedys and Woody Guthrie, I think in practicality the best way is something in between.

That said as outlined in this article, the work of reaching out and rehabilitating is not something the current administration approves of:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/katharine-gorka-life-after-hate_us_59921356e4b09096429943b6
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 07:26:58 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 07:21:04 PM
Nah, every Nazi is bad. By the very belief they support that ideology makes them a bad person.

Only good nazi is a dead nazi.

As much as I can understand the emotion behind it I think this sort of blanket policy is idiotic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 August, 2017, 07:28:31 PM
I wasn't being serious but, eh, i'll stand by it. Fuck nazi's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 August, 2017, 07:38:48 PM
QuoteThe kids are too young to understand what's going on but if you punch their dad, you're the one who looks like a hate filled nutter!
"What happened to daddy?"
"Daddy got his face broken by someone who thinks we should all love each other."

There's a way to test this theory.  How popular is Nazism in modern Germany, and would it be more or less popular if we hadn't punched as many Nazis in the 1940's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 07:51:06 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 August, 2017, 07:38:48 PM
QuoteThe kids are too young to understand what's going on but if you punch their dad, you're the one who looks like a hate filled nutter!
"What happened to daddy?"
"Daddy got his face broken by someone who thinks we should all love each other."

There's a way to test this theory.  How popular is Nazism in modern Germany, and would it be more or less popular if we hadn't punched as many Nazis in the 1940's?

I think you're being facetious but I'll rise to it.
I think many German people's relationships with their past and their older relatives in the years following the war have been incredibly complex. I know of someone personally who says that her grandfather (in the Luftwaffe I think), while always saying that he knows the Nazis were wrong had a nagging sense of shame that Germany lost the war.
In a war situation I don't think there's much left to do but fight. War signals a failure of other, better solutions.

I'd ask - do you think Hitler would have lost support if more people had been punched at his rallies?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2017, 08:08:41 PM
Hitler would simply have lumped the Nazi-punchers in with the trade unionists, the communists and the Jews as enemies of the state intent on destroying Germany. Like all politicians, he'd never let a good crisis go to waste.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 August, 2017, 08:15:44 PM
I'm not being at all facetious.  I think that by the time of mass rallies it was too late.  I also think that the Nazis were not going to be stopped by public debate, and that extremists pretend to debate only to further their own position. 

The rise of the Nazis was a product of a people damaged by war, traumatized and sold easy answers.  They had limited information and were desperate.  Not many people supported Hitler because of his "kill everyone we regard as different" policy.  They voted for Hitler because of his "make Germany great again" policy.  Neo Nazis have mobile phones.  They are aware that the end point of their ideology is gas chambers and furnaces, and they welcome it.  They cannot be debated, because you're not going to provide the with any new information thats going to bring about an epiphany.  They already know your viewpoint, they just regard you as weak for not killing them in the same way they would happily kill you and everyone you care about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 August, 2017, 08:35:29 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 15 August, 2017, 08:15:44 PM
I'm not being at all facetious.  I think that by the time of mass rallies it was too late.  I also think that the Nazis were not going to be stopped by public debate, and that extremists pretend to debate only to further their own position. 

The rise of the Nazis was a product of a people damaged by war, traumatized and sold easy answers.  They had limited information and were desperate.  Not many people supported Hitler because of his "kill everyone we regard as different" policy.  They voted for Hitler because of his "make Germany great again" policy.  Neo Nazis have mobile phones.  They are aware that the end point of their ideology is gas chambers and furnaces, and they welcome it.  They cannot be debated, because you're not going to provide the with any new information thats going to bring about an epiphany.  They already know your viewpoint, they just regard you as weak for not killing them in the same way they would happily kill you and everyone you care about.

Well yes, these are the really scary fuckers but I think for every one of these there are 50 or 100 weak willed morons who are being dragged along.
You and I may know a bit of history but if you're an idiot who's just been given his first swastika t-shirt and sent a link to 'Nazis are great.com' you can soon have historical facts indoctrinised out of you.
Like I said, it's radicalisation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 09:37:46 PM
The facts are that in the '20 and early '30s the Sturmabteilung brownshirts won the 'street war' against the Communists and Social Democrats, their dominance in disruptive violence meaning that only Nazi rallies and marches went ahead, other political opposition parties struggled to be heard.

Perhaps if even more people had punched them then, things would have been different.

Of course back then, unlike now, people didn't have concrete evidence of the utter evil of the Nazis, they could still wear their period-equivalent MAGA hats and look plausibly sharp. So perhaps their opponents could be forgiven for not trying harder to kick the crap out of them. I don't think that excuse holds much water nowadays.

(Worth noting that Hitler promptly had the SA leaders killed in '34 when he didn't want to be associated with their violence, the very violence that had handed him power).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 August, 2017, 11:39:32 PM
Nazis are just a gang of stupid hooligans, but they do serve a purpose - let them get rid of the Communists. Later, we'll be able to control them. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29Mg6Gfh9Co)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 01:37:51 AM
Now I feel bad for my 'idiotic' extremist position on Nazis: no less a light than President Trump has confirmed that as well as bad people, there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville.  Good Nazis, probably just out for an evening stroll in their fashionable swastika regalia. But it's okay, David Duke, late of the KKK, thanked him for this endorsement on all our behalves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 16 August, 2017, 02:25:04 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 01:37:51 AM
Good Nazis, probably just out for an evening stroll in their fashionable swastika regalia.

Unless namechecked at Yad Vashem we'll just have to assume they have an architect's eye.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 August, 2017, 06:49:03 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 09:37:46 PM
The facts are that in the '20 and early '30s the Sturmabteilung brownshirts won the 'street war' against the Communists and Social Democrats, their dominance in disruptive violence meaning that only Nazi rallies and marches went ahead, other political opposition parties struggled to be heard.

Perhaps if even more people had punched them then, things would have been different.

Of course back then, unlike now, people didn't have concrete evidence of the utter evil of the Nazis, they could still wear their period-equivalent MAGA hats and look plausibly sharp. So perhaps their opponents could be forgiven for not trying harder to kick the crap out of them. I don't think that excuse holds much water nowadays.

(Worth noting that Hitler promptly had the SA leaders killed in '34 when he didn't want to be associated with their violence, the very violence that had handed him power).


Well let's fucking teach people this stuff then. I didn't know this.
Honestly, I think this stuff should be taught at school. I don't just mean as history but extremist beliefs and ideas should really be studied and examined in order to be debunked.
If we think an idea is bad and dangerous, surely it's better to bring that idea into the open and watch it wither in the light of rationality rather than to lock it in a box and say we'll punish or judge anyone who mentions it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 07:18:26 AM
And, as I have said before, the powers and rights of governments must be curtailed to parity with those of individuals. The habit of the state to initiate violence for whatever reason it deems necessary is by far the biggest threat to humanity existent today. Vote a Nazi "into power" and, as we have seen, and he or she will use that power for vile purposes. Limit the powers and rights of government and the danger is greatly reduced.

Education and equality.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 07:46:30 AM
No need for governments, these fine people here (https://youtu.be/P54sP0Nlngg) are going to clear the streets of  the "communist Jews and criminal niggers" that run everything. Then we can all live in stateless harmony.

I strongly advise watching that video, it has all the open expression of views you could ever want. Although I do accept that the occasional sinister music wasn't necessary, and selective editing is magic, you get more than enough straight to camera unedited lengthy declarations for everything to be absolutely crystal clear. Nazi tactics, Nazi objectives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 August, 2017, 07:50:27 AM
The second amendment, which Trump is of course an adamant supporter, actually requires for militias to form in defence of the democratic state in times of crisis.  Nazis and Confederates have a stated aim of destroying the democratic state with violence.  It is an American duty to punch Nazis and Thomas Jefferson says so.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 08:10:07 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 August, 2017, 06:49:03 AM
Well let's fucking teach people this stuff then. I didn't know this.
Honestly, I think this stuff should be taught at school. I don't just mean as history but extremist beliefs and ideas should really be studied and examined in order to be debunked.

I wasn't aware this stuff wasn't taught. In fact I regularly hear complaints that 'sexy' stuff like the rise of fascism, WWII and the Holocaust take up too much of school history curriculums. But then my school days were 30 years ago, and in another country.

For me the clearest indication of the value of denying fascists the freedom of the streets is England's experience: British fascism was effectiveky destroyed at Cable Street. If those people had stayed at home, not thown punches (and stones), and let Moseley's scum get on with their march unmolested, who's to say his crap wouldn't have gained the same kind of traction it did elsewhere. You can claim that the British character and inter-war experience was comparatively stony ground for their message and Moseley was a poor substitute for the European demagogues, but that's the beauty of hindsight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 August, 2017, 08:27:43 AM
Quote. Limit the powers and rights of government and the danger is greatly reduced.

The guy with the Confederate flag and the machine gun would agree.  Explain to me how the government getting less involved in this situation would make things better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:56:33 AM
Indeed - I can't follow your anti-State argument whenit cpmes to defending against Nazis and otehr extremists - what would happen is groups would form for good or ill, and in the vacuum of no one claiming an authoratitve power, thuse groups would.  You would then need to band together to claim a greater authority than said nutters, but if violence isnt your claim to power, all that is left is numbers, and a pretty good way to legitimise numbers is a voting system, whereby the powerless individual can combine his power into a statement - otherwise,mob rule is exactly what you would get. 

I don't think it is much of a coincidence that both Nazis and Islamic Extremists deny the rule of law and believe they have the right to take power.  The lack of a standing Government would be pure heaven to any extremist
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 August, 2017, 09:18:47 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 08:10:07 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 August, 2017, 06:49:03 AM
Well let's fucking teach people this stuff then. I didn't know this.
Honestly, I think this stuff should be taught at school. I don't just mean as history but extremist beliefs and ideas should really be studied and examined in order to be debunked.

I wasn't aware this stuff wasn't taught. In fact I regularly hear complaints that 'sexy' stuff like the rise of fascism, WWII and the Holocaust take up too much of school history curriculums. But then my school days were 30 years ago, and in another country.


Me neither - just about everything I know about history other than 'History of Medicine' and 'England 1815-1851' I learnt myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 August, 2017, 09:19:59 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 16 August, 2017, 09:18:47 AM
Me neither - just about everything I know about history other than 'History of Medicine' and 'England 1815-1851' I learnt myself.

(and most of the stuff I know about Victorian England I also learnt myself, probably inspired by Nemesis the Warlock Book IV and after that, Luther Arkwright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 09:22:13 AM
Forcibly opposing them yourself isn't the answer, looking to governments to oppose them isn't the answer... So assuming that letting Nazis get on with their plans for gathering enough support to commit their various genocides isn't what anyone here wants, what to do? Chat and a cup of tea and appeal to their better natures? (You can see in that Vice video I linked to what you'd have to deal with, and Lara Croft there was a prime Aryan specimen herself which had to confer an advantage).

Stand quietly at the side of the road looking disapproving and hope no-one tries to run you over?

Ignore them until they go away?

Appease them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 16 August, 2017, 09:37:54 AM
QuoteStand quietly at the side of the road looking disapproving and hope no-one tries to run you over?

Ignore them until they go away?

Appease them?

Ahem...

Look, its simple...once we live in a world without "government", after we've cleared away the corpses, people will just be nice to each other, 'cos the "government" won't be making them break the illegal "laws" the "government" writes with its "pens". Its natural law, or common law, or something, and easily explained with a (usually transport or vehicle based) metaphor.  Also, its not my job to come up with solution, gov'nor, its for everyone to solve the problem on their own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 August, 2017, 09:57:20 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 August, 2017, 12:10:47 PM
No.  How is it hypocritical to support punching a Nazi?  That would require that the act in some way goes against someone's stated beliefs or position on punching people.  It's entirely consistent with my belief that Nazi ideology should never again be allowed expression, and that anyone aligning themselves with Nazis deserves a good punch.  So whatever else it is, it ain't hypocrisy.

This is not an open discussion of conflicting views, this a demonstrable evil that does not deserve a hint of recognition. With Nazis we've already moved on from what is quite obviously 'the first best solution' (unfortunate resonances for that phrase) of engaging in reason and talk.  We're 80 years beyond that.

Again, I respect Prodigal's particular experience in this area, and his always-reasonable approach, and Sharky's determination to examine everything from first principles without being guided by the 'wisdom' of the herd, but I've thought long and hard about this and I believe the visual semantics of these utter c*nts being driven from their podiums is a positive thing in this world.

TB I genuinely appreciate where you are coming from but one question that springs to mind is when do you stop punching? Do you restrict it to card carrying Nazi's or export it to any ideology that supports political violence? I have worked with loyalists and republicans who have killed many times. Should I have considered punching them? I worked with Serbian nationalists during the 90's-should I have considered punching them?

What is the punching criteria?

Sorry if that sounds facetious-it's a genuine question.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 August, 2017, 10:07:19 AM
Following the car attack that took the life of one of the protesters, 31-year-old Heather Heyer, and injured 19 others, Cantwell showed no regret, much less remorse.  "I'd say it was worth it," Cantwell says. "The fact that nobody on our side died, I'd go ahead and call that points for us." (http://www.motherjones.com/media/2017/08/vice-news-just-released-chilling-must-watch-footage-from-behind-charlottesvilles-battle-lines/)

Let's all sit down and have a nice chat about it, eh? These people are not playing by our rules.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 August, 2017, 10:07:50 AM
BTW your Cable Street reference was in my mind all day yesterday as the chief counter-argument to any position on my part.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 August, 2017, 10:13:32 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 August, 2017, 10:07:19 AM
Following the car attack that took the life of one of the protesters, 31-year-old Heather Heyer, and injured 19 others, Cantwell showed no regret, much less remorse.  "I'd say it was worth it," Cantwell says. "The fact that nobody on our side died, I'd go ahead and call that points for us." (http://www.motherjones.com/media/2017/08/vice-news-just-released-chilling-must-watch-footage-from-behind-charlottesvilles-battle-lines/)

Let's all sit down and have a nice chat about it, eh? These people are not playing by our rules.

Any prerequisite to contentious dialogue requires voluntary engagement which admittedly might be a pipe dream where nazis are concerned. That having been said I spent 20 years facilitating discussion often with very unlikely chatting partners in Northern Ireland and some further a-field.

Sometimes seemingly mad things are possible. Sometimes. Maybe not here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2017, 10:14:05 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 August, 2017, 10:07:19 AM
Following the car attack that took the life of one of the protesters, 31-year-old Heather Heyer, and injured 19 others, Cantwell showed no regret, much less remorse.  "I'd say it was worth it," Cantwell says. "The fact that nobody on our side died, I'd go ahead and call that points for us." (http://www.motherjones.com/media/2017/08/vice-news-just-released-chilling-must-watch-footage-from-behind-charlottesvilles-battle-lines/)

Let's all sit down and have a nice chat about it, eh? These people are not playing by our rules.
These are not reasonable human beings, they care not for why they hate only that they may be allowed to. By going over and over the pointless 'system' farce again y'all are just ignoring the blatent issue that these jokers, these absolute monsters, care none for your reasoned debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 10:20:31 AM
I know you have far greater direct experience of this whole area Prodigal, and I know I should probably defer to you on it.  But I can't, so I'll try to give you answer.

Love 'em or hate 'em (mainly the latter) most extremist groups are fighting and killing for their corner. Our own local examples, Loyalists and Republicans, tick loads of boxes: intimidation, murder, criminality, racism and sectarianism, indoctrination etc. See many other nationalist groups. Their 'causes' may be twisted and their methods horrific, but usually at the root there's fear and self-preservation, a sense of self-worth, empowerment and an unhealthy dose of ignorance. And yet many have come back from that, sometimes the most unlikely folk turned out 'good'. And often there are shades of grey in there that permit that, legitimate grievances,  the possibility of acknowledgement of each opposing group's fears and misapprehensions and commonalities and mutual suffering, irrespective of political claims.

The difference for me with self-identifying Nazis is that they know exactly what they are subscribing to: it's there in black and white, an undeniable torrent of evidence. There can be no excuse: it's not an understandable response to ANY grievance, because its course has been explicitly charted.  When one of those neatly dressed gobshites gets in front of a microphone or megaphone, there's no mystery in what he's advocating: and a valid response to that is to drive him from his public platform without discussion or remorse. Make it clear that the world will not tolerate this specific ideology to find expression again.

The simple semiotics of a punch conveys that message.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 16 August, 2017, 10:27:53 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 10:20:31 AM
I know you have far greater direct experience of this whole area Prodigal, and I know I should probably defer to you on it.  But I can't, so I'll try to give you answer.

Love 'em or hate 'em (mainly the latter) most extremist groups are fighting and killing for their corner. Our own local examples, Loyalists and Republicans, tick loads of boxes: intimidation, murder, criminality, racism and sectarianism, indoctrination etc. See many other nationalist groups. Their 'causes' may be twisted and their methods horrific, but usually at the root there's fear and self-preservation, a sense of self-worth, empowerment and an unhealthy dose of ignorance. And yet many have come back from that, sometimes the most unlikely folk turned out 'good'. And often there are shades of grey in there that permit that, legitimate grievances,  the possibility of acknowledgement of each opposing group's fears and misapprehensions and commonalities and mutual suffering, irrespective of political claims.

The difference for me with self-identifying Nazis is that they know exactly what they are subscribing to: it's there in black and white, an undeniable torrent of evidence. There can be no excuse: it's not an understandable response to ANY grievance, because its course has been explicitly charted.  When one of those neatly dressed gobshites gets in front of a microphone or megaphone, there's no mystery in what he's advocating: and a valid response to that is to drive him from his public platform without discussion or remorse. Make it clear that the world will not tolerate this specific ideology to find expression again.

The simple semiotics of a punch conveys that message.

I mightn't agree with every last detail of that Tb but its a damn fine answer and gives me a lot to chew over.

Thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 August, 2017, 11:06:22 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 10:20:31 AM
The difference for me with self-identifying Nazis is that they know exactly what they are subscribing to: it's there in black and white, an undeniable torrent of evidence. There can be no excuse: it's not an understandable response to ANY grievance, because its course has been explicitly charted.

It's not just that, what puts Nazi/neo-Nazi/far-right extremists into a different category is that most groups, like the Loyalists and the Republicans, have a belief (mistaken or not) that they have been treated badly. At its root is usually something you can engage with.

The far right's grievance is that they have been treated badly only in so far that they have been denied their right to treat others badly, or that their position of privilege has been eroded by efforts to ensure that the Other is no longer treated badly. Their position explicitly requires that they be afforded superior status over other groups.

There's no room for negotiation in that, because it's an absolutist position. Any movement towards their position automatically validates theirs, and invalidates yours:

"OK... let's say that hanging black people and beating Jewish people to death is a red line. What's the minimum amount of prejudice you want to be allowed to express against non-white, non-straight, non-abled-bodied people?

"Non-lethal violence? Mmmm. No, I'm not sure we can agree to that. How about public verbal abuse? Would that be enough?"

"No? Tell you what, let's split the difference and go for segregation, then!"

Compromise! Everybody wins!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 August, 2017, 12:00:46 PM
I think we're all agreed that the Nazi ideology is despicable.
The question for me is how far some of these people are entrenched in that ideology and whether they can be pulled out of it. I think that if it is possible to pull people out of it or change their minds then that's preferable to violence.
If it's not possible the I guess violence is the only way. But it feels like failure.

Oh, and getting back to education - my history lessons didn't even touch on this stuff. What I know is from documentaries, films and books.
In fact we were never taught politics at all - not even how our own parliament works!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 12:43:40 PM
This idea that a government which is barred from instigating violence does not equate to a weak pacifist stance.

Violence in defence is always valid and of course if you feel you need a government then its First Duty must be the protection of the people.

It is the prevention of governments from instigating violence in pursuit of its own interests that I advocate. Nazis are undoubtedly nasty, but they're not the only nasty people in the world. Take away the "right" of governments to instigate violence, except in defence of the lives, rights and property of the people, and we take away the danger of future Hitlers who, whilst they may still conceivably get themselves elected, will find themselves powerless to attack anybody with "legitimate" government power.

If one supports the idea that governments can use whatever force they want, against whomever they like for whatever purpose they think fit, one is leaving the opportunity for Holocaust-level abuse wide open.  That door must be closed, not as a single panacea but as part of a wider approach covering as many areas of society as possible.

You can ban Nazis if you like but they will only re-emerge under a different name. Libertarianism allows for the fact that there will always be bad people in the world and strives to take away the tools which allow them to commit atrocities. Statists take the hand-waving position that, so long as we make sure we always give the correct people the power of life and death over us, everything will be fine.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 August, 2017, 01:22:54 PM
I base my attitude to how we should treat Nazis on the fine example of Cable Street and the reaction of the Blues Brothers to Illinois nazis (almost posted a link to clip but decided it may be a bit tasteless after the events of the weekend.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 August, 2017, 01:27:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 12:43:40 PM

Violence in defence is always valid

Isn't that what they think they are doing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 01:27:33 PM
Isn't the problem that as far as your Nazi or Religious extremist is concerned, "life, rights and property" clause can easily be extended to cover whatever genocide you fancy?  "We have to use violence on these people becausue they want to take away our "right" to practice our Fundamentalist religion" or "these foreigners want to take/destroy our property/lives"

edit: What Proudhuff said
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 01:31:16 PM
Quote from: Prodigal2 on 16 August, 2017, 10:27:53 AM
I mightn't agree with every last detail of that Tb but its a damn fine answer and gives me a lot to chew over.

Likewise, Prodigal. I know that you are right, that dialogue and engagement are the only way to make progress with extremists, and that setting up absolutes of 'evil' for humans is a fool's game. I also strongly disapprove of advocating violence or censorship, both usually being counterproductive.

However, the clarity with which the Nazi ideology can be viewed in the light of history makes it very hard for me to see it as anything other than an exception to my normal way of thinking. I can imagine myself as an extreme loyalist, seeing uppity popish bog-trotters intent on destroying the expression of my identity, or a hard-line Israeli, or a disaffected third-generation Moroccan in the banlieues looking to violence for a sense of agency:  I can abhor it, but I can see how people end up there, and maybe how you could one day carve out some compromise, some fix. 

As Jim explains better than I could, I just can't see a middle ground with people who - with all the evidence before them - define themselves in terms of the extermination of their inferiors. It's the nature of the aspiration, the transparency of it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 03:02:37 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 16 August, 2017, 01:27:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 12:43:40 PM

Violence in defence is always valid

Isn't that what they think they are doing?

My apologies.

Proportionate physical violence in defence of physical violence is always valid. Physical violence in defence of non-physical violence is not valid.

If someone thinks I don't deserve to live because I'm a white male I have no right to punch them for expressing that opinion - and if I do I must face the consequences. If, on the other hand, that person tries to kill me because I'm a white male, I have every right to use as much force as necessary to stop them, which right I can pass on to or share with third party protectors, be they government agents, private contractors or fellow citizens/volunteers.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2017, 03:16:54 PM
Theres no point pondering on garbage hypothetical situations like white genocide Shark when there are actual racial supremacists calling for racial segragation and purging of POC's and queer people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 04:08:53 PM
I can't claim to be gay so I didn't think it was proper to use that as an example. However, if it makes the argument more acceptable to you, I'm willing to pretend:

If someone thinks I don't deserve to live because I'm gay I have no right to punch them for expressing that opinion - and if I do I must face the consequences. If, on the other hand, that person tries to kill me because I'm gay, I have every right to use as much force as necessary to stop them, which right I can pass on to or share with third party protectors, be they government agents, private contractors or fellow citizens/volunteers.

Better?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 04:18:46 PM
So who is responsible for investigating, pursuing and prosecuting the citizens who gang together to kill in the name of Islam or white supremacy?  Do I have to contract that out, or can I do it myself - will all the various contractors/volunteers share information? Do I really have to wait until I am dead before responding - what if they are just planning, or inciting others to do so on their behalf?

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 04:08:53 PM
I can't claim to be gay so I didn't think it was proper to use that as an example. However, if it makes the argument more acceptable to you, I'm willing to pretend:

If someone thinks I don't deserve to live because I'm gay I have no right to punch them for expressing that opinion - and if I do I must face the consequences. If, on the other hand, that person tries to kill me because I'm gay, I have every right to use as much force as necessary to stop them, which right I can pass on to or share with third party protectors, be they government agents, private contractors or fellow citizens/volunteers.

Better?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 04:23:53 PM
Seriously? You think that barring a government from instigating violence automatically means the eradication of laws, police and courts?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 August, 2017, 04:43:03 PM
Unless those bodies have powers to levy taxation and enforce its collection, probably. If you have to pay cops (for example) directly it's little different from a protection racket; if you're waiting on voluntary contributions, good luck. And as we've been here before I won't ask how a series of bodies with those powers differs from a government, except in scale.

But look, I'm really not starting all that again Sharky. Your position re non-defensive violence is a noble one, and one I wish I could share. I would note that we are talking about punching: painful, potentially dangerous but essentially as much symbolic as harmful: it's even the basis of several sports, which shooting people or running them over are definitely not. If people were advocating shooting unarmed Nazis, I'd be right with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 05:03:21 PM
Thanks, Tordels. You are, as ever, the voice of reason.

I think most if not all of us regard the existence of ideologies like Naziism as a shameful stain on the collective soul of humanity and would wish such horrid movements didn't exist. We all have ideas how to get rid of them and I'd like to end on that note rather than the usual round of me trying to explain how Austrian economic theory works.

Down with Fascism (and such)!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2017, 04:23:53 PM
Seriously? You think that barring a government from instigating violence automatically means the eradication of laws, police and courts?

Where do I say that?  I'm asking how the reduction in Governments power allows such investigation and control to be better handled.

If you accept violence in defence of certain commonly held rights (to life and property as big examples), how does it matter if  it is Government or some other group, and if it is in the hands of individuals and collectives, how do they do the job more efficiently than a single entity - how would you manage to over see such undertakings as defending against plots from extremists without an over arching "control" that could similarly be abused?

I agree that the Government shouldnt have power to visit violence on me if I abide by the commonly held laws - If I dont go out to hurt others or steal their stuff, or put at risk lives and "stuff" by my recklessness or negligence.  I'd like a world where there was more accountability, but I think as we have moved towards a more libertarian and less statist world things have got worse, not better in that regard - the US rapes the world to serve business and economic interests that are much harder to hold to account because the real decisions are being made by the unelected - I'm all for reforming Governments to stop such abuse of power.  I just don;t see how handing power to people to govern themselves wouldnt inevitably mean that those same people with an interest in power would have even greater access to the instruments of control - Without a clear "democratic" process to see whos hands are on those instruments, what seems like freedom could just as easily (and in my view more easily) be abused as the current system
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 August, 2017, 08:08:44 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PMI'm asking how the reduction in Governments power allows such investigation and control to be better handled.

(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/054/349/e5a.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 16 August, 2017, 08:13:56 PM
I am saying UK and US governments are so shite, US got Trump and what the hell happens with Brexit?! I kept see Brexit this, and Brexit that in media almost every day!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2017, 09:01:36 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PM

I'm asking how the reduction in Governments power allows such investigation and control to be better handled.


You might be asking that now (and the answer is that such things would be handled in a more humane and fairer way) but in your previous post you asked,

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 04:18:46 PM

So who is responsible for investigating, pursuing and prosecuting the citizens who...

(My emphasis)


The implication here is that there can be no recognisable form of policing or judicial process without the current government monopoly. This is not true.

You later add,

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 04:18:46 PM

Do I really have to wait until I am dead before responding...


Of course not. What I propose is limiting government, and its monopolies, to common or natural human law levels. Limited power is not the same as powerlessness and does not lead to disconnection of already integrated services or general decay of inter-agency cooperation..

To oversimplify the idea myself, I want a police force (and government, if we must) that can only step in when there is a good reason to do so, when people are threatened - which is what most people believe we have right now but which I can say, from direct personal experience, we do not.


Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PM

...how does it matter if  it is Government or some other group...


This is the crux of the problem. Government can write legislation and present it as Law. Not just Law but Law which is equal or even superior to common or natural human law. Thus a Fascist government can pass legislation allowing the legal construction and operation of anything from television stations to death camps. As part of the machinery of state, police and courts are compelled by that legislation to not only tolerate such things but also actively protect and even serve such things.

Common or natural human law, which is fundamental to all praxeology, outlaws murder except in the most extreme cases of self-defence. Legislation authorising the construction and operation of death camps, then, is fundamentally invalid. If the government monopolised services swear allegiance to the government or head of state, their allegiance, and therefore the rules by which they are bound, are necessarily fluid and in jeopardy of being hijacked by a bloodthirsty government at any time. Perhaps the simplest change to the current system that could be made, and one which I feel would be welcome and is a necessary step forward, would be to change the oaths made by public servants and officials from swearing allegiance to the Queen and/or her government to swearing allegiance to the people. This would create a minimal, largely symbolic but nevertheless important firewall between an abusive government and the people.


Of course, the death camp is the extreme example but simply authorising police to chase down and forcibly arrest a driver with a faulty light is example enough. A faulty light might be dangerous but so long as no actual loss, harm or damage has been caused there is no natural law need or authorisation to initiate violence against the driver. In such a circumstance, the only lawful course is to request the driver with the faulty light to stop and advise them to repair it - which right each and every one of us has and which many of us have used ourselves. (For example, many of us have flashed our lights at other drivers who may have forgotten to turn on their headlamps but few, if any of us, have chased those drivers down, forced them to a halt and taken their money or vehicle away from them as punishment.)

But I stray from the point, which is the current asymmetry of rights and powers between the government and its mechanisms and the people. Most if not all of you believe that government is necessary, I do not but that's unimportant for this discussion. The question is, do you want a government that can arbitrarily decide that you are its enemy and bring all its machinery to bear against you for whatever reason it legislates/magics into existence or do you want a government bound by basic human laws?

If we must have a government, then I want the latter kind.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 17 August, 2017, 10:22:25 AM
A great sharing of opinions on this subject and a reflection of this place as a whole-this really is one of the best places on the inter-web. If I had met you fine folk a few years back I would seriously have liked to talk to you about a job role (TB you have missed your vocation entirely fella).

Reading back over I would like to perhaps clarify one point. I have been responsible for facilitating quite a bit of stuff down the years where compromise was the goal. However I heartily agree with the statement that you cannot compromise with nazis. I would talk with them but compromise would never be my goal.

On the subject of a limited violent response, say a single punch to "punchtuate" an entirely understandable moral abhorrence, my only observation is that violence tends to escalate very, very quickly perhaps beyond original intent. One punch conceivably could lead to spiraling life threatening violence in a very short space of time (In America this can also involve assault rifles that came free with your morning breakfast cereal).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2017, 01:40:29 PM
With all respect LS, if you want to insinuate meaning, I'm at a loss to argue that.

Nowhere do I say or even imply we wouldn't have laws - I'm saying how do you make the laws apply without the concensus of an over arching agreed authority.  I am asking who is responsible for making such happen if Government has reduced/removed powers due to them being handed to "the people" so I have not changed my question at all - if there is no over arching "authority" that is recognised by some common law, how do you organise the oversight and prosecution of dangerous extremists, the kind of people who would welcome power being put in (or closer to) their hands?  It seems to me your problem with Government is the poweers you ascribe to it, rather than Government itself, though if I follow you, you seem to believe that Government inevitably will take these powers because it becomes bad spontaneously, and all the good people working there are caught in the wheels of empowerment.  Your answer (to empower even more people) might seem counter productive if that is the case.

You explicitly (no assuming here) state you would prefer no Government, so the original question stands - if it isnt the responsibility of a Gvt (because you would ultimately prefer not to have one), then who does these things?  I'm not implying you dont want laws and protection, I am asking how you organise such a system effectively (both times)

I agree Government should alway be made to be accountable to the people, and in a generality, it is this way - at least to the degree that most people feel it is the "best" solution and enough voters arent spooked to teh point the system falls apart - the person with the faulty tail light is going to be stopped and asked to get it fixed in my experience; he isnt going to be carted off. 

What you seem to want is what I and most people would like - a system where you cant abuse the citizenship, or your power or position and work directly for teh benefit of the people - now, we have seen a move from that ideal, and that is directly due to the thinking that Government isnt important and is an obstacle to "good business". Such moves create a very real danger of emboldening extremists and bringing the system into such a state as it isnt viewed as working for the people and we get what - Trump and Brexit seem to me to be the "fuck the system" vote, as opposed to a "fix the system" vote that we desperately need


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2017, 09:01:36 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PM

I'm asking how the reduction in Governments power allows such investigation and control to be better handled.


You might be asking that now (and the answer is that such things would be handled in a more humane and fairer way) but in your previous post you asked,

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 04:18:46 PM

So who is responsible for investigating, pursuing and prosecuting the citizens who...

(My emphasis)


The implication here is that there can be no recognisable form of policing or judicial process without the current government monopoly. This is not true.

You later add,

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 04:18:46 PM

Do I really have to wait until I am dead before responding...


Of course not. What I propose is limiting government, and its monopolies, to common or natural human law levels. Limited power is not the same as powerlessness and does not lead to disconnection of already integrated services or general decay of inter-agency cooperation..

To oversimplify the idea myself, I want a police force (and government, if we must) that can only step in when there is a good reason to do so, when people are threatened - which is what most people believe we have right now but which I can say, from direct personal experience, we do not.


Quote from: Leigh S on 16 August, 2017, 08:02:05 PM

...how does it matter if  it is Government or some other group...


This is the crux of the problem. Government can write legislation and present it as Law. Not just Law but Law which is equal or even superior to common or natural human law. Thus a Fascist government can pass legislation allowing the legal construction and operation of anything from television stations to death camps. As part of the machinery of state, police and courts are compelled by that legislation to not only tolerate such things but also actively protect and even serve such things.

Common or natural human law, which is fundamental to all praxeology, outlaws murder except in the most extreme cases of self-defence. Legislation authorising the construction and operation of death camps, then, is fundamentally invalid. If the government monopolised services swear allegiance to the government or head of state, their allegiance, and therefore the rules by which they are bound, are necessarily fluid and in jeopardy of being hijacked by a bloodthirsty government at any time. Perhaps the simplest change to the current system that could be made, and one which I feel would be welcome and is a necessary step forward, would be to change the oaths made by public servants and officials from swearing allegiance to the Queen and/or her government to swearing allegiance to the people. This would create a minimal, largely symbolic but nevertheless important firewall between an abusive government and the people.


Of course, the death camp is the extreme example but simply authorising police to chase down and forcibly arrest a driver with a faulty light is example enough. A faulty light might be dangerous but so long as no actual loss, harm or damage has been caused there is no natural law need or authorisation to initiate violence against the driver. In such a circumstance, the only lawful course is to request the driver with the faulty light to stop and advise them to repair it - which right each and every one of us has and which many of us have used ourselves. (For example, many of us have flashed our lights at other drivers who may have forgotten to turn on their headlamps but few, if any of us, have chased those drivers down, forced them to a halt and taken their money or vehicle away from them as punishment.)

But I stray from the point, which is the current asymmetry of rights and powers between the government and its mechanisms and the people. Most if not all of you believe that government is necessary, I do not but that's unimportant for this discussion. The question is, do you want a government that can arbitrarily decide that you are its enemy and bring all its machinery to bear against you for whatever reason it legislates/magics into existence or do you want a government bound by basic human laws?

If we must have a government, then I want the latter kind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2017, 03:31:32 PM
Laws would be discovered and applied through courts (not governmental diktats), as traditionally happened.

That is to say, arguments are aired in courts and settled by legal experts (judges). The government does not have to decide who these judges are, just as it does not decide who are the best doctors, architects or engineers. The education and experience of individuals, and the acceptance of the parties involved, decides on who can be a judge. The government also has no blanket laws which must be enforced equally in every case. Laws are discovered from the unique facts of individual cases and remedies tailored to each individual circumstance based on unique facts and previous cases. The courts become independent of government control and are de-monopolised, although there is nothing to prevent previous or future relevant legislation being taken into account as an advisory source. Under independent courts, law and law making returns to the people and the judges.

The overarching agreed authority you seek is provided by the courts, the law and society itself. In the case of dangerous criminals, the police would look after them until trial, much the same as happens today, and there will still be prisons and remedies. The big difference is that the victim will take centre stage and the most important factor will be restitution, not punishment.

Under our current nonsensical system, the victim suffers twice - once under the crime itself and then under taxation (theft) the victim is expected to pay for the criminal's incarceration, punishment and/or rehabilitation. Under Libertarian punishment, the perpetrator is expected to not only recompense the victim but to also pay for their own punishment, thus easing the burden on society and not punishing the victim further.

And yes, you are correct when you say that I believe government will always become bad. It has to, it's in its nature. Imagine, for a moment, that I could make you the Ruler of the World. What would you do with that power? You would, no doubt, wish to do all manner of good and worthy things. And how would you pay for all these noble projects? Through taxation*, probably.

But say that just one person decides he doesn't like one of your projects, or doesn't want to contribute to the upkeep of your palace or the wages of your agents and refuses to pay up. What do you do then? If you let him off you risk other people getting the same idea and the failure of your worthy projects. You therefore have to bring force to bear, you have to do something you would never do in your private life, you have to initiate violence. It is your only choice; to use force or to let it go.

Government has violence at its very core and cannot exist without it. I am not talking about organisation here, private companies organise huge and disparate concerns perfectly well for 365 days every year without threatening violence** on their staff or customers or locking them up and stealing their stuff to keep them in line. The organisational skills of human beings are apparent in every aspect of our lives and violence or the threat of violence is not needed to make large organisations run smoothly. No, it's not the organisational side of things that's wrong - it's the violent side.

The answer, in my view, is not to gather around six hundred people (usually the most corrupt, power-hungry sociopaths we can find) together and give them (somehow) rights and powers that the rest of us do not possess and then let them "run the country" because they're going to make a pig's ear of it. At least, they always have until now and I see no sign that these people want to stop ruling and start serving or pass up the opportunity to feather their own nests at our expense.

If you want to have six hundred flawed people in charge of you then that's fine - just don't allow them more rights and powers than you have because they'll abuse them. As we have seen, they must abuse them or they cannot govern. If you want to give up your right to say "no" to these people then you are perfectly free to do so - but what right does anyone have to force me to give up that right also? So long as I am causing no actual loss, harm or damage, so long as I am acting honestly and without violence, what right does anyone have to rule me and to force me to act against my will or conscience?

When I employ violence, I must be stopped and pay restitution. When the government employs violence, it must be treated exactly the same because otherwise there are two standards of justice and no such thing as the rule of law.

Treating the government as a group of ordinary people abiding by the same laws and adhering to the same responsibilities as the rest of us, which is exactly what it is, is the best "fix" the system could hope for.

*Although there are other ways which do not rely on taxation, which can of worms we have previously discussed on this thread.

**Although governments can bring violence to bear on workers for their own spurious reasons, mainly to protect the criminally run economy through strike bans, minimum wage edicts and demands for payment (for licenses and such) and what have you, but that's a separate can of worms again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2017, 03:51:07 PM
I think the root problem I ahve is that you see Government only having vilene as a fall back to enforcement, whereas I see the very nature of enforcement is to ahve violene to back it up.  hyou want to remove enforcement, fine.  At that point, how do you organise a society where a vast number of people will say, "I'm doing my own thing, thanks" - the Peoples Couts would still need to have a threat of incarceration and "violence" - the guy who mugs me has to pay me back with interest, but he doesnt, or he does so by committing more crimes... Government or none, someone is going to have to address the abuse of the new system as much as they need to address the abuses of the existing one
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2017, 05:08:37 PM
Once violence has been caused (your mugging) or threatened (threat of mugging) defensive and proportionate violence is automatically justified - it is the initiation of violence that is outlawed. The defensive violence does not have to happen immediately but can happen later through arrest, for example.

A society full of people doing their own thing is very similar to the one we have today and is actually what Libertarians want - nobody being forced to do anything against their will or conscience. Left to their own devices, people tend to cooperate and help one another. Take that terrible block fire in London a few weeks ago; private citizens mobilised immediately to bring help, aid and succour to the victims whilst the state dithered, wrung its hands, covered its arse and generally faffed about. So when people ask, "who's going to do this thing without government permission or enforcement?" the answer is simple; people are. People do it now, people will still do it then.

Societies, like most complex systems in nature, are largely self-organising. People love to organise things and will continue to do so, and even thrive, in a free society.

Enforcement, in my view, is a relatively new  and wholly heinous trend. When I was growing up it was the role of the police to uphold the law but slowly that role has mutated into the enforcement of legislation. People do not generally need to have law and order enforced upon them. The vast majority of people understand how to behave, and in my personal experience I have walked alone through villages, towns and cities all over without being mugged or attacked.

Yes, of course there are some people who act badly and there always will be. Libertarianism understands and acknowledges this while statism tries to legislate it away. Libertarianism takes the view that the vast majority of people are decent and cooperative while statism tries to convince you that the world is primarily staffed by horrible, evil bastards from whom you must be segregated and protected, providing justification for their violence of enforcement.

Just the word itself gives me the shivers - enforcement. Really? Isn't this supposed to be a free country? Aren't we supposed to value our liberties? Didn't our ancestors spill their blood and guts all over Europe to protect these things? Are they, after all, nothing but illusions and empty promises given the lie by our casual acceptance of Orwellian labels like law enforcement? *shudder*

There will always be people who abuse the system, this is inevitable. At the moment, the biggest abusers work within the system because we have given them leave to do so by ignoring their appropriated superhuman rights and powers. The way to stop people abusing the system in such a fashion is to strip away these superhuman rights and powers and make everyone equal under natural human law. There will still be abusers, as I said, and there always will be - but they abuse then at their own risk and without the protection of a superior position.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2017, 05:36:31 PM
But when the mugger is caught and refuses to pay me back or comply with whatever alternative to incarceration in place (he can't be incarcerated, because he can;t afford to pay for it and no one else should be made to fund that) - what then?

I think people can very well organise for a Grenfell style event, or for Comic Relief or for a surprise party - I agree that people are generally good.  but what you propose is people deal witha Grenfell every day - they dont step in for the short period that the State dithers, they have to dedicate themselves to this daily.

I Liberteranism is possible, it would surely have happened, either through rich benefactors stepping in to replace state education or welfare, or via charity.  You could then argue that people dont because tax, but give people back their tax and they might fund the local hospital, but would they fund drug addiction services or planned parenting?  I would say, look to America for your answer - they are further down a Libertarian route - does it appeal? I know my view on that
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2017, 06:04:35 PM
Libertarian prisons are more akin to workhouses and incarceration a form of indentured servitude. The convict is put in a place where there is the opportunity to work off a debt. If he refuses to compensate you as lawfully ordered, a loan could be taken out in the convict's name and paid to you. The convict is then indentured until he's earned enough to pay off the loan and cover his keep. The amount of time he spends locked up is entirely in his own hands, he can work hard or be a slacker, and you do not suffer at all.

As for emergencies, there is nothing to stop permanent organisations being formed. There will still be fire services, hospitals, ambulances and suchlike, these things will not evaporate. They will be funded differently, that's all. It doesn't mean that every emergency will be met by do-gooders in pyjamas and a tin hat who rock up without any training on their days off.

The Native American Nations existed in a libertarian fashion for centuries, rubbing along in a largely cooperative anarchic way before statists turned up with legislation, infected blankets and Gatling guns. Anarchism is nothing new and, I believe, the default setting of humanity.

It doesn't take a rich benefactor to educate children. In the olden days, children of all ages shared classrooms. The teacher would concentrate on the younger students, teaching them how to learn through the trivium and, later, the quadrivium (the seven liberal arts), and setting the curriculum for the older students, who would help each other learn. It was an effective method and quite cheap and there's nothing to stop communities from reviving this method or constructing their own. This idea that nothing can be done without first securing a rich investor is a modern malaise and part of the learned helplessness with which we are all infected.

I would say that the United States is a lot further away from libertarianism than even the UK is. They have a tyranny rising over there which seems breathtaking in its scope and depth and threatens to ensnare us all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2017, 11:10:36 PM
Male fragility is a nice term I just heard that seems useful to get into the heads of these white supremacists and possibly also your extremists of all factions who feel traditional power structures being removed by modernity.

If you have something, then having that taken from you, or believing someone is taking it from you, creates a visceral reaction.  If you haven't had privilege, you can fight for it, but you don't have it so you don't fear the situation of not having it - if you aren't on the top, you can agitate for a slice of that, but you know you won't be any worse off without it, because you have nothing and survive day to day.  If you are insecure in your individual ability to deserve a privileged place, you are gonig to be very fragile about anything that would ask you to justify your advantage beyond "my ancestors built this for me".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2017, 11:06:58 AM
Thought some of you might find this essay interesting...

Quote

How Welfare States Make Us Less Civilized

by Per Bylund

Throughout history, the state has justified itself on the grounds that it is necessary to protect us from others whose habits and beliefs — we are meant to believe — are dangerous. For millennia, this fiction was easy to maintain because most people interacted so little with people outside their nearly autarkic — and therefore impoverished — communities.

But, with the rise of industrialization and international trade in recent centuries, the state's claim that it is necessary to keep us "safe" from outsiders has become increasingly undermined. Much of this is thanks to the fact that in order to benefit from the market, one must engage in activities designed to serve others and anticipate their needs. As a result, trade increases our understanding for both members of our community and even the stranger; it also makes us realize that other people are much like us. Even if they speak strange languages or have odd customs and traditions.

The Market Order and Civilization

This is in essence Say's Law, or the Law of Markets, which states that in the market we produce in order to trade with others so that we can thereby, indirectly, satisfy our own wants: our demand for goods in the market is constituted by our supply of goods to it. In order to effectively satisfy other people's wants we need to not only communicate with them, but understand them.

If we don't, then we're wasting our productive efforts for a random result. Obviously, we'd benefit personally from learning what other people want, both their present wants and anticipated future wants, and then produce it for them.

So far so good. Most people (except for Keynesians) grasp this very simple point about the market — and how it contributes to civilization and peaceful interaction. But all people aren't saints, so good, hard-working people risk being taken advantage of as they have nothing to set against such actions. Without a central power such as the state, who will protect us from such people?

Answer: the web of voluntary transactions aligns people's interests. In the market, "bad people" are not only defrauding, stealing from, or robbing a single person or family. They are, in effect, attacking the community of interdependent producers and network of traders.

Imagine a town with a baker who specializes in baking bread that people in the town like, but that he doesn't necessarily fancy himself. Instead, he sells the bread in order to earn money that he uses to buy from others what he truly wants. Others similarly specialize their production to produce what others want, including the baker, so that they can use part of their income to buy bread. When a thief steals from this baker, he negatively affects the town's bread supply — and thereby also makes the baker unable to effectively demand goods from others. This affects a lot of people, not only the baker: it affects all people who wanted to but now can't buy bread and all those who expected to but no longer can sell their goods to the baker.

The network of exchanges and the specialized production for others thus creates a community of interdependent producers whose interests are generally aligned: they have all increased their productive effort by supplying a single good that is in high demand, and thereby made everybody better off. But it also means it is in their own interest that no one is unjustly treated and disadvantaged, whether the victim of a "bad person" is an existing or potential supplier of goods they desire or existing or potential customer of the goods they produce.

They all benefit from this order, since their productive efforts are used where they do most good. But they are also all in it together — they are all affected if things go wrong. It is not strange, then, to see how towns used to spontaneously organize to deal with crime.

Robbing the baker involves not only a robber and his victim: an attack on one is an attack on the community. The robber has by his very actions chosen to not partake in community — to be an outcast.

Effect of the Welfare State

What's happened over the course of the last century with the rise of the democratic welfare state is that these market-based bonds between people within a community have been severed. With the growing state, more and more people have found positions in the economy and society where they do not need to serve others. In other words, the state has made it possible to live off what other people produce rather than contribute to satisfying everybody's wants.

As these bonds between people are severed, the threshold to engage in criminal behavior becomes lower. But more importantly, as people do not need to rely on their ability to satisfy the wants of others, they don't understand other people: they have no incentive to learn about their needs and wants, and they have nothing to gain personally from satisfying them. In other words, there is no interdependence and therefore less of a reason to stay away from destructive behavior.

This is exactly what we've seen over the course of the past century when the very large state has replaced civil society with centralized systems and market with power. The problem is that when people stop learning about each other, it is easier to resort to conflict rather than cooperation — and it is much easier to see other people as obstructions to your own happiness. Getting rid of them thus increases your share of the (now diminishing) pie, and using and exploiting others for your own benefit appears a means toward satisfaction of one's own wants.

We increasingly see examples of this type of thinking among entrepreneurs and those who want to be entrepreneurs. They start businesses not as a means to make a living — that is, to indirectly benefit themselves according to the Law of Markets — but in order to do "what they like." It's a lifestyle choice that many seem to think they have a "right" to make.

Even worse, sometimes they even blame their entrepreneurial failure on "society" for not being supportive enough and not appreciating what they're offering at the price they're demanding.

This is exactly backward: to be able to do what you like for a living is a privilege that you can enjoy only if you, by doing so, satisfy others. If you create value for others, you gain value for yourself.

In this type of society where the bonds between people are weakening, it is not strange that people find the idea of a decentralized, spontaneous order outrageously naïve. Competition is here not the sound striving to better serve others by trying different and differentiated ways of satisfying wants, but rather a zero-sum game where there are winners and losers. In this situation, whoever is willing to cut corners, lie, and deceive is immediately better off. The incentives, in other words, are for destroying value and to prioritize short-term gains even if they come at high long-term costs — because those costs may be another's burden. It's the very opposite of civilization and an existence that will, if left unchecked and unchanged, eventually degenerate into a Lord of the Flies- type tribalism.

It is not strange that people have a hard time understanding the harmony argument for markets in a time when the state has alienated them from productive interdependence as explained by Say's Law. The market's informal, spontaneous cooperation for mutual benefit has been replaced by a statist mindset, which seeks guarantees — and finds it only in formal power.

But it should be obvious from the discussion above that this is not in any sense a guarantee — especially against bad behavior. It is the opposite. Yet it should be recognized that the market also offers no guarantee, strictly speaking. But do we need one when people's interests are aligned? All we need to trust is that people do what is good for themselves.

That's hardly naïve.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 18 August, 2017, 11:45:59 AM
That alls eems very logical, but does predispose to assume that the vast majority of users of the welfare state abuse it as a life style choice - sure, a good number may, but they are vastly outweighed by people who transition through it, either rarely or less so, as a means to gain temporary support between employment.

By all means attempt to target those who use the "safety net" as a web to live on, but A: don't assume that net isn;t vital to millions of others and B: that some of those people "caught in the web" would be very hard to actively integrate into mainstream employment due to learning or mental health difficulties or other issues such as addiction and abuse. 

As ever, proposing a new system or solution can seem very easy when you assume everyone else is starting from the same "reasonable" view of life that most people operate by, but whatever the system, tehre will be people unable to navigate it due to disadvantages, and willing to game it due to sociopathic tendencies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2017, 12:09:11 PM
Indeed. No system can be perfect.

Title: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 August, 2017, 06:54:55 PM
I've been umming and awing about this all afternoon.  Potentially this could spiral out of control since at present it looks like some of our's and our American brethren's 'democratically elected representatives' (careful now Sharky!) seem to suffer from permanent 'foot in mouth' disease.  That said, I do wonder if our political thread needs a light hearted cousin of sorts (in this case, perhaps mutated offspring of Donald Trump and Theresa May) where we could revel in some of the choicer moments, or perhaps cower in fear at the thought of the awesome power these muppets wield!

Anyway.  For me Jeremy Hunt has set a new standard this week.  He decides to question Hawkings' ability to appropriately critically evaluate scientific evidence.  Not content with shooting himself in the foot on this point he continues to try to undermine the eminent, world renowned scientist by questioning his integrity and suggesting that he is being mendacious in questioning the direction of travel of health policy in this country.  Do we have a winner for the political equivalent of the Darwin Awards?
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Something Fishy on 19 August, 2017, 07:08:28 PM
Yup he proved what a great A turd he is with this one  :lol:
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2017, 09:16:29 PM
Geez you guys, I don't know who to side with in this: the most famous boffin in the world, or a man who insists that he didn't write a book with his name on it and who has killed 3 times more people than the IRA ever managed.
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Something Fishy on 19 August, 2017, 09:50:33 PM
Tricky one isn't it.
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Goaty on 19 August, 2017, 09:57:12 PM
(http://viz.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Screen-Shot-2015-06-02-at-16.43.48.png)
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Richard on 19 August, 2017, 11:15:36 PM
 :lol:  :D
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: sheridan on 20 August, 2017, 12:42:27 AM
 :D

p.s. great idea to have a more light-hearted political thread.
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Colin YNWA on 20 August, 2017, 08:10:10 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 August, 2017, 12:42:27 AM
:D

p.s. great idea to have a more light-hearted political thread.

Even my naive optimism won't stretch that far!
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 August, 2017, 12:42:27 AM
:D

p.s. great idea to have a more light-hearted political thread.

_____ days since Trump said something mind blowingly daft.

:o
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: von Boom on 20 August, 2017, 12:11:17 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 August, 2017, 12:42:27 AM
:D

p.s. great idea to have a more light-hearted political thread.

_____ days hours since Trump said something mind blowingly daft.

:o

FTFY
Title: Re: Politicians Saying Something Stupid
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2017, 04:50:30 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2017, 10:45:50 AM


_____ days nanoseconds since Trump said something mind blowingly daft.

:o

Probably more accurate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Satanist on 23 August, 2017, 04:01:24 PM
https://www.politicalcompass.org/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 August, 2017, 04:42:36 PM
Shock result:  ;)

Your Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -8.5
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.69
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 August, 2017, 05:05:11 PM
Almost everyone I know maps to the Greens when they take this test. Almost no-one I know votes for the Greens.

(FWIW, -5.0 economic; -6.56 social lib/auth.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 August, 2017, 05:38:20 PM
The Greens won't win, so there's no point voting for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 August, 2017, 05:51:20 PM
Round here, no-one but Tories can win, so there's no point in voting Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP either, then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 August, 2017, 06:22:38 PM
-5.63 Eco, -6.41 Lib/Auth
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 August, 2017, 06:34:34 PM

Economic Left/Right: -7.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.77

Well there's a shocker. (And I always vote Green, then Labour (PR)). This is one of those echo chambers, init?

Init

Init

It

It

T
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 August, 2017, 08:43:01 PM
Thread's full of fucking commies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 23 August, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
(https://media.tenor.com/images/6b3d8a95f5faea11a6b1644a7d0693a7/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 August, 2017, 09:32:24 PM
(http://www.geekvintage.com/images/commodore-64-system.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 August, 2017, 09:44:55 PM
Quote from: Goaty on 23 August, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
(https://media.tenor.com/images/6b3d8a95f5faea11a6b1644a7d0693a7/tenor.gif)

C'mon, join the Party!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 August, 2017, 09:52:08 PM
Which party?

The ONLY party!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 24 August, 2017, 01:59:12 AM
-8.5 / -7.08

interesting test. debatable placing of the uk parties on the grid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 August, 2017, 07:15:00 AM
When I did the test it said, "f*ck off, Sharky."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 August, 2017, 09:08:12 PM
Remember when Labour melts responded with fury at the sexist idea of women-only train carriages?  Well, brave centrist visionary Stella Creasy has suggested an alternative: carriages where men aren't allowed.
I don't know why I ever thought these people were sectarian psychopaths.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 August, 2017, 01:36:59 PM
Immigration? Remember that? Remember how all-important the issue was in the Brexit vote?

The numbers were wrong. (https://amp.ft.com/content/b9c61fcc-88c7-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787) May, as Home Secretary, knew they were wrong and lied about it. She continued to lie about it as Prime Minister.

In case you can't get at the linked article behind the FT paywall, here's an excerpt:

(http://i.imgur.com/w3UWEIZ.jpg)

The accurate figure was a shade over 4,000.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 August, 2017, 03:02:36 PM
Jesus wept, who is still voting for these pricks?  And how can anyone with any sense stand by their Leave vote?  The mind boggles.

Mind you, I've just had a very strong coffee and am more angry about things than usual.  But noticing Jim's new avatar brought a smile to my face.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 August, 2017, 03:55:34 PM
Well, you can prove anything with "facts".  What really matters is how people feel, and who they can blame for their life not working out the way it should.  You won't find many leave voters who will happily admit to being wrong, because most of the movement was founded in irrationality.  It purposefully ignored evidence and openly told lies, creating a shallow pretense at logic which allowed people to pretend that their deep seated grievances and fears were justified, whilst being so vacuous as to but impossible to debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 August, 2017, 04:21:32 PM
... and the best part about it is that it has been used as the basis for one of the most significant foreign policy decisions in decades that will have massive ramifications for future generations.  The current generation in this country has a lot to answer for.  Letting this shower in, letting them run the referendum, letting them use it as the basis of policy ...

:(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 25 August, 2017, 04:26:25 PM
Its not quite politics, but also really is, so I just wanted to share Matt Lees' short talk on video games and  culture, and how angry extremist form in purpose build echo chambers of video games and social media.

www.coolghosts.net (http://www.coolghosts.net)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 September, 2017, 12:11:34 PM
 :| sums it all up these days. What a stupid, small minded little island we've turned out to be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2017, 12:20:26 PM
Why Aren't We Discussing the Things We Agree On? (https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2017/09/05/why-arent-we-discussing-the-things-we-agree-on/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 October, 2017, 03:09:39 PM
(answering the last post on the Catalonia thread)

Catalonia has had an antonymous devolved government since the 1970s and the referendum is within their administrative powers.  Spain, however, has been attempting to ratify its constitutional powers over the region (without consulting Catalonia, which you will recall has its own government) since 2006.

Coincidentally - and I am sure this has absolutely nothing to do with Spain attempting to stop the vote - the majority of the Catalan population support independence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2017, 08:28:09 PM
The 273rd mass shooting in the country this year (no joke) has now been declared the worst in US history.  So far.  This year.
To commemorate this unforeseeable tragedy that nothing could stop, The Onion has released its traditional mass shooting headline. (http://www.theonion.com/search?q=no+way+to+prevent+this+says+only+nation+where+this+regularly+happens)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 October, 2017, 10:50:48 AM
The Boy and I were throwing some numbers around on our morning run today (for some reason I find running encourages mathematical speculation), and came to the conclusion that if the EU had the same rate of mass-shootings as the USA, there'd have been 600 here this year so far, with over 750 dead and 2,500 injured.  That's more than two massacres a day, or the equivalent of a Bataclan every couple of months. 

So despite the shamefully unarmed civilian population, teeming no-go Sharia Law boroughs, vast swarms of unarrestable Syrian rape gangs and entire dinghy-borne ISIS battalions crossing the Med dressed as toddlers, we still somehow keep a lid on the actual mass-slaughter. 

And this doesn't even begin to get at aggregate non-massacre gun deaths, or even just police shootings.

Grow up, you f*cking idiots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2017, 12:54:47 PM
You don't understand, TB: if more Europeans had guns, there would be even less shootings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 03 October, 2017, 05:53:41 PM
Its obviously a very complex situation.  I mean, what if the King of England comes back and tries to get them to pay taxes?  Besides, some gun enthusiasts really want access to a device designed to kill large numbers of people in a short timescale, and who are we to take away their freedoms?  Extend those freedoms, I say.  If legislation intended to provide access to front loading muskets also applies to assault rifles, why shouldn't it apply to weaponized anthrax or surface to air missiles?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2017, 09:58:11 PM
Dan Hodges - yes, that Dan Hodges - got his once-a-century true statement out of the way when he commented that the chance for gun regulation ended with Sandy Hook, because once Americans decided that they could live with their children being murdered, the debate was over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 October, 2017, 10:29:10 PM
A fair claim, but Sandy Hook was the merest drop in an ongoing ocean of sickness: on average 4 children are killed by guns every single day, a further 20 injured. One child shot every hour of every day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2017, 09:37:25 AM
But one-off events can be fairly easily dismissed individually. I remember Dunblane here. The response was fairly swift – the Cullen Reports, restrictions against the arguments of gun lobbyists, and a general acceptance from the public that this could never happen again. As others have noted, Sandy Hook could have been a tipping point in the USA – a teachable moment that was forever lost. Rather than using it as a means to at least begin basic gun control provisions, it was used as the start of an argument to arm teachers, other school workers, and, well, everyone. I'm half surprised the NRA isn't arguing we should be arming children in schools.

And we hear much the same now after LA. People are genuinely arguing that more people died because not enough people were armed. Because if anything would have helped in LA, it would have been hundreds of people firing blind, despite the shooter being over 30 storeys up, and heavily armed. (And we're hearing the same old shit from major news sources: 'lone wolf'; 'he just snapped'; 'mentally ill'. FFS. Deal with your shit, America.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2017, 11:24:27 AM
Dunblane is indeed the parallel I keep thinking of. Almost overnight the unimaginable happened and all (most) of the guns in Britain went away. My point isn't that Sandy Hook wasnt a critical moment that was utterly missed, it was that these 'spectacular' tragedies are just the visible tip of an appalling iceberg - it's not about one-off never-agains, it's every hour of every day.

I look at the current post-LA arguments, and from the gun nut side it's mainly about technical definitions of assault rifle versus modded semi-automatics, and jesus h christmas... GET RID OF YOUR F*CKING GUNS YOU IDIOTS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2017, 02:24:33 PM
You don't understand.  Once the Muslims and Mexicans can't get in, this will never happen again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 October, 2017, 11:23:48 AM
The Tory Party appear to be lemmings looking for a cliff to throw themselves over. Trouble is they might take the rest of us with them since a Hard Brexit seems increasingly inevitable. Perhaps they'll split, and we'll have two new centrist Parties one right wing and the other doolally right wing led by Boris Johnson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 October, 2017, 11:29:32 AM
Surely to god people have to get wise to Johnson.  He's been a running joke for so long that it seems inconceivable, particularly after his disgraceful performance either side of the Brexit vote, that he hasn't been put out to pasture yet.  Personally I believe that there's a keen and calculating intelligence under that ridiculous mop, but it is simultaneously utterly self-serving and occasionally self-defeating when it reveals its pure contempt for all entities other than itself.  The Libya remarks were such a clear and definitive insight into his understanding of the world, I can't understand how any politician could remain in his job after that, Public School Trump or not.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 05 October, 2017, 01:51:12 PM
In the lengthy history of Boris gaffes, I don't think the Libya example stands out. It is, regrettably, pretty much par for the course with him.

You would have thought that a Foreign Secretary should tailor his addresses and rhetoric for other countries. Boris disagrees. Everything is aimed at the Daily Mail and Telegraph-reading party faithful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 October, 2017, 02:11:36 PM
The big worry now is, with Cameron having launched the nation into the abyss, the Tories seem determined to completely and utterly balls up what was a curates egg to start with.  Even taking current reporting with a healthy dose of scepticism, it doesn't appear that the European negotiating partners are massively impressed with how things have gone so far.  May has already weakened her position with the result of the snap election, Florence doesn't seem to have gone very far towards raising confidence levels, Johnson seems to be doing everything possible to cause a riot and this week at the Tory Party Conference we have seen the mother of all balls-ups. I can understand why the Labour party have decided to stay quiet again; attacking the Tories at the moment is a bit like clubbing baby seals, if you will excuse the analogy.  If this was a deftly written black political comedy it would be garnering rave reviews.  Unfortunately this is real life.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 October, 2017, 04:35:38 PM
The media protects Johnson and his ilk and they'll continue to do so.  Just look at the cover of today's Daily Mail announcing how May's speech was a resounding triumph because of everything that went wrong -  Pravda couldn't have done better.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 October, 2017, 02:11:36 PMI can understand why the Labour party have decided to stay quiet again

You don't piss on your enemies if they're on fire.
But if you're a Blairite, when you see your party - the Conservatives - in trouble, you do your duty and announce that you're worried about the antisemitism and misogyny in the Labour party.  Look to see that in the news later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 05 October, 2017, 08:36:04 PM
Quoteutterly self-serving and occasionally self-defeating when it reveals its pure contempt for all entities other than itself. 

Yes, but you're regarding those as negatives.  In this post brexit vision of the future, society is only dragged forward as a side effect of the selfish actions of special individuals.  Compassion and concern for any less fortunate (or rather, less determined and hardworking) members of society is Marxism. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2017, 05:27:51 PM
Texas City People Seeking Harvey Relief Must Promise Not To Boycott Israel. (http://www.houstonpress.com/news/to-get-harvey-relief-funds-in-dickinson-youll-have-to-promise-not-to-boycott-israel-9893599) (Houston Press.)

What a world we live in.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 October, 2017, 12:33:36 PM
Criticising Israel?  I never thought I'd see the day Antisemitism was allowed on the forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 October, 2017, 02:07:36 PM
Mind you, the writer reckons she only gets by with one small cup of coffee a day and they also reckon the world's not going to end (http://www.houstonpress.com/news/olympic-gold-medalist-mckayla-maroney-reveals-she-too-was-abused-at-karolyi-ranch-9887020) so perhaps that's just another example of 'fake news'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 22 October, 2017, 02:19:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 October, 2017, 12:33:36 PM
Criticising Israel?  I never thought I'd see the day Antisemitism was allowed on the forum.
I think it was more like criticizing Texas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 30 October, 2017, 12:17:03 PM
Funny how little reaction there is to the Spanish occupation of Catalonia.Shouldn't Yanks bomb them by now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2017, 02:52:51 PM
Because Catalonia has taken the peaceful protest approach, so there's not really much to report.  Once the deaths start livestreaming on Periscope, it'll be a different matter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 30 October, 2017, 03:16:27 PM
Yeah,imagine something like that happening in a not-NATO country.Actually,you don't have to imagine that hard.Double standards...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2017, 06:12:48 PM
It really isn't. Imagine you lived in Catalonia, but didn't want to leave Spain. An unconstitutional referendum was held, which you as a Spanish citizen didn't want to participate in, and even if you did the state's appalingly heavy handed treatment meant you weren't going to go out and vote. Then that clusterfuck was used as a pretext to declare independence. I'd say you would hope that your constitutional democratically elected government might step in to uphold your right to remain a citizen.

Now I'm happy for any group to govern themselves at whatever scale they fancy, and think Spain has handled this atrociously throughout, but there's more than one group of people whose interests are being trampled by the evils of nationalism here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 October, 2017, 08:42:23 AM
Similarly

Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2017, 06:12:48 PM
It really isn't. Imagine you lived in Britain, but didn't want to leave the EU. A poorly prepared referendum was held, which you as a British citizen didn't want to participate in, and even if you did the campaigners' appallingly constructed arguments  meant you weren't going to go out and vote. Then that clusterfuck was used as a pretext to declare independence. I'd say you would hope that your constitutional democratically elected government might step in to uphold your right to remain.

Not saying that the way the Spanish police handled some aspects of the referendum is analogous with what is being experienced but parallels are slightly more than a little disturbing, no?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 31 October, 2017, 10:43:01 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 October, 2017, 08:42:23 AM
Similarly

Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2017, 06:12:48 PM
It really isn't. Imagine you lived in Britain, but didn't want to leave the EU. A poorly prepared referendum was held, which you as a British citizen didn't want to participate in, and even if you did the campaigners' appallingly constructed arguments  meant you weren't going to go out and vote. Then that clusterfuck was used as a pretext to declare independence. I'd say you would hope that your constitutional democratically elected government might step in to uphold your right to remain.

Not saying that the way the Spanish police handled some aspects of the referendum is analogous with what is being experienced but parallels are slightly more than a little disturbing, no?

No.

Imagine you lived in country governed by a conservative government, but didn't want to Have labour in charge. A First past the post election was held, which you as a Hard right Tory didn't want to participate in, and even if you did the campaigners' appallingly constructed arguments and mixed ideological messages  meant you weren't going to go out and vote. Then that clusterfuck was used as a pretext to return a Labour government . I'd say you would hope that your constitutional democratically elected government might step in and dissolve parliament and set up a permanent hard right dictatorship

I can't see any parallels between The EU referendum and what's Happening in Spain. The closest parallel would be if Scotland had not been given a referendum on  independence, had held one anyway, the Government had confiscated ballot papers and sent police to close polling stations. Strong supporters of independence, who called for the vote and have the most interest in turning out continued to vote as best they can, then the Scottish Parliament had used that flawed and undemocratic process to declare independence.   

The best thing that Catalan independence campaigners can hope for is this disruption will and international attention will force Spain into holding a legal  referendum some time in the future
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 11:24:14 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2017, 06:12:48 PMThen that clusterfuck was used as a pretext to declare independence.

The clusterfuck was actually used as a pretext to remove democratically-elected officials - as early as the day after the indy vote, Spain was tabling a motion to dissolve the Catalan government that was guaranteed to pass.  The declaration of independence was like that bit in Terminator 2 when Arnie gives the thumbs-up as he's going in the smelter, except instead of the thumbs-up he's flipping the bird.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 31 October, 2017, 11:45:48 AM
That was a really odd few days where Spain's government were asking Catalan if they were declaring independence or not. It was also a tactically astute move from the independence movement as it made the central government take the initiative (the aggressor)

The regional power overstepped it's constitutional and legal mark and ceased to function as a regional authority. Madrid was constitutionally obligated to take control of Catalan, something the separatists would have known. which is again a smart PR move on the part of the independence movement.

I wouldn't say this was a pretext so much as the inevitable result of a certain course or action. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 October, 2017, 12:29:18 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 31 October, 2017, 10:43:01 AM

I can't see any parallels between The EU referendum and what's Happening in Spain.


For me, the parallels are in terms of reacting overtly to a situation that, as you point out is internationally significant.  In terms of the referendum vote, it is a case of resolutely following through on Brexit even though the mandate is questionable.  In the case of Catalan, imposing central rule based on questionable reasoning (to whit, we didn't approve of the referendum so we are taking everything away).  That said, I can see what you mean in terms of the situation in Spain being significantly more challenging.  Thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 12:59:47 PM
I don't support doctors and nurses having a strike because the government says it's illegal for them to have one.

Dissolving the Catalan government was always on the cards.  The region hasn't had any real power for some time, just look at how it implemented a bullfighting ban completely legally and within its power and Spain simply overturned the ban in the Spanish courts, both eroding the regional powers yet also reinforcing the idea that they and Spain were separate legal dominions.
Leaving aside that they knew from experience that Spain wouldn't acknowledge their decisions, Catalan has no military and their police take their orders from outside the region: how exactly was independence ever going to be enforced?  I don't doubt for one moment the declaration was just a parting "fuck you" to Spain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 31 October, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 12:59:47 PM
I don't support doctors and nurses having a strike because the government says it's illegal for them to have one.

Not sure of the relevance?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 31 October, 2017, 04:09:46 PM
Just because the Catalan leaders were elected doesn't absolve them of their duty to uphold the law. They can't just do what they like and say it's fine because "democracy." Part of democracy is voting, and another part is the rule of law.

There's no comparison with the EU referendum, which was authorised by a law passed by Parliament, which then passed a second law to authorise Brexit (after the Supreme Court told then they had to and the government deferred to that ruling). A better comparison would have been if David Cameron had refused to have a referendum so Nigel Farage had carried out an illegal referendum anyway, which non-UKIPs boycotted because it was illegal, and then Farage illegally declared that he was starting the Article 50 process, and the EU said "no you can't do that" and insisted that Britain was still in the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 04:52:24 PM
Quote from: Richard on 31 October, 2017, 04:09:46 PMA better comparison would have been if David Cameron had refused to have a referendum so Nigel Farage had carried out an illegal referendum anyway

No.  Nigel Farage has never held elected office in the UK, the only election he's ever actually won in this country was the one that made him an MEP - or to put it another way, he won an election to send him out of the country, but that's all.  Any referendum he called would be the same as you or I holding a referendum, though ours would probably be worth more because as far as I know, neither of us is bankrolled by Russia.

A greater equivalence would probably be if the Scottish Assembly had the legal right to hold a referendum at the time of its formation, but Westminster made a unilateral decision to remove that legal right and then Nicola Sturgeon called a referendum anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 October, 2017, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 31 October, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 12:59:47 PM
I don't support doctors and nurses having a strike because the government says it's illegal for them to have one.

Not sure of the relevance?

It'd only be relevant if Doctors and Nurses had declared a strike without a mandate from their members in accordance with the articles of their unions. The issue isn't Catalonia's right to seek independence (carry on, please), the issue is with those citizens who are disenfranchised by appeals to an unconstitutional referendum they did not participate in because it was illegal.

The comparison I was thinking of was one where nationalist MPs in NI unilterally called a referendum on leaving the UK, outside of the terms of the Good Friday agreement, and when Stormont was dissolved (as if anyone would notice) declared independence anyway.

Be a bit shite on all those who are entitled to a say under existing agreements, regardless of past and current injustices and ongoing gerrymandering. Once you have a valid democratic process, you have to play by those rules to be fair to those citizens who may disagree with you.

And yes, although I think many on the Leave campaign should have been jailed for deliberate fraud, and the government pilloried for ludicrous wording and subsequent handling, this does indeed include Brexit. That the UK has failed to vote anyone supporting the fiasco out of existence is neither here nor there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 09:59:32 PM
The sad truth is that not everyone gets a say in what their elected government decides to do on their behalf, but this is the possible eventuality they signed up to when they voted at all.  It's called a "cluster"fuck for a reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 31 October, 2017, 10:03:11 PM
QuoteA greater equivalence would probably be if the Scottish Assembly had the legal right to hold a referendum at the time of its formation...

No it wouldn't, because the Catalan Parliament has never had the legal right to call a referendum on independence -- it's prohibited by the Spanish constitution. Madrid didn't just take that right away from them last week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 October, 2017, 10:07:55 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 31 October, 2017, 09:59:32 PM
The sad truth is that not everyone gets a say in what their elected government decides to do on their behalf, but this is the possible eventuality they signed up to when they voted at all.  It's called a "cluster"fuck for a reason.

True enough, but as we often do on this thread, I move to cite that great genocidal imperialist's characterisation of democracy as the worst form of government etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2017, 12:00:31 AM
Well okay, but I'd still like to see us give it a try one day.

Pardon the left turn, but the un-redacted spreadsheet of illicit Tory rumpy-pumpy is inevitably doing the rounds (not sure what forum policy is, so no names), and what gets me about it is not that pretty much all of it is minor on a one-to-one basis and perfectly survivable politically if some of the shit this lot have gotten away with over the last few years is any indicator*, but instead the fact that the single most obvious revelation that could possibly have come from this document is present and correct: a married cabinet minister who voted against marriage equality is gay.  Not quite Peak Tory, but definitely getting there.


*  I mean, if tanking the country in a failed leadership maneuver gets you to the front bench rather than political exile, I don't see how (FOR EXAMPLE) an extra-marital affair will do you much harm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 November, 2017, 07:09:23 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2017, 12:00:31 AM
Well okay, but I'd still like to see us give it a try one day.

Gruddamn Shark-puppet.

Anyway, I just assumed opposing LGBT equality was how people come out these days. 'Mater, Pater, I have something to tell you: I think trans people are detrimental to unit cohesion'.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 November, 2017, 08:41:46 AM
Quotepretty much all of it is minor on a one-to-one basis and perfectly survivable politically if some of the shit this lot have gotten away with

Its almost like the Tory High Command is preparing for a purge of those not considered pure enough.  For how long have they been gathering grievances, ready to destroy anyone who steps out of line.

Get ready for the "Corbyn told me I looked nice once. The Labour party must be burned to the ground" response from blairites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 November, 2017, 09:38:44 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 01 November, 2017, 08:41:46 AM
Get ready for the "Corbyn told me I looked nice once. The Labour party must be burned to the ground" response from blairites.

Serious though the accusation was, there was an almost palpable sense of relief on last night's PM when they turned up one about Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 November, 2017, 10:48:05 AM
Oh look, the BBC's political editor has suddenly developed an interest in the sex pest problem at Westminster.  I can't imagine why.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 November, 2017, 10:52:45 AM
I haven't looked, but I'm curious as to whether the secret Tory dossier contains the line...

"Cameron, D - pig"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 November, 2017, 06:38:16 PM
I am curious regarding Fallon's resignation reason.  Apparently it relates to an off colour remark he made to a female colleague.  Considering how tenaciously MP's have fought scandals of far greater scope in the past it does seem a bit peculiar that he is resigning over such a remark.  Plus, he mentions the 'high standards of the armed forces' as his metric.  Unless things have changed radically since my day, the remark he is alleged to have made is a long way from some of the worst examples of inappropriate remarks made by members of the armed forces to their female colleagues.  Am I reading too much into this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 November, 2017, 07:09:19 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 November, 2017, 06:38:16 PM
Am I reading too much into this?

No. Anna Soubry, who worked for him, was on R4's World At One yesterday and (more or less verbatim) said: "No one resigns a senior ministerial post over something like this. That's all I'm going to say on the subject, but think about it..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 November, 2017, 07:27:41 PM
I think that there were so many accusations he had to go, but he chose to fess up to a relatively minor one knowing the others will be almost impossible to prove.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 November, 2017, 09:05:39 AM
Ah, thank you.  It did strike me as peculiar.  I was also interested in the implications.  If it was the case that he was resigning over 'off colour banter' and the decision was made to include this in discussions about appropriate behaviour then would it not have the potential to make some of the old 'politically correct' arguments in the shade?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 04 November, 2017, 09:54:19 AM
This sexual abuse scandal will probably have a long run since MP's and their staff work long, unsociable hours allowing the more predatory amongst our elected representative's many opportunities to offend. It's only a minority that is responsible for this abhorrent behaviour, but it hardly shows Parliament in a good light. The press will have files on MP's sexual predilections, and I have no doubt the Sunday Papers will be the guillotine for several Political careers over the next months. We can only wait and see which MP's gets caught in the Net and hope that some independent system is set up to deal with the more boorish of our Parliamentarians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 04 November, 2017, 10:51:54 PM
If even small number fall then we'll have another GE next year.  Crazy times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 November, 2017, 11:26:05 PM
All she had to do was be less crap than a man who fucked a pig.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2017, 07:28:45 AM
1: Hold a popularity contest for imperfect human beings.

2: Award the winners superhuman rights and powers.

3: Complain when those imperfect human beings err or abuse their superhuman rights and/or powers.

4: Go to 1.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 November, 2017, 09:26:26 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 November, 2017, 11:26:05 PM
All she had to do was be less crap than a man who fucked a pig.


... and a sterling job she's doing of it, too!   :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 November, 2017, 09:41:38 AM
This business of the WH issuing a terrifying climate change report, then verbally dismissing it, seems to encapsulate politics in 2017.  Reality doesnt matter anymore, there's no fact that can undermine a government policy, no reasoned argument, no lie that can undo a populist politician*. I firmly believe that Trump could tear up the US Constitution tomorrow and just say he had made a better one - the best one - and he'd still retain his supporter base - and most of the GOP.  Insert Brexit parallels here as desired.


*The response to sexual harassment and assault revelations is very welcome, and I hope it's the beginnings of a culture that endures, but its impact remains largely peripheral to real power games.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2017, 10:32:04 AM
And off we go again.  The Texas church mass-murderer is Antifa, a Hillary supporter, an ISIS agent, a  Muslim convert... but Fake News and the FBI won't tell you this, because they are all communist Islamic feminists. Round and around social media it echoes and repeats and amplifies. Lies, lies, lies, and no one gives a shit as long as their narrative is supported: all these years blaming religion for foisting indoctrination and ignorance on people, and it turns out people actually WANT to be indoctrinated, voluntarily revel in ignorance and denial of the reality in front of them.

Who would have believed that universal access to all the information in the world would end up like this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2017, 11:43:34 AM
"White terrorist kills dozens at Texas church, taking advantage of lax gun laws" is a headline we're not going to see. (I'm guessing lots of "lone wolf". And we've already seen Trump bafflingly say it's "not about guns", and the GoP talk a lot about praying, despite the fact these people – including young children – were fucking shot in a church. If there is a god, he/it is hinting pretty bloody heavily that some manner of gun control law might be a good idea right now.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 06 November, 2017, 11:54:10 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 November, 2017, 10:32:04 AM

Who would have believed that universal access to all the information in the world would end up like this.

Me.

The world has evolved past most humans cognitive abilities. Society has evolved to such a degree as to make vast swaths of the population entirely redundant. We live in Megacity one only the futsies aren't so funny when you have to live with them.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2017, 12:06:37 PM
I never understood how the relative success of gun control in the rest of the world didn't represent an irrefutable evidence-based argument against "bad guys will still have guns", at least for the borderline sane portion of the US pop.

And then after Las Vegas I tried to gather up some actual facts and figures to spit back at the tossers that infest my various feeds: it's a nightmare. Google searches link repeatedly to page after page of cherry picked and outright falsified statistics, where single incidents in places like Serbia are used to 'demonstrate' that mass shootings are MORE common in Europe, and that the gun crime figures in the US just look bad because black drug gangs kill each other, and let's face it, that's probably a good thing.

Page after page of garbage stats, backed up by links to Fox editorials and the usual red-piller rants, just in case you didn't trust the evidence of your own eyes.  Even if people do some looking, odds are good that all they will see is confirmation of their idiotic beliefs. And that goes for climate change, feminism, Islamic takeover of the West, you name it.

There's literally no hope: this entire wonderful Internet has become a vast trap of reinforcement and self-delusion, an Encyclopedia Britannica of shit that can support any Murdoch lie you choose to check.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2017, 01:03:42 PM
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qvS0dwqEHck/Twtm7ibUu5I/AAAAAAAAAZs/TMr2alQLRuY/s1600/wargames-quote-not-to-play.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2017, 01:08:11 PM
TordelBack: In modern history, Australia's shift in stance on gun ownership should be enough evidence. But as others have said, once the US collectively decided it was OK to kill children in a mass shooting (compare that to the response to Dunblane), that was the end of it. Guns now rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 06 November, 2017, 01:23:56 PM
I went into a gun shop in America, and it was interesting. This was an antique/collectable place so it didn't feel any different than looking at swords or armour or cannons in a museum. Was odd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
Right now, I'm honestly not sure I want to set foot in the US again. I've visited regularly, because my folks have a place in Clearwater Beach, but I've felt a growing sense of unease in recent years. And then my dad said during their most recent stay that he'd had a gun pointed at him by a kid in their condo's foyer. Fortunately, the kid decided to make a run for it. But when you hear stories like that, your blood runs cold. That country has a massive problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 November, 2017, 08:54:26 PM
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents."

The problem is not new, but the phrase "Echo Chamber" is probably true for the internet. We all search for the reason why life is like it is, and you have to be very self aware not to look for blame elsewhere? 

Never did anything with your life?  It was those Bulgarians moving in next door

Left your wife for a younger model?  She was a drag who brought it on herself

Defrauded the Government?  I work hard - They don't deserve my tax

and on and on.

When we had a concensus of Church, State and Public Service Media provider, the "truth" was less slippy and multitudinuous - not to say it was entirely more accurate of course, but many things were accepted and shared as "right"

In this world where a quick google will find you in the company of like minded perverts/racists/dullards/zealots.... 



Quote from: TordelBack on 06 November, 2017, 12:06:37 PM
And then after Las Vegas I tried to gather up some actual facts and figures to spit back at the tossers that infest my various feeds: it's a nightmare. Google searches link repeatedly to page after page of cherry picked and outright falsified statistics, where single incidents in places like Serbia are used to 'demonstrate' that mass shootings are MORE common in Europe, and that the gun crime figures in the US just look bad because black drug gangs kill each other, and let's face it, that's probably a good thing.

Page after page of garbage stats, backed up by links to Fox editorials and the usual red-piller rants, just in case you didn't trust the evidence of your own eyes.  Even if people do some looking, odds are good that all they will see is confirmation of their idiotic beliefs. And that goes for climate change, feminism, Islamic takeover of the West, you name it.

There's literally no hope: this entire wonderful Internet has become a vast trap of reinforcement and self-delusion, an Encyclopedia Britannica of shit that can support any Murdoch lie you choose to check.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 November, 2017, 01:13:49 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 06 November, 2017, 08:54:26 PM


In this world where a quick google will find you in the company of like minded perverts/racists/dullards/zealots.... 


Absolutely right. That's how I ended up here.

The Eternal September (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September) is what my father calls it.

Clickbait, listicles and Fake News all preying on narcissism. The web is an ugly place and should be used sparingly. I work in a bar frequented by functioning alcoholics and the majority of them are positively charming compared to the youtube commentariat. Better informed too. I think that's my point here. If you get out there and talk to real people, even the biggest degenerate is better than most 'net persona.

And they are persona. Comes from the latin for 'mask'. The internet isn't real life. This isn't really a conversation. Not a real discussion. Your internal monologue could be reading this in the snarkiest, most condescending voice your mind can conjure, or maybe the angriest, most bellicose vomit of bile. I'm nowhere near good enough a writer to convey my ideas with an appropriate tone, nor is yer average web denizen. The subtle tonal changes and cadence of voice are lost online, along with body language cues. You don't get to see the other person nodding along to your point, indicating comprehension, before disagreeing. You just see the disagreement.

I concede I may just be stuck in the echo chamber of real life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 03:27:54 AM
Well said, Mr P.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2017, 06:19:11 AM
Yep, no arguments there - people you meet in person are almost always an improvement over what you see in the distance, the internet being a heightened example.  However, this is heart of the problem: the internet, together with 24 hour news and colouring-book tabloids, have become an easy substitute for engaging with reality, or your fellow humans.  And this is what brings this bottomless pit of lies and ignorance screaming into the real world, via opinion, platform, votes, mandate and policy.

It's obviously a function of growing up in the 70s, but as a  kid I had understood the business of politics was telling exactly as many crowd-pleasing lies as you could get away with before the facts were exposed by journos in a 'scandal' with the fibber swiftly being turfed out of office.  Now the second part of that story no longer exists, journalists having been replaced by a chorus of online liars (paid, misguided or malicious). 



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2017, 06:38:42 AM
It's curious but reading through this, I'm minded of some of the stuff that I was reading back in the nineties about Internet culture, it's democratic power and it's implications.  Some of it was downright bonkers and certainly there was a degree of utopian fervour that I struggled at the time to cope with but looking back on it ... wow!

I think for me, the turning point was the advent of 'social media' and Facebook in particular.  The Internet slowly morphed into a far uglier place, although it had always been there.  There seemed to be a lack of restraint, a willingness to pour out bile without any regard to the consequences.  What made it worse was that often in schools the consequences poured out into the real world but teachers, parents and kids all struggled to deal with it.  It became largely unmanageable and no one was really taking responsibility.  Did those kids basically learn that it was possible to be as abusive as you want without any consequences?

That generation are now adults and are starting to engage with a wider range of media sources.  Have they brought the same habits with them and were the lessons that they learned part of the reason why the internet is now so problematic?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 07:30:44 AM
I think that in the past people could be victimised via notes passed in class amongst a handful of their peers, as it were. The internet provides the potential for those notes to be passed amongst millions. The core problem remains the same in this aspect but the scale has increased dramatically.

Most of the problems are not new but the extent to which those problems can cause harm is new.

People always have printed books or pamphlets expounding their pet theories or theses, from the insightful to the insane and every flavour in between, but instead of reaching a few readers they now have access to a virtually unlimited audience.

Under these conditions, where data massively outweighs knowledge, we must all be careful what we let past our personal filters. As I've said before, an open mind is like an open wound - if you don't look after it, it'll get infected and the internet is a swamp rife with disease.

But there is also truth, humour, compassion, love and all the good things about the human condition present also, also massively magnified and accessible to a virtually limitless audience.

The internet is, in my view, neither a good nor a bad thing - it is simply a tool. It is also a very young phenomena and we have not yet learned to use it as well as we might. It will continue evolve and change and the way we use it will both drive and be driven by that evolution.

We can only hope that the people passing notes in class will grow out of it, as most of us do.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2017, 07:45:42 AM
A lot of truth there my friend.  Probably the same thing was said about Caxton's invention.  I wonder how much the far lower (apparent) cost of access influences this.  As you say, scope is definitely a factor.

This place has always amazed me with its compassion, sensitivity and receptiveness.  Even the most controversial amongst us is receptive to censure but it needs to be used so infrequently.  A good example of your core point.

I think my concern is that the 'people passing notes' are growing up having learnt that they don't need to grow out of it, that in fact there is a big wide world where they can carry on the practice and tools such as Facebook and Twitter re there to make it possible, with loads of people chanting them on and shouting down anyone who challenges them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 08:48:49 AM
As probably one of the more controversial posters myself, I agree with what you say. I've posted a few things on here that I regret, or regret the form and tone of some of my postings, and have been prompted to examine and, where necessary, change my tone or apologise or both. Nobody actually forced me to do these things and I'm still prone to prosthelytizing on occasion and am aware that this is one of my flaws (I'm doing it now!).

Another option would have been for me to take my ball and go home, to turn my back on the forum and slope off. That option has been very tempting in the past but I like it here and happily I resisted the urge. One of the major factors I have identified in threads like this one is that "I disagree with you" has somehow become synonymous with "you are an idiot and I hate you," which is, in reality, probably not so accurate as it sometimes feels. As someone said earlier, it's almost impossible to communicate nuance and intent just through text.

One of the problems is that it's easy to pass a note in class anonymously and then walk away if it blows up in your face. In a real classroom, if the perpetrator is caught then the humiliation and shame are immediate and personal, an uncomfortable sentence of public disapprobation to which most of us have been exposed at some point in our lives.

I'm not really worried that some people think they can get away with bad behaviour on suchlikes as Twitter and Facebook. There have always been mannerless oiks and, unfortunately, there always will be. I think that internetters will evolve to see them for what they are and treat them appropriately.

If Twitter and Facebook become mired in mannerless oiks they will simply be abandoned for new platforms like Steemit and what have you.

I think the bad elements are necessary because they demonstrate what not to do, how not to behave, and encourage us all to learn better netiquette. I like to think that I have learned from my own bad behaviour, and the bad behaviour of others, during my virtual lifetime.
Even if everything I've written above is piffle of the highest order, one thing is certain: the rest of the web could learn a lot from this place!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 07 November, 2017, 09:05:25 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2017, 06:38:42 AM
I think for me, the turning point was the advent of 'social media' and Facebook in particular.  The Internet slowly morphed into a far uglier place, although it had always been there.  There seemed to be a lack of restraint, a willingness to pour out bile without any regard to the consequences.

I think the culture of some forums (fora?) like 4chan, Something Awful, some subReddits has basically taken over the internet.

It always amazes me when I see an old-school troll on a comments page or forum. They seem so antiquated and quaint. Don't they realise that it's over? The trolls won. They have their man in the White House. They got Britain to sabotage its future. Their voices are given "equal weight" when we endlessly debate the destruction of the climate. What's the point in trolling now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 09:11:41 AM
It's always darkest just before dawn.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2017, 10:18:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 07:30:44 AMPeople always have printed books or pamphlets expounding their pet theories or theses, from the insightful to the insane and every flavour in between, but instead of reaching a few readers they now have access to a virtually unlimited audience.
There are interrelated issues here, which are time, money and access. In terms of access, there's a relatively level playing field, in the sense anyone can be a publisher now. This means any old crap can go on the internet and be used by dribbling idiots at 'proof'. But also, people are much more likely to self-select the content they 'want' to read. This means they head towards things that confirm what they already believe, rather than looking for relatively neutral stances on any subject matter.

This all dovetails with analytics and income. The former is a vicious cycle, in analytics in many cases driving what a publication will write about. If a certain type of story is popular, they will write more, to get advertising income. And because people are now unwilling to pay for journalism at every single level, quality is going down the toilet because there's no money to pay for investigation. It's now depressingly simple for someone to seed disinformation and for it to spread throughout the entire publishing industry.

I'm not sure what the way back is, if one even exists. In the British press, we also see its effects. The Telegraph, for example, is increasingly shifting from a reasonable and sane right-wing newspaper to a broadsheet take on The Daily Mail. Even in niche industries (tech and gaming, say), a lack of money is causing people to rush when it comes to news, reviews and even features. That lack of scrutiny allows an awful lot of shit to happen. (And even when you get a relatively 'good guy' among the dross, you'll find problems. The Guardian, for instance, is haemorrhaging money at an obscene rate.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 10:56:21 AM
True enough, but there are investigators like James Corbett who fund their projects through voluntary donations and make their content available without charge. Whilst I do not endorse every project of his, I would recommend many of his pieces such as How Big Oil Conquered the World and Why Big Oil Conquered the World.

He does, of course, have his own perspective and agenda but this is in no way unique; all journalists have their own perspectives and agendas, as do we all.

I agree that most of us are attracted to those subjects and ideals we are already interested in and like to have our views reinforced. One thing I will say for Corbett is that he open to being corrected. For example he, like me and many others, believed that President Kennedy signed an executive order limiting the power of the Federal Reserve. When told that this was a myth, he investigated and (to the protestations and jeers of many "truthers") found that the executive order in question was in fact an instrument allowing the Fed to retire and replace worn out bank notes without requiring written permission from the President. This prompted him to investigate a little further and uncover further ties between JFK and the banking system, undermining one of the major planks of the assassination conspiracy theories. I would not claim Corbett is unique in his willingness to question his own beliefs but it does, to me at least, suggest a level of investigative and interpretive integrity which, whilst not a guarantee of accuracy (there is no such thing), does lead me to hold his investigations and reports in higher regard than most.

There are many investigative journalists like Corbett out there who are not beholden to publishers, owners or advertisers and are funded by reader donations. This arrangement is not, of course, an ironclad guarantee of accuracy, impartiality or integrity but then, neither is being printed in a traditional newspaper.

The media is evolving and it is our responsibility to filter it as best we can and to make donations to those we deem worthy of our money. There is no way back, there are only ways forward.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 07 November, 2017, 01:43:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 09:11:41 AM
It's always darkest just before dawn.

I live in a country which has Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary and where Jacob Rees-Mogg is thought of as a credible and plausible next PM. Things can get a lot darker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2017, 01:51:24 PM
The problem isn't that new-fangled media has taken over our brains, it's that old media went and shit the bed.
People used to trust old media sources even when they were being told unpalatable truths, but those outlets lost that trust and people looked elsewhere.  The Guardian being caught time and again falsifying stories (particularly about Putin, one of the few people in the world about whom you don't need to make shit up) and being funded by tax avoidance isn't the failing of "the internet", it's the failing of old media to adhere to its own self-professed standards and pushing its audience into the waiting arms of Russian bots and tailored newsfeed algorithms, and instead of calling them out on it, we make excuses and say they're just going where the money is so they can compete with the internet, handily ignoring that print outlets like the Telegraph have been tailoring their reportage for decades based on the interests of their advertisers.
When absolutely every outlet is revealed to have feet of clay, obviously people are just going to pick one they like and stick with it, hence so many people using The Canary or Guido Fawkes as if they were news outlets rather than glorified blogs.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 09:11:41 AM
It's always darkest just before dawn.

It's actually darkest when the sun has gone out forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2017, 02:03:41 PM
Oh, man. The Canary was rife for a while in my Facebook feed. It's bloody awful – a Breitbart of the left. As for traditional print, I agree with quite a lot of what you say, Professor Bear, but would still argue that standards are sliding due to a lack of money, and a desperation for eyeballs. The Telegraph as an example was always a right-wing newspaper, and, yes, it had an agenda. But it never used to be batshit.

Also, there's that notion of editorial curation that's being hurled out of the window. Magazines are a superb format, because you can self-select in terms of a relatively broad 'genre', but then get served up a selection of content you may not have expected, but may end up liking – or at least broadening your experiences with. To some extent, traditional newspapers are the same. The internet bulldozes all that, leaving you in a cycle of clicking through to things you already know you want to see.

Also, the lack of financial investment means you have no concerns about time investment in what you're exploring, meaning content is far more likely to be rapidly abandoned. (Back in the day, I used to read magazines cover to cover, because I didn't have much money and wanted to squeeze every drop of value out them. These days, the internet serves up more crap than I could read in a lifetime every second, but I'm not paying for it so can leap from article to article. But I don't believe the format is beneficial to me, in the main. And the quality of the content, generally speaking, is getting worse.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 07 November, 2017, 03:36:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2017, 01:51:24 PM


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2017, 09:11:41 AM
It's always darkest just before dawn.

It's actually darkest when the sun has gone out forever.

Your super soar-away Sun?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 07 November, 2017, 04:51:08 PM
The sun hasn't gone out Bear, you're just lying in a cave gnawing on a mastodon bone. Z  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2017, 12:02:21 PM
Seems like Ed Gillespie jumped on the Trump Train and fell off. America hasn't completely lost its collective mind just yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 November, 2017, 12:31:52 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 07 November, 2017, 01:43:06 PM
I live in a country which has Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary and where Jacob Rees-Mogg is thought of as a credible and plausible next PM. Things can get a lot darker.


I'd be hesitant about going to some countries when, instead of working to get you released, the foreign secretary actually doubles your sentence...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2017, 02:01:39 PM
Don't worry, the Tories have worked hard to rebuild public trust after the Bojo gaffe by sacking an Indian lady.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 20 November, 2017, 01:25:08 PM
Labour in Scotland have finally managed to sort out their rift with the UK party by electing a pro-Corbyn leader. Hopefully they can now avoid needless distractions and act as the opposition Scotland needs.

Oh, I see..:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/20/kezia-dugdale-joins-im-a-celebrity-and-causes-splits-in-scottish-labour
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 November, 2017, 02:42:43 PM
All that article tells me is that old media is getting desperate - if only because it somehow defines Kezia Dugdale as a celebrity.  Dugdale herself I don't blame at all for looking to cash in while she still can, as after telling the few Labour voters she hadn't alienated to vote Tory in order to stick it to the SNP (thanks for that, Kez), we can safely say her career in the party in its current form is done.

In less important news, the multinational peer-reviewed British Medical Journal - a review and research body established in 1840 and acknowledged globally - has brought out a study linking 120,000 deaths in the UK directly to the government's Austerity policies.  The BBC is flatly refusing to cover the story because the Science Media Center - whom the BBC itself has described as being a GM lobbying group founded in 2002 headed by a Rwandan genocide denier - has said it doubts the study's findings.  In the meantime, the BBC is running stories sourced from Guido Fawkes, a right wing conspiracy blog founded by a man convicted of drink driving four times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2017, 07:58:39 PM
I've just heard about Oxford Circus, and would like to extend my deepest condolences to Tommy Robinson and Nigel Farage at this most difficult time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 November, 2017, 03:16:19 PM
 :lol:
I remember being evacuated from the Tube on a short trip to London, during a red alert period back in the good old days of post 9/11 Al Qaeda attacks. I was amazed at how well it was carried out and how calm and orderly everyone was.  (If only the UK could approach a referendum in the same spirit.)

In other news,  Theresa May has finally done something that wasn't utterly loathsome.  Best get your fallout shelters dug
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2017, 03:35:55 PM
I used to work Saturdays at Woolworth's in Southport when I was at school in the 80s. Quite regularly some chap with an Irish accent would ring up and claim to have left a bomb somewhere in the store.

There would be no evacuation. Instead, some of us "Saturday Lads" would be given brooms and told to pretend to sweep the floor. Our real mission was to use our brooms to poke about under the racks and counters, fishing for suspicious packages.

Mr J____, who invariably took charge of this dubious operation, once asked me what I'd do if I actually found a bomb.

"Well," I said, nonplussed, "I'll need a new broom for a start."

I wasn't selected for Covert Security Sweep duties again after that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 30 November, 2017, 03:52:29 PM
Like a good business they were worried about you losing the broom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2017, 04:03:38 PM
Indeed. Good brooms are hard to come by.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2017, 07:03:07 AM
The New Chartist Movement. (https://www.newchartistmovement.org.uk/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 December, 2017, 09:48:53 AM
A good read, cheers. Not sure how many iPhones the Bradbury Pound would buy, but still, maybe that day is coming anyway.

It's odd to me that such a revolutionary declaration makes such ready use of the terms "country" (and indeed "Queen"). Which country would this be? How defined?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 December, 2017, 01:46:50 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 03 December, 2017, 12:49:21 PM
I'd rather see Christian groups recognise the real good they could do in society, and that leading by example is better than force and threat when it comes to connecting with people. However, I think that by placing them under constant attack they inevitably withdraw and double down. I wonder if actively supporting individual priests, vicars, whoever, who are in favour of (for example) gay marriage would be more beneficial than attacking their church as a whole?

I hope nobody minds but I didn't want to have the prog thread mired down the way some other threads have of late.  In some respects I suppose there is a degree of inevitability since Tooth has always worn its political sensibilities on its sleeve but these days things seem so polarised that it is difficult to engage with issues without things getting nasty.

Christianity seems to have been reduced to this single issue it seems, its stance on sexuality.  Sometimes it seems like it is baiting.  People know what the Bible says and how important it is to Christians.  The vast majority are happy to accept that this goes against social mores.  Granted some are quite vocal and they generally tend to be quite influential but that is not the same as saying that they speak for all Christians.  It's a bit like saying that Donald Trump speaks for all Americans with some of the daft things he says.

It is fair to say though that Christians would do far better to focus on serving needs, following Gospel teaching on service and letting people make up their own minds.  Sometimes Evangalising does more harm than good even though it is possible to understand the concern that sometimes drives it, as misunderstood / miscommunicated as it often is.  Perhaps, as is suggested, this needs to be rethought since it is being done so badly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2017, 02:48:25 PM
It's hard to take organised religion seriously when the Pope's own Aula Paolo VI Audience Hall, also known as the Hall of the Pontifical Audiences, looks like a whacking great serpent's head...

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lGBfeHnMiNc/hqdefault.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 December, 2017, 12:51:21 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 December, 2017, 01:46:50 PM
Christianity seems to have been reduced to this single issue it seems, its stance on sexuality. 


Don't forget they also want to prevent non-Christians from shopping on Sundays because of reasons...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2017, 01:34:43 PM
I have no real issue with British folk not knowing the precise line of the RoI/NI border, or the modern complexities of our little internecine squabbles, t'was ever thus with core and periphery. 

What I do have a problem with is the brows being earnestly furrowed in animated contemplation of the (surprise!) intractable border situation, and all the wider consequences of ANY solution within the Brexit milieu. This is actual thought being applied 18 months too bloody late, chaps: we were saying exactly this (even on this very thread!) the very moment the UK's suicide was mooted. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 07 December, 2017, 05:22:26 PM
agreed - I'm amazed by the number of web comments and newspaper letters that say: "We were not told about... divorce bill/Irish border/fruit rotting in the fields (delete as applicable) so we should have another referendum" - when they were told over and over again but dismissed it as "remoaner scaremongering"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 07 December, 2017, 06:56:31 PM
We should probably ask UKIP.  I mean, leaving the EU was the only reason they existed for twenty years, and they constantly agitated for a referendum.  Surely they put some thought into the practical aspects of something as obvious as a land border.


My favourite moment of the last few days was The Liar Ian Duncan Smith insisting that if the UK government doesn't get what it wants re border regulation they should walk away from negotiations, presumably just pretending RoI doesn't exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 December, 2017, 07:03:55 PM
TBH the government's policy on these 'negotiations' seems dangerously close to that of Violet Bott.  We are moments away from Mrs May standing in the chamber in Brussels and muttering those immortal words: "I'll scream and scream and scream until I'm sick!" whilst Davis, Gove, Johnson and IDS all stand behind her with their fingers in their ears chanting 'la la la la!'  We are so far past international embarrassment now that the next turn off is the Horse Head nebula. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 December, 2017, 07:25:14 PM
It's terrifying. It must be astonishing to be someone like Ken Clarke, having followed his party's policy for his entire political career, and suddenly finding himself on the very fringe of the party for being broadly positive about the EU. And tomorrow, the wife and I get to have our first chat with a lawyer, having paid him a small pile of cash just to get his opinion on whether we should proceed with citizenship applications. Thanks, Brexit!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 December, 2017, 08:13:42 AM
Government quietly mentioned yesterday that the planned £72k cap on social care costs, which was previously delayed for a few years, is now being scrapped as unaffordable. The Tories are now willing to screw over their base just to keep the country afloat, whereas previously they focussed mainly on the poor and disenfranchised.  And this is before budgeting for the massive infrastructure projects we'll need to place in 18 months time but which haven't been started yet.

Still, sovereignty eh...can get enough of it.

So glad
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 December, 2017, 08:39:47 AM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 08 December, 2017, 08:13:42 AM...the massive infrastructure projects...

Come now, there must be some coolies, bearers or shovel-wallahs hanging about that can be pressed into service of Empire.  Probably been sitting around chewing betel since '75, must be desperate to improve themselves with a bit of honest toil at the end of a swagger stick, when swung by the right sort of chap.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 08 December, 2017, 09:05:32 AM
Surprise! Surprise!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 December, 2017, 11:32:40 AM
After months of strong and stable negotiations, May has agreed to everything the EU demanded on day one - she strongly refused to budge in stable negotiations, securing a strong and stable future for the workers of Britain.  In a stunning display of strength and stability, she has also agreed to everything Ireland demanded in regards to the border issue, as well as agreeing to everything the DUP demanded by agreeing to move the border to the English Channel.
Irish Teashop, Varak... Vanar... Vanak - the Irish president has issued the following statement to the UK press: "You're our wife now."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 December, 2017, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 December, 2017, 11:32:40 AM
Irish Teashop, Varak... Vanar... Vanak - the Irish president has issued the following statement to the UK press: "You're our wife now."

A paddy, a wog and a poof walk into a border negotiation...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 08 December, 2017, 12:41:51 PM
Quoteagreeing to move the border to the English Channel.

The DUP, finally succeeding in their dream of a united Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 December, 2017, 01:18:23 PM
The general consensus of lawyers online now seems to be that the fight has narrowed. The chances of no deal are now extremely small, but the chances of stopping Brexit are almost nil, too. The fight now shifts to whether we end up like Canada or Norway/Switzerland. (And some are suggesting the Tories will fuck things up to the point they'll be claiming a victory on a kind of EEA- deal.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 08 December, 2017, 07:23:45 PM
The test of a first-rate country is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the same agreement and still retain the ability to DUPe the electorate   :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Prodigal2 on 09 December, 2017, 10:05:48 AM
I think Indigo's analysis is bang on here. The route map seems a little more predictable now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: marko10174 on 19 December, 2017, 12:24:28 AM

It's been quite interesting reading this thread, as someone who has never contributed. I am curious... (and drunk, so I do apologise) on what side of the political spectrum do you all align yourselves with? left? right? centrist?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2017, 07:04:39 AM
I don't subscribe to the false left/right paradigm. I believe the questions of left or right are artificial constructs designed to attract people to certain parties and present the illusion of choice.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2017, 11:08:20 AM
I wouldn't go as far as Shark. I'd say people can broadly be placed into certain areas of alignment, but left/right is a very reductive way of doing so, given that it's usually talking about economics, or trying to overlay economics and social thinking. That doesn't really work, because you'd place Labour and the Greens in a similar lefty slot, despite Labour being broadly authoritarian, and the Greens being far more liberal/libertarian in nature.

The political compass (like other, similar systems) is a little better at this, placing economic thinking on left/right and auth/lib on north/south. I suspect the majority of people here would tend towards the lower-left quadrant on that model (libertarian left), or not be too far over the boundaries if in one of the others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 19 December, 2017, 05:41:06 PM
It's a nonsense anyway. My reasonably centrist views in Scotland would, if transplanted to the US, have me labelled as a "commie". There is good policy and bad policy, that's the only useful paradigm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 20 December, 2017, 06:40:02 PM
Quote from: marko10174 on 19 December, 2017, 12:24:28 AM
on what side of the political spectrum do you all align yourselves with? left? right? centrist?

Socially conscientious.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 December, 2017, 08:05:43 PM
Left and right are increasingly irrelevant as political identities, the only reason they persist is because of the UK's shitty electoral system and effectively binary choice of parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 21 December, 2017, 02:58:14 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2017, 07:04:39 AM
I don't subscribe to the false left/right paradigm. I believe the questions of left or right are artificial constructs designed to attract people to certain parties and present the illusion of choice.

There has been a considerable polarisation of support in what are effectively two party races normally ascribing Left and right to the two camps.

socially liberal/conservative, Authoritarian/Libertarian, Socialist/Capitalist, Democratic/autocratic they all describe interacting sliding scales of vastly differing opinions.   

However when two right wing capitalist parties sitting slightly apart at the same end of more or less all of the scales as your only choices yet some how they are referred to as left and right the terms do become as meaningless as randomly ascribed colours. Like red and blue.

TLDR: I kind of agree with you 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 December, 2017, 10:32:07 AM
I'm the opposite of whatever the Daily Mail is, always.

That carries on through to blue ****ing passports. Never have I struggled to censor a swearword more on this board.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 January, 2018, 02:09:05 PM
"The monarchy earns more than the average UK worker by 00:43 on 1st January." (https://www.republic.org.uk/what-we-do/news-and-updates/fat-cat-monarchy)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 January, 2018, 03:04:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 January, 2018, 02:09:05 PM
"The monarchy earns more than the average UK worker by 00:43 on 1st January." (https://www.republic.org.uk/what-we-do/news-and-updates/fat-cat-monarchy)
And that's mean average of £28K - median average for a UK worker is around £21,500, while median average household income (two adults) is around £22:500 (those figures are few years out of date, but wage inflation hasn't been large enough to make a huge difference).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 January, 2018, 03:29:56 PM
In today's news we hear that Trump has literally resorted to 'my one is bigger than yours' in his diplomatic manoeuvrings with North Korea.  I am minded of the future shock "War Game" (prog 287) in which a couple of kids are playing at thermonuclear war.  Only now we've got grown ups behaving like kids but with a nuclear arsenal.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 January, 2018, 08:46:55 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 January, 2018, 03:29:56 PM
In today's news we hear that Trump has literally resorted to 'my one is bigger than yours' in his diplomatic manoeuvrings with North Korea.  I am minded of the future shock "War Game" (prog 287) in which a couple of kids are playing at thermonuclear war.  Only now we've got grown ups behaving like kids but with a nuclear arsenal.   :o
Just when you think you've seen it all, he shows even less self-awareness of the image he's portraying (of being an extremely insecure, small* person).

* small-minded, small-handed and other areas...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 January, 2018, 11:51:43 AM
... and in todays news, Nigel Farage is going for the Dave Channel award for the most amusing Twitter thread.  He decided it would be a good idea to ask for suggestions on what to ask Michel Barnier in his meeting later and received some amusing suggestions.  I think he's considering changing the thread title from #askBarnier to #ownGoal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2018, 01:15:18 PM
Well, I must say I did enjoy that Farage Twitter thread immensely.  It was up there with the Twitter responses to his previous statements about being broke and miserable in terms of schadenfreude comedy gold.

I have to ask, though, does anyone actually like him?  Everyone I've ever spoken to thinks he's an utter tosspot.  But yet he's all over the media, and his opinion is the one referred to time and again to counterbalance the more rationally-minded commentators on social politics.  Am I still just trapped in the little wishy-washy liberal non-UK bubble that stopped me from foreseeing Brexit and that tiny-handed little gobshite that calls himself President of the US?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2018, 02:08:15 PM
Farage is a useful idiot to keep the Overton Window framed around the right and the far right, rather than around the right and the left.  I imagine it also helps that UKIP represents the opinions of a lot of conservatives.
The Greens are more electorally representative, but the BBC - despite its mandate demanding it do so - has repeatedly refused to give the Greens representation similar to that they've given to UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2018, 05:20:00 PM
I had to look up the Overton Window, but yeah, I get you.
I've been listening a lot to James O'Brien on youtube, but my friend in England tells me LBC is a right-wing station.  I've never listened to anyone else on LBC but I know that the frog-faced UKIP Mosley/Del-Boy wannabe in question has a slot on it too.

I fully understand that this is a shamelessly ad-hominem judgement on Farage, but I'm giving myself a free pass because he's a racist, hypocritical cock.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2018, 11:32:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2018, 05:20:00 PMI've been listening a lot to James O'Brien on youtube, but my friend in England tells me LBC is a right-wing station.

It is very much a right-wing station and O'Brien is a small-c conservative - quite a few small-c conservatives now being default lefties because large-c Conservatives have lurched so far to the right.  What you're likely hearing on YT is edited highlights of O'Brien tackling the Little England nutjobs that comprise LBC's primary audience and actually asking them questions about their straw men rants rather than indulging them as other LBC presenters do.
Having said that, I have no idea why Owen Jones presented shows on the channel.  Possibly he just likes to appear in media organs that damage the left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 08 January, 2018, 10:06:25 AM
If you don't appear in any media organs, you don't appear. Damned either way when you stick your head up it seems.

If only the Conservatives were James O'Brien, I could actually vote for them.

My idiot friends liked Nigel Farage, and Boris Johnson. The ones who voted Leave and said we are "GREAT Britain we've been through 2 world wars etc we'll be fine" and give up when you ask *why* they want to return things to a period before they were born. The ones who, when challenged on anything, play a victim card about "Oh I'm the bad guy, I've got a mortgage and a job and a family" and mentally draw some sort of connecting line between themselves and these toffs who might pose for a pint with them but would rather die than send their kids to the same schools.

In short it's those who take what they say at face value.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 January, 2018, 01:56:28 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 08 January, 2018, 10:06:25 AMIf you don't appear in any media organs, you don't appear.

This would be true as recently as 2 years ago, but the media landscape has changed.  Social media had negligible impact on the 2015 General Election, but it changed the UK's political landscape in 2017.  Any wonder the Tories are suddenly in a panic to stop "fake news" after being its beneficiary for so long.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 January, 2018, 02:02:33 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2018, 11:32:13 PMO'Brien is a small-c conservative

You may well be right in saying that I'm only getting selected snippets of his show, but I'm struggling to see him as a conservative - he's pro-union, pro-nationalisation (at least for the transport industry) and pro-immigration; as well as a self-professed 'snowflake'.  I know he's not fully on board with Corbyn, but if he's not a socialist, he's at least a liberal, unless everything I've missed him say is the opposite of what I've heard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 January, 2018, 04:30:30 PM
It's hard to see anyone who is reasonably civil and inquisitive as a conservative because conservatism as a body has been hijacked by neoliberals and the certifiably batshit insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 06:30:36 PM
So Trump is a racist. Gosh. Who could possibly have guessed?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 12 January, 2018, 08:04:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 06:30:36 PM
So Trump is a racist. Gosh. Who could possibly have guessed?
I would book a holiday in Haiti right away,just to prove him wrong,if I were you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 January, 2018, 09:18:33 PM
Quote from: Smith on 12 January, 2018, 08:04:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 06:30:36 PM
So Trump is a racist. Gosh. Who could possibly have guessed?
I would book a holiday in Haiti right away,just to prove him wrong,if I were you.

No, you're quite right Smith.  The President of the US should talk like some obnoxious arsehole down the pub.  It's Political Correctness Gone Mad that the most powerful man in the world should show respect for some of the poorest, or indeed the slightly nuanced view that not all of Africa is mudhuts and/or shanty towns.

Oddly however it's not his view of the places themselves that is the genuinely racist part of his comment: it's his view that the people that might potentially come from all these overwhelmingly-black countries  would automatically be inferior to overwhlemingly-white Norwegians.  Which as you know is exactly what he, and the gobshite down the pub, thinks.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 January, 2018, 09:57:19 PM
Perversely, Trump's presidency may be a good thing - I've protested for decades about the USA pulling the strings behind the scenes- Trump seems determined to piss off allies and enemies alike, so the long term effect is that the USA will be less of a bully power player in the future
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 11:04:18 PM
Quote from: Smith on 12 January, 2018, 08:04:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 06:30:36 PM
So Trump is a racist. Gosh. Who could possibly have guessed?
I would book a holiday in Haiti right away,just to prove him wrong,if I were you.

Please tell me I've picked you up wrong here, and that you're not honestly suggesting that Trump, in explicitly stating that dark-skinned people from poorer nations are worth less than white people from richer ones, has a point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 12 January, 2018, 11:20:37 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 11:04:18 PM
Quote from: Smith on 12 January, 2018, 08:04:02 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2018, 06:30:36 PM
So Trump is a racist. Gosh. Who could possibly have guessed?
I would book a holiday in Haiti right away,just to prove him wrong,if I were you.

Please tell me I've picked you up wrong here, and that you're not honestly suggesting that Trump, in explicitly stating that dark-skinned people from poorer nations are worth less than white people from richer ones, has a point.

That what I thought too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 13 January, 2018, 05:06:34 AM
Well,grandstand all you want,but would YOU live in Haiti?Yeah,didnt think so.
Its not about race,its about crime and corruption.Some places are shitholes.I could name a few shitholes in this country.Most of them 90% white.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2018, 06:40:31 AM
It's also worth remembering that $10bn in international aid donations following the Haitian earthquake allegedly disappeared under the stewardship of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Apparently, even though they loved Haiti enough to spend part of their honeymoon there, the Clintons prioritised sinking aid money into garment factories and a business centre over addressing the problems of ordinary Haitians made destitute and suffering cholera outbreaks following the earthquake.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2018, 08:13:12 AM
While I'd love the chance of a holiday in Haiti, I don't want to live there any more than I'd like to live in that magical kingdom of whiteness Norway, mainly because my home and interests are here in Ireland.

But that's not really the point, is it?  My issue is the idea that rich white people should be allowed to travel while poor dark-skinned people need to stay where they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 January, 2018, 09:24:07 AM
The Leader of the free world is a racist, narcissistic fuckwit with less charisma than a monkeys armpit. Impeachment seems increasingly like a necessary public duty than a criminal one, Americans and the rest of the world need defending from this tanned twerp and his entourage of KKK fans. Let's hope the November mid-term elections prove disastrous for the Republicans and leave the glowering ogre impotent in the White House.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 January, 2018, 10:12:55 AM
Quote from: Smith on 13 January, 2018, 05:06:34 AM
Well,grandstand all you want,but would YOU live in Haiti?Yeah,didnt think so.

You hear that whooshing sound? That would be the point going over your head.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 10:51:21 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2018, 08:13:12 AM
While I'd love the chance of a holiday in Haiti, I don't want to live there any more than I'd like to live in that magical kingdom of whiteness Norway, mainly because my home and interests are here in Ireland.

But that's not really the point, is it?  My issue is the idea that rich white people should be allowed to travel while poor dark-skinned people need to stay where they are.

What that man said.

I've called more than a few places shitholes in my time,  I've even lived in one or two (by my middle class western standards).   What I have never done is say that the people that live there are inferior to the people that live in 'nice' places, nor ascribed those values along black and white lines. And I'm not even in the position of influencing global policies and attitudes.

Trump, and his supporters, are a disgrace to humanity, and no amount of supposed telling-it-like-it-is changes that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2018, 12:17:11 PM
On a related note, I've been teaching English to Mexicans this week. The question arose as to whether anyone had ever done anything illegal. While I always considered my own youthful transgressions mild if manifold (mainly drug possession, shoplifting and traffic violations) the worst the two Mexicans could manage was taking a piss in public (one while drunk in an alleyway, one with his wife keeping watch while on a quiet cliffside walk).

But yeah, build that fucking wall, Trump, while your own citizens carry on with their shooting sprees and rioting. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 January, 2018, 12:53:14 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 January, 2018, 09:24:07 AMImpeachment seems increasingly like a necessary public duty than a criminal one

Not going to happen.  The highest office in the Western hemisphere being brought down by either the system or the people it represents would set a disastrous precedent for the political establishment, as well as be a millstone around the Republican Party's neck in exactly the same way Nixon has been.  Legacy means a great deal to this strain of the political classes, as you can tell by the way they've worked relentlessly to destroy anything Obama contributed to policy while in office, and they work under the impression that they control how history will be written and that their provable transgressions will be written out of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2018, 01:40:12 PM
Either he'll quit after his first term as the "best president ever" or he'll get a second term. Those are the only two scenarios, bar karma giving him a heart attack on a golf course.

As for the shithole comment, it says everything about the man. He's a disgrace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 13 January, 2018, 02:37:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2018, 06:40:31 AM
It's also worth remembering that $10bn in international aid donations following the Haitian earthquake allegedly disappeared under the stewardship of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Apparently, even though they loved Haiti enough to spend part of their honeymoon there, the Clintons prioritised sinking aid money into garment factories and a business centre over addressing the problems of ordinary Haitians made destitute and suffering cholera outbreaks following the earthquake.
Also,a good point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 January, 2018, 02:42:37 PM
Quote from: Smith on 13 January, 2018, 02:37:18 PM
Also,a good point.

Deflection. You've been asked directly whether you're approving of Trump's statement and its implications. Perhaps you should answer that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 13 January, 2018, 02:50:19 PM
It does seem a bit of a pastime, to loathe whoever is in office as American president.  Obama has been the rare bright spark but even there his record has been tainted, particularly over the issue of Gitmo and drones.  That said, Trump seems an order of magnitude worse than anything that we've seen in the oval office.  Reagen might have been a dithering fool, Bush a stooge of the oil business and Clinton a lying womaniser but the comments, actions and behaviour of Trump are disturbing at times.  More worrying is the way in which he has seemingly accelerated media mistrust.  Editorial bias has always been a concern but he seems to have seized on it and expanded it in an especially damaging manner.

Impeachment though?  I'd have to agree with PB here; not particularly likely to happen.  Even if it did, it doesn't necessarily guarantee that Trump will go. I suspect that we will have to ride out the next three years, praying that Trump doesn't manage to destroy all human life on this planet.    :|

As for the 'shithole' comment; there are plenty of parts of the US and Europe that could potentially fall under that category.  Personally I have a high level of antipathy for Suffolk, particularly the Stowmarket area.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 13 January, 2018, 03:09:14 PM
QuoteIt's also worth remembering that $10bn in international aid donations following the Haitian earthquake allegedly disappeared under the stewardship of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Apparently, even though they loved Haiti enough to spend part of their honeymoon there, the Clintons prioritised sinking aid money into garment factories and a business centre over addressing the problems of ordinary Haitians made destitute and suffering cholera outbreaks following the earthquake.

Quoteallegedly

I mean, if we're setting unsourced allegations as the bar, then Trump is "allegedly" a treasonous money launderer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2018, 04:29:48 PM
A source. (http://www.dadychery.org/2015/01/06/ban-ki-moon-challenged-on-immunity-of-un-special-envoy-to-haiti-and-cirh-co-chair-bill-clinton/)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 04:30:44 PM
No-one is under the impression that you can get to be, and remain, POTUS while retaining blood-free hands and unblemished character: it's not possible.  Deflecting arguments by accusing people of believing that is probably the greatest straw-man fallacy of all. 

So the dubious, venal, stupid or plain brutal deeds of Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama (or Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy, you fecking name 'em: skeletons abound) are completely irrelevant: we know.

What matters is that the current incumbent is a contemptible dickweasel whose every stumbling utterance emboldens the vilest dregs of humanity and reassures them that their wilful ignorance, contempt for the weak and hate-filled selfishness is not just okay, but worthy of the highest acclaim and respect of their nation. Obama, whatever his other sins, represented his nation as caring, witty, educated, inclusive, respectful and informed: his personal grace was something to be admired, to aspire to, even if he too had feet of clay.

Trump degrades the USA in a way even crooked Nixon, arrogant LBJ and Chimp-in-Chief GWB scarcely approached, and as the whole planet lives in its political and economic ambit, all of us too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 04:40:59 PM
POST DELETED.

Thought better of continuing with my rant.  Trump is bad, mmmmkay?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 13 January, 2018, 08:21:42 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2018, 01:40:12 PM
Those are the only two scenarios, bar karma giving him a heart attack on a golf course.

Too good for him, shirley? Son of Karma demands Al Trumpone be crushed by his wall while denying by tweet he knew all along 'poonani' means what it means and, no, he didn't grab it confuse it for that non-American Indian bloke's wife. Meanwhile, the Grey Cardinal finalizes divorce proceedings but that's just поддельные новости.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 13 January, 2018, 08:35:40 PM
I just want Trump to be ruined and his family name in blacklisted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 January, 2018, 09:20:28 PM
I'm running a sweep on when he's going to drop the N-bomb
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 January, 2018, 09:48:00 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 13 January, 2018, 09:20:28 PM
I'm running a sweep on when he's going to drop the N-bomb

According to a couple of stories from last year he already has. Supposedly captured on tape during a recording of a boardroom meeting relating to The Apprentice, (tape is yet to surface, obviously), and Don Cheadle claims he used the term during a game of golf with a friend's father, (a man Trump had only just met).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 January, 2018, 10:09:16 PM
If I was in the sweep, my money would have been on "unearthed recording", as there is zero chance the buffoon hasn't violated every taboo already, it's just a matter of waiting for the tapes to surface.

Also: when - not if - he drops the N-bomb, the GOP will suddenly develop amnesia about that time they threw a shit fit when Obama said it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 10:17:01 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 13 January, 2018, 10:09:16 PM
Also: when - not if - he drops the N-bomb

It's pronounced 'Nuc-u-lar'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: marko10174 on 16 January, 2018, 10:59:12 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 10:51:21 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2018, 08:13:12 AM


Trump, and his supporters, are a disgrace to humanity, and no amount of supposed telling-it-like-it-is changes that.

Have you spoken to all of the millions of Trump supporters? do you know them personally? I'm no Trump supporter, but I wouldn't go as far as describing them collectively as a disgrace to humanity. Try not being so dogmatic, speak to people, try to understand other peoples views, and what has led them to adhere to those views. Generalising... I thought we were passed that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 January, 2018, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: marko10174 on 16 January, 2018, 10:59:12 PMtry to understand other peoples views, and what has led them to adhere to those views. Generalising... I thought we were passed that?

If you're happy to support a man who thinks neo-nazis are "good people" and endorses an alleged paedophile for the US Senate, I don't much care what led you to adopt that position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2018, 12:23:49 AM
Quote from: marko10174 on 16 January, 2018, 10:59:12 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 13 January, 2018, 10:51:21 AM
Trump, and his supporters, are a disgrace to humanity, and no amount of supposed telling-it-like-it-is changes that.

Have you spoken to all of the millions of Trump supporters? do you know them personally? I'm no Trump supporter, but I wouldn't go as far as describing them collectively as a disgrace to humanity. Try not being so dogmatic, speak to people, try to understand other peoples views, and what has led them to adhere to those views. Generalising... I thought we were passed that

I'm not generalising, I'm being very specific: deliberately and knowingly supporting a head of state who conducts himself in the manner that Trump does means that person brings (additional) shame on our species. It is disgraceful to listen to the shit that flows out of that dangerous baboon and say "yay Trump, telling the hard truths, have my vote": that goes for anyone that is even slightly aware of themselves and the world around them.

I fully appreciate the levels of ignorance, hardship and social conditioning that may bring an individual to that point,  but it in no way diminishes the disgrace. People do stupid things for all sorts of understandable reasons: it doesn't mean the aren't stupid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 06:34:36 AM
I agree. Just look at the number of people who still believe in voting despicable morons into power and then feeling honour bound to do as they say...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2018, 08:39:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 06:34:36 AM
I agree. Just look at the number of people who still believe in voting despicable morons into power and then feeling honour bound to do as they say...

Touché, monsieur le Requin!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 10:21:20 AM
Ha - I had to Google that. :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 January, 2018, 12:49:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 10:21:20 AM
Ha - I had to Google that. :D

there's a very cool bar in Paris called Le Requin Chagrin (the embarrassed shark) that always makes me think of you
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 01:01:59 PM
Well, I'm glad it's a cool bar and not a dive. If ever I find myself in the vicinity, I'll have to search it out and take a suitably staged selfie (naked, of course...).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 17 January, 2018, 03:08:26 PM
now that would be embarrassing  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2018, 03:55:23 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 17 January, 2018, 03:08:26 PM
now that would be embarrassing  :-[

No need for clasper-shaming.  I'm sure the Shark is just as nature intended, dorsal and ventral.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 06:41:21 PM
I'm exactly as Nature intended. Unfortunately, she formulated these intentions in the middle of that phase during which she became fascinated by the concept of miniaturisation.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2018, 06:58:13 PM
I think you meant to say "it's cold out."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 January, 2018, 07:07:39 PM
You sure it's not "It's cold outside, there's no kind of atmosphere?"

Are you alone?  More or less?

What are the Goldfish up to?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 January, 2018, 09:05:28 PM
Go on, mock the afflicted, you shower.

You remind me of all my (ex) girlfriends. "Put it under the pillow; I'll smoke it in the morning," indeed! "Nobody is this cold," indeed! "It's like a travel-dildo only smaller," indeed!

Michaelwhatsname's David statue for a start - the perfect body: ripped with a full head of luxurious hair and a knob like the light switch in a bottom of the range Honda. That's just like me, that is. Well, almost - one out of three isn't terrible...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: marko10174 on 17 January, 2018, 09:46:58 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 January, 2018, 11:13:22 PM
Quote from: marko10174 on 16 January, 2018, 10:59:12 PMtry to understand other peoples views, and what has led them to adhere to those views. Generalising... I thought we were passed that?

If you're happy to support a man who thinks neo-nazis are "good people" and endorses an alleged paedophile for the US Senate, I don't much care what led you to adopt that position.

"I don't like that man, I must get to know him better"  Abraham Lincoln. Fighting ignorance with ignorance doesn't work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 January, 2018, 10:07:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2018, 06:58:13 PM
I think you meant to say "it's cold out."
Tuck it back in and it'll soon warm up ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 January, 2018, 11:25:24 PM
Quote from: marko10174 on 17 January, 2018, 09:46:58 PM
"I don't like that man, I must get to know him better"  Abraham Lincoln. Fighting ignorance with ignorance doesn't work.

Can't punch Nazis, can't silence Nazis, now I can't even ignore Nazis...

But then this is Abe talking, the same guy who started a four year civil war over the secession of South Carolina, so I suppose I have some leeway.

(Yes, I'm aware I'm that "all true Scotsmen" applies here.  But if Nazis wear the same slacks and beanies as you, you're probably doing something wrong.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 18 January, 2018, 02:36:43 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 January, 2018, 11:25:24 PM

Can't punch Nazis, can't silence Nazis, now I can't even ignore Nazis...


Can I still blame my farts on them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 01:17:36 PM

Quote
Have you spoken to all of the millions of Trump supporters? do you know them personally? I'm no Trump supporter, but I wouldn't go as far as describing them collectively as a disgrace to humanity. Try not being so dogmatic, speak to people, try to understand other peoples views, and what has led them to adhere to those views. Generalising... I thought we were passed that?


Can you help out then? I'm not joking.  I've struggled and failed to understand why people would continue to support this bigoted, self-obsessed, sociopathic man-child, in the face of all his undeniable lies, boorishness and prejudice.  The best I've heard is 'he's not Hilary Clinton'.  Not good enough for me - I really could do with a decent explanation.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2018, 01:32:38 PM
You don't support the president, our Commander in Chief and leader of the free world? What are you, some kind of anti-freedom, America-hating terrorist?

(Shoot the first one to stop clapping.)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 02:42:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2018, 01:32:38 PM
You don't support the president, our Commander in Chief and leader of the free world? What are you, some kind of anti-freedom, America-hating terrorist?

(Shoot the first one to stop clapping.)

How could I possibly be a terrorist? No white person from Ireland has ever planted bombs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2018, 03:00:53 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 01:17:36 PMThe best I've heard is 'he's not Hilary Clinton'.  Not good enough for me - I really could do with a decent explanation.

As ever with right wingers, just look at what they're raging at to find an explanation for their behavior.  In Trump's case, it's "fake news" and "the social media bubble" wherein Trump's supporters maintain themselves in an alternate reality created by right wing media outlets and alt-right social media celebrities - most Alabama voters, for example, didn't even know Republican Roy Moore had been accused of sexual assault by nine separate women (some of whom were children at the time).  Trump's spokesmen openly lie because they know the truth won't get an airing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 03:07:13 PM
Another one - 'I love the fact that he's not a politician'.

Now, nobody is saying that politicians have an honourable profession.  But on the other hand - 'We've got one of the schoolkids to take the place of the bus driver. He can't drive, obviously, but I love the fact that he's not a bus driver.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 January, 2018, 03:23:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2018, 03:00:53 PMAs ever with right wingers, just look at what they're raging at to find an explanation for their behavior.  In Trump's case, it's "fake news"
Worse, a recent poll (yes, I know) has over 4 in 10 Republicans believing accurate but negative news was "fake news". We're all screwed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2018, 04:01:00 PM
We're only screwed if we keep on supporting a system that provides us with these sociopaths.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 06:10:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2018, 04:01:00 PM
We're only screwed if we keep on supporting a system that provides us with these sociopaths.

Of course the system is heavily flawed.  But smashing the system doesn't happen overnight, and in the meantime while decent and well-meaning people aren't voting on principle, selfish bigots are heading straight down the voting booths and elect the worst of the worst.
I know we've been over this time and time again, sorry, but I think it's worth repeating.  While the lefties and liberals were listening to Russell Brand on his non-voting soapbox a few years back, Cameron was sailing comfortably into number 10.  So Russell Brand changed his mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2018, 06:43:50 PM
The system doesn't need to be smashed. It needs to be stripped of every right and power that the rest of us don't have - most crucially, the right to instigate violence. All that's needed is for everyone to be under the same law, with the same rights and the same responsibilities. I don't think that's an unreasonable desire for any society.

For example, in his Nine Principles of Policing (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles), Robert Peel included at #7 the words: "To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence."

But the police are not simply citizens in uniform any more. They have slowly morphed into a body of men and women who have been convinced that they are not mere citizens any more. They are "super-citizens" with more rights and powers than the rest of us, chiefly concerned no longer with "the interests of community welfare and existence," but now fixated on policing the status quo.

This is what undue authoritarian power does, it takes good ideas and useful institutions and, through the bestowing of illusory rights and powers and the aggrandisement of favoured participants, bends them to its will. I want my police, and all my public servants, to be equal with the rest of us. After all, isn't this what most people believe is the case anyway?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 January, 2018, 08:42:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 January, 2018, 03:23:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2018, 03:00:53 PMAs ever with right wingers, just look at what they're raging at to find an explanation for their behavior.  In Trump's case, it's "fake news"
Worse, a recent poll (yes, I know) has over 4 in 10 Republicans believing accurate but negative news was "fake news". We're all screwed.

This ... this .... this .... this here!!!!! This is the reality of Trump's crime; not just against the US but the whole world.  Anything that one chooses to disagree with is now 'fake news'.  What was once the sole purview of the tinfoil hat brigade is now the political dictator's rebuttal de jure.  Trump has becoming the living embodiment of the old axiom; repeat a lie often enough and people will believe it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2018, 09:18:47 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 06:10:26 PMI know we've been over this time and time again, sorry, but I think it's worth repeating.  While the lefties and liberals were listening to Russell Brand on his non-voting soapbox a few years back, Cameron was sailing comfortably into number 10.  So Russell Brand changed his mind.

He didn't really change his mind, he endorsed the Greens, which is as good as not voting B'DUM TISH.

You seem to be remembering things differently to me, as I recall the lefties and liberals hated and despised Brand in the same way they currently hate and despise Corbyn, right down to the sneering condescension as they retweeted skewed Guardian headlines and bat away any suggestion that they're still being led around by the nose.
Two things worth remembering are (1) that Brand's Damascene conversion from being an unbearable knob to being an unbearable lefty knob has changed his natural audience from 20 and 30-something readers of The Sun to politically homeless youths, and if Brand had just browbeaten that audience into voting Labour because they were the lesser of two evils, it would have backfired just like it did for Hillary Clinton's cheerleaders, because (2) back when he was telling people not to bother voting, he was right: there wasn't clear water between the Tories and New Labour.  I'm not even sure if Milliband had won that we'd have avoided Brexit, because if there's one thing his Labour party loved, it was meaningless but politically-suicidal populist gestures like that marble monument he spent 30 grand on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2018, 09:54:59 PM
 
Quotethe lefties and liberals hated and despised Brand in the same way they currently hate and despise Corbyn,

Do they despise Cornyn? I'm not casting doubt over what you say,  I'm just curious. I thought a lot of them had got on board with Jezza since Theresa's ill-judged snap election.
Obviously I'm in a different country so can't really judge the political climate properly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2018, 10:31:00 PM
They certainly hated and despised him before the election, but I can't say it's been my experience that someone gets made to look like a fool and takes it on the chin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 January, 2018, 09:28:45 AM
If anything, Corbyn fans are doubling down. I have a friend who's big into Corbyn, and who's convinced himself (although slightly less so of late) that he's playing the long game regarding the EU, and will eventually change his mind. "Just wait and see!" Yes, presumably that's why he's using a three-line-whip to stop his MPs voting on anything to do with pro-EU settlements/plans, erroneously stating you can't be in the single market unless you're in the EU, going on about the will of the people (2016 Forever Set In Amber™ edition), and so on.

No-one wants to admit the leadership is cynically courting the UKIP vote and making the gamble Labour will retain the borrowed votes (seven points or so from Lib Dems, and still one or two from Greens) and new ones (mostly young/students), even after a perceived (if not actual, going by the manifesto) betrayal on EU membership, or some kind of EEA fudge. But as people who've known Corbyn for years say, he never changes his mind on something, and his views about the EEC/EU are well known.

As for his supporters, I had someone yelling "fake news" at me about the "can't be in the single market" point, despite me sending a link to a YouTube clip with Corbyn actually saying that on Peston. (Others make a more nuanced argument that he's somehow stating you can't be in the single market, but can instead have a participation treaty. But no-one – including lawyers and EU scholars I follow – use that terminology. Norway is effectively in the single market. And if Corbyn is talking about a Norway-style deal, he should bloody well come out and say it. All this ambiguity is bullshit, and makes him no better than May.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 January, 2018, 09:35:04 AM
It's also interesting right now looking at Electoral Calculus, which is quite accurate in terms of seat count. If an election were held today and the predictions proved accurate (unlikely – Con its usually underestimated), Labour ends up 21 short of a majority (305 to Con 278). The only viable coalition/deal is Lab/SNP, although Labour has repeatedly ruled out all deals and basically 'dared' others to return us to a Tory government. (Again, people have a go at the Tories a lot, but they did at least go into coalition with the Lib Dems.)

If we make the assumption the polls are wrong (as they usually are), and swing each just two per cent, we end up roughly where we are now, with the Tories 12 seats short. However, make those votes I was talking about 'go home', and we see the Tories end up with a majority of ten, and Labour lose over 20 seats. (Lib Dems, on a mid-teens percentage, claw their way back to 22 seats – or 3% – again showcasing the absurdity of FPTP.)

A smart, pragmatic Labour Party would look at demographic shifts, and plan for a future of coalition/partnership with centrists and nationalists. But instead we have a small-minded bunch of far-left ideologues wanting to usher in a socialist paradise (while simultaneously not recognising that this won't be possible if there's no bloody money).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 January, 2018, 12:58:30 PM
The Trots under the bed won't be happy until we have gulags and bread lines, Beryl.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 January, 2018, 01:27:16 PM
Will secret family courts and food banks suffice?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 January, 2018, 01:52:13 PM
Insofar as it's feasible for an exclusively aquatic predator to be on fire, you most definitely are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 January, 2018, 02:48:06 PM
There has to be something driving rising temperatures in the oceans, right? :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 January, 2018, 04:26:49 PM
And yet it's snowing outside - so much for global warming.  FAKE NEWS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 January, 2018, 08:04:41 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 January, 2018, 09:35:04 AM
But instead we have a small-minded bunch of far-left ideologues wanting to usher in a socialist paradise (while simultaneously not recognising that this won't be possible if there's no bloody money).

I do wonder if this is a core part of the problem; the ideological extremism inherent in Labour just as in the Tory party.  In some respects, Tony Blair got it right insofar as he recognised the limits in the socialist / marxist position.  On the one hand you want to embrace the full potential of human ingenuity and innovation but on the other hand you want to recognise the impact that might have. 

Technology has the potential to improve the human condition but individuals have to be able to respond to it appropriately.  Some will exploit that for their own benefit, others for their own plus others.  That is the challenge we face; to maximise the benefit across society whilst rewarding those making the greatest risk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 January, 2018, 09:28:38 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 January, 2018, 09:35:04 AM
It's also interesting right now looking at Electoral Calculus, which is quite accurate in terms of seat count. If an election were held today and the predictions proved accurate (unlikely – Con its usually underestimated)
It's not so much that the estimates are out, it's that people lie in opinion polls and don't want to admit that they vote Tory - it's called the Shy Tory Syndrome...


Quote(Again, people have a go at the Tories a lot, but they did at least go into coalition with the Lib Dems.)
Technically, yes - but wouldn't an actual coalition have involved them having an influence on policy, instead of just enabling them to carry out their own policies as if they'd had an actual majority?  The DUP has more influence on current Tory decisions than the Libs ever did, even though the DUP isn't in a coalition with them.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 January, 2018, 10:20:37 PM
LOL at the idea that Tony Blair wasn't an ideological extremist.  I mean, you don't even have to roll out the corpses of 1 million dead Iraqis to dispute that one.

Quite the juggling act Corbyn is doing there, being both a hardline ideological extremist who never yields and yet also betraying the working classes by voting with the government.  I don't know how he manages it on top of being unelectable by winning elections, and a bully who insists on getting things his way whilst simultaneously being too weak to lead.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 January, 2018, 08:04:41 PMI do wonder if this is a core part of the problem; the ideological extremism inherent in Labour just as in the Tory party.

WHO ARE THE HARD LEFT, TJM?
I am curious what this ideological extremism is when even the IMF have endorsed the Shadow Chancellor's policy of taxing higher earners saying it won't harm economic growth.  Meanwhile, the left in the party hasn't purged anyone - quite the opposite, the Labour right have been trying to gerrymander internal elections for two years and the left have still won things fair and square - and have even gone out and recruited Tory voters like Michelle Dorrell, who you may remember we all laughed at when she broke down in tears on QT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 January, 2018, 09:28:38 PMTechnically, yes - but wouldn't an actual coalition have involved them having an influence on policy
The Lib Dems had plenty of influence on policy. Most of the decent things that coalition did (and the shitty things it didn't do – but the Tories have done since) were down to the Lib Dems. The problem is, the Tories took the credit for everything that was received positively, and shovelled the shit for all the bad stuff on to the Lib Dems. It's also worth noting that party has shifted rightwards under Clegg too, so what you got was the more capitalist-oriented wing of the party outnumbered by the Tories 5:1 having some – but not massive – impact on policy.

QuoteDUP has more influence on current Tory decisions than the Libs ever did, even though the DUP isn't in a coalition with them.
One of the Lib Dem party's greatest errors was in not realising the power they had. They were naïve. The DUP really isn't. LDs should have strong-armed on a number of matters (not least, but including: Clegg should have been foreign secretary; no AV referendum – AV+ should have been put through in the Commons and three-line whipped; NHS bill should have been killed; no increase in student fees for the length of the coalition).

Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 January, 2018, 10:20:37 PMQuite the juggling act Corbyn is doing there, being both a hardline ideological extremist who never yields and yet also betraying the working classes by voting with the government.
He's an ideologue in the sense he's three-line-whipping the party to put through a position that he thinks will usher in his socialist utopia. He wants hard Brexit, but for a different reason than May and co. For now, that means doing the same as May.

QuoteI don't know how he manages it on top of being unelectable by winning elections
Only for the leadership. His party made a massive balls-up of the last general election. (Plenty of on-the-ground reports of them basically doing fuck-all in seats that turned out to be easily winnable.) Also, what the fuck in places like Richmond Park? Just get out of the fucking way, rather than offering hubris and letting another bloody Tory in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 January, 2018, 04:26:33 PM
The Labour Party want people to vote for the Labour Party?  I wholeheartedly agree that's no way to fight an election, etc.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
QuoteI don't know how he manages it on top of being unelectable by winning elections
Only for the leadership.

And Parliament.

Quote(Plenty of on-the-ground reports of them basically doing fuck-all in seats that turned out to be easily winnable.)

They also took Tory seats that were unwinnable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 05:13:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 January, 2018, 04:26:33 PMThe Labour Party want people to vote for the Labour Party?  I wholeheartedly agree that's no way to fight an election, etc.
It's hubris. Labour had no chance of winning that seat. But in standing, it went to the Tories. They're presumably hoping the FPTP tipping point will favour them again soon, like it did in 1997, but we have a bullshit way to vote, and Labour's continuing 'no deal' arrogance (and direct threats prior to the last GE regarding 'daring' everyone else to not support them) showcases how absurdly juvenile British politics is.

QuoteAnd Parliament.
262 seats, against the worst Conservative government and the most inept election campaign in recent memory. So they're basically back to where they were in 2010. 2017 was not a victory of any sort.

QuoteThey also took Tory seats that were unwinnable.
They got a few good punches in, but to what end? Actually giving a shit in a handful more seats, or having the good grace to step back in one or two other constituencies and we suddenly have an entirely different political landscape, where even with the DUP the Tories cannot make ends meet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 January, 2018, 09:00:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
His party made a massive balls-up of the last general election. (Plenty of on-the-ground reports of them basically doing fuck-all in seats that turned out to be easily winnable.)

That was fuck-all to do with Corbyn. The Progress/Blairite-controlled party management believed (hoped?) that they were going to get annihilated and adopted a 'circle the wagons' strategy that saw them pour resources into defending safe seats while adjacent marginals got literally no support. Labour were never going to win that election but there were a number of winnable marginals that Party Central abandoned due to their belief (hope?) that Corbyn was leading them to electoral catastrophe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 January, 2018, 09:02:47 PM
This is a very informative debate for an outsider,  keep it going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 January, 2018, 01:11:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
Also, what the fuck in places like Richmond Park? Just get out of the fucking way, rather than offering hubris and letting another bloody Tory in.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. But the parties act like your vote counts individually, rather than in a first past the post system. Strategic voting undermines the democratic ideal they espouse but anything other than strategic voting is a waste of the absolutely miniscule amount of power anyone has.

Tim Farron demonstrated the self-same hubris in the by-election by taking the opportunity to piss all over Labour. He spent longer talking about Corbyn and Labour being 'irrelevant' than he did about taking Richmond Park from Zac Goldsmith and the Conservatives' attempt at a puppet-independency.

For all the stick they get for idealism, the Greens are the only ones I see who talk about the electoral system in the context of how it actually bloody well works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2018, 02:06:42 PM
Yep. The Greens put their money where their mouth is, and stood down in a bunch of seats (democratically, with the backing of their local teams/reps). Perhaps my memory's faulty, but I seem to recall this being reciprocated precisely once, by the Lib Dems (who stood down in Brighton Pav – although it turns out Caroline Lucas wasn't really under threat there in the end).

It's all hubris. Labour thinks it has a God-given right to rule, and craps all over the idea of standing down or collaborating. (After all, one must ALWAYS have the option to vote Labour! Well, unless you're in Northern Ireland, for some reason.) The Lib Dems seem to be labouring under the misapprehension they still matter to the extent they did before 2015. As noted, Farron should have shut the fuck up about Labour and gone full-on "get Goldsmith out". By all means appeal to Labour voters to achieve this, but don't rubbish their party.

Elsewhere, a limited amount of cooperation in specific seats would have resulted in a load more Lab MPs, and at least a handful of extra LDs, and no Con/DUP numbers that added up. Mostly, people respond to this by saying: but what about the press side of things, with Cons slamming this kind of cooperation? Well, UKIP candidates stood down to aid the Tories, and they didn't start complaining about that. The other point – Blair hurling the Jenkins report into the future, and Corbyn taking up that particular baton (as in: PR IS EVIL because Labour can't take advantage of it like it can maybe one election in four like FPTP) and running with it – is perhaps a bigger issue.

Basically, our electoral system is shit, hasn't really worked since the existence of Labour, has only twice in the last hundred years provided a government voted for by the majority (rather than a plurality), and leaves a great many people not represented. Still, it works for the Tories and sometimes for Labour, so neither of them gives a damn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 January, 2018, 02:11:12 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2018, 02:06:42 PM
Basically, our electoral system is shit, hasn't really worked since the existence of Labour,

I don't disagree that it's shit but I'm struggling to see the connection there - did it work better when it was whigs vs tories?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2018, 02:34:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 January, 2018, 09:00:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2018, 01:25:41 PM
His party made a massive balls-up of the last general election. (Plenty of on-the-ground reports of them basically doing fuck-all in seats that turned out to be easily winnable.)

That was fuck-all to do with Corbyn.

Didn't the Blairites actually change the codes on Labour HQ to lock out lefties on the day of the election in preparation for purging them and seizing the party's assets?  Even the BBC couldn't bury what was happening, their on-the-ground documentary about what they thought was going to be the elimination of Centrist Dads' nemesis turning instead into a chronicle of the palpable frustration of "moderate" MPs that their party wasn't being annihilated, Kinnock jr's face as the penny dropped becoming a meme the day after the documentary aired.
Added to which, there were some areas where Momentum had to bus in their own campaigners because local activists had been suspended from the Labour party for supporting Corbyn during the leadership contest instead of their own right wing MPs, which I am sure would have been reciprocated by Progress to support left wing MPs like Clive Lewis or Laura Pidcock, except, you know, it wasn't.

Still, it's a lie to say Labour didn't consider electoral pacts - Kezia Dugdale told Labour voters to vote for other parties, for instance.

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 22 January, 2018, 01:11:08 PM
Tim Farron demonstrated the self-same hubris in the by-election by taking the opportunity to piss all over Labour. He spent longer talking about Corbyn and Labour being 'irrelevant' than he did about taking Richmond Park from Zac Goldsmith and the Conservatives' attempt at a puppet-independency.

Anything that got Tim to stop talking about gay sex was probably good for the LibDems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2018, 02:52:08 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 22 January, 2018, 02:11:12 PMI don't disagree that it's shit but I'm struggling to see the connection there - did it work better when it was whigs vs tories?
It could still be a shit-show. 1847 was a good example: the Whigs secure 54% of the vote (an actual majority), but end up with 44% of the seats, and so the Conservatives win the election. Well done, democracy. (In the event, Conservative in-fighting meant the Whigs continued, but still.) Then you add into the equation ongoing complexity with Irish politics, suffrage, etc, and you realise FPTP has to some extent always been bollocks.

Still, when the majority of the country had just two choices, the system at least makes some sense, and the UK's tendency towards more multi-member constituencies at various times in history resulted in – broadly speaking – better representation in some ways.

Today, it's almost always a shit-show, and it really has been since a third party ended up getting a decent chunk of the vote, be that Labour in the early 1900s or Liberals of various flavours more recently. On the latter, look at 1983: the SPD/Lib got 25% of the vote (vs Labour's 27) yet ended up with 4% of the seats (vs 32). That is mental.

Then in 2015, we see UKIP and the Greens, respectively, secure 12% and 3% of the vote and get 0.2% of the seats. (The battered Lib Dems, meanwhile, become an irrelevance, but their 1% of seats – 8 – does not align with their 8% of the vote, which should have got them closer to 50.) These are extremes, of course, but at every GE we have this crap. My wife looks at this and doesn't understand why the UK has such an undemocratic, unrepresentative parliament, while banging on about being some kind of world leader in terms of democracy. (To top it off, we then have an entirely unelected second house with clergy, and a head of state that wears a fucking gold hat.)

Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2018, 02:34:09 PMStill, it's a lie to say Labour didn't consider electoral pacts - Kezia Dugdale told Labour voters to vote for other parties, for instance.
Some people in Labour said X ≠ Labour policy was X.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 22 January, 2018, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2018, 02:52:08 PM
Some people in Labour said X ≠ Labour policy was X.

The Scottish Labour leader would be a reasonable source for Labour policy in Scotland, I'd have thought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Goaty on 10 February, 2018, 12:08:18 AM
So Trump fired everyone at White House, same as in Zombo back in 2011...

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--IRv9n3-_--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/wq7mypiu1v5nw7epsj3t.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 February, 2018, 11:10:55 AM
I always knew the prog was a more accurate forecaster of the future than your standard newspaper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2018, 06:08:41 PM
Real Trump wishes he looked like Zombo Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 February, 2018, 07:35:42 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2018, 06:08:41 PM
Real Trump wishes he looked like Zombo Trump.

Or talked the best words as good as him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 10:52:27 AM
Well, just to prove that the world is going to hell in a handcart, Trump suggests that one possible solution to the school shooting problem is to arm teachers!   :o

Now that might be one way to stop behaviour problems in school.  Just imagine the scene:

"Sit, shut up, get on with your work!"
"Make me!"
"Make my day, punk!"  (pulling out large semi-automatic rifle)

On a more serious note; seriously?  The solution to the gun problem in school is to put more guns in schools?  As has been pointed out by a few commentators, when the SWAT team come gunning for the gunman the last thing you want to be doing is running around school with a firearm.  Their first thought is going to be "they've got a gun.  They must be the perpetrator.  If the teacher is lucky, they won't open fire.  If the teacher is not white, that is pretty unlikely.

Two quotes from Robin Williams spring to mind:

"You have the right to bear arms, or the right to arm bears.  Whatever the hell you want!"
"Reality is a crutch for those who can't handle hard drugs."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 February, 2018, 11:40:17 AM
That's such a good idea for the Big Meg in the face of cuts to Justice Department.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2018, 12:04:40 PM
13 well-trained military personnel were gunned down at Fort Hood by a spree killer, but sure: a civics teacher will fare much better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 February, 2018, 01:57:15 PM
The best-case scenario here is minimum 2 casualties. The 'bad guy with a gun' and whoever they shot first so the 'good guy with a gun' could open fire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 22 February, 2018, 02:25:42 PM
There's also the issue of what happens if the teacher is the 'bad guy'.

The perpetrator of the Dunblane massacre (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_massacre) was a youth club director and had previously been a Scout leader.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 02:37:38 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 22 February, 2018, 01:57:15 PM
The best-case scenario here is minimum 2 casualties. The 'bad guy with a gun' and whoever they shot first so the 'good guy with a gun' could open fire.

Nah, the best case is that armed teachers - or the kids that access their weapons - accidentally (or deliberately) kill fewer students than would have been killed without their supposed deterrent effect. And given the numbers of teachers we're talking about, I would consider that to be a deeply improbable outcome. The solution to guns in is not, and has never been, more guns.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 02:57:26 PM
Plus there is the issue of teacher burnout and stress.  How good an idea is it to have professionals with a high incidence of mental health issues bringing firearms to work?  Also, what happens if a kid accidentally gets hold of it?

Yeah, this is shaping up into a really good idea.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 03:26:23 PM
FwiW; The issue with firearms and these random shootings I personally believe has little to nothing to do with firearms themselves, ease of their procurement, or a reciprocal threat on the premises (teachers having guns).  I do believe you need some controls as to who and how firearms are procured, yet I believe the answer is much simpler though much more difficult to address.

50-years ago firearms in the U.S. were not only easier to get, by virtually anyone, yet there was also no fear of a response (as in quickly alerted L.E., armed guards, etc.)  In fact in rural communities it was not that uncommon for someone to go out hunting in the morning and then take their firearm to school and it was not given a second thought.  By virtue of all of the suggestions, there should have been even more shootings then, though decreased proportionally due to population.

In any case, I believe among many other issues one of the biggest is the loss of feeling a sense of responsibility to one's family, their name, good standing and so on, as well as to the community.  Naturally that means a much bigger problem being that those values aren't taught, and on the same token aren't enforced by the community at large... Further, as much as so many people are afraid to say such now-a-days, one of the biggest aspects of that family and community often revolved around their faith in God.

The second there is no belief in an inescapable overseer, then the possibility of convincing ones self of 'getting away with it, being praised for it, finding acclaim or notoriety for it, etc..' and then having to pay with no greater consequence than your life (which really makes no sense to me, most youngsters are fatalists at one time or another, so if this life is all there is, why wouldn't you fight and scratch for it), then why not (as a twisted mind would envision it)?

Personally, I believe you could establish all sorts of defenses, and they'll find their way around them. Ban guns, and they'll still find them.  Destroy all the guns, and they'll use something else...

It's a deeper issue, one where the individual, and their families, and the communities need to begin once more taking responsibility for everything/one else, instead of where being an "individual" without responsibility to others is the end all goal.  So it is a MUCH bigger problem.

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2018, 03:27:20 PM
The GOP is pathologically incapable of arguing its side without personal attacks, so there is every possibility this one is going to go badly for them - especially in a mid-term election year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 04:00:53 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 03:26:23 PM

It's a deeper issue, one where the individual, and their families, and the communities need to begin once more taking responsibility for everything/one else, instead of where being an "individual" without responsibility to others is the end all goal.  So it is a MUCH bigger problem.


Granted there are other dimensions to this issue.  Trump is not completely wrong to suggest that mental health support could be more robust.  I may be misreading your core argument which seems to suggest that the decline in religious observance may be a factor and I can see where that might have come from.  Certain American politicians have been decrying the decline of morality and linking it thusly.  Your final point is one that I'm not entirely sold on though.

Firstly my understanding, albeit flawed and limited, is that American's value individual responsibility and self sufficiency above a lot of other things (from American relatives and time living among US armed forces personnel out in Germany).  The idea of the 'self made wo/man' is often cited as a key feature of the American psyche.  Secondly, a sizeable chunk of American's prefer local community solutions to government imposed federal solutions.  There is an inherent tension in American politics as it tries to resolve this dichotomy.

it is a MUCH bigger problem, that much is true.  I think it's also fair to say that Trump's proposed solution could make it so as well.  Having said that, I think that this time the NRA might find themselves on the losing side of history.  Maybe someone will finally call them out on the first half of the 2nd Amendment.  Does America still need a well armed militia to protect the citizenry against the British?  (let's face it, a pea shooter would probably do the trick).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 February, 2018, 04:08:43 PM
As The Onion points out, depressingly regularly: 'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens (https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:35:05 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 03:26:23 PM
Destroy all the guns, and they'll use something else...

And yet in Australia and the UK they didn't. American exceptionalism is never more frustrating than when applied to this issue.  In aggregate human behaviour is becoming less violent, less criminal,  year after year: the US is part of this trend,  your population is not composed of any more amoral rudderless psychos than the rest, but of all the rich western countries,  only in the one where you can pretend you need a military grade firearm to hunt deer and/or protect yourself from uppity negroes does this crap happen again and again and again. Join the bloody dots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:37:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 04:00:53 PM***Compressed Quote***
Granted there are other dimensions to this issue...........Does America still need a well armed militia to protect the citizenry against the British?

Against the British? Are you kidding me, would you want them traipsing around your backyard?  ;)

In any case, first off, get the idea that Trump is going to be good for anything right out of your head... I'll just leave it at that.  Secondly, the 2nd Amendment is not just about defending against other nations, or other individuals.  It is most importantly about defending against your own government if they decide that the constitution can be scrapped and they can just take charge (The Declaration of Independence spells it out much better than I ever could... Simply replace Great Britain with "the U.S. Government").

That said, morality is subjective.  My morality is not your morality, and my morality may not jibe with societal standards, yet I'm free to live my morality as long as I don't impose it on others.  It has nothing to do with women's rights, and even as contradictory as it sounds, an individuals rights... and to some degree even what level of government it comes from.  You're encouraged to be an individual.  In fact if you think about it, in a good home you're groomed for the day you go out and are that independent individual, to give you the tools to do so both mentally and emotionally.

What I'm talking about is a sense of responsibility.  To your family, your friends, your local community, customers, people you encounter, state, and then nation.   Until a few years ago, schools and churches were the focal point of community.  I lived in a region where dependent upon what church a family went to established the smallest aspect of community after family (and many friends also went there).  Then it worked up the scale.  In fact, people would be looked at as coming from a separate yet peer community if they didn't attend the same church.  To not attend church at all made you an absolute outsider.

Church and God regardless, it boiled down to having a sense of responsibility to others... That your actions or inactions could not only harm yourself, yet harm the ever escalating and greater community at large, and you dared not risk that lest you be excluded from that community.  That oddly is part of it too.  We now tend to tolerate people who want this and that from the community, yet never participate let alone give back.  So instead of having this ever growing ring of communities that you're a part of, that you feel "responsible to and for" and realize and accept that you affect them and that they affect you... People have made themselves into islands.  They take no responsibility for anything except themselves, mostly in that they're not a part of it.

If you have to blame something, blame the loss of personal interaction due to the internet, though it goes back further than that.

In the end, it's about feeling both a responsibility to others, obligation, and feeling a need to contribute and bear the losses that occur when we fail to act and participate.

Someone I know has a great answer for many questions that in his case bears tremendous weight.

"How do I know you'll do X?"... 'Because I'm _____ ________."
"How do I know you're not lying?"... 'Because I'm _____ ______."
etc..

His name bears weight not because of fame or fortune, yet due to his consistent honesty, resolve, and sense of responsibility. And it all started with never wanting to harm his families name, and just worked out from there.

So it boils down to "each of us" as individuals living our lives being more concerned for others than for self.  Then actually getting out there and being a part of it, contributing, not just taking or doing it all on our own.

That's what I'm talking about ;)

Boy, can I yap or what?

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:42:25 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:35:05 PMAnd yet in Australia and the UK they didn't... ***Quote cut short***

And yet, didn't they recently pass or try to pass a ban on long and large bladed weapons like swords, machetes and so on?  "American Exceptionalism?"  How about we not turn it into that debate along with all the other qualifiers you've stated.  Such an approach negates having a discussion.

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:43:54 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:37:25 PM
That said, morality is subjective. 

To a point. And the idea that the constitutional right to maintain a well-regulated militia somehow trumps the rights of children not to be mown down by a freely-available semi+automatic weapon seems to be to way beyond that point.

I accept your arguments about personal responsibility,  and responsibility to others. But that has nothing to do with what happens when you liberally distribute devices that have only one purpose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 22 February, 2018, 05:45:28 PM
the us public school system
disproves the idea
that if everyone was armed
fewer kids would die
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:47:04 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:42:25 PM
And yet, didn't they recently pass or try to pass a ban on long and large bladed weapons like swords, machetes and so on? 

*checks Google for stats on recent school massacres by machete in UK*

Your point?

My reference to 'American exceptionalism' is to the idea that US citizens and culture are somehow exempt from the patterns experienced by the mass of humanity: the notion that your country is so fucked that if you took away the guns there'd be the same number of mass-murders,  just with cutlery,  is the example at hand. It doesn't happen
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2018, 05:48:56 PM
I note that many people calling for disarmament don't seem to believe in the concomitant disarmament of government employees like the police. The suggestion to arm teachers is an extension of the belief that ordinary citizens are untrustworthy but government employees are not. This is, to my mind, a problem.

If the idea is to bar violent or unstable people from owning weapons then it must extend to all violent or unstable people, irrespective of whether they work for government or not. After all, elected officials are amongst the most violent and unstable people in any country and to only allow their employees access to weapons is as dangerous as arming the Mafia. These statists already believe themselves to be above the general citizenry (even though they are human too) and so believe only their agents should be armed. One wonders how easily Hitler and Stalin might have fared in their various pogroms had their victims been better armed.

But it goes even further than that, for governments also maintain ludicrously well-armed military forces which they throw into foreign countries for all kinds of nefarious purposes. Nobody seems to be calling for gun control to extend this far or for the manufacture of weapons to be criminalised.

People look to their governments for direction and, as in many aspects including but by no means limited to gun control, they see a disparity. "We, your rulers, can be armed but you, the ruled, cannot," introduces an element of danger. Is anyone comfortable with the idea of Trump being in charge of the only people allowed to carry guns? Let's say someone like Nigel Farage ascends to the office of prime minister, how many of us would be comfortable having that person in charge of armed police or extending access to weapons to lesser officials like traffic wardens, tax collectors or teachers?

I don't pretend to have any answers to this conundrum but I do see it as a bigger problem than just whether ordinary citizens should be permitted to bear arms or not. Weapons exist and the world is awash with them - from sharpened sticks to intercontinental thermonuclear missiles - so maybe the first step should be a conversation about all weapons. Maybe gun ethics and usage should be taught in schools so that everyone grows up with an appreciation and respect for what guns can do. It's an oft tripped out observation that automobiles are also deadly when misused but most people are happy to let anyone who passes a test to own one. Would it be possible to require anyone wanting a gun to take lessons and pass a test before owning one, both ordinary citizens and government employees alike?

Getting rid of weapons altogether is not a realistic target in the current world and so it seems to me like education might be one way forward. If one cannot prevent the waters rising then one must learn how to swim. Perhaps gun laws should be as simple as, if you pass your test, you can have a gun but it must only be used for hunting, target (sport) shooting or in self-defence and to extend these laws to all gun carriers from soldiers to citizens. If even our armies were only permitted to use weapons in self-defence, it would be much harder to justify the next Iraq or Afghanistan.

As I say, I don't have answers but I do believe that this problem must be seen in its entirety. If we want fewer weapons and tighter controls then we must push for fewer weapons and tighter controls across the board.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:49:32 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:47:04 PM
*checks Google for stats on recent school massacres by machete in UK*
Your point?

My point being I'd say that you and I are done discussing this subject.  Thank you for your participation!

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 22 February, 2018, 05:54:38 PM
But the UK is even more Godless and lacking in community spirit than the most barren backwater of the US- trust me on this, I'm from Chelmsley Wood!  But school children DON'T kill each other, or attempt to kill each otehr in mass numbers - it just doesnt happen.  What's keeping us from doing it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 06:01:06 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:49:32 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 05:47:04 PM
*checks Google for stats on recent school massacres by machete in UK*
Your point?

My point being I'd say that you and I are done discussing this subject.  Thank you for your participation!

My pleasure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 06:01:15 PM
I'm not British, so it would be unfair and uneducated of me to comment as to why it's not happening in Chelmsley Wood.  I could make a few jokes as to why, but then only us barbarians would get it.

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 February, 2018, 06:02:34 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 06:01:15 PM
I'm not British, so it would be unfair and uneducated of me to comment as to why it's not happening in Chelmsley Wood.

I would suggest that it's the absence of guns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 22 February, 2018, 06:08:03 PM
50-years ago firearms in the U.S. were not only easier to get, by virtually anyone, yet there was also no fear of a response (as in quickly alerted L.E., armed guards, etc.)  In fact in rural communities it was not that uncommon for someone to go out hunting in the morning and then take their firearm to school and it was not given a second thought.  By virtue of all of the suggestions, there should have been even more shootings then, though decreased proportionally due to population.

(https://i.imgur.com/TbiToM7.png?1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 06:08:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 22 February, 2018, 06:02:34 PM
I would suggest that it's the absence of guns.

Perhaps, though I'll still refrain from responding with a tasteless though witty reply. Though it is tempting ;)

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 22 February, 2018, 06:35:10 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 06:01:15 PM
I'm not British, so it would be unfair and uneducated of me to comment as to why it's not happening in Chelmsley Wood.  I could make a few jokes as to why, but then only us barbarians would get it.

K2

Make the jokes, everyone who knows the place does! But honestly, it is a desperately squalid and cheap and hopeless place where every neighbour depises their neighbour. What stops them from obtaining the most lethal item they can and trying to take out as many people as they can in Cash Generator?

I was thinking about the time when Heavy Metal music was blamed for these kind of things, and my response I'm sure was very similar to a pro-gun enthusiast - "I don't kill people - I'm a responsible user - dont' take away my fun!" - so on just that basis, I understand the protective impulse - lets say they did prove a link between a small number of suicides and murders with music - should we ban everyone from listening? Trump would presumably advocate playing Manson directly into classrooms.   Mental Health IS a factor that plays into this - but I'm not sure wishing that everyone could be like yourself and responsible and community minded is not really like wishing no one was mentally ill. It isnt a practical solution in the first place, and isnt the solution the UK or other countries use to keep the kill crazies at bay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 22 February, 2018, 06:47:16 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 03:26:23 PM
Ban guns, and they'll still find them.  Destroy all the guns, and they'll use something else...

Those pesky laws. Making bad things more difficult for people to do be they mad, bad, or just dangerous to know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 07:38:48 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 22 February, 2018, 06:35:10 PM
Make the jokes, everyone who knows the place does!

Oh no, you're not baiting me in with that one.  I've seen British TV and movies, I'm pretty sure you fellas don't have a sense of humor.

In any case... Once again, forget Trump who I personally refer to as the, hmm, how to say this... Posterior-Clown.  Trump is all about destroying America from the government on down.  As to mental health, there have always been depressed people, every war has produced people who suffer with PTSD, etc., etc. to flat out homicidal crazies.  This goes right back to responsibility to your community, and thusly, visa versa.  Now I agree that the old standard of "he's nuts, shun him or lock him up" isn't right, but in the same vein of being a responsible citizen and good neighbor you would offer help, and if you can't help (more than likely), than you alert others in your community who can, if anything for simply the safety of the community let alone the individual.

There are a gazillion examples I could use, yet even the old standard (not ideal) of excluding a person or family from interacting with yours, socializing with others and so on was better than nothing.  AND that also applies to when one in your own family goes off the rails.  Your responsibility is to their well being, and the community.  It forced someone to either interact properly, or they didn't get to interact... No doubt making things worse for them, but, they didn't have an opportunity to interact, influence, right down to even reproduce.  Eliminate that societal buffer yet don't replace it with a better way of which their are many, and crazy does what crazy does.

It's about being a good citizen, but you British know that very well being so domesticated and all that.

Finally, I'm Native American.  When faced with a government that had guns and we didn't, it didn't exactly work out so well.  Then again we're not a compliant lot when it comes to obeying our government.  So you've got us beat there ;)

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 February, 2018, 08:21:03 PM
I think the moment passed in the US. Once the national collectively decided it was fine to kill schoolchildren, they were done. In the UK, we had Dunblane. It shocked the country to its core. It was unthinkable. Two rounds of major gun control changes then happened. Since then: one mass shooting, in a country with 65 million people, and – as it turns out – still a fuck-load of guns in the wild. The difference is, they're controlled and licensed, and you can't just pop into your local supermarket and walk out with one (or grab a military grade weapon designed to destroy people's organs with a single shot, making it almost impossible for them to survive, rather than 'merely' being incapacitated).

But for some reason, it's never about the guns. It's about mental health, or videogames, or stopping the government taking over, or some other excuse. And now every other week, there's a massacre somewhere in the US, often in a school. But, like I said, when even the death of schoolchildren doesn't cause Americans en masse to rise up and scream ENOUGH, nothing will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 22 February, 2018, 08:37:27 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 07:38:48 PM
Now I agree that the old standard of "he's nuts, shun him or lock him up" isn't right, but in the same vein of being a responsible citizen and good neighbor you would offer help, and if you can't help (more than likely), than you alert others in your community who can, if anything for simply the safety of the community let alone the individual.

There are a gazillion examples I could use, yet even the old standard (not ideal) of excluding a person or family from interacting with yours, socializing with others and so on was better than nothing.  AND that also applies to when one in your own family goes off the rails.  Your responsibility is to their well being, and the community.  It forced someone to either interact properly, or they didn't get to interact... No doubt making things worse for them, but, they didn't have an opportunity to interact, influence, right down to even reproduce.  Eliminate that societal buffer yet don't replace it with a better way of which their are many, and crazy does what crazy does.

Those with mental health issues are more likely to be a danger to themselves or themselves victims than a threat to society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 09:53:31 PM
Quote from: Eric Plumrose on 22 February, 2018, 08:37:27 PM
Those with mental health issues are more likely to be a danger to themselves or themselves victims than a threat to society.

Agreed 100%... However, if no one stands up to help them, or directs them to help, or directs help to them, then I suspect it doesn't get much better.

In the end, though I don't like it I'm a firm believer in "to change the system, you have to be a part of the system."  That lends itself directly to what I've been saying about family/community/state/nation responsibility.  Therein lies one of the big problems.  No one wants to be responsible or have to contribute or participate, they all just want to do their own thing in their own little world hoping that everyone else will do their part too.

Finally as well although no one likes hearing this, that applies to this discussion.  We were each raised (though perhaps some hatched) and shaped by our families, our community and our national standards.  That goes back to again, responsibility in raising our own and responsibility for community.  So really us (the barbarian savages) and you folks from the UK are speaking totally different languages from totally different perspectives... Besides the fact the conversation is difficult with the British not speaking English, by not having the same values and viewpoints raised so differently, it makes finding a mutual resolution difficult at best.

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 09:59:03 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:37:25 PM
Secondly, the 2nd Amendment is not just about defending against other nations, or other individuals.  It is most importantly about defending against your own government if they decide that the constitution can be scrapped and they can just take charge (The Declaration of Independence spells it out much better than I ever could... Simply replace Great Britain with "the U.S. Government").


Thank you. There is a lot to deal with but I think this above all else.  The 2nd amendment was very much in response to the colonial wars and the threat of a foreign government.  As such it is a historical anachronism and needs to be viewed in that context.  Regrettably these days America is the greatest threat to national security but more importantly, this amendment is being abused in the name of internal security.  As such, it is incredibly damaging to America's international standing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eric Plumrose on 22 February, 2018, 10:02:12 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 09:53:31 PM
Finally as well although no one likes hearing this, that applies to this discussion.  We were each raised (though perhaps some hatched) and shaped by our families, our community and our national standards.  That goes back to again, responsibility in raising our own and responsibility for community.  So really us (the barbarian savages) and you folks from the UK are speaking totally different languages from totally different perspectives... Besides the fact the conversation is difficult with the British not speaking English, by not having the same values and viewpoints raised so differently, it makes finding a mutual resolution difficult at best.

Outside perspective . . . bad.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 10:07:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2018, 05:48:56 PM
The suggestion to arm teachers is an extension of the belief that ordinary citizens are untrustworthy but government employees are not. This is, to my mind, a problem.
...
If the idea is to bar violent or unstable people from owning weapons then it must extend to all violent or unstable people, irrespective of whether they work for government or not.

Speaking as a teacher with a mental health problem, the idea of having a firearm fills me with dread.  In fact, as an ex-serviceman who was taken off live armed duty, I seriously question the sanity of such an approach.  This is one of those occasions when Sharky and I are completely on the same wavelength.  That the president of the United States thinks this is a sensible idea and moreover that no one could convince him otherwise is actually quite disturbing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 22 February, 2018, 10:13:58 PM
The US Murder rate per million people is 4 times greater than the UK

The US Murder rate per million people is 3 times greater than Canada

The US Murder rate per million people is 4 times greater than Australia

1 in every 5 US murders are gun related

tea
mapel syrup
& vegemite
must be good for mental health & community spirit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 09:53:31 PM
So really us (the barbarian savages) and you folks from the UK are speaking totally different languages from totally different perspectives... Besides the fact the conversation is difficult with the British not speaking English, by not having the same values and viewpoints raised so differently, it makes finding a mutual resolution difficult at best.


This is a very accurate point.  National cultural values really do shape this.  I would also agree with the idea that this is a 'linguistic' problem.  The mistake is, I would suggest, to think that this decries the validity of any points being raised.  Self deprecation aside (barbarian savages) there is a significant difference in worldview.  We 'cultural imperialists' could do with being brought down a peg or two, as could you 'financial imperialists'.  Growth comes from stepping outside of these viewpoints and embracing alternatives.  Yours are most certainly welcome here.  In fact, Tooth is built on that tradition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 February, 2018, 10:34:36 PM
Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:37:25 PM
Secondly, the 2nd Amendment is not just about defending against other nations, or other individuals.  It is most importantly about defending against your own government if they decide that the constitution can be scrapped and they can just take charge (The Declaration of Independence spells it out much better than I ever could... Simply replace Great Britain with "the U.S. Government").


Even taking the archaic 2nd Amendment as it is, it's this part: A well regulated Militia that seems to be completely disregarded. I don't think corporate weapons manufacturers selling assault rifles and ammunition to every individually licensed Tom, Dick & Harriet as part of their weekly big-shop at Wal-Mart was really part of James Madison's intention – there's nothing regulated about it: it's just another way for arms-dealers to make money at the expense of the public's well-being.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 11:14:08 PM
It's also worth remembering that the Bill of Rights was written at the same time the Revolutionary Army was being formed in France, the rapid replacement of the formal ancien regime army with an eventual 1.5 million sans-cullottes, citizen soldiers. The notion that a new Republic could be defended against its monarchist neighbours by the sheer mass of its armed citizens was very much in fashion.  It's likely that the 2nd Amendment envisaged a similar formalisation of 'well-regulated' militia as the contemporary Reglement of 1791.

How this pre-Napoleonic pragmatism translates to disaffected boys buying military-grade weapons in a 21st C mall I have no idea.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 22 February, 2018, 11:36:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 22 February, 2018, 11:14:08 PM
How this pre-Napoleonic pragmatism translates to disaffected boys buying military-grade weapons in a 21st C mall I have no idea.

Yeah, it doesn't make any sense in socially atomised suburbs built around car access to strip-malls. The 'old-time' community structure is just not there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 23 February, 2018, 01:18:57 AM
Herein is exactly what I meant about two different societies speaking two different languages and not understanding the others viewpoint.   You all keep seeing "Well regulated militia" in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights... Though Red Dawn makes for a fun movie, fact of the matter is that come that point something went terribly wrong with our well equipped and trained military.

As I stated 2-pages back, Americans see this:

Quote from: K2 on 22 February, 2018, 05:37:25 PMSecondly, the 2nd Amendment is not just about defending against other nations, or other individuals.  It is most importantly about defending against your own government if they decide that the constitution can be scrapped and they can just take charge (The Declaration of Independence spells it out much better than I ever could... Simply replace Great Britain with "the U.S. Government").

Seriously, the U.S. DoI is an amazing document to read, words well worth everyone in the world taking to heart... However, to save you the trouble of looking it up, I'll just paste the passage here:

-That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--


Americans view their right to bear arms first and foremost to state "we have the right to defend ourselves and our nation with military equivalent force..."  BUT also, MOST importantly, that we have the right to not be forced into a situation... BY OUR government, wherein we cannot defend ourselves from it and take back the government and return it to the people.


Forget Trump... The guy is as whacky and self serving as they come, I'm still stewing over that.  Forget the NRA... Though they started with good intentions for some time now they have used firearms as their soapbox to control politicians (the same ones that the nation may one day need to be taken back from).

It is an Americans God given right, as all peoples of the world, to not be oppressed by their own government.  Why I'm explaining this I don't know in that: We hold these truths to be self-evident...

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 23 February, 2018, 01:26:47 AM
Oh and for the record, the reason I came to this forum to gather information to write a fictional story, is about the coming of the Judges because of abuses of a president known as the "Mad Clown" which sent the world into a spiral flush... and it's about to be taken back... The government that is.

Oddly, my story set in 2029, regarding events of 2019-2029, isn't so much about the 2029 president but the one before 2019/2020.

Kooky, huh?

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 February, 2018, 02:20:08 AM
Quote from: K2 on 23 February, 2018, 01:18:57 AM
Americans view their right to bear arms first and foremost to state "we have the right to defend ourselves and our nation with military equivalent force..."  BUT also, MOST importantly, that we have the right to not be forced into a situation... BY OUR government, wherein we cannot defend ourselves from it and take back the government and return it to the people.

I think I understand your sentiment, but "military equivalent force"? Like the US military? That military with the obscene budget? That military that can deploy drones and minimize the risk to its own personnel? That military with the nukes?

That may sound a bit hyperbolic, as does this:

If the US government went full Authoritarian, Facist dictatorship, it would have to be backed (if not initiated) by the US military industrial complex.

And we'd all be fucked. No well organized militia would be able to do anything about it. Our only hope would be China throwing enough bodies at the problem.

In spite of all that, I don't think the US's problem is guns. There are deeper cultural and societal issues that are highlighted when guns are thrown into the mix.

Last time this came up I argued that no one needs an AR-15, but you know what? Fucking nobody gets killed by AR-15s. The people that own them tend to be pretty law abiding and sensible.

Handguns on the other hand, kill fucking hundreds of thousands in the states. A depressingly high percentage of those deaths list the shooter and the victim as the same person.

Every time I visit the states, I enjoy going to a shooting range, shouldering my mate Johnny's shotgun, squeezing the trigger and making it go FUCKING KABOOM!

I get the appeal of firearms. I'm a responsible law-abiding adult and I should be allowed to enjoy them.

But I can't where I live, because a bunch of kids got shot in Dunblane. I can live with that. I can accept that I don't get to play with guns because of dead children.

I guess I just hate freedom
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 23 February, 2018, 06:24:33 AM
Quote from: K2 on 23 February, 2018, 01:18:57 AM
Herein is exactly what I meant about two different societies speaking two different languages and not understanding the others viewpoint.   You all keep seeing "Well regulated militia" in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights... Though Red Dawn makes for a fun movie, fact of the matter is that come that point something went terribly wrong with our well equipped and trained military.

Americans view their right to bear arms first and foremost to state "we have the right to defend ourselves and our nation with military equivalent force..."  BUT also, MOST importantly, that we have the right to not be forced into a situation... BY OUR government, wherein we cannot defend ourselves from it and take back the government and return it to the people.

I think I can safely say a lot of us here all ready know the particular details/contents and intentions of the referred to historical documents and how they've been interpreted. I mean, they're quite well known, held up as being significant, and Americans have never been shy about proselytising how great they are to the world and what it all means to them - anecdotally, as you know, the Declaration of Independence is of course a significant story point in a certain comic about a future lawman so even on that level we're aware of what it's supposed to mean.

There's also been plenty of high profile documentaries, TV dramas, news reports, articles etc. representing all sides over the years that anyone interested would need to be willfully ignorant not to be aware so - we get it - and as countries with our own centuries of armed and bloody rebellions, civil-wars, their lasting consequences, and what the violent reality of such events really means, we know that these things don't always work out so well.

Having said all that, in the modern context of a situation that now seems to be turning into an arms-race between a people and their government - who will always have the bigger guns than what they allow to be sold at street level - and that maybe after the rather loud warning of several thousand incidents of its own offspring/future murdering themselves/itself with the pervasive overflow of handguns, the US as a country may need to reflect upon where it's going: to re-examine the myths it has been built upon and that maybe the culture and the incongruent clash with its capitalist ambitions are escalating the problem towards more random chaotic conflicts rather than trying to thoughtfully live up to some imagined ideal.

Even if the apocalyptic scenario of a tyrannical government actually occurred, on just a civilian level I can't imagine the 'rebellion' of such a fragmented society would be anything other than an all out free-for-all of isolationist factions and individuals deprived of their right to the 'pursuit of happiness' or has it now been reduced to just 'right to happiness' for some? It's in that bubbling brew the spectre of true fascism may well arise.

Ironically, America doesn't have a regulated militia of monastic, idealistic lawfolk sworn to protect the public who can step in on behalf of the angry mob.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 February, 2018, 08:13:09 AM
If the US government believed that american gun owners would've in anyway effective in removing them from power, they wouldn't waste so much of their dignity on preserving the rights of american gun owners.  The idea that the slave owners who wrote and signed the constitution, and were eager for a bunch of people to be armed with muskets in case a King showed up and demanded they pay taxes and take their farms, is in any way comparible with the murder devices of the 21st century is laughable. Is it extendrs to an AR 15, why no surface to air missiles, or weaponized anthrax? The only reason anyone needs a gun is to hunt, to kill people, and because firing a gun makes them feel big and important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 23 February, 2018, 08:57:29 AM
I see Jeremy Corbyn may be coming round to the idea that making Labour a party of opposition, rather than protest, may be a successful strategy. Bit late, and a shame that he rebuffed the Greens and SNP when they suggested it to him last year. Anyway, hope the man shows at a bit of sense:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/22/jeremy-corbyn-could-back-remaining-in-eu-customs-union
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 09:17:24 AM
From Twitter:

I never said "give teachers guns" like was
stated on Fake News @CNN & @NBC.
What I said was to look at the possibility
of giving "concealed guns to gun adept
teachers with military or special training
experience - only the best. 20% of
teachers, a lot, would now be able to
12:26 PM - Feb 22, 2018
76.4K 45.4K people are talking
about this

....immediately fire back if a savage sicko
came to a school with bad intentions.
Highly trained teachers would also serve
as a deterrent to the cowards that do
this. Far more assets at much less cost
than guards. A "gun free" school is a
magnet for bad people. ATTACKS WOULD
END!
12:40 PM - Feb 22, 2018
86.7K 49.4K people are talking
about this

....History shows that a school shooting lasts, on average, 3 minutes. It takes police & first responders approximately 5 to 8 minutes to get to site of crime. Highly trained, gun adept, teachers/ coaches would solve the problem
instantly, before police arrive. GREAT DETERRENT!
12:54 PM - Feb 22, 2018
106K 56.3K people are talking
about this


I post this only to show that Trump's argument seems to be slightly more nuanced than the MSM's simplistic "arm all the teachers" meme. Of course, this might just be Trump back-pedalling or it might be another example of the depths to which the MSM has sunk. Either way, I'm not defending Trump or his ideas. As you know, I don't believe in any political leaders. It should be up to individual communities to decide how best to protect their schools and government can only ever come up with "one size fits all" policies. It might be feasible for some schools in violent neighbourhoods to employ armed protectors (be they trained staff, police or private security) but, I suspect, the majority of schools just don't need it. In this latter case, the only thing this idea would do is bring guns, and their side-effects, into hitherto gun-free schools. Some "sickos" might even regard it as a challenge, making an armed school not safer but more dangerous.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 09:44:01 AM
"We need guns to defend against tyranny" is kind of predicated on the idea that gun nutters would actually fight back against tyranny rather than embrace it - a lot of them seem quite happy with a Russian stooge in the White House.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 09:50:42 AM
Well, we've had American stooges in positions of foreign power for decades so I guess it's their turn...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2018, 10:11:06 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 23 February, 2018, 08:57:29 AMI see Jeremy Corbyn may be coming round to the idea that making Labour a party of opposition, rather than protest, may be a successful strategy. Bit late, and a shame that he rebuffed the Greens and SNP when they suggested it to him last year. Anyway, hope the man shows at a bit of sense:
Although Thornberry's suggestion this morning is a total headdesk moment. Labour apparently wants to leave the customs union, and then create a new customs union that is essentially identical, at great expense, and for no reason that makes any sense. (Labour, I suppose, is under the misapprehension that the UK should be an 'equal partner' to the EU, like a lot of Tories keep banging on about.) It does feel like Labour's at least making baby steps in the right direction, but I wish they'd just get off the fucking fence. There's clearly a weird 'union' to be had in the Commons: almost all of Labour, the SNP/PC/GP/LD bloc, and probably 50 or so Tories. But the dance to get there is tedious and ridiculous. (Also: if Labour really is again pressing ahead with CU but not SM, someone – probably Corbyn – needs another slap.)

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 09:17:24 AMI post this only to show that Trump's argument seems to be slightly more nuanced than the MSM's simplistic "arm all the teachers" meme.
Except that's actually what Trump said initially, and now he's arguing he never said that, despite, you know, actually saying that. He's a liar. It really is that simple.

As for the US, the solution is simple: get rid of the fucking guns. That's it. And if that's too troubling for gun-happy culture, then at least make it harder to get the things in the first place. How many more kids need to die in schools because someone with a grudge had access to military grade weaponry designed to obliterate rather than 'merely' incapacitate? How many more stories must be read about a four year old who accidentally shot and killed a sibling or parent because a loaded gun was left lying around?

And on arming schools, where does it stop? Teachers? Janitors? Cleaners? What about the kids themselves? Should the over 16s be armed? Over 14s? Fuck, why not just give every kid able to walk a machine gun and let everything sort itself out. The very notion of arming teachers is madness. I'm seeing teachers all over the place saying they're done if this ever comes to pass. (Notably, many are also saying right now that cuts mean they're having to buy paper, markers, pencils, and so on. Even if they were pro-arms, they'd not feel terribly keen about having to fund that themselves.)

Beyond that, there are numerous practical considerations: what happens if the armed teacher is overpowered? What happens when they shoot someone in the crossfire? What happens when SWAT breach the school, and see someone with a weapon? (Hint: they will not spend a long time considering whether or not to take them out.) All arming teachers will do is increase deaths, not decrease them. It's the same stupid argument that happened during that cinema screening. "If only a good guy had a gun." Only that time, the argument was someone should have literally been shooting blind in the fucking dark.

Gah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 23 February, 2018, 10:53:27 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2018, 10:11:06 AM
It's the same stupid argument that happened during that cinema screening. "If only a good guy had a gun."

Well, the fact that an armed officer was at the Florida school and did nothing dampens that argument.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43164634
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 February, 2018, 10:55:22 AM
Today it is revealed that the armed 'resource officer' stayed outside the school for the duration of the shooting rather than go inside and respond.

Which I can't say I honestly blame him for not running in, even if it does undermine the entire rationale for his profession. And of course all these arguments about arming teachers as an effective response against completely non-rational actors (no one shoots a school for profit, unlike the majority of pre-meditated criminal behaviour).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: K2 on 23 February, 2018, 12:17:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 09:44:01 AM
"We need guns to defend against tyranny" is kind of predicated on the idea that gun nutters would actually fight back against tyranny rather than embrace it - a lot of them seem quite happy with a Russian stooge in the White House.

How can I argue against such blunt logic?  Odder still, look up the connections with Alexander Torshin (good friend of Putin, Russian banker) contributing huge sums to the NRA (because everyone knows how much Soviets love the idea of Americans having guns) wherein the NRA then contributes huge funds to Trump.  Coincidence?

Like I said, the NRA has little to do with guns anymore.

K2
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2018, 12:22:48 PM
Quote from: Pyroxian on 23 February, 2018, 10:53:27 AMWell, the fact that an armed officer was at the Florida school and did nothing dampens that argument.
For gun nuts, that just means you need more people with guns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 February, 2018, 12:35:11 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 23 February, 2018, 10:55:22 AM
Today it is revealed that the armed 'resource officer' stayed outside the school for the duration of the shooting rather than go inside and respond.


This sounds like cowardice, but I certainly wouldn't want to risk running into a school with some madman shooting things and then make a mistake and accidentally shoot a child myself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 February, 2018, 12:49:33 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 23 February, 2018, 12:35:11 PM
This sounds like cowardice, but I certainly wouldn't want to risk running into a school with some madman shooting things and then make a mistake and accidentally shoot a child myself.

He probably shouldn't have taken the job...!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 12:52:55 PM
Maybe he was on his break. Rules is rules...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 February, 2018, 03:03:45 PM
QuoteAs for the US, the solution is simple: get rid of the fucking guns. That's it. And if that's too troubling for gun-happy culture, then at least make it harder to get the things in the first place. How many more kids need to die in schools because someone with a grudge had access to military grade weaponry designed to obliterate rather than 'merely' incapacitate? How many more stories must be read about a four year old who accidentally shot and killed a sibling or parent because a loaded gun was left lying around?

This.  Solving a gun problem with more guns?  Bringing more guns into schools?  Feck off.

I don't know how the idea of arming and training teachers sounds to the average US citizen, but to me it sounds utterly bugfuck crazy.  I teach adults, and I'd sooner take my chances than become some kind of super-cowboy from Charlton Heston's wettest posthumous dreams.  Then again, my chances of any kind of classroom shooting are pretty low here, because getting a gun is a lot harder than walking into the local supermarket with some cash and the blessing of the local police station.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 03:04:25 PM
If there were more guards with guns, one of them might have went into that school, that's just statistics.  Funny how you liberal snowflakes tell everyone they have to listen to science, but when it proves something you don't like, you're against it.  Typical liberal hypocrisy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 February, 2018, 04:10:53 PM
It occurs to me that I don't think I've seen a single person who has actually been shot at or had to shoot others advocate for the 'if everyone has a gun we'll all be safe'.

Also as a teacher pointed out on Twitter, the Republicans won't fund schools enough to pay for basic classroom supplies. They just removed their ability to claim tax deductions when they use their own money to buy supplies. But suddenly there's enough money to train and arm millions of teachers?

Sadly that wouldn't actually surprise me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 February, 2018, 05:20:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 03:04:25 PM
might of went

Ftfy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Big_Dave on 23 February, 2018, 05:24:25 PM
the solution is simple: get rid of the fucking guns

usa has as many guns as peopel
(over 300 million)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 February, 2018, 05:26:30 PM
Arm them all, I say!  Every child, upon joining kindergarten shall be provided with a government sanctioned firearm, and taught to use it to defend themselves.  The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is forty dangerous first-graders. It says so right there in the constitution...

" the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

and since we've already established that life begins at conception, there's no way that "people" only refers to adults.  If you're old enough to pull a trigger, you're old enough to pretend you need it to conceal your fear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2018, 05:35:44 PM
As has often been pointed out though, the constitution says nothing about the availability of ammunition.  It just says you can have all the guns you want, go for it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 05:52:31 PM
Are we sure Americans don't have the right just to bear coats of arms? I mean, has anybody checked? They'd look pretty foolish if it was all actually about heraldry...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 February, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 05:52:31 PM
Are we sure Americans don't have the right just to bear coats of arms? I mean, has anybody checked? They'd look pretty foolish if it was all actually about heraldry...

'A well-regulated livery'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2018, 06:09:47 PM
I've got a well pickled liver if that's any use?   :-*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 February, 2018, 06:12:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 February, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 05:52:31 PM
Are we sure Americans don't have the right just to bear coats of arms? I mean, has anybody checked? They'd look pretty foolish if it was all actually about heraldry...

'A well-regulated livery'.
The right the arm bears with bear coats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 23 February, 2018, 07:17:27 PM
Are we quite sure this all isn't down to a spelling error? Perhaps it was a right to bare arms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2018, 07:37:21 PM
Now we're straying into #MeToo territory.  Is there any way we can shoehorn Brexit into this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 February, 2018, 07:46:26 PM
Hmmm - we could say that even though the U.S. has a gun problem, we have an entire country that's shot itself in the foot...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 08:08:08 PM
Iain McNicol, the man who... erm "oversaw" the increased democratisation of the Labour Party and its surge in membership to be the largest left wing party in Europe has resigned.  It has naturally turned a bit panto with the usual "man was a c##t"/"no he wasn't!" back and forth, but no clues as to why he's naffed off from a cushy ride on the gravy train at this particular moment.
Is there a new centrist party in the works?  That's Brexit solved, then.

Tweaked to adjust the not allowed here word...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 26 February, 2018, 07:53:08 PM
Idiot.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/26/gun-control-laws-nra-congress-return-recess (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/26/gun-control-laws-nra-congress-return-recess)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 February, 2018, 08:04:55 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2018, 08:08:08 PM
Tweaked to adjust the not allowed here word...

So glad it was basically only me that got banned for that. Although it wasn't actually a bannable offence when I got banned. And in the specific infraction that got me my temp ban, I'd self-censored the word and it wasn't even spelled out in full. What larks!

(See many previous past posts about the opacity of moderation policy on here. Specifically because I know being a mod is a horrible job and a more clearly defined and visible set of policies would make their lives easier.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 07:12:15 AM
I got banned for the same offence, though I'd missed the thread that established the rule. (Listen to the latest Mega City Book podcast for more details, Earthlets!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 February, 2018, 09:46:42 AM
To be fair, should we have to be told that name calling and use of bad language is not allowed?

I know I'm a f#cking c@#t for both.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 11:30:24 AM
Can YOU think of a better word to describe Nigel Farage?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2018, 11:32:00 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 11:30:24 AM
Can YOU think of a better word to describe Nigel Farage?

Call a spode a spode, that's my motto.  And as Farage represents the type-fossil for the species C*ntis rex, no better term exists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 11:39:37 AM
Though his Lego-man-handed, detachable-haired American chum is clearly a very closely-related species.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2018, 11:50:40 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 11:39:37 AM
Though his Lego-man-handed, detachable-haired American chum is clearly a very closely-related species.

Cuntis shitgibbonii.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 February, 2018, 12:01:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 February, 2018, 11:50:40 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 11:39:37 AM
Though his Lego-man-handed, detachable-haired American chum is clearly a very closely-related species.

Cuntis shitgibbonii.
Wherent they wiped out by the Shiteaor 65 Million years ago?

Yeah i've seen Walking with Politicians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2018, 01:08:13 PM
Now the rules are known, skirting as close to them as possible probably isn't the best of moves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2018, 01:22:23 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2018, 01:08:13 PM
Now the rules are known, skirting as close to them as possible probably isn't the best of moves.

But I classed it up bigly with fake taxonomic Latin and everything!

(Duly noted).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 28 February, 2018, 02:35:12 PM
As long as it's said with a Scottish burr it's fine. Isn't it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thh5AOJTD-Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thh5AOJTD-Q)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 February, 2018, 05:58:02 PM
Perhaps we could try 'queynte'?  Good enough for Chaucer?

Intersting and totally useless piece of information; according to wikipedia there used to be a Gropec**t Lane in London.  It seems that it was quite a common name to reflect the main trade conducted there!   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 February, 2018, 06:11:23 PM
This explains why there is no-one from Scunthorpe on the forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 February, 2018, 06:39:11 PM
Am I allowed to lol? I don't know if I'm allowed to lol.

lol anyway.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 February, 2018, 07:50:08 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 February, 2018, 06:11:23 PM
This explains why there is no-one from Scunthorpe on the forum.

I doff my cap sir.  You truly are a cunning linguist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2018, 09:13:35 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 February, 2018, 01:08:13 PM
Now the rules are known, skirting as close to them as possible probably isn't the best of moves.

Well, that's working out a treat.  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 March, 2018, 02:08:51 PM
And speaking of the banned word, has the biggest one of all finally suggested doing something that isn't appalling?  For the first time ever, I can say that I hope his latest policy is taken seriously.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2018, 02:21:08 PM
The tiniest movements in the right direction, tied to policy that no-one wants (i.e. arming teachers). This will be a clustertrump of epic proportions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 01 March, 2018, 02:32:18 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2018, 02:21:08 PM
The tiniest movements in the right direction, tied to policy that no-one wants (i.e. arming teachers). This will be a clustertrump of epic proportions.

I wonder how long it will take Oxford to add this to the dictionary?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 March, 2018, 02:41:29 PM
Just came across this on t'internet.  I wonder, having published some viciously anti-Islam propaganda himself a few years ago, if Franky Boy ever feels just a tiny bit guilty about the election outcome himself? 

https://twitter.com/frankmillerink/status/792525006613848065?lang=en (https://twitter.com/frankmillerink/status/792525006613848065?lang=en)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 March, 2018, 05:29:37 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 22 February, 2018, 10:07:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 February, 2018, 05:48:56 PM

If the idea is to bar violent or unstable people from owning weapons then it must extend to all violent or unstable people, irrespective of whether they work for government or not.

Speaking as a teacher with a mental health problem, the idea of having a firearm fills me with dread.  In fact, as an ex-serviceman who was taken off live armed duty, I seriously question the sanity of such an approach.  This is one of those occasions when Sharky and I are completely on the same wavelength. 


.... and in today's news, a teacher with a mental health problem decides it's 'take a gun to work day'! (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school)

Now we did not see that coming did we?   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 March, 2018, 10:33:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 March, 2018, 02:08:51 PM
And speaking of the banned word, has the biggest one of all finally suggested doing something that isn't appalling?  For the first time ever, I can say that I hope his latest policy is taken seriously.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control)


He must have read somewhere that 80% of voting-age Americans are in favour of gun control...


Wonder how long before he reads something else?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 March, 2018, 10:34:23 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 February, 2018, 05:58:02 PM
Perhaps we could try 'queynte'?  Good enough for Chaucer?

Intersting and totally useless piece of information; according to wikipedia there used to be a Gropec**t Lane in London.  It seems that it was quite a common name to reflect the main trade conducted there!   :o
Also in York, and many other cities (though both the ones in York and London are now known as 'Grape Lane').
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 March, 2018, 05:18:12 AM
Aye, that was one of the things that turned up during a rather interesting 5 minutes procrastination research.  Makes you wonder how many other street names have been sanitised over the years and what their past was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 March, 2018, 11:01:26 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 06 March, 2018, 10:33:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 March, 2018, 02:08:51 PM
And speaking of the banned word, has the biggest one of all finally suggested doing something that isn't appalling?  For the first time ever, I can say that I hope his latest policy is taken seriously.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/trump-background-checks-gun-control)


He must have read somewhere that 80% of voting-age Americans are in favour of gun control...


Wonder how long before he reads something else?

Quite a while, I suspect, unless it's very short and mentions his name in big letters.  https://nypost.com/2017/05/17/how-trumps-aides-trick-him-into-reading-press-briefings/ (https://nypost.com/2017/05/17/how-trumps-aides-trick-him-into-reading-press-briefings/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 March, 2018, 04:37:49 PM
Does that link say Alphabetti Spaghetti?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 March, 2018, 06:10:17 PM
I love the comment about him being a visualiser and loving diagrams.  I bet what the guy wanted to say was, "If it doesn't have pictures we've no hope.  Oh, and great big letters."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 March, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
They should write the reports on old Playboy magazines. Instead of the girls' information, put what needs to be read:

Isreal is a country in the Middle-East at the eastern end of the MED-DA-TA-RAY-NEE-AN sea... (should also probably be spelled phonetically).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 March, 2018, 07:56:00 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 07 March, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
Isreal [...] (should also probably be spelled phonetically).

Or at least correctly! :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 March, 2018, 08:37:59 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 March, 2018, 07:56:00 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 07 March, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
Isreal [...] (should also probably be spelled phonetically).

Or at least correctly! :-)

*face-palm*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 March, 2018, 10:52:22 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 07 March, 2018, 06:36:50 PM
They should write the reports on old Playboy magazines. Instead of the girls' information, put what needs to be read:

Isreal is a country in the Middle-East at the eastern end of the MED-DA-TA-RAY-NEE-AN sea... (should also probably be spelled phonetically).

Things are getting heated between Miss Israel and Miss Palestine...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 March, 2018, 06:36:24 AM


"A pale stein? Are we having beer? That's great!"


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2018, 08:26:46 PM
Continuing the news that Trump's weapons in schools policy is so hare brained it is unreal (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/14/teacher-gun-safety-lesson-fires-injures-students-california) ...

Can I congratulations to our American brethren for electing the physical incarnation of Bad Bob Booth?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 March, 2018, 09:05:53 PM
Meanwhile, the UK executive basically refuses to acknowledge the sovereignty of parliament. (https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/973967483823706113) This is... not good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2018, 09:19:58 PM
For the Tories, Sovereignty equals whatever is in the best interest of themselves / their donors.  Clearly the Skripral incident has got their Russian donors spooked.To quote Camelot, "it could be you!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 March, 2018, 10:23:25 PM
Trump announces support for May over Russia: "with the UK all the way".

In other news, Trump sacks Secretary of State after Rex Tillerson makes series of statements about Russia's meddling in Western affairs and attacks on British soil.

Hmmmm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2018, 09:37:06 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2018, 09:19:58 PM
For the Tories, Sovereignty equals whatever is in the best interest of themselves / their donors.  Clearly the Skripral incident has got their Russian donors spooked.To quote Camelot, "it could be you!"
It's terrifying. Brexit is spiralling out of control. It was never a good idea anyway, but could at least have been handled in a way that didn't wreck the economy and the social fabric of the UK. (The smart move – beyond not doing it, after a period of due diligence – would have been joining EFTA and entering into a customs union, but no. We just get idiots yelling IT WILL ALL BE FINE, when it very clearly won't be.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2018, 02:10:35 PM
Aye, plus we get absolutely nothing from the opposition because they are all scared of the 'will of the people' [should be spoken in the same tones of voice as 'the greater good' a la Hot Fuzz].  Blair damaged the UK's international reputation with his unwavering support of Bush but Cameron looks set to have done far more damage with his spineless fear of the nutters in his party.  We are paying the price in endless austerity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 March, 2018, 05:17:59 PM
I have never met an Irish person as interested in shamrocks as every Irish person who meets Trump appears to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2018, 08:51:29 PM
WW3's up next and I've barely any tinned food in the cupboards.  Damn this healthy eating kick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 April, 2018, 09:16:44 PM

I think WWIII started in September 2001.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 April, 2018, 10:04:34 PM
To see Trump and May up there parroting the old familiar lines with even less sincerity and coherence than the usual cast, and know that the only reason either of them (or their regimes) are remotely interested in gassed brown muzzies-or-whatever is the potential for distraction from their circling of their own domestic plugholes...  it's making me so angry it feels like I have permanent indigestion. 

How I wish they would just blink out of existence like the predictable, lacklustre nightmares they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2018, 11:55:17 PM
At least Brexit will be a success.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2018, 06:15:52 AM

Armagexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 April, 2018, 09:17:01 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2018, 11:55:17 PM
At least Brexit will be a success.

.... and now the Political Thread and Squaxx telling Jokes thread have merged.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2018, 10:36:42 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 15 April, 2018, 09:17:01 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2018, 11:55:17 PM
At least Brexit will be a success.

.... and now the Political Thread and Squaxx telling Jokes thread have merged.

Now all I have to do is coordinate the Writers' Block and Strontium Dog CGI Movie Announced by Lionsgate Entertainment threads and my conspiracy to install a New Forum Order will be almost complete.

Bwahaahaahaahaaa...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 April, 2018, 11:56:59 AM
Thall I throw the thwitch now Marthter?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2018, 12:25:50 PM

Not yet - wait for The Signal...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 April, 2018, 12:59:57 PM
Yeth Marthter!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 April, 2018, 02:41:09 PM

Excellent. Now fetch me a kitten smoothie while we wait - and don't skimp on the whiskers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 April, 2018, 11:01:51 PM
Jings, that Fox and Friends 'interview' was something to behold.  If some septuagenarian with a badly dyed combover started ranting like that on the bus, I'd get off several stops early. How could anyone want that incoherent crank as their First Citizen? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2018, 11:23:20 PM
Cynical man that I am, I wonder if the Windrush Scandal coming to light a week before local elections in which the Tories will be heavily reliant upon a core base of racists is just a coincidence or actual design.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 April, 2018, 11:27:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 April, 2018, 11:01:51 PM
Jings, that Fox and Friends 'interview' was something to behold.  If some septuagenarian with a badly dyed combover started ranting like that on the bus, I'd get off several stops early. How could anyone want that incoherent crank as their First Citizen?

On the plus side, by publicly stating that Cohen wasn't his lawyer and that they only had a 'business relationship', he's just completely torpedoed any thought of invoking attorney/client privilege in his dealings with Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 April, 2018, 11:33:57 PM
This Windrush debacle has been my first forced, sad admission that the BBC has fallen a long way from what it should be doing. Every day another story about Corbyn & Anti-semitism allegations is pinned to the UK News front page, but they've sidelined Windrush into minor articles that never get stuck to the main pages and repeat the governments (exposed) lies from the first couple of days.

If it wasn't for Channel 4 et al, they'd have been able to kick this into the bushes like everything else.

Used to think the BBC was only slightly guilty and its bias ultimately balanced out, but last few years have been something else. The omnishambles carries on and on without mention, even where it prominently causes scandalous harm and distress for no reason other than more omnishambles and xenophobia.

No wonder people keep voting Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 April, 2018, 07:11:26 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2018, 11:23:20 PM
Cynical man that I am, I wonder if the Windrush Scandal coming to light a week before local elections ....

I can understand the cynicism, just not the faith in the current government's competence.  Let's face it, if you got an invite from them to an all night drinking session at your local brewery, you'd make sure you took a hell of a lot of booze with you, wouldn't you? (Actually, I'd be more likely to tell them where to go but that's another story).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 April, 2018, 11:28:36 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 April, 2018, 11:33:57 PM
Every day another story about Corbyn & Anti-semitism allegations is pinned to the UK News front page, but they've sidelined Windrush into minor articles that never get stuck to the main pages and repeat the governments (exposed) lies from the first couple of days.

I've always been pretty pro-BBC, but the anti-Corbyn bias is undeniable, IMO. Take a look at this story (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-43908496) on the suspension of a Conservative candidate and note that the word "antisemitism" doesn't appear once.

By contrast, the preceding day, they reported on Marc Wadsworth "antisemitism hearing". Not a hearing to decide whether he could stay in the Labour party, not even a "hearing on allegations of antisemitism", despite the fact that the case against Wadsworth is incredibly flimsy.* Antisemitism.


*He'll probably be expelled today. If Labour wants this to go away, it's going to require a lot of expulsions and at the very least the scalps of Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker. Except that it won't go away — the net effect will be that anyone the Labour right wants to get rid of can simply be removed by screaming "antisemitism" at them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 April, 2018, 11:41:34 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 April, 2018, 11:33:57 PM
This Windrush debacle has been my first forced, sad admission that the BBC has fallen a long way from what it should be doing. Every day another story about Corbyn & Anti-semitism allegations is pinned to the UK News front page, but they've sidelined Windrush into minor articles that never get stuck to the main pages and repeat the governments (exposed) lies from the first couple of days.

If it wasn't for Channel 4 et al, they'd have been able to kick this into the bushes like everything else.

Used to think the BBC was only slightly guilty and its bias ultimately balanced out, but last few years have been something else. The omnishambles carries on and on without mention, even where it prominently causes scandalous harm and distress for no reason other than more omnishambles and xenophobia.

No wonder people keep voting Tory.

As a Scot, I reached that conclusion some time ago.

Polls tend to show that trust in the BBC is lowest in Scotland. Which is not really surprising, considering how dire their coverage of the independence referendum was. In that case, I think it was a mix of a couple of high-profile biased reporters and the rest of them taking their lead from London, rather than Scotland. And why wouldn't they, BBC Scotland has very limited resources and staff, no significant autonomy and anyone with any say is based in London.

The Corbyn thing has different roots, though. You'd think that the election would have caused a moment of self-reflection in the BBC.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2018, 11:49:55 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 April, 2018, 07:11:26 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2018, 11:23:20 PM
Cynical man that I am, I wonder if the Windrush Scandal coming to light a week before local elections ....

I can understand the cynicism, just not the faith in the current government's competence.

It's not the government in charge of election PR, it's outside firms and the UK media.  Mainstream outlets have lost control of the narrative, so they have to shift their focus to distraction tactics instead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2018, 11:52:11 AM
BBC news and current affairs has multiple problems, not all of which are down to bias, but that have combined to result in the mess that currently makes the organisation look pretty poor:

- A huge influx of Tory-backed/Tory-led people into key roles (including the person who selects Question Time audience members).

- A lack of interest in/expertise for critical think pieces/explainers about the most important issues. The BBC's analysis on things to do with Brexit is often embarrassingly bad.

- A stick-in-the-mud attitude towards terminology (such as migrant). This alone put my wife off of the corporation.

- A tendency to parrot rather than investigate. This has often been the way with the BBC, which strives to be impartial, but it's a massive problem when added to:

- A lack of understanding regarding balance. Too often, we'll see the BBC cover a subject and 'balance' it with a counterpoint that gets roughly equal coverage. This is insane. You shouldn't be running stories on climate change and then spending half your time talking to a denier. And this is worse with Brexit, where the corporation has repeatedly invited rapidly pro-Brexit MPs and MEPs to opine, broadly ignoring those who are against it. (See how often Farage and Hannan are interviewed versus the likes of Charles Tannock and Catherine Bearder.) The corporation also frequently sets up 'debates' to be arguments, and misleads guests as to the nature of an intended narrative. (I've been caught in that myself once, although fortunately for nothing especially important. They did make me come across in a manner that made me feel rather angry though.)

And earlier today, you have the BBC's economics editor blaming British GDP growth issues on crap weather, when the figures for France and Germany aren't nearly as bad. The BBC ignores Brexit and reduces the entire story (that the economy is fucked due to Brexit) to chatting with bricklayers about the fact the weather was rubbish. Just awful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 April, 2018, 03:47:34 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2018, 11:49:55 AM
It's not the government in charge of election PR, it's outside firms and the UK media.  Mainstream outlets have lost control of the narrative, so they have to shift their focus to distraction tactics instead.

That is a fair point (albeit slightly tinfoil hattish, but reasonable in the present circumstances).  I wonder if the bigger problem now is that people tend to give more credibility to BTL comments than 'news' articles themselves rather than pausing and thinking about how accurate or evidence based the comments might be?  As an example, a comment about the Smeeth / Wadsworth case suggested that the gentleman near Ms Smeeth that made the 'anti-semitism at an antisemitism event' remark was in fact a Sun journalist but has offered no proof.  How many took this as gospel rather than unsubstantiated rumour?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 April, 2018, 04:12:59 PM
As the word "Semitic" most commonly refers to the Abrahamic religions, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam, then "anti-semitic" must refer to people who hate Jews, Christians and/or Muslims.

This means that, in calling certain Christian and Muslim people "anti-Semitic," the BBC is actually being anti-Semitic.

And that's when they started shooting at me, Your Honour...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2018, 05:10:36 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 April, 2018, 03:47:34 PMAs an example, a comment about the Smeeth / Wadsworth case suggested that the gentleman near Ms Smeeth that made the 'anti-semitism at an antisemitism event' remark was in fact a Sun journalist but has offered no proof.  How many took this as gospel rather than unsubstantiated rumour?

Not many, I imagine, as identifying him would entail scrutiny of the video and that would make it clear she was fed the line by another person.  This is actually the first I'm hearing of it, and I follow lots of Twitter commies left wingers.

Objectively, though, it's still pretty rum: a man accuses someone of working with the media to discredit the party and the first thing that person does is go straight to the media to discredit the party.  Said person was last seen at the head of an all-white mob of MPs hounding a black man out of the party while the Daily Mail cheered them on.  Bizarre times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 April, 2018, 06:15:20 PM
The video is on the Evening Standard website IIRC.  Wadsworth's comments are drowned out by someone's phone to a certain extent (and Smeeth's shouting) but it is very clear in regard to the comment before she gets up and stalks out dry eyed.  It's been interesting nosing around the different reports into the event and the varied interpretations presented.

I would agree that Wadsworth is guilty of very poor judgement and bringing the party into disrepute.  It would have been far more effective to leave out the MP's name and leave her to put her foot in it independently but hey ho.  As you say, the hounding of an ethnic minority member out of the party does raise questions regarding partiality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 April, 2018, 07:23:43 PM
For what it's worth, I think his race is likely incidental to his being a lifelong anti-racism campaigner, which seems to be the target of choice for Labour's far right - especially Brummie loudmouth (and close friend of Jacob Rees Mogg) Jess Phillips, who seems to have had an amazing knack over the years for being in antagonistic relationships with lefty people of colour.

Anyway, I'm just glad that Brexit will be a great success and leave us better off than we were.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 April, 2018, 08:04:31 PM
At least Amber Rudd has officially scrapped those targets that didn't exist yesterday
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 30 April, 2018, 11:59:59 AM
And so, Sajid Javid gets the job. The same Sajid Javid who last year declined to protect the UK and European steel industries from predatory practices and "dumping", then shed crocodile tears when steel plants shut. The BBC radio report this morning described him this morning as "competent" and "respected". That's not my memory of the man.

Meanwhile the architect of the policy that lost Rudd her job is lumbering along incompetently in the country's highest office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 April, 2018, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 30 April, 2018, 11:59:59 AM
Meanwhile the architect of the policy that lost Rudd her job is lumbering along incompetently in the country's highest office.

The same ghastly cypher whose office had complete control over the majority of net migration into the UK for the 6 years up to the Brexit vote, which she campaigned against, and then once shuffled into the PM's office, apparently by default, began asserting the necessity of leaving every vestige of the EU largely in order to... reduce net immigration.

And now this.

It's bewildering how such a rudderless, drifting creature could hang on to her position so long.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 April, 2018, 06:45:39 PM
Rupert Murdoch won't let her quit.  The power balance in The Opposition has drastically changed and no amount of wrangling will put a Blairite back in charge of the party in the near future to ensure the cross-party neoliberal consensus is maintained in Parliament, so all the Tories and their backers have going for them at the moment is the tenuous soap-bubble illusion of stability maintained by the media that goes out the window once May resigns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 April, 2018, 07:21:27 PM
But surely Johnson or Rees-Mogg or Gove would do just as well, what with their having willies and all as an added bonus*.

Hard to believe we live in a world where that sentence can be parsed.

At least crucifixion gets you out in the open air.



*Well, maybe not Gove**, I mean a willy on Pob is more than six-impossible-things-before-breakfast level of difficult to believe.

** Prime Minister Gove, ahahahhahah, why that's almost as ridiculous as... as...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 May, 2018, 06:07:31 PM
 Avengers - Infinity War: [spoiler]give one person too much power and they will use it, even if only to see a sunrise, and when they do use it, everyone suffers.[/spoiler] But in a really entertaining way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 01:40:31 PM
The local election results are in: Labour have had their best performance in nearly half a century and have taken control of more council seats than all of the other parties combined and yes, that number includes the Tories so naturally the fair and impartial BBC narrative declares there is "no clear winner" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44014076) and the corporation has begun airing interviews with minority Blairite MPs who demand an explanation from the party leadership for this poor showing.

Good news: UKIP are officially fucked, and even their voters going back into the Tories didn't stop the party tanking.
Bad news: voter disenfranchisement was a great success.  4000 people denied ballot papers and some Tory seats were saved by numbers of votes in the single figures, so we can now expect vote denial tactics to be rolled out nationwide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 02:42:03 PM
I think part of the reason for the narrative is that although Labour have gained a significant number of seats, they have not gained overall control of councils.  I suppose it's a case as well of how this would compare to a GE and whether this would see Labour achieving overall control in the Commons.  Considering this is against the most inept, disingenuous, immoral government in living memory (possibly longer) it is easy to see why questions are being asked.

The voter ID trial is a particularly troubling issue.  As was pointed out on R4 news, the number of cases of potential voter fraud in the UK is in the single digits and the proportion that have resulted in a conviction are at concentration levels that even a homeopath would be embarrassed by.  Where there are issues they tend to be around postal ballots rather than polling stations.  Definitely an issue that needs to be watched carefully.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 04:19:13 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 02:42:03 PMI suppose it's a case as well of how this would compare to a GE and whether this would see Labour achieving overall control in the Commons.

Locals aren't a good indicator of voting intentions in a general election because the motivators are different and the turnout is much lower - particularly among left wing voters whose politics tend to skew more holistically.  As one Twitter wag put it: Labour wins where people vote on principle, but the Tories win where people vote on bin collections.
Having said that, the BBC tried to downplay the consequences of the locals results by applying them to a general election via the usual filters and found the best case scenario for the Tories was to be the second-largest party in a hung Parliament.
Which still means absolutely nothing, but is at least amusing.

QuoteConsidering this is against the most inept, disingenuous, immoral government in living memory (possibly longer) it is easy to see why questions are being asked.

Most on the left absolutely agree with you, Tjm.  They are very, very keen to take a good hard look at whatever or whoever might have been damaging the party in the eyes of the public over the last few years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 05 May, 2018, 04:19:42 PM
If for every voter fraud stopped, another person is denied their valid right to vote, it isnt worth it is it? Are we to believe there were 4000 people trying it on, or were 4000 denied democracy? It would seem unlikley to be the former....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 04:50:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 04:19:13 PM
They are very, very keen to take a good hard look at whatever or whoever might have been damaging the party in the eyes of the public over the last few years.

This is quite a tricky one.  There is a real risk in tinfoil hat thinking that might result in a far less accurate assessment of what is going on.  Is the MSM narrative skewed against Corbyn?  I think there is a lot of evidence to suggest that this is the case but then he also has a really nasty habit of handing his opponents ammunition as well. 

His approach to issues like Syria has a lot to commend it but when he allows journalists to send him up on it rather than staking out ground assertively it doesn't help.  Why he doesn't link these conflicts with illegal immigration and human trafficking is a mystery to me.  He could have pointed to Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan and challenged on the end game.  How much damage have those conflicts cost on multiple levels?

The antisemitism one is an odd one and probably an excellent example of how politics is dominated by London.  It is a bit disingenuous of the Tories to suggest that they don't have a problem either by all accounts.  How much of his response is guided by his position on Palestine is open to question but certainly he hasn't done himself any favours there.  That said, as I've mentioned before, Smee's 'performance' that resulted in Wadsworth's explosion from the party looks a tad suspect.

Then there is the Blairite wing of the party which is still heavily represented in the PLP and probably the reason why the party comes across as divided.  A questionable bunch on a good day.  "Et tu ..."

Let's hope the post mortem addresses some of these issues properly.  Eight more years of Tory rule is a truly terrifying prospect, particularly considering the damage they've already inflicted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2018, 05:03:18 PM
Increasingly, my take is Corbyn is he's awful. He's an ideologue on Europe, meaning he'll betray his core voters ("jobs-first Brexit" – sure, but only in the sense jobs will be the first thing to go), and ignore the wishes of the majority of his party (democracy!) and, accordingly to all polls now, the electorate at large (democracy!), not least on the single market, for which there is something close to a super-majority (democracy!). And it feels like he loves being the activist, but not a leader. He misses so many open goals in PMQs, and has a rabid following that if you criticise him often screams WELL GO AND VOTE TORY THEN. Oh, OK, thanks.

A sensible leader would have played chess with the Tories from day one. He'd have said there was a slim mandate to leave the EU but not Europe. He'd have talked about options like Norway+, mentioning that this is what the likes of Hannan and even Farage had been suggesting. He'd have built consensus. Instead, because Thatcher was instrumental in the single market, and because he clearly doesn't understand state aid and competition law, he wants to wrench us free from the one thing that might not cause economic armageddon. (And what the blazing fuck is Abbott on of late, rampaging around and arguing that ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS BAD, like a right-wing Tory bigot. Just fucking stop already. Reboot the conversation around migration, and make your party seem like actual humans, because those in power clearly are not.)

As specifically regarding the locals, I said on Twitter something along the lines of it wasn't a defeat, in the same way it's not a defeat when a team misses an open goal and scrapes a score draw against terrible opposition. But it's nothing to crow about. Really, no-one really 'won' last night:

• UKIP are basically fucked
• The Conservatives didn't do terribly, held up in rural areas, and got a kicking in a few councils (and really amusingly in a couple where the Lib Dems flipped the councils in eye-opening fashion)
• The Lib Dems showed that they weren't dead after all, but are still very much a minor party. They have some hope that they might be able to claw back the position they once held as the default for people who want something different, but they've a hell of a way to go before they're back in Kennedy territory.
• The Greens got some new councillors, which is lovely and all, but basically remain a rounding error.
• And Labour did OK, but seem to think anything beyond a disaster is suitable now for a victory dance.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 06:36:10 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 04:50:03 PMLet's hope the post mortem addresses some of these issues properly.  Eight more years of Tory rule is a truly terrifying prospect, particularly considering the damage they've already inflicted.

General Election cycles are five years in the UK, which was one of the first things Davey Cameron changed when he took office, but I'm sure any post mortem's findings will be reported fairly and accurately, and anyone proved demonstrably incorrect or at fault will admit as much and move on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 06:47:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2018, 05:03:18 PM
Increasingly, my take is Corbyn is he's awful. He's an ideologue on Europe, meaning he'll betray his core voters ("jobs-first Brexit" – sure, but only in the sense jobs will be the first thing to go), and ignore the wishes of the majority of his party (democracy!) and, accordingly to all polls now, the electorate at large (democracy!), not least on the single market, for which there is something close to a super-majority (democracy!). And it feels like he loves being the activist, but not a leader. He misses so many open goals in PMQs, and has a rabid following that if you criticise him often screams WELL GO AND VOTE TORY THEN. Oh, OK, thanks.

Aye.  When he was first put up as leader, the alternatives were incredibly undesirable.  Since he was given the job he has pretty much clearly demonstrated his ineptitude.  May could and should have been torn to shreds in PMQ's on so many issues it's unreal.  Leaving aside Brexit, pick any issue and go to task.  As for her poll tax response, the simplest rebuttal would have been on how it affected the quality of services for the needy.  How many councils are struggling to provide statutory services because of cuts to funding?  Just as well those residents don't live in Nottingham (is that the right council)?  Kirk's line about marksmen from Wrath of Khan is pretty much spot on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 07:47:18 PM
I am curious: how does one "win" PMQs?  Objectively, I mean.
I know it can't be if the media agree that someone did well because that's a subjective analysis, and one in which Corbyn seems to be doing well - as I have pointed out here on the thread in the past, I have not been able to see even the slightest bit of difference between his performance with Cameron (which everyone agrees he kept losing, even that time Cameron turned red in the face and screamed about his mother) and his performance with May (against whom the media seems to broadly agree that Corbyn is doing well) and I voiced my suspicions that it had more to do with gender politics than what is actually said or done.

Anyway, as I said, genuine question: how does one "win" PMQs in an objective and verifiable manner?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 May, 2018, 10:05:50 PM
I think that is a valid question.  I suppose in many respects a 'win' is a bit like witty come backs.  At present neither side is putting the other in its place.  May has some reasonable responses to queries by Corbyn  but there is so much scope to put her on the back foot it is unreal. 

A good example is on Windrush, a cracking manifestation of 'nasty tories'.  She responded that this was a policy started under Labour.  The first rebuttal should surely be 'well, why didn't you change the policy then?'  After ten years, to be still following on under that policy is questionable at best.

Another is her comparison between different boroughs and their council tax.  A tory council with incredibly low council tax vs a neighbouring council with high council tax?  Okay, but how do their service provisions compare?  How many people are struggling to access social care in Wandsworth?  I'd hate to be a service user in Chelsea and Kensington, even after the fire ...

A win?  I'd have to say that it is a response to May that leaves her no room for manoeuvre since she knows that it is true.  The scope here is massive.  Gender politics aside, she is getting in an awful lot of hits (anti semitism?) that she should not be.

Anyway, that's my tuppeny ha'porth ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2018, 10:40:04 PM
He rarely follows up. He has his list, often with questions from Gladys from Hull, and that's it. The best responses in recent years have come from the SNP, the Lib Dems, Labour backbenchers, and Caroline Lucas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2018, 01:32:09 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 07:47:18 PMhow does one "win" PMQs?  Objectively, I mean.

I'm not sure "what I would have done" is really an objective answer to my question what the desired and verifiable end result of PMQs actually is (beyond confirmation bias, I mean), but doesn't follow up come from MPs with more experience in specific cases?  In the above mentioned case of Windrush, for example, it was Diane Abbott who did the follow-up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 06 May, 2018, 06:00:51 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 01:40:31 PM
The local election results are in: Labour have had their best performance in nearly half a century

I keep seeing this Owen Jones factoid quoted, without the (slightly less impressive) other half of it being mentioned - ...in terms of their share of the vote specifically in London.

However - as with the rest of England - they finished the night in control of the same number of councils in the capital that they had when they started.  Does that really sound like a half century's worth of achievement against a shambles of a government that's just suffered a major Cabinet resignation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 06 May, 2018, 06:30:25 PM
There was a feature on the radio earlier about Javid's love of Ayn Rand. Not very reassuring.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 06 May, 2018, 06:55:04 PM
QuoteGeneral Election cycles are five years in the UK, which was one of the first things Davey Cameron changed when he took office...

Er, what?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/1 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/section/1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 May, 2018, 07:16:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 06 May, 2018, 06:30:25 PM
There was a feature on the radio earlier about Javid's love of Ayn Rand. Not very reassuring.

There's also an article on the Daily Mail website about a couple of his Uncles back home that are mixed up in some sort of visa scam.  Not that Mr Javid was implicated, just his relatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 May, 2018, 08:23:09 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2018, 07:47:18 PM
I am curious: how does one "win" PMQs?  Objectively, I mean.

If the PM told a big enough whopper at PMQ, you can't accuse her of lying (that would be rude), but if you could persuade the speaker that she was misleading the House, he may invite her to withdraw the remark. If she refused, the speaker could suspend her from the chamber, and if she refused to leave, have her physically dragged out by the sergeants-at-arms.

I guess that would count as a win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 May, 2018, 10:25:12 PM
The odd dynamic with Labours result is as much to do with it being against the backdrop of blatant self sabotage from within as moribund opposition from without.  I'm not sure how much an impact a united party would have had, but it could only have been positive
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2018, 11:04:08 PM


I don't understand. Are we winning, or not?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 May, 2018, 07:51:51 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2018, 11:04:08 PM


I don't understand. Are we winning, or not?

"It's broadly speaking a tie, sir.  I had to send four hundred and seventy three men off though."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2018, 01:13:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 May, 2018, 11:04:08 PMI don't understand. Are we winning, or not?

Never.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 May, 2018, 01:30:27 AM
Who "wins PMQs" seems a matter of what the papers or BBC say, and so far they all lean heavily towards whatever pre-written joke May or her cronies have rather than engaging with the questions asked. All the focus is on the PMQs, not the PMAs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2018, 09:41:51 AM
Well, that was a shocker yesterday: the Lords managing to win a vote where both of the big two had whipped their MPs (Tories to vote against and Labour to abstain). Bizarrely, my old MP (a fairly right-wing Tory) is seemingly a pragmatist and was again among the Tory rebels. Corbyn, natch, wanted all his Lords to abstain, because he's an ideological halfwit when it comes to the single market. ("Thatcher had a big hand in this! GRRRR! I'll just lie to Momentum about EU rules and they'll stick up for me!")

The fight now returns to the Commons, where Corbyn will presumably three-line whip his MPs to vote down or abstain from the amendment, thereby obliterating any suggestion he's not in favour of hard Brexit, and that he doesn't give the slightest shit about people's jobs. So much for Labour being a party for workers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 09 May, 2018, 10:46:40 AM
And the unemployment rate is ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 May, 2018, 11:21:39 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 09 May, 2018, 10:46:40 AM
And the unemployment rate is ?
Unemployment rate never factors in the omnipresent, borderline illegal zero hour contract, at the highest since their inception. It's a wafer thin argument against change in the current employment scheme.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/contractsthatdonotguaranteeaminimumnumberofhours/mar2017
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2018, 12:18:31 PM
Well, quite. Employment levels mean naff-all when you're basically removed entirely from the system after a set point, or forced into zero-hour contracts. But my point about jobs was really about the future. When you have the Japanese being as brazen as they are – which basically never happens – you know something's up. (Their take: Thatcher promised the UK would always be in the internal market. We're off and taking our jobs with us if it turns out you lied. And they're far from the only ones. But, hey, I'm being battered on Twitter right now by Corbyn supporters who still claim he's "canny" and in favour of remain, let alone the internal market.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 01:06:03 PM
The other issue that I have with unemployment figures is that they never show regional variation.  You also have the issue of quality of jobs that is rarely if ever mentioned.  It's not just zero hours contracts mind.  How many folks are no longer unemployed because they have been reclassified as 'self employed' or 'entrepeneurs' running businesses that don't even earn them the minimum wage? 

Plus we still have the, far less reported now, hounding of folks on disability.  The Rochdale Herald regularly runs articles with headlines like "Prince Philip cleared by ATOS as fit for work" with the names of terminally ill or even deceased substituted in.

Now in the latest wheeze the government wants to tap 'silver strivers' for NIC.  Enough of these are folks working to make ends meet since their pensions are not up to snuff (so much for baby boomers enjoying all the benefits there) but hey, they won't mind losing a few more quid a week to balance the books.

And we haven't even left the EU yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2018, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 01:06:03 PMbecause they have been reclassified as 'self employed' or 'entrepeneurs' running businesses that don't even earn them the minimum wage?
And will soon be royally fucked by the government forcing everyone to do tax returns four times per year instead of once. (When I wrote to the minister about that, complaining about the fact this will cost me a ton of money, he merrily replied the it shouldn't because "everything is automated these days". Tell that to my fucking Excel spreadsheet, you arsehole.)

As for all of the other points: yep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 03:37:12 PM
Everything is automated?  Then HMRC need to seriously sort out their lives and their IT systems.  I think the only organisation that has them beat on customer dissatisfaction at the moment is TSB (IIRC that stands for Totally S****y Bank).

Certainly sounds like your MP is automating it's responses  (not a Tory perchance?).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2018, 04:00:53 PM
Tory MP and Tory minister. The latter's dismissal of my concerns because accounts are all automated these days really pissed me off. His argument was I should be hurling all my details into some magical number-crunching system. Instead, I have an accountant, whose fees already swallow up something like 2% of my annual income. I can't really afford for that to ramp up significantly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 09:15:15 PM
This is where I have one of a number of problems with the current self employed / entrepeneur culture; the amount of money most make on these 'business' ventures barely qualifies for tax of NIC.  It's also worth bearing in mind that this means that such 'workers' are barely making enough to enable them to save for pensions.  Add in that some lunatics actually believe that it would be a good idea if more people had private medical care schemes.  I'm currently reading Alice in Wonderland to my youngest daughter whilst wondering if Lewis Carroll was not actually describing early 21st Century Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2018, 09:25:52 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 09:15:15 PM
This is where I have one of a number of problems with the current self employed / entrepeneur culture; the amount of money most make on these 'business' ventures barely qualifies for tax of NIC.  It's also worth bearing in mind that this means that such 'workers' are barely making enough to enable them to save for pensions.

Small entrepreneurs do it because they love it.  I know we'll all share the wealth when the LibDems take power and implement a communist state but until then stop squashing dreams, you lentil-eating anarchist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 May, 2018, 09:55:38 PM
Thank you sir for that tongue in cheek reply.  If I'm completely honest, this is where my divided loyalties lie.  On the one hand, that vision embodied in the entrepeneurial spirit but on the other the need for social responsibility.  Unfortunately this government has taken that rugged individualism and turned into something altogether unsavoury, as only a British tory government could do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2018, 10:54:27 PM
Much as I'd like to lay that at the Tories' door, the Western neoliberal consensus has led to a global sea change in recent years to vampire economies and the rise of shit like UBER where you put in all the risk and work of a small business, but a multinational corporation takes all your profit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 10 May, 2018, 11:15:44 AM
I'm not sure what the number of unemployed people is supposed to prove?

Record numbers of people in work in poverty and the huge bill for housing benefits for people in full time work who simply can't afford to live would suggest that unemployment figures alone are not a suitable metric for either employment getting people out of poverty or off of benefits, or any particular positive social or anecdotal improvement. 

Using unemployment as a KPI for the economy is like using the amount of CRT TV's being repaired as a KPI for their current build quality. (CRT's aren't breaking down at anywhere near the same rate as they did in the 70's and the 80's if you go by the numbers being fixed by repair shops so they must be super reliable now)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 May, 2018, 11:23:48 AM
Indeed. I've been made redundant twice this year by companies employing me on zero hour contracts, one working me ludicrous overtime on pain of losing my job only to sack me at the end of my provisional period so as not to give me the mandatory pay rise, and another using me to fill in a few hours a week between other staff who, quiet frankly,m did a shiter job than I. Again, sacked because they would have to raise my pay.

Employment figures are bust because they don't factor in for those trapped in poor contracts, zero hours, on or bellow minimum wage, work hours that skirt the legal requirements, and in general just mug those in vulnerable positions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 11 May, 2018, 04:43:05 PM
There is Zero unemployment in the workhouse!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2018, 04:58:38 PM
Or the graveyard.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 May, 2018, 10:12:32 PM
This is why I have zero confidence in the so called 'unemployment' figures.  The situation has already once been compared to the 16th century and the quality of employment protection.  All this talk of the 'productivity problem' ignores the simple reality, very few employees have any faith in their employer to protect them.  The once sacred public sector is now as vulnerable as the private sector.  The result is obvious. 

When the public audit commission start raising concerns about how people that are allegedly self employed business owners are going to create a sustainable business you know that you are in trouble.  Unfortunately at present we have a government that has taken incompetence to a whole new level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2018, 04:46:43 PM
A question for Scotch* boarders: if a Scotch* independence referendum happened again, post-Brexit, do you think it would have a different result? (Also, do you think a second referendum is likely?)

*Yes, Scotch. That's the correct word. Even my autocorrect has the word 'Scotchman'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 18 May, 2018, 05:32:19 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2018, 04:46:43 PM
A question for Scotch* boarders: if a Scotch* independence referendum happened again, post-Brexit, do you think it would have a different result?

No. If anything, I think it would be a more pronounced victory for the 'No' side. I'm not saying that's what I'd want, mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 May, 2018, 06:06:55 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2018, 04:46:43 PM
*Yes, Scotch. That's the correct word. Even my autocorrect has the word 'Scotchman'.

"It's 'Scots' if you don't mind.  Scotch is a drink!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2018, 07:14:07 PM
Scotch egg, Scotch whiskey, Scotch rumors - Scotch is clearly the correct term.

There will be no second referendums on anything, as the political upheaval of the last few years has made it clear that the oiks aren't doing what they're supposed to and no result can be predicted ahead of time.  With Scotland, I think it's a mistake to confuse Indy sentiments with general anti-establishment feeling and wouldn't presume that the SNP's vote share would directly translate to a Yes vote on independence.
Mind you, I wouldn't have voted for Irish unification two years ago, but now I'll do it in a fucking heartbeat.  I wouldn't put it past many Scotch to vote Yes just to annoy JK Rowling - and to be fair, this is a perfectly sound reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 May, 2018, 09:18:24 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2018, 07:14:07 PM
Scotch egg, Scotch whiskey, Scotch rumors - Scotch is clearly the correct term.

Also Tape and Guard. QED. Quo Vadis. Case closed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2018, 09:50:39 PM
See? I'm right.  Everyone says so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 May, 2018, 12:48:40 AM
The problem with 'Scots' is that it automatically suggests more than one Scot(ch). And who wants that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 May, 2018, 03:30:30 AM
I don't think it really matters. In my experience, it's quare difficult to insult those jocks and tams.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 May, 2018, 07:42:46 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 18 May, 2018, 07:14:07 PM
Scotch whiskey

I think the Scotch call it whisky. Indeed and indeed, sure it's those Micks and spudmunchers that put an E* in whiskey, so it is, so it is, to be sure, to be sure.

*Not that kind of E.**

**Though I may have done that in my younger days too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 May, 2018, 10:07:00 AM
Was in Oban a few years back and asked, slightly pissed already, if the bar had any Irish whiskey.

"Oh aye, we use it to water down our own"



In more relevant new, School Shooting in US. 10 kids dead. Thoughts and prayers. NRA couldn't give a fuck. Rinse and repeat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 May, 2018, 12:41:18 PM
The Irish prefer weaker alcohol as they don't have as much to escape as the Scotch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 May, 2018, 04:04:11 PM
... Apart from swapping 800 years of foreign oppression for nearly a century of religious oppression, a blatantly corrupt and ineffective police force, decades of sectarian violence (with massive improvements being steadily undone by short-sighted  Brexiteers), bankers selling out the whole country out for the good of their own pockets and escaping punishment, greedy landlords making rent unaffordable and causing homelessness figures to rocket, and of course shit weather.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 May, 2018, 05:13:37 PM
All balanced out by not being Scotch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 May, 2018, 06:09:50 PM
I just find it really depressing that no-one recognised the quote.   :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 May, 2018, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 20 May, 2018, 04:04:11 PM
and of course shit weather.

Still better than Scotch weather.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 May, 2018, 09:52:28 PM

When there were loads of us, that would have been funny. I'm the only Jock now, so you're all racists.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 May, 2018, 10:11:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 May, 2018, 09:52:28 PM

When there were loads of us, that would have been funny. I'm the only Jock now, so you're all racists.

You can't be racist to a Scotch person.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 20 May, 2018, 10:13:08 PM
If there were a referendum, would Englanders keep the Scots?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 May, 2018, 12:06:16 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 May, 2018, 06:09:50 PM
I just find it really depressing that no-one recognised the quote.   :'(

I recognised it, but didn't have anything to add to the thread - here goes.

Eddie MacPhail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 May, 2018, 06:28:38 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 May, 2018, 06:09:50 PM
I just find it really depressing that no-one recognised the quote.   :'(

I recognised it immediately too, in fairness to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 May, 2018, 06:48:58 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 May, 2018, 10:11:45 PM
You can't be racist to a Scotch person.

We prefer the term people of no colour.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 May, 2018, 10:09:57 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 20 May, 2018, 10:11:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 May, 2018, 09:52:28 PM

When there were loads of us, that would have been funny. I'm the only Jock now, so you're all racists.

You can't be racist to a Scotch person.

What if their ginger?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 May, 2018, 02:02:58 PM
No, thats a root vegetable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 May, 2018, 06:07:12 PM
well, that's a turnip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 May, 2018, 08:12:16 PM
Aaand we're back to Trump, the ginger turnip.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 May, 2018, 07:39:21 PM
Irish Squaxx: I implore you all, get out there tomorrow and vote 'Yes'. Unless of course you somehow think that the current system does anything but increase misery, in which case please stay at home and continue to enjoy the unnecessary suffering of your sisters - for a short while more at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 May, 2018, 09:54:20 PM
Wot the Tordels said, a turning point in your nation is upon you. Do the right thing, vote Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2018, 12:16:04 PM
Of course. I have a nasty feeling it's going to go the wrong way, though maybe I'm suffering from Trump / Brexit PTS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2018, 10:19:45 AM
It's looking like another major step out of the Stone Age from Ireland. Normally I'm not big on national pride (which all too often involves not liking foreigners and taking credit for things long-dead people did), but I'm allowing myself some today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2018, 10:27:53 AM
An important referendum on the future of the country and you don't make the stupidest possible choice?  You're doing it wrong.

Also, you are forgetting the lessons of Brexit - which wasn't a legally binding vote, and nor did it have an overwhelming majority: if they want to, the political classes can ignore the result and say it was just an advisory referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 May, 2018, 12:23:33 PM
Brexiters are losing their minds today. "So should Ireland have a second vote, then?" Go for it. I imagine if that happened, the yes vote would only grow higher, and it's already likely to be above super-majority territory. Compare that with Brexit, where extremely cautious estimates put the tipping point back to remain as being in January, purely on demographics, let alone polling swings we've seen in Northern Ireland, Cornwall, Wales and Sunderland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2018, 12:45:06 PM
VICTORY! After 35 years of utter defeat. Reminder to never give up, Remainers - good always triumphs, it's just a matter of time.

Now we just have to get the 'No' side to continue to campaign for all those fabulous maternity and childcare supports that they were so keen on the State providing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 May, 2018, 02:34:16 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2018, 12:45:06 PMgood always triumphs, it's just a matter of time
I do hope so. My fear is we just don't have any time. Brexiters no longer care about concessions. It's all bluster to get them over the finish line next March. That's their prize, after which point the anti-EU ferocity will be ramped up to breaking point. (At that point, since we'll be out, we'll hear a lot of "rule taker" and "vassal state" rubbish, and people who'd previously advocated Norway+ will be silent or retract. Politically, rejoining won't be something even on the radar for probably 20+ years.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 May, 2018, 02:51:48 PM
I'm not sure good actually can triumph when, at (s)election time, many people vote for the lesser of two evils.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2018, 06:40:11 PM
It's the ultimate consequence of a utilitarian universe: what's good is what's right; what's right is what works. If something doesn't work, it cannot stand for long. So good will always win, eventually.

The problem is the horrors of the interim - which is also the problem with your own superlocal community-based anarchytopia: not necessarily the end itself, which will either work or it won't, but the nature of the road that leads there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2018, 07:39:47 PM
Strangely, the teenage me, had there been a referendum back then, would have voted no.  Sorry, I knew no better: I grew up in 80s rural Ireland and hadn't a clue. (In my defence, I was always pro-gay-marriage and gave up the whole Catholic thing in my mid-teens.)
I'm proud to say I've come on a bit since then, and am delighted with this result.  I do, however, feel some sympathy for elderly people who honestly believe that the country has just chosen to legalise murder.  They are very misguided of course, but it's not entirely their fault.
That said, the Iona Group are the nastiest strain of rabid bone-rattlers this country has to offer, and i am quite enjoying the schadenfreude of watching them struggle to keep hold of a country that has very much wriggled out of their clammy grip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2018, 09:01:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 May, 2018, 02:51:48 PM
I'm not sure good actually can triumph when, at (s)election time, many people vote for the lesser of two evils.
It's not particularly relevant in this instance though, is it? A step closer to society reclamation of womns body autonomy and womens rights is only a step forward for good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 May, 2018, 09:48:11 PM

What is good and right, in my own view, does not come from government or ministers - it comes from people. It makes me sad that some people seem to think that what is good and right needs to be imposed from above - by people who don't generally give a shit unless it means votes.

I don't want to violate anyone's body, and I believe most people feel similarly, and I don't need anyone to impose that on me - especially not people who believe they have the right to instigate violence against anyone they wish for money, resources or power.

I realise that my views are unpopular and that society is not going to evolve overnight, or even over the next few generations, but I think that we need to start at least thinking about where goodness and rights come from - which is the same place as evil and oppression come from. In either case, it's not government.

Maybe the Irish vote is a step in the right direction, but I don't think so. If government can do the right thing today then that's fine but, while it has the perceived power to make such decisions, and we allow and support it, it can just as easily reverse that decision or make an even worse one tomorrow.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2018, 10:34:23 PM
Oh Sharky, I love ya baby 'offers a Tootsie Pop' but sometimes you can't see the forrest for trees.

Systemic mysogyny runs much deeper than the government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2018, 10:41:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 May, 2018, 09:48:11 PM

Maybe the Irish vote is a step in the right direction, but I don't think so. If government can do the right thing today then that's fine but, while it has the perceived power to make such decisions....

It was a referendum. It was our decision.  The referendum was a result of lobbying by the people, not a whim of the government.  But in any case, it's very much a step in the right direction. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2018, 11:44:04 PM
Indeed. The referendum was a specific request of a Citizens' Assembly, which interestingly approved the proposal by almost exactly the same 2:1 split as the real referendum. And the beauty of a binding referendum on a written constitution is that you can see exactly the wording you're voting for, stripped of spin. About as real an example of democracy as you could ask for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2018, 07:17:02 AM
What if the vote had gone the other way? Would people now be shrugging their shoulders and bemoaning the fact that misogyny is okay or even to be encouraged? Of course not. (Though some might, I fear.)

I know, as many others do, that treating anyone badly simply because of who they are is wrong. Asking a small group of rulers who habitually treat everyone badly to ban treating a section of the populace badly seems illogical to me.

Legislation is fine as a general guide but it is not Law. The Golden Rule applies in all cases - this is what must be reinforced through all strata of society. It will take longer this way, admittedly, but will be stronger for it in the end. Government's "magic wand" is an illusion, real and significant change comes through widespread and protracted hard work.

This referendum may make people feel proud and happy but it is only one small aspect of the overall problem and not a solution. There is still a long way to go and the ultimate solution is to be found only in how we act as individuals. The way I treat people is my responsibility and mine alone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 May, 2018, 09:16:50 AM
A general guide lets people continue on with how things were, with women dying due to ideology. I don't want that future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2018, 10:21:56 AM
Who does?

One of the problems with legeslative law is that, in court, arguments devolve from what actually happened to whom and the damage done down to arguments over the interpretation of words and looking for loopholes. Legislation and justice are, at this fundamental level, not the same thing at all. There's nothing to stop a court from considering legislation alongside common law, case law and tradition to arrive at a just conclusion but relying entirely on this one aspect is foolish, counterproductive and dangerous.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2018, 11:14:19 AM
I can't say I don't dream of an anarchist society where everyone is enlightened enough to respect one another and do the right thing all the time (though the one I dream of is fundamentally different from your utopia, Sharky). 

But I live in a real country with real people, and huge proportions of those real people were being denied human rights.  This referendum (and the gay marriage one of a few years ago) gave us a chance to give them those rights. We were successful. Ireland is more free than it was, and saying 'I'm not taking part in any referendum because there shouldn't be a state to organise one' achieves precisely fuck all.

Significant change has come about - we're far from a utopia, but we're a hell of a lot better off than we were a few years ago - and it has happened through hard work. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2018, 12:41:09 PM
I understand, JBC, and maybe forcing government to act better is one way forward but another, in my view more important way, is to learn how to take more responsibility for ourselves. There's no quick and easy way on any path but I'm willing to concede that improving the state is probably a valid way of encouraging statists to improve along with it. I think that we must begin by trying to identify the core problems we all face and only then begin exploring possible solutions. Leaving these explorations and solutions to a small ruling class is not the answer now, never was in the past and never will be in the future. We are on that path already. We began by being ruled by a god or gods, moved on to being ruled by god kings, then kings representing god, then governments representing kings and now we're ruled by governments representing "the common good" (which is whatever the government decides it is). Power is shifting all the time from the divine to the individual, due in most part to individuals recognising injustices and bringing pressure to bear on the rulers. If individuals can do this - and they have been doing it for centuries - then there is every possibility that we can move, eventually, into a self-governing society. We need to learn how to do this and to have faith in ourselves and each other. 

I'm not against rules but I am against rulers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2018, 05:31:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2018, 12:41:09 PM
. There's no quick and easy way on any path but I'm willing to concede that improving the state is probably a valid way of encouraging statists to improve along with it.

Well good lord, if it isn't that special time of year again - the Shark and I have agreed on a political issue! 🎆🥂🎆😉
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2018, 06:16:47 PM
We should throw a party! :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 May, 2018, 12:03:07 AM
...or form a party
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2018, 09:10:15 AM
Wash your mouth out...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2018, 06:36:23 PM
That blithering, pig-ignorant, racist buffoon of yours has a sister to match.  https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/boriss-sister-criticised-for-clear-english-remarks-36952105.html


Edit: I know she has apologised, but she can try not saying stupid things in the first place, and also sticking her apology up her arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 May, 2018, 07:11:41 PM
You bloody Irish and your difficult accents. Can't you just bloody well speak the Queen's English, like everyone else in England? Etc!

^ (I actually do still wonder how many of the Brexit mob still think Ireland is part of the UK – or should be. Personally, I'm hoping for a reverse takeover, or at least a coup by the SNP.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 May, 2018, 08:08:09 PM
How about we meet you halfway and resume bombing the mainland?  Let's face it, this is the best solution to the border issue you're going to get.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2018, 08:37:06 PM
Maybe we'll just go the whole hog: wait for the UK to break up and stage a full-scale takeover.  After all, we've got the rest of the continent on our side.  That said, I'm half English by blood, so I'll be first against the wall.

On a slightly more serious note, I see Ms Johnson has used the word 'feck' in her apology. Well that's our quaint little Gaelic word, Rachel, and you can jolly well fUck off with yourself and never use it again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 June, 2018, 09:15:37 AM
SWITZERLAND IS IN SCHENGEN. And it has full regulatory alignment with the EU for almost all goods. And it STILL has a hard border at major crossings.

STOP. SAYING. SWITZERLAND. There is no comparison. Unless of course Brexiteers want free movement, no control over regulations, etc. In which case, carry on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 03 June, 2018, 11:08:56 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2018, 08:37:06 PM
Maybe we'll just go the whole hog: wait for the UK to break up and stage a full-scale takeover.  After all, we've got the rest of the continent on our side.  That said, I'm half English by blood, so I'll be first against the wall.

On a slightly more serious note, I see Ms Johnson has used the word 'feck' in her apology. Well that's our quaint little Gaelic word, Rachel, and you can jolly well fUck off with yourself and never use it again.

I feel that the UK as a Country has little time left. The Historical and cultural reasons for its ascent have passed into history, and there is little to keep it together beyond notions of a shared identity which is fraying fast. Nationalism, mainly rising English Nationalism will ensure the end of perfidious Albion and the 4 Nations will go their separate ways. The future is smaller, meaner, poorer and I'll have to learn to be an Englishman since Britain, the identity I grew up with will be a memory. Ah, how to rethink yourself eh? A bit of a troubling question and just not for me.  :think:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 03 June, 2018, 11:21:07 AM

Considering David Davis's brilliant suggestion for the Nrn Irn border (an even bigger one or 2 borders 10 miles apart) it'll interesting to see how the former UK handles internal borders once it's been Balkanized.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 June, 2018, 11:32:33 AM
Davis is borderline (geddit) insane.  This shit needs to stop right now, and the 52% desperately need to accept that they were gulled by conmen and pull the plug toot-sweet. They've had their dreams-of-empire good-old-days fantasy for a couple of years, time to wake up. Otherwise... jesus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 June, 2018, 11:43:52 AM
The Swiss border thing is intentionally trying to muddy the waters. "Look," peeps Hannan, "they can do it, so why can't we?" He does this while standing at an unmanned border post that's nonetheless a border, and as a tourist, rather than someone ferrying goods about. When couriers and the like tell these idiots what's really involved in getting something to Norway or Switzerland, it's waved away with "well, we'll obviously come up with something better". Rees-Mogg was on the radio the other day arguing that Dover will just have to buck its ideas up or it will "lose business" to Southampton and other more Internationally oriented ports. The fact the entire system is going to be shot is what they're trying to hide.

The whole thing is insane. We have the Tories and Labour front-bench alike barrelling towards hard Brexit, to usher in their ideology that will screw everyone but the rich. The Tories want disaster capitalism and a captive, compliant, locked workforce; Corbyn wants a siege economy, which amounts to much the same. Moderates everywhere look on in horror while this plays out, and the Commons refuses to act, because MPs are shit-scared about being deselected by zealots and losing their jobs.

Everyone needs to wake the fuck up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 June, 2018, 07:56:05 PM
Ireland got a second Nice Treaty referendum, after a No vote was decided first time round.  The government quickly realised that the population needed to know why a Yes was better for the country, informed us properly, and held another referendum.  Can't see anything like that happening with the Brexit clusterfuck, though.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 June, 2018, 08:24:17 PM
The amazing thing to me is still the failure of the (any) opposition to actively court the 48%.  I mean, 48% of the voting population, disillusioned, scared and up for grabs!

It seems to me that saying "if elected, we will remain with the Single Market", or "if elected, we will protect the rights of all current EU residents of the UK, and all UK residents of other EU countries", never mind "we will have a second referendum on the final deal" [the obvious choice], should have been enough to ensure a massive swing.  That the endless self-destructive in-fighting and peculiar historical contingencies within HM Opposition almost mirror the same fuck-up in the Tory party that got us all (I use the term deliberately) into this mess in the first place is almost too ironic to bear.   

But I still can't understand why those voters aren't being courted in the same way the Tories courted the Kippers, racists, xenophobes, fogies and Little Englanders. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2018, 09:35:37 PM
If we had proportional representation, Lib Dems may well have had a fighting chance – or some other new pro-EU party. As it is, with FPTP, we're basically fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2018, 11:42:17 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 June, 2018, 08:24:17 PMBut I still can't understand why those voters aren't being courted in the same way the Tories courted the Kippers, racists, xenophobes, fogies and Little Englanders.

The UK couldn't support a one-issue party (even UKIP had only one MP, and he was a defection), so in practice that 48% wouldn't be a single body of voters in the same way the Kippers, fogies, and Little Englanders are.  Remain is riven with splits, with the hardcore often making it quite clear they no interest in actually building a cohesive political alliance - unless calling everyone else a racist and/or an ignoramus is the way one goes about doing that, in which case I have apparently been building the strongest political party in the UK on my blog since 2010, one drunken 3AM post at a time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 June, 2018, 05:34:09 AM
I suppose that's the source of my incredulity: if ever there was to be a single issue that should support a party - or coalition - in the short term at least, it's this. A real tangible imminent disaster, that almost half the people already oppose. But as Bear says, instead there's no hint of cohesion, or any will to create same. I can't believe that FPTP could stand up to a coherent anti-Brexit platform, if such a thing existed. Tragic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 05 June, 2018, 07:24:44 AM

It's a bit like hoping for the Greens to win on their core platform.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2018, 10:24:57 AM
Quite. The only way a no-Brexit party could possibly do OK is if it had a shit-ton of cash behind it, forged an alliance with the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and PC, and even then it'd be as a combined kingmaker with a very obvious red line. But that would never happen, because the Lib Dems and SNP won't work together, 1983's election showcases how much of a shit-show FPTP is to new parties and alliances, and Labour won't actually do the right thing. (Really, if Labour – or rather Jeremy fucking Corbyn – would support the single market, that's it. Brexit is over. But he wants his prize, despite it being against the majority of Labour voters, Labour members, the general public, and an increasing number of unions.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2018, 05:34:09 AMinstead there's no hint of cohesion, or any will to create same.

Tories apparently don't understand social media - and yet they've clearly created the FBPE hashtag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 June, 2018, 03:03:41 PM
They might not understand social media but they are masters at anti-social media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 04:09:56 PM
Why fight an enemy that outnumbers you when you can get them to turn on each other?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2018, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2018, 05:34:09 AMinstead there's no hint of cohesion, or any will to create same.

Tories apparently don't understand social media - and yet they've clearly created the FBPE hashtag.

except they didn't ... https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2018/02/what-does-fbpe-mean-and-could-it-stop-brexit-history-hashtag (https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2018/02/what-does-fbpe-mean-and-could-it-stop-brexit-history-hashtag)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2018, 04:49:45 PM
Depends on the circumstances. With Brexit, that appears to be Corbyn's cunning plan. The tiny snag: in the meantime the UK will be totally fucked and he will inherit the ashes – if he's fortunate. (Chances are, he'll instead lose a ton of Labour votes through allowing this to happen.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 June, 2018, 05:21:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 05 June, 2018, 07:24:44 AM

It's a bit like hoping for the Greens to win on their core platform.

Hah, well put! (Even speaking as a lifelong Green voter).

Although you might imagine thar even their stock might rise if 48% had voted against abandoning all environmental   measures, and lost to 52% who were promised that global warming would only increase the value of their seaside properties...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 05:33:58 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2018, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 June, 2018, 05:34:09 AMinstead there's no hint of cohesion, or any will to create same.

Tories apparently don't understand social media - and yet they've clearly created the FBPE hashtag.

except they didn't ...

Yeah I was sort of joking there, DDD, I do not think that the actual Tories created the FBPE hashtag, if only because Tories are hilariously useless at social media.  I meant that FBPErs currently have a singular dedication to attacking the British left and dividing Remainers along several factional lines, and thus serves the Tories' agenda.
/McBainThatIsTheJoke.jpeg
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2018, 09:14:21 PM
of course, I was joking too because...ummm..er

Look, I've been trying to feed facts to morons on Breitbart this afternoon (quiet day at work). I think the culture-shock of flitting from there to here all day caused some psychic dissonance or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2018, 09:19:49 PM
or the Breitbart version*;

jokes are supposed to be funny, libturd. Why do hate freedom, you butthurt snowflake?




(*the mild version to avoid getting banned, even in irony - seriously, it's scary down there dude)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2018, 11:06:00 PM
I think if I had any lingering doubt about Corbyn, it died today. The man is an idiot and a liability and his leadership in years to come will be seen if anything as a worse decision than Cameron or May's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2018, 11:29:08 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 05 June, 2018, 09:19:49 PMjokes are supposed to be funny, libturd. Why do hate freedom, you butthurt snowflake?

Blocked and reported for violating my safe space.  Have fun being no-platformed, Nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2018, 06:52:25 AM
Both Trump and Kim have just done something good and positive.  The news is broken today
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 June, 2018, 11:26:49 AM
Kim Jung has seen that someone like Trump can head a first world country and suddenly decides the DPRK can fit in?  Are we entirely sure this is good news?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 June, 2018, 12:42:35 PM

They're both collectivists at core. Their only point of disagreement is how the collective must be ruled.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 12 June, 2018, 02:32:48 PM
Same thing happened with Hitler and Stalin. Look how well that turned out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2018, 03:41:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 12 June, 2018, 11:26:49 AM
Kim Jung has seen that someone like Trump can head a first world country and suddenly decides the DPRK can fit in?  Are we entirely sure this is good news?

At the risk of quoting my least favourite comic character Jesse Custer: Point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 June, 2018, 10:31:41 PM
Hey Folks, remember me?

SO

Right, the royals. I get they bring in more money than my tax. I just watched a report where Liz and Meg did a meet and greet with the public. Again, I see the financial benefits of the English monarchy, but...

People were genuflecting and generally showing subserviance to Lizzie Windsor, and newly annointed Meg. This is what I struggle with. How? How can you act inferior to these people. Obviously no one here does, but maybe ye could offer insight?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 June, 2018, 11:07:43 PM
A lifetime of propaganda and indoctrination.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 June, 2018, 11:35:53 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 June, 2018, 10:31:41 PM

People were genuflecting and generally showing subserviance to Lizzie Windsor, and newly annointed Meg. This is what I struggle with. How? How can you act inferior to these people. Obviously no one here does, but maybe ye could offer insight?

Never understood it either.  I realise I don't live in a monarchy and am a bit removed from it, but it's very hard to get my head around the idea that people think that other people are superior because of an accident of birth.

Nothing against any of the Windsors personally, but what exactly have they achieved to make people bow or genuflect to them like that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 14 June, 2018, 11:57:16 PM
I have no idea, but in general Michael D is held in affection here, the role of the President in Ireland is similar in some respects to the Monarchy.
I think he  represents what I would like to think is  good about the people and country. I realise that's very general and I may not be making the point well, but if I want someone to represent this side of the island on the world stage, he is the man.
Maybe its the same for a lot of Folk with the Royal Family?

Then again the class thing may be a bit different, I met Michael D one night in Galway, Tommy Tiernan said there is no famous people in Ireland, just a few that are well known.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 06:55:21 AM
I've met him too, he's a gentleman and a scholar. There are major differences there, though, between him and the royals - first of all he was elected, and secondly nobody acts like a fawning serf when he's around.

I
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 15 June, 2018, 07:29:18 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 June, 2018, 10:31:41 PM
Right, the royals. I get they bring in more money than my tax. I just watched a report where Liz and Meg did a meet and greet with the public. Again, I see the financial benefits of the English monarchy, but...
Tourism revenue is no basis for a system of government. In any case, the French got rid of their royal family 200 years ago and people still pay to visit Versailles.

Can't really answer your question as I find it equally bewildering. For a long time I assumed it was a generational thing and nobody my age or younger wanted anything to do with them. Was quite shocked to discover English friends excited about Jubilee street parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2018, 07:34:46 AM
Back when Miggeldy was a mere Minister for Arts, Heritage, Environment, the Gaeltacht, the Islands, and Any Other Shite We Just Pretend To Care About, he used to do a lot of book launches, conferences and openings of things, and those of us who had to attend such things learned to dread the unfolding of the little piece of paper that heralded that he had Prepared a Poem for the Occasion.  However, bloke (or his lackeys at least) had inevitably done his homework, knew what he was supposed to be talking about and to whom, and was often good for a chat over a slightly stale vol-au-vent after.  These points alone put him ahead of almost all his predecessors and successors (Sile DeValera was okay too), but at the end of the day he was just a rather verbose little man standing between me and the rapidly depleting wine table.

I'd accord him plenty of respect, 'cos he does a good job, and in doing so manages to embody a lot of what I hope my country could represent. I imagine Lizzy fills a similar role, and while it seems bizarre that her wealth and status derives from an accident of birth rather than graft, wit or erudition, the same could be said of a great many people who occupy important positions.  Maybe it's just that the illusion of worth through merit can't be sustained in her case.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 15 June, 2018, 07:46:22 AM
Birthright doesn't absolutely preclude someone from being the best to fill a given role but it does make the chances of their being so vanishingly small. It also perpetuates the myth of innate superiority and hierarchy which should be resisted at all times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2018, 08:07:36 AM
Quote from: I, Cosh on 15 June, 2018, 07:46:22 AMIt also perpetuates the myth of innate superiority and hierarchy which should be resisted at all times.

That's the nub of it alright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2018, 08:57:08 AM
Yup. Democracy is great, all right.

Looks at Trump.

Looks at Brexit.

Looks at the only semblance of sanity in the entire British political system coming from the unelected House of Lords...

Ummm...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 10:11:42 AM

All those wishing to participate in either the House of Commons or the House of Lords are required to make an oath of allegiance to the monarch before being permitted to do so.

"I (name of Member) swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God."

Don't believe in God? Fine, there's an oath for that, too.

"I (name of Member) do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law."

Yaay! So one doesn't have to believe in a big invisible mega-Santa magic man living in the sky but one does have to believe in a woman who wears a gold hat because she's appointed by God and better than you.

No mention of the people or the country in this oath, just vile people promising to be loyal to a supposedly non-political leech.


Some say that the oath is "just tradition" and, if that's the case, why not do away with it, make it optional or re-word it to make it relevant to the idea of representative democratic organs rather than a pit of ravenous vipers?

In essence, the MP achieves position by first claiming to be loyal to the voters and then discards that position by swearing an oath to an unelected family of entitled spongers.

Jim and I rarely agree but in this instance he's spot on - "Democracy is great, all right."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2018, 10:23:40 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2018, 08:57:08 AM
Yup. Democracy is great, all right.

"Worst form of government, except for mutter mutter mutter..."

Both Trump and Brexit represent attacks on democracy, rather than the form itself: in both cases the winners triumphed because of largely unchallenged lies.  The strength of democracy depends on an informed electorate, in turn on a robust and independent media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 11:40:36 AM
Just got a 'phone call from my solicitor in regards to my case against the police. The police admit to nothing but have offered a modest settlement.

I wasn't expecting anything, to be honest, because when one takes a government organisation to a government court for enforcing government whims, one is not in a fair or even tenable position.

I would much rather have sued the people involved for acting outside their authority but they have successfully hidden behind their uniforms and are using public funds to cover what they, personally, should pay.

It's a very minor victory leaving a sour taste in my mouth but at least I can move on now.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2018, 11:58:41 AM
Little victories, Shark - well done. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 12:16:45 PM
Thanks, Tordels - that's what I'm trying to tell myself but it feels hollow, somehow.

Still, bright side, I may be able to treat myself to a con soon.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 June, 2018, 12:37:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 12:16:45 PM
Thanks, Tordels - that's what I'm trying to tell myself but it feels hollow, somehow.

Still, bright side, I may be able to treat myself to a con soon.

What's your local cons?

(alternative question - which con are you thinking of?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 01:04:06 PM
Not sure yet, Sheridan - probably best not to decide until this circus is well and truly over and I have something tangible in my hand. I'd probably opt for one of the big ones like Thought Bubble or Glasgow so I can meet as many of you lovely people as possible - and preferably one with a FQP table I can hang out at for a bit. The way it's been going, tough, I might still be waiting this time next year. At the moment, I'm trying not to count my chickens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 01:41:06 PM
At the very least, they might think twice before overstepping the line again. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 01:55:33 PM

I hope so, JBC, but I doubt it. They've ignored everything else and concentrated on one single breach of regulations (being late completing a single item of paperwork which I didn't even know about). "Never mind the false arrest and unlawful imprisonment, never mind the assaults and lies, never mind the "lost" cctv footage and perjury, we're sorry we didn't sign this obscure form in time."

Okay, okay... breathe, just breathe...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 02:19:18 PM
Believe me, I have no love for the boys in blue, at least not my own country's version.  It seems to be held together by a toxic fusion of apathy, corruption, incompetence and above all self-preservation.

The major turning point for me in my attitude towards them was when I got up one morning to find my street closed off - on asking the nearest Garda about it, she refused to explain.  It later turned out that a Garda car had knocked down and killed a young guy of about 19, then bundled his body off to a distant station for some reason (the local one was two minutes away).

They later claimed the poor victim was 'known to them' and that he was involved with drugs - in fact he was a volunteer in a drug rehab centre and had a very good reputation locally.

On a way smaller scale, I was scammed for a grand and a half a couple of years ago - the bumbling con artist managed to leave me his real name, reg plate and bank details, though.  I personally tracked his identity and whereabouts in a matter of minutes, while the Gardai lost my evidence twice times over the course of a year and a half, before suddenly becoming interested again (he'd crossed someone they knew personally, I suspect) and finding out he was already in prison for similar crimes (which had been reported in national papers a year beforehand).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 02:48:43 PM
I remember that, JBC, did you ever get it sorted out?

I think that most people who join the police force do so out of a genuine desire to do good but that the institution has become so fundamentally corrupted towards enforcing legislation instead of upholding Law that little good can actually be done.

Put the government in charge of anything and it becomes a government tool, gets elevated almost to the point of sainthood. The police end up protecting the rulers and enforcing their whims at the cost of common or natural Law, and the rulers protect their protectors by legislating away their actual rights and responsibilities as human beings. A police officer is nothing more or less than a human being in a costume - a human being trained to believe that the costume they wear is somehow a magic suit bestowing elevated powers upon them and placing them above the law.

But I've waffled on about all this before - sorry to be so boring!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2018, 03:14:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 02:48:43 PM
I think that most people who join the police force do so out of a genuine desire to do good but that the institution has become so fundamentally corrupted towards enforcing legislation instead of upholding Law that little good can actually be done.

One of the most depressing hours I've ever spent was a lunch break on a training course with a colleague from our sister paper in Grimsby who was an ex-copper. Crime (at least at that time) was endemic in Grimsby thanks to grinding poverty and massive unemployment due to the decimation of the fishing industry* — the conversation was summarised when he said "I joined the police to fight crime, but all I ended up doing was recording it."

Sadly, I don't think there's any way back to the Peel-ian ideal of the police, which is that they have no more or no fewer powers or authority than any member of the community, simply that they are delegated by the community to deploy those powers on a full-time basis and can be better trained in important skills like not getting their heads kicked in.

*Side note: another thing the pro-Brexit crowd in for a sore disappointment over, if they think the British fishing industry is coming back. The catch quotas are a product of the EU but are broadly sensible measures to avoid stock depletion. Who actually gets to catch those fish is, and always has been, a matter for the UK government. However, since they privatised the agency that assigns fishing rights, the large factory fleets completely outbid the far smaller UK operations (often one-man or family operations) for the rights. They not one extra fish will be landed by UK fishermen as a result of leaving the EU unless we abandon the quotas, and then the North Sea will get fished until it's empty.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 June, 2018, 03:22:44 PM
Isn't it two or three major companies that basically get all the fish now, and almost all of that is landed directly at EU27 ports? THIS IS ALL GOING TO END WELL.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 03:40:46 PM
In my view, it's government/EU subsidies which contribute most to overfishing. Large companies receive subsidies so that the EU fishing fleet is now two to three times larger than it needs to be for sustainable fishing. If a trawler comes home with a hold full of fish it can't sell the company doesn't have to worry because it can dump the catch and still get paid.

Remove these subsidies and fishermen will have to rely on what they catch to make money - the free market - overfishing would be less of a problem then because businesses would have to operate freely, without artificial income.

The reintroduction of the free market would solve many problems (whilst, granted, throwing up a few others), including the policing problem. If one has no choice but to accept the government monopoly then that monopoly has little incentive to do much more than ensure its income and preserve its position. Private policing agencies, on the other hand, would instead have to concentrate on providing a decent service to their subscribers or lose income to more efficacious outfits.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 June, 2018, 04:15:10 PM
No. The problem, as I very clearly explained, is that the government privatised the agency that assigns the fishing rights. The UK's small-scale, largely independent, fleet of fishermen simply weren't able to compete with multinational operations running factory fleets in the bidding process. The death of the UK fishing industry is the product of less government and more market forces, not the other way round.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 04:49:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 02:48:43 PM
I remember that, JBC, did you ever get it sorted out?



Never got my cash back and never found land to put my mobile home on (the property scam being just one in a series of incidents of raised hopes giving way to crushing disappointment).

My real dream, though, had been to live on a boat, but I'd given it up as being totally impractical and beyond my means.  I live on a boat now, though, and I love it.  Weird how things work out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 04:54:46 PM
It's the "rights" that I see as the problem, hand in hand with subsidies. Governments cannot issue rights, only licenses.

If we look at the fundamental free market process (simplified for brevity) in connection with fishing (for example), we can see how government subsidies and licensing interferes with the natural order of things, upsetting thousands of years of balance.

Let's imagine that there are only two types of fish, Type A and Type B. Fishermen go out and catch them to sell into the market. Now imagine that the stocks of Type A begin to dwindle; the fisherman of Type A now faces a choice; he can continue his pursuit of Type A and, do to scarcity, charge a higher price for his catch or he can switch to pursuing Type B which, because of its relative abundance, has a higher volume of availability but a lower unit price. At some point, if he continues to pursue Type A, they will become so scarce as to be too expensive to sell. The market will naturally prefer the cheaper Type B and so most fishermen will concentrate on these.

As time passes, stocks of Type B will begin to decline in number and increase in price. In the interim, however, stocks of Type A will have recovered, becoming more abundant and cheaper in price and thus this particular economic cycle begins again and the natural free market forces actually protect the fish stocks.

Now let us introduce government interferences in the form of licenses and subsidies. A fisherman with a license is restricted to a specific area, and if fish there are scarce he's forced to catch whatever he can to turn a profit, which can lead to overfishing of a declining species because he's not allowed to cross into more abundant waters due to the terms of his license. Once subsidies are introduced, it does not matter if the fisherman catches more than he can sell, and even encourages him to catch more. Thus, both types of fish are over-exploited and the underlying stabilising mechanism of the free market is upset at a fundamental level.

As I said, this is a simplified example but it does indicate how government interference in the markets leads to overfishing and also creates such wasteful anomalies as wine lakes and butter mountains.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 05:00:08 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 04:49:05 PM

My real dream, though, had been to live on a boat, but I'd given it up as being totally impractical and beyond my means.  I live on a boat now, though, and I love it.  Weird how things work out.


Ah yes, of course, I remember now - sorry for being so dim! I'm really happy for you, I loved my time living on a boat as well, just as I'm currently loving living in my shed cabin.

I guess life really is what we make of it :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 05:08:27 PM
Cheers, Sharky; I remember you being genuinely sympathetic at the time, and I appreciate it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 05:45:12 PM

What can I say? I'm just a nice guy :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2018, 07:16:30 PM
Nice like a fox  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 June, 2018, 07:21:50 PM
Quotethe underlying stabilising mechanism of the free market

It seems an idealistic oversimplification to suggest that free market economics will naturally result in stable (fish) stocks.  Rapa Nui has no trees: free market economics didn't stop them from all being chopped down. 
And dodos.  Etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 07:38:42 PM
I did say it was a simplified model. It was presented in order to explore the harmful effects of government interference. Of course, one can find outliers such as Rapa Nui to demonstrate basic problems but these do not negate the basic principles of Austrian free market economics. Indeed, one does not have to look very far to see how government interference destroys rain forests on a much greater scale today than at any time in the past.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 June, 2018, 08:38:55 PM
Well, I'm not arguing that regulation is always a positive force.

But a free market has the downside that it might run out of control and entirely (or substantially enough) consume the resource that allowed it to operate.  See: great auk, buffalo et al.  In that regard, a lack of regulation does not seem like a sensible approach (either).

I've never studied economics, though.  Mine is very much opinion from the sidelines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2018, 08:54:12 PM
There are upsides and downsides to all economic systems but, from what I've read, the Austrian approach is fundamentally more stable than the rest - though it does require more personal understanding and responsibility, but not confusingly so. (If a dumbass like me can grasp it, just about anybody can!)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 16 June, 2018, 03:32:10 PM
The free market works if all parties are rational actors who act with long-term interest.


This is evidently even more ludicrous than the most passionate revolutionary communist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2018, 04:44:16 PM
I'd hardly call governments rational actors working for long-term interests either. Solutions exist but it's too soon. First the problems, inconsistencies and downright crimes must be explored. Most people don't seem to see the problems, or expect the problems to be fixed for them by people like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, Theresa May or - God help us - Donald Trump. We have to fix as much as we can ourselves first. Once politicians catch on, they'll jump in front of the parade and pretend to be leading it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 June, 2018, 09:59:04 PM
Personally I would question whether a free market can ever exist.  It's like assuming the markets are 'rational'.  Self interest is always going to trump any other forces.  This is naturally going to lead to a monopoly situation as we've seen so often just over the last hundred or so years.  The result is going to be a gross distortion that is going to benefit the few not the many. 

It seems that the biggest problem in this country in particular is that finance is seen as the ultimate good rather than a tool to be used by society.  Everything is driven by the imperatives of the financial sector rather than the social good.  The ultimate case of the tail wagging the dog.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 June, 2018, 10:56:20 PM

Monopolies can only exist with the backing and enforcement of government, through such mechanisms as licensing and patents.

I do, however, agree that the "financial sector" (another licensed monopoly) grossly distorts markets and concentrates wealth into the hands of a few. It's still early days yet but cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin have the potential to break the current financial system wide open to the benefit of virtually everyone.

There's so much good stuff in this world waiting in the wings or on the rise. It feels like there's a race going on between freedom and tyranny and I don't know which is going to win out in the end but, as long as so many people put their faith in "the authorities" and refuse to look at the basic problems and figure out solutions for themselves, freedom will be hard to achieve. But by no means impossible.

Exciting times!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 June, 2018, 11:19:25 AM
Is that the Bitcoin that is now seen to have been massively manipulated and that is requiring insane amounts of energy to mine?

As for the financial sector, I'm no fan of banking (although regulation is the problem rather than the banks/bankers themselves), but we're going to be in for a massive shock when all these banks leave the UK, and the tax take tanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 June, 2018, 12:07:11 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 June, 2018, 11:19:25 AM...the tax take tanks.

Surely you mean "...incidences of money acquired with menaces will be reduced..."!  Tax is bad, mmmkay?  Rather depending on than armed extortion being employed to fund services, every village should get together to encourage an entrepreneur (unfettered by taxes or regulation, so far more motivated!) to set up their own local (for example) specialist oncology department, and if it's charging too much (despite everyone having loads of money now there are no taxes) or its results are judged poor by the folk of the village (and not by some kind of centralised body of expertise), simply set up another oncology centre and watch them compete for the tumours of the village on price/outcomes.  There should be no shortage of oncologists to staff it, since in the absence of subsidised university training or imposed medical standards wannabe doctors will be motivated to pay entirely for their own education in order to access the most lucrative fields, which should be easy to get into since the only people rating their qualifications and experience are the folk of the village.  Who needs taxes, the Austrian free market will settle it all!

It'll be fine.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 June, 2018, 02:51:40 PM
I like how everyone is banging on about the Brexit Dividend like it's a real thing for the country rather than a windfall for the small number of press baron billionaires who get to avoid paying the EU's new tax rates.  The Prime Minister is on tv promising literal magic money and the BBC refuse to ask any questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2018, 03:11:44 PM
Bitcoin is just one example of a cryptocurrency, it's the blockchain technology behind it that's most important. Like any currency, the external value of bitcoin can be manipulated by the centralised monetary system, which only has to buy them up and then assign its own value to them. A centralised system will do anything it can to destroy or neuter a decentralised system. Therein lies the potential great danger to authority weighed against the potential great benefit to society at large. The manipulation of bitcoin is not a consequence of the cryptocurrency itself but of the existing monopolistic financial system's attempts to quash it. It's not bitcoin that's the problem but the existing controlled markets. This is exactly the same problem current "regular" fiat currencies face. Every fiat currency in the world is manipulated by central authorities such as the Bank for International Settlements and the various central banks on a constant basis. These manipulations are undertaken for the benefit of the financial sector itself and not the economy as a whole, which manipulations lead to economic crashes and the massive overproduction of debt-based fiats which steadily and perpetually reduce the value of all currencies. The cost of produced goods and services does not rise, the value of money falls.

There is a cost to the production of any currency and so I don't see the cost of mining cryptos as a real problem. Cryptos are mined on computers but this is obviously not what all computers, or even the majority of them, are used for. One could make the argument that emails, taken in isolation, consume far more energy than bitcoin mining and so they should not be used but I doubt anyone would take that argument seriously. Email is a way of decentralising communication in the same way that cryptos are a way of decentralising currency.

*

As I've said before, it's not the idea of paying for things I'm against but being forced to pay for things I don't want, don't agree with or are morally repugnant to me. I'm happy to pay insurance for medical cover (maybe even to the NHS itself because, as a body, it has a great deal of assets, expertise and experience already in place) but I do not in any way want to fund the bombing of brown people on the other side of the world so the "elites" can carve up their resources between them. This is why I don't vote any more, for anybody, because they all believe they have a right to simply take my stuff for whatever reason they like, good, bad or indifferent, and to punish me if I disagree.

Taking away the coercive power of governments does not mean that hospitals or universities will cease to exist or be instantly transformed into predatory death and rapine factories. Oncological knowledge and research will not evaporate; technology will not cease to function or improve; crops will not vanish from the fields; roads will not crumble to dust and blow away; human beings will not revert to wearing animal skins and eating nettles.

My approach to living in society rests on the twin foundations of Private Property Rights and the Non Aggression Principle (and I like to believe that the majority of ordinary people have the same or similar fundamental beliefs), therefore I cannot in all good conscience participate in, support or condone anything that violates those foundations. Unfortunately for me, the foundations of authoritarian beliefs are that all property belongs to the state and that aggression is justified to acquire it. Statists simply have to accept these ideas or ignore them altogether.

Most of the people I know are so afraid of the state, or so brainwashed by a lifetime of propaganda and indoctrination, or so apathetic, or so unsure of their own abilities and morality, or so trusting of governments, or so distrustful of their fellow human beings, or so wary of the future that they cannot even listen to alternative ideas without flying into a rage or making the most convoluted justifications. "What about the roads," is a familiar excuse for rejecting rational thought (although the people on this thread are more willing to engage with these ideas than most, for which I am grateful).

In the run-up to any great change there is resistance - "how will the sun rise if we cease to make sacrifices to the gods?", "who will pick the cotton if we free all the slaves?", "what will become of the horses if we all use automobiles?", "what will the sailors do if we all use aeroplanes?", "what will become of the postal service if we all use email?"

"Who will take care of the roads if we strip the state of its coercive powers?" is merely the latest question as we move (hopefully) towards a free society of personal rights and responsibilities. In every case, solutions were found and the world improved. I sincerely hope that our world is on the path to a freer, more equal global society but I understand that change on such a scale can be terrifying. That change is going to take a lot longer than I initially thought but I believe it is not only necessary but inevitable. I may be wrong about that and I may be right but the one thing I do know with absolute certainty is that the future is not built by emperors or kings or presidents or prime ministers but by ordinary individuals like you and me.

Private property and non-aggression, that's the world I want. I hope some of you will at least consider wanting that too and thinking about how to achieve it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 June, 2018, 03:38:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 17 June, 2018, 02:51:40 PM
The Prime Minister is on tv promising literal magic money and the BBC refuse to ask any questions.

How much more money will you give the NHS and is it enough? (https://youtu.be/hzT6EHjLMLo?t=2m40s)

Is this money we were told we'd save from Brexit? (https://youtu.be/hzT6EHjLMLo?t=7m27s)

Will this extra money for the NHS actually come from increased tax and borrowing? (https://youtu.be/hzT6EHjLMLo?t=8m51s)


Marr went on to ask questions about social care. She didn't really answer any of them, but he asked the questions and followed them up.  If you want greater scrutiny, listen to what Eddie Mair & PM make of this tomorrow (5pm) (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b6hr9d).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 June, 2018, 05:30:13 PM
Unless there's follow up and the duel of wits has been ended with nothing less than conclusive victory, the questions being asked were never asked.  I learned this further up the thread when we discussed PMQs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 June, 2018, 11:40:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2018, 03:11:44 PM
Taking away the coercive power of governments does not mean that hospitals or universities will cease to exist or be instantly transformed into predatory death and rapine factories. Oncological knowledge and research will not evaporate...

It seems to me that historically all these things you list have been integrally linked with the rise of the state, and latterly the super-state or international body, simply because of their coercive and redistributive powers.  How will (to pursue the pressing example) advanced medical training and equipment be funded and subsidised? 

Your idea of medical insurance is - without wanting to be rude - laughable.  Specifically, Sharky, neither you nor I could possibly afford private medical insurance that could equate to its tax-subsidised equivalent, unless what you actually mean is a 'medical tax' (here we have a 'health levy'  ::)), in which case we're right back to coercion and wondering what happens to those who don't pay...  We will get sick, we will (hopefully) get horribly old: you can't economically insure against an inevitability.  Modern medicine and its further research is a resource-hungry time-hungry people-hungry project, and it access to it depends on centralised resource redistribution.   

I really can't take on board the reductio ad absurdum argument that wondering about these things is akin to worrying about the sun not rising if the appropriate sacrifice is not performed.

A better EASIER approach would be to campaign, agitate and vote for representatives that will genuinely reform the existing system in its rotten media-strangled entirety, and then not use your tax money to bomb brown people (or feather their own nests).  This depends just as much on the thing we do share: a vision of humanity as basically good and decent, and not prone to donning leather chapes and spiky gimp masks and grabbing what they can as soon as change rears its scary head.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2018, 03:49:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 June, 2018, 03:11:44 PMOne could make the argument that emails, taken in isolation, consume far more energy than bitcoin mining
One could, but it wouldn't be in any way accurate. And it's terrifying to hear stories like this (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43030677), where electricity use purely for bitcoin mining in Iceland is set to outstrip that of Iceland's homes. That is nuts. (And, yes, I realise this is an outlier, but it showcases how such a system also has massive problems.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 06:41:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 June, 2018, 11:40:11 AM

How will (to pursue the pressing example) advanced medical training and equipment be funded and subsidised?




This is an excellent question but why ask me? This is statist thinking, as if I'm running for office and must have all the right answers in order to attract votes. I can throw out ideas, of course, but that's all they are. The insurance model is just one idea that will work in some instances but not others. I cannot say, "it will all be handled by insurance just like car insurance or house insurance" and expect that model to be imposed upon everyone because the last thing I want is to impose anything on anyone. There are many billions of people on this planet and millions of them will come up with models to fit their own societies and circumstances better than I ever could. The first thing to do is decide whether the current system is acceptable to you, if it is then there's no problem but if it isn't it's time to get our thinking caps on.

In my view, the current system is based on unacceptable foundations and must be revised. This is my view and not one I want to impose on others like some arrogant government minister. In a free world there may be two or five or nine or a million options to choose from - which is a scary thought but no scarier than having a single option imposed from above no matter how good or bad it is.

The last part of your post I love. I have no objection whatever to trying to reform the system in the way you suggest but, to me, those reforms must be a step along the way and not the ultimate goal. Take the coercion and corruption out of government and leave its organisational aspects in place and I'd be on board with that in an instant - Hell, I'd even vote for whomever I think will do the best organisational job, maybe even campaign for them. I would still, however, be calling for a stateless world society.

I think I've said it before but what I want from government (if government we must have) is very, very simple: the right to say no (providing, of course, that my saying no isn't part of an act of aggression).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 June, 2018, 06:52:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 06:41:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 June, 2018, 11:40:11 AM

How will (to pursue the pressing example) advanced medical training and equipment be funded and subsidised?




This is an excellent question but why ask me?

To be fair, you brought it up.  You have a very specific idea of what society should be like, but if you want other people to see your point of view, you of need to address hard questions like this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 June, 2018, 07:17:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 06:41:50 PM
The first thing to do is decide whether the current (health care) system is acceptable to you, if it is then there's no problem ...

Seventy-seven per cent of the public believe the NHS should be maintained in its current form. This level of support has remained consistent over almost two decades despite widespread social, economic and political change.

Around 90 per cent of people support the founding principles of the NHS, indicating that these principles are just as relevant today as when the NHS was established.

A clear majority (66 per cent) of adults are willing to pay more of their own taxes to fund the NHS, underlining growing support among the public for tax rises to increase NHS funding.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/what-does-public-think-about-nhs


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 07:23:00 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 June, 2018, 03:49:42 PM

And it's terrifying to hear stories like this (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43030677), where electricity use purely for bitcoin mining in Iceland is set to outstrip that of Iceland's homes.


How is this "terrifying"? The linked article is packed with ifs and excluded concepts. For example, will the bitcoin mining centres be stealing electricity or paying for it? I imagine they'll be paying for the energy they use, injecting capital into the system. And in a country with only ~340,000 people, is it really so bad to sell more energy to bitcoin mining than households? The article doesn't claim that bitcoin mining will reduce the amount of energy available to households, which would be unacceptable. The whole article is skewed and seems designed to demonise bitcoin.

The BBC supports the government and the government supports centralisation. Bitcoin represents decentralisation, a threat to government, and so the BBC is duty bound to trash it. This is not impartial reporting, as far as I can see, and contains nothing even approaching "terror."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 07:51:22 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 June, 2018, 06:52:00 PM


To be fair, you brought it up.  You have a very specific idea of what society should be like, but if you want other people to see your point of view, you of need to address hard questions like this.


Actually, no - I have a very specific idea of what basis society should be built upon and some ideas as to how such a society might solve certain problems but the ideas I present are just that; ideas. Come up with better ones and I'll accept them. And there are better ideas out there, I'm sure of it, or at least there will be.

However, just for shits and giggles, here are a couple of ideas to apply to Tordels' question: Teaching Hospitals and R&D facilities which sell new technologies and drugs to fund themselves. Perhaps an NHS drug manufacturing company. A national lottery run by the NHS to attract partial funding. Charitable donations. An NHS backed and issued currency. NHS toys, souvenirs, collectibles, home medical kits and books. Insurance premiums. Car boot sales. An "Approved by the NHS" stamp purchased by food (eg.) manufacturers.

Virtually no thought whatsoever went into the above suggestions as they already exist in one form or another. I'm certain other people can come up with much better ideas to augment or replace the above. The possibilities are endless and do not need to rely on government coercion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 08:20:01 PM
Quote from: Frank on 18 June, 2018, 07:17:08 PM


A clear majority (66 per cent) of adults are willing to pay more of their own taxes to fund the NHS, underlining growing support among the public for tax rises to increase NHS funding.



In which case, they should be equally willing to pay voluntarily - perhaps even moreso - for an NHS run by healthcare professionals instead of ministers looking to their next election.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 June, 2018, 08:39:05 PM
Minister for Health is an unelected position, and the current incumbent is independently wealthy, was parachuted into his parliamentary seat when the previous incumbent became a dame or whatever the heck the inbred title is, and is widely regarded as a shock absorber for the government ideological position of dismantling a free at point of use NHS.  It is literally impossible for him to give less fucks what people think of him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 09:01:02 PM
I'd guess that he/she is an elected MP though - I don't follow The Circus, however, so I may be wrong in this assumption.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 18 June, 2018, 09:56:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 07:51:22 PM
The possibilities are endless and do not need to rely on government coercion.

How does an approval rating of between 77-90%* equal 'government coercion'?


* https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/what-does-public-think-about-nhs
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 06:00:34 AM
Approval does not indicate legitimacy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 June, 2018, 11:02:02 AM
How so?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 12:14:24 PM

There are people who approve of female genital mutilation, persecution of anyone different and execution. Their approval does not make any of these things legitimate.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2018, 01:31:06 PM
An excellent answer: the death penalty in the UK being a good example of where approval and political legitimacy differ, polls regularly indicating its popularity at over 50%, but parliament refusing to legislate to that effect*. Thank feck. 

However, legitimacy can be conferred (and understood) in many different ways (the examples of 'approved' acts Shark cites have historically been granted legitimacy by tradition and/or religious belief), so I suspect we end up appealing to an absolute morality for an absolute legitimacy.  And seeing as such a thing is elusive (although I do firmly believe it exists as an ideal, and that we are steadily working our way towards it), the legitimacy granted by a well-informed and morally-engaged electorate is a useful guide - unfortunately we don't have one of those either.



*Only finally abolished by the Human Rights Act (1998), which incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law, my Eurosceptic chums!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 02:59:53 PM
The death penalty is a good one for debate. It was the state that imposed it and removing its own "right" to execute people is one of the better things our state has done. (Although it still reserves the "right" to bomb people and call it war.)

There is debate even in libertarian circles over this. Some think that nobody has the right to take a human life in retribution and some think that it should be up to the victim's family to decide on "an eye for an eye" basis. I don't find either side wholly convincing but lean towards the former. In the latter case, at least the state is denied the right to decide and the victim's family has the right to choose the murderer's punishment, from compensation through incarceration to the ultimate sanction.

As Tordels says, this kind of thing rests on human morality, which is notoriously difficult to legislate. A good place to begin infusing morality into society is, I believe, the Golden Rule - but even this gives no clear-cut answer to the question of execution

What does the hive mind think about this?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 19 June, 2018, 03:18:50 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 02:59:53 PM
The death penalty is a good one for debate. It was the state that imposed it and removing its own "right" to execute people is one of the better things our state has done. (Although it still reserves the "right" to bomb people and call it war.)

There is debate even in libertarian circles over this. Some think that nobody has the right to take a human life in retribution and some think that it should be up to the victim's family to decide on "an eye for an eye" basis. I don't find either side wholly convincing but lean towards the former. In the latter case, at least the state is denied the right to decide and the victim's family has the right to choose the murderer's punishment, from compensation through incarceration to the ultimate sanction.

As Tordels says, this kind of thing rests on human morality, which is notoriously difficult to legislate. A good place to begin infusing morality into society is, I believe, the Golden Rule - but even this gives no clear-cut answer to the question of execution

What does the hive mind think about this?

When faced with tough moral questions my thought process is usualy 'what would Jean Luc Picard think?'
It's as good a yard stick as any, I find.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 June, 2018, 03:27:41 PM
Hold a meeting of the senior staff, ignore Worf, listen to Data, and then get Geordi to modify the main deflector dish?

Ultimately the death penalty demeans everyone involved: it demonstrably has no deterrent role (arguably the opposite), it presents enormous risks of injustice, not to mention the legal expense and the practical difficulties of 'humane' execution, and thus it has no role except as pure state-sanctioned vengeance.  We all love a bit of vengeance as individuals, but societies have to be above it to survive.  A life wasted in prison is no moral walk in the park either, but it stops short of the barbarity of eye-for-an-eye, includes the potential of rehabilitation, and the possibility for wrongful conviction to be overturned.   

And even if there was no other argument against it, the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 would hold the day. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 19 June, 2018, 03:31:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 June, 2018, 03:27:41 PM
Hold a meeting of the senior staff, ignore Worf, listen to Data, and then get Geordi to modify the main deflector dish?

Ultimately the death penalty demeans everyone involved: it demonstrably has no deterrent role (arguably the opposite), it presents enormous risks of injustice, not to mention the legal expense and the practical difficulties of 'humane' execution, and thus it has no role except as pure state-sanctioned vengeance.  We all love a bit of vengeance as individuals, but societies have to be above it to survive.  A life wasted in prison is no moral walk in the park either, but it stops short of the barbarity of eye-for-an-eye, includes the potential of rehabilitation, and the possibility for wrongful conviction to be overturned.   

And even if there was no other argument against it, the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 would hold the day. 

I read this in Patrick Stewart's voice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 05:54:35 PM
I'm inclined to agree with Tordels on this, but just to play Devil's advocate for a...

Bollocks to it. I've had a long, hard day; my back is aching, my blisters are burning, my muscles seem to have dribbled away and I want me tea. Just pretend I shouted something about Kahless the Unforgettable while slicing my own palm open with a d'k tahg and let me fall asleep in me chair.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 June, 2018, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 June, 2018, 03:27:41 PM
Hold a meeting of the senior staff, ignore Worf, listen to Data, and then get Geordi to modify the main deflector dish?

Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 would hold the day.

I came here to get away from Football!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 June, 2018, 10:23:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 June, 2018, 02:59:53 PMIn the latter case, at least the state is denied the right to decide and the victim's family has the right to choose the murderer's punishment

I don't believe someone who has lost a family member to a violent crime is really the person to make a logical, rational decision in a case like that.  While I could not imagine how awful it must be to be bereaved in such a terrible way; life-or-death legal decisions that are fueled by a mix of grief and hatred (however understandable) might not be beneficial in creating a better and more humane society. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 07:19:58 AM
The idea, as I understand it, is that a court determines what happened and renders a verdict. A range of suitable punishments is offered and it's up to the victim's family to decide which is imposed. Only in the case of deliberate, premeditated murder would the death penalty be on the table.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 June, 2018, 08:33:34 AM
I choose Thunderdome.  Always Thunderdome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 10:15:03 AM
I choose the option from Monty Python's Meaning of Life...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 June, 2018, 10:41:02 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 10:15:03 AM
I choose the option from Monty Python's Meaning of Life...

"We'll take the foreplay as read..."?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 10:44:37 AM
Don't we always?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 20 June, 2018, 12:31:33 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 19 June, 2018, 03:31:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 June, 2018, 03:27:41 PM
Hold a meeting of the senior staff, ignore Worf, listen to Data, and then get Geordi to modify the main deflector dish?

Ultimately the death penalty demeans everyone involved: it demonstrably has no deterrent role (arguably the opposite), it presents enormous risks of injustice, not to mention the legal expense and the practical difficulties of 'humane' execution, and thus it has no role except as pure state-sanctioned vengeance.  We all love a bit of vengeance as individuals, but societies have to be above it to survive.  A life wasted in prison is no moral walk in the park either, but it stops short of the barbarity of eye-for-an-eye, includes the potential of rehabilitation, and the possibility for wrongful conviction to be overturned.   

And even if there was no other argument against it, the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 would hold the day. 

I read this in Patrick Stewart's voice.

The line must be drawn he-yar!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 June, 2018, 04:56:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 07:19:58 AM
The idea, as I understand it, is that a court determines what happened and renders a verdict. A range of suitable punishments is offered and it's up to the victim's family to decide which is imposed. Only in the case of deliberate, premeditated murder would the death penalty be on the table.

Nope.  Not for me - not now, not ever.  Start killing people and you're a killer too.  Make the death penalty an 'option' for the bereaved then you get a penal code based on revenge and hatred.  I might have a very different point of view if one of my loved ones were murdered in cold blood, but then my judgement too would be clouded by extreme emotions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 05:39:40 PM
I tend to agree. I posted that for clarity as I think I might have given the impression that the victim's family would act as judge, jury and executioner.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 20 June, 2018, 05:55:48 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 June, 2018, 08:20:01 PM
Quote from: Frank on 18 June, 2018, 07:17:08 PM


A clear majority (66 per cent) of adults are willing to pay more of their own taxes to fund the NHS, underlining growing support among the public for tax rises to increase NHS funding.



In which case, they should be equally willing to pay voluntarily - perhaps even moreso - for an NHS run by healthcare professionals instead of ministers looking to their next election.

I think you misread that statistic - I think a large majority of people are willing to pay more for the NHS as long as everyone is paying - a system where some pay voluntarily but everyone is covered would quickly disintegrate as it would conflict with our natural sense of fairness "why should I keep paying when all those feckless/stingy people are getting free treatment?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 June, 2018, 08:01:39 PM

I think you'd be right if this idea was implemented too soon and on its own. We're all too used to not trusting one another, unfortunately. That attitude, in my view, simply has to change and not just on this issue. It's an attitude the state encourages.

First there has to be a revolution of the mind because that's the only kind of revolution that's worth anything. We can all see that the current system isn't working - people laud democracy out of one side of their mouths and condemn the actions of the rulers out of the other. In my experience, people only support democracy when it throws up results they agree with. Take Brexit as a prime example; there was a sacred democratic referendum and, because the result didn't go the way people wanted, they bitch and whine and oppose the result instead of honouring the democratic system they claim to believe in so deeply. Same with Trump's election, he won out in a system believed in and supported by so many and yet his victory is seen as a huge, some would say catastrophic, mistake - so much so that there are rumblings about US Civil War II all over Facebook. Democracy only works for people if they get what they want out of it. It's no wonder people don't trust one another under these conditions.

The first step (on a long road) is to look impartially at what we've got and identify why it isn't working. As you know, my opinion is that the core problem is too much state power. If my opinion is correct, which I think it is, the second step is to think and talk about it, to further the conversation and devise non-violent solutions to all manner of problems, the NHS being one of the most important. If democracy has taught us anything it's that solutions imposed from the top down don't work for everybody, or even the majority. We need a better way.

Voluntary contributions won't work in the current climate with the current mindset but societies change and what's true today won't necessarily be true in fifty or a hundred years. Sadly, it's probably too late for old farts like me to ever see a better system but, by God, I'd rather talk about it now so that the coming generations can at least be made aware that there are alternatives than just keep quiet because that's the easier option.

And believe me, keeping quiet is the easier option. I personally have been threatened and verbally abused by otherwise quite level-headed people for daring to suggest that Sacred Democracy is a hollow sham. It's like standing up in a church and denying the existence of God. Even posting in this thread has attracted replies that made me feel physically ill, caused me sleepless nights and driven me almost to tears. But so what? I can't say that I didn't sometimes deserve it as my fervour overshadowed my good sense and my proselytising was offensive and unbending. I hope I have learned enough to make my points in more acceptable ways over the years and that I'm less insulting these days.

But that's all just "poor me" whining bullsh*t and not relevant. What is relevant is that I still believe and that you are willing to entertain my rants without accepting them - which a wiser man than I once pointed to as the mark of a good mind.

And finally, in confusion, I would like to say, um, er... What was the question again?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2018, 05:46:20 AM
Quotethey bitch and whine

That's unfair,  abusive and manipulative.  It's perfectly fair to criticize the Brexit referendum on several counts.

Democracy doesn't necessarily mean "everyone gets a vote and if 51% vote aye a thing is passed".  First, we vote in our representatives, who hopefully know more about running complicated things like the national economy a little bit better than John - that guy who props up the bar every evening going on about how he'd fix things if he were in charge.  The point being: the general public isn't (and wasn't) qualified to make a sensible decision about whether or not Britain should leave the EU.  Not qualified. 

Boris printed a bunch of lies on the side of a bus.  And the Leave campaign spent too much money hiring out call centers to push their message.  So: the vote was unfairly manipulated.

If democracy is voting on things to get what you want, why can't you re-vote (or desire to) on a similar issue later hoping to get a different result?  (And if you wanted to do that: why would you be a "bitch" or a "whiner"?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2018, 06:26:57 AM
So it's fair to criticise Brexit but unfair to criticise democracy?

If I want to trade or interact with somebody on a lawful level, no matter where they happen to live, why do I need permission from above?

What if what I want isn't offered by any candidate or party, such as withdrawing troops and such from involvement with America's wars of aggression? A million people marched to prevent our involvement and all they got was sore feet.
John from the pub is as qualified as anyone to run the country (that is, not at all) but knows much better what's best for himself and his family. One person who wins a popularity contest is in no way qualified to represent half a million strangers, each one with their own unique beliefs and circumstances - most of whom likely didn't vote for that person anyway. It's like me telling you, a person I don't know, that you must abide by my rules or I'll hurt you. I respect your rights too much to do that, or to vote for somebody who'll do it for me. It's your life; so long as you're not harming anybody, what possible business is it of mine or anyone else's?

The people we vote for generally don't know how to run an economy (even assuming that an economy needs to be run), they only know how to get elected.

To bitch and moan means to complain and moan, not that people are bitches. Apologies if that was unclear.

That politicians lie to get elected is no excuse for electing them (and also not a new concept), especially not in the Internet Age where we can check our own facts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 08:39:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2018, 06:26:57 AM
The people we vote for generally don't know how to run an economy (even assuming that an economy needs to be run), they only know how to get elected.

SO ELECT DIFFERENT PEOPLE. 

Look, in a representative democracy we aim to elect people who we feel demonstrate our biases and concerns, and can listen to the advice of public servants and others who are genuine experts in a range of fields and parse that into policy and action that (we hope) is what we would do ourselves.  We do this because no one person has the time to have a competent understanding of every aspect of decision making that affects a society, so we do what humans always so: we choose specialists to do it full-time on our behalf, no different from bronze-workers or sysadmins. I pay a kid in China to make my phone, I pay a ham-faced twat in Dublin to navigate health funding.

That we don't do that, that we treat democracy as, as Shark says, a popularity contest for demagogues who can spin the most attractive fantasy, that's on us.   

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos" is often used to indicate the Hobson's choice faced by voter - but in fact it's one that's self-imposed.  It's seldom noted that Ross Perot was also on that ballot.  Not an ideal example, I grant you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 June, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
ah... so Sharky's theories are possible, we just need to fundamentally alter human nature. Sorted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 09:22:00 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 21 June, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
ah... so Sharky's theories are possible, we just need to fundamentally alter human nature. Sorted.

In so far as it exists as a thing at all, "human nature" changes all the time. Usually for the better. It's no harm factoring further change into utopian aspirations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2018, 01:29:46 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 08:39:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 June, 2018, 06:26:57 AM
The people we vote for generally don't know how to run an economy (even assuming that an economy needs to be run), they only know how to get elected.

SO ELECT DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

No one is pure enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2018, 05:00:30 PM
In a recent episode of John Oliver's show, he spoke quite a lot about local elected judges in the US. Hardly any of them in the area he was talking about are lawyers. They don't have a clue, but, hey, community! And this is the problem. Brexit showcased brilliantly how the average person has no fucking idea how the world works, and what's largely in their best interests. Instead, we got populist lashing out that will cost every household in the UK thousands, trash the reputation of the country for decades, and leave millions of people in a dodgy legal situation regarding residency.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 06:51:23 PM
Totally agree IP: the problem we have to tackle is education, information and engagement, I think a more functional political establishment would inevitably follow, if only it could be done. 

A  democracy requires a level of enlightened self-interest, with emphasis on the enlightened.   That's the nut that needs to be cracked - on all sorts of levels, because the choices we're facing regarding the environment, biodiversity and mass migration are going to be very hard ones.  Disappearing down internet rabbit-holes of confirmation-bias bandwagonning and rampant Dunning-Kruger everyman 'expertise' is not going to cut it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2018, 07:08:12 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 June, 2018, 05:00:30 PMBrexit showcased brilliantly how the average person has no fucking idea how the world works, and what's largely in their best interests.

There should be some sort of tests or safeguards before people are allowed to vote, and the ones that don't pass shouldn't get a vote at all.

My local council was dissolved and absorbed into a "super council" located in another town, and apart from a nosedive in local services and works that happened almost overnight, another side effect has been the rise of Loyalist triumphalism in the area, as the town has a Catholic majority which translated into a Nationalist majority council in every election - just in case you are not familiar with the delightful tribalism of Northern Ireland, Catholics are generally Nationalists, while Protestants are generally Unionists/Loyalists, but obviously there's bit of overlap because that's what happens in any large body of contrarian bastards a politically active population.
Anyhoo, there's lots of flegs being flown trumpeting how "the people of Ulster have triumphed over the IRA establishment" because despite the aggressive improvement in the quality of life ushered in by the council over the last couple of decades (they were European socialists, so stuck their hands into that that phat EU honeypot), it was still a majority Catholic one, and thus run by the IRA.  Also, just to hammer in the metaphor, we used to be very, very white - I mean, there was like one black person in this town until somewhere around 2002 - but the increase in factories in setting up locally to take advantage of lower rent and rates (which used to be prohibitively high) has meant an influx of migrant labor, so the council was also responsible for the town's recent multiculturalism.

I mention all this because we don't have FPTP over here, we have PR, so the council, while majority Catholic/Nationalist, was still run as a co-operative that included Protestant/Unionist councillors, so the entire community was not only represented, but the town was doing pretty well.  Not so much anymore, and yet a small contingent have set to crowing about how they've taken back control of their tiny portion of the world, just as it goes to absolute shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 June, 2018, 10:34:46 PM
Quotea small contingent have set to crowing about how they've taken back control of their tiny portion of the world, just as it goes to absolute shit.

Amazing how well this fits elsewhere
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 June, 2018, 04:19:17 PM
Trio of youtube bell-ends join UKIP.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/25/ukip-welcomes-social-media-activists-linked-to-alt-right-into-party (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/25/ukip-welcomes-social-media-activists-linked-to-alt-right-into-party)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 June, 2018, 04:53:37 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 June, 2018, 04:19:17 PM
Trio of youtube bell-ends join UKIP.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/25/ukip-welcomes-social-media-activists-linked-to-alt-right-into-party (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/25/ukip-welcomes-social-media-activists-linked-to-alt-right-into-party)

At least there all in one place now and easily identified as to what they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2018, 06:19:33 PM
When credibility remains elusive, UKIP is one's natural home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 June, 2018, 06:24:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 06:51:23 PM
Totally agree IP: the problem we have to tackle is education, information and engagement, [ .... ] on all sorts of levels, because the choices we're facing regarding the environment, biodiversity and mass migration are going to be very hard ones.  Disappearing down internet rabbit-holes of confirmation-bias bandwagonning and rampant Dunning-Kruger everyman 'expertise' is not going to cut it.

To quote the West Wing:

"Can I tell you something, honestly? This is one of those situations where I couldn't give a damn what the people think. The complexities of a global arms treaty, the technological, the military, the diplomatic nuances, it's staggering, Toby. 82% of the people cannot possibly be expected to reach an informed decision."

This is why, to me, what Cameron did was so criminally dishonest.  He took an insanely complex issue, wrapped it up in hyper-emotional rhetoric, phrased it in a dangerously simplistic question and then threw it out to the 'people' to reach some sort of decision.  Then having stepped out of the way, he left his party to fight over how to interpret the results.  Why?  To avoid some sort of internal split in his party and to satisfy the lunatic fringe.

Tony Blair famously said that history will judge him.  How much more will history judge Cameron and May?  What about the current 'government'?  The present 'opposition'?  There are days when I'm actually inclined to think that maybe Sharky is right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 June, 2018, 09:24:29 PM
It was the Beeb wot done it.  Years of platforming they granted to UKIP rather than allow "the far left" (the Greens) to appear on publicly-funded political programming made the far right more of a threat to Cameron than the left, so he had to appease them rather than an ascendant Green party or Labour (which was then still center-right).  A political landscape where the discussion is between the right and the far right has arguably turned out exactly as we might have expected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 July, 2018, 11:25:59 AM
Sorry it's taken me a while to spot these.

[/quote]
Quote from: Dandontdare on 21 June, 2018, 09:06:34 AM
ah... so Sharky's theories are possible, we just need to fundamentally alter human nature. Sorted.

Not at all. Human nature is fundamentally sound and most people are basically good, with instinctive knowledge of how to be social animals. The problem is how human nature is manipulated through the compulsory state schooling system and the media. 
If one thinks of how much knowledge of human psychology and manipulation thereof goes into something as simple as the advertising and sale of a chocolate bar, then how much more must go into the advertising and sale of the idea of authority? We all know that if we get sick or injured it's logical and desirable to defer to a person with knowledge of and experience with healing, or if our house catches fire we'd be better served following the lead of an experienced firefighter. These instincts and lessons are constantly manipulated to con us into thinking the same way about government authority over virtually every aspect of our lives.

Fundamental human nature does not need to be changed - it needs to be encouraged and strengthened.


Quote from: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 08:39:45 AM


SO ELECT DIFFERENT PEOPLE. 

Look, in a representative democracy we aim to elect people who we feel demonstrate our biases and concerns, and can listen to the advice of public servants and others who are genuine experts in a range of fields and parse that into policy and action that (we hope) is what we would do ourselves.  We do this because no one person has the time to have a competent understanding of every aspect of decision making that affects a society, so we do what humans always so: we choose specialists to do it full-time on our behalf, no different from bronze-workers or sysadmins. I pay a kid in China to make my phone, I pay a ham-faced twat in Dublin to navigate health funding.


The fundamental problem with this idea, as I see it, is that there can be no such thing as a representative democracy as most people understand it.

For example, the person currently pretending to represent me is called Seema Kennedy, I think. She does not know me, couldn't pick me out of a crowd or attach my name to my face. She doesn't know my family, has no idea where I live, doesn't share my history or background, has a different income bracket, doesn't understand my beliefs or perspectives, doesn't care about what I have to say, knows nothing of how live I live my life or earn my keep, has no knowledge of my hobbies or the books I read or the podcasts I listen to or the films I watch, can't grasp my thoughts or dreams, doesn't understand my personal needs and has no idea whether I even voted for her or not or which of her ideas I might agree or disagree with. How can she possibly represent me, except in the most fundamental basics as my needs for oxygen, water, food, clothing, shelter, energy, medicine and the like, when she knows virtually nothing about me? And there are hundreds of thousands of people in the same situation - all complete strangers to her - who she pretends to represent. It's impossible.

Not only does she pretend to represent me, but she also believes she has the right to impose what she thinks is right on me - and on all the other unique thousands, and to have me punished if I disagree. Even if she knew me intimately and represented me perfectly to government to ensure my life goes how I want it to go, what's right and helpful to me will not fit with all those other people, but she'd impose what I want on everyone else anyway, she'd become the proxy through which I impose my will on others and the agent of retribution against anyone who disagrees with me.

When trying to understand government, I often find it useful to look at what it does through a mirror. Having Seema Kennedy represent me to government makes no sense to me, but when I look at it as Seema Kennedy trying to represent government to me it suddenly makes perfect sense.

She simply cannot represent me, she can only re-present me in an abstract manner, stripping me of everything that's unique and counting me as a symbol or simple statistic. I would much rather present myself in person to the world around me than be re-presented by a complete stranger to a distant group of power-addled sociopaths who expect nothing from me other than unquestioning obedience.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 July, 2018, 10:45:06 AM
I must say I'm looking forward to Trump's reaction to that angry baby balloon. For a chap who admires 'tough-guy'-style leadership so much, he's a remarkably insecure wuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 July, 2018, 01:14:16 AM
I think it's a good idea that Trump is spending the weekend in Scotland. The Scots are such a calm and easy going sort. He'll have no trouble there, I'm sure.  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 July, 2018, 09:13:47 AM
See I'm in the 'let's not bother about his visit' camp.  The infantile egomaniac thrives on this sort of attention.  The greatest way to drive home our lack of regard would be to simply not show up.  Let his visit pass off with absolutely no attention whatsoever, a gesture of 'who is he?'  Can you imagine the implosion?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 10:14:56 AM

I'm of the same mind with the lot of 'em.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 July, 2018, 11:38:10 AM
That is a perfectly elegant and simple solution Tjm.

*Get Downing St. on the line!*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2018, 12:44:19 PM
Personally I think ridiculing him is a better solution. As we've seen time and time again, he gets VERY upset about that
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 02:41:05 PM

Are you sure it's entirely wise to taunt a dumb-ass bully with a nuclear football?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 July, 2018, 04:59:33 PM
Oh Sharky - the guy who carries the nuclear football for Trump is also its guardian.  His job is to put a bullet in Trump's head if he tries anything stupid(er than usual).

Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 July, 2018, 09:13:47 AM
See I'm in the 'let's not bother about his visit' camp.  The infantile egomaniac thrives on this sort of attention.

Yes and no: the Donald Trump that was a tv villain liked being hated because he could tell himself that was what he wanted as he was playing a character, but the Donald Trump that expected to be taken seriously hates being ridiculed when everybody tells him he's the most powerful man in the world.

See, Trump has long been a friend to the McMahons - he even appointed Linda McMahon to a position in the Whitehouse - and it was that association and his dabbling with the professional wrestling industry as a manager, a heel and a face that made him look at the world in a way that his sociopathy could comprehend: if people were cheering or booing him, it was all good because he wanted them to.  Whether loved or hated, it was because Donald wanted it that way, and his time as the face of The Apprentice (US) only cemented that idea in his thick tangerine skull.  In the same way that some of the brighter Republicans can understand Randist objectivism as an excuse for their robbing the poor, so too did b-list celebrity gave Don a worldview that essentially let him go on believing in his superiority to the hoi-polloi.
Not anymore.  It is finally sinking in that public opinion and the historical record of who and what Donald Trump is will no longer be written by his biographer or TV Guide reviewers.  He isn't a celebrity anymore, he's a politician and his name will not go down in history as a beloved television villain like JR Ewing, it will go down in history as a hated and divisive political figure like Richard Nixon, and his name will essentially become a shorthand for dumbass egotists in political circles for years to come, meaning he's personally responsible for ruining his family's name.
Trump is not happy where he is right now, and every protest reinforces that.  Make the goon suffer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 July, 2018, 05:52:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 July, 2018, 04:59:33 PM
....  the Donald Trump that expected to be taken seriously hates being ridiculed when everybody tells him he's the most powerful man in the world.

I see your point.  Exposure to contrary views that challenge his perception of himself and his status can have a powerful effect if managed carefully.  I just wonder though if mass protests can feed his ego though.  He is expecting protests.  It reinforces his perception that he is a powerful and important world figure.  As you say, he likes it when they boo on his terms.

This is why I think the stay completely away approach will be the most damaging.  It is akin to saying "Donald Who?"  It says that he is so unimportant in the great scheme of things that we don't even think he's worth protesting about.  We've got more important things to do.  How do you think he's likely to feel when he turns up and finds that fewer protesters turned up than Labour had when they held their antisemitism hearings.  (8 and a slightly arthritic dog if memory serves).  Think about the spat over the size of the crowd for his inauguration.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2018, 06:46:08 PM
I think more things like the balloon are the best bet.  It shows very clearly that people think he's ridiculous. THAT'S what seems to get to him most. Which is a great thing, in my book.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 July, 2018, 07:00:26 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 July, 2018, 05:52:35 PM
This is why I think the stay completely away approach will be the most damaging.

Unless the sycophants stay away too, he's just going to think he's loved in the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 07:04:03 PM

"They're, um, 'stealth fans,' Your Orangeness."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2018, 07:37:40 PM
I read on the BBC website that they were planning to use the extra crowdfunding cash to send the balloon round the world to haunt him wherever he goes.

I really, really hope this happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 07:46:26 PM

And so, the sacred institution of the democratic system is reduced to throwing balloons at buffoons.

I think I can just about rest my case...

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2018, 08:06:19 PM
Come on, Sharky, the fact that we can protest in a fun way doesn't really support your arguements.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 08:19:01 PM

I know, JBC - us anarchists can laugh too! (We have to, to be honest.)

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 July, 2018, 11:11:27 PM
Yes, of course. Sorry lad, think my humour circuits were on the blink earlier 😁
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 11:27:01 PM

No harm, no foul.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 July, 2018, 12:54:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 07:04:03 PM

"They're, um, 'stealth fans,' Your Orangeness."


Slocombe, remind me to get my eyes checked, I can't seem to see the crowds...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 July, 2018, 03:44:57 PM
Nice!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 July, 2018, 04:29:32 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 10 July, 2018, 12:54:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 July, 2018, 07:04:03 PM

"They're, um, 'stealth fans,' Your Orangeness."


Slocombe, remind me to get my eyes checked, I can't seem to see the crowds...

Thread winner!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 July, 2018, 08:13:59 AM
It seems like Britain will have the EU's trading regulations but not its benefits. And that is the best possible outcome, sadly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: AlexF on 11 July, 2018, 09:55:50 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 21 June, 2018, 06:51:23 PM
Totally agree IP: the problem we have to tackle is education, information and engagement, I think a more functional political establishment would inevitably follow, if only it could be done. 

If I may be so bold as to offer a solution to this problem  :D

https://usborne.com/browse-books/catalogue/product/1/12821/politics-for-beginners/ (https://usborne.com/browse-books/catalogue/product/1/12821/politics-for-beginners/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 July, 2018, 04:10:05 PM
Putin and Kim are cool.  The EU is a 'foe'.  Where's it all going to end?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 July, 2018, 04:51:15 PM

Anarchy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 July, 2018, 04:57:13 PM
Condolences to any thriller writers currently trying to pitch a series which ends with POTUS exposed as a puppet of an enemy nation and/or "the American people" rising up and demanding he be removed from office.

In UK news, Vote Leave broke the law and so it was an illegitimate result.
In completely unrelated news, the government have voted to go on holiday immediately, seeing as they have no other pressing matters to attend to in this Parliamentary session.

Currently stocking up on tinned foods.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2018, 06:51:12 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 July, 2018, 04:51:15 PM

Anarchy.

I doubt it. The most powerful man in the world loves despotic dictators and hates liberal democracies. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 July, 2018, 07:30:06 AM
He's only powerful because ordinary people believe him to be powerful. Erode that belief, erode the power.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Angry Vince on 20 July, 2018, 06:01:08 AM
As a kiwi, there are times when I am very glad to be about as far away from Europe as possible.

What I would like to see is someone coming up with definitive proof as to what Putin has over Trump, (business deals and dodgy goings on with prostitutes aside). With the bashing of Nato and cozying up to Russia, Putin has the perfect agent friend in Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Angry Vince on 20 July, 2018, 09:05:22 PM
Also, this...

(https://www.chaostrophic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/funny_picdump_2830_640_high_13.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 July, 2018, 10:08:33 PM
Now school shootings will be even easier. USA! USA!

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/opinion/3d-printed-guns-trump-terrorists.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/opinion/3d-printed-guns-trump-terrorists.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 11:49:43 AM
Sensible, centrist, fully transparent think tank beloved of impartial BBC political editors The Adam Smith Institute has a solution to Britain's housing crisis, you guys - and unsurprisingly, it's a fucking doozy. (https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/britain-needs-more-slums)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 25 July, 2018, 11:58:22 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 11:49:43 AM
... BBC ...

I can't see this blog post referenced anywhere on the BBC site. Did you hear it mentioned on a BBC radio station or the TV news?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 July, 2018, 12:23:15 PM
One of the major roots of this problem is how the monetary system works. The more money is created (from debt), the less it's worth. The less money is worth, the more of it is needed to buy stuff. The more money is needed, the more people have to borrow. The more money people borrow, the more is created (from debt). The more money is created (from debt), the less it's worth...

This is how inflation is fuelled.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
As I understand it, the idea is that instead of real money, we use collateral and theoretical money instead - debt - and this means money retains its worth because while more (theoretical) money has been made or spent, there's only a certain physical amount of it that actually exists at any one time.  As long as no-one sits on big piles of it so it isn't in circulation anymore doing what money is supposed to, the economy chugs along just fine.

The main implication of this for me is that Scrooge McDuck was an utter monster that held the world economy hostage in the Duck Tales cartoon, hence people were always trying to kill him before he could accrue more wealth.  This also explains why the perverted bastard could walk around with no pants on in front of his nephews and no-one did anything.  Another childhood hero ruined forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 July, 2018, 01:07:40 PM
All money is essentially an illusion, a simulacra of energy/action. It's a construct that doesn't exist in Nature - but this is getting into deep philosophical water, which trouserless ducks enjoy, of course.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 01:13:49 PM
Scrooge is an outlier - you know what the Scotch are like - and billionaires are generally good people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 July, 2018, 01:27:07 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 12:58:34 PMThis also explains why the perverted bastard could walk around with no pants on in front of his nephews and no-one did anything.

Sir!  Sir!  Bear's making pedo jokes! 

That's your chances of helming a billion dollar War Cars movie franchise right out the window.  Well, not more than two parts of a trilogy anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 01:38:55 PM
I'm not saying I am an unreliable creator, but I had to Google what War Cars was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 July, 2018, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 11:49:43 AM
Sensible, centrist, fully transparent think tank beloved of impartial BBC political editors The Adam Smith Institute has a solution to Britain's housing crisis, you guys - and unsurprisingly, it's a doozy. (https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/britain-needs-more-slums)

This reply was good:
QuoteYou know, the more I read this organisation's content (blog posts, research reports, policy recommendations), the more I become utterly convinced that you must all live in some strange, cloistered, unhealthy place so far removed from reality and other, normal, people that rubbish like this seems sensible. There is no better case for democratic socialism that spending an hour or two reading this ridiculous waffle. What are you thinking? What is going on in your little heads? Do you ever hear yourselves?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 25 July, 2018, 02:43:09 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 11:49:43 AM
Sensible, centrist, fully transparent think tank beloved of impartial BBC political editors The Adam Smith Institute has a solution to Britain's housing crisis, you guys - and unsurprisingly, it's a fucking doozy. (https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/britain-needs-more-slums)

Technically a necropost from 2015.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 03:01:24 PM
Yeah, to be fair, that blog post was written when everyone thought Andy Burnham was going to be Labour leader, nothing like Trump was on the immediate horizon, and that the economic and political consensus was going to continue along the trajectory it had been on for a while.  The ASI may very well have mellowed since.  LOL.

What's fascinating about that post is that past periods of economic depression have typically led to the establishment of shantytowns for various reasons (usually to accommodate an influx of financial migrants, ala the US' Hoovervilles and Brazil's favelas), and neoliberal thinking is to get ahead of that not by preventative measures, but by legislating specifically for the monetisation of homelessness.

Non-sequitor: "tiny living" is now a thing because years ago people started renovating vans, buses, lorries and caravans on a large scale into livable home spaces because they couldn't afford to get on the property ladder, and now it has turned into a hipster trend because of course it has (https://www.youtube.com/user/livingbigtinyhouse/videos).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 July, 2018, 03:19:19 PM
The latest Corbyn speech twisted by reporting as slamming "Cheap Labour from Abroad" has been another lesson in how, no matter how much I disagree with his Brexit stance, there's just a sickening level of distortion in the press + pundits on whatever Labour does or says. And worse a complete lack of good faith amongst all of them as any attempt to highlight it leads to accusations of tinfoil hat conspiracies (see the Newsnight kremlin photoshopping and photo selection).

The actual speech is about sending public service contracts abroad, rather than to UK firms, and limiting the economic harm caused by outsourcing. Given that huge swathes of our IT jobs are moving to India, it doesn't just affect Manufacturing. Shame about the Brexit dividend bollocks though but take issue with that, not by distorting it as some kind of UKIP speech about immigrants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 July, 2018, 08:38:49 PM
Collective hysteria is part of a healthy democracy.  Without it we might have voted for that far left guy who ate a bacon sandwich weird.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 July, 2018, 09:09:42 PM
Normally I wouldn't condone public vandalism, but when someone destroys a Hollywood star belonging to that spiteful, chubby manchild with grasping little hands, then I say fair play. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 August, 2018, 04:24:44 PM
FFS Donald, have some fecking dignity - irrespective of how you cheated your way into that office,  you still represent 325 million people on the world stage. Calling former staff - and your only senior black staffer at that - a dog: what an ill
mannered insecure person you are. Maybe if you had retained a shred of respectability you could simply rise above the accusations of disgruntled ex-employees,  like almost everyone else in business manages to do (in public at least).  But because you've positioned your presidency - and life - in the gutter you have to screech at them like a junkie whose fix has been stolen.  Pathetic excuse for a man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 August, 2018, 05:09:56 PM

Problem: Trump is unpopular.
Reaction: people like him should not hold high office.
Solution: Skynet!

:-D

I get the feeling that T'Rump is being universally trashed in order for the Powers That Shouldn't Be to institute a more rigorous selection process so that only the "right sort of people" get elected as front men presidents.

Whatever one thinks of the man, he's certainly fulfilling his role as a distraction brilliantly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 August, 2018, 09:17:10 PM
He's not a distraction, or a joke, or a passing fad.  His policies are having very real effects on many immigrant families here in the US: breaking them apart through forced separation and deportation whilst interring their children.  He is attempting to produce a supreme court with a strong conservative bias with the very real aim of overturning abortion rights legislation (Roe vs Wade).

Just a couple of examples. 

Government isn't a myth: it has real effects.  Your blether about him being a front-man puppet for unseen forces sounds like Mills-esque lunacy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2018, 12:49:46 PM
No-one should be allowed to continue to serve as figurehead - and executive - for a nation after publicly writing this:

Quote"When you give a crazed, crying lowlife a break, and give her a job at the White House, I guess it just didn't work out. Good work by General Kelly for quickly firing that dog!"

Sharkie, I appreciate that you don't believe in the electoral system, or indeed the idea of 'leaders', but leaving aside that and all of Trump's other actions, that people in power should be allowed to say these kinds of things with impunity... It's appalling to me.  They're the words of a spiteful vindictive spoilt child, in the mouth of a person with unimaginable power.  In my head, that single tweet should be enough to start the process for anyone's removal from office. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2018, 01:16:58 PM

I don't disagree, Tordels, but as you know I'd rather take the power from the man rather than the man from the power.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 15 August, 2018, 02:48:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2018, 01:16:58 PM

I don't disagree, Tordels, but as you know I'd rather take the power from the man rather than the man from the power.

What does that actually mean?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2018, 03:00:14 PM
It means that government power (as in the right to wield powers the rest of us do not possess) is illusory and unlawful and exists only as an article of faith. Have leaders, sure, but not leaders who force people to do as they say.

Remove that illusory power, or more specifically the public's belief in that power, and it won't matter if a dick gets elected because his/her orders can be simply ignored.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 August, 2018, 03:02:49 PM
Putting words in the mouth of the Shark (sounds risky, I'll use a pole...(but not a poll)), I presume it refers to the idea of not giving people power in the first place: the only power should be that vested innately in the individual person.  I also presume he's not thinking that that person is likely to be the Lord Humungous or Immortan Joe, whereas I'd rather assume it would be.  Aunty Entity at best.

EDIT: Bah, gazumped.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 August, 2018, 04:48:44 PM
Nicely put, Tordels.

Mad Max is quite a good example of this. He refuses to be intimidated into joining either side and joins the society of his choice for as long as it suits him and then goes his own way. The majority of the characters around him are bound to certain leaders through force but Max gives his allegiance on his own terms, following or leading as the situation requires.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 August, 2018, 10:33:12 PM
Sharkey's political views have frequently caused consternation in these parts but I can't help wondering if at present we aren't seeing concrete evidence of the validity of his views.  Trump in the states and the Tories in the UK are co-opting discontent for their own ends.  People have legitimate complaints and concerns yet what we are seeing are 'solutions' that potentially are likely to make situations worse for complainants. 

Personally I'm torn.  On the one hand I see a legitimate need for social action in support of those who struggle to meet the challenges that they face but on the other hand the rationale behind the support they provide is often questionable or contested.  I question whether I have the right to intervene where I see need but at the same time I also worry about the consequences if I fail to do so.  I see a need for some sort of socially responsible framework of support but I worry about the political imperatives that drive it.  Do I have the right to impose my priorities on those around me?  Am I complicit if I fail to act in support of legitimate need?

What we seem to be seeing at the moment though is certain groups tapping into this confusion.  There is an argument that governments are over-reaching rather than a sensible debate about social and political organisation.  Brexit has been cast as 'taking back control' when it is becoming increasingly apparent that it is more a case of consolidating control from some quarters.  Cross-juristidictional governance is about compromise and acceptance.  there may well be a cost implication but the bigger question is how does that stack up against the benefits?  If 'governments' are too concerned with a narrow constituency then how valid is their mandate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 August, 2018, 07:44:29 PM
I'm kind of pleased to see such a pitiful turnout for the Pope's visit to Ireland.  People aren't listening any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 August, 2018, 09:03:27 PM
Not even 5% of the 1979 turnout - and our population is 25-30% higher than it was then. Ed fecking Sheeran managed 20,000 more at the same venue just a few months back.  What this really does is highlight the age profile of the remaining papal enthusiasts - all our friends went with their families to the Park to see JPII, those kids are in the 40-55 bracket, and they should have been well able for the 5km hike and the weather. But they didn't show. Coming after two referendums (and especially the last one), I think that's actually, finally, the end of that. I wonder how many no-shows Catherine Corliss can claim credit for.

And while it's hard to forgive Leo his other failings, I can't fault him for giving the Pope a public dressing down.  Never in my life did I expect to see a Taoiseach have the balls.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2018, 09:44:11 PM

What use is a Pope in a world where Money, Power and Control are the Holy Trinity worshipped by virtually everyone?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 26 August, 2018, 10:41:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2018, 09:44:11 PM
What use is a Pope in a world where Money, Power and Control are the Holy Trinity worshipped by virtually everyone?

The pope is the head of an organization that specializes in money, power and control. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2018, 11:12:05 PM
I'm not sure it's an achievement that numbers were higher for the pope that covered up for child rapists and said suicides, gays and unbaptised babies would burn in Hell.  Given a choice, I'd rather people turned up in larger numbers for and actually listened to a Pope that begged the forgiveness of the church's victims, but clearly this is where me and all the other taigs have a difference of opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 August, 2018, 11:30:23 PM
No thanks.

Ex-Vatican official accuses Pope Francis of covering up McCarrick's sex abuse (https://www.vox.com/2018/8/26/17783168/pope-francis-vigano-cover-up-accusation-sex-abuse)

Religious groups still owe €1.3 billion for institutional child abuse (http://www.thejournal.ie/religious-abuse-compensation-3278789-Mar2017/)

Actions will always speak louder than the Vatican's latest PR man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 August, 2018, 11:44:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 August, 2018, 09:44:11 PM

What use is a Pope in a world where Money, Power and Control are the Holy Trinity worshipped by virtually everyone?

Ah, come on, Sharky, all I was saying was that I was glad the Vatican don't have control over my country any more. Not every conversation has to get back to your anti-state agenda, unless you actually believe being ruled by an abusive body of organised superstition is preferable?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 August, 2018, 11:50:34 PM
PS I know, I know, the state is abusive and exists because of collective belief too. But just right now I'm not talking about the state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 August, 2018, 11:54:38 PM
Still struggling to see how it's a good thing that the Irish liked the Pope that was an actual literal Nazi more than this one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 August, 2018, 12:01:45 AM
I don't particularly like any of them, personally. They can all take their bone-rattling, boy's-club, repressed twaddle and fuck off forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 August, 2018, 12:03:12 AM
Before the actions of the Church –with the complicity of the State– were revealed to the masses long after 1979, most Irish people hadn't a clue who the Pope really was, or what he really did, other than being a figurehead who rode around in a car that looked like it was in Wacky Races.

(http://globalnation.inquirer.net/files/2015/01/09pope-mobile2.jpg)

Irish people nowadays don't like 'the Church' – doesn't matter who was, or who is, in charge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 August, 2018, 12:11:10 AM
Quite.
The current guy was ok when he used to present Bullseye, but he should have stuck with the day job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 August, 2018, 12:16:25 AM

Wasn't a dig at you, JBC - I was trying to be hilarously sarcastic. And failing, as usual.

I must say, though, that "being ruled by an abusive body of organised superstition" is an excellent way of describing government! :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 August, 2018, 12:23:59 AM
Joe has the right of it. It's the fact that 2.7 million out of 3.3 million people lined up for Mass in the Park in 1979, literally every kid I knew, whereas only 0.13 million out of 4.8 million could be arsed this time. I don't it was JP2 v Francis, I think it was the dawn of sanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 August, 2018, 12:37:02 AM
These 2 charmin', drinkin', smokin', shaggin' boyos were the real face of the 80s Irish Church. We knew them. They were one of us. They could pack churches in every town – and they weren't even paedos.

(https://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cleary_popevisit.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 August, 2018, 01:06:56 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 August, 2018, 12:23:59 AM
Joe has the right of it. It's the fact that 2.7 million out of 3.3 million people lined up for Mass in the Park in 1979, literally every kid I knew, whereas only 0.13 million out of 4.8 million could be arsed this time. I don't it was JP2 v Francis, I think it was the dawn of sanity.

Precisely.  It's not a question of who was the most popular pontiff - it's the fact that we now have a stark illustration of how more and more people are realising that the teachings of this organisation, whoever heads it, are at worst toxic and at best irrelevant.

Sharky, I know you weren't having a dig at me; I just didn't feel like turning this into yet another anti-state argument. Didn't realise you were joking, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 August, 2018, 01:52:28 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 27 August, 2018, 12:37:02 AM
These 2 charmin', drinkin', smokin', shaggin' boyos were the real face of the 80s Irish Church. We knew them. They were one of us. They could pack churches in every town – and they weren't even paedos.

S'right, they were everywhere.  Lad on the right came to our school (and it was a proddy school!) to lecture us on the evils of drink,  drugs and sex, and he was bloody good at it (even if it didn't take hold) . Lad on the left had two damnably catchy songs written about him.

Try and imagine that mainland chums, two blokes in curtains as ubiquitous and influential as Esther Rantzen and the Green Cross Code man.

And when we found out who they really were, it was hard to take anything seriously.

And they were just hypocrites, not the fucking monsters we discovered later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2018, 09:28:24 AM
Don't get me wrong, it's great people are staying away, I'd just prefer to know for certain that it was for the right reasons, as my concern isn't the extremely relative merits of the contestants of the Best Pope (http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Pope) nominations, but that low attendance might be just as explainable in terms of the Irish thinking the current incumbent is not socially conservative enough.
And yes, I realise I say that as an occupant of the only part of this island that won't decriminalise abortion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 August, 2018, 10:45:41 AM
Just curious as to where folks stand on the Rochdale Herald's take on the Papal Visit. (https://rochdaleherald.co.uk/2018/08/25/head-of-worlds-largest-global-paedophile-network-spotted-in-dublin/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 August, 2018, 04:47:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2018, 09:28:24 AM
but that low attendance might be just as explainable in terms of the Irish thinking the current incumbent is not socially conservative enough.


I'd be very surprised if that were the reason. After two landslide referendum results to allow gay marriage and abortion, I am pleased to say it doesn't seem like this country is getting more conservative.  The nonstop barrage of abuse revelations doesn't exactly suggest that people want a return to the past so-called glories of Catholic power here either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 August, 2018, 09:01:57 PM
Ireland will remain a predominantly Catholic country but Church attendance figures have been falling for the last 20 years and the few men joining the priesthood seem to be using it (still) as a closet for the profane rather than the sacred.

September 29, 2017

For the first time in living memory, first-year clerical student numbers are higher in the Protestant Church in Ireland than in the biggest Catholic institution for the priesthood.

The Irish Times reported that just six men have begun training for the Catholic priesthood at St. Patrick's College Maynooth this autumn. It is believed to be the lowest number since its foundation in 1795.  There are a total 41 men studying for the priesthood in Maynooth.

Twice as many students started training for ministry in the Church of Ireland this month, with 12 admissions, including two women, to the Church of Ireland Theological Institute in Dublin. In total there are 34 students in training at the institute, 10 of them women.

In August last year the college was at the center of controversy when it emerged that the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, said he was no longer going to send seminarians there because of its "poisonous" atmosphere.

He said students were accessing gay dating apps and anonymous letters were being circulated accusing seminarians of misconduct.

The college administration said it shared "the concern" of Archbishop Martin about the "poisonous atmosphere" created by anonymous correspondence and blogs. It added, however, there was "no concrete or credible evidence of the existence of any alleged 'active gay subculture'" at the seminary.


https://www.irishcentral.com/news/irishvoice/ireland-has-more-protestant-priests-training-than-catholic
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 August, 2018, 10:31:59 PM
Not sure if this is the place to speak of ComicsGate, but I thought earlier "I'm looking at Twitter a bit too much" and went off and did some work, and when I came back later and checked Twitter, ComicsGaters were literally sending each other pictures of their gaping anuses.  I don't know what this means as objective discourse, but in terms of nailing down a paradigm I think they are to be commended for a job well done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 27 August, 2018, 11:28:45 PM
So... What's Comicsgate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2018, 12:53:51 AM
I believe I already mentioned posting pictures of gaping anuses on social media, and that pretty much covers it.

On the offchance you need more to go on, ComicsGate is a racist hate movement - with a healthy dollop of misogyny - that blames the decline of comic book sales in North America on diversity rather than poor distribution of an increasingly impenetrable product.  The movement gained traction when distributors and comic store owners passed the buck from the lousy job they were doing to the comics themselves and now 90 percent of Youtube videos about comics are just fat white men screaming about feminism.  Oh, and that one guy who expressed his displeasure at that new Avengers comics with women and gay cast members in it by stabbing the comic to pieces with a knife and then throwing the pieces across the room while screaming that he hated it, though I still say the gaping anuses thing is where we really pinned the button on this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 August, 2018, 07:39:26 AM
This is something that I became aware of over the weekend.  Not going anywhere near Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat or any other 'antisocial media' platforms, it was a news report on CBR that caught my eye and prompted a bit of investigating.  It really does seem to be yet one more depressing example of how the potential of the internet has been utterly derailed in the last decade or so. 

Does it belong on the Political Thread as an issue?  I'd say yes, particularly since one of the most disturbing aspects is the creation and distribution of lists of creators who should be boycotted at the comic shop.  The McCarthyite dimension of this issue is apparently lost on proponents.  For me personally, the other issue is the manifestation of a disturbing and powerful trend for hostility towards alternative viewpoints that shuts down debate completely.  The implications for the democratic process and social cohesion are rather profound but at present there is no scope for exploring them properly.

Let's face it, there are a range of political views among boarders that are engaged with and defended robustly but as a general rule there is an underlying respect both for the individual and the intellectual integrity of those views.  However questionable they might appear, they are at least engaged with from a position of respect for the most part (unless you are a Thatcherite in which case .... )

I would say that pictures of gaping anuses is probably the perfect metaphor for this movement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 August, 2018, 12:55:51 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 August, 2018, 07:39:26 AM
Does it belong on the Political Thread as an issue?  I'd say yes, particularly since one of the most disturbing aspects is the creation and distribution of lists of creators who should be boycotted at the comic shop. 

I'd love to see that list (so that I can buy their productions if I find myself wanting to try something new, naturally).

QuoteThe McCarthyite dimension of this issue is apparently lost on proponents.

Erm, they would probably support McCarthy?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 August, 2018, 03:47:56 PM
I wish every comic character was male, white and straight. Then I wouldn't be afraid any more
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2018, 04:12:57 PM
Oh for the days of Wolverine rolling around in the mud rubbing the sculpted muscles of his hairy body against the Adonis-like Sabretooth as they tear each other's clothes off with their nails.  You know -  the days when comics were made for straight men.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2018, 09:12:08 PM
Plato suggested banning poets from the Ideal Society, partly because a poet appeals to emotions to get perspectives and ideas across. I think Plato thought that exploring arguments emotionally was vastly inferior to logical explorations and rational debate, and more powerful because more people enjoyed a good play than a good debate.

I think he was only partially correct in that emotional arguments are just as dangerous as rational ones. The emotional argument put out in books, songs, plays and movies can lead to genocide as surely as X+Y/Z=Rwanda. What I think is needed is to balance the two, to learn about our basic selves so that we can understand first what it means to be human and then on to thinking and feeling in a human way. How does the logic of an argument make us feel and how do our feelings colour our logic? Would it be okay to reject an argument in favour of something repulsive simply because it feels repulsive? Would it be okay to accept an argument simply because it felt good? It's a hard thing to do, bringing the two sides of my brain into balance, and I'm still a long way off - but just being aware of the problem is a big help. And I think there is a problem.

Society is awash with poetic, or emotional, arguments. Politicians prey on fear; without them everything will fall apart. Bankers, CEOs, civil servants, monarchs - all use the same argument. Fear poverty, fear Europe, fear Brexit, fear disease, fear people, fear foreigners, fear idiots, fear children, fear teenagers, fear pensioners, fear animals, fear yourself. Hell, even shampoo adverts aren't selling you shampoo, they're selling you a cure to your fear of having hair like a scarecrow in a hurricane.

It's all so terribly imbalanced. The logical arguments are drowned out by all the screaming and ballyhoo, and I did not know how to filter it for the longest time, not really, and I'm still nowhere near what you'd call adept.

Anyway, emotional arguments lead to emotional responses and censorship is one of those responses. The logical arguments against censorship are manifold and some of them even chime with my emotional need to respect others' rights as much as I respect my own. Hopefully some of those arguments will succeed in this case and cooler heads prevail.

From what little I've read on this thread it seems the situation is symptomatic of the general imbalance, too much emotion and not enough thought.

Yeah, that Plato dude was definitely on to something.

TL;DR - f*ck censorship.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 August, 2018, 07:47:08 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2018, 12:53:51 AM... I still say the gaping anuses thing is where we really pinned the button on this.

I always knew that Godpleton lad would go far.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 August, 2018, 09:05:36 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2018, 09:12:08 PM

It's all so terribly imbalanced. The logical arguments are drowned out by all the screaming and ballyhoo, and I did not know how to filter it for the longest time, not really, and I'm still nowhere near what you'd call adept.

Anyway, emotional arguments lead to emotional responses and censorship is one of those responses.

From what little I've read on this thread it seems the situation is symptomatic of the general imbalance, too much emotion and not enough thought.

See I'd argue that Plato was wrong on that score and that actually we cannot ignore the emotional aspect of our being.  By trying to pretend that they are something separate, alien or undesirable we set ourselves up for the current problem wherein we struggle to manage the emotional side of the debate.

On the one hand too much emotion, as with all things, is dangerous but so is the other extreme of too little emotion.  How many atrocities down through history have resulted from either approach?  Being able to handle the feelings that circumstances, objects and situations elicit is crucial. 

Of course I could be completely wrong about all of this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2018, 10:18:56 AM
I completely agree, TJM. We've been given or evolved two fantastic abilities - reason and emotion - and we should use them both in equal measure. As I think, so I feel, so I act is one of the states to which I aspire.

Reason is the map, emotion is the compass. (I wonder if this concept is what is meant by 'moral compass'?)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 August, 2018, 11:06:17 AM
In the words of quiet literally the only good person to work on Youtube, Captain Disillusion, Love with your Heart, and use your head for everything else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 August, 2018, 02:44:18 PM
As someone who doesn't do social media (this forum is the closest I get), most of this passed me by but I've just spent the last hour reading up on gamergate, comicsgate, the Hugo awards, Theodore Beale, Brad R. Torgersen, Sad Puppies, and more.

Holy fucking shitbiscuits what is going on in the world? How do such colossal wankjockeys get so much support?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eamonn Clarke on 30 August, 2018, 10:32:45 AM
I'm bemused by the #Comicsgate thing with both sides claiming the other is responsible for some truly loathsome harassment, although I am inclined to believe it is the Comicsgaters who are lying about this.

Interestingly the Lakes comic art festival has just announced that Mitch and Elizabeth Breitweiser have pulled out over fears for their personal safety. I understand that they are possibly associated with the Comicsgate movement.

The Lakes festival having to tread carefully after their self-confessed mishandling of the Comics and Cola incidents last year.

I'm now feeling unsure about which creators might be suspect. At least I'm on safe ground with John and Carlos at Brum-Ice next month.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 August, 2018, 11:06:38 AM
I wasn't aware of the 'furore' over the Lakes but thanks for the link.  Certainly makes for some interesting reading.  As a former Lancaster resident, Kendal was an occasional visit.  Nice enough for a day out and IIRC the Chocolate Cafe was a real treat.  I can see where Akhtar was coming from in terms of her thoughts on the place.  There are definitely more diverse places to visit.

Looking at the responses from the Lakes organisers, that was pretty much an own goal really wasn't it.  I can understand their take on her piece.  By her own admission she conflates her experience in the town with her experience at the festival.  How exactly the organisers are expected to be responsible for the behaviour of a handful of locals who probably had no interest whatsoever in the festival is a mystery to me.  I'm not sure how she can appear to hold them responsible for the casual racism of individuals.  At the same time though it does seem that 'offence' is now something that only certain groups are allowed to experience.  It's probably fair to say that it would have been much more sensible to start with a reasonable query as to why she chose to suggest that the organisers should be held in any way accountable and go from there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 August, 2018, 01:09:56 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 29 August, 2018, 02:44:18 PMHoly fucking shitbiscuits what is going on in the world? How do such colossal wankjockeys get so much support?

By othering the problems of the industry and laying them at the feet of outside influences, they appeal to those fans who want reading comics to be the experience it was when they were kids by telling them the reason comics are different now is because they are made and/or consumed by younger, left-leaning and more diverse people, but this has the side-effect of creating an in-road for the wider alt-right movement that wants to curtail the influence of women, LGBTQ and non-white voices in the media.
Also a factor is that birth of the Comicsgate movement is arguably when retailers started whining at Marvel that no-one wanted to buy more diverse comics and that diversity was the cause of low sales, and not - as any moment's rumination might suggest is entirely more likely - a failure on the part of retailers to attract new customers despite essentially free product, free advertising, and a sea change in the perception of the medium.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 30 August, 2018, 01:37:41 PM
I think pneumonia was more of a concern for me last time I went to the Lakes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 August, 2018, 02:38:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 August, 2018, 01:09:56 PM
[ ... ] retailers started whining at Marvel that no-one wanted to buy more diverse comics and that diversity was the cause of low sales, and not - as any moment's rumination might suggest is entirely more likely - a failure on the part of retailers to attract new customers despite essentially free product, free advertising, and a sea change in the perception of the medium.

The big problem though is that a lot of this 'free' product is failing to prove to be the gateway drug the comics industry was hoping for.  There is a massive disconnect between the screen and page audiences with a lot of folks simply enjoying the spectacle on the screen and not particularly worried about the fifty plus years worth of history in print.  Pricing doesn't really help mind.  £2 - £3 a time doesn't really stack up against the old days.  How many of us remember the days when 50p was a premium price to pay for an advanced order American import?

Personally I'm not so sure that the diversity agenda was as big a problem as the quality of product.  When readers have a high level of emotional investment in characters that they've essentially grown up with they are far more forgiving of lapses in quality. Granted the most vocal segment are not perhaps the most representative but those that were possibly on the verge may well have used it as the perfect jumping off point.  (How many of us did that back in the nineties with tooth and the likes of the Summer Offensive?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 10:09:51 AM
I dreamt last night about Trump (he was a teacher and I was in his class; he treated the foreign students like shit), then I woke up to find that the biggest twat in the world is coming to Dublin in November.

Can we borrow your balloon?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 12:28:04 PM
Also, I'm kind of relishing the schadenfreude of imagining him sitting at home in a huff while all the other presidents get to go to John McCain's send-off.

McCain - one of the last of a dying breed of non-toadying, honourable Republicans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 September, 2018, 01:36:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 12:28:04 PM
McCain - one of the last of a dying breed of non-toadying, honourable Republicans.

Perhaps we could gloss that eulogy slightly with some reference to his strongly hawkish politics, and general tendency towards smiting brown folk.  Never mind all that firey death he rained down on Hanoi on behalf of LBJ.

Much as the very idea of Trump makes me sick to my stomach, there is also something a bit unsavoury about all the cross-party chumminess around McCain's death - while a humane and civil political atmosphere is to be commended, there's also more than a whiff of the kind of monolithic Washington establishment that Trump supposedly stands against, people for whom democratic politics is just the sideshow of a Duke and Duke-style $1 bet, rather than a matter of opposed policies that determine the fates of the actual people of the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2018, 02:14:11 PM
There's no such thing as an honorable Republican, or an honorable Democrat for that matter - once you're operating at that level of US politics, the donor money is king and if you have any remaining scruples, they'll soon weed you out and replace you with someone more open to how things are done.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 30 August, 2018, 02:38:45 PMThe big problem though is that a lot of this 'free' product is failing to prove to be the gateway drug the comics industry was hoping for.

Online sales are up, digital sales are growing, as are trade sales.  New readers are buying comics, they're just not buying them from comic book stores - so an obvious question is "what are comic book stores doing wrong?"

Y'know... I am so old I can actually still remember when DC Comics fans were calling the company a bunch of jerks for making Batgirl/The Atom/Green Arrow white.  Comics fandom can be a trip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 September, 2018, 03:31:50 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 September, 2018, 02:14:11 PM

Online sales are up, digital sales are growing, as are trade sales.  New readers are buying comics, they're just not buying them from comic book stores - so an obvious question is "what are comic book stores doing wrong?"


Well, if companies like Marvel are cutting out the middlemen or Comixology cornering the digital market its a little hard to see how shops can compete with that.  Thanks for the information on digital though.  Mind you, is it a case of additional readers or reader migration from physical to digital?

As for what the shops are doing wrong, I think most of us have experience of the rather dingy stores run by the 'only fan in the village' who look sneeringly at newbies who are looking for the tie in to the latest film to hit the stands or some other faux pas.  A certain comic shop in the capital of Wales is infamous among local fans for some of its owner's past antics.  Even FP has a better reputation (and that's saying something!)  The retail industry in general is struggling to cope with the impact of online shopping and the decline in disposable income.  Throwing in an image problem is unlikely to aid the situation is it?

As for the incipient nerdism that haunts comic fandom, fair point it's nothing new really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 03:48:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 01 September, 2018, 01:36:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 12:28:04 PM
McCain - one of the last of a dying breed of non-toadying, honourable Republicans.

Perhaps we could gloss that eulogy slightly with some reference to his strongly hawkish politics, and general tendency towards smiting brown folk.  Never mind all that firey death he rained down on Hanoi on behalf of LBJ.

Fair enough; I was very much in favour of Obama when that election came around.  But I admire McCain's refusal to kowtow to Trump's awfulness, right to the bitter end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 September, 2018, 04:22:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 03:48:22 PMBut I admire McCain's refusal to kowtow to Trump's awfulness, right to the bitter end.

That one I'll happily endorse!  The very sight of that pouting turd with his arms crossed like a 3 year old, I'd cheer for Le Pen, Farage or Bertie himself if they cocked a snook at that one.

And I don't like to speak ill of the recently dead, I've just found that a lot of the hubbub surrounding McCain has been a bit one-dimensional: he was still a right-wing militaristic anti-vaxxer. I'll concede his consistent opposition to torture (and he should know), rejection of religious nutters in his own party, his criticism of Putin, and his willingness to cross the floor to vote on matters he supported on principle.  And let's face it, I'd trade him for Trump in a heartbeat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 06:36:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 01 September, 2018, 04:22:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 01 September, 2018, 03:48:22 PMBut I admire McCain's refusal to kowtow to Trump's awfulness, right to the bitter end.

That one I'll happily endorse!  The very sight of that pouting turd with his arms crossed like a 3 year old, I'd cheer for Le Pen, Farage or Bertie himself if they cocked a snook at that one.

Farage is more likely to snook a cock at him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 02 September, 2018, 02:32:36 AM
QuoteI'll concede his consistent opposition to torture (and he should know), rejection of religious nutters in his own party, his criticism of Putin, and his willingness to cross the floor to vote on matters he supported on principle.  And let's face it, I'd trade him for Trump in a heartbeat.
In American politics this made him nearly a commie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 September, 2018, 08:40:48 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 30 August, 2018, 11:06:38 AM
I wasn't aware of the 'furore' over the Lakes but thanks for the link.  Certainly makes for some interesting reading.  As a former Lancaster resident, Kendal was an occasional visit.  Nice enough for a day out and IIRC the Chocolate Cafe was a real treat.  I can see where Akhtar was coming from in terms of her thoughts on the place.  There are definitely more diverse places to visit.

I've no idea what anybody's talking about - what page of this thread is the link to the Lakes Coca Cola thing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Eamonn Clarke on 02 September, 2018, 09:18:12 PM
This and the previous articles he links to explain last year's row.
https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/10/11/director-lakes-comics-art-festival-offers-full-apology/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 September, 2018, 08:25:51 AM
And now the Van Sciver shitnugget is claiming Dave Sim is working with him.  I know Sim might seem like a natural ally to the Comicsgate wankers,  but for all his doolally ideas the man has huge intelligence and ability,  not to mention a misguided integrity made entirely of layered graphene; how could he not realise the kind of human effluvia he's stepped in?  Really hope this is just more lies, despite ironically representing nett damage to CG's "credibility" if true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 September, 2018, 09:57:22 AM
Double posting on the Political Thread now.  Trumpism is catching. SAD!

But I do have to report some internal conflict: I have an overwhelming desire to cheer for an $80 billion sportswear company with a dubious history of sweatshop exploitation. That's some advertising video they have there, whatever the motivation behind it,  and their explicit rejection of the MAGA group is powerful stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2018, 10:14:47 AM
If nothing else we've at least lived to see right wingers unironically denounce sweatshops, and endorse consumer boycotts.  What a time to be etc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 September, 2018, 12:53:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 September, 2018, 09:57:22 AM
Double posting on the Political Thread now.  Trumpism is catching. SAD!

But I do have to report some internal conflict: I have an overwhelming desire to cheer for an $80 billion sportswear company with a dubious history of sweatshop exploitation. That's some advertising video they have there, whatever the motivation behind it,  and their explicit rejection of the MAGA group is powerful stuff.

Had a quick look at today's news and can't figure out what advert and clothing company this relates to?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2018, 01:47:12 PM
Nike have sponsored ex-NFL player - and originator of the "take a knee" protest - Colin Kaepernick as the face of their brand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tomwe on 06 September, 2018, 01:56:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2018, 01:47:12 PM
Nike have sponsored ex-NFL player - and originator of the "take a knee" protest - Colin Kaepernick as the face of their brand.
Aaahhh now I get why the MAGA crowd are all threatening to boycott Nike. Thanks for the lowdown.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 September, 2018, 10:56:15 PM
It's a bizarre argument because the (right-wing) response never addresses the reason for the protest.

It goes something like this:

Person taking a knee during the anthem: "I'm protesting against racial violence towards black Americans."
Right-wing person: "Stop disrespecting our heroic military veterans."
Nike: "No, listen, they said they were protesting about racial violence".
Right-wing person: "I'm burning my shoes now."

It could only be worse if they first formed their shoes into the shape of a cross before setting them on fire.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 September, 2018, 09:52:00 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2018, 01:47:12 PM
Nike have sponsored ex-NFL player - and originator of the "take a knee" protest - Colin Kaepernick as the face of their brand.

I'd almost be tempted to buy something from Nike just to counter-act the boycott!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 September, 2018, 11:04:32 AM
So ... our new Secretary of State for Northern Ireland wasn't aware that people there tend to vote along deeply rooted sectarian lines. Who'da thunk it?

That's a level of knowledge that I would expect a 16 year old school leaver from anywhere in the UK to have, even if they weren't interested in politics. For a politician, never  mind the minister who's supposed to be responsible, it's mind-bogglingly depressing.

Is there some kind of competition in the party to see who can advance the furthest with the least impressive track record? Leadsom and Grayling must be getting worried.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 September, 2018, 11:54:00 AM
I see what you mean.

QuoteI didn't understand things like when elections are fought for example in Northern Ireland - people who are nationalists don't vote for unionist parties and vice-versa.

Sweet Jesus.  With Brexit looming too, I worry about Northern Ireland.  As an outsider, I believed things had really improved North of the border, but it's not looking too good these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2018, 12:32:48 PM
Reading medical supply companies and health professionals working through their Brexit projections and preparations on Twitter is a lot like the end of the first third of a Stephen Baxter novel: the bit just after the scale of the imminent world-ending disaster becomes public, but just before everyone starts killing each other to get a place in the Government's giant bunker/spaceship.  Hint: the password is 'Spaceba, tovarich'.  Or maybe just 'Floreat Etona'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 September, 2018, 12:48:43 PM
The blame game is in full effect. "Surely the EU wouldn't be cruel enough to withhold vital medical supplies?" FFS. This isn't hard. The UK is CHOOSING to leave the EU. The British government, egged on by disaster capitalists has CHOSEN to remove itself from all of the EU's frameworks, entirely unnecessarily. This is our own damn fault, and has nothing to do with the EU. Yet that's going to be the spin for years, as the UK rapidly heads to the abyss.

I don't think it's hyperbole now to say that we're rapidly heading towards a very frightening place, with a real possibility of massive social unrest, where people are going to die. With luck, enough Tories will grow spines and steer us somewhere else before we hit no deal. But I see no evidence of that happening. (The customs union vote showcased that there are enough votes for no deal.) So we can no look forward to a point where there are massive food shortages, a lack of vital medical supplies, at least two million job losses, the expulsion of thousands of people (cf Rees-Moog and "EU citizens should have no more rights than any other foreigner"),  permanent austerity, the eradication of the entire social layer of the country, and possibly – according to an increasing number of very clever people – the army on the streets dealing with unrest.

At this rate, May's lot may as well just rebrand as Norsefire and be fucking done with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 September, 2018, 12:56:59 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 September, 2018, 11:54:00 AM
I see what you mean.

QuoteI didn't understand things like when elections are fought for example in Northern Ireland - people who are nationalists don't vote for unionist parties and vice-versa.

Sweet Jesus.  With Brexit looming too, I worry about Northern Ireland.  As an outsider, I believed things had really improved North of the border, but it's not looking too good these days.


With the possibility of a hard Irish border looming, Johnson brings up suicide vest (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45462900) imagery in his latest desperate attempt to keep in the limelight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 September, 2018, 02:08:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 September, 2018, 12:48:43 PMThis is our own damn fault, and has nothing to do with the EU. Yet that's going to be the spin for years, as the UK rapidly heads to the abyss.

That's the bit that really bothers me more than any other.  If even a fraction of current 'no deal' projections come to pass, I can see genuine hatred for the EU being stoked in favour of the far right.  Given that we in the RoI are almost certainly going to suffer the severest collateral damage if the UK goes down in flames, I can see the same shit happening here.

My own touchstone for secessionist opinion, my mother, subsisting as she does entirely on a diet of Daily Mail, genuinely thinks Ireland (and Britain) leaving the EU will return her to a childhood world where the Royals are above reproach, where Muslims only exist in those countries you wouldn't visit, and everything is safe and nice. She seems to forget that her own grandmother had to give up her children to a church-run home, from which my great-uncle ran away to join the navy at 15 only to be blinded when his ship was sunk in the war, and where her mother was worked so hard that her hands and knees were almost useless for most of her life, suffered appalling nightmares for the rest of her days, and was apparently completely incapable of being a loving parent.  That her father's family essentially disowned him for marrying a catholic.  Or that she herself barely survived TB. That she had to leave her bank job when she got married, her RTE job when she had me, that divorce and contraception were unavailable. Or that we were caught up in an IRA bombing when I was a baby. 

But yeah, the past, totally awesome, sign your grandkids up for some of that.

When she reads me the latest headline about reclaiming our own laws, I ask her my usual Brexit question, "name one single EU rule or regulation you want to get rid of", and she refuses to answer, which I read as her tactful way of saying "keep the Arabs out". She's having a rough time of it at the moment, and knowing that she used to love holidays in France when she was younger, I sketch out a simple trip that I could take her and my ailing father on before it's too late, and her response is: "I wouldn't like France now, it's full of Muslims.  It must be awful, such a lovely country ruined."  I tell her that from two recent visits that wasn't my experience at all, that specific places I know she loves appeared to be completely unchanged from when she was last there, but she dismisses this testimony: "It's not safe there any more.  And it's almost gone that way here now too".

My mother is a well-travelled intelligent and compassionate person, has been all over the world, was a shop-steward, was an art teacher, a book keeper, worked on the floor in a supermarket for 25 years, has friends from all walks of life: but this is how she thinks now.

And this is what you're up against: my mother, and her likeminded friends, have votes, and they're not going to be swayed by anything other than the doorway to fucking Narnia.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2018, 05:47:17 PM
Was EU Tax Evasion Regulation The Reason For The Brexit Referendum? (https://medium.com/the-jist/was-eu-tax-evasion-regulation-the-reason-for-the-brexit-referendum-980ba88a8077)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2018, 05:57:56 PM
City Kicked Out Their Cops and Politicians 7 Years Ago and Now They Have the Lowest Crime Rates in Mexico. (https://www.activistpost.com/2018/09/city-kicked-out-cops-politicians-7-years-ago-lowest-crime-rates-mexico.html?utm_source=Activist+Post+Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=b2ea46af86-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_b0c7fb76bd-b2ea46af86-388034361%5B/url)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 September, 2018, 07:32:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2018, 05:47:17 PM
Was EU Tax Evasion Regulation The Reason For The Brexit Referendum? (https://medium.com/the-jist/was-eu-tax-evasion-regulation-the-reason-for-the-brexit-referendum-980ba88a8077)

When a headline poses a yes/no question, the answer is always no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 September, 2018, 07:40:13 PM

Or yes and no. There's probably no single reason but a whole lot of little reasonlets, of which this may very well be one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 10 September, 2018, 11:56:36 PM
TB, that's not too far removed from my Dad, my Mam is more even handed. That said, even though he does't like some of the EU regulations, he sees the benefit and the market (farming background) of the EU. You would be hard pushed to find anyone agreeing with an Ireland Exit out west (my experience) except for John Waters and Co!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 September, 2018, 07:17:04 PM
Australian newspaper cartoonist (Mark Knight), and his editor, say this isn't racist:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/16DB2/production/_103381639_d7b9febd-386d-4516-b3e8-5c6553cd0a40.jpg)

I don't know if they're lying or if they just don't realize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2018, 07:39:05 PM
Lying.  Although as others have pointed out, if proof of supreme ignorance of your subject was required for a defence, it would be drawing Naomi Osaka as a skinny blond white girl with a ponytail.   

The treatment of Williams in this matter is appalling anyway: the single greatest player in the history of the game has a bad day, is harshly sanctioned, loses the Open and her temper, and then is harried across the media as some kind of petulant child.  No doubt her behaviour was poor, but nowhere near as bad as many male, white players across the years.  Her vocal remorse over the incident overshadowing Osaka's victory was ample evidence of her character as a sportswoman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 September, 2018, 07:58:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 September, 2018, 12:32:48 PM
Reading medical supply companies and health professionals working through their Brexit projections and preparations on Twitter is a lot like the end of the first third of a Stephen Baxter novel: ...

I'm not sure that using a Baxter Novel as an analogy for Brexit is the best choice.  Especially when you consider how many of them end up with the death of every character.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 September, 2018, 08:54:59 PM
Well, they're stockpiling medicine, so fingers crossed. 
Seriously though, my mother is English and my brother and sister live over there as well as most of my extended family and it kills me to see the disaster Britain is hurtling towards.

In better news, it seems that the fat ignorant fuck in the White House isn't visiting Ireland after all. Though it could have been fun to see his toddler's tantrum when the balloon floated past his golf course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 11 September, 2018, 08:59:45 PM
As unemployment falls to its lowest level for over forty years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 September, 2018, 09:14:14 PM

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2018. All rights reserved. (https://www.ft.com/content/83e7e87e-fe64-11e6-96f8-3700c5664d30)

How wages fell in the UK while the economy grew

The UK sits on its own as a rich economy that experienced a strong economic performance while the real wages of its workers dropped.

There are various reasons for the exceptional case of the UK, not least a shift towards lower-paid jobs, low productivity levels and growth, a strong rise in employment and higher inflation.

More people in work but with lower pay

Only the US and Canada have greater flexibility in labour market regulation than the UK, according to the OECD. Thanks to a more flexible job market, people were able to find jobs quicker than in other countries. Employment expanded by 2.4 per cent in the six years to 2013, while in France there was no job expansion and the EU as a whole experienced job losses.

After the crisis, labour supply increased, but these "unusual increases in labour supply" were absorbed by the market, writes the OECD in its latest country survey. Pension reform and other policies contributed to the increase in supply with a rising number of older workers and incentives to work rather than live off benefits. Meanwhile "sustained inflows of well-educated immigrants have boosted the working-age population", says the OECD.

Such employment expansion coincided with the loss of labour bargaining power due to the risk of unemployment and "slack" remaining higher than pre-crisis levels. Unemployment, underemployment and involuntary part-time working, for example, were far above their levels in 2008. Coupled with low and falling levels of unionisation, employment growth came at the expense of a fall in real wages.

The expansion has begun to slow, not just because of the Brexit vote, but also because the economy is close to full employment, reducing downward pressure on wages.

Wages have not kept up with inflation

Inflation is likely to squeeze real wages in the next couple of years just as it did after the crisis.

Between 2007 and 2015 the UK had one of the highest inflation rates among big advanced economies, largely because of high energy prices and the depreciation of the pound. Consumer prices expanded at an annual rate of over 5 per cent at their peak in September 2011, well above the rate of expansion of nominal earnings.

Now inflation is rising rapidly once again.

It is expected to exceed 2.5 per cent this year because of the pound falling further. But in a tight labour market, high inflation "may make it harder for firms to award small pay increases", says Capital Economics.

When employment was expanding, it was in lower-paid jobs

Employment growth was driven largely by self-employment and part-timers, while the number of full-time jobs shrank. "The rapid rises in employment over the past few years have been made up by a larger than usual share of low-skilled jobs which tend to be lower paid," says Capital Economics.

The number of managers fell more than 24 per cent in the eight years to the third quarter 2015, while the number of sales and service workers expanded by a similar amount.

So as manufacturing and financial services lost workers, the workforce in accommodation and food services expanded.

The trend is now reversing, and the number of managers, professionals and technicians grew in the last year, while the number of elementary occupations contracted. Which means that the composition of jobs should stop pushing the average real wages level down.

Companies hired people rather than invested in capital

UK employment expanded at the expense of capital stock, which contributed to low (and falling) levels of productivity. In turn, lack of investment growth hampered productivity with negative effects on wages. "Whether pay drives productivity, or productivity drives pay, they go hand in hand," as Sarah O'Connor, our labour correspondent, puts it.

Inflation and the dynamics of the labour market are pulling real wages in opposing directions. Ultimately further progress in living standards rests on boosting productivity growth, a challenge for the coming years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2018, 09:49:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 September, 2018, 08:59:45 PM
As unemployment falls to its lowest level for over forty years.

Always good to hear positives, but I thought the UK economy was strangled by daft EU regulations and the jobs market flooded with dodgy cut-price Polish plumbers and benefits tourists?  Because you haven't actually left yet, you know.

Still, you're currently bottom of the real-wage growth table for the entire developed world, so I suppose there's room for improvement under WTO rules. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 September, 2018, 09:56:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 September, 2018, 02:08:45 PM
...  Or that she herself barely survived TB.

Jeez, just how difficult were you a a child?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2018, 09:58:48 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 September, 2018, 09:56:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 September, 2018, 02:08:45 PM
...  Or that she herself barely survived TB.

Jeez, just how difficult were you a a child?

Aaarf!  I did think of ditching that abbreviation, but forgot in the heat of the rant...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 September, 2018, 01:02:07 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 September, 2018, 09:49:36 PM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 September, 2018, 08:59:45 PM
As unemployment falls to its lowest level for over forty years.

Always good to hear positives

It's the kind of good maths that will make post-Brexit Britain a global economic superpower: instead of one person being taken off the unemployment list because he works a 40 hour week, 40 people work one hour a week and that way not only do all of them get taken off the unemployed list, but none of them make enough to qualify for the protections of full employment so the employer saves money.  Plus they don't actually work one hour every week, so even more people get to have a go at being "fully employed".
Soon, even though no-one in the UK actually has a job, everyone will be employed.

I'll miss the UK when I and the ground beneath my feet become Irish in about... ohhhh 6 years at the outside?  I'd joke that the UK will have a bit of bother finding medical staff and teachers once that happens, but luckily the Tories have made that a moot concern already.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2018, 01:38:06 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 September, 2018, 08:59:45 PM
As unemployment falls to its lowest level for over forty years.
Zero Hour contracts account for 1.8M recorded employment contracts (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/23/number-of-zero-hours-contracts-in-uk-rose-by-100000-in-2017-ons), a rise of 0.1M from last year, these people are typically young and impoverished, but keep touting this non-argument every few dozen pages like you've somehow npt had it explained to you a dozen times that being employed on a zero hours basis, for borderline or bellow minimum wage, is bordering on slave labour and is as much a pandemic now than ever.

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 September, 2018, 07:19:59 AM

The substantial impact of the financial crisis has left people's wages 3% below what they were a decade ago, new research reveals. The analysis done for the BBC by the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that on average people's real annual wages are £800 lower.

And that people who are aged between 30 and 39 now are earning £2,100 a year less than people of the same age group in 2008. That's a drop of 7.2%.

At the time of the financial crisis in 2008, the average wage was £24,100. In 2017, it was £23,300.

Even more stark is the analysis from the IFS that, if wage growth trends between 1998 and 2008 had continued, people would on average be earning £3,500 more. That's 15% higher than today's average figure.

On the upside employment levels are remarkably high and, the gap between rich and poor has actually narrowed somewhat, but the gap between old and young has grown and grown.

The IFS said that the financial crisis of a decade ago sparked the deepest recession since the Second World War and had been remarkable for the "persistence of its effects". Economic growth is still low by historic standards and the total debts of the government have grown by £1 trillion.

The public spending cuts pushed through by the governments of 2010 and 2015 were "historically unprecedented" the IFS said. The deficit - that is the difference between what the government spends on services and receives in tax revenues - has been substantially reduced.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45487695
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 12 September, 2018, 07:39:17 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 11 September, 2018, 08:59:45 PM
As unemployment falls to its lowest level for over forty years.

Yes, you dropped this same one-line non sequitur a few months ago, and then got schooled in the facts just as you're getting schooled in them again.

Do you really not remember this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 08:14:19 AM
So come on then, Headmaster, tell me what I said that isn't true? Unemployment is down, vacancies are up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2018, 08:25:27 AM
If you consider working 6 hours a week with no acces to support allowances or without any hope of extra hours, a pay rise, or promosion 'work' then you are part of the problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 09:37:53 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 08:14:19 AM
So come on then, Headmaster, tell me what I said that isn't true? Unemployment is down, vacancies are up.
You know full-well it's all about context. Unemployment being down isn't in and of itself a benefit if people aren't earning enough money to support themselves. We have an economy that's increasingly having people be self-employed (removed from unemployment figures) and not earn even half the average wage, where people are on zero-hours contracts (removed from unemployment figures) and are not guaranteed any work despite being contracted and making themselves available to a single corporation, and where others are deemed to not have tried hard enough to look for work (removed from unemployment figures).

It's the simplest of spins, and it's bullshit. I suspect if we were tracking people earning sustainable incomes in the UK, the figures would be much more damning, but this government is all about the spin and bullshit rather than reality. (See also the looming disaster of shifting the electoral boundaries and reducing the number of MPs to 600 under some batshit arguments about fairness and efficiency. In reality, all this does is sew up England for the Tories forever, and kick out the single Green MP as her constituency is carved in half and shared between a Tory and a Labour MP. As ever, it's a fucking disgrace, but people see "fewer MPs" and "money saved" and start cheering.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2018, 09:45:13 AM
Old Tankie is impressively resistant to reason or facts and will continue to drop his oblique non sequiturs as if they were mic drop truth bombs.

He either knows that the unemployment figures are a poor metric to hold up as an economic or social positive or genuinely thinks they are and is incapable or understanding why, in isolation,they are not, or thinks they do mean something in isolation like a magic totem of some sort and things like in work poverty and constantly changing the criteria for who is 'unemployed' is unimportant.

It does not help that every (quarter?) the press publicise the latest unemployment figures at face value. There may be the odd story talking about what these jobs are or how many people have been classed as 'not looking for work' or in work when they are functionally unemployed or how many people have died from the cruel and pointless poverty that chasing these metrics has created. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 10:10:57 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2018, 09:45:13 AMIt does not help that every (quarter?) the press publicise the latest unemployment figures at face value.
Given that I'm a journalist, I'm increasingly angry with the way in which stories are presented. We had some BBC journo banging on about post-Brexit figures yesterday, parroting some bullshit shat out by a right-wing thinktank. Without context, this is all meaningless. The way headline are written is increasingly dangerous: "Opinion dressed up as fact, says person". Yeah, great. Most people (as in, literally a majority) don't read past headlines online any more. Reporters MUST do better, both in writing headlines and also on microblogging services where each post may as well be a headline.

Also, regarding employment figures alone, the government's going to have a hell of a spin job next year. The current estimates are, what, that we'll lose about two million jobs? That's about one in 17 people suddenly without a job. Still, I'm sure those zero-hour contracts can be forced on a few million more, and conveniently hacked in half for meaningless job shares. That'll work. Give it a few years and we'll have no unemployment at all – but food bank use will have somehow skyrocketed. Mind you, as Tory MPs have pointed out, that's only because people love free handouts, and not, say, because they can't afford to live.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 10:27:37 AM
"Current estimates". Oh please! Project fear in full flow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 September, 2018, 10:37:33 AM
Quote from: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2018, 09:45:13 AM
or how many people have died from the cruel and pointless poverty that chasing these metrics has created.

You liberal luvvies will spin anything to be bad news - 120,000 people who'll never be unemployed again and you only see the downside.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2018, 10:38:12 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 10:27:37 AM
"Current estimates". Oh please! Project fear in full flow.

Guys, stand back, we have a free thinker here!

::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2018, 10:39:54 AM
'Current estimates' needs citation.

'Project Fear' is just a buzz word used to dismiss any criticism of fact that do not fit into a particular world view. often the favoured retort of the braxier. their is no project fear beyond the one created by the people citing project fear every time they see something they disagree with or would like to whish away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 10:47:02 AM
What like you guys, trying to wash away the unemployment figures.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 September, 2018, 10:52:33 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 10:47:02 AM
What like you guys, trying to wash away the unemployment figures.
Figures you've yet to quote? The statistics already discredited several times over?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steven Denton on 12 September, 2018, 11:09:19 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 10:47:02 AM
What like you guys, trying to wash away the unemployment figures.

No. The exact opposite in fact. if someone had just responded with 'project spin' and then refused to elaborate or back their argument up then maybe, but as the pages of responses, reasoned arguments and cited information not only don't fall into that category but represent the antithesis of 'project fear' as a response I would have to say you analogy is a particularly poor one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 11:24:12 AM
I've not tried to wash away any unemployment figures. I and others have stated that in isolation and out of context, they are meaningless. If you can't afford to live, being employed isn't enough. Yet too many people see unemployment figures as the be all and end all. You must know this.

As for project fear, that's the most ridiculous ongoing slogan. It's project reality now. At best, the UK will come out of Brexit diminished. Even its biggest proponents say any benefits might not be felt for 50 years. That means people coming of voting age now would work for their entire lives earning less than they otherwise would have, just so a handful of rich people (some of which are moving their businesses to... the EU) can get richer. In the meantime, the ERG seeks to drive the country off of a cliff and renege on every single promise made prior to the referendum. (The latest zinger from Rees-Moog: a belief EU/EEA citizens should be treated no differently form the second we leave. That'll be fun for the estimated four million people in the UK who are either EU/EFTA/Swiss nationals, or who are married to/in a relationship with one.)

In terms of employment alone, we've already seen EU agencies move out (the most obvious of things that would happen, despite the arguments of idiots like David Davis), and companies are relocating staff. Many businesses simply won't be able to exist. Without the CU/SM, JIT manufacturing is dead. Agriculture will be wrecked if we want a deal with the US or Australia. Services will be bulldozed by our lack of a deal with the EU (and the knock-on effect is the UK then becomes less interesting to other third countries regarding trade.) Investment in the UK has dropped sharply, and no-one is talking about benefits anymore. Brexit more or less went like this:

- Sunlit uplands! No downsides!
- Easiest deal ever with the EU – done in an afternoon
- We never said it was going to be easy
- Always said there would be an adjustment period before the benefits
- Won't be like a Mad Max dystopia
- May not see any benefits for 50 years
- Won't be the end of the world

The last of those is something May quoted recently. That is the lowest possible fucking bar to set for no-deal. Although, arguably, it will be the end of the world for some people, because under a no-deal scenario, people will die. That's not hyperbole. Unless we can guarantee the flow of medicine and food, there are going to be colossal problems in this country. Of course, Brexiters wave such problems away, or lay groundwork for blaming the EU. "Surely, they wouldn't be so CRUEL as to stop insulin medicine coming into the UK?" It's nothing to do with the EU. We've flung up barriers entirely unnecessarily, and this government is so ideological and stubborn that it won't walk back.

I hope that something changes. Either something happens to call this shitstorm off, or the Irish border forces the UK into a semi-permanent transition state within the CU and SM, and that holds until such a point that enough old people die to get us back into the EU. The first of those I think is vanishingly unlikely. (Sorry, second referendum fans, but that just isn't going to happen.) The second is reasonably possible, albeit under massive spin. The third I suspect is very likely, albeit not in the timescales pro-EU people hope. (I'm in my early 40s. I don't imagine the UK will be in the UK again before I hit retirement age, and possibly not within my lifetime, assuming I live to an average age for a person born in the UK.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 September, 2018, 12:55:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 09:37:53 AM
Quote from: Old Tankie on 12 September, 2018, 08:14:19 AM
So come on then, Headmaster, tell me what I said that isn't true? Unemployment is down, vacancies are up.
You know full-well it's all about context. Unemployment being down isn't in and of itself a benefit if people aren't earning enough money to support themselves. We have an economy that's increasingly having people be self-employed (removed from unemployment figures)


Anybody remember Job Clubs being brought in in the late 1980s / early 1990s?  People who were previously classed as unemployed go to a local job centre or other organisation, spend an hour or two looking at the job sections of newspapers and magically they're not counted as unemployed any more (the one morning a week is the only actually difference).

Quote(See also the looming disaster of shifting the electoral boundaries and reducing the number of MPs to 600 under some batshit arguments about fairness and efficiency. In reality, all this does is sew up England for the Tories forever, and kick out the single Green MP as her constituency is carved in half and shared between a Tory and a Labour MP. As ever, it's a fucking disgrace, but people see "fewer MPs" and "money saved" and start cheering.)


Reminds me of the 'bonfire of the quangos' (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/aug/22/bonfire-quangos-victims-list), which got rid of such evil organisations as:
Y'know, not anybody who tried to make the country a better place - nobody's interested in excessive packaging, clean air or young people learning things, are they?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 01:08:36 PM
I get furiously angry about the state of electoral reform in this country. The Tories simultaneously go with "it's so unfair and biased in favour of Labour" and "we need to save money" as excuses for stitching up boundaries to the point they'll be able to command a sizeable majority on about 35% of the vote. Labour fucks about as well, with Blair kicking the Jenkins Report into touch (presumably labouring under the misapprehension that they'd be in government forever, rather than thinking that they could eventually form coalitions with the Lib Dems), and Corbyn bangs on about PR for the Lords but – SHOCK! – thinks it's a terrible idea for the Commons. Hmm. I wonder why? Could it be that FPTP also benefits Labour, and they'd rather have a third or so of elections go entirely their way (and the rest not) rather than consider a mature voting system that would require some compromise on the part of ideology? Perish the thought! (As for the Lords, all those pesky crossbenchers and Lib Dems. Best be getting rid of them, to transform the UK's political landscape into one that mirrors the USA's, only without a president.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 September, 2018, 03:37:32 PM
.
QuoteOf course, Brexiters wave such problems away, or lay groundwork for blaming the EU. "Surely, they wouldn't be so CRUEL as to stop insulin medicine coming into the UK?" It's nothing to do with the EU. We've flung up barriers entirely unnecessarily, and this government is so ideological and stubborn that it won't walk back.

This is one of the most ludicrous arguments arising from the whole pantomime.

'I quit my job last year. Now I have no money to buy food, and my former company REFUSES to pay me.'

I can't help wondering whether such a sense of self-importance arises from tribal memories of the Empire - Brexiteers simply can't understand what it's like to live in a small and economically insignificant country.  Maybe it's time to start getting used to it.

(There's also the hypocrisy issue regarding immigrants from the East too - when you use force to smash down long-established borders to make your own big Empire, you can't really complain when people start wandering across them).

'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2018, 03:59:37 PM
I suspect it's a combination of factors. The fag-end of empire. Massive arrogance combined with shocking laziness. An unwillingness to even learn about the basics of the EU, despite hating it. (Remember David Davis said on day one after the referendum, we'd be in Germany making deals, seemingly unaware that you don't deal with one EU country – you deal with them all.)

There's also, perhaps more worryingly, the people using this to usher in disaster capitalism and make millions off of betting against the UK. In other words, crash the economy and make a fortune. Beyond that, eradicate worker rights but also their free movement opportunities, making a subservient workforce that has no choices. (This extends to those few EU migrants who'll want to come here. Instead of being able to move around, they'll get visas for a specific job. Which is shit.)

The blame game warrants watching, though, and calling out. If there's no insulin that'll be because of the British government deciding against retaining our place in the single market while simultaneously not ramping up British production (which currently accounts for a massive two per cent of demand). Now expand this problem out to other non-British pharmaceuticals and things like cancer medication (which we cannot provide). And energy (ditto). And food (ditto). But it'll all be the EU's fault, for some reason, when everything goes to hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 September, 2018, 12:28:01 AM
I honestly can't decide what spectacle has made me want to vomit more today: the Kavanaugh debacle or BBC Question Time.  We're all fucked.  Where would we be without large volumes of cheap whiskey, and ageing cats.

At least our own presidential campaign debate was a bit of light relief - piss off home,  you collection of freaks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 September, 2018, 12:07:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 September, 2018, 12:28:01 AMI honestly can't decide what spectacle has made me want to vomit more today: the Kavanaugh debacle or BBC Question Time.

We knew exactly what was coming from the GOP because they've done this before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Hill), but the BBC uncritically putting a wife-beating racist on QT claiming they need "someone from the left" for balance is very... American.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 September, 2018, 12:25:42 PM
Are we talking about Rod Liddle? They're surely not trying to label him "someone from the left"?!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 September, 2018, 12:50:31 PM
I never said Rod Liddle, M'Lud, I was uhhhhh talking about someone else on QT that was a wife-beating racist that had no business being on the panel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 September, 2018, 01:05:11 PM
I'm not a remotely violent person, I don't think I've been in any kind of a ruck since about 1990, but I think I'd have a hard time being in a room with Rod Liddle for any length of time without taking a swing. That he was allowed a largely unopposed platform on the National broadcaster...  Pure human filth.

As for Rees-Mogg, cheeses crust,  if he appeared in some historical drama calmly ordering the execution of tenant farmers while pricing up the chandlery for the next voyage of his slaving fleet,  people would say the casting was a bit on the nose. A living Punch cartoon. And a liar to boot.

And nowhere,  nowhere,  a hint of balance or a coherent contrary view.

But however awful that spectacle was,  I still don't think it quite matches the Kavanaugh hearing. How any country with a shred of self-respect could allow that farce to play out - what is the rule of law if this is how it assembles its highest court?

It's an "I'm With Sharky" kind of day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 28 September, 2018, 01:10:14 PM
But surely no one is trying to say Liddle is a leftie right?

Mr:
ROD LIDDLE Why do lefties continue to ignore the mass exploitation of migrant workers?
The more extreme the left's screeches, the greater the populist surge

I could go on, just like Rod, who never fucking stops because we never stop him.

Please I need a sanity check, no one tried to claim that did they.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 September, 2018, 02:39:03 PM
Ian Lavery: I wish you'd stop pretending to be on the left when you clearly belong on the extreme right.
Liddle: (shaking head) no, I just don't agree with you about Cuba, mate.
Lavery: I'M NOT YOUR MATE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 September, 2018, 03:48:33 PM
Lavery was shambolic and all.  Admittedly not helped by Dimbleby practically sitting in his lap and contradicting everything he said almost before he'd finished a sentence.

All dissenters are fifth-column fascists, having a pragmatic plan is tantamount to treason, no time for facts, no coherent opposition, no turning back. No single moment of media theatre has made me more convinced that hard Brexit is really happening, and it's taking us all down with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 September, 2018, 05:09:47 PM
I don't know why you're so worried about Brexit, you're getting a military border to keep you separated from it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 September, 2018, 11:35:30 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 12 September, 2018, 12:55:27 PMReminds me of the 'bonfire of the quangos' (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/aug/22/bonfire-quangos-victims-list), which got rid of such evil organisations as:

       
  • National Tenant Voice
  • Hearing Aid Council Executive
  • Disability Employment Advisory Committee
  • Cycling England
  • Renewable Fuels Agency
  • Advisory Committee on Packaging
  • Air Quality Expert Group
  • Young People's Learning Agency
Y'know, not anybody who tried to make the country a better place - nobody's interested in excessive packaging, clean air or young people learning things, are they?

No idea why SMF messed about with the font size there - the list of evil Quangos should have read:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 September, 2018, 01:20:05 AM
I didn't really know who Rod Liddle was, so I looked him up on Wikipedia.  Whoever edited his page is clearly not a fan, as evidenced by:

Quote...a wannabe journalist at the Sun, a poor excuse for a 'news' paper...

...resigning in 2002 after his employers realised he was a total gobshite...

...His knowingly false comments...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 October, 2018, 02:50:58 PM
Good grief,  Johnson's conference speech...!   Working hard to burn everything to the ground so he can step over the smouldering ruins, blame his predecessors and Europe for everything and through inevitable apotheosis assume his rightful place as the ruling embodiment of everything that is shit about Britain.  What a turd.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2018, 05:30:48 PM
He truly is an odious little shit.  Absolutely amoral; his only principle being the accumulation of money and power.  It depresses me that it took me over forty years to fully understand that the vainest, most sociopathic bullies don't get punished at all; in fact they get the adulation of normal, otherwise decent people and get elevated to positions like US President and potential future British PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 06:26:26 PM

Sorry to go on like a broken tri-vid but, take the power out of the position and it doesn't matter who fills it. With no power to enforce, what damage could they inflict? You don't like the way the government is going, you stop funding it.

The real power is yours. Always has been. Always will be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2018, 07:08:17 PM
Which could well work if everyone agrees to not feed the politrolls, but when the Right Wingers collective decides it is the one true voice, is the answer to not form a response and let them get on with it - at which point, you have to pick a side?


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 06:26:26 PM

Sorry to go on like a broken tri-vid but, take the power out of the position and it doesn't matter who fills it. With no power to enforce, what damage could they inflict? You don't like the way the government is going, you stop funding it.

The real power is yours. Always has been. Always will be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 07:45:52 PM
If what they, or anyone else, is doing is lawful then they have every right to get on with it. If it isn't, they don't. All the removal of power means is bringing all people under the same basic law. If what someone is doing is unlawful, extortion, for example, then even if a certain group of people change this crime's name to 'taxation' and claim the right to enforce it, they'll have no power to do so. If, on the other hand that class takes the concept of voluntary contributions and change its name to 'taxation' then that's absolutely fine. With the "right" to coerce and enforce removed, only the things people actually want will be funded.

At least, that's the theory. I'm sure there'd be problems and unforeseen consequences but then, there always are. The chance to prevent governments from exploiting and harming their own and foreign citizens, however, makes it seem worth the risk to me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2018, 08:54:26 PM
Or - and I'm just floating this out there - guillotines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 02 October, 2018, 09:08:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 07:45:52 PM
If, on the other hand that class takes the concept of voluntary contributions and change its name to 'taxation' then that's absolutely fine. With the "right" to coerce and enforce removed, only the things people actually want will be funded.
Thats all well and good. Until someone wants to use the public service paid for by taxation without having paid their share.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 09:10:44 PM
Let's not, eh? Chopping one another up isn't just messy, it's unnecessary and cruel and just facilitates the replacement of one bunch of gangsters with another. Not to mention the creation of even more generational hatreds to be passed down through the ages. We need to undertake this revolution the hard way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 09:14:14 PM
Is that what you would do, Hawkie? I think not. A few would, sure, but then some always do. There will be cheats under any system but that's no reason to dismiss ideas for improvement.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 October, 2018, 09:43:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 07:45:52 PM
If, on the other hand that class takes the concept of voluntary contributions and change its name to 'taxation' then that's absolutely fine. With the "right" to coerce and enforce removed, only the things people actually want will be funded.

At least, that's the theory.

This isn't a theoretical discussion. I count 67 states (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates) - a third of all the states on Earth - with no income, sales (VAT) or corporate tax at all. More than two thirds of all the states on Earth have a zero base rate for income tax too.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2018, 09:49:40 PM
Lawful by whose idea of what the Law should be?  a referendum on every law?  Who decides what the "expected" but not coerced level of not tax is? Another referendum? What about when a law becomes outdated or unworkable? where does the law appear from and how would you get concensus on all the things "politics", however shoddily under the way we currently let it run, take care of
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 10:10:31 PM

It's not the tax, or lack of it, itself that's the core issue for me. So long as our species clings to the idea of money then things will have to be paid for somehow. My understanding is that the current threat-based system of funding is unlawful, immoral and leads to scarcity and waste. This is where the rubber meets the road. Either one agrees with this assessment or one does not. If one does not, fine, continue to support or tweak the current system. If one does agree with this assessment, then one faces a dilemma - whether to support it anyway or whether to try and find a better way, whatever that may be.

The system I'd like to see starts by putting everyone under the same basic Law and learning what that means. The rest of it will be figuring out how to handle the consequences, which will be legion. I can suggest some solutions to some of the consequences but there are billions of minds on this planet capable of coming up with far better ideas. The solutions come in legions of legions. But that's not where to start.

First one must ask oneself if the current system is the best we can do, if it's acting properly, honestly, fairly and honourably.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2018, 09:33:51 AM
The problem with the system you're proposing is the assumption that everyone has infinite time, and probably also enough income to deal with the fact people are fundamentally selfish. The EU referendum is an excellent example of how people in the main do not do detail. Sure, partly this stems from a lack of civic education and arseholes like Boris Johnson systematically poisoning the well. But ultimately if you're asking people to decide on all law, how will you get consistency? Or should things be based on community? How large/small should said communities be? What happens when you cross a border? What happens if you just don't agree with what the local majority says? How do you deal with nationwide requirements for things like medical care, benefits/support for the less able, and even basic infrastructure?

I agree that the current system is a shitshow, but that's also in part because we have a very bad version of a variable system. A shift in voting system alone would be transformative.

One thing I will, say, though, is we have become a very apathetic country. I recall when I was at uni in the mid-1990s, a technician there said Thatcher basically ruined everything. The head campus was fucking us over, and no-one was doing everything. "Ten years ago, you lot would have barricaded yourselves in and negotiated something better." It rather feels like that with the manner in which people in this country are meekly surrendering their free movement rights, or allowing over three million EU citizens to be systematically shat on. (Most of my friends are sympathetic to these things, and voted remain. Almost none of them have even contacted their MPs, because they think it's just a waste of time. Not really. If an MP was swamped with communications, their own self interest at least would force change.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 10:17:25 AM

That people are fundamentally selfish is not at issue. If I want or need something I band together with people who want or need the same things, we all do.

What I don't understand is how our fundamental selfishness can be addressed by granting a small group of fundamentally selfish people the power to dictate to the rest of us. After all, if one gives fundamentally selfish people power, they will use it selfishly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2018, 11:40:56 AM
I get that, and I empathise with that. What I don't get is how you get away from at least some level of centralised power and retain anything remotely resembling modern-day society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 12:21:14 PM

Separating power from organisation is the key, in my view. Lots of organisations and individuals can and would operate perfectly well, and often even better, without coercion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2018, 12:36:58 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2018, 09:33:51 AMIf an MP was swamped with communications, their own self interest at least would force change.)

"MP bullied by hard left thugs promises they "won't be broken" by organised abuse campaign."

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2018, 09:10:44 PM
Let's not, eh? Chopping one another up isn't just messy, it's unnecessary and cruel and just facilitates the replacement of one bunch of gangsters with another. Not to mention the creation of even more generational hatreds to be passed down through the ages. We need to undertake this revolution the hard way.

This is exactly the kind of intransigent extremism that prevents us making grown up compromises with those of opposing political views.  A big part of political engagement is about finding an acceptable middle ground for both parties instead of entrenching in binary positions, and in that spirit I would like to make the first step by taking guillotine murders off the table entirely and instead proposing a publicly funded guillotine to be placed outside Westminster.  Whatever happens, happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 12:56:12 PM

I'm all for compromises, just not imposed compromises. If Party A wants to punch me in the face and Party B wants to kick me up the arse, and they both argue about it for a bit and compromise to kick me in the face, I'm not going to consent to that - who would?

It's like all this nonsense come election time of voting for the lesser of two evils. The lesser evil is still evil and I don't feel obliged to choose any evil at all.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2018, 01:16:00 PM
And people wonder why the UK guillotine industry is dead on its arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2018, 01:16:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 12:56:12 PMIt's like all this nonsense come election time of voting for the lesser of two evils. The lesser evil is still evil and I don't feel obliged to choose any evil at all.
But this is entrenched by our electoral system. This is not how, e.g., people feel in Iceland, because they have a broadly representative parliament. Sure, you may not always get what you voted for (and that country really thinks of itself as far less conservative than it is), but at least the colour of MPs more or less matches what's on the ballots. Here, people often vote for the lesser of two evils rather than what they want, because that may stop the worst evil winning. It's a fucking ludicrous system that was out of date a century ago, let alone now.

It's notable that in the past 100 years, the UK has had a majority government elected by a majority precisely once, and a majority collation elected by a majority once. British majority governments have otherwise been due to the party winning a plurality of the vote, and that's a disgrace. Some flavour of PR (I don't really care which) would force compromise, collaboration and consensus, because there would be no other way to get a majority in the Commons. (Not that we're likely to see this. The Conservatives realise they would find it extremely tough to ever win a majority again, hence their lies about how we already voted down PR, despite never having a referendum on that. Labour sit there, like entitled fools, reasoning they'd sooner have majority control one time in three of four than share power with evil centrists like the Liberal Democrats, or the SNP. And so on we go.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 02:42:58 PM

It isn't their power to share, or wield exclusively, that's my point. The only power anyone has is over themselves or, by contract, over willing participants. Whatever convoluted shenanigans these people undertake in order to "take power" are essentially meaningless. It's like entering into a competition to win a unicorn.

Prof, the UK guillotine industry may soon enjoy a revival as exports to the US rise sharply.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2018, 03:23:13 PM
So how does law work in your future version of the world? People just do whatever they like? Or are there courts for wrongdoing? Who decides what's wrong? How is that dealt with? How big are these groupings/areas?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 October, 2018, 04:36:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 02:42:58 PM
It isn't their power to share, or wield exclusively, that's my point. The only power anyone has is over themselves or, by contract, over willing participants. Whatever convoluted shenanigans these people undertake in order to "take power" are essentially meaningless. It's like entering into a competition to win a unicorn.

Voluntarily giving up ones right to vote by pretending that it has no effect is delusional and feckless.  The idea that political power is a figment of our collective imaginations is delusional (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_X9GCWlyEo).  The public services we enjoy are not fucking unicorns: they have a real effect (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/oct/02/families-take-surrey-council-to-court-over-special-needs-funding). 

The only thing that is meaningless is a presentation of a vacuous entitlement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8bqQ-C1PSE) and a tirelessly repetitive posture: if only we could all just believe in nice things, nice things would happen.  Tell that to the fucking Rohingya. (Oh yes: if they would all just hold hands and stop believing in the military junta, everything would be just dandy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8bqQ-C1PSE).)   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 05:48:13 PM

Law works the same way as it is supposed to. There are courts and judges and police and investigators and forensic experts and all that jazz. However, the purpose of courts is to examine cases, discover the pertinent law and foster harmony. Not taking legislation and interpreting words and meanings, enforcing them regardless and focusing on punishment.

No rulers does not mean no rules.

Funt, in my view believing that some people have the right to tell you what to do is delusional. And I never said governments don't have an effect, of course they do - or rather, the people pretending to be above everyone else in the name of government do. Belief can kill. For example, if a fundamentalist Christian decided to shoot up an abortion clinic and one got caught in the crossfire, the fact that one doesn't believe the same thing will not stop the bullets.

Governments murder, steal, lie and cheat - the consequences of which are real - the delusion is that these people (who are the same as everyone else) have the right to murder, steal, lie and cheat and those whom they murder, steal from, lie to and cheat must accept it because they're lesser people than the rulers. That's the delusion. That's where the unicorns live - not in the real world effects but in the illogical belief that drives those effects.

I don't know where people get the idea that the only alternatives to a coercive government are either total chaos or holding hands and singing Kum ba yah because that's simply not the case. Non-coercive government means taking on responsibility for yourself, which requires education, imagination and hard work. It is far from the easy option. The easy option is leaving all the decisions to somebody else, whether they're qualified to make them or not and whether one likes them or not.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 October, 2018, 07:43:04 PM
I think (at first glance) that I agree with all of that.

But didn't you advocate for abstaining from voting in elections?  You did say "It's like entering into a competition to win a unicorn".  My point is that voting can and does make a difference, because it drives policy, which has real effects.

How can you, on the one hand say "unicorn" and on the other say "the consequences of which are real"?  The two are inconsistent.  Baldly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 08:34:01 PM

The reason I don't vote is because I do not believe that I have the right to impose my views on anyone else. Further, I do not have the right to demand money or services from other people just because I need them. If I do not have this right, then it follows that I also do not have the right to authorise other people to make these demands on my behalf. I believe that voting for people who believe in unicorns they have the right to coerce my fellow humans into giving me what I need, whether they want to or not, is an act of violence.

I do not believe in violence or coercion, therefore, morally, I cannot vote.

The way I see it, belief in€€€(s) unicorns€(/s) the validity of violence and coercion is not inconsistent with those beliefs having real world effects. How many people has belief in a magic sky Santa killed over the centuries?

If other people want to vote then there's nothing I can, or have the right, to do to stop them. People who do vote, however, believe they have the right to force me to obey the winner - although I don't think they do this consciously or maliciously because they see coercive government as necessary or "just the way things are." I have to agree that this is the way things are but that doesn't mean I agree it's the only way or, indeed, a particularly good way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 08:46:52 PM

Grrr

Edit timeout :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2018, 10:44:37 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 05:48:13 PMLaw works the same way as it is supposed to.
So does this work on a local level, or a national level? How are the actual rules that everyone follows arrived at, if this is a society without a traditional means of democratic representation? Especially when you say:

QuoteFunt, in my view believing that some people have the right to tell you what to do is delusional.
How can this tally with the rule of law?

QuoteThe easy option is leaving all the decisions to somebody else, whether they're qualified to make them or not and whether one likes them or not.
It's the only viable option. We must delegate in life, because there isn't time to do anything else.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2018, 08:34:01 PMThe reason I don't vote is because I do not believe that I have the right to impose my views on anyone else.
So, again, how can your society function? Who decides on rules, if there is no voting, and no willingness to impose views?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2018, 03:32:22 PM
Anarcho-pacifism: is it viable?  Film at 11.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 04 October, 2018, 03:37:58 PM
so like you don't believe in unicorns?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2018, 03:45:24 PM
As a Bi man I gotta tell you the experiences i've be on the receiving end of, while bigotry is remain a basic principle of the human condition, Sharkys ideal world is impossible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 04:36:05 PM

All ideal worlds are impossible. All I want is a better one.

One might praise governments for decriminalising homosexuality, but it was they who criminalised it in the first place.

IP, I've answered all those questions before, most likely in excruciating detail. Instead of asking me, try to imagine a world without coercive government, with courts and police and roads and all the things we have today, where education includes classes on how things work and the media tells the truth, and answer them for yourself.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2018, 04:45:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 04:36:05 PM
One might praise governments for decriminalising homosexuality, but it was they who criminalised it in the first place.
To say thats a simplification and more than a little bit wrong, is an understatement. Criminalisation and mistreatment of LGBTQ folks predates organised government and reduces the systemic nature of homophobia to a government construct, which it isn't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 06:17:01 PM

I never said it was a government construct. Just like religion before it, government stirs up division by supporting and condemning any faction they can, often in very simplistic, A or B ways. Being gay is bad, being gay is good - when it's bad, government (with its magical powers) makes homosexuality illegal, punishes those who defy it and rewards those who support it. Debate is encouraged, but mainly in simplistic, binary terms - and actual gay human beings get caught up arguing, with others and amongst themselves, whether something that's perfectly Lawful should be legal or not. This constant tension causes division and violence as legislation, which is the illusion of Law, is debated. When it's good, government (with its magical powers) makes homosexuality legal, punishes those who defy it and rewards those who support it. Debate is encouraged, but mainly still in simplistic, binary terms - and actual gay human beings get caught up arguing, with others and amongst themselves, whether something that's perfectly Lawful should be illegal or not. This constant tension causes division and violence as legislation, which is the illusion of Law, is debated.

And meanwhile the ruling class, who don't give a shit about whether the peasants are gay or not, get on with the business of quietly feathering their own nests. And, of course, there are more differences than sexuality to stir up. How about gender? Lawfully complementary, legally apart. Race? Lawfully inconsequential, legally distinctive. Class? Lawfully irrelevant, legally maintained. In every case, our fundamental natures and rights are twisted by the black magic of legislation and reflected back at us as distorted illusions.

Divide and rule. This is how it's always worked. If I define myself as a heterosexual male, or any such description, I'm erecting barriers automatically, cutting myself off from other people who define themselves differently. Government legislation provides ample quantities of definitions, enough for everyone and more. The more definitions I choose, the more barriers I erect and the fewer people I interact with. Divide and rule. Legislation is a distortion of base reality - it's the world as the ruling class wants the peasants to see it.

But when I call myself just "human," all the barriers disappear. You are just like me, basically - the most important similarity is that we are both unique, just like everyone else. And so long as we're not hurting each other, why should we give a toss about how each of us lives our lives? That's the base state of humanity but, unfortunately, we are not perfect and part of our survival instinct is to be wary of the unknown, where we instinctively start to build barriers of our own - some of which persist and some of which get broken down. We all know of people, things or ideas we've rejected, realise we've misunderstood and subsequently re-adopted. Education and experience tends to break down barriers. So politicians stir up differences, keep those broken barriers in check by creating new ones and enforcing them whenever possible.

Do you prefer A or B? Tell you what, give me access to the entire alphabet, and the numbers as well just to be on the safe side, and I'll decide for myself, okay?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2018, 06:48:15 PM
Democracy is a form of violence because it involves imposing your will on the majority.  The only good bug is a dead bug.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 06:57:34 PM

And the minority.

Let's keep the brain bug alive.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2018, 07:02:26 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 04 October, 2018, 03:37:58 PM
so like you don't believe in unicorns?

It's Scotland's national animal (https://www.google.com/search?q=scotland%27s+national+animal&oq=scotland%27s+national+animal&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.4023j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8).

(I'm not sure why we got a mythical one.  We could've gone with a hedgehog.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 October, 2018, 07:11:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 06:17:01 PMAnd so long as we're not hurting each other, why should we give a toss about how each of us lives our lives?
I agree entirely with you. The problem is, not everyone does. So what happens when there's discrimination in this society? And therein lies the problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 07:13:08 PM
I think what I believe in is a snidge more common than unicorns. But we have genetic engineering these days, so I guess you never know...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 09:05:59 PM

Lawfully, people have every right to discriminate. Now, before you hit the roof... :D

We all discriminate. I discriminate against expensive shops, because I'm skint, I discriminate against thieves, because I don't want to be robbed, I discriminate against bullies, because I don't want to get my head stove in, I discriminate for pretty girls, because I want to get laid, I discriminate against my mother, because I don't want to eff and blind in front of her. Discrimination is simply treating some people differently, for whatever reason. But I suspect this isn't what you mean.

If a shopkeeper decides not so serve a person, for whatever reason, there's no crime there. It's immoral, I'd venture, in the case of cultural, racial or religious reasons, but not actually unlawful. In such cases, other shopkeepers might take advantage of extra customers being available or new shops open. Trade is and always has been a voluntary arrangement. To refuse a trade can be practical, in the case of a known swindler, immoral, in the case of persecuting someone different, or just plain bad business.

But, hold that thought for a digression, an idea as to how discrimination can work for the good of society. Imagine that things have gone way too far and the police, now operating under a higher moral code stressing non-violence, have no right to physically arrest a suspect (not a criminal caught in a violent act where use of force would be permissible) and force them into court. Oh dear. But we have tools for dealing with suspects who refuse to submit to a Lawful court. The choice; voluntarily go to court or refuse. Go to court, examine the evidence, discover the Law and apply a solution. Don't go, all your accounts will be frozen and your name will be put on a national database to which all reputable businesses subscribe. No business will hire you. No business will serve you; no landlord, no shopkeeper, no cab company, no train service or airline, no restaurant or roadside burger van, no publican, no tobacconist, no Mighty One. You might find a few dives to take you in, a few charities or parasites to feed you and the hospitals turn none away but, apart from that, you'll be outside of all society's privileges until you turn yourself in. In this country, we don't like people who run from their responsibilities. You'll be almost universally discriminated against. Now, you coming, or not?

Discrimination can be a powerful tool for good and ill and is not always either bad or evil. It is the role of us all, and of schools in particular, to educate away as many reasons to discriminate as possible. If this can be achieved, discrimination will be a powerful tool in maintaining social order from the ground up. But I suspect this isn't what you mean, either.

I suspect you mean violent discrimination. In such a case the word "discrimination" would be secondary to the word "violent." Initiation of violence is the root crime, the excuses for doing so being less relevant. You can want to hurt somebody all you like, it's your brain so you can do what you want in it, but if you initiate actual violence against another person, that's the crime. Hate speech? I wouldn't allow it on my property and I think it's irresponsible, sub-human and dangerous, but a mouth is private property too, and so is a voice. There's nothing Unlawful about it. But if I listen to that hatemonger and go off and beat another person up - that's on me. "If I told you to stick your finger in the fire, would you do it?" "I was just following orders," is no excuse. Unless he actually hurt someone, the hatemonger would remain free. By punishing actual criminal and not the orator we reinforce the concept of personal responsibility and demonstrate the folly of accepting Unlawful orders. From anyone.

Which leads me on to the worst kind of discrimination, gulags and gas chambers. Now, I suppose it's possible, in a free world, for a murderous faction to rise up and inflict a genocide by force but by that time the society is already broken. Education has failed. Economies have failed. Courts have failed. The media has failed. Law has failed. But, at the absolute very least, the genocide would be plainly unlawful.

Now, you know what I'm going to say next. It's inevitable. Coercive government has it within its magic powers to discriminate indiscriminately and make it legal. And all the statists believe it has this right, often even the victims. They may not like it, but its legal and if you disagree with the government, well, maybe there's a list somewhere soon to have your name on it. This genocide is, too, Unlawful - but shrouded in legality.

The power to discriminate, or not, belongs to the individual. If people can be taught to understand it then they will learn how to use it responsibly, even if some don't - and there are always some who don't. Give that power to define and use discrimination away to government, and people like Uncle Joe beam from ear to ear.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 October, 2018, 04:42:04 PM
So we have a referendum coming up to remove a blasphemy law that was interested introduced in two thousand and fucking nine.  I lobbied my local TD (that's MP to you Sassenachs) and he didn't even respond.

Let's hope my country remembers that it's not the 15th century any more - though the last two referenda (?) give me a bit of hope.

PS please, Sharky, don't make this yet another discussion about Libertarianism - I'm a different kind of anarchist, as I said before, and believe in using the political tools we've got instead of ignoring them.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 October, 2018, 04:52:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 October, 2018, 09:05:59 PMBut we have tools for dealing with suspects who refuse to submit to a Lawful court. The choice; voluntarily go to court or refuse. Go to court, examine the evidence, discover the Law and apply a solution. Don't go, all your accounts will be frozen and your name will be put on a national database to which all reputable businesses subscribe. No business will hire you. No business will serve you; no landlord, no shopkeeper, no cab company, no train service or airline, no restaurant or roadside burger van, no publican, no tobacconist, no Mighty One. You might find a few dives to take you in, a few charities or parasites to feed you and the hospitals turn none away but, apart from that, you'll be outside of all society's privileges until you turn yourself in. In this country, we don't like people who run from their responsibilities. You'll be almost universally discriminated against. Now, you coming, or not?

So how would this leper,  who by definition has not been convicted of any crime,  other than refusing to submit to the authority of the court,  be identified to society at large?  Big billboards,  news bulletins, maybe spray him with indelible dye when you see him,  or have some kind of universal implant that lights up when you are accused of something?  Not sure I'm seeing the practical improvement over arrest and remand and/or bail. Indeed,  I smell nightmare dystopia.

Also,  if this chap has non-computerised resources,  can't he just pay people to succour him. Or draw on his wealthy family or cronies? Again,  not seeing the improvement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 October, 2018, 08:48:32 PM
No problem, JBC - we're all looking for a better way, in our own way, anyway...

Tordels, (are you getting my PMs by the way? I never know if you're getting my PMs) excellent questions again.

Firstly, this is an unashamedly Utopian idea. It represents the kind of system I think we should be aiming for. So, in the hypothetical above there would already have been a fundamental shift in society over perhaps a few generations. With voluntary systems in place and a culture of self-ownership established, public attitudes will be different than they are today. With proper education from an early age people will learn about conflict resolution themselves - they'll have learned to rely on themselves and each other first, only going to court as a last resort. The courts, too, would not be as they are today, with the emphasis on repair rather than punishment (which would still be within its purview for cases involving violence).

This idea wouldn't work today, the time isn't right. It's a way of thinking to work towards, I think. If one takes my central premise that government is inherently immoral as true (or at least possibly true), then doesn't it follow that a change in thinking might be in order? And I ask this question with all respect and humility because I don't understand it all, either. Not by a long way. The hardest part is figuring out what we want and charting our way from here to there won't be a picnic either, not even taking into account actually getting there.

But in the spirit of debate and exploration, Tordels raises excellent points concerning public surveillance - a thorny topic even today - and how it can be abused. Governments are increasingly giving themselves the "right" to spy on their citizens, so this is a modern worry.

However, let us Utopianise the Mark of the Beast. In essence, keeping tabs on where everyone is is a logical idea. It's especially useful in emergencies. So, let's assume that everyone who wants one can get some kind of card or number or tracker and some central database, or network of central databases, keeps tabs on the subscribers. There'd be contracts on how the data is displayed; you might want to be on the system for all the world to see, or you might want your location shown to just friends and family, or just the emergency services, or nobody at all. In the case of nobody at all, it might take a court order (or a contractual clause) for the stored data to be examined in case of a criminal investigation. Such a system, used properly and openly, could do a lot of good.

But, what about the Pariah, cast out of all systems? How does one make it preferable to face one's responsibilities rather than run away or cheat? How does creating the Pariah help or harm society? Can the process be abused?

By creating a society worth living in. I don't know. Yes.


TL;DR - Sharky's full of shit. As per.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 06 October, 2018, 08:56:15 PM
To be honest Sharky, I see what you are saying, but to get there, as you say would require massive fundamnetal shifts in peoples thinking.

And the only way to get them is to KEEP VOTING for the lesser of two evils, so we slowly, on an evolutionary scale, move peoples mindsets towards your utopian way of thinking.

By refusing to engage in reality as it stands, you are ensuring that such utopias are moving further and further away from ever coming to pass.

I'm sure you would be  the first to agree this utopia can;t come into being overnight, so how is allowing us to shift further away from ANY kind of utopia, allowing people to suffer NOW, an acceptable stance?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2018, 10:50:18 PM
As Rosa Parks famously said: "Okay, I'll go sit at the back of the bus, I don't want any trouble and what's one person making a stand on an issue as big as this really going to achieve?"

Weirdly, Novaro just did an interview with Socialist Register's Leo Panitch (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lhye6gJ9Uk) where he covers the idea of libertarian communism and how it both cannot be voted into place, but also - crucially - cannot be achieved outside the existing political system because - and this is the mind-bendingly difficult bit to comprehend - there isn't any alternative to the existing political system on offer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 12:04:27 AM

I get what you're saying, Leigh, and it can seem like refusing to engage is doing nothing. It's not easy, though - disengaging from the system is like trying to climb out of a bucket of randy squid.

I'm still not free of it entirely, and probably never will be. But I have to try. I cannot impose my views on anyone else. I just don't think that's right. I, personally, cannot support a coercive system. All I want to do is live my life, do my bit, help whomever I can and hopefully enjoy a few giggles along the way. And so I do.

And bollocks to anyone who tries to stop me, no matter who they are. If anybody wants to negotiate with me then I'm perfectly willing, but I bow to nobody, and nobody bows to me.

Not engaging is more than just not voting - for me at least. It's about not supporting immorality. I can't fight the system on its terms, only on mine. All it really wants is my faith - and it does not deserve that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 06:54:34 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 12:04:27 AM

I get what you're saying, Leigh, and it can seem like refusing to engage is doing nothing. It's not easy, though - disengaging from the system is like trying to climb out of a bucket of randy squid.

I'm still not free of it entirely, and probably never will be. But I have to try. I cannot impose my views on anyone else.

So if a referendum arises that could give equality to minority groups (as it did in Ireland a few years ago), the moral thing to do is not impose your view on the bigots who WILL use their vote to keep the queers from getting uppity?

Or a racist far-right candidate is getting popular, and because there shouldn't be governments anyway, the moral thing to do is sit back and let them be elected
as the persecution begins?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 09:05:55 AM
It is a tough one, though.  Participation in any system amounts to an endorsement, as anyone who was ever baptised to get into a school or organised a funeral for a relative will attest - churches aren't shy about claiming your lifelong support despite your protestations that you don't believe and were only involved for the briefest of moments because there was no better option.  And we've seen how politicians can cynically  defend the cruel and irrational by reference to "the will of the people", aka putting the blame on democracy itself.

In a way our objections to Sharky's position sound oddly like those attacking Quakers and other conscientious objectors in WWI - "but you're letting the Kaiser win! Don't you care about the fate of the small nations?".

If you really do believe the whole system needs to go, if you believe it's inherently immoral,  it's possible you do need to turn your back on it entirely. You or I may believe that the immediate/medium term consequences of doing that are too terrible to risk, but I can certainly see the argument for following your conscience and hoping your example contributes in some way to the change you seek.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 09:37:23 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 09:05:55 AM

In a way our objections to Sharky's position sound oddly like those attacking Quakers and other conscientious objectors in WWI - "but you're letting the Kaiser win! Don't you care about the fate of the small nations?".


Well, not really - putting an X on a ballot slip to advance social equality isn't quite the same as signing up to murder hundreds of innocent conscripts in freezing trenches. 

I absolutely believe the system is immoral and should eventually be scrapped and replaced with something else.  But I also believe that boycotting it entirely just makes it worse. Even Sharky has conceded in the past that voting in a referendum can improve the system whether you agree with its existence or not
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 10:12:27 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 09:37:23 AMWell, not really - putting an X on a ballot slip to advance social equality isn't quite the same as signing up to murder hundreds of innocent conscripts in freezing trenches. 

Unless you believe that by enabling the system of representative democracy by voting and participating you must take responsibility for the wars and other outrages that system carries out.  In your name, "the people".

Obviously it's simpler to be clear about your moral intentions in the case of referendums with specific aims (and in a country that generally doesn't invade or bomb other coubtries...), but referendums exist as a component in the wider system.  In voting on the same side as the government in the abortion referendum,  weren't we also allowing them to claim our support for their health and housing policies?

(https://cdn.extra.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/29093628/Simon-Harris-Catherine-Noone-Leo-Varadkar-Josepha-Madigan-Yes-Referendum-Dublin-Castle-1-696x406.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 10:16:36 AM
JBC, I don't need a referendum to tell me to treat all people Lawfully. In fact, the very idea of holding a referendum to decide whether a minority is valid or not is repulsive to me.

It's up to me, as an individual, to stand up to bigots and bullies and, in my mind at least, the very idea of allowing even the possibility of these people being handed power is the biggest danger of all. There will always be bigots. In a world without government power the damage these people can do is limited, in a world with government power bigots can shred societies into bloody lumps and protect their bullies by putting them into uniform and under protective legislation.

With the systems and technologies available to modern governments, the potential exists for unimaginable damage. I don't think it's worth the risk.

As a wise man often quotes, "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." Then the illusory power, invented by the priests and perfected by the kings, will finally be gone and we will be free. I always loved that quote - who said it originally?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 07 October, 2018, 10:32:17 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 10:16:36 AM
Lawfully.

Am I right in interpreting your frequent capitalisation of this and related words to refer to a belief in some kind of 'law' that exists independently of legislation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 10:39:25 AM

More or less, yes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2018, 10:45:29 AM
So in other words, that's not actually 'law'. It's a society where 100 per cent of the people act for then common good, all of the time. Because if anyone doesn't, under its own rules no-one can intervene or do anything because everyone's ultimate right is to do whatever they want, without fear of impact from anyone else.

Quote from: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 10:12:27 AMIn voting on the same side as the government in the abortion referendum,  weren't we also allowing them to claim our support for their health and housing policies?
My take on that would be no, or at least probably no. With a referendum, you should be voting in favour (or not) of a specific piece of legislation. You therefore take partial responsibility for that legislation alone. Brexit is a good example of a totally warped take on this. Because there was no legislation, the government aligns whatever it wants on to the will of the people. It's an excellent example of how such things can be subverted in the worst possible manner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 11:25:28 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 10:16:36 AM

As a wise man often quotes, "Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." Then the illusory power, invented by the priests and perfected by the kings, will finally be gone and we will be free. I always loved that quote - who said it originally?

Jean Meslier, an oddly atheistic and materialist Catholic priest, no less.  Rehashed a bit by Denis Diderot, the French philosopher who wrote an encyclopedia and who would later discover he was merely a military-grade cyborg with the synthetic memories of his original self.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:28:18 AM

IP, you will never get 100% of the people acting for the common good 100% of the time. That doesn't even happen now. Society is dynamic and adaptable and unpredictable. The best that can be hoped for is a majority. These days, the majority believes in statism - but that's not to say it always will.

There are other ways to apply laws and organise courts, other ways to distribute wealth and tend economies, other ways to provide services and essentials - ways that don't involve voluntary servitude to politicians and their masters.

This does not preclude the existence of law, which is essential in any society. In a free society the law would be free; freely known, freely available, easily understood and applied equally.

We all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built. This instinct should be explored - it's served us for hundreds of thousands of years so there must be something in it.

That's not the side of us being encouraged, though. We're being encouraged to do as we're told and rely on the decisions of others. To not blame ourselves when things turn to shit because, hey, I voted for the other guy. To believe that participating in a popularity contest once every four or five years discharges all one's responsibilities?

No, we need, in my view, a society where everybody knows the Law and knows how to use it. The only way for nobody to be above it is for everybody to have it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:30:37 AM
Heh, thanks, JBC - he sounds like a fascinating character.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 07 October, 2018, 11:54:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:28:18 AM
We all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built.

I'm not convinced of the idea of innate morality – it doesn't really marry up with my own perception of the human condition - though I gather there's been some psychological research that supports the idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 October, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:28:18 AM
We all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built. This instinct should be explored - it's served us for hundreds of thousands of years so there must be something in it.


As a point of order, I'd say ten thousand years - I'm particularly interested in prehistory and 'pre-ancient history' (if you count ancient history as Greco-Roman) so if you're aware of any evidence of human law and society from 20,000 years or earlier I'd love to hear about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 October, 2018, 12:02:19 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 October, 2018, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:28:18 AM
We all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built. This instinct should be explored - it's served us for hundreds of thousands of years so there must be something in it.


As a point of order, I'd say ten thousand years - I'm particularly interested in prehistory and 'pre-ancient history' (if you count ancient history as Greco-Roman) so if you're aware of any evidence of human law and society from 20,000 years or earlier I'd love to hear about it.

p.s. I think I overdosed on greek and roman in my childhood - difficlut to do otherwise in the western world if you're interested in history - so my pre-ancient history would be the pre-roman celts in the british isles, egypt, pre-Alexander in the places touched by that particular bit of world-building (yes, I know Alexander was macedonian).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 12:08:41 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2018, 10:45:29 AM
So in other words, that's not actually 'law'. It's a society where 100 per cent of the people act for then common good, all of the time. Because if anyone doesn't, under its own rules no-one can intervene or do anything because everyone's ultimate right is to do whatever they want, without fear of impact from anyone else.

Quote from: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 10:12:27 AMIn voting on the same side as the government in the abortion referendum,  weren't we also allowing them to claim our support for their health and housing policies?
My take on that would be no, or at least probably no. .

The picture I included was our centre-right (indirectly elected) Taoiseach and the Minister for an imploding Health Service taking centre stage at the victory celebration for the Abortion referendum, to the annoyance of many of the core campaigners (and adulation of others). So they definitely did appropriate the result as an endorsement of their personal and political brands.

That wouldn't stop me voting for a minute,  I have never missed a single vote since I was able to do so,  and always drag the kids to the polling station with me to normalise the process for them as sonething you just do,   but you can see how even a plebiscite requested by a People's Assembly can support an existing political framework.   Sharky's views are not mine, but I can see how voluntary participation is a form of consent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 12:10:41 PM

Sheridan, I'm talking about innate law, not written law - I guess I'm talking about behaviour. Just like any species we have our own core behaviours and from these stem all our modern laws. Before our species could read or write, or even speak, our social instincts helped us to survive and thrive. These instincts run deep and can, as any advertising company knows, be manipulated with relative ease.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2018, 04:24:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 11:28:18 AMIP, you will never get 100% of the people acting for the common good 100% of the time.
But without that, and with a society where no-one is compelled to adhere to the common good, and where there's no element of compulsion, what happens when someone murders someone, or steals from someone?

QuoteThis does not preclude the existence of law, which is essential in any society. In a free society the law would be free; freely known, freely available, easily understood and applied equally.
Again, how? I honestly don't get how this can work, because you will always be beholden to some kind of law as decided on by people. How is your future ultimately any different from what we have now, bar a level of benevolence from those setting the rules? (Our law is freely known. It's just that you require a lifetime to understand it, because it's complex, because it covers everything that it needs to – although sometimes not even that, hence it always expanding.)

Application, granted, is a problem, not least equally. But, again, I don't see how that changes in your society, just beyond everyone basically being good people by default. In which case, that's a perfectly nice sentiment, but I'd say we're centuries away from that, and probably going backwards at the moment.

QuoteWe all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built. This instinct should be explored
Human history is also based on power – I'm stronger than you, and can kill you and take all your stuff. Women for thousands of years in most societies barely had any power and autonomy. And so on.

QuoteThat's not the side of us being encouraged, though. We're being encouraged to do as we're told and rely on the decisions of others.
Again, you still have this if there is law and courts. And if there isn't, the entire world is the Wild West, where humans have the option to basically cave someone's head in and steal their house.

Quote from: TordelBack on 07 October, 2018, 12:08:41 PMThe picture I included was our centre-right (indirectly elected) Taoiseach and the Minister for an imploding Health Service taking centre stage at the victory celebration for the Abortion referendum, to the annoyance of many of the core campaigners (and adulation of others). So they definitely did appropriate the result as an endorsement of their personal and political brands.
Yes, I can see what you mean there, but that's politicians being arseholes and attempting to claim a result is an endorsement, rather than the result actually being an endorsement. Granted, that's quite a nuanced difference, but I'd hope people would be a able to see the air between them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2018, 05:12:24 PM
I think Thelema Sharktopia is supposed to work like that Star Trek episode where Wesley stamps on some flowers and gets sentenced to death because equal punishment for every transgression means no-one wants to break any laws, so you end up with a utopia, only in Sharktopia instead of the death penalty, the punishment is that nobody does anything and you're never punished because no-one has the right to tell you you did something wrong, plus there are no laws anyway because no-one has the right to define right or wrong behavior, so technically there's no crime, but we still get a utopia anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 05:19:22 PM
QuoteWe all have an innate understanding of right and wrong, instincts that allow us to live as social animals, this is our basic Law upon which all lesser laws are built. This instinct should be explored

This is something I find problematic too.  It largely depends on where and when you were born.  Even the deepest thinkers of Roman times were in favour of slavery in one form or another, and there are cultures today who believe wholeheartedly that people who don't believe in their superstitious old books should be killed.

It's easy to be an independent thinker when you're born into a society that values independent thinkers (which, more than most parts of the world, ours does), but not every culture likes that kind of thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 06:12:13 PM
IP - do you refrain from murder because you don't want to murder or because the government tells you not to?

There's more to law than just legislation but all of it, from laws of tradition to case law to theoretical law are all artificial constructs. At best they are attempts to discover and describe the fundamental workings and consequences of Natural Law and at worst tools of control.

This does not render the body of written law thus far accumulated entirely worthless. Case law, especially, is very useful in guiding judges and juries in their decisions if they can see how similar cases were resolved. Even legislation can be useful for providing definitions and recommending standards.

What legislation is really good at is creating criminals whose only offence is disobeying the legislation and also in protecting the state's allies.

I can't see how taking the power to create arbitrary decrees disguised as laws based on often transient political needs and backed up by threat of violence away from a small group of generally questionable individuals can be a bad thing. Just because there isn't a bunch of unqualified sociopaths making the laws, that doesn't mean there'd be no Law. Just because that same group aren't controlling the police, courts and prisons that doesn't mean there'd be no police, courts or prisons.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 07 October, 2018, 06:22:11 PM
Isn't the question more 'Why don't most of us murder?' You'd argue we innately don't want to - isn't it possible that it's because we've been brought up in a society of small-l laws and morals in which murder is taboo? Bring us up in a society without such qualms, and wouldn't we be happy to?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 06:58:49 PM

Good points, JBC.

What I'm saying is that all cultures, no matter how dissimilar, are inevitably built on human nature, which is essentially social. Lots of things get built on top of that nature, some of them wonderful, some of them horrendous and others just plain confusing. If we want to have a human society, I think we have to base it on human needs and human character. The more fundamental the better.

You raise a good point in toxic beliefs such as in slavery or bigotry. I can't do anything about them, all I can do is try to rise above those things myself and hope I'm not the only one trying - as I'm sure I'm not. I can't do anything about other cultures, either, except try to understand them. I've said this before but I long ago realised that I can't change the world, I can only change
my world.

I suppose it all boils down to belief. I believe in people. There's not one of us perfect and a few are downright nasty but, on the whole, the majority of us are pretty cool - especially when things are going well. Before I can properly believe in other people, though, I must first believe in myself; and this is the hard bit. If I can learn how to live without harming others, how to take control of my own rights and responsibilities, then I think that's a worthwhile way to spend my time. Keeps me occupied, anyway.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 07:12:15 PM

I'm not sure there's ever been a culture that practised casual murder. Ritual murder, yes (but magically made "not murder" by decree of the rulers), but as a rule people in all cultures know how to get through their days without killing one another. A society that committed murder as casually as breaking a speed limit wouldn't last very long.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 October, 2018, 08:51:59 PM
Shark.

Watch THIS DOCUMENTARY (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7323594/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl) if you get the chance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 09:14:58 PM

Thanks, Mr P - sounds interesting.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2018, 09:39:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 06:12:13 PM
IP - do you refrain from murder because you don't want to murder or because the government tells you not to?
I don't see how that's relevant. The point is, some people will, and without anyone being compelled to do anything about anything, they'd have more of a free rein.

QuoteJust because there isn't a bunch of unqualified sociopaths making the laws, that doesn't mean there'd be no Law. Just because that same group aren't controlling the police, courts and prisons that doesn't mean there'd be no police, courts or prisons.
But you've said throughout no-one should be compelled to follow anything they don't believe in. So who makes these laws? Why should anyone adhere to them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2018, 10:04:33 PM

Who said nobody could ever be compelled to do anything? So long as one's actions do not violate the rights of others, there's no justification for compulsion. The only justification for any level of violence is, in my view, self defence. Every creature on Earth has the right to defend itself, and so do we. That can be done individually or collectively or through expert agencies. The right to self defence justifies a proportionate use of force to apprehend violent criminals.

Society makes the laws. People adhere to them because they know Law holds society together.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2018, 10:23:59 PM
The second last episode of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast is worth a listen too if you're interested in the changing tides of human morality.  It's essentially about the gleeful gusto in which public torture and executions were viewed by the masses, and how disturbingly recently such a phenomenon continued.

The most recent western version of the phenomenon he describes is the terrible torture, burning and lynching of Jesse Washington, the young (black, of course) man suspected of raping a (white) girl. The whole community of Waco, Texas came out to watch and celebrate, with photos of the mutilated youth being sent to loved ones as postcards. Bits of his body were handed out as souvenirs.

It was 1916; there are people alive today who were alive back then.  Historically speaking, we are within a very tiny minority of people who don't get our kicks from watching humilation, mutilation, agony and death. Makes me seriously question the existence of a universal and unchanging core sense of human decency.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2018, 11:58:33 PM
As regards the mutilation and torture: I don't think it's intrinsically human nature to want to do those things.  You need to be taught that it's okay. 

With the example you provided, the white society was taught that black people were subhuman.   I do wonder how many of the townsfolk didn't turn out for the public murder.  Or how many were secretly disgusted but played along so that they wouldn't be next in line.

One thing that humans find difficult is climbing down from being tricked.  I wonder how many people continue to convince themselves (against all evidence) that God (the Christian one) exists simply because their ego can't handle the climb down.  Imagine how much worse it would be if you'd acted on that information to harm others.  Now it's not just a climb down, but a confession of guilt.

Circumcision is still carried out in what are otherwise considered civilized countries (the UK and US being two).  Male genital mutilation.  And most everyone goes about their business as if there's nothing wrong with that.  Because they've been told it's okay by an organized movement.  You wouldn't just dream that up unless you were deranged and sadistic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2018, 06:27:20 AM

One only need look at the Millgram Experiment to see how statist conditioning can force people to act in ways repugnant to their morality.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 08 October, 2018, 06:31:32 AM
1) 90% of humanity is evil and they need the other 10% to guide them
2) 90% of humanity is good and the other 10% is there to corrupt them
Im not that optimistic about percentages either way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 October, 2018, 09:24:06 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2018, 11:58:33 PM
Circumcision is still carried out in what are otherwise considered civilized countries (the UK and US being two).  Male genital mutilation.  And most everyone goes about their business as if there's nothing wrong with that.  Because they've been told it's okay by an organized movement.  You wouldn't just dream that up unless you were deranged and sadistic.

Excellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.

I would however point yet again to the overwhelmingly positive and largely unbroken trend towards an OBJECTIVE reduction in cruelty, violence and oppression that the arc of human history demonstrates. The subjective perception that things are getting worse is just an indication that we are dissatisfied with the pace and degree of improvement.  From this I infer an inherent goodness that we are working towards articulating in our societies, a deeper goal that en masse we strive for. Whether that translates to innate morality or just the accumulating wisdom of our species,  I don't know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2018, 09:41:09 AM

Probably both.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 October, 2018, 10:13:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 October, 2018, 09:24:06 AMExcellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.
It's also proven in recent history to be reversible in terms of attitude. Australia used to echo the US (and how the UK was a long while ago) regarding how common this was. They then switched guidelines, and within a generation the numbers dropped significantly. In the US, though, they still cling to this, offering all kinds of bullshit regarding hygiene, cancer risk, and even sex (with American women often cited as apparently preferring a cut bloke – probably because that's what they're used to).

I find it abhorrent that this still exists, and it's bizarre the response I've had from otherwise free-thinking and liberal Americans. Many are dead set on retaining this, in part presumably because "it didn't do me any harm". Well, actually it probably has, because it's fucked with your head and your sense of right and wrong regarding what's OK to do to a baby without consent. If you're 18 and want to hack a bit of your cock off, go right ahead, but no-one has any right to do that to a child.

I nearly had this done to me, as it happens. Mid-1970s. Circumcisions were becoming much rarer in the UK by then, but apparently some doctors were still pretty fucking gung-ho. One tried repeatedly to convince my mum that I needed it done, for various medical reasons that naturally turned out to be total bullshit (but that wouldn't later have been provable either way, obviously). Fortunately, she told him to fuck off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 October, 2018, 12:57:38 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 October, 2018, 10:13:41 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 October, 2018, 09:24:06 AMExcellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.
It's also proven in recent history to be reversible in terms of attitude. Australia used to echo the US (and how the UK was a long while ago) regarding how common this was. They then switched guidelines, and within a generation the numbers dropped significantly. In the US, though, they still cling to this, offering all kinds of bullshit regarding hygiene, cancer risk, and even sex (with American women often cited as apparently preferring a cut bloke – probably because that's what they're used to).

I find it abhorrent that this still exists, and it's bizarre the response I've had from otherwise free-thinking and liberal Americans. Many are dead set on retaining this, in part presumably because "it didn't do me any harm". Well, actually it probably has, because it's fucked with your head and your sense of right and wrong regarding what's OK to do to a baby without consent. If you're 18 and want to hack a bit of your cock off, go right ahead, but no-one has any right to do that to a child.

I nearly had this done to me, as it happens. Mid-1970s. Circumcisions were becoming much rarer in the UK by then, but apparently some doctors were still pretty fucking gung-ho. One tried repeatedly to convince my mum that I needed it done, for various medical reasons that naturally turned out to be total bullshit (but that wouldn't later have been provable either way, obviously). Fortunately, she told him to fuck off.

I can't get my head around how the doctors or nurses actually do it. Just the thought of doing that to a baby makes my blood run cold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 October, 2018, 01:22:29 PM
I genuinely don't understand why it's still legal. Perhaps it's something to do with it being hidden, and people not liking to talk about genitals. But imagine if a religion was all about hacking off earlobes or nose tips. After all, you don't really 'need' those. As for blood running cold – more blood boiling here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 08 October, 2018, 08:07:01 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 October, 2018, 10:13:41 AMIt's also proven in recent history to be reversible in terms of attitude. Australia used to echo the US (and how the UK was a long while ago) regarding how common this was. They then switched guidelines, and within a generation the numbers dropped significantly. In the US, though, they still cling to this, offering all kinds of bullshit regarding hygiene, cancer risk, and even sex (with American women often cited as apparently preferring a cut bloke – probably because that's what they're used to).

For what it's worth, I work in a hospital path lab and we get adult foreskins on a regular if not daily basis. A very tiny fraction of the overall workload, of course, but they can be troublesome. As you note in your subsequent post, people don't like talking about these things.

That said, I'm not keen on the idea of routine circumcision without consent, either.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 October, 2018, 02:34:46 AM
The BBC cementing the heuristic that any headline that asks a Yes/No question has a really obvious answer:

Should women be spelt womxn? (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45810709)

(Saves anyone the trouble of reading the article.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 October, 2018, 10:04:31 PM
Anyone who is familiar with the Irish boys in blue will be at once completely unsurprised and utterly terrified to hear about the vindication of Sergeant Maurice McCabe.

It turns out that (as a whistleblower who tried to expose Garda corruption) he is not a paedophile who abused his own children, but rather the victim of a conspiracy by his colleagues to smear his name. Though, fortunately, most people realised that a long time ago.

Fuck, to quote the late Eazy E, tha police. The Irish ones anyway.  Lucky there's a few like McCabe still around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 October, 2018, 05:15:30 AM

Our costumed crackpots are no different. Liars, cheats and bullies, in my experience, protected by the illusion of power. Even the good ones seem to think they're above the rest of us, protected by magic costumes given to them by the deluded muppets in government.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 October, 2018, 11:33:47 AM
Are the Tories all doing a Gulbadeen Hekmatyar and attacking their allies to weaken them in the final Brexit negotiations or are we going to crash out? Miserable question but is it jockeying or something much worse, and we go out of the Eurozone back to WTO rules plus NI border shambles?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 October, 2018, 11:50:01 AM
We're going to crash out, unless there's a last-second climbdown by the UK or MPs find a collective spine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2018, 12:16:50 PM
It's a shame I'm not much of an Irish nationalist because if I was I could be enjoying this whole karmic payback thing.  If nothing else it'll be a hoot to see Irish people making famine jokes about the British.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 October, 2018, 12:29:44 PM
Yeah,  I dont think our economically-ruined terrorist-stalked island would be in much of a position to gloat*. We'd certainly be suffering a hell of a lot more than Boris & Chums,  unless someone takes a pop at Brighton again... And I don't even know how I'd feel about that at this point. And if I don't,  you can be sure there's plenty whose feelings are quite clear.

Given as how EVERY permutation of Brexit is intrinsically a disaster, my money is on the average venal opportunist secretly angling for a last minute re-run and scrapping of Article 50 so that they can play the see-sawing markets for a bit and then settle back into lucrative careers of spittle-flecked divisionist euro-blaming.  That's not going to be any fun either, but on a purely personal note it'd be better than teenagers pointing guns at me every time I fancy some cheap booze and fireworks and tit-for-tat atrocities on the radio every morning.


*Never stopped us before...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2018, 12:38:32 PM
I am reasonably certain that if the RA don't kill any civilian casualties in their upcoming campaign, they will be the first terrorist group to have the support of the majority of the UK's population.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 October, 2018, 12:54:25 PM
And that's democracy!  Thought this was rather good: https://mobile.twitter.com/DonaldClarke63/status/1051143334226526208
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2018, 06:50:05 PM
Ugh - after listening to the radio news I now how have Tommy Robinson's weird football chant/ call out stuck in my head. I really don't want to absentmindedly vocalise it in public.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 23 October, 2018, 06:51:20 PM
To be clear - I'm not talking '2,4,6,8 Motorway'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2018, 09:36:09 PM
I was happy that the news was giving Robinson free publicity just to get a break from the near-constant coverage of the five earthquakes that struck Blackpool in one day and which have no possible explanation.  Not even the engineers working on the nearby fracking operation that had recently restarted causing subterranean explosions in an attempt to create earthquakes could explain where all these earthquakes were suddenly coming from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 October, 2018, 11:08:00 PM
Haven't you heard? We don't have to worry about those because they're going to redefine them (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/09/uk-fracking-rules-on-earthquakes-could-be-relaxed-says-minister) so they won't be dangerous, progress-impeding earthquakes any more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2018, 06:14:09 PM
Seven earthquakes now.
Seven earthquakes striking the area of the UK that began fracking operations less than a week ago and we're just stumped - stumped - as to why this might be happening.
Why are we redefining "earthquakes"?  Oh, no reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2018, 06:23:34 PM

Particularly worrying for me as it's practically on my doorstep, just on the other side of the Ribble. I haven't felt any of these recent quakes but I did feel the one a few years ago that shut the fraccing down for a bit. Indeed, they've drilled in fields within walking distance of where I live. Although these wells are shut down at the moment there's worry locally that they'll soon be back in business.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 October, 2018, 06:59:12 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 October, 2018, 11:08:00 PM
Haven't you heard? We don't have to worry about those because they're going to redefine them (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/09/uk-fracking-rules-on-earthquakes-could-be-relaxed-says-minister) so they won't be dangerous, progress-impeding earthquakes any more.

oops, linked wrong: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/09/uk-fracking-rules-on-earthquakes-could-be-relaxed-says-minister (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/09/uk-fracking-rules-on-earthquakes-could-be-relaxed-says-minister)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2018, 10:16:45 PM
Plenty more fracking fun to look forward to after next March, ma leetle Breeteesh churms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 October, 2018, 07:01:48 AM

Just yer Eengleesh choms - Scots and Welsh banned eet already, I theenk.

Until they're told to un-ban it, I guess.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 25 October, 2018, 07:40:10 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 October, 2018, 07:01:48 AM

Just yer Eengleesh choms - Scots and Welsh banned eet already, I theenk.

Until they're told to un-ban it, I guess.

The Scottish government hasn't banned it, they've just said that it is under a "moratorium" for review for an unspecified period. I suspect this is a mechanism to avoid them having to deal with a legal challenge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 October, 2018, 10:12:19 AM

I stand corrected. Let's hope you can keep fraccing out for good, though.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 26 October, 2018, 07:12:37 PM
Fracking in Lancashire suspended following earthquake (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-lancashire-45976219)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 October, 2018, 08:28:21 PM

18 hours. Jeez. Maybe if Blackpool falls into the sea they might just stop it altogether.

Odd how the BGS recorded the event, presumably with its own equipment, but the fraccing spokesman mentions the sensitivity of Cuadrilla's equipment - almost as if trying to take credit for the detection. Or is my cynicism showing again?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 October, 2018, 09:23:14 PM
Somewhere called Little Plumpton should be the site of a 70s kids show, not an earthquake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 October, 2018, 06:04:32 AM

Yeah, The Changes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 October, 2018, 08:49:25 AM
Frackle Rock. 

Waking this morning with that sense of pride that comes from re-electing a warm and fearless poet President of Ireland and binning the basis of a blasphemy law, and then feeling suddenly sick that a fifth of the country voted for a reality TV businessman solely because they were openly proud to be a racist.

Next constitutional amendment we vote on should be to add the right to freely kick the mickey of anyone who claims to be "brave enough to say what everyone else is thinking".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 October, 2018, 09:53:44 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 October, 2018, 08:49:25 AM
Waking this morning with that sense of pride that comes from re-electing a warm and fearless poet President of Ireland and binning the basis of a blasphemy law, and then feeling suddenly sick that a fifth of the country voted for a reality TV businessman solely because they were openly proud to be a racist

You could have devoured all UK news media for the last month and not known any of that was happening. Explains 1916, 1968 and the current forehead-slapping regarding the border after Brexit*

Can't blame folk for voting for someone they recognise from the telly, though:

(https://i.imgur.com/s1qrgj9.png?2)

* The island of Ireland is the UK's car keys
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 01:25:27 PM
It is rather depressing to see so many votes for a bigoted shitbag, but I suppose it is worth remembering that he was over 30% behind all-round good guy Michael D.

And that the ridiculous blasphemy law is gone - three good referendum results in a row. Eat our dust, Vatican.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 27 October, 2018, 01:52:20 PM
Say what you want but he kept the beaches open.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/fear-world/images/4/41/Amity-jaws1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121114004354)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 27 October, 2018, 02:38:27 PM

Hours of painstaking research reveal three of the other five candidates are judges on Irish telly's version of Dragon's Den*. You need to find something for these vacuums to do when their five minutes are up.

If they were making tits of themselves on Strictly or pretending to be a cat on Celebrity Big Brother, you wouldn't have to listen to them protest that what they said is nothing like Hitler at all (and anyone who says different is a Jew).


* X-Factor for people who clean the Qashqai every Saturday
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 October, 2018, 03:01:15 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 01:25:27 PMAnd that the ridiculous blasphemy law is gone - three good referendum results in a row. Eat our dust, Vatican.
And Britain. We've managed two nationwide fuck-ups in a row now. Go us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 07:27:30 PM
I'll assume the other one was keeping the Tories in?  As for Brexit, you're just not believing enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 October, 2018, 07:41:34 PM
The other one was AV (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum,_2011). A referendum no-one wanted and that the Tories campaigned against, but have nonetheless used the defeat of as a stick to beat anyone demanding electoral reform.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 08:52:04 PM
Lovely. If it's broke, don't fix it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 October, 2018, 08:58:25 PM
Don't forget the Scotch Indy ref, which was a right stitch-up thanks to the media landscape at the time.

Guillotines are a better equaliser than PR anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 09:44:54 PM
'Don't leave us!  We don't want to be the only ones driving our slogan-sided bus off the pier!' 

I wonder how the Scotch would vote if another indy ref were on the cards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 27 October, 2018, 09:54:10 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 09:44:54 PM
I wonder how the Scotch would vote if another indy ref were on the cards.

Exactly the same way as last time, sadly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 October, 2018, 11:05:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 October, 2018, 08:58:25 PM
Guillotines are a better equaliser than PR anyway.

I know you got those shares cheap off a bloke in Marseille,  but you really need to diversify your portfolio.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 October, 2018, 11:07:56 PM
Scottish, not Scotch.

Did you learn nothing from Zenith's manager?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 October, 2018, 11:20:30 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 October, 2018, 11:05:03 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 October, 2018, 08:58:25 PM
Guillotines are a better equaliser than PR anyway.

I know you got those shares cheap off a bloke in Marseille,  but you really need to diversify your portfolio.

I also have shares in Lockheed Martin, so I'm good whatever happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 October, 2018, 11:41:37 PM

I am very drunk bfor the first time in a long time. One of our volunteers invitted me and bought me some Grouse because he thinks I'm an okay blokee. Jim no doubt disagrees, and thast upsets me more than it should, but he's probly right. I'm a twat, more or less. Cos I don't believe everything I'm told. Ha ha ha.

I would like to say "f*ckv government, rule yourselves" but I probly shouldn't.

BoLlocks to it. Do what you want, just don't hurt anyone.

Shit, where's the fucking bucket?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2018, 11:51:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 October, 2018, 11:41:37 PM

I am very drunk bfor the first time in a long time. One of our volunteers invitted me and bought me some Grouse because he thinks I'm an okay blokee. Jim no doubt disagrees, and thast upsets me more than it should, but he's probly right. I'm a twat, more or less. Cos I don't believe everything I'm told. Ha ha ha.

I would like to say "f*ckv government, rule yourselves" but I probly shouldn't.

BoLlocks to it. Do what you want, just don't hurt anyone.

Shit, where's the fucking bucket?

What's a Fucking Bucket? I want one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 09:10:13 AM
Whisky freely given is the very highest of character references.  Hope you found that bucket,  lad!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2018, 10:03:07 AM

Thanks, Tordels. It's always a surprise to me when our volunteers do something like this and I never feel like I deserve it. Didn't need the bucket in the end, thank Heaven.

My humblest apologies for last night's alcopost.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 10:29:58 AM
Yeah, it's amazing how affecting even a small token can be. On my last job I shuttled colleagues to and fro down alternately muddy and icy roads from bus-stop to site in my tiny shitty car, multiple runs each day on my own time and expense, morning and evening for seven months, eventually becoming a bit resentful of the whole business.  But at the end of it all two of my passengers (out of a dozen) popped a bottle of Jameson and a DS game on my desk as a thank-you and it somehow made the whole thing worthwhile.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 October, 2018, 11:00:39 AM

Here's to the Little Things that make life so good!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 October, 2018, 11:36:52 AM
Which reminds me, I must get a bottle of whiskey for my neighbour, who helped fix my boat engine. He was utterly shit-faced while he did it, but I didn't realise that till he told me a week later.
His mate, Can Al (Alan, who drinks cans every day) helped too, but I'd already done him a free mural on his barge .

I love this little boat community; sometimes it feels like a Walking Dead survivors' compound. With joggers instead of walkers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 12:00:55 PM
Reluctant to cut across the warm feels,  but feck me this Peter Casey (failed Irish Presidential candidate and human of dubious merit) business is depressing. Ex-pat TV non-entity finds his campaign mojo by picking on a minority and thus rockets from 1% polling to 23% of the final vote, practically overnight,  but happily still loses more than 2:1 to the most inclusive, intellectual and eloquent of men, Miggeldy Higgins himself, who wins a second term with one of the highest proportion of first-preference votes in the history of the state. 

And what do we find splashed across every form of media today?  Is it a celebration of our collective wisdom at recognising that a virtuous cultured man should continue to represent us?  No,  you guessed it: it'd the Amazing Success of Peter Casey and His Shining Political Future.

Has no-one learnt anything? This is exactly how vile twats like Trump and Farage survive and thrive,  the media catapulting their vapid opportunistic faces into widespread acceptability, even when they are in the depths of their own failure and irrelevance. Let's be cool and edgy and legitimise a petty bully as a Force for Change,  a Mouthpiece for the Silenced Majority. Let's stick him on every discussion panel and opinion piece to Provide Balance.

Let's not, eh?  Just this once let's leave them in the rubbish bin, and forget they exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 October, 2018, 12:57:06 PM
Quite. We've seen recently (eg Milo) that starving people of publicity kills their careers. That could have been done with Hopkins. It should be done now with Farage. But no. Instead, ol' tombstone teeth bangs on about 'traitors' like Vince Cable meeting with the EXACT SAME PERSON Farage himself met months back. He gets used as the dissenting voice by the BBC almost daily, despite not currently being anything other than an MEP. (And note that no pro-EU MEP has appeared on Question Time in recent history.)

Partly, this is down to the problem that news is about entertainment and eyeballs these days. Few people are willing to pay for anything, and so you justify your existence with audience reach, ad hits, etc. Which reminds me: time to finally chuck a few quid in the Guardian's tin every month. Money where mouth is, etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 October, 2018, 03:08:18 PM
You're right, of course, Tordels. I suppose a part of me (the Irish half maybe, my mam's from Lancashire) was unconsciously congratulating myself that well, whatever awful right-wing bigot the Americans and British seem to be venerating, at least Ireland hasn't gone down that path.

But here we are, feeding the little shit the publicity he craves, rewarding him for being a racist.  I can only hope he's a has-been by the time the next presidential election rolls around, though I suspect that even if it's true, the ball is now rolling and plenty of other pricks will be taking notes.

It's not entirely surprising, I suppose, that his comments have boosted his popularity. At least a fifth of people I know are bigots too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 October, 2018, 03:56:31 PM
On the positive side, you've only woken up to find a fifth of people in your country are fuckwits. I woke up two years back and discovered over half in mine were.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 October, 2018, 04:11:02 PM
To be fair, it was only 36% of the electorate but unfortunately just over half of those who voted.

Mind you, I think that the revelation on the F'wit front was pretty clear a few years earlier when they let Cameron near government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 October, 2018, 04:40:06 PM
Cameron only got in because of the LibDems propping him up after a collapse in the New Labour vote.  Like Brexit, a lot of the votes in the 2010GE can be viewed not as an endorsement of the alternatives to the then-current government, but as a vote that the current state of affairs wasn't working for everyone, and much as I like Tory-bashing as much as the next man, I'm not sure that dismissing everyone who didn't vote the way you did as some sort of extremist or racist is helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 09:56:57 PM
Veering back to positivity,  after watching this (https://t.co/oVLUdWr70Y). Not bad for small fella. We may be a country of gombeens and nimbys but do we ever know how to choose a head of state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 October, 2018, 10:45:18 PM
I remember some Irish Youtuber with about 30 subscribers doing a stout tasting in a local pub in the middle of nowhere and halfway through the video she suddenly turns abruptly to one side and nudges her husband to do the same, muttering "oh fuck me - don't look at him."  Enda Kenny was, I gathered, neither a regular nor a personal acquaintance of the Youtuber, but had landed in after cycling down to the place, and she was determined not to get stuck in a conversation with him.  This Father Ted* sketch is now my default image when thinking of Irish heads of state.


* which is a 1990s sitcom written by Arthur Mathews.  And only Arthur Mathews.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 29 October, 2018, 12:32:16 AM
Casey will be forgotten about in a few weeks, so I wouldn't get too worried about him or anyone following in his footsteps.
Great time for Michael D, probably not without his faults, but he is someone that I'd be happy too see represent Ireland. The kids all had faux elections in their classrooms, all four classroom voted Michael D, the youngest was because he looked 'nice', the oldest because he was 'obvious'  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 October, 2018, 09:09:28 AM
Quote from: maryanddavid on 29 October, 2018, 12:32:16 AMCasey will be forgotten about in a few weeks
I'm sure people were saying that about Jair Bolsonaro at one point, when he was the punchline in ill-advised TV station jokes. Or we could pop back to 1997, when UKIP was led by Alan Sked, and only got 105,722 votes, but subsequently transformed the fabric of British society. In short: never be complacent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 October, 2018, 11:09:43 AM
Meanwhile in NI.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46011779 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46011779)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 01:17:02 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 12:00:55 PM
Reluctant to cut across the warm feels,  but feck me this Peter Casey (failed Irish Presidential candidate and human of dubious merit) business is depressing. Ex-pat TV non-entity finds his campaign mojo by picking on a minority and thus rockets from 1% polling to 23% of the final vote, practically overnight,  but happily still loses more than 2:1 to the most inclusive, intellectual and eloquent of men, Miggeldy Higgins himself, who wins a second term with one of the highest proportion of first-preference votes in the history of the state. 


Hadn't heard of him before (but then about the only news I've heard lately has been from this board and The News Quiz) - taking to Wikipedia I see that "He became the youngest district manager in [/size]Rank Xerox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rank_Xerox)" so it's no surprised he's been copying the tactics of Farage and Trump!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 01:17:57 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 October, 2018, 10:45:18 PM
This Father Ted* sketch is now my default image when thinking of Irish heads of state.

* which is a 1990s sitcom written by Arthur Mathews.  And only Arthur Mathews.


No love for fellow Squaxx Graham Linehan?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 01:18:27 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 October, 2018, 10:29:58 AM
Yeah, it's amazing how affecting even a small token can be. On my last job I shuttled colleagues to and fro down alternately muddy and icy roads from bus-stop to site in my tiny shitty car, multiple runs each day on my own time and expense, morning and evening for seven months, eventually becoming a bit resentful of the whole business.  But at the end of it all two of my passengers (out of a dozen) popped a bottle of Jameson and a DS game on my desk as a thank-you and it somehow made the whole thing worthwhile.


Good that those two showed some gratitude, though shame on the other 10!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 October, 2018, 02:03:40 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 01:17:57 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 October, 2018, 10:45:18 PM
This Father Ted* sketch is now my default image when thinking of Irish heads of state.

* which is a 1990s sitcom written by Arthur Mathews.  And only Arthur Mathews.


No love for fellow Squaxx Graham Linehan?

You've not been keeping up with his relationship with the trans community then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 October, 2018, 02:33:20 PM
Trans community: hey, Glinner, that episode of IT Crowd was problematic but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Glinner: this person is not the same gender as my daughter.
Trans community: uh...
Glinner: trans people subject themselves to David Cronenberg movie-like ordeals of body horror.
Trans community: what th
Glinner: by which I mean Dead Ringers, because trans people have mental problems.
Trans community: I don't even know where to
Glinner: everyone suggesting I have said something amiss is a misogynist.
Trans community: (unfollows and blocks)
Glinner: men only pretend to be feminists so they can attack women from the left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2018, 03:14:27 PM
Well, that's disappointing. I always saw him as one of the good guys
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 October, 2018, 03:30:16 PM
You'd think no longer being stereo (https://twitter.com/Glinner/status/1011912395789348864) in the ball department would have brought him a little closer to post-op trans folk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 October, 2018, 04:52:19 PM
I think the demonisation of Glinner is a little unfair; I think he was originally approaching trans issues from a place of genuine concern for potential abuses of self identification and perceived pressures on other marginalised groups.

He was completely wrong of course, as a simple application of the 'hard cases make bad law' principle would show: such concerns are best addressed through enforcing the laws and systems that already exist, rather than dehumanising and discriminating against a vulnerable group in the old familiar way (my childhood was full of warnings of the dangers of predatory old gays looking to recruit me to the other team - but look at who we really should have been worried about). The issue is,  as it always is, those few individuals who abuse others within the system, not the system itself. Trans equality and self-identification doesn't change that,  because trans people are just people. Majority good, a few bad.

We've had self-identification in Ireland for 3.5 years now: no reported issues (thT I'm aware of).  As Glinner well knows.

Still, you can maybe see that he originally meant well, but then faced with online criticism he dug his heels in and went full-on one-note extremist, making strawman arguments saying awful hurtful things, with the resultant attacks on him and his family that give him all the justification he needs to play the heroic clear-eyed victim. It's tragic, because he's an intelligent and deeply funny guy responsible for much of my favourite TV,  and was a strong ally in many other liberal topics. TBH I feel sorry for him as much I do a deep disappointment. I hope he will see things differently one day,  and make amends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2018, 05:23:10 PM
He'll always have written Father Ted, Big Train and a fair bit of Brass Eye.  He hasn't quite veered into Frank Miller territory yet I suppose
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 October, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
"I hear you're a transphobic now, father?  How did you get interested in that type of thing?" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zkL91LzCMc)

Sometimes people drift into difficult territory without meaning to, and perhaps without having thought it through, and also perhaps whilst having many other admirable qualities.

My sister is transphobic.  I can't disown her - she's kind in many ways.  She lives in a farming community out in the countryside.  A lot of the community is casually racist & casually transphobic.  This is in Australia: and it's not uncommon for white country folk to perpetuate mythic stereotypes about aboriginals.  And it's also not uncommon for people in that area to buy into scare politics like the idea that a trans person is somehow just putting on a show so that they can assault people in public restrooms.

I abhor those sentiments, but I still have a relationship to maintain with my family.  And those people can be utterly unkind in those ways, and incredibly kind in other ways.  I still argue my corner, but I have to be a little gentle otherwise I'll just come over as sanctimonious, views will get entrenched and I'll spoil the good things we do have in common.

I only have to go back into my own past to realize how much my views have changed over time.  When I was a kid, the Chinese takeaway in town was called "The Chinkies", in Spaced they used "gay" as a derogatory term (and so did my younger sister), and I was once of the opinion that personal pronouns being changed to suit individual desires was just a load of needy nonsense.

We all have to be given room to evolve our thinking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 October, 2018, 06:24:16 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 October, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
We all have to be given room to evolve our thinking.

Spot on there, Funt.

I do think Linehan's repeatedly doubling-down on perhaps at-least-understandable concerns until they became outright frothing prejudice is a function of his Twitter experience. Backing himself into a corner, he's just at become more and more extreme, keeping pace with his vilification which grows worse and worse, confirming to him that he's fighting the good fight against ideological extremists. And not, as is the case, using his platform to take a pop at people who just want to be able to live their lives as they want to.  If he had space and time to rethink the implications of what he's saying, instead of daily online combat, maybe things might be different.

Very much a symptom of the modern  world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 October, 2018, 06:38:51 PM
Hey, I gave him the benefit of the doubt long after everyone else on my tl had unfollowed, and for much the same reasons - that perhaps he was simply backed into a corner by online criticism - but once he started with the "people who use the term "TERF" are virtue-signalling men who are really misogynists" shit*, it was time to call it a day - which meant I thankfully missed the delightful exchange when a woman tried to talk him off the ledge by saying her child had passed a suicidal phase after deciding to live as a girl, to which Glinner replied "I'm glad he's happy now, but--", and of course I also missed the incident for which he received a written warning from the police after trawling the social media feeds of a trans activist he'd been beefing with and posting pictures of her as a young man alongside her birth name.
I gather she wasn't blameless, but this is such a vindictively specific and calculated way to target someone that I can't really continue to entertain my initial position that he was just explaining a poorly thought-out position in a bad way.


* you will note that many prominent proponents of the term "TERF" are trans women defending themselves from mainstream feminist commentators attempting to deny them the right to self-identify, meaning Glinner's use of the term "men" in reference to them is open a far more dubious interpretation than I first assumed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2018, 06:48:33 PM
Fecking hell. I didn't know any of this.

Edit: I am drinking my way through a hangover and realise this is an utterly pointless post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 October, 2018, 08:11:00 PM
Ah look, I'm not defending him or his views, I just find it hard to believe that his views started out this way, or that he would have ended up espousing this crap if he wasn't in an unending minute-by-minute public argument with one gang calling him a rapist and a genocidal monster, and the other gang telling him he's the one true champion of women (and lesbians in particular) everywhere.

That said, the whole TERF slanging match is complicated because it involves the competing voices of multiple historically marginalised groups, and sympathies and past wrongs pull you in different directions.  Luckily the issue at its heart isn't complicated at all,  listen to what people say about their own gender identity, but the arguments around its implications are. Chuck in "won't somebody think of the children" and some pre-existing distaste or prejudice,  and you end up with a right mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 08:14:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2018, 06:48:33 PM
Fecking hell. I didn't know any of this.

Edit: I am drinking my way through a hangover and realise this is an utterly pointless post.

First time I'd heard any of this as well (surprised that something like this hadn't come up on the board before now - when did all this happen?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 29 October, 2018, 08:23:00 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 October, 2018, 08:14:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2018, 06:48:33 PM
Fecking hell. I didn't know any of this.

Edit: I am drinking my way through a hangover and realise this is an utterly pointless post.

First time I'd heard any of this as well (surprised that something like this hadn't come up on the board before now - when did all this happen?)
Same here. I don't use twitter much and I wasn't aware that Glinner had been saying any of this. I was looking forward to his next series, but now I'm not so sure. Are we sure this isn't a symptom of Hairy Hands Syndrome and he just needs a spell at St. Clabbert's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 29 October, 2018, 08:33:56 PM
Past couple of years - may have been longer (time seems meaningless these days) but seems to have ramped up in the past 18 months or so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 29 October, 2018, 09:04:32 PM
He's certainly been acting like a bit of a git online for years. This random person's blog post from 2012 should give a general idea... http://richardhcooper.blogspot.com/2012/05/look-at-conduct-of-graham-linehan-and.html

(I read another person's blog a few years ago detailing similar behaviour, but can't find it now, so that one'll have to do.)

He also did a very weird thing a couple of years ago when he posted a picture of someone's mother on twitter and asked them if they thought she'd be proud of them, after said person called Linehan a rude name. The picture of the bloke's mother wasn't from twitter but from an unconnected facebook account, meaning Linehan had to go looking for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 29 October, 2018, 09:51:53 PM
Twitter brings out the absolute worst in everyone, eventually. I stopped using it years ago, and I can't fathom why anyone still wants to be on there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 October, 2018, 09:58:13 PM


I blame a private Catholic school education, but hey, a least twitter's share price gets a bump from our shared narrative collapse!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 October, 2018, 10:10:36 PM
Talking of the possibility of redemption,  what the feck is Alastair Campbell up to? The Prince of Lies himself,  who must bear some heavy  responsibility for the degradation of politics that has gifted us Trump and Brexit, on top of his share of hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, is now draping himself in the People's Vote flag. I was all for it before,  now I have doubts. I acknowledge the good work he's done for mental health in recent years, but surely the Real Malcolm Tucker is still poison for any political campaign?   Shoo, shoo!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 November, 2018, 02:17:32 PM
And still they feed Peter Casey the publicity he craves.  He didn't win the fecking election; he came a distant second.  It worries me: Trump was once a joke, as was Bolsonaro. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 November, 2018, 06:31:49 PM
There's a bit in The Lobby  (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6wisw0)where the Associated Press releases 50-odd pre-written articles to support fabricated claims of antisemitism against UC Campus students when they voted to support BDS at a student council meeting that's pretty much all you need to know.  New media outlets like Huffington Post and Buzzfeed are also outed as enthusiastic tools of the Israeli lobby in a far-reaching spin programme aimed at undermining the Western left by deliberately emboldening the far right - at one point, one of the Lobby's spies admits that their actions in faking Antisemitism had led to a real Antisemitic attack on a Jewish college dormitory by "some passing neo Nazis or something" that they then blamed on those students on campus that supported BDS.
Anecdotally, I've noticed an awful lot of Twitter talk from centrists espousing the "Nazis were actually left wing" line, and Norman "Tarzan" Tebbit in the House cited the murderer of Jo Cox as being left wing.

The far right are being rehabilitated before our eyes.  This is not going anywhere good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 November, 2018, 08:57:06 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 October, 2018, 08:11:00 PM
Luckily the issue at its heart isn't complicated at all,  listen to what people say about their own gender identity,

At the very real risk of sticking my head in the lion's jaws so to speak, I do find myself wondering if perhaps this is something that needs considering from a different direction.  Feel free to shoot down some very poorly formed thoughts and educate me correctly, but is it possible that there is actually an issue with how people define their own gender identity that a lot of this is throwing up?

I'm thinking about comicgate and some of the reactions to recasting major Marvel characters as female or raising the profile of their sexual orientation.  All this at a time when core ideas about historically defined gender identity has become so radically open but at the same time intrinsically linked with a person's core identity.  So what has historically been a source of security and identification for a group of individuals who already have their gender identity defined externally by others (think about it, masculinity for instance has for a long time had very specific connotations that can result in rather traumatic experiences for non conformists) is suddenly being transformed in a way that may well be troubling.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 October, 2018, 05:55:42 PM
We all have to be given room to evolve our thinking.

I think this is perhaps the most astute comment that I have seen in a long while on this issue.  A lot of folks are struggling with these issues and need the time and space to get there.  Speaking personally, I'm confused as hell at times regarding my gendered identity, in fact I'm confused about many aspects of my identity.  I don't think it is that easy to define myself although I have a rather nasty habit of letting other people define and limit me in quite negative ways.

In terms of evolving thinking, there are things about the #metoo movement that have made me incredibly uncomfortable when I've reflected on my past, particularly now that I am the father of two daughters..  That's not necessarily a bad thing because it has transformed my thinking and behaviour.  The sorts of conversations that we would have considered appropriate in the crew room out in Germany are ones that I view quite differently now.  My first thought when someone talks about pornography now tends to be "but that is someone's daughter ..."  These things are not static.

So I guess I'm with Funt Solo with regards to everyone needing to take a deep breath and try to see things through someone else's eyes for a change.  It's something that tends to happen quite well here.  Folks are open to being educated and willing to recognise the limits of their understanding.  It just needs to happen on a much larger scale.

Anyone for a quick round of Kumbaya?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 November, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
Holy crap can someone please just burn the BBC news and current affairs department to the ground.They have genuinely moved the needle on the Brexit record back to the start and changed the label to 'Irexit'. Go. Away.

Over on Twitter I have supposed nationalists comparing the Irish economy and society of 1973 to Canada,  Norway, Japan and Singapore in an effort to prove to me that the EU has been nothing but a drain on us. I just can't listen to this stuff. Again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 November, 2018, 12:38:55 PM
Oh gods,another reboot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2018, 05:49:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 November, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
Holy crap can someone please just burn the BBC news and current affairs department to the ground.They have genuinely moved the needle on the Brexit record back to the start and changed the label to 'Irexit'. Go. Away.


For fuxake. It reminds me of the crew of the Black Freighter, cheering on other souls to join them on their voyage towards nothing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 November, 2018, 05:53:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2018, 05:49:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 November, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
Holy crap can someone please just burn the BBC news and current affairs department to the ground.They have genuinely moved the needle on the Brexit record back to the start and changed the label to 'Irexit'. Go. Away.


For fuxake. It reminds me of the crew of the Black Freighter, cheering on other souls to join them on their voyage towards nothing.

I saw the best response to the Brits suggesting Ireland should leave the EU too. It was on reddit of all places, and it went:

QuoteWhy the fuck would we want to get in your clown car?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2018, 07:45:43 PM
I'm sure there are quite a few Brits who genuinely think Ireland is some quaint little colony that'll see the error of its ways any day now and rejoin the only union that matters. I'm very happy to see Ireland's response to that is: FUCK, NO. I'm just hoping Ireland's general goodwill and good nature extends to me when my extended family finally provide me with the documentation I need to get an Irish passport.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 November, 2018, 08:01:20 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 November, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
Over on Twitter I have supposed nationalists comparing the Irish economy and society of 1973 to Canada,  Norway, Japan and Singapore in an effort to prove to me that the EU has been nothing but a drain on us. I just can't listen to this stuff. Again.

RT – surprise surprise – are pushing the same narrative.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 November, 2018, 02:46:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2018, 07:45:43 PM
I'm sure there are quite a few Brits who genuinely think Ireland is some quaint little colony that'll see the error of its ways any day now and rejoin the only union that matters. I'm very happy to see Ireland's response to that is: FUCK, NO. I'm just hoping Ireland's general goodwill and good nature extends to me when my extended family finally provide me with the documentation I need to get an Irish passport.

My mother is a British citizen, and after over 50 years of living in Ireland is applying for Irish citizenship.  You are very welcome here in my book, IP; though I'm beginning to wonder if, as a newly-assigned foreigner, you'll be welcome in your own country.  A lot of people there don't seem to like that kind of thing very much.

Maybe I'm being grossly unfair but I have to admit when I see the many stag and hen parties in Temple Bar these days, I can't help wondering how many of them voted to m make future trips much more difficult for themselves and for future generations.

Also, I'm having that clown car quote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 November, 2018, 03:22:50 PM
the comments on the BBC news story are depressing in their lack of knowledge and understanding - common themes seem to be "the EU/RoI are being awkward/intransigent, we should just walk away and ignore them" and "why don't we just unite Ireland - problem solved"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2018, 04:04:56 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 November, 2018, 02:46:06 PMMy mother is a British citizen, and after over 50 years of living in Ireland is applying for Irish citizenship.  You are very welcome here in my book, IP
My family has a weird relationship with its Irishness. I remember interviewing Eoin Colfer years back, and he remarked that there were "loads of people with your name" down his way. But my gran was all "go over to Dublin with your accent and they'll kill yer", despite, in the event, our little getaway back in the day (late 1990s) being really lovely. (First day, we perhaps unwisely head into a random pub. I go to the bar and order five pints of Guinness and a pint of lager. The guy propping up the bar slowly turns to me and says: "I bet you hate that person.") My grandparents were British subjects (my granddad was army), and so I've no idea why they moved away. Their kids don't have Irish passports, despite obviously being eligible. So: odd.

I'd always wanted to get an Irish passport at uni, 20 years back, but it just never happened. Now, it feels like opportunism through birth. By the same token, it provides me – by luck – to get the same rights of free movement my wife and kid enjoy, on my own merits, so we will be able to stay together even if the UK government goes completely mental. Fortunately, the Irish government right now seems to be of the thinking "yay – more Irish people", which is something of a relief. That said, finding the right sodding documentation to get me on the birth register is not easy.

Which is all a babble to say: yay, Ireland. And also: fuck England. Or at least its Conservative MPs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 November, 2018, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 November, 2018, 02:46:06 PM
My mother is a British citizen, and after over 50 years of living in Ireland is applying for Irish citizenship.  You are very welcome here in my book, IP;

My English father-in-law's done the same, after close to 70 years living here. All those referendums* he couldn't vote in didn't bother him, but losing his right to free movement does. Conversely my English Sister-in-Law (living here for 15 years) got a UK passport for her wee daughter rather than getting an Irish one for herself. Crazy times.

And yes IP,  you are very welcome (most Irish folk our age had grandparents who were British subjects - there wasn't an alternative!), although I think you'll find we're not without our considerable downsides. No Greggs for a start.


*Resident British citizens can of course vote in our Local, General and European Elections.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2018, 07:06:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 05 November, 2018, 06:13:40 PMI think you'll find we're not without our considerable downsides. No Greggs for a start.
Well, I'm gluten-free anyway, and so don't shop in Greggs any more.

I'm not sure whether Ireland would be a destination for us either at this stage, TBH. We honestly don't have a specific plan B at this stage. (Ireland has been on 'the list' at various points, along with Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Spain.) Right now, life is about trying to secure options (which in my case is a minor hassle, finding some paperwork, and paying 100 quid for an Irish passport; and for Mrs IP is us spending about ten grand on legal fees to try and get her to citizenship in time – fun times!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 November, 2018, 07:49:46 PM
Aye, no Gregg's, very few pies in pubs, no pickled eggs, and none of those nice little corner shops of the type 8 Ace buys his favourite tipple in.  Better Guinness here on the other hand, and apparently better Dairy Milks - my brother always stocks up when he comes here to visit.  Also, at long last, a beer selection to rival Britain's (though I suppose that's not much use if you're celiac).  At least come over for a visit, IP; me and Tordels will bring you out on the lash.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 05 November, 2018, 11:00:37 PM
Lots of English folk here out west as well, especially in Achill and Belmullet, pints waiting here too  :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 06 November, 2018, 11:13:46 AM
What will future Historians say of the Age of Globalisation? It lasted just 30 years or so, not even half the lifetime of the Soviet Union, the rich got richer, and then all hell followed on its collapse. Not too good if longevity is a sign of success globalisation was a failure but history is not an upward curve but a series of starts, stops, advances and declines. The world we knew is coming to a rather abrupt end replaced by a Nationalistic Unitlaterlism that I do not care for, but that seems to be the flow of events for the moment. I'm sure we'll endure whatever is coming, though some of that will be very unpleasant indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2018, 11:33:24 AM
Not necessarily. There's nothing to say this won't be a bump in an ongoing trend. It could be the last fart of the Boomers. Or perhaps it really is a shift due to people forgetting the past and being doomed to repeat it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 November, 2018, 02:28:42 PM
Is it tinfoil hattery to suggest that Putin has had a very big role in all this populist nationalism? It would seem that Russia, though one thing and another, has been going balls-out to influence the politics of the West, whether through internet propaganda, (alleged) donations to far-right politicians and the Brexit campaign, or spreading the fear of Islam (which I've heard is a major part of the troll-farming agenda).

Putin has a whole lot to gain from the fragmentation of the West. Or maybe I've become the type of conspiracy theorist that I've railed against for years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2018, 02:33:59 PM
Not this time!  In reality Putin's Russia would be crazy not to want to undermine the political and economic blocs surrounding it. An insane and paralysed US, a fragmenting EU, a weakening NATO...  if you were the immoral nationalist strongman in charge of a vast but quite-recently humbled nation/Empire this is all very good news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2018, 03:36:55 PM
Wanting those things and engineering them are different kettles of fish, and based on some of his previous attempts at media manipulation - such as his ham-fisted handling of the denial of the downing of flight MH17 - Putin sure seems to have magically upped his game without ever changing Kremlin personnel or tactics.

Anyway, no you aren't being paranoid - all the ills of the last few years are definitely the work of one single enemy of the people, and nothing at all to do with disparate interest groups finding it much easier to organise and mobilise thanks to social media and a global paradigm shift in accessible information and communication.
People raging on Star Wars because it has a girl in it now?  Putin's doing.
She-Ra's new design looks a bit butch?  Also Putin.
Currently waiting to hear how Putin is responsible for Comicsgate, too.  Because you know that story's coming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2018, 04:19:42 PM
Heh, I'm not blaming every launch failure on the fiendish Dr. Nyet!  The divisions of our present world are real and more to do with the results of the blind hunger of the everyday homegrown tosser class and the media they control.  That, and giving all the monkeys digital machine guns.

It is however also a fairly safe bet that massaging of financial interests and new media manipulation are part of the toolkit of international skullduggery, and many of the issues we find ourselves mired in are ones that Russia can only find enticing.  So yeah, I'd happily point the finger at that wanker as a cheerful source of productive irritation in, albeit pre-existing, wounds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 November, 2018, 04:59:45 PM
It's not all down to him, but it'd be complacent to suggest none of it is. Relatively small amounts of money injected into the right things (say, a certain political donation, or a boat-load of targeted Facebook ads) can throw a referendum or an election. It's not about on-camera media manipulation – it's about what goes on behind it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2018, 05:23:49 PM
I just don't think that a far right foreign head of state interfering in the internal politics of the US and UK to promote dissent and the rise of nationalism and neo-nazis is a plausible scenario, that's all.
But enough about Benjamin Netanyahu, what's all this about Putin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 November, 2018, 07:24:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 November, 2018, 02:28:42 PM
Is it tinfoil hattery to suggest that Putin has had a very big role in all this populist nationalism?

This is arguably the greatest tragedy of political developments of the last few years and the  greatest threat to democracy, this complete breakdown in trust for sources of information.  I'm not sure that I would blame Trump but I think he is an example of someone who has 'weaponised' it very effectively to negate potential challenges.  The concept of 'fake news' has at one stroke neutered formerly trusted sources whilst at the same time elevating 'conspiracy theory' to the level of possibility.

So now not only do we now know what to trust but we also find ourselves suspecting that formerly insane ideas actually might be credible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 November, 2018, 08:02:54 PM
Well, I never claimed that Putin was solely responsible for the rise of the right and the fracturing of Western society, but with proven interference in high-profile elections and a possible link to the Leave campaign, it doesn't seem too unfeasible that he had some role in it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2018, 09:20:07 PM
It's odd that we readily accept the role of the CIA/NSA/DEA in quasi-covertly fecking over half the democracies in the world, but it's crazy talk to think that Russia might be mucking about on the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2018, 09:35:13 PM
Employing an internet troll army to give Star Wars movies bad reviews in order to exacerbate racial tensions in the West?

I don't doubt Putin's been bankrolling people and programmes whose end goals align with Russia's interests, but the levels of multi-dimensional chess he's accused of playing amount to some objectively suss scenarios.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 06 November, 2018, 10:05:36 PM
Putin's divide and rule strategy have paid nothing but dividends for his United Russia Party. By giving almost every opposition party money, he sows mistrust between them all. Who is taking the money because free cash is always welcome in political circles and who is a paid up state informer, happy to sell out anyone for a fee? If you can't trust each other how can offer any adequate defence against the Russian President and his state-run monopoly on media and power? Europe divisions tend to be along ethnic or religious lines, so Putin uses those differences to try and split them apart. Vlad is winning hands down far no wonder Macron is calling for a European Army to try and counter the threat of Trump and Putin's Russia but he won't get anywhere replacing Nato would take years rather than months.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2018, 10:56:12 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2018, 09:35:13 PM
Employing an internet troll army to give Star Wars movies bad reviews in order to exacerbate racial tensions in the West?

Or a Disney false-flag to tribalise the SJWs to replace the Fortnite tweens; or 4chan lolz and bantz; or the YouTube algorithim rewarding endlessly vommitted contentious content on a regular schedule;  or racists gonna racist; take your pick of theories,  or have a slice of each. It's a buffet clusterfuck out there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2018, 11:11:02 PM
One of the scariest thing about the popular support for Trump (for example), is that there is a popular support for Trump.  (Not that he won the "popular vote": he didn't.  But still: a lot of people did vote for him.)

One of his key allies has been the Christian right.  It doesn't really matter if Trump paints himself red, wears horns on his head and a t-shirt saying "I am Satan!" - if there's a possibility that he can deliver a ban on abortions (and, as a bonus, a ban on trans folk and gay folk), then the Christian right is behind him.

All this means to me is that Satan appears to run the church.  (They didn't teach me that part in school: I've had to figure it out for myself.)  The greatest trick the devil ever pulled...

Adendum pudendum: I'm not saying all church-goers are evil.  And I don't think that.  But I think banning abortions is.  And I think legally under-classing gays and trans is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2018, 06:58:04 AM
The Daily podcast from Monday the 5th is worth a listen; basically an Evangelical woman who broke tradition and decided to become a Democrat. It gets very interesting when she calls her father to explain her reasons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2018, 10:15:54 AM
Sometimes all this chaos is good for a giggle - the "Mogg for No.  10 grassroots movement" is 'reminding' its supporters that the UK doesn't currently have a free trade deal with the EU (because it is a contributor, see - presumably in the same way a taxpayer doesn't have roads, emergency services, libraries etc), and that its trade deficit with the EU means having free trade is a bad thing anyway (despite the deficit being the result of a deliberate 40-year campaign of eliminating UK manufacturing in favour of financial services).

But it's okay,  the Leave vote was fully and accurately informed thank you very much. It's a right laugh. Still,  at least the entirely predictable non-event of the 'blue wave' in the US should give some indication of how a putative if highly unlikely Second (Third) Vote would play out. In the post-fact world where everyone with a phone can find someone to confirm that they are their own personal expert, you can't expect anyone to learn or change.

And over on Irish social media, every comment on the US elections is followed by someone saying "Vote Peter Casey, he tells it like it is! ". All the ubiquitous seething pool of frustrated racists needs is some gobshite to appear to support them and they're everywhere. It's like printing free votes. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2018, 10:33:23 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 November, 2018, 10:15:54 AMStill,  at least the entirely predictable non-event of the 'blue wave' in the US should give some indication of how a putative if highly unlikely Second (Third) Vote would play out.
This is the concern. The C4 piece shows a marked swing to remain, BUT when you factor in issues with likely turnout, the result is – brickingly – 50/50. (Actually, it's very slightly remain, but only by a whisker.) That said, better we get another vote and confirm the madness if that's the decision, than spend decades thinking "what if?" Not that we'll get the chance, mind. What will happen now:

- EU has had enough, and just wants the UK out
- The UK will cook up some fuzzy language, and agree to the backstop indefinitely, because it has no choice
- EU will agree that the entire UK can sit inside of a 'customs partnership' until such a point as magical technology exists to allow for a border-free Ireland (or, for that matter, Ireland unifies)
- PR machines of UK and EU will align behind this, and PV idea will be crushed and gone for good

- UK stays in de-facto customs union, and can't do any trade deals
- UK leaves single market, and royally fucks its entire economy
- UK retains inward free movement of a sort, but Brits are blocked from the reverse
- Most people wonder what the fuck we were thinking, but 40%+ are still too proud to shift position

- Some bright spark next summer starts talking about rejoining the EU
- EU says: sure, but you're a third country now, and so will have to join the Euro and Schengen
- Second 'punishment' narrative kicks off, because now the UK really really wants back in (60%+ in favour by this point, probably)

Cue a decade of stupidity and stagnation, a probably one-term Corbyn government, a Tory resurgence, and a dawning realisation that the UK will eventually have to rejoin. That'll probably happen, although not until some time in the middle decades of the century.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 07 November, 2018, 10:47:47 AM
You've all see the excellent Hypernormalisation, I hope? https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04b183c

One Adam Curtis documentary a decade almost makes up for endless weeks of the likes of Marr, Neil, Dimbleby and Kuessenberg clutching their pearls at the suggestion they could do a better job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2018, 11:17:00 AM
I wouldn't worry about anything that far in the future. It's obvious now we're going to play with our phones and polish our mighty nations until the planet is underwater and/or on fire and the fortified uplands contain only the most vicious, richest wankers. We had a good long chance to work together to save it all, but preferred the comforting sound of our own voices to the slightest compromise in our lifestyles, and we hated each other way more than we loved our kids, so that's that. Who's for another episode of NCIS: Los Angeles?   

(EDIT: Adam Curtis is the business)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2018, 01:59:22 PM
Dems become the majority party in the House of Representatives, and Nancy Pelosi - who'll probably be House Speaker - has already publicly stated she wants both parties on the same page, so lobbyists are still in charge.  Hooray for moderates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2018, 02:30:54 PM
It's fairly obvious that this is just how America likes things. If having that dishonest embarrassment of a petulant toddler in the highest office didn't encourage any real change in voting patterns, I'd say nothing will now.  The 2-seats-per-State breakdown of the Senate is a reasonable compromise for balancing a federal system, but if voters in the 'smaller' states are happy with what they see in Washington it almost guarantees stasis, even between the two wings of Gore Vidal's Property Party: centrism is hardly even required, it's all the centre (of the right).

So that's that, on with the show.  You lot may as well make a start on moving Boris' probably-considerable stuff over to Downing Street and all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2018, 02:38:06 PM
Although when you look at how the popular vote translated to seats, you have something akin to the typical shitshow we see in the UK, in terms of representation (or the lack thereof).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2018, 03:25:21 PM
Me in 2016: Are Senate and Congress the same thing?

Me in 2018: There at least used to be some elbow room for indys - Bernie Sanders, for instance, only recently threw in his lot with the Dems - but the results now are pretty much binary*.  Unless the Dems get some major scalps - gun law legislation or movement on healthcare, neither of which the party main has shown any real interest in - I can see their vote fracturing and a huge drop in turnout next time the polls open, but in the meantime, monied interests couldn't have hoped for better than a homogenized House in their pocket.
It's a shame the shine has gone off Occasio-Cortez and O'Rourke never took Texas, because the Dems could have done with a populist of their own instead of the same collection of milquetoast centrism that turns off the fringe voters they'd need.  As it is, it looks like Hillary in 2020 again.

* Which is all Susan Sarandon's fault.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 November, 2018, 03:51:33 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2018, 02:38:06 PM
Although when you look at how the popular vote translated to seats, you have something akin to the typical shitshow we see in the UK, in terms of representation (or the lack thereof).

I don't really know much about US politics, but as far as the Senate goes misrepresentation appears to be the actual intention: balancing the interests of the individual states against the overall federal population. In a bicameral system you do need to have some difference in the way each house is generated, otherwise why have two?  Probably a slightly better system than 750 (now 100) peers just getting into the upper house because their ancestors loaned Henry II some dosh in return for half of Ireland. 

House of Representatives on the other hand seems to just be that ol' familiar gerrymandering a-go-go, but at least each party seems to take turns at that, so I suppose it's... fair?  The real joke are the Primaries and the Electoral College - that's a pure kind of nonsense. But we've a couple of year before that circus. 

I do hope Bear is wrong about a re-run of the Hillary debacle (I hope the Prof is wrong about a lot of things), but I'd be surprised if he was. In the meantime I'll engage my inner unreformed creepazoid and say I could definitely stand to watch more of Occasio-Cortez.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 November, 2018, 06:53:38 PM
There are plenty of reasons to be cynical about US politics, but winning control of the House puts something in the way of the Trump steamroller.  Things didn't just get even worse.

Our Washington state managed to pass a gun control law.   (We did fail on the carbon tax, though.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Going off on a tangent here, but this morning I tried to buy a coffee in a cafe where I often go, only to realise they ONLY take card payments (I'd never noticed before, but had fuck-all in my account this time around so tried to pay with cash).

In fairness, they recognised me and took my cash just the once, but as I left, it struck me that this is bullshit of the highest order, and another attempt to keep Dublin out of the reach of the riff-raff.  They can rest assured, I suppose, that no homeless person could ever sully their premises, nor anyone on a very low income. (I frequently only have cash; having spent all the contents of my account or squirreled it away in a distant credit union to protect it from myself.) Or am I overreacting?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 November, 2018, 07:23:40 PM

The move away from cash is a move towards more control of the population.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2018, 08:37:58 PM
Nevada elects pimp's corpse to high office. (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/dennis-hof-brothel-nevada-state-assembly/index.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 November, 2018, 08:55:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2018, 07:11:05 PM
Going off on a tangent here, but this morning I tried to buy a coffee in a cafe where I often go, only to realise they ONLY take card payments (I'd never noticed before, but had fuck-all in my account this time around so tried to pay with cash).

In fairness, they recognised me and took my cash just the once, but as I left, it struck me that this is bullshit of the highest order, and another attempt to keep Dublin out of the reach of the riff-raff.  They can rest assured, I suppose, that no homeless person could ever sully their premises, nor anyone on a very low income. (I frequently only have cash; having spent all the contents of my account or squirreled it away in a distant credit union to protect it from myself.) Or am I overreacting?
Nail on head. There was a cafe in Manchesters northern quarter that tried that crap a few years back, being a pretty left leaning (and one of the friendlier cities towards the homeless, not to put too bright a shine on my fair lands) once folks caught on to it they just stopped going. Closed down recently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 07 November, 2018, 09:56:01 PM
Had it happened to me I would have told them they would never receive my custom again and walked out.

If my cash isn't good enough then fuck 'em.

Also, is it even legal for them to only accept payments by card? I would have thought that there would be some sort of proscription against refusing legal tender?

Might be something to check with the Consumers Association of Ireland?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 07 November, 2018, 10:02:11 PM
Doubt it.

In London the buses have been cashless for a good few years. You either have to use contactless cards, oyster cards or your phone.

In Beijing everyone uses phones, which seems insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 November, 2018, 10:40:56 PM
I like cash.

(Top Tips: If you've found yourself in a cashless society, take heart!  You can simply send your cash to me and I'll spend it for you.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 November, 2018, 10:46:02 PM
Like so much of Gibson's writing, there's a line in (I think) one of the original 'Sprawl' trilogy that struck me as prescient even back then. It said something like: 'it wasn't that cash was illegal, it was just that no one did anything legal with it...'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2018, 06:54:11 AM
Interesting. The distinction between cashless public transport (which I Iove) and cashless cafes (which sounds like an abomination) is one I hadn't considered. I suppose the difference is that you can acquire and charge up transport cards with cash (in Dublin at least), and it certainly does speed things up.

I've often in the past struggled to get the money together for a weekly coffee out of the rain,  and the idea that I'd have to have a card to do it, and in the process reveal my self-indulgent spending to all...  Ugh. It's a deeply oppressive idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2018, 07:00:14 AM

There is freedom in cash, and anonymity. The authorites don't like these things - except for themselves.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 November, 2018, 01:32:18 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 07 November, 2018, 09:56:01 PM
Also, is it even legal for them to only accept payments by card? I would have thought that there would be some sort of proscription against refusing legal tender?

Can't speak for Ireland, but whilst trying to find out which NQ cafe Hawkmumbler was talking about, I found this quote from the Manchester Evening News:

"It may be legal tender but businesses are under no obligation to accept cash as payment - the term is only relevant in the settlement of debts.
"Whether you pay with banknotes, coins, debit cards or anything else as payment is a decision between you and the other person involved in the transaction," is the Bank of England's position on the matter."

I wouldn't frequent a cashless pub, but I do get surprised looks when they offer me the machine and I hold out a tenner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2018, 02:55:59 PM
The thing about using a card to travel, at least in Ireland, is that it's both optional and cheaper.  Also, it's a travel card.

The cafe on the other hand requires a credit or debit card, which is at best lazy and at worst elitist.  As I said, they took my cash as a one-off 'favour', but they only explained their stupid policy to me after they'd started making the coffee.  I'll be going elsewhere next time .

Also, they're stiffing themselves for tips. Which in fairness they don't deserve anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 November, 2018, 03:02:34 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 08 November, 2018, 01:32:18 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 07 November, 2018, 09:56:01 PM
Also, is it even legal for them to only accept payments by card? I would have thought that there would be some sort of proscription against refusing legal tender?

Can't speak for Ireland, but whilst trying to find out which NQ cafe Hawkmumbler was talking about, I found this quote from the Manchester Evening News:
Kicking myself as I forgot it's name, it was in on Red Lion street...

What Jayzus said. I actually binned my contactless to curb my impulse spending. But on a trip to London came to regret it, spending way more than I needed on a day pass I didn't end up needing for the tube. Going against my better judgement, I've downloaded apple pay as a quick solution whenever i'm in the capital and need contactless again, otherwise i pay almost entirely in cash these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2018, 03:08:13 PM
Purely as a matter of interest Jayzus, what is the cafe in question? Is it a chain or an independent? I'm not looking to start a boycott or anything (my coffee shop days are over for the time being, strictly a flask man unless I'm treating my daughter to a babyccino), just intrigued by the whole idea. I only have a debit card for my business these days, no personal credit cards at all, and trying to hire a car abroad has proved nightmarish (the much-maligned Green Motion were the only ones who would help me, and despite an agonisingly long pickup process I had no complaints). To think that might extend to cafe-level transactions...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2018, 03:40:33 PM
Fegans 1924, near the Four Courts Luas stop. It's not really a boycott if you have no option but to avoid it.  Although in my case it will be a boycott.  Also far from cheap, though the interior design is nice.

In other news, a reporter is not allowed to do his job, as he asked questions that made the President cross. That pan of water is getting a bit toasty; wonder if we should hop out yet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2018, 06:51:52 PM
In the murky world of media manipulation that is today's White House, some of the press are commenting that the fandango around banning a CNN reporter is better news (for Trumpet) to have around than:

1. Losing control of the House in the mid-terms
2. Sacking Sessions in a bid to stifle corruption investigations
3. Sending in the military to stop a refugee caravan that you've labeled a crime wave
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 November, 2018, 07:48:51 PM
Watching the video of the event, the intern that tried to grab the microphone from the aforementioned reporter has an incredibly aggressive look on her face.  Trying to grab hold of it was an exercise in idiocy that is surpassed only by Sanders' claim that the intern was the victim.

What is also quite disturbing about the whole affair is that the veracity of the video is now being challenged.  An 'official' rebuttal which claims to show the reporters' misdemeanour by reducing the frame rate tries to cast doubt on what is seen in the original version.

So yes, to describe this as 'media manipulation' is probably incredibly accurate.  How much do you want to bet we'll see an escalation of this now that the Democrats control Congress in the states?

I'm eyeing several books on cyberspace and liberation that were written back in the nineties and thinking 'wow, you guys are seriously babes in the wood!'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 November, 2018, 08:53:44 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 November, 2018, 03:08:13 PM
(my coffee shop days are over for the time being, strictly a flask man unless I'm treating my daughter to a babyccino),
What, pray tell, is a babyccino?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2018, 09:24:57 PM
Just frothed milk with chocolate sprinkled on top. Free for kids in a lot of places if you're buying a coffee yourself, or maybe 50p to a quid if they're being mean about it. The youngest loves going to a cafe on a 'date' with her aged pa, and it's a damn sight cheaper than a hot chocolate. An espresso for me and we're out for €2 plus tip.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 November, 2018, 09:31:20 PM
Serve a lot of them at work, always a delight. The wee ones in particular glow at the feeling they're being treated like adults.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2018, 09:41:41 PM
That's the one!  I was almost sad when my eldest developed a tea habit instead, but we've now eased into a ritual of tea and toast and an episode of Rick & Morty whenever we get a spell alone together, so it's all to the good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 09 November, 2018, 08:38:46 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 08 November, 2018, 07:48:51 PM
Watching the video of the event, the intern that tried to grab the microphone from the aforementioned reporter has an incredibly aggressive look on her face.  Trying to grab hold of it was an exercise in idiocy that is surpassed only by Sanders' claim that the intern was the victim.

What is also quite disturbing about the whole affair is that the veracity of the video is now being challenged.  An 'official' rebuttal which claims to show the reporters' misdemeanour by reducing the frame rate tries to cast doubt on what is seen in the original version.

So yes, to describe this as 'media manipulation' is probably incredibly accurate.  How much do you want to bet we'll see an escalation of this now that the Democrats control Congress in the states?

I'm eyeing several books on cyberspace and liberation that were written back in the nineties and thinking 'wow, you guys are seriously babes in the wood!'

And now the White House is pushing the doctored video, and a significant amount of the American public believe it.

Throughout our lives, we've been hearing about we in the West have "strong institutions" and "checks and balances" to power. Turns out that its rubbish. A racist demagogue can be elected by a minority and abuse his power and ordinary people will cheer him on. The BBC will cheerfully broadcast fascists and racists unchallenged.

We are in a seriously dangerous place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2018, 09:57:59 AM
It's fine, what's your problem snowflake?  All opposition is funded by the Jews (but not Israel, just the greedy communist ones) or faceless Eurocrat experts who can't accept that they lost the war so you can discount all their 'evidence', and all your problems are caused by swarms of immigrants, taking our jobs and our handouts and our homes and our Christmas and raping our daughters (unless women tell you this, in which case they are lying). The most racist thing you can do is call a white man racist, you racist.

We need to be polite and meet these good people halfway, nothing to be gained by this obstructive nastiness which is just offensive, you lying dogfaced cuck. Let the men who God chose to lead us get on with the job, all this time you waste worrying could be better spent honing your gun skills so you can stop the Bad Hombres when they come to kill those who,  let's face it,  probably deserve it for being godless libtard queers. My glorious nation first, unless its undemocratic laws constrain me!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2018, 10:33:19 AM

I feel like I've finally come home. :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 November, 2018, 11:43:38 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2018, 09:57:59 AM
It's fine, what's your problem snowflake?  All opposition is funded by the Jews (but not Israel, just the greedy communist ones) or faceless Eurocrat experts who can't accept that they lost the war so you can discount all their 'evidence', and all your problems are caused by swarms of immigrants, taking our jobs and our handouts and our homes and our Christmas and raping our daughters (unless women tell you this, in which case they are lying). The most racist thing you can do is call a white man racist, you racist.

We need to be polite and meet these good people halfway, nothing to be gained by this obstructive nastiness which is just offensive, you lying dogfaced cuck. Let the men who God chose to lead us get on with the job, all this time you waste worrying could be better spent honing your gun skills so you can stop the Bad Hombres when they come to kill those who,  let's face it,  probably deserve it for being godless libtard queers. My glorious nation first, unless its undemocratic laws constrain me!

Didn't realise you were running for office!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 November, 2018, 12:02:09 PM
How much euro do you get for a rouble anyway, TB?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2018, 01:00:41 PM
Not half enough, mate.

Current opinion of the entire modern world: GOP Jesus (https://youtu.be/SZ2L-R8NgrA)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 November, 2018, 05:32:22 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 09 November, 2018, 08:38:46 AM

We are in a seriously dangerous place.

... and the award for the most subtly understated description of the utter hell into which we are currently heading in a handcart goes to ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 November, 2018, 05:51:19 PM
So I stumbled across a Jonathan Pie video on my FB timeline, and is it me or has this guy let his success get to his head? He used to be a genuinely witty political commentator, but now seems to cater the outrage alt-right community.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 November, 2018, 06:06:39 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 09 November, 2018, 08:38:46 AM
The BBC will cheerfully broadcast fascists and racists unchallenged

This might be a shitty thing to do to someone who was speaking colloquially with friends, but we're supposed to be fighting against the dicks who want to say things that are demonstrably untrue without being called on it:

Watch this right to the end. The expression on Robinson's face is priceless: https://youtu.be/opEM4I_g_Sc

This heartwarming story (https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/ec9df017-8af5-4bd0-96e4-e6d86141bed1) reads like a kale-eating, centrist-BBC fantasy.

Robinson actually left the EDL following this documentary (https://youtu.be/bGLuEhAkpaI), although he's since decided there's too much cash in exploiting the anxieties of middle-aged Weller fans to give up being a dick completely.

Or at least there was ... 

(https://i.imgur.com/bmdzcQl.png?3)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2018, 07:08:10 PM
Quote from: Frank on 09 November, 2018, 06:06:39 PM

Or at least there was ... 


Stephen Yaxley-Lennon bought himself a £900,000 house with someone's money, so it appears there's still some gold in them thar racist hills...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 09 November, 2018, 07:38:54 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2018, 07:08:10 PM
Quote from: Frank on 09 November, 2018, 06:06:39 PM
Or at least there was ... 

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon bought himself a £900,000 house with someone's money, so it appears there's still some gold in them thar racist hills...

As I'm sure you know, but it's a hilarious irony worth repeating, the legitimate part of Yaxley-Lennon's income was earned turning white people into brown people (https://youtu.be/P_9-nNhFDZE?t=12)*


* Orange, probably
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2018, 08:50:18 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 09 November, 2018, 08:38:46 AMThe BBC will cheerfully broadcast fascists and racists unchallenged.

In the interests of balance, you have to air both sides of the argument, hence Nigel Farage and Stephen Yaxley-Lennon being given screentime as a counterpoint to the arguments that we're living in the 21st century and most people aren't fucking idiots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2018, 11:58:15 PM
Seriously Prof, less of your ursine sophistry - it's perfectly clear that the truth lies almost exactly in between two extreme viewpoints, that's just how the world works. 

For example, if the theory of evolution was fully correct, then pray tell why are there still monkeys? If the laws of gravity were fully true, how would planes fly, eh? If all people had an equal value and the same set of intrinsic rights, why would we treat so many of them like subhuman shit?  You cant blame the media for trying to reflect the real world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 November, 2018, 12:08:59 AM
Ancient aliens, see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2018, 12:31:53 AM
Not sure what the middle ground might be between guillotining the rich and hoping really hard that communism is a winner this time around and the rich setting fire to all the countries and hiding in a cave until they die and their kids eat each other, but one way or another it's fixing up to be an eventful decade or so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 November, 2018, 12:29:50 PM
You'd have to kill the rich worldwide to make such a strategy effective and since Vladimir Putin is one of the wealthiest men on the Planet good luck there. We'll be served 'Russian tea' and return glowing from that experience. It seems enforcement of the rules is what the 1% dread since their Lawyers and accountants can't drive hard bargains with governments that way. They bribe, corrupt or intimidate the politicians into non-regulation hence the stranglehold they exert upon society is far higher than their numbers. That's part of the reason established politicians are being thrown out to be replaced by pseudo-Nationalist in an attempt to break the CEO/Bankers grip and with possibly disastrous results all around. The 'strongman' politico's who are coming in are often very volatile personalities, narrow-minded in view and deeds and might resort to either blame others, foreigners, internal opposition when their corruption or economic mismanagement drag their countries into decline. War, of course, is a great distraction from internal strife and that's the worry how long before willingly or just through their sheer bloody incompetence does some little border dispute become the lightning rod for all the competing parties to fight over.         
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2018, 01:08:38 PM
Prof Bear has pinned his hopes for socio-political reform on a nice little guillotine Kickstarter. The stretch goals include knitting classes. Mobfunding is the next big thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 November, 2018, 01:14:02 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 November, 2018, 01:08:38 PM
Prof Bear has pinned his hopes for socio-political reform on a nice little guillotine Kickstarter. The stretch goals include knitting classes. Mobfunding is the next big thing.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/122/107/04e.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2018, 01:52:51 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 November, 2018, 01:08:38 PM
Prof Bear has pinned his hopes for socio-political reform on a nice little guillotine Kickstarter. The stretch goals include knitting classes. Mobfunding is the next big thing.

I'm actually hoping capitalism endures in its current form because it's worked out just fine for me so far, I only pretend to be a braying communist to stop myself getting lynched during The Event by - let's be honest here - the 70-85% of this board that are hard left bullies (© Facebook 2018).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 November, 2018, 02:14:52 PM
Communism claim that Capitalism must inevitably fail has rung true; it did fail, and this is the fallout were still under a whole decade after the crash of 2008. Trouble is communism also collapsed its claim of being able to build better human beings proven false. Nationalism is the entity to which many have turned to, Scottish, Irish but particularly a growing English Nationalism, which contributed to giving us Brexit and this more polarising assertion of identity is what is coming. We can't return to the world that was, it's almost history already, and a much more fragmented Planet will probably be the result. Perhaps this is the chaos before some, ahem new world order appears, though it might be a very factional creation prone to tribal outbursts, despotism and asymmetrical warfare.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2018, 03:34:58 PM
When communists claim capitalism will fail, they don't mean they were waiting for the 2008 crash to be vindicated, they meant that financial crises are an inevitable component of capitalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_economic_crises)* because its founding precept is getting more of a return than you invest.  Inequality is unavoidable, so they just made that the endgame.
In Communism, you murder Kulaks and rob their stuff - but eventually you run out of Kulaks.  No system is perfect.


* going back as far as "The Financial Panic of AD 33", Roman banks created a financial crisis by issuing too many unsecured loans (LOL) until Tiberius salvaged the economy with quantitative easing (ROFLcopter).  Capitalism sure doesn't like to change much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2018, 04:10:32 PM

The fundamental flaw shared by capitalism corporatism (fascism) and communism is that both systems are presided over by a tiny fraction of greedy wazzocks pretending to have the right to dictate how things go and supported by great masses pretending to be inferior.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2018, 05:23:19 PM
Much truth being spoken here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 November, 2018, 05:56:48 PM
I think this forum needs to be reinvented as a serious news/journalism outlet. Can't do any worse than the ones we've got now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2018, 06:27:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2018, 03:34:58 PM
* going back as far as "The Financial Panic of AD 33", Roman banks created a financial crisis by issuing too many unsecured loans (LOL) until Tiberius salvaged the economy with quantitative easing (ROFLcopter).  Capitalism sure doesn't like to change much.

Yeah, but at least no-one got nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2018, 07:10:17 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 10 November, 2018, 05:56:48 PM
I think this forum needs to be reinvented as a serious news/journalism outlet. Can't do any worse than the ones we've got now.

Bagsie the Howard Beale slot!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2018, 09:34:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2018, 04:10:32 PM

The fundamental flaw shared by capitalism corporatism (fascism) and communism is that both systems are presided over by a tiny fraction of greedy wazzocks pretending to have the right to dictate how things go and supported by great masses pretending to be inferior.

But bullets are not imaginary. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2018, 10:02:16 PM

That's very true but neither does a bullet care if it's fired by a communist or a corporatist. Just because one does not share the beliefs of the shooter, that doesn't make the bullets any less dangerous.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 November, 2018, 01:34:04 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 10 November, 2018, 02:14:52 PM
Communism claim that Capitalism must inevitably fail has rung true; it did fail, and this is the fallout were still under a whole decade after the crash of 2008.

I'm not completely convinced that 2008 was a single event but rather the beginning of a chain of events that we're still struggling through.  It always felt like the 'left' failed to come up with an effective response largely because, as you say, the collapse of communism provided a rather effective rebuttal.  Questions relating to the damage that neo-liberal capitalism / corporatism had wreaked were dismissed by challenging opponents to provide viable solutions then screaming 'communist' at anyone who suggested anything even remotely social-democratic.

So the 'right' largely claimed that they had been vindicated and had won the day then carried on with business as normal but now with austerity thrown in for good measure.  Social welfare programs and public institutions have been decimated by freezes, real term cuts, quasi-privatisation and the 'balance the books / live within our means' narrative.  The result has been the longest and most profound squeeze on living standards in generations against the backdrop of a political and financial system that has failed to realise that 'business as usual' is no longer a viable option.

I'm not sure that we should be surprised about the likes of Trump, Farage, Robinson et al gaining traction or events like Brexit.  If mainstream politicians are going to pretend that they don't need to listen to large segments of the population someone is going to harness that growing discontent.  We've seen it before.  Mind you, someone recently noted that the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 November, 2018, 01:07:24 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 November, 2018, 03:34:58 PM
* going back as far as "The Financial Panic of AD 33", Roman banks created a financial crisis by issuing too many unsecured loans (LOL) until Tiberius salvaged the economy with quantitative easing (ROFLcopter).  Capitalism sure doesn't like to change much.


I'll take your AD 33 and raise (or lower) you the Late Bronze Age collapse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Bronze_Age_collapse).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2018, 02:59:56 PM
I've just come across this trainwreck and watched till the end in fascinated horror.  This is a very frightened little man.  Also, it seems Garth has succeeded in doing exactly as he'd planned - upsetting a weak-minded man who fears strong women.  My respect for him grows all the time.

https://youtu.be/WB01D5PGIQU (https://youtu.be/WB01D5PGIQU)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 November, 2018, 03:06:27 PM
Ah shit, I'd avoided that guy for a good while...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2018, 03:43:03 PM
Sorry. I hadn't heard of him before. Rorschach indeed
I'm sure Alan Moore would be overjoyed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 12 November, 2018, 04:11:21 PM
He popped up sometime last year complaining about 2000 AD SJW etc. etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 November, 2018, 04:14:30 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 12 November, 2018, 04:11:21 PM
He popped up sometime last year complaining about 2000 AD SJW etc. etc.

Yup. ISTR he didn't like the Scream/Misty special last year, either. Too many girls, too many Nazis getting socked in the gob. Typical leftist propaganda. Apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 November, 2018, 04:27:52 PM
He's actually priceless. Did you watch the one where his main objection to Spurrier's Dora (in The Dreaming) is that her type of woman (and he doesn't mean monstrous teeth and wings sticking out of her head, BTW,  he means a 'masculine empowered woman' with a short haircut) doesn't exist in the real world? This revelation is illustrated with scenes of her talking to Merv Pumpkinhead,  Lucien the Librarian of Books That Never Were and Matthew the Raven-that-in-life-was-married-to-Abby-Holland-nee-Arcane. In the Dreaming. I don't know about you,  but that's where I go to read about grounded, real-world characters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2018, 09:10:36 PM
It's not this fucking clown, is it?

https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=45065.msg979161#msg979161 (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=45065.msg979161#msg979161)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2018, 09:20:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2018, 09:10:36 PM
It's not this fucking clown, is it?

https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=45065.msg979161#msg979161 (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=45065.msg979161#msg979161)

https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=24115


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 November, 2018, 09:22:25 PM
I dunno, Jayzus - he seems to know absolutely nothing about the prog. I watched one vid last year where he spent half the runtime googling Grennie and Dabnett to see how old they were, and how creepy it was that they wrote comics about "young girls" at their ages.

IIRC the 'young girls' in question were Officer Bridget Curtis (a 'teenager of colour',  apparently), Officer Resting Bitch Face (a 'sad girl' who wants to join the Borg) and Rogue Trooper (he had decided Rogue had actually turned into Venus Bluegenes at some point). Even passing familiarity with the forum would have cured him of that little lot.

EDIT: ah,  that one looks more like it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 12 November, 2018, 09:26:44 PM
Oh yeah,that guy. :lol:
Priceless stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2018, 10:42:52 PM
He's wrong about absolutely everything, but apart from that he's spot-on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2018, 11:12:01 PM
Won't somebody think of the straight white males for a change?  Let's call them SWMs for short, because I think I can better be a part of the gang if I use lots of obscure acronyms.  MAGA despite the SJWs!

Why only today I read on the news (http://"https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46187460") that a SWM* security guard was accidentally shot dead by the cops because when they arrived on the scene they assumed he was the nutter when actually he was kneeling on the nutter's back.

*Actually he was black and his sexuality is irrelevant regarding what occurred, but I'm sure you take my point.

And straight people aren't allowed to get married anymore or have kids, or be white, or be male, or get jobs, or avoid being racially profiled by vegan supremacists!  All because of comic creators.

Etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 November, 2018, 09:27:24 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 November, 2018, 09:22:25 PMhe had decided Rogue had actually turned into Venus Bluegenes at some point
Given the (problematic) in-universe reason for Venus and her ilk originally existing, you'd think people like that bloke would actually be gung-ho for her. But the notion Rogue Trooper turned into Venus is... I don't even.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 November, 2018, 10:24:48 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 November, 2018, 09:27:24 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 November, 2018, 09:22:25 PMhe had decided Rogue had actually turned into Venus Bluegenes at some point
Given the (problematic) in-universe reason for Venus and her ilk originally existing, you'd think people like that bloke would actually be gung-ho for her. But the notion Rogue Trooper turned into Venus is... I don't even.

I can't even remember why Venus was made (except for that Cliff Robinson / Alan fecking Craddock one-off in the Friday Rogue Trooper special that came out in the 90s, but I doubt that's canon).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 November, 2018, 09:56:08 PM
Its not just 2000ad related.He reviews a Vox Day comic and explains its about Europe and fighting islamists,only for several people in the comments to point out its set in US and bad guys are MS13.
Not a careful reader,I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 November, 2018, 10:41:08 PM
When we start discussing the Brexit deal, do we all have to pretend to be outraged like we didn't know this was coming months - if not years - ago?
Anyway, the deal is clearly bad, but opposing it is also bad, and asking not to go through with it is also bad.  Asking if we needed to do this at all is especially bad.
The people who support it are wrong, as are the people who don't.  No deal is worse than a bad deal, because no deal means having to make a deal later that might not be as bad, so we have to make a bad deal now which is bad, but not having a bad deal is also bad, because if there's no bad deal, the next government might not negotiate a deal that's bad enough.  The next government will be arriving in February.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 November, 2018, 12:47:45 PM
—PLACEHOLDER TORY BREXIT RESIGNATION POST—
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2018, 01:14:01 PM
Can none of these grexnixes stick around to do a day's work?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 November, 2018, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 November, 2018, 01:14:01 PM
Can none of these grexnixes stick around to do a day's work?

I started to draft a reply to this post, but by the time I'd finished drafting it, I realised that I could not, in all conscience, support my own reply and have tendered my resignation forthwith.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 November, 2018, 02:09:50 PM
Campbexit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2018, 02:16:36 PM
Started making a Venn to illustrate the current sitch and got as far as adding the word "fucked " to the middle of a circle and realised I was done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2018, 02:37:49 PM
Another example of Great Britain losing it's place as a global leader - we used to top the world when it came to "comically unqualified government ministers" - who could forget the Brexit negotiator who didn't realise that the Dover Calais route was quite important, or the NI secretary who didn't know that people vote along Sectarian lines - but the Japanese have topped us with a minister for Cybersecurity who has never used a computer IN HIS LIFE and does not know what a USB is.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/15/japan-cyber-security-ministernever-used-computer-yoshitaka-sakurada (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/15/japan-cyber-security-ministernever-used-computer-yoshitaka-sakurada)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 November, 2018, 02:43:27 PM
Yeah they beat us there, even after the high watermark we left Damian Green and the "All my staff use my computer and login, of course! It's perfectly reasonable" response from across parliament when he looked at porn on his ministerial computer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2018, 03:14:25 PM
Japan seems like the place ye want to be doing your best-ever-trade-deals with,  so. At least you'd have mutual transparency.
Oh, wait a mo.. ..  (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/eu-japan-free-trade-deal-brexit-uk-leave-asia-a8450476.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2018, 04:22:46 PM
We'll be stronger than ever once we get past our reliance on food and technology.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 15 November, 2018, 04:52:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2018, 04:22:46 PM
We'll be stronger than ever once we get past our reliance on food and technology.

as my dear old dad used to say:

'I had that dog trained to go without food then it died on me...'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 November, 2018, 04:58:04 PM
I think shit's about to go down. BBC2 are showing an empty podium instead of Eggheads and I'll be damned if I'm going to watch that Tipping Point shite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 November, 2018, 06:06:12 PM
I have to admit, Mr Raab's resignation excuse is highly likely to lead to the morphing of the Political Thread and Squaxx Telling Jokes.

"I cannot in all conscience ..."

He's a Tory F****** Politician!   >:( <steaming ears emoji!>
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2018, 06:40:58 PM
Technically true, tho - can't do something "in good conscience" if you don't have a conscience.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2018, 06:48:37 PM

Carry on voting - maybe one day you'll elect a human being by mistake.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 November, 2018, 05:56:39 PM
Jim Acosta is given back his White House access. A rare piece of good news from the US, as Trump is reminded that he doesn't quite have full power over the law and the press (yet).

I'll admit to just a smidgen of schadenfreude as Trump's temper tantrum is fuelled even further, though I won't be laughing when I'm in my radsuit fighting muties for tinned food.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 11:16:49 AM

A Solution to Great Britain's Brexit Problem (https://www.garynorth.com/public/18817print.cfm)?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 November, 2018, 11:34:20 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 11:16:49 AM

A Solution to Great Britain's Brexit Problem (https://www.garynorth.com/public/18817print.cfm)?
A solution? No. No it is not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 November, 2018, 11:47:18 AM
Gary North, a disaster capitalist, unleashes a 'solution' that would obliterate all British manufacturing, any leverage whatsoever that we have in trade deals, doesn't deal with the border in Ireland, etc.

This is the kind of 'solution' presented by someone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about – or, more worryingly, does, and basically wants to hurl the UK into the abyss because they have their own personal agenda.

Frankly, there are only three solutions to Brexit:

1. The WA deal is accepted. This will leave the UK in a much diminished position, although it would be feasible to shift red lines (especially on free movement) to gain access to the single market by way of some kind of EEA deal later on. In the meantime, we can look forward to a decade of austerity like we've never experienced in most people's lifetimes.

2. MPs do their damn jobs and kill Brexit, on the basis that it is not for the good of the people. I'm sure plenty of people would whine about democracy, but we are a parliamentary democracy and not a direct democracy. MPs are supposed to look after our best interests. They are not delegates.

3. Throw the question back to the people. Have them vote for the deal or remain, to confirm the direction of the country. This is a cowardly way out, but almost certainly the least-worst option. Commentators (notably on the Leave side) say this would be too dangerous and divisive. Frankly, we're fucked either way. I'd rather be in a country where people are fucking angry that has a working economy than one where people are fucking angry and with a broken economy and perhaps even worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2018, 11:54:07 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 11:16:49 AM

A Solution to Great Britain's Brexit Problem (https://www.garynorth.com/public/18817print.cfm)

Tariffs are simply sales taxes on imported goods. Anytime a government cuts taxes, that is positive.

Revenues to the government would fall. This is also good.


A personal opinion stated as objective fact! I wonder how that works out in real life?


Countries with lowest import duties

1   East Timor   
2   Singapore   
3   Tonga   
4   Malaysia   
5   Hong Kong
6   Israel   
7   Sao Tome and Principe
8   Vietnam   
9   Myanmar   
10   Samoa


Countries with lowest business tax rates

1 Macedonia
2 Quatar
3 Kuwait
4 Bahrain
5 Lesotho
6 Saudi Arabai
7 Zambia
8 United Arab Emirates
9 Georgia
10 Singapore


Countries with lowest personal tax rates

1 Bermuda
2 Chad
3 Central African Republic
4 Comoros
5 Democratic Republic Of Congo
6 Congo
7 Eritrea
8 Ethiopia
9 Haiti
10 Honduras


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 November, 2018, 03:09:54 PM
Identify something that the lower orders buy a lot of and then tax the fuck out of it.  Economy saved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 03:35:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 November, 2018, 11:47:18 AM
...a 'solution' that would obliterate all British manufacturing...

Removing import taxes on raw materials and fuel, thus making manufacturing cheaper, would not obliterate manufacturing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 17 November, 2018, 04:03:19 PM
Identify something that the lower orders buy a lot of and then tax the fuck out of it.  Economy saved.

There is an even better solution that I seem to recall being used in a Judge Dredd story some time ago: A Tax on the Air that Citizens Breathe.

:)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 05:17:48 PM

If memory serves, the Spanish (?) government recently floated the idea of taxing sunlight in order to profit from solar farms and such.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2018, 05:47:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 03:35:46 PM
Removing import taxes on raw materials and fuel, thus making manufacturing cheaper, would not obliterate manufacturing.

Yeah, but removing import tariffs also makes it cheaper to import goods, rather than manufacturing them domestically. Good luck competing with Ireland, India and Mexico in terms of labour costs (https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/labour-costs)*

North's argument, and most political conversation in the UK, is based on catastrophism - the mistaken belief that everything was fine and then we suddenly found ourselves plunged into crisis.

This is, in economic terms, demonstrable bollocks. The UK is the fifth largest economy on Earth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)#Lists); the seventh largest** industrial economy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition#By_economic_sector) on Earth, to address your specific concern.

The only comparable economy - in terms of population and labour costs - above the UK on either list is Germany, which attained that position while hamstrung by the same trade agreements that are stifling the natural entrepeneurial spirit you, me and Aaron Banks just know lies dormant in the heart every British shelfstacker, waiting only to be set free from the stone, like Excalibur, by the invisible hand of Adam Smith.

North's remedy is incompatible with his diagnosis***


* UK labour costs are already among the lowest in the developed world.

** And South Korea and India are only above the UK by a ballhair, achieving this modest advantage by having, in the latter case, a much larger population, and in both cases, much lower labour costs. Quick show of hands: who wants to take a pay cut so we can brag we're beating SK and India at manufacturing widgets?

*** Say the UK somehow achieved an economic miracle and increased manufacturing by 10% (a fantasy). That would barely affect GDP, almost three-quarters of which comes from what is euphemistically termed 'the service sector' - by which, we mean the City Of London. Basically, the UK stole a fucking ton of stuff while the stealing was good, and we've been playing the ponies with the proceeds ever since.

The UK's economic strength is not translated into a socially equitable society. The UK ranks a lowly 26th among nations in terms of GDP (ppp) - in other words, how much cash there is for every person in the country and what they can buy with that share of national wealth. I suppose cutting import duties on Samsung tellies might make a wee dent in that ranking, but investing in education, the information economy, the social safety net, and increasing wages seem like safer bets, to me
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 05:58:32 PM

The things it would be cheaper to manufacture could be manufactured and the things it would be cheaper to import could be imported.  This is a problem?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2018, 06:01:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 05:58:32 PM
The things it would be cheaper to manufacture could be manufactured and the things it would be cheaper to import could be imported. 

See absolutely everything else I wrote.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 06:11:18 PM
The stuff resting on the woolly initial premise, you mean?

If you meant: "Yeah, but removing import tariffs also makes it cheaper to import some goods, rather than manufacturing them domestically," then I agree.

If you meant: "Yeah, but removing import tariffs also makes it cheaper to import all goods, rather than manufacturing them domestically," then I disagree.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2018, 06:20:02 PM

Nice chatting to you.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 November, 2018, 06:40:17 PM

Oh, come on. Tell me what you mean and we can discuss the pros and cons from there.

Will removing import duties and tariffs solve every problem? Of course not. Will it solve none of the problems? Of course not.

You know approximately where I stand on government and I know approximately where you stand. All this means is that we come at issues from different directions. I might attack your arguments but I'm not attacking you because I'm virtually certain that, just like me, you want what's best for as many people as possible.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 November, 2018, 02:49:00 PM
Alastair Campbell on Marian Finuncane (Ireland's main Sunday radio current affairs chat), championing a People's Vote on Brexit (a bunch of other PR shills hawking their wares on too). This is the nearest thing I have to hope in this whole matter (and it's not much of one), but when I see Campbell weighing in I want to throw my hat at the whole thing. Why do we keep on giving airtime to professional liars and opportunists? Why is there no such thing as quietly slinking off in perpetual disgrace for these people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 18 November, 2018, 03:07:15 PM
Ego for those who have tasted power never lose the appetite for more. It looks like a second Ref is what the Media money is on, May, compromised on her Chequers deal is awaiting the Executioners knife, the Tories civil war would prove disastrous in an Election, so the only way out is to ask for an extension beyond the 29th of March, punt the job back to the public and vote again.  Whether events play out that way, I doubt with recent history being so unpredictable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 November, 2018, 03:21:09 PM
Like I say, a 2nd vote is the only sliver of hope I can see (any variation of the half-arsed deal is going to explode in short order, simply because its inadequacies compared to EU membership will be obvious to everyone: I'm the last person to bang on about 'sovereignty', but that definitely wouldn't be it), but I wouldn't want to bet on the outcome: Leave's accusations of treason and anti-democratic mandarins would actually have some validity this time. It's a dangerous path, and whatever happens the UK is going to be a political wasteland for a generation, and every right-wing separatist in Europe is going to have ammunition for decades of division and hatred. 

And its the direct descendants of Campbell, the whole caste of Big Lie fuckers, who are to blame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 November, 2018, 03:52:38 PM
My guess: we will take the WA deal, and it will be a shitshow. This will happen because the PR machine will swing behind it: a combination of May's "ending free movement" thing, spineless MPs getting freaked out and believing there isn't an altearcive, and business backing it under the hope the govt will then head towards EEA. Interestingly, the EU hasn't swung behind deal alone as yet, and keeps noting remain is an option.

I was on the march, but I reckon the people's vote is unlikely, primarily because of Corbyn. If Labour supported one, that's it – game over. There's an instant parliamentary majority for a vote, and remain would probably win. If it didn't, fair enough: we know what the country wants now it has the evidence in place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 November, 2018, 12:26:01 AM
Corbyn always wanted to leave the EU, as evidenced by his somewhat haphazard and notional support for remaining.  I'll tape this up in my window because they keep telling me I should do something:

(https://www.newstatesman.com/sites/default/files/styles/nodeimage/public/blogs_2016/07/gettyimages-543169534.jpg)

It's probably his toilet window.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2018, 08:48:09 AM
Corbyn is awful. Lots of people still love him. God knows why. His just dreadful. Mind you, so are most of his followers. If you don't bow down before Dear Leader, they want to tear your face off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 19 November, 2018, 11:23:35 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 November, 2018, 03:21:09 PM
Like I say, a 2nd vote is the only sliver of hope I can see (any variation of the half-arsed deal is going to explode in short order, simply because its inadequacies compared to EU membership will be obvious to everyone: I'm the last person to bang on about 'sovereignty', but that definitely wouldn't be it), but I wouldn't want to bet on the outcome: Leave's accusations of treason and anti-democratic mandarins would actually have some validity this time. It's a dangerous path, and whatever happens the UK is going to be a political wasteland for a generation, and every right-wing separatist in Europe is going to have ammunition for decades of division and hatred. 

And its the direct descendants of Campbell, the whole caste of Big Lie fuckers, who are to blame.

Campbell and Co thought they could win, but they fell victim to history's unpredictable swings. As for political violence, that looks inevitable to me both in Northern Ireland and here in the UK for if a new Referendum vote opts to remain in Europe a lot of people will feel aggrieved. Four million people ticked the UKIP box, and that's a large pool of discontent in the making. Some will be Ex-Soldiers with battle experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, gold dust to any insurgency so things might turn very ugly at some point shortly. We've had one MP murdered, Jo Cox and you have to wonder at the safety implications for others if a new Referendum overturns the first result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 November, 2018, 11:41:30 AM
It seems an unimaginably pessimistic and sensationalist view of the future, and a few years ago I would have laughed at you oh person with Bartolomew as an avatar, but today I wouldn't be at all surprised if you're right. 

I would hope that the deeply-unlikely decision to remain wouldn't result in violence in NI, if only because it's the option with the best guarantees for preserving the Union: there is zero incentive for anyone for a united Ireland with the UK staying in the EU, so no threat to extreme unionists, and the GFA suits everyone else fine.  But there's plenty of nutters to prove me wrong.

And all of this, ALL of it, because of relentless tide of lies, repeated and amplified and repeated again. I don't deny there are actual problems with the EU and its future that need addressing, but I don't accept that any but a minority of Leave voters had any awareness or interest in those: instead it was made-up crap and intentionally-stoked fear that carried the day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2018, 11:53:18 AM
If we don't leave the EU, there will be some unrest. I doubt it'd be heavily widespread, and it certainly wouldn't be rampaging gangs of ex-army. If we do leave the EU... there will be some unrest also, not least when people find their jobs disappearing, costs sky-rocketing, and recognise they were sold a pup.

Our choice now is which of these is the best options. Frankly, again deciding to take a terrible deal on the basis some arseholes might riot doesn't strike me as the smart way to define a country's future for an entire generation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2018, 12:31:02 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 19 November, 2018, 11:41:30 AMI would hope that the deeply-unlikely decision to remain wouldn't result in violence in NI,

Political violence has never really stopped in NI, it just doesn't get reported on the news.  I am kind of surprised the Republican stuff wasn't at least highlighted as a stick to beat Corbyn with, though - the BBC has long known how to compartmentalise Republican/Loyalist violence for reportage on the mainland news, and is still doing much the same thing with its reportage on Israel/Palestine
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 19 November, 2018, 12:33:04 PM
According to the front of today's Telegraph, Boris Johnson has a Brexit plan.
So, problem solved, right?  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2018, 12:35:48 PM

Would that plan be something along the lines of waiting for everything to burst into flames and then rolling out his own line of fire extinguishers?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 November, 2018, 01:01:40 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2018, 12:31:02 PMPolitical violence has never really stopped in NI, it just doesn't get reported on the news. 

You're right of course, and I know I have developed a bad habit of implying that all is rosy in the six counties these past 20 years, when I'm well aware that it's really not: what I mean is no increase in violence, or anything that'll push us to the greater excesses of the not-so-distant past.

Like all southerners what I'm really concerned about is anything that might disrupt the Christmas shopping expedition to Lisburn: once that goes off without a hitch, you can batter nine kinds of shite out of each other for as long as it takes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 November, 2018, 01:07:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2018, 12:35:48 PM

Would that plan be something along the lines of waiting for everything to burst into flames and then rolling out his own line of fire extinguishers?

Don't worry, he knows a guy who's got some going  cheap...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46258584 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46258584)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 November, 2018, 01:10:03 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 19 November, 2018, 11:23:35 AM
We've had one MP murdered, Jo Cox and you have to wonder at the safety implications for others if a new Referendum overturns the first result.
No we haven't - remember, the Brexit vote went through "without a single bullet being fired (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/eu-referendum-nigel-farage-branded-shameful-for-claiming-victory-without-a-single-bullet-being-fired-a7099211.html)".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2018, 01:14:24 PM
They'd have got more by retrofitting them to spray pure hate and selling them to Israel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2018, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 November, 2018, 01:10:03 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 19 November, 2018, 11:23:35 AM
We've had one MP murdered, Jo Cox and you have to wonder at the safety implications for others if a new Referendum overturns the first result.
No we haven't - remember, the Brexit vote went through "without a single bullet being fired (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/eu-referendum-nigel-farage-branded-shameful-for-claiming-victory-without-a-single-bullet-being-fired-a7099211.html)".

Once you stop and think about that particular choice of words and the context and timing in which he used them, it becomes clear what an evil little shitrag Farage actually is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 November, 2018, 09:06:46 AM
Lock her up... Lock her up. No? Anyone?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 20 November, 2018, 10:44:56 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2018, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 November, 2018, 01:10:03 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 19 November, 2018, 11:23:35 AM
We've had one MP murdered, Jo Cox and you have to wonder at the safety implications for others if a new Referendum overturns the first result.
No we haven't - remember, the Brexit vote went through "without a single bullet being fired (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/eu-referendum-nigel-farage-branded-shameful-for-claiming-victory-without-a-single-bullet-being-fired-a7099211.html)".

Once you stop and think about that particular choice of words and the context and timing in which he used them, it becomes clear what an evil little shitrag Farage actually is.

Modified post. Apologies, I posted an article from The Independent that someone had tweeted, thinking it's new, but it's from May 2017:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-brexit-rifle-pick-up-uk-eu-withdrawal-ukip-leader-liberal-democrat-a7741331.html


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2018, 05:45:27 PM
A lady speaking to a fat fool in language he'll understand. Fair play.  https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866 (https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 November, 2018, 07:32:56 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/QpEHMLj.png?2)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2018, 10:00:47 PM
Oh good all those Tory rebels will save us.  That's Brexit no longer a concern then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 23 November, 2018, 11:11:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2018, 05:45:27 PM
A lady speaking to a fat fool in language he'll understand. Fair play.  https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866 (https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866)
Did they kill that journalist?Was he an American citizen?I mean we do have a few billion dollar deal with them so...
*Actual Trump dialogue*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 November, 2018, 12:19:37 PM
Quote from: Smith on 23 November, 2018, 11:11:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2018, 05:45:27 PM
A lady speaking to a fat fool in language he'll understand. Fair play.  https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866 (https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/congresswoman-to-trump-being-saudi-arabia-s-bitch-is-not-america-first-1.6677866)
Did they kill that journalist?Was he an American citizen?I mean we do have a few billion dollar deal with them so...
*Actual Trump dialogue*

Trumps sticking up for Muslims. Trumps sending dodgy emails. Hillary telling Europe to stop the immigrants.  It's back-to-front week!

What next? Farage accepting money from the EU after Brexit? Lord Mogg moving his businesses out of Britain and into Ireland? Wait, hang on a minute...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 23 November, 2018, 12:48:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 23 November, 2018, 12:19:37 PM
Trumps sticking up for Muslims.
Only for those who buy weapons from him,ofc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 November, 2018, 01:07:58 PM
Quote from: Smith on 23 November, 2018, 12:48:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 23 November, 2018, 12:19:37 PM
Trumps sticking up for Muslims.
Only for those who buy weapons from him,ofc.

Goes without saying.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_Aryan (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_Aryan)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 23 November, 2018, 01:17:50 PM
Relations between Trump and Saudis have been covered before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDPIyiszoo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDPIyiszoo)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 23 November, 2018, 01:29:58 PM
QuoteFarage accepting money from the EU after Brexit?

He's suddenly concerned about racists joining ukip.  Never happened when he was in charge. They were just bad apples.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 November, 2018, 02:21:08 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 23 November, 2018, 01:29:58 PM
QuoteFarage accepting money from the EU after Brexit?

He's suddenly concerned about racists joining ukip.  Never happened when he was in charge. They were just bad apples.

"...for when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss also gets that little bit worse and gazumps your natural base".

The sad thing about this is that it moves Farage's brand of highstool racism even further towards the middle of the Overton Window.  "Say what you like about Nige, at least he's not as bad as that Tommy Robinson, what!".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 November, 2018, 05:57:25 PM
Well, he'll always be a [spoiler]xxxx[/spoiler] to me.
I got a week ban from this forum last year for saying as much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 November, 2018, 06:25:23 PM
Was that word something that rhymes with my forum name and can be formed by carefully rearranging the letters CNUT? I remember an old forum auto-kicker that would kick you out if you typed cockatoo, wristwatch or Scunthorpe.  Not exactly a sophisticated AI.

Nigel Farage, though: what a complete Scunthorpe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 November, 2018, 06:28:06 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 November, 2018, 06:25:23 PM
wristwatch

Took me a minute.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 November, 2018, 06:32:44 PM
I get it - he's a polibellendtician. Have I got the hang of this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 November, 2018, 07:15:19 PM
Quote from: Frank on 23 November, 2018, 06:28:06 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 November, 2018, 06:25:23 PM
wristwatch

Took me a minute.

.... 175 seconds.  Face, meet palm ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 November, 2018, 07:38:21 PM
Turning into House of Games here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 November, 2018, 09:27:45 PM

Christmas comes early to Downing Street:

(https://i.imgur.com/b0KLVkG.png?2)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 November, 2018, 06:06:10 AM
This made me think of The Legendary Shark:

"It is possible to live in complete equality - and it can make for a peaceful community.

There's one catch: it involves becoming an anarchist. No government, no state, only the individual and their will to do as they please."

From a BBC article: "John Allen Chau: What we could learn from remote tribes" (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-46301059)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2018, 12:48:03 PM
I saw one dude on Twitter opine that he was not only legitimately happy that missionary died, but he wished it had been more painful because the main thing we learn from remote tribes is what diseases we carry that they never developed an immunity to.  We're still waiting to see if that bible-thumper infected the Sentinelese with anything that might legitimately cause their genocide - their numbers being catastrophically low since the 2004 Tsunami.

I saw THIS (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vk5xnEL8mYg) vid about why we don't need cops and thought of Sharky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 24 November, 2018, 12:59:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2018, 12:48:03 PM
I saw THIS (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vk5xnEL8mYg) vid about why we don't need cops and thought of Sharky.
That's not what the B in ACAB stands for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 November, 2018, 01:27:09 PM
As someone who skirts on the fringes of Anarchism (Noam Chomsky's lefty version, not Sharky's Randian version), I honestly don't know what should replace the police.

But in my country at least, we really need something better than what we've got.  I've written here before about both personal experiences (the coppers knocking down and killing a 19-year-old near my apartment then spreading drugs-related lies about him; me locating a conman's address in minutes while waiting 2 years for the old bill to do the same) and public ones (most recently, spreading false rumours that a whistleblower had abused his own children, and not being prosecuted for doing so).

I haven't got an answer as to how to change things, but I think of all the times they did precisely fuck all when I and people I know needed the Gardai and conclude we deserve better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2018, 02:25:38 PM
Hey, you lefties are the ones who said you didn't want hear any more stories about a lack of accountability in the Garda, and they do their best to make that happen and you're still gurning.

Weird how the police have become problematic, though.  Historically, creating a privileged class licensed to arbitrarily utilise violence as a means of social control has usually worked out just fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 November, 2018, 02:46:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 24 November, 2018, 02:25:38 PM

Weird how the police have become problematic, though.  Historically, creating a privileged class licensed to arbitrarily utilise violence as a means of social control has usually worked out just fine.

And that was the warm-up act... Now let's welcome the Shark!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 November, 2018, 03:23:09 PM
The trouble with Anarchy is that no one ultimately is in control and therefore the most organised force, usually, some military caste seizes power cloaked in 'the name of the people.' Government for all its many faults, corruption, nepotism is so far the best organisational force society has built as it provides basic services, security, state benefits in reward for the individual's compliance with its laws. In the same way, we see no purely Libertarian societies in history ones that allowed the elderly to starve to death say we see very few Anarchist regional states for the same reason. They don't seem to have enough support to make themselves attractive enough to the vast swathes of the populace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 November, 2018, 03:52:37 PM
I don't think the Guards are the absolute worst as police forces go, but I suspect that's just down to institutionalised laziness on their part. They have perfected the shoulder-shrugging privilege-protecting soft-target-focused close-ranks thing that their international brethren do so well, but with way less guns and slightly less energetic racism. What I'm saying is that I seldom fear them or dread our rare interactions*.

The whole McCabe thing though... jeezus. That's making a play for the grown-ups' table!


*I do have one story about being the sorely-abused mistaken subject of an anti-terrorism raid, but it was 25 years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 November, 2018, 06:23:37 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 November, 2018, 03:52:37 PMWhat I'm saying is that I seldom fear them or dread our rare interactions*.


You really shouldn't have to.  They're supposed to protect and serve you (I know that's a yank slogan, but that is, technically, the supposed job of every police force).  As far as I can see, their main priority is to protect and serve themselves.  It's a pity that the best you can say about them is that they're not as bad as other forces.

And I dread to think of how many other Maurice McCabes there have been, who haven't been so fortunate as to be publicly vindicated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2018, 07:31:04 AM
The problem with the police, as I see it, is that they are funded by government, which requires them to enforce legislation (artificial law, created by politicians) rather than uphold the Common Law. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

When Robert Peel created the modern police, he understood that we all have a responsibility to uphold and work within the Law and that a police constable is just an ordinary person who happens to get paid by society to undertake duties the rest of us have no time to undertake ourselves. Police have, or rather should have, no greater or lesser powers, rights or responsibilities than the rest of us.

What has gone wrong is that governments, themselves claiming superhuman rights, responsibilities and powers, have given some of their illusory powers to the police. This has changed their fundamental nature from upholders of Law to enforcers of policy. The modern police constables may as well be renamed policy officers.

As with the problem of government, the main solution is to strip them of their illusory powers, reinforce their actual powers and reinstate their actual responsibilities.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 November, 2018, 12:35:05 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 24 November, 2018, 03:52:37 PM
I don't think the Guards are the absolute worst as police forces go, but I suspect that's just down to institutionalised laziness on their part. They have perfected the shoulder-shrugging privilege-protecting soft-target-focused close-ranks thing that their international brethren do so well, but with way less guns and slightly less energetic racism. What I'm saying is that I seldom fear them or dread our rare interactions*.

Especially if they demonstrate the kind of empathy shown in the clip below. ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VODUI787noc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 November, 2018, 01:38:38 PM
Ooops!

Misclicked on Emoji options. Should have been this one instead:   :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 November, 2018, 01:42:03 PM
That bloody McSavage. When I was an amateur stand up still trying to overcome the terror of facing audiences, I supported him one night and found myself floundering. The bastard shouted from the crowd 'Why don't you tell a few jokes?' then walked out.  I confronted him about it later, and he started on about doing it 'to help get laughs" for me. A friend of mine called him on his bullshit and he had a hissy fit and flounced off.

I hate that I still think he's a great comedian and find him occasionally hilarious.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 November, 2018, 02:05:49 PM
As another of McSavage's alter ego's might say: "Ah, Jayzus"!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 November, 2018, 06:12:26 PM
I've heard two other successful Irish comedians describe him off the record as a... well, the word I got my week-long ban for last year.  That said, and it kills me to say it, his show is great and he deserves to do well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2018, 07:48:22 PM

I forgot you did stand up. I'm so jealous!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 November, 2018, 08:01:44 PM
It's a long time ago now! Don't be jealous, I wasn't especially good 😁
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 November, 2018, 08:53:03 PM
I don't know what a McSavage is, but searching that and... an abbreviation of Scunthorpe and the first result is a forum post about that time he threatened to rape an audience member for talking during a joke.  I guess not every Irish comedian can be Brendan O'Carroll.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2018, 11:56:42 PM
Brendan O'Carroll is a sound lad, and talented as feck- it's not his fault British audiences fell arse over tit for the worst shite he ever produced.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
That's what I meant and I have no idea why you would assume otherwise.

I assumed Mrs Brown's Boys was revenge for Partition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 November, 2018, 01:31:38 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
I assumed Mrs Brown's Boys was revenge for Partition.

Only the IDF would consider that a proportionate response.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 November, 2018, 02:10:42 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
I assumed Mrs Brown's Boys was revenge for Partition.

Has to be Give My Head Peace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 November, 2018, 08:07:43 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 November, 2018, 02:10:42 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
I assumed Mrs Brown's Boys was revenge for Partition.

Has to be Give My Head Peace.

Christ. I'd nearly excised that from my mind, and you had to go and mention it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 26 November, 2018, 02:26:31 PM
Social credit system,AI news anchor...China is going full Black Mirror,it seems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2018, 04:46:22 PM
Quote from: Rately on 26 November, 2018, 08:07:43 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 November, 2018, 02:10:42 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
I assumed Mrs Brown's Boys was revenge for Partition.

Has to be Give My Head Peace.

Christ. I'd nearly excised that from my mind, and you had to go and mention it!

If ever a show was aptly named.

Quote from: Smith on 26 November, 2018, 02:26:31 PM
Social credit system,AI news anchor...China is going full Black Mirror,it seems.

Jayzus wept.  That's rather terrifying. I lived and worked in Beijing for a few months; I lived near Tianenmen Square where nothing bad ever happened.[/i  There's a massive portrait of Mao there, staring down cheerily as if he'd never massacred intellectuals, engineered famines and separated families.  The idea that it's a Communist state is a myth - it's one of the most Capitalistic societies I've ever seen, and the social divisions are enormous.

There are some truly lovely people there, though, and they deserve better than this dystopia the government is forcing on them. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 26 November, 2018, 05:11:11 PM
Scary thing is- this is very likely to become a thing in other countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 November, 2018, 05:21:23 PM
Been on the boil for a while - when I worked at an ad agency there was (I think it probably was a TED talk) doing the rounds about the gamification of everything - we've had the endless apps and loyalty cards, the micro-transactions, it's just taking it to the extreme end of things.

Pretty much everybody in Beijing pays by phone rather than cash or even card, which makes it even easier to develop this kind of system I guess.

I don't understand payment by phone at all - if someone introduced a card that regularly needed to be charged up, cost a fortune etc, easy to steal/drop and break - who would use that by default?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2018, 08:16:21 PM
Quote from: Smith on 26 November, 2018, 05:11:11 PM
Scary thing is- this is very likely to become a thing in other countries.

Yeah. I can't help thinking that the Powers That Shouldn't Be are using China as a test bed for the technologies and systems required to enslave the rest of the world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 26 November, 2018, 10:23:48 PM
At this point,enslaving is done,this is just control.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 November, 2018, 05:46:06 AM

Not quite - but nearly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2018, 06:12:45 AM
Trying to enjoy the Mars InSight coverage,  but can't seem to escape "we need to colonise Mars now Earth is fucked" garbage. Aside from the lovely image of a planet inhabited solely by Elon Musk clones, my particular bugbear is Mars as a pressure valve for overcrowded Earth. Assuming we could live on Mars, we would need to shift 10,000 times more people there per day than have ever left low earth orbit in order to stabilise current global population growth - or 400 times the total number of humans that have ever even made it to orbit. Per day, every day.

Current lowest cost of 1kg to orbit: $2000 (admittedly falling rapidly). Avg weight of human: 62kg. Global pop increase daily: 200,000. So just the physical weight of the necessary bodies, not even worrying about the stuff they need to survive the journey or live on Mars, is $25,000,000,000. To LEO alone, not Mars. Per day. Every day.

Or we could,  you know, think in terms of spending that cash on keeping everyone alive and happy down here, and embrace space exploration as the scientific joy and very-long-term project it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 27 November, 2018, 10:24:26 AM
Colonising Mars is not about stabilising population growth, but more about having an off-site backup of the human race in case something really bad (Asteroid!) happens on Earth. Plus, the technological challenge of keeping people alive on Mars would give us technologies to solve some of our problems on Earth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2018, 11:09:00 AM
Yes, I know this, but i dare you to dip your toe into any of the InSight commentary. "Earth is a bust, but it's OK because we can go live on Mars". It's the Rapture for the pseudo-scientific. And about as bloody likely.

It's yet another meaningless excuse to do nothing about climate change, wealth inequality and population displacement, because they are planning to do a runner. Hence I posted on the Politics rather than the Science thread.

Reduction in consumption. Real money on renewables and sequestration. Immeduate planning changes for innundation areas. Massively increased spending on global aid programmes. Large scaie accommodation for refugees.

Not running away to space.

Focus, people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2018, 01:25:10 PM
The idea that billionaires are in any way friends to humanity is laughable, and the "rich white savior of the space programme" thing is probably the one trope I'm most sick of in science fiction of late.
TB's talk of the economics of lifting materials into space is the nub - space access is a money racket, and guys like Richard Branson and Elon Musk are simply using the idea of space tourism/colonisation to distract from the fact that they're really trying to come up with multi-use rockets they can rent to NASA - in the same way the Russian government currently does - and get access to a multi-billion dollar chunk of public funding.  Just look at how Branson makes his money from Virgin Care - for all his talk of a better health service, he makes his money suing the NHS for not awarding him contracts and he'll do exactly the same thing once he gets his claws into NASA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2018, 02:14:36 PM
Tangential rant, but my dander is up:  I've said it before and no doubt I'll be saying it on my death bed: it is not possible for a privatised utility* to offer the same service as an efficiently managed public one for the same price, because the private sector has to make a profit for its shareholders.  That money inevitably comes from the taxpayer in the form of subventions and exclusions or directly from service users in addition to the actual cost of the service.

I accept that not all public services are run efficiently in terms of value to the consumer/taxpayer, but I completely reject the idea that all privatised ones are, and generally this is by design.  There is an incentive for companies to be inefficient from the very start, in order to drive up subventions to maintain services, and thus increase profits.  In this 'rival' companies frequently collude at the tender stage, and then go on to browbeat further profits through sustained claims and legal challenges.

I've seen this firsthand, repeatedly, and at length.  For just one example, work on one major national infrastructure programme I was involved with was deliberately done as inefficiently as possible during regular working hours, forcing the public client to authorise literally years of nightworks and weekend works to stay on schedule, which were themselves monumentally less efficient and vastly more lucrative for the contractors, with a culture of cash-in-hand working, fictional timesheets showing staff that were at home in bed, near-zero client monitoring (no budget for out-of-hours working for the client representatives), non-existant safety practices and backhanders to those responsible for doling out the overtimes. 

Machinery was hired from companies part-owned by managers on the job, and left sitting idle for weeks at a time at full hire rate. Entire methodolgies were dreamed up mid-project to justify expensive sub-contracts for relatives of managers. Injuries and accidents were magicked away as either surprise 'holidays to Disneyland' or fabricated and co-ordinated lies about the victims' personal culpability and/or 'slipping Jimmy' ways**. Serious sexual harassment was responded to by denials, and then at most transferring the offender to another part of the job. Staff from supervisory companies spent their inspection days in cafes chatting with the owners of contracting companies, then went home without seeing anything untowards - and then flatly contradicted fully-evidenced negative reports from others. And all this was in plain sight on the streets of  a capital city.

And then you get a publicity flourish at the end of "under budget and ahead of time", when the project wasn't finished at all and the budget was ludicrously inflated from the start.

No-one can convince me that the world of private supply of public projects isn't utterly corrupt top to bottom.

Space, too.




* And for argument's sake we'll view getting things into space as a utility/service.
**  I've seen accident statements from witnesses that were clearly dictated at the same company session - young lads who never put pen to paper in their lives writing the same phrase: "I then observed Ms. X acting in an unsafe manner deliberately putting herself at risk of injury, despite the repeated warnings of the Mr. Y not to do so".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 10:22:33 AM
So now all Leave voters knew that the UK would be worse off after Brexit. So the relentless campaign of lies about the money extorted by Europe, and what the UK could spend the surplus cash on, was completely ignored in their decision making.

And the promise of amazing instant trade deals with the Commonwealth and the rest of the world that would be so much better than EU markets was also untrue,  but apparently Leavers didn't believe that either. Even the ones that spent the last two years proclaiming the wonders of the WTO.

So basically the Brexit vote was really about ending FoM at whatever cost, despite the UK government never implementing the immigration controls it already has at its disposal. Or to put it another simpler way, good old irrational xenophobia. Twist ending or what!

Buy shares in tear gas,  that's my expert economic forecast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2018, 12:07:41 PM
Brexit is gaslighting on a national level. And:

Quote from: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 10:22:33 AMSo basically the Brexit vote was really about ending FoM at whatever cost, despite the UK government never implementing the immigration controls it already has at its disposal. Or to put it another simpler way, good old irrational xenophobia.

Well, quite. And I'm getting sick of the Remain pundits like Femi who keep banging the "we could have been shitter to migrants but weren't" drum. Migration controls would have cost the UK money, which is why they were never implemented. And it enabled EU citizens to be a convenient stick to beat EU membership with, despite EU nationals being vital to this country's well-being, in a whole raft of ways.

Still, I'm sure Leave voters will be thrilled at the collapse of the economy and hundreds of thousands of lost jobs, if it means slightly fewer Polish people in places they don't even live in.

Gah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 12:23:31 PM
Sure,  I'm not suggesting tighter immigration controls should should have been implemented,  just that if that was the only goal of those voting for Brexit (which due to their uncanny foresight and ability to see through the lies of the Leave campaign it apparently was) it would have been a lot less painful to try out that route, despite its obvious problems.

But where's the political capital in not blaming Brussels for everything.

It's almost as if the real motivation here was career grandstanding and deregulation of everything. Imagine my surprise!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2018, 01:36:58 PM
Exactly. Xenophobic arseholes are going to be xenophobic arseholes and fans of deregulation and making money off of everyone's misfortune are going to want to deregulate and make money off of everyone's misfortune.

The democratic deficit in this country is colossal right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 02:23:09 PM
It's bleak all over.  We haven't had a significant opposition party here for almost 8 years, everything's been run by an essentially collegiate centre-right gravy train. The current justification for this is Brexit,  BTW.

Even so we do seem to have got the hang of referendums, so much so that we like to forget that in 2004 80% of us voted to remove the right of citizenship of children born here to foreign parents - while still extending citizenship to people with a single Irish grandparent (no offence intended,  you're all very welcome, more the merrier! ) regardless of where they live, or if they've ever even seen the place.

And I'm sure this disparity has nothing to do with the fact that our diaspora is overwhelmingly white and Christian and largely Catholic.

And it's just a coincidence that our direct provision system for asylum seekers (generally not white nor Catholic) is as shit as anything Trump cogged off the telly.

Democracy. Inclusivity. Humanity. Who needs it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2018, 02:53:01 PM
"Oh no, Bear, guillotines are a terrible idea, all that mess blah blah blah"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 03:22:48 PM
It's your inevitable monopoly on their supply and operation I object to, not the executions themselves. Not even the offer of complimentary locally-sourced Tom Baker scarves and wooly hats can sway my conviction that the revolution should respect grass-roots traditions of community-based artisanal justice rather than sanitised spectacle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 28 November, 2018, 04:40:00 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/by5lRiU.png?2)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 November, 2018, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: Pyroxian on 27 November, 2018, 10:24:26 AM
Colonising Mars is not about stabilising population growth, but more about having an off-site backup of the human race in case something really bad (Asteroid!) happens on Earth. Plus, the technological challenge of keeping people alive on Mars would give us technologies to solve some of our problems on Earth.

Potatoes. I've seen a documentary about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 04:51:11 PM

My shed is creaking in the wind. So am I, to be frank.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 04:52:15 PM

Oops - wrong thread.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 November, 2018, 04:56:19 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 28 November, 2018, 04:42:56 PM
Potatoes.

Same approach worked out great for our lot, let me tell you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 November, 2018, 05:55:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 04:51:11 PM

My shed is creaking in the wind. So am I, to be frank.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 04:52:15 PM

Oops - wrong thread.

And I was just about to congratulate you on a most perceptive metaphor for the Brexit negotiations!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 06:07:08 PM

Which is, of course, er, what both posts were all about...

Ahem.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 November, 2018, 08:57:02 PM
Not so strong and stable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 28 November, 2018, 09:03:17 PM
That partly depends on if it's big enough to keep a small horse in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 November, 2018, 09:08:59 PM
I can see if it'll fit a large mule in. Theresa, you're up...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 November, 2018, 10:07:32 PM

Ass, shirley?

Hang on a minute...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 November, 2018, 09:51:12 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 28 November, 2018, 09:03:17 PM
That partly depends on if it's big enough to keep a small horse in.


Is it a lovely horse (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzYzVMcgWhg)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 29 November, 2018, 01:05:15 PM
No its a symbol of Dredd's aging and reality breaking down apparently. And something to do with a Dark Knight story and Johnny Cash of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 November, 2018, 02:03:09 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 November, 2018, 11:09:00 AM
Yes, I know this, but i dare you to dip your toe into any of the InSight commentary. "Earth is a bust, but it's OK because we can go live on Mars". It's the Rapture for the pseudo-scientific. And about as bloody likely.

It's yet another meaningless excuse to do nothing about climate change, wealth inequality and population displacement, because they are planning to do a runner. Hence I posted on the Politics rather than the Science thread.

Reduction in consumption. Real money on renewables and sequestration. Immeduate planning changes for innundation areas. Massively increased spending on global aid programmes. Large scaie accommodation for refugees.

Not running away to space.

Focus, people.

Your point is completely valid.

BUT

I still think we should get our asses to Mars. The Earth has a myriad of problems, but I don't think we should wait until they're all solved before going to other planets. What's the timeline on these issues being solved? A decade? A century?

I'm an optimist when it comes to scientific endeavours. Figuring out an unrelated problem may yield solutions to our biggest ones. To use a videogame analogy, it's like doing the side missions to get enough XP for the main quest.

I agree, running away TO space might not be a solution, but neither is running away FROM space.

Focus? Scientists aren't interchangeable. The ability to build a Mars rocket doesn't qualify a scientist to focus on, and deal with the Earthly problems you outlined.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2018, 05:00:02 AM
I agree with all of that, BPP - I've been a space nut all my life, and nothing would be more exciting or worthwhile than a human mission to Mars in my lifetime, the creation of a sustainable colony, asteroid mining, fabrication stations at the Lagrange points, or a robot mission to Barnard's Star or Proxima Centauri.  I also believe that the time to do it is now (50 years ago, really), before fuel resources become too scarce, and economic conditions here too hostile to permit it.

The value of this kind of science is incalculable, and despite casting an increasingly bleak eye on the future I remain ever Roddenberry that space exploration has the potential to inspire and unite humanity. 

My objection isn't to the doing, it's to the dangerous delusion that me, you, our kids or our grandkids are getting off this world to go to a better one. This is just the old religious carrot of "don't worry about this world, because the next one is what matters".  And just like with the churches, there are plenty of middlemen happy to direct public subvention into their private vaults on the undeliverable promise of smoothing your path to the next life.

There'll be over 11 billion of us on Earth before we get any kind of workable foothold offworld: effectively no-one here is going to space, any more than any of us are going to heaven.  We need to face the realities of this world, and do the best we can here, because it's here all of us are going to live and die. 

As you say, it's not an either-or proposition, we should do both, and each effort will support the other. But letting people believe that we don't need to deal with the global horror that's coming because a better life awaits you in the offworld colonies... No.  That's the loss of focus I refer to, one more reason to stick our heads in the sand.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2018, 06:39:55 AM
Dunno why I addressed that screed to BPP, it was written in sleep-deprived state - my apologies to Mr. Pops (and BPP).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2018, 11:32:43 AM

"Darkside" - Lunar penal colony on the far side of the moon where enemies of Gaia and humanity are sent to work in the mines, never to see the Earth again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 November, 2018, 12:04:32 PM
I was going to complain about the name, but I suppose the more accurate alternative would conjure up unsuitably jolly images of socially-awkward neanderthals and cows with hidden agendas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2018, 12:15:10 PM

I just thought it was a good name for a prison :)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 November, 2018, 12:55:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2018, 11:32:43 AM

"Darkside" - Lunar penal colony on the far side of the moon where enemies of Gaia and humanity are sent to work in the mines, never to see the Earth again.


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Iron_sky_poster.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2018, 01:10:20 PM

Ha! One of the best terrible films of all time!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 November, 2018, 04:51:04 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 November, 2018, 05:00:02 AM

My objection isn't to the doing, it's to the dangerous delusion that me, you, our kids or our grandkids are getting off this world to go to a better one.


Have you been at the Baxter?  This is the core of his Manifold series!  Or KSR's "Aurora" - a failed attempt at colonisation.  It's a fair point though.  Those who will be in charge of such an endeavour are pulled from the same gene pool that have gotten us into this mess in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 November, 2018, 05:26:30 PM
Nearly 1K pages of this shite. How fitting we're now looking to bugger off to the moon at this point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 30 November, 2018, 07:50:53 PM
Does the state have the right to decide the morality for the people?Does the state have the right to shield its citizens from obscenity or should anyone decide for themselves?Is all expression actually equal?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 November, 2018, 08:14:09 PM
"Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" is both freedom of speech and potentially incitement to violence.

And thus the question perhaps becomes "Does the state have the right to curb incitement to violence"?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 November, 2018, 09:38:00 PM

The state is just a collective noun for a group of people, so I tend to think about these questions from that perspective and then, if possible, boil it down even further to individuals.

Does one person have the right to keep secrets from another? I think so, yes. Does one person have the right to act secretly to harm another? I don't think so, no. Does one person have the right to keep an external threat secret from another? Yes, I think so but I also think that to do so is morally repugnant. Does one person have the right to order another to injure a third party? If no coercion is used, yes but, again, I think this is morally repugnant. Does one person have the right to injure another if ordered by a third party? No, I don't think so.

For me, it all comes down to personal rights and responsibilities. If a single person cannot do a thing then it must follow that a group of people, or a state, cannot do that thing either. If a single person has a responsibility then it likewise must follow that a group of people, or a state, must bear that responsibility as well.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 November, 2018, 11:44:11 PM
I see Theresa May has referred to EU migrants as 'queue jumpers'. Queue jumping will, of course, be curtailed after next March.

Yep, those who have simply exercised their rights in the past were somehow barging, or sneaking, ahead of everyone else. Wonder if she'd have a problem with my mother legally jumping the queue to move from England to Ireland?  Or perhaps all those Brits who live in the Costa del Sol?

Or maybe, god forbid, she's a bigot at worst or a licker of bigots' arses at best?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2018, 01:35:22 PM
Vicargate is, IMO, the dumbest BBC scandal - yes, even dumber than covering up the actions of pedophiles for decades or naming journalistic sources inside the defence ministry that subsequently turn up dead in the woods.  Even dumber than that Blue Peter presenter from Northern Ireland who draw a picture of Ireland and coloured it in with the Union flag and then held it up onscreen and then said later it was an honest mistake kind of like when you pay your longest-serving presenter considerably less than her white co-presenters "for some reason."

I will point out, though, that Vicargate lady had a CV that included a bit-part in The Force Awakens playing a despondent scavenger dwelling in a backwater post-Empire wasteland, so quite why the BBC thought she'd be perfect to play someone who supports May's Brexit deal, etc etc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 December, 2018, 02:44:42 PM
Had to google this and I'm confused - What's the scandal? The Mail & Express have whipped it into some fake controversy (natch), but there's nothing there. She's a pastor who has also done some extra work and the BBC insist she was not hired to appear, but was just part of the debate. The most offended comments seem to be that she was a pastor in some fringe Christian group and not a 'real' vicar - "You allowed her to come on dressed as a Vicar, which gave the impression she was a respected person with standing in her community." (sic) - not sure what the BBC dress code is for a topical debate, but I doubt they check ecclesiastical credentials at the door.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 December, 2018, 03:25:56 PM
I explicitly said this was a dumb scandal.

Incidentally, this might damage the BBC's chances in hosting the Leaders' Debate as it started trending on the same day the BBC made its intentions explicit, though I'm sure that didn't occur to any of the journalists working at C4 or ITV when they weighed in on the topic and made their thousands of followers aware of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 December, 2018, 03:43:16 PM
Ah, I thought you meant dumb as in dumb for them to have done it, which could apply to your other examples - the BBC has made some incredibly stupid decisions, but this seems to be just redtop mischief-mongering and faux-outrage.

Any Private Eye reader will be will be well-briefed on tabloid hypocrisy - "Stop the disgusting sexualisation of children, lock up these paedos ... but visit our website to see how This Celebrity's 14yr old Daughter is Blossoming into Womanhood in These Bikini Pics...".

They often lambast ministers for doing exactly what they were urging them to do the previous month, some of the Brexit convolutions have been hilarious . One of the best reverse-ferrets recently has been the Sun's attitude to Chris Evans now that he's joined the radio station they own - overnight he's been transformed from an arrogant, overpaid talentless drunkard, to the greatest broadcaster of all time

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 01 December, 2018, 06:46:09 PM
QuoteI doubt they check ecclesiastical credentials at the door.

She wasn't just sitting in an audience and asked a question. She was part of a small, selected group, intended to represent the views of the nation, who were in front of the camera, asked to give their views on Brexit...but she's leader of a scam internet church, who appeared to be dressed as a vicar of the Church of England. In doing so, it gave undue credence to her views, in the same way it would if they had introduced her as a doctor, or professor, or knight of the garter.

The BBC might not be checking credentials at the door, but I would certainly hope that if they invite someone in front of camera, they make sure they're not pretending to be something they're not.

It's been a long term problem with the BBC. The number of 'ordinary members of the public' who appear in the audience of Question Time who are actually plants, or who were selected because they would say something ridiculous, is absurd. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 01 December, 2018, 07:05:25 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 01 December, 2018, 06:46:09 PM
(she) appeared to be dressed as a vicar of the Church of England. In doing so, it gave undue credence to her views, in the same way it would if they had introduced her as a doctor, or professor, or knight of the garter

I'm really not sure that's true. Maybe in 1950.


(https://i.imgur.com/oYiymtK.jpg?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 December, 2018, 08:45:42 PM
Vicar of the Church of England: delusion belief in a sky fairy. No inherent qualifications for economic expertise.

Order of the Garter: privilege granted through the inherent unfairness of a system of birthright class discrimination. No inherent qualifications for economic expertise.

Doctor: evidence of education.  No inherent qualifications for economic expertise.

Professor: of economics?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 01 December, 2018, 09:29:01 PM
Professor of Economics ...

credibility?

Didn't someone once say that Economists were put on this Earth to give Astrologers a good name?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 December, 2018, 11:17:02 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 01 December, 2018, 06:46:09 PM
QuoteI doubt they check ecclesiastical credentials at the door.

She wasn't just sitting in an audience and asked a question. She was part of a small, selected group, intended to represent the views of the nation, who were in front of the camera, asked to give their views on Brexit...but she's leader of a scam internet church, who appeared to be dressed as a vicar of the Church of England. In doing so, it gave undue credence to her views, in the same way it would if they had introduced her as a doctor, or professor, or knight of the garter.

Ah, I hadn't actually heard about this story  before the prof's post - if she was one of the invited panel then it's either poor background checking or sly positioning, however...


+++INTERNET FIRST +++             +++INTERNET FIRST +++




I don't really know anything about this story, so I'm not really qualified to comment. You may be right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2018, 03:12:15 PM

Violent protests in France, apparently. (https://m.theepochtimes.com/increase-in-taxes-growing-poverty-cited-as-reasons-for-french-protests_2729815.html?ref=brief_News)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 December, 2018, 03:28:39 PM
Violent protests in Paris? Who ever heard of such a thing!

I suppose that's what you get when you only elect a right-winger instead of an actual Nazi. That the casus belli of this jambon fumé unrest is environment-related taxes means we had better get used to much, much, much more of the same. Just great that he appears to have caved already. We're all going to burn-slash-drown.

<Insert some obligatory conspiracy waffle about Putin here>, who knows, it might make me look smart retrospectively.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2018, 03:38:02 PM

I dunno, violence against the state is never the answer and always makes me suspicious. I'm sure Putin will be blamed by some, though, because people (especially politicians and pundits) love bogeymen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 December, 2018, 03:46:56 PM
I've no real problem with Putin as an all-purposes bogeyman for our modern age, but in this instance the French have plenty of form of their own, and you only have to look at who that handsome young granny-fiddler defeated to suggest a homegrown gang of fascists to pull any strings that might need an extra tug. 

Like I say, get used to it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2018, 03:52:42 PM

I fear you're right (see the link in the Truth? thread for an exploration of string-pulling). Makes me sad and tests my faith :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 December, 2018, 05:54:20 PM
I am all for peaceful solutions and am willing to hear about this nonviolent way of getting heads onto spikes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 December, 2018, 06:30:35 PM

Onto Spike's what?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2018, 09:34:29 PM
Well, that was a fun day of politics. For the first time since June 2016, I was quite happy seeing what was going on in the Commons, mostly because WHACK the government THUMP got rather THWOCK a kicking. Three defeats. The first British government ever called into contempt. I'm too jaded now to think Brexit might not happen, but it's good to see parliament taking back control from an arrogant and abusive executive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 December, 2018, 08:38:02 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 December, 2018, 09:34:29 PM
Well, that was a fun day of politics. For the first time since June 2016, I was quite happy seeing what was going on in the Commons, mostly because WHACK the government THUMP got rather THWOCK a kicking. Three defeats. The first British government ever called into contempt. I'm too jaded now to think Brexit might not happen, but it's good to see parliament taking back control from an arrogant and abusive executive.

She looks to be limping towards her own exit.

Scary thought - Just look at the shower that will want to replace her!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 December, 2018, 09:31:00 AM
It's still a toss-up what will happen, in every sense. No-deal isn't – despite reports – dead, but it is now severely wounded. This suggests the battle is now May's deal vs Remain. But the executive would probably have to withdraw Article 50 for the UK to remain (and won't want to), Brexiteers could feasibly break in either direction (May's deal because it is at least Brexit, or People's Vote/Remain because of the perceived betrayal), and god knows what the DUP will do.

Labour wants a general election that all current polling suggests not only that it would lose, but that would probably secure a Tory majority (thereby showcasing them to be tactically more inept even than Theresa May). And polling around the options available continues to be baffling. Apparently, research now shows a third of people backing no-deal think it's a status-quo position and that nothing will therefore change. On head-to-head options, Remain sometimes wins out over other options, but it'd still be a knife-edge vote.

Frankly, this country is fucking stupid. Or at least half of it is. Even now, millions of people are still clamouring to leave the EU, despite knowing it's basically a con job by a handful of multi-millionaires. Good job, everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2018, 09:51:06 AM
If one of the polling options was "Forrins! Stop forrins stealing your fish and talking jibber-jabber!" the picture would clearer.

You have to respect the commitment to such a rigorously thought-out position in the face of threats, bullying, cajoling, pleading and facts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2018, 05:32:44 PM
I see George W welling up during his funeral speech, and I can't help wondering if he ever thinks of the people he bereaved whose family funerals don't get on the telly.
I don't like to see anyone lose a family member, but I also think the current clown in the WH makes us forget what a murderous shitbag the old, non-cuddly non-painting Dubya really was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2018, 05:41:46 PM
Yeah, it's important to remember the devastation of human lives those in the front row of that service have smilingly presided over (with the possible exception of Carter, who always seemed thoroughly decent, but I don't know enough to be sure).

But at the same time, given the choice, I'd rather have my life destroyed by someone who at least pretended to aspire to basic human norms of decency, instead of that orange turd at the end of the row.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 December, 2018, 09:17:00 PM
This is my post and I will waste it on a rambling fucking anecdote if I please: so my sister and her kids met a doggo while on holiday.
It would come into their hotel room and beg for food, and though flea-bitten and a bit of a stringy, ragged thing, they warmed to it and blah blah blah gnawed my ear off about this doggo and how they would get drunk with it and it was the highlight of their vacay to the point they didn't want to leave it wandering the streets, so when they came home, they started a drive to get the animal adopted, established a fundraiser of some sort via Facebook and eventually they got enough cash together to send the dog somewhere it would be looked after.  This was their feelgood holiday story and their FB circle natters away about it and I'll cut to the chase they holidayed in Greece and the dog was starving because no-one could afford to give leftovers or scraps to it or any other strays and this was my family of Remain voters' takeaway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 December, 2018, 09:36:14 PM
Fair play to them. Mind, I was in Athens long before austerity and the streets were full of underfed strays (pics available on request!), and this wasn't long after the Olympics cull of over 10,000 dogs. So while I remain disgusted by the EU's handling of Greece, I'm not sure dog welfare was particularly high on the agenda even in the days before credible taxation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 December, 2018, 09:41:34 PM

Apupalypse.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2018, 11:05:27 PM
Them three-headed dogs they have over there keep eating the normal dogses'es food.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 December, 2018, 04:30:52 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 December, 2018, 09:17:00 PM
... and this was my family of Remain voters' takeaway.

They ate the dog?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 12:59:57 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2018, 05:32:44 PM
I see George W welling up during his funeral speech, and I can't help wondering if he ever thinks of the people he bereaved whose family funerals don't get on the telly.
I don't like to see anyone lose a family member, but I also think the current clown in the WH makes us forget what a murderous shitbag the old, non-cuddly non-painting Dubya really was.


What was it, half a million civilians killed in Iraq?  Something like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 01:04:33 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 12:59:57 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 December, 2018, 05:32:44 PM
I see George W welling up during his funeral speech, and I can't help wondering if he ever thinks of the people he bereaved whose family funerals don't get on the telly.
I don't like to see anyone lose a family member, but I also think the current clown in the WH makes us forget what a murderous shitbag the old, non-cuddly non-painting Dubya really was.
What was it, half a million civilians killed in Iraq?  Something like that.

Deaths in the high 400,000s, though not sure of the breakdown by civilian/military status.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 06 December, 2018, 01:08:02 PM
Nearly a 1000 pages of this.... Care in the Community works!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 December, 2018, 05:01:39 PM
Dont threads have a 1000 page cap limit? Is this the final countdown?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 December, 2018, 05:12:35 PM
If that's true I want to get the last word in!

YOU'RE ALL WRONG!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 06 December, 2018, 05:39:18 PM
Except that your logic is false.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 06 December, 2018, 05:43:30 PM
Maybe, but there's also an option to set how many posts you see per page. So I'm afraid there's a long way to go!
(https://i.imgur.com/0eLSb6R.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 December, 2018, 05:50:49 PM
At least in an otherwise highly charged political debate, we can all agree on the number of pages.

Oh, wait...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 December, 2018, 06:38:40 PM
Let's hope the forum doesn't explode when a thread hits four figures.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: I, Cosh on 06 December, 2018, 05:43:30 PM
Maybe, but there's also an option to set how many posts you see per page. So I'm afraid there's a long way to go!
(https://i.imgur.com/0eLSb6R.jpg)

There is?  Where's  that then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 08:33:31 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: I, Cosh on 06 December, 2018, 05:43:30 PM
Maybe, but there's also an option to set how many posts you see per page. So I'm afraid there's a long way to go!

There is?  Where's  that then?

...or did you photoshop that?  Not found any setting for amount of messages on a page, and there don't seem to be too many setting pages for it to hide on.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 December, 2018, 08:36:35 PM
Found it! (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?action=profile;area=theme;u=9823) - and am currently on page 300 of the political thread!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2018, 08:55:07 PM

What have I done?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 December, 2018, 09:11:41 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 December, 2018, 08:55:07 PM
What have I done?

Broeken teh Interwebz¿
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 December, 2018, 10:19:02 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 06 December, 2018, 05:01:39 PM
Dont threads have a 1000 page cap limit? Is this the final countdown?



da da daaah daaah daah daah daah daah daaaaaah ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 December, 2018, 10:30:57 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 December, 2018, 10:19:02 PM
da da daaah daaah daah daah daah daah daaaaaah ....

Noooooo!  I already had to live through the run up to New Year's 2000. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 December, 2018, 02:57:57 PM
'Politics Thread hit 1K'

Rebellion HQ:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/10K9kJqt9Ao15C/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 01:22:42 PM
Israel conducts covert disinformation campaigns against those espousing economic boycotts of illegal settlement goods, Russia mobilises a troll army to sow discontent in Western states along racial lines via infiltration of traditional bastions of white privilege, the UK government... pays people on Twitter to say Jeremy Corbyn's coat isn't nice enough. (https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/foreign-office-funds-2m-infowars-13707574)

This is an amazing story - amazingly fucking boring, that is.  This should be a sensational revelation, with leaked names of paid state actors apparently including Guardian and Times writers, but instead I'm struggling to care.  I guess I don't like that public money is being spent to undermine HM Opposition, but only because we already have the BBC for that.
The shitty old mill piled up with trash that they run the op from is amazing, tho.  I bet the Russian ops are run from that place from Hackers - including a guy whizzing about on a hoverboard barking orders at teenage edgelords - but of course a British psi-op is based in an old shed where kids go to drink cider.  This shithole country can't do anything right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 December, 2018, 03:08:19 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 01:22:42 PM
The shitty old mill piled up with trash that they run the op from is amazing, tho.  I bet the Russian ops are run from that place from Hackers - including a guy whizzing about on a hoverboard barking orders at teenage edgelords - but of course a British psi-op is based in an old shed where kids go to drink cider.  This shithole country can't do anything right.


The logo is in Papyrus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_(typeface)), as well.


Now there's a font I haven't seen in a very long time.  A very long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2018, 03:10:39 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 10 December, 2018, 03:08:19 PMNow there's a font I haven't seen in a very long time.  A very long time.

2009, wasn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 December, 2018, 04:48:08 PM

You're missing the bigger story, which is that at least one area of Fife now, apparently, has the internet (https://youtu.be/VYflT3h6lCQ?t=37)*


* Replace the word 'Paris' with '1000 videos about how Disney DESTROYED Star Wars
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2018, 04:53:58 PM
In case anyone's following along, democracy in the UK has just levelled down, and now ranks 'appalling and previously considered impossible level of shitshow'.

Bercow, though: what a guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2018, 07:21:39 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 01:22:42 PM
...This is an amazing story...

More amazing: thing printed in Daily Record gets treated as if it might have any basis in fact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2018, 07:28:44 PM

It's probably just Cambridge Analytica or something.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 08:04:42 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2018, 07:21:39 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 01:22:42 PM
...This is an amazing story...

More amazing: thing printed in Daily Record gets treated as if it might have any basis in fact.

David Cameron fucking a dead pig was a Daily Mail exclusive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 December, 2018, 08:32:53 PM

It's all fucked, and nobody has a clue (https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5c5i19boq1/SundayTimes_Results_191207.pdf) how to fix it:

Theresa May is doing well as Prime Minister - 33
Theresa May is doing badly as Prime Minister - 55

Jeremy Corbyn is doing well in opposition - 26
Jeremy Corbyn is doing badly in opposition - 60

Theresa May negotiated a good Brexit deal - 25
Theresa May negotiated a poor Brexit deal - 45

A different leader would get a better deal - 23
A different leader would not get a better deal - 52

Theresa May should not resign - 36
Theresa May should resign - 44

David Davis should be Prime Minister - 15
David Davis should not be Prime Minister - 34

Sajid Javid should be Prime Minister - 15
Sajid Javid should not be Prime Minister - 33

Boris Johnson should be Prime Minister - 22
Boris Johnson should not be Prime Minister - 57

We should take May's deal - 20
We should not take May's deal - 51

We should have a hard brexit - 23
We should not have a hard Brexit - 53

We should leave the EU - 39
We should stay in the EU - 42

A general election would resolve the Brexit problem - 18
A general election would not resolve the Brexit problem - 64

A 2nd referendum would resolve the Brexit problem - 31
A 2nd referendum would not resolve the Brexit problem - 51


In summary: May should resign, but nobody else would do any better; we should reject May's deal, but all the other options are awful  -  and we still can't even agree on whether we should stay or leave.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2018, 08:37:29 PM

We'll stay in the EU - but only if we can be in charge.

Vote for me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 December, 2018, 08:58:47 PM
Brexit really is the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it?  Cameron says that he does not regret calling the referendum in the first place.  May calls off the vote because she'd rather avoid the mother of all humiliations, only to find herself facing the mother of all humiliations.  The pound is at its lowest for 20 months.  Parliament is completely paralysed.  Corbyn has just thrown down the challenge of an emergency debate on the decision of the government to postpone the debate and vote.

The Tories used to throw out the line that if Labour got back into power there would be no money left.  Looks like this time round with the Tories back in power there's going to be no country left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 December, 2018, 08:59:19 PM
Could you define being 'in charge' being on the winning side in 95% of votes (plus 3% abstentions) in the EU Council of Ministers, and >75% of all EU Parliament policies and EU Council decisions going the way your representatives voted?  'Cos that's how it has played out for the UK these past 20 years. 

(Probably helps the averages that Farage almsot never showed up)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 11:01:36 PM
Who needs a functioning government anyway?  We haven't had one here in Northern Ireland for ages and the bins still get collected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 December, 2018, 11:15:34 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 December, 2018, 08:58:47 PM
The pound is at its lowest for 20 months.

Some of us get paid in dollars. :-)

Seriously, though — this is the thing that makes me SO angry when some Brexit headbanger accuses me of putting self-interest before my country... 1) I don't give a shit about "my country", but if the human beings that live near to me are in danger of something harmful to them, I'd like to avoid it, and 2) 80%+ of my income is USD, and I have a relatively little personal debt plus a chunk of savings earning effectively nothing. The hardest of hard Brexits would see sterling collapse and interest rates soar, which would be like half a century of Christmasses coming at once, financially.

And I still don't want it to happen. Because i'm not a complete [spoiler]c*nt[/spoiler] ... unlike, say, Jacob Rees-Mogg, who is somehow inexplicably is now the voice of the people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 11 December, 2018, 06:12:39 AM
Pound still slightly better than what it was immediately post-referendum, which keeps astonishing me. I thought that nosedive would continue if anything. Instead it just stung me at the first time in a decade I needed to turn my £ into $  :'( :'( :'( :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 December, 2018, 08:32:35 AM
The markets keep hoping the UK will change its mind. In the event of hard Brexit, the general prediction is parity or slightly worse than USD. Even with May's deal, we will see years of stagnation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 December, 2018, 12:43:50 PM
Worse of all, Lynda Snell's Christmas play seems to be precoging all of these Brexit shenanigans  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 December, 2018, 02:06:45 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 11 December, 2018, 12:43:50 PM
Worse of all, Lynda Snell's Christmas play seems to be precoging all of these Brexit shenanigans  :o

Chairs blocking the fire exits, people making arses of themselves in public, yep, sounds right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 December, 2018, 02:07:07 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 11 December, 2018, 02:06:45 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 11 December, 2018, 12:43:50 PM
Worse of all, Lynda Snell's Christmas play seems to be precoging all of these Brexit shenanigans  :o

Chairs blocking the fire exits, people making arses of themselves in public, yep, sounds right.

(for those not following the Archers - it's complicated...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 11 December, 2018, 02:37:49 PM
And I tough my country was a mess. The problem world-wide is that their is no country that has any strong, solid and good leadership.  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2018, 03:48:22 PM
Double post deleted
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2018, 03:50:57 PM
If the Tories only had a tenth of Linda's sensitivity and equanimity in the face of a self-authored farce...

Quote from: broodblik on 11 December, 2018, 02:37:49 PM
The problem world-wide is that their is no country that has any strong, solid and good leadership.

Isn't that Anakin's lament to Padme while they're rolling about in the grass with the giant ticks..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2018, 05:08:29 PM
Quote from: broodblik on 11 December, 2018, 02:37:49 PM
The problem world-wide is that their is no country that has any strong, solid and good leadership.  :(

And there never will be while leaders reserve the "right" to impose their views and systems on others.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 11 December, 2018, 06:34:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2018, 05:08:29 PM
And there never will be while leaders reserve the "right" to impose their views and systems on others.

So true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2018, 06:54:32 PM
Well, if nobody's going to cut those leaders' heads off and stick them on spikes, how are things ever going to change?  They're not likely to decapitate themselves and then dissolve the systems that have served them well for decades, are they?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 11 December, 2018, 07:16:53 PM
I think the modern democratic system that we have in place has created a new type of kingship. You are there for a short period of time, so you use, "abuse", break the system for your benefit (and your benefit only or some lucky family member) . The train stop you get off the new clean broom gets one, repeat until the next French Revolution.   :-[ :'( >:(


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2018, 07:50:48 PM

Every human being is flawed. As I keep saying, it's not the people that need decapitating, it's the "power" itself. Give a person power and he or she will abuse it, take away the power (or, more specifically, teach the population that the power is actually illusory) and it cannot be abused.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 December, 2018, 07:59:42 PM
Peasant: "Ha!  You cannot rule me!  Your power is illusory!"
King: "Man-at-arms, kill this peasant."
[Man-at-arms kills peasant.]

EXEUNT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 December, 2018, 08:22:54 PM

All Peasants: "Ha! You cannot rule us! Your power is illusory!"
King: "Man-at-arms, kill all the peasants."
[Man-at-arms runs away.]
EXEUNT

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 December, 2018, 08:59:59 PM
You mean like in the French Revolution?  I will admit that certainly got rid of centralized power and resulted in everlasting peace...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 December, 2018, 09:06:31 PM

Brexit's pretty weird anyway, but seeing the news lead (two nights in a row) with a chorus of pensioners from the home counties singing Twisted Sister* outside parliament is David Lynch-level weird:

https://youtu.be/4xmckWVPRaI?t=97


* I admit, I had to google it
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 11 December, 2018, 09:51:55 PM
Quote from: Frank on 11 December, 2018, 09:06:31 PM

Brexit's pretty weird anyway, but seeing the news lead (two nights in a row) with a chorus of pensioners from the home counties singing Twisted Sister* outside parliament is David Lynch-level weird:

https://youtu.be/4xmckWVPRaI?t=97


* I admit, I had to google it

I haven't followed the link or seen the footage but I'm assuming it's 'We're not gonna take it' and not 'I wanna rock'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2018, 10:11:15 PM
That at least sounds amusing, but BBC News in my region tonight led with how wages were rising faster and more people were in work than ever before.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 December, 2018, 10:18:39 PM


And you still have Brexit to look forward to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2018, 11:05:27 PM
Yeah,  if it's this good with only the fragrant promise of Brexit, think how good it's going to be when May follows through!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 December, 2018, 11:17:47 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2018, 10:11:15 PM
That at least sounds amusing, but BBC News in my region tonight led with how wages were rising faster and more people were in work than ever before.

Wonder where they got that idea (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/labourmarketeconomiccommentary/december2018)? The ONS end of year report is published every December.

I found that link in an article on the economics section (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/economy) of the BBC website, which notes that this is due in part to a reduction in the number of students, carers and the long-term sick being forced back into work, and pensioners putting off retirement.

That story was alongside Pound sinks after no confidence report (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46531893), UK economy slows as car sales fall (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46505692), November shopper footfall 'worst since recession' (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46502650) and UK economic growth 'stalls' as service sector slides (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46452727).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2018, 11:49:54 PM
It's attitudes like yours, Frank, that have sabotaged this whole glorious leap into the past right from the start. It's almost as if you think that the Leave vote was a product of opportunist manipulation of growing inequality and political stasis,  rather a brave response to the evil eurocrats scheming to pull old England Britain the UK down. All anyone ever asked is that you clap your hands and say "I do believe in fairies, I do!". Your "facts" have no place in magical thinking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:14:34 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 December, 2018, 08:59:59 PM
You mean like in the French Revolution?  I will admit that certainly got rid of centralized power and resulted in everlasting peace...

No.

I think I'm on record (probably multiple times) stating my opinion that bloody revolutions never work as they simply change one group of violent, entitled bullies with another and that the only revolution worth having is a revolution of the mind.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 December, 2018, 07:24:53 AM

Just in case there's any doubt how I feel about our economic miracle:

I was talking to a guy, recently. He lives in a tiny village, about twenty minutes drive from anything larger than a Spar shop. He is, if you'll pardon my bluntness, a head with a withered vestigial limb attached.

He was in a state because he had a benefits review coming up, and there's a real chance he'll have his specially adapted mobility vehicle taken from him and his incapacity benefit stopped.

The idea that he might soon be paying a taxi driver to take him to work at a city call centre every day fills me with personal shame. All to produce essentially meaningless headlines like the one Pro Bear reported, the only purpose of which is to placate the kind of ranting pub bore who imagines benefits claimants living it up watching daytime telly while he's stuck at work.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 07:44:27 AM

It seems significant to me that the number of people out of work is a great worry to the "government" but the number of people out of money simply doesn't matter. "Having a job" seems to be of primary importance, even if that job is a soul-destroying grind that fails to cover basic living expenses.

"Look at all those slaves sitting around the plantation with nothing to do! Get them up and doing something, anything, it doesn't matter what so long as the place looks busy!"

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 December, 2018, 08:47:46 AM
It looks like its Regicide again in the Conservative party. After the May-Bot deactivation, her replacement will be a Euroskeptic hardliner who will appeal to the grassroots and UKIP-ers. It means we almost guarantee to crash out on the E.U on the 29th of March, not much fun there. It's going to be the worst of all worlds, possibly fatal to the Car Industry and others but I doubt we'll get a General Election or a second Referendum. 2019, for all the wrong reasons, will be a year to remember as the post-Cold War consensus gets increasingly replaced by Nationalism. Shite! :crazy:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 09:17:22 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 11 December, 2018, 09:51:55 PM
Quote from: Frank on 11 December, 2018, 09:06:31 PM

Brexit's pretty weird anyway, but seeing the news lead (two nights in a row) with a chorus of pensioners from the home counties singing Twisted Sister* outside parliament is David Lynch-level weird:

https://youtu.be/4xmckWVPRaI?t=97 (https://youtu.be/4xmckWVPRaI?t=97)


* I admit, I had to google it

I haven't followed the link or seen the footage but I'm assuming it's 'We're not gonna take it' and not 'I wanna rock'.


Certainly isn't Leader of the Pack or Hot Love (could be Burn in Hell or Shoot 'em Down though).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 09:22:48 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 December, 2018, 08:47:46 AM
It looks like its Regicide again in the Conservative party. After the May-Bot deactivation, her replacement will be a Euroskeptic hardliner who will appeal to the grassroots and UKIP-ers. It means we almost guarantee to crash out on the E.U on the 29th of March, not much fun there. It's going to be the worst of all worlds, possibly fatal to the Car Industry and others but I doubt we'll get a General Election or a second Referendum. 2019, for all the wrong reasons, will be a year to remember as the post-Cold War consensus gets increasingly replaced by Nationalism. Shite! :crazy:

Strong and stable!

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9KZ-sF5GgpQ/VKTqXGuu56I/AAAAAAAAFcI/uRf14LvgjF0/s1600/Warrior_Issue_25_Page_50%2Bcopy%2B2.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wcWXRa66dyY/VJpeGrNEiiI/AAAAAAAAFZs/6l-V9hz9tmw/s1600/Warrior_Issue_16_Page_35.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 December, 2018, 09:31:58 AM
David Lloyd and Mr Moore sure did some magic work!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 12:48:48 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 December, 2018, 09:31:58 AM
David Lloyd and Mr Moore sure did some magic work!

Nah, it was Mr Moore and Glycon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycon) doing the magic!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2018, 01:00:51 PM
One of the best pages in the best issue of one of the greatest comics ever - I love how V seems to be only the most current part of his collage of lunatics and frauds.  No simple answers with Moore & Lloyd (I think Glycon came later - part of his 50th birthday treat).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2018, 01:39:11 PM
Quote from: Frank on 12 December, 2018, 07:24:53 AMHe was in a state because he had a benefits review coming up, and there's a real chance he'll have his specially adapted mobility vehicle taken from him and his incapacity benefit stopped.

A family member works for the DWP in Belfast, but rather than take care of Northern Ireland's benefits claims, their entire building has for the last few years been dedicated to overspill from DWP claims processing offices in places like Manchester and Birmingham, dealing almost entirely with transparently fraudulent reasons for imposing benefits sanctions by third-party contractors, and the appraisal that DWP contractors are evil scum is, apparently, coming from a not-insignificant number of Northern Irish born-again Christians, the most myopic and empathy-free people you will ever encounter.
There's a conspiracy theory going around that, in order to give a pretext for a show of aggression from management and a crackdown on in-office malingering where discussion of sanctions might take place, management faked an incident involving someone in the building shitting all over the bathrooms - a "black plop" if you will - that later made the local papers.  Several months before that, someone in the office broke ranks and called in the police after finding hidden surveillance equipment in communal parts of the building - including cameras in the toilets.

Anyway, people who actually work for the DWP don't like the benefits sanctions regime.  Its pretty much maintained by and for a narrow band of subcontractors in the private sector who exist only to create excess workload that they never actually have to deal with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 December, 2018, 03:10:03 PM
Miss read that as DUP  :-[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 03:25:29 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2018, 01:39:11 PM
A family member works for the DWP in Belfast, but rather than take care of Northern Ireland's benefits claims, their entire building has for the last few years been dedicated to overspill from DWP claims processing offices in places like Manchester and Birmingham, dealing almost entirely with transparently fraudulent reasons for imposing benefits sanctions by third-party contractors, and the appraisal that DWP contractors are evil scum is, apparently, coming from a not-insignificant number of Northern Irish born-again Christians, the most myopic and empathy-free people you will ever encounter.


Thanks for that info - I won't go into details but in the course of my work I see a lot of requests from the DWP with envelopes for the NI centre.  In fact, there's so many that go to NI it really stands out when any go to local jobcentres or DWP offices - I'd assumed they weren't dealt with locally at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 03:44:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:14:34 AM
...the only revolution worth having is a revolution of the mind.

Okay, but your central arguments don't make any sense to me and the world I live in.  You often state that power is illusory, despite all evidence to the contrary.  Perhaps you mean theoretically illusory, but that's not the same as actuality.  I mean: realpolitik.  Or: we have to play the cards we're dealt.

If someone punches me in the face, it's no good me saying that their power is illusory - that won't help stop my nose bleed, will it?  Your revolution of the mind is terribly inhuman, in that it relies on us (the species) evolving beyond where we are right now.  It's unreal.  It's illusory.  Your arguments are illusory, because they rely on a humanity that only exists in your imagination.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2018, 04:20:09 PM
Yes but if the change happens only in the mind, you don't actually have to do anything.

Unless the plan is to spike the water supply with hallucinogenic drugs in order to expand the minds of the populace so that such a shift in consciousness occurs.  Maybe Sharky plans on doing that, I dunno.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2018, 04:26:05 PM
I see where you're coming from Funtington, and I sympathise, but I also suspect similar arguments were made about introducing universal suffrage, ending slavery and abolishing the death penalty: all were critical suposedly inescapable means of managing society and economy. Human behaviour isn't fixed, we can and will change. Not fast enough to usher in Sharkyworld next week or next year, but no reason to believe such a major shift isn't possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 December, 2018, 04:33:07 PM
Prof. Bear offered Sharky an open door to his ideal anarcho-dream-state, and he walked on by.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2018, 11:01:36 PM
Who needs a functioning government anyway?  We haven't had one here in Northern Ireland for ages and the bins still get collected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 05:26:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 December, 2018, 04:26:05 PM
I see where you're coming from Funtington, and I sympathise, but I also suspect similar arguments were made about introducing universal suffrage, ending slavery and abolishing the death penalty: all were critical suposedly inescapable means of managing society and economy. Human behaviour isn't fixed, we can and will change. Not fast enough to usher in Sharkyworld next week or next year, but no reason to believe such a major shift isn't possible.

I entirely agree that change is possible.  But our friend the Shark tends to state that the power of government is illusory right now, rather than in a potential future society.

There is another point, which is that governance is not necessarily a bad thing.  Isn't it just another word for an organizational hierarchy?  Susan the Accountant (with her Calculator +1, +5 vs. Tax Calculations) should be in charge of the accounts, rather than, say, Harold the Oaf (with his Cursed Pitchfork -1, +3 vs. Chickens).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 05:30:53 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 05:26:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 December, 2018, 04:26:05 PM
I see where you're coming from Funtington, and I sympathise, but I also suspect similar arguments were made about introducing universal suffrage, ending slavery and abolishing the death penalty: all were critical suposedly inescapable means of managing society and economy. Human behaviour isn't fixed, we can and will change. Not fast enough to usher in Sharkyworld next week or next year, but no reason to believe such a major shift isn't possible.

I entirely agree that change is possible.  But our friend the Shark tends to state that the power of government is illusory right now, rather than in a potential future society.

There is another point, which is that governance is not necessarily a bad thing.  Isn't it just another word for an organizational hierarchy?  Susan the Accountant (with her Calculator +1, +5 vs. Tax Calculations) should be in charge of the accounts, rather than, say, Harold the Oaf (with his Cursed Pitchfork -1, +3 vs. Chickens).

I bet Harold the Oaf would have a good saving throw against rod, staff or wand though!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 December, 2018, 05:37:14 PM
QuoteThere is another point, which is that governance is not necessarily a bad thing.  Isn't it just another word for an organizational hierarchy?

This would be my general feeling too. My main argument with TLS is that I want to be able to delegate decision making and bean counting to people who are (or at least should be) good at it, rather than having to think about every damn thing. I have enough trouble keeping on top of the choices that every day brings.  How that delegation comes about, at what scale, and how quality of delegates is assured are questions I'm happy to discuss, but if I have to personally select private security, sewerage contractors, train operators, food safety inspectors... 

That said, you can seldom go wrong following Chomsky's line on anything, and his anarcho-syndicalism trends in a similar direction (the necessity for all power to justify its existence).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 05:43:49 PM

The illusory power of government, or any perceived authority, is that certain people - through divine right, social status or popularity - have the right to order "lesser" individuals to perform actions or behave in certain ways, even if those actions or behaviours are morally repugnant.

For example, if I ordered another person to murder a third party for any reason, that person would (in the vast majority of cases) rightly refuse to comply. Government (and also monarchs and religion), however, assume the right to do this very thing, usually cloaking the order in ceremony and special robes (uniforms, flags) and special words (war, execution). They tell their "subjects" that they have the right to issue such orders and that the rest of us are obligated to comply when, in truth, they have only the same rights as any other human being.

The illusory power is just that.

The tragedy is, of course, that the people, by and large, also believe in this illusion (as demonstrated by Stanley Milgram in his famous 1963(?) experiments). This basic illusion, of course, leads to actual pain, suffering and death. If people can learn to see through this illusion and understand that each of us is responsible for our own actions then the damage authorities can do will eventually be largely eliminated.

That is the revolution of the mind - not some mystical esoteric download requiring thousands of hours of meditation and divine revelations but simply the realisation that "no" is a perfectly valid and moral response to a repugnant directive from "above."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 06:01:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 05:43:49 PM
..."no" is a perfectly valid and moral response to a repugnant directive from "above."

My point, which I keep repeating and you keep skirting, is that "no" may be, as you say, "a perfectly valid and moral response", but it doesn't stop you getting, say, put into a gas chamber.  Or shelled to death.  Or unfairly imprisoned.  Etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:08:20 PM

On Tordel's point, I have no problem delegating certain tasks to specialist bodies or individuals. We live in a complex world and there is simply too much to do for each of us to be involved in every aspect of it.

What I object to is the government's belief that it has the right to impose solutions and systems on society. Most of us suspect, I suspect, that the government wishes to privatise the entire NHS (to privatise something, first destroy it). Whilst I have no fundamental objections to an affordable private healthcare system, I do object to being denied the right to choose between an effective NHS and a possibly superior but prohibitively expensive private system.

Because of its illusory power, the government imposes the "right" to do with public services and utilities as it pleases - and to force the people into paying for it (through theft and extortion disguised as taxation) no matter how poor the service is.

Of course, the other major illusion believed in by the authorities and the people - the illusion of money, a simulacrum of energy - at this moment in time makes any reforms extraordinarly hard to achieve.

The three main illusions holding society back, and in many cases constraining and even retarding progress are, in my opinion:
Government power.
Debt-based money.
Legislation (a simulacrum of Law) - an offshoot of government power but a danger in its own right.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:22:33 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 06:01:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 05:43:49 PM
..."no" is a perfectly valid and moral response to a repugnant directive from "above."

My point, which I keep repeating and you keep skirting, is that "no" may be, as you say, "a perfectly valid and moral response", but it doesn't stop you getting, say, put into a gas chamber.  Or shelled to death.  Or unfairly imprisoned.  Etc.

This is exactly right. I have been unfairly imprisoned myself (only for 26 hours, so I'm no Nelson Mandela by any stretch of the imagination) and so I have first-hand experience of how ineffective just one person saying "no" can be. But this does not mean that saying yes is the only viable option.

Imagine if the police officer had understood my position and said "no" to the council official demanding my arrest or if the council official had understood my position and said "no" to his boss. Or if half of my neighbours had said no, or half of the street, or half of the village, or half of the county, or half of the country, or half of the kingdom, or half of the continent, or half of the world.

One person saying "no" today makes no difference, neither does two saying it tomorrow or four saying it the day after. If the numbers continue to rise, however, and more and more people recognise the illusions, there will come a time when violent revolution becomes less and less likely - that is the time I hope to live long enough to see.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2018, 06:56:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:22:33 PM
...One person saying "no" today makes no difference...

I agree with your premise that we can evolve into a fairer way of structuring our society.  It seems we also agree that evolution takes time: and knowing that we can evolve doesn't necessarily help an individual navigate any particular situation they may find themselves in today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 07:18:05 PM

That's why the very first thing to do is recognise the illusions. This must come first - knowledge leads to action.

I look on my role, arrogant is it may be, to draw attention to the illusions. I have no control over whether people can see them or not, or whether they want to see them or not, or even if they believe these things are illusions are not. Whether people see the illusions or not, what they do with that knowledge is up to them. Whatever happens next is, likewise, beyond my control. I have some ideas, sure, but there are billions of people who can have better ones.

For myself I can only say this; I will not cooperate with the illusions or allow them, through me, to harm anyone else.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2018, 07:19:20 PM
Be interesting to see how the completely fair and impartial BBC covers Theresa May's confidence vote compared to how they cover uhhh other party leaders' confidence votes.  Probably no difference at all.
Also Tories have reinstated suspended MPs supportive of May so they can vote, including one who was suspended while rape claims against him are investigated.

I'm glad Brexit is happening.  You wouldn't want the political thread being uneventful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 December, 2018, 09:16:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2018, 06:22:33 PM
Imagine if the police officer had understood my position and said "no" to the council official demanding my arrest or if the council official had understood my position and said "no" to his boss. Or if half of my neighbours had said no, or half of the street, or half of the village, or half of the county, or half of the country, or half of the kingdom, or half of the continent, or half of the world.

As happened in Leipzig in 1989 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monday_demonstrations_in_East_Germany).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2018, 06:12:06 AM

Very interesting, Sheridan, thank you. I would nit-pickingly point out, however, that the protesters were basically petitioning the government for rights, labouring under the misapprehension that those "above" have the right to decide what the rights of those "below" should be.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 December, 2018, 07:00:10 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/2ZcGBCb.png?2)

The look on Faisal Islam's face.  Kuenssberg was asking Tezza if it was time for her to resign.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2018, 08:41:24 PM
He's trying to figure out if her mouth is coming or going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 December, 2018, 09:16:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2018, 08:41:24 PM
He's trying to figure out if her mouth is coming or going.

Kuenssberg's mouth is like Momentum's Brexit strategy; just when you think you've figured it out, it goes all weird and wrong again.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 December, 2018, 09:57:51 PM
Alarums!  Alarums!  A woman is being allowed to talk!  Her mouth is twisted and wrong!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2018, 10:32:35 PM
Someone finally figured out the secret ingredient in Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder.  Which you should probably stop using. (https://nypost.com/2018/12/14/how-johnson-johnson-hid-its-baby-powder-asbestos-problem/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2018, 11:27:20 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2018, 10:32:35 PM
Someone finally figured out the secret ingredient in Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder.  Which you should probably stop using. (https://nypost.com/2018/12/14/how-johnson-johnson-hid-its-baby-powder-asbestos-problem/)

Wow. Though am I right in saying that the laws against asbestos use are way more relaxed Stateside?  Not that that's any excuse, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 December, 2018, 12:27:43 AM
In the future, we'll probably look back at talcum powder in the same way we now look at mercury enemas and trepanning

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/22/johnson-johnson-ordered-pay-417m-cancer-lawsuit/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/22/johnson-johnson-ordered-pay-417m-cancer-lawsuit/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 12:54:14 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 December, 2018, 12:27:43 AM
In the future, we'll probably look back at talcum powder in the same way we now look at mercury enemas and trepanning

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/22/johnson-johnson-ordered-pay-417m-cancer-lawsuit/ (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/22/johnson-johnson-ordered-pay-417m-cancer-lawsuit/)

You'll be able to wolf down all the carcinogens you like once those barmy Brussels bureaucrats back off from barraging Brits with bonkers bans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 15 December, 2018, 03:47:16 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 December, 2018, 12:27:43 AM
In the future, we'll probably look back at talcum powder in the same way we now look at mercury enemas and trepanning

Ah, the days when we used to drill holes in our heads just to let off some steam.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 15 December, 2018, 08:54:51 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 December, 2018, 12:27:43 AM
In the future, we'll probably look back at talcum powder in the same way we now look at mercury enemas and trepanning

Technically, we still do trepanning, although it's a lot more stylish these days:

https://wdong9972.en.ec21.com/Cranial_Drill_Perforator--3315020_3315393.html

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 December, 2018, 10:02:13 AM
Well, it's been a 'momentous week' in British Politics allegedly-and we're still stuck in Fuckwit land far as I can see. Crashing out with no deal looms larger every day, and if that occurs say goodbye to several sectors of the Economy and hello to Paramilitary attacks along Northern Irelands border. The clocks are running down to Midnight, and like Rorschach and Night Owl no action seems to make any difference except staying in which might generate some serious political violence in England since the Leavers will cry foul. Staying or Leaving both are bad, one worst economically than the other, but remaining might damage the long-term health of Democracy. Hopefully, the Politico's might get around the table and conclude that a delay followed by a Second Referendum is the only way to sort this mess out before it's over the cliff's edge. The Abyss doth beckon wide, however.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 10:05:14 AM

I once had similar problems trying to cancel my Book of the Month membership.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 December, 2018, 11:12:46 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 December, 2018, 10:02:13 AM
action seems to make any difference except staying in which might generate some serious political violence in England since the Leavers will cry foul.

I think the media need to stop parrotting this nonsense. Every time the gammon has tried to organise even a rally in the last couple of years, they've basically embarrassed themselves. Fuck them. Let them moan. It's all they really want to do anyway.

They've made it clear nothing short of a no-deal crash-out will satisfy them, and that was the one thing everybody campaigning for Leave during the referendum assured us wouldn't happen. There's no mandate for no deal and if every course of action will leave some section of the population dissatisfied, let's do the one that doesn't ruin the economy, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 11:13:17 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 December, 2018, 10:02:13 AM
a Second Referendum is the only way to sort this mess out before it's over the cliff's edge.

Your fellow Britons (https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5c5i19boq1/SundayTimes_Results_191207.pdf) do not share your certainty:

We should leave the EU - 39
We should stay in the EU - 42

A general election would resolve the Brexit problem - 18
A general election would not resolve the Brexit problem - 64

A 2nd referendum would resolve the Brexit problem - 31
A 2nd referendum would not resolve the Brexit problem - 51


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 11:27:00 AM
It's a simple fact that the victors don't really need to protest. Plus they all live in the country and the minibuses are needed for the bingo; you can never find the lav at these things and their bladders aren't what they used to be*. 

I was reading a thread about one of Sharky's favourite source of factoids, the Milgram expriments, and it observed that one of the main stated motivations in the <40% of participants who administered shocks past the point where the 'victim' cried-out was a strong reluctance to admit that they had been wrong to do so in the first place. It was those folks that went all the way to 'lethal' and beyond, rather than accept that they were duped and in the wrong way back when the pain they were causing first became evident. Watch this space.


*Whose is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 15 December, 2018, 12:41:13 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 11:27:00 AM
It's a simple fact that the victors don't really need to protest. Plus they all live in the country and the minibuses are needed for the bingo; you can never find the lav at these things and their bladders aren't what they used to be*. 

I was reading a thread about one of Sharky's favourite source of factoids, the Milgram expriments, and it observed that one of the main stated motivations in the <40% of participants who administered shocks past the point where the 'victim' cried-out was a strong reluctance to admit that they had been wrong to do so in the first place. It was those folks that went all the way to 'lethal' and beyond, rather than accept that they were duped and in the wrong way back when the pain they were causing first became evident. Watch this space.


*Whose is.

Doesn't that covers most managerial decisions?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 01:55:24 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 15 December, 2018, 12:41:13 PM
Doesn't that covers most managerial decisions?

And many relationships.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 02:27:23 PM
Not completely clued in about this, but I feel some degree of relief that Theresa has won the vote of confidence.  Awful though she is, she voted remain  and is trying her best to control the damage.

Boris and Lord Mogg really need to be kept out of this one. Pair of [whizzerandchips] toffee-nosed twerps [/whizzerandchips] who neither know nor care about the lives of ordinary folk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 December, 2018, 02:30:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 02:27:23 PM
Not completely clued in about this, but I feel some degree of relief that Theresa has won the vote of confidence. 

That is perhaps the most terrifying aspect of the whole current situation.  Hell of an election slogan:  "Theresa May: because the others will screw you over a hell of a lot more!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 02:37:33 PM
The problem as I (a largely ignorant arsehole) see it is that Rees-Mogg, Johnson and the whole parasitic parade of toffee-nosed freaks are staying/being kept out of it, permitting them to sweep in when the dust clears (whatever the outcome) and be annointed as saviours of the land in its hour of need.  May was never more than a sacrificial lamb for the Tories, the PM who was chosen to eff-up Brexit, because that's the only outcome there could ever have been. 

No-Deal Brexit: May failed, hateful EU punishes UK with unending hardship, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.
May's Deal: May failed, hateful EU punishes UK with economic decline and vassal-status, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.
Remain: May failed, betrayed the wishes of the people and condemned UK to eternal occupation, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.

I hope the pension was worth it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 02:49:01 PM

I couldn't care less whether May stays or goes, but the plan she's trying to get through is the least-worst of any of the versions of Brexit that stand a realistic chance of happening.

Whatever version of Brexit we eventually get, everyone will hate it and nobody will be happy.

Which is why we're doomed to keep hearing the same tired grievances we've endured for the last three years (from both sides) for the rest of our lives. For our generation, this will never end.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2018, 02:51:09 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 02:37:33 PMNo-Deal Brexit: May failed, hateful EU punishes UK with unending hardship, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.
May's Deal: May failed, hateful EU punishes UK with economic decline and vassal-status, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.
Remain: May failed, betrayed the wishes of the people and condemned UK to eternal occupation, Rees-Mogg to the rescue.

So basically what happened to Greece.  And Greece is still inside the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 03:00:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2018, 02:51:09 PM
So basically what happened to Greece.  And Greece is still inside the EU.

Pretty much that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 03:06:15 PM

Why would anyone want to be part of a "hateful" organisation that would actively try to destroy any people who want to leave it?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 03:08:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 03:06:15 PM
Why would anyone want to be part of a "hateful" organisation that would actively try to destroy any people who want to leave it?

You may have misread the ironic tone of TordelBack's comment.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2018, 03:18:16 PM
In fairness to TLS I'm not very good at expressing tone in my posts.

What annoys me most about Eternal Brexit, even more than what is likely to be catastrophic economic and political impact on my own country that we're not supposed to care about because it's the the will of "the" people, is that it permanently distracts from what actually matters: tackling climate change and mass migration (not the occasional storms and a trickle of refugees of today, the real stuff - drowned cities, barren fields and billions on the move).  That a bunch of posh fucks have manipulated us down this nationalist dead-end for their own short-term benefit... it's almost too much to bear. And before anyone says, "growing economic inequality": same posh fucks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 03:54:57 PM

Apologies, Tordels. I'm pretty bad at projecting irony myself - and, of course, detecting it. Maybe I'll try posting ironic content in italics from now on :)

Still, I gather the general feeling is that the EU will punish the British for leaving it, reducing our country to a virtual ruin. This does not seem like the behaviour of a democratic and enlightened body to me - although I admit I've not been following proceedings very closely at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 04:03:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 03:54:57 PM

Apologies, Tordels. I'm pretty bad at projecting irony myself - and, of course, detecting it. Maybe I'll try posting ironic content in italics from now on :)

Still, I gather the general feeling is that the EU will punish the British for leaving it, reducing our country to a virtual ruin. This does not seem like the behaviour of a democratic and enlightened body to me - although I admit I've not been following proceedings very closely at all.

The EU is not punishing Britain for leaving - the rules for leaving haven't changed from the start.  Fair enough, the British public were not properly informed on those rules in the run-up to the referendum.

A good metaphor I heard was to imagine you're leaving a golf club (not that I've got a clue about being part of a golf club).  The golf club says 'well, now you're leaving, you no longer have easy access to our facilities'.  Not really a punishment.  It's what happens when you leave an organisation.

Doesn't mean the organisation is perfect, but it's a stretch to call that a punishment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 04:21:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 04:03:08 PM
... imagine you're leaving a golf club ... The golf club says 'well, now you're leaving, you no longer have easy access to our facilities'.  Not really a punishment.  It's what happens when you leave an organisation

Or Netflix
Or a gym
Or cancelling a subscription to a comic

Tharg is no more punishing lapsed subbers by not mailing them a copy of 2000ad every week than the EU is punishing the US by not allowing its chlorinated chickens tariff-free access to your belly.

Ideological Brexiters calculated that the benefits of membership were outweighed by the benefits of leaving, which is their right as free agents.

Those who voted to Leave as a vague, directionless, existential howl of protest against the state of things in general are the ones who see loss of access as a punishment. No resolving that one; no point in trying.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 December, 2018, 04:22:32 PM
It seems in some respects that the rules for leaving the EU were a bit like the safety trunk of a submarine; there for show but if anybody ever had to use it then the chances of survival would be pretty slim.  I would agree with the consensus regarding the EU punishing the UK.  They don't really need to do much beyond waving goodbye. 

If anything the EU are playing the canny game.  Be as reasonable and accommodating as possible without compromising principles (possibly where the UK is at a disadvantage since the current chancers haven't the first clue what those are) and let us get on with it.  Any country thinking about leaving is probably taking a long hard look at the clusterflob that the government is making of this and thinking twice.

Whilst it might be possible for Brexit to be a success and revitalise the UK, it is hard to see that as a credible outcome in light of the ferret sack that we've seen the last two years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 December, 2018, 04:27:25 PM
When the hard choice comes, I hope it will be remain, but ideology and overzealous patriotism blinds certain groups to the realities that even the best 'out' plan is worse financially than staying in. Like the Milgram test, they keep pressing the switch in the hope the current will gain a different reaction, but all you get is louder screams. Misery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 04:30:03 PM

I see, thanks.

Not having access to undemocratically created rules, regulations, restrictions, tariffs, taxations, quotas and licenses sounds awful. Still, we have our own local systems to fill that particular void - so we can be screwed from Westminster rather than Brussels.

I doubt we'll be allowed to leave anyway, at least not fully. The Powers That Shouldn't Be want global government so this whole thing seems to me to be a kind of political false flag operation to prove that huge bureaucratic unions are better than piddling little sovereign states or, especially, local and personal rights and responsibilities.

And just for the record, my position on the EU is the same as my position on all governments - it's not the organisation I'm opposed to, it's the illusions.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 04:40:48 PM

Trading, loads of funding for local heritage and infrastructure projects, and being able to live in other countries with a minimum of hassle have been nice too. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 04:48:32 PM

I don't believe one needs permission to trade, fund worthy projects or live somewhere.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 04:49:33 PM
Try moving to Australia without a visa. What should be true and what is are two different things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 05:05:38 PM
I wonder if the Queen would need a visa? I wouldn't be surprised if she doesn't even need a passport, what with her being appointed by God and everything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 05:14:28 PM
I agree completely, but YOU need a passport and trying to argue at customs that it's not fair won't get you residency. But in the EU, everyone can do it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 05:31:08 PM

I don't need a passport, the people "above" me demand that I have one if I want to travel around their planet.

There are perfectly good administrative and organisational reasons why passports might be useful but I don't think they should be mandatory or require government permission to obtain. If private airlines or shipping companies want to require their passengers to have passports (maybe even private ones they issue themselves) then that's fine by me but they shouldn't be made to require them by government.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 15 December, 2018, 06:18:27 PM
Then you need one. 

You just don't want to need one. 

Or rather, you want to need as many as the wealthy people who run transport companies say you need, for whenever you need to use their services.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 06:27:02 PM
'I shouldn't need a passport.'
'But you do need one.'
'But I shouldn't.'
'But you do.'

Think I'll take a break from this particular argument and make myself a mojito.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:42:06 PM

Fundamentally, I don't need one. It's a travel permit, that's all. Just because governments tell me I need one, that doesn't make it so. They need me to have one and they need me to believe it's impossible to travel without one - which it patently isn't (I looked it up - the Queen doesn't have one and she jets about all over the shop), geese travel thousands of miles every year without a shred of paperwork.

I know this is an academic argument at present but, in essence, passports are simply one aspect of the pervasive illusion of control. In reality, I am a natural, flesh and blood creature belonging to this planet and naturally free to roam. The Powers That Shouldn't Be, however, have reduced this right to the level of a mere privilege, to be granted, denied or withdrawn at their whim.

I also know that I'm not free to travel over imaginary lines on the map without imaginary permission because That's the Way Things Are, but That's the Way Things Are doesn't necessarily mean that The Way Things Are are right (or, of course, wrong).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2018, 06:43:56 PM
No passports?  So federalisation of the European Union, then?  You shouldn't have voted Leave, Sharky.

Incidentally, are there actually any Leavers still on the forum?  Or have they all been chased off by the lentil-munchers?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 06:47:22 PM
Seem to remember Old Tankie being a staunch Leaver, though I don't think he's been around lately.  Despite loathing his political opinions, I liked the guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:48:43 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 06:27:02 PM'I shouldn't need a passport.' 'But you do need one.' 'But I shouldn't.' 'But you do.' Think I'll take a break from this particular argument and make myself a mojito.
It's not about the passport, or the "need" for one, itself. It's about natural human rights and how some humans restrict and/or curtail the rights of other humans.  The passport is just an example of one of the many manifestations of this idea. You're right, though, I'd rather have a mojito than argue about it as well. Email me one over...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 06:50:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
... passports are simply one aspect of the pervasive illusion of control. In reality, I am a natural, flesh and blood creature belonging to this planet and naturally free to roam. The Powers That Shouldn't Be, however, have reduced this right to the level of a mere privilege, to be granted, denied or withdrawn at their whim.

Do you have the natural, inalienable right to right to roam in Alton Towers?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:52:17 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2018, 06:43:56 PMYou shouldn't have voted Leave, Sharky.
I don't vote at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 06:53:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:48:43 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 December, 2018, 06:27:02 PM'I shouldn't need a passport.' 'But you do need one.' 'But I shouldn't.' 'But you do.' Think I'll take a break from this particular argument and make myself a mojito.
It's not about the passport, or the "need" for one, itself. It's about natural human rights and how some humans restrict and/or curtail the rights of other humans.  The passport is just an example of one of the many manifestations of this idea. You're right, though, I'd rather have a mojito than argue about it as well. Email me one over...

Get your 3d printer ready.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 15 December, 2018, 07:00:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
geese travel thousands of miles every year without a shred of paperwork.

...but move into their territory when they don't want you to and they'll try to kill you (whatever you are), like most other species on the planet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:02:16 PM
Quote from: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 06:50:02 PMDo you have the natural, inalienable right to right to roam in Alton Towers?
Interesting question. If there's an angry mob after me, intent on doing me harm, and Alton Towers is directly in my path and going around it would result in me getting a good and possibly terminal biffing then I'd argue that yes, I have the right to enter and roam Alton Towers in search of safety. However, absent any such life-threatening circumstance I'd say no, I don't have the right to roam Alton Towers, or any private property, without the consent of the property owner. Your question, however, raises a crucial point - are countries private property and, if so, who owns them? It would appear that governments believe countries to be private property - otherwise how would they justify charging rent (property taxes, etc.) for living in them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 07:22:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:02:16 PM
I don't have the right to roam Alton Towers, or any private property, without the consent of the property owner

Why do you respect the right of a PLC* to extract a profit more than the desire of a community to know who's in their midst?


* Merlin Entertainments Plc (https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/08700412-merlin-entertainments-plc), in this case
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:28:41 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 15 December, 2018, 07:00:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
geese travel thousands of miles every year without a shred of paperwork.

...but move into their territory when they don't want you to and they'll try to kill you (whatever you are), like most other species on the planet.

Not sure that's entirely the same argument. Geese come from Canada to winter in the area where I live and they get on fine with all the other birds once they arrive. I'm sure there must be a few squabbles but it's never all-out goose v duck war.

Similarly, many animals show tolerance for each other around watering holes on land or cleaning stations in the oceans, for example. Many animals will, however, get shirty if their nests, young, social group or persons are threatened - but that's the right to self defence, which is slightly different to the right of movement.

Whilst animal rights and behaviours can give us insights into the natural rights of other species they cannot, in my view, be applied precisely to the natural rights of the human species. Each species has its own specific - but fundamentally similar - natural behaviours and instincts which give rise to their own "rights," as it were, just as the basic behaviours and instincts of human beings form the basis of our own rights.

By the way, as social animals I would define a human right as the right to undertake any action that does not harm another human being. Vegans take this one step further to the right to undertake any action that does not harm another cognizant being. I'd love to be able to take it that far but I'm afraid I'm a bit of a carnivore at present.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:49:17 PM
Quote from: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 07:22:54 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:02:16 PM
I don't have the right to roam Alton Towers, or any private property, without the consent of the property owner

Why do you respect the right of a PLC* to extract a profit more than the desire of a community to know who's in their midst?


* Merlin Entertainments Plc (https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/08700412-merlin-entertainments-plc), in this case

I respect property rights, to a degree. I respect the closed door of your home, under normal conditions, and your right to do as you please (so long as you're not harming others) inside that space. I haven't read that link, sorry, but I also respect the property rights of companies to precisely the same extent - no harm, no foul.

If, however, harm is being done to others and the only way to stop it is to invade private property, no matter who owns it, then I say invade away.

In the spirit of full disclosure, however, I have recently begun to question the libertarian principle of the absolute right to own property, specifically land. On the one hand, it seems necessary for people to own land and homes but, on the other, how much? If a person can own an acre of land he can own ten acres, a thousand acres, an island, a county, a country, a continent, a planet, a solar system. To own land leads to ruling land, a troublesome concept to me because rulers are, in my view, at the root of most of our problems - yet to limit or restrict land ownership is equally troublesome as it necessitates externally enforced limits, which I'm also against. I've been trying to think of some solution to this paradox but, so far, have only been able to think of something along the lines of changing the right of ownership to the right of stewardship based on the fundamental concept that the planet does not belong to us but that we belong to the planet. Other libertarians I talk to about this are, on the whole, unwilling to even discuss it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 07:58:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:49:17 PM
I respect the closed door of your home, under normal conditions, and your right to do as you please (so long as you're not harming others) inside that space ... I also respect the property rights of companies to precisely the same extent

Why is a community, rather than an individual, less deserving of your respect than an amorphous, unnatural entity such as a Plc?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 08:45:47 PM

They deserve the same respect because communities and companies are made up of individuals. One person, in my view, has exactly the same rights and responsibilities as two people, ten or a million - they are indivisible, not cumulative. Do no harm and do as you will, do harm and face the consequences.

Statists' views are the opposite and boil down quite simply to might makes right. They give themselves the superhuman right to make legislation, pretending that this is Law, to protect favoured companies from regulation, prosecution and even competition.

I have nothing against companies, in principle, so long as they adhere to common rights, responsibilities and Law. Indeed, the only death penalty I am fully in favour of is the execution of companies (not the people who own or work for them) who do willful harm. For example, if the restaurant chain "MacBurgers" knowingly or negligently poisons its clients it should be executed - its name stricken out,its profits and assets seized and used to recompense the shareholders (if innocent) and the remainder, if any, gifted to the communities in which the branches are located (maybe even given to the local - if innocent - employees) to be run as individual standalone businesses. This done, those responsible, including those who knowingly went along with it ("I was just following orders" is no excuse) should be tried in court and dealt with accordingly.

And now I'm off to watch a dvd.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 08:52:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 08:45:47 PM
They deserve the same respect because communities and companies are made up of individuals. One person, in my view, has exactly the same rights and responsibilities as two people, ten or a million

So why don't you respect the right of a community to control entry into their territory in the way you would for any Plc?

Enjoy your film, Shark.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 December, 2018, 09:49:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
Fundamentally, I don't need one.

Fundamentally, yes you do.  (Assuming you wish to travel unmolested from one country to another where there is a legal requirement for you to produce a passport.  You could attempt to evade the border authorities disguised as a goose, I suppose.  Good luck, and please send photos.)

Perhaps you meant "ideologically"? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 11:17:05 PM

I did enjoy the film thanks, Frank. Of course I respect the right of a community to exclude me or anyone else from their territory if they so desire. I might not like it, it leads to all kinds of unsavoury possibilities like whites only enclaves and such but, if they own the land and make those rules, and apply them Lawfully, who am I to interfere? There are plenty of other places I could go instead. (We might be touching here upon the idea that entire countries can be owned, but I really don't see how except by a state. But as states are basically small groups of people claiming rights they don't have, I don't think that kind of ownership is valid.)

Funt, no, I mean fundamentally, not ideologically. As you say yourself, it's the "authorities" stopping me, the state. And it does so using superhuman rights it bestows upon itself, which are, at core, illusory. The fact that the illusion is so widely accepted as reality is what leads to their power. If people stopped believing in the illusion it would have no power. I've already said that legality, stemming from legislation, is the simulacrum of Law, that the authorities write down whatever they want and pretend it's Law. Law never changes, thou shalt not kill being as true today as it was thousands of years ago, but legality changes all the time - one of the best examples being prohibition in the U.S. Government says alcohol is legal, then it says it's illegal, then it says it's legal again when, Lawfully, drinking alcohol has been permissible since it was first discovered. Even elephants and wasps get pissed. As a general rule of thumb, if it's natural it's Lawful. Fundamentally, then, I don't need a passport - it's the ideology of statists that says I do, and the ideology of statists that prevents me from travelling without one.

(Deadpool 2, by the way - and very entertaining it was an' all.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 11:28:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 11:17:05 PM
I respect the right of a community to exclude me or anyone else from their territory ... if they own the land and make those rules, and apply them Lawfully, who am I to interfere?

... But as states are basically small groups of people claiming rights they don't have, I don't think that kind of ownership is valid

Why isn't a state a community, with the same rights as a community?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 11:36:08 PM

That's the question, isn't it? Do you have the same rights as the Queen? Does your local parish council have the same rights as your local county council? Does your local county council have the same rights as the government? Do your neighbours have the same rights as MPs? It's my argument that, in reality, they do, but most people believe otherwise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 11:57:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 11:36:08 PM
Does your local parish council have the same rights as your local county council? Does your local county council have the same rights as the government? Do your neighbours have the same rights as MPs?

They seem exactly the same to me, too.

How high up the chain you outline do we have to go before these organisations cease being communities electing representatives to carry out their will and become The State, oppressing the people and laying claim to rights they don't have?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 December, 2018, 12:09:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 06:52:17 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 December, 2018, 06:43:56 PMYou shouldn't have voted Leave, Sharky.
I don't vote at all.

Whatever its flaws, we do have a system that allows people to express their views and determine outcomes. If you choose not to vote, you lose the right to whinge about the outcome. I like asking people who deploy the "unelected bureaucrats" argument who they voted for as MEP and very few voted, or even know who stood. Democracy is the least-worst tool we've got, -I frankly don't give a shit what a non-voter thinks, as they have abrogated their collective responsibility to make sure the system works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 12:45:50 AM

Frank, until you get to the first person who believes he or she has the right to give you orders.

DDD - I don't vote because I don't have the right to put someone into power who may demand that you do something you don't want to do. I believe exactly the opposite to you - if you vote, then you have no right to complain because you've agreed to be ruled by whomever wins. Moreover, a person who votes believes everyone must submit to that rule whether they like it or not.

I don't want to harm anybody, I don't want to rule anybody, I don't want to force anybody to live in a way I find acceptable - neither do I have the right to do any of these things. By not voting, I have every right to complain when these things are done to me without my consent.

A voter consents to being ruled, a non-voter does not.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 16 December, 2018, 01:22:02 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 07:28:41 PM
Similarly, many animals show tolerance for each other around watering holes on land or cleaning stations in the oceans, for example. Many animals will, however, get shirty if their nests, young, social group or persons are threatened - but that's the right to self defence, which is slightly different to the right of movement.

I had half of a rather long, multi-paragraphed and nuanced reply typed out and then the power went off for five hours, but basically...

Set up a bird table and you'll soon see a bit more competition.

..and...

It's all tied up together. Animals don't like others, (mostly of their own species), encroaching upon their territory for pretty much the same reasons that crop up whenever anybody starts going on about needing strict border control and immigration laws. The same perceived threats. It's fear of someone from outside using up your limited resources, fear that they'll spread disease, fear that they'll take what's rightfully yours, fear that they'll do something to the children, fear that they'll take over and you'll have to do what they want, fear that they'll do you harm. Some of the time there may indeed be a genuine threat but most of the time it's like a cat reacting to a cucumber.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 December, 2018, 02:13:34 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 December, 2018, 11:17:05 PM
Funt, no, I mean fundamentally, not ideologically. As you say yourself, it's the "authorities" stopping me, the state. And it does so using superhuman rights it bestows upon itself, which are, at core, illusory. The fact that the illusion is so widely accepted as reality is what leads to their power. If people stopped believing in the illusion it would have no power. I've already said that legality, stemming from legislation, is the simulacrum of Law, that the authorities write down whatever they want and pretend it's Law. Law never changes, thou shalt not kill being as true today as it was thousands of years ago, but legality changes all the time - one of the best examples being prohibition in the U.S. Government says alcohol is legal, then it says it's illegal, then it says it's legal again when, Lawfully, drinking alcohol has been permissible since it was first discovered. Even elephants and wasps get pissed. As a general rule of thumb, if it's natural it's Lawful. Fundamentally, then, I don't need a passport - it's the ideology of statists that says I do, and the ideology of statists that prevents me from travelling without one.

TL;DR.  You're wall-of-texting the fuck out of me, here.  Basically, you abuse the English language by applying new (& false) meanings to existing words.  It's impossible to have a coherent debate with you.  You're the illusion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 06:07:11 AM

Sniddleprang rolk lurgerfrink lufko!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 December, 2018, 02:08:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 06:07:11 AM

Sniddleprang rolk lurgerfrink lufko!

Hmmm. Much as I like the word 'sniddleprang*', it's things like this that make people think you're trolling rather than debating.

*I had a Thai girlfriend called Prang, so maybe I'm just being nostalgic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 December, 2018, 02:46:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 12:45:50 AM
Quote from: Frank on 15 December, 2018, 11:57:44 PM
How high up the chain you outline do we have to go before these organisations cease being communities electing representatives to carry out their will and become The State, oppressing the people and laying claim to rights they don't have?

... until you get to the first person who believes he or she has the right to give you orders

The check-in clerk at Terminal 2 isn't on a power trip

You fundamentally disagree with her asking you to show a valid passport, yet you respect her counterpart's right to order you away from Alton Towers unless you bung her a few quid?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 03:04:28 PM

I'm sorry.

I was just trying to lighten the mood. I know I bang on about this stuff and can be verbose but that's because the questions I get here are challenging and I feel I need to give detailed answers - answers I'm generally formulating as I write based on my own knowledge and beliefs.

People grow tired of this, I get that (I'm as bored and frustrated by all the Brexit talk as everyone else is about my posts), so when I think people have had enough I think it's best to bow out on a lighter note rather than keep going.

Once again, I am sorry for misjudging my last post. It would do me no good to start a slanging match - a lesson it's taken me a while to learn - because we all have our perspectives but we're all in the same shit and we either swim together or sink together.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 December, 2018, 03:26:19 PM
I want to hear more about Jayzus sniddling Prang. It's been too long since bumsex girl and the charity shop fumbles, as a boring monogamist I need to live vicariously through the grubby people I meet on the internet. You know who you are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 03:30:50 PM
Quote from: Frank on 16 December, 2018, 02:46:52 PM



The check-in clerk at Terminal 2 isn't on a power trip

You fundamentally disagree with her asking you to show a valid passport, yet you respect her counterpart's right to order you away from Alton Towers unless you bung her a few quid?




I think we're conflating the way things are with the way I think things could be, reality with philosophy, if you will.

The main point is to think about the nature of state power and whether it's valid or not. Criticising check-in clerks for operating under current conditions does me no good whatsoever - just because the clerk doesn't see the world as I do doesn't justify an outpouring of my wrath or scorn.

There are thousands of rabbit holes to dive into once we get into the minutiae and few of them lead to satisfactory outcomes - the so-called "truth" community is particularly prone to rabbitholeitus, countless people down countless rabbit holes all screaming at each other that their rabbit hole is the right one and all the others are invalid. It's counterproductive and even dangerous.

Can we back up and discuss the nature of state power? Do you think it's right that some human beings, through birth, wealth, strength or popularity, assume rights the rest of us don't have? Do you even think they do this to begin with? If these illusory powers, as I call them, do exist, are they, as I contend, a bad thing?

Let's see if we can come to some agreement, or not, on this basic premise before picking apart what it means and whether there are alternatives.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 16 December, 2018, 03:35:17 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 December, 2018, 03:26:19 PM
It's been too long since bumsex girl

Look how riotously filthy this place used to be!

https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=21891.msg374820#msg374820


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 December, 2018, 03:46:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 December, 2018, 02:08:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 06:07:11 AM

Sniddleprang rolk lurgerfrink lufko!

*I had a Thai girlfriend called Prang, so maybe I'm just being nostalgic.


And was Prang sniddly?  And did you ever witness her lurgerfrinking Lufko?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 December, 2018, 04:10:46 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 16 December, 2018, 03:46:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 December, 2018, 02:08:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 December, 2018, 06:07:11 AM

Sniddleprang rolk lurgerfrink lufko!

*I had a Thai girlfriend called Prang, so maybe I'm just being nostalgic.


And was Prang sniddly?  And did you ever witness her lurgerfrinking Lufko?

I assume it was Prang lurgerfrinking Lufko that lead to the breakup.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 December, 2018, 05:32:09 PM
Quote from: Frank on 16 December, 2018, 03:35:17 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 16 December, 2018, 03:26:19 PM
It's been too long since bumsex girl

Look how riotously filthy this place used to be!

https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=21891.msg374820#msg374820

Those were the days!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 December, 2018, 09:11:48 PM
She was sniddly enough, I suppose, yes. I hope Lufko is happy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2018, 07:06:09 PM
I noticed on the news that the evil Europeans have forced Theresa May (who they have locked in the Black Tower of Brussels) to give up Northern Ireland, build a floating fence in the Irish Sea and also postpone her crucial vote until after Yuletide.

The Loony Left Corbynites threatened to usurp the throne unless they got a new date on which to vote.  Why they believe they'll get a vote on a set date (given what happened last week) is a mystery.  All that is clear is that they shouldn't be trusted because of their shabby, disheveled appearance.

Meanwhile, Tony Blair, speaking (loudly because he's forgotten to turn on his hearing aid) from his retirement community, suggested that there should be a new referendum where the people get to decide.

Opinions are divided on a new referendum but can be neatly summed up into these three options:

Oh dear, five is right out...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 December, 2018, 08:26:55 PM
I assume "Retirement Community" is the name of Tony Blair's yacht located atop the waves of a lake filled with the blood of Iraqis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2018, 09:16:05 PM
When he got that job as a peace envoy my metaphorical tea splattered all over humanity and my spirit was squashed forever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 December, 2018, 09:19:56 PM

"It's a big club and you ain't in it." - George Carlin.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2018, 09:26:23 PM
"I would never want to belong to any club that would have someone like me for a member" - Woody Allen (as Alvy in Annie Hall).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 December, 2018, 09:26:52 PM
I must say, from a person outside the tent looking in, the entire yellow vest uprising in France is a strangly cathartic one. Tens of thousands of people from all walks of working class life, from the far left to far right, for once putting aside their collective differences (for better or ill, certainly a thin spectrum of anti-immigration neo-nazis attempting to manipulate the situation in their favour isn't doing the movement any favours) to say fuck you to unfair tax rises.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 December, 2018, 10:00:19 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2018, 09:26:23 PM
"I would never want to belong to any club that would have someone like me for a member" - Woody Allen (as Alvy in Annie Hall).

Ref: Groucho Marx (https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/04/18/groucho-resigns/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 December, 2018, 11:55:42 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 17 December, 2018, 09:26:52 PM
I must say, from a person outside the tent looking in, the entire yellow vest uprising in France is a strangly cathartic one. Tens of thousands of people from all walks of working class life, from the far left to far right, for once putting aside their collective differences (for better or ill, certainly a thin spectrum of anti-immigration neo-nazis attempting to manipulate the situation in their favour isn't doing the movement any favours) to say fuck you to unfair tax rises.

And then killing people over it.



Also... anti-pollution taxes are unfair?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 December, 2018, 11:56:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 17 December, 2018, 10:00:19 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2018, 09:26:23 PM
"I would never want to belong to any club that would have someone like me for a member" - Woody Allen (as Alvy in Annie Hall).

Ref: Groucho Marx (https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/04/18/groucho-resigns/)


I did wonder when I saw Woody Allen credited...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 December, 2018, 12:43:30 AM

Pierre: "I 'ate zeese unjust taxes."
Jaques: "Moi too. We should protest."
Pierre: "Oui! But, 'ow will we know oo is oo?"
Jaques: "We should all wear ze yellow vests."
Pierre: "Formidable!"
Both (chanting): "Down with zis kind of thing!"
President: "Uh-oh, zis looks bad."
Ministres: "Oui, but 'ow do we stop eet?"
DGSI: "Make zem look bad."
President: "But 'ow? Zey are just ordinary folk."
DGSI: "Pah! Simples. Louis - 'ere, take zis yellow vest and bag of rocks."
Pierre: "Down with zis kind of... Ow! Oo smashed that window!?!"
Jaques: "I got glass on me!"
Louis: "Down with zis kind of thing! Ha, ha, ha!"
Sûreté: "Right you two, come wiz me."
Pierre: "What?"
Jaques: "But we did not do nothing!"
Sûreté: "Men in yellow vests are throwing ze rocks. You 'ave yellow vests."
Pierre: "We all 'ave yellow vests!"
Jaques: "Careful, now..."
Sûreté: "Do not resist, creeps!"
Pierre: "Zis is an outrage!"
Jaques: "It's not so bad. At least zis cell gets ze sun in ze afternoons."
Pierre: "Hmph. "Yellow vests," ee says. Bloody idiot."
President: "He, he, he. Merci."
DGSI: "No problem. Can we 'ave some more money?"
President: "I don't see why not, I will just raise ze taxes a bit."
DGSI "Ha, ha, ha."
President: "Ho, ho, ho."
Ministres: "He, he, he."
Pierre & Jaques: "Boo, hoo, hoo."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 18 December, 2018, 11:25:34 AM
Here in the UK, our own yellow vest protesters are taking the opportunity to shout racist abuse at reporters:
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1074688060418334722

Lovely bunch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 December, 2018, 11:58:27 AM
Well it took less than 48 hours for that to go sour. There is a yellow vests anyi-austerity march in Manchester on monday, be keeping my eye on that, hope mone of that nastiness kicks off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 December, 2018, 12:22:17 PM
Another few chips removed from my rapidly diminishing faith in humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 December, 2018, 07:53:49 PM
We had one In Dublin at the weekend too, to judge by the feeds of various Facebook friends. Apparently the hundred-odd bandwagoners ncluded pro-Palestine (yay) and anti-flouride (nay) groups. Nothing like sending a clear and unambiguous message of solidarity to their French brethren.

I'm all for mass protest, and nobody is better at it than the French, but it depresses me that it's the mildest possible environmental levy that has occasioned it, rather than the imminent global crisis itself. Very soon we are going to have to rethink distribution of national resources completely to tackle climate change and its inevitable effects, and I can promise you that the rich aren't going to be funding it in any fair or significantly impactful way - it'll be us lot who'll bear the brunt, and we'll be watching our lifestyles and our imagined futures disintegrate.  This isn't even the beginning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 18 December, 2018, 08:55:06 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 December, 2018, 07:53:49 PM
and we'll be watching our lifestyles and our imagined futures disintegrate. 
Along with our teeth if the anti-flouride had their way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 December, 2018, 09:04:37 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 December, 2018, 07:53:49 PMit depresses me that it's the mildest possible environmental levy that has occasioned it

I would have preferred Americans finally snap over the way slaves were treated, but in the end what did for their tolerance of the British was a tax on tea.  Greatness from small beginnings and all that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 December, 2018, 01:27:38 PM
It's looking very like no deal then.  Scary times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moogie101 on 19 December, 2018, 01:36:18 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 December, 2018, 01:27:38 PM
It's looking very like no deal then.  Scary times.

Nah, clearly this is all just posturing on behalf of May to try & push her shitty deal through as well as to convince the EU she's serious about walking away with "no deal" to try & get more concessions to help sell it to the hard-line Brexiteers.

I'm just amazed that despite not having done anything for the last two years, there's only 100 days left & yet they're all off for a three week Christmas holiday.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 December, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
I can't think of what further concessions the EU could make at this point,  never mind what concessions would satisfy the frothing Downton Abbey extras that apparently alone know 'the will of the people', in much the same way the Pope knows the will of God. There was never going to be a deal that represented the UK's interests, because leaving the EU isn't in the UK's interests.

It's No Deal and/or a second referendum now,  surely. But at least to pass the time we'll get to listen to the people that called Corbyn a terrorist and an anti-semite in print be outraged for calling someone stupid under his breath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 December, 2018, 05:34:48 PM

Spent the last 20 minutes watching looped video showing the puckered lips of an elderly gentleman gently undulating in extreme close-up and in slow motion.

No idea what he said, but I would definitely now bang Jeremy Corbyn.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 December, 2018, 05:57:44 PM
It's No-Deal lads; make sure you all have digital subs.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 December, 2018, 06:08:49 PM
Shite, never even thought of that! As digital-averse I find I'm now counting on Prof Bear to smuggle the hard stuff across the border concealed in Dickhead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2018, 06:16:06 PM
I get my comics from a standing order with Forbidden Planet, so I'm used to missing issues on a regular basis.

Quote from: Frank on 19 December, 2018, 05:34:48 PM

I would definitely now bang Jeremy Corbyn.

Called it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 December, 2018, 02:46:47 PM
I'm not sure how much the law has changed but listening to the Levellers' Julie EP with its section on the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill, I think we really missed something this year.  Boris' offer to lie in front of the Bulldozers at Heathrow when they move in is apparently a criminal offence courtesy of his own party.  So basically when he made that statement he was committing to the execution of a criminal offence?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 December, 2018, 03:58:52 PM
Tories literally tore small animals to shreds in violation of the law on Boxing Day and the police outright refuse to investigate the matter.  The law does not apply equally to all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 27 December, 2018, 04:01:09 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 December, 2018, 02:46:47 PM
I'm not sure how much the law has changed but listening to the Levellers' Julie EP with its section on the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill, I think we really missed something this year.  Boris' offer to lie in front of the Bulldozers at Heathrow when they move in is apparently a criminal offence courtesy of his own party.  So basically when he made that statement he was committing to the execution of a criminal offence?

Pretty sure he got away with worse while he was mayor (dodgy deals, selling off prime land to his mates at knock-down prices, etc).  Not to mention his pre-mayoral career.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 December, 2018, 07:29:51 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 December, 2018, 03:58:52 PM
Tories literally tore small animals to shreds in violation of the law on Boxing Day and the police outright refuse to investigate the matter.  The law does not apply equally to all.

It was interesting watching the video of the protests in a bit more detail.  IIRC the Mail (hey, I also like the Daily Mash and Rochdale Herald) had a picture of the woman kicking out at a man seemingly stood minding his own business.  If you watch the video the gentleman in question turned around, walked over to her and shoved her back into the crowd a few frames before.  Now granted she did not go with the most sensible response but she's the one being painted as an extremist rather than him being painted as a thug ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 28 December, 2018, 10:43:33 AM
I like the tone deaf Mail headline that says protesters were terrifying the horses. Pretty sure that fox was terrified while your dogs were tearing him to pieces, mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 December, 2018, 02:46:27 PM
Prime D-Mail: "Black family occupies council house (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6529111/Disgraced-Labour-MP-Kate-Osamor-says-proud-live-council-house.html)"

Strip away the trappings of the aristocracy and fox hunting is basically one of those expose stories that papers run every few years or so when one of their copy writers finds out about some whacky forrin culling practices.  I mean, it's not just killing a fox, it's chasing it down with dogs while dressed in some kind of fetish outfit from a Pornhub video, letting the dogs tear the fox to pieces, then rubbing the remains on the faces of children.  This is messed-up shit meant to reinforce the idea in toff children that morality does not apply to their social tier, and I have no fucking clue how it isn't traumatic for them to experience it.
(dough prob'ly worse for the fox, I imagine)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 December, 2018, 08:33:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 December, 2018, 02:46:27 PM
Prime D-Mail: "Black family occupies council house (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6529111/Disgraced-Labour-MP-Kate-Osamor-says-proud-live-council-house.html)"

I followed that link and was bewildered (both by the main story and) by the click-bait side column "Femail Today".  If you strip out the celebrity nature of each of the stories, it's just a list of human banality:


Etc. (for ever)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 December, 2018, 09:30:12 PM

I've heard it said that literacy is a sign of freedom but, I wonder, is that still true if there's nothing worth reading?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 December, 2018, 11:34:16 PM
My main thought on the fox-hunting is that those selfsame people only do it because it's (more) illegal to hunt immigrants. For now.

Imagine their thrill "controlling vermin" of the sand-n****r variety in the traditional manner!  How much better thst Tarquin and Persephone be blooded with the remains of a vanquished enemy of the English way of life. And after all, if they come to your country, they should respect your traditions, and it's a humane way to deal with their reckless breeding in an environment where their natural enemies of drone strikes and cluster bombs are no longer a threat. For now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 December, 2018, 11:40:32 PM

Christ.

And I thought I was dark :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 December, 2018, 12:00:15 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 December, 2018, 11:40:32 PM

And I thought I was dark :(

Do you think he came here from the DC Universe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2018, 12:42:04 AM
Cruelty to animals is one of the top predictors for sociopaths and their subset psychopaths, so I can confidently speculate what an institution dedicated to the practice would like get up to if it had half a chance. Already devoid of empathy and mired in the belief that their own traditions have inherently superior value, all it takes is that next step in dehumanisation that you can see in almost every piece about refugees and asylum seekers. What is this obsession with borders if not an enlarged fear of foxes in the henhouse?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 December, 2018, 03:58:43 AM
Well, I just made the mistake of watching a Joe Rogan video on Youtube.

Might as well cut out the algorythmic middle-man and go straight to Pornhub to watch self congratulatory masturbation
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 06:27:11 AM
It's hyperbolic to say that all fox hunters are on a slippery slope to murdering immigrants.  I've never been a fan of fox hunting, and I hate the phrase "loony left", but if one were left-leaning and one were to say that fox-hunting is tantamount to people-hunting, then one would be talking like a loon (wot is left).  Wouldn't one?  What, what?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2018, 07:44:23 AM
Hyperbole? On the Political Thread?  Surely some mistake?

It's probably quite damning enough to say that foxhunters enjoy terrifying and torturing small animals while parading around looking like the cavalry regiment of the KKK, but I like to draw that extra line that casts aspersions on what else that type of institution might secretly be into, a conclusion that is given some small weight by the strong correlation between psychopathic murderers and animal cruelty. Using overwhelming force to kill,  taking pleasure in the pain of the weak.  I flick my gaze in the direction of the Trump boys. Certain activities and the attitudes they display make me deeply suspicious about what else goes on in the minds of the participants.

In short I hate the practice with every fibre of my being, and I want you to too, working through the deployment of a rhetorical device.

Don't get me started on fly-tippers and people who break young trees.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 December, 2018, 08:12:59 AM

Then, when the "hunt" is over, some of them jet off to Bilderberg meetings (in Gotham).

It has been said that certain of the "elite" families raise their offspring to be sociopaths - wouldn't want something trivial like empathy jeopardising all that lovely power and wealth. Whether this is true or not I don't know but Tordels' mention of fox hunting and its practices and traditions lends some circumstantial weight to this idea.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 December, 2018, 03:40:03 PM

It all do be kickin' off down Somerset way... (https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/yellow-vest-protests-spreading-somerset-2368394?fbclid=IwAR0DAG1WLmlfO45KyZb4DsMsFWeSicF5V4lZWaAtibI2Q-HMS0fCLzLNhq0)

How long before this 'Yellow Vest' thing gets hi-jacked and used to spread fear and dissent, you reckon?

What?




Oh.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 December, 2018, 04:00:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 December, 2018, 07:44:23 AM
In short I hate the practice with every fibre of my being, ...


I know what you mean.  I get the same feeling when I see people using comic sans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 December, 2018, 04:35:56 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 29 December, 2018, 04:00:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 December, 2018, 07:44:23 AM
In short I hate the practice with every fibre of my being, ...


I know what you mean.  I get the same feeling when I see people using comic sans.

Exactly like that, legibility and good taste being torn apart by the hounds of ignorance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 December, 2018, 06:59:34 PM
Typical hyperbole of the hard left Stalinist Lennonist Marxist cultural cucktard brigade.  It is a recorded fact that the vast majority of foxhunters rarely go on to tear any other living being apart with dogs apart from other foxes.  Foxhunters aren't sexually aroused by immigrants.
Foxhunting as a gateway to other acts of violent sexual depravity simply hasn't been scientifically proven.  Those pedophile rings and the culture of Nazi fetishism found in the upper classes are entirely unrelated phenomena.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 10:07:35 PM
Oh for fuck's sake.  Someone compares fox hunters to murderers and somehow it's weird to point out that's a bit of an extreme position to take?

On my planet the sky is blue.

On a related note, blaming the upper classes for Brexit (or anti-immigration) is just odd as all get out, given that the referendum was won by over 50%.  They're hardly upper class if they make up over half the country.  Every time I watch the news, they're interviewing working class bigots who "don't want none of 'em scroungers round 'ere", not posh twits on horses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 10:17:53 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 29 December, 2018, 06:59:34 PM
...Nazi fetishism found in the upper classes...

Yes, like this (https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-45919730).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 December, 2018, 10:21:48 PM
No wonder Remain lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 December, 2018, 11:24:16 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 10:17:53 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 29 December, 2018, 06:59:34 PM
...Nazi fetishism found in the upper classes...

Yes, like this (https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-45919730).

What a wonderfully potty story - reminds me of "Three Lions" a bit.

"...over to his Army property where they spent an evening firing arrows at a burning cross in the back garden."


Then you get to those last two paragraphs and it's all about our secret policing bodies being given more to do to combat this kind of hateful buffoonery.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 December, 2018, 12:13:11 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 10:07:35 PMEvery time I watch the news, they're interviewing working class bigots who "don't want none of 'em scroungers round 'ere", not posh twits on horses.

Have you noticed the type of people that are cheerleading these attitudes from the political arena? Do Rees-Mogg and Johnson strike you as working-class? Do dishonest/disingenuous politicians and their copiously funded media campaigns have no influence?

Yes, it was an extreme position to equate fox-hunting with the Deadliest Game, and as noted it was a rhetorical device intended to compare the pageantry and enthusiastic cruelty of the hunt to the way refugees and immigrants are characterised as vermin, and much joy and satisfaction is taken in their 'control'. Both attitudes display the same pragmatic justifications that in my opinion actually mask a disturbing lack of simple empathy and an inherent pleasure in applying personal and institutional superiority to cause pain in the vulnerable. I suspect - and criminal psychology supports my view - that these attitudes and practices are common in the same people.

I apologise for not being relentlessly literal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 December, 2018, 12:49:26 AM
Well, I never asked you to be entirely literal all the time.   And I didn't argue that there wasn't a lack of empathy inherent in fox-hunting.  And I never said that some upper class people aren't anti-immigration. 

I was taken aback (and worried about the health of the debate) when you equated hunting a wild animal with hunting a human, to the extent that you said they only hunt foxes because they aren't allowed to hunt humans.  If you were exaggerating for effect (which wasn't clear by any means), then you shouldn't be surprised when it works and has an effect.

Quote from: TordelBack on 28 December, 2018, 11:34:16 PM
My main thought on the fox-hunting is that those selfsame people only do it because it's (more) illegal to hunt immigrants. For now.

I only responded after that because Phoncible P. Bear decided it would be fun to pour petrol all over the aristocracy by calling them Nazis and pedophiles.  He's hilarious: so much so that I need a sticky note to remind me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 December, 2018, 01:07:48 AM
What I personally find most disturbing about where we are at present is that the every real concerns of the most vulnerable in society have been grossly distorted and utilised in the service of the needs of those who have created the conditions for some of these ideas to evolve.  2008  began a process in which the state was progressively rolled back, the support of those with greatest need was assaulted and the gains of those in the strongest positions were entrenched.  The referendum campaign piggybacked on the anger and discontent, or rather distorted and abused it.  Two years on, it has become talismanic despite its tainted nature.

The aristocracy / elite of this nation may not be full on national socialists or paedophiles (and for f***s sake can we stop using the latter as a casual insult since they are anything but human) but they are definitely calculated and devious bastards who care absolutely nothing for the interests of the population as a whole.  Let's face it, we are talking about a group of individuals who are essentially descended from the most devious and calculating bullies on the block.   HRH Mrs Windsor is descended from the biggest of them all.  These are individuals responsible for some of the greatest atrocities in history.  The national socialists made only one mistake compared to some of this crowd; they lost.  The aristocracy of this country built a nation on trade in human beings and exploitation of the resources of other nations and the people of this nation.

It is understandable that so many have given up on the political process and embraced extremist ideologies. After all, politicians have given up on them.  Other than the vague pretence at concern every 5 years (or more frequently if it serves the interests of the ruling party) as a rule politicians really don't give a damn.  The current political crisis is solely down to the utterly inept attempt by Cameron to consolidate his position of power so what else is there to say?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 December, 2018, 04:38:23 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2018, 10:07:35 PM
On a related note, blaming the upper classes for Brexit (or anti-immigration) is just odd as all get out, given that the referendum was won by over 50%.  They're hardly upper class if they make up over half the country.

The leave vote don't make up over half the country (and the referendum wasn't won by over 50%).  37% of the electorate voted leave, 35% voted remain.  That's after the right to vote was taken away from many people (due to recent reforms to the electoral system).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 December, 2018, 05:24:01 AM
The referendum was won by over 50% of those that voted.  I could just as easily say "they're hardly upper class if they make up 37% of the country".  Perhaps 6% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Class_Survey).

My general point is that it's weird (i.e. too easy, lazy & factually incorrect) to blame the upper classes (or even specifically fox-hunters) for Brexit (or anti-immigration generally), when it's a cross-class thing.  Those 37% can't all claim to have been brain-washed by Boris and Rees-Mogg.

Notice Tjm86 and the casual bigotry of "as a rule politicians really don't give a damn".  How can politicians become a hive entity who are all devoid of care?  How can there be a homogeneous aristocracy who are allsociopaths?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 December, 2018, 06:59:10 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 December, 2018, 12:13:11 AM


Have you noticed the type of people that are cheerleading these attitudes from the political arena?



Step One: Locate a useful idiot (Tommy Robinson, for example).

Step Two: Fund, encourage and spotlight the useful idiot.

Step Three: Make the useful idiot the face of something ("Leave," for example), thereby spreading the fallacious opinion of guilt by association. If I now support Leave, it must be because I am like the useful idiot - an ignorant bigot - and any arguments I make will be seen in that light. For example, if I argued that it might be wise to curb immigration due to the failing nature of this country's public services, said argument can be characterised as racist and/or xenophobic instead of practical.

Step Four: Sit back and maintain the status quo while the general public squabble over which useful idiot is the One True Messiah and ignore what's going on.

.

When it comes to fox hunting, it's not something that upsets me very much. That's not to say I support it, fox hunting is an activity I don't want any part of, but I'd rather see us concentrating on banning war. Indeed, I'd be content to see these people continue fox hunting if only they'd stop raping and destroying other nations. I'd call that a fair, if somewhat disappointing, swap.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 December, 2018, 12:40:28 PM
I do think it's weird of late how some supposedly liberal commentators are now defending the monarchy's wealth and the means by which they acquired it simply because they see members of the left questioning it.
Reassuringly, that defence takes the form of faux-outrage at the left's "extreme position" on a matter it doesn't properly comprehend, so at least you know that outrage is manufactured.  #NotAllWealthyElites
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 December, 2018, 01:46:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 30 December, 2018, 06:59:10 AM

.... while the general public squabble over which useful idiot is the One True Messiah and ignore what's going on.


He's not the Messiah, he's just a very naughty boy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 December, 2018, 01:51:07 PM

Are you a virgin?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 December, 2018, 06:34:17 PM
If it's not a personal question?  How much more personal can you get?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 January, 2019, 06:49:25 PM
Bercow clarifies that his wife is not chattel. (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-46810614/john-bercow-anti-brexit-sticker-belongs-to-my-wife)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 January, 2019, 07:00:36 PM
He handled that superbly, and has been on fire all day. Bercow will be sorely missed when he steps down post-Brexit, and I do hope the next speaker has his ability to deal with what's become a house driven by a rotten executive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2019, 07:10:20 PM
One woman escapes from Saudi Arabia's gender caste system. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46844431)

Another woman funds Saudi Arabia's gender caste system. (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/mar/09/national-disgrace-fury-over-100m-aid-deal-between-uk-and-saudi-arabia)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2019, 11:07:47 PM
The west's support of Saudi Arabia has always infuriated me - I've heard decades of speeches about why we need to go to war against people who shun democracy and abuse their own people, and yet we are slaves to a regime with zero democracy, who hold half their population in virtual slavery and who are currently committing horrific war crimes against the population of a weaker neighbour (with British arms)

Beyond the obvious 'oil money' argument I could never understand how this relationship had come to pass - check out Richard Curtis' documentary Bitter Lake - it recounts how FDR established the partnership for short  term political ends, and how the right-wing US neocons and the extremist Wahhabi jihadists are so very similar in origin and intentions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 January, 2019, 06:52:45 PM
Gillette advert (https://youtu.be/koPmuEyP3a0) made me go a bit weepy.  I never imagined that would happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 January, 2019, 08:01:35 PM
202 to 432. Ouch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 16 January, 2019, 07:53:34 AM
And yet, despite that defeat, the most incompetent government of our time looks likely to stand, thanks to the most incompetent opposition of our time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 January, 2019, 08:27:27 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 16 January, 2019, 07:53:34 AM
And yet, despite that defeat, the most incompetent government of our time looks likely to stand, thanks to the most incompetent opposition of our time.

I'm curious as to how you think the competency or otherwise of the opposition can magically create a majority in a vote of no confidence? The Tories won't vote themselves out of government, and the DUP has a billion quid of taxpayers' money to keep them on side. I'm not defending Labour's performance here, but the most competent opposition in the world wouldn't have been able to change the parliamentary arithmetic.

Corbyn has to move a vote of no confidence, because party policy won't allow consideration of other options on brexit (like, say, a second referendum) until the possibility of a general election is ruled out. Corbyn appears not to be a fan of that option, but the membership very much is, so we'll have to see how that plays out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 January, 2019, 11:18:03 AM
We'd best hope the VONC isn't successful, frankly, given that polling suggests the best-case scenario would be no viable coalition (i.e. like now, but with fewer Tories), but the most likely end result would be a Con majority. The smartest move right now for ERG would be to vote the government down along with Labour, get a GE, wipe the floor with Corbyn and May alike, and head for the chilly embrace of hard, hard Brexit.

As for "until the possibility of a general election is ruled out", senior Labour figures today suggest we're in Groundhog Day there. They will apparently keep going for VONCs rather than moving on to "all other options", because they're authoritarian arseholes who don't give the slightest shit about the membership. Oh, to have Cooper in the leadership right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 January, 2019, 01:57:44 PM
If Cooper was Labour leader it'd be great.  For UKIP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 16 January, 2019, 02:19:32 PM
Tommy Cooper?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 January, 2019, 03:29:07 PM
Tommy Cooper - who I see no reason to assume isn't Yvette's husband - didn't introduce the benefits sanctions regime that's shifted the paradigm of the welfare state from a safety net against poverty to a means of punishing it, so he'd probably still be better than Yvette, a woman who only avoided coming dead last in her leadership bid because Liz Kendall was also running.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 January, 2019, 04:59:10 PM
'd for truth.  The homogeny of middle ground politics got us in this position in the first place, what with Ed Milibands "Immigrant's suck" mugs and giant concrete replica of the "There's no money left" note shockingly failing to swing the hearts and minds of the UK population against austerity and isolationism.

It isn't hard to work out why voters are voting for change options, the problem being the change options available to them were Trump and Brexit,

Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 January, 2019, 03:29:07 PM
Tommy Cooper - who I see no reason to assume isn't Yvette's husband - didn't introduce the benefits sanctions regime that's shifted the paradigm of the welfare state from a safety net against poverty to a means of punishing it, so he'd probably still be better than Yvette, a woman who only avoided coming dead last in her leadership bid because Liz Kendall was also running.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2019, 12:14:09 PM
We probably should have guessed as much years ago when Tony B colonised the left and seeded it with now-entrenched neoliberal passengers, but centrists are the new conservatives - the saddest part of which is that this isn't even necessarily a bad thing because the actual conservatives are generally such utter head-the-balls that one of them can now quote the motto of a death camp as justification for benefits sanctions that have killed the sick and disabled and the media just gives it a pass.

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 January, 2019, 04:59:10 PMgiant concrete replica of the "There's no money left" note

I liked Stonehenge unironically, though admittedly more as a concept than how it was executed.  Engraving FREE NHS in stone and sticking it in No 10's garden is ballsy as fuck if you can pull it off, but engraving a bunch of long-winded spin-talk like "affordable housing for families where possible and appropriate for their income and status" ruins the whole point of a simple, blunt statement of intent.  I also can't quite shake the notion that engraving it on a marble obelisk and writing it on the side of a bus are pretty much the same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 04:36:46 PM
Cooper has been consistently deeply impressive with Brexit. Corbyn, meanwhile, has been shown up to be more or less incompetent at PMQs, a liar regarding Brexit, and an anti-democratic authoritarian while promising something different. Corbyn is awful. I was full of hope at the time, but that hope has all gone. Even if it wasn't for his utterly deluded Brexit stance, his appalling attitude towards other political parties that Labour could actually work with, his repeated lies and/or ignorance about the EU, his awful ideas about democratic reform that are basically entirely lacking in integrity (because it's all about Labour rather than what's best for democracy), and the way in which his frontbench claims to be about the members but ignores their wishes, he'd still be shit.

And, yeah, perhaps Cooper is too status quo, but if Corbyn is really the best Labour has to offer, we're in deep fucking trouble.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2019, 06:52:48 PM
I've lost track of Brexit now; listening to MPs and PMs squabbling is like watching that Big Bang-related grey static you used to get after closedown. 

If you want your Irish passports you know where to find us.  I've a spare berth in my boat.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 07:17:01 PM
Although if you want your Irish passport and you're not already on the birth register, I'm reliably informed that you're basically fucked pre-Brexit. Nine months is the current waiting time, according to the Irish passport office person who emailed me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 January, 2019, 07:31:29 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 04:36:46 PM
but if Corbyn is really the best Labour has to offer, we're in deep fucking trouble.

No... he was the least bad. Literally every other candidate when he won was running on a platform almost indistinguishable from the Tories with at least a couple trying to say the Tories weren't tough enough on things like immigration, benefits or various other areas of public spending.

I, like more than a few others I suspect, voted for him as a placeholder for the left, as the only alternative to a concerted attempt to drag the party still further to the right. There was every expectation back then that there would be a full five years before the next general election, during which time someone more obviously electable from the party's left might be persuaded to stand for leader, possibly even with Corbyn's blessing (since he never actually wanted the job).

What no one expected was for May to call a snap election and for Corbyn to become the first Labour leader in twenty years to increase Labour's number of seats, to the astonishment of everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 January, 2019, 07:32:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 07:17:01 PM
Nine months is the current waiting time, according to the Irish passport office person who emailed me.

You multiply that by 3, Irish-Time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 07:53:41 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 January, 2019, 07:31:29 PMa couple trying to say the Tories weren't tough enough on things like immigration
Frankly, with his bullshit on EU movement, he's no better; and while I sympathise with the crap Diane Abbott is flung through being a black woman, I have no time with her after listening to her recent xenophobic attack on EU and EFTA citizens. That neither of them (nor others in Labour's front bench) care remotely about free movement sickens me. (And that they conflate it with straight immigration, rather than noting it's a reciprocal right, is exactly the tactics used by the right of the Conservative party. Horseshoe political theory in action.)

QuoteWhat no one expected was for May to call a snap election and for Corbyn to become the first Labour leader in twenty years to increase Labour's number of seats, to the astonishment of everyone.
Although Labour still got a kicking, but Owen Jones and others acted like Labour won. And Labour continued throughout that entire campaign to be arrogant wankers when it came to any kind of collaboration effort with anyone else, arguing the SNP and others should back Labour policy for no return, because, well, otherwise it would somehow be their fault if the Tories got back in.

So I think of the promise and potential and hope from when Corbyn was elected, and compare it to now. His stance sickens me. Their idiocy surrounding FPTP angers me. (I mean, Richmond Park. Labour had no fucking chance, and the majority was 45.) And on Brexit, his utter disregard for the poorest people in society, and how his ideology is going to fuck them over, combined with his apparent thinking that 'socialism' means 'Brits only' is rooted in a place I really don't want to be.

Corbyn is a dinosaur and a disgrace. Worse, under the current political deadlock, he will be the one that ushers in a hideous flavour of Brexit – and that's what he wants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 January, 2019, 08:14:39 PM

Admittedly I only googled Coopers record on Brexit on the bus on the way honme and the only two highlights I could see were _ "We shouldn't stop Article 50 and it would be anti-democratic to do so" and "we have to fight to stop no deal", so fundamentally, Corbyn's position?

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 04:36:46 PM
Cooper has been consistently deeply impressive with Brexit. Corbyn, meanwhile, has been shown up to be more or less incompetent at PMQs, a liar regarding Brexit, and an anti-democratic authoritarian while promising something different.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 08:32:31 PM
Watch her performances at committee hearings. It's a world away from Corbyn, who's even now still making errors about the fundamental basics of the EU.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 January, 2019, 08:50:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2019, 07:53:41 PM
Although Labour still got a kicking, but Owen Jones and others acted like Labour won.

Owen Jones still thinks he's in the 6th form common room and writes like he's still in primary school.  I've given up on pretty much anything he writes now as it is likely to be puerile garbage ... but aye, the idea that somehow Labour did amazingly in the last GE just lacks comprehension.

The whole House at present is just a colossal embarrassment.  It's hard to tell who is the bigger joke; May or Corbyn.  The only reason May is still in power is because no-one else is stupid enough to put their head above the parapet.  Even Blojo has done his duck and cover, hoping that when the dust settles everyone will have forgotten how inept he is.  The Labour front bench though is something else again.  Brown really did a number on the party to make sure he had his shot at PM and now the country is paying the price.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2019, 08:57:09 PM
THEYRE ALL AS BAD AS EACH OTHER

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 January, 2019, 07:31:29 PMduring which time someone more obviously electable from the party's left might be persuaded to stand for leader, possibly even with Corbyn's blessing (since he never actually wanted the job).

I distinctly remember that the accepted wisdom at the time (coming even from the man himself) was that Corbyn would be gone before the next election, having given his blessing to someone "electable" who would at least give the illusion of being left wing in a party that had by then stopped pretending (Harriet Harmon's disgraceful interim tenure as party leader being the absolute nadir), and what's truly amazing is that no-one wants to admit that the reason he's still in the job is because all of his potential replacements publicly shit their pants while trying to dislodge him before he just left on his own, which kind of felt inevitable in that whole period between the EUREF and the general election.
Dan Jarvis had a serious chance of getting the job before he crumpled on bombing Syria despite his entire schtick being that he was a veteran who was wary of military adventurism, Tom Watson just had to sit out the in-fighting and he was a shoo-in - even Clive Lewis (a Corbyn ally) looked like a good candidate until the media exacerbated nonexistent tensions between him and the leadership, though I suspect he's probably still the best bet on the leftie slate even if he is a fucking Trekkie.

And what's truly amazing is: for what?  We hadn't even had the Brexit ref before these people took it on themselves to take a dump in their own trews, the general election was five years away, and they've made it clear in the intervening time that public opinion of the party is most certainly not something that concerns them, nor does - saints preserve us - a Labour government, the very notion of which repels them like holy water repels a Dracula.
I almost suspect that they just aren't very good at this and media pundits are covering their asses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moogie101 on 17 January, 2019, 09:13:19 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2019, 08:57:09 PM
THEYRE ALL AS BAD AS EACH OTHER

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 January, 2019, 07:31:29 PMduring which time someone more obviously electable from the party's left might be persuaded to stand for leader, possibly even with Corbyn's blessing (since he never actually wanted the job).

I distinctly remember that the accepted wisdom at the time (coming even from the man himself) was that Corbyn would be gone before the next election, having given his blessing to someone "electable" who would at least give the illusion of being left wing in a party that had by then stopped pretending (Harriet Harmon's disgraceful interim tenure as party leader being the absolute nadir), and what's truly amazing is that no-one wants to admit that the reason he's still in the job is because all of his potential replacements publicly shit their pants while trying to dislodge him before he just left on his own, which kind of felt inevitable in that whole period between the EUREF and the general election.
Dan Jarvis had a serious chance of getting the job before he crumpled on bombing Syria despite his entire schtick being that he was a veteran who was wary of military adventurism, Tom Watson just had to sit out the in-fighting and he was a shoo-in - even Clive Lewis (a Corbyn ally) looked like a good candidate until the media exacerbated nonexistent tensions between him and the leadership, though I suspect he's probably still the best bet on the leftie slate even if he is a fucking Trekkie.

And what's truly amazing is: for what?  We hadn't even had the Brexit ref before these people took it on themselves to take a dump in their own trews, the general election was five years away, and they've made it clear in the intervening time that public opinion of the party is most certainly not something that concerns them, nor does - saints preserve us - a Labour government, the very notion of which repels them like holy water repels a Dracula.
I almost suspect that they just aren't very good at this and media pundits are covering their asses.

My money on Corbyn's replacement is Keir Starmer, smart & talks well plus he's got a posh name which might confuse Tory voters into ticking his name by mistake.

Sadly I think Labour have been terrible these last few years, happy to watch the Government fall apart but not take advantage & actually present an alternative. The shockingly bad way they've handled the Brexit situation & not getting behind a second vote has surely cost Corbyn a large percentage of the young votes which made it close last GE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 January, 2019, 09:38:36 PM
Getting behind a second vote - I'm all for a second vote, but what's the point of being behind one when the country would just repeat the same mistake?  I don't like this uncertainty dragging on endlessly, but you can't ignore the first ref because it didnt go the way it might have without all the lying - and even then, you could make a case for a second ref on that basis, but would it change the outcome?  is there really such an easy reset button? It's clear large swathes of brexiters think (bizarrely) that all the foreigners are going to shipped out come March 29, and truth matters very little to them.  Is a second ref winnable? If not, then calling for one is going to get you painted as anti-democratic and achieve what?

I really can't see a way out of this which runs "you were tricked, deal with it", unless a sizeable number of those tricked are willing to accept that, which the polling doesnt seem to support.  Kicking No Deal/Red line Deal into the bin is step one - offering a softer Brexit step 2, with the potential to take that to the people? 

Does anyone really think any other leader of the opposition could have made any different route (given they werent in power and Corbyn did,if nothing else reduce Mays power and improve Labours numbers, albeit not enough to stop her having just enough cards to try and subvert Parliament with a backroom Brexit.

Honestly, what would another leader have done, other than draw even more flak on themselves for no actual advantage?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 January, 2019, 09:47:41 PM
But yes if Labour had got behind the partymembers desire for a left turn,  to be the party that represents change, Corbyn would probably be a footnote by now and someone else in place - instead they did their best to deny the democratic result, and have basically just entrenched his position and at the far end of all this, played some foul political games that mean I would never vote for a Centrist Labour party again, after years of holding my nose, where did it get us - i got us here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 January, 2019, 11:09:00 PM
Labour weren't centrist before Corbyn, they were on the right and heading further rightward - there are still New Labour headbangers insisting that Ed Milliband only lost in 2015 because Labour were "too far left", and Harmon's support for drastic welfare cuts shows you where the party was going after Milliband*.
We would be far more to the political right without a left Labour, and Brexit would have been waved through no matter how shit the withdrawal agreement was.  And anyone thinking that UKIP wouldn't soak up left-leaning Leavers and general malcontents while being increasingly legitimised by the media hasn't been paying attention to the last ten years of politics.  Or they've slept through it, the lucky stiff.

Quote from: Leigh S on 17 January, 2019, 09:38:36 PM
Getting behind a second vote - I'm all for a second vote, but what's the point of being behind one when the country would just repeat the same mistake?  I don't like this uncertainty dragging on endlessly, but you can't ignore the first ref because it didnt go the way it might have without all the lying - and even then, you could make a case for a second ref on that basis, but would it change the outcome?

I suspect the backfire effect would come into play to an even greater extent once once you factor in the last two years of Remain painting all Leavers as racists, ignorant, dupes of Putin, or too stupid to look out for their own best interests.  I've seen plenty of Remainers try and talk their comrades off the ledge with "not all Leavers are racists" homilies, but they're pretty much pissing into the wind.  I can think of a couple of Leave voters on here who were mostly reasonable even if I didn't agree with their politics, but they seem suspiciously absent from the board these days and I suspect I know why.

QuoteHonestly, what would another leader have done, other than draw even more flak on themselves for no actual advantage?

Yes but they wouldn't be Corbyn.


* To Red Ed's credit, he did at least stick up for the banks when it wasn't fashionable to do so while his yellow-bellied Labour compatriots were briefly riding anti-banker sentiment in the press.  Ed reasoned - to Russell fucking Brand of all people - that banks needed to be bailed out because their fates were intertwined with that of people's savings, mortgages, benefits payments, etc, and "let the banks fail" was little more than a dumbass soundbite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 January, 2019, 09:52:24 AM
Ed Milliband was still better than the utter shower that claims to follow in his footsteps and as you say, collectively shat the trews as soon as people did the horrific act of joining the Labour party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 January, 2019, 10:39:00 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 17 January, 2019, 09:38:36 PMGetting behind a second vote - I'm all for a second vote, but what's the point of being behind one when the country would just repeat the same mistake?
The problem (well, one of the problems, beyond things like hostile power interference, an alleged colossal number of 'missing' ballots from overseas, and a broken franchise) with the referendum is that it offered one deliverable option, and one vague hand-waving alternative. The way to have enacted this properly was as per the Irish referendum on abortion law: you have one option that is the status quo (remain) and one piece of legislation that will be enacted, detailing what will happen. Sure, you wouldn't get every detail in there, but leave offered none of that. Instead, remain was beaten by a coalition – everyone from swivel-eyed no-deal loons to pragmatic anti-EU but pro-SM types.

So a second referendum might 'repeat' the mistake in terms of leaving, but it would be for something that's actually deliverable (the WA, followed by the future relationship doc – although the latter of those would have to be locked down by MPs, and would likely change at least somewhat to get the support of the house).

Quoteis there really such an easy reset button?
There is no reset button. The best-case scenario from a remain person's perspective is that we stay in the EU, but that still means: probably a decade of rebuilding trust; having to deal with right-wing politicians who will scream BETRAYAL at the top of their lungs; a likely boost for UKIP in MEP seats, despite them now literally sitting with fascists in the EU parliament; the permanent loss of EU agencies; a probably permanent loss of the UK's standing within the world; ongoing problems for anyone who isn't British/doesn't pass as British.

QuoteIs a second ref winnable? If not, then calling for one is going to get you painted as anti-democratic and achieve what?
It depends what you mean by winnable. If you mean for remain, polling is now heading outside of margin-of-error territory. On demographics alone, this weekend is the flip point – where if no-one changes their original vote, the country goes remain anyway. But things are moving more quickly, primarily due to Labour leavers changing their minds. The gap still isn't anywhere as large as I'd like (60/40 would be good), but the latest polling has 56/44, and so that is winnable. But even if that didn't come to pass, we'd end up with the WA and transition – certainty at least, even if a permanently diminished country (and, almost certainly, Scotland heading towards indy 2, unless the final agreement included single market membership).

QuoteDoes anyone really think any other leader of the opposition could have made any different route
Yes, because they wouldn't be driven by ideology to trample all over any attempts to remain, or even soften Brexit. Be mindful, Corbyn hasn't just ruled out remain and a second referendum multiple times, but even any kind of EEA deal (in many cases getting what the EEA entails totally wrong). He comes across like he doesn't like the EU, but also that he doesn't care; so he just doesn't understand a lot of it. He bangs on that Labour couldn't do what it wants within the EU, which means one of two possibilities:

1. He's just flat-out ignorant, given that the entire 2017 Labour manifesto is possible as an EU member
2. We haven't remotely seen what a Corbyn manifesto looks like, and he's prepping to erect a full-on siege economy scenario

The point is that right now, Corbyn holds all of the cards. What Labour does – or doesn't do – will decide this country's future. If Labour unified with the smaller parties and said "second ref" or "EEA" or whatever, there would be enough Tories to secure a majority. But instead we get vagueness about the future, with him talking about a "close relationship with the single market", which is functionally meaningless.

QuoteI can think of a couple of Leave voters on here who were mostly reasonable even if I didn't agree with their politics, but they seem suspiciously absent from the board these days and I suspect I know why.
It's probably worth noting that even in 2016, 700,000 people flipping changes the result. That's really not a big ask, purely on demographic lines. But there are quite a few regretful leavers I've seen. If the majority stuck to their guns, that wouldn't matter. You'd only need a small number to switch. (And this assumes everyone turns out.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 January, 2019, 12:51:22 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 January, 2019, 04:59:10 PM
'd for truth.  The homogeny of middle ground politics got us in this position in the first place, what with Ed Milibands "Immigrant's suck" mugs and giant concrete replica of the "There's no money left" note shockingly failing to swing the hearts and minds of the UK population against austerity and isolationism.


I understand the 'no money left' reference (part of the long-standing tradition of outgoing governments to leave jokey notes for the incoming - which the Tories ripped ripped up and spat on by making the joke public and pretending it was real).  The immigrants mug reference I don't get though - did I miss a new item a few years back?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 January, 2019, 12:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 January, 2019, 07:31:29 PM
There was every expectation back then that there would be a full five years before the next general election, during which time someone more obviously electable from the party's left might be persuaded to stand for leader, possibly even with Corbyn's blessing (since he never actually wanted the job).


As a resident of his constituency for a decade (well, until the latter half of last year), I was pretty surprised when he ran for the job - I can only guess it was because he looked at the selection who had put themselves forward and didn't want any of them further destroying the party he'd be a member of for however-many-years.  I did bump into him at a community centre a few doors up from where I lived and he did seem to miss some aspects of his previously backbencher status (like being able to cycle to work before security concerns put an end to that).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 18 January, 2019, 01:09:42 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 18 January, 2019, 12:51:22 PM
The immigrants mug reference I don't get though - did I miss a new item a few years back?

For reasons we can only wonder at, the Labour party was selling mugs of its 2015 manifesto commitments, including one which promised "Controls on immigration". Just one of many "WTF?" moments from that misconceived and disastrous campaign.

https://www.channel4.com/news/labour-mug-immigration-controls
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2019, 01:11:51 PM
There's footage somewhere of Corbyn joking with Dianne Abbott that "we agreed it was just my turn" to be the token lefty on the leadership ballot.  He was pretty open at the time that his motivation was that they couldn't find anyone else who identified as left-leaning to run in the contest, and most of the MPs who sponsored his inclusion have been equally open that they thought it would just look bad if there wasn't a lefty on the leadership ballot of the Labour Party - especially as Liz Kendall was then on it, and she was widely considered a step too far to the right even by Blairites.

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 January, 2019, 09:52:24 AM
Ed Milliband was still better than the utter shower that claims to follow in his footsteps and as you say, collectively shat the trews as soon as people did the horrific act of joining the Labour party.

Politics aside, I liked that Ed stood up against the Daily Mail's antisemitic attacks on himself and his late father.  I got the impression that his real problem while leader was probably taking bad advice from the rank and file who we now know were briefing the press against him.

And yes, too many people joining Labour was bad*, but now Yougov has published The Sacred Poll that suggests a majority of Labour members want a second referendum, so the membership is actually good now, and its wishes must be respected.


* On account of them being "Trotskyist sleeper agents" according to Tom Watson and his LOL secret list of enemies and infiltrators
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 January, 2019, 01:39:50 PM
The thing is, Labour can't have it both ways. When you've got a Labour MP yelling over Swinson on the news, that the Lib Dems messed up in coalition, and shouting demands at her to promise that the Lib Dems would never enter coalition again, that's not a good look. (Swinson did actually, on air, apologise, but was basically saying it'd be nice if Labour would actually follow the sequencing it promised.)

And regarding the membership, either Corbyn does what he promised, and ensures Labour is a democratic entity, or he continues to be an autocrat, and betrays one of the primary pillars on which he was elected. That I'm seeing long-term Labour voters I know quitting the party suggests he's fucking things up. And these people were far from fans of Blair. They're just sick of Corbyn doing a Theresa May ("my way or the highway"), rather than following the wishes of the members, voters and CLPs as he said he would.

What's most depressing on this is there's clearly a majority to be had for soft Brexit or possibly even no Brexit, if Corbyn would get his head out of his arse. Beyond that, there's also a ton of cooperation that could be done between various not-Tory parties (bar, obviously, UKIP), but Labour has the same "God-given right to rule" thinking that the Tories have. So there's no way they could conceive electoral pacts (even though they'd be in an extremely strong position from a demands standpoint), because everyone has the right to vote Labour (even though they won't support PR).

It's a mess. But my anger stems from the fact I hoped for better. I saw Corbyn has a beacon of light, despite the warnings of those older than I am, who remember further back into his career. I believed what he said. 90 per cent of the time I agree with his public policy. But Brexit overrides everything else; it is the most important issue of our age. Corbyn for that has been at best absent, and at worst has enabled the Tories in the cynical hope that they alone will get the blame. Labour's crashing polling with the under 30s suggests that's not going to be the case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 18 January, 2019, 03:17:30 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 18 January, 2019, 12:51:22 PM
the long-standing tradition of outgoing governments to leave jokey notes for the incoming - which the Tories ripped ripped up and spat on by making the joke public and pretending it was real

My favourite was the Clinton staffers who, when George W Bush came in, removed all the Ws from the white house keyboards. Childish, but made me smile.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2019, 04:05:24 PM
Speaking of Clive Lewis, he implies institutional racism (https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/you-re-not-what-our-viewers-are-looking-for-norwich-mp-clive-lewis-attacks-institutional-racism-at-the-bbc-1-4304542) exists at the BBC.  I always assumed they were at the very least leaning hard enough into diversity to annoy the "there were only white people in Victorian London!" brigade, although in retrospect that's the drama department rather than news, which most admit is the section that needs some reform.  Arguably moreso than ever if the stories about Fiona Bruce taking 10 minutes before QT to rile up the audience against Dianne Abbott are accurate - especially when the programme featured a tag-team between Bruce and some blonde lady shouting Abbott down to insist that Labour were behind in the polls (they're actually ahead in all but the Yougov poll, AKA The Only Poll), which looks suspiciously like a variation on the whole "Abbot can't do teh sums" thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 18 January, 2019, 06:04:01 PM
I should probably be a bit careful about what I say here but as someone who works in the building that BBC East is based in (and as done since before the BBC moved in) I have some impression of the environment Mr Lewis was working in.
I don't know what manager he's referring to but the regional head at the time Lewis worked for the BBC is now my boss and I can say with strong belief that he's certainly not racist.
At the same time Katie Nash (who now presents 5 News) was taken from being a very junior member of staff through to a regular presenter (before moving off to that London). I'm sure being young and pretty didn't hurt her but she's also very good at what she does, seemed to work mega hours and has her head screwed on.
The main thing I remember about Lewis was that he always brought his bike in the building even though he wasn't meant to (it was a fold up one but he never folded it up).
In all fairness though he does seem like a pretty genuine bloke and I've never heard much of a bad word against him other than that he's a bit vain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2019, 07:03:02 PM
I did mention he was a Trekkie - there's little worse you can say about a man.

Lewis does specifically say that he didn't think any of his bosses were racist, just that the institution and culture created a glass ceiling for some.  To be fair, that can be said about many equal opportunity environments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2019, 03:42:29 PM
Time for grandpa to give up the car keys. (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46935721)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 21 January, 2019, 10:23:39 AM
I think the unconscious racism at the BBC is more on the editorial side of things than the workplace side of things. As someone who should also watch what they are saying.

More than anything it is just an institutional problem, where (as Abbott said) the Conservatives and whichever stuffed suit they bring out is instantly viewed as responsible and credible, despite all evidence to the contrary, whilst their opponents are treated with a certain level of incredulity and skepticism. The racism is I think simply a by-product of a top-down editorial stance that kow-tows to Right wing claims of bias and dismisses any complaint by the Left. It's still very who-you-know, old history and so on. You see a much wider diversity in places where they're forced to hire diversely (World Service) or the old Oxbridge standards aren't quite so entrenched as News and Politics (Childrens and to a lesser extent, Sport). I'd agree there's a bit of a glass ceiling though, particularly on the public facing side of things.

We don't talk about Philip Hammond getting billions wrong with his estimate of CrossRail, we still keep bringing Boris and Davis on like they know anything, and Isabel Oakeshott - whose main claim to fame is publishing a book where the PM allegedly had sex with a pig - is a revolving door panelist. Newsnight photoshops Jeremy Corbyn to create a Communist era poster on its backgrounds, but leaves Gavin Williamson and Theresa May untouched. BBC Online runs a million stories on Anti Semitism in Labour, but nothing on Baroness Warsi's call for an investigation into Islamophobia within the Conservative party. James O'Brien has to leave Newsnight, but Andrew Neil gets to run Conservative dinners and call Caroline Cadwaller a mad cat lady because she does some journalism rather than sit in a chair and read a script. How many times did I see "Where will the money come from???" during the GE for Labour but when it comes to Brexit (or Cross Rail or HS2 or Hinkley point or whatever) the BBC will only at best report on what a trade body or a think tank has to say.

I think it mostly boils down to conceit in their own position. They believe their own hype and think that they uphold the idea of crusading, honest and balanced journalism simply because they are where they are, rather than based on anything they do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2019, 11:01:00 AM
On Question Time, there's a failure at some point in the pipeline, although I'm not sure precisely where. Fiona Bruce is supposed to be a mediator/moderator, but appeared to stamp her own opinion in there, which is not a good look. But also the producer should have dealt with this, feeding figures to her earpiece. This happened more than once with Dimbleby, and so Bruce was also let down. (The BBC non-apology tries to weasel out of this by saying that different polling says different things. Not really, given that Oakeshott was arguing Labour was "way behind" in all the polls.)

I'm of late very much not a fan of Abbott, due to her stance on freedom of movement (and outright lies about it that she's spat out in the Commons), but her treatment in that section of Question Time was unacceptable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 22 January, 2019, 06:04:33 AM
Theresa May's Plan B is really ingenious - I think she's cracked it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2019, 10:23:47 AM
- Ask for something you cannot have
- Keep everything else the same
- Grab a headline by throwing a bone at the Three Million (while not even informing the Home Office first)
- Continue running down the clock

Plan C will be the above, minus the third bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 January, 2019, 07:17:11 PM
Brexit answers well the question: "What happens when an unstoppable force (MPs failing to agree on anything) meets an immovable object (Theresa May's deal)".

Not much, a lot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 January, 2019, 12:12:58 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2019, 10:23:47 AM
- Ask for something you cannot have
- Keep everything else the same
- Grab a headline by throwing a bone at the Three Million (while not even informing the Home Office first)
- Continue running down the clock

Plan C will be the above, minus the third bit.

A few friends have tried the Home Office's app.  The app is in beta, to say the least.  You have to use an android device (a problem for one i-using friend of mine), with some particular chip in it, download an app on to said device.  Something about having to provide documentary evidence, but no more than 10 files (to possibly cover a decade's continuous residence), each of which has a size limitation, and can't be uploaded anyway due to 'viruses'.  The only way to get past that stage is to declare you have no evidence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 January, 2019, 10:09:45 AM
Given that I know people who could code something secure simple and workable for both iOS and Android in two weeks given a budget to buy the backend stuff, you have to wonder why things like this are always so reliably shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 January, 2019, 10:34:08 AM
I don't suppose we'll ever discover why IT companies fail to get these things sorted in time and have to charge literally millions in budget over-runs to try and fix the entirely preventable mess they created.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 January, 2019, 10:45:39 AM
I suspect the govt went for the lowest bidder, combined with the hostile environment. The last set of stats I saw suggested in the UK there's a more or less even split between Android/iOS phone usage, and many Android devices lack NFC. So already we're down to well under half having a capable device. This forces people to use someone else's device (which HO could say caused problems, and declare the application invalid), mail their documents (easy to lose), or force them to visit a scanning centre (of which there are, IIRC, 14 to cover the entire UK).

Even when you get past that hurdle, the app is a shitshow. One friend who's been here 20 years had "computer say no". He's now logged in the system with pre-settled status, which means he'd have to have another several years of residency prior to gaining settled status. A major post on Twitter is doing the rounds from someone who says the app states a lack of recent evidence of employment. Settled status was supposed to be purely about residency and the lack of a criminal record.

Add to that the massive loss of rights for EU/EFTA citizens, the lack of EFTA citizens even being included at this stage, and the appalling issue of data rights (no data protection for EU citizens – they've in this area been exempted entirely from the data protection act, so the govt can do whatever the hell it likes with your data, and share it with anyone, and you can never find out if that's happened), and you have the most appalling fuck-up waiting to happen.

Dropping the charge was a canny move by May. I've seen a ton of "why are EU citizens STILL complaining?" and right-wing fuckers saying "I thought £65 for the right to remain in such a great country is a bargain", combined with non-EU citizens complaining about how much ILR cost them. But this isn't the straightforward process that was promised. It's not a registration – it's an application. And this comes from the assumption people could move, live and retire in, say, Manchester (to pick a big UK city at random) just as easily as someone from London, Cardiff, Edinburgh, or Belfast.

Also, I saw people saying that "hopefully" 99 per cent of cases will go through just fine. Imagine they don't. One per cent will be 35,000 people. During the low-run test (with only hundreds of people), the error rate was much higher – around ten per cent. And with the way the Home Office is, I won't be surprised if we're about to see a disaster that makes Windrush look like the bastion of good politics, ethics and humanity.

Incidentally, if you care about those of us caught up in this mess, and are a British citizen, do please write to your MP. Most of them now think this is job done, when it's still an ongoing disaster of pain and anxiety for the millions caught in this web of shite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 January, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
Why would you need NFC? Doesn't it go over IP?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 January, 2019, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 23 January, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
Why would you need NFC?

I can't work that out, either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 January, 2019, 01:54:00 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 January, 2019, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 23 January, 2019, 01:41:12 PM
Why would you need NFC?

I can't work that out, either.
Personally as someone who spends a fair bit of time in London, NFC is useful for capped contactless travel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 January, 2019, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 23 January, 2019, 01:54:00 PM
Personally as someone who spends a fair bit of time in London, NFC is useful for capped contactless travel.

I understand what it is, I don't understand why it's a requirement for this Home Office app that's never going to see the phone its installed on go anywhere near a contactless PDQ and doesn't need it to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 23 January, 2019, 02:08:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 23 January, 2019, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 23 January, 2019, 01:54:00 PM
Personally as someone who spends a fair bit of time in London, NFC is useful for capped contactless travel.

I understand what it is, I don't understand why it's a requirement for this Home Office app that's never going to see the phone its installed on go anywhere near a contactless PDQ and doesn't need it to.
Oh, I misunderstood. I thought yourself and Blaze where queering why android phones, generally lacking NFC, would be a needed feature.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 January, 2019, 02:25:57 PM
A cynical man might suggest that knowing someone of uncertain residential status owns an NFC phone will make them easier to track, seeing as Google cooperates with the UKgov in matters of tracking and data decryption while Apple doesn't (yet).
Keeping the cynicism train on track, mass deportations will really help fill those holding centers run by private industry who I am sure are politically neutral and have never donated to any of the UK's major parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 January, 2019, 03:17:47 PM
NFC apparently required to read the passport chip, IIRC. But doesn't work with iPhone because the people writing the app are fucking idiots. (They've blamed Apple for "not offering support", reportedly.) Also, given the shitshow that Google Play is, I'm just waiting for the slew of fake apps that steal everyone's details, over and above legally gained details being sold to and shared with third-parties without the express permission of the owners.

Also, as various people have noted, if you were looking to draw up a potential deportation list, this settled status lark and the accompanying "fuck off if you want your data" is precisely how you'd go about doing it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 January, 2019, 01:15:00 AM
Meanwhile, in USA-land, Trump's minions are editing photographs (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46977712) to make his hands look larger (and his neck thinner).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 January, 2019, 10:51:28 AM
Holy shit. The passport CHIP?

Set themselves up to fail, every time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2019, 12:35:18 PM
It's all going brilliantly, people being denied settled status for not providing information that they shouldn't have to, and using a system that won't allow them to, and in some cases that's impossible to provide anyway. The latest doozy: denying applications if you can't submit proof of six months of employment (exercising treaty rights is NOT a demand for settled status)... for 2019.

I'll bet everyone on this forum would have trouble doing that, unless you have a working TARDIS lying about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 January, 2019, 06:12:51 PM
Giving Graham Linehan time to modify his views is working out well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2019, 07:25:15 PM
"8 minutes left. Goodbye twitter."

Shame he doesn't mean for good. I'll admit, I almost skipped Book of Scars because it had a Linehan afterword. Also rather depressing to find Robert Webb has in the same line of thinking. I'd rather liked his book on the whole, although it's not nearly as humble as he thinks it is. (Some bits are about his growing up and sexuality, and having trouble with women; and then he talks about all the women he shagged. So, er...)

It's really odd how people can turn and dig in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 24 January, 2019, 08:38:32 PM
Is he having some kind of breakdown or something?

He's someone I've always admired up til now and eveyone's entitled to their own opinions, but I'm really not sure what he's trying to achieve with all this? I'll freely admit that I'm largely ignorant of the issue at hand and am far too uninformed to have any strong opinions either way about it... but can he really not see how badly he's coming across? And is it really worth (seemingly) torching his career over?

For the love of God just get off Twitter, man. (That goes for everyone else, too).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 January, 2019, 10:22:44 PM
I find gender politics very ... fluid.  It's a lot to take in.  Some people get frustrated with the shifting sands of what was once a seemingly simple binary system of male or female (designated fairly obviously at birth for most people).  It's easy to fall into traps.

Even Monty Python's Life of Brian, with the "I demand the right to be called Loretta!" can now come across as hideously old-fashioned and out of touch, whilst at the time of its release was breaking barriers in terms of our freedom to express our opinion of organized religion.  "Where's the fetus gonna gestate?" points to the idea that gender identity has something to do with sexual proclivity or the desire to procreate, when it needn't.

As for Linehan, it's just odd that anyone would choose to have that conversation with thousands of people at once, in public, and take an extreme stance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 January, 2019, 05:17:51 PM
Gender identity politics is a lot to take in and tricky to navigate when you're one of the heteronormative CIS populace.

But then, when I was a kid, being Gay was still a bit to take in. And I was still in what was, at the time, thought of as the good times and the 'look how far we've come' period. The "I want to identify as an attack helicopter" crap is the same, in the end, as the "Gay marriage - next people will be marrying animals".

I fall into the category of most people, for most things. But no one falls into it for everything, and we all went through those periods when we took some flak for it. Christ, I remember getting shit for playing WH40k and basically dropping the entire hobby. And that was just a hobby. What if I didn't fall into the two binary options dictated at birth and carried throughout my entire life.

That's probably even harder than falling into one of those binary options but being attracted to my type, rather than the other one. I don't want to do anything that makes anyone feel uncomfortable to be themselves, other than if 'themselves' is an exclusionary dickhead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2019, 07:22:26 PM
I'll admit something: I find trans hard to fully understand. This despite two people I know having very publicly come out as trans. So what I do is I read. (One of them writes a blog.) I listen. I try to understand. What I don't do is use a massive Twitter following and a platform to unleash hell on people in that situation, or try to pit one chunk of feminists and a certain subset of lesbians against trans people. What Linehan is doing is just fucking insane. And Webb, too. Gah.

I interviewed Linehan once. I had a great time. I loved his shows. I used to really rate his Twitter feed. Now, even the thought of watching the things he was involved with grosses me out.

As for Monty Python, things change. The problem is when we don't. We can look back now and think that was a not good moment in that team's history. Similarly, we can view the train-wreck that is Friends in a similar light, with how awful it is to minorities, anyone who has the audacity to be overweight, and, yes, trans people (remember the 'jokes' about Charles Bing/Helena Handbasket?). What's important is we call shit out when we see it now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 January, 2019, 08:43:05 PM
At least the lesson of Charles bing is to accept them, right? I forget. Maybe it was actually about the trauma it caused Chandler and how it was a selfish act, I really hope it was the former though.

In related news https://www.newsweek.com/trans-people-required-be-sterilized-changing-gender-after-court-ruling-japan-1304865

Legally enforced sterilisation. Always a good look, to be glib about a sentence that repels me utterly.

As for the feminist/lesbian angle, I think it's inevitable. Some people will always kick the ladder out behind them if they think someone might be trying to climb up in their footsteps. And yeah, I admit I don't understand either and I really struggle to not refer to a person of my acquaintance as 'They', or refrain from calling them 'Man' as part of verbal punctuation. Still - got to try right? Not like it cost us anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 January, 2019, 08:55:30 PM
You could likely fill a library with what I still don't know about trans/gender identity issues, but Natalie Wynn's Contrapoints (https://youtu.be/9bbINLWtMKI)channel on Youtube was a big help.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 January, 2019, 09:22:29 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 January, 2019, 08:55:30 PM
You could likely fill a library with what I still don't know about trans/gender identity issues

Me and all. Our own Taryn Tails graciously explained quite a bit to me when she was beginning her treatments.  Also, after living for a few months in Thailand, the sight of a transgender person isn't even remotely unusual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2019, 09:28:06 AM
US government workers get paid again, and no wall for Orange Fuck.  I'm addicted to Trump-related schadenfreude .
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2019, 10:42:33 AM

As China's Orwellian Social Credit Score system starts getting its foot in the doors of other countries (like Canada (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-ottawa-opens-door-to-chinas-sesame-credit-for-visa-seekers-credit/)), led by the banking system (of course), at least this bastion of freedom called the UK isn't beginning to get its subjects used to the idea of having government apps on their phones.

Er...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 January, 2019, 01:53:08 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 25 January, 2019, 08:43:05 PMAt least the lesson of Charles bing is to accept them, right? I forget. Maybe it was actually about the trauma it caused Chandler and how it was a selfish act, I really hope it was the former though.
I think it's "point and laugh at them" (them being anyone who's not white, skinny, and entitled), and then at some point realise just how far down the rabbit hole you've gone, and so spend two minutes of an episode dialling back a bit to look good. See also: the horror show that is The Big Bang Theory. (Casual racism, slut shaming, mental health issues, and the like are just so, like, hilarious!)

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2019, 09:28:06 AMUS government workers get paid again, and no wall for Orange Fuck.
And then in three weeks it all goes to shit again. The British political system may be broken and shite, but the US one is just staggering in the way it operates. Seriously: put through a damn law that states funding continues at current levels if no votes are made to change it, not that the entire thing gets shut down, you arsing absurd buffoons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2019, 08:00:58 PM
Ah, yeah, I know the whole pantomime with the wall is going to kick off again with bells on, but I just enjoy the cheap and hollow thrill of watching a fool struggling to keep his massive ego inflated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 January, 2019, 07:49:23 PM
This BBC article (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47015184) tells of a survey finding: "five per cent of UK adults do not believe the Holocaust took place and one in 12 believes its scale has been exaggerated".

CBBC has done a series of videos (https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/beta/canvas/holocaust-stories) in which survivors (or their relatives) recount some of their experiences. 

Whilst it's terribly harrowing material to watch, I think it's worth being educated about.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 January, 2019, 10:14:03 PM
Speaking as a Northern Ireland native, let me reassure all the mainland forum users that the Troubles weren't that bad (https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-planners-could-use-martial-law-against-civil-disobedience-11619088?dcmp).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2019, 10:57:18 PM
Well, Labour and Corbyn just played another blinder! No, hang on – what's the opposite of blinder again?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 January, 2019, 05:24:05 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 January, 2019, 10:14:03 PM
Speaking as a Northern Ireland native, let me reassure all the mainland forum users that the Troubles weren't that bad (https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-planners-could-use-martial-law-against-civil-disobedience-11619088?dcmp).

Speaking as a 'legitimate target' during the troubles, I'm assuming that is ironic.

[also, what Army are they going to deploy?]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 06:40:50 AM
Quote

The source added: "Although there is nothing
that can replicate the scale of chaos threatened
by a no-deal Brexit, which will be about a
thousand times worse than the volcanic ash
cloud crisis, this is about the closest example
we have in modern British history.

"The only other thing that would be
comparable would be something like a major
Europe-wide war."


Who the Hell is this "source"? Mek Quake?

Pure fearmongering.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 09:08:35 AM
Not really. We are a country that is linked to the EU in terms of provision. We are used to seamless trade and the benefits that brings, even if we don't really understand the mechanics. And this extends to basically everything: fuel; food; even chemicals to ensure our water is clean. A no-deal Brexit means everything just stops overnight. Shop shelves empty when there's a bank holiday. Now imagine traffic across the Channel drops to a tiny fraction of current movements (which are the estimates in a recently leaked but unreleased report). What do you think will happen, given that the UK is not self-sufficient in food production? (The government's own figures state that British people will have "sufficient calories to survive – that is the new yardstick. I'm sure everyone fancies going on a 1500-calorie max diet, right?)

The reality is that ingredients won't turn up. Within a month, British factories making food will shut down. Shops will still have some produce, but it will be greatly reduced in scale and range. That will become the new normal, like in the Eastern Bloc, or Russia when it got into a spat with the EU. Beyond that, there will be far fewer flights. Most businesses will find themselves unable to enact international trade. (No countries in the world trade on WTO terms alone for good reason.) Britons will instantly lose free movement rights to the EU and EFTA. JIT manufacturing will be destroyed in an instant, because companies expect to get parts mere hours before they need to use them, not to have to hold weeks of stock in warehousing that the UK just doesn't have.

That quote, note, is not saying there will be war. It's stating that the effects of a no-deal Brexit will be as if there has been one. (One alternative is the UK will seem like it's under sanctions.) It's notable that army bases are stockpiling in a major way. They have teams of logistics people, and so don't take this sort of thing lightly. This isn't fearmongering. This is the reality of baking a cake decades ago and now demanding you have your eggs back. You can't do that without destroying the cake, and so you leave with nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 10:31:19 AM

I don't believe that no deal means no trade. That makes no sense to me. Are European farmers going to refuse to trade with British markets because our servants in Westminster can't find a way of cutting their servants in Brussels into a piece of the profits? Is it going to become unlawful to trade with the UK? I very much doubt it.

I admittedly don't follow this very much because it smells like a huge pile of bullshit to me so I don't understand why a deal is needed anyway. The referendum, as far as I recall, was about leave or remain - not remain or partially leave (which is what leave with a deal seems to be).

We have a country that voted leave and politicians who want to remain, so the politicians seem to be making a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing in order to bore or scare people into eventually remaining.

Just stop faffing about and leave already - there may be problems arising from Brussels' Pique but nothing that can't be overcome. It's not like we're declaring war on Europe, ffs, or trying to tow our islands out into the middle of the Atlantic to get away from it.

Me? I don't care either way - be ruled by our "servants" in London or be ruled by our "servants" in Brussels? All of them, every last one, they can serve or they can piss off - that's the real issue here.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 10:39:47 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 10:31:19 AMI don't believe that no deal means no trade.
I never said it did. It means we are removed from EVERY SINGLE ONE of our existing trade agreements, and therefore become the only country in the world purely on WTO terms. It means we are outside of the single market and customs union that currently ensures we get food, parts, and so on, exactly when we need them. This means that there will be border-based checks that the UK isn't remotely prepared for. With lorries being backed up, traffic will substantially fall from its current levels, and the government has already stated that priority will be given to things like medicine and water cleaning supplies. Food is some way down the list. This means that in the short term, things like salad and fresh fruit will likely become seasonal.

This isn't scaremongering. This is the basic reality of what happens when the UK removes itself from a heavily integrated trading system.

QuoteI admittedly don't follow this very much because it smells like a huge pile of bullshit to me
Then perhaps actually do some reading rather than dismissing it out of hand. We are going to lose every single one of our trade agreements in no deal. There will be a trade border around the UK. This is basically the opposite of frictionless trade. Things won't continue as they are today.

QuoteThe referendum, as far as I recall, was about leave or remain - not remain or partially leave (which is what leave with a deal seems to be).
The question was whether or not to leave the EU. Norway and Iceland are not in the EU, but are in the single market. If you want go all ERG and say we should "leave entirely" every single EU institution, go you. But that does mean no flights. It means the most basic of trading terms. It means, most likely, a recession of the like no-one has ever seen before. It means the poorest will be hit hard, and only a few rich people able to bet against the UK will be fine.

Your reply in this case, sadly, would be worthy of Jacob Rees-Mogg or some other arch-Brexiter. Again: at least do some reading on the basics of frictionless trade (let alone all other deals regarding things like freedom of movement and capital; rights for pilots; cross-border employment for Britons), and see what we are up against come 29 March.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 09:08:35 AM
JIT manufacturing will be destroyed in an instant, because companies expect to get parts mere hours before they need to use them, not to have to hold weeks of stock in warehousing that the UK just doesn't have.

A warehouse capable of holding nine days' worth of Honda stock would need to be roughly 300,000 sq m — one of the largest buildings on earth. Its floorspace would be equivalent to 42 football pitches, almost three times Amazon's main US distribution centre. (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/27/honda-faces-the-real-cost-of-brexit-in-a-former-spitfire-plant.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 11:27:58 AM
Jim: stop scaremongering with your *re-reads post* reality and facts!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 29 January, 2019, 11:37:37 AM
What Indigo said. Anything else I write would be a bit angry as the blithe stupidity of "stop faffing about and get on with it" really drokking drives me insane and I understand that you're coming at the whole thing from an angle so far out of the box that it could be in the warehouse Jim is talking about, so it's not really relevant to what pisses me off.

You're not, for example, a group of people who make their vast sums of money entirely from the exact kind of invisible deals and arbitration that they dismiss as 'Faffing about'. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 11:51:40 AM
Quite. "Let's just get on with instantly removing our entire trading infrastructure on 29 March" is the cry of disaster capitalists, massive but deluded optimists (the "everything will be fine" or "they won't let that happen" crowd) and those who are ignorant of the realities of modern trade within an internal market. It makes me furiously angry, because it's beyond reckless. As it stands, people will die. We're already hearing of medicine shortages – cancer treatments; insulin. This will get worse.

What happens then is anyone's guess, but a friend of my wife offered some insight from Russia about the notion of the new normal. This seems... worryingly prescient.

QuoteRussia under sanctions – govt limited food imports. On items disappearing: the thing is, it's not quite overnight, this sort of change. You get used to it, too. And when the cheese comes back, you don't directly compare its quality and price because of the gap. You are just pleased to see it.

On local produce: There were a rash of articles about Moscow based restaurants having a local food revolution.

On quality: Without a way to compare two things on a plate in front of you right now, people will notice, but it is the same once you are used to something, as actually being able to taste the difference right there and then.

Impact: It will be a very noticeable impact but I suspect that it will be of the sort that if you want to ignore it, you can. And you will then point to all the more extreme predictions and dismiss the whole phenomenon.

A lot of people will absorb it in the way the politicians are already preparing them for. No bananas for six months is entirely doable. Bonkers, given that it is entirely unnecessary, but doable, and the fact that in reappearance they also cost 50p each, the new normal.

I appreciate that not everyone will absorb the costs as well, but since society is already quite good at ignoring them, I do not think you will find headlines about chaos and so on. Articles about hardship, yes, but not screaming panicky headlines.

This is purely about food, of course. But then presumably people voted to have a radically compromised health service and a food economy closer in nature to the Eastern Bloc in 1970 than a modern European nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 29 January, 2019, 12:12:08 PM
The medicine side of things is terrifying, my wife is a hospital pharmacist and from what I understand Brexit is going to be utterly catastrophic. I'd thought it would be a case of stockpiling medicines but apparently that wouldn't work because of the short shelf-life of a lot of treatments.

When something like that is looming with no plan in place to handle it, due to a situation we're bringing on ourselves and that could just be cancelled (it was after all just an advisory referendum which clearly stated there was no obligation to actually leave whatever the result), the attitude of 'just get on with it already' is maddeningly self-destructive.

Maybe I'm being naive, but I had hoped that after using the referendum to gauge the public feeling (as was its sole purpose seemingly) the government would then work to find the best solution, and if the best solution is to remain then that should be the outcome. Any public outcry about the supposed death of democracy that a reversal would signal would die down a lot quicker than the backlash to driving the whole country off a cliff on the say-so of some purposefully (and as we now know illegally) misinformed voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 January, 2019, 12:19:43 PM
QuoteMaybe I'm being naive, but I had hoped that after using the referendum to gauge the public feeling (as was its sole purpose seemingly) the government would then work to find the best solution,

Cameron already tried negotiating better terms with the EU, but because it was Cameron, he fucked it up.
To be fair, the UK already had a pretty sweet EU deal, wanting better terms despite being a glorified money laundering operation was just taking the piss.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 10:31:19 AMI admittedly don't follow this very much because it smells like a huge pile of bullshit to me so I don't understand why a deal is needed anyway. The referendum, as far as I recall, was about leave or remain - not remain or partially leave (which is what leave with a deal seems to be).

Trade deals are needed because we have borders.  You can, technically, just ship something into a country and sell it directly to your customer, but then where does the government get its cut?  Taxing billionaires might be off the table, but taking a slice of Joe Schmoe's pie is how politicians' salaries get paid.

QuoteWe have a country that voted leave and politicians who want to remain, so the politicians seem to be making a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing in order to bore or scare people into eventually remaining.

If you're wealthy enough to survive this comfortably and have the army to protect you, what's the downside to Brexit?  Why would you stop it?
From the point of view of the ideologically-committed capitalist, austerity was a huge success that led to the tripling of the incomes of top earners.  The bigger the disaster that Brexit is, the better, as it becomes an automatic sanction for the previously-unthinkable, such as selling off the NHS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:38:23 PM
I'm sorry, IP, I must have misunderstood. When you said, "(W)e are used to seamless trade and the benefits that brings, even if we don't really understand the mechanics. And this extends to basically everything: fuel; food; even chemicals to ensure our water is clean," I assumed you meant that no deal would automatically destroy our ability to trade in these things.

So, the country will have a new base-line of WTO trade rules on which to build. I don't think that means this base-line will last forever or is even inevitable. Countries have been negotiating trade deals forever and will continue to do so.

As for "frictionless trading" - where does the friction come from? Is this not simply Brussels saying "toe the line or we will impose friction"? A threat, in other words?

Why would something like importing wine from Spain, for example, incur any more "friction" for a country outside the EU than in it if not for government bureaucracy applied simply so that it can be relieved when joining the club? It seems to me that all the down sides to leaving the EU are artificial problems that will be imposed as a punishment for - or a warning against - leaving the EU.

I'm happy to admit that I don't understand any of this foolishness. Why do we need a deal with the EU to trade with European countries?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 12:40:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:38:23 PM
I'm sorry, IP, I must have misunderstood. When you said, "(W)e are used to seamless trade and the benefits that brings, even if we don't really understand the mechanics. And this extends to basically everything: fuel; food; even chemicals to ensure our water is clean," I assumed you meant that no deal would automatically destroy our ability to trade in these things.

So, the country will have a new base-line of WTO trade rules on which to build. I don't think that means this base-line will last forever or is even inevitable. Countries have been negotiating trade deals forever and will continue to do so.

As for "frictionless trading" - where does the friction come from? Is this not simply Brussels saying "toe the line or we will impose friction"? A threat, in other words?

Why would something like importing wine from Spain, for example, incur any more "friction" for a country outside the EU than in it if not for government bureaucracy applied simply so that it can be relieved when joining the club? It seems to me that all the down sides to leaving the EU are artificial problems that will be imposed as a punishment for - or a warning against - leaving the EU.

I'm happy to admit that I don't understand any of this foolishness. Why do we need a deal with the EU to trade with European countries?

I've edited your post for you to include only the salient point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:42:41 PM

Or the points you don't want to answer.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 12:46:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:42:41 PM

Or the points you don't want to answer.

None of this stuff is a secret. I admire IP for taking the time to explain things as far as he has, but demanding people explain international trade from first principles because you, by your own admission, don't understand them but are still adopting a sceptical position... some people might suggest that was a little unreasonable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:54:05 PM

I understand how trade works, Jim. It's a fundamentally simple process.

What I don't understand is how leaving the EU alters those fundamentals in such catastrophic ways unless those catastrophic alterations are imposed as a punishment or disincentive.

Simply crossing out my thoughts and opinions does nothing to explain why a deal is needed. If the answer is "to avoid sanctions" then I'd find that a perfectly acceptable answer, even if it's a terrible thing to have to face. If you have another answer, I'm happy to consider it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2019, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 10:31:19 AMI don't believe that no deal means no trade. That makes no sense to me. Are European farmers going to refuse to trade with British markets because our servants in Westminster can't find a way of cutting their servants in Brussels into a piece of the profits? Is it going to become unlawful to trade with the UK? I very much doubt it.

Just as one example: you won't have the benefit of EU food regulations so the UK is free to import the cheapest of low quality foods undercutting local farmers/Producers while destroying their livelihoods, and the people's health, which puts more strain on the NHS. Hello Monsanto etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 01:00:47 PM

Does that mean EU regulations are more humane than UK regulations? And does this mean that, no matter who you vote for, UK politicians have absolutely no regard for public health?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2019, 01:10:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 01:00:47 PM
Does that mean EU regulations are more humane than UK regulations? And does this mean that, no matter who you vote for, UK politicians have absolutely no regard for public health?

There are degrees between no regard and less regard. One of the selling points of Brexit by Brexiteers is cheaper food (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/18/rees-mogg-cheap-food-brexit-workers-human-rights-abuses). Cheaper food generally means less regulation of quality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 01:26:59 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 29 January, 2019, 12:19:43 PMCameron already tried negotiating better terms with the EU, but because it was Cameron, he fucked it up.
Not really. He got a deal that surprised a large number of people. The issue was that even if he'd brought back a moon on a stick, it wouldn't have been enough.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 12:38:23 PMSo, the country will have a new base-line of WTO trade rules on which to build. I don't think that means this base-line will last forever or is even inevitable. Countries have been negotiating trade deals forever and will continue to do so.
Seriously, go and read a bit. You're either being wilfully ignorant now, or are just taking the piss. Basic FTAs take about five to ten years to do, if you have competence – which the UK does not. Trade will not cease, as I've said, but throwing up borders means the frictionless nature of trade is gone. Because we do not have ports to deal with this, and our ENTIRE manufacturing and warehousing is based on JIT, we're basically fucked. We're not self-sufficient in food, for one thing; and we don't, for example, make insulin. So unless you're happy for people to go hungry and for diabetics to die, go and do a bit of reading.

QuoteAs for "frictionless trading" - where does the friction come from? Is this not simply Brussels saying "toe the line or we will impose friction"? A threat, in other words?
Again, go and do some reading. This is trade 101, not something complicated. We are currently in a trade and customs union. When you move outside of such a union, a border goes up. That's it. This isn't the EU imposing anything on us. This is us deciding we want to leave a club, going "SHIT!" when we realise what the implications are, and then blaming the club for the decision we made.

QuoteI'm happy to admit that I don't understand any of this foolishness. Why do we need a deal with the EU to trade with European countries?
We don't. But we do if we want that trade to be frictionless. We do if we don't want lorries backed up for miles for customs checks. We do if we want to not obliterate the entire agri-food and manufacturing industries. We do if we want to retain the likes of Airbus.

We've already lost the EMA. It seems a lot of people won't be happy until we've lost everything, and can pretend we're scrappy little Britain after the war again, on rations, and dying of preventable diseases.

Seriously, though: devil's advocate is fine. But if you're going to march in talking like some far-right nutter from the ERG, I'm going to find it very difficult to respond again here, because this makes me furiously angry. Again, as politely and patiently as I can say this, go and read up on the single market and customs union, and understand what the ramifications are of leaving them both, without having put in place anything to deal with the changes.

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 29 January, 2019, 01:10:11 PMOne of the selling points of Brexit by Brexiteers is cheaper food (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/18/rees-mogg-cheap-food-brexit-workers-human-rights-abuses). Cheaper food generally means less regulation of quality.
That was also one of the lies of Brexit. UK food is among the cheapest in the world – or, more accurately, we spend less per capita than comparable nations. Mostly, this is down to a mix of competition and availability, rather than cutting standards. Brexiters bang on erroneously about tariffs and being evil to ex-Commonwealth countries, even though the EU (perhaps against its better judgement) caved to the UK regarding ditching tariffs for the majority of that stuff anyway. From what I can tell, the main arguments now are that wine could be about 10p cheaper per bottle (although the govt is increasing taxes by about the same), and we could import meat and veg from the US, which has significantly lower standards than the EU.

Yum yum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 January, 2019, 01:51:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 29 January, 2019, 05:24:05 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 January, 2019, 10:14:03 PM
Speaking as a Northern Ireland native, let me reassure all the mainland forum users that the Troubles weren't that bad (https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-planners-could-use-martial-law-against-civil-disobedience-11619088?dcmp).

Speaking as a 'legitimate target' during the troubles, I'm assuming that is ironic.

[also, what Army are they going to deploy?]


I think I was a legitimate target at the time.  I was about twelve or thirteen years old and lived within 20 miles of an army barracks in East Anglia.  Due to this I got caught up in a bomb scare while getting comics from the local town (didn't blow up thankfully).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 January, 2019, 02:08:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 10:31:19 AM
Are European farmers going to refuse to trade with British markets because our servants in Westminster can't find a way of cutting their servants in Brussels into a piece of the profits?


Depends if they want to go to prison for smuggling or not.


QuoteIs it going to become unlawful to trade with the UK? I very much doubt it.


Doubt as much as you wish, it would be unlawful to trade with the UK without following trading laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2019, 02:36:14 PM
'Brexit isn't going to be bad, because I don't believe it will be bad.'

And so the believers chug happily along towards disaster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 02:45:07 PM

QuoteSo unless you're happy for people to go hungry and for diabetics to die, go and do a bit of reading.

I humbly bow to your superior logic.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 January, 2019, 02:53:53 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2019, 02:36:14 PM
'Brexit isn't going to be bad, because I don't believe it will be bad.'

And so the believers chug happily along towards disaster.

It's alright, reddit user Ch@mbers4(((Bankers))) tells me we can survive off of chlorine chicken and these 'red pills'? So we should be alright then...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 03:15:05 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2019, 02:36:14 PM'Brexit isn't going to be bad, because I don't believe it will be bad.'
And so the believers chug happily along towards disaster.
Quite. And this is quite a varied coalition of sorts. I heard someone yesterday argue Airbus won't leave the UK because of the investment it's made here, and because it's a big company and will therefore "sort something out". Others are arguing the letter from a massive amount of the food industry (over half of major supermarkets, several fast food chains) about no-deal being a shit-show was because they were remainers in some sort of conspiracy, and therefore should be boycotted. And so on.

But then even my dad (who, fortunately, voted remain) was quite upbeat a while ago. He's been in sales since the 1970s and so is good at deals, but also applies logic. So his thinking is that there needs to be a good deal, and that's what we'll get. My point to him: we are no longer dealing with rationality nor logic. Brexit today is little more than a cult. It eschews facts and rules, and thinks we'll be fine, or we'll be better, or we can just do our own thing before Empire/God Save the Queen/British spirit. It is ludicrous.

I do get that most people don't get how international trade works, nor how things like single markets and customs unions operate. That's fair enough. But to then hand-wave away explanations of these things when they're offered just makes me think we deserve what we get. And what we're going to get – unless some miracle happens – is the broad equivalent of having sanctions applied to the UK, but having done this to ourselves.

And while I'm sure some Brexiters and others might think the line "people will die" is hyperbolic, tell that to diabetics who have already been told that under no-deal their supplies cannot be guaranteed, or the people who are already finding vital cancer treatments are in short supply.

Still: fewer Polish people and blue passports, eh? What a fucking prize.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 January, 2019, 03:37:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 02:45:07 PM
QuoteSo unless you're happy for people to go hungry and for diabetics to die, go and do a bit of reading.

I humbly bow to your superior logic.


If you weren't a regular on this forum, I'd have said you're just trolling at this point.  You've admitted you haven't done any background reading on this, yet you're spouting wild claims.  They're not suggesting you bow to their logic, they're just suggesting you do a little research next time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 04:47:24 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 03:15:05 PM
Others are arguing the letter from a massive amount of the food industry (over half of major supermarkets, several fast food chains) about no-deal being a shit-show was because they were remainers in some sort of conspiracy, and therefore should be boycotted. And so on.

It's the utter refusal to engage with reality that is simultaneously maddening and terrifying. The revelation that Heathrow Airport had put a provision into its accounts for zero revenue for three months after March 29th was similarly greeted with cries of 'remainer propaganda!'

The notion that the second busiest international airport in the world would even contemplate writing off an entire quarter to make a political point is just deranged. There's no other word for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 05:10:52 PM

Not trolling, Sheridan, just accepting the fact that arguing against ad hominem attacks is pointless.

I was going to post a more reasoned response but, given I.P. all but accused me of being happy to see people die instead of reading something (he doesn't say what or give any suggestions), I saw little point. If that's what he actually thinks I want then I have nothing more to say.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 January, 2019, 05:21:11 PM
Oh give over. You're happy to play devil's advocate and spout extreme views all the time here. Do I literally think you want people to die? No. My actual comment was:

"So unless you're happy for people to go hungry and for diabetics to die, go and do a bit of reading."

The second bit of that was key. Go and do some research, rather than just saying "everything will be OK". Because the likely outcome of a reckless "leave right now" policy regarding Brexit is that people will suffer. We don't make enough (almost any) insulin in this country. It cannot be stored for any length of time. Cancer treatments cannot be guaranteed and are already a problem. We also just saw the EMA leave, obliterating the UK's position as a leader in pharma. Beyond that, the NHS will be dead in the water when the tax take collapses as we lose hundreds of thousands of jobs.

As for reading, I don't know. Even Wikipedia would be a good place to start regarding the basics of the single market and customs union, if you genuinely don't understand how these things work. My point, repeatedly, was that this isn't the time for hand-waving, or thinking the EU is punishing us as a part of some great conspiracy. It's more like we made a cake and now want our eggs back. Or, as someone said on Twitter, like we and 27 friends pooled all of our Lego decades ago, and spent years building amazing structures; but now the UK wants its bricks back. And it wants to carry on playing with all the other bricks without paying for new ones.

The thing is, many of us have never lived through real disruption on a national scale. We genuinely cannot understand what it is like. The way things are going in the Commons right now, it looks like we're soon going to find out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 05:43:15 PM

I think the problem is that I will always come at things like this from an anarchist perspective and you from a statist perspective.

I can appreciate some aspects of statism but these are few and maybe you can appreciate some aspects of anarchism but only a few.

Because of this, I will always see the whole Brexit thing (whichever side "wins") as utterly pointless while you will see it as vitally important. You simply cannot see it my way and I cannot see it yours. I have read a book or two about history, politics, economics and such - just as I'm sure you have - and the Wikipedia page on Brexit is, to me, no more or less helpful to me than the Wikipedia page on Star Wars' Rebel Alliance: interesting but ultimately pointless.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 05:58:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 05:43:15 PM
Because of this, I will always see the whole Brexit thing (whichever side "wins") as utterly pointless while you will see it as vitally important.

On one side of this argument, there are food shortages and a lack of cancer treatments and insulin. On the other, there aren't. Please explain how there is no difference between these two outcomes.

If you don't believe that this is an accurate assessment of the likely outcomes, it's incumbent on you to come back with some research, not on us to educate you so that you can disagree with us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 06:11:51 PM

On both sides are governments who believe they have the right to determine whether there are food shortages and a lack of cancer treatments and insulin. Please explain how there is a difference between these two sides.

You believe these people have the right to decide this because you vote for them. If you don't believe that this is an accurate assessment of the situation, it's incumbent on you to come back with some research, not on me to educate you so that you can disagree with me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 January, 2019, 06:28:16 PM
And this is why no one wants to discuss anything with you. Leaving aside your snotty, condescending attitude, we always get back to your basic refusal to engage with reality.

Something is going to happen here, whether you accept the legitimacy of the political system or not. It is going to happen. If we leave the EU without any transitional arrangements, the basic mechanisms by which we import food, medical supplies and countless millions of components vital to thousands of businesses' supply chains will simply stop working.

If you believe that isn't going to happen, it's incumbent on you to provide some evidence for that belief. We get it. You're an anarchist. Well done, you. However, we don't live in an anarchist utopia, we live here and now and with things the way they are. You pretending you're better than other people because you don't want to engage with that reality doesn't actually change anything.

Why are you even discussing this if you reject the basic premise of the discussion? Other than to elevate my blood pressure, obviously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2019, 07:01:54 PM
As Brexit trundles on, I find myself agreeing with folk I thought I'd never agree with, because they seem to sensibly see the disaster approaching and want to avert it (by staying in the EU, naturally).  Tony Blair, Michael Heseltine and now Lord Saatchi (https://www.channel4.com/news/uk), who sensibly points out that the result of the referendum was "we're not sure, we can't decide".

I liken people who say "what's the worst that could happen" as being as dense as Internet game forum morons who say stuff like "why can't they fix the bug, it can't be that difficult".  What they're really saying is "It should be easy to adjust a complex system that took several months to create without anything unforeseen or untoward occurring: why it would as easy as pouring this milk onto my cornflakes."  Moron alert!

This is why "the people" shouldn't be deciding complex economic questions: they're not qualified.   (Which is why economics, and game development, are things that gets studied in depth as post-secondary topics, rather than something you cover in primary school.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:03:37 PM

I don't doubt that things "will stop working" in the event of Brexit. The question is, why?

My view - which has never changed - is that a handful of people will decide what is and is not going to stop working. I do not believe they have the right to do this. That is my argument. That is reality.

I do not pretend to be better or worse than anyone else. This is why I do not vote - as I have explained many times - because I do not have the right to force other people to live in the way I think they should. People who vote, on the other hand, believe they do have the right to force people to live how they see fit. They believe it's up to politicians to decide whether they can have insulin or not. As far as I'm concerned, I have no right to support a system that can deny people life based on politics.

We do not live in any kind of Utopia, anarchist or statist, and we never will. To expect any kind of Utopia is fantasy but we both strive towards it. Utopia is like Absolute Zero - a state that can never be achieved in reality - but that does not mean we shouldn't try. While you search for the Perfect Ruler, whom you will never find, I search for the Perfect Rule, which I will never find.

You and I have a long history of butting heads on this forum, Jim, but that's not because I dislike you, it's because I disagree with your ideas. If I come across as snotty and condescending then so be it but I'm attacking your arguments, not you.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2019, 07:06:38 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:03:37 PM
I don't doubt that things "will stop working" in the event of Brexit. The question is, why?

People have already answered the why part up above.  In short: trade laws.  It's got fuck all to do with anarchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:08:51 PM

You're absolutely right, it's got fuck all to do with anarchy. It's got everything to do with statism.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2019, 07:24:56 PM
Reality: this discourse occurred because someone pointed out evidence that a no-deal Brexit would be harmful for the British economy.  You countered that this was "fear-mongering", because you said you think everything will be fine.

So, on the one hand, there are expert economists who say it will be harmful.  On the other hand is you (self-admittedly not an economic expert).

QED, I think. 

(Unless you have new information pertinent to the argument: mentioning that you don't like politicians doesn't count.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:34:31 PM

I don't think "everything will be fine." I don't think the country's going to be dragged into some Mad Max dystopian nightmare either, though.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 29 January, 2019, 08:08:01 PM
They've just rejected the amendment to take 'no deal' off the table.
Guess that makes May's crappy deal more likely to get through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 January, 2019, 09:41:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/5SNM8do.jpg?1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
I normally avoid this thread for fear of causing / taking offence.

I'm clever, I'm educated, I am read up. I just don't have a clue about what is going to happen. I fear the uncertainty of it all. On Brext, my tuppence is:

1. The world is bad enough without deliberately adding to our woes.

2. I worry for politics. At large. I remember strong leaders who had conviction and courage. I thought well of Heseltine when he resigned, of Scargill for taking a stand, of Hague during the Gulf War. With hindsight, even John Major and Neil Kinnock stood for something. Now, our MPs seem to be jobs-worths in the truest sense. They worry for their jobs, but don't do them. Do they have principles and courage?

3. Brexit should have been two referendums. That is the critical mistake in all this. One to ask "Do you want us to negotiate an exit?" and one ask "Here's the deal, do you like it?". Of course, the Tories didn't think it would be a leave vote and so botched the question to appease their right wingers. They didn't think about (care about) the North, which suffers from a general lack of wealth and a fear of unintegrated immigrants.

4. Why did we allow an EU vote to become about non-EU immigration, asylum seekers and NHS cash that doesn't exist? Hell mend us, and hell mend our politicians (see point 2).

5. Brexit, for me, is like a group of people saying "who fancies eating out?". Most say yes. They then disagree on what eating out is: Italian, chippy, Chinese, Indian, Mexican? So, there should have been a second vote on what to eat (see point 3).

6. I am vehemently against a second referendum. While I voted to leave, I see a second referndum as a catastrophe for democracy. You don't like an answer, so you ask again? But if it is a remain, without a proper two step referendum (see point 3) then that is the government dictating the vote - you will keep voting until we get the answer we want. That's a banana republic rabbit hole.

7. And does that mean we can re-open Scottish independence? Can the SNP just keep asking until they get a yes? Is that fair? (But why not, if it's done for Brexit?).

8. Really? I'd rather a cliff edge than lose democracy.

9. And if we did have Indyref 2, and it was to split, then how is that done? It's been two years for Brexit where there has been a process to break up. The Treaty of Union goes deeper and has no such process. Are we looking at three or four years? A decade? More financial turmoil.

10. All this plays into the hands of those who resent the status quo. That means the disenfranchised and the super-rich vote for change. History shows there's only one winner from that vote.  They don't live in council flats...

11. What of my children? Why does a 90 year old with rose-tinted memories get to vote and create years of chaos that they won't suffer through. Why can't I vote for my children on the shape of the country they will inherit?

All a mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 29 January, 2019, 11:56:17 PM
Does anyone else think that Farage is secretly crossing his fingers for a second ref? He seems to bring it up all the time. I think he's starting to realise that he'd rather go down in history as the hero of the lost cause than the arsehole that got us into all this mess.

I'm inclined to just wish May's deal goes ahead now. It'll ensure that Leavers and Remainers are equally miserable and unsatisfied, and isn't that the definition of compromise?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 January, 2019, 12:35:45 AM
Quote from: radiator on 29 January, 2019, 11:56:17 PM
Does anyone else think that Farage is secretly crossing his fingers for a second ref? He seems to bring it up all the time.

Yep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 06:46:53 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:34:31 PM

I don't think "everything will be fine." I don't think the country's going to be dragged into some Mad Max dystopian nightmare either, though.

1) Nobody said "Mad Max dystopian nightmare".

2) You dismissed as "fearmongering" a number of possible effects of a no-deal Brexit that are logical consequences of the scenario and are agreed as ranging from quite likely to more-or-less-inevitable by experts in their field. You did this whilst admitting that you had little knowledge or understanding of the subject under discussion and when asked on what basis you reached your conclusion, you demanded that people explain the argument to you. It was not an ad hominem to point this out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 08:35:29 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
6. I am vehemently against a second referendum. While I voted to leave, I see a second referndum as a catastrophe for democracy. You don't like an answer, so you ask again? But if it is a remain, without a proper two step referendum (see point 3) then that is the government dictating the vote - you will keep voting until we get the answer we want. That's a banana republic rabbit hole.

I'm assuming you meant "While I voted to remain"...?

I agree with you in principle on the idea of a second referendum. However, in practise, I can't see a way past the current political impasse. The first referendum was practically a textbook example of how not to run a referendum and has left us in a position where parliament has been paralysed by the whole "will of the people" schtick (leaving aside the small fact of the result's illegitimacy) and I can't see anything other than a new set of instructions from "the people" breaking the deadlock. The alternative is to let the clock run down to zero and for us to crash out with no deal, an outcome for which there is definitely no democratic mandate.

On a broader note of principle, I'd have no issue if the price of a second referendum was renewing the mandate by referendum every 10-15 years, assuming that the lessons of this first clusterfuck were properly learned: a threshold set for a clear majority (whatever the usual standard is for major constitutional change); the choice to be between the status quo (EU membership) and a clearly-outlined, detailed proposal for the terms under which we might leave; additionally, if those terms could not be negotiated within a fixed timeframe (say, two years) then they would be abandoned as unworkable/unreasonable and the country would remain, making it incumbent on the leavers to come back with a better/more realistic plan before the next referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 30 January, 2019, 09:35:41 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 January, 2019, 07:03:37 PM
People who vote, on the other hand, believe they do have the right to force people to live how they see fit. They believe it's up to politicians to decide whether they can have insulin or not.

Unfortunately it doesn't matter what any of us believe should be the case, what matters is the reality of the situation. You may not think it's fair that Brexit will lead to medicine shortages, but thinking that won't magically stop it from happening.

The system that you want and that you see as fair doesn't exist, so by voting we're using the system we do have in the hopes of achieving the best result. You've made a choice not to engage with the system but that doesn't make you or anyone else immune to its outcomes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2019, 10:22:25 AM
There are degrees of shitness between Today and Mad Max.

My personal opinion is taking one step down that ladder of Shitness is unacceptable.

Hopefully that'll be the last time anyone has to answer that stupid hyperbole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 January, 2019, 10:51:47 AM
To be fair we're about 6 steps up from Mad Max but only 2 from Split Second.

Not sure which is worse to be honest!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 30 January, 2019, 11:13:28 AM
Sammy Wilson can have some US style beef to go with his chippy chips. This is what the ERG want.

US lobby groups for agriculture and pharmaceutical firms want UK standards changed to be closer to those of the US in a post-Brexit trade deal.

The meat lobby wants the sale of growth hormone-fed beef, currently banned in the UK and EU, to be allowed in the UK.

The drugs company lobby wants changes to the NHS drugs approval process to allow it to buy more of US drugs.

They are also asking US officials - who will hold a hearing later - to seek lower tariffs on agricultural goods.
The farming groups say any deal should move away from EU standards, including rules governing genetically modified crops, antibiotics in meats, and pesticides and herbicides, such as glyphosate.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47036119
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 30 January, 2019, 11:59:29 AM
If we had fewer politicians like Sammy Wilson, the world would be a much better place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2019, 12:44:03 PM
To refer back to bias; the most recent Brexit vote is, wall-to-wall, being described as a victory for Theresa May. Laura Kuenssberg using her objective, BBC hat, describes it as an 'Unconventional Win'.

Literally all that's happened is they've said go back and get a deal. It's only a win against the Conservative party itself. We're still exactly where we always were with the EU, and really exactly where we always were in Parliament.

For all those people who cry out for an Opposition thats worth talking about, I think the real issue is that this is how monumentally shit the Conservatives can be and still be described as winning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 12:47:24 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2019, 12:44:03 PM
Laura Kuenssberg using her objective, BBC hat, describes it as an 'Unconventional Win'.

Keunssberg is a disgrace. Corbyn says he won't meet with May until no deal is off the table. The Commons passes a motion that (at least theoretically) takes no deal off the table, so Corbyn says he'll meet with May. Kuenssberg describes this as "a u-turn".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 30 January, 2019, 12:49:24 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM

5. Brexit, for me, is like a group of people saying "who fancies eating out?". Most say yes. They then disagree on what eating out is: Italian, chippy, Chinese, Indian, Mexican? Or your Mum?

Fixed that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ZenArcade on 30 January, 2019, 02:27:04 PM
Haven't posted here in a long while. This country and its political class has gone fucking nuts over the past two years. I struggle for words: no leadership; held to ransom by a bunch of rightwing zealots and 10 venal, corrupt religious headbangers. The BBC are utterly supine. Z
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 03:39:54 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
6. I am vehemently against a second referendum. While I voted to leave, I see a second referndum as a catastrophe for democracy. You don't like an answer, so you ask again? But if it is a remain, without a proper two step referendum (see point 3) then that is the government dictating the vote - you will keep voting until we get the answer we want. That's a banana republic rabbit hole.

7. And does that mean we can re-open Scottish independence? Can the SNP just keep asking until they get a yes? Is that fair? (But why not, if it's done for Brexit?).

I don't quite follow why people are so against second votes, within reason.  Like: each case on its merits.  Clearly, if you vote on something on Tuesday (& lose the vote), so then vote again on Wednesday and so on ad infinitum, then that's not reasonable because why have the vote in the first place.

But there's an extreme counterpoint to that, which is that once you've voted on something once, that's it decided for eternity.  (Which, as Prince told us, is a mighty long time.)

So, sensibly, there must be a middle ground on re-voting stuff.  The argument being used currently for a second referendum (either for Brexit or Scottish independence) is that time has passed and things have changed.  Like science, politics should be allowed to advance with new knowledge. 

(Like Brexit, economically, is actually a really shit idea, but it was sold as a great one.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 January, 2019, 03:47:59 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 08:35:29 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
6. I am vehemently against a second referendum. While I voted to leave, I see a second referndum as a catastrophe for democracy. You don't like an answer, so you ask again? But if it is a remain, without a proper two step referendum (see point 3) then that is the government dictating the vote - you will keep voting until we get the answer we want. That's a banana republic rabbit hole.

I'm assuming you meant "While I voted to remain"...?

I agree with you in principle on the idea of a second referendum. However, in practise, I can't see a way past the current political impasse. The first referendum was practically a textbook example of how not to run a referendum and has left us in a position where parliament has been paralysed by the whole "will of the people" schtick (leaving aside the small fact of the result's illegitimacy) and I can't see anything other than a new set of instructions from "the people" breaking the deadlock. The alternative is to let the clock run down to zero and for us to crash out with no deal, an outcome for which there is definitely no democratic mandate.

On a broader note of principle, I'd have no issue if the price of a second referendum was renewing the mandate by referendum every 10-15 years, assuming that the lessons of this first clusterfuck were properly learned: a threshold set for a clear majority (whatever the usual standard is for major constitutional change); the choice to be between the status quo (EU membership) and a clearly-outlined, detailed proposal for the terms under which we might leave; additionally, if those terms could not be negotiated within a fixed timeframe (say, two years) then they would be abandoned as unworkable/unreasonable and the country would remain, making it incumbent on the leavers to come back with a better/more realistic plan before the next referendum.

While a couple of years ago I would have agreed that a second referendum would be undemocratic, I've since changed my mind. What was undemocratic was the fact that voters were misled, either by errors or, more often,  by lies.

Leaving was going to leave the UK with all the benefits of Switzerland and Norway.  Nope.  There'd be an extra 350 million available for the NHS. A lie owned up to the very day after the referendum.  Britain could stay in the single market.  Again,  no.  Britain would have control over its borders: it already did.  The Northern Ireland issue wouldn't be important. Brits could still retain full power to travel round Europe without visas. Bendy bananas, fishing rights, blah blah blah: all bollocks.

A second,  informed referendum makes democratic sense to me.  If you still want to fuck yourselves over the second time around,  knock yourselves out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 30 January, 2019, 03:56:18 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
7. And does that mean we can re-open Scottish independence? Can the SNP just keep asking until they get a yes? Is that fair? (But why not, if it's done for Brexit?).

It's worth noting that a large part of the case for Scotland remaining in the UK was built on retaining EU membership. Circumstances have clearly changed now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 30 January, 2019, 04:11:00 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 30 January, 2019, 03:56:18 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
7. And does that mean we can re-open Scottish independence? Can the SNP just keep asking until they get a yes? Is that fair? (But why not, if it's done for Brexit?).

It's worth noting that a large part of the case for Scotland remaining in the UK was built on retaining EU membership. Circumstances have clearly changed now.

Yeah, I wouldn't see another Brexit or Indy referendum to be in any way a compromise of democracy. As mentioned, to just redo them willy nilly wouldn't make any sense but when a situation has changed so drastically that the question has completely changed I think it's the only thing that makes sense.

Brexit was massively mis-advertised so a second vote now that people are hopefully better informed makes more sense than ploughing on with it regardless, and Scotland being removed from the EU against our will despite one of the main Better Together campaign points being that we'd be safeguarding our place in it should really necessitate another indy vote.

If the chips fall the same way again then so be it, but at least they'd have gone back to the people and let them have their say in light of new information, which seems the most democratic thing you could do in the situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 04:33:31 PM
Quote from: Keef Monkey on 30 January, 2019, 04:11:00 PM
Brexit was massively mis-advertised

Not to mention the fact that the Electoral Commission has declared the referendum result unsafe due to the Leave campaign's significant overspend and dubious data collection/targetting... something which I think the remain camp should have hammering on from the minute the Commission made its finding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 04:40:51 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2019, 12:44:03 PMFor all those people who cry out for an Opposition thats worth talking about, I think the real issue is that this is how monumentally shit the Conservatives can be and still be described as winning.

For the last couple of decades, anything in the mid-30s range of the polls for Labour is Doing Quite Well, anything around the mid-20s is Doing Quite Bad, and anything over 40 is This Is Never Gonna Happen territory - they are currently averaging between 38-40 in most polls.
You will note, however, that the same people who cry about the Opposition not doing better against the current government are the same people who spend all their time bitching about the opposition and insisting that they'll fail, that they can't be elected, that their leader is shit, that the supporters are thugs, etc, and then when the opposition does actually do well in any way at all, it's decried as Fake News from Owen Jones, a junior column writer for the Guardian upon whom they seem to have some sort of fixation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 January, 2019, 05:04:05 PM
On democracies and mandates, the 2017 GE rather messed up those arguments. There was less time between 2015 and 2017's GEs than between the current day and the referendum. Also, there is an argument that the mandate was effectively extinguished by the 2017 GE, on the basis that May didn't win a majority. (That one's trickier, but it's an interesting point. Blame the Remainiacs podcast for that idea.)

As for the referendum issues, JayzusB.Christ offered the tip of the iceberg. There's the little-reported matter of a shit-load of ballots for overseas voters simply disappearing. (Some numbers put those as enough to swing the result.) The franchise was dreadful (cloning the GE one, which meant that EU citizens were denied a vote, as were any Brits who'd been in the EU for 15 years, but any Commonwealth citizen who'd just rocked up could put in their 2p). Also, there's the tiny issue that the referendum was between the status quo and an aspiration.

The Irish showed how this sort of thing should be done. Create some legislation, and ask people to vote on it. If they do, the legislation becomes law. If not, it gets ripped up and chucked in the bin. If there was a people's vote, it wouldn't be about overriding the first (and, frankly, Leave could win), but a combination of ratification (should May win) and people actually being able to vote for one of two legally deliverable alternatives (assuming no deal is not on the ballot, and that May's deal is roughly as it is today).

Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 04:40:51 PMYou will note, however, that the same people who cry about the Opposition not doing better against the current government...
My problem isn't polling. Anyone arguing Labour should be ten points or more in front baffle me. It's almost unheard of for any party to secure 50% in polling; and the Tories absorbed almost the entire UKIP vote to hit their figure, while Labour has to battle to retain the new young vote, and the 'borrowed' Green and Lib Dev votes. My problem is how inept the front-bench can be, such as with the mess over the immigration bill, and things like Corbyn having to get notes from Starmer earlier over the correct line to use about the customs union (which did not go unnoticed on the other side of the floor).

What most frustrates me about Corbyn, though, is that although I like his policy outline, his stance of Brexit remains appalling, and his notions of democracy within the party are flawed. He's shown himself to be just like the rest. On the immigration bill, that's something he used to fight; now, when he could have whipped his party, he choose not to, and then it was a feeble one-line. CLPs beg for a PV. He more or less kills the option by placing so many barriers in its path. In other words, like everyone else, he does what he wants when it suits his ideology – even if that flies in the face of the majority of Labour voters and members. At least with May, you can say her Brexit stance aligns with that of most of her party's voters and members.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 30 January, 2019, 06:09:14 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 08:35:29 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 29 January, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
6. I am vehemently against a second referendum. While I voted to leave, I see a second referndum as a catastrophe for democracy. You don't like an answer, so you ask again? But if it is a remain, without a proper two step referendum (see point 3) then that is the government dictating the vote - you will keep voting until we get the answer we want. That's a banana republic rabbit hole.

I'm assuming you meant "While I voted to remain"...?




Yeah. I voted to remain. Oops
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2019, 06:16:01 PM

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 06:46:53 AM


1) Nobody said "Mad Max dystopian nightmare".

2) You dismissed as "fearmongering" a number of possible effects of a no-deal Brexit that are logical consequences of the scenario and are agreed as ranging from quite likely to more-or-less-inevitable by experts in their field. You did this whilst admitting that you had little knowledge or understanding of the subject under discussion and when asked on what basis you reached your conclusion, you demanded that people explain the argument to you. It was not an ad hominem to point this out.

1) Conceded. However, everyone here seems to think that Brexit will lead to some level of disaster.

2) It's the nature of these predicted disasters (which almost always seem to begin with words like may, might, possibly and so on) which seem to me to be fearmongering. People are going to die because of Brexit, it has been said. Well, we've been in the EU for some time now and people are already dying. Membership has made no difference to the poor bastards Atos (a European company) and IDS drove to poverty, homelessness and suicide - but, somehow, if Brexit happens it will be even worse because... er, the EU won't be able to protect these people any more. If it wasn't for EU protection, our government might even have been investigated by the UN for human rights violations. Imagine that.

Brexit will cost money - just like the European companies buying up British utility companies, increasing the costs of basic necessities and taking their profits out of the country - only moreso because, er, something.

Today, British ports work well enough but, the day after Brexit, they will somehow become unfit for purpose. I don't understand how this will happen. We live on a collection of islands so we're pretty used to running ports but, according to I.P., Brexit will somehow render all that knowledge and experience worthless.

Similarly, Brexit will also render stupid all our diplomats and negotiators who, after centuries of brokering international deals of all types and scales, will suddenly find themselves robbed of the ability to make any kind of trade deal whatsoever. I don't understand how this will happen.

When Britain leaves the EU, borders will automatically go up but, again according to I.P., these won't be imposed by the EU. That means, then, that these borders must be imposed by the UK government, which works for us, and can therefore be influenced by the electorate to be as useful as possible - simply vote for the party who advocates the best border system.

I.P. again points out that insulin is not at present made in the UK. I don't understand how this is a long term problem unless our chemists are going to suffer the same knowledge and experience drain as our diplomats. I don't understand why drug manufacturers would suddenly cease supplying insulin to Britain in the event of Brexit anyway - the bad publicity alone from such a dick move would make withholding insulin from British diabetics not worth it, and then there's the money they'd lose. So there must be some other reason why insulin wouldn't get into the UK in the event of Brexit but I can only think of one - the EU imposing restrictions for some reason, but the general feeling here seems to be that the EU wouldn't do that. So, the insulin shortage is something else I don't understand.

It seems to me that the general feeling is that, if Brexit goes ahead (and I'll be astounded if it does because Project Fear seems to be working perfectly) every aspect of Britain will either rot, crumble to dust or burst into flames because... Well, as I say, I don't understand how all this doom will come about.

It won't be the EU punishing us, obviously, because it's just a trading club. Well, it used to be. The fact that its unelected bureaucrats can now veto the budgets of democratically elected sovereign governments (like in Greece) is, I'm sure, neither here nor there. In fact, I don't quite understand how a simple customs and trading club got, or even needs, such powers.

So yes, I admit my ignorance on all these things. I simply don't understand but I am glad that you do. I'd be grateful if anyone could explain some of these things to me but I by no means demand it - because many of these things (and the article that started this particular conversation off) do seem like fearmongering to me.

But I'll stick my neck out here and make a prediction (my predictions are always wrong but I have a good feeling about this one): There will be no real Brexit. There may be a technical leaving with a deal that doesn't really change anything but, by this time next year, we'll all be spitting feathers about something else our overlords are fucking up and The Great Brexit Aversion will be all in the past, "phew, we really dodged that bullet" moment.

Either that or a bunch of other European countries will be making noises about leaving themselves - but I think this is unlikely.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 30 January, 2019, 06:40:20 PM
I recommend listening to Jason Hunter. But hey, what does he know? He's only an expert on international trade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 06:50:29 PM
Sharky, austerity measures have killed 120k people in the UK, and those measures were relatively restrained (so we're told).  Will Brexit result in a literal Thunderbirds-style catastrophe full of pyrotechnics?  Probably not, but there will be people who will face disruption to their needs, and it won't take much for them to suffer a disaster of some sort, be it a lack of funds to buy food or a sudden urge to walk under the wheels of a truck so they can stop letting their family down.
Society is maintained in a delicate balance of multiple moving parts and I would expect an anarchist to understand that.  Any disruption to its mechanisms can have knock-on effects that could affect thousands - if not millions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 06:52:59 PM
Quoteevery aspect of Britain will either rot, crumble to dust or burst into flames

Nobody said that.  They said this:

1. Remain - economy will tick along - things are pretty difficult as they are due to austerity measures.
2. May's deal - economy will suffer - things will be worse to some degree.
3. No deal - economy will suffer more - things will be worse to a larger degree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 30 January, 2019, 06:57:24 PM
Thanks, Radiator. I'll start with this (https://www.reddit.com/r/brexit/comments/9ay74g/jason_hunter_on_trade_tariffs_a_good_read/), chosen at random, for now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 January, 2019, 07:01:58 PM
Specifically on fruit/veg in the event of no deal:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/supermarket-fruit-buyer-no-deal-brexit/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 07:11:20 PM
The insulin scare was fact checked by Channel 4 News to be not as scary as first thought.  Like, we won't run out.  (But only because the government has stockpiled enough to see us through any initial border crisis.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 30 January, 2019, 07:41:53 PM
Welcome to Brexit Britain:

QuoteIt is something Iraqi-Kurds in the barbers up the road have heard a lot since the referendum. "I was in a nightclub and these two English lads were pretty drunk," said one barber, who asked not to be named. "They were saying: 'We're coming out of Europe  and then we can get rid of you.' I told them: 'I'm a British citizen.' I got citizenship 20 years ago after fleeing from Iraq. But they said: 'It doesn't matter, you've got dark skin.' My 11-year-old daughter has heard this too."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/30/it-is-terrible-but-i-still-want-it-crewe-voters-size-up-no-deal-brexit?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Othery

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 January, 2019, 07:58:32 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 03:39:54 PM
I don't quite follow why people are so against second votes, within reason. 

This is actually a fair point.  Let's face it, we voted in a Tory government in 1979 (or a Labour government in 1997), why bother having another election a few years later?  The British people had their say.  That's it, it's set in stone.  Isn't another election a failure to respect the 'will of the people' (please properly intone a la 'Hot Fuzz').
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 January, 2019, 08:21:12 PM
Funt Solo: insulin doesn't store for long. So there's likely a cushion, but there are no subsequent guarantees if the problems last for many months. (Under no deal, they would, although medicines will be prioritised.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 January, 2019, 08:46:24 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 30 January, 2019, 12:44:03 PM
To refer back to bias; the most recent Brexit vote is, wall-to-wall, being described as a victory for Theresa May. Laura Kuenssberg using her objective, BBC hat, describes it as an 'Unconventional Win'.

Literally all that's happened is they've said go back and get a deal. It's only a win against the Conservative party itself. We're still exactly where we always were with the EU, and really exactly where we always were in Parliament.

For all those people who cry out for an Opposition thats worth talking about, I think the real issue is that this is how monumentally shit the Conservatives can be and still be described as winning.


Tell me about it - one report I heard on radio news compared the latest votes to the 432 to 202 defeat and the way they reported yesterday's vote made it sound like the exact same issue had been voted on with May's government winning 317 to 301...  I genuinely thought I'd completely missed news about the vote being re-run.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 January, 2019, 08:52:15 PM
The Daily Fail are heralding it as "Theresa's Triumph!".

Boot lickers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 January, 2019, 09:31:54 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 03:39:54 PM
So, sensibly, there must be a middle ground on re-voting stuff.  The argument being used currently for a second referendum (either for Brexit or Scottish independence) is that time has passed and things have changed.  Like science, politics should be allowed to advance with new knowledge. 


Though with science, if it was found that the test conditions were falsified and that there was a secret source of funding from an interested party (cigarette companies, car manufacturers, etc), the results would no longer be considered valid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 January, 2019, 09:35:48 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 January, 2019, 03:47:59 PM
Leaving was going to leave the UK with all the benefits of Switzerland and Norway.  Nope.  There'd be an extra 350 million available for the NHS. A lie owned up to the very day after the referendum.


Owned up to?  I remember the Fromage interview where he denied he'd ever endorsed the idea - in my book a denial isn't the same as taking ownership of a lie :-(


QuoteBendy bananas, fishing rights, blah blah blah: all bollocks.

A second,  informed referendum makes democratic sense to me.  If you still want to fuck yourselves over the second time around,  knock yourselves out.


Unfortunately Johnson's made-up bendy bananas lie is still believed by far too many people.  Information is placed in front of them and they wilfully ignore it so that they don't have to face up to their mistakes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 09:52:04 PM
I recall in the last election, when Amber Rudd lost her seat, she burst into tears and then demanded repeated recounts until they told her she'd won - not just one recount "just to be sure", but at least two going by reports (and scuttlebutt at the time was that the actual number of recounts was 8).  Not so keen on do-overs now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 January, 2019, 10:12:50 PM
The bendy bananas euro-myth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromyth) was around decades ago (1994, probably), slapped on the front of tabloids for people to feed their Euro-rage.  What a load of bollocks.

Of course, I'm willfully ignoring the plight of poor, honest, hard-working cockney market traders who were all rounded up and imprisoned by the jackbooted Euro Police for trying to sell improperly shaped bananas.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 30 January, 2019, 10:40:11 PM
Comprehensive list of EU myths/hysteria/bullshit:

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/ (https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/)

For the life of me I cannot fathom the mentality of someone who:

a) makes this shit up

or

b) falls for it/cares about it

I barely even gave the EU any thought at all tbh. I like Europe, and I like not having wars.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 January, 2019, 11:10:15 PM
There was a story on Yahoo the other day about how Orkney was the best place to live in the UK. Shetland was voted second best place to live in Scotland.

The comments were full of folk saying something along the lines of "isn't it funny how all the best places to live in the UK are the places that haven't been 'culturally enriched' and have zero migrants swarming across from Europe."

Meanwhile, everybody in Lerwick was getting ready to celebrate their cultural heritage by dressing up in winged helmets and going on a torchlight procession to set fire to a longship. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-47034640)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2019, 01:46:59 AM
There's some Swedish bloke on Youtube called the Golden One who makes ranty vids about how Cultural Marxism sucks because its wrong to impose all this foreign cultural hegemony and I'll skip to the punchline he fetishises Vikings.  Bodybuilds like crazy, has swords, skull ornaments, plays Skyrim as a Nord and sides with Ulfric Stormcloak in the civil war quest - the full nine yards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 31 January, 2019, 09:31:02 AM
Brexit was all about emotion as far as I can tell. A significant group felt left out by globalisation, hated the elites as they saw them who seemed unaffected by austerity and believed that mass immigration was a 'conspiracy' to make every society reflect urban cultures like London. The Neoliberals had done this to them so their cherished ideals of European integration would pay hence the result of the Referendum. I believe we'll crash out on the 30th of March, Right-wing Tories have got May bottled up in Downing Street, so they'll allow the clock to run down 'winning' by default. What comes afterwards will not be pleasant for anyone with some significant disruption to some business and the Manufacturing Industry leaving for European shores. They'll be no second referendum that's just wishful thinking so WTO here we come, the UK will break up into its constituent parts a new England, Wales Scotland and probably war in Northern Ireland and Ireland plus some outrages here by various extremist factions. Rough seas ahead are all we have to look forward to now. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 31 January, 2019, 10:13:36 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 31 January, 2019, 09:31:02 AM
the UK will break up into its constituent parts a new England, Wales Scotland

I don't know your nationality, but in my experience, non-Scots massively overestimate the Scottish desire for independence - and I say that as a (formerly card-carrying) Scottish nationalist myself. If Brexit led to an independent Scotland I'd be overjoyed, but I'm not in the least convinced the appetite for another form of exit will be there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 31 January, 2019, 10:36:05 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 30 January, 2019, 11:10:15 PM
There was a story on Yahoo the other day about how Orkney was the best place to live in the UK. Shetland was voted second best place to live in Scotland.

The comments were full of folk saying something along the lines of "isn't it funny how all the best places to live in the UK are the places that haven't been 'culturally enriched' and have zero migrants swarming across from Europe."

Meanwhile, everybody in Lerwick was getting ready to celebrate their cultural heritage by dressing up in winged helmets and going on a torchlight procession to set fire to a longship. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-47034640)

I saw those comments as well. It was a good news story about a community but I just felt depressed to find that some people can only see the world through race.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2019, 11:18:00 AM
Quote from: Greg M. on 31 January, 2019, 10:13:36 AMI don't know your nationality, but in my experience, non-Scots massively overestimate the Scottish desire for independence - and I say that as a (formerly card-carrying) Scottish nationalist myself. If Brexit led to an independent Scotland I'd be overjoyed, but I'm not in the least convinced the appetite for another form of exit will be there.
I suspect it'd be closer than it was last time, not least if Westminster continues basically ignoring Scotland. I imagine if we ended up in the EEA, that'd be the end of it; but outside of the single market, Scotland would have a very difficult decision to make (not least that if it did go indy and join the EEA/EU, there would be a land border with England).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 31 January, 2019, 11:20:42 AM
So long as a Scottish exist from the UK could extend to Lancashire and Yorkshire, Westminster don't give a stuff about us either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 31 January, 2019, 12:10:10 PM
Scottish independence would require a rethink of Scottish national identity. A majority of Scots are happy to also be British: a continued shafting from Westminster is simply the expected state of affairs, and defining ourselves in opposition to England is, for some, part and parcel of Scottishness, something that's harder to maintain if we're permanently divorced. There's an argument that the case for independence needs separated in the popular consciousness from the SNP - they've been in government a long time now and are somewhat more tarnished of late.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 31 January, 2019, 12:32:47 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 31 January, 2019, 12:10:10 PM
There's an argument that the case for independence needs separated in the popular consciousness from the SNP - they've been in government a long time now and are somewhat more tarnished of late.

That's a good point. The Alex Salmond case is being used as an argument against independence, rather illogically.

Thinking about this a bit more, it would make sense for the Lib Dems to be pro-independence. They could pick up votes from disaffected SNP voters, rather than Tories, who tend to be rather fanatical these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 January, 2019, 01:08:48 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 31 January, 2019, 11:20:42 AM
So long as a Scottish exist from the UK could extend to Lancashire and Yorkshire, Westminster don't give a stuff about us either.


Have a feeling that Lancashire and Yorkshire aren't a politically great fit for Scotland, certainly not regarding the referendum.  A better fit would be London (just because Westminster is physically surrounded by the city, doesn't mean the MPs there have anything in common with Londoners).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2019, 01:15:27 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 31 January, 2019, 12:32:47 PMThinking about this a bit more, it would make sense for the Lib Dems to be pro-independence. They could pick up votes from disaffected SNP voters, rather than Tories, who tend to be rather fanatical these days.
Given that their manifestos have so much overlap, that would be one tactic. Frankly, I never did understand the Lib Dem position of not working with the SNP in coalition. The SNP wants an independent Scotland, and the Lib Dems are opposed. But the Lib Dems also want regional devolution and a senate of sorts to replace the Lords. There's plenty of common ground; but politics in this country is so tribal that people cannot see past this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 31 January, 2019, 02:30:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 12:47:24 PM
The Commons passes a motion that (at least theoretically) takes no deal off the table

Is that true? I thought No Deal was still a very real and increasingly likely possibility?

Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 06:50:29 PM
Sharky, austerity measures have killed 120k people in the UK,

Where does this figure come from? I'd like some evidential ammunition before quoting it myself.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2019, 02:33:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 31 January, 2019, 02:30:25 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 30 January, 2019, 12:47:24 PM
The Commons passes a motion that (at least theoretically) takes no deal off the table

Is that true? I thought No Deal was still a very real and increasingly likely possibility?

Hence my use of the word "theoretically" — the amendment explicitly said that the UK shouldn't leave without a deal, but didn't commit to any measure to ensure that actually happens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2019, 03:47:47 PM
That amendment was non-binding. It was nothing more than figuring out the collective voice of the house. May then used that combined with Brady to state the house didn't want no-deal, and the only option they went for was removing the backstop. The inference is with the backstop, the deal falls, and that's the EU's fault.

And today we hear that the claimed 40 or so Tories who don't want no deal, and therefore didn't vote for Cooper/Boles have just been shafted. There will be no defined means of placing those before MPs again, according to the leader of the house. They never bloody learn. They should have just recalled what happened to Grieve when May promised him and immediately reneged.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2019, 03:51:41 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 31 January, 2019, 02:30:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 January, 2019, 06:50:29 PM
Sharky, austerity measures have killed 120k people in the UK,

Where does this figure come from? I'd like some evidential ammunition before quoting it myself.

"The paper identified that mortality rates in the UK had declined steadily from 2001 to 2010, but this reversed sharply with the death rate growing again after austerity came in." (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/tory-austerity-deaths-study-report-people-die-social-care-government-policy-a8057306.html)

As a counterpoint, I can't say I know if Full Fact has a reputation for impartiality, but they are signatories to the International Fact Checking Network, and they have a more reserved and cautious response to the claims (https://fullfact.org/health/austerity-120000-unnecessary-deaths/) that basically amounts to "we can't say for sure that slashing funding to the services need to prevent those deaths was what caused those deaths, but 120 thousand deaths happened, they shouldn't have happened based on pre-2010 data, and something must have happened in 2010 to cause the drastic switch from death rates that were lowering to death rates that were skyrocketing - though we cannot possibly say what that thing which happened in 2010 might have been."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 January, 2019, 04:57:17 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 31 January, 2019, 01:08:48 PM
just because Westminster is physically surrounded by the planet Earth, doesn't mean the MPs there have anything in common with the rest of humanity, or are even in touch with reality ...

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 February, 2019, 11:37:34 AM
This is fine.

(https://i.imgur.com/ujAC3j9.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 February, 2019, 12:13:34 PM
That's the least of it. Also be mindful that:

- The app does not work on iPhones nor quite a few Android devices
- There are only 13 scanning centres in the whole of the UK, and they will charge people to scan documents
- Despite settled status supposedly only being about residency and a lack of a criminal record, those who've not worked for five years are typically NOT getting settled status at present – only pre-settled status
- Even those who have full HMRC records are not guaranteed status, because the system is a shit-show
- Quite a few people are stuck in a tech support loop, after the app's failed but no-one can help them (and so: no settled status)
- EFTA citizens cannot apply at all as yet
- NO-ONE SHOULD HAVE TO FUCKING APPLY AT ALL ANYWAY

That last point is one a lot of people are missing, including the MPs who've signed that "make this shit better, please" letter. EU and EFTA residents, who may have been here for years or decades (one on my Twitter feed earlier: 74 years) are having to APPLY for the right to stay in their own homes. This is abhorrent. At most, this should have been a basic registration process: go to your local council office with photographic ID and proof of residency, and you get a bit of paper back with "congrats – you have pre-settled status". Add to that proof of five years of residency (which for many would be automatic through you being on the council's listings for council tax) and that becomes full settled status. Job done.

But no. Things can't be like that, despite the government claiming that the process would be as easy as buying something online. Apparently, they must purchase things from sociopathic websites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2019, 12:21:07 PM

The purpose of bureaucracy is to perpetuate bureaucracy. The effect of bureaucracy is to entrench power. And the role of the people bureaucrats ostensibly work for is to pay for it and stfu.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 05 February, 2019, 11:38:58 AM
If the first early part of this century was a struggle against Islamic extremism, a fight that looks ongoing is the aftermath a vying against Christian Fascism? Russia and America both seem behest to extreme Orthodox Christians who believe in a broad application of Biblical theocracies. How do Rationalists try to reason with those who believe in a Primitive Fairy story and the even more dangerous  "Politics is the art of identifying and neutralising the enemy."—Ivan Ilyin, 1948? Vladimir Putin had Ilyin's body interred in a Monastery overseen by a Priest who was a known KGB informer so that should tell you all you need about his adoration of that miserable sod. Is there any reasoning with such people or are we heading for a collision with a sizable group some of whom believe that routing out unbelievers moves society closer to God?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 February, 2019, 10:05:57 AM

That is a scary aspect.

These buffoons believe in the Book of Revelations and so don't really care about the consequences of their actions as everything they do they do in God's name. Furthermore, God is going to allow Hell to be unleashed upon the Earth and then come down off His cloud to sort everything out, thereby absolving the ruling classes of all responsibility.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 February, 2019, 10:10:22 PM
Aging white knight, the Member of Parliament Sir Christopher Chope promotes female genital mutilation. (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47173445)  The only plus side I can think of here is that he's closer to his death than he is to his birth.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 February, 2019, 10:42:24 PM
QuoteSir Christopher has argued his aim is to stop badly thought-out legislation.
He said he had not been objecting to the substance of the issue, but wanted to see all legislation properly debated.
Strange how he does this on legislation (this isn't the first time) relating to women's rights, yet waves through plenty of PMBs by his mates. It's almost like he's a raging misogynist or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 February, 2019, 02:19:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 February, 2019, 10:42:24 PM
QuoteSir Christopher has argued his aim is to stop badly thought-out legislation.
He said he had not been objecting to the substance of the issue, but wanted to see all legislation properly debated.
Strange how he does this on legislation (this isn't the first time) relating to women's rights, yet waves through plenty of PMBs by his mates. It's almost like he's a raging misogynist or something.

Actions speak louder than words...

Lovely chap.  Initially came to prominence for helming the poll tax legislation.

Claimed £136,992 in expenses in one year, including £881 on repairing a sofa.

Threatened to delay the Hillsborough disaster enquiry by questioning the amount of time allotted to a debate on MP's pensions.

Refers to dining room staff in the House of Commons as 'servants'.

Is against the minimum wage, same-sex marriage, declaration of gender pay gaps in companies, the pardoning of Alan Turing, banning of use of wild animals in circuses, revenge evictions, restrictions on hospital parking charges, making upskirting a criminal offence, legal protection for police horses and dogs, protection of children from genital mutilation (this is the second time he's blocked that particular bill).

Is for reintroduction of the death penalty, conscription, privatisation of the BBC and Channel 4, banning the burka, for unrestricted use of force in mental health units, marrying his secretary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 February, 2019, 06:46:05 PM
It's unclear whether Liam Neeson has helped or hindered his career (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-47196786) by telling stories of his (self-admittedly highly regrettable) past desire to murder an innocent black man (as part of a revenge by skin pigmentation association). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 February, 2019, 09:00:59 PM
QuoteBrexit, the diplomatic equivalent of your dad divorcing your mom by moving to a waterbed into the garage, isn't going great.


You've got to love cracked.com.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 February, 2019, 10:28:55 PM
I find it weird when the BBC report on "miracles (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-47228423)" without ever mentioning that it's just made up by a bunch of old men in Rome.

Or, at the least, presenting it as an opinion (which allows for old men in Rome making stuff up), rather than as fact.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 14 February, 2019, 01:20:09 PM
I had to share this amusing story as it immediately reminded me of a certain forum member.

https://www.wigantoday.net/news/crime/freeman-of-the-land-causes-chaos-in-wigan-court-1-9594633?fbclid=IwAR02QTBBQixoXbhLjAhOnj7Nwv6RtCe8sgqqkz3TRAKWQAfUUHcKOBkqIgQ

No offence intended - it just made me laugh. :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 February, 2019, 01:36:06 PM
"There is my name. I did not consent to it. It was given to me at birth."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 February, 2019, 01:41:03 PM
"The truth is just an opinion"

I hear he's been scouted by Fox news for in field reporting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 February, 2019, 02:02:26 PM
"There is no recorded example of these tactics being successful in a UK court."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2019, 02:38:38 PM
"Plunged the court into chaos" - it can't have been a particularly stable work envirenment, then.

I kind of see his point that the court's authority is derived from coercion rather than the consent of all parties to abide by its arbitration.  Much like our politics, the UK's legal system is a joke based on deference to some rando in a wig.  That'd be stupid if you saw it in Star Wars, yet it's pretty much the basis of all legal authority in a supposedly first world nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 February, 2019, 03:51:04 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2019, 02:38:38 PM
"Plunged the court into chaos" - it can't have been a particularly stable work envirenment, then.

I kind of see his point that the court's authority is derived from coercion rather than the consent of all parties to abide by its arbitration.  Much like our politics, the UK's legal system is a joke based on deference to some rando in a wig.  That'd be stupid if you saw it in Star Wars, yet it's pretty much the basis of all legal authority in a supposedly first world nation.

Similar to the monetary system as well.  "I promise to pay the bearer" what, exactly?  It used to be gold until 1931, though there's more banknotes in circulation than there is excavated gold in this country (possibly the world).  Since then the only thing the Bank of England is promising to pay the bearer of a banknote is another banknote...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 04:17:22 PM

It's all part of the same problem - reality v simulation. Legislation is simulated Law, paper money is simulated gold, political right is simulated human right.

Simulations are not in themselves evil or bad but just tools. The problem, of course, comes when those who create the simulations claim them to be on a par with or above realities.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 February, 2019, 06:06:34 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 14 February, 2019, 01:36:06 PM
"There is my name. I did not consent to it. It was given to me at birth."

Well, seems reasonable.  Apparently you have to seek consent before procreation now ... (https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2019/feb/05/consent-being-born-man-suing-parents-for-giving-birth-to-him)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 February, 2019, 07:16:33 PM
QuoteFrustrated by Graver's lack of respect, the bench imposed a suspended 45-day prison term, which will hang over him until the entire £2,423.32 is repaid.

"Graver"-who-didn't-consent-to-that-name will no doubt be buoyed by the wonderfully freeing notion that the prison term and the £££ are mere simulations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 07:25:35 PM

The fact that witchcraft wasn't real didn't prevent people being burned to death. It's the blind belief in the simulations that's the danger, not the simulations themselves.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 February, 2019, 09:26:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 07:25:35 PM

The fact that witchcraft wasn't real didn't prevent people being burned to death. It's the blind belief in the simulations that's the danger, not the simulations themselves.

[Pedantry mode activated] Mostly not (kind of) real. Quite a lot of accused witchy folk's 'magic' potions actually worked and still work when prescribed by one of them fancy modern doctors they have nowadays.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 09:51:32 PM

Witchcraft was often used as an excuse by the state and church to strip widows of their land and property. The nature of the witchcraft, regardless of its actual form, was imposed by the state's illusionists (legislators) in pursuit of this goal. Ordinary people, who believed in law and order and the rights of the rulers, were schooled to accept these judgements by being told what to believe and through fear of persecution for questioning.

It might be that most people did not actually believe that an old woman who was well versed in natural medicine was in league with the Devil, but to believe such a thing and to say it out loud - against the pronouncements of authority - were two very different things.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 February, 2019, 10:18:33 PM
This has nothing to do with witchcraft.  He was done for illegal street trading.  I'm sure he didn't sell his goods for barter only, and probably happily accepted *illusory* money from his *imaginary* customers.  Of course, if anyone approached him and just took the stuff they could quite rightly argue that his *ownership* of the items was naught but an illusion of grandeur and that Legally (note that magical uppercase 'L' that lends more weight to my banter) anyone could just take them.

All these arguments are self-consuming. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 February, 2019, 11:00:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 09:51:32 PM
Witchcraft was often used as an excuse by the state and church to strip widows of their land and property. The nature of the witchcraft, regardless of its actual form, was imposed by the state's illusionists (legislators) in pursuit of this goal.

While I don't doubt that it may have been used as an excuse for such a purpose, I don't think it could really be argued that this was the case with the vast majority of witchcraft accusations. Most of the cases I'm familiar with involve people with very little land or property, but I don't want to warp the thread into a debate on the theology and folklore of the 16th & 17th centuries, (even if it would be more interesting), so I'll shoosht now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 11:15:07 PM

"He was done for illegal street trading."

Yes. The illusion here is that traders and customers need permission from a ruling class to engage in trade, a fundamental human activity. If Person A wants to engage in free, honest and consensual trade with Person B, why do either of them need the permission of Person C?

The usual answer is that Person C offers some form of protection against the sale of poisonous foods or dangerous goods but this presupposes that most traders will sell any old tat, often even wilfully, which flies in the face of basic economic theory. Licenses are a way for authorities to protect the businesses of their friends and allies, and to raise revenue, using the illusions of safety and fairness as an excuse.

This is not to say that safety and fairness in trade are insignificant aspects as, clearly, they are not. Yet to imagine that buying a license guarantees such things is simply an aspect of the overall illusion that the state has any right to interfere with the fundamental interactions of honest and peaceful people. If a trader is deliberately or accidentally selling dangerous goods then by all means step in - that's why we have police, courts and consumer protection agencies - but do not imagine that licensing is anything more than a tool of control imposed by those few who believe they have the right to interfere with the lives of others.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 February, 2019, 11:28:49 PM

M.I.K., my point is that the "crime" of witchcraft, however imposed or prosecuted, was simply one aspect of the illusion of the power of the state to interfere with the freedoms of the people at a whim. The state decides that something is the case and assumes the right to enforce that case regardless of its reality.

A more modern example would be homosexuality, where the state decided it was wrong and assumed the right to imprison perfectly innocent human beings using anti-gay "laws" as an excuse.

As with trade or any other human interaction, so long as the parties enter into proceedings willingly, honestly and with reasonable intentions, and cause no loss, harm or damage, then what right has anyone else to either ban it or demand their cut?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 February, 2019, 01:19:59 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 February, 2019, 06:06:34 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 14 February, 2019, 01:36:06 PM
"There is my name. I did not consent to it. It was given to me at birth."

Well, seems reasonable.  Apparently you have to seek consent before procreation now ... (https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2019/feb/05/consent-being-born-man-suing-parents-for-giving-birth-to-him)


Doesn't appear in that frivalous treatment of the subject, but in the context of the religion of those involved, there would actually have been a way for the parents to seek permission (through ritual).  I'm not saying it makes any sense, just that there's a little more to that case than conveyed in that report (as usually occurs in reports of unusual court cases).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 February, 2019, 10:57:59 AM
Oh Christ, that fat gimp across the pond is going to get his wall after all.  A state of emergency when there's no emergency.  God help us all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 15 February, 2019, 11:08:18 AM
QuoteI'm sure he didn't sell his goods for barter only, and probably happily accepted *illusory* money from his *imaginary* customers.  Of course, if anyone approached him and just took the stuff they could quite rightly argue that his *ownership* of the items was naught but an illusion of grandeur and that Legally (note that magical uppercase 'L' that lends more weight to my banter) anyone could just take them.

'nuff said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2019, 07:14:49 PM
All the kids nicked off school to chant "fuck Theresa May" as they marched through London, apparently.  I don't think we can really blame the BBC for not airing footage of this one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 February, 2019, 04:16:12 PM
Good work, lads
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.euronews.com/amp/2019/02/17/brexit-billboard-crusaders-four-working-dads-are-holding-politicians-to-account (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.euronews.com/amp/2019/02/17/brexit-billboard-crusaders-four-working-dads-are-holding-politicians-to-account)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 February, 2019, 05:45:47 PM
That's Brexit solved now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 February, 2019, 05:38:57 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 17 February, 2019, 05:45:47 PM
That's Brexit solved now.

Yep. Can't help feeling there were a couple of slight hiccups along the way, but things are going swimmingly now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 February, 2019, 10:04:26 PM
Monday morning: "We are leaving the Labour Party because it is racist."
Monday evening: "I would like to apologise for using the words "funny tinge" to describe black people's skin."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 February, 2019, 11:04:56 PM
I get the motivation but by god, way to do exactly the kind of naive self destructive crap that every armchair buffoon has been saying is a reason not to vote Labour ("Its a party of protest") or the other parties. Including these lots. That's just not the system we have. Be bloody real.

And oh look, couldn't even go a single day without being more explicitly racially dodgy than anything I heard said in the anti-semitism row.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 February, 2019, 08:51:09 AM
Still, at least they haven't readmited Derek Hatton, because that would be really stupid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 February, 2019, 11:16:36 AM
I'm finding it hard to get actual information on Hatton. Did he send the redundancies via taxis? What's the big deal other the Labour Party having one actual-hard-left nutter? The Tories have tons of hard-right nutters front and centre...

Also I see this new centrist party is just Labour MPs. And on another note, we really should have a by-election called every time MPs change their parties like this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 February, 2019, 12:24:45 PM
(TRIGGER WARNING)
[spoiler]The main issue of late seems to be attempts to attach Hatton to "rape apologism" because of his comments about removing anonymity for people who turn out to have made false rape allegations.[/spoiler]

Hatton self-describes himself as "a capitalist" (he made his money in property development) and is critical of Corbyn because of Brexit, so I would have thought the sensibles would welcome him with open arms regardless of his transgressions - I mean, if the blood of a million dead Iraqis can be washed from Tony Blair's hands on the grounds of sensible politics, I would imagine forgiving the hiring of taxis to deliver P45s should be a no-brainer.
Liverpudlians seem to have a higher opinion of him than the rest of the UK's media.  Make of that (admittedly low bar) what you will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 February, 2019, 12:47:52 PM
Right now, his anti-semitic comments especially aren't a good look for the party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 February, 2019, 01:23:08 PM
See, this is what I don't understand. All references are that he was banned for being part of 'militant' and doing some remarkably stupid things as part of a council. The Daily Mail reports it as 'It's good to be back': Militant leader Derek Hatton gloats about being let back into Labour for the first time in decades on the SAME DAY 'gang of seven' moderates walked out"

Obviously gloating is a gross exaggeration, he's no longer the militant leader, and the 'gang of seven' are self-described moderates, doing the old overton window schtick forever onwards. Anyway; Lots of links to the 'anti-semitism' row in the stories but literally no mention of Hatton's part in anything like that.

Anything in particular?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 February, 2019, 02:13:41 PM
According to social media, he actually rejoined the party five weeks ago, it's just that it was widely reported yesterday for some reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 February, 2019, 03:33:21 PM
Complete coincidence that every news outlet including the BBC did that at the same time right

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 February, 2019, 03:50:46 PM
There are tweets he posted doing the rounds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 February, 2019, 03:51:42 PM
To be fair, they all ran with the funny tinge thing, too.  Wait I meant they did the opposite of that.

In other news: up yours, Glinner, you wanker (https://www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstrudwick/after-an-anti-trans-backlash-the-lottery-fund-will-give-a).  The icing on the cake is probably the higher visibility that both Mermaids and trans rights now have, and Hbomberguy's Donkey Kong livestream that raised an extra quarter million in funding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 February, 2019, 04:38:09 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 February, 2019, 03:51:42 PM
To be fair, they all ran with the funny tinge thing, too.  Wait I meant they did the opposite of that.
Not sure what you mean there, but it was a top story on The Guardian this morning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 February, 2019, 05:02:51 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 19 February, 2019, 03:51:42 PM
To be fair, they all ran with the funny tinge thing, too.  Wait I meant they did the opposite of that.

In other news: up yours, Glinner, you wanker (https://www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstrudwick/after-an-anti-trans-backlash-the-lottery-fund-will-give-a).  The icing on the cake is probably the higher visibility that both Mermaids and trans rights now have, and Hbomberguy's Donkey Kong livestream that raised an extra quarter million in funding.

I liked the exquisitely phrased comment: "The Mumsnet post against the proposed grant was started by Irish comedian Graham Linehan, who has written some sitcoms and does not have training or expertise in the treatment protocol of trans children."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 20 February, 2019, 01:37:33 PM
Bloody hell, Linehan's worse than I'd encountered. Mumsnet...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 February, 2019, 02:40:07 PM
Linehan is a cop.

Gaming Youtuber Jim Sterling has never made any secret of his left-wing leanings in his videos about the entertainment industry's products, but he may have reached a sweet crossover patch between his political beliefs and his hobby in his piece about how the business practices of AAA videogames publishers are deliberately destroying videogaming (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmW0GhdDOvw).
I absolutely fucking hate online multiplayer gaming, so this one struck a chord with me as someone watching the games industry ravage once-great studios and franchises in order to switch the default gaming model from "product" to "service" that they may stave off the inevitable and completely unavoidable collapse of their profit margin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 February, 2019, 02:50:18 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 February, 2019, 02:40:07 PM
someone watching the games industry ravage once-great studios and franchises in order to switch the default gaming model from "product" to "service" that they may stave off the inevitable and completely unavoidable collapse of their profit margin.

You're saying that the game industry might collapse?  This could be serious - never mind destroying the UK economy, stopping international travel (apart from to repatriate citizens stripped of nationality who have never been to a foreign country before), environmental armageddon and the rest.  If Rebellion has problems that might affect the weekly prog!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 February, 2019, 04:13:14 PM
Because of that twat Yaxley-Lenon planning to march past our offices to the BBC at Salford Quays, they've decided to close, which means  I'm being bussed from Manchester to Staines tomorrow and put up in a hotel, so that I can do my Saturday shift at our other main call centre - why this is cheaper than just hiring some security guards to protect the building for a few hours is a mystery, but hey it means I get to miss half of tomorrow's shift and get a nice meal and hotel stay, so I'm not gutted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 February, 2019, 06:40:51 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 20 February, 2019, 01:37:33 PM
Bloody hell, Linehan's worse than I'd encountered. Mumsnet...

Did you know there's a job where you use specially adapted scuba gear to dive into sewers?

.....

Anyway, I stumbled across an interesting acronym that's apparently common on mumsnet, an acronym I've not seen anywhere else.

YANBU

I just found that interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 February, 2019, 10:52:37 PM
Someone named Bowser now runs Nintendo America.  The whole world is going to Hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 22 February, 2019, 11:32:31 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 February, 2019, 10:52:37 PM
Someone named Bowser now runs Nintendo America.  The whole world is going to Hell.

"Everything is politics." Thomas Mann
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 February, 2019, 11:37:40 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 February, 2019, 10:52:37 PM
Someone named Bowser now runs Nintendo America.  The whole world is going to Hell.
Let the Bowsette CEO fanfiction begin...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2019, 01:05:16 PM
Bowsette cosplayers can stay.  Everyone else get out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2019, 10:45:34 PM
Genuine question - what is up with all the accusations of anti-semitism that surround Corbyn?

Is there any real substance to it, because I never really hear any actual examples being cited, I just hear the accusations themselves as if that should convince me. I'm totally open to counterpoints, but right now all I'm hearing is 'Hilary's emails!'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2019, 11:59:19 PM
He was a Czech spy this time last year.
People who know him personally - including members of orthodox jewish groups with no political affiliations - say there's no substance to the claims, but right wing news outlets who have waged a four year hate campaign against him insist otherwise.  As you can imagine, it's impossible to know who to believe.

In more sensible times, that even his harshest critics won't directly call him an antisemite in a legally neutral venue would probably have been the end of the matter, though I guess you could do worse than Google "Joan Ryan bribe" to find the footage of her discussing the fabrication of antisemitism smears against the leadership of the Labour Party that she now insists doesn't exist.
Corbyn's a big boy, though, and he'll be fine - the real issue is the erasure of leftwing jews from this conversation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 23 February, 2019, 03:18:27 AM
I generally try to be as objective as I can - to be clear I'm certainly on the left side of things and I somewhat admire Corbyn by default seeing that he actually seems to stand for something and have principals (and I utterly loathe the tories), but I wouldn't call myself a hardcore supporter of his (I'm a remainer for a start), and from where I'm standing it just seems like one big ongoing smear campaign. They've tried various things before - including the 'commie spy' angle, it's just that this one seems to have stuck more than the others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 February, 2019, 04:08:03 PM
There seems to be a clear political slant at work in some claims of antisemitism.  Like: the notion that criticizing Israeli government policy is antisemitic.  Would it be fair to say that criticizing British government policy is anti-Christian?

On the other hand, people who intend to criticize Israel (by which I mean their government policy) sometimes fall foul (whether deliberately or accidentally) of instead criticizing Judaism, or Jewish people in general.  Of course, it (Israeli policy) cannot be the fault of the entire diaspora.

I wouldn't like to be blamed for the actions of the US military or for the policies of the US government, and yet I pay taxes that then go on to be spent on those actions.

On reading the wiki page about Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party (itself perhaps a well-poisoning title), there is an accusation that Muslim Labour members are somehow antisemitic by default, which ties back into the problem of conflating anti-Israeli (policy) sentiment with antisemitic sentiment.  No doubt there is some crossover, and also a tendency for polarization of views.

Quote"Never get involved in a land war in Asia"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 February, 2019, 04:12:08 PM
Who are these dangerous looking men? (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47298111)

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/800/cpsprodpb/C365/production/_105712005_untitled.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 February, 2019, 04:26:40 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 February, 2019, 11:59:19 PM
Corbyn's a big boy, though, and he'll be fine - the real issue is the erasure of leftwing jews from this conversation.

If you want to see an example of the whole sordid Labour antisemitism mess in microcosm, it's this:

Someone makes a remark on Twitter referring to Palestine about (not to, to the best of my knowledge) departing Labour MP Joan Ryan. Joan Ryan is not Jewish.

Almost immediately, Jess Phillips, also not Jewish, pops up on national TV to point to this 'incident' as yet more evidence of Labour's endemic antisemitism problem.

A couple of days later, Michael Rosen, the only actual Jewish person in this discussion, asks Phillips, via Twitter, what, specifically, is actually antisemitic about what was said about/to Ryan.

Phillips' response, directly to Rosen, is that he should shut up and "stop shit-stirring" (that's a direct quote).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2019, 04:53:10 PM
Quote from: radiator on 23 February, 2019, 03:18:27 AMThey've tried various things before - including the 'commie spy' angle, it's just that this one seems to have stuck more than the others.

You feel it more acutely because as a leftist you have concerns about these matters - that's why so many on the left have decided not to bother fighting the accusations and instead concentrate on getting their house in order.  There are antisemites on the left and the left needs to deal with them, but an understandable response is also to affirm that you shan't be called a racist by actual racists.

Anecdotally, I grew up in a place in Northern Ireland where a jewish family was regularly threatened if they tried to take down the Israeli flags that were put on their house by (far right) loyalists.  I admit I might not have been privy to all of the nuance, but it really did seem from the outside like violent white supremacists were not actually that kindly-disposed towards jewish people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2019, 06:42:13 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2019, 04:53:10 PM
You feel it more acutely because as a leftist you have concerns about these matters - that's why so many on the left have decided not to bother fighting the accusations and instead concentrate on getting their house in order.  There are antisemites on the left and the left needs to deal with them,

The thing is, it's hard to work out how much of an issue it actually is.  Perhaps that is why it has become so effective.  Based on what data is available it seems that it is a significant problem for a small proportion of the population.

Most certainly it is muddied by Corbyn's position on issues such as Israel / Palestine and the actions of parties on both sides.  Raising the entirely valid question of whether actions by the Israeli Security Services are appropriate or ethical seems to have brought this issue to a head. 

The international definition of antisemitism that caused so much trouble for him last year is not entirely uncontested and there are valid concerns about how elements of it such as those to which Corbyn was unwilling to include could be used to shut down legitimate criticism of the Israeli government.

So it creates a real dilemma in terms of how to respond.  On the one hand the injustices inflicted on the Palestinian people need to be highlighted but on the other hand discrimination and intolerance in any form needs to be challenged.  It does appear though that there has been an element of conflation by critics of Israel as well as by those on the receiving end in an attempt to shut down this debate.

What is not helped though is that Corbyn seems so completely inept when it comes to communicating.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 February, 2019, 07:34:08 PM
Whether or not the IHRA definition was adopted for internal disciplinary matters was entirely up to the elected and independent members of the NEC.  The idea that Corbyn had any say was a canard to sucker the gullible into believing the mess (because no matter how things turned out, the press were going to report it the same way) was somehow attributable to him, when it was, in fact, a matter entirely separate from the party leadership.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 February, 2019, 05:54:55 AM
This is it.  It is so easy to understand why the 'fake news' trope has gained such traction. Editorial bias has always existed and provides secure foundations for it.  Social media and 'citizen journalism' or 'crowdsourced journalism' with its reliance on video clips and images that are selectively edited feeds into this narrative as alternative perspectives that should have been originally incorporated are used to challenge interpretations. 

Digital technology is making it far easier to distort source evidence.  The lack of ethical oversight and laissez faire governance of 'platforms' like facebook have created an explosive situation.  It has become far too easy for digital tools to be used to start and exploit rumours in support of specific agendas.

We are definitely living in 'interesting times'!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 February, 2019, 04:05:23 PM
We were always living in interesting times, it's just that now social media won't ever let us forget it.

As for "fake news", the only reason it's gained traction is because the media had to get ahead of it and be seen to denounce it before their record was examined.  Corporate news has always had an agenda, I don't know why anyone is surprised by this - though I'll admit the extent of some of it is sobering, especially when you realise you've become used to it.  Did anyone even bat an eyelid at Channel 4 News getting a little girl to cry on camera because "Jeremy Corbyn is coming to get me"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 February, 2019, 04:41:40 PM
Well today certain proved that Social Media won't let go.  A 6 year old tweet by Derek Hatton is being used to prove that Labour is still anti-semitic.  If anything it proves more that criticism of the IHRA definition is correct.  In making an observation about how difficult it should be for a person with a conscience to support what was happening in Palestine he made the crucial error of using the word 'any', thereby suggesting that all persons of that faith bore responsibility.

Not sure what aspect is most disturbing; the distortion of meaning, digging up the embers of a dying fire or this constant recourse to year-old social media comments taken out of context and used to convict.  I wonder if a snarky comment on this forum will be dug up in years to come to hang me out to dry?

Ironically at the moment I'm reading Stross' 2nd "Empire Games" novel.  Some of the uses of technology that he talks about suddenly don't seem quite so farfetched but do seem very disturbing ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 05:31:19 PM
Yeah, it seems to me the idea that Labour has only in the past two years had some members making outright antisemitic or potentially read as antisemitic has no basis in anything other than whatever bias against Corbyn you are trying to prove (and as others have said, we have arguing with regards Livingstones "historical" but maybe poorly worded argument, Wadsworths complaint about the press being turned into "Jews control the press is an antisemitic trope therefore any criticism of the press is antisemitic" (the video of that is chilling, as you see them realise the link they can make and the delayed outrage kicks in) and what else, Muralgate?

There do seem to be a few  criticisms of Israel that sound pretty antisemitic made by some low level councillors, but no one seems to care so much about those, as the truth of what was and wasnt said appears to not be of any interest to the narrative being pushed.

The Marr Show today had Berger,Allen, Gove and Watson on... there's BBC impartiality in action!

 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 05:34:23 PM
Forgot the point I was trying to make! Isnt the fact that antisemiticism has become more festering more likely to be due to Brexit and austerity?  People looking for someone to blame - this would explain the rise since 2015, and tie in with Hodges 200 comapints being vastly about people who were not Labour members?

This isnt to excuse anti-semitism, in case anyone wants to spin it that way!  It's abhorrent, and thats why trying to paint someone as antisemitic is also abhorrent
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 06:03:23 PM
Hatton's tweet said: "Jewish people with any sense of humanity need to start speaking out publicly against the ruthless murdering [sic] being carried out by Israel!"

That is, on the face of it, antisemitic.  Why's he blaming the diaspora for Israel's state actions?  Why's he implying that Jews don't have a sense of humanity?  Why doesn't the sentence begin simply "People with any sense of ..."

Of course, I don't know his motivations - so I don't know if he was being careless or deliberate in his choice of words.  And him saying that doesn't equate to Labour being intrinsically antisemitic (especially as he's not actually a member).

---

As for Ken Livingstone, he's a bit of a Hitler apologist, isn't he?  Why does he keep excusing the Holocaust on the grounds that Hitler was "mad"?  Why did he suggest that Hitler was a supporter of Zionism?  And then when he's confronted about it, he weasels around his conflations and tries to make out that he's an innocent victim that should be apologized to.  Oh dear...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 06:25:25 PM
Well, doubling down rather than apologising never seems to work out - presumably he was trying to have a debate about the Final Solution and the fact that Nazi Germany had various plans for relocating German Jews

I've read about this somewhere and a Google found it on wiki, so I'm assuming it isnt a mad holocaust denial theory?  The "Hitler went a bit mad" was pretty cringeworthy, but was it anti-semitic?  Genuinely not sure!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 06:32:31 PM
Of course, none of that suggests that Zionists and Nazis were planning this together.

As for Hatton, that does sound suspiciously like those "all Muslims should condemn terrorism or are part of it" Tommy Robinson type statments, though it was in 2012, so it would be hard to blame Corbyn for that and he was immediately re-suspended once it was pointed out?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 February, 2019, 06:45:39 PM
A cynic might point out that Candace Owens said exactly the same thing as Red Ken did, yet did not have foaming-at-the-mouth journalists practically battering down the door of the toilet she was in minutes later.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 February, 2019, 04:41:40 PMA 6 year old tweet by Derek Hatton is being used to prove that Labour is still anti-semitic.

I can't be arsed looking it up but there's some journalist that's been called an antisemite for tweeting almost word for word what Hatton did - except the journalist had copy & pasted what Rupert Murdoch had tweeted about Muslims, he'd just put the word "jews" where "muslims" had been in Murdoch's tweet, and said "Israel" instead of "Hamas".  To be fair, this is less proof of a double standard in racism and more an example of how Murdoch gets a free pass.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 06:52:24 PM
I would be amazed if the Sun/Daily Mail doesnt have a headline/editorial calling on all Muslims to denounce Terrorism.  It's a crass and reductive argument whoever you use it against, so that doesnt give Hatton any kind of let off for using it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 07:32:48 PM

Who benefits from all the msm's bullshit?

The ruling classes?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 09:23:40 PM
What Ken Livingstone said when asked whether Naz Shah was antisemitic (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-anti-semitism-row-full-transcript-of-ken-livingstones-interviews-a7005311.html):

Quote"Let's remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews."

Other people have taken this apart more cleanly and comprehensively than I can, but there are lots of disturbing things about his statement.  The idea that it was some kind of insanity that caused the Holocaust, rather than direct, clearly considered Nazi policy.  The notion that Hitler was a supporter of Zionism, when he authored his actual feelings quite clearly in Mein Kampf (in 1925).

And, contextually, in response to an accusation of antisemitism, why is Ken trying to sow the bizarre notion that Adolf Hitler was some kind of friend to Jews before he had a "mental illness" and "accidentally" offed six million of them?  It's not Holocaust denial: just Holocaust excuses.  Oh, if only he hadn't gone "mad".  What - was he going to create an island paradise for them in Madagascar?  This is mental.

Why hasn't he been expelled from Labour?  Do Labour agree with him? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 09:35:44 PM

Hitler didn't kill the Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill and so on - the ordinary people who believed he had the right to order such atrocities did so. Blaming one man is ludicrous and dangerous and ignores the relationship between those "in power" and those not.

This fact almost tore Germany apart in the 60s and 70s as a new generation thought they'd uncovered an ongoing Nazi plot when, in reality, it was the older generations refusing to speak about, examine or take responsibility for their actions that looked like a massive conspiracy to the young.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 09:40:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 09:35:44 PM
Hitler didn't kill the Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill and so on - the ordinary people who believed he had the right to order such atrocities did so. Blaming one man is ludicrous and dangerous and ignores the relationship between those "in power" and those not.

I appreciate that Hitler didn't personally off several million people: but he was the considerable driving force behind a more widespread ideology.  I mean, you wouldn't say (one assumes) that it wasn't his policy, or his desire?  The point under discussion is that Ken Livingstone was suggesting otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 09:41:22 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 09:40:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 09:35:44 PM
Hitler didn't kill the Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill and so on - the ordinary people who believed he had the right to order such atrocities did so. Blaming one man is ludicrous and dangerous and ignores the relationship between those "in power" and those not.

I appreciate that Hitler didn't personally off several million people: but he was the considerable driving force behind a more widespread ideology.  I mean, you wouldn't say (one assumes) that it wasn't his policy, or his desire?  The point under discussion is that Ken Livingstone was suggesting otherwise (in order to deflect an argument).

Edit: Oops - I meant to edit the parenthetical addendum of the previous post, not quote myself.  Oh well: it's not every day you can fit parenthetical addendum into two sentences in a row.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 09:48:52 PM

I appreciate that but it just means that Ken is absolving the real criminals by saying Hitler went insane - as if the orders of the rulers must be followed regardless of their sanity. He's completely missing the major lesson Hitler taught us.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 February, 2019, 09:57:05 PM
Don't elect people who plan to murder large swathes of the populace?

---

Anyway - I predict you're going to entirely miss the point by blaming "the people" (it seems that your philosophy really hates the proletariat) for falling under the magical spell of power structures, and completely avoid focusing on the brutal realities of bullets.  Hitler didn't use magic to control people, he used murderous force (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 09:57:33 PM
Again, it's  very crass argument Ken comes up with there, though on just that quote, I would not like to say that was due to antisemitic intent or just trying to reduce his argument int a soundbite for TV - the reductive "went mad" stuff is a bit boggling, as is the suggestion you could take from it that Hitler was the sole author of the Holocaust.

And he was rightly suspended for it, and the suspension was  extended when further concerns were raised while he was investigated - then he left, so it would be hard to expell him on a "you can't fire me, I quit!" kind of situation?

The problem with the investigations dragging on rather than being sorted asap are a whole other issue of course

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 February, 2019, 10:13:00 PM

F.S., Hitler did not have genocide as a campaign policy. His rhetoric was all about making Germany great again after the ruinous Allied punishments for WWI. He lied his way into power.

As unpalatable as it may be, people were to blame. Hitler was a person, his supporters were people, people followed his orders, people fired the harsh bullets, people built the weapons and camps, people applied the murderous force, people presented the propaganda, people frightened one another into obeying authority, people did it all.

And until people learn to say "no" to authority, the Hitler Effect will continue to threaten us all.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2019, 06:48:24 AM
Blood!  Sorry for lighting the touch paper here.   :-\

Funt, I would have to agree with you on Livingstone.  His comments were crass, ingenuous and ill conceived.  Suggesting that Hitler supported Zionism because he wanted to remove them was just downright stupid.  His continuing presence in the Labour party is embarrassing for a whole host of reasons, this included.

Sharky's correct about Hitler's ascendancy.  It's also worth bearing in mind that there is a real danger in trying to reduce anything to simple tropes.  Hitler and the National Socialists very effectively harnessed and channelled very real anger and provided a murderous outlet for it.  "Hitler's Willing Executioners" by Goldhagen makes for interesting (albeit contested and controversial) reading regarding the nature of anti-semitism in German culture but also raises the issue of the culpability of the wider population. 

For me the key lesson of this period in history, and one that is dangerously relevant today, is that it is very easy to manipulate sentiment in a population and create an environment of hatred and discord in which rational debate and respect for other human beings is seen as abnormal.  You only have to look at Trump in America or the Brexit debate in this country.  What is the old saying? "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."  As you say Sharky, challenging authority is a moral imperative.  In this current climate it is more important than ever.  Can you imagine what Goebells would have achieved in this age of social media?

Another agreement Leigh on the danger of 'excusing' what happened as madness.  Then again at the same time the wholesale, industrial level slaughter of millions speaks to a terrifying rationality that does suggest a serious disconnect with morality.  So often in recent years ethics and morality have played second fiddle to efficiency, expediency and profit.  The government's Austerity Agenda, Universal Credit, Syria, the Rohingya's,  world leaders on climate change, ... all causing untold damage and suffering, even death and destruction.  I'm not for a moment suggesting that these are on the same level but they share a disturbing tendency to view human life as less important than short term political or economic gain.

The one thing I'm grateful for in this little corner of the insanity is that however heated the debate gets, respect and reason normally win through.  Of course the irony of a group of fans of a story about a Fascist Dictatorship cannot be ignored.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 February, 2019, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2019, 06:42:13 PM
What is not helped though is that Corbyn seems so completely inept when it comes to communicating.

I don't think Corbyn is great at communicating but time and time again, the issue really is that the channels of communication are overwhelmingly hostile. You can make speeches and you can make statements, but they get paraphrased, they get chopped up, they get reported in a fairly consistent manner. In the radio news bulletin, it's not Corbyn's quote you hear in the last few seconds before it goes off, it's his opponent's accusations.

Maybe I was too young to remember, but was Corbyn in the newspapers every day whilst he was criticising the Blair/Gordon years? Was he a regular studio panel member? Did he consistently put out the message that Labour was unfit to govern?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2019, 11:41:49 AM
I disagree with this. The problem is that Corbyn says one thing and then does another. He talked about democratic process, but then undermines it. He talks of kindler, gentler politics, but then lashes out. He's a grumpy old git, with no idea how the modern world works, and no interest in change.

I agree he gets a rough time of it from the press, but his Trump-like bullshit in Soubry's seat was just mind-boggling. Why not campaign in May's seat? Or Johnson's? Why sit there on stage bleating about the press, and ignoring all the problems that have led to what's happening now? Because protesting is easier than doing.

It's notable that there are plenty of TV interviews out there that are pretty straight, with minimal or no editing, and there you get to see the real Corbyn. It's not pretty. For what it's worth, I don't necessarily think he needs replacing, but plenty of commentators are bang-on in noting that Labour should have made the Corbyn shift all about policy rather than something closer in nature to a personality cult. It's become all about him, and that just doesn't work. And it's going to be a shit-show when he – through inaction or otherwise – helps May get Brexit through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 February, 2019, 11:56:14 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 25 February, 2019, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 February, 2019, 06:42:13 PM
What is not helped though is that Corbyn seems so completely inept when it comes to communicating.

I don't think Corbyn is great at communicating but time and time again, the issue really is that the channels of communication are overwhelmingly hostile. You can make speeches and you can make statements, but they get paraphrased, they get chopped up, they get reported in a fairly consistent manner. In the radio news bulletin, it's not Corbyn's quote you hear in the last few seconds before it goes off, it's his opponent's accusations.

Maybe I was too young to remember, but was Corbyn in the newspapers every day whilst he was criticising the Blair/Gordon years? Was he a regular studio panel member? Did he consistently put out the message that Labour was unfit to govern?

Yep - the biggest problem with Corbyn's communication skills is that he (or a friend) don't own a large multinational media empire feeding selected soundbites via newspapers, radio, the web and/or TV.  Before he was in the leadership campaign the only reason I knew who Corbyn was was because he was my MP - it was pretty surreal when he started appearing in the news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 February, 2019, 11:56:53 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 05:34:23 PM
People looking for someone to blame - this would explain the rise since 2015, and tie in with Hodges 200 comapints being vastly about people who were not Labour members?


Comapints - sums up the entire media outrage really, doesn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 February, 2019, 11:59:33 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 24 February, 2019, 06:52:24 PM
I would be amazed if the Sun/Daily Mail doesnt have a headline/editorial calling on all Muslims to denounce Terrorism.  It's a crass and reductive argument whoever you use it against, so that doesnt give Hatton any kind of let off for using it.


They have before - usually after British muslim community leaders had already denounced whatever it was that the newspaper was propagandising about (but not reported on, as that wouldn't have fit with their narrative).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2019, 12:42:13 PM
There's a story somewhere about the Sun's "1 In 5 UK Muslims Support ISIS" story, and how Yougov decided to take a pass on doing the polling once they discovered what the story was going to be.  Most people concentrated on the whole "GASP EVEN YOUGOV THOUGHT THIS WAS A BAD IDEA" angle, though in retrospect it's probably more worthy of note that the story's conclusions were in place before the polling that supported it was even commissioned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 25 February, 2019, 01:02:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 February, 2019, 11:41:49 AM
plenty of commentators are bang-on in noting that Labour should have made the Corbyn shift all about policy rather than something closer in nature to a personality cult. It's become all about him, and that just doesn't work. And it's going to be a shit-show when he – through inaction or otherwise – helps May get Brexit through.

How could that ever happen? It's become all about him because every attack has been about him. It was Corbyn's fault that Remain lost. It was Corbyn's fault that they called a second leadership election within months of the first. Anyone who voted Corbyn was a cultist. An infiltrator. You retweeted the Green Party once? You clearly don't belong in Labour you marxist infiltrator.

You vote for Labour and you came to the party in the last few years? CORBYNISTA.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2019, 02:19:18 PM
What's ironic is that the people screaming "personality cult" are just as guilty of it as the people they accuse.  Obsession doesn't necessarily mean being in love with a cult figure, it can just as easily spring from a relationship with someone you hate and it can make you just as delusional and immune to reason as people wearing white robes and banging tambourines.

For example: a lot of leftist Youtubers have just hosted mirrors of Big Joel's video essay "Anita Sarkeesian and the people who hate her" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjeLuicWh6E), after the original was taken down by Youtube after alt-righters mass-flagged it*.  The video is quite interesting in that it examines two alt-right Youtubers (Thunderfoot and Sargon of Akkad) who usually have at least a passing acquaintance with the notion of showing their work and/or articulating an argument and how they singularly fail to do any of this when faced with the task of debunking the work of someone they clearly despise.  I feel this is a particularly germane example because Sarkeesian's relevance in media circles is arguably on the wane of late, but here her critics are magnifying her with a clumsy attempt at a takedown.


*Entirely coincidentally, this happened after an angry video response to the original vid was posted on Sargon Of Akkad's Youtube channel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 25 February, 2019, 02:23:14 PM
Sargon of Akkad is the joke of the online community. The court jester unaware of his own insignificance yet quiet eager to make a fool of himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2019, 03:09:29 PM
Our culture rewards and latterly monetises attention.  It's a mistake to outright dismiss the likes of Akkad when they have a large audience, a successful engagement strategy, and a viable platform - not least because their audience so often spews out spree killers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 February, 2019, 06:01:38 PM
Well, this is going to put the cat among the cans of worms... Corbyn to back second vote. (https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/jeremy-corbyn-to-back-a-peoples-vote-on-brexit-1-5906296)

Starmer has just clarified on Twitter that Labour is going to propose one more alternative deal and if that doesn't get passed, they'll back the Kyle/Wilson amendment that rules out 'no deal' and says May's deal goes to a referendum with 'Remain' as the other option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 February, 2019, 06:34:16 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 25 February, 2019, 11:56:14 AM

Yep - the biggest problem with Corbyn's communication skills is that he (or a friend) don't own a large multinational media empire feeding selected soundbites via newspapers, radio, the web and/or TV.  Before he was in the leadership campaign the only reason I knew who Corbyn was was because he was my MP - it was pretty surreal when he started appearing in the news.

See here is where I have a problem.  The old 'but the MSM aren't reporting' works up to a point.  As a Labour party member, I can count the number of emails I've had reporting his position on issues on the fingers of one hand.  MSM have been absolutely hammering him but those around him have resolutely failed to utilise alternative channels to get across 'his message'.  I'd almost be tempted to agree on the old 'MSM hold all the cards' trope except for the number of times the likes of Twitter, Facebook etc get quoted as 'sources'.  If the party machine cannot harness the power of social media to side-step the usual channels (which Obama seemed to in his campaigns) then they are either useless or inept.

Quote from: Theblazeuk on 25 February, 2019, 01:02:22 PM
It was Corbyn's fault that they called a second leadership election within months of the first.

Ironically enough 'paratrooper Smith' is our local MP.  I have to admit to having heard more from Corbyn than from him.  I think that leadership challenge was a serious case of hubris.  Allegedly he is considering his position in the party.  I think most locals are wondering whether or not he has left the country ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2019, 07:49:01 PM
The plan was never to present a serious challenger to Corbyn, the plan was to keep him off the ballot so that the only choice was between Blairites chosen by the PLP.  Once the courts ruled Corbyn was to be on the ballot, absolutely nobody expected Smith to win, and it said everything about the party's right wing that it still went through with the whole tedious panto when all it could possibly do was make things worse for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 February, 2019, 09:22:55 PM
I'd forgotten that!  Do you think Corbyn has been waiting all this time until Chukka et al left before he could announce this, just for lolz?  Honestly, it always seemd the only path Labour could honestly take regards the 2nd ref - propose a Custom Union based deal that doesnt pander to the racists, and only then can you say Remain is better than the shit deal being foisted on us.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 February, 2019, 07:49:01 PM
The plan was never to present a serious challenger to Corbyn, the plan was to keep him off the ballot so that the only choice was between Blairites chosen by the PLP.  Once the courts ruled Corbyn was to be on the ballot, absolutely nobody expected Smith to win, and it said everything about the party's right wing that it still went through with the whole tedious panto when all it could possibly do was make things worse for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 February, 2019, 12:06:29 AM
Corbyn clearly does not do the whole long game thing.  Not that he needs one with MPs whose only selling point was the Labour brand, as evidenced by the fact they're still using it when they are introduced as "ex-Labour MPs", and are still talking about Labour in interviews.
I think I realised the squitters were done when I spotted that Momentum had decided that they weren't worth their time after making a single diss vid last week, and have now settled for just accusing them of being the kind of people who order the lemon and herb chicken off the Nandos menu.  There's no Nandos where I live but I assume this is equivalent to going into a kebab shop and not getting spicy sauce.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 February, 2019, 09:24:31 AM
Actually, I think Nandos is the fast food equivalent of KFC for the 'up their own arse' set ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2019, 09:29:09 AM
Well, it's all getting very interesting. Thornberry has been very clear about what she thinks everything means, even if that amusingly means it's a straight 180 from her very clear views last week – weather vane politics in action, but at least now pointing in the right direction.

Of course, what will actually happen now is May will come probably up with some half-arsed A50 extension plan that the EU cannot agree to (given that it won't come with an actual plan attached), and drive the UK off the cliff while blaming the EU. It's all up to MPs now to find their collective backbones. And it says a lot that TIG are now polling in the high teens, despite not actually having any policies, not being a political party, and only having a handful of members. Still, it seems likely they pushed Labour into acting, so that's good. (There are, natch, still Labour MPs today whining about the prospect of a second ref, despite all the evidence pointing to the majority of Labour voters, even in Labour seats, being pro-remain, and increasingly so as time moves on.)

Elsewhere, though, the Tories are attempting to out-arsehole themselves by firing Costa, who's had the sheer audacity to put forth an amendment that would ringfence the rights of EU nationals, and Brits abroad. (The Tories are saying this isn't compatible with his role. Presumably, this is shorthand for "being human is not compatible with being a Tory under May".)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 February, 2019, 01:19:23 PM
This probably isn't relevant but apparently some local gobshites recorded a version of Candle in the Wind called Nandos in the Bin, so I suspect I have managed to let some key element of UK culture pass me by entirely.  I didn't understand the tweet that read "Nandos is the Greggs of the political classes" but I am sure this is a very clever observation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 February, 2019, 02:52:27 PM
QuoteI'd almost be tempted to agree on the old 'MSM hold all the cards' trope except for the number of times the likes of Twitter, Facebook etc get quoted as 'sources

I mean, isn't this just coming back to the power of institutions to influence what you see even as we discuss an alternative medium? Alternative channels are how Corbyn etc has stuck around or get anywhere at all. 'Momentum' might be derided as a cult by everyone who obsesses over Corbyn but they turned social media reach into physical campaigning into actually getting people involved. The response was 'That's enough of that you mad cultists'.

Barely anyone still reads newspapers, they still absolutely dominate other forms of News and political debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 February, 2019, 03:24:07 PM
So is that why Tommy Robinson is so upset about being turfed off of Facebook and Instagram?

I would agree though, for quite a few people, MSM still carries a degree of authority that anti-social media lacks.  Editorial bias has long been seen as the cost of doing business but at least there has always been an acknowledgement that underneath the 'interpretation' there are some facts being interpreted, or selectively presented to create a narrative.  You pays your money, you takes your chances ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 26 February, 2019, 04:18:21 PM
Tommy Robinson utterly relies on people who were by and large already buying in to his message. Tommy Robinson wouldn't win a local election, never mind a general one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 February, 2019, 04:54:00 PM
Facebook certainly has an older/receptive user base, but losing IG would be a blow to Robinson's ability to reach younger recruits.  I suppose he still has Youtube.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 26 February, 2019, 06:02:15 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 26 February, 2019, 03:24:07 PM
I would agree though, for quite a few people, MSM still carries a degree of authority that anti-social media lacks.  Editorial bias has long been seen as the cost of doing business but at least there has always been an acknowledgement that underneath the 'interpretation' there are some facts being interpreted, or selectively presented to create a narrative.  You pays your money, you takes your chances ...


Are you saying that some people believe that underneath the biased reporting there's some truth or are you saying there actually is some truth under the rubbish that certain newspapers publish?  I'm thinking of things like Boris Johnson's EU banning bananas story - which was entirely made up by him around 1994 and has absolutely no basis in reality (and is still quoted now, two years after the referendum, by some people who voted to leave).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 26 February, 2019, 06:57:54 PM
What's MSM?  I Googled it and got arthritis medicine: I'm guessing that's not the topic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 February, 2019, 07:11:50 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 26 February, 2019, 06:02:15 PM
Are you saying that some people believe that underneath the biased reporting there's some truth or are you saying there actually is some truth under the rubbish that certain newspapers publish?  I'm thinking of things like Boris Johnson's EU banning bananas story ...

A little of both ...  You're right, there are reports out there that are utterly bogus.  There are also biased stories that do contain a germ of truth.  This is half the reason why 'fake news' has gained so much traction.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 26 February, 2019, 06:57:54 PM
What's MSM? 

Main Stream Media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 February, 2019, 09:26:30 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 26 February, 2019, 04:18:21 PM
Tommy Robinson utterly relies on people who were by and large already buying in to his message. Tommy Robinson wouldn't win a local election, never mind a general one.

I hope you're right.  The fact that the grubby little shitbag already has such a high media profile would concern me a bit.  Even Farage thinks he's too extreme (not that our Nige is any less of a squalid little racist wanker).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 February, 2019, 01:09:22 PM
Well, a classic example of a man who has a high profile and lots of followers but can't win elections. Other than MEP because sadly, UKIP have always been the only party to not take having members elected to EU parliament for granted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2019, 01:42:48 PM
Aren't MEPs elected using proportional representation?  FPTP all but ensures UKIP and the like remain unelectable because votes are funneled to the name brand parties (and latterly Team Nandos), but under proportional representation UKIP would be guaranteed a certain number of MPs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2019, 01:49:25 PM
Possibly, but not necessarily. There are various PR systems, and although most would make UKIP MPs more likely, there wouldn't be a guarantee. Frankly, though, why shouldn't there be UKIP MPs? Either we want a representative democracy or we don't. If find it baffling that e.g. some Green voters I know would rather stick with one MP (and none if the boundary reforms happen) and FPTP than head for PR and end up with some kippers in the Commons.

In other news, it's been that Costa 'resigned' earlier, for the crime of trying to protect EU citizen rights and the rights of Brits in the EU. The bastard. If only he'd done something sensible like totally fuck up a ferries contract, he'd have been fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 February, 2019, 02:20:33 PM
Turnouts for EU elections are dismal, so it's a ripe area for parties on the political extremes to target.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2019, 02:38:51 PM
But that's a failure of civic education in the UK, not the system itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2019, 03:53:27 PM
Nandos political party funded by pro-Israel lobby. (https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/israel-lobby-funders-back-breakaway-british-mps)  As a big nerd I was aghast at what David Gerrold was doing these days, but thankfully I just need new glasses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 February, 2019, 06:23:13 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 February, 2019, 03:53:27 PM
Nandos political party funded by pro-Israel lobby. (https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/israel-lobby-funders-back-breakaway-british-mps)  As a big nerd I was aghast at what David Gerrold was doing these days, but thankfully I just need new glasses.

This one is no doubt worth digging into more but ... is Russia the only state interfering with elections?  Are we allowed to talk about the possibility of this state interfering with British democracy?  Do I need a tinfoil hat? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 February, 2019, 06:42:25 PM

The way the US is interfering with Venezuela doesn't seem to be bothering many people.

Former UN rapporteur says US sanctions are killing citizens. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/venezuela-us-sanctions-united-nations-oil-pdvsa-a8748201.html)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2019, 06:44:34 PM
Well, politicians interfere with democracy all the time: that's sort of their job.  And then it all gets into fine definitions of what democracy is, exactly.

Jacobi Reese Wither-Mogg-Spoon would have it that it's absolutely unconscionable to have a second referendum because it would be undemocratic.  (Unless you were speaking to him prior to the first referendum result, when he said having multiple referendums would be democratic.)

Politicians: they sail close to the winds of definition.  Y'know: they lie.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 February, 2019, 07:14:15 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2019, 06:44:34 PM
Jacobi Reese Wither-Mogg-Spoon would have it that it's absolutely unconscionable to have a second referendum

Turns out he's remarkably sanguine on the subject of concentration camps, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2019, 10:41:12 PM
And he was wrong about the stats (https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17438410.is-rees-moggs-claim-that-the-death-rate-in-glasgow-was-the-same-as-boer-war-concentration-camps-true/):

Death rate in Boer war concentration camps: 24%
Death rate in Glasgow at the same time: 2%

Reese Moggerspoon said it was the same.  Plus the whole thing about Boer war concentration camps being purposeful subjugation of a civilian population as part of a scorched earth policy and on the other hand Glasgow being ... well, y'know, an accident.  (Sorry, Glasgow.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 March, 2019, 09:00:22 PM
A quick life hack for anyone planning on punching a pensioner in the back of the head - make sure you're holding an egg at the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 05 March, 2019, 10:33:10 AM
Ah but remember those nutcase lefties require people to have police protection, aren't they awful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 March, 2019, 01:23:05 PM
It's getting so you can't even conduct a years-long media campaign smearing an entire political movement as racist, homophobic, antisemitic, violent, misogynistic cultists who support terrorism without them just turning around - out of nowhere - and telling you you aren't welcome at their meetings anymore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 March, 2019, 01:25:03 PM
So while there's a campaign going on to smear labour as a buncha commie antisemites, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland stands up and in parliament and says it's ok for soldiers to shoot unarmed civilians. Civilians who were, at the time being treated as second class citizens. Sure they were only following orders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 07 March, 2019, 01:43:31 PM
I was struck by the fact that a few months ago, she was happy to reveal she knew little to nothing about the, shall we say, lack of subtlety in Northern Ireland politics, but seemed absolutely sure yesterday that none of the killings by state personnel were crimes. At the very least it was a staggeringly stupid thing to say (and I can't help thinking of her as a DUP sock puppet) and at worst it's the expression of an attitude which hasn't ever changed and has no desire to do so.

There is no way murder can be excused. There's no whataboutery makes up for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2019, 02:33:59 PM

Some people actually believe that putting killers into uniforms excuses murder.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 March, 2019, 03:35:06 PM
It's disgusting.

Murder is murder.

Then I've just had the experience of a colleague in work saying she was totally justified in what she said. And i just was struck dumb, and i couldn't even be bothered to get into it. Vileness abounds.

If there was an ounce of decency in Bradley, she would have resigned already. The fact that 24 hours later she finally apologises, says it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 March, 2019, 04:59:03 PM
In the US at the moment, most police officers are allowed to shoot someone if they feel threatened.  They don't have to justify it much beyond that.  All they need to feel threatened, often, is to meet a black person.  So then they kill them (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47430090).  And legally, that's all just fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 March, 2019, 06:53:24 PM

Hence me always banging on about the difference between legal and lawful...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 March, 2019, 09:55:19 PM
Quote from: Rately on 07 March, 2019, 03:35:06 PM
If there was an ounce of decency in Bradley, she would have resigned already. The fact that 24 hours later she finally apologises, says it all.


She actually used the following sentence: "They were people acting under orders". 


If it wasn't going to be used for the usual politicking, it might actually stir some useful debate about Superior Orders / the Nuremberg Defence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders), though somehow I don't think it will lead to anything of the sort.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 March, 2019, 10:08:50 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 March, 2019, 09:55:19 PM

She actually used the following sentence: "They were people acting under orders". 


Well, the former Work & Pensions Secretary didn't seem to think there were any negative connotations to the phrase "work sets you free", so she's in good company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 08 March, 2019, 10:40:00 AM
They really are some of the vilest people to ever breath.

Bradley still not resigned.

And I hear she reached out to the families of the Ballymurphy Massacre, to arrange a meeting. The Ballymurphy family had asked her on numerous occasions to meet with them to discuss one of the most disgusting incidents of The Troubles, and she refused. Now she wants to try to use them for PR.

The families have rightly refused and ask that she do the right thing and resign.

I won't hold my breath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 03:39:16 PM

10,000 troops from 13 countries arrive in the UK for major exercise. (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/10000-troops-from-13-countries-arrive-in-the-uk-for-major-exercise)

Timing...?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Amstor Computer on 15 March, 2019, 06:04:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 03:39:16 PM

10,000 troops from 13 countries arrive in the UK for major exercise. (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/10000-troops-from-13-countries-arrive-in-the-uk-for-major-exercise)

Timing...?

Timing of what? This is Exercise Joint Warrior, a multi-branch, multi-nation military exercise that has been running twice a year for over ten years (it was previously held three times a year under the title Neptune Warrior). There's nothing unusual about the size of the exercise or the time of year, as it's been roughly the same for ages, and there's certainly nothing unusual about the exercise itself.

Our local RAF station - RAF Lossiemouth - typically hosts the maritime patrol element, plus the occasional visiting fast-jet squadron, and the participants are up and down Scotland to Cape Wrath, the Tain AWR etc. so it's a familiar yearly event here. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 06:21:10 PM

Hopefully. Although it doesn't hurt the government to have back-up on hand should article 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or somesuch, be invoked for some reason.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Amstor Computer on 15 March, 2019, 06:30:09 PM
I'm not 100% of the participants involved in this year's first exercise - Joint Warrior 19-1, which the linked article refers to - but it will be a mix of maritime patrol aircraft, small passenger jets used to mimic missiles/aggressor aircraft, some US helicopters, a couple of naval vessels etc., plus the hundreds of support personnel needed to bring them here and maintain them, all drawn from multiple friendly nations. They certainly aren't going to be drafted in as "back-up" should Brexit go any more tits-up than it already is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 07:15:16 PM

The treaty allows for a government to request military aid should certain circumstances arise. That doesn't necessarily mean foreign troops on the "front lines" but would make it possible for them to be used in support roles, freeing up local troops for other, more direct duties.

I'm not saying this is going to happen or is even likely but that it gives the globalists an option should their plans go breasts aloft.

I've said before, I don't believe the UK will ever be allowed to leave the EU - most people are thoroughly sick of the last nearly three years of procrastination, misrepresentation and fearmongering and just want it to be over - but if the globalists can't save the "integrity" of the EU politically, they're not above setting the country on fire so they can come "riding to the rescue."

In my view,it's not about controlling every little thing, it's about influence and having contingency plans - and I think that's what this is.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 15 March, 2019, 07:34:24 PM
Those bloody globalists, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 07:43:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 07:15:16 PM
most people are thoroughly sick of the last nearly three years of procrastination, misrepresentation and fearmongering and just want it to be over

There hasn't been a single opinion poll showing a majority for 'leave' since March 2018 — that's about 60 separate polls. They want it to be over in the sense that they'd just like us to abandon the whole stupid idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 March, 2019, 07:47:23 PM
Quote from: radiator on 15 March, 2019, 07:34:24 PM
Those bloody globalists, eh?

(https://i.imgur.com/98lxlob.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2019, 08:00:08 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 07:43:42 PMThere hasn't been a single opinion poll showing a majority for 'leave' since March 2018 — that's about 60 separate polls. They want it to be over in the sense that they'd just like us to abandon the whole stupid idea.
People just want Brexit to be done with. The thing is, unless article 50 is revoked, it won't ever be. Brexit is just the start of unending negotiation that will take over political capacity into the distant future. We'll never be rid of the fucking thing. (And almost none of the commentators think anything good's happening next week. Most are veering heavily towards May getting her deal through at the third attempt, mostly by bullshitting that there's a way out of the backstop if the UK fancies it.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 08:12:47 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2019, 08:00:08 PM
Most are veering heavily towards May getting her deal through at the third attempt, mostly by bullshitting that there's a way out of the backstop if the UK fancies it.)

I genuinely have no idea why one single person in Westminster believes a single word that comes out of that woman's mouth. How many times does she have to give assurances, make promises, and then immediately do a 180° and completely fuck over anyone stupid enough to take her at her word before MPs realise that she can't be trusted on any scale of even the most basic human decency?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2019, 08:13:55 PM
Weird conversation I overheard (somewhere):

Conspiracy theorist: these military drills are probably a nefarious government scheme to put down the populace because ... something something ... Brexit.

Person armed with facts: it's just a standard scheduled military drill and nothing to do with Brexit.

Conspiracy theorist: yeah, but the timing, yeah?  Probably there's a link to Brexit.

Person armed with facts: Nope. No connection whatsoever.

Conspiracy theorist: yeah, sure - but it's Europe, innit?  They're conspiring to set Britain on fire!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2019, 08:16:30 PM
Jim: For me, it's not even about her lies anymore, but that it's making the UK look awful. So we're saying "hey, once we've left, we'd like some lovely FTAs", while having spent weeks trying to figure out how to possibly technically wiggle out of one of the most important agreements in recent European history. Then beyond that, we all know full well that the second the WA is down, the Tories will try to kill it, and all the Brexiters – even those who voted it – will whine that it wasn't proper Brexit, and therefore all the shit that happens won't be their fault.

We should just revoke now and end this mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 08:32:50 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 07:43:42 PM


There hasn't been a single opinion poll showing a majority for 'leave' since March 2018 — that's about 60 separate polls. They want it to be over in the sense that they'd just like us to abandon the whole stupid idea.


Isn't this the pattern, though? When the people vote "the wrong way," they are pestered until they vote "the right way." The EU has form on this.

Right or wrong, the democratic process is ostensibly sacrosanct but it's being overridden. If there needs to be another "once in a generation" referendum this year or next year then fine, have one. But doesn't this mean there should be the same referendum every few years? (Once the vote shifts to 'remain,' there's unlikely to be another vote, is there? It's only the 'leave' vote that seems to be negotiable.) If democracy is good enough for choosing our national rulers, why is it not good enough for choosing (and holding to account) our European rulers? Maybe vote on it every ten years or so and make the in-out process as easy and streamlined as possible. It might be awkward but it's not impossible and it would make the EU more accountable.

Or, and this would be my preference, wind the EU back to a simple trading union with no power over sovereign governments.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 08:47:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 08:32:50 PM
Isn't this the pattern, though? When the people vote "the wrong way," they are pestered until they vote "the right way." The EU has form on this.

Neither of the major political parties is supporting remain/revoke as an option and yet there is now a consistent majority polling in favour of it. That's remarkable. Imagine what the numbers would look like if there was some actual leadership on the issue.

QuoteRight or wrong, the democratic process is ostensibly sacrosanct but it's being overridden. If there needs to be another "once in a generation" referendum this year or next year then fine, have one. But doesn't this mean there should be the same referendum every few years?

Sacrosanct? The vote that's been declared unsafe by the Electoral Commission due to criminal activity by one of the participants in the campaign?

Even disregarding that (as the entire political establishment seems bafflingly willing to do), it is impossible to argue that all 17.4M leave voters all voted for exactly the shitshow we're now looking at. Some may have thought they were voting for a harder, no deal Brexit (they were wrong, BTW — Vote Leave's campaign literature explicitly ruled that out), some may have voted for a softer, Norway-style Brexit, as mentioned repeatedly by Johnson, Gove, Hannan and even Farage. There's no way of knowing...unless we ask them.

If the price of getting us out of this is a sensible referendum every, say, ten years to renew the mandate, I can live with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 08:57:30 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2019, 08:47:51 PM


If the price of getting us out of this is a sensible referendum every, say, ten years to renew the mandate, I can live with that.


We... agree on something??

Who are you and what have you done with Jim!?

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2019, 09:13:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 08:32:50 PM
If democracy is good enough for choosing our national rulers, why is it not good enough for choosing (and holding to account) our European rulers?

MEPs are already democratically elected.  Direct democracy (i.e. referendums) isn't used to decide day to day policy because it can be demonstrated that the populace are non-expert in matters of economic longevity and therefore don't actually vote in their own best interests.

The question "What would you like your tax bill to look like?" might be met with lots of joyous "Zero!" responses.  Then the trash piles up, the roads fall apart and crime runs rampant on un-policed streets full of a dispirited youth with no social services to fall back on for support.  And people complain, because after all: they paid their taxes .... oops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 March, 2019, 10:25:15 PM
A second referendum makes perfect sense when it's so blindingly obvious that the voters were misled.  It would be the same people voting, for Chrissakes, they'd just be better informed now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 11:03:23 PM

FS - take my arguments against UK MPs and the UK government and simply apply them to MEPs and the European Parliament. If I type them out again, some people may actually burst.

I would like my tax bill to be voluntary - once more, to avoid unnecessary bursting I won't go through it again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 March, 2019, 11:38:36 PM
ah c'mon no appreciation for the ZOG  joke? I was quite proud of that!  :lol:

Just back from drinks with a lovely new acquaintance, an attractive linguist who's lived in Paris and Berlin, we swapped travel stories and music and fun anecdotes; the conversation only got rocky when she said she voted leave and would again. I foresee some tongue biting if I pursue this relationship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 15 March, 2019, 11:52:56 PM
(https://media.tenor.com/images/2241fa5523688f3d5b948bad72d1ac65/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 March, 2019, 01:01:51 AM
Heh, well it's been a while and I've just binge-watched 100 episodes of Seinfeld, so I'm seriously considering a foolproof strategy of joining UKIP to secure a date.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 16 March, 2019, 06:19:17 AM
Europe is clearly an Evil institution. This is evidenced by the extra rights granted to workers, such as better pay, less hours and proper holiday entitlement. Another example of their foul machinations would be not allowing the sale of food products that have been turned into poison by Unscrupulous businesses desperate to make a profit even if it kills you.

How can anyone in their right mind want to be protected from harm or mistreatment?

Cheers

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 March, 2019, 01:51:09 PM
Quote from: NapalmKev on 16 March, 2019, 06:19:17 AM
Europe is clearly an Evil institution. This is evidenced by the extra rights granted to workers, such as better pay, less hours and proper holiday entitlement. Another example of their foul machinations would be not allowing the sale of food products that have been turned into poison by Unscrupulous businesses desperate to make a profit even if it kills you.

How can anyone in their right mind want to be protected from harm or mistreatment?

Cheers

But fishing rights and 350 million and sovereignty.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 March, 2019, 03:23:04 PM
The fishing thing still gets me. Much of the fishing stuff is again down to UK mismanagement. The vast majority of fish caught in British waters are not eaten much by Brits, and they are therefore sold to the EU. Many of the boats simply fish in UK waters, then head immediately to the EU to offload the fresh catch. That entire market will be dead, as will the industry itself. (Not that in the wider scheme of things that industry makes much of a dent anyway, beyond in a handful of local communities.)

Big wake-up calls are coming, and also for a large range of other sectors, not least restaurants and agriculture. I suspect they'll all continue to blame EU intransigence for a while, but when those amazing FTAs fail to materialise...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 March, 2019, 04:00:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2019, 11:03:23 PM
FS - take my arguments against UK MPs and the UK government and simply apply them to MEPs and the European Parliament. If I type them out again, some people may actually burst.

I would like my tax bill to be voluntary - once more, to avoid unnecessary bursting I won't go through it again.

At this point it's tempting to believe that you're just a wind-up merchant.  You first make an argument that somehow democracy isn't being followed ("If democracy is good enough for choosing our national rulers, why is it not good enough for choosing ... our European rulers?"), then when I point out that it is, actually, you follow up with a completely unconnected comment about your general negative feelings towards the concept of democracy.

You're trying to have your cake (where's my democracy?) and eat it (I've always hated democracy) too.  It's a great way to spin out an argument, but it's a shit way to make sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 March, 2019, 05:00:19 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 March, 2019, 04:00:51 PM
....  It's a great way to spin out an argument, but it's a shit way to make sense.

Is that where Theresa May learnt it from?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2019, 06:53:33 PM

FS - My attitude towards democracy is that it's okay to a point, in theory, but in practice it's more akin to mob rule because of the power element.

Most MPs don't seem to know what's best for their own constituencies or constituents, much less the rest of the country. They know only what's best for themselves, their friends and sponsors, their parties and lobbyists. They tend to live outside the world the rest of us inhabit. I don't think the MP for South Ribble knows (or particularly cares) what's best for the people of Tarleton or Croston, much less for the people of Lichfield, Kensington or Edinburgh, and yet they get to effect the lives of ordinary people throughout the UK.

Similarly, I don't see how a British MEP can know and vote for what's best for the ordinary people of the UK, let alone Greece, Spain, Belgium, etc. They, like their UK MP counterparts, must rely on political theory, often biased and/or incomplete reports, and lobbyists upon which to base their votes. This is all very well to a point but the kicker is that their decisions, whether right, wrong, indifferent, helpful or harmful, are then imposed on societies and communities they've never even heard of, much less visited.

I think it was Churchill who said that democracy is the least worst system of government, and I broadly agree with that. But government, as it stands today, is in my opinion a terrible system of organising society simply because of the power it assumes to have in order to impose things the people don't want on the people.

For whom do I vote, for example, if I don't want British made weapons sold to Saudi Arabia for use in subjugating Yemen? For whom do I vote if I don't want my money used to support American military adventures, corporate subsidies or banker bail-outs? For whom do I vote if I don't want a cashless society? Some tiny, one-trick party with no hope of getting "into power" so that when they lose I'll still be forced into supporting egregious actions, be forced into complicity? If I want to contribute to the good things about society like hospitals, roads and schools, why is the price for these things that I must also pay to bomb civilians, keep the Royal Family and bankrupt other countries?

The organisational potential of a body like the EU, or even a single global government, is enormous and could make our world a much better place - but giving such bodies the power to impose their decisions on the population is, in my view, the most dangerous threat civilisation faces. For me, it all boils down to one simple right - the right to say "no" and to have that right respected.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 March, 2019, 07:17:17 PM
But yet when you get a referendum, which actually does give you at least some control over your country's future, you choose not to participate, Sharky.

I've said it before: I'm not at all averse to anarchism; if not your capitalist free-for-all version, but not even exercising the little bit of say you have in government achieves fuck all.  I'm proud to say that I voted on the winning side of the gay marriage referendum and the abortion one in my own country, thus helping to make my country a more tolerant and secular society.  (And if it turned out that my side had cheated and misinformed in the run-up to voting day, I'd happily have another run at each, but that's another story.)

If you don't like what they're doing, then lobby, campaign, protest, use the means available to you to get rid of them.  Otherwise you're doing nothing to change anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2019, 07:25:30 PM

FS - I'm sorry, I'm not sure my last properly addressed your point.

The Brexit referendum was a democratic mechanism similar to a general election. Most people in this country regard democracy as important, even vital, for the continuation of civilisation. When an MP is elected or a party elevated into power, I don't think there's ever been a situation where the result was called into question the day after and a new election demanded as soon as possible because the electorate has made a horrible mistake. The results of a general election are adhered to no matter what. If this referendum was truly a democratic mechanism then surely the result, good or bad (a subjective determination), must be treated with the same respect as a general election in a democratic society.

The crux of my original question was to ask whether the democratic process should be respected or not - irrespective of the consequences, which is a different argument.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2019, 07:38:25 PM

I understand your point, JBC, but I don't agree. If I don't believe in government power, then appealing to government power to get rid of government power isn't going to work.

If I had voted in the referendum then I would have voted "leave" for reasons of sovereignty and breaking up the corporate globalist power base. I would be very angry by now because the EU and "my own" pro-EU government have been pissing about for years now, doing everything they could to sabotage the result, aided and abetted by the MSM.

If there's another referendum, and then another, until "remain" triumphs, then my vote counts for nothing. The system simply cannot be changed from within, the last two and a half (or whatever) years is, to my eye, a clear demonstration of this view.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 March, 2019, 12:23:49 AM
QuoteThe system simply cannot be changed from within, the last two and a half (or whatever) years is, to my eye, a clear demonstration of this view.

And again I say, laws were changed in my country (for the better, unlike Brexit) because of two referendums.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 March, 2019, 07:11:37 AM

JBC, I agree that the gay marriage and abortion referendums look good on the surface but at core they are still appeals for authorities to allow or disallow basic human rights. They are simply a reinforcement of the idea that some people have the right to decide what's best for others. In ten or twenty or thirty years a government could come along and overturn those decisions because it's allowed the power to make legislation and pass it off as law.

Morality cannot be legislated, it's a matter of education and personal responsibility.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2019, 10:25:34 PM
Time for a Hail Mary.  If you don't sign this I will find you. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 21 March, 2019, 04:28:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2019, 10:25:34 PM
Time for a Hail Mary.  If you don't sign this I will find you. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)

Christ! Alright, Liam. Laying it on a bit thick, like....

Over a million have signed, and website has crashed again.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 March, 2019, 04:57:28 PM
Quote from: Rately on 21 March, 2019, 04:28:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2019, 10:25:34 PM
Time for a Hail Mary.  If you don't sign this I will find you. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)

Christ! Alright, Liam. Laying it on a bit thick, like....

Over a million have signed, and website has crashed again.

Possibly due to people checking what the running total is!

lighten the load (https://odileeds.org/projects/petitions/?241584)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mattofthespurs on 21 March, 2019, 05:55:00 PM
So glad that North London and Cambridgeshire have stepped up to the plate.

But then we have always been an enlightened bunch  :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 March, 2019, 03:24:05 PM
Quote from: Rately on 21 March, 2019, 04:28:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2019, 10:25:34 PM
Time for a Hail Mary.  If you don't sign this I will find you. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)

Christ! Alright, Liam. Laying it on a bit thick, like....

Over a million have signed, and website has crashed again.

My hopes aren't too high (and obviously as a foreigner I can't sign it) but 5 million signatures is impressive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 March, 2019, 09:20:23 PM
It was pretty fucking awesome in London yesterday too. Obviously bigger than the first march when you were immersed in it. Mostly because it moved at the speed of an asthmatic slug.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 24 March, 2019, 11:13:11 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 24 March, 2019, 03:24:05 PM
Quote from: Rately on 21 March, 2019, 04:28:15 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2019, 10:25:34 PM
Time for a Hail Mary.  If you don't sign this I will find you. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584)

Christ! Alright, Liam. Laying it on a bit thick, like....

Over a million have signed, and website has crashed again.

My hopes aren't too high (and obviously as a foreigner I can't sign it) but 5 million signatures is impressive.


I saw some Tory minister dismiss it the other day, sarcastically saying 'let's take a look when it passes 17.4m' to smug laughter.

At this point I think it was still in the hundreds of thousands.

It's 5.3m now and (I would guess) will probably top out around 6m, but how funny would it be if it actually did surpass 17.4m?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 March, 2019, 04:25:30 PM
I must admit to being very disappointed that Trump has been cleared of collusion.  We're going to get another 5 years of the slimy, bigoted old boor now; I just know it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 25 March, 2019, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 March, 2019, 04:25:30 PM
I must admit to being very disappointed that Trump has been cleared of collusion.  We're going to get another 5 years of the slimy, bigoted old boor now; I just know it.

Yep. Two term president now, easy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 March, 2019, 04:34:57 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 March, 2019, 04:25:30 PM
I must admit to being very disappointed that Trump has been cleared of collusion.  We're going to get another 5 years of the slimy, bigoted old boor now; I just know it.

He hasn't been cleared — Mueller's inquiry was very limited in scope and truncated by the appointment of AG Barr, the man who got Reagan off the hook over Iran/Contra and became Attorney General by declaring that he wanted the job and didn't think the president should be prosecuted.

Mueller's investigation only covered two very specific possibilities, which he has reported lack sufficient evidence to make a case. Not exactly exoneration. As I understand it, Mueller has effectively "sub-contracted" more than a dozen separate/parallel investigations to other offices/organisations/authorities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 March, 2019, 04:41:41 PM
I'm guessing the public perception will get him over the line though. I hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 March, 2019, 05:42:53 PM
I figure it's always been a long shot to impeach even with strong evidence.  To beat Trump, you need an opponent who convinces as being able to deliver an economic boost (and for Trump to have significantly harmed the economy in some way). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 March, 2019, 01:57:12 PM
I'd love to think that he would say / do something that would turn the voters, even the rest of the Republican party against him, but at this stage, with some of his behaviour, that's clearly not going to happen.

A horrendous shit stain of a human being.

We can only hope at some stage in future they take him off in handcuffs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 March, 2019, 02:17:27 PM
I hope he dies having a massive shit from eating too many burgers. He's never going to get impeached.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 March, 2019, 02:39:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 March, 2019, 02:17:27 PM
I hope he dies having a massive shit from eating too many burgers. He's never going to get impeached.

Fatal Trumping on the autopsy report.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 27 March, 2019, 03:17:33 PM
Comment I spotted on a Yahoo news story about the UK telling the EU to keep daylight savings time shifts...

(https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/55853790_10157334793262792_4172189445321129984_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=3525ab80b00f6faf82df62a00d7d8e9e&oe=5D4006B3)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 27 March, 2019, 03:44:35 PM
Space was also invented by the British in 1869, when Alexander MacHovercraft needed somewhere to store his cutlery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2019, 05:08:59 PM
Oh god. One of the reasons I'm dreading leaving the EU is because of the inevitable campaign that will follow to set UK time permanently to GMT (even though basically no-one uses the term GMT). So we'll get to enjoy 3am sunrises in the summer, but lose light evenings forever. But, hey, BRITISH AND GOD SAVE THE QUEEN AND *dies*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 March, 2019, 06:31:29 PM
Don't worry. You'll soon have another British Empire that the sun never sets on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2019, 07:58:26 PM
Is the UK going to invade the oceans, then? "This is all ours now! We've planted a flag!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 March, 2019, 08:01:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2019, 07:58:26 PM
Is the UK going to invade the oceans, then? "This is all ours now! We've planted a flag!"

Imagine all the fishing rights you'll have then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 March, 2019, 08:20:33 PM

At least until Atlaexit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2019, 09:16:12 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 March, 2019, 08:01:37 PMImagine all the fishing rights you'll have then.
UK: WE HAVE ALL THE FISH!
Everyone else: Who are you going to sell them to? You have no trade deals now, you fucking muppets.
UK: ...
Everyone else: ...
UK: Bugger.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: titchard on 28 March, 2019, 09:29:22 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2019, 09:16:12 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 March, 2019, 08:01:37 PMImagine all the fishing rights you'll have then.
UK: WE HAVE ALL THE FISH!
Everyone else: Who are you going to sell them to? You have no trade deals now, you fucking muppets.
UK: ...
Everyone else: ...
UK: Bugger.

I guess we will have something to eat post-brexit then...  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 March, 2019, 09:37:11 AM
Nice to see even the Guardian this morning not understanding what happened in the Commons last night. Yes, nothing got a majority. That wasn't the plan. It was to see what might be palatable. People's vote did a lot better than expected. CU almost secured a majority. Had parties actually allowed free votes, everything from Labour's plan, Boles's CM2, and revoke as a last resort may have passed too. If this gets to a second day on Monday, it'll be interesting times. (Tomorrow, reportedly, May will have another crack at getting her deal through. She should just weld a referendum to it and be done with it. That would almost certainly pass now.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 March, 2019, 10:39:45 AM
Sweet God. Will it ever end.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 March, 2019, 04:05:36 PM
So is choosing the name "Change UK" (or "Change.org"!) supposed to be ironic?  iIs it all part of the new politics where you accuse your opponents of doing the very thing you are doing and vice versa?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 March, 2019, 05:08:23 PM
Change.org have already stated they are consulting solicitors.  What a car crash of a party limited company.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2019, 05:13:03 PM
Yes, God forbid MPs go with their convictions and try something different. (I had a friend go full-on conspiracy about where the "website was incorporated" or some such shit recently. Yeah, it has a domain cloaking service that anyone in their right mind would use, and that one – used by literally millions of people – is based in Panama or something.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 March, 2019, 06:11:57 PM
I'd feel more convinced by their convictions if they hadn't spent all their efforts trying to reverse change and pretend that "steady as she goes" Centrist austerity capitalism was not in need of the slightest change, and it was the voters who needed to get over it.  I say this as a pretty despairing remainer, and not as a conspiracy nut who thinks that there is a Global effort to drain the 99% dry.  It is just the natural result of 40 years of Politics for politic's (and vested interests with the ear of politicians) sake.  What change are they actually advocating for?


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2019, 05:13:03 PM
Yes, God forbid MPs go with their convictions and try something different. (I had a friend go full-on conspiracy about where the "website was incorporated" or some such shit recently. Yeah, it has a domain cloaking service that anyone in their right mind would use, and that one – used by literally millions of people – is based in Panama or something.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2019, 07:59:38 PM
Moderation and internationalism, I suppose. Neither of the main two parties want that. Frankly, TIG is basically a less liberal and economically Clegg-era (vs. Kennedy-era) Lib Dems. But then the LD brand is a bust now, and not enough people will vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 March, 2019, 08:22:16 PM
Which is fine if they can find a way to make either of those "work" with the electorate - The problem being that the image that most readily springs to mind for use against that brand is Hilary Clinton style "basket of deplorables" bubbled off politics -the kind that reacted to the 2008 crisis with "money for banks, so no money for you" as opposed to seeing that 'change' was precisely what was needed.

I think you can draw a line directly from that failure of the Left/Centre to spot what was obvious to the weaponisation of the fall out by the Right.  So, I'm all for change - the desire for change is what has got us Brexit, Trump and Corbyn. Corbyn, for all the failings real,imagined and trumped up, was a phenomenom because of the desire for change (moreso than anything inherent in him as a force for change, you might argue, but thats beside the point).   These are teh very politicians who were terrified and bewildered by that groundswell.

For a group of people who represent the thing people felt needed changing in the first place to call themselves "Change", they need to explain how that works at the very least as a first step, how that works - like if the all the Empire Admirals at the end of "Jedi" decided to form a breakaway party of "Admirals for Change" - forget that Darth Vader guy and the Death Star stuff - terrible business, though there were less rebellions and big explosions back when it was just us Admirals in charge.... If their idea of change is "the Galaxy worked well when there were more stormtroopers"... it isnt really change they want is it?



Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 March, 2019, 07:59:38 PM
Moderation and internationalism, I suppose. Neither of the main two parties want that. Frankly, TIG is basically a less liberal and economically Clegg-era (vs. Kennedy-era) Lib Dems. But then the LD brand is a bust now, and not enough people will vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 29 March, 2019, 08:24:15 PM
To be fair teh more accurate anaolgy would be the Jedi council headless chickening about in the prequels, but hopefully you get my point!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 March, 2019, 08:42:38 PM
I don't read the spin-off Star Wars media where all this wankery was established, but the backstory to the Sequel trilogy is apparently that after Jedi, centrists fucked everything up and then some fascists took over, so there's probably a germane analogue in there somewhere if you want to go looking for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 March, 2019, 09:29:32 PM
On Channel 4, a journalist just congratulated Heidi Allen on being the leader of Change UK.  Allen's response: "is that what they're calling it?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 01 April, 2019, 12:25:04 PM
(https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1554030549-20190331.png)

I think more or less this is spot-on, but with the last part mainly used as a rhetorical put-down if you give a shit about things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 April, 2019, 02:21:24 PM
If I hadn't seen about 30 critiques of that Gillette toxic masculinity advert coming from the left, I would agree, but critical thinking is alive and well and that strip - while well-made - is inherently incorrect in its central assumption that capitalist exploitation of dissent is a simple matter of seeing a thing and then using it to advertise Nike shoes or Pepsi.  People aren't stupid and social movements aren't homogeneous, not even on the far right where groups argue specifically for things like race nationalism - though obviously I am not entirely sure about the net cultural gains of having the EDL and BNP's latter turns as spokespersons of zionism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 April, 2019, 06:40:07 PM
That Gilette thing was mad. I now present a short dramatisation:

Twitter: RABBLE! RABBLERABBLE!
Me (the hero of the piece): What's wrong now twitter?
Twitter: IT'S FECKIN' @GILETTE, MISTER POPS, YOU SEXY GENIUS!
Me: Gilette? The Razor people? For shaving? Don't you all have beards?
Twitter:YES!
Me: Ah, you've decided to finally shave and now you're angry to discover they charge you the guts of a fiver for a small piece of metal mounted in plastic?
Twitter:NO!
Me:No?
Twitter:THEY MADE A FECKIN ADVERTISEMENT!
Me (feigning understanding): Ah....very good carry on Twitter.

FIN
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 April, 2019, 07:06:17 PM
Bercow having fun this evening. He just shat all over hard Brexit options, and now the Tories hate him even more than they already did – if that's possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 April, 2019, 07:31:19 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 01 April, 2019, 06:40:07 PMThat Gilette thing was mad.

To be fair, it's got a ways to go to beat Sunny D marketing their disgusting drinks by having the person running their Twitter account pretend to be contemplating self harm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 01 April, 2019, 07:35:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 April, 2019, 07:31:19 PM
To be fair, it's got a ways to go to beat Sunny D marketing their disgusting drinks by having the person running their Twitter account pretend to be contemplating self harm.

That'll be the high corn-syrup content.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 April, 2019, 07:52:13 PM

Drinking Sunny D is self harm.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 01 April, 2019, 10:26:00 PM
I don't frequent this thread, but I came here to see if there was any common sense on Brexit.

That's not a slur on anyone posting here. It's just that I have no idea where else to go, and this board is usually sensible.

What are we all to do? How hand-wringy a thing is that to post? How true, though?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 April, 2019, 11:18:08 PM
I feel really downcast about things right now, after the shitshow of this evening's IVs. Some politicians are trying to find positives. It feels like there may be a consensus, or that one could be reached. But we're out of time. One more crack at this and then we're over the cliff edge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 April, 2019, 06:30:40 PM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 01 April, 2019, 10:26:00 PM
I don't frequent this thread, but I came here to see if there was any common sense on Brexit.

That right there is an oxymoron ....

Let's face it, Brexit crawled up its own anus two years back.  May's announcement tonight should have come with an advertisement for the Samaritans.  The only thing of note in the Palace this week was the climate protest.  Rather apposite as well.

I'm trying to decide whether the current impasse is intentional on the part of some.  Between the ERG and DUP, the fate of the nation is being held hostage by a bunch of delusional headbangers.  The only problem with that theory is that it implies some sort of cunning and competence.

Now the Political Thread is merging with the Black Dog Thread.  I'm off to watch Threads again to cheer myself up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 April, 2019, 09:19:57 PM
Supreme being's ex-representative on earth blames time-traveling hippies for priests' rape of children. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47898562)

I should definitely be hired by the BBC to write their headlines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 12 April, 2019, 10:30:50 AM
Quote"The question of paedophilia, as I recall, did not become acute until the second half of the 1980s," he said.

"Our efforts at covering this behaviour up were going well until about then, that's when it all started to go to hell. Still, got a good few more years in, eh?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 April, 2019, 11:07:23 AM
I can't believe someone who used to be in the Hitler Youth has turned out to have bad opinions.  I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of other Nazis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 April, 2019, 11:17:34 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 12 April, 2019, 11:07:23 AM
I can't believe someone who used to be in the Hitler Youth has turned out to have bad opinions.  I hope this doesn't tarnish the reputation of other Nazis.
'Lots of fine people'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 April, 2019, 01:07:08 PM
In happy political news, Mrs IP got ILR (settled status) yesterday. We shouldn't have had to go through this shit, and many others are still fighting this abhorrent system. If you have a mind to ever write to your MP, please do so and ask them to demand a declaratory system for people who moved here with every assumption they could just live their lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Keef Monkey on 12 April, 2019, 01:39:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 April, 2019, 01:07:08 PM
In happy political news, Mrs IP got ILR (settled status) yesterday. We shouldn't have had to go through this shit, and many others are still fighting this abhorrent system. If you have a mind to ever write to your MP, please do so and ask them to demand a declaratory system for people who moved here with every assumption they could just live their lives.

Good to hear, it must be a huge weight off to have it sorted but as you say should never have been necessary in the first place. What a mess things are right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 April, 2019, 03:21:26 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 April, 2019, 01:07:08 PM
If you have a mind to ever write to your MP, please do so and ask them to demand a declaratory system for people who moved here with every assumption they could just live their lives.

I would, except that my MP Is a prick who voted against everything in the indicative votes except no deal. I did write to him once, reminding him that the Tories (then only rumoured) arrangement with the DUP would come perilously close to breaching the Good Friday Agreement. When I tackled him on social media about the lack of reply, he claimed his staff at the constituency office couldn't find any correspondence from me.

It's particularly galling because when I moved here, we were in Ken Clarke's constituency but a chunk of Rushcliffe was carved out and added to Newark, flipping it from Labour to Conservative and landing us Patrick Mercer as an MP. He was forced to resign in disgrace after getting caught in a cash-for-questions scandal and I actually voted for his replacement because the most likely alternative to win was the UKIP candidate, Roger Helmer, who's a gammon-faced bigot and rampant homophobe.

I'm delighted to hear Mrs IP is going to be OK, though. I can only imagine how ever-present and stressful this must have been for both of you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 April, 2019, 03:54:58 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 April, 2019, 01:07:08 PM
In happy political news, Mrs IP got ILR (settled status) yesterday. We shouldn't have had to go through this shit, and many others are still fighting this abhorrent system. If you have a mind to ever write to your MP, please do so and ask them to demand a declaratory system for people who moved here with every assumption they could just live their lives.


Congratulations, Mrs IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 13 April, 2019, 11:08:31 AM
https://youtu.be/FjbBSLZlpsQ (https://youtu.be/FjbBSLZlpsQ)

Both funnier than anything we could possibly do and more relevant than anything we would do. Both parties would prefer MEPs were some dark secret so you can blame it on Brussels, even today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 April, 2019, 12:25:00 PM

I'm happy for you both, IP. May you live long and prosper!



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 April, 2019, 10:03:32 PM
Fuck me, I never thought I'd support a priest, but the way he ripped the hole clean out of our so called politicians at Lyra McKee's funeral was feckin' spectacular
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 April, 2019, 10:10:55 PM
Easy target..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 April, 2019, 10:30:27 PM
35,000 people sign petition to end all life on their planet. (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-48038130)

Oh, wait: the button said "Insert Hyperlink", and I accidentally inserted hyperbole.  Oops.  Still: perhaps the 35,000 people who need to drink through a straw could just, y'know, become adults. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2019, 06:53:30 AM

They should try hemp-based plastic (https://www.green-flower.com/articles/448/7-ways-hemp-plastic-could-change-the-world) instead.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 25 April, 2019, 11:35:40 AM
Been away from the discussions but my overall take on everything.. Brexit, climate change etc .. we're all fucked.  There's no will to do the right thing and there never will be.   Taken me a long time to accept there really is nothing we can do except our own little things and that they really won't change anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2019, 12:16:15 PM

Nobody can do everything but everybody can do something.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2019, 12:50:42 PM
Quote from: Something Fishy on 25 April, 2019, 11:35:40 AM
Been away from the discussions but my overall take on everything.. Brexit, climate change etc .. we're all fucked.  There's no will to do the right thing and there never will be.   Taken me a long time to accept there really is nothing we can do except our own little things and that they really won't change anything.

Seems to me if someone didn't want things to change, that's the attitude they'd want people to have.  We like to tell ourselves we're helpless to change things because we mistakenly believe that this also makes us blameless.

If everybody does nothing, we really are fucked.  Yes, it will take more than no longer using plastic straws to repair the damage done to our environment, but that is a start and if you can manage that much, you can do something else.  Work your way up, but don't do nothing, don't just hide away from the problem, if only because the Tories have told us they won't let you (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-is-too-tolerant-and-should-interfere-more-in-peoples-lives-says-david-cameron-10246517.html).
Today you stop using straws or buying milk from animal sources, but tomorrow you could be driving a van full of explosives into Parliament or whatever the next logical step is after ethical consumerism.  Baby steps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2019, 03:25:24 PM
Quoteor buying milk from animal sources
That one always gets me – people feeling all great about themselves, despite drinking almond milk. Almond milk is a massive fuck-up, from a sustainability and ecosystem standpoint.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 April, 2019, 04:49:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 April, 2019, 03:25:24 PM
Quoteor buying milk from animal sources
That one always gets me – people feeling all great about themselves, despite drinking almond milk. Almond milk is a massive fuck-up, from a sustainability and ecosystem standpoint.
And they're also willing to ignore the ungodly amount of genetic manipulation it takes to give almonds tits
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2019, 05:37:55 PM
"Ignore"?  That's the one selling point of almond milk, the worst - but most sexy - of all non-dairy products.

Apropos of nothing, almond milk and dairy milk are banned in my local school for allergy-related reasons.  It's getting so you can't even send your kids to school with things that will kill other kids anymore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2019, 06:41:22 PM
Did someone mention milk (and tits)? (https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-48051236)

[Entirely work safe link.]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 April, 2019, 07:08:57 PM

Tits (https://www.warrenphotographic.co.uk/photography/bigs/07676-Blue-Tit-drinking-cream-from-milk-bottle-white-background.jpg) are brilliant. I love 'em.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 April, 2019, 09:40:40 PM
I don't know, there are times when I really do think that   tits are a bad thing. (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1118720/Brexit-news-Nigel-Farage-Brexit-Party-candidates-today-UK-BBC-Clacton-MP)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2019, 10:57:11 PM
Sharky: extra points for thematically-appropriate usage of an image containing milk.
Tjm: minus points for linking to the Express.

"Within twenty-four hours, Change UK racked up more racism scandals than the Brexit Party" - The Hard Center Is Racist. (https://www.patreon.com/posts/26357879)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 April, 2019, 10:25:16 AM
Fair point on the Express front.  That said I do consider both it and the Mail essential occasional viewing.  I do also find time to dip into the RT website.  I would argue that it is dangerous to limit reading to a narrow echo chamber that never challenges or contradicts.  It is also important to know what the lunatic fringe tin-foil-hat-brigade alt-right gammoner right is 'thinking'.

The only thing I have to be careful of is that at times I also mix it up with a visit to the Daily Mash and Rochdale Herald.  When that happens I can sometimes forget when I'm looking at a satirical website.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 26 April, 2019, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2019, 12:50:42 PM
Quote from: Something Fishy on 25 April, 2019, 11:35:40 AM
Been away from the discussions but my overall take on everything.. Brexit, climate change etc .. we're all fucked.  There's no will to do the right thing and there never will be.   Taken me a long time to accept there really is nothing we can do except our own little things and that they really won't change anything.

Seems to me if someone didn't want things to change, that's the attitude they'd want people to have.  We like to tell ourselves we're helpless to change things because we mistakenly believe that this also makes us blameless.

If everybody does nothing, we really are fucked.  Yes, it will take more than no longer using plastic straws to repair the damage done to our environment, but that is a start and if you can manage that much, you can do something else.  Work your way up, but don't do nothing, don't just hide away from the problem, if only because the Tories have told us they won't let you (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-is-too-tolerant-and-should-interfere-more-in-peoples-lives-says-david-cameron-10246517.html).
Today you stop using straws or buying milk from animal sources, but tomorrow you could be driving a van full of explosives into Parliament or whatever the next logical step is after ethical consumerism.  Baby steps.

Oh I agree, we've gradually changed our behaviour.  Going down to one car, recycling vastly more, buying less shit, keeping clothes until they are worn then passing to the local charity shops wherewearable rather than buying for the sake of it,  eating far less meat (nearly none) , just generally thinking politically about how we might help not harm others and being willing to be taxed for it etc.. sadly we know that a large chunk of people will never give a fuck so our little changes probably mean nothing.  It's all we can do though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2019, 11:14:42 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 26 April, 2019, 10:25:16 AMI would argue that it is dangerous to limit reading to a narrow echo chamber that never challenges or contradicts.
I just can't be doing with the tabloids now. They're full of shit, and don't remotely care about accuracy. They're the UK equivalent of Fox News. The US has shitty TV news; we have better TV news, but really shitty mass-market print news. If I want to be challenged outside of my cosy lefty bubble, I'll read the Times. (The FT is good, too, and fairly impartial. The Telegraph, however, has absolutely fucking lost it since Brexit happened.)

Quote from: Something Fishy on 26 April, 2019, 11:04:15 AMGoing down to one car
We have one car. Most people think we're mental. HOW DO YOU COPE? they scream. It can be a PITA at times. (Mrs G will soon have new work hours, which is going to complicate school pick-ups – not least given that our town cleverly placed most of the primary schools at the bottom of a THREE MILE north-to-south catchment area.) But, well, meh.

Reuse is the other one we're trying to get better at. I went a bit Marie Kondo recently. There was no faffing about with 'joy', but I did go through my entire wardrobe, and organise my T-shirts so I could actually see what I had. WAY more than I thought. Yeah, I don't need any new tops this side of the 2020s. But I did find a bunch of stuff to recycle/give away, which is rather fab.

Quoteeating far less meat (nearly none)
I wish we could do that. We were barrelling down the vegetarian route a few years ago. Then I got a chronic digestive disorder that eradicated gluten and dairy, and forced a massive reduction in fibre and veg. At the same time, Mrs G got diagnosed with oral allergy syndrome, which is a horrible nightmare when it comes to fresh fruit and veg.

In short: arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 April, 2019, 11:24:48 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2019, 11:14:42 AM
I just can't be doing with the tabloids now. They're full of shit, and don't remotely care about accuracy. They're the UK equivalent of Fox News. The US has shitty TV news; we have better TV news, but really shitty mass-market print news. If I want to be challenged outside of my cosy lefty bubble, I'll read the Times. (The FT is good, too, and fairly impartial. The Telegraph, however, has absolutely fucking lost it since Brexit happened.)

In short: arse.

You won't get any argument from me and normally I find myself having to mentally rinse my brain out afterwards, especially after Nigel "the fish" Farage's latest 'brilliant put down' according to the Express. 

Thing is though, it is helpful to get a sense of why some people are spewing the utter garbage they are.  My parents read both the Mail and the Express although more for the sports coverage and crosswords.  Having said that, my mother did once make the mistake of commenting on the wonderful job Gove was doing as Education Secretary.  It was a damn good job I wasn't drinking anything at the time!  Half hour of detailed dissection of the complete dogs breakfast of a job he was doing, she conceded that she was misinformed. 

So I think it is more a case of knowing what 'facts' some people are operating with in order to be able to counter them with a healthy dose of reality (or just walking away in a lot of cases .... )
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2019, 12:52:33 PM
I'd quite like to know where I can find this left wing echo chamber bubble everyone keeps talking about, as it sounds quite nice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 April, 2019, 01:25:01 PM
Tjm86: Media is a big problem right now. My dad in a couple of conversations has talked to me about "EU intransigence". It's pretty clear he's picked that up from TV news, given that it has no basis in objective reality. (And my dad voted remain, note. Which is probably just as well, because otherwise Mrs IP would probably have never spoken to him again.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 April, 2019, 02:09:49 PM
True but that is why more than anything else there is a profound need to read widely and critically.  Unfortunately there is a growing need to work to fill in the blanks left by editorial bias and the polemics of so many news sources.  When you factor in the use of social media as an authoritative news source you know we are in serious trouble.

I mean, could you imagine what Goebells might have done if he had access to Facebook?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 April, 2019, 06:13:46 PM

38degrees - Stop the Trial of 5G on the Isles of Scilly and Cornwall. (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-trial-of-5g-on-the-isles-of-scilly-and-cornwall?bucket&source=facebook-share-button&time=1552223947&fbclid=IwAR2EvqwRUgsRxAdi_pGVqfLdU06ztXQUiKbfRvV8kDfSBao0y-2_Ar9k7kY)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Something Fishy on 27 April, 2019, 07:42:39 PM
Thank you Shark.  I was just talking to my son about this today (discussing the physics as he is doing a chem phys masters).

I did not realise they were about to trial it here though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2019, 06:25:15 PM
If someone in the future is reading this - possibly some form of cockroach tasked with deciphering the language of the people of the corpse pits - and are wondering why we didn't even bother commenting on the fact that the fourth estate failed so badly in its duty that its responsibilities were assumed by Pamela Anderson: it's not that we didn't notice, it's just that we were past caring.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2019, 06:41:06 PM

It's not that we were past caring, it's that we voted people who only cared for themselves into power in the hope they'd do our caring for us.

By the time we realised our mistake, it was too late.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 May, 2019, 06:47:33 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the more I think about it, the more encouraged I am by what is happening at present.

The current political situation is a mess but it has been for a looooong time.  As long as I can remember the British political system has created a sense of impotence.  My vote doesn't matter because politicians don't care about anyone but themselves.  Most politicians are parachuted into 'safe' seats that favour one party or another and independents only get a shot when parties screw up royally.  Governments do what they want and no one really can do much about it except accept it ...  Pretty bleak and nihilistic really.

Then there is the unexamined growth of disturbing groups and movements that threaten individuals and communities.  The likes of the EDL and NF, of their offspring and similar groups, has been a largely unexamined phenomenon.  Except now they are subject to the cold hard light of scrutiny.  Farage is being exposed for the half-wit he is by his constant pronouncements.  Yaxley-Lennon manages to show himself for the thug he is when he responds to ridicule over his attempt to intimidate and provoke. 

There is a very real debate going on at the moment about the sort of media, politics, leadership, society etc we want to live in.  Sharkey's utopian idealism may not be to everyone's taste but it is at least part of the process.  Everything is up for grabs, all ideas are open for discussion, all options are on the table.  Politicians have finally shown that they cannot be continually left to their own devices but need to be challenged more.  Journalists can no longer carry on the same lazy way, allowing their reporting to be distorted by editorial bias.  Anyone who wants to step up to the plate has got to be willing and able to justify their positions, to engage with opponents.

So maybe I am being a little optimistic here.  Maybe I am idealistic.  I just see a real opportunity here to address some of the problems and mistakes we have made.  We really do live in 'interesting times'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 09:08:21 AM
True dat, Tjm. Although I fear we no longer have the time needed for the mass of ignorant ageing scrotes to die of natural causes.

I do wish people (or their blankets) would stop quoting Cromwell in defence of civil and political liberties.  He was Not A Nice Man, and very many of His Ideas And Actions Were Very Bad. It's akin to citing Mussolini in order to criticise frequent delays on your local commuter train.

See also: Churchill, Mother Teresa, the 5thC BCE city-state of Sparta.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 May, 2019, 09:13:03 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 09:08:21 AM
I do wish people (or their blankets) would stop quoting Cromwell in defence of civil and political liberties.  He was Not A Nice Man, and very many of His Ideas And Actions Were Very Bad. It's akin to citing Mussolini in order to criticise frequent delays on your local commuter train.

See also: Churchill, Mother Teresa, the 5thC BCE city-state of Sparta.

You must mix in different political bubbles than I - what are they saying about Cromwell?  I always thought he was the bad guy, though I did grow up on The Adventures of Luther Arkwright.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 08 May, 2019, 09:45:15 AM
Cromwell devastated Ireland his attacks killing between 25%-40% of the Countries then population. He also imported settlers to Northern Ireland to ensure compliance and eliminate the threat of any Catholic uprising. We all know how well that turned out. :( Cromwell, did, however, destroy the Medieval world and the Divine Right of Kings forever ushering in a new age of politics. The arbitrary whim of Rulers became history, Kings or the powerful must consider the will of their communities before any action. It struck me as strange how many on the left of British Politics who professed themselves to be 'Revolutionaries' were terrified of Oliver Cromwell, an English Revolutionary. That's because many of them came from cities or Industrial areas, often with Catholic connections or communities none too keen to remember how Cromwell brought through fire, bloodshed and the sword a Revolution that saw their Faith and those who practised it as the enemy. Understandably so. Even now I've heard that one Labour Politician regularly turns the bust of Oliver Cromwell in the Houses of Parliament to face the wall. Almost 400 years later Oliver Cromwell still frightens the Country he killed so many for to preserve. Who says History doesn't matter eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 10:00:14 AM
I was referring primarily to Pamela Anderson's Assange-visit blanket, which seems to reference Cromwell's attack on the appalling prison treatment of the Leveller John Lilburne (the latter most recently appropriated by the Freeman movement).

But more generally I see Cromwell quotes everywhere, "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken" , "subtlety may deceive you, integrity never will",  etc, and generally cited as a hammer of establishment tyranny and champion of democracy and personal liberty. With a big statue outside the Houses of Parliament to prove it.

Which as IAMTHESYSTEM documents above is not what his record would support.

Or a reading of Luther Arkwright, now that you mention it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 10:30:41 AM
TL;DR version: get a better class of hero, Britain!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 May, 2019, 11:10:33 AM
Quite what the fuck Pamela Anderson was thinking, I've no idea. Presumably, she wasn't. Assange is a problem, in various ways. There are issues with whistleblowing and the US, but I'm also baffled at people who see him as a hero in a black-and-white scenario. Many of his releases put people in direct danger, for no good reason. (Ego.) He is accused of rape in Sweden. But then ex-Baywatch celeb goes all "he's the most innocent person ever". Why the fuck did he hide in a bloody embassy, then? (Extradition to the US? The UK and Sweden would have had to have agreed to that. Unlikely.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2019, 01:54:56 PM
Does this mean Chelsea Manning deserves to be held without trial and tortured for showing solidarity with Assange?  I mean, if he's bad then she shouldn't be helping him.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 May, 2019, 06:41:06 PMIt's not that we were past caring, it's that we voted people who only cared for themselves into power in the hope they'd do our caring for us.

No, I'm definately past caring.  Whatever comes next, we deserve it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 May, 2019, 02:10:54 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 May, 2019, 11:10:33 AMhe hide in a bloody embassy, then? (Extradition to the US? The UK and Sweden would have had to have agreed to that. Unlikely.)

If I had the US wanting to put me in prison for the rest of my life, I'd hide wherever I could!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 02:15:40 PM
I'm ever more inclined to the Prof's PoV in this matter, but I have irritating kids and beautiful nephews and nieces and some coastal places that I really value, and they force me back to thinking about what could be done to save it all, improve social justice, political accountability and  global equality, or maybe just mitigate the onrushing shitsunami a little.

For myself, I am resigned to my wholly deserved fate; for them, I dunno. Not quite yet.

And then I watch BBCQT and Emily Thornbury is explaining how UK Labour's Climate Emergency actually translates into - maybe - home insulation grants and - who knows -
more charging points for EVs.

And I feel like never voting again, ordering a Big Mac and booking a rake of long-haul flights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 May, 2019, 03:15:39 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2019, 01:54:56 PMDoes this mean Chelsea Manning deserves to be held without trial and tortured for showing solidarity with Assange?  I mean, if he's bad then she shouldn't be helping him.
I'm not sure if that was aimed at me. Of course Manning doesn't deserve such treatment. But arguing Assange is only a force for good is troubling, to say the least. (My point is that people see things in black and white, whereas this case has more shades of grey than the average website circa 2000.)

Quote from: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 02:15:40 PMAnd then I watch BBCQT and Emily Thornbury is explaining how UK Labour's Climate Emergency actually translates into - maybe - home insulation grants and - who knows -  more charging points for EVs.
They are almost all awful. Lucas gets it. Some of the SNP and Lib Dems do. Painfully few others.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 May, 2019, 04:10:12 PM
Everyone I've seen who has defended Assange has done so with qualifiers, even the patron saint of sensibles John Oliver (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCosbhT3Klc).  I have seen literally one person argue Assange was a force for good, and that person was George "It doesn't count if she's asleep" Galloway.    How Assange is treated is not about Assange, it is about what we tolerate being done in our name and it's just as much a yardstick of our ongoing descent as everything else.

Quote from: TordelBack on 08 May, 2019, 10:00:14 AM"subtlety may deceive you, integrity never will",  etc

Ah I'm an old fashioned snob, me, I like Shakespeare for the poncy quotes.  "The quality of mercy is not strained - it blesseth him that gives and him that takes."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 May, 2019, 08:33:39 AM
Julian Assange is a fascinating fellow. I think he's highly committed to his beliefs to uncover wrongdoing by Governments, and the revelations about secret Intelligence communications were intriguing. But you could argue that a lot these revelations suited Russia very nicely, and Assange's Wikileaks blatant attempt to sink Hilary Clinton's Presidential prospects with the release of her E-Mails must make his motives seem questionable. Only the Orange Ogre Trump then a Presidential candidate and his pal Vladimir Putin would benefit from this. These two people I wouldn't consider overly invested in freedom. So is Julian Assange a fearless Journalist, publishing and being damned or a 'useful idiot' as Lenin described some of his Western admirers? A bit of both I suspect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2019, 10:07:28 AM

There's just something about Assange and Wikileaks that feels a bit off to me. It's just my gut talking, I can't put my finger on anything specific.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2019, 10:14:26 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2019, 10:07:28 AMI can't put my finger on anything specific.
I would have thought deeply partisan interventions in a US presidential election, and the reckless outing of operatives in the field, both of which only serve to assist one major actor, would be two things.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2019, 10:20:32 AM

I think it's deeper than that, somehow.

As I said, it's just a feeling.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 May, 2019, 11:30:12 AM
Julian Assange is an egoist hiding his own collusion and actions behind an ideal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 May, 2019, 12:13:30 PM
Yeah any degree of doxing is a big red mark against an activists name for me, especially if the targets family and children are put at risk. There's no excuse for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2019, 02:21:58 PM
Wikileaks has definately doxxed people over the years, but wasn't it the Guardian that was responsible for the doxxing during their collaboration with Assange?  They were in a rush to get their story out and didn't vet security information, causing the still-ongoing animosity between it and Wikileaks - the paper was recently caught fabricating a story about a meeting between Assange and Trump aide Paul Manaforte, so I think we can assume the honeymoon is over.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2019, 10:07:28 AMThere's just something about Assange and Wikileaks that feels a bit off to me. It's just my gut talking, I can't put my finger on anything specific.

Well he's possibly a rapist so I don't really know that you have to think too hard about why you find him off, and I stopped following Wikileaks on Twitter because they kept posting autoplaying footage of atrocities that seemed more about self-promotion than raising awareness, though they've also doxxed the personal information of rape victims since then for some reason or other.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 May, 2019, 06:39:46 AM
I'm no particular fan of Danny Baker, but I've never seen anything that'd make me think he's a racist: but his ill-judged monkey tweet is/was, and now he has to pay the iron price: when you play the game of tweets, you win or you die.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 07:35:23 AM
Mixed race mum and kid, and he tweets a pic of a monkey. What is this, the 1970s? Then he offers a half-arsed jokey apology. Just no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2019, 08:16:47 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 07:35:23 AM
Mixed race mum and kid, and he tweets a pic of a monkey. What is this, the 1970s? Then he offers a half-arsed jokey apology. Just no.

Claims he didn't know about the black people/monkey racist trope. Also claims to be a lifelong football fan. These things cannot both be true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 May, 2019, 11:09:24 AM
I'm perfectly willing to accept that DB was attempting a joke about royals being monkeys rather than intending anything racist. It seems far more inkeeping with his sense of humour to be hitting out at the monarchy and establishment than to be making race jokes.
Having said that, I can quite see why people were offended - more to the point so could he, he accepted it and then took down the content immediately once pointed out.
To still be talking about it as a race jibe, rather than a mistake that could be easily misconstrued isn't very helpful in my opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2019, 11:10:26 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 May, 2019, 11:09:24 AM
To still be talking about it as a race jibe, rather than a mistake that could be easily misconstrued isn't very helpful in my opinion.

Claims he didn't know about the black people/monkey racist trope. Also claims to be a lifelong football fan. These things cannot both be true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 May, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
Did he actually claim he didn't know about the black people/monkey racist trope though?
It was my understanding that he said it just didn't occur to him - because he isn't racist he doesn't immediatley draw a connection when he sees a picture of a monkey and a black person together.
I can honestly say, I think I'm in the same boat. I would have had to think twice to have seen the racist connotation in the picture.
This is the quote I read:

"Sorry my gag pic of the little fella in the posh outfit has whipped some up. Never occurred to me because, well, mind not diseased. Soon as those good enough to point out its possible connotations got in touch, down it came. And that's it."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2019, 11:33:04 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 10 May, 2019, 11:24:20 AM
"Sorry my gag pic of the little fella in the posh outfit has whipped some up. Never occurred to me because, well, mind not diseased. Soon as those good enough to point out its possible connotations got in touch, down it came. And that's it."

Claiming that offence is entirely in the eye of the beholder, that seeing a well known racist trope is evidence of a "diseased mind", is not a good look. Again: British football was rife with this exact racist trope throughout the seventies and much of the eighties. For a die hard football fan of Baker's age to claim the connection simply never occurred to him... well, it fucking well should have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 10 May, 2019, 11:40:34 AM
Fair enough, I think we can all agree it should have.
I just don't feel comfortable saying for certain that Danny Baker was suggesting mixed race children are like monkeys. It seems such a serious accusation to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 12:48:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 07:35:23 AM
Mixed race mum and kid, and he tweets a pic of a monkey. What is this, the 1970s? Then he offers a half-arsed jokey apology. Just no.


He says he didn't know the mother was mixed-race, which seems fair.  The tweet was about the circus of the birth of somebody whose parents are royalty.  The person who had been invited to comment on the radio four news thought it was entirely unbelievable that anybody would not know which of the over-privileged parents had had sex nine months ago.  If this fuss hadn't been made of it I'd have assumed it was William's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 12:48:27 PMHe says he didn't know the mother was mixed-race
Bullshit, unless he's spent the last several years with his head in a ditch, ignoring every single tiny scrap of coverage about the royals – in which case, as a comedy-oriented host, it's rather a good idea to do the tiniest bit of research into what you're lampooning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 02:41:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 12:48:27 PMHe says he didn't know the mother was mixed-race
Bullshit, unless he's spent the last several years with his head in a ditch, ignoring every single tiny scrap of coverage about the royals – in which case, as a comedy-oriented host, it's rather a good idea to do the tiniest bit of research into what you're lampooning.

I refer you to the end of my comment where I stated I did not know which royal had had a baby, unless you're calling me a liar too?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 02:56:25 PM
Are you in the media? Moreover, he offered a half-arsed apology when it was obvious he'd made a massive blunder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 03:38:39 PM
If someone does make an honest mistake, why must they prostrate themselves in abject apology over it?

Edit: I mean, he's already lost his job over it.  Perhaps he feels that crawling around on the floor begging for forgiveness over what he considers an ill-judged mistake might make him, oh I don't know, lose all his self-respect?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 May, 2019, 03:49:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 03:38:39 PM
If someone does make an honest mistake, why must they prostrate themselves in abject apology over it?

I contest the "honest mistake" thing. For reasons already explained, the only way Baker could "not have known" about the racist connotations is if he is really, breath-takingly stupid. I've had very little exposure to him over the years, but I don't believe he's stupid. His non-apology with the 'diseased mind' crack strongly suggests he didn't think he'd done anything wrong.

It's possible that he's not a racist, but I don't believe he didn't know there were racist connotations to his tweet. I think he thought it was funny and did it anyway.

Important distinction: believing you're not a racist is not the same thing as not being a racist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
I hear what you're saying and understand your position - but given the evidence on offer, I can't come to a definite conclusion about his motives. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 04:57:31 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 03:57:33 PM
I hear what you're saying and understand your position - but given the evidence on offer, I can't come to a definite conclusion about his motives. 

As you can probably tell from my responses so far, I'm erring on innocent until proven guilty as well.  If only he'd picked a picture involving a clown to evoke 'media circus' instead!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 05:30:58 PM
The case of the nazi salute pug dog (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925) was also interesting - although that went to court and he was found guilty of committing a hate crime.

I think in that case it was clear (to the Sheriff, certainly) that what he (the dog owner) saw as humor was seen legally as hate speech.  The damning part seemed to be the cues he gave the dog:

QuoteMark Meechan, 30, recorded his girlfriend's pug, Buddha, responding to statements such as "gas the Jews" and "Sieg Heil" by raising its paw.

There's nothing as clear and damning about the Danny Baker incident.  I've always found him a bit stupid (like a human Labrador), so I'm willing to buy into the idea that he just wasn't as media savvy as a lot of folk think he should have been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 May, 2019, 10:30:06 PM
I had half typed out an opinion before I realised how little a fuck I give about Danny Baker, the Royal Family and the shite twitter wanks itself silly over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 10 May, 2019, 10:48:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2019, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 10 May, 2019, 12:48:27 PMHe says he didn't know the mother was mixed-race
Bullshit, unless he's spent the last several years with his head in a ditch, ignoring every single tiny scrap of coverage about the royals – in which case, as a comedy-oriented host, it's rather a good idea to do the tiniest bit of research into what you're lampooning.

I only found out there was any mixed race element about six months ago. But I don't d o this sort of thing for a living.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 10 May, 2019, 10:52:32 PM
Btw, does anyone remember Tony Mills/Burgess gag from maybe twenty five years ago about...

opening the door to someone who said "We believe that white is right!". So I twatted the racist git.

Only turned out to be Danny Baker doing the Daz doorstep challenge..!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 May, 2019, 11:46:40 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 May, 2019, 05:30:58 PM
...  I'm willing to buy into the idea that he just wasn't as media savvy as a lot of folk think he should have been.

Someone observed in a radio interview on the subject that he made a big thing about his support for the Champions League and that being the case they found it difficult to understand his lack of recognition of the racist undertones of the chimpanzee.  Being in the media as well, it is a bit of a stretch to follow the argument that he didn't know who's baby it was. 

For me though, the final blow was when he completely changed his story the next day.  It was almost like he had woken up, noticed that no one was supporting his position and that if he didn't suck it up he could pretty much kiss any chance of reviving his career goodbye.  Simply put, I'm not sure he is quite as dull on this matter as he's tried to make out.

Course I could be wrong, that he has the media awareness of a house brick and the intelligence of a UKIP politician.  That being the case then, I'm more concerned about which idiot hired him in the first place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 May, 2019, 12:31:12 PM

Does he have a history of racism? I have no idea because I don't follow such celebrities.

If he does, why was he not sacked earlier and if he doesn't, why does one stupid joke demand his immediate sacking in this case?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 May, 2019, 04:28:49 PM
This diagram may help:




Canny Media Operator & Obvious Racist   A Career Clown
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NHJBALTyfoFAWcwN5jO3Dxgqyw4=/0x0:2048x1401/1200x800/filters:focal(861x538:1187x864)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/59417061/Border1.0.jpg)   (https://www.beyondthejoke.co.uk/sites/beyondthejoke.co.uk/files/danny_baker_tour_image.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 May, 2019, 11:29:27 AM
Someone has made a pretty solid 1-page RPG, 'Dementia and Dealings' (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SRFt47iQcjD6aNfdzxS_ARn519vSZQoV/view), that reflect the cross-Atlantic trend of politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 22 May, 2019, 02:56:10 PM
A letter has been written to The Grauniad (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/to-choose-brexit-is-to-choose-to-lose-say-writers) from various UK-born or based writers.

Squaxx may recognise a few names there:

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 May, 2019, 03:10:44 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 22 May, 2019, 02:56:10 PM
A letter has been written to The Grauniad (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/to-choose-brexit-is-to-choose-to-lose-say-writers) from various UK-born or based writers.

Squaxx may recognise a few names there:

Kenneth Niemand's name isn't on that list. *


* Yes it is
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 22 May, 2019, 03:47:00 PM
Warren Ellis has some cheek after those FreakAngels of his severed us from the outside world in an apocalyptic flood and psychic bubble!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 May, 2019, 04:17:11 PM
And also in a readable format:

Nick Harkaway
Suw Charman-Anderson
Neil Gaiman
Laurie Penny
Warren Ellis
Emma Kennedy
John le Carré
Philip Pullman
Charles Arthur
Robert Harris
Dr Sue Black
Kieron Gillen
Joe Abercrombie
Samuel West
Prof Kate Williams
Sam Baker
Dr Helen Czerski
Nikesh Shukla
Dr Sunny Singh
Molly Flatt
Sarah Hilary
Irenosen Okojie
Tade Thompson
Ben Lyttleton
Paul Cornell
Andy Diggle
Max Porter
Sarah Pinborough
Rob Williams
Ed James
Paul Burston
Simon Spurrier
Al Ewing
Emma Newman
Tom Hunter
Adrian Tchaikovsky
Prof Adam Roberts
Robert Shearman
Adam Christopher
Prof David Andress
James Henry
Mike Carey
Jon Courtenay Grimwood
Gaia Vince
David Barnett
Alex Paknadel
James Smythe
Martyn Waites
Dr Una McCormack
Steve Mosby
Prof Roger Luckhurst
Chrissy Williams
Claire North
Dave Hutchinson
Kim Curran
Barbara Nadel
Julia Crouch
Juliet E McKenna
Den Patrick
Jill Dawson
Dan Watters
Sydney Moore
Sophia McDougall
Neil Broadfoot
Daragh Carville
Anne Charnock
Al Robertson
Lesley Thomson
Jaine Fenn
Dr Mark Blacklock
Jo Baker
E. J. Swift
Rhiannon Lassiter
David Gullen
Ian Whates
Ian Macleod
Laura Wade
Tricia Sullivan
Andrew Greig
James Oswald
Jane Rogers
Julian Simpson
Marina Lewycka
Sydney Padua
Annie Auerbach
Tom Pollock
Liz Fraser
Paul Johnston
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 May, 2019, 05:42:06 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 22 May, 2019, 02:56:10 PM
A letter has been written to The Grauniad (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/to-choose-brexit-is-to-choose-to-lose-say-writers) from various UK-born or based writers.

Squaxx may recognise a few names there:


       
       
  • Nick Harkaway
  • Suw Charman-Anderson
  • Neil Gaiman
  • Laurie Penny
  • Warren Ellis
  • Emma Kennedy
  • John le Carré
  • Philip Pullman
  • Charles Arthur
  • Robert Harris
  • Dr Sue Black
  • Kieron Gillen
  • Joe Abercrombie
  • Samuel West
  • Prof Kate Williams
  • Sam Baker
  • Dr Helen Czerski
  • Nikesh Shukla
  • Dr Sunny Singh
  • Molly Flatt
  • Sarah Hilary
  • Irenosen Okojie
  • Tade Thompson
  • Ben Lyttleton
  • Paul Cornell
  • Andy Diggle
  • Max Porter
  • Sarah Pinborough
  • Rob Williams
  • Ed James
  • Paul Burston
  • Simon Spurrier
  • Al Ewing
  • Emma Newman
  • Tom Hunter
  • Adrian Tchaikovsky
  • Prof Adam Roberts
  • Robert Shearman
  • Adam Christopher
  • Prof David Andress
  • James Henry
  • Mike Carey
  • Jon Courtenay Grimwood
  • Gaia Vince
  • David Barnett
  • Alex Paknadel
  • James Smythe
  • Martyn Waites
  • Dr Una McCormack
  • Steve Mosby
  • Prof Roger Luckhurst
  • Chrissy Williams
  • Claire North
  • Dave Hutchinson
  • Kim Curran
  • Barbara Nadel
  • Julia Crouch
  • Juliet E McKenna
  • Den Patrick
  • Jill Dawson
  • Dan Watters
  • Sydney Moore
  • Sophia McDougall
  • Neil Broadfoot
  • Daragh Carville
  • Anne Charnock
  • Al Robertson
  • Lesley Thomson
  • Jaine Fenn
  • Dr Mark Blacklock
  • Jo Baker
  • E. J. Swift
  • Rhiannon Lassiter
  • David Gullen
  • Ian Whates
  • Ian Macleod
  • Laura Wade
  • Tricia Sullivan
  • Andrew Greig
  • James Oswald
  • Jane Rogers
  • Julian Simpson
  • Marina Lewycka
  • Sydney Padua
  • Annie Auerbach
  • Tom Pollock
  • Liz Fraser
  • Paul Johnston

Fifth from top looked a bit familiar ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 May, 2019, 05:57:53 PM
Comic writers are paid to think about things.  Hence the common sense, I suppose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 23 May, 2019, 01:34:08 PM
Yeah just look at Frank Miller
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 May, 2019, 06:18:31 PM
And Comicsgate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 May, 2019, 06:21:10 PM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 23 May, 2019, 01:34:08 PM
Yeah just look at Frank Miller

Point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dudley on 24 May, 2019, 10:32:55 AM
Theresa's gone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 24 May, 2019, 10:45:12 AM
I can't wait to listen to all the insincere tributes to an incompetent PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 May, 2019, 10:50:49 AM
Tears. Of joy no doubt, to be rid of the whole farce.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2019, 11:32:59 AM
Hat trick - not only are we losing the worst PM in our history, but our last PM was the previous record holder and in all likelihood her replacement will be even worse.  Thank fuck we never elected Ed Milliband, God knows how much worse this would have been without the strong and stabilising influence of the Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 May, 2019, 12:22:25 PM
Oh God, it's going to be Boris, isn't it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2019, 12:30:04 PM
Is he the worst possible choice?  If so, then yes.  If Mogg would be worse - and there's every chance he could be - then Tories might want him for the job, though obviously they'd have to get over their instinctive loathing of Catholics first.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2019, 12:33:18 PM

Who would you all prefer as the next High Priest?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 May, 2019, 12:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2019, 12:33:18 PM

Who would you all prefer as the next High Priest?

Peter St John.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 May, 2019, 12:46:37 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 24 May, 2019, 12:38:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2019, 12:33:18 PM

Who would you all prefer as the next High Priest?

Peter St John.

You already had him. Or at least a wanking mental case telepathically animated by him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 May, 2019, 01:14:18 PM
That Nelson Kreelman has some sound ideas...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 May, 2019, 01:21:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 24 May, 2019, 12:46:37 PM
You already had him. Or at least a wanking mental case telepathically animated by him.

Just the one...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 May, 2019, 02:05:28 PM
Dave



(the orangutan not the gammon-faced Chipping Norton twat who got us in this mess)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 May, 2019, 02:20:21 PM
It'll be a Brexiteer friendly Boss whoever the Tories vote in for their next Leader. Prepare for fuel hikes and paying more for less. Modi's unexpected victory in India shows the rightward way the world is tilting. Tory strategists would have noted it too. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 May, 2019, 02:21:50 PM
You're not a million miles away from Adam Susan either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2019, 02:44:52 PM

Over a million views for this thread.

What have I done? :(

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 24 May, 2019, 02:48:29 PM
Rescued a hundred other threads!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 May, 2019, 03:42:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 May, 2019, 02:44:52 PM
Over a million views for this thread.

Mostly that's just me hitting refresh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 May, 2019, 11:13:22 PM
Not often, but sometimes, I'm proud of my fellow citizens and our democracy. An utter triumph for the Greens, my own No. 1 in every election since I was old enough to vote, this time partly on the strength of one young woman's televised drubbing of our home-grown racist candidate* and partly on the commitment of our schoolkids to mass protest and single-issue politics. No party, no candidate in furure elections, can affird to ignore this result. The hard decisions seem to be on the table at last. Finally the tables have started to turn. Talkin'bout a revolution.

Oh, and 87ish% in favour of reducing time restrictions on divorce. 87%. Yet again that's how you do referendums, neighbourinos.


*7% of the vote in his constituency. Ahahahahahahaha. Won't stop him being invited to chat shows and op-eds, but a steel toecap to the electoral nadgers is better than nowt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2019, 06:58:05 AM
Delighted to hear it.  Our own rich reality-TV racist left out in the cold.   And here he is doing the digital version of shouting at the traffic: https://extra.ie/2019/05/23/news/politics/peter-casey-m
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2019, 12:48:03 PM
Errr yes, that was all a bit effusive from me last night; rather too much happy juice taken. Still, yay!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 26 May, 2019, 01:49:48 PM
Given that 50% of those who actually did bother to get off their arse and vote, continue to support those fuck-wits in FF & FG*, methinks that they could have done with a healthy dose of Happy Juice too.

Having been a lapsed Green voter - in protest at their deal with FF - I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt, and as leaders go, Eamonn Ryan always impressed me and seemed to be down-to-earth and sensible. (I also wanted to make it as difficult as possible for any of the FFG and Labour Crowd too). So it was good to see the Greens doing so well.

A pity that the Left Wing parties had such a disappointing result. No doubt the usual excuses will be trotted out by those who did not exercise their franchise: "Ah shure, there's no point in bothering, sure dey're all the bleedin' same, an' anyway."

To which my response is: "Want to know one of the main reasons why the area that you live in is such a run-down, crime ridden and poverty stricken shit-hole? It's because of dense, apathetic Muppets like you who will invest all their energy in giving out about their situation on Talk-Radio shows, but when it comes to doing something as simple as voting people in to at least represent their concerns, they are too lazy to even bother".

And then I'll tell 'em to fuck off and stop annoying me, lol.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 May, 2019, 07:10:33 PM
Other rays of sunshine are leading astroturf-operation Irexit candidate Herman Kelly polling at less than 1% and Anti-Vax climate-denying racist nutter Gemma O'Doherty looking at a likely 1%.

I agree about the collapse of the left, but I have always voted Green no 1 and filled the rest of the sheet with Labour and the Socialist Worker variant of the day so its safe to say lefties can depend on my transfers . Living at the back of Jobstown my enormous ballot papers were thick with SF, PBP and independant affiliates. Reader, this time I struggled to fill half the boxes. It's all local opportunists, there's no coherent left wing block to vote for.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2019, 08:13:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 May, 2019, 07:10:33 PM
Other rays of sunshine are leading astroturf-operation Irexit candidate Herman Kelly polling at less than 1% and Anti-Vax climate-denying racist nutter Gemma O'Doherty looking at a likely 1%.


Great news.  Irexit and anti-vax are among the two most toxic and ridiculous policies out there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2019, 10:35:31 PM
Yorkshire, you let the side down.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 May, 2019, 10:45:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2019, 10:35:31 PM
Yorkshire, you let the side down.

You call a Yorkshireman... but you can't tell him much. :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 May, 2019, 08:05:14 AM
SNP gain share in Scotland. The Greens miss out, unfortunately.

Bafflingly, 1.9% of Scottish voters put their X beside Change UK. A party whose candidate explicitly said not to vote for them as it was a waste of a vote in Scotland. If you follow the news enough to know who Change UK are, surely you'd have picked up on that? The only explanation I can think is that some people only watch the BBC news and listen to BBC radio, where Scottish news is not news (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhL57cjN8xY).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 May, 2019, 08:15:18 AM
Labour continue to be utterly irrelevant in Scotland, finishing fifth. Their share of the dwindling unionist-but-won't-vote-Tory vote hijacked by the Lib Dems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 May, 2019, 11:21:42 AM
Rather than hating CHUK, Labour leaders should phone and thank them today. Without CHUK, Lib Dems would likely have two more MEPs and Labour would have two fewer. Still, not the worst night. Dance is still an MEP. Loads of new Greens and Lib Dems. Magid Magid won.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 May, 2019, 09:49:04 PM
CHUK fulfilled their own prophecies, becoming a useless protest vote that only weakened other groups by its existence.

Ah well.

Overall, its a clear vote for Remain. It won't be reported as such, because the Right utterly collapsed into its most poisonous element.

We're a divided nation and we're divided by this utter obstinate stupidity that has coalesced around a single, destructive idea. We'll be told again and again to heal those divisions but the only path to reconciliation we'll ever be allowed is utter capitulation to that stupidity, which was formed around division (and which is divided in and of itself - whenever not simply turned against the wider, complicated world).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 28 May, 2019, 09:14:24 AM
It's perhaps worrying to note that the parties that did well Brexit Party, SNP, Plaid Cymru are all Nationalists of varying shades. Bit of a sobering realisation but that seems to be the way of things at the moment — a retreat from integration towards separate Nations. I still suspect we'll be going out of the EU on the 31st of October just in time for Halloween. What horrors both economic and social come after that we'll have to endure. Perhaps a General Election might save us, but I doubt we'll get one. A new right-leaning Tory Leader would scupper any idea of that by chucking another billion quid at the Bronze Age Bigots Party from Northen Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 May, 2019, 09:50:18 AM
I know what you mean but at the same time Plaid here in the Valley's seems to be capitalising on Labour's balls ups along with the Brexit party.  Plaid may have some unfortunate tendencies but they also have a social-democratic dimension that they are channeling against local authorities and the Labour led Welsh Assembly very effectively. 

Farage has tapped the 'victim' mentality that seems to be behind the pro-Brexit vote in this part of the world.  It doesn't help that successive governments' neglect has left too many communities reliant on EU money or that the Welsh Assembly have fairly consistently squandered that money.  All that matters is that little has changed since the collapse of the main industries back in the eighties, or that to get even a poorly paying job you need to commute crazy distances (okay, maybe not crazy but with limited options a 10 mile journey can take over an hour at the wrong time of day on a regular basis).  So just like Plaid, he is harnessing discontent effectively.

In the meantime Labour seems to have crawled up its own backside.  It has been notable by its complete absence in recent weeks.  Whilst Farage has carefully stage managed his appearances, the local donkey's have pretty much vanished.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2019, 10:36:03 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 28 May, 2019, 09:14:24 AMIt's perhaps worrying to note that the parties that did well Brexit Party, SNP, Plaid Cymru are all Nationalists of varying shades.
Well, first, the biggest winners of the night were arguably the Lib Dems. The next biggest winners were probably the Greens. Lib Dems are unionist, but not nationalist. Like the Greens, they are internationalist. Also, SNP/Plaid are pro-independence but internationalist in outlook. There's no real overlap in policy between them and whatever vanity project Farage is currently doing.

QuoteBit of a sobering realisation but that seems to be the way of things at the moment — a retreat from integration towards separate Nations.
Again, it's not fair to conflate, say, Scotland, which rightly feels is being forced out of the EU against its will, and wants to be part of a union of countries, with BXP, who seem to think the UK can magic back the days of Empire, where we told everyone else what to do. SNP are collaborative-minded; BXP are isolationist disaster capitalists. As Tjm86 says, Plaid are along similar lines to the SNP in these regards.

QuotePerhaps a General Election might save us, but I doubt we'll get one.
'Volatile' is perhaps the best descriptive term of a GE. There's no telling what we'd get. Current polling suggests anything from a small Labour majority to a landslide BXP one, depending on a few percentage point tweaks. FPTP to some extent 'protects' the current big two, but there are tipping points that are now quite easily reached. Even if a party won a majority, it would be in a deeply undemocratic manner (some projections put Labour in government on 28% of the popular vote).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 May, 2019, 12:38:52 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 May, 2019, 09:50:18 AM
All that matters is that little has changed since the collapse of the main industries back in the eighties, or that to get even a poorly paying job you need to commute crazy distances (okay, maybe not crazy but with limited options a 10 mile journey can take over an hour at the wrong time of day on a regular basis).


I thought an hour commute was pretty normal, but point taken...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 May, 2019, 01:28:50 PM
I'm just relieved that I won't be represented by Tommy Robinson, who polled a humiliating 2.2% and lost his deposit - of course, this is all part of a media establishment plot to censor him, he said as he slunk out of the count early.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2019, 06:40:26 PM
Why does Jeremy Corbyn keep insisting that the Labour Party has a clear Brexit policy?  It seems like most voters are voting to either leave Europe (Brexit) or not leave Europe (remain).  Labour's policy is Bremain, or Rexit.  I can understand his dilemma (Labour voters are a mix of the two sides), but he looks pretty stupid sitting on the fence losing both sides at the same time.

And now I even feel sorry for Alistair Campbell (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48434842) (a wee bit).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 28 May, 2019, 07:21:29 PM
My reading of it may be an over simplification, bbut it seems simple to me:

First off, get a General Election so Labour can renegotiate a "Workers" Brexit.  Failing that, a second referendum

The only confusion I can see there is why you wouldnt get a ref on the "Workers" Brexit, but presumably it isnt a great leap of logic to say if Corbyn wins an election on the promise of said "Workers" brexit by such a margin he can get it through Parliament, then there is assumed consent granted from the Election result?

Not difficult to understand, but would be simpler as "second ref on ANY deal", though knowing what we know about how referendums can bloww up in your face, perhaps there is method in the madness?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2019, 07:29:01 PM
The problem is Labour has intentionally positioned another referendum in an unreachable position, and that's after the entire thing was knobbled at conference anyway. A slew of CLPs demanded Labour come out in favour of a second ref. 80% of members are in favour. 75% of voters. So, being the great democrat he is, Corbyn decided along with Milne and McClusky that all those people could go fuck themselves, because they all want Brexit.

As for Labour's "workers" Brexit, I've still no idea what the hell that is. From what I can tell, Labour's Brexit position is almost identical to May's. Legally speaking, there's barely a sheet of paper between them. The only thing that stops Corbyn three-line-whipping in favour of the withdrawal agreement is that it doesn't have Labour branding.

Even today, after being given a kicking by the Lib Dems, and only ending up ahead of the Greens on MEP count because CHUKTIGWTF acted as a remain spoiler, they STILL can't come out with a unified policy. Corbyn wants to piss about for four months, for reasons. Abbott wants a second referendum, but stops short of saying Remain would be an option. Thornberry has apparently had enough, and has thrown her hat into the ring for "I'd quite like Corbyn's job" and has said a second ref under all circumstances. Although, given her form, she'll probably backtrack on that by tomorrow.

There is no method in the madness. Labour probably thought triangulation was going well. From what I hear from Labour activists, they still do, largely on the basis they are "five points ahead of the Tories". Yes, well fucking done, guys. You've just managed to lose support less rapidly than they have, and so while they've slumped from ~43% in polling to 23%, you've gone from ~40% to 28%. Although the latest polling suggests that's more like 23. And the Tories are on similar. As are the Lib Dems and BXP. Which under FPTP makes for the most volatile electoral situation imaginable, where we could see anything from a big Labour majority to a full-on BXP majority, just from a few percentage points going one way or the other.

Still, a second referendum would be too dangerous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 28 May, 2019, 08:01:40 PM
don't disagree with any of that, barring I'm not sure what the evidence is for Corbyn wanting a deal much like Mays - any source you can point to for that?

The problem is that whichever way you cut the cake, you have a potential 50/50 split that can never find common ground - its oil and water - if a second ref would win for remain, then surely Lib Dems are on for power next General Election rather than Corbyn?  And if not, then a second referendum is as likely to end in disaster anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 May, 2019, 09:20:24 PM

In a couple of decades, maybe sooner, there'll be a handful of pan-European parties vying to run all Europe and everyone will be squabbling over how crap and self-serving they all are right across the continent.

The same people will still be in charge of money creation, the same people will still be pulling the strings, and the rest of us will still be struggling and arguing and waiting for the Right Person to be elected so we can all be saved.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2019, 10:41:06 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 28 May, 2019, 08:01:40 PM
don't disagree with any of that, barring I'm not sure what the evidence is for Corbyn wanting a deal much like Mays - any source you can point to for that?

Once you strip away all of the things a future govt cannot be bound by (eg worker rights) and elements Labour are intentionally vague on (eg single market), you get a customs union. So that's basically what May wants, only she hasn't called it such. (Add on SM for goods to attempt to not fuck up Ireland too much.)

No chance of LDs getting power in a GE. Best they can hope for under FPTP must be around 100 seats – and that would take very special and specific circumstances.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 29 May, 2019, 08:30:16 PM
Well,Sargon killed UKIP.
We all knew that wasnt going to end well,but this is like next level bad.He nuked a whole political party,not many youtubers can say that.  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 May, 2019, 08:58:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 29 May, 2019, 08:30:16 PM
Well,Sargon killed UKIP.
We all knew that wasnt going to end well,but this is like next level bad.He nuked a whole political party,not many youtubers can say that.  ::)

No, he didn't. UKIP was always a Farage vanity project — the Brexit Party was in the planning stages three years ago, when Farage realised that running a political party meant he (and his paymasters) couldn't exert sufficient control over its organisational structures. Farage just transferred the entire support base of UKIP to his 'new' party.

The new BXP project is a limited company over which Farage has complete control. It has no manifesto and no polices because it doesn't need them, and because Farage doesn't want to have to commit to anything that he might have to answer for down the line. It's literally broadcasting Farage's disdain for the democratic process in everything it does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 29 May, 2019, 09:10:51 PM
He didnt really help them,either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 June, 2019, 10:20:10 AM

INTERNATIONAL APPEAL: Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. (https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 June, 2019, 08:16:22 AM
Wish I could get my head around the 'truth' of 5G, it's such a sea of bizarre claims and potential consequences. 

Meanwhile, last night a dog-tired mind, and persistent longing of almost k.d. lang proportions for an electric camper van, led me on a deep-dive into the current facts of matters climatic. 

Short version: I'd invest heavily in suicide pill futures.

I look at the fatuous cultural inbreds vying to be the UK's Village Idiot, still campaigning largely on a platform of invented fear of handfuls of Latvian fruit pickers and the survivors of Britain's highly-profitable bombs, and I try to imagine what's going to happen in our or (at best) our children's lifetimes when literal BILLIONS of people rock up at our drowned doorsteps once much of Africa, Australasia, and all of India become completely uninhabitable over the next 70 years . They're diverting your country's future into a dead end over lies about a non-existant 'flood' of swarthy rapists, while real inescapable horror bears down on us all, just not in the current electoral cycle.

Meanwhile the Irish government, another unelected PM* by the way, kvetches about hotel-room toiletries and tree felling for bus corridors.  For the love of humanity, GET A FUCKING SHIFT ON.

Anyway, all-hail CBT, not so very long ago I'd be non-functional and non-verbal this morning, instead of pushing on with work and planning a camping trip. La-la-la-la-la-la-la.



*I KNOW.  But when almost all electoral rhetoric is about Comrade Hamas and Ol' Strong & Stable, the cult of party leader personality means a PM is effectively chosen by the electorate in a GE.  Or in the case of both May and Varadkar, not.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 June, 2019, 09:45:22 AM
5G reminds me of the exact same shit that happened with Wi-Fi back in the day, people freaking out because it would give them cancer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 June, 2019, 11:21:55 PM
I think we can all agree that Boris Johnson has been punished more than enough by having to wait almost two years longer than he should have to become Prime Minister.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 June, 2019, 05:41:16 PM
Sorry, is this the Political Thread or the "Incendiary Trolling Thread"?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 June, 2019, 05:59:11 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 June, 2019, 05:41:16 PM
Sorry, is this the Political Thread or the "Incendiary Trolling Thread"?

Pretty sure that was a joke?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 June, 2019, 06:23:05 PM
Well I would have thought so considering the Ursine Academic's track record.  You never can tell though.  Someone might recently have outed him as a closet BloJo fan and he was fully embracing his new found freedom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 June, 2019, 06:33:04 PM
I was a big fan of Bojo as London mayor because London is shit and they deserved him.  I am not a fan of Bojo as everyone else's problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 15 June, 2019, 09:30:35 AM
The 'Ugliest' Beauty Contest in Britains history continues. You desperately try to find some sensible policymaker, but there are no ones currently present. It looks like the last of the Great Apes is going to walk into Downing Street, and then steamrolls us out of Europe. BoJo's a Right Wing Loony despite the slightly bumbling, toffish manners. The Square Mile will be the only ones sleeping happily over his appointment. If you're a Car manufacturer or worker kiss your job goodbye and say hello to more money for the Rich under the guise of 'Deregulation.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 June, 2019, 09:44:44 AM
It's been well known that's he's a lying scumbag for years - Eddie Mair called him out 6 years ago:
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/06/12/a-bbc-presenter-branding-boris-johnson-a-nasty-piece-of-work-has-gone-viral/ (https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/06/12/a-bbc-presenter-branding-boris-johnson-a-nasty-piece-of-work-has-gone-viral/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2019, 11:54:52 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 June, 2019, 09:44:44 AM
It's been well known that's he's a lying scumbag for years - Eddie Mair called him out 6 years ago:
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/06/12/a-bbc-presenter-branding-boris-johnson-a-nasty-piece-of-work-has-gone-viral/ (https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/06/12/a-bbc-presenter-branding-boris-johnson-a-nasty-piece-of-work-has-gone-viral/)
.

That's the thing, isn't it?  He isn't a bumbling buffoon at all; that's the public image he has carefully crafted. He's a cynical, conniving weasel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2019, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2019, 11:54:52 AM
...  He's a cynical, conniving weasel.

Or as most people refer to them:  a Tory politician.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 15 June, 2019, 12:37:20 PM
He is both - bumbling and lazy AND a nasty piece of work
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 June, 2019, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 15 June, 2019, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 June, 2019, 11:54:52 AM...  He's a cynical, conniving weasel.
Or as most people refer to them:  a Tory politician.
Ftfy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2019, 04:22:54 PM
I don't think there's much of the bumbler about Johnson. He plays the part of hail-fellow-well-met with complete cynicism, somehow selling himself as a plain speaker puncturing pomposity while simultaneously speaking in meaningless riddles and being consumately pompous himself. He chooses to be shit at every brief, because he doesn't care, it suits him, and he knows it doesn't affect his support one bit.

Truth, loyalty and duty are meaningless sounds to be uttered at will but never embraced, and he is without a single constant principle other than the Divine Right of Boris. He's a walking parody of the ambitious politician.

That there was ever a possibility that this man could hold your highest political office is a stain on your democracy. That any sane person could see themself as represented by him, when all he could ever imagine doing for a constituent is exploiting them.

Where's Rik Mayall when you need him.  :'(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 15 June, 2019, 04:56:50 PM
#possibly, but the recurring theme of anyone who has worked for him in political office is his laziness and vaguenes, leaving all the decision making and anything approaching work to everyone elsse - he doesnt seem to switch off the bumbling to become a razor sharp political machine.  He certainly uses the bumbling to mask his many deficiencies, but the bumbling would appear to be ingrained.

If it wasnt for his massive ego, I wouldnt be surprised if he sabotaged his bid, if he had enough self reflection to consider what the job will ask of him
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 June, 2019, 08:04:29 PM
Sure, don't mean to imply he's remotely competent at anything other than being Boris, I'm sure he's a worthless lazy charlatan through and through: I just think all his alleged bumbling is calculated, and in ultimate service of his ambitions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 June, 2019, 04:51:18 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 15 June, 2019, 04:22:54 PM
I don't think there's much of the bumbler about Johnson. He plays the part of hail-fellow-well-met with complete cynicism, somehow selling himself as a plain speaker puncturing pomposity while simultaneously speaking in meaningless riddles and being consumately pompous himself. He chooses to be shit at every brief, because he doesn't care, it suits him, and he knows it doesn't affect his support one bit.

Truth, loyalty and duty are meaningless sounds to be uttered at will but never embraced, and he is without a single constant principle other than the Divine Right of Boris. He's a walking parody of the ambitious politician.

That there was ever a possibility that this man could hold your highest political office is a stain on your democracy. That any sane person could see themself as represented by him, when all he could ever imagine doing for a constituent is exploiting them.

Where's Rik Mayall when you need him.  :'(

This is what I was trying to say, albeit less eloquently.  I remember hearing that he deliberately ruffles his hair before meeting the press. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest; it's this cuddly scatterbrained image that has worked very well for him.

The fact that people are buying it amazes me.  What also baffles me is how the UK consistently chooses members of the upper classes to represent working people (and I speak as a half-Brit myself).  A no-deal Brexit will be water off a duck's back for a privileged twat like Mr 'Fuck Business' himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 June, 2019, 06:37:26 PM
When Change UK launched, I had to block an ex-droid who was rt'ing them uncritically, as it was utterly painful to watch someone whose work I had respected be publicly suckered into the back of a clown car with the promise of free sweets.  People are absolutely dumb enough to vote for Bojo, especially once the media falls in line after his coronation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 June, 2019, 01:42:56 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 June, 2019, 04:51:18 PM
I remember hearing that he deliberately ruffles his hair before meeting the press. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest; it's this cuddly scatterbrained image that has worked very well for him.


I've heard the same.  Also, that the incident where he was 'trapped' on a zip wire was similarly staged and was timed to coincide with news that the Party didn't want on the front pages that day (though I've not been able to ascertain what story that was).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 27 June, 2019, 01:52:21 PM
Today, I've mostly been feeling sick and angry at children sleeping on concrete floors behind chain link fences with 24/7 lighting, separated from their parents and with 10 year olds forced to look after five year olds. Not being provided toothpaste, brushes, soap, beds. Children as young as four months and none older than 13. The guards getting angry and punishing them by taking away beds as punishment. Making 'prison bosses' by promising special treatment to older children if they keep the rest in line.

https://boingboing.net/2019/06/26/trump-official-says-caged-chil.html
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/the-inhumane-conditions-at-migrant-detention-camps.html

Or just sending a four year old on a plane to another country without telling anyone.
https://boingboing.net/2018/10/12/ice-deporting-separated-4-year.html

This is Evil. These are children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 03:56:02 PM
You're talking about the US concentration camps that the current regime is using.  The US president blames ... wait, there's a list ... the Democrats (who didn't enact the policy), the migrants (many of whom are seeking asylum) and the Mexicans (for not being a defined "safe" country).

If they'd just all stop being the way they are, he argues, he wouldn't have to separate children from their families and lock them up in concentration camps.  (Yes, he's the victim!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 27 June, 2019, 06:55:03 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 03:56:02 PM
You're talking about the US concentration camps that the current regime is using. 

That's exactly how I described them to a colleague yesterday. I don't think there's anything that upsets or angers me more than the suffering of children, but the fact this is an official government policy fucking beggars belief. It makes the shower of callous, incompetent bastards running this country look almost kindly, save for the fact they're not loudly and forcefully condemning it as they damn well should be.

I want to do something to help, but I'm at a complete loss.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 07:40:47 PM
CNBC: Here's where to donate to help migrant children and families at the border (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/20/where-to-donate-to-help-immigrant-children-and-families-at-the-border.html)

Charity Navigator: Immigration and Refugees (https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=4665)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 27 June, 2019, 09:09:33 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 07:40:47 PM
CNBC: Here's where to donate to help migrant children and families at the border (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/20/where-to-donate-to-help-immigrant-children-and-families-at-the-border.html)

Charity Navigator: Immigration and Refugees (https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=4665)

Thanks, I appreciate it.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 June, 2019, 11:13:11 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 07:40:47 PM
CNBC: Here's where to donate to help migrant children and families at the border (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/20/where-to-donate-to-help-immigrant-children-and-families-at-the-border.html)

Charity Navigator: Immigration and Refugees (https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=4665)

You know, I think I will.  I always feel helpless and overwhelmed when I think of the insane and sinister things this ridiculous US president is doing , but at least this way I can do something small to help.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2019, 11:29:40 PM
I feel as helpless as anyone: I live in the US currently, and there feels very little I can do practically to stop what I find to be a hateful administration from doing a raft of things I find abhorrent.

I'm glad Robin asked the question, because it made me seek an answer that is at least within reach.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 June, 2019, 11:09:46 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 27 June, 2019, 06:55:03 PM
It makes the shower of callous, incompetent bastards running this country look almost kindly, save for the fact they're not loudly and forcefully condemning it as they damn well should be.


Also I'm pretty sure they'd do exactly the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.  Actually - didn't they effectively take away statehood from somebody who otherwise would have been born a UK citizen?  Not that it makes any difference now, because the child died...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 June, 2019, 11:45:48 AM
What really gets me is the fact the majority of these shitebags claim proudly to be Christians.

Say what you want about religion etc. but there is very little in their words, actions that would lead me to believe they have a single shred of Christian values, or humanity in them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2019, 12:01:33 PM

This is the kind of thing that, to me, highlights the basic problems with statism. It doesn't really matter what atrocities are occurring because, if one doesn't like it, all one has to do is put up with it for a few years and then vote for somebody else in the (forlorn) hope that they'll put things right. Just like Obama promised to do with Guantanamo Bay.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 June, 2019, 12:59:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 28 June, 2019, 11:09:46 AMAlso I'm pretty sure they'd do exactly the same thing if they thought they could get away with it.

They've been doing it for years in for-profit detention centers like Yarl's Wood, it's just that British laws being what they are to protect the interests of private companies, the administration of Yarl's Wood didn't have to grant access to elected representatives (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/22/diana-abbott-asks-for-explanation-over-denied-access-to-yarls-wood) like they did in the US, so we've never seen the default conditions in YW, we only know male guards have strip-searched young girls on a regular basis, and there have been multiple sexual assaults (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/shine-a-light/truth-about-sexual-abuse-at-yarls-wood-detention-centre/) and suspicious deaths (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26814261) which the police have been prevented from investigating, sometimes by the rapid - and illegal - deportation of the victims or witnesses.
The only difference between what happens in the US and what has been happening in the UK for years is that the UK government has been able to keep a lid on it (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/un-human-rights-investigator-denied-access-to-yarls-wood-immigration-centre-9262941.html), and the US is taking steps to copy the UK setup by moving their detention centers onto military bases where taking photos or filming is forbidden under national security laws.

As has long been the case with concentration camps, the UK has led the way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2019, 04:56:15 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 June, 2019, 11:45:48 AM
What really gets me is the fact the majority of these shitebags claim proudly to be Christians.

Say what you want about religion etc. but there is very little in their words, actions that would lead me to believe they have a single shred of Christian values, or humanity in them.

That is most definitely the biggest problem faced by Christians.  Way too many that still act in ways that are anything but Christian.  I get why Jeanette Winterson wrote the way she did in Oranges.  The persistent selectivity of too many who claim to be followers of Christ and look to the Bible for guidance but have a dangerously selective understanding of the Gospels, never mind the Old Testament. 

I always thought that Bartlett nailed it in the West Wing when he pulled up a talk radio host.  He baited her into agreement on what Leviticus says about homosexuality and then really went to town on her appreciation and understanding, showing how foolish she was.  It was a perfect rebuttal to all those who use scripture to persecute.

If anyone ever asks, I always say I'm a practising Christian because I'm crap at it and have still got loads to learn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 June, 2019, 06:01:18 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 June, 2019, 12:59:34 PM... and suspicious deaths (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26814261) which the police have been prevented from investigating, sometimes by the rapid - and illegal - deportation of the victims or witnesses.

Is there more to this? There's nothing particularly suspicious about this death in the report you link and it says there is (or should I say was, it was 2014) a police investigation taking place.

Regards,

Robin

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 June, 2019, 07:40:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 28 June, 2019, 12:01:33 PM

This is the kind of thing that, to me, highlights the basic problems with statism. It doesn't really matter what atrocities are occurring because, if one doesn't like it, all one has to do is put up with it for a few years and then vote for somebody else in the (forlorn) hope that they'll put things right. Just like Obama promised to do with Guantanamo Bay.

I find this a bit of a reductionist argument as it suggests that there's effectively no difference between Obama and Trump in terms of policy and (crucially) effect: but there is.  (It's true that Obama wanted to close Gitmo and found that he couldn't, but it doesn't follow that he was ineffective in all his policy aims.)

(You're also abusing the term "statism" by equating it with democracy.  One could summarize your point as "the problem with statism is that it's an ineffective democracy".  But not all states are democratic.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 June, 2019, 07:55:55 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 June, 2019, 11:45:48 AM
What really gets me is the fact the majority of these shitebags claim proudly to be Christians.

Say what you want about religion etc. but there is very little in their words, actions that would lead me to believe they have a single shred of Christian values, or humanity in them.

I don't see what Christian values have to do with being humane.  It surprises me not one jot that people who are prepared to commit evil acts also identify as being Christians (because it happens with such frequency).  Christianity is all about control (of our thoughts and actions), a lack of foresight (take no thought for the morrow) and is founded on the idea that blood sacrifice is a positive force.

There's been quite an effective marketing campaign that suggests that Christian values means being nice, but (as with most marketing campaigns) the thing you're being sold doesn't quite measure up.  Check the small print.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2019, 09:29:46 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 June, 2019, 07:55:55 PM

I don't see what Christian values have to do with being humane.  It surprises me not one jot that people who are prepared to commit evil acts also identify as being Christians (because it happens with such frequency).  Christianity is all about control (of our thoughts and actions), a lack of foresight (take no thought for the morrow) and is founded on the idea that blood sacrifice is a positive force.

There's been quite an effective marketing campaign that suggests that Christian values means being nice, but (as with most marketing campaigns) the thing you're being sold doesn't quite measure up.  Check the small print.

Hmm, there is a lot here to unpick.

Not surprising that individuals willing to commit evil acts identify as Christians?  Aye, fair point.  This is a problem that is definitely not unique to religion but that many religions have to deal with, that it can be used to justify the most grotesque acts.  The fact is though that such acts have been committed by religious adherents and committed atheists (Communist Russia and China).  It does seem that ultimately anyone who wants to commit atrocities against another can find some sort of justification.

Christianity is all about control.  I'm afraid you'll have to explain that one.  Catholicism has a rather unfortunate, and entirely justified, reputation for using guilt.  In fact there are a number of different branches of Christianity that tend to use the concept of 'sin' in a thoroughly unhealthy way.  If this is what you are referring to, I'm with you100%.  Unfortunately it does not fully square with what Christ preached but this is very much the problem that so many face.

No thought for the morrow?  That one you will definitely have to explain.  Please do.

Blood sacrifice is a positive force?  That one is probably the easiest of the lot.  Absolutely not.  The Levitical law was based on the concept of blood sacrifice.  Christ's point was that this was never going to work as you would spend your entire life sacrificing to try and make amends.  The key was that it was impossible but unnecessary.  Christ's death on the cross rendered the old Mosaic law irrelevant.  So it is not so much a case of positive force as it is redundancy.  There is no need to do anything to set things right as all debts are paid.

I think this is where I tend to part company with far too many 'Christians' who have issues with lifestyles that do not match their ideal.  Scripture is crystal clear on the fact that none of us are spotless.  Criticising anyone who lives a life that we feel uncomfortable about misses this point.  What is problematic though is that identity and behaviour have become conflated.  Or even that identity is so narrowly defined.  So rather than my being 'white, male, middle-class' being aspects of who I am, they potentially define me.  My sexual orientation becomes my whole being rather than part of who I am.  For those who have been persecuted for so long for this, it is easy to understand why it is so important.  To classify them as 'sinners' though is to miss so many fundamental points.  This is where Christians let themselves down so often to my mind.

Check the Small print?  Not so sure what you mean but to me this means the Sermon on the Mount.  That being the case I would agree 100%  Being 'nice' is not what Christians are called to.  Compassionate, understanding, etc, recognising that actually we are in no position to judge .... aye, there is a lot to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 June, 2019, 10:53:03 PM
Sorry (not much, though) to derail the politics thread but in for a penny.

I don't disagree that anyone is capable of evil, but there's an assumption made when someone who identifies as Christian does something evil that somehow that's a surprise.  My point would be that Christians have no special claim to being nicer than anyone else: and I'd even go so far as to say the reverse should be true given the teachings of Christianity (which is a broad brush, I'm aware).

So, to control.  "Whom God has joined together let no man put asunder".  So, God's in charge.  That's control.  It's especially unnerving as (because there's is no persuasive evidence at all for the existence of the God in question) it really means that humans who claim to be able to interpret the will of God are in control.  I say fuck 'em: they're no more in touch with God than I am with the Loch Ness monster.

The "no thought for the morrow" is partly from the Sermon ("Take therefore no thought for the morrow"), but also all the ideas of putting to one side things like saving up ("Gather not your riches up upon this earth") and defending yourself against aggressors ("Love your enemies" and "If a man strikes you on one cheek, turn the other cheek").  Very poor advice, really.  I would have thought prudently saving, considering the future carefully and not loving your enemies were all far more sensible.

You can't sensibly say that blood sacrifice isn't part of Christianity because of "Christ's death on the cross".  His death on the cross is the blood sacrifice I'm talking about.  Christianity is a belief in the benefits of blood sacrifice, by definition.  Unless somehow there are Christians floating about who think his death on the cross doesn't absolve us all of sin (itself a perverted notion that suggests we're all born wicked and need saved.)

I suppose if you cherry pick the nice bits of any religion (say, being compassionate), and put aside the bits you don't find nice (say, being homophobic) then how religious are you, really?  That seems like someone who has a moral compass and doesn't actually need religion to muddy things up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 07:13:03 AM

FS, you are correct - not all states are democratic. Fascist states employed concentration camps, communist states employed gulags and democratic states employ detention centres. Of course, democratic states' detention centres are less barbaric than concentration camps or gulags so at the very least we're moving in the right direction but this is hardly a ringing endorsement.

The fundamental problem with all states remains the same, and I've explored that problem here so often that it really doesn't need mentioning again.

Whether a state is executing human beings because of their beliefs or incarcerating human beings because they're foreign, evil though these practices are, these are merely symptoms of the same underlying flaw.

No matter our personal political views, I like to think that most people who contribute to this thread are against concentration camps, gulags and detention centres. In my view, we need to find a way of curbing the worst excesses of the state; things like persecution and starting wars. In democratic states, at least, governments are supposed to work in service of the people but this is demonstrably not the case. One of the bitter pills we have to swallow is that these detention centres are our fault. We allow our governments to do these things and, arguably worse, allow our taxes to be used to fund them - we are footing the bill for the infliction of all this misery. Just blaming the Trumps of this world for the excesses of governments and states, in my view, just doesn't cut it. We have to take responsibility and figure out how to bring our governments to heel.

I found your comment on another issue, "That's control. It's especially unnerving as (because there's is no persuasive evidence at
all for the existence of the God in question) it
really means that humans who claim to be able
to interpret the will of God are in control. I say
fuck 'em: they're no more in touch with God
than I am with the Loch Ness monster," to be particularly relevant. Simply replace the word "God" with the word "Government" and you and I would be in complete agreement. As I see it, government is as much a religion as Catholicism and is just as corrosive - moreso, in fact, as more people believe in the divine right of governments than the divine right of any particular religion.

In this aspect at least, I'm proud to declare myself a heretic.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 29 June, 2019, 10:51:49 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 June, 2019, 10:53:03 PM
I suppose if you cherry pick the nice bits of any religion (say, being compassionate), and put aside the bits you don't find nice (say, being homophobic) then how religious are you, really?  That seems like someone who has a moral compass and doesn't actually need religion to muddy things up.

Fair point.  Life is complex enough as is without adding to the mix.  I guess it comes back to the original point that there is a misconception that Christians are somehow nicer or more moral than others.  Ultimately there is nothing to back up such a claim and a hell of a lot of evidence to challenge it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 June, 2019, 11:03:05 AM
As I age, I increasingly find religion a tough topic to grapple with. I have some residual belief, due to Christian imprinting during childhood. I doubt that will ever go away, and I have major problems with the English educational system imposing by law a daily act of worship. School should be secular. (I doubled down on this view after a friend's child – fortunately from a different school to where mini-IP goes – coming home in floods of tears, because "daddy is going to hell". Something a teacher had kindly pointed out, because daddy was not a believer.)

I also recall a while back, a prominent politician – possibly Warsi – said something along the lines of it didn't matter so much which religion you subscribed to, as long as you had religious faith. Which sounded to be like a combination of desperation and bullshit. Personally, I don't care what religion someone subscribes to, so long as it doesn't impact on anyone else.

And that's the problem, and which brings it back to the politics thread. Too often, religion does impact on laws, rules and regulations. Even the basics of trading are impacted by the argument god decided you should rest on a Sunday (although, apparently, not for all of the Sunday – only before 10 and after 4, or something, in England and Wales – and not at all if you're a chef or a firefighter or...). It's also too often used as a stick, with hypocrites like Rees-Mogg arguing that he's driven by his Catholicism when it suits him, and entirely ignoring it when it's not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 June, 2019, 01:58:43 PM
Gay pride march in Dublin today - fair play, we've come a long way. I'll go in and check it out if I finish work early.

Not so impressive: online comments about wanting a 'Straight Pride' march and 'preferential treatment' being given to the LGBTQ community.  Translation: 'Why can't we go back to the time when the poofs were treated like shit? I felt safe then.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 06:25:02 PM

I'm a kind of agnostic pantheist. With delusions of godhood and a vicious case of the Farmer's.

Seriously.

They're itching like a bastard.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 June, 2019, 06:30:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 07:13:03 AM
One of the bitter pills we have to swallow is that these detention centres are our fault.

Victim-blaming, that is.  The excesses of an unfriendly government are not (de facto) the fault of its people.  Your brush (as usual) is too broad.  You offer revolution as a solution, but don't bother to look at history to see how inconsistent a solution that is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 07:22:42 PM

I never have and never will offer revolution as a solution. As you so rightly suggest, revolutions never work - it's just replacing one set of bullies with another, probably even worse, set of bullies.

Armed revolution is the traditional ultimate weapon against the state but it doesn't work and generally causes more problems than it solves. I do not want that.

As I've said before, the only revolution worth having is a revolution of the mind. Stop believing that the state can do whatever it wants. That's the only political revolution I want, for enough people to stop believing in what is at core an illusion and to start believing in themselves, in their own intelligence, their own empathy, their own creativity and their own rights and responsibilities.

The moment one person believes he has superior rights and responsibilities to the rest of us, be he tyrant, president, or revolutionary, the vicious cycle continues. Their power over us is what I see as the main problem. If what I see is true then it opens up a world of problems and opportunities which can be debated until the cows come home.

Ultimately, the only revolution I want is for all of us to have the power to say "no" and have that respected. Everything else after that is negotiable because, when carried on enough lips, the word "no" is more powerful than any tyrant, or president, or revolutionary.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 June, 2019, 08:11:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 07:13:03 AM
We have to take responsibility and figure out how to bring our governments to heel.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 07:22:42 PM
I never have and never will offer revolution as a solution.

I cannot square your endless circle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 June, 2019, 08:18:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 06:25:02 PM
I'm a kind of agnostic pantheist. With delusions of godhood and a vicious case of the Farmer's.


Uh... Farmer's?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 June, 2019, 08:19:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 June, 2019, 11:03:05 AM
Even the basics of trading are impacted by the argument god decided you should rest on a Sunday (although, apparently, not for all of the Sunday – only before 10 and after 4, or something, in England and Wales – and not at all if you're a chef or a firefighter or...).


That's only if the shop is big.  If the shop is small enough then god doesn't care what hours you work, any day of the week.  Makes sense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 29 June, 2019, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 June, 2019, 08:18:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 06:25:02 PM
I'm a kind of agnostic pantheist. With delusions of godhood and a vicious case of the Farmer's.


Uh... Farmer's?

"SO I HEAR YOU'RE A RACIST NOW FATHER?!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 June, 2019, 09:25:47 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 June, 2019, 08:18:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 06:25:02 PM
I'm a kind of agnostic pantheist. With delusions of godhood and a vicious case of the Farmer's.


Uh... Farmer's?

Farmer Giles. Rhyming slang, see
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 June, 2019, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 June, 2019, 09:25:47 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 June, 2019, 08:18:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 06:25:02 PM
I'm a kind of agnostic pantheist. With delusions of godhood and a vicious case of the Farmer's.
Uh... Farmer's?
Farmer Giles. Rhyming slang, see

Or: Local God who doesn't know whether to believe in himself or his fellow Gods heard to utter "Ooh, me grapes!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 June, 2019, 11:13:18 PM

Doctor gave me some suppositories. For all the good they did I might as well have stuck them up my arse...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 30 June, 2019, 07:43:52 PM
"I cannot square your endless circle" is a great line FS, I'm going to have to steal that one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 30 June, 2019, 07:47:05 PM
"Ooh, me Chalfonts!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 04 July, 2019, 03:00:07 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/07/border-patrols-oversight-sick-migrant-children/593224/

Couldn't get through this in one sitting without crying and wanting to murder a whole bunch of people simultaneously.

Quotea baby who'd been fed from the same unwashed bottle for days

Was just the start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 July, 2019, 08:12:37 AM

PLEASE MARK YOUR BALLOT ONLY TWICE: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48890803

In a matter of weeks, we'll be asked to choose whether the most complex series of logistical, economic and diplomatic challenges we've ever undertaken should be coordinated by this shambles or the shambles who were so much of a shambles they couldn't beat this shambles in 2017 (or the two previous attempts).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 06 July, 2019, 09:30:24 AM
I wouldn't worry, Hunt and Johnson's pathological terror of Scottish independence (Hunt in particular) may be giving them a hook to hang an 'abandon Brexit to save the union' plan on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 July, 2019, 09:47:06 AM
What was supposedly troubling the national psyche that it was driven to commit (at the very least) yubitsume?  Ah yes, the perceived democratic deficit of the EU. Better to let 160K foxhunting enthusiasts decide your fate. Although I don't think even Thomas Hobson could have pitched this pair of nags.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 06 July, 2019, 09:49:47 AM
Is it better to reign in hell than serve in heaven? That is the dilemma for Bojo and his cohorts of fuckwits. If the Union has to be sacrificed to get Brexit, then that's the price to pay. He's only interested in what the Square Milers want, and they'll be happy to be shot of any regulation particularly since the EU might start to enforce anti-corruption laws. The Freemarketeers care nothing for any history only for-profit, and they've got the Tories over a Barrel since their haemorrhaging money and supporters. Violence in Northern Ireland along the Border or in some English Towns has zippo meaning to them when there's the juicy prize of even more deregulation and weaker Governments. Divide and conquer. The economy will take a big hit after Brexit, but that's irrelevant when you've got a Yacht and a Mansion in the South of France.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 July, 2019, 09:53:59 AM
Quote from: Greg M. on 06 July, 2019, 09:30:24 AM
I wouldn't worry, Hunt and Johnson's pathological terror of Scottish independence (Hunt in particular) may be giving them a hook to hang an 'abandon Brexit to save the union' plan on.

I know as much about the internal life of Jeremy Hunt as I do about Love Island, but politics is just calculation and pragmatism.

63% of the wee toerags:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/politics/news/104672/grassroots-tories-would-sacrifice-union-if-it-meant-brexit-being


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 06 July, 2019, 10:55:42 AM
Maybe so, but Hunt's currently saying the opposite (with Johnson in broad but less specific agreement.) Probably more likely to get an indyref2 out of Johnson though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 July, 2019, 12:00:23 PM
If there's one immutable fact we know about each of those two men, it's that they are habitual and professional liars whose excuses for moral compasses are attached to a windvane of self-interest.  They'll do whatever suits them best on the day, and feck the rest of ye.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2019, 12:16:51 PM
Tories just won't allow a vote on Scottish independence: problem solved.
Northern Ireland?  They sat out the entirety of the Troubles and it was only once the Tories were gone that the GFA happened: no matter what happens in Northern Ireland, it's never been the Tories' problem and they won't change that attitude now.  Killing each other, is it?  WHO CARES?

The only silver lining in all this is that Prime Minister Johnson - the PM we have all worked hard to get and unarguably deserve - is such an egotist that he would go against the wishes of the Rothermeres and the Murdochs if he thought it was in his own interests to do so.
This shambling inbred fuckwit is literally the only possible person I could see stopping Brexit, simply because he thinks he could get away with doing so, and yes, I realise this is the absolute definition of a Hail Mary, but this is all you're getting.
Hunt on the other hand is genuinely dangerous.  He expertly oversaw the dismantling of the NHS and he would burn this whole fucking country without a second thought and then blame it on us for being flammable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 July, 2019, 02:47:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2019, 12:16:51 PM
They sat out the entirety of the Troubles and it was only once the Tories were gone that the GFA happened: no matter what happens in Northern Ireland, it's never been the Tories' problem and they won't change that attitude now.  Killing each other, is it?  WHO CARES?

I don't know about that.  Considering that the IRA came pretty close to killing Maggie in Brighton, the Tories became quite attentive.  Probably the bigger issue was / is that Tories don't have the first clue how to compromise.  For them the only option is to crush opposition and dissent.  The only safety under Tories is in compliance (and even that is relative).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 July, 2019, 02:57:05 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 July, 2019, 02:47:21 PM
Probably the bigger issue was / is that Tories don't have the first clue how to compromise.

Which was basically ignoring the solution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 July, 2019, 04:38:36 PM
Apparently, loads of party members were sent multiple leadership ballots, but the party don't intend to do anything about it because they "trust that their members know the rules and will only vote once"


So that's alright then, 'cos you can always trust a Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 July, 2019, 10:38:37 PM
A few extra ballots isn't going to make much of a difference, as they're going to install that chinless inbred by a large margin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 July, 2019, 11:29:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 July, 2019, 10:38:37 PM
A few extra ballots isn't going to make much of a difference, as they're going to install that chinless inbred by a large margin.

The beauty of this post is that you can pretend you were right whoever wins.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 10 July, 2019, 10:55:23 AM
Pro-roguing? We've been doing that since Helm was inserted!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 July, 2019, 05:28:24 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 10 July, 2019, 10:55:23 AM
We've been doing that since Helm was inserted!


:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 July, 2019, 07:53:55 PM
Was browsing the BBC news site:

(https://i.imgur.com/PJSZUoL.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 17 July, 2019, 12:16:48 AM
Go back where you came from.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that because a lot of people agree with me.



Disgusting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 July, 2019, 06:58:24 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 17 July, 2019, 12:16:48 AM
Go back where you came from.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that because a lot of people agree with me.



Disgusting.

It's unbelievable, isn't it?  A few years ago we would have been all over this thread in shock and dismay.  These days we're just shaking our heads sadly.  The water's getting pretty warm but we're staying put; there's nowhere to hop to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 July, 2019, 08:38:01 AM
He really is an utter cockwomble.

The people who rush to defend him deserve hounding to their dying day.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 July, 2019, 01:32:14 PM
Daily politicians say and do things that even 20 years ago would have meant a press hounding and a swift resignation. But then I wonder, have the middle-aged always thought exactly this about the politicians of the day?  I can almost hear the Baz Luhrmann lyrics...

And then Trump says "spics out!", or words to that exact effect,  and people DEFEND him,  and I'm pretty sure it's worse than any nostalgic idealism could possibly invent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 July, 2019, 02:10:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 17 July, 2019, 01:32:14 PM
Daily politicians say and do things that even 20 years ago would have meant a press hounding and a swift resignation. But then I wonder, have the middle-aged always thought exactly this about the politicians of the day?  I can almost hear the Baz Luhrmann lyrics...

And then Trump says "spics out!", or words to that exact effect,  and people DEFEND him,  and I'm pretty sure it's worse than any nostalgic idealism could possibly invent.

I wouldn't have thought that talking about "spaffing" in relationship to child abuse would have allowed one to continue working, yet it seems to be a qualification to become prime minister these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 July, 2019, 04:00:49 PM
"Oooh Sheridan, you're so PC! You can't say anything nowadays". According victims of abuse basic human dignity is not "so PC".

Johnson isn't qualified to run a tombola. If he showed up and volunteered to clean the toilets (no chance) at a community event, I'd run him before he could get us sued.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 July, 2019, 04:23:07 PM
investigating historic child abuse was described as money spaffed up the wall - BY THE MAN WHO WASTED A BILLION - YES A BILLION-  QUID OF PUBLIC MONEY (AGAINST EXPERT ADVICE) ON VARIOUS VANITY PROJECTS!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 July, 2019, 05:34:40 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 July, 2019, 04:23:07 PM
investigating historic child abuse was described as money spaffed up the wall - BY THE MAN WHO WASTED A BILLION - YES A BILLION-  QUID OF PUBLIC MONEY (AGAINST EXPERT ADVICE) ON VARIOUS VANITY PROJECTS!!!

Completely read that as INSANITY PROJECTS...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 18 July, 2019, 12:51:05 AM
And yet a very clever man (far cleverer than me) repeatedly told me the other night that the way it works is the Tories clean up Labour's financial messes. Labour spend it, the Tories save.

Despite being able to hear everything other one of my criticisms of the shambles of the Tory party and its actual record vs its hype (and the nature by which this hype is sustained), he wouldnt shift on that one. All evidence to the contrary, BoJo a shining, crystallized icon of the absolute utter waste of time and money they're capable of without any kind of positive return. Never mind overspending, it's literally setting fire to it so you stand in the faint light. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 July, 2019, 01:09:17 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 July, 2019, 12:51:05 AM
And yet a very clever man (far cleverer than me) repeatedly told me the other night that the way it works is the Tories clean up Labour's financial messes. Labour spend it, the Tories save.

Despite being able to hear everything other one of my criticisms of the shambles of the Tory party and its actual record vs its hype (and the nature by which this hype is sustained), he wouldnt shift on that one. All evidence to the contrary, BoJo a shining, crystallized icon of the absolute utter waste of time and money they're capable of without any kind of positive return. Never mind overspending, it's literally setting fire to it so you stand in the faint light. 

It's trickle-down theory, isn't it?  Giving lots of money to really rich people is good for everybody because (theoretically) they'll spend it on things and the money eventually gets down to the poor people.  And the rich people don't hoard it all or spend it on incredibly expensive pieces of artwork.

Also - you left out that the tories are the party of law and order, as we can tell from the glowing recommendations that the police, court system, probation services, prisons, et al have given the tories in the ninth year of their current rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 July, 2019, 02:59:05 AM
Quote
Labour spend it, the Tories save. 

Or Labour spend it on services, the Tories spend it on ... something offshore, probably.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 18 July, 2019, 08:26:08 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 18 July, 2019, 12:51:05 AM
And yet a very clever man (far cleverer than me) repeatedly told me the other night that the way it works is the Tories clean up Labour's financial messes. Labour spend it, the Tories save.

This is one of those myths (lies) that simply passes into perceived 'truth' by endless repetition. The actual numbers (https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/11/27/the-tories-created-two-thirds-of-the-uks-national-debt/) very clearly show that not only do the Conservatives borrow more than Labour when in government, Labour also repays more of the national debt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 18 July, 2019, 10:09:30 AM
That Boris speech. Sweet Jesus.

When we run out of Mars bars, will the UK finally see sense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 July, 2019, 04:25:39 PM
Quote from: Rately on 18 July, 2019, 10:09:30 AM
That Boris speech. Sweet Jesus.

When we run out of Mars bars, will the UK finally see sense?

It's only a suggestion, but it might be an idea if we all stopped calling him Boris, which plays into his own carefully constructed image of a cuddly, matey lad-next-door.  He's a cynical, calculating fuck that has never known anything other than how the entitled rich live.

He can have his surname like every other politician, or even better, that word I used for Farage that got me a week's ban from the forum.

Speaking of that particular profanity, Trump has his bovine followers shouting 'send her back'.  Where is it all going to end? The west is broken now, and it won't be fixed any time soon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 July, 2019, 05:00:40 PM
Yep. I'm in particular sick of the media getting sucked into the Boris thing. Stop using his first name, like he's Prince or Madonna. He's a fucking MP, like the rest of them. Use his full name!

Still, I guess he'll at least get to go down in history now, probably as the last PM of the UK, if not the last Tory PM. (I'm not optimistic enough to think this will bring down that party.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 July, 2019, 07:59:37 PM
Quote from: Rately on 18 July, 2019, 10:09:30 AM
When we run out of Mars bars, will the UK finally see sense?

Pretty sure the reaction to no Mars Bars/medicines/planes/jobs will be very far from sense: instead it'll be further misplaced rage at the EU, only fueling the careers of toerags like Johnson and Farage and demands for retribution and even more complete separation and union with the US.

Floating the idea that the UK will be anything other than injured prey for the US after Brexit should be enough to see any politician booed off the stage. Amazing that the English can understand in their very bones that 54 million > 5 + 3 + 2 million, and what power that confers, but not that 510 million > 325 million > 64 million, and what that implies. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 July, 2019, 08:35:48 PM
Boy, it sure is good that no harm came of pretending the left was riddled with antisemitism just so we could take potshots at Corbyn and Omar.  Now if you'll excuse me, I'm just off to see what this #SendHerBack thing is all about...

Welp.  Dunno how fucked we were before, but we're super fucked now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 July, 2019, 10:35:53 PM
Still hard for me to believe that this is where we've ended up: if you can't persuade your party and constituents of the value of your ideas, just tell lies and more lies and keep telling lies until you're in charge. And why stop then?

It feels like someone's found a glitch in a side-scroller where you just keep running in the same specific spot and nothing can kill you, and now all the kids are doing it and getting ludicrous scores and no-one else gets a game but equally no-one seems to care that IT'S TOTAL BULLSHIT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 19 July, 2019, 09:47:02 PM
It's also like lots of people are standing around saying about how good those players are and how they're the only ones playing it right and getting very self righteous and offended when anyone points out the flaws.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 21 July, 2019, 04:10:23 AM
Quote from: Theblazeuk on 19 July, 2019, 09:47:02 PM
It's also like lots of people are standing around saying about how good those players are and how they're the only ones playing it right and getting very self righteous and offended when anyone points out the flaws.

Yep. Sounds like the Dunning-Kruger effect. Kind of like unconscious incompetency.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/1/31/18200497/dunning-kruger-effect-explained-trump
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 July, 2019, 11:27:46 AM
The UK's now basically in the same space as the US, despite claiming otherwise. We have a broken electoral system (and, sorry, Labour, but you are very responsible for this after kicking the Jenkins Report into the long grass, due to your own arrogance), which is cementing arseholes in power; and we have a sizeable number of people now worked up into a frenzy to not only vote against their own best interests, but also in favour of the dismantling of democracy. This has turned from something merely deeply depressing (leaving the EU) to something that is getting genuinely fucking scary. I'm not sure there will be enough MPs to stop the UK heading somewhere very dark.

It says everything that 274(!) MPs voted against legislation designed to stop an executive coup that would literally cancel parliament, and that people were shocked at the scale of the defeat. TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FOUR MPs voted to make themselves irrelevant. And every day this kind of shit is in the conversation, the more it is normalised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 July, 2019, 01:19:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 July, 2019, 10:35:53 PM
Still hard for me to believe that this is where we've ended up

Don't blame me, I voted for the Greens.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 July, 2019, 01:26:26 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 July, 2019, 01:19:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 July, 2019, 10:35:53 PM
Still hard for me to believe that this is where we've ended up

Don't blame me, I voted for the Greens.

Heh!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 July, 2019, 12:22:42 PM
If anyone has not yet checked today's political news could I provide the following strong trigger warning:

today's developments may produce strong feelings of nausea, revulsion, terror, existential-angst, an overwhelming desire to defenestrate the device being used to view the news and could possibly induce suicidal tendencies.  The Samaritans are on standby and have enlisted additional staff to cope with anticipated demand.

Also, request to moderators; could this thread please be renamed "The Black Dog Thread?"

Thanks
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 July, 2019, 12:28:08 PM
Present mood:

(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fthingsthatmadeanimpression.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F07%2Fpicture-planetoftheapes_hell2.jpg&f=1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 July, 2019, 01:20:26 PM
I'm actually thinking of going and watching a few movies just to take my mind off things.  I'm trying to decide between:

On The Beach
Threads
The Day After Tomorrow
The Day the Earth Caught Fire
The Day After
Defcon 4
By Dawn's Early Light
Deep Impact

or
Dr Strangelove
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 July, 2019, 01:36:10 PM
Try A Boy and his Dog.  At least it has a happy ending.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 July, 2019, 01:56:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 July, 2019, 01:36:10 PM
Try A Boy and his Dog.  At least it has a happy ending.

Is that the one with the [spoiler]bestiality[/spoiler]?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 July, 2019, 02:26:29 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 23 July, 2019, 01:56:50 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 July, 2019, 01:36:10 PM
Try A Boy and his Dog.  At least it has a happy ending.

Is that the one with the [spoiler]bestiality[/spoiler]?

Asking for a friend, eh? 

Nah, not that I remember - sperm-milking machines and cannibalism, mainly. Although to be honest, I suspect we'd be lucky if there are sperm-milking machines in our future hellscape, and not just endless wankers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 July, 2019, 03:49:38 PM
Quote"The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Boris Johnson as Prime Minister..."

- Gordon Brown

Hang on, wait a minute. I've got that wrong.

Quote"The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister..."

- Boris Johnson
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 July, 2019, 06:58:10 PM

That's it.

I'm done.

There is nothing left for me to say except, 'I rest my case.'

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 23 July, 2019, 07:18:56 PM

BY JEREMY VINE   /  17 JUNE 2019

With four minutes to go, Boris Johnson ran in. I was already concerned ― maybe more concerned than Boris. It was an awards ceremony at the Hilton, Park Lane. The room was packed with financial people in bow ties. It was a couple of years before Johnson became Mayor of London. At this point he was a backbench Conservative MP and newspaper columnist. Right now he was due to make a funny speech.

In four minutes.

There I was, at 9.26pm, sitting with a tableload of London bankers, trying to answer their questions. "Will Boris actually arrive?" "Is he normally this late?" "Has he got lost?"

Suddenly ― BOOM. A rush of wind from an opened door, a golden mop, a heave of body and dinner jacket onto the chair next to mine, and the breathless question, at 9.28pm:

"JEREMY. Where exactly AM I?"

"Its the Securitisation Awards, Boris."

He said, "Right-o. And who is speaking?"

"You are."

"Good God," he cried. "When?"

I looked at my watch. "Um ― pretty much now."

I noticed we now had the attention of the whole table.

Boris asked for a sheet of paper. Someone produced a piece of A4, the reverse side of our menu for the night. He laid it on his thigh, below the tablecloth.

"Anyone got a pen?" he said. "Quick!"

A biro slid across the table. Very quickly, taking it, the future Mayor of London and Foreign Secretary began to write what looked like a plan for a speech. It was now past nine-thirty.

Looking at the scrap of paper I could make out very little of what his scrawl said. There seemed to be about ten words. There was one at the very top that I could make out:

SHEEP

and then, a few inches below that, another in capitals:

SHARK

but I could not read the rest of the scrawl. Boris harrumphed and groaned, as if straining at an idea. Then his arm was tugged and I heard the announcement: "Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome MP and journalist, Boris Johnson, to the stage."

Applause.

I pressed my palms into my trouser legs, ready for the catastrophe. And then I noticed ― he had accidentally left his page of notes on the table. Could I run up with them? It would be too obvious. He was already at the podium.

"Ladies and gentlemen ― errrrrrrrr," he began.

" ― errrrr, Welcome to THE International. Errrrr ― "

The catastrophe had happened. He did not know, could not remember, what event he was at. This is one of the biggest fears any speaker has, forgetting where they are.

Johnson then did a crazy thing. To find out where he was, he very obviously turned around and looked at the large logo projected at the back of the stage.

" ― to the International SECURITISATION Awards! YES!" he cried triumphantly, and to my amazement it brought the house down. There was a huge cheer. Everyone realised this was not going to be a normal speech. The chaos had descended on us, we were in it, and we were going to enjoy it.

"SHEEP," he began. He started a story about his uncle's farm and how OUTRAGEOUS it was that they couldn't bury animals that had JUST died, as they used to do back in the sixties, seventies and eighties. No, he said, EU regulations meant an abattoir had to be involved. "One died today. A SHEEP. And my uncle had to RING a fellow at an abattoir fifty MILES away. His name was Mick ― no, it was Jim ― no, sorry, MARGARET, that was it, MARGARET ... "

People were now, not just roaring with laughter, but listening. He continued.

"Which is why my political hero is the Mayor from JAWS."

Laughter.

"Yes. Because he KEPT THE BEACHES OPEN."

More guffawing around me. He spoke as if every sentence had only just occurred to him, and each new thought came as a surprise.

"Yes, he REPUDIATED, he FORESWORE and he ABROGATED all these silly regulations on health and safety and declared that the people should SWIM! SWIM!"

More uproar.

"Now, I accept," he went on in an uncertain tone, "that as a result some small children were eaten by a shark. But how much more pleasure did the MAJORITY get from those beaches as a result of the boldness of the Mayor in Jaws?"

Brilliant. The whole room is hooting and cheering. It no longer matters that Boris has no script, no plan, no idea of what event he is attending, and that he seems to be taking the whole thing off the top of his head.

I realise that I am in the presence of genius.

Something about the chaos of it ― the reality, I suppose ― was utterly joyful. The idea that this was the opposite of a politician, that suddenly we had an MP in front of us who was utterly real, who had come without a script or an agenda and then forgotten, not just the name of the event but his whole speech and the punchline to his funniest story ― I watched in awe.

Finally he said, "Right-o. Jeremy VINE is out here and he will be presenting the ― " (looks behind him again) " ― International Securitisation Awards ― " (cheering because he has said the name a second time) " ― and I ACTUALLY have some of those very trophies here." He starts handling one of the glass awards. "I suppose you could call this, not really an award, but a sort of elongated lozenge."

Laughter. A wave. Cheering. Applause.

I did something I have never done before. Ditched all the funny things I had planned to say as a warm-up to the awards, because I realised what I was saying could not be even faintly amusing after that. I had been completely blown off the stage.

I thought about that night for a long time. During the Blair years, we got used to a way of presenting information that was so mechanically smooth, so professional, that in the end we stopped believing any of it. This mastery of the message eventually backfired completely and came to be known as spin.

Was Boris, with his total lack of varnish, part of the new wave?

Eighteen months after the marvellous securitisation night, I arrived at an awards ceremony for a totally different industry.

"Is someone else speaking?" I asked.

"Boris Johnson," the organiser said, a frown appearing on her brow. "Do you know where he is?"

And here we were again. He was due to speak at nine-thirty. He arrived seven or eight minutes before the actual moment, heaving and laughing himself into the chair beside me.

"Jeremy," he said, "what is this?"

I told him. Others at the table helped. Did they have a pen, paper? Both were produced. A better ballpoint this time, and the back of the menu again. I watched, fascinated, as Boris pulled the paper tight across his thigh and wrote a few words ― yes, SHEEP was definitely one ― in a barely-legible scrawl.

Then he was on.

"It is wonderful, and a privilege, to be here at ― oh goodness."

Laughter.

He turns, reads if off the screen.

Shocked expression, as if ― that has honestly never happened before, my God, I am so sorry, how embarrassing to forget which awards I am at.

Louder laughter. The hair everywhere.

Into the tirade about the uncle who is not allowed to dispose of a dead sheep on his farm and had to call the man at the abattoir. "I can't remember his name. Mick ― no, Jim. No. Hang on. It was MARGARET ... "

Then to the Mayor from Jaws, who kept the beaches open.

A moment's pause. "I do accept that some small children were eaten by a shark as a result ...

https://reaction.life/jeremy-vine-my-boris-story/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 27 July, 2019, 04:13:09 PM
I think this song perfectly describes the current situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aItpjF5vXc

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 10:36:59 AM

I've just been listening to the latest Mindscape podcast, concerning democracy, and heard an intriguing idea. What if we were to establish a Third House, made up of randomly chosen "ordinary" people from throughout the UK to be a part of the governmental system?

What do you all think of this idea?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 01 August, 2019, 10:44:43 AM
 Only f it replaced the Lords. And how soon before 'parties' moved in, after all they are a handy short hand, and as seen recently you currently vote for the individual not the party they are a member of, so it could be argued this currently happens?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 August, 2019, 12:05:09 PM
How would a third house function? What input would it have? Would it be able to veto policy? The notion of random people being a roadblock is interesting. And I don't mean that in a positive way.

There are other options. The Greens, for example, are big into the idea of citizen assemblies (to assist/advise) and also 'committee government'. The latter probably sounds horrendous – government by committee, but their thinking is government should be more collaborative, and whipping should be omitted entirely.

As for our second house, I hate it in principle, but in reality it's done a lot more in recent years to protect our rights than the Commons. In part, this has been down to the Lords thinking about the long game, rather than whatever will get them elected in five years or fewer. There's something in that, although the manner in which Lords are appointed is clearly outrageous, as is the fact bishops have reserved/mandated places there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 12:17:44 PM

All valid concerns, which I share.

The Irish Citizens' Assembly (https://www.involve.org.uk/resources/blog/opinion/citizens-assembly-behind-irish-abortion-referendum) did lead to positive outcomes on same sex marriage and abortion - which only proves, of course, the potential of such a house.

I think it's possible, with the proper safeguards, processes and "powers,"* such a House of Citizens could provide a useful check on government.


*Sorry, I just had to put quotation marks around that word :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 August, 2019, 12:39:46 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 01 August, 2019, 10:44:43 AMand as seen recently you currently vote for the individual not the party they are a member of

I'm not sure about that, as most places would vote for a turd in a bowl if someone stuck a party rosette on it.  There's a reason most MPs who go independent after being elected on a party ticket don't call by-elections.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 August, 2019, 12:47:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 01 August, 2019, 12:39:46 PM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 01 August, 2019, 10:44:43 AMand as seen recently you currently vote for the individual not the party they are a member of

I'm not sure about that, as most places would vote for a turd in a bowl if someone stuck a party rosette on it.  There's a reason most MPs who go independent after being elected on a party ticket don't call by-elections.

The point is that you might think you're voting for a party, but you're actually voting for the individual (which is why MPs don't lose their seats if they quit or switch parties).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 12:50:04 PM
For this idea, there wouldn't be a vote - it would be more akin to jury service, with appointments lasting for maybe a year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 August, 2019, 01:33:32 PM
Great. Now how do people retain their careers if they are called up? (I live in constant fear of jury service, not because I don't want to serve, but because freelancers are not accounted for under the existing system. If you end up on a months-long trial, you may emerge to discover you have nothing left of your career.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 02:39:38 PM

Legislation? Opt-outs? Legal protections? Social attitudes?



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 August, 2019, 03:37:41 PM
Opt-out is the only thing that would work. But then that also causes problems, because you end up in the scenario where the only people who can take part are those who can – for whatever reason – afford to.

(With jury duty, I've discussed my particular circumstances with a lawyer and their response was basically "hope you don't get called up for a months-long trial". Fun times.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 August, 2019, 04:50:38 PM
What could go wrong by handing power over to a chamber composed of the knuckle-draggers who voted for Brexit and a Tory government till 2022?  The jury duty comparison is an interesting one, as juries are forbidden from exposing themselves to media that might influence their decision, and that is most definately an interesting idea to explore.  There's a Terry Pratchett novel where the politicians of a country are put in jail when they assume office, and I've always thought there's definite mileage in that notion.

I would want a 3rd chamber only if it was composed of people deliberately excluded from having a say in our current democratic processes, like prisoners, immigrants who live/work here, the under 18s, etc.  I don't see the benefit in forcing people into working as politicians, I mean if you just want to ensure greater participation, then make voting easier and/or compulsory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 04:55:16 PM
These are all implementation problems. Assuming these can be solved, or at least mitigated, would a House of Citizens be a useful addition to the governmental machinery and, if so, how? I'm not proposing this idea, or backing it, or defending it, but exploring the concept. As you all know, I despise the way government works but understand that most other people regard it as essential but flawed. This being the case, does the idea of a third house hold any value as a possible improvement?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 04:57:27 PM

(The above was posted before I read the Prof's post.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 02 August, 2019, 01:55:57 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 12:17:44 PM
The Irish Citizens' Assembly (https://www.involve.org.uk/resources/blog/opinion/citizens-assembly-behind-irish-abortion-referendum) did lead to positive outcomes on same sex marriage and abortion - which only proves, of course, the potential of such a house.

Scotland is trialling a Citizens' Assembly:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48759720
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 August, 2019, 05:47:54 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 August, 2019, 12:17:44 PM


The Irish Citizens' Assembly (https://www.involve.org.uk/resources/blog/opinion/citizens-assembly-behind-irish-abortion-referendum) did lead to positive outcomes on same sex marriage and abortion - which only proves, of course, the potential of such a house.



Hang on, weren't these the same referendums you rubbished at the time for being statist concoctions?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 August, 2019, 09:19:56 AM

Probably.

As I said, I despise the way government works and what it stands for - but most people don't. It's not going to be abolished any time soon, so at least I'm open to ways of improving it and bringing it more in line with the wishes of the people.

If people want to believe that the only rights they have are the ones their governments allow them, then at least let the people have a greater hand in the invention of those rights. Let people at least participate in the Grand Illusion rather than just be enslaved to it.

Things like citizen's assemblies and this third house, just like the rest of government, are fundamentally flawed ideas but they might at least be a step in the right direction - bringing "power" closer to its true source.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 03 August, 2019, 07:05:49 PM
I continue to be fascinated by UKIPs downward spiral...it appears there is really no end to it. Its been a rough patch for Stepfather of Akkad lately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 August, 2019, 07:29:13 PM
Expect the same for the Brexit Party when Farage is done with his latest vanity project, and jumps ship to something else that's temporarily less toxic (but then becomes the same right-wing wet-dream nightmare).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 01:44:29 PM

More than half of all US states (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories_of_the_United_States_by_population) have populations smaller than Scotland, and their major cities boast fewer residents than Glasgow.

Last year, there were 59 murders in Scotland. The only US state with fewer murders (total) was Rhode Island, which has a population 5 times smaller than Scotland but a gun homicide total 20 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.html) times greater than Scotland (https://www.gov.scot/publications/homicide-scotland-2017-18/pages/4/).

The US states with populations most directly comparable in size to Scotland (Minnesota, Alabama, South Carolina, Kentucky) have gun murder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_United_States_by_state#Murders) totals 40, 100, 140 and 90 times that of Scotland. With the exception of the twin cities of Minneapolis-Saint Paul, the largest urban centres in those states have populations smaller (much smaller) than Glasgow.

Of the two US cities in the news this weekend, El Paso has a population less than 1.4k greater than Glasgow but a gun murder total 10 (http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-El-Paso-Texas.html) times than that of all Scotland. The city of Dayton has a quarter of the population of Glasgow but a gun murder total 22 (http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Dayton-Ohio.html) times greater than Scotland (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-45572691) as a whole.*


(https://i.imgur.com/Mt17y1l.jpg?1)


* I can't find gun homicide stats for individual US cities, so that's based on the fact that more than two-thirds of all US murders involve firearms (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls), which holds true for the states (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/table-20) to which Dayton and El Paso belong. The UK placed heavy restrictions on the ownership of long-guns in 1988 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_the_United_Kingdom#The_Firearms_(Amendment)_Act_1988) and handguns in 1997 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/firearms-act-twenty-years-on-has-it-made-a-difference-dunblane-port-arthur-a8110911.html).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 August, 2019, 02:42:19 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 August, 2019, 09:19:56 AM

Probably.

As I said, I despise the way government works and what it stands for - but most people don't. It's not going to be abolished any time soon, so at least I'm open to ways of improving it and bringing it more in line with the wishes of the people.

If people want to believe that the only rights they have are the ones their governments allow them, then at least let the people have a greater hand in the invention of those rights. Let people at least participate in the Grand Illusion rather than just be enslaved to it.

Things like citizen's assemblies and this third house, just like the rest of government, are fundamentally flawed ideas but they might at least be a step in the right direction - bringing "power" closer to its true source.

Oddly enough,  we're on the same page.

My ideal society is radically different from the status quo. 

My imagined anarchist utopia would have had abortion clinics for years and human rights a given no matter who someone happens to be attracted to.

However, in my real society, women had died because my hypothetical clinics weren't there.  LGBT people who loved one another were not given the same freedoms as everyone else, and that had genuine negative effects on their lives, no matter how hard I believed that this shouldnt be so.

Voting in a referendum may be a compromise for an anti-establishment thinker, but it's one made in the name of other people''s welfare.

Refusal to do anything has the same results as apathatetically not bothering: nothing happens and the same people continue to suffer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 August, 2019, 03:36:51 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 01:44:29 PM

Of the two US cities in the news this weekend, El Paso has a population less than 1.4k greater than Glasgow but a gun murder total 10 (http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-El-Paso-Texas.html) times than that of all Scotland. The city of Dayton has a quarter of the population of Glasgow but a gun murder total 22 (http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Dayton-Ohio.html) times greater than Scotland (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-45572691) as a whole.*


I'm also wondering how Priti Patel would respond to the fact that both Ohio and Texas have Death Penalty statutes on their law books but have faced spree shootings this weekend.  In fact, how many of these incidents over the last few years have occurred in non-death penalty states (which are in the significant minority it would appear).  Or would this be an example of one of those inconvenient facts that undermines the deterrent effect of capital punishment?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 04 August, 2019, 04:13:49 PM
She never said she supported the Death Penalty despite all those times she supported the death penalty so I imagine she'd say nothing of any worth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 06:18:23 PM

The El Paso Shooting and the Gamification of Terror  l  August 4, 2019 By Robert Evans

As we've seen with two other mass shootings this year, the killer announced the start of his rampage on 8chan's /pol board. The poster also attached a four-page manifesto to the post, along with a document in his original post that included his name.

The El Paso shooter's manifesto and 8chan post show his radicalization and turn towards white suprematism, the Christchurch shooter's manifesto, and the video of his massacre, likely acting as major influences in his eventual attack. The most important takeaways from the El Paso shooting are twofold:

1/  8chan's /pol board continues to deliberately radicalize mass shooters.

2/  The act of massacring innocents has been gamified.

Ever since the Christchurch shooting spree, 8chan users have commented regularly on the terrorist's high bodycount, and made references to their desire to "beat his high score".

What we see here is evidence of the only real innovation 8chan has brought to global terrorism: the gamification of mass violence. We see this not just in the references to "high scores", but in the very way the Christchurch shooting was carried out.

The Christchurch shooter livestreamed his massacre from a helmet cam in a way that made the shooting look almost exactly like a First Person Shooter video game. This was a conscious choice, as was his decision to pick a sound-track for the spree that would entertain and inspire his viewers.

The Poway Synagogue shooter attempted to copy Tarrant in both these tactics, posting a musical playlist along with his shooting. The three 8chan massacres do represent an evolution in far-right violence, but they are very much tied to a decades-long tradition of murder.

On April 19, 1995, right-wing extremist Timothy McVeigh detonated a truck bomb outside the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. Four years later, in 1999, Erik Harris and Dylan Klebold killed thirteen of their classmates in Columbine High School in Colorado.

Prior to masterminding the attack Erik Harris wrote constantly of his dedication to Hitler and Nazi ideology. Dave Cullen, a journalist who studied the attacks and combed through Harris's journals, noted that the young killer was also obsessed with Timothy McVeigh. Cullen writes:

"In his journal, Eric would brag about topping McVeigh. Oklahoma City was a one-note performance. McVeigh set his timer and walked away. He didn't even see his spectacle unfold."

Harris and Klebold did not beat McVeigh's "high score" in their lifetimes. But to date the Columbine attacks have inspired at least 74 copy-cat attacks, which have killed 89 people and injured 126 more.

This is the way far right terrorism works: it is foolish, bordering on suicidal, to attribute attacks like the El Paso shooting or the Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting to "lone wolves". Both shooters were radicalized in an ecosystem of right-wing terror that deliberately seeks to inspire such massacres.

The Gilroy shooter specifically referenced "Might is Right", a white supremacist text by "Ragnar Redbeard". PDFs of this book have been deliberately spread on 8chan and 4chan for years, and it has become even more popular in the wake of the Gilroy shooting.

8chan's /pol board regularly hosts threads filled with right wing extremist literature like The Turner Diaries, a work of fascist speculative fiction that lays out how a right-wing insurgency based around seemingly random acts of terror could bring down the United States government.

The Turner Diaries was the favorite book of Timothy McVeigh. He cited passages from it directly in the manifesto he carried with him after bombing the Murrah building.

Until law enforcement, and the media, treat these shooters as part of a terrorist movement no less organized, or deadly, than ISIS or Al Qaeda, the violence will continue. There will be more killers and more bloody attempts to beat the last killer's "high score".

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/americas/2019/08/04/the-el-paso-shooting-and-the-gamification-of-terror/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 06:30:17 PM
They might be giving too much credit to autistic shitposters on various chans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 August, 2019, 07:01:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 06:30:17 PM
They might be giving too much credit to autistic shitposters on various chans.

Deep sigh. C'mon man, you're better than this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 07:20:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 August, 2019, 07:01:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 06:30:17 PM
They might be giving too much credit to autistic shitposters on various chans.

Deep sigh. C'mon man, you're better than this.
Your not going to find criminal masterminds on /pol/ . People post responses like that because they are dicks,not because of ideology. Its in horrible taste,but its not a terrorist hivemind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 07:33:27 PM

Stochastic Terrorism  l  JONATHON KEATS  l  01.21.1906:00 AM

n. The use of mass public communication to incite or inspire acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random.

In 2011, after the shooting of US representative Gabby Giffords, a Daily Kos blog warned of a new threat the writer called stochastic terrorism: the use of mass media to incite attacks by random nut jobs — acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.

The person who actually plants the bomb or assassinates the public official is not the stochastic terrorist, they are the "missile" set in motion by the stochastic terrorist.  The stochastic terrorist is the person who uses mass media as their means of setting those "missiles" in motion.

Here's the mechanism spelled out concisely:

The stochastic terrorist is the person who uses mass media to broadcast memes that incite unstable people to commit violent acts. 

One or more unstable people responds to the incitement by becoming a lone wolf and committing a violent act.   While their action may have been statistically predictable, the specific person and the specific act are not predictable. 

The stochastic terrorist then has plausible deniability: "Oh, it was just a lone nut, nobody could have predicted he would do that, and I'm not responsible for what people in my audience do."

The lone wolf who was the "missile" gets captured and sentenced to life in prison, while the stochastic terrorist keeps his prime time slot and goes on to incite more lone wolves.   

Further, the stochastic terrorist may be acting either negligently or deliberately, or may be in complete denial of their impact, just like a drunk driver who runs over a pedestrian without even realizing it. 

Finally, there is no conspiracy here: merely the twisted acts of individuals who are promoting extremism, who get access to national media in which to do it, and the rest follows naturally.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/1/10/934890/-

https://www.wired.com/story/jargon-watch-rising-danger-stochastic-terrorism/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 07:36:57 PM
Broadcasts meme to incite unstable people...Okay,is the problem memes or unstable people?How do we decide which memes might be dangerous?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 August, 2019, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 07:20:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 August, 2019, 07:01:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 06:30:17 PM
They might be giving too much credit to autistic shitposters on various chans.

Deep sigh. C'mon man, you're better than this.
Your not going to find criminal masterminds on /pol/ . People post responses like that because they are dicks,not because of ideology. Its in horrible taste,but its not a terrorist hivemind.


I know a number of people at various points on the autistic scale and with differing degress of Asperger's - none of them deserve to be placed in the same group as terrorists and murderers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 09:34:13 PM
Thats the thing, not everyone on 8chan is a terrorist.Its just shitposting.
Actually,the shooter also had a facebook and linkedin profiles,why is nobody investigating that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 August, 2019, 11:01:23 PM
Quote from: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 06:30:17 PM
They might be giving too much credit to autistic shitposters on various chans.

When did these board merge with Reddit to generate such utterly wrong headed and indirectly offensive guff as this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 04 August, 2019, 11:38:33 PM
Have you been to Reddit recently?  :lol:
Sorry if somebody felt offended,I was just using the term the imageboard users use to describe other users.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 August, 2019, 08:23:31 AM
Blaming racially-motivated radical terrorism and a complete lack of sensible gun control on autism is weak sauce. Pathetic, really. Your apology should be stronger than a sort of vague "hey, well, y'know, the Internet".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 August, 2019, 09:33:54 AM
'Autistic' has become this gross shorthand for all manner of woefully unjustifiable social profiling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 10:26:16 AM
Quote from: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 06:18:23 PM


2/  The act of massacring innocents has been gamified.

Ever since the Christchurch shooting spree, 8chan users have commented regularly on the terrorist's high bodycount, and made references to their desire to "beat his high score".

What we see here is evidence of the only real innovation 8chan has brought to global terrorism: the gamification of mass violence. We see this not just in the references to "high scores", but in the very way the Christchurch shooting was carried out.

The Christchurch shooter livestreamed his massacre from a helmet cam in a way that made the shooting look almost exactly like a First Person Shooter video game. This was a conscious choice, as was his decision to pick a sound-track for the spree that would entertain and inspire his viewers.


I'm not sure what to be more disturbed by here: the fact that Tooth predicted this idea decades ago in a Dredd one shot or that the line between the virtual and real worlds has become so dangerously blurred.  In regard to the latter, I'm not sure how surprised I should actually be.  Back in the early days of socially connected gaming with COD we ended up dealing with a physical fight in school that originated in the game itself.  This was a couple of 12 year olds scrapping.  Now we have a situation where individuals with access to real weaponry are acting out their experiences? 

The implications are distressing to say the least.  I want to be a little careful here as the relationship between certain types of games and terrorism / extremism / violence has a long and complicated, possibly even hysterical, history.  Certainly the vast majority of gamers are able to maintain a suitable distinction between games and reality.  The issue seems to be more linked to instability, isolation, exposure to ideas that feed distorted thinking and a distorted sense of connection that some virtual communities seem to create.  How on earth do we manage the complexity of this situation?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 10:37:15 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 10:26:16 AM

How on earth do we manage the complexity of this situation?


I think it starts with education - a winding down of the current Prussian model and introduction of a more Trivium-based method.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 11:58:12 AM
Sorry, that has to be the most inane response to any situation 'let schools sort it out'!  Society has to start taking responsibility for this and let schools get on with providing the basics. 

Kids are only in lessons 25 hours a week for 39 weeks a year.  If schools are to take on everything that society demands of them then this has to double, something that is never going to happen.

The other square I would like to see circled is this: teachers are universally panned as utterly incompetent yet at the same also expected to be able to solve every single social problem that we encounter.

[ .... and breathe!  Sorry Sharky, it just really p****** me off how schools are used as a dumping ground for problems people don't have the courage to confront]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 05 August, 2019, 12:22:32 PM
We don't need to get stuck in to changing present things because we'll be teaching kids better for the future
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 12:35:30 PM

I said it starts with education - and not the type of education we inflict on our youth today, which was designed not to educate but to produce obedient citizens suitable to be workers and soldiers. An education system that teaches people how to think and not what to think.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 12:35:30 PM
An education system that teaches people how to think

Pretty sure that's what I do in my job on a daily basis, but what would I know, I've only been a secondary school teacher for fourteen years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 August, 2019, 12:55:28 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 12:35:30 PM
An education system that teaches people how to think

Pretty sure that's what I do in my job on a daily basis, but what would I know, I've only been a secondary school teacher for fourteen years.

Does the curriculum support you in teaching children how to think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 12:57:47 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 01:12:17 PM

What's the most important thing you teach your students?

Is it to do as they're told and to ask permission? To eat when it's eating time and to ask permission if they want to perform some basic human function like going for a piss? Do you teach them that their sense of self-worth and achievement is provisional, based on approval from the system? Do you teach them that they have no choice but to do things the way you tell them and that they Must attend school or be punished? Do you teach them how to follow the subjects that appeal to them or that they must learn only the subjects available to them? Do you teach them that the word of the authority figure is law? Do you teach them to obey the bell and the clock without question? Do you teach them that helping each other is cheating? Do you teach them that the goal of education is to get a job? Do you teach them that they must conform?

These are the things I was taught and the way I was taught. I passed my old high school last week and was struck by all the new fences and gates erected within the grounds. It always felt like a minimum security prison and now it looks like one.

I recommend reading up on the ideas of John Taylor Gatto and the School Sucks Project, the Prussian education method and the Trivium and Quadrivium.

I have every respect for teachers, their drives and motivations and the pressures they're under - but I have little to respect for the framework in which they're forced to operate.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 01:12:17 PM

What's the most important thing you teach your students?

Critical thinking. And creativity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 01:39:28 PM
Primary school kids are supposed to know what subjects to focus on before trying them all?  Come on.  I chose four of my subjects at the age of 13, and two of them were mistakes. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 02:07:09 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 01:12:17 PM

What's the most important thing you teach your students?

Critical thinking. And creativity.

Excellent.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 01:39:28 PM

Primary school kids are supposed to know what subjects to focus on before trying them all? 


Nope, not at all. Teach them the Trivium and they can teach themselves anything at any time, without getting locked into mistakes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 August, 2019, 02:14:37 PM
For once, Sharky, we're on the same page. I'm actually writing my masters on the education system of the new millennium thus far, and how the Blairite push for University candidates at a young age lead a a generation of dissociated and confused young students who where pressured into specifically focusing on a minute end goal and, in the event of either falling down on the way or reaching end game and realizing it was a waste of time, has lead to considerable disillusionment in the education system and those who benefit off of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 02:40:59 PM

That's good to hear, Hawkie. I think looking into John Taylor Gatto, the Prussian system, the trivium, unschooling, and School Sucks would give you some interesting food for thought (if you haven't done so already, of course).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 02:52:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 02:07:09 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 01:15:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 01:12:17 PM

What's the most important thing you teach your students?

Critical thinking. And creativity.

Excellent.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 01:39:28 PM

Primary school kids are supposed to know what subjects to focus on before trying them all? 


Nope, not at all. Teach them the Trivium and they can teach themselves anything at any time, without getting locked into mistakes.

Fair enough,  I don't know anything about the Trivium.  I do know that the education system is bollocks though.  I don't know how to fix it so maybe you're right.

I was good at art but that wasn't seen as a real subject, so we were taught by the career guidance teacher's clueless wife who couldn't draw and knew nothing about art history. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 03:09:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 12:35:30 PM

I said it starts with education - and not the type of education we inflict on our youth today, which was designed not to educate but to produce obedient citizens suitable to be workers and soldiers. An education system that teaches people how to think and not what to think.

Fair enough sir, my apologies for a rather heated response.  As I say, the rather puerile response of the majority of politicians and commentators to every problem as being solvable by the education system tends to irk me a tad (!).

I'm wholeheartedly behind you on the quality of the educational diet we are forced to inflict on pupils at present.  I'm not sure that I agree with regards to the current level of indoctrination that schools are guilty of, they are too busy trying to cram the whole damn curriculum in to find time for that. 

Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 05 August, 2019, 02:14:37 PM
For once, Sharky, we're on the same page. I'm actually writing my masters on the education system of the new millennium thus far, and how the Blairite push for University candidates ...

I'm going to be really pedantic here, he actually said 'higher education' which encompasses a far broader range of educational opportunities than just university.  At the time it also held out radically different prospects than today.  Until even 2008 graduates still stood a far better chance of employment than non-graduates although there was and is considerable variation in terms of prospects based on both subject and institution.  Granted the increasing number of graduates has diluted the value of degrees but this is as much the fault of business and industry that has spent more time and energy complaining about British workers than building up a long term and sustainable base. 

I would agree that there has been considerable pressure over the last 20 odd years for youngsters to go on to higher education in general and it has been narrowly defined by commentators as university but that pressure has generally come overwhelmingly from parents.  Alternative routes have frequently been shot down and it is a brave teacher or careers adviser that suggests them.  Ironically your average plumber or electrician can take home more than a number of graduate careers.

Perhaps the bigger issue is that 'education' is still so narrowly defined but also incredibly poorly conceptualised.  Competing theories about what it is, how it is experienced, what its purpose is ... That it is generally seen as institutionalised and only certain types of learning as valid (Foucault eat your heart out ...) ... that the way it is experienced so often puts all but the hardiest off learning for life when learning is a lifelong process ... Personally I think what is really astonishing is not so much that so little learning goes on for all the energy that goes into our educational systems but that so much goes on in spite of the overwhelming array of obstacles that successive governments have put in the way.  The only benefit of Brexit is that we are now looking at the longest period of stability in British schools in over 30 years (unfortunately after the biggest cluster f*** in the last 150 years).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:13:31 PM
Quote from: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 12:42:32 PMPretty sure that's what I do in my job on a daily basis, but what would I know, I've only been a secondary school teacher for fourteen years.
Having been out of school for a LONG time now, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to let me know what you think of the current state of teaching regarding social and historical background in schooling. By which I mean, looking into how our country exists, and the context behind things like European institutions, migration, social contracts and the like.

I was in secondary school in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we had NO teaching on any of this. History was all EMPIRE EMPIRE RAH RAH RAH and some bits about ancient Britain and Vikings. We had basically no teaching about how the political systems in the UK work, nor about then then EEC. Similarly, our 'personal and social education' (as it was called back then) was woeful and minimal. One period a week. (Laughably, contraception was a single lesson in two years, with a poor red-faced teacher trying to show how to use a condom in front of braying teenagers. Sex in itself was barely mentioned. Consent was never mentioned. But also, wider social contracts and important societal elements were mostly barely touched on. I'd hope this has improved immensely these days.)

As for the education system in general, it constantly baffles me how we look to e.g. Finland, go "man, their kids are all so happy, fulfilled and educated" and consistently learn precisely none of the lessons (such as them starting formal education later, concentrating on play through to about age 7, specialising later, ensuring education is more rounded, testing far less often, and so on).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 03:27:03 PM
Oh boy, now there is a can of worms!

To the first point regarding social and historical foundations.  This one is a real mixed bag.  The subject of Citizenship was bolted on to PSE / PSHE / Wellbeing / Whatever along the same lines as you experienced back in the day.  Only thing is, as with the rest of this, it was left up to individual schools to implement without any coherent thought or resources.  These days you have to be damn careful as a teacher about what you say regarding any of these topics.  It is also further muddied by the fact that education is a devolved issue so there are variations according to where you are in the UK.

As to the second point on international comparisons, there is a long and lamentable history of complete failure to transplant educational initiatives even within a national educational system with broadly similar structures and cultures.  Attempts to emulate methods from other nations have frequently fared far worse due to radical variations in contexts that render efforts meaningless.  unfortunately proponents of lessons from around the world have a regrettable tendency to over-simplify them, ignore contextual factors especially if they have cost implications and generally misinterpret the rationale behind them.  A good example would be Dweck's 'mindset' research that has been utterly b***ardised by schools up and down the country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:36:32 PM
On the comparisons, I just find it bonkers that the UK keeps asking the same questions again and again, finding the answers, and then doing the exact opposite. Finnish kids are happier and better educated. They start formal schooling later, get tested less often, and don't specialise as early. So we could... do the same. Instead, the UK doubles down on early formalised education, more testing (including, soon, for four-year-olds!), and limiting the curriculum (not least with the EBACC debacle, which would have been OK had they not ignored Lord Judge, but, hey, he's the wrong kind of Tory, apparently).

On "saying the wrong thing", I can see how things could quickly becoming a minefield on certain topics. But are kids even taught the basics of how the UK functions? The basics of voting and politics? How the EU functions? We certainly had nothing of the sort. But we did learn about the Vikings, drew loads of pictures of Tollund Man, and – if we took GCSE history – spent ages banging on about WWII. That's not to say those things don't have importance too, but the fact I went through my entire schooling without ever knowing about the Commons, the Lords, the EEC, and so on, in hindsight seems baffling. And this surely had a major effect on things like the referendum.

Are we fairly unique in terms of widespread ignorance about not only European institutions, but also our own? (Most EU/EFTA nationals I know say they are taught all this stuff as they grow up. The understand how the EU/EFTA functions, and also how their own countries function.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 05 August, 2019, 03:39:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:13:31 PM

Having been out of school for a LONG time now, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to let me know what you think of the current state of teaching regarding social and historical background in schooling. By which I mean, looking into how our country exists, and the context behind things like European institutions, migration, social contracts and the like.

I'm a teacher of English (working in the Scottish education system), so I can't claim to be able to give a definitive answer re: the specific content of the Modern Studies or History curriculums. My understanding is that the former focuses on the workings of the democratic system in Scotland and the UK, social issues within the UK, and broader world issues, whereas the latter involves looking at Scottish, British and European history. From what I do know, I'm pretty sure that much of what you mention is indeed discussed – certainly up here. In terms of what's covered elsewhere in the UK – haven't a clue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 05 August, 2019, 05:05:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:13:31 PM
I was in secondary school in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we had NO teaching on any of this. History was all EMPIRE EMPIRE RAH RAH RAH and some bits about ancient Britain and Vikings. We had basically no teaching about how the political systems in the UK work, nor about then then EEC.

That's interesting. I was at high school in Scotland during the same period and modern studies lessons taught us about stuff like the first past the post system, proportional representation, antidisestablishmentarianism and mutually assured destruction. It was when the Berlin Wall was coming down so there was some mention of the impact that might have, plus a smattering about the EU and EEC (but I don't remember exactly what that entailed).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 August, 2019, 05:08:01 PM

JBC - the Trivium is, very basically, teaching people how to learn based on the way that the mind works. The three cores are Grammar (learning the specific words and meanings of any given subject and how they fit together), Logic (understanding how a subject's contents fit together and relate, and resolving any inconsistencies, misunderstandings or contradictions), and Rhetoric (learning how to present or apply what has been learned in a clear and coherent manner). In modern computer parlance it's Input, Processing, Output. That's the basics. It's how the later Greeks taught their citizens (but not their slaves).

The Quadrivium (which combines with the Trivium to compose the original Seven Liberal Arts) is composed of Arithmetic (the basic meanings and operations of numbers), Geometry (numbers in space), Music (numbers in time), and Astronomy (numbers in space and time).

I wish I'd learned this at school!

TJM - no probs, Man - I probably should have been clearer in my original post, proving that my own eddykayshun was, and continues to be, woefully inadequate!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 05:45:31 PM
Fair enough.

I'm a teacher of English to adults, and have been for a long time.  For me there are only four rules that I follow: Know your shit, keep it practical, keep them interested, and give them confidence.

As for teaching kids, I haven't a clue.  I hate doing it and as such don't do it.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 06:15:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:36:32 PM
On the comparisons, I just find it bonkers that the UK keeps asking the same questions again and again, finding the answers, and then doing the exact opposite. Finnish kids are happier and better educated. They start formal schooling later, get tested less often, and don't specialise as early.

British education seems to have wholeheartedly embraced the idea of repeating the same mistakes in the hopes of a different outcome over the last, well Century or so if I'm completely honest., but particularly since the second world war.  Since the 1988 Education Reform Act this has gone into overdrive as both parties seem to have tried to outbid each other in an attempt to crush the soul out of education.  So much of what is expected is not only not based in any evidence but actually frequently negated by available evidence.  The problem is though that because educational research is so heavily contested, often poorly constructed and definitely 'ideologically suspect' in the eyes of decision makers it tends to be twisted to meet any point you want.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 03:36:32 PM
But are kids even taught the basics of how the UK functions? The basics of voting and politics? How the EU functions? We certainly had nothing of the sort. But we did learn about the Vikings, drew loads of pictures of Tollund Man, and – if we took GCSE history – spent ages banging on about WWII.

The history curriculum, in its compulsory phase up to the end of key stage 3 at year 9 (as is now, 3rd form in old money, 14 in age ...) is focused more on historiography than content.  It is more about gaining a sense of historical enquiry and core ideas from history.  The GCSE curriculum still has a heavy focus on Nazi Germany but also American history on most syllabi.  Modern English history is (IIRC) largely reserved for A level study, tends to focus mainly on political issues and is about as exciting as watching a cricket match.

Teaching about voting and political structures is supposedly reserved for Citizenship and has the distinction of being the biggest dogs breakfast in UK education (which in itself is a significant achievement).  In terms of discussions / lessons about political institutions and structures, this will depend very much on who your child has as a teacher and how informed they are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2019, 06:45:41 PM
You got the Empire; we got the Vatican.  I distinctly remember being very suspicious of our history book when I was about 14 - it stressed how the Spanish Inquisition's methods were probably exaggerated by biased historians, and that it didn't use torture more than anyone else.  Fortunately Pat Mills had already given me a more accurate picture of its true nastiness in Nemesis.

The prog did a lot, in hindsight, to rescue me from the toxic influence of Catholicism in the education system.  I have no idea how much time is devoted to god-bothering in Irish schools these days, but I would imagine it's a whole lot less than it was in my time. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 07:12:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 06:15:31 PMboth parties seem to have tried to outbid each other in an attempt to crush the soul out of education
What gets me most (bar the incessant testing, which has resulted in children as young as five suffering from depression – when the medical world often doesn't recognise it as a problem in people that young) is when I hear about schools closing their entire arts departments. So children there – at secondary level – are basically robbed of painting, drawing, drama, music, and so on. This obsession with academia and chasing international league tables baffles me, not least because we aren't preparing kids anymore for the things we are actually good in.

This is even the case in English. I'm a writer. I have been since 2002, and full-time for over well over a decade
now. I have no idea about half of the arcane chunks of grammar kids are now being told are essential. And yet the Tories seem to think this is more important than storytelling, presentation, and ideas. (Of course, you need to balance the two. We've just gone WAY too far in one direction.)

QuoteSo much of what is expected is not only not based in any evidence but actually frequently negated by available evidence.  The problem is though that because educational research is so heavily contested, often poorly constructed and definitely 'ideologically suspect' in the eyes of decision makers it tends to be twisted to meet any point you want.
Well, quite. But, again, the Finnish thing shines through. Their kids are happier. Let's face it: this isn't down to sunlight, nice summers, etc.

QuoteTeaching about voting and political structures is supposedly reserved for Citizenship and has the distinction of being the biggest dogs breakfast in UK education (which in itself is a significant achievement).  In terms of discussions / lessons about political institutions and structures, this will depend very much on who your child has as a teacher and how informed they are.
So that's actually a specific lesson at secondary now? We had nothing like that. (As I said, we got PSE, which IIRC was one period a week for two years.) Depressing that these fundamentals are down to the knowledge of a teacher – a lottery. Still, I'm sure it's probably not that important to learn about the fundamental principles of your democracy. What could go wrong, eh?

*looks at news about Brexit*

Oh. Oh fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 August, 2019, 08:15:13 PM
I'm no teacher, but I regularly hear STEM professors/academics bemoaning the awful standard of teaching at secondary level maths. I would generally agree with them until recently when I heard a podcast with Simon Singh. He had been travelling around the UK doing maths outreach/promotion stuff in schools and concluded that maths is taught exceptionally well. His argument was basically in every maths classroom, around half the pupils aren't really engaged. This breaks down into about 40% that have no aptitude for the subject at all, and think it's useless. The other 10% having an almost instinctive grasp of the subject, and are completely bored that the teacher is going over how to multiply fractions for the umpteenth time this year, even though they got it the first time they heard it 5 years ago. However, that 40% mostly get passing grades. The 10% go into STEM and complain about maths teaching standards because they found school so boring.

The big problem with maths teaching is if you know enough to teach GCSE maths, you're qualified to earn a lot more than a teachers salary offers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2019, 09:13:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 August, 2019, 07:12:25 PM
the Finnish thing shines through. Their kids are happier. Let's face it: this isn't down to sunlight, nice summers, etc.

No it isn't.  The problem is that there is a lot more to the situation in Finland that the government in the UK would never countenance.  Top of the list is their attitude to teachers full stop.  There is also the issue of the wider context which means that there is a far greater degree of trust in teachers.  What is interesting is to note the strategies and practices that politicians do seem willing to embrace.  Approaches like those used in China or Singapore, based on drill and rote, are encouraged.  Approaches like those used in Finland, based on a reform of the way in which teaching is viewed and rewarded, in which schools are structure, are admired but ignored.

Quote from: Mister Pops on 05 August, 2019, 08:15:13 PM
I heard a podcast with Simon Singh. He had been travelling around the UK doing maths outreach/promotion stuff in schools and concluded that maths is taught exceptionally well. His argument was basically in every maths classroom, around half the pupils aren't really engaged. This breaks down into about 40% that have no aptitude for the subject at all, and think it's useless.

This is probably one of the biggest challenges that Maths teachers face.  On the one hand, as an essential and compulsory subject, everyone has to do it regardless of competence.  This is compounded by a grading system that means that some pupils are not able to achieve the hallowed 'C' / '4' (depending on where OFQUAL left the goal-posts under the new regime) grade that they believe all employers demand.  So the benefit of being in a high demand subject is offset by the fact that an awful lot of class time is spent fighting against these factors.  Then you add in the old "well, I was useless at Maths in school so I'm not too worried that my child can't do it ..." mindset that manifests itself pretty uniformly at parents' evenings.

The only thing is, attempts to make Maths Exams more useful and functional actually over complicate it to an insane extent.  Pupils are expected to be able to read train timetables at a time when more and more train companies are moving over to using apps.  Pupils are expected to be able to calculate household bills when these are fully automated.  The lag between the sorts of assessment questions pupils are given and the sorts of skills that they need is insane.  The end result are exams that are overly complex and confusing, limiting further still pupil outcomes.

This is before we get into the debate about who decides which child is capable of dealing with the sorts of Maths tested by current exams.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 August, 2019, 10:00:51 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 06:18:23 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 August, 2019, 07:33:27 PM
Stochastic Terrorism  l  JONATHON KEATS  l  01.21.1906:00 AM

n. The use of mass public communication to incite or inspire acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random.

One or more unstable people responds to the incitement by becoming a lone wolf and committing a violent act.   While their action may have been statistically predictable, the specific person and the specific act are not predictable.

The stochastic terrorist may be acting either negligently or deliberately, or may be in complete denial of their impact, just like a drunk driver who runs over a pedestrian without even realizing it. 

There is no conspiracy here: merely the twisted acts of individuals who are promoting extremism, who get access to mass media in which to do it, and the rest follows naturally.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/1/10/934890/-[/i]




The El Paso Shooting and the Gamification of Terror  l  August 4, 2019 By Robert Evans

As we've seen with two other mass shootings this year, the killer announced the start of his rampage on 8chan's /pol board. The poster also attached a four-page manifesto to the post, along with a document in his original post that included his name.

The El Paso shooter's manifesto and 8chan post show his radicalization and turn towards white suprematism, the Christchurch shooter's manifesto, and the video of his massacre, likely acting as major influences in his eventual attack ...

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/americas/2019/08/04/the-el-paso-shooting-and-the-gamification-of-terror/




Lengthy but prescient (2017) and rigorous piece on the myth of the lone wolf attacker and the de-centralised model of terrorism. Influencers, man:


If the label of lone wolf is plainly incorrect, there are other, more subtle cases where it is still highly misleading.

Another category of attackers, for instance, are those who strike alone, without guidance from formal terrorist organisations, but who have had face-to-face contact with loose networks of people who share extremist beliefs.

The Exeter restaurant bomber, dismissed as an unstable loner, was actually in contact with a circle of local militant sympathisers before his attack. The killers of Lee Rigby had been on the periphery of extremist movements in the UK for years, appearing at rallies of groups such as the now proscribed al-Muhajiroun, run by Anjem Choudary, a preacher convicted of terrorist offences in 2016 who is reported to have "inspired" up to 100 British militants.

A third category is made up of attackers who strike alone, after having had close contact online, rather than face-to-face, with extremist groups or individuals.

A wave of attackers in France last year were, at first, wrongly seen as lone wolves "inspired" rather than commissioned by Isis. It soon emerged that the individuals involved, such as the two teenagers who killed a priest in front of his congregation in Normandy, had been recruited online by a senior Isis militant.

In three recent incidents in Germany, all initially dubbed "lone-wolf attacks", Isis militants actually used messaging apps to direct recruits in the minutes before they attacked. "Pray that I become a martyr," one attacker who assaulted passengers on a train with an axe and knife told his interlocutor. "I am now waiting for the train." Then: "I am starting now."

Very often, what appear to be the clearest lone-wolf cases are revealed to be more complex. Even the strange case of the man who killed 86 people with a truck in Nice in July 2016 – with his background of alcohol abuse, casual sex and lack of apparent interest in religion or radical ideologies – may not be a true lone wolf. Eight of his friends and associates have been arrested and police are investigating his potential links to a broader network.

What research does show is that we may be more likely to find lone wolves among far-right extremists than among their jihadi counterparts. Though even in those cases, the term still conceals more than it reveals.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/mar/30/myth-lone-wolf-terrorist


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 August, 2019, 07:00:18 AM
So Trump is blaming the latest mass racially-motivated shootings on video games, mental health problems, immigration (!) and negative news about himself.

Everything except the shit-ton of guns in America.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 August, 2019, 07:38:43 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 August, 2019, 07:00:18 AM
... Everything except the shit-ton of guns in America.

Turns out there is a need for high power assault rifles amongst the general population after all: 

Feral Hogs! (https://heavy.com/entertainment/2019/08/feral-hogs/)

Now see I would have gone with claymores and other anti-personnel mines myself.

Or better yet, dust off and nuke them from orbit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 August, 2019, 07:56:15 AM
I wonder to what extent I, a low-level prog-buyer, have been radicalised into occasional acts of purchasing the Meg and even hardback Hachette volumes, through my association with a shady internet group of almost-exclusively middle-aged men who follow every utterance from a decades-long series of quasi-anonymous men who pass themselves off as gaudily-attired avatars of a cruel supernatural dictator. When inevitably raided by the culture police, my home will be shown to be strewn with almost 50 years worth of mouldering publications depicting sickening acts of violence, and mounds of plastic tat so infantile that its aggregate purchase can only be a way of secretly channelling funds to shadowy masters. As they drag me away, my frankly-relieved wife and children will be quoted as saying "we always knew he was a bit odd, but as long as it kept him quiet for an hour or two a week we just let him at it".

On the question of the supposed failures of modern education, I think we'd be as well looking at the systems of 40 or 50 years ago for explanation of many of our modern woes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 05:35:35 PM
Turns out the Ohio shooter posted his manifesto on INSTAGRAM,then somebody else posted it on 8Chan. So when is Instagram getting shut down?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MacabreMagpie on 06 August, 2019, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 05:35:35 PM
Turns out the Ohio shooter posted his manifesto on INSTAGRAM,then somebody else posted it on 8Chan. So when is Instagram getting shut down?

Did you hear all that stuff that happened with the teenager Bianca Devins, the other week? Her murderer posted photos of her body on instagram and they've been all over the platform since.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49001706
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 06:21:09 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 05:35:35 PM
Ohio

El Paso (https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/8/4/20753951/el-paso-dayton-shooting-8chan-twitter-facebook). The Dayton (https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/08/06/dayton-shooting-ex-girlfriend-connor-betts-saw-red-flags/1930622001/) murderer posted no manifesto; no reports of any Toledo (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/06/toledo-mayor-trump-didnt-mean-pray-my-city-i-pray-washington/?noredirect=on) manifesto either.

Here's an image of the extra-capacity magazine the Dayton murderer used to kill 9 people in 10 seconds. You can't stop people owning this kind of firepower though - what if they want to hunt 100 ducks to feed their family, but have to do so in the time it takes to light a fag?

Won't anyone think of the time-pressed sportsman?


(https://i.imgur.com/hPnL7s1.png)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 August, 2019, 06:24:17 PM


Just stop selling the bullets.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 06:27:48 PM

https://youtu.be/VZrFVtmRXrw


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 07:24:47 PM
Quote from: MacabreMagpie on 06 August, 2019, 06:08:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 05:35:35 PM
Turns out the Ohio shooter posted his manifesto on INSTAGRAM,then somebody else posted it on 8Chan. So when is Instagram getting shut down?

Did you hear all that stuff that happened with the teenager Bianca Devins, the other week? Her murderer posted photos of her body on instagram and they've been all over the platform since.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49001706

Yeah,I heard about it. So again,why isnt anyone calling for Instagram to be shut down?

@Frank Your right,El Paso.
Jim read it on his stream and its just...I mean,how many mass shooter manifestos mention Lorax?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 07:39:05 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 07:24:47 PM
why isnt anyone calling for Instagram to be shut down?

Nobody called for anything to be shut down*. You set that one up and have been fighting that fight all by yourself for several posts without reply.

No law against it, but it seems like a waste of time and energy.


* The El Paso link in my last post lists how organisations like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube have responded to demands for action against hate speech and those who promote it. As far as I'm aware, none of these organisations have ever been 'shut down'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 August, 2019, 07:42:35 PM
I mean 8Chan is a cesspool of the worst kind of human being but I honestly can't think of any benefits of shutting it down that wouldn't result in the emotionally stunted inhabitants migrating to other platforms. Imposing stricter moderation seems to be the only sensible, but highly unlikely, option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 07:49:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 07:39:05 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 07:24:47 PM
why isnt anyone calling for Instagram to be shut down?

Nobody called for anything to be shut down*. You set that one up and have been fighting that fight all by yourself for several posts without reply.

No law against it, but it seems like a waste of time and energy.


* The El Paso link in my last post lists how organisations like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube have responded to demands for action against hate speech and those who promote it. As far as I'm aware, none of these organisations have ever been 'shut down'
Every blue checkmark on twitter? Every so called journalist and useful idiot out there? Moderation,censorship, think of the children.
Losing your DDos protection and hosting provider does wonders for the site,Im sure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 08:02:52 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 07:49:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 07:39:05 PM
Nobody called for anything to be shut down

Every blue checkmark on twitter? Every so called journalist and useful idiot out there?

Those advancing that argument on Twitter are unlikely to see your replies if you post them on this site.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 08:09:15 PM
@Frank Im answering your question.You asked who.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 August, 2019, 08:14:28 PM
I do wonder at the argument in favour of giving such attitudes the space and oxygen needed.  The idea that such creatures would migrate to other spaces, that the best disinfectant is sunlight ...

All valid arguments but then again what message does denial of such attitudes in most freely accessible fora send?  This place has robust moderation that ensures that appropriate standards of humanity are adhered to.  Denial might offend but it exclusion also sends the message that those standards will be maintained.

The audience on this site is diverse across many dimensions.  We have ethnic minorities and majorities, we have a range of sexualities, a combination of national and educational backgrounds, we even have representatives from religious groups.  There may be robust disagreement at times but the one line that is not crossed is the one that uses any of these characteristics to dehumanise and exclude.

The tech industry has had a free ride for far too long and needs to be called out for its failings.  Its about time anyone who hosts fora of any kind, social interaction of any type, needs to have a named moderator who is legally answerable for what is posted.  The same expectations of media organisations need to be placed on social media companies.  While posters might be able to remain anonymous online, it should be a legal requirement that hosts provide verifiable contact information for posters who break the law.

Shutting down providers may be extreme but that sanction does need to be in place as a nuclear option.  Robust measures that make these companies stop and think though are more likely to make it unnecessary.  Telling companies that they will not be welcome to do business is potentially the only realistic option, the only one they are likely to pay attention to.  Telling ISP's in this country that they are likely to be massively fined for allowing intentional access and placing the burden on them to prove that individuals have acted to circumvent restrictions will help.

Will this drive the sorts of behaviours that cause these problems underground?  Quite conceivably.  Then again that also reinforces the message that these are not normal behaviours.  The restrictions we establish also set the parameters for acceptable behaviour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 08:14:28 PM
Quote from: Smith on 06 August, 2019, 08:09:15 PM
@Frank Im answering your question.You asked who.

Nope. Read the post you quoted.

This is embarrassing, man - I'm not replying anymore.  Have a nice evening.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 August, 2019, 08:56:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 August, 2019, 08:14:28 PMThe tech industry has had a free ride for far too long and needs to be called out for its failings.  Its about time anyone who hosts fora of any kind, social interaction of any type, needs to have a named moderator who is legally answerable for what is posted.
I disagree, because such places are not publishers. Also, if you start arguing moderation people are liable for content posted by others, you open up a can of worms that will ensure forums such as this would immediately cease to operate, and so would the vast majority of social networks.

I'd argue the bigger players need to be much, much better regarding social responsibility and moderation. It's pretty clear Twitter doesn't give much of a shit about racism, for example. Facebook isn't too fussed about women when they're being harassed, and yet the site has a really random touch regarding banning. This is what happens when social networks are all run by rich white conservatives.

On this place, I hope we get the balance right. This forum has the lightest-touch moderation of any I've been involved with that has more than the tiniest amount of traffic. But most of the admins aren't Rebellion staff – we just help out. If the day comes when someone says "Hey, IP: you are legally answerable for what is posted", then fuck that. And even if that's shunted over to 'a' moderator who's staff, that's the day someone's told to hit delete on the folder marked 'forum'.

(In a more general sense, I'm of the oxygen theory — when you stop talking about people, they do eventually fuck off. See: Yiannopoulos.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 August, 2019, 08:57:46 PM
It's really freaking important we don't give white supremacists and Nazis (as well as those who appeal to and profit off of them) a platform to share their bile,  but with their alt-right mentality of victim hood and 'displacement' just cutting the cunts out completely, unfortunately, will only give them a great platform in the mainstream media. I don't see there being a way of suffocating these cretins online presence without more shootings as a result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 August, 2019, 09:27:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 August, 2019, 08:56:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 August, 2019, 08:14:28 PMThe tech industry has had a free ride for far too long and needs to be called out for its failings.  Its about time anyone who hosts fora of any kind, social interaction of any type, needs to have a named moderator who is legally answerable for what is posted.
I disagree, because such places are not publishers. Also, if you start arguing moderation people are liable for content posted by others, you open up a can of worms that will ensure forums such as this would immediately cease to operate, and so would the vast majority of social networks.

I'd argue the bigger players need to be much, much better regarding social responsibility and moderation. It's pretty clear Twitter doesn't give much of a shit about racism, for example. Facebook isn't too fussed about women when they're being harassed, and yet the site has a really random touch regarding banning. This is what happens when social networks are all run by rich white conservatives.

On this place, I hope we get the balance right. This forum has the lightest-touch moderation of any I've been involved with that has more than the tiniest amount of traffic. But most of the admins aren't Rebellion staff – we just help out. If the day comes when someone says "Hey, IP: you are legally answerable for what is posted", then fuck that. And even if that's shunted over to 'a' moderator who's staff, that's the day someone's told to hit delete on the folder marked 'forum'.

(In a more general sense, I'm of the oxygen theory — when you stop talking about people, they do eventually fuck off. See: Yiannopoulos.)

Absolutely agree, there must be a distinction between service provider, platform, publisher etc, but what that should be legally is uncharted territory - the can of worms is open - the law, regulation and generally accepted attitudes are racing to keep up with developments, and lagging way behind.

As for this place, it is an oasis of generally well mannered and lightly moderated sanity in a sea of batshit craziness, and for that our volunteer mods deserve our thanks.

I've been knocking around here for 11 years now, and I can only think of 3 boarders who I'm sad were banned, but the mods were left with little choice; and only one that I feel was too harsh. Trolls are ignored, bullshitters are quickly shut down, and the general community is quick to chime up if someone's just being a bit of a dick that day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 August, 2019, 10:24:33 PM

Richard Bacon, of all people, explained how social media worked in a way that opened my eyes. YOU are the publisher, now.

Every time your thumbs bash out some nonsense while waiting for the kettle to boil, you assume the same responsibilities that once fell on the heads of billionaire tyrant Rupert Murdoch and fascist sympathiser (the late) Viscount Rothermere.

I'm in favour of massively expanding the role of Ofcom (https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/policies-and-guidelines) to treat everyone in the same way as Sky News* because the last decade's infinite amount of monkeys/typewriters has caused incalculable damage to our public life and our democracy.


* If you're not at least fact-checking what you post and citing sources, you need to go into Read-Only mode and let the adults in the room educate you. If you're not running everything you post past an internal editorial committee for signs of bias, you need to ask yourself why. And for the love of Jeebus, employ an internal sub-editor to check for spellnig and the grammars.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 August, 2019, 11:21:48 PM
You are a publisher on social media only in the sense that an Uber driver is a small business owner - as a social media user, you provide free labor and content for corporations to exploit, but you see no reward beyond social media's virtual currency: attention.  cHEck oUT mY insTAgRaM
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2019, 11:36:06 PM

I think that free speech is vital. It means I can talk about babies starving to death in Yemen and our government tacitly supporting that by not raising all kinds of Hell about it and by allowing Made in GB weapons to be sold to Saudi Arabia, the perpetrator of this vile state of affairs (amongst others, such as beheading people for homosexuality).

The dark side of free speech is obvious - but speech is not action. If I were to call for others to perform some criminal act then that would be deplorable and I'd deserve to be banned from whatever privately owned forum I used to spread that call and maybe even prosecuted alongside anybody dumb enough to do my bidding.

Individual platforms are free to ban whomever they like. A judge, whose name I can't recall, once said that anyone was free to make any argument they wanted in their court and be given a fair hearing, but that doesn't mean they can come into his home and expect the same treatment. Speech is only as free as a particular forum allows.

The danger is that governments complicit in atrocities (which is just about all of them) will use the relatively few terrible incitements to institute blanket bans on free speech all over the net, with the "side effect" of throwing the starving babies out with the bathwater.

We are all responsible for our own words and actions, and that - in my view - has to be the bottom line. Yes, it's dangerous to let some tub-thumping nutter call for unlawful activity in public (where they can at least be contradicted, argued with and laughed down) - but to drive them underground to preach to their own twisted choir in private is even worse.

All personal freedoms are indivisible from personal responsibilities, and freedom of speech is no different.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 August, 2019, 12:39:58 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 06 August, 2019, 11:36:06 PM
Yes, it's dangerous to let some tub-thumping nutter call for unlawful activity in public (where they can at least be contradicted, argued with and laughed down) - but to drive them underground to preach to their own twisted choir in private is even worse.

That's probably where we're headed anyway. Zuckerberg's (https://www.inc.com/larry-kim/mark-zuckerberg-makes-it-facebook-official-future-of-facebook-is-messaging.html) getting out of the troublesome role of pseudo-publisher* and concentrating on the small, private, encrypted networks ideal for organising family meet-ups or terrorist cells (see previous).

That doubles down on the threats to our democracy with which we all became familiar in 2016, when political organisations targeted us with ads specifically tailored to exploit our individual psychological weaknesses, which nobody else could see.


* The idea of The Internet as a public space might soon be over in the same way the idea of it as a bunch of websites and blogs belongs in the nineties and early oughts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 06:37:18 AM

There's already a privacy aspect (emails, private chat rooms and so on) and I think that's important too. I like my privacy as much as I like my public loudmouthery.

Facebook's and Youtube's algorithms may not be perfect in burying certain things yet but they're getting there. These censorship tools are part of their drives to become state-sponsored monopolies, with places like China serving as ideal test beds.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 August, 2019, 09:39:18 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 August, 2019, 08:56:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 August, 2019, 08:14:28 PMThe tech industry has had a free ride for far too long and needs to be called out for its failings.  Its about time anyone who hosts fora of any kind, social interaction of any type, needs to have a named moderator who is legally answerable for what is posted.
I disagree, because such places are not publishers. Also, if you start arguing moderation people are liable for content posted by others, you open up a can of worms that will ensure forums such as this would immediately cease to operate, and so would the vast majority of social networks.

I'd argue the bigger players need to be much, much better regarding social responsibility and moderation.

Fair point.  For me the problem is that the current situation is normalising this sort of behaviour and it does feel a little like it has had dangerously corrosive social and political consequences.  It does also appear that there is an overspill from the virtual to the real and it is not just 'nutters'.  Take the Trump visit for instance.  The Trump supporter that was surrounded by demonstrators including the one screaming 'nazi' in their face?

Right now things are insanely dangerous.  It might be that drawing parallels with Weimar Germany for instance is alarmist but then again that is surely the key point, unless we admit to the most dangerous possibilities we expose ourselves to that risk.  So perhaps it is worth considering the most extreme responses to this problem and how we find a more moderate solution?  Preferably before the extremists do it for us?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 10:19:22 AM

Yes, I think that's right. Consider everything because, by so doing, reasonable solutions will probably emerge. Thesis, antithesis, synthesis.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 August, 2019, 10:32:59 AM
Undecided exactly where I stand, but I'll throw this familiar quote into the mix:

Quote from: Benjamin Franklin, 1755"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:54:33 AM
Working with a Trump voter at the mo, and if he's typical you can forget rational discussion or common ground.

He's from Leitrim, lived and worked in London forvyears, then Queens for a decade, became an American citizen, now back living in Ireland. His brother and family still lives in NY, his sister in Derry. He gets his dentistry done on the NHS  (no idea).

First thing he says about Trump, having established I'm not a fan and therefore 'must follow the media':

"He's sorting out the immigrants, people have had enough of immigrants. Best thing that happened to the the States since Kennedy".

On Varadkar: "another immigrant, all he cares about is the gays, they'll never have kids so they don't care about the place filling up with immigrants".

On Ireland and Brexit: "This is an emigrant country, not an immigrant one - the Brits have that right. Getting the Border back is a good thing, no-one wants unionists all over the place".

On Bertie Ahern:
"He was a crook, but he did a good job".

I'd known him 5 minutes by this point. Find me some common ground, or even a shred of self-awareness please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
Oh, he's just pursued and stamped on a field mouse. I think our relationship is unfixable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2019, 12:12:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
Oh, he's just pursued and stamped on a field mouse. I think our relationship is unfixable.

Kill him. Hide the body. If you need an alibi, you were with me all day. :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 12:24:42 PM

I'm with Jim on this one.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 August, 2019, 12:36:40 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 August, 2019, 09:39:18 AMIt might be that drawing parallels with Weimar Germany for instance is alarmist but then again that is surely the key point, unless we admit to the most dangerous possibilities we expose ourselves to that risk.

Yes some people goose-step down the street wearing actual Nazi armbands and chanting that "jews will not replace us", but to call them Nazis is uncivil - and besides, who else is going to take care of the socialists for us?  Let them get rid of the Communists, later we'll be able to control them.

(copied and pasted from my column in this week's Observer)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 August, 2019, 12:44:45 PM
I'm trying to figure out if that one is satirical or not Prof.  I'm going to reserve judgement until I have a better idea.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 August, 2019, 12:49:21 PM
I'm an immigrant to the US. The thing is that the Trump supporters aren't going to argue that I don't belong there (because I'm Caucasian). It's double-speak at the least and double-think otherwise when people say they don't like immigrants when what they mean is that they're white supremacists. Or anti Latina/Latino, at any rate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 August, 2019, 12:54:28 PM
Yeah, I very much get the impression that if you're a white person visiting the US you're in a much better position than someone of latin descent who was born there, in terms of attitudes towards you. It's not about immigration, it's about race.

Coming back to the whole situation where democracy currently seems to be ruled by the right wing in the UK and in the US,  I take it you've all seen 'the Great Hack' on Netflix?

If it's a TL:DR kind of show, try this TEDtalk from Carole Cadwalladr, and you'll get a flavour of it:

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy?language=en

(apologies if this is old news)


Basically, democracy is dead in the water.






Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 12:57:20 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2019, 12:12:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
Oh, he's just pursued and stamped on a field mouse. I think our relationship is unfixable.

Kill him. Hide the body. If you need an alibi, you were with me all day. :-)

While I stopped short of justifiable homicide, I did shout at him in quite an uncivil manner. Apparently he doesn't value "telling it how it is" quite as much as he claimed.

Ironies continue to abound, as we're supposedly working on a coastal greenway for a Council ecologist (an EU immigrant, naturally). Twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 01:00:29 PM

"In February 2019 I spoke to students at a public high school in El Dorado County, California about the things they're not allowed to say." (http://unregistered.blubrry.net/episode85/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 07 August, 2019, 01:27:15 PM
Quote from: Benjamin Franklin, 1755"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Not sure Franklin would describe the right to moan that immigrants get all the council houses as essential liberty.

Actually, young Benji F would have defended his right to spread racist myths (http://www.benjamin-franklin-history.org/slavery-abolition-society/), but Old Man Franklin wouldn't. The question is whether the benefits of allowing teen-Benny his essential liberty to promote lies that don't stand up to a moment's scrutiny outweigh the perils (i.e. disabling his Instagram and telling him to read a book).

SPOILER: they don't. Holding social media platforms to the same basic standards as any broadcaster (https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/policies-and-guidelines) strikes some as onerous and expensive but any tech giant can bear the cost, even before AI rides to their rescue and makes this whole argument seem like Victorian fears train passengers would be turned inside out at speeds over 60mph.


(https://i.imgur.com/hrR1Ahy.png?2)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 August, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 01:00:29 PM

"In February 2019 I spoke to students at a public high school in El Dorado County, California about the things they're not allowed to say." (http://unregistered.blubrry.net/episode85/)

That's an hour and twenty minutes long - what kind of things are they 'not allowed to say'?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 August, 2019, 02:41:35 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 12:57:20 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 August, 2019, 12:12:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
Oh, he's just pursued and stamped on a field mouse. I think our relationship is unfixable.

Kill him. Hide the body. If you need an alibi, you were with me all day. :-)

While I stopped short of justifiable homicide, I did shout at him in quite an uncivil manner. Apparently he doesn't value "telling it how it is" quite as much as he claimed.

Ironies continue to abound, as we're supposedly working on a coastal greenway for a Council ecologist (an EU immigrant, naturally). Twat.

Fuck me pink, you've got a live one there.  Keep us posted, I'm genuinely fascinated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 02:47:01 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 August, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 01:00:29 PM

"In February 2019 I spoke to students at a public high school in El Dorado County, California about the things they're not allowed to say." (http://unregistered.blubrry.net/episode85/)

That's an hour and twenty minutes long - what kind of things are they 'not allowed to say'?


I'm not permitted to tell you... ;)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 August, 2019, 02:58:16 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 August, 2019, 12:49:21 PMI'm an immigrant to the US. The thing is that the Trump supporters aren't going to argue that I don't belong there (because I'm Caucasian).
I dunno. A family member until recently owned a place in Florida. He ended up on various boards, and got shit done. Some of the long-term residents didn't like that, because there were fewer backhanders, and they ended up looking comparatively useless. He got quite a few "fuck off back to your own country" and the like. He's white British. Clearly, he didn't get it to the extent a black person would, but it was still straight up anti-foreigner xenophobia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 August, 2019, 03:03:13 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 August, 2019, 11:58:08 AM
Oh, he's just pursued and stamped on a field mouse. I think our relationship is unfixable.

I know the best bridges in Manchester to dispose a body off of, if you travel by night they will never trace you here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 August, 2019, 03:30:43 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 August, 2019, 12:44:45 PMI'm trying to figure out if that one is satirical or not Prof.  I'm going to reserve judgement until I have a better idea.

If it makes you feel any better, I don't know anymore either.  Once the president of America is openly praising Nazis and calling for non-white politicians to be sent back to the countries their ancestors came from, there's not really anywhere for satire to go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 August, 2019, 03:36:38 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 August, 2019, 02:02:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 01:00:29 PM

"In February 2019 I spoke to students at a public high school in El Dorado County, California about the things they're not allowed to say." (http://unregistered.blubrry.net/episode85/)

That's an hour and twenty minutes long - what kind of things are they 'not allowed to say'?

Haven't listened to it yet, but...

I'm always a bit suspicious of those types who love to trumpet that they say things that they're not allowed to say.  Not being allowed to say things involves secret police kicking in your door and arresting you, not being made to explain yourself using hard evidence and being ridiculed if you can't.

That said though, of course, you can be arrested and put in prison these days just for saying you're English.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 August, 2019, 03:51:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 August, 2019, 03:30:43 PM
.... there's not really anywhere for satire to go.

I think satire gave up the ghost and just let journalists go for broke a long time ago.  America is not unique in that respect.  When you stop and think that this country is now 'ruled' by a politician with the sort of reputation that would bar him from pretty much any other job in the country and has been 'elected' by a select group of lunatics, advised by someone who is on record as holding parliament in contempt and in a former life has run a political campaign that has flirted with abusing this country's electoral laws and 'governed' by a cabinet containing more disgraced ministers than any other in living history, then satire just does not stand a chance.

On the plus side, allegedly Spitting Image is making a comeback (or possibly it already has but we keep thinking its the ITV news?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 07 August, 2019, 05:07:50 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 07 August, 2019, 12:54:28 PM
Yeah, I very much get the impression that if you're a white person visiting the US you're in a much better position than someone of latin descent who was born there, in terms of attitudes towards you. It's not about immigration, it's about race.

Coming back to the whole situation where democracy currently seems to be ruled by the right wing in the UK and in the US,  I take it you've all seen 'the Great Hack' on Netflix?

If it's a TL:DR kind of show, try this TEDtalk from Carole Cadwalladr, and you'll get a flavour of it:

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy?language=en

(apologies if this is old news)


Basically, democracy is dead in the water.

It's bad, but at least it's not as bad as whats currently going down in Brazil. This was all news to me, and genuinely shocking. Essentially, a righteous crusade against entrenched public sector corruption has slowly been revealed to have been cover for what amounts to a whole scale far right coup. Scary stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Car_Wash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Car_Wash)

Entire story covered here, starting at around the 4min mark:

https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/336-neom-2049-feat-glenn-greenwald-72919 (https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/336-neom-2049-feat-glenn-greenwald-72919)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 August, 2019, 05:28:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 August, 2019, 03:36:38 PM


Haven't listened to it yet, but...

I'm always a bit suspicious of those types who love to trumpet that they say things that they're not allowed to say.  Not being allowed to say things involves secret police kicking in your door and arresting you, not being made to explain yourself using hard evidence and being ridiculed if you can't.




He generally interviews people the msm wouldn't touch with a barge pole. One of his best, imo, was with sex worker activist Maggie MacNeil (no relation, I expect), which really opened my eyes to the plight, and the power, of women. He's not a shock-jock, saying controversial stuff just for the Hell of it.

In the episode I linked to above, he covers several of the topics we've been covering here recently, from education to attitudes towards immigrants. You may not agree with everything he says but he's a reasoned and intelligent guy and I find most of his interviews to be quite engrossing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 August, 2019, 08:40:43 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 August, 2019, 03:36:38 PM
I'm always a bit suspicious of those types who love to trumpet that they say things that they're not allowed to say.  Not being allowed to say things involves secret police kicking in your door and arresting you, not being made to explain yourself using hard evidence and being ridiculed if you can't.

That said though, of course, you can be arrested and put in prison these days just for saying you're English.


Funny thing is, when they say these things that nobody is allowed to say, it's never anything I haven't heard before - so someone must be saying it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 August, 2019, 08:25:09 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 August, 2019, 02:41:35 PM
Fuck me pink, you've got a live one there.  Keep us posted, I'm genuinely fascinated.

Ah Friday morning, surely we can get through necessary pleasantries without incident. Verbatim:

"Ah thank f*ck it's Friday, can't wait to get out of this kip and back to lovely Leitrim where's there no blacks, Brazilians or Arabs."

#notallTrumpVoters.  You'd hope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 August, 2019, 10:12:37 AM

What a knob.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 09 August, 2019, 10:21:10 AM
"But at least one more twat, ey?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 August, 2019, 10:28:26 AM
There's very little you're not allowed to say. What a lot of the right don't get is that people don't have to listen, and don't have to agree, and no-one has to give you a platform. So they get their knickers in a twist when people correct their lies, or social media kicks them off for saying reprehensible stuff. Or they think it's fine to attack people (freedom of speech) but suddenly turn into legal experts regarding defamation and libel when even a fraction of that rebounds on to them.

We live in dangerous times. It's all going a bit Orwell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 August, 2019, 10:47:36 AM
Fecksake.  As fascinating as it is appalling.  Reminds me of my friend's ex-housemate, Dermot 'President' Mulqueen. Google hin at your peril.  I don't mind posting his name; he's done his level best to make himself a household name.

Edit- this is a response to TB's post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 09 August, 2019, 10:53:53 AM
It's the extension to the little Britainer 'You can't hoist a flag in your own garden anymore' attitude.

A sense of entitlement masquerading as oppression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 August, 2019, 05:43:08 PM

Jeffrey Epstein: Financier found dead in New York prison cell. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49306032)

Jeffrey Epstein Found Dead In Apparent Suicide Hours After Documents Released. (https://www.activistpost.com/2019/08/jeffrey-epstein-found-dead-in-apparent-suicide-hours-after-documents-released.html?utm_source=Activist+Post+Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=348fbce48b-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_b0c7fb76bd-348fbce48b-388034361)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 10 August, 2019, 05:57:29 PM
Nothing suspicious about this at all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 August, 2019, 06:08:51 PM

Today, we are all conspiracy theorists.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 August, 2019, 10:12:20 PM
He was literally in jail for being part of a criminal conspiracy that goes back decades and which involves the world's most powerful people, and he died in a locked room.  Not exactly the moon landing hoax of conspiracy theories, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 August, 2019, 10:14:23 PM
This may be the only conspiracy theory I subscribe to, although I feel the 'theory' bit may be superfluous
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 10 August, 2019, 10:51:55 PM

It'll run forever because both sides agree that it's murder but each thinks the other lot did it. Cons think it proves Pizzagate and Whitewater, Dems think it's evidence Epstein was about to reveal some unspecified dirt on Trump.

A white Fiat Uno (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7342169/Prince-Andrew-exposed-Teen-sex-slave-alleges-pair-intimate-Ghislaine-Maxwells-London-home.html) was seen leaving Epstein's cell.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 August, 2019, 11:47:51 AM
I heard this crazy outlandish wildly bizarre theory that he may have killed himself, rather than face justice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 August, 2019, 12:10:09 PM

Don't worry about anything, Frankie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Pentangeli) Five-Angels: https://youtu.be/U89DzP8NGM4


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 August, 2019, 12:52:25 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 August, 2019, 11:47:51 AM
I heard this crazy outlandish wildly bizarre theory that he may have killed himself, rather than face justice.

I'm sure he did and no one was around to stop him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 August, 2019, 06:39:37 PM
I don't what is most disturbing about the tin-foil hat brigade today, the fact that some of the conspiracies floating around are so bat-shit crazy or that they count Trump among their number.

:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 August, 2019, 11:38:00 PM
Here's another conspiracy theory to keep the fun going: batshit conspiracy theories abounding to muddy the waters is a textbook example of the dead cat strategy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 12 August, 2019, 07:21:26 PM
I never thought I would actually say this, but apparently Prince Andrew molested children with a puppet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 August, 2019, 11:04:22 PM
Quote from: radiator on 07 August, 2019, 05:07:50 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 07 August, 2019, 12:54:28 PM
Yeah, I very much get the impression that if you're a white person visiting the US you're in a much better position than someone of latin descent who was born there, in terms of attitudes towards you. It's not about immigration, it's about race.

Coming back to the whole situation where democracy currently seems to be ruled by the right wing in the UK and in the US,  I take it you've all seen 'the Great Hack' on Netflix?

If it's a TL:DR kind of show, try this TEDtalk from Carole Cadwalladr, and you'll get a flavour of it:

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy?language=en

(apologies if this is old news)


Basically, democracy is dead in the water.

It's bad, but at least it's not as bad as whats currently going down in Brazil. This was all news to me, and genuinely shocking. Essentially, a righteous crusade against entrenched public sector corruption has slowly been revealed to have been cover for what amounts to a whole scale far right coup. Scary stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Car_Wash (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Car_Wash)

Entire story covered here, starting at around the 4min mark:

https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/336-neom-2049-feat-glenn-greenwald-72919 (https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/336-neom-2049-feat-glenn-greenwald-72919)

Bloody hell - that is a crazy tale of corruption and counter-corruption on such an enormous scale!!!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 14 August, 2019, 03:42:28 PM
Occams Razor and the Epstein thing:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/thirty-two-stories-jeffrey-epstein-prison-death/596029/

Horrific.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 August, 2019, 07:32:01 PM
I'm not entirely sure that 32 instances of proof that the prison system is utterly corrupt and guards act with sometimes-criminal impunity without fear of reprisal is going to make conspiracy theories go away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 August, 2019, 10:09:22 AM
Trump seems to be pushing the 'look at the Clintons' line quite strongly.  This from a man that is on record as lauding Epstein, is in numerous photos at social events with the man and has a track record of sexual predation.

Not to mention that he has had to blink in his stand off with China, Iran is quite literally pushing the boat out and North Korea has gone back to trying to set the world on fire.

Whether it is gaslighting, deadcatting or redpilling, it is the sort of thing that made the likes of 24 completely unbelievable back in the day.  (Ironically my wife is currently watching the 24-lite series 'Designated Survivor' which I gave up on a while back as ludicrous with its 'crisis of the minute' approach ... )
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2019, 09:43:36 AM
The madness continues. First Trump successfully persuades Israel to refuse entry to two US Muslim congresswomen. Then he says he wants to buy Greenland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 August, 2019, 11:13:32 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2019, 09:43:36 AM
The madness continues. First Trump successfully persuades Israel to refuse entry to two US Muslim congresswomen. Then he says he wants to buy Greenland.

Trump tells one of them to "go home" ... and then tells the country that he's told her to go home to, to refuse her entry.

You couldn't make it up!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 August, 2019, 05:36:57 PM
He's a wannabe Hitler: the only saving grace is that he doesn't have the military behind him (despite being their CIC).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 16 August, 2019, 05:59:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 August, 2019, 05:36:57 PM
He's a wannabe Hitler: the only saving grace is that he doesn't have the military behind him (despite being their CIC).
Just wait until his second term.  ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 August, 2019, 07:10:10 PM
Or his third.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2019, 07:39:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2019, 09:43:36 AM
.... Then he says he wants to buy Greenland.

D'you think it's possible he got confused because so many UK politicians are falling over themselves to flog off bits of the UK to him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2019, 09:47:18 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2019, 07:39:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2019, 09:43:36 AM
.... Then he says he wants to buy Greenland.

D'you think it's possible he got confused because so many UK politicians are falling over themselves to flog off bits of the UK to him?

Now I'm depressed.  I'm not even from the UK but I shudder to think of the indignities in store for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 August, 2019, 10:32:07 PM
That went well. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/change-uk-independent-group-zero-support-poll-soubry-a9064186.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 10:52:08 AM
She's been good on Brexit in the Commons, but I've lost respect for Soubry after the Euros. Allen got it right: there is no point in acting as a spoiler in electoral systems that we use here. At most, they should have stood CHUKTIG candidates in the SE and London. Arguably, even there doing so was an error. Fortunately, number crunching on the night suggests that TIGCHUK didn't cause too much damage – one Lab that would have been LD, and possibly one BXP that could have gone LD. But now, what do they think they're going to achieve? They have no ground support. They have no brand. They have no policies that differentiate them beyond the Lib Dems. And if their main argument is "we didn't form a coalition with the Tories", some of them actually WERE Tories.

(See also: current Green leaders, who have some big decisions to make before the next GE. I fear most of them aren't Caroline Lucas, sadly.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2019, 11:55:16 AM
To be fair, they took a punt on having a year or so to set up shop and there was no reason to think they wouldn't be indulged by the media and credulous centrists while that happened.  They didn't see Prime Minister Johnson being a reality within a couple of months any more than the rest of us did, and probably expected Chuka to at least pretend a little bit longer than he did that he wasn't going to join the LibDems.

I also just realised that lefties tossing milkshakes was in the media cycle longer than a white supremacist's killing spree.  Which is fine.  This is all fine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 12:07:00 PM
The TIGCUKWTF lot just baffle me. I admire what they did initially, but after the local elections, they should have recognised that the Lib Dems weren't in fact an ex-party, and strategised accordingly. Instead, you had the bizarre spectacle of MEP candidates being asked why someone should vote for them over the Lib Dems and stumbling, because they had no answer (and, to a great extent, no policies). You can't just be against something in politics – that's not enough. "We hate Brexit." OK, great. What about everything else? "Well, we've not had a chat among ourselves about that yet." Fine, so how will you spread the message to doorsteps around the country, matching the Lib Dem ground army? "... Shit."

Baffling.

Still, the shitshow moves ever onwards, with threats of marshal law, the government arguing that the Yellowhammer document is irrelevant because the leak was from two weeks ago (because, clearly, all the issues surrounding severe delays to medicine are now solved), and bullshit from Patel that's now made my wife terrified to leave the country. WELL DONE, EVERYONE.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 August, 2019, 12:18:40 PM
It was a bit like the SDP's Gang of Four... but without the characters and people who have actually done something in politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 August, 2019, 12:23:05 PM
As The Clash fortold: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49390285 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49390285)

It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala
When that well known face got beaten to bits, hurrah, tala
Your face was blue in the light of the screen
As watched the speech of an animal scream
New Party army was marchin' right over our heads

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2019, 01:35:13 PM
Violence against the left is self-defence.  Every true patriot knows that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 02:13:41 PM
Meanwhile, on  the left, Corbyn cleverly screws up what was otherwise a decent speech by performing Ultimate Fence Sitting on a second referendum, and then going all Trumpist when a journalist asks a perfectly decent question and his braying mob try to shout him down. FFS. It really comes across like he doesn't want to be PM or even in power, because activism is his home.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 19 August, 2019, 02:47:56 PM
It's rather grim the reported attack on the reporter Owen Jones. Some repulsive people are coming to the fore. Proudhuff might be right that we're ' Still at the stage of clubs and fists.'  A memorable song The English Civil War by the Clash and horribly prescient. Well, will Bo-Jo get his way, and throw us out of Europe since starving for Blue Passports is character building? I think the grim scheme, as far as my amateurish thinking goes, is to have Brexit then the Tories will call an immediate general election. There hoping grateful Northern voters, many of whom voted to leave the EU, will either vote for them or abstain. All this before the harsh realities of Brexit begin to kick in, of course. It's chilling in its logic and might prove 'A Bridge too Far' for Remain inclined Parties to match.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2019, 05:04:20 PM
The Jones attack happened because the right and center are increasingly conditioned to feel they shouldn't have to argue with a left they see as an illegitimate homogenous mob, best illustrated by the bastion of Sensibles in the commentariat keen to point out that they aren't condoning what happened to Jones, but he isn't really a journalist, just a "columnist" (The Guardian) or "Labour activist" (BBC News).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 August, 2019, 05:38:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 02:13:41 PM
going all Trumpist when a journalist asks a perfectly decent question and his braying mob try to shout him down.

I've not been able to find out what the question from the journalist was, or any report of the mob - any details?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 06:54:08 PM
The question was whether Corbyn would be willing to support someone else leading a temporary govt IF he couldn't command the House. The mob was Momentum types in the audience. The poor MP had to keep saying things like "may I remind you this is going out LIVE". She got the optics; no-one else did. Corbyn was grinning like an idiot for long stretches before going "*chuckle* No, no, let's let him ask the question. He's a very nice man". It was like a very British take on Trump, and pretty horrifying. (Also, while it's an out of context snippet – much of the rest was good – it's absolutely NOT the kind of shit Corbyn should be doing at this stage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 August, 2019, 08:17:23 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 August, 2019, 05:38:36 PMI've not been able to find out what the question from the journalist was, or any report of the mob - any details?

If you Google "Momentum mob" the first result is Guido Fawkes's fair and balanced reporting on events (https://order-order.com/2019/08/19/corbyns-anti-free-press-momentum-mob/) which explains how Corbyn is directly comparable with Trump for (checks notes) remaining polite, like an absolute bastard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 August, 2019, 08:46:53 PM
he should have shut down the droners there, seems like he was just letting their droning buy him some time he shouldnt really need, but it was hardly Trumpish - If we had to judge politicians by their most boorish supporters, we'd have a pretty thin playing field (maybe just Rory Stewart?).  I'd be more interested in hearing what his answer was.  I do wonder if stepping aside might be a good if risky play for Corbyn - showing he is the only one there willing to do whatever it takes it get the job done, rather than play personality politics.  As the official leader of the opposition, he shouldn't really have to, and it could be more damaging in cementing the "unelectable/unsuitable" tag.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 09:36:40 PM
No, this was directly out of the Trump playbook: grinning while a reporter is booed, waiting far too long to quieten the crowd, saying the reporter should be allowed to ask their question, and then allowing the entire debacle to repeat. I'm not saying Corbyn is Trump-like, but this episode was in the same territory, albeit at a much smaller – and more 'British' scale.

I've no idea what his answer was, but Labour so far have dodged that particular question like champion Dodgeball player Dodgy Dodge McDodgerson. Meanwhile, Labour activists continue to slam anyone asking the same question (including 'hilariously' getting Swinson's name wrong), while offering outright lies like how only the LOTO can form a government if the PM falls, and that other parties would be picking Labour's leader. (The confidence of the House can be held by any MP, and, indeed, any Lord. And there's nothing in law that states Corbyn could not continue as leader of the Labour party, planning the next GE, and defining policy, while someone else is temporary PM.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 August, 2019, 09:49:29 PM
I see what youre saying, though it isnt booing the journalist as such, but calls of "no", as in calling for Corbyn to resist what the Journalist proposes - I readily admit that you and others might see that as semantics - hesitating enough to let some awful woman drone on wasn't the best admittedly. still more interested in his answer.

Whether Corbyn is in the wrong in stating he should lead any interim Gvt or it is those calling for it not to be Corbyn is so chicken and egg that you could probably fuel a perpetual motion machine on the concept
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 10:09:54 PM
I don't like Corbyn, but I don't think he's wrong. I also am furiously angry with Swinson's ridiculous red line, given that she should have taken a lesson from May. Where the wheels fall off for Corbyn is in Labour's ongoing ideological position, which appears to be "back us, or we'll ensure the country falls into the abyss".

Labour COULD have offered a cooperative temporary government. Instead, they want Labour alone, and for support from everyone else will ensure no-deal doesn't happen, and would offer a second referendum – albeit one they're now saying they'd be neutral on (as the government, which is fucking astonishing).

Corbyn COULD entertain the very real possibility that he doesn't in fact – and will not under this composition – command the confidence of the House. So what then? What would Labour do if a VONC passes, and there's no temporary government to guarantee no deal doesn't happen? We might not be able to do a GE fast enough, so that means no deal by default because, what, Corbyn couldn't hack the possibility of someone else being PM for a month or three? He needs to get over himself. He's not bigger than the country. No-one is.

Frankly, the fucking lot of them need hurling into the sea, with a few rare exceptions. (That all said, I'm not sure who should head up a temporary government as PM. Who would everyone get behind? Is there a Lord that everyone could be OK in getting behind? Or an independent like Heidi Allen?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 August, 2019, 10:31:12 PM
Aye, there's the crux.  I do think the worry in the idea of parachuting in a Ken Clarke or Harman or Heidi Allen is they are ardent remainers - the very stereotype of "liberal elite" that Brexiteers have told us are trying to undemocratically take their toy from them - how would Farage et al spin that? Corbyn may have frustratingly tried to play both sides by playing none, but that makes him more of a neutral figure than those proposed - Corbyn would argue he is trying to find a "third way" between disastrous Tory Brexit and "let's call the whole thing off" - that might indeed put him in a minority in Parliament, so it might be the only alternative palatable to Parliament is a "sensible Centrist".  But what kind of look is that outside of Westminster?

If Corbyn isnt going to get this coalition, maybe someone else should do it - why do they need to wait for him if he doesnt have the numbers?


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 10:09:54 PM
Frankly, the fucking lot of them need hurling into the sea, with a few rare exceptions. (That all said, I'm not sure who should head up a temporary government as PM. Who would everyone get behind? Is there a Lord that everyone could be OK in getting behind? Or an independent like Heidi Allen?)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 August, 2019, 11:20:41 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 August, 2019, 10:31:12 PMIf Corbyn isnt going to get this coalition, maybe someone else should do it - why do they need to wait for him if he doesnt have the numbers?
Because if someone tries to circumvent Corbyn, a chunk of Labour will stomp off with their ball, leaving the numbers short.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 August, 2019, 08:47:54 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 August, 2019, 09:49:29 PMit isnt booing the journalist as such, but calls of "no"

It's perhaps germane that of the two kinds of attacks on journalists - physical assault and heckling - discussed in the last page or so of this thread, the one we ended up most invested in is the guy who got heckled.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 August, 2019, 08:50:36 AM
From the journalist in question (Andy Bell): (https://twitter.com/andybell5news/status/1163488269172170753)

Quote"2 points for me out of this 1) a partisan crowd's enthusiasm should not tip over into threat  (It didn't) 2) those on platform should make clear journalists must not be shouted down (they did)"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 August, 2019, 10:43:49 AM
Ultimately, a lot of this comes down to Labour's shitty media training. Corbyn could and should have nixed this earlier, and not grinned like an idiot at his lot shouting down a journalist asking a perfectly reasonable question. Also, I'm very much aware that this kind of shit happens at Brexit and Conservative pressers, too. But I want Labour to be BETTER.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 August, 2019, 01:26:44 PM
I can't believe I missed the obvious "WOW those Corbyn people jumped all over that journalist like it was 2AM outside a pub" joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 20 August, 2019, 03:57:10 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 August, 2019, 01:24:31 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 02:07:42 AM
At least we'll have bendy bananas. (https://youtu.be/uovt1sC3rtM)

Edit: which I meant to post in the politics thread.  Ah well.  It's here now.


I certainly agree that Johnson's career should have ended back in 1994, when he made up that myth!

Stewart Lee has been writing about BJ often in his Sunday column,, adding to his name each time - he now refers to him as "Boris Piccaninny Watermelon Letterbox Cake Bumboys Vampires Haircut Wall-Spaffer Spunk-Burster Fuck-Business Fuck-The-Families Get-Off-My-Fucking-Laptop Turds Johnson" - which come to think about it, is an easy way to fill up a 500 word column if you repeat the gag a few times!  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 August, 2019, 04:05:31 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 20 August, 2019, 03:57:10 PMhe now refers to him as "Boris Piccaninny Watermelon Letterbox Cake Bumboys Vampires Haircut Wall-Spaffer Spunk-Burster Fuck-Business Fuck-The-Families Get-Off-My-Fucking-Laptop Turds Johnson"


Classic
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 August, 2019, 08:10:53 PM
There have been very few human beings as relentlessly and pointedly funny as Stewart Lee.  There's your caretaker PM right there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 August, 2019, 08:55:51 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 August, 2019, 08:10:53 PM
There have been very few human beings as relentlessly and pointedly funny as Stewart Lee.  There's your caretaker PM right there.

That'd be an entire decade of privately educated Prime Ministers, who were all at Oxford together*


* Which would mean the UK had been governed by Oxford graduates since 1979, with only the brief tenure of the unelected Brown (Edinburgh) and Major (Life) offering respite. May wasn't at Oxford at the same time as Cameron, Johnson and Lee, but she was there alongside Blair. If the IRA had really been trying to alter history, they'd have targeted Corpus Christi, not chip shops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 09:27:24 PM
I can only read that as either A) genuinely suggesting murder or B) making a joke about murder.  Either way, it's in poor taste. Any sentence that begins with "What the IRA should have done..." should trigger alarm bells in that part of one's mind that filters the output.  Do you have that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 August, 2019, 09:37:47 PM

I really like your posts, Funt, but part of your brain is missing. This keeps on happening to you (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=36237.msg995013#msg995013).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 20 August, 2019, 09:50:02 PM


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CsX-sdtWcAEM5_s.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 August, 2019, 10:09:18 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 09:27:24 PM
I can only read that as either A) genuinely suggesting murder or B) making a joke about murder.  Either way, it's in poor taste. Any sentence that begins with "What the IRA should have done..." should trigger alarm bells in that part of one's mind that filters the output.  Do you have that?

I didn't read it like that at all - it seemed to me a valid point about strategy. In any armed struggle, the ordinary people (in chip shops) tend to suffer far more than the ruling elites (in Corpus Christi), which is  crazy because it's the elites who cause all the trouble in the first place. Ordinary people, by and large, just don't care about who rules where and just want to live in peace and safety.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 August, 2019, 10:17:24 PM
Elites have better security than people in chip shops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 August, 2019, 10:18:39 PM

And better chips.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 August, 2019, 10:34:03 PM
I strongly doubt that. The best chips are always to be found in the grungiest chipper. There's nothing worse than a gentrified chip.

There's also nothing wrong with going to Oxford per se, it's a very fine university once you past all the institutional bollocks and the tendency for the rich to foist their disprortionately inadequate children on its negotiable mercies in the hope that a posh-sounding degree will make up for a complete absence of learning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 August, 2019, 11:19:51 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 20 August, 2019, 10:34:03 PM

The best chips are always to be found in the grungiest chipper.


Actually, you're right. Furthermore, I have never been able to make a bacon buttie as good as those made by greasy ragamuffins  in greasy roadside vans.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 11:34:18 PM
Quote from: Frank on 20 August, 2019, 09:37:47 PM

I really like your posts, Funt, but part of your brain is missing. This keeps on happening to you (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=36237.msg995013#msg995013).

*mutter* *mumble*  ... dredging up something I said last October and calling it a pattern ... *winge* *moan*

A good chip is better than a good french fry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2019, 12:40:16 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 11:34:18 PM



A good chip is better than a good french fry.


Xenophobia now? Tsk, tsk... :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 21 August, 2019, 01:50:08 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2019, 12:40:16 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 11:34:18 PM



A good chip is better than a good french fry.


Xenophobia now? Tsk, tsk... :D
Well, nobody likes pommes frites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2019, 01:56:19 AM

Exactly - and this is why we have Brexit...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 August, 2019, 11:58:50 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 August, 2019, 12:40:16 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2019, 11:34:18 PM



A good chip is better than a good french fry.


Xenophobia now? Tsk, tsk... :D

Kettle Pot you ragamuffinist!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 August, 2019, 06:33:16 PM

:D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 August, 2019, 10:49:22 AM
This is the 1066th page of this thread. The Sex Page, I suppose
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 August, 2019, 11:08:27 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 24 August, 2019, 10:49:22 AM
This is the 1066th page of this thread. The Sex Page, I suppose

I get that!


(http://www.2000ad.org/covers/2000ad/hires/1066.jpg)


I mean, if you were going to theme prog 1066 around anything, other alternatives suggest themselves more readily than mild titillation. Battle*, Invasion, a sequel to There's Something Abnormal About Norman, even.


Egmont didn't own Battle, but Bad Company, Koburn and El Maldito demonstrate you can Tharg-up a Battle premise without giving anyone in Legal a hard shift.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 August, 2019, 07:22:32 PM
A mark was missed with that issue, should have been prog 1069.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 August, 2019, 07:35:28 PM
Quote from: Frank on 24 August, 2019, 11:08:27 AMBattle*, Invasion, a sequel to There's Something Abnormal About Norman, even.



I see what you've done there...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 August, 2019, 09:16:39 PM
Shout-out to Philosophy Tube (Oliver Thorn) doing a live read-through of the complete works of Shakespeare on Twitch (https://www.twitch.tv/philosophytube) in aid of the Samaritans.  It's often as delightfully shambolic as you'd expect a stream currently approaching its fourth day and featuring supporting roles played by game streamers, social media communists and/or real actual actors to be, but it's all in a good cause.

Should you be unaware, Philosophy Tube is the creation of Thorne, a reformed LibDem voter who took up explaining philosophical concepts on that there Youtube after someone went and put higher education beyond the financial reach of young people like himself, but fast forward 6 years and a switch of ambition from academia to acting and he's become one of the most entertaining Youtubers generating original content.
His latest video explaining "Climate Grief" helpfully highlights how burning rainforests and all cops being bastards are the same problem. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqCx9xU_-Fw)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 August, 2019, 10:32:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 August, 2019, 09:16:39 PM
Shout-out to Philosophy Tube (Oliver Thorn) doing a live read-through of the complete works of Shakespeare on Twitch (https://www.twitch.tv/philosophytube) in aid of the Samaritans.  It's often as delightfully shambolic as you'd expect a stream currently approaching its fourth day and featuring supporting roles played by game streamers, social media communists and/or real actual actors to be, but it's all in a good cause.

Can't decide if that was intentional or auto-correct (commentators / communists)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 August, 2019, 11:07:06 PM
Mostly they're from the Breadtube community, so technically they are both.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 August, 2019, 06:07:22 AM
Still relevant. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EHT6rNpABA)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2019, 11:40:09 AM
I've enjoyed the last couple of weeks of liberal fanfiction in the Guardian describing how the Queen is going to step in and stop Brexit any second now, but I must say the punchline just before the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme kicks in was a bit depressing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 August, 2019, 11:52:56 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2019, 11:40:09 AM
I've enjoyed the last couple of weeks of liberal fanfiction in the Guardian describing how the Queen is going to step in and stop Brexit any second now, but I must say the punchline just before the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme kicks in was a bit depressing.

It's hilarious. Well, it isn't, but the fact that there are people who think the Queen will step in is a very good measure of just how far we have all fallen during this whole bloody mess.

I suppose next they'll be saying that she made a veiled political attack on Boris the Baboon, based on what piece of jewellery she wore when meeting him.

Ugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 August, 2019, 01:32:30 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2019, 11:40:09 AM
I've enjoyed the last couple of weeks of liberal fanfiction in the Guardian describing how the Queen is going to step in and stop Brexit any second now, but I must say the punchline just before the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme kicks in was a bit depressing.

Maybe they were thinking of the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 August, 2019, 01:42:47 PM
I don't think so, otherwise they would have mentioned it before now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 August, 2019, 01:56:29 PM
Hah.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 28 August, 2019, 02:01:13 PM
Nobody:

Absolutely No One:

Not a Soul:

BoJo: "You see this democracy..."
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/cc14c3cccebd13ca765532ae8afd36cd/tenor.gif?itemid=12138330)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 28 August, 2019, 09:04:21 PM
By eliminating Parliament, Bo-Jo's fuckwit Brigade gets their way by default. The Tory majority is too thin, and Jonson doesn't want to wait till October hence the barnstorming. They'll be blood on the streets sooner or later over this. >:D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 28 August, 2019, 09:30:46 PM

So long as the people believe that these squabbling lunatics have the right to screw things up for everyone else in order to increase their own wealth and power, they'll continue to screw things up for everyone else in order to increase their own wealth and power.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 August, 2019, 01:27:22 AM
Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157)

---

Everyone concentrate now, really hard, close your eyes and wish the bad men would go away because your belief in their power is their only strength.  Did you wish?  Really hard?  Now open your eyes ... yay!  Oh, no, wait - turns out that has no effect at all.  Bummer.  Hey Shark, that doesn't work!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2019, 06:25:02 AM

Neither does wishing for a decent "government."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 August, 2019, 07:03:14 AM
Well, yes, exactly: wishes don't work.  But the reason I responded to your first post is that you were suggesting that pure belief (i.e. wishful thinking) would have an effect.  What confuses me about your rhetoric is that it doesn't even agree with itself from one post to the next.  You can boil it down to this as a conversation:

A: People should wish for better things.
B: But wishes don't work.
A: Neither do wishes, though.

Once again, I cannot square your endless circle.  (And also apparently can't resist responding when you publicly victim blame the electorate for the behavior of their government.  Which isn't in quotes, because it's a real thing, not a figment of our collective imaginations.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2019, 10:35:53 AM

It's not about wishing, Funt, or about apportioning blame. To me, it's about realising and acknowledging that a big part (to my mind, the biggest part) of our collective problems is that we all have the same basic rights and responsibilities regardless of our station in life.

If and when we realise this will just be the first step. What we do with this knowledge is another question altogether, a question which has myriad consequences, problems and solutions.

And I like your responses and criticisms because they encourage me to try and be clearer when I'm talking about my position.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 August, 2019, 10:41:16 AM
It's good to know that when governments finally start to push through the essential but incredibly painful and unpopular measures that preventing the death of the human world now requires, the Mother of Parliaments has shown us all how it can be done.  Quick referendum on "Do you you want to stop everyone you love dying from the effects of climate change?', claim that the measures involved would never do *anything* to negatively affect lifestyle or economy, and then interpret that mandate however the f*ck you like and suspend parliament until it's done.  Sign me up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 29 August, 2019, 12:35:54 PM

We could have Climate Police - "This your bonfire, Creep?"

Sham Slade: Carbo-Hunter.

Aluminium Barium Carbon Warriors.

Mandroid Against Carbon Horrors One.

Flesh: Extinction. (Zarjaz issues 10, 14 and 17 (written by Yours Truly, illustrated and lettered by Chris Geary - Shameless Self Promotion Dept.) because, as bad as things are getting, we're all here for the comics, right?)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 August, 2019, 02:23:45 PM
I'm not going to lie to you Sharky, sometimes it's only the comics, or prospect of same, that get me out of bed in the morning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 29 August, 2019, 02:28:14 PM
It's been interesting to see some online Tories cheering the departure of Ruth Davidson today. She's personally and near single-handedly responsible for the recent resurgence of the Tory vote in Scotland - and they don't care. As a nationalist myself, I should be glad to see her go, because she was a potent enemy of the independence cause - but at least she actually seemed to be a sane, fairly reasonable human being, something that's getting increasingly rare in her party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 August, 2019, 02:37:34 PM
Yeah, from a complete outsider's perspective Davidson appeared as close to being a competent adult human as it's feasible for Tories to be. Even her exit speech had an honesty to it. Obviously a poor fit for the contemporary party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 September, 2019, 01:32:06 AM
I know politicians are supposed to lie, but has Boris no sense of shame?  (Rhetorical, of course: otherwise I'd be guilty of asking a stupid question.) 

This in reference to his continuing protestations that he's attempting to make a deal with the EU, when he can't provide any substance to indicate that there is any attempt being made to make a deal.

It's pure politics (100% proof), a complete absence of any reality save the underlying quest for power.  "If I say A, and people believe me, I might gain B."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 September, 2019, 09:33:40 AM
I've no idea what the party's tactics are now. The only possible explanation is that this is a combination of purge (get rid of any moderate Tory) and an election to secure a majority. The thing is, this is easily defeated. Non-no-deal has the numbers. All it would need is for Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens to set up a non-aggression pact for English seats. That this is extremely unlikely (expect perhaps between GP/LD in a few seats) is deeply depressing, and will be the difference between a Labour-led coalition and no/soft Brexit, and Johnson's kipper version of the Tories trampling over everyone's face for as long as it likes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 05 September, 2019, 01:20:35 PM
and the wheel spins, round and round and round she goes, where she stops nobody knows!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 September, 2019, 02:30:37 PM
It's baffling. We are now at the point – a really horrible point – where Labour and the SNP collectively just have to stay a bit calm and not jump the gun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 September, 2019, 03:26:25 PM
The Conservative/DUP bed has, well and truly, been shat in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 September, 2019, 06:45:39 PM
I'm increasingly convinced that Brexit is now too useful as a distraction to let 31st October be the end of it.  Arguing about the minutia of shit trade agreements after then is nothing compared to the atmosphere of fear and uncertainty that Brexit has come to represent and it's just too useful a political tool to let it be over and done with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 September, 2019, 10:16:14 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 05 September, 2019, 03:26:25 PM
The Conservative/DUP bed has, well and truly, been shat in.

The Conservatives must rue the day they made a pact with the DUP. It was only ever going to end badly.

I just hope the DUP take the trouncing at next elections that they deserve, but then I've been hoping for that for years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 September, 2019, 11:05:52 PM
Quote from: Rately on 05 September, 2019, 10:16:14 PM
I just hope the DUP take the trouncing at next elections that they deserve, but then I've been hoping for that for years.

Well, this sounds promising. (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/sinn-fein-open-to-westminster-electoral-pact-with-other-proremain-parties-to-challenge-the-dup-says-oneill-38468538.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2019, 01:18:37 AM
People in Northern Ireland vote along sectarian lines and literally no scandal exists that will change our minds about the tribes to which we swear fealty - if anything, the appearance of bringing that billion pound bribe home will only make the DUP more popular here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 September, 2019, 07:00:14 AM
I refuse to bring this up in the RIP thread but....

Mugabe can fucking burn in hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 06 September, 2019, 08:52:47 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2019, 01:18:37 AM
People in Northern Ireland vote along sectarian lines

You're over-qualified to be NI secretary with that level of expertise: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/07/karen-bradley-admits-not-understanding-northern-irish-politics (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/07/karen-bradley-admits-not-understanding-northern-irish-politics)

and there may be a glimmer of hope...https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/25/northern-ireland-unionism-nationalism-tribalism (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/25/northern-ireland-unionism-nationalism-tribalism)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 September, 2019, 11:45:31 AM
Well, Sinn Fein have inferred they'd potentially stand down to fuck the DUP and let in more pro-EU candidates. A possible in for more Alliance seats? Here's hoping.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 06 September, 2019, 01:57:09 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 September, 2019, 11:45:31 AM
Well, Sinn Fein have inferred they'd potentially stand down to fuck the DUP and let in more pro-EU candidates. A possible in for more Alliance seats? Here's hoping.

More Alliance representatives can only be a good thing.

The country needs more Naomi Longs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 September, 2019, 04:40:42 PM
SF voters won't vote for centrists any more than the DUP's base would vote for a party that abandoned their pro-union founding principles in favor of union-skepticism.

The only realistic option would be standing Labour candidates and harking back to the solid the party did the Shinners in 1918.  A callback like that is a gift if your aim is to appeal to the fenian vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 September, 2019, 06:48:57 PM
Scottish judges rule Parliament suspension is unlawful (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-49661855): good olde Scotch Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_law), providing rulings on all matters pertaining to Bourbon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_whisky) since afore ye 12th century, no?

I'm fully expecting the Supreme Court of Albion to diss the ruling, but it's still nice to see some arse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson) being kicked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2019, 09:13:07 PM
There we go. Yellowhammer (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf). Remember that this ISN'T the WORST CASE no-deal Brexit scenario.

Food shortages, medicine shortages, fuel shortages, 'localised' disruption to water supplies, severe impact on the care sector, police resources strained due to anticipated civil unrest.‬ And a redacted paragraph for good measure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 September, 2019, 09:21:47 PM
They don't care, Jim. They're taking back control. Taking it back from Parliament. Taking it back from the Law. Taking it back from the Courts. And then apparently handing it to a cabal of hedge-fund managers, via their bumbling lackeys.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2019, 09:13:07 PM
There we go. Yellowhammer (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf). Remember that this ISN'T the WORST CASE no-deal Brexit scenario.

Those who saw the original document describe the current report as identical, the only difference apart from the redacted elements being that the term "baseline scenario" has been removed.

The redacted paragraph comes in the middle of discussion of civil unrest and the possibility of police forces being overly-stretched, so I can't imagine what the redacted section could possibly have been about, but I will say that I and most of my family survived soldiers on the streets, and I imagine so will most of Britain.

edit: actually, according to those in the know, it's not martial law-related, it's just a thing about there being no petrol for 2 weeks and a minimum of 2000 British jobs being lost overnight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 September, 2019, 10:13:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2019, 09:13:07 PM
There we go. Yellowhammer (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf). Remember that this ISN'T the WORST CASE no-deal Brexit scenario.

Food shortages, medicine shortages, fuel shortages, 'localised' disruption to water supplies, severe impact on the care sector, police resources strained due to anticipated civil unrest.‬ And a redacted paragraph for good measure.

They should've just got Hibernia (http://hiberniabook.blogspot.com/2014/02/tower-king-collection-out-now.html) to do a new run of The Tower King.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 September, 2019, 10:14:38 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 09:42:11 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2019, 09:13:07 PM
There we go. Yellowhammer (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf). Remember that this ISN'T the WORST CASE no-deal Brexit scenario.

edit: actually, according to those in the know, it's not martial law-related, it's just a thing about there being no petrol for 2 weeks and a minimum of 2000 British jobs being lost overnight.

Well, we've already lost about a quarter of a million jobs (https://smallbusinessprices.co.uk/brexit-index/) - that's a conservative estimate - others put it around the 400,000 mark.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 11 September, 2019, 10:31:37 PM
Then there's the UK citizens working in the EU and being paid in Sterling and basically seeing a drop in income of around 15-20% due to Sterling versus the Euro.

It's a fucking shambles all round.

Goddam Russians, Aaron Banks, Cambridge Analytica, and all the other dirty money from shady foreign entities that weaponised Facebook data to completely screw our democracy!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 10:53:33 PM
As is always worth pointing out, foreign interference in UK elections is not exceptional but the standard.

Germane to that, here's an interesting article by South Africa's Daily Maverick detailing how the UK security services turned the Guardian into their sock puppet to the point that independent journalists and human rights organisations no longer bring sensitive stories to the paper because they no longer trust it. (https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/amp/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 September, 2019, 11:02:51 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 09:42:11 PM

edit: actually, according to those in the know, it's not martial law-related, it's just a thing about there being no petrol for 2 weeks and a minimum of 2000 British jobs being lost overnight.

Redacted para apparently reads: "15. Facing EU tariffs makes petrol exports to the EU uncompetitive. Industry had plans to mitigate the impact on refinery margins and profitability but UK Government policy to set petrol import tariffs at 0% inadvertently undermines these plans. This leads to significant financial losses and announcement of two refinery closures (and transition to import terminals) and direct job losses (about 2000)."

Can't imagine why they redacted a paragraph that basically says "And we managed to take this clusterfuck and make it even worse, directly costing 2000 people their jobs"...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 10:53:33 PM
As is always worth pointing out, foreign interference in UK elections is not exceptional but the standard.

Germane to that, here's an interesting article by South Africa's Daily Maverick detailing how the UK security services turned the Guardian into their sock puppet to the point that independent journalists and human rights organisations no longer bring sensitive stories to the paper because they no longer trust it. (https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/amp/)

Let's avoid the media then, and see what the academic viewpoint is.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/11/14/the-extent-of-russian-backed-fraud-means-the-referendum-is-invalid/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2019, 09:54:18 AM
Chaos being normalised. Johnson doing Chinese-style state broadcast instead of attending prior commitment at a democratic investigation. Parliament literally shut down on a whim (and there's nothing in law to stop this being done for, say, the entire parliamentary term, because our constitution only works if those in charge play fair). Gearing up for a general election where a worst-case Brexit will be forced through by a majority government backed by a third of the electorate.

This is all going swimmingly, isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 September, 2019, 11:03:37 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 September, 2019, 09:54:18 AM
Chaos being normalised. Johnson doing Chinese-style state broadcast instead of attending prior commitment at a democratic investigation. Parliament literally shut down on a whim (and there's nothing in law to stop this being done for, say, the entire parliamentary term, because our constitution only works if those in charge play fair). Gearing up for a general election where a worst-case Brexit will be forced through by a majority government backed by a third of the electorate.

This is all going swimmingly. Isn't it?

Yes, it's horrifying. Bo-Jo acts like his ogreish pal Trump, a President with questionable legitimacy. More division, less cohesion, almost invites disaster. Maybe that's the scheme with chaos and social breakdown on the streets people tend to look for a 'strongman' to save them. We all know that would favour conservative forces and their Law and Order spin. The chilling times we live in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 11:12:35 AM
Yep.  And it's all thanks to dark money and Russia, playing the UK populace via normal and social media.  Russia couldn't have done more damage to the UK and the cohesion of the EU without an actual physical war.  They've played a blinder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 September, 2019, 12:38:18 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 September, 2019, 10:53:33 PM
As is always worth pointing out, foreign interference in UK elections is not exceptional but the standard.

Let's avoid the media then, and see what the academic viewpoint is.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/11/14/the-extent-of-russian-backed-fraud-means-the-referendum-is-invalid/

You seem to be under the impression I am disputing that there was interference in the EUref, when I was actually saying that there is interference by outside actors in every British vote, the obvious example of this being the constant drip of poison from the headlines of foreign press barons.  Considering the number of electoral law violations the Tories are regularly charged with, setting a precedent for ignoring the results of votes that were compromised would arguably end British democracy overnight.

edit: Which in theory sounds great, tbh, but you can understand why the establishment aren't keen to go down that route.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 02:47:25 PM
Apologies! Wasn't making myself clear. I agree there has been and will always be interference.

I think my original point, probably not made remotely clear, is 'it just me, or has that interference been ramped up to the nth degree in the last three or more years?'

It would have helped if I'd framed it like that originally.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 12 September, 2019, 05:28:46 PM
As with the election of Trump (and the Mueller investigation), the whole Russia angle (imho) has been overplayed, and stems from a desire to shift the blame for our malaise onto an external actor, when in fact the causes of the dysfunction in our society are much closer to home. If we're gong to blame anyone, the likes of the Telegraph and the Daily Mail deserve far more blame than a few Russian bots shitposting on facebook.

The uncomfortable fact about both Brexit and Trump is that they were both somewhat inevitable (in hindsight), and can't be dismissed as the result of some big conspiracy, or social media manipulation. They both happened for a reason. Trump supporters and Brexiteers are by and large right to feel aggrieved. Their anger is understandable, and things do need to change. It's just that (imo) they have been conditioned by right wing politicians to target their anger at the wrong people. Same as it ever was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 06:53:28 PM
Yep, I'll go with that to a certain extent, as 10 years of all the papers constantly laying the blame for our ills on the EU, with a huge slab of lies, hyperbole and racism on top, can't NOT have had an effect on the nation's psyche.

But again, it's the entities with money doing this. The narrative is not being controlled by the populace.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 September, 2019, 07:06:41 PM
QuoteTrump supporters and Brexiteers are by and large right to feel aggrieved.

I think I disagree, but then I have to make an assumption as to what you're suggesting they have a right to feel aggrieved about.

I can think of things where I don't think they have the right to feel aggrieved. Like, a Brexiteer doesn't have the right to feel aggrieved about the EU forcing the UK to maintain a certain banana curvature, because that was just a load of shit thought up by a younger Boris.

Trump supporters don't have the right to feel aggrieved by a wave of criminal immigrants, because there was no data to suggest that the asylum seekers at the border were criminals. It's just that Trump called them rapists and thieves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 12 September, 2019, 07:50:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 September, 2019, 07:06:41 PM
QuoteTrump supporters and Brexiteers are by and large right to feel aggrieved.

I think I disagree, but then I have to make an assumption as to what you're suggesting they have a right to feel aggrieved about.

I can think of things where I don't think they have the right to feel aggrieved. Like, a Brexiteer doesn't have the right to feel aggrieved about the EU forcing the UK to maintain a certain banana curvature, because that was just a load of shit thought up by a younger Boris.

Trump supporters don't have the right to feel aggrieved by a wave of criminal immigrants, because there was no data to suggest that the asylum seekers at the border were criminals. It's just that Trump called them rapists and thieves.

Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly, but that's sort of my point - the anger is real/arguably justified, but that anger is being directed at the wrong targets. Its the same old 'blame the other' tactic.

I'm not even remotely an expert on the subject, but the real problem, as I see it, is one of wealth inequality (the North/South divide in both the US and the UK, decades of right wing/neoliberal economic policy and the decline of industry, trade unions etc etc etc). Like, it's not hard to see why large swathes of the population feel disenfranchised and left behind, and why that anger eventually led to a backlash, and a rejection of the status quo.

I've travelled a lot around the US in the last few years, and the inequality and rural/urban divide here is even more stark than it is in the UK. Whole towns just cast off and left to rot, an out of control crisis of homelessness and poverty that is bizarrely, maddeningly underreported. Even five years ago when I moved here it was easy to sense a feeling of unease and foreboding in the air every time I stepped out of my metropolitan bubble.

It's easy to poke fun at Brexiteers and Trump supporters and dismiss them all as loons, but it isn't going to make them go away. Pointing the finger at Russia and wasting time with things like the Mueller investigation is just avoiding talking about the real, underlying social problems that led us to this mess.

That's my two cents, anyway.

Quote10 years of all the papers constantly laying the blame for our ills on the EU, with a huge slab of lies, hyperbole and racism on top, can't NOT have had an effect on the nation's psyche.

More like 40 years, isn't it? There's been spurious, bendy banana type stories about the EU for as long as I can remember.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 10:40:07 PM
Aye.

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 September, 2019, 10:41:27 PM
Thanks for explaining: I see what you mean.  The outside manipulation by other states is partly just taking advantage of problems that already exist at a local level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 10:50:01 PM
Indeed. At ground level we are completely fucked. Voluntary Services are being stripped to the bone. Just in Wales we've lost youth services, child mental health services, drug and alcohol services, community centres, Greek areas, woodland areas, etc etc etc. Homelessness is soaring, poverty in general is soaring, child poverty is particularly awful, and so on.

Unions are almost a thing of the past, apathy is rife, and the electorate are being led by the nose by the media.

Even when the UN Special Rapporteur rocked up and told everyone what a dreadful poverty stricken shitshow it was the government and media barely batted an eyelid. Why would you report those things though, if the populace IS EXACTLY WHERE YOU WANT IT TO BE? Hungry, abused, powerless.

The working class is now the service class, unwittingly servile to those who control the narrative - the millionaires and billionaires.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 11:37:35 PM
Apologies for the typo - not Greek areas, GREEN areas.

Though the smashing of plates has risen, as sadly domestic violence is also on the increase.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2019, 11:53:37 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 10:50:01 PM


Hungry, abused, powerless.



We are not powerless. We are the power - that's they're afraid to tell us, and what we're afraid to admit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 11:57:29 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 September, 2019, 11:53:37 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 12 September, 2019, 10:50:01 PM


Hungry, abused, powerless.



We are not powerless. We are the power - that's they're afraid to tell us, and what we're afraid to admit.

Tell that to the poor fuckers out there literally BEGGING for a No Deal Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 September, 2019, 12:03:24 AM

If they're begging for other people to save them, they can't listen. Anybody who believes in the state cannot believe in their own power. We're beaten - we've been brainwashed over centuries to believe that power comes from above.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 September, 2019, 12:24:10 AM
I blame Enclosure!

I'm not sure EU membership and international trade deals are decided at the anarcho-syndicalist level, Sharky.  I think you specifically need large nation states for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 September, 2019, 12:38:40 AM

Yep, you 'need' nation states to tell you who you can and can't trade with, what you can and can't buy, what you have to buy things with and how much of a kickback to pay the state.

Yeah, nation states are essential because there's no way ordinary people are clever enough to buy and sell things on our own...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 September, 2019, 04:08:05 AM
Like a Big Mac: tempting but ultimately unfulfilling.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 13 September, 2019, 06:52:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 13 September, 2019, 04:08:05 AM
Like a Big Mac: tempting but ultimately unfulfilling.

... tends to sit like a bowling ball on the stomach, repeating at irregular intervals as the body struggles to digest it before forcing the lions share of the damn thing through the lower intestine and out the alimentary canal ...

Hmmm, does that work as an analogy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 14 September, 2019, 09:44:19 AM

YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH A COW

One for the Shark (Legendary) and the Monkey (Shaolin)

Life on the island of Eigg, where they drove off their feudal lord with fire and established an anarcho-syndicalist commune powered by renewable energy (using EU funds*).

WE THOUGHT WE COULDN'T DO WORSE THAN THEY HAD, WHICH WAS NOTHING (https://youtu.be/YzIguTRN7Rk?t=555)


* There are dozens of such caveats in this one report, but let's not spoil the narrative
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 14 September, 2019, 05:35:34 PM
Thank you, that was utterly brilliant!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 September, 2019, 07:55:15 AM

AL EWING JUST HAD AN
IDEA FOR A STORY



https://news.sky.com/story/johnson-warns-eu-the-madder-hulk-gets-the-stronger-hulk-gets-11810117
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 15 September, 2019, 02:04:18 PM
A brainless, rage-driven monster which leaves a trail of destruction in its wake and has an intelligent half that does all that they can to put things back to normal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 September, 2019, 02:38:07 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 13 September, 2019, 06:52:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 13 September, 2019, 04:08:05 AM
Like a Big Mac: tempting but ultimately unfulfilling.

... tends to sit like a bowling ball on the stomach, repeating at irregular intervals as the body struggles to digest it before forcing the lions share of the damn thing through the lower intestine and out the alimentary canal ...

Hmmm, does that work as an analogy?

It works as an anal loggy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 September, 2019, 11:34:10 PM
I want to visit the houses of all the people who don't want the RNLI spending less than 1p in every pound teaching Bangladeshi kids to swim* and twat them about the head with a lifebelt until their humanity reboots.

As if the RNLI doesn't do enough. As if it should be funded by donations in the first place. Pathetic racist shits.

And just wait until the Mail discovers they cover RoI too!


*Roughly 14,000 kids and 8,000 adults drown in Bangladesh every year. Probably worth a few pence trying to bring that down a bit, eh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2019, 10:34:51 PM
He says he's the Hulk, but it looks like he's ... the Invisible Man (https://www.channel4.com/news/empty-podium-for-boris-johnson-as-he-pulls-out-of-brexit-event-with-luxembourgs-pm).

(https://i.imgur.com/57u41Mj.png)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2019, 08:27:05 AM
UK news outlets swallowed the spin, though, including Channel 4 news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 September, 2019, 09:43:25 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2019, 08:27:05 AM
UK news outlets swallowed the spin, though, including Channel 4 news.

Wow, just Wow.

We really are in the stupidest times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 September, 2019, 10:44:19 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2019, 08:27:05 AM
UK news outlets swallowed the spin, though, including Channel 4 news.

What was the spin on Johnson running away from scrutiny (again)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 September, 2019, 11:19:38 AM
Wily Boris cleverly avoiding a cynical ambush by the intransigent Neo-Nazi EU superstate, a sort of Dunkirk manoeuvre in response to Brussels Blitzkrieg but presumably without the thousands of French rearguard troops dying while covering his oh-so noble retreat, and then being painted as cowards ever more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 17 September, 2019, 11:51:29 AM
You could confuse them even more by actually showing some of the African and Indian soldiers and sailors who helped in aspects of the evacuation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 17 September, 2019, 01:23:25 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 17 September, 2019, 11:51:29 AM
You could confuse them even more by actually showing some of the African and Indian soldiers and sailors who helped in aspects of the evacuation.

Or the Highland Division being left behind and sacrificed in a rear-guard action with the French.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2019, 01:54:35 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 17 September, 2019, 10:44:19 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2019, 08:27:05 AM
UK news outlets swallowed the spin, though, including Channel 4 news.

What was the spin on Johnson running away from scrutiny (again)?

To be fair (an outdated concept when you're defending someone you hate) a press conference can be scheduled anywhere - but they chose to have it right next to the railings where they knew there'd be booing protesters. Now this may just be an unplanned coincidence, or it may have been deliberate scheduling to make him look bad, in which case it would be a very petty stunt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 September, 2019, 02:04:29 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2019, 01:54:35 PM
To be fair (an outdated concept when you're defending someone you hate) a press conference can be scheduled anywhere - but they chose to have it right next to the railings where they knew there'd be booing protesters. Now this may just be an unplanned coincidence, or it may have been deliberate scheduling to make him look bad, in which case it would be a very petty stunt.

You'd presume BJ's people knew where it was to be held and checked it out, well in advance, but it transpires they requested a change of venue at the last minute.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2019, 02:12:04 PM
Which lends weight to his version of events - that the Luxembourg PM planned this as an ambush, and BJ's lot weren't aware until the last minute.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 September, 2019, 02:26:17 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2019, 02:12:04 PM
Which lends weight to his version of events - that the Luxembourg PM planned this as an ambush, and BJ's lot weren't aware until the last minute.

It was BJ who requested the change of venue at the last minute not that the venue itself was sprung on them. Not that it really matters: he went to the EU with nothing to offer and left with nothing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2019, 02:42:56 PM
Well, that's it, isn't it? The course of events was that the venue had been agreed, and Johnson could do his big podium thing. But when he rocked up, yet again he's faced with protesters. His team then suggested moving everyone inside, despite the fact the podiums were already mic'd up, and the more important issue that there wasn't enough room for all of the accredited journalists. Johnson's team suggested cherry picking a select few (which in itself should set of FUCKING LOUD alarm bells), but Bettel reportedly didn't give the slightest shit and was happy to continue. Johnson chickened out.

This was then framed by the usual parties as an EU attempt at humiliating the PM, and Channel 4 went along for the ride. The reality is we've now sunk to the point as a country where we're being humiliated on a daily basis anyway, by just our very existence and actions; and also, the UK still doesn't understand that the point of the EU is it gives everyone a much greater collective voice, from the mighty powerhouse of Germany through to the very smallest members.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 September, 2019, 03:54:36 PM
On balance, I think there was a sense that Bettel was quite amused by the predicament that Johnson found himself in. But it's just schadenfreude: not a planned set-up.

Johnson is really being hoisted by his own petard. He keeps bluffing that he's got everything under control: you couldn't ask for a clearer metaphor of his actual relationship with Europe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 September, 2019, 03:30:44 AM
Youtube lefty Jack Saint's two-part thesis "All Cops Are Bad (in Media)" examines authoritarianism in US cop movies, and the second part covers Judge Dredd (1995), Dredd (2012) and Wagner/Cooper's One-Eyed Jack. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7quIlnIllk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 September, 2019, 09:32:05 AM
Aye saw that, Jack makes good video essays on socio-political elements of media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 September, 2019, 10:21:14 PM
Now, do I have time to watch the latest Channel 4 news reports..?

(https://i.imgur.com/YCFDCSP.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2019, 05:42:30 PM

I like most of you, and we've eaten the same food, read the same books, listened to the same music and watched the same telly for our entire lives, but I've given up hope of ever understanding The English:


(https://i.imgur.com/sP1wTSD.png?2)


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 September, 2019, 07:10:00 PM
Just the English..?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 September, 2019, 07:48:03 PM
I really don't understand why no-one wants to vote for the sexist, racist, antisemitic, anti-sugar, anti-Falklands, terrorist-loving, Britain-hating, weak-willed, authoritarian, tax-raising, business-hating, muslim-loving Labour Party which is simultaneously in chaos and also controlling all events at all times under the personal guidance of Putin via an army of online trolls and offline crisis actors who wait around in hospitals to ambush Tory politicians with carefully-scripted scenarios involving their nonexistent infant children and which they play out for waiting cameras from the liberal media who are helping undermine the government's negotiating position with the EU, which is important even though we don't want or need any deal because we want sovereignty back from unelected bureaucrats and Boris Johnson our PM will get it for us.

Yeah this started out as flippant but I realise now that's it's just a summation of where we are.  The Tory Party have pulled The Gimp out of its crate and I am not one jot surprised that everyone is eager to vote for a violent bumming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 September, 2019, 07:52:05 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 September, 2019, 07:10:00 PM
Just the English..?

I'm assuming the Boris Bounce (see chart) is primarily an Anglo thing, but I don't have the data to back that up. The Welsh voted for Brexit too, so maybe they're delighted Dom Cummings is riding the mother of parliaments like a newly shorn merino.

There's a section of the green and pleasant land that just feels better being ruled by Downton Abbey.

Not that I think Tunnock-munchers will have to worry about England's midlife crisis for much longer - although the history of newly independent nations (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094995) illustrates the nature of the Chinese curse. It's not as if we haven't been going quietly insane (https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/four-loyalist-marches-given-go-20098893) ourselves.

Hutus and fucking Tutsis, man.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 September, 2019, 10:11:19 PM
Quote from: Frank on 19 September, 2019, 07:52:05 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 September, 2019, 07:10:00 PM
Just the English..?

There's a section of the green and pleasant land that just feels better being ruled by Downton Abbey.


Speaking as a Mick who's half English by blood, I must say that's one aspect of English politics that's always baffled me.  Why does every PM have to be posh?

Not that the likes of our barely-coherent Bertie are much better, mind you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 September, 2019, 10:30:14 PM
Quote from: Frank on 19 September, 2019, 07:52:05 PM
Hutus and fucking Tutsis, man.

Aye, tribalism. I was playing Alternative Ulster by the Stiff Little Fingers one time and my neighbor, who'd always been pleasant and up for a chat and a bit of drink, suddenly turned weird and starting ranting "No! No alternative! Never!" like he'd been possessed by the spirit of Ian Paisley. (Although I have no idea which variant he was: he just had a similar accent to Paisley.)

He calmed down when Closed Groove came on. I think it's really sending the same message, but is perhaps less clear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 22 September, 2019, 12:21:12 AM
Justin, Justin, Justin.

What is it?

I'll bet everybody on this forum has made it to some right venerable ages, 55 for me,  without once putting on blackface or dressing up as a Nazi or being charged with sexual assault or fucking a pig's head or wanking off into a potted plant in the presence of a co-worker*.

It's really not that hard to get through life without being accused of these things.


* Even this, the most likely, no, not even close.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 06:07:34 AM
Um, yes. Of course. Definitely. Nothing like that here. Nope. Not one thing... (https://standupdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/ed35b8092cf3043ecd0b4401ee494194e66ae3d01cb4114692f3c870_1280-3-640x427.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 September, 2019, 08:21:53 AM
I think it's just you, Tips.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 September, 2019, 11:46:13 AM
I had a jobby dressed as a Yeti in Tooting Bec Underground but my social worker says I shouldn't mention that under oath....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 03:10:39 PM
Do you mean you had a job dressing as a Yeti or that you did a jobby whilst dressed as a Yeti?  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 September, 2019, 03:14:34 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 03:10:39 PM
Do you mean you had a job dressing as a Yeti or that you did a jobby whilst dressed as a Yeti?  :-\


Yes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 September, 2019, 03:17:46 PM

So, how does everyone feel about copyright and selling prints of fan art?

(ducks and zig-zags for cover)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 05:04:06 PM

In my view, patents, copyright and IP restrict artistic, scientific and technological development and are actively detrimental to human progress.

If memory serves, patents and copyrights were created in the 16th Century as a way for the king to grant monopolies to his friends and supporters. One of the first (again, from memory) was for the printing of playing cards, of all things, so that only one person was allowed to print, and profit from them. If someone had come along at that time with a process for printing playing cards of an equal or higher quality for a lower price, they'd have been banned from doing so and prosecuted if they tried.

Innovations are often adaptations and/or amalgamations of existing technologies, such as Henry Ford's assembly line, which was based on a novel arrangement of existing technologies, or the invention of the typewriter, which was inspired by the piano. When adaptations of existing technologies are outlawed, it can only restrict innovation.

Imagine if there'd been caveman patent lawyers. The person who invented the flint blade would have had control over their invention and nobody else would have been allowed to copy it, improve the technology or adapt it without paying Ug the Napper. In such a world, the knife handle might never have been invented, or the arrow head, or even the metal knife.

It's also not uniformly enforced. Einstein should have made oodles from his work, and every sat-nav maker (for example) should be kicking back a percentage to his family and descendants - and yet the family of the creator of Dan Dare (for example) control that character to this day, which seems arse about face to me.

As a wannabe writer myself, I'd expect to be paid for my work if I wrote a worthy novel or script and sold it to a publisher. Once it's been released into the wild, however, it's not mine any more and belongs to everyone. If another publisher comes along and decides to reprint my work then it would be nice to receive payment but - so long as my name was attached - I couldn't, in all conscience, insist upon it. I also couldn't complain if another writer came along and extrapolated from my stories or used my characters, so long as that writer used their own name and not mine (which would be fraud anyway and thus unlawful to start with). This other writer might want to pay me for endorsing or "authorising" their work, which would be nice but, again, not compulsory. Their work might be much better than mine anyway - a real treat for readers. Then again, it might be about the same or inferior, but that's life. Me keeping tight control of my "IP" deprives readers, writers and publishers of revenue, innovation and enjoyment.

Whilst JRR Tolkein was in negotiation with a US publisher, a "pirated" copy of The Lord of the Rings was released and he simply asked readers not to buy it and to wait for the "official version," which worked quite well - especially as this was long before the internet.

Once an idea is out in the world, it cannot be realistically controlled or restricted and belongs to everyone.

*hides behind Frank*

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 September, 2019, 05:59:59 PM
Disney famously lobbied for an extension to the term required before a character can enter the public domain so that they could hold on to the rights for Steamboat Willy, the first appearance of Mickey Mouse, which they could still have used however they wanted if it had entered the public domain, it's just that others could have made their own Steamboat Willy cartoons, too (why they want to is anyone's guess).
If Disney hadn't successfully lobbied for the extension, Spider-Man would have entered the public domain this year and Disney could have gone on making movies featuring the character that raked in billions instead of losing control to Sony and getting fuck all.  LOL, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 05:04:06 PM
Once an idea is out in the world, it cannot be realistically controlled or restricted and belongs to everyone.

Or, yes it can and no it doesn't. I mean: things are (copyrighted) and then free-for-all usage is blocked (legally). Me wandering around saying it ain't so will have no material effect.

It's a bit of a broad brush to state that being able to copyright your work is "detrimental to human progress", which is what you actually said. When I read it, I spat my cornflakes all over my screen so I've had to clean all that up to make sure I didn't just imagine it.

I suppose it's like any kind of ownership, really. Would you also argue that I should be able to walk into your house and take your stuff? No problems with that? The older I get, the more I think anarchy is as dumb as a bag of hammers. It's like a free-for-all idea that relies on humanity's generally decent good nature. The trouble is there are too many examples of humanity's generally indecent bad nature for me to accept it as a good idea.

If the world was in a state of anarchy, the first thing I'd want to do is organize some collective resistance. In other words: avoid anarchy at all costs. Just a terrible idea. Like giving in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 22 September, 2019, 06:21:55 PM

That's a reasoned and considered response, Shark. I was talking about the fuss that happened on social media when a fan sold prints of their art, which was very closely based on original work by a 2000ad artist.

The insanity that ensued seems to have spread across social media, with one 2000ad artist being asked whether he'd sought permission from a dead creator to provide cover art for a collection of their work.

The way everyone instantly divided into one camp or another, and the ferocity, vitriol and absolute conviction with which they argued echoed the dynamics of the other divisive issues of our time. I think we've been infected with a kind of madness.


It's not relevant to Shark's point, but Dan Dare is owned by the Dan Dare Corporation (https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/01228849-the-dan-dare-corporation-ltd), which is controlled by a TV producer (https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-1526715/Dan-Dare-and-the-battle-for-163115m.html) who was a fan as a kid. The whole point of the tragic, emblematic story of Dan Dare is that his creator(s) - and, therefore, their heirs - had no control or financial interest in the future exploitation of their creation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 06:43:20 PM

Taking property is a different thing. Property is a scarce resource, ideas are infinitely replicable.

Anarchism isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, and I don't agree with all of it, but statism is much worse. I'd rather rely on my own judgement, and the judgement of the individuals I deal with, rather than being forced to submit to the judgement of a Boris Johnson or Donald Trump. Bending to people like that simply because they won a popularity contest is dumber than a whole warehouse full of bags of hammers.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 06:47:06 PM

Thanks for the Dan Dare correction, Frank.

It doesn't change my argument but it's good to get the facts right.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 07:05:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 06:43:20 PM
Taking property is a different thing. Property is a scarce resource, ideas are infinitely replicable.

I wouldn't have to call "bollocks" so often if you didn't present absolutes with such frequency. Look at the work of Escher, of Giger, of Einstein. The intellectual property they created should belong to them in the same way that a talented wood-worker should earn a crust from their finished product.

At what point do you take the end product and decide that it's so much something that is just borne of an "infinitely replicable" source of ideas that actually it just belongs to everyone? Happy days for the plagiarists in your world.  "Yeah, I didn't actually come up with any of the ideas or anything, but I could if I wanted, so really it's mine, ain't it?" It's a playground argument. "I know the secret of how to transmute lead into gold." Prove it. I could if I wanted but I'm not going to...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 07:45:16 PM

If an artist creates a work, then it is theirs to sell, absolutely. But what if the buyer then sells that artwork to a third party? Should the artist get that money as well? If I sell a Dredd GN I bought, should I pass on the money I get for it to Rebellion?

If I pay a master woodworker to make me a bespoke table, to whom does that table belong?

People should be able to profit from their work, you'll get no argument from me on that score. However, expecting an income in perpetuity for something you've already been paid for is, to me, unreasonable. Would you pay a plumber to install a toilet and then continue to pay them 10p per flush for as long as you use that toilet? If not, why not? How about paying the manufacturer 10p per flush after you've bought it?

I mentioned Einstein to highlight the differences in attitude to what is essentially the same thing. If one wants to exploit his work to invent a gps system then that seems to be okay but if one wants to exploit something of far less importance, like a fictional character, then that's seen as wrong and punishable.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 September, 2019, 07:53:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 07:45:16 PM
Would you pay a plumber to install a toilet and then continue to pay them 10p per flush for as long as you use that toilet? If not, why not? How about paying the manufacturer 10p per flush after you've bought it?


Kicking into total pedant mode, you do pay for each flush.  That's the sewerage part of your water bill ....

[ducks quickly]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 07:57:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 07:45:16 PM
If I sell a Dredd GN I bought, should I pass on the money I get for it to Rebellion?

No, but you also shouldn't mass produce copies of it and sell those. Your original argument was against copyright, not against selling on a single product you bought. You're changing the position of the goal posts mid-way through the argument. Ref calls foul!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 08:16:22 PM

Nope, same thing. See my op.

The creators have been paid once by the original publishers, the secondary publishers might reprint it without permission but, basically, so what? It's entirely analogous to buying the original publication second-hand. One might believe that the second publisher is acting immorally but that's a judgement call on the part of the secondary publisher and their customers. As I said, so long as the original creators are credited then I can't see a problem.

If I were to re-publish 'Judge Dredd: Day of Chaos, by John Wagner,' and put enough money into the project to produce a really nice (or really cheap) version, then there should be no problem, especially if I throw a few sheckels at Mr Wagner and company. The purchaser must decide whether to buy it or not. If, on the other hand, I were to re-publish 'Judge Dredd: Day of Chaos, by The Legendary Shark,' two things would happen. First, I'd be rightly laughed out of town and probably not sell a single copy and, second, I'd open myself up to charges of fraud and be punished accordingly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 September, 2019, 09:10:45 PM
Honestly, you make no sense. On the one hand you reference fraud laws, on the other you say copyright is nonsense. It's scattershot logic, or you're trolling me and I'm an idiot for responding. Sadly, I think it's the second.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 September, 2019, 09:30:43 PM

You seem to be under the impression that anarchy is the same as lawlessness. Anarchy depends on law and can't work without it. Statism, on the other hand, can't work without the ability to ignore, pervert and simulate law.

IP laws (legislations), as I said originally, were invented to grant monopolies to favoured royal supporters and have no foundation in reality. Fraud laws, on the other hand, arise from tradition and actual case laws. Fraud is a form of theft, which is an ancient and widely accepted crime.

And I'm not trolling you, I simply have a different view, which I have tried to explain - though I don't seem to have done a very good job of it, for which I apologise. If you wish to continue, then I'm happy to try and make my arguments clearer - if not, then that's fine too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 22 September, 2019, 11:28:10 PM
I see where you are coming from.

But there's a fuck ton of other people who have invested time and effort (and money) to make Day Of Chaos a viable product. 

If you spent time planting an orchard, feeding and nurturing, looking after the trees for years until they bore fruit, you'd be pretty hacked off if people came along and took your fruit.

It wouldn't matter if they brought their own ladders and baskets, they'd still be taking, literally, the fruits of your labour. Fruit that they had nothing to do with getting ready to harvest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 September, 2019, 11:43:14 PM
The creator of PePe the Frog basically had his character hijacked by neo-nazis who proceeded to produce counterfeit merchandise and profit off of his IP.

Thats why we have content protection laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 05:10:02 AM
In 500 BCE, the government of the Greek state of Sybaris offered one year's patent "to all who should discover any new refinement in luxury". (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property#History)

The grey area is all important: there are cases where IP constricts creative solutions (such as medical development being horded for profit) but also cases where it seems fair that the artist should be the main beneficiary of their hard labors, or decide who to sell stuff to (rather than just any lazy chump who happens to wander along afterwards and claim that it's easy to think of such things).

"The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave." - Ayn Rand
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 10:35:43 AM
I remember in a recent GE (2015, I think, but it might have been 2017), the Greens wanted to overhaul copyright rules. That they couldn't easily do so unilaterally seemed to have escaped their thinking, but I did notice the number of people I know in the creative industries who were considering voting Green (quite a few) dropped almost to zero on hearing this news. They were, to put it lightly, massively insulted and absolutely furious by the Greens' stance.

A lot of it came down to "you shouldn't have the right to profit from the thing you've made for long, and you can just make up other ideas anyway". That hand-waving thing that creativity is just something on tap. But also, there was the wonderful follow-up of the market naturally deciding to 'reward' the rightful owners/creators, if a dodgy rip of their stuff were to occur. So author X writes an amazing novel. After the laughably small rights window that was being proposed, OF COURSE everyone would continue to buy from author X and not undercut company Y. And when movies come out, OF COURSE everyone would flock to the one that's paying the original creator, because that's how things work!

Except it isn't. This kind of system would make things far worse for creators, because all of the power (rather than, as now, 'merely' a whole lot of it) would sit with those who have the deepest pockets.

I'm all for better creator rights. I agree that copyright shouldn't be forever. But I'm also not for removing what little rights people currently enjoy under the law, for whatever work they've made.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 05:26:57 PM

Tips, an orchard is a physical thing, a scarce resource. Stealing apples isn't the same thing as copying a book. The author of a book always owns the content of their book, the abstract form, the arrangement of words and/or illustrations. When that abstract form is made physical, as in the printed book, the purchaser of the book owns that physical thing, just like the purchaser of the apple owns that apple. Once the apple or book has been purchased, it's up to the owner what they do with it. The purchaser of the apple does not own the orchard just as the purchaser of the book does not own the story. Theft of an apple is the same as the theft of an original manuscript. Once the apple or the original manuscript has been sold, the ownership of the physical object passes from the farmer/author to the new owner. The new owner of the physical object can do with it as he or she sees fit - just as they can with any other physical property they lawfully own. The owner of the apple has every right to plant the apple seeds found inside and grow a tree just as the owner of the book has the right to copy it or reinterpret or expand upon it - but neither has the right to claim the orchard or the story as their own.

Hawkie, I think that's a different argument. Would you be as upset if it was, say, Amnesty International who used PePe to raise funds instead of neo-nazis?

FS, your post highlights one of the fundamental problems with IP (etc) legislation, namely its arbitrary nature. Where did the Greeks come up with the one year term of monopoly? Why not six months or eternity? We've already seen how the arbitrary nature of these legislations reward the Dan Dare Corporation and offer the discoverer of E=mc² absolutely nothing. I don't think any of us are comfortable with arbitrary laws, I'm certainly not.

The pharmaceutical industry is a big advocate of IP, and one can understand their reasoning. If a company invests large amounts of money into developing a product, why should they not be given a patent or monopoly on their developed products? Humanitarian reasons aside, this is a good question. However, I have no problem with trade secrets. A company can keep developments, formulae, etc. to itself and guard its secrets closely. However, this does not protect them from parallel developments or reverse engineering. Existing laws offer some protection from industrial espionage but parallel developments are a risk every developer faces. If two companies invest heavily in developing the same or similar products, why should the first to finish glean all the rewards and the runner-up be forced to write off their investment? That doesn't seem fair and is the antithesis of the free market. In the case of reverse engineering, again this is an aspect of the free market which itself requires time and funding. The original developer will still have a head start in which to try and recoup its investment which it may or may not do. On the plus side, the company would not have to pay for legal fees and IP lawyers and would still have the option of entering into contracts with other companies to manufacture their development. It's not perfect but, then again, neither is the current system.

Sorry, this is a long post already and there's still a lot to say. Should I continue or have we had enough?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 05:54:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 05:26:57 PM
Should I continue or have we had enough?

That made me laugh. There is a sense that you're beating me into submission with word volume. I still think you're just arguing that it's okay to steal other people's work: you're just dressing it up in lots of blah.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ch9gG2mWMAExI_M.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 06:19:07 PM

No, that's not what I'm saying.

Copying is not theft because ideas and knowledge are not property. Imagine that I own a farm and discover oil on it. I decide to keep this information to myself and plan to buy up my neighbours' properties before they find out.

A burglar breaks into my house and steals my laptop, on which are details of the oilfield. The thief then spreads the word and my neighbours find out about the oil. Despite the fact that the thief committed a crime against me and is prosecuted, the information is out there.

If one believes that ideas, knowledge or information can be owned and stolen, then one must believe that my neighbours have no right to it and therefore have to forget it or be guilty of receiving stolen property, and that they have no right to charge me ten times what I was offering to buy their land, or to sell to someone else, or to pump the oil themselves.

I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right or to "beat you into submission." I'm trying to explain how I view this subject - the high word count is simply a fault in my style because I can't seem to explain things properly in a condensed fashion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 06:31:08 PM
Where is the incentive to create work that will immediately be taken by someone else?

Let's say a basement inventor spends decades working on their SuperMaguffin2000,a machine that everyone will want but nobody has ever thought of - he's slaved and studied and invested huge amounts of time and money into creating a prototype - but once he unveils it, a multinational with deep pockets and a chain of manufacturing plants and a distribution network will instantly start making it and selling it - inventor gets nothing for their hard work and genius. Under your system, he would be fine selling the physical prototype he's knocked up, but won't get a penny of the gazillions that it makes on the market.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 06:51:08 PM

That kind of happened to Nikola Tesla under the current system - which doesn't make it right, of course.

In your example, this is indeed a risk - but to both parties. Would you support such a Mega Corp's actions in this case? The negative publicity could easily ruin the big company, especially given the power of the internet to spread and amplify public opinion. It would be in the Mega Corp's best interests to reach an equitable deal with the inventor.

Under the current system, it's easier for the Mega Corp to rush through a patent and tie up the inventor for years, and easily ruin him or her, through protracted legal battles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 06:57:04 PM
Sorry, Shark, but your response is akin to those Greens in the GE campaign – basically that good people will punish the large corporations for being mean. Ultimately, that never happens. Our current copyright system is deeply flawed in fundamental ways. Moreover, the UK also doesn't have a sensible fair-use system. It is absurd that you cannot format-shift, for example, thereby creating a system where you're supposed to buy the same content multiple times, on increasingly ephemeral services.

BUT as someone immersed in the creative industries, I like having some protections for what I do, and the publications I work for. Without it, many of those things would be gone. In short, the system needs reform, not eradication.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 06:51:08 PM
In your example, this is indeed a risk - but to both parties. Would you support such a Mega Corp's actions in this case? The negative publicity could easily ruin the big company, especially given the power of the internet to spread and amplify public opinion. It would be in the Mega Corp's best interests to reach an equitable deal with the inventor.

Absolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE. If everyone is going to want a SuperMaguffin2000, and economies of scale means that Global Bastard Inc. can sell it first, at a fraction of the cost that Honest Local Co. can, then people will buy it from them whatever the internet says. They're not going to be the only one on their street without a SM2K because they think it's a shame that Professor Genius isn't getting paid enough. They're not going to wait a year until a more equitable company puts it into production whilst generously donating profits that they don't have to to the Prof.  A system reliant on a shaming campaign going viral is ridiculous.

Once again your argument falls to pieces on the realities of human nature.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 07:09:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 06:19:07 PM
Copying is not theft...

Yes it is.

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ClassicUniformGerbil-size_restricted.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:13:16 PM

It won't just be good people, it'll also be investors and shareholders. Those kinds of hard-nosed people will stop investing or dump their shares if they think the Mega Corp is going to take a financial hit. Then suppliers and affiliates, not to mention employees, will start backing out as well.

Doing away with IP will actually open up opportunities for creatives because there will be far more projects that can be worked on.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 07:13:37 PM
The SuperMaguffin2000:

(http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/384860/10035592/1293944839297/Steampunk-clock05-STEAMPUNK-TREND-CULTURE_full_380.jpg?token=BLmKqJHifWqlizvtlWafsg5j7wU%3D)

Kopyleft 2019
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:13:16 PMDoing away with IP will actually open up opportunities for creatives because there will be far more projects that can be worked on.
Doing away with IP will eradicate opportunities because the risk will be colossal, and the rewards will be almost entirely removed. For people who just faff about with things as hobbies – again, I refer to all those Greens I argued with – this is fine. For people who have a carerer in creative industries, you're talking about obliterating their livelihoods, because you think IP should be a free-for-all.

Again, I think the system needs work, fair-use needs strengthening, and current copyright laws should be questioned, but lobbing the entire lot into the sea won't result in some kind of utopia for creatives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PMAbsolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE.
They do far worse, far more often, because they are protected by governments.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:28:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:13:16 PM

It won't just be good people, it'll also be investors and shareholders. Those kinds of hard-nosed people will stop investing or dump their shares if they think the Mega Corp is going to take a financial hit. Then suppliers and affiliates, not to mention employees, will start backing out as well.

Doing away with IP will actually open up opportunities for creatives because there will be far more projects that can be worked on.

But that's the point - bad publicity doesn't mean a financial hit - Look at the Nestle Babymilk Action campaign - the longest running ethical consumer boycott going (I really miss my Rowntrees fruit pastilles!), but Nestle are still one of the hugest and most profitable companies in the world, people still buy Nescafe, and babies are still dying by being force-marketed inappropriate baby formula. Or those drugs companies that suddenly increase the price 4000% - they get bad publicity and everyone agrees it's awful - but they don't care because they make lots of money.

You're talking about those 1 in a 10000 cases where public anger does directly affects sales - out of all the awful, evil things that multinational corporations do on a daily basis, can you name me any examples of that ever working?

We shop in Primark even though we know that you can't sell a shirt for £3 without somebody being exploited, we tut and moan about all the evil things that companies do, but ooh look, shiny things that are cheap!

Companies know this and 99.9% of the time, they'll just make some concerned PR noises, wait till the fuss dis down and keep raking in the cash.

I'll put my faith in a statist system of laws and regulations, over the self-sacrificing goodwill of either consumers or corporations any day of the week. Sadly, greed and self interest always beat altruism, we need laws to enforce basic principles and stop the worst excesses of exploitation.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PMAbsolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE.
They do far worse, far more often, because they are protected by governments.

Now the problems arise when the corps have too big an input into framing those laws, but that's another argument. IP protection is needed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:28:43 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:23 PM...some kind of utopia for creatives.
There's that tired old straw man again. There is no such thing as Utopia, just as there is no such thing as a perfect system. Industries will adapt. This idea that all companies are evil rapists is pure paranoia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:30:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PMAbsolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE.
They do far worse, far more often, because they are protected by governments.

And you're doing the "I can't win this argument so I'll shift the goalposts" thing again - we're talking about IP rights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 07:47:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:28:43 PMIndustries will adapt. This idea that all companies are evil rapists is pure paranoia.
One, probably don't use the R word in this context. Completely inappropriate. Two, adapt in what sense? You are literally saying that, say, Rebellion would have to hope people would reward it with loyalty, when any other company could do whatever the hell it likes with its IP. And that creatives would have to risk that. Then expand this out to everyone doing anything creative that would currently fall under existing legal protections.

This isn't about adaptation. This is about creating a place in which creatives have zero protection, and will therefore be far less likely to put in the effort, because the risk is far too high. (Or, as I explained to the Greens, you just end up entrenching the fortunes of the super-wealthy, because they can afford to take said risks, and will have the marketing clout to shout loudest.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:48:42 PM

Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:30:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PMAbsolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE.
They do far worse, far more often, because they are protected by governments.

And you're doing the "I can't win this argument so I'll shift the goalposts" thing again - we're talking about IP rights.

Yes, we are. As I said, something in the mind is not property, only government legislation makes it so. If you keep an idea in your mind and don't tell anyone about it, that's your right. Once you tell somebody, or sell your idea, it cannot be exclusively yours any more.

If someone copies your story, or expands upon it, then what has been stolen from you? Nothing. You still have the idea, it's not like it's been sucked out of your head. One might argue, then, that it's your extra income that's been stolen - but that makes no sense either because it implies that other people's money belongs to you, that you have a right to it.

It's like saying one shop is stealing customers from another, as if customers can be owned.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:51:12 PM

Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:30:03 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 07:08:18 PMAbsolute tosh - multinational companies do far worse, far more often and don't give a fuck what the anyone says - and why? BECAUSE THEY CAN AND BECAUSE IT'S PROFITABLE.
They do far worse, far more often, because they are protected by governments.

And you're doing the "I can't win this argument so I'll shift the goalposts" thing again - we're talking about IP rights.

Yes, we are. As I said, something in the mind is not property, only government legislation makes it so. If you keep an idea in your mind and don't tell anyone about it, that's your right. Once you tell somebody, or sell your idea, it cannot be exclusively yours any more.

If someone copies your story, or expands upon it, then what has been stolen from you? Nothing. You still have the idea, it's not like it's been sucked out of your head. One might argue, then, that it's your extra income that's been stolen - but that makes no sense either because it implies that other people's money belongs to you, that you have a right to it.

It's like saying one shop is stealing customers from another, as if customers can be owned.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 07:58:23 PM
QuoteIf someone copies your story ... then what has been stolen from you? Nothing.

Everything. The intellectual property has been stolen.  You're advocating that people should be slaves to other, stronger people. You're arguing in favor of slavery. (Which makes sense, because as a non-voter, you're giving your country's management over freely to others and giving up any say you might have in the process. So, in some fashion, you want to be led and desire to have no say. You wish to be a slave.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:22:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 07:47:09 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 07:28:43 PMIndustries will adapt. This idea that all companies are evil rapists is pure paranoia.
One, probably don't use the R word in this context. Completely inappropriate. Two, adapt in what sense?


One, the context was in raping ideas, as I suspect you well know. Two, adapt in the sense of looking after their creatives as valuable resources. What would it profit any publishing company to deter the creators of original works? That would lead to them only being able to employ third-rate hacks (like me :D).

The publishing industry needs top flight creators of original works. Let's say Uncle Pat decides to write an original James Bond story, for example, for 2000AD. That would bring in new readers, James Bond fans, who might then stay for the other stories. Rebellion might decide to reprint classic Dan Dare strips, or seminal comic works from history, to fill the Megazine floppies - a treat for regulars and a draw for new readers.

Once Uncle Pat's James Bond series has finished, Rebellion could still collect it into a GN and then have two choices, to pay Uncle Pat or to not pay him. Which option would make more sense if they want to keep him on board? Another company might want to collect the parts into a GN themselves and face the same question. They could photocopy the Progs and do it that way, without paying a penny, or they could pay for access to the original artwork (which is property and can therefore be kept under lock and key forever, if needs must) and maybe a foreword by the creators.

It's not like the ability to copy existing works is suddenly going to make everybody want to buy them. Some of the greatest literary works in history are available to be published by anyone, but that hasn't put Plato or Homer into the Top Ten Bestseller charts.

Speaking of Homer, if IP had existed in his time, we probably wouldn't have The Iliad or The Odyssey today. As I understand it, Homer presented his stories orally and it's only because some "criminal" wrote down what he said (using their own materials and time) that we can still enjoy them, centuries later.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 08:29:46 PM
In this rosy future, Rebellion doesn't exist, because all the IP it relies on has been co-opted by much larger companies with colossal budgets. Most of the creators are no longer creating, because there are no guaranteed income streams. After all, there's no IP law, and so anyone can use anything and copy everything. Turns out, people won't buy stuff when everything is freely available and there's no law against anything that isn't a physical object.

Quoteor they could pay for access to the original artwork (which is property and can therefore be kept under lock and key forever, if needs must)
Most artwork is now digital, which means there's no physical product. Under your rules, on what basis do these have any rights whatsoever?

QuoteSpeaking of Homer, if IP had existed in his time, we probably wouldn't have The Iliad or The Odyssey today. As I understand it, Homer presented his stories orally and it's only because some "criminal" wrote down what he said (using their own materials and time) that we can still enjoy them, centuries later.
The world may have changed a little bit since then. (Also, I am not blind to the benefits of a certain amount of illegality. One of the reasons many 8-bit games are extant is because people cracked them in the 1980s. But then that's more an argument for fair-use law than the wholesale eradication of IP law.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:40:35 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 07:58:23 PM
QuoteIf someone copies your story ... then what has been stolen from you? Nothing.

Everything. The intellectual property has been stolen.  You're advocating that people should be slaves to other, stronger people. You're arguing in favor of slavery. (Which makes sense, because as a non-voter, you're giving your country's management over freely to others and giving up any say you might have in the process. So, in some fashion, you want to be led and desire to have no say. You wish to be a slave.)

I can only assume you haven't been paying attention. Ideas. Cannot. Be. Property. Property is any tangible, scarce resource. Ideas are intangible and practically infinite.

Theft can only happen with a limited resource. If I steal your car, that's theft because I've deprived you of something real. If you could just snap your fingers and magick up another car, then me stealing your car wouldn't be theft because you could create an infinite number of cars at no cost - but you can't (or, if you can, could you magick me up an Aston Martin, please?), so stealing your car deprives you of it. If, on the other hand, you tell me about your technique for tweaking your car's fuel system to increase efficiency and I use your idea to tweak my own fuel system, that isn't theft because you still have your idea. But if you write your idea down in a notebook and I steal the notebook, then I've only deprived you of your notebook and can be prosecuted for that. I haven't stolen your idea, your intellectual property, because it's still in your head.

Only through the bizarre alchemy of government legislation can something you still possess and have unlimited access to (your fuel-tweaking idea) be classed as "stolen."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 September, 2019, 08:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:40:35 PM. Ideas. Cannot. Be. Property. Property is any tangible, scarce resource.

I haven't read this latest argument in detail, nor am I going to. A large part of my living involves creating art.  If someone started selling prints of my work, I'd consider them a thieving gobshite who is cheating me out a living. Putting extra full stops in your counterargument won't change that.  That's all I'm going to contribute here till the subject changes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:58:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 08:29:46 PM...there are no guaranteed income streams.
I think this is the foundation of your argument, greed. You expect a creative to write a novel (for example) and then be allowed to live off it for ever. This does not apply to a plumber, who also has to use his intelligence, his training, his experience and his (yes, yes - or her) creativity to install a bathroom but only gets paid once. It's a corporate mindset, the mindset you so obviously despise, to earn as much money as possible for the minimum of effort.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 09:04:59 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 23 September, 2019, 08:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:40:35 PM. Ideas. Cannot. Be. Property. Property is any tangible, scarce resource.
I haven't read this latest argument in detail, nor am I going to. A large part of my living involves creating art.  If someone started selling prints of my work, I'd consider them a thieving gobshite who is cheating me out a living. Putting extra full stops in your counterargument won't change that.  That's all I'm going to contribute here till the subject changes.
So sell your own prints and add extra value through signing them. Or make a deal to add extra value to the gobshite's prints by charging him (or her) for signing them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 09:12:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:40:35 PM
I can only assume you haven't been paying attention. Ideas. Cannot. Be. Property.

Now you're being patronizing and incorrect. IP laws exist: you can't deny it. Ergo, ideas literally are property. QED. Actual reality usurps your desired reality. Go ask a lawyer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 09:16:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:58:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 08:29:46 PM...there are no guaranteed income streams.
I think this is the foundation of your argument, greed. You expect a creative to write a novel (for example) and then be allowed to live off it for ever. This does not apply to a plumber, who also has to use his intelligence, his training, his experience and his (yes, yes - or her) creativity to install a bathroom but only gets paid once. It's a corporate mindset, the mindset you so obviously despise, to earn as much money as possible for the minimum of effort.
OK, I'm going to bow out here because the above is blinkered in thinking and pretty insulting. I'm not talking about people making a mint from royalties. I'm talking about editors and grips and staff writers and engineers and everyone else who will have no job because they won't exist. I'm talking about freelancers with regular work whose income streams will dry up. Most of the creative industry isn't people making fortunes – it's people getting by. And we Kong IP laws just ruins their chances for continuing to work. This isn't about greed. This is about the viability of the creative industry – an industry I've been deeply immersed in for nearly 20 years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 09:16:53 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 09:12:05 PMNow you're being patronizing and incorrect. IP laws exist: you can't deny it. Ergo, ideas literally are property. QED. Actual reality usurps your desired reality. Go ask a lawyer.
That's a circular argument. IP exists because legislation says IP exists, just like God exists because the Bible says God exists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 09:22:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 09:16:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:58:40 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 September, 2019, 08:29:46 PM...there are no guaranteed income streams.
I think this is the foundation of your argument, greed. You expect a creative to write a novel (for example) and then be allowed to live off it for ever. This does not apply to a plumber, who also has to use his intelligence, his training, his experience and his (yes, yes - or her) creativity to install a bathroom but only gets paid once. It's a corporate mindset, the mindset you so obviously despise, to earn as much money as possible for the minimum of effort.

I'm talking about editors and grips and staff writers and engineers and everyone else who will have no job because they won't exist.


A company trading in reprints will need staff too, just like the purveyors of original works. That's more jobs, not fewer.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 09:16:53 PM
IP exists...

Yes. That's what I've been saying all along. At last, we agree on something. *phew* As this is turning into a game of "last word", I'm going to excuse myself from responding further from this point of mutual agreement.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 23 September, 2019, 09:59:17 PM
IP exists in order to incentivise creative individuals to continue to create things.

The problem is that it is abused. But that does not affect the underlying rationale or reality of it.

True, ideas as a thing cannot be protected. They cannot be property. Inherently, once communicated, they are in the wild (hmm... there's a future shock in that). IP law is, therefore, an artificial construct designed to creat and attribute value to them.

To that extent, they are property. But only because the law says that they are.

In fact, the alternative to most of the laws to which Shark objects, should they be scrapped, is anarchy. I disagree with a lot of posts here for that reason.

But that is not to say things should not be questioned or unchanged. The rules are good for all, but only if the rules are fair. The problem is that the rules are often rigged. But that does not mean they should be scrapped or sacrificed on the altar of principle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 10:46:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:22:36 PMWhat would it profit any publishing company to deter the creators of original works?

They wouldn't need to deter or encourage as the creators would be powerless ...  they'd just wait till they create something and then steal it.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:22:36 PM
Once Uncle Pat's James Bond series has finished, Rebellion could still collect it into a GN and then have two choices, to pay Uncle Pat or to not pay him. Which option would make more sense if they want to keep him on board?

Why would they need to keep him 'on board' if they can just appropriate anything he produces, either for another publisher or self-published? Why would they invest in him at all by publishing it in the first place if they weren't going to have any exclusivity?


You write - how would you feel if one of your stories was published, became hugely successful, made into movies etc making millions for a bunch of talentless businessmen, and you received no money or recognition?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 September, 2019, 06:41:15 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 23 September, 2019, 10:46:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:22:36 PMWhat would it profit any publishing company to deter the creators of original works?

They wouldn't need to deter or encourage as the creators would be powerless ...  they'd just wait till they create something and then steal it.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 September, 2019, 08:22:36 PM
Once Uncle Pat's James Bond series has finished, Rebellion could still collect it into a GN and then have two choices, to pay Uncle Pat or to not pay him. Which option would make more sense if they want to keep him on board?

Why would they need to keep him 'on board' if they can just appropriate anything he produces, either for another publisher or self-published? Why would they invest in him at all by publishing it in the first place if they weren't going to have any exclusivity?


You write - how would you feel if one of your stories was published, became hugely successful, made into movies etc making millions for a bunch of talentless businessmen, and you received no money or recognition?


To your first point, protection would come from private law contract. No money, no work. Companies willing to enter into such contracts would be preferred over companies that just exploit.

To your second point, also as above plus the benefit of being the first to market with original content.

To your third point, I write because I enjoy it. In your unlikely scenario I'd be quite content. If my name was credited then I'd be able to make a living at conventions, signings and so on. If it was credited to someone else I'd be able to sue for fraud. If it wasn't credited at all I'd make it widely known that this was my work in order to undertake my first option and secure contracts with a more honourable company to produce either an "authorised" version or sequels. On an idealistic note, it's the work itself that matters, not the money. To bring enjoyment to so many people would be its own reward. I was born with nothing, have lived my life with enough to survive and I'll die with nothing - but I'd be content to leave such a popular legacy behind me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 September, 2019, 08:35:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 September, 2019, 07:13:37 PM
The SuperMaguffin2000:

(http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/384860/10035592/1293944839297/Steampunk-clock05-STEAMPUNK-TREND-CULTURE_full_380.jpg?token=BLmKqJHifWqlizvtlWafsg5j7wU%3D)

Kopyleft 2019


Looks more like the SuperMaguffin 1900 to me!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 September, 2019, 08:50:53 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 23 September, 2019, 09:59:17 PM
True, ideas as a thing cannot be protected. They cannot be property. Inherently, once communicated, they are in the wild (hmm... there's a future shock in that).


I can think of two Future-Shocks along similar lines off the top of my head - one with art by Trev Goring, the other written by Neil Gaiman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 September, 2019, 08:52:41 AM
Anybody else think it's strange that there's a page of discussion on IP on the Political Thread at the same time that the news has been taken over with reports on the Supreme Court deliberating and the beginning of the conference season?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 24 September, 2019, 09:12:09 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 23 September, 2019, 09:59:17 PM
IP exists in order to incentivise creative individuals to continue to create things.

The problem is that it is abused. But that does not affect the underlying rationale or reality of it.

True, ideas as a thing cannot be protected. They cannot be property. Inherently, once communicated, they are in the wild (hmm... there's a future shock in that). IP law is, therefore, an artificial construct designed to creat and attribute value to them.

To that extent, they are property. But only because the law says that they are.

In fact, the alternative to most of the laws to which Shark objects, should they be scrapped, is anarchy. I disagree with a lot of posts here for that reason.

But that is not to say things should not be questioned or unchanged. The rules are good for all, but only if the rules are fair. The problem is that the rules are often rigged. But that does not mean they should be scrapped or sacrificed on the altar of principle.

I don't know where you think you are, coming here with your nuanced, balanced and considered views. Pfffh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 24 September, 2019, 09:21:42 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 24 September, 2019, 08:52:41 AM
Anybody else think it's strange that there's a page of discussion on IP on the Political Thread at the same time that the news has been taken over with reports on the Supreme Court deliberating and the beginning of the conference season?

It's been a quiet week, to be honest.

Apart from the PM being exposed for giving gifts of government money to friends.

Apart from the government looking like losing their court case by acting dishonestly to stymie democracy.

Apart from the opposition collapsing into in-fighting.

Apart from the EU pointing out, again, that the UK isn't presenting any serious Brexit proposals, despite their grandstanding.

Apart from the US President using aid to pressure a foreign leader to intervene in US domestic politics against a rival.

As I say, it's been a quiet week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 September, 2019, 10:14:20 AM

Good post, DocX. As I'm obviously coming at this subject from an anarchist perspective I don't agree with everything you say but I'm glad that, whilst we are not on the same page, we are at least in the same book. Unless that book's under copyright, that is :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 September, 2019, 10:49:17 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 24 September, 2019, 09:21:42 AM
As I say, it's been a quiet week.

It's a photocopier jam of shit.  A shitjam, if you will.

But I think the unanimous UK Supreme Court ruling on Johnson's prorogation just leapfrogged right to the top of the roller-clearing queue. Go, law!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 September, 2019, 10:52:40 AM
Supreme Court: "The PM's advice to her majesty was unlawful, void, and of no effect... The prorogation was also unlawful, void, and of no effect. Parliament has not been prorogued."

It's worth mentioning that the rulings of the Supreme Court were unanimous. No one... NO ONE, not even the most optimistic legal commentators thought that would be the case.

In any normal circumstances, Johnson's position would be untenable and he'd be gone by the end of the day. I have little doubt he'll be in front of a lectern in the next thirty minutes going "FWAH! Enemies of democracy! Do or die!" and emphatically NOT going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 24 September, 2019, 11:35:44 AM
Sadly, that seems about right. How did we get here?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 September, 2019, 11:57:23 AM
That schtick will play well with the brain-dead and the far right (quite a simple Venn diagram, that), but I'd have some hope that the more Lawful Evil elements of the Tory party will actually balk at swallowing his effluent this time. They have to know that it utterly contradicts any small-c-conservative principles they still might have: ignoring the clearly-stated rule of law in favour of claims to popular support is literal fascism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 24 September, 2019, 12:24:25 PM
The Telegraph's headline is some shite about usurper remainer judges overturning the will of the people.  ::)

(By saying the unelected executive can't suspend the elected Parliament to avoid scrutiny.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 24 September, 2019, 12:24:54 PM
   Priti Patel: Until Brexit is fully operational, we are vulnerable. The Rebel Alliance is too well equipped. They're more dangerous than you realize!

    Domic Raab: Dangerous to your constituency, Commander. Not to this government.

    Patel: The Rebellion will continue to gain a support in the Parliament, until...

    Boris Johnson: [walking in with Rees Mog] Parliament will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word from the Lord Advocate that we can prorogue Parliament permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.

    Raab: That's impossible! How will you maintain control without democracy?

    BJ: The Secretaries of State now have direct control over their portfolios. Fear will keep the local people in line. Fear of hard Brexit.

    Patel: And what of the Rebellion? If the Rebels have obtained a complete technical readout of the law on proroguing it is possible — however unlikely — that they might find a weakness and exploit it.

    Rees Mog: The law you refer to will soon be back in our hands.

    Raab: Any attack made by the Rebels against this government would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they've obtained. This Tories are now the ultimate power in Europe! I suggest we abuse it.

    Rees Mog: Don't be too proud of this geopolitical terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a country is insignificant next to the power of the Constitution.

    Raab: Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Rees Mog. [Mog walks toward Raab, then slowly raises his hand] Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure up better legal advice or given you clairvoyance enough to find the Rebels' legal argumen–– [grasps his throat as if he is being choked]

    Mog: I find your lack of faith disturbing.

  BJ: Enough of this. Rees Mog, release him!

    Mog: As you wish. [drops his hand and Raab's head hits the table as he regains his breath]

    BJ: This bickering is pointless. Rees Mog will provide us with the core of the the Rebel legal case by the time prorogation is operational. We will then crush the Rebellion with one swift stroke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 September, 2019, 12:39:52 PM
Andrew Bridgen (Con MP for North West Leicestershire) has been quoted on the BBC as stating "Parliament is holding our democracy to ransom". That's... quite the take.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Theblazeuk on 24 September, 2019, 01:06:03 PM
How did we get here?

This guy.

Those people.

The Tories.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 September, 2019, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 24 September, 2019, 08:52:41 AM
Anybody else think it's strange that there's a page of discussion on IP on the Political Thread at the same time that the news has been taken over with reports on the Supreme Court deliberating and the beginning of the conference season?

I am honestly grateful to you for changing the subject. 

So, Johnson's decision to act like a fucking megalomaniacal dictator has been ruled illegal. There's hope for the UK yet.  But... five weeks left.

I'm on my holidays in Tenerife, though, so feck it, eh? Long may I be allowed to travel here without a Visa. Don't mean to rub it in, but looking at what Britain could well lose makes me appreciate what we still have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2019, 03:50:25 PM
When I see actual consequences for what he's done, then I might get excited, but as far as I'm concerned all this is just more distraction for which Johnson will not suffer any reprisals because his kind never do, meanwhile the political classes shall go about dismantling the welfare state and killing brown people in faraway lands while we all pontificate about Brexit.
Brexit is a slight of hand.  If it didn't exist, they'd have to create it, and I am not convinced this fucking thing will ever end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 24 September, 2019, 03:53:29 PM
Really? I thought it was Trump that was slight of hand?












I'll get my coat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 September, 2019, 10:12:20 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 24 September, 2019, 03:53:29 PM
Really? I thought it was Trump that was slight of hand?












I'll get my coat.

Well played, sir.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 September, 2019, 11:05:52 PM
You stupid Remain bastards were fools to ever doubt we'd be okay. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrfMiZNrVIQ)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 25 September, 2019, 09:16:27 AM
Apparently half of our media think that the government should be able to act outside the law and courts should not be allowed to hold them to account:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs/the_papers

We are so f*cked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 10:22:38 AM

All the government has to do is write down what it wants in legislation or an act and then call it law. Legislation can be good for guidance, as in H&S, but calling it law is fundamentally nonsense. It's the main power they should be stripped of, in my opinion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 September, 2019, 02:16:46 PM
Just watched your Attorney General in full flow in the HoC, essentially contradicting your Supreme Court who ruled that parliament should sit, in the name of the "17.4 million", and not, say, the law of the land. Your Attorney General, mind, who is responsible for legal advice to the government, which was ruled to be incorrect. I do believe your democracy is fecked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 September, 2019, 05:10:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 10:22:38 AMIt's the main power they should be stripped of, in my opinion.
WHAT?
I had no idea you felt that way!


Sorry, couldn't resist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 05:54:53 PM

I know - I am very shy and retiring :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 September, 2019, 06:35:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 10:22:38 AM
Legislation can be good for guidance, as in H&S, but calling it law is fundamentally nonsense.

Except that that's how laws get made. So we might replace "fundamentally nonsense" in this sentence with "actually how things work."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 07:02:12 PM

It's rule by decree, not law. Law is made slowly, over time, by arbitrators and judges, who hear disputes then discover the law, make their decisions and write them down to guide future judgements.

When governments took over this process, they began co-opting such decisions and writing them into legislation, as if they had created them (but usually with additions which basically read "except us and our agents"), to add a veneer of verisimilitude. Now they can slip in anything they want and pretend it's law and the people believe it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 September, 2019, 07:07:09 PM
So who gives judges the authority to make/enforce those rulings, or to be a judge in the first place? At least politicians are elected
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 September, 2019, 07:21:10 PM
Again Sharky's argument seems to hinge on a philosophical and practical objection to delegating authority. New laws (okay, 'legislation') are made by parliament (not, please note, government - bills have to pass both houses), which is (or should be) the democratically elected representatives of the country: this is the first delegation of our individual responsibility, one based on the need for a mechanism of large-scale decision making.

The legal expertise of an independent judiciary both assesses whether these laws are compatible with existing law, and interprets them in practice. (And in a sane country with reference to a written constitution). This is a second delegation, one based on expertise that most of us lack

This seems to be a good balance between democratic will, long precedent and the expertise of formal training and experience. Of course there are awful errors and biases, but hey, humans.

There's no need for this to be exclusive to the nation state. The same basic structure could be applied at almost any social scale.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 07:50:32 PM

Let's have a look at this. There are about 950 Mps and peers, which means that society is ruled by roughly 0.004% of the population. Okay, fair enough, greater numbers would just get unwieldy so I'll assume people are more or less happy with this ratio and accept it as legitimate that these 950 can pass "laws" that apply to us all.

This forum of 2000AD fans has 25176 members. Let's say we decide to hold an election amongst ourselves. We can't use the same ratio, obviously, because that would mean we'd need less than one person, so let's be uber democratic and elect five "MPs" from amongst us. Those of us who bother to vote, anyway.

Those five decide, three to two, to order 2000AD to print two Judge Dredd stories every week or face fines or imprisonment.

It's the same basic democratic process, so it must be reasonable, no?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 September, 2019, 08:14:17 PM
Why does every discussion on this thread end up being about statism versus anarchism? No offence to anyone's views - in fact I lean more towards the latter myself - but it just seems that every time we start discussing actual current affairs we're just put back on the endless merry-go-round.

Sorry to rant but the truth is I'm losing interest in what was once an interesting thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 September, 2019, 08:20:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 07:50:32 PM
It's the same basic democratic process, so it must be reasonable, no?

Well Pat did try to warn of us of the tyranny of the Reader's Poll voting slip...

It's not so much a false equivalence as the fact that I'm happy to delegate my individual 2000AD editorial duties to the office of Tharg and rely on his expertise (and then moan about his choices). I don't want to edit the GGC, I want to read it. So I pay my weekly Groats and am happy with the system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 September, 2019, 08:24:37 PM

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ
link=topic=28209.msg1014234#msg1014234
date=1569438857Why does every discussion
on this thread end up being about statism
versus anarchism? No offence to anyone's
views - in fact I lean more towards the latter
myself - but it just seems that every time we
start discussing actual current affairs we're
just put back on the endless merry-go-round.
Sorry to rant but the truth is I'm losing
interest in what was once an interesting
thread.

I'm sorry. I just feel passionately about it.

Tell you what, as a show of good faith, I'll refrain from posting here for the next month, after which I'll try to tone it down a bit.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 September, 2019, 08:31:46 PM
I feel bad now; I don't want to silence anyone's views.  The truth is I was interested in what was happening with Johnson and parliament and came here to see what other boarders made of it, but i find the same old argument that's been played out here a thousand times before and will clearly never be resolved.

Maybe it's me that should avoid the thread, not you, Sharky. After all, well, it's your thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2019, 10:32:41 PM
What do we make of Johnson?  Getting Brexit done is what Jo Cox would have wanted, he says.
Honestly don't know what to say about that - certainly not since the forum banned the only word I would consider useful or accurate.

He also really really wants a general election now.  Can't imagine why a man who's just been forced to reconvene Parliament would want to undertake a venture that requires the dissolution of Parliament for the exact same amount of time he just tried to prorogue it - I guess it must be some deep and well thought-out strategy we couldn't possibly grasp in a million years.
Either way, it doesn't seem like anyone's biting - the SNP have already expressly ruled it out until after A50 has been extended so I suppose we're just waiting for the LibDems to shit the bed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 September, 2019, 10:48:05 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 September, 2019, 10:32:41 PM
What do we make of Johnson?  Getting Brexit done is what Jo Cox would have wanted, he says.
Honestly don't know what to say about that - certainly not since the forum banned the only word I would consider useful or accurate.

Sweet jesus, this is the first I've heard of this. What an absolute James Blunt, as you say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 26 September, 2019, 08:34:57 AM
BoJo is scum.  Simple as.

Never wanted to kick my TV in more than i did watching him and his cronies last night.

Good God, it was stomach churning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 September, 2019, 07:01:00 PM
It's funny how quickly his mask has slipped now he's got the power he's always craved.  There's barely a trace of the old bumbling, shaggy-haired panel show host left now.  It's boorish, ruthless aggression all the way. Even his own siblings have spoken out against him.

Johnson news has become as interesting as Trump news, and not in a good way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 26 September, 2019, 07:11:18 PM
Exactly. His real face, attitude and general unpleasantness has been revealed in record time.

And he clearly doesn't care.

I read about what he was really like over a decade ago, and it stuck.

Since then, I always found the "bumbling clown" persona off.

And now we all can see.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 September, 2019, 07:56:06 PM
In many ways, Johnson is exactly like his hero, Winston Churchill - and I don't just mean he's a bloodthirsty racist, I mean his public persona keeps everyone distracted so he gets on with shitting on the poor and non-whites.  This is all theater and still there are no consequences in sight.
His sister was on the radio today saying we should have a bit of sympathy for him as he's under a lot of pressure to deliver Brexit from the people who've invested in there being a short pound*.  Poor fella.



* insert joke about Johnson's mistresses here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 27 September, 2019, 09:22:37 AM
Eddie Mair had the measure of him years ago.

A revolting person. No morals, empathy or decency.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 September, 2019, 01:12:26 PM
The BBC now uncritically platforming far right extremists calling for riots.
Still, "both sides", eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 October, 2019, 08:50:52 AM
From no Northern Ireland border to two of them.  Nice one, Johnson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 October, 2019, 09:57:13 AM

Borders do seem challenging, (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston's_Hiccup) sometimes...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 October, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
The worst single moment of all this for me was the Truss interview yesterday, where the UK Trade Secretary admitted in an interview that despite confirming that the UK would leave without a deal on 31st Oct, she didn't now how, "but even if I did, I wouldn't tell you". Your government admits it doesn't know what it's doing about the most significant event since WWII, and even if it did isn't going to tell you. Democracy, everyone!

Politicians do tend to set a low bar for competence, but if there was ever a more stupifyingly vapid collection of dishonest charlatans shoehorned into a cabinet, I didn't hear about it. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2019, 11:43:37 AM
Thank God the LibDems are going to stop Brexit when Jo Swinson becomes PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 October, 2019, 11:54:15 AM
They're above Labour in some polls now, which showcases what a massive shitshow the Labour conference has been. It also neatly highlights the disaster that is FPTP. That particular poll has the Tories on a chunky majority with a fraction over a third of the vote (34%), and the Lib Dems winning half as many seats as Labour, despite getting 23% of the vote compared to 21. (Of course, the Lib Dems and Labour combined under any sane system would, on 45%, have way more seats than the Tories. THANKS, TONY BLAIR AND YOUR CABINET! You really fucked us on that one.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 October, 2019, 03:27:53 PM
Hey remember that time Johnson was caught on camera deliberately avoiding shaking the hands of black people?  Well, I guess it was so long ago that I can understand why the media don't bring it up anymore.
Prime Minister Swinson won't make that mistake, let me tell you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2019, 07:56:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 October, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
Politicians do tend to set a low bar for competence, but if there was ever a more stupifyingly vapid collection of dishonest charlatans shoehorned into a cabinet, I didn't hear about it.

Shoehorned into anywhere?  Ever?  In human history?  In any dimension?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 October, 2019, 10:18:53 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2019, 07:56:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 October, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
Politicians do tend to set a low bar for competence, but if there was ever a more stupifyingly vapid collection of dishonest charlatans shoehorned into a cabinet, I didn't hear about it.

Shoehorned into anywhere?  Ever?  In human history?  In any dimension?
If it doesn't contain Chris Grayling and Grant Shapps, it's not going to take the Incompetence Gold, although the Truss/Williamson/Leadsom axis have shown some good form in the early rounds.


Oh fuck, just realised that Shapps is in there - yeah, give them the medal.They've even got Javid and Hancock on the bench, we haven't seen a fraction of the shambles they can create (yet).

Although it won't be long before the PM sweeps the medal table in the finals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 October, 2019, 10:25:08 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2019, 07:56:59 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 October, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
Politicians do tend to set a low bar for competence, but if there was ever a more stupifyingly vapid collection of dishonest charlatans shoehorned into a cabinet, I didn't hear about it.

Shoehorned into anywhere?  Ever?  In human history?  In any dimension?


If it doesn't contain Chris Grayling and Grant Shapps, it's not going to take the Incompetence Gold, although the Truss/Williamson/Leadsom axis have shown some good form in the early rounds.


Oh fuck, just realised that Shapps is in there - yeah, give them the medal. They've even got Javid and Hancock on the bench, we haven't seen a fraction of the shambles they can create (yet).

Although it won't be long before the PM sweeps the medal table in the finals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2019, 05:22:10 PM
They're still leading in the polls, so everyone on this thread is wrong and the Tories are doing a good job and are well-loved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 04 October, 2019, 06:32:12 PM
"I trst Boris 2k19"

-Some guys called Dave probably, has his dog as his FB icon, still has a poppy filter on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 06:42:15 PM
I saw a piece on Channel 4 News where they were interviewing a woman who runs a business trading locally caught seafood. Her main markets were on the continent, the seafood was caught by British fishermen.

Her trading license is European, and come Brexit, is expected to be revoked: leaving an entire segment of her town with a sudden lack of a well-established market. She agreed there was no clear path to carrying on trading, and that her business, and that of the local fishermen, would take a massive hit.

When asked what she thought of Brexit, she said she had voted for it and still supported it because of "her children's future".

What does that even mean, though? Does she think that they'll be better of economically even though she's facing economic disaster? Is it something else? Is it to do with white supremacy?  (I know that might be a leap: but I'm trying to follow her logic.)

I suppose that brings the wider question: with only a few elites set to profit massively from a shite pound, why is Brexit such a popular idea?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 04 October, 2019, 07:06:23 PM
Quotewhy is Brexit such a popular idea?

Why is Trump so popular*? It all really comes down to the same motivation. They like Brexit (and Trump) primarily because it's exactly what the 'other side' don't want.

It's a protest vote, and it isn't about gaining anything tangible - pretty much every single argument that the UK will be better off post-Brexit have now fallen away, and the only thing left powering the drive for it is spite, and a desire to stick it to the establishment. Much like Trump's border wall, it's just a giant monument to resentment more than anything practical or useful. I've heard all the arguments, I've read all the analysis, and that's the conclusion I have come to. The more rational, sensible people try to explain why it's a bad idea, the more entrenched those in favour of it become, and I don't really see a way out of it.

*I acknowledge that he isn't broadly popular, but much like supporters of Brexit, the people that like him have a cult-like devotion to him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:16:31 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 06:42:15 PM
When asked what she thought of Brexit, she said she had voted for it and still supported it because of "her children's future". What does that even mean, though?

LEAVE and REMAIN are belief systems now.

Her faith - and ours, if we're honest - isn't subject to challenge by facts or evidence. We all do that confirmation bias thing of seizing upon news that supports our existing bias and ignoring anything that should be cause for doubt or confusion.

Which is why, however this shakes out, we're doomed to tribal division and rehearsing the same arguments for the next thirty years or so. Brexit is God's way of making the British finally understand what went wrong in Northern Ireland.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Ah now, I don't buy that about myself. If it stacked up that there was evidence that leaving the EU was the most profitable course, I'd have to listen to that. I'm an evidence-based sort of person. I just haven't heard the persuasive evidence, or any evidence, that it's a good idea. Plenty in the other direction. I'm not into faith.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:49:11 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Ah now, I don't buy that about myself.

Okay, but everyone else on both sides imagines themselves a rational, impartial arbiter who has soberly assessed the evidence, too.

No honest person - even the experts, who we've all had quite enough of - can plausibly claim to understand the infinite variables and branching domino rallies of cause and effect of something so complex and without precedent.

Brexit's a coin-toss, which is why the result was basically 50/50. Nobody knew what to do for the best, so we went with our gut instincts. And now - because the situation's no clearer than it was before - we're doubling down on that coin flip.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 04 October, 2019, 08:01:23 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 07:26:41 PM
Ah now, I don't buy that about myself. If it stacked up that there was evidence that leaving the EU was the most profitable course, I'd have to listen to that. I'm an evidence-based sort of person. I just haven't heard the persuasive evidence, or any evidence, that it's a good idea. Plenty in the other direction. I'm not into faith.

I'm with you. I'm fully aware of my own bias - and that's why I make a point of reading/listening to a huge variety of sources all across the political spectrum. Hell, I even occasionally read Fox News/Daily Mail articles. I try to be as open as I can be to radically different opinions, and occasionally I do read or hear something that challenges my prejudices.

There is a semi-coherent left-wing case in favour of Brexit (often called 'Lexit'*) but to me it all seems rather fanciful (the idea that the EU is all that prevent s the UK from becoming a socialist utopia for example) and it's abundantly clear that the whole Brexit thing is primarily a project of the far right, and as such should be opposed at any cost. I mean Jesus, you only really have to look at who is lining up to champion it.

*This podcast is an interesting listen. It's certainly a different pro-Leave take to the one we usually hear: https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/bonus-this-is-where-i-leave-eu (https://soundcloud.com/chapo-trap-house/bonus-this-is-where-i-leave-eu)

QuoteOkay, but everyone else on both sides imagines themselves a rational, impartial arbiter who has soberly assessed the evidence, too.

They really don't, though. Many on the pro-Brexit side are gleefully ignorant. You only have to look at how the pro-Brexit argument has changed and been reframed since the referendum, from a tone of optimism 'we'll get a great deal'/'we'll be better off' to now, where all of that has been abandoned and people are genuinely saying things like 'it won't be the end of the world' and invoking the 'Blitz spirit'.

I have heard so few rational, reasoned arguments in favour of Brexit, and I have gone out of my way to look for them. Usually all you'll get are the same old empty Nationalistic slogans, and that's why I find it quite unsettling.

It's also incredibly frightening and upsetting how the arch pro-Brexit camp has shifted to this shockingly laisse faire attitude about the integrity of the union of the United Kingdom and seem perfectly happy to throw it under the bus in pursuit of Brexit, which would have been unthinkable even 5 years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2019, 08:17:19 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:49:11 PM
Brexit's a coin-toss, which is why the result was basically 50/50. Nobody knew what to do for the best, so we went with our gut instincts. And now - because the situation's no clearer than it was before - we're doubling down on that coin flip.

Can't really agree with that either. Obviously nobody could say for sure what would happen, but plenty of people had a fair idea that leaving would be incredibly messy and would most likely lead to financial difficulties to say the least.  the information p to p
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 08:27:26 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:49:11 PM
No honest person can plausibly claim to understand the infinite variables and branching domino rallies of cause and effect of something so complex and without precedent.

I see now I was wrong.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 04 October, 2019, 08:31:27 PM
There is obviously a deliberate pattern and strategy playing out here that encompasses things like Brexit, but what I'm really trying to wrap my head around at the moment is; what is the endgame here? What is the long term goal? Who stands to profit from overturning decades of (relative) peace and international co-operation and reverting to a pre-WWII setup of isolationist, bickering (presumably warring) Nationalist states?

How is that a good outcome for anyone, even the likes of the Mercers and the Steve Bannons of the world?

Genuine question.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/24/us/politics/trump-nationalism-united-nations.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/24/us/politics/trump-nationalism-united-nations.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 04 October, 2019, 08:35:44 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:16:31 PM
Brexit is God's way of making the British finally understand what went wrong in Northern Ireland.

If, because of Brexit, Ireland eventually ends up doing a swapsy where it loses northern partition only for Britain to gain its own iteration with Scotland, we'll be able to power the national grid with the sheer power of irony.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2019, 08:36:13 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 08:27:26 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:49:11 PM
No honest person can plausibly claim to understand the infinite variables and branching domino rallies of cause and effect of something so complex and without precedent.

I see now I was wrong.

No, it's a fair point. But I just don't think it was a 50 / 50 coin toss, information wise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 08:41:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2019, 08:36:13 PM
I just don't think it was a 50 / 50 coin toss, information wise.

It is (present and future tense) a coin flip how things will turn out, mate.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2019, 08:59:34 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 08:41:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2019, 08:36:13 PM
I just don't think it was a 50 / 50 coin toss, information wise.

It is (present and future tense) a coin flip how things will turn out, mate.

Ah, I get you now. Should have read your posts more carefully,  sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 09:00:43 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 04 October, 2019, 08:35:44 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:16:31 PM
Brexit is God's way of making the British finally understand what went wrong in Northern Ireland.

If, because of Brexit, Ireland eventually ends up doing a swapsy where it loses northern partition only for Britain to gain its own iteration with Scotland, we'll be able to power the national grid with the sheer power of irony.

The Scotland part's inevitable, now. Hopefully not via another idiotic referendum* but through the dull, bureaucratic way Canada and Australia sauntered their way from colony to dominion to independence without anything of any interest happening then or in the century since.

Rather than the thrilling and sexy way your good selves, India and the African lads bid farewell to Empire, with the decades of interesting (in the Chinese curse sense) consequences that follow any liberation struggle.

To bring it back to Brexit, that's how the UK should have disengaged from the EU - slowly, piecemeal, over the course of decades and according to a mutually agreed timetable.


* nobody who's lived through the last two can delude themselves referenda settle anything
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2019, 10:05:40 PM
I think you're all being very charitable.

Despite being repeatedly assured that it isn't the case, I see both Brexit and Trump (both acts against the best interests of the majority of their supporters) quite simply as xenophobia manipulated and exploited by cynical shits for personal, political, and probably financial gain.

The fear of the Other, the notion that a sub-human swarm of moral degenerates is sweeping/has swept/will sweep away the life you supposedly value, that your worsening circumstances are the result of your masters appeasing the Others instead of looking after you. Leave/Trump promise they'll put you back in the driving seat and punish the Others.

Make it like it was.  Keep Them away from me. Tell me I'm wise and I'm right.

That's all it is, nothing more complex or arcane than that.

There are of course sane and sensible arguments to be made against the specifics of European integration or the dynastic complicity that makes up the US political class, but these are minority concerns and wholly irrelevant to the popular vote. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 10:20:39 PM
Quote from: Frank on 04 October, 2019, 07:49:11 PM
Brexit's a coin-toss, which is why the result was basically 50/50.

Just because there are two sides to an argument, it doesn't mean that each has equal validity. Look at my original post today - it was about someone who, rationally, could see economic hardship associated with her decision, and yet also felt that it was good for her children.

There's a dichotomy there. The evidence in the piece demonstrated why the economic hardship was going to occur, but there was no reason given for her belief that it would be good for her children.

So, on the one hand: evidence. On the other: faith. For me, that's exactly 100/0. Far away from 50/50. You can argue that it's 50/50, but without any evidence, you're just whistling into the wind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2019, 10:28:52 PM
Quote from: radiator on 04 October, 2019, 08:01:23 PMThere is a semi-coherent left-wing case in favour of Brexit (often called 'Lexit'*) but to me it all seems rather fanciful (the idea that the EU is all that prevent s the UK from becoming a socialist utopia for example)

This is a rather reductionist reading of what many on this very thread were discussing right before the referendum was even announced: the EU project as a massive federal endeavour with unaccountable actors at the helm of policy construction, the answer to which IIRC was (and remains) "well, we can't fix any of that if we're not in Europe" which is a nice soundbite but doesn't actually answer questions being asked about how TTIP got as far as it did, how Greece was carpetbagged, or why Alan Kurdi had to die.

The leftist crackers on Youtube have been giving some fine content of late, including Canadiamerican I don't know he's one of those Peter Coffin's vid on democracy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv_wAaohQ5k) being a rambling but admirably accessible defence of democracy that takes a lengthy diversion into Brexit territory as an example of how and why democray fails not because of voters, but because of how the version of reality they experience is specifically tailored for them by media companies to reinforce prejudices and engineer financially-exploitable disasters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 October, 2019, 10:33:27 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 October, 2019, 10:28:52 PM...the EU project as a massive federal endeavour with unaccountable actors at the helm of policy construction, the answer to which IIRC was (and remains) "well, we can't fix any of that if we're not in Europe" which is a nice soundbite but doesn't actually answer questions being asked about how TTIP got as far as it did, how Greece was carpetbagged, or why Alan Kurdi had to die.

Quite. And as you point out, very little of this is engaging 52% of the population. These are the kind of discussions we could be having if we weren't dealing with Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 October, 2019, 12:33:10 PM
Wonder how being dead in a ditch is sounding to Johnson right now. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49936352 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49936352)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 October, 2019, 08:13:16 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 October, 2019, 10:20:39 PM
So, on the one hand: evidence. On the other: faith

A useful exercise anyone can try is to think back to the instinctive reaction they had to Brexit.

And ask themselves whether the informed opinion they hold now is any different to the emotional response they felt then.

Curiously, that gut feeling* I experienced four years ago was in perfect accord with the studied, rational (https://youtu.be/OjCt-L0Ph5o) position I hold today.


* REMAIN
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 October, 2019, 09:43:30 PM
Your central argument seems to be that nobody reacts to reason. I entirely disagree with you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 05 October, 2019, 09:54:09 PM

You haven't gone on a Brexit journey then, Funt? None of the evidence you've examined has changed the opinion you, like me, formed seconds after someone changed the G in Grexit to a B?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 October, 2019, 09:54:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 05 October, 2019, 08:13:16 PM
A useful exercise anyone can try is to think back to the instinctive reaction they had to Brexit.

Actually, even that one sentence is entirely misleading. The idea that someone hears about the idea of the UK leaving the EU (because it wasn't called Brexit then) for the first time and their reaction is based purely on instinct is just hogwash. It's a distracting argument that dismisses any intellectual response based on already present evidence as some kind of emotional reflex.

That's even before we get to the terrible presumption that nobody ever changes their mind based on new evidence, which I'm sure large swathes of people (including one or two scientists) might take issue with, as I do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 03:05:27 PM
Iraq, Indonesia, Egypt, France - all protest hotspots right now, but all we see is Venezuela this and Hong Kong that for some strange reason.  I don't suppose we'll ever know why we only see activity sponsored by the CIA and not the grassroots uprisings on the news.  One of life's mysteries, I guess.
I'm just thankful that kind of thing could never happen here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 October, 2019, 04:24:28 PM
Quote from: Frank on 05 October, 2019, 08:13:16 PMA useful exercise anyone can try is to think back to the instinctive reaction they had to Brexit.
Depends who we're talking about, given that Brexit voting patterns have since been shown to break down into a range of areas.

For the working classes (which were apparently split 50/50), there's a lot of ignorance, combined with ongoing decline of jobs and locales. This isn't the fault of the EU – it's primarily down to a lack of education combined with a lack of central government spending on infrastructure. That's prime territory for manipulation, which is precisely what happened – and continues to happen, whipping people into a religious frenzy to vote against their best interests. It's a straight copy of the GoP playbook in the US.

For wealthy Tories, who make up a substantial amount of the Brexit vote, mostly in the south of England, this is often about a combination of xenophobia and money. For the very wealthy, tax evasion stuff being put through the EU would cause them to personally lose out on savings. Those who aren't insanely wealthy probably didn't think that far beyond this, given that they're going to get a kicking along with everyone else.

And then there are the delusional Lexit set, old bastards who think they lived through the war but didn't, and so on.

Also, as someone put it on Twitter recently, the actual campaign was a shitshow. Remain put up a spreadsheet, when Leave had some really powerful slides. No competition. And in the unlikely scenario where we do get to a second referendum, there's no suggestion things will be any different next time either. (Mrs IP has stated that we won't be sticking around if the UK votes leave twice.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 04:47:27 PM

To summarize and synthesize Funt & IP's posts, one-third of the adults in the UK reached a different conclusion to them (and me) because they are by turns ignorant, easily manipulated, delusional, xenophobic and greedy.

And they refuse to change their minds in spite of all available evidence proving them wrong.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 October, 2019, 06:46:52 PM
Sorry to say it Frank, but while I fully accept there are many exceptions to that generalisation, as an outsider it strikes me as a depressingly accurate summary.

I do gowever understand and appreciate the psychological point you are making,
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 07:31:22 PM
BEHOLD - The holy text from which all wisdom flows:

(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a1b834251457b11ce782b7947f5c5fcb)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 07:53:55 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 October, 2019, 06:46:52 PM
Sorry to say it Frank, but while I fully accept there are many exceptions to that generalisation, as an outsider it strikes me as a depressingly accurate summary.

I do however understand and appreciate the psychological point you are making.

It's an epistemological point as much as a psychological one.

Projecting the exponentially mushrooming number of possible outcomes resulting from changing the terms of the UK's relationship with EU member states, numbering the links in a chain of causality of such length and complexity no human or (existing) artificial intelligence can hope to hold them in their mind at one time, is an impossible task.

I'm not arguing Funt or IP aren't clever enough to know how they should have voted in 2016, I'm saying nobody is.

Faced with an impossibly huge and complex conundrum, the intelligent human focuses on smaller tasks and whatever facts they can be sure of, and uses those to make a best guess. It's not a bad strategy*, but it's important to recognise that's all it is - and that others can use the same strategy and the same facts to reach different conclusions.

No matter how much evidence you amass and consider, the final step is only ever a hunch.


* It's a perfectly rational and practical strategy. I heard a professional quiz champion break down how he approaches questions to which he just doesn't know the answer. His methodology is to run through whatever he does know about the subject and use that to eliminate the many possible answers until he's left with one or two to choose from, then makes his best guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 October, 2019, 08:14:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 07:31:22 PM
BEHOLD - The holy text from which all wisdom flows:

(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a1b834251457b11ce782b7947f5c5fcb)

Not sure if I'd throw Noam Chomsky, an outspoken Anarchist but a very well informed one, in with the rest of the lunatic fringe. Or am I reading it wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 October, 2019, 08:46:56 PM
FFS that horseshoe thing is beyond moronic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 October, 2019, 08:52:52 PM


(http://images.cnlive.it/gallery/24046/Big/a1a335fe-e15e-4e9d-b3ae-8dab6103ce51.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 October, 2019, 08:54:42 PM
It's supposed to be the other way up to keep the good luck in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 October, 2019, 08:57:50 PM
Quote from: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 04:47:27 PMbecause they are by turns ignorant, easily manipulated
Perhaps I wasn't clear, but I think it's more nuanced than that for many. Ignorance has been baked in at a national level. This isn't down to people being stupid, but in a population that has to actively go looking for information about how the country they live in actually works. That is a reckless and negligent approach to education. People quite often say they didn't know about our relationship with Europe, and how things functioned. That is just appalling from a structural standpoint.

The same argument should go to our print media, which for decades has mostly been akin to trash US TV rather than proper quality journalism without obvious bias. And the manipulation pays into that. I'm not suggesting all Leave voters were "easily manipulated", but I am saying a great many were manipulated (not just by print media, but also gaming social networking, and micro targeting individual accounts).

Quotedelusional, xenophobic and greedy.
This, on the other hand, I don't feel needs any clarification!

QuoteAnd they refuse to change their minds in spite of all available evidence proving them wrong.
And this is the problem. By setting Brexit as a class war/religion, people dig in. Humans are terrible at admitting wrongs anyway; but with Brexit, you can see from the way in which polling has totally stalled that we're basically fucked. (My original prediction was that by now, we'd be roughly in super-majority territory for Remain, albeit having left. Instead, we're still – albeit only just – inside margin of error territory, with Remain having a small lead for many months.

It's not nearly enough, though. As many others have said, the depressing thing about all this is that people really may have to see what life outside the EU is like before recognising and understanding the damage. But by then, it'll be too late to reverse it. Best-case scenario – and vanishingly unlikely – is rejoining in a decade, with a worse deal, and far less influence. Fairly typical scenario, from those in the know, is that the UK would be unlikely to be a member again for decades. After all, everyone else in the club would have to unanimously let the UK rejoin – and, frankly, why would they?

Quote from: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 07:53:55 PMI'm not arguing Funt or IP aren't clever enough to know how they should have voted in 2016, I'm saying nobody is.
Personally, I don't think it should ever have gone to referendum. Also, I agree to some extent that no-one's bright enough to know for sure about how they should have voted. But the vast majority of experts were pretty clear that Remain was the safe, secure option for everything from social benefits to economic power. It was notable that the Leave lot had to wheel out the exact same voices time and again. So: defer to experts. But experts had been trashed.

However, I will concede that the arguments were skewed. Leave more or less ran with classic Euroscepticism dressed up in language that was intentionally vague – that "free trade area" that runs from Iceland to Turkey; "let's give £350m a week to the NHS". All ditched the second they won, and arguments then shifted to these things being possibilities and aspirations, rather than pledges and promises. Of course, the response then is that both sides lied. Really, Remain got the speed of impact wrong (not least due to some sterling work by Mark Carney, and the UK govt not immediately triggering Article 50); but Leave lied in a big way all the way through.

QuoteNo matter how much evidence you amass and consider, the final step is only ever a hunch.
One could make that argument about everything. But when you've 99 people saying to not jump off a cliff, because you'll break every bone in your body, but one fucker with a loudhailer saying you'll be fine and probably sprout wings on the way down anyway because BY GOD YOU'RE BRITISH, it's more than just a hunch.

Quote from: TordelBack on 06 October, 2019, 08:46:56 PMFFS that horseshoe thing is beyond moronic.
That version is a bit over the top. But there's certainly some truth in the far left and far right having certain things in common regarding authoritarianism and anti-migrant thinking. There are reasons why the ERG and Momentum have the same wishes for Brexit – albeit different ideas about how they want to rule the ashes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 October, 2019, 08:59:48 PM
Quote from: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 07:53:55 PM
No matter how much evidence you amass and consider, the final step is only ever a hunch.

My problem with your theory (and I see a partial validity in it) is that it dismisses both sides of the argument as effectively random by extrapolating the results of any decision to a distant future point.

We can still make decisions based on the rationale we have available (as you suggest). But you present both sides in the argument as having equally valid rationales.

They don't. Where are the experts (not politicians, but experts) claiming that Brexit will be good for the UK economy? I just haven't seen or heard any of that reported. I saw posters of migrant swarms (doctored by Brexit-leaning politicians) and I saw false promises on buses (doctored by Brexit-leaning politicians). The expert testimony against Brexit has been from what appear to be neutral economists.

It's just not the even playing field that you suggest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 10:45:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 October, 2019, 08:14:36 PMOr am I reading it wrong?

Ah don't worry about it, I sometimes forget to make it clear when I shitpost something, and I certainly didn't mean for anyone to take that ludicrous old cobblers seriously.
If I was, you may as well ask why the diagram doesn't include Judaism, a religion that practices genital mutilation on children, or why Catholicism and environmentalism are on opposite ends of the spectrum and does this mean that there are no Catholic environmentalists?  Or are the things on opposite sides supposed to be equivalent rather than mutually exclusive positions?  If they aren't meant to be mutually exclusive, doesn't this negate the entire concept of the horseshoe theory?  Also, why are terms like "classic feminism" or "postmodernism" on there when these are alt-right code for TERFism and "cultural Bolshevism" (an antisemitic conspiracy theory) respectively?  Why is Liberalism there when that's become a right wing position after being supplanted by neoliberalism?
And that's before you even get to the basic problem with centrism: adopting a neutral position when faced with oppression is to endorse it.
More like horseSHIT Theory, amiright?

True story: I went looking for that diagram on the web and found it on a Quora page where the related questions included "Were the Nazis on the left or right?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 October, 2019, 11:18:43 PM
Quote from: Frank on 06 October, 2019, 07:53:55 PM
No matter how much evidence you amass and consider, the final step is only ever a hunch.

Don't make me post a link to Tim Minchin's Storm  (https://youtu.be/HhGuXCuDb1U).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2019, 12:26:17 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 10:45:38 PM
True story: I went looking for that diagram on the web and found it on a Quora page where the related questions included "Were the Nazis on the left or right?"

Well, they were socialists, yup.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/britishcomics/images/c/cd/Hoagy.jpg)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2019, 07:57:12 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 10:45:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 October, 2019, 08:14:36 PMOr am I reading it wrong?

Ah don't worry about it, I sometimes forget to make it clear when I shitpost something, and I certainly didn't mean for anyone to take that ludicrous old cobblers seriously.
If I was, you may as well ask why the diagram doesn't include Judaism, a religion that practices genital mutilation on children, or why Catholicism and environmentalism are on opposite ends of the spectrum and does this mean that there are no Catholic environmentalists?  Or are the things on opposite sides supposed to be equivalent rather than mutually exclusive positions?  If they aren't meant to be mutually exclusive, doesn't this negate the entire concept of the horseshoe theory?  Also, why are terms like "classic feminism" or "postmodernism" on there when these are alt-right code for TERFism and "cultural Bolshevism" (an antisemitic conspiracy theory) respectively?  Why is Liberalism there when that's become a right wing position after being supplanted by neoliberalism?
And that's before you even get to the basic problem with centrism: adopting a neutral position when faced with oppression is to endorse it.
More like horseSHIT Theory, amiright?

True story: I went looking for that diagram on the web and found it on a Quora page where the related questions included "Were the Nazis on the left or right?"

Sorry, my bad.  I'm an eejit.  That'll larn me to react without taking a proper look
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 October, 2019, 01:07:35 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 October, 2019, 08:57:50 PM
Quotedelusional, xenophobic and greedy.
This, on the other hand, I don't feel needs any clarification!


Unfortunately I see or hear about the results of this most weeks.  One friend (with a European accent) woke up briefly on the ground next to a bus stop, then a few days later woke in a hospital bed - the only thing he could remember about the bus stop attack was the attacker saying the word 'Brexit'.  And when I say the only thing he could remember, for the first few days he didn't know his name.  He has managed to use his limbs again now and can walk, but this kind of verbal or physical assault on people I know started a day or two after the plebiscite and shows no signs of ceasing.

QuoteIt's not nearly enough, though. As many others have said, the depressing thing about all this is that people really may have to see what life outside the EU is like before recognising and understanding the damage. But by then, it'll be too late to reverse it.


Unfortunately the ill-effects of Brexit are being cast as not being a direct result but of being the result of a conspiracy among remain voters to ruin the economy because of something-or-other (I find it difficult to follow the reasoning).  I actually do look forward to hearing arguments from pro-Brexit speakers, in the hope that they'll be anything more than wishy-washy 'return to Empire' and xenophobia on display, but I've not heard any yet.  There's something about the EU being corrupt, but as this all kicked off around the time we got the (UK) MP expenses scandal, I can't see the point of that argument.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2019, 02:03:39 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 October, 2019, 01:07:35 PMOne friend (with a European accent) woke up briefly on the ground next to a bus stop, then a few days later woke in a hospital bed - the only thing he could remember about the bus stop attack was the attacker saying the word 'Brexit'.  And when I say the only thing he could remember, for the first few days he didn't know his name.  He has managed to use his limbs again now and can walk, but this kind of verbal or physical assault on people I know started a day or two after the plebiscite and shows no signs of ceasing.


Fucking hell. 
Me, I was very saddened to hear that my uncle (once fun-loving and upbeat, now bitter and old before his time) voted leave.  When my Mam pressed him on it, he mumbled something about 'immigration' - which is pretty much non-existent in the small Northern town he has always lived in - forgetting that his niece and nephew (that would be my brother and sister) are immigrants themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 October, 2019, 03:43:21 PM
Actually, instead of my clumsily worded and second-hand account, how about I just post his facebook post (with a few details removed).

QuoteI cannot sleep. I'm reflecting on the last months since I was beaten up by a Brexiteer because of my Dutch accent, and the long way I've come since then. Some of my friends may not have understood what I've been through. I will tell you a bit about my journey of recovery. I'm telling to explain my absent behaviour from the last period (I may be wrong about some details):

Days 1-2: I wake up in a bus stop, everything hurts. I feel a boot print on my face. There's blood everywhere. Next time I wake up: I'm in hospital. I black out again. I wake up in the white tunnel of a CT scanner. This day, my main task is seriously trying to get the answers to: Who am I? What's my name? What am I doing here? The doctors tell me I'm lucky as I could have died with such serious head injuries.

Day 3-4: OK, I remember who I am. But wtf happened? And what's that life-crippling headache doing in my brain? My hand doesn't work, my nose is skewed and continues bleeding, is that normal? I cannot walk any further than the end of my street, is that OK? Why do I have a limp? Why cannot I find some words; what's this thing called again, I know I knew it's name once, o yeah it is called a "hand". It's this hand that's painful and can't carry anything ; o you say it's broken from the fall?

Day 4-6: OMG! I remember everything that has happened! Wtf! I was beaten up by a Brexiteer! Because I'm Dutch! Because they cited Nigel Farage! I need to share this with my friends! I need their support! People need to hear about this! I realise how lucky I am to be alive and that I have just escaped death.

Day 6-9: OMG! My Facebook post has been shared 20,000 times, I have received 2,000 responses including 1,000 hate messages and posts, and several anonymous phone calls of people threatening to kill me because I shared my post! There are more than 100 people telling me that my assailant should have succeeded in killing me. My mental health is doing surprisingly well, thank you for asking; I'm actually surprising myself, how well my psychological health is. And all of this because I made the mistake of being Dutch and living in London!

Day 9-12: Delete delete delete my Facebook posts! Call the police! Call the embassy! Get protection! But the police don't want to do anything, it seems they'd prefer me to die in an assault. And I literally still cannot leave my house because I'm too ill: daylight and noise kill my head. But having a Brexiteer neighbour who has assaulted me before because of my accent does not make me feel safe at home either - I'm safe nowhere. I try to walk a bit outside, as being on my own, lying in a bed in a dark room, doesn't help my mood either. I literally start walking until the end of one street - that's the main activity of the day -, the day after I walk two streets etc. But I get exhausted and almost faint after just a couple of hundreds of meters. So frustrating! And all of this, just because I'm Dutch and living in the UK.

Day 12-15: There's not one part of the day that I'm not seeing a medical specialist. The neurologist, the nose expert, the hand expert, the radiologist, another radiologist... They tell me I'll be fine... but they cannot tell me when, because they see I'm not doing well now. I collapse several times and I have to visit the A&E several times again. I know which A&E in London has the shortest waiting time and I know how to get helped quickly (these are crucial survival skills in London!). I am getting bored; I feel I've seen all interesting series on Netflix (I've binge watched house of cards, but I cannot remember anything of it - is that due to my brain trauma or due to how bad the series are?). I try to avoid newspapers and the news: bojo's election makes me fear for my life even more! I know I should apply for settled status to secure my future in the UK but just the thought of it triggers headaches, literally.

Day 15-xxxx: Each day I'm walking one street further. I'm trying to read a bit, to train my mind, but my head starts exploding after a while. I can type Facebook posts, but after that, the pain in my hand is killing me. I literally need to teach myself to use a pen and a pencil again. I need to learn to walk without a weird limp. One word at a time, one step at a time.

Day Xxx-yyyy. The specialists tell I should try out more activities. OK, I'll try! I see some friends, I try to work a day, I meet up with friends - at the start, just for an hour...but after a couple of hours my head explodes and I feel exhausted. How much can I do? This is OK... no, but that's too much! It's difficult to find my balance. Will I ever be better again?

Day after conference- I am well! I can do my work, answer emails, meet XXXX, eat, and... and? Collapse on the street! And later collapse again in hospital where people have brought me. The specialists see some weird blood values but for the rest I'm fine. I go home, and for six days in a row I sleep 16 hours a day. The neurologist told me I should use a specific medication! Bless the Lord! This relieves me from my headaches that I've been suffering from, from day 1 onwards. But I'm so exhausted that I need to build up my physical condition again, one street at a time :-( I'm starting to read more, to use my brain - finally my brain can sustain reading for a bit. I have had to relearn to concentrate - I didn't know that concentration and attention is something you need to learn again!

Jump to now - I can do most things again. I have built up my physical condition and my concentration and attention skills. I've started working again - all goes well, I feel well. And now - holiday time (because I need to use my holiday hours before the end of the academic year). I have had to cancel my holiday - I still don't know what to do with my time. Just being healthy already feels as a holiday to me. I am well.

Being alive and being healthy are priviliges that we are usually not aware of. But they are unique and critical moments in our life.

In dark times, you learn who your friends and who your enemies are. I've met so many friends. Thanks for all the cards, the donations to charities (I still need to cry about that amazing gift!), and the hugs! You have made me continue. Thanks.

Apparently people on both sides are hostile.  Though with events like this, the fact that almost every friend I have who lives in the UK and has a foreign accent and/or 'funny tinge' (copyright Angela Smith, MP) and the death of Jo Cox, I'm wondering why all the physical attacks on Brexiters aren't being reported (or maybe they're just not happening?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2019, 04:55:56 PM
Both sides are as bad as each other, though - I mean, just look at all those left wing spree killers there've been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2019, 05:31:02 PM
Reading sheridan's account is awful. It makes me glad that Mrs G 'passes' for English – something that she's increasingly guilty about (although certainly won't be if her insanely expensive citizenship application doesn't go through). That someone can be beaten almost to death for having a different accent is beyond the pale. If you're in London, people in "Europe" are closer than those in the other end of your own bloody country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2019, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2019, 04:55:56 PM
Both sides are as bad as each other, though - I mean, just look at all those left wing spree killers there've been.

Like the Nazis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 October, 2019, 06:52:38 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 October, 2019, 01:07:35 PM
Unfortunately the ill-effects of Brexit are being cast as not being a direct result but of being the result of a conspiracy among remain voters to ruin the economy because of something-or-other (I find it difficult to follow the reasoning). 

This is where I have a major issue with the complaints about Project Fear.  Leaving aside the fact that Sterling has tanked, the economy slowed to a crawl, inward investment dried up, consumer confidence doing a fantastic impersonation of a cold testicle and the Great British High Street signing up for The Specials' reunion event ("This town ...") before we have even left, the whole debate was around the economic impact of Brexit.  The last two years have shown how myopic that view was.

We have literally had politicians murdered, others threatened with physical or sexual violence (both even), hate crime rising, the credibility of the judiciary attacked, democratic institutions undermined and the press giving up all pretence of impartiality and accuracy.

The thought that the narrative will now turn to 'Remoaners' sabotaging the UK economy to prove their prediction right is terrifyingly believable.  It is incredibly difficult to see now how we are going to get out of this mess, particularly with the complete muppets that are 'in charge'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 07 October, 2019, 06:56:34 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2019, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2019, 04:55:56 PM
Both sides are as bad as each other, though - I mean, just look at all those left wing spree killers there've been.

Like the Nazis.

'Tips fedora, pretends to drink from glass of Aldi Whisky'

So white genocide is a thing thats happening right now, and did you know, my fellow incels-

'Sheaths flee market katana'

-that Hitler was in fact a socialist, m'lady?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2019, 07:34:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 October, 2019, 04:55:56 PM
Both sides are as bad as each other, though - I mean, just look at all those left wing spree killers there've been.

You won't be so glib when the anarchist bombers of 1919 come after you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: McGurk76 on 08 October, 2019, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2019, 12:26:17 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 October, 2019, 10:45:38 PM
True story: I went looking for that diagram on the web and found it on a Quora page where the related questions included "Were the Nazis on the left or right?"

Well, they were socialists, yup.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/britishcomics/images/c/cd/Hoagy.jpg)

This is, of course, not true.
A few clues:
They were very into nationalism
They were very into militarism
They liked invading countries
They didn't really ever do anything socialist ever
They liked shooting people and persecuting minority groups
They er...hated socialists. And socialists hated them.
Does this sound like Tony Benn to you? Or Jeremy Corbyn? Or Attlee?
Hitler retained the name "National Socialist' in the hope of attracting working class support. His ruse clearly fools some people even today!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 08 October, 2019, 01:57:42 PM
The massive picture of Hoagy should have been your first clue that Funt was not entirely serious...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 October, 2019, 02:01:09 PM
They don't say these things because they believe them, they say them to get you to spend time and energy debunking them because they know they can't win a straight debate and can only hope to occupy your time in the hope of appearing to be engaging with you, and/or to frustrate you into quitting.
There was one member of the forum who would constantly goad other members with right-wing statements that were easily proved to be false with only the most cursory of checks, but his statements were maybe one or two sentences, while the rebuttals, by necessity, were several paragraphs long, and often had to go over the same ground as previous rebuttals because he would make the same points again and again and it was clear he wasn't even reading the responses people had composed.  That's why the only sensible response to "they had socialist in the name" is "what do you think buffalo wings are?"
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LqWmrtKWSys/Vx27Yid3YmI/AAAAAAAADyI/FppXUDCofQgWPkZ4Nm0y1C1SJb7NumxGQCLcB/s1600/ziobrando.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 October, 2019, 03:28:17 PM
"Like, sparing no expense, I have erected signs that will warn people against touching these unbelievably menacing oranges, man."

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_bDUK5U-yua8/TRBJnRfVOTI/AAAAAAAAALY/KedoYK4HR3A/S898-R/Mind%2Bthe%2BOranges%252C%2BMarlon%2521.jpg)

But, like Waldo, I did not consider the illiterate...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: McGurk76 on 08 October, 2019, 03:28:56 PM
Quote from: Dark Jimbo on 08 October, 2019, 01:57:42 PM
The massive picture of Hoagy should have been your first clue that Funt was not entirely serious...

Good point! You do get people who say that though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 08 October, 2019, 03:33:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2019, 05:31:02 PM
Reading sheridan's account is awful. It makes me glad that Mrs G 'passes' for English – something that she's increasingly guilty about (although certainly won't be if her insanely expensive citizenship application doesn't go through). That someone can be beaten almost to death for having a different accent is beyond the pale. If you're in London, people in "Europe" are closer than those in the other end of your own bloody country.

A few years ago - guess it might have been 2015, before the referendum anyway, I had some guy come up to me at a bus stop in Clapham, slowly asking me IF I UNDERSTOOD THE QUEENS ENGLISH, I'm guessing he was spoiling for a fight, and thought I might be 'forrin', fuck knows how terrifying it must be for anyone with an accent, or the 'wrong' shade.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 October, 2019, 05:36:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 October, 2019, 02:01:09 PMThat's why the only sensible response to "they had socialist in the name" is "what do you think buffalo wings are?"

Nice one, I'll remember that for future use.

Now I just need one for "but the KKK was founded by Democrats"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 06:18:32 PM
Wasn't the name 'National Socialists' kind of deliberately oxymoronic? Almsot sarcastic, like a primitive kind of trolling or something?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 08 October, 2019, 06:31:29 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 06:18:32 PM
Wasn't the name 'National Socialists' kind of deliberately oxymoronic? Almsot sarcastic, like a primitive kind of trolling or something?

No.  The original title was the German Workers Party, later changed to the National Socialist German Workers Party.  Hitler objected strongly to the inclusion of the word 'socialist', but was overruled.  (Remember, he didn't start the party and wasn't in charge at this point.)

The workers/socialist thing was to draw people away from actual socialist/communist groups, of which there were many at this volatile time.  The party was, and always had been, composed of crazed right-wing German nationalists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 06:35:45 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/xll6WmU.png?2)


Nick Clegg is Facebook's head of Global Affairs & Communication. That's obviously a nothing-job, but who would have thought he'd have the time to find and delete this stuff by hand?


Not my post or image, by the way
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 08 October, 2019, 06:37:55 PM
The 2000AD Facebook groups are filled with....a strange lot, they probably didn't take lightly to that before it got taken down.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 07:03:24 PM
I generally don't mind Youtube ads - I understand channels need to make money etc etc and I'm perfectly fine with seeing ads for products or services I might be interested in based on my viewing habits... However I am so utterly sick and tired of the constant stream of Libertarian/far right propaganda (which is presumably funneled towards me in a laughable attempt to change my political stance).

I swear to God if I see one more ad for the 'Epoch Times' or another Prager U type bozo lecture about 'free speech' or why fossil fuels are great or whatever I'm going to throw my iPad through the nearest window. Aren't there any kind of rules or guidelines about the ratio of political advertising on Youtube? It's literally nonstop.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moogie101 on 08 October, 2019, 07:22:07 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 07:03:24 PM
I generally don't mind Youtube ads - I understand channels need to make money etc etc and I'm perfectly fine with seeing ads for products or services I might be interested in based on my viewing habits... However I am so utterly sick and tired of the constant stream of Libertarian/far right propaganda (which is presumably funneled towards me in a laughable attempt to change my political stance).

I swear to God if I see one more ad for the 'Epoch Times' or another Prager U type bozo lecture about 'free speech' or why fossil fuels are great or whatever I'm going to throw my iPad through the nearest window. Aren't there any kind of rules or guidelines about the ratio of political advertising on Youtube? It's literally nonstop.

What the hell sort of videos are you watching to generate such ads? I often use YouTube to listen to music at the end of a shift & just get the usual generic adverts
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 07:37:35 PM
I'm in the US so it may be different here. I watch all kinds of stuff, but generally its quite a lot of left-leaning news/current events type shows etc so my assumption is that these ads are specifically being targeted at me because of that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 07:52:27 PM
Quote from: moogie101 on 08 October, 2019, 07:22:07 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 07:22:07 PM
I swear to God if I see one more ad for the 'Epoch Times' or another Prager U type bozo lecture about 'free speech' or why fossil fuels are great or whatever I'm going to throw my iPad through the nearest window.

What the hell sort of videos are you watching to generate such ads?

Radiator's not just in the US. He's located in the geographic centre of US neo-Nazidom.

Even for those US citizens living in areas without abnormally high sales of chinos and Fred Perry shirts, political ads are much more of an everyday feature of life than in the UK.

In the last three days, the POTUS spent a million dollars on Facebook ads (https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-is-fundraising-off-of-impeachment-and-has-raised-millions-2019-9?r=US&IR=T) not just to promote the idea that he's being unfairly targeted by the efforts to impeach him but to encourage his base to send him cash to fight the Democrats' witch hunt.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 October, 2019, 08:04:47 PM
You have to tailor the algorithm by deleting some of the videos from your recs*, so it knows to filter out similar videos and channels.

Like the recommendations algorithm, Youtube advertising aggressively posts content it knows to be antagonistic to a user's preferences, not because - as with recs - they want you to engage with the content even if it's in a negative way, but because they want you to sign up for a Youtube subscription so you can turn off the ads.
I don't get Youtube ads on my desktop pc, though they do show up on my tablet and consoles, so possibly they are affected by one or more of the ad blockers/privacy plugins/extensions I have on Firefox.
The following are enabled, if it helps:
Adblock Plus
Privacy Badger
DuckDuckGo
Ghostlery
All are free, and I assume also available for Chrome.


* click the three dots on the top right of the video, pick "not interested", then "tell us why", and then "I am not interested in this video/channel".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 October, 2019, 08:06:31 PM
This might work:

Control the ads you see. (https://support.google.com/ads/answer/2662856?co=GENIE.Platform%3DiOS&hl=en)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 08:48:45 PM
QuoteRadiator's not just in the US. He's located in the geographic centre of US neo-Nazidom

Oregon has an... interesting history regarding inclusiveness, but that statement isn't really accurate - I don't think it's any nuttier than any other Northern state, give or take, and for the most part it's a fairly tolerant and friendly place. Drive a few miles into the countryside and things quickly get a bit Trumpy, but thats the case pretty much everywhere else I've been in the US, even California. There are definitely some loons here, but I think historically Idaho has a much worse reputation for being a base of operations for white supremacist/militia types.

If you're referring to the far right marches and attendant counterprotests that regularly happen in Portland (and get widely reported in the news), I will say that (from my point of view as a resident), they are;

1. Generally quite overblown by the media - the amount of violence and property damage that typically occurs wouldn't even raise an eyebrow compared to what goes down on the average saturday night in every town up and down the UK, for example, and I doubt I'd even know anything was even happening if I didn't hear about it on the news.

2. As far as I understand it mostly composed of non-locals who come from all over the country specifically because it's an extremely progressive, liberal city and they know they will get a more hostile reaction here than they would in say, Tallahassee, Florida.

QuoteAll are free, and I assume also available for Chrome.

* click the three dots on the top right of the video, pick "not interested", then "tell us why", and then "I am not interested in this video/channel".

Thanks. However, I watch vids on my iPad while I work, so (as far as I know) most adblockers won't work. I'm also not sure I have the option to click on autoplaying ads, but I'll check. Regardless, as I say, I generally don't mind ads per se, it's just the sheer volume of the nutty political ones that bother me. It's almost like someone should... more heavily regulate the big tech companies or something?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 09:16:01 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 08:48:45 PM
QuoteRadiator's not just in the US. He's located in the geographic centre of US neo-Nazidom

Oregon has an... interesting history regarding inclusiveness, but that statement isn't really accurate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksfront

https://www.behindthebastards.com/podcasts/part-one-oregon-is-a-bastard-the-history-of-a-white-supremacist-state.htm


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 October, 2019, 09:16:49 PM
Quote from: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 07:52:27 PM
In the last three days, the POTUS spent a million dollars on


I don't remember seeing that acronym beyond the last few years.  Always makes me think PITA (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PITA)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 09:35:03 PM
Quote from: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 09:16:01 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 08:48:45 PM
QuoteRadiator's not just in the US. He's located in the geographic centre of US neo-Nazidom

Oregon has an... interesting history regarding inclusiveness, but that statement isn't really accurate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksfront

https://www.behindthebastards.com/podcasts/part-one-oregon-is-a-bastard-the-history-of-a-white-supremacist-state.htm

As I say, it has some very dodgy suff in its history (again, like most US states I would imagine). Worth pointing out how much it's changed (and how the population has exploded) in recent decades though. Portland itself has by all accounts completely transformed from what it was like even 15-20 years ago.

Funnily enough, listening to a different episode of that very same podcast right now. I'll give that one a listen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 08 October, 2019, 09:58:20 PM
Quote from: radiator on 08 October, 2019, 09:35:03 PM
As I say, it has some very dodgy stuff in its history (again, like most US states I would imagine). Worth pointing out how much it's changed (and how the population has exploded) in recent decades though.

Yeah, man; we've all seen Portlandia (https://www.amazon.com/Portlandia-Season-1/dp/B004KCKQP8), but Liza Minnelli tells me Weimar Germany was a pretty liberal place. Embrace your new home's entertaining ability to attract weirdos who would seek to shape it in their own image (https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/80145240?source=35).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 October, 2019, 10:50:05 PM
I always liked the acronym SCROTUS for Trump.

So Called Ruler Of The United States.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 October, 2019, 10:34:02 PM
I'm watching RTE for the first time in ages, and there's a home renovation show on - the family is a gay male couple and their adopted black ltitle boy. I'm a bit drunk now, but it's nice, is all I'm saying, that the focus is on what their gaff looks like and not on them.

I could never have envisaged such a future in the church-ridden backwater of my youth.  We have a long way to go but we're getting there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 14 October, 2019, 12:06:30 AM
I like Room to Improve, RTE gets a bit of stick, but the Doc On One is great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 October, 2019, 05:12:31 PM
Last night was the first time I watched actual, non-computer screen telly in months.  I only have the Irish channels but I must say I quite enjoy the old-world charm of being limited in your viewing options.  And Irish telly is a whole lot more varied than it was when I were a lad (though thankfully back then we had the English channels too, and could watch The Word and cursing and sex and that).

I did like Room to Improve though.  Never seen it before but I do like a nice renovation show, especially when I know the area the house is in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 October, 2019, 06:01:43 PM
Whereas I watched a mere sliver of the Late Late for the first time this year, just to watch the Bercow appearance. It was unutterable shite, we should collectively sue Tubirdy as a nation to try to recoup some of our licence fee. I can't believe any host of a flagship chat show could be so flat and clueless, never mind one that gets half million of our money p.a.

Aside: I worked on one of the Room to Improve projects 6 or 7 years ago. It was... bizarre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 19 October, 2019, 06:33:22 PM
Was anyone on the march or in Parliament Square today?

I skipped the march and went straight to Parliament Square.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 October, 2019, 11:43:54 PM
I did both. First time in three marches I've made it to Parliament Square.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 October, 2019, 12:38:24 AM
Just got done watching a documentary about the Brits negotiating Brexit from Ireland in 1921 and I am amused at the cycle of history.  When it gets to the bit about Northern Ireland complicating the whole process, it is to LOL.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 20 October, 2019, 01:35:58 AM
"Gladstone spent his declining years trying to guess the answer to the Irish question; unfortunately, whenever he was getting warm, the Irish secretly changed the question."
Sellar & Yeatman - 1066 and All That 1930
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 October, 2019, 10:58:48 AM
Oh those drunken rascals, always playing tricks on his lordship.

A humorous book taken as their sole history text by far too many.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 October, 2019, 10:59:54 AM
Took a bit of time to figure out which book you were talking about there ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 October, 2019, 11:46:41 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 20 October, 2019, 01:35:58 AM
"Gladstone spent his declining years trying to guess the answer to the Irish question; unfortunately, whenever he was getting warm, the Irish secretly changed the question."
Sellar & Yeatman - 1066 and All That 1930

I've never read it, but my dad had the Irish knock-off, The Comic History of Ireland. Despite its derivative nature and pedestrian title, it was utterly hilarious.  '"Are you the password?" they asked. With ready wit, Sarsfield replied "I am."'

(Also, would it be churlish to point out that Ireland didn't exactly sign up to join the UK, and didn't get much say in the policy-making processes?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 20 October, 2019, 02:28:50 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 20 October, 2019, 11:46:41 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 20 October, 2019, 01:35:58 AM
"Gladstone spent his declining years trying to guess the answer to the Irish question; unfortunately, whenever he was getting warm, the Irish secretly changed the question."
Sellar & Yeatman - 1066 and All That 1930

I've never read it, but my dad had the Irish knock-off, The Comic History of Ireland.

Now I am confused - is the humour book taken as history the bible, 1066 and All That or The Comic History of Ireland? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 October, 2019, 02:49:18 PM
yes
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2019, 04:41:42 PM
So on this day of horrific news about migrant deaths in an Irish truck,  all four MEPs from our governing party Leo 'I'm such a Statesman," Varadkar's Fine Gael voted *against* a resolution for search-and-rescue of refugees crossing the Med - on an EP motion that was defeated by 3 votes.

Your Brexit Ltd. employees stood up and cheered the defeat of course, what would you expect (although WTF it has to do with them I don't know)  but for representatives of a republic that suffered needless famine, coffin ships and mass emigration, and a party that only exists because of the impetus of, and US funding deriving from, that event, it is an outrage.

Here's some of the (damning) text of the resolution:

Quote...whereas saving lives is an act of solidarity with those at risk, but first and foremost a legal obligation under both international law, as Article 98 of UNCLOS – ratified by all Member States and the Union itself – requires States to render assistance to any person in distress at sea
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2019, 05:04:25 PM
"Those poor people. Someone should do something!"

OK, how about making things less shit for migrants, and opening our borders more readily to refugees, rather than forcing them to claim asylum only after they've already smuggled themselves into the country, often in a very dangerous way that risks actual death?

"NO, NOT THAT!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2019, 05:10:51 PM
That too, obviously - and Ireland is particularly shit in dealing with asylum at every level - but voting to let people drown because saving them is a 'pull' factor... f**king hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2019, 05:19:24 PM
Yeah, well, the UK's currently talking about the "unit costs of deportation" of EU/EFTA and Swiss citizens. You know, those people that even Vote Leave said would be able to stay, their lives unchanged.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 October, 2019, 05:27:43 PM

Typical leftie do-gooder nonsense. The only good kind of immigration is when people have a piece of paper.

The piece of paper makes it okay, and I know I speak for everyone here when I say that if I lived in an absolute shithole, where I had zero prospects, I'd just accept that as my own hard luck for shooting out of the wrong fanny during the wrong period of history.

Scotland and Ireland might very well be countries whose national identities are founded on the idea that we're disproportionately responsible for spreading white semen across and into every corner of the globe, but that was in the olden days and involved sad pipe music and jigs on ocean liners.

And much of it was perfectly legal. Granted, in the case of Scotland, it was retrospectively legal in the sense that we helped the English invade other peoples' countries, changed the laws to make doing so legal, and then put any locals who disagreed in front of a firing squad.

Obviously, if the Chinese had invaded and subjugated us - before taking highly paid jobs in the proud British cockle-picking and takeaway food industries that our proud, British Media Studies graduates are desperate to do - that would be perfectly fucking fine.

But you say that and people call you mad.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 October, 2019, 05:32:01 PM
Sadly the rest of us have now given up on the UK. If a policy doesn't draw from arrogance and hatred, and its implementation won't maximise misery and division, then it's not on the Tory agenda. We feel nothing but sympathy for the people of the UK,  but you really need to organise, change some minds, think tactically and vote those creatures back to the 1800s where they'll be happier.  That said, in NI it'd be a case of going *forward* to the 1800s.

And as the aforementioned vote shows,  we're not far behind ye. And the shit hasn't even reached the general area of the fan yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2019, 06:09:44 PM
A friend of mine recently got irate about an anti-racism advertising campaign that Irish Rail did - apparently his tax euros shouldn't pay for posters that assumed that Irish people were racist. I mean, generally speaking he's a lovely guy, but for fuck's sake.  A lot of Irish people are racist, but even a handful would be too many.

Fortunately he began to see reason after a bit of further discussion, when I pointed out that anti drink driving campaigns are useful without needing a disclaimer that the warning does not apply to non-drink-driving Irish people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 October, 2019, 06:51:22 PM
Quote from: Frank on 24 October, 2019, 05:27:43 PM
...jigs on ocean liners...

7:13 (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3511a4)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 October, 2019, 07:01:46 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 24 October, 2019, 06:51:22 PM
Quote from: Frank on 24 October, 2019, 05:27:43 PM
...jigs on ocean liners...

7:13 (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3511a4)

Following that clip, Daily Motion chose to play me a clip of Alexandra Daddario in San Andreas. I'd love to be able to say it underestimated me or mischaracterised my interests.

If Johnson gets his December 12th (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50174402) election, I'll give everyone here a fiver.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 October, 2019, 10:24:16 PM
About the only political certainty I would gamble on is that if a General Election guarantees the Tories some breathing room, then a General Election will happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 October, 2019, 05:53:02 PM
Yay! A general election! I wonder what Labour's position on Brexit will be...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 October, 2019, 05:56:17 PM
so do they...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 29 October, 2019, 06:16:45 PM
So Frank, do you have Venmo, or...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 October, 2019, 06:20:09 PM
This is great news,  I'm skint at the mo: PayPal will be fine for me, Frank.  Good old Boris, finally doing something that benefits the common squaxx. But I won't spend it quite yet,  eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 October, 2019, 06:28:50 PM
Looks like it might be the 9th. Corbyn's moved an amendment to change the date that seems to be picking up support in the house. The difference between this and the 12th is that the 9th doesn't leave Johnson enough parliamentary time to try and force his Withdrawal Agreement through the Commons again.

That's actually fairly shrewd from Corbyn... not only is it politically a good idea, it shows up Johnson's real intention (he couldn't give a toss about an election) if he fights it, and also puts the Tories on the back foot as the ones trying to delay an election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 October, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 October, 2019, 06:20:09 PM
Quote from: radiator on 29 October, 2019, 06:16:45 PM
So Frank, do you have Venmo, or...?

PayPal will be fine for me, Frank.

I'll pay up after Brexit.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 29 October, 2019, 06:39:26 PM
I feel like this period of history will be very interesting to watch a documentary about in twenty years time, when we know how everything worked out and we can see the bigger picture, but its so exhausting trying to keep up with it all in real time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 October, 2019, 08:01:55 PM
Really looking forward to six weeks of "I don't know Labour's Brexit position", an act of performative ignorance with no possible negative repercussions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 October, 2019, 08:05:48 PM
Quote from: radiator on 29 October, 2019, 06:39:26 PM
I feel like this period of history will be very interesting to watch a documentary about in twenty years time, when we know how everything worked out and we can see the bigger picture, but its so exhausting trying to keep up with it all in real time.

Basically, follow Ian Dunt and David Allen Green on Twitter.

(Dunt is a known Squaxx and Green is not averse to littering his tweets with comic book metaphors...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 October, 2019, 08:30:27 PM
The obvious caveat is that both are notorious horseshoe theorists, or "melts" as the commulists would say in their jive youth lingo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 October, 2019, 09:54:53 PM
December 12th it is, then. Corbyn's alternative date was defeated by ten votes, coincidentally the exact number of Tories Johnson just restored the whip to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2019, 10:29:32 PM
So what now for Brexit? This isn't rhetorical or anything, I really would like to know. I've lost track
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 29 October, 2019, 10:38:00 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 October, 2019, 10:29:32 PM
So what now for Brexit? This isn't rhetorical or anything, I really would like to know. I've lost track

All up in the air. A 1.4% swing to the Tories gives them a majority and Brexit is on, a 1.9% swing to Labour makes them the largest party and they should be able to cobble together a coalition which puts a second referendum on the cards. My gut tells me the Tories are going to take it, but May had bigger poll leads and lost her majority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 October, 2019, 06:47:32 AM
Cheers Jim. We worry about this over it over here; a hard Brexit means we're in deep trouble too. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 October, 2019, 11:28:36 AM
It's also interesting to look at the number of MP's that are jacking it in, even in safe seats.  We're in Labour Donkey Territory here and Smith has announced that he is not standing in this Sh** Show.  By all accounts he's one of over 50 MP's to say 'sod it'.  Not to mention that Alex Johnson is looking at his own seat very carefully.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2019, 11:54:13 AM
I suspect there may be another reason why right-wing MPs who have made a career of late in biting the hand that feeds them are leaving a Labour Party whose trigger ballot system was recently revised to make deselection easier.

Smith is a good example of someone jumping before they were pushed, as he's not only a running joke in the party because of his "negotiate with ISIS" and "I have a 30 inch penis" gaffes, but he has relatively little support locally, and a lot of people still can't tell him apart from Owen Jones, a man to whom he bears no physical resemblance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 October, 2019, 12:52:42 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2019, 11:54:13 AM
Smith is a good example of someone jumping before they were pushed, as he's not only a running joke in the party because of his "negotiate with ISIS" and "I have a 30 inch penis" gaffes,

Typical partisan lies and fake news - it was 29 inches.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2019, 01:44:22 PM
The obvious joke is, of course, that I was confusing it with Owen Jones' penis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 October, 2019, 04:00:57 PM
There aren't many politicians who have support round here.  Smith had more than most although he did a pretty good job of reducing the party's lead that Kim Howells built up over the years.  Its not just Labour that is seeing the exodus mind.  Quite a few Tories and Liberals doing a runner too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2019, 09:22:29 PM
So. Has that knob Jack Dorsey just changed everything? Will the other even knobbier knobs follow his lead? Is it wrong to hope?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 October, 2019, 09:41:06 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 30 October, 2019, 09:22:29 PM
So. Has that knob Jack Dorsey just changed everything? Will the other even knobbier knobs follow his lead? Is it wrong to hope?

It's a bit disingenuous. He's only banning political advertising (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50243306) - and who's to say what's political?

When something as innocuous and universal as Star Wars(!) can be weaponised to create social division in the Culture War, this is as effective as that school that tried to ban a specific kind of haircut (https://www.independent.ie/world-news/school-bans-haircut-known-as-the-meet-me-at-mcdonalds-36631225.html).


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 30 October, 2019, 10:34:40 PM
Well they can't really ban ALL advertising and keep the site 'free', or foresee every dIrty trick - but if they can put an end to spend on targeted lies for explicitly political ends, and IF Facebook etc follow... well, we possibly wouldn't gave been fucked over by Trump and Brexit for a start.

I choose to see a glimmer in this.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2019, 10:42:13 PM
Banning political advertising on Twitter is just a shell game, as its usefulness is as a means of disseminating misinformation and narrativising via fake accounts and bots.  If Dorsey was serious about tackling bad faith actors on the platform, he'd introduce more secure identity verification.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 October, 2019, 12:20:06 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 October, 2019, 10:42:13 PM
  If Dorsey was serious about tackling bad faith actors on the platform, he'd introduce more secure identity verification.

This is certainly the case, but baby steps are still steps. For me it's more the hope that other platforms will feel pressure to follow - I don't really think the paid advert thing is the big issue on Twitter. The very notion that it's somehow not Facebook's responsibility to stop taking money for precisely targeted verifiable lies is an affront, so I'm going to take any movement that pushes against that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 October, 2019, 05:19:29 PM
Ordinarily Cambridge students and Doctors tend to attract my ire but this young lady deserves a medal. 

Hope this footage is widely used. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlh7mlNMhP8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 October, 2019, 06:31:58 PM

Elections! Phah! Y'all know me. All know what I think about elections. They're like them big bitey things* in the sea. Doesn't matter which one you pick, it's gonna tear chunks off ye - just see if it don't.

One has to look at it in the context of picking the least fetid coagulation of cells one can stomach, or deciding whether to be kicked in the head or the nethers, or choosing between a well-meaning idiot or a ruthlessly shrewd bastard. And all shit like that. It's like the Church** having elections every four years to raise up those priests most similar to Jesus in the sincere hope that they'll soon pick the Actual Reincarnated Jesus after which, everything will be fine. Well, I suppose it's not really like that but it's a fun image and I can't be arsed deleting it.

Anyway: elections! Phah!

...aaaaand breathe. It's good to be back.

*eels.
**peals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 October, 2019, 09:32:56 PM
Or ... they're the cornerstone of a democratic society that stops us from plunging headlong into chaos and the rule of the mob.

Welcome back, Shark!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 October, 2019, 10:14:22 PM
I'd imagine you're all chuffed over there right now to have Nige's bff Trump helping you make your mind up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 November, 2019, 10:31:05 PM
There's this Youtube click-bait that is titled "Jacob Rees-Mogg Calmly Dismantles Student".  I know it's going to be a video of him being a horrible, smug, upper-class shit (because that's what he does), but I love the idea that it's literal and he's dismembering someone. He plays a bit like a movie serial killer.

"What you fail to realize is that when I saw off your leg..." etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 November, 2019, 03:37:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 05 November, 2019, 10:31:05 PM
There's this Youtube click-bait that is titled "Jacob Rees-Mogg Calmly Dismantles Student".  I know it's going to be a video of him being a horrible, smug, upper-class shit (because that's what he does), but I love the idea that it's literal and he's dismembering someone. He plays a bit like a movie serial killer.

"What you fail to realize is that when I saw off your leg..." etc.

'...Limbus amputatium aristocratius wankorum...'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 07 November, 2019, 07:20:17 PM
Anyone have any experience voting from abroad?

Does your proxy have to live in the same area as your registered UK home address?

I've googled and been to the gov.uk site, but finding it hard to find straight answers on anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2019, 07:43:37 PM
Your proxy has to be registered themselves and able to vote in that particular election. They do not have to be able to vote in your polling station, but if they cannot will need to contact your electoral registration office to sort a postal vote. Ideally, you would want someone local to your polling station, if that's possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 November, 2019, 07:49:46 PM
It's looking more and more likely that the only two candidates in my constituency are going to be from Sinn Fein and the DUP. Literally just those two. In assembly and council elections the ballot is usually the length of your arm, but that's PRSTV vs FPTP.

Who should I vote for? A party that doesn't represent me in any way, or a party that won't represent me anyway? Should I even bother?

This doesn't seem like democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2019, 07:50:47 PM
That's a shitty choice. If I were in that position, I'd go Sinn Fein through very gritted teeth, purely to keep out the DUP, and never let the Sinn Fein MP forget it if they were elected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 07 November, 2019, 08:38:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2019, 07:43:37 PM
Your proxy has to be registered themselves and able to vote in that particular election. They do not have to be able to vote in your polling station, but if they cannot will need to contact your electoral registration office to sort a postal vote. Ideally, you would want someone local to your polling station, if that's possible.

Cheers.

Whenever I've looked into postal voting in the past the timeline has always seemed way too short. I did send my postal vote in the last general election, but have no idea if it actually got there in time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2019, 09:30:44 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 07 November, 2019, 07:49:46 PMWho should I vote for? A party that doesn't represent me in any way, or a party that won't represent me anyway? Should I even bother?

I've always thought the choice over here has been a remarkably straightforward paradigm for Western democracy in the last twenty years: you vote for whoever will do the least damage if they get in.  That this is usually a representative of a paramilitary murder gang rather than a devout Christian says a great deal about this toilet of a country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 November, 2019, 07:27:31 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 November, 2019, 09:30:44 PM
....  you vote for whoever will do the least damage if they get in. 

What exactly does that say about the UK?  Voters are faced with a choice between lunatics, fascists, murderers, xenophobes, religious fundamentalists ...

You know, I ordered the 'Apathy Party' t-shirt because whenever politics has crept into Dredd it has been dangerously accurate.  The challenge on 12th December is going to be to decide between that and the Vote Dave t-shirt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2019, 07:37:07 PM

Voting, for me, is like a political placebo - it might make one feel better but ultimately has no real effect.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2019, 10:25:46 PM
Except that a placebo *can* have a real effect.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2019, 10:57:04 PM

Only if one believes in it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2019, 12:50:33 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2019, 10:57:04 PM

Only if one believes in it.

No. There are studies showing that you can give patients placebo tablets and actually tell them that it's just sugar and there's still a statistically measurable improvement in their outcomes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2019, 02:45:30 AM
Placebo Party slogan: "Vote for us. Statistically, your life will improve despite us doing nothing!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2019, 06:45:33 AM
I'd get that on the side of a bus pronto if I were you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 November, 2019, 05:44:15 PM
Johnson made a minor gaffe at the Remembrance Day ceremony by laying a wreath upside down and the BBC accidentally removed the few seconds of footage in which the gaffe occurred, accidentally deleted it, then accidentally ordered the retrieval of footage of the 2016 Remembrance Day ceremony from their library, then accidentally trimmed out several seconds featuring Johnson laying a wreath properly, accidentally spliced that into yesterday's footage, then accidentally didn't tell anyone until they were called out on it by several viewers on social media.  Well anyway purdah is going well.

I am always amused during general election season - which now happens often enough that I can make this observation - to see that Rupert Murdoch's SKY News is more reliable than the BBC when it comes to observing purdah rules, but I imagine that has more to do with the BBC being untouchable and knowing it while the working stiffs at SKY know a bad OFCOM ruling can end their careers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 November, 2019, 05:58:03 PM
It's a truly baffling bit of deliberate misdirection by the beeb, as if they thought no one would notice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 11 November, 2019, 06:07:04 PM

Sky News is a subsidiary of US cable provider Comcast*. Cenotaph-gate is Corbyn's-hat-gate all over again.


* home of MSNBC, Trump's favourite
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 November, 2019, 08:13:49 PM
The BBC explained that: they didn't put the Kremlin in the background of an existing photo and then change the hat to look like an ushanka, all they did was adjust the contrast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 November, 2019, 09:00:41 PM


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D3Dn99aXQAALsaS.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2019, 03:59:59 AM
Looks just like Charlie Chaplin!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 November, 2019, 10:09:07 AM
bit more worrying than that!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 12 November, 2019, 10:10:00 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 November, 2019, 05:44:15 PM
Johnson made a minor gaffe at the Remembrance Day ceremony by laying a wreath upside down and the BBC accidentally removed the few seconds of footage in which the gaffe occurred, accidentally deleted it, then accidentally ordered the retrieval of footage of the 2016 Remembrance Day ceremony from their library, then accidentally trimmed out several seconds featuring Johnson laying a wreath properly, accidentally spliced that into yesterday's footage, then accidentally didn't tell anyone until they were called out on it by several viewers on social media.  Well anyway purdah is going well.

I am always amused during general election season - which now happens often enough that I can make this observation - to see that Rupert Murdoch's SKY News is more reliable than the BBC when it comes to observing purdah rules, but I imagine that has more to do with the BBC being untouchable and knowing it while the working stiffs at SKY know a bad OFCOM ruling can end their careers.

anyone got a link about this?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 November, 2019, 11:13:31 AM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50374630 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50374630)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2019, 12:16:00 PM
They recycle the "didn't bow enough" line.  Literally cannot help themselves.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 November, 2019, 03:59:52 PM
The story is not the wreath it's the ridiculous twitter storm and partisan newspaper comments - which is what the BBC reported.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2019, 04:50:56 PM
So to sum up: the BBC are saying that the BBC did nothing wrong and that this was everyone else's fault?  That's quite an unusual ruling to get from them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2019, 06:24:15 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/ihB8Xu7.png?2)


I like you very much, Pro Bear - you're funny and clever, which are rare commodities anywhere on the internet. But this is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read.

For a start, this theory requires BBC bosses to have reluctantly allowed that evening's 6(ish) and 10 o'clock bulletins - the highest rated news bulletins in the UK - and the News Channel and the BBC website to continue broadcasting the correct footage - of a dishevelled fat man carelessly discarding flowers he bought 5 minutes earlier from a petrol station forecourt (watch it at 45 min, HERE (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000b9cz/remembrance-sunday-the-cenotaph-2019)) - but then, after witnessing the merciless barrage of criticism unleashed upon their boy Boris from UK Twitter between the hours of 11pm and 6am on Monday morning, phoning the producer of BBC Breakfast and ordering the incriminating footage to be replaced (and maybe for Naga Munchetti to show a little cleavage) to keep the much smaller number of viewers who feel the need to watch telly in their pyjamas - the real powerbrokers and opinion makers in the land - oblivious to the awful truth of the evil that sits at the seat of power on this cursed isle.

This toss is the kind of petty, juvenile points-scoring that you, me and our fellow lefties here castigate The Mail and social media's horde of You Can't Say Anything These Days for when they get up to the same tricks.

When I read The Sun's fake story about Jezza dancing his way to the Cenotaph, I thought exploiting the occasion for partisan political purposes was shameful shit. I'm sure you agree on that score ...


(https://i.imgur.com/euRWzbe.png?2)

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/anger-after-the-sun-photoshops-out-ww2-veteran-from-remembrance-sunday-service/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2019, 07:05:28 PM
Well, we all make mistakes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2019, 09:03:46 PM
Quote from: Frank on 12 November, 2019, 06:24:15 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/ihB8Xu7.png?2)


I like you very much, Pro Bear - you're funny and clever, which are rare commodities anywhere on the internet. But this is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read.

I'm sure the rest of your post is very insightful, but I still remember the last very lengthy lecture you gave when I took a swipe at the BBC in which you explained how a senior political editor editing an interviewee's responses was actually the fault of The Canary or something, so I think I'll leave it there, thanx.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2019, 09:29:07 PM

You never see anyone, left or right*, berating Sky News, ITV News, Channel 4 News, or Channel 5 News, despite all UK broadcasters being bound by the same regulations ensuring impartiality as the public service broadcaster.

That's probably just a coincidence. I can't see how it serves any kind of agenda (https://www.thetvfestival.com/website/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/GEITF_MacTaggart_1989_Rupert_Murdoch.pdf).


* The papers, social media politics accounts, or even your mates. My racist friends sometimes take a pop at Channel Four News in a very general way, but I'm pretty sure they've only ever seen that clip of the lovely Cathy Newman being DESTROYED!!! by Jordan Peterson on Youtube
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 November, 2019, 10:42:35 PM
Sky News are always under fire - admittedly because they're seen as a Rupert Murdoch operation - and their "Brexit Election" branding has even prompted official complaints to OFCOM by the Labour Party (https://consent.yahoo.com/collectConsent?sessionId=3_cc-session_30534639-b83b-445e-8b54-fd3af7155207&lang=en-gb&inline=false), while Channel 4 News get it in the neck all the time (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMJ_rkCGc48).  If you're not seeing examples of other broadcasters than the BBC facing criticism then you aren't looking hard enough.

Or you aren't on Twitter.  Lucky bastard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2019, 10:54:58 PM
Wouldn't it be more worrying if The Sun was a trusted news source? A sign of the end times, that.

---

During the last US presidential election, the BBC news front page had something ridiculous like 10 images of Trump - all smiling victoriously (this is prior to the voting taking place) and about 2 of Clinton looking grumpy and aggrieved.

I doubt that the BBC was directly manipulating the message - but I think their algorithm was just scooping up lots of Trump stories and hardly any Clinton ones. I'm not sure if a human selects the images: but it's always an image that reflects the story content - so unhappy if something bad has happened to them, jolly if it's more upbeat.

The end result was that the front page looked terribly skewed in favour of the Orange Scunthorpe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2019, 11:28:50 PM

Wouldn't stand up in court or to peer review, and for all I know you'll see a completely different set of results than I do:

BBC bias (https://www.google.com/search?q=bbc+bias&oq=bbc+bias&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l4j69i60.2063j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

ITV bias (https://www.google.com/search?q=itv+bias&oq=itv+bias&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j0l3j69i60.3567j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

Channel 4 bias (https://www.google.com/search?q=channel+4+bias&oq=channel+4+bias&aqs=chrome..69i57j0j69i60.3815j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

Sky bias (https://www.google.com/search?q=sky+bias&oq=sky+bias&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j0l4j69i60.3207j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 12 November, 2019, 11:54:46 PM

Apologies for the DP*. Like his valet, no man is a hero to his search engine:


(https://i.imgur.com/LMOCpeq.png?2)

(https://i.imgur.com/fOEzhYB.png?2)

(https://i.imgur.com/TPmrLae.png?2)

(https://i.imgur.com/QlHC9dq.png?2)


Hilariously, Interneters are so determined to find evidence of BBC bias that a search for Sky or ITV bias return hits for BBC bias (2 hits, in the case of ITV, including the TOP hit)**


* Fnar

** The Internet also seems convinced Channel 4 is biased but sees ITV as the least biased news broadcaster. Channel 4 News and ITV News are, of course, both made by the same company (ITN)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2019, 01:31:06 AM
If your point is that people have biases, that was my point, too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2019, 03:44:11 PM
Another example of the corrupt, biased, Ministry of Truth style BBC trying to trick us with doctored images:

(https://i.imgur.com/JozJlyl.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2019, 07:08:28 PM
This could get addictive...

(https://i.imgur.com/HWXtTLq.png)


[spoiler](The boat is part of Rod Stewart's model railway diorama.)[/spoiler]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2019, 07:25:27 PM
And don't forget that the BBC reported the controlled demolition collapse of WTC 7 about half an hour early.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 13 November, 2019, 07:37:24 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/CVFGcsX.png?2)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 November, 2019, 08:18:45 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2019, 07:25:27 PM
And don't forget that the BBC reported the controlled demolition collapse of WTC 7 about half an hour early.

Really dude? Really? This playground urban legend?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2019, 09:05:53 PM
Hoisted by my own petard, I now don't know if anyone's posting actual news or just jokey nonsense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2019, 10:05:41 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler link=topic=28209.msg 1017307#msg1017307 date=1573676325Really dude? Really? This playground urban legend?
"It is certainly true that on 9/11 the BBC broadcast that WTC7 had collapsed when it was still standing. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/controversy_conspiracies_iii.html)" BBC website. I'm not arguing for or against anything else in that article, because I simply don't know, but it's a fact that the BBC reported the collapse (which looked like a controlled demolition, whether it was or it wasn't) some time before it happened - for whatever reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 November, 2019, 10:12:57 PM
Next you'll be saying there's a coup in Bolivia and Epstein didn't kill himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2019, 10:16:16 PM
Occam's Razor neatly puts that nonsense to bed, doesn't it, Shark?

These conspiracy theories are entertaining, in a way, but they're such fluff.

I saw that Tony Robinson show where he walks around Britain, and he was in the pub most local to the crop circles - which gets quite a bit of crop circle related tourism. The guy who made the crop circles sits in the pub and explains to people how he did it: and they still think it was aliens.

It's like religion - some people just like to believe fluff. (Or pretend that they do.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 13 November, 2019, 10:53:23 PM
The paradox of conspiracy thought is that the people who extol conspiracy theories think they are the ones with their eyes open and everyone else are 'sheep', yet the reality is that they who are the naive ones, as they are the ones subscribing to the rather quaint notion that someone, somewhere is in charge and in control of everything, and we live in a ordered universe instead of one of horrifying chaos.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 November, 2019, 11:04:26 PM

On balance, it was probably just confusion-induced sloppy reporting. Probably.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 November, 2019, 01:40:13 PM
so in all the chaos of that day, one of their reporters was told, and passed on, that a building that had been hit, was burning and in danger of imminent collapse had actually collpased about 20 minutes before it actually happened.

Damn the BBC for not employing omniscient psychics!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 November, 2019, 08:19:29 PM
Was about to say, watched a bunch of news reels from the day. Everyone was in shambles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 14 November, 2019, 08:36:30 PM
I am planning the most horrific False Flag event in history - better send out a timetable to the media!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 November, 2019, 09:05:17 PM
Quote from: radiator on 13 November, 2019, 10:53:23 PM
The paradox of conspiracy thought is that the people who extol conspiracy theories think they are the ones with their eyes open and everyone else are 'sheep', yet the reality is that they who are the naive ones, as they are the ones subscribing to the rather quaint notion that someone, somewhere is in charge and in control of everything, and we live in a ordered universe instead of one of horrifying chaos.

100%

For me, JFK's assassination seems be the birth of elaborate conspiracy theories. Like people don't want to face the reality that one unimportant nobody could completely fuck up everything. Yet I've never heard as much speculation around Gavrilo Princip as there is around Lee Harvey Oswald. The former undoubtedly fucked shit up more than the latter, there just wasn't as much images and footage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 November, 2019, 10:29:10 PM
The odd thing about Princip and Archduke Ferdindand is that while the action was just a simple bit of cackhanded political violence, it became the key to several genuine Mills-level conspiracies.

I used to enjoy and entertain conspiracy theories quite a lot (JFK a case in point), but 9/11 pretty much ended that for me. The cascade of shit spinning out of one Tom Clancy plotline made it abundantly clear that there was no-one in charge, no grand scheme or enlightened puppeteers, just a scrabbling mess of opportunists pulling in whichever direction suited them at that moment. The inciting event of a secular atheism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 November, 2019, 11:14:23 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 14 November, 2019, 01:40:13 PM
so in all the chaos of that day, one of their reporters was told, and passed on, that a building that had been hit, was burning and in danger of imminent collapse had actually collpased about 20 minutes before it actually happened.

To be fair to the Shark, that was his conclusion too.

I hate conspiracy theories. I have a good mate and an ex girlfriend who never learned how to recognise those rabbit holes and got lost in them. The former has since learned about Occam's Razor and confirmation bias; whilst the latter will spend the rest of her days thinking she needs to educate us sheeple about about chemtrails, Pizzagate and fucking crisis actors.

I've said it before, but tinfoil hatters are the authoritarian leader's greatest allies. They're off trying to get everyone else to chase phantoms while the real powers that be are pissing on us in plain sight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 November, 2019, 12:17:25 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 November, 2019, 10:29:10 PM
The odd thing about Princip and Archduke Ferdindand is that while the action was just a simple bit of cackhanded political violence, it became the key to several genuine Mills-level conspiracies.

Aye, but the actual circumstances should be rife for conspiracy* theories. It would be like Lee Harvey Oswald missed and JFK was spirited away, only for the fella on the grassy knoll to happen upon JFK while he was picking up a sandwich from his favourite but obscure deli.

*technically it was a conspiracy as there were several Serbs involved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2019, 06:06:42 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops
Aye, but the actual circumstances should be rife for conspiracy* theories. It would be like Lee Harvey Oswald missed and JFK was spirited away, only for the fella on the grassy knoll to happen upon JFK while he was picking up a sandwich from his favourite but obscure deli.

So true!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 November, 2019, 06:19:00 AM
The only conspiracy theory I have any time for is the circumstance around Diana's crash.
I don't know what happened but I'm pretty sure we'll never get the full story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 15 November, 2019, 08:01:40 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 November, 2019, 06:19:00 AM
The only conspiracy theory I have any time for is the circumstance around Diana's crash.
I don't know what happened but I'm pretty sure we'll never get the full story.

The driver had a bit of drink on him, there were paparazzi chasing them so they crashed. Seems fairly clear cut to me - people are killed in traffic accidents every day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 15 November, 2019, 09:34:20 AM
Pizzagate? What's Pizzagate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 November, 2019, 10:34:46 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 15 November, 2019, 08:01:40 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 November, 2019, 06:19:00 AM
The only conspiracy theory I have any time for is the circumstance around Diana's crash.
I don't know what happened but I'm pretty sure we'll never get the full story.

The driver had a bit of drink on him, there were paparazzi chasing them so they crashed. Seems fairly clear cut to me - people are killed in traffic accidents every day.

Fair enough - just never rang true to me - at least I always thought there was more to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2019, 10:36:12 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 15 November, 2019, 09:34:20 AM
Pizzagate? What's Pizzagate?

the claim that Clinton and the democrats were running a paedoophile ring from a pizza restaurant - patent nonsense, but it diodn't stop some Trumper firebombing the place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 November, 2019, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2019, 10:36:12 AM
the claim that Clinton and the democrats were running a paedoophile ring from a pizza restaurant - patent nonsense, but it diodn't stop some Trumper firebombing the place.

From the basement of a business that didn't even have a basement, if I recall correctly...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 10:53:54 AM

Lee Harvey Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in October 1959 and lived in Minsk until June 1962, when he returned to the United States with his Russian wife, Marina, and eventually settled in Dallas.

This is the kind of factoid that simply cries out for speculation. It doesn't mean the Russians were responsible for the assassination, nor does it mean they had nothing to do with it. In itself, it means only what it says. One cannot deny, though, that it adds spice, and possibly even a little context, to the overall story.

When discussing this point, using the term "conspiracy theory" to dismiss it out of hand, in my evolving opinion, is rarely useful.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2019, 11:13:49 AM
 Fake news and conspiracy theroies thrive on this snide "I'm not saying it proves anything, but isn't it insteresting that ..." bullshit. Either have the balls to say what you think or keep your "factoids" to yourself.

Why did you even mention  that BS about WTC7 if you don't think it proves anything? These things accumulate a weight of circumstantial suspicion and just muddy the waters. Back it up or shut up.

In fact we created this thread to stop you polluting every other thread with your political digressions, and yet another thread for your conspiracy nonsense - I do like to talk politics, so can we move the rest to that thread so I can ignore it as it really makes me angry.

It seems that an almost infinite access to knowledge has only made the human race exponentially more stupid
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 12:16:09 PM

Jeez - sorry, DDD. I was trying to make a point about...

Well, I guess it doesn't matter. I misjudged the mood of the thread and posted the wrong thing, for which I apologise.

Nowt more from me on the subject here.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 November, 2019, 01:07:07 PM
Nah s'okay - shouldn't have gone off on you - made the mistake of taking a break from a stressful day by catching up on the news and the sheer volume of lies and bullshit being thrown around under the guise of "I'm only saying..." left my blood boiling.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 01:22:48 PM
Oh good we've stopped talking about fun distracting things and can get back to talking about Brexit.

In election news, Labour is going to put Yer Dad on Twitter, which as long term plans go is up there with that guy in Jurassic World who told scientists to make a dinosaur that can turn invisible and use machine guns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 15 November, 2019, 02:11:42 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 01:22:48 PM
In election news, Labour is going to put Yer Dad on Twitter, which as long term plans go is up there with that guy in Jurassic World who told scientists to make a dinosaur that can turn invisible and use machine guns.

I'm holding out - I reckon we can get Labour to throw in a free PS4 and a puppy if we keep threatening to vote Conservative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 02:41:31 PM
What I find most funny is the dated thinking betrayed by commentators who see the words "free broadband" and assume Labour is talking about some kind of exclusive luxury product equivalent to a games console being given away free, rather than access to the baseline iteration of something that we're already paying for through our taxes and subsidies to telecom companies like BT, and which is already omnipresent to the point it has become an essential component of everyday life, be it for streaming our television channels or accessing our local council services* - even benefits seekers and FOB migrants/refugees with literally no money or access to infrastructure are expected to have internet access in order to fill out forms or perform job searches.
Many consider internet access a human right, and while that was more debatable 10-15 years ago when it was essentially just an entertainment platform populated by wannabe tech firms, a lot of essential services have now moved entirely online - in many cases because of austerity cuts - and if access to medicine is a human right and the only way to access your GP is to fill out an online ticket and wait for an appointment, maybe people need more access options than waiting for the library to open and hoping they have a functioning PC this week.

I certainly don't think Labour's intent was to get a lot of out-of-touch media commenters to out themselves so much as they wanted to stop online access being a barrier to lower earners, but nonetheless the former has been the result.


* Coincidentally, I filled out an online repair ticket a few weeks ago for our local Housing Executive branch to come fix my leaky roof.  There was no alternative means of contacting the specific service I needed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 November, 2019, 03:28:08 PM
I remember when the news folk kept pronouncing "lulzsec" as if it was a German car maker, rather than something that was set up for the lulz.

On the other hand, a student was having me do a questionnaire about vaping yesterday and I didn't understand most of the terms. I kept thinking of The V.C.s.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 02:41:31 PM
... even benefits seekers and FOB migrants/refugees with literally no money or access to infrastructure are expected to have internet access in order to fill out forms or perform job searches ...

... and kids are given homework assignments that can only be completed online. There's no argument about this anymore - once the current Labour leadership are gone, every party will adopt the policy.

They won't call it renationalisation of BT* or free broadband, which, to be fair, it's not.

Free broadband's a good shorthand for the news, but what's actually being proposed is funding broadband access through general taxation, in the same way as motorways and rail infrastructure. Or the NHS.


* Openreach, actually, the bit of BT that looks after the boring infrastructure. From a PR point of view, they should have avoided any hint of nationalisation, since it plays into preconceptions of Jezza as a seventies throwback, the three-day week, power blackouts, and Vesta curry
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2019, 05:01:00 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 November, 2019, 03:28:08 PM
On the other hand, a student was having me do a questionnaire about vaping yesterday and I didn't understand most of the terms. I kept thinking of The V.C.s.

Suck it in, Funt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:01:55 PM
The weirdest thing about the announcement was the snow.

It wasn't outside, it didn't look like something in the hall.

So that leaves something being overlaid on top of the feed going to both Sky and BBC.

https://twitter.com/peter25674/status/1195306237530984449 (https://twitter.com/peter25674/status/1195306237530984449)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 05:15:47 PM
You seem to have linked to someone I've blocked.  There are very few reasons I block people on Twitter, but I suspect all the flags in his handle are a clue as to why I might have put him in the bin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:20:16 PM
I'm sure if you search for Corbyn Snow you will find someone you haven't blocked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:26:01 PM
Any good?

https://twitter.com/kirancmoodley/status/1195301352597053440 (https://twitter.com/kirancmoodley/status/1195301352597053440)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 05:26:27 PM

Can't imagine why Pro Bear and Peter wouldn't get on.


(https://i.imgur.com/vNp1LJY.png?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 05:33:29 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:01:55 PM
The weirdest thing about the announcement was the snow ... something being overlaid on top of the feed going to both Sky and BBC.

Phil Schofield left the quantel box plugged in and set to SNOW when he quit the broom cupboard:

https://youtu.be/X3wmpGOwzHE?t=169


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:33:55 PM
Was looking for the video, and that was the first one I saw in a search.

More about the video than the person who posted it.

I'm more interested in how a christmassy overlay got on the video - whether that's Labour putting it in, or someone further downstream.

Since people are losing their shit over hats and Remembrance Sunday footage swapsies, I thought it was a little unusual to see on a manifesto pledge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 05:39:07 PM

Quote from: Dandontdare
link=topic=28209.msg
1017438#msg1017438
date=1573823227
Nah s'okay - shouldn't have
gone off on you - made the
mistake of taking a break
from a stressful day by
catching up on the news and
the sheer volume of lies and
bullshit being thrown
around under the guise of
"I'm only saying..." left my
blood boiling.

No probs, it's all cool.

I feel, though, that "free broadband" today opens the door for "internet driving licenses" tomorrow. That's a great way to control access - getting points on your license for visiting the wrong site or posting the wrong thing until you get banned from surfing.

I am cynical, aren't I? No wonder I piss folk off so much! :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 06:13:09 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 15 November, 2019, 05:20:16 PM
I'm sure if you search for Corbyn Snow you will find someone you haven't blocked.

Or lots of photshopped pictures of Jez tooting a line of blow off a hooker's arse.  I have enough of those on my HD already.
You can look at blocked accounts on Twitter, I was more implying the kind of people with strongly-worded opinions about this sort of thing tend to come from a very specific niche of the UK political spectrum, and their distraction with "giving away free stuff like it's Christmas" narrative is possibly a clue where that snow came from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 06:15:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 05:39:07 PM
I feel, though, that "free broadband" today opens the door for "internet driving licenses" tomorrow. That's a great way to control access - getting points on your license for visiting the wrong site or posting the wrong thing until you get banned from surfing.

The State (hiss!) can already ban you from specific sites (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/paedophiles-can-banned-using-snapchat-judge-rules/) and (in the case of terrorist offences) the internet in general, in the same way they can ban you from hanging around outside your ex's house or put you on a no-fly list.

Choosing Richard Branson as your internet provider doesn't make anyone any more or less free. Despite what Ayn Rand and Rees-Mogg might have said, there's no direct, causal connection between capitalism and essential liberties.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 06:34:43 PM

But surely the right to trade is an essential liberty?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 November, 2019, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 04:52:14 PM

Free broadband's a good shorthand for the news, but what's actually being proposed is funding broadband access through general taxation, in the same way as motorways and rail infrastructure. Or the NHS.


The media do seem to have been quite lazy in how they are portraying the announcement.  On the talking head radio shows lots of folks are talking it down.  The thing is though, it raises quite an important point: considering how vital digital connectivity is to accessing basic services, should the infrastructure be in public or private ownership?  Who are best able to deliver to the whole nation? 

To me this should have been linked in with starting a debate about the TV license.  This funds a technology that is slowly fading out.  More people are viewing without a TV (or a license).  Should we still have a license that is solely for terrestrial broadcasting or should we transform it to a 'digital access license' that spreads the cost equitably across the population, covers all access modalities, and is primarily for the upkeep and development of infrastructure?

Everything in this election is about how we should pay for it rather than what should we be paying for.  It's a bit like May's disastrous 'dementia tax' of the last election.  It spoke to a massive issue that needs to be addressed since it has massive ramifications: what sort of care support do we put in place for an ageing population with increasingly complex needs?  What was the focus though?  Who would be paying and how.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 06:54:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 06:34:43 PM
But surely the right to trade is an essential liberty?


(https://i.imgur.com/q8boogP.png2)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 07:06:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 06:34:43 PM

But surely the right to trade is an essential liberty?

I mean, I can guess based on the anarchism, but do you mean in terms of use or exchange value?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 November, 2019, 07:21:11 PM
Quote from: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 06:54:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 06:34:43 PM
But surely the right to trade is an essential liberty?
(https://i.imgur.com/q8boogP.png2)

But surely the right to change topic is an essential liberty?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 07:21:25 PM

Nobody's talking about stopping anyone trading.

The Shark household would be free to pay Richard Branson to provide internet services in the same way they are currently free to pay for private healthcare alongside the taxation-funded healthcare provided to everyone in the UK*

It would be up to Branson to provide a service the Sharks considered to deliver the extra value and quality of service that made it worth paying an additional premium, thus driving up quality and choice (according to capitalist doctrine).


* free at the point of access
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 09:12:31 PM

I could sit and type a(nother) long and boring post about Austrian economics and its advantages over corporatism, but the truth is that it would do no good and just annoy people.

Austrian economic theory is the natural economy for an anarchist society and I don't think either one can properly exist without the other, so by giving an Austrian perspective I'd be asking people to accept a more anarchic society - which is a big ask.

For the record, however, in a more anarchic society there might be thousands of little ISPs, some of them run by private companies, some by local collectives, some by private and personal individuals, some by charities, some by institutions, some by ingenious means yet to be devised. There'd be no government interference and the ISPs would all be bound by common law, maybe with reputability indicators such as a shared, voluntary code of conduct and public liability insurance, which would evolve over time in line with the needs of users and providers.

But, all this requires society to have changed in other ways as well, some of them quite fundamental. So, in the end, I guess I'm just another peace, trust and love kinda guy. A prophet of boon. But I'm fully aware that there is no Utopia waiting for us just around the corner. Ain't gonna be one in the future, never was one in the past, and we sure ain't in one now. We'll always have problems, and opportunities, let's just hope we can take the best ideas from as many systems as we can and network the problem - then maybe tomorrow might not be quite as shit as today, and the day after a little bit better again.

So, in conclusion, government's there. It might be an illusion, but it's a powerful one and has a measurable effect. Let it provide broadband, then, but hold it to account for doing so. Don't let it abuse its power.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 09:30:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 09:12:31 PM
... in a more anarchic society there might be thousands of little ISPs, some of them run by private companies, some by local collectives, some by private and personal individuals ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37974267


It all began when the trees which separated Chris's neighbouring farm from its nearest wireless mast - their only connection to the internet - grew too tall.

Something more robust was required, and no alternatives were available in the area, so Chris decided to take matters into her own hands.

She purchased a kilometre of fibre-optic cable and commandeered her farm tractor to dig a trench. "We dug it ourselves and we lit [the cable] ... It wasn't rocket science. It was three days of hard work."

She now claims to have laid 2,000 miles (3,218km) of cable and connected a string of local parishes to her network. Each household pays £30 per month and must do some of the installation themselves.

The entire infrastructure is fibre-optic cable right to the property, rather than just to the cabinet, offering fast one gigabit per second broadband speeds.

The service is so popular that the company has work lined up for the next 10 years and people from as far as Sierra Leone have attended the open days it holds a couple of times a year.

The bulk of the work is done by volunteers and one of the conditions of service is that profits must be ploughed back into the community.

There are other independent fibre broadband providers out there, like Gigaclear which serves around 50,000 customers based in several UK counties and Hyperoptic which is active in 13 cities. They all claim to offer 1Gbps speeds.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 09:34:28 PM

Garlic bread!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 November, 2019, 10:58:50 PM
"A lot of benefits claimants are really embarrassed that they struggle with computers. You can tell people are quite proud and don't want to have to ask for help with things they've been told they should be able to do." (https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/universal-credit-claimants-librarian-help-application-140763)

I'm probably being a naive woolly-headed lefty but this description from a librarian of their having to walk benefits claimants through the application for Universal Credit (a digital-only process) reads more like someone describing their encounter with an adult illiteracy crisis in the making than some freeloading teenagers being hooked-up with free Xboxes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 November, 2019, 11:47:11 PM
If I wasn't already a lifelong pinko, I'd be seriously swayed by the concept of quality internet access funded by general taxation. I genuinely couldn't work without the internet, all my contracts are posted to and tendered for solely on the internet,  my licence for each job is applied for by email, and the datasets I rely on are now only accessible online within anything approaching a commercial timescale. Internet access is every bit as essential to me as roads or sewerage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2019, 06:26:38 AM

In another 27 years there'll be outrage over the suggestion that the Tories want to sell our internet but Labour plan to fund it with an extra £3bn per year saved when Earxit (the UK's bid to leave planet Earth) goes through.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 November, 2019, 07:57:26 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 November, 2019, 07:21:11 PM
Quote from: Frank on 15 November, 2019, 06:54:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 November, 2019, 06:34:43 PM
But surely the right to trade is an essential liberty?
(https://i.imgur.com/q8boogP.png2)

But surely the right to change topic is an essential liberty?

You could always have death ....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 November, 2019, 10:13:33 AM
From reading a lot of stuff written by learned colleagues, by reading of Labour's plans is that they are unworkable, but I'm glad they kickstarted a conversation the UK's not had at any meaningful levels since Thatcher's days. And, remember, Thatcher fucked UK broadband. She tied BT's hands and said the markets would sort it. They didn't. Now we have some of the worst broadband provision of any remotely comparable nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 November, 2019, 01:40:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 November, 2019, 06:26:38 AMIn another 27 years there'll be outrage over the suggestion that the Tories want to sell our internet but Labour plan to fund it with an extra £3bn per year saved when Earxit (the UK's bid to leave planet Earth) goes through.

Earxit is only for the rich people as the wildfires and floods claim their surface homes and the mobs find the luxury bunkers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2019, 11:12:48 AM

No idea who does Her Majesty's PR, but their services will probably be available to other employers very soon:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c1j4/newsnight-prince-andrew-the-epstein-scandal-the-newsnight-interview


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 November, 2019, 11:30:47 AM
Just as well for him not all BBC content is yet available for a full year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 November, 2019, 12:06:16 PM
Talk about a car crash.  It's gone from "I have no recollection of the young lady in question"  to "I definitely did not engage in sexual activity with the young lady in question".

Anyone who has ever questioned a small child knows exactly what it means when the story starts changing ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 17 November, 2019, 12:22:28 PM
Quote from: Frank on 17 November, 2019, 11:12:48 AM

No idea who does Her Majesty's PR, but their services will probably be available to other employers very soon:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c1j4/newsnight-prince-andrew-the-epstein-scandal-the-newsnight-interview

Newsnight for non-subjects.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=AKQi3wzNFGQ
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 17 November, 2019, 12:43:45 PM
Quote from: Frank on 17 November, 2019, 11:12:48 AM

No idea who does Her Majesty's PR, but their services will probably be available to other employers very soon:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c1j4/newsnight-prince-andrew-the-epstein-scandal-the-newsnight-interview

They quit before the interview when he decided to go against their advice.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 November, 2019, 09:02:23 PM
Boris explains why he's relatable (https://youtu.be/3zUu8Fs5Ta8) (except he doesn't, because he isn't).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 17 November, 2019, 10:07:31 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 17 November, 2019, 12:22:28 PM
Newsnight for non-subjects.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=AKQi3wzNFGQ

Gosh, maybe having an hereditary monarchy with all its unwanted offspring gadding about like they actually deserve all the fawning and earned the unimaginable wealth isn't the terrific idea it must have appeared to be back in 830AD when Egbert declared himself Bretwalda. 

I've seldom seen anything quite so like a deleted chapter of From Hell.

But thank goodness you Brits have a robust democracy that reliably produces a legitimate moral counter to the 19th C rummagings of the Saxe-Coburg & Gothas.  Ummm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 17 November, 2019, 10:53:33 PM

Communist


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 18 November, 2019, 11:47:22 AM
There was a commentator on the BBC this morning saying that the problem was that the Prince Andrew came across as "privileged and entitled". You don't say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 November, 2019, 12:25:17 PM
This is a country where Boris Johnson is a man of the people so possibly that statement isn't that bonkers.

The Queen wouldn't have been so elitist about her connections to the world's most prolific billionaire pedophile - she'd have tossed some shade by wearing her least-fancy conflict diamonds when she bought a 12 year old off him to feed to the corgis.  She won the war for us, probably.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 18 November, 2019, 01:08:31 PM
"Dieu et mon droit", as the royal family's coat of arms keep reminding us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 November, 2019, 01:49:06 PM
Non Gratum Anus Rodentum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 November, 2019, 01:51:52 PM
It's hard to imagine how a man  who has had to deal with the media his entire life could so comprehensively stuff-up saying:  "I was flattered by Epstein's courtship of me which made me feel relevant, and befuddled by all the attention of pretty young girls that it entailed, I didn't see what was going on under my nose or how my presence legitimised and sheltered it. I'm a self-absorbed moron who was out of his depth and I can't apologise enough for being an unwitting party and causing such hurt to so many".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 November, 2019, 02:31:23 PM
Well, the guy is innocent until proven guilty.  But at least we can rest assured that, in the light of so many cases of paedophilia being swept under the carpet due to privilege, lessons have been learned and he'll be investigated and punished if he has been shown to have committed any crimes.

Like fuck he will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 November, 2019, 03:25:00 PM
I'm not even saying he's guilty of a crime (he almost certainly is), or that he had to admit that on the telly - just that there are obvious ways of 'fessing up to being a complete chump that would make him appear to be a remorseful human being who made awful mistakes in his associations, instead of an arrogant lizard who thinks he still enjoys the rights of prima nocta and doesn't see what's all that wrong with that anyway.

He somehow managed to expose himself as one of Dave Stone's inbred Brit-Cit royals, and I just can't imagine how stupid anyone has to actually be to achieve that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 November, 2019, 10:57:21 PM
Okay - Brexit's defeated me. Now I just want Britain to leave Earth entirely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2019, 10:53:20 AM
Peter Oborne in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media):

"I have talked to senior BBC executives, and they tell me they personally think it's wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 19 November, 2019, 10:56:54 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 November, 2019, 10:57:21 PM
Okay - Brexit's defeated me. Now I just want Britain to leave Earth entirely.

SPACE! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Sq1Nr58hM)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 November, 2019, 12:14:16 PM

IIrc, the Dan Dare Poster Prog predicted Brexit - after a fashion. I'm sure this point's already been made but it only just occurred to me...

As for BBC executives thinking that lies are fine so long as the liar is trustworthy - well, they seem to be living in a post logic world. Maybe we should all lie about having paid our license fees because to admit not doing so would undermine trust in the British public.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 November, 2019, 12:20:20 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2019, 10:53:20 AM
Peter Oborne in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media):

"I have talked to senior BBC executives, and they tell me they personally think it's wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics."

"It's wrong to expose lies" = "lying".  Wasn't this essentially the Inquisition's position re: Sidereus Nuncias?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 19 November, 2019, 01:32:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2019, 10:53:20 AM
Peter Oborne in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media):

"I have talked to senior BBC executives, and they tell me they personally think it's wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics."

This is a great example of what I was on about earlier.

Oborne's been doing the rounds on this topic for weeks, now, slagging off every aspect of the UK print and broadcast media and naming individuals, much to the consternation of Krishnan Guru-Murthy.

This specific article opens with seven paragraphs about Sky News and names a presenter. Oborne cites another broadcast example involving Channel 4's Michael Crick and one from the BBC's Andrew Marr.

But what's the anecdote about unnamed executives chosen to be highlighted here? The public have been trained over the course of thirty years (https://www.thetvfestival.com/website/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/GEITF_MacTaggart_1989_Rupert_Murdoch.pdf). Oborne's a Tory who wrote for the Telegraph and The Mail, but he's worth listening to:

https://boris-johnson-lies.com


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 November, 2019, 01:43:44 PM
There's a running joke about Jo Swinson which was started by several lefty shitposters on Twitter that involved crudely photoshopping squirrels under the wheels of the LibDem battlebus, and Swinson this morning made a public statement on LBC saying stories about her being a squirrel murderer are "sophisticated fake news operations".
You might assume this is Swinson being cack-handed at PR and boosting shitposts that at best reached a couple of thousand people, but an equally-valid reading is that Swinson had to clarify this because some actual for-real journalists fell for it as they haven't had to think critically for so long.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 November, 2019, 03:14:20 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2019, 10:53:20 AM
Peter Oborne in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-lying-media):

"I have talked to senior BBC executives, and they tell me they personally think it's wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics."

Just how many of these News execs have previously worked for the Tory party in some guise?
I believe the answer may be more than one
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 November, 2019, 06:36:54 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 November, 2019, 10:53:20 AM
BBC executives, [ ... ] personally think it's wrong to expose lies told by a British prime minister because it undermines trust in British politics."

I'm trying to figure out what the bigger joke is here:

a) there is anyone left in Britain that actually has any trust left in British politics and has not been institutionalised;
b) allowing politicians to dissemble and not calling attention to their falsehoods is the best way of shoring up the aforementioned tissue-thin trust;
c)  there is anyone left in the UK that actually believes anything that Johnson says;
d) by failing to hold politicians to account the BBC is going to repair its damaged reputation for partiality and support any argument for continuing support of the license fee;
e)  anyone gives a damn what BBC executives 'think'.

Let's face it the only reason we know Johnson really wanted this election is because he said he didn't ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 20 November, 2019, 05:30:04 PM
‪I say we wire up Orwell's grave to the grid and turn off some coal plants 'cos he's spinning so fast. ‬
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 November, 2019, 06:30:46 PM

Yeah ... I'm reminded of those weeks when TordelBack or Jimbo has to explain what's been happening in Deadworld or Grey Area.

Oborne's been on a weeks-long crusade against the use of unattributed quotations from insiders by journalists, which he believes promotes the dissemination of lies.

Oborne's piece for The Guardian (above) seeks to bring attention to this issue by ... using an unattributed (indirect) quotation from an insider?

Like I say, Oborne has a valid point and is worth listening to, but cherry-picking his work to reaffirm a pre-existing bias you just sort of feel is probably true is doing him and his work a bigger disservice than the one lapse he made towards the end of an otherwise well-evidenced piece.

Since you all find Oborne so trustworthy and compelling, you'll be sure to read the full text of his argument explaining exactly what he thinks is wrong with UK media:


British journalists have become part of Johnson's fake news machine. It's chilling. From the Mail, The Times to the BBC and ITN, everyone is peddling Downing Street's lies and smears. They're turning their readers into dupes.

"Number 10 probes Remain MPs' 'foreign collusion'." This huge banner headline dominated the front page of The Mail on Sunday on 29 September.

Turn to page 2 and "a senior No 10 source" was quoted in bold type: "The government is working on extensive investigations into Dominic Grieve, Oliver Letwin and Hilary Benn [who tabled the Bill] and their involvement with foreign powers and the funding of their activities. Governments have proper rules for drafting legislation, but nobody knows what organisations are pulling these strings."

This story was granted huge prominence and followed up the next day by the Daily Express, Sun, Times and the alt-right news site Breitbart.

Nick Robinson didn't ask the obvious question. Was there an investigation at all?

On the BBC's 'Today' programme the following Tuesday, presenter Nick Robinson asked Prime Minister Boris Johnson about the investigation. Johnson gave credibility to the story when he declared there were "legitimate questions" to be asked of the MPs.

But Robinson didn't ask the obvious question. Was there an investigation at all?

I rang Dominic Grieve. He told me he had not sought the help of any foreign government "in drafting and tabling a British statute".

He added that he was "not in receipt of any sources of foreign funding". Nor, he said, had he been contacted by Downing Street or anyone else about any investigation.

I then rang the Downing Street press office, and asked an official whether there was an investigation as stated in The Mail on Sunday.

He told me categorically: "No investigation."

Yesterday a Cabinet Office spokesperson told openDemocracy: "There was never such an investigation."

In other words, the Mail on Sunday splash that Downing Street was investigating Grieve, Letwin and Benn was fabrication. Fake News.

There has, however, been no retraction from The Mail on Sunday. As far as the newspaper's readers are concerned, the story remains true and the senior British politicians behind the Benn Act continue to be investigated for suspicious involvement with foreign powers.

Of course this bogus story fitted like a glove with the dominant Downing Street narrative that the Benn Act – which ruled out a No Deal Brexit – was actually a 'surrender act' designed to thwart Brexit altogether.

There's been a lot of this sort of thing over the past two months. Dodgy stories and commentary linked to Downing Street or government sources started to appear in the press and media after Johnson installed his own media team, which was largely drawn from the Vote Leave campaign that won the 2016 Brexit referendum.

With the prime minister's evident encouragement these Downing Street or government sources have been spreading lies, misrepresentations, smears and falsehoods around Fleet Street and across the major TV channels. Political editors lap it all up.

Another case in point involves Amber Rudd, the former work and pensions secretary who stated after her resignation on 7 September that her repeated requests to see the attorney general's legal advice on the prorogation of Parliament had been refused.

Two weeks later, Sunday Times political editor Tim Shipman – who had broken the story of Rudd's resignation – tweeted a "govt [government] source" saying: "Amber Rudd was given every opportunity to see the legal advice but chose to resign without doing so."

Shipman's 'government source' then accused Rudd of lying, saying: "It is utterly dishonest to suggest it was in anyway withheld."

Tim Shipman allowed his Twitter account to be used as a vehicle for someone unknown to smear a prominent public figure.

Amber Rudd told me that she had repeatedly asked to be given the legal advice, including on two occasions approaching attorney general Geoffrey Cox.

She was told again and again that she would be given it. When she was not, her private office told her that Downing Street senior adviser Dominic Cummings had intervened to ensure she was not shown it.

It remains the case that the claim made by Shipman's government source that Rudd had been "given every opportunity to see the legal advice" was wholly untrue.

This brings us to the major problem with Shipman's decision to share with his 130,000 Twitter followers a venomous remark made by an unnamed person accusing Rudd of dishonesty.

Had the comment been made on the record by an official government spokesperson Shipman would have been well within his rights.

The spokesperson would have been accountable for her or his allegation against Rudd. He or she could have been identified and questioned about it.

Instead Shipman allowed his Twitter account to be used as a vehicle for someone unknown to smear a prominent public figure as dishonest.

An unpleasant and vicious example concerns the Downing Street smear campaign mounted against former chancellor of the exchequer, Philip Hammond.

This started on 18 August after Sunday Times news reporter Ros Urwin published the leaked Yellowhammer dossier setting out the painful short-term disruption that would confront Britain in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

The government hit back, saying Yellowhammer was an "old document". This false claim was made first by Michael Gove, minister in charge of Brexit preparations, and later by Tory chairman James Cleverly.

At this point 'a senior Number 10 source' went into action alongside Gove, briefing journalists that the Yellowhammer dossier was out of date.

But this 'source' added the vicious twist that it had been "deliberately leaked by a former minister to influence discussions with EU leaders".

The result was that most of the following day's newspapers did not focus on the Yellowhammer disclosures about the dangers of a No Deal Brexit.

Instead most turned Yellowhammer into a whodunnit – which of May's ministers had been the leaker?

The Times headline read "Boris Johnson accuses ex-ministers over Brexit chaos leaks".

The Daily Telegraph's read "No-deal leak blamed on Hammond's Remainers".

Boris Johnson's Downing Street media machine had thus achieved a double success. It had distracted attention away from the real story, namely that No Deal Brexit carried real dangers of economic disruption and civil disorder.

And at the same time, it had smeared political opponents.

Most newspapers dutifully pointed the finger at Hammond. The Daily Mail (for which I write a political column) reported: "A No 10 source blamed former frontbenchers led by Philip Hammond."

This was a brilliantly successful if cynical media operation. But it soon became apparent that the leaked document was dated 2 August, nine days after the Boris Johnson government had entered office.

It was therefore mysterious how a member of the May government could have leaked Yellowhammer to the Sunday Times. The leak had occurred on Johnson's watch, not May's.

No newspaper has yet written a story about the failure of Johnson to reply to Hammond's letter. I expect that political journalists don't want to upset valuable Downing Street sources.

There is an implicit deal. In return for access and information (much of it false) the political media spins a pro-government narrative.

This means that Johnson's Downing Street can malign political opponents, lie about them and get away with it. But it can do this only because political journalists and editors allow it to.

It's not just the print media which allow themselves to be manipulated by Boris Johnson's Downing Street.

Take BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg's reporting of the government's formal submission to a Scottish court that Boris Johnson would comply with the so-called Benn Act, and so if need be request an extension of membership of the EU on 19 October, supposing no deal had been struck.

But the prime minister's submission was accompanied at the same time by a breathless tweet thread by the BBC's political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, reporting [a "senior No. 10 source"] clarifying that message.

"Yes, the government would comply with the 'narrow' provisions of the Benn Act – but the source went on to suggest that shadowy MPs were behind the act and that the government had ways of undermining it.

"And thus Number 10 perpetuated the prime ministerial paradox: that Boris Johnson will comply with the Benn Act and yet still leave the EU 'do or die', deal or no deal, on 31 October."

Kuenssberg is therefore open to the criticism that she was being manipulated by Downing Street. Her tweets to her 1.1 million followers meant there were two government positions.

This compliance is part of a pattern. Political editors are so pleased to be given 'insider' or 'exclusive' information that they report it without challenge or question.

Another culprit is ITV News political editor Robert Peston, who regularly preens himself on his special insight into the mind of Boris Johnson's senior adviser Dominic Cummings.

In a Twitter thread on 25 September, he cited a "senior government source" to the effect that there was a way for Johnson to avoid complying with the Benn Act.

According to Peston's informant, Johnson "still believes he can lawfully render the Benn Act null and void" by sending a second letter to Brussels that would counteract the first.

Unmitigated nonsense, said legal experts. But the message Downing Street wanted was out there.

This has become a signature technique of the Johnson media machine. Officially no comment. Meanwhile it makes its views known to friendly political editors, who push them without much inspection or analysis out into the public domain.

Jill Rutter, a former director of communications at the Treasury, notes: "That may be how Number 10 wants to operate: to allow the prime minister to look statesmanlike while the dodgier tactics emerge from an unnamed source.

"But this way of operating does the public a big disservice – it allows Downing Street to get its message out without having to take responsibility for it.

"These are not official words. The prime minister does not have to account for them. And there is no way to interrogate the source."

It's a classic case of what Johnson once called "having our cake and eating it". This means that the British media are not just failing to hold him to account. They are not even trying. They are behaving as cheerleaders to the government. They are allowing the prime minister to get away with lies and dishonesty which they would never have permitted to his predecessor, Theresa May, let alone Jeremy Corbyn.
Guido Fawkes is the provisional wing of Boris Johnson's Conservative Party press office

I haven't cited the Daily Express, The Daily Telegraph or The Sun – all of them Johnson cheerleaders.

Nor have I examined Guido Fawkes, which has transformed itself within a remarkably short space of time from an anarchic website challenging lobby freemasonry to the provisional wing of Boris Johnson's Conservative Party press office.

The price of privileged access and favourable treatment is turning readers and viewers into dupes

Of course political journalists have always entered into behind-the-scenes deals with politicians, but this kind of arrangement has gained a new dimension since Boris Johnson entered Downing Street with the support of a client press and media. As a former lobby correspondent (on the Evening Standard, the Sunday Express and The Spectator) I understand the need for access. The job of lobby journalists is to produce information.

But there is now clear evidence that the prime minister has debauched Downing Street by using the power of his office to spread propaganda and fake news. British political journalists have got chillingly close to providing the same service to Boris Johnson that Fox News delivers for Donald Trump.

I had to edit Oborne's piece to meet the wordcount restriction imposed by this forum, but none of the text I excised featured the words BBC, Kuenssberg, or Today. You can read the full text here:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 November, 2019, 07:38:20 PM
TL; DR.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 November, 2019, 08:22:18 PM
You love to see it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 November, 2019, 09:35:50 PM

Interesting.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 20 November, 2019, 10:56:26 PM

One of the problems identified with the most recent UK and US elections (and the Brexit referendum) was targeted ads on social media.

Unlike TV, print and billboard ads, you were seeing ads tailored to your personal concerns and nobody else knew you were seeing them (or who was paying for them).

I just got this. Feel free to share your own targeted ads and lift the lid off the closed box - clicking on Zuckerberg's transparency link (https://i.imgur.com/pBdTpZj.png?1) about the ad doesn't yield anything useful, but a search reveals it's a front for a Boris Johnson minion who only left government a few weeks ago and has already been fined for violating Facebook's incredibly lax ad regulations (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50296664).


(https://i.imgur.com/jMgtArv.png?2)


How old do they think I am? And is she wearing black lipstick? Do they think I'm emo? I never even owned a wallet chain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 21 November, 2019, 12:08:03 PM
Now, THAT is what I call a manifesto!! 

Wow, if a Labour Government can pull off even a quarter of that it will revolutionise the lives of millions of people.

https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Real-Change-Labour-Manifesto-2019.pdf
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 21 November, 2019, 01:10:00 PM
I like your manifesto, put it to the testo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 November, 2019, 02:08:11 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 21 November, 2019, 01:10:00 PM
I like your manifesto, put it to the testo.

Oddly, I'd had that song in my head all morning before reading this.  Now that I think of it, it was because I couldn't find my jumper when I came out of the shower.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 November, 2019, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 21 November, 2019, 01:10:00 PM
I like your manifesto, put it to the testo.

Do you know any Latin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 November, 2019, 02:39:54 PM
Obviously the big stuff will get all the attention to prove it's unworkable Stalinist pipe dreams - flattening long stretches of ground and then laying a solid layer of material over it so that vehicles can traverse the land in an attempt to create some kind of daffy transport infrastructure paid for through a sort of tithe is some kind of crazy madman's lunatic insanity because I have consulted people in the know and they say it can't possibly work - but I audibly gasped at the policy of banning MPs from having second jobs or receiving money from lobbying or special interest groups, which is genuinely a great idea on its own but also top trolling.
Banning ATM charges - also good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 November, 2019, 05:48:07 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 November, 2019, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 21 November, 2019, 01:10:00 PM
I like your manifesto, put it to the testo.

Do you know any Latin?

Nil illigitimo Carborundum ...

Amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant. 

Amavo, amavi, amavit, amavamus, amavatis, amavant. 

Salve deo. 

uno, duo, tres, quattor, quinque. 

Per Ardua Ad Astra.

It's amazing what six of the best pants down does for the memory!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 November, 2019, 06:01:54 PM

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 21 November, 2019, 08:21:03 PM
Targeted ads are weird - for instance Youtube seems to think I am a US military veteran for some reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 21 November, 2019, 08:40:37 PM
Quote from: radiator on 21 November, 2019, 08:21:03 PM
Targeted ads are weird - for instance Youtube seems to think I am a US military veteran for some reason.

You did move to the Pacific North-West


(https://i.imgur.com/MSQeXLO.png?1)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 21 November, 2019, 10:03:05 PM
The Tory Party manifesto turns out to be more interesting than I ever thought it could be.

https://www.thetorymanifesto.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 24 November, 2019, 10:34:44 PM


EDIT: Actually from 2017.


I don't think this is Dominic Cummings messing about with Photoshop or something from a parody site, but at this point who can really tell the difference:


(https://i.imgur.com/G9MIeF8.png)




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 November, 2019, 11:09:39 PM
Reminds me of...
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-592uoUWm0Kw/VbW_OPcnEuI/AAAAAAAAXbY/GwVkYkkfHfk/s1600/large-boondock-saints-blu-ray12.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 12:02:38 PM
Can someone please tell me if Corbyn is an anti-semite or not?

I usually listen to the Today programme on my way to work. It's probably my main (or at least most regular) source of news. This story comes up time and again - they're always interviewing so called experts and discussing it. Over the course of how ever many months I'm yet to hear any specific examples of anti-semitic behaviour from Corbyn.
I could google it but the question is - should I really have to? If they're going to trot out this accusation time and again they could at least be specific about what the accusation actually is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 12:02:38 PM
Can someone please tell me if Corbyn is an anti-semite or not?

It's nonsense. There is literally no data to support the idea that antisemitism is more prevalent amongst Labour supporters than the general population and what data there is suggests it's far less prevalent, and decreases the further left you go politically.

Corbyn supports Palestinian rights and a two state solution in Israel, which has given a a chunk of the pro-Israel lobby (not code for "Jews" before anyone suggests it — there are lots of non-Jewish people in the pro-Israel lobby) and the political right a common cause and anti-semitism is the stick with which they've chosen to beat Labour in general and Corbyn in particular.

Corbyn personally has a long record of defending Jewish rights including, ironically, supporting a campaign to stop the sale (and in the view of orthodox Jews, desecration) of a Jewish cemetery to property developers when planning permission was granted by the council run by Margaret Hodge, who has been among the loudest voices screaming "antisemitism" at him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2019, 12:25:28 PM

I've recently listened to a series of lectures about the history of Israel, which was quite interesting. For instance, as I'm sure many of you already know, the initial offering for land upon which to create a Jewish state/homeland was in Uganda (or was it Zimbabwe? I forget). How different the world would be if they'd accepted...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 12:29:27 PM
Jim is spot on. In fact, if you'd like a look at Corbyn's record in these matters this doc is very useful.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vR-tiGv2w89fnqY1_cPygN8VlP4uROfF9ys8THXB1p0r-UTAPgmx5g3pgWfr-aeo3G3Ka1S-bbtmD1w/pub


Corbyn has been the victim of one of the worst media campaigns against him than any leader of the opposition that has come before.

‪Consider this study from the London School of Economics.‬

‪It states no previous leader of the opposition has been the victim of such vitriol. ‬

‪They end by noting our media and journalism can no longer be considered 'watchdogs', but rather 'attack dogs'.‬

‪ http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/research/projects/corbyn/Cobyn-Report.pdf



Then there's this study from Birkbeck which shows the media's report on the supposed anti-semitism has been entirely questionable.

https://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Labour-antisemitism-and-the-news-FINAL-PROOFED.pdf
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 12:36:55 PM
Thank you.
If only someone had the balls to say this on the Today programme.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 12:39:06 PM
The media has been complicit in amplifying the voice of one section of the Jewish community (and pretending that Jews have a homogenous opinion on any subject is, in itself, an antisemitic trope) whilst dissenting Jewish voices feel very strongly that they have been silenced.

The primary source of accusations of anitsemitism come from:

The Labour Friends of Israel group... whose president, Joan Ryan, was filmed taking a million quid bung from a member of the Israeli embassy staff and whose membership lean very strongly towards the 'New' Labour right and, frankly, hate Corbyn. Another member, Louse Ellman, once claimed unchallenged on Radio 4 to be able to read Corbyn's mind, since she asserted that she was certain that he "had antisemitic thoughts."

The Jewish Chronicle... whose editor, Stephen Pollard, has unequivocally declared that the political left in Britain "is the enemy". All of them. Anyone doubting that he is cyncially exploiting this issue on political grounds should consider that the Chronicle was excoriating of Margaret Hodge right up until the point where she started throwing around wildly inaccurate accusations of antisemitism*, at which point she was suddenly wonderful.

The Jewish Labour Movement, an organisation that requires doesn't require its members to be either Jewish, or members of the Labour Party.

The Board of Deputies. Leaving aside the apparent political bias of the BoD (they effusively congratulated both Theresa May and Donald Trump on their election victories), it's worth remembering that their claim to "speak for" the Jewish community is highly dubious. Over half of Britain's Jews are secular/non-observant and thus not able to participate in the BoD's selection process or policy choices. A quarter of British Jews belong to the orthodox Charedi community which has been very vocal in support of Labour and specifically of Corbyn, declaring him to be a friend to their community. Which leaves about a quarter for whom the BoD probably speaks.

If you'd like to see an example of the silencing of dissenting voices, take a look at Michael Rosen's Twitter feed some time. Michael has been called "a cheerleader for George Soros", "Corbyn's useful idiot" and a "kapo"** ... by people who are, supposedly, concerned about antisemitism. If they were that concerned about it, they wouldn't heap antisemitic abuse on a Jewish man for the crime of disagreeing with them about what constitutes antisemitism.

*Her much-vaunted 'dossier' of 200+ antisemitic incidents turned out to relate to about 100 indivduals, 90-odd of whom weren't even members of the Labour Party.

** For those unfamiliar with the term, it refers to Jews who collaborated with the Nazis in the concentration camps. I'm not Jewish, but I can't think of a worse thing one might call a Jewish person, never mind one like Rosen who lost a whole chunk of his parents' immediate family in those concentration camps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 01:08:21 PM
This is really interesting - thank you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 November, 2019, 01:25:36 PM
Thanks Shaolin for that.  Some really interesting reading there.  I gave up a long time ago trying to keep up with media distortions on Corbyn's position vis-a-vis Israel.  It's actually got to the point now where it is slightly more than a little tedious and if anything plays into the hands of the likes of Trump and their 'fake news' narrative.

There is a course on the Open University's FutureLearn platform about Antisemitism run in conjunction with an Israeli university (I forget which one).  It is the first one that I have actually withdrawn from because of the general slant of the course.  Balanced it was not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 04:27:25 PM
Oh dear - here's what it may all be about.

'Mirvis described Johnson as a "longstanding friend".'

https://www.thecanary.co/opinion/2019/11/26/theres-one-crucial-sentence-missing-from-the-mainstream-medias-coverage-of-the-chief-rabbis-comments/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 04:32:54 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 04:27:25 PM
Oh dear - here's what it may all be about.

'Mirvis described Johnson as a "longstanding friend".'

https://www.thecanary.co/opinion/2019/11/26/theres-one-crucial-sentence-missing-from-the-mainstream-medias-coverage-of-the-chief-rabbis-comments/

And, of course, there's no political dimension to this. It's a complete coincidence that this gets pushed back to the top of the news cycle on the day Labour launches a 'Faith and Race' manifesto.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 05:39:08 PM
Also, it's interesting it happens on the same day the UK Muslim Council attacks the Tories for Islamophobia:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50561043

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/108214/muslim-council-britain-accuses-tories

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 05:46:29 PM
‪Chief Rabbi Mirvis, apparently a good friend of Johnson, attacks Corbyn.‬

Here's a reminder of Corbyn's superb record against racism, plus also sexism and homophobia.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vR-tiGv2w89fnqY1_cPygN8VlP4uROfF9ys8THXB1p0r-UTAPgmx5g3pgWfr-aeo3G3Ka1S-bbtmD1w/pub

(As noted earlier)

‪Now, here's a great reminder of Johnson's record of racism, sexism, and homophobia, with sources, courtesy of @uk_domain_names‬ on Twitter.

‪

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XzAujyzN9JxpUl9rN7EIIX0AlgaXL8rE/view?usp=drivesdk


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 06:07:17 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 12:02:38 PM
Can someone please tell me if Corbyn is an anti-semite or not?

That's not the allegation French electronica producer Mirwais (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50552068) made.

In his opinion, the current leader of the UK Labour party hasn't done enough to tackle anti-Semitism among some supporters of the UK Labour party during his time in charge.

There's no way of objectively proving such an opinion is right or wrong. Even if one party can prove they've taken action, the other party can still insist they should have done more.

It's a Rorschach blot - if you already hate Corbyn, you'll think the Rabbi's Burn is valid, if you think he's great, you won't. It's not going to change anyone's mind *


* The public have already voted on Corbyn once, so his relative popularity (http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/category/leader-approval-ratings/) is baked-in. From the vantage point of a tiny village in rural Scotland, the anti-Semitism debate might as well be about jawas, which holds for most of the country. If you're being brutally pragmatic about it, Jezza can afford to lose the votes of every single person who considers themselves Jewish (http://=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Jews#Population_) in the UK without worrying about it affecting the outcome of the forthcoming election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 06:16:25 PM
Quote from: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 06:07:17 PM
If you're being brutally pragmatic about it, Jezza can afford to lose the votes of every single person who considers themselves Jewish (http://=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Jews#Population_) in the UK without worrying about it affecting the outcome of the forthcoming election.

Worth noting also that the "Jewish vote" hasn't traditionally been primarily a Labour one for many years and what there was dropped sharply under Ed Miliband, a secular Jew, when he moved the party to an explicitly pro-Palestinian stance, much to the fury of Labour Friends of Israel.

You may also recall that this was the first time Maureen Lipman left the Labour Party, although she's now left so many times I'll admit it can be hard to keep track.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 November, 2019, 06:50:02 PM
The Hindu Council UK and the Sikh Federation UK have their say...

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1199390279876403201 (https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1199390279876403201)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 26 November, 2019, 07:13:01 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 26 November, 2019, 12:02:38 PM
Can someone please tell me if Corbyn is an anti-semite or not?

I usually listen to the Today programme on my way to work. It's probably my main (or at least most regular) source of news. This story comes up time and again - they're always interviewing so called experts and discussing it. Over the course of how ever many months I'm yet to hear any specific examples of anti-semitic behaviour from Corbyn.
I could google it but the question is - should I really have to? If they're going to trot out this accusation time and again they could at least be specific about what the accusation actually is.

It's really all they've got to attack him with, isn't it? It's honestly quite pathetic.

Until someone can point me to evidence of an actual track record of Corbyn publicly or privately saying or writing overtly antisemitic things (say, something along the lines of Boris Johnson's openly homophobic, racist and Islamophobic slurs) - I'm just not buying it, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 07:20:29 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 November, 2019, 06:50:02 PM
The Hindu Council UK and the Sikh Federation UK have their say...

I'll confess that this one has come a bit out of the blue but, from a very quick attempt to get up to speed, it appears that 1) the issue of Kashmir is nearly as divisive amongst Hindus as that of Israel is among the Jewish community, and 2) there's a strong suspicion that pro-Conservative figures in the community (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/08/british-hindus-urged-whatsapp-messages-vote-against-labour) have been working quite hard to exacerbate those divisions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 07:36:44 PM
In the meantime, these 10 grim graphs show the impact of 20 years of Tory rule.

https://twitter.com/uk_domain_names/status/1194580555033133056?s=21
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2019, 07:48:59 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2019, 07:20:29 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 November, 2019, 06:50:02 PM
The Hindu Council UK and the Sikh Federation UK have their say...
I'll confess that this one has come a bit out of the blue


Good to see people on Twitter rightly call out Paul Brand's dishonest framing and knowingly misrepresenting the Muslim Council, but this is not that unexpected, as Hindu nationalists have been giving off about British leftists' criticism of Narendra Modi over Kashmir.
A far-right ethno-nationalist who hates Muslims has endorsed another far-right ethno-nationalist who hates Muslims in a politically-motivated smear campaign against someone who has openly criticised Israel's treatment of Palestinians and India's treatment of Kashmiri Muslims - I mean, the only surprise is that it's taken this long for the two to get together.  About four paragraphs in, he even starts complaining specifically about how Corbyn defends Muslims more than he does Hindus - replace "Hindus" with "white children" and apart from not being written in crayon it's hard to distinguish between this and a Tommy Robinson Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon screed.

Quoting "first they came for the socialists" in a letter that is literally coming for the socialists takes some fucking brass neck, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 26 November, 2019, 07:50:39 PM
And when some respond that they've never heard of this organisation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 07:51:03 PM

And people thought Sturgeon came out worst from her encounter with Andrew Neil last night ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000bqpt/the-andrew-neil-interviews-election-2019-jeremy-corbyn


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 November, 2019, 09:27:58 PM
I was so sure Jez would get an easy ride and then be reported upon as having done well, but this has come as a complete surprise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 09:31:03 PM

Neil's got Johnson on tomorrow. The poor twat must be absolutely shitting himself.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Enigmatic Dr X on 26 November, 2019, 11:32:31 PM
I really don't know who to vote for, as I am in Scotland.

I don't want Brexit, but accept it's the will of the people. So it should happen. Except I don't think anyone knew what was being proposed, and am worried about Russian involvement having skewed the vote. (That may be paranoia).

I really don't want Scottish independence. The European Union is 40 years old and has an exit mechanism, yet it has proven difficult bordering on impossible for the UK to exit. What chance, then, for either England or Scotland to have an orderly unwinding of a 300 year old treaty with no exit mechanism? We could face a decade of uncertainty and, frankly, there are bigger (climate, economy) problems that need fixing in that time.

Not to mention the simultaneous negotiations with Europe. We face not an endless war but rather an endless dialogue.

So, vote Tory to keep the union? Likely a wasted vote.

Vote labour, to have a referendum? But Corbyn will sell Scotland up the referndum river to get SNP backing.

Vote libdem? Certainly a wasted vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 11:43:41 PM

You're my brother from another mother, Doc:

https://www.remainunited.org/


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 November, 2019, 12:26:24 AM
The "will of the people" is a line trotted out by autocrats. In any other country that enacts direct democracy, there would at the very least be a confirmatory ballot on a vote this massive. Here, we instead get to look at polling that hasn't showed Leave with a majority in something like two years, with the Tories screaming that they have to get Brexit done. (They're half right. They have to get it started or their chance will slip away. But it won't be 'done' in any meaningful sense for a decade at the very least. And when it is done, only a handful of very rich people will be better off.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 27 November, 2019, 01:00:42 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 26 November, 2019, 11:32:31 PM


I don't want Brexit, but accept it's the will of the people. So it should happen. Except I don't think anyone knew what was being proposed, and am worried about Russian involvement having skewed the vote. (That may be paranoia).



Not paranoia at all my friend. It seems everyone has accepted it except the U.K.  Here's a former CIA chief of staff openly discussing it:

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1198169894401036288?s=21


You might do well to check out Carole Cadwalladr's TEDtalk about Facebook interference. Leave.EU, Aaron Banks, and Cambridge Analytica got some seriously shady money from somewhere:


https://youtu.be/OQSMr-3GGvQ


Then, of course, there's our Leave supporting Russian asset of a PM:

2017

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/04/boris-johnson-brexit-russia-trump


2018

https://www.businessinsider.com/suspected-russian-spy-pictured-with-his-good-friend-boris-johnson-2018-2?r=US&IR=T







Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 27 November, 2019, 01:03:55 AM
Urgh, post went wrong. Loads of links got lost there, mostly under the Johnson/Leave/Russia bit.  Anyway, it's all on Google - just type Boris Johnson Leave Russia and you'll see a shitload of news articles about the clown compromising our democracy via Russian influence.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 27 November, 2019, 01:28:13 AM
QuoteI don't want Brexit, but accept it's the will of the people. So it should happen.

If the referendum had had a clear majority result I'd agree with you. But with the result being so down to the wire and the issue being so big and all-consuming, and infinitely more complicated than anyone realised at the time (100% myself included) I'm not convinced, especially as it seem the Tories will only be happy with a very hard Brexit that only extremists want.

The Lib Dem idea of simply overruling and scrapping Brexit altogether seems dangerous, so for me (trying to be as objective as possible) the only sensible, grown up way forward is what is being proposed by Labour - so-called No Deal Brexit off the table (because that is absolutely NOT what was being proposed by even the most hardline of Leave campaigners prior to the ref, despite what they try to spin now), and then a prospective deal for a soft Brexit is negotiated, which will be then put to the public, with the Labour leadership not campaigning for either result.

QuoteVote labour, to have a referendum? But Corbyn will sell Scotland up the referndum river to get SNP backing.

Maybe so, but wouldn't the prospect of another EU ref and a soft Brexit at worst take a lot of the wind out of the sails of the drive for a second indy ref?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 November, 2019, 01:30:55 AM
Quote from: radiator on 27 November, 2019, 01:28:13 AMwhat is being proposed by Labour - hard Brexit off the table
Although Labour policy right now is still hard Brexit, given that the furthest it will move on the single market is woolly words about "close alignment", which is functionality meaningless. So really, they're offering a customs union with some worker rights bolted on – a Turkey Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 November, 2019, 08:41:23 AM
Quote from: The Enigmatic Dr X on 26 November, 2019, 11:32:31 PM
I really don't want Scottish independence. The European Union is 40 years old and has an exit mechanism, yet it has proven difficult bordering on impossible for the UK to exit. What chance, then, for either England or Scotland to have an orderly unwinding of a 300 year old treaty with no exit mechanism? We could face a decade of uncertainty and, frankly, there are bigger (climate, economy) problems that need fixing in that time.

It certainly seems like a massive challenge, but I don't think the UK is in any shape to address any of the bigger problems you identify and I can't see when it will ever be. At what point do you head for the liferaft?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 27 November, 2019, 11:59:05 AM
So, Jeremy Corbyn held a press conference revealing 400 pages of unredacted documents exposing the NHS is on the table in US trade talks.

Discuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 27 November, 2019, 01:14:43 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 26 November, 2019, 12:29:27 PM
Corbyn has been the victim of one of the worst media campaigns against him than any leader of the opposition that has come before.


Pretty well co-ordinated, I thought ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 November, 2019, 01:54:02 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 November, 2019, 11:59:05 AM
So, Jeremy Corbyn held a press conference revealing 400 pages of unredacted documents exposing the NHS is on the table in US trade talks.
I think that the first few questions from journalists were all BUT WHAT ABOUT APOLOGISING FOR ANTISEMITISM sums up the level of coverage this will receive. I hope I'm wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 27 November, 2019, 02:00:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 27 November, 2019, 01:54:02 PM
I think that the first few questions from journalists were all BUT WHAT ABOUT APOLOGISING FOR ANTISEMITISM sums up the level of coverage this will receive. I hope I'm wrong.

Sayeeda Varsi on R4's World At One to talk about Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. Second question: "How does this compare to the Labour antisemitism scandal?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2019, 02:01:49 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 November, 2019, 11:59:05 AM
So, Jeremy Corbyn held a press conference revealing 400 pages of unredacted documents exposing the NHS is on the table in US trade talks.

Discuss.

I love that the immediate comeback from journalists was to dismiss it on the basis that "we knew about this a month ago (https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1199644811155984384)."  I also love that the morning they thought would be spent with Labour on the defensive against one of their narrative constructs was instead spent by the media on the defensive against a general public who wanted to know why they'd sat on this.  LOL talk about reaping the whirlwind.

Hey, you ever notice there's only like six Dr Who episodes a year and wonder "where does my dang licence fee go? (https://twitter.com/BarbaraDenning3/status/1199450553253797890)"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2019, 03:24:40 PM
This has aged well.

Quote from: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 09:31:03 PM
Neil's got Johnson on tomorrow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 27 November, 2019, 04:03:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2019, 03:24:40 PM
This has aged well.

Quote from: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 09:31:03 PM
Neil's got Johnson on tomorrow.

Like a fine milk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 27 November, 2019, 10:39:07 PM
Me in 2016...
Quote from: M.I.K. on 09 March, 2016, 02:41:52 PM
if Britain left the EU, there probably wouldn't be the same requirements to label stuff properly and I wouldn't know if certain foodstuffs, (such as the American macaroni and cheese I bought from a Poundland a couple of years ago with a sticker slapped on it), have tartrazine in them and tartrazine makes me go all wheezy.

Stuff happening now...
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/corbyn-us-document-more-than-nhs-to-worry-about/ (https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/corbyn-us-document-more-than-nhs-to-worry-about/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 27 November, 2019, 10:54:38 PM
Quote from: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 09:31:03 PM

Neil's got Johnson on tomorrow. The poor twat must be absolutely shitting himself.

Tough interrogation on policy or fucking around with scones... hmm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 November, 2019, 11:02:13 PM
Very frustrated with C4 News for continuing to ask the same ridiculous question over and over again: basically "The Chief Rabbi said Corbyn was anti-Semitic. How can you continue to support Corbyn?"

It's like saying "Puff the Magic Dragon said Corbyn was bad. How can you continue to support Corbyn?"

Nobody has the balls to suggest that none of us should be listening to the judgement of self-serving fantasists, whatever their particular stripe of bullshit. Not the Chief Rabbi, or any of the various Popes (however entertaining the teachings of Eris), or Ayatollahs, or Archbishops.

Nobody asked that question even has the balls to question the motives of the local Mouth of Yahweh. It's all made up!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 28 November, 2019, 10:46:36 AM
Well, the recent polls suggest a Conservative win. I'd put a big emphasis on the 'Con' there. So, folks, Rexit will be happening, and that isn't so good for several Industries. On a happier note, I read that over 2 million had signed up to vote many of them under 35. Will we have a 'Youthquake' surprise on Polling day?

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/polls/general-election
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2019, 11:22:38 AM
One can but hope. Nearly three million was the figure I last saw (2.8m) and that was a while back. Here's hoping they're mainly progressives and willing to hold their noses and vote tactically.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Steve Green on 28 November, 2019, 11:48:06 AM
My constituency (Wimbledon) is one of those seats that the LibDems are heavily pushing the 'only we can beat the Tories' line.

They've finished third in past elections - 14% of the vote last time.

I expect Hammond will retain his seat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2019, 12:30:32 PM
Traditionally a Con/Lab marginal, but with a big LD voting pool. That said, the recent constituency polling had Con 38, LD 36, Lab 23. On that basis, given usual margin of error caveats, that one actually is seemingly winnable by the Lib Dems. (Same also for Kensington. I suspect Finchley is well out of reach though.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2019, 12:41:05 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 28 November, 2019, 10:46:36 AMOn a happier note, I read that over 2 million had signed up to vote many of them under 35. Will we have a 'Youthquake' surprise on Polling day?

To be fair, it's only been two years since the last election and a lot of new voters likely just didn't see a need to register in any hurry.  Instead of a surge of support for any one party, this might just as easily be seen as a logjam of last-minute registrations.  The youth vote could go anywhere - in recent years before the tuition fee fiasco, it went to the LibDems, and a half-flippant case can be made that enough young voters now don't even consider university as a possibility so might not hold that against the party anymore, in the same way Labour voters are (kind of) over Iraq.

A factor also has to be Tory voters who turn up out of nowhere - I think I read somewhere that Theresa May managed to get more votes than Thatcher in '87 when something like three million extra voters turned out for the Tories in 2017, and the "shy Tory" effect was well-documented in the surprise majority win for the Conservatives in 2015.  Maybe this time around another extra couple of million Tory voters will just turn up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 November, 2019, 12:48:02 PM
I see the Tory's are doing the old 'its too close to call' rouse they use every election, but hey it works  :( 
Do you think if Nicola asked nicely Mr Trump would sponsor us rebuild Hadrian's wall?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 29 November, 2019, 08:24:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2019, 03:24:40 PM
This has aged well.

Quote from: Frank on 26 November, 2019, 09:31:03 PM
Neil's got Johnson on tomorrow.

(https://i.imgur.com/nv8X4Yf.png?2)


If he can't handle this line of questioning, you can see why he's not keen on facing Weetabix Head:

https://youtu.be/-6PxJg3rgD8 *


* Keep watching right to the end, to see the wee face he does, like he's just survived an ordeal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 November, 2019, 11:31:41 PM
Quote from: Frank on 29 November, 2019, 08:24:45 PM
If he can't handle this line of questioning, you can see why he's not keen on facing Weetabix Head:

https://youtu.be/-6PxJg3rgD8 *

Leader of your country. That. Openly admitting he can't make his own decisions about who to speak to, as his cunning plan for getting out of giving a straight answer. 

Mind, if there'd more of this style of interview a few years back, we mightn't all be in this mess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 November, 2019, 12:04:32 AM
Cameron fucked a pig and still got elected, while Ed Milliband lost an election because he ate a bacon sandwich funny - presumably because he put it in his mouth rather than on his cock.

It doesn't matter what Johnson does, as we don't have a media that's worth a single fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 November, 2019, 12:35:26 AM
It's too easy to blame the media. The Brits created a culture where three different versions of The Sweet could exist simutaneously
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 30 November, 2019, 02:21:27 AM
I see the a Labour Party are going for the jugular.

A fascinating read!

https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Time-To-Tell-The-Truth-60-Questions.pdf?1
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 November, 2019, 10:38:45 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 28 November, 2019, 12:48:02 PM
I see the Tory's are doing the old 'its too close to call' rouse they use every election, but hey it works  :( 

Polling's an art, not a science, and it's too far away from Dec 12th for things not to change a little, but this methodology produced the most accurate picture of the 2017 election result: Tory majority (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/27/mrp-poll-conservatives-on-course-for-68-seat-majority).

It seems too generous to me. I don't think anyone's changed their mind at all in the 2 minutes since we last did this. The only change in the calculus is that - for reasons that are entirely lost on me - Johnson's a much less unpopular leader than May.

Assuming YouGov's forecast is a bit too generous to the Tories, Johnson should only win the kind of majority* that was predicted for May before she self-sabotaged her campaign.

Labour's problem seems to be that whatever new support they've gained since 2015 is concentrated in large cities they were winning anyway, rather than the fish market and mothballed car factory towns where everyone's old enough to remember Bernard Manning on telly.

I'm in a constituency where the SNP and Tories both have more than double the vote share of Labour, so a tactical SNP vote to minimize the size of Johnson's majority is the only realistic option. There are a number of sites which help you see what the best chance of doing the same in your own area might be:

https://tactical.vote/


* Predicting seat wins is too difficult for a layman, but the balance of the popular vote in YouGov's poll looks suspect, to me. Tories and Labour were neck and neck 2.5 years ago (https://i.imgur.com/BbElXzz.png?1). Like I say, I don't think anyone's changed their minds about anything in that time, so the spectacular collapse in Labour support/turnout (or huge increase in Tory support/turnout) required to produce that swing doesn't make sense to me. Maybe it's been long enough dor the Lib-Dems to have lived down the shame of the Coalition years and become a repository for protest votes. I'm speaking from inside the bubble of Scotland, where there's 100% unanimity that Johnson's a fucking fanny, so I can't possibly have any reliable insight into what it is about Johnson that seems to speak to something inside the hearts of (some) English voters
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 November, 2019, 12:25:58 PM
As the saying goes, "Yougov is the only accurate poll, all the others are outliers."

Was May unpopular?  I know she was despised in the lefty liberal bubble of social media, but so was Cameron.  I keep seeing the claim bandied about - by those on the left - that she was more popular than Thatcher and Blair at their peak, and she did deliver three million more votes than Cameron managed.
And Johnson is supposedly more popular than that?  At some point we may have to admit to ourselves that we might be getting what we deserve.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 November, 2019, 01:05:57 PM
The methodology for polling right now isn't equipped to deal with hyper-local shifts and tactical voting. So it's a generalist view. It may well turn out to be accurate. But for Johnson to get a majority, all of the following have to come to pass:

- Con MPs all hang on in Scotland
- Labour > Conservative gains
- No Conservative > Lib Dem gains

Because the Lib Dems and Labour have spent so much time kicking each-other's faces in, rather than recognising the enemy is Johnson, there is a real possibility we'll see a lot of Richmond Parks – seats Lab or Lib could have won/retained had the other side voted tactically. And yet constituency polling suggests although some seats under threat of being lost to Con, some are also heading the other way. A little nudge here and there and the Tories may well lose the likes of Wimbledon.

My concerns right now are:

- The first of the list above does come to pass, and SNP only gain from Lab, not Con
- The LD vote falls back en masse, rather than merely strategically, meaning Con seats in south remain safe
- The lack of noise from LD in the SW, suggesting they just aren't making inroads there
- Idiotic decisions being made by opposition parties in key marginals, like Stroud, Richmond Park, and Canterbury

I totally get why Greens and Lib Dems don't want to stand aside for Labour. Labour is supremely arrogant. They assume they 'should' rule. They've stated that even under a minority scenario, they would 'expect' other opposition parties to simply back its policies and get nothing in return. But right now, we're staring at the abyss. And as much as I value the likes of Molly Scott Cato as an MEP, she's making a catastrophic error in Stroud.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 November, 2019, 01:33:46 PM
Labour know they can't ask their voters to support a party led by someone who stones squirrels, IP.  I mean even the Tories draw the line at stuff like that - well you know, after Heath they did.  I am reasonably certain none of them since well maybe IDS he's got that look and Cameron wasn't technically inflicting cruelty because the pig was dead at the time but I forget what I was saying anyway

THIS HAS AGED WELL:

Quote from: Frank on 29 November, 2019, 08:24:45 PM

(https://i.imgur.com/nv8X4Yf.png?2)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 30 November, 2019, 05:07:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 November, 2019, 12:25:58 PM
As the saying goes, "Yougov is the only accurate poll, all the others are outliers."

Was May unpopular?  I know she was despised in the lefty liberal bubble of social media, but so was Cameron.  I keep seeing the claim bandied about - by those on the left - that she was more popular than Thatcher and Blair at their peak, and she did deliver three million more votes than Cameron managed.
And Johnson is supposedly more popular than that?  At some point we may have to admit to ourselves that we might be getting what we deserve.

I'll stick with my original choice of less unpopular to describe Johnson in relation to May. She got the wee bounce you'd expect for any new leader when she first took over from Cameron (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summaries) then crashed precipitously as soon as she announced the 2017 election and had to get out in front of the cameras.

Johnson's mysterious allure is as lost on me as it is on the many idiots he's pumped and dumped (and the unquantifiable number of children resulting from those couplings), but Tory (and Labour) support has only increased (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49798197) since Sturgeon & Swinson locked lips (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/lib-dems-snp-join-forces-20733897) and gave Johnson a massive election *

But Jezza hasn't closed the gap in the way polling showed in 2017 (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/may/08/general-election-2017-poll-tracker-who-is-in-the-lead). Barring intervention from The Ghost Of Christmas Past, Doc Brown, or Vladimir Putin, it looks like the most the opposition can hope to do is limit the size of Johnson's majority and, therefore, the kind of Brexit deal he will get through the Commons.


* I still think Jezza only caved in to their demands to bankrupt me (https://forums.2000ad.com/index.php?topic=28209.msg1016083#msg1016083). He couldn't afford to see a general election being called against his will, and Sturgeon will make out like gangbusters, but Swinson (https://www.buzzfeed.com/emilyashton/election-jo-swinson-lib-dems) was either deluded by ego or manipulated into signing her own death warrant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 November, 2019, 07:05:13 PM
Noticing "the story" as regards Prince Andrew is nearly always focused on how much harm it's done to the Queen, as opposed to whether or not he raped a child.

The Daily Mail heralds the wonderful PR recovery by Liz and Chaz. The Sun that Liz is disappointed.  The NY Times talks about how it will effect the rest of the Royals. The Washington Post refers to charities that have dropped him (so now he's the victim, or the charities are). (https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-the-papers-50497529)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 December, 2019, 11:02:43 AM
I see Electoral Calculus has now added a 'low' predictor alongside the terrifying 'high' one that predicts 437(!) Tory seats. Although this also suggests that every Green voter in Brighton will somehow forget to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2019, 01:10:54 PM
As the polls narrow I just become increasingly convinced that a few million Tory voters are going to appear magically from somewhere.  I'm not sure where right now (if I was a betting man, "the youth vote came out for Johnson"), but in the days after the election I'm sure our fair and impartial media will let us know what the story is this time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2019, 05:41:11 PM
Speak of the devil. (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/dec/01/media-bias-is-a-gift-to-the-conservatives)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Frank on 02 December, 2019, 06:01:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2019, 05:41:11 PM
Speak of the devil. (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/dec/01/media-bias-is-a-gift-to-the-conservatives)

This is the letters page?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 December, 2019, 07:49:31 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2019, 01:10:54 PM
As the polls narrow I just become increasingly convinced that a few million Tory voters are going to appear magically from somewhere.  I'm not sure where right now
The final twist of the knife will be the remaining Brexit Party voters (c. 3%) all going Conservative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 December, 2019, 10:16:15 PM
Boris steals reporter's phone rather than look at image of ill patient on floor of hospital due to lack of beds. (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50717606)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 December, 2019, 10:48:12 PM
Channel 4 News investigative report into racism in the Brexit party. (https://www.channel4.com/news/racism-in-key-brexit-party-campaign)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 December, 2019, 10:51:18 PM
And then the Tories concoct a complete lie about Matt Hancock's advisor being assaulted outside the Leeds hospital in question to distract from Johnson's PR disaster, which is uncritically retweeted by both Laura Kuenssberg and Robert Peston despite there being actual video of the supposed incident clearly showing that no part of what "senior Tories" were claiming was true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 01:43:00 AM
If you do a search for the following:
QuoteVery interesting. A good friend of mine is a senior nursing sister at Leeds Hospital - the boy shown on the floor by the media was in fact put there by his mother who then took photos on her mobile phone and uploaded it to media outlets before he climbed back onto his trolley.

You'll find it quoted word-for-word by multiple social media accounts, though it originates on Facebook where the Tories have just been exposed as running targeted political ads containing "inaccurate or debunked" information.  They're taking no chances this time around.


The record will reflect that I said the media would ignore Purdah this time around after the lesson they learned in 2017, but one thing I did not see coming was the slow-motion nosedive into a wood chipper that the BBC's credibility has been taking in the last few weeks.  I wish I could say it's some kind of watershed moment for accountability or whatever, but the truth is that the rest of us are just catching up with something that Scottish indy supporters have known for years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2019, 03:38:13 AM
Mind you, it shouldn't really matter if the boy on the floor had been staged: the PM didn't want to look at a picture of anyone suffering - he wanted to skirt around it with his loud waffle / baffle persona. When that didn't work, some part of his tired mind went for pocketing the phone, until he apparently woke up to what he looked like and tried to recover a while later.

Looking forward to four years of waffle / baffle from Boris, as he stuffs his pockets full of tax payers' hard-earned, grinning like an amiable ape and shaking his blond tufts while he shouts "Eh? Nonsense! Absolute tosh-mongery of the highest quibble!".

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 10 December, 2019, 08:14:29 AM
Awful.

When you think the man couldn't fall any lower, he proves us all wrong.

A shame there are people who will still vote for him. Surely in any decent Society that would be the end of him, and his awful party.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 December, 2019, 08:42:30 AM
Quote from: Rately on 10 December, 2019, 08:14:29 AM
A shame there are people who will still vote for him. Surely in any decent Society that would be the end of him, and his awful party.

How many times have those words been typed about Donald Trump in the last three years. Every time it doesn't happen, the limit for what is 'acceptable' shifts still further and ever-more-despicable behaviour becomes normalised.

The only way back from this is for both the Republicans in the US and the Tories here to be destroyed electorally... and I don't see that happening, since the underlying thrust of their strategies is to rig the political system to make it impossible to get the fuckers out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 December, 2019, 09:19:30 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 01:43:00 AM



The record will reflect that I said the media would ignore Purdah this time around after the lesson they learned in 2017, but one thing I did not see coming was the slow-motion nosedive into a wood chipper that the BBC's credibility has been taking in the last few weeks.  I wish I could say it's some kind of watershed moment for accountability or whatever, but the truth is that the rest of us are just catching up with something that Scottish indy supporters have known for years.

The BBC's credibility has been a long-standing worry for me. For example, it's "reporting" of the alleged chemical attack in Douma in 2018 continues to unravel (https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-368-the-douma-hoax-anatomy-of-a-false-flag/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CorbettReportRSS+%28The+Corbett+Report%29&utm_content=Gmail).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2019, 10:27:52 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 01:43:00 AMone thing I did not see coming was the slow-motion nosedive into a wood chipper that the BBC's credibility has been taking in the last few weeks
Great timing, too, given that Johnson has now effectively said he within the next parliament will look at whether it's still "relevant" to have a licence fee. The BBC has far fewer friends now. I know very few people who'd defend the corporation to the hilt, and that's solely due to the atrocious news arm (from LK through to Question Time).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2019, 10:29:23 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 December, 2019, 08:42:30 AMThe only way back from this is for both the Republicans in the US and the Tories here to be destroyed electorally... and I don't see that happening, since the underlying thrust of their strategies is to rig the political system to make it impossible to get the fuckers out.
As soon as Farage bottled it, that was the end of any hope the Tories would be meaningfully split. They've shaved off the fully decent wing. They've probably got (and will get) 100 MPs who are too cowardly to do anything to rock the boat, but who'd be better off in another party. I'm really not looking forward to Friday morning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 10 December, 2019, 10:43:47 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 December, 2019, 08:42:30 AM
Quote from: Rately on 10 December, 2019, 08:14:29 AM
A shame there are people who will still vote for him. Surely in any decent Society that would be the end of him, and his awful party.

How many times have those words been typed about Donald Trump in the last three years. Every time it doesn't happen, the limit for what is 'acceptable' shifts still further and ever-more-despicable behaviour becomes normalised.

The only way back from this is for both the Republicans in the US and the Tories here to be destroyed electorally... and I don't see that happening, since the underlying thrust of their strategies is to rig the political system to make it impossible to get the fuckers out.

I know, Jim.

All utterly depressing and dispiriting, especially when I see decent people who try their best everyday to be better, and prop others up, even if just with kind words. I see the food banks, drop-in centres, the stall in a supermarket last week that was asking for donations of pet food to help unfortunate people feed their pets, the Hospitals at breaking point along with the staff. Then you look towards the Republican and Conservative parties and see the lack of decency, empathy and total moral cowardice, the lies and manipulations. All the greed and sneer. If that's what people want elected, then maybe there is little hope for any of us. If you vote Tory, you are a bad person. There's no two ways about it. Don't let them claim ignorance, and don't let them forget it if the Tories make it back in for another few years of more misery.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2019, 11:08:03 AM
We are moving to a US model. We will become a low-tax/small-state place, where the rich are rich and the less wealthy too often consider themselves temporarily embarrassed soon-to-be-rich, and so fight against the higher taxes that would make their lives better. (Arguably, that's already happened in this GE run, with the bullshit about people under Labour "on average" paying £2k+ more tax. Yes. Because some people are super-rich and that monumentally skews things.)

As for voting Tory, it's never been my bag, but I've in the past understood it. I know people who have voted Tory in the past. They're not bad people. We don't share politics, and they may be a bit "head in the sand" on certain issues (along with – mostly – being insulated and privileged), but they weren't bad. Now, I'm past that. In this GE, you're either ignorant of reality or flat-out horrible if you've voting Tory. And that we've 40%+ looking at voting for a repainted UKIP, that doesn't say good things about the future of the UK. (Although if the Tories get a majority, I don't think the UK as an entity has a future.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 December, 2019, 12:07:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 01:43:00 AM
If you do a search for the following:
QuoteVery interesting. A good friend of mine is a senior nursing sister at Leeds Hospital - the boy shown on the floor by the media was in fact put there by his mother who then took photos on her mobile phone and uploaded it to media outlets before he climbed back onto his trolley.

You'll find it quoted word-for-word by multiple social media accounts, though it originates on Facebook where the Tories have just been exposed as running targeted political ads containing "inaccurate or debunked" information.  They're taking no chances this time around.

Confirmed as fakery - from today's Guardian:

"A false online story that the photograph of an ill boy lying on the floor of Leeds General infirmary was staged came from a hacked account, according to the medical secretary whose name was attached to the initial post.

The woman, whose name the Guardian is withholding because she says she has received death threats since the post was made, denied posting the allegation that four-year-old Jack Willment-Barr's mother placed him on the floor specifically to take the picture, which was on the front page of Monday's Daily Mirror.

"I was hacked. I am not a nurse and I certainly don't know anyone in Leeds," the woman said. "I've had to delete everything as I have had death threats to myself and my children."

She said she had tried to report the hack of her Facebook account to the advice service Action Fraud."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 01:09:49 PM
The jig was up when the hospital apologised, but the speed and ease with which a fake counter-narrative was established (not just about the boy being faked, but about the punch that never happened) should really concern more people than it seems to.  Not all fake news operations slip-up like this one did and repeat the attack line verbatim.  We can take a guess why that report on Russian interference was buried.

I like the optimism of those saying things like "a few more years of the Tories", but we need to be honest with ourselves and admit that once they get in this time, they're never leaving power.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 December, 2019, 05:40:36 PM
"88% of Conservative Party election advertisements found to be misleading" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50726500) is being reported by the BBC, ironically under the misleading headline: General election 2019: Ads are 'indecent, dishonest and untruthful' implying it's a problem with all the political parties.
The article contains a stretch that Reed Richards would be proud of:

Quotefor Labour, it said that it could not find any misleading claims in ads run over the period. However, it noted that the party's supporters were more likely to share unpaid-for electioneering posts than those of its rivals. It said one of these contained leader Jeremy Corbyn's disputed claim that a Tory-negotiated trade deal with the US could cost the NHS up to £500m a week by driving up the cost of medicines

So yeah: people talking to each other on social media is the same as a political party paying Facebook to publish lies.  Glad we've cleared that up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 10 December, 2019, 09:17:56 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2019, 11:08:03 AM
We are moving to a US model. We will become a low-tax/small-state place, where the rich are rich and the less wealthy too often consider themselves temporarily embarrassed soon-to-be-rich, and so fight against the higher taxes that would make their lives better. (Arguably, that's already happened in this GE run, with the bullshit about people under Labour "on average" paying £2k+ more tax. Yes. Because some people are super-rich and that monumentally skews things.)

As for voting Tory, it's never been my bag, but I've in the past understood it. I know people who have voted Tory in the past. They're not bad people. We don't share politics, and they may be a bit "head in the sand" on certain issues (along with – mostly – being insulated and privileged), but they weren't bad. Now, I'm past that. In this GE, you're either ignorant of reality or flat-out horrible if you've voting Tory. And that we've 40%+ looking at voting for a repainted UKIP, that doesn't say good things about the future of the UK. (Although if the Tories get a majority, I don't think the UK as an entity has a future.)

Pretty much agree with you word for word, though I personally have never fully agreed with the 'temporarily embarrassed millionaire' reasoning for the poor being convinced to vote against their interests. Most poor people I know are aware they will always be poor. It's more that the right wing leans heavily on social issues and culture war rhetoric to keep the plebs on their side. Here, it's things like guns, abortion and immigration, over in the UK it's Brexit and immigration.

I live in the US, and feel deeply conflicted about it. On the one hand, I'm personally pretty comfortable (at least I am for the time being). I'm financially stable and have 'good' health coverage. However I don't see myself staying here for the rest of my life, because due to healthcare and sky-high property taxes you only realistically stand a chance of ever retiring, or even perhaps transitioning to working part time in your old age, if you have a rock-solid private pension plan (which due to the ever more precarious state of work, vanishingly few people have anymore). Workers rights are non-existent - I didn't even realise before I moved here that you can literally be sacked for no reason and given no notice, and most people get by on 10 days or less of holiday a year, with sick days being deducted from that. They sell all this by calling it 'freedom'. You are 'free' to leave your job at any time, just as your employer is 'free' to get rid of you on a whim.

I would not wish the insurance-based American healthcare system on anyone. It is a literal nightmare on every level.

You have to sit through tedious, impenetrable insurance seminars. You sometimes have to have a separate policy just to cover your deductible. You have the constant stress of worrying about losing your job, because that also means losing your health coverage, exponentially increasing the anxiety of job security (its no wonder that there is such a mental health crisis in this country).

And even if you are 'covered', you really aren't ever 'covered'. If you travel to different state for example, your coverage may vary completely and you could still be on the hook for thousands if something goes wrong. On our old policy, apendicitis was not covered. At all. Weeks after we switched to a different provider (which you have to do constantly for boring reasons) my colleague got apendicits. If we hadn't just switched providers, he would have received a bill for $20,000+. And that's with insurance. Another acquaintance had complications with the birth of their child. They still had to pay a lot out of pocket, but if they didn't have insurance, their bill would have been almost $300,000.

It really is almost inconceivable to a Brit. Never get complacent about the NHS. It is a godsend.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2019, 10:41:57 PM
I was born in Calhab but live in the US now, and radiator speaks true!

The health care system here is madness.

Imagine you go to the Doctor (with insurance coverage), they immediately charge you money before you get to the waiting room (about $20 or so: this is called an Office Co-Pay.  Co-Pay seems to be doublespeak for "You Pay").

Then, you get to see the Doctor. Whatever treatment you get is costed - but you're not told what the cost is. If you ask the Doctor, they'll tell you they don't know: that's up to their finance office and your insurance company. If you ask the finance office, they'll tell you they don't know: that's up to the insurance company. If you ask the Insurance Company, then you're on hold for hours: and then the person who answers the 'phone is a minion that deals with millions of people and often doesn't have a clue what's going on either.

Several months later you get a bill (actually, several) for a mystery amount of $$.

My daughter broke her leg last December. She was insured, which cost $2130 per year. For the broken leg we had to pay $4661.  (Again, note: that's with insurance.) Without the insurance, we'd have had to pay much more (more than $6791, if you're wondering if the insurance was "worth it"). By the way, the cost was spread out over 23 separate bills, one of which I had to battle over to get the correct costing: saving me $382 after several long 'phone calls over several months.

More crazy: your insurance might insure you for a particular hospital, but when you visit you sign a form that says "anything we do that isn't covered you have to pay for". This may include the treatment you are given, or the Doctor that treats you (who charges you separately for their time).

---

TL;DR

Fight tooth and nail for your National Health Service. It's rock solid gold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 10 December, 2019, 11:02:07 PM
I work in British health insurance dealing with the employees of a couple of large international banks. They do get very generous policies, with cover for pre-existing conditions and suchlike, but I've had several Americans find it hard to believe the relative simplicity: "so that's it? I just give them this number and you pay ALL the bills? Oh what's that, there's a deductible excess? How much? £75 - per year?"

One of the top schemes allows them to have treatment anywhere in the world - for 90% of the world, this is done on a pay-and-claim back basis, but for the US we have to hire an intermediary billing company as hospitals always start with a crazy price and then basically expect to haggle it down with the insurers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 10 December, 2019, 11:23:11 PM
QuoteMy daughter broke her leg last December. She was insured, which cost $2130 per year. For the broken leg we had to pay $4661.

As you point out, I think most people would quite reasonably assume that a figure like $7000 would be what you might end up getting charged if you weren't insured, when in reality the cost of deductibles alone can be truly eye-watering. Even someone who jumps through all these hoops and has top of the line insurance could still easily find themselves crippled with debt through no fault of their own. That fact alone should in any sane world be more than enough to invalidate the whole system. Argument over.

The most bizarre thing is how brainwashed people are.

The people I work with are intelligent, fairly engaged liberal types. And on the subject of healthcare, they occasionally ask me things like 'so is it better over there or here/which system do you prefer?'. They are fed such a concentrated diet of lies and propaganda - even by the so-called 'left-wing' media - on an almost daily basis that they genuinely think they have the superior system. Remember that those pro-NHS protests in the UK a few years ago were widely reported as anti-NHS protests by the US media.

I think a lot of people in the UK have become genuinely complacent. They bitch and moan about the NHS so much - they clearly haven't got a clue what the alternative would really mean in real terms for themselves and their loved ones. They are fully prepared to swallow all the BS and let the Tories get away with privatising the NHS by the back door - which, if you actually listen to pretty much any NHS employee, is clearly already well underway. And it drives me nuts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 11 December, 2019, 03:43:08 AM
To raise the spirits a little I messed with Boris's grim attempt at an already shit film.

He ignored the golden rule of the internet - never allow a picture of yourself holding a placard.

Thread:

https://twitter.com/scowlingmonkey/status/1204271500343177216
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2019, 07:25:27 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2019, 10:41:57 PM
I was born in Calhab but live in the US now, and radiator speaks true!

The health care system here is madness.

Imagine you go to the Doctor (with insurance coverage), they immediately charge you money before you get to the waiting room (about $20 or so: this is called an Office Co-Pay.  Co-Pay seems to be doublespeak for "You Pay").

Then, you get to see the Doctor. Whatever treatment you get is costed - but you're not told what the cost is. If you ask the Doctor, they'll tell you they don't know: that's up to their finance office and your insurance company. If you ask the finance office, they'll tell you they don't know: that's up to the insurance company. If you ask the Insurance Company, then you're on hold for hours: and then the person who answers the 'phone is a minion that deals with millions of people and often doesn't have a clue what's going on either.

Several months later you get a bill (actually, several) for a mystery amount of $$.

My daughter broke her leg last December. She was insured, which cost $2130 per year. For the broken leg we had to pay $4661.  (Again, note: that's with insurance.) Without the insurance, we'd have had to pay much more (more than $6791, if you're wondering if the insurance was "worth it"). By the way, the cost was spread out over 23 separate bills, one of which I had to battle over to get the correct costing: saving me $382 after several long 'phone calls over several months.

More crazy: your insurance might insure you for a particular hospital, but when you visit you sign a form that says "anything we do that isn't covered you have to pay for". This may include the treatment you are given, or the Doctor that treats you (who charges you separately for their time).

---

TL;DR

Fight tooth and nail for your National Health Service. It's rock solid gold.

What he said.  I listened to a New York Times podcast last week who interviewed a woman who was sued by a hospital as her daughter needed a series of operations which turned out not to be covered by her insurance policy.

Our own healthcare system here in Murphyville isn't quite that bad but appalling nevertheless.  The NHS is precious. Hang onto it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 December, 2019, 07:42:10 AM
I came across a thread on Twitter a few days ago where people were sharing their experiences of US healthcare — specifically, in this case, people who'd had quite serious surgical procedures under local anesthetic because having a general meant an overnight stay in hospital which they couldn't afford. One person described actually watching surgeons open up his abdomen and how much pain you can still feel under a local.

Apparently, in US healthcare, this is Very Much A Thing (to the extent that there's a NY Times article about it that I won't bother linking because it's behind a paywall).

One doctor rightly described the whole thing as 'uncivilised' saying that in this day and age, we shouldn't just be giving people "something to bite down on" during surgery.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2019, 12:01:37 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2019, 07:25:27 AM
Our own healthcare system here in Murphyville isn't quite that bad but appalling nevertheless.  The NHS is precious. Hang onto it.

Every Ethnic Nordy I know who lives/works in the Free State heads back to the Occupied Territories for their medical needs.  Says it all. 

We've a pretty amazing health service here in Ireland, large parts of it almost shockingly free, but there is constant and frequently expensive buggeration in accessing it - €60-€70 for every GP visit and €100 to attend A&E, which is pretty much the only way to get admitted or get seen by any kind of specialist: my old man has been very poorly for the past year and a half, and despite having a list of ongoing issues and associated consultants as long as Pete Well's wang (allegedly) if he takes a bad turn he has no choice but to go back to Casualty each time. 

The average price of Health Insurance here, which 50% of the population feel they need largely to ensure quick access to consultants and procedures, is almost €2000, which is change for the coffee machine in US terms, but still a terrifying €40 p.w. 

Which is by way of saying: any UK party that threatens the NHS in any way should be voted out of existence toot-sweet. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2019, 12:33:00 PM
In normal circumstances that might have happened, but Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 December, 2019, 01:46:45 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 December, 2019, 12:01:37 PM
The average price of Health Insurance here, which 50% of the population feel they need largely to ensure quick access to consultants and procedures, is almost €2000, which is change for the coffee machine in US terms, but still a terrifying €40 p.w. 

This figure that I pulled out of my shapely arse got me thinking (also fact checking, and I wasn't far off: about 2.2 million out of 4.5 million ruddy-cheeked bogtrotters pay an average of €1900 health insurance).  Googling suggests that the UK median household income is £29,000. Taking £1700 for even modest RoI HI for even one member of the household (and let's be honest, it's 2-4) off that would be a 6% reduction in disposable income. Imagine a tax hike that did the same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 11 December, 2019, 01:52:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 December, 2019, 12:01:37 PM
Which is by way of saying: any UK party that threatens the NHS in any way should be voted out of existence toot-sweet.

Which is possibly why the Yanks are being a bit cannier than attempting to buy it outright.  Let's face it, it makes a hell of a lot more sense from their point of view to have a government funded service.  If they get their way on the meds front then all of that extra dosh Johnson is promising is going to be hoovered up by the bar-stewards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2019, 02:25:09 PM
Remember up the thread when I put on my tinfoil hat and said magic votes would appear for the Tories from somewhere?  Apparently they arrived by post already. (https://twitter.com/Carolin31152898/status/1204748359963234304)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 December, 2019, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2019, 02:25:09 PM
Remember up the thread when I put on my tinfoil hat and said magic votes would appear for the Tories from somewhere?  Apparently they arrived by post already. (https://twitter.com/Carolin31152898/status/1204748359963234304)

That's quite exceptional - if it's true then a BBC reporter is breaking the law by declaring election results before polling day (never mind before the polls have closed - they haven't even opened yet).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
I was in A&E recently after falling off my motorbike.  The ambulance crew put me in a wheelchair and gave me some kind of vape to smoke which got me absolutely off my tits and most definitely killed the pain. I had a great time.  Sorry, I realise this doesn't advance discussions in any way. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 December, 2019, 05:44:01 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 11 December, 2019, 04:52:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 December, 2019, 02:25:09 PM
Remember up the thread when I put on my tinfoil hat and said magic votes would appear for the Tories from somewhere?  Apparently they arrived by post already. (https://twitter.com/Carolin31152898/status/1204748359963234304)

That's quite exceptional - if it's true then a BBC reporter is breaking the law by declaring election results before polling day (never mind before the polls have closed - they haven't even opened yet).

Again, the Calhab is ahead of you. Ruth Davison, the Scottish Leader of Conservatives, who you Have to remind yourself to hate her, did it at last election and no prosecution followed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 11 December, 2019, 06:25:42 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 December, 2019, 07:42:10 AM
I came across a thread on Twitter a few days ago where people were sharing their experiences of US healthcare — specifically, in this case, people who'd had quite serious surgical procedures under local anesthetic because having a general meant an overnight stay in hospital which they couldn't afford. One person described actually watching surgeons open up his abdomen and how much pain you can still feel under a local.

Apparently, in US healthcare, this is Very Much A Thing (to the extent that there's a NY Times article about it that I won't bother linking because it's behind a paywall).

One doctor rightly described the whole thing as 'uncivilised' saying that in this day and age, we shouldn't just be giving people "something to bite down on" during surgery.

See also: uninsured victims of accidents begging bystanders not to call them an ambulance and opting to make their own way to hospital instead, women in labour getting Ubers to hospital instead of ambulances etc etc. These aren't exaggerated horror stories, these are things that happen all the time.

Mixing healthcare with profit motives, to me, introduces so many self-evident conflicts of interest, as a corporation is, given the choice, obviously always going to put profit before wellbeing.

Far from being 'more efficient' because of competition, the sheer number of different providers and the huge amounts of money involved things like marketing, having to hire god knows how many agents and middle-men, all the bloated admin involved... It's really hard to see how it isn't far more wasteful and bloated than a fully socialised system.

Again, things like this alone, in any sane world, should end the argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 December, 2019, 06:43:58 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
I was in A&E recently after falling off my motorbike.  The ambulance crew put me in a wheelchair and gave me some kind of vape to smoke which got me absolutely off my tits and most definitely killed the pain. I had a great time.  Sorry, I realise this doesn't advance discussions in any way.

Europe: "Someone has been hurt: quickly, get them high!"
USA: "Someone has been hurt: quickly, let's profit from that!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 12 December, 2019, 08:27:49 PM
Quote from: radiator on 11 December, 2019, 06:25:42 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 December, 2019, 07:42:10 AM
I came across a thread on Twitter a few days ago where people were sharing their experiences of US healthcare — specifically, in this case, people who'd had quite serious surgical procedures under local anesthetic because having a general meant an overnight stay in hospital which they couldn't afford. One person described actually watching surgeons open up his abdomen and how much pain you can still feel under a local.

Apparently, in US healthcare, this is Very Much A Thing (to the extent that there's a NY Times article about it that I won't bother linking because it's behind a paywall).

One doctor rightly described the whole thing as 'uncivilised' saying that in this day and age, we shouldn't just be giving people "something to bite down on" during surgery.

See also: uninsured victims of accidents begging bystanders not to call them an ambulance and opting to make their own way to hospital instead, women in labour getting Ubers to hospital instead of ambulances etc etc. These aren't exaggerated horror stories, these are things that happen all the time.

Mixing healthcare with profit motives, to me, introduces so many self-evident conflicts of interest, as a corporation is, given the choice, obviously always going to put profit before wellbeing.

Far from being 'more efficient' because of competition, the sheer number of different providers and the huge amounts of money involved things like marketing, having to hire god knows how many agents and middle-men, all the bloated admin involved... It's really hard to see how it isn't far more wasteful and bloated than a fully socialised system.

Again, things like this alone, in any sane world, should end the argument.

When I moved to London back in '89, the advice I received was "stay out of political and religious conversations". When I moved to LA in '98, the advice I received was "don't call an ambulance if you're sick. Get a friend to drive you." They weren't joking. I've three friends who drove themselves to hospitals while having heart attacks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2019, 08:44:27 PM
Air ambulance is even worse: there's a flood of air ambulance private companies: too many copters and not enough patients.  The upshot of this is that if you take a ride in an air ambulance they're going to try and extract the cost of running the entire business from you. Because it's the land of the free (*cough* *drool*), there's no regulation on what they charge you.

Air ambulance == bankruptcy.

(Of course, if you need one, then you have no choice but to take it. Or, I dunno, attempt to crawl to hospital. You'll die, but at least you'll still have money in the bank.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 December, 2019, 10:45:57 PM
Fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 December, 2019, 10:58:01 PM
Yep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 12 December, 2019, 11:00:29 PM
Jesus suffering fuck....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 December, 2019, 11:09:09 PM
LOL We really are the absolute worst.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 December, 2019, 11:20:58 PM
God help us all. I'm half Brit myself, but what the hell's going on over there?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 12 December, 2019, 11:49:34 PM
I think this link says it all.  :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aItpjF5vXc

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: edgeworthy on 12 December, 2019, 11:54:26 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 December, 2019, 08:44:27 PM
Air ambulance is even worse: there's a flood of air ambulance private companies: too many copters and not enough patients.  The upshot of this is that if you take a ride in an air ambulance they're going to try and extract the cost of running the entire business from you. Because it's the land of the free (*cough* *drool*), there's no regulation on what they charge you.

Air ambulance == bankruptcy.

(Of course, if you need one, then you have no choice but to take it. Or, I dunno, attempt to crawl to hospital. You'll die, but at least you'll still have money in the bank.)

If you want to feel really bad my local Air Ambulance is a Registered Charity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 December, 2019, 03:37:22 AM
Jesus fucking shit Christ. Really UK? Fucking REALLY?!?

Oh my god. It looks like right wing propaganda and lies wins over truth a progressivism. We are so fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 December, 2019, 03:57:03 AM
It's Brexit, innit. People want it done (even if they didn't originally want to do it).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 13 December, 2019, 04:22:31 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 13 December, 2019, 03:57:03 AM
It's Brexit, innit. People want it done (even if they didn't originally want to do it).

I understand the impulse behind Brexit, even if I oppose it. I get why people are angry and wanted to reject the status quo. I guess I just had a glimmer of hope that the party with the policies that could actually start to address some of the underlying issues that made people so frustrated as to want to vote for Brexit in the first place might gain a bit more traction, but I guess not. Getting Brexit through isn't going to satisfy that anger, it's just going to make everything worse.

All I see is a country that is enthusiastically hastening its own decline. God knows what the tories will inflict now that they basically have free reign to do whatever the hell they want.

And this is all also probably mana from heaven for those over here that want to stop Bernie Sanders from getting anywhere near the Democratic nomination. What does Labour even do now? New New Labour? Tories but a bit superficially nicer? Don't we have the Lib Dems for that (and look at how that's going for them)?

A sad day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 December, 2019, 04:37:10 AM
Heartbroken and angry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 04:58:10 AM
Remember when Stanley Johnson accused the British publib of being illiterate and that they couldn't even spell Pinnocio?


He was right.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 13 December, 2019, 06:37:54 AM
Tory win? 100% predictable. The scale of it? Maybe less so. But give Scotland indyref2, and I am quite sure that this time, finally, we'll make the right choice and be out of this joke of a union. The problem, of course, is that Johnson won't let us have it. Which will in turn inevitably increase the desire for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2019, 07:32:19 AM
Phew, finally the UK is safe from anti-semitism.

This UK December election has turned out to be an historian's blessing, neatly marking the twenty-teens as the decade that western democracy shat the fucking bed. Enjoy Christmas, my turkey friends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 07:43:06 AM
What an absolute nightmare we're in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 08:38:14 AM
I'm still angry. Mrs IP in tears all last night. This shortly after the first time she told me she no longer feels safe and secure in the UK. She's now driving to work, where staff had Farage posters up and were being shitty to her because they knew she's a migrant – as are a third of the people who work there. She's been shopping around in Sweden, idly looking for houses.

I don't want to leave everything I know and start again. I don't want my child to lose all her friends and start again. But it almost feels inevitable now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 08:51:36 AM
I truly hope that this sort of disgusting nationalistic fervour soon dies down.  I just don't know.

No-one should ever feel threatened in that way.

I can't stand what this country is now.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 10:05:49 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 08:38:14 AM
I'm still angry. Mrs IP in tears all last night. This shortly after the first time she told me she no longer feels safe and secure in the UK. She's now driving to work, where staff had Farage posters up and were being shitty to her because they knew she's a migrant – as are a third of the people who work there. She's been shopping around in Sweden, idly looking for houses.

I don't want to leave everything I know and start again. I don't want my child to lose all her friends and start again. But it almost feels inevitable now.

Absolutely awful to read that, IndigoPrime.

Devastating to think that there are people so awful, that they think that behaviour is acceptable. Sad that the Newspapers, Politicians etc. have one their damndest to normalise and make acceptable the behaviour of vile people who add so little to our communities.

Someone said this morning that Brexit isn't a British thing, it's an English thing. I think we are headed towards an horrendous, even more uncertain and chaotic times in the UK, or at least for as long as the UK lasts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 10:11:47 AM
Quote from: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 08:51:36 AM
I truly hope that this sort of disgusting nationalistic fervour soon dies down.  I just don't know.

Of course it won't. It just won the Tories a landslide — they're not putting this back in its box when it works so well for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 10:14:00 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 10:11:47 AM
Quote from: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 08:51:36 AM
I truly hope that this sort of disgusting nationalistic fervour soon dies down.  I just don't know.

Of course it won't. It just won the Tories a landslide — they're not putting this back in its box when it works so well for them.

Hope you are wrong, Jim, but I think my optimism is misguided.

All we can do is try and be decent, and hope that eventually people wake up and realise that we are marching towards a very dark, dangerous time in History.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 December, 2019, 10:32:52 AM
You could argue the North of England, who lost many Industries like Shipping and Coal to the first wave of Thatcherite Neo-Liberal Freemarketeers has finally got their revenge upon the globalists. Quite a way to go about it, so we'll have to understand that we'll be leaving the eurozone sooner, rather than later. Nationalism I suspect has been the winner here, both in England and Scotland. Gas-Putin must be rubbing his hands with glee at a weakened E.U. All left-leaning Parties appeared to have recieved a mauling by the electorate, but that's the way it went. Not much to be happy about Brexit looks now unstoppable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 10:36:58 AM
We gotta have hope, chaps.

What a disaster.  I'm literally sat in work whilst people argue around me.

Grim.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 10:42:52 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 December, 2019, 10:32:52 AM
Nationalism I suspect has been the winner here, both in England and Scotland.

You keep using "nationalism" like this in relation to the SNP, but their platform is determinedly internationalist, rather than the isolationist nationalism peddled by the likes of Johnson, Farage and Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 13 December, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
No matter how anyone feels about their nation and the teeming hordes of swarthy letterbox-faced jihadist rape-gangs that threaten to overwhelm the queue in Lidl, it seems genuinely beyond comprehension that someone could look at Boris Johnson and think "yep, that's  the man who'll look out for me".

If - eyes fully open to his endless lies, venal shenanigans and cynical buffoonery - another nation can deliberately grant someone like that the power he craves, I don't know where it's all going to end. Like Trump, what could Johnson possibly do that would unsettle his followers?

I really truly feel for you, UK peeps - and individual stories like IP's break my heart.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2019, 11:09:16 AM

We've had our disagreements, IP, but your post genuinely brought a tear to my eye.

I feel bad for you all but please don't despair, you are stronger and more powerful than you know. I don't want to sound trite or condescending (too late?), but I put my faith in individuals - like you wonderful, amazing, humane people - and not in tribes, factions or institutions.

Peace and love, my friends, peace and love.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 13 December, 2019, 11:19:15 AM
The Tory voters and BoJo fans on my Facebook feed are mainly people I went to school with and were the kids who hung around with the school bullies just so they weren't the ones to get picked on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 December, 2019, 11:19:56 AM
Quote from: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 10:05:49 AM
Devastating to think that there are people so awful, that they think that behaviour is acceptable. Sad that the Newspapers, Politicians etc. have one their damndest to normalise and make acceptable the behaviour of vile people who add so little to our communities.


And so loyal to their masters, who care nought for them.  I'm reminded of the brownshirts who pushed Hitler to power, but were executed in their hundreds when he had no further use for them (he had the SS by then)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ming on 13 December, 2019, 11:21:46 AM
I'm heading back to the UK for Christmas but I've rarely felt so low at the prospect of a visit...  I'm just left shell-shocked.  We all live in our little bubbles / echo chambers so news and views are strongly filtered but I really hoped that this one would have gone differently.  I guess there are a lot of angry, frustrated people out there who thought that this result will leave them better off but having seen the trajectory of things like food banks, child poverty and homelessness under the Tories I think the vast majority are just going to be shafted even harder than previously.

Next election, if it's just a two party race, I think the ballot paper should just make it simple and offer a choice between 'an attempt to lessen inequality and make the place better for all' and 'fuck the poor' and let people put their mark where their conscience lies.

Having lived in various parts of the world for too long I'm not even eligible to vote in UK general elections any more - not that its would have made any difference, given the scale of the outcome.  The UK's not been home to me for a long time but it's never felt so distant as it does today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 13 December, 2019, 11:24:04 AM
My constituency is Great Yarmouth and our MP is Brandon Lewis.
I've never heard anyone from Yarmouth have a good word to say about him - the town is a deprived area and has been on a downward spiral for years. Brandon Lewis is best known for being unreachable by people in the town. He's never here and he blocks people on social media if they ask him questions he doesn't want to answer.

He got a 65.8% share of the vote.
What the fuck?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 December, 2019, 11:29:28 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 13 December, 2019, 11:24:04 AM
My constituency is Great Yarmouth and our MP is Brandon Lewis.
I've never heard anyone from Yarmouth have a good word to say about him - the town is a deprived area and has been on a downward spiral for years. Brandon Lewis is best known for being unreachable by people in the town. He's never here and he blocks people on social media if they ask him questions he doesn't want to answer.

He got a 65.8% share of the vote.
What the fuck?

He was probably hiding in a fridge.  It worked for Johnson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 11:31:42 AM
Fridge them all.

Wait, isn't that Metallica's debut album?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 12:00:34 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 10:42:52 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 December, 2019, 10:32:52 AM
Nationalism I suspect has been the winner here, both in England and Scotland.

You keep using "nationalism" like this in relation to the SNP, but their platform is determinedly internationalist, rather than the isolationist nationalism peddled by the likes of Johnson, Farage and Trump.

I can't see how Scottish nationalism is different from any other kind of nationalism in that it distracts from the fact that we are ALL being screwed by an international elite, instead suggesting that life would be better for the (insert race or nationality here) if it wasn't for all those nasty (insert race or nationality here) - as long as we're fighting each other based on nationality or religion, we'll never fight the true enemy.

I am saddened and amazed that one of my oldest friends, who did more than anyone else to indoctrinate me with his Marxist views educate me politically, who taught me the words of the Internationale and who campaigned with me on the doorsteps of Dundee, now supports the SNP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2019, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 12:00:34 PM

I can't see how Scottish nationalism is different from any other kind of nationalism in that it distracts from the fact that we are ALL being screwed by an international elite, instead suggesting that life would be better for the (insert race or nationality here) if it wasn't for all those nasty (insert race or nationality here) - as long as we're fighting each other based on nationality or religion, we'll never fight the true enemy.



Spot on.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 12:12:27 PM
My new MP is a Sínn Fein abstentionist, so now I'm not being represented in Westminster. This is a vast improvement over Nigel Dodds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 12:25:50 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 12:00:34 PM
I can't see how Scottish nationalism is different from any other kind of nationalism

Except in the way I described, presumably? The SNP positions itself as internationalist and inclusive — it's pro-EU membership and pro-immigration, exactly the opposite of the nationalism peddled by Johnson, Farage and Trump. Hence my suggestion that it's not reasonable to lump them all together. Their position is for independence from the UK but in the context of EU membership, rather than the isolationist dreams of empire the Tories, Brexit Party and UKIP have traded on.

If, by 'nationalism', you mean what Johnson, Farage and Trump are all selling then perhaps it's not right to call the SNP a 'nationalist' party at all, since the term, when applied to their aspirations for an independent Scotland, seems to mean something entirely different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 12:39:37 PM
Scotland nationalism: we want to have our own say, after decades of being repressed and overruled by the Tories, and be part of an internationalist and cooperative EU

English nationalism: we want to force everyone do confirm to our mindset, and quite like the idea of Empire 2.0. Also: fuck all foreigners. Also: foreigners who don't integrate are bad. Confused? We hope they are. Etc.

(Also: thanks, folks, for the kinds words a page or two page.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 13 December, 2019, 12:59:12 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 12:00:34 PM
I can't see how Scottish nationalism is different from any other kind of nationalism in that it distracts from the fact that we are ALL being screwed by an international elite, instead suggesting that life would be better for the (insert race or nationality here) if it wasn't for all those nasty (insert race or nationality here)

Is that really what they're saying? Or is it that Scotland's needs and aspirations are different from England's and will always be subordinate in the union? That's quite a different argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 01:15:21 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 12:12:27 PM
My new MP is a Sínn Fein abstentionist, so now I'm not being represented in Westminster. This is a vast improvement over Nigel Dodds.

Yes, a massive improvement surely. And a seismic shift in NI politics for a nationalist to take that seat.

I would say most parties would learn from having their noses bloodied, but the sheer arrogance of the DUP makes them very unpredictable.


Would think they need to get the Assembly back up and running as quickly as possible, with the RHI Report due as well. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 December, 2019, 01:41:17 PM
One Labour Guy quoted in the Times said he believed that the Tories would be in power for the next twenty years. Rather a grim thought, but it certainly is a possibility if this election is anything to go by. The 'Save our NHS' campaign the Labour Party endorsed appeared to make little impact on an election dominated by Brexit. One world slides out of view replaced by a more disjointed, national based world order. I was reading John Gray's 'On Humans and Other Animals', and it was full of dire predictions on how humans don't learn from the past, are arbitrary in their thinking and not logical or rational at all. Human Progress, Gray asserts it is a myth, and you can't help thinking there might be something in that after recent events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 02:02:38 PM
The SNP may have a more open outlook than many nationalist parties, but they share the trait of blaming all the ills of the world and all their failures in government on "them".



assuming the numbers are correct, this analysis is interesting:

QuoteThe headlines this morning would be very different if we had proportional representation:
• No overall majority for any party
• The Conservatives win 75 seats fewer
• The Greens go from one seat to 17
• The amount of SNP seats halves
• A government could only be formed if parties worked together
• The Brexit Party win 13 seats
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 02:15:46 PM
Quote from: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 01:15:21 PM

...but the sheer arrogance of the DUP makes them very unpredictable...


Well they're refusing to take any kind of responsibility and blaming the fenians. Seems completely predictable to me.

The nationalist majority was more a result of anti-brexit sentiment, it's looking like the DUP might still have lost most of Belfast even if the Nationalist's hadn't formed an electoral pact. I was surprised Naomi Long didn't take East-Belfast, I thought she had a better chance than Finucane in North Belfast. I guess her constantly feeding twitter trolls lost her support.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ming on 13 December, 2019, 02:17:49 PM
Is a move to proportional representation likely at this point?  Or will that be quietly buried since it's unlikely to work in favour of the current government?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 02:27:11 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 02:15:46 PM
Quote from: Rately on 13 December, 2019, 01:15:21 PM

...but the sheer arrogance of the DUP makes them very unpredictable...


Well they're refusing to take any kind of responsibility and blaming the fenians. Seems completely predictable to me.

The nationalist majority was more a result of anti-brexit sentiment, it's looking like the DUP might still have lost most of Belfast even if the Nationalist's hadn't formed an electoral pact. I was surprised Naomi Long didn't take East-Belfast, I thought she had a better chance than Finucane in North Belfast. I guess her constantly feeding twitter trolls lost her support.

Those bloody Pan-Nationalists!

Aye, I thought Gavin Robinson would have lost the seat, too, to be honest. A shame.

If they fail to learn lessons, and soften their stance on so many issues facing Northern Ireland, they will lose more seats. Hopefully the hangers-on they attract, and encourage, will disappear back off into the shadows.

Be interesting to see how those blood red lines they always talk about are reassessed in any upcoming talks to restore Stormont. Maybe the moment is right to consign the POC to the rubbish heap it belongs in. Would be a good start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: ming on 13 December, 2019, 02:17:49 PMIs a move to proportional representation likely at this point?
Not even remotely. It's supported by pretty much every party in GB (not sure about NI positions), with two glowering exceptions: the Tories (because FPTP works very nicely for them) and Labour (because they're still arrogant enough to think it will work for them again – at some point). In favour of PR: Lib Dems; Greens; UKIP; Brexit Party; Plaid Cymru; and – due to the fact they have integrity – SNP.

No fucking chance then, not least because people wrongly keep banging on that we already had a referendum on PR in 2011 and rejected it. (No we didn't and no we didn't. AV is a majoritarian system, not proportional. It can actually result in LESS proportional results than FPTP.) Blair needs a serious kicking for 1) not standing up to his cabinet over the Jenkins Report and junking it, and 2) still believing FPTP is the right system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2019, 03:23:48 PM
We have STV in Northern Ireland, which is pretty much the same thing as PR so I assume we're generally in favor, or at least don't care enough to kick up a fuss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 03:24:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 02:44:31 PM
No fucking chance then, not least because people wrongly keep banging on that we already had a referendum on PR in 2011 and rejected it. (No we didn't and no we didn't. AV is a majoritarian system, not proportional. It can actually result in LESS proportional results than FPTP.) Blair needs a serious kicking for 1) not standing up to his cabinet over the Jenkins Report and junking it, and 2) still believing FPTP is the right system.

This is what pissed me off most about the coalition - the LibDems had a once in a lifetime chance to push through ONE policy properly in return for their support, but fluffed it with an AV system that even they didn't really support.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 December, 2019, 03:48:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 02:44:31 PM
Blair needs a serious kicking for 1) not standing up to his cabinet over the Jenkins Report and junking it, and 2) still believing FPTP is the right system.

This is not an exhaustive list
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 13 December, 2019, 03:54:07 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 10:11:47 AM
Quote from: karlos on 13 December, 2019, 08:51:36 AM
I truly hope that this sort of disgusting nationalistic fervour soon dies down.  I just don't know.

Of course it won't. It just won the Tories a landslide — they're not putting this back in its box when it works so well for them.

It absolutely won't. The only question is, once we're out of the EU, who the anger gets turned on next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 03:56:32 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 03:24:52 PMThis is what pissed me off most about the coalition - the LibDems had a once in a lifetime chance to push through ONE policy properly in return for their support, but fluffed it with an AV system that even they didn't really support.
Gay marriage was the prize, but the Tories subsequently spun that as their win. The Libs monumentally messed up on AV though. The suggestion at the time was Labour wouldn't budge any further than AV either. Libs should have red-lined AV+ (and via parliament, backed by Con, not a ref) along with Clegg as foreign secretary. The DUP might be arseholes, but they show the strength a junior partner in a coalition can have.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2019, 03:23:48 PMWe have STV in Northern Ireland, which is pretty much the same thing as PR so I assume we're generally in favor, or at least don't care enough to kick up a fuss.
I would assume the DUP is against PR, but had to suck it up for the assembly. In 2011, they, the Tories, the UUP and the BNP were against PR (as, oddly, with the NI Greens). Labour, natch, sat on the fence, because of course they did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2019, 04:22:47 PM
In the context of NI, STV and FPTP are essentially the same thing for the really tribalist voters who likely don't bother with anything beyond their first preference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 December, 2019, 04:24:52 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 02:02:38 PM
The SNP may have a more open outlook than many nationalist parties, but they share the trait of blaming all the ills of the world and all their failures in government on "them".




I can't claim to know how Scottish people feel and think, but I would imagine feelings about Scottish independence have changed a bit since Brexit.  Leaving the UK would mean having the option to stay in the EU (which the majority of that country wanted anyway), so supporting independence may be more a pragmatic choice for some Scots these days than an emotional one.  Or am I way off the mark?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 December, 2019, 04:40:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 December, 2019, 04:24:52 PM
Leaving the UK would mean having the option to stay in the EU (which the majority of that country wanted anyway), so supporting independence may be more a pragmatic choice for some Scots these days than an emotional one.  Or am I way off the mark?

Plus, of course, being in the EU and not having to go through the process of applying to join as an independent nation was sold as one of the key advantages of staying in the union.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 04:49:52 PM
And "you'd never get in anyway, because Spain wouldn't allow it" has been shown up as the bullshit it always was. There is, mind, one thorny issue: if Scotland does join the EU, there would have to be a hard border with England. Fun times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: ming on 13 December, 2019, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 04:49:52 PM...if Scotland does join the EU, there would have to be a hard border with England. Fun times.

Hadrian's wall 2.0?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 December, 2019, 05:04:36 PM

The Tory Trellis.

Or that old favourite, the Irn Bru Curtain.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 13 December, 2019, 05:40:54 PM
More people voted for Remain parties than for Leave parties. If this had been a referendum, Remain would have won. Worth remembering when Tories and Brexiteers talk about their "mandate" to get Brexit done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 13 December, 2019, 08:13:10 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 13 December, 2019, 02:02:38 PM
The SNP may have a more open outlook than many nationalist parties, but they share the trait of blaming all the ills of the world and all their failures in government on "them".

'cept in their case the "them" has always mainly been the British government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 December, 2019, 09:10:23 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 13 December, 2019, 01:41:17 PM
I was reading John Gray's 'On Humans and Other Animals', and it was full of dire predictions on how humans don't learn from the past, are arbitrary in their thinking and not logical or rational at all. Human Progress, Gray asserts it is a myth, and you can't help thinking there might be something in that after recent events.


"One thing you learn from history is that nobody ever learnt anything from history."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 December, 2019, 09:11:26 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 December, 2019, 03:56:32 PM
Gay marriage was the prize, but the Tories subsequently spun that as their win. The Libs monumentally messed up on AV though.


And how long before gay marriage is repealed?  I know there are definite plans to bring back fox hunting (as if it actually went away, despite the law).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 December, 2019, 10:52:48 PM
This is what happens when a decent man tries his best.

"Last night hurt, today hurts a bit more, tomorrow it will hurt even more.

Jeremy has dedicated each day of his political life for the less fortunate amongst us. Unwaveringly, he has fought and campaigned for people who suffer and people in hardship.

Being honest, humble and good natured in the poisonous world of politics has meant that he has endured the most despicable attacks filled with hatred for the duration of his 36 years in public life.

In his 31 years as an MP preceding his leadership he supported each campaign for peace and justice wherever it was in the world and however difficult or unpopular at the time. As Labour leader he continued to do so. He also produced the most wonderful manifesto this country has ever seen. He took on an entire establishment.

This meant that the attacks from all sides intensified and became even more poisonous while he was leader. We've never known a politician to be smeared and vilified so much.

His unbelievably broad shoulders and incredibly thick skin endured all of this so that we could all live in the hope of a world free of racism or hunger. The man led with strength difficult to quantify.

Not only have his messages been inspirational but he has delivered them with honesty, humility, dignity and above all, love. The polar opposite of how his opponents delivered theirs. As we are so used to seeing, the politics of division and the message of hatred prevailed.

To say we are proud is a vast understatement. To assume that the ideologies he stands for are now outdated is so wrong. In the coming years we will see that they are more important than ever.

Thank you to every person who saw his vision and supported it and supported him. From the three proudest sons on the planet, please continue the fight."

Ben Corbyn
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 December, 2019, 10:54:46 PM
I weep for what could have been. I weep for our country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2019, 11:26:09 PM
Ah, they'd have just declared the election result invalid anyway, like they did in Bolivia and Venezuela and everywhere else a socialist government gets in.  At least this way we don't have to have CIA goons clogging up the streets of London starting riots.

On the plus side, at least now we'll get to see this Russian report that Boris promised he'd publish after the election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 14 December, 2019, 01:25:52 AM
Why are we living in such an unfeeling society?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2019, 01:56:27 AM
Drink and on Public Tansport now so.please ignore, but:

What makes me so angry.about the UK result is the contrastime between Jezza and Johnson. I'd have voted for Corbyn. A thousand times if I was allowed. A intellectual, a proud, principled and demonstrable champion of the everyday person. Someone I'd have been proud to call leader, despite being a republican. You see him becoming the whipping boy of UK politics, on every fucking radio ststion.. Jesus. It's like fucking Spartacus in real time. 

He was the man who cold have given you back here beautiful dream of Britain. And again, I speak as a socialist and a republican. But.you.chose Johenson, who represents pr8veletw and entrenched self intetest.  I respected but never undestood Padraic Pearse until.today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 December, 2019, 03:23:09 AM
Ugh, home now and I promise that at least 10% of that incoherence was the bastard lovechild of my fat fingers and an unforgiving predictive text function on my heavily-aromoured phone. Point was, the UK was taasked by Grail Knight to chose wisely, but instead plumped for the gilded one with aw' the gee-gaws. I blame Allison Doody.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 14 December, 2019, 03:34:08 AM
It's pretty clear that it all came down to Brexit. I would bet money that even if Labour had had a more centre-left, more telegenic and media trained leader, the result would have been exactly the same.

The irony is that the people turning on Corbyn now are probably the same kinds of people who pressured him into adopting a more overtly Remain/2nd Ref stance in the first place.

Ah well. All I'll say is that I appreciated, for once in my life, being able to actually enthusiastically cast my vote for a candidate rather than just picking the least objectionable option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 December, 2019, 07:33:07 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 13 December, 2019, 11:26:09 PM
..... at least now we'll get to see this Russian report that Boris promised he'd publish after the election.

Prof, this is the Political Thread, not Squaxx Telling Jokes ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2019, 09:35:51 AM
The narrative currently being pushed that it was Corbyn* not Brexit that fucked Labour doesn't seem to be born out by the numbers.**

The Tories' share of the vote increased by 1.2%.... I'd actually have expected more of a bounce than that just from UKIP/BXP voters coming home. The Green Party increased their share of the vote by that much (presumably at the expense of Labour).

Labour's lost votes went to the LibDems and the Brexit Party, which means that their losses were *entirely* about Brexit. They lost Remain voters to the LibDems for not being Remainy enough and Leave voters to the BXP for not being Brexity enough.

Ironically, the issue which threatened to destroy the Conservatives has handed them a huge election victory and split the Labour Party instead. All the Tories had to do was promise to fuck the country's economy, wholeheartedly embrace racism, and destroy the union. Well done, everybody.

* I'm not saying Corbyn shouldn't go. You can't lose two General Election campaigns and expect to stay as party leader.

** I had a handy table with all the numbers, but I can't work out where my bloody phone saved it to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2019, 11:00:11 AM
As a kid, I was bullied for being half-English.  All my life I've defended England against pig-headed black-and-white nationalism, saying that you can't blame the everyday man on the street for abuses against other countries.

But you know what?  I'm running out of excuses.  Brexit is a nasty, ugly and arrogant piece of work, paving the way for decades of xenophobia and isolationism, and now a landslide victory for a self-serving little prick who hasn't got an ounce of moral fibre. 

Obviously you guys here are ok, but we would appear to be in a bubble.  Get it together,  England.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 December, 2019, 11:57:48 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 December, 2019, 09:35:51 AM
I had a handy table with all the numbers, but I can't work out where my bloody phone saved it to.

No table, but I've read a few interesting stats...

Cons and Brexit parties got 46% of the vote, though the Cons have 56% of MPs, giving them the majority.

Labour, Lib Dems and other parties whose manifestos support Remain got 51% of the vote, meaning the British public have made clear * they don't want Brexit.  But it looks like that's what we'll get anyway.



* as clear as the 35% / 37% ** referendum split, anyway.

** popularly known as the 52% / 48% split.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 December, 2019, 12:08:28 PM
When I totted it up, parties in favour of a second referendum got 53%. Those against: 46%. (Then there's the rabble, and I couldn't be arsed trawling through that.) In short, we got fucked by FPTP. Again. Labour got fucked by FPTP. Again. Labour SUPPORTS FPTP. They are part of the problem.

As for the why, from advocates I've been following, for every person who switched to Con due to Brexit, four switched due to Corbyn. He's deeply unpopular. Bar for a brief period after GE2017 when he was merely somewhat unpopular, that's always been the case. Is that unfair? Possibly. But that is where we are at and it has long been a known factor. Even now, Corbynites  are fighting against this, arguing they somehow won the argument, and that this was a 30-year project anyway.

Couple this with Labour's arrogance in refusing to stand down anywhere AND vehemently campaigning against LDs in a few key seats and you see the problem in the future. (There are a ton of people noting that at the death, they switched a ton of on the ground Labour to where Berger was campaigning, to ensure she would lose.)

We need Corbyn out. Labour must find a middle ground between his approach and Blair. Then it needs to make peace with not winning a majority and enter an electoral pact with the Lib Dems and Greens. Try to get the Greens an extra seat or two. Cede bits of the south to the LDs. Give Labour a clear run at its traditional London seats, and almost the entirety of the midlands and the north. Exceptions only for incumbents. For rare Lab/Lib marginals, split them 3:2 in Labour's favour. Then we might have a sliver of a hope of getting the Tories out next time around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 14 December, 2019, 12:17:42 PM
That's a very sensible and evidence-based proposal, which is why it certainly won't happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 12:25:24 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 14 December, 2019, 11:00:11 AMObviously you guys here are ok, but we would appear to be in a bubble. 

We're not the only bubble. The gaming forum I'm on is largely anti-Tory, as is my deliberately small FB circle. There are a lot of differences in the details, but the generalities are the same.


Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 12:36:01 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 December, 2019, 12:08:28 PM
We need Corbyn out. Labour must find a middle ground between his approach and Blair. Then it needs to make peace with not winning a majority and enter an electoral pact with the Lib Dems and Greens.

Definitely agree with the first two sentences, and have a lot of sympathy for the third. I sometimes think if Blair had had the sense to keep out of Iraq and Brown had settled for second best they'd still be in charge.

Frustrating though it seems, I'd not get too hung up on FPTP. From someone else's analysis I saw, FPTP would have given the Brexit Party 13 seats. If that's correct, the last thing we need is that lot having a foundation to build on.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2019, 12:41:52 PM
One of the arguments I've seen against PR is that overnight it would legitimise parties like the BNP/UKIP/Brexit, but they seem to be a constant presence anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 December, 2019, 12:54:41 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 12:36:01 PMFrustrating though it seems, I'd not get too hung up on FPTP. From someone else's analysis I saw, FPTP would have given the Brexit Party 13 seats.
Good. People deserve representation. Either you believe in it or you don't. If you don't, then fine, but that means we'll never have more than one Green, and the Lib Dems will remain scrabbling around with about 1.5% of the seats on 12% of the vote (or, at their very best, 9% of the seats on 23% of the vote). And with Scotland lost to anyone but the SNP, we won't even bounce back and forth between Con/Lab majorities voted in by a minority of the people – it'll just be Tory forever, when the numbers are consistently there for progressive coalitions.

FPTP doesn't work. It's only worked once in a hundred years, when Baldwin's Tories won a majority actually backed by a majority (although, of course, the seats Baldwin got were massively higher than the vote). Arguably, 2010 was representative too, in the sense at least the government we ended up with had the backing of a majority – and 59.1%, which was the largest backing since 1868(!), unless you tot up all the parties Wilson eventually had to do deals with in the mid-70s.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2019, 12:41:52 PMOne of the arguments I've seen against PR is that overnight it would legitimise parties like the BNP/UKIP/Brexit, but they seem to be a constant presence anyway.
The other argument is that by denying them representation, other parties have to play for their votes. So Labour and Tory policy alike has gone more UKIP, which split the former, and resulted in an effective takeover of the latter. If we had a PR system, these parties could split without fear of electoral oblivion. 'Corbyn' and 'Blair' Labour parties could co-exist and potentially come together in coalition. One Nation Tories could have removed themselves from the more right-wing in the party, and would have had options regarding who to work with. This is what happens in democracies all over the place, but we sit there complaining about the prospect of a 'hung parliament', which is what people from plenty of other countries would call a 'parliament'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 03:00:54 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 December, 2019, 12:54:41 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 12:36:01 PMFrustrating though it seems, I'd not get too hung up on FPTP. From someone else's analysis I saw, FPTP would have given the Brexit Party 13 seats.
Good. People deserve representation. Either you believe in it or you don't. If you don't, then fine, but that means we'll never have more than one Green, and the Lib Dems will remain scrabbling around with about 1.5% of the seats on 12% of the vote (or, at their very best, 9% of the seats on 23% of the vote). And with Scotland lost to anyone but the SNP, we won't even bounce back and forth between Con/Lab majorities voted in by a minority of the people – it'll just be Tory forever, when the numbers are consistently there for progressive coalitions.

It's not so much that I don't believe in PR, more that I believe in the law of unintended consequences.

And while I accept there may well be the numbers there for progressive coalitions (and frankly that's what I was hoping for), the last three years do suggest that the willingness and competence is sorely lacking.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 December, 2019, 03:17:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 14 December, 2019, 03:00:54 PMAnd while I accept there may well be the numbers there for progressive coalitions (and frankly that's what I was hoping for), the last three years do suggest that the willingness and competence is sorely lacking.
We've no way of knowing for sure how voting patterns would change if we had PR, nor what realignment would occur under such a system. But if we look at 2010 and even take the vote we got as the basis, things would have been fundamentally different. The Lib Dems would have been de facto kingmakers. They would have had the choice of an almost 1:1 coalition with Labour or a 3:2 coalition with the Tories. Even with this week's vote, you have the numbers for Con+LD or Lab+LD+SNP+Green.

Perhaps it's naive to think that we can escape the us or them politics that's poisoned this country's politics. But it's pretty clear that unless some major shifts happen, Labour won't ever win a majority again. Therefore, it in the short term needs to figure out how to win enough seats to lead a coalition (so: a pact), and then make the likelihood of that occurring again increase (PR). And PR also has the knock-on effect of quite simply making elections fairer.

Of course, unintended consequences can then occur. We could end up with two conservative parties joining forces after a strong election showing. But even so, that's representation. And I'd take that alongside the greater likelihood of progressive and/or centrist coalitions than the shitshow we have now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 December, 2019, 03:30:54 PM
I was disappointed, pre-election, when there was talk of a caretaker government, but it required that either Corbyn step-aside to allow a more neutral figure to lead it (he refused and wouldn't budge on that position) or that the Lib Dems would be okay with Corbyn leading it (they refused and wouldn't budge on their position).

Now, he's strapped himself to the wheel of the Titanic, and Jo Swinson's coracle went down in stormy seas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 December, 2019, 03:44:11 PM
On the topic of Scottish nationalism, I don't see it as a xenophobic trend to tribalism: it's just clear from endless rounds (years) of voting that the people of Scotland want to manage their own affairs (as part of Europe: so to an extent) and that being tied to Westminster just doesn't allow that. You can see this from the most recent election in an incredibly stark and obvious, colour-coded way. Scotland wants something different:

(https://i.imgur.com/zcno6fP.png)


Scotch nationalism is where we fight to turn the country into a whisky-themed amusement park. Take a wild ride in the Cragganmore Corryvecken Cork-Boat Calamity!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 14 December, 2019, 04:11:37 PM
Perhaps protest votes (voting for racist parties like BNP, UKIP and Brexit even though the voter wouldn't actually want to see them get in) would be less common if there was more of a chance that your actual vote had any effect?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 December, 2019, 04:21:08 PM
How to cope if your mental health is suffering because of the election result. (https://metro.co.uk/2019/12/13/cope-mental-health-suffering-election-result-11896602/?ito=social&fbclid=IwAR36vbj-YYFEHAdXfTmo07qCyRPGoUwPKIwTAVjdBRpQa2tsZVL3AZd1z84)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 14 December, 2019, 04:36:26 PM
Only reason BJ hasn't agreed to IndyRef2 is he needs to appease the Unionist faction of the Conservative party, otherwise it would be a done deal and Tory's would have their perpetual rule copper-fastened – but he can't say no forever. Norn Irn is similar: now that a non-unionist vote is the majority in NI for the first time ever (unionist seats taken in unionist jerrymandered constituencies), it holds no political value and is only a drain on the Treasury.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 14 December, 2019, 05:01:38 PM
Does anyone remember a documentary (possibly a series) from about 30 odd years ago in which some bloke was looking at various forms of nationalism around the globe? Don't remember much about it except for said bloke getting to Scotland and summarising that it was the weirdest kind of nationalism he'd encountered because it seemed much more of a grievance with who was running things than tribalism and everybody seemed to have English grannies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 15 December, 2019, 05:32:42 PM
Jonathan Pie's Election Aftermath! sums up a lot of the problem to me. Not what a lot of people want to hear, but it's not wholly wrong, either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0nIhL4v6bY

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 December, 2019, 06:57:22 PM
The problem's a lot simpler than that. The problem is that a lot of people believe a lying clique of toffs are somehow genetically equipped to run the estate like it's always been run and keep everyone in their appointed station. Better to live your life in the scullery, let his lordship have the odd grope and watch your kids die of malnutrition than take the risk of seeing some darkies walking about the village like they're actual people.

All you need on top of that mental hellscape is a split of the vote of people who've thought about aspiring to a different life, some concerted media dishonesty picking off the less committed, a ludicrous FPTP system to amplify it all, and hey presto shit city forever.

But look, it's bitter unwarranted vitriol to suggest such a thing, to maintain that people voting for objective c**ts and their c**tish ways is self-harming stupidity: why shouldn't billionaires fuck us all, unassailed by the minor irritation of my whining about it. Or so the forelock-tuggers tell me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 December, 2019, 07:06:12 PM
There's a lot of apathy and laziness too. Lots of friends expressed sadness at my family's situation. Precisely one of them went on the marches with me. For march two, there were lots of excuses about short notice (six weeks, apparently, is not enough). One person was painting their garage. Then for march three, there was a notice period of many months. Still, people were terribly busy. Also, during all that time, no-one wrote to their MPs, because there was "no point". I agree that writing to MPs is usually a waste of time, but imagine five million people had done so, because the situation with citizen rights was so appalling? Things would have changed. Instead: oh, it's so terribly awful that you're being treated like shit. Oh, it's nasty the way you got abused in the street. Tsk, wasn't it awful when she got deported and they had to move to Denmark? And so on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 December, 2019, 06:58:02 PM

The Douma narrative continues to unravel. (https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/releases/) Was the BBC involved in constructing a lie that led to air strikes? If so, who or what was behind it, and what should be done?


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 December, 2019, 06:58:01 PM
I realize we're now beyond politics, which is why this thread is so quiet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 December, 2019, 10:53:14 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 December, 2019, 06:58:01 PM
I realize we're now beyond politics, which is why this thread is so quiet.

I've found it too bleak to talk about recently.  To quote Dan Ashcroft from Nathan Barley, the idiots are winning.  Decency and common sense are not part of the new system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 07:18:22 AM

I'm not sure there can be decency when one small section of society believes it can impose its will on the rest, and I'm not sure there can be common sense when the rest of society sincerely believes the same thing.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 19 December, 2019, 07:34:56 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 18 December, 2019, 10:53:14 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 December, 2019, 06:58:01 PM
I realize we're now beyond politics, which is why this thread is so quiet.

I've found it too bleak to talk about recently.  To quote Dan Ashcroft from Nathan Barley, the idiots are winning.  Decency and common sense are not part of the new system.

A thousand times this! Just very disheartening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 December, 2019, 10:47:29 AM
It is odd, an overwhelming feeling of resignation. I look at the Trump impeachment and just can't it see making any (positive) difference, I see our own party leaders just sort of accepting that they need to dissolve their not-coalition and ho-hum have some sort of, y'know, election, fairly soon. But no-one really seems to give a shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2019, 02:08:04 PM
I wonder as well if it is also because no one really knows what is coming?  Granted Brexit is now so much more likely to be on the cards but the shape of it is still unclear.  How is it going to affect Ireland?  What sort of trade deals are we going to end up with?  How many of Johnson's ambiguous promises are going to actually come to pass?  Who is going to be holding him to account and how?

If the tin-foil hat are to be believed and Brexit is all part of some grand plan to break up the EU then those behind that plan are, I would have though, most likely to make every effort possible to ensure Brexit is a resounding success.  Those wonderful trade deals that Johnson et al have been harping on about will materialise and expose the folly of Britain's membership over the last couple of decades.

Whether that is insane optimism, delusional thinking or just plain wrong .... Who knows?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 19 December, 2019, 02:44:42 PM
People don't need to actually be better off to be convinced they're better off, even if that means ignoring the raw evidence of their increasingly squalid existences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 02:46:09 PM
What's behind it is just hubris. My guess is Ireland will unify (meaning the border issue goes away) and Scotland will declare independence (thereby be creating a new – if very different – border). England will become an isolationist state reliant on the USA, and may at some point come to its senses, elect someone other than the Tories, and rejoin the EU on much worse terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 02:50:45 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2019, 02:08:04 PMI wonder as well if it is also because no one really knows what is coming?  Granted Brexit is now so much more likely to be on the cards but the shape of it is still unclear.  How is it going to affect Ireland?  What sort of trade deals are we going to end up with?  How many of Johnson's ambiguous promises are going to actually come to pass?  Who is going to be holding him to account and how? If the tin-foil hat are to be believed and Brexit is all part of some grand plan to break up the EU then those behind that plan are, I would have though, most likely to make every effort possible to ensure Brexit is a resounding success.  Those wonderful trade deals that Johnson et al have been harping on about will materialise and expose the folly of Britain's membership over the last couple of decades. Whether that is insane optimism, delusional thinking or just plain wrong .... Who knows?
I'm more worried about the opposite; that the remaining EU members and supporters will go out of their way to trash the UK so they can say, "You see? You see what happens when you leave!?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 December, 2019, 03:02:49 PM
Voter ID now mandaTory.  Well, this is what we wanted, I guess.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 December, 2019, 03:23:52 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 02:50:45 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2019, 02:08:04 PMI wonder as well if it is also because no one really knows what is coming?  Granted Brexit is now so much more likely to be on the cards but the shape of it is still unclear.  How is it going to affect Ireland?  What sort of trade deals are we going to end up with?  How many of Johnson's ambiguous promises are going to actually come to pass?  Who is going to be holding him to account and how? If the tin-foil hat are to be believed and Brexit is all part of some grand plan to break up the EU then those behind that plan are, I would have though, most likely to make every effort possible to ensure Brexit is a resounding success.  Those wonderful trade deals that Johnson et al have been harping on about will materialise and expose the folly of Britain's membership over the last couple of decades. Whether that is insane optimism, delusional thinking or just plain wrong .... Who knows?
I'm more worried about the opposite; that the remaining EU members and supporters will go out of their way to trash the UK so they can say, "You see? You see what happens when you leave!?"

You see Larry, This is what happens when you met a stranger in the alps...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 19 December, 2019, 03:35:16 PM
Yeah, Boris and austerity have fecked the country, and if it all goes tits up it, he'll blame the Remainers, the Trots, saboteurs and refuseniks ,  The whole Uncle Joe thing, my worry is the counrty will end up like the movie 'Children of Men' but without the excuse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 December, 2019, 03:43:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 02:50:45 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2019, 02:08:04 PMI wonder as well if it is also because no one really knows what is coming?  Granted Brexit is now so much more likely to be on the cards but the shape of it is still unclear.  How is it going to affect Ireland?  What sort of trade deals are we going to end up with?  How many of Johnson's ambiguous promises are going to actually come to pass?  Who is going to be holding him to account and how? If the tin-foil hat are to be believed and Brexit is all part of some grand plan to break up the EU then those behind that plan are, I would have though, most likely to make every effort possible to ensure Brexit is a resounding success.  Those wonderful trade deals that Johnson et al have been harping on about will materialise and expose the folly of Britain's membership over the last couple of decades. Whether that is insane optimism, delusional thinking or just plain wrong .... Who knows?
I'm more worried about the opposite; that the remaining EU members and supporters will go out of their way to trash the UK so they can say, "You see? You see what happens when you leave!?"

It's not in our interest to trash a trading partner.  Brexit is on UK leave voters, not us.  But I am expecting a whole lot more opinions like this one being bandied about if things go wrong.

I hardly need go into the old golf club membership analogy, do i?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 03:50:33 PM
The harsh lesson the UK will learn is what happens when you remove yourself from seamless economic integration with the world's largest market, and become an outlier in a world of massive trading blocs. This will be blamed on the EU, and it will be framed as the EU 'bullying' the UK. The reality is it will be protecting its own market, to which the UK no longer belongs. As others have noted, the UK will also be negotiating the first trading deal in history that is about throwing up barriers rather than removing them. The entire thing is insane.

And, yeah, there will be a bit of "this is what happens when you leave", because that's just reality. You don't get to keep seamless trade. You lose free movement rights. Tariffs happen. You don't get default access to Euratom and other EU-wide programmes. And, in the UK's case, we obliterate London as a financial centre, destroy a ton of industry (some of which will never return), and cause untold damage to the 80% of our economy that is services and that is basically never covered by trade deals.

Well done, everyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 December, 2019, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 03:50:33 PM
The harsh lesson the UK will learn is what happens when you remove yourself from seamless economic integration with the world's largest market, and become an outlier in a world of massive trading blocs. This will be blamed on the EU, and it will be framed as the EU 'bullying' the UK.

Oh, we've been bullying you since the referendum.  By not changing the terms of leaving that voters had already been told about before the vote, apparently, accepting a deal and then watching MPs squabble about it ad nauseum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 03:50:33 PM

The reality is it will be protecting its own market, to which the UK no longer belongs.


Exactly. The EU is not a free market, it's a protectionist racket.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 04:28:12 PM
No market exists that doesn't protect itself from, for example, goods that are considered substandard within that market. No market exists that doesn't ensure its own people benefit first and foremost over competition from other markets. That is not a "protectionist racket" by any stretch. In fact, the EU bent over backwards to deal with the UK's rotting corpse of empire, and has been great regarding tariffs for nations that need help. But we don't hear about that because, say, people are yelling falsehoods about the realities of trade.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2019, 04:37:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 02:50:45 PM
I'm more worried about the opposite; that the remaining EU members and supporters will go out of their way to trash the UK so they can say, "You see? You see what happens when you leave!?"
[/quote]

I know.  That is the other extreme.  Like I said, I'm working off the tin-foil-hat theory of Brexit, that it is all part of some master plan to damage the EU and break it up.  The idea that the EU is not likely to want to see the UK succeed post Brexit to protect itself is just as likely, if not more so.

We also have to take into account the competence levels of the present incumbents.  Johnson's track record is not great but then again neither is that of the majority of the cabinet.  Grayling's main mistake was to be a tad too overt in his incompetence.  This is likely to have some bearing on the direction of travel (mainly Westwards if indicators are to be believed).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 04:47:41 PM
People like Farage have been open that they want to end the EU, although precisely why is always the question. Partly, this hinges on the UK not wanting to be part of something rather than leading it, but this whiffs of having paymasters in the USA and Russia. But Brexit won't end the EU. It will weaken it in key areas, but the EU will survive and probably unify more than it otherwise would have had the UK remained a member. If the UK (or England) subsequently tries to rejoin, I suspect it'll be told to get stuffed as well, unless public opinion is very much in the pro camp.

As for the EU not wanting the UK to succeed, that's just not the case. The problem for the UK is it cannot succeed in any meaningful sense economically nor socially outside of the UK. We are a medium-sized country that punched above our weight due to empire and then due to EU membership through being a 'bridge' to Europe for the US and Japanese. Without being that, the UK is nothing special and has nothing special. The EU won't have to do anything for us to fail. It doesn't have to.

The problem is the UK wants friends with benefits. It wants to be treated differently from any other third country, while also not paying anything, because apparently car manufacturers in Germany will demand this. (Clue: no they won't.) This is a project of delusion and hubris, and by the time the UK's final position becomes clear, it will be years too late.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 05:17:03 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 04:28:12 PM
No market exists that doesn't protect itself from, for example, goods that are considered substandard within that market. No market exists that doesn't ensure its own people benefit first and foremost over competition from other markets. That is not a "protectionist racket" by any stretch. In fact, the EU bent over backwards to deal with the UK's rotting corpse of empire, and has been great regarding tariffs for nations that need help. But we don't hear about that because, say, people are yelling falsehoods about the realities of trade.

I'm not talking about protecting consumers from unsafe or sub-standard goods; that's what the law and free trade are for. I'm talking about this:

Protectionism is a politically motivated defensive measure. In the short run, it works. But it is very destructive in the long term. It makes the country and its industries less competitive in international trade. (https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-trade-protectionism-3305896)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 07:10:25 PM
LSE: "The EU isn't protectionist – it's one of the most open economies in the world"
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2017/08/14/the-eu-isnt-protectionist-its-one-of-the-most-open-economies-in-the-world/

FT: "The EU is no protectionist racket"
https://www.ft.com/content/e761a1ca-47af-11e8-8ee8-cae73aab7ccb

BBC: "Is the European Union a 'protectionist racket'?"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44291103

By any modern definition, the EU trade bloc is pretty liberal. I'm sure anarchists hate it. The thing is, most Brits aren't anarchists. We as a country have relied on our links with other European countries for decades now. We're about to get the shit kicked out of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 08:00:12 PM

I couldn't read the FT link because I keep running into a paywall, but the other two links reinforce that the EU is protectionist - but only a little bit. I guess that's like being a little bit pregnant.

But let's assume that the EU's protectionism is very low, even though it isn't. If the UK leaves the EU, then what would be the problem? Their protectionism is low and therefore fairly cheap, so the only way we're going to "get the shit kicked out of us" is if the EU raises its protectionism against UK trade as a political lever. Which it won't, because it's a fair and advanced organisation...

You are quite correct that the UK has been trading with other European countries for centuries, mostly without the "help" of the EU. It's not as if trade between European countries and the UK will evaporate without the EU - unless the EU actively causes it. Which it won't, because it's a fair and enlightened superstate...

I understand that you, and most people in this and many other countries, are statists and support the role and powers of the state, which is why you argue so vehemently in its favour. Calling you a statist is not an insult, nor does it define you - it's just one of the myriad facets that make you you. To be fair, if the state protected, supported, and respected all of its people lawfully and without bias then I would be a statist too. But it doesn't, so I'm not.

Statists concentrate on the benefits of the state, of which there are admittedly some, but as an anarchist I'm just as guilty, in this instance of concentrating on the disadvantages, of which there are also some. The question is whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages which, to my mind, they do not.

Finally, the Earth does not have a single government or ruler and is, therefore, an anarchist planet. So far, anyway...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2019, 08:20:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 08:00:12 PMIf the UK leaves the EU, then what would be the problem?
Increased costs. A basic lack of customs infrastructure and training. Obliteration of supply chains. (JIT is destroyed by ANY friction.) You know, the things people have been banging on about since 2016.

QuoteYou are quite correct that the UK has been trading with other European countries for centuries, mostly without the "help" of the EU. It's not as if trade between European countries and the UK will evaporate without the EU - unless the EU actively causes it.
Seriously? This? Again? This is almost as good as "well, people worked in Europe before the EEC, and so I don't see why losing free movement makes any difference". Again: friction. Trade will continue. It's just it won't be frictionless. Ergo, we won't benefit.

QuoteThe question is whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages which, to my mind, they do not.
What are the benefits for you in leaving the EU? What are the disadvantages?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 December, 2019, 08:27:23 PM
At what point does "just asking questions", getting detailed, well-informed answers, waiting a couple of months and asking the same questions again become trolling?

Just asking the question...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 December, 2019, 08:51:59 PM

And where will the increased costs and friction come from? What will prevent free movement? Governments, by any chance?

Sorry I wasn't clear, I was talking about the benefits and disadvantages of the state in general. The major benefit I see is in organisation of national infrastructure, the disadvantages I have proposed many times before - so I won't repeat them again in case Jim's head explodes. Just assume that what I see as the disadvantages of the state become the superdisadvantages of the superstate, which outweigh (in my view) the superbenefits of the superstate.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 December, 2019, 01:38:38 AM
For correct navigation of this thread, follow this handy-dandy guide:

A. Someone says something about politics.
B. Someone (with a prominent fin) will say the problem is statism.
C. If you want to have a circular argument conversation about statism, respond to B. Otherwise, respond to A.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 December, 2019, 06:09:40 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 December, 2019, 01:38:38 AM
For correct navigation of this thread, follow this handy-dandy guide:

A. Someone says something about politics.
B. Someone (with a prominent fin) will say the problem is statism.
C. If you want to have a circular argument conversation about statism, respond to B. Otherwise, respond to A.

D.  Someone will post a semi-serious / sarcastic / irrelevant comment.  Respond to D, A, G or Y as required ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2019, 08:26:03 AM

You rotters...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 20 December, 2019, 09:56:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2019, 08:26:03 AM

You rotters...

I blame the government
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 December, 2019, 10:12:02 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 20 December, 2019, 09:56:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 December, 2019, 08:26:03 AM

You rotters...

I blame government

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 December, 2019, 09:05:45 AM

You utter rotters...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 21 December, 2019, 12:51:53 PM
Hilarious!

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/martyn-turner-1.4121782

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 December, 2019, 04:32:23 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 21 December, 2019, 12:51:53 PM
Hilarious!

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/martyn-turner-1.4121782

I love Martyn Turner; one of the best political cartoonists I've seen, home-grown or otherwise.

Nice to see some evangelicals crowbarring their nose out of Trump's privy parts for once:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/trump-slams-evangelical-magazine-called-removal-191220141854170.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/trump-slams-evangelical-magazine-called-removal-191220141854170.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 December, 2019, 05:46:42 PM
I don't imagine the believers in the evangelical movement were too impressed by the growing belief that "Christians are worshiping Trump".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2019, 05:04:39 PM
I know we've all become inured to the madness by now, but it's just hit me how absolutely pathetic Orange Clown's response was to Greta Thunberg getting the Time Person of the Year award.

Imagine, if you'll forgive an oft-repeated cliché these days, this happening five years ago: The US President consumed with jealousy and spite because a 16-year-old girl is getting more attention than him.  Thankfully she'll be alive long after he's dead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 December, 2019, 05:08:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2019, 05:04:39 PM
The US President consumed with jealousy and spite because a 16-year-old girl is getting more attention than him.  Thankfully she'll be alive long after he's dead.

Considering his current age, general physique and idea of 'good eating' (remember the time he gave a variety of hamburgers to a visiting sports team?) I'd imagine he'll pop his clogs sooner rather than later.  There's only so much that expensive private medicine can do if the lifestyle doesn't support good health...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 December, 2019, 05:33:52 PM
In my unhappy anecdotal experience the more bitter and selfish a person is the longer they live. If you can call it living.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2019, 10:01:41 PM
He's the Sabbat Head, essentially. With less charm and wit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 January, 2020, 09:52:05 AM
... and in more inspiring news, the revelation that the Americans have decided to murder a senior Iranian military figure in Iraq. (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/03/baghdad-airport-iraq-attack-deaths-iran-us-tensions)  More and more each day this person is growing to resemble a figure from Dredd history ...  [oh sh**, we're monumentally f***ed emoticon]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 January, 2020, 10:20:02 AM
I always find the US 'served him right, world is a safer place' reaction to these targeted murders fascinating. I can't help but imagine what would unfold if Iran assassinated someone like Shanahan, Petraeus or McConville while they were 'mission accomplished'-ing some oil-rich desert somewhere.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 January, 2020, 10:20:26 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 03 January, 2020, 09:52:05 AM
... and in more inspiring news, the revelation that the Americans have decided to murder a senior Iranian military figure in Iraq. (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/03/baghdad-airport-iraq-attack-deaths-iran-us-tensions)  More and more each day this person is growing to resemble a figure from Dredd history ...  [oh sh**, we're monumentally f***ed emoticon]

Literally terrifying.

That he was voted in was horrible enough, but the fact he is somehow still in power, and facilitated by that reprehensible shower of cowards makes my blood boil.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 January, 2020, 10:21:46 AM
Relax, there's still 5 more years of this to go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 January, 2020, 10:27:12 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 03 January, 2020, 10:21:46 AM
Relax, there's still 5 more years of this to go.

We can do it!

Wonder how closely US Justice will reflect Dredd's World by the time the oul wank nostril pops his clogs, preferably on the toilet, after a rage shite!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 January, 2020, 11:47:56 AM

Trump is nothing new in the assassination stakes. President Messiah Obama (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/05/obama-kill-list-doj-memo) ordered assassinations by the shedload, even of US citizens. He had a hit-list.

In 1999 a civil trial concluded that the US government was involved with the assassination of Martin Luther King. It's not clear whether President L. B. Johnson ordered it or not but the implications of either possibility are chilling.

More. (https://wikispooks.com/wiki/US/Assassinations_since_1945)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 January, 2020, 04:10:16 PM
That's a fair point.  It's worth considering the 'greatest' American president of the post war years, Kennedy, was responsible for a number of covert attempts on leaders and high profile figures around the world.  Plus, bringing the world the closest it may well have been to nuclear annihilation up until Reagan's time ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 January, 2020, 05:57:57 PM
Drones don't have 'plausible deniability ', this act can't be compartmentalised, so it could a Frank Ferdinand moment....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2020, 06:43:45 PM
Typical US double-think going on as they assassinate an Iranian enemy and then insist that the Iranians "started it".  US government == playground bullies, but the playground is the Earth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 January, 2020, 08:58:38 PM
Weird to be on the Iranians' side.  It's like all the Chuck Norris movies were a lie.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 January, 2020, 09:06:20 PM

According to the US backed Iraqi Prime Minister Abdul-Mahdi, he was planning to meet Soleimani on the morning he was killed to discuss a diplomatic reconciliation that Iraq was brokering between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Mahdi claimed that Trump personally thanked him for the peace efforts (even as he was planning Soleimani's assassination) thus giving the impression that the Iranian general was safe to travel to Baghdad, where he was killed.

Apparently, Trump promised on Twitter to bomb Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliated - then changed his mind when told that this would be a war crime.

I don't think Trump knows what's going on and is being manipulated by the hawks who 'work for him.'

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2020, 10:33:14 PM
The news report I saw mentioned that Trump's military staff were surprised that he chose that option when it was presented.

It's a bit disturbing that from Trump's perspective he's just playing a Choose Your Own Adventure.  If you wish to assassinate one of the leader's of a nation state, turn to entry #57. If you wish to have a burger instead, turn to entry #39.

...

#39: You die of heart disease.

...

#57: Everyone dies in World War III.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 08 January, 2020, 11:10:49 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2020, 10:33:14 PM
The news report I saw mentioned that Trump's military staff were surprised that he chose that option when it was presented.

It's a bit disturbing that from Trump's perspective he's just playing a Choose Your Own Adventure.  If you wish to assassinate one of the leader's of a nation state, turn to entry #57. If you wish to have a burger instead, turn to entry #39.

They can't have been that surprised - they still presented it as an option and let's face it, when has this imbecile ever taken the least extreme choice?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 09 January, 2020, 08:14:31 AM
Yes, blackly funny as it might be, I don't think "We never thought he'd pick it" is a defence here.

Probably more "We've been secretly hoping for years that a President might pick it and this is our best shot. Diplomats? Fuck those guys!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 January, 2020, 08:21:14 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2020, 10:33:14 PM
The news report I saw mentioned that Trump's military staff were surprised that he chose that option when it was presented.

Clearly not a graphic designer among them — that whole 'present them with the option you want them to chose and two shit ones to make it look like they have a choice' thing never works.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 January, 2020, 08:37:32 AM
Remember reading in the early days of his Presidency that they were presenting his briefings with lots of pictures, and sound bites, as they knew he couldn't take in large amounts of information and was easily bored.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 January, 2020, 10:18:21 AM

Trump must be a joy to work with for the deep state - easy to manipulate into doing what they want and even easier to blame because he's already so goofy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 January, 2020, 06:58:51 PM
Another gem from one of the Emerald Isle's finest cartoonists. Just listening to some of the utter fuck-wits who have been in Government here, and their brain-dead, morally bereft cheer-leaders - who, alas, comprise the majority of the Irish electorate - makes me wonder why I even bother voting anymore. At this stage I think I just do so out of spite, lol.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/martyn-turner-1.4150336

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: edgeworthy on 26 January, 2020, 06:12:22 AM
Did everyone hear about The Great Orange One claiming that America invented the wheel :lol:
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/trump-makes-bizarre-statement-about-protecting-the-inventor-of-the-wheel-in-rambling-interview/
Are you telling me he isn't completely senile!?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 27 January, 2020, 10:09:11 AM
This Impeachment is an utter shitshow from the Republicans. The sheer corruption. My God. And now Bolton's book about to drop.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 January, 2020, 01:00:40 PM
As I understand it the argument is that the People elected Trump and love him dearly, and only the People have the right to get rid of him. Congress and the law isn't fit for purpose, and all this obstruction, manipulation and evasion is merely patriots respecting The Will of the People and frustrating the efforts of Traitors. All a tad familiar, TBH.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 27 January, 2020, 03:34:08 PM
I find it amusing his legal team have appealed to the courts on the pretence Trumps 2016 victory would be undemocratic in the eyes of "the majority who voted him into office".

They seem to have forgotten Trump lost the popular vote. My how just 37 months can make thick people forget.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 January, 2020, 04:58:36 PM
I think the democractic primacy of the popular vote versus the Electoral College is probably moot: the electoral system is what it is (for now), you can drill all the way down into electoral divisions and processes and find enough quirks to convince you that none of it is remotely representative of the aggregate voter. 

As always with the kind of single-issue malarkey that Impeachment typifies, what I find fascinating is the complete dismissal of every other vote at every other level that selected the relevant parliament.  If you don't like the law of the land and what it requires, fair enough I suppose, it's probably largely out of your hands in the short term, but the House or Representatives/Commons/Dáil (and in the US the Senate too) are very much the choice of the voter - but that vote apparently no longer matters when some populist cause is afoot.

I wonder where it all ends, but if it wasn't for the bamboozling effects of media/social media, having seen how well Citizen's Assemblies have worked here of late* I'd still be sort-of hoping for a digital version of demarchy as the ultimate winner in the death match of representative versus direct democracy versus appeal to the Mob.


*And no, not just because of my fondness for Alastair Reynolds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 January, 2020, 10:58:32 AM
Quote from: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!

The BBC seem to have forgotten that the electorate aren't in fucking kindergarten.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 January, 2020, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!

heh, it's worth it for the comments!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 January, 2020, 11:58:44 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 January, 2020, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!

heh, it's worth it for the comments!

But why is the inbred dog with breathing difficulties green?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 January, 2020, 11:59:02 AM
Actually, probably a side-effect of not getting enough oxygen...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 01:00:10 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 January, 2020, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!

heh, it's worth it for the comments!

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 28 January, 2020, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 January, 2020, 11:52:05 AM
Quote from: Rately on 28 January, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
https://twitter.com/BBCLondonNews/status/1222081082323095552

Seriously? Just feck off!

heh, it's worth it for the comments!
I couldn't find the obligatory Churchill comment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 07:26:36 AM
I almost felt sorry for her till I heard her speech at the end.  Nasty little goblin.  https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2020/01/31/katie-hopkins-tricked-into-accepting-nsfw-fake-award (https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2020/01/31/katie-hopkins-tricked-into-accepting-nsfw-fake-award)/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 11:13:43 AM
For everyone feeling depressed/angry/upset/all of the above on "Brexit Day"... I'd urge you to read David Allen Green's (as always) eminently clear and sensible analysis of what this means (linked below).

The short version is: the referendum result is done. The Leavers can no longer bang on about "the will of the people" because they've got exactly what they voted for. The UK is no longer a member of the EU. Nothing else was provided for in the terms of that mandate so they will have to argue everything else on merit.

We 'lost', but everything else is in play now and the Brexiteers can no longer deflect counter-arguments with the cover-all "will of the people" nonsense.

For those of you not familiar with him, David Allen Green is a constitutional lawyer, a long-standing Eurosceptic but 'pragmatic remainer' (he believes that the sensible time to have come out of the EU was over Maastricht but that it's been too complex to bother with since then) and you'll find his thoughts here. (https://davidallengreen.com/2020/01/the-discharge-of-the-mandate-the-real-significance-of-brexit-day-31st-january-2020/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 12:35:11 PM
Can't find that link I'm afraid, Jim. I really want to read the article though
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 12:41:00 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 12:35:11 PM
Can't find that link I'm afraid, Jim. I really want to read the article though
.

Hmm. Sorry about that! The hyperlink on the word "here" at the end of my post seems to be working for me, but here's the full URL:

https://davidallengreen.com/2020/01/the-discharge-of-the-mandate-the-real-significance-of-brexit-day-31st-january-2020/ (https://davidallengreen.com/2020/01/the-discharge-of-the-mandate-the-real-significance-of-brexit-day-31st-january-2020/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 12:43:15 PM
I broadly agree with DAG, but fear things aren't that simple. Every fuck-up will be spun as the EU's fault, and that they are somehow still in control. We lack decent media right now to take the government to task. I can only hope that changes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 12:50:49 PM
I think a lot of Leave voters will take it as read that Brexit is "done". They didn't bother informing themselves of the inconvenient nitty-gritty at any other point during the process, so I don't think they'll start now. The Tories will certainly try to spin this as "delivering Brexit" and I'm sure their friends in the broadcast and print media will repeat this message as uncritically as everything else that comes out of the Conservative press office.

If this goes off the front page, away from the glare of constant coverage, I suspect a lot of cans will get kicked down the road and a lot of red lines will quietly go away.

Notice that Rees-Mogg has been deleting every Tweet on his timeline that claimed "no deal was better than a bad deal". The ERG doesn't have the luxury of being a protest group within the Tories any more — they own this now. It's in the Tories' interests to give the impression that this is all done and then try to steer a far less disastrous course when they think no one is looking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 January, 2020, 01:42:24 PM
Every single thing, from pet passports to fishing quotas, from border tension in Ireland to illegal immigrants in lorries, every single thing will be ascribed to the vengeance of the defeated EU. I think this will more than compensate the new Tory party electorally for any and all losses incurred through economic implosion etc. I hope I'm wrong, and the processes described above play out., but right now I can see unemployment figures being run under a banner of 'Casualties of EU Blitz on Britain' ad infinitum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 02:03:32 PM
Every cost will be ignored or "worth it". Every minor victory from a baseline of zero (rather than our existing position) will be spun. My guess is the UK at best now will be an Italy – a once-major player that will decline to the point of being a barely relevant regional power. Although for the average Joe, it may be more like in Russia, where new norms (worse food; austerity; an effective serf system) become ingrained.

The one hope we have from an electoral standpoint is Labour, but that seems... far-fetched. I'd dearly love to see Starmer or Nandy give the Tories a kicking at the next GE and propose something better (association agreement; even rejoining) at GE+1. But I fear we'll get an RLB win, more 'head in the sand' politics, and two more Tory wins. (And over in the world of the Lib Dems, Davey will win, and they'll act all surprised when another couple of stellar local election performances, including possibly securing several more entire councils, subsequently turn into just one extra seat at a general election.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 03:09:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 12:41:00 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 12:35:11 PM
Can't find that link I'm afraid, Jim. I really want to read the article though
.

Hmm. Sorry about that! The hyperlink on the word "here" at the end of my post seems to be working for me, but here's the full URL:

https://davidallengreen.com/2020/01/the-discharge-of-the-mandate-the-real-significance-of-brexit-day-31st-january-2020/ (https://davidallengreen.com/2020/01/the-discharge-of-the-mandate-the-real-significance-of-brexit-day-31st-january-2020/)

Oops, sorry - my fault.   . Never spotted the blue 'here' on my phone's little cracked screen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 January, 2020, 03:50:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 02:03:32 PMThe one hope we have from an electoral standpoint

The only election in the last ten years that hasn't had centrists crawling out of the woodwork to denounce the result as invalid because of Russian interference has been a Tory landslide delivered via a sharp increase in postal ballots, a string of purdah violations, and a political editor of the BBC currently under criminal investigation for reporting on the result ahead of time - and we haven't got to the redrawing electoral boundaries stage yet, or the packing of the House of Lords with Tory peers.
Anyway I think we can stick a fork in British democracy now.

This is a country with an electorate so thick that it believed that the one person who can counter the threat to national security posed by the Russians is a guy who has been described as a security threat by MI6 because he keeps having secret meetings with Russians, who regularly receives money from Russia, and oh yeah, is literally called Boris.  This is not a democracy, it's a Radio 4 sitcom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 31 January, 2020, 05:46:55 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 12:50:49 PM
I think a lot of Leave voters will take it as read that Brexit is "done". They didn't bother informing themselves of the inconvenient nitty-gritty at any other point during the process, so I don't think they'll start now. The Tories will certainly try to spin this as "delivering Brexit" and I'm sure their friends in the broadcast and print media will repeat this message as uncritically as everything else that comes out of the Conservative press office.

If this goes off the front page, away from the glare of constant coverage, I suspect a lot of cans will get kicked down the road and a lot of red lines will quietly go away.

Notice that Rees-Mogg has been deleting every Tweet on his timeline that claimed "no deal was better than a bad deal". The ERG doesn't have the luxury of being a protest group within the Tories any more — they own this now. It's in the Tories' interests to give the impression that this is all done and then try to steer a far less disastrous course when they think no one is looking.

I feel like it'll be the same story with Trump when he is finally out of office. Being as objective as I possibly can be, he has done very little to make the lives of his core supporters better in any tangible way - in many ways he has made them far worse with his awful tax policies, the destruction of environmental protections, the impact of his trade war of the farming community and the stripping away of healthcare.... And yet his term will inevitably be looked back on with great fondness and reverence by the majority of those who voted for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 07:37:59 PM
I half wonder whether the only way Trump will leave office is when he dies. He's already been testing the water of not pissing off after two terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 07:59:19 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 07:37:59 PM
I half wonder whether the only way Trump will leave office is when he dies. He's already been testing the water of not pissing off after two terms.

It's a worry alright. Acquittal is pretty much a certainty, as, in my view, is re-election.  His next project will involve working out how to stay there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 31 January, 2020, 08:02:17 PM
If it's good enough for Putin...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 08:07:44 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 07:59:19 PM
It's a worry alright. Acquittal is pretty much a certainty, as, in my view, is re-election.  His next project will involve working out how to stay there.

With the Supreme Court now stacked with Republican appointees, and McConnell's determined effort to stuff all the lower levels of the judiciary with Republicans, there'll be no route for a legal challenge if Trump just announces he's not going in the event of an election loss.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 09:39:39 PM
Christ, that is terrifying.  I find myself reduced to a position of hoping his shitty junk food diet catches up with him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 09:49:34 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 January, 2020, 09:39:39 PM
Christ, that is terrifying.  I find myself reduced to a position of hoping his shitty junk food diet catches up with him.

There have been something like 400 bits of legislation McConnell has refused to even make tine to debate since Trump has been in office. That's because he's done nothing but bulldoze judicial appointments through the Senate for the last three years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 31 January, 2020, 10:21:53 PM
Ol' Mitch 'Gravedigger of Democracy' McConnell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 31 January, 2020, 10:26:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 January, 2020, 07:37:59 PM
I half wonder whether the only way Trump will leave office is when he dies. He's already been testing the water of not pissing off after two terms.
Barring that Trump probably sees the office as hereditary now and expects to see a line of his fuckwit progeny filling the position from now until the end of time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2020, 10:30:52 PM

I remember the same discussion about not leaving office surrounding Bush. And Obama.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 11:39:34 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 January, 2020, 10:30:52 PM

I remember the same discussion about not leaving office surrounding Bush. And Obama.

Links, please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 February, 2020, 08:36:29 AM
Well, that's it done then, I suppose. Off you pop.  I expect we might see Scotland and Northern Ireland back before long though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 01 February, 2020, 09:35:40 AM
Well, it's a Brave New World. I suspect things a year from now will be more expensive, hectic and unhappy, but some sort of pain is inevitable. It's a new path, and one less travelled, and we're out of the EU until WW3 happens. Not a very enticing prospect, but we can still support our European neighbours since their troubles, and our own, tend to be shared ones. Leaving is a bugger for sure, but it's done now, and there is no road back. So since many of our forum members are Irish, I will embarrass myself by saying Slan Abhaile, 'Safe Home.' Er, I can't speak any Gaelic, I Looked it up on the Internet!     
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 February, 2020, 09:48:41 AM
Cheers IATS, good choice of words.

This is a sad morning to wake up to, not least because we all have *way* bigger fish to fry than all this insensate pettiness, and need to be pulling together not falling apart.

But when I see the usual suspects banging on about winning freedom from foreign control and regaining their independence all I want to do is punch something. Fucking morons, outright gulled by rich bastards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2020, 10:04:47 AM
Well, that's any hope that things might get more sensible now we've got past 'Brexit Day' out of the window.

Boris Johnson plans to 'put pressure on the EU' by hampering the inward flow of goods to the UK... basically imposing sanctions on his own country. (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/01/31/boris-johnson-ramps-pressure-eu-plans-impose-full-customs-border/?fbclid=IwAR3zfrvexfGfBIyaKteUNcVy438XyuFDm16A0uWl7NgP8G1k3AwCDDZH_vk)

(The UK imports over a third of all the food consumed in the country, and 80% of that comes from the EU.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 February, 2020, 10:47:32 AM
Yes, it's time we EU fascists started upping our bullying tactics, by reminding people of the same rules that were clearly laid out before the referendum, and not treating Britain like the Empire it hasn't been since early last century.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 February, 2020, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 01 February, 2020, 10:04:47 AMBoris Johnson plans to 'put pressure on the EU' by hampering the inward flow of goods to the UK...
"EU causes food shortages across entire UK"

Mrs IP and I were talking a bit about this last night. Without hyperbole, we were starting to get to that point of "at what point did Germans in the 1930s recognise something was up, and how many of them could actually move?" Even if the UK doesn't descend into fascism, the foundations are being erected.

As for Shark's earlier point, I recall idiots on the GoP side throwing around bullshit that Obama would set himself up for life and never leave. The difference this time is the US constitution is being trashed, and it's clearly not robust enough to deal with someone who doesn't play by the rules. (See also: the British constitution.) But in an echo of British politics, the opposition in the US seems to think it's time is better spent arguing with and vilifying each other over details than wholeheartedly attacking Trump. They're fracturing. He will at the very least win a second term.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 01 February, 2020, 11:16:18 PM
Oh feck it, I've just deleted a long angry rant. Nothing to see here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 02 February, 2020, 01:16:43 AM
Quote from: radiator on 31 January, 2020, 05:46:55 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 January, 2020, 12:50:49 PM
I think a lot of Leave voters will take it as read that Brexit is "done". They didn't bother informing themselves of the inconvenient nitty-gritty at any other point during the process, so I don't think they'll start now. The Tories will certainly try to spin this as "delivering Brexit" and I'm sure their friends in the broadcast and print media will repeat this message as uncritically as everything else that comes out of the Conservative press office.

If this goes off the front page, away from the glare of constant coverage, I suspect a lot of cans will get kicked down the road and a lot of red lines will quietly go away.

Notice that Rees-Mogg has been deleting every Tweet on his timeline that claimed "no deal was better than a bad deal". The ERG doesn't have the luxury of being a protest group within the Tories any more — they own this now. It's in the Tories' interests to give the impression that this is all done and then try to steer a far less disastrous course when they think no one is looking.

I feel like it'll be the same story with Trump when he is finally out of office. Being as objective as I possibly can be, he has done very little to make the lives of his core supporters better in any tangible way - in many ways he has made them far worse with his awful tax policies, the destruction of environmental protections, the impact of his trade war of the farming community and the stripping away of healthcare.... And yet his term will inevitably be looked back on with great fondness and reverence by the majority of those who voted for him.

They don't care about his policies. They don't care about what happens to the country. They're just enjoying sticking it to anyone who doesn't agree with them. That is literally the only reason. "Take that, libtard!" There's not one rational or intelligent argument to defend him and his base has embraced that mantra. It's a pathetic cult. And yeah, he's getting another four years and then he'll put forward one of his human dud children to take over the mantle. And they'll probably win too. So, make of that what you will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2020, 07:30:20 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 01 February, 2020, 11:16:18 PM
Oh feck it, I've just deleted a long angry rant. Nothing to see here.

Heh, me too.

Anybody fancy a pint?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 02 February, 2020, 05:12:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 February, 2020, 07:30:20 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 01 February, 2020, 11:16:18 PM
Oh feck it, I've just deleted a long angry rant. Nothing to see here.

Heh, me too.

Anybody fancy a pint?
Or 10?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 February, 2020, 09:25:52 PM
I've managed six today, and I still don't feel happy about Trump and Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 February, 2020, 10:19:39 AM
Well, the Brexiteers have taken to Twitter shouting "See, the planes are still flying and there's still food on the supermarket shelves — we told you it was all Project Fear"...

Blithely ignoring the reality (as Brexiteers are wont to do) that none of that shit is happening precisely because the Brexit hardliners were prevented from pushing through a no deal Brexit. They're crowing about a thing they literally decried as a betrayal of Brexit and fought against tooth and claw.

As always, the indefatigable David Allen Green has more to say on the subject. (https://davidallengreen.com/2020/02/the-hidden-wiring-of-brexit-is-keeping-brexiters-safe-from-falling/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 February, 2020, 10:35:09 AM
Respectfully, I disagree on this, Jim. The people are not ignoring reality – they are reframing reality. This is semi-coordinated gaslighting. Hannan and co. are well aware we are in transition. This is getting the message to the masses that 'remoaners' were all wrong and Project Fear was right. By the time problems do kick in, the excuse will be that it was nothing to do with Brexit anyway, because that happened a year ago.

This gaslighting and 'intentional delusion' is now the heart of British government. Johnson's current rubbish about the EU 'reneging' on its deal is an excellent example. The EU is merely sticking to what Johnson signed. But Johnson talks shit and the entire media parrots it, because reportage now beats even the slightest bit of investigation. And we are all somewhat complicit in this – after all, when did anyone here last buy a newspaper?

(I've been the same. As Brexit loomed into view, I decided to put a little money where my mouth is, and bought a Guardian digital thing. Even so, it's still less than actually buying the paper would net them.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 February, 2020, 11:09:42 AM
Some of the videos and comments I've seen this weekend would end your hope in Humanity. The sheer ignorance and casual racism.

Bloody Irish and EU, making life liveable with their funding of Community projects and boosting employment.

Seeing Andrew Neil attack a comedy skit, an accurate one at that, says it all about the mentality.

Reframe all they want, bottom line, we are going to see massive changes to the UK within the next five years. And not for the good, unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 February, 2020, 12:41:46 PM
Quote from: Rately on 03 February, 2020, 11:09:42 AM
Some of the videos and comments I've seen this weekend would end your hope in Humanity. The sheer ignorance and casual racism.

You have to remember that what you see when you go online is cultivated for your benefit by algorithms and troll factories churning out fake people and social media accounts meant to create the impression that there is a larger amount of - and thus body of support for - racist sentiment than there actually is.  I'm not saying there aren't people as vocally racist as these fake accounts want you to think, just that there isn't as many of them online as there seems to be.

And it's not just home-grown arseholes doing this, as while I do not subscribe to every red scare boogeyman theory put out there about big bad Putin by MI6-sponsored centrist bible The Guardian and its array of genocide-supporting columnists, it's no secret that Russia promotes discontent in the West by various means, including (I shit you not) using RT - a global multimedia outlet - to platform incel comic book Youtube fanboys moaning about "forced diversity" and how this is destroying comic book culture.  I don't know about anyone else, but I was fucking kicking myself for not twigging sooner that the reason the alt-right is occupying comic book fandom spaces lately is because when comics fanboys bang on about how "SJWs are using political correctness to supplant white male culture", "SJWs" is actually code for "jews" - Comicsgaters are literal Nazis and I didn't see it as I was too busy arguing that you couldn't have paid me to read a Carol Danvers comic 10 years ago because I thought that was the argument we were having.
The far right aren't idiots - but they are outnumbered.  You have to remember that second part, because it's the part they want you to forget.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 03 February, 2020, 01:47:41 PM
Quote from: Rately on 03 February, 2020, 11:09:42 AM

Bloody Irish and EU, making life liveable with their funding of Community projects and boosting employment.


For my sins - and they must have been many! - I used to work in the Community sector in Ireland. Since the last economic crash - and under a government coalition that comprised a centre-right political party and a supposedly Socialist - ha! - Labour party, the Community sector here was absolutely decimated by cuts to funding. The community group for which I used to work, had its ENTIRE funding base removed, after the local community partnership - through which the money was channeled - was dissolved by the Government department which oversaw that area of things.

The upshot of this was that we could no longer afford the basics like office rental, phones etc. As the administrator for the group I was left effectively homeless as regards a place to work from. I spent the next  several months depending on the kindness of strangers as it were - relying on the goodwill of a manager of  community project in the area - that was funded from another government department -for a place in which I could work from.

Whereas previously I would have had an office to myself, with room for all the general things one would expect in a working environment - like filing cabinets, shelving space, a working telephone - for the initial six months after the funding was cut, I was lugging around a laptop, sharing half of the day in a nurses office when they weren't there. The rest of the day, the only other available space was a tiny room used for counselling services and in which there was no internet service. The lady who ran the project was a thoroughly decent person, doing her best to accommodate me, but she simply did not have the space or facilities within the project to cater for my basic needs.

My then boss in the community group agreed a deal with the guy who ran a small community centre in the area. I would assist him with the day to day running of the centre, and the quid pro quo of that was that I would have my own separate office in the centre, from which to carry out my duties in relation to the community group to which I was seconded.

On the second day after I started working there, I opened the door to a young school-girl in her early teens and a couple of her feral mates. The first thing this sneering little bitch said to me was: "Are you gay?" I told her to fuck off and slammed the door on their faces. For the next six months I was driven demented by her and the rest of her fellow scrotes, as they regularly hurled Homophobic abuse at me whenever I was going to the local shop or banged on the doors or shutters, pressing the bell to the door and then running across to the other side of the road, to scream more abuse at me when I opened it. "Skinny Bastard!" and "Fuckin' Weirdo!" were among the other terms that issued from their vile gobs.

For most of this time I was dealing with this situation on my own, as the guy running the centre was tragically afflicted with cancer - and from which he later sadly died. The old ladies on the board of this centre were utterly ineffectual - they wanted to wash their hands of any responsibility and just wanted out of the whole thing. Matters were finally resolved when a fantastic lady in one of the groups that used the centre intervened, and through her community connections put a stop to this abuse.

But just as I began to recover from this situation, two utter witches took over the running of the centre. These sociopathic, incompetent twats took a dislike to me for no reason that I could see, brought another guy in to run the centre - essentially demoting me to the status of a dogs-body. After several months of bullying abuse - followed by a refusal to even communicate with me - they announced to my supervisors on the community scheme through which I was employed, that my services were no longer required and that they had "other plans for running the centre". As they were not my official employers - and the former manager was now deceased - the union said that there was nothing they could do and so once again I was left without anywhere to work from. While all of this was going on, I was also struggling with extreme ill-health for the best part of ten months and which necessitated internal surgery.

As a result of all this stress, I ended up having to take sick leave for a month, followed by having to use up my quota of leave and holiday time for the entire year, while another place was found for me in which to work from.

The lady who had previously tried to assist me, gave me space in another centre that she ran, but again, through no fault of her own - down to a simple lack of available space and resources - I found myself utterly depressed and at this point suicidal. I have to stress that I still hold this woman in high regard and no blame should be accorded to her for what happened. She was trying to do her best for me in an utterly impossible situation.

(Because of long-standing social anxiety, I find it very difficult to be around people for a sustained length of time and need a space just to myself in order to work effectively. However, the only place they could put me in was a small counselling room. As one of the strictures in terms of funding for their project was the provision of such a space, they had to give the impression that I was just there on a temporary basis in case an inspector should happen to visit the centre. So again I had no proper office facilities, no phone or, for that matter, even a table upon which to put my laptop. Instead, I had to perch it upon two chairs and lean down over it - which probably wasn't good for my back either. And again, there was no internet signal from the room).

The upshot of all this was that I ended up taking an overdose due to stress and burn-out, had to quit work to spend two years on Illness benefit and am now on Invalidity benefit and unable to ever work again.

I personally know of several other community projects in the area which were also closed down due to their funding being cut, or which were forced by the government to essentially outbid each other in terms of how cheaply they could operate. Some absolutely excellent and dedicated people in the community sector ended up unemployed as a result. And this state of affairs - which happened country-wide - was presided over by a supposedly socialist Minister in charge of the sector.

Apologies for the long rant, but I thought it was important to point out the reality behind the community sector in this country. My personal experience is but one of many examples of the damage that was done to so many decent, hard-working individuals by a government and political party which purported to care about the community.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 February, 2020, 01:53:59 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 03 February, 2020, 12:41:46 PM
The far right aren't idiots - but they are outnumbered.  You have to remember that second part, because it's the part they want you to forget.

Good to see that TROS got through to you in the end, Prof.

And feck me PaddyKafka but that's some tale of complete horror. Take the greatest of pride in the twin facts that you are somehow still here to tell it, and that you tell it so very well. Hat is off to you, mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 February, 2020, 02:30:03 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 03 February, 2020, 01:47:41 PM
Quote from: Rately on 03 February, 2020, 11:09:42 AM

Bloody Irish and EU, making life liveable with their funding of Community projects and boosting employment.


For my sins - and they must have been many! - I used to work in the Community sector in Ireland. Since the last economic crash - and under a government coalition that comprised a centre-right political party and a supposedly Socialist - ha! - Labour party, the Community sector here was absolutely decimated by cuts to funding. The community group for which I used to work, had its ENTIRE funding base removed, after the local community partnership - through which the money was channeled - was dissolved by the Government department which oversaw that area of things.

The upshot of this was that we could no longer afford the basics like office rental, phones etc. As the administrator for the group I was left effectively homeless as regards a place to work from. I spent the next  several months depending on the kindness of strangers as it were - relying on the goodwill of a manager of  community project in the area - that was funded from another government department -for a place in which I could work from.

Whereas previously I would have had an office to myself, with room for all the general things one would expect in a working environment - like filing cabinets, shelving space, a working telephone - for the initial six months after the funding was cut, I was lugging around a laptop, sharing half of the day in a nurses office when they weren't there. The rest of the day, the only other available space was a tiny room used for counselling services and in which there was no internet service. The lady who ran the project was a thoroughly decent person, doing her best to accommodate me, but she simply did not have the space or facilities within the project to cater for my basic needs.

My then boss in the community group agreed a deal with the guy who ran a small community centre in the area. I would assist him with the day to day running of the centre, and the quid pro quo of that was that I would have my own separate office in the centre, from which to carry out my duties in relation to the community group to which I was seconded.

On the second day after I started working there, I opened the door to a young school-girl in her early teens and a couple of her feral mates. The first thing this sneering little bitch said to me was: "Are you gay?" I told her to fuck off and slammed the door on their faces. For the next six months I was driven demented by her and the rest of her fellow scrotes, as they regularly hurled Homophobic abuse at me whenever I was going to the local shop or banged on the doors or shutters, pressing the bell to the door and then running across to the other side of the road, to scream more abuse at me when I opened it. "Skinny Bastard!" and "Fuckin' Weirdo!" were among the other terms that issued from their vile gobs.

For most of this time I was dealing with this situation on my own, as the guy running the centre was tragically afflicted with cancer - and from which he later sadly died. The old ladies on the board of this centre were utterly ineffectual - they wanted to wash their hands of any responsibility and just wanted out of the whole thing. Matters were finally resolved when a fantastic lady in one of the groups that used the centre intervened, and through her community connections put a stop to this abuse.

But just as I began to recover from this situation, two utter witches took over the running of the centre. These sociopathic, incompetent twats took a dislike to me for no reason that I could see, brought another guy in to run the centre - essentially demoting me to the status of a dogs-body. After several months of bullying abuse - followed by a refusal to even communicate with me - they announced to my supervisors on the community scheme through which I was employed, that my services were no longer required and that they had "other plans for running the centre". As they were not my official employers - and the former manager was now deceased - the union said that there was nothing they could do and so once again I was left without anywhere to work from. While all of this was going on, I was also struggling with extreme ill-health for the best part of ten months and which necessitated internal surgery.

As a result of all this stress, I ended up having to take sick leave for a month, followed by having to use up my quota of leave and holiday time for the entire year, while another place was found for me in which to work from.

The lady who had previously tried to assist me, gave me space in another centre that she ran, but again, through no fault of her own - down to a simple lack of available space and resources - I found myself utterly depressed and at this point suicidal. I have to stress that I still hold this woman in high regard and no blame should be accorded to her for what happened. She was trying to do her best for me in an utterly impossible situation.

(Because of long-standing social anxiety, I find it very difficult to be around people for a sustained length of time and need a space just to myself in order to work effectively. However, the only place they could put me in was a small counselling room. As one of the strictures in terms of funding for their project was the provision of such a space, they had to give the impression that I was just there on a temporary basis in case an inspector should happen to visit the centre. So again I had no proper office facilities, no phone or, for that matter, even a table upon which to put my laptop. Instead, I had to perch it upon two chairs and lean down over it - which probably wasn't good for my back either. And again, there was no internet signal from the room).

The upshot of all this was that I ended up taking an overdose due to stress and burn-out, had to quit work to spend two years on Illness benefit and am now on Invalidity benefit and unable to ever work again.

I personally know of several other community projects in the area which were also closed down due to their funding being cut, or which were forced by the government to essentially outbid each other in terms of how cheaply they could operate. Some absolutely excellent and dedicated people in the community sector ended up unemployed as a result. And this state of affairs - which happened country-wide - was presided over by a supposedly socialist Minister in charge of the sector.

Apologies for the long rant, but I thought it was important to point out the reality behind the community sector in this country. My personal experience is but one of many examples of the damage that was done to so many decent, hard-working individuals by a government and political party which purported to care about the community.

Jesus, Paddy.

Heart goes out to you fella. That is horrendous.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 04 February, 2020, 01:19:47 PM
Thank you Tordel's and Rately for your kind words and support. It means a lot and is deeply appreciated. All the best to ye!

-Paddy Kafka
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 04 February, 2020, 01:41:38 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 04 February, 2020, 01:19:47 PM
Thank you Tordel's and Rately for your kind words and support. It means a lot and is deeply appreciated. All the best to ye!

-Paddy Kafka

Best to you too, Paddy!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2020, 02:44:29 PM

Sounds like a rough road, Paddy. I hope it's smoothing out some for you.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 04 February, 2020, 03:18:12 PM
Jeez, Paddy, hope things are getting better for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 04 February, 2020, 06:43:52 PM
Cheers Shark and Von Boom. At this point, and after everything that has happened to me over the last few years, I'm just hanging on out of spite.   :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 February, 2020, 07:49:10 PM
That's a rough situation you've been in, paddy - glad you're out of it now, and hope life improves for you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 February, 2020, 10:03:44 PM
Sorry to hear about all the shite you've been through. Hope things improve hugely
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 04 February, 2020, 10:56:52 PM
Blimey! Paddy, that puts my moaning about work into perspective. Hope you are onwards and upwards.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 05 February, 2020, 09:49:57 AM
Thanks be to Jayzus - and as an Atheist that's something I rarely hear myself saying, lol - to Sheridan, Tips, Tordels, Rately, Sharky, Von Boom and all you good people on the finest, friendliest and greatest comics forum on the planet, for all your best wishes, for your kindness, understanding and essential decency.

In a world in which I continually find it very hard to fit into and function in - and frequently feel like Ignatius J. Reilly railing against the Confederacy of Dunces - it is heartening to know that there are good folk like yourselves out there. I am so grateful to you all.

You guys rock!

Cheers! - Paddy Kafka
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moogie101 on 05 February, 2020, 10:16:00 AM
Damn Paddy, we all bitch about the odd bad day at work but how you were treated is disgusting. I genuinely hope things are much better for you now mate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 05 February, 2020, 06:45:10 PM
Cheers, Moogie. Much appreciated!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 08:52:32 AM
Ah voting, I still enjoy it. You don't know what you're missing Sharky!

Despite an uttetly beautiful morning in Dublin , turnout so far looks pitiful. At 830 the missus and I were the only people there, and the first people to vote from our subdivision: you could even hear the pages of the register hadn't been turned yet. Looks like a Saturday poll was a good move for capitalising on inertia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 12:37:16 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 08:52:32 AM
Ah voting, I still enjoy it. You don't know what you're missing Sharky!

Despite an uttetly beautiful morning in Dublin , turnout so far looks pitiful. At 830 the missus and I were the only people there, and the first people to vote from our subdivision: you could even hear the pages of the register hadn't been turned yet. Looks like a Saturday poll was a good move for capitalising on inertia.

And thus the Civil War continues, not with a bang but a whimper.  I'm off straight after my fuel delivery to vote for a party that isn't one of the big identical two, for all the good it will do: Weird that I never see many blind, deaf, wealthy amnesiacs around normally, but they seem to make up the largest part of the electorate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 08 February, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Yep, went and did my Democratic duty too, today, despite being currently fecked with a potential ulcer or something like it. To my surprise, there seemed to be a steady enough stream of voters going in - or at least more so than usual, if memory serves me correctly. With any luck, it might indicate a surge against the two current centre-right parties, aka Two Cheeks of the same Arse.

We can only live in Hope.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 01:56:03 PM
What's interesting this time out is that it's clear SF and the Greens could have caused serious upset to the udual suspects if they'd run more candidates. The seemingly endless parade of FF and FG on my ballot paper demonstrates the advantages of a long political history in an PR-STV multi-seat system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2020, 06:21:11 PM
Now Ireland is going to the left, Irish boarders can look forward to their media amplifying the far right even more than usual.  Welcome to the club, fellas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 07:26:05 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2020, 06:21:11 PM
Now Ireland is going to the left, Irish boarders can look forward to their media amplifying the far right even more than usual.  Welcome to the club, fellas.

Ireland's going to the left? Are you quite sure?  I've never known us to be anything other than varying degrees of right and I doubt that's going to change, whether or not there's a few more Green or SF votes.  Nevertheless, your far right predictions are already gathering momentum fast, don't you worry about that.

Anyway, I'm just out of the polling station.  My vote is going to make about as much difference as running into the Australian Bush with a fire extinguisher, I know, but someone's got to stand against the Civil War parties.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 February, 2020, 07:41:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 01:56:03 PM
What's interesting this time out is that it's clear SF and the Greens could have caused serious upset to the udual suspects if they'd run more candidates.

I think less candidates worked in their favour: they became more attractive because voting for them was less of a risk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2020, 07:52:23 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 07:26:05 PM


...My vote is going to make about as much difference as running into the Australian Bush with a fire extinguisher..
.



*manlily holds back a manly tear and sniffs manlily*

I'm so proud.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 08:00:56 PM
I was expecting this.  I believe not voting is no better than total apathy. Please don't patronise me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 08 February, 2020, 08:16:17 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2020, 07:52:23 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 07:26:05 PM


...My vote is going to make about as much difference as running into the Australian Bush with a fire extinguisher..
.



*manlily holds back a manly tear and sniffs manlily*

I'm so proud.

Point. Missed.

He voted.

I have only ever had voting rights in safe seats, blue and red, so my individual vote was never going to change any result, but you've still got to do it to show that there's x-percentage of the constituency who don't agree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 08:20:05 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 08 February, 2020, 07:41:11 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 February, 2020, 01:56:03 PM
What's interesting this time out is that it's clear SF and the Greens could have caused serious upset to the udual suspects if they'd run more candidates.

I think less candidates worked in their favour: they became more attractive because voting for them was less of a risk.

Mmm, good point!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2020, 08:20:43 PM
It's just a joke, J.B.C. I thought it would go down better than one of my rants. Ahem. Anyway, no offence was given or intended.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 08:47:21 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 February, 2020, 08:20:43 PM
It's just a joke, J.B.C. I thought it would go down better than one of my rants. Ahem. Anyway, no offence was given or intended.

Intended, maybe not, but given, I'm afraid so.  Few things get my goat more than strawmanning, whether it's me  arguing or somebody else.

But... you said it was a joke, and you're nothing if not honest, so I believe you and will say no more about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2020, 11:33:28 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 07:26:05 PMIreland's going to the left? Are you quite sure?

Relatively so what with FG/FF being various degrees of right-wing, but marriage equality and abortion rights were all but unthinkable a decade ago, even if they were well-overdue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 03:39:45 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 February, 2020, 11:33:28 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 February, 2020, 07:26:05 PMIreland's going to the left? Are you quite sure?

Relatively so what with FG/FF being various degrees of right-wing, but marriage equality and abortion rights were all but unthinkable a decade ago, even if they were well-overdue.

Fair point; I hadn't thought of that.  Never thought I'd see an openly gay Taoiseach in fact. His policies, now, and lack thereof when they're needed, are another issue.

Tordels, looks like your predictions of a low turnout were off the mark.  It's just that nobody else is out at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, you absolute maniac.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2020, 09:59:12 AM
Always pleased to be proved wrong about such things!  :P

I'm less amused by the 'all about housing and health' narrative. This past decade of my life has been about little else beyond dealing with a cumbersome uncommunicative health service and fighting to keep my family in our home, to the point that I'm a barely functional person any more, with no dreams or ambitions beyond keeping going day to day while distracting myself with SF trash, so I really do understand the focus, and the importance of change.

But there is only one issue that matters above all others, and none of the rest of it is going to mean anything soon if we don't accept that reality.

In the absence of any meaningful commitments from th main parties, 8% first preferences for the Greens (who are no great shakes, but a useful benchmark) just isn't enough to show anyone is taking this seriously. We're going to carry on arguing about budget overruns and rent pressure zones while everything dies around us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 09 February, 2020, 10:27:02 AM
The fact that we need to vote green is nonsensical. They should be a permanent government department, not a party. People only need to look at this morning's weather to get a hint of the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 10:35:24 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 February, 2020, 10:27:02 AM
The fact that we need to vote green is nonsensical. They should be a permanent government department, not a party. People only need to look at this morning's weather to get a hint of the future.

I absolutely agree. Greens got my number 1 though, and will always do so till either other parties start waking up to the horrible truth, or we all asphyxiate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2020, 11:08:29 AM
Exactly. I was really looking for a genuine, serious commitment from parties this year, what with the Dáil declaring a climate emergency and all, but no, nothing.

Given the unimaginable pain and upheaval that seriously tackling climate and dealing with the legacy of not doing so to date, is going to cause, we somehow need to separate it from the fecking Santa list that electoral politics represents.

Telling people that entire traditional sectors if the economy are effectively over, and established ways of life have to change, is never going to be on anyone's manifesto.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 February, 2020, 05:12:43 PM
Just 6% polled saw climate as the most important issue influencing their vote. We're unequivocally fucked.

On the other hand, only 1% gave a shite about immigration, and our homegrown racists and womb-controllers have overwhelmingly been ignored by the electorate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 07:50:18 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 February, 2020, 05:12:43 PM
Just 6% polled saw climate as the most important issue influencing their vote. We're unequivocally fucked.

On the other hand, only 1% gave a shite about immigration, and our homegrown racists and womb-controllers have overwhelmingly been ignored by the electorate.

Swings and roundabouts, I suppose.  If only the roundabouts weren't the extinction of life on earth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 10:07:12 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 February, 2020, 05:12:43 PMnequivocally fucked.

On the other hand, only 1% gave a shite about immigration, and our homegrown racists ..

I just checked the twitter feed of our own little reality-show bigot Peter Casey. He was mad to have his vote tally emailed to him, but it was done publicly as a twitter response instead. Last count: Less than 500. Snigger!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 01:35:43 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 03:39:45 AM
Tordels, looks like your predictions of a low turnout were off the mark.  It's just that nobody else is out at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, you absolute maniac.

I withdraw my earlier concession speech. It was the 4th lowest turnout in the history of the State.

And fecking Aontú got a seat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 February, 2020, 06:35:01 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 01:35:43 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 03:39:45 AM
Tordels, looks like your predictions of a low turnout were off the mark.  It's just that nobody else is out at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, you absolute maniac.

I withdraw my earlier concession speech. It was the 4th lowest turnout in the history of the State.

And fecking Aontú got a seat.

And I humbly withdraw my contradiction of your even earlier speech.  I'd thought that a Saturday election might mop up that all-important young people's vote, and maybe it did,  but not enough people give two fucks, apparently. 

It also baffles me that the older generation of today grew up during flower power and punk rock, but still remain intensely conservative- though I suspect the Vatican's Men In Black did quite a lot to fend off their influence in this country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 February, 2020, 09:01:34 AM
Baffling to see the UK media can't be arsed to understand the basics of STV, and so have been blurting out all kinds of crap from the start. And it's not like STV isn't used in the UK! (Reminds me of when 538 tried once – disastrously – to apply its standard modelling to UK elections.)

As for this:

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 07:50:18 PMSwings and roundabouts, I suppose.  If only the roundabouts weren't the extinction of life on earth.

Indeed. I voted Lib Dem at the last GE, primarily because I felt that as I'd been banging on about tactical voting, I had to not be hypocritical and stick with such convictions. But that's the last time at a national level. Greens from hereon out. (Lib Dems probably at local level, though, given that it's usually a straight fight between them and the Tories, occasionally with a 'spoiler' party lobbed in that has never won a seat locally, like Labour or the Greens – and won't win either.)

Good luck, Ireland. Even if your politics hasn't been refreshed, at least Irexit is looking more distant than ever (not that it was at any point remotely realistic anyway).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 10 February, 2020, 11:32:10 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 10:35:24 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 February, 2020, 10:27:02 AM
The fact that we need to vote green is nonsensical. They should be a permanent government department, not a party. People only need to look at this morning's weather to get a hint of the future.

I absolutely agree. Greens got my number 1 though, and will always do so till either other parties start waking up to the horrible truth, or we all asphyxiate.

The story in the link below says it all as far as I'm concerned. Just how fucking dumb, brain-dead ignorant and clueless does someone have to be, to vote for the likes of turf-munching, bog-trotting Muppets like this? I have to admit, that it is at times like when I think, that the sooner the human race wipes itself out and hands over the planet to the cockroaches, the fucking better. Because if this is the kind of individual that humanity is entrusting to positions of responsibility, then it deserves what it gets.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/green-candidate-confronts-danny-healy-rae-after-his-to-hell-with-the-planet-comment-980714.html
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 10 February, 2020, 12:32:23 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 10 February, 2020, 11:32:10 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 February, 2020, 10:35:24 AM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 February, 2020, 10:27:02 AM
The fact that we need to vote green is nonsensical. They should be a permanent government department, not a party. People only need to look at this morning's weather to get a hint of the future.

I absolutely agree. Greens got my number 1 though, and will always do so till either other parties start waking up to the horrible truth, or we all asphyxiate.

The story in the link below says it all as far as I'm concerned. Just how fucking dumb, brain-dead ignorant and clueless does someone have to be, to vote for the likes of turf-munching, bog-trotting Muppets like this? I have to admit, that it is at times like when I think, that the sooner the human race wipes itself out and hands over the planet to the cockroaches, the fucking better. Because if this is the kind of individual that humanity is entrusting to positions of responsibility, then it deserves what it gets.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/green-candidate-confronts-danny-healy-rae-after-his-to-hell-with-the-planet-comment-980714.html

*Looks around, checks thread title*

I thought I'd stumbled into the 'wet/hot/cold/whatever' thread for a moment then.  :D

Totally agree that this should be a government department in EVERY COUNTRY that is unable to be divested or under resourced by whatever party (usually a right-wing fossil fuel-controlled one) gets into power, rather than a few soundbites on a manifesto, or a Green party that's never likely to get into power.

I notice Fuhrer Johnson has sacked the organiser of the COP in Glasgow in November, the person he installed in the first place, and his lack of any further action suggests the event won't be getting another organiser any time soon.  That speaks volumes re his commitment to net zero.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/04/sacked-cop-26-chair-claire-oneill-berates-boris-johnson-over-climate-record





Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 12:35:32 PM
The Healy-Raes are no fools, for all that they work to portray themselves as innocent toilers from the boreens of Kerry.  They know full well that the burden of climate change is going to fall heavily on the communities that keep re-electing their little tuath, and are positioning themselves (as usual) as protectors of the traditional man of the land being endlessly harried by the jet-setters and avocado-eaters of the Big Smoke (and there's some truth in that part at least). In reality the dynasty was founded in New York when Jackie married an American, their daughters are a barrister and a teacher: the whole circus is a wildly successful, utterly cynical, performance worthy of Synge or Boucicault.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 10 February, 2020, 01:14:39 PM
If the practice of Parish-Pump Politics was an Olympic event, the Healy-Raes' and their ilk would be gold medal winners.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szNLMtgI7hU&list=FLgzteLj8koHu5Gw2cSr6nzA&index=18

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 February, 2020, 02:41:15 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 12:35:32 PM
The Healy-Raes are no fools, for all that they work to portray themselves as innocent toilers from the boreens of Kerry.  They know full well that the burden of climate change is going to fall heavily on the communities that keep re-electing their little tuath, and are positioning themselves (as usual) as protectors of the traditional man of the land being endlessly harried by the jet-setters and avocado-eaters of the Big Smoke (and there's some truth in that part at least). In reality the dynasty was founded in New York when Jackie married an American, their daughters are a barrister and a teacher: the whole circus is a wildly successful, utterly cynical, performance worthy of Synge or Boucicault.   

True. But it doesn't want me want to force feed them their own eyeballs any less. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 06:57:33 PM
I genuinely can't get my head around the reaction of so many British commentators to SF's success. SF have been repeatedly elected to Westminster, the NI Assembly and the Dáil: this just a matter of degree in the context of a decade-long  government presiding over accelerating neo-liberal misery.

It's 20 years since the GFA. When they were actively apologists for terrorism, they couldn't get a whiff of a vote in the Republic (to our credit). Now we've had (relative) peace for decades, and the old and tainted leadership has shuffled off, is the first time they've enjoyed large-scale success. Isn't thst a good thing? Isn't that how peace works?

They aren't my cup of tea, or my voting preference, but have a listen to Mary Lou McDonald or (better yet) Eoin O'Broin.  These are proper democratic politicians offering the usual political promises, not the bloody Provisional IRA in a suit - anymore than Fianna Fail are DeValera's anti-Treaty IRA of 1922, or Fine Gael are the murderous pro-Treaty National Army or Cumann nGaedheal's fascist bodyguards the Blueshirts.

The lesson of history is surely that you have to move the feck on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 February, 2020, 07:26:40 PM
Yes, but this isn't a lesson Brits appear to have learned, hence Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 10 February, 2020, 07:42:44 PM
If the ancien régime continue to marginalise Sinn Féin they're more likely to retreat back to a more entrenched position and grow stronger in opposition; and the public aren't buying into the old 'but you're IRA' rhetoric they continue to throw at them. Sinn Féin aren't going anywhere so the only way to handle it is to engage them so their politics can be further normalised (which seems to be an imposssibility in the North) – isn't that how a progressive democracy is supposed to work?


Good to see the Greens reach double figures.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 February, 2020, 09:21:20 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 06:57:33 PM
I genuinely can't get my head around the reaction of so many British commentators to SF's success.

"Jeremy Corbyn sympathises with democratically-elected British MPs" doesn't have quite the same sting, so The Brits have been pushing a different angle on SF for the last few years that has become the accepted narrative - though I suspect a major part of their apparent befuddlement also stems from the fact that the UK media has now locked itself into a performative ignorance about the successes of any party that presents even the faintest whiff of socialism.  Much of what I've seen of SF's rhetoric seems to focus on their workers' rights campaigning and housing policy, which seems to go down with British centrists even worse than SF's policy on people's family members disappearing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 10:12:40 PM
It's the "blowing people up" bit that leaves me speechless, as if every UK government hasn't joyously taken any opportunity to blow shite out of foreign children for political and financial gain, or gleefully support those who do, and a hell of a lot more recently.

I've no time for the 'armed struggle', or for sectarian politics, never have, never will. I wish my country's independence had grown quietly and gradually through Home Rule, not violence and division. But that's over, and this is what comes after. Stop trying to bring it all back.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 February, 2020, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 10:12:40 PM

I've no time for ... for sectarian politics..

To be fair, neither did the Sínners for three years there
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 11:05:33 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 10 February, 2020, 10:16:48 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 10:12:40 PM

I've no time for ... for sectarian politics..

To be fair, neither did the Sínners for three years there

Arf!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2020, 07:00:09 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 10 February, 2020, 10:12:40 PMy.

I've no time for the 'armed struggle', or for sectarian politics, never have, never will. I wish my country's independence had grown quietly and gradually through Home Rule, not violence and division. But that's over, and this is what comes after. Stop trying to bring it all back.

Couldn't agree more.  However, the Shinners aren't doing themselves too many favours on that score either, with a TD unapologetically shouting 'Up the Ra' to celebrate his election, and supporters shouting similar boneheaded slogans on hearing news of the landslide.

While I am delighted to see such breaches in the two-party brick wall, I can't help thinking it isn't just the opposing parties who need to let the past go and grow the fuck up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 11 February, 2020, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2020, 07:00:09 PMCouldn't agree more.  However, the Shinners aren't doing themselves too many favours on that score either, with a TD unapologetically shouting 'Up the Ra' to celebrate his election, and supporters shouting similar boneheaded slogans on hearing news of the landslide.


I blame the BBC for making Republican songs cool and funny.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 February, 2020, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 February, 2020, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2020, 07:00:09 PMCouldn't agree more.  However, the Shinners aren't doing themselves too many favours on that score either, with a TD unapologetically shouting 'Up the Ra' to celebrate his election, and supporters shouting similar boneheaded slogans on hearing news of the landslide.


I blame the BBC for making Republican songs cool and funny.

Cullinane is an absolute fecking eejit for what he said, no question, unnecessary, hurtful, divisive and damaging.

However, to hear commentators- both UK and RoI - banging on about it as if one fool's words undermines the GFA and the peace process, after the utter contempt with which Leave and the Tories have treated those very issues, or to imply that celebrating past acts of violence is beyond the Pale, or that asserting nationalist ambitions is barbaric... that's galactic scale hypocrisy.

You don't get to laud Cromwell as the architect of your democracy, or your Brexit as liberation from oppression, or the civilising benefits of your once-and-future Empire and lecture other prats about their offensive nationalist language.

Note: I am in no shape or form a nationalist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 February, 2020, 08:16:42 PM
As a Northerner, the thing I find baffling is that the people of Ireland no longer wanted incompetent politicians, operating as part of a political duopoly, whose inaction was causing suffering to their citizens, while burying their snouts in the trough ans their heads in the sand... so they voted for Sínn Fein?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 February, 2020, 09:06:10 PM
Meanwhile, in the UK Labour continues to tear itself apart:

https://twitter.com/RaynerSkyNews/status/1227300116937216000

I don't even.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 11 February, 2020, 09:33:31 PM
I like Eamon Ryan but he is a poor at getting his points across. If the Greens had a more articulate leader I think they would have done a lot better.
A lot of the SF vote was a vote for anyone other than FGFF and Labour. It will be very interesting to see how it all pans out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2020, 10:04:21 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 February, 2020, 08:04:57 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 11 February, 2020, 07:21:32 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 February, 2020, 07:00:09 PMCouldn't agree more.  However, the Shinners aren't doing themselves too many favours on that score either, with a TD unapologetically shouting 'Up the Ra' to celebrate his election, and supporters shouting similar boneheaded slogans on hearing news of the landslide.


I blame the BBC for making Republican songs cool and funny.

Cullinane is an absolute fecking eejit for what he said, no question, unnecessary, hurtful, divisive and damaging.

However, to hear commentators- both UK and RoI - banging on about it as if one fool's words undermines the GFA and the peace process, after the utter contempt with which Leave and the Tories have treated those very issues, or to imply that celebrating past acts of violence is beyond the Pale, or that asserting nationalist ambitions is barbaric... that's galactic scale hypocrisy.

You don't get to laud Cromwell as the architect of your democracy, or your Brexit as liberation from oppression, or the civilising benefits of your once-and-future Empire and lecture other prats about their offensive nationalist language.

Note: I am in no shape or form a nationalist.

I absolutely agree.  We really need to get past this idea of fetishising our own past atrocities and condemning those of others.  Killing people is never something to be proud
of, whoever does it.

Sure, the British nationalist cheerleaders are in no position to throw stones from their glass houses.  But I really feel that Sinn Fein now has a lot more responsibility, and also needs to at least address this kind of frothing, belligerent bullshit when it comes from from its own members.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 February, 2020, 10:24:40 PM
I think the most impressive thing about the sitcom Father Ted is that Arthur Matthews wrote the entire thing by himself. (https://twitter.com/WhatTheTrans/status/1227035053412229120)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 February, 2020, 09:10:56 AM
Jesus. I think Musk should hire Linehan for his Boring Company - once he starts digging that hole he's unstoppable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 February, 2020, 09:17:32 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 11 February, 2020, 08:16:42 PM
As a Northerner, the thing I find baffling is that the people of Ireland no longer wanted incompetent politicians, operating as part of a political duopoly, whose inaction was causing suffering to their citizens, while burying their snouts in the trough ans their heads in the sand... so they voted for Sínn Fein?

See, this is the level at which SF's victory should be criticised. Not "OMG Brexit made the Irish mad and now the Provos are in power!". Although as Jayzus says, to be taken seriously as democrats SF really do need to police theIr people, just not in the, er,  traditional way.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 12 February, 2020, 10:27:36 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 11 February, 2020, 08:04:57 PM
...celebrating past acts of violence is beyond the Pale,

I see what you did there!  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 February, 2020, 10:32:12 AM
Nationalism has become the new rebellion, both in the soon to be the defunct UK and now in Ireland. It is a strange parallel that two opposing groups, Brexiteers and Sinn Fein, should ride the wave of discontent, but they have, and that puts them in power, like it or not. Local issues over National identity, housing and the EU have allowed these groups great influence since the adage of 'no change' has damaged Parties associated with globalisation. They've all been thrust aside by a still angry public who have concluded anything is better than the status quo. Well, where do we go from here? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 February, 2020, 10:44:18 AM
There's a world of difference between the Irish and British systems. 'Winning' in Ireland isn't cut and dry. STV means that a majority government has to have the backing of the majority of the publication. SF won't be able to ride roughshod over the country as a whole, because if they get into government, it will be in a coalition in which they themselves won't even be a majority. By contrast, the UK is lumbered with a toxic and massive Tory majority off the back of a plurality vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 February, 2020, 02:33:39 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 February, 2020, 10:44:18 AM
There's a world of difference between the Irish and British systems. 'Winning' in Ireland isn't cut and dry. STV means that a majority government has to have the backing of the majority of the publication. SF won't be able to ride roughshod over the country as a whole, because if they get into government, it will be in a coalition in which they themselves won't even be a majority. By contrast, the UK is lumbered with a toxic and massive Tory majority off the back of a plurality vote.

Well, quite.  SF can now make some of the decisions but not all of them.  It doesn't allow for radical change but I'd take it over Johnson/Trump-style ripping up of perfectly good existing policies out of spite.  Now, if I had my way, the entire system would be swept away and rebuilt from scratch, but it's not going to happen any time soon so the best we can do is work with what we have.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 February, 2020, 02:38:28 PM
Looking at the numbers, it was interesting to see that SF wouldn't even be a majority within a coalition (assuming the coalition forms a majority government). That's quite something.

Honestly, I'd love to see something similar here in the UK, but it's quite clearly never going to happen. The Tories are wedded to FPTP, and Labour are as well, under the delusion that sooner or later they'll win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 12 February, 2020, 07:47:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 February, 2020, 02:38:28 PM
Honestly, I'd love to see something similar here in the UK, but it's quite clearly never going to happen. The Tories are wedded to FPTP, and Labour are as well, under the delusion that sooner or later they'll win.

Why would an incumbent government ever allow a change to the system that got them elected?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 February, 2020, 07:55:40 PM
Don't see the Lords voting themselves out of a job, either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 February, 2020, 08:01:11 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 12 February, 2020, 07:47:17 PMWhy would an incumbent government ever allow a change to the system that got them elected?
The Tories won't; Labour should have seen the writing on the wall in the mid-2000s, and recognised working with the Libs would beat being out on their arses. (Also: fairness would be a reason in general. Again, not that the Tories give a shit about that. But it's notable that the SNP are pro-PR, even though it'd cost them a bunch of Commons seats.)

QuoteDon't see the Lords voting themselves out of a job, either.
Despite being a wishy-washy lefty liberal, the Lords is the lesser evil. I'd like to see changes, but it's not nearly as urgent as changes for the Commons. Regardless, there are ways to transition that house to a more democratic end game, if necessary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2020, 02:43:55 PM
Siri: zeige mir schadenfreude (https://twitter.com/ColinBrowning14/status/1227906931450425344).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 February, 2020, 05:50:53 PM
That this lengthy and honest look at the current raft of Labour frontrunners chose to go with "There's a Starmer Waiting In The Sky" (//http://) and not "Starmer Chameleon" as its title is an outrage that should never be forgiven.

It does make a good point, though: as attractive as Starmer's collection of nice suits and "he's not Corbyn" headlines from gushing Guardian op-ed writers who voted for the LibDems may seem to people who hate the Labour Party more than they do the Tories or austerity deaths, in actual practice as a politician he's a weather-vane (as most recently seen in his stance(s) on FOM), and that is far more important going into the climate catastrophe than his record in the CPS or his illegally accessing members' data (not that I'm attempting to dismiss the seriousness of either).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 05:58:05 PM
My mate's former housemate was a bit of an oddball and a terrible if prolific painter.  After he moved out we found his blog and realised he was a very deluded man who believed his paintings were worth millions and had some kind of chip on his shoulder about Britain.

As the years went on we watched in a kind of horrified fascination as his delusions got worse and he expanded his online presence. Meanwhile his bigotry grew to encircle gays, people of colour and above all Jews, and he got sucked into conspiracy rabbit holes including the Flat Earth Theory, the non-existence of dinosaurs and the idea that mixed-race parents somehow leads to lesbian daughters.  He tried to run for president a few years ago which got about as far as you'd expect.

Anyway, now he's really done it.  He appeared on David Baddiel's BBC documentary this week and let rip to the whole world his mad holocaust-denying views and various other antisemitic accusations (even singing one of his horrendous songs about how great Auschwitz was, while Baddiel sat there in amazement).

Having looked at Facebook, I see that the walls of his little bubble have dissolved and people all over the world want his head on a plate.  I'm conflicted - he's repulsive and his views are appalling, but I remember the lonely, mentally ill fool that once was convinced he'd win the Nobel Peace Prize and shudder to think what will become of him now.  Obviously nothing close to what happened to inmates in Auschwitz, of course, but like I say, the guy is not well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 February, 2020, 06:41:13 PM
Yikes, just read up on that. He does sound seriously unwell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 February, 2020, 06:52:12 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 February, 2020, 02:43:55 PM
Siri: zeige mir schadenfreude (https://twitter.com/ColinBrowning14/status/1227906931450425344).

Wunderbar! (Auch ein tragisches spiegelbild der idiotie des menschen.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 February, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
I thought the jew-hating painter was going to turn out to be Hitler until the bit about running for president...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 February, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
I thought the jew-hating painter was going to turn out to be Hitler until the bit about running for president...

Hitler's paintings, though fairly dull, were pretty decent.

Here's one of the other lad's.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dermot+mulqueen+painting&oq=dermot+mulqueen+pa&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i60j35i39.9228j0j7&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=JFXvHrjeCk542M: (https://www.google.com/search?q=dermot+mulqueen+painting&oq=dermot+mulqueen+pa&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i60j35i39.9228j0j7&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=JFXvHrjeCk542M:)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 February, 2020, 07:53:53 PM

That's sad, JBC.

I just deleted my two penn'orth because... Well, it doesn't matter. What does matter, I think, is that you still care about this guy. What you do with that is up to you, but I think it's great that you care.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 February, 2020, 07:57:09 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 February, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
I thought the jew-hating painter was going to turn out to be Hitler until the bit about running for president...

Hitler's paintings, though fairly dull, were pretty decent.

Here's one of the other lad's.

google (https://www.google.com/search?q=dermot+mulqueen+painting&oq=dermot+mulqueen+pa&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i60j35i39.9228j0j7&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=JFXvHrjeCk542M:)

Archetypal use of the classic line during his statement when being arrested: "I am not a racist but I have found out that the Holocaust was a hoax and I wanted to highlight this."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 09:15:12 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 February, 2020, 07:53:53 PM

That's sad, JBC.

I just deleted my two penn'orth because... Well, it doesn't matter. What does matter, I think, is that you still care about this guy. What you do with that is up to you, but I think it's great that you care.

I don't know the guy; think I met him once or twice and said hello and that's it. I think he's a complete arsehole and I detest his views, but he's very clearly mentally ill and maybe needs psychiatric treatment rather than death threats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2020, 01:01:46 AM
The BBC's Andrew Neil infamously published Holocaust denier David Irving in the Spectator over the objections of the mag's own writers, I would have thought a BBC production could have managed to gain access or insight there and examine the role of the BBC in normalising extremism and conspiracy theories instead of seeking out a niche oddball in a whole other country to platform out of his well-deserved obscurity.

I'm thinking of that documentary the BBC did on Jimmy Saville's crimes and their aftermath and thinking how it would have been more helpful if the BBC just hadn't covered up his crimes for decades.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 February, 2020, 06:24:34 AM
"Unskilled". I was (working) on an state training course on the '90s, and one of the older lads was an unemployed labourer, probably the definition of "unskilled manual". I watched him build the project workshop and toilets from the ground up: set-out, foundations, plumbing and electrics, floor, walls, roof, doors and fit-out. More skills than I'm ever likely to have. When the project foreman went on holidays, he handed me the keys and told me I was in charge. Because I had a college degree. I was in my early 20s and utterly clueless about essentially everything, but I was somehow "better". There's your problem right there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 February, 2020, 09:34:23 AM
Ah, brings back fond memories!  My first job after failing everything at school was as a plumber's mate on our local hospital redevelopment.  Many an hour clambering around ceiling spaces, holding pipes for him to weld, fetching and carrying, burring the ends of threads (and finger tips!) ....

Unskilled though?  TBH that there is the problem.  The whole academic / vocational debate has long been an absolute joke.  We now have more graphic designers and historians in this country than builders and brickies.  The only positive part is that both kids and parents are slowly waking up to this fact.  Fifteen years ago it would have been insane to suggest anything other than Uni to a parent.  Now though?

I'm just wondering how long its going to be before the government realises the fatal flaw in their argument that employers have got to wean themselves off 'cheap' labour.  Leaving aside for a moment the fact that some sectors rely on seasonal, mobile labour or that the cost of living is so prohibitive in some places that it makes it non-viable for locals to work for the sectoral wages, most businesses in the UK are operating on a shoestring when it comes to finance. 

The care sector in particular is about an inch away from collapsing under rising costs and collapsing funding, not to mention being massively over-leveraged.  The hospitality sector might as well close up shop if its going to have to put up prices since a lot of people are still living on 2008 (or worse) standards.  Considering the number of workers reliant on in-work benefits, its hard to see how they are going to be able to afford increased food costs and even harder to see how some of their employers are going to be able to find the money to pay them more without going under.

Let's face it, its a nice little sound bite that gives the appearance of 'taking back control' and 'honouring the referendum'.  As always the devil is going to be in the detail.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 20 February, 2020, 12:03:35 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 05:58:05 PM
I'm conflicted - he's repulsive and his views are appalling, but I remember the lonely, mentally ill fool that once was convinced he'd win the Nobel Peace Prize and shudder to think what will become of him now.
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 19 February, 2020, 07:53:53 PM
What does matter, I think, is that you still care about this guy. What you do with that is up to you, but I think it's great that you care.
Everyone has some good in them, no matter how far their views have taken them, and if someone was to reach out to him - to show him that his views are (to put it bluntly) disturbing - then there is still hope.
Most people who have these kinds of views are, in some way or other, damaged, so addressing that damage and assisting in the healing process is far more useful than the people calling for extreme measures. I'm not saying that such abhorrent comments should be dismissed, but it seems a shame that the culture of the time is to immediately jump to "burn the heretic" rather than something more nuanced and thoughtful.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2020, 01:01:46 AM
I'm thinking of that documentary the BBC did on Jimmy Saville's crimes and their aftermath and thinking how it would have been more helpful if the BBC just hadn't covered up his crimes for decades.
They're scared that the rest of the big names who have worked for them are going to get the same scrutiny. Understandable that they are covering themselves, but there is a lot which hasn't been made public yet. Of course the rumor mill can't be taken as fact, but when you hear stories from so many people you have to wonder how much of it is true.
What are we standing at now? Three children's presenters? Four?
Dammit, I'm trying to keep my head under the parapet. Note that I didn't name any names. I'm so not digging myself into another shitstorm...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2020, 12:45:33 PM
I found out a popular-in-the-1970s crooner (no names) has a taste for 13 year old girls and I wasn't even looking to find out such things, I was just looking up who'd performed in South Africa during the Apartheid boycott - oh, and also he performed in South Africa during the Apartheid boycott.  A real charmer.
If I know, the BBC certainly do, and it hasn't stopped them keeping him employed and maintaining his high profile.  When he dies - it doesn't look like it'll be long, but that's been the case for a while now - I imagine everyone will be shocked by the "new revelations" only just discovered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 February, 2020, 02:14:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 20 February, 2020, 01:01:46 AM
I'm thinking of that documentary the BBC did on Jimmy Saville's crimes and their aftermath and thinking how it would have been more helpful if the BBC just hadn't covered up his crimes for decades.

Not just the Beeb mind.  Considering that our esteemed Prime Minister considers historical abuse claims to be a waste, the 'revelation' of the scale of abuse back in those days is no doubt unhelpful. (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/05/police-uncovering-epidemic-of-child-abuse-in-1970s-and-80s)  I say 'revelation' because too many are able to attest personally to both how widespread it was and how supportive authorities were. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PM
First confirmed case of Corona in Northern Ireland.  Jesus.  I've been in touch with my old boss (actually an attractive young Chinese lady) in Beijing who told me things are worse there than we're told. People haven't left their homes for weeks and get everything delivered, and entire blocks are being infected through their water supply.  It all sounds very Block Mania, with a touch of Have You Seen the Mushroom Men.

She believes it's a conspiracy to attack the Chinese government. I didn't feel it was appropriate to bang on about Occam. On the vague offchance that she's right, the conspirators are doing a fine job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 27 February, 2020, 09:33:17 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMFirst confirmed case of Corona in Northern Ireland.
The WHO map of Europe is slowly but surely turning blue. By the time this is over I doubt there will be anwhere completely untouched. Anyone who's already booked a flight for later in the year would be wise to check the cancellation details - just in case.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMI've been in touch with my old boss (actually an attractive young Chinese lady) in Beijing who told me things are worse there than we're told.
:o Is she okay? And how much worse are things than the already-horrific news stories?

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMShe believes it's a conspiracy to attack the Chinese government.
We can't rule anything out at the moment, but the list of possible aggressors isn't very long. Only NK really stands out as being capable of anything, and it is highly questionable that they have the technological capabilities to do so. The notion that it is a conspiracy is somehow scarier than it being random bad luck.

This isn't blowing over any time soon:

Coronavirus: Outbreak at 'decisive point' as WHO urges action (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-51665704) (BBC News)
QuoteGlobally, more than 80,000 people in nearly 50 countries have been infected. Nearly 2,800 have died, the majority in China's Hubei province.
Big European companies ban business travel as coronavirus outbreak escalates (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/27/business/coronavirus-business-travel-ban/index.html) (CNN)
How the coronavirus outbreak is affecting travel in Europe  (https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2020/feb/26/how-the-coronavirus-outbreak-is-affecting-travel-in-europe) (The Guardian)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2020, 09:36:36 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMShe believes it's a conspiracy to attack the Chinese government. I didn't feel it was appropriate to bang on about Occam.
Shit happens – and increasingly so – when density ramps up, people are in close proximity to animals, and transport enables carriers to zoom across half the planet in well under a day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 09:58:58 PM
Quote from: Gary James on 27 February, 2020, 09:33:17 PM


Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMI've been in touch with my old boss (actually an attractive young Chinese lady) in Beijing who told me things are worse there than we're told.
:o Is she okay? And how much worse are things than the already-horrific news stories?

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMShe believes it's a conspiracy to attack the Chinese government.
We can't rule anything out at the moment, but the list of possible aggressors isn't very long. Only NK really stands out as being capable of anything, and it is highly questionable that they have the technological capabilities to do so. The notion that it is a conspiracy is somehow scarier than it being random bad luck.


Therein lies the conceit of all conspiracy theorists.  As Alan Moore says, we're rudderless.. We're fucked.

As for my boss, she's fine, physically; just very scared and, I'd imagine, depressed.  Maybe it's just worse than I thought- I didn't realise how long people were being confined to their homes, nor how quickly whole communities were being infected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: edgeworthy on 28 February, 2020, 12:37:22 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 19 February, 2020, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 19 February, 2020, 07:19:42 PM
I thought the jew-hating painter was going to turn out to be Hitler until the bit about running for president...

Hitler's paintings, though fairly dull, were pretty decent.

Here's one of the other lad's.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dermot+mulqueen+painting&oq=dermot+mulqueen+pa&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i60j35i39.9228j0j7&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=JFXvHrjeCk542M: (https://www.google.com/search?q=dermot+mulqueen+painting&oq=dermot+mulqueen+pa&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j69i60j35i39.9228j0j7&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=JFXvHrjeCk542M:)

Churchill was a painter as well ...
https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fs3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com%2Fhtsi-ez-prod%2Fez%2Fimages%2F0%2F0%2F0%2F9%2F1499000-1-eng-GB%2F02-17468.jpg?width=620&dpr=1&format=jpg&source=htsi
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 February, 2020, 12:52:31 AM
Quote from: Gary James on 27 February, 2020, 09:33:17 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 February, 2020, 08:45:03 PMFirst confirmed case of Corona in Northern Ireland.
The WHO map of Europe is slowly but surely turning blue. By the time this is over I doubt there will be anwhere completely untouched. Anyone who's already booked a flight for later in the year would be wise to check the cancellation details - just in case.

Off to Lanzarote a week on Saturday - don't mind if they close the airport once we're there, I could do with a month of quarantine in the sun  :D

As for conspiracies, unless there's proof I'll side with Occam and go with unregulated farming and markets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 01:27:15 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 February, 2020, 12:52:31 AMOff to Lanzarote a week on Saturday - don't mind if they close the airport once we're there, I could do with a month of quarantine in the sun  :D
There are worse places to be stuck... As long as you have enough insurance coverage for any unexpected hotel bills - if you cough and sneeze enough when you get to the airport you might be refused entry on the return flight. (not suggesting anyone should get themselves quarantined for a little extra sun, but...)  :lol:

Quote from: Dandontdare on 28 February, 2020, 12:52:31 AMAs for conspiracies, unless there's proof I'll side with Occam and go with unregulated farming and markets.
Not forgetting the people keeping all kinds of animals in their homes... Walls covered in cages full of chickens, for example. I'm still astonished at some of the things the H1N1 reportage uncovered, and no doubt we're going to get similarly awful stories coming out of the hotspots as this goes on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 February, 2020, 03:36:20 AM
2018: "Just look at the improvements China has undergone now that it's embraced the free market - this is proof that capitalism is the only economic model that works."
2020: "Just look at the widespread viral outbreak that's occurred because China is socialist - this is proof that capitalism is the only economic model that works."

Apropos of nothing, this would be a terrible time to have an underfunded healthcare system.  LOL I wouldn't wanna be those poor jerks etc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 12:46:26 PM
I was chatting to some US folk re what might happen at ground level if the disease turned up in their area.

They explained that they, and the majority of their friends and families, were in very low paid employment in service industries, in areas of enormous contact with the public. 

We're talking baristas, mechanics, waiters, checkout staff, working in bars and cafes, WalMart etc etc etc.  None of them could afford basic medical aid, even to pop to their GP if they became unwell.

They said there's already a thing called 'walking illness' and 'working pneumonia' whereby staff have no paid sick leave (in fact, taking time off sick often leads to dismissal), and can't afford ANY unpaid leave due to their minimum wage roles, so come into work sick. 

And then they pass that illness to the rest of the staff, and they come into work sick.  Then those staff members take it home to their families, who get sick, but also can't avoid work as they are in similar low paying roles. So they also go into work sick.

Meanwhile, every single customer they service is exposed to whatever illness they're forced to endure in work.

They finished by explaining to me that this absolute army of millions upon millions of low paid service industry staff are basically a medical/contagion timebomb.  They feared that once Corona Virus takes hold in the US, that's it - game over. 

Chilling stuff, given a 7% mortality rate so far.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 12:58:31 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 12:46:26 PM
Chilling stuff, given a 7% mortality rate so far.

I don't think the general mortality rate is anything like 7% — I understood it was more like 2%. (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/coronavirus-fatality-rates-vary-wildly-depending-on-age-gender-and-medical-history-some-patients-fare-much-worse-than-others-2020-02-26) As that report in that link discusses, fatality varies hugely dependent on age and underlying health conditions.

Even that mortality rate, I think, is probably over-stated — because the symptoms (if you don't get the vomiting and diarrhoea) are basically indistinguishable from a rough bout of flu, detection is going skew hard towards cases involving hospitalisation and/or fatality. There will be many more cases where the sufferer assumes they have flu, take themselves off to bed for a few days and recover without ever being recorded as an official case.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 01:00:12 PM
Apologies - mortality rate has moved around since I last read up on it.  It seems to be anywhere between 1% and 6% depending on region, age, nutrition, current medical conditions such as asthma, heart disease, kidney disease, high blood pressure, etc. 


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2020, 01:06:27 PM
QuoteThey said there's already a thing called 'walking illness' and 'working pneumonia' whereby staff have no paid sick leave (in fact, taking time off sick often leads to dismissal), and can't afford ANY unpaid leave due to their minimum wage roles, so come into work sick.}

It's not as severe, and dismissal is unlikely, but I see it in my industry (commercial archaeology) all the time - virtually no-one has paid sick leave, despite* working physically out in the wet and cold all winter, so I usually have 1 or 2 people on every team shivering and hacking in the corner of the site hut, often the start of a chain of dominoes. Subversive middle-management best practice is to sign them in, get them to do a bit of dated paperwork for a hour or two to prove their existence and then send them home and say nothing to no-one. But by that time they've been on crowded public transport or a shared car, and spread their germs around the site. But if they don't come in, they don't get paid, so what are they supposed to do?

It's madness. When I used to have a company of my own, we had certified and limited uncertified sick pay, so at least people stayed away. But then I went bust and we all had to stay away... so take what lesson you will from that.

*More 'because' than 'despite'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 February, 2020, 01:22:01 PM
One bed in a triple bunk in Dublin City centre is going for 475 a month, while Fianna Fáil cry about a rent freeze being unconstitutional.  If I didn't have the boat I'd be homeless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 01:28:14 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 12:46:26 PMThey said there's already a thing called 'walking illness' and 'working pneumonia' whereby staff have no paid sick leave (in fact, taking time off sick often leads to dismissal), and can't afford ANY unpaid leave due to their minimum wage roles, so come into work sick.
Which is already a thing that happens routinely in the UK - and, I would wager a guess, nearly everywhere else these days - given how easy it is to replace people on zero hour contracts.

I'm trying so, so hard to avoid the easy target here, and not point the blame at multinational corporations for, once more, fucking people over in cruel and unusual ways, but it is extremely difficult not to see the obvious solution here. Banning the use of such contracts, and allowing people to take time off work when they are clearly unwell, seems to be too obvious for the government to see.

Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 12:46:26 PMMeanwhile, every single customer they service is exposed to whatever illness they're forced to endure in work.
Which, in metropolitan locations, is going to include a number of people who routinely take international flights...

Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 12:46:26 PMChilling stuff, given a 7% mortality rate so far.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 12:58:31 PMI don't think the general mortality rate is anything like 7% — I understood it was more like 2%. (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/coronavirus-fatality-rates-vary-wildly-depending-on-age-gender-and-medical-history-some-patients-fare-much-worse-than-others-2020-02-26)
Because numbers can offer a little reassurance in these instances I checked what the Spanish Flu mortality rate was - hoping to see that it was much, much higher, and therefore things were nowhere near as bad as was being made out.

Not so reassuring (http://www.influenzavirusnet.com/1918-flu-pandemic/mortality.html):
Quote...it is estimated that 10% to 20% of those who were infected died.
Well... damn. Taking into consideration the advances in treatment since 1918, and the (arguably) better living conditions overall (for certain countries, at least), there isn't a dramatic difference*. The only real encouraging divergence from that outbreak is that the current epidemic isn't killing off people at such an alarming rate.

There are rumblings that the first Briton to die from the virus has occurred, but it doesn't seem to be reported as yet in any news sources.

Depressingly, it is spreading to untouched areas, far and wide:
Coronavirus: Nigeria confirms first case in sub-Saharan Africa (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51671834) (BBC News)

*Not, say 40-50%, which would be enough to make it clear that things are going to be a-okay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2020, 01:40:54 PM
The issue with mortality rates, as I understand it, is that currently these deaths take place within a functioning health system.

With somewhere between 10-20% of cases requiring serious medical care, if overall infection rates go as high as 40%, you're looking at potentially 30,000 people requiring hospitalisation in little RoI alone. We have 250 ICU beds total and operate at 98% capacity on a normal day. What's that mortality rate going to look like if that scenario comes to pass? And the knock-on for the huge population that already requires regular access to hospitals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 01:44:30 PM
Quote from: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 01:28:14 PM
*Not, say 40-50%, which would be enough to make it clear that things are going to be a-okay.

I'm going to assume you are neither an epidemiologist nor a statistician* so I'm not sure why you picked that bar for "A-OK". I'm also not either of those things but even I know that diseases with mortality rates that high are very rare and/or difficult to catch.

Bottom line, based on all available data: if you're under 60 and have no serious underlying health conditions, COVID-19 is basically no worse than a rough bout of flu. If either of those two factors apply to you, you should certainly be taking the risks more seriously and maybe limiting your exposure to large crowds of people, checking your travel destinations carefully, observing the hygiene advice that's been given and should probably seek medical advice if you display any of the symptoms.

*Obviously, I'll apologise unreservedly if you are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 01:56:43 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 01:44:30 PM
I'm going to assume you are neither an epidemiologist nor a statistician*
:lol: Nope.

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 01:44:30 PMso I'm not sure why you picked that bar for "A-OK". I'm also not either of those things but even I know that diseases with mortality rates that high are very rare and/or difficult to catch.
I had expected the Spanish Flu to be way worse than all indicators point to it being. The fact that so many people were engaged in conflict out in the open - in extremely unsanitary conditions, with no readily available treatment (and none coming close to modern medicine) - seems to demand a much, much higher percentage of deaths than merely 10-20%.

Counting those who were killed while the war was going on, while fatally infected, would skew the estimates upwards a little, but not significantly given how many (overall) people were infected.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 02:05:52 PM
Quote from: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 01:56:43 PM
I had expected the Spanish Flu to be way worse than all indicators point to it being. The fact that so many people were engaged in conflict out in the open - in extremely unsanitary conditions, with no readily available treatment (and none coming close to modern medicine) - seems to demand a much, much higher percentage of deaths than merely 10-20%.

It was a global pandemic. If it had killed 50% of its victims, WWI would be a historical footnote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Gary James on 28 February, 2020, 02:15:28 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 28 February, 2020, 02:05:52 PMIt was a global pandemic. If it had killed 50% of its victims, WWI would be a historical footnote.
Which is exactly why doing a direct comparison didn't provide the expected warm and fuzzies...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 February, 2020, 11:30:41 PM
Just to dispel any notion that China hasn't fucked the dog completely in how it's embraced the free market, citizens compulsorily put into quarantine to fight the spread of the Corona virus are being billed for it. (https://twitter.com/FWucinski/status/1233198471156510720)

Meanwhile in the US, Nancy Pelosi, that most sainted of centrists, has pledged to introduce legislation to make sure that when a vaccine is developed, it will be... "affordable."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 February, 2020, 11:55:14 PM
Capitalism in action.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 February, 2020, 12:05:16 AM
Don't  underestimate some Americans willingness to fight and die to deny the possibility of someone curing them for free.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 February, 2020, 03:30:14 AM
But it's NOT FREE! We'd pay through it through HIGHER TAXES! And if someone can't afford private healthcare, fuck 'em; they shouldn't have decided to be poor in the first place. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 February, 2020, 01:02:48 PM
The polling is terrifying. Americans are now by a small majority in favour of single-payer healthcare. So that barrier at least has now been passed. But the second money enters into the equation, support falls into the 40s. And that includes when they're told "your taxes will go up, but you'll be better off overall". It's utter fucking madness.

I was chatting with some people on Facebook about this, and someone – a Democrat, and quite lefty from a US standpoint – said they shouldn't move to a single-payer system, because many people love their insurance. I found that baffling, but they added US employers may have trouble with employee retention if insurance wasn't a part of the package. It's like Stockholm Syndrome or something. You shouldn't stick with an employer out of fear (hello, also, upcoming bullshit post-Brexit British visa systems for fruit pickers, etc.), but because you have a decent job you like.

She then added that this was even more necessary because most US companies also don't offer things like parental leave, and other benefits. ARGH! THEN. CHANGE. THINGS.

Quoteif someone can't afford private healthcare, fuck 'em; they shouldn't have decided to be poor in the first place.
This also is a lot of it. But it's also curious how this exists primarily around health. Americans don't generally have some kind of "fire insurance" system, where only the reasonably wealthy can stop their homes from burning down. (Although then you do see the odd horrifying story like this as well (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/t/no-pay-no-spray-firefighters-let-home-burn/#.Xlpg0y2cbUI), so...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2020, 09:44:46 PM
As our first Covid-19 case is confirmed, I have to wonder about the mental picture 'the authorities' hold of the average person.

We can all work from home, we all have individual rooms in which we can isolate ourselves, we can all cope with schools being closed, we can all stockpile weeks' worth of food, we are all in good health so no need to worry.

It's as if those of us who have to go places to physically do things and rely on our ability to do them to survive week to week or are old, long-term unwell, really don't count as part of modern society. Ripe for the cull.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 March, 2020, 01:32:35 AM
[flippancy]
Well, every cloud ... Coronavirus: Nasa images show China pollution clear amid slowdown (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51691967)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2020, 06:55:33 AM
Dublin City Council bravely fights to keep our city ugly. (The Thin Lizzy one was taken from a design by my late best friend Colin, and done in his memory.)

https://www.thejournal.ie/murals-removals-dublin-city-council-warning-5024646-Mar2020 (https://www.thejournal.ie/murals-removals-dublin-city-council-warning-5024646-Mar2020)/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 02 March, 2020, 07:36:37 AM
When the Shinners grab the reins of power we'll have murals on every gable end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2020, 08:08:12 AM
I bet Belfast City Council wouldn't have the balls to have any Falls Road murals painted over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2020, 08:09:48 AM
Yeah, the tourist board would kneecap them toot-sweet.

It's bloody stupid, almost all the ones cited brighten up a drab environment and are widely appreciated by the inhabitants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 March, 2020, 10:21:05 AM
Three cases in Iceland now, not being reported outside of Iceland for some reason. Reports already about company-wide lockdown/self-isolation. This is a country of a still tiny population, almost all of which is in or around Reykjavik, and where people have no option but to leave their homes for e.g. buying food. Fun times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 March, 2020, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2020, 08:08:12 AM
I bet Belfast City Council wouldn't have the balls to have any Falls Road murals painted over.

Well of course they wouldn't, they paid for them. To be fair, most of the murals of boys in balaclavas holding armalites have now been replaced with more positive images and messages. The only time anyone complained was when they replaced a mural of our most famous alcoholic wife-beater soccer superstar, George Best, with some hippy-dippy nonsense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 March, 2020, 01:57:17 PM
Not wanting to be Beeny to anyone's Logan, but here are some cheery numbers derived from that 72K-people epidemiological study. "80% get a mild dose not requiring treatment" sounds great until you dig into the other 20%..

If 10,000 people were infected simultaneously in RoI (an infection rate of just 0.2% of the pop, or  say about 1 in 8 people attending the All-Ireland Final) and outcomes followed the global average, we'd need about 500 additional critical care beds. And if infection rates climb to just 1%, that's 2500 beds, 10 patients for every one.

If there's no capacity to properly treat the relatively low percentage that become seriously ill, that 2% mortality rate looks very optimistic. This really emphasises that this thing needs to be delayed and spread out as long as possible, to give the Health Service any chance of coping, or its going to be absolutely brutal on the elderly and compromised.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 March, 2020, 03:47:14 PM
If you think in purely economic terms, the spread of this infection will help governments around the world with their surplus population problem, as well as providing a great excuse for the predicted market crash that will allow the return of quantitative easing and negative interest rates (for the rich), as well as drastic austerity measures (for the poor).  A cynic might suggest there's a reason that the inbred psychopaths running our countries are dragging their feet on doing anything useful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 02 March, 2020, 04:23:51 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 02 March, 2020, 01:57:17 PM

If there's no capacity to properly treat the relatively low percentage that become seriously ill, that 2% mortality rate looks very optimistic. This really emphasises that this thing needs to be delayed and spread out as long as possible, to give the Health Service any chance of coping, or its going to be absolutely brutal on the elderly and compromised.

Well now, given my experiences of the poxy excuse that passes for a Health Service in the Emerald Isle, and the fact that I already have COPD, that's me well and truly fucked. I would have more faith in the bloody Tooth Fairy to manage this situation in a competent manner, as opposed to the half-wits currently installed in positions of management within said so-called service and their political masters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 March, 2020, 06:42:42 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 March, 2020, 03:47:14 PM
A cynic might suggest there's a reason that the inbred psychopaths running our countries are dragging their feet on doing anything useful.

Maybe but I think the late, great Sir Terry P put it best when he raised the question of government conspiracies and their general inability to do much of anything right ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 March, 2020, 08:17:39 PM
If the last few years have taught us anything, it's that our governments are perfectly capable of letting disasters happen and then using the aftermath to their advantage.  Kind of like a cockroach couldn't organise a nuclear war, but it certainly knows how to eat a corpse.

And at the risk of contradicting myself a bit: as much as I love Pterry, he's wrong about government conspiracies.  Boris Johnson took money from the Russians and used it to fund Brexit propaganda and now he's prime minister and we Brexit next year, while Priti Patel committed treason and got another high-level government job for it rather than being shot against a wall.  For a bunch of people bad at doing a conspiracy, their lives and careers seem to be working out okay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2020, 10:42:34 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 02 March, 2020, 06:42:42 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 March, 2020, 03:47:14 PM
A cynic might suggest there's a reason that the inbred psychopaths running our countries are dragging their feet on doing anything useful.

Maybe but I think the late, great Sir Terry P put it best when he raised the question of government conspiracies and their general inability to do much of anything right ...

I think the late, great Sir Terry W put it best when he said "Hold on. Be Strong. Just cling to the wreckage. It'll be over soon."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 02 March, 2020, 11:22:09 PM
He also said:

Quote
There is a curse.
They say:
May you live in interesting times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 03 March, 2020, 03:02:32 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 02 March, 2020, 11:22:09 PM
He also said:

Quote
There is a curse.
They say:
May you live in interesting times.

Terry P didn't come up with that one...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_times (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_times)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 03 March, 2020, 05:26:47 AM
Apt, all the same, don't you think?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2020, 08:19:44 AM
Yaxley-Lennon's been arrested again, I see. I'm not quite sure why he's so well known in the first place anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 March, 2020, 08:27:10 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 March, 2020, 08:19:44 AM
Yaxley-Lennon's been arrested again, I see. I'm not quite sure why he's so well known in the first place anyway.

The scary thing is, I work in an Office with a few people who think he is just the best thing ever.

Really scraping a barrel to think of him in any terms other than scummy grifter, as so many of these racists are. Mind you, I'm assuming once he has sorted his legal troubles, he will be a member of Boris' Cabinet before long.

God knows, Northern Ireland has enough of them at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 March, 2020, 06:19:37 AM
I have the distinct feeling that Ireland's response to Covid-19 has been directed by Dan Francisco, and no-one listened to Dredd. I'm in that stadium near the end, and they're playing hand-washing videos on loop and we're all eyeing each other nervously, and any minute now the judges are going to lock the doors.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 March, 2020, 09:44:58 AM
I just learned today that one of our local secondaries sent a load of kids on a school trip to Italy on Monday. Parents apparently were against cancelling because they'd lose 600 quid. And I realise Italy is a big place, but, well, what the actual fuck? Apple won't let engineers go to Italy unless they get sign-off from a VP. A corporate I work with has similar precautions in place. But, sure, let school children head to a country known to be having big problems. I don't even.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 05 March, 2020, 10:09:26 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 March, 2020, 09:44:58 AM
I just learned today that one of our local secondaries sent a load of kids on a school trip to Italy on Monday. Parents apparently were against cancelling because they'd lose 600 quid. And I realise Italy is a big place, but, well, what the actual fuck? Apple won't let engineers go to Italy unless they get sign-off from a VP.

Apple can afford to take the hit. I don't know many parents who can afford to shrug off £600!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 05 March, 2020, 10:39:27 AM
Surely the school could pursue reimbursement under the circumstances?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 March, 2020, 10:51:19 AM
My point isn't about money – it's about the fact a range of large corporations with the funds to do solid risk assessment are banning most staff from travel to Italy, unless it is of vital importance. Apple is just one example – there are dozens of others, some of which are British companies. That a school would just allow children to travel to Italy during an outbreak baffles me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 05 March, 2020, 12:43:40 PM
Is anyone else following the furore around the white folk on BBC Politics telling Dawn Butler that accusing Johnson of racism was 'totes rude?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000fzvf/politics-live-04032020

This screen grab from iPlayer sums up the outcome.


(https://i.imgur.com/yvM2dG3.png)


As if there's any doubt, here's a great reminder of Johnson's racism record, with sources, courtesy of @uk_domain_names

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XzAujyzN9JxpUl9rN7EIIX0AlgaXL8rE/view


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 March, 2020, 02:14:59 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 March, 2020, 10:51:19 AM
My point isn't about money – it's about the fact a range of large corporations with the funds to do solid risk assessment are banning most staff from travel to Italy, unless it is of vital importance. Apple is just one example – there are dozens of others, some of which are British companies. That a school would just allow children to travel to Italy during an outbreak baffles me.
Doesn't that make the point about money - as you say, large corporations with the funds to do solid risk assessments are banning staff - very few state schools would have those kinds of funds available?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 March, 2020, 03:01:07 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 05 March, 2020, 12:43:40 PM
Is anyone else following the furore around the white folk on BBC Politics telling Dawn Butler that accusing Johnson of racism was 'totes rude?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000fzvf/politics-live-04032020

This screen grab from iPlayer sums up the outcome.


(https://i.imgur.com/yvM2dG3.png)


As if there's any doubt, here's a great reminder of Johnson's racism record, with sources, courtesy of @uk_domain_names

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XzAujyzN9JxpUl9rN7EIIX0AlgaXL8rE/view

The idea that politics has become less civil is the driving force behind modern centrism: that all problems ultimately stem from a lack of education and/or deportment, and the underlying belief - they have just enough self-awareness not to voice - that certain people don't deserve to be heard, to vote, or to have any say in how things are run, because that's how you get Brexit, Trump, Johnson, Corbyn, and Bernie.

But then it's long been preferable to attack people who demand accountability than address the problems that made them angry.  During the International Anti-Anarchist* Conference of 1898, all nations agreed that attempts to institute social change were technically violent acts against the state, because their intent was transformative.  The result was that anarchism (any social and political reform movement) was to be stamped out and the first step was to wage a PR war to make sure that reformists were painted as violent and illegitimate actors so that extreme measures against them could be justified.  Again: this was in 1898, and it's the playbook the BBC is still using - when those fancy universities call it a "classic education", they aren't kidding.


*  "Anarchy" being, OFC, a euphemism for labor and civil rights movements of the time which were challenging power structures, and even assassinating members of the ruling classes
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 March, 2020, 06:53:59 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 05 March, 2020, 12:43:40 PM
Is anyone else following the furore around the white folk on BBC Politics telling Dawn Butler that accusing Johnson of racism was 'totes rude?

Aye: get your doublethink right here!

Tories: racism isn't racism, and suggesting otherwise is rude - but then what do you expect from a black? (And why can't we ship all these blacks back to where they came from?*)

*Reference to Windrush Scandle: not just me being randomly hyperbolic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 March, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
To be entirely fair to the Tories and their record on Windrush, they don't just ship black people back where they came from, they also ship black people to places they've never been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 March, 2020, 07:20:51 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 March, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
To be entirely fair to the Tories and their record on Windrush, they don't just ship black people back where they came from, they also ship black people to places they've never been.

Quote of the Day. ^^^

Did any of you watch Dawn Butler having to defend her position about being better people than the Tories, when the Tory voter sat next to her had literally the previous second denied the racism in the Tory party?! Is there a new phrase that sits somewhere between cognitive dissonance, and lying outright?

24 minutes in. It really is quite astonishing. Power to Dawn Butler, who remained remarkably calm and polite throughout, while quoting the racist epithets used by our glorious leader to aforementioned Tory voter..
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 March, 2020, 02:41:28 PM
I didn't see it, but apparantly BBCQT excelled themselves last night by managing to pack the audience with people desperate to ask questions about how immigrants had spread Covid19 through the UK's open borders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 March, 2020, 03:57:05 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 March, 2020, 02:41:28 PM
I didn't see it, but apparantly BBCQT excelled themselves last night by managing to pack the audience with people desperate to ask questions about how immigrants had spread Covid19 through the UK's open borders.

As opposed to just people on skiing holidays.

Humanity: "Ha! I escaped the quarantine by cleverly flying through a neutral airport - and now I've effectively murdered half of my relatives! Win!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 March, 2020, 04:30:40 PM
100% of Iceland's current infection is from rich nobs who went on Italian skiing jollies. But, yeah, immigrants are teh evilz.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 March, 2020, 12:05:47 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 March, 2020, 04:30:40 PM
100% of Iceland's current infection is from rich nobs who went on Italian skiing jollies. But, yeah, immigrants are teh evilz.

Sorry, I'm unclear, is demonising people wrong, or is it ok when they're not completely destitute?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 March, 2020, 12:34:17 AM
It's a sliding scale. Basically lay off the tramps and feck the rich.

Unless I get rich.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 March, 2020, 09:11:56 AM
I may be wrong, but I think the point was that the virus is indiscriminate.  Rich, poor, foreign, native: if you've been abroad in a danger zone you may well be bringing the danger home.

But in today's Brexity, Trumpish climate I have a feeling that the people to whom 25 - 50% of those adjectives apply are going to get the lion's share of the blame.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 March, 2020, 12:55:28 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 07 March, 2020, 12:05:47 AMSorry, I'm unclear, is demonising people wrong, or is it ok when they're not completely destitute?
The news cycle there shifted very noticeably, according to my wife, from hardly giving a shit to "oh no – it turns out that the wealthy are affected". It was _instant_. Also, that entitled bullshit of flying back through alternate airports to avoid quarantine restrictions on an island where the vast majority of the population is packed into a single small city, and then boasting about that on social media(!), while – like here – people increasingly clamour to point the finger of suspicion at migrants? Yeah, some people deserve a bit of demonisation at this point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 March, 2020, 01:36:30 PM
My favorite story from all this remains the cabin staff on the cruise liner that was quarantined who were forced to go about their duties from cabin to cabin to keep the passengers happy.
700 additional infections after the quarantine was initiated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2020, 02:58:35 PM
The people who would never vote Labour in a million years finally have the leader of the Labour Party they wanted and I'm calling it now: a lot of them won't even last until the end of the day before they start renouncing the centrist nonentity they've been clamoring for these last five years, saying he can't win because of Coronavirus and/or Corbyn and how everyone should have listened to them years ago but it's too late now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2020, 03:03:06 PM
Perhaps. But what was the alternative? RLB, who's basically Corbyn II, fighting for policies and ideology that was trashed — often by working-class Labour voters — at the last GE. Or Nandy, who said a lot of good things, but different things to different people, and who painfully went for the "both sides" argument when it comes to the UK's fucking awful immigration issues. And both of them pledged to never campaign to rejoin the EU. Because that makes a whole lot of sense.

Starmer isn't ideal, but I guess we'll see. Personally, I'm glad it's him and not one of the other two.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2020, 04:24:55 PM
RLB was far from Corbyn 2, but she is an Irish Catholic.  This is not aimed at you personally, IP, but one thing we've seen over the last few years is that the centrist class are rotten with anti-Irish and anti-Catholic sentiment*, from the Guardian's John Crace decrying "fenians" at the heart of the shadow cabinet to Paul Mason's accusations that RLB had dual loyalties and answers to the Vatican.  If RLB was a Jew or a Muslim, we'd be calling the media campaign against her what it really is - or, given that we're still seeing "Dianne Abbott is thick" jokes on Have I Got News For You, maybe we wouldn't.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2020, 03:03:06 PMfighting for policies and ideology that was trashed — often by working-class Labour voters — at the last GE.

When the pundit class was high on the smell of its own farts in 2017 and followed purdah laws, voters supported those policies despite objections from the pundit gallery that this was "too far left" for the British working class, even though the famously Tory-disposed Yougov was bringing in conservative support for railway nationalisation at 60% (https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/05/19/nationalisation-vs-privatisation-public-view).  The only things that were different in 2019 was that purdah laws were blatantly discarded by the media and Labour offered a Remain option on top of 2017's policies, so I can equally claim that what working class voters rejected in 2019 was Remain.

All of which is moot, as the Tories have implemented in the last few weeks most of what Corbyn was offering.  Centrists were not only completely wrong (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_OaoEyEApk), but the Tories just went ahead and did it all anyway.  TBH, this is getting to be a pattern: the media spends years decrying some mild social democratic policy from the left, and then the Tories go ahead and implements some form of it, at which point it's suddenly a great idea.


* Ironically, the political right is more accommodating to Irish Catholics, to the point they'll even elect a member of the IRA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Gatland).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2020, 06:50:29 PM
Well, my family on my dad's side is Irish and Catholic, and so that isn't a problem for me. This issue is that the Corbyn project electorally failed multiple times, and the argument from a lot of places is "we just need to shout louder". It didn't work. Something needs to change. RLB, from everything I saw of her, was making the same mistakes (in much the same way the Lib Dems won't bloody learn, their overwhelming hubris with Swinson directly echoing Cleggmania — and after Cable had somehow made them electorally viable again, albeit as a medium-sized third party).

As for the Tories, it doesn't matter what they do now from a Corbyn standpoint. This doesn't prove he was wrong or right, because we are in exceptional circumstances. And we all know full well that the Tories will as soon as possible aim to "return to normal" and scream that this episode cost huge swathes of cash, forcing cuts, etc.

I personally liked quite a bit about what Corbyn's team offered in terms of policy. But it was too overloaded, too often gone deaf and incoherent, and was shambolic and silent at varying points on Brexit. It remains to be seen where Starmer heads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2020, 08:18:43 PM
Well he's just said "I support Zionism without qualification" so it seems like he's made his heading pretty clear.

If there isn't a conference this year (which looks likely), Starmer can't stock the party administration with loyalists, so can't force through any policies (or carry out the purge of the left many media pundits have been masturbating over) without the backing of the largely-deadlocked NEC, so he'll lose parts of the loose and fragile right/center/soft left alliance he used to get elected while the actual left that lent him their vote will evaporate over the coming year as memberships organically lapse.
And all that's before you even figure in the media - most assume that they'll keep their powder dry and only go on the offensive against Labour when there's an election or a war vote, but this ignores that the government will soon need a scapegoat to distract from their disastrous Coronavirus response.  Starmer's honeymoon period won't last long.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2020, 06:50:29 PMthe Tories will as soon as possible aim to "return to normal" and scream that this episode cost huge swathes of cash, forcing cuts, etc.

They'd have to be absolute fools not to denounce the coming recession as being caused by every socialist policy they've currently implemented here in the UK as an emergency measure, but this comes with the potential downside of admitting that there was a time when they weren't for it, reminding everyone why granny died and no-one could go to the funeral.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 April, 2020, 08:29:58 PM
Now the democratic primaries are basically over, I wonder which rapist the Americans will vote as their president?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 10 April, 2020, 10:03:58 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2020, 03:03:06 PM
Perhaps. But what was the alternative? RLB, who's basically Corbyn II, fighting for policies and ideology that was trashed — often by working-class Labour voters — at the last GE. Or Nandy, who said a lot of good things, but different things to different people, and who painfully went for the "both sides" argument when it comes to the UK's fucking awful immigration issues. And both of them pledged to never campaign to rejoin the EU. Because that makes a whole lot of sense.

Starmer isn't ideal, but I guess we'll see. Personally, I'm glad it's him and not one of the other two.

Nandy also managed to lose Scotland (again) in a single speech, which is quite a feat, when she suggested that the Spanish government's treatment of Catalonia should be the model for the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 April, 2020, 10:27:30 AM
Yikes. I missed that doozy. Got a link?

Personally, I'm disappointed in a female-heavy line-up we've ended up with another white bloke. But looking at that final three, I'd sooner have Starmer leading the opposition than either of the other two. Whether he will have any impact and make good on his promises remains to be seen. Also, short of a massive change in England, we also need the Lib Dems to get their shit together and start polling in the mid-teens again — which after Swinson seems a very long stretch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 10 April, 2020, 10:41:30 AM
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18165536.labour-leadership-hopeful-lisa-nandy-suggests-scotland-look-catalonia-deal-independence/

She later commented that she was referring to the efforts by the Spanish centre-left but by that point the damage was done, I think. It was completely tone deaf and showed a total lack of understanding of Scottish politics (and amply demonstrated why Scottish Labour is in its current state).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 12 April, 2020, 08:33:40 PM
Signalling the arrival of the long-promised stability in Labour that got him elected, Keir Starmer instructed Labour's lawyers not to submit the Labour Party Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism, 2014 - 2019 report in response to the antisemitismpocalypse, only for it to be leaked anyway (https://twitter.com/chelleryn99/status/1249401676915752960).
TLDR: Starmer's current allies in the party deliberately caused the 2017 general election loss, and their efforts to combat antisemitism seem to involve shredding documents detailing antisemitic incidents in the party and harassing left-wing jews - which seems the wrong way to go about it to me, but then I'm not a big city politics scientist.  All of this was backed up by leaked Whatsapp chats and private internal party communications, and hilariously, the story was broken yesterday by Rupert Murdoch's Sky News, prompting today's leak of the entire document, in full (https://twitter.com/WhatEvil/status/1249388309928910856), so anyone who voted for Starmer in the belief he'd be getting an easier ride and that we'd currently be in some kind of honeymoon period...

LOL.

And the thing is, none of this matters.  There will be no reckoning, no self-reflection on the part of the British liberal chatterazzi who gleefully boosted every anti-left story in between retweeting James O'Brien sound clips in which he clears the lofty intellectual heights of out-thinking an LBC listener, because we exist in the post-truth world where we know for certain that there is no revelation that can prompt change in our culture or reflection in our pundit classes.  An 860-page document detailing deception and borderline criminality in a UK political party may as well be the nattering of fishwives on the banks of the Seine as they discuss the distant intrigues of the palace.  Or whatever a good analogy is for an abstract soap opera.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 13 April, 2020, 09:44:38 PM
Tom Watson broke the politics thread (amongst other things)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 14 April, 2020, 08:56:22 AM
I wonder what it would be like to live in a country with a functioning opposition and political scrutiny?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 April, 2020, 09:08:22 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 14 April, 2020, 08:56:22 AM
I wonder what it would be like to live in a country with a functioning opposition and political scrutiny?

No idea mate, I live in Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 April, 2020, 09:08:29 AM
That Trump press conference. Christ.

The CNN headlines alone.

How goes the voting in of a racist moron on a wave of Nationalistic idiocy, during a crisis? No, wait...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2020, 11:57:30 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 14 April, 2020, 08:56:22 AM
I wonder what it would be like to live in a country with a functioning opposition and political scrutiny?

We had a functioning opposition for two years but the Remain crowd gave it all up for a handful of Second Referendum magic beans.  I'm not sure what you mean by "political scrutiny" but if you mean the fourth estate, then theoretically we have the BBC, which despite my many criticisms of it, I must admit is probably doing about as well as one might hope of a news organisation populated almost exclusively with people from a privileged pro-capitalist conservative background who view the working class as (and I quote a former Eastenders writer) "zoo animals."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 April, 2020, 01:29:52 PM
We didn't have a functioning opposition so much as a dysfunctional but independent parliament. So although by the end the government couldn't do anything, nor could the opposition agree on what it wanted to do. Every party messed up monumentally. The Lib Dems and SNP in particular screwed up by agreeing to an election, the Lib Dems in particular again believing their own press, like during 'Cleggmania'. (I felt rather sorry for Cable in this, given that he'd somehow made the party viable again, and now it's dead.) But Labour did plenty of wrecking ball moments too. It could have thrown its support behind Cherry's amendment to backstop Brexit with revoke rather than no-deal, but instead the party mostly sat on its hands because SNP —  while wittering that it'd stop no deal, despite having abstained in the only way to do so.

The entire mess about a unity government was absurd, too, with every side moaning about who would run the show, rather than recognising the danger. Frankly, they all screwed up in a big way — even the Greens played their part, for example running Molly Scott Cato in Stroud, more or less gifting the seat to the Tories (maj 3840; Green vote 4964). Of course, Labour dicked around there as well (there are plenty of accounts of resources being diverted to stop Lib Dems winning in London). About the only party that came out of this disaster well was Plaid Cymru.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 01:39:50 PM
Quote from: Rately on 14 April, 2020, 09:08:29 AM
That Trump press conference. Christ.

The CNN headlines alone.

How goes the voting in of a racist moron on a wave of Nationalistic idiocy, during a crisis? No, wait...

Not well. But that's kind of the point of the story (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52276004): Trump's not in charge of everything (*breathes enormous sigh of relief*) but spits the dummy when people point it out.

Our state governor (Jay Inslee) had WA state on lock-down pretty early, so the outbreak's curve here is flattening now. Our first school district closure happened on March 4th - on the same Day Trump briefed that it wasn't anything to be concerned about and played down the death rate. See: if he was in charge of our state, we'd have a lot more deaths now.

What's really weird (imagine aliens observing Earth from space) is that each day the media cover what Trump says. I know it's not weird in the sense that "media cover President", but if you listen to him speak for more than a minute, it's weird in the sense that "media cover Terrible Narcissist".

Last bit of vaguely good news: the military don't like him. Man, if he had those guys on side...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 April, 2020, 01:51:14 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 01:39:50 PM
Quote from: Rately on 14 April, 2020, 09:08:29 AM
That Trump press conference. Christ.

The CNN headlines alone.

How goes the voting in of a racist moron on a wave of Nationalistic idiocy, during a crisis? No, wait...

Not well. But that's kind of the point of the story (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52276004): Trump's not in charge of everything (*breathes enormous sigh of relief*) but spits the dummy when people point it out.

Our state governor (Jay Inslee) had WA state on lock-down pretty early, so the outbreak's curve here is flattening now. Our first school district closure happened on March 4th - on the same Day Trump briefed that it wasn't anything to be concerned about and played down the death rate. See: if he was in charge of our state, we'd have a lot more deaths now.

What's really weird (imagine aliens observing Earth from space) is that each day the media cover what Trump says. I know it's not weird in the sense that "media cover President", but if you listen to him speak for more than a minute, it's weird in the sense that "media cover Terrible Narcissist".

Last bit of vaguely good news: the military don't like him. Man, if he had those guys on side...

It really is horrendous stuff to witness, Funt Solo.

A 73 year old man throws a temper tantrum, because of people being mean to him? Mean? Pointing out the truth more like. A horrible, horrible example of humanity.

If we make it to November, I would like to think Karma would deliver some good news this year, and he isn't ten foot from the White House before they start investigating every facet of him, his family and business, and not long after that he gets a set of handcuffs clamped on his little wrists.

You and yours stay safe, Funt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2020, 03:11:10 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 01:39:50 PM
What's really weird (imagine aliens observing Earth from space) is that each day the media cover what Trump says. I know it's not weird in the sense that "media cover President", but if you listen to him speak for more than a minute, it's weird in the sense that "media cover Terrible Narcissist".

TBH I think it is pretty weird for the majority of residents of the planet that watch him pronounce.  Mind you, a very close (wafer thin margin, barely detectable) second is Jared Kushner.  It must be absolutely terrifying for any rational American to watch the pair of them with the thought that "these twonks are making decisions about our nation".

Donnie Boy's highlights of the last few weeks include musing on the fact that he is allegedly number one on some social media sites, dressing down a journalist for asking a question and provoking a government official to facepalm on international television.  All this plus trying to claim that the pandemic is a conspiracy created by his democratic opponents to try and make him look bad ( no Donnie, you just have to open your mouth for that ...)

I do wonder if the Chinese are planning on changing their curse from "may you live in interesting times" to "may you live in Donald Trump's America."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2020, 04:13:56 PM
It's amazing to me that no-one even notices or cares at this point that the president gave high-ranking jobs in the American government to his daughter and son-in-law.  It's just not even worth registering anymore, kind of like if Romans stopped talking about the original reason why Incitatus shouldn't be allowed to hold public office at all and instead spent all their time and energy bitching about what a lousy job he was doing as chief magistrate.  Still, this is a country that has made peace with weekly high school shootings, so I shouldn't really be surprised.

FYI: March gone by was the first March since 2002 without a shooting spree in an American high school.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 April, 2020, 04:29:58 PM
Oh people notice, without a doubt.  Care too.  I think though that many have reached the point where they realise that right now there is buggery ada they can do about it except for collect evidence.  Trump may not be impeached but it would not surprise me in the slightest that he finds himself on the receiving end of some very pointed legal action along with his nearest and dearest.

As for the shooting spree statistic, remind me again: when did the schools in the states close down?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 14 April, 2020, 05:16:37 PM
I'm amazed that shooting spree stat.  Got a source discussing that?

Re the US public not doing anything, what are they supposed to do? Revolt?  They're as powerless as we are.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 14 April, 2020, 08:07:02 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 01:39:50 PM
Quote from: Rately on 14 April, 2020, 09:08:29 AM
That Trump press conference. Christ.

The CNN headlines alone.

How goes the voting in of a racist moron on a wave of Nationalistic idiocy, during a crisis? No, wait...

Not well. But that's kind of the point of the story (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52276004): Trump's not in charge of everything (*breathes enormous sigh of relief*) but spits the dummy when people point it out.

Our state governor (Jay Inslee) had WA state on lock-down pretty early, so the outbreak's curve here is flattening now. Our first school district closure happened on March 4th - on the same Day Trump briefed that it wasn't anything to be concerned about and played down the death rate. See: if he was in charge of our state, we'd have a lot more deaths now.

What's really weird (imagine aliens observing Earth from space) is that each day the media cover what Trump says. I know it's not weird in the sense that "media cover President", but if you listen to him speak for more than a minute, it's weird in the sense that "media cover Terrible Narcissist".

Last bit of vaguely good news: the military don't like him. Man, if he had those guys on side...

Whereabouts are you in Washington, Funt?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 08:26:19 PM
Up in Skagit, radiator. We've had it pretty light here - only five recorded deaths. Snohomish (one county south) has 70, then King has 295.

Deaths (by pop.):

WA: 0.0068%
NY: 0.0539%
UK: 0.0182%
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 April, 2020, 08:27:17 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 14 April, 2020, 05:16:37 PM
Re the US public not doing anything, what are they supposed to do? Revolt?  They're as powerless as we are.

I thought this was the Second Amendment was for.

The gun nuts are all "Gotta have muh guns so's I can defend muhself against a tyrannical gubmint" and when one comes along, they're fine with it, apparently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 08:39:01 PM
Gun advocates are fine with Trump because he won't challenge their ownership of guns.

You won't be surprised to know that gun shops got closed down as non-essential businesses, then the NRA immediately launched a legal challenge and they opened back up again.

Coronavirus: LA county gun shops to reopen as 'essential' business (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52108162)
How the coronavirus led to the highest-ever spike in US gun sales (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52189349)

(As a high school teacher in the US, I've come to the conclusion that I must be, by definition, suicidal.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 April, 2020, 11:30:06 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 14 April, 2020, 05:16:37 PM
I'm amazed that shooting spree stat.  Got a source discussing that?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-first-march-without-school-shooting-since-2002-united-states/

QuoteRe the US public not doing anything, what are they supposed to do? Revolt?

Why not?  We insist on regime change in all the other third world countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 April, 2020, 07:21:57 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 April, 2020, 08:39:01 PM
Gun advocates are fine with Trump because he won't challenge their ownership of guns.

Brilliant, isn't it? So what that "tyranny" argument actually means is "Gotta have muh guns, so the gubmint can't take muh guns. Any other kind of tyranny is A-OK with me."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 15 April, 2020, 08:40:30 AM
-WRONG THREAD POST DELETED-
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 April, 2020, 05:03:29 PM
Labour's Tracy Allen, on discovering that her party had not been destroyed in the 2017 general election as she had hoped: "The people have spoken.  Bastards." (https://www.medialens.org/2020/the-people-have-spoken-bastards-leaked-labour-report-shows-partys-own-senior-staff-acted-to-keep-corbyn-out-of-power/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 April, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
Following developments in the States as protests over the lockdown grow and the President complements them!!!!!!!

Not entirely sure the human race is going to get through this after all.  :-(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2020, 04:21:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 April, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
Following developments in the States as protests over the lockdown grow and the President complements them!!!!!!!

Not entirely sure the human race is going to get through this after all.  :-(

I had to put the computer away and go to my happy place when I read that. I mean: I know he's a horrible man - he's proved it time and again. But to foment armed rebellion against his political opponents during a national health crisis is ... AAAAARGH!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 19 April, 2020, 04:34:45 PM
It's not a health crisis to him though, is it? It's an election campaign, like every other day of his presidency has been.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 20 April, 2020, 08:15:10 PM
It can be hard to see what the end goal is by tacitly supporting the protests when reopening would lead to huge numbers of dead, but the best analysis I've heard is that what Trump is actually doing is basically absolving himself of all responsibility and, in his mind, improving his chances of reelection.

He is egging on the protests (most of which are apparently being orchestrated by shady right wing interest groups, some with connections to his own administration) in the full knowledge that one way or another the lockdown will stay in effect (even if the government ordered everything to reopen tomorrow, the vast majority of people are too scared to go back to their regular lives). That way, when all the dust has settled and the number of lives lost is (hopefully) far lower than initially projected, he can turn around and attack all of the democratic state governors for 'overreacting' and damaging the economy, even though it's only their 'overreaction' that avoided the worst case scenario.

To his supporters, he will not be seen as responsible for the deaths or the damage to the economy, and by stirring up controversy and outrage will have distracted everyone from his bungling of the crisis.

Totally cynical, totally disgusting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2020, 04:14:42 AM
Donald Trump has now suggested injecting disinfectant as a thing that should be looked into.

I mean...  ...that's just...  ...how can...   ...What?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 April, 2020, 07:06:03 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2020, 04:14:42 AM
Donald Trump has now suggested injecting disinfectant as a thing that should be looked into.

And really powerful tanning beds. I'm not making that up. Ultraviolet light. Maybe from the inside instead, though:

Quote"So supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it's ultraviolet or just a very powerful light — and I think you said that hasn't been checked because of the testing," Trump said. "And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that, too."

In case you missed the results of Donnie's last genius suggestion: Study finds Chloroquine useless in treating Covid-19, but useful if you want to kill 17% of study participants (https://boingboing.net/2020/04/21/study-finds-chloroquine-useles.html?_ga=2.237522120.958295907.1587708257-892166260.1415369566)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 24 April, 2020, 08:20:46 AM
It would not surprise me in the slightest if he has shares in tanning salons and bleach manufacturers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 April, 2020, 09:09:44 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2020, 04:14:42 AM
Donald Trump has now suggested injecting disinfectant as a thing that should be looked into.

I mean...  ...that's just...  ...how can...   ...What?

Did this one get posted here yet?

Some people actually follow Trump's medical advice (and, of course, die as a result) (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/24/coronavirus-cure-kills-man-after-trump-touts-chloroquine-phosphate).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 24 April, 2020, 09:56:05 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2020, 04:14:42 AM
Donald Trump has now suggested injecting disinfectant as a thing that should be looked into.

I mean...  ...that's just...  ...how can...   ...What?

Yep. I imagine sales of Dettol will go through the roof now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 24 April, 2020, 11:14:39 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 24 April, 2020, 09:09:44 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 24 April, 2020, 04:14:42 AM
Donald Trump has now suggested injecting disinfectant as a thing that should be looked into.

I mean...  ...that's just...  ...how can...   ...What?

Did this one get posted here yet?

Some people actually follow Trump's medical advice (and, of course, die as a result) (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/24/coronavirus-cure-kills-man-after-trump-touts-chloroquine-phosphate).

Do they still do the Darwin awards?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 April, 2020, 11:26:01 AM
Don't think you'd qualify for Darwin if you're following the advice of the President standing on a platform with the country's top medical experts. I appreciate that this is tank cleaner we're talking about, but that's why chemists and prescriptions exist, to supply the correct compounds. Trump's literal exhortation in this case was for people to "just try it!".

Ol' Handshake Johnson, now he'd have been in with a shot.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 April, 2020, 01:23:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2020, 04:21:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 April, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
Following developments in the States as protests over the lockdown grow and the President complements them!!!!!!!

Not entirely sure the human race is going to get through this after all.  :-(

I had to put the computer away and go to my happy place when I read that. I mean: I know he's a horrible man - he's proved it time and again. But to foment armed rebellion against his political opponents during a national health crisis is ... AAAAARGH!


.... aaaaand he tops it.  So, medical advice from Trump:

- do nothing, it is all a conspiracy by the Democrats.
- inject yourself with disinfectant.
- sit under a sun lamp.
- fish cleaning tablets.
- 9mm trepanning.

Sorry folks but I think there is only one thing left to say, and apologies for the vulgarity here:

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 24 April, 2020, 01:26:11 PM
All hyperbole and exaggeration aside, I honestly think he must have dementia. They should get a psychiatrist to check him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2020, 02:12:24 PM
This has happened largely because journalists have worked very hard to ensure that people do not trust them or their profession - though to be entirely fair, I do not think journalists foresaw a day where they would actually be needed to be trusted enough that they could tell people to ignore the president's advice to inject themselves with bleach.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2020, 04:29:05 PM
Fair play to the French: Amazon tried to blackmail the French courts into overturning a ruling (which forced the corporation to ensure worker safety) by threatening to close all its French warehouses - so the courts will now fine Amazon one hundred thousand dollars for every non-essential item it delivers in France. (https://www.rt.com/news/486810-amazon-appeal-rejected-france/)

For some reason, I am reminded that the EU tried to make just this kind of ruling illegal through the TTIP trade document.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 05:21:57 PM
I'm not sure he has dementia. I don't really recognise in him what happened to my gran, although I guess it affects people very differently. What I do see is someone who has some kind of personality disorder (likely narcissism) combined with huge privilege, and with the more typical issues that come with age (poor memory) and sheer arrogance (talking bullshit, like he has all his life, but now being under scrutiny for it).

As for journalism, I'm not sure my profession (although I'm not in political news) needs damning to quite the degree it is getting right now. The blanket distrust is quite worrying, because if the journalists aren't reporting, who do you trust? The governments are suggesting them, and it's working. That recent YouGov poll on who Brits trust re C19 is terrifying. Journalism is deep into negative territory. The NHS, unsurprisingly, leads the poll at the positive end. But also in the positives: Boris Johnson. In the negatives? Kier Starmer.

Welcome to the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 24 April, 2020, 06:51:08 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 April, 2020, 01:23:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2020, 04:21:25 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 April, 2020, 04:07:13 PM
Following developments in the States as protests over the lockdown grow and the President complements them!!!!!!!

Not entirely sure the human race is going to get through this after all.  :-(

I had to put the computer away and go to my happy place when I read that. I mean: I know he's a horrible man - he's proved it time and again. But to foment armed rebellion against his political opponents during a national health crisis is ... AAAAARGH!


.... aaaaand he tops it.  So, medical advice from Trump:

- do nothing, it is all a conspiracy by the Democrats.
- inject yourself with disinfectant.
- sit under a sun lamp.
- fish cleaning tablets.
- 9mm trepanning.

Sorry folks but I think there is only one thing left to say, and apologies for the vulgarity here:

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!

No apologies necessary, as far as I'm concerned, TJM. I would consider your reaction a perfectly justifiable response that a sane, decent, morally upright individual could possibly make in the light of present events.

And to which I will add my own: AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGHH!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2020, 07:34:55 PM
The word "journalism" obviously covers a lot of ground, but the overall problems amount to the same thing: distrust of journalism has not happened in a vacuum, and be it the BBC covering for pedophiles or games journalists selling good reviews, the industry has done itself no favors.
You could bang on about how class interest has seen the profession reduced to gatekeepers of hegemony like Chomsky does, but tbh, the mainstream media has slowly and surely eroded what trust in the institution of journalism there was until we got here, and no lessons have been learned along the way.  Our media is a sewer and it will not get any better while it self-regulates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
I don't disagree there are problems, but as someone in the industry, I've also seen a breakneck shift away from people willing to pay for media. When the money disappears, problems appear. Either publications trying to do the right thing have to cut costs, and keep going. The result is slips and production issues and more. Or you get a rich backer, and at some point inevitably end up doing what they want. Meanwhile, Facebook and others obliterated the notion of even short-form (let alone long-form) news for many, replacing news with nuggets of headlines that few people read beyond.

So we are all culpable. It's not just the journalists who are to blame for the current state of play.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 April, 2020, 09:10:30 PM
Revealed: leader of group peddling bleach as coronavirus 'cure' wrote to Trump this week

Mark Grenon wrote to Trump saying chlorine dioxide 'can rid the body of Covid-19' days before the president promoted disinfectant as treatment

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirus?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR1YxIxkgmOvWM3wadM4Tx02ja5vzZZGQKz5LoTox2HXUFFh-fO0AeKiM5M
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 24 April, 2020, 10:33:02 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
So we are all culpable. It's not just the journalists who are to blame for the current state of play.
This.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 April, 2020, 10:48:11 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 24 April, 2020, 10:33:02 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 07:40:08 PM
So we are all culpable. It's not just the journalists who are to blame for the current state of play.
This.

Years ago when Trump started using the phrase "fake news" I thought - but that's just a way of denying any story you disagree with. That's a really dangerous phrase.

A couple of weeks later I was chatting with my dad about his work with the Greens, and he complained about the "fake news" and I thought - but that's just a way of denying any story you disagree with. That's a really dangerous phrase.

A while later I was reading posts on my favorite message board, and I noticed people complaining about the biased media who didn't see things the way they did and I thought - but that's just a way of denying any story you disagree with.

I'm not sure if it's more ad hominem or straw man, but dismissing information you don't like without actually addressing the content of the message is ... weak sauce. But it's a weak sauce that a lot of people are enjoying on their discussion burgers these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 April, 2020, 11:27:22 PM
But what if the story appears in the Byline Times?  Surely that's an immediate red flag*?



* No pun intended.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2020, 12:30:54 AM
Ah, well then it's to be believed utterly without question because it's fighting the good fight against the mainstream media. It has a special "Not Fake" badge that their reporters (both of them, mind) stick on top of the "PRESS" sign tucked into their hat-band. Definitely not agenda-driven. You couldn't say anything about chips or shoulders, certainly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2020, 04:59:09 AM
Sorry to double-post, but I found what's perhaps real fake news, in that we didn't need any "experts" to fact check that staying too long in a sun-bed and drinking bleach isn't good for you and doesn't cure illness - but the BBC has a fact-check article.

That's just shit that everyone (except for the president of the US) knows. Humanity just innately knows that drinking corrosive fluid and sun-burning yourself is bad.

(https://i.imgur.com/cX266hE.png)


* I admit I added the donkey head.

* Truth: I googled "horse's ass" to see if I could paste a horse's ass over Trump's glowing visage, but a cartoon of his face as a horse's ass came up in the search results, and sort of defeated the purpose.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 25 April, 2020, 06:48:34 AM
He's now claiming that he was being sarcastic to wind up the media.

So that's alright then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 April, 2020, 08:08:41 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 25 April, 2020, 06:48:34 AM
He's now claiming that he was being sarcastic to wind up the media.

So that's alright then.

Really???????????

[sorry, was that too sarcastic?]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 25 April, 2020, 08:49:12 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 25 April, 2020, 06:48:34 AM
He's now claiming that he was being sarcastic to wind up the media.

So that's alright then.

Well, since he has demonstrated a clear talent for comic timing and expression, no doubt his next gig after the Presidential one will be on the Stand-Up Comedy Circuit.

(Now THAT is how you do Sarcasm).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2020, 12:23:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2020, 12:30:54 AMYou couldn't say anything about chips or shoulders, certainly.

The tone and direction of comments here and elsewhere make this choice of phrase especially poignant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 25 April, 2020, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 05:21:57 PM
I'm not sure he has dementia. I don't really recognise in him what happened to my gran, although I guess it affects people very differently. What I do see is someone who has some kind of personality disorder (likely narcissism) combined with huge privilege, and with the more typical issues that come with age (poor memory) and sheer arrogance (talking bullshit, like he has all his life, but now being under scrutiny for it).


Yes, I've seen what dementia is really like, and it's nothing like whatever Trump has.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2020, 03:06:20 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 April, 2020, 12:23:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 25 April, 2020, 12:30:54 AMYou couldn't say anything about chips or shoulders, certainly.

The tone and direction of comments here and elsewhere make this choice of phrase especially poignant.

Honestly, I'm often baffled, confused and wrong-footed when it comes to discerning tone and intent in a forum setting. I imagine you and I are in approximately the same place, as regards political bent and level of cynicism with the world.

Despite years of experience that should maybe make me know better I sometimes climb up on my high horse and then have to suffer the indignity of awkwardly sliding off, usually into a muddy puddle.

Also, introspection.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 25 April, 2020, 03:30:15 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 25 April, 2020, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 05:21:57 PM
I'm not sure he has dementia. I don't really recognise in him what happened to my gran, although I guess it affects people very differently. What I do see is someone who has some kind of personality disorder (likely narcissism) combined with huge privilege, and with the more typical issues that come with age (poor memory) and sheer arrogance (talking bullshit, like he has all his life, but now being under scrutiny for it).


Yes, I've seen what dementia is really like, and it's nothing like whatever Trump has.

I think we can safely say Trump has cognitive impairment, much like his friend, Joe Biden.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 April, 2020, 04:41:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 25 April, 2020, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 05:21:57 PM
I'm not sure he has dementia. I don't really recognise in him what happened to my gran, although I guess it affects people very differently. What I do see is someone who has some kind of personality disorder (likely narcissism) combined with huge privilege, and with the more typical issues that come with age (poor memory) and sheer arrogance (talking bullshit, like he has all his life, but now being under scrutiny for it).


Yes, I've seen what dementia is really like, and it's nothing like whatever Trump has.

Agreed.

I personally don't think he's stupid or short of marbles either. I think he's a pathetic lump of amoral self-serving shit, but he knows exactly what sub-human schtick goes over best with the greedy, deluded and/or stupid people who hang on his ever dribble, and that's all he cares about.

In my book, that's far worse than being ill or thick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 25 April, 2020, 06:03:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 April, 2020, 04:41:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 25 April, 2020, 12:59:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 April, 2020, 05:21:57 PM
I'm not sure he has dementia. I don't really recognise in him what happened to my gran, although I guess it affects people very differently. What I do see is someone who has some kind of personality disorder (likely narcissism) combined with huge privilege, and with the more typical issues that come with age (poor memory) and sheer arrogance (talking bullshit, like he has all his life, but now being under scrutiny for it).


Yes, I've seen what dementia is really like, and it's nothing like whatever Trump has.

Agreed.

I personally don't think he's stupid or short of marbles either. I think he's a pathetic lump of amoral self-serving shit, but he knows exactly what sub-human schtick goes over best with the greedy, deluded and/or stupid people who hang on his ever dribble, and that's all he cares about.

In my book, that's far worse than being ill or thick.
Yes. He's a self-serving c*nt of epic proportions. His only goal is to protect his own interests at the cost of everyone else's.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 April, 2020, 10:41:22 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 April, 2020, 04:41:34 PM
I personally don't think he's stupid or short of marbles either. I think he's a pathetic lump of amoral self-serving shit, but he knows exactly what sub-human schtick goes over best with the greedy, deluded and/or stupid people who hang on his ever dribble, and that's all he cares about.

In my book, that's far worse than being ill or thick.

It's quite possible for someone to be mentally ill, extremely stupid and evil incarnate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 April, 2020, 11:24:06 PM
Post Deleted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 26 April, 2020, 11:51:02 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 25 April, 2020, 10:41:22 PM

It's quite possible for someone to be mentally ill, extremely stupid and evil incarnate.

That is uncanny, M.I.K. You have just described the girlfriend, of the bloke in the flat upstairs from me, to an absolute tee.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 April, 2020, 10:01:53 PM
Keeping the argument accessible and covering ground that might be familiar to anyone involved in a Brexit debate over the last few years, Renegade Cut examines how capitalism has form in creating a system of wedge issues to make the poor wage war on themselves rather than their oppressors: "These protests are not the result of some people just being born dum-dums or inferior people - that's some low-key eugenics talk, let's not do that." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVYrTfdkYU8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 April, 2020, 12:09:57 AM
I listened to a news report the other day where they asked a man why he was protesting the lock-down, and he responded that he has a mortgage payment and a truck payment he needed to meet - and if he couldn't make those payments he was toast. (Hardly the blathering of a right-wing nutter - just someone concerned for his economic plight.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 April, 2020, 09:04:51 AM
Lockdown should have been implemented with an option of deferment of mortgage payments and finance to the end of the loan, and corresponding waiving of rent (commercial included). It made no sense for any government to essentially suspend earning ability otherwise. Apparently this is 'too simplistic' to be possible, but it's amazing what has proved possible this past month, and the supposedly-nuanced alternative is far, far worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 April, 2020, 10:23:14 AM
UBI would have fixed most of this, but conservatives are ideologically opposed, hence the needlessly complex rules set up instead (under the guise of stopping fraud). Also, banks need a kicking. They're coming across as kind and lovely, but all they're really saying is "pause your mortgage payments for three months, but we'll give you a kicking via added interest afterwards". Our council was better: we pay ten months a year here, and so they just offered to switch the 'blank' months to the start rather than the end of the payment cycle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 May, 2020, 11:42:06 PM
The UK government is now saying that the £14bn/mth cost of benefits & furlough is "unsustainable".

Just a reminder that the total cost of quantitative easing (aka recapitalising the banking system) was £375bn magicked up from nowhere* and saved not one single life.

They could do this for two years with the same amount of money. If they decide not to, that's a political choice.

Remember that at the ballot box: bailing out the banks was more important than saving lives.

*ALL money is magicked up from nowhere, before some smart arse starts talking about "how do we pay for it...?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2020, 08:00:03 PM
Government using pandemic to accelerate NHS privatisation. (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/04/uk-government-using-crisis-to-transfer-nhs-duties-to-private-sector)
Government using pandemic to introduce tracking of British citizens. (https://www.businessinsider.nl/cybersecurity-experts-uk-government-contact-tracing-surveillance-2020-4/)

This is just an opportunity for them.  Thank goodness we have an electable opposition that's 20 points ahead in the polls and finally holding the government to account.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2020, 08:32:02 PM
Whatever else we might say about Labour, it's not like Corbyn was suddenly going to make people change their minds. Perhaps Starmer won't either, but sticking with something that's repeatedly failed and trying again is getting close to that definition of madness people like to talk about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 05 May, 2020, 09:04:48 PM
Isn't that THE definition of Starmer?  Miliband mkII?

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2020, 08:32:02 PM
Whatever else we might say about Labour, it's not like Corbyn was suddenly going to make people change their minds. Perhaps Starmer won't either, but sticking with something that's repeatedly failed and trying again is getting close to that definition of madness people like to talk about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2020, 10:40:00 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2020, 08:32:02 PM
Whatever else we might say about Labour, it's not like Corbyn was suddenly going to make people change their minds.

We'll never know, because Tom Watson and his buddies actively sabotaged the 2017 election and now it looks like the racist bullies who gave a free pass to the tiny number of antisemites in the Labour Party in order to manufacture a 'crisis' will get away without so much as a slap on the wrist. It's all colossally depressing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2020, 11:51:49 PM
Don't be dispirited, Jim.  I can't walk five feet without seeing where some kid has chalked a pro-NHS hashtag on the pavement, or a window with a rainbow in it, or a banner with the word "hope" on it.  Whatever else is going on, it's a confusing time to be a cynic.

People committed to socialism had already come to the conclusion it wasn't going to happen through the parliamentary Labour Party even as they loaned it their support in the early days of Corbyn's leadership, latest developments have only made it apparent to anyone else who was still under the impression that a societal overhaul required only one elderly vegetarian who is willing to listen and nothing else.
A movement with aims counter to the global suicide cult of capitalism was always going to have to make its own arrangements outside the political establishment, and it can be done - just look at the year-long street protests in France, the anarchist communes springing up around issues like the Wet'suwet'en protest, or the global rent and labor strikes currently taking place.

I realise none of this is very helpful at a time where you probably want to hear a concrete plan for what we do next.  I wouldn't mind knowing myself, tbh.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2020, 08:32:02 PMsticking with something that's repeatedly failed and trying again is getting close to that definition of madness people like to talk about.

I agree with your assessment of capitalism and/or centrism, and that it is time to try something else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2020, 12:13:31 AM
Also: some other stuff happened today, summed up by this Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/venanalysis/status/1257417513262071808).
In a nutshell, the US mounted a military operation against Venezuela's government which failed when one disaster after another occurred, ending with the mercenaries being owned by a bunch of fishermen.  Not pictured in the thread is the helmet they took off one of the "stealth deep cover operatives" which to me looked to me like Rick Moranis' helmet from Spaceballs but with a huge US flag on it, which was tweeted without a hint of irony by journalists in response to people asking "yeah but how do we know this guy was American?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2020, 09:37:02 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 05 May, 2020, 09:04:48 PMIsn't that THE definition of Starmer?  Miliband mkII?
My point was more that Labour repeatedly did poorly at several elections, and so giving him another crack would have been nuts. Yes, press, etc, but that doesn't matter. You work within the frameworks and limitations you have. And for every Lib Dem and SNP member who fucked us over with that election, we still have the fact Corbyn would not step aside temporarily and have another Labour figure lead a GNU.

His team's policies were often good, but frequently also incoherent. His handling of some stuff was fine, but other times not. His followers were too often inconsistent in their beliefs (undying devotion to Corbyn and zero tolerance of critics, for a man who'd spent much of his life going against his own party), and so on. So at this point, you have to try something else, because this approach was just not going anywhere. (And when you have Labour heartland voters ditching Corbyn for Johnson, you really do have a problem.)

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 May, 2020, 10:40:00 PMWe'll never know, because Tom Watson and his buddies actively sabotaged the 2017 election and now it looks like the racist bullies who gave a free pass to the tiny number of antisemites in the Labour Party in order to manufacture a 'crisis' will get away without so much as a slap on the wrist. It's all colossally depressing.
Although various sources (including Remainiacs) have suggested that's not actually the case when you read through the report. Note: I have not read the report, but I intend to. (Their reading was more that Labour has a big problem with factionalism, and that attempting to state 'Blairites' were to blame for antisemitism when Corbyn and his people had control of basically every facet of the party is a massive stretch, even going by all the shit in that report.)

But even if 2017 was a lost opportunity, it and 2019 still showcase Labour's basic arrogance and unwillingness to play with others. Throughout Corbyn's entire leadership, he's talked a lot about democracy, but come down firmly on not changing our broken electoral system for the Commons — because otherwise Labour cannot lead alone. (Corbyn is pro-Lords reform, although I suspect primarily because that would annihilate Lib Dems and crossbenchers and result in a greater proportion of Labour members in the upper house.)

He's been against any form of coalition, because that would require compromise and consensus. Right now, I'm not sure Starmer's looking any better on that — but then in terms of electoral reform Labour seems to revert to type after sometimes making positive noises, no matter who's leading. (I will never forgive Blair for his junking of the Jenkins Report, and even now he's still in denial about FPTP and the benefits of PR to Labour, let alone the UK as a whole. But the party would seemingly prefer to win one election in three or four outright than end up much more often leading a progressive left/centre coalition.)

Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2020, 11:51:49 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2020, 08:32:02 PMsticking with something that's repeatedly failed and trying again is getting close to that definition of madness people like to talk about.
I agree with your assessment of capitalism and/or centrism, and that it is time to try something else.
I agree also. I am a floating voter, but my general tendencies are liberal (NOT libertarian) and somewhat left (unless I take a political compass poll, in which case I'm very much bottom-left corner). I'd like to see UBI, PR, much heavier taxes on the rich (no reason why marginal rates shouldn't go way north of 50%), stronger worker rights, and ratio caps on employee payments. All Green policies in recent years, but Labour has only taken on some of them — and watered down others. (Its tax tiers in 2017 were less progressive than the Lib Dem ones(!), a point McDonnell batted away with excuses about electability — so god knows what happened with 2019's policy free-for-all.)

In short, I want a fairer society where more people have a say. Corbyn got a lot right, but was badly wrong with politics itself, his own ideology as trump card (not least whipping Labour against SNP motions, even if they were precisely what we needed), and an inability to work with other parties for the common good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2020, 10:29:27 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2020, 09:37:02 AM
Although various sources (including Remainiacs) have suggested that's not actually the case when you read through the report. Note: I have not read the report, but I intend to. (Their reading was more that Labour has a big problem with factionalism, and that attempting to state 'Blairites' were to blame for antisemitism when Corbyn and his people had control of basically every facet of the party is a massive stretch, even going by all the shit in that report.)

It's undeniable that McNicoll sat on the Chakrabarti Report for a year and literally no action was taken on it until he was replaced by Formby. By that stage, the hysteria war was out of control, and presenting even undisputable facts about the tiny extent of the problem was just met with howls of outrage that the party was "in denial".

There were many, many reports from party workers on the ground the day after the 2017 election complaining that they'd had no resources for campaigning in winnable marginals whilst nearby safe seats had money and staff poured into them.

A charitable reading, before the leaked report, was that this was down to incompetence but the report has centrist/Blairite MPs and staff in their own words explicitly stating that it was intentional and deliberate, with the aim of damaging Corbyn and his allies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2020, 12:44:13 PM
There's a concerted gaslighting effort by many pundits - including the Remainiacs podcast presenters - to downplay and dismiss the contents of the leaked report, but you don't have to have read or understood it to comprehend that it isn't being reported upon in the same way as anecdotal antisemitism accusations were - and considering the report is based on documentary evidence, this seems a bit odd at the very least, as is Starmer's bizarre vow to track down the whistleblower given his profile as a McLibel consultant.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2020, 09:37:02 AMan inability to work with other parties for the common good.

"Corbyn wouldn't work with others" - the assertion that the problems came from only one direction - is doing a bit of heavy lifting there, especially if we're to take your comment about doing the same thing over and over again at face value.  The LibDems' history of claiming they'll work with Labour if X leader would only step aside has been proven a lie time and again, most notably when Gordon Brown called their bluff, and while I have a soft spot for Ed Milliband for standing up for his late father against the Daily Mail's antisemitic attacks, he arguably nixed a Lab/SNP coalition ever happening under Sturgeon, as she took a risk in asking him on live tv, only to get arguably the only unambiguous assertion he ever made thrown in her face.  I'm not saying she'd never form a coalition with Labour, but she's clearly more cautious about the notion than she used to be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2020, 01:50:01 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2020, 12:44:13 PM"Corbyn wouldn't work with others" - the assertion that the problems came from only one direction
Not really. This isn't just about that moment in time, but his ongoing stamping out of any effort to have Labour support electoral reform, and his multiple whipping against amendments during the Brexit debates that came from the SNP. Basically, if it wasn't a Labour idea, it could just fuck right off. And any attempt to change the system to make it more representative wasn't of interest — it had to benefit Labour. This isn't about the Lib Dems. This is about the UK having a shit democracy, and Labour throughout my lifetime being a roadblock to that, with no interest on giving up its occasional shot at power, for a likely scenario where it would lead a coalition.

QuoteThe LibDems' history of claiming they'll work with Labour if X leader would only step aside has been proven a lie time and again, most notably when Gordon Brown called their bluff
Except the numbers weren't there (it would have been a minority government), and even Labour figures at the time said they weren't really interested, and they refused to compromise on basically anything.

I'm just fucking sick of it all. We live in a democratic environment that's barely moved on in hundreds of years. We talk of "hung parliaments", which other countries simply call "parliaments" because that's what they are. Labour perpetuates this — it enables this state of being. Of course, the Tories do as well, but they are arseholes, and that will always be the case. Labour could and should be better. In this area, it isn't. And the reason it isn't is because it refuses the notion that anyone other than it should rule — and rule alone.

(And when people vote for any other party, they are slammed into the ground, even when they note that they would have backed Labour had Labour moved on electoral reform, but chose not to. Neatly, I've also been harassed by Corbyn followers for criticising him, and then branded a Tory for voting Green. Because, yeah, lots of overlap between Green and Tory policy. Again: Labour must be better — all wings.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 06 May, 2020, 06:04:55 PM
I have to be honest, I've been a quiet and despondent Labour member for a number of years now.  When Milliband folded and Corbyn was put up as a 'joke' candidate I have to admit to supporting him.  Not as a joke but rather because he was the best option on the table at the time.  There was a brief moment when he first took the reins that I thought we might see something positive moving forward.  It definitely did not last.

When Owen Smith decided to stand against him when the PLP decided to have a go at toppling him it was clear that there was a gulf between the party and the PLP, that Corbyn was getting nowhere fast and was doing more harm than good.  That said, Owen Smith was not much better (and I say this in spite of his being our local MP).

The 'antisemitism crisis' was a strange beast though.  You had a mixture of incredibly dated, highly edited video snippets and twitter threads / Facebook posts, selectively quoted articles and misrepresented pictures.  His position on Israeli treatment of Palestinians was often presented as something other than it was although quite often he didn't leave his opponents with much work to do.  The groundswell of antisemitism in the party seems quite hard to pin down despite the coverage given to it.

The last year or so though Corbyn has gone from bad to worse.  Leaving aside the ammo he kept giving his critics, his refusal to engage constructively and his inability to bring May to task despite it being such an insanely easy task for all she was doing, his refusal to call out the referendum campaign for what it really was has to be the most galling offence.  Especially when he kept banging on, a la May, about "hearing what the people have said and get Brexit done ..."  It's taken a lot to keep my membership going.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 May, 2020, 06:59:33 PM
I've asked this before so apologies if I missed the answer, but what was the end goal of "bring May to task"?  In tangible terms, I mean?  What would constitute "winning"?
I'm just curious what this might have involved apart from getting her to call an election or resign or something.

Anyway, all this is moot, as I for one can't wait to see what the dream team of Starmer and Raynor do with their 20 point lead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 May, 2020, 10:04:12 AM
So I'm a bit confused by "Obamagate", but the jist of it appears to be Intelligence services tried to stop Russia's illegal attempts to help Trump get elected, so Obama himself was therefore interfering in the election? A bit like the Joker saying that Batman is the true villain becaue he was stopping me rob banks and we all hate banks, right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 May, 2020, 12:03:22 AM
Obamagate is nothing more than a PR intervention to deflect attention from the administration's catastrophic failures. Doubleplusbad.



Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 May, 2020, 06:04:55 PM
I have to be honest, I've been a quiet and despondent Labour member for a number of years now.
I feel your pain.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2020, 09:37:02 AM
Labour has a big problem with factionalism
Enlarged for truth: When I was a student, newly bathed in the white-hot fire of socialist enlightenment, many political discourses were conducted in the snug of the Ladywell Tavern in Dundee, a tiny space, smaller than my current bedroom. I recall one occasion that brought home the farce of it - a table of SWP and a table of Militant (about 8 people tops, knees almost touching, the room was packed that night) almost ready to come to blows over who was the biggest traitor to the cause. It was a sobering lesson, which I have subsequently seen played out over three decades.

You can't blame disillusioned believers for embracing Corbyn after seeing two "successful" leaders who'd made the trade off between principles and power and had betrayed so much of what labour supporters believed in. When Corbyn was a candidate (and subsequently leader), his opponents' only arguments seemed to be that of course he was right, but realistically we have to be more Tory to get into power, which is a futile argument that I'll always reject.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 May, 2020, 03:52:20 PM
It's weird but I've actually walked away from more arguments with "centrists" than I ever have with neolibs or commies, as when cornered, centrists just retreat into the position that everyone else is being abusive/unreasonable, or just doesn't understand why they're wrong.  It's hard to escape the notion that British centrism isn't actually a diaspora of political atheists practicing dialectics anymore, and is in fact an entrenched political faction all its own which preaches endorsement of a lost era of rational discourse - if you want to be glib, I guess you could mock its adherents for harking ever-backwards to its golden age where centrism succeeded and would have been great if only it had time to finish its work because it just wasn't implemented properly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: blackmocco on 17 May, 2020, 06:26:16 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 May, 2020, 10:04:12 AM
So I'm a bit confused by "Obamagate", but the jist of it appears to be Intelligence services tried to stop Russia's illegal attempts to help Trump get elected, so Obama himself was therefore interfering in the election? A bit like the Joker saying that Batman is the true villain becaue he was stopping me rob banks and we all hate banks, right?

Confusion is the idea. Essentially Flynn was being investigated before anyone ever even got elected because he's a slimy bag of shit but naturally, they're trying to twist it into "Obama was spying on my people to sabotage my presidency!" Like it needs any fucking help at this point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 May, 2020, 01:31:56 PM
Dear EU and EFTA citizens: fuck you!

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/it-just-got-more-difficult-for-europeans-to-become-british-citizens/

Excellently, this potentially fucks up Mrs IP's application, which after six months was bumped because they couldn't make a decision in time. YAY UK. (Mrs IP in bits today, and asking why "we are even staying in this fucking country — it only ever makes things harder, not easier". Yeah.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 May, 2020, 05:10:21 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 18 May, 2020, 01:31:56 PM
Dear EU and EFTA citizens: fuck you!

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/it-just-got-more-difficult-for-europeans-to-become-british-citizens/

Excellently, this potentially fucks up Mrs IP's application, which after six months was bumped because they couldn't make a decision in time. YAY UK. (Mrs IP in bits today, and asking why "we are even staying in this fucking country — it only ever makes things harder, not easier". Yeah.)

On the positive side, though, with the way the UK has gone over the last few years, very few of us WANT to be UK citizens.  And I speak as a half-Brit who has the option.

Facetiousness aside, though, that's very saddening and I hope Mrs IP can get her citizenship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 May, 2020, 06:21:09 PM
Really sorry to hear that, IP.

I hate Brexit, still. I hate it's divisiveness. I hate the notion that there's something British worth protecting if it means isolationism and the likes of Rees-Mogg getting paid to take cat naps in parliament. I love the European Court of Human Rights. I think Nigel Farage should be pushed off the White Cliffs of Dover into an enormous glass of beer (in which he drowns). And Dominic Cummings should be given herd immunity by having a herd of angry cows stamp him to death.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 18 May, 2020, 07:44:06 PM
JayzusB.Christ: Mrs IP doesn't necessarily want to be a British citizen. But given the tentative nature of SS, she wants something with at least a degree of permanence, and that can't be so easily dicked around with. Citizenship can be revoked and withdrawn, but not nearly so easily as ILR. Also, she wants to be able to vote — and not for the Tories.

And, yeah, Funt Solo, I don't know what this country stands for anymore. Or, rather, I do — and I really don't like it. I like my home. I like the area where I live. I like my friends and that my kid is having a much better time at school than I ever did, surrounded by bullying little shits. But Mrs IP crying again today, asking why we're still here, makes me wonder why. And, of course, then mini-IP gets upset because she overhears, understands only part of what's being said, and doesn't want to be forced away from her friends.

All of this because the Home Office are a bunch of shits. So, so angry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 May, 2020, 10:29:57 AM
So it turns out that Cummings spent the duration of his Covid-19 experience up in Durham with family rather than self-isolating at home.  Being somewhat short of the readies, it turns out that he had to have childcare provided at the family home up in Durham.

Apparently "sources close to Cummings" have dismissed the revelations as "fake news" (which now, more than ever, appears to be extended to mean "news that is embarrassing and we'd rather not talk about").  I'd forgotten about the revelation back in November that Labour was seeking answers to questions about his links to Russian business, political groups and intelligence services.

Be interesting to see what dead cat Johnson et al come up with to distract from this story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 May, 2020, 11:56:40 AM
I'm sure we'll hear later how the leader of the opposition once — and I can't believe I'm saying this — didn't leave a big enough tip at a restaurant. He should have left 10%, but left 9%, thereby depriving WORKING CLASS SERVING STAFF of £1.57, the elitist posho bastard. Story continued on pages 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10–12, 15–26, and all next week, FOR SOME REASON.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 May, 2020, 04:53:51 PM
You reap what you sow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 23 May, 2020, 05:42:33 PM
I'd love to see Cummings go...we'll see.

(And, if he does, let's face it, he'll rise again in another role in a few months time, anyway).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 May, 2020, 08:17:20 PM
For those of you keeping score on the Cummings thing: after it being widely reported that he was self-isolating in London, it turns out he drove 260 miles with ihis wife and child to Durham because they were worried that no one would care for their child if they both fell ill, so wanted Cummings' elderly parents to look after the kid.

Then they said it wasn't Cummings' parents, it was his sister.

Then they said that it was still his sister, but no childcare was involved.

And they said Cummings wasn't spoken to at the Durham property by the police, but the police say he was.

And now it looks like he was barrelling up and down the country repeatedly, having a merry old time.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/23/new-witnesses-cast-doubt-on-dominic-cummingss-lockdown-claims?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR3rEep_MkB5fo-9Er7u06ixsw-6YpJ4obltZctSnRjF7qlrsc1lF75im3U (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/23/new-witnesses-cast-doubt-on-dominic-cummingss-lockdown-claims?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR3rEep_MkB5fo-9Er7u06ixsw-6YpJ4obltZctSnRjF7qlrsc1lF75im3U)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 May, 2020, 09:18:12 PM
Quote from: karlos on 23 May, 2020, 05:42:33 PM

(And, if he does, let's face it, he'll rise again in another role in a few months time, anyway).

He really is a 'floater' isn't he?  Doesn't matter how many times you flush.

:|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 23 May, 2020, 09:22:13 PM
Quote from: karlos on 23 May, 2020, 05:42:33 PM
I'd love to see Cummings go...we'll see.

(And, if he does, let's face it, he'll rise again in another role in a few months time, anyway).

You mean, like this?

https://tenor.com/view/dracula-rising-coffin-gif-10936275



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 24 May, 2020, 04:59:57 PM
quick predictions before they wheel out Boris at 5...

Noble Dom has resigned, despite acting reasonably and legally.  He's been pushed out by an elitist media, who hate that the government is doing so well.  It's time to get back to the job of Getting Covid Done, so lets all put is behind us, and ignore the lies we told, and that we accused the police of lying.  Stay Alert, but only to the things we deem important.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 May, 2020, 06:08:55 PM
You gave them too much credit MP...

It was sort of incredible, the switcheroo: starting with "I take this very seriously and there can be no impression that there is one rule for you and a different one for us"..... then immediately volte face and off the hook - Classic Dom....


You'd hope the press had another card to play, some evidence of the things that have been denied, that they are going to play in tomorrow's papers... you'd hope.

Quote from: Modern Panther on 24 May, 2020, 04:59:57 PM
quick predictions before they wheel out Boris at 5...

Noble Dom has resigned, despite acting reasonably and legally.  He's been pushed out by an elitist media, who hate that the government is doing so well.  It's time to get back to the job of Getting Covid Done, so lets all put is behind us, and ignore the lies we told, and that we accused the police of lying.  Stay Alert, but only to the things we deem important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 May, 2020, 07:35:09 PM
Who would have thought that five years of normalising the concept of the Tories escaping any meaningful consequences for their actions would have resulted in their escaping any meaningful consequences for their actions?  How could anyone have seen this coming?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 May, 2020, 09:36:19 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/cEfUI2S.png)

Aggressive ferret-man
takes over England
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 25 May, 2020, 02:22:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/m3H03Pt.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 May, 2020, 02:57:08 AM
A welcome twist on clapping for the NHS. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5JnPfRexDU)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2020, 08:50:33 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 May, 2020, 02:57:08 AM
A welcome twist on clapping for the NHS. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5JnPfRexDU)

It's the closest he'll get to being penalised. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 May, 2020, 03:21:02 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 24 May, 2020, 09:36:19 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/cEfUI2S.png)

Aggressive ferret-man
takes over England

That is a gross insult to mustelids everywhere, especially when he more closely resembles a naked mole-rat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 May, 2020, 03:33:27 PM
Truth.

(https://i.imgur.com/6hGuNSC.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moly on 25 May, 2020, 04:17:15 PM
Bloody hell Leo vardaker is at it now, obviously one rule for them and another for the rest of us
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 May, 2020, 05:19:53 PM
Don't make me defend Varadkar again, please, I hate doing it,  but he really was doing precisely what the Phase 1 relaxation measures allow - to the letter. Long lenses and curtain-twitching, it's no good for anyone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2020, 08:16:52 PM
I was just listening to the reaction to Cummings this morning, by some poor guy who couldn't see his mother before she died. Due to the rules, of course, that our Dominic knew full well he could break with impunity.  Now I'm hearing sympathy for the latter from members of the public on Sky News.

Reminds me of Private Eye from Marshal Law, smugly musing on how he has pissed on everybody and told them it was raining. 

EDIT - I see the Covid 19 thread has used the exact same phrase.  If ever there was evidence of 'one law for them..', this is it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 25 May, 2020, 09:21:50 PM
Genuine expression, (I checked)...

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SgfuT1ySd5s/XswoKrwUf2I/AAAAAAAABNQ/hYI6SiPTqhErhY-PgoijQDo5pti8M5M7wCPcBGAYYCw/s1600/Barney%2BCastle%2B1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2020, 10:05:05 PM
Perfect!

I like the look of that book too; think it'll be my next Kindle app purchase
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 May, 2020, 09:55:59 AM
Cummings now apparently been caught out amending his blog, on the day after he returned from his "Test Drive", to make mention of Coronavirus / SARs "fears."

But, that'll be the fault of the Press as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 26 May, 2020, 10:51:24 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 25 May, 2020, 10:05:05 PM
Perfect!

I like the look of that book too; think it'll be my next Kindle app purchase

I used to have a copy of Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable and it was a fantastic read. Might need to hunt down a new edition.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 08:34:50 AM
Trump's latest hissy-fit row is against Twitter.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 27 May, 2020, 09:09:17 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 08:34:50 AM
Trump's latest hissy-fit row is against Twitter.   :o

Perhaps now Twitter will finally ban him.  ::)

It will have only taken several years of him repeatedly breaking their own rules of conduct.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 27 May, 2020, 12:31:12 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 May, 2020, 09:09:17 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 08:34:50 AM
Trump's latest hissy-fit row is against Twitter.   :o

Perhaps now Twitter will finally ban him.  ::)

It will have only taken several years of him repeatedly breaking their own rules of conduct.

I wouldn't like to be in Twitter's shoes - the most powerful person in the world, a megalomaniac and now having a bone to pick with you (and only too willing to use Executive Privilege to abuse that power).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 12:39:34 PM
His grubby little child's mind must be spinning furiously right now - he's having to use Twitter to attack Twitter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 27 May, 2020, 12:52:03 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 12:39:34 PM
His grubby little child's mind must be spinning furiously right now - he's having to use Twitter to attack Twitter.

What a thought. Imagine the thought process and the sheer insecurities that drive the little turd bucket.

He is pushing the Shadow ban conspiracy, and I'd love it to be true, because then I wouldn't have to read his shite, and that of the rest of the right-wing grifters that seem to live on Twitter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2020, 03:18:53 PM
You have to wonder about Americans.  They forced Nixon out,  impeached Clinton, killed Lincoln, Garfield,  McKinley and Kennedy,  even took a pop at Roosevelt and Reagan, but this barely ambulatory effluvia stumbles on, unmolested.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 04:44:36 PM
Sometimes I wonder whether Americans are close to North Korean in terms of indoctrination.  There seems to be this idea that everyone in the world wants to be like them.  Unaffordable healthcare; school shootings; constant war; institutionalised racism; policies decided by people who don't believe in dinosaurs; a petulant baby as a president: no thanks.

That said, it should be remembered that the majority of Americans voted against Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 May, 2020, 05:15:34 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 May, 2020, 04:44:36 PM
That said, it should be remembered that the majority of Americans voted against Trump.

That's SO important!

I live in Washington state, which is true blue (that's Democrat). In effect that means that the big cities (like Seattle) are more left-leaning and the countryside is more right-leaning, but there are fewer of them.

Our state governor, Jay Inslee, calls a lot of the shots (which has been good for us during the pandemic). It's like we're a little mini-country. Like Washington (State) is to the USA what Scotland is to the UK. Sort of thing.

We still have bastards around - don't get me wrong. There's evil people that stand outside the abortion clinic accusing patients and doctors of murder. There are people who use derogatory names for latinx folk. People who call Native Americans dirty alcoholics. But there's more people that don't.

If all I knew of the US was what I saw on the news (which is mostly Trump being a knob) I'd never live here in a million years.

But would I live in the UK? Unaffordable housing; dreams of Empire; institutionalized racism; constant war fueled by its own arms sales; policies decided by people who believe in herd immunity; a spoilt bully as a prime minister, a seneschal who tests his eyesight by going driving, a country-wide social caste system, state-driven belief in an ancient sky-god cult from the Middle East, a hereditary monarchy that effectively perpetuates a state of serfdom...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 27 May, 2020, 05:55:05 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 May, 2020, 05:15:34 PM
But would I live in the UK? Unaffordable housing; dreams of Empire; institutionalized racism; constant war fueled by its own arms sales; policies decided by people who believe in herd immunity; a spoilt bully as a prime minister, a seneschal who tests his eyesight by going driving, a country-wide social caste system, state-driven belief in an ancient sky-god cult from the Middle East, a hereditary monarchy that effectively perpetuates a state of serfdom...

2000AD and the NHS.

We win  ;)

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2020, 05:56:35 PM
I think this is almost a universal truth, States and their people are different things. So many of my favourite creatives, intellectuals, entertainers, comedians and commentators are Americans; all the Americans I know personally are eloquent and informed, those I met in passing in the States generous and helpful. Historically the US set a standard for secular republican governance, funded the Irish independence movement and  bankrolled our nascent state, saved us from Hitler and brokered a genuinely inconceivable peace on our island. 

In many ways the US's words and actions as a state since 2001, even including the Obama years, have broken my heart precisely because they don't seem to reflect what I know of Americans.  And Trump is the steaming shit on top of that pile of dissonance.

As for your UK strawman yeah,  pretty much that.   ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 May, 2020, 06:24:51 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 27 May, 2020, 05:55:05 PM
2000AD and the NHS.

We win  ;)

Gah! You DO win. (I try to make myself feel better about the health care debacle over here in the US by leaning on cheaper house and petrol prices, but it's weak sauce consolation placed next to a national healthcare system. There is no way of arguing the 2000AD point - it's the galaxy's greatest comic.)

---

The idea that Trump is the worst thing since sliced bread (and he is demonstrably just an incredibly horrific individual held up by a mean-spirited base) is somewhat diminished if you watch the documentary series The Vietnam War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vietnam_War_(TV_series)).

It's difficult to pinpoint the worst of the behavior, but there you had an absolutely cynical sequence of presidents who knew full well they were doing the wrong thing, but kept doing it in order to remain in power. And the wrong thing just happened to include things like deliberately fire-bombing civilians and shooting unarmed college students: and then defending those actions.

Which only brings us back to Tordelback's point that "states and their people are different things" (but with a side dish of it has ever been this way).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2020, 06:44:32 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 May, 2020, 06:24:51 PM


The idea that Trump is the worst thing since sliced bread (and he is demonstrably just an incredibly horrific individual held up by a mean-spirited base) is somewhat diminished if you watch the documentary series The Vietnam War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vietnam_War_(TV_series)).

Oh hey,  I'm under no illusions about US foreign policy throughout its history (as a teen I suckled at the teat of Chomsky), and how it has treated its own people, but in the 21st C the facade of its aspiration to global freedom and international betterment, that even in its cynical superficiality served as a kind of standard that base actions could be judged against, just fell away.

Torture was okay,  assassination was a valid strategy, blatant lying to create cassus belli was fine, wars of religion were back on the table... It had always done these things, everyone knew it, but always with a sense of shame and denial, that it should be better than that.

Now, instead of a republic that was struggling towards noble ideals, but always dragged down by dirty money, deep-rooted oligarchy, dishonest hawks, gun nuts and ignorant zealots, it suddenly seemed to accept that all it was was the sum of those terrible things. And that that was fine.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 May, 2020, 10:29:19 PM
That's really an interesting point. Like they've stopped pretending.

---

In the news today, Trumpet responds to Twitter labeling his bullshit as bullshit by threatening to shut them down. Sometimes the idea of free speech in the U.S. means the freedom to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. (Or "drink bleach" at a crowded press conference.) And, apparently, also the freedom to threaten to shut down the media's right to free speech.

---

Just in case anyone forgot about it - I feel it's my duty to remind you all that Dominic Cummings told everyone the other day that his trip to a scenic beauty spot on his wife's birthday, in which they sat on a riverbank in the glorious sunshine, was just a test drive to see if his headache and temporary blindness were getting any better. And then the prime minister told everyone that was fine and it was time to move on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 May, 2020, 07:10:15 AM
Apparently Cummings isn't trending on Twitter because his name triggers the anti-porn filters (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/27/anti-porn-filters-stop-dominic-cummings-trending-on-twitter)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 11:45:03 AM
Mrs IP now so upset at the fuckwits running this country that she's going offline for the foreseeable. Her final tweet, directed at me, was "we have to move". Somewhat related, we just instructed an immigration lawyer to explore how the latest bit of goalpost shifting will affect the citizenship application that's already cost us well into four figures, and this will add another £360. Fun times.

(Edit: And sorry for lumping this here, but I need to vent a bit, and this is basically the only forum I post on these days.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 May, 2020, 12:06:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 11:45:03 AM
Mrs IP now so upset at the fuckwits running this country that she's going offline for the foreseeable. Her final tweet, directed at me, was "we have to move". Somewhat related, we just instructed an immigration lawyer to explore how the latest bit of goalpost shifting will affect the citizenship application that's already cost us well into four figures, and this will add another £360. Fun times.

(Edit: And sorry for lumping this here, but I need to vent a bit, and this is basically the only forum I post on these days.)

Hope everything can be resolved for you as swiftly, and with as little hassle as possible, IndigoPrime. Awful situation to be in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 May, 2020, 12:50:27 PM
Quote from: Rately on 28 May, 2020, 12:06:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 11:45:03 AM
Mrs IP now so upset at the fuckwits running this country that she's going offline for the foreseeable. Her final tweet, directed at me, was "we have to move". Somewhat related, we just instructed an immigration lawyer to explore how the latest bit of goalpost shifting will affect the citizenship application that's already cost us well into four figures, and this will add another £360. Fun times.

(Edit: And sorry for lumping this here, but I need to vent a bit, and this is basically the only forum I post on these days.)

Hope everything can be resolved for you as swiftly, and with as little hassle as possible, IndigoPrime. Awful situation to be in.

I feel you totally.  My partner and I re-opened discussions about moving to NZ last night. A few minutes later, one of my NZ ex-pat friends said he's so glad he still has his NZ passport, as he's getting the hell out of here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 12:59:00 PM
Sorry, Funt, bit of a sweeping and unfair generalisation about Americans from me. Like Tordels says, the vast amount of Americans I've met are clever, open-minded and decent - I suppose the way news works is that we only hear about the bad guys (particularly the bad guy-in-chief).

I suppose what irks me is the arrogant side of national pride in general. Like when George W claimed that his enemies-du-jour 'hate us for our freedom' - I seriously doubt it was jealousy that drove the terrorist attacks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 01:47:08 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 28 May, 2020, 12:50:27 PMMy partner and I re-opened discussions about moving to NZ last night.
I suspect our discussions will shift quite rapidly now from being flights of fancy to genuine plans to potentially put in motion. Our problem is where to go. Mrs IP is keen on Scotland, but that would be a massive gamble on several levels (whether indy2>EEA happens; negative impact in the meantime), and yet beneficial in others (language; familiarity; proximity to Iceland). Iceland's likely a no-no (climate; lack of opportunities). We don't have a support network anywhere else, and so would have to start from scratch in other places (which, IIRC, are in current order of preference Netherlands==Spain/Sweden==Denmark/Ireland).

I'm just sick of a government that doesn't give a shit, and that is routinely anti-migrant. Also, from a purely selfish standpoint, I'm sick of lobbing thousands of pounds at immigration stuff that shouldn't even be an issue. But, hey, they're coming over here to steal our jobs, and so moving the goalposts every so often without bothering to inform anyone is a perfectly viable and sensible thing to do.

As for Americans, there's a guy called Evan Edinger on YouTube who I quite like watching. Often, he does comedic comparison videos, but he does also delve into why the USA acts like it does. A lot of it comes down to de-facto indoctrination — all those essays about why one should love the flag, and why America is best. He recently had a story about a teacher being reprimanded for showing her class what other countries think of the USA because — and this is horrifying — it would "make the children love their country less". We have the same in some areas of British education, notably in the archaic and indefensible mandated daily act of worship; and our notion of the country's history is distinctly warped. But at least we're not being hit at childhood to the same level — although that might now only be a matter of time, given the current lot in charge.

EDIT: I'm reminded reading back the above on the British values thing mini-IP learned at school and that Mrs IP had to swallow for her Life in the UK test. They were actually really good values. I only wish they were true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 03:09:48 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 12:59:00 PM
Sorry, Funt, bit of a sweeping and unfair generalisation about Americans from me. Like Tordels says, the vast amount of Americans I've met are clever, open-minded and decent - I suppose the way news works is that we only hear about the bad guys (particularly the bad guy-in-chief).

I suppose what irks me is the arrogant side of national pride in general. Like when George W claimed that his enemies-du-jour 'hate us for our freedom' - I seriously doubt it was jealousy that drove the terrorist attacks.

No worries from me, JB - before I moved here (from Scotland) I was far less able to see what a mixed bag this place is. And I only live in one small corner, and it's a left-leaning corner. Plus, like you, I hate the flag-waving bullshit and the idea that it's "the best country in the world". Posturing tribalism.

---

My Salute to the Flag story: every morning at school it's the law here that we carry out a flag ceremony. The idea is that everyone stands up, places their hand on their heart, faces the flag (which is displayed prominently in every classroom in the country) and recites The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, which goes like this: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

So far, so North Korea, right?

But now the waters muddy. This thing was invented in 1892, then adopted by the government in 1942. Interestingly, for a secular nation, the words "under God" only got added in later, in 1954. (As I lead my students in the pledge each morning, because it's a legal requirement that I do so, I somehow always get terribly confused just after the word "nation" but then recover my senses just in time for "indivisible". I just can't bring myself to bow quite that low.)

Now how about students who don't want to play? Well, this has been tested at the Supreme Court under  Freedom of Speech (the first amendment). See, that freedom also includes the freedom not to speak. Or, even, not to stand up (because that could signify assent). So students are free to ignore the flag ceremony in whole or in part. But, it's the law that the ceremony must be held, and (because freedom of speech works in both directions), students who don't want to take part are not allowed to disrupt the ceremony.

So, this is where my personal views start to conflict with my desire for clean classroom management. I tried the version where I told the students "It's your right not to participate, but you also need to sit nice while the ceremony happens", and that results in a shit-show. So, I've changed my approach: now I just pretend (like I expect a lot of people are pretending) that my views on the ceremony are set in stone, and the whole thing goes off without a hitch. The quiet ones and sitters are left alone, most people take part and I get to quietly and gently reprimand anyone who decides it would be a good time to get some work done or go for a drink of water.

tl;dr - the US sometimes reminds me of North Korea, but there's more food.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 03:28:25 PM
To my mind, the option for people to not take part isn't always helpful anyway. I remember our daily act of worship at school, where a few kids would be ushered out before out teachers would force us into some fucking awful bout of piano and singing in praise of Jesus. They were the odd ones. That wasn't great for them. I'm trying VERY hard to be pragmatic with mini-IP and her school is fairly soft touch on this stuff. But even so, her head's being filled full of Christian teachings as an 'accurate thing that definitely happened' rather than historically dubious retellings of stories that have barely more confirmed accuracy beyond common myths from anywhere else in history.

I think a flag ceremony would just break me, even if the prospect of home schooling isn't terribly appealing, for all manner of reasons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 03:37:51 PM
I remember (with some dismay) all the Bible-thumping from my schooling in the 70s and 80s up in the Highlands. They forced me at one point to win a Bible through my writing, so in protest I burned it.

So, in the US: the negative is the flag ceremony (although you can choose your own level of quiet opting out). On the positive side we don't have religious indoctrination in schools here due to the "separation of church and state" thing built into the US constitution. All the mad church stuff gets shoe-horned into kids heads outside of school.

My daughter has some friends at school who, on hearing that she wasn't a believer (which, by the way, is entirely her choice), commiserated with her about their fact that she would be going to hell. I quite liked her response: "Probably not."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 03:59:19 PM
I have a friend whose kids went to a fairly well-to-do school. One of his sons came home in floods of tears, because he'd been informed by a teacher that "daddy was going to hell". I'm told that a very interesting parent/teacher meeting followed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 04:12:46 PM
Head scratching stuff!  In my ignorance I thought the Pledge of Allegiance had stopped some time back, precisely because it had the whole God bit and public schools were aggressively secular (shows what getting your educational info from The Simpsons does).

We too endured a daily prayer fest in school in RoI, as I imagine did every kid in Ireland my age be they Catholic, Protestant, Jew or Dissenter, but I've been lucky enough to send my kids to Educate Together schools (no religious instruction, except in the sense of learning about all religions) and so the very concept has faded into some sort of dusty Tom Brown's Schooldays archive in my noggin. At least here a daily act of worship is imposed by religious patrons (the Churches still own and subvent most of the schools) and bootlicking parents, not mandated by the state. 

However, the reality of funding a school which draws solely from State coffers, outside of the supports of a parish or minority religion, has proved sobering, as has the grassroots opposition to their siting. My son is gong into the third year of a new Educate Together secondary school, and they still haven't even got a temporary site yet (the norm would be portacabins in a carpark), they're still squatting in the as-yet unfilled spare classrooms of two other new startup schools of a more traditonal bent. Makes you wonder, as it is no doubt intended to do, whether we should have just (as we say here) taken the soup. (The soup in this instance being bunsen burners).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 04:51:59 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 03:09:48 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 12:59:00 PM
Sorry, Funt, bit of a sweeping and unfair generalisation about Americans from me. Like Tordels says, the vast amount of Americans I've met are clever, open-minded and decent - I suppose the way news works is that we only hear about the bad guys (particularly the bad guy-in-chief).

I suppose what irks me is the arrogant side of national pride in general. Like when George W claimed that his enemies-du-jour 'hate us for our freedom' - I seriously doubt it was jealousy that drove the terrorist attacks.

No worries from me, JB - before I moved here (from Scotland) I was far less able to see what a mixed bag this place is. And I only live in one small corner, and it's a left-leaning corner. Plus, like you, I hate the flag-waving bullshit and the idea that it's "the best country in the world". Posturing tribalism.
---

Cheers Funt, glad I didn't cause offence.  I do find the ceremony you describe fairly chilling - I'd heard a while ago it's a relatively recent introduction into schools but had shut the whole thing out of my mind.

I suppose, like Tordelback describes, I grew up when schools were riddled with Christian Brothers (surely the most wretched social club there is) and nuns, and the bullshit rituals feel normal when you don't have a lens through which to view their weirdness .

Though very few locals were impressed when a nun advised a teenage girl I knew not to talk to a Protestant schoolmate (a close friend of the first girl, and obviously in a minority in that school).

My primary school principal, by the way, was an unmarried ex-Christian Brother and a violent psychopath - most teachers hadn't quite adjusted to the corporal punishment ban, but this prick smashed heads off radiators for talking in class. I heard he was eventually given a thorough hiding by local parents and I'm afraid, for all my pacifist tendencies, I was pleased to hear it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 May, 2020, 05:03:50 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 03:28:25 PM
I'm trying VERY hard to be pragmatic with mini-IP and her school is fairly soft touch on this stuff. But even so, her head's being filled full of Christian teachings as an 'accurate thing that definitely happened' rather than historically dubious retellings of stories that have barely more confirmed accuracy beyond common myths from anywhere else in history.


This is the bit that drives me completely insane, and this as one of the 'middle eastern sky god cultists', that the Bible is viewed as an accurate and detailed history.  No!

I mean, leaving aside the fact that there are sections that are openly declared as works of poetry, fiction or other literary forms, even the accuracy of the 'historical' sections is pretty patchy. 

[Okay, insanely patchy but please bear with me.  If I tried this on the Guardian website I would be stoned.  At least here you guys just pat me on the head, smile benignly and move the conversation on ...]

As for the old 'act of collective worship' in schools.  The guidelines and expectations are now so mind-boggling that it is a wonder that even lip service is paid to it.  Actually, outside of inspections it quite often isn't but that's another story.

Now it is supposed to be 'broadly but not exclusively Christian'  :o.  It is supposed to inspire 'awe and wonder'   :-*.  There is supposed to be deep and meaningful reflection  :-\.

To be honest, more often than not there is more concern with evidence that it is happening involving all sorts of bizarre and tortuous jobs for teachers or the more amenable members of a class.

I do remember upsetting one of our old heads suggesting that the daily collective act of worship would be fairly straightforward since we were always worshipping the school Rugby team.  He wasn't totally convinced.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:01:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 03:28:25 PM
To my mind, the option for people to not take part isn't always helpful anyway. I remember our daily act of worship at school, where a few kids would be ushered out before out teachers would force us into some fucking awful bout of piano and singing in praise of Jesus. They were the odd ones. That wasn't great for them. I'm trying VERY hard to be pragmatic with mini-IP and her school is fairly soft touch on this stuff. But even so, her head's being filled full of Christian teachings as an 'accurate thing that definitely happened' rather than historically dubious retellings of stories that have barely more confirmed accuracy beyond common myths from anywhere else in history.

I went through it all at school, too, but I'm quite proud of the fact that I'm familiar with the stories and characters from the bible. I know people who are equally proud of their atheism, but sadly it's often coupled with ignorance of the very thing they don't believe in. I'm less worried about indoctrination at school than I am about ignorance.

I think being told the stories from the bible is as important as being read fairy tales and Aesop's fables as a child. I don't say that to belittle Christian or other religious belief, either. Stories are important, whether they're true or not.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 06:13:08 PM
I have thought about my bible-burning escapade, that I'd have learned more if I'd read it. Years later, as an adult, I chose to read Crumb's Illustrated Book of Genesis, which was a bit of an eye opener. For knowledge I lean on masters such as Hitchens and his superlative "god is not Great" (capitalization following the cover).

I'm wary of the idea that a committed Christian can dismiss those parts of the Bible that trouble them by saying "oh well, that part is simply metaphor, my child - didn't you know?", whilst still touting the parts they want me to believe as literal. Having one's cake and eating it, that is.

Anyway - everyone's being really nice just now so I should probably back off and leave those better equipped (Hitchens) to make my points for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 06:30:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:01:14 PM...I'm quite proud of the fact that I'm familiar with the stories and characters from the bible. I know people who are equally proud of their atheism, but sadly it's often coupled with ignorance of the very thing they don't believe in.

Much the same thoughts here (although you don't have to know about a thing to justifying not believing in a thing - lack of belief is a priori). Having gone to all the bother of keeping my kids out of the grasp of religious orders, I promptly bought them an illustrated Bible and read them stories from it - I drag them to churches wherever we go and quiz them on the meaning of the iconography (although it should be noted I do this with every cave, tomb and fort too).  We also light candles in churches, leave offerings at shrines, apologise to the fairies for trespass, leave mince pies and whiskey for Santa, and observe the equinoxes and the solstices.

I take pride that the spawn of my atheism should be able to identify the Fall of Simon Magus on a High Cross, name the three Hebrews in the fiery furnace, distinguish the evangelists from their animal icons, recognise a palaeolithic tectiform when they see one, and explain how the Lia Fáil works.   

Much of all the human experience and endeavour there has ever been has found lasting expression through the forms of religion, folklore and spiritualism, and to be blind to it is to be ignorant of humanity.

There's also no better instruction in atheism than seeing the wonderful breadth of belief.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:34:28 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 06:13:08 PM
I'm wary of the idea that a committed Christian can dismiss those parts of the Bible that trouble them by saying "oh well, that part is simply metaphor, my child - didn't you know?", whilst still touting the parts they want me to believe as literal. Having one's cake and eating it, that is.

I like to tell them that the bible is not a set of instructions: it's a test. First proper story in the bible tells us three things: firstly, we have free will; secondly, we have knowledge of good and evil; thirdly, our choices have consequences. You're not gonna get into heaven by doing what the bible tells you. You'll get into heaven by distinguishing between the good and the bad, and choosing the good. It's staggering how many religious types haven't spotted this.

(Yeah, I'm sure folk can pull that apart, but I still kind like the idea and I'm sticking with it.)

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:46:24 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 06:30:48 PM
Much of all the human experience and endeavour there has ever been has found lasting expression through the forms of religion, folklore and spiritualism, and to be blind to it is to be ignorant of humanity.

Yup, and yup to the stuff I cut.

QuoteThere's also no better instruction in atheism than seeing the wonderful breadth of belief.

Potentially, it can go the other way: "There must be something in it."


Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 06:53:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:34:28 PM
three things: firstly, we have free will; secondly, we have knowledge of good and evil; thirdly, our choices have consequences.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who disagreed with those. Where I fall off the cart is in attaching those to any holy teachings. To stay with the cart, it's being put before the horse. We know those things as humans, not as humans being taught how to behave by outside forces.

As for good behavior leading to the promise of a better second life - well, there's just no evidence for that at all. So I don't need to argue against it: it's clearly apparent as wishful thinking (in the best light) and a control mechanism (in the worst).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 07:57:55 PM
Given when it was written, though, the Bible is horribly sexist. Today, it deserves to be taught in historical context, but not as truth. And schooling should be strictly secular, not forcing a daily act of worship. FWIW, I've read the New Testament a few times, and so it's not like I'm ignorant to it. I'm also not blocking religion from my kid. But I am trying very hard to gently note these are very old stories, given that her school is inferring they were literal events. (Jesus did not die and come back to life because that is impossible. See also loads of other stuff in there. Believing otherwise is not an act of faith. It's an act of not recognising a massive game of Chinese Whispers, combined with half the Bible being based on older texts, and being very heavily edited for frankly not very altruistic reasons over the years. Heck, even Mary's virginity is almost certainly a basic mistranslation and that is a deeply important thing for some people.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:21:20 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 06:53:09 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:34:28 PM
three things: firstly, we have free will; secondly, we have knowledge of good and evil; thirdly, our choices have consequences.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who disagreed with those. Where I fall off the cart is in attaching those to any holy teachings. To stay with the cart, it's being put before the horse. We know those things as humans, not as humans being taught how to behave by outside forces.

As for good behavior leading to the promise of a better second life - well, there's just no evidence for that at all. So I don't need to argue against it: it's clearly apparent as wishful thinking (in the best light) and a control mechanism (in the worst).

Not simply no evidence, but no possibility of evidence. Any hypothetical entity capable of creating a universe from scratch is also capable to covering up after itself. After all, offering proof of its existence would be an act of coercion, and that rather defeats the point of freedom of choice.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 08:30:13 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get involved, but... Why would a loving creator give us a choice whether to believe or not, when the wrong choice leads to eternal agony?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:36:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 07:57:55 PMAnd schooling should be strictly secular, not forcing a daily act of worship.

I don't really see it as a problem - other people's experiences may differ, but I can't say I've ever met any Christians who are Christian because of school assemblies. People are Christians because they come from practising families or because they had some kind of spiritual awakening or because they were trying to get into a Christian girl's knickers or because (as in the case of one chap who knocked on my door when I was a uni) because it finally got him off heroin.

I hint to my spog that giants and dragons used to really exist, and they ask, "Really?" I reply, "Maybe." They'll work it out the reality of it in time, but in the meantime they can experience a little wonder.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:42:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 08:30:13 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get involved, but... Why would a loving creator give us a choice whether to believe or not, when the wrong choice leads to eternal agony?

Because it's not about the belief, it's about what you do - hence my suggestion that the bible is a test, with a mix of good and bad ideas.

Anne Widdicombe would disagree with my thesis, but she's horrible and is choosing the bad ideas, so to hell with her. Literally, one hopes.

Regards.

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:55:47 PM
Please be advised, I have no formal theological training, so my thoughts may not be a route into Heaven.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 09:13:20 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:36:17 PMI don't really see it as a problem
Again, just my examples from earlier showcase why it is a problem. A child in floods of tears because a teacher said their father was going to hell. My kid having her head muddled with bullshit at the age of five, because the curriculum demands it. And this stuff does stick with people. I know several people who've been messed up by even the British level of religious indoctrination at school — that shit sticks with you. Perhaps it didn't with you — great! — but that's not the case for everyone.

Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:42:38 PMhence my suggestion that the bible is a test, with a mix of good and bad ideas.
That's a nice way to look at it, but it's fundamentally a rulebook, and although the bare basics ("be nice to one another") are good, there is a lot of really abhorrent, nasty shit in the Bible.

I'm in favour of a certain amount of religious studies at school, but as a critical historical/social subject, freed from any sense of accuracy. Because the basic fundamentals of the Bible item from writings many decades after the event. These have subsequently been edited, often for overtly political reasons, a number of times, which in itself is deeply problematic, and needs to be fully addressed in schooling, right from the start. Instead, my kid's being told some bloke came back from the dead, not that it's a story with any number of explanations beyond "sort of a zombie, but a good one".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 09:32:53 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:21:20 PM
Not simply no evidence, but no possibility of evidence.

You can presumably see why I've never bought into it. For me, a lack of evidence suggests the non-existence of an afterlife. I simply can't comprehend why anyone would take a complete lack of evidence to mean the opposite.

And the mystical answer of "it's a test of your free will, and you're failing" is, like, well, it's playground logic, isn't it?

Scrote A: "I have magic powers that can destroy trees!"
Scrote B: "Go on, then: show me."
Scrote A: "I don't want to right now."

I don't see how we get from there to belief that Scrote A has magic powers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 10:44:17 PM
I should also say that I really appreciate the open dialogue on this forum and if I'm being too robust or insistent with my arguments, please let me know. Also feel free to PM me.

I'd much rather try to dial myself back a bit than upset anyone. I've had a boarder tell me they don't come here anymore because of my style and so I'm trying not to be too abrasive: I offered to back off from them completely.

If it was just me shouting in an empty room, I'd hate that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 11:02:54 PM
These seem rather charitable readings of the Fall. The choice that Adam and Eve made wasn't between right and wrong, it was between obedience and disobedience. They didn't have any knowledge of right and wrong / good and evil (the latter apparently including nakedness) until they disobeyed God and ate from the Tree of Knowledge: original sin is disobedience to an omnipotent dictator, benevolent or otherwise, not choosing to commit any act of evil.

In committing this first sin they corrupted themselves and the world and condemned themselves and their descendants to pain and death (until Jesus fixed the death part, if you're of a Christian bent). These were the consequences of not doing what God had ordered, not a conscious informed choice of right and wrong.

So the lesson of Genesis, and most of the Old Testament, is not "do the right thing or suffer the consequences", it's "do what you're told or die". To which I say, piss off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 May, 2020, 10:04:45 AM
Oh, but don't forget: everything wrong with the world is down to Eve; Adam was being good, and so man's suffering is down to women! Women are bad! That's a recurring theme throughout the Bible, bar Mary getting retconned into being a literal virgin rather than just a young girl (as she was originally, with a... suspiciously old Joseph).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 29 May, 2020, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:42:38 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 08:30:13 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get involved, but... Why would a loving creator give us a choice whether to believe or not, when the wrong choice leads to eternal agony?

Because it's not about the belief, it's about what you do - hence my suggestion that the bible is a test, with a mix of good and bad ideas.

Anne Widdicombe would disagree with my thesis, but she's horrible and is choosing the bad ideas, so to hell with her. Literally, one hopes.

Regards.

Robin

Ann Widdecombe the perfect example of someone who thumps the Bible, can quote from it with no bother, but seemingly hasn't taken on-board any of its more basic lessons. As you say, Robin, she picks and chooses to fit her own prejudices and bigotry. Her comments on AIDs recently show the true person.

I'm an atheist, and I'm more Christian than she is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 May, 2020, 10:17:45 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 04:51:59 PM
Cheers Funt, glad I didn't cause offence.  I do find the ceremony you describe fairly chilling - I'd heard a while ago it's a relatively recent introduction into schools but had shut the whole thing out of my mind.


Yeah - always seems really fascist when I get reminded of it (having just watched the Man in the High Castle TV adaptation).

QuoteMy primary school principal, by the way, was an unmarried ex-Christian Brother and a violent psychopath - most teachers hadn't quite adjusted to the corporal punishment ban, but this prick smashed heads off radiators for talking in class. I heard he was eventually given a thorough hiding by local parents and I'm afraid, for all my pacifist tendencies, I was pleased to hear it.


Seems to me that only the most committed pacifists would shed a tear at a child abuser getting a taste of the treatment they mete out...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 May, 2020, 11:04:55 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 May, 2020, 12:59:00 PM
I suppose what irks me is the arrogant side of national pride in general. Like when George W claimed that his enemies-du-jour 'hate us for our freedom' - I seriously doubt it was jealousy that drove the terrorist attacks.


...and nothing to do with proxy wars which had effectively "bombed them back to the stone age".  The single biggest cause of anti-Western terrorism is the resentment caused by Western governments (not the only cause, but if the UK and US didn't gallivant around the world expecting everyone else to capitulate to their demands the world would be a substantially more peaceful place).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 May, 2020, 11:22:07 AM
Just to pick up on comparing the US with an authoritarian dictatorship, their law enforcement regularly gets away with murdering citizens. I've been trying to think of a case of that happening here (Northern Ireland), and I'm not saying it hasn't happened, it probably has, but I can't think of an example off the top of my head, and my google-fu is just bringing up examples of PSNI officers getting murdered. There's certainly no video evidence of it happening. If there was such a video, of say a group of PSNI officers suffocating a cuffed suspect to death (just a random example), I doubt the local media would be trying to give context that justified it (actually the Belfast Telegraph might, for the clicks).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 29 May, 2020, 03:00:19 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 06:30:48 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 06:01:14 PM...I'm quite proud of the fact that I'm familiar with the stories and characters from the bible. I know people who are equally proud of their atheism, but sadly it's often coupled with ignorance of the very thing they don't believe in.

Much the same thoughts here (although you don't have to know about a thing to justifying not believing in a thing - lack of belief is a priori).


To play *hah* devil's advocate for a moment - as an atheist should I learn more about the christian bible because I live in a christian country or the Bhagavata Purana and Qurʼān because those are the two dominant religions in my neighbourhood?




















p.s. as far as learning about religion goes I'm more interested in the wide range of beliefs from prehistory to the present rather than focusing on any one religion, as long as that one religion doesn't try to stop me living my life.  I don't see why I should be restricted from going shopping because somebody else believes, erm, something about sky fairy needing a breather after six days of work or something?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 05:26:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 May, 2020, 09:13:20 PMAgain, just my examples from earlier showcase why it is a problem. A child in floods of tears because a teacher said their father was going to hell.

Good god (ahem) what kind of school is your child at? I mean, I went to a school labelled as a Church school and other half and my mum both went to convent schools, but I don't think they encountered anything like that. Hell, it was a nun who told my mother "not to put her faith in the infallibility of printed matter"!

QuoteAnd this stuff does stick with people. I know several people who've been messed up by even the British level of religious indoctrination at school — that shit sticks with you. Perhaps it didn't with you — great! — but that's not the case for everyone.

It's one of those things I wouldn't be absolutist about ('different folks, different strokes'), but I'm honestly surprised, and saddened, if a school was that damaging.

For my/our limited experience, more than anything their Catholic schools instilled a sense of personal discipline: responsibility, organisation, focus... time-management! You'd get non-religious people wanting their kids at religious schools for that reason. My other half went on a management course once, and the first thing everyone had to do was fill out a questionnaire about attitudes. The course leader looked at her answers, then looked at her and asked, "Religious or military?"

Mind you, she's just told me she once had a statue of St. Edmund full of arrows pointed out to her as an aspiration figure. As a logical child, her first thought was 'but I don't know anyone with arrows', which sounds reminiscent of the old Dave Allen routine.

Her bother, however, manged to get to his teens without knowing what Easter was all about, which deserves some kind of award for resistance.

Quote
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:42:38 PMhence my suggestion that the bible is a test, with a mix of good and bad ideas.
That's a nice way to look at it, but it's fundamentally a rulebook, and although the bare basics ("be nice to one another") are good, there is a lot of really abhorrent, nasty shit in the Bible.

Thanks - the only way I could accept the bible as a guide to life would be by seeing it as a test not a rulebook. Not so much bothered about the nasty shit, as, well, that's the world.

QuoteI'm in favour of a certain amount of religious studies at school, but as a critical historical/social subject, freed from any sense of accuracy. Because the basic fundamentals of the Bible item from writings many decades after the event. These have subsequently been edited, often for overtly political reasons, a number of times, which in itself is deeply problematic, and needs to be fully addressed in schooling, right from the start. Instead, my kid's being told some bloke came back from the dead, not that it's a story with any number of explanations beyond "sort of a zombie, but a good one".

I appreciate how much this bothers you, but unless your offspring is clearly being affected I'd say don't let it get to you - there's already enough to stressed about. I'm far more bothered by advertising and crap on YouTube... though I imagine these are on your bugbear list too.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 06:20:21 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 May, 2020, 09:32:53 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 28 May, 2020, 08:21:20 PM
Not simply no evidence, but no possibility of evidence.

You can presumably see why I've never bought into it. For me, a lack of evidence suggests the non-existence of an afterlife. I simply can't comprehend why anyone would take a complete lack of evidence to mean the opposite.

For me, it's simple fear of death. The prospect of unfeeling, unthinking oblivion is not something I'm happy to accept.

I suppose I also need something that I hope is going to validate my personal sense of morality.

I often joke that the reason I believe in god is the same reason I believe in ghosts, UFOs and the Loch Ness monster: they make the world just that much more interesting. Stephen Fry can cream in his pants listening to Brian Cox blandly waffling on about the wonders of the universe and pretend he's clever... but I get to be a professional scientist and also believe in all sorts of interesting weird shit without any of it affecting my life in away at all... apart from occasionally getting involved in hopeless internet debates.

And then there's the vengeance angle - how many of us are really comfortable with the idea that Trump will almost inevitably go to his grave after a life of callous privilege without being called to account?

QuoteAnd the mystical answer of "it's a test of your free will, and you're failing" is, like, well, it's playground logic, isn't it?

Something else to remember is that it's god who's should be making the judgement here, and then only in the afterlife. Religious leaders can advise, guide, lead by example, offer interpretation and so on, but they should not dictate or impose - that erodes free will.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 06:26:30 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 29 May, 2020, 03:00:19 PM
To play *hah* devil's advocate for a moment - as an atheist should I learn more about the christian bible because I live in a christian country or the Bhagavata Purana and Qurʼān because those are the two dominant religions in my neighbourhood?

If you've got the time, sure, all three. I would, but unfortunately, my reading is dominated by fiction and I've barely dented my Very Short Introduction to... collection and I really need to get around to reading some more Ronald Hutton. I have to hope for an afterlife where I can catch up with all the non-fiction... or fiction... or...

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 May, 2020, 11:02:54 PM
These seem rather charitable readings of the Fall. The choice that Adam and Eve made wasn't between right and wrong, it was between obedience and disobedience. They didn't have any knowledge of right and wrong / good and evil (the latter apparently including nakedness) until they disobeyed God and ate from the Tree of Knowledge: original sin is disobedience to an omnipotent dictator, benevolent or otherwise, not choosing to commit any act of evil.

In committing this first sin they corrupted themselves and the world and condemned themselves and their descendants to pain and death (until Jesus fixed the death part, if you're of a Christian bent). These were the consequences of not doing what God had ordered, not a conscious informed choice of right and wrong.

So the lesson of Genesis, and most of the Old Testament, is not "do the right thing or suffer the consequences", it's "do what you're told or die". To which I say, piss off.

Nah, I like my version better: a choice made through naivety leading to learning. It's a metaphor for childhood and parenting. You tell your child not to run, they'll get hurt, but they run anyway, fall over and bump their head. Sure, you'll want to give them a hug better and a few more years before kicking them out of the house, but you can't have them cluttering up the place forever.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 May, 2020, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 05:26:32 PMGood god (ahem) what kind of school is your child at?
Not my kid—a friend's. It's a standard junior school, as far as I'm aware—not even a religious school. But one of the teachers there quite clearly needed to be reprimanded.

QuoteI'm honestly surprised, and saddened, if a school was that damaging
It's about infused and lingering belief systems. You get that in the USA with 'the flag' and similar. I have some of this myself with religion—a kind of vestigial 'belief in God', despite not believing. It's like an itch I can't scratch and make go away. My parents are not religious; all religion from me came from school, and it was relentless (despite me going to a standard primary).

QuoteI appreciate how much this bothers you, but unless your offspring is clearly being affected I'd say don't let it get to you
She's five and she's been confused by this a bunch of times. She's smart enough to ask me and to question why she's being told things by teachers that we are saying are just stories. But this is part of the problem. We have a legally mandated act of worship that is invariably Christian. She sings praise to God on a daily basis. Frankly, I'd rather they ditch all that shit. She's much rather sing Eye of the Tiger anyway...

Quotehow many of us are really comfortable with the idea that Trump will almost inevitably go to his grave after a life of callous privilege without being called to account?
I don't like that at all, but then we also have the reverse. I recall Baroness Warsi once talking about religion, and inferring you can only be a good person if you are religious. She referred to a "rising tide of militant secularisation", and wanted faith to be put back at the heart of government. I don't give a shit what people do in their own time, as long as it doesn't affect others; but religion needs to stay the hell away from politics, and people must stop linking religion with being good. Religion has been at the heart of countless wars and is still a core aspect of atrocities across the globe. But secularists are the ones often being described as militants? Right.

Also, we should want to do good things because it's right, not because we'll go to heaven. (And the reverse, too.)

Quoteyou can't have them cluttering up the place forever
That's a long way from "you ate a piece of fruit I specifically told you not to eat, and so you and every woman thereafter can suffer the most excruciating pain imaginable to simply further the existence of the human race".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 29 May, 2020, 08:31:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
It's a metaphor for childhood and parenting.

If it's a metaphor about parenting it's a very poorly sustained one. God spends the rest of Genesis and the Pentateuch and a lot of the next 30-odd books, killing or at the very least tormenting everyone who disobeys Him in the slightest particular,  or happens to belong to the same tribe as someone who did. The whole planet at one point.

I get annoyed about the kids not putting their clothes in the laundry basket as much as the next metaphorical deity, but sheesh...

It's almost like the Bible is primarily intended to inspire complete obedience to the cult leaders of the day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 29 May, 2020, 10:02:37 PM
I got the cane* at Catholic primary school for "disrespecting" some rosary beads.


a bamboo cane with a lead core - 3 strokes (with gusto) on the hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2020, 10:26:29 PM
That's horrendous. But I have to ask.. what exactly were you doing with them? It's just that I've seen a few videos, and ... never mind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2020, 01:21:17 AM
Shite as Youtube is of late in its quest to make creators accountable for how the company has spent decades financially benefiting from copyright infringement, it is also a great place to find accessible debunkings of fascist and white supremacist propaganda, such as the notion of the Pakistani grooming gang (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSH_Gs19uz8) peddled by the British press (including the Guardian and BBC).  The video doesn't just debunk the objective notion, it also points out the double standard in how the media reports on organised child sex trafficking, which risks inverting truth entirely in service of wiping out the role of British men in child sex exploitation and helping to keep it slightly mystified and "foreign" as a concept - something from outside our own society - because that aids in the media's larger aim of demonising Muslims and immigrants.

One of the things mentioned in the video really stuck with me: how politically correct language can make a difference.  In this case, the conscious change from using the term "child prostitution" (a term which implies the child is a consensual actor) to "child sex exploitation" or CSE saw an immediate rise in the number of children seeking help, because the new terminology lacked the stigma of the original phrase and reframed the child as a victim of sex crimes rather than a co-conspirator.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:14:30 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 29 May, 2020, 08:31:34 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 29 May, 2020, 06:44:43 PM
It's a metaphor for childhood and parenting.

If it's a metaphor about parenting it's a very poorly sustained one. God spends the rest of Genesis and the Pentateuch and a lot of the next 30-odd books, killing or at the very least tormenting everyone who disobeys Him in the slightest particular,  or happens to belong to the same tribe as someone who did. The whole planet at one point.

I get annoyed about the kids not putting their clothes in the laundry basket as much as the next metaphorical deity, but sheesh...

It's almost like the Bible is primarily intended to inspire complete obedience to the cult leaders of the day.


While it's reasonable to argue to that's it's a poorly sustained metaphor, one could also argue that all parents mess up from time to time and are often hypocritical. It's a tough old job.

Like I said, I prefer to look at it as a test, not a set of instructions. I obviously wouldn't advocate believers taking it as a literal and valid-for-all-time ruleset and history of the world.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:32:10 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 29 May, 2020, 08:07:57 PMBut one of the teachers there quite clearly needed to be reprimanded.

I think we can all agree on that!

Quote
It's about infused and lingering belief systems. You get that in the USA with 'the flag' and similar. I have some of this myself with religion—a kind of vestigial 'belief in God', despite not believing. It's like an itch I can't scratch and make go away. My parents are not religious; all religion from me came from school, and it was relentless (despite me going to a standard primary).

I know what you mean - it's an early experience that becomes too ingrained to completely clean away. For me, though, it's just harmless background colour. If it affects my behaviour, then it does it subtly, although I love Christmas and all it's imagery.


QuoteI don't like that at all, but then we also have the reverse. I recall Baroness Warsi once talking about religion, and inferring you can only be a good person if you are religious.

Yeah, Widdicome said something along the lines of you don't go to hell for doing bad things, you go to hell for rejecting Christ, an idea I have absolutely no fucking time for.

QuoteShe referred to a "rising tide of militant secularisation", and wanted faith to be put back at the heart of government. I don't give a shit what people do in their own time, as long as it doesn't affect others; but religion needs to stay the hell away from politics, and people must stop linking religion with being good. Religion has been at the heart of countless wars and is still a core aspect of atrocities across the globe. But secularists are the ones often being described as militants? Right.

Richard Dawkins is a bit of a wanker, though, and Stephen Fry could always ruin a good episode QI with his tiresomely smug atheism.

QuoteAlso, we should want to do good things because it's right, not because we'll go to heaven. (And the reverse, too.)

True, but it's amazing how people can differ on what's good and bad, and what's right and wrong.

Quote
That's a long way from "you ate a piece of fruit I specifically told you not to eat, and so you and every woman thereafter can suffer the most excruciating pain imaginable to simply further the existence of the human race".

Metaphor, man, metaphor. Remember, it's the fundamentalists who read this nonsense literally.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:33:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.

You naughty, naughty people.

So, this thread has gone from politics to religion to sex.

Hmmm, sounds about right, I suppose.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2020, 11:27:35 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:33:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.

You naughty, naughty people.

So, this thread has gone from politics to religion to sex.



Sounds like every Pat Mills script ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 11:40:27 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 May, 2020, 11:27:35 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:33:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.

You naughty, naughty people.

So, this thread has gone from politics to religion to sex.



Sounds like every Pat Mills script ever.

Needs more robots/aliens/zombies/dinosaurs.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 30 May, 2020, 12:26:20 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:33:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.

You naughty, naughty people.

So, this thread has gone from politics to religion to sex.

Hmmm, sounds about right, I suppose.

Regards,

Robin

It'll be bloody football next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 12:28:24 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 30 May, 2020, 12:26:20 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:33:12 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 May, 2020, 11:27:11 PM
Analyze...analog...analogous...analgesic...

There so many types of bead.

You naughty, naughty people.

So, this thread has gone from politics to religion to sex.

Hmmm, sounds about right, I suppose.

It'll be bloody football next.

There's always someone how has to lower the bloody tone.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 May, 2020, 01:45:05 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 29 May, 2020, 10:26:29 PM
That's horrendous. But I have to ask.. what exactly were you doing with them? It's just that I've seen a few videos, and ... never mind.

Nothing as filthy as you imagine, I was only 9! I found a broken set of cheap plastic rosaries in the playground (must've been Lent) and I chased my classmates round the playground, whipping them round my head and making whip-crack noises. I still remember the teacher's earnest words as she tried to explain why this innocent game meant a caning: "They're to do with Our Lady!".

Oh, so that's clear then.

I always say that my three canings at primary school were, respectively, Religious Oppression (see above), A Miscarriage of Justice (my friend set off a stink-bomb off in the dinner hall, that I had given him on the strict condition he didn't use it at school, and I got the blame), and A Fair Cop (we teased the weird kid till he exploded and tried to strangle everyone).

As for where that left me on God, I went to a protestant secondary and was surprised to find out that all the essential guff I'd been taught about guardian angels, Purgatory, Limbo etc was not, in fact, Gospel. Once you unpick that thread, I pretty soon rejected the rest of it.

I cannot discount the possibility of a creator, whether it's God, Celestials or Ringworld Engineers, but all the rest, the holy books, the rules about what's sinful and so on, that's just, myth, folklore and social engineering.

My two final thoughts on Religion:

1. If God does exist, I'm pretty sure he doesn't care what sort of hats we wear. For some reason though, religious types seem to think this is extremely important.
2. Religion is like a big dog - If it's yours, it can provide great comfort and security, if it's someone else's it can seem scary and threatening; but in either respect, best to keep it away from small children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 May, 2020, 01:45:05 PM
1. If God does exist, I'm pretty sure he doesn't care what sort of hats we wear. For some reason though, religious types seem to think this is extremely important.
2. Religion is like a big dog - If it's yours, it can provide great comfort and security, if it's someone else's it can seem scary and threatening; but in either respect, best to keep it away from small children.

I'm with Dandontdare block.


Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:32:10 AM
Richard Dawkins is a bit of a wanker, though, and Stephen Fry could always ruin a good episode QI with his tiresomely smug atheism.

C'mon, now. By all means deconstruct their arguments, but ad hominem tactics just don't hold water.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 05:36:40 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 08:32:10 AM
Richard Dawkins is a bit of a wanker, though, and Stephen Fry could always ruin a good episode QI with his tiresomely smug atheism.

C'mon, now. By all means deconstruct their arguments, but ad hominem tactics just don't hold water.

A fair point, but smarter people than me have tackled Dawkins. I really don't like the man. IP and TB obviously disagree with my ideas passionately, but they've not sneered at me the way Dawkins does at his opponents.

Fry sadly, regardless of the merits of arguments, is also rather patronising. However, he does have personal problems, and I often feel he's working through his own issues, so yes, it probably is a bit unfair to have a go at him.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:17:40 PM
More ad hominem rhetoric. Still nothing about their thinking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 30 May, 2020, 06:46:33 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:17:40 PM
More ad hominem rhetoric. Still nothing about their thinking.

There's such a thing as the fallacy fallacy, where pointing out a fallacy in an argument doesn't negate the argument. The fact that Dawkins is a smug wanker is relevant, because his air of moral and intellectual superiority damages his cause. A dickhead like him makes it that much easier for cynical bad faith (pun intended) arguments that cast science as the enemy of religion when it doesn't have to be. Dawkins indirectly perpetuates backwards tribalism. Something he is fully aware religion exploits.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 06:52:35 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:17:40 PM
More ad hominem rhetoric. Still nothing about their thinking.

I'm not being critical of their thinking, I'm being critical of their demeanor when discussing the subject.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
The problem I have with both your arguments is that they're entirely based on perspective.

I've never found Richard Dawkins to be in the least as you describe. I have never thought him to be a "smug wanker", nor a "dickhead", nor to have some kind of negative "demeanor". I cannot argue that he's not those things in your eyes.

So, you both seem to be arguing against the man, rather than the man's logic.

We could perhaps start discussing the point: which (I assume) is that some people believe in things they have no evidence whatsoever for, and others don't.

That the people who don't believe in fantasy might not be socially to your liking is really neither here nor there. Unless we're discussing whether you'd like to hang out with them (but I didn't think we were).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 07:32:23 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
The problem I have with both your arguments is that they're entirely based on perspective.So, you both seem to be arguing against the man, rather than the man's logic.

Yes. My issue is not with the logic, but with the presentation.

QuoteThat the people who don't believe in fantasy might not be socially to your liking is really neither here nor there. Unless we're discussing whether you'd like to hang out with them (but I didn't think we were).

I'd quite like hang to out with Fry et al on an episode of QI, as long as it wasn't an episode with fucking Clarkson. He's a wanker too (although he was spot on about Brunel).

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 30 May, 2020, 07:39:26 PM
You'll have to make do with Sandi Toksvig.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 07:54:23 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 30 May, 2020, 07:39:26 PM
You'll have to make do with Sandi Toksvig.

I like her. She's very good.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 08:23:14 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 07:32:23 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
The problem I have with both your arguments is that they're entirely based on perspective.So, you both seem to be arguing against the man, rather than the man's logic.

Yes. My issue is not with the logic, but with the presentation.


So you agree then that belief in mythical beings is a nonsense?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 May, 2020, 08:44:41 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
I've never found Richard Dawkins to be in the least as you describe. I have never thought him to be a "smug wanker", nor a "dickhead", nor to have some kind of negative "demeanor".

I have but it probably wasn't helped by the time he compared the Quran to Mein Kampf or the time he used the term "mild pedophilia" or the time he suggested it wasn't a good idea telling children fairytales because it could lead to them believing in the supernatural.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 09:02:11 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 30 May, 2020, 08:44:41 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
I've never found Richard Dawkins to be in the least as you describe. I have never thought him to be a "smug wanker", nor a "dickhead", nor to have some kind of negative "demeanor".

I have but it probably wasn't helped by the time he compared the Quran to Mein Kampf or the time he used the term "mild pedophilia" or the time he suggested it wasn't a good idea telling children fairytales because it could lead to them believing in the supernatural.


I'd be interested in reading or hearing the full context in each case.

Perhaps there are some similarities between the Quran and Mein Kampf? For example, this bit seems a bit fascistic:

QuoteFight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and are subdued.

As for pedophilia coming up in a discussion of organized religion - well, that's not too surprising, is it? Just as an example: we all know, I think, that the Catholic church has in place a structure that nurtures and supports pedophiles by hiding their actions and moving them to fresh locations where their terrible nature is as yet unknown. Was Dawkins perhaps quoting the Pope?

The part about fairy-tales is intriguing, as Dawkins wrote a book (The Magic of Reality), specifically for children, in which he describes all sorts of fantasy stories (like the Eden myth, for example) as a backdrop to the science.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 30 May, 2020, 09:54:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 09:02:11 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 30 May, 2020, 08:44:41 PM
I have but it probably wasn't helped by the time he compared the Quran to Mein Kampf or the time he used the term "mild pedophilia" or the time he suggested it wasn't a good idea telling children fairytales because it could lead to them believing in the supernatural.

I'd be interested in reading or hearing the full context in each case.

Perhaps there are some similarities between the Quran and Mein Kampf? For example, this bit seems a bit fascistic:

QuoteFight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and are subdued.

As for pedophilia coming up in a discussion of organized religion - well, that's not too surprising, is it? Just as an example: we all know, I think, that the Catholic church has in place a structure that nurtures and supports pedophiles by hiding their actions and moving them to fresh locations where their terrible nature is as yet unknown. Was Dawkins perhaps quoting the Pope?

The part about fairy-tales is intriguing, as Dawkins wrote a book (The Magic of Reality), specifically for children, in which he describes all sorts of fantasy stories (like the Eden myth, for example) as a backdrop to the science.

I'd want to know the context to - otherwise it's like the ad hominem attack on people pointing out certain Israeli policies being accused of being anti-semitic (even if the person pointing out the policies are Israeli jews).

What we'd now call paedophilia seems to be written in to the holy books of two major world religions that I know of - think of all the patriarchs marrying girls of seven or twelve years old - twelve years and one day technically.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 30 May, 2020, 10:49:02 PM
Quran/Mein Kampf thing (https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/316101862199791616)

He once said in an interview that when he was a child a teacher had put his hand inside his shorts and felt him up and had also done the same to other pupils. Direct quote...

QuoteJust as we don't look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild paedophilia, and can't find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today.'

He then went on to say "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm". How he assumed he could talk for the other pupils involved, I do not know.

When defending the "mild paedophilia" comment on Twitter he said he'd meant it wasn't as bad as "violent" paedophilia and then compared it to date rape not being as bad as "stranger rape". https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/494012589828218881 (https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/494012589828218881)

His remarks about fairytales were made at the Cheltenham Science Festival, where he was quoted as saying "I think it's rather pernicious to inculcate into a child a view of the world which includes supernaturalism – we get enough of that anyway."

He later backed down, saying he didn't actually think fairytales did that, but he had wondered about it and had sort of thought it, but now he'd changed his mind and that he hoped he didn't look boring. Or something.


...and then there's his really weird (over) reaction to a reasonable request in what became known as Elevatorgate...  https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Elevatorgate (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Elevatorgate)



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 11:27:35 PM
Thanks for all the links and things - that really helps with the context.

Taking a step back for a second from the "do you like or dislike Richard Dawkins" side-debate, I think it's worthwhile following the train of logic that got us here. It went like this:

- IP said that Baroness Varsi, a member of the House of Lords, wanted to entwine religion and governance.
- Robin said (in response to that) that he didn't like Richards Dawkins or Stephen Fry.

So, I'm a bit confused as to how a dislike of two atheists (somewhat in the entertainment industry) excuses the intolerant nature of someone who's actually in a position of power over the laws of the land.

But, anyway, now we're talking about whether or not people like Richard Dawkins.

---

On the "mild pedophilia" quote - it is interesting in context, because at the heart of it he's saying that he doesn't feel he was harmed. I disagree with him (not, obviously, about how he feels about it) about being able to categorize rape by whether anyone was on a date or not. Although, without going into unsavory details, there are degrees of offence. Like ABH vs. GBH, for example.

Does his opinion on this make Baroness Varsi's stance okay? (Or make anyone's gods exist?)

---

The thing about fairytales was actually about (seeing the quote) "supernaturalism". These seem as if they could be two very different things, don't they? Like, "supernaturalism" might include the belief that crystals have healing properties (beyond a placebo), and teaching a child that doesn't seem helpful. Telling them about Hansel & Gretel is different - and surely no parent is telling their kids that the witch is real? And then, what, he's a horrible person because he thought about it and changed his mind?

Does his behavior here make Baroness Varsi's stance okay? (Or make anyone's gods exist?)

---

His tweet comparing the Quran to Mein Kampf is provocative, certainly. Is there a sense in which it's an unfair comparison?

Does his behavior here make Baroness Varsi's stance okay? (Or make anyone's gods exist?)

---

Whatever you think of the elevator story (where his message seemed to be - you think you've got it bad being propositioned in an elevator - there are women getting treated far more unfairly in Saudi Arabia) - he apologized later.

Does his behavior here make Baroness Varsi's stance okay? (Or make anyone's gods exist?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 31 May, 2020, 12:51:06 AM
He apologised three years later, indirectly, on a blog, without mentioning the apologee's name.

I'll have to let someone else answer those questions. I was just noting some reasons why he might be considered a prick.

Also, here's his thoughts on eugenics, (FFS), which I was completely unaware of until now...

https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1228943686953664512 (https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1228943686953664512)

...and before you start thinking he may have a point with that statement, may I direct your attention to the numerous health problems which occur as a direct result of selective breeding, as most commonly noted in various breeds of dog, (deafness, breathing issues, heart disease, cataracts, cancer, hip dysplasia, etc;)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 03:24:31 AM
Okay. But he doesn't say he's in favor of eugenics, and he doesn't say it wouldn't potentially have side effects.

All he said was that it would be possible. And he's right, isn't he?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 31 May, 2020, 04:41:37 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 03:24:31 AM
Okay. But he doesn't say he's in favor of eugenics, and he doesn't say it wouldn't potentially have side effects.

All he said was that it would be possible. And he's right, isn't he?

No, he said eugenics would "work". He also says "facts ignore ideology".

The basis for "working" in regard to the animals he mentioned is entirely subjective and therefore entirely ideological.

The only way to work towards an 'improvement' is to have some form of ideology, otherwise you're just mucking about to see what sticks and you'd be better off letting evolution handle it.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 05:52:48 AM
His follow-up post:

"For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy. I simply said deploring it doesn't mean it wouldn't work. Just as we breed cows to yield more milk, we could breed humans to run faster or jump higher. But heaven forbid that we should do it."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 31 May, 2020, 09:10:00 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 11:27:35 PMTaking a step back for a second from the "do you like or dislike Richard Dawkins" side-debate, I think it's worthwhile following the train of logic that got us here. It went like this:

- IP said that Baroness Varsi, a member of the House of Lords, wanted to entwine religion and governance.
- Robin said (in response to that) that he didn't like Richards Dawkins or Stephen Fry.

It was something if a throwaway comment, really, more in reference to the bit about militant secularists. And I do like Stephen Fry, but his atheism is a bit on the smug side.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 31 May, 2020, 09:18:59 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 08:23:14 PM
Quote from: Robin Low on 30 May, 2020, 07:32:23 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 30 May, 2020, 06:59:56 PM
The problem I have with both your arguments is that they're entirely based on perspective.So, you both seem to be arguing against the man, rather than the man's logic.

Yes. My issue is not with the logic, but with the presentation.


So you agree then that belief in mythical beings is a nonsense?

Yes.

But at the same time I'm quite comfortable embracing a lot of - even muturally contradictory - nonsense. I just don't let it get in the way of the practical stuff, except where it's useful - not walking under ladders seems quite sensible to me.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 09:21:55 AM
Cows that produce more milk - and suffer more mastitis. I mean if you set a narrow goal and ignore all the side-effects then yeah eugenics "works". If on the other hand you actually look at it holistically (and surely we should always be looking at life holistically) then I'm less convinced.

Dogs are always my favourite example of this, we've selected an arbitrary set of characteristics for each breed and selected for them over generations. In the process we've given then a set of genetic defects which in some cases would kill the animals without human intervention and in non-fatal cases significantly reduces their quality of life. There are a couple of breeds that are unable to reproduce withouth medical intervention ffs - how is that improving anything?

If your definition of "works" is so narrowly defined that it only measures the single characteristic you bred for then yeah eugneics works - but I'm not even sure that's a good definition of eugenics. Wikipedia defines it as:

"Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek εὐ- "good" and γενής "come into being, growing") is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population, typically by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics)

I'd argue that genetic quality has not been improved in dogs, cows or pigs (I'm not familiar enough with roses or horses to comment). Both cows and pigs are more productive sure but I'm not sure that equates to improved genetic quality unless we measure everything in terms of economics.

A few years back I had an old friend who disappeared down the alt-right rabbit hole - I think he got sucked in via the toxic mess that was gamer-gate. He was a big Dawkins fan precisely because in Dawkins he saw a top level academic who was validating his racism and islamaphobia. And that right there is my biggest gripe with Dawkins - he provides a veneer of credibility to the beliefs of some deeply unpleasent people and it's hard to believe he doesn't know that (he's far from an idiot after all). Following up your initial message with:

"For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy. I simply said deploring it doesn't mean it wouldn't work."

basically validates a redefinition of morality which values the genetic purity of the human race as more important than individual human suffering. And at that point you're just a small step away from justifing death camps and mass sterilization. Ugh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 May, 2020, 10:24:29 AM
Quote from: Robin Low on 31 May, 2020, 09:18:59 AM
But at the same time I'm quite comfortable embracing a lot of - even muturally contradictory - nonsense. I just don't let it get in the way of the practical stuff, except where it's useful - not walking under ladders seems quite sensible to me.


Seeing as modern religion is based on things which may have made sense at one time (keeping away from some types of food before refrigeration was possible, etc) how do you feel about avoiding walking under ladders when it means walking into busy roads with fast-moving traffic?  Which isn't even a metaphor because superstitious people will do things like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 May, 2020, 10:38:02 AM
Quote from: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 09:21:55 AM
I'd argue that genetic quality has not been improved in dogs, cows or pigs (I'm not familiar enough with roses or horses to comment).


I've got one - if you've bred everything to be the same then what you've got is a monoculture.  Wikipedia has a few examples of what that isn't the best idea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoculture#Historic_examples_of_monocultures).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 31 May, 2020, 10:55:10 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 31 May, 2020, 10:24:29 AMSeeing as modern religion is based on things which may have made sense at one time (keeping away from some types of food before refrigeration was possible, etc)

Indeed, and some if it may still prove to be relevant if we're willing to engage with it in a thoughtful manner, rather than reject it wholesale.

Quotehow do you feel about avoiding walking under ladders when it means walking into busy roads with fast-moving traffic?  Which isn't even a metaphor because superstitious people will do things like that.

I'd probably look first and wait for a break in the traffic. Depends on what's going on at the top of the ladder, really. Like I said in the post, I don't let it get in the way of the practical stuff.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 11:34:43 AM
Checked in with an equestrian friend, her comments on genetic selection in horses - " a thoroughbred, for example, now has really thin leg bones that really easily snaps and their feet are brittle".  So yeah another great success for eugenics there.

I think what Dawkins was rather clumisly stating was we can selective breed for specific traits, which I'd agree is an inarguable fact. But I'm not sure it can be claimed that doing so really "improves the genetic quality", which as I understand it is the aim of eugenecists. Most recent evidence seems to be showing that a more diverse gene pool is the best way to improve overall genetic quality and for me that's a much stronger argument against eugenics than saying inacting a eugenecist policy would be morally deplorable. What's considered morally acceptable is somewhat subjective after all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 May, 2020, 11:42:26 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 30 May, 2020, 01:21:17 AM
it is also a great place to find accessible debunkings of fascist and white supremacist propaganda, such as the notion of the Pakistani grooming gang (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSH_Gs19uz8) peddled by the British press (including the Guardian and BBC).  The video doesn't just debunk the objective notion, it also points out the double standard in how the media reports on organised child sex trafficking, which risks inverting truth entirely in service of wiping out the role of British men in child sex exploitation and helping to keep it slightly mystified and "foreign" as a concept -

Sorry for bringing the thread back to this.  The idea that Child Sex Exploitation is a 'foreign' concept and primarily practiced by members of ethnic minority communities has a major and regrettably underreported evidence base to debunk it.

The practice of pedophilia in the private, boarding-school sector down through the years has only been mentioned occasionally.  Yet the number of individuals that can comment on such experiences and the range of institutions mentioned suggests that the practice is far more widespread.

So what is the difference?  I mean, is it because the perpetrators were / are predominantly indigenous, white, male, middle / upper class?  Is it because these incidents involve 'respectable' academic institutions?  Is it the 'money'?

When I think back to the reporting on our old head and his exploits after he had disappeared from our place of learning I am utterly appalled.  Authorities in this country and other nations effectively gave him impunity to practice his vices.  He was able to repeat what he did at our school again and again.  So the news of his prosecution when it finally came about was tinged with bitterness at the missed opportunities.

Like I say though, his story is far from unique.  Fellow students who experienced his attentions first hand share those memories with students from far too many British Educational Establishments for the well-heeled.  Strangely though those stories rarely if ever make the national press.

So yes, there are far more British men involved than the press would have us believe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 31 May, 2020, 12:45:01 PM
Both Judge Dredd and Rogue Trooper are a result of genetic manipulation, rather than natural selection. Built for specific tasks, Law Enforcement, Warfare, they had the traits that helped them survive in their various environments. Like ourselves, they did not choose their inheritance; it was bestowed upon them by scientists, as we had our genes given to us by our parents. Though these are fictional characters at some point humans will be able to manipulate the genetics of their offspring. So the hard question is, should we do so? If we can make everyone equally healthy, eliminating physical disability, say as a human trait is that not for the greater good? Or is that the grim trap, that an arms race of genetic traits driven by social desires makes us very alike in the end, destroying the diversity of humans by the very thing we hoped would make us more 'equal.'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 09:21:55 AM
"For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy. I simply said deploring it doesn't mean it wouldn't work."

basically validates a redefinition of morality which values the genetic purity of the human race as more important than individual human suffering. And at that point you're just a small step away from justifing death camps and mass sterilization. Ugh.

You know, I absolutely agree with you that there is a wide range of possible definitions for what the word "works" means if someone says "eugenics works". That's fair. I presume most people would be able to then debate that point and come to some conclusions. Like, it's operable but there are examples of serious side effects.

But it's a shocking leap to suggest that the phrase "eugenics works" (even more especially when surrounded by caveats such as "I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy") somehow leads to there being an automatically attached justification of "death camps and mass sterilization". Catch oneself on.

There's a suggestion there that we aren't allowed to even talk about eugenics. Now where's the fascism?

I imagine a braying herd of angry but well-meaning folk dragging Dawkins out to the scaffold chanting "dickhead" and "nazi" and afterwards, when asked what he had done to deserve his fate, they listed the crimes:

- he apologized in a half-hearted way
- he tried to discuss biological science and we misinterpreted his motivations
- he compared a book that says all non-believers should be forced to bow down before their one true god to another book that says all people of a particular creed aren't human and should be "removed"
- he said we shouldn't lie to children
- sometimes he was impatient

Oh well then. I suppose he deserved it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 06:20:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo  on 31 May, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
But it's a shocking leap to suggest that the phrase "eugenics works" (even more especially when surrounded by caveats such as "I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy") somehow leads to there being an automatically attached justification of "death camps and mass sterilization". Catch oneself on.

That's not quite what I was trying to say - maybe my choice of wording was poor. Just to be clear I fully accept that Dawkins is in no way advocating death camps or mass sterilization. His follow up is clearly distancing himself from that position.

What I was trying to say is that for someone already enamoured with the idea of a superior Aryan man and whose personal morality values genetic purity over individual freedom/suffering they've now got a leading geneticist telling them eugenics would be successful. They will quote his tweet as evidence for thier position and that I find deeply concerning because it can help convince others of the validity of their arguments. Maybe my experience arguing on this subject with the previously mentioned ex-friend has coloured my feelings on this somewhat. He would post pro-eugenicist material from sites like Stormfront and when called out on it would try to validate it with quotes like this.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
I imagine a braying herd of angry but well-meaning folk dragging Dawkins out to the scaffold chanting "dickhead" and "nazi" and afterwards, when asked what he had done to deserve his fate, they listed the crimes:

- he apologized in a half-hearted way
- he tried to discuss biological science and we misinterpreted his motivations
- he compared a book that says all non-believers should be forced to bow down before their one true god to another book that says all people of a particular creed aren't human and should be "removed"
- he said we shouldn't lie to children
- sometimes he was impatient

Oh well then. I suppose he deserved it.

I find this scenario equally disturbing and I agree we do need to be able to have conversations about topics like this without it blowing up into finger pointing and name calling. I'm also pretty convinced that Twitter isn't the medium via which those conversations are going to happen. It's hard to know what point Dawkin's was trying to make with his tweet without the context of why he decided to broadcast that opinion to thousands of people. It seems ill-considered imo but I wouldn't condemn anyone for that (I'd be a massive hypocrite if I did as I'm plenty prone to placing my foot in my mouth as I think I've proven nicely here).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 May, 2020, 06:43:17 PM
I'm super-ignorant of Twitter, so I'm not even sure when someone's responding to someone or just declaring into the void.

I think we're both coming from the same place of not wanting neo-Nazis running anything. I'm sorry that you lost your friend down that path. I suppose we can hope that they'll think better at some point down the line.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 31 May, 2020, 06:53:07 PM
I hope so - he's blocked me on social media as I think he got sick of me calling him out on the memes and "news" articles he posted so I've no idea what he's doing these days. It made me realise just how easily people can become radicalised though - very scary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 31 May, 2020, 09:13:38 PM
Maybe we should have just talked about football.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 June, 2020, 05:55:06 PM
Talking of Football, here's Liverpool taking a knee (https://www.bbc.com/sport/52875059) in support of the Black Lives Matter movement:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/onesport/cps/624/cpsprodpb/10C1D/production/_112573686_lfc.jpg)


Crazy scenes in the US (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52872401). My wife pointed out that when people protest peacefully (taking a knee at sporting events) they're told they shouldn't do that (by the white president) - that it's unAmerican. When they protest violently they're told they shouldn't do that (by the white president) - that they deserve then to be shot. How should they protest, then?

Of course it's a no-win situation. The white president wants the black people to just be murdered quietly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 01 June, 2020, 06:56:48 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 01 June, 2020, 05:55:06 PM
Of course it's a no-win situation. The white president wants the black people to just be murdered quietly.

Or to meekly accept their oppression.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 02 June, 2020, 01:07:55 PM
So Trump announces he's going to bring the US military down on the citizens of the US, then promptly after his declaration has protesters brutally removed from the front of the Whitehouse so he can take a stroll to a church and have a photo op holding a bible.

Why?  Sources say his ego was bruised for us laughing at him hiding in a bunker.

https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1267612075536326656?s=21

Presenter: Oh boy, we are in trouble.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Your Prez is an out-of-control maniac.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 June, 2020, 02:22:01 PM
If nothing else, the past few years have been an excellent showcase that our existing checks and balances were all assumptive on people playing by the rules, even if they'd sometimes stretch them. Trump and Brexit have proved beyond all doubt that if you don't care about the rules, the system cannot stop you doing whatever the hell you like.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 02 June, 2020, 09:21:21 PM
He just wants to be in the history books. Doesn't care what for.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 June, 2020, 10:45:23 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 02 June, 2020, 09:21:21 PM
He just wants to be in the history books. Doesn't care what for.

Trump or Johnson?  Not that it matters - both wanted to be rulers for so long but didn't have a clue what to do once they got there.  Was it on here that I read (of Johnson) "He wanted to become Prime Minister.  He wants to have been Prime Minister.  He doesn't really want to be Prime Minister".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 June, 2020, 09:25:29 PM
I see some US Evangelicals began talking in tongues and ecstatically throwing out phrases like 'the Armour of God' and 'a Jericho Walk' at the sight of their leader and his Bible.  How fucking gullible can you be?

Similarly, I wonder if there is anyone left still buying the cuddly, scatterbrained jack-the-lad image Johnson crafted for hiself over the years.  I can't see anything these days but a cynical, calculating sociopath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 June, 2020, 09:44:23 PM
Thank goodness Kier Starmer is forensically saving the day at PMQs and holding Johnson to account.  I can feel my material conditions improving by the minute, and Johnson can't possibly last against a barrage of such competence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 June, 2020, 10:03:05 PM
He's forced a couple of U-turns, and polling has seen the biggest swing in recent history. Perhaps it'll all go horribly wrong, but given that we now have a Prime Minister properly losing his shit to basic questions in the Commons, and Labour's managed to get the govt into change tack on some things despite it having a massive majority, he seems to be doing all right.

I know he's not your cup of tea, Professor Bear, and that Corbyn was treated badly by a lot of people. But we have what we have now. Perhaps polling won't budge again, and Labour will have mostly eaten half of the Lib Dem share and only a couple of points of Con. But if the swing continues even just two more points and sticks at a general, we're into Tory minority territory. Even a slight Lib Dem resurgence, and we'd be looking at some kind of Lab/Lib deal.

It's all a long way off. Loads of shit can happen before then. But I've liked a reasonable amount of what I've seen so far, despite having some misgivings regarding Starmer on a couple of key points.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 01:34:00 PM
You give the glorious leader nothing but praise and the Starmtroopers still come for you.  The more things change etc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2020, 01:37:05 PM
Labour really needs to break in two. That both sides of the party don't support the PR that would enable it to baffles me. (I guess both think — like Labour does as a whole — they have a god-given right to rule alone. It's one of the few things they are in complete alignment on — albeit to their mutual detriment.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 03:11:50 PM
Labour did break in two already - it got us the LibDems, which has been a fantastic success all round, and also it got us Change TIG Tinge UK, which was also a great success in that it ended the careers of some of the absolute worst MPs in Parliament.

Democratic reform in the UK is pointless as long as the House of Lords exists.  Leaving aside all the basic issues with unqualified lifetime appointees, as a concept alone it normalises dynastic entitlement.  The best we could ever hope for is that one day - maybe, possibly - the House might discuss limiting the number of peers to a mere hundred or so by clearing out all the New Money riffraff cluttering the place up since the mid-80s, or possibly adopting a version of the US Supreme Court model, which, of course, has no problems whatsoever.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2020, 01:37:05 PMI guess both think — like Labour does as a whole — they have a god-given right to rule alone. It's one of the few things they are in complete alignment on — albeit to their mutual detriment.

I was under the impression that most MPs - left and right - don't support PR because it would make fringe parties mainstream overnight.  I guess I can understand that reasoning, but if you think 13 UKIP MPs is a price worth paying to get 7 Green MPs and to make the LibDems kingmakers again, then fair play.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 04 June, 2020, 03:33:18 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 June, 2020, 10:03:05 PM
snip> that Corbyn was treated badly by a lot of people. <snip

It's not that Corbyn was treated badly by a lot of people that gets me, it who those people were.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 June, 2020, 05:48:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 03:11:50 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2020, 01:37:05 PMI guess both think — like Labour does as a whole — they have a god-given right to rule alone. It's one of the few things they are in complete alignment on — albeit to their mutual detriment.

I was under the impression that most MPs - left and right - don't support PR because it would make fringe parties mainstream overnight.  I guess I can understand that reasoning, but if you think 13 UKIP MPs is a price worth paying to get 7 Green MPs and to make the LibDems kingmakers again, then fair play.

It's difficult to predict.  With PR the electorate would hopefully be more inclined to vote for those whose manifestos match their own feelings, rather than making protest votes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 June, 2020, 08:18:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 03:11:50 PMLabour did break in two already - it got us the LibDems
Well, it got us the SDP, which joined with the Liberals to form the Lib Dems. And while I know you hate the Lib Dems with the passion of a thousand suns, I'd argue they are useful, for a range of reasons. For one, they are liberal. Labour have often not been so in my lifetime, sometimes tending towards authoritarianism. The Charles Kennedy-era LDs had some superb policies, which I'd love to have seen enacted in government. And they've long been champions of political reform, whereas Labour's desperate to cling to the status quo that allows it to win one time in four, while the Tories fuck up the country for the rest of the time. (And that's every stripe of Labour.)

Also: I'm sure people love to think Labour can win every seat in the country, but the fact is they cannot. However, soft Tories can sometimes be persuaded to vote Lib Dem. For the next GE, under FPTP, we need Lab and Lib to both do well, or we're basically fucked. Again. (And even if they both do well, that might not be enough unless both parties can stop their ridiculous pissing contest with the SNP. Plaid and the Greens are at least grown-ups — about the only ones right now.)

QuoteDemocratic reform in the UK is pointless as long as the House of Lords exists
That view aligns with Corbyn's, and I vehemently disagree. I'm no fan of the Lords in its current form, but it has frequently proven to be a useful safeguard precisely because of its oddball mix (not enough Tories nor Labour to 'control' the house, due to a great many crossbenchers who'd be instantly eradicated under a voted system) and because the Lords aren't beholden to the electorate. So they're not thinking five years ahead—they're just examining the policy as they get it, and making changes. If anything, the house lacks power, because the Commons can override it too easily.

The problems with the Lords stem with how the people there are selected more than them being democratically elected. (Note that I'm not against that happening, however. My ideal would be to split England into a number of states, and have a regional PR-based 'senate' of sorts.)

But the Commons is where we already elect our representatives, and right now it's a massive fucking stitch-up— and that's never going to change.

QuoteI was under the impression that most MPs - left and right - don't support PR because it would make fringe parties mainstream overnight.  I guess I can understand that reasoning, but if you think 13 UKIP MPs is a price worth paying to get 7 Green MPs and to make the LibDems kingmakers again, then fair play.
That's not the impression I've ever got. It's always been about the numbers, and realising for Labour that PR means the end of majority Labour government, probably forever. The Tories are against it because it would dramatically reduce the likelihood of a Tory majority as well.

My take is either you believe in proper representation or you don't. I do. That means, yes, some arseholes will get into parliament (and local govt). But you know what? We've just spent half a decade watching the Tories and Labour (and that includes the Labour left) pandering to UKIP and then the Brexit Party. Our elections hinge on a tiny number of swing seats. The vast majority of votes mean nothing and are wasted. And parties are elected into a majority position despite almost never getting a majority of the votes. Whichever way you slice it, it's a stitch-up.

So, yeah, fine: 20/30/50 Brexit MPs. Whatever. But we'd have dozens of Greens too, and potentially dozens of Lib Dems. As sheridan says, voting patterns would likely change anyway, allowing people to vote for what they believe in, rather than the 'least worst from the big two'. We'd end Labour bitching that it didn't get into power because people who prefer another party had the audacity to vote for said party (or Labour in elections where people 'do the right thing' boasting about increase in vote share, ignoring literally millions of votes being borrowed).

Parties could split, safe in the knowledge that wouldn't mean electoral oblivion, but instead looking to forge alliances that could shift and change depending on circumstances. Parliament could become a place of consensus and compromise, rather than 'us vs them'.

It's never going to happen, of course. The Tories will never go for PR, and Labour almost certainly won't either. But I find it deeply sad that so many of our politicians actually want a situation where the parliament is not representative of the people who voted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 June, 2020, 08:42:55 PM
Right now, I'd settle for the MPs we have got actually being allowed to vote. The farce that Rees-Mogg has enacted by enforcing in-person voting should be getting a LOT more attention.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 09:48:45 PM
It sometimes worries me when I see people make amusing comments about JRM being a snooty fop or whatever, because I realise that's all people see and it obscures the absolute fucking monster that he really is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 June, 2020, 10:01:41 PM
So... What's the crack with Cummings now? Fish and chip papers already?  He and Johnson should be begging forgiveness at this stage, not that I'm naive enough to think that will ever happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 June, 2020, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 June, 2020, 08:42:55 PM
Right now, I'd settle for the MPs we have got actually being allowed to vote. The farce that Rees-Mogg has enacted by enforcing in-person voting should be getting a LOT more attention.

Every time a Tory/Brexiteer claims there is a modern technological solution to the British border in Ireland, I will point them to the farcical social distanced voting system in the house of commons. These are not people who support technology. You could take all of Boris' recent speeches and replace "The Science" with "The Bible" and no meaning would be lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2020, 01:42:05 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 04 June, 2020, 05:48:28 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 June, 2020, 03:11:50 PMI was under the impression that most MPs - left and right - don't support PR because it would make fringe parties mainstream overnight.  I guess I can understand that reasoning, but if you think 13 UKIP MPs is a price worth paying to get 7 Green MPs and to make the LibDems kingmakers again, then fair play.

It's difficult to predict.  With PR the electorate would hopefully be more inclined to vote for those whose manifestos match their own feelings, rather than making protest votes.

From Fullfact.org:

The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a change from the current 'first past the post' system, estimates that UKIP would have won 80 seats under a 'list PR' system, 54 under a 'single transferable vote' regime, and stayed at one using the 'alternative vote' that was rejected at a 2011 referendum.

Full article HERE. (https://fullfact.org/news/how-many-seats-could-ukip-have-under-different-voting-system/)

The above is from 2016 because I am a lazy bastard and only checked the first couple of links I got from a Google search I used UKIP as an example so had to go that far back to find a PR model where they were relevant, as their vote share isn't actually worth two fucks anymore and most models don't give them a single seat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 June, 2020, 03:37:56 AM
Personally I feel like the way that the different nations of the UK have reacted both during Brexit and the Covid-19 crisis points to significant challenges ahead.  Since it affects devolved issues in particular (health and policing) it has given the other parts of the UK a chance to flex their muscles and show what is possible. 

So Wales and Scotland make mainstream news for a change, foregrounding the fact that there is scope for greater regional autonomy.  Regions in England get to make hay over it and Westminster is forced to make noises over variation.

Between this and the "English Votes" issue it does seem that there is a growing case for fundamental restructuring of the UK parliament.  Let's face it, there is widespread opposition to the cronyism of the House of Lords.  The House of Commons is imbalanced towards England.  The stranglehold of the government on fiscal policy hamstrings devolved governments.  The whole structure is stuck in the past.  Small wonder then that voter apathy is a continual problem.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2020, 10:46:18 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 June, 2020, 01:42:05 AMThe Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a change from the current 'first past the post' system, estimates that UKIP would have won 80 seats under a 'list PR' system, 54 under a 'single transferable vote' regime, and stayed at one using the 'alternative vote' that was rejected at a 2011 referendum.
UKIP's rise was in part fostered by the party being a protest vote for the disenfranchised. The Lib Dems also at times got a vote share well above their natural level. So we really have no idea how many seats either party would have won, because voting might have changed substantially.

Even if it didn't, we return again to basic fairness and representation. I find it genuinely baffling that progressive people want a parliament that is not representative. Yet I see this across the political spectrum. I've been in various Green groups that have baffled me in being anti-PR because that would "let in UKIP". Well, they're already in. They're now in government. They were for a time the driving force behind 80% of MPs, to a great extent.

Attempting to stamp out extreme views by way of rigging the vote in a deeply flawed system can sometimes work, but often it really doesn't, as we are now finding. 80 UKIP MPs would be bloody horrible, but at least voters would be represented, and at least some of those people would soon enough see what a bunch of useless tossers they are and likely switch away next time. But also, we would have the Greens on more than one seat (and zero if the boundary changes carve up Brighton Pav), more Lib Dems, fewer SNP (to align with their vote share), and the potential for political parties to split into coherent entities, rather than being de-facto coalitions in and of themselves, endlessly infighting. (Well, apart from the Tories, who are now entirely driven by their second-most extreme faction.)

FWIW, this was my take, way back in 2010 (http://reverttosaved.com/2010/05/08/uk-2010-general-election-what-you-voted-for-and-what-you-got/). Lots more options. And even if we'd have still ended up with Con/Lib, the balance would have been completely different, because it would have been representative.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2020, 10:55:50 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 05 June, 2020, 03:37:56 AMBetween this and the "English Votes" issue it does seem that there is a growing case for fundamental restructuring of the UK parliament.
The problem is always going to be the English relinquishing the power they hold due to population size. Yet at the same time, we also have the regions whining because they lack influence or the means to go about their own way in various areas of influence. Pick one, England!

Personally, I'd happily see this country (England) split into states broadly along the lines of the MEP regions. Give them some autonomy. At the very least have the regions represented in the upper house. Instead, we'll 'happily' continue doing politics like it's 1820, with people yelling at each other across a room, and baffling the world with stupid traditions rather than basic pragmatism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 June, 2020, 04:24:22 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 June, 2020, 10:55:50 AM
The problem is always going to be the English

I agree
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 June, 2020, 02:06:27 PM
Riot police watch a video of two of their number commit G.B.H. against a 75-year old, and a further member stop the one police officer who showed any concern about the prone elderly man bleeding from his head and decide the best thing they can do is resign en masse (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52945190) when the attackers are suspended.  Disgusting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 June, 2020, 03:31:37 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 07 June, 2020, 02:06:27 PM
Riot police watch a video of two of their number commit G.B.H. against a 75-year old, and a further member stop the one police officer who showed any concern about the prone elderly man bleeding from his head and decide the best thing they can do is resign en masse (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52945190) when the attackers are suspended.  Disgusting.

Jesus wept.  Not even an acknowledgement of wrongdoing.  And they wonder why the protests are happening.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2020, 04:55:16 PM
While trying my best to be cautious about one-sided video editing, internet echo-chambers, algorithms and the relative number of incidents against the sheer scale of this thing,  the relentless procession of documented acts of complete inhumanity from the police seems undeniable - and their willingness to do these things on camera highlights their perception of invulnerability and acceptability.

I titled the Covid-19 thread 'Day of Chaos 2' in a weak attempt to make it 2000AD-relevant, but the way these protests and consequential violence have spread during a pandemic makes the joking parallel a lot more real. The judges fatally lose control of their lockdown not just because of outside agitators, but because they have systematically destroyed the trust of the citizens through decades of abuse and dishonesty.

And here we are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 June, 2020, 05:23:21 PM
One of the things that's really depressing me, is that when the inevitable second wave comes, it will be blamed wholly on the protests, both here and the US. The protests will be part of the reason, but it will be spun as the whole of the reason.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2020, 05:34:50 PM
Absolutely agree, Robin. You even see it now with the glib distinctions drawn between people en masse pushed past breaking into action with families crowding the beaches.

The narrative of a population that has done this to itself is being aggressively established - not Trump's fault, not Boris's, just those uppity piccaninnies and their liberal cucks at it again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2020, 06:38:21 PM
That mayor being told "get the fuck outta here!" by a speaker at a protest and then having to perp-walk through a crowd that chanted "SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!" was really funny, tho.  The crowd's demand was that the police department be defunded entirely, which you just know will never happen, but... holy dang it's not just some crusty lefties saying "it would be nice" while sitting on a piss-stained mattress in a squat, this is black, white, young, old, working and middle class, left and centrist protestors saying the previously-unthinkable.  No-one is distracted with (perfectly legitimate) questions about how such a thing would even work, because it doesn't matter if it's not working now.

It's got me thinking about what the end of history might really mean when "apocalypse" is just an old Greek word meaning enlightenment, and how maybe the end of the world is just people coming to understand that if they really want it to, the world can change into something unrecognizable but better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2020, 06:46:19 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2020, 06:38:21 PMNo-one is distracted with (perfectly legitimate) questions about how such a thing would even work, because it doesn't matter if it's not working now.

It's got me thinking about what the end of history might really mean when "apocalypse" is just an old Greek word meaning enlightenment, and how maybe the end of the world is just people coming to understand that if they really want it to, the world can change into something unrecognizable but better.

Aggressive nodding ensues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2020, 06:54:29 PM
Bristol just tore down the statue of a slave owner (https://twitter.com/_jackgrey/status/1269625428400132096), then dragged it to the fucking sea (https://twitter.com/bbcrb/status/1269642592247001088) and threw it in. (https://twitter.com/bbcrb/status/1269644536281776128)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 June, 2020, 07:21:07 PM
There are also many examples of US police joining (to some extent or another) with protests: many taking the symbolic knee in solidarity.

But there's clearly a systemic problem with how the police force are trained to deal with the public in situations of confrontation: much of that to do with US gun laws. As in: don't take stupid risks when your suspect might be armed.

The example of the shoved 75-year old is interesting because the entire riot squad resigned (from that squad, not from their jobs) in support of their two suspended colleagues, have been supported in full by their union leaders and have also had the local DA voice his difficulty in prosecuting them (because, he says, they're his colleagues). They're still saying the old man tripped. As if the brutal shove had nothing to do with his falling over. "To Protect And Serve". Who?

As for the insignia-free military forces deployed in Washington - that's really creepy.

---

Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 June, 2020, 06:54:29 PM
Bristol just tore down the statue of a slave owner (https://twitter.com/_jackgrey/status/1269625428400132096), then dragged it to the fucking sea (https://twitter.com/bbcrb/status/1269642592247001088) and threw it in. (https://twitter.com/bbcrb/status/1269644536281776128)

Enjoyed that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 June, 2020, 07:26:03 PM
And my goodness has it brought the cockroaches out into the open!

You might imagine that as an archaeologist I am outraged by the destruction of historic monuments. You would be wrong. Statues memorialise and glorify their subjects, they reflect how a society views and values their own history.  Angrily fecking the hagiographic representation of a slaver into the Severn estuary seems like a step forward. The local authority should have done it long, long ago but it didn't.

Find me a statue of the Famine Queen on public display in the Republic. We actually transported ours to Australia.  We don't miss them, and we don't forget her either.  Instead we have this:
(https://i.redd.it/7lhhj90he9ly.jpg)

Which says more about our history and what we think of it?

Monuments change with their people,  it's how we make our world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 07 June, 2020, 09:09:45 PM
Quoting myself here from somewhere else:

You're absolutely right these things [statues] should not be celebrated. But I think they should be publicly, openly remembered, and not simply in museums and history books. I think some statues should be about condemnation - imagine statues around the country, David Cameron: Father of Austerity. Maybe people would think twice about their actions if they knew there might be hostile memorials to them one day. Where we have statues and street names of people who have contributed to the worst parts of our history, perhaps add plaques to make that point. People have shockingly short memories, as well as a lack of interest in history, so stick it in their faces

I think there should suitably labelled statues of Trump - warnings to history. Preferably at ground level for passing dogs.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2020, 12:13:48 AM
Holy shit. (https://theappeal.org/minneapolis-city-council-members-announce-intent-to-disband-the-police-department-invest-in-proven-community-led-public-safety/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 08 June, 2020, 02:29:21 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 June, 2020, 07:26:03 PMFind me a statue of the Famine Queen on public display in the Republic. We actually transported ours to Australia.  We don't miss them, and we don't forget her either.

The hubby's still outside Leinster House hiding in a bush, we should probably fix that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 June, 2020, 12:50:23 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2020, 12:13:48 AM
Holy shit. (https://theappeal.org/minneapolis-city-council-members-announce-intent-to-disband-the-police-department-invest-in-proven-community-led-public-safety/)

You said it.
QuoteMinneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender said Sunday. "Our efforts at incremental reform have failed. Period."
Wow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 08 June, 2020, 03:49:09 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 June, 2020, 12:50:23 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 June, 2020, 12:13:48 AM
Holy shit. (https://theappeal.org/minneapolis-city-council-members-announce-intent-to-disband-the-police-department-invest-in-proven-community-led-public-safety/)

You said it.
QuoteMinneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender said Sunday. "Our efforts at incremental reform have failed. Period."
Wow.


John Oliver covers similar ground this week. And includes a few chuckles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 June, 2020, 05:01:21 PM
Just had a listen to that. Thanks, Tips, truly riveting stuff - the clip of the black protestor at the end will stay with me for a long time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 08 June, 2020, 11:47:42 PM
I am completely torn. These issues are devastating, I've campaigned on them for most of my life, and pre-pandemic I would also have been vociferously cheering on any tipping of slaver statues into harbours. I fully understood the initial explosions of rage, where it would have been ludicrous to have imposed any demands of logic or rationality onto emotion. But the hundreds of thousands filling European streets subsequently have left me feeling profoundly depressed. I feel that this is the week the left left me. There has clearly been almost no social distancing, end of. Like millions of others, I have been told by the government and doctors to shield for months, given that I have a condition that, I'm told, leaves me at serious risk of demise should I encounter the virus. I have followed the rules to the letter, living in my one-room miserable damp flat and not opening my front door once. Almost everyone at these demonstrations knows that they are personally at miniscule risk from this virus but that the death toll will swell considerably amongst the vulnerable as a result of their actions. The question that no journalist has asked is whether they would be there if they themselves stood a 70-80% chance of dying should they contract covid? Of course they wouldn't be. And so it is therefore impossible to escape the conclusion that our lives really do not matter that much. Even worse, Cummings, Johnson, Trump etc now have their get out of jail free cards when the spike happens and the enquiries start pointing fingers. Barnard Castle, full beaches, VE Day Conga Lines, house parties, all of these have been horrific and wrong - but none of these can be properly criticised by anyone shouting and screaming and hugging their way through a street protest. And indeed, Dom seems to be off the hook even as the deaths continue. Just think how powerful a masked, socially distanced, vast, silent protest would have looked. The shielded, all of whom already had serious non-covid conditions, feel entirely forgotten, without healthcare, spending all our time scouring online medicine providers and just getting through each day, week, month, season. And now this. I wish everyone would just recall that before going after everyone else, the fascists usually go after the ill and the disabled first. Apologies. Rant over. But being apparently ethical and on the side of justice does not grant immunity from coronavirus. And it's too late now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2020, 01:10:00 PM
No-one wanted to be protesting during a pandemic, but here we are.
These protests are against white supremacy, and non-whites die in disproportionately higher numbers from Covid-19, so it might be worth asking why black people are still protesting when they're at higher risk than you are.  I get you're worried about your health and the well-being of your family and community, but you and BLM protestors have that in common.
Most protest footage I've seen has people marching at a distance and wearing masks.  A small number might not be doing that, but again, if you're going to take a small number of a larger group to task for endangering the public, that's also BLM's beef with the cops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2020, 01:20:01 PM
Smart piece over at Politics.co.cuk (https://politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/06/08/covid-nity-is-over-poll-analysis-shows-brits-retreating-into), arguing that COVID unity is over, and people are retreating into camps. They talk about three groups: the trusting, the dissenting, and the frustrated. And, yep, they map to Con/Lab and Leave/Remain.

Culture war FT... L.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 June, 2020, 01:28:24 PM
'it might be worth asking why black people are still protesting when they're at higher risk than you are'

It's probably courteous not to assume anything about anyone's ethnicity or identity. Thanks.

And the vast majority of those protesting are clearly not at significant risk. However, as potentially asymptomatic carriers they now represent a lethal risk to many of the vulnerable, ill, disabled and elderly within their communities (aside from those protestors who are subsequently entirely quarantining for x number of weeks).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 June, 2020, 02:46:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 June, 2020, 01:20:01 PM
Smart piece over at Politics.co.cuk (https://politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/06/08/covid-nity-is-over-poll-analysis-shows-brits-retreating-into), arguing that COVID unity is over, and people are retreating into camps. They talk about three groups: the trusting, the dissenting, and the frustrated. And, yep, they map to Con/Lab and Leave/Remain.

Culture war FT... L.

This going to be it now. Ian Dunt made a perfectly sensible tweet about the Colston thing and was immediately accused of "pandering to the Remain crowd". Every damn thing the Tories and the right don't like people complaining about will be labelled "Remoaner discontent" and dismissed. The clamour for Cummings' head was instantly factionalised as "Remoaner revenge for Brexit" or "an attempt to sabotage Brexit".

You wouldn't think that they won. It's done. It's happened. The democratic mandate of the referendum (contentious as that might be), the 'will of the people' has been discharged.

We're never going to hear the end of it. For the Brexiteers, this is their Battle of Britain, their 1966 World Cup and they won't let it go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 June, 2020, 02:56:53 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 June, 2020, 01:28:24 PM
'it might be worth asking why black people are still protesting when they're at higher risk than you are'

It's probably courteous not to assume anything about anyone's ethnicity or identity. Thanks.

That jumped out at me as well - also comparing black people in general with somebody who has already declared they have a condition which leaves them at considerable risk.  Even if Wolfie Smith is white, black people are only more likely than the average white person, not a white person with one of the conditions listed on the guidance. 

I'll make this about myself to avoid stepping on anybody else's toes (also I know what ethnicity and conditions I have).
As I also have one of the conditions on the list, I'm both more susceptible to catching COVID than somebody who doesn't have my condition, and more likely to die if I do catch it.  A black person in the same high-risk group would (according to what we can ascertain at the moment) be more vulnerable than me, all else being equal.  I - white and in high-risk group - am more vulnerable than the average black person not in the high-risk group, who themselves are more vulnerable than the average white person not in a high-risk group.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 June, 2020, 03:20:25 PM
Muddy waters.

Arguably, there are two public health crises: the Covid thing, and the racism thing. In the US, it's patently clear that a militarized police force that was born in the slave trade (see: Runaway Slave Patrols (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-52943128/early-american-policing-runaway-slave-patrols)) has a modern tendency to kill black suspects first, and get away with it later. The argument that it's not happening in the UK is debunked in a recent Gruniad article: "Systemic racism and police brutality are British problems too (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/04/systemic-racism-police-brutality-british-problems-black-lives-matter)".

There's certainly a dilemma for many people: protest in a group setting or maintain careful distancing? I just don't know how one could reach a sensible position in suggesting that people shouldn't protest. Most of the time, the status quo prevails: entrenched racism persists because it has a foothold.

The idea (I assume) of the protest movement is to change things when there's a will for change: and you can only get it done now, while it's raw. You can't say "Well, Covid, so if you could all just contain your anger and frustration at the murder of a black suspect in a $20 unproven fraud case by four police officers and save it up for ... a year or so. I double-promise that we'll think about looking into things then."

Ultimately, if anyone's angry about the protests, the blame lies with the government. They could provide strong leadership and a determination to change the system and to root out systemic racism. Have they? Not in the US: Trump tear-gassed peaceful protesters and waved a bible. He thinks white supremacists are "very fine people". Not in the UK: Boris and Co. reckon that statue of the slaver should have stayed up and that democratic channels should be used to "address concerns". (But that had already been tried.) Priti Patel says there's no problem with the police in this country.

Save your fury at the protesters for your elected government: they support the status quo. Which means, in effect, that they support the death of George Floyd. (Trump went so far as to say the murdered man would be pleased about how things were going down on earth from an imagined perch in an imagined heaven. Jesus wept!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2020, 04:24:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 June, 2020, 03:20:25 PM
a militarized police force that was born in the slave trade (see: Runaway Slave Patrols (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-52943128/early-american-policing-runaway-slave-patrols)) has a modern tendency to kill black suspects first, and get away with it later.

I wasn't aware until recently that some of the earliest police forces in the US were slave patrols and that part of their job was terrorising black people who weren't slaves.  One of the first things that struck me after that was that cops in the US still call themselves "patrolmen" - when I looked it up, the phrase is considered to have originated in North America.  African American fathers are expected to give their children "the talk" at some point, in which it is explained how they never argue with patrolmen, they always do what they're told by patrolmen, they never talk back, they never give them any excuse, and at what point do we start acknowledging that black communities are being terrorised by cops?

Quote from: sheridan on 09 June, 2020, 02:56:53 PMAs I also have one of the conditions on the list, I'm both more susceptible to catching COVID than somebody who doesn't have my condition, and more likely to die if I do catch it.  A black person in the same high-risk group would (according to what we can ascertain at the moment) be more vulnerable than me, all else being equal.  I - white and in high-risk group - am more vulnerable than the average black person not in the high-risk group, who themselves are more vulnerable than the average white person not in a high-risk group.

I am worried we're veering into "all lives matter" territory so I apologise for poor phrasing on my part regarding any presumption of ethnicity, and for suggesting that a black person's singular concern in attending a protest would be about catching a virus.  The latter is most obviously not the case, especially in the context of the George Floyd protests, and my intent was merely to draw attention to why a particular community might feel the protests are worth the risk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 09 June, 2020, 04:26:21 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 08 June, 2020, 11:47:42 PMI would also have been vociferously cheering on any tipping of slaver statues into harbours.

That statue wasn't thrown into the sea at all, it just tripped and fell
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 June, 2020, 05:11:04 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 June, 2020, 04:24:37 PM
I am worried we're veering into "all lives matter" territory so I apologise for poor phrasing on my part regarding any presumption of ethnicity

As that was a reply to what I said, I have no connection with "all lives matter", the EDF, BNP, National Front or any other racist organisation.  I'm not suggestion that you're accusing me of that, but as the racist trigger phrase is directly after the quote of what I said I don't want anybody to get the wrong end of the stick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 09 June, 2020, 11:42:00 PM
Another superb 'Week in Tory' from Russ, where we learn of the jolly japes of Johnson (he likes a midday three hour snooze you know) and his ragtag bunch, as we officially hit 64,000 excess deaths to Covid19.

https://twitter.com/russincheshire/status/1270366444405096451?s=21
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2020, 09:12:54 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 June, 2020, 04:26:21 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 08 June, 2020, 11:47:42 PMI would also have been vociferously cheering on any tipping of slaver statues into harbours.

That statue wasn't thrown into the sea at all, it just tripped and fell

I think you'll find it fell harder than it was pushed. Could have been a provocateur?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 June, 2020, 09:56:39 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 09 June, 2020, 11:42:00 PM
Another superb 'Week in Tory' from Russ, where we learn of the jolly japes of Johnson (he likes a midday three hour snooze you know) and his ragtag bunch, as we officially hit 64,000 excess deaths to Covid19.

https://twitter.com/russincheshire/status/1270366444405096451?s=21 (https://twitter.com/russincheshire/status/1270366444405096451?s=21)


Wonder what Keir Starmer's 64,000 deaths prime-ministers-question will be?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 10 June, 2020, 11:30:30 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2020, 09:12:54 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 09 June, 2020, 04:26:21 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 08 June, 2020, 11:47:42 PMI would also have been vociferously cheering on any tipping of slaver statues into harbours.

That statue wasn't thrown into the sea at all, it just tripped and fell

I think you'll find it fell harder than it was pushed. Could have been a provocateur?

Either way, 54 protesters are resigning, because they don't like being told not to push statues over.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 10 June, 2020, 02:31:46 PM
I'm currently seeing people simultaneously saying "black lives matter" while moaning that they can no longer watch LITTLE BRITAIN and COME FLY WITH ME and luagh at blokes in dresses or blacked up (or both) on streaming services.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2020, 02:46:44 PM
I always found that show duff. At best, it was deeply problematic at the time, with a few good ideas, but far too much repetition. It felt like a third-rate and extremely smug Fast Show. But I'll give Matt Lucas his dues. A few years ago, he said he wouldn't make that show today, and was very aware of how "cruel" it was, and the various problems with what he did. He noted there was no bad intent per se, but that from a place of arrogance they showed off their range—which led to some very bad decisions.

If nothing else, the manner of modern streaming services shows how poorly a lot of comedy dates. Even a couple of decades back, we were already aware of this with Python, which was very white, totally male, and extremely sexist—albeit also inventive, clever, and witty in a certain public school way. But it's surprising how quickly Friends become quite poisonous (I couldn't stomach it after about the halfway point into the run), and that people recognised the deep-hearted issues in Big Bang Theory (which I found intolerable for all kinds of reasons). Little Britain is little more than a blip, and I don't care if it's gone. It was never especially big nor clever, and unlike Python hardly stands as required viewing even as a historical curiosity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 10 June, 2020, 02:52:19 PM
I'm witnessing campaigns in London to take down statues of both Horatio Nelson and Nelson Mandela. I personally would agree with the former being toppled but obviously not the latter - it is becoming clear though that this isn't going to end anywhere good. Most statues from antiquity were of some of the very worst of history's psychopaths.

What we really need is a proper contemporary contextualising of every statue - to make it clear, for example that a previous age's veneration, was wrong, is no longer shared, and why.

In Hungary, where statues of card-carrying fascists and war criminals have been springing up all over the place during Orban's viktatorship, there is an excellent park on the edge of Budapest that I would urge everyone to consider visiting. Rather than destroy all the many dozens of statues erected during the Communist decades saved, during the peaceful revolution 30 years ago these statues were saved and repositioned in this windswept park. They are giant vulgar homages to Communist might and muscle, and are of zero artistic merit. Seen together, however, with contextualising, they are intriguing, fascinating and grotesque. Meanwhile, in downtown Budapest, more profound and gentler statues and sculptures erected to mark the city's appaling time at the very epicentre of the Holocaust are still routinely vandalised and desecrated by the far-right. And so it goes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2020, 05:12:13 PM
This could come back to bite me, but in a happy piece of personal news, to counter a tiny bit of the gloom, Mrs IP heard back from the Home Office today, and was told that "a decision has recently been made on your application" and that her "citizenship paperwork will be generated in coming weeks". I'm hoping there's not some other twist in this particular (and very expensive) tale. Thanks to all those on the board who've offered well wishes and support to date—it really has been appreciated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 June, 2020, 05:39:52 PM
Great news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 June, 2020, 05:42:01 PM
Two thumbs up, IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 June, 2020, 05:53:54 PM
Wonderful news, IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 June, 2020, 06:23:13 PM
Delighted to hear it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 10 June, 2020, 08:55:10 PM
Congrats!! That must be a massive relief.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 June, 2020, 09:05:36 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 10 June, 2020, 08:55:10 PM
Congrats!! That must be a massive relief.
Definitely Mrs IP was in bits earlier. It was such an outpouring of stress and relief, not least given the law recently changing on the quiet regarding citizenship and EU/EFTA migrants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 June, 2020, 10:55:14 PM
Our Karl responding to Trump's stupidity.

https://twitter.com/KarlUrban/status/1270459771720593408 (https://twitter.com/KarlUrban/status/1270459771720593408)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 11 June, 2020, 09:04:16 AM
IP -- late to the party as ever, but that is fantastic news.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 June, 2020, 09:49:08 AM
Congrats, Mrs IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2020, 08:58:50 PM
Here's something I've been thinking about for a while.  While I believe the majority of high-ranking national leaders are to some extent sociopathic, most of them can at least emulate some kind of normal behaviour (look at Johnson, with the lovable buffoon mask that he spent so much time crafting and is only now slipping).

Trump, on the other hand, is an absolute weirdo.  He seems utterly unable to even project normality, whether it's boasting about his daughter's 'voluptuous figure', calling himself a 'stable genius'. or tweeting the kind conspiracy theories that friendless internet oddballs dredge up and think people are listening. He has publicly stated that he has no friends, and seems totally incapable of interacting with other human beings.

I don't get it. I don't understand how people can look at him and say, 'there's the man that's fighting for us, the common folk'.  It's like finding the weirdest of all the class misfits and making him the school president.  Just a thought, anyway. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 June, 2020, 09:48:47 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2020, 08:58:50 PM
I don't get it. I don't understand how people can look at him and say, 'there's the man that's fighting for us, the common folk'.

The anti-abortionists vote for him because he promises them what they most desire: complete control over women's lives. He's well on his way to providing them their dream by shifting the supreme court to the "Christian" right.

The white supremacists vote for him because he plays to their wants and mores: a wall to keep out the Mexicans ("rapists"), a rally in Tulsa on the anniversary of the race massacre of 1921, support for white supremacist demonstrations ("very fine people"), support for racist flag-waving ("our heritage") & denigration of black victims of police violence ("not a good person").

The dyed in the wool Republicans vote for him because he provides them with power: because he won the primary and then won the election, and then when in power provided them with tax breaks.

Struggling small business people and blue collar workers felt like he promised them economic recovery with his mythic status as a savvy business mogul. (In stats, the economy has done quite well, but it was on an upward trajectory driven by Obama's policies prior to Trump taking office. We're yet to see the effects of Trump's trade wars and isolationism.)

Edit: a certain portion of the lackadaisical also seem fond of him. Think of young, white, male millennials who haven't navigated their way well through the challenges of mental health, education and the forming of meaningful relationships. They're frustrated - and he promises change. This segues into the organization of deliberately misogynistic groups who feel that they're owed sexual companionship.

(See also: transphobes & homophobes.)

And all of those folk - they make up something like 46% of the population of the US. The corrupt electoral system gave them a win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2020, 10:55:35 PM
Couldn't really ask for a more comprehensive answer than that. Thanks, Funt.  Though I despair for the future of the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 June, 2020, 12:13:49 AM
Yeah, sorry: I'm a real bummer sometimes.

On a positive note, the US military quite often distances itself (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53012887) from Trumpet Scunthorpe Cockatoo Wristwatch.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 June, 2020, 02:52:42 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 June, 2020, 09:48:47 PM
a rally in Tulsa on the anniversary of the race massacre of 1921, support for white supremacist

Just as a point of order - the Tulsa massacre (and not race riot as the right-wing would have you believe) was on the 31st of May and 1st of June 1921 - i.e. has just had it's 99th anniversary.  Trump's having his Nuremberg rally on the site, on the anniversary of the abolition of slavery in the united states.

p.s. anybody who saw the recent Watchmen series - it was the massacre at the beginning of one of the episodes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 June, 2020, 10:21:02 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 June, 2020, 12:13:49 AM
Yeah, sorry: I'm a real bummer sometimes.

On a positive note, the US military quite often distances itself (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53012887) from Trumpet Scunthorpe Cockatoo Wristwatch.

There seems to be quite a bit of that going on alright, which is refreshing to see.  So much for the military parades he was having his dictatorial wankfests about a while ago.

QuoteTrumpet Scunthorpe Cockatoo Wristwatch

Had to think about that for a while  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 05:59:44 AM
So Trump's rally last night is garnering attention for some of the normal reasons:

- 2/3 full arena, plenty of empty seats (blamed on pranksters booking up tickets they had no intention of using ...)

- usual selection of ramblings to terrify the sane.

but the highlight?

- he asked for testing to be slowed because too many were testing positive.

:o Words ....  :o :o :o :o .... fail ......  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 21 June, 2020, 07:08:13 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 05:59:44 AMbut the highlight?

- he asked for testing to be slowed because too many were testing positive.

:o Words ....  :o :o :o :o .... fail ......  :o

The word you're after is stupid. It really is that simple. He's stupid. Thick as pig-shit level stupid.

There's also ignorant and psychopathic, but at the most basic level he is stupid.

If ever there was an example of the power of money, he is it.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
I wish it were that simple.  Let's be honest though, could someone that 'stupid' really make it to such a prominent position in an American political party, get himself elected and manage to stay there as long as he has?

I mean, I would love to reduce it to such simplistic rhetoric but the reality of that fact is just staggering.  Mind you, I don't think we're in much better a position here in the UK.  The only real consolation is that we now seem to have an opposition willing to take a more nuanced and considered approach:  aka, let Johnson spin out the rope himself ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2020, 11:03:54 AM
I think, for all his lack of political experience, Trump is pretty smart when it comes to whipping fellow pig-ignorant boors up into a frenzy of hatred.  His cynical scapegoating works very well on those incapable of thinking with any degree of nuance, of which I now realise there are many.

When it comes to everything else, well, yeah. TAPS* to the core. A man in his 70s having to ask whether Finland is part of Russia.  A man running for president not knowing that Britain is a nuclear power.  Advising injection of disinfectant.  The mind boggles; at least a lot more than his does.

*Thick As Pig Stomm
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 01:23:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2020, 11:03:54 AM
A man running for president not knowing that Britain is a nuclear power. 

Weellll when you consider the size of the UK's nuclear arsenal and the source of the armaments it is possible to argue that the idea of Britain as a 'nuclear power' is slightly suspect. 

It might be better to suggest that it is an increasingly irrelevant extension of America's nuclear arsenal and that actually we've done more damage to the UK by electing Johnson as PM than even the most limited strike by Russia, China or North Korea might do.

Add in the amount of property and state infrastructure owned by Russia or China and you have to wonder if they would go to the trouble of a nuclear strike.  After all it would cost them more than it would cost us Brits (I know, I know, ... lives count too, except not so much in some circles ...).

A far better version of the 'nuclear deterrent' would be to sow nuclear mines around the more upmarket areas of London and threaten to set them off if the Russians do anything stupid.  As for the Chinese, well, they're building a great big nuclear bomb with their own money on British soil.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2020, 03:42:58 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
The only real consolation is that we now seem to have an opposition willing to take a more nuanced and considered approach:  aka, let Johnson spin out the rope himself ...

When Corbyn did that you accused him of not following through.  Theresa May and David Cameron were forced to quit and it didn't affect the governing party one jot beyond buying them breathing room, but I am happy to be informed how what Starmer's doing will result in a measurable and tangibly different outcome, especially given his low polling numbers "against this government, against this PM, in this current mess of a political situation™" and those numbers are with the public and the media on his side.

We're actually even worse off than the Americans because they at least can hope that Biden somehow gets elected (unlikely) and then dies within the next 12 months (very likely) and the VP takes over and it's someone like Warren, who is not great, but if nothing else might be a good accelerationism candidate if you're absolutely at the end of your tether with mainstream politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2020, 06:13:12 PM
Corbyn? Who's that?  :-\

Sorry for being a bit cheeky, but I'm not sure of the value of comparing everything negatively back to sour grapes about how things went for Corbyn. He was ousted by the media, by people within his own party, by the opposition and by the public. Okay.

But he also failed himself. He was grumpy, he was a fence-sitter on Brexit, he failed to take the political party with him, he didn't perform convincingly at PM's questions and he failed to negotiate with the Lib Dems when it might have proved of some use. Ultimately, he failed to take responsibility when he lost. As some of his supporters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 21 June, 2020, 06:39:24 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
I wish it were that simple.  Let's be honest though, could someone that 'stupid' really make it to such a prominent position in an American political party, get himself elected and manage to stay there as long as he has?

That's what I mean about the power of money. His achievements have been bought. He says he wants something and somebody else is paid to do it. Aside from becoming the President, pretty much everything else he's thought would be a good idea has been a failure. He's been a failure as a business man and has failed miserably at being the President. He's remained in place purely because the Republicans are so desperate and greedy for power.

Believe me, I don't and have never liked explanations of the 'it really is that simple' variety, but in this case I think it absolutely is that simple. It is, I agree, almost impossible to believe.

JayzusB.Christ is correct that he is able to whip up the crowd. He is certainly a very effective demagogue. But I don't think that's a sign of intelligence. In this case, it's low cunning at best.

Regards,
Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 June, 2020, 07:09:22 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
I wish it were that simple.

I wish it weren't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2020, 08:16:19 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2020, 06:13:12 PM
Corbyn? Who's that?  :-\

I understand it to be a song by the White Stripes.

Quote from: Robin Low on 21 June, 2020, 06:39:24 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
I wish it were that simple.  Let's be honest though, could someone that 'stupid' really make it to such a prominent position in an American political party, get himself elected and manage to stay there as long as he has?

That's what I mean about the power of money. His achievements have been bought. He says he wants something and somebody else is paid to do it. Aside from becoming the President, pretty much everything else he's thought would be a good idea has been a failure. He's been a failure as a business man and has failed miserably at being the President. He's remained in place purely because the Republicans are so desperate and greedy for power.

Believe me, I don't and have never liked explanations of the 'it really is that simple' variety, but in this case I think it absolutely is that simple. It is, I agree, almost impossible to believe.

I think Noam Chomsky called it right when he said that Nixon went too far with the Watergate break-in because he challenged the establishment rather than individuals, as individuals can come and go and that's just part of the musical chairs game of politics, but lobbying groups and organisations where the money and influence reside will defend themselves against any challenger.*  With Trump, you could see the Republican establishment didn't want him before his confirmation, though when it happened they got in line - but so did the Democrats, who watered down attempts to impeach and remove Trump from office because those same measures could be used against "their" presidents, especially by a GOP that has considerably less care for optics than the Dems do.
I mean, obviously we're in strange new times right now, but before all... this, imagine actually removing a president from office just because people wanted it to happen - what would that have said to the country or the world?  While money politics might be the context, I think the situation with Trump might also be something more intangible - something to do with America's relationship with symbols and the political establishment's fear of what people might get in their heads, but it all comes down to the same thing: once he was 'in', Trump was never going anywhere because the establishment was always going to look after him.


* Just look up "The Business Plot" for an - admittedly long in the tooth - example of how far American business leaders will go to protect their interests
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2020, 09:33:50 PM
I find it difficult to express how I feel about current affairs, but Public Enemy have done it for me: PUBLIC ENEMY - State Of The Union (STFU) featuring DJ PREMIER (https://youtu.be/OQvDRe79F8k)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 June, 2020, 09:43:48 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2020, 09:33:50 PM
I find it difficult to express how I feel about current affairs, but Public Enemy have done it for me: PUBLIC ENEMY - State Of The Union (STFU) featuring DJ PREMIER (https://youtu.be/OQvDRe79F8k)

Excellent.

I also like that it has the line "Mister I-am-the-law, and you are NOT"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 June, 2020, 11:28:15 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 June, 2020, 09:33:50 PM
I find it difficult to express how I feel about current affairs, but Public Enemy have done it for me: PUBLIC ENEMY - State Of The Union (STFU) featuring DJ PREMIER (https://youtu.be/OQvDRe79F8k)


Oh man, I had forgotten how good PE were, and they haven't lost it.  'Orange hair fear the comb-over' - love it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 June, 2020, 11:54:09 AM
WHANNG (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra6HXCI9mGMl)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 June, 2020, 02:03:46 PM
I thought Flavor Flav was fired anyway?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2020, 06:38:21 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 June, 2020, 03:42:58 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 June, 2020, 09:37:51 AM
The only real consolation is that we now seem to have an opposition willing to take a more nuanced and considered approach:  aka, let Johnson spin out the rope himself ...

When Corbyn did that you accused him of not following through. 

Fair point.  The difference to me though is that Starmer is currently pressing points consistently rather than casting about aimlessly.  Corbyn had a regrettable habit of bouncing around from one topic to another, giving May breathing space by shifting the topic.  By the time Johnson got going he had pretty much given up the ghost.

From what I've seen so far, it appears that Starmer picks questions that allow Johnson to fall into old habits.  Take this week's Child Poverty figures.  Johnson's response is being increasingly questioned.  Given his history of rebukes from statistics authorities it is starting to be interpreted as another example of his lying.  So we end up with a blustering PM, trying to goad a reaction out of Starmer that Corbyn generally fell for.

I would agree that Starmer missed an opportunity when Johnson tried to press him on his position vis-a-vis school 'reopening' (THEY WERE NEVER CLOSED! [sorry, it annoys me when politicians and the press present a completely inaccurate picture]).  The question that should have been put to Johnson here, to my mind, is why so few parents have been convinced of the safety of their children's schools. 

Your point on what Starmer can measurably do is also a valid one.  It isn't just a case of his polling numbers though, rather of practicality.  With the margin the Tories have in the HOC right now the only way to force an issue is to make it one that troubles the Tories themselves. 

Johnson's approval figures are possibly the better metric here.  His tenure has not been brilliant and even traditional media supporters such as the Mail are making for uncomfortable reading.  The Foreign Interference Report is still hanging over him, Cummings is now even more of a poisoned chalice than before, Jenrick's planning decision is becoming a bit of an issue, Whateley's Nurses comments haven't gone down well and there is a growing awareness that Sunak is about to present the country with the bill for their <sarcasm>"Covid-holiday"</sarcasm>.

I think you're right to challenge me on perceptions though.  It might be worth comparing Starmer and Corbyn more closely to see whether the difference is tangible rather than perceptual.  Thanks for putting me on the spot there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2020, 10:33:55 AM
It's to do with questioning and follow-up. Corbyn was crap at PMQs. He'd show up with a bunch of questions and run through them. Political folks I follow on Twitter were forever going nuts that he had the Tories on the ropes, and then he'd fail to deliver a killer blow by moving on to something else, seemingly at random.

Starmer uses his training as a lawyer to more skilfully drill down and cause damage. The issue is, fundamentally, whether that matters. Still, polling is improving slowly for Labour, and Starmer's own ratings are way, way higher than Corbyn's. Unfair? Perhaps, but we play in an unfair system. The big question marks for me now are what Starmer will do over extension. Having the Tories own it without stating categorically that an extension is necessary will be a big tactical blunder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2020, 12:41:30 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2020, 06:38:21 AM
Your point on what Starmer can measurably do is also a valid one.

It was really the only point I had apart from uncharitably implying there was a double standard - for the latter, I apologise.
PMQs is pretty much just a masturbatory exercise for political pundits to convince themselves they have a tangible skillset and aren't just guessing and pushing their own narrative like everyone else.  PMQs is not a metric of anything, it's PR, it's just that when Tony Blair was doing it, there was still some dignity to the process of two public schoolboys exchanging opinions in nice suits.  With a preening, bulletproof narcissist like Johnson, that isn't possible anymore - though it's probably a mistake to fall back into the thinking that the issue with PMQs (and UK politics in general) is just one of presentation.

QuoteIt might be worth comparing Starmer and Corbyn more closely to see whether the difference is tangible rather than perceptual.

This is, of course, compulsory if the mistakes of the past are to be avoided, but recent reports/reviews - both officially-released and leaked - show that such a frank evaluation is unlikely to happen within the framework of the Labour Party.  It looks suspiciously like one personality cult has just been replaced with another*, albeit this time without the funny memes.



* Is it ironic that the Labour Party has had two cults of personality in a row based around men who don't seem to have much of a personality, or just depressing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2020, 02:02:16 PM
I was thinking about this the other day. It does seem we're basically fucked unless:

- Labour recognises the need to work with others, stands down in key marginals, and promises PR
- Lib Dems recognise they are a second-tier party, have the means to perhaps win 30 seats at the next GE, stop being pricks in Scotland to the bafflement of English Lib Dems, stand down in all Con/Lab marginals, and perhaps also realise the SW is not 'their' territory anymore
- Greens recognise the need to basically stand down everywhere bar Brighton Pav (assuming it still exists in 2024) and IOW, and obliterate their finances from 2024–29, for the promise of 20+ MPs in 2024
- SNP put on hold indy2 and work with other parties for a more accountable, representative and probably devolved state-based UK that will rapidly recreate ties with Europe (~EEA, but not EU membership)

So, yeah, Con majority in 2024, then, albeit probably on a smaller plurality — (~35–40% vote share, and 10–30-seat majority, while Starmer and co. still play down the need for PR, the Libs/SNP kick the shit out of each other in Scotland, Lab/Lib do the same in England, and the Greens act baffled when people get angry with them for running high-profile candidates in Labour-winnable seats) — unless things change in a big way, or enough people in England recognise what a massive shitshow the Tories are and decamp to Lab/Lib en masse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2020, 02:09:14 PM
I know what you mean.  I think my thing is that round here we have a new Labour MP who is actually a local as opposed to Paratrooper Smith who tried to give Corbyn a run for his money.  In a short space of time she appears to be much more engaged with constituency issues than Smith was in his entire time as our MP.

So it may be that this is one of the things that is affecting my perception of Starmer.  It does help that Johnson is doing all the heavy lifting in digging himself into a hole.  Yes his is a preening narcissist but right now that is doing him more harm than good.  He may be bulletproof but the ricochet's are harming the Tories nonetheless.

TBH Labour is less at the moment about Starmer's leadership and more about holding the government to account across the board.  Perhaps I'm in the wrong part of the party ecosystem but a lot of comms before Corbyn went were very much in the 'cult of personality' camp.  Now it is more about issues that need to be addressed.

This is a peculiar time, just as much for politics as for everything else. I'm wondering how lockdown has affected attitudes to social media.  That being the case then, it might make the job of figuring out the mood music so much harder than before.

As for the 'double standards', no need to apologise.  I would rather someone called me out for something and put me on the spot to justify myself than let cheap shots slide.  Thanks for the provocation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 June, 2020, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2020, 02:02:16 PM
...
So, yeah, Con majority in 2024, then, albeit probably on a smaller plurality [ ... ] unless things change in a big way, or enough people in England recognise what a massive shitshow the Tories are and decamp to Lab/Lib en masse.

True but then again Labour are going to have to work hard to undo the damage Blair did to this back in '97.  Lot of burned bridges there.

We've got four years to the next GE.  In that time Brexit will become a reality, a post-pandemic global recession is going to have to be navigated, the already fragile UK economy is going to have to weather a combination of Spanish Flu / Wall St Crash and all this under a Johnson government with no seriously viable contender.

So I'm actually following the one piece of advice that I think Johnson got right (albeit for slightly different reasons than I think he had in mind):  Stay Alert - keep track of everything the buggers are doing.  Concentrate on keeping records of all this.  Save it up for the next GE campaign.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2020, 02:25:01 PM
TIL: there are still LibDems in Scotland.

I agree with your general thrust, IP, but I'm pretty sure the SNP view Indy 2 as their wedge issue rather than a fight they can/should win.  Before any Scotch boarders @ me for using "Scotch" instead of Scottish saying the SNP are using the issue cynically: give Sturgeon some credit for knowing big votes based on nationalist sentiment are not a good gamble right now, but the absolute circus they generate is great for putting clear water between nationalist parties and everyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2020, 06:20:32 PM
For reasons best known to the Algorithm I get Daily Express stories pushed into my news feed. I would make efforts to purge it from my life, but I've developed a sort of a
fascination for it - as if proving the reality of living in a Leftist Online Bubble, it's like little messages seeping through from a parallel reality where Brexit and Johnson's government  have been one unbroken sparkling triumph. A transdimensional glimpse of whatever the opposite of Deadworld is.

Over in Daily Express Online World the main concerns expressed about the UK Govt and its negotiators are over who will get a knighthood first after delivering Britain's trade miracle and breaking Barnier. 

Meanwhile the Meddling Irish PM is being humiliated on the hour, every hour (back in Miserable Regular World this would be the guy with a 75% approval rating despite drinking cans in the park topless with his mates during lockdown, who currently appears to be worming his way back into government despite losing an election). Better yet,  no-one there is overly troubled by coronavirus or institutional racism.

Sadly I think I prefer Daily Express World to this one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 June, 2020, 07:40:10 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 June, 2020, 06:20:32 PM
For reasons best known to the Algorithm I get Daily Express stories pushed into my news feed.

Try to keep it that way. Ye don't want to be stuck in an echo chamber.

Having said that, try to filter out the Daily mail, because half their headlines alone make ye feel like a pervy wab.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 23 June, 2020, 07:53:49 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 23 June, 2020, 06:20:32 PM
Sadly I think I prefer Daily Express World to this one.

Which is precisely why so many choose to live there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 23 June, 2020, 08:17:12 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 June, 2020, 07:40:10 PM
Having said that, try to filter out the Daily mail, because half their headlines alone make ye feel like a pervy wab.

Alas, I would have to filter out my own mother, whose ideal opener to any conversation is to repeat whatever nonsense is in there today. I have come to view these gambits as akin to a Bene Gesserit test - show weakness by engaging,  and the Gom Jabbar of Asylum Seekers and Sharia Law will strike, ruining the whole day. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 June, 2020, 08:47:05 PM
I walked in on my dad (a Daily Mail reader) talking to one of his similarly-aged mates today about BLM.  It was quite a thing seeing two Irish nationalists agreeing you can't tear down statues of Cromwell.
Sometimes the best you can do is just wait for the grave to claim them and hope they don't do too much damage between now and then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 June, 2020, 09:08:23 PM
Someone had mention this.

(http://i.imgur.com/Dcwe7K2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 24 June, 2020, 08:45:23 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 23 June, 2020, 09:08:23 PM
Someone had mention this.

(http://i.imgur.com/Dcwe7K2.jpg)

I literally work with a few, different ages daily males.

Boring and tiresome wouldn't describe the "conversations."

Initially, because I've never, thankfully, worked in such an atmosphere before, I was angry and offended by their words, I still am, but I've come to pity people with such little empathy or hope or understanding. It really must be a miserable existence to have such narrow, hateful views, and always be yearning for things that never existed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 24 June, 2020, 09:42:05 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 June, 2020, 02:02:16 PM
I was thinking about this the other day. It does seem we're basically fucked unless:

- Labour recognises the need to work with others, stands down in key marginals, and promises PR
- Lib Dems recognise they are a second-tier party, have the means to perhaps win 30 seats at the next GE, stop being pricks in Scotland to the bafflement of English Lib Dems, stand down in all Con/Lab marginals, and perhaps also realise the SW is not 'their' territory anymore
- Greens recognise the need to basically stand down everywhere bar Brighton Pav (assuming it still exists in 2024) and IOW, and obliterate their finances from 2024–29, for the promise of 20+ MPs in 2024
- SNP put on hold indy2 and work with other parties for a more accountable, representative and probably devolved state-based UK that will rapidly recreate ties with Europe (~EEA, but not EU membership)

So, yeah, Con majority in 2024, then, albeit probably on a smaller plurality — (~35–40% vote share, and 10–30-seat majority, while Starmer and co. still play down the need for PR, the Libs/SNP kick the shit out of each other in Scotland, Lab/Lib do the same in England, and the Greens act baffled when people get angry with them for running high-profile candidates in Labour-winnable seats) — unless things change in a big way, or enough people in England recognise what a massive shitshow the Tories are and decamp to Lab/Lib en masse.

Interesting post, but your analysis of Scotland is askew.

The SNP would have bitten your hand off for a federalised UK back in 2014. I remember being amazed that Cameron didn't offer a third option on the ballot, before I realised that no England-based politician had a clue about what was happening on the ground in Scotland and the sense of isolation from Westminster. The infamous "pledge" by unionist politicians, which was torn up in a matter of hours post-ref, will now mean this is an hard thing to sell to even soft indy-types. However it won't be offered, because Scottish Labour currently have only one consistent policy- unionism. Starmer would basically have to shut down the Scottish party to get something like that through (which is possibly not the worst plan).

The Lib Dems are nowhere in Scotland (4 seats in Westminster out of 59)- it's a straight SNP-Con battle and it's basically framed on constitutional lines. Labour and the Lib Dems are an irrelevance and will be for the next electoral cycle at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 June, 2020, 10:20:48 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 June, 2020, 07:40:10 PM
Having said that, try to filter out the Daily mail, because half their headlines alone make ye feel like a pervy wab.


Quote from: dictionaryzoology. the interdigital skin web on certain animals. 2. zoology. the set of barbs on the shaft of a bird's feather.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 11:21:58 AM
CalHab: I'm not saying what the SNP would do, nor what I think it should do. I'm stating what would need to happen to avoid another Conservative majority. And even if the SNP took most Scottish seats and Labour did something beyond any party in history in terms of flipping English seats, we could end up with no viable government, if the SNP sticks to its guns—as it has every right to do—and tells the English to get fucked (or demands something they know will not be agreed in return for supply/confidence).

Given that Labour and the Lib Dems don't seem to fully understand that by digging their heels in, they're stoking the fire, and so one of those things is very likely to happen. (Although one is also an SNP loss, unless they fancy doing a referendum against the national government, thereby triggering a full-on constitutional crisis.) This is all especially stupid from a Lib Dem standpoint, given that the party has long advocated for... devolved regions and a federal UK. But there you go. The Lib Dems aren't a remotely smart party at the top table these days. (As for Labour's position, that shifts and changes. I still can't get a handle on Starmer for key issues surrounding devolution and PR.)

I'm aware the Lib Dems are not a power in Scotland, but they are a spoiler—and arguably beyond the degree the Greens are in England. So you end up in a situation where the SNP could just do a pact with the Lib Dems (where they leave each other alone) and keep their existing seats, or where they kick the shit out of each other, the SNP flip a couple—perhaps all—Lib seats, but the Tories then grab some SNP seats. That result doesn't really benefit anyone apart from Scots who (in many cases entirely rightly and fairly) dislike the Lib Dems. But for a broader picture of 2024, we really need some kind of 'leave the incumbents alone' if said seat is held by a Labour, SNP, Lib Dem, Plaid or Green. Naturally, there's almost no chance that will happen.

And that's all just thinking about the SNP. Imagine trying to convince the English Greens to stand down basically everywhere, when there's little top-down leadership and local parties can do whatever they like. We're just going to get a load of Strouds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2020, 12:00:59 PM
"You are the courageous warriors standing in the way of what they want to do and their goals. They hate our history. They hate our values, and they hate everything we prize as Americans."

Goebbels' speechwriting guidelines getting quite a workout this week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 24 June, 2020, 12:01:22 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 11:21:58 AM
CalHab: I'm not saying what the SNP would do, nor what I think it should do. I'm stating what would need to happen to avoid another Conservative majority. And even if the SNP took most Scottish seats and Labour did something beyond any party in history in terms of flipping English seats, we could end up with no viable government, if the SNP sticks to its guns—as it has every right to do—and tells the English to get fucked (or demands something they know will not be agreed in return for supply/confidence).

Given that Labour and the Lib Dems don't seem to fully understand that by digging their heels in, they're stoking the fire, and so one of those things is very likely to happen. (Although one is also an SNP loss, unless they fancy doing a referendum against the national government, thereby triggering a full-on constitutional crisis.) This is all especially stupid from a Lib Dem standpoint, given that the party has long advocated for... devolved regions and a federal UK. But there you go. The Lib Dems aren't a remotely smart party at the top table these days. (As for Labour's position, that shifts and changes. I still can't get a handle on Starmer for key issues surrounding devolution and PR.)

I'm aware the Lib Dems are not a power in Scotland, but they are a spoiler—and arguably beyond the degree the Greens are in England. So you end up in a situation where the SNP could just do a pact with the Lib Dems (where they leave each other alone) and keep their existing seats, or where they kick the shit out of each other, the SNP flip a couple—perhaps all—Lib seats, but the Tories then grab some SNP seats. That result doesn't really benefit anyone apart from Scots who (in many cases entirely rightly and fairly) dislike the Lib Dems. But for a broader picture of 2024, we really need some kind of 'leave the incumbents alone' if said seat is held by a Labour, SNP, Lib Dem, Plaid or Green. Naturally, there's almost no chance that will happen.

And that's all just thinking about the SNP. Imagine trying to convince the English Greens to stand down basically everywhere, when there's little top-down leadership and local parties can do whatever they like. We're just going to get a load of Strouds.

I think you overstate the difficulty Scotland presents to a future non-Con government.

The SNP hold 48 of 59 seats in Scotland. The main opposition party is toxic to an increasing part of the electorate, so I don't see that changing in the near future.

The SNP will do a deal with Labour, and have promised so in the past, if they are promised a referendum. If I was Starmer, I would ignore his Scottish party (who are largely inept) and do a deal including a third option on the ballot for federalisation, which is currently the only feasible path that would assist Labour getting into power and keep the Union intact. I think the Lib Dems can safely be ignored in Scotland for the next electoral cycle. I doubt many Scots could name any LD politicians.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 24 June, 2020, 01:34:59 PM
Today in Expressworld,  Ireland is likely leaving the EU as the next 'Brexit domino'. Part of the evidence offered for this surprising revelation is that we held referendums on European treaties when no-one else did (we've had 6, not counting the 2 re-runs). Never mind that our constitution requires it, it's really because we're bolshie.

Not included in the article for some reason is the latest Red C poll (possibly they don't do those in Expressworld?) which shows 84% support for EU membership, which is actually lower than usual (around 90%) mainly because folk didn't think the EU acted strongly enough on Covid-19 health measures. That's right, EU approval is down because of their lack of interference in national competencies .

It's the little differences that make this parallel universe so fascinating.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 02:15:13 PM
To be fair, one of the major poles of Bonkersville Brexit was Brexit being amazing > Ireland getting jealous > Irext > Ireland rejoins the UK, because that's how things should be > some kind of party, where Nigel Farage is made king and PM all in one > EU bursts into flames and is also shot into space

Or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 June, 2020, 02:50:03 PM
No freedom of movement!  Needing a visa to have a sun holiday! No trade deals! Even more racism and xenophobia!  Unpicked fruit! Dependency on Trump's America!  Chlorinated chicken*! Sounds awesome - where do I sign up?

*The bendy banana law of the remoaners.  Except it's real.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 02:59:27 PM
It's an excellent example of people doubling down on a terrible decision, and convincing themselves they voted for something when they didn't. Brexit was promised as an easy-to-deliver solution to a (n imaginary) problem, with only upsides, and no loss of benefits. Little by little, it's trended towards the worst possible Brexit, to the point the country will have an internal trade border and/or a literally open import border but gated exports. This would be satirical and extremely funny if it wasn't real life, and lots of us didn't live here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 June, 2020, 09:21:13 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 02:59:27 PM
It's an excellent example of people doubling down on a terrible decision, and convincing themselves they voted for something when they didn't. Brexit was promised as an easy-to-deliver solution to a (n imaginary) problem, with only upsides, and no loss of benefits. Little by little, it's trended towards the worst possible Brexit, to the point the country will have an internal trade border and/or a literally open import border but gated exports. This would be satirical and extremely funny if it wasn't real life, and lots of us didn't live here.

Some of those of us who don't live there aren't going to do too well out of it either. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 09:24:11 PM
Point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2020, 06:48:36 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 June, 2020, 02:15:13 PM
... where Nigel Farage is made king and PM all in one ...

This would be the same Nigel Farage who has done a runner to America then?

Which raises the curious matter of one of the more peculiar aspects of Brexit ... the number of anti-EU campaigners / political types who appear to be actively seeking citizenship in an EU country.  Alexander Johnson's father being the latest example.

It's also becoming increasingly apparent why Johnson has been so keen this week to trumpet 'lockdown easing' moves.  Evidence of Jenrick's role in Desmond's London development planning decision appears to be increasing.

So now in addition to having sat with him at a fundraiser, spent several minutes watching a video Desmond wanted him to see (I would be generous about the video having nothing to do with the development here since we are talking about Desmond but not sure how much that helps him), we now learn that

Not a problem though because the Prime Minister "considers the matter closed."

It is becoming increasingly apparent that significant lockdown changes, increased appearances of the Prime Minister and embarrassing revelations about Ministers / select SPADs are closely correlated.  Is this tin-foil-hattery?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Aaron A Aardvark on 25 June, 2020, 08:29:20 AM
They're pretty openly corrupt. Conspiracies usually involve at least a little bit of secrecy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 June, 2020, 04:19:33 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2020, 06:48:36 AMWhich raises the curious matter of one of the more peculiar aspects of Brexit ... the number of anti-EU campaigners / political types who appear to be actively seeking citizenship in an EU country.
Nothing peculiar about that. Brexit in part was always about the proles knowing their place. The rich have always been allowed to do what they want, by buying their way in. They just don't want everyone else to have the same — or at least want to secure their own freedoms. It's disgusting, obviously; but it also showcases yet again how literally millions voted against their own best interests, while the rich do whatever the hell they like.

As for Jenrick, it's just further confirmation that this government has no interest in accountability. Until a change of leading party, we need to make peace with having an openly corrupt government, and do whatever we can to fight that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 June, 2020, 04:38:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 June, 2020, 04:19:33 PM
As for Jenrick[...]

Ahhh... my MP. Amusingly, he replaced Patrick Mercer, who was forced to resign as an MP having been caught out shamelessly taking a bung and, on on his departure, sent his constituents one of the most ill-tempered and unapologetic 'apology' letters I've ever seen.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 June, 2020, 07:11:04 PM
... and it appears that Wrong-Daily has given Starmer the excuse he needed ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 June, 2020, 07:42:55 PM
Twitter is now a minefield. I liked someone's response to a RLB fantastic: "But it was only a LITTLE BIT anti-semitic".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:00:47 PM
Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:19:49 PM
I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it?  The editors presumably didnt see anything hugely glaring in the claim, or they would have pulled it or hiighlighted it?  Presumably RLBs problem was not retracting immediately (but then, I think the Independent should ahve done so as well)

That said, Labour MPs should be hyper sensitive to any trigger words that might indicate such a potential whistle - a quick ctrl f before sharing perhaps?

Quote from: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:00:47 PM
Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 June, 2020, 10:30:13 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 June, 2020, 07:42:55 PM
Twitter is now a minefield. I liked someone's response to a RLB fantastic: "But it was only a LITTLE BIT anti-semitic".

And yet, Rachel Reeves can eulogise for Nancy Astor, an openly antisemitic Hitler apologist, and not a peep.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 25 June, 2020, 10:34:41 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:00:47 PM
Has the paper pulled the interview, apologised or fact checked it for context - surely its as much anti-semitism for the paper to publish and continue to? i'm not saying the claim isnt born from aome anti-semitic cospiracy, but it's odd that wasnt the headline? "Maxine Peake conspiracy theory nut and Corbyn supporter"

Are American police forces trained by the Israelis? It kind of looks like they are. (https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 June, 2020, 10:35:03 PM
And liberals can openly claim RLB has dual loyalties because of her religion.

Quote from: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:19:49 PM
I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it?  The editors presumably didnt see anything hugely glaring in the claim, or they would have pulled it or hiighlighted it?  Presumably RLBs problem was not retracting immediately (but then, I think the Independent should ahve done so as well)

Possibly the papers didn't pull the interview because Amnesty International were reporting on this as far back as 2016 (https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/), and concerns about militarised policing are somewhat relevant at the moment.  There's loads of links in that Amnesty article, to organs like The Times Of Israel, The Jerusalem Post, JINSA, and AIPAC, all of which I presume must be antisemitic organisations if they are also spreading this conspiracy theory.

Anyway, Israel training cops in racism might not be real, but just yesterday, I discovered the Ash Sarkar Godfather Theory, which definitely is real: young Muslim journalist Ash Sarkar shared a picture of herself eating an orange ice lolly in a park on a warm day after months in lockdown, and within hours was bombarded by tweets calling for her death, calling her a "disgusting c*nt", pictures of nooses, etc.  You see, it was an orange ice lolly, and in the movie The Godfather, oranges are a metaphor for death, so Sarkar sharing the picture of herself in a park, eating an orange ice lolly, is a reference to the three murders in a park in Reading committed by a Libyan national, because oranges come from Libya.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm convinced.

edit: DAMN YOUR QUICK FINGERS, CAMPBELL!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:42:40 PM
Amnesty International are hardly Stormfront - well, that's what I thought... anyone want a Crisis Amnesty International Special going spare....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 June, 2020, 08:16:17 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:19:49 PM
I suppose what I'm getting at here is if the claim is a racist dog whistle, then only racist dogs are going to hear it? 

I think one of the issues is that discrimination is not just overt and we've seen how dangerous covert discrimination can be.  How many statements start with "I'm not being [racist / sexist / homophobic / transphobic / antisemitic] but ...?

It's a mine-field but it's one that needs to be navigated consciously.  If I do hold prejudices (which I know I do) but don't challenge my thinking then does that make me any better than the average "Britain First" member?

Quote from: Leigh S on 25 June, 2020, 10:19:49 PM
That said, Labour MPs should be hyper sensitive to any trigger words that might indicate such a potential whistle - a quick ctrl f before sharing perhaps?

This is where the party ends up with the second mine-field.  At the moment certain groups are hyper-sensitive (with potential good reason).  Any critical comments are going to be instantly seized upon and possibly over-inflated.

Long - Bailey (btw, my apologies for the slur on her name earlier, as much as she has made a mess of things in the past, personal attacks like that are unjustified) should have, as you say, recognised that any criticism of Israeli activity was going to be an issue.  Whether it was a whistle or not is immaterial.

So on the plus side Starmer has managed to send a clear message that Labour party members need to be far more circumspect.  The danger though is that it has also raised the spectre of censorship and the closing down of critical debate.

LB has only been asked to step down from the shadow cabinet though.  She has not been expelled from the party.  Perhaps a sensible and appropriate amount of contrition that suggests recognition of the sensitivity of the issue whilst keeping open space for debate could turn this into a win-win situation - show that mistakes of the past are not going to be made in the future but making it clear that there are issues that need to be discussed openly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 June, 2020, 09:22:10 AM
Several things are obvious to me in all this.

(1). The State of Israel is one of the most appalling perpetrators of Human Rights abuses in the modern world, aided and abetted by the self-interest of western politicians, geopolitical manoeuvring and an unhealthy dose of Islamophobia. As Chomsky puts it, Israel practices worse apartheid than South Africa ever did,  and yet retains the economic support of the west.
(2). The automatic conflation of criticism of the actions of the government of Israel with anti-semitism is pure weaponised bollocks.
(3). Accusations of anti-semitism frequently come from the people voted least likely to give a flying shit about anti-semitism, or any other form of racism or sectarian discrimination. Which casts reasonable doubt on their motives.

But importantly:
(4). Anti-semitism is alive and well.
(5). Politicians and commentators need to realize that Jewish people worldwide have well-founded and absolutely legitimate concerns, be fully aware of the long tragic history of anti-semitic tropes and calumnies, and thus be 100% certain that their criticisms of Israel are verifiably factual and avoid the kind of language that can be seen as contributing to that legacy of persecution.

It's hard, especially when the enemy thrives on the language of hatred and lies that no-one cares about,  but that's where it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 June, 2020, 09:59:45 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 June, 2020, 09:22:10 AM
(2). The automatic conflation of criticism of the actions of the government of Israel with anti-semitism is pure weaponised bollocks.

Worth noting that the IHRA definition of antisemitism specifically state that conflating the state of Israel and its actions with the Jewish people as a generality is, in itself, antisemitic. Odd how that very clear statement only ever works in one direction.

I agree everything you wrote, BTW, but would also add the words of Rabbi Howard Cooper, writing in The Jewish Chronicle, in November 2019:

"Jews are not threatened with organised violence in this country. If it comes, as it might, it will come from the populist right - who have no internal countervailing voices, as the left do. We will then realise that we had our eyes on the wrong ball all along."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 June, 2020, 12:15:01 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 26 June, 2020, 09:59:45 AM
Worth noting that the IHRA definition of antisemitism specifically state that conflating the state of Israel and its actions with the Jewish people as a generality is, in itself, antisemitic. Odd how that very clear statement only ever works in one direction.

Aye, this was where Corbyn really ended up in hot water.  He was unwilling to adopt it in its current form for precisely that reason.  By that point the knives were out for him anyway so he had no hope of getting reasoned discussion going.

What didn't help was some of the stupidity from members of the London wing of the party such as posing a question during a recorded press conference that could be spun as anti-semitic and perpetuate the narrative. 

Arguably this is where RLB has acted in such an unhelpful manner.  Those supporting her might also be adding to the problem.  If they quietly accept this for now, they give credence to the idea that there is a different objective and make it harder for opponents to deploy the 'anti-semite' attack.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 June, 2020, 06:32:55 AM
Hoping this is a good omen:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/0230/production/_113106500_gettyimages-1221587855.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 June, 2020, 12:45:34 PM
Wearing a mask? What kind of American is he?

I see Texas's 'We're Texans - we got this' approach has been about as successful as you would expect.  The virus doesn't give a shit where you're from, people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 27 June, 2020, 12:51:33 PM
To be fair, it does seem a lot of Texans have got it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2020, 01:20:30 PM
What?  I thought Trump said that all you need to do is lay the virus out in the sun?  If there is one thing Texas has plenty of, it's sunlight isn't it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 June, 2020, 01:51:59 PM
I'm seeing a lot of Brits now arguing the same — that going to the beach en masse was fine because the virus apparently instantly dies in sunlight. We're in serious fucking trouble if we can't put a lid on this thing within the next eight weeks. Fortunately — *checks news* — the government is — *checks again* — oh. It's doing fuck-all that will actually help. But it did buy a load of satellites from a bankrupt American company, with the hope of retro-fitting them to compete against the Galileo system we co-created and co-funded and could still be a part of if our leaders weren't such fucking inept ideologically driven idiots. (The most charitable — non-frothing Brexiter — position on this appears to be that it is an "enormous gamble". A bit like everything to do with COVID-19...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 27 June, 2020, 02:02:56 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2020, 01:20:30 PM
What?  I thought Trump said that all you need to do is lay the virus out in the sun?  If there is one thing Texas has plenty of, it's sunlight isn't it?

And Florida is known as the 'Sunshine State'...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 June, 2020, 02:17:32 PM
If The Guardian's report today is accurate, it's also shifted from the 'ignore the stats' state to the 'delete the data' state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 June, 2020, 07:51:04 PM
Delete the data?  Where is that one?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 June, 2020, 10:53:04 PM
https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/05/19/florida-health-department-officials-told-manager-to-delete-coronavirus-data-before-reassigning-her-emails-show/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 June, 2020, 04:45:41 PM
So the orange clown has just retweeted a video showing one of his supporters clearly shouting 'white power'. Seriously, the man is a waste of oxygen.

Also, I note 'Sleepy Joe' has become 'Corrupt Joe'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2020, 08:12:53 PM
If you want 'corruption' it seems that you have to look no further than our present government.  I'm beginning to think that this thread should be renamed the "Incandescently Outraged at the Shameless Self-Serving Bar-stewards Screwing Over This Country" thread.

So Cummings seems to have succeeded in bullying Sedwill out, paving the way to screw over the civil service in his own image.  Gove has gone on record blaming civil servants for the general public distrust in politicians.  Patel has gone on record supporting Jenrick's intensely dubious planning manipulations (... curiously the gentleman also seems to have links to Israeli business interests ... now where do the names Patel and Israel go together again .... ).  London property developers who benefited from decisions made when Johnson was London Mayor seem to have benefitted the Tory party to the tune of up to a million pounds ...  No wonder Johnson called his Telegraph column pay 'chicken feed'. 

I am not just angry, I am apoplectic!  This is the sort of behaviour that we used to condemn in banana republics around the world.  How the hell did this country become so corrupt but more to the point, so blithely accepting of it?  Or is it more a case of it was ever thus but now the f***ers are so emboldened that they don't see any point in trying to hide it any more?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 June, 2020, 11:10:24 PM
No, it was not ever like this, even in that party. What angers me is how many Tories are sticking with it, like they think things will change back, rather than this being one-way travel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 July, 2020, 02:47:25 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Oor4syt.png)

The BBC needs to up its game here with the obvious answer headline questions.*

*Of course he will rule Russia forever, as he will download his consciousness into an army of purpose-built clone-droids rather than face the death that lies in store for us mere mortals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 03 July, 2020, 03:41:32 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 28 June, 2020, 08:12:53 PMOr is it more a case of it was ever thus but now the f***ers are so emboldened that they don't see any point in trying to hide it any more?

Got it in one. They have really been testing the water to see what they can do with impunity, and the answer appears to be "everything".

There really does not appear to be any other way to stop them stripping the assets of this country and killing the citizens besides an open revolt and the guillotine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2020, 04:46:12 PM
Sign my petition to replace all Westminster's statues of racists with working guillotines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 July, 2020, 04:59:35 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 03 July, 2020, 04:46:12 PM
Sign my petition to replace all Westminster's statues of racists with working guillotines.
Only if you promise the blades will be very blunt requiring at least 2-3 attempts for a complete cut.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 July, 2020, 05:08:50 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 03 July, 2020, 03:41:32 PM
There really does not appear to be any other way to stop them stripping the assets of this country and killing the citizens besides an open revolt and the guillotine.

This is a conversation I've been having with ever-increasing frustration for years. Just about everything one can cite as an economic or social ill in modern society can be identified as a predictable, in many cases even the expected, outcome of the neoliberal agenda. It's why I joined the Labour Party specifically to vote for Corbyn: because I wanted someone to articulate a political alternative to that agenda that might have a chance of getting into government, and we weren't going to get that with any of the other leadership candidates.

The question the neolibs (and their centrist apologists) can't or won't answer is: where does this end? If you keep forcing people into ever more insecure labour while ratcheting up the costs of housing, education and healthcare and simultaneously stripping away the societal safety nets, where does it end? Eventually, one way or another, it ends with blood on the streets...

Sadly, the Overton Window in the UK has moved so far to the right that a policy platform like Labour's 2017 manifesto, which contained little that would have upset an Edward Heath-era conservative, was greeted as though it was an attempt to impose some kind of Maoist communism on the country by the national media.

We may all come to regret the fact that the centrist/Blairite faction actively sabotaged Labour's 2017 election campaign very bitterly indeed over the coming years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 July, 2020, 11:10:54 PM
I can't decide what's most "2020" about this story (https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/supplying-ppe-the-new-klondike/): that the Tories have been using a catastrophe to line the pockets of their donors yet again, or that the guy who uncovered it is most famous for living in a windmill and bragging on Twitter about being in drag that time he beat a fox to death - and no that is not a euphemism, you can literally Google "beat a fox to death" (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=beat+a+fox+to+death) and he's the first result.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 July, 2020, 12:41:43 AM
Quotebeing in drag that time he beat a fox to death

That intrigued me, so I went and read about it. He had put on his wife's kimono because it was near at hand when he heard his chickens were in distress. Upon discovering the fox tangled in the chicken coop's protective netting he made the necessarily quick decision to kill it. The RSPCA investigated (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/05/jolyon-maugham-will-not-prosecuted-clubbing-fox-death-kimono) and found that no criminal act had taken place.

Probably the stupidest thing he did there was Tweet about it and enrage the howling mob.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2020, 12:21:32 PM
One rarely beats an animal to death in a fit of logic and practicality, so I suspect he was in shock at the time he tweeted out his story of brutal animal murder to a platform where people still bitch and whine about Anthony Bourdain's ecologically-unsound diet despite his being dead for two years.

I live in a rural area and I've heard plenty of stories of fox encounters, but they usually end with a call to the USPCA (RSPCA to you mainland yokes), so I just assumed Windy Miller's story was SOP for townies whenever they encounter any form of wildlife that isn't a stray cat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 06 July, 2020, 01:32:51 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2020, 12:21:32 PM
I live in a rural area and I've heard plenty of stories of fox encounters, but they usually end with a call to the USPCA (RSPCA to you mainland yokes), so I just assumed Windy Miller's story was SOP for townies whenever they encounter any form of wildlife that isn't a stray cat.

Standard Operating Procedure?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 July, 2020, 02:30:50 PM
Yep.  A townie sees a cat larger than 15lbs and 2 minutes later they're talking about escaped panthers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 07 July, 2020, 04:35:38 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 05 July, 2020, 11:10:54 PM
I can't decide what's most "2020" about this story (https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/supplying-ppe-the-new-klondike/): that the Tories have been using a catastrophe to line the pockets of their donors yet again, or that the guy who uncovered it is most famous for living in a windmill and bragging on Twitter about being in drag that time he beat a fox to death - and no that is not a euphemism, you can literally Google "beat a fox to death" (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=beat+a+fox+to+death) and he's the first result.
Any relation to Owen Benjamin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 July, 2020, 08:28:55 AM
And this week's ironic infection prize goes to Jair Bolsonaro.  Thoughts and prayers are with him. But not too many.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 July, 2020, 10:03:09 PM
Forced diversity is ruining comics. (https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/comics/article/83842-2019-north-american-comics-sales-hit-record-1-21-billion.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 July, 2020, 10:50:44 PM
Comics could make a fortune in the US if they released anthology titles aimed at kids, because the kids market is huge and there are no anthology titles that I know of - everything goes under the model of being just one thing at a time.

Also, lots of comic shops here don't stock kids' graphic novels - those are in book stores instead.

*Disclaimer: personal experience may not include actual facts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 03:57:31 PM
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/057/013/618/small/b4b63e2e6e528547.jpeg?1594583320)
Bit of an overkill?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgeurko on 15 July, 2020, 04:06:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 03:57:31 PM
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/057/013/618/small/b4b63e2e6e528547.jpeg?1594583320)
Bit of an overkill?
No
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 04:32:16 PM
Quote from: judgeurko on 15 July, 2020, 04:06:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 03:57:31 PM
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/057/013/618/small/b4b63e2e6e528547.jpeg?1594583320)
Bit of an overkill?
No
Arresting 12 y.o. is the best use of police resources?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 July, 2020, 05:07:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 04:32:16 PM
Quote from: judgeurko on 15 July, 2020, 04:06:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 03:57:31 PM
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/057/013/618/small/b4b63e2e6e528547.jpeg?1594583320)
Bit of an overkill?
No
Arresting 12 y.o. is the best use of police resources?

What should they have done?  By the time they find out the age of the perpetrator a lot of resources would already have been used.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:14:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Were you arrested for saying shit on the internet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:14:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Were you arrested for saying shit on the internet?

Strange question: I already told you what I was arrested for. You're making the argument that racist abuse shouldn't be a crime - but it is, so you're bang out of luck on that score.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:25:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:14:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Were you arrested for saying shit on the internet?

Strange question: I already told you what I was arrested for. You're making the argument that racist abuse shouldn't be a crime - but it is, so you're bang out of luck on that score.
So its not the same.

Give an exact quote where I said that. No mind reading.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:26:07 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 15 July, 2020, 05:07:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 04:32:16 PM
Quote from: judgeurko on 15 July, 2020, 04:06:44 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 03:57:31 PM
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/057/013/618/small/b4b63e2e6e528547.jpeg?1594583320)
Bit of an overkill?
No
Arresting 12 y.o. is the best use of police resources?

What should they have done?  By the time they find out the age of the perpetrator a lot of resources would already have been used.
I like to let people form their own opinions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:37:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:25:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:14:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Were you arrested for saying shit on the internet?

Strange question: I already told you what I was arrested for. You're making the argument that racist abuse shouldn't be a crime - but it is, so you're bang out of luck on that score.
So its not the same.

Give an exact quote where I said that. No mind reading.

You've equated "a series of racist messages" with "saying shit on the internet", and I've inferred from your stance that you think the boy should've gotten let off and not taken into custody. This would seem to lead to the conclusion that you think children should be allowed to send racist abuse with legal impunity. If I'm wrong, then what argument are you making?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 05:40:29 PM
You asked if arresting a 12yr old was overkill and were responded to with "no".
You then asked if arresting a 12yr old was a good use of police resources and were provided with an example for the arrest of a 12yr old being a good use of resources. It was also stated that by the time of the arrest, much of the resource, the investigation, would already have been spent.
You then made the point that being arrested for online abuse was not the same as being arrested for shoplifting.

For what it's worth, I think online racist abuse is far worse than shoplifting and I'm glad they arrested the kid.
As far as punishment / rehabilitation goes, I hope the arrest put the shits up the abuser and I hope they find a way to make him reflect on what he's done and hopefully encourage him to grow up as a decent, non racist person.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:41:28 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:37:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:25:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:14:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:09:33 PM
I was taken into custody around that age for shoplifting. I've always considered that a valuable part of my education in life. Should they just have let me get on with it?
Were you arrested for saying shit on the internet?

Strange question: I already told you what I was arrested for. You're making the argument that racist abuse shouldn't be a crime - but it is, so you're bang out of luck on that score.
So its not the same.

Give an exact quote where I said that. No mind reading.

You've equated "a series of racist messages" with "saying shit on the internet", and I've inferred from your stance that you think the boy should've gotten let off and not taken into custody. This would seem to lead to the conclusion that you think children should be allowed to send racist abuse with legal impunity. If I'm wrong, then what argument are you making?
Mindreading again. Point to where I said that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:44:21 PM
At this point I'm tempted to ask if you're twelve. Your original question was answered: perhaps we should leave it there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:45:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:44:21 PM
At this point I'm tempted to ask if you're twelve. Your original question was answered: perhaps we should leave it there.
So you got nothing beyond pulling "conclusions" about the other person outta your ass? I thought so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:54:02 PM
Well, I've got to keep them somewhere.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 05:55:57 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 05:54:02 PM
Well, I've got to keep them somewhere.  :D
"HaHa,its all a joke,guys"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 06:02:30 PM
Now that we're friends we can enjoy some music (https://youtu.be/gqH_0LPVoho) together.  :D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:04:09 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 06:02:30 PM
Now that we're friends we can enjoy some music (https://youtu.be/gqH_0LPVoho) together.  :D
Ok,boomer. But first tell me more about what I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:53 PM
The Australian Dream - Official Trailer (https://youtu.be/zRJkLgl56jk)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:15:20 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:53 PM
The Australian Dream - Official Trailer (https://youtu.be/zRJkLgl56jk)
"I outted myself as an empty shell incapable of having an opinion and when namecalling didnt work,I started spaming"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:18:05 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.

You obviously want this very much to be true.
It makes it so much easier to pick fights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:21:34 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:18:05 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.

You obviously want this very much to be true.
It makes it so much easier to pick fights.
If somebody asks one question you can totally deduct their whole life story from it. Especially on the internet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:52:16 PM
Well, I was going to respond to Smith but I think mg1 has responded with all the eloquence that was warranted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 July, 2020, 07:08:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.

Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 07:15:43 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:52:16 PM
Well, I was going to respond to Smith but I think mg1 has responded with all the eloquence that was warranted.
https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/starcraft2/23471116/starcraft-ii-4-13-0-ptr-patch-notes
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 07:16:15 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 July, 2020, 07:08:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.

Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
Brigading.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 07:57:17 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Qrvhns9.png)

So, the question in the article (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53420322) is was US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just posting an innocent picture of his puppy, or was he deliberately trolling the Chinese president Xi Jinping (who wags have compared to Winnie the Pooh, leading to massive China-wide censorship of the friendly fictional bear).

So, a story about deliberate trolling and childish tantrums.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 08:02:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 07:57:17 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Qrvhns9.png)

So, the question in the article (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53420322) is was US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just posting an innocent picture of his puppy, or was he deliberately trolling the Chinese president Xi Jinping (who wags have compared to Winnie the Pooh, leading to massive China-wide censorship of the friendly fictional bear).

So, a story about deliberate trolling and childish tantrums.
https://youtu.be/utLrtEvF6gk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 15 July, 2020, 10:37:45 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 07:16:15 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 15 July, 2020, 07:08:47 PM
Quote from: Smith on 15 July, 2020, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: JamesC on 15 July, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
People are going to base their opinions about what you write by both the content, your demeanor and what you choose to respond to or bring up.
Making inferences is both natural and reasonable and does not constitute telling you what you think.
Yes,it does.

Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
Brigading.

You're obviously more experienced with internet trolling than I am as I don't even know what that means.

Come to think of it, I don't even care enough to google it or continue this conversation.

You are tiresome. Goodbye.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 16 July, 2020, 12:31:59 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 July, 2020, 07:57:17 PM
So, a story about deliberate trolling and childish tantrums.

Not like this thread today then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 July, 2020, 01:57:14 PM
OK—enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 July, 2020, 06:08:29 PM
Talking of politics, support for wearing face masks is oddly being driven down party lines, rather than by people listening to medical advice. Even when people do wear a mask, a small percentage seem to think that the nose doesn't count.

(https://showmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/wearing-your-mask-like-this-is-like-wearing-your-underwear-like-this.jpg)


And, while masking up is not the whole story, people are suggesting some correlation with the data:

(https://www.maskssavelives.org/static/Adjustments.plist.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 July, 2020, 06:29:42 PM
So the Face Mask debate rages on with policy more and more resembling Kermit the Frog in a Blender.  From the 'murrican point of view there is a line of thought that wearing is seen as a tacit criticism of Trump.  The debate this side of the pond seems to revolve around whether or not it is too much of an imposition, does any good or makes you feel self conscious.  Simply put, there seems to be no end of puerile reasons not to wear it, with one LBC caller describing them as "face nappies" (which, as was observed, seriously raises questions about what comes out of his mouth!).

It feels a little like the wheels have come off this completely.  Scientists are being honest about the data that is still equivocal to say the least.  Politicians in the UK are burning through credibility at a dizzying rate.  It's no  wonder folks don't know which way to go.  Police say rules are unenforceable.  Shopkeepers are told to police the rules (aye, they're going to kick out potential paying customers at a time when they're trying to keep their business afloat).

This just feels symptomatic (sorry) of where we are at right now.  We spend more time arguing about crap than getting on and doing something.   :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 July, 2020, 07:03:54 AM
BBC article: Portland protests: Oregon state files lawsuit against federal US government (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53460495)

Key quote: "federal officers in unmarked vehicles appeared to forcefully seize protesters from the streets and detain them without justification".

Trump's extra-judicial goon squads are detaining non-violent protesters, basically.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 July, 2020, 04:42:17 PM
They've been doing it for years already to Latinos, and it's gone without any real challenge so why wouldn't they escalate it to others on their list of enemies?  Me, though, I was hard at work doing real grassroots political activism to fight it - I was tweeting the Niemoller poem at least once a week.
No matter what happens next, my conscience is clear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 July, 2020, 04:43:55 PM
You know, whilst I watch the news from the states with a growing sense of unease bordering on horror, events in this country don't help either.

So federal law enforcement engages in suspect activity while at the same time it looks like Trump might actually be laying the foundations for a reflection of November's result (admittedly that might be high scale tin-foil-hattery but it is also disturbingly believable).

Here in the UK on the other hand our politicians have just voted to deny parliamentary scrutiny of future trade deals whilst it turns out the government has been avoiding any coherent scrutiny of distortion of British democracy mainly because they are getting so much money for their party.

Remember the good old days when this was the sort of stuff our favourite dystopian writers made up?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 July, 2020, 05:55:32 PM
A lot of our favorite dystopian writers were journalists, or knew journalists.  What if they were just writing about what was already going on?  What if periods of prosperity and relative domestic calm are not the norm but the exception?  What if a constant stream of data from people's firsthand experiences of current events make it impossible to tell that lie anymore?  What if it's always been like this?
For a lot of people, it has always been like this.  This is our life now and there's no going back - we change or we die.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 July, 2020, 07:02:09 PM
Fair points.  I just don't remember living through so much in such a short space of time.  Growing up, the Cold War was so ubiquitous it was barely noticeable.  Granted the prospect of nuclear holocaust and slow death by radiation poisoning was a possibility but it still seemed a bit, I don't know, detached somehow?  In all honesty the threat from Irish nationalists was a bigger issue, certainly more real somehow.

The last decade has been something else though.  It's a bit like Sir James Jasper's Warp.  We have a global pandemic involving a potentially lethal virus for which there doesn't seem to be any obvious solution.  We have political leadership that makes the most lunatic of conspiracy theorists look sane on one side of the Atlantic while the Sloth rules the UK, aided and abetted by Beeker's less intelligent cousin.  So while we are trying to find some sort of solution, the folks that are supposed to be in charge are terrifying everyone in sight.

Oh, and we seem to have managed to provide evidence that climate change is a man-made phenomenon as air quality around the world improves with lockdown.  Not that the most pressing problem we've ever faced is that important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 21 July, 2020, 08:36:41 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 July, 2020, 07:02:09 PM
The last decade has been something else though.  It's a bit like Sir James Jasper's Warp.

Best analogy so far!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 July, 2020, 09:39:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 July, 2020, 07:02:09 PM
Fair points.  I just don't remember living through so much in such a short space of time.  Growing up, the Cold War was so ubiquitous it was barely noticeable.  Granted the prospect of nuclear holocaust and slow death by radiation poisoning was a possibility but it still seemed a bit, I don't know, detached somehow?  In all honesty the threat from Irish nationalists was a bigger issue, certainly more real somehow.

I certainly encountered the IRA trying to blow me up when I was ten years old more often than the Russians did!  I say ten, I think I was actually about twelve or so.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 21 July, 2020, 10:43:58 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 July, 2020, 07:03:54 AM
BBC article: Portland protests: Oregon state files lawsuit against federal US government (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53460495)

Key quote: "federal officers in unmarked vehicles appeared to forcefully seize protesters from the streets and detain them without justification".

Trump's extra-judicial goon squads are detaining non-violent protesters, basically.

Quite fascinating Twitter thread related to this on the idea of collusion and plausible deniability.

https://mobile.twitter.com/GregoryMcKelvey/status/1284007847173386240
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 22 July, 2020, 12:34:08 AM
You know how the Conservatives are constantly stripping the U.K. of its assets and flogging then at bargain basement prices just to keep them and their rich pals in Lear Jets? I think they've just sold our democracy down the pan for shitloads of cash from Russian oligarchs. I think Russia owns the U.K. now.

It's the only thing that seems to explain why Johnson, Cummings and Banks haven't been dragged away and jailed for treason. They can't be traitors to the state if the state is now owned by Russia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 July, 2020, 06:36:51 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 22 July, 2020, 12:34:08 AM
You know how the Conservatives are constantly stripping the U.K. of its assets and flogging then at bargain basement prices just to keep them and their rich pals in Lear Jets?

There are a couple of takeaways from the Russia Report that have not quite made the headlines yet: this has been going on for decades, the process started not long after the fall of the Communist Regime as the Islamic Threat was prioritised, attempts were made to create a new regime with Russia and (possibly most importantly) the City of London became one of the key laundering centres.  So New Labour once again has questions to answer here.

Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 22 July, 2020, 12:34:08 AM
I think they've just sold our democracy down the pan for shitloads of cash from Russian oligarchs. I think Russia owns the U.K. now.

This is the other takeaway; this is not a recent event nor is it just about the political class here.  The role of what the report euphemistically terms 'enablers' (once upon a time would be called 'collaborators') in the City should raise some serious questions for us about the role of finance.  So now in addition to the question of how much damage they did to the UK with the 2008 crash (please remember the role of our current chancellor here) there is the question of the role that they have played in weakening democracy in the UK.

As you say, the British government (or rather ironically, the Tory party) has been pretty much bought and paid for by foreign money.  I wonder if May would now like to revisit her frequent use of the phrase "betrayal of democracy" of recent years?

It's also worth bearing in mind that the UK Treason Laws only apply to crimes against the crown, not the state and British People.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 22 July, 2020, 01:03:11 PM
QuoteIt's also worth bearing in mind that the UK Treason Laws only apply to crimes against the crown, not the state and British People.

Drat.

So what law is there that would apply here? What would you legally call their collaboration with an enemy of the state in terms of getting them hauled out of office and up in front of a judge?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 July, 2020, 01:39:32 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 21 July, 2020, 09:39:47 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 July, 2020, 07:02:09 PM
Fair points.  I just don't remember living through so much in such a short space of time.  Growing up, the Cold War was so ubiquitous it was barely noticeable.  Granted the prospect of nuclear holocaust and slow death by radiation poisoning was a possibility but it still seemed a bit, I don't know, detached somehow?  In all honesty the threat from Irish nationalists was a bigger issue, certainly more real somehow.

I certainly encountered the IRA trying to blow me up when I was ten years old more often than the Russians did!  I say ten, I think I was actually about twelve or so.

I can't help but feel my point is being made for me: The Cold War and the Troubles happening at the same time and we just sort of hand-wave them away like they don't really count as extraordinary.  I'm a bit guilty of this myself as I don't even remember living under military occupation most of the time, but I do sometimes feel when I pass where military bases and checkpoints used to be that the houses since built on those sites don't quite belong there.  My dad still drives around town using routes based on avoiding where military roadblocks used to be.

"We Didn't Start The Fire (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFTLKWw542g)" is just Billy Joel listing mental things that went on in his lifetime.  He wrote it as a response to those people who said it was harder to grow up in the turbulence of the 1980s compared to the 1950s of Joel's youth when things were simpler.  I imagine the obvious joke is that a remake would be fifteen minutes long.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 July, 2020, 07:15:37 PM
My sister is quite relaxed about the current swing to the right that's being experienced in the UK and the US: she said "there are always swings to the left and to the right - we just happen to be in a swing to the right".

The thing is, if we swing too far (I suppose in either direction), we get death camps. I don't think I'm being hyperbolic. Look at China at the moment and how its treating its citizens: in particular the Uyghurs. They're not gassing or shooting them (as far as we can tell), but there is clearly a program of mass incarceration and sterilization. Coming out of the other end of that pipeline are two products: indentured workers (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51697800) and hair (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/01/china-muslim-labor-camps-uighur-hair-products). (Oh, and thanks to the sterilization program: the genocide of an ethnic group. I'm not sure why this is in parentheses - it's worse than selling hair or enslavement, right?)

So, I disagree with my sister. Just because it's SNAFU, that doesn't mean we shouldn't fight it. Trump's goons in Portland are now being confronted by a Wall of Moms (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53504151)!

The guy in charge of the goon squad is Acting DHS (Department of Homeland Security) Secretary Chad Wolf. Yes, the man preying on mostly peaceful protesters is named "Wolf". And Chad. Are there any nice Chads?

What the feds are doing (deploying troops when the local state & city government is asking them not to) is all perfectly legal, under an old law that was put in place to put down Native Americans. Or, as we see here, anyone the federal government decides is an enemy. Like ... the citizens of the country.

[/rant]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 22 July, 2020, 07:25:32 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 22 July, 2020, 07:15:37 PM
My sister is quite relaxed about the current swing to the right that's being experienced in the UK and the US: she said "there are always swings to the left and to the right - we just happen to be in a swing to the right".

These swings normally produce the worse of mankind. When will we ever find the middle-ground ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 July, 2020, 08:08:20 PM
This is not a normal swing to the right. This is straight-up nationalism. The Tories threw Heseltine and Clarke out, for crying out loud. Thatcher would be too much of an EU-loving liberal for this party. The upshot is the Overton window is now so heavily skewed that even the likes of Dominic Grieve are seen as being worryingly left-leaning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 22 July, 2020, 08:20:50 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 22 July, 2020, 07:15:37 PMAre there any nice Chads?

Well, there's one hanging chad I'd like to see... :-)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 July, 2020, 10:04:57 PM
Quote from: broodblik on 22 July, 2020, 07:25:32 PMWhen will we ever find the middle-ground ?

We tried, but the centrists refused to support it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 23 July, 2020, 10:23:45 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 July, 2020, 08:08:20 PM
This is not a normal swing to the right. This is straight-up nationalism. The Tories threw Heseltine and Clarke out, for crying out loud. Thatcher would be too much of an EU-loving liberal for this party. The upshot is the Overton window is now so heavily skewed that even the likes of Dominic Grieve are seen as being worryingly left-leaning.

This would be the Thatcher that opposed the social chapter, opposed ERM let alone a Single Currency, opposed the Maastricht Treaty, and was calling for Britain to leave in the early noughties? I think you might be blinded by the early Thatcher's jumper.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 10:53:11 AM
She was also heavily responsible for the single market, remember, which the current Tories are oblivious to. I don't like Thatcher. I don't for a second think she was anything other than a right-wing horror show. But the point is she would be a moderate at worst in this current shitshow of a Conservative Party, because that's how far they've gone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 July, 2020, 11:01:31 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 10:53:11 AM
She was also heavily responsible for the single market, remember, which the current Tories are oblivious to. I don't like Thatcher. I don't for a second think she was anything other than a right-wing horror show. But the point is she would be a moderate at worst in this current shitshow of a Conservative Party, because that's how far they've gone.

I heard Berhard Ingham, Thatcher's press secretary and ardent Leaver, interviewed a couple of years back and he said there was little doubt in his mind that Thatcher was a pragmatist and would almost certainly have been a reluctant Remainer if she'd been faced with binary choice of the referendum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 11:35:34 AM
Quite possibly. Regardless, I can't imagine—as a pragmatist rather than an ideologue—she would have taken the referendum result we did get to detonate everything she and her colleagues had built. A number of the frameworks within the EU come from UK Conservative governments and the lawyers they instructed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 July, 2020, 12:23:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 10:53:11 AM
I don't like Thatcher. I don't for a second think she was anything other than a right-wing horror show. But the point is she would be a moderate at worst in this current shitshow of a Conservative Party ...

That really is the key point right now, isn't it?  It is hard to put a finger on what it is that is setting this shower apart.  Thatcher might have had skewed and disturbing principles but there was still an element of recognition that she had a duty to perform.  Whatever you think of the way she went about it.  For her free market liberalisation was about empowerment to some extent.  What she chose to ignore was the Darwinian dimension.

This present crowd are nothing more than craven, narcissistic opportunists.  it feels more like they are acting from a sense of self-importance and entitlement that is all about exploiting the free market for their own game.  The key takeaway that Cummings seems to have accepted from his Russia experience is how much you can get away with if you are brazen enough.  He wraps it up in pseudo-intellectual rhetoric but it all boils down to a belief that he is so much better than the rest of us.

Johnson is today trying to shore up belief in the future of the UK, all the while ignoring the damage that he is allowing to be done in his name to the union.  Lenin spoke of every nation being just 3 meals away from anarchy?  I have a suspicion we've had two already ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 23 July, 2020, 01:29:12 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 July, 2020, 12:23:34 PM
For her free market liberalisation was about empowerment to some extent.  What she chose to ignore was the Darwinian dimension.

The thing about both Thatcher and Major is that they weren't posh. I may have viscerally disagreed with pretty much everything they did, but I don't doubt that they at least had some notion of empowering social mobility at their political core, even if I think policies they believed would achieve that were unspeakably damaging and wrong-headed.

This shower, though, have never held proper jobs in their entire lives — they were born into privilege, which waved them through expensive public schools and Oxbridge, and then either straight into politics, or via the sort of cushy jobs that privilege makes available. They believe they can do whatever they like because their entire lives have shown them that this is true and they genuinely, at their core, believe they are better than the rest of us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 01:40:31 PM
This also explains government by slogan. To date, that is what has worked for them. Pithy responses and snark got Johnson through his journalism career, HIGNFY, and several election wins. But it doesn't work when it comes to governance. Also, a brief look at the Thatcher and Major ministries on Wikipedia shows cabinets peppered with chancers, but also backed by some serious heavyweights who knew their shit. That's true also for Blair and—for the most part—Cameron/Clegg. Although on the last of those, the big warning light on seeing the initial cabinet is that most of the solid politicians there are Liberal Democrats.

Now, we just have people who don't know how to do the job—and mostly don't care. They lack talent, skill and empathy, but are backed by cunning tactical manipulators and strategists. This is why the opposition—all of it; not just Labour—has to get its shit together and work together. That, sadly, is about as likely as this shower of arseholes in government suddenly showing a glimmer of competence and pragmatism regarding Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 July, 2020, 01:54:19 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 23 July, 2020, 12:23:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 July, 2020, 10:53:11 AM
I don't like Thatcher. I don't for a second think she was anything other than a right-wing horror show. But the point is she would be a moderate at worst in this current shitshow of a Conservative Party ...

That really is the key point right now, isn't it?  It is hard to put a finger on what it is that is setting this shower apart.

Thatcher was a classic liberal who believed in individualism as the basis of society, but the current stream of cat piss are neoliberals, led by the sanctity of the free market over all other concerns, which is why they occasionally do positive - spin-friendly - things that "conservatives" as we understand them would never countenance, such as Cameron's apology for Bloody Sunday, and legalisation of same-sex marriage.  I've seen the argument made that we're one renewable energy magnate becoming a Tory donor away from seeing the party shift to supporting green energy while Labour will still be chasing "slightly" racists for votes, meaning green, student and pragmatic voters will just bite the bullet.

QuoteLenin spoke of every nation being just 3 meals away from anarchy?  I have a suspicion we've had two already ...

If Lenin meant missing three meals, he was obviously wrong, given that the UK populace has its fair share of families in food poverty and they don't look like doing a revolution any time soon.  More's the pity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 26 July, 2020, 05:42:56 PM
Well, colour me surprised! Barely a couple of weeks in power, and already the Irish political piggies already have their snouts buried deep in the trough.

https://www.thejournal.ie/paschal-donohoe-junior-minister-salaries-5160153-Jul2020/

And as for the Green Party, well, they've already shown their true colours.

"The Green Party's 2020 Election Manifesto outlines a programme of transformational climate action for the Green decade ahead; initiatives that will futureproof our economy, create jobs, and reshape our society in a way that promotes fairness, equality and social justice."

https://www.irishpost.com/news/green-party-leader-eamon-ryan-falls-fast-asleep-in-dail-and-has-to-be-woken-up-189319

I gave them the benefit of the doubt at this election - but never again. Fucking hypocrites!



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 July, 2020, 01:12:56 AM
The company that tracks down immigrants for ICE has been given permission to use the data collected by the NHS to combat Covid 19 to create databases recording citizens' race, religion and political orientation (https://twitter.com/StefSimanowitz/status/1286946529446699008), because these are - apparently - important factors in whether or not one has the flu.  I could have the wrong end of the stick here, but it seems like the journalist is suggesting that the UK government opted out of the version of a Covid tracking system that actually worked so it could instead create databases of Muslims, non-whites, and political opponents.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 30 July, 2020, 02:19:13 PM
The current President of the United States is now calling for a 'delay' in the forthcoming November 2020 election. 'The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants.' Thomas Jefferson.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/trump-suggests-unprecedented-delay-to-november-election/2542252/



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2020, 02:30:21 PM
And yet so many Americans don't see what's going on here. He's laying the groundwork now to contest the result, and especially in the case of a close win for Biden (which is what polling points to, at least in terms of the Electoral College). But also, he by law can't do this anyway; and if he did, then the USA is at that point no longer a democracy in any meaningful sense. (Arguably, it's at the moment teetering on the brink, and is enacting policy that during a sane president's time would elsewhere have likely resulted in sanctions.)

Still: we shouldn't forget more or less the same is happening in the UK. The difference here is democracy is slowly and methodically being dismantled in a much quieter manner, while Johnson provides a useful distraction in occasionally planting an outwardly progressive story—BIKES! MORE BIKES! DON'T LOOK AT VETTING GOING TO GOVE! BIKES!

My wife's increasingly of the opinion we need to get the fuck out of here, but COVID has done for that. No way to move anywhere else now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 30 July, 2020, 02:40:18 PM
Come to Scotland. The weather is worse, but the climate is better (politically, at least).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2020, 03:27:53 PM
We would already have moved there if Scotland had quit the UK. But there's no point in uprooting the family until that happens. If we have to go, we'll head to somewhere in the EU. The issue right now is in not being able to travel and check places out. We're also having a battle between various things we'd like from a place to live, and fast coming to the conclusion you can't have everything...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 July, 2020, 04:24:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 July, 2020, 02:30:21 PM
we shouldn't forget more or less the same is happening in the UK. The difference here is democracy is slowly and methodically being dismantled in a much quieter manner, while Johnson provides a useful distraction in occasionally planting an outwardly progressive story

Aye, this is why I keep saying that Johnson's revamped "catch-phrase" is actually good advice.

Stay Alert!  Watch the buggers like a hawk!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 30 July, 2020, 04:45:29 PM
Trump will be fine when he steals his election, much as GW Bush was.  2024 is where things will get interesting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 July, 2020, 06:35:34 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 30 July, 2020, 02:19:13 PM
The current President of the United States is now calling for a 'delay' in the forthcoming November 2020 election. 'The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants.' Thomas Jefferson.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/trump-suggests-unprecedented-delay-to-november-election/2542252/

Attempts to subvert the democratic process in order to remain in power are certainly worrying signs of despotism - but on the other hand it's also a clear sign that he's expecting to lose the election.

Delay would, of course, serve him well - he'll be hoping that the Covid crisis will have a real cure (as opposed to the bullshit ones he promotes) in time, and the economy will recover, and then he can win again.

In the meantime, he just needs to be stopped from adopting (more) emergency powers with which to cement his claim to the throne.

---

In related news (by which I mean: Republicans are Scunthorpes), the mask-avoiding congressman Louie Gohmert has caught Covid. Rather than fess up to the fact that it's his own damned fault for not wearing a mask consistently, he's instead decided that those rare occasions when he did wear a mask are when he must have caught it. Cognitive dissonance is alive and well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 30 July, 2020, 06:45:18 PM
This article makes for some interesting reading (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/27/trump-loses-election-what-happens-possibilities) about the dangers of the election result not going Trump's way, or more importantly, not clearly enough. 

Considering the problems we've seen here in the UK with a wafer thin result things are looking disturbing for November in the States.

I reckon the next few months are going to be some of the most 'interesting' in American Electoral history.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 August, 2020, 03:15:08 PM
QuoteThe Thick of It's central proposition – that both major parties were essentially the same – wore thin as Cameron and Osborne's cuts became harsher. It collapsed when Corbyn assumed the Labour leadership on an anti-austerity platform. Suddenly, the 'both sides' framing British comedians had often used no longer rang true, instead implicitly siding them with power.

While this is an interesting overview of why so many on the left can be heard mourning that they can't enjoy any comedy made in the 1990s anymore (https://www.redpepper.org.uk/how-corbyn-unmasked-comedy/), I feel it could have gone beyond the Corbyn-centric stuff (though fair play, that is it's central premise) and examined how some comedy figures like Robert Webb and Graham Linehan brought about their own cancelling through a belief that their dated and toxic opinions didn't need to be modified or guarded anymore.
Title: The Secret Life Of The Bathhouse Tribe!
Post by: NapalmKev on 01 August, 2020, 06:51:23 PM
Quote from: NorvezhskiyDommoomb on 01 August, 2020, 06:34:55 PM
A bathhouse or a bathhouse - repeated several times because bots are crap!

Not the best argument regarding current Politics but I appreciate the effort. I would say though that you haven't included enough Bathhouses.


Cheers
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 August, 2020, 10:19:26 AM
A polite reminder: please do not respond to spam on this forum. It just creates extra work for the admins/mods in cleaning up those messages along with the original posts/accounts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: NapalmKev on 02 August, 2020, 10:22:33 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 August, 2020, 10:19:26 AM
A polite reminder: please do not respond to spam on this forum. It just creates extra work for the admins/mods in cleaning up those messages along with the original posts/accounts.

Apologies! I shall refrain from being an idiot.

Cheers


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 05 August, 2020, 10:41:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/BBHpq9l.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 05 August, 2020, 12:58:49 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 August, 2020, 04:38:46 PM
The absolutely, sphincter-tighteningly terrifying reality of that interview is:

a)  it does not need parodising, the reality is a joke itself;

b)  the man making the inane remarks is in charge of the American military, including its nuclear arsenal.

:crazy:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 05 August, 2020, 04:48:30 PM
The image with the giraffe is clearly fake news.

If the claim is that Trump wrote it, then why is the spelling correct?

If the claim is that it was written for his benefit by an aide, then the sentence construction is way too complex for him to understand.

And he'd never get that pun.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 August, 2020, 02:12:04 PM
The USPS (United States Postal Service) has been steadily gutted over the years and its services have nosedived and created massive delays in delivery times, so fair play to Trump for choosing now - during a pandemic when the presidential election looks to be decided by mail-in and absentee voting - to fire 23 postmasters with decades of experience and replace them with one of his private sector donors.
Finally the free market will fix what the socialist postal service has broken, and ensure a fair and democratic election for the greatest country on Earth (citation needed).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 08 August, 2020, 02:25:01 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 August, 2020, 02:12:04 PM
The USPS (United States Postal Service) has been steadily gutted over the years and its services have nosedived and created massive delays in delivery times

Managers are being specifically instructed to delay the mail rather than pay overtime to delivery staff. The financial crisis is the direct result of Republican legislation that decreed that USPS had to have cash on hand to fund its pension commitments for seventy-five years. There is no other employer in the US, public or private, with a pension fund that has this obligation — it was specifically designed to bankrupt the postal service.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2020, 12:46:52 PM
Whilst we have spent quite a bit of time lamenting the slow, slip from democracy that seems to be afflicting our American cousins it would seem that there is much to concern ourselves about this side of the Atlantic too.  It's worth reflecting on how far we've come in such a short space of time.  It is less than a year since we had the highly dubious proroguing of parliament, accompanied by the shenanigans that led to Labour shooting the country in the other foot with the December GE.  The last few months though have seen quite a few acts that need to be kept in mind too.

Today sees reports of the dissolution of Public Health England and the establishment of a replacement body.  The Telegraph is making much of the 'failings' of the 2016 war game and laying the blame at this body's feet.  The bigger question though is what is going to replace it.

When you consider the recent expansion of the Lords and the latest local government reorganisation together with several clauses in the recent Trade Bill that hobble the devolved governments and moves to limit the powers of the London Mayor there are some rather disturbing headwinds forming.  All this on top of a plethora of unscrutinised contracts over the last six months that appear to start at unethical and plunge headlong into territory that should be prompting legal action.

... and speaking of legal action, certain law firms in the City are starting to promote the idea of using the sorts of legal powers integral to TTIP to sue for lost profits. 

It is looking more and more like Covid-19 has been used as cover for the wholesale plunder of our nation with the contrivance of our government.  Like Johnson said (in one of his 'stopped clock' moments ...)  "Stay Alert"!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2020, 03:48:08 PM
If we had PR - like Australia does - we could have a much less racist and nakedly capitalist government - like Australia does.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 16 August, 2020, 04:17:13 PM
You are correct, Tjm.

There is something extremely worrying going on.

It might seem over the top to some but many institutions will come out of the covid mess either utterly changed or dismantled completely.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2020, 06:23:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2020, 03:48:08 PM
If we had PR - like Australia does - we could have a much less racist and nakedly capitalist government - like Australia does.

Quick check Prof .... is that sarcasm?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2020, 06:43:54 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2020, 06:23:14 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2020, 03:48:08 PM
If we had PR - like Australia does - we could have a much less racist and nakedly capitalist government - like Australia does.

Quick check Prof .... is that sarcasm?

It pleases me that no-one can tell anymore.
But: Yes and no.

Quote from: karlos on 16 August, 2020, 04:17:13 PMIt might seem over the top to some but many institutions will come out of the covid mess either utterly changed or dismantled completely.

Don't get me wrong, the Tories would privatise the NHS in a heartbeat, but they're probably possessed of just enough self-preservation to know that if they do it too quickly, some of them will die.  I do not mean this in an abstract political career-type sense, I mean if people saw a privatised NHS watershed moment before them, they'd go for the ones that did it with pitchforks and hammers and literally murder them dead - there is a reason so much of our stuff was still nationally owned even after Thatcher's tenure.
History shows us that whether for good or bad, too much change in one go galvanises people into proactive groups that push back against that change (going back to Thatcher again, she was ultimately undone by the Poll Tax Riots), and it's far too easy to organise a mob these days, especially when there is already a mob in most cities right now still protesting the George Floyd murder, still buzzing on that torn-down monument high and angry as all heck at authority in general.

Having said that, the current crop of Tories may be deluded enough to think they can do it and get away with it, even though some of them have had actual mobs show up at their homes in recent times.  The days when a Tory chancellor (Howe) can deliberately create 3 million unemployed just to drive down union membership and then get away with it are long gone, but I think this lot might actually be dumb enough to think otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 August, 2020, 09:21:11 PM
The way things are shaping up though there is a pretty good bet that 3 million unemployed is going to look fairly lightweight.  The figures are already pretty scary and that's before furlough ends and companies mass produce P45's.  It's not just the retail sector either which was already taking a hammering long before the pandemic kicked in.

I would agree though that this shower are arrogant enough to think that they can get away with it.  Not to mention enough to have a bash at taking out the NHS.  Not in one go to be sure but I reckon it won't be long before we're back to the pre NHS days of healthcare being an unaffordable luxury if we aren't careful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 August, 2020, 11:40:24 PM
These Russian chaps that keep popping up are - I presume - keen to make a point about sex work, and how the recession will almost certainly see a drastic increase which in turn will have knock-on effects on sex trafficking, which won't stop in the face of local competition and will likely just become cheaper and more unsafe for its victims.  Fair play to our Russian chums for bringing up this often-neglected area of discussion, which is surely invaluable in examining the effects of both a global recession, and the increasing commodification of human beings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 August, 2020, 03:41:52 AM
Yes - let's have three cheers for our new US Chinese Russian overlords, and their caring exposure of the plight of the world's sex workers. And double-glazers. And roofing contractors. And suppliers of heavy plant equipment.

Gip-gip ura! Gip-gip ura! Gip-gip ura! Da zdravstvuyet rossiya!

---

Meanwhile: England sees Scotland have a terrible time with algorithmic grades and backtrack quickly to save their reputations with the electorate. What does Prime Minister Boris Johnny-Breath Johnson Seneschal Dominic Eye-Test Cummings do in response? Why, he's no fool - he quickly stops the same thing happening in England, thus avoiding embarrassing scenes such as students burning their results papers outside parliament.  Oh, no ... wait ... he's a rich twat, so instead he shits all over the poor and claims it's coming up roses. It is: for those elite bastards from Eton. The algorithm says they're all terribly clever and will one day run the country. Huzzah!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 August, 2020, 05:50:41 PM
And there's the government U-turn (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53810655). What a sorry mess: it's like Scotland, Wales and NI figure it all out first and warn England, who smugly don't heed the warning because SMUG only to have to backtrack days later when they come to terms with the fact that the provinces know how to govern.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 17 August, 2020, 11:19:55 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 17 August, 2020, 05:50:41 PM
...when they come to terms with the fact that the provinces know how to govern.

If only they'd copied the provinces in terms of COVID management too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 10:00:15 AM
And just when you thought Steve Bannon couldn't be more of a gobshite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 21 August, 2020, 10:17:05 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 10:00:15 AM
And just when you thought Steve Bannon couldn't be more of a gobshite.

Ruh roh.

Trump really knows how to pick his advisors. Be quicker naming the ones who haven't been charged / convicted of crimes. We can but hope that Nigel Farage is sitting very uncomfortably this morning.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 11:05:15 AM
Here's what the frog-faced Coast-Watcher General in question had to say.

QuoteVery sorry to see my friend Steve Bannon go. His political brain will be hard to replace.

Who cares if he's a corrupt conman? He's a fellow white supremacist, and that's all that matters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 21 August, 2020, 11:47:17 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 11:05:15 AM
Here's what the frog-faced Coast-Watcher General in question had to say.

QuoteVery sorry to see my friend Steve Bannon go. His political brain will be hard to replace.

Who cares if he's a corrupt conman? He's a fellow white supremacist, and that's all that matters.

Vile people.

Political brain? As I read the article, it just reaffirms all we ever knew about Bannon. A vile, right wing grifter who manipulated people to his own end, then discarded them. Any wonder him and Trump made such grim bedfellows.

When you actually read about him asking Trump to side with the White Supremacists in Charlottesville, it just still takes the breath away that such people exist in the world.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 August, 2020, 12:24:08 PM
Bannon's grift was telling people their wages are low because of immigrant labor, or their favorite videogames/comics suck now because they've got women/minorities in them - re-framing changes in conditions so that they never came from the effects of capital interests, but instead were always the fault of outsiders intruding in spaces where they didn't belong.  By using left-wing rhetoric to launder right wing solutions, Bannon excelled at making people across political lines believe they were an aggrieved party, rather than stuck in the same boat as their supposed "oppressors", and the damage he's done to Western society is incalculable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 09:09:07 PM
Doubt he'll get a pardon either, now he's on Trump's shit list. Not that anyone Trump pardoned was worth a fuck.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 August, 2020, 09:16:39 PM
OK, that's unfair. The dead people he's pardoned seem OK, and I don't know the story of all the living ones. But all of them I know anything about are a collective waste of oxygen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 August, 2020, 10:10:23 PM
If I was feeling conspiratorial, I'd suggest that "if anyone is likely to have dirt on Trump, it's Bannon" and say he'd cash it in for a pardon, but let's face it: we know there's no dirt on Trump that will have any effect on the tangerine bastard, and even if there was the Dems wouldn't have the guts to use it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 August, 2020, 09:30:08 PM
Banksy funds boat to rescue refugees at sea (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-53949831)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 September, 2020, 10:36:40 PM
It's always refreshing to see a positive news story: Several boats sink at pro-Trump parade in Texas (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54045115).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 06 September, 2020, 11:32:04 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 06 September, 2020, 10:36:40 PM
It's always refreshing to see a positive news story: Several boats sink at pro-Trump parade in Texas (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54045115).

As the wags are dubbing it - Dumbkirk!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 September, 2020, 10:47:02 AM
Not a lifejacket between them either. As a former safety office of a sailing club, this gives me palpatations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 September, 2020, 11:25:01 AM
At this stage, to still be beating the drum for the man, or considering voting for him - you must be an abhorrent, hateful shite.

The man is like Teflon, just keeps going, and i'm starting to fear that he will somehow win another term. God help us all if that comes to pass.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2020, 11:50:17 AM
538 has more or less the same odds as last time: 30% chance for Trump. The Democrats are making much the same mistakes as last time. Frankly, I'll be amazed if he doesn't win, further radicalising a nation. We're in a similar space in the UK, too. Orwell must be spinning in his grave, what with people now being told by governments to not believe their own eyes and ears.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 September, 2020, 12:26:15 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2020, 11:50:17 AM
538 has more or less the same odds as last time: 30% chance for Trump. The Democrats are making much the same mistakes as last time. Frankly, I'll be amazed if he doesn't win, further radicalising a nation. We're in a similar space in the UK, too. Orwell must be spinning in his grave, what with people now being told by governments to not believe their own eyes and ears.

I'm near certain he will find his way back in. The thought of another four years of his shite is enough to make you vomit. Would love to think that at some stage, he will be brought to book for the awful things he has done or condoned, but in all honesty, he will get away with it all.

The world is in an absolutely awful place.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 September, 2020, 01:19:47 PM
The encouragement of racial division is appalling, as is the ripping up of the more respectable political traditions (aren't Conservatives supposed to conserve?).  But the huge, overlying question for me would most certainly be:  Do you want to destroy the global environment sooner or later?  Anyone who votes The Clown in doesn't care about imminent global catastrophe or is too deluded to believe it's real; and while the latter is less morally repugnant than the former, it's every bit as dangerous.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 September, 2020, 01:45:48 PM
Demographics mean white Americans still dominate the USA, so it's not improbable to see the Orange Ogre sitting in the Oval Office for another four years. You wonder if this is the trend for the next ten to thirty years, with Libertarians using fear of immigration and emphasising ethnic divisions to drive an even more gutting free-market agenda. One Labour Party member on the night of the UK's last General election said he didn't see the Labour Party becoming electable for twenty years. It was a pretty bad night for the Labour Party, and so I thought at the time it was just the lamentations of the Corbyn faithful who had lost, but it might be the stark horrible truth instead. We'll have to hope that Americans in November lead the world back to some sort of sanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 September, 2020, 02:00:20 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 September, 2020, 01:19:47 PMAnyone who votes The Clown in doesn't care about imminent global catastrophe or is too deluded to believe it's real
The problem is the latter. Conservatives have successfully made people not believe evidence by experts. Everything is countered by idiocy on TV or YouTube. The entire US/UK political sphere is wrapped up in short-termism. Orwell must be spinning.

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 09 September, 2020, 12:02:22 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/sV2a0wP.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:56:17 AM
My daughter (8) made a comic and I'm proud:

(https://i.imgur.com/eOuxRPs.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2020, 04:22:59 AM
Heh. Oddly enough, I had a not dissimilar thought yesterday, shaolin...

(https://i.imgur.com/kSft5VY.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 September, 2020, 08:20:20 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:56:17 AM
My daughter (8) made a comic and I'm proud:

Wait, does that last panel show him hanging from a lamppost? Ace! That's one tough Academy of Law you're running there!.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2020, 08:47:39 AM
All the kudos for mini-Solo. (And a few also for Mr. Campbell.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 September, 2020, 09:38:18 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:56:17 AM
My daughter (8) made a comic and I'm proud:


Magnificent.  His angry, lumpen face and unnatural hair are the work of a master caricaturist in waiting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:53:58 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 September, 2020, 08:20:20 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:56:17 AM
My daughter (8) made a comic and I'm proud:

Wait, does that last panel show him hanging from a lamppost? Ace! That's one tough Academy of Law you're running there!.

I'm not sure what he's hanging from, but he is tied up and hanging upside down, although it hasn't shut him up. I had to get her to translate half of panel #3, which was "a bogey" and "ugly hair".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 September, 2020, 06:01:09 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2020, 03:53:58 PM
I'm not sure what he's hanging from..

I was drawing an inference from Chekhov's Lamppost in Panel 4.  And wishful thinking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 September, 2020, 08:49:15 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 September, 2020, 04:22:59 AM
Heh. Oddly enough, I had a not dissimilar thought yesterday, shaolin...

(https://i.imgur.com/kSft5VY.jpg)

:D  Missed that one, somehow.  Brilliant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 September, 2020, 01:43:56 AM
I was trying to make sense of a sentence in an article (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54096520) about White House interference with its own intelligence services. Here's the sentence:

"The complaint says Mr Murphy was then removed from future meetings and in July was effectively demoted form [sic] acting secretary and principal deputy under secretary to assistant to the deputy under secretary in the management division."

It made me think of these:

- "The old man the boat."
- "The horse raced past the barn fell."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 September, 2020, 01:23:12 PM
Still makes more sense than most of Trump's interview answers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 September, 2020, 09:37:58 PM
You are not allowed to be in groups of six because that's breaking the law, and you aren't allowed to break the law except the government's EU withdrawal bill does break the law, but That's Different™.
Anyway, you aren't allowed to be in groups of six, except in your job that you have to go to - but That's Different™ - and schools that your kids have to go to - but That's Different™ - and public transport if you use it.

/dons tinfoil headwear
I will remind you that the anti-cop protests never stopped, the BBC etc just stopped reporting on them, but completely coincidentally, the police now have additional discretionary powers to disperse crowds.  This is not going to end well.
For cops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2020, 12:41:25 AM

I wonder which MPs voted for this new restriction, which ones abstained and which ones voted against...

I further wonder how our representatives will vote on the World Economic Forum's Great Reset (https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/) initiative. I guess we won't get to vote on it because we aren't "global stakeholders." At least, I'd be astonished if we are.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 September, 2020, 08:31:40 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 September, 2020, 12:41:25 AM

I wonder which MPs voted for this new restriction, which ones abstained and which ones voted against...

I further wonder how our representatives will vote on the World Economic Forum's Great Reset (https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/) initiative. I guess we won't get to vote on it because we aren't "global stakeholders." At least, I'd be astonished if we are.


The MPs didn't get the chance to vote.  Or any warning at all.  It was 'announced' on Twitter by a reporter, even though Matt Hancock had been in the House and had ample opportunity to mention it a few hours earlier (https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/furious-speaker-sir-lindsay-hoyle-admonishes-matt-hancock-a4543676.html).  Almost as if they don't want any scrutiny of their actions...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2020, 01:35:35 PM
Keith Stormer is in self-isolation after "household symptoms" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54148974), which I assume is a euphemism for "one of the kids caught it after being sent back to school, a measure I fully supported and in fact demanded be implemented."
On the plus side, at least Labour are finally twenty points ahead in the polls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 14 September, 2020, 02:28:16 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2020, 01:35:35 PM
Keith Stormer is in self-isolation after "household symptoms" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54148974), which I assume is a euphemism for "one of the kids caught it after being sent back to school, a measure I fully supported and in fact demanded be implemented."
On the plus side, at least Labour are finally twenty points ahead in the polls (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ).

Keith Stormer is the Happy Shopper  version of the labour leader
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2020, 02:54:06 PM
Without Keith to oppose them, the Tories will run rampant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 September, 2020, 02:58:46 PM
Say what you like about Kieran Stammer, but it takes a seriously awful Tory party to lose that overwhelming lead they had last election.  But that's what they are. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 September, 2020, 08:12:57 PM
The lead created by a sustained media campaign of (occasionally legally-actionable) disinformation was never sustainable, and there was always going to be a crash in Tory support - if only when Brexiteers inevitably shat their nappies at not getting what they wanted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 14 September, 2020, 10:26:23 PM
Did you all enjoy Ed Milliband taking apart Johnson today?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 September, 2020, 10:35:40 PM
Johnson looks like a grumpy school-child who's been told he's not allowed second helpings. (https://youtu.be/QG71rhV9ocI)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 September, 2020, 10:30:00 PM
Coronavirus: Families 'mingling' would be breaking rule of six - home secretary (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54165362) - but presumably she goes on to outline how this doesn't apply to Dominic Cummings or to any Tory who decides that they need to break that rule in a very specific and limited way.

How can anyone take them seriously? Why did anyone vote for them? (Rhetorical.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 September, 2020, 10:37:25 PM
I'm vaguely curious how many milquetoast British panel show guests have made the joke that Johnson would be breaking the rules if he ever met all his children, but I don't want to look it up in case I accidentally see or hear Lee Hurst.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 September, 2020, 01:08:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 September, 2020, 10:37:25 PM
I'm vaguely curious how many milquetoast British panel show guests

Edited for redundancy
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 16 September, 2020, 01:51:07 AM
"Four senior congressmen write to Boris Johnson to reiterate there will be no US-UK trade deal if the legislation to override the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement isn't pulled"

https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1305988117036445698?s=21
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 09:19:46 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 16 September, 2020, 01:51:07 AM
"Four senior congressmen write to Boris Johnson to reiterate there will be no US-UK trade deal if the legislation to override the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement isn't pulled"

https://twitter.com/samcoatessky/status/1305988117036445698?s=21

Rumours floating about that Johnson may resign in January. Spotted it on Twitter yesterday, and i'd usually take it with a large grain, but looking at him at moment, even more shambolic and irritable looking than normal, i wonder if there is any truth to it. This is surely another hammer blow to the fantasy he created. It must also be galling that US Congress have also reiterated that any threat to GFA, or attempted re-writing of it, will lead to no US-UK trade deal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2020, 09:25:36 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 09:19:46 AM
Rumours floating about that Johnson may resign in January.

I've thought this was a likely scenario for some time now. He'll hang on until January so he can be the PM "that got Brexit done" (and also, no one will want to step into the role just in time for the no-deal shitshow). I can practically guarantee it'll be for "health reasons" — never fully recovered from Covid, fwah, fwah, for the good of the nation, fwah! Nil desperandum, quote from Shakespeare, and he'll be off to take up a few cushy directorships and a lucrative turn on the speaking circuit.

And then, God help us, it'll probably be Gove, who's Murdoch's preference.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2020, 09:26:00 AM
Cue: UK govt spinning that "we always said the US trade deal would only add a small amount to GDP—we are concentrating on more lucrative deals instead".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 09:34:57 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2020, 09:25:36 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 09:19:46 AM
Rumours floating about that Johnson may resign in January.

I've thought this was a likely scenario for some time now. He'll hang on until January so he can be the PM "that got Brexit done" (and also, no one will want to step into the role just in time for the no-deal shitshow). I can practically guarantee it'll be for "health reasons" — never fully recovered from Covid, fwah, fwah, for the good of the nation, fwah! Nil desperandum, quote from Shakespeare, and he'll be off to take up a few cushy directorships and a lucrative turn on the speaking circuit.

And then, God help us, it'll probably be Gove, who's Murdoch's preference.

Christ.

At least it will mean he can spend more time on what he does best - ignoring, and pretending his kids don't exist. Mind you, based on his behaviour and character, he is probably doing the kids a favour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 10:23:11 AM
Funnily enough, I was just speculating the other day that we'd probably have a Gove-ernment for 2021. I can't see him being an improvement on Boris - the only upside is that he's even disliked by the 'Gotta love Boris-lol' brigade, so it will hopefully erode the Tory majority even further. Also, it may take some power away from Cummings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 10:32:18 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 10:23:11 AM
Funnily enough, I was just speculating the other day that we'd probably have a Gove-ernment for 2021. I can't see him being an improvement on Boris - the only upside is that he's even disliked by the 'Gotta love Boris-lol' brigade, so it will hopefully erode the Tory majority even further. Also, it may take some power away from Cummings.

Surely Cummings would be forced out if Johnson resigns? From what I've read, he is detested by everyone but Johnson.

That Labour aren't miles ahead in the polls is utterly depressing. How can anyone have a favourable opinion of this Government?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 10:32:18 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 10:23:11 AM
Funnily enough, I was just speculating the other day that we'd probably have a Gove-ernment for 2021. I can't see him being an improvement on Boris - the only upside is that he's even disliked by the 'Gotta love Boris-lol' brigade, so it will hopefully erode the Tory majority even further. Also, it may take some power away from Cummings.

Surely Cummings would be forced out if Johnson resigns?


Let's hope so. But I have a feeling there's more going on than we know concerning that guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 11:57:09 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 10:32:18 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 10:23:11 AM
Funnily enough, I was just speculating the other day that we'd probably have a Gove-ernment for 2021. I can't see him being an improvement on Boris - the only upside is that he's even disliked by the 'Gotta love Boris-lol' brigade, so it will hopefully erode the Tory majority even further. Also, it may take some power away from Cummings.

Surely Cummings would be forced out if Johnson resigns?


Let's hope so. But I have a feeling there's more going on than we know concerning that guy.

Have a feeling you may be right. The power he seemingly wields, and the stuff he has got away with, its just horrendous. Noticeable that a lot of the more Tory "leaning" publications have been getting shots in on Cummings Father-In-Law. Obviously lots of backstabbing and positioning going on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 September, 2020, 11:59:20 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 September, 2020, 10:32:18 AM
Quote from: JamesC on 16 September, 2020, 10:23:11 AM
Funnily enough, I was just speculating the other day that we'd probably have a Gove-ernment for 2021. I can't see him being an improvement on Boris - the only upside is that he's even disliked by the 'Gotta love Boris-lol' brigade, so it will hopefully erode the Tory majority even further. Also, it may take some power away from Cummings.

Surely Cummings would be forced out if Johnson resigns?


Let's hope so. But I have a feeling there's more going on than we know concerning that guy.

The Brexiters don't really mind being governed by unelected bureaucrats, do they?  As long as they're not foreign ones.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2020, 01:32:03 PM
Brexiteers also don't seem to have any problems with foreigners owning UK newspapers, football teams, tv and radio stations, trains and buses, most of London, and building the UK's nuclear power stations.  That they can't even do their own racism consistently isn't really a surprise, tho.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2020, 03:08:59 PM
Labour front bench now wants to "get Brexit done".

WELP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2020, 03:22:05 PM
They're holding Johnson's feet to the fire. Johnson promised X, and so no deliver. They're throwing all his shit back at him. Besides, it's not like this is a shift from Labour's position under Corbyn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2020, 06:00:22 PM
Last year, I eventually gave up trying to get Brexiteers to explain how we could have no border with Eire, no border in the Irish Sea, and yet take back control of our borders. The contradictory cast-iron guarantees are coming home to roost and I'm still curious how this magic is supposed to happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 September, 2020, 06:09:53 PM
The only difference being that this position (held by Starmer under Corbyn) is no longer a sign that you are unfit to lead the Party.


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2020, 03:22:05 PM
They're holding Johnson's feet to the fire. Johnson promised X, and so no deliver. They're throwing all his shit back at him. Besides, it's not like this is a shift from Labour's position under Corbyn.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 September, 2020, 06:21:28 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 16 September, 2020, 06:00:22 PMLast year, I eventually gave up trying to get Brexiteers to explain how we could have no border with Eire, no border in the Irish Sea, and yet take back control of our borders. The contradictory cast-iron guarantees are coming home to roost and I'm still curious how this magic is supposed to happen.
They also seem quite happy with no borders for goods, primarily because they've realised a border means we're basically fucked and will have no manufacturing sector and massive food shortages. Well done, everyone!

Quote from: Leigh S on 16 September, 2020, 06:09:53 PMThe only difference being that this position (held by Starmer under Corbyn) is no longer a sign that you are unfit to lead the Party.
Not really. Under Corbyn, Labour's Brexit position was contradictory and incoherent, as I'm sure would be detailed in that new Left Out book. Under Starmer, Brexit has already happened. "Go on, then—do what you promised, you blithering goon" is a perfectly reasonable position for Labour to take right now, although Starmer will have to pivot at speed once no-deal comes roaring towards us. Corbyn's "get Brexit done" started basically immediately when he demanded article 50 be sent. (As DAG has noted on Twitter, no sane government would EVER have done that.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2020, 06:50:09 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 16 September, 2020, 06:09:53 PM
The only difference being that this position (held by Starmer under Corbyn) is no longer a sign that you are unfit to lead the Party.

Ken Stormer was a pretty hardcore "Remoaner" - inasmuch as someone with so little charisma can be hardcore anything - while under Corbyn, so this is still an about-face no matter how much the Starmtroopers try to spin it as some kind of consistent strategy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 16 September, 2020, 07:43:57 PM
well, it has shifted or it hasn't.  You could argue that the incoherent, vague dodging of the 2017 election reaped much better results than the much more specific (some would say complex, but it was only complex for thickoes) 2019 Brexit stance that I understand Corbyn was sceptical of (being the massive Brexiteer that he was, natch), but was foisted on him by his then Brexit secretary - at least THAT guy is no longer around to cause any more problems...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 09:15:59 PM
I always understood Labour's Brexit stance to be one of having their cake and eating it, or of fence-sitting in a vain attempt to appeal to everyone.

The problem was that there was (is) a majority in England who want fewer furrinas messing up their green and pleasant land. Thus Boris and his gang.

A hard pill to swallow, but there it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 September, 2020, 09:47:59 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 09:15:59 PM
The problem was that there was (is) a majority in England who want fewer furrinas messing up their green and pleasant land. Thus Boris and his gang?

As a far wiser man than I said, it's not that Leave voters are racists, it's that all the racists are Leave voters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2020, 09:56:00 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 09:15:59 PM
I always understood Labour's Brexit stance to be one of having their cake and eating it, or of fence-sitting in a vain attempt to appeal to everyone.

This is ludicrously simplistic. At its core, the problem is this: Conservative supporters split about 75/25 Leave/Remain. That meant the Tories could go all in on Brexit and abandon that 25%, figuring they'd pick up a good chunk of UKIP/Brexit Party support in compensation. Labour support splits 35/65 Leave/Remain — too many Leavers to just write off, because they wouldn't pick up disaffected Tory Remainers if they moved to a hard Remain position, but obviously if they moved to a hard Leave position then two-thirds of their support would evaporate.

Corbyn, Starmer, whoever was leader, there was no squaring that circle. Depressingly, the party's 2019 position was perfectly sensible, but it turns out Labour Leave voters would rather have a Conservative government than risk their precious Brexit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 16 September, 2020, 10:41:15 PM
There's also that even with all that was at stake, we still couldn't get X million people to actually get off their fucking arses to go and vote.  I mean, the Tories even got dead people to vote for them, and we can't even rouse the living.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 11:15:07 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 16 September, 2020, 09:56:00 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 09:15:59 PM
I always understood Labour's Brexit stance to be one of having their cake and eating it, or of fence-sitting in a vain attempt to appeal to everyone.

This is ludicrously simplistic. At its core, the problem is this: Conservative supporters split about 75/25 Leave/Remain. That meant the Tories could go all in on Brexit and abandon that 25%, figuring they'd pick up a good chunk of UKIP/Brexit Party support in compensation. Labour support splits 35/65 Leave/Remain — too many Leavers to just write off, because they wouldn't pick up disaffected Tory Remainers if they moved to a hard Remain position, but obviously if they moved to a hard Leave position then two-thirds of their support would evaporate.

Corbyn, Starmer, whoever was leader, there was no squaring that circle. Depressingly, the party's 2019 position was perfectly sensible, but it turns out Labour Leave voters would rather have a Conservative government than risk their precious Brexit.

This is stupendously long-winded says the same thing but with more words. It was an election fought on a single issue - and Labour didn't have the integrity to tell us what they thought was right between two choices.

Weetabix or Cornflakes, Labour? Cornabix, they replied.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 16 September, 2020, 11:59:04 PM
It was so painful to see the election won/lost over one stupid three word fucking slogan when that Labour manifesto could have pulled so many people out of grinding poverty, kickstarted their first steps towards a green revolution, etc etc etc blah blah blah.

Three words repeated over and over, combined with a the huge right wing media propaganda machine. That's all it took to ruin us, probably for decades.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 September, 2020, 12:20:15 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 11:15:07 PM
Weetabix or Cornflakes, Labour? Cornabix, they replied.

This is just blatant factionalism by disaffected Weetflakista agitators
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 September, 2020, 01:50:59 AM
They've always been here, sowing the seeds of dissent (and riboflavin)!

(https://images.yaoota.com/PHct3VypJSJJaqVxTFtErWqbVf4=/trim/yaootaweb-production-ke/media/crawledproductimages/89559af2d78920fc57ab4b9745b5dcf0cbb4b512.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 September, 2020, 01:59:53 AM

But, sadly, all we have is the ruin of last night's experimental pizza and some worryingly lumpy milk.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 September, 2020, 09:44:39 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 17 September, 2020, 01:59:53 AM

But, sadly, all we have is the ruin of last night's experimental pizza and some worryingly lumpy milk.

Oh I see you've bought Heston's new cook book too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 10:02:52 AM
Dominic Raab accusing the EU of "threatening" the GFA.

They really have no shame. Morals. Principles.

To be honest, the quicker this shiteshow tips Scotland and Northern Ireland out of the Union, the better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2020, 10:07:51 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 11:15:07 PM
Weetabix or Cornflakes, Labour? Cornabix, they replied.

Except that's not what they said. They said: "You voted for Brexit, but Boris Johnson's deal is self-evidently terrible. We'll negotiate a better one and you get to vote on whether you think it's good enough."

Given that Johnson's deal was so terrible that even he wants to tear it up, despite winning an election by telling people how great it was, that looks like an even more sensible position now than it did in 2019.

Sadly, even that relatively modest level of nuance can't compete with the new political reality, which is that people would rather accept easily-digested lies than a marginally more complicated truth.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 10:09:20 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 16 September, 2020, 11:59:04 PMIt was so painful to see the election won/lost over one stupid three word fucking slogan
And an inability of the not-Tory parties to work together. It was bleedingly obvious from day one that BXP would cave and ultimately stand down in Tory seats. Most of the other parties got together, and Labour said nope. So a large number of seats were narrowly lost because Labour ate into the 'others' share and vice-versa. Labour, as ever, arrogantly refused to work with others because it should rule alone.

And the others needed a healthy dose of realism as well. The Lib Dems were shocking, thinking Swinson could be PM(!) and at their highest level predicting anything up to 200 seats. They also continued with their aggressive attacks on the SNP (to the bafflement of English Lib Dems) and Labour (because, hey, let's fight them rather than the Tories). The Greens, even, were messing up, with WTF moments like Stroud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroud_(UK_Parliament_constituency)). They should have stood down in Labour winnable seats and did not.

But this goes even further back. The IV era was a shitshow. The SNP put forward an idea to default to revoke, but Labour sat on its hands. Then the IVs happened and no-one could agree. Every single party—Labour; 'rebellion' Tory faction; LD; Green; TIG; SNP; Plaid—fucked up monumentally by not voting for as many alternatives as possible, to provide choices. It was all the excuse the government needed to continue down this path of shit.

Imagine the IVs were different. In the second round (https://ig.ft.com/brexit-second-round-indicative-votes/), the SNP backs the customs union as an option (and makes that clear). Seven MPs flip on the referendum vote, from SNP/Lab. TIG and LD flip on 'Common Market 2.0'. All three of those votes were winnable. But all these parties screwed us by wanting 'their' thing rather than looking at broadly acceptable options.

I guess this is why we're fucked long-term. This country cannot countenance the notion of grown-up modern politics. Most other countries don't have 'hung parliaments'. They have 'parliaments', where parties work together. They compromise. They reach consensus. They collaborate. Here, everything is always a fight, and it's so fucking tiring and pointless. I hope—but won't hold my breath—Starmer and Davey might figure out a way to work together in England, assuming they're both still leaders in 2024. But even then, the only viable coalition is likely to make the SNP kingmakers. And if Labour and the Lib Dems still flat refuse to work with them (in part because the SNP will likely red-line indy2), then we're back to stalemate at best, short of something radical happening in Scotland with Labour and England with both Labour and the Lib Dems.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 10:16:09 AM
Quote from: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 10:02:52 AMDominic Raab accusing the EU of "threatening" the GFA.
That video of him in committee doing the rounds today sums everything up. He's asked whether he's read the GFA. He blathers on for about two minutes, like a kid who's not done his homework. What's worse isn't that he's not read the GFA (although he talks about referring to it when necessary), but that he's clearly not familiar with it. He mentions not taking it on holiday to read like a novel. Well, no, because the thing is 35 fucking pages long. You can read that over a breakfast. That he clearly wasn't even aware of the document's succinct nature is as damning as his failure to have read it.

This also explains an awful lot about the predicament we are currently in. Clearly, almost none of the people who voted for the WA actually bothered to read it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 10:30:12 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 10:16:09 AM
Quote from: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 10:02:52 AMDominic Raab accusing the EU of "threatening" the GFA.
That video of him in committee doing the rounds today sums everything up. He's asked whether he's read the GFA. He blathers on for about two minutes, like a kid who's not done his homework. What's worse isn't that he's not read the GFA (although he talks about referring to it when necessary), but that he's clearly not familiar with it. He mentions not taking it on holiday to read like a novel. Well, no, because the thing is 35 fucking pages long. You can read that over a breakfast. That he clearly wasn't even aware of the document's succinct nature is as damning as his failure to have read it.

This also explains an awful lot about the predicament we are currently in. Clearly, almost none of the people who voted for the WA actually bothered to read it.

He literally hasn't bothered his arse, and it just shows how craven these people are. He couldn't have gotten any of his numerous SPADs to draw up a quick summary of it? A summary of 35 pages? These really are the worst people, who have no idea of the damage and fear they generate with every thoughtless utterance. It just shows the utter contempt they have for NI, it just draws into focus the madness of the DUP, who claim to be defenders of the Union, marching along with the Tories towards God knows how serious of a mess they are going to make of NI.

Mind you, if things go as badly as i think they will, with Brexit on top of Covid spiralling into the Winter ahead, his only defence may be that he hadn't taken the time to read the GFA.

I can have all the respect and love in the world for my Unionist brethren in NI, but when i look at the party that represents them, the Tories who lied to their faces and stabbed them in the back, the continual subterfuge and mealy mouthed lies... it just doesn't compute that they still vote in the DUP to do everything but represent NI's best interests.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 10:36:35 AM
The DUP's stance has always baffled me. It was interesting that near the death of the last parliament, they at least seemed to recognise they were going to be royally fucked, and dramatically switched sides on some key votes (that without them would have been lost). But bloody hell. Throughout, they could have forced the Tories to create a situation where NI and the UK as a whole would have had a reasonably pragmatic Brexit. But no—they wanted to set fire to everything instead and bring back a hard border, the fucking lunatics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 10:49:15 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 10:36:35 AM
The DUP's stance has always baffled me. It was interesting that near the death of the last parliament, they at least seemed to recognise they were going to be royally fucked, and dramatically switched sides on some key votes (that without them would have been lost). But bloody hell. Throughout, they could have forced the Tories to create a situation where NI and the UK as a whole would have had a reasonably pragmatic Brexit. But no—they wanted to set fire to everything instead and bring back a hard border, the fucking lunatics.

They were offered a best of both worlds deal, and shat all over it. Demanded that no difference be made for NI, that we should all prosper, in truth suffer, along with rest of UK. I bet they would jump all over that deal now, seeing the way that the Tories have already started to sow the seeds of discontent in Mainland Press about the cost of NI. They may hope and wish for a hard border, but when it comes down to it, the Conservatives would cut them out of the Union without a moments hesitation. I just hope, that if a Border Poll becomes a reality, that people vote for their own betterment, not for the ideals of Green or Orange, enough with the supremacy politics.

The crazy thing, i voted for us to remain in EU, and if we had stayed in, the viability of a Border Poll was a generation or two away, now it seems possible that we will have one within the next few years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 11:56:27 AM
The Tories would ditch Scotland. I can't imagine NI enters most of their thoughts for even the briefest second.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 September, 2020, 12:02:35 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2020, 10:07:51 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 11:15:07 PM
Weetabix or Cornflakes, Labour? Cornabix, they replied.

Except that's not what they said. They said: "You voted for Brexit, but Boris Johnson's deal is self-evidently terrible. We'll negotiate a better one and you get to vote on whether you think it's good enough."

The idea there was any "choice" to be made is also a false dichotomy - much as I disliked the decision that was made in 2016, it was made and there was no "choice" on offer that was going to magic it or its attendant complications away.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 12:07:34 PM
The problem remains that people were never given a choice in the conventional sense. When referendums are usually conducted, you get to choose between the status quo and a clearly defined alternative. Brexit was always a status quo versus a set of woolly and contradictory aspirations targeted at a coalition of voters. On that basis, I still believe there was a very short time during which damage could have been severely limited. But Labour's own internal fights meant it could also never present a coherent 'package' that it would have backed, which would ultimately have had to have included single market membership as its foundation. (Natch, this was the mainstream Eurosceptic position for decades and the logical first port of call for a post-Brexit UK, but there you go. Everyone got so angry about those bloody EU/EEA migrants coming over here and "taking our jobs" that nothing else mattered. Boy, is everyone in for a fucking shock come January.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 17 September, 2020, 02:16:14 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 11:56:27 AM
The Tories would ditch Scotland. I can't imagine NI enters most of their thoughts for even the briefest second.

Very true.

Not even an afterthought.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 September, 2020, 02:46:53 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2020, 10:07:51 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 September, 2020, 11:15:07 PM
Weetabix or Cornflakes, Labour? Cornabix, they replied.

Except that's not what they said. They said: "You voted for Brexit, but Boris Johnson's deal is self-evidently terrible. We'll negotiate a better one and you get to vote on whether you think it's good enough."

It feels a bit like we're disagreeing about agreeing. The "vote on whether you think it's good enough" is where they were offering both Leave and Remain at the same time. That's the fence-sitting. That's the Cornabix. (Maybe I just like metaphors more than you.)

I'm not saying it wasn't nuanced. I'm not saying it wasn't actually the better offer. And we both came to the same conclusion - that the result was (is) a sad state of affairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 04:17:29 PM
I think the election offer from Labour was fine: "we'll get a better deal then give you the choice". There were two problems. The first was that, even by that point, Labour couldn't bring itself to say "single market membership", meaning that unless it was going for the mother of all fudges, it wouldn't have got much more than May. Secondly, it took fucking ages to get to that point—and by then not enough people really trusted Labour.

There were a couple of short periods far earlier in this process where Corbyn's Labour, had it not been unduly influenced by the likes of Len McCluskey, might have been able to "get Brexit done" by offering May a large bloc of votes. If nothing else, even this showcases that Labour's coalition is far more fragile and problematic than the Conservative one. It needs PR to split in two and then reform for government. But it fights against PR because it still labours under the misapprehension that there is a path to a majority Labour government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2020, 07:18:14 PM
No argument from me about McCluskey. He badly needed to sit the fuck down, and shut the fuck up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 08:29:41 PM
He'd be more at home in the DUP than Labour. Loves the idea of an ultra-hard Brexit, but can't articulate why beyond FORRINERS STAELING YOUR JOBZ
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 September, 2020, 09:22:57 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 September, 2020, 08:29:41 PM
He'd be more at home in the DUP than Labour. Loves the idea of an ultra-hard Brexit, but can't articulate why beyond FORRINERS STAELING YOUR JOBZ

See also: Kate Hooey. What the fuck was she ever doing in the bloody Labour Party in the first place...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 09:19:24 AM
RIP Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Now we get to see the rank hypocrisy of the GoP in action, again, and how the Orange President can minimalise her sterling service and make it all about him. Fuck 2020.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 19 September, 2020, 10:53:52 AM
Aye, and there's a distinct worry that if he gets a replacement in ahead of the elections, and then disputes an ejection result that doesn't fall in his favour, it'll go to the SC (see Gore vs Bush) and the balance of power means he'll just walk into office again. Aside from everything she stood for, losing her right now is the worst possible thing that could have happened to the US re their election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 11:09:57 AM
Current numbers are 53/47. Two GOP already said they won't confirm. 51/49. What's the betting one more finds a conscience (50/50) and so the deadlock is broken by Pence? Checks and balances!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2020, 11:12:46 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 19 September, 2020, 10:53:52 AM
losing her right now is the worst possible thing that could have happened to the US re their election.

Remember, of course, that Mitch McConnell refused to allow Obama to appoint a Supreme Court seat because he was only a year away from an election. I'll bet cold hard cash that he won't apply the same precedent to Trump when he's two months away from an election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 11:21:16 AM
He's already said he won't—has vowed to "move forward quickly". He's fucked if two more GOP find a conscience, but I suspect that's vanishingly unlikely to happen.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 September, 2020, 05:13:30 PM

A friend's 13yo daughter was barred entry into a fast food franchise unless she signed up to a contact tracing app earlier today.

"The choice for mankind lies between freedom and happiness and for the great bulk of mankind, happiness is better."

O.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 September, 2020, 05:51:01 PM
Mankind does nothing of consequence with its freedom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 September, 2020, 05:52:28 PM


I think good health is better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 September, 2020, 06:02:12 PM
If you must insist on using a feckin fast food franchise as the yardstick of our freedom, I would counter that said teenager is free to take her business elsewhere. In fact, if the government stepped in and told this fast food franchise they weren't allowed to do what they liked on their own privately owned property? That would be a horrific restriction of freedom.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2020, 06:11:23 PM
Too many people confusing inconvenience and restricted choice with oppression
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2020, 07:46:25 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2020, 06:11:23 PM
Too many people confusing inconvenience and restricted choice with oppression

I'm concerned about reactionary right-wing governments, like our own, using this whole Covid mess as a pretext for seizing more power, but at the same time we have to recognise that inconvenience is a small price to pay for keeping a potentially horrific death toll down.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 07:50:11 PM
Mrs IP took mini-IP to gymnastics today. Because the younglings are under eight, parents must stay on-site and are directed to a viewing area—a smallish room with probably 40 seats. Natch, several did not wear a mask.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 September, 2020, 08:04:56 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2020, 06:11:23 PM
Too many people confusing inconvenience and restricted choice with oppression

Bit like the argument that denying a few print papers that most people are happy to read digitally is abhorrent but allowing a handful of individuals to control the media output of the nation is acceptable.  Or that closing down a road for a few hours to highlight the perils of unstable climate change is more deserving of action than roads, bridges or homes that are still closed 8 months after catastrophic flooding brought on by extreme weather events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2020, 08:19:28 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 19 September, 2020, 07:46:25 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 19 September, 2020, 06:11:23 PM
Too many people confusing inconvenience and restricted choice with oppression

I'm concerned about reactionary right-wing governments, like our own, using this whole Covid mess as a pretext for seizing more power, but at the same time we have to recognise that inconvenience is a small price to pay for keeping a potentially horrific death toll down.

I wage a constant war between my principles and my inner Judge Dredd. Yesterday, for the first time since the trams reopened, I saw police come on and chuck off anyone who wasn't wearing a mask couldn't suddenly find the mask in their pocket they'd 'forgotten' to put on - four big guys in stab vests and a dog. That always makes me uneasy, but my Little Mo was saying cube 'em all!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 09:16:16 PM
I think liberal people have internal battles about state actions, but fuck it. I'd happily see a Green government in the UK, but at the same time we must protect lives. Masks are one way of doing that. If people won't comply with a simple rule to help stop the spread of a pandemic, fuck them. There was a great story recently about one of France's super-speedy cross-country trains. Some twat wouldn't wear a mask, so they apologised to everyone on board, made an unscheduled stop in the middle of nowhere, and booted him off, hours from his destination. More of that, please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 September, 2020, 09:29:18 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 September, 2020, 09:16:16 PM
There was a great story recently about one of France's super-speedy cross-country trains. Some twat wouldn't wear a mask, so they apologised to everyone on board, made an unscheduled stop in the middle of nowhere, and booted him off, hours from his destination. More of that, please.

I hope 'in the middle of nowhere' also means 'between stations' :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 September, 2020, 12:03:50 PM
They set him down at a tiny rural station.

Elsewhere, the BIL now has COVID. I hope he'll be OK. But his experience showcases the ineptitude of the UK govt and Rees-Mogg's recent appalling response. He's in Iceland. They had two outbreaks, one aligning with one of his workplaces. He immediately quarantined because of this and applies for a test. He gets the test around noon and Is told he'll get the results within 24–48h but he actually gets them six hours later. He didn't have to drive several hundred miles. He didn't have to wait a week or take a second test because swabs were destroyed. And the country he lives in is taking this seriously, more or less delegating policy to the science panel, and I've no doubt will get on top of what they're referring to as their third wave.

Here, Rees-Mogg lashes out at people "carping" about not being able to get tested, and saying they aren't patriotic because they have the audacity to criticise our "great British achievement". It's no wonder Mrs IP increasingly wants us to up sticks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 September, 2020, 12:22:26 PM

Not having a bank account (because ad nauseam), I can no longer use public transport in the rural area where I live.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 September, 2020, 02:47:49 PM
That's unbelievable, and so wrong. No pre-paid card option at all?

I found it bad enough not being able to hire a car without owning a credit card, but at least some outfits will take cash or debit cards long as you can pay the whole deposit & excess up front.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 21 September, 2020, 10:02:57 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/21/no-10-denies-reports-boris-johnson-went-on-secret-italy-trip

Nothing to see here! Move along!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 September, 2020, 03:08:36 PM
Not a "conspiracy theory", but an actual conspiracy, laid bare by Channel 4 News over the past couple of days, about the Republican party's data-driven method of suppressing undesirable (usually black) voters, with the assistance of Cambridge Analytica, which means with the assistance of Facebook's (highly secretive) targeted advertising model.

If only we could gather up all the energy being spent on hoaxes like "Bill Gates is a Lizard" and "Radio Signals give you Covid" and "Covid is a lie" and redirect them into some ire about the fact that there is a real conspiracy where those in charge got there by deliberately brainwashing the populace and enacting policies that make it difficult for them to vote.

Revealed: Trump campaign strategy to deter millions of Black Americans from voting in 2016 (https://www.channel4.com/news/revealed-trump-campaign-strategy-to-deter-millions-of-black-americans-from-voting-in-2016)

How Trump campaign targets millions of white voters – and activates fears over rioting (https://www.channel4.com/news/how-trump-campaign-targets-millions-of-white-voters-and-activates-fears-over-rioting)

---

Meanwhile, in Britain, the government adopts special powers during an emergency without parliamentary oversight (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54352765), and makes plans to ship undesirables to a remote island (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54349796) half way around the world.

Well, that doesn't remind me of anything. (Like the Reichstag Fire (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-reichstag-fire-and-nazis-rise-power-180962240/) or the Madagascar Plan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan).) The only thing I can't figure out is who the players are - seems like Boris is more Hermann Goring to Dominic Cummings' Himmler. I suppose these days you don't really need a Hitler. Although, there's always Rees-Mogg. He has a suitable streak of psychopathy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2020, 04:17:02 PM
It's all in plain sight, too, with enough of the masses cheering these arseholes on. If nothing else, it showcases how horribly broken majoritarian democracy is, where a party can secure about a third of the vote and yet have fully working majorities to do as it sees fit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 01 October, 2020, 01:13:39 PM
Farage now says the UK should never have signed the Brexit deal.
Now, more than ever:

[spoiler](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EeLIJfdXgAE76Iz?format=jpg&name=small)[/spoiler]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 02 October, 2020, 09:01:15 AM
Is it true? Has Christmas come early? It has! The Orange Ogre has COVID-19! This world may not have much justice in it, but it sure has a sense of humour.


https://nypost.com/2020/10/02/president-trump-and-first-lady-test-positive-for-covid-19/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 02 October, 2020, 09:29:55 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 02 October, 2020, 09:01:15 AM
Is it true? Has Christmas come early? It has! The Orange Ogre has COVID-19! This world may not have much justice in it, but it sure has a sense of humour.


https://nypost.com/2020/10/02/president-trump-and-first-lady-test-positive-for-covid-19/

FAKE NEWS!

The early reports indicate that on Wednesday, his aide tested positive, and that they had been on Air Force 1 together. Rather than isolate, he flew off on a campaign rally and, by all accounts, the only reason his diagnosis was made public was because it was leaked to the press.

What an utter, utter piece of human shite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2020, 12:14:30 PM
Seems to be true alright.  Johnson, Bolsonaro and now Trump.  My only worry is that the man with access to the best healthcare money can buy will use it as a political gambit to show how easy it to beat.

EDIT - Also, I really hope that he hasn't shouted his filthy germs all over Joe 'not perfect but not Trump' Biden.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2020, 12:33:57 PM
It works the other way around: Trump doesn't pay for the medical aid he receives as POTUS, so if he recovers it's an advertisement for free universal healthcare.  At least, it would be if there was a political party in the US that actually supported universal healthcare.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2020, 12:59:23 PM
Either way up, he must be relieved now that his ridiculous 'China Virus' label never caught on.  Biologically, he's now part-Chinese.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 02 October, 2020, 01:14:50 PM
A true dumpster fire of a human being. Now, we have new stuff coming out with unflattering tapes of Melania, and resurfacing allegations of sexual harassment against Don Jr's partner, Kimberley Guilfoyle.

Just a nasty, nasty group of people.

Truly, if this nightmare ever ends, i hope that anyone who enabled, helped, worked for, voted this fella into Office is blacklisted from employment and society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2020, 02:19:47 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2020, 12:33:57 PM
It works the other way around: Trump doesn't pay for the medical aid he receives

€750 a year goes a long way, it seems.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2020, 03:17:05 PM
Current conspiracy theory doing the rounds is that Trump is faking it so he can avoid the remaining debates.
Just leaving that aside for a moment, I remember the conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton was that she'd created a fake pizza business and secretly - Gus Fring-style - constructed an entire subterranean slave processing center under it, so that she could curry favor with the billionaire pedophile cabal that runs the world, but when she was exposed by Qanon, she had the complex filled-in and all trace of its ever existing was forensically scrubbed by Kremlin cyber-intelligence units, all videotapes and photographs of the area from the time digitally altered to remove evidence that the slave pens were ever even there at all, and now if you check the building, it looks like it never even had a basement.
By contrast, the most complicated that a Trump conspiracy theory gets is that he told a lie to dodge work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 02 October, 2020, 03:25:41 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2020, 03:17:05 PM
Current conspiracy theory doing the rounds is that Trump is faking it so he can avoid the remaining debates.
Just leaving that aside for a moment, I remember the conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton was that she'd created a fake pizza business and secretly - Gus Fring-style - constructed an entire subterranean slave processing center under it, so that she could curry favor with the billionaire pedophile cabal that runs the world, but when she was exposed by Qanon, she had the complex filled-in and all trace of its ever existing was forensically scrubbed by Kremlin cyber-intelligence units, all videotapes and photographs of the area from the time digitally altered to remove evidence that the slave pens were ever even there at all, and now if you check the building, it looks like it never even had a basement.
By contrast, the most complicated that a Trump conspiracy theory gets is that he told a lie to dodge work.

Bonkers.

I see the Q*non crowd are saying that finally, the Storm has arrived. Yes, the haunted Pringle canister that the USA elected as President is using this as a smokescreen to unleash hell on - the pedophiles, liberals, Antifa, George Soros, people with sense and a modicum of self-respect, non white people, Rob Reiner, Definitely the Jews, European Union technocrats who are trying to block Ireland exiting the EU, Mexicans who are all rapists, Brad Parscale for embezzling the Presidents dollah, CNN, the Clintons...

Jesus Christ. I mean, how do you even start to unpack how crazy these people are.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 October, 2020, 05:27:06 PM
Whilst I would never wish death upon someone ... normally ... [thought lots of people on hearing today's news]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Angry Vince on 02 October, 2020, 07:05:48 PM
Well, part one of my ironic Xmas wish has come true... 

I'm not saying what part two is but fingers crossed for The Orange Trumpkin making number 208,192!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 October, 2020, 08:02:51 PM
Ooh, that is harsh.  Totally understandable though; the world would most definitely be better off without him. But I'm rooting for the democratic way of giving him the boot. 

At the very least, his efforts to sweep aside the virus as a political issue are going to be much, much harder now.  Saying that it's under control will look a bit daft coming from a man who has it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 02 October, 2020, 08:21:29 PM
Thoughts and prayers going out to the coronavirus for contracting a case of Donald Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 October, 2020, 09:49:17 PM

In a public statement outside the Blight House, Covid-19 said it "regretted very much" not wearing a mask, adding that it "...should have known better after already having contracted a dose of the Johnsons."

Hillary Clinton, whose own symptoms are definitely due to the recent acquisition of a white cat (for effect) and nothing else, was again today unavailable for comment, riding out the crisis in a reinforced concrete Winnebago.

The case continues.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 October, 2020, 10:00:22 PM
And it was only hours before being the test result that he said that covfefe-19 was on the decline...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 October, 2020, 10:05:38 PM
If Trump and Pence both become medically incapacitated, Nancy Pelosi becomes president - that would be interesting to watch
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 02 October, 2020, 11:25:27 PM
The entire White House staff could be brought down by Trump's negligence. With a month to go until their election I wonder if they'll postpone it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 02 October, 2020, 11:52:12 PM
Trump moved to Walter Reed Hospital. White House say he has a mild case. Some Democratic Senators questioning why a mild case would need to be treated at Walter Reed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 October, 2020, 12:35:16 AM
So if he dies it will be upgraded to moderate?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 03 October, 2020, 01:29:11 AM
Quote from: von Boom on 03 October, 2020, 12:35:16 AM
So if he dies it will be upgraded to moderate?

Mild symptoms. President is working hard. President in good spirits. President has a low grade fever. The President is on an experimental antibody cocktail. What the actual Fuk? Not to be heartless, but I hope he pulls through, so he can serve a lovely, long prison sentence for his shithousery.

If he dies, I'm assuming the rest of the Presidential debates will be a Weekend At Bernies affair, with Eric and Don Jr getting into ever more hilarious scrapes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 03 October, 2020, 01:54:00 AM
Quote from: Rately on 03 October, 2020, 01:29:11 AM
Quote from: von Boom on 03 October, 2020, 12:35:16 AM
So if he dies it will be upgraded to moderate?

Mild symptoms. President is working hard. President in good spirits. President has a low grade fever. The President is on an experimental antibody cocktail. What the actual Fuk? Not to be heartless, but I hope he pulls through, so he can serve a lovely, long prison sentence for his shithousery.

If he dies, I'm assuming the rest of the Presidential debates will be a Weekend At Bernies affair, with Eric and Don Jr getting into ever more hilarious scrapes.
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 October, 2020, 02:58:45 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 October, 2020, 03:17:05 PM
Current conspiracy theory doing the rounds is that Trump is faking it so he can avoid the remaining debates.
...
By contrast, the most complicated that a Trump conspiracy theory gets is that he told a lie to dodge work.

It looks like it's getting better.  Another one floating around is that Trump was deliberately infected the last time he had a medical check up.

I think it is fair to say that psychologists are going to have a field day with a lot of this.  The ways in which some of Trump's supporters are adjusting their logic to fit the facts into their distorted reality ....

:-\ :crazy:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 October, 2020, 03:01:55 PM
In hugely amusing news, Republican Senators are now coming down with Covid so fast it looks like they may not have enough available to attend the necessary votes to confirm their Supreme Court pick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 04 October, 2020, 01:08:55 AM
Project Lincoln and one of their members, Rick Wilson, have tweeted that they are receiving information in droves from staff finally fed up and at breaking point, with the information leaked both terrifying and remarkable.

Within the White House, Wilson says the infections and potential infections constitute a national security crisis of the first order.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2020, 11:55:20 AM
At the very least, it's nice to have a break from the screaming gibbon for a few days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 04 October, 2020, 12:16:30 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2020, 11:55:20 AM
At the very least, it's nice to have a break from the screaming gibbon for a few days.

Nah, he's still got access to twitter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2020, 01:09:48 PM
A smarter and more self-aware man would feel a sense of humility and remorse right now.  I won't be counting on it - this will, I suspect, be China's fault if and when he gets his energy back.   On the other hand, it's often said that Johnson has never quite returned to his old, bouncy* self after succumbing, though that might partly down to the pressures of a job he doesn't know how to do.


*which is not to suggest for one minute that he ever had a shred of decency to go with his exuberance.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 04 October, 2020, 03:12:48 PM
I've been reading The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt, which was based on study of ethical decision making from people across the political spectrum.  The findings were basically that people on the left tend to not really care about things like tradition or respecting authority, but put a lot of emphasis in fairness and making sure people are protected from harm.  For right-wingers, tradition  and "purity" are much more important ("Sov-rin-tee!/build a wall!"), but their interest in the wellbeing of others extends tends to only go as far as their ingroup. They care deeply about the other members of their team, but much less about "others". 

So many people in the Republican inner circle quickly finding out that the Trump inner circle consists of Trump.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 October, 2020, 04:30:46 PM
Quote from: Modern Panther on 04 October, 2020, 03:12:48 PM
I've been reading The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt, which was based on study of ethical decision making from people across the political spectrum.  The findings were basically that people on the left tend to not really care about things like tradition or respecting authority, but put a lot of emphasis in fairness and making sure people are protected from harm.  For right-wingers, tradition  and "purity" are much more important ("Sov-rin-tee!/build a wall!"), but their interest in the wellbeing of others extends tends to only go as far as their ingroup. They care deeply about the other members of their team, but much less about "others". 

Fascinating stuff - could be my next audiobook purchase (I fly through them these days).

Quotefinding out that the Trump inner circle consists of Trump.

You could possibly include the object of his grubby little sexual fantasies, Ivanka.  Cheap shot? Maybe, but most fathers don't boast about how 'voluptuous' their daughters' bodies are, and say they'd be dating them if not for that frustrating familial connection.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2020, 03:24:58 PM
A little slice of good news from these parts: Mrs IP had her citizenship ceremony today. Turns out the local authority is rather friendly, acknowledged the stress and difficulty of the system, welcomed her to our county, and provided a bunch of pointers on how to register to vote, etc. Clearly, the HO could take some lessons from them!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 October, 2020, 03:55:54 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2020, 03:24:58 PM
A little slice of good news from these parts: Mrs IP had her citizenship ceremony today. Turns out the local authority is rather friendly, acknowledged the stress and difficulty of the system, welcomed her to our county, and provided a bunch of pointers on how to register to vote, etc. Clearly, the HO could take some lessons from them!

That's great news, IndigoPrime!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 07 October, 2020, 04:08:46 PM
That is good news.

Less so is to see that our Prime Minister regards Human Rights as lefty, do-gooder nonsense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 October, 2020, 04:27:15 PM
Great news,  IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 October, 2020, 05:45:40 PM
Congratulations to you and your wife, IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 October, 2020, 06:23:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 07 October, 2020, 04:27:15 PM
Great news,  IP!

Very much seconded.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 07 October, 2020, 06:30:12 PM
Ah, IP -- that's great news and hopefully a huge weight from both of your shoulders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 October, 2020, 06:35:29 PM
Congratulations from me also, IP. Great news after all the worry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2020, 07:40:33 PM
Thanks, all. It's a big relief. She had settled status already, but, well, this government... So now she has a fancy certificate of naturalisation, a commemorative pen, and... the right to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 October, 2020, 07:52:32 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 October, 2020, 07:40:33 PM
the right to vote.
An elegant weapon for a more civilised age.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2020, 08:11:24 PM


Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 07 October, 2020, 09:11:29 PM
Glad to hear your good news, IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 October, 2020, 09:48:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2020, 08:11:24 PM


Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.
That could be the Trump political slogan.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 October, 2020, 09:56:12 PM

Too many syllables.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 October, 2020, 09:58:27 PM
Delighted to hear the good news, IP!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 October, 2020, 12:18:59 AM

Whilst I can't congratulate you for what you've done due to the whole what-the-f*ck's-it-got-to-do-with-the-f*cking-state-anywav? vibe I've got going on over here, I am, truly, happy that you're happy, IP.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 14 October, 2020, 03:57:43 PM
Scotland is now recording the highest ever polling levels in favour of independence. Once the reality of Brexit is apparent on the ground then I'd expect these levels to rise again. The UK appears to be in its dying days:
https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-support-for-independence-hits-historic-high-of-58?top
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 14 October, 2020, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 14 October, 2020, 03:57:43 PM
Scotland is now recording the highest ever polling levels in favour of independence. Once the reality of Brexit is apparent on the ground then I'd expect these levels to rise again. The UK appears to be in its dying days:
https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-support-for-independence-hits-historic-high-of-58?top

Aye. Putin will be rewarding his cyber Psyops team for a job well done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 October, 2020, 07:20:59 PM
Not sure if the Putin comment is a joke or not.

Certainly, Scottish voters have been demonstrably marginalized by Westminster for many a long year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 October, 2020, 08:06:20 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 14 October, 2020, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 14 October, 2020, 03:57:43 PM
Scotland is now recording the highest ever polling levels in favour of independence. Once the reality of Brexit is apparent on the ground then I'd expect these levels to rise again. The UK appears to be in its dying days:
https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-support-for-independence-hits-historic-high-of-58?top

Aye. Putin will be rewarding his cyber Psyops team for a job well done.

Another country (re)joining the EU is hardly a win for Russia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 October, 2020, 08:33:45 PM
The UK fracturing isn't a win for Russia?

Where I would argue is the idea of it being entirely Putin's doing and not just the inevitable consequence of Tory greed and incompetence abetted by client journalists looking out for their own class interests.  We didn't need Putin to get here, but I imagine he'll take the win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 October, 2020, 11:35:25 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 14 October, 2020, 08:33:45 PM
The UK fracturing isn't a win for Russia?

Where I would argue is the idea of it being entirely Putin's doing and not just the inevitable consequence of Tory greed and incompetence abetted by client journalists looking out for their own class interests.  We didn't need Putin to get here, but I imagine he'll take the win.

Fair enough.  I was more thinking about the EU than the UK - I may be wrong but the way I understood it, Putin was hoping that Brexit would lead to a chain reaction of EU exits and thus, of course, a weaker EU.  Obviously this hasn't happened; and I thought that more countries joining the EU would be at least a small blow to Uncle Vlad even if they do have to leave the UK to do it; given that Britain is going to matter less as a political entity when all is done and dusted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 15 October, 2020, 07:56:41 AM
Putin is also hoping to preserve the money laundering route used by his cronies through London's banks. Inside the EU there was going to be increasing pressure on our government to do something about that. Outside the EU we'll be free to continue and probably even ramp it up. Boris and co certainly aren't going to do anything to stem the tide, most of them have their fingers deep in the pie after all. I'm not convinced Starmer will fight it much either sadly meaning there's no meaningful political opposition on that issue at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2020, 08:21:03 PM
Johnson pushing through fascist legislation to allow the murder of political opponents bodes well for the future.  Ah well, I'm sure the unelected Lords will fix it, not like we even need an opposition anymore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 October, 2020, 09:07:11 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2020, 08:21:03 PM
Johnson pushing through fascist legislation to allow the murder of political opponents bodes well for the future.

This is going to be one of those stories I can't find on the BBC. G'arn, give us a clue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 October, 2020, 10:09:48 PM
Inform yourself or the fascists win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 October, 2020, 11:06:46 PM
It was a joke, then?

I think we're destined to always pass like ships in the night.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2020, 11:24:11 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 October, 2020, 11:06:46 PM
It was a joke, then?

No. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54552152)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: maryanddavid on 15 October, 2020, 11:34:57 PM
Jasus. :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Angry Vince on 16 October, 2020, 07:52:20 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2020, 11:24:11 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 October, 2020, 11:06:46 PM
It was a joke, then?

No. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54552152)

So this new law is called "CHIS"? A bunch of clenched dicks running around, so that makes sense...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 October, 2020, 02:59:49 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 15 October, 2020, 11:24:11 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 October, 2020, 11:06:46 PM
It was a joke, then?

No. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54552152)

Thanks, Jim. That was helpful.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 October, 2020, 10:09:13 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 October, 2020, 02:59:49 PM
Thanks, Jim. That was helpful.

Excellent. It was meant to be, and my apologies because the response is a bit, umm... brusque.*


*Some might say "rude", but I'm sticking with brusque, which is a nicer way of saying the same thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 October, 2020, 04:09:14 PM
So Farage said something nice today.  Even a racist, hypocritical, snide, frog-faced stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-free-school-meals-tories-labour-snp-marcus-rashford-b1220911.html (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-free-school-meals-tories-labour-snp-marcus-rashford-b1220911.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 October, 2020, 08:12:43 PM
He's a smarter nationalist wanker than the nationalist wankers in government. Like Piers Morgan, he understands the right side of a populist fight to be on, at least most of the time, whereas Johnson and co. appear to think the smart move is to constantly be putting up a fight, because it makes them look tough and keeps their opponents off guard. That is pure Cummings. The snag is Cummings just isn't that smart. He's good at winning elections and shit at everything else. Hence why we still have a government that is campaigning and not governing.

Wankers, all of them. (Possibly 'less of a wanker' label for the five Tories who showed a bit of backbone and voted against this shit.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 23 October, 2020, 02:29:12 PM
I seriously think Marcus Rashford might be my favourite Politician.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2020, 03:05:21 PM
The petition to end free food and drink for all MPs (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-mps-entitlement-to-free-work-meals?bucket=&source=facebook-share-button&time=1603455669&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=facebook&share=24c02df5-6a70-476e-ad09-53cb7ea8de71) has reached a quarter of a million signatures in less than a day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 23 October, 2020, 03:21:22 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 23 October, 2020, 03:05:21 PM
The petition to end free food and drink for all MPs (https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-mps-entitlement-to-free-work-meals?bucket=&source=facebook-share-button&time=1603455669&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=facebook&share=24c02df5-6a70-476e-ad09-53cb7ea8de71) has reached a quarter of a million signatures in less than a day.

I would say it is great to see him shame these Politicians, but most of them don't have the empathy required.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 24 October, 2020, 10:43:26 AM
Quote from: Rately on 23 October, 2020, 02:29:12 PM
I seriously think Marcus Rashford might be my favourite Politician.

If you look at Marcus Rashford's Twitter feed, it is a joyous list of all the councils, businesses, organisations and charities sticking two fingers up at the Tory scum, and working together to get as many kids fed as possible!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 24 October, 2020, 12:00:25 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 24 October, 2020, 10:43:26 AM
Quote from: Rately on 23 October, 2020, 02:29:12 PM
I seriously think Marcus Rashford might be my favourite Politician.

If you look at Marcus Rashford's Twitter feed, it is a joyous list of all the councils, businesses, organisations and charities sticking two fingers up at the Tory scum, and working together to get as many kids fed as possible!

I think he deserves a Knighthood, which he should promptly tell them to stuff up their arses. The whole lot of them are a disgrace.

The inevitable backlash that the right-wing press launch against him, dog whistling in whatever form, hopefully is seen through for what it is by the majority of decent people.

Tory Scum the lot of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2020, 12:11:07 PM

Weird how MPs are trusted to rule the country and yet simultaneously not worth feeding out of the public purse.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 24 October, 2020, 12:48:32 PM
All those that voted against extending free school meals across the holidays?

Check out their expenses:

http://mpsagainstfreeschoolmeals.com/
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 24 October, 2020, 01:22:26 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 24 October, 2020, 12:48:32 PM
All those that voted against extending free school meals across the holidays?

Check out their expenses:

http://mpsagainstfreeschoolmeals.com/

Literally can't fathom how you deny children food? That anybody has a problem with Marcus Rashford, and not this despicable Government and their enablers just makes me more miserable in the knowledge that there are people who can be so cruel and heartless.

If you vote Tory, vote with them, enable them in any way you are not worth spitting on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 October, 2020, 02:17:06 PM
Apparently, the DUP, who oppose gay rights and women's rights, draw the line at letting children go hungry. Considering this vote only affected English children, it is quite remarkable and I think the DUP deserve some credit for doing the right thing for once. 2020 has been a quare year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2020, 02:58:02 PM
Things are fairly fecked up when Arlene Foster and Nigel Farage have the moral high ground on an issue.  You can't really accuse those two of virtue signalling; they have precious few virtues to signal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2020, 03:31:33 PM
Looking at the voting record, only one DUP vote was cast, and so I won't be giving them that much credit. Had they all thrown their lot in with Labour, that would have been more impressive. I suppose at least they were smart enough to let the Tories own this one alone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 October, 2020, 03:47:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2020, 12:11:07 PM

Weird how MPs are trusted to rule the country and yet simultaneously not worth feeding out of the public purse.

TBH Sharky, like you I wouldn't trust them to run a tin bath.  Too many of them are a walking advertisement for your political views.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2020, 04:09:47 PM
What worries me now is how often I'm seeing people argue they're all the same, when that's demonstrably not the case. Elections are often won not by people voting, but through people not voting. If we hit 2024 and have a lot of people still banging on that Starmer is a 'blue Tory, like Blair', genuinely not seeing the massive gulf between the Blair and Johnson governments, then we are truly fucked. (And I say this as someone with deep problems with several decisions Blair and his cabinet made.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2020, 04:46:35 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 October, 2020, 03:47:30 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 October, 2020, 12:11:07 PM

Weird how MPs are trusted to rule the country and yet simultaneously not worth feeding out of the public purse.

TBH Sharky, like you I wouldn't trust them to run a tin bath.  Too many of them are a walking advertisement for your political views.

For me, it's not the people - they're just flawed humans like the rest of us - it's the powers we allow them to have over us. I don't think there will ever be, indeed, I don't think there can be, a truly "good" MP or PM. That's why all I want is to have my right to say "no" to them respected. That way, it doesn't matter how flawed our "representatives" are.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 October, 2020, 11:03:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2020, 03:31:33 PM
Looking at the voting record, only one DUP vote was cast, and so I won't be giving them that much credit. Had they all thrown their lot in with Labour, that would have been more impressive. I suppose at least they were smart enough to let the Tories own this one alone.

Fair point. It's easy to ride the public opinion bandwagon after the public have already spoken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 October, 2020, 12:08:34 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 October, 2020, 03:31:33 PM
Looking at the voting record, only one DUP vote was cast, and so I won't be giving them that much credit. Had they all thrown their lot in with Labour, that would have been more impressive. I suppose at least they were smart enough to let the Tories own this one alone.

Of course, I wasn't suggesting this absolves them of all their previous nonsense, but your Government, for all its progressive lipservice, is right of the DUP
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 October, 2020, 06:33:39 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 25 October, 2020, 12:08:34 AM
... but your Government, for all its progressive lipservice, is right of the DUP

Which is absolutely fucking terrifying!   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 October, 2020, 10:45:49 AM
I'm not entirely surprised by that, though. Economically, nationalism has various places it sits within the political axis, and even if you shift to a political compass, that doesn't offer the nuance to accurately position a party—just approximate where it stands. But in England, BNP and UKIP have historically in many cases sat economically to the left of the Tories, even if they are more authoritarian. That's still largely true—and the same for the DUP—although I do wonder at what point the Tories might now start gunning for things like women's rights and gay rights.

As for the DUP in general, they're just inept. They held so much power last year, and they pissed it up the wall for the sake of ideology that made no sense whatsoever. Then again, it's not like any of the opposition parties covered themselves in glory either in things like the IVs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 25 October, 2020, 11:17:53 AM
Short message - Fuck the DUP.

Awful people, who care not a jot for anyone other than enriching themselves and their "chosen few." The corruption and disregard they have shown since Brexit has ballooned by the day. Facts, logic no longer apply in their little bubble Universe of Union Jacks!

I'm a moderate Nationalist, who voted for staying in the EU, knowing it would let the Union limp on for the foreseeable, and was not surprised at the monumental self-harm the DUP inflicted on us all, and their precious Union, when they fully got behind Brexit. Even as it becomes clearer and clearer that NI is going to suffer horrendously after Brexit, they are still flying the flag for it, ignoring good advise and the future now coming into view.

A shower of awful people.

Brexshit, more like.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 October, 2020, 09:53:51 PM
I'm morbidly curious to see how they integrate with the Dail, even though I know that no matter how the details pan out the end result will be an absolute fucking disaster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 October, 2020, 12:02:24 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 25 October, 2020, 09:53:51 PM
I'm morbidly curious to see how they integrate with the Dail, even though I know that no matter how the details pan out the end result will be an absolute fucking disaster.


They'll keep them in Stormont for a few years just to see if they fuck-off. I more curious what they'll change their name to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 October, 2020, 09:21:01 AM
The DUP in the Dail? Christ.

I've no doubt, as you say, that it would be disastrous, but it would be poetic to see them have to bed in and try and navigate their own hostility and intransigence.

Mind you, if they can continue claiming expenses I've no doubt they could be talked into it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 October, 2020, 12:32:02 PM
Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 October, 2020, 12:02:24 AMThey'll keep them in Stormont for a few years just to see if they fuck-off. I more curious what they'll change their name to.

I suspect they'll keep the unionist name and branding - "change" is not something with which the DUP is familiar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 October, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
They'll become the NIxit Party, determined to have NI rejoin the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 October, 2020, 01:50:35 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 October, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
They'll become the NIxit Party, determined to have NI rejoin the UK.

Bonkers. But sounds just about right.

Just like this bonkers Irexit movement. Just another band of grifters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 October, 2020, 01:56:39 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 26 October, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
They'll become the NIxit Party, determined to have NI rejoin the UK.

BrexNIt wasn't a huge vote to begin with (and neither will Irexit).

(https://i.imgur.com/4pisKqn.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 October, 2020, 02:18:52 PM
Never really was.

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uybffw4llGM/T6V0rxjth5I/AAAAAAAAAYI/bPPnTxuAEjg/s1600/1918.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 26 October, 2020, 02:30:00 PM
Rathmines clinging on there with one Westminster seat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 26 October, 2020, 03:13:14 PM
Always said no good would come from the Stella showing those furren pictures with all the quare wans.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 October, 2020, 02:42:44 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 26 October, 2020, 03:13:14 PM
Always said no good would come from the Stella showing those furren pictures with all the quare wans.

I watched The General there, without realising at the time that most of it had happened about two minutes' walk down the road.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 27 October, 2020, 08:54:18 PM
This cartoon re Marcus Rashford vs The Tories hits the nail on the head, and is funny to boot.

Goooal!

https://imgur.com/gallery/Ln8PBv8
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 October, 2020, 09:31:03 PM
As soon as I saw the font I knew that was Squires, my current favourite cartoonist (sorry Steve Bell). His football cartoons in the Guardian are just brilliant, I even enjoy the ones about Australian football, even though I don't know the people or the events referred to - I have inadvertently learned a lot about the AFL from him!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 October, 2020, 10:00:04 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 October, 2020, 08:54:18 PM
This cartoon re Marcus Rashford vs The Tories hits the nail on the head, and is funny to boot.

Goooal!

https://imgur.com/gallery/Ln8PBv8

That was really good. I couldn't believe the nerve of the Tories - they were on C4 News yesterday doing all this "Isn't charity wonderful!" and making out that they've somehow engineered a wonderful result. Politicians? Poli-twat-ions, more like!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 October, 2020, 09:17:38 AM
The Tories seem to be having a hissyfit at being called what they are - Scum.

This Gary Sambrook thing is hilarious. Talking about civility, when they are starving kids.

And i'll continue the love for David Squires. Funny. Emotional. Can hit every emotion in a single strip, and his Arsene Wenger leaving Arsenal one had me in floods of tears.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 October, 2020, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 October, 2020, 08:54:18 PM
This cartoon re Marcus Rashford vs The Tories hits the nail on the head, and is funny to boot.

Goooal!

https://imgur.com/gallery/Ln8PBv8

Now *there's* some good political comics. Funny,  punches up, encapsulates reality.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 October, 2020, 12:37:34 PM
 :thumbsup:
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 October, 2020, 08:54:18 PM
This cartoon re Marcus Rashford vs The Tories hits the nail on the head, and is funny to boot.

Goooal!

https://imgur.com/gallery/Ln8PBv8
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 October, 2020, 01:49:33 PM
A far less witty take on the same subject, but it made me laugh out loud (and Gary Sambrook really is a daft fecker for drawing attention to it).

https://twitter.com/GarySambrook89/status/1320702726611914754 (https://twitter.com/GarySambrook89/status/1320702726611914754)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 28 October, 2020, 02:30:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 28 October, 2020, 01:49:33 PM
A far less witty take on the same subject, but it made me laugh out loud (and Gary Sambrook really is a daft fecker for drawing attention to it).

https://twitter.com/GarySambrook89/status/1320702726611914754 (https://twitter.com/GarySambrook89/status/1320702726611914754)

I wonder what the chances are that a Dredd artist will slip in the Sambrook Graffiti in a story at some stage!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 October, 2020, 03:03:38 PM
Typical uncivil thuggery from the far left.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 29 October, 2020, 12:39:48 PM
I see the "is Corbyn racist?" story is vastly overshadowing the one about a sitting government being sued for failing to safeguard national security FOR THE FIRST TIME IN U.K. HISTORY.

Makes you wonder about the timing, eh?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54725758

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/29/legal-action-taken-against-pm-over-refusal-to-investigate-kremlin-meddling

https://www.ft.com/content/a8b9ee93-2b04-49b3-ba19-f7121ba47108
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 29 October, 2020, 02:21:33 PM
I would have thought it more likely it was timed to provide cover for the EHRC's refusal to investigate Islamophobia in the Conservative Party, but it says a great deal about UK politics that there's so many dead cats to choose from.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 01 November, 2020, 11:48:01 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 October, 2020, 09:58:23 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 27 October, 2020, 08:54:18 PM
This cartoon re Marcus Rashford vs The Tories hits the nail on the head, and is funny to boot.

Goooal!

https://imgur.com/gallery/Ln8PBv8

Now *there's* some good political comics. Funny,  punches up, encapsulates reality.

That Squires guy is terrific, I've seen a bit of his stuff.  Am I the only First Dog On The Moon fan here? His humour might be too Australian focussed for you and he does have his annoyingly didactic moments, but when he's good, which is most of the time, he's very good. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/31/queensland-meet-your-new-premier

(an oldie but a goodie about an election in Queensland)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 01 November, 2020, 12:29:47 PM
Yep, I'd vote cassowary!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 01 November, 2020, 01:24:04 PM
Everything I know about Cassowaries comes from FDotM, and everything I know about the AFL comes from Squires
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 01 November, 2020, 02:23:43 PM
Here's the pre-action protocol from the Good Law Project, designed to legally challenge the appointments of Tories like Dido Harding to positions with seemingly no advertisement or fair recruitment process.


Quote"We are instructed by The Runnymede Trust, the leading independent think- tank on race equality and race relations in the UK, and the Good Law Project, a civil society organisation. This letter sets out the grounds of their proposed claim against the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister.

These grounds concern the Government's appointment of individuals, some of whom are personally, politically or professionally connected with senior members of the Conservative Party, to administrative roles of vital public importance, without any open or formal recruitment process.

In particular, the claim challenges the appointment of Baroness Dido Harding to be Interim Head of the National Institute for Health Protection and Mike Coupe, Gareth Williams, Ben Stimson and Paul de Laat to senior positions at NHS Test and Trace.

These appointments evidence a Government policy or practice of making public appointments without adopting processes designed to ensure appointment on merit, on the basis of transparent and fair competition."

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SUww4RRuv6pBZcISOXTmdNNa2ZcUHGsm/view
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgefloyd on 01 November, 2020, 11:18:49 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 01 November, 2020, 01:24:04 PM
Everything I know about Cassowaries comes from FDotM, and everything I know about the AFL comes from Squires

You're on the money on both counts.  As you probably know, the Cassowary was so popular he bought it back as Snitty the Psephological Cassowary.  Thanks to Mr Dog, I now know Cassowaries kick trees to make the fruit fall out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 November, 2020, 05:46:17 PM
Fingers crossed over here in US of A land that Spongebob Bidenpants wins the election by a margin significant enough to avoid civil strife. I don't normally head into an election wondering if it'll result in civil war, but this is 2020, so all bets are off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 November, 2020, 06:11:18 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 November, 2020, 05:46:17 PM
Fingers crossed over here in US of A land that Spongebob Bidenpants wins the election by a margin significant enough to avoid civil strife. I don't normally head into an election wondering if it'll result in civil war, but this is 2020, so all bets are off.
I wonder if a big margin would be worse than a small one - those fanatical nutjobs may believe a narrow win, but if it's huge it will just convince them that some deepstate fraud has happened (Like Lukashenko claiming a 82% victory in Belarus - no-one was sure if he'd scarpe a win, but NOBODY believed he'd won by that much)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 November, 2020, 06:17:11 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 03 November, 2020, 06:11:18 PMI wonder if a big margin would be worse than a small one

No. Trump's strategy isn't to win — he doesn't need to. He only needs the result to be close enough to contest it and then it goes to the same courts that Mitch McConnell has spent the last four years packing with Republican appointees at every level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 November, 2020, 06:32:28 PM
The two-party non-proportional system is messed up - it just begs for corruption and binary thinking.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 November, 2020, 07:29:28 PM
Biden needs to win by more than one state and for those margins to be reasonable. 538 reckons Trump has a 1 in 10 chance. So presumably we'll all wake up tomorrow and find he's somehow won California. (Being more sensible, I suspect he'll win Florida, because Florida. I hope not though. If Biden takes Florida, Trump's chances drop like a stone. Best thing of the night would be Texas going blue, but I wouldn't bet on that happening until 2028.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 04 November, 2020, 09:25:55 AM
Thoughts with any forumites living in the US. No matter how it goes from here, it's going to be an absolute stommshow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2020, 11:10:41 AM
Yep. The best possible result now all rests on 'late' votes across a few battleground states. At least NE-2 means things can't end up a draw but it's bizarre to think a reasonable outcome could mean the entire election rested on that one electoral college vote. (This would be e.g. ME-2 going red, Biden taking Wi+Ga but Trump getting Mi+PA.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 04 November, 2020, 12:37:04 PM
I can't believe I'm so concerned about someone else's election result that I'm watching the Michigan count as it happens...  :o
Biden was 1.5% down, they are both now on 49.2% share with about 700,000 mail-in votes still to be counted. If Biden doesn't get this state he is stuffed and I'm giving up on democracy for good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 04 November, 2020, 01:01:19 PM
US polling is so unreliable it clearly needs to be phased out in favour of the 'Dave the Orangutan' approach.

(https://i.imgur.com/v2GbY1Z.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 November, 2020, 01:23:02 PM
Wi+Mi+Nv is the hope at this point. Then Ga and Pa don't matter. But Biden's losing his lead in Nv. ARGH. I hate this so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 04 November, 2020, 02:07:57 PM
Biden just took the lead in Michigan by 2000 votes! There are only about 60,000 left to count. I believe he has lost Ga, Pa and Nc. Biden leads Nv by 8000, WI by 21,000 and Az by 100,000.

Edit: Biden's lead in Michigan now 25,000!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2020, 02:35:09 PM
I feel a bit humanity sick that so many people would vote for such an openly corrupt, hateful bully. You'd think I'd have gotten over Boris's win by now, but there it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 November, 2020, 03:01:34 PM
"But look at the alternative."
"What a choice."
"Both sides."
"As bad as each other."
"Just hold your nose when you vote."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 04 November, 2020, 03:20:15 PM
If you want an illustration of how friggin' insane the electoral college system is, Biden's popular vote figure now stands at 69,551,088 — more than Obama in 2008, making it the largest number of votes for a presidential candidate in history.

And yet the result is still too close to call.

(FWIW, Biden's ahead in Nevada and Wisconsin, and fractionally ahead in Michigan, but his lead is widening there as the count goes on. Those three states would give him exactly 270 electoral college votes.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 04 November, 2020, 03:21:32 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2020, 02:35:09 PM
I feel a bit humanity sick that so many people would vote for such an openly corrupt, hateful bully. You'd think I'd have gotten over Boris's win by now, but there it is.

People/voters keep finding new ways to disappoint.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 04 November, 2020, 04:10:15 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 November, 2020, 03:20:15 PM
If you want an illustration of how friggin' insane the electoral college system is, Biden's popular vote figure now stands at 69,551,088 — more than Obama in 2008, making it the largest number of votes for a presidential candidate in history.

And yet the result is still too close to call.

(FWIW, Biden's ahead in Nevada and Wisconsin, and fractionally ahead in Michigan, but his lead is widening there as the count goes on. Those three states would give him exactly 270 electoral college votes.)

I don't care how big Biden's popular vote margin is, as long as he wins the vote!

Even Kennedy only won the popular vote by 112,827  :o   The smallest margin in the modern era.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 November, 2020, 04:54:20 PM
Quote from: Lorenzo on 04 November, 2020, 04:10:15 PM
I don't care how big Biden's popular vote margin is, as long as he wins the vote!

The 'popular vote v. electoral college' stuff is just a peculiarity of the compromises in a federal electoral system: we all have these kind of historical idiosyncrasies*, and we all like to interpret them as unfair, when in fact the alternatives are often just differently unfair**.

The bigger issue is the Senate results, which could well destroy a new administration's ability to do anything.  It's here JFK's tiny margin becomes relevant: he was unable to get any of his progressive proposals through Congress in his short tenure, and it's really only posthumously that he became an effective President.



* An example would be Ireland's most recent election, where many decided to present 1st Preferences in the STV-PR system as a kind of proxy FPTP, and thus evidence that their preferred party had "won" and were being undemocratically excluded from power, despite the system being specifically designed not to work that way.
** This is not the case with gerrymandering and appalling voter suppression, for which there are no excuses. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 04 November, 2020, 10:29:53 PM
A corporate, centre-right Democrat like Biden was always going to be a really hard sell, which was why so many of us were deeply anxious when he secured the nomination back at the start of the year. While he isn't as reviled as Hilary Clinton, he still personifies a system that a huge section of this country feels, rightly or wrongly, has turned its back on them. If there's one single lesson to be taken from the last five years of US politics, it's that a hell of a lot of people aren't happy, and want change, not a return to the status quo. There is a reason why relative unknowns like Andrew Yang did comparatively well in the primaries when the more established names dropped like flies with almost zero support.

If only there were another possible Democratic candidate - someone who has Trump's outsider, anti-establishment status and rabid core base of grassroots support, but is also a broadly liked and widely popular figure. Someone who actually has some solid policy ideas vs just being the 'safe choice' and 'not Trump', and could, maybe, just maybe, stand a chance of actually engaging with and winning over a significant number of Trump voters?

Nope, I can't think of anyone either!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 November, 2020, 11:02:46 PM
I was going to act shocked that Americans wouldn't vote out a shower of hugely incompetent clowns who can't govern and don't care about their constituents. I was going to smugly denigrate the people of America who put tribalism over their own interests.

But I live in Belfast...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2020, 11:36:56 PM
Quote from: radiator on 04 November, 2020, 10:29:53 PM
Nope, I can't think of anyone either!

I suppose the tragedy is that someone like Sanders (who would actually fight really hard for working class rights) gets dismissed as being some kind of crazy left-wing radical whilst Trump (who says he'll drain the swamp when he really means that he'll set up shop there) is somewhat adored by a large section of the working class, who he didn't actually deliver for because he gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy and left poor people to die of Covid (whilst doing his best to take away their health care and force them into unwanted pregnancies).

It's difficult to feel sorry for people who vote for their own worst interests.

Maybe ... Jimmy Kimmel?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2020, 07:38:03 AM
See also: UK seats that flipped Lab to Con.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 05 November, 2020, 09:18:02 AM
Hi folks,

Don't venture into this dark realm often but come here to ask you to settle an old man's nerves. Should I be worried about Nevada? The margins make me worry about Nevada. I know there are other options BUT Nevada seems the most clear cut for a Biden win. North Carolina is pretty much gone to Trump, will someone call Alaska already, Georgia feels like an outside chance at best now with so little left to count. Pennsylvannia, well the ground to cover is still pretty big that even though closing I don't want to be relying on that.

Most commentators seem to think its all but done, BUT I'm nervous as I can see a very clear way for Trump to snatch this. I'm looking to Nevada to settle those nerves therefore BUT man it looks very close with a lot to count and a lot of that counting seeming to be in rural counties where Trump does well - even if they don't have big populations. Anyway should I be worrying?

Nervous of Sheffield.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 09:19:24 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2020, 07:38:03 AM
See also: UK seats that flipped Lab to Con.

I've never seen any real analysis of where those Labour voters went in 2019. Not to the Conservatives, since their share of the vote barely moved. I'm assuming the remainers went Lib Dem or Green because Labour weren't remain-ey enough. The leavers? Like I say, they didn't go to the Tories (unless defecting Tory remainers cancelled them out, in which case, where did the Tories go?)... did they go BXP? Stay at home? It's curious.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 09:26:31 AM
Quote from: Colin YNWA on 05 November, 2020, 09:18:02 AM
Don't venture into this dark realm often but come here to ask you to settle an old man's nerves. Should I be worried about Nevada? The margins make me worry about Nevada. I know there are other options BUT Nevada seems the most clear cut for a Biden win. North Carolina is pretty much gone to Trump, will someone call Alaska already, Georgia feels like an outside chance at best now with so little left to count. Pennsylvannia, well the ground to cover is still pretty big that even though closing I don't want to be relying on that.

Basically, Trump has to win everything that's yet to declare in order to win. Wiser heads than mine seem to think Nevada is reasonably safe — Biden's lead has certainly remained constant as the votes are counted. As to the others, I can only quote an American poster from a different forum I frequent (as of about two hours ago):

QuoteI've fallen into spreadsheet land tracking land as numbers come in all evening.

Assuming the number of outstanding votes is somewhat accurate, Biden is going to take GA and PA. In PA, he needs ~55-60% of the remaining vote to go his way, and he's been getting in the mid-70's with each update.

Similarly in GA, Biden needs closer to 60% to overtake Trump and has been pulling mid-70's to mid-80's with each update.

TBH, I'm still nervous that no one seems to be looking at Arizona, which uncalled itself because they discovered uncounted ballots and are still counting.

Georgia is looking really tight, TBH, but it's not mathematically improbably that there's an upset in North Carolina (80K lead to Trump but ~200K ballots still to count).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 05 November, 2020, 09:39:10 AM
Interesting to see more detailed takes on the data. i did some quick maths this morning, which is where my nerves come from. But seeing those vote rates in states is a little reassuring that some votes might still be in the balance I thought were gone.

Hadn't thought about Arizona as I'm going off the Guardian map and while Biden has a decent lead as you say the vote count % still leaves a worryingly open field.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 05 November, 2020, 09:42:56 AM
In 2021 the Republican Party will have more Qanon Senators in House Of Representatives, than African American Senators.

America, you really, really need to start educating, force Facebook and Twitter etc. to enforce harsher crackdowns on what i would love to deem fringe thinking, now clearly not, and discover the decency and empathy that just over half the voters have.

Conspiracy theories, guns.. Christ. We could be headed for dark times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 November, 2020, 11:07:38 AM
Quote from: Rately on 05 November, 2020, 09:42:56 AM
In 2021 the Republican Party will have more Qanon Senators in House Of Representatives, than African American Senators.

They've got six men called John - I'm assuming that's more than they've got African American senators?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 November, 2020, 11:10:26 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 05 November, 2020, 11:07:38 AM
Quote from: Rately on 05 November, 2020, 09:42:56 AM
In 2021 the Republican Party will have more Qanon Senators in House Of Representatives, than African American Senators.

They've got six men called John - I'm assuming that's more than they've got African American senators?

Going from the photos* on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_senators) they've got one non-WASP senator.

* not that photos can reveal everything about somebody's cultural heritage, but it's better than nothing (as long as you bear in mind that it's only just better than nothing).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 November, 2020, 11:44:53 AM
I doubt suppression of online-fueled nutjobbery will ever do anything more than boost its support.

Education is a solution, but a very long-term solution. I got into an argument (on TikTok!) with some bright 20somethings who insisted they were ignorant about politics because they were never taught about the Irish electoral or legislative systems in school. When I linked them to the outline of the compulsory Civic, Social and Political Education 100-hour course in the Junior Cycle curriculum that they'd all done in the last 10 years, and the relevant strand that covers all that, they insisted their teachers hadn't taught it. This may well be the case (which would be a disgrace), or it may be that they just paid no attention, but the point is that making inroads via formal education is a long uphill battle.

So it strikes me that the best medium-term approach is to create an alternative position that offers as much as the Trumps and Farages pretend to do. Make equality, community, climate, social services, as seductively, selfishly beneficial to the individual voter as "taking back control". That means simplifying messages, being clear, being humble, and being united behind a distinctive, aspirational set of ideas that can be borne out by results. Trying to be more like the other side, to walk a middle path,  or trying to be morally purer-than-thou, or being sneeringly intellectual about the morons isn't going to cut it: the big lies are always going to be more appealing.

It has to be an alternative populism based around real goals. Easy-peasy or what!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 12:02:57 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 04 November, 2020, 04:54:20 PM
The bigger issue is the Senate results, which could well destroy a new administration's ability to do anything.  It's here JFK's tiny margin becomes relevant: he was unable to get any of his progressive proposals through Congress in his short tenure, and it's really only posthumously that he became an effective President.

Interestingly, the Senate isn't quite as settled as the reporting would have you believe. Breakdown of the current state of play on Twitter here. (https://twitter.com/lynnv378/status/1324209977163173889)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 05 November, 2020, 12:07:14 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 12:02:57 PM
Interestingly, the Senate isn't quite as settled as the reporting would have you believe. Breakdown of the current state of play on Twitter here. (https://twitter.com/lynnv378/status/1324209977163173889)

Yeah, was heartened to see that. It certainly didn't come across that way yesterday.

Hopefully there'll be a functional administration, and all we'll have to deal with is the US being a right-wing global menace on 'Normal' difficulty. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2020, 12:41:17 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 09:19:24 AMI've never seen any real analysis of where those Labour voters went in 2019. Not to the Conservatives, since their share of the vote barely moved. I'm assuming the remainers went Lib Dem or Green because Labour weren't remain-ey enough.
Judging by Best for Britain research, quite a few long-time Labour in key seats went Conservative. They've done plenty of research and talked to voters who flipped, and in the most recent Oh God What Now podcast, Naomi Smith noted that quite a few of these voters are very resolute in their choice, because it cut them up and they don't want to be proven wrong. Getting them back is going to be a tricky job for Labour—although perhaps not that tricky if the Tories continue to more or less say fuck the north. (The north in this case being anything north of Watford. Or west of the M25, for that matter.)

As for the US election, Arizona is freaking me out a bit. Biden can afford to lose that and Nevada if Pa goes blue. Nate Silver reckons Pa will go blue, but I'm frankly not putting a lot of faith in his forecasting right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 05 November, 2020, 01:00:10 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 05 November, 2020, 12:41:17 PM
Judging by Best for Britain research, quite a few long-time Labour in key seats went Conservative.

The numbers don't really bear that out as a major factor, though — Labour's share of the vote dropped by something like 7.5% and the Tories' only went up by 1.2%. Obviously, the relative size of each party's pool of voters will account for some of that difference, but nowhere near all of it...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 05 November, 2020, 05:58:07 PM
Today we have seen the bizarre situation of Trump-supporting protesters in states where Biden's ahead chanting "count all the votes" and Trump-supporting protesters in states he's leading chanting "stop the count"

The idea that the same rules should apply to everyone seems to have been long abandoned by this administration and it's followers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 05 November, 2020, 06:10:26 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2020, 11:36:56 PM
Quote from: radiator on 04 November, 2020, 10:29:53 PM
Nope, I can't think of anyone either!

I suppose the tragedy is that someone like Sanders (who would actually fight really hard for working class rights) gets dismissed as being some kind of crazy left-wing radical

The point is that its clear that anyone running on the Democratic ticket will be 'dismissed as some kind of crazy left-wing liberal'. This was exactly the charge leveled against (hilariously) Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

I can only go on my own experience but my gut feeling is that a lot of right wingers (media types and voters) if anything have a kind of respect, possibly even bordering on admiration, for Sanders whereas they have nothing but contempt for Obama, Biden, Clinton etc. And honestly that isn't unfounded. I have a feeling that Trump's usual routine just wouldn't work on Sanders in the same way. Granted I live in a liberal bubble (though not so much as you might suspect from where I live - eg my next door neighbour is a Qanon fan) but literally everyone I know would have (enthusiastically) voted for Sanders. I don't know anyone who is remotely passionate about Biden. You see a lot of yard signs for 'Any Functioning Adult 2020'. And this is all Biden is to most people, a means to an end. There's no passion on the Democratic side to match what there is on the right.

Sanders obviously would not have the support of the right side of the dems (and the former republicans in their ranks), but imo he'd have a damn sight more of a chance of getting through to Trump voters in swing states than any candidate they could field. The present situation - where the voting habits of the population seems to be entirely split down the middle between the cities and rural areas, surely cannot continue.

It is beyond a shadow of a doubt now that for all their patronising dismissal of Bernie supporters, the Democratic Party do not have a single clue what they are doing. They might scrape a win, but its a Pyrrhic victory at best. I'm an idiot, and even I could have called what just happened. Why not roll the dice?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 05 November, 2020, 07:03:05 PM
I remember the last time Trump got elected I had just finished reading Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72 by Hunter S. Thompson*. His almost 50 year old words are sadly still relevant.

"Liberalism itself has failed, and for a pretty good reason. It has been too often compromised by the people who represented it."

"The main problem in any democracy is that crowd-pleasers are generally brainless swine who can go out on a stage & whup their supporters into an orgiastic frenzy—then go back to the office & sell every one of the poor bastards down the tube for a nickel apiece."

"A lot of blood has gone under the bridge since then, and we have all learned a hell of a lot about the realities of Politics in America. Even the politicians have learned – but, as usual, the politicians are much slower than the people they want to lead."

But most importantly

"Every now and then you have to get away from that ugly Old Politics trip, or it will drive you to kicking the walls and hurling AR3's into the fireplace."

*The real one, not the cartoon character portrayed by wife beater** Johnny Depp in the Terry Gilliam movie

**I can call him that without fear of reprisal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 November, 2020, 07:15:48 PM

There seems to be a good deal of disillusionment and distrust surrounding the current US democratic process. What are the root causes, do you think? How can they be remedied or at least alleviated?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 05 November, 2020, 07:27:33 PM
For me the only memorable moment from the entire Biden campaign was when he told Trump to 'shut up, man!' during the first debate. It resonated because it felt honest, and is what everyone was thinking. And yet Biden probably thought of it as a faux pas.

If one thing is clear it's that people are sick and tired of polished, moderate politicians. The left need to embrace a bit of Trump's off the cuff style. Doesn't mean they have to behave like complete pricks like him all the time, just show a bit of genuine passion. Call the other side on their shit. Fight fire with fire. You see how Trump just responds to attacks by punching back? It obviously works!

Biden's whole schtick of 'crossing the aisle' and compromise seems so ludicrously old fashioned and naive in this day and age.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 05 November, 2020, 10:24:35 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 05 November, 2020, 07:03:05 PM
*The real one, not the cartoon character portrayed by wife beater** Johnny Depp in the Terry Gilliam movie

**I can call him that without fear of reprisal.


Didn't do Sean Connery's career any harm.  Pretty sickening idol-worship of an unrepentant spousal abuser in the last week :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: radiator on 05 November, 2020, 11:02:37 PM
Articles like this crack me up. You're really just figuring this out now?

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/theres-no-escaping-who-we-have-become/616992/

People weren't somehow 'tricked' into electing Trump in 2016. They knew exactly who and what they were voting for, and they did it anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 12:52:39 AM
Quote from: radiator on 05 November, 2020, 06:10:26 PM
They might scrape a win, but its a Pyrrhic victory at best.

I have to disagree. If Trump goes, that's insanely good news, for all sorts of reasons. And Biden is calling for calm even as Trump foments discord. Biden's not my perfect candidate for president, but he's a voice of reason against a voice of hate. I'll take that every day of the week - and especially this week.

Day-dreams about the potential of Sanders (or Corbyn) haven't produced fruit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 November, 2020, 02:20:07 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 12:52:39 AM
Quote from: radiator on 05 November, 2020, 06:10:26 PM
They might scrape a win, but its a Pyrrhic victory at best.

I have to disagree. If Trump goes, that's insanely good news, for all sorts of reasons.

The main one being our civilisations may now be able to weather the coming storm, keep deaths to just a few million, and stop it from getting much worse.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 09:03:49 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 12:52:39 AM
Day-dreams about the potential of Sanders (or Corbyn) haven't produced fruit.

Sanders is like an articulate and competent Corbyn. He would have been destroyed in exactly the same way Corbyn was.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 November, 2020, 09:17:57 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 09:03:49 AM
Sanders is like an articulate and competent Corbyn. He would have been destroyed in exactly the same way Corbyn was.

Amusingly, they actually wheeled out the antisemitism slur against what passes for the left in the US quite early on in the primaries... before it dawned on them that was difficult to make it stick against Sanders, what with him being Jewish and everything.*


*Although, they weren't really trying. McNicoll and his cronies at Labour Party Central managed to expel a Jewish son of Holocaust survivors for antisemitism... and if that sentence doesn't give you some clue as to how fucked up the "Labour Antisemitism" row was, I don't know what will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 10:06:46 AM
Georgia has flipped to the Democrats, with not many votes left to count.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 06 November, 2020, 10:26:18 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 10:06:46 AM
Georgia has flipped to the Democrats, with not many votes left to count.

917 votes ahead of Trump at moment.

I know Biden will be a competent President, not in my opinion what America needs, but at least it is a good swift kick in the balls to all the racists, conspiracy theorists and losers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 11:41:55 AM
As someone watching from the UK, competency seems like a worthwhile goal to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 06 November, 2020, 11:45:22 AM
Quote from: CalHab on 06 November, 2020, 11:41:55 AM
As someone watching from the UK, competency seems like a worthwhile goal to me.

Competent, decent and empathetic, to be fair. Something that Trump, and those that orbit him are completely lacking in.

Now if we could only get a competent Prime Minister and functioning Government.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 November, 2020, 01:25:54 PM
I suspect Biden will still find ways to disappoint, particularly in regards to race, immigration, wealth inequality, jobs, corruption, foreign policy, healthcare and the economy.
A lot of people seem to be mistaking voters who hate Trump for voters that support the Democrats or their latest front man, and all Biden represents is a chance - that the Democrats will almost certainly squander - to go back to the neoliberal consensus that represented the exact set of conditions that elected Trump in the first place, so we'll be doing all this again very soon, and it just remains to see what sideshow freak the Republicans trot out to run in 2024 or 2028.
After the last 5 years, the term "President Kid Rock" has a depressing air of plausibility to it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 06 November, 2020, 02:00:59 PM
Reports of Biden having over taken Trump in Pennslyvania now. Christ the dream of quiet competence is coming true, it actually might be coming true.

And remember were America goes the UK follows... maybe... man imagine having a government run with quiet competence... just imagine...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 November, 2020, 02:02:39 PM
Biden's 5,000+ up in Pennsylvania now. Arizona and Nevada are going to hold for Biden. It's done, whatever happens in Georgia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 06 November, 2020, 02:06:17 PM
Bring on the Alaskan count on I say - he's on a bloody roll!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 06 November, 2020, 02:17:42 PM
Some good news.

Seen reports today that the Democrats wrote to the Secret Service and the US Military before Election, asking what would happen if Biden won and Trump refused to move aside, and they have been assured that if he hasn't vacated the White House in an orderly fashion, they will move him along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 06 November, 2020, 02:18:31 PM
Joe Biden is likely a one-term President. Apart from being elderly, he's Reagan II and not particularly Progressive – which is what many of his electorate want him, and Kamala Harris, to be. The Democrats will see the 'greatest amount of votes for a candidate in US history' as tacit approval of their usual MO and disregard rural America, again.

No doubt the Republicans will seize the gift they've been given and mobilise the huge army of believe any aul shite zealots Trump has amassed and continue to build towards their one-party state – only they'll be more clever about it and run a Latino candidate next time, or sumpin' like that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 03:02:47 PM
Once it's called for Biden, I'm going to allow myself 24 hours of celebration at the overthrow of a tyrant before I lay back down and let the waves of cynicism wash over me again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 06 November, 2020, 04:20:41 PM
Enjoy that feeling while it lasts - it is a good feeling - cynicism is overrated. I allowed myself a small scream and a Balki style Dance of Joy when I heard the Pennsylvania news.
It would really make my day if you changed back to your Vaughan Oliver avatar...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 05:15:19 PM
Your wish is my command.

---

Pundits pointing out that Arizona and Georgia are perhaps punishing the Twitter Monster for being mean to their beloved sons (e.g. McCain).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 06 November, 2020, 05:55:38 PM
 :D

I wonder whether my love for the Cocteau Twins would be the same without Vaughan's covers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 November, 2020, 07:26:55 PM
Got told I looked like Pete Tong once, as well.

---

Oh, I hope they get the counts all completed without violence breaking out. Tense times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 06 November, 2020, 09:17:25 PM
Today is the first time in a decade when it feels like a weight has been lifted, instead of yet another added.

Yes, everything's still utterly fucked, and I have no expectations for a Biden presidency or what happens after, but at least the world feels a little saner.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 November, 2020, 09:58:40 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 November, 2020, 09:17:25 PM
Today is the first time in a decade when it feels like a weight has been lifted, instead of yet another added.

Yes, everything's still utterly fucked, and I have no expectations for a Biden presidency or what happens after, but at least the world feels a little saner.

I've avoided this thread, and news sites, for the last few days.  The sad truth is, I was wracked with anxiety about the election after seeing the numbers on Wednesday far closer than I was comfortable with.  When I finally got it together and looked at the news, I'm slightly ashamed to admit my first reaction was a feeling of schadenfreude; watching a vindictive sociopath who has railed against 'losers' for so long have to face up to the fact that he's one himself.

It feels like an anticlimax and it's far from over yet, and I'm still anxious.  Joe Biden will not be a perfect president and a huge number of Americans think it's ok to destroy the environment, discriminate against other races and let a virus run rampant.  But the next four years can't be worse than the last four, and imagine how Trump would behave if he didn't have re-election to worry about.

The schadenfreude hasn't quite left me yet either.  The Shitgibbon has lost for the first time in his life, and he's lost the bigliest competition of them all.  Also, he'll have a few taxes to pay and harassment allegations to face up to come 2021.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 November, 2020, 11:14:08 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 06 November, 2020, 09:17:25 PM
Today is the first time in a decade when it feels like a weight has been lifted, instead of yet another added.

Yes, everything's still utterly fucked, and I have no expectations for a Biden presidency or what happens after, but at least the world feels a little saner.

Literally all of this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 November, 2020, 02:26:38 AM
QuoteWhen I finally got it together and looked at the news, I'm slightly ashamed to admit my first reaction was a feeling of schadenfreude; watching a vindictive sociopath who has railed against 'losers' for so long have to face up to the fact that he's one himself.

I would say that is a legitimate response, all things considered!

One of the few pluses of such a drawn out election is watching the Curious Orange slowly disintegrate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 10:21:57 AM
Aye, well, I suppose.  Just not sure if I'm happy about being vindictive back at him. Also, weirdly, I thought about his weird, sheltered life last night and genuinely began to feel sorry for him - the man is a giant toddler whose toys have been taken away from him forever.  It led me to this article, which I found very interesting.

https://jbarbush.medium.com/the-awkward-moment-i-stopped-hating-trump-and-began-to-feel-sorry-for-him-18b7559510 (https://jbarbush.medium.com/the-awkward-moment-i-stopped-hating-trump-and-began-to-feel-sorry-for-him-18b7559510)

But when I woke up today, I remembered I'd been at the whiskey and sod him: I'll feel sorry for the immigrant children whose parents he's taken away and lost, the families of the coronavirus victims he did nothing to help, and the future generations who have to deal with a climate he's helped to destroy.

Also, the Curious Orange! I loved him! The other one, that is; the one on TMWRNJ with the Fall theme music.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2020, 10:47:45 AM
Fuck him. I'll go as far as saying I wasn't rooting for him to die of COVID. That's it. Everything else: fuck him. The man has burned through money all his life, got constant opportunities, squandered everything, and never, ever been held to account. He sees everything as a fight and doesn't have the most basic understanding of mutual benefit in business. He's responsible for the deaths of tends of thousands of people. He's wrecked US political institutions and ensured the country's highest court will be heavily conservative for a generation. (And bearing in mind that this is conservative from the viewpoint of a conservative country. The closest equivalent here would be a political high court where a couple of members are DUP and the rest of the majority is Johnson-era Tories.)

He became the president of the USA and then discovered he didn't really want it? Boo fucking hoo. See also: Boris Johnson, now whining about the increased workload and reduced income he has on being PM.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 11:01:58 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2020, 10:47:45 AM

He became the president of the USA and then discovered he didn't really want it? Boo fucking hoo.

One might even say 'womp womp'. 

I'm not sure if he doesn't want that job, though.  Judging by this little mickey-fit he's throwing right now, it seems he wants it very much.  In fact he really doesn't seem to have a plan B -  I hope he doesn't come here to waddle round his poxy, eroding golf-course as his hides from his enormous debts.

But yeah, you're right: Fuck him  My sympathy for him was a moment of tipsy madness.  I'm also curious to see how Nigel Farage is going to crowbar his tongue back out now things haven't gone his way. 

Speaking of Johnson, I heard in a political podcast recently that the Tory Brexit strategy, such as it is, depended on Trump's re-election.  I don't really know why; only that Trump loved the idea of the UK leaving the US - I can't really see how that would lead to any significant trade deal, though, going by Trump's utterly one-sided approach to such matters.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2020, 11:09:21 AM
IIRC on Oliver Stone's History of America, FDR pursued a policy of bankrupting the UK to cripple the Empire and lay open space for American ascendancy.  Maybe I'm being hyper-cynical in suggesting that perhaps what Trump was looking forward to was the full and final reversal of fortunes with Britain becoming totally subservient as a colony of the US.  Tin-foil-hattery it may be ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 November, 2020, 11:17:34 AM
We can only hope that along with the current humiliation, and inevitable countdown till his Presidential immunity expires, that he is gripped by the knowledge that he may lose everything he has managed to grift, steal and destroy.

He had every advantage in life, destroyed all that he was given, and, as somebody wisely said, everything Trump touches dies. Squandered his inheritance, owes money to God only knows how many very dodgy people.

Hopefully judgement is coming, and he lives out his remaining years in prison, or exile.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 11:53:51 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2020, 11:09:21 AM
IIRC on Oliver Stone's History of America, FDR pursued a policy of bankrupting the UK to cripple the Empire and lay open space for American ascendancy.  Maybe I'm being hyper-cynical in suggesting that perhaps what Trump was looking forward to was the full and final reversal of fortunes with Britain becoming totally subservient as a colony of the US.  Tin-foil-hattery it may be ...

Seems fairly likely that he'd want complete subservience; whether it's because of Britain's former dominance or not it's impossible to say.

Anyway, it's lucky he survived his hospitalisation.  If he hadn't, Mr 'I'm much more humble than you'd understand' wouldn't be experiencing the humiliation of defeat by an unremarkable rival - that 'your favourite president' shit isn't really cutting the mustard any more.  My schadenfreude may have waned a bit last night, but it's back with a vengeance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 November, 2020, 12:17:46 PM
Trump will lose a lot if this doesn't go his way, but I expect him to flee to somewhere he cannot be extradited from, or spend the rest of his life in court but not jail. His plan B is to set up Trump TV, and I'd genuinely like to see that happen because Murdoch would nail him to the wall.

Farage: he'll be fine. He's rebranding his party for the umpteenth time, and it'll now be the meaningless Reform UK. But that word strikes home. If nothing else, he's good at branding and a superb salesperson. So he'll end up on TV constantly, despite his party having no MPs, precisely 12 councillors, and a polled ~1% of the vote. (By contrast, the Green co-leaders are barely given airtime, despite the party having 1 MP, 2 Lords, 2 London assembly seats, 382 councillors, running one council, and polling in the 3–5% range.) The worrying thing: Farage this time is going full anti-science rather than just racist. Media companies need to stop giving him oxygen.

Johnson and the Tories: well, yes. Everything they've done relies on Trump winning. If he doesn't, they have no path forward. Biden will rightly prioritise the EU and there will be no special relationship. We will effectively be alone, yelling from a distance, just as everyone predicted would happen. That's not to say the UK lacks clout and influence. We are still a big economy of some importance. But we are about to learn the difference between being a worldwide rule-taker and medium-sized country alone in the world versus 'vital cog in the machine' status where we existed as a driving force within the world's largest market, alongside Germany and France.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 November, 2020, 12:27:17 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 07 November, 2020, 02:26:38 AM
QuoteWhen I finally got it together and looked at the news, I'm slightly ashamed to admit my first reaction was a feeling of schadenfreude; watching a vindictive sociopath who has railed against 'losers' for so long have to face up to the fact that he's one himself.

I would say that is a legitimate response, all things considered!

One of the few pluses of such a drawn out election is watching the Curious Orange slowly disintegrate.


I share those feelings except I haven't got the slightest trace of shame that a horrible, vindictive, cruel tyrannical person is finally facing a set-back.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 07 November, 2020, 12:27:41 PM
Less Curious, more Furious Orange!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 07 November, 2020, 12:30:58 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 11:01:58 AM
Speaking of Johnson, I heard in a political podcast recently that the Tory Brexit strategy, such as it is, depended on Trump's re-election.  I don't really know why; only that Trump loved the idea of the UK leaving the US - I can't really see how that would lead to any significant trade deal, though, going by Trump's utterly one-sided approach to such matters.


Er yes - Trump loved the idea of the UK leaving the EU, but it wasn't because it was going to go well for the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 12:35:15 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 07 November, 2020, 12:27:41 PM
Less Curious, more Furious Orange!

I'm having that one.

QuoteBut we are about to learn the difference between being a worldwide rule-taker and medium-sized country alone in the world versus 'vital cog in the machine' status where we existed as a driving force within the world's largest market, alongside Germany and France.

Welcome to the economically-insignificant nation club.  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 07 November, 2020, 01:03:35 PM
In fairness to Trump, he really does have to contest every vote since as soon as he's a private citizen again he'll most likely face dozens of criminal charges and lawsuits, along with his idiot children. Maybe he and jr. can share a cell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 November, 2020, 01:35:16 PM
Sorry, had to share this here. Cassette Boy's latest.  It made me chortle.

https://youtu.be/2gr0B16rFzI
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 07 November, 2020, 03:15:20 PM
Pure Class!

https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.4402460.1604678293!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 November, 2020, 04:37:15 PM
CNN has just officially called the election for Biden. That should be it. Barring the 76 days the currently most powerful man on Earth has left to act out the world's most terrifying temper tantrum, obviously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2020, 04:38:27 PM
just seen this.

reaction?

FUCK YES!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 07 November, 2020, 04:54:38 PM
Well that makes the world a better place!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 05:07:09 PM
Hey, you're right!

Phew. Well, that was an uncomfortable week.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 November, 2020, 05:33:37 PM
Ding dong! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM13ebbVrdQ)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2020, 08:25:44 PM
Another happy thought to throw in the mix ... Trump is up to his neck in debt off the back of this failed campaign.  How much was he banking on winning to keep him out of hock?  Looks like life is about to get really interesting for him, and not in a good way!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 November, 2020, 08:33:32 PM
YUB NUB!!

(https://i.imgur.com/4wsn8sO.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 November, 2020, 08:34:17 PM
(Return of the Jedi is trending on Twitter)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 November, 2020, 08:53:20 PM
I have to admit, I thought that was Bungle for a few seconds.

I wonder how long spineless sycophants like Lindsey Graham will keep up the 'voter fraud' nonsense, now that the horse has well and truly bolted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 07 November, 2020, 11:53:22 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 07 November, 2020, 08:25:44 PM
Another happy thought to throw in the mix ... Trump is up to his neck in debt off the back of this failed campaign.  How much was he banking on winning to keep him out of hock?  Looks like life is about to get really interesting for him, and not in a good way!

You'd have to think that the people who he owes money to, especially of the organised crime kind, will be looking to collect very quickly, if Trumps circumstances are to be as reduced as we are led to believe.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 08 November, 2020, 01:11:19 AM
Good riddance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 08 November, 2020, 11:56:04 AM
This is absolutely hilarious. Where does the Trump campaign end... in a garden centre parking lot sandwiched between a porn shop and a crematorium. You couldn't make this shit up if you tried https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/the-other-four-seasons-trump-team-holds-press-conference-at-suburban-garden-centre

I'd love to hear the backstory of how this unfolded. On assumes the tweet went out before the hotel had been booked and the hotel then turned around and told them to get stuffed. Queue a hurried hunt for somewhere with a similar name to try and avoid a humiliating retraction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2020, 12:03:55 PM
The depressingly dry explanation appears to be that it's near a freeway exit and so was primarily chosen because it was convenient and a large open space that could be dressed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 08 November, 2020, 12:22:43 PM
It's good that the Republicans are putting the focus on fair and open elections though.  Maybe we can get all that voter suppression and gerrymandering sorted....

Maybe even sort out the inequality in the Electoral College vote.  The Republicans want it fair, right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 12:25:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2020, 12:03:55 PM
The depressingly dry explanation appears to be that it's near a freeway exit and so was primarily chosen because it was convenient and a large open space that could be dressed.

Any chance of a link? Can't find any explanation on Google other than that it's a cock-up.  (And I do realise that most people want to believe it's a ridiculous mistake they had to follow through with, myself included.)

Quote from: Leigh S on 08 November, 2020, 12:22:43 PM
It's good that the Republicans are putting the focus on fair and open elections though.  Maybe we can get all that voter suppression and gerrymandering sorted....

Maybe even sort out the inequality in the Electoral College vote.  The Republicans want it fair, right?

Hmmm. Only one Republican popular vote winner since 1992, and even he didn't win it when he was first elected - in fact he may not even have won the electoral college.

It's amazing how well a minority party does in a country that sees itself as the pinnacle of democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 08 November, 2020, 12:43:44 PM
Quote from: sintec on 08 November, 2020, 11:56:04 AM
This is absolutely hilarious. Where does the Trump campaign end... in a garden centre parking lot sandwiched between a porn shop and a crematorium. You couldn't make this shit up if you tried
There was a point a few days ago where it seemed possible Trump might successfully engineer a 'victory' through Machiavellian master-planning and recourse to highly devious legal means.

It's not really going that way, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 12:49:36 PM
Farage bet ten grand on a Trump win. The laughs just keep coming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2020, 12:52:10 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 12:49:36 PM
Farage bet ten grand on a Trump win.

Or so he says. I work on the assumption that everything that ambulatory tapeworm says is a lie.

If Biden's Heaney reading on RTE news last night didn't lump-up the old throat, check out this little beauty: https://twitter.com/PiaGuerra/status/1325405777402630144?s=20
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2020, 01:28:04 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 12:25:36 PMAny chance of a link?
It was on Twitter, from a journalist who said he'd actually phoned up the place. That was the suggestion as to why someone might have chosen it, note, rather than a confirmation.

QuoteIt's amazing how well a minority party does in a country that sees itself as the pinnacle of democracy.
Then again, the last time a single ticket won a majority in the UK with a majority of the votes was 1931 (National) and before that 1900 (Con & Lib Unionists). The last time a single party won a majority of the seats with a majority of the vote in the UK was 1880 (Liberal).

The UK always has a government backed by a minority, which is insane, and one of the reasons we desperately need electoral reform. (Ironically, given how angry people remain about it, at least the 2010 coalition did have the backing of a fairly sizeable majority of voters — 59.1% — even if, of course, they didn't specifically vote for that result. (This is something Brits — and especially Labour — need to get over. We need an electoral system that pushes for collaboration, consensus and cooperation, rather than US VS THEM.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 03:40:57 PM

Have there been any instances of Russia interfering with these selections? Or is it China this time?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 03:57:07 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 03:40:57 PM

Have there been any instances of Russia interfering with these selections? Or is it China this time?

In the hope that that's a genuine question and not sarcasm, I think the Russian interference is beyond doubt but has been monitored more closely by social media platforms. China - I don't have the facts to hand but it seems highly likely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 04:24:08 PM

It is a genuine question. I don't follow the msm so I really don't know what the narratives are beyond what's on this thread and what rl people are talking about. During the last selection, everyone was going on about Russian interference - this time, hardly a whisper.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 November, 2020, 04:25:31 PM
Once a country has been destabilised, the level of required input is lower. They already won against the USA and UK. What happens now beyond that is just gravy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 04:28:10 PM

It is a genuine question. I don't follow the msm so I really don't know what the narratives are beyond what's on this thread and what rl people are talking about. During the last selection, everyone was going on about Russian interference - this time, hardly a whisper.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 04:40:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 04:24:08 PM

It is a genuine question. I don't follow the msm so I really don't know what the narratives are beyond what's on this thread and what rl people are talking about. During the last selection, everyone was going on about Russian interference - this time, hardly a whisper.

Fair enough. Yeah, as far as I can gather the Kremlin played at least a part in Trump's rise, and its main objective wasn't to get a Putin-friendly leader in charge - though that was, of course, a bonus - but to cheapen the concept of democracy and to disunite the people of the most powerful Western nation, as well as to loosen the ties between the US and Europe.

I'd imagine a Biden win wasn't what Putin wanted, but in terms of elections his job has largely been done since 2016.

None of which is to say that western nations don't do equally shitty or far worse things to Eastern ones of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2020, 05:53:50 PM
Basically, Putin did to America what America does to South America, albeit via different methods.
His methods are - allegedly - to cause tension in as many disparate groups as possible, from socialists to Brexiteers to video gamers to comic book fans, thus normalising aggression and preventing dialectic and the formation of cohesive or effective movements.
To his credit, if it's true this is some pretty intersectional thinking, and seems to be working out great for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2020, 06:17:52 PM
Given that moar patriots voted for Trump than last time, despite the evidence of their own eyes, one might speculate that putinative interference continued. Certainly if you wanted to promote division and/or complacency in your enemies this election might have been a laudable goal.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 06:42:04 PM

Thanks, chaps - some very interesting posts. It seems to me, ostensibly anyway, nothing more than a continuation of the ancient Great Game of Nations and Powers; all jostling for position.

Yet, there seems to be an increasing tendency around the world towards a dissatisfaction with politics in general and democracy specifically. As if the currency of democracy is being eroded.

If only bodies like the UN, World Bank and the WHO could get on with running things properly, feeding the children and saving the planet without being held back by all these petty political squabbles, incompetence and corruption...

Fertile ground for Stalins, SPECTREs and Sith Lords. And also for Gandhis, Bonds and Skywalkers, fortunately.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2020, 07:24:32 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 November, 2020, 06:17:52 PMGiven that moar patriots voted for Trump than last time, despite the evidence of their own eyes, one might speculate that putinative interference continued.

I fear this can be more easily explained by Facebook selling targeted ads and Twitter being Twitter.  Capitalism, baybay.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 November, 2020, 07:46:50 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2020, 05:53:50 PM
Basically, Putin did to America what America does to South America, albeit via different methods.
His methods are - allegedly - to cause tension in as many disparate groups as possible, ...  if it's true this is some pretty intersectional thinking, and seems to be working out great for him.

I think this is quite a valid point.  I've always found Pratchett's quote from Good Omens about government conspiracy to be quite a good touchstone. 

Is it a case of cunning manipulation or is it slowly simmering forces as populations grow and resources become scarcer?  Are we just seeing a handful of canny individuals surfing these waves for their own benefit (Farage, I'm looking at you here ...)?

Certainly the last few years have given the yanks food for thought but I think the same is true for us too.  Mind you it looks like Johnson's been pasted pretty well.  Seen their latest moniker for him?  "The Shapeshifter."  Priceless!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2020, 08:29:29 PM
Quite a lot of celebration over here in Washington state, with friends and family and neighbors. Every second house in our neighborhood has a BLM poster in the window - so it's a left-leaning locale.

We watched Kamala Harris speak lastnight, and my daughter (who's eight) was enraptured with her words - as Kamala spoke about the difficulties of dealing with Covid, and the struggles we've endured. Watching her have that effect was really powerful. Mini-Solo then got bored during Biden's long-winded stump speech of victory.

And that's a really important part of this - a (relatively young) black, female VP can speak to people in a way that the old white men can't.

We walked downtown yesterday with our "Be Kind" placard - which was made four years ago for a protest march against Trump. We got lots of car honks and comments from folk. It's not a sign that has any indication on it of party affiliation, but it's interesting, of course, that nobody on Earth would assume it was a message of support for the incumbent president or his administration. Why are so many people keen to affiliate with a movement that, at it's core, is about being terribly unkind?

Or, to borrow from James Baldwin: "If I'm not the n****r here and you invented him ... then you've got to find out why. And the future of the country depends on that..."

---

Regarding the wider question of democracy - I've always felt like some form of proportional representation (importantly, somehow non-binary) would benefit the social and political landscape of the US and of the UK. There's a real problem with a mindset that is determined to always win, and for that win to mean domination. (We can argue that the Senate and the House, or the Commons and Lords, aim to provide that - but we can see in practice that they fail to do so.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 08:32:46 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2020, 05:53:50 PM
Basically, Putin did to America what America does to South America, albeit via different methods.
His methods are - allegedly - to cause tension in as many disparate groups as possible, from socialists to Brexiteers to video gamers to comic book fans, thus normalising aggression and preventing dialectic and the formation of cohesive or effective movements.
To his credit, if it's true this is some pretty intersectional thinking, and seems to be working out great for him.

I know I'm getting old and out of touch, but now I'm not sure if YOU'RE being sarcastic, Prof.  In any case, I think that looking at the Brexit shambles may have strengthened the resolve of us remaining EU countries even more; and it's nice to know that the new US President won't see us as a 'foe'. 

I don't want Britain to suffer. My mother is English and most of my family live in England, and most of YOU are British.  But I want the EU to succeed more. To quote Zenith, I live there.


EDIT - Funt, I've been listening to BBC reports from Washington. Sounds like an incredible atmosphere over there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 08:37:34 PM
I think we need to figure out what government is actually for, what purpose it serves, and go from there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 08:51:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 08:32:46 PM



EDIT - Funt, I've been listening to BBC reports from Washington. Sounds like an incredible atmosphere over there.


Sounds like when Obama won, and look at his record. He expanded drone strikes against terrorists - some of them American nationals, and all that. If memory serves, Obama was the first US president to spend his entire term of office at war. People forget that Obama was a war president. Trump's a war president. Now, with the War on Terror still underway, this new guy's going to be a war president too.

It seems to be the new normal. Hidden behind first Nobel Peace Prize morality, next by toxic buffoonery and now by a steady hand. War doesn't seem related, somehow, a separate new normal - a rather profitable one, by all accounts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 08:54:49 PM
So... I'm a tad ignorant as regards American politics - in fact I've learned a fair bit about the system from this election - but these lawsuits beginning tomorrow are hardly going anywhere, are they?

Also... sorry, Shark, I appreciate you've toned it down a lot, but I'm not getting into another argument about Libertarian Anarchism vs Statism.  Maybe someone else will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 08 November, 2020, 08:56:59 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 November, 2020, 07:24:32 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 08 November, 2020, 06:17:52 PMGiven that moar patriots voted for Trump than last time, despite the evidence of their own eyes, one might speculate that putinative interference continued.

I fear this can be more easily explained by Facebook selling targeted ads and Twitter being Twitter.  Capitalism, baybay.

I'm sure, but equally it'd be crazy to think that foreign powers wouldn't stick their oar in where convenient. Does anyone believe the US doesn't do whatever it thinks it can get away with, as it does in every other theatre, and will continue to do so under Joe?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2020, 09:00:53 PM
The only thing I can say about complaining about Obama (the, frankly odd, argument that they're all a bunch of bastards therefore it's better to do nothing) in the context of the current Biden / Harris win is that that idea is well debunked in this article: Why Perfection Is The Enemy Of Done (https://www.forbes.com/sites/deeppatel/2017/06/16/why-perfection-is-the-enemy-of-done/?sh=2d240f454395).

It makes use of some of my favorite quotes from far finer minds than mine:

QuoteVoltaire, the French writer, said, "The best is the enemy of the good." Confucius said, "Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without." And, of course, there's Shakespeare: "Striving to better, oft we mar what's well."

---

As regards asking what government is actually for, that seems disingenuous, or perhaps just lacking in some basic research. I don't need to tell you - anyone can just look that up. Here's a short and partial definition: "Government is a means by which organizational policies are enforced, as well as a mechanism for determining policy". That's from Wikipedia.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2020, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 08:54:49 PM
So... I'm a tad ignorant as regards American politics - in fact I've learned a fair bit about the system from this election - but these lawsuits beginning tomorrow are hardly going anywhere, are they?

There's an extreme right pipe-dream that the fully loaded Supreme Court will somehow step in and declare Trump the victor by over-turning the counts in several states, each of which requires its own legal case (because there's not a centralized election body to take to court over the ballots).

Most brains are seeing that as an extreme scenario because, well, Biden just won the election. Realpolitik, and all that.

(The only worry for me is that Trumpet's trumpeting will cause actual violence, or that if that edge-case scenario came to pass there would be widespread civil discord. I think he wants that. I think a lot of the mad, Qanon twerps want that. Violent wet dreams all over the place out in the back country. Not enough to do.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JamesC on 08 November, 2020, 09:35:13 PM
https://twitter.com/celsiusgs/status/1325279501132177408?s=20
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 09:45:13 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2020, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 November, 2020, 08:54:49 PM
So... I'm a tad ignorant as regards American politics - in fact I've learned a fair bit about the system from this election - but these lawsuits beginning tomorrow are hardly going anywhere, are they?

There's an extreme right pipe-dream that the fully loaded Supreme Court will somehow step in and declare Trump the victor by over-turning the counts in several states, each of which requires its own legal case (because there's not a centralized election body to take to court over the ballots).

Most brains are seeing that as an extreme scenario because, well, Biden just won the election. Realpolitik, and all that.

(The only worry for me is that Trumpet's trumpeting will cause actual violence, or that if that edge-case scenario came to pass there would be widespread civil discord. I think he wants that. I think a lot of the mad, Qanon twerps want that. Violent wet dreams all over the place out in the back country. Not enough to do.)

Cheers Funt, I'm glad to hear that Giuliani's bleatings are just bleatings, and he can piss off and pull his microphone to his heart's content.  It was the Court that Trump Built that had me doubtful.

I really hope the Great Oaf's barely-disguised call to arms lead nowhere.  Stay safe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 November, 2020, 11:56:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 08 November, 2020, 08:51:54 PM
Sounds like when Obama won, and look at his record. He expanded drone strikes against terrorists - some of them American nationals, and all that. If memory serves, Obama was the first US president to spend his entire term of office at war. People forget that Obama was a war president.


How do you figure that?  A quick look suggests that 1985 was the last year that the United States wasn't openly involved in a war.  It was, however, involved in the Cold War plus activities in the Honduras and Nicaragua before, during and after that year.  I'm not sure what a 'war president' is exactly - as far as I know Obama didn't declare any wars, just continued those that others had begun.


p.s. not that I'm holding Obama up on a particular pedestal, but he's the best of the bunch I've known in my lifetime (all I know about Carter I learned from 2000AD back progs, Ronald Reagan was the first president I remembered).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 09 November, 2020, 03:09:55 AM
(https://i2.wp.com/www.comicon.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/4930.jpg?resize=768%2C476&ssl=1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2020, 03:32:52 AM
A short message from Glasgow. (https://imgur.com/LrGiVtG)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2020, 07:17:07 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 08 November, 2020, 11:56:36 PM
I'm not sure what a 'war president' is exactly - as far as I know Obama didn't declare any wars, just continued those that others had begun.

Trump is basically an isolationist. If you want to look for anything positive in the white-hot dumpster fire that's been his presidency, it's that he disengaged the US military from overseas actions and managed to start zero new wars in his term.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2020, 07:48:47 AM

Quote from: Funt Solo
link=topic=28209.msg1043667#msg1043667
date=1604869253

Here's a short and partial definition: "Government is a means by which organizational policies are enforced, as well as a mechanism for determining policy". That's from Wikipedia.


Well, if that's what you think government is for then that's fine. (Personally, I have problems with the word "enforced" in this description - but everything else seems adequate.)

It's more a description of what government does than what it's for. Is it, though, a good enough description of what it's for? There are no mentions of people or society in that description, it could be applied to almost any body from a corporate board to a mother's meeting.

How about something like "that part of society tasked with the organization and maintenance of public infrastructure and services." That's closer to what I think government is for - whether and to what extent it succeeds is another question. I'm not sure my description is entirely adequate either so let's see if we can come to a definition we can agree on and then go from there.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 08 November, 2020, 11:56:36 PM

...as far as I know Obama didn't declare any wars, just continued those that others had begun.




Exactly - he didn't withdraw from any wars or end any. Murderous anti-terrorist attacks continued throughout his presidency, along with assassinations and other monstrous acts. Ditto under Trump. I imagine this new guy won't be winding operations down any time soon either.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2020, 08:22:43 AM
Being Commander-in-Chief in a country which spends around a trillion annually on the military, whose foreign policy for 100 years had been incessant, violent neo-colonial meddling for financial gain, and whose national identify could best be summarised as a mastubatory fantasy of freedom through firepower, drenching oneself in the blood of the infidel is a key part of the job description.

In this, Obama was no different, nor would Clinton 2 have been, and nor will Biden. In this regard the issue is the USA, not necesarily the President-du-jour.

The harm that Trump did lay elsewhere, and additional to, the role of America as global bully boy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2020, 08:40:43 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 09 November, 2020, 07:17:07 AMTrump is basically an isolationist. If you want to look for anything positive in the white-hot dumpster fire that's been his presidency, it's that he disengaged the US military from overseas actions and managed to start zero new wars in his term.
Although the isolationism offset that by eradicating the relationships between a number of countries in the world. The one arguable positive from that is we saw China and Germany emerge as countries people considered replacements for the USA's leading role in certain areas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 November, 2020, 09:03:20 AM
Apparently Trump's campaign team have set up a 'voter fraud hotline' for people to pass on concerns.  Unfortunately it would appear that it has not had the response they hoped for ...

Probably just as well the X-Factor and Strictly finals weren't on this week!

;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 November, 2020, 09:21:27 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2020, 08:22:43 AM
Being Commander-in-Chief in a country which spends around a trillion annually on the military, whose foreign policy for 100 years had been incessant, violent neo-colonial meddling for financial gain, and whose national identify could best be summarised as a mastubatory fantasy of freedom through firepower, drenching oneself in the blood of the infidel is a key part of the job description.

In this, Obama was no different, nor would Clinton 2 have been, and nor will Biden. In this regard the issue is the USA, not necesarily the President-du-jour.

The harm that Trump did lay elsewhere, and additional to, the role of America as global bully boy.

Wars aside, there is the matter of global warming. Trump must be aware of the certainty of it, but as is the case with the pandemic, he doesn't care and ignores it. We've got about twenty years of damage control left, and Trump pulls out of the Paris Agreement, and casts doubt over renewable energy sources, because who cares about future generations?  Even Trump has a young son who'll be living through the worst of it, but who cares?  The Paris Agreement not perfect and it may not be enough, but you know, it's something.

The sheer number of Americans who voted for four more years of this shit both baffles and depresses me.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2020, 10:07:22 AM
Republicans are fuming that without Trump, the US might minimise the use of oil, coal and gas and might expand healthcare provision. GOP voters are fuming too. Because, clearly, a better future is more pollution, extreme weather, failing crops, and no healthcare coverage by default.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 November, 2020, 10:45:09 AM
If they can dismiss Covid-19, which is immediate and right in front of their eyes with another 100,000 US deaths on the cards before Trump even leaves office, they'll never accept the reality of human-driven environmental collapse. The reality is that it's going to require building sufficient support in the remainder of the population, financially incentivising the deluded and just pushing on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 November, 2020, 11:00:42 AM
Talk of Biden treating Saudi Arabia as the Pariah state it deserves to be.

I'll believe it when i see it, but if it were to happen, it would be an incredibly positive development.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2020, 11:13:17 AM
If I was one of those states in the desert, I'd be building solar farms at insane speed right now. There will come a tipping point, but they are well placed to reap the advantages of location for a second time—but only if they act.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 09 November, 2020, 11:15:33 AM
Still get that uneasy feeling that the monster has been slain but the you realise there's still twenty minutes of the movie to go.

Let's hope it's just RETURN OF THE KING happy endings galore.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 09 November, 2020, 11:18:16 AM
I'd think that our best hope is to get to February 2021, and watch the Criminal Prosecutions rain down on him and his associates. They all deserve to rot, and i think his current grandstanding will hopefully make law enforcement more determined and diligent in their actions.

He deserves to live in a courtroom, then a cell for the rest of his life.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 November, 2020, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 09 November, 2020, 11:13:17 AM
If I was one of those states in the desert, I'd be building solar farms at insane speed right now. There will come a tipping point, but they are well placed to reap the advantages of location for a second time—but only if they act.

It does seem like the way forward. Obviously you'll have to keep Dante types from commandeering the solar farms and holding cities to ransom.  Seriously though, if we press on with the Trump attitude, we are, to quote my favourite anarchist Noam Chomsky, toast.  He actually used that word.

Quote from: TordelBack on 09 November, 2020, 10:45:09 AM
If they can dismiss Covid-19, which is immediate and right in front of their eyes with another 100,000 US deaths on the cards before Trump even leaves office, they'll never accept the reality of human-driven environmental collapse. The reality is that it's going to require building sufficient support in the remainder of the population, financially incentivising the deluded and just pushing on.

Yep, it's not even as if it's something we can't see happening already.  One of the biggest tragedies of the last four years was that the Mr 'I Know Windmills Very Much' is too vain to accept that he doesn't have to be the expert on everything. 

It genuinely makes me fearful to see those simpletons shouting at Trump, the man who doesn't give a flying fuck about anything but his ego, to fire Fauci, the man who is trying to save them.  But then, Michael Gove doesn't like experts much either.  Knowing things doesn't seem to be de rigueur at the moment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 November, 2020, 01:30:16 PM
120 thousand people died in the UK because of government mismanagement, and no less than the BBC said that 120 thousand extra deaths were the result of people dying "with benefits cuts", not of.  Making 100 thousand dead Americans disappear is a doddle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2020, 06:10:55 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2020, 07:48:47 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 08 November, 2020, 09:00:53 PM
Here's a short and partial definition: "Government is a means by which organizational policies are enforced, as well as a mechanism for determining policy". That's from Wikipedia.

Well, if that's what you think government is for then that's fine.


Not to get too drawn into this, but it's not what I *think*, it's the definition of what it is. We might as well discuss re-defining the value of zero, as to try to re-define a word that already has a (consensus-driven) meaning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 09 November, 2020, 06:48:27 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2020, 06:10:55 PM
We might as well discuss re-defining the value of zero, as to try to re-define a word that already has a (consensus-driven) meaning.

Ah well, that's an easy one ... after all zero can be contextual.  So it doesn't necessarily mean 'nothing' per se.

::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2020, 07:02:52 PM

Funt, if that's your preferred definition then, as I say, that's fine. I personally don't like that definition because of the reason I gave, which is why I offered a definition of my own for your consideration.

As enforcement is a part of that definition then I must assume, for the moment, that you are happy with (or at least accepting of) having government policies enforced on you. Is this an accurate assumption or am I in error?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2020, 09:41:01 PM
I don't have control over the definition of government. It is what it is. Man.

(Laws are made, and enforced. Whether I like those laws has nothing to do with the definition of what a government is and does.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 November, 2020, 09:50:52 PM
I was just thinking, when Trump said a couple of weeks ago that a vaccine was around the corner, he was lying but he may just have been right.  Even a stopped fascist sociopathic gobshite tells the right time once a term.  Too late to save his sorry, fat, loser's arse, fortunately.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 November, 2020, 10:10:45 PM

Okay, Funt, let's not agree on even a definition, that way we can keep on talking past one another and getting nowhere - but at least we won't have to explore our own beliefs.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 November, 2020, 10:45:53 PM
Shark, you started with wanting to define what government is. My point is that it already has a definition (that is outside our control). I don't see how you get to a disagreement from there. Anyone may wish for the definition to change over time, or to be different right now: in the former case there is hope, in the latter, none.

(https://publicdelivery.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Rene%CC%81-Magritte-%E2%80%93-The-Treachery-of-Images-This-is-Not-a-Pipe-1929--scaled.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 07:17:23 AM

Because, if you define government in a way that requires its imposition from above, and I define it in a way that requires individuals' consent, we're going to be starting off at cross-purposes when considering what each of us thinks government is for.

Now, if you want to first discuss the merits and otherwise of imposed government over voluntary government then I'm happy to do that as it does touch upon the question of what government is for - is it for ruling or is it for organisation; both or neither?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 03:07:05 PM
I seem to be failing to get across the point, which (again) is that it's not my definition. I just quoted what seemed like a fair description of an actuality from a Wikipedia page. Here it is again:

"Government is a means by which organizational policies are enforced, as well as a mechanism for determining policy"

That's what government (of a country, or a business, for example) actually is. People who speed are given tickets. Murderers are confined. Tax avoidance is taken to court (well, unless you've found a cunning loophole). New laws are made. Old laws are rescinded. HR sends out a memo. You can see this for yourself in the same way I can see it.

Summary: I cannot engage in a fanciful entreaty to re-define something that is self-evident. You might as well ask me to re-define mountains.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 04:23:37 PM

I'm not asking you to redefine anything. I'm simply asking that we define terms before we start, sticking to a definition we can both agree on.

Also, I'm not interested in what Wikipedia thinks in this instance, I'm interested in what you think.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 10 November, 2020, 04:56:01 PM
Good luck with getting everyone to agree to your new Organisation method for Society there Shark,  while you are still quibbling about the definition of Government!

You have to have A system - seems to me you are (or maybe should be) more interested in the defiinition of policies than the definition of Gvt?



Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 04:23:37 PM

I'm not asking you to redefine anything. I'm simply asking that we define terms before we start, sticking to a definition we can both agree on.

Also, I'm not interested in what Wikipedia thinks in this instance, I'm interested in what you think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 05:30:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 04:23:37 PM
Also, I'm not interested in what Wikipedia thinks in this instance, I'm interested in what you think.

I've already told you what I think, in my previous post. It feels like maybe you want me to engage in a discussion about some other topic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 November, 2020, 05:45:49 PM
It seems pretty clear from here: Sharky believes that government's role should be limited to organisation of voluntary participants, without coercive powers over the individual, while Funt presents the conventional definition that also foregrounds organisation, but adds enforcement of regulations which is not necessarily consensual wrt each individual, although it may be so at a societal level.

The former is an aspiration, albeit based on precedent, the latter is the present case in the vast majority of situations.

That seems fairly simple, and distinct.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 06:01:56 PM
Like a large oil tanker, if we wish to change course, we need to make adjustments to our current course, in order to get the behemoth to change its path. It will react slowly, as it is heavily laden and already has momentum.

So, you have to accept the oil tanker as it is before you can make changes. You cannot deny its existence. You are left with only three choices: engage with the tanker, ignore the tanker or destroy the tanker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 06:17:40 PM

Yes, I do want to engage in another topic; exploring the question of what government is for, not whichever particular form it takes or what it currently does.

If we can agree on a definition then that gives us a solid basis for any further discussion, should we choose to engage in one.

As I said, if you want to use the definition you found on Wikipedia then that's fine. It is, however, a definition based on what government does, which isn't the same as defining what you think government is for, what its foundational purpose is.

We might, for instance, first be able to agree on a few things societies use governments for, such as organisation and then build our own mutually acceptable definition from there.

Look, I'm not trying to be awkward here, or lead you into some sophistic trap, or change your beliefs, or even to win an argument. To be frank, I thought it might be fun to explore our basic, core beliefs and see how they hold up. I don't want a slanging match, that's what politicians are for...

Anyhoo, I propose that, for the purpose of this particular discussion concerning what government is for, we adopt the definition for government as, "that part of society tasked with the organisation and maintenance of public infrastructure and services." This definition, to me, encompasses what government is for without any reference to method (eg., enforcement). It also assumes that government is a part of society and not apart from it, and I think it's a fairly neutral definition that can describe all governments no matter their flavour, methods, or size.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 07:24:13 PM
There's a software engineering adage of "what's the problem?". Until you've defined the problem (well), what is that thing you're building actually for? What's the problem?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 07:35:09 PM

What's the problem with what?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 November, 2020, 07:44:58 PM
Maria?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 08:01:58 PM

Thanks, Tjm. Now I have drinking chocolate dripping out of my nose.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 08:26:57 PM
She's a terror with curtains.

---

I mean, what's the point of your project to do with imagining a form of government. What is the problem you're trying to fix? What are you striving towards?

What's the problem? (And, if there isn't one, then there's nothing to build. Or is that art?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 08:43:39 PM

I think the problem is a discussion for the future. There may be many problems, few, or none.

I figured that if we first identify what government is for, then we can judge from that starting point what it's actually doing well, what it's doing badly, the directions it might take and the consequences of doing so. Who knows? We may even come up with something useful - even if it's only a deeper understanding of our own and each other's perspective.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 November, 2020, 09:16:36 PM
I guess the conclusion I'm arriving at is that I don't want to be a member of the committee for developing a definition for a new form of government for an unspecified task. Too ephemeral for me. Good luck, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 09:56:53 PM

Who mentioned a committee?

Never mind. I guess we'll have to leave things as they are and hope to improve things by, I don't know, voting harder or something.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 10 November, 2020, 11:04:46 PM
The problem is that government is run by the wealthiest portion of the population and have no intention of letting the rest of us have a say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 November, 2020, 12:13:04 AM
You're thinking of feudalism.  What we have these days is plutocracy, which is different and better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 01:00:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 09:56:53 PM
Who mentioned a committee?

Right? I mean, what's a committee even for?  :-\

---

Talking of government, I wrote a planet generator for the Traveller RPG ... let's see now - the planet Sut is a low gravity, temperate, desert world with only a trace atmosphere and a population of over ten million, run by a feudal technocracy - although there's are three factions on the planet (one a military dictatorship).  Rather than countries, every citizen is a member of a corporate media empire whose CEO is chosen based on the number of monthly up-votes generated via their various mass-communicated opinion-dissemination platforms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 November, 2020, 07:34:48 AM

Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 November, 2020, 12:13:04 AM
You're thinking of feudalism.  What we have these days is plutocracy, which is different and better.

I prefer "kakistocracy." It seems to fit fairly well.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 November, 2020, 07:50:57 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 November, 2020, 07:34:48 AM
I prefer "kakistocracy." It seems to fit fairly well.

I'll get the plunger.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 11 November, 2020, 10:24:57 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 01:00:11 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 10 November, 2020, 09:56:53 PM
Who mentioned a committee?

Right? I mean, what's a committee even for?  :-\

I think it's important we first agree a definition for 'committee'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 November, 2020, 10:37:33 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 11 November, 2020, 10:24:57 AM
I think it's important we first agree a definition for 'committee'.

What do you mean by "definition"...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 November, 2020, 12:48:29 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 11 November, 2020, 10:37:33 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 11 November, 2020, 10:24:57 AM
I think it's important we first agree a definition for 'committee'.

What do you mean by "definition"...?

(If you're being serious...)
Both perfectly valid points - if one happens to be preparing to discuss the nature of committees or definitions.

(If you're joking...)
Ha, ha, ha. Very amusing! :D

(If you're just being nasty...)
.




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 November, 2020, 02:25:26 PM
A Committee for Public Safety should sort it out....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 November, 2020, 02:30:40 PM
Bring things to head, at least.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 November, 2020, 02:44:07 PM

As long as that head is suitably equipped with a hi-vis hard hat, ear defenders, face guard, neck shield, goggles, mask, sunscreen, tracking device, panic button, and multiphasic shields.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 November, 2020, 02:48:56 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 11 November, 2020, 02:44:07 PM

As long as that head is suitably equipped with a hi-vis hard hat, ear defenders, face guard, neck shield, goggles, mask, sunscreen, tracking device, panic button, and multiphasic shields.

FTFY...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 11 November, 2020, 03:57:21 PM
Trump is now actively blocking Biden's take over as President by sending in lawyers to stop the normal transition process. I'm looking forward to the high comedy of the secret service bodily throwing Trump out of the White House on inauguration day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2020, 05:47:16 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 11 November, 2020, 03:57:21 PM
Trump is now actively blocking Biden's take over as President by sending in lawyers to stop the normal transition process. I'm looking forward to the high comedy of the secret service bodily throwing Trump out of the White House on inauguration day.

Maybe I'm being irrational, but I'm feeling a bit of dread about the whole thing.  Watching the Biden administration physically assault the beloved idol of the assault-rifle-wielding voters could stir shit up even more.  What a thundering great snivelling baby of a man.  Why this 'strongman' adjective is used so often baffles me - he's the whiniest, most emotional and most oversensitive politician I've ever seen.   
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 11 November, 2020, 06:00:27 PM
 FFS.

You'd think America has had so much practice getting rid of leaders of other countries that they could manage to get rid of their own.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 06:04:00 PM
He'll walk out unassisted claiming all along that he's been robbed by cheaters. He's pathologically narcissistic, so it's his only option.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 11 November, 2020, 06:39:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 06:04:00 PM
He'll walk out unassisted claiming all along that he's been robbed by cheaters. He's pathologically narcissistic, so it's his only option.
I bet he'll hear this music in his head as he goes:

https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ (https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2020, 06:49:16 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 11 November, 2020, 06:39:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 06:04:00 PM
He'll walk out unassisted claiming all along that he's been robbed by cheaters. He's pathologically narcissistic, so it's his only option.
I bet he'll hear this music in his head as he goes:

https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ (https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ)

:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Greg M. on 11 November, 2020, 06:54:40 PM
He's got plenty of time to salt the earth before he goes, and he's more than capable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 11 November, 2020, 08:13:51 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 11 November, 2020, 06:39:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 November, 2020, 06:04:00 PM
He'll walk out unassisted claiming all along that he's been robbed by cheaters. He's pathologically narcissistic, so it's his only option.
I bet he'll hear this music in his head as he goes:

https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ (https://youtu.be/33izVlIOgnQ)

Nope, I see absolutely no parallels between the strangely-hued, monasyllabic monster which is fuelled by rage and destroys everything in its path, and the Hulk.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 November, 2020, 08:24:17 PM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 11 November, 2020, 08:13:51 PM
Nope, I see absolutely no parallels between the strangely-hued, monasyllabic monster which is fuelled by rage and destroys everything in its path, and the Hulk.

Niccccce.

I see even Boris Johnson has referred to him as 'the previous president' - a wee bit previous in itself but it kind of fucks Trump's idea of him being a kind of British mini-me. 

Which is not to say, of course, Johnson has any concept of morality and integrity himself - he realises which way the wind is blowing, is all.  But the Donald really needs to get the message through his thick skull, and every little helps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 12 November, 2020, 01:26:37 AM
Quote from: M.I.K. on 11 November, 2020, 08:13:51 PM
Nope, I see absolutely no parallels between the strangely-hued, monasyllabic monster which is fuelled by rage and destroys everything in its path, and the Hulk.
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2020, 04:02:46 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/osiDaxR.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 November, 2020, 09:33:14 AM
You can't have a king in America, and that's what the Trumpster is still trying to achieve, so his demise is something to feel satisfaction over. I doubt Trump will go quietly or if he does, it will be in the dead of night by the White House's backdoor, which would be a fitting enough judgement on his term of office.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 November, 2020, 10:07:47 AM
I'm not finding much satisfaction in the GOP trying to engineer a coup in plain sight and people in the US hand-waving it away. We have prominent GOP people very strongly hinting that, hey, the electors should just reinstall Trump. And even if they don't succeed in that, they will have painted the incoming administration as illegitimate and normalised the notion that only votes for the GOP are valid. This is straight-up authoritarianism. The USA is on the brink right now, even though Biden won.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 November, 2020, 10:29:43 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 November, 2020, 10:07:47 AM
I'm not finding much satisfaction in the GOP trying to engineer a coup in plain sight and people in the US hand-waving it away. We have prominent GOP people very strongly hinting that, hey, the electors should just reinstall Trump. And even if they don't succeed in that, they will have painted the incoming administration as illegitimate and normalised the notion that only votes for the GOP are valid. This is straight-up authoritarianism. The USA is on the brink right now, even though Biden won.

There is literally no legal path for Trump to retain power. Biden's margins are too wide to be overturned by recounts. The electors can't be instructed to overturn the vote in their states — there is a legal means for this, but it has to be legislated for prior to the election, and no challenge on the basis of voter fraud will succeed because there is literally no evidence for it.

Republicans privately accept that Trump is going to have to go, and the simple operation of US law means that Trump automatically ceases to be president on Jan 20th regardless of what he says or does. The thing is, the Republican senators and congressmen won't speak out because they've shackled their traditional support to Trump and they're all terrified that he will destroy their voter base in their own states by tweeting against them. Spineless? Yes. Supine? Yes. But that leads us on to...

...the only pathway for Trump to retain power is a literal coup. He's alienated the CIA, the FBI, and all the military top brass. Even the military rank and file didn't vote for him in the sort of numbers they normally break for Republicans. I can't see these fawning cowards in the GOP developing the spine for an actual coup.

At the end of the day, if Trump refuses to leave the White House, Biden can requisition Mar A Lago by executive order and run the government from there if he wants to.

Which is not to say that this is not all incredibly dangerous — Trump is radicalising his base even further and I don't think that the 30-odd% of the US that will support him no matter what will ever come back. It's time to put a stop to this "how can the Democrats reach out to Trump supporters" shit that's filling editorials in the US and here, because the short answer is: "You can't. Focus on the people you can reach."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 November, 2020, 10:32:10 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 November, 2020, 09:33:14 AM
You can't have a king in America...

That's what they said to Octavian, right before 500 years of the Republic came crashing down at Actium.

But I agree, for all its oddities, Americans are almost depressingly proud of their democracy, and I honestly don't believe more than a tiny fraction will put up with this nonsense. It's just a tactic of using up the last of Trump I  to build up resentment for 2  and 4 years time, with no regard for the collateral damage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 12 November, 2020, 10:42:31 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 November, 2020, 10:29:43 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 November, 2020, 10:07:47 AM
I'm not finding much satisfaction in the GOP trying to engineer a coup in plain sight and people in the US hand-waving it away. We have prominent GOP people very strongly hinting that, hey, the electors should just reinstall Trump. And even if they don't succeed in that, they will have painted the incoming administration as illegitimate and normalised the notion that only votes for the GOP are valid. This is straight-up authoritarianism. The USA is on the brink right now, even though Biden won.

There is literally no legal path for Trump to retain power. Biden's margins are too wide to be overturned by recounts. The electors can't be instructed to overturn the vote in their states — there is a legal means for this, but it has to be legislated for prior to the election, and no challenge on the basis of voter fraud will succeed because there is literally no evidence for it.

Republicans privately accept that Trump is going to have to go, and the simple operation of US law means that Trump automatically ceases to be president on Jan 20th regardless of what he says or does. The thing is, the Republican senators and congressmen won't speak out because they've shackled their traditional support to Trump and they're all terrified that he will destroy their voter base in their own states by tweeting against them. Spineless? Yes. Supine? Yes. But that leads us on to...

...the only pathway for Trump to retain power is a literal coup. He's alienated the CIA, the FBI, and all the military top brass. Even the military rank and file didn't vote for him in the sort of numbers they normally break for Republicans. I can't see these fawning cowards in the GOP developing the spine for an actual coup.

At the end of the day, if Trump refuses to leave the White House, Biden can requisition Mar A Lago by executive order and run the government from there if he wants to.

Which is not to say that this is not all incredibly dangerous — Trump is radicalising his base even further and I don't think that the 30-odd% of the US that will support him no matter what will ever come back. It's time to put a stop to this "how can the Democrats reach out to Trump supporters" shit that's filling editorials in the US and here, because the short answer is: "You can't. Focus on the people you can reach."

This thing of reaching across the floor... they don't deserve it. They don't deserve any decency or respect, and i'm reading that the Republican Party is willing to string Trump along till the Senate run-offs in January, Then run him out. It's just a ruse to hold Trumps base.

They have no idea what damage they are doing to themselves, their  Party and their Country.

Mind you, the thought of Trump having to be forcibly evicted come January 20th isn't beyond the realms of possibility, wouldn't be surprised if he has a Reality show up and running by then.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 November, 2020, 10:50:44 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 November, 2020, 10:29:43 AMThere is literally no legal path for Trump to retain power.
This is true. But even Snopes states the following: "That said, the law is only relevant to the extent that is it enforceable. If Republican-dominated legislatures were determined to find excuses for ignoring their states' election results, a Republican-controlled Senate were willing to facilitate the scheme, and a conservative judiciary were compliant in upholding the results, then such a plot might indeed succeed."

I'm not suggesting this is likely — and it's good to see that the Pa state senate majority leader said the legislature will follow the law. But also we long ago blazed past political norms in the USA.

QuoteWhich is not to say that this is not all incredibly dangerous — Trump is radicalising his base even further
Hence my best-case scenario: Trump's base — which I'd say is higher than 30% of the voter pool — is being instructed to only believe votes are legitimate if they are for him. The GOP is playing with fire here. (Also, there's the nightmare scenario that will linger of Trump continuing to do rallies, Biden having to give way to Harris, and then 2024 being Trump vs Harris. Or Trump Family Member vs Harris, because when you're an authoritarian, you have to keep it in the family.)

Quote from: TordelBack on 12 November, 2020, 10:32:10 AMAmericans are almost depressingly proud of their democracy, and I honestly don't believe more than a tiny fraction will put up with this nonsense.
All the norms are gone. Chunks of the country have been radicalised. People aren't educated about what the norms even are — and don't care. (We have similar problems in the UK. I shudder to think what's going to happen at our next GE in 2024.)

Quote from: Rately on 12 November, 2020, 10:42:31 AMThey have no idea what damage they are doing to themselves, their  Party and their Country.
I doubt they care about the damage to the country. As for the GOP, it'll be fine, just like the Tories are fine in the UK. We've for years been hearing about how the days of hard conservatives are numbered, and it's repeatedly come back to bite us.

Until the systems change, things never will. In the UK, that would actually be really fucking easy, but it'd need Labour to get its head out of its arse re PR and make good with never winning a majority again. Although you'd think Labour would rather like very regularly being the biggest party in coalition vs perennially being the biggest losers on the opposition benches. (And this isn't a left or right of Labour thing: Blair tossed out the Jenkins report, and Corbyn was against PR for the Commons, but of course wanted it for the Lords where that would potentially benefit Labour and eradicate crossbenchers and Lib Dems. Starmer's at least made positive noises here, but we'll need something much firmer come 2024.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 November, 2020, 11:09:35 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 12 November, 2020, 10:32:10 AM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 12 November, 2020, 09:33:14 AM
You can't have a king in America...

That's what they said to Octavian, right before 500 years of the Republic came crashing down at Actium.

But I agree, for all its oddities, Americans are almost depressingly proud of their democracy


I never get why they're proud to not have a monarchy, to be proud of democracy but always seem to support hereditary rulership - out of 230,000,000 people eligible to be president how come the son of a previous president was the one voted in?  And that's not mentioning the Kennedy family.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 12 November, 2020, 11:10:08 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 November, 2020, 10:50:44 AM
All the norms are gone. Chunks of the country have been radicalised. People aren't educated about what the norms even are — and don't care.

No question of it, but we're still talking about a minority, and a statistically less powerful minority at that. Enough to cause chaos, but not enough to undo the commitment of a majority of Americans to their Constitution and its institutions. They love that shit almost as much as the others hate it. That's right now,  mind - I make no predictions for what happens over the next four years. The ability of robber barons to leverage hate and ignorance should never be underestimated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 01:25:22 PM
Re. the last two posts: He even named his youngest son Barron. Grooming by nominative determinism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 12 November, 2020, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 01:25:22 PM
Re. the last two posts: He even named his youngest son Barron. Grooming by nominative determinism.
His middle name wouldn't be Harkonnen by any chance?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 03:59:57 PM
Quote from: von Boom on 12 November, 2020, 03:36:04 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 01:25:22 PM
Re. the last two posts: He even named his youngest son Barron. Grooming by nominative determinism.
His middle name wouldn't be Harkonnen by any chance?

I thought that sounded familiar, but I'm afraid I had to look it up! I was more thinking Von Blubba.

It honestly must be tough being a Trump son.  Love does not seem to be unconditional in that family, except if you're a hot (or 'voluptuous') daughter.

Funny how the Christian right can block out straight-out declarations of incestuous attraction, and twenty accusations of sexual assault, in their love for the great leader.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2020, 04:35:55 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 03:59:57 PM
Funny how the Christian right can block out straight-out declarations of incestuous attraction, and twenty accusations of sexual assault, in their love for the great leader.

Their agenda seems to be the sexual / reproductive enslavement of women, by men, so it's not too surprising. Remember that Pence can't be alone with any woman except his wife - which indicates clearly that he sees women as chattel. Just like the "good" book says.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 05:01:04 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2020, 04:35:55 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 03:59:57 PM
Funny how the Christian right can block out straight-out declarations of incestuous attraction, and twenty accusations of sexual assault, in their love for the great leader.

Their agenda seems to be the sexual / reproductive enslavement of women, by men, so it's not too surprising. Remember that Pence can't be alone with any woman except his wife - which indicates clearly that he sees women as chattel. Just like the "good" book says.

Wow, I had no idea.  No wonder their administration love Saudi Arabia so much.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 12 November, 2020, 05:17:44 PM
Pence women (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/31/mike-pence-doesnt-eat-alone-women-speaks-volumes) (that was the search term I used).  Just in case you still have any faith left in humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 06:57:27 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 12 November, 2020, 05:17:44 PM
Pence women (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/31/mike-pence-doesnt-eat-alone-women-speaks-volumes) (that was the search term I used).  Just in case you still have any faith left in humanity.

Nahhh. Brexit, Trump and almost half of America still wanting Trump has helped me clear that hurdle. Thanks for the link though, I'll read it (and weep) properly later.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2020, 09:31:21 PM
This takes a bit of mental hop-scotch, but there are some relatively innocent reasons a lot of people gave for voting Trump. There's a danger of tribalism, of course, if all Republicans are somehow beneath contempt (almost half the people in the nation) and all Democrats are somehow superior.

Reasons to vote for Trump (you can decide for yourself which are relatively innocent):
- Desire to ban abortion
- Desire to firmly control immigration
- Desire to subjugate non-whites
- Desire to punish Cuba
- Personal economic improvement during his presidency
- Fear of civil unrest (regardless of the cause)
- Fear of Islam
- Desire for binary gender specifications
- Force of habit
- You've fallen for Qanon, so Trump is your savior
- The right to bear arms, including semi-automatic rifles
- Huntin', shootin', fishin' & flatin' (although this could also be a Dem)
- You believe he will reduce federal oversight
- You're one of those gun-toting Boogaloo whack-jobs
- You're one of those Proud Boy neo-Nazi whack-jobs
- You're a misogynist


Boy, it's difficult, but I like to think that a lot of them are some of the more innocent reasons. Makes me sleep easier.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 10:46:00 PM
I just really, really hope it's number 5 for most people, despite the face that the economic upturn started under Obama.  Not saying it's ideal to reward a vindictive psychopath because of a few extra dollars in your pocket, but it's the one that makes me feel most comfortable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 November, 2020, 11:17:20 PM
There's a reason more college-educated folk vote Dem, and it's because they know how to think through a problem (like that it takes time to see the results of economic management changes).

I'm willing to guess that there aren't many particle physicists in the Qanon camp.

Having said that, there are loads of highly educated people that purport to believe in deities regardless of the lack of any evidence whatsoever, so who knows?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 November, 2020, 11:48:58 PM
QuoteHaving said that, there are loads of highly educated people that purport to believe in deities regardless of the lack of any evidence whatsoever, so who knows?

It's an odd one alright.  I barely know my uncle, but he's a very highly-educated Catholic priest (from the English side of the family, perhaps surprisingly).  I know he's had doubts, but faith seems to win the battle of his mind every time.

Also, top marks to you for referencing that Rees-Mogg-with-a-mohawk Dredd story set in Alabammy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2020, 02:15:01 AM
Ah, Dominic Cummings is out (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54925322), it seems.  :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 November, 2020, 07:45:27 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 13 November, 2020, 02:15:01 AM
Ah, Dominic Cummings is out (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54925322), it seems.  :D

Far too late. He has caused untold damage, particularly around COVID. Good riddance, but I wish they had booted him the minute the Barnard Castle fiasco happened. Could have saved so many lives.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 13 November, 2020, 07:52:47 AM
Although they couldn't have sacked him over the Barnard Castle bollocks anyway, because he was there doing the governments work, sorting out a contract with GlaxoSmithKline. The whole 'childcare' thing was a bloody smokescreen. Lying, devious fuckers, the lot of them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 November, 2020, 09:22:26 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 13 November, 2020, 07:52:47 AM
Although they couldn't have sacked him over the Barnard Castle bollocks anyway, because he was there doing the governments work, sorting out a contract with GlaxoSmithKline. The whole 'childcare' thing was a bloody smokescreen. Lying, devious fuckers, the lot of them.

Yeah, it's looking like his sexual harassment of a female adviser is what actually gave him the push.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 November, 2020, 09:45:06 AM
America's top military officer says "We do not take an oath to a king" (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/america-s-top-military-officer-says-we-do-not-take-an-oath-to-a-king)
QuoteAmerica's top military officer has spoken at a Veteran's Day event in the midst of a chaotic week at the Pentagon and said, 'we do not take an oath to a king or a queen, a tyrant or a dictator. We do not take an oath to an individual.' General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said 'each of us will protect and defend that document regardless of personal price'.

US election security officials reject Trump's fraud claims (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-54926084)
Quote"While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too," it added, without naming Mr Trump directly.

I only ever read the first Harry Potter book. I remember thinking the characters were all being tad melodramatic. All that silliness about not invoking Voldemort's name, lest it empowers him to return.

I think I get it now.

In another news, when Trump declared "Stop the Count!", some of his supporters misinterpreted and thought they could claim a bounty. They were heard asking "Can you tell me how to get...how to get to Sesame Street?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 November, 2020, 09:53:05 AM
"America's top military official, who had no trouble traipsing across the White House lawn next to Trump, while he was prepping gassing protesters to clear an area for a photo op, nicely highlights US exceptionalism by inferring the USA is unique in its army not declaring allegiance to an individual"

As for melodrama, every day this goes on, it casts more doubt on those results in the mind of his base. This is going to be a turbulent four years, and the Democrats need to start planning how to counter this in 2024, rather than making the same mistakes they keep making.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 November, 2020, 10:02:45 AM
QuoteIn another news, when Trump declared "Stop the Count"

I've been saying something a bit like that for the last four years, give or take a vowel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 November, 2020, 12:26:07 PM
I know it's a week ago now, but imagine what an absolute mindfuck this must be, coming from your own townspeople.  Especially when you're under the impression that everyone thinks you're some kind of Christlike figure.  I suspect he'll be spending a lot more time in the South in future.

https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/articles/2020-11-13/donald-trump-raised-and-rejected-by-new-york-city (https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/articles/2020-11-13/donald-trump-raised-and-rejected-by-new-york-city)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 November, 2020, 02:34:59 AM
(https://i.redd.it/wr1k36e7s9z51.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 20 November, 2020, 12:11:03 PM
This reminds me of the scene in Alien when [spoiler]robot Ash starts leaking.

"A Robot! Giulani's a goddamn Robot!"[/spoiler]

https://9gag.com/gag/aqnEBqj

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 20 November, 2020, 01:06:41 PM
Quote from: paddykafka on 20 November, 2020, 12:11:03 PM
This reminds me of the scene in Alien when [spoiler]robot Ash starts leaking.

"A Robot! Giulani's a goddamn Robot!"[/spoiler]

https://9gag.com/gag/aqnEBqj
:lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 November, 2020, 02:11:41 PM
(https://i.stack.imgur.com/IxJES.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 20 November, 2020, 04:44:02 PM
Remember when Trump threw a tantrum* over not getting nominated Time Magazine's person of the year when he was elected for the first time?

They should give it to him this year. It would be apt for 2020.

*Can you remember when he wasn't having one?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 November, 2020, 10:12:54 PM
To be fair, he did get it when he was elected.  His tantrum was about Greta Thunberg getting it last year, instead of him getting it again.  Because it takes maturity, integrity and leadership to be jealous of a teenage girl getting more attention than you.

Fuck him. Obscurity is what he fears the most.  Certainly a lot more than democracy being destroyed, the planet being uninhabitable, and hundreds of thousands of his people dying from a disease. He won't fade away, but let's give him as little of the limelight as possible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 November, 2020, 01:53:26 AM
'Scuse the double post, but Don Jr now has the virus.  Jesus wept, get it together, Trumps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 November, 2020, 02:24:14 PM
You notice that Corbyn resigned almost a year ago and yet he's still all over the media?  For the same reason that's happening, Trump isn't going anywhere soon.  He's just too useful as a distraction.
The alternative is that the media has to focus on the nous of institutional or systemic issues after almost five solid years of airing talking points on polorising BIG ISSUES like Brexit, the Covid-19 EMERGENCY, the antisemitism CRISIS, Trump, Corbyn, LEFTIST RIOTS - and no-one wants the plebs going after hegemonic problems when the rich are lining their pockets via one crisis after another.
We're just waiting to see what pantomime they manufacture for us to get angry about and focus all our impotent rage upon, like the absolute fucking rubes we are.  Until that manifests, we're stuck with Trump and whatever headlines they can squeeze out of him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
I still can't get my head around the fact that almost half of the US electorate wanted him to stay.  And I believe that upwards of 80% of Republicans believe his election fraud claptrap.  I remember my shock and confusion when he got in in 2016 (good news, Don Jr, you almost had this liberal in tears), and was chatting to my dad about it.  He spoke about we think American culture is similar to ours, but it's an illusion caused by the use of the same language, and our exposure to their TV and movies.  I know very, very few Irish or British people, even those more right-wing types, who see any redeeming qualities whatsoever in the man.

One of the most common arguments seems to be 'well, he's not a politician'.  Well, he's one now.  Also, let's get a TV star in to do your heart surgery, because the last thing you want is a medical expert.  And halfway through that sentence I just remembered one of the most disturbing things I've seen this year, which was a Trump rally chanting 'fire Faucci'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2020, 05:42:28 PM
People can be suckered by constant propaganda, and hegemonic interests rigged the election to be a binary choice between two shitty options.
We should understand how that goes better than most countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 November, 2020, 07:32:21 PM
It's interesting seeing how English-language countries are. Australia seems in key ways very American at times, but NZ is often like the good bits of Britain, without a lot of the shite. The USA, though... I mean, it started life because people who wanted to be shits weren't allowed and so they fucked off, did a genocide, and ruthlessly utilised resources to a manner that even then champion shits The British couldn't compete with. Their entire politics got stuck in Whigs vs Tories and never really moved on.

From a societal standpoint, the USA is on average significantly less liberal than the UK and significantly more right-wing. The danger for the UK is that the country is heading the same way, embracing nationalism (well, English nationalism in England, which is a much more poisonous variety than e.g. Scottish nationalism), bullshit spewing from media, and the argument that democracy is only acceptable is your team wins.

Our electoral system makes this worse. Pretty much daily I see people arguing that the Tories won a majority of the vote and therefore have a mandate to be shits. No party has ever secured a majority of the vote in my lifetime, and I doubt one ever will.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 22 November, 2020, 07:42:36 PM
It all reminds me of the 2017 French Presidential Election, where I was momentarily delighted that Le Pen lost, before realising that that meant Macron had won. An increasingly narrow field, where the least-worst option is still terrible, and the worst a handy distraction from that fact.

Still, as I felt 4 years ago and still do today, the elevation of a person like Trump to even a symbolic position of 'supreme power' degrades the whole of humanity, and stunted or reversed what little progress we have made in many areas. The masks of decency political systems use to hide their crimes and manipulations still have some role to play in creating wider aspirations and expectations for how society should behave. So whatever useful role he played as a public bogeyman for the usual suspects, polarising, distracting, shifting the Overton Window, I'm still very glad he'll soon be gone.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 November, 2020, 07:58:58 PM
See one of the things I'm trying to make sense of is why people support Conservatives.  When I read up on it I can see the appeal.  All the talk of respect, tradition and individualism makes sense.  There's a certain 'safety' in the sorts of ideas that are mentioned.

It does seem that some of these ideals have been taken to extremes though.  I mean, Thatcher's old "there is no society, just the individual" is correct on one level.  it takes individuals and personal responsibility to make society work. 

If I take care of my own health and wellbeing then I am not a 'burden' on those around me, more to the point I can contribute to the health and wellbeing of others.  Then again if I am unable to do this through no fault of my own that does not necessarily make me a 'burden', rather someone who can be turned back into a productive citizen again.

Over the last 40 odd years this idea has been distorted all out of proportion though.  "Rugged Individualism" has morphed into selfishness.  It's no longer a matter of making sure we interact appropriately but defending our personal rights whilst ignoring responsibilities. 

The likes of Trump and Johnson are the worst manifestations of this in the political sphere largely because they bring so many along with them.  Enablers make sure they have the chance to do what they want to do out of self interest.  In the meantime the rest of us get screwed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2020, 08:11:23 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
I still can't get my head around the fact that almost half of the US electorate wanted him to stay.  And I believe that upwards of 80% of Republicans believe his election fraud claptrap.

Dirty liberal George Monbiot covers some of the ground you wonder about, JBC (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkJI_nBKzAo), and even suggests a solution of sorts in what they're doing in Finland by teaching their population "digital literacy" to stop them getting rabbitholed by social media.  I don't necessarily agree with Monbiot's "not using guillotines" policy, but he makes some good points about how people are being conditioned into voting against their own best interests.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 November, 2020, 09:36:12 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 22 November, 2020, 07:58:58 PMSee one of the things I'm trying to make sense of is why people support Conservatives.  When I read up on it I can see the appeal.  All the talk of respect, tradition and individualism makes sense.  There's a certain 'safety' in the sorts of ideas that are mentioned.
It's not my politics, but I understood the appeal of Thatcherism, which was imbued with a kind of get-rich-quick selfishness that appealed widely, and branded 'socialism' as old hat. Also, she was a pragmatist. All the Tories arguing she'd have been on the bus of lies... Really? She and her government were heavily influential in the creation of the single market. I suspect she'd have been on the Eurosceptic side but would have been a Remainer.

What I don't get is how people can vote Conservative now. 40% or so seems to be their base. It's astonishing to think 40% of the UK will happily vote for 2015/17-era UKIP politics. If nothing else, it shows that these days voting is like football for many people: you pick a team and back them, no matter what. And because of our deeply shitty voting system, we are fucked unless everyone else gets their shit together and works together—which is almost certainly never going to happen.

Corbynites scream they won't back Starmer's Labour. So-called Labour moderates yell that they won't vote Labour unless they fully back a nonsensical rejoin stance right now. Labour in general refuse to back PR (something they're unified on, from Blair's lot through to Corbyn) because they'd sooner perennially be the largest party in opposition—a huge protest party—than very regularly the leader of a centre-left coalition. Lib Dems and Labour tear chunks out of each other in England, and the Lib Dems and SNP scrap in Scotland. The Greens hold firm with their local democracy ideology that could very well lead to a bunch more Strouds in 2024.

FPTP is the root of all of the shit we've suffered in recent history. Kill that and everything potentially changes. But I can't see it ever happening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2020, 09:57:20 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 November, 2020, 08:11:23 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 22 November, 2020, 03:31:17 PM
I still can't get my head around the fact that almost half of the US electorate wanted him to stay.  And I believe that upwards of 80% of Republicans believe his election fraud claptrap.

Dirty liberal George Monbiot covers some of the ground you wonder about, JBC (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkJI_nBKzAo), and even suggests a solution of sorts in what they're doing in Finland by teaching their population "digital literacy" to stop them getting rabbitholed by social media.  I don't necessarily agree with Monbiot's "not using guillotines" policy, but he makes some good points about how people are being conditioned into voting against their own best interests.

Cheers, Prof.  I'll have a listen to that while I wash the dishes now. Hadn't heard of this guy before. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 23 November, 2020, 05:50:20 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 November, 2020, 09:36:12 PM
FPTP is the root of all of the shit we've suffered in recent history. Kill that and everything potentially changes. But I can't see it ever happening.

Aye and nope .... in that order ...

Fair point on the rest.  It's depressing watching the London labour party crawl up its own arse all the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 November, 2020, 11:21:19 AM
They're all awful. That's the problem. I'm certainly not going to go down the route of arguing all parties are the same. But in this one area, they are all awful, with the sometimes exception of the SNP, Plaid and—less often—the Greens.

FPTP screws us all. Blair could have changed that, but his Cabinet said no. So the Jenkins Report (on AV+ — not even proper PR!) was hurled into a skip. GOOD WORK, EVERYONE! But Corbyn! Breath of fresh air! Surely you support progressive politics and PR, Jeremy? "No." Yet he did support PR for... the Lords. FFS. Now we even have a Lib Dem leader soft on Commons PR(!) It's fucking insane.

I do find some people on Twitter a bit too excitable about this subject. That notion parties should campaign on a single-issue ticket (PR) and have only the best-placed go up against a Tory, win, and then have another GE in six months. That's just madness—and could feasibly result in an actual Tory majority. But Labour, Lib Dems and all the others should without doubt put PR at the heart of their manifesto, regardless of the GE outcome. (So if Labour somehow squeaks a majority, it should still be fully committed to electoral reform.)

Starmer has at least made some positive noises in this direction, but I still can't see it happening. A Labour-led coalition looks unlikely when Labour's sitting there punching its own face off and, come a GE, will spend more time fighting with the Libs, nats and even Greens (which will mostly be reciprocal) than the Tories. I hope I'm wrong. I hope by 2024, all these parties have their collective shit together. But after the last GEs, the ongoing arrogance of Labour, the sheer ineptitude of the Libs, the stubbornness of the Greens, etc, I just don't see it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 November, 2020, 10:53:29 AM
Seems like the Donnie 'n' Rudy Clown Show is pretty much finished. I realise Trump will still be screaming in our faces for a long time, but as scary attempted coups go, it has been comedy gold.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 24 November, 2020, 11:31:28 AM
If, as has been reported by a few people on the Twitter, Georgia Republicans deface their Senate Run-off ballots with Trumps name, thereby handing the Senate to the Democrats, I may well laugh for a week or two.

Republicans protect Trump, Trump throws them under the bus. Poetic. And something many Political Commentators warned them of at the time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 November, 2020, 01:51:25 PM
Quote from: Rately on 24 November, 2020, 11:31:28 AM
If, as has been reported by a few people on the Twitter, Georgia Republicans deface their Senate Run-off ballots with Trumps name, thereby handing the Senate to the Democrats, I may well laugh for a week or two.

Republicans protect Trump, Trump throws them under the bus. Poetic. And something many Political Commentators warned them of at the time.

Divide without the conquer. Like it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 04:27:03 AM
A harsh reality in coal country - with or without Trump (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55050347) - a tale of economic boom and bust that goes some way to explain an innocent enough reason to vote for Trump. (File under: "It's the economy, stupid.")

---

Period poverty: Scotland first in world to make period products free (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51629880) - Oh, Flower of Scotland!...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 25 November, 2020, 09:20:09 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 04:27:03 AM
Period poverty: Scotland first in world to make period products free (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51629880) - Oh, Flower of Scotland!...

This is such a classy move by Scotland. A bit of cheer in the gloom of 2020 politics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2020, 09:44:43 AM
About fucking time a country did this. You can bet it would have happened decades ago had men had to suffer this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 10:29:11 AM

I doubt this will be free. I'd guess that this service will be funded by expanding government debt, thereby increasing tax demands to pay for the products, organisation, distribution, bureaucracy, interest on the loan, etc.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 10:45:58 AM
Or to put it another way, distribution of the cost across society so that one particular segment doesn't have to bear all the cost of a necessity. TANSTAAFL, but we can split the bill.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2020, 11:05:54 AM
Exactly. Nothing is 'free' free, but we have the choice of sharing the load or paying by need. Some things are required for existence to be tolerable. Others are nice-to-haves. Sanitary products for women are without doubt the former, and so I don't really give a shit if my tax burden goes up microscopically to pay for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 25 November, 2020, 11:14:15 AM
Amen, brother.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 12:31:23 PM

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2020, 11:05:54 AM

Exactly. Nothing is 'free' free, but we have the choice of sharing the load or paying by need.


No. You don't have the choice, that's my point. If you wanted to help before, you could have started a charity, donated to a charity, bought the products and donated them to maybe a food bank or your local high school or whatever - which maybe you chose to do anyway, I don't know.

This is my problem with mandatory taxes - you are forced to fund bullets, bombs, and bailouts along with properly helpful things like this. To support good, one must also support evil. It's madness - toxic madness at that.

To be clear, in this instance I object to the method and not the intent. (For bullets, bombs, and bailouts I object to the method and the intent.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 01:01:05 PM
A very fair point, Shark, but we might be waiting. It would require quite the charity infrastructure to fund and supply to roughly 25% of the population on a regular basis, and we already have that in place through existing institutions, plus precedent in other supports for specific groups. So until the whole system is replaced with a workable alternative, this seems like a good use of centralised redistribution to alleviate an unfair burden.

Can't happen soon enough in this neck of the woods.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2020, 01:17:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 12:31:23 PMNo. You don't have the choice, that's my point.
Good. The needs of society shouldn't be reliant on whether or not enough people would be willing to donate to a charity and for that charity to then fund people. This is what we currently have with food banks, which were once an unfortunate necessity but an aberration but that have now been broadly normalised.

The issue you mention is more about how taxes are spent rather than taxation itself. You also, as has been shown in the past, live in a world where you assume people wouldn't be selfish arseholes when presented with the option to support rather than the requirement. We in the USA see where that leads with things like healthcare provision. We also see that in the UK in terms of arts funding, which is now in the toilet.

Quote from: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 01:01:05 PMSo until the whole system is replaced with a workable alternative, this seems like a good use of centralised redistribution to alleviate an unfair burden.
Or that, not least given that the utopian model is a pipe dream, but the existing taxation system already exists. And to be clear, I'm fucking furious about the way tax is used in the UK. But I'd still prefer to have a system where certain things—health; education; infrastructure—are funded by default than relying on the goodwill and charity of millions of people who suddenly have to start thinking about these things and in many cases ultimately decide against throwing some cash into the pot this month. "After all, I don't have kids/health issues/interest in the arts, so why should I be funding schools/the NHS/museums?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 01:31:38 PM
You're preaching to the choir re: taxation, my point was rather that if you were to successfully head down Sharky's alternative path this unfairness wouldn't be addressed for a long time, and while acknowledging the contradictions he raised,  I'm in the take-whatever-little-victories camp these days
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 03:08:26 PM
Yeah, it's only fucking Voltaire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good) again, innit?

QuoteDans ses écrits, un sage Italien
Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 03:26:58 PM

I.P., it feels like every time I point out what I believe is a serious fault which is emblematic of the deeper systemic flaws, your counter- argument is something like, "Utopia is impossible so shut up."

Just because you don't like my solutions because we can't use them tomorrow or that they won't work in isolation (both of which points I agree with), that doesn't address my concerns. It would be as pointless as me calling you out on your "perfect government system" because I'm pretty sure you don't believe that any more than I believe in the "perfect anarchist system."

The basic problem, as I see it, is the system's monopoly on violence, of which mandatory, enforced taxation is a symptom. That's all. Agree with it or not. Solutions are a completely different conversation which we cannot have until we first recognise whether what I see as a problem actually is a problem, its extent and its consequences.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 03:41:12 PM
To be fair, one might retort that whenever anyone mentions anything at all, however remote to the topic, you bang the drum for anarchy.

Women shouldn't be allowed to escape period poverty because ... anarchy is better? Or something.

Feel free to ignore me, though, because I feel like an idiot for biting. Again. (Not your responsibility how I feel, I know, I know.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 03:56:10 PM

Guilty as charged.

But then... You seriously, I mean seriously, believe my argument is "Women shouldn't be allowed to escape period poverty"?

Well, I refute that position utterly.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 04:43:16 PM
That's fair - you just said that it wouldn't be free.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 November, 2020, 04:53:19 PM
I think I just get triggered when arguments veer towards "I shouldn't be compelled to pay for that" when it comes to progressive ideas and thinking. Ideally, people would do what's necessary for a functioning society in which people aren't left behind. I think we're in agreement on that, TLS.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 04:53:43 PM

It's cool.

I'll get the beers in.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 05:10:30 PM
One of the interesting truisms of the current covidfuck is the extent to which all systems depend FAR more on voluntary compliance than they do on coercion. It simply isn't possible for most states to enforce regulations that don't have broad support: even the Shark's implicit threat of violence needs the consent of a significant proportion of people to be enforceable.

Which is both hopeful for the future and depressing for the present, in roughly equal measure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 05:30:13 PM

Don't underestimate the power of the mainstream media on the masses. All that fear constantly pumping out has a widespread effect, on the spirit if not the mind - but I fear it's both.

When I was a teenager, I lived in a caravan in our back yard for a while. On about my third or fourth night in there, my Gran came rushing out in her dressing gown, in a right state. She was in fear for my life because the tv news had just reported that a murderer had escaped. In London (we live in Lancashire, between Southport and Preston). Televisual hyperbole overrode her own usually sound common sense. I've never forgotten that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 November, 2020, 05:39:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 05:30:13 PMTelevisual hyperbole overrode her own usually sound common sense. I've never forgotten that.

An ever-wider problem. But ultimately the same cognitive potential that allows people's minds to be manipulated by media also allows for people to change their own minds.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 November, 2020, 06:03:26 PM

Absolutely.

It's not the tool, it's how it's used.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 November, 2020, 09:03:14 PM
Coming back over to recent discussions about creator rights (sparked by the always correct Mr. P. Mills of Europe Hulking out on his FaceTwatterSpace-igramTokTube), I noticed this article: Netflix removes Dave Chappelle's show after comedian's complaint (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-55070232), in which the creator signed a contract when desperate that they've now come to regret as it entirely disenfranchises them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
I'm genuinely wondering, given that my political knowledge isn't all that thorough, what will happen to the GOP now.  Given that it seems to have become a sort of cult of personality, with so many of its members torn between loyalty to / fear of Trump, and unhitching themselves from the election loser.  I mean, Bush Jnr was a nasty little buffoon too, but he didn't throw the whole democratic system into crisis like Trump has done.  Yeah, he got more votes than any election loser in history, but he's still a loser.

So, where now for the Republicans?  Not really a rhetorical question; I'm just wondering if any of you who are more clued-in than me have any speculations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 26 November, 2020, 10:21:28 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
So, where now for the Republicans?  Not really a rhetorical question; I'm just wondering if any of you who are more clued-in than me have any speculations.

At some point they're going to have to deal with the fact that the die-hard MAGA crowd are Trump-supporters first and Republicans second... which may well cost the GOP the Senate run-off elections in GA, and that would be hilarious because:

1) it would give a tied Senate, with Kamala Harris having the casting vote, but...

2) ...the Democrats would have to rely on the votes of two independents, one of whom is Bernie Sanders who, I imagine, will have a very interesting set of demands in exchange for his support.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 10:34:12 AM
Cheers, Jim.  Interesting times ahead.  The last four years have been interesting too; you can see why that old Chinese expression is a curse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 November, 2020, 11:20:32 AM
My guess is things will be simpler: we'll just see another Overton window lurch to the right. That's already happened in the UK. In 2015, if you'd have polled Tory voters about their thoughts on voting UKIP, the vast majority would have been against that. In 2019, they all got behind a party that is, for the most part, offering the same policy platform as 2015-era UKIUP.

So this is the GOP now. It will be the party of anti-science and full-on nationalism. It starts with a base of at least 40%. And if everyone else in the country doesn't get their shit together and work together, they will win in 2024. See also: the UK's next generation election. 2024 could be a doozy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 01:02:38 PM
That is worrying alright.  The GOP has seen that a pig-ignorant, autocratic psychopath is what stirs up most support, so it's hard to see them moving away from that model.  On the plus side, it seems that a majority of even Trump's base don't want Don Jnr to run, but I worry about 2024 and the possibility of Old Trump - by then even older - running again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 November, 2020, 01:23:05 PM
Possible—perhaps even fairly likely—scenario: Biden doesn't stick around for four years. Harris takes over. OH NOES A BLACK WOMAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE. Cue: racists re-elect Trump, a Trump or someone similar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 26 November, 2020, 03:46:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 01:02:38 PM
That is worrying alright.  The GOP has seen that a pig-ignorant, autocratic psychopath is what stirs up most support, so it's hard to see them moving away from that model.  On the plus side, it seems that a majority of even Trump's base don't want Don Jnr to run, but I worry about 2024 and the possibility of Old Trump - by then even older - running again.


Won't trump be the same age in four years as Biden is now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 November, 2020, 04:19:24 PM
Yes, but he's the healthiest man alive in their personality cult thinking, while Biden is an old geezer with some kind of dementia or something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 04:24:25 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 26 November, 2020, 03:46:40 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 01:02:38 PM
That is worrying alright.  The GOP has seen that a pig-ignorant, autocratic psychopath is what stirs up most support, so it's hard to see them moving away from that model.  On the plus side, it seems that a majority of even Trump's base don't want Don Jnr to run, but I worry about 2024 and the possibility of Old Trump - by then even older - running again.


Won't trump be the same age in four years as Biden is now?

I only mentioned the old part to distinguish him from Don Jnr. I don't give a flying fig what age the candidates are if they're not actively trying to make the world an uninhabitable hell hole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 26 November, 2020, 04:53:59 PM
Well, with this kind of support, I doubt we've seen the last of the chosen one:

(https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/3/you-are-not-alone-danny-hahlbohm.jpg)


Just imagine his prayers at night: "Dear Lord, the haters be hating! But I did the right thing, didn't I? Separating those illegals from their children, and keeping them in cages?"

Jesus: "Dad's a bit busy today, Donald, so he sent me."

Donald: "You got crucified, though? Kind of a loser move. I don't like to work with losers. Bad!"

Jesus: "Jesus!"

etc.

---

This post sponsored by Qmoron - Where We Go One, All For One And One For All!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 26 November, 2020, 05:29:20 PM
Jesus needs to put his hands together more closely. And much tighter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2020, 06:23:11 PM

Well, I guess we were promised a final trump to herald the End...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 November, 2020, 11:07:24 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2020, 06:23:11 PM

Well, I guess we were promised a final trump to herald the End...

:lol:

At the risk of offending everyone everywhere, my namesake looks like he's getting way too much intob whatever he's doing to that fat guy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 November, 2020, 11:25:29 PM

Son of God he may be - but he'll never be able to handle Malteasers.

I'll get me coat of many colours...


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 November, 2020, 05:33:54 PM
'This is War': Poland's battle for abortion (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-55077166)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 November, 2020, 06:51:06 PM
One of the Youtubers I follow posted a video in which she spoke of her recent miscarriage, and she was just so resigned to what's coming next, because she's an openly pro-choice public figure.
Not all Christians are hateful myopic shitheads, so I sometimes wonder how pro-lifers square the circle of the people they consort with and the things they do.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2020, 08:41:45 PM
Fairly sure that the Jesus of the Gospels would have had no time for pro-lifers*.


*As distinct from reasonable people who object to abortion on various levels, some of them religious: I'm classifying the vile aggressive bullies as a separate species.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 27 November, 2020, 09:56:51 PM
I remember our whole class in secondary school was asked if we supported the abortion ban. Everyone said yes, male and female. We've changed with the times, I'm pleased to say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 November, 2020, 10:31:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 November, 2020, 09:56:51 PM
I remember our whole class in secondary school was asked if we supported the abortion ban. Everyone said yes, male and female.

I remember the exact same episode. Mind you, it was Fr. Michael Cleary doing the asking, and he threw in drink and drugs and general abstinence. The big fat hypocrite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 November, 2020, 12:20:01 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 November, 2020, 10:31:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 27 November, 2020, 09:56:51 PM
I remember our whole class in secondary school was asked if we supported the abortion ban. Everyone said yes, male and female.

I remember the exact same episode. Mind you, it was Fr. Michael Cleary doing the asking, and he threw in drink and drugs and general abstinence. The big fat hypocrite.

My word.  No one did hypocrisy like the men in black. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 November, 2020, 07:56:05 AM
What bugs me most about pro-lifers is they don't seem to give a flying fuck what happens to the child once it has been born.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 November, 2020, 10:55:12 AM
Fundamentally, it comes down to controlling women. There's nothing more to it once you see past the bullshit. Given that the Venn diagram of pro-lifers is almost a circle when it comes to support for the death sentence, denying children sex education, not supporting children in poverty, fighting against national healthcare, gun advocacy, etc, you can see that their priorities aren't about life at all.

But it again shows how language can be weaponised. 'Pro life' in and of itself is a powerful statement and sentiment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 November, 2020, 04:13:28 PM
It's a political argument that's really easy to sell to children, as well. You say "do you want babies to be murdered?" and everyone goes "of course not, Jesus, why would anyone do that?"

Next thing you know people are parading around outside abortion clinics haranguing the patients (who are already having a pretty fucking tough day, thank you very much).

I lose my biscuits with anti-abortionists. This law in Poland (quite apart from all the other things that are wrong with it), forces women to carry to term babies that are medically guaranteed to die post-birth in great suffering. Apparently, it's God's will. If Preacher got one thing right - it's that we need to stand up to and argue with that God. Take Him to task. There's your path to revelation right there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 November, 2020, 07:19:56 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 28 November, 2020, 04:13:28 PM. This law in Poland (quite apart from all the other things that are wrong with it), forces women to carry to term babies that are medically guaranteed to die post-birth in great suffering.

This is the way it was in Ireland till two years ago, I'm embarrassed to say. I remember some outraged American (male) expats moaning after the referendum that the reason they lived here was the abortion ban. There's a two - word solution to your problem, lads, and the second of those words is 'off'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 November, 2020, 08:24:03 PM
To be fair, he must be very afraid that they'll make him get an abortion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 November, 2020, 09:02:01 PM
Imagine all the hassle saved if he'd been one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 December, 2020, 09:51:35 AM
Looks like Willy Barr is about to be thrown under that proverbial bus we hear so much about these days.

Say what you like about him, but respect to him for crowbarring his tongue out for a day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 December, 2020, 09:57:46 AM
Barr is still somewhat playing to the crowd with lines like "we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election". This leaves the suggestion there was fraud, but it just didn't tip the balance. Still, the nutters have decided he's now part of the massive conspiracy to unseat their man, so, um, that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2020, 12:07:35 PM
Twitter thread covering the investigation into the Democrats' voter fraud.  I know this will be hard for some people to accept, but it's important to know the truth. (https://twitter.com/TepidButterASMR/status/1333862192928731142)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 December, 2020, 12:41:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2020, 12:07:35 PM
Twitter thread covering the investigation into the Democrats' voter fraud.  I know this will be hard for some people to accept, but it's important to know the truth. (https://twitter.com/TepidButterASMR/status/1333862192928731142)

That's amazing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 December, 2020, 12:44:49 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 02 December, 2020, 12:41:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2020, 12:07:35 PM
Twitter thread covering the investigation into the Democrats' voter fraud.  I know this will be hard for some people to accept, but it's important to know the truth. (https://twitter.com/TepidButterASMR/status/1333862192928731142)

That's amazing.

It's incredible, so much so I stopped browsing it incognito mode.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 02 December, 2020, 01:31:09 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 02 December, 2020, 12:07:35 PM
Twitter thread covering the investigation into the Democrats' voter fraud.  I know this will be hard for some people to accept, but it's important to know the truth. (https://twitter.com/TepidButterASMR/status/1333862192928731142)

This year's Parks & Recreation Holiday Special has gone too far. I blame Chris Pratt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 02:46:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 December, 2020, 07:58:58 PM
Back when I believed, as you do

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 07:32:13 AM
Back when I believed in government and its processes, I meant.

I've got adjectives for this: stupid and insulting, in about equal measure. The very notion that you can separate people out into those that "believe in government and its processes" and those that don't is - well, there's no kind way of putting it - it's moronic. It doesn't even bother to define terms properly. It's foolishly muddy and it's not ever going to go anywhere but dumber. All I can think is that you're the guy in The Untouchables who brought a knife to a gun fight. A blunt, rusty one.

Just to dip our toes in the water: I do believe in government, because government exists. I do have faith in some governmental structures - like free-at-point-of-access libraries paid for through a taxation system. I don't blindly have faith in all governmental types. I don't believe anything the Chinese government says, because they lie as a matter of course. I don't love Biden, but he's better than the corn-hole they elected last time.

The idea that you can slot me into a binary "do/don't" belief system in such a complex topic is - back to the beginning -  stupid and insulting, in about equal measure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 05:17:44 PM

I didn't separate "people" into two camps, I set myself in a different camp to yourself and those with a similar core belief. That widespread core belief is basically that government has the right to command and the responsibility to control, whereas I believe that (in whatever form) it has the right to advise and the responsibility to organise.

You may not agree with the Chinese government (or indeed your own), and wish for better, but I suspect you firmly believe that China (and your country) must have one, regardless of its quality. It is in this sense that I attribute to you a belief in government - not in its existence but in its rights and in its utility.

I, on the other hand, believe that societies need organisation for their support services and infrastructure - and that, crucially, these tasks do not justify violence or unlawful acts of any kind. Stealing money and calling it taxation is not morally acceptable to me, irrespective of what it funds. I can't go around stealing from people because I want to buy my neighbour's medicine for him or pave my other neighbour's garden path and then calling what I do taxation. It's theft. If I beg for the money, or work for the money, then I can fund my neighbours if I so desire.

This is where I am often called a Utopianist or something, and quizzed for solutions - to which I can only proffer suggestions. But forget the solutions for now. I don't even know whether compulsary taxation is something anyone would be interested in discussing, it's been around for so long and done so much good that maybe it doesn't need discussing. It is of great interest to me, though.

As a person who believes in the state, do you believe it has the right to demand taxes and punish anyone who refuses?

My answer is, of course, no. Firstly because it is fundamentally theft, secondly because I have no control over how my own money will be spent and whether such spending aligns with my personal morality, and thirdly because if I don't have the right to steal then I cannot create this right and award it to the people I vote for, no matter what they spend it on. That's my view of the problem, which is merely a symptom of the deeper malaise.

So it's not really the belief in the utility of government I'm questioning - I'm sure it could be organised to do many things well - but belief in its right to power. I suppose another way of putting it would be, should governments uphold or enforce? Both? Neither?

You're right, it's not an entirely binary thing but there are, I think, certain binary choices hidden amongst the complexity.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 05:29:20 PM
It's like a game of pin the tail on the donkey, but you keep moving the donkey and telling people they've lost.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 06:05:59 PM

Lost what? I thought this was a conversation, not a competition.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 06:18:18 PM
A. Bananas!
B. You just said "bananas".
A. But what I meant was peaches.
B. So, "peaches"?
A. You only think that's what I said - this is actually about fruit in general.
B. So we're discussing fruit?
A. This isn't a discussion, it's a friendly round table.
B. You have a round table?
A. Tables are just one aspect of the wider conspiracy.
B. [shoots self in head]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 02 December, 2020, 06:21:38 PM
You're wasting your time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 06:25:27 PM

Yes, I think I am.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 December, 2020, 06:33:32 PM
The notion that taxation is theft just baffles me. The most progressive politicians around are in favour of taxation, as a means to share the load. The English & Welsh Green Party's platform is primarily one of a society underpinned by UBI, eco-friendly power, and where we transition to a shorter work week due to automation. They're anti-war, anti-whip, anti-nuclear, pro-representation, etc. Their plans are costed and broadly viable. Funding for what they need would have to be via taxation. But you'd still call that theft.

In a sense, I suppose this is the gulf between liberal socialist thinking (theirs/mostly mine) and libertarian thinking (yours). They would use taxation to fund a society much closer to the one you'd like to see. You'd presumably argue that's theft and not want any part of it, unless people could only opt-in to taxation—at which point, we end up back in that circular argument of: but they wouldn't/yes, but I'd hope they would.

Also, reliance on charity for core components of society is, from a contemporary economic standpoint, the preserve of the far right. It's that mindset of what's mine is mine and I should never be compelled to share unless I choose to. So although I don't think that's your leaning, it's a very odd thing to hear you often using the same arguments. (And similarly regarding things like COVID.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 07:03:58 PM
At the core of the obtuseness of the debate, I think, is that there are already terms in place in the language that do a good job: theft, taxation and charity.

Saying that theft is equal to taxation is incorrect (and therefore misleading). And using "voluntary taxation" in place of charity is doing a disservice to the language.

We have words for the three things, and they're three different things.

---

Similarly, there's an attempt to say something like "I don't believe in government - instead we should have a government!" Which doesn't make sense.

Look:

Quotesocieties need organisation for their support services and infrastructure

Oh, you mean a government?

---

Which leads to the tail-on-the-donkey metaphor. Because even the terms of the debate can't be trusted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 08:55:08 PM

A human being takes your money without your permission = theft.

A government takes your money without your permission = taxation.

Governments are made of human beings, so where does the alchemy happen? At what point does taking someone's stuff without their permission and hurting them if they resist go from unlawful theft to lawful taxation? At what point does a group of human beings extorting money become a government redistributing wealth?

"Tax is theft" is nothing in itself, just a symptom of the violence inherent in the system. It's that inner violence I oppose, the state's supposed sole right to it and its use.

We can do better. We must, I don't think the orang-utans got time to wait for us to get our shit together.

One last time, Funt, government is not the same as organisation. I do not want to abolish organisation. Organisation is a Good Thing. Human beings are social animals with big brains, organisation is what we do and we're very good at it. But government is not the same thing. Government is enforced organisation. Of all the things that government is supposed to do, the only aspect of it I would remove is its right to initiate violence, to put it on the same footing, and under the same law, as the rest of us.

Take away their power to fuck things up and you can vote Trumps and Johnsons in to your hearts' content and just sit back and enjoy the show.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 02 December, 2020, 09:13:36 PM
Well no. I understand the need for taxation and am happy to pay it even though I know some money goes to things I don't like. So there is absolutely no equivalence there apart from a cheap joke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 09:23:17 PM

I do not want one penny of my money to go towards warfare, even if that means I have to forfeit my privileges - many of which I have.

I actually do my best to live by this shit, and it's not bloody easy, I can tell you. But, by Grud, it's worth it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 09:38:35 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 08:55:08 PM
A human being takes your money without your permission = theft.

Agreed.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 08:55:08 PM
A government takes your money without your permission = taxation.

Disagreed. First of all, it's with our permission, in the case of a democracy. In the case of theft, there's no sense in which you know how your money will be spent, and no benefit planned for you or society at large. In the case of taxation, they build roads and shit. (I know they also do things one might not like, like bomb people - but that's why the democracy bit should be used. Or, if you're more of an ursine activist, guillotines.)

---

Theft and taxation are not the same thing. It's simple thinking to say otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 December, 2020, 09:47:02 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 08:55:08 PM

A government takes your money without your permission = taxation.


I do feel like this is a bit of a historical aberration.  By this I mean that the idea dates back to a time when taxation was all about the crown taking what they needed for their own purposes.

Over the course of the last century the state has grown to include health care, education and social security as well as those objectives that have historically been pursued. 

Personally I would argue that this is the true price of a civil society.  There is a collective contribution towards a common good.  Education is available to all for instance as it is paid for out of general taxation.

Arguing that the monies are taken without permission is a little problematic.  Certainly there is little control over this.  That said there are still democratic mechanisms available to challenge it (albeit of variable quality).

Personally I'm in the "no man is an island" camp.  I feel that there is a case to be made for providing support for the most needy since it benefits all of us.  Also, none of us can be sure that we won't find ourselves there.  We have a moral responsibility to support our fellow 'man' (however they define themselves).

I have major problems with government policy that channels this in inappropriate ways.  Arguably over the last 20 odd years this has become an ever increasing problem, from outsourcing on.

Ultimately though, as a social democrat and idealist, I would rather contribute a portion of my earnings to the 'common good'.  [that said, I do have problems as well with the fact that 'labour' is more heavily taxed than capital]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM

Funt; 51% of the population vote to take £10 each from the other 49%. That may be democratic, but it's still theft. The government is elected on the promise of tax cuts, but taxes are raised. Again, democratic but still theft. Democracy, then, does not transform theft.

TJM, there is no doubt that spreading the cost of civilisation is extremely helpful, but I question the need for it to be enforced by the barrel of a gun. The problem is that the enforcers come to see this contribution as theirs to control. Thus we get obscene banker bailouts that divert resources from more tangible things like homelessness, hospitals, and hostels.

But there are more radical solutions which would do away with the need for taxation as we know it and still keep the lights on. These solutions involve altering the processes of money creation and application, and removing the current galactically profitable banking franchises. That will not be easy, so I'll settle for taking violence out of the equation for now.

After all, if you had the chance to opt-in to a taxation system if the government's doing a good job, and to opt out if it isn't, would you do that? I think it would be a better application of democracy, and certainly more powerful. (Thanks to Funt for suggesting the idea.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 10:49:27 PM
It's clear that taxation feels like theft to you.


Quote51% of the population vote to take £10 each from the other 49%
This is just you making stuff up. Although I would quite like it if I could be in the 51% group here.

Quoteenforced by the barrel of a gun
I've never had my tax collected this way. Which country do you live in? And: I don't think those guys were tax collectors.

Quotethe chance to opt-in to a taxation system
This is charity, not taxation.

---

Idea: if you want to change your governance way things are organized why not vote for a system that you'd prefer. Oh, wait ... you don't actually bother to vote, do you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 December, 2020, 11:01:33 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM
51% of the population vote to take £10 each from the other 49%.

I don't think that's how tax works.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM
That may be democratic, but it's still theft.

But you've described an entirely hypothetical situation, which I don't understand. Would you only be affected by this £10 tax if you voted against it? And be exempt if you voted for it? Then why would anyone vote against it? Or would the government promise a specific 51% demographic to tax the other 49% if the voted the way they were told? What would the logistics of that vote involve? How would they figure out who voted for what? The democratic process requires anonymity. I'm going to assume you came up with this scenario without really thinking it through.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM
The government is elected on the promise of tax cuts, but taxes are raised.

Yeah I don't follow the thread of logic from the previous statements, and I'm starting to suspect there isn't one.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM
Again, democratic but still theft. Democracy, then, does not transform theft.

Democracy does not transform the supposed theft. The provision of services for your money does. If you received state education, used a school bus on public roads to attend said education, and received healthcare, and a load of other publicly funded things, all before you were old enough to finance those things yourself, then the government aren't stealing, they're collecting on a debt. Unless you want to argue that you did not consent to being educated by the state. Which seems likely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 11:10:40 PM
No, I don't vote because I don't have the right to support a system that offers to impose my views on others and force them to fund what I find important - or which expects me to bow to things with which I disagree or go against my conscience if I happen to be in the minority. The barrel of a gun is the symbol of ultimate force. Stand up long enough and resist hard enough and there will be gun barrels. Maybe it's neither charity or taxation but performance related funding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 December, 2020, 11:33:03 PM
Anti-union. Anti-taxation. Anti-socialist. Ah, a Tory!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 11:57:34 PM

The 51%/49% thing was intended to show that democracy doesn't justify mandatory taxation, not to explain how either one works. I accept it was a clumsy analogy with little nuance, but then subtlety doesn't seem to be one of my strong points.

Let's come at it from a different direction. Imagine a community of 110 people - 10 rulers and 100 citizens. The rulers want to raise taxes in order to build a governmental palace and put the question to the citizens. 50 of the citizens vote, 26 are in favour of the mandatory tax increase for the palace and 24 against. (I don't know how this vote would be organised, or who would count the votes - maybe they'd hire an outside specialist or use a computer or something.) Assuming all the rulers voted the same way, 36 people have decided that it's perfectly fine to forcibly take money from the other 74 people who either don't want the palace or don't care. If those 36 people really want a palace, they should pay for it themselves whilst trying to convince the rest to pitch in as they go, or find another way to finance it. Just because something is voted for in a democratic fashion, that doesn't make it right. A referendum to bring back hanging (God forbid) would not make murder right, a prohibition on alcohol (God and all His angels forbid with the utmost vigour) would not make taking a wee dram wrong.

Democracy (nor aristocracy, meritocracy, plutocracy, anarchy, or any other system) cannot transmute a base crime into a shining virtue.

The end might be a Utopian ideal state that looks after everyone's basic needs from cradle to grave in exchange for mandatory fees, but that seems as likely to happen as any other Utopian ideal. (The existence of such bodies as food banks, Big Issue, and myriad other charities call into question the efficacy of the present system as well as its morality.) If such a Utopian state was the end, though, would it justify the means?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 12:04:09 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 11:57:34 PM
A referendum to bring back hanging (God forbid) would not make murder right

If hanging were legal then it wouldn't be murder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 12:18:37 AM

Why not?

To deliberately kill a person against their will is murder. To deliberately hang a person against their will is to deliberately kill a person. Hanging is murder, there is no difference between a private murder or a public murder. Both have the same outcome.

Here's that alchemy again. At some point, a group of special human beings can decide that it's fine to murder people so long as they call it something else, like execution. That's the only thing about the act that changes - its name. A few people write some words down, wave their hands in the air, count up the votes, and suddenly, hey presto, the primary crime of murder becomes the perfectly legal tool of the state.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 12:26:02 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 11:57:34 PM

The 51%/49% thing was intended to show that democracy doesn't justify mandatory taxation, not to explain how either one works. I accept it was a clumsy analogy with little nuance, but then subtlety doesn't seem to be one of my strong points.

Let's come at it from a different direction.

(https://lymediseaseuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/moving-the-goalposts-300x2402.jpg)

Here's the direction I want to come at it: I'm the God Emperor of the universe and everyone has to do what I say. And complement my groovy hairdo.

If you want to be counterfactual, at least be ambitious man.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 12:38:36 AM

I love your groovy hairdo, your Divine Highness.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 12:53:15 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 12:04:09 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 11:57:34 PM
A referendum to bring back hanging (God forbid) would not make murder right

If hanging were legal then it wouldn't be murder.

Ah now, state sanctioned murder is still murder. Tax is not theft because *ctrl{c}**ctrl{v}*
QuoteDemocracy does not transform the supposed theft. The provision of services for your money does. If you received state education, used a school bus on public roads to attend said education, and received healthcare, and a load of other publicly funded things, all before you were old enough to finance those things yourself, then the government aren't stealing, they're collecting on a debt. Unless you want to argue that you did not consent to being educated by the state. Which seems likely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 01:52:03 AM
Sorry, but murder is a crime. By definition, if a state makes capital punishment legal, and then subjects someone to it, then it's not a murder. (Unless some other organization has a law against it and then it could both be murder and not murder at the same time, depending on your view of the comparative legal systems or your place within them.)

I think there's a confusion here between murder and killing. (Or tax and theft.)

I get it - one can use loaded, emotive terminology to try to support a passionately held position. That doesn't make it a correct use of English, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 02:04:16 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 01:52:03 AM
...That doesn't make it a correct use of English, though.

Aye but linguistics is descriptive, not prescriptive. Unfortunately this makes it quite exploitable
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 December, 2020, 07:15:26 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 December, 2020, 10:20:45 PM

TJM, there is no doubt that spreading the cost of civilisation is extremely helpful, but I question the need for it to be enforced by the barrel of a gun. The problem is that the enforcers come to see this contribution as theirs to control. Thus we get obscene banker bailouts that divert resources from more tangible things like homelessness, hospitals, and hostels.


For me the 'enforcement' side is highlighted by some of the issues that you talk about here.  As I said previously, I do have major issues with some of the ways in which we as a nation prioritise things.  Finance is considered more important than any other industry despite the very distortions you mention.

In an ideal world enforcement would not be necessary since everyone would accept the need to contribute appropriately.  Regrettably we don't live in an even remotely ideal world.  Human nature has a regrettable habit of getting in the way.

... and Mr Pops?  Felicitations and Salutations to your Splendiforously Groovy Hairdo man!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 December, 2020, 08:50:45 AM
The argument that the definition of murder in English usage (as opposed to legal usage) requires it to be 'unlawful' is necessarily a relativist one. Its common everyday use exists outside any specific legal system to describe a killing that one knows to be wrong.

I'd argue that no law that permits capital punishment can be considered valid, any more than the Nuremberg Laws etc made the Holocaust legal just because they were formally enacted. The internal aura of legality within a specific system doesn't change a killing into something miraculously sanitary, it just protects the executioner from consequences. The 'law' which murder violates exists independent of any system, it's not part of a temporary code contingent on who holds power. 

In redefining cold-blooded killing as lawful execution, the murder doesn't go away through some miracle of semantics: instead, the State becomes the murderer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 03 December, 2020, 09:08:04 AM
Meat is murder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 09:14:57 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 03 December, 2020, 09:08:04 AM
Meat is murder.

May I recommend the meat-free wonder burger? Had one once and now I have a rather wonderful set of tits.

Wait, this isn't the conspiracy thread....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 03 December, 2020, 09:22:58 AM
In your exmaple Sharky, whats to stop the other 50 people joining the 24 who voted against the injustice to stop it and introduce a system that does not rely on compulsion? 

Seems your example is of a dysfunctional disengaged democracy, most likely fueled by theoretical but very famous aquatic animal types gonig round saying "democracy doesn't work..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 09:27:43 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 09:14:57 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 03 December, 2020, 09:08:04 AM
Meat is murder.

May I recommend the meat-free wonder burger? Had one once and now I have a rather wonderful set of tits.

Wait, this isn't the conspiracy thread....
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/033/487/rick.jpg)

I was about to ask if anyone had heard from Hawkmumbler recently
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 December, 2020, 09:44:21 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 09:14:57 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 03 December, 2020, 09:08:04 AM
Meat is murder.

May I recommend the meat-free wonder burger? Had one once and now I have a rather wonderful set of tits.

Wait, this isn't the conspiracy thread....

I always pictured you as a gaunt, vampiric type.  Tits are always good though.
.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 11:47:08 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 09:27:43 AM
I was about to ask if anyone had heard from Hawkmumbler recently

Ha! Just been a little busy lately what with one thing and another, still been checking in plenty but with 2020 malaise sinking in rarely felt the need to comment much.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 03 December, 2020, 09:44:21 AM

I always pictured you as a gaunt, vampiric type.  Tits are always good though.
.


The dream.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 03 December, 2020, 01:01:54 PM
Do we have a Brexit thread? Apologies if we do and this is the wrong place.

Check out this 9 mins from John Shirley, who has a cargo forwarding company that works out of Dover, who warn us EU hauliers (which make up 99% of lorries coming in and out of the U.K.) will be avoiding delays and costs by JUST NOT COMING TO THE U.K. after 01/01/21.

We might be ok re the U.K.'s 46% of food imports - but we might not.

Stock up this month, if you're able.

https://youtu.be/S-Z04srnd_8


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 December, 2020, 01:33:42 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 03 December, 2020, 01:01:54 PM
Do we have a Brexit thread? Apologies if we do and this is the wrong place.

Check out this 9 mins from John Shirley, who has a cargo forwarding company that works out of Dover, who warn us EU hauliers (which make up 99% of lorries coming in and out of the U.K.) will be avoiding delays and costs by JUST NOT COMING TO THE U.K. after 01/01/21.

We might be ok re the U.K.'s 46% of food imports - but we might not.

Stock up this month, if you're able.

https://youtu.be/S-Z04srnd_8

But stock up on what?  The closest list I've seen is potatoes, tomatoes and a couple of other things (unfortunately our freezer isn't big enough to stock up on fresh fruit and veg - have to stick to tinned and dried stuff).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 02:55:44 PM
From Merriam-Webster:

Quote
murder: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
kill: to deprive of life : cause the death of
homicide: a killing of one human being by another

From the perspective of a state carrying out capital punishment (or killing their enemies in a war), what they're doing is homicide, and not murder. As I said before, the perspective of another state or body (e.g. the ICC) may be different.

Sure, you can call capital punishment murder (feel free), but you're strictly incorrect, unless a law has been broken in some jurisdiction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 December, 2020, 03:08:00 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 02:55:44 PM
From the perspective of a state carrying out capital punishment (or killing their enemies in a war),

I'll quickly add 'enemy combatants' - killing civilians or enemies who have surrendered can count as a war crime.  There was a study on first person shooter games a few years back which racked up how many war crimes were committed.  Made for interesting reading / viewing especially bearing how influential computer games can be in shaping world views*.

* at the risk of not being so 'quick', I mean people are desensitised to news reports from warzones, rather than actualising those fantasies of massacres being inspired by comics / video nasties / RPGs / computer games.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 03:48:04 PM

From Merriam-Webster:

Quote
Definition of homicide:

1 : a person who kills another
2 : a killing of one human being by another

Synonyms for homicide:

blood, foul play, murder, rubout, slaying

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 December, 2020, 04:19:58 PM
Can the mods add spoiler tags? Some of us haven't read the whole dictionary yet
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 04:20:55 PM
Oh my gahd - you guys are murdering me here!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:23:25 PM
Do I have to read The Thesaurus before I read The Dictionary or would that be going against Tolkiens authorial intent?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 03 December, 2020, 05:27:54 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 03 December, 2020, 01:33:42 PM

But stock up on what?  The closest list I've seen is potatoes, tomatoes and a couple of other things (unfortunately our freezer isn't big enough to stock up on fresh fruit and veg - have to stick to tinned and dried stuff).

Yeah, food that takes a while to perish basically. There's a useful list here:

https://www.muchmorewithless.co.uk/essentials-emergency-food-stockpile/


I've been called a "prepper" just 'cos we've had about six months rolling stock since the least three at to just crash out was. It came in hand during first lockdown, it has to be said! (PS - pushing on with the economic lunacy of Brexit during a FUCKING PANDEMIC?!? Heads need to roll.)

Anyway, the way I see it two things could happen:

A) Nothing. Food supplies are not interrupted by whatever 'deal' the idiots in power arrive at.
Effect on me - I eat the stockpile.

B) Bloody disaster. Lorries can't move across borders. Fresh foods rot. EU hauliers say "stuff this" and take their business elsewhere. Food becomes scarce or really expensive.
Effect on me - I eat the stockpile.

So either way, my food gets eaten.

Maybe we need a separate "how are you prepping for Brexit?" thread...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 05:29:38 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:23:25 PM
Do I have to read The Thesaurus before I read The Dictionary or would that be going against Tolkien's authorial intent?

FTFY.  :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:31:23 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 05:29:38 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:23:25 PM
Do I have to read The Thesaurus before I read The Dictionary or would that be going against Tolkien's authorial intent?

FTFY.  :P
Sod it, I'll wait for the film adaptation then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2020, 05:42:00 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 03 December, 2020, 05:27:54 PM
So either way, my food gets eaten.

More or less my reasoning. When it started to look like we were going to crash out with no deal the first time, I actually cleared some extra space in the garage and bought a BIG freezer, which we filled with all sorts of frozen veg. Plus, I invested in one of those vacuum packer things for food and bought a load of fresh meat and froze it myself (vacuum packing basically adds a year onto however long you'd usually expect to be able to leave stuff in the freezer). Lots of tinned tomatos, baked beans, chick peas, mixed beans lots of pasta, lots of rice. Long-lasting tubes of stuff like garlic paste, chilli paste.

All stuff we were going to use anyway (apart from the frozen veg) but I basically made sure we could make seven main meals a week for about three months.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 03 December, 2020, 05:48:32 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:23:25 PM
Do I have to read The Thesaurus before I read The Dictionary or would that be going against Tolkiens authorial intent?

Late entry for Post of the Year.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 03 December, 2020, 09:22:58 AM

In your exmaple Sharky, whats to stop the other 50 people joining the 24 who voted against the injustice to stop it and introduce a system that does not rely on compulsion? 



The 10 rulers. From the vote, they somehow assume the right to extract the tax from everyone, whether they voted or not.

It's that "somehow" that vexes me. How, exactly, does dipping theft into government turn it into taxation? How does dipping murder (which, as eagle-eyed thesaurusophiles may already have spotted, means the same thing as 'homicide')  into government turn it into execution? How can you feed a wrong in and get a right out?

It gets, what? Written down? "We, ye Ftate, do giveth ourfelvef ye right to kick butt and chop neckf. Alfo, pay up - or elfe..." Something gets written down and then signed by somebody in a gold hat, or blessed by somebody wearing curly slippers and a robe, or splattered with hot wax and pressed with a Special Seal, or whatever, and suddenly the Primary Crime and All Time Number One Sin is just fine.

I love this question, Leigh, because it cuts to the heart of it. Any power the state or the agents of the state assume is just that; assumed. They can only get their rights from us but are claiming rights we don't have. Are we comfortable with that?

Tordels labelling the state the murderer is a good point - it hadn't occurred to me to look at that specific aspect. Leaving aside the idea that the government is an abstract, inanimate thing which cannot be charged with murder, but is made of human beings who can so be charged, are we comfortable having a bunch of thieves and murderers (with myriad other concomitant "charms") in a position to potentially declare your very life illegal at the stroke of a pen? Or if not your life, the life of somebody you've never heard of in a town you've never heard of in a country you're vaguely aware of over something like oil or terrorism?

Oh my God - it's just struck me. The way to defeat government power has been right in front of me all along.

Just take their pens away.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 08:21:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 08:01:53 PM
Just take their pens away.

They chain pens to desks for a reason, you know. They're aware of your plans, and have been for some time.

(http://wiki.urbandead.com/images/8/8c/GrimTin.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 03 December, 2020, 08:25:49 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 03 December, 2020, 05:23:25 PM
Do I have to read The Thesaurus before I read The Dictionary or would that be going against Tolkiens authorial intent?

I once read the whole dictionary out loud. It gave me thesaurus throat I've ever had.

And we will meet for that pint sometime soon HM!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 09:06:48 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 December, 2020, 08:21:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 03 December, 2020, 08:01:53 PM
Just take their pens away.

They chain pens to desks for a reason, you know. They're aware of your plans, and have been for some time.

(http://wiki.urbandead.com/images/8/8c/GrimTin.jpg)

Curses! Pre-foiled again!

Muttley! Fetch the flouride-free toothpase - this is fully a three brush problem...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 04 December, 2020, 12:24:09 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 03 December, 2020, 05:42:00 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 03 December, 2020, 05:27:54 PM
So either way, my food gets eaten.

More or less my reasoning. When it started to look like we were going to crash out with no deal the first time, I actually cleared some extra space in the garage and bought a BIG freezer, which we filled with all sorts of frozen veg. Plus, I invested in one of those vacuum packer things for food and bought a load of fresh meat and froze it myself (vacuum packing basically adds a year onto however long you'd usually expect to be able to leave stuff in the freezer). Lots of tinned tomatos, baked beans, chick peas, mixed beans lots of pasta, lots of rice. Long-lasting tubes of stuff like garlic paste, chilli paste.

All stuff we were going to use anyway (apart from the frozen veg) but I basically made sure we could make seven main meals a week for about three months.

We tried to source a new fridge (ours is on its way out anyway) with a much larger freezer compartment, but we haven't been able to get one for love nor money - sold out everywhere! Makes me wonder why. 🤔

Perhaps because forewarned is forearmed.

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-latest-uk-brace-months-food-shortages-1-january-delivery-782518

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 December, 2020, 04:43:05 PM
Those sunny uplands aren't looking very sunny. Not that I can afford to laugh. We're fucked because of it too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 04 December, 2020, 04:57:26 PM
I'm really not all that comfortabe with the idea that charity as replacement for taxation as the means to provide public services.

By relying on charity to provide services like education or health care society hands huge amounts of power to those with the most income to donate.  Those with the biggest wallets get to decide what gets into text books, or who is eligible for free health care (and for what things).  You can see the effects of this in parts of America where evangelical organisation will donate "science" textbooks to schools which remove any information about evolution or sexual reproduction. Funding for womens health will be contingent on it promoting abstince as the only form of contraception and not providing any kinds of abortion services.

Should society really be reliant on the donations of the Gates Foundation to solve malaria?
Whilst I'm not buying into him as the "great satan" or member of the illuminati trying to inject us with nanobots (or whatever the current wingnut conspiracies on him are). There are genuine issues with how his philanthropy distorts health care services in the countries that he is helping. His goals don't always align with the services that the local populations would choose - but his huge injections of capital mean that large numbers of doctors and nurses are diverted to whatever schemes he is promoting.

Then there are the historical examples of things like the Eugenics Education Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galton_Institute#Activities_(1907%E2%80%931939) which was a charitable organisation. And then there are all those who use charity as a way to either convert/indoctrinate people to their political cause (see various criminal/terrorist/revolutionary organisations). Or those like Saville and Pablo Escobar who use charity to try and cover up or atone for their crimes.

I'd add a caveat to your taxation is theft. To me taxation without representation is when it becomes theft. Imo the problem is how poorly out government represents the people not the existence of government itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 04 December, 2020, 06:48:05 PM
What Sintec said.

When you ask "what stops the 10 rulers doing what they want?"  The other 50 voters! They vote oout those rulers and replace them with rulers they prefer, inching albeit slowly towards progress, as opposed to 100 eople all pissing in the wind of their own "ideas" of what might be a good way to do things.

Rather than avoid the tyranny on a small minority, you'd just become beholden to the tyranny of a hundred minorities, all pulling in different directions and getting fuck all done.   If you say "they'll organise themselves", well they might, they might not, but without some form of compulsion to follow an agreed set of rules, when "all opinions are equal" and one persons fact is equivalent to another's fiction.... well, that's whats already wrong with the world, why create more of it?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 04 December, 2020, 06:49:13 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 December, 2020, 04:43:05 PM
Those sunny uplands aren't looking very sunny.

If there's one thing I know about "sunny uplands", it's that they are inevitably taken out the common use, then fenced-off and divided-up before being rented back to their traditional inhabitants for crippling sums, and exploited exclusively for the profit and pleasure of absentee toffs.

So I'd say those sunny uplands are indeed almost in sight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 December, 2020, 07:04:03 PM
When Churchill said it*, he was talking about the sunlit uplands of not being murdered by the Nazis.

When Rees-Mogg says it, he is the wannabe Nazi that you need to beware.


QuoteHitler knows that he will have to break us in this island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be freed and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2020, 12:14:59 PM
Hey, remember that time in India when a quarter of a billion people went on strike to protest working conditions under a far right pro-capitalist government (https://jacobinmag.com/2020/12/general-strike-india-modi-bjp-cpm-bihar) in the largest industrial action in the history of the world?  And which statistically worked out as one in thirty humans on the planet Earth being on strike?  No?  Well I'll just assume you were very busy and missed the wall-to-wall coverage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 December, 2020, 02:16:21 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 06 December, 2020, 12:14:59 PM
Hey, remember that time in India when a quarter of a billion people went on strike to protest working conditions under a far right pro-capitalist government (https://jacobinmag.com/2020/12/general-strike-india-modi-bjp-cpm-bihar) in the largest industrial action in the history of the world?  And which statistically worked out as one in thirty humans on the planet Earth being on strike?  No?  Well I'll just assume you were very busy and missed the wall-to-wall coverage.

Came here to post exactly this, but from a different source!!

https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/250-million-indian-workers-and-farmers-strike-breaking-world-record/


Naturally, no mention I can see on BBC, ITV, SKY, or even Ch4!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 December, 2020, 02:22:47 PM
Ah, I have found reference to it in the BBC (though I had to dig):

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-55156219

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-55157714
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 December, 2020, 07:44:08 PM
Everything we have been warned about over the last four years is likely to come to pass.

1) Flow rates of medicines and medical products "could initially reduce to 60-80% over three months which, if unmitigated, would impact on the supply of medicines and medical products across the UK".

2) "Protests and counter-protests will take place across the UK and may absorb significant amounts of police resources. There may also be a rise in public disorder and community tensions."

3) "EU and UK fishers could clash over the lost access to historic fishing grounds, and there could be a significant uplift in illegal fishing activities."

4) "Competing demands on UK government and devolved administration maritime agencies and their assets could put [maritime security] enforcement and response capabilities at risk."

5) There will be "reduced [food] supply availability, especially of certain fresh products" and "supply of some critical dependencies for the food supply chain... could be reduced".
6) "Low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel."

7) "Border delays, tariffs and new regulatory barriers/costs may result in disruption to supply of critical chemicals used in the UK... leading to the disruption of essential services (such as food, energy, water and medicine). Economic factors could result in some chemicals suppliers reducing operations or closing."

8. "Border delays could affect local fuel disruption. There will not be wider national-level oil shortage."

9) There is a risk of a reduction in the supply of medicines for UK veterinary use which "would reduce our ability to prevent and control disease outbreaks, with potential detrimental impacts for animal health and welfare, the environment, wider food safety/availability and zoonotic disease control which can directly impact human health".

10) "Between 40-70% of trucks travelling to the EU might not be ready for new border controls. This could reduce flow across the short channel crossing to 60-80% of normal levels with maximum queues of 7,000 trucks in Kent and delays of two days. The worst disruption would subside within three months".

11) The transition from "internal security cooperation with the EU" to "non-EU mechanisms" may not be smooth and seamless and may "result in a mutual reduction in capability to tackle crime and terrorism".

12) Around one in 20 local authorities are at risk of financial collapse as a result of higher service demand caused by a disruptive EU exit.

...and more:

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-12-06/the-12-reasonable-worst-case-outcomes-if-brexit-talks-collapse
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 December, 2020, 09:07:29 PM
Does this include the second—and not predicted—issue with distribution, in that EU drivers just don't want to come to the UK? There is apparently a massive shortfall in people, because drivers tend to be paid by the km and so sitting in queues is a big no.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 06 December, 2020, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 December, 2020, 09:07:29 PM
Does this include the second—and not predicted—issue with distribution, in that EU drivers just don't want to come to the UK? There is apparently a massive shortfall in people, because drivers tend to be paid by the km and so sitting in queues is a big no.

That isn't mentioned, and it appears to have taken Freight Forwarders in the U.K. by surprise. 99% of hauliers are from EU countries, and they have said that the costs and delays of transporting in and out of U.K. will make it unviable.

Check out this dude on James O'Brien's show talking about it:

https://youtu.be/S-Z04srnd_8

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 December, 2020, 10:56:35 PM
In a world beyond satire: Georgia declares Biden winner for a third time (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55224511)

Keep counting them until you get the right answer. Kind of how I felt after Twaxit, and the Indyref.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 08 December, 2020, 10:41:00 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 06 December, 2020, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 December, 2020, 09:07:29 PM
Does this include the second—and not predicted—issue with distribution, in that EU drivers just don't want to come to the UK? There is apparently a massive shortfall in people, because drivers tend to be paid by the km and so sitting in queues is a big no.

That isn't mentioned, and it appears to have taken Freight Forwarders in the U.K. by surprise. 99% of hauliers are from EU countries, and they have said that the costs and delays of transporting in and out of U.K. will make it unviable.

I'm not sure surprise is quite the right word.  I've seen loads of adverts around telling businesses to prepare.  Though notably after four years the ads don't say exactly what to prepare for, there not being a plan published yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 December, 2020, 10:48:07 AM
PREPARE for food shortages!

PREPARE for 80% drops in medicine provision!

PREPARE for the media and govt to blame all of this on the EU!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 08 December, 2020, 03:06:59 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 December, 2020, 10:56:35 PM
In a world beyond satire: Georgia declares Biden winner for a third time (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55224511)

Keep counting them until you get the right answer. Kind of how I felt after Twaxit, and the Indyref.

I still can't get my head around the fact that 80% of Trump voters think the election was rigged, when it's being disproved on a daily basis. But hey, the great leader said it, so it must be true. This is North Korea shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 December, 2020, 03:28:56 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 08 December, 2020, 03:06:59 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 December, 2020, 10:56:35 PM
In a world beyond satire: Georgia declares Biden winner for a third time (https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55224511)

Keep counting them until you get the right answer. Kind of how I felt after Twaxit, and the Indyref.

I still can't get my head around the fact that 80% of Trump voters think the election was rigged, when it's being disproved on a daily basis. But hey, the great leader said it, so it must be true. This is North Korea shit.

It is bananas - the story I linked to is essentially all friendly fire politics anyway - there are no Democrats left involved in the argument there. It's Republican believers vs. non-believers. Another amazing quote from the Trumpet*: "I'd be a gracious loser ... if I'd lost!"

And nobody wants to be too rude to the shit-flinging, entirely nude emperor because they still see him as either their ruination or their elevation, based on his being supported by a loud minority of (try to be kind, try to be kind) ... voters.

America is such a fucking weird nation. From the heights of intellectual wit and easy bonhomie to the depths of moronic depravity, it sails. On it sails.


*Our savior, helping bar the Gates of the great reset.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 08 December, 2020, 05:49:20 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 08 December, 2020, 10:48:07 AM
PREPARE for food shortages!

PREPARE for 80% drops in medicine provision!

PREPARE for the media and govt to blame all of this on the EU!

PREPARE for Leave voters to blame it all on Remainers! Oh hang on, they're doing that already, sorry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 08 December, 2020, 06:04:28 PM
To be fair, we didn't believe enough in Britain and now it is sad and unable to negotiate....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 December, 2020, 06:17:07 PM
A person who used to be on the board of a large and successful corporation, who didn't like sharing power and so resigned. He now waits downstairs, on the street, outside the front door. Whenever any of the board members leave the building he approaches them, shaking his collection tin and demanding his cut of the profits, with his "Take Back Control" t-shirt, frayed, stained and smelling of desperation.

Great Britain*!


* I mean, they didn't even watch The Godfather! Never tell your enemies what you're thinking, Boris!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 08 December, 2020, 07:59:57 PM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 08 December, 2020, 05:49:20 PMPREPARE for Leave voters to blame it all on Remainers! Oh hang on, they're doing that already, sorry.

To be fair, we lost the referendum not once but twice, had the government in deadlock so they couldn't actually do anything and pissed that away, and then we rehabilitated Tony Blair for some reason.  All Remainers had to do was not call every Leaver a thick racist for four years straight or get bogged down in entirely-manufactured wedge issues, and we fucked it.  We fucked it good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 December, 2020, 08:23:50 PM
It was weird, finding myself agreeing with both Tony Blair and Michael Heseltine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 08 December, 2020, 08:34:22 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 08 December, 2020, 07:59:57 PMTo be fair, we lost the referendum not once but twice
Eh?

[quote[had the government in deadlock so they couldn't actually do anything and pissed that away[/quote]
No arguments on that. The IVs were also a shitshow, but by that point we were already fucked anyway. May's obsession in killing FOM (and enough of Labour enabling that position) forced Brexit into the disaster zone.

Ultimately, post-Brexit, we really had two chances to avoid ruin. The first would have been Labour going in hard with SM-based Brexit, and stating it would support the Tories. Long shot, but it would have been an option to "get Brexit done" and unify the country. But Labour wobbled about the SM all the way.

Then the IVs potentially gave us an out, by which time everyone apart from the Tories were sitting into their own camps, abstaining or voting against anything they didn't come up with. So we had CU absurdly lose by three votes (thanks, soft Tories and Greens!), 2nd ref lose by a smallish number (thanks, Labour!) and CM2 get a kicking by a number that was easily overturned (thanks, TIG!), before enough parties got taken in by their own hubris (thanks, Lib Dems!) or agenda (thanks, SNP!) and obliterated an independent and genuinely interesting parliament to usher in the current shitshow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 08 December, 2020, 11:03:48 PM
Drunk rant where my rage at what we face from Jan 1st  came before rational thought, so deleted. Apologies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 December, 2020, 02:49:17 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 08 December, 2020, 11:03:48 PM
Drunk rant where my rage at what we face from Jan 1st  came before rational thought, so deleted. Apologies.

I appreciate the thought and care you put into your postings here - providing us with data, insights and helpful guides to understand things like the climate crisis.

We're going through an extended set of large-scale, existential disappointments at the moment, and we wouldn't be human if it didn't get to us from time to time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 09 December, 2020, 06:26:55 AM
Some rage warranted.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 December, 2020, 08:16:11 AM
Quote from: Leigh S on 08 December, 2020, 06:04:28 PM
To be fair, we didn't believe enough in Britain and now it is sad and unable to negotiate....


Britain can't do it while you're watching.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 December, 2020, 02:08:25 PM
Stronghold had a good story and an interesting twist as one of the Aliens was rebuilt as a Robot. He worked for a complete scumbag who came to a nasty end so let's hope Marvel get some of their characters to take on those acid blooded Xenomorphs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 09 December, 2020, 02:36:41 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 09 December, 2020, 02:08:25 PM
Stronghold had a good story and an interesting twist as one of the Aliens was rebuilt as a Robot. He worked for a complete scumbag who came to a nasty end so let's hope Marvel get some of their characters to take on those acid blooded Xenomorphs.

This is the political thread - we talk about xenophobes here, not xenomorphs :P
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 December, 2020, 03:51:09 PM
I was trying to figure out if it was an obscure metaphor for a current affair.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 09 December, 2020, 04:22:34 PM
Maybe this should go in the 'what are you listening to?' thread.

(https://i.imgur.com/DI7TEqZ.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 December, 2020, 09:56:33 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ZX7YOGj.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2020, 10:29:59 PM
Three and a half years, they've had, to sort something out. And nothing, absolutely sweet fuck all, to show for it. And now we're shafted too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2020, 10:39:27 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 11 December, 2020, 10:29:59 PM
Three and a half years, they've had, to sort something out. And nothing, absolutely sweet fuck all, to show for it. And now we're shafted too.

Four and a half even. I can't work figures out either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 December, 2020, 10:24:33 AM
Clearly, enough of the UK is quite happy being repeatedly lied to, as long as that aligns with their own beliefs that everything will be OK. The Tories have for a while been sowing the seeds that the WA was the referenced deal, not the actual deal—my MP sent a letter to that effect weeks ago. I was suspicious at the time, but it's now confirmed as briefing policy. And it's bullshit. But even when confronted with video evidence to the contrary, Johnson hand-waves that away and says the person confronting him is wrong.

We're fucked. We're in a post-truth environment, led by people who have no scruples whatsoever. Next year will be a constant game of 'Blame the EU', further poisoning the well. We will—if fortunate—live through a torrid time, all of which was entirely avoidable, while Tories try to get everyone to have wartime spirit, invoking a period they themselves didn't live through. (See also the influx of Tories/right-wingers bigging up the 1970s as a halcyon simpler time of joy. Nick Timothy did that this week. He was born in 1980.)

It's hard to know how to combat this when people are so entrenched and when they won't believe their own eyes and ears. When the Tories this week are even trying to pin Johnson's failure on Labour (the argument being, apparently, that because Labour publicly stated it wanted a deal, that somehow undermined the UK's position of, er, wanting a deal, and therefore this is primarily what will lead to no deal), we're well beyond logic and facts.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 December, 2020, 12:32:24 PM
It turns out we EU countries can control our own borders after all. Just wish we didn't have to right now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 December, 2020, 12:41:59 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 December, 2020, 12:32:24 PM
It turns out we EU countries can control our own borders after all. Just wish we didn't have to right now.

Yep - the 'referendum' four years ago may have been 'about sovereignty' but sovereignty was something we had all along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 December, 2020, 11:24:07 PM
Russian agent 'tricked into detailing Navalny assassination bid' (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55395683)

Watching the YouTube video this links to is chillingly fascinating. Navalny manages to dupe his would-be assassin on the phone and get him to explain what went wrong - when they poisoned his underpants with a nerve agent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 24 December, 2020, 04:00:21 PM
Well, the EU Brexit deal is apparently done. I don't think the ink is dry on it yet, but you have to wonder what the details are of course. It seems we're not crashing out over a cliff which I feared the more deranged amongst the Brexiteers wanted. That has to be good news for future relationships with Europe and the Irish peace process though it might be a mess of new regulations for small businesses. Not quite the Christmas present they'd want to receive.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 December, 2020, 04:04:21 PM
The UK government chooses to withdraw from the Erasmus exchange scheme. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-uk-decided-not-to-stay-in-erasmus-exchange-programme-eu-says-b1778667.html?fbclid=IwAR2v_6Q8FqFHfvy_UAyb2FNXVTJMS4MFD6apcmJWkRDWopDgjbOw7zey2kk)

Chooses to perpetrate an astonishing, enraging act of cultural and intellectual vandalism. Removing opportunities for a generation or more of students in order to... what? Prove a fucking point?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 December, 2020, 04:39:40 PM
Rich kids will still be able to do it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 December, 2020, 04:40:43 PM
Exactly that. In the same way we are now paying far more for the vaccine than tiny Iceland, because our idiots in charge refused to throw their lot in with the EU on a bull purchase. (On Erasmus, like everything else, the UK argument is we will set up our own thing instead. That gets a headline, they do nothing, and everyone moves on. Rinse and repeat.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 24 December, 2020, 05:50:17 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 December, 2020, 04:04:21 PM
The UK government chooses to withdraw from the Erasmus exchange scheme. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-uk-decided-not-to-stay-in-erasmus-exchange-programme-eu-says-b1778667.html?fbclid=IwAR2v_6Q8FqFHfvy_UAyb2FNXVTJMS4MFD6apcmJWkRDWopDgjbOw7zey2kk)


Irish government has stated students in Northern Ireland will still have access to Erasmus.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 27 December, 2020, 02:10:49 PM
It must have been a slow month since all the politigrifters pulled out the old "War on Christmas" bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 December, 2020, 05:40:02 PM
The EU:

(https://i.imgur.com/EQITMg8.png)


The UK:

(https://i.imgur.com/fEjnFYp.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 December, 2020, 12:56:47 AM
Quote from: Smith on 27 December, 2020, 02:10:49 PM
It must have been a slow month since all the politigrifters pulled out the old "War on Christmas" bit.

To be fair, most alternative news outlets have also been running long-completed pieces specifically debunking "The Left's War On Christmas" - Hbomberguy's vid (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbZo4x0NbbI) has been on the metaphorical shelf for the better part of 2 years before he finally released it a few days ago, though his dissection of the eternally-dreadful PragerU remains as topical as ever.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 28 December, 2020, 06:03:38 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 28 December, 2020, 12:56:47 AM
Quote from: Smith on 27 December, 2020, 02:10:49 PM
It must have been a slow month since all the politigrifters pulled out the old "War on Christmas" bit.

To be fair, most alternative news outlets have also been running long-completed pieces specifically debunking "The Left's War On Christmas" - Hbomberguy's vid (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbZo4x0NbbI) has been on the metaphorical shelf for the better part of 2 years before he finally released it a few days ago, though his dissection of the eternally-dreadful PragerU remains as topical as ever.
It gets revived every year for the last ... well,forever. Pat Boone wrote a book about it back in the 60's.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 December, 2020, 06:26:33 PM
Some copy-pasta that (alongside the Excel spreadsheet shit-show (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54423988) earlier in the year) demonstrates the establishment's firm grip on the modern world: Brexit deal mentions Netscape browser and Mozilla Mail (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55475433)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 29 December, 2020, 07:48:01 PM
It's a dirty text, in part copied from earlier deals/docs. This is down to the UK pissing about and running down the clock. It provides a framework to sign, and the text will be cleaned over the coming weeks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 31 December, 2020, 09:42:36 AM
DUP now blaming everyone for a deal they brought about.

Hilarious, tragic. Predicted years ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 10:33:27 AM
They had so much power and influence and squandered all of it. They made the same mistake as Labour c. 2005 and Lib Dems c. 2014, thinking they'd be in power forever. But power is fleeting. You must make the most of what you have at the time, to further your own goals. They never did. Looking at the numbers, one of their biggest fuck-ups was the IVs, where they voted with the government. Had they switched, to provide the UK with more options, Customs Union would have passed with a majority of 17 (thereby potentially creating a path to eradicating the Irish sea border), public vote on the final deal would have passed with a majority of 12 (thereby—if it managed to get through—almost certainly reversing Brexit entirely), and Common Market 2.0 would have only lost by a single vote, thereby arguably becoming viable for consideration as well.

A united Ireland now looks inevitable. How the DUP exists within that scenario, who knows?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 31 December, 2020, 11:45:41 AM
Hopefully Unionists and Loyalists are finally able to form or reform one of the Unionist parties to better serve them, and actually help their community. Perhaps to deliver a better message.

Time they realised you can' eat a flag, and that the bigger issue than preserving the "precious Union" is actually improving their voters lives, and perhaps actually being honest with them rather than selling them fantasies and the same old bollix.

The DUP have made a United Ireland almost inevitable, I just hope that if it comes about, that we actually change NI society from top to bottom. Education, integration. I'm fed up of living in a zombie state, that is served by crony Politicians maintaining the Status Quo as our Economy turns to shit and our young people leave for better opportunities and to escape the sectarian shite. Throw all the flags in the sea. If I was never to see a Union Flag, Irish flag, Paramilitary flag ever again, I'd feel blessed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 December, 2020, 12:22:53 PM
Johnson has all but guaranteed that this issue is going to run and run, either side of the Irish sea.  3 hours to debate a bill of such massive importance?  After a similar number of days to scrutinise the text?  How do you reach any conclusion at all?

No, Johnson deliberately ran down the clock knowing that nobody was willing to risk the UK shifting to WTO terms, a land border in Ireland, the ire of the Americans and any number of issues that would result from a failure to conclude some sort of agreement.  The only problem is that as the reality of this deal emerges there will be a drip of revelations to keep the issue open like a festering wound.

He may well believe that he has outmanoeuvred his opponents.  I think the truth is that it is he himself that has been manipulated.  He has been set up as the perfect fool, willing and eager to take on the mantle of 'leader' at this time. 

I'm also now starting to become incredibly suspicious of Cummings' very public departure several weeks ago.  Was it designed to give him the excuse that he was not there for the final days of negotiations?  If his rumoured involvement in the 2024 campaign is to be believed has he bolted to give himself the veneer of innocence when the matter of Johnson's deal comes up?

Maybe that latter is tin-foil-hattery.  Then again I sometimes fear that I am nowhere near cynical enough for British politics these days. :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 01:37:20 PM
He's fucked come tomorrow. We're already seeing how thin this deal is with couriers refusing to ship to the EU and the like. The queues of lorries won't diminish because they can't. The City is fucked, meaning billions will leave the UK, never to return. JIT is done. Prices will go up. Choice will go down. People will be stuck in the UK, unless rich.

The arch Brexiters will turn, probably within a few months, trying to denounce and unpick the deal. Having just argued that five hours was enough time for a debate, given how long we've been in the EU, they'll nonetheless by next summer slam that there was never enough time to debate the bill. This will never be over. And with Labour and the Lib Dems shifting to cowardly "tell us what we need to do for you to vote for us" mode, it's hard to see how the opposition can hope to win in 2024.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 31 December, 2020, 01:52:05 PM
Full-on "the enemy is weak but also strong" from here on out, combined with escalating hardship it's a proto-fascist's wet-dream. Every emergent issue is the scheming EU's vengeance, every revelation of the next humiliating concession somehow a hard-won victory for GREAT Britain.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 December, 2020, 02:42:57 PM
It's a great trade deal if you're a carpetbagger, but then all deals are.  The fire sale of what national assets remain is supposedly already underway - I don't know what "planned shakeup of the NHS" means specifically, but I do hope no-one on the forum plans on getting sick or old.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 31 December, 2020, 02:57:54 PM
... and every single economic shitshow will be blamed on "the virus" instead of Brexit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 03:31:18 PM
I had another thought recently, in that the Tories are great at taking things away and then boasting about giving them back, but as amazing hard-fought victories. It's perhaps optimistic to think this will happen with EU-oriented benefits, but it might. I wouldn't be shocked for Johnson to announce some kind of reciprocal visa-free work agreement between the EU and UK at some point in the future—just don't call it free movement of workers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 December, 2020, 03:54:06 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 01:37:20 PM
And with Labour and the Lib Dems shifting to cowardly "tell us what we need to do for you to vote for us" mode, it's hard to see how the opposition can hope to win in 2024.

Aye, Labour seriously need to sort their lives out.  Liberals as a credible option?  I doubt it, not after Clegg.  The Greens?  ...

Nope.  British politicians have so much to answer for with this.  I think you really have hit the nail on the head though.  They're way too concerned about getting and keeping support and not concerned enough about hard choices and doing the job they're paid for.  For me that pretty much guarantees that I won't vote for the buggers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 04:07:55 PM
I get that polarisation has made the landscape tricky, and FPTP makes things worse. But Labour needs to come to terms with the latter and that it will likely never win another majority but could become the main party in coalition almost indefinitely (or at least certainly very regularly). As for the Lib Dems, I've no idea what they're doing now. Previously, they've always been about making stands on things that really matter (liberalism; anti-Iraq War; PR), but Davey appears to be triangulating the party into oblivion. (Labour at least has been doing well in the polls, although mostly by eating into the LD share rather than the Tory one).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 31 December, 2020, 05:50:22 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 December, 2020, 03:54:06 PMAye, Labour seriously need to sort their lives out.  Liberals as a credible option?  I doubt it, not after Clegg.

I wouldn't underestimate the long-term damage to the LibDems done by Swinson, which is all the more remarkable considering she got such an easy ride.  There's footage somewhere of her going on tv to deny that she murdered squirrels for fun.
I'd also be quite surprised if Farron's homophobia has been entirely forgiven, as there was pointed discussion of how the party couldn't get him to keep his opinions to himself, meaning that the party was fine with his being a homophobe, they just had a problem with people knowing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2020, 06:03:40 PM
Just to change the subject - it may well just be me, but I've been noticing slightly less coverage of the orange buffoon in recent days.  If this is a trend, roll on 2021.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 December, 2020, 08:16:08 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2020, 06:03:40 PM
Just to change the subject - it may well just be me, but I've been noticing slightly less coverage of the orange buffoon in recent days.  If this is a trend, roll on 2021.

I got so frustrated and bored with hearing news stories that were basically "Orange buffoon tweets [nasty rhetoric]" or "Orange buffoon forwards a fascist agenda" (and this was before he was elected president), that I would switch the radio on in the car (on NPR) and then switch it off as soon as his name was mentioned. During the morning commute, I never got past 15 seconds. For a whole year.

This nation is obsessed with the presidency, and tribalism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 31 December, 2020, 09:24:11 PM
Massively sad day for many reasons, not least the 1000 deaths a day to COVID due to government's (deliberate?) mishandling, but also the last few hours of being in the EU.

Wales voted Leave, one of the most impoverished parts of all of Europe, one  of the countries that benefitted the most from EU investment trying  to raise it out of economic zone 1. The EU had earmarked 10 billion for Wales over the next decade, which it now isn't getting - not from the EU, and not being replaced by Westminster either.

Combine that with the big car manufacturers pulling out of South Wales, and the economic impact of just leaving the EU - Wales is going to see impoverishment not seen since the dissolution of industry in the 70s. Probably worse than then - kids are already starving here.

Then of course there's the end of OUR free movement, the loss of ERASMUS, and so so much more.

Wales fell foul of one of the biggest cons perpetrated against U.K. citizens ever.

It's a desperately sad day.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 December, 2020, 10:53:16 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 December, 2020, 08:16:08 PM

This nation is obsessed with the presidency, and tribalism.

Sorry to bring him up again. Got a bit obsessed with his antics myself I have to admit, but I'll be very glad to get myself a life in 2021 and leave him behind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 11:07:59 PM
Fireworks going off here constantly. My wife just reminded me, it's Brexiters celebrating. Fuck 2020.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 01 January, 2021, 10:45:23 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 11:07:59 PM
Fireworks going off here constantly. My wife just reminded me, it's Brexiters celebrating. Fuck 2020.

Doubtful. Plenty fireworks going off up here in Scotland and BREXIT not popular.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 01 January, 2021, 10:55:12 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 01 January, 2021, 10:45:23 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 December, 2020, 11:07:59 PM
Fireworks going off here constantly. My wife just reminded me, it's Brexiters celebrating. Fuck 2020.

Doubtful. Plenty fireworks going off up here in Scotland and BREXIT not popular.

I think the time IndigoPrime posted hinted at it being a Brexit celebration 😩 the Transition period officially ended 11.00pm (GMT)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 January, 2021, 11:40:39 AM
Yep. Sporadic fireworks since 3pm, but a shit-ton of them around 11pm, and then a lull before a — depressingly — smaller amount at midnight. This was Brexiters offering another twist of the knife.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 04 January, 2021, 03:36:43 AM
As a non-UK citizen I always tough that Brexit was a bad idea, here is an interesting article/opinion peace I read in one of my local websites: https://www.news24.com/fin24/opinion/opinion-how-delusions-about-world-war-ii-fed-brexit-mania-20210103 (https://www.news24.com/fin24/opinion/opinion-how-delusions-about-world-war-ii-fed-brexit-mania-20210103)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 January, 2021, 09:17:45 PM
Genuine holy shit moment: US Capitol Building just got stormed (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55568131) by Qanon and (in a shocking twist) the Confederacy!

Trump has called for calm, after earlier calling for non-calm. Watch this space...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 06 January, 2021, 11:34:56 PM
'Insert Dredd: Origins image here'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 January, 2021, 11:50:05 PM
So much for the 'law and order president'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 01:14:54 AM
Well, even though the storming of Congress by Trump supporters was carried out by conspiracy theorists, I notice that it's still too early in The Event for new conspiracies to have taken hold. So, I think it's my turn to start one: the entire thing was planned by deep state agitators planted in the crowd so that The Enemy could enact new draconian laws and take out the organizations who oppose them.

Some of the agitators are so deeply undercover that they don't even realize that they're both the enemy and not the enemy at the same time. That's right! The enemy is actually YOU!!!

Two dice, a pencil and an eraser are all you need to hopefully overturn democracy. YOU decide which facts are real ones, which bleach to drink and which votes to count.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 07 January, 2021, 02:01:06 AM
2021 is off to an amazing start.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 January, 2021, 07:16:19 AM
Comparisons are also being made about the stark difference between police handling of the storming of the Capitol and the BLM protests back in the summer.

As for the parallels with Bad Bob Booth .... well, that one is proving terrifyingly accurate.  Trump has also apparently announced that he will not concede!   :o

On the subject of Tooth parallels, currently re-reading the 1750's and just passed the second series of Zombo with a president that fires everyone in sight, is totally psychotic and refuses to give up power (even after he is killed himself!) 

  :|It is quite scary how prescient Tooth is sometimes!  :|
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 07 January, 2021, 07:21:19 AM
QuoteYOU decide which facts are real ones, which bleach to drink and which votes to count.

Turpentine,more likely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 08:58:27 AM
Looks like there's now coordinated spin on the right in the UK to silence anyone on the remain/PV side as the same as people who broke into the Capitol, because they are against democracy. Which is quite something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 07 January, 2021, 09:08:30 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 01:14:54 AM
the entire thing was planned by deep state agitators planted in the crowd so that The Enemy could enact new draconian laws and take out the organizations who oppose them.

You see I think you're joking - but I went and peered into the cess pool of the comments section on Breitbart last night (while things were still kicking off) and this theory was genuinely being spouted. Protest was a false flag op by anti-fa to make the patriotic march look bad according to some on there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 07 January, 2021, 09:23:57 AM
Quote from: sintec on 07 January, 2021, 09:08:30 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 01:14:54 AM
the entire thing was planned by deep state agitators planted in the crowd so that The Enemy could enact new draconian laws and take out the organizations who oppose them.

You see I think you're joking - but I went and peered into the cess pool of the comments section on Breitbart last night (while things were still kicking off) and this theory was genuinely being spouted. Protest was a false flag op by anti-fa to make the patriotic march look bad according to some on there.

Cernovich has already deduced that Ashley Babitt was an actor and it was all fake blood. He really outdid himself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 10:41:31 AM
What happens next, then?  Even Mike Pence has become an enemy of the MAGA crowd.  Can Republicans keep defending him or will they distance themselves?  Is this still the kind of thing 74 million Americans want?  I'd be interested to hear from those of you who are more politically informed than me, which admittedly isn't saying a whole lot. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 11:30:05 AM
Polling suggests almost half of Republican voters support what was in effect an attempted coup. Dangerous times for democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 07 January, 2021, 11:56:44 AM
Listening to LBC a little while ago.  An American expat was trying to explain how Americans think about politicians.  Apparently Trump is an "honest crook" and its all down to folks growing up on the X-files!

Oh, and the highlight of the conversation?  He was saying that he believed Biden was crooked even though he had no evidence to support it.  His justification:  well, he's been a politician all these years.  Trump is not a criminal though, despite the massive body of evidence that supports such a view.

I pray that he doesn't have kids!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2021, 12:35:46 PM
It has to be a simple conspiracy theory otherwise the MAGA crowd won't be able to understand it.  So: it wasn't MAGA that stormed the capital buildings, it was Antifa, and anyone who thinks otherwise has been brainwashed by the fake news media and/or George Soros.  Any dead people are crisis actors.  Any witnesses are lying.  The infamously far-left liberal US police force is in on it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:00:20 PM

Dear Terran Stakeholder,

Your governments aren't working properly. Maybe you should let all us good and wise and friendly people at the UN take over for a while - just until you can get things fixed, of course.

Love and kisses,

The Management.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 07 January, 2021, 12:35:46 PM
It has to be a simple conspiracy theory otherwise the MAGA crowd won't be able to understand it.  So: it wasn't MAGA that stormed the capital buildings, it was Antifa, and anyone who thinks otherwise has been brainwashed by the fake news media and/or George Soros.  Any dead people are crisis actors.  Any witnesses are lying.  The infamously far-left liberal US police force is in on it.

Unreal.  Stupidity really does seem to be rampant.  It's cold comfort to see Mitch McConnell finally growing a pair, though it seems to be like throwing a tin of peas at world hunger at this stage.  Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM

...am I being tin-foil-hattish to think...


I wouldn't worry about that. "Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:44:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM

...am I being tin-foil-hattish to think...


I wouldn't worry about that. "Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

Sorry, Sharky, I don't subscribe to that at all.  When someone refuses to accept an overwhelming weight of expert analysis in favour of a flimsy fringe idea, I don't want to be part of their group. I'll gladly THINK about the alternative viewpoint but I'll go with the more convincing facts every time.

As for the specific instance I cited, I don't know. If the theory doesn't hold weight, I'll disregard it, as I have done with other ideas many times.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 January, 2021, 01:49:19 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/158wyx35fw961.png?width=638&auto=webp&s=946f90365277c597120200151695f2586a1b29c2)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 02:25:10 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:44:46 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM

...am I being tin-foil-hattish to think...


I wouldn't worry about that. "Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

Sorry, Sharky, I don't subscribe to that at all.  When someone refuses to accept an overwhelming weight of expert analysis in favour of a flimsy fringe idea, I don't want to be part of their group. I'll gladly THINK about the alternative viewpoint but I'll go with the more convincing facts every time.

As for the specific instance I cited, I don't know. If the theory doesn't hold weight, I'll disregard it, as I have done with other ideas many times.

Also, I should probably apologise for using the term 'tin-foil-hattish' in the post before that and replace it with the word 'wrong' - which I might be, but I was wondering what other boarders think.

Belief in fringe, unproven theories have played a large part in causing the violence in the USA today, and Trump is happy to start, or at least fuel them - the supposed election steal being the main one, of course, but also QAnon and coronavirus denial. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 02:56:21 PM

All I said was think about it, not believe. Beliefs evolve over time as more information comes to light. We none of us believe the same thing - and God help the rest of the universe if we ever do - which I think is great.

What I meant was really what you said, to not be afraid of thinking about something just because somebody's nailed a thought-stopper to it. To think about something doesn't mean to accept it but to not think about something does mean to accept it as either true or false.

I wasn't having a go or anything, I'm just fascinated by the ubiquity of labels and how they guide us both physically and mentally, and how they can be weaponized and spread like linguistic viruses.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 02:57:05 PM
Alternate viewpoints are fine, but people are being radicalised to believe the most outlandish nonsense, and social media has created a way of being that is more about sharing than thinking and reasoning. A friend of a friend has gone down a rabbithole of wrong in the USA. This person was sharing and typing PROOF in all-caps of things like that pic of the supposed antifa bloke in the Capitol. Said proof? A tattoo. An ANTIFA tattoo! Except it wasn't—it was from the videogame Dishonored.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:02:58 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM
Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

No, it doesn't take fringe-theory lunacy to come to that conclusion. Personally, I don't think there was collusion between the police and the protesters - everything moved too quickly for that to be the case, and there's strong evidence (most of which you can watch) that it was chaos first, planning (the take-back) much later.

So, firstly, there wasn't a large protest at the Capitol - there was a rally at the White House. That was pre-planned and had a police presence, but no huge trouble was expected because it was Trump addressing Trump supporters. Then he told them to march on the Capitol Building (a few streets away), and off they went.

At the Capitol Building, you've got several sets of police (the number of forces working in that area is almost lunacy itself - the USA is nothing if not an enormous paper-driven bureaucracy working somewhat in the dark ages), each with their own command & control - and they were overwhelmed. One plains-clothes group shot the female protester who later died. Elsewhere, there was a lone black police officer holding back a large crowd as best he could as he retreated through the building desperately calling for back up. Code word: shit-show.

Armed police did retreat: but it was that or open fire against a much larger crowd than they'd have been able to contain.  Plus, they were being pepper-sprayed by militant rioters.

(Another factor is that, as the Capitol has been closed to tour groups for months due to Covid restrictions, the local police forces are on skeleton staffing.)

---

Now: if there had been a planned BLM protest that day, I've no doubt we'd have seen a much stronger police presence in the first place, who would have been prepared to put down any riot (with overwhelming force). So, people aren't wrong to think a BLM protest would have been met with more force - but it would have been planned for in advance. This was "president's hoodlums go mental". Hindsight predicts it perfectly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:15:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
"Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

The idea that anyone who uses a particular phrase is incapable of rational thought is arrogant. I don't particularly like most uses of the phrase "snowflake", but I don't dismiss the speaker out of hand as someone who hasn't thought through their position.

Your notion that someone who uses the term "conspiracy theorist" is somehow lacking in a rational thought process next to someone who doesn't use that term is (probably demonstrably) the opposite of the truth.

Example: believers in a flat earth have not really applied logic in the same way as, say, the developers of the global GPS system. Because one group is made up of credulous people who have gotten as far as being able to read, and the other group have applied themselves to an expert-level problem and developed a solution that works to the benefit of humanity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 January, 2021, 03:17:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:02:58 PM
Now: if there had been a planned BLM protest that day, I've no doubt we'd have seen a much stronger police presence ...

I reckon there was a huge police presence, they were just wearing their nice red hats instead of their blue work hats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:32:53 PM
Yeah - I don't think these are off-duty cops:

(https://i.imgur.com/Shj5kGm.png)


(Amusingly, once the rebels-without-a-clue gained access to the building, they behaved as if they were in a tour group - walking along the roped off paths and admiring the paintings. Then stealing some things.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 04:00:05 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:15:01 PM


The idea that anyone who uses a particular phrase is incapable of rational thought is arrogant.


Yes it is, which is why I didn't say that. Indeed, by suggesting that a person's own mind is perfectly capable of seeing through such standard rhetorical devices, I was suggesting the exact opposite of that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 04:29:08 PM
Riddle me this...

(https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/110-prop-narcotic-k9-30-mg-pills_1_08923bfcd6abda53c7d53e66e5089ccc.jpg)


Sure, you got me: the think you intimated wasn't really the thing you intimated at all. Uh-huh, sure, ya got me etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 05:04:59 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 02:56:21 PM

All I said was think about it, not believe. Beliefs evolve over time as more information comes to light. We none of us believe the same thing - and God help the rest of the universe if we ever do - which I think is great.

What I meant was really what you said, to not be afraid of thinking about something just because somebody's nailed a thought-stopper to it. To think about something doesn't mean to accept it but to not think about something does mean to accept it as either true or false.

I wasn't having a go or anything, I'm just fascinated by the ubiquity of labels and how they guide us both physically and mentally, and how they can be weaponized and spread like linguistic viruses.

No, I know you weren't having a go or anything like that.  I just don't like the idea that people who don't agree with conspiracy theories haven't thought about them - on this board, in particular, the people who argue against the 'alternative theories' have looked long and hard at the evidence before presenting their counter-arguments.  I've learned a lot from them. 

I used the tin-foil hat thing jokingly.  I know not all conspiracy theorists wear tin-foil hats.  As for the label  conspiracy theorist - well, if someone has a theory about a conspiracy (conspiracies like Watergate were discovered through incontrovertible evidence, and therefore can't really be classed as theories), then it's hard to see them as anything else.  There may be negative connotations connected to the name, but what can you do?  You yourself label other boarders 'statists' fairly often, and this has negative connotations for you. (Personally, I'm not a statist, but nor do I subscribe to your vision of a stateless society.)

As for 'just asking questions' - fair enough, but once it strays into devil's advocate territory, then I start wondering what the point is.  I think it's essential to see the opposite point of view and discuss it, but once someone starts adopting that viewpoint as if it's their own purely for the sake of causing heated argument, then I see them as just as disingenuous as a person puts aside their own values to tow the party line.  Not that I'm accusing you specifically of that or anything, Sharky, I'm just putting forward my own view of the distinction between seeing both sides of an argument and belligerent devil's advocacy.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 05:12:15 PM

Well, good for me. Do I get a gold star for "getting you"?

My point is that thought-stoppers are nailed to loads of ideas and we must beware of them - not only of falling for them but of using them ourselves. Which is not easy, because as soon as that camel's nose is in the true Scotsman's tent the straw man will have no choice but to slide the red herring down the slippery slope of sixty million obviously correct Frenchmen until our subjects go around in ever decreasing circles, finally disappearing up their own predicates.

And that would be bad, man.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 05:14:43 PM
Not all ideas are created equal and viewpoints don't require equal billing. This is something society—and especially news organisations—frequently fail to get their heads around. Why Toby Young is always on the TV, spouting his anti-lockdown garbage is beyond me. Young vs Dunt gives each the same amount of time, when the UK is overwhelmingly in favour of lockdown. But it's the same everywhere. Doing something on climate change? Then get in someone from the anti brigade. Only if you were doing that properly, you'd have 99 vs 1, not 1 vs 1.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 05:19:46 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WKy1bn9KpAw/UtyxU9E5sEI/AAAAAAAADos/fmDDCmQbxsI/s1600/goalposts.jpg)

We've been here before, Shark. You made a statement about the use of the term "conspiracy theorist" - that using that term made the user somehow lacking in thought*. You said that. Now that you're confronted on that specifically, you've shifted to talking about generalities and denying that you made the point you made**.

And around and around in circles we go like some demented circus act.

* You called it a "thought-stopper label".
** Except you'll respond that this isn't what you're doing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 07 January, 2021, 05:29:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 05:14:43 PM
Doing something on climate change? Then get in someone from the anti brigade. Only if you were doing that properly, you'd have 99 vs 1, not 1 vs 1.

Often not even equivalent in expertise, either — see the various Qualified Climate Scientist vs Nigel Lawson discussions where both parties are given equal time and their opinions equal weight by the interviewer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 05:33:28 PM

Fair points all, JBC.

I know I get a little Devil's Advocatey from time to time (though I hope not belligerently) and yes, I absolutely do call people statists. I don't mean it as an insult, although any label by its very nature can be construed that way, but as a kind of signpost. In my experience, most people I've met believe in the state without really knowing they believe in it, without question. When I call someone a statist it's simply to highlight the fact that statism is just one option.

However, I do try not to apply hasty generalisations as a rule and have knowingly broken that rule in calling people statists. Perhaps I should stop doing this, or amend my usage. I'll give it some thought.

I can only say that the things I believe are not arbitrary (at least, I don't think they are) and, although I may sometimes argue my corner with some determination, it is never my intention to cause ill will - though I often seem to manage it with alarming ease; maybe it's my superpower - The Amazing Annoyarizer.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 05:58:59 PM

Funt, the term "conspiracy theorist" can and is used as a thought-stopper. It has nothing to do with the intelligence of the "user," but, yes, it can lead to a lack of thought - that is the purpose of the label "conspiracy theorist" when used in an ad hominem context.

Pol: "You can't believe her, she's a conspiracy theorist."

Vot: "Sounds reasonable."

Pol: "Excellent."

So yes, logical fallacies like this can short-circuit thought, pulling off the age-old sophists' trick of making bad arguments look good and good arguments look bad.


Pol: "You can't believe her, she's a conspiracy theorist."

Vot: "Maybe so, but what does her evidence say?"

Pol: "Damn!"


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 06:02:23 PM
Pol: "You can't believe her, she's a conspiracy theorist."

Vot: "Maybe so, but what does her evidence say?"

Pol: "She's claiming someone has an antifa tattoo, but it's actually from a videogame!"

Vot: "Oh."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 January, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 07 January, 2021, 05:29:27 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 January, 2021, 05:14:43 PM
Doing something on climate change? Then get in someone from the anti brigade. Only if you were doing that properly, you'd have 99 vs 1, not 1 vs 1.

Often not even equivalent in expertise, either — see the various Qualified Climate Scientist vs Nigel Lawson discussions where both parties are given equal time and their opinions equal weight by the interviewer.

I reckon this is to give the likes of the BBC the veneer of impartiality when really they're just giving their freinds and/or paymasters an exaggerated platform.

It's not always two opposing views being made to look equally valid. Both sides are just as bad is commonly trotted out, especially here in Northern Ireland. There are currently Republicans (the American kind) trying to claim the Democrats are equally responsible for their shitemare of a country. I'm not trying to say it's either polar or binary or judge either side as the goodies or baddies, but one side is definitely worse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 07 January, 2021, 06:11:42 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 05:58:59 PM

Pol (with great hair, big muscles, a tight butt, a noticeable bulge in his pants and a winning smile): "You can't believe her, she's a conspiracy theorist."

Vot (with big boobs, long blonde hair, longer legs and an hourglass figure): "Sounds reasonable."

Pol (with great hair, big muscles, a tight butt, a noticeable bulge in his pants and a winning smile): "Excellent."


FTFY, your Strawpeople need to be sexier
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 06:15:24 PM
But Qanon is a conspiracy theory, and people with 'Q' on their shirts stormed the Capitol Building, and then we can say "The Capitol Building was stormed by conspiracy theorists".

Would you have us say "The Capitol Building was stormed by people who have theories that are just as valid as anyone else's and deserve to be discussed on an equal footing"?

Because, you know those folk believe that Trump is the messiah sent to deliver them from demon-worshipers, right? I'm not sure how you un-pack that into "those guys deserve a fair hearing - stop labeling them!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 06:23:05 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 05:33:28 PM

Fair points all, JBC.

I know I get a little Devil's Advocatey from time to time (though I hope not belligerently) and yes, I absolutely do call people statists. I don't mean it as an insult, although any label by its very nature can be construed that way, but as a kind of signpost. In my experience, most people I've met believe in the state without really knowing they believe in it, without question. When I call someone a statist it's simply to highlight the fact that statism is just one option.

Fair enough, but if you're going to label other people to highlight that their view is only one option, as is your absolute right, people are going to going label you too for the same reason.

I think I'm quoting you directly in saying on this board 'you're all statists and I'm not' - for one thing, I'm not either, and for another, I think most people who have argued against you on that topic in this forum have proven that they've given plenty of thought to their stance, and have more than enough intelligence to see other points of view.

I also agree that an argument is not balanced simply by having two people with opposing theories - the theory with better supporting evidence wins it for me, every time.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 06:35:03 PM

I would say that as soon as people start storming things the time for discussing rights and wrongs grows short.

I think you may be looking at what I'm saying from the wrong perspective. You seem to think I mean that every conspiracy theory must be considered equally valid, like 'every child gets a trophy,' which is poppycock. What I'm actually saying is that just because something is labelled as a conspiracy theory that doesn't automatically mean it's rubbish any more than automatically meaning it's unquestionable.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 07:02:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 06:35:03 PM

I would say that as soon as people start storming things the time for discussing rights and wrongs grows short.

I think you may be looking at what I'm saying from the wrong perspective. You seem to think I mean that every conspiracy theory must be considered equally valid, like 'every child gets a trophy,' which is poppycock. What I'm actually saying is that just because something is labelled as a conspiracy theory that doesn't automatically mean it's rubbish any more than automatically meaning it's unquestionable.

My last paragraph wasn't directed at you - sorry, should have made that clear. I was more thinking about what other boarders were saying about discussion panels bringing on vacuous mouthpieces to argue with rational and well-informed types in the name of balance. Sometimes, as you rightly say, two arguments are not equally meritorious.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 07:08:12 PM

I didn't think it was, JBC - you are a proper gent.

I am trying to tone it down from past rabidities - how am I doing? :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 07:11:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 07:08:12 PM

I didn't think it was, JBC - you are a proper gent.

I am trying to tone it down from past rabidities - how am I doing? :D

I did notice - fair play :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 07:26:36 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
"Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

Coming full circle, then: I agree with you that labeling something doesn't necessarily make it the thing you're labeling it. Really, this is regardless of label.

But I still disagree that the labels you list are "just a thought-stopper". They could be, depending on context.

On balance, by the time something has earned the sobriquet of "conspiracy theory", then (again, on balance), it's probably bullshit. We could speak to cases, but...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 07:41:00 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 07:26:36 PM


But I still disagree that the labels you list are "just a thought-stopper". They could be, depending on context.


The context was a question about whether thinking about a certain subject was tin-foil-hattery (later amended to wrong). My position was, in this instance, that the (derogatory) label attached to such thinking was irrelevant, 'just a thought-stopper' used by lazy rhetoricicians (?) to distract the less thoughtful. In this intended context, I believe calling these labels "just thought-stoppers" is justified.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 08:15:22 PM
I see how you were applying your thinking in context for the particular term "tin-foil-hattery". I don't agree with your general expansion to the other terms. I also don't see how it's a derogatory term. I see it as descriptive.

It's generally understood that the fictional person wearing the tin foil hat is not at home to reason, but rather a credulous individual willing to believe information that excites them, regardless of things like scientific method or peer-reviewed references, or easy to grasp common sense structures like Occam's terribly sharp thingy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 08:32:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 07:41:00 PM

The context was a question about whether thinking about a certain subject was tin-foil-hattery (later amended to wrong)
[/quote]

I may be getting crossed wires here, but the concept I amended from 'tin-foil-hattish' to 'wrong' was not the act of thinking about a certain subject - it was adopting the belief that an idea was true despite all credible evidence showing that it isn't.  In fact, I believe I said it was necessary to examine opposing views.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:05:00 PM

I think that this can be expanded to other terms if the context remains intact. If, say, Paul Merton calls someone a "conspiracy theorist" on Have I Got News For You then we can all have a good laugh but if Jeremy Paxman does it on Newsnight it's taken far more seriously, in a negative way. It shouldn't matter whether Merton or Paxman uses the label, it's the information that's important - if that information makes sense, fine - integrate it. If it doesn't, then that's fine too - file it away under "probably wrong.".

I think I noted earlier that most labels can be applied in a derogatory way. Tin-foil-hattery can just as easily be used in a comedic context, a mental health context, even a loving context - but it seems to me that such labels are widely regarded as negative and derogatory.

I think you hit the nail on the head describing the tin-foil-hat wearer as fictional. It's a stereotype, one of countless others from history (Commies, Gooks, Huns, Frogs, Kerrymen, immigrants, asylum seekers, etc., etc., etc.) designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations.

And yeah - Occam's Razor is a terribly useful thingy but should never be put aside in favour of Occam's Scythe.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 09:10:49 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:05:00 PM
designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations

FTFM (Fixed That For Me)

I don't think describing someone who's deluded as deluded is dehumanizing, rather than just descriptive. Sometimes it's helpful to be able to shorthand complex ideas, so that they're more easily transmittable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 09:15:22 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:05:00 PM
I think you hit the nail on the head describing the tin-foil-hat wearer as fictional. It's a stereotype, one of countless others from history (Commies, Gooks, Huns, Frogs, Kerrymen, immigrants, asylum seekers, etc., etc., etc.) designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations.


I'd argue that the only one there that fits the simile is Commie - The tin-foil-hat thing is about a person's ideas and beliefs, not their race or nationality.  There are many that would call me a snowflake or cuck for my liberal ideology - whereas I don't like the alt-right (their own label) culture that has come up with these anti-liberal insults, I don't see them as being in any way similar to a xenophobe calling me a Paddy or a Mick (though it was generally a Brit, growing up with an English mother in 80s Ireland).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 09:22:26 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM
Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

Getting away from linguistic semantics and back to the question - I've noticed as the day has moved along that you're not alone in your thinking - with Biden repeating the point that BLM protesters were treated very differently.

There's a lot of evidence coming out now that, even ignoring the lack of readiness (itself probably swayed by the make up of the expected crowd), the way the rioters were treated when the Capital was re-secured speaks to a certain level of camaraderie between security staff and rioters.  Some had the doors held open for them as they were allowed to leave - rather than be arrested.

Certainly, it's complicated, though. Some police obviously in fear for their own safety. This video is chilling (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2021/jan/07/pro-trump-mob-chases-lone-black-police-officer-up-stairs-in-capitol-video). (Another bit of uncomfortable race-obvious viewing.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 09:26:54 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 09:22:26 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM
Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

Getting away from linguistic semantics and back to the question - I've noticed as the day has moved along that you're not alone in your thinking - with Biden repeating the point that BLM protesters were treated very differently.

There's a lot of evidence coming out now that, even ignoring the lack of readiness (itself probably swayed by the make up of the expected crowd), the way the rioters were treated when the Capital was re-secured speaks to a certain level of camaraderie between security staff and rioters.  Some had the doors held open for them as they were allowed to leave - rather than be arrested.

Certainly, it's complicated, though. Some police obviously in fear for their own safety. This video is chilling (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2021/jan/07/pro-trump-mob-chases-lone-black-police-officer-up-stairs-in-capitol-video). (Another bit of uncomfortable race-obvious viewing.)

Oh yeah, I'd heard about that video, but hadn't seen it till now - it is fairly terrifying.  I'm seeing more and more comments (why can't I stop reading them?) along the lines of 'Oh, so it's ok when the BLM protestors burn buildings and loot shops'?  No, you binary-minded oafs, it isn't, and this isn't alright either. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:33:57 PM

JBC - I simply used your statement as a starting point for a discussion about labels which can deter thinking - I mentioned your amendment to acknowledge the fact that the point I was trying to make wasn't the point you were trying to make.

I agree, generally speaking, that to believe in something like the flat earth in spite of all the evidence is perverse but I don't think it's particularly dangerous or worth wasting anger on (not that I'm saying you do). File it away under "probably wrong" and don't lose any sleep over it but also don't be afraid to take the arguments seriously until they've been examined and evaluated (not that I'm saying you don't). After all, one never knows when studying a "wrong" idea will provide deeper understanding of the "right" idea or lead to a new idea altogether.

Which is why I agree with you that it's necessary to examine as many views as possible.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 09:46:23 PM
 
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:33:57 PMand don't lose any sleep over it



We're in agreement, except for this point.  When ideas that are probably wrong start causing real world harm, then I genuinely do lose sleep - again, none of these are directed at you, but I find it deeply disturbing that lives have already been lost - and that the USA could be headed for civil war - because people believe the almost-certainly-wrong idea that the election was fraudulent. It negatively affects my state of mind too when millions of people are dying because of the very-probably-wrong idea that the pandemic either doesn't exist or is harmless, or that future generations could live in a devastated wasteland because not enough believe the almost-definitely true idea that we are not treating the planet properly.  So you'll forgive me if can't help losing sleep over such worries.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 09:59:06 PM

JBC (Pt II), I don't think there is any difference between social and racial stereotypes. They're both like cheap pies, filled with a few standard ingredients, topped off with an unattractive crust, and then half-baked.

In my view, stereotypes of any kind can only be of minimal use as they conflate complex human beings and complex human notions into a palatable and easily digestible mush. One can never understand a cow by studying a steak and kidney pie.

Damn.

Now I've gone and got me the munchies...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 07 January, 2021, 10:08:09 PM

JBC (Pt III), sorry - I have no right to tell you what to lose sleep over and what not to.

I meant no disrespect - I guess I was just projecting the fact that I don't lose any sleep over these things. I do, of course, lose sleep over other things.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 10:38:28 PM
No bother at all, I didn't take offence - was just stating my own view.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 08 January, 2021, 02:56:02 PM
A theory about a conspiracy to concoct conspiracty theories for political aims https://blog.usejournal.com/qanon-is-propaganda-and-we-know-whos-responsible-faa133fb6acd

Well worth a read if you're interested in some back ground on QAnon and some of the people promoting/distributing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2021, 03:29:04 PM
Thanks, sintec. Fascinating article. My favorite part so far is:

(https://miro.medium.com/max/475/1*prdQasKfYCix6AC3TjzVrQ.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 08 January, 2021, 04:08:46 PM
I feel like it should come with a health warning: this could terrifying the living shit out of you!

:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 08 January, 2021, 11:32:46 PM
Ways to change the world (s06e21) - Timothy Snyder (https://www.channel4.com/news/series-6-episode-21-timothy-snyder)

Fascinating interview by Krishnan Guru-Murthy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 January, 2021, 05:53:33 AM
I already knew that Russel Brand was a fast-talking moron that's always trying to punch above his intellect, but I was still shaking my head at his response to Trump's attempted fascist coup-de-mob.

In his video (Capitol Hill - Who Is To Blame? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orad8gIfCiY)) he spends much of the running time making the stupendously dull, moronic and provably false point that (paraphrasing) "it doesn't make any difference who you elect - they're all as bad as each other", thus blaming everything on ... the system.

In telling us it's not a perfect system (neatly rebutting a claim made by ... nobody, ever), he steps neatly over Voltaire's grave (having pissed on it, probably) and tells us that nobody in the USA will see any change in the quality of their lives regardless of who is president.

So, the fact that Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act has "reduced the number of uninsured people to historically low levels and helped more people access health care services, especially low-income people and people of color" doesn't matter to Mr. Brand. Facts are dull compared to feelings, and it's all or nothing for him, as he sits enjoying his over-privileged lifestyle and acting as if he's some kind of wise guru. What a twat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 January, 2021, 10:36:18 AM
I remember a brief period when he ended up on Question Time and also interviewed a bunch of politicians for his YouTube channel. It felt like a car crash, showing him up as a kind of vacuous Wilf Self — rich in vocabulary but short on substance. That hasn't changed. And right now, "but both sides" or "they're all as bad as each other" are staggeringly bad takes. Even Tories are trying to row back from that, now they've seen Trump's legacy is in tatters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 10 January, 2021, 05:57:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 January, 2021, 05:53:33 AMSo, the fact that Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act has "reduced the number of uninsured people to historically low levels and helped more people access health care services, especially low-income people and people of color" doesn't matter to Mr. Brand. Facts are dull compared to feelings, and it's all or nothing for him, as he sits enjoying his over-privileged lifestyle and acting as if he's some kind of wise guru. What a twat.

Most people knew he was a twat when he cold-called Manuel to tell him what he'd done to his grand-daughter's bottom.

I confess I lost track of Brand after he started growing the Osama Bin laden beard (at least 2 years before the lockdown) but I do know that Brand has long-posited (since at least the 2015 General Election) to his primary audience of 13 year-old girls that systemic change through voting would be unlikely given the limited options presented by the two-party setup, but the difference for the disabled and people reliant on the NHS if a party with a mandate to fund the NHS was to take power would be significant and potentially life-changing.  And then he endorsed the Greens.
I know he's a quixotic figure, but it seems you and he are actually of a similar mind in this and likely many other matters, even if he perhaps doesn't explain it to your satisfaction in that particular video because of his rambling demeanor.
Another video which covers much the same subject matter as Brand's - though with significantly more coherence - may be found HERE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4G7asMHqZ4&t=1s), and though it is now several months old, it is specifically about American fascists and you will note the author's pinned comment.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 January, 2021, 08:03:37 PM
I've been feeling some sympathy for some of the Capitol rioters. Yes, they're fascist boot boys - but a lot of them are working class stooges that have been set on this path by the manipulations of people who didn't take part in the riot and get to continue with their lives unmolested.

---

I expect Brand and I would agree on quite a lot - but I was frustrated that he seemed to see an attempted fascist putsch as a sort of "ho hum - same difference" event rather than a dangerous crossroads. At least, that's what I got from his video.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 10 January, 2021, 08:34:41 PM

It was ever thus.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 10 January, 2021, 10:18:19 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 January, 2021, 08:03:37 PM
I've been feeling some sympathy for some of the Capitol rioters. Yes, they're fascist boot boys - but a lot of them are working class stooges that have been set on this path by the manipulations of people who didn't take part in the riot and get to continue with their lives unmolested.

---

I expect Brand and I would agree on quite a lot - but I was frustrated that he seemed to see an attempted fascist putsch as a sort of "ho hum - same difference" event rather than a dangerous crossroads. At least, that's what I got from his video.

His 'woss the point in voting when naffink changes' schtick of a few years ago got on my tits something rotten.  Those who listen to Brand and don't vote: Young, liberal and progressive.  Those who don't listen to him, and vote: Tory and Ukip fans. 2020: Labour all but disappears and the Tories become a Ukip tribute act.  I'm not saying it's ALL the fault of hunky Russ (45), but he could have done with shutting his trap for a while back then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2021, 04:01:29 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 07 January, 2021, 03:17:37 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2021, 03:02:58 PM
Now: if there had been a planned BLM protest that day, I've no doubt we'd have seen a much stronger police presence ...

I reckon there was a huge police presence, they were just wearing their nice red hats instead of their blue work hats.

Just read (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-police-investigation/off-duty-police-firefighters-under-investigation-in-connection-with-u-s-capitol-riot-idUSKBN29F0KH) that there were off-duty police and fire fighters at the event, some of whom have since been placed on administrative leave.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 11 January, 2021, 12:14:36 PM
Seeing them being rounded up at Airports, and taking it very badly that they are seen as Domestic Terrorists, is really something beautiful. The video of a man proclaiming "they are going to ruin my life" sums up these arseholes perfectly. No personal responsibility, always somebody else's fault and all the better for them if that person is a different colour.

The Right-Wing media response has been a thing of grotesque Fukery. Again, everybody else to blame, not Trump or his inciting, not those "Patriots" who desecrated their own Democracy and actually murdered a Police Officer. No Sir. Antifa, BLM, Soros, False Flags...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 January, 2021, 12:59:37 PM
The guy, face down on an airport floor, screaming that the cops were treating him "like a black man" sums his ilk up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2021, 12:59:56 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 10 January, 2021, 10:18:19 PMHis 'woss the point in voting when naffink changes' schtick of a few years ago got on my tits something rotten.  Those who listen to Brand and don't vote: Young, liberal and progressive.  Those who don't listen to him, and vote: Tory and Ukip fans. 2020: Labour all but disappears and the Tories become a Ukip tribute act.

I fear you might be insulting the agency of the average human in suggesting they are mere thralls to the impeccably-reasoned arguments of Sir Russell Brand QC, but as the forum's democratically-elected left unity candidate and wallet inspector 1st class, I feel the need to point out that if you're the type who will only vote if the guy who divorced Katy Perry via text message says you should, you were never going to vote.

Brand has a massive social media presence and he uses it to promote left-wing ideas to an audience conditioned to be apolitical, and it seems foolish to assume that that same audience, faced with everyday concerns, would refute electoralism entirely on the say-so of a celebrity anarchist.  Brand is essentially encouraging critical thinking to teenagers and white van drivers, and their material conditions and experiences will decide whether or not they become politically-engaged and/or active after that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 January, 2021, 01:05:17 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2021, 12:59:56 PMBrand is essentially encouraging critical thinking to teenagers and white van drivers, and their material conditions and experiences will decide whether or not they become politically-engaged and/or active after that.

Man's a clever wally, but essentially this ^^^^.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2021, 02:00:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 11 January, 2021, 12:59:56 PMif you're the type who will only vote if the guy who divorced Katy Perry via text message says you should, you were never going to vote.



Fair point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2021, 03:23:46 PM
Brand attended a Narcotics Anonymous meeting that my friend goes to in Manchester - he didn't tell me what was said (they call it anonymous for a reason) but said he was very humble and genuine, really likeable - and this guy's a cynical manc with zero-tolerance for twats and phoneys. Shame his public persona is so fucking aggravating
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 11 January, 2021, 03:39:17 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 11 January, 2021, 12:59:37 PM
The guy, face down on an airport floor, screaming that the cops were treating him "like a black man" sums his ilk up.

Disgusting people.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2021, 04:17:26 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 11 January, 2021, 03:23:46 PM
Brand attended a Narcotics Anonymous meeting that my friend goes to in Manchester - he didn't tell me what was said (they call it anonymous for a reason) but said he was very humble and genuine, really likeable - and this guy's a cynical manc with zero-tolerance for twats and phoneys. Shame his public persona is so fucking aggravating

He visited the prison in Leicester where my brother works.  My brother didn't meet him but the inmates seemed to get on with him. I saw him live once, before all the political stuff - he was a very good performer.  In true Irish style, the audio equipment failed for a few minutes, but he handled it very deftly - mainly by talking very loudly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2021, 05:41:28 PM
Domestic neo-nazi terrorists getting deplatformed, accidently doxxed and slapped on a no-flight restriction is 'chefs kiss' so good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 January, 2021, 08:23:12 PM
Parler - haven for those who believe in 'free speech' (generally far-right conspiracy theories, racism, death threats) has been pulled down - but before it went a bunch of hacktivists (and almost certainly also the FBI, CIA and other usual suspects) have managed to pull 99% of content from the site such as photos and videos with full date, time and location - down to degrees, minutes and seconds.  It's believed this is how the no-fly orders got put in to place so quickly at US airports...

details here (https://gizmodo.com/every-deleted-parler-post-many-with-users-location-dat-1846032466).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2021, 09:04:09 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 07 January, 2021, 01:11:58 PM
Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

And I keep coming back to this question as new information comes out. Today, the BBC's live coverage has a piece (https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-55617421?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=5ffc5443e81bcc02ea0f74ab%26Ex-Capitol%20police%20chief%20accuses%20officials%20of%20hindering%20response%262021-01-11T15%3A17%3A53.323Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:f71287cc-1c55-49e7-bdf8-91c45074be69&pinned_post_asset_id=5ffc5443e81bcc02ea0f74ab&pinned_post_type=share) about the (now former) Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund - he said that security officials hindered efforts to call in the National Guard, and that his request to have them on standby was denied by two superiors.

---

Looks like the inauguration will either be deserted (as requested by DC Mayor Muriel Bowser) or one site of a country-wide armed insurrection (as feared by the FBI) - the much touted Boogaloo beloved of a certain stripe of gun fetishist (and other fascists).

---

The black cop who led the white rioters up the stairs (the aptly named Eugene Goodman (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55623752)) is being cited as a hero for leading them away from the open Senate chamber, by repeatedly making himself the target.

---

And I know we're all different sizes, but this Lilliput photo is just funny:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2021/1/11/faf630f2-ab2b-430d-b723-4888cb48ca0e.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2021, 09:39:10 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2021, 09:04:09 PM

Looks like the inauguration will either be deserted (as requested by DC Mayor Muriel Bowser) or one site of a country-wide armed insurrection (as feared by the FBI) - the much touted Boogaloo beloved of a certain stripe of gun fetishist (and other fascists).


Well that is really, really scary.  I remember four years ago, feeling lots of anxiety about the future of the world - my fears were allayed somewhat by reading a bit more about it.  Congress was still there.  Moderate Republicans still existed.  He didn't have complete authority, and we might just get through it.  Four years later, we've got armed fucking fascist uprisings in America, full of racists who treat his word as divine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2021, 09:56:03 PM
I would say, yes, it is really scary - because it's a rise in fascism, and these disparate groups are all working under the MAGA banner, have their own version of reality and are not opposed to the violent overthrow of - well, anyone that Trump labels as an enemy.

On the other hand, there is plenty to be hopeful about - the majority of the politicians here decry the fascism and it seems like the military are on the side of democracy. Once Biden is in place, he can enact policies which make life easier for working class Americans, which in turn will turn down the dial on the febrile atmosphere.

As soon as Trump is out of the White House, he no longer has federal agents (aka secret police) to do his bidding. I suppose then the wider issue is why there are so many federal agents available to any president - or to broaden it out further: why any president is given so many powers that (it is now apparent) are so easily abused.

I've been reading and watching a lot of musings on this particular rise in fascism, and one of the key points that was made is that fascism arises out of a liberal democracy. It's the very liberalism that we desire that leads to a lax approach to dissent and allows for a rise like this one: in which a demagogue becomes a King or Emperor for his adherents.

Hopefully, this will be a near miss - the high water mark that warns us not to be complacent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 11 January, 2021, 10:11:48 PM

Plato thought that democracy inevitably leads to tyranny. Then again, he also thought aristocracy was the ideal.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2021, 10:17:57 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2021, 09:56:03 PM

Hopefully, this will be a near miss - the high water mark that warns us not to be complacent.

Fingers crossed.  A lot of what I'd thought were laws were simply traditions; ones that depended on normal people taking a bit of responsibility and with the assumption that some psychotic Caesar-with-a-dash-of-Caligula wouldn't start riding roughshod over everything and enjoying the mayhem in his wake.  I used to wonder how ancient Rome could go from a democracy to a dictatorship with the people's blessing, but it's a whole lot clearer to me now.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 January, 2021, 11:09:29 PM
On the bright side, the tendrils of US power and influence (which, let's face it, where usually abused) across the world have weakened considerably over the past four years.  In similar ways to the power and influence of the UK has, though for different reasons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 12 January, 2021, 12:08:48 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 11 January, 2021, 11:09:29 PM
On the bright side, the tendrils of US power and influence (which, let's face it, where usually abused) across the world have weakened considerably over the past four years.  In similar ways to the power and influence of the UK has, though for different reasons.

The UK's power and influence? The illusion of such resulted in the mess in which we find ourselves and the reasons are broadly similar, though not as extreme, as how the States got into a state. Succumbing to right-wing populism and weakening ties with hard won, but well established allies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 12 January, 2021, 09:41:33 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 11 January, 2021, 05:41:28 PM
Domestic neo-nazi terrorists getting deplatformed, accidently doxxed and slapped on a no-flight restriction is 'chefs kiss' so good.

It is bloody brilliant.

Those who lob about snowflake as an insult are turning out to be the biggest snowflakes of all, especailly with calls for unity. Seriously? After the last four years of this horrible Presidency. The Democrats need to push for punishment of all those involved, including any member of the Republican party who questioned Bidens win.

Actions have consequences as a lot of them are about to find out, and that applies to the Politicians as well as the MAGA mob. The party of personal responsibility might be about to be put under serious criminal investigation for the actions of some of their most senior members, and with the FBI now tracking down people, phones, computers we are most likely going to be even more shocked when the whole truth of this awful affair comes out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 January, 2021, 11:36:40 AM
Lots of danger now. People arguing that democratic norms held firm in the US. They did not. The entire thing was on a knife-edge. A more organised coup attempt may well have succeeded. Trump isn't looking forward to a second term under martial law primarily because he wasn't organised. Things could have been a lot worse, and so Democrats and Republicans alike need to recognise that and ensure those responsible for this mess face consequences.

As for democracy as a whole, the US and UK has discovered that their systems are primarily reliant on good actors. For all the issues of a Thatcher or a Bush, they worked within existing systems and norms. Now, we face people installed through terrible voting systems who are out to destroy such systems and make it harder to take on the executive. That should be a grave worry for anyone who isn't a Republican or a Conservative. But, natch, Labour's now decided yet again that what it really needs to do to win is secure the vote of nationalists, broadly ignore everyone else (because they'll obviously vote Labour!) and still exist under the lunacy that Labour has any chance of a majority (rather than aiming for a future where it leads a progressive coalition).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2021, 01:11:25 PM
QuoteThings could have been a lot worse, and so Democrats and Republicans alike need to recognise that and ensure those responsible for this mess face consequences.

That's something I hadn't really thought of before.  Punishing as many people as possible won't just show that trespassing, breaking and killing are a bad idea - it will also show that trying to turn the US into a fascist dictatorship has consequences too.

Not to say it's any great shakes as a democracy as it is, but you know, it isn't Mussolini-era Italy just yet.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 12 January, 2021, 01:35:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 12 January, 2021, 11:36:40 AM
For all the issues of a Thatcher or a Bush, they worked within existing systems and norms. Now, we face people installed through terrible voting systems who are out to destroy such systems and make it harder to take on the executive.

This is why I am actually quite concerned about Cummings / Farage.  the former has gone quiet but he very publicly departed from Downing Street.  There was no doubt he was going and not coming back and he was making damn sure everyone knew it.  So the question is what is the bar-steward up to?

As for Farage and his new "Reform" party, just consider his track record.  He has pulled UK politics sharply to the right with his Euroscepticism.  He has a track record of outright and dog-whistle racism / discrimination.  He has contributed to the polarisation of political debate in this country.

The devil may well be in the detail but what reform is he actually after?  I mean, we all know that the outrageously antiquated voting system in this country is unfit for purpose.  Tory boundary reforms are simply going to make matters worse, not to mention giving nationalists ammunition with their reduction in Scottish and Welsh seats.  Is he actually offering anything productive though?

Personally I am absolutely disgusted with the performance of politicians in recent years in the UK.  The extent to which the electorate has been exploited for personal political gain (in Cameron's case resoundingly disastrously) is beyond belief.  Considering the depths to which politicians have descended prior to this in our lifetime, their performance is terrifying.

What is most outrageous is the half-wits and charlatans that have now been installed in positions of power not just in politics but across national institutions. :sick:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 January, 2021, 09:26:04 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/TOci3Yl.png)

Well - typical behavior from those European wallahs! I shall write an angry letter to the Times - you see if I don't. Johnny Foreigner can't bally well stop a good old-fashioned English British sarnie! We didn't fight the war so that blah blah Blitz spirit etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 12 January, 2021, 09:46:42 PM
One of the Capitol rioters must have been reading our politics thread:

(https://i.imgur.com/YhpzKn4.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2021, 01:44:34 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 12 January, 2021, 09:26:04 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/TOci3Yl.png)

Well - typical behavior from those European wallahs! I shall write an angry letter to the Times - you see if I don't. Johnny Foreigner can't bally well stop a good old-fashioned English British sarnie! We didn't fight the war so that blah blah Blitz spirit etc.

I think I've just spotted some tired chickens on their way home. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2021, 11:52:38 PM
A second impeachment. He continues to win bigly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 January, 2021, 12:08:21 AM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 13 January, 2021, 11:52:38 PM
A second impeachment. He continues to win bigly.

Half of all US Presidential Impeachments have happened in the last two years. Trump's presidency was unprecedented, and he should have been unpresidented.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Bolt-01 on 14 January, 2021, 08:25:05 AM
Isn't one of the points of 'this' impeachment that they can now stop him from running again? I can see that as being a very desirable thing for both sides of the house.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 09:29:21 AM
Reading this morning that he is refusing to pay Rudy Giuliani's Legal Fees.  :lol:

Truly, the worst people.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 09:35:59 AM
Teddy Spaghetti aka Vox Day aka Theodore Beale still high on copium. If THE PLAN isnt happening,you need to trust harder.  :lol:

https://archive.fo/G8SWH (https://archive.fo/G8SWH)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 09:48:13 AM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 14 January, 2021, 08:25:05 AM
Isn't one of the points of 'this' impeachment that they can now stop him from running again? I can see that as being a very desirable thing for both sides of the house.

There were reportedly a significant number of Republicans who wanted to vote for impeachment, but didn't for fear of their lives and those of their families. That's only likely to get worse between now and any vote on conviction... I don't think there's a chance in hell Trump will get convicted, because he's so thoroughly intimidated so many Republican politicians.

Also, they have no spines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 09:54:22 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 09:35:59 AM
Teddy Spaghetti aka Vox Day aka Theodore Beale still high on copium. If THE PLAN isnt happening,you need to trust harder.  :lol:

https://archive.fo/G8SWH (https://archive.fo/G8SWH)

Christ. Literally mentally ill.

I've had to mute a few relatives on Facebook because they believe this stuff. Strangely, every time i go down the rabbit hole of concern over vaccines, coups, multi-culturism ( wink, wink ) etc. it nearly always leads back to far right grifters and their anti-semitism, racism and hatred.

One cousin is forever calling me a sheep, whilst posting from the likes of OANN, Newsmax and fringe arseholes like Grand Torino on FB. Challenge him, and he laughs, and says I've been brainwashed by the Mainstream Media, and them Doctors and Scientists with their facts, figures and Degrees.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 10:02:04 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 09:48:13 AM
Quote from: Bolt-01 on 14 January, 2021, 08:25:05 AM
Isn't one of the points of 'this' impeachment that they can now stop him from running again? I can see that as being a very desirable thing for both sides of the house.

There were reportedly a significant number of Republicans who wanted to vote for impeachment, but didn't for fear of their lives and those of their families. That's only likely to get worse between now and any vote on conviction... I don't think there's a chance in hell Trump will get convicted, because he's so thoroughly intimidated so many Republican politicians.

Also, they have no spines.

That a week removed from an attempted Coup, they are trying to quickly gloss over it and downplay it, tells you all you need to know about the Republican party. They made a pact with an utter Devil, and are paying a price. If CNN are right, and there is worse evidence regarding the coup, and even worse footage from inside the Capitol Building still to be made public, those who vote against convicting Trump are literally pissing their good name and standing for a man who has only offered threat and intimidation to them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 10:10:19 AM
Quote from: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 09:54:22 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 09:35:59 AM
Teddy Spaghetti aka Vox Day aka Theodore Beale still high on copium. If THE PLAN isnt happening,you need to trust harder.  :lol:

https://archive.fo/G8SWH (https://archive.fo/G8SWH)

Christ. Literally mentally ill.

I've had to mute a few relatives on Facebook because they believe this stuff. Strangely, every time i go down the rabbit hole of concern over vaccines, coups, multi-culturism ( wink, wink ) etc. it nearly always leads back to far right grifters and their anti-semitism, racism and hatred.

One cousin is forever calling me a sheep, whilst posting from the likes of OANN, Newsmax and fringe arseholes like Grand Torino on FB. Challenge him, and he laughs, and says I've been brainwashed by the Mainstream Media, and them Doctors and Scientists with their facts, figures and Degrees.
Ted is a complete lolcow. Or EL-O-EL cow as he pronounced it. We are talking self described 150 IQ genius,musician,game designer,columnist,martial artist,son of a tax fraud and wannabe cult leader Robert Beale...The lore is practically bottomless.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 10:12:55 AM
Quote from: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 10:02:04 AM
If CNN are right, and there is worse evidence regarding the coup, and even worse footage from inside the Capitol Building still to be made public

What I've seen already — 'protestors' moving through the building with very clear knowledge of the layout,* coupled with reports of far-right Republican members of congress leading multiple tours of people who've been tentatively identified as 'protestors' through the building the day before plus at least one Democrat reporting that the 'panic buttons' had been physically removed from their office... it's hard not to conclude that some groups in that crowd were a lot more organised than just an angry mob.

*I don't mean just looking like they knew where they were going — I mean, video of them discussing which way to go, what lies beyond closed doors, where to go to find a specific person's office. They were in the building, they knew the layout, and, perhaps most alarmingly, they were sufficiently confident that no one was going to arrest or shoot them that they could stand around discussing which way to go next.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 10:17:56 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 10:12:55 AM
Quote from: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 10:02:04 AM
If CNN are right, and there is worse evidence regarding the coup, and even worse footage from inside the Capitol Building still to be made public

What I've seen already — 'protestors' moving through the building with very clear knowledge of the layout,* coupled with reports of far-right Republican members of congress leading multiple tours of people who've been tentatively identified as 'protestors' through the building the day before plus at least one Democrat reporting that the 'panic buttons' had been physically removed from their office... it's hard not to conclude that some groups in that crowd were a lot more organised than just an angry mob.

*I don't mean just looking like they knew where they were going — I mean, video of them discussing which way to go, what lies beyond closed doors, where to go to find a specific person's office. They were in the building, they knew the layout, and, perhaps most alarmingly, they were sufficiently confident that no one was going to arrest or shoot them that they could stand around discussing which way to go next.

Frightening.

If it actually comes to pass, and we see members of Congress arrested over this, perhaps then the Republican Party might start doing the right thing. Won't hold my breath, though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 10:21:30 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 10:10:19 AM
Quote from: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 09:54:22 AM
Quote from: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 09:35:59 AM
Teddy Spaghetti aka Vox Day aka Theodore Beale still high on copium. If THE PLAN isnt happening,you need to trust harder.  :lol:

https://archive.fo/G8SWH (https://archive.fo/G8SWH)

Christ. Literally mentally ill.

I've had to mute a few relatives on Facebook because they believe this stuff. Strangely, every time i go down the rabbit hole of concern over vaccines, coups, multi-culturism ( wink, wink ) etc. it nearly always leads back to far right grifters and their anti-semitism, racism and hatred.

One cousin is forever calling me a sheep, whilst posting from the likes of OANN, Newsmax and fringe arseholes like Grand Torino on FB. Challenge him, and he laughs, and says I've been brainwashed by the Mainstream Media, and them Doctors and Scientists with their facts, figures and Degrees.
Ted is a complete lolcow. Or EL-O-EL cow as he pronounced it. We are talking self described 150 IQ genius,musician,game designer,columnist,martial artist,son of a tax fraud and wannabe cult leader Robert Beale...The lore is practically bottomless.

What an utter arsehole. Quickly perused a few articles, and saw he had a spat with another awful human being, Ethan Van Sciver.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 14 January, 2021, 10:28:47 AM
@Rately He had internet spats with everyone. Last big thing was him and Owen Benjamin getting their fans to sue Patreon foe torturous interference. 😂

If you are interested in the Spaghetti lore,check out his Kiwi Farms thread or r/gammasecretkings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 January, 2021, 12:01:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 10:12:55 AM

*I don't mean just looking like they knew where they were going — I mean, video of them discussing which way to go, what lies beyond closed doors, where to go to find a specific person's office. They were in the building, they knew the layout, and, perhaps most alarmingly, they were sufficiently confident that no one was going to arrest or shoot them that they could stand around discussing which way to go next.

Yeah, I was initially dismissive of this - I took a tour of the Capitol building more than 20 years ago, including visiting both chambers, and I still have a reasonably clear idea of the layout, so I imagined it was all pretty common knowledge. But the actual details that have emerged since make for a much more sinister picture.

My only niggle about all this is the perennial false flag issue - it was all remarkably convenient, but just as much for the anti-Trump as the pro-Trump lobby.  It's harder to imagine a plausible scenario where this rabble could have have achieved much more than murdering a bunch of Trump's enemies (not to minimise the human cost) and slightly delaying Biden's certification before the irresistible force of US military stamped it out, than it is to imagine multiple endings where it creates a huge anti-Trump backlash, justification for cracking down on internet freedoms and a Patrician excising of no-longer useful elements of the right in the manner of the Rohm Purge.

I don't think it's going into full-on conspiracy nuttery to wonder if some of the steps along the way might not have been enabled by people with aims opposite to the active participants. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 14 January, 2021, 12:29:56 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 January, 2021, 12:01:27 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2021, 10:12:55 AM

*I don't mean just looking like they knew where they were going — I mean, video of them discussing which way to go, what lies beyond closed doors, where to go to find a specific person's office. They were in the building, they knew the layout, and, perhaps most alarmingly, they were sufficiently confident that no one was going to arrest or shoot them that they could stand around discussing which way to go next.

Yeah, I was initially dismissive of this - I took a tour of the Capitol building more than 20 years ago, including visiting both chambers, and I still have a reasonably clear idea of the layout, so I imagined it was all pretty common knowledge. But the actual details that have emerged since make for a much more sinister picture.

My only niggle about all this is the perennial false flag issue - it was all remarkably convenient, but just as much for the anti-Trump as the pro-Trump lobby.  It's harder to imagine a plausible scenario where this rabble could have have achieved much more than murdering a bunch of Trump's enemies (not to minimise the human cost) and slightly delaying Biden's certification before the irresistible force of US military stamped it out, than it is to imagine multiple endings where it creates a huge anti-Trump backlash, justification for cracking down on internet freedoms and a Patrician excising of no-longer useful elements of the right in the manner of the Rohm Purge.

I don't think it's going into full-on conspiracy nuttery to wonder if some of the steps along the way might not have been enabled by people with aims opposite to the active participants.

On his Podcast, the former Republican Strategist, Rick Wilson, said he would be surprised if the rioters hadn't been coordinated by people with knowledge of the Capitol. He said he had visited the building hundreds of times, and he would struggle to get to some of the parts of the Capitol building that they accessed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 January, 2021, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 January, 2021, 12:01:27 PMMy only niggle about all this is the perennial false flag issue - it was all remarkably convenient, but just as much for the anti-Trump as the pro-Trump lobby.  It's harder to imagine a plausible scenario where this rabble could have have achieved much more than murdering a bunch of Trump's enemies (not to minimise the human cost) and slightly delaying Biden's certification before the irresistible force of US military stamped it out, than it is to imagine multiple endings where it creates a huge anti-Trump backlash, justification for cracking down on internet freedoms and a Patrician excising of no-longer useful elements of the right in the manner of the Rohm Purge.

Not to justify the conspiracy theories or anything - don't want to trigger the Fact-Checker General - but you assume all things being equal, TB, rather than our having a firmly-established media environment in which many people exist in an alternate reality and already believe batshit-crazy things thanks to deliberate conditioning - a huge number of people already believe that antifa dressed in MAGA hats to frame Trump supporters.  Who in the media was going to speak on behalf of The Left if this had turned into a massacre?
After 911, the US public didn't look inward and consider the cost of their training and funding Al Qaeda operatives, they found an enemy at their gates and they embraced hatred for it that endures to this day, and a massacre in the Capitol would have been a gift to American authoritarians, with Republicans speaking fondly of their poor dead colleagues from across the aisle who simply cannot be allowed to have died in vain - these socialists who stormed the Capitol must be stopped.

I'm sure I've mentioned before how US corporations funded a million-strong private army of fascist veterans to march on Washington DC with the intent of removing FDR from office and installing a military dictatorship in America (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot) in the 1930s, and how over time it's been reframed - even on that Wikipedia article - as "a hoax" despite official records of it still existing in presidential and congressional archives.  The capitalist fash of the military-industrial complex has precious few new ideas, just newer methods of execution.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 January, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
All true, but I wasn't really suggesting the left (as if US politics had a left) as having any part to play, more the actions of the usual socialised-capitalism brigade for whom Trump is now a busted flush. How much better that he be condemned by history for a bloody coup attempt in his final weeks than for all those years of fine work making rich folk richer. Then the tools of repression can be sharpened further and business under the other political wing that the oligarchy funds and directs can continue as normal, safe in the knowledge that the threat to the Republic from a lone madman was averted by the robust principles of democracy. Cicero would have had a field day.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 January, 2021, 05:58:26 PM
I often wonder weather Adam Curtis is kicking himself for pitching HYPERNORMALISATION too early, as the prominence of manufactured realities and 'alternative facts' under the Trump administration feels like an inevitable inclusion in that truly mammoth documentary.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 January, 2021, 06:10:37 PM

Aye, I watched the first episode of The Power of Nightmares again not long ago. Same schtick, different crisis.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 January, 2021, 07:27:13 PM
WWN always cheers me up:
(https://i.redd.it/jcmt40xcnib61.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 January, 2021, 08:11:56 PM
It seems like the Properpocalypse is getting started up now after the Fakepocalypse of 2020.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 16 January, 2021, 12:05:06 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 15 January, 2021, 07:27:13 PM
WWN always cheers me up:
(https://i.redd.it/jcmt40xcnib61.jpg)

We will literally have to start eating flags!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 January, 2021, 02:10:17 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 January, 2021, 12:05:06 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 15 January, 2021, 07:27:13 PM
WWN always cheers me up:
(https://i.redd.it/jcmt40xcnib61.jpg)

We will literally have to start eating flegs!

FTFY
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 January, 2021, 10:02:54 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Er9mwEtVgAQJ9bZ?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 January, 2021, 10:29:02 AM
Arsom! I like how feeling certain individual entries need to move down one level* makes me think "...are we the baddies?".


*Cryptids, mainly. Belong above the 'speculation' line and below the 'leaving reality' one. You can speculate on unknown animal life represented in folklore without leaving reality,  surely!  But also 'Govt made diseases' seems a bit high, since I'm sure someone has a budget for that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 18 January, 2021, 10:44:46 AM
I worked with a guy that believe in a Flat Earth and it was amazing in the alternative stuff he believed in. It was weird but it was super "entertaining"*

* Please do not tell our Lizard Overlords I said the earth is not flat
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 18 January, 2021, 10:49:03 AM
Quote from: TordelBack on 18 January, 2021, 10:29:02 AM
*Cryptids, mainly. Belong above the 'speculation' line and below the 'leaving reality' one. You can speculate on unknown animal life represented in folklore without leaving reality,  surely!  But also 'Govt made diseases' seems a bit high, since I'm sure someone has a budget for that.

Ah but your a reasonable sort Tordels, take a few moments to look at any given Cryptid board and you'll find it rotten to the core with Christian fundamentalism, phrenology, and white supremacy.
The good name of theoretical zoology has been tarnished somewhat by, and i'll be somewhat polite here, wankers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 18 January, 2021, 10:51:22 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 18 January, 2021, 10:49:03 AM
... take a few moments to look at any given [TOPIC] board and you'll find it rotten to the core with Christian fundamentalism, phrenology, and white supremacy.

I've generalised your observation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 18 January, 2021, 10:51:48 AM
It is always interesting to note how these conspiracy theories are almost always like against religion and extreme groups.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 18 January, 2021, 11:05:41 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 January, 2021, 02:10:17 AM
Quote from: Rately on 16 January, 2021, 12:05:06 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 15 January, 2021, 07:27:13 PM
WWN always cheers me up:
(https://i.redd.it/jcmt40xcnib61.jpg)

We will literally have to start eating flegs!

FTFY

FS! That was a silly spelling error on my part  :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 18 January, 2021, 11:36:59 AM
This neatly ties in with conspiracies and denying reality. You see, the DUP are throwing their toys out of the pram, because the Irish sea border is making it harder to get deliveries from that wee racist island off our west coast, which is leading to bare shelves in our supermarkets. The aim of this big fuss is to get the Irish sea border removed.

However, and it may shock you to learn this, the DUP don't always act in good faith. A cynical person might suggest they are scare mongering, engaging in a project to cause fear one might say, in an effort to start panic buying like at the start of the pandemic. Then they could point at the empty shelves and demand the Irish sea border for the good of the people who they apparently care about now? Only most people either already have their stockpile from the start of the pandemic and have just been topping it up, or are now unemployed/on 80% wages for 9 months and can't afford to buy £100s worth of groceries on Edwin Poots' say so.

The reality is, Northern Ireland is a net exporter of food. Our main industry is agriculture. Moy park produces something like 2/3rds of all the chicken consumed in GB and Ireland and we could replace all the water in Lough Neagh with milk and we'd still have an excess supply. Anecdotally, their are a few items missing from shelves, but there is still plenty of food to be had, just maybe not as wide a variety.

This is just one of many things that needs to be considered when people talk like reunification is just around the corner. It is not a simple matter of shutting down Stormont and getting some TDs to scooch up the benches in the Dáil. Reunification requires the both governments to dissolve and reform as something entirely new. Essentially an entirely new country needs to be negotiated out. And those negotiations will involve the DUP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2021, 03:36:21 PM
On top of that, you have to remember the DUP is notoriously shite at politics.  They'll boycott negotiations until it's too late and things have progressed without them, then afterwards they'll play the victim.  If they have any plans beyond that, I'll eat my hat.  From my arse.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 January, 2021, 03:42:33 PM
Odd place to keep your hat, but there you go.

---

I really didn't think I'd find myself respecting a political message from Arnold Schwarzenegger, but when he sits down to warn everyone about the dangers of pandering to fascists (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_P-0I6sAck), I've got to give kudos.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 18 January, 2021, 07:36:31 PM
Who owns a hat rack in 2021?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 January, 2021, 08:33:43 PM

Helmet stretchers - a specialist type of milliner.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 January, 2021, 08:37:07 PM
What did you just call me?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JOE SOAP on 19 January, 2021, 12:35:15 AM
The DUPes are bleeding like a stuck pig; they can't be seen engaging in any kid of constructive cross-border talks but the longer they leave discussions entertaining possible Reunification means if/when it comes to actually happening they'll be playing their weakest hand (probably a good thing). The smart play would be to make their deals with Dublin now but instead they'll push Poots out front and hardline themselves into greater irrelevancy.

You would hope the absolute neccessity for an all inclusive long term Zero-COVID strategy, so the island could open up and go about its business, would be the push for de facto Reunification – at least the idea of dumping Partition would then be about survival/common sense and less about triumph over unionism.







Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2021, 07:11:19 PM
Yay - it's President Biden now! And VP Kamala Harris - the first female, black VP in US history.

I'm with Voltaire on this one - it might not be folk's idea of perfection, but it's good in comparison to what we've just suffered under the rule of a wannabe fascist dictator.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 20 January, 2021, 07:18:18 PM
Just a change of wallpaper, the termites are still dug in, we just won't notice them as often now. Which may not be what you want with termites.

However, I was really, really, really sick of that arsenic-treated orange flock pattern, dragged the whole neighbourhood back decades, so it's definitely a change worth celebrating.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 January, 2021, 08:51:14 PM
He'll be invoked like a tangerine phantom every time a journalist asks if there are currently any children in dog cages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2021, 09:08:05 PM
It's funny looking back at the Obama administration nowadays as some kind of 'golden era' of US diplomacy and civil rights but....yeah no.

As a wise old Sharky so often says, 'Same shit, different captain'. Only this time the captain isn't quite such a spoilt bore.

Edit: I should probably say, 4 years ago I would have believed all that about Obama, but I was a dumb kid so 2016 Zac can take a long walk off a short pier.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2021, 10:32:24 PM
I find that 'Same shit, different captain' stuff doesn't really hold water when you hold it up to the real lives being lived by real people who are really the ones that suffer under the real policies.

For real.

Example: Obama opened up access to healthcare for people who had no access to healthcare. Trump shut down access to healthcare as much as he could get away with. Or: Obama didn't enact a deliberate policy to separate migrant children from their families - Trump did. Trump caused the deaths of five people by fomenting a riot.

These are real policy effects on real people - having anyone (not anyone in particular) but anyone come along and say that it doesn't make any difference just projects a shallow, vacuous view of reality. Not wise, at all: the owl is blind, but has the trappings and beliefs of the far-sighted.

You might not like statism, but you can't pretend that it doesn't exist as a framework, and that within that framework there are more or less preferential policies. (Well, you can pretend whatever you like, but I'm sure you get my drift.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 January, 2021, 10:35:32 PM
You beat me to it, Funt, but...

Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 20 January, 2021, 09:08:05 PM'Same shit, different captain'. Only this time the captain isn't quite such a spoilt bore.



Badness is baked into the job of running the US.  But it's not as simple as just not liking the personality of the guy in charge.  Of course Obama wasn't a paragon of virtue, and Biden won't be either - the job forbids it.  But... there are administrations who actively campaign against saving the environment, and those who support it.  There are administrations who don't try to ban all Muslims from entering, and those who don't.  There are presidents who refuse to condemn the KKK, and those who make a black woman their VP.  And there are those who shrug responsibility while hundreds of thousands die, and those who make the pandemic their number 1 priority. 

It won't be perfect.  Biden, for all Trump's rhetoric, is certainly no liberal.  But it's better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 08:01:15 AM
You get the same shit here, with people arguing Blair was no different from the Tories. It's bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 21 January, 2021, 08:46:58 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 08:01:15 AM
You get the same shit here, with people arguing Blair was no different from the Tories. It's bollocks.

Aye. If it wasn't for his horrendous decision re Iraq, the record of the last Labour government is pretty damn good in terms of social reform, NHS funding, in fact huge spending on public services up and down the U.K. . It was definitely going in the right direction.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 09:46:31 AM
That's the thing. Some people can't deal with trends/movement/consensus. There was a lot of chat recently on Twitter about an electoral pact in 2024. Some Labour folks were dead against involving the Lib Dems. Why? One person told me it's because LDs would never agree that "the dream" for the UK is to "end capitalism". First, that isn't the dream of the majority—and even the Greens want a mixed economy! But also, congratulations, Labour fans, because in removing the Lib Dems from the equation, you just lost any hope of leading a coalition at the next GE. (Ironically, Best for Britain polling suggests that with LD support, Labour could even get a majority, which is interesting.)

All of this is even more frustrating when you bother to read manifestos and examine key policy. There is so much overlap between Labour/SNP/LD/Plaid/Green. I'm not saying working together would be simple, but there's plenty on which they could agree—and those things would be a world away from the extremist shitshow we now find ourselves dealing with.

It's depressing. There is a route to getting the Tories out and keeping them out, but it's just not going to happen, because it requires Labour and the Lib Dems to get over themselves, for the Greens to yet again put the good of the country before their own ability to remain solvent, the SNP to pause (but not abandon) indy ambitions, and also for Labour to get behind PR for the Commons. If that could all happen, we'd end up with a shift in electoral support for all parties, but probably (judging by polling/elections since the 1970s) a lot of Labour-led coalitions. Instead: Tory majority, albeit on as little as 35% of the popular vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 21 January, 2021, 09:56:49 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 21 January, 2021, 08:46:58 AMIf it wasn't for his horrendous decision re Iraq, ...

Oh, just that little thing.

This is the point being made. Things might get better for some, and that's very important,  but as long as western government is just a revolving Chair for a permanent committee of local and international monied interests, the rest of us are fucked.

I can be delighted to see the turd Trump rejected in favour of someone who can at least pass as a human being and may start to make improvements, and still be convinced that no substantial change will be permitted.

I'd like to make some disparaging remark about centrists, as is the fashion, but Biden would have a long walk left to even get to the centre.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 10:11:40 AM
Thing is, we increasingly end up in a situation where tribalism won't shift countries with FPTP. So we can either sit there and complain about Blair's massive error of judgement, Lib Dems being a bit Tory, etc, and again experience an electoral disaster or we can figure out how to work together and oust the shitbags running the country and dramatically shifting the Overton window to the right.

We currently have a government whose headline policies map to 1970s-era NF, and much of that is down to Labour, the Lib Dems and the SNP not getting their shit together from 2016–2019. There were multiple pathways to stop the Tories and Brexit, but hubris and delusion got in the way from every corner, from Labour sitting on its hands whenever a revoke backstop was suggested to the Lib Dems bafflingly thinking Swinson could become PM. But worse: the Tories are going to win again unless we deal with this shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 11:50:15 AM

It is a constant source of disappointment to me that we are still deeply mired in dealing with the consequences of Blair's crimes. No following government has put this right. People are still dying. Fortunes are still swelling. The Punch and Judy show continues. The captivated children laugh and scream and cry out, "He's behind you!" while touts and pickpockets infiltrate the crowds.

Nothing of consequence changes.

Governments are just cowboys, herding the cattle, the real power lies with the ranch owners who live in the Big Houses. However the cowboys manage the herds is largely immaterial so long as they stay away from the Big Houses, the occupants of which make their own rules.

Which is a crude and simplistic analogy for a delicate and complex situation, of course, but a useful preliminary sketch nonetheless.

In short, I want nothing to do with the cowboys.

When the banks crash again, which party will deny them a bail-out at our expense? when they need some beef up at the Big House, which cowboy will toss aside his lasso? A few minor ones, maybe, but none of the strongest - and you don't get strong going against the vesteds.

And so I decline to take part in a system that gives me no say in the things it wants me to pay for. If NHS funding is indistinguishable from, and more importantly reliant upon corporate bail-outs, if paying for roads cannot be accomplished without paying for bombs, then I cannot in all good conscience go along with that. So I live outside and interact with the government's machinations as little as possible. I ask nothing of it, take nothing from it, give nothing to it.

I simply live my life as best I can, striving to be of use to the little community on whose shores I washed up some few years ago. To be of use and to enjoy my life and, for the moment at least, I am succeeding at both.

I have no illusions that one day they will come for me, probably with their hands out, and that I must say no. After that, well, I guess I'll get chewed up and spat out again and have to start from scratch again, again.

TL;DR - They're all a bunch of cowboys.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 January, 2021, 02:31:32 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2021, 10:32:24 PM

You might not like statism, but you can't pretend that it doesn't exist as a framework, and that within that framework there are more or less preferential policies. (Well, you can pretend whatever you like, but I'm sure you get my drift.)

100% this.  The system is a shitshow and I abhor it, but in my book one vote for more decent candidate is worth a thousand online rants.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 02:49:07 PM

Where do I say the system doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, I may as well be against unicorns.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 January, 2021, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 02:49:07 PM

Where do I say the system doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, I may as well be against unicorns.

I never said you did.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 02:56:11 PM
My take is I want change, but 1) my personal position is not a majority one, and 2) I recognise that any broad and sustainable shift in a more progressive direction is a good one.

I recall being on a Green Party Facebook group one time when there was an almighty row about coalitions. One person started ranting that the party could never form even an agreement with a ruling party if they were in favour of retaining nuclear power. This seemed a quite popular opinion. Someone then asked how the Greens ever expected to be a viable party, then, rather than a protest group. "When we have a majority Green Party government" was the reply.

And this is the problem. The Greens, at best, poll in the low single figures. If Corbyn Labour was its own thing, it'd perhaps poll up to 25%. But these are not majority positions. A majority should come from consensus, collaboration and, yes, compromise. Better to have some of what you want than nothing. I hope everyone realises that when the next general election rolls around, but I fear they won't.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 03:18:16 PM
So, the argument seems to have shifted from "there's no difference" to "there's no substantive difference", which (of course) is a position it's difficult to argue against, as one person's substantive is another person's trivial.

But, even there, there's evidence that change has been measurably substantive. What I sense about people's "ho hum - Biden's no different really" or "riots at the Capitol - meh, we've seen this before" is that (well, firstly, they're provably wrong - ha!) those cynical views are coming from a place of incredible privilege. That the differences don't directly affect you right now - I get. It's because you're privileged and safe.

But, to substance:

US hate crime highest in more than a decade (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54968498)

And, this article on militia groups (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55638579) shows a rise in militancy:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/6D54/production/_116488972_optimised-militias-nc.png)

And I gave other examples in my previous post - but people somehow can brush all of that aside - all of those real effects on real people and just "meh" it away into a cynical spin cycle of same old same old. How do you ever expect to get to what you consider the real (your version of substantive) change if you don't actually accept any sort of movement in that direction as being worthy of note?

I suppose there's no point in even attempting to climb the hill - it's just too high. (But we could make it to the other side of the car park, surely, Shirley? And from there..)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 03:21:04 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 January, 2021, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 02:49:07 PMWhere do I say the system doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, I may as well be against unicorns.
I never said you did.
No, but it is in the first sentence of the quote you posted (which I seem to recall was originally directed at me anyway), which you followed up immediately with "100% this." Sorry if I misunderstood.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 03:22:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 02:49:07 PM
Where do I say the system doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, I may as well be against unicorns.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2021, 10:32:24 PM

You might not like statism, but you can't pretend that it doesn't exist as a framework, and that within that framework there aren't more or less preferential policies. (Well, you can pretend whatever you like, but I'm sure you get my drift.)

Trying to help focus on the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 03:31:04 PM
Sorry to triple post, but I'm genuinely curious about...

QuoteAnd so I decline to take part in a system that gives me no say in the things it wants me to pay for. If NHS funding is indistinguishable from, and more importantly reliant upon corporate bail-outs, if paying for roads cannot be accomplished without paying for bombs, then I cannot in all good conscience go along with that. So I live outside and interact with the government's machinations as little as possible. I ask nothing of it, take nothing from it, give nothing to it.

So, you never use the NHS, or roads?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 January, 2021, 03:34:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 03:21:04 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 January, 2021, 02:53:26 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 02:49:07 PMWhere do I say the system doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, I may as well be against unicorns.
I never said you did.
No, but it is in the first sentence of the quote you posted (which I seem to recall was originally directed at me anyway), which you followed up immediately with "100% this." Sorry if I misunderstood.

Fair enough, I can see where you're coming from.  Personally, I was following on Hawkmumbler's original point, and the sentence 'you may not like statism' made me think of myself and my own dislike of statism. The point of my post was to explain why I still believe in participating in it as a voter rather than opting out.  I know you don't agree with me, but it's your perogative of course. I wasn't aiming my post at any one individual.  Sorry if it seemed like a dig at you. It wasn't meant to be.

Also the fact that my post came directly after yours probably didn't help - have to admit I skimmed through everyone's last few posts without paying too much attention to them. Nothing personal, I'll read everything in more detail later when I have time, but my post was not a response to yours, is the point I'm trying to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 03:49:24 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 03:18:16 PMIt's because you're privileged and safe.
Quite. Obama was a long way from perfect, but that didn't matter to the millions of people he enabled to access healthcare or freed from discrimination at work. Blair was a long way from perfect, but that didn't matter to the millions lifted out of poverty, the gains in terms of funding for culture, and so on.

I get that some people want their own version of a utopia, but if you genuinely can't see the difference between Johnson, Cameron, Clegg, Blair, etc, and think they're all the same, you're wither being wilfully obtuse or an ideologue who's going to spend an awful lot of time getting the 'nothing' I talked of in my previous post, rather than something. And once you do get the something, you can push for more.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 04:21:09 PM

I do not think that the roads and the NHS belong to the government. I believe they belong to society as a whole - as does government itself - and that its job is to properly maintain them on behalf of society.

The inference seems to be of a similar flavour as "why don't you go and live somewhere off in the wilderness then, Hippy?" That dissenters should be banished or otherwise restricted, thrown out of civilisation altogether with only rocks and twigs as tools, leaves stitched together with pine needles as shoes, and allowed only to consume what can be killed, picked, or dug up (provided none of it's in a fenced-off area or within certain lines on a map). To leave behind my family and friends, my home, all the benefits provided by generations of society stretching back into the shadows, to take nothing, to receive no benefits of civilisation whatsoever? Just for questioning the legitimacy of state power and believing that no mythical political Christ is ever going to rock up and fix it all? For not wanting to support something which I see as both morally and actually rotten? For just wanting to keep my head down and live out the rest of my life (which, given past incidents, may not be long) in peace? For this I should be treated worse than a convicted murderer, who I'm sure most people here would want to see fed, clothed, protected, and generally get her basic needs met and not dumped in a remote wilderness.

But the roads and the NHS, sure I use them - but sparingly and in emergencies. To not use them would be to recognise the government's ownership of these things which is, like so much about it, illusory.

Amusingly, my job tomorrow will consist chiefly of clearing the encroaching countryside off the public pavement running in front of the farm because the Council can't afford to stay on top of shit like that any more. I'll also clear the gutters and drains as well while I'm at it because why not? That's contributing, isn't it? Making a public pavement safe for passers by who will never know what I've done and never get a demand to pay for it or else is one of the little things I can give. Because I don't contribute monetarily doesn't mean I don't contribute at all.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2021, 04:40:23 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 04:21:09 PM
Because I don't contribute monetarily doesn't mean I don't contribute at all.

There are lots of ways to contribute to the 'common wealth'.  It's a very narrow perspective that limits it to financial contribution.  Those who take responsibility for their own health, wellbeing and education are arguably contributing.  Such actions free up resources for those who genuinely need it.

One thing that does get my back up at the moment is the comment from some quarters about the proportion of taxation contributed by the highest earners in the nation.  Kind of misses the point that what this means is that far too many are not being paid enough to pay tax.  The number of people on in-work benefits is bonkers.

I would also say that how we compose ourselves online is an important contribution.  The last few years have really foreground what has been growing for a long time.  The sort of abuse and vitriol that started in the playground of the early Facebook years has now morphed into something truly terrifying.

No, there are lots of ways to contribute.  Money is only one of them.  The fact that far too many people in this country are not able to contribute more financially is something we should really be questioning but that is another argument entirely.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 04:56:56 PM
High earners don't pay enough. But then, whenever anyone talks about putting up taxes, most people default to saying they won't vote for them. Locally, services are in the shit, and people rage about that all the time. The second anyone notes that council tax needs to go up to pay for them, they have a failure of logic.

In a national taxation sense, I do also wish more people understood the basics of marginal tax rates. It's deeply worrying how many sensible people I know are starting to advocate the Farage-style flat rate (which would likely take a small number of lowish earners out of the tax system entirely, royally fuck anyone earning under about 60 grand and be a boon to anyone on six figures or more).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 05:17:08 PM

The monetary system as it currently exists is both unfair and unsustainable, and a fundamental part of the problem. Fiddling with tax rates will do nothing to address these flaws - like rearranging the books on a wormy shelf does nothing to address the alliterative problem of the worms in the weakening wood.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 05:24:52 PM
Given that lowering tax rates and removing funding demonstrably causes problems at almost every level of society, one can easily enough argue that increasing tax rates in a progressive manner would do the reverse. I'm not arguing it's a perfect system, but it's the one we have. If the wealthy paid more—at levels most would barely notice—those with little would be much better off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 05:32:27 PM
Quote... if paying for roads cannot be accomplished without paying for bombs, then I cannot in all good conscience go along with that. So I live outside...

My point wasn't that you should not use roads, it was that you said you were going to have nothing to do with them. But you do use them. So, you do have something to do with them.

Which is fine (by me) - because why shouldn't you use them?

But, you using the roads (that were built using tax money that also pays for those bombs you mentioned) doesn't make you guilty of dropping bombs. In the same way as voting for a government doesn't make you guilty of things the government does that you disagree with.

I don't understand why you take a moral high ground on voting (effectively throwing away a responsibility that could really help real people), but you don't take a moral high ground on road use.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
I can't remember who it was, but there's some conservative talking head on Youtube who got asked how he ratified his objections to socialism with the need to maintain infrastructure necessary not just for the civilian populace but for the capitalist class to use in pursuit of profit, and he just goes off on one saying "you think you got me with them bitch-ass roads, but I don't care about no motherfucking roads."  Then he said the army and cops weren't socialism, "because they ain't."  I am really trying to remember his name because I think it's really important to get him and Sharky in the same room and film what happens.

Quote from: TordelBack on 21 January, 2021, 09:56:49 AM
Quote from: shaolin_monkey on 21 January, 2021, 08:46:58 AMIf it wasn't for his horrendous decision re Iraq, ...

Oh, just that little thing.

Jimmy Saville raised a lot of money for kids' charities, so on balance he did more mathematically-quantifiable good than harm, and in the end, aren't the numbers more important than the ethics?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 January, 2021, 05:59:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
I can't remember who it was, but there's some conservative talking head on Youtube who got asked how he ratified his objections to socialism with the need to maintain infrastructure necessary not just for the civilian populace but for the capitalist class to use in pursuit of profit, and he just goes off on one saying "you think you got me with them bitch-ass roads, but I don't care about no motherfucking roads."  Then he said the army and cops weren't socialism, "because they ain't."  I am really trying to remember his name because I think it's really important to get him and Sharky in the same room and film what happens.

If that isn't the walking dumpster fire in a shite beard formerly known as 'Sargon of Akkad' i'd be incredibly surprised. The dude's one argument is 'I don't need it/ I didn't ask for it' to stuff he absolutely uses every single day, then laughs at rape victims or something because he's scum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 06:05:31 PM

Sorry, I was unclear. The aspect I want nothing to do with is not the roads themselves, or how they are used or maintained, or my responsibilities towards them, but how they are funded by a dishonest system.

I believe that yes, if my money pays for bombs and I know it does then I am guilty of aiding and abetting at worst or wilful ignorance at best. "I was just following orders," just doing as I was told, does not salve my conscience as it once did.

Furthermore, I do believe that voting has roughly the same character, at least under current conditions. If I vote, I'm encouraging someone else to impose my will on others, expecting them to live according to the policies and standards I find acceptable. I have no right to do that to you, nor to pay someone else to rule you for me.

As far as I'm concerned, folk can live their lives however they like. The only thing I expect from everyone is that they don't harm anybody - which is impossible but a worthy aspiration. A good portion of my belief system rests on trying to live up to this myself by trying not to support what I see as a harmful system. It's me trying to do no harm because, as sure as eggs is eggs, I can't stop others from doing it - but I can, and must, refuse to enable them.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 06:18:17 PM
Shark - I entirely understand your personal reasoning for your position on voting, but I find I can't square it for myself. It goes back to Asimov's first law (of Robotics, not Sharks, naturally):

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.


I don't really understand why you're convinced that not voting has any benefit. It's inaction, y'see. Your "I will not take part" stance actually leaves you in a position of effectively having allowed the winners to win, through your inaction.

I get that you have a moral stance that suggests that's okay, but from my perspective it's immoral behavior, because the results of your inaction are also real.

Conundrum.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 06:24:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 05:48:09 PM...it's really important to get him and Sharky in the same room and film what happens.
I don't want to be overly sensitive here, but are you guys suggesting this person as an opponent or an ally? Because, y'know, if it's an ally then, from the sound of it, I might as well chop off my thumbs burn my 'phone right now...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 21 January, 2021, 06:24:41 PM
Theodore Roosevelt once said: 'In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 06:32:52 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
"you think you got me with them bitch-ass roads, but I don't care about no motherfucking roads."

I don't have any point to make - I just like those words in that order.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 06:52:28 PM
Same, tbh.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 06:24:06 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 January, 2021, 05:48:09 PM...it's really important to get him and Sharky in the same room and film what happens.
I don't want to be overly sensitive here, but are you guys suggesting this person as an opponent or an ally? Because, y'know, if it's an ally then, from the sound of it, I might as well chop off my thumbs burn my 'phone right now...

My inference is that you would not get along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 07:04:23 PM

I agree, Funt, my inaction has consequences. On a large scale, it's a flea bite on an elephant's arse, just one less pebble in the foundation. On a personal scale, I live in a shed with a Jack Russel and some spiders.

In a large part I guess it comes down to the lesser of two evils - a concept I understand voters the world over are familiar with - on the whole, does supporting the current system do more harm than good? I believe it is the former and so, personally, I feel compelled to withdraw all support.

I.P. and others seem to have a fair grasp of how the factions could work together to effect real and positive change and despair of the conditions preventing this. But maybe I.P. and his peers can somehow bring pressure for change from within the system and all power to them for trying. Maybe one day they'll clean things up enough to begin rekindling my interest. But my gut doesn't think this is likely and may not even be possible at all given how resilient to change entrenched establishments tend to be. But anything's possible, and even though I think trying to reprogram the dinosaur is a waste of time that doesn't mean it is. At the very least this approach hopes to keep blood off the streets, which grants instant validation in my eyes.

But.

In my world the struggle is to build local and global networks, with hierarches restricted as much as possible to cope with individual but interconnected tasks. It's about taking a step back and relying less and less on the Centralised Tit, promoting agorism and Austrian economics but, most of all, it's about me living a life I can live with.

And, who knows, with the statists working from within and the anarchists working from without, maybe we can form a crucible in which to forge a better system.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2021, 07:09:48 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 04:56:56 PM
It's deeply worrying how many sensible people I know are starting to advocate the Farage-style flat rate (which would likely take a small number of lowish earners out of the tax system entirely, royally fuck anyone earning under about 60 grand and be a boon to anyone on six figures or more).

Right there is the biggest problem with the tax system.  It is obsessed with taxing labour.  Taxation is heavily skewed in favour of property / capital ownership.  (shit, I sound like a bloody Commie now!)


BTW Funt, I'm not sure I would completely agree with your position re voting.  I have this argument periodically with my mother who bangs on about the number of people who lost their lives fighting for our right to vote (no, not in the two world wars ...).

I get it on one level.  The problem is that with the British voting system as it stands right now too many people live in 'safe' seats.  You might as well piss into the wind for all the good voting against the incumbent party will do.

I would also argue that abstention / vote spoiling is a valid act. (spoiling more than abstention) It registers dissatisfaction with the options available.  If politicians cannot provide a convincing enough argument for people to vote for any of them that is on them too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 07:23:07 PM
Quote from: broodblik on 21 January, 2021, 06:24:41 PMTheodore Roosevelt once said: 'In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing'.
Unless doing nothing is the right thing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 January, 2021, 07:31:02 PM
In the spirit of inventing your own reality; Qanon was a psyop intended to prevent multiple domestic terror attacks by convincing its adherents to stay home and "trust the plan".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 07:52:03 PM
Here is one of them, staying at home and trusting the plan, just like it says on his shirt:

(https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/e3903a1/2147483647/strip/true/crop/5537x3691+0+0/resize/1486x991!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F99%2Fbc%2F94b6b09f5ae1079d210706a999b0%2F5df60e54a3ae4756a53f54bdd04c03c9)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 08:41:34 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2021, 07:09:48 PMThe problem is that with the British voting system as it stands right now too many people live in 'safe' seats.  You might as well piss into the wind for all the good voting against the incumbent party will do.

I would also argue that abstention / vote spoiling is a valid act. (spoiling more than abstention)
Both of those. Personally, I want to see representative voting and equal votes in the UK, the move towards heavily encouraging people to vote (although I'm unconvinced about compelling the act), massively adjusting the franchise, and also enabling people to legitimately and officially 'abstain' should they wish. So on that:

1. The Commons should be broadly representative of the popular vote. It's impossible for this to be exact, but it needs to be much closer than it is today. Various forms of PR can enable this to happen. Labour are the ongoing block to this happening.

2. The above creates a situation in which votes are much more equal. Safe seats would effectively be abolished. There might be safe list appointments (depending on the system decided upon), but even then there are mechanisms that can be implemented to eject someone from a list seat.

3. The franchise should ideally be expanded to all residents—the end. I can't imagine the British public going for that immediately, and so I'd suggest expanding it to existing franchise (despite its inherent WE HAD AN EMPIRE nature) and anyone with ILR. It's fucking insane that someone who rocks up from Canada, Kenya, South Africa or Vanuatu can vote in a general election, but a Spaniard who's lived here for 50 years cannot unless they spend thousands navigating the hideous citizenship application process.

4. Voting forms, while being redesigned, should have a little space for "fuck all of them", albeit possibly labelled very slightly differently.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 08:45:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 08:41:34 PM
4. Voting forms, while being redesigned, should have a little space for "fuck all of them", albeit possibly labelled very slightly differently.

To quote the woman who first taught me how to tend bar, you could opt for "Shower o' c*nts" (which she always followed by, as an aside to me, because I was a bit more middle to her working "pardon my French").
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 08:59:07 PM

Let's say that voting system materialises and works as intended or thereabouts - will I have the right to abstain from going along with the winners' policies?

If not, what use or relevance does having a legitimate and official right to abstain from voting have?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 09:04:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 08:59:07 PM

Let's say that voting system materialises and works as intended or thereabouts - will I have the right to abstain from going along with the winners' policies?

If not, what use or relevance does having a legitimate and official right to abstain from voting have?

Goes back to roads again - if you're not willing to join in the burden of payment (in a fair way) why should you be allowed to benefit from the results of said payment? You want to have your cake and eat it. Or, rather, you want someone else to buy your cake, which you will then eat, and then complain to the person who bought it for you that it's not even your favorite kind of cake.

I really want a slice of cake now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2021, 09:20:41 PM
Funt, you just described government policy on Brexit!   :o

Let's face it, at the end of the day there is never going to be a perfect political system.  People are involved.

Sharky certainly has an extreme position on the subject but at the end of the day he has a right to his viewpoint and to make a case for it.

I think its fair to say that he is unlikely to get converts in a hurry but at least he is consistent.

Of course it might be worth taking a moment to reflect that we are arguing the merits of various democratic systems on the forum of a comic that has built its reputation on the activities of a fascist.

:-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 09:21:02 PM

That's the point - I am willing to contribute in a fair way but not willing to be coerced in an unfair one.

I don't coerce people, especially not for money, because I don't believe I have the right (except, maybe, in extreme cases of self-defence where actual injury seems likely), and I suspect many others feel the same way at heart. So I expect the same respect from everyone else and reserve the right to resist anyone who thinks otherwise. That includes everyone from the local bully to the highest officer in the land.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 09:47:03 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 21 January, 2021, 09:20:41 PM
Sharky certainly has an extreme position on the subject but at the end of the day he has a right to his viewpoint and to make a case for it.

I agree 100%. If I think it's bollocks, I get to make that case as well. I often find myself back at square one, of course, so I'm not sure there's much point.

From my perspective the last few days of the politics thread went like this:

1. Thank f*ck Trump's not in power.
2. But there's no difference between Biden and Trump (the "shower o' c*nts" response).
3. Evidence is presented that there is a measurable difference, often widely effecting the proletariat.
4. But those differences don't amount to a hill o' beans in this crazy world, it is argued.
5. Shark doesn't like voting.

Replace steps #1-4 with anything you like and step #5 is always the same, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the preceding points.

Like you said: it's consistent. I'd be crazy to expect anything else, and yet, like a dog with bone, running along tax-funded road dreaming of cake...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 10:01:38 PM

I love voting. I just vote to not get involved. If a vote is as important and sacrosanct as you seem to believe, why is mine invalid? I keep my vote to myself instead of giving it to some pre-approved politician and I use it all the time to decide my own fate instead of once every four years merely to express a preference.

Make no mistake, I love my vote at least as much as you do and will neither waste it or give it away.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 January, 2021, 10:59:47 PM
Well, we can probably all agree that Brexit was a great idea, anyway...

Brexit: 'I was asked to pay an extra £82 for my £200 coat' (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55734277)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 January, 2021, 11:14:25 PM
Project Fear, even though we've been screaming about this since May's stupid speech.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2021, 12:03:22 AM
I had to order something on amazon the other day. I was about to order from the UK, then remembered things would be cheaper and probably quicker if I ordered from an EU country. So I did that. I say that without any pleasure whatsoever.  I wish things could have been different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 January, 2021, 12:35:03 AM
Meanwhile in Northern Ireland, we can only order from amazon.co.uk now, unless you want food or drink. The sometimes cheaper alternatives of .de and .fr are rejecting all orders to BT postcodes now, since the orders would go through that racist wee island off the west coast. I suppose we shouldn't be giving Bezos any more money, and this will encourage people to buy from all the local shops which are closed due to the pandemic.
Ebay? Forget it.

In other news, Biden's whitehouse has released a 200 page document outlining their Covid strategy (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/National-Strategy-for-the-COVID-19-Response-and-Pandemic-Preparedness.pdf). I haven't read it in detail, but at least it exists.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: broodblik on 22 January, 2021, 04:32:47 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 07:23:07 PM
Quote from: broodblik on 21 January, 2021, 06:24:41 PMTheodore Roosevelt once said: 'In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing'.
Unless doing nothing is the right thing.

I am going to sound like I am preaching now but is it not better to decide for yourself rather that someone else make the decision for you?  This is especially true in a democracy if you do not decide and the majority make a bad decision which your vote could have changed you still need to life it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 22 January, 2021, 09:32:11 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2021, 07:11:19 PM
Yay - it's President Biden now! And VP Kamala Harris - the first female, black VP in US history.

I'm with Voltaire on this one - it might not be folk's idea of perfection, but it's good in comparison to what we've just suffered under the rule of a wannabe fascist dictator.


Is that a Candide reference?  ""the best of all possible worlds".  Roll on El Dorado!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2021, 11:59:46 AM
Quotewhich your vote could have changed
This is the problem with our current system. There are clearly the numbers to usher in a better society, but so many of them don't vote. If the under-30s voted in the same percentages as pensioners, the Tories would be toast. But they don't. I just hope that if we see a miracle and Labour win the next GE, they'll recognise it as a potential blip and usher in PR. (My ideal would be for Labour to win about 300 seats and the Lib Dems to be on 30 — as unlikely as that seems at the moment. The price for support would be STV.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 January, 2021, 01:43:22 PM
Aye.  Unfortunately when I see low election or referendum turnouts, I don't tend to immediately think 'Ah, nice to see so many conscientious objectors who refuse on moral grounds to take part*' - I think 'why are there so many lazy or uninformed feckers who could get the finger out and help us change things**'?  And I suspect most of those in power take next to no notice of the non-voters, or even relish the fact that young or minority potential voters have stayed at home.

In fact the Republicans in the US seem to be very much in favour of people not voting; high turnout generally doesn't work out in their favour.***  Hence the shameless attempts by some states to make voting difficult in minority-heavy areas, but that's another story.



*I fully understand that some of them are genuine moral objectors, of course, like Sharky or my mate Cathal.
**I was a lazy and uninformed fecker a couple of times in my younger days and missed a couple of elections as a result.
***which, although I'm certainly no expert, suggest that the majority of people in the states have preferred the Democrats for a very long time, but sometimes find it difficult or impossible to vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2021, 02:12:06 PM
Why would you turn out to vote when alternatives are presented as being worse?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 22 January, 2021, 02:16:18 PM
I reckon there's a phenomenon where an individual thinks taking a certain action won't make any difference. However, there are a significant number of individuals not taking that action for the similar reasons, to the point where if they all just acted it would make an actual difference.

Like someone who lives in a constituency with a perceived "safe seat", so doesn't bother voting. Maybe the seat is only safe because there are enough people who don't vote for the same reason?

Or with the current pandemic, an individual might think it's okay to ignore the guidelines "just this once*, because I'm only blah, blah, blah...", but there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of individuals acting like this and...well here we are almost a year later and things are the worst they've been.

I don't really know much** about sociology, but surely this is an observed, analyzed and named phenomenon?

Quote from: Professor Bear on 22 January, 2021, 02:12:06 PM
Why would you turn out to vote when alternatives are presented as being worse?

I look forward to next election when Boris de Pfeffel claims the opposition are too incompetent to govern

*I'm being quite generous here
**anything
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 January, 2021, 02:28:13 PM
Exactly. If enough people believe they cannot change things and act accordingly, the result is that things do not change. That's not to say numbers always result in success. I went on all those EU referendum marches. Political cowardice, tribalism and hubris ensured we failed — and I still don't believe the notion of a confirmatory referendum, although alien to the UK, was that much of a long shot — but at least we tried. In elections, though, there are regular opportunities to turn things around.

QuoteI suspect most of those in power take next to no notice of the non-voters
It's worse than that—and this is something the Labour leadership consistently fails to grasp—in that most Tories as a rule (especially MPs) don't really care about anyone who doesn't vote Tory, and often don't care about many who do. But, yeah, non-voters in particular don't matter to Tories. The young don't matter either. Nor do people who aren't wealthy. But they have a voice. The issue is so many don't use it.

I wish more people would get angry about this and figure out how to kick the fuckers out. Yes, that might not result in a utopia, but it would result in meaningful change. I'm not a big fan of Starmer, and he's making some really weird/bad decisions. But it's absurd to think a Starmer-led government wouldn't be a meaningful improvement over the shitshow we have today. (See also: Biden vs Trump.)

As for safe seats, that's a different kettle of fish. But even there, progress can be made. Safe seats can become marginals, which would scare the shit out of the incumbent for at least one term. Marginals can flip. So even if you live somewhere where a Tory has an actual majority share, that doesn't mean you should just say "oh well—fuck it". Additionally, short money exists. So although my vote is broadly meaningless in electoral terms, it does mean the party I do vote for will receive more money later on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 January, 2021, 03:28:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 January, 2021, 10:01:38 PM

I love voting. I just vote to not get involved. If a vote is as important and sacrosanct as you seem to believe, why is mine invalid? I keep my vote to myself instead of giving it to some pre-approved politician and I use it all the time to decide my own fate instead of once every four years merely to express a preference.

Make no mistake, I love my vote at least as much as you do and will neither waste it or give it away.

War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength and now not voting is voting.

Amazing!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 January, 2021, 05:38:21 PM

A vote is an expression of will, a choice. As we previously discussed with murder and theft, the perception of choice is altered by changing its name to "vote." Choices are infinite, votes are restricted. Choices are rights, votes are privileges. Choices work in all situations, votes have limited scope.

But hey, if you don't believe me you can always vote with your feet...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 January, 2021, 05:44:48 PM
"Well, maybe I am and maybe I'm not!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7PETX-0L9g)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Modern Panther on 22 January, 2021, 06:22:54 PM
As a counterpoint I'd like to encourage everyone to get involved in how the country is run and what laws are in place by actually voting.  Not voting changes nothing and never has.

Choice is lovely, but I for one would also quite like an actual welfare system in place so that fewer kids go to bed hungry, and fewer families have to rely on charity to survive.  Y'know, silly things like a properly funded health service and real schools paid for by actual taxation.

I will not be taking questions.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 January, 2021, 02:42:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 January, 2021, 05:38:21 PM

As we previously discussed with murder and theft, the perception of choice is altered by changing its name to "vote." Choices are infinite, votes are restricted. Choices are rights, votes are privileges. Choices work in all situations, votes have limited scope.

But hey, if you don't believe me you can always vote with your feet...

Voting is not tantamount to choosing murder or theft, you fucking melter.

The Catholic Church in Ireland are trying to shift the blame for hundreds of dead babies buried in a septic tank onto the civilians who didn't stand up to stop them.

Just letting it happen, and claiming you're not an enabler is not a morally superior position.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 07:31:03 AM

Eh?

Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 January, 2021, 02:42:45 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 January, 2021, 05:38:21 PM

As we previously discussed with murder and theft, the perception of choice is altered by changing its name to "vote." Choices are infinite, votes are restricted. Choices are rights, votes are privileges. Choices work in all situations, votes have limited scope.

But hey, if you don't believe me you can always vote with your feet...

Voting is not tantamount to choosing murder or theft, you fucking melter.

The Catholic Church in Ireland are trying to shift the blame for hundreds of dead babies buried in a septic tank onto the civilians who didn't stand up to stop them.

Just letting it happen, and claiming you're not an enabler is not a morally superior position.

It's an example of how things get re-labelled behind a distorting lens of legislative language; thus murder becomes execution, theft becomes taxation, and choice becomes vote. Each label changes the perception of the act.

Any dead babies suggested by this observation are clearly made of straw and feasting on red herrings.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 January, 2021, 06:13:19 PM
Shark - do you see no problem at all with the method of communication you use? For literally years you've expressed here your reasons for not voting. You've explained your position on that countless times. Then I say you don't like to vote and immediately you say that you love voting. And you twist it around so that not voting IS voting, somehow.

Can you not see how that comes across as just a giant troll-move?

It feels like it doesn't really matter what I say to you - literally, that I could say anything at all (even something you had just said you believed or thought or witnessed) - and you would immediately counter that I'm wrong about it, by using some metaphorical device.

You seem very convincing when you express your innocence but I can't help but come to the conclusion that you're a wind up merchant that enjoys seeing other people struggle.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 07:37:29 PM

No, I don't see that at all. I was pretty sure I'd defended that ostensibly inconsistent statement in the remainder of the post, however...

If a vote is an expression of an individual's will, and votes are taken seriously, then the will behind the expression must also be taken seriously. This is the aspect of voting I believe in.

However, a political or legislative vote is more about transferring will. One expression of will every four to five years essentially negates large areas of individual will for the intervening time. This is the aspect of voting I deplore.

I do not see that as inconsistent - poorly explained, perhaps, but not inconsistent. Or trollish.

Also, I seem to remember that we have agreed on at least one or two occasions, so I don't see myself as simply contrarian for the sake of it. The problem may be that, as we are coming at things from different perspectives we will often interpret the terrain in different ways, as it were. What one of us sees as an inviting pool on the beach the other may see as quicksand.

I do not enjoy seeing people struggle.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 23 January, 2021, 07:50:01 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 07:37:29 PM

No, I don't see that at all. I was pretty sure I'd defended that ostensibly inconsistent statement in the remainder of the post, however...

If a vote is an expression of an individual's will, and votes are taken seriously, then the will behind the expression must also be taken seriously. This is the aspect of voting I believe in.

However, a political or legislative vote is more about transferring will. One expression of will every four to five years essentially negates large areas of individual will for the intervening time. This is the aspect of voting I deplore.

I do not see that as inconsistent - poorly explained, perhaps, but not inconsistent. Or trollish.

Also, I seem to remember that we have agreed on at least one or two occasions, so I don't see myself as simply contrarian for the sake of it. The problem may be that, as we are coming at things from different perspectives we will often interpret the terrain in different ways, as it were. What one of us sees as an inviting pool on the beach the other may see as quicksand.

I do not enjoy seeing people struggle.

A vote isn't an expression of will, it's a statement about what kind of society you want to live in. No politican or political group is ever going to be 100% aligned with your vision of the kind of society you want to live in.   And while you may not want to impose your will on others - some will have no problem imposing theirs on you.  So if you feel strongly about that you should vote for the party or individual most aligned with your viewpoint, you can't simply wait for Utopia to manifest itself.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 23 January, 2021, 07:50:01 PM


1) A vote isn't an expression of will, it's a statement about what kind of society you want to live in.

2) No politican or political group is ever going to be 100% aligned with your vision of the kind of society you want to live in.   

3) And while you may not want to impose your will on others - some will have no problem imposing theirs on you. 

4) So if you feel strongly about that you should vote for the party or individual most aligned with your viewpoint,

5) you can't simply wait for Utopia to manifest itself.

1) What's the difference between an expression of will and a statement expressing a choice? They are both indications of preference.

2) 100% agree.

3) That's no reason to capitulate. It's like saying, "That bully's going to take your dinner money - you'd best just let him." Sod that.

4) There aren't any. Seriously, how many politicians are willing to stand up for ideas like government having far less power and being stripped of its "right" to initiate violence against its own or other people? Of being barred from dealing with the debt-based money system and moving over to a more Austrian School economic system? PM me his/her email because I'd love to chat.

5) I don't know how many times I have to say that there's no such thing as Utopia and yet still this tired old appeal to perfection keeps on turning up. Just because proposed possible solutions (which we haven't even begun discussing yet, by the way) aren't perfect they must be invalid. Which doesn't follow. I do not use the argument that other people vote in order that somebody else can build their Utopia for them because it's a fallacy.

At least we agree on #2! :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 09:05:57 PM
In what way have you stopped the bully taking your dinner money by not voting? Surely you have merely just refused to engage with the bully by setting up a direct debit
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 09:11:37 PM
I would argue that a better analogy would be, you are in a prison cell with 10ft thick concrete walls and a spoon.  You can scrape at those walls, knowing that you might not get through before you die, indeed knowing you probably wont.  Or you can do fuck all about the walls, because they are 10 ft thick and just fantasis about what life on the outsidee could be like if it wasnt for those walls
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 09:19:13 PM

That simile (or metaphor? I can never remember which is which) addresses the specific point made - which was, "...you may not want to impose your will on others - some will have no problem imposing theirs on you," (my emphasis), which I interpreted as a description of "might is right" - that having the will of another imposed upon one is quite alright and to be tolerated. It's not really about dinner money.

Also, I don't have a bank account.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 09:28:33 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 09:11:37 PM
I would argue that a better analogy would be, you are in a prison cell with 10ft thick concrete walls and a spoon.  You can scrape at those walls, knowing that you might not get through before you die, indeed knowing you probably wont.  Or you can do fuck all about the walls, because they are 10 ft thick and just fantasis about what life on the outsidee could be like if it wasnt for those walls

True - but if the walls represent the current system, the outside represents some future preferred state, and the spoon represents a vote, then I can dig at those walls for as long as I like and as often as I like. The "voter" will give his spoon to somebody else every four years and hope they will do his digging for him while he sits on his arse in his cell, watching telly and doing as he's told by the person he gave his spoon to.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 09:42:00 PM
The more people who use their spoons to dig in the direction you want to go makes the guys using their spoons to cake on more concrete less likely to succeed

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 09:28:33 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 09:11:37 PM
I would argue that a better analogy would be, you are in a prison cell with 10ft thick concrete walls and a spoon.  You can scrape at those walls, knowing that you might not get through before you die, indeed knowing you probably wont.  Or you can do fuck all about the walls, because they are 10 ft thick and just fantasis about what life on the outsidee could be like if it wasnt for those walls

True - but if the walls represent the current system, the outside represents some future preferred state, and the spoon represents a vote, then I can dig at those walls for as long as I like and as often as I like. The "voter" will give his spoon to somebody else every four years and hope they will do his digging for him while he sits on his arse in his cell, watching telly and doing as he's told by the person he gave his spoon to.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 10:01:56 PM

This cell seems to be getting very crowded...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 23 January, 2021, 10:09:13 PM
Let's assume 3 men - Man One digs with his spoon, while Man Two undoes all Ones handiwork.  The third would like to get out, but he can see that wall isn't getting any thinner....


Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 10:01:56 PM

This cell seems to be getting very crowded...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 January, 2021, 10:44:59 PM
As for removing power from government and reworking the nature of money, that sounds a lot like current Green Party policy. They probably don't go far enough for Shark's liking in policy, of course.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 07:41:10 AM

While the other two are fighting over spoons I think I'll settle down with a bit of Plutarch and see if I can fashion my spoon into a lock-pick.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:10:52 AM

Going through the Green Party website now. I didn't really want to but it seems fair to explore the suggestion. So far, some of it at least is acceptable to me and some is not. I'll try and get through the rest after work.

As an example of something I like (except for calling legislation law):

"WR202 We recognise that the law must not be used as a way of dealing with the symptoms, whilst the source of the problem remains untouched. Laws designed to protect the oppressed, must also empower. Laws which penalise the oppressor, must also foster a sense of responsibility."

And the opposite:

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The adventure continues...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 08:31:06 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 23 January, 2021, 08:49:50 PM

4) There aren't any. Seriously, how many politicians are willing to stand up for ideas like government having far less power and being stripped of its "right" to initiate violence against its own or other people? Of being barred from dealing with the debt-based money system and moving over to a more Austrian School economic system? PM me his/her email because I'd love to chat.


Are these the only issues you're willing to vote on?

You can also use your vote to help others you know? You can use it to ensure LGBTQ+ are treated fairly in society, that women are given bodily autonomy, that children can have free school lunches .. it is the duty of the strong to protect the weak etc

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 January, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
Despite the lock not actually allowing you access to the mechanism from within the cell...

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 07:41:10 AM

While the other two are fighting over spoons I think I'll settle down with a bit of Plutarch and see if I can fashion my spoon into a lock-pick.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 12:30:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:10:52 AM

And the opposite:

(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)

The adventure continues...

Wow, didn't realise they were trying to educate children. F**k those guys  ;)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 January, 2021, 01:06:59 PM
Bringing back the work houses to own the libs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 02:07:27 PM
That's so unfair - not only getting free housing but jobs provided for them too!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 02:14:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:10:52 AM(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)
The Greens are in favour of a system closer in nature to Finland's, where schools start later and have fewer pupils per class. Formal education as we understand it today would be compulsory only between the ages of 7 and 16. Prior to 7, the party has an emphasis on mixed provision. Post-14, it wants to emphasise transition to career paths, with a mix of learning/training.

Notably, homeschooling forms part of the party's remit — as it does today by matter of law anyway — "support[ing] parents' right to educate their children in settings other than at school".

Given the manner in which Greens would also support people financially, this is the most flexible system I can imagine under any form of modern government, and I can therefore only imagine you are against it purely on the basis it would compel parents to educate their children rather than not. I find that a pity, because it pushes you into an extreme position where you would only accept government if every action from an individual was voluntary, and that in itself eradicates protections for those people living with bad actors.

If parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How would you deal with that on a societal basis?

EDIT: 14 is wrong. 16 is accurate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 24 January, 2021, 03:28:21 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 02:14:43 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:10:52 AM(From ED001) "We hope by setting out an appropriate system for compulsory learning that this will nurture in everyone a desire to continue learning throughout life." (My emphasis.)
The Greens are in favour of a system closer in nature to Finland's, where schools start later and have fewer pupils per class. Formal education as we understand it today would be compulsory only between the ages of 7 and 14. Prior to 7, the party has an emphasis on mixed provision. Post-14, it wants to emphasise transition to career paths, with a mix of learning/training.



That's a tough one, for me at least.  In the Irish system, you carry on with the basics - Maths, English, and in my day Irish, but I don't know if that one's compulsory in modern multicultural Ireland - until you're 18 or so, but before that when you're about 15 you choose a few from the rest and stick with them - languages, one of the branches of science, art, tech drawing, business studies and so on. 

The thing was, art aside*, I made the wrong choices because I hadn't a clue what my career would be when I was 15.  I wish I had learned some more technical skills, as I needed them for both art school and basic day-to-day living in a boat, and some business skills, because I feel like I'm constantly winging it as a sole trader.

Just personal experience, though.

*the problem there, though, was most people chose art because they didn't want to study 'real' subjects, and a clueless and incompetent teacher was assigned accordingly. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 04:06:49 PM
First, I had errors in my post. The compulsory range is 7–16, but with 14 being a breakpoint for potential dovetailing with a level of workplace training. Secondly, I'm not convinced by all their policy in this area, not least the level of local demolition that—without extremely strong monitoring—could lead to all kinds pf problems in terms of educational biases. That said, ED124 does note that there are issues with the current mix in schooling types causing division.

Personally, I'd like to see the UK learn from e.g. Finnish schooling, rather than repeatedly ignoring the key benefits of later academic starts, reduce the exam load on kids, and broaden education during teen years. The English system is far too restrictive at A-Level, where you scythe education from nine or ten subjects down to three or four, and potentially ditch entirely key foundational skills.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 04:39:34 PM

Quote from: Rara Avis
link=topic=28209.msg1050975#msg1050975
date=1611477066

Are these the only issues you're willing to
vote on?
You can also use your vote to help others you
know? You can use it to ensure LGBTQ+ are
treated fairly in society, that women are
given bodily autonomy, that children can have
free school lunches .. it is the duty of the
strong to protect the weak etc


I'm not willing to "vote" on any issue because... Well, I've been through my reasons often enough, recently and in the past.

I use my personal vote to help people quite often, with my own two hands, you know? As, I'm quite certain, do we all. I have no interest in protecting the privileges of minorities or even of majorities - all that different privileges (name changed to "rights") baloney just fosters division. My interest lies in protecting the rights of everyone, of everyone having the same basic rights (and responsibilities, lest we forget) - from the basest criminal to the Queen.

At the last, I agree that we should all protect each other - but to hand that responsibility over to inadequate representatives working for an inadequate system is to protect nobody. Relying on noblesse oblige, on the self-devised and implemented largesse of "better people than me," hasn't worked particularly well in the past and I don't believe it's an anywhere near practical solution for the future.

Quote from: Leigh S
link=topic=28209.msg1050983#msg1050983
date=1611489464

Despite the lock not actually allowing you
access to the mechanism from within the
cell...


I take it that there is oxygen inside the cell, and access to food, water, etc.? If so - and I'm not going to starve or suffocate - then I'll still just leave the two spooners at it. If one wants to get out by digging holes with a spoon, and the other one wants to stay in by filling in holes with a spoon (as the cell also seems to contain an unlimited amount of wet concrete, for some reason), and they aren't physically fighting (or even if they are), then again it's best to leave them to it while I consider other means.


Quote from: Rara Avis
link=topic=28209.msg1050985#msg1050985
date=1611491431


Wow, didn't realise they were trying to
educate children. F**k those guys


If you (who I presume went through state schooling) think that the only alternative to compulsory schooling is no education, then I suggest you've just added another reason for radically changing the current system.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 05:14:50 PM

Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 24 January, 2021, 01:06:59 PM

Bringing back the work houses to own the libs.


If you (who I presume went through state
schooling) think that the only alternative to
compulsory schooling is workhouses, then I
suggest you've just added yet another reason for radically changing the current system.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 02:14:43 PM


If parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How would you deal with that on a societal basis?



Do you need to be compelled to educate your children? I expect not - and I expect most parents feel the same way. Yes - some will feel otherwise but some always do. That's not a separate problem but part of the whole.
Any solution will have to address this aspect.

I'm not going to go into possible solutions right now because you don't think there's a problem, or, at least, you see different problems. There's this guy called John Taylor-Gatto, a retired US teacher, who has a much better handle on the problem than I do. There are interviews with him scattered about the net at places like Peace Revolution and School Sucks but they are quite lengthy - as I seem to recall, the PR podcast interview is around five hours long. That's a fantastic interview, btw, but who has the time, right? So, here's a random   interview with him (https://www.home-school.com/Articles/interview-with-john-taylor-gatto.php) I found  at Homeschool World - which, of course, barely scratches the surface but is a decent start.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 05:16:53 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 04:39:34 PM

I'm not willing to "vote" on any issue ... I use my personal vote to help people quite often -

I have no interest in protecting the privileges of minorities or even of majorities -  BUT  My interest lies in protecting the rights of everyone, of everyone having the same basic rights

You're all over the shop here mate.

If you (who I presume went through state schooling) think that the only alternative to compulsory schooling is no education, then I suggest you've just added another reason for radically changing the current system.

Compulsory schooling just means that children have to receive an education no one ever argued it should be exclusively through the state school system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 05:40:23 PM

All over the shop? Really? I want a system where everyone is treated equally as a matter of course rather than being treated differently due to one or more personal differences, as we have now.

Not through the state, then, just enforced by it? Either way - learn what the state wants you to know or be punished.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 06:20:20 PM
You don't vote except when you do.

You don't want to protect the rights of anyone (sorry you said privileges of minorities and majorities as though they are the same thing) but want to protect the rights of everyone.

You do realise that education benefits society as a whole? I'm not sure what your argument against educating people is. Do you think that children going to school should be optional and not mandatory? That is going to lead to a system were everyone is treated unequally as a matter of course due to personal differences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 06:41:08 PM

I don't "vote," I exercise free will.

Rights are innate, privileges (what the state mis-labels "rights") are bestowed. There is a world of difference between the two.

I don't have an argument against educating people - I have an argument against educating people badly and schooling them in obedience to authority.

Yes, I do think children going to school should be optional. They should be excited by education and tempted into it - not forced - and if they show interest and/or promise in other areas they should be encouraged. School, it has to be remembered, isn't for everyone - as a fair few successful businesspeople can attest, and a fair few criminals too, I expect.

Er, people are already treated unequally due to personal differences - if they weren't, why would you be so staunch in your support of imposed top-down rights (privileges) and so dismissive of individual rights?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 06:53:47 PM
I'm not going to lie but you really had me there!
This is some epic trolling the likes of which I have not seen for years.


(https://media2.giphy.com/media/3o7buejMEbsuh7xmk8/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 07:11:13 PM
Shark: school is already optional. It is not a legal requirement to send children to school. The legal requirement is that children must have an education. I note you neglected to mention how you'd deal with children whose parents refuse to educate them. I'd love for you to elaborate on this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 January, 2021, 07:21:31 PM
You  will get your oxygen and food Sharkie, while you attempt to just make the guards realise "they are the real prisoners".  You risk being killed by spoon man 1 in frustration that you wont dirty your fingers in case it is raining on the day you finally tunnel out, or by spoon man 2 who is (quite clearly) a dangerous psycopath who, if not for the efforts of spoon man 1, WOULD have blocked up the windows and door with that concrete.

Maybe you could dig with the spoon AND still consider the system incredibly flawed?  It isnt an either/or situation.

Consider you live in a concpetual space that is coloured yellow but you would like it to be blue - in fact, if the space was red, you would actually die. Every inhabitant in this space gets  to add a tiny drop of colour, a pixel if you will - they get to choose orange or green.  There are guys who would live it to be red - they will all splash a bit of orange aroound, moving the general colour of the space to orange.  Next round of colouring comes along and the choice now becomes "move back to yellow", or "would you prefer red"....?

Thankfully by excluding yourself from making a colour choice, you'll presumably be safe.  I get that you would rather not get involved in this potentially fatal "game", but this is the core problem of your argument each time - the only way you are going to convince everyone to "just be nice" is to move society to a place where that is possible - get everyone to see the benefits of green, before moving them into blue. 

Quote from: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 06:53:47 PM
I'm not going to lie but you really had me there!
This is some epic trolling the likes of which I have not seen for years.


(https://media2.giphy.com/media/3o7buejMEbsuh7xmk8/giphy.gif)

Yeah, Sharkie always drags you back in for more of his "Most people are quite capable of being nice and doing the right thing without any coercion, so we dont need other people telling us what to do as those other people in Government are mostly terrible  non humans with hideous motives aimed mostly at directly curtailing my freedom to not be a nice person - but of course most people are quite capable of being nice and do the right thing....." and on and on.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 07:26:41 PM
Hence my question about compelling parents to educate their children, which Shark neatly avoided answering.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 January, 2021, 07:30:43 PM
I believe Sharky has said in the past that it would just be societal pressure to not be a jerk  that would work on them,because the only reason people are jerks now is that they have Gvts telling them not to be.

Maybe they'd find themselves ostracised by their community, maybe unable to get served in the local pub or have the local tradesmen fix their plumbing? Maybe labelled witch or communist?   Who needs coercion by Government when you have unleashed people power? Who need Big Brother when you have Big Society?



Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 07:11:13 PM
Shark: school is already optional. It is not a legal requirement to send children to school. The legal requirement is that children must have an education. I note you neglected to mention how you'd deal with children whose parents refuse to educate them. I'd love for you to elaborate on this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
Don't they have the right to educate their children to be jerks?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 January, 2021, 08:02:19 PM
I did write a bit about what happens when education isn't compulsory (mainly that parents in poverty have no choice but to put young children to work instead of sending them off to school), but the internet ate it all and didn't post it, so I'm going to leave this link here:

1870 Education Act (https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/livinglearning/school/overview/1870educationact/)

Quote from: Parliament UKThe issue of making education compulsory for children had not been settled by the Act. The 1876 Royal Commission on the Factory Acts recommended that education be made compulsory in order to stop child labour. In 1880 a further Education Act finally made school attendance compulsory between the ages of five and ten, though by the early 1890s attendance within this age group was falling short at 82 per cent.

Many children worked outside school hours - in 1901 the figure was put at 300,000 - and truancy was a major problem due to the fact that parents could not afford to give up income earned by their children.

Fees were also payable until a change in the law in 1891. Further legislation in 1893 extended the age of compulsory attendance to 11, and in 1899 to 12.

Compulsory education was also extended to blind and deaf children under the Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act of 1893, which established special schools. Similar provision was made for physically-impaired children in the Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Act of 1899.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 January, 2021, 08:04:05 PM
In short, the choices are compulsory education (either at a state-funded school, at home or a few other routes) or child labour except for those lucky (?) enough to attend religious schools - though I have a few more things to say about religious schools...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 08:13:31 PM
Maybe Shark is a part of Big Chimney and wants access to a tiny workforce ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:15:59 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 24 January, 2021, 06:53:47 PM
I'm not going to lie but you really had me there!
This is some epic trolling the likes of which I have not seen for years.


(https://media2.giphy.com/media/3o7buejMEbsuh7xmk8/giphy.gif)


Nice bit of ad hominem to end on. Well done.


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 24 January, 2021, 07:11:13 PM
Shark: school is already optional. It is not a legal requirement to send children to school. The legal requirement is that children must have an education. I note you neglected to mention how you'd deal with children whose parents refuse to educate them. I'd love for you to elaborate on this.

"Parents can be issued a Fixed Penalty Notice
by the Local Authority for their child's non-
attendance. The penalty is £60 and this rises to
£120 if paid after 21 days but within 28 days.
Each Local Authority should publish a 'Code of
Conduct' for Fixed Penalty Notices. The School's
headteacher decides if they wish to fine
unauthorised absences from school by issuing a
Fixed Penalty Notice. The headteacher then
requests by a referral to the Local Authority to
issue a fixed Penalty Notice on his or her
behalf.
"There is no right of appeal against a Fixed
Penalty Notice. If this is not paid, the Local
Authority can proceed to prosecution or
withdraw the notice. The Local Authority can
also prosecute parents for non-attendance
without issuing a Fixed Penalty Notice. Only the
Local Authority can prosecute parents and they
must fund all associated costs. Local authorities
must conduct its investigations in line with the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)."

Seems like a fairly legal requirement to me.

Okay, so that's not exactly what you were talking about.

According to the .gov website, "You must make sure your child receives a full-time education from the age of 5, but you do not have to follow the national curriculum." I did not know this, especially the part about not having to follow the national curriculum, and I think it's a good thing.

However, the next paragraph reads, "The council can make an 'informal enquiry' to check your child is getting a suitable education at home. They can serve a school attendance order if they think your child needs to be taught at school."

So, an 'informal enquiry' (their quotation marks) can lead to a formal order. The authorities still get to decide what is a 'suitable education' (my quotation marks), and to order state school attendance anyway.

You're right, I didn't - and gave my reasons.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 January, 2021, 08:17:00 PM
Religious schools?

News of a wedding with four hundred guests (around ninety times the legal limit) held at a school near where I used to live prompted me to look in to the history of this school.  Apparently they have such charming policies as telling their pupils not to answer any exam questions concerning evolution (this was after they'd been found to be censoring exam papers), that the most important outcome for their (female) pupils is to become successful mothers, that girls shouldn't go to university, censorship of homosexuality in GCSE textbooks and removal of mentions of women socialising with men.

And I thought the compulsory hymns at my CofE school were a bit extreme...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 24 January, 2021, 08:17:34 PM
Oh, and for some reason the state is funding that school for religious extremists - not sure why, but there you go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 24 January, 2021, 08:22:16 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:15:59 PM


However, the next paragraph reads, "The council can make an 'informal enquiry' to check your child is getting a suitable education at home. They can serve a school attendance order if they think your child needs to be taught at school."

So, an 'informal enquiry' (their quotation marks) can lead to a formal order. The authorities still get to decide what is a 'suitable education' (my quotation marks), and to order state school attendance anyway.


So in Sharky World, there is no one to "enforce/check" that the parent isnt just sitting the child in front of their Playstation and calling that education, but at least "The Man" doesnt get to decide, kid, and you are level 257 on GTA?  Cool!

Here;s a thing - I was top of my class at school - there was no compulsory careers advice and my parents, bless em, didnt really involve themselves in asking.  So as a 15 to 18 yr old, I was left to my own devices - Sharky freedom, but actually, the heavy hand of a Big Brother to step in with some support would have been most welcome.  In Sharky World, we are all in the best possible world.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:39:51 PM

Quote from: sheridan on 24 January, 2021, 08:04:05 PM
In short, the choices are compulsory education (either at a state-funded school, at home or a few other routes) or child labour except for those lucky (?) enough to attend religious schools - though I have a few more things to say about religious schools...

This is why education cannot be addressed in a vacuum - neither can government, religion,  infrastructure, banking, corporatism, law,  healthcare, etc., etc. All parts of society are interconnected and interdependent. There is no re-set switch, no "pull for Utopia" lever, no Good Citizens' Bible. It would be next to impossible, I believe, to reform any one part in isolation.

I have said many times before that I cannot change the world, I can only change my world. If people want to change their own worlds, either individually or in consenting groups then that's great, good luck to them - if I like what they're doing I'll join in. If people like their worlds as they are then that's great too, good luck to them - but if I don't like what they're doing I won't join in - even if they order me to.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 24 January, 2021, 08:47:07 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 24 January, 2021, 08:22:16 PM

So in Sharky World, there is no one to "enforce/check" that the parent isnt just sitting the child in front of their Playstation and calling that education, but at least "The Man" doesnt get to decide, kid, and you are level 257 on GTA?  Cool!

Here;s a thing - I was top of my class at school - there was no compulsory careers advice and my parents, bless em, didnt really involve themselves in asking.  So as a 15 to 18 yr old, I was left to my own devices - Sharky freedom, but actually, the heavy hand of a Big Brother to step in with some support would have been most welcome.  In Sharky World, we are all in the best possible world.



If I thought we were all in the best possible world, why would I be constantly claiming the opposite?

If you have a read of that interview I posted earlier (https://www.home-school.com/Articles/interview-with-john-taylor-gatto.php), you will see how a teacher with 30 years of experience engaged with disinterested and even disruptive students.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 08:57:32 AM
Again: If parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How would you deal with that on a societal basis?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 11:08:17 AM

Would you need to be compelled?

Hypothetically, if we lived in 1930s Germany and all the state and private schools drummed Nazi ideology into children, would you need to be compelled then?

Or, if we lived in the 23rd Century and all the schools were run by the Federation with its ideology of cooperation and understanding, would you need to be compelled then?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 12:00:13 PM
You are avoiding the question, again. Would I need to be compelled? No.

But as I've said already: if parents are not compelled to educate their children, that means some will choose not to, and those children will suffer. How do you deal with that?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 12:15:54 PM

Again, why shift the argument to solutions when one side doesn't believe  there's a problem, or believe that the problems are different?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 01:09:36 PM
I'm not shifting any argument. You, pages back, said you disagreed with that area of Green policy because it compels parents to educate their children. My point is that in taking that position, you leave vulnerable children at risk—and you don't seem to be offering any suggestion as to how that can be dealt with other than "remake all of society in the manner I'd be happy with, and in a way that ensures every single parent is a good actor". Or perhaps I'm missing something, but that's certainly how things are coming across.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 02:50:59 PM

If you want a "one size fits all" solution from me you'll be disappointed - you already have that.

So, be specific. Invent or convey a specific case, tell me about the family, their situation, their beliefs, and what the perceived problem is.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 25 January, 2021, 03:20:28 PM
There are plenty of accounts of religious parents in the US with a strong beliefs in "the end times" whose home schooling regime consisted of nothing but bible studies and music (because being able to sing God's praises is of value). They see no point in study beyond that because the rapture is coming so it'll just be wasted time. That's made life very difficult for those children who have moved away from those communities later in life.

Or how about the impoverished family who (given freedom of choice) decide that sending their child out to work a menial job to bring in extra £s is better than educating them.  In the short term that may well be true for the family but in the long term that childs future job prospects may be restricted due to their lack of formal education.

Having known a few people who have fallen through the cracks of the education system for various reasons I've witnessed the struggle they've had to re-establish a "normal" life later on. For some that wasn't possible and in the saddest case it almost certainly contributed to depression and then suicide.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 03:43:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 02:50:59 PMIf you want a "one size fits all" solution from me you'll be disappointed - you already have that.
From existing government, sure. But you said you couldn't get on board with any policy that compels anyone to do anything. My counterpoint to that was to ask what you would do should a parent decide to not educate their child, thereby negatively impacting on the child. I'm not sure why this needs me to provide a backstory for every example this might happen with. (I see Sintec's provided a few though.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 05:23:53 PM

In a libertarian or anarchic society, the highest law is do no harm.

If parents are doing harm then it is perfectly legitimate for police, courts, social workers, etc. to intervene. No rulers does not mean no rules. A non-violent system does not mean no system.

Sintec:

Case 1: Religious education. Fine. In this case, the only thing to do is tempt students to your school. Advertising would probably work.

Case 2: The working child. A lot can be learned from work. In this case, if poverty is the only driver, the local community can pay the parents their extra £5 per week or provide a home tutor. If the job is actually dangerous then the law kicks in and police etc. can get involved.

3: Fallen through the cracks. Some schools may be open 24 hours a day, providing walk-in educational help for anyone at any time.

Just forcing some people (me included) to go along just turns them against the system. Helping people (me included) turns them to it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 05:44:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 05:23:53 PM
In a libertarian or anarchic society, the highest law is do no harm.
[...]
Case 1: Religious education. Fine. In this case, the only thing to do is tempt students to your school. Advertising would probably work.
Sorry, Shark, but this makes no sense. If a child is being educated to a very specific, extreme and narrow ideology, due to their parents, they are arguably being harmed. How on earth do advertising and temptation help when the parents are bad actors within a specific and extreme worldview?

The children won't have agency to make a decision themselves. This is why we arguably need oversight that ensures children are given the tools they need to thrive, rather than spending their entire time being taught about their parents' god—or, worse, having their heads stuffed full of shite because their parents and like-minded followers do not believe in science, to pick one example.

QuoteCase 2: The working child. A lot can be learned from work.
At what age? 15? 12? 8? 5? A family has decided it will not educate its 7yo, because said child can work for a living. The job isn't phsycailly dangerous, but, hey, they're not compelled to educate their child. So what then? The child gets no education, but brings home minimum wage. Not good for them.

Quote3: Fallen through the cracks. Some schools may be open 24 hours a day, providing walk-in educational help for anyone at any time.
Schools open 24/7? In what reality is this even possible?

QuoteJust forcing some people (me included) to go along just turns them against the system.
I have big problems with the existing English system, not least its tendency towards children being property of the state and things like mandatory daily worship (which is one of the benefits of lockdown—that has been abandoned entirely by mini-IP's school). The non-attendance fine system, e.g, is not well structured, and in our county there's a sense of 'pass the buck' between the schools and the LA. But I still am fully in favour of a system where parents are—at some level—compelled to, for a defined period, educate their children to a broadly agreed standard.

The problem with—

QuoteIn a libertarian or anarchic society, the highest law is do no harm.

—is that by not compelling parents to educate children and not providing some basic guidelines on that, the children do come to harm. That's the point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 25 January, 2021, 05:46:35 PM
It's also interesting to see the split here between the ideas of a liberal society (which is arguably what parties like the English/Welsh Greens what) and a libertarian society, which is a rare position in the UK, given that it's most typically embraced by the right. (The British right are mostly somewhat libertarian when it comes to economics, but are ultimately authoritarian in terms of societal outlook.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 25 January, 2021, 05:52:43 PM
I pretty much agree with you on 2 - if the issue is poverty then solve the poverty problem. How you do that then becomes the question but that's a separate point.  I certainly wouldn't dispute that there's plenty to learn from working, although I intentionally specified a menial job as (generally) those offer less opportunity to learn. I'd certainly agree that our societies focus on exams and paper learning needs a rethink as it's a somewhat narrow focus on knowledge.

The problem with your other 2 points is that it isn't the students who are making the choice. It's the parents of those students making a choice on their behalf. Is the best we can offer really just to help them catch up once they're old enough to realise they were indoctrinated and/or deprived?

Intervention in these kind of situations is definitely an egregious form of violence that states inflict on families. Overriding parental choice is not something which should be taken lightly. But there has to be a balance between a parents freedom to choose and a childs right to a decent rounded education. I feel your reply to 1 is weighing the parents right as greater than the childs in this situation, personally I view that situation as harmful to the child and requiring intervention.

Again I completely we absolutely should be making adult education cheaper and easier to access. Both to help those who fall through the cracks and also to help those who want to retrain or just want to learn for the pleasure of learning. By that time it can often be a huge struggle to catch up though should we not try to ensure people don't get left behind where possible?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 06:36:05 PM

That is what courts are for. If a child (or anyone) is being harmed then that can be lawfully stopped. If the child is not being harmed then, as unpalatable as it might be to others, there's really no cause for anyone else to intervene directly.

Advertising can get people to spend money on almost anything - including buying shares in utilities they already own. In its propaganda form it can inflame people to genocide. It's a multi-billion dollar global industry for a reason and I feel sure it can sell the idea of education to many, but probably not all, anti-educators.

I've worked for as long as I can remember. My first job was helping my Mum, Granny, and a couple of neighbours shilling shrimps. Later I worked with my Dad, who was a diesel fitter. He taught me tons of practical stuff and left me with a lifelong love for fixing things and bodging things together out of rubbish and scrap. Sure, I went to school as well but, to be honest, I preferred working. It gave me a sense of pride in a job well done and entailed lots of concomitant learning in reading and maths as well as inspiring self-confidence and exposing me to the wider world.
It was exciting and interesting whereas school was dull and boring.

I said some schools may be open 24 hours a day, not just "schools." Some supermarkets are open 24/7. Petrol stations. Hotels. Police stations. Fire stations. Kebab shops. Hospitals. Is there really no reality in which you can see some all-night schools in areas that need them?


Freedom does not mean doing whatever the Hell one wants and hang the consequences. Indeed, living in a free society places a greater burden of responsibility on everyone.

I agree that the state treating children (all of us, really) as property is wrong - but that's the way it sees us. It's one of my biggest bugbears. Thing is, if I say to the state "you don't own me," then I have to concede that it doesn't own anyone else, either. And as one only has jurisdiction over one's own property (or one's own self), then everyone else must have that same right. So if the state can't treat people as property, forcing them to do whatever, then neither can I.

If someone is teaching their children that the Earth is flat, for example, I'm perfectly at liberty to argue and disagree but not to interfere directly. That is frustrating, sure, but ultimately not my business no matter how much I might wish it was.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 06:51:52 PM

Sintec - you're absolutely right, probably the first and most important thing is to ask the children what they want as well as the parents. Ideally, solutions should be tailored to individual circumstances.

I.P. - the elites tend to be very libertarian amongst themselves as well. I think this is because they have so much money/clout that they can basically go anywhere and do anything, hence monsters like Jeffrey Epstein. The downside is that they use all of their libertarian rights and very few, if any, of the responsibilities.

Curiously, the Earth is technically a libertarian or anarchist planet because it doesn't have a single ruler or state.

Yet.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 25 January, 2021, 06:54:43 PM
Quote from: sintec on 25 January, 2021, 05:52:43 PM
I pretty much agree with you on 2 - if the issue is poverty then solve the poverty problem. How you do that then becomes the question but that's a separate point. 

Education can be a massive factor in lifting people out of poverty - even a basic education around biology and family planning can have a really positive impact.

Just read TLS's most recent post - doesn't want to impose his will on anyone but it's ok if the courts do but only it seems if a child is physically harmed. Has no appreciation of how strictly some parents can control the children's lives, doesn't really believe in schools but wants them open 24 hours a day regardless (although some online courses are available on demand, what do you do if you're poor and can't afford a computer or wifi or can't read because you're parents didn't think it was useful), won't defend at risk children in case his own freedoms are affected and is perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to child abuse. Tut tut tut.


Also FYI most children are likely to be abused by someone they know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 07:08:34 PM

Quote from: Rara Avis on 25 January, 2021, 06:54:43 PM

...perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to child abuse. Tut tut tut.



How fucking dare you?

And you called me a troll.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 January, 2021, 07:14:54 PM
Okay folks, at the risk of stepping on people toes now ... actually fuck it ....

Please bear in mind that there are people in these parts that have first hand experience of what you are now talking about so glibly.

By all means debate the pros and cons of various different political philosophies.  I would honestly say that we've been round this too many times for it to be worth carrying on now and its time to call it a day.

We've spoken before about how civil this place generally is, largely because we tend to self-moderate.  So for the love of all that you hold dear ... fucking drop this NOW.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 25 January, 2021, 07:27:11 PM
Tjm got there before me. This 'debate' is going nowhere good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 25 January, 2021, 07:30:09 PM
Agreed, I'm happy enough to leave it at that.

Have a pleasant evening all, you too Shark, no hard feelings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 25 January, 2021, 08:31:21 PM
yep fair enough. Absolutely no desire to cause any upset.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 25 January, 2021, 08:32:53 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 January, 2021, 07:27:11 PM
This 'debate' is going nowhere...

As usual.

Anyway, have you heard what's been happening in America this week?

No?

Me neither, it's feckin' great. I've found I have to go looking for news about America the past few days.

Not too happy with what's dominating headlines now mind you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 25 January, 2021, 08:34:41 PM
Covid and the budget deficit are about to become really hot topics.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 January, 2021, 08:44:33 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 25 January, 2021, 08:32:53 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 25 January, 2021, 07:27:11 PM
This 'debate' is going nowhere...

As usual.

Anyway, have you heard what's been happening in America this week?

No?

Me neither, it's feckin' great. I've found I have to go looking for news about America the past few days.


It's odd alright.  Of course it's a huge relief not to be hearing about the Furious Orange (was it you who came up with that?), but for me, it's a bit of a weird feeling too - I was absolutely riveted by the madness surrounding Trump since the election, and now it seems bland and boring.  Bit like when I gave up the fags - they were horrible and toxic and disgusting but I still missed them for a while when they were gone.

But of course, it's great.  Wherever you may stand on the Twitter ban debate, the world is a far nicer place without his tweets.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 25 January, 2021, 09:23:01 PM

I haven't been paying him any attention for four years so it's business as usual in the Sharkshed.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 January, 2021, 09:33:41 PM
Aye, fair enough.  Though the ChristCurrach feels safe enough too - if the worst happens I'll bring on two of every animal that'll fit (not mice or rats, though, I've only just got rid of them).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 January, 2021, 09:41:01 PM
Biden's been president less than a week and thousands of Americans are dead already.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 January, 2021, 10:17:23 PM
It's quite a bodycount, alright.  Stretches all the way back to 1776.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 25 January, 2021, 11:28:06 PM
The year Biden was born.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2021, 07:26:55 AM

Off topic a bit - what's the story behind the name "ChristCurrach"? Is it like a Jesus boat?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2021, 07:55:16 AM
Well, technically, yes, but it's not my boat's actual name (which is Sin É*, though I've been planning to change it for years).  I was only riffing on your alliterative use of the Sharkshed for your gaff.

*'That's It' in Irish, but also the name of a fairly crappy pub in Dublin so I've never liked it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rately on 26 January, 2021, 09:34:27 AM
Deplatforming doesn't work, they said.

Be great if a few other serious arseholes could receive the same treatment.

At this stage, Trump is apparently floating the idea of starting his own party, purely for the grift, and the thought that he would decimate the Republican membership is hilarious. Everything Trump touches Dies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 January, 2021, 12:19:14 PM
I hope he does, because unlike Farage he probably wouldn't bottle it come election time and would fully split the GOP vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2021, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2021, 07:55:16 AM

...my boat's actual name... is Sin É*, though I've been planning to change it for years...


How about Sin E * Deck *?

(I'll get me coat.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2021, 12:55:06 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2021, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2021, 07:55:16 AM

...my boat's actual name... is Sin É*, though I've been planning to change it for years...


How about Sin E * Deck *?

(I'll get me coat.)


Nice!

Sadly it's pronounced 'Shin ay' in Irish, so doesn't quite work  :(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2021, 12:59:07 PM

Story of my life :D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 January, 2021, 01:11:52 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 28 January, 2021, 12:29:00 PM
Looks like Republicans' tongues are way too firmly entrenched now for Trump to be convicted of putting their own lives in danger.  But Giuliani might be reaping the hurricane to the tune of 1.3 billion, and rightly so.

It's probably time to forget about these wankers really.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Smith on 28 January, 2021, 01:04:22 PM
Anyone following Brian Rose and his mayoral run? That is some funny shit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2021, 01:05:02 PM
On Trump, there's a certain inevitability about how things play out now. The impeachment trial will likely end the same as it began: 55–45 but not the two thirds needed. Trump will issue some kind of I WON statement, but his deplatforming means it won't get as much traction as it once would have. Meanwhile, Biden will be getting on with sane government.

It's quite nice not seeing the orange buffoon pop up every single day, having said something new and hideous. But it is depressing that US media are already laying into Biden for having not miraculously fixed everything instantly. (I've seen more than one "honeymoon over" headline, which is bloody ridiculous.)

A pity we don't have our own equivalent of the USA's shift here in the UK. Alas, we appear to have gone full-on Stockholm Syndrome combined with Pravda. So many headlines yesterday about POOR BORIS and LOOK HOW SAD HE IS. Load of commentators slamming people who dare criticise his government and decisions. One professor called up by Liam Fox on Twitter, because she dared to point out how the government screwed up and — shocker — she was a REMAINER and votes LABOUR. So therefore the BBC should be scrapped due to allowing such partisan views!

Natch, I doubt Fox would have been so angry had some idiot Brexiter know-nothing coughed up some garbage about how great the government has done. We really are fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 January, 2021, 03:16:25 PM
Breitbart's main headline todays was "31,000 Americans die of Covid in Biden's first week in office"

Not one mention of the 12 mths of incompetence and denial that caused it. Unbelievable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2021, 03:20:47 PM
Biden will be blamed for everything, despite his COVID team being astonished at the total lack of anything the Trump team did. There have been multiple comments that they will be dealing with distribution and other things from scratch, which is insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 January, 2021, 05:01:13 PM
Holy shit.

I can't remember if I mentioned it here before, but 'The Good Law Project' was issuing a legal challenge against the U.K. government re it's spending of billions of taxpayers money on questionable PPE and COVID related contracts.

This is the email I just got from the good folk at the Project:

"Correspondence with Government has revealed they expect to spend a staggering £1 million defending our judicial review of their decisions to award contracts criticised by the NAO. This is a sum unprecedented in our lawyers' experience of judicial review proceedings. We can't but wonder whether they are trying to scare us off – using the bottomless public purse to avoid accountability to the public.

Government also says, remarkably, that finding out whether they acted lawfully in channelling hundreds of millions or billions to their VIP associates, is not in the public interest.

We had until recently been working on the understanding that we had raised enough money for our challenges to Government's awards of hundreds of millions of pounds of PPE contracts to Pestfix, Ayanda, and Clandeboye.

We were shocked to learn that – having failed to provide the evidence we've been asking for since July – Government is threatening a vast disclosure exercise going well beyond what would normally be undertaken in a judicial review. And not just that they have hired an expensive international commercial law firm. They expect to have a team of 30-40 working for up to 3 months on an exercise that has not been requested by us, or by the Court.

In the experience of our legal team, costs incurred by Government in judicial review proceedings rarely exceed £100,000. Here Government says it has already spent over £325,000, and estimates their total costs will amount to £1 million – a staggering sum for a judicial review.

Government knows full well that we cannot take existential risk on bringing a single case. So we wrote to Government asking it to agree and order 'capping' both our costs and the taxpayers' costs in these public interest proceedings.

We were shocked this week to receive their response contending that the litigation is not in the public interest, and refusing our proposed reciprocal cap: "In particular our client does not agree that the proceedings are 'public interest proceedings'". These are cases involving on Government's own admission hundreds of millions of pounds being spent on unusable facemasks on companies that went through the VIP lane.

Not in the public interest? What are they on!

The point is all the more remarkable given that a barrister employed by the Government Legal Department in her witness statement of 30 November stated that: "We acknowledge that there is considerable public interest in Covid related procurement, particularly of PPE."

We have now applied to the court for a Cost Cap. In line with our transparency principles I am publishing my Witness Statement. But if we don't get one, unless a white knight or white knights emerge, the simple fact is we will have to abandon the litigation. We are not in a position to bear a £1 million risk.

Thank you,

Jolyon Maugham QC
Director of Good Law Project"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 January, 2021, 05:04:40 PM
Here's the Witness Statement mentioned above - it is insane:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ji1d2YOCesV7pTA21_zljiV2zuKUK1-E/view?usp=drivesdk
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 28 January, 2021, 05:11:42 PM
A working guillotine costs only £1100.
Now.  I am not a scientist of doing numbers, but I am pretty sure this is less than 1 million pounds, and in these austerity times we surely have to go with the most cost-effective method of accountability?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2021, 05:14:21 PM
Slamming a professor as 'partisan' because she isn't Brexity enough. Now trying to scare the shit out of a law firm for having the audacity to hold the government to account. We're in full-on banana republic territory now, aren't we? But a very British take.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 28 January, 2021, 06:45:30 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2021, 05:14:21 PM
We're in full-on banana republic territory now, aren't we?

More bad news: you're not even a republic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 28 January, 2021, 06:47:30 PM
They're using our money to stop us finding out how much of our money they've wasted!!!

AAARGGH!!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 January, 2021, 07:23:07 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 28 January, 2021, 06:45:30 PMMore bad news: you're not even a republic.
Banana monarchy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 29 January, 2021, 09:00:53 PM
The Daily (NY Times' podcast) was an interesting listen today.  Focussed on how QAnon followers dealt with the situation when their promised moment - all the Democrats' paedophile-ring conspiracy crimes being exposed during the Biden inauguration - didn't happen. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2021, 09:20:12 PM
I'm going to assume that it's like quite a lot of cults and went something like this:

"Instead of abandoning their beliefs when the flood and the flying saucer failed to materialise, most cult members actually consolidated their beliefs and increased their attachment to the group."

That's from the Gruniad's "It's not the end of the world when doomsday prophets get it wrong" (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/20/end-of-world-doomsday-prophets).

The short story is that it's a lot easier to add more bullshit to the original bullshit than it is for someone to admit (or face the fact) that they've been fooled by a bunch of bullshit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 January, 2021, 09:57:45 PM
This video by the Internet Historian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QynNpzqYt0Y) is sort of relevant.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2021, 11:42:27 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 January, 2021, 09:57:45 PM
This video by the Internet Historian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QynNpzqYt0Y) is sort of relevant.

Am really enjoying a bunch of Internet Historian videos now. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 29 January, 2021, 11:59:40 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 29 January, 2021, 11:42:27 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 29 January, 2021, 09:57:45 PM
This video by the Internet Historian (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QynNpzqYt0Y) is sort of relevant.

Am really enjoying a bunch of Internet Historian videos now. Thanks.

His No Man's Sky video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5BJVO3PDeQ) was not what I was expecting at all, and probably his best work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: shaolin_monkey on 30 January, 2021, 03:58:31 AM
"Hardcore Gangster Rapturist"

Yeah, I stopped there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 01 February, 2021, 08:14:34 PM
"OoP BE DO!" (https://twitter.com/OliDugmore/status/1356198125506080768)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 March, 2021, 09:24:32 PM
Blimey - there's been no politics at all for over a month!

I enjoyed this story: Piers Morgan leaves ITV's Good Morning Britain after row over Meghan remarks (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56334082).

Mainly because I've always thought Piers was a complete [Khonsu]*.


*Admin. note: your expletive has been automatically replaced with a random deity.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 March, 2021, 10:21:37 PM
Piers Morgan will never refuse an opportunity to act like a dick. I don't think he realises he blew his chance at a knighthood when he hacked that dead wee girl's phone.

I liked the Irish times take on things (https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/tv-radio-web/harry-and-meghan-the-union-of-two-great-houses-the-windsors-and-the-celebrities-is-complete-1.4504502)

QuoteHaving a monarchy next door is a little like having a neighbour who's really into clowns and has daubed their house with clown murals, displays clown dolls in each window and has an insatiable desire to hear about and discuss clown-related news stories. More specifically, for the Irish, it's like having a neighbour who's really into clowns and, also, your grandfather was murdered by a clown.

Beyond this, it's the stuff of children's stories. Having a queen as head of state is like having a pirate or a mermaid or Ewok as head of state. What's the logic? Bees have queens, but the queen bee lays all of the eggs in the hive. The queen of the Britons has laid just four British eggs, and one of those is the sweatless creep Prince Andrew, so it's hardly deserving of applause.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 March, 2021, 10:40:41 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 March, 2021, 09:24:32 PM
Blimey - there's been no politics at all for over a month!

I enjoyed this story: Piers Morgan leaves ITV's Good Morning Britain after row over Meghan remarks (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56334082).

Mainly because I've always thought Piers was a complete [Khonsu]*.


*Admin. note: your expletive has been automatically replaced with a random deity.

I've occasionally enjoyed him putting Tories on the spot and ripping them a new one for botching the pandemic so much.  For a few seconds I think, 'Nice one, Piers!'... but then I remember: he's Piers cocking Morgan.  Good riddance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 March, 2021, 07:37:06 AM
The frothing over the Markle interview (with Harry sat there as a lovely adornment ...), especially over at the Fail, would be amusing if it were not actually so disturbing for what it says about their priorities.

I mean, we've got over 100k officially dead due to the pandemic.  We've got public services not just on the point of collapse  but now so far over it is terrifying.  This government has channelled millions into dubious contracts for goods and services, including a 'test and trace' service that can't even keep track of its own staff.  The government has just approved a six figure payout over allegations of bullying conducted by a member of the cabinet.

Yet what is the singularly most important issue of the day?  An American actresses claims of racism and bullying against a bunch of benefits scroungers that do nothing for the country except siphon off money and property.

The UK is definitely a "potato republic"  (like a banana republic with all the corruption, cronyism and crap ... just also with weather that's really only good for growing tubers in the ground!)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 March, 2021, 07:42:37 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 March, 2021, 07:37:06 AM
This government has channelled millions into dubious contracts for goods and services, including a 'test and trace' service that can't even keep track of its own staff.

Not millions, £37 billion that no one can adequately account for on the dysfunctional Track & Trace scheme alone.

To try and put that number into some kind of context, for that amount of money, you could put Perseverance on Mars nineteen times or give every one of the NHS's 285,000 nurses an annual £10K pay rise for the next thirteen years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 March, 2021, 08:44:15 AM
Fair point Jim.  I also note over at the Grauniad that the number of councils in the UK planning on cutting services, raising council tax and just going under has increased precipitously under the pandemic.

Sunak's latest budget is probably a pretty good indication of who is going to fit the bill for his largesse.  I think what a lot of people forget is that furlough may have kept some people in jobs but the main purpose was to funnel money to employers to keep the jobs going.  So the real beneficiaries were the likes of Sunak's in-laws.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 March, 2021, 09:30:08 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 March, 2021, 08:44:15 AMthe real beneficiaries were the likes of Sunak's in-laws.

Quite so. Track & Trace may not actually have tracked or traced anyone, but it certainly delivered a lot of shareholder value to Serco and Deloittes. Add to that the government simply overriding all normal procurement procedures for public expenditure and awarding PPE contracts valued in hundreds of millions to companies with no track record of supplying PPE but were run by their mates* and what you have is nothing more than a smash-and-grab raid on the public finances, with the small matter of 125,000 covid dead as collateral damage.

This should be a government-ending scandal, with criminal prosecutions, and riots in the street if those things weren't forthcoming. Instead, the media is running interference for the Tories, as always. Never mind the fact that they've handed unimaginable sums of taxpayers' money to their mates and killed your Nan, what about Meghan and Harry, eh? Eh?!


*Supplying PPE at inflated unit costs that was often not fit for purpose. I've seen no suggestion, even from people who are trying very hard to scrutinise this, that any of these fuckers has been forced to re-supply the PPE to the correct spec, or pay back the money due to failure to deliver on the contract.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 10 March, 2021, 05:30:04 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 10 March, 2021, 09:30:08 AM

Never mind the fact that they've handed unimaginable sums of taxpayers' money to their mates ...


Speaking of which, (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56341013) the government has commissioned on official feasibility report into building a bridge across an extremely deep chasm, which is now slightly less deep because it's full off bombs. This bridge would link a remote part of Scotland to Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland does not even have basic infrastructure, like a motorway between it's two largest cities.

They're basically paying one of their mates to produce a 300 page document, the first page will be along the lines of "No Boris, what the fuck?" and the next 299 will be a catalogue of all the various bombs dumped in the Irish from what ship and when.

Pterry Prachett had a character called Bloody Stupid Johnson didn't he?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 11 March, 2021, 08:36:01 AM
Last I heard they were going to avoid Beauford's Dyke by building a series of tunnels some distance south, with a big roundabout under the Isle of Man. No, seriously.

I'd love to think there's an aspect of future proofing going on, given the big laugh that is climate change, but it's bugger all to do with that. It's more like Famine Roads.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 March, 2021, 09:27:10 AM
The tunnels thing was quite something, given that Liverpool and Heysham both had exits. Beyond the sheer insanity of the plan—and the tiny snag that the Isle of Mann is not British—there were suggestions the insane idea of two English exits that are only 90 minutes away from each other by road was down to Johnson wanting it to look balanced on the images that were being circulated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 11 March, 2021, 12:04:50 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 10 March, 2021, 05:30:04 PM
They're basically paying one of their mates to produce a 300 page document,...

My old company went belly-up 10 years ago now, and I still walk past unlikely parcels of undeveloped land that we were paid to prepare planning application reports on. There's always money to be made consulting on fantasies and pure bollocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 11 March, 2021, 12:33:41 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 March, 2021, 10:40:41 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 March, 2021, 09:24:32 PM
Blimey - there's been no politics at all for over a month!

I enjoyed this story: Piers Morgan leaves ITV's Good Morning Britain after row over Meghan remarks (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56334082).

Mainly because I've always thought Piers was a complete [Khonsu]*.


*Admin. note: your expletive has been automatically replaced with a random deity.

I've occasionally enjoyed him putting Tories on the spot and ripping them a new one for botching the pandemic so much.  For a few seconds I think, 'Nice one, Piers!'... but then I remember: he's Piers cocking Morgan.  Good riddance.

Piers Morgan is contemptible, but he seems to have a knack for following the public mood. Its a bit surprising that he has so badly misjudged how his comments would be received in this case.

I suspect he'll turn up on Murdoch's "news" channel, where he'll have a hard right wing slant (in line with the way English voters now lean).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 11 March, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
"We're here today with globally-recognised millionaire tv celebrity Piers Morgan to talk about how he's been denied a platform.  Piers - what would you like to say to our 8 million viewers?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 March, 2021, 02:40:03 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 11 March, 2021, 09:27:10 AM
The tunnels thing was quite something, given that Liverpool and Heysham both had exits. Beyond the sheer insanity of the plan—and the tiny snag that the Isle of Mann is not British—there were suggestions the insane idea of two English exits that are only 90 minutes away from each other by road was down to Johnson wanting it to look balanced on the images that were being circulated.

Isn't there a Garth Ennis story about tunnels and bridges to Ireland which ran out of money?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 March, 2021, 02:41:34 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 11 March, 2021, 02:40:03 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 11 March, 2021, 09:27:10 AM
The tunnels thing was quite something, given that Liverpool and Heysham both had exits. Beyond the sheer insanity of the plan—and the tiny snag that the Isle of Mann is not British—there were suggestions the insane idea of two English exits that are only 90 minutes away from each other by road was down to Johnson wanting it to look balanced on the images that were being circulated.

Isn't there a Garth Ennis story about tunnels and bridges to Ireland which ran out of money?

(technically between Mega-City One and Brit-Cit with an off-ramp for Ireland).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2021, 03:40:43 AM
Newsthump must have a headline by now about the irony of women holding a vigil for a woman murdered by an off-duty polis being violently arrested by a large gang of mostly male polis.

Let me check ... ah, not yet. They're still leading with the fact that the Burmese protesters being shot in the street isn't getting as much headline space as the Megan/Morgan story (https://newsthump.com/2021/03/12/maybe-tomorrow-sighs-despondent-myanmar-protestor-after-scanning-global-headlines-again/).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 March, 2021, 10:23:39 AM
They've caught up with you...

https://newsthump.com/2021/03/14/people-of-clapham-protected-from-terrifying-small-group-of-mourners-holding-vigil/ (https://newsthump.com/2021/03/14/people-of-clapham-protected-from-terrifying-small-group-of-mourners-holding-vigil/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 March, 2021, 07:44:22 PM
Always wondered what I'd be doing if the country ever started slipping towards fascism.  Guess now I know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2021, 07:58:47 PM
Trying to decompress Cressida Dick's defense (see video (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56389824)) of her police going in mob-handed against a peaceful vigil is quite a thing.

The major beats:

1. She says that anyone who wasn't there can't judge how it was policed, then says she wasn't there but trusts that the correct decisions were made.
2. It was peaceful for much of the day, and not illegal, she says, but then it became an "unlawful gathering" (she doesn't explain how), and so police had to act the way they did.

Reminds me of watching those apartheid-era movies where a policeman would shout through a loudspeaker "thes is en illegal gethering" before opening fire on the crowd of unarmed civilians. This event should be a warning that we need to remove some powers from the police - but it looks like the Tories are gearing up to kick the can down the road by talking about reports and tough choices and blah.

---

Newsthump (https://newsthump.com/)'s done a few variations on the theme today:
- Beatings will continue until women know their place, confirm Met Police
- People of Clapham protected from terrifying small group of mourners holding vigil
- Metropolitan Police announce crackdown on Mothers' Day celebrations

---

Who could have predicted that giving the police sweeping powers to handle Covid restrictions would have resulted in them later abusing those same powers? [I would look back through this thread, but ... that way lies madness.]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2021, 08:28:32 PM
Watching the footage it is a bit hard to work out where the wheels came off.  It looks like whoever decided to send in the 'troops' to defend the bandstand really didn't think that one through.  Mind you, the decision not to allow it to go ahead was probably unhelpful in the first place.

Once again we are seeing anger boiling over.  We had BLM last summer, along with various anti-lockdown / restriction protests.  You can argue all the stats you want as far as murder is concerned but that really misses the point, doesn't it?  The simple fact is that there is a lot of fear and anger out there.

Is it coming to a head?  Millions have lost jobs and livelihoods.  Opportunities seem few and far between.  We have a government who seems to think that saying "you should be grateful you still have a job" is a sensible response to those who have literally put their lives on the line over the past year in the face of the pandemic.

Politicians across the spectrum are recognising the mood music to a certain extent, calling for answers on this event.  Is that going to be enough to dampen the febrile state of this nation though?  I think comments about the direction of travel are very valid.  Not to mention very, very frightening. :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2021, 08:48:52 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2021, 08:28:32 PM
Mind you, the decision not to allow it to go ahead was probably unhelpful in the first place.

Yeah, that seems to be the decision that allowed it to go wrong. The police said no, the crowd arrived anyway, so then they clamped down (to enforce their earlier no), and that created unnecessary conflict.

There's actually quite a good breakdown on this BBC side article (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56394344), although they've nothing yet on the fact that quite a large crowd is currently protesting outside Met HQ.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: I, Cosh on 14 March, 2021, 10:27:18 PM
Deliberate decision by the Met to play it like this. They can crack a few heads and claim the astounding doublethink of intervening to protect the public welfare. A goal which might be better served by not employing and empowering potential sex offenders. Or, indeed, allowing their officers to systematically trick women into sexual relationships over a period of years without repercussions.

Then there's tonight's ludicrous follow up: https://t.co/WJlVr18sfK

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 14 March, 2021, 11:23:40 PM

So, what's to be done?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 15 March, 2021, 12:07:27 AM
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/srTYyZ1BjBtGU/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 12:52:32 AM
Quote from: I, Cosh on 14 March, 2021, 10:27:18 PM
Then there's tonight's ludicrous follow up: https://t.co/WJlVr18sfK

Ridiculous response-by-flowchart there from some drab commander who had to do something, anything when confronted by a crowd of peaceful protesters that they're not allowed to kettle. I can write a computer program to run the Met:

if(crowd){
   protectStatue();

   if(womenTalking){
      arrestViolently();
   }
}
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2021, 06:28:42 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2021, 08:48:52 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 14 March, 2021, 08:28:32 PM
Mind you, the decision not to allow it to go ahead was probably unhelpful in the first place.

Yeah, that seems to be the decision that allowed it to go wrong. The police said no, the crowd arrived anyway, so then they clamped down (to enforce their earlier no), and that created unnecessary conflict.


I feel like any enquiry into this is going to end up dodging some of the questions here.  I've seen reports of other police forces agreeing to allow these vigils to go forward for short periods of time to allow the expression of feeling evoked, allowing them to be controlled, and then ended calmly.

Cressida Dick's position is interesting.  Politicians across the spectrum, including the normally mute Home Secretary, are condemning the Met.  She is standing firm.  Now does that sound right?

The same goes with Patel's response.  Why so forthright?  Could it have anything to do with the bill going through the commons today?  The one that wants to place quite severe restrictions on protests and rights?

Much as it pains me, I do find myself pondering Spikd's position on the whole 'vigil' issue.  They take the usual provocative position that Sarah Everard's death has been politicised.  The usual collection of statistics are trotted out about gender, age and murder.

From what I can tell a lot of the complaints from Women's group surrounds  aggressively and unwelcome sexualised behaviour by males (cat-calling, comments, women made to feel uncomfortable while exercising, following etc ...) that is contributing to a general feeling of insecurity and disgust.  The argument, perfectly reasonable to my mind, is that what allegedly happened (and let's bear in mind that even though in all probability it is going to turn out as we suspect, it still needs to go through due process) is the inevitable result of allowing such predatorily sexualised behaviour to go on without being challenged.

So the rank hypocrisy of the likes of the Mail who is reporting on this whilst it's website is stuffed to the gills with articles about Amanda Holden's 'rather leggy displays' or the latest instagrammer / influencer / Towie / what the hell are you doing? ... and their revealing swimwear sends starkly contradictory messages.  As does the fact that not all of the pictures involved are taken through a telephoto lens but clearly with the cooperation of those involved.

I know that there is a risk of 'victim blaming' here (something that I am personally a little too familiar with ...), I would like to point out that this whole situation is opening up a major can of worms.  It raises questions about our attitude towards sex and sexuality as a whole though, what is and is not healthy, how to navigate interpersonal relationships, how to behave in public ...  Not to mention how we manage and 'police' it.

Nor do I think politicians across the spectrum are in the best position to remark / judge the matter.  There is, I suspect, a rather unsavoury seam to explore there.  Plenty of stones I suspect people of all political persuasions would prefer were left unturned, not least of all members of the Islington party.

No, we stand in a very dangerous place right now.  A government that believes itself impervious.  A media that pursues its own agenda.  Democratic institutions and processes directly attacked.  A scared population ...

:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2021, 09:19:11 AM
Patel's response was presumably gamed out. It amounted to 'lessons learned'. There will be a report. She will say that lessons have been learned. Then this shit will happen again. Rinse and repeat.

As for behaviours, it's ingrained from year dot, and we all have to do what we can to change that. My kid's first public experience of sexism happened when she was about three, in a supermarket. An old fucker said she should smile for him. My wife was fuming, because the last thing you should be doing is trying to distract a little kid away from their parent; then adding the "smile for me" bullshit. Around the same time, we had a "boys will be boys" incident at play school, which infuriated me.

Issues continue at infant school. To the school's credit, the teachers there are trying to teach the children about important women through history. Mary Seacole and Mary Anning are recent examples. Some parents weren't familiar with these figures. A few of us recommended books, such as Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls. Probably inevitable responses followed from parents of boys, such as "we got the boy version of that" (thereby somewhat missing the point that boys are the 'default') and the 'hold me back' of "yeah, my boy wouldn't be interested in that stuff". Yes, he probably wouldn't. And that's the fucking point.

All of this continues as kids grow. Boys: don't cry. Don't do anything girly. Don't play with dolls (because heaven forbid you play act at being a parent). Stop doing gymnastics. Don't sew. Be tough, because that's 'manly'. Oh, and girls: be quiet. Don't be forthright in your opinions! Don't dress in a manner that will attract attention. And so on.

Everything is fucking broken and this is just part of it. That a woman was murdered by a man whose colleagues just trampled over a vigil for her really is the UK digging a hole when I thought it might finally have reached rock bottom. And now, today, we'll see the beginning of a bill that will effectively outlaw protest entirely in the UK.

That notion earlier in the thread of wondering how you'd feel as your country slowly shifts towards authoritarianism. Well, now we know. The UK is set to become the Hungary of northern Europe.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 15 March, 2021, 09:40:30 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2021, 06:28:42 AM
Plenty of stones I suspect people of all political persuasions would prefer were left unturned, not least of all members of the Islington party.

What does this mean?  I used to live in Islington and haven't a clue what your'e talking about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 15 March, 2021, 09:47:10 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2021, 09:19:11 AM
That notion earlier in the thread of wondering how you'd feel as your country slowly shifts towards authoritarianism. Well, now we know. The UK is set to become the Hungary of northern Europe.

You're not the only person to have had this thought. (https://www.irishlegal.com/article/uk-could-follow-hungary-and-poland-in-backsliding-on-rule-of-law)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2021, 11:36:21 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 15 March, 2021, 09:40:30 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2021, 06:28:42 AM
Plenty of stones I suspect people of all political persuasions would prefer were left unturned, not least of all members of the Islington party.

What does this mean?  I used to live in Islington and haven't a clue what your'e talking about.
https://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/crime/paedophile-derek-slade-left-half-estate-to-islington-politician-3830816
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 05:17:36 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2021, 09:19:11 AM
As for behaviours, it's ingrained from year dot, and we all have to do what we can to change that. My kid's first public experience of sexism happened when she was about three, in a supermarket. An old fucker said she should smile for him. My wife was fuming, because the last thing you should be doing is trying to distract a little kid away from their parent; then adding the "smile for me" bullshit. Around the same time, we had a "boys will be boys" incident at play school, which infuriated me.

Lots of this sort of ingrained, low-level sexism with my daughter, as well - although much more when she was younger than she is now (8). Last time someone opened with (over the top of my daughter's head, ignoring her, to me) "Isn't she beautiful?!", I responded with  "And fiercely intelligent." This might seem like me being a dick, and maybe it is - but there's too much focus on looks (for girls) and not enough on depth.

We went to watch the girls' soccer the other day because she's suddenly developed an interest in being a goalie, and I was explaining that there was no girls' soccer when I grew up. She wanted to know why, and I told her that it was considered a boys sport and that for a lot of sports the general idea was that girls weren't tough enough. Anyway - she was spitting about that for a while. Entirely incredulous. Fierce. I like her. She's not taking any prisoners.

Funt: apologies, but I somehow did an edit rather than a reply. I hope this is correctly reverted—IP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 05:42:13 PM
Aging sexual perverts in fancy dress declare that gay marriage is a sin (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-56402096) - that there Pope fella is dressed all in pink, as well. You couldn't make it up.

Of course, they have no choice but to take their stance against gay marriage because God told them to do it. In a celestial Zoom. "NO! IT IS SINFUL!" He intoned, dramatically. "Why is it sinful, oh Lord?", the Pope replied. "BECAUSE I WAS MADE UP BY SOME SMALL-MINDED DESERT TRIBE YEARS AGO AND THEY WERE PRETTY FUCKING CONSERVATIVE!" He explained, dramatically. "Ah, right-o, oh Lord. Now, moving onto the next item of business - how much gold do we own now?"...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2021, 05:52:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 15 March, 2021, 09:19:11 AMthere was no girls' soccer when I grew up
That's great to hear about your girl's team, and I hope your daughter continues to have fun with that. It wasn't so good at our school, sadly. Mini-IP was the only girl in football club (a year of 90 kids and 270 children in all). Credit to her: she stuck it out for an entire term, despite the people running the place not giving her any support whatsoever.

She'd sometimes come home and say no-one gave her the ball for the entire game. The boys were, naturally, being little shits and not being called on that. My wife at one point mentioned all this, quite sternly, to one of the people running it. Things improved for a week or two but then reverted. Later on, one more girl joined, but by then my kid didn't want anything to do with it. What's most disappointing is her aunt played pro-league football in her country. But in my town, inclusivity in that area is non-existent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 06:21:53 PM
Ah - sorry to hear that, IP. I know it's not as simple us US vs. UK on this one - or as simple as progressive / non-progressive. We've just lucked out and landed in an area that runs a lot of girls' soccer out of schools. They don't do girls' (american) football here, for example. I'm glad, though - that's a dangerous sport.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 15 March, 2021, 06:22:46 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 05:42:13 PM
Aging sexual perverts in fancy dress declare that gay marriage is a sin (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-56402096) - that there Pope fella is dressed all in pink, as well. You couldn't make it up.

Of course, they have no choice but to take their stance against gay marriage because God told them to do it. In a celestial Zoom. "NO! IT IS SINFUL!" He intoned, dramatically. "Why is it sinful, oh Lord?", the Pope replied. "BECAUSE I WAS MADE UP BY SOME SMALL-MINDED DESERT TRIBE YEARS AGO AND THEY WERE PRETTY FUCKING CONSERVATIVE!" He explained, dramatically. "Ah, right-o, oh Lord. Now, moving onto the next item of business - how much gold do we own now?"...

I've read an article that suggests this has been mistranslated - surprise, surprise. The specific bible verse should or could read 'A man should not lie with a boy as with a woman' or and was a pop at Greek pederasty. So they (bible folk) have been specifically told not to have sex with children but no it's the gays that are ruining lives and destroying families.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 15 March, 2021, 07:43:38 PM
QuoteI'm concerned that a young woman's murder could be hijacked by those who would seek to defund the police and destabilise our society, making it even harder for women to come forward and report assaults.Priti Patel House of Commons

Am I the only one staggered by this statement on every level imaginable?  So now it is leftist agitators to blame?   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 08:05:37 PM
"Defund the Police" is a terrible slogan - it comes oven-ready for criticism because people willfully misconstrue it to mean "Remove the Police". It should be "Reform the Police". But I know that lacks bite, so I don't really know what it should be.

Priti Patel is, of course, not a nice person. In fact, she's a proven bully. But Boris has rewarded her for being a bully - so we shouldn't be too surprised at her views.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2021, 08:20:51 PM

Free the police.

Make them independent with direct public funding/accountability. Get them back to upholding the law for everyone and away from enforcing legislation for the few.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 15 March, 2021, 08:23:07 PM
I'm all in favor of deep systemic reformations of our constabulary, but the realist side of me feels that they're far to deep into their habits to be 'freed' so easily. They enjoy affectively being able to act without fear of any real consequences.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2021, 09:14:10 PM

Yes, because they're shielded by the government in return for protection from the plebs. Take away two shields at once and watch them both scramble to reform.

Sure, something like that presents a lot of organisational, financial, social, and transitional problems, and can't be achieved overnight - nor should such a thing be rushed, in my not so humble. For now I present the idea in principle; all things being equal, and assuming for now that it could work, would it be a desirable goal?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 09:14:27 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 15 March, 2021, 08:23:07 PM
I'm all in favor of deep systemic reformations of our constabulary, but the realist side of me feels that they're far to deep into their habits to be 'freed' so easily. They enjoy affectively being able to act without fear of any real consequences.

Yeah - I have a personal experience with that - arrested for a crime I didn't commit (sounds like the opening of a cheesy 80s movie), then later acquitted in court when my ridiculous plethora of alibis became apparent. The one witness (an off duty "special constable") the police had, who directly identified me in court, then admitted that he'd only done that because he'd assumed the police had identified the correct person.

So far, so justice being served - except for a couple of things that still worry me. If I'd had no alibis I'd have been stitched up for that crime. And what about the special - he just got to walk away after doing that. And what about the cops that arrested me? They did that on pure speculation - and no reprimand for them either. So, I was lucky - and they all got to go and play the same trick on the next mug who happened along.

I haven't trusted any cops since then. They have too much power - and they're not accountable enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2021, 09:31:12 PM

Same for me, Funt. I was assaulted inside a police station by five officers (not bad, not a beating or anything, but forced to the ground and cuffed basically for flinching) while others looked on.

I was charged with assault.

In the magistrate's court, the cctv footage from inside the police station - my only witness - was "unavailable due to a corrupted hard drive" and the two officers called to give evidence gave conflicting statements. Even the clerk of the court picked up on the inconsistencies. Plus the fact that, you know, I didn't do it. You'd have been proud of me, arguing my corner.

Guilty.

Of some kind of technical assault that isn't really assault but kind of is on an official record. They fined me two hundred quid and refused to pay on grounds of unsatisfactory service. They barked at me for a bit until I started sending them bills of my own for the time it was taking me to deal with their bullsh#t and they eventually left me alone.

You can't beat the system but, by turning its own methods against it, you can force it to a stalemate. Until they get the batons out, at which point everybody's lost.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgeurko on 15 March, 2021, 09:38:54 PM
cops are scum
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2021, 07:22:28 AM

No, cops are confused. They can either be constables upholding the law or officers enforcing legislation but not both.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 16 March, 2021, 09:48:59 AM
... and today's "jolly little wheeze" to address the concerns.  Johnson wants to deploy more undercover police officers in night clubs to ensure women's safety.

a) not many nightclubs open at the moment;
b) undercover police don't have an even remotely savoury reputation for women's safety;
c) it's the streets that women are complaining about.

:o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 16 March, 2021, 10:18:18 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2021, 07:22:28 AM

No, cops are confused. They can either be constables upholding the law or officers enforcing legislation but not both.

Rare that I agree with Shark about anything,* but the ideal status of the police is, for me, the Peel model, where a police officer is no more or less empowered than a private citizen, but is essentially deputised by the community to serve that community (and thus trained better to deploy the powers which any citizen is entitled to use, such as restraint and arrest). Of course, as with all such lofty ideals, the real question is how we get to there from here and there is no political will to undertake such root and branch reform.

* Differentiating "enforcing legislation" and "upholding the law" requires some semantic acrobatics that, for the avoidance of doubt, I have no interest in getting into.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 March, 2021, 10:33:13 AM

Political will can be influenced by sufficient public will. All we have to do at this stage is launch the idea and see if it floats.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 March, 2021, 07:24:03 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 15 March, 2021, 05:42:13 PM
Aging sexual perverts in fancy dress declare that gay marriage is a sin (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-56402096)

Ah, Newsthump is playing catch-up with me again. I should get a job there.

It's 'impossible' for God to bless all the gay people that He created, insists Church. (https://newsthump.com/2021/03/16/its-impossible-for-god-to-bless-all-the-gay-people-that-he-created-insists-church/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 March, 2021, 12:07:27 PM
British politicians showing they can write satire as well as Newsthump.  Dominic Cummings giving evidence to the Scientific Committee ... because we all know how much he knows about science and how accurate / advanced his understanding is. :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 17 March, 2021, 06:38:17 PM
THIS IS FINE. (https://twitter.com/netpol/status/1372102846028611584)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 17 March, 2021, 09:51:44 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 17 March, 2021, 06:38:17 PM
THIS IS FINE. (https://twitter.com/netpol/status/1372102846028611584)
Just like referees. Part of the field, so anything goes.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 17 March, 2021, 10:18:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 15 March, 2021, 08:20:51 PM
Free the police.
Make them independent with direct public funding/accountability. Get them back to upholding the law for everyone and away from enforcing legislation for the few.

You want judges? because that's how you get judges.
(https://i.imgur.com/96RYk5dt.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2021, 01:17:35 AM
The good news is that the pigs what bashed-up those women at a vigil didn't go rogue after all.
The bad news is that they didn't go rogue. (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/19/priti-patel-wanted-police-stop-people-gathering-sarah-everard-vigil)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 March, 2021, 08:11:49 AM
... yet politicians are trying to paint it that way.  Apparently kneeling on women was an 'operational decision'!

Fair point.  Then again if you turn around and tell coppers that they need to treat people turning up to vigils as criminals what do you expect.

Contrast this with police responses to traveler funerals during the lockdown.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 20 March, 2021, 09:35:30 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 March, 2021, 08:11:49 AM
Contrast this with police responses to traveler funerals during the lockdown.

I mean, I would, but I don't have the slightest clue what the police response to traveller funerals was?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2021, 03:25:22 PM
A strung-out, under-resourced and undermanned police force with nothing to lose and everything to gain by brutalising anyone with a camera?  That can only end well.

This shithole of a country is currently brewing-up the perfect recipe for accelerationism and at this point, I'll take it.  Anything to bring this nightmare to an end.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 March, 2021, 06:15:53 PM

"Anything to bring this nightmare to an end."

Those are truly terrifying words.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 March, 2021, 07:54:47 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 20 March, 2021, 09:35:30 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 March, 2021, 08:11:49 AM
Contrast this with police responses to traveler funerals during the lockdown.

I mean, I would, but I don't have the slightest clue what the police response to traveller funerals was?

Leave 'em to it.  Massive gatherings?  Go for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 20 March, 2021, 11:26:47 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 March, 2021, 06:15:53 PM

"Anything to bring this nightmare to an end."

Those are truly terrifying words.

The country turning into Chile circa 1973 is slightly more worrying to me tbh.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 07:21:32 AM

It's the charismatic psychopaths with all the answers waiting in the wings that worry me.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 March, 2021, 08:58:52 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 07:21:32 AM

It's the charismatic psychopaths with all the answers waiting in the wings that worry me.

On the bright side there aren't many of those in British politics ... certainly not 'charismatic', or intellectual lightweights, much less welterweights.

On the fringes there are plenty of charismatic types to be sure ... Piers Corbyn, Nigel Farage, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon ... but they have a tendency to shoot themselves in the foot as soon as they open their mouth in certain circumstances.

Granted the likes of Johnson are of far more concern ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 10:24:02 AM

This person doesn't have to be British, in this interconnected and interdependent world. If enough people in enough countries are sick of their governments it might not be too hard to convince them to let the good old UN, or similar, take over. For our own good, of course. Just until things get better.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 March, 2021, 12:02:43 PM
You know, I'm not even going to try to disagree with you.  Social media has so much to answer for.

I wonder how long it will be before someone decides that Zuckerberg needs to be spending time in the Hague?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 12:15:13 PM

As soon as his usefulness is at an end.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 March, 2021, 12:39:57 PM
It's my understanding that the UN is just a kind of international forum, and can't "take over" a government, it can only write sternly worded letters.

The UN can no more run a country than this forum can edit the prog.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 12:56:22 PM

The people would demand it - just as they have demanded being placed under house-arrest and to be injected with an experimental vaccine.

And it is indeed tempting to pool our resources across farming, industry, finance, law, research, defence, social care, medicine so that we can all live better lives, free of all these disruptive local inconsistencies and squabbles. "We can help, if you'll let us." (This does not apply to you, you, you, you, you, or you.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 March, 2021, 01:02:43 PM
So what I'm getting from you is that I could start a campaign to supplant Tharg with this forum.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 02:51:49 PM

I suppose you could, but I wouldn't expect you to get very far. If you put £10K into the effort, you might buy a small chance. With £100K you'd be able to buy a significant chance and with a million you could put your guy (or yourself) into the position with relative ease.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 March, 2021, 03:35:43 PM
No, not me or a guy appointed by me. This forum, would be running the prog. We'd all have to put our heads together and agree on what kind of prog to put out.

Every week.

I say this with the best will in the world, and don't mean any offense to anyone here, but it just wouldn't work. I'm sure several individuals here could do it, but as a collective it would be a disaster. The forum is not set up to do it. And we don't even need translators to communicate with each other.

Just like the UN isn't set up to take over any country. It's just a place where many highly qualified people* from all over the world come together and try (and often fail) to work together on issues that affect the whole world. It is not a monolithic entity that will usurp a democracy when it judges things have gone all wonky.

I don't think any country on this planet has a single law, policy or piece of legislation that has been enacted and enforced because the UN forced it upon them. Such things may have been adopted because many highly qualified people* from all over the world came together to work on an issue, then governments looked at the fruits of their labour and thought "they might be on to something there, we should probably base policy/legislation/law on these findings made by highly qualified people* from various backgrounds".

*although the probably haven't read every single article on the internet about whatever issue, or watched every single youtube video on said issue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2021, 04:49:03 PM
Clearly, the UN is a complicated mechanism.

It's not a Blofeld-run evil, as the mad hatters might have it, but it's also not just a benign suggestion box, because it does participate in enforcement actions from time to time.

You can dip your toe into something positive-sounding, like the UN's decolonization efforts, and immediately find complexities of aim and result (https://escholarship.org/content/qt07g886jq/qt07g886jq_noSplash_8f8335d72026fa2cd1a5af97f4b0f99a.pdf?t=noae7q) (which is not surprising, given the number of moving parts).

---

That seems to be a distraction from the core discussion of British politics, and the current swing to increasing levels of authoritarianism by the incumbent government, who don't have a viable (or coherent) opposition in a position to stop them.  They are, clearly, in hog heaven.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 21 March, 2021, 07:53:07 PM
Give Keir Starmer a chance.  He's just keeping his powder dry.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2021, 08:44:55 PM
Another hard-hitting, in-depth article from Auntie Beeb:

(https://i.imgur.com/ZDA3X5k.png)

I managed to get a copy of the list of aims, so far:

1. Wear pink in support of those gays. They'll like that. Just as long as they don't want to join the firm.
2. Try our very best not to drive away any more mixed race scroungers people.
3. Maybe try a corgi cross-breed - a coodle! That's diverse!
4. Try and get our ginger back from that witch!
5. We already have plenty of hats ... maybe a more diverse property portfolio?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2021, 09:23:44 PM

One is unconcerned with the physiognomy, pigmentation, or personal preferences of the peasants procured to perform primarily perfunctory procedures in one's pile of palaces.
It must have been one's head butler what done it. Always a bit dodgy, that bugger. Now bring one a Drambuie slammer and throw another corgi on the fire - Love Island's about to start...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: dweezil2 on 22 March, 2021, 12:36:41 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2021, 08:44:55 PM
Another hard-hitting, in-depth article from Auntie Beeb:

(https://i.imgur.com/ZDA3X5k.png)

I managed to get a copy of the list of aims, so far:

1. Wear pink in support of those gays. They'll like that. Just as long as they don't want to join the firm.
2. Try our very best not to drive away any more mixed race scroungers people.
3. Maybe try a corgi cross-breed - a coodle! That's diverse!
4. Try and get our ginger back from that witch!
5. We already have plenty of hats ... maybe a more diverse property portfolio?


Which reminds me, how's that old sex tourist Andrew getting on, haven't heard from him in a while?
Bet he's gutted that international travel is unlikely to resume anytime soon.
Although private jets are probably exempt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 March, 2021, 02:38:18 AM
(https://2w6kxc22rrr9mabqt1mglgait6-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/new-labour-slogan-small.jpg)

*from Newsthump, but it's one of those ones where it's difficult to tell it apart from a real news story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 23 March, 2021, 12:39:45 AM
It's a shame that's not a real Labour Party ad, because it would be one of their better efforts.

Murdered teenager fined by police for attempting to prevent her own death. (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/teenager-fined-reporting-stalker-police-23775721)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 March, 2021, 08:41:48 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 March, 2021, 07:53:07 PMGive Keir Starmer a chance.  He's just keeping his powder dry.
His entire strategy appears to be "do whatever is needed to win back the red wall seats". About the only real positive over the past few months has been his inference Labour might back PR—but I suspect that will vanish in a puff of smoke sooner or later when Labour realises it would therefore never win another majority (even though the chances of that are slim anyway, and zero on an actual majority vote).

With the Lib Dems also now a busted flush, this doesn't bode well for the next GE, unless things change in a big way. (I'd take heart in the Green vote growing consistently, but every Green vote outside of Lucas's seat is—bar short money—a wasted vote.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 March, 2021, 01:42:58 PM
Utterly, utterly useless (https://labourheartlands.com/starmer-to-back-tory-takeover-of-liverpool-city-council/). 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 24 March, 2021, 06:13:01 PM
Labor just lost Liverpool for the next couple of elections. Manchester has been increasingly falling into the Blue as well.

Shit is absolutely fucked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 24 March, 2021, 07:22:13 PM
Apparently, Labour are actually more electable than ever now the grown ups are back in charge, and the real problem is people talking the party down and not keeping the faith.  Oh, and don't forget the all-powerful hard left Cultural Marxists who want Labour to lose*.

/clears throat
"NOT A CULT."



* Actually, they probably have a valid point with this one - I know I definately never want bootlickers and right-wing psychopaths to win elections.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 March, 2021, 08:19:54 PM
Would the Liverpool thing have happened if the council hadn't been doing dodgy deals?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 March, 2021, 08:22:50 PM
Labour needs to understand the electoral maths has changed. Blair didn't realise he was a blip and, frankly, had been elected in the usual unrepresentative manner. Corbyn never got to grips with this either. Starmer has wobbled a bit towards PR, but is still lukewarm on it. But until Labour can get over itself and learn to work with others, there is no path to a Labour win.

The choice is stark: perennially be the biggest losers, yelling into the void while the Tories fuck everything up, or regularly lead (and be the biggest power within) a coalition that'd likely include the Greens, the Libs and possibly nats, depending on how the election goes. Also thereby ushering in an age of more cooperative and collaborative politics than the us vs them shitshow we've long had and that's responsible for so many of the problems in this country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 March, 2021, 01:03:46 AM
While Keir Starmer avoids taking on any fights he can't win, but has yet to realize that means he'll never take on a fight, north of the border we have Alex Salmond trying his his best to win independence for Scotland by ... splintering the SNP and providing endless miles of negative headlines.

This got farcical quickly today when someone told him that he should be pronouncing "Alba" as "Alabar" and he spent almost all of his excruciating interview on C4 News (https://www.channel4.com/news/alex-salmond-says-alba-party-will-fill-void-in-the-independence-cause) referring to his new splinter group as "Alba Alabar", which started to sound a lot like Allahu akbar.

Oh, good grief.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2021, 01:40:50 AM
George Galloway 2.0 is online.

Content Warning for police violence: cops cover their names and badges before laying into protestors yet again. (https://twitter.com/MichaelEast1983/status/1375612429460242434)  ACA - and I cannot stress this enough - B.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 27 March, 2021, 02:30:47 AM
I'm getting a little pissed off with labour activists who are outraged at a "Tory takeover" of Liverpool but never got outraged about decades of graft and corruption.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 March, 2021, 09:11:13 AM
I'm with you on that one.  TBH the more I learn about the party the more disturbed I become.  I'm just keeping in mind the quality of our local MP and AM.  Both of a completely different stripe it seems.

It really does feel a bit like the central party and that of some of the major cities is the problem.  The only thing is it does pale compared to the level of graft that we've seen from those connected to a certain other party ...

British politics is rapidly making the most corrupt, disturbing banana republic look like the model of British democracy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2021, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 March, 2021, 02:30:47 AM
I'm getting a little pissed off with labour activists who are outraged at a "Tory takeover" of Liverpool but never got outraged about decades of graft and corruption.
Or how the Tories don't have the moral right to dismantle everything good about the UK because they didn't win a majority of the vote and yet won't get behind PR in enough numbers to make a difference, because that means Labour wouldn't ever be able to pull the same trick either.

It's depressing, really. The Tories are awful and directly to blame for all the shit that's happening now. But if Labour had at any point from 1997 onwards got over itself and recognised it could transform British politics—albeit at the cost of Labour never winning a majority again—things could have been very different today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2021, 12:17:12 PM
Maybe I'm getting too old, but I don't know if the Northern Independence Party (https://www.joe.co.uk/news/the-northern-independence-party-were-planning-on-taking-all-of-labours-seats-in-the-north-268170) are a real thing or yet another Reelpolitik podcast meme that's gotten out of hand again.  It's not even April and 2021 is giving me something that I genuinely cannot tell if it's a real political party or a shitpost.
Either way, it's great to see centrists filling their nappies with the old "but they'll split the vote and hand victory to the Tories for a generation!" canard, which as we know from the 2019 election isn't actually a problem for centrists when it's the LibDems doing it.

Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 March, 2021, 02:30:47 AM
I'm getting a little pissed off with labour activists who are outraged at a "Tory takeover" of Liverpool but never got outraged about decades of graft and corruption.

I imagine most were unaware.  I certainly don't recall it being national news, even when the media were publishing absolutely anything they could that painted Labour in a bad light.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 March, 2021, 02:39:36 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2021, 12:17:12 PMEither way, it's great to see centrists filling their nappies with the old "but they'll split the vote and hand victory to the Tories for a generation!" canard, which as we know from the 2019 election isn't actually a problem for centrists when it's the LibDems doing it.
The 2019 election was a shitshow from almost everyone, bar, arguably, Plaid. The Libs were high on their own hubris. The Greens had plainly had enough of getting a kicking through standing down and losing short money. But it's also disingenuous to blame what occurred on the Lib Dems. They, the Greens and Plaid formed a pact and invited Labour as well. Labour, as ever, regardless of who is in charge, not only declined to be a part of it (likely costing Labour dozens of seats) but also in a number of reports spent a shit-ton of time derailing Lib Dem seats in London, which otherwise would have trimmed the Tory majority.

This isn't about centrists—it's about representative government (something that Labour's leadership to date has never had any interest in, but that many of its members have) and providing the framework for a future where the UK could have a progressive government and stop lurching back and forth whenever the colour of government switches from blue to red. (And, yes, I'm sure some people will scream BUT YELLOW TORIES about the Lib Dems. But they should 1. probably actually read their manifestos, and 2. recognise that in any coalition/Commons agreement Labour would be the driving force with probably 250-odd seats, with the Lib Dems and Greens each having 20–60, assuming the Greens could get over themselves on nuclear and whip red lines or the coalition could at least abandon the latter, if it had the numbers.)

It was interesting to see Best for Britain's recent polling. Assuming Farage bottles it again (very, very likely), but Labour goes it alone, we're all fucked. The Tories retain a sizeable majority. But if there was a smartly conceived pact, Labour would be very likely to lead a coalition and perhaps even has the numbers to take a majority itself. The price would almost certainly be PR (presumably AMS or STV), which would mean a future that involves consensus, collaboration and compromise. That Labour's leadership during the Blair/Brown/Corbyn years would rather the Tories ruled the country if Labour couldn't rule alone baffled me and continues to do so. It's such a dated way of thinking about politics.

So the choice is between Labour being the biggest losers or frequent coalition leaders. And if Labour's best argument is "you should vote for us to stop the Tories", then that's just not good enough. The UK throughout my entire lifetime has not by vote been a two-party system. Labour could choose to recognise that, but prefers not to because it also seeks power through the backing of a plurality (rather than a majority), rather than looking to a future where consensus and representation could win through. Given the party's broadly excellent history in voting reform, its constant reluctance to do anything regarding the Commons is a horrible blind spot.

Naturally, I would prefer a Labour government of any stripe—Blair; Brown; Corbyn; Starmer—to any Tory equivalent. But what I really want is for the shape of the Commons to look much like whoever voted for it. The only route to that has ever been Labour. But I suspect Labour will never do anything about that and will after the (likely) 2023 General Election instead fume at Lib Dem, Green and Plaid voters for not backing Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 March, 2021, 09:01:30 PM
I've just listened to today's The Daily podcast, and am absolutely horrified to see these voter suppression laws that Georgia has introduced now that it's getting way too purple for the Trump cult's* tastes.  Other former Republican stronghold states seem likely to follow suit.

My God, they are shameless, aren't they?  They don't even bother coming up with excuses any more for stopping minorities from voting. Democracy is dying, well, in darkness.

*Not a typo, though if it was, that would work too.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 March, 2021, 09:32:57 PM
Those are poor-form machinations from the Republicans. They're in a sticky situation, where the demographics suggest that they'll never win another election without doing one of two things:

1. Appealing to the ethnic minorities that they hate.
2. Removing the ethnic minorities that they hate.

They are going for option 2.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 March, 2021, 11:50:56 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 27 March, 2021, 12:17:12 PM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 27 March, 2021, 02:30:47 AM
I'm getting a little pissed off with labour activists who are outraged at a "Tory takeover" of Liverpool but never got outraged about decades of graft and corruption.

I imagine most were unaware.  I certainly don't recall it being national news, even when the media were publishing absolutely anything they could that painted Labour in a bad light.

Private Eye's been chronicling 'Uncle' Joe's shenanigans for years, but you only need to have watched Our Friends in the North or had any interaction whatsoever with local politics in a safe northern stronghold to be as shocked as Captain Renault (https://youtu.be/SjbPi00k_ME). In these long term investigations, when you actually have enough to make an arrest is crucial, but the overly dramatic timing and nature of his and Del Boy Hatton's capture does smack of a bit of a stunt.

Indigo Prime - that's about the most sensible and concise description of the current situation that I've seen.

Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 30 March, 2021, 09:01:30 PM
I've just listened to today's The Daily podcast, and am absolutely horrified to see these voter suppression laws that Georgia has introduced now that it's getting way too purple for the Trump cult's* tastes.  Other former Republican stronghold states seem likely to follow suit.

My God, they are shameless, aren't they?  They don't even bother coming up with excuses any more for stopping minorities from voting. Democracy is dying, well, in darkness.

*Not a typo, though if it was, that would work too.

Whilst there is a discussion to be had about proof of ID (I was shocked even at 18 to learn that as long as I gave my name and address and they could find it with the big book and ruler, I could vote), but the rest of it is pure evil shite - making it illegal to give water to people who have to stand in line for hours at the fewer polling stations for less time in the Georgia heat .. oh yeah, that's going to cut down a lot of thirst-based voter fraud. The president is (naturally) very limited in what he can do about state election laws. The republicans know (from demographics and birthrates if nothing else) that they can never win elections in some ares unless they stop people voting. Let's wait and see if Biden can come up with anything. They could always retaliate by making it illegal to give water to filibustering senators.

Meanwhile, back in a more sane and sensible country, it is proportionate to drag mourning women from a murdered woman's vigil, but not an IRA funeral, bunging £125k of taxpayers cash to your bit on the side is within the rules, breaking international law is official government policy, and nurses get applause and an effective pay-cut whilst useless chums get £37bn contracts. Hey ho.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 30 March, 2021, 11:54:40 PM
Oh and are they really going to call this Brexit celebration Festival UK? FUK? Seriously?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 March, 2021, 12:11:30 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 March, 2021, 11:50:56 PM
Whilst there is a discussion to be had about proof of ID

Given the statistically insignificant indicidence of in-person voter fraud,* there really isn't. The main reason being that it's a fantastically inefficient means of influencing the result of an election, which is why no one does it.

*Both here and in the US. I mean, seriously, it's in the tens of thousandths of one percent of votes cast.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 31 March, 2021, 01:22:02 AM
It's a complex topic that I can't really be arsed going into here, which is why I said "a discussion to be had" and left it at that.

If you don't think it even warrants discussion, fair enough
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 March, 2021, 07:13:37 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 31 March, 2021, 01:22:02 AM
It's a complex topic that I can't really be arsed going into here, which is why I said "a discussion to be had" and left it at that.

Statistically, honestly, it's not an issue. There are certainly arguments for looking at postal vote fraud but the arguments about voter ID as a means of combatting in-person voter fraud are almost exclusively advanced from the right as cover for voting suppression tactics.

I get that you don't want to get into the nitty-gritty of it, and that's fine, but I thought that needed to be clarified.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 31 March, 2021, 07:47:19 AM
I'm kind of fishing for good news here, but are the Republicans really in that bad a shape?   I'm pretty sure that if it hadn't been for the pandemic, Trump would have very comfortably bagged himself a second term.  Also, if anything should happen to Joe Biden, and of course I hope it doesn't, that puts Kamala Harris in the hotseat.  While it really shouldn't be an issue to vote a miced-race woman in, I think it probably would be.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 March, 2021, 09:24:15 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 March, 2021, 07:13:37 AM
I get that you don't want to get into the nitty-gritty of it, and that's fine, but I thought that needed to be clarified.

To clarify my annoying clarification — I'm not suggesting you're supportive of the right, DDD. One of the things the right has become alarmingly good at is getting their 'talking points' amplified by seemingly moderate/reasonable people. This is one of those things — pull at the thread for long enough and it almost always unravels back to some person or organisation on the right making a lot of noise about an issue with no statistical significance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 March, 2021, 09:35:34 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 March, 2021, 07:47:19 AMare the Republicans really in that bad a shape?
Not really. They've briefly lost control. It'll take a small miracle for them not to win back at least one branch of government at the next elections, and there's a reasonable chance they could take the House too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 March, 2021, 09:52:38 AM
Am I the only one becoming increasingly disturbed at the direction of travel in this country right now?  We have one of the worst governments in living memory (if not even longer ...), wide scale corruption and nepotism, repression of fundamental rights to protest and potentially even to vote, police brutality and intimidation and now a report that the UK should be held up as an exemplar in international race relations?

I'm beginning to think that I've been reading dystopian fiction for so long that I'm now hallucinating it ...  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 March, 2021, 10:01:34 AM
No. We now live in an authoritarian-oriented country run by an executive with a scant regard for democracy and constitutional matters. We're not China just yet, but we are well on our way to becoming another Hungary.

The UK is also an excellent example of how these things can all happen in tiny steps. The London mayoral election is on the way, and polling suggests Khan will walk it—possibly even taking it on first preferences alone, but the Tories are well aware that London is lost forever once you take into account second preferences. So they're going to switch the vote to FPTP, which will at the very least marginalise Green/LD and make it a two-party anti-Labour battle that's easier for them to spin.

Again, this is why Labour needs to see the danger and think long-term—something it's been unable to do since the late 1990s. Without cooperating with other parties and extensive electoral reform, our future is a Tory boot stamping on anything progressive, forever, and constantly gaslighting us about everything.

Right now, though, polling points to a horrible situation: a sustained uptick for the Greens (which under FPTP will be a waste), a continued dismal showing for the Libs (which, whatever you think about them, are the best option in a slew of England seats to combat the Tories), and Labour mostly taking points from the Libs rather than the Tories. Under PR, that would be OK. Under FPTP, it's going to be another shitshow.

Here's hoping things change before the next GE, but I'm not holding my breath.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 31 March, 2021, 10:10:38 AM
Yeah, the Neo-Medievalist future is almost upon us now. Oligarchies, unaccountable Politicians and lobbyists, plus a Laizze-Faire attitude to everything means bad news all around.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 March, 2021, 11:35:43 AM
It feels more like politicians have given up trying to kid us now as well.  The antics of ministers, ex-ministers and anyone vaguely related to them isn't even defended any more.  They just mouth some platitude and wait for the press to move on to the next 'celebrity' gossip.

The big question though surely has to be what is going to happen once they reach the point where they can't keep on with the pandemic response we've had for the past year.  When they do decide that they need to do something about the national debt we all know where the bill is going to land ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 March, 2021, 11:43:54 AM
The chancellor's budget was a delaying tactic. So we will probably see the following:

- Ongoing framing of all criticism as unpatriotic and/or against a service (vs the govt), such as the NHS
- Ongoing gaslighting and rewriting of history
- Blaming the EU for all economic issues that can't be blamed on COVID
- Framing the EU's 'new rules' as wrecking UK trade (and ignoring UK unilateral decision to leave single market)
- Ongoing erosion of democracy (more elections switch to FPTP; boundaries redrawn; voter ID requirement)
- Headlines continuing to be more important than actions — policy about what you say rather than do
- Further consolidation of power within the executive
- A gradual shift from policing by consent to crackdowns on anything the govt doesn't want
- Consistently keeping the culture war fire burning
- A GE around 2023 before the chancellor's payments come due, which is the best moment for the Tories to capitalise (people will have cash in their pockets; the economy will be recovering) before it all goes to shit again in 2024 (which will be blamed on something other than the Tories)

All this is beatable. But the press needs to stop prizing headlines over stories, and every political party to the left of the Tories needs to figure out how to work collectively to oust the Tories in England and Wales, ensure there's no Tory comeback in Scotland, and minimise the DUP in Northern Ireland. The numbers are there, but, right now, the will is not.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 March, 2021, 03:00:33 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 31 March, 2021, 07:47:19 AM
I'm kind of fishing for good news here, but are the Republicans really in that bad a shape?   I'm pretty sure that if it hadn't been for the pandemic, Trump would have very comfortably bagged himself a second term.  Also, if anything should happen to Joe Biden, and of course I hope it doesn't, that puts Kamala Harris in the hotseat.  While it really shouldn't be an issue to vote a miced-race woman in, I think it probably would be.

C4 News did a series of pieces on this that were fascinating. First off - there was a huge dedication to voter suppression in the election that Trump won. It was targeted, it used big data, it used Facebook tools. It sorted everyone into camps - and one of those was the "undesirables" (memory failing a bit - but it was either exactly that word or one that is synonymous with it) that the Republicans targeted with negative ads against Clinton - pointing out to black voters that she'd said negative things in the past about black men. I mean, she had - but it's still propaganda with a clear agenda.

Anyway - it worked. C4 followed the stats and found that far fewer people who had previously voted Dem for Obama came out to vote at all.

The Reps put in this massive effort because if they don't - if there's a strong voter turnout - the numbers are against them. Remember, Trump still lost the popular vote in that first election.

Reason: the big cities are generally Dem. They're growing in size with an influx of Dem-type voters - college educated people and immigrants. As they grow, the Rep-base (farmers) shrinks.

Summary: they wouldn't be using voter suppression tactics if they could win a fair fight.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 March, 2021, 03:05:17 PM
All of which is true, and yet it's not a fair fight and the opposition needs to recognise that and respond accordingly. We have the same here. You need fewer votes to elect a Tory in the UK than a Labour MP and far, far more to elect a Lib Dem. The only Green that's ever going to be elected is Caroline Lucas—and even she's gone (despite her massive majority) when Brighton Nav is cynically hacked in half during the boundary reforms. A sensible opposition would be thinking it's a bit shit 55–65% of the vote isn't enough to oust the Tories and working to deal with that. Instead, Labour and the Libs scrap in England and the Tories win, even though the fight is rigged. And that's before you even dig into shitty advertising, the mostly right-wing press, etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 March, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Race report: 'UK not deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities' (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56585538)

I can imagine this: you take your clipboard around all the government departments and say "Oh, yeah, hi - listen, are you a racist? No? Do you have any openly racist policies written down anywhere? No? Thanks - yah!"

Government: "See? There's nothing to worry about."

A policeman, later: "OUT OF THE CAR! NOW! Bit of a flash motor for your sort, isn't it? Bit suspicious..."

(This last part happened so many times last year on C4 News that I started to think we'd all teleported to the fucking 80s.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 02 April, 2021, 05:01:27 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 March, 2021, 12:11:30 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 30 March, 2021, 11:50:56 PM
Whilst there is a discussion to be had about proof of ID

Given the statistically insignificant indicidence of in-person voter fraud,* there really isn't. The main reason being that it's a fantastically inefficient means of influencing the result of an election, which is why no one does it.

*Both here and in the US. I mean, seriously, it's in the tens of thousandths of one percent of votes cast.

I've been stewing about this for days Jim, and composed all kinds of sarcastic, humourous or passive aggressive responses, but the bottom line is

Disagree all you want, correct me, debate me me but do not ever tell me what to talk about.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 April, 2021, 06:03:49 AM
That hardly seems like a sensible topic.






I'll get me coat...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 April, 2021, 07:16:10 AM
Quote from: Dandontdare on 02 April, 2021, 05:01:27 AM
Disagree all you want, correct me, debate me me but do not ever tell me what to talk about.

I wasn't doing that. I was trying, and obviously failing, to point out that any discussion would be somewhat one-sided because it would be talking about addressing a problem that isn't a problem. I'd point out that you said that you didn't want to discuss it, hence my rather drive-by approach to a response. I didn't mean to imply anything more than that.

The issue is being framed as a problem by some people on the political right because it's a handy cover for voter-suppression tactics, but even a cursory examination of the issue shows that in-person voter fraud statistically insignificant. You can go back decades in US elections and incidents number in the hundreds out of literally billions of votes. In the UK it's a similarly infinitesimal fraction.

However, I don't particularly want to get into the nitty-gritty of it, either. I apologise if you thought I was telling you not to talk about the subject. As I've said recently: tone is hard to judge in a text-based medium and it certainly wasn't my intention to suggest that you may not discuss this, or anything else, nor do I have the authority (or means) to prevent you from doing so.

I don't want anyone to 'stew' about something I say on here — not for minutes, certainly not for days, and I'm honestly sorry for that, DDD.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 April, 2021, 07:25:34 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 March, 2021, 03:00:33 PM

C4 News did a series of pieces on this that were fascinating. First off - there was a huge dedication to voter suppression in the election that Trump won. It was targeted, it used big data, it used Facebook tools.

You know, I keep looking through some of the literature on the internet 'revolution' from the 90's.  There is a sort of utopian zeal at times, especially when it comes to democracy.

Mind you, this was in the days before things like social media, algorithms and 'big data'.  The focus was on the ways in which it was possible to link up, share ideas and engage people that had not been previously engaged.

So when you look at the trend over the last decade, where the internet has become an increasingly 'anti-democratic' force, when it has become almost weaponised by state and non-state actors, it really is quite sad on one level. 

On other levels it is actually terrifying for what it says about us.  It feels like this needs to be relabelled the "Insanely Pessimistic Dystopian Reality" Thread ....  :-X
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2021, 12:27:02 PM
Living dangerously and risking the ire of thread-locking mods with what is either conspiracy theory nonsense or citizen journalism (https://twitter.com/rjaycamm/status/1378482350334574596) - who can say which?
If you can't be bothered deciphering the latest in a long line of protest drama, the guy who was plastered all over the news yesterday being condemned by all and sundry for waving a "KILL COPS" banner at the site where a young PC was murdered has apparently turned out to be an undercover cop, the whole thing presumably being a setup for the press in order to discredit protestors.
This is huge if true, because... ah, who am I kidding?  If it's true, it'll be swept under the rug by this afternoon.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 April, 2021, 02:56:35 PM
In all honesty it's a bit like the allegations of 'armchair criticism' over the Everard Vigil.  Footage of women being pushed to the ground or knelt on supposedly justified on the grounds that the crowd 'turned ugly' as it started to get dark.

The problem seems to be that journalists and the media have dug themselves into a hole.  Editorial bias has been a thing for as long as any of us can remember but it just feels like it's gone to extremes now.  So you're left with snapshots and misinterpretation from the likes of Twitter rather than detailed and accurate reporting from diligent journalists.

We don't need 'conspiracy' any more.  By this afternoon the press will be frothing over the latest Megxit revelation or which love island contestant has posted the most recent swimsuit snaps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2021, 07:23:26 PM
The one thing we've learned in the last few years is the the media resists change and accountability with a baffling ferocity for a profession whose cornerstone is supposedly the pursuit of objective truth, so it's more likely that rather than bias being worse than ever, it's simply become more apparent to the observer.  One can only assume that Russell Brand spending the last 8 years explaining to tweens how everything within capitalism serves the interests of the ruling class is finally paying dividends.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 04 April, 2021, 08:17:32 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 04 April, 2021, 07:23:26 PM
a profession whose cornerstone is supposedly the pursuit of objective truth

Most of them gave up on that years ago... it's all about the advertising £s and has been for ages.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2021, 09:10:24 PM
It's more complicated than that. News has seen a massive squeeze due to fewer people being willing to pay for it. This has resulted in far fewer people being employed in production (proofing; fact checking) and a tendency to commission cheaper content (opinion vs investigative journalism). Magazines have had much the same problem, but the widespread impact these is obviously far less overt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 April, 2021, 08:02:20 AM
No, it's a fair point.  My brother-in-law works for the Press Association and the pay is crap.  Not to mention the hours he's expected to put in at times.

It's a bit of a vicious circle really, isn't it.  Demands for profitability over stability pushes down on overheads, quality and coverage suffers (let's face it, the 'national' news is so London-centric is it is insane) and folks become less inclined to support it financially.

Then you add in allegations of off-shore ownership and editorial bias.  Not to mention when you look at some of the crap that is produced ...

On the flip side, how many folks have seen their income decimated in the last decade?  How many are expected to put in more hours for less pay?  How many 'inflation-busting' pay rises have turned out to be nothing but the sort once you take into account cost of living increases that CPI doesn't take into account (those that have been lucky enough to have pay rises, that is ...)

Like you say, complicated ... but also dangerous ...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 April, 2021, 10:47:08 AM
Local news has been devastated. Much of it no longer exists in any viable form. In many cases, multiple publications have merged into pseudo-regional blocks, thereby obliterating much of the point of such outlets. Their digital variants are templated nonsense that's barely a step up from low-league football sites.

And, yes, editorial bias does creep into the mix. Plenty of publications are deeply partisan. However, even there you can spot regression. The Telegraph is an excellent case in point. It's a full-on right-wing newspaper, but it also used to be a quality publication. You might not have agreed with what was in it, but you couldn't fault its journalism. Now, its online component is a screeching parody of its former self, like the Express for people who think they know better.

Elsewhere, even stalwarts are suffering. The Times recently had a staff cull of the people behind the news writing—the production staff. Something like half of them were left; those that remained were expected to do more work in the same time. Quality therefore slips—there's no alternative. And when that's news you're talking about, errors creep in.

I should note that no-one owes any sector anything. It's not like we owe newspapers their very survival. But we are also seeing what happens when people stop investing in news en masse (with a daily newspaper, say), how the nature of storytelling within news has to change within 24/7 news cycles on TV, and when people tend to get most of their 'news' from social networks and yet rarely read beyond the headlines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 05 April, 2021, 03:31:59 PM
It's always been taken as axiomatic, to my mind, that a free and impartial press is the 'fourth estate' and essential to democracy.  Which is why much of what you describe is so troubling. 

I've always struggled to find 'news' on social media ... either Twitter or Facebook .... and much of the conspiracy theory stuff seems to have passed me by.  Yet looking at many of the news websites these days, what is there is depressing.  The likes of the Mail and Express seem to be on a par with the Sun and the Star these days, full of risqué titillation about various influencers and other z-list personalities.

When you think of all the effort they went to in Soviet Russia to manipulate the press and keep the population compliant, you have to wonder if they weren't just poor amateurs compared to what we've achieved without any effort in this country. 

I know that is tin-foil-hattery but half the problem these days is that some of the most disturbing trends of history and fiction seem to be unravelling right in front of us.  When does it stop becoming paranoia and start to become justifiable concern?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 05 April, 2021, 08:18:13 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 April, 2021, 09:10:24 PM
It's more complicated than that. News has seen a massive squeeze due to fewer people being willing to pay for it. This has resulted in far fewer people being employed in production (proofing; fact checking) and a tendency to commission cheaper content (opinion vs investigative journalism). Magazines have had much the same problem, but the widespread impact these is obviously far less overt.

Oh yeah absolutely - I was massively oversimplifying with my one line reply. It is a genuinely distrubing trend though. As Tjm86 said a free and impartial press is essential to democracy; if we (the electorate) don't have accurate information about what's going on then our ability to vote on those issues is diminished and so is our democracy.

Modern Russia seems to be looking to control social media - I think they've already seen that the press is no longer as relevant as it once was.

It's hard to see how we get back from here. The old adage Information Wants To Be Free is looking somewhat tattered. It seems that when information is free the quality of that information is questionable at best.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 April, 2021, 03:07:58 AM
To quote NWA

QuoteWhen something happens in South Central Los Angeles, Nothing happens it's just another...

...and so forth
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2021, 05:00:12 PM
Sir Keith's whole winning over the pub landlord vote (https://twitter.com/JamesEFoster/status/1384136300077355020) thing is shaking out just great, I see.  Thank God he didn't do something that would really lose votes, like working in a food bank, attending a Seder on Passover, or sitting down on a train.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 19 April, 2021, 05:06:20 PM
It sounded like he was channelling Barbara Windsor in Eastenders: "Ger ourra my pub!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2021, 05:07:41 PM
Reading a bit about that earlier, wasn't the landlord pissed off because Labour didn't go against lockdown? It all whiffed a bit of COVID denial, frankly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 April, 2021, 05:48:59 PM
Curious - Guy seems to disagree fundamentally with lockdown, but I'm not sure how Starmer reaches the conclusion the guy didnt believe in Covid since he also talks about 1000s of deaths having happened due to the Government mishandling -  I'm not sure how the guy holds both views, to be honest.

It was an odd idea to try and ignore him bby going into his pub!  Either debate the guy's odd position (isnt that why we have him as Leader due to his razor Legal mind) or run to the hills from the crazy guy!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2021, 06:47:20 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 19 April, 2021, 05:48:59 PM
I'm not sure how the guy holds both views, to be honest.

I'm not saying the fella believed or not in, like, science facts, but most conspiracy theorists are very adept at holding entirely opposing views simultaneously without blinking. Whenever the dichotomy is directly addressed they move quickly onto new ground with their Wand of Levitating, +3 vs. Goalposts. Or just shout "gerroutta my pub!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 19 April, 2021, 06:50:22 PM
What is that pub footage all about?  From the comments on twitter Starmer and gang appeared to try to force their way in to the pub, then got one of the minder's to use force against the landlord when they objected?  Seeing as senior politicians generally go through a few hoops to check security ahead of visits this seems like odd behaviour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2021, 06:54:53 PM
The minder looks like he was doing his job - stop any screaming, out of control lunatics from assaulting the talent.

Agreed that it doesn't look good for the politician, either. For some reason, screaming, out of control lunatics win the moral argument.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 April, 2021, 07:33:44 PM
There's an interview with pub owner on Twitter where he makes it very clear (albeit in seemingly exasperated fashion) that he doesn't hold the same views.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 April, 2021, 08:13:50 PM
Does he explain how a stricter lockdown than he thought necessary led to MORE deaths?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2021, 08:42:37 PM
I admit I am playing armchair politician here, but I think the general consensus is more that your minder getting a pub landlord in a headlock when he tells you to leave his premises is bad optics even if the landlord in question is some sort of Holocaust denier.  Not that Labour's polling could be much worse, anyway.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 April, 2021, 08:49:29 PM
Eatching another clip shows the chap brandishing a graph and saying "its only old people dying anyway, so yeah, I;m with Starmer on this one - though not with him going in the pub - presumably he didnt know the guy was the "not" landlord (think he just worked there?) ... don't you set up these PR type things in advnace to avoid this kind of thing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 19 April, 2021, 09:07:45 PM
Yeah, Sir Keith pretty much had a PR win until he fucked it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 April, 2021, 09:54:02 PM
For some reason reminded me of this: "The People Are Revolting (https://youtu.be/h0iAcQVIokg)".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 April, 2021, 10:23:45 PM
BBC ... "jurors find Derek Chauvin guilty of all charges over George Floyd's death"

I'm so relieved.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 April, 2021, 08:42:02 AM
And then you hear about Makhia Bryant. They've learned nothing. They continue to learn nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 April, 2021, 11:03:48 AM
That self confessed not-an-actual-journalist Ticker Carlson has been saying no one will want to be a cop now. If not being allowed to get off of murder after kneeling on a restrained man's neck for ten minutes puts you off being a cop...good.

More importantly, the ESL looks like it's DOA. I must commend you all for your diginity, stoicism and restraint during this dire crisis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 April, 2021, 11:44:05 AM
Yes, no-one will want to be a cop in case they get convicted of second-degree murder when they murder someone and get caught on camera. What says more is how the event was originally reported though. If it wasn't for that video, the outcome would have been very different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 April, 2021, 01:00:09 PM
Some what bemused to hear the top-of-the-hour news summary on Radio 4 refer to the verdict being in relation to "George Floyd, who died after Chauvin knelt on his neck for over nine minutes", as if there still might be some disconnect between those two events. Surely "...who was killed by Chauvin, who knelt on his neck for over nine minutes" would have been a more accurate summary?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 April, 2021, 01:00:09 PM
Some what bemused to hear the top-of-the-hour news summary on Radio 4 refer to the verdict being in relation to "George Floyd, who died after Chauvin knelt on his neck for over nine minutes", as if there still might be some disconnect between those two events. Surely "...who was killed by Chauvin, who knelt on his neck for over nine minutes" would have been a more accurate summary?

I'm going to be generous and suggest that they still haven't quite got used to the post-verdict language.  Hopefully history will record it as 'George Floyd, who was murdered by Derek Chauvin.'

In related news, why the absolute feck do I ever look at the comments section in thejournal.ie? 'I'm just saying that a repeat criminal with drug problems is no major loss to the world', etc, ad fucking nauseum.  That's serial killer logic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 21 April, 2021, 01:28:31 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 April, 2021, 01:00:09 PM
Some what bemused to hear the top-of-the-hour news summary on Radio 4 refer to the verdict being in relation to "George Floyd, who died after Chauvin knelt on his neck for over nine minutes", as if there still might be some disconnect between those two events. Surely "...who was killed by Chauvin, who knelt on his neck for over nine minutes" would have been a more accurate summary?


Is that really what they said?  Floyd didn't die after anything - it was while Chauvin was kneeling on his neck.  From what I understand he died some time before the knee was removed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 April, 2021, 01:36:39 PM
Still, nice to see Nancy Pelosi *checks notes* thanking George Floyd for *rechecks notes, just in case I'm going insane* sacrificing his life for justice.

I don't even. The world is broken.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 April, 2021, 02:13:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 01:13:01 PM
In related news, why the absolute feck do I ever look at the comments section in thejournal.ie?

I often compare this sort of thing to swimming in a sewer then complaining about the smell, but I've come to realise that this comparison is flawed because sewers actually serve an important function in society.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 03:15:50 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 April, 2021, 02:13:06 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 01:13:01 PM
In related news, why the absolute feck do I ever look at the comments section in thejournal.ie?

I often compare this sort of thing to swimming in a sewer then complaining about the smell, but I've come to realise that this comparison is flawed because sewers actually serve an important function in society.

You're right, of course. One day I'll learn my lesson.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 April, 2021, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 01:13:01 PM
In related news, why the absolute feck do I ever look at the comments section in thejournal.ie? 'I'm just saying that a repeat criminal with drug problems is no major loss to the world', etc, ad fucking nauseum.  That's serial killer logic.

It's not too far away from the defense case in the trial, and it gets to the heart of the problem in a lot of cases similar to this one: the victims are seen as less than human by the perpetrators, and by those who defend the perpetrators.

Chauvin put a man down, while he knew he was being filmed, and some part of him assumed that either it was the right thing to do or that he'd get away with it even if it wasn't.

My daughter asked why he did it at all, and I had to tell her that we'll never get a clear answer to that because Chauvin isn't going to explain himself. (She knows some of the wider context of race relations and a history of injustice, but I'm always trying to strike a balance between informing her and at the same time avoiding traumatizing her. Does anyone have a really good book on How To Correctly Parent..?)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 09:37:13 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 April, 2021, 07:00:39 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 April, 2021, 01:13:01 PM
In related news, why the absolute feck do I ever look at the comments section in thejournal.ie? 'I'm just saying that a repeat criminal with drug problems is no major loss to the world', etc, ad fucking nauseum.  That's serial killer logic.

It's not too far away from the defense case in the trial, and it gets to the heart of the problem in a lot of cases similar to this one: the victims are seen as less than human by the perpetrators, and by those who defend the perpetrators.



True enough - having looked (again! Why do I do it?) at the comment I half-quoted, I see I missed a bit at the end - 'or his family'.  Now that's psychopath stuff.  And it's just one of many similar ones. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 22 April, 2021, 07:12:42 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 April, 2021, 11:03:48 AM
That self confessed not-an-actual-journalist Ticker Carlson has been saying no one will want to be a cop now. If not being allowed to get off of murder after kneeling on a restrained man's neck for ten minutes puts you off being a cop...good.


I know we don't like to use the word around here but this racist, hypocritical, misogynistic, rabble rousing piece of $hit is the definition of the word c**t.

Really enjoyed the Last Week Tonight on him: https://youtu.be/XMGxxRRtmHc
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 April, 2021, 07:21:23 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 22 April, 2021, 07:12:42 PM
I know we don't like to use the word around here but this racist, hypocritical, misogynistic, rabble rousing piece of $hit is the definition of the word c**t.

I didn't know Tucker Carlson was a Celt. You learn something new...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 22 April, 2021, 07:27:52 PM
Genuine lol. Thank you Funt.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 April, 2021, 06:14:31 PM
I've been wondering, will Derek Chauvin be in some kind of special prison for his own protection? Not that I have a whole lot of sympathy for a racist murderer, but it seems to me that an ex copper with a high profile would have a much rougher time inside than most.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 April, 2021, 06:37:59 PM
Cops are segregated from the rest of the prison population, often along with child sex offenders. It's open season on both categories, so they're either grouped or isolated to protect them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 April, 2021, 06:55:44 PM
Would it not make more sense to segregate him off with all the other white supremecists?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 23 April, 2021, 07:01:43 PM
Aha! You've fallen into the trap of trying to make sense of the moral code within (especially US) prisons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 April, 2021, 09:43:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 April, 2021, 06:37:59 PM
Cops are segregated from the rest of the prison population, often along with child sex offenders. It's open season on both categories, so they're either grouped or isolated to protect them.


Ah, I get you.  Thanks.  I knew sex offenders were segregated but I didn't know cops were.  My brother works in a prison regularly.  I went in there with him last year to paint a mural - the last trip abroad I had before all this covid stuff kicked off.  Bit of a mental atmosphere, of course, but the inmates I met seemed fairly friendly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 23 April, 2021, 10:20:54 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 April, 2021, 07:01:43 PM
Aha! You've fallen into the trap of trying to make sense of the moral code within (especially US) prisons.

GADZOOKS! I've fallen for one of the classic blunders!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 23 April, 2021, 11:35:25 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 23 April, 2021, 10:20:54 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 23 April, 2021, 07:01:43 PM
Aha! You've fallen into the trap of trying to make sense of the moral code within (especially US) prisons.

GADZOOKS! I've fallen for one of the classic blunders!

The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well known is this; never go in against a Sicilian, when death is on the line!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 April, 2021, 08:50:33 AM
It's been a fun week this week hasn't it?  Just when you thought that British politics could not be dragged lower into the gutter, along comes a playground spat that pretty much everyone saw Cumming (sic) a mile away.  After everything that we've learnt this year about the destruction of political integrity, it turns out that we weren't even close to the mark.

What is really terrifying though is that roughly 30% of people surveyed still think Johnson and the tories have integrity.   :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 April, 2021, 06:56:53 PM
It wouldn't be the good old US of A if it weren't bat-shit crazy:

West Virginia to give young people $100 bond to get vaccine (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56900381)

Miami school bars vaccinated teachers from seeing students (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56905752)

(*I kept thinking the second headline had to be a typo but nope.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 May, 2021, 11:04:42 PM
Keir Starmer says he's "a man" (https://www.channel4.com/news/keir-starmer-says-hes-a-man-who-cant-stand-injustice-as-labour-face-pressure-in-polls)

Painfully awkward attempt at emoting starts at 1:36. It's like when Gordon Brown would try to smile (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBXj5l6ShpA).

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 05 May, 2021, 09:52:56 AM
The Scottish Parliament elections are on Thursday. Up here we've been treated to various politicians tearing lumps out of each other, hoping to claw their way to the vaunted position of....... leader of the opposition.

The SNP are polling so high that there is no realistic possibility of anyone overtaking them. Despite Sturgeon's competency with the pandemic, the SNP have been in government for so long that they are showing real signs of malaise. Key targets are missed. Factions within the party are openly warring. Ministers with dubious compentency remain in post because they aren't challenged. The kind of thing that a good, strong opposition would haul them over the coals for.

It's a bit similar to the situation in Westminster, but without the open racism, contempt for the poor, corruption, flagrant incompetence, cronyism.....etc.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 05 May, 2021, 09:58:27 AM
If I was the leader of Scottish Labour (who would want to be?), I would agree to an independence referendum subject to maximum devolution being on the ticket. I'm not convinced it would win, or that it would or could be delivered, but that would be the way of maximising wins from soft unionists and soft nationalists. You could form a strong opposition on that basis.

In reality, people like Ian Murray are pushing them down a hardline unionist path which leads to increasing irrelevance. The Tories have that vote and it isn't shifting (and is ageing).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 05 May, 2021, 11:32:00 AM
The thing that gets me in Scotland is that the SNP is a broadly progressive party (with some dangerous blind spots from individuals on certain issues, like trans) but is approaching indy in a manner far too similar to UKIP. As someone who's English and hoping one day to be Irish (because fuck England), I don't have any real opinion about which way Scotland should head. I'm a bit torn, but have realised at every point that my own thinking was swayed too heavily by what I would like and not necessarily what would be best for Scotland.

But I do long on, concerned, when I see people arguing that a country split right down the middle should perform a major and irreversible political change beyond anything tried in modern history, with scant regard for economic and geopolitical consequences. Because that's Brexit all over again. (If there was a super-majority behind indy and/or the UK government wasn't so fucking stupid about things like the single market, that might be different.)

That all said, I do hope the Tories and Labour get a kicking on Thursday, and also that the Greens get some seats.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 05 May, 2021, 12:27:31 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 May, 2021, 11:04:42 PM
Keir Starmer says he's "a man" (https://www.channel4.com/news/keir-starmer-says-hes-a-man-who-cant-stand-injustice-as-labour-face-pressure-in-polls)

You've taken this out of context - the full quote is "I'm a man who can't stand injustice."
Which is... an interesting statement from someone who's personally overseen a CPS drive to prevent the trials of dozens of rapists, quashed investigations into human rights abuses in for-profit detention centers, conducted what seems to some objective observers to be a targeted campaign of suspension and harassment of left-wing Jews in the Labour Party, and settled out of court for a case that lawyers had said could easily be won.  At the very least I'm thinking Sir Keith isn't much of a lawyer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 May, 2021, 10:30:40 PM
I don't follow that Scottish independence is much like Brexit. Brexit's narrative has always been negative and based on isolationism - and a big lie (that Europe dominated). Scottish independence is only really a viable political aspect of modern politics because of the truth that the Scottish electorate is largely left out in the cold from Westminster, and (rather than isolationism) the first thing on the agenda would be re-joining Europe.

The ideas just come from very different places. Scotland didn't want Brexit - but it jolly well got it because England voted for it. That really is the shitty end of the stick, and Scotland's been forced to hold it for far too long. Unless I'm wrong and the Tories have been bending over backwards to accommodate the political will of Scotland ... *tumbleweeds* ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 05:04:08 AM
I wonder if the potential referendum comes to light and the results again remain in favor of Scots staying in UK, would a subsequent referendum be available, until Scots finally walk scot free (pun intended). It was a tight vote, for sure, but not tighter than Brexit.
Speaking of Brexit, or better to say, criticism of it, I hate it when people acted as if it something apocalyptical, in that UK would be sealed off, becoming like N. Korea. I don't think that people that voted for Brexit even had that in mind for UK. Nevertheless, majority voted for it, it won't be democracy if we test it every few years continually. Democracy isn't perfect and doesn't always work, but it's the only (most) trustful system we have today.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 06 May, 2021, 06:47:30 AM
Well, without wanting to revisit Brexit, most leave campaigners made the case for a "soft" exit, retaining the single market. That was ditched by the Tories early on as it didn't appease their (far) right wing. I'd dispute that democracy was well served there. It certainly wasn't from a Scottish perspective.

As for the "neverendum" argument, in Quebec the second referendum brought it to a close. This is a point moderate Scottish nationalists are keenly aware of.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2021, 07:10:55 AM
Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 05:04:08 AM
Speaking of Brexit, or better to say, criticism of it, I hate it when people acted as if it something apocalyptical, in that UK would be sealed off, becoming like N. Korea.

Nobody. Nobody on the Remain side said that. Unlike the Leave side, which repeatedly said that we would retain all the benefits of Freedom of Movement, the Single Market and the Customs Union... plus that £350M/wk for the NHS, literally none of which turned out to be true.

The Remain side did say that businesses would leave the UK for the EU to retain those benefits if we didn't keep them, which has happened and is continuing to happen, that Brexit wouldn't do a damn thing to help the UK fishing industry, would be a disaster for the creative arts, that loss of freedom of movement would impact EU-resident expats, that there would be no £350M/wk for the NHS, and that there was no form of hard Brexit that was compatible with maintaining the Good Friday Agreement. All of which did turn out to be true.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 09:16:48 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2021, 07:10:55 AM
Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 05:04:08 AM
Speaking of Brexit, or better to say, criticism of it, I hate it when people acted as if it something apocalyptical, in that UK would be sealed off, becoming like N. Korea.

Nobody. Nobody on the Remain side said that. Unlike the Leave side, which repeatedly said that we would retain all the benefits of Freedom of Movement, the Single Market and the Customs Union... plus that £350M/wk for the NHS, literally none of which turned out to be true.

The Remain side did say that businesses would leave the UK for the EU to retain those benefits if we didn't keep them, which has happened and is continuing to happen, that Brexit wouldn't do a damn thing to help the UK fishing industry, would be a disaster for the creative arts, that loss of freedom of movement would impact EU-resident expats, that there would be no £350M/wk for the NHS, and that there was no form of hard Brexit that was compatible with maintaining the Good Friday Agreement. All of which did turn out to be true.

Don't know who the nobody is, as I firmly remember people bleating online:"omg, we'll be sealed off the Europe, with the limit of movement to other countries severely imposed, that Tories would bend the country to their will" and so on.
As for the economical consequences of Brexit, I think it'll have to yet to (really) kick in.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2021, 09:28:36 AM
Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 09:16:48 AM
Don't know who the nobody is, as I firmly remember people bleating online:"omg, we'll be sealed off the Europe, with the limit of movement to other countries severely imposed, that Tories would bend the country to their will" and so on.

That's hardly "North Korea" is it? And UK expats (immigrants to everyone else) are already complaining about loss of their residential status in EU countries and having to come back to the UK, UK travellers have complained about having to use the non-EU queues at immigration — it's only the fact that the pandemic has all but stopped international travel that's kept this from being a major issue on the front pages of the tabloid (although obviously framed as a nefarious EU plot to victimise the UK).

It's only been five months since Brexit actually happened, and the Tories are already floating ideas of employment "reform" (transl: stripping all the EU employment rights out of UK legislation), ending judicial review, bringing back the death penalty. Wait until the pandemic is behind us (whenever the fuck that will be) and see what further legislative gems they have in store...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 09:40:55 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 05 May, 2021, 10:30:40 PMI don't follow that Scottish independence is much like Brexit.
Although many aspects of it aren't, some are. There's that idea that 50%+1 is enough, rather than broader consensus. There's hand-waving away important considerations like the economy and, now, land borders. I get it — and I suspect independence would, in the long run, be the best option for Scotland. But there is overlap with Brexit, even if the primary reasoning is in reality different.

Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 05:04:08 AMNevertheless, majority voted for it, it won't be democracy if we test it every few years continually. Democracy isn't perfect and doesn't always work, but it's the only (most) trustful system we have today.
Two things there. Democracy is literally resting things continually. That's what elections are. Democracy isn't making a decision that's forever. One of the UK's most stringiest rules is that no parliament can bind its predecessor.

But on democracy in general, it's a good thing, but it's strongly dependent on systems and people playing by the rules. The USA and UK have in recent years shown what happens when people just don't care about the rules. As for systems, that showcases the weakness at the heart of British democracy.

Our elections are not designed to provide representative government. Instead, they are provided to give total power to whoever wins more votes than whoever's in second. It would be feasible if five parties were running across the entire UK for one to gain 100% of the seats on a little over 20% of the vote. That's of course never happened, but we've had seats won on a little over 20% of the vote, and Blair's Labour won a majority of seats with a little over a third of the vote. The system is broken.

As for Brexit being democratic, it was. But it also used the most idiotic referendum set-up imaginable. Let's look at what happens elsewhere:

- Ireland has a vote on abortion. It pits the status quo against a policy document. In the event of a no vote, everything stays the same. In the event of a yes, people know what they'll get.

- Switzerland frequently has referendums where the destination is fluid. So when that happens, they have the vote, discover the consequences (like with the recent free movement mess) and then get a confirmatory referendum to decide whether to stick with the original decision.

The UK? We did the worst of both: pitting the status quo against aspirational woolliness, without any confirmatory ballot once the destination was shown.

In short, democracy is only as strong as the systems that comprise its foundations.

As for everything else, what Jim said. We've already lost thousands of companies, millions of people and billions of pounds. COVID has shielded then Tories from much of this. People aren't aware of the massive damage that's been done. And worse is on the way. Everything the Tories will do in terms of eradicating rights will be dressed up as "hard decisions to get the UK back on track after COVID". The insular nature of our society and our news means enough people will lap that up, rather than look further afield and see how aghast the rest of the world is at what the UK has become. Meanwhile, an overly expensive boat named after a dead royal will sail to countries with the aim of securing trade deals, like a sketch from The Day Today, because the Tories live in the 1800s.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 11:42:29 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2021, 09:28:36 AM
That's hardly "North Korea" is it? And UK expats (immigrants to everyone else) are already complaining about loss of their residential status in EU countries and having to come back to the UK, UK travellers have complained about having to use the non-EU queues at immigration — it's only the fact that the pandemic has all but stopped international travel that's kept this from being a major issue on the front pages of the tabloid (although obviously framed as a nefarious EU plot to victimise the UK).

It's only been five months since Brexit actually happened, and the Tories are already floating ideas of employment "reform" (transl: stripping all the EU employment rights out of UK legislation), ending judicial review, bringing back the death penalty. Wait until the pandemic is behind us (whenever the fuck that will be) and see what further legislative gems they have in store...

Hardly - yes, but (my) impression is close. Particularly after Trump's subsequent victory, where Tories quickly grew close to him. Tbh, I don't know what would Labour do if given chance to the throne, but I am not a fan of them, either.
One thing this pandemic definitely did: it postponed some hot issues. Now the concern for the life out of EU (I remember the quote:"now EU has a GB of free space") is replaced with the worries about virus and vaccines (of which I, btw, ain't taking for now).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 11:44:34 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 09:40:55 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 05 May, 2021, 10:30:40 PMI don't follow that Scottish independence is much like Brexit.
Although many aspects of it aren't, some are. There's that idea that 50%+1 is enough, rather than broader consensus. There's hand-waving away important considerations like the economy and, now, land borders. I get it — and I suspect independence would, in the long run, be the best option for Scotland. But there is overlap with Brexit, even if the primary reasoning is in reality different.

Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 05:04:08 AMNevertheless, majority voted for it, it won't be democracy if we test it every few years continually. Democracy isn't perfect and doesn't always work, but it's the only (most) trustful system we have today.
Two things there. Democracy is literally resting things continually. That's what elections are. Democracy isn't making a decision that's forever. One of the UK's most stringiest rules is that no parliament can bind its predecessor.

But on democracy in general, it's a good thing, but it's strongly dependent on systems and people playing by the rules. The USA and UK have in recent years shown what happens when people just don't care about the rules. As for systems, that showcases the weakness at the heart of British democracy.

Our elections are not designed to provide representative government. Instead, they are provided to give total power to whoever wins more votes than whoever's in second. It would be feasible if five parties were running across the entire UK for one to gain 100% of the seats on a little over 20% of the vote. That's of course never happened, but we've had seats won on a little over 20% of the vote, and Blair's Labour won a majority of seats with a little over a third of the vote. The system is broken.

As for Brexit being democratic, it was. But it also used the most idiotic referendum set-up imaginable. Let's look at what happens elsewhere:

- Ireland has a vote on abortion. It pits the status quo against a policy document. In the event of a no vote, everything stays the same. In the event of a yes, people know what they'll get.

- Switzerland frequently has referendums where the destination is fluid. So when that happens, they have the vote, discover the consequences (like with the recent free movement mess) and then get a confirmatory referendum to decide whether to stick with the original decision.

The UK? We did the worst of both: pitting the status quo against aspirational woolliness, without any confirmatory ballot once the destination was shown.

In short, democracy is only as strong as the systems that comprise its foundations.

As for everything else, what Jim said. We've already lost thousands of companies, millions of people and billions of pounds. COVID has shielded then Tories from much of this. People aren't aware of the massive damage that's been done. And worse is on the way. Everything the Tories will do in terms of eradicating rights will be dressed up as "hard decisions to get the UK back on track after COVID". The insular nature of our society and our news means enough people will lap that up, rather than look further afield and see how aghast the rest of the world is at what the UK has become. Meanwhile, an overly expensive boat named after a dead royal will sail to countries with the aim of securing trade deals, like a sketch from The Day Today, because the Tories live in the 1800s.

You know, I heard saying that we wouldn't have elections if elections can change anything. In modern times, I will have to agree with that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 06 May, 2021, 11:51:12 AM
Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 11:42:29 AM
vaccines (of which I, btw, ain't taking for now).

That's the end of this conversation for me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2021, 12:20:00 PM
QuoteDon't know who the nobody is, as I firmly remember people bleating online:"omg, we'll be sealed off the Europe, with the limit of movement to other countries severely imposed, that Tories would bend the country to their will" and so on.

Apart from the hyperbole of the 'sealed off' bit, I'd say those bleatings weren't far wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 06 May, 2021, 12:21:55 PM
Quote from: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 11:42:29 AM
..vaccines (of which I, btw, ain't taking for now).

FFS
Sort yourself out.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 12:50:39 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 06 May, 2021, 12:21:55 PM
FFS
Sort yourself out.

I'm already sorted, mate!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 06 May, 2021, 12:58:27 PM
You're no mate of mine. People I care about are literally risking their lives on a daily basis whilst you put your own desire not to be inconvenienced over other peoples wellbeing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 01:08:07 PM
"Over other people wellbeing".

So do I get vaccinated for myself or for them? Nevermind. But talking about wellbeing of others, why would I get the shot over people who are in more need of that than me? You know, old and physically weak. Those that had some tough disease prior that squandered their immune system. I couldn't bear that someone might die because I took the shot instead of them. My 86 year old grandma took one, and we are not rife with vaccines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 01:13:08 PM
Board rules on vaccination discussion have been noted multiple times recently. If this thread is derailed into an anti-vaxx argument, it will be locked. Anti-vaccination sentiment will not be tolerated, and so please consider that a general warning.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 06 May, 2021, 01:18:28 PM
Ok Milstar, so I don't want to get in an argument with someone on the internet as it's the biggest waste of time I can think of, nor do I want this thread to be locked or personally be sanctioned on this forum, so I will just say this:

I shouldn't have risen to what you said and the comments you made, that's on me for starting this.

I'm not interested in debating this with you.

Based on what you've said I have no interest or respect for your opinions and I won't be reading nor responding to anything you say going forward.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 01:37:04 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 06 May, 2021, 01:18:28 PM
Ok Milstar, so I don't want to get in an argument with someone on the internet as it's the biggest waste of time I can think of, nor do I want this thread to be locked or personally be sanctioned on this forum, so I will just say this:

I shouldn't have risen to what you said and the comments you made, that's on me for starting this.

I'm not interested in debating this with you.

Based on what you've said I have no interest or respect for your opinions and I won't be reading nor responding to anything you say going forward.

Good. Likewise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 06 May, 2021, 01:38:55 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 01:13:08 PM
Board rules on vaccination discussion have been noted multiple times recently. If this thread is derailed into an anti-vaxx argument, it will be locked. Anti-vaccination sentiment will not be tolerated, and so please consider that a general warning.

I was not aware of them, but if that's the case, I'll comply. Btw, I do not consider myself as anti-vaxxer, so no further comments from me on this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 May, 2021, 03:11:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 09:40:55 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 05 May, 2021, 10:30:40 PMI don't follow that Scottish independence is much like Brexit.
Although many aspects of it aren't, some are. There's that idea that 50%+1 is enough, rather than broader consensus. There's hand-waving away important considerations like the economy and, now, land borders. I get it — and I suspect independence would, in the long run, be the best option for Scotland. But there is overlap with Brexit, even if the primary reasoning is in reality different.

Ah, yes - I see what you mean. Me being somewhat biased, I quite like 50%+1 for Indyref2, but didn't like it for Brexit. Ha!


---

Talking of North Korea - I was chatting to a US school student the other day about the flag ceremony: the daily Pledge of Allegiance that every (federally-funded) school child in the US has to make every day*. They asked me "Is there any other country that does this?", to which I replied "Maybe North Korea?"


*Actually, they don't have to, because of their First Amendment right to free speech, which includes the freedom not to speak. But the ceremony must take place - that's the law!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 03:40:20 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if the UK heads down that path. Plus we already have the mandated daily act of worship in English/Welsh schools, to weed out those unbelievers and get them picked on by other kids, along with confusing the crap out of really young children, by inferring that all these old myths are facts. Fun.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 May, 2021, 04:06:12 PM
After my North Korea jibe, I did explain that growing up in Scotland we had a weekly religious assembly and a mandated Religious Education class - which is weird shit for US school students to hear (again - for federally-funded school). Plenty of private religious schools over here that lay it on thick, of course.

My daughter has had an interesting time navigating a friendship because her pal has been taught that my daughter is going to hell. Being kids, and being sympathetic beings who care for each other, they both feel for the other. The pal is worried about my daughter's eternal soul, and my daughter is worried that her pal's been brainwashed. I love that they are still friends, that mostly just enjoy playing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 04:53:49 PM
A friend's young kid returned home in floods of tears one day, because the teacher had informed them that their dad was "going to hell". So that was a thing.

The Welsh look like they're getting on top of this. Eradicate religious studies and replace it a broader class that includes social, ethical and religious topics. Ensure humanism is part of it. And stop fucking up children with tales that were first penned close to 2000 years ago and heavily rewritten much more recently to align with the thinking of the day (something that, I note, hasn't happened more recently, despite many translations in the Christian Bible alone being shown to be wrong).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2021, 05:03:26 PM
It's an international clownshow. Over here, despite decades of systematic child abuse, locking up women and burying babies in sewers, along with countless conspiracies to cover up said atrocities, the Pope's lot still own the best schools, to the point where it's difficult to find a secular school while ensuring a good future for your children.  Fortunately, the Christian Brothers here, pointless at best and dangerously psychopathic at worst, who used to teach these schools are on the verge of dying out. 

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 06 May, 2021, 05:23:21 PM
Here, my annoyances stem not from faith schools (although I'm not a fan) but that the daily acts of worship are mandated at state schools. The state has no business inserting its ideas about religion into my kid's head.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 06 May, 2021, 07:23:35 PM
I think having religion in schools has been great for Northern Ireland. It keeps us all separate and stops vulnerable young minds from being exposed to themmuns.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2021, 07:57:41 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 06 May, 2021, 07:23:35 PM
I think having religion in schools has been great for Northern Ireland. It keeps us all separate and stops vulnerable young minds from being exposed to themmuns.

Shhh! Or Garth Ennis will come and write about you.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 06 May, 2021, 09:11:48 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 06 May, 2021, 05:03:26 PM
It's an international clownshow. Over here, despite decades of systematic child abuse, locking up women and burying babies in sewers, along with countless conspiracies to cover up said atrocities, the Pope's lot still own the best schools, to the point where it's difficult to find a secular school while ensuring a good future for your children.  Fortunately, the Christian Brothers here, pointless at best and dangerously psychopathic at worst, who used to teach these schools are on the verge of dying out.

Upsetting idea you may not want to read: [spoiler]Do we know if the babies in the sewer were dead when they were thrown in there?
[/spoiler]

The Church are down but they're not out : https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/new-catholic-primary-school-sex-education-programme-published-1.4547221

"The programme for senior classes states that "puberty is a gift from God. We are perfectly designed by God to procreate with him"; while a lesson on safety and protection advises senior infant children to say the "Angel of God" prayer."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 May, 2021, 09:14:55 PM
Talking of themmuns, C4 News did a predictably divided set of interviews (by Paraic O'Brien) this week with da yout of NI - the second of which was hilarious mostly because the lairy one with more front than Tescos had a lot of chutzpah: "What sort of question is that to ask me, Paraic - how the fuck would I know?"

100 years on: How do today's Loyalist teenagers see their Northern Irish identity? (https://www.channel4.com/news/100-years-on-how-do-todays-loyalist-teenagers-see-their-northern-irish-identity)

100 years on: where do the allegiances of Northern Ireland's young Catholics lie? (https://www.channel4.com/news/100-years-on-where-do-the-allegiances-of-northern-irelands-young-catholics-lie)

It wasn't until this week that I knew when NI came into being.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 07 May, 2021, 08:01:20 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 06 May, 2021, 09:14:55 PM
It wasn't until this week that I knew when NI came into being.

That's not unlike impulse-buying the prog because of Manco's Sláine cover only to discover it's the last-ever episode...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 07 May, 2021, 10:16:08 AM
Well, Brexit still lingers on, as the Hartlepool result demonstrates. Poor Labour; they can't seem to win under any Leader at the moment. To see such a result during the reign of the most inept, vainglorious Tory Leader ever to disgrace politics is even more galling. With boundary changes in the offing, you wonder if the country might be renamed 'Toryshire', such is the seemingly unstoppable march of the Conservative party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2021, 10:36:11 AM
The boundary reforms are absurdly cyclical, to the point they plan to carve Brighton Pavilion in half. Can't have a Green MP with a majority, can we? (The proposed new boundary aims to gift half the seat to Con and half to Lab. Really, really shitty.)

Thing is, across England and Wales, the numbers aren't there for the Tories to win in a straight fight. All that needs to happen is for Labour to finally recognise that it cannot win alone. But seeing as the previous three leaders hurled the notion of cooperation into the sea, with Corbyn's lot being particularly vicious and arrogant when votes were 'loaned' (to the point the Greens needed to crowdfund for Lucas's staff, since they'd lost so much short money), I don't see that happening any time soon. Which is bonkers, since Best for Britain research suggests a pact might even lead to a Labour majority. That said, it'd be the last, so Labour would probably prefer to lose instead and blame voters of other parties for not backing Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 07 May, 2021, 10:49:56 AM
It's another depressing morning in politics. I'm struggling to see a way back for Labour now, at least within a generation: they've repeatedly shot themselves in the foot so many times they can't have anything left below the proverbial knee but bloodied stumps.
Meanwhile the Tories have essentially normalised lying and the sort of blithe incompetence that kills vast swathes of people. Things feel pretty grim atm.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 07 May, 2021, 11:14:30 AM
"Electable" is such a weird word.  It can mean anything.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 07 May, 2021, 11:20:28 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2021, 10:36:11 AM
Thing is, across England and Wales, the numbers aren't there for the Tories to win in a straight fight. All that needs to happen is for Labour to finally recognise that it cannot win alone. But seeing as the previous three leaders hurled the notion of cooperation into the sea, with Corbyn's lot being particularly vicious and arrogant when votes were 'loaned' (to the point the Greens needed to crowdfund for Lucas's staff, since they'd lost so much short money), I don't see that happening any time soon. Which is bonkers, since Best for Britain research suggests a pact might even lead to a Labour majority. That said, it'd be the last, so Labour would probably prefer to lose instead and blame voters of other parties for not backing Labour.

This is key. Labour need to realise that they need to cooperate in elections with other parties and, crucially, agree to electoral reform. Instead they are stuck in a 90s mindset.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 07 May, 2021, 12:02:57 PM
Add to that Labour not recognising that it was Corbyn many people didn't like rather than (most of) his policies, and you've a recipe for electoral disaster—a shrinking opposition that has nowhere to go in England. The Libs remain a busted flush that look vanishingly unlikely to poll much above 10% ever again (which presents a BIG problem in the south, where Labour remains weak), and the Greens might gain in vote share but they can't win a seat outside of Brighton, unless something VERY strange happens. (Wales will, I suspect, shift quite heavily Plaid in the west and Con in the east, but the numbers there won't move the needle significantly.)

I'd like nothing more than waking up to a Labour-led coalition, promising electoral reform and progressive policy, with Libs and Plaid cabinet members to present a new era of cooperation and consensus. Alas, a pipe dream. It's never going to happen while political parties remain wedded to our country's archaic electoral process.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2021, 01:53:01 PM
It's not my city, nor even my country, but I was cheered up to see that Laurence Fox got 1.9% of the vote.  With 5 million pounds spent, that's £100 a vote.  Good work, London.  Waitrose Tommy Robinson now knows exactly where he stands in the capital, as does Farage.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 09 May, 2021, 02:35:43 PM
The parents strike back

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/05/us/critical-race-theory-southlake-carroll-isd-trnd/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/05/us/critical-race-theory-southlake-carroll-isd-trnd/index.html)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2021, 03:51:01 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2021, 01:53:01 PM
It's not my city, nor even my country, but I was cheered up to see that Laurence Fox got 1.9% of the vote.  With 5 million pounds spent, that's £100 a vote.  Good work, London.  Waitrose Tommy Robinson now knows exactly where he stands in the capital, as does Farage.
Thing is, we all joked about Farage some time ago and Fox got a TON of media coverage. He might fizzle out, but we though the same of Farage, who continues to arguably be the most effective single politician since Blair, in terms of the effect he has on the electorate (albeit largely driven by our broken electoral system, and increasingly by the US-style culture war that's now growing in the UK).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2021, 04:21:29 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 07 May, 2021, 11:20:28 AMLabour need to realise that they need to cooperate in elections with other parties and, crucially, agree to electoral reform. Instead they are stuck in a 90s mindset.

The LibDems expressly and repeatedly said they wouldn't work with Labour in 2019.  At this point the SNP would be mad to.

This isn't a dig at you, Calhab, but the loudest proponents of PR I've seen online are always a bit iffy on the specifics, making me view PR as little better than magical thinking.  Britain is a racist country, and PR would see thugs like the BNP go from the lunatic fringe to making policy decisions on councils overnight, and I'm not sure I want to just greenlight that without discussing the finer details a bit first.
For what it's worth, we have PR over here in Northern Ireland, and to put it mildly, it did not solve the problems of a polorised political community and a two-party system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 May, 2021, 05:03:22 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2021, 04:21:29 PMThe LibDems expressly and repeatedly said they wouldn't work with Labour in 2019.
They were part of a pact with the Greens and Plaid that invited Labour to join it. Labour said no.

As for PR, I'm not sure what you mean about the specifics. Most people I know who are pro-PR want representative government. They want a system where we don't end up with 35% of the vote installing a government that can do whatever the hell it likes, ignoring the majority. They want a system where parties have to work together to build consensus.

And, yes, this would likely mean some arsehole MPs—although note that the vast majority of PR systems in use have minimum cut-off points. But that is representation too. Right now, Farage is still the tail wagging the two-headed dog that is the Conservative Party and the Labour Party. Hell, given Davey's weak leadership, he's wagging the Lib Dems as well. When the entire political direction of our country is built around appealing to a minority of shouty regressives, that helps no-one. When our elections are mostly wasted votes and reliant on flipping a handful of marginals, that helps no-one. But that's where we are.

My wife is from a country with PR and has lived in the UK for around 15 years. She's still aghast at our system. She thinks we're living in the Stone Age as far as democracy goes—and she's right. We lurch from Con to Lab and back. Everyone blames everything on their predecessor and wants to tear everything down and remake the UK in their own image. There's no continuity. Worse, FPTP gives the Tories a massive in-built advantage. Yet Labour still won't even consider looking at a future where they would regularly lead a government comprising multiple parties with a reasonable amount of policy overlap. They'd rather sit in opposition and blame Greens, Lib Dems and Plaid voters for their inability to win an election.

I'm so bloody sick of it all.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2021, 05:16:47 PM

At certain points in Rome's history, as I'm sure most of you know, they would elect two consuls. No policy could go forward unless both consuls agreed. Two prime ministers, maybe, one from each of the most popular parties?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 May, 2021, 05:23:48 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 09 May, 2021, 04:21:29 PM
For what it's worth, we have PR over here in Northern Ireland, and to put it mildly, it did not solve the problems of a polorised political community and a two-party system.

You could use the same logic to denounce murals.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2021, 06:03:31 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2021, 05:16:47 PM

At certain points in Rome's history, as I'm sure most of you know, they would elect two consuls. No policy could go forward unless both consuls agreed. Two prime ministers, maybe, one from each of the most popular parties?

That's pretty much what we have here in Ireland right now.  Sadly, both parties are exactly the same - right-of-centre, look after the banks, the landlords and the big businesses.  The only difference between them is that they took different sides during the Civil War a hundred years ago. 

I've never voted for either of them and I never will, but like Tory voters, lots of people out there obviously don't think the way I do.

EDIT - I should point out that there aren't two PMs (Taoiseachs here) at the same time; they've just divided the term between them - one for the first half, the other for the second.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2021, 06:39:51 PM

As you know, I don't think voting works at all under the present system, but I'm in the minority. As most people do believe in it, but not in the results, maybe it's time to change what the vote is for. Power sharing is far from perfect in itself, and dual prime ministers would require other changes too, but it might at least limit the damage a foolish single pm or president could do. Then again, it might cripple the system through intractability. I mention it only as a suggestion and am not going to defend or advocate it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 09 May, 2021, 07:11:29 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 09 May, 2021, 06:03:31 PM
That's pretty much what we have here in Ireland right now.  Sadly, both parties are exactly the same - right-of-centre, look after the banks, the landlords and the big businesses.  The only difference between them is that they took different sides during the Civil War a hundred years ago. 

Isn't Sinn Fein today very lefty party?

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 09 May, 2021, 06:39:51 PM

As you know, I don't think voting works at all under the present system, but I'm in the minority. As most people do believe in it, but not in the results, maybe it's time to change what the vote is for. Power sharing is far from perfect in itself, and dual prime ministers would require other changes too, but it might at least limit the damage a foolish single pm or president could do. Then again, it might cripple the system through intractability. I mention it only as a suggestion and am not going to defend or advocate it.


We need a new political system.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 09 May, 2021, 07:46:38 PM
Quote from: milstar on 09 May, 2021, 07:11:29 PM

Isn't Sinn Fein today very lefty party?


They aren't currently in power in Ireland, despite gaining the most first preference votes. Make of that what you will.

Sínn Fein are ostensibly a left wing party, with progressive socialist policies. Conveniently for them though, the merits/weaknesses of these policies never get scrutinized, because the DUP in the north and the FGFF coalition in the south thwart them at every turn. The bounders!

What Sínn Fein really is, is a bunch of murderers the Irish reunification party. At least that's what they tell the yanks when they're looking for donations, they wouldn't get much from pushing their socialism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 10 May, 2021, 09:13:11 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 09 May, 2021, 07:46:38 PM
They aren't currently in power in Ireland, despite gaining the most first preference votes. Make of that what you will.

Arguably because they didn't field enough candidates. STVPR doesn't really give a runny shite who gets the most No.1s nationally, it's a game played at the local level.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: wedgeski on 10 May, 2021, 09:49:48 AM
So where should we be looking for the model of a good, real-world, working democracy?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 10 May, 2021, 11:25:08 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 09 May, 2021, 07:46:38 PM
Sínn Fein are ostensibly a left wing party, with progressive socialist policies. Conveniently for them though, the merits/weaknesses of these policies never get scrutinized, because the DUP in the north and the FGFF coalition in the south thwart them at every turn. The bounders!

What Sínn Fein really is, is a bunch of murderers the Irish reunification party. At least that's what they tell the yanks when they're looking for donations, they wouldn't get much from pushing their socialism.

Well, like SNP, I suppose.

Quote from: wedgeski on 10 May, 2021, 09:49:48 AM
So where should we be looking for the model of a good, real-world, working democracy?

Hm, Switzerland?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 May, 2021, 11:28:27 AM
New Zealand would be a start. Elections every three years. MMP. Ardern govt shows a majority is possible if one party gives enough of a shit about the country and voters at large.

And plenty of countries in the EU have reasonable systems we could adapt for the UK. Of course, all we hear about are when it takes ages for a coalition to form in, say, Belgium, or the ongoing shitshow of Italian politics. We very rarely hear about other countries that have PR, because, well, their politics is often pretty boring. They work out how to collaborate and just get on with things.

Our electoral system was fine when just a smallish number of rich men could vote and choose between a relatively liberal rich-person's party and a somewhat less liberal rich-person's party. Today, it's a relic. I mean, look at what happened in 1983. Thatcher gets 61% of the seats on 42% of the vote. Labour ends up with 32% of the seats on 28% of the vote. The Lib/SDP alliance gets 4% of the seats on 25% of the vote.

FPTP is bullshit and needs consigning to history. Once that's done, we can look at how to deal with the upper house, although that's a much, much trickier thing to sort. After all:

- Do you make it fully elected? If so: cross-benchers are eradicated and you have a deeply partisan second chamber, with an eye on elections rather than doing their jobs

- If you create a senate, how do you divvy up the seats? Evenly between country? (Good for the union; not great for representation of individuals.) By population? (Bad for the union; would give too much power to the English.) Regionally, like with MEPs? (Could go either way—would depend if English regions would gang up on the others, or recognise they have power at that point.)

- And do you give it more powers, potentially enabling it to block HOC decisions? (Vs the current situation, where the Lords is basically a chamber with little power that the govt can override almost whenever it chooses to.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2021, 08:21:06 AM
Feck, that Liz Cheney stuff is a bit scary. What may be the most powerful political party in the world in 2025, reduced to one policy: believing a liar.

Oh, and stopping the wrong people voting for the wrong party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2021, 08:39:24 AM
Lots of people online there (with the GOP) and here (with the Tories) still running with the line of thought that this is the last dying twitch of the right. The US also has people saying they think the GOP will split, much like people were saying with the Tories a few years back.

Given recent history, that people think either of these things is the case is baffling. Moreover, there's been so much reliance on assumed demographic shifts. Yet, lo and behold, the young are turning out for the GOP in various spots in the US and the Tories have somehow transformed themselves into the party of the working classes, despite shitting all over the working classes at every available opportunity.

Both countries have one thing in common: the slimmest of windows to set things right. Sure, the Dems now control three branches of government, but bar a small miracle that won't be the case for long. In the UK, the Tories are stitching things up for the future, so they can win on fewer votes (and/or stop lots of people from voting) and free their decisions from judicial oversight. We might get one more general election before an inevitable descent into something much closer to a North Atlantic Hungary. That means other parties have to work together.

Current state of play:

Labour: two rats in a sack, endlessly fighting. Ex-leader says Labour must widen its approach, yet—as ever—falls short of suggesting actual cooperation with other parties (despite working with the Libs getting him elected in 1997)

Libs: absent from the discussion, with a leader either anonymous or intent on asking people what the Libs should stand for, in order for people to vote for them again.

Greens: buoyed by local election success, and now of the opinion they should fight hard in a GE, despite being able to win at most one seat.

I've no idea what Plaid's doing. That party was the grown-up in 'England and Wales' last time. I guess we've a couple of years to go yet before the 'SHOCK' GE of 2023 (before all Sunak's shit really kicks in, and before the COVID report will be published). Here's hoping smarter heads prevail by then.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 13 May, 2021, 09:10:49 AM
Back in the 90s I remember reading about the "End of History", as various academics and analysts believed that the post-cold-war centrist liberal consensus would continue indefinitely and lead to the end of conflict. There was no longer any major ideological battles to be fought.

The one thing that is certain about the future is that our ideas are wildly wrong.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2021, 10:17:22 AM
The biggest fuck-up for progressives has been complacency—that assumption it would all be one-way traffic. We didn't account for how regressives and authoritarians would cling on to power. We didn't account for how people would detach themselves so much from the political process, to the point voters would back the very people who are harming them.

The second biggest fuck-up for progressives in the UK has been fighting each other. If instead of attempting the foolhardy proposition of plotting each party on a political compass (economics for horizontal axis; auth/lib on vertical), you drew a shape that encompassed the party's internal coalition, the sheer overlap between Lab/Lib/Green/SNP/Plaid would be obvious. Sure, there are differences and outliers, but there is a shit-ton of policy they could and would agree on.

Instead, people focus on the differences. You have Greens who'll never share power with any party that's pro-nuclear (vs. getting into government and pushing a heavily renewable agenda while recognising existing power structures must remain in place until then). You have Labour voters who scoff at the thought of working with Lib Dems, ignoring the parties' histories of working together for the common good. You have Lib Dems who scoff at working with anyone, still delusional about the prospect of power. And that's all before you get to the nats, with their own problems.

I despair. The numbers are there to beat the Tories. They always have been. There hasn't been a single general election in my voting lifetime where the Tories—or those who agree with their views—had a majority. But here we are—and here we'll stay, unless people's mindsets radically change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 13 May, 2021, 11:24:32 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2021, 10:17:22 AM
And that's all before you get to the nats, with their own problems.

I don't know about Plaid Cymru, but the SNP minority government has had a support agreement with the Scottish Greens. It's the Lib Dems and Labour that threw their hands up in horror at working with the SNP. This resulted in the ridiculous and depressing sight of Scottish Labour voting to oppose SNP bills, even when the same policy was on the UK Labour manifesto.

I genuinely think many in the Labour party are completely detached from the reality of their situation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2021, 11:28:28 AM
That's very Labour. It hates working with others. The number of times Labour sat on its hands because it refused to vote in favour of perfectly reasonable SNP/Lib+Green policy in Westminster beggars belief. In Scotland, the Libs are bloody awful too, flipping much of their principles because the SNP wants independence from the UK. Never mind that there is a reasonable middle ground to be fought for, given the party's long-standing demands for regional authority, decentralisation, devolution, electoral reform and representative government.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 13 May, 2021, 11:41:17 AM
You're not wrong.

I was looking at the Scottish results last week and I think that both the SNP and Conservatives are at the absolute peak of what they can expect in terms of votes or representation. The party that has the biggest opportunity to grow is Labour. To me, that comes from embracing devolution (which Labour introduced FFS) and supporting the growth in powers of the Scottish Parliament, even if that means backing the SNP on bills. I genuinely think that would be a good offering to many Scots and would get them having a realistic chance of being next government in Holyrood.

The elephant in the room is that the UK Labour party has no prospect of holding the government in Westminster to account or forcing their hand.

I don't see much of a future for the Lib Dems in Scotland. Once the older generation in their island and border heartlands goes, they'll have no base, no policies and no prospects.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 May, 2021, 11:50:22 AM
I've not read recent manifestos, but it always struck me that there was too much overlap between SNP and LD. Take out indy and you'd often be hard-pressed to separate them. So that leaves little to no space for the party, even under PR. In a sense, it's a pity, given the party's history (not least Charles Kennedy), but things move on. Really, the Libs should look to shore up being the party of liberalism in England, working with other progressive parties to create a Westminster majority. But that will require Labour to get on board, rather than arrogantly demanding all Libs (and Greens and Plaid) vote Labour.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 13 May, 2021, 12:41:52 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 13 May, 2021, 11:24:32 AM
I don't know about Plaid Cymru, but the SNP minority government has had a support agreement with the Scottish Greens.

The nature of the Senedd has often forced Labour to work in collaboration with other parties for some time.  They have had a coalition with Plaid in the past and for the last few years the sole LD member was Education Minister (Kirsty Williams). 

At the moment they've got exactly half the seats so they have to work collaboratively.  How well they do will remain to be seen.  The pandemic has been good for them (I know, sorry ...) because it has allowed them to exercise devolved powers and Westminster has been forced into funding measures. 

As we come out, the focus will shift towards issues over which there is less scope for independent action but also more constraints.  The track record of the Senedd on the economy has been pretty ropey over the years.  Possibly Labour will once again look to where they have common ground with Plaid and the liberals as they go.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 May, 2021, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 13 May, 2021, 08:21:06 AM
Feck, that Liz Cheney stuff is a bit scary. What may be the most powerful political party in the world in 2025, reduced to one policy: believing a liar.

Oh, and stopping the wrong people voting for the wrong party.

Just when you thought the US election was over months ago ... Arizona recount: Why Republicans are still tallying votes (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57089359). It it goes nowhere, they look like desperate fools. On the other hand, this is part of the new fascist agenda for the Republicans in the US. In general (and officially, at the highest levels of the party), they now have a mindset that embraces the Big Lie (that Trump really won).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 13 May, 2021, 05:04:09 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 13 May, 2021, 09:10:49 AM
Back in the 90s I remember reading about the "End of History", as various academics and analysts believed that the post-cold-war centrist liberal consensus would continue indefinitely and lead to the end of conflict. There was no longer any major ideological battles to be fought.

The one thing that is certain about the future is that our ideas are wildly wrong.

I remember LOL the first time I heard that theory, the arrogance of it was astounding.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2021, 06:00:45 PM
I recall the follow-up to the End Of History theory was that the future would see resource wars, with countries having to realign their military strategies to deal not with nations, but with terrorist threats caused by said resource wars.  It's interesting to note that even back then, they knew that the end result of neoliberal consensus would be that capitalism would run rampant and destroy nations.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2021, 06:12:57 PM

Not capitalism; corporatism.

Remember, also, how Mussolini defined fascism.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 May, 2021, 06:14:31 PM
One of the things I find most disturbing at the moment is that there are so many supply-chains that link fairly clearly into the current ongoing genocide of the Uighurs in China. Like, if you buy jeans at all, then the cotton that is in those jeans was probably picked via indentured labour (you know, slavery) in right now, modern-day, happening as I type China.

But don't worry - all the companies that make jeans, and all the consumers of jeans are ... oh. No. Nothing. Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 13 May, 2021, 09:32:11 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2021, 06:12:57 PM
Not capitalism; corporatism.

Name one place where capitalism has ever worked.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 May, 2021, 09:54:04 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2021, 06:12:57 PM

Not capitalism; corporatism.


They're synonymous, though....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 May, 2021, 10:05:37 PM
It does seem like a bit of a task to try and separate them. I found this:

(https://i.imgur.com/gWRNGIV.jpg)


The problem I have understanding it is how you avoid what's happening on the right. I suppose you could argue that government intervention could (should?) step in to avoid what's happening on the right - you know - legislating against monopolies or something (but then they're being manipulated by the monsters they've allowed to come into existence).

I thing it's amusing that there's no context for "Someone has a bright idea so forms a company" - yes - if they have opportunities afforded them. Being born into a capitalist (or corporate) society means you'll already be an on an uneven field.

Anyway - fascist ideology is on the rise.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2021, 11:14:37 PM

Capitalism will never work properly because it is based on an illusion. Corporatism is even worse because it deifies that illusion.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 08:39:12 AM
The terrible failures of Communist systems operating under relentless external economic and military assault from the moment of their birth are tiny stumbles compared to the universal global annihilation that unchallenged Socialised Capitalism has brought us to.

That's the real End of History; not a metaphor, not an imaginary story.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 08:46:20 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 13 May, 2021, 11:14:37 PM

Capitalism will never work properly because it is based on an illusion. Corporatism is even worse because it deifies that illusion.

I could say the same for the communism. In fact, I see them both as two opposite sides of the same coin. Which is globalism.

Quote from: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 08:39:12 AM
The terrible failures of Communist systems operating under relentless external economic and military assault from the moment of their birth are tiny stumbles compared to the universal global annihilation that unchallenged Socialised Capitalism has brought us to.

I wouldn't call tens of millions of dead under Stalin and Mao as tiny stumbles.

In general, I figured, if there is a left, then there should be right. And vice versa. Two have to serve as counterpoint to each other, where flaws of left are, the right can thrive, and again - vice  versa.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 14 May, 2021, 09:27:17 AM
Neither Stalinism nor Maoism in action where truly communist in their disciplines, and the continued suggestion they where is about as grounded in observable history as Hitler being a leftie because hey, it was the National 'Socialist' Party, right?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 14 May, 2021, 10:40:33 AM
There's no "true" communism, I don't think. Every implementation has been flawed and partial.

There's also no "true" capitalism for the same reason.

Personally, I just look around the world at countries who have systems that seem the most humane and liveable. By that metric Scandi/NZ style Social Democracy seems like the best compromise (to me at least) in a difficult world.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes", as the great philosopher once said.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 14 May, 2021, 10:40:54 AM
And I am aware that I am now a "centrist Dad".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 11:17:03 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 14 May, 2021, 09:27:17 AM
Neither Stalinism nor Maoism in action where truly communist in their disciplines, and the continued suggestion they where is about as grounded in observable history as Hitler being a leftie because hey, it was the National 'Socialist' Party, right?

To me, that's the communism in purest form. Because of trying to reach an ideal no matter the consequences. About Hitler, I can see salient point there, but to me, he was rather a centrist. Which, I should be wary how I put, because I consider myself centrist. And political spectrum does places him there (although political spectrum says that I am a bit on the left and authoritarian lol). Total left - Stalin, Hitler - middle, Thatcher - right. All authoritarian. Ofcourse, Thatcher was the least malevolent of the three. I think we can all agree that both left and the right can be very totalitarian and pro-censorship.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 11:18:31 AM
Quote from: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 08:46:20 AM
I wouldn't call tens of millions of dead under Stalin and Mao as tiny stumbles.

Versus the extinction of most life on this planet, and the destruction of human civilisation that capitalism is delivering?  Yeah, stumbles.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 14 May, 2021, 12:11:09 PM
I'm not sure Scandi is particularly Centrist - or at least with regards how UK politics is run, its in line with Corbynism so "extreme left" by that measure!

Quote from: CalHab on 14 May, 2021, 10:40:54 AM
And I am aware that I am now a "centrist Dad".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 12:38:04 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 11:18:31 AM
Quote from: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 08:46:20 AM
I wouldn't call tens of millions of dead under Stalin and Mao as tiny stumbles.

Versus the extinction of most life on this planet, and the destruction of human civilisation that capitalism is delivering?  Yeah, stumbles.

Are we going to count the victims of Stalin + Mao + Castro vs the victims of unnecessary wars in the name of capitalism?  Not discrediting the latter, but the former has a pretty big death toll.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 May, 2021, 01:30:21 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 14 May, 2021, 12:11:09 PMI'm not sure Scandi is particularly Centrist - or at least with regards how UK politics is run, its in line with Corbynism so "extreme left" by that measure!
They're mixed economies. Plenty of capitalism and competition, but also with a stronger social underpinning than the UK has. That said, Scandi/Nordic countries often have a quite conservative core, and so vary quite a lot politically. (Iceland, for example, mostly returns coalitions led by politicians that in the UK would have sat somewhere in the Cameron-era Conservative Party.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 01:33:42 PM
Castro? A weekend in Iraq in 2003 courtesy of "the world's largest economies" would put his lifetime total to shame. With none of the benefits.

And again, I'd point out that capitalism, as the only game in town, is in the possibly-unstoppable process of wiping out most of the animal life on this planet, including us. Its mantra of unending "growth", by which it means "accumulation", without any consequences is analogous to carving up your own legs for your dinner when you're not even hungry The Musks of this world are betting it's actually someone else's thigh rashers on the buffet plate, because that's how it looks in the short term, but they're wrong.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 May, 2021, 01:37:00 PM
It's beginning to sink in with some—albeit too late—that capitalism is essentially a pyramid scheme in its current form. We should be aiming to realign business success with new targets that aren't endless growth. Alas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 May, 2021, 03:41:31 PM
Quote from: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 12:38:04 PM
Are we going to count the victims of Stalin + Mao + Castro vs the victims of unnecessary wars in the name of capitalism?  Not discrediting the latter, but the former has a pretty big death toll.

I'll admit that I used the back of an envelope* for this, but:

Death toll of Stalin + Mao + Castro would be something like 6m + 35m + 2K. Probably we'd get a better total if we shelved Castro here (as he's a bit embarrassed) and replaced him with Hitler, who brings in another 16m. That gets us up to 57 million. Hey, go Mao! (As in, go to hell, I mean.)

Now, Capitalism - 100 million. (Probably I'm cheating here by counting Hitler's death toll twice. But if we remove Adolf from the Commie side, as we maybe should, then that just makes the difference all the starker.)

Capitalism, as we should have guessed, wins easily. It's set up to win, of course, and win it does. That's a strong dollar, that capitalism dollar etc.


*Asking where I actually got these figures from will result in crows cawing, tumbleweeds tumbling and a soft, low wind whistling through the tall grass. For verily, I am not your research monkey. I belong to Mister Pops.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 14 May, 2021, 06:29:01 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 01:33:42 PM
Castro? A weekend in Iraq in 2003 courtesy of "the world's largest economies" would put his lifetime total to shame. With none of the benefits.

Well, the effect of this comes pretty close.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article118282148.html

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 14 May, 2021, 01:30:21 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 14 May, 2021, 12:11:09 PMI'm not sure Scandi is particularly Centrist - or at least with regards how UK politics is run, its in line with Corbynism so "extreme left" by that measure!
They're mixed economies. Plenty of capitalism and competition, but also with a stronger social underpinning than the UK has. That said, Scandi/Nordic countries often have a quite conservative core, and so vary quite a lot politically. (Iceland, for example, mostly returns coalitions led by politicians that in the UK would have sat somewhere in the Cameron-era Conservative Party.)

Not sure if you refer to Sweden by this, because Sweden is ultra liberal state. Perhaps the most on the planet.


As for capitalism vs communism, I don't think we should negate the victims of one system (of which there are inexcusably lot) in order to criticize the other. Ofcourse, these commie countries weren't the only one in existence; in fact, some today are still communist with the exception being China, that is very capitalist, yet with communist government (the one that would hang you if you dare to mention Mao, whose revolution almost destroyed the country). Both systems to me, are equally bad, but for different reasons. I can see that majority in UK is capitalist-oriented and despising communism. Same or even more so, can be applied to US. And likely, the rest of (western) world. I don't wanna now excuse capitalism, but the fact is that such system prevailed throughout, where communism ended up miserably. Imperfect capitalism is, both it and democracy need a reform.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 14 May, 2021, 08:05:17 PM
"My mum still refuses to admit Stalin put a foot wrong.  She used to say to me, you can't make an omelette without starving forty million people to death."  Alexei Sayle.


Each year 9 million people die by design, because artificial scarcity is the engine driving capitalism.  Homelessness and food poverty are required components of capitalism in order that it may function as intended, and I'm not one of them big city sums-doing lawyers, but even I am pretty sure that 9 million a year for a couple of centuries now is probably higher than whatever number is the death toll of communism this week.

One thing I always wondered about these "death toll" numbers, though, is since the death toll of communism includes Nazis killed by Russian soldiers and - double-dipping, but we don't let that stop us - Russian soldiers killed during WW2 BY Nazis, then where do we add the 3-5 million Bengalis who were starved to death by Winston Churchill?  Do they go on Hitler's tally, or on the UK's, or do we just add them to communism's death toll because some of them might have been left-wing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 May, 2021, 08:29:53 PM
So today I learned that capitalism actually isn't because it doesn't, communism never isn't except that it wasn't.

Both have spread around the world, resulting in the deaths of load the  poorest and most vulnerable people exposed to them. LIKE THE CORONAVIRUS, DO YOU SEE THE SHIT METAPHOR?

Anyway, a young Earth creationist is now in charge of the DUP, and possibly the province. No not the one the allegedly use tax-payers money to buy gentleman's entertainments in a hotel, the one that used tax-payers money on a court case to block gays donating blood. Because he knew a guy that got his life saved with the gay blood and caught the notoriously infectious gay disease. No not AIDS, haemophila....HAEMOPHILIA (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/letters/gay-blood-answer-shows-ignorance-of-science-28719702.html)! The man is a verifiable idiot.

And he has big stupid ears too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 14 May, 2021, 08:46:07 PM
Just to be clear, and then yield Edwin Poots the floor of his Flat Earth,  I don't give a flying shit for Stalin or Mao (or Pol Pot or George W Bush)  or the ideological smokescreen of any other mass-murdering prick, my point is solely that capitalism is in  charge and has been for several centuries now, has murdered and degraded countless millions just like the other guys, but perhaps more significantly is systematically working on killing us ALL to line the pockets of a statistically insignificant number of greedy pricks. On that basis the final scoreline doesn't look great. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2021, 09:37:57 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 May, 2021, 08:29:53 PM

Anyway, a young Earth creationist is now in charge of the DUP, and possibly the province. No not the one the allegedly use tax-payers money to buy gentleman's entertainments in a hotel, the one that used tax-payers money on a court case to block gays donating blood. Because he knew a guy that got his life saved with the gay blood and caught the notoriously infectious gay disease. No not AIDS, haemophila....HAEMOPHILIA (https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/letters/gay-blood-answer-shows-ignorance-of-science-28719702.html)! The man is a verifiable idiot.

And he has big stupid ears too.

Not only a blinkered, bigoted, big-eared bellend, but a blinkered, bigoted, big-eared bellend with a name out of a Dickens novel.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 May, 2021, 09:53:47 PM
I don't see where anyone gets the idea that a suffering underclass is being exploited in order to elevate a privileged minority into positions of untold wealth.

Jeff Bezos and the secretive world of superyachts (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57079327)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 May, 2021, 09:55:25 PM
Wait - there's a real man really called Edwin Poots, who's really in charge, really has those thoughts and really has those ears?

Brain melting...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 14 May, 2021, 09:59:27 PM
It's quite a Mega City 1 name too, when you think about it.  You can imagine someone with a name like that being stuffed by Jacob Sardini.  If only...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mikey on 15 May, 2021, 08:38:55 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 14 May, 2021, 08:29:53 PM

Anyway, a young Earth creationist is now in charge of the DUP, and possibly the province...

It's just an embarrassment that clearly sets out how things will run from here on (again). Rumour I've heard postulates Givan for first minister, which is even worse in some ways to Poots. He's like the wee shite that hangs around with the bullies but wouldn't open his mouth when he's on his own. The foreman's half wit son if you will.

They're a pack a dirt in my opinion.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2021, 11:06:36 PM
Once you adopt PR on the mainland, you can have politicians just like ours.

I was on the BBC News website and out of curiosity I searched to see if anything interesting was happening in Israel, and holy crap they only have a big comic convention coming up this weekend, and a whole bunch of musical events in the coming months ahead LOL just kidding they're murdering children again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 16 May, 2021, 06:59:07 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 15 May, 2021, 11:06:36 PM
...just kidding they're murdering children again.

The benefits of a world-beating vaccination roll-out: life's back to normal. You can barely hear the missiles over all the public health media frottaging that's been going on. A solid response to a pandemic could have saved Botha a lot of international hassle. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 16 May, 2021, 09:29:38 AM
Yes, Bear, because FPTP hasn't resulted in a bunch of horrifying halfwit and genuinely scary Tory MPs barely a hair's breadth from NF wannabes. PR isn't the problem. And "on the mainland", FPTP is nothing more than an enabler of multiple Tory governments and very occasional Labour governments that do not have the backing of a majority, while keeping our politics from being remotely representative and cooperative at the national level. (I see at local level, some councils are at least doing better, like Cambridgeshire's anti-Tory coalition, but they are sadly anomalous.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 26 May, 2021, 03:39:46 AM
I'm wondering if it's possible to mention China in any way that doesn't bring to mind the novel 1984, or the phrase Kafkaesque.

AI emotion-detection software tested on Uyghurs (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57101248) - installed at police stations, this modern marvel looks at you and detects whether or not you are nervous. Anyone who somehow remains calm is clearly an android and should be immediately destroyed.

John Cena: Fast and Furious star sorry over Taiwan remark backlash (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57241053) - this could so easily be "Man apologizes to China* for saying he liked Winnie the Pooh". It's a bit embarrassing that the BBC article toes the party line and also manages to avoid calling the country of Taiwan a country.

*Well, to their totalitarian government.

From protests to 'patriots': Why China is crushing Hong Kong dissent (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-57225142)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 26 May, 2021, 12:13:21 PM
Fecking hell. I've spent time in both Hong Kong and Beijing - really liked Hong Kong but Beijing looks like the movie version of MC1 (without the crime in fairness, but just as grim, grey and imposing).  I suspect the former will very soon be like the latter.

I taught a lot of Chinese people over there, and while they tend to be very patriotic, a lot of them will quietly tell you that they are not happy with the government suppressing their news and crushing dissent, although there's not much anyone can do about it - people tend to disappear in vans on a fairly regular basis.  I also noticed a belief that cracks in the firewall would some day force the government to change its oppressive ways, though I suspect that level of optimism has been dampened in recent years.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 26 May, 2021, 04:07:35 PM
Spent about 30 seconds 'listening' to Cummings' testimony.  It's a wonderful situation we're in right now, isn't it?  Which duplicitous, scheming, lying, back-stabbing bar-steward do you believe the most?  I really do despair for this country.   :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2021, 11:02:24 PM
Don't worry, the peerless British press will hold them to account.  We're just one unnecessarily-smug Marina Hyde column away from real social change.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2021, 10:14:15 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2021, 11:02:24 PM
Don't worry, the peerless British press will hold them to account.  We're just one unnecessarily-smug Marina Hyde column away from real social change.

Most people  I know, sadly including my mother, believe every word they hear. "Don't be daft, Mark, they're not allowed to lie."

Makes me weep.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 27 May, 2021, 02:50:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 27 May, 2021, 10:14:15 AM

Most people  I know, sadly including my mother, believe every word they hear. "Don't be daft, Mark, they're not allowed to lie."

Makes me weep.

I don't know if it's the syndrome of watching telly too much or something else. To me, your government and press lying to you, are yesterday news to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 27 May, 2021, 05:56:21 PM
Quote from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/26/the-guardian-view-on-cummings-testimony-a-vivid-portrait-of-failureMr Cummings reports that the prime minister likes "chaos" as a mode of government because it forces others to await his arbitration, thereby bolstering his power. That is consistent with other accounts of Mr Johnson's modus operandi: maintaining a deliberately weak cabinet, contradicting himself, making false public statements, making policy commitments one day and U-turning the next, procrastinating while the options narrow.

So Cummings would have us believe that Johnson is running the country much like Lord Julius runs Palnu in the Cerebus comics. Not sure how it's taken me this long to realise that similarity, particularly as I've only recently re-read High Society.

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebus_the_Aardvark#Characters
Lord Julius
    Grandlord of the city-state of Palnu, who exercises control by making the bureaucracy incredibly dense and incomprehensible. Julius is crafty and intelligent, but often plays the fool to confuse and baffle opponents.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: TordelBack on 27 May, 2021, 10:38:37 PM
Lord Julius' particular style of obscurantist misrule being in turn closely based on President Rufus T. Firefly (Groucho) in the brilliant Duck Soup. It is indeed a parallel that makes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: zombemybabynow on 28 May, 2021, 09:57:51 AM
one step away from E J Saggs [from space truckers]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 28 May, 2021, 10:33:22 AM
Ah - Cerebus before Sim's nervous breakdown - still amongst the best comics every published.

Meanwhile, at the risk of invoking Godwin's Law - there was one political leader from the mid-twentieth century who gave obscure orders which had to be interpreted by underlings (who could suffer severe consequences if there interpretation was later judges to be incorrect)...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 June, 2021, 05:19:38 PM
Abortion: Texas teen attacks new law in high school graduation speech (https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-57343832)

The YouTube video (https://youtu.be/mrfe27VDuRA) linked in the article has a long intro. from one of her teachers, and Paxton Smith (for it is she) starts speaking at 4:38.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 03 June, 2021, 05:26:26 PM
Fantastic speech.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 06 June, 2021, 11:51:06 PM
Xi Jinping calls for more 'loveable' image for China in bid to make friends (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57327177)

Meanwhile...

Tiananmen: Hong Kong vigil organiser arrested on 32nd anniversary (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57353803)
Xiaohongshu account blocked after post on Tiananmen anniversary (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57374879)
Microsoft says error caused 'Tank Man' Bing censorship (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57367100)
John Cena: WWE star says sorry to China for Taiwan remark (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57241053)
AI emotion-detection software tested on Uyghurs (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57101248)
Christopher Robin: Winnie the Pooh film denied release in China (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45083944)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 June, 2021, 09:28:34 PM
And: China has created a 'dystopian hellscape' in Xinjiang, Amnesty report says (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57386625)

Not messing around with euphemisms there, those Amnesty folk. Telling it like it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: karlos on 10 June, 2021, 10:46:42 PM
Read the headlines over morning coffee.

Shake head at utter desolation of it all.

Repeat daily.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 11 June, 2021, 11:03:11 AM
After 70 million of deaths under Mao years, I expected Chinese to get wiser.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 June, 2021, 11:27:44 AM
Quote from: milstar on 11 June, 2021, 11:03:11 AM
After 70 million of deaths under Mao years, I expected Chinese to get wiser.

I can't now find it to link to, but I read an utterly harrowing and genuinely stomach-turning account of what happened at Tiananmen Square, where a realistic death toll is apparently more of the order of 10,000+ than any 'official' number, that kind of puts it into perspective. The answer of Chinese authorities to that old cry of "they can't kill us all" was a very emphatic "Not only can we, be assured that if we deem it necessary, we will."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 11 June, 2021, 11:50:19 AM
Might have been this one in the Independent? It is a horrible read.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-square-massacre-death-toll-secret-cable-british-ambassador-1989-alan-donald-a8126461.html

I've met people from China who literally don't believe this happened.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 11 June, 2021, 12:02:36 PM
Yeah. That's the one. It might have been a different article, but using the same ambassador's account.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 June, 2021, 03:43:58 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 11 June, 2021, 11:50:19 AM
Might have been this one in the Independent? It is a horrible read.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-square-massacre-death-toll-secret-cable-british-ambassador-1989-alan-donald-a8126461.html

I've met people from China who literally don't believe this happened.

Me too.  I lived a few minutes' walk from Tiananmen Square when I was in China - For all its giant screens showing Chinese society in all its glory, it's a miserable, concrete waste of space where a nice green park would be a lot nicer.  Or even proper housing for the people who live in the nearby slum streets.

One local IT guy I taught asked me in a conspiratorial voice if I'd heard about the massacre.  While I told him I had, I didn't have the heart to tell him that pretty much everyone outside China had heard of it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 13 June, 2021, 08:22:02 PM
Merkel turning up to G7 in a Red Shirt cosplay might have been a poor call.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 23 June, 2021, 07:22:12 AM

A message to the PM, (https://balfourproject.org/a-message-to-the-pm/) MPs send No.10 the Balfour Project call for the strict application of international law, including via the ICC, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 23 June, 2021, 01:55:08 PM
Well, the US can take all its bragging rights about freedom and democracy and stick them up its flabby great arse.

Obviously it's no major surprise, but any attempts to prevent the less popular party stopping people voting against it have failed. When only the right people are allowed to vote in certain states, those states aren't really small-D democratic states at all, are they?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 20 July, 2021, 08:51:23 PM
Ah. I see we've reached 'checks notes' the "Antivaxxers comparing themselves to Rosa Parks" stage of the pseudoscience dystopia...

Somewhere Andrew Wakefield is polishing his monkeys paw smugly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 10:08:05 AM

Given that contradictory evidence and counterarguments are currently forbidden, that's not the worst comparison I've ever encountered.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 July, 2021, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 10:08:05 AM
that's not the worst comparison I've ever encountered.

If Rosa Parks had been protesting her right to get on a bus with a highly contagious disease and infect every fucker on there, the comparison might be apt. Otherwise, GTFO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 12:11:05 PM

Excellent illustration of my point. Thanks, Jim.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 21 July, 2021, 12:14:06 PM
To clarify, yet again: This board and especially this thread is extremely tolerant of varied viewpoints, arguably to a fault. What we do not—and will not—tolerate is antivaxx rubbish, especially in the middle of a pandemic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 04:17:37 PM

I couldn't agree more.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 July, 2021, 04:32:22 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 20 July, 2021, 08:51:23 PM
Ah. I see we've reached 'checks notes' the "Antivaxxers comparing themselves to Rosa Parks" stage of the pseudoscience dystopia...

This brought up some interesting points for me:

1. Rosa Parks is often historically misunderstood as being a quiet person who had finally had enough and made a sudden stand against oppression - but was actually a long-term activist against racial oppression (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/01/how-history-got-the-rosa-parks-story-wrong/).

2. White (pro-virus) conspiracy theorists have been ridiculously comparing themselves to Parks for about a year or so now - I assume to get publicity (which works, of course). Her freedoms were curtailed due to the color of her skin, as opposed to people being (in most cases, asked nicely) to conform to regulations during a public health emergency. You'd have to be a complete idiot to think that was a valid equation. Still: no shortage of those in the world.

3. See also: pro-virus tw*ts wearing Jewish stars to compare themselves to victims of the Nazi holocaust. No shame, no brain.

4. There's some perverse solace in that the virus outbreaks in the US are now centered on pro-virus (also: Republican) states. Mass Darwin Awards. Why have people started wedding their medical thinking to their political affiliation and not questioning their own internal logic?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 July, 2021, 04:42:59 PM
(https://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/60d9bdfc2084d_0nhVuH1__700.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 05:31:35 PM

And so I'm back to "no comment" as  the only acceptable comment I can make at this point. I've seen this movie and recognise Chief Brody slopping chum into the water when I see him. Don't want no more barrels in my hide...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 July, 2021, 07:09:03 PM
Well of course the shark is the victim.  :-\
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: SmallBlueThing(Reborn) on 21 July, 2021, 07:39:06 PM
So, where are we? It's looking like on top of the tories threatening to put refugees in prison for fourteen years for the temerity to escape war zones without paying Tui for the privilege, they now want to lock journalists up for a similar length of time if they cause the government "embarrassment", by, er, reporting when they break the law. And their generous counteroffer to the recommended 15% NHS payrise is... 3%.

I don't often post on this thread because frankly I am not a.well man and my heart/ blood pressure couldn't stand the strain, but... drokk those motherfunting spugfunts.

SBT
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 July, 2021, 07:41:01 PM
Tories deserve to be shot politely asked to be better people in the street.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 21 July, 2021, 08:24:51 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 21 July, 2021, 05:31:35 PM

And so I'm back to "no comment" as  the only acceptable comment I can make at this point. I've seen this movie and recognise Chief Brody slopping chum into the water when I see him. Don't want no more barrels in my hide...

I think we're going to need a bigger thread.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 22 July, 2021, 06:59:19 AM
Quote from: SmallBlueThing(Reborn) on 21 July, 2021, 07:39:06 PMAnd their generous counteroffer to the recommended 15% NHS payrise is... 3%.

I think 3% is what the Pay Review Body recommended. 15% is what some of the unions were asking for. The Royal College of Nursing was asking for 12.5%.

I won't pretend that a bit of extra money in the pocket wouldn't be welcome, but given the way things are right now, more staff, resources and facilities would improve our quality of life considerably, especially staff.

Obviously, the NHS is a huge organisation and we won't all agree on this, but the people I work with are mostly just thankful we still have jobs.

Also, I worry that a 15% pay rise would trigger a wave of resentment and jealously towards the NHS, and we can really do without that kind of shit at the moment.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 22 July, 2021, 01:12:50 PM
(https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-councilman-who-used-n-word-wont-apologize-may-run-mayor-1611884)

And now he has to live with it. Tbh, he better face the fucking consequences than issuing an apology (likely fake as they always do, as if "I have me plenty Ngg friends"). Pff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 July, 2021, 02:08:13 PM
Quote from: milstar on 22 July, 2021, 01:12:50 PM
(https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-councilman-who-used-n-word-wont-apologize-may-run-mayor-1611884)

And now he has to live with it. Tbh, he better face the fucking consequences than issuing an apology (likely fake as they always do, as if "I have me plenty Ngg friends"). Pff.

https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-councilman-who-used-n-word-wont-apologize-may-run-mayor-1611884 (https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-councilman-who-used-n-word-wont-apologize-may-run-mayor-1611884)

FTFY - seems you used an image link in your post rather than a URL one.


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 22 July, 2021, 03:36:11 PM
Jeez, I haven't even noticed. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 July, 2021, 07:11:25 PM
No bother. It truly is a horrendous story alright, but not altogether surprising these days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 07 August, 2021, 04:00:04 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/05/outcry-over-plan-to-deport-jamaican-nationals-who-came-to-uk-as-children (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/05/outcry-over-plan-to-deport-jamaican-nationals-who-came-to-uk-as-children)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 August, 2021, 09:30:14 AM
Well, the West has failed in Afghanistan, the 'graveyard of Empires.' The Enlightenment age, which believed in self-determination and scientific progress, perhaps fades into history a little more. Bush and Blair believed they could convert a society steeped in conservative Islamism to accept modernity. This ill-conceived idea collapses with little ceremony, and so quickly, it appears to have been almost a mirage, and with large amounts of martial material lost to those hardly disposed towards western liberalism. A hard lesson in Imperial hubris is that you cannot create by force and belief alone some westernized version of another country, and Suez seems like a minor hiccup compared to this debacle. It might be the Saigon moment of this century.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2021, 11:42:35 AM
Incels are terrorists. The media splitting hairs over this does nobody any good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 16 August, 2021, 03:33:29 PM
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 August, 2021, 09:30:14 AM
Well, the West has failed in Afghanistan, the 'graveyard of Empires.' The Enlightenment age, which believed in self-determination and scientific progress, perhaps fades into history a little more. Bush and Blair believed they could convert a society steeped in conservative Islamism to accept modernity. This ill-conceived idea collapses with little ceremony, and so quickly, it appears to have been almost a mirage, and with large amounts of martial material lost to those hardly disposed towards western liberalism. A hard lesson in Imperial hubris is that you cannot create by force and belief alone some westernized version of another country, and Suez seems like a minor hiccup compared to this debacle. It might be the Saigon moment of this century.

Like any "humanitarian" intervention, Afghanistan is failure. I wonder whether those responsible will answer for war crimes (including dear Mr. Blair).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2021, 04:07:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2021, 11:42:35 AM
Incels are terrorists. The media splitting hairs over this does nobody any good.

Depends on the incel, surely? I mean, their whole so-called ideology is a blight on society, but they're not ALL committing violent acts.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 16 August, 2021, 04:34:22 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 16 August, 2021, 04:07:01 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 16 August, 2021, 11:42:35 AM
Incels are terrorists. The media splitting hairs over this does nobody any good.

Depends on the incel, surely? I mean, their whole so-called ideology is a blight on society, but they're not ALL committing violent acts.

Nah, Hawk just got it arseways. Terrorists are all incels.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 August, 2021, 04:40:12 PM
Terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. That's the Google search definition: you can broaden it out by searching other dictionaries to the point where it includes school bullying.

I suppose you could argue it either way for the recent British tragedy - was he pursuing political aims? Or just going on a pre-suicide murder spree (while also believing a loose ideology)?

Directed violence against women is abhorrent (of course), but his targets seemed to be random in that regard.

---

I do think more could be done by social media companies (or laws controlling them) to tackle misinformation - there are cult-like online movements for all sorts of weird, harmful beliefs: whether it be pro-suicide messaging, self-harm romanticizing, the dark depths of incel doctrine, anti-vaxx or whatever.

The way social media is set up to form bubbles of belief drives their marketing policies and helps them make money from ad revenue. They're not in the business of helping people. The same dumb algorithms that offer me more shoes if I buy shoes, offers people more bullshit if they buy bullshit. If you ever watch a Jordan "I Use Big Words and Complex Sentence Structures to Pretend I'm Not a Misogynist" Peterson video, the YouTube algorithm will try to feed you more. If you happen to be easily swayed by bullshit you'll come out the other end a trans-phobic misogynist pseudo-intellectual who thinks it's reasonable to attack minority groups in order to save the subjugated white male race from extinction by an out of control, effete, liberal junta.

Be careful out there!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 16 August, 2021, 07:49:03 PM

It seems that anyone the government doesn't like, or anyone who doesn't like the government (*hi there!*) is a terrorist these days. I think it would be much simpler to call any human who harms another a criminal.

Oh. Right. Soldiers, cops, etc. Sorry. How silly of me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 August, 2021, 07:47:19 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 August, 2021, 04:40:12 PM

I suppose you could argue it either way for the recent British tragedy - was he pursuing political aims? Or just going on a pre-suicide murder spree (while also believing a loose ideology)?


Certainly of the multiple instances of incel mass murder this one appears the most directionless of lacking in apparent agency, but when taking into account the 2014 California mass shooting and the 2018 Toronto vehicular rampage (I refuse to name these incidents after their perpetrators) who where both cited by the Plymouth shooter as influences in video logs, both of whom left very public, and very explicit manifestos on the nature of their intentions* this cult absolutely fits the definition of a terror cell. Albeit it an extremely scattered, disorganized, and completely disconnected one. It's worth noting that the incel movement as it currently stand has only been a phenomena of the last decade, which really draws into my concerns what they could be capable of in future as the death count associated with this hive of troglodytes already numbers in the upper double digits.

*Thats before we consider the innumerable mysoginistic outlets these cretins utilize to network.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 10:57:34 AM
I don't see how incels can be connected to the act of terrorism, when terrorism is a pretty much an individual thing. Whether on a macro or micro scale. You can be successfully married and still be pissed off on your government. By that logic, all terrorist attacks committed in Europe must be done because of "muh" incelism, when the matter is something else.

I remember when movie Joker came out and some people ridiculously stated it'll incite incels to do something horrible. But why? And I never heard for any crime related to the movie. But one thing Joker did to me. After the credits rolled, I felt something worst inside me is boiling up that I wanted to be Michael Douglas from Falling Down. I still do not see how the movie can be inspiring to actions of an individual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 August, 2021, 04:24:46 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 17 August, 2021, 07:47:19 AM
...both cited by the Plymouth shooter as influences in video logs...

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. That sways me into agreement that it was terrorism. There's a shared ideology which is being *promoted* through acts of terror. That's terrorism.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
So to summarise your argumemts. Milstar, it cant be terrorism because all terrorism is just someone hitting out for personal reasons, and all this guy did was hit out for personal reasons?

And to all those people saying "Joker" incited people to violence, the only effect it had on you was making you want to act like Michael Douglas in famous violent rampage film "Falling Down"?


If I ever need someone to defend me on Death Row, remind me not to call you!



Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 10:57:34 AM
I don't see how incels can be connected to the act of terrorism, when terrorism is a pretty much an individual thing. Whether on a macro or micro scale. You can be successfully married and still be pissed off on your government. By that logic, all terrorist attacks committed in Europe must be done because of "muh" incelism, when the matter is something else.

I remember when movie Joker came out and some people ridiculously stated it'll incite incels to do something horrible. But why? And I never heard for any crime related to the movie. But one thing Joker did to me. After the credits rolled, I felt something worst inside me is boiling up that I wanted to be Michael Douglas from Falling Down. I still do not see how the movie can be inspiring to actions of an individual.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 05:59:50 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 17 August, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
So to summarise your argumemts. Milstar, it cant be terrorism because all terrorism is just someone hitting out for personal reasons, and all this guy did was hit out for personal reasons?

And to all those people saying "Joker" incited people to violence, the only effect it had on you was making you want to act like Michael Douglas in famous violent rampage film "Falling Down"?


If I ever need someone to defend me on Death Row, remind me not to call you!


What actually is your argument? Furthermore, I think you severely misunderstood what I wrote.

And who needs a defense from the Death Row? Nor I think we have Death Row, at least in UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 August, 2021, 06:08:03 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 05:59:50 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 17 August, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
So to summarise your argumemts. Milstar, it cant be terrorism because all terrorism is just someone hitting out for personal reasons, and all this guy did was hit out for personal reasons?

And to all those people saying "Joker" incited people to violence, the only effect it had on you was making you want to act like Michael Douglas in famous violent rampage film "Falling Down"?

If I ever need someone to defend me on Death Row, remind me not to call you!


What actually is your argument? Furthermore, I think you severely misunderstood what I wrote.

And who needs a defense from the Death Row? Nor I think we have Death Row, at least in UK.

For the record, what I took from what you wrote was that you saw a film and upon leaving the cinema you were so full of rage that you wanted to go out on a murderous rampage.  What other reading could possibly have been taken from what you said up-thread?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 17 August, 2021, 06:28:46 PM

I took it to mean that feeling like going on a murderous rampage is not terrorism but actually going on a murderous rampage is.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 August, 2021, 06:30:52 PM
I rarely 'reveal' posts of folks I've blocked but I was curious and good lord. Where to begin?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 06:47:12 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 17 August, 2021, 06:08:03 PM
For the record, what I took from what you wrote was that you saw a film and upon leaving the cinema you were so full of rage that you wanted to go out on a murderous rampage.  What other reading could possibly have been taken from what you said up-thread?

No, I never felt enraged or anything. I felt that my propensity for violence has awoken and I am actually, very pacifist person. I didn't feel like I was going to bash a random bloke's skull.  Nor I thought about a murder.

Either way, each act of terrorism is rooted in personal reasons. Ofcourse it is, but all differ. As a matter of fact, every act that endangers the lives of people is basically a terrorism; not to be confused with the cold-blooded murder.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 07:20:34 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 06:47:12 PM
As a matter of fact, every act that endangers the lives of people is basically a terrorism

No, it's not. Terrorism, by definition is violence applied in the service of a political agenda. It has to be premeditated, serve a cause, and its intended effect is to influence others. You can't accidentally commit a terrorist act.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 17 August, 2021, 07:30:33 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 07:20:34 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 06:47:12 PM
As a matter of fact, every act that endangers the lives of people is basically a terrorism

No, it's not. Terrorism, by definition is violence applied in the service of a political agenda. It has to be premeditated, serve a cause, and its intended effect is to influence others. You can't accidentally commit a terrorist act.

I believe milstar is citing FOUR LIONS as a source. His case, as they say, rests. Precariously.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 07:34:49 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 07:20:34 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 06:47:12 PM
As a matter of fact, every act that endangers the lives of people is basically a terrorism

No, it's not. Terrorism, by definition is violence applied in the service of a political agenda. It has to be premeditated, serve a cause, and its intended effect is to influence others. You can't accidentally commit a terrorist act.

No one ever does. A bloke who comes gunning down a slew of people didn't think of that five minutes ago. And why always it needs to serve for political (or religious) purposes?

Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 17 August, 2021, 07:30:33 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 07:20:34 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 06:47:12 PM
As a matter of fact, every act that endangers the lives of people is basically a terrorism

No, it's not. Terrorism, by definition is violence applied in the service of a political agenda. It has to be premeditated, serve a cause, and its intended effect is to influence others. You can't accidentally commit a terrorist act.

I believe milstar is citing FOUR LIONS as a source. His case, as they say, rests. Precariously.

Never seen Four Lions.

But this is what FBI has to say about it:

International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

From:
https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism (https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 August, 2021, 08:33:08 PM
Th Definition of Domestic Terrorism is pretty good fit IMO

His Social Media presence shows that he aligned himself with a particualr group, showed sympathy for other mass shooters and their "agenda", even if that is a social one more than a religious one - to be honest, it makes more sense to me that someone might be upset at feeling ostracized from partaking in "life" than they might someone drawing pictures of their Imaginery friends.  Not t condine the one over the other, but the principles seem in the same ball park.

I'm not sure if you are saying this guy didnt think he was going to shoot someine until 5 minutes before he did it?  If so, thats a pretty lucky coincidence he had a gun licence, guns and was a keen follower and supporter of other nutjobs who went on a shooting spree?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 17 August, 2021, 08:50:25 PM
QuoteTerrorism is the use or threat of action, both in and outside of the UK, designed to influence any international government organisation or to intimidate the public.  It must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
UK CPS definition (https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism)

Which may well be why there is a shift in perspective on the INCEL movement.  Then again it's the same as any other belief / cause.  There will be those who are simply vocal proponents of it whilst others engage in acts designed to terrorise.  Both have the same aims but differ in their methods.

At present though it looks like the authorities are in two minds.  Certainly there is growing concern over the attitudes and online behaviour of some of those engaged with the ideology.  Whether Davison was motivated to take such extreme action by it is still an open question.

In all honesty though, as we've said before, quite often 'social media' is anything but.  Ironically the sort of education a lot of kids are getting around these issues in schools means that it is actually more likely that it is their parents generation involved. 

The suggestion that the authorities should be using social media in vetting procedures is possibly well overdue.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 08:58:02 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 07:34:49 PM
No one ever does. A bloke who comes gunning down a slew of people didn't think of that five minutes ago. And why always it needs to serve for political (or religious) purposes?

Because it wouldn't be terrorism if it didn't serve a political purpose. Besides, you were the one who tried to define terrorism just a couple of posts ago as "every act that endangers the lives of people". You're wrong. I have no idea what point you think you're making and, frankly, I don't think you do, either.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 10:00:16 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 08:58:02 PM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 07:34:49 PM
No one ever does. A bloke who comes gunning down a slew of people didn't think of that five minutes ago. And why always it needs to serve for political (or religious) purposes?

Because it wouldn't be terrorism if it didn't serve a political purpose. Besides, you were the one who tried to define terrorism just a couple of posts ago as "every act that endangers the lives of people". You're wrong. I have no idea what point you think you're making and, frankly, I don't think you do, either.

Okay Jim, don't be an arse. You misread or misunderstood my previous comments. I can play like that and ask "Ah, I am not sure what you are struggling about". One thing I noticed about this forum. It doesn't hold back, but at least people in majority of cases don't go by rude route. It is starkly obvious that I do see only politics involved in terrorist acts. And ofcourse the terrorism endangers the lives of the innocents. I don't think I owe that to explain - the obvious.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 17 August, 2021, 08:50:25 PM
QuoteTerrorism is the use or threat of action, both in and outside of the UK, designed to influence any international government organisation or to intimidate the public.  It must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
UK CPS definition (https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism)


Hm... I wish UK policy includes environmental causes that FBI already did. Bioterrorism is a real threat just as any. But I am glad that, like I said, there are other topics, apart from political and religious matters included.

Quote from: Leigh S on 17 August, 2021, 08:33:08 PM
I'm not sure if you are saying this guy didnt think he was going to shoot someine until 5 minutes before he did it?  If so, thats a pretty lucky coincidence he had a gun licence, guns and was a keen follower and supporter of other nutjobs who went on a shooting spree?

No, I just pointed that such acts are already premedidated. Planning, logistics, etc. A man who bumped into a mosque in NZ or the guy who massacred a gay club in Orlando surely had it in mind for days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 17 August, 2021, 11:05:49 PM
[Deleted]

Never mind. I'm done with this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 18 August, 2021, 12:15:24 AM
Sensible.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2021, 07:37:35 AM

Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan acts of terrorism? I would answer yes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 08:52:04 AM
Quote from: milstar on 17 August, 2021, 10:00:16 PM

Quote from: Tjm86 on 17 August, 2021, 08:50:25 PM
QuoteTerrorism is the use or threat of action, both in and outside of the UK, designed to influence any international government organisation or to intimidate the public.  It must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
UK CPS definition (https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism)


Hm... I wish UK policy includes environmental causes that FBI already did. Bioterrorism is a real threat just as any. But I am glad that, like I said, there are other topics, apart from political and religious matters included.


The thing is 'ideological' covers a multitude of 'sins' so to speak.  Environmentalism, Anti-abortion, Incel ... all would fall under this umbrella.  It is also worth remembering the position of feminists in that "The personal is political".  There is fine line that is not always easy to define.

I can see where you are coming from in terms of trying to interrogate the boundaries here.  Possibly we are a little too used to terrorism being narrowly defined in terms of organisations such as Al-Queda or PIRA.  What appears to be happening is a more amorphous type of 'terrorist' without any links to some overarching organisation but rather an adherence to a particularly belief set / ideology that they are seeking to advance.

To a large extent this has been an issue for those involved in counter-terrorism for a long time now, stretching back to the Twin Towers.  The organisational structures are far less clearly defined, if at all.  This problematises the issue a lot.

In some respects it seems to me that both you and Jim are actually in agreement to some extent.  Both of you agree on the premeditation aspect.  Both on the ideology / belief dimension.  Certainly that is how it comes across to me reading back through what you have both posted.  What does seem to be an issue is how broadly to define 'political' but even there it is possible to see how both of you share common ground.

Your point that 'every act that endangers the lives of others is a form of terrorism' [sorry, my addition there] is something I could get behind.  The sorts of activities and actions of drug dealing groups for instance seeks to intimidate and 'terrorise' to achieve their goals. 

For me though, what distinguishes this from 'terrorism' is the goals involved.  In their case it is narrow self-interest as opposed to some sort of social / political / ideological goal.

Mind you, my view is possibly distorted by experiences back in the 80's and 90's as a legitimate target of the IRA.  Crawling around checking under my car every time we parked off camp just in case a tupperware box with a magnet and a few pounds of Semtex had been shoved on it did raise a few eyebrows at times but better than the alternative.  Some habits became so ingrained that I still adhere to them even now.  Ultimately though I still tend to see 'terrorism' as something that has an organisation behind it.  Clearly this is not so much the case any more so like you I am struggling to figure out many of these issues.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 10:32:38 AM
This article on  the Conversation website (https://theconversation.com/inside-the-warped-world-of-incel-extremists-166142) makes for interesting reading about the current debate we appear to be having regarding the classification of INCEL.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 18 August, 2021, 02:09:08 PM
That's an inteteresting and in many ways terrifying article.

Like Tjm86 I think we're very used to thinking of a terrorist as being part of an organised paramilitary style group, rather than someone with an extreme ideology that drives them to commit acts of violence. From what I've read, the Plymouth attacker was radicalised online and I know the Isla Vista murders in 2014, which targeted both men and women and was / is one of the defining Incel atrocities, were defined as a terrorist attack (although I suspect that's because the attacker had some kind of manifesto).

I've not read the debate here in full as I have a poster blocked, but as well as the discussion on the acts and ideology that define a terrorist incident I've been part of some discussion elsewhere about the actual use of the word terrorsim itself and what it means both as a label and a badge. I've seen some argue that defining Incel 'movement' (if it could be described as one) as such legitimises them as an idealogy, others that it's a necessary descriptor for them to be taken seriously as a threat. It's certainly a word with heavy connotations - when news of this attack broke I know it was initially described as a 'domestic' incident which is also very connotation-laden, but in the opposite way: it almost downplays the severity of the incident (another example is the description of an attacker as a 'lone wolf' - it's kind of cool and romantic sounding and there's been suggestions it's not used in the media as, to the wrong kind of people, it has the wrong kind of connotation. Interestingly it's rarely used in attacks where the killer is not a white male).

(Also Tjm, your experiences looking for carbombs sound truly frightening)




Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 02:22:39 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2021, 07:37:35 AM

Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan acts of terrorism? I would answer yes.

Hm...Interesting. Is counter-terrorism a terrorism?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2021, 02:48:15 PM

I suppose that depends on the nature the counter-terrorism takes. Information gathering and securing possible targets I would say no - but drone-strikes and similar forms of injurious retribution, yes.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 02:51:14 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 18 August, 2021, 02:09:08 PM
(Also Tjm, your experiences looking for carbombs sound truly frightening)

It's strange but in some respects it was so ingrained that we didn't think twice about it.  Gate guard training, especially in Germany, focused on the PIRA threat and the sort of things that they did.  So you kind of treated it as just a fact of life. 

Six months before I was posted to Wildenrath Cpl Islania was gunned down in his car with his infant daughter in the back seat.  This was while I was on guard duty at Brize and to this day I still remember watching a Rock Ape carry the tiny coffin of his daughter off the kite at Northolt.  Then at Wildenrath we were shown photos of the car.  The image of the blood-stained and bullet ridden child seat was equally powerful.

At the time Germany was somewhere the IRA were operating at a higher level largely due to the ease with which they could spot British service personnel and the ease with which they could slip back and forth across borders.  You may recall some of the mistakes that they made such as the shooting of a couple of Australians.

Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan acts of terrorism?  No, they were unwarranted acts of war.  They have and no doubt will continue to have the accolade of the greatest mistakes of the last 20 odd years.  As Blair said, history will judge them.  Indeed it and many of us are doing exactly that.  Oh and Milstar, are you really sure you want to be quoting Priti Patel?  You know, that great advocate of the fight against counter-terrorism?   ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 02:51:14 PM
It's strange but in some respects it was so ingrained that we didn't think twice about it.  Gate guard training, especially in Germany, focused on the PIRA threat and the sort of things that they did.  So you kind of treated it as just a fact of life. 

Six months before I was posted to Wildenrath Cpl Islania was gunned down in his car with his infant daughter in the back seat.  This was while I was on guard duty at Brize and to this day I still remember watching a Rock Ape carry the tiny coffin of his daughter off the kite at Northolt.  Then at Wildenrath we were shown photos of the car.  The image of the blood-stained and bullet ridden child seat was equally powerful.

At the time Germany was somewhere the IRA were operating at a higher level largely due to the ease with which they could spot British service personnel and the ease with which they could slip back and forth across borders.  You may recall some of the mistakes that they made such as the shooting of a couple of Australians.

Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan acts of terrorism?  No, they were unwarranted acts of war.  They have and no doubt will continue to have the accolade of the greatest mistakes of the last 20 odd years.  As Blair said, history will judge them.  Indeed it and many of us are doing exactly that.  Oh and Milstar, are you really sure you want to be quoting Priti Patel?  You know, that great advocate of the fight against counter-terrorism?   ::)

Priti Patel is the least valuable person I'd quote on from a perspective that such statement would hold some length. No, I must agree with Shark; the cause for "humanitarian" intervention may initially been honourable, before all of them fucking up those countries up.

Sorry for your mishaps, Tjm, terrorism is one of the greatest evils of today, forcing people to live in fear and constant threat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
I found an interesting article on "War and terrorism" (https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass/war-and-terrorism) (published by the Council of Europe) that explores some of these themes.  As you may imagine, there's a lot of grey area involved in such a broad topic.

QuoteIn many ways war and terrorism are very similar ... the differences are not always clear-cut and even experts may disagree about whether a violent campaign counts as terrorism, civil war, insurgency, self-defence, legitimate self-determination, or something else.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2021, 05:43:01 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 02:51:14 PM


Were the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan acts of terrorism?  No, they were unwarranted acts of war.


This is why I dislike politics (though not you, Tjm - I'm merely using your comment as a jumping off point for the following rant and not to argue with you specifically).

I think I've probably mentioned the Trivium before; it is the first three elements of the classical liberal education which are - in order - grammar, logic, and rhetoric. In modern parlance these subjects might be described as input, processing, and output, were designed to exploit the way the human mind works in order to learn anything, and form the foundation of the modern scientific method. Grammar is the information of a subject; its realities, facts, specialised vocabulary, and so on. Logic is sorting those elements into a meaningful body and eliminating any contradictions. Rhetoric is passing on or using that information. A very simple analogy would be a flat-pack wardrobe - first one reads the assembly instructions (grammar), second one makes sense of the instructions in relation to the parts (logic), and third one uses this collated knowledge to assemble the wardrobe (rhetoric). This is innate in human beings, it's the way we function mentally.

Politics, however, gets these steps in the wrong order - logic, grammar, rhetoric. The political way is to first arrive at the logical conclusion that a wardrobe is needed, second to define the parts required, third to build it. Because politicians begin with the outcome they want, they can then define the parts they need in any way they choose in order to build their wardrobe. Thus any part can become a shelf or a fixing and the resulting wardrobe is, most likely, a mess.

The grammar of a subject, then, becomes twisted to fit the logic. For example, King Whosit the nth logically wants to remain king and decides that the best way to achieve this is by murdering his opponents. Murder, however, is widely regarded as unlawful and so he redefines the term as execution in order to kill people without murdering them. If he was to begin with the grammar, the fact that murder is unlawful, logic would dictate that he must either find another way to remain king or openly commit murder.

Thus we find ourselves using grammar to justify logic instead of using logic to understand grammar, leaving us tangled up trying to sort out terrorism from unwarranted acts of war. Both involve murder, but this point of logic is lost by putting the cart before the horse. Sophistry, then, which is the art of making good arguments seem bad and bad arguments seem good, becomes a vital skill in politics in order to justify a position rather than arrive at a position.

The twisting of grammar is aided by the fact that the spoken language is imprecise and malleable. English, for example, is nowhere near as exact as the languages of mathematics or even music. In mathematical language, X cannot be X and Not-X at the same time but, in English, terrorism can be terrorism and not-terrorism at the same time depending on personal choice or perspective - just as execution can be murder and not-murder, and war can be war and not-war at the same time.

[/rant]

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 18 August, 2021, 06:51:15 PM
Either the non-political example in your analogy uses logic twice or they're a half-wit who's just bought a wardrobe for no reason.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 August, 2021, 07:57:14 PM

Probably both.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 08:30:40 PM
Quote from: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
I must agree with Shark; the cause for "humanitarian" intervention may initially been honourable, before all of them fucking up those countries up.

In the case of both Iraq and Afghanistan there was nothing 'humanitarian' about it at all.  The likes of Sarah Vine now trying to call out government failure to protect women's rights in Afghanistan rings hollow by comparison to the total silence over the years on this issue around the globe.  Both had political / military objectives and didn't take the humanitarian cost into account.

In both cases the forces were sent in without anything even remotely like a plan for how to deal with the post-invasion landscape.  The civilian death toll in both cases has been catastrophic.  The reputational cost for the US and UK on the global stage has been similarly disastrous.  What happens next is on the governments of both of those nations to a large extent.

Quote from: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
Sorry for your mishaps, Tjm, terrorism is one of the greatest evils of today, forcing people to live in fear and constant threat.

I was fortunate in some respects, the issues were generally at arms length.  They did impact on our lives but it was so pervasive that you didn't think about it.  To be fair I'd never really considered it until my wife commented on my reaction to an unattended bag at a railway station one day.  Having clocked it I immediately found a member of staff to report it.  Just as he was looking at details the owner turned up.  I suppose you're right on one level; it's quite disturbing how it becomes completely naturalised to the point that you don't even think about it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 10:31:10 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 08:30:40 PM
The likes of Sarah Vine now trying to call out government failure to protect women's rights in Afghanistan rings hollow by comparison to the total silence over the years on this issue around the globe.

It may be the case that the political leaders who planned a military adventure in Afghanistan had no thought to women's rights - although I can't conclude that because I don't know enough about it - but it's simply not true to broaden that out into "total silence over the years on this issue around the globe".

That's simply not true. Various human rights organizations and news broadcasters have focused on that very issue - pre-Invasion, during and now post. Contrary to what you say: the media bringing that issue front and center is very important (not least to women, in Afghanistan).

I don't quite get the idea that because one was against military intervention in the first place, one cannot recognize any positives that stemmed from said: such as an increase in the rights of women. (Now, clearly, terribly at risk of being lost.)

---

And we segued into war discussing a meaning for "terrorism", because of the murder of several people by an Incel-believer. I thought this segment from the Independent was pretty level-headed (if brutish) in describing the situation:

QuoteThe independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall QC, previously said incels would be treated "more seriously" if there were more attacks.

He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "The question is really whether or not the authorities want to treat the incel phenomenon as a terrorist risk. That would involve diverting resources or putting resources into it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 11:35:58 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 18 August, 2021, 08:30:40 PM
Quote from: milstar on 18 August, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
I must agree with Shark; the cause for "humanitarian" intervention may initially been honourable, before all of them fucking up those countries up.

In the case of both Iraq and Afghanistan there was nothing 'humanitarian' about it at all.  The likes of Sarah Vine now trying to call out government failure to protect women's rights in Afghanistan rings hollow by comparison to the total silence over the years on this issue around the globe.  Both had political / military objectives and didn't take the humanitarian cost into account.

In both cases the forces were sent in without anything even remotely like a plan for how to deal with the post-invasion landscape.  The civilian death toll in both cases has been catastrophic.  The reputational cost for the US and UK on the global stage has been similarly disastrous.  What happens next is on the governments of both of those nations to a large extent.

I know. That's why I put quotations on humanitarian. Nothing ever was humanitarian. Just excuses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 August, 2021, 06:05:58 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 10:31:10 PM

The likes of Sarah Vine now trying to call out government failure to protect women's rights in Afghanistan  but it's simply not true to broaden that out into "total silence over the years on this issue around the globe".

That's simply not true. Various human rights organizations and news broadcasters have focused on that very issue - pre-Invasion, during and now post. Contrary to what you say: the media bringing that issue front and center is very important (not least to women, in Afghanistan).

Sorry no you're absolutely right about the general commentary here.  The likes of Malala have highlighted how much of an issue that has been even as the Taliban were being held at bay to a very small degree.

No, I meant that the likes of Sarah Vine have been pretty much silent about this issue, not just in Afghanistan but in a lot of places around the globe, not that there had been barely any commentary about the issue internationally.  My phraseology did not really help there.  Sorry.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 10:31:10 PM
I don't quite get the idea that because one was against military intervention in the first place, one cannot recognize any positives that stemmed from said: such as an increase in the rights of women. (Now, clearly, terribly at risk of being lost.)

Again a fair point.  To be sure we can say that a 'happy accident' of the intervention in Iraq was an improvement in some of these cases, albeit potentially short lived.  Again I think my real issue with some of those raising their voices is that it is more about jumping on the bandwagon than it is a genuine concern about the issue.  This to me is the real definition of 'woke': appearing to support a social, ethical or political issue for the sake of appearance.  The crass cynicism is offensive.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 10:31:10 PM
And we segued into war discussing a meaning for "terrorism", because of the murder of several people by an Incel-believer. I thought this segment from the Independent was pretty level-headed (if brutish) in describing the situation:

QuoteThe independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall QC, previously said incels would be treated "more seriously" if there were more attacks.

He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "The question is really whether or not the authorities want to treat the incel phenomenon as a terrorist risk. That would involve diverting resources or putting resources into it.
Now there is an interesting point isn't it?  The issue of resources to monitor and evaluate any potential threat.  When you consider how overstretched the security services are at the moment with Russian passive-aggression, Chinese economic / industrial activity, a potentially renewed Islamic fundamentalist threat as well as the usual band of home-grown nutcases that fortunately never make the headlines because they are picked up in time, add this into the mix?

When you consider the profile of many of these INCEL supporters / adherents, the challenge is going to be massive.  There is also another dimension that is a little disturbing: the implications of this for monitoring activities.

I know that this is dangerously close to tin-foil-hattery but perhaps there is also a need to consider the civil-liberties dimension here.  If INCEL is classified as a terrorist 'organisation' / ideology and the security services are given the go-ahead for tracking and monitoring of this ...  :-\  Again I come back to the issue of their track record.

Dangerous Days indeed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 August, 2021, 04:09:43 PM
I realized I must have been missing something and so I looked up Sarah Vine. Now I understand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 19 August, 2021, 06:59:18 PM

Fnar...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 August, 2021, 08:50:25 PM
Well, if she's good enough for Michael Gove ....  :o
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 20 August, 2021, 01:19:33 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 August, 2021, 06:05:58 AM
Sorry no you're absolutely right about the general commentary here.  The likes of Malala have highlighted how much of an issue that has been even as the Taliban were being held at bay to a very small degree.

No, I meant that the likes of Sarah Vine have been pretty much silent about this issue, not just in Afghanistan but in a lot of places around the globe, not that there had been barely any commentary about the issue internationally.  My phraseology did not really help there.  Sorry.

Again a fair point.  To be sure we can say that a 'happy accident' of the intervention in Iraq was an improvement in some of these cases, albeit potentially short lived.  Again I think my real issue with some of those raising their voices is that it is more about jumping on the bandwagon than it is a genuine concern about the issue.  This to me is the real definition of 'woke': appearing to support a social, ethical or political issue for the sake of appearance.  The crass cynicism is offensive.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 August, 2021, 10:31:10 PM
And we segued into war discussing a meaning for "terrorism", because of the murder of several people by an Incel-believer. I thought this segment from the Independent was pretty level-headed (if brutish) in describing the situation:

Now there is an interesting point isn't it?  The issue of resources to monitor and evaluate any potential threat.  When you consider how overstretched the security services are at the moment with Russian passive-aggression, Chinese economic / industrial activity, a potentially renewed Islamic fundamentalist threat as well as the usual band of home-grown nutcases that fortunately never make the headlines because they are picked up in time, add this into the mix?

When you consider the profile of many of these INCEL supporters / adherents, the challenge is going to be massive.  There is also another dimension that is a little disturbing: the implications of this for monitoring activities.

I know that this is dangerously close to tin-foil-hattery but perhaps there is also a need to consider the civil-liberties dimension here.  If INCEL is classified as a terrorist 'organisation' / ideology and the security services are given the go-ahead for tracking and monitoring of this ...  :-\  Again I come back to the issue of their track record.

Dangerous Days indeed.

I'd say that not every incel is a potential terrorist. How many of them are ranting online, actually a very few of them actually dare to do something about it. But I agree there needs to be some policing over, in order to monitor places where people tend to radicalize themselves (this ofcourse doesn't just apply to incel movement). The question is inevitable: freedom or safety?

Btw, I agree with the woke part A bunch of hypocrites who rant behind their computers in Beverly Hills. It's not about altruism, it's about selfishness. That's why I don't understand people who support modern day feminism. I mean, the movement should be all about equality, which is commendable; those people  who claim they are feminist, in society today, do so under the guise of hate, racism, and egalitarian sexist ideology in order to promote their own selfish desires which forgoes the rest of human kind's needs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2021, 03:07:15 PM
No that's true.  Just like every environmentalist is not necessarily a terrorist, nor is every muslim, or every Irishman for that matter.  So often the farthest many get is joining the keyboard warrior regiment.

In some respects I would argue that this is where the likes of Facebook and Twitter have caused such damage.  By denying any responsibility for what is posted on their platforms they have allowed free reign to the sort of commentary that provides an opening for extremism.

Contrast it with this place for instance.  I know that some feel that the moderation is quite extreme but you have to be honest, as places on the Internet go it is actually quite pleasant.  Yes the discussion can become quite heated as strongly held views are challenged and it can become personal but by and large the discussions we have are quite civil.  Then again quite a bit of that is self-moderation.  Disengagement tends to happen long before things get out of hand.

As for the selfishness of many movements.  I suppose to some extent that is necessary to draw attention to injustices.  The difference in the case of INCEL is that the 'injustices' that they are laying claim to are potentially questionable. 

By contrast, feminists can point to legitimate exploitation and discrimination due to sex / gendered identity.  The real issue now is the collision with trans rights but that is a whole other can of worms that arguably we really don't want to open.

This does seem to speak to what feels like your point here, that in order to defend your own group's rights you have to attack that of another group.  This taps into the scarcity message that is used to limit opportunities and does seem to be being deployed to powerful effect in preventing marginalised groups from collaborating and mobilising effectively.  Elements of this can be seen in some of the extreme positions propounded by INCEL such as dog-pilling (if that is to be believed).

Perhaps we need to heed the words of that great philosopher, Waldo 'D.R' Dobbs ... "Hey man! Why can't everybody just, y'know, be FRIENDS and everything?"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 August, 2021, 03:44:17 PM
This is a good example of why I think use of the term "woke" during an argument is a cheap distraction, and simply a cover for an ad hominem* (or ad Eminem, as the spell-checker would have it) attack.

It doesn't really matter if Sarah Vine is the one making the argument, or whether she's making a cynical attempt to generate Daily Mail sales: did her argument make sense?

Or, to put it another way: are women in Afghanistan in more danger, and have fewer freedoms, than they did a couple of weeks ago, prior to the Taliban takeover? (Sarah Vine's veracity, I think we can see, fades into the distance in asking this question. In fact, it's a distraction from the main thrust of the topic.)

We can go further, if we wish, and sink ourselves into the muddy bathwater of milstar's follow-up, where he neatly stone-steps from the mere use of the word "woke" to all feminists being Nazis. (Well, he didn't say "Nazis" - he just said that any modern feminist was a racist, selfish, hate-filled sexist.) Why? Keyboards, apparently. Or Beverly Hills? Something something maybe-trolling something.

Summary: calling someone "woke" doesn't win you the argument. It just attempts to dismiss the validity of your opponent.

*Although last time I pointed this out on the board I was told that ad hominem attacks are okay if your opponent is a big enough arsehole. Irony lives!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2021, 04:28:06 PM
The term 'woke', like it's forerunners such as SJW, is most definitely an attempt to shut down debate.  Just as 'marxist', 'capitalist' or 'counter-revolutionary reactionary' are in other circles.  It seems almost as if ethical positions have become increasingly weaponised.

I would completely agree with you point about the thrust of Vine's argument.  What are the likely implications for women's rights in Afghanistan under a new Taliban regime?  Arguably Vine is manifesting the stopped-clock syndrome here but at least we can concede the validity of her point.

This is a major problem these days.  People are more inclined to force their point than to try and understand the nuances of the argument being presented.  Ultimately it reduces to shouting insults at each other.

As you quite accurately observed earlier, Funt, a happy accident of the allied invasion of Afghanistan was to challenge the treatment of women and educational opportunities.  It doesn't matter whether the thought had crossed Blair or Bush's minds when they sent in troops.  The simple fact of the matter is that the effect for them was profound. 

Should we dismiss Vine's call to arms in support of this as a continuing state of affairs?  Nope, I'm with you on that one.  Not sure how much we can do about it but at the very least keep up pressure on politicians I suppose. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 20 August, 2021, 07:59:14 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 20 August, 2021, 03:07:15 PM
No that's true.  Just like every environmentalist is not necessarily a terrorist, nor is every muslim, or every Irishman for that matter.  So often the farthest many get is joining the keyboard warrior regiment.

In some respects I would argue that this is where the likes of Facebook and Twitter have caused such damage.  By denying any responsibility for what is posted on their platforms they have allowed free reign to the sort of commentary that provides an opening for extremism.

Contrast it with this place for instance.  I know that some feel that the moderation is quite extreme but you have to be honest, as places on the Internet go it is actually quite pleasant.  Yes the discussion can become quite heated as strongly held views are challenged and it can become personal but by and large the discussions we have are quite civil.  Then again quite a bit of that is self-moderation.  Disengagement tends to happen long before things get out of hand.

As for the selfishness of many movements.  I suppose to some extent that is necessary to draw attention to injustices.  The difference in the case of INCEL is that the 'injustices' that they are laying claim to are potentially questionable. 

By contrast, feminists can point to legitimate exploitation and discrimination due to sex / gendered identity.  The real issue now is the collision with trans rights but that is a whole other can of worms that arguably we really don't want to open.

This does seem to speak to what feels like your point here, that in order to defend your own group's rights you have to attack that of another group.  This taps into the scarcity message that is used to limit opportunities and does seem to be being deployed to powerful effect in preventing marginalised groups from collaborating and mobilising effectively.  Elements of this can be seen in some of the extreme positions propounded by INCEL such as dog-pilling (if that is to be believed).

Perhaps we need to heed the words of that great philosopher, Waldo 'D.R' Dobbs ... "Hey man! Why can't everybody just, y'know, be FRIENDS and everything?"

Ah...to start with your last sentence. wasn't those words by Rodney King lol? Hm...history doesn't seem very kind of utopian ideas. I think everyone want it, but it's just impossible.

Sadly, seems that platforms like Fakebook and Twatter are the major leader in global thought. I mean, people today pay more attention to some celebrity tweet or post. Who gives a damn about what people on some forum like this may say? And it's obviously not good when you have that situation. To me, both are toxic spaces (I actually have FB account, which I frequent once in a six months). Actually, I think...whatsname...4chan? Even worse. A fertile ground for incels. Who, and I feel a bit for them, if they were ostracized in life, not that I approve some nefarious actions, but at least I feel a bit of empathy if they had horrible life experiences, unlike those who never talked to a woman. And online is full of ranting people. But, everything has its boundaries and I like I said, I can feel a bit for them, before it turns into a mental illness. Problem with feminism is that arguably often goes into real shady areas, where the plight for against discrimination replaced plight for misandry (which is a legitimate, but not something I am fond of).
Like the basket case below:
(https://i.imgur.com/KLi0ONG.png)

I could use the term Nazi, but why should I? Honestly, we live in society where if you disagree with someone on random hot-topics, you're labeled as Nazi. Woke is just euphemism for that and it often succeeds (but not those who try to be a bit objective and see what both sides have to offer) at discrediting the other speaker.

I think we live in Bioshock universe. Right in between polar (extreme) opposites.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 21 August, 2021, 11:52:38 AM
They seem quite funny; seems to me they are exaggerating for comic effect to make a serious point. Plus again, genuine inequality vs. perceived slights.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 August, 2021, 11:54:39 AM
Not a fan of Leths writing but she's absolutely doing a bit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:10:24 PM
Taking Kate Leth (even if she were being absolutely serious) and using her as a yardstick for feminism in general would be like taking your output, milstar, and using it as a yardstick for English literature.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 04:12:16 PM
Pathetic is your excuse at defending one of modern day cancers and sliding away blatant bigoted speeches under pretense of altruism and equality, Funt. Whatever yardstick has to do with it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 21 August, 2021, 04:37:52 PM
Kate Leth is great. If she's annoyed Milstar I like her even better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 21 August, 2021, 04:40:23 PM
Are Alt-right talking points from 2011 on the TEFL syllabus now?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 04:41:27 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 21 August, 2021, 04:37:52 PM
Kate Leth is great. If she's annoyed Milstar I like her even better.

Don't you have something to do in your life?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: M.I.K. on 21 August, 2021, 04:42:16 PM
I think the inclusion of the tweet about Stan Lee says more about whoever put together that collage than anyone else.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:45:40 PM
Quote from: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 04:41:27 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 21 August, 2021, 04:37:52 PM
Kate Leth is great. If she's annoyed Milstar I like her even better.

Don't you have something to do in your life?

Yes, Barrington Boots! Go make a trifle or something!

Actually, why is your profile pic a trifle?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 August, 2021, 04:49:22 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 August, 2021, 04:40:23 PM
Are Alt-right talking points from 2011 on the TEFL syllabus now?

This is the bit that really amuses me. I remember this guff making the rounds the first time, and the faux outrage was as laughable then as it is now.

A-Rs are a peculiar breed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 21 August, 2021, 04:54:55 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:45:40 PM

Yes, Barrington Boots! Go make a trifle or something!

Actually, why is your profile pic a trifle?

Ha! I don't read Milstar's posts as he's an rightwing troll, but he certainly chastised me here, oh no

The trifle is a reference to the character Barrington Boots, as mentioned in Strontium Dog: Outlaw.  He's not a man to be trifled with.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:59:48 PM
I need to re-read Outlaw. And also buy some trifle.

---

Erm ... politics ...

Nine Afghan girl robotics team members safe in Qatar (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58286398)

The irony (well, the most obvious one) in this story is that when they tried to come to the US as part of their Robotics competition, they were denied entry visas because Trump was hating on the Muslims. (You probably don't remember Trump, but you can look him up on Facebook Twitter Wikipedia.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 05:15:38 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 21 August, 2021, 04:54:55 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:45:40 PM

Yes, Barrington Boots! Go make a trifle or something!

Actually, why is your profile pic a trifle?

Ha! I don't read Milstar's posts as he's an rightwing troll, but he certainly chastised me here, oh no


Is that how is someone called who points at the obvious ills of the society?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 05:15:38 PM
Is that how is someone called who points at the obvious ills of the society?

Milstar - all joking aside - it's a fair conclusion to come to in the circumstances. Feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes". You've said that feminism is "hate, racism", "a mental illness", "real shady" and "misandry".

So, you're quite far off the actual definition. What conclusion should we reach?

1. You mean it. You're incredibly right wing and a probable misogynist.
2. You don't mean it. You're trolling for effect and reeling at least me in to some extent.
3. You don't understand that your equation makes no sense, so you're just ignorant.

So, the only option that Boots isn't allowing for is that you're a few bricks short of a load. In effect, in applying the title "right-wing troll" he's actually being kind.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 21 August, 2021, 06:07:57 PM
Quote from: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 05:15:38 PM

Is that how is someone called who points at the obvious ills of the society?
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/tbt.gif)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 06:36:04 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: milstar on 21 August, 2021, 05:15:38 PM
Is that how is someone called who points at the obvious ills of the society?

Milstar - all joking aside - it's a fair conclusion to come to in the circumstances. Feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes". You've said that feminism is "hate, racism", "a mental illness", "real shady" and "misandry".

So, you're quite far off the actual definition. What conclusion should we reach?

1. You mean it. You're incredibly right wing and a probable misogynist.
2. You don't mean it. You're trolling for effect and reeling at least me in to some extent.
3. You don't understand that your equation makes no sense, so you're just ignorant.

So, the only option that Boots isn't allowing for is that you're a few bricks short of a load. In effect, in applying the title "right-wing troll" he's actually being kind.


if his title is kind, then I obviously have nothing to do here.

But, let's for moment, do not take me into the equation.

QuoteMilstar - all joking aside - it's a fair conclusion to come to in the circumstances. Feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights based on the equality of the sexes".

And that would be a very reasonable thing to do. I have nothing against equality, it certainly doesn't bother me, if there is something I am against at, it's over-equality. That is, everyone deserves the same treatment, for all faults and virtues. But...

QuoteYou've said that feminism is "hate, racism", "a mental illness", "real shady" and "misandry".

To quote myself:"

QuoteBtw, I agree with the woke part A bunch of hypocrites who rant behind their computers in Beverly Hills. It's not about altruism, it's about selfishness. That's why I don't understand people who support modern day feminism. I mean, the movement should be all about equality, which is commendable; those people  who claim they are feminist, in society today, do so under the guise of hate, racism, and egalitarian sexist ideology in order to promote their own selfish desires which forgoes the rest of human kind's needs.

You may say now that I the whole feminist movement had based on one person. But Kate Leth is not the only one. There are thousand Kate Leths today; real life, Twitter, Facebook etc. If I post all that she did, but taking a very opposite route, like KillAllWomen, what it would make out of me? Right-wing troll (possibly extreme right-wing troll), need I to say more?
And I've heard all kinds of discriminatory comments coming from people of all races, gender (maybe Martians someday), but bigotry works both ways. No one should be allowed to post such wretched stuff in public. Not only gender-related stuff. James Gunn had a few tweets that were pedophiliac in nature. Sorry, but that's a big no to me. Ethan Van Sciver made a joke about Nazism and was rightfully booted off Facebook (or was it twitter? But I am stretching the subject wide now. But I think I said now everything that I had at my disposal and I feel free to add:
4.Maybe my words have some truths in them, notwithstanding that terms like right-wing pretty loose today, like woke or Nazi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 06:37:44 PM
There's a strong feminist theme running through Mad Max: Fury Road. Plus shooty kaboom crash action! Oh, what a lovely day! (https://youtu.be/xUpz1Na5zP8)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 21 August, 2021, 10:52:47 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 06:37:44 PM
There's a strong feminist theme running through Mad Max: Fury Road. Plus shooty kaboom crash action! Oh, what a lovely day! (https://youtu.be/xUpz1Na5zP8)

Non-political comment... Saw this twice in the cinema. That opening fifteen-or-so minutes are astonishing. You get to end of the storm and that flare sputtering out... both times, I didn't realise I was gripping the arms of my seat until I let go at that moment. Astonishing film making.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 August, 2021, 03:37:32 PM
Probably in my top 10 block busters of the last decade. Maybe top 100 movies of the decade too. Astonishing at times.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 23 August, 2021, 10:11:05 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 August, 2021, 04:59:48 PM
I need to re-read Outlaw. And also buy some trifle.

Definitely do both of these Funt!

Adding to the not-on-topic love for Fury Road. Incredible film.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 30 August, 2021, 11:37:17 AM
Now trans rights isn't a political issue, of course it isn't, its a humanitarian one. Trans rights are human rights.

What IS  a political issue is a fascistic, antagonistic hate group like LGB Alliance being platformed by a "major" media outlet like GB News. A grotesque, vile state of affairs.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 August, 2021, 08:19:35 PM
Here in Washington State, schools are starting back up this week and, what with a rise in Covid cases due to the Delta* variant, the state governor (Jay Inslee) has issued a mask mandate for being inside public buildings - which includes, y'know, shops and schools and suchlike. So, all children and staff, regardless of vaccination status (which, for the kiddos, is, for the vast majority - unvaccinated) need to mask up. Oh, and staff in schools have until mid-October to get vaccinated.

Anyway - so far so meh, right? I mean - Delta's a bastard and vaccinated staff and masked up kiddos should mitigate the risks, right? Obviously. Like, duh? You'd have to be an ignoramus to actually want to spread a deadly new virus - and there must be a limit to the number of complete balloons out there, surely.

Cue the fascist Unmask Our Kids organisation, staging nationwide protests at school board meetings in which they shout obscenities (some of a racist nature) & threats, block staff from leaving and demand that their personal wishes (to have everyone spread the virus to everyone else - for ... freedom?!) take precedence over that of the democratically-elected majority (who just so happen to be following the best scientific advice).

I *thought* this was just happening in weird places like Florida and Texas, but it's right in my neighboring school district - where a family member works: Here and elsewhere, angry unmasked parents disrupt meetings  (https://www.heraldnet.com/news/here-and-elsewhere-angry-unmasked-parents-disrupt-meetings/).

*A scientist wag on the news recently hoped that this wouldn't be how humanity learned the entire Greek alphabet. I'm sure we're all looking forward to the Upsilon variant. And Covid Pi.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 August, 2021, 10:34:11 PM
English schools start going back this week. No masks. No bubbles. Parents will not be informed if someone in their child's class had a positive COVID test. No isolation for classmates. It's insane.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 August, 2021, 10:59:13 PM
Oh - I had no idea. That's awful. Sorry to hear.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 12:38:46 AM
Spent 5 minutes on BoredPanda this afternoon.  A supposedly satirical site.  Until you find a thread that shows some of the anti-vaxxer 'arguments'.

In the early days of the internet the focus was on the 'democratisation' of information.  Somewhere along the line we've reached the point where disinformation has been 'weaponised'.

There are plenty of arguments for how Russia has turned the internet into a weapon of disinformation that is currently undermining western democracy.  How accurate those arguments are is debatable.  What needs to be questioned though is how 'gullible' we are in the west.

BTW IP.  The rules for schools have been adjusted to try and minimise disruption.  Isolation / sending home entire 'bubbles' is being changed to isolation for direct contact.  It isn't that parents will not be informed.  Rather that isolation is going to be limited to close contacts (those seated closest).  The objective being to avoid sending home entire classes / year groups.

Not often I find myself in support of this government's policy.  Having said that, this is one of those rare occasions where they are coming up with a sensible option.  Parents will be informed if isolation affects their child.  Insane?  Not really, rather pragmatic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 31 August, 2021, 01:19:30 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 30 August, 2021, 11:37:17 AM
Now trans rights isn't a political issue, of course it isn't, its a humanitarian one. Trans rights are human rights.

What IS  a political issue is a fascistic, antagonistic hate group like LGB Alliance being platformed by a "major" media outlet like GB News. A grotesque, vile state of affairs.

Are these the people who have been digging up Sir Pterry's corpse and, despite a clear unfamiliarity or misunderstanding of his work, parading it around as a grotesque anti-trans mascot?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 02:09:17 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 31 August, 2021, 01:19:30 AM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 30 August, 2021, 11:37:17 AM
Now trans rights isn't a political issue, of course it isn't, its a humanitarian one. Trans rights are human rights.

What IS  a political issue is a fascistic, antagonistic hate group like LGB Alliance being platformed by a "major" media outlet like GB News. A grotesque, vile state of affairs.

Are these the people who have been digging up Sir Pterry's corpse and, despite a clear unfamiliarity or misunderstanding of his work, parading it around as a grotesque anti-trans mascot?

Got curious, so found this summary of events: Here's why Terry Pratchett's daughter and Neil Gaiman are fighting with transphobes on Twitter. (https://lithub.com/heres-why-terry-pratchetts-daughter-and-neil-gaiman-are-fighting-with-transphobes-on-twitter/)

I'm with Gaiman and Pratchett blocks.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 07:37:02 AM

University of Oxford QCovid Risk Calculator. (https://www.qcovid.org/)

For me this calculator returns an absolute risk of a COVID-19 associated death as 1 in 7299 (without my heart condition it returns 1 in 9901).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 08:51:06 AM
See here's my thing for all those banging on about Covid; life is 100% fatal.   ::)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 08:56:46 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 12:38:46 AM
BTW IP.  The rules for schools have been adjusted to try and minimise disruption.  Isolation / sending home entire 'bubbles' is being changed to isolation for direct contact.  It isn't that parents will not be informed.  Rather that isolation is going to be limited to close contacts (those seated closest).  The objective being to avoid sending home entire classes / year groups.

Not often I find myself in support of this government's policy.  Having said that, this is one of those rare occasions where they are coming up with a sensible option.  Parents will be informed if isolation affects their child.  Insane?  Not really, rather pragmatic.
Seating changes daily. And we already know Alpha (let alone Delta) spreads throughout a classroom sized room within a few hours. With the eradication of masks abs bubbles (no reason to drop the latter in primaries, but many have already switched to whole-school assemblies), it now feels inevitable that everyone with a primary aged kid will have a much higher likelihood of catching COVID within months at best. Notably, Williamson has already shifted the blame for this to parents for not testing enough.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 10:08:11 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 08:51:06 AM

See here's my thing for all those banging on about Covid; life is a 100% fatal sexually transmitted condition.   ::)


FTFY ::D
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richard on 31 August, 2021, 10:17:53 AM
Funnily enough, testing for Covid doesn't stop you catching it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 August, 2021, 10:23:41 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 08:56:46 AM
Seating changes daily. And we already know Alpha (let alone Delta) spreads throughout a classroom sized room within a few hours. With the eradication of masks abs bubbles (no reason to drop the latter in primaries, but many have already switched to whole-school assemblies), it now feels inevitable that everyone with a primary aged kid will have a much higher likelihood of catching COVID within months at best. Notably, Williamson has already shifted the blame for this to parents for not testing enough.

Not to mention those who sit near somebody with a primary school age kid when at work...  There's a well-known trend for people calling in to work sick in early September - children pick up diseases (and variants) while on summer holidays, transmit it to each other at school, take it home to their family, then the family take it along with them to work - so a few days after the schools go back, working people (whether or not they have children) are ill.  I can't see that COVID is going to improve any of that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 10:43:21 AM
Yep. And there's yet another issue here—actually two. 1. Delta often presents with initial symptoms indistinguishable from a cold—the kind of cold you tend to see blaze around schools (especially primaries) at the start of every term. 2. Have you tried doing a home test on an infant? It's not fun. Moreover, it's probably not always accurate.

So we now have Williamson pre-blaming parents for a new wave of COVID, for not testing enough, despite: testing not stopping COVID's spread; testing not being easy/even always possible with young children; testing showing YOU ALREADY HAVE COVID and have therefore already likely spread it; schools removing bubbles and all other protections; schools receiving precisely fuck-all assistance from the government in terms of making classrooms safer. Oh, and people are ditching masks at speed, which is the one simple thing everyone can easily do that can slow COVID spread.

I'll be bloody amazed if we're not in lockdown again by half term. (Or perhaps the government's plan now is back to herd immunity—let it rip through the country and hope that plus vaccines does enough, and then look all sad on TV when another 100,000 British people are dead. Meanwhile, many other countries will again look on in horror at the UK not even doing the bare basics to slow COVID, and question the country's flatlined vaccine take-up that was once hailed as "world leading".)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 31 August, 2021, 12:03:34 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 10:43:21 AM
Yep. And there's yet another issue here—actually two. 1. Delta often presents with initial symptoms indistinguishable from a cold—the kind of cold you tend to see blaze around schools (especially primaries) at the start of every term. 2. Have you tried doing a home test on an infant? It's not fun. Moreover, it's probably not always accurate.

So we now have Williamson pre-blaming parents for a new wave of COVID, for not testing enough, despite: testing not stopping COVID's spread; testing not being easy/even always possible with young children; testing showing YOU ALREADY HAVE COVID and have therefore already likely spread it; schools removing bubbles and all other protections; schools receiving precisely fuck-all assistance from the government in terms of making classrooms safer. Oh, and people are ditching masks at speed, which is the one simple thing everyone can easily do that can slow COVID spread.

I'll be bloody amazed if we're not in lockdown again by half term. (Or perhaps the government's plan now is back to herd immunity—let it rip through the country and hope that plus vaccines does enough, and then look all sad on TV when another 100,000 British people are dead. Meanwhile, many other countries will again look on in horror at the UK not even doing the bare basics to slow COVID, and question the country's flatlined vaccine take-up that was once hailed as "world leading".)

I'd really love for you to be proved wrong, but I'm not that hopeful :-(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 12:07:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 10:43:21 AM
I'll be bloody amazed if we're not in lockdown again by half term. (Or perhaps the government's plan now is back to herd immunity—let it rip through the country and hope that plus vaccines does enough, and then look all sad on TV when another 100,000 British people are dead. Meanwhile, many other countries will again look on in horror at the UK not even doing the bare basics to slow COVID, and question the country's flatlined vaccine take-up that was once hailed as "world leading".)

I'll bet cold, hard cash that there will be a public enquiry somewhere down the line, and that the Tories will stack it with cronies from the private healthcare lobby. The thing will be framed in terms of the 'failure of the NHS', which will be judged to be systemic and have cost tens of thousands of lives. Under cover of 'never allowing such a failure again', the handing off of great chunks of healthcare to the private sector will be accelerated.

I'm not sure if this is their real underlying intent, or they've just spotted it as a handy secondary effect of pursing a herd immunity policy by infection, rather than vaccination.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 31 August, 2021, 12:27:05 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 12:07:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 10:43:21 AM
I'll be bloody amazed if we're not in lockdown again by half term. (Or perhaps the government's plan now is back to herd immunity—let it rip through the country and hope that plus vaccines does enough, and then look all sad on TV when another 100,000 British people are dead. Meanwhile, many other countries will again look on in horror at the UK not even doing the bare basics to slow COVID, and question the country's flatlined vaccine take-up that was once hailed as "world leading".)

I'll bet cold, hard cash that there will be a public enquiry somewhere down the line, and that the Tories will stack it with cronies from the private healthcare lobby. The thing will be framed in terms of the 'failure of the NHS', which will be judged to be systemic and have cost tens of thousands of lives. Under cover of 'never allowing such a failure again', the handing off of great chunks of healthcare to the private sector will be accelerated.

I'm not sure if this is their real underlying intent, or they've just spotted it as a handy secondary effect of pursing a herd immunity policy by infection, rather than vaccination.

I'd really love for you to be proved wrong, but I'm not that hopeful :-(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Barrington Boots on 31 August, 2021, 12:48:45 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 12:07:45 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 10:43:21 AM
I'll be bloody amazed if we're not in lockdown again by half term. (Or perhaps the government's plan now is back to herd immunity—let it rip through the country and hope that plus vaccines does enough, and then look all sad on TV when another 100,000 British people are dead. Meanwhile, many other countries will again look on in horror at the UK not even doing the bare basics to slow COVID, and question the country's flatlined vaccine take-up that was once hailed as "world leading".)

I'll bet cold, hard cash that there will be a public enquiry somewhere down the line, and that the Tories will stack it with cronies from the private healthcare lobby. The thing will be framed in terms of the 'failure of the NHS', which will be judged to be systemic and have cost tens of thousands of lives. Under cover of 'never allowing such a failure again', the handing off of great chunks of healthcare to the private sector will be accelerated.

I'm not sure if this is their real underlying intent, or they've just spotted it as a handy secondary effect of pursing a herd immunity policy by infection, rather than vaccination.

My wife works in the NHS and this is more or less what she and many of her colleagues think is going to happen too.
There'll be no accountability for these guys, just backhanders from private healthcare providers and not a thought given to the dead in their wake.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 01:11:08 PM
Quote from: Barrington Boots on 31 August, 2021, 12:48:45 PM
My wife works in the NHS and this is more or less what she and many of her colleagues think is going to happen too.
There'll be no accountability for these guys, just backhanders from private healthcare providers and not a thought given to the dead in their wake.

Sadly, you only have to look at their willingness to weaponise the Grenfell inquiry to see the template, which spent an awful lot of time trying to blame the Fire Service and, despite the existence of 'smoking gun' emails clearly showing that there were people who knew the cladding was dangerous and rejected safer options as too expensive, has resulted in not one person being brought up on criminal charges so far.

Look after your cronies and scapegoat some poor bastards doing a difficult and dangerous job.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 03:31:25 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 07:37:02 AM

University of Oxford QCovid Risk Calculator. (https://www.qcovid.org/)

For me this calculator returns an absolute risk of a COVID-19 associated death as 1 in 7299 (without my heart condition it returns 1 in 9901).

Factoring this up for the population of the UK (and assuming they were all clones of you), that would be 9131 deaths over 90 days. That's the equivalent of 710 deaths per week, which is significantly above the current 115 rolling weekly average death rate.

Also, the calculator only takes into account deaths - it ignores the pressure of hospitalizations on an over-stretched health service, the danger from allowing the virus free reign to mutate to a more dangerous form (as it did already with Delta) and the effects of long Covid.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 04:50:55 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 03:31:25 PM
the current 115 rolling weekly average death rate.

I'm pretty sure that number is the daily total, taken as a rolling average over the previous seven-days.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 04:57:38 PM
Oh - so that would make it currently 805 - probably because not everyone IS a clone of Shark.

Another important point to note is that the chance of death has been reduced over time by the vaccination program - so each person vaccinated has improved Shark's chance of survival.

No need to thank us, Shark. You're welcome.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 05:00:39 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 04:57:38 PM
probably because not everyone IS a clone of Shark.

Sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 06:38:01 PM
Another great movie - this Political Thread is doing a bang up job of recommending movies.

Although, following the plot, that would be The Legendary Sea Bass.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 07:20:53 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 08:56:46 AM
Seating changes daily. And we already know Alpha (let alone Delta) spreads throughout a classroom sized room within a few hours. With the eradication of masks abs bubbles (no reason to drop the latter in primaries, but many have already switched to whole-school assemblies), it now feels inevitable that everyone with a primary aged kid will have a much higher likelihood of catching COVID within months at best. Notably, Williamson has already shifted the blame for this to parents for not testing enough.

To be honest most schools have long had a 'seating plan only' policy to make life easier.  Assemblies have been done via Teams / Zoom for the most part with some whole year group assemblies outside during the fine weather.  Our daughter's school is keeping masks in communal spaces  but limiting use in classrooms.  To be honest now that I'm out of teaching (Praise The Lord!!!!!) I'm not quite so clued up but there does appear to be a shift toward trying to 'normalise' as much as is practical.

Given that Scotland has seen an uptick with their schools returning it is probably fair to say that England and Wales will see similar developments over the next few weeks.  To be honest though last year the majority of cases in our school were down to community rather than school transmission.  As you say though, Williamson is trying to shift the focus as ever.  Then again how many people ever pay attention to him?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 31 August, 2021, 07:30:10 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 31 August, 2021, 07:20:53 PMThen again how many people ever pay attention to him?
But the issue is how much schools try to normalise. Ideally, we'd have vaccinated 12+ over the summer to help secondaries function normally and then just put up with bubbles in primary for a term or two. (Let's face it: that isn't a major issue for the most part.) But this headlong rush back to the status quo isn't going to end well. Too many people are acting like COVID is over. The numbers are significantly higher than they were at this time last year, and yet the Tories have done fuck-all for schools.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 08:58:03 PM
I haven't actually heard an anti-mask argument that goes beyond "it makes me feel icky", so I'm not sure why there's not a mandatory mask policy in place in UK schools. It's a really low-hanging fruit in terms of mitigating the virus spread.

I understand it makes direct communication more difficult, which is something you don't want in a school setting - but it doesn't impact learning as much as a Covid infection so...

I don't get it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 09:23:05 PM
There is a preprint (not yet peer reviewed) Israeli (Israel claims a ~68% vaccination rate) paper entitled "Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections" (posted 24/08/2021). Would anyone like a link (either here or via pm) or would this be considered "misinformation"?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 31 August, 2021, 09:49:01 PM
It's interesting, but I've had the virus* and I've had the vaccine. There's only one of those things I would want to go through again. Gaining immunity by getting infected with the potentially-fatal-or-life-changing** virus is a ...and I'm being very kind here...bold strategy.

*the original variant, such a hipster me.

**life changing, not in a win the lottery way, more like getting paralyzed because seat-belts are a for cowards kinda way
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 31 August, 2021, 10:16:25 PM
Take the bold* strategy: catch Covid - chance of death is about 0.68% or about 7 per 1000 (680 per 100,000). Usual caveats for age and pre-existing conditions apply. Could be higher or lower per individual. We all know that. Oh, and you give the virus a chance to mutate. And you pass it on to other people. And you're a cock-womble (unless it wasn't your fault - in which case you're a cuddle-muffin).

Take the wise strategy: get vaccinated for Covid - chance of death (possibly from the vaccine itself but that's not really clear from the data) is about 0.0019% or about 0 per 1000. (2 per 100,000.) You don't give the virus a chance to mutate. You don't pass it onto other people. You're a cuddle-muffin (possibly posthumous - sorry).

---

If you survive, you've probably got better protection if you went the vaccine route: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-protection.html).


* "bold" is actually Zwaheli for "wasp-inhaling".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 10:29:40 PM

Oh well, if the CDC's okay to post - here's one from Barnstable County, Massachusetts (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e2.htm?s_cid=mm7031e2_w), which indicates that 74% of COVID infections occurred in fully vaccinated persons. (Probably because the jab doesn't augment front line mucus antibodies, which natural infection does. I'll leave the implications of that for you to ponder.)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 31 August, 2021, 10:49:15 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 10:29:40 PM

Oh well, if the CDC's okay to post - here's one from Barnstable County, Massachusetts (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e2.htm?s_cid=mm7031e2_w), which indicates that 74% of COVID infections occurred in fully vaccinated persons. (Probably because the jab doesn't augment front line mucus antibodies, which natural infection does. I'll leave the implications of that for you to ponder.)

Or as the study itself says:

QuoteThe findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, data from this report are insufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, including the Delta variant, during this outbreak. As population-level vaccination coverage increases, vaccinated persons are likely to represent a larger proportion of COVID-19 cases. Second, asymptomatic breakthrough infections might be underrepresented because of detection bias. Third, demographics of cases likely reflect those of attendees at the public gatherings, as events were marketed to adult male participants; further study is underway to identify other population characteristics among cases, such as additional demographic characteristics and underlying health conditions including immunocompromising conditions.*** MA DPH, CDC, and affected jurisdictions are collaborating in this response; MA DPH is conducting additional case investigations, obtaining samples for genomic sequencing, and linking case information with laboratory data and vaccination history. Finally, Ct values obtained with SARS-CoV-2 qualitative RT-PCR diagnostic tests might provide a crude correlation to the amount of virus present in a sample and can also be affected by factors other than viral load.††† Although the assay used in this investigation was not validated to provide quantitative results, there was no significant difference between the Ct values of samples collected from breakthrough cases and the other cases. This might mean that the viral load of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 is also similar. However, microbiological studies are required to confirm these findings.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 31 August, 2021, 11:17:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 10:29:40 PM
which indicates that 74% of COVID infections occurred in fully vaccinated persons.

Fuck's sake. As more of any given population gets vaccinated, more of the people who contract the virus will have been vaccinated. This is statistically obvious. What those people are NOT doing, by and large, is dying from Covid.

This is like saying: 90% of people involved in traffic accidents were wearing seatbelts — seatbelts don't work.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 September, 2021, 12:41:48 AM
100% of the people who died in the Twin Towers were in an office. Offices are clearly unsafe.

Philosophical question for you Shark: I'm quite often wrong. Like, I might have misheard someone, or misconstrued something, or just made a false positive, or repeated what I thought was a fact only to find out later it was just one of those things people say that isn't actually true when tested. Also, I'm a coder: which involves removing bugs from programs - and quite often I put the bugs there in the first place (by accident) - so coding is sort of the process of being wrong over and over again. Being wrong is a natural part of life.

Have you ever considered you might be wrong?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM

I made no claim that the post I linked to was representative of the whole world, and neither did Funt with the post he linked to, that would be like trying to reconstruct a high definition photograph from just two pixels. We will never get to that full picture, however, if we ignore or, worse, villify the pixels we don't like.

Jim, in the report there were no reported deaths in vaccinated or unvaccinated cases, which is surely a Good Thing. A COVID case is not a COVID death - which does not, of course, mean that deaths do not occur and nor does it mean that every case is a death sentence. The msm has really muddied the waters, in my view, whipping the public up into an orgy of fear. And fear is a poor teacher. Science tells us that natural immunity is far superior to vaccinated immunity but, again, this does not mean that nobody should be vaccinated. The drive to vaccinate everybody is a political rather than a scientific one, in my view (and in the view of a not inconsiderable number of experts). The correct balance must be found, I believe.

Sure I might be wrong, Funt, but in the meantime I'm content to risk being part of the Control Group (you're welcome).

---

As an aside, I've long had an idea of making a little computer program called Scribbler, or something. It would be a very basic drawing program with no filters or effects and limited pencil/brush styles and a maximum of three layers (if any at all) BUT I want the program to be able to rotate the page in the same way Corel Painter does. Rotating the 'page' would be really useful, I think, because when I'm sketching on real paper the ability to rotate it makes life a lot easier whilst drawing in PS or GIMP is a pain in the proverbials. Most programmers I talk to say it's impossible - I really think they mean 'difficult' - but I reckon it can be done. If you can do that, Funt, it might be a nice little earner for you. All I ask is a free copy and a mention in the "About" tab.

---

Anyhoo - back to the politics...

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Woolly on 01 September, 2021, 08:49:51 AM
QuoteScience tells us that natural immunity is far superior to vaccinated immunity...

People with Polio might disagree there.

As for the covid vaccine - the point of it is to strengthen your natural defenses against the virus, meaning you aren't as badly affected by it if you catch it, and your body stops the virus more quickly than it would if you were unvaccinated. Which in turn, helps to stop the spread of the virus (even more so if isolation rules are followed).

Bottom line is - less people will die of covid related issues if more people are vaccinated, and if more people would observe social distancing, isolation of cases, and wearing face-masks.

PS. I fully respect anyones right to refuse the vaccine - as long as they also stay the hell away from people who don't refuse it. It isn't fair to place others in a situation where they are more likely to catch it, vaccinated or not.
Gamble with your own life by all means, but not someone elses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 September, 2021, 09:35:03 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM

I made no claim that the post I linked to was representative of the whole world, and neither did Funt with the post he linked to, that would be like trying to reconstruct a high definition photograph from just two pixels. We will never get to that full picture, however, if we ignore or, worse, villify the pixels we don't like.


No but you did post a link to a report and in the very next sentence, followed it up with an assertion on the effectiveness of the vaccine.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 31 August, 2021, 10:29:40 PM

Oh well, if the CDC's okay to post - here's one from Barnstable County, Massachusetts (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e2.htm?s_cid=mm7031e2_w), which indicates that 74% of COVID infections occurred in fully vaccinated persons. (Probably because the jab doesn't augment front line mucus antibodies, which natural infection does. I'll leave the implications of that for you to ponder.)



Do you see how that might be taken as you claiming to have found a report that calls the effectiveness of the vaccine into question? Of course the report makes no such claims and in fact explicitly states:

Quote...data from this report are insufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, including the Delta variant, during this outbreak.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM


The drive to vaccinate everybody is a political rather than a scientific one, in my view ...


This sentence is...and I'm trying not to be mean ... muddled. Vaccination programs are more effective when the highest proportion of the population possible is vaccinated. That is quite a basic part of the science. The fact that politicians are promoting this only shows that even they are able to grasp this quite simple concept.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM

Sure I might be wrong, Funt, but in the meantime I'm content to risk being part of the Control Group (you're welcome).


I beleive this is what the young people would call a "weird flex".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 10:35:17 AM
Quote from: Woolly on 01 September, 2021, 08:49:51 AMPeople with Polio might disagree there.
FIL had polio. He's still having operations to this day, in his 60s, to try and preserve what increasingly limited mobility he has. It's sad to note that, in his country, he was born during the very last year to NOT be offered the polio vaccine. Polio has since effectively been wiped out in western Europe, because we get a squirt of vaccine under our tongues when children. It's gone. Imagine the same anti-jab people had such a strong voice back in the day. It doesn't bear thinking about.

Yet this is where we are with COVID. Vaccine rates in the UK have plateaued. We are far short of herd immunity, once you take children into account. And, unlike many other nations, the UK government seems reluctant to vaccinate the under 16s (presumably due to a clusterfuck on vaccine provision that went hard on the GREAT BRITISH UNION JACK BREXIT AZ when what we really need is more Moderna and Pfizer.

Genuinely, I find it hard to understand why people don't want to be vaccinated. It baffles me. Are they also furiously angry they once got vaccines for measles? And, if they're young enough, mumps and other diseases also? Are the fuming that they got a polio vaccine? Or is it just COVID that causes all this nonsense?

What's most depressing is that said nonsense only serves to increase spread, ramp up the likelihood of vaccine escape and more dangerous mutations, and lengthen the pandemic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 01 September, 2021, 11:55:10 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM
Sure I might be wrong, Funt, but in the meantime I'm content to risk being part of the Control Group (you're welcome).

Nobody here is thanking you.  And control group suggests you're part of a scientific study, which I'm seriously doubting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 01:02:24 PM
Seems that vaccine talk will never run dry. For it I am glad I took both shots. Glad nothing happened to me, that is (Moderna rules!). But I am against forced vaccination. We are not living in a commie state, where people are forced to do things they simply don't want. Children and the elders, okay, their immunity isn't that developed, but if a middle age person refuses to take a shot, who am I to convince him/her/it otherwise? What should be more worrying are covid variants and the question is would these jabs be enough? Especially when scientists and doctors are never ahead, and always behind in this matters. And I don't feel like getting a shot for x number each time this virus mutates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 01:30:33 PM
I see very few people compelling anyone to have a vaccine. But there are arguments that those who choose not to—and that are therefore a danger at a societal level—might find themselves in a position where they cannot do certain things. In which case: tough. They'll whine and moan, but it's no different from "have jab X to visit country Y", which has long been a thing.

QuoteWhat should be more worrying are covid variants and the question is would these jabs be enough?
Variants are most likely to appear in a fairly high-vaccinated population but where there are few mitigations in play and were a still reasonably sized chunk of the population is unwilling to be vaccinated. Hello, UK/USA!

QuoteEspecially when scientists and doctors are never ahead, and always behind in this matters.
That would be the scientists who have pivoted as soon as their understanding has changed, informed politicians and sat there aghast as many politicians have refused to believe the science or adjusted it to only take on board what they wanted to? We've known COVID is aerosol-based for a very long time, and yet mask mandates still aren't in place in the UK and USA because, what, some people are arguing enforced mask use for a temporary period is against their human rights?

QuoteAnd I don't feel like getting a shot for x number each time this virus mutates.
That isn't going to be what happens. But when boosters are free and could stop you getting sick, would it really be that much of a hardship to rock up once a year at a vaccine centre? The second boosters are available for my age group (having had Moderna and seen the efficacy drop-off), I'll sign up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 01 September, 2021, 01:38:04 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 01:30:33 PM
I see very few people compelling anyone to have a vaccine. But there are arguments that those who choose not to—and that are therefore a danger at a societal level—might find themselves in a position where they cannot do certain things. In which case: tough. They'll whine and moan, but it's no different from "have jab X to visit country Y", which has long been a thing.

Exactly. I have had to get Hep B and Yellow Fever vaccines when travelling to some areas and have required a certificate to prove my vaccination status. This has been the case for decades, and is not "controversial".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 01 September, 2021, 01:42:26 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 01:30:33 PM
We've known COVID is aerosol-based for a very long time, and yet mask mandates still aren't in place in the UK and USA because, what, some people are arguing enforced mask use for a temporary period is against their human rights?

Just a note that mask mandates are still in place in Scotland. Anecdotally, this is apparently a problem in tourist areas. Not wearing a mask is seen by some visitors as standing up against the evil SNP.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 01 September, 2021, 06:36:00 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 01 September, 2021, 01:42:26 PM
[Not wearing a mask is seen by some visitors

You say visitors, I say [spoiler]REDACTED[/spoiler].
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 September, 2021, 06:47:10 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 01 September, 2021, 08:00:22 AM
Science tells us that natural immunity is far superior to vaccinated immunity

No, it doesn't. Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection (https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-protection.html)

Plus, people keep pointing out to you that in the case of just getting it, you also have to suffer the effects of the disease, whereas with the vaccine you don't.

There is no logical basis for your anti-vaxx rhetoric.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 08:09:13 PM
QuoteVariants are most likely to appear in a fairly high-vaccinated population but where there are few mitigations in play and were a still reasonably sized chunk of the population is unwilling to be vaccinated. Hello, UK/USA!

But doesn't that imply that vaccine is responsible for creating variants? And I mean, covid reached the whole globe practically. It's not that variant versions appeared in only USA/UK.


QuoteThat would be the scientists who have pivoted as soon as their understanding has changed, informed politicians and sat there aghast as many politicians have refused to believe the science or adjusted it to only take on board what they wanted to? We've known COVID is aerosol-based for a very long time, and yet mask mandates still aren't in place in the UK and USA because, what, some people are arguing enforced mask use for a temporary period is against their human rights?

What can I say? We live in selfish times.

QuoteThat isn't going to be what happens. But when boosters are free and could stop you getting sick, would it really be that much of a hardship to rock up once a year at a vaccine centre? The second boosters are available for my age group (having had Moderna and seen the efficacy drop-off), I'll sign up.

Ah...not for me. As if we are cattle for taking each year a shot. The best is ofcourse a vaccine that keeps you protected until your heart stops beating. Like for TB. That's why I said once I am not taking a vaccine, in order to see how things will develop. As I see it, the situation with the vaccines is far from perfect. My mother had to wait for months to get the second jab of AZ (which I vehemently refused). And apparently, Russian or Chinese are far from ideal, but we haven't got those. Russians rushed up their development of the vaccine so they had to withdraw it temporary. Now I am reading that Chinese vaccine may offer squat protection for the elders.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: MumboJimbo on 01 September, 2021, 08:28:43 PM
Quote from: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 08:09:13 PM

Ah...not for me. As if we are cattle for taking each year a shot.

There's nothing inherently bovine about an annual vaccine booster, or (being less facetious, and trying to understand how you actually mean it) contrary to human dignity. I've no idea where this kind of thinking springs from. Is it some idea of rugged masculinity? The hardy frontiersman who can live off the land without government aid?

This year-and-a-bit has truly opened my eyes to how other people's internal monologue is just so bloody alien to me.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 08:40:22 PM
Quote from: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 08:09:13 PMBut doesn't that imply that vaccine is responsible for creating variants?
No. It's that vaccinating your population to a fairly high degree, but then not mitigating spread AND not vaccinating to herd immunity levels, means you end up with one of the main ways in which a virus can end up mutating into something more deadly. There are other scenarios as well.

QuoteAh...not for me. As if we are cattle for taking each year a shot. The best is ofcourse a vaccine that keeps you protected until your heart stops beating. Like for TB.
COVID is not TB. Some things work for your whole life. Others do not. Would you refuse a tetanus booster, or prefer to get lockjaw?

QuoteAs I see it, the situation with the vaccines is far from perfect.
Imagine if everyone had waited until measles vaccines were "perfect" or polio ones were. I really don't understand this viewpoint—it's just beyond my comprehension.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 09:05:20 PM
QuoteCOVID is not TB. Some things work for your whole life. Others do not. Would you refuse a tetanus booster, or prefer to get lockjaw?

Well, considering TB in its time had a rather large death toll, I woudln't sign off that notion easily.
I had tetanus only once when I hurt my knee in childhood days. I hurt my knee a few more times from later on, but I am absolutely fine.

QuoteImagine if everyone had waited until measles vaccines were "perfect" or polio ones were. I really don't understand this viewpoint—it's just beyond my comprehension.

So far all vaccines we have have been put through a meat grinder for measuring effect they have. I am not talking about covid related ones. Who sanely enough would release an untested and undeveloped properly vaccine that showed signs of impinging your health?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 September, 2021, 09:24:14 PM
Quote from: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 09:05:20 PMWell, considering TB in its time had a rather large death toll, I woudln't sign off that notion easily.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? My point is they are not the same thing, in a literal sense. One TB jab is fine. One COVID jab is not. As for tetanus, the point is efficacy fades. The difference there (from COVID) is you can be reactive rather than proactive—although GPs will generally tell you to keep your tetanus jab up to date.

QuoteI am not talking about covid related ones.
OK, so why aren't you taking a COVID jab, then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 September, 2021, 11:03:23 PM
People take a yearly flu shot because flu is really a sequence of variants.

Taking medicine to circumvent illness is a modern wonder.

I know there are some religious sects that refuse to "pollute" themselves with medicine, but I didn't realize that the education systems of modern nations were so woeful as to have produced a sizable sub-culture of moon-struck ignorami, waving their collective fists at passing helicopters and shunning needles in favor of the ranting non-sequiturs of poe-faced minor online demogogues.

Or, as Socrates would say: "What a load of pish".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 11:13:12 PM
QuoteAre you being intentionally obtuse? My point is they are not the same thing, in a literal sense. One TB jab is fine. One COVID jab is not. As for tetanus, the point is efficacy fades. The difference there (from COVID) is you can be reactive rather than proactive—although GPs will generally tell you to keep your tetanus jab up to date.

Nobody told me anything about tetanus.
Me say one covid vaccine should be developed to be one enough, not taking x shots for God knows how many almighty variants. Ofcourse, never happened in human history that an antidote is developed for a disease that came afterwards.

Quote
OK, so why aren't you taking a COVID jab, then?

I think twice is enough for now.
One thing I agree with Sharky here. And that is the question in whether these vaccines do the job (some obviously didn't), which is pretty a valid question.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Pyroxian on 01 September, 2021, 11:30:59 PM
Quote from: milstar on 01 September, 2021, 11:13:12 PM
I think twice is enough for now.
One thing I agree with Sharky here. And that is the question in whether these vaccines do the job (some obviously didn't), which is pretty a valid question.

All you have to do is look at the deaths:cases ratio - we're experiencing the same number of cases at the moment as we did just before Christmas last year (so pre-vaccine roll out), but we're seeing an 80% drop in fatalities. I'd say the vaccines are working.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 (Click on the UK data - we're fourth from the top...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 September, 2021, 11:57:50 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 01 September, 2021, 11:03:23 PM
.. I didn't realize that the education systems of modern nations were so woeful as to have produced a sizable sub-culture of moon-struck ignorami, waving their collective fists at passing helicopters and shunning needles in favor of the ranting non-sequiturs of poe-faced minor online demogogues.


I think a major weakness of modern education systems has been exposed by the lockdowns; many parents and politicians see school as a place to provide free child-care first, and education second.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 September, 2021, 07:58:55 AM
One of the interesting theories at the moment is that the common cold may well have been an ongoing pandemic until, thousands of years later, humans adapted. We are fortunate to live in a world where a broadly effective vaccine can be made in relatively little time, based on ongoing research. It's a pity people don't see the value in vaccines or have a binary approach to defining success.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 02 September, 2021, 11:25:16 AM
Quote from: Pyroxian on 01 September, 2021, 11:30:59 PM
All you have to do is look at the deaths:cases ratio - we're experiencing the same number of cases at the moment as we did just before Christmas last year (so pre-vaccine roll out), but we're seeing an 80% drop in fatalities. I'd say the vaccines are working.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 (Click on the UK data - we're fourth from the top...)

I'd say it's great that we have diversity in options in picking vaccines.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 02 September, 2021, 01:42:32 PM
As a doctor in a COVID unit, I'm running out of compassion for the unvaccinated. Get the shot (https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-08-17/vaccinated-covid-doctor-shot)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 September, 2021, 04:54:39 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 01 September, 2021, 11:57:50 PM
... many parents and politicians see school as a place to provide free child-care first, and education second.

To be honest, for a significant number of parents / kids in this country now, 'education' as a purpose of school does not even fit in the top 100 ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 03 September, 2021, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 02 September, 2021, 01:42:32 PM
As a doctor in a COVID unit, I'm running out of compassion for the unvaccinated. Get the shot (https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-08-17/vaccinated-covid-doctor-shot)

That's a very powerful piece.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 September, 2021, 07:20:27 PM
https://theconversation.com/out-of-afghanistan-joe-biden-and-the-future-of-americas-foreign-policy-166914 (https://theconversation.com/out-of-afghanistan-joe-biden-and-the-future-of-americas-foreign-policy-166914)

Sounds too optimistic if you ask me. Military complex won't like this a one bit, but nevertheless it's one decision that begs to be (finally) done.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2021, 06:49:40 PM
Be careful out there: London transport staff warned of anti-mask posters with razor blades (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-58499899)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 09 September, 2021, 08:52:31 PM
I remember seeing that. Awful. Mind you, having just returned from a school meeting where mask use was "recommended", I'm not sure anti-mask posters are necessary anymore. I'd estimate perhaps a fifth of parents were wearing a mask in the closed, unventilated hall. Great.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2021, 10:16:56 PM
Lots of criticism over theocracies like in Iran and now Afghanistan, but there's a stealth theocracy in power now in the USA. The supreme court has been heavily weighted with right-wing evangelicals, to the extent that Texas now has some of the most severe and repressive anti-abortion laws in the US - just one step away from Poland. The supreme court decided not to rule on it, which opens up more of these laws from other states.

Meanwhile, they did choose to stop an execution because the man requested that a priest lay hands on him as he's being executed, and the court are considering it.

See how humans pretending to be working for their fictional God are taking charge of life AND death in the good old U.S. of A. Hallelujah!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 September, 2021, 09:40:26 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 09 September, 2021, 10:16:56 PM
Lots of criticism over theocracies like in Iran and now Afghanistan, but there's a stealth theocracy in power now in the USA.

I think they failed their stealth check, they're not exactly subtle about it!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 September, 2021, 07:03:59 PM
I'm not sure America is quite at the same level as the likes of Iraq or Afghanistan but it is definitely a disturbing trend.  Right now it seems like America is a little too chaotic for that.

If anything this is more of Trump's legacy.  As you say, the make up of the Supreme Court has been tilted dangerously to the right.  State legislatures have definitely been taking advantage of that fact.

You can just imagine the response though in many of those states to Biden's announcement this morning about vaccinations. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 September, 2021, 10:20:32 PM
The anti-abortion law in Texas prompted evangelical sky-god, death-cultists (i.e. Christians) to set up a web site where you could betray your fellow humans by naming and shaming them for attempting to access abortion health care. The idea is to try to get service providers and patients prosecuted. Then this happened...

How TikTokers took down a Texas anti-abortion site (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-58577039)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2021, 12:21:34 AM
Fair play.  Good to see young people doing what young people are good at doing - fucking with the system to the point where the old people trying to control them can't keep up.

A mate-of-a-mate was recently on a Whatsapp group ranting on about how soft young people are compared to us (coupled with a bit of 'they don't even know what gender blah fucking blah'), as if it wasn't said by older folks about every generation going back to the boomers and possibly before, and as if it's anything other than a sad attempt to deal with our increasing irrelevance as we stumble through middle age and watch people become cooler than us.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 18 September, 2021, 07:26:58 AM

Pfft. Ain't nobody cooler than a Squaxx.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 September, 2021, 10:28:42 AM
Point.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2021, 04:25:29 PM
It feels a little like this needs to be rebranded "The End of The World Thread".  It really does feel like the wheels have come off completely this week.  For the last few years we've managed to limp through a global pandemic with mass excess deaths, immeasurable damage to the educational opportunities of youngsters and a healthcare backlog that is probably going to do just as good a job as Covid.  The climate crisis has added to the tribulations for quite a chunk of the population too.

Back in 2016 there was much mockery made of some of the more extreme prognostications about the impact of Brexit.  We all remember Project Fear with its predictions of shortages of pretty much everything and anything, of the country grinding to a halt or food rotting in the fields.  The news this week though really does make me wonder how wide of the mark they actually were.

So when Grant Schapps goes on TV and tells everyone there is no need to panic-buy petrol, traffic is brought to a standstill around petrol stations across the country.  Either that or the petrol stations end up closed due to depleted stocks they are unable to replenish.  There are reports that the army is being put on standby to lend a hand.

Right now it feels like we're living through a Stephen Baxter novel.  We all know how well they end ...

8-(
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 24 September, 2021, 04:44:43 PM
And yet if there was a general election, our rotten voting system combined with a population happy to eat shit whenever their betters tell them to and opposition parties who'd sooner punch each other's faces off than working together to oust the Tories, would currently almost certainly result in another Tory majority, albeit probably a slightly smaller one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 24 September, 2021, 04:59:13 PM
I did notice that the leader of the opposition - Ed Miliband - was doing a good job on various news outlets, of taking the Tories to task.

It's funny, but I'd had a dream that he was no longer the Labour leader, and instead it was a grumpy man on a bicycle who supported Brexit. Then he morphed into a tedious lawyer who always looks ashamed to be be speaking. Just a dream, though...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 September, 2021, 07:14:44 PM
This satire stuff just writes itself:

'Brexit going really well actually' insists government with no fuel, energy, food, workers, border control or trade deals (https://newsthump.com/2021/09/24/brexit-going-really-well-actually-insists-government-with-no-fuel-energy-food-workers-border-control-or-trade-deals/)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 28 September, 2021, 08:30:15 AM
It's like they're determined to ensure the Tories stay in power https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote-down-local-labour-parties-call-to-axe-first-past-the-post

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 28 September, 2021, 09:42:56 AM
Yep. They're fucking idiots. They want all the power or none of it. They're going to get none of it. PR is going to be the key that unlocks cooperation from the Greens (who will again eat into Labour votes in key marginals) and Lib Dems (less of a problem, but there are still major clashes in the West Country, and Labour voters might stop Libs winning seats in the south).

It says everything that an op-ed in The Guardian yesterday argued proportional representation would give smaller parties disproportionate power. No, it would give them proportionate power. THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 28 September, 2021, 03:36:08 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-58718085 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-58718085)

I bloody hate coppers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 September, 2021, 03:47:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 28 September, 2021, 09:42:56 AM
Yep. They're fucking idiots. They want all the power or none of it. They're going to get none of it. PR is going to be the key that unlocks cooperation from the Greens (who will again eat into Labour votes in key marginals) and Lib Dems (less of a problem, but there are still major clashes in the West Country, and Labour voters might stop Libs winning seats in the south).

It says everything that an op-ed in The Guardian yesterday argued proportional representation would give smaller parties disproportionate power. No, it would give them proportionate power. THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT.

Even with gerry rigging, its worked well here in Scotland... at least in Hollyrood we get a representation of what we voted for, unlike Westminster
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 September, 2021, 03:53:47 PM
Quote from: milstar on 28 September, 2021, 03:36:08 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-58718085 (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-58718085)

I bloody hate coppers.

They really don't know their legends...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 29 September, 2021, 04:28:29 PM
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/27/china-restricts-abortions-for-non-medical-purposes (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/27/china-restricts-abortions-for-non-medical-purposes)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 30 September, 2021, 02:23:04 PM
Strange.  My (admittedly clueless outsider's) experience of Chinese culture was that abortion wasn't even remotely controversial there, and it was seen as a fairly routine operation with no moral judgement from others.  I wonder how this will go down with the people?  Not that we'll ever really know.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2021, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: sintec on 28 September, 2021, 08:30:15 AM
It's like they're determined to ensure the Tories stay in power https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote-down-local-labour-parties-call-to-axe-first-past-the-post

I mean not to be pedantic but PR can't be the solution to getting the Tories out of power, but the Tories won't pass it themselves. You do need to win a FPTP election first
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 30 September, 2021, 06:44:14 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2021, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: sintec on 28 September, 2021, 08:30:15 AM
It's like they're determined to ensure the Tories stay in power https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/27/unions-vote-down-local-labour-parties-call-to-axe-first-past-the-post

I mean not to be pedantic but PR can't be the solution to getting the Tories out of power, but the Tories won't pass it themselves. You do need to win a FPTP election first

I suppose, like Brexit, it could be an election-deciding issue - but only if a political party (Labour, say) were to champion it.

---

On the point of Starmer trying to make everything all New Labour again by channeling Blair and taking his orders from Mandelson - they're perhaps missing the point that Blair's policies are effectively what drove Scotland to move almost lock stock behind the SNP.

Or - Labour need friends to win.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2021, 07:52:49 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2021, 04:54:44 PMI mean not to be pedantic but PR can't be the solution to getting the Tories out of power, but the Tories won't pass it themselves. You do need to win a FPTP election first
You do, but how does Labour do that under current electoral maths? Scotland is lost to the SNP. Labour majorities always relied on seats there. That would mean Labour would have to flip a ton of English seats AND fend of the Greens AND fend off the Lib Dems — the latter in Con/LD marginals. It seems unlikely.

But if Labour promised PR in the event of a win, that would likely be enough for the Greens to stand down in many seats and possibly the Lib Dems too. A 1997-style agreement (at the very least) would then see Labour regain many seats it lost in recent years and probably a bunch of new LD seats around London and elsewhere in the south.

Also, the notion that 'equal votes' or 'fair votes' wouldn't appeal when the vast majority of Labour, Lib, Green, Plaid, SNP and BXP voters are in favour, and when a sizeable number of soft Con voters are too, seems unlikely. It needn't be the primary policy point, but it needs to be in there somewhere. Instead, we've discovered Starmer's Labour is no different from Corbyn's and Blair's—it wants reform only when it might benefit the Labour Party rather than when it would benefit UK democracy as a whole.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 October, 2021, 07:02:44 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/D1tOvDl.png)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 October, 2021, 07:03:58 PM
I see the government is attempting to pivot from the shortages being nothing to do with Brexit to them being down to the "will of the people" in demanding a low-immigration/high-income economy. The audacity is quite something.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 October, 2021, 06:32:20 AM
To be honest I'm inclined to agree with those who are pushing back against Brexit being behind the current shortages.  Brexit is just one in a long list of decisions by the Tories over the last decade that have led to a decade of stagnating wages, increased child poverty, crumbling health services, staggeringly high levels of excess death, decimation of trust in police and judiciary, levels of violence against women that are being described as 'epidemic', blatant cronyism and corruption, crises in social care, explosion of demand for food banks, ....

What is behind all this?  A party that is ruling this country into the ground.  It isn't Brexit that is to blame, it is the Tories.  Let's call it like it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 09:40:58 AM
No, because that lets them off the hook of the most important decision this country made in modern history. Yes, broadly, Tories are to blame. But the UK is struggling like other comparable nation right now, and there's only one difference. And NI is in very specific ways struggling less, again because it has one major difference from GB.

Also, we need to keep hammering the Brexit drum so Labour can actually use it as a weapon. If not, we will eye the 2023 general election with both major parties wanting to keep our relationship with the EU cold and dead. That would hamper any efforts Labour might make to improve things, and the party would be out on its arse after a single term. (Not that it has much chance of getting in anyway, as per my previous post.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GordonR on 02 October, 2021, 11:48:53 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 30 September, 2021, 07:52:49 PM
Quote from: Will Cooling on 30 September, 2021, 04:54:44 PMI mean not to be pedantic but PR can't be the solution to getting the Tories out of power, but the Tories won't pass it themselves. You do need to win a FPTP election first
You do, but how does Labour do that under current electoral maths? Scotland is lost to the SNP. Labour majorities always relied on seats there.

Yeah, that's nonsense. All three of Tony Blair's victories would still have happened without a single person in Scotland voting Labour.  It's not the Scots abandoning Labour that causes Tory governments; it's English voters voting Tory.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 12:13:05 PM
OK, you're right on that. So I take that back. But I stick to all my other points regarding Labour's current direction and thinking.

Right now, the electoral maths does not work. You are not going to get enough English voters to switch. Instead, you'll end up with Lab/Lib cancelling each other out. And even if Labour did squeak home, we're still in the same unrepresentative bullshit. (On a Tory win, I'm sure people will blame that on the English, BUT even in 2019 the Tories only won a plurality of the English vote!)

I'd take Blair's government over the current shower any day, but there's no getting away from it still being unrepresentative. Getting a majority in 2005 with barely more than a third of the popular vote should have triggered deep thinking. Instead, Blair still hand-waves away PR, because he knows FPTP is the only way his party could ever take full control.

Still, I'm sure Labour will keep going, thinking it could see a bigger swing than we've ever seen in modern history. Then the party will lose and blame Lib/Plaid/Green voters for not voting Labour. Again.  It's exhausting.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 12:58:14 PM
I'm the first to defend a "loony left" idea such as free broadband, but a minimum wage of £15 sounds like it's from the mouth of someone who doesnt even know basic facts about current wage levels and thinks that is a low figure.  It's more than the average wage from what I read?

I know I have been in a sector with decades of wage stagnation, but even so, I am nowhere near £15 an hour. I don't think even a promotion would put me on that wage, and I am already a few rung up from the lowest level in our organiation. Why would I (and many others in the same boat) continue to do high stress jobs that require specialit knowledge when we could go stack shelves?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 October, 2021, 01:12:37 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 12:58:14 PM
Why would I (and many others in the same boat) continue to do high stress jobs that require specialit knowledge when we could go stack shelves?

This is precisely the point: it drives wages up across the board because that's the only way retain/attract skilled/specialised staff. All the arguments currently being wheeled out against are essentially the same arguments used when New Labour brought in the minimum wage in the first place. We didn't get mass unemployment, catastrophic waves of business failures and rampant inflation then, so there's no real reason to imagine it'll happen this time.

With 40% of Universal Credit claimants actually in work, the taxpayer is currently subsidising employers' low wages and the only realistic way of changing that is by forcing employers to pay their staff better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
I get that, and I am all for a rise that removes UC supporting low wages (rather than specific needs within a family re disability, children etc).

But if the result is half of the workforce or more are now on the same lowest wage (because you can be damned sure employers arent going to factor in increases above that), then all you have is a new bottom that people who have worked their entire life find themselves at. 

That's a pretty seismic shift that would not be about pulling out the poorest in society, but would alter the landscape massively for the majority of workers in the UK.  And the vast amounts of spending power unleashed per pound by that would surely be a tidal wave of inflation, with more than half your workforce now at the bottom rung of wages wherever prices level out at. 

They'd need to give me a pay increase of something like 20-30% to put me in a comparable position to where I am now. Given I'd be surprised If I have had a 30% payrise in the last 20 years combined, it seems unlikely that would follow on.   And if every company did increase in comparison, then surely all we have done is inflate everyone wages in one giant blast. 

It just doesnt sound believable, even if there is some research that might support it - and if there is research to support it, then that should be front and centre of any push for it, because without that, it sounds crazed to anyone on a low to middle income - they are at least as likely to be turned off by it than on, if we look at how previous ideas such as Free Broadband have been met.

Isn't it Norway that doesnt ahvve a minimum wage, but sets inimum standards across different industries?  That sounds more credible as an approach. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 October, 2021, 02:47:06 PM
The median UK salary in August 2021 was £23760*, or £12.18 an hour. I'll be honest, that seems shockingly low. After standard PAYE and NI deductions, that's £1650 a month. The average UK mortgage payment is £723, average rent for a domestic property is £1007.

That's going to leave this statistically average person with £162-£230 per week for everything else. I mean, I imagine council tax is likely to work out at £30/wk for a lot of people. Get a pay rise of £1300p/a and your student loan repayments will kick in if you graduated after 2012. (Before 2012 you'd have been repaying since your gross salary reached £19K.)

God forbid you run a car, since the average weekly cost of putting fuel in it is £20-25 (depending on whether its petrol or diesel).

So... you're working full time, on the exact statistical average salary, living in rented accommodation and running a car. You're not repaying your student loan. You've got £448 a month left out of your salary to pay all your other bills and buy food. Apparently, the average UK energy bill for a small (1-2 bedroom) house or an apartment is £66/mth. So you're down to £398/mth (£95.50 a week) and out of that you've still got to find money for your phone bill, broadband, water rates.

Maybe you're right... maybe a £15/hr minimum wage isn't the answer, but, Christ, that makes grim reading.


*A lot of stats quote the mean average, which is closer to £30K, but the mean is useless in this case because a small number of really high earners can (and do) distort the average.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 October, 2021, 02:57:24 PM
I meant to add to the above:

Keep in mind that, as the median salary, by definition half the population is earning less than this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 03:39:47 PM
Yeah those figures make it worse -£15 is setting it way past what half the population currently earn. Probably at a rate that is more than 60% or more of the population - just on that base fact, it seems a sell 1000 times harder to make than free broadband, and would surely have vast implications that your average voter is going to be wary of. 

Theres a separate cost of living crisis as you lay out there, Jim.  I'm not sure that putting up wages would solve that or we would just see a commensurate (or more likely inflated) boost in prices.  It feels like it would be akin to changing the currency, where no one would be really sure what their pound was worth anymore, and certainly it wouldnt be worth as much as it was prior. 

I'm a bit above that average wage* and a little below the average mortgage (though paying off more!) after 30 years in the Job market and a couple of promotions -we both drive but have one ccar for both financial and "green" reasons. Neither of us has student debt. 

Although my employer calculates my hourly rate on the basis of a 42 hour week when we work 37, presumably in order to cut down on overtime! This means my "hourly" rate is probably a lot closer to that average than I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 October, 2021, 04:33:19 PM
Quote from: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 03:39:47 PM
Theres a separate cost of living crisis as you lay out there, Jim.  I'm not sure that putting up wages would solve that or we would just see a commensurate (or more likely inflated) boost in prices. 

This is probably the biggest issue right now.  As you've all mentioned above, basic costs are sucking away at any earnings at a disturbing rate.  It's not any surprise that so many are forced to rent rather than buy their own home.  There is also the issue of how on earth many can afford to save for retirement when they can't afford to make ends meet now.

The £15ph min wage is a wonderful aspiration but the question is who ends up footing the bill.  The NICs increase that Johnson has just brought in is going to have a massive impact on the care sector where they are only just keeping their heads above water.  So increasing the min wage to that level is likely to be the straw that breaks the camels back.

What is daft is how Starmer made a big thing about it not long ago and joined a photo op.  So he boxed himself into a corner on that one.

Quote from: IndigoPrimeNo, because that lets them off the hook of the most important decision this country made in modern history. Yes, broadly, Tories are to blame. But the UK is struggling like other comparable nation right now,

True but then that is my point.  They made this decision and it is part and parcel of their misrule.  It is a decision that should never have been foisted on the country and certainly not the way it was handled.

The problem with Labour hammering on the referendum is that they have been stung by some of the stupid decisions made over the last few years.  Until they can find a better way of handling the issue it is going to bite them.  So it is the elephant in the room for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 05:39:39 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 02 October, 2021, 04:33:19 PMIt's not any surprise that so many are forced to rent rather than buy their own home.
Not least when you frequently see people renting for £1k+ per month told by building societies and banks that they aren't eligible for mortgages just over half of that outlay.

QuoteThe NICs increase
Which is, as ever, anti-progressive. Really, we should have more tax rates, but every party bottles that because not enough voters understand how marginal tax rates work. (Hence people freaking out about Labour's tax rise, which would only have affected earnings over 80 grand.)

QuoteThe problem with Labour hammering on the referendum is that they have been stung by some of the stupid decisions made over the last few years.  Until they can find a better way of handling the issue it is going to bite them.  So it is the elephant in the room for them.
They should stop backing Brexit and start hammering, tooth and nail, at the manner in which Brexit was done and seeding in people's minds the benefits of being a part of Europe while not being part of its politics. A smart Labour Party would be able to get us back into the single market within two terms in office. But this is not a smart Labour Party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 02 October, 2021, 05:58:03 PM
Arguably a smart Labour Party would have campaigned on committing to a soft Brexit, staying in SM / CU back in 2019.  Of course, the Right of the Party got their way with what was spun as too complicated and/or a backdoor second referendum and the architect of that got the Party to boot.

But that would have been too close to what Corbyn wanted presumably, so we get what we got.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 07:16:33 PM
I never quite understood what Corbyn wanted. I'm not sure he did either. He and others in the party conflated the CU and SM, coming out in favour of the former but being lukewarm on the latter whenever it was mentioned. Ultimately, no-one came out of that period well. Corbyn's lot say on their hands whenever the SNP suggested something smart. Libs, Lucas and TIG derailed IVs on CU and CM2 while Labour wrecked 2nd ref. All three should have passed and been options. Instead, we got nothing.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 02 October, 2021, 08:27:09 PM
IIRC Corbyn has a long history of ambivalence / opposition to EU membership.  His call for May to trigger Article 50 pretty much straight away before anyone had had a chance to think through the implications of the vote didn't help since it set a hard deadline without any clear direction.

What also didn't help is that there was still quite a lot of tension within the parliamentary Labour party (as usual).  Plenty of voices were commenting that they needed to respect the wishes of leave voting constituents, particularly in areas with high levels of support for leaving (a lot of these being so called 'red wall' seats ...).

Irrespective of whether or not the vote should be respected, the behaviour of MP's during this period is a despicable abuse of their role.  From the initiation of the referendum through to the final votes on the Brexit deal they have done immense damage to the already fragile trust of politicians.  May talked about the betrayal of democracy too many times during her tenure, failing to realise that she was presiding over it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 02 October, 2021, 09:44:31 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 07:16:33 PMwhile Labour wrecked 2nd ref.

It was literally their policy in the 2019 general election.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 02 October, 2021, 10:47:06 PM
Too late by then. They derailed it during the IVs, at which point there was still a slender chance something could be salvaged from the wreckage. By the time the party then came to support it, trust was gone, people were bored and even a chunk of Remainers just wanted Brexit done. (Personally, I wish Labour had thrown its weight behind CM2 or hijacked the first major post-Brexit LD policy of "single market at the least". Alas.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 12 October, 2021, 08:52:17 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 October, 2021, 11:36:24 PM
Quote from: milstar on 12 October, 2021, 08:52:17 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew)

Point...?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 October, 2021, 07:46:52 AM

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 October, 2021, 11:36:24 PM
Quote from: milstar on 12 October, 2021, 08:52:17 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/12/sally-rooney-beautiful-world-where-are-you-israeli-publisher-hebrew)



Point...?

"Sally Rooney has turned down an offer from the Israeli publisher that translated her two previous novels into Hebrew, due to her stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict."

Seems like a political act to me, and this is the Political Thread...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 13 October, 2021, 09:42:40 AM
Meanwhile, the UK government's Coronavirus response is deemed the worst public health failure in history and it barely gets traction in the news cycle. I understand the coronavirus fatigue, but tens of thousands dying unnecessarily as a result of poor decisions seems kind of important.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 October, 2021, 11:17:30 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 13 October, 2021, 09:42:40 AM
Meanwhile, the UK government's Coronavirus response is deemed the worst public health failure in history and it barely gets traction in the news cycle. I understand the coronavirus fatigue, but tens of thousands dying unnecessarily as a result of poor decisions seems kind of important.

Right. Time has moved on and nobody has the energy to care - partly because we all know that the government would be in charge of investigating itself, so the result would be a finding that they didn't do badly after all.

Like, Priti Patel was found to be a bully. Result: keeps her job with the absolute backing and support of Boris "The Johnson" Johnson.

Or, the Tories hire a racist non-white man to write a report finding that there's no institutional racism in the UK, just lazy black people. You think I'm exaggerating, but go and read a summary.

Or - China imprisons, enslaves and sterilizes an entire ethnic region and then sells us the by-products (hair and jeans), and what do a bunch of us do? Spend our entire time metaphorically wanking ourselves silly over conspiracy theories about a secret elite who are trying to control our lives. While wearing jeans. That's the thing that irritates me the most about the foil hats - there are *real* conspiracies - you don't need to make them up.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 18 October, 2021, 11:28:41 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 October, 2021, 11:17:30 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 13 October, 2021, 09:42:40 AM
Or - China imprisons, enslaves and sterilizes an entire ethnic region and then sells us the by-products (hair and jeans), and what do a bunch of us do?

Yes, well, they have nearly every animal on their menu. Plus, they'll start banning shows with effeminate men. What a bloody country.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 18 October, 2021, 11:33:53 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 October, 2021, 11:17:30 PMThat's the thing that irritates me the most about the foil hats - there are *real* conspiracies - you don't need to make them up.

With you all the way.  Conspiracy theorists are a boon to the real powers-that-be, who fuck large swathes of people over in plain sight while the would-be activists are off chasing phantoms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 October, 2021, 08:30:41 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 October, 2021, 11:17:30 PM
That's the thing that irritates me the most about the foil hats - there are *real* conspiracies - you don't need to make them up.

Personally I've always subscribed to Terry Pratchett's Theory of Government Conspiracies.  It's a fascinating little mine field though. 

There is a school of thought that posits the weaponisation of the term by the CIA during the Warren Commission debates.  Looking at the key document that purports to prove this though it is one possible interpretation rather than unequivocal evidence.

Arguably though the use of 'conspiracy theories' or 'alternative facts' has taken on a life of its own in recent years.  Propaganda, disinformation, stoking dissent or insurrection ... there are not many nations across the globe that can be said to be completely innocent in these regards.  The internet seems to have managed to elevate it to a whole new level of sophistication though.

Issues around press ownership and editorial bias have not helped either.  I find myself baffled by accusations of left-wing bias against the BBC when their reporting of strikes and union action is so negative as a rule.  Then again five minutes of the Mail or Express is enough to make me want to wash my brain out with bleach!

I guess the real problem is discerning between what we suspect and what we can prove.  How much of this is down to deliberate manipulation and how much to simply letting people's imagination run away with them?  How much is delusion and how much is justifiable suspicion?

As Sir T put it:  "The truth is out there, but lies are in your head ..."
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 October, 2021, 10:46:31 AM
The BBC's main issue is one of resource. People forget how much the corporation's been cut. And the public want it cut further by eradicating the licence fee, which would force content to be skewed towards advertisers and/or subscribers. The logical result of that is a much smaller and more populist BBC that would be far worse at offering balance, news and political programming (not to mention any niche fare, whether that's radio or children's programming).

Very much a "careful what you wish for".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 October, 2021, 11:30:05 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 October, 2021, 10:46:31 AM
The BBC's main issue is one of resource.

...And the revolving door between Conservative Central Office and senior positions in their news organisation, I'd suggest.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 October, 2021, 09:38:21 PM
I guess this would be something for a whole new thread of itself but my rather fragmented memory of my youth in the UK [late 77 to early-is 80's] suggests that the Beeb offered quite a varied diet.  Compared to these days where it seems to revolve around Strictly and associated reality shows ... The less said about it's news offerings the better.

My problem is my basis of comparison.  My old man only ever got a TV when either the olympics or the commonwealth games were on.  So there are obvious gaps there.  Plus the early seventies that was Iranian television and the early eighties that was America Forces Network / German TV, except at school.

I do however think that it is a little unfair to single out the BBC when the ownership of the rest of the British media leaves us with serious questions about the impartiality of the information we are presented with.

Sharkey may be at the more extreme end of views on this matter but it may well be worth reconsidering how our favourite Dredd writer has addressed this issue down through the years ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 October, 2021, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 October, 2021, 09:38:21 PM
I do however think that it is a little unfair to single out the BBC when the ownership of the rest of the British media leaves us with serious questions about the impartiality of the information we are presented with.

The owners of the rest of British Media can pay for all the bias and Tory propaganda they like, I do however think it is a little unfair when the BBC demands ~£120 a year from me for it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 19 October, 2021, 11:15:26 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 October, 2021, 09:38:21 PM
I do however think that it is a little unfair to single out the BBC when the ownership of the rest of the British media leaves us with serious questions about the impartiality of the information we are presented with.

Not really. I'm an instinctive supporter of the BBC, since I'm generally in favour of the idea of a public service broadcaster as a principle, but they have form for this going back to the 80s. The rushes of the disorder at Orgreave, for example, clearly showed that the BBC cut the disorder from the miners to appear before the police mounted a cavalry charge against them, when the exact opposite was what actually happened.

Fast forward to stuff like David Kelley, and we see an organisation cowed by nothing less than government intimidation, followed by the 2010s where we see the still-ongoing revolving door between the Tory establishment and senior positions in their news organisation and we have a systemic problem that renders the BBC news entirely untrustworthy.

Right now, we have flagship BBC news programmes talking about how we deal with issues in the "post-pandemic era" when we're right in the middle of a fucking pandemic with the worst case rates in Europe. They're literally capitulating to the government's desire to define the news agenda and failing in their most basic responsibilities as a public service broadcaster.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 October, 2021, 08:43:09 AM
There's something broken in the mainstream news arm. Part of that stems from the BBC's absurd reading of 'balance', which isn't only a BBC thing, but seeks to always provide the other side of an argument. The snag is the BBC does this on even footing, rather than on scientific balance. (We see this on things like climate change, where the BBC will create a deliberately combative set-up with someone who's trying to stop humanity from wiping itself out and put them against a sceptic who has well below 5% of the scientific community behind them.)

What's curious is this doesn't typically extend to long-form investigative reporting. While imperfect, shows like Panrorama are still doing good work. But, yes, the main news org needs starting from scratch. The BBC as a whole, though, needs safeguarding. Alas, I suspect it will be a UK PBS within 20 years—perhaps sooner. (One counterpoint here might be the BBC having the balls to attack the Tories where it hurts. If the licence fee is threatened, the BBC says: "Fine. Then we scrap things that aren't profitable, such as the World Service and Radio 4." Then the Tories might suddenly shift to "you can keep the fee, but we're watching you" again.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 20 October, 2021, 08:49:01 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 20 October, 2021, 08:43:09 AM
What's curious is this doesn't typically extend to long-form investigative reporting. While imperfect, shows like Panrorama are still doing good work.

*coughcoughcough*antisemitism hit piece*coughcough*
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 October, 2021, 08:51:15 AM
Exceptions abound.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 20 October, 2021, 09:43:16 AM
I tend to listen to BBC Scotland on the radio a lot. There are a lot of issues with it, but I agree that they are generally caused by a lack of funding.

The problem I have is the "national" and international news, particularly when it covers Scottish matters. There is widespread ignorance and arrogance about devolved matters and Scottish issues. They invariably use talking heads from Westminster who repeat UK government lines without analysis or critique.

Their international coverage does the same and is uncritically supportive of UK foreign policy, in a way that their World Service coverage isn't.

I don't think this is an accident. They do function as a propaganda arm of the UK government for a "home" audience. It's particularly interesting that the "home" audience is England.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 20 October, 2021, 12:37:32 PM
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/19/1047258467/thomas-jefferson-statue-removal-new-york-city-council-chamber (https://www.npr.org/2021/10/19/1047258467/thomas-jefferson-statue-removal-new-york-city-council-chamber)

What a bunch of whiny stupid idiots.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 20 October, 2021, 12:54:27 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 20 October, 2021, 09:43:16 AM
I don't think this is an accident. They do function as a propaganda arm of the UK government for a "home" audience. It's particularly interesting that the "home" audience is England.

This becomes blatantly obvious when you watch international sporting events.

I can't speak to how badly the BBC misunderstand Scottish or Welsh issues, but I can't believe it could be worse than their understanding of Northern Ireland, especially when it comes to the NI protocol.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 October, 2021, 02:26:16 PM
Trump:  Last year expressing jealousy over the attention a teenage girl was getting from the media, and now doing the same with a dead man. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 20 October, 2021, 03:24:56 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 20 October, 2021, 12:54:27 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 20 October, 2021, 09:43:16 AM
I don't think this is an accident. They do function as a propaganda arm of the UK government for a "home" audience. It's particularly interesting that the "home" audience is England.

This becomes blatantly obvious when you watch international sporting events.

I can't speak to how badly the BBC misunderstand Scottish or Welsh issues, but I can't believe it could be worse than their understanding of Northern Ireland, especially when it comes to the NI protocol.

True! However bad the BBC's Scottish coverage is, it pales into insignificance when compared to their treatment of Northern Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 October, 2021, 06:42:37 PM
That topic *always* reminds me of The Day Today helium sketch (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOUeauLWEaE).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 October, 2021, 06:05:05 AM

It's worth noting that every public media company ultimately relies on government for its broadcasting license.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 21 October, 2021, 06:18:52 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 20 October, 2021, 12:54:27 PM
I can't speak to how badly the BBC misunderstand Scottish or Welsh issues,...

To be fair it isn't just the Beeb that this is an issue with here in Wales.  There is a real lack of effective media coverage.  The 'national newspaper' of Wales, the Western Mail is a joke and a half.  Considering its history and ownership at present (Reach who own the Express, Star and Mirror ...) this is hardly surprising.

It's website is even more of a joke mind.  The quality of reporting is on a par with a primary school news-sheet at times and if you want to find out anything other than what is going on in Cardiff or Newport then you may as well forget it.

This is one of those occasions when I find myself in agreement with Sharkey, although only partially.  Ultimately media relies on monied interests for its 'license' with fairly predictable results.  The UK's incredibly lax attitude towards media ownership has arguably contributed to the rather unpleasant situation we find ourselves in these days regarding political and social discourse.

It will be 'interesting' to see what Johnson puts before parliament regarding social media and hate crime.  Whether what finally appears has any teeth at all or is going to be about as frightening as a cockapoo puppy ...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 27 October, 2021, 05:14:28 PM
https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hollywood/news-black-actress-sharon-duncan-brewster-removed-from-new-dune-poster-in-china-424424 (https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hollywood/news-black-actress-sharon-duncan-brewster-removed-from-new-dune-poster-in-china-424424)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 October, 2021, 06:39:56 PM
(https://api-assets.infowars.com/2021/10/dune-posters.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 02 November, 2021, 12:18:40 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/25/fauci-puppy-experiments-conspiracy-republicans/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/25/fauci-puppy-experiments-conspiracy-republicans/)

And I was just to jump at Anthony's throat.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2021, 12:35:49 PM
I see the usual cured-or-smoked-ham crowd are upset that John Lewis' have made their new Christmas ad 'political', which of course means that not all the people in it are white.  Fucking snowflakes.

Now, I will say that it's way too early for a Christmas ad, but that battle was lost a long time ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 November, 2021, 12:46:22 PM
Said snowflakes aren't bright enough to realise their outrage is the REAL marketing campaign.

It's working, they got you to mention their brand here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 04 November, 2021, 03:42:34 PM
I just watched this ad and wondered 'Why are John Lewis making an ad about colonialism?'
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2021, 06:01:21 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 04 November, 2021, 03:42:34 PM
I just watched this ad and wondered 'Why are John Lewis making an ad about colonialism?'

It does rather portray the white person as vastly superior in ability and intellect. Oops?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Rara Avis on 04 November, 2021, 08:28:31 PM
This is up there with Bob Geldof asking 'Do they know it's Christmas?'.

Yes Robert after all those years of forced Christianisation under the guise of bringing civilisation to the savages, Africans are well aware of this rebranded pagan festival.

Having said that I can't wait to see JL's new cholera blanket range or Trail of Tears exclusive lingerie sets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2021, 09:39:55 PM
Obvious difference being John Lewis is lining its own pockets whereas Sir Bob was trying to stop people from starving to death by appealing to our understanding of Christmas.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 November, 2021, 09:51:11 PM

Both of them all about money, though. Money to make a profit, money to save lives.

Money, money everywhere - and not a pot to piss in.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2021, 10:18:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2021, 06:01:21 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 04 November, 2021, 03:42:34 PM
I just watched this ad and wondered 'Why are John Lewis making an ad about colonialism?'

It does rather portray the white person as vastly superior in ability and intellect. Oops?

To be fair, it doesn't get much whiter than that person (if indeed 'person' can be used to describe a different species).  I liked the ad anyway; as ads go it's quite a nice one.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2021, 10:19:10 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2021, 10:18:08 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 November, 2021, 06:01:21 PM
Quote from: Rara Avis on 04 November, 2021, 03:42:34 PM
I just watched this ad and wondered 'Why are John Lewis making an ad about colonialism?'

It does rather portray the white person as vastly superior in ability and intellect. Oops?

To be fair, it doesn't get much whiter than that person (if indeed 'person' can be used to describe a different species).  I liked the ad anyway; as ads go it's quite a nice one.

It is a nice ad. I'm a terrible cynic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 November, 2021, 11:43:26 PM
I'd say you're quite a good cynic. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 November, 2021, 12:58:51 AM
You're just saying that. :)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 December, 2021, 09:27:05 AM
The Metropolitan police has said it will not investigate the Downing Street Christmas party widely reported to have been held last year. In a much awaited statement, the force said it had a policy of not retrospectively investigating alleged breaches of coronavirus laws. But policing and prosecution sources told the Guardian there was no reason in law for police not to investigate, and essentially the Met's decision was a choice. A former Met police chief said the force was acting as judge and jury.
but all crime is investigated retrospectively. so this is dredd coming true a little early. not only are the police now judge and jury, but implicit in this position is the suggestion that the police will now only investigate alleged misdemeanours committed in the future (e.g. city of the damned).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 09 December, 2021, 10:31:57 AM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 December, 2021, 09:27:05 AM
The Metropolitan police has said it will not investigate the Downing Street Christmas party widely reported to have been held last year.

Well, after they flatly refused to investigate clear evidence of criminal breaches of election law by the various 'Leave' factions in the EU referendum,* I'm not really surprised by this.

* ISTR they said they don't involve themselves in political matters. Meaning that there is literally no point in having election laws, because any investigation is going to have a political dimension — it's the entire reason for the laws to exist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 09 December, 2021, 12:13:03 PM
The Met is not keen on biting the hand that feeds it.

They much prefer to beat up women at peaceful vigils and persecute minorities.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 December, 2021, 12:49:43 PM
that would be the vigil that had more or less finished when the police decided to retrospectively invoke emergency covid legislation to brutalise and arrest those who had allegedly broken such laws.
hmmm ... reassuring that we're all still so very equal in the eyes of the law.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: von Boom on 09 December, 2021, 02:58:58 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 09 December, 2021, 09:27:05 AM
all crime is investigated retrospectively. so this is dredd coming true a little early. not only are the police now judge and jury, but implicit in this position is the suggestion that the police will now only investigate alleged misdemeanours committed in the future (e.g. city of the damned).
Maybe they didn't have the minority report.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 09 December, 2021, 03:22:38 PM
Probably key here is the thought (for Boris - the Johnson - Johnson) that he can wave all of this away rather easily because the voting sums all still add up. All the people who wanted him to be tough on immigration, and to tell Europe to get f*cked, probably also think you should be able to party hearty regardless of any public health concerns.

All of the annoyed people - scientists, middle-class liberals & reporters - don't add up to a coherent opposition given the current electoral system. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 10 December, 2021, 09:50:01 AM
This does seem to getting traction in the polls. The Tories will be ruthless if they think Boris is now a liability with voters. The ethics, long term implications for public trust, and the rule of law are utterly unimportant to them. Keeping power is what matters.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 December, 2021, 10:34:05 AM
Johnson may well finally be starting to become a liability but that still doesn't get us away from what the Tories are doing:

- criminalising protest;
- undermining international refugee support;
- breaking international law;
- selling off the NHS piecemeal;
- putting up obstacles to voting;
- restricting legal support;
- limiting judicial review ...

Then there is the small matter of who might replace him ... 8=[
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2021, 11:14:33 AM
Quite. Cut off the head and the Tories will do what they did with Johnson, claiming they're a new and different party now, rather than one that's been in power and doing increasingly shitty things since 2010.

Labour and the Lib Dems in particular (along, to a lesser degree with the Greens and Plaid) really need to get their shit together, figure out how to cooperate, and educate voters on how one "hold your nose" election could eradicate the Tories and build a system that makes it very difficult for them to ever get into power alone again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 10 December, 2021, 11:41:14 AM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 10 December, 2021, 10:34:05 AM
Johnson may well finally be starting to become a liability but that still doesn't get us away from what the Tories are doing:

- criminalising protest;
- undermining international refugee support;
- breaking international law;
- selling off the NHS piecemeal;
- putting up obstacles to voting;
- restricting legal support;
- limiting judicial review ...

The bad news is that a lot of voters think they are in favour of those things too. At least they are until it personally impacts them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 10 December, 2021, 06:27:28 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2021, 11:14:33 AM
Quite. Cut off the head and the Tories will do what they did with Johnson, ...

"Cut off the head and two more will grow in its place!  Hail Tories!!!!!!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2021, 06:39:52 PM
I'm still amazed about the amount of doublethink and doublespeak going on at No. 10 at the moment.

If there was no party, why did that other person have to resign in floods of tears? And the press secretary that was giving a speech at the party is the one who's now managing the response by saying there wasn't one, even though he was at it, giving a speech.

Tory scum being scum is normal - I never quite grasp why people vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 10 December, 2021, 07:03:11 PM
If only this alleged party had happened somewhere with extremely high security, ideally guarded by Police perhaps, then we might have some sort of clue as to if it happened....

They could just check whatever logs were kept of whoever went in and out of the gate and at what time, if only Downing St had such a gate, and a heavy Police presence that any visitors have to interact with.


The Police really can;t afford to investigate this, because the question that immediately arises if shown to have happened is "and what did the Police on duty do about it?"



Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2021, 06:39:52 PM
I'm still amazed about the amount of doublethink and doublespeak going on at No. 10 at the moment.

If there was no party, why did that other person have to resign in floods of tears? And the press secretary that was giving a speech at the party is the one who's now managing the response by saying there wasn't one, even though he was at it, giving a speech.

Tory scum being scum is normal - I never quite grasp why people vote for them.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2021, 10:10:17 PM
Ah, yes - all of that. Be a bit embarrassing if the Met had to investigate themselves and maybe apologize to all the people who were charged and fined for having illegal parties. Maybe pay them back, somehow.

It makes it incredibly difficult to make the case that the government (the people whose job it is to manage the public health crisis) should be listened to, allowed powers or trusted at all for anything.

Reportage is having a field day with Tory ministers saying wonderfully Kafkaesque things like "There wasn't a party, but if there was all the rules were followed".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 10 December, 2021, 10:15:52 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 10 December, 2021, 10:10:17 PM
Reportage is having a field day with Tory ministers saying wonderfully Kafkaesque things like "There wasn't a party, but if there was all the rules were followed".

And also, the utterly bizarre spectacle of a Downing St spokesperson being fired for making inappropriate jokes about a party that never happened. Apparently, we're supposed to think this closes the matter. Because it didn't happen.

So why would it matter if a No 10 representative made jokes about it...?

It's not the fact that it happened (although that's bad enough) but their self-evident bafflement that the plebs might be upset about it that makes me want to invest heavily in shares in piano wire manufacturers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 10 December, 2021, 11:16:55 PM
Labour MP accidentally switched on the Number 10 lights an hour early (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/10/labour-mp-admits-accidently-switching-on-no-10-christmas-lights-early)

(then Johnson fails to switch them on at the appointed time)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 11 December, 2021, 12:26:27 AM
perhaps the most appaling news of the week (barely covered by our media at all) is that our dear and right honourable friend, ms patel, has inserted a new clause into the immigration and borders bill that effectively turns 5 million british citizens into second class citizens:
if this passes, british dual nationals who were born outside the uk can be stripped of their british nationality on a basis as tiny and ridiculous as officials not being able to contact them.
my daughter is a dual national who was born outside the uk. this is an appaling desecration of her basic rights.
interestingly, boris johnson is also a dual national born outside the uk.

regardless, the darkness rises.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 11 December, 2021, 10:47:50 AM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 11 December, 2021, 12:26:27 AM
interestingly, boris johnson is also a dual national born outside the uk.

Patel must really want the premiership...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 December, 2021, 11:10:19 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 10 December, 2021, 11:14:33 AM
Quite. Cut off the head and the Tories will do what they did with Johnson, claiming they're a new and different party now, rather than one that's been in power and doing increasingly shitty things since 2010.

Missed out the 3rd biggest party in parliament...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 11 December, 2021, 11:15:34 AM
What, the SNP?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 11 December, 2021, 11:19:00 AM
 :) :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 December, 2021, 07:47:21 AM
HOWARD: I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job, the dollar buys a nickel's worth, banks are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter, punks are running wild in the streets, and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do and there's no end to it. We know the air's unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat and we sit and watch our teevees while some local newscaster tells us today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be. We all know things are bad. Worse than bad. They're crazy. It's like everything's going crazy. So we don't go out any more. We sit in the house and slowly the world we live in gets smaller and all we ask is, please, at least leave us alone in our own living rooms. Let me have my toaster and TV and my hairdryer and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything, just leave us alone. Well, I'm not going to leave you alone. I want you to get mad. (He gets up from his desk and walks to the front of the set.)

I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your congressmen. Because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the defense budget and the Russians and crime in the street. All I know is, first you've got to get mad. You've got to say: 'I'm a human being, goddammit. My life has value.' So I want you to get up right now. I want you to get out of your chairs and go to the window. Right now. I want you to go to the window, open it and stick your head out and yell. I want you to yell, 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this any more.'

Get up from your chairs. Go to the window. Open it. Stick out your head and yell. And keep yelling. First you've got to get mad. When you're mad enough we'll figure out what to do. Stick your head out and yell, 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more.' 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more.' 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more.'

That's it. I've had it with the foreclosures and the oil crisis and the unemployment and the corruption of finance and the inertia of politics and the right to be alive and the right to be angry. I want to hear the little man and woman — I want to hear you now — go to your windows — yell out so they can hear you — yell and don't stop yelling — so the whole world can hear you — above the chaos and degradation the apathy and white noise.

They're yelling in Chicago. Yell, yell, and then we'll work out what to do about terrorism and the oil crisis. Stick your head out of the window and shout it with me: 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more. I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take this any more. I'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANY MORE.'

Network, (1976)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sintec on 12 December, 2021, 10:46:59 AM
Classic film - the scary bit is the number of Trump supporters I've seen quoting it without really seeming to understand it's message. Nuance isn't really their strong suit is seems - they also have a habit of misappropriating quotes from Fight Club too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 13 December, 2021, 12:33:41 AM
I've not seen Network, though it's seeming that this would be a good guide to becoming a deluded, close-minded bigot:
1) watch Network, Fight Club and The Matrix
2) completely misunderstand what they're about
3) endlessly quote them from that point onwards
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 December, 2021, 02:36:13 PM
I'm reminded of this piece of nsfw brilliance.

https://mobile.twitter.com/lilly_wachowski/status/1262104754496339968?lang=en (https://mobile.twitter.com/lilly_wachowski/status/1262104754496339968?lang=en)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 December, 2021, 09:01:44 AM
Great result in North Shropshire.  Though it was a similar reaction to learning that Russell T Davies was returning as showrunner - I cheered loudly, then remembered the dodgy stuff he got up to in his time
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 December, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
The worst of the Lib Dems aligned with the party's time in govt. But had Lab/Lib happened in 1997, things could have been very different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 17 December, 2021, 10:25:47 AM
Why would Tony Blair have considered any kind of pact with Lib Dems in 1997? 

The Lib Dems won more seats than the previous election, sure, but on a reduced share of the vote. 46 seats vs 418 doesnt seem like the Electorate asking for anything other than Labour to take control


Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 December, 2021, 10:10:41 AM
The worst of the Lib Dems aligned with the party's time in govt. But had Lab/Lib happened in 1997, things could have been very different.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 December, 2021, 10:50:45 AM
The history of this is that he and Ashdown had more or less agreed the terms. There would have been two senior Libs in the cabinet and Labour would have agreed to Lib demands on PR. Ashdown would not have been in the cabinet, but would have remained LD leader.

At the time, people assumed there would be a minority Labour government. The Libs would have been necessary to make up the numbers. But Blair reportedly suggested that even with a fairly small majority, a coalition would have been viable to ensure a stable government (as in, backbenchers wouldn't have been able to play their games). I don't recall the exact figures there, but it was something in the region of a majority of a few dozen.

In the event, Labour's majority was huge, but Blair was reportedly still considering a coalition because it would have upended British politics and dramatically reduced the chance of a future Tory win. (He also apparently suggested the two parties merge, but that was turned down.) What stopped a team-up is a couple of Labour heavyweights saying they would resign in protest. Blair put party over country — and again when kicking AV+ into the long grass — and thereby arguably missed two massive opportunities to overhaul UK politics. The second, arguably, was the bigger blunder, in my opinion, though.

Labour subsequently descended into hubris. It felt it deserved to rule — and rule alone. The nadir was the 2005 win, where the party secured 55% of the seats on 35% of the vote, massively at odds with its reformist stance elsewhere. Here was a party then no different from the Tories, wanting 100% of the power on barely more than a third of the votes. At that point, the shift to PR should have begun (not least when you had Kennedy's Libs with 9% of the seats on 22% of the vote), but Blair by then had shifted. Today, he argues PR won't fix anything.

It's quite something that the one thing Blair, Corbin and Starmer all have in common these days is that they don't want a representative parliament and fair votes. I suppose Labour folks should cheer that there is at least that one thing that unifies the party. But it's also the one thing likely to perennially leave Labour the biggest loser, exiting elections and blaming Libs and Greens for not backing Labour, when a better alternative is for those parties to work together in England (while Plaid and Labour work together in Wales to oust the Tories there).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
The Tory Christmas Party story keeps writing itself more chapters - as Simon Case (the man given the job of investigating whether parties happened) has discovered that he himself hosted one.

Top civil servant Simon Case set to quit No 10 party probe amid rule breach claims (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-59701369)

The difficulty now is finding anyone in government who wasn't at a Xmas party a year ago.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 18 December, 2021, 04:25:12 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 17 December, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
The Tory Christmas Party story keeps writing itself more chapters - as Simon Case (the man given the job of investigating whether parties happened) has discovered that he himself hosted one.

Top civil servant Simon Case set to quit No 10 party probe amid rule breach claims (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-59701369)

The difficulty now is finding anyone in government who wasn't at a Xmas party a year ago.

It's lucky that Case is heading that probe - how would they have known what parties they attended last christmas otherwise?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 18 December, 2021, 09:17:50 PM
lord frost gone. good. it seems that masks in shops may well have been one of his gripes with bojo.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 18 December, 2021, 09:22:04 PM
... always found the work of the other david frost to be infinitely superior.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 04:01:53 PM
Was watching some video from Dublin (or was it Belfast?), either way, it was in Ireland, a massive gathering of anti-vaxx, anti-lockdown crowd. Nothing unusual these days, but was it necessary to call officials in charge and coppers effin stasis and commie scum? I suggest them to travel to N. Korea or China and see communism first hand (not that I ever did it, though), but the point is there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

It's probably worth clarifying some of the rhetoric used by the pro-virus campaigners and marchers:

- Anti-vaccine just means pro-virus. It's a death cult.
- Anti-mask just means pro-virus. It's a death cult.
- Any accusations of communism seem like they're really complaints against authoritarianism - which would in most circumstances be a reasonable complaint, but in this specific circumstance means that people are taking a pro-virus, death cultist stance because they're suffering from a collective delusion that doesn't stand up to even the vaguest scrutiny, but which they can't be argued out of because they're stuck in an echo chamber of deep-dive, heavily layered conspiracy theories.

Summary: death cultists on the march! Film at 11.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2021, 05:32:30 PM
Well, they are, but they're in two different countries.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2021, 05:38:33 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...

Nice to see that awareness of one of the more thorny and intractable issues of British politics is so widespread!  ;-)  On the plus side it does show one of the benefits of the Good Friday Agreement.  After all we don't have so many bombings these days.  Not to say that everything is rosy in the Northern part of the Emerald Isle.

As for anti-brigade, hopefully they enjoyed the opportunity to broadcast their views to all and sundry in London yesterday.  Once the latest criminal justice bill gets on the statute books that is a privilege that will go the way of the dinosaurs.  They will end up with the best part of a year to appreciate what 'freedom' really is at Her Majesty's pleasure.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...

Not being a mind-reader, I can never tell whether you're taking the piss. Was it London or Glasgow? One of those. Interchangeable. Whatever. Sunni or Shia? Whatever. Black, white - what's the difference? Etc.

This is why the Brexit referendum was such a bad idea. How many of the voters even knew what country they were in while voting? Or on what continent? Planet?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:36 PM
Speaking as someone who lives in Belfast, ignorance and confusion about our constitutional status is more widespread than you might think, or the DUP would like to admit. Particularly amongst those Tory voting weirdos on that wee island off our east coast. I would add that it's always amusing to have it yanksplained to you, which brings us neatly around to the pro-disease crowd. There have been several protests at city hall which always include rhetoric from America's so-called culture war, like our homegrown one isn't good enough anymore. People claiming their constitutional rights and whatnot. I've even seen some confederate and "Don't tread on me" flags flegs. Pure scundered.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:50:25 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 19 December, 2021, 05:32:30 PM
Well, they are, but they're in two different countries.

I know that, I just thought my mind-slipping wasn't that pertinent for the anti-vaxx protesters news.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 19 December, 2021, 05:38:33 PM
Nice to see that awareness of one of the more thorny and intractable issues of British politics is so widespread!  ;-)  On the plus side it does show one of the benefits of the Good Friday Agreement.  After all we don't have so many bombings these days.  Not to say that everything is rosy in the Northern part of the Emerald Isle.

I'd like some Clothworthy beer.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:52:02 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:36 PM
...rhetoric from America's so-called culture war...

I saw on the news a protest in New Zealand where they were wearing MAGA hats and Trump t-shirts (this summer). I got a bit depressed at that - the notion of Trump as president of a fascist world state.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:52:27 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...

Not being a mind-reader, I can never tell whether you're taking the piss. Was it London or Glasgow? One of those. Interchangeable. Whatever. Sunni or Shia? Whatever. Black, white - what's the difference? Etc.

This is why the Brexit referendum was such a bad idea. How many of the voters even knew what country they were in while voting? Or on what continent? Planet?

Okay, I wasn't sure which one was of the two cities. Big deal. It was in Ireland, let's leave it at that. I definitely wasn't planning this to turn into a The Troubles debate.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:55:31 PM
Sorry - feel free to switch back to discussing pro-virus campaigners.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 20 December, 2021, 01:08:19 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:52:27 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...

Not being a mind-reader, I can never tell whether you're taking the piss. Was it London or Glasgow? One of those. Interchangeable. Whatever. Sunni or Shia? Whatever. Black, white - what's the difference? Etc.

This is why the Brexit referendum was such a bad idea. How many of the voters even knew what country they were in while voting? Or on what continent? Planet?

Okay, I wasn't sure which one was of the two cities. Big deal. It was in Ireland, let's leave it at that. I definitely wasn't planning this to turn into a The Troubles debate.

I wish I could be surprised at the wilful ignorance.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 December, 2021, 01:51:19 PM
Quote from: pauljholden on 20 December, 2021, 01:08:19 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:52:27 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 05:48:09 PM
Quote from: milstar on 19 December, 2021, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 19 December, 2021, 04:42:29 PM
I'll just put to one side the idea that Dublin and Belfast are interchangeable in your mind - let's call that unusual and move on.

I thought they are both in the Emerald Isle. Maybe I was wrong...

Not being a mind-reader, I can never tell whether you're taking the piss. Was it London or Glasgow? One of those. Interchangeable. Whatever. Sunni or Shia? Whatever. Black, white - what's the difference? Etc.

This is why the Brexit referendum was such a bad idea. How many of the voters even knew what country they were in while voting? Or on what continent? Planet?

Okay, I wasn't sure which one was of the two cities. Big deal. It was in Ireland, let's leave it at that. I definitely wasn't planning this to turn into a The Troubles debate.

I wish I could be surprised at the wilful ignorance.

Its the English way, Big deal. let's leave it at that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 20 December, 2021, 03:38:21 PM
the things is, if that party was a work meeting, as our buller betters contend, the obvious question to retort with is why the barons actually needed to be fuelled by umpteen bottles of vino whilst making decisions about what has become, in terms of death numbers (around 19 million, according to actual epidemiologists), the worst affliction of any kind that humanity has ever suffered (with the uk continuing to be one of the most horrific exemplars)? maybe there's a boozed-up link ?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 December, 2021, 03:59:48 PM
The Tories Conservative Party and their Christmas Parties work meetings held in accordance with the rules, and the response to everyone finding out about them worshiping them as their rightful betters seems like a narrative from Orwell Churchill, with the levels of doublethink patriotism in our fight against Eurasia!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 December, 2021, 10:25:11 PM
So... Will Johnson last January?  Genuinely wondering what the view is like from inside the UK.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 December, 2021, 11:28:15 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 21 December, 2021, 10:25:11 PM
So... Will Johnson last January?  Genuinely wondering what the view is like from inside the UK.

Wil it make a difference? what's the next one like Dave the Mayor?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 22 December, 2021, 12:04:59 PM
i remember many, many conversations at the time about cameron being the 'worst prime minister ever'.
then may took the crown.
then bojo took it, easily, and transported us all into the ninth circle. he has even made jeremy hunt look like an empathetic statesman - in comparison.
i have no doubt that whoever comes next will be even worse. raab? gove? patel (and under her premiership, i wouldn't be at all surprised if the tyburn death circus made a comeback)? gloriana truss? sunak, the current favourite (although he will embarrass us less internationally, with his seeming to possess at least a veneer of respectability, we must never forget his culpability in being the architect of the eat out to help out massacre - and sources have it that it was sunak who prevented bojo from taking any of the measures at covid mitigation suggested by the country's leading virologists and epidemiologists this week)?
there is nothing good to follow, whenever the blond buffoon goes.
hohoho.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PM
Quote from: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 22 December, 2021, 12:04:59 PM
i remember many, many conversations at the time about cameron being the 'worst prime minister ever'.
then may took the crown.
then bojo took it, easily, and transported us all into the ninth circle. he has even made jeremy hunt look like an empathetic statesman - in comparison.
i have no doubt that whoever comes next will be even worse. raab? gove? patel (and under her premiership, i wouldn't be at all surprised if the tyburn death circus made a comeback)? gloriana truss? sunak, the current favourite (although he will embarrass us less internationally, with his seeming to possess at least a veneer of respectability, we must never forget his culpability in being the architect of the eat out to help out massacre - and sources have it that it was sunak who prevented bojo from taking any of the measures at covid mitigation suggested by the country's leading virologists and epidemiologists this week)?
there is nothing good to follow, whenever the blond buffoon goes.
hohoho.

Any of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab 😁
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 22 December, 2021, 12:45:53 PM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PM
Any of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab 😁

To be honest Lancashire, Cumbria, Yorkshire and Milton Keynes are liable to declare independence, never mind Scotland and Wales! 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 December, 2021, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PMAny of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab
Perhaps. But despite everything, polling in Scotland hasn't substantially shifted. Also, even if 'leave' were to win there, the country would be deeply divided on the matter, which—as we've seen with Brexit—does't necessarily bode well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 22 December, 2021, 02:09:47 PM
... which only means, yet again as ever, that democracy is very overrated. technocracy is our only hope. time for the actual experts to bite back.
after all, haven't we had enough of everyone being an epidemiologist now (except for the, er, actual epidemiologists)?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 December, 2021, 02:14:08 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 December, 2021, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PMAny of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab
Perhaps. But despite everything, polling in Scotland hasn't substantially shifted. Also, even if 'leave' were to win there, the country would be deeply divided on the matter, which—as we've seen with Brexit—does't necessarily bode well.

Wow, I had no idea. Couldn't you join the EU again if you became independent? I seem to remember the EU was quite a major selling point for the non-independence side in the last referendum?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 December, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
I'm not Scottish, but, yes, Scotland could in theory join the EU under Article 49, although would have to do quite a lot to align. I get the sense the best settlement for Scotland, though, would be for the UK as a whole to stop electing fuckwits to Westminster, to rejoin the EEA (at least) and the EU (eventually), while increasing devolution (not only to Scotland/NI/Wales, but also to English regions), along with reforming the upper house so representation is split broadly evenly between the four nations (although I'd argue it would make sense to first split it evenly between non-partisans and politicians).

Sadly, I suspect the UK will continue electing fuckwits, in which case good luck to Scotland. Breaking away will make a lot of sense, but I do hope everyone on the "let's scarper" side recognises how painful and divisive such an event will be. A shit-ton of loser's consent will be required. (Wales did quite well with that during its vote on the assembly. The Brexit lot, though...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 03:10:26 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 December, 2021, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PMAny of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab
Perhaps. But despite everything, polling in Scotland hasn't substantially shifted. Also, even if 'leave' were to win there, the country would be deeply divided on the matter, which—as we've seen with Brexit—does't necessarily bode well.

I agree polling isn't at the tipping point yet and I would prefer an independence vote of 65% to bring most of the population along. (Can but dream).

I don't know how much the longing to be part of the EU will be in peoples mind.I know I'd prefer to be in the EU even if it meant a hard border between Scotland & England - and I love popping down south for visits. But only to deal with one border is easier than 27!

It's still a long way off and may never happen in my lifetime but it's inching closer?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 December, 2021, 04:25:59 PM
I'm with Calhab Block! Who you fighting with?!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 December, 2021, 04:32:56 PM

EVERYBODY!

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 22 December, 2021, 04:34:23 PM
Presently fashioning some colossal iron hooks and chains in the vein hope the northern counties will be dragged along re. indiref.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 07 January, 2022, 01:09:17 AM
Well, I've been enjoying the result of the Colston Four trial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 January, 2022, 06:42:29 PM
I know they won't, but wouldn't it be great if the police arrested Boris for fiddling while Rome burned.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 11 January, 2022, 07:55:05 PM
It would be glorious to behold, but they've already made it clear that they can't investigate crimes that have happened in the past.  I expect they're putting a lot of resources into Efil Drago San's mass homicides.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 11 January, 2022, 10:43:43 PM
I don't wish any harm upon the Prime Minister, but I do find myself increasingly curious about the comparative durability of his teeth compared to the palm of my hand.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 09:30:31 AM
I think the big question is whether Sunak wants to be PM now, or in the summer.

I'm hugely impressed by the likes of Pippa Crerar at the Mirror for this drip, drip strategy with he Downing Street revelations. She could have released a huge expose, as has been done in the past, and Johnson would have bluffed and blustered his way through a few days of bad news before finding the latest dead cat. As it is, she and her colleagues have sustained a slow, painful death in the polls for the Tories.

All Kier Starmer has to do is stand around and look semi-competent. Which is good, because that's about his limit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 03:10:26 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 22 December, 2021, 01:45:52 PM
Quote from: Trooper McFad on 22 December, 2021, 12:11:48 PMAny of those mentioned above can only mean a step closer to independence for Calhab
Perhaps. But despite everything, polling in Scotland hasn't substantially shifted. Also, even if 'leave' were to win there, the country would be deeply divided on the matter, which—as we've seen with Brexit—does't necessarily bode well.

I agree polling isn't at the tipping point yet and I would prefer an independence vote of 65% to bring most of the population along. (Can but dream).

I don't know how much the longing to be part of the EU will be in peoples mind.I know I'd prefer to be in the EU even if it meant a hard border between Scotland & England - and I love popping down south for visits. But only to deal with one border is easier than 27!

It's still a long way off and may never happen in my lifetime but it's inching closer?

There's a generational change in opinions. A 65% majority may be possible, but only when the boomer generation no longer form the largest voting bloc. I suspect that a campaign would see a fair amount of movement in the polls as well.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 12 January, 2022, 11:55:56 AM
At the first glance of this guy on the ITN news last night, I thought it was some comedian impersonating Boris Johnson.  :)

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/139/590x/michael-fabricant-1548159.webp?r=1641977919818

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2022, 12:47:45 PM
I thought exactly the same thing! One comment I saw was 'He's so far up Johnson's arse, he's got his hair'.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 12:48:28 PM
So, to the surprise of absolutely nobody, Boris Johnson was at the party. But it was a work event. And "technically within the rules".

Is this it, then?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 January, 2022, 12:57:19 PM
So... all Johnson did was wilfully and knowingly attend an event at Downing Street that he claims, as PM, he didn't know the nature of but once he discovered that it was actually illegal, he only stayed for 25 minutes, took no action at the time or subsequently, and then lied about it for months.

Dunno about you, but that all sounds completely fine to me...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 01:15:55 PM
I think its 50/50 he goes at this point.

I also wouldn't bet against Pippa Crerar posting photos from the party of Johnson in a dentist's chair having champagne poured down his throat by a couple of strippers.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 January, 2022, 01:24:52 PM
The narrative they've been trying to build over the pat day or two is that the event happened but that it was within the rules. Because most office meetings ask people to bring their own booze and have tables of picnic food. They're taking us for fools, again. And they'll almost certainly get away with it, again.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 01:36:39 PM
I don't know that they will get away with it.

It's highly unlikely the Met will prosecute. They won't bite the hand that feeds.

The question is, how much will it damage the government and the Tories in the polls? I think the anecdotal stories about relatives dying alone while Downing Street partied are horrifying, and it appears that a lot of folk agree.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 01:45:34 PM
Anecdotally, I've just spoken to a couple of Conservative voters I know. Both said the same, "He has to go."

If I was Keir Starmer, I'd probably hope that Johnson limps on for a few months, damaging everyone around him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 12 January, 2022, 02:23:15 PM
But that's the issue: HE has to go. How much damage will Johnson do the Tories? So he might lose his job, but the party will be insulated. There will be a new leader. There will be a significant poll bounce as the press comes back on-side while the bullshit begins in convincing the public that this is somehow an entirely different party (again).

A pity there isn't a general election tomorrow, mind. Most current predictors suggest you'd have a reasonably comfortable Lab/Lib majority.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 12 January, 2022, 02:24:20 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 01:45:34 PM
Anecdotally, I've just spoken to a couple of Conservative voters I know. Both said the same, "He has to go."

If I was Keir Starmer, I'd probably hope that Johnson limps on for a few months, damaging everyone around him.

Agree let him limp on and affect more people around him and in the party and hopefully make them unelectable for a good few decades. (But it won't 🙁)

They(the tories) could let him stay until the May elections and use that and any bad results as an excuse to get rid of him instead of punting him out in "Disgrace"  and officially tarnish the party?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Colin YNWA on 12 January, 2022, 03:34:20 PM
I'm just waiting of the leaked footage of Johnson shouting:

"YES!!! He's getting done for sexual assault. That's a result today!"
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: judgeurko on 12 January, 2022, 04:33:59 PM
i hope Johnson burns in hell.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 12 January, 2022, 05:08:17 PM
Hmm... seems a bit permanent.  I'll settle for him resigning in disgrace and hopefully doing a lot of damage to the Tories' reputation as a whole along the way.  Obviously he'd also need to be face legal charges for breaking the law, like everyone else who got caught doing similar things during lockdown, but that's probably a pipe dream.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 12 January, 2022, 06:40:35 PM
Douglas Ross, to whom I never tire of shouting "Fuck off, Douglas!" whenever he appears on screen, Leader of Scottish Conservative Party, has called for Boris to resign.

Well done, Douglas. But can you still fuck off, please?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2022, 11:47:50 PM

There's so much evil loose in the world right now and this is the focus of attention. To me it's just theatre, an emotional distraction from things that can't be talked about.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 12 January, 2022, 11:54:40 PM
Quote from: CalHab on 12 January, 2022, 09:30:31 AM
I think the big question is whether Sunak wants to be PM now, or in the summer.

I'm hugely impressed by the likes of Pippa Crerar at the Mirror for this drip, drip strategy with he Downing Street revelations. She could have released a huge expose, as has been done in the past, and Johnson would have bluffed and blustered his way through a few days of bad news before finding the latest dead cat. As it is, she and her colleagues have sustained a slow, painful death in the polls for the Tories.

All Kier Starmer has to do is stand around and look semi-competent. Which is good, because that's about his limit.
As delightful as it might be to imagine this is the strategy of Pippa Crerar I suspect she's putting stuff out as it's been leaked to her. Someone with rather a lot of evidence is trying to damage Johnson from the inside. (Assuming it's not just Cummings )
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 January, 2022, 03:04:32 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 12 January, 2022, 11:47:50 PM

There's so much evil loose in the world right now and this is the focus of attention. To me it's just theatre, an emotional distraction from things that can't be talked about.

Dear Points of View: why-oh-why do people insist on talking about politics on The Political Thread?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 08:28:04 AM
I suspect with Crerar, it's a bit of both. Newspapers, if they have enough of a bombshell, will hold things back if the story can run over multiple days. But in this case, someone is clearly attempting to keep this in the news cycle. Would be interesting to know who.

And, yes, Shark is right that it's depressing this is the focus of attention, when the government is putting through legislation that will effectively ban protest in the UK, along with many other shitty things. But if that's what it takes to finally knacker this Tory government, so be it. (Not that it definitely will, mind.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2022, 08:55:33 AM
Labour seem to be ahead by a considerable margin now.  No idea how things will pan out if Johnson goes - if fellow Tories back him right now, they've lost the support of two-thirds of the people, but if they turn against him, they have to deal with the sycophants who still run the party.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 11:11:42 AM
The issue the Tories will have is that none of them enjoy the broad popular support of Johnson. He is a vote winner. Truss isn't. Sunak has elements of that, but that's mostly from him giving away money; he won't be nearly as popular when he's taking it back. Patel? Just no. So I suspect there will be a leadership change and an immediate poll post for the Tories, but it won't necessarily be sustainable.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2022, 01:07:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 11:11:42 AM. He WAS a vote winner.

FTFY 😀
Speaking as an outsider and not REALLY having much of a clue, I would tentatively suggest that the fun-loving, zipline-fumbling panel show presenter persona is gone and won't be back. He got Brexit done already and it turned out not to be very done at all - 'Let's get the bits of Brexit done that we didn't do properly last time' isn't the strongest electoral slogan. 

I'll be very saddened if I turn out to be wrong, and I may well be given the mind-bogglingly awful results of various elections and referenda around the world in recent years, but I think his vote-magnet days are behind him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 02:12:16 PM
I suspect his star has faded, but he still has clout. There are a lot of people who still want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Once he's gone, who fills the void? Who will appeal to the people who like 'Boris' but frankly couldn't give much of a shit about the Conservatives? Dangerous times for the Tories, because if we revert to politics being boring (which it should be), then people will become more interested in competence — and the Tories excised almost all quality from the party's ranks during the Brexit purge.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 13 January, 2022, 02:34:01 PM
Fair enough.... I was naive enough to think the Capitol riots would finish Trump's reputation too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 January, 2022, 03:49:55 PM
I have started to seriously consider my position in the US. It feel's like a coin flip at the moment between a fairly liberal society with some deep-rooted issues and a fascist dictatorship - depending on how the Republicans manage to fix the voting laws before the next election.

I think if they win it, by cheating, then they'll just change the laws even more so that they remain permanently in power. It's what Trump was trying to achieve last time - and he managed to get secret police onto the streets of Portland and almost managed to enact mob rule.

So - do I scarper back to Scotland and try to persuade my family to come with me? Or do I buy a gun to defend myself when the civil war happens? Or write a book about the madness of people who are trying to usher in a new dark age, before being executed by the new regime?

Probably just go for a walk...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 04:22:13 PM
To some degree, I imagine it'd be down to where you are and where things are headed. My family used to holiday often in Florida, on the west coast. Over-development and the shift from 'policing' to 'security' over time transformed a rather lovely city beach into a place where I at weekends felt genuinely uncomfortable walking around. We're unlikely to ever go back, and I really miss what the place was but not what it became. Hopefully wherever you are is closer to the former than the latter.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 January, 2022, 04:28:06 PM
I'm reminded of an Onion headline that went something like:

"Americans Predict Impending Dystopia as a Way to Cope with Already Living in One"

I wouldn't worry too much about a second American civil war. It won't last long unless these "well regulated militias" have access to drones and the like.

I read somewhere that if California, New York and Texas seceded, the remaining US GDP would plummet to third-world* levels. That may be an urban myth though.

*Technically Ireland would be considered third-world, being neither a member of NATO nor a signatory to the Warsaw Pact
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 13 January, 2022, 05:44:45 PM
It was all cool when I was reading it in Martha Washington Goes to War.

Oddly, I ended up marrying a Martha, in Washington.


---


Some powerful interviews on Channel 4 News yesterday from people who suffered while Number 10 partied. Yet, there are still plenty of folk tugging the forelock and defending their betters for quaffing champers while the plebs either toed the line or were fined for crossing it.

Where's Bear and his guillotines, when we need them?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Robin Low on 13 January, 2022, 06:37:53 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 13 January, 2022, 05:44:45 PM

Where's Bear and his guillotines, when we need them?

I'm now imaging Michael Hordern narrating that particular episode.


While I won't take responsibility if it all goes wrong I'd say move back to Scotland. I'm not wildly happy with what's going on in Britain these days, and I'm given to understand that there are many decent people in America, but I'd rather be here than anywhere else in the world. I just wish we could learn to look after the place - and each other- better than we do.

Regards,

Robin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 13 January, 2022, 09:57:29 PM
Not sure I'd rather be here, TBH. We stay here primarily because of roots now: mini-IP's school and friends; close proximity to my parents. If it wasn't for those things, England could go fuck itself as far as I'm concerned. The wife and I would be elsewhere in a jiffy. (Although these days I'd have to rely on her for FOM, because 17 million people in my country are fuckwits.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 January, 2022, 10:55:09 PM

I wouldn't want to live anywhere else. It might be on its knees right now but I want to be here, and part of it, when this country gets back on its feet and stands proud again, free of the tyrant clowns and greedmongering monsters infecting not just us but the whole world.

Credo.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 13 January, 2022, 11:08:18 PM
And now the Telegraph has gone for Johnson's throat. I think that's him done, TBH.

Notice how the key points are all in the Twitter thread linked below, rather than expecting you to pay for access to the article behind the Telegraph's paywall. That's not a coincidence — they want him gone.

Et tu, Brutus? (https://twitter.com/tony_diver/status/1481741337951195136?s=21)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 January, 2022, 08:44:49 AM
They certainly want someone gone, but I'm unsure whether that's Johnson or a civil service scalp. The Telegraph has been careful to note Johnson was away from Number 10 during this particular shindig.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 14 January, 2022, 08:46:42 AM
Linking it to "the day before Prince Philip funeral" is a genius idea to remove any remaining support flag shaggers have for him.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 14 January, 2022, 09:09:26 AM
The Times is reporting (https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1481759645194723335/photo/1) that Sue Gray's report will be critical of the general atmosphere at No10 for "blurring the lines" between work and social events, but will conclude that there's "insufficient evidence of criminality" to warrant further action.

The Tories are going to try and front this out. I'm not sure that's going to play well with people who got a visit from the police because they had four people in their own back garden.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Lorenzo on 14 January, 2022, 09:18:24 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 13 January, 2022, 11:08:18 PM
And now the Telegraph has gone for Johnson's throat. I think that's him done, TBH.

Notice how the key points are all in the Twitter thread linked below, rather than expecting you to pay for access to the article behind the Telegraph's paywall. That's not a coincidence — they want him gone.

Et tu, Brutus? (https://twitter.com/tony_diver/status/1481741337951195136?s=21)
If you want to read the telegraph article without paying, just use a 12ft ladder (https://12ft.io/)...

Telegraph (https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2022%2F01%2F13%2Ftwo-parties-held-downing-street-queen-country-mourned-death%2F)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 January, 2022, 03:35:00 PM
Quote from: Lorenzo on 14 January, 2022, 09:18:24 AM
If you want to read the [paywalled articles], just use a 12ft ladder (https://12ft.io/)...

I love that.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 14 January, 2022, 04:56:01 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 14 January, 2022, 08:46:42 AM
Linking it to "the day before Prince Philip funeral" is a genius idea to remove any remaining support flag shaggers have for him.

On the other hand, if you're not a flag shagger, it just highlights how the UK has an elite class who are above the rest of us. No doubt the Tories were partying on the eve on hundreds of funerals (no doubt a higher than average number), that the bereaved had to pay for out of their own pockets.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 14 January, 2022, 07:11:14 PM
That's the bit that pisses me off more than owt else about this latest revelation.  Mrs Windsor gets a full apology for a couple of minions having a few bevvies the night before Phil the Greek's send off.  Where is the apology for the rest of the nation?  Where is the apology for the number of funerals the bar stewards actually caused?

Oh, and the mithering from politicians now because Johnson has "tarnished the Tory brand'?????? FFS stop for a moment and think about the real and lasting damage the pillock has caused to the UK's economy, health, education, judiciary, democracy ... never mind reducing the country to a global laughing stock!  Nope, it's all about what people think of the Tories.

..... and breathe .....
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 14 January, 2022, 07:44:22 PM
Really, it's all fake. That's the thing. These people aren't pro-monarchy. They don't give a shit about the flag or the country. All they care about is themselves. The only reason there was an apology to the queen is because they know hurting her would negatively impact on the party's support. (Note how Rees-Mogg tackled the proles—he said he mourned for them, and argued the COVID restrictions were the problem and what caused their pain, not the PM and his colleagues having broken said rules and laws.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 January, 2022, 09:43:15 PM
If you're not a Tory minion, this happens:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/34C4/production/_117580531_hi066234506.jpg)


If you are a Tory minion, this happens:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/81492860b5b6ce0c311e25db6b6e2bf2536b992f/0_0_1826_2100/master/1826.jpg?width=465&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=528fa64b91ece4e4e4c9227fb7e3ffc2)

Tory scum. Gaslighting the nation.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 16 January, 2022, 12:25:47 PM
Heading out to Bargain Booze for some office supplies.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 16 January, 2022, 06:34:09 PM
He's not even going to do the decent thing and quit, it seems. It'll be a wave of populist sloganeering from here on in, and shame on anyone who buys it at this stage of the game.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2022, 09:19:46 AM
The current cunning plan appears to be to distract Tories by saying they'll kill the BBC. If the BBC had any sense (it doesn't), it would respond with saying how challenging this would make it to retain the World Service, Radio 4, nature programmes and shows for children.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 17 January, 2022, 12:28:52 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 17 January, 2022, 09:19:46 AM
The current cunning plan appears to be to distract Tories by saying they'll kill the BBC. If the BBC had any sense (it doesn't), it would respond with saying how challenging this would make it to retain the World Service, Radio 4, nature programmes and shows for children.

There's also something about using the Royal Navy to enforce immigration rules (which I assume means forcing people to turn back mid-channel, likely resulting in mass drownings).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 17 January, 2022, 02:45:30 PM
Yep, there they are: The right's favourite scapegoats; public services and immigrants. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 17 January, 2022, 04:15:40 PM
They're also punting a "Don't worry! Boris is going to get to the bottom of this!" line.

(Which, yes, is more scapegoating.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 January, 2022, 10:20:22 PM
Rich arsehole publicly doesn't give a fuck about China's genocide against the Uyghars: Backlash as US billionaire dismisses Uyghur abuse (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60045076).

I expect he profits quite nicely from their enslavement. Long term, he may have issues with the forced sterilization, though. How can you turn a profit from the next generation if they're not going to be born?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 January, 2022, 10:39:27 PM
Loving this clickbait image from Channel 4 News:

(https://i.imgur.com/M41rbsW.png)

Gie's a job! I can do that! I can have parties! That's easy, that is!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Leigh S on 19 January, 2022, 10:17:52 PM
Privilege is being able to make a successful career out of being a liar, despite being a really shit liar.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2022, 08:25:32 AM
Privilege is also being able to instigate policy against scientific advice that you know will lead to thousands of unnecessary deaths, all because you think it might save your own skin.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 20 January, 2022, 08:38:19 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 18 January, 2022, 10:39:27 PM
Loving this clickbait image from Channel 4 News:

(https://i.imgur.com/M41rbsW.png)

Gie's a job! I can do that! I can have parties! That's easy, that is!

:)

Cummings definitely has the Yosser look there, but I'm not sure who should be begging who for a job...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 20 January, 2022, 08:57:50 AM
Apparently Boris Johnson is now more likely to stay in power now that an MP has crossed the floor and he's being directly attacked.

Just another day in a broken country, with a broken system and a broken media.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 20 January, 2022, 09:13:07 AM
Telegraph claiming today "up to five" Con MPs are considering crossing the floor. Well, I suppose zero is technically "up to five".
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 20 January, 2022, 10:57:20 AM
Now accusations that the Whips are Blackmailing Con Mps to toe the line. I always knew they (whips) stronge armed the backbenchers to support the party line but to go as far as "Blackmail" surely that's a step too far?

I wonder  what skeletons they were going to use and against who?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2022, 12:01:28 PM

"Skeletons" imply wrongdoings, improprieties, illegalities - which in turn suggests that such malfeasances are being deliberately withheld from the electorate in order to make unsuitable persons appear fit for government in the first place.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 20 January, 2022, 03:30:54 PM
Shirley Knott?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 20 January, 2022, 05:45:40 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2022, 12:01:28 PM
"Skeletons" imply wrongdoings, improprieties, illegalities - which in turn suggests that such malfeasances are being deliberately withheld from the electorate in order to make unsuitable persons appear fit for government in the first place.

That sounds tremendously Machiavellian, but then I realized it's also how people behave in job interviews and on first dates.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tiplodocus on 20 January, 2022, 07:12:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 20 January, 2022, 12:01:28 PM

"Skeletons" imply wrongdoings, improprieties, illegalities - which in turn suggests that such malfeasances are being deliberately withheld from the electorate in order to make unsuitable persons appear fit for government in the first place.

Possibly the main thing is withholding constituency funding with which you could try blackmail someone with no skeletons.

I note that the phrase "there's no evidence this happened" has been trotted out as opposed to a proper denial.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 22 January, 2022, 10:30:01 PM
Keeping detailed files on 'leverage' which could be applied by the whips when necessary has been a thing for decades - unusual for it to be mentioned in public though.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: pauljholden on 22 January, 2022, 11:04:55 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 22 January, 2022, 10:30:01 PM
Keeping detailed files on 'leverage' which could be applied by the whips when necessary has been a thing for decades - unusual for it to be mentioned in public though.

I wonder if there's not a couple of things going on here, firstly, I think most of the new cohort don't have the decades worth of leverage a longer term politician might have - not only because they're from 2019 but the last few years lockdown has changed the landscape a great deal over what you can do. Meaning the whip has had to resort to far less subtle measures of coercion.

Secondly, I wonder if these new tories are maybe not feelin more existential pressure from their previously labour voting constituents - requiring a stronger bit of arm twisting.

Thirdly, I suspect too they just aren't used to the idea "well, a bit of coerican is just how things get done round here" - this might be a generational thing, I dunno.

And finally, Johnson is a nasty bit of work, and stands to reason he's gonna surround himself in other nasty bits of work and what they lack in charm they probably make up for in weapon's grade dickheadery.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 25 January, 2022, 04:11:37 PM
Just checked yougov and he's at 22% in the approval ratings.  Surely there's no way back from that?

And yeah, from slashing benefits for the most needy, through trying to make protesting illegal, to blithely opening the floodgates to a potential resurgence of Northern Ireland's troubles, the Tories are doing far worse things, but this is law breaking and a near-sociopathic sense of disregard for the sense of common good that the rest of us abided by.

I know he's not my PM but what his crowd does affects us too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 25 January, 2022, 05:13:47 PM
I hear what you're saying JBC.  I think you're also spot on across the board.  What the Tories have done to the UK over the past decade is nothing short of criminal. 

The most disturbing thing about this whole situation is that it was so blessed obvious this was going to happen.  Given his track record this was as predictable as the sun rising.  So this speaks volumes for the judgement of the Tory party as a whole.

Which brings me to the next terrifying aspect of all of this.  As despicable as Johnson has been, even the most cursory examination of potential contenders is enough to make you reach for the black pill.  Liz Truss as PM?  Raab?  Sunak?  Gove?  Tugenhadt?

Aye, what the whole crowd does affects all of us, and not for the better.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 January, 2022, 05:31:12 PM
I read in the news that BJ "welcomes the police investigation". I suppose: what else could he say? And - he probably does welcome it. It allows him to shelve his own non-independent investigation into his own behavior and keep hiding behind the "well, we can't say anything until the findings..." bullshit that he's been peddling for ages.

Adolf Rees-Mogg was even clearer when interviewed and basically said that the tactic was to just wait a couple of years, by which time he calculates that the plebs would have moved on in their thinking and not pay much attention to the partying while people were busy going through unimaginable grief and loss.

When I read about the birthday party, I had two thoughts: (1) now he's finally done and (2) people are so bored of this story now that it won't make a blind bit of difference.

I will not be at all surprised if the Tories internal investigation finds that everything was somehow work and therefore fine, that the PM doesn't know where he is or what he's doing, ever, so can't be held accountable and that the Police investigation finds no evidence of wrongdoing. It seems to be going that way, so if anything else happens I'll be pleasantly surprised.

(But by then we might be at war with Russia, so...)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 26 January, 2022, 12:32:30 PM

UNITED NATIONS, Jan 17 2022 (IPS) - The numbers are unbelievably staggering: the world's 10 richest men more than doubled their fortunes (during the first two years of [the] Covid-19 pandemic) from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion — at a rate of $15,000 per second or $1.3 billion a day, according to a new study from Oxfam International. (https://www.ipsnews.net/2022/01/pandemic-devastates-poor-worlds-10-richest-multiplied-wealth-trillions/)

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 January, 2022, 02:21:41 PM
With Johnson, it is quite something what people are willing to forgive. It does feel like the sheer level of "I don't give a shit about you plebs" has had some cut-through, but there's still a very stubborn 30% of the population that is now clearly core right-wing Tory, and probably up to another 10% that would support the party in a GE. My hope remains that the Libs will strengthen in core support areas and Labour will do enough that we'll end up with 300 Labour MPs and a rump of Libs that can somehow force Labour's hand on PR. I suspect I'll be disappointed in some way either by Labour kicking the shit out of the Libs come the GE, rather than doing a 1997-style non-aggression thing, or in Labour getting a majority (and thereby kicking PR into the sea) or a minority and demanding others do its bidding by saying it'll otherwise be their fault if we end up with a further GE and Tory govt.

Mind you, even the 'good' scenario there is two years away, during which time these arseholes in power will do as much damage as they can.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 February, 2022, 12:08:07 AM
Ian Blackford told to leave the Commons (https://youtu.be/YmlJn35-xxg) for being the only person there willing to tell the truth. Shurely he should realize that politicians aren't supposed to be honest - especially in the House of Commons.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Trooper McFad on 01 February, 2022, 07:51:31 AM
Blackford kicked out for telling the truth but Boris is allowed to spout an untruth regarding Starmer and not prosecuting Saville and not asked to withdraw that comment. The Speaker should ask him to return and correct the record. I won't hold my breath.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 03 February, 2022, 04:52:53 PM
One tiny glimmer of hope is that Johnson's vicious little jibe doesn't seem to have gone down with his staff and the public as well as Trump's similar nastiness does over the other side of the Atlantic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 February, 2022, 06:41:33 PM
Indeed ... Boris Johnson's policy chief Munira Mirza resigns over PM's Savile remarks (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60250036)

Aye, he's a dirty one, that Johnson. No low is too low.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 February, 2022, 07:54:56 PM
The jibe has become the conversation, though, which is what he wanted. In some people's minds, the link is there, and that won't be broken. Another reason we need overhaul and possibly the removal of things like parliamentary privilege.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 February, 2022, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 03 February, 2022, 06:41:33 PM
Indeed ... Boris Johnson's policy chief Munira Mirza resigns over PM's Savile remarks (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60250036)

Three more (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60253231).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 12:29:30 AM

Seems to me like Boris is doing his job* exceptionally well.


*Distracting.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 February, 2022, 12:35:32 AM
I doubt you'll find much disagreement with that sentiment.

Meanwhile the government in Northern Ireland is set to fall into its ground state of disfunction and crisis.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:01:04 AM

[Drunenkpost/ #whatever]

Quote from: Mister Pops on 04 February, 2022, 12:35:32 AM

I doubt you'll find much disagreement with that sentiment.


I wish.

There's so much going on in this world that is just plain evil. Good, to me, is that which promotes and encourages human life, human achievement, and human habitat. Evil, again to me, is that which is against such things. To me, seven or eight (or even twenty) billion human beings on the planet is a Good Thing because we are, each and every one of us, beings of infinite worth and potential. One person might do one or two good things in our lives (I myself have been a small part of two on this forum and others which... are none of your concern), two people might come up with four or five, three with more, and billions... Well, the possibilities are endless.

But governments stamp us down. That is their purpose - to make us feel like a cancer, a plague, an evil in ourselves - in order for a very, very few to live like gods while the rest of us scrabble for their crumbs and actually believe that we are cancers, plagues, and evils. Because that's what we are told. But few of us are evil, few of us are cancerous, few of us are plagues. In my experience, most of us are Good People. Not all, to be sure, but most of us, and this holds true for the overwhelming majority of "Americans," "Iraqis," "Russians," "Chinese," "British," or whatever. We are all human beings. We are all creatures of infinite worth and potential. Every last one of us - even Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, if they would but believe it.
But they don't. They believe that they, and only they, have any worth or potential. To them, the rest of us are "useless eaters," as Henry Kissinger famously labelled us. If you don't have an income measured in the billions, what good are you? Ask governments and they will say "not much," but ask your loved ones - your spouses, your daughters, your sons, your friends - and what will their answer be? You don't need me to tell you. You know. You are priceless. We all are.

It's high time that we all understand that governments are a part of society, not in charge of it. It's their job to organise healthcare and infrastructure and housing and education, not to dictate How Things Must Be or Who Is Your Enemy. Your enemy is evil. Period.

Your enemy is not death, for death comes to us all. Planets die. Suns die. Galaxies die. You will die. I will die - probably quite soon, as it goes, for I've already had more heart attacks than I can count and the next one will likely be the Last One. Nor is your enemy Russian, Chinese, Jewish, Islamic, or a virus. Your enemy is a lack of belief in Humanity. Your enemy is evil. But governments pile enemy upon enemy in order to keep us all afraid, because terrified people are easy to distract and easy to control. And so they give us immigrants and terrorists and viruses.

I know: blah, blah, blah.

I'm the guy some of you love to hate, and I'm cool with that - because there are are parts of me, of my history, that I hate too. But they are not the parts that concern you - they are the parts where I have caused actual harm to others, which are not insignificant to me, the parts in real life I wish I could take back. The parts where I was truly evil. And I in no way believe I am unique in this - we have all acted evilly at some time and in some manner and must deal with it ourselves. But governments the world over ignore our goods and emphasise our evils and use them to enslave us, ignoring our worth and potential. Only the rulers, they suggest, have any worth or potential. Only they are fit to tell us what is evil and what is good. Well, feck them, I say. I know what is good and I know what is evil without them telling me. The governments should concentrate on keeping the lights on and the sewers unblocked, not telling me whom I should trust or whom I should hate. I, and you, can decide that well enough on our own.

We are human. Hear us roar.
[Drunkenpost/ End]
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:09:25 AM
...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 04:30:01 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:01:04 AM
governments ... give us ... viruses.

No, they don't. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:40:38 AM

Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 04:30:01 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:01:04 AM
governments ... give us ... viruses.

No, they don't. 

Not literally, to be sure, but as a means of control, yes they do. More damage has been done by lockdowns and...

Oh, what's the point?

Worship your rulers if you wish. I won't.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 05:06:19 AM
It's not worshiping anyone to point out that Covid wasn't created on purpose to control the masses. That's just you slinging mud cos you've got no logic to back up your assertions. Weak sauce. Dribble it on someone else, please.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 05:22:39 AM

I never said it was, that's your strawman.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 February, 2022, 10:20:55 AM
A reminder that COVID anti-science won't be tolerated.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 February, 2022, 05:03:37 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 04:01:04 AM

[Drunenkpost/ #whatever]


Wait...

...

...Do people actually post here when they're sober?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 05:14:49 PM

I wouldn't have thought sho.

>hic<

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 07:04:08 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 05:22:39 AM
I never said it was, that's your strawman.

That's not true. I'm only ever reacting to what you actually say. You said that "governments give us viruses". You followed up with the self-contained non-sequitor "Not literally, but as a means of control, yes they do."

The only assumptions I'm making are that you're talking about Covid specifically. Are you not? Which virus, then, are you referring to? And if you're saying that governments both DO and DON'T give us viruses, which do you mean? And which governments?

If you're entirely unclear in your assertions, it seems a bit rich to blame me. I only respond because your anti-vaccine rhetoric (however thinly disguised) isn't welcome, and could cause real harm if people swallow it. If you can it, I'll can it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 08:34:03 PM

The word "give" has 20 or 30 definitions, or so I'm given to understand. Either you or I have fallen to equivocation. If it's me, I apologize.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 09:25:09 PM
If, by using the phrase "governments give us viruses" you didn't actually mean that "governments give us viruses", perhaps you could elucidate on what exactly you did mean.

You're starting to sound a lot like Boris. He said that Starmer was responsible for not prosecuting Jimmy Savile. Then he said what he meant was that Starmer was in charge and therefore partly responsible. Then he changed it to Starmer wasn't responsible but had apologized. But we all know what Boris meant. He was trying to say that Starmer was a friend to pedos. He wriggles like an ugly worm to try to get away from it - but he said what he said - he meant what he meant. It's clear to everyone.

Next he'll be saying that Savile has 20 or 30 definitions...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moogie101 on 04 February, 2022, 10:02:00 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 04 February, 2022, 08:34:03 PM

The word "give" has 20 or 30 definitions, or so I'm given to understand. Either you or I have fallen to equivocation. If it's me, I apologize.

Usually I just read your comments with a sense of bemusement and feel no need to respond, but that is a terrible argument to make.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 February, 2022, 10:04:33 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 04 February, 2022, 09:25:09 PM
... perhaps you could elucidate on what exactly you did mean.

Are you some sort of masochist?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2022, 07:28:48 AM

Alright then, try this - add the words "their opinions on" after the words "they give us."

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 05 February, 2022, 03:08:17 PM
If that's what you'd actually written down in the first place I would never have responded to your post.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 05 February, 2022, 04:35:44 PM

As the old joke goes, "I know you think you understand what you thought I wrote, but I'm not sure you realize that what you read is not what I meant."

;-)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 24 February, 2022, 08:18:00 PM
The more I learn about this Vladimir Putin character the less I care for him
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2022, 08:19:02 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 February, 2022, 08:18:00 PM
The more I learn about this Vladimir Putin character the less I care for him

I'm starting to think he might be a wrong 'un, despite what that nice Mr Trump says...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 25 February, 2022, 01:13:48 AM

I really appreciated being woken up at 7;30 am yesterday morning not with a nice Happy Birthday message but with a "Have you seen World War 3 has just started".  Grrr
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 25 February, 2022, 01:21:18 AM
Happy Birthday!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 25 February, 2022, 01:55:15 AM

Thank you...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Doctor Alt 8 on 27 February, 2022, 01:23:33 AM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 24 February, 2022, 08:19:02 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 24 February, 2022, 08:18:00 PM
The more I learn about this Vladimir Putin character the less I care for him

I'm starting to think he might be a wrong 'un, despite what that nice Mr Trump says...

I think Putin has "lost it". If he doesn't withdraw his very rich friends will become his enemies and somehow he'll be bumped off.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2022, 10:59:26 AM
Feels like he took a punt and miscalculated how much of a fight he'd have on his hands. Estimates suggest his rich friends have so far lost $39bn, IIRC. You do wonder how much patience they will have. It also appears to have woken up a few countries to basic realities of the modern world (UK Tories relying on Russian money; the EU being too dependent on Russian gas; China realising that always nodding along with Russia isn't going to cut it now; even Hungary now thinking twice about going full despot).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 27 February, 2022, 11:57:08 AM
What irritates me here is big man Boris promising military help to Ukraine, like there are no bigger issues to solve on the homefront, such us taking care of the country in post-Brexit. Jumbling into internecine conflicts always led up to disasterous consequences afterwards. What a plonker.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 27 February, 2022, 12:16:02 PM
My knowledge of geo-politics - and politicians in general - could be written on the back of a stamp, but it strikes me as a somewhat scary thought that Putin - if recent reports are to be believed - has gone a bit doolally. An insane politician who has already hinted at the use of nuclear weapons is a terrifying prospect. I wonder what it will take before some of his own associates wake up and smell the proverbial coffee?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GoGilesGo on 27 February, 2022, 03:26:02 PM
Paddy,

I think it is a big mistake to tend towards believing Putin's actions in Ukraine are a corollary of recent madness.*

His televised, hour-long address to the nation last week put together a coherent argument that Ukraine is part of Russia and only exists as an independent entity because Lenin stitched a large bloc of borderland Russia to Eastern Poland and parts of Hungary to create a new state. He told George W Bush as far back as 2008 that he did not believe Ukraine to be a real country.

I appreciate this mindset is difficult (impossible?) to comprehend for those of us who are not ethno-chauvinists, but Putin is ex-KGB, and has been surrounded by other Siloviki for nigh on two decades. In the last 15 years Russia has occupied parts of Moldova & Georgia and taken the Crimea, with more or less no consequence. This move is degrees of magnitude larger, but along the same trajectory.

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2022/02/why-putin-invaded-ukraine (https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2022/02/why-putin-invaded-ukraine)

By the always excellent Bruno Maçães is well worth a read.



*While tying I read the news Putin has put Russia's nuclear forces on "special alert" so perhaps he is about to go full Bad Bob Booth.



Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 27 February, 2022, 04:46:54 PM
He wants the old empire back (including Finland) and is betting no-one will stop him if he adopts the madman theory. The tiny snag is this: he might well be a madman.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2022, 05:20:08 PM
Echoing gogilesgo's points, I found this page informative: Territorial evolution of Russia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_evolution_of_Russia).

The city of Lviv, currently in western Ukraine, close to the Polish border, was in Poland prior to the Russian and German invasion of the country in 1939 (as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact).

Part of the reason for the expansion of the USSR at the end of WWII, and then the Cold War that followed, was that Russia got brutalized by Nazi Germany to a much larger extent than the other allies. 20-27 million deaths, compared with the USA's less than half a million. Even as percentage of population, it's 13.7% to 0.32%. (UK was 0.94%, Germany was about 8.5%, China was 3.38%.)

So, Russia bled. One of the key things they took from that harsh lesson was that a buffer zone should exist between their core state and the outside world - so that's why, at the end of the war, they stayed in all the territory that they'd conquered on the way to Berlin.

Putin's outward perspective is that the buffer zone between Russia and any potential enemy has been eroded and that now they are even more vulnerable than they were at the outset of Hitler's Operation Barbarossa.

---

The obvious counterpoint is the argument that NATO is a defensive, not offensive, alliance. That there is no equivalent to Nazi Germany on the borders of Russia. (China would be the more obvious belligerent, frankly.) That Ukraine is an independent state with as much right to exist as anyone else. That Putin's reasoning is more to do with the cementing of personal power than the notion of a wider Russia.

And there are echoes of Hitler's reasoning in annexing the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. A warmonger is a warmonger. The reasoning behind it is always, at the end of the day, an excuse to brutalize your neighbors and maintain a grip on absolute power.

Not madness, then. Evil, perhaps.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 27 February, 2022, 05:38:11 PM
Whatever Putin reasoning might be, I find his "N" rhetorics as scary bedtime story. WW3? Metaphorically speaking, we already live in WW3. Nuclear warheads weren't flying in 1962, as they weren't since 1945. And Cold War was already much strressful period. And I don't expect this conflict will last much (but with using knee-jerk to reserve my wrongness). Whatever the outcome might be. And please without Johnson's involvement!

(Crimea for a long time has been Russian; only when Kruschov (or whathisname) made catastrophical error, transferring it to Ukrainian SSR).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 27 February, 2022, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2022, 05:20:08 PM
Part of the reason for the expansion of the USSR at the end of WWII, and then the Cold War that followed, was that Russia got brutalized by Nazi Germany to a much larger extent than the other allies. 20-27 million deaths, compared with the USA's less than half a million. Even as percentage of population, it's 13.7% to 0.32%. (UK was 0.94%, Germany was about 8.5%, China was 3.38%.)

The death toll on the Eastern Front definitely puts much of what happened elsewhere in the shade.  What also needs to be remembered though is the number of deaths in the inter-war period that resulted from the Revolution, Civil War, purges, famines and other activities.  Wholesale deportations, mass incarceration, judicial abuses ... Estimates vary quite widely.  [for an interesting literary account, Solzhenitsyn's "A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" is well worth a read.  It is also quite a short piece, compared to his three volume "Gulag Archipeligo".]

From the point of view of Ukraine, the Holodomor or Terror Famine is a major issue.  Contested as genocide, there is certainly evidence to suggest that the famine was a deliberate act on the part of the Soviet regime.  Hence the strength of feeling about Russian rule.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 27 February, 2022, 09:11:26 PM
Quote from: gogilesgo on 27 February, 2022, 03:26:02 PM
...Putin... told George W Bush as far back as 2008 that he did not believe Ukraine to be a real country.

Unfortunately for Putin, it would appear the Ukrainians zealously believe it is.

Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 February, 2022, 08:42:01 PM
... Contested as genocide, there is certainly evidence to suggest that the famine was a deliberate act on the part of the [foreign] regime.  Hence the strength of feeling about [foreign] rule.

Begorrah, sure'n doesn't that sound quare familiar
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2022, 11:26:26 PM
Quote from: Tjm86 on 27 February, 2022, 08:42:01 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2022, 05:20:08 PM
Part of the reason for the expansion of the USSR at the end of WWII, and then the Cold War that followed, was that Russia got brutalized by Nazi Germany to a much larger extent than the other allies. 20-27 million deaths, compared with the USA's less than half a million. Even as percentage of population, it's 13.7% to 0.32%. (UK was 0.94%, Germany was about 8.5%, China was 3.38%.)

The death toll on the Eastern Front definitely puts much of what happened elsewhere in the shade.  What also needs to be remembered though is the number of deaths in the inter-war period that resulted from the Revolution, Civil War, purges, famines and other activities.  Wholesale deportations, mass incarceration, judicial abuses ... Estimates vary quite widely.  [for an interesting literary account, Solzhenitsyn's "A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" is well worth a read.  It is also quite a short piece, compared to his three volume "Gulag Archipeligo".]

From the point of view of Ukraine, the Holodomor or Terror Famine is a major issue.  Contested as genocide, there is certainly evidence to suggest that the famine was a deliberate act on the part of the Soviet regime.  Hence the strength of feeling about Russian rule.

Indeed. I'm not going to be suggesting that the Soviet empire was some kind of paradise prior to Barbarossa, or post-'45. Just that, on a geopolitical level, they felt like a buffer zone of occupied countries was a good way forward in terms of protecting their central government. That Putin's moves are calculated, rather then whimsical. (Economically - I suppose it's a lot less difficult to sell gas if you don't have to negotiate.)

My inter-war history is pretty weak, I must say.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dandontdare on 28 February, 2022, 12:59:05 PM
Some bugger has signed up my personal and work e-mail addresses to receive every bloody one of FoxNews' alerts and newsletters. Got inboxes full of that drivel, and they have to be unsubscribed individually.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 28 February, 2022, 06:15:50 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 27 February, 2022, 11:26:26 PM
Indeed. I'm not going to be suggesting that the Soviet empire was some kind of paradise prior to Barbarossa, or post-'45. Just that, on a geopolitical level, they felt like a buffer zone of occupied countries was a good way forward in terms of protecting their central government.

I have to confess to a lasting interest in Russian history from studying the revolution for O Level history.  The pre-revolution period is fascinating enough but Soviet era history is something else again.  My favourite poet is also one that straddles these periods, Anna Akhmatova.  Along with Pasternak, Mandelstam and Gumilev she chronicled those years in an amazing way.  Her most famous piece, Requiem, details her experiences waiting outside Lefortovo prison to visit her son.  Poem Without a Hero though is an absolutely outstanding epic poem.  She weaves a narrative across the span of the 20th Century including all the individuals and events she encountered.

As for the politics of the Eastern bloc post WW2, I would agree that a determination not to allow another incursion as they experienced during the Great Patriotic War was a significant factor in the Soviet strategy.  This was an era that Putin was born and raised in, with Soviet Russia holding sway over international affairs and considered a Superpower.

Since the Fall of Communism in the 90's though, Russian influence has become significantly diminished.  Think of how often we've heard of America being the 'only superpower.'  Many of the oligarchs made their fortunes during this period by dint of being in the right place at the right time, having the right sorts of political connections or in many cases outright criminality.  The lawlessness of this period has been well documented.

Putin's thinking does appear to be redolent of old Soviet-era nationalistic attitudes.  Seeking to restore Russian 'glory', exert influence on the world stage and re-establish Soviet era borders.  Although Finland and Sweden have been specifically mentioned recently, it is highly unlikely that the Baltic states of Latvia and Lithuania will be ignored.  The fact that they are NATO members (IIRC) might offer some protection but that may well depend on how things go in Ukraine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 28 February, 2022, 07:00:48 PM
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/gen-z-worried-draft-war-russia-ukraine/ (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/gen-z-worried-draft-war-russia-ukraine/)

Lmao. Aren't people aware that wars are being fought from your cozy chair xD?

As for Putin, I don't think he seeks to re-establish another USSR, it sounds more like tries to renew imperialist Russia. First by pushing back NATO.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 28 February, 2022, 07:14:17 PM
This war I have mostly been enjoying "Russian warship - go fuck yourself!" (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/ukraine-island-defenders-who-told-russian-officer-go-fuck-yourself-may-still-be-alive)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 01 March, 2022, 08:44:21 AM
I'll defer to those with more knowledge of Russian history, but Putin is surely just the latest in a long line of despotic autocrats, whether they were Tsars, Party Leaders or Presidents. I imagine it all looks the same from the perspective of an ordinary person in Moscow or Vladivostok.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 March, 2022, 05:31:45 PM
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/698419/German-family-flees-to-Russia-claim-asylum-Griesbach (https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/698419/German-family-flees-to-Russia-claim-asylum-Griesbach)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2022, 05:53:41 PM
Even for the Express, that's quite the story. Or non-story, I guess.

"a lack of democracy"

So they fled to Russia, a country known for its amazing democracy! There must be something else to this story, surely?

"and forced immunisation"

Ah. There it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 March, 2022, 06:50:37 PM
Years ago, when I started teaching in the US, I was required to show proof of my MMR vaccination status, so I did.

At no point during that process did I think either a) it's all made up by shady governments in order to control me using nanobots or b) I should move to Russia.

I'm not sure which thought would be more insane, there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 01 March, 2022, 08:12:25 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 01 March, 2022, 06:50:37 PM
Years ago, when I started teaching in the US, I was required to show proof of my MMR vaccination status, so I did.

At no point during that process did I think either a) it's all made up by shady governments in order to control me using nanobots or b) I should move to Russia.

I'm not sure which thought would be more insane, there.

I would say option b).

Taking option b) might get you neurotoxined for thinking option a).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 01 March, 2022, 08:36:44 PM
Probably I have been neurotoxined (and nanoprobed*) and actually do live in Russia.


(https://static2.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/bill-and-ted-meme.v1-1.jpg)


*I should be so lucky.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 01 March, 2022, 09:10:07 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2022, 05:53:41 PM
Even for the Express, that's quite the story. Or non-story, I guess.

"a lack of democracy"

So they fled to Russia, a country known for its amazing democracy! There must be something else to this story, surely?

"and forced immunisation"

Ah. There it is.

Well, let's say that I believe they moved to Russia. Why..? Only express and daily mail know. But we live in era of disinformation and our media is trash anyway, so...

Quote"and forced immunisation"

Ah. There it is.

"They are inviting all the immigrants over so they can stir up trouble in the country and start the war the government wants."

There, I fixed it for ya.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 02 March, 2022, 11:09:47 AM
Another timely gem from the inimitable Mr Turner.

https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.4815402.1646154517!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 02 March, 2022, 11:41:49 AM
Quote from: milstar on 01 March, 2022, 05:31:45 PM
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/698419/German-family-flees-to-Russia-claim-asylum-Griesbach (https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/698419/German-family-flees-to-Russia-claim-asylum-Griesbach)

The Griesbachs claim the agreement between Russia and Germany to stop fighting in 1918 was not a true peace agreement, and therefore the countries are still at war.

Mr Griesbach argues Russia is therefore duty bound to protect them.

Wow! Just... wow.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 03:54:18 PM
It's never too early to start subjugating your people - the Russian regime is arresting primary school children (https://twitter.com/novaya_gazeta/status/1498784549639229444?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1498784549639229444%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flive%2Fworld-europe-60582327) for protesting the invasion of Ukraine.

(I shouldn't be surprised - after all, they're bombing civilians of all ages.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 02 March, 2022, 05:33:24 PM
there are precious few feeble straws to grasp at in this endofdays evil in central europe.
but to witness the character and unreally articulate bravery of one extraordinary man shaming even the very worst of us into ethics and volte faces is really something. is really something incredible.

even viktor orban. even fifa.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 March, 2022, 06:01:46 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 01 March, 2022, 05:53:41 PM
Even for the Express, that's quite the story. Or non-story, I guess.

"a lack of democracy"

So they fled to Russia, a country known for its amazing democracy! There must be something else to this story, surely?

"and forced immunisation"

Ah. There it is.

Also, and at the risk of giving even more oxygen to a non-story about some random bloke with mental issues, 'It's morally corrupt and people don't about anything like punctuality ...anymore.'

A lack of punctuality.  In Germany.   The buses in the town where I spent my student summers drove slowly so as to be at the stop at precisely the right time. 

He should try organising a party here in Ireland.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 03:54:18 PM

(I shouldn't be surprised - after all, they're bombing civilians of all ages.)


Governments (including ours) do this all the time. It's wrong no matter which government is doing it.

It also seems that, in allegedly arresting children, Russia is taking a leaf out of the United States' book. (https://eu.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2022/02/10/who-are-kids-arrested-at-schools/6664306001/) It's wrong no matter which government is doing it.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 06:46:13 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 03:54:18 PM

(I shouldn't be surprised - after all, they're bombing civilians of all ages.)


Governments (including ours) do this all the time. It's wrong no matter which government is doing it.

It also seems that, in allegedly arresting children, Russia is taking a leaf out of the United States' book. (https://eu.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2022/02/10/who-are-kids-arrested-at-schools/6664306001/) It's wrong no matter which government is doing it.

I'm not sure why you quoted me there - it's not as if I suggested it would be right if another government did the same, because I didn't. As it is, Russia is the government arresting their own civilians for telling the truth and bombing Ukrainian civilians (on a massive scale) right now, so that's the government I'm focused on right now.

So, yeah, not sure why you're waving your hands and pointing at "other governments" in a vague way. (Also, you linked to an article that's behind a pay wall, so it's relevance, or lack thereof, remains a mystery.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 07:16:36 PM

Not a dig at you, Funt.

It's long been my position that governments are nothing more than bands of criminals, all of them. They all lie, they all cheat, they all steal, they all treat their citizens like cattle, they're all thugs at heart. I am not defending any of them but pointing out their similarities.

That article from USA Today isn't paywalled for me (maybe due to using a vpn), but maybe 12ft Ladder (https://12ft.io/) will remove it for you.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 02 March, 2022, 08:21:29 PM
I think it's good you keep reminding us that you don't like government's Shark. We might forget otherwise.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 08:37:00 PM

My thoughts exactly :-D

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 09:02:28 PM
It's an incredibly reductive argument, though, and is a variation of "they're all as bad as each other". Effectively, it's meaningless - it gets us absolutely nowhere.

Under the argument of "all members of all governments are [evil]", there's no difference between, say, Putin (who has his agents place nerve agents in the underpants of his political enemies and launches missiles at civilians) and, say, Nicola Sturgeon, who ... doesn't.

So - reductive, meaningless and just plain wrong. Your broad brush paints over all the details, Shark, and all we're left with is:

(https://static.onecms.io/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2014/12/ecce-homo_612x380_1.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 09:48:10 PM

I don't accept that all members of all governments are evil, but the whole is not the same as the sum of its parts. The whole is evil, because the good guys (for want of a better term) contained therein can do nothing to change things no matter how sincere they are or how hard they try.

The ultimate expression of any government argument will always be the barrel of a gun, until we take that privilege away from them.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 March, 2022, 10:16:27 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 07:16:36 PM
It's long been my position that governments are nothing more than bands of criminals, all of them. They all lie, they all cheat, they all steal, they all treat their citizens like cattle, they're all thugs at heart.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 09:48:10 PM
I don't accept that all members of all governments are evil...

I imagine if you go to a football match, you change scarves half way through.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 02 March, 2022, 10:22:06 PM
it seems to me that covid proved you wrong. not always, but in general, leaders who wear empathy as part of their political creed have, by and large, steered their people through the pandemic with an almost infinitely smaller hit. others - you know who they are - who believe more in an expendable surplus population ... haven't.

of course they're not all the same. i find it difficult, in similar tragic and traumatic circumstances, to imagine cameron doing a zelenskyy, for example.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 11:23:32 PM

I don't like football, but I imagine that all the players are not the same, and that a football team is not much like a government except in that the players are all in it for personal motives and not necessarily because they love the team above all else. You seem to have taken my view that "all governments are evil" means that "all members of all governments are evil," maybe because that interpretation is easier to argue against. As I said, the whole is not the same as the sum of its parts.

I'm not allowed to discuss alternate views of the pandemic here, unfortunately, due to things like "anti-science." Which I always thought was religion, not science that highlights unpolitic results (of which there is a great deal) or does what science is supposed to do - ask questions and discuss results. But it seems that governments have turned science into a religion, and far be it from me to encourage blasphemy...

I wonder if one could imagine Zelensky doing a Blair?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:18:33 AM
What is ludicrous it seems propaganda machinery is firing on all engines, tough to believe what is what. Like allegedly (or not), a Russian projectile fell on an Israel memorial centre. True story. Then it fell on some 300 meters farther. True story.

But nobody to mention that US (and probably UK) faces shortage of lock n load ready people to serve in times of conflict (never said which though).

Saying Putin is bad however would sound hypocritical at least from our side and I am not ashamed stressing that our leaders are svim and NATO is bully. Maybe we should clean up our own yard first.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2022, 01:40:16 AM

The first casualty of war and all that.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 March, 2022, 02:01:50 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 02 March, 2022, 08:21:29 PM
I think it's good you keep reminding us that you don't like government's Shark. We might forget otherwise.

And attempts to discuss current events wouldn't be derailed while people try to grasp your weird philosophy

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 11:23:32 PM
But it seems that governments have turned science into a religion, and far be it from me to encourage blasphemy...

Scientism has been around since the mid-to-late 20th century, and it wasn't any government's idea.

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 11:23:32 PM
.. what science is supposed to do - ask questions and discuss results.

You have missed out about half a dozen steps there. Any eejit can ask a question.

Researching*, forming a hypothesis, establishing a null hypothesis, coming up with a methodology, designing a repeatable experiment, establishing the various possible errors, making measurements, drawing conclusions, and then going back to re-evaluate the whole shebang, is where the real work of science is done.

And you don't just discuss the results, you discuss the whole lot. It takes literally years of study to be able to do any of that in a meaningful way. And at the outset you won't even be studying a lot of science, you'll be studying mostly the maths that makes up the framework of a lot of scientific language.

Then at the end of all that, you'll have a lot of knowledge of a complex, but specific bit of science. From there you tend to get two schools of thought

1) I am able to grasp the very specific and complicated thing, therefore I can understand ANY complicated thing. I don't have to listen to experts, because I am an expert.

2) It was a lot of hard work grasping this specific and complicated thing, and I appreciate that others have worked just as hard to understand their complicated and specific thing, so I should probably defer to them.

I fall into 2), and I think scientific endeavours benefit from all the disciplines defering to each other, working together and supporting each other with their own wee bits of specialized knowledge. Scientific progress isn't made by charismatic geniuses smashing preconceptions. Ye get the occasional Newton or Einstein, but it's mostly thousands of unsung scientists chipping away at our preconceptions bit by bit with tools most of us can't really grasp. That needs to be coordinated by some sort of external body, that works on promoting collaboration both nationally and internationally, raising and distributing funds, building labs and so forth. A body that focuses on governing all of that so that the scientists can focus on science. Doesn't sound intrinsically evil to me.

Shark, the reason I'm half-drunkenly rattling this all out of my keyboard is in the hope that you'll understand that I don't think you're stupid when I say I think you're scientifically illiterate.

Science is really hard.

Most scientist have limited literacy in a specific language. I'm only well versed in one of its more obscure dialects and it took me half a decade to understand just that much. So when I nod along to the scientific consensus, it's not like religious faith, it's an understanding of just how ignorant I am, and that there's little chance I could sensibly contradict it without several years study.

Anyway I now return you to your scheduled program:

(https://preview.redd.it/yjz7z82qu3k81.jpg?width=497&auto=webp&s=2764aed959ce4f38ab1eeef428485bd742f25379)

*google is not research
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 March, 2022, 03:15:42 AM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 11:23:32 PM
You seem to have taken my view that "all governments are evil" means that "all members of all governments are evil," maybe because that interpretation is easier to argue against.

I'm sorry, but that's just bollocks because what you said was (my bolding):

Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 02 March, 2022, 07:16:36 PM
It's long been my position that governments are nothing more than bands of criminals, all of them. They all lie, they all cheat, they all steal, they all treat their citizens like cattle, they're all thugs at heart.

I wish you'd stop saying one really extreme thing, then when people point out that it's extreme bollocks, you pretend it's not what you said, or you insert new words in-between the actual words you used to alter the meaning of what you said. How about you make the fucking effort to just say what you actually mean in the first place, without all the missing words and the obscure hidden meanings that nobody but you can decipher.

And even if you did mean "all governments in general are evil even though some individuals within said are not" (even though that's not what you said) - it's still just pontificating, over-generalized bullshit and all I hear when you say it is that you don't give a fuck about the suffering of ordinary people because you can't pull your head out of your arse about not being allowed to spin your Covid conspiracy theories all over the board. If it really means that much to you - stand up to the censors and have it at! Tell us your grand truth so that we may learn from you! They can silence you but they can never douse your spirit! Preach! Preach!

Mind you, at least you're not milstar and basically arguing that Putin's got every right to bomb innocent people because someone else did it before him at some point in history. Milstar - closet fascist. Or, wait - is that what you're arguing?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 03:52:20 AM
Funt, I'd take it if you had a very lousy day.

But don't imply that I am a fascist in the future.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 March, 2022, 10:20:36 AM

(snipping quite a bit)
Quote from: Mister Pops on 03 March, 2022, 02:01:50 AM
Then at the end of all that, you'll have a lot of knowledge of a complex, but specific bit of science. From there you tend to get two schools of thought

1) I am able to grasp the very specific and complicated thing, therefore I can understand ANY complicated thing. I don't have to listen to experts, because I am an expert.

2) It was a lot of hard work grasping this specific and complicated thing, and I appreciate that others have worked just as hard to understand their complicated and specific thing, so I should probably defer to them.

I fall into 2), and I think scientific endeavours benefit from all the disciplines defering to each other, working together and supporting each other with their own wee bits of specialized knowledge.


I know a fair amount of scientists (including computer scientists, engineers, doctors (medical and non-medical), even a professor) and I'd say they all fall in to the second category.  The only people I've had contact with who would fall in to the first category would be, shall we say, armchair scientists...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: sheridan on 03 March, 2022, 10:25:05 AM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 03:52:20 AM
Funt, I'd take it if you had a very lousy day.

But don't imply that I am a fascist in the future.

Perhaps don't say things like this (couldn't decipher what your sentence was meant to mean, but it seems to be something about USA citizens taking up arms?)

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:18:33 AM
What is ludicrous it seems propaganda machinery is firing on all engines, tough to believe what is what. Like allegedly (or not), a Russian projectile fell on an Israel memorial centre. True story. Then it fell on some 300 meters farther. True story.

But nobody to mention that US (and probably UK) faces shortage of lock n load ready people to serve in times of conflict (never said which though).

Saying Putin is bad however would sound hypocritical at least from our side and I am not ashamed stressing that our leaders are svim and NATO is bully. Maybe we should clean up our own yard first.

p.s. that thing about the missile - you're the only person I've heard say anything about that, so no idea what your point is.

Also - I'm going to say that "Putin is bad" - not sure how that makes me a hypocrite.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 03 March, 2022, 11:12:27 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 03 March, 2022, 10:20:36 AM

(snipping quite a bit)

armchair scientists...


Hey now, the fine men and women that study the science of armchairs are heroes and I'll brook no negativity towards them
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 03 March, 2022, 11:29:36 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 03 March, 2022, 11:12:27 AM
Quote from: sheridan on 03 March, 2022, 10:20:36 AM

(snipping quite a bit)

armchair scientists...


Hey now, the fine men and women that study the science of armchairs are heroes and I'll brook no negativity towards them

Descriptions of their work are often couched in negative terms.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Proudhuff on 03 March, 2022, 11:45:42 AM
Just don't get the Chippendales involved, they have now been discredited as armchair scientist.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:52:33 PM
Quote from: sheridan on 03 March, 2022, 10:25:05 AM
Perhaps don't say things like this (couldn't decipher what your sentence was meant to mean, but it seems to be something about USA citizens taking up arms?)

p.s. that thing about the missile - you're the only person I've heard say anything about that, so no idea what your point is.

Also - I'm going to say that "Putin is bad" - not sure how that makes me a hypocrite.

The whole purpose behind my dribble is that we are swarmed by disinformation in the media, particularly regarding this conflict. no less I've seen the amount of contradictory informations than here. and since I am openly professed my disdain for our government activities in the times of covid (which seems that no one mentions now, while big man Boris and his cohorts host parties) and just in general, I think I could use my suspension of disbelief. I am not ashamed to admit that it may paint me as ignorant, at least, and arsehole, at worst. But being labelled as fascist is naive, at least, at worst - distasteful.

As for "Putin is bad", I could say a few things pro-him and anti-him here, but I'd rather stay neutral on affairs like this. Ofcourse, what is going on in Ukraine is terrible, but I think we personally have bigger problems to solve on our own. Besides, you can only be drag into mud if try, notwithstanding that outing someone as fascist/nazi today practically is effective as calling someone woke.

(https://i.imgur.com/rfny6MG.jpg)

Quotebut it seems to be something about USA citizens taking up arms?)

not taking up their arms (at least not on their own), which is not remotely connected to Ukraine crisis (or maybe it is...?) I think I've already left the link on the topic here.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2022, 12:55:14 PM

I agree with just about everything you say there, Mr P. I don't base my disagreements with certain elements of what I'm going to call politicised science on the workings of my own mighty brain (because it isn't) but on the brains of people with properly mighty scientific brains (for example, Kary Mullis, the Nobel Prize-winning inventor of the pcr technique - look for a 1996 interview with him on Youtube where he explains the religionization of science (amongst other things) far better than I ever could) who are ignored and/or ridiculed for bringing their own experience and expertise to bear if it doesn't agree with the political or corporate consensus.

I defer to experts like Mullis all the time, but not blindly (even you say we should "probably defer," which admits to the perfectly rational element of uncertainty). There has to be some level of personal diligence involved as well as trust, and it's often difficult to strike the right balance - especially in these polarizing times.

And yes, I freely admit that my own views on deference are coloured by my "weird philosophy" that governments lie, cheat, steal, collude, coerce and murder. I'm sure other people's views are coloured by their own "weird philosophies" as well.


*Google is a gateway to research like this... (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=encyclopedia+of+armchairs&t=ffsb&atb=v277-1&iax=images&ia=images)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 01:30:14 PM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:52:33 PMOfcourse, what is going on in Ukraine is terrible, but I think we personally have bigger problems to solve on our own.
A dictator on our doorstep has invaded a European country, has designs on bringing back into being the Russian Empire at its greatest extent, and has threatened at least two EU nations with massive repercussions if they don't do what Russia wants regarding "security guarantees".

At what point do we decide this isn't a big problem? When Ukraine is partitioned? When Ukraine is subject to a genocide and full Russian takeover? When Russia follows its actions up by invading Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia? When there are inclusions into Polish and Finnish territory Putin believe are Russian? At what point do we draw a line?

Right now, the world is almost united. Four other countries]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text]Four other countries (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text) appear to fully back Russia right now. Even China is on the fence. If we do nothing, Europe will could be destabilised for decades. Perhaps it will be anyway, but going down without any kind of fight seems to be a curious way to respond.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mudcrab on 03 March, 2022, 02:05:16 PM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:52:33 PM
As for "Putin is bad", I could say a few things pro-him and anti-him here, but I'd rather stay neutral on affairs like this

Fucking neutral? Maybe you're not a fascist, but you're certainly a cunt!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2022, 02:15:10 PM

Such sparkling repartee. :-/

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 02:31:36 PM
Please refrain from insulting other board members, Mudcrab.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 03 March, 2022, 02:32:16 PM
You can argue about the West's conduct on various issues, but taking a "neutral" stance when civilians are being shelled, starved and over a million people are forced to become refugees is abhorrent.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IAMTHESYSTEM on 03 March, 2022, 02:36:44 PM
Well, John Gray gives his grim view of the current European crisis. Is the globalist order over and misguided in its belief in a better tomorrow? Not for the faint-hearted or dogmatists.

https://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/geopolitics/2022/03/the-new-age-of-disorder?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1646311908
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 02:48:46 PM
That's a sobering view. I'm not sure I align with all of it, but there are broad strokes within that are very much true. Perhaps the biggest is that underlying complacency at the heart of relatively liberal people who assume the direction of travel is always one way. But as we've learned in recent years, from everything from Brexit to what's happen right now, nationalism, illiberalism and outright shithousery remains strong – and it remains a compelling draw for a sizeable chunk of the masses.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 March, 2022, 02:57:36 PM

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 02:48:46 PM
That's a sobering view. I'm not sure I align with all of it, but there are broad strokes within that are very much true. Perhaps the biggest is that underlying complacency at the heart of relatively liberal people who assume the direction of travel is always one way. But as we've learned in recent years, from everything from Brexit to what's happen right now, nationalism, illiberalism and outright shithousery remains strong – and it remains a compelling draw for a sizeable chunk of the masses.

Hear, hear.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Hawkmumbler on 03 March, 2022, 03:04:19 PM
It's really telling when even Japan is willing to step up and enforce trade and economic sanctions, historically (since the end of t'war, of course) the most "neutral" of economic superpowers putting their neck out for once.

Truly what we're seeing are changing times unfolding at a rapid pace, and at its heart a bunch of innocent folks. Civilians just wanting to go about their life, and soldiers who'd (mostly) rather be home with their families. Putin has nothing to gain here beyond making the rest of the world think for even a second he doesn't have a micro-penis. Sad stuff.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 03:13:24 PM
Heck, even Sweden and Switzerland are going: actually, we're not that neutral. And, again, China abstaining is a big deal. It usually votes alongside Russia. Not now.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: CalHab on 03 March, 2022, 03:52:16 PM
I've got issues with a lot of what George Monbiot writes, but this is fascinating:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/02/russian-propaganda-anti-imperialist-left-vladimir-putin
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 07:07:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 01:30:14 PM
A dictator on our doorstep has invaded a European country, has designs on bringing back into being the Russian Empire at its greatest extent, and has threatened at least two EU nations with massive repercussions if they don't do what Russia wants regarding "security guarantees".

At what point do we decide this isn't a big problem? When Ukraine is partitioned? When Ukraine is subject to a genocide and full Russian takeover? When Russia follows its actions up by invading Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia? When there are inclusions into Polish and Finnish territory Putin believe are Russian? At what point do we draw a line?

Right now, the world is almost united. Four other countries]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text]Four other countries (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text) appear to fully back Russia right now. Even China is on the fence. If we do nothing, Europe will could be destabilised for decades. Perhaps it will be anyway, but going down without any kind of fight seems to be a curious way to respond.

Indigo, you are now fairly stretching it up. All I hear is Putin = Hitler, wants to conquer half of the globe, but 1)Cold War ended 30 years ago and 2)Putin isn't mad as Hitler, as Putin knows what he is doing and this was set months, even years ago. I mean, I am tired of paranoid boogey tales of evil Russkies.
What happens in Ukraine is solely localized conflict and is definitely not on our doorstep. Unless our doorstep extends toward Eastern Europe. I thought times of the empire are long over. Russians have been at war with Chechens, did they invade us then? Abkhazia, South Ossetia?
To understand this conflict, a one needs to dig in a bit into Eastern European history, starting from 1945 (for example, Crimea has been in the hands of Russians, until it was handed over to Ukrainians over some weird politics). Which always seemed the problem of us westerners, our own arrogancy, inability that is not about us anymore. Knee jerk reaction on going to war with Russia would be horrible idea. And that would be WW3 (technically speaking, we are already living in ww3). One has to remember how ww1 started.
Ofcourse, I don't denounce the simple fact that both sides (Russians and Ukrainians) - to put it euphemistically, showed less than honourable sides in the conflict. Since 2014,that is. And our media has quite a habit of lying, being in the service of conflicts that typically ended in miserable failures. I am talking on the period from 1990s onwards, not for example ww2 (though I don't think also that conflict over Folklands was of any beneficiary to us, save maybe the adversial relationship with Argentinians *sarcasm*). So, no, this is why I am neutral. And a heavy pacifist at that. I am not going to serve scum politicians who only think of me when they need my vote.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 08:05:30 PM
Putin told Macron earlier that he see Ukraine as his, and a French official earlier said Putin was prepared to "go all the way". Ukraine is, remember, a fully sovereign state. Putin has decided it's his and appears happy to at best commit war crimes and atrocities to achieve the goal of subjugation and/or assimilation; but if not, we could be looking at genocide. As for mad, I don't think so; this is calculated and cold.

Given that Ukraine borders EU countries, it's effectively on our doorstep. This is within our continent. I wasn't talking literally. Putin isn't bombing Brighton. But this is our neighbourhood in the global scheme of things, and it's another attempt to further destabilise Europe. As others have noted, Putin is also on record as stating that he wants more than this. He believes Russia is entitled to get back all that is its 'historical' lands. So that's the point: where does this stop? Perhaps he'll run roughshod over Ukraine and that will be enough. But he's already outlined it won't be and The Balkans are also 'his'—as is Finland. (Still, an invasion of an EU country would be a step beyond and without doubt would escalate things beyond the point of no return.)

Regardless, I honestly find it astonishing anyone would be neutral about a country being invaded like this, but there you go. Will you say the same if Putin is in a few months obliterating Helsinki in a similar manner to the crap he's doing in Ukraine?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 March, 2022, 10:05:06 PM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 07:07:37 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 01:30:14 PM
A dictator on our doorstep has invaded a European country, has designs on bringing back into being the Russian Empire at its greatest extent, and has threatened at least two EU nations with massive repercussions if they don't do what Russia wants regarding "security guarantees".

At what point do we decide this isn't a big problem? When Ukraine is partitioned? When Ukraine is subject to a genocide and full Russian takeover? When Russia follows its actions up by invading Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia? When there are inclusions into Polish and Finnish territory Putin believe are Russian? At what point do we draw a line?

Right now, the world is almost united. Four other countries]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text]Four other countries (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/unga-resolution-against-ukraine-invasion-full-text) appear to fully back Russia right now. Even China is on the fence. If we do nothing, Europe will could be destabilised for decades. Perhaps it will be anyway, but going down without any kind of fight seems to be a curious way to respond.

Indigo, you are now fairly stretching it up. All I hear is Putin = Hitler, wants to conquer half of the globe, but 1)Cold War ended 30 years ago and 2)Putin isn't mad as Hitler, as Putin knows what he is doing and this was set months, even years ago. I mean, I am tired of paranoid boogey tales of evil Russkies.
What happens in Ukraine is solely localized conflict and is definitely not on our doorstep. Unless our doorstep extends toward Eastern Europe. I thought times of the empire are long over. Russians have been at war with Chechens, did they invade us then? Abkhazia, South Ossetia?
To understand this conflict, a one needs to dig in a bit into Eastern European history, starting from 1945 (for example, Crimea has been in the hands of Russians, until it was handed over to Ukrainians over some weird politics). Which always seemed the problem of us westerners, our own arrogancy, inability that is not about us anymore. Knee jerk reaction on going to war with Russia would be horrible idea. And that would be WW3 (technically speaking, we are already living in ww3). One has to remember how ww1 started.
Ofcourse, I don't denounce the simple fact that both sides (Russians and Ukrainians) - to put it euphemistically, showed less than honourable sides in the conflict. Since 2014,that is. And our media has quite a habit of lying, being in the service of conflicts that typically ended in miserable failures. I am talking on the period from 1990s onwards, not for example ww2 (though I don't think also that conflict over Folklands was of any beneficiary to us, save maybe the adversial relationship with Argentinians *sarcasm*). So, no, this is why I am neutral. And a heavy pacifist at that. I am not going to serve scum politicians who only think of me when they need my vote.

I can only assume you're 15 years older thereabouts. I can see no other explanation for this, frankly, stupid and infantile reading of events.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 03 March, 2022, 08:05:30 PM
Putin told Macron earlier that he see Ukraine as his, and a French official earlier said Putin was prepared to "go all the way". Ukraine is, remember, a fully sovereign state. Putin has decided it's his and appears happy to at best commit war crimes and atrocities to achieve the goal of subjugation and/or assimilation; but if not, we could be looking at genocide. As for mad, I don't think so; this is calculated and cold.

Given that Ukraine borders EU countries, it's effectively on our doorstep. This is within our continent. I wasn't talking literally. Putin isn't bombing Brighton. But this is our neighbourhood in the global scheme of things, and it's another attempt to further destabilise Europe. As others have noted, Putin is also on record as stating that he wants more than this. He believes Russia is entitled to get back all that is its 'historical' lands. So that's the point: where does this stop? Perhaps he'll run roughshod over Ukraine and that will be enough. But he's already outlined it won't be and The Balkans are also 'his'—as is Finland. (Still, an invasion of an EU country would be a step beyond and without doubt would escalate things beyond the point of no return.)

Regardless, I honestly find it astonishing anyone would be neutral about a country being invaded like this, but there you go. Will you say the same if Putin is in a few months obliterating Helsinki in a similar manner to the crap he's doing in Ukraine?

Let's not switch the thesis'. Putin said is all he did so far. Putin trolled us with nukes and people instantly bought it. He's calculated and cold, but ain't stupid. You also have to take into account that he doesn't want NATO in his neighbour; plus, what I said about both sides acting less than honourably, ethnic minority in Eastern Ukraine (Dombas, Lugansk) are being theatened and harassed for years. I mean, just look what Azov neo-Nazis did, burning people to frazzle. And it's why Putin went into it, not that he woke up one day and said "I want to conquer half of Europe." Where does it stop? Well, Putin, like we can all agree on, is not mad, he is cold and calculated, and zero stupid. He probably would laugh at idea of conquering all states where Russians live, or were historically Russian. Balkans? The Balkans never literally were Russian. Finland? They are not under Russian boot for 100 years. A move of madman would be to attack Finland, but like I stated already, Putin is not stupid. Or mad.
The way how I literally see this to end: 1)Putin successfully occupies Kyiv and installs vassal government, perhaps something akin to Belarus, a president who is not anti-russian, but is not pro-Russian either; 2)Donbas and Lugansk becoming part of Russia. 3)nothing from the above, NATO gives all guarantees it won't move to the East (as they agressively did for the past 30 years) or 4)someone sucessfully completes wetwork mission on Putin or Putin dies of heart attack, and his successor announces complete withdrawal from Ukraine.
Should we intervene? My personal philosophy is that true heroes are the one who refrain from raising a sword (translated to modern times, someone who refrains from picking a gun). Lately, we raised the sword too many times, even if the cause was justified, it universally ended up in disaster, one way or another. Sadam did not possess a WMD, Lybia is cesspool state, and Balkan...what was, one country committing genocide against another, which was absolutely untrue. But it's important to go to foreign war, waste resources and lives of young people.
There are no more clear-cut good and bad guys. And when Kruschov said that we have bigger problems to solve, I am more interested drunk Boris will keep this sinking ship afloat in post-Brexit period.

And just so that I don't give impression of myself as Putin/Russia shill, although compared to him, Boris has nowhere near (huge) support than Putin, I am going to say that anti-lgbtq rhetorics, arresting sundry and all people, supporting genocidal Chinese regime, and surrounding yourself by oligarchs isn't something that put me on his fan list.

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 03 March, 2022, 10:05:06 PM

I can only assume you're 15 years older thereabouts. I can see no other explanation for this, frankly, stupid and infantile reading of events.

A 15 year old would pick up a rifle and listen brainwashing propaganda machine.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 March, 2022, 12:51:24 AM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Let's not switch the thesis'.

What is that apostrophe doing there? What do you think a thesis is and what do several of them apparently possess?

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.
...

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.

What?

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.

...

I beg your pardon?

I can't parse this at all. It's a feckin' riddle. I literally cannot understand you Milstar.

Do you know what a Turing test is?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 04 March, 2022, 01:16:37 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 04 March, 2022, 12:51:24 AM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Let's not switch the thesis'.

What is that apostrophe doing there? What do you think a thesis is and what do several of them apparently possess?

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.
...

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.

What?

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PM
Putin said is all he did so far.

...

I beg your pardon?

I can't parse this at all. It's a feckin' riddle. I literally cannot understand you Milstar.

Do you know what a Turing test is?

On which of those three quotes I need to click to bypass captcha?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 04 March, 2022, 01:19:09 AM

It's all clearly perfectly and, well, clearly written. I understanding much more now than the before, which is dark in Russian but not so much China or Huddersfield, for that mater. Maybe some kind of proofreading might, or not, especially with tangents involved to such an extensively. Reading out, loud, might help to help readability for readers reading who need reading help. Or it might not. Who know's? It's worth it for a try, or even a goal with extra time points in the final countdown when the analysis is ready for analysing with analytical analytics like, what the professionals or even the, careful, writers of postings might write if I had my way all over this.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: moly on 04 March, 2022, 06:43:47 AM
Putin trolled us on nuclear weapons milstar ? Russian army then shell the largest nuclear power station in Europe get a grip you are an apologist for putin be honest with you self
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 04 March, 2022, 08:28:53 AM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 11:46:11 PMPutin trolled us with nukes and people instantly bought it.
I was talking about genocide, not nuclear warfare, which is what we're well on the way to. Even the corridor announcement is chilling, since in the past we know how that ends up. (Basically, everyone leave your country so it can be taken over easily; those who stay behind all become enemy combatants by default and therefore fair game.) Beyond that, we've already seen Putin poison people overseas (including in the UK), by way of radioactive contaminants, along with committing atrocities with war-crime-level weaponry. Little to nothing is off the board for him.

And perhaps you're right about the end state. But if the end result of this is Putin killing countless thousands, probably committing genocide, and wiping a sovereign nation forever from existence, you're OK with that? You're like "hey, Ukraine brought this on themselves"? As for the NATO aggression, have you ever thought that ex-Soviet client states saw a shot at independence vs subjugation and therefore went for that? (CIS could have been a much smarter set-up, but Russia didn't want independence – it wanted those countries to do what Russia wanted, hence its failure.)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 04 March, 2022, 12:18:33 PM
Genuine question:  Where are you from, milstar?  I'm very curious; partly because of your views, and partly because of your sometimes fluent and sometimes broken English.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 04 March, 2022, 05:28:06 PM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 07:07:37 PM
All I hear is Putin = Hitler, wants to conquer half of the globe, but 1)Cold War ended 30 years ago and 2)Putin isn't mad as Hitler, as Putin knows what he is doing and this was set months, even years ago. I mean, I am tired of paranoid boogey tales of evil Russkies.

Granted the rhetoric around Putin and comparisons with Hitler are misleading.  Same goes with the end of the 'Cold War' however in that regards it has to be remembered that Putin grew up in that environment.

Since Perestroika Russia has seen its status on the world stage diminished to an extent, the rise of a 'criminal aristocracy' that has blurred the lines between politics, business and criminality to the utter detriment of the Russian people and seen a government installed that is quite happy to act aggressively towards its own citizens and other nations.  These are not bogey tales.   There is plenty of documented evidence in this regard.

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 07:07:37 PM
What happens in Ukraine is solely localized conflict and is definitely not on our doorstep.

Another valid point.  However it does gloss over the reach of Russian military forces as has been evidenced in the regular encroachment of British air and sea borders.  There is also the matter of Russian disinformation practices, a carryover from the Cold War.  Closely linked are cyber-attacks that have been traced back to Russian hackers that may or may not have links to the government.  Not to forget of course the small matter of the Salisbury incident, compelling evidence of which exists suggesting Russian involvement.

Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 07:07:37 PM
To understand this conflict, a one needs to dig in a bit into Eastern European history, starting from 1945 (for example, Crimea has been in the hands of Russians, until it was handed over to Ukrainians over some weird politics).

Here I'm going to refer you to some of my remarks upthread on the Holodomor (Terror Famine) that Ukraine suffered at the hands of the then Soviet regime.  Granted you have to go back quite a way to find a point when Ukraine was fully independent but that can be said of a lot of nations.  What is more pertinent is the way various Russian governments have acted towards the 'regions' or 'republics'.  In that regard there is a longstanding enmity.  Given that this conflict was instigated by Putin though, I'm not entirely sure the history would be particularly illuminating though.

Is Putin 'mad'?  Who knows.  Are nations around Russia justified in their concern?  Arguably, yes.  Are we beyond Russia's reach?  Definitely not.  Putin may not want to conquer the world but it would seem that he is intent on restoring / expanding Russian international standing and has a rather curious idea of Russian nationalism (have a gander at Gumilev's anthropological / historical writings for an idea ...)

All in all, it is definitely sphincter-tightening.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 04 March, 2022, 10:53:09 PM
milstar, it's often difficult to work out what you're saying. however, if english is your second language then we all owe you respect.
but if your comment, "and Balkan...what was, one country committing genocide against another, which was absolutely untrue" means what i think it means, then this is a squalid new low for this thread and this entire forum.
(i say this as a central european, not that this should matter).
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 04 March, 2022, 11:57:52 PM
I feel I should withdraw my criticisms of milstars incomprehensible posting style. Milstar, if English isn't your native language, then practicing it by composing posts for the complex and nuanced subject that is the war in Europe and Russian politics, in the relatively consequence free environment of an obscure British comics thread is kind of inspired.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 05 March, 2022, 12:06:09 AM
 definitely inspired. i'm a big admirer of the ambitiously prolix.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 11 March, 2022, 10:51:42 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 March, 2022, 12:18:33 PM
Genuine question:  Where are you from, milstar?  I'm very curious; partly because of your views, and partly because of your sometimes fluent and sometimes broken English.

I'm fairly sure milstar is Putin's mum. It's difficult to imagine anyone else defending him so ardently while pretending to be neutral. Methinks thou dost protest too much.

I don't really understand the cognitive dissonance that allows people to think of themselves as fair-minded as they lay down excuse after excuse for the violent, murderous behavior of a tyrant. "Oh, if only people hadn't pressured poor Mr. Putin, then he wouldn't need to bomb maternity hospitals! You forced him to do it! It hurts him more than it hurts them!"

If you're going to support that (while vacuously pretending that you're just being fair-minded) you're just a pathetic worm of an excuse for a human. Wriggle around all you like, but there it is.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 12 March, 2022, 12:36:30 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 11 March, 2022, 10:51:42 PM

I'm fairly sure milstar is Putin's mum.


Putin's mum has been dead for years.

Allegedly.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 March, 2022, 08:02:32 AM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 12 March, 2022, 12:36:30 AM
Allegedly.

You cannnnott killll what doesssss not livvve!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: GoGilesGo on 12 March, 2022, 02:45:52 PM
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 12 March, 2022, 08:02:32 AM
You cannnnott killll what doesssss not livvve!

You have no idea how on the button you are, Jim.

Putin's mum did, actually, come back from the dead.

I know this sounds like something right out of Fiends of the Eastern Front, but bear with me...

Both of Putin's parents, like little Vova himself, are natives of St Petersburg, formerly Leningrad. Between winter 1941 and January 1944, his mum and two older brothers, found themselves encircled by the Wehrmacht in the Siege of Leningrad. This was one of the grimmest sieges in history. Hardly any planes could land supplies and nothing could get through the German lines. Horses, dogs & rats became prized meals. Cannibalism was a fact of life few dared mention.

Adding to this was the Russian winter, and 1942 was a particularly unforgiving one. Wood was in such short supply, the crematoriums did not function and the ground was so hardened by frost few graves could be dug. The citizens of the city took to leaving bodies, stiff from death and in no danger of rotting due to sub zero temperatures, in piles on the street.

Both of Putin's older brothers, Albert and Viktor, died during the siege. A few weeks later Putin's exhausted and half-staved mother, collapsed in her apartment building. She was taken by neighbours and laid next to  a funeral pile.

She woke, apparently, just before the undertakers could cart her away.

Vladimir Putin was born ten years later.

One of many fascinating and brutal anecdotes chronicled in this amazing book
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B015754S6O/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B015754S6O/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Jim_Campbell on 12 March, 2022, 06:34:39 PM
Quote from: gogilesgo on 12 March, 2022, 02:45:52 PM
Vladimir Putin was born ten years later.

HOLY. SHIT.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 13 March, 2022, 09:06:00 PM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 04 March, 2022, 12:18:33 PM
Genuine question:  Where are you from, milstar?  I'm very curious; partly because of your views, and partly because of your sometimes fluent and sometimes broken English.

Sorry for the late response, Jayzus. In recent weeks, I haven't had much spare time (if any). I saw your reply a couple of days ago, but I forgot about it, 'til now. Anyway, the frequency of responses here is going to be very sparse. (Just don't think I spent this whole week scribbling this comment, though did this whole afternoon).
Where am I coming from? Freshford, Somerset. A few miles south of Bath. We have a lovely inn. Or at least I think we do. I haven't been there in years. The river Frome burbles right through, and another one, the Avon, is close. I used to travel occasionally to Southern Europe, until the lockdown, met people, who were not really keen on western politicians. That probably influenced my views on the world of politics.
My English? Ah, it's a mix of several factors involved, all of a rather trivial nature. I was never a man of particular literacy. Even in elementary school, I had trouble grasping walls of text. I once heard a pretty good statement that native speakers tend to be lazy with their language, with which I can agree. It may sound controversial here, but grammar rules are something I pay little attention to when typing my comments, and I write them quickly as I lay out my thoughts at the time. Additionally, I often use my cellphone (unlike now), where I must wrangle with the tightness of the buttons and autocorrect (often necessary option). I hope these explain my Jekyll-Hyde coherency.
My views? I dare say they are not that weird to some other members of this forum. Over the years, I have observed governmental doings, or better said, wrongdoings, in both domestic and foreign departments. So-called "humanitarian" interventions often ended up miserably, one way or another (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya...).
The extent of our leaders' crimes is that they only happen to remember a casual voter right before elections. This left me severely anti-authoritarian, maybe even more so than our Sharky laddie here. I am only baffled about whether I should consider them traitorous or putty-headed.

@Wolfie, I hope my answer satisfies your demands as well.

Quote from: IndigoPrime on 04 March, 2022, 08:28:53 AM
I was talking about genocide, not nuclear warfare, which is what we're well on the way to. Even the corridor announcement is chilling, since in the past we know how that ends up. (Basically, everyone leave your country so it can be taken over easily; those who stay behind all become enemy combatants by default and therefore fair game.) Beyond that, we've already seen Putin poison people overseas (including in the UK), by way of radioactive contaminants, along with committing atrocities with war-crime-level weaponry. Little to nothing is off the board for him.

And perhaps you're right about the end state. But if the end result of this is Putin killing countless thousands, probably committing genocide, and wiping a sovereign nation forever from existence, you're OK with that? You're like "hey, Ukraine brought this on themselves"? As for the NATO aggression, have you ever thought that ex-Soviet client states saw a shot at independence vs subjugation and therefore went for that? (CIS could have been a much smarter set-up, but Russia didn't want independence – it wanted those countries to do what Russia wanted, hence its failure.)

Indigo, I am a man of peace. I am against war, any war. Meaning you have to go al lthe way. I was just saying that while I don't support the invasion, I said that he had reasons, unlike waking up one day and going off the rocker, like "let's massacre and conquer a neighbouring country." I am assured this was in the boiling pan for quite some time. At its optimal, Putin probably seeks to restore a mix of imperialist Russia and the Soviet union, albeit in redux form. What is especially troubling is how the whole war trickled into the media, and I don't doubt both sides use propaganda for their purposes (well, one must be blind and notice extreme polarisation). No, I wouldn't throw the word "genocide" that lightly, giving it its weight. Ukraine has millions of refugees now, right? What if they return when the conflict is over? Additionally, what is spine-tingling is that Ukraine had a biological (biochemical, perhaps) lab seized by Russian forces. Under US supervision. Only a naive person, extremely naive, would think one side is exclusively good, and the other exclusively evil. Conflicts, at least in modern times, have rarely been that. I only feel sorry for the pain that the Ukrainian people have to endure as a result of NATO, Russia, and their own regime's actions.
Of what I've named as probable outcomes, I think the most likely one is where Ukraine loses a portion of its eastern part and is barred from joining NATO.

@Tjm86 without going part by part, I'll just say that I agree with you on a good number of your comments. I'll just add this. I am aware of Putin's statement on the fall of the Soviet union, and it is obvious that he seeks to restore Russia's influence worldwide, much in the vein of the US. In fact, Putin may already have reached that point when he decided to intervene in Syria. I seriously doubt a country like the UK could be of any interest to him, politically and geographically. Ofcourse, I don't claim we are beyond his reach, but that is not the point I am trying to make. If we haven't been invaded during the Cold war, I don't see that happening now. I am also fully aware of, and I've read somewhere pretty good reasoning on why some countries feel antagnistic toward Russia, blaming the Soviet era (well, more Soviet than tsarist). And quite rightfully so. Then there is the situation with eastern Ukraine with Azov neonazis adding fuel to the fire. Another problem is that both sides are spouting propaganda (the first casualty of war), which has seethed to extremely polarising levels. I'm not going to call Putin Hitler; in fact, I don't think Trump deserved that dreadful moniker; and Trump was certainly a madman. Politically illiterate.
Now, this whole situation is horrible. But what would be a more horrible outcome is if we go to war with Russia. That would be catastrophic. Well, I slightly walk that back. It would be castrophic, unless they do invade us.
Anyway, I don't expect this conflict to drag on, and if I have any clairvoyant skills, I don't see more of this in six months. And you, sir, seem well versed in Eastern-European politics and culture? Fancy giving some books to read?

Anyway, I think Oliver Stone gave a pretty good view on this (I'll leave the link instead of the whole post):
https://deadline.com/2022/03/oliver-stone-criticizes-putin-ukraine-1234973037/ (https://deadline.com/2022/03/oliver-stone-criticizes-putin-ukraine-1234973037/)

My only disagreement is that I don't think anyone is happy about this, Russian nationalists too, and those others, the legion if they are happy about this, I don't consider them humans.
There's also the documentary "Ukraine on Fire," in which Stone appears, and which I watched and felt quite educated on the entire Ukraine crisis situation (that movie, by the way, is either forbidden or has been removed from Youtube).

But just so that a war can be tragicomical, here's one example:
https://www.newsweek.com/russell-texas-bentley-interview-pro-russia-donbas-ukraine-1684450 (https://www.newsweek.com/russell-texas-bentley-interview-pro-russia-donbas-ukraine-1684450)

@Funt Solo which one? I take it's well known he had two of them.

But yeah, I'd rather be a pathetic human with a neutral PoV; than a fascist one, being conditionally demanded to use a designated label for the bloke.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Definitely Not Mister Pops on 13 March, 2022, 09:10:57 PM
Quote from: milstar on 13 March, 2022, 09:06:00 PM
...I had trouble grasping walls of text...

Understandable
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 13 March, 2022, 09:33:48 PM

Nicely put.

If my previous post was offensive, I apologise. Sometimes I have difficulty discerning comedy and reality, but my intent is never to hurt.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2022, 03:44:00 PM
Claiming neutrality is disingenuous when you spend your entire time repeating disinformation as if it's fact from one side (the invading side), defending the leader of one side (the invading side) and minimalizing attacks on civilians by one side (the invading side).

If you repeat the lies of a fascist, defend the honor of a fascist and excuse the crimes of a fascist, what does that make you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 14 March, 2022, 05:52:44 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 13 March, 2022, 09:10:57 PM
Quote from: milstar on 13 March, 2022, 09:06:00 PM
...I had trouble grasping walls of text...

Understandable

Ironic.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 16 March, 2022, 11:54:07 PM
Link to an article in The Guardian: Ukraine crisis: how you can help from the UK by donating cash and supplies (https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/mar/05/ukraine-crisis-how-you-can-help-donating-cash-supplies)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 March, 2022, 02:52:29 PM
Mad respect for Arnie here: Arnold Schwarzenegger's anti-Ukraine war video trends on Russian social media (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60794809)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 18 March, 2022, 06:02:10 PM
Comparisons between Hitler and Putin seem perfectly valid from my perspective.

- Hitler made Austria a puppet state. Putin has Belarus.
- Hitler annexed the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. Putin annexed Crimea* (and parts of Donetsk & Luhansk) from Ukraine. Before that, South Ossetia. He also has his finger in Moldova's pie.
- Hitler assassinated his political rivals. Putin's not as good at it, but he does the same.
- Hitler made it illegal to question his authority. Putin has done the same.
- Hitler invaded Poland on a pretext. Putin invaded Ukraine on a pretext.

So, why would comparisons here be unfair?


* Crimea was parceled into Ukraine originally as a cynical control maneuver - it increased the amount of Russian speakers so made it easier (in theory) for Moscow to maintain influence.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 19 March, 2022, 12:39:46 PM
And as surely as night follows day, Rees Mogg is here to tell us that Partygate isn't important any more.   Being a bear of very little brain, he hasn't worked out that he really should have kept quiet and let the public decide themselves, and that a very bad thing happening doesn't make another bad thing good.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: IndigoPrime on 19 March, 2022, 04:14:39 PM
Well, because a Very Important Thing is happening, partygate is now just "fluff". It was just a party*, after all.

* the government considering itself above the laws it itself sets **
** how every autocratic...
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 20 March, 2022, 11:40:34 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2022, 03:44:00 PM
Claiming neutrality is disingenuous when you spend your entire time repeating disinformation as if it's fact from one side (the invading side), defending the leader of one side (the invading side) and minimalizing attacks on civilians by one side (the invading side).

If you repeat the lies of a fascist, defend the honor of a fascist and excuse the crimes of a fascist, what does that make you?

Disinformation? Nothing that I wrote above is disinformation.

To give myself a bit of sarcasm, and a bit of honesty, I admit that I perhaps have repeated the lies of one side, but what does it say of the other side as well?

And now that we are here, I wonder what is the next thing crafted to delude the crowd (apparently, covid is behind us, Boris can host his corrupt elite parties on daily basis)? China taking Taiwan, maybe? That is definitely coming.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 02:08:25 AM
Quote from: milstar on 20 March, 2022, 11:40:34 PM
Nothing that I wrote above is disinformation ... I admit that I perhaps have repeated the lies of one side

Hoisted by your own petard.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2022, 07:11:35 AM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 02:08:25 AM
Quote from: milstar on 20 March, 2022, 11:40:34 PM
Nothing that I wrote above is disinformation ... I admit that I perhaps have repeated the lies of one side

Hoisted by your own petard.

Once again you have stripped out the context to make your point.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2022, 03:44:00 PM

Claiming neutrality is ... fascist


See how that works?

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 02:24:29 PM
Oh ffs, Shark.

However dim one's bulb may be, one should be able to easily illuminate the fact that milstar's substantive meaning wasn't altered by the text I excluded from the quote.

As you argue (incorrectly) about semantics, entirely innocent people are being bombed to oblivion, on purpose, by a power hungry, brutal dictator. One whose fascism milstar openly supports. Their plight, seemingly, having no more meaning to you than picking your nose.

Quote from: Funt Solo on 16 March, 2022, 11:54:07 PM
Link to an article in The Guardian: Ukraine crisis: how you can help from the UK by donating cash and supplies (https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/mar/05/ukraine-crisis-how-you-can-help-donating-cash-supplies)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 02:36:06 PM
BBC article, which "contains some upsetting scenes": In Mariupol, children bear the brunt of Vladimir Putin's war (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60814913)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 21 March, 2022, 04:20:55 PM
Quote from: milstar on 20 March, 2022, 11:40:34 PM

To give myself a bit of sarcasm, and a bit of honesty, I admit that I perhaps have repeated the lies of one side, but what does it say of the other side as well?



Sorry, I'm struggling, but I don't get it.  What lies have you sarcastically repeated?  And what does it say about the other side?  And which side is that, given you're neutral?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2022, 07:35:23 PM

To me (unless I've misunderstood), it means that automatically accepting the claims made by Side A because it's Side A and automatically rejecting the claims made by Side B because it's Side B is not helpful. Both sides, especially in times of war, will make true, false, and ambiguous claims. Therefore it behooves us to examine each claim made by Side A and by Side B with the same neutrality and rigour in order to discern truth, fiction, and ambiguity with as much impartiality as possible. Discussing the claims made by either side is therefore not necessarily indicative of support for or even belief in those claims.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 08:16:13 PM
I'm sure all of these Ukrainians are fleeing their country just because they all fancied going on vacation at the same time:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2022/3/21/2e9820e5-4067-438f-a94d-48b0ea45e953.png)

And all the video evidence and the evidence from multiple independent news sources can't be taken at face value because [places tin foil hat on head] this is all part of the great reset blah blah bullshit bullshit.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 21 March, 2022, 08:57:31 PM

People fleeing a warzone does not explain the reasons behind the war, unless one thinks that if those people believed the war was just they'd happily stay behind to be bombed because they deserve it. I don't think anybody believes that.

Believe it or not, there are people who investigate possible ways to destabilise Russia by any practical means - as demonstrated by this 2019 RAND Corporation analysis, Overextending and Unbalancing Russia (https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10014.html). Of course, the existence of this analysis proves nothing beyond its own existence and certainly doesn't prove that the United States (or anyone, for that matter) is using it as a plan. It is, however, indicative of certain attitudes and makes for interesting reading.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 09:18:21 PM
I honestly couldn't give a flying fuck what Putin's rationale is: he's deliberately invaded his neighbor, and is deliberately targeting civilians. There's no motive that makes that okay. Ukraine never threatened Russia.

Just like Poland never threatened Germany, but Hitler decided he'd quite like to invade anyway.

It is odd that you're so supportive of these states and their aggressive behaviors - you're normally against governments lording it over people. Something of a fondness for dictators, is it?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Mind of Wolfie Smith on 21 March, 2022, 11:30:55 PM
the constant and deliberate targeting of children.
it would be truly sordid to give the time of day to any supposed justification for this. the only possible explanation is genuine evil born of extreme sociopathy.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 March, 2022, 06:39:24 AM

Funt, I'm not supportive of any of it. I don't know where you'd get that idea. What I find disgusting are the double standards involved. Tony Blair can cause atrocious mayhem on the basis of a false dossier and he's still running around free doing Voldemort impressions, Bush is still free, Obama, Trump, Biden. Saudi Arabia gets away with its atrocities. So Israel. And others.

But Russia bad.

They're all f*cking bad and they all need to be stopped because people are dying. I know I can't stop it on my own, but I can do my bit - as I've droned on about time after time after time - which is why I do not support any government or willingly give any of them money or resources. They can buy their own bloody bullets and bombs with the money they extort out of people willing to give it to them.

Why do you think I continue to live in a shed, ffs? I'm at least smart enough to get a job stacking shelves for a supermarket or sweeping their car parks but that would necessitate me supporting the government's extortion taxation system. Which I will not do until they stop killing people.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 22 March, 2022, 08:33:09 AM
My problem there is the implication that no one else on this thread is capable of nuanced thought.  I was on this board when Iraq was invaded, and the west's actions were condemned vociferously by pretty much every person here at the time (and continue to be, as far as I can see). 

Are people supposed to just keep quiet about the atrocities and loss of life now that it's not a western government doing it?  Or do you just want every conversation here to be about how governments shouldn't exist?  I mean, that's pretty much close to my own view; even if I don't like your own particular alternative, but I want to hear people's opinions about current events too.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 22 March, 2022, 10:22:02 AM

Apologies - I sometimes get carried away. There is a lot of thought, nuanced and otherwise, all over these boards, and it's my intention to convey what I think and not what I think other people should think. Whether I tend to pull this off is questionable.

I don't want anyone to keep quiet about anything. Furthermore, I don't believe that governments shouldn't exist (at least in the short term) but that they shouldn't have the power to ride roughshod over the rest of society as if they own it. Give them the power to organise the infrastructure, healthcare, and those aspects of civilization conducive to a peaceful existence but strip them of the power to harm others. That would be a good start, I think.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 22 March, 2022, 03:00:44 PM
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 22 March, 2022, 06:39:24 AM
What I find disgusting are the double standards involved.

Norm Macdonald on Bill Cosby (https://youtu.be/ljaP2etvDc4)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:16:07 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 21 March, 2022, 02:24:29 PM
Oh ffs, Shark.

However dim one's bulb may be, one should be able to easily illuminate the fact that milstar's substantive meaning wasn't altered by the text I excluded from the quote.

As you argue (incorrectly) about semantics, entirely innocent people are being bombed to oblivion, on purpose, by a power hungry, brutal dictator. One whose fascism milstar openly supports. Their plight, seemingly, having no more meaning to you than picking your nose.

For fuck's sake, is the phrase I should utter here. The disgusting thing here is how you, deliberately or not, have twisted my comments. I am under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to pick a side here, and it hardly makes me a fascist, or sprouting fascist views, if I do one of each. Urging one to do so is a true definition of fascism. And why would I, as a contrarian, listen to someone who obviously listens to very mainstream news, the same media that uses very little truth in their outings? Not that long ago, Zelensky was the autocratic one and a dictator, so what exactly did we do about him? To quote Russell Brand: (whatever feelings someone harbours for the git belongs to an entirely different topic)
"The mainstream media is not your friend. The culture is not your
friend. The government is not your friend. Big business is not your
friend. They are operating collegiately, in unison, to create a set of
systems that are beneficial to them, and disadvantage you."

Plus, I find that you personally have a very skewered idea of what dictator and fascist mean (and all those points are pretty debatable).

Now, I don't think that I buried my statements that the conflict in Ukraine is a horrible decision. It's pretty much overt to see for anyone who wants to see it.

But I also added that one must be blatantly naive or ignorant to see this whole thing through black-n-white glasses and be blind enough to see nuances here. As if Ukraine has done nothing wrong, yes? Not at all. A whole lotta no. Ukraine has, in fact, bullied the Russians. For their own citizens, that is. For years. Except that you won't hear that on Channel 4 or the BBC. Pointing that out, apparently, paints you as a person with fascist beliefs. I was also against interventions in Iraq or Libya (although both countries each had more brutal dictators and who never invaded anyone; at least to my knowledge, Libya did not; don't know about Saddam). And just as I bare mentioned these two countries, I want to say that I have no recollection of anyone protesting or complaining about NATO intervening there. At least not in my neighbourhood, nor on the news. Now I have no idea how the average Russian feels about their president. But I predict the majority are behind Putin, which is quite a common thing in these countries. Is the majority fascist?

But let us all talk about this as if everyone forgot about COVID. As if everyone is unaware that Russians pay for petrol way less than us. But let us talk about how one autocratic leader attacked a "sovereign" and ''peaceful'' country. That, btw, recently fired back, which is why they should not be slammed as aggressors, according to the mainstream book, right? Let us use the Ukrainian flag motif on our profile photos on Facebook, Twitter, etc, even though we have never been there.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 April, 2022, 09:28:48 PM
Quote from: Funt Solo on 14 March, 2022, 03:44:00 PM
Claiming neutrality is disingenuous when you spend your entire time repeating disinformation as if it's fact from one side (the invading side), defending the leader of one side (the invading side) and minimalizing attacks on civilians by one side (the invading side).

If you repeat the lies of a fascist, defend the honor of a fascist and excuse the crimes of a fascist, what does that make you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:54:59 PM
To use good ol' quote: I know what I am, but what are you?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 02 April, 2022, 10:05:18 PM
A motley fool.

(https://64.media.tumblr.com/1e93e909324981a80a921cf419b5343c/tumblr_ny0zx32V3S1rhjbado1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2022, 11:53:13 PM
Quote from: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:16:07 PMI want to say that I have no recollection of anyone protesting or complaining about NATO intervening there. At least not in my neighbourhood, nor on the news.

Do you really not recall any protests against the Iraq invasion?  Holy feck. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mudcrab on 03 April, 2022, 01:01:52 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2022, 11:53:13 PM
Quote from: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:16:07 PMI want to say that I have no recollection of anyone protesting or complaining about NATO intervening there. At least not in my neighbourhood, nor on the news.

Do you really not recall any protests against the Iraq invasion?  Holy feck.

They didn't show them on Russian TV
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 April, 2022, 01:19:15 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2022, 11:53:13 PM
Quote from: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:16:07 PMI want to say that I have no recollection of anyone protesting or complaining about NATO intervening there. At least not in my neighbourhood, nor on the news.

Do you really not recall any protests against the Iraq invasion?  Holy feck.

Nope. In fact, I do remember some neighnours saying "get that blighter Saddam!"

Quote from: Mudcrab on 03 April, 2022, 01:01:52 AM
Quote from: JayzusB.Christ on 02 April, 2022, 11:53:13 PM
Quote from: milstar on 02 April, 2022, 09:16:07 PMI want to say that I have no recollection of anyone protesting or complaining about NATO intervening there. At least not in my neighbourhood, nor on the news.

Do you really not recall any protests against the Iraq invasion?  Holy feck.

They didn't show them on Russian TV

Very muddy comment. And because I remember your other comment directed at me, I think we shouldn't reply to each other, or they will, at least from my side, be very profane.

Quote from: Mudcrab on 03 March, 2022, 02:05:16 PM
Quote from: milstar on 03 March, 2022, 12:52:33 PM
As for "Putin is bad", I could say a few things pro-him and anti-him here, but I'd rather stay neutral on affairs like this

Fucking neutral? Maybe you're not a fascist, but you're certainly a cunt!
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Mudcrab on 03 April, 2022, 02:01:02 AM
Oh no, save me from your profanities! lol

I stand by my original comment, which I was warned about, but whatever.  Go fuck yourself, you Russian apologist piece of shit! You were a cunt then and you've proven yourself to be a cunt since, so fuck off back to your soviet facebook factory!

I'm sure my Ukrainian friends would agree that filth like you deserve to have their throat ripped out like every other Russian!

Slava Ukraini!

---------------------

Thankyou for reading my Fiends of the Eastern Front fan-fiction! :)


Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Funt Solo on 03 April, 2022, 02:24:39 AM
Mudcrab - don't rise to milstar's bait - he's a not-very-subtle mixture of tin foil hat and trolling  - he's not worth your passion.

This thread has become so poisonous - it's either milstar planting his jackboots firmly and refusing to budge or our resident anarchist forcing everything into his narrow-prism world view. Or me reacting to it.

Man ... sad ... time to move on, I think.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: milstar on 03 April, 2022, 05:30:47 AM
Aside from Funt rather wiseless repartee - Mudcrab, little braindead fuckers like yourself before spewing some ridiculous, disingenous amount of bullshit. You think I am Russian? Fine. I think you are 8 year old retard with cognitive disabilities. Sadly with the access to the computer.

You can tell that to your throat - ripping, likely Azov scum friends the same. The country you love so much is currently cesspit, and it was even before invasion. But I dare you creeps to try, even to reach my throat. In meantime, you can fuck off too. I hope to somewhere murky and sealed.
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Tjm86 on 03 April, 2022, 09:27:28 AM
Quote from: milstar on 03 April, 2022, 05:30:47 AM
You think I am Russian? Fine. I think you are 8 year old retard with cognitive disabilities. Sadly with the access to the computer.

Sorry but this is totally unacceptable.  The language is the disables equivalent of racist abuse and as such should not be used full stop.  The level of discrimination faced by individuals with cognitive conditions that restrict their daily functioning should not be used as an insult.

Having spent the last week working with an 8 year with a cognitive disability who daily shows enthusiasm and integrity that far surpasses that of individuals significantly older than he, I would have to challenge the utter inappropriateness of this language.

I'm afraid that Funt is right, this thread has now descended to levels rarely seen here.  Personal abuse and vitriol aside, positions have become excessively polarised.  We have always prided ourselves on tolerance and courtesy.  There has always been at the very least respectful engagement with different perspectives and ideologies (sorry, Sharkey!) but it is clear that we need to take a leave of absence from this discussion.

Perhaps the moderators should lock this thread and give everyone time to refocus? 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Richmond Clements on 03 April, 2022, 09:36:34 AM
Let's take this down quite a few notches, eh?
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: The Legendary Shark on 03 April, 2022, 10:17:57 AM

Quote from: Richmond Clements on 03 April, 2022, 09:36:34 AM
Let's take this down quite a few notches, eh?

Yes.

This is a fiery thread filled with fiery opinions so let's keep away from all that TNT in the ad-hom box, shall we? Disrespect the argument if one must, but not the person making it.

Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: paddykafka on 03 April, 2022, 11:05:36 AM
As a way of toning down the bad language, I was going to suggest the idea of a digital Swear Jar - until I realised that I would be one of the main contributors. 
Title: Re: The Political Thread
Post by: Molch-R on 03 April, 2022, 11:08:07 AM
I don't like having to spend my Sunday morning dealing with the forum, but here we are.

Millstar is permanently banned for abusive behaviour.

However, I would like *everyone* involved in this thread to reflect on their behaviour and conduct.

This thread is now permanently locked.
Text only | Text with Images